# , 

# •

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS United State, Couru SOuthDrn**O1~trir.t** of Texas 

# I: FILED 

## OCT ll(l 20M

Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF ILLINOIS, STATE OF LOUISIANA, and STATE OF NEW JERSEY



### No. Plaintiffs, 

### v. ) ) ) ) ) 

### ) ) ) 

### ) ) 

### ) CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION, ) CITGO REFINING AND CHEMICALS ) COMPANY, L.P., PDV MIDWEST ) REFINING, L.L.C., and CITGO ASPHALT ) REFlNINGCOMPANY, ) ) )

### ~-~~------~-)

CONSENT DECREETABLE 

## OF CONTENTS 

### I. Jurisdiction and Venue (paragraphs 1-3) 7 II. Applicability and Binding Effect (paragraphs 4-8) 7 

## m. Objectives (Paragraph 9) 9 IV. Definitions (Paragraph 10) 10 V. Affirmative Reliefi'EnvironmentalProjects (paragraphs 11-134) 20 A. 

### NOx Emissions Reductions from FCCDs (Paragraphs 11-31) 20 B. S02 Emissions Reductions from FCCDs (Paragraphs 32-42) 39 C. PM Emissions Reductions. from FCCDs (Paragraphs 43-47) 48 D. CO Emissions Reductions. from FCCUs(paragraphs 48-50) 50 E. NSPS Applicability to FCCD Regenerators (paragraph 51) ...................• 51. F. NOx Emissions Reductions from Heaters and Boilers (Paragraphs 52-62) .51 G. S02 Emissions Reductions from and NSPS Applicability ofHeaters, Boilers and Other Fuel Gas Combustion Devices (paragraphs 63-65) .58 H. SulfurRecovery Plants (paragraphs 66-73) 60 I. Hydrocarbon Flaring (Paragraphs 74-76)

__ 67 

### J. Control ofAcid Gas. Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents (Paragraphs 77-93) 69 K. 

### Control ofHydrocarbon Flaring Incidents (Paragraph 94) 79 L. 

### Benzene Waste NESHAPProgram Enhancements (Paragraphs 95-112) 79 M. Leak Detectionand Repair ("LDAR') Program Enhancements (Paragraphs 113- 130) 96 N. Incorporation ofConsent Decree Requirements into Federally Enforceable Pennits (Paragraphs 131-134) .1 

### 08

1VI. Emission Credit Generation (paragraphs 135-138) " 109 Vll. Modifications to Implementation Schedules (Paragraphs 139-140) .112 Vm. EnvironmentallyBeneficial Projects (paragraphs 141-143) .lIS IX. Recordkeeping and Reporting (Paragraph 144) 117 X. Civil Penalty (Paragraphs 145-148) , .118 XI. Stipulated Penalties (Paragraphs 149-226) , , .. 120 A. Requirements forNOx Emission Reductions from FCCDs (Paragraphs 150-156) , 121 B. Requirements for S02 Emission Reductions from FCCDs (paragraphs 157-160)
.. 122 C. Requirements for PM Emission Reductions from FCCDs (Paragraphs 161-163)
.. 124 D. Requirements for CO Emission Reductions from FCCDs (Paragraphs 164-165). , 124 E. Requirements Related to NSPS Applicabilityto FCCD Regenerators (Paragraph 166) , ; , 125 F. Requireinents for NOx Emission Reductions. from HeatersIBoilers (Paragraphs 167-170) '" , .125 G. Requirements for S02 Emission Reductions from HeaterslBoilers (Paragraphs 171-17Ia) , 126 

### H. Requirements for SulfurRecovery Plants (Paragraphs 172-178) .127 I. Requirements for Flaring Devices (paragraphs 179-180) .129 J. Requirements for Control ofAG Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents (paragraphs 181-184) , , 130 K. Requirements for Control ofHydrocarbon FlaringIncidents (Paragraph 185)
..... 132 L. Requirements for BenzeneWaste NESHAP Enhancements (Paragraphs 186-203) .132 M. Requirements for LeakDetection and Repair Program Enhancements (paragraphs 204-220) , " , , 135

11

### N. Requirements to Incorporate Consent Decree Requirements into FederallyEnforceable Permits (paragraph 221) , .. 137 O. Requirements for Reporting and Recordkeeping (Paragraph 222) 138 P. Requirements for Environmentally BeneficialProjects and Civil Penalties (paragraph 223)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 138 Q. 

### Requirement to Pay StipulatedPenalties (Paragraph 224) 138 R. 

### Payment ofStipulatedPenalties (Paragraph225) 138 S. StipulatedPenalties Dispute (Paragraph 226) 139 XII. Interest (paragraph 227) 140 XIII. Right ofEntry (paragraph 228) , .140 XIv. Force Majeure (Paragraphs 229-237) : 141 XV. Retention ofJurisdictionlDispute Resolution (paragraphs 238-246) 144 XVI. Effect ofSettlement (paragraphs 247-261) , 146 XVII. General Provisions (Paragraphs 262-273) 154 

## xvm. Termination (paragraph 274-276) 161 XIX. Signatories (paragraph 277) 165

111TABLE OF APPENDICES Appendix A: State andFederal Compliance Orders and Notices AppendixB: List ofHydrocarbon Flaring Devices Appendix B-1 : List ofNSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Devices Appendix B-2: List ofNSPS Acid Gas Flaring Devices AppendixC: List ofHeaters and Boilers AppendixD: Determining the OptimizedAddition Rates ofLow NOx Combustion Promoters and NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives AppendixE: NSPS Subpart 

### J Compliance Schedule for Heaters and Boilers and Streams in Fuel Gas AppendixF: Fuel Gas Combustion Devices Compliance Schedule Appendix G: NSPS Subpart J Compliance Schedule·for NSPS Flaring-Devices Appendix H: Predictive Emissions Monitoring Systems for Heaters andBoilers with Capacities Between 100 and 150 MMBTU!HR

IVAppendix I: Koch Guidance



### vCONSENT DECREE WHEREAS, plaintiffthe United States ofAmerica ("Plaintiff" or "the United States"), by the authority ofthe Attorney Generalofthe United States and through its undersigned counsel,
. acting at the request and on behalfofthe United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), alleges upon infonnation and beliefthat defendants CITGO Pettolerun Corporation, CITGO Refining and Chemicals Company, L.P., PDV MidwestRefrning, L.L.C., and CITGO Asphalt Refining Company (collectively "CITGO") have violated and/or continue to violate the requirements ofthe Clean Air Act, and the regulations and permits promulgated thereunder at CITGO's petroleum refineries in Lemont, minois, Lake Charles, Louisiana, and Corpus Christi, Texas, and at CITGO's asphalt refmeries in Savannah, Georgia and Paulsboro, New Jersey (collectively "Covered**Refineries'~;** WHEREAS, theUnited States specifically alleges that ClTGO has violated and/or continues to violate the following statutory and regulatory provisions: 1) Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration ("PSD") requirements found at Part C of Subchapter 1 ofthe Clean Air Act (the "Act"), 42 U.s.C. §§ 7475, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. § 52.21 (the "PSD Rules"); and "Plan Requirements for Non-Attainment Areas" at Part D ofSubchapterI ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7502-7503, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. § 51.165(a) and (b) and at Title 40, Part 51, Appendix S, and at 40 C.F.R. 

### § 52.24 .("PSDfNSRRegulations"), for fuel gas combustion devices, fluid catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators for NOx, S02' CO and PM and for sulfuric acid plants; 2) New Source Perfonnance Standards ("NSPS") found at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and 

### J ("Refinery NSPS**Regulations'~** and Subpart H, promulgated under Section III of· the Act, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7411, for sulfurrecovery plants, fuel gas combustion devices, and fluid catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators and for sulfuric acid plants; 3) Leak Detection and Repair ("LDAR") requirements promulgated pursuant to Sections III and 112 ofthe Act, and found at 40 C.F.R. Part 60 Subparts VV and GGG; 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subparts J and V; and 40 C.F.R. Part 63, Subparts F, H, and CC ("LDAR Regulations"); and 4) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. ("NESHAP") for BenzeI\e Waste Operations promulgated pursuant to Section 112(e) ofthe Act, and found at 40 C.F.R. Part 61, Subpart FF ("Benzene Waste NESHAP Regulations''). WHEREAS, the United States also specifically alleges witli respect to the Covered Refineries that, upon information and belief, CITGO has been and/or continues to be in violation ofthe state implementation plans ("SIPs") and other state rules adopted by the states in which the Covered Refineries are located to the extent that such plans or rules implement, adopt or incorporate the above-described Federal requirements; WHEREAS, the State ofGeorgia ("Georgia"), the State of Illinois ("minois"), the State ofLouisiana ("Louisiana''), and the State ofNew Jersey ("New Jersey") (collectively "CoPlaintiffs") have alleged violations. oftheirrespective applicable SIP provisions and other state and local rules, regulations, and permits incorporating and/orimplementing the foregoing federal requirements; WHEREAS, with respect to the provisions ofSection V.I. ("Control ofAcid Gas Flaring Incidents and Tail Gas Incidents'') ofthis Consent Decree, EPA maintains that "[i]t is the intent ofthe proposed standard [40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.104] that hydrogen-sulfide.rich gases exiting the amine
2regenerator [or sour water stripper gases] be directed to an appropriate recovery facility, such as a Claus sulfurplant," Information for Proposed New Source Performance Standards: Asphalt Concrete Plants, PetroleumRefineries, Storage Vessels, Secondary Lead Smelters and Refineries, Brass orBronze IngotProduction Plants, Iron and Steel Plants, Sewage Treatment Plants, Vol. I, Main Text at 28; WHEREAS, EPA further maintains that the failure to direct hydrogen-sulfide-rich gases to an appropriate recovery facility

-- and instead to flare such gases under circumstances that are not sudden orinfrequent orthat are reasonablypreventable

-- circumvents the purposes and intentions ofthe standards at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart J; WHEREAS, EPA recognizes that "Malfunctions," as. defmed in Paragraph 10 ofthis Consent Decree and 40 C.F.R 

### § 60.2, ofthe "Claus SulfurRecovery Plants" or of"Upstream Process Units" may result in flaring of"Acid Gas" or "Sour Water Stripper Gas" on occasion, as those terms are defined herein, and that such flaring does not violate 40 C.F.R § 60.1 I(d) ifthe
owner or operator, to the extentpracticable, maintains and operates such units in a manner consistent with good airpollution control practice for minimizing emissions during these periods; WHEREAS, CITGO denies that ithas violated and/or continues to violate the foregoing .statutory, regulatory, SIP provisions and other state and local rules, regulations and permits incorporating and implementing the foregoing federal requirements, and maintains that it has been and remains in compliance with all applicable statutes, regulations and perinits and is not liable for civil penalties and injunctive reliefas alleged in the Complaint;

3WHEREAS, the United States is engaged in a federal strategyfor achieving cooperative agreements with U.S. petroleum refineries to achieve across-the-board reductions in emissions in
a mannerthat achieves compliance with existing statutory and regulatory standards ("Global Settlement Strategy"); WHEREAS, CrrGO consents to the simultaneous filing ofthe Complaint and lodging of this Consent Decree so as to accomplish its objective ofcooperativelyreconciling the goals of the United States, CrrGO and the Co-Plaintiffs under the Clean Air Act and the corollary state statutes, and therefore. agrees to undertake the. installation ofairpollution control equipment and enhancements to its air pollution managementpractices set forth in this Consent Decree at the Covered Refineries to reduce air emissions through participation in the Global Settlement Strategy; WHEREAS, by entering into this ConsentDecree CrrGO is committed to reducing air pollutant emissions from its operations; WHEREAS, the United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey, and CITGO agreethat the affirmative reliefand environmental projects identified in Sections V and VIII of this ConsentDecree will reduce annual emissions from the Covered Refineries by the following amounts: 1) nitrogen oxide by approximately 7,162 tons; 2) sulfur dioxide by approximately 23,250 tons; and 3) particulate matter ("PM") by approximately 915 tons; WHEREAS, EPA recently issued PSD Rules and 

### PSDINSR Regulations, see. 67 Fed. Reg. 80186-80289 (2002), that identity and address "Pollution Control Projects" and "Clean Units" and the applicability ofPSDINSRpermitting requirements to such Projects orUnits;

4WHEREAS, EPA previously issued guidance ("Pollution Control Projects and New Source Review (NSR) Applicability", July 1,1994) identifying and addressing "Pollution Control Projects" and the applicability ofPSDJNSRpennitting requirements to such Projects; WHEREAS, EPA agrees that under the recently issued PSD Rules and PSDJNSR Regulations that identify and address "Clean Units", see 67 Fed. Reg. 80186**~.,** units that accept the following emission limits underthis Consent Decree maybe considered "Clean Units" with respect to the identifiedpollutants: ForFCCUs:

- 20 ppmvdNOx at 0% 02 on a 365-dayrolling average basis

- 25 ppmvd S02 at 0% 02 on a 365-dayrolling average basis

- 100 ppmvd CO at 0% 02 on a 365-dayrolling average basis

- 0.5 pounds ofPMper 1,000 pounds ofcoke burned on a3-hour average basis ForHeaters and Boilers:
.



### 5rules, regulations, and guidance, provided that CITGO complies with the requirements for "Pollution Control Projects" under applicable federal, state, and local regulations and policies. WHEREAS, projects undertakenpursuant to this Consent Decree are for the purposes of abating orcontrolling atmospheric pollution or contamination by removing, reducing or preventing the emission ofpollutants and, as such, may be considered for certification as PolIution Control Facilities by federal, state or local authorities. WHEREAS, CITGO has waived any applicable federal or state requirements ofstatutory notice ofthe alleged Violations; WHEREAS, the Parties agree that: (a) settlement ofthe matters set forth in the Complaint (filed herewith), and those orders and notices identified in Appendix A, is in the best interests of the Parties, and the public; and (b) entry ofthis Consent Decree without litigation is the most appropriate. means ofresolving this matter; WHEREAS, the Parties recognize; and the Court by entering the Consent Decree finds, that the ConsentDecree has been negotiated at arms-length and in good faith and that the Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, and in the. public interest; NOWTHEREFORE, with respect to the matters set forth in the complaint, and those orders and notices identified in Appendix A, and in Section XVI ofthe ConsentDecree ("Effect ofSettlement"), and before the takiug ofany testimony, without adjudication ofany issue offact
orlaw, and upon the consent and agreement ofthe Parties to the Consent Decree, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows:



### 6I. JURISDICTION AND 

### VENUE 1. This Courthasjurisdiction overthe subject matter ofthis action and overthe Parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

### §§ 1331, 1345 and 1355. In addition, this Court hasjurisdiction overthe subject matter ofthis action pursuantto Sections 113(b) and 167 ofthe CM, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7413(b) and 7477. The Complaint states a claim upon which reliefmaybe granted for injooctive reliefand civil penalties against CITGO under the Clean AirAct Authority to bring this suit is vested in the United States Department ofJusticeby 28 U.S.C. 

### §§ 516 and 519, Section 305 ofthe. CM, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7605. 2. Venue is properin the Southern District ofTexas pursuant to Section 113(b) ofthe CM, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7413(b), and 28 U.S.C. 

### §§ 1391 (b) and (c), and 1395(a)
.. CITGO consents to thepersonaljurisdiction ofthis Court, waives any objections to venue in this District, and does not object to the participation ofthe States ofGeorgia, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey as parties or intervenors in this action. 3. Notice ofthe commencement ofthis action has been given to theStatesofGeorgia, lllinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and Texas in accordance with Section 113(a)(I) ofthe Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.c. 

### § 7413(a)(l), and as required by Section 113(b) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7413(b). II. APPLICABILITY AND BINDING EFFECT 4. The provisions ofthe Consent Decree shaH apply to the Savannah Refinery, the Lemont Refinery, the LakeCharlesRefinery, the Paulsboro Refinery, the Corpus Christi East Refinery and the Corpus Christi West Refinery ("Covered Refineries"). Theprovisions ofthe Consent Decree shall be binding upon the United States, the Co-Plaintiffs, and CITGO, its
successors and assigns.
75. CITGO, the United States and the Co-Plaintiffs agree not to contest the validity ofthe

. ConsentDecree in any subsequent proceeding to implement or enforce its terms. 6. ClTGO shall give written notice. ofthe Consent Decree to any successors. in interest priorto the transfer ofownership or operation ofanyportion ofany Covered Refinery and shall provide a copy ofthe ConsentDecree to any successor in interest. ClTGO shall notifythe United States, and the**~ppropriate** Co-Plaintiff, in accordance with the notice provisions set forth in Paragraph 270 (Notice), ofany successor in interest at least thirty (30) days priorto any such transfer. 7. CITGO shall condition any transfer, in whole or in part, ofownership of, operation of,
or other interest (exclusive ofany non-controlling non-operational shareholder interest), in any

.Covered Refinery, upon the execution by the transferee ofa modification to the ConsentDecree, which modification shall make the terms and conditions ofthe Consent Decree that apply to such Covered Refmery orportion ofa Covered Refinery applicable to the transferee. In the event of such transfer, CITGO shall notify the United States and the applicable Co-Plaintiff, but ifsuch transfer occurs before CITGO achieves all ofthe NOx reductions required byParagraph 54, CITGO shall then submit an allocation to EPA for that Covered Refmery's share ofNOx reduction requirements ofParagraph 54 that will apply individually to the transferred Covered Refinery after such transfer (such allocation may be zero). By no earlierthan thirty (30) days after such notice, CITGO may file a motion to modifythe Consent Decree to make the terms and conditions ofthe Consent Decree applicable to the transferee. CITGO shall be released from the obligations and liabilities ofthis Consent Decree UIlIess the United States opposes the motion

8and the Court fmds that the transferee does not have the financial and technical ability to assume the obligations and liabilities under the Consent Decree. 8. Subject only to. Paragraph 7, above, and Sections

## vn and XIV, below, CITGO shall be solely responsible for ensuring that performance ofthe work contemplated under this Consent Decree is undertaken in accordance with the deadlines and requirements contained in this ConsentDecree and any attachments hereto. CITGO shall provide a copy ofthis Consent Decree (or an extract ofrelevant, applicable provisions ofthis Consent Decree) to each consulting or contracting firm that is retained to perform work required under this ConsentDecree upon execution ofany contractrelating to such work. No laterthan thirty (30) days after the Date of Lodging ofthe ConsentDecree, CITGO also shall provide a copy ofthis. Consent Decree. (or an

.extract ofrelevant, applicable provisions. of this Consent Decree) to each consnlting or contracting 

### finn that CITGO alreadyhas retained to perform the work required under this Consent Decree. Copies ofthe Consent Decree (or an extract ofrelevant, applicable provisions ofthis ConsentDecree) maybe provided by electronic means but do not need to be supplied to firms who are retained to supply materials or equipment to satisfy requirements ofthis Consent Decree. III. OBJECTIVES 9. It is the purpose ofthe.Parties in this ConsentDecree to further the objectives ofthe
. federal Clean Air Act, the Georgia Air Quality Act, OCGA 12-9-1; the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, 415lLCS 5/8: Title II Air Pollution; Louisiana Air Control Law, LSA-R.S. 30:2051-2065; the New Jersey Air Pollution Act, 26:2C-l to 252; and the Texas Air Act, Acts 1989,71" Leg., ch. 382.
9

### IV. DEFINITIONS 10. Unless otherwise defined herein, terms used in the Consent Decree shall have the meaning given to those tenns in the Clean Air Act, and the implementing regulations promulgated thereunder. The following tenns used in this ConsentDecree shall be defmed, for purposes ofthe Consent Decree and the reports and documents submittedpursuant hereto, as follows: A
.. "Acid Gas" or "AG" shall meanany gas that contains hydrogen sulfide and is generated at a refinerybythe regeneration ofan amine scrubber solution but does not mean Tail Gas. B. "Acid Gas Flaring" or "AG Flaring" shall mean the combustion ofAcid Gas and/or SourWater Stripper Gas in a AGFlaring Device. Nothing in this definition shall be construed to modifY, limit, or affect EPA's authorityto regulate the flaring ofgases that do not fall within the definitions ofAcid Gas or Sour Water Stripper Gas contained in this Decree. C. "Acid Gas Flaring Device" or "AG Flaring Device" shall mean the devices listed in Appendix B-2 that are used by the Covered Refineries to combust Acid Gas. and/or SourWater Stripper Gas. The tenn "Acid Gas Flaring Device" does not include facilities in which gases are combusted to produce snlfur or sulfuric acid. To the. extent that, during the duration ofthe ConsentDecree, any Covered Refinery utilizes any Flaring Devices otherthan those specified in Appendix B-2 for the purpose ofcombusting Acid Gas and/or Sour Water Stripper Gas, those Flaring Devices shall be AG Flaring Devices and shall be subject to the requirements ofthis Consent Decree.

10D. "Acid Gas Flaring Incident" or "AG Flaring Incident" shall mean the continuous or intermittent combustion ofAcid Gas and/or Sour Water Stripper Gas from one or more AG Flaring Devices at a Covered Refinery that results in the emission ofsulfurdioxide equal to, orin
excess of, five-hundred (500) pounds in anytwenty-four (24) hourperiod. Where such continuous orintermittent combustion from one or more AG Flaring Devices continues into subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twenty-four (24) hourperiod(s), and sulfur dioxide equal to, or in excess of, five.-hundred (500) pounds is emitted in each subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twenty-four (24) hourperiod(s), then only one AG Flaring Incident shall have occurred. Subsequent, contiguous, non"overlapping twenty-four (24) hourperiods are measured from the initial commencement ofAG Flaring within the AG Flaring Incident. E. "ApplicableFederal and State Agencies" shall mean, with respect to the Savannah Refinery, EPA's Office ofRegulatory Enforcement, EPA's Region 

### 4, and the Georgia Department ofNatural Resources; with respect to the LemontRefinery, EPA's Office of Regulatory Enforcement, EPA's Region 5, and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency; with respect to the Lake Charles Refinery, EPA's Office ofRegulatory Enforcement; EPA's Region 6 and theLouisianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Quality; with respect to the Paulsboro Refinery, EPA's Office ofRegulatory Enforcement, EPA's Region 2, and the New Jersey Department ofEnvironmental Protection; and with respect to the Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi West Refineries, EPA's Office. ofRegulatory Enforcement, and EPA's Region 6. F. "Applicable State Agency" shall mean, with respect to the Savarmah'Refinery, the Georgia Department ofNatural Resources; with.respect to the Lemont Refinery, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency; with respect to the Paulsboro Refinery, the New Jersey 

### 11Department ofEnvironmental Protection; and with respect to the Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi West Refineries, as used in Paragraphs 131, 132 and 134 ofthis Consent Decree only, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. As used in Paragraphs**131~** 132 and 134 ofthis Consent Decree only, "Applicable State Agency" shall also include anyregional or local air qualityboard that issues pennits referred to in those Paragraphs. G. "Calendarquarter" shall mean the three month period ending on March 31 ", June 30th
, Septeinber 30th
, and December 31 st. H. "CEMS" shaH mean continuous emissions monitoring system. I. "CITGO" shall mean CITGO Petroleum Corporation, CITGO Refming and Chemicals Company, L.P., PDV Midwest Refining, L.L.C., and CITGOAsphaltRefining Company, their
successors and assigns. J. "Consent Decree" or "Decree" shall mean this Consent Decree, including any and all appendices attached to the Consent Decree. K. "Corpus Christi EastRefinery" shall mean the refinery owned and operated by CITGO and located at 180I Nueces Bay Boulevard, Corpus Christi, Texas. L. "Corpus Christi West Refmery" shall mean the refinery owned and operated by CITGO and located at 7350 Interstate Hwy. 37, Corpus Christi, Texas. M. "Covered FCCUs" shall mean the following six FCCUs that CITGO owns and operates:

• Corpus Christi FCCU # I at the Corpus Christi EastRefinery

• Corpus Christi FCCU # 2 at the Corpus Christi East Refinery

• Lake Charles FCCUs 

### # A, 

### B, and C at the Lake Charles Refinery
12• Lemont FCCU at the Lemont Refinery N, "Covered Refineries" shall mean the following refineries that are subjectto the requirements ofthis ConsentDecree: the Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi West Refinery, the Lake Charles Refinery, the Lemont Refinery, the Paulsboro Refinery, and the Savannah Refinery. O. "CO" shall mean carbon monoxide. P. "Current Generation Ultra-Low NOx Burners" shall mean those burners that are designed to achieve a NOx emission rate of0.020 to 0.040 Ib/mmBTUHHV when firing natural gas at 3% stack oxygen at full design load without airpreheat, regardless ofwhetherupon installation actual emissions exceed 0.040 Ib/mroBTUHHV. 

### Q

.. "Date ofLodging" or "Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree" shall mean the date the Consent Decree is lodged with the Clerk ofthe Court for the United States District Court for the Southern District ofTexas. R "Date ofEntry" or "Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree" shall mean the date the Consent Decree is entered bythe United States District Court for the Southern District ofTexas. S. "Day" or "Days" shall mean a calendar day or days. T. ''FCCU'' shall mean a fluidized catalytic cracking unit, its regenerator and associated CO boiler(s) where present. U. "Flaring Device" shall mean an AG and/or an HC Flaring Device, V. "Fuel Oil" shall mean any liquid fossil fuel with sulfur content ofgreater than 0.05% by weight.

13W. "Full Burn Operation" shall mean when essentially all ofthe CO produced in the FCCU regenerator is converted to CO, inside the regenerator and there is excess 0, present in the regenerator flue gas. Specifically, for the Lemont FCCU, Full Burn Operation shall occur when

.less than. 500 ppm CO and greaterthan 0.2% 0, by volume is present in the regenerator flue gas, and for COlpus Christi FCCU #1, Full Bum Operation shall occur when greaterthan 0.2% O2 by volume is present in the regenerator flue gas. X. "GDNR" shall mean the Georgia Department ofNatural Resources and any successor departments or agencies ofthe State ofGeorgia. Y. "Hydrocarbon Flaring" Or "HC Flaring" shall mean the combustion of refmery-generated gases, except for Acid Gas and/or Sour Water Stripper Gas and/or Tail Gas, in
a Hydrocarbon Flaring Device. Nothing in this definition shall be construed to modifY, limit, or affect EPA's authority to regulate the flaring ofgases that do not fall within the definitions contained in this Consent Decree. Z. "Hydrocarbon Flaring Device" or "HC Flaring Device" shall mean the devices listed in Appendix Bthat are used by the. Covered Refmeries to control (through combustion) any
excess. volume ofa refmery-generated gas other than Acid Gas and/or Sour Water Stripper Gas and/or Tail Gas. To the extent that any Covered Refinery utilizes FlaringDevicesotherthan those specified in Appendix B for the purpose ofcombusting any excess ofa refmery-generated gas other than Acid Gas and/or SourWater Stripper Gas, those Flaring Devices shall be He Flaring Devices and shall be subjectto the provisions ofthis ConsentDecree. AA. "Hydrocarbon Flaring lncident" or "HC Flaring lncident" shall mean the continuous
or intermittent flaring ofrefinery-generated gases, except for Acid Gas or Sour Water Stripper
14Gas or Tail Gas, at a Hydrocarbon Flaring Device thatresults in the emission ofsulfur dioxide equal to, or greaterthan five hundred (500) pounds in a 24-hourperiod. Where such continuous
orintennittent flaring from a Hydrocarbon Flaring Device continues into subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twenty-four (24) hour period(s), and sulfur dioxide. equal to, or in excess of, five-hundred (500) pounds is emittedin each subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twentyfour (24) hourperiod(s), then only one HC Flaring Incident shall have occurred. Subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twenty-four (24) hour periods are measured from the in.itial commencement offlaring within the HC Flaring Incident. BB. "Hydrotreater Outage" shall mean the period oftime during which the FCCD operation is affected as a result ofcatalyst change-out operations, shutdowns required by ASME pressure vessel requirements or state boilercodes, or as a result ofMalfunction, that prevents the hydrotreaterfrom effectively producing the quantity and quality offeed necessary to achieve established FCCD emission perfonnance. CC. "IEPA" shall mean the Illinois Envirorunental Protection Agency and any successor departments or agencies ofthe State ofIllinois. DD. "Incremental NOx Reduction Factor" and "Incremental S02 Pick-up Factor" shall
mean: 

### PE..

- PE..I CAR;-CAR;l where: PR; =Pollutant (NOx or S02 ) reduction rate at increment i in pounds per day from the baseline


### 15

### PR;-l =Pollutant (NOx or S02 )reduction rate at the incrementprior to increment i inpounds' per day from the baseline 

### CAR; =Pollutant (NOx or S02 ) Reducing Catalyst Additive Rate at increment i in pounds per day from the baseline 

### CAR;_1 =Pollutant (NOx or S02) Reducing Catalyst Additive Rate at the increment prior to increment i in pounds per day from the baseline EE. "Lake Charles Refinery" shall mean the refmery owned and operatedby CITGO and located in Lake Charles, Louisiana; FF. "LDEQ" shall mean theLouisianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Quality and any
successor departments or agencies ofthe State ofLouisiana. GG. "LemontRefinery" shall mean the refinery owned and operatedby CITGO and located in Lemont, lllinois;

. HH. "Low NOx Combustion Promoter" shall mean a catalyst that contains no platinum that is added to an FCCD, consistent with Appendix D, or such other technology as may be approved by EPA,. that minimizes NOx formation while maintaining its effectiveness as a combustion promoter. II. "Malfunction" shall mean, as specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 60.2, "any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure ofair pollution control equipment, process equipment, or a process to operate in a normal orusual manner. Failures that are caused in part bypoor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions." JJ. "Natural Gas Curtailment" shall mean a restriction imposed by a natural gas supplier,

, which limits CITGO's ability to obtain natural gas. 16KK. "Next Generation Ultra-Low NOx. Burners" or ''Next Generation ULNBs" shall
mean those burners that are designed to achieve a NOx emission rate ofless than or equal to 0.020 Ibl mmBTU HHV when firing natural gas at 3% stack oxygen at full design load without airpreheat, regardless ofwhetherupon installation.actual emissions exceed 0:020 Ib/mmBTU 

### HHV. LL. "NJDEP" shall mean the New Jersey Department ofEnviroIlIIlental Protection and any successor departments or agencies ofthe State ofNew Jersey. MM. "NOx" shall mean nitrogen oxides. NN. "NOx Additives" shall mean Low NOx Combustion Promoters and NOx Reducing· Catalyst Additives. 

### 00. "NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive" shall mean a catalyst additive that is introduced to an FCCU to reduce NOx emissions through reduction or controlled oxidation ofintermediates. PP. "NSPS. Hydrocarbon Flaring Device" or "NSPS HC Flaring Device" shall mean the Hydrocarbon Flaring Devices listed in Appendix B-1 which are, or will be, regUlated as fuel gas combustion devices underNSPS Subparts A and J. QQ. "Paragraph" shall mean a portionofthis ConsentDecree identified by an arabic numeral. RR. "PM" shall mean particulate matter. SS. "Parties" shall mean the Uriited States, the Co-Plaintiffs, and CITGO. TT. "Paulsboro Refinery" shall mean the asphaltrefinery owned and operatedby CITGO and located in Paulsboro, New Jersey.

17UU. "Co-Plaintiffs" shall mean the States ofGeorgia, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey. VV. "PollutantReducing CatalystAdditive" shall mean either a NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive or a S02 Reducing CatalystAdditive. WW. "Root Cause" shall mean the primary cause(s) ofAG Flaring fucident(s), Hydrocarbon Flaring fucident(s), or Tail Gas Incident(s), as determined through a process of investigation. XX. "Savannah Refinery" shall mean the asphalt refinery owned and operatedby CITGO and located in Savannah, Georgia. YY. "Scheduled Maintenance" shall mean any shutdown ofany emission unit or control equipment that CITGO schedules at least fourteen (14) days in advance. ofthe shutdown for the

.purpose ofundertaking maintenance ofsuch unit or control equipment. ZZ. "Shutdown" shall mean the cessation ofoperation ofan llffected facility for any purpose. AAA. "SourWater Stripper Gas" or "SWS Gas" shall mean the gas produced by the process ofstripping or scrubbing refinery sour water.

. BBB. "S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive" shall mean a catalyst additive that is introduced to an FCCD to reduce S02 emissions by reduction and adsorption. CCC. "Startup", as specified in 40 C.F.R.Section 60.2, shall mean the. setting in operation ofan affected facility for anypurpose. DDD. 

### "SOt shall mean sulfur dioxide.



### 18EEE. "SRP" or "Claus Sulfur Recovery Plant" shall mean a process unit that recovers sulfur from hydrogen sulfide by a vaporphase catalytic reaction ofsulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide.FFF. "Tail Gas" or "TG" shall mean exhaust gas from the Claus trains andJor the tail gas unit ("TOU") section ofthe SRP. GGG. "Tail Gas Unit" or "TGU" shall mean a control system utilizing a technology for reducing emissions ofsulfur compounds from a Claus SulfurRecovery Plant. HHH. "Tail Gas Incident" shall mean combustion ofTail Gas that either is: 

### 1. combusted in a flare and results in 500 pounds ormore ofS02 emissions in any 24 hourperiod; or ii. combusted in a thennalincinerator and results in excess emissions of500 pounds or more ofS02 in any 24-hourperiod. Only those time periods which are in excess ofa S02 concentration of250 ppm(rolling 12-hollr average) shall be used to detennine the amount ofexcess S02 emissions from the incinerator. CITGO shall use engineeringjudgment andJor othermonitoring data to estimate emissions during periods in which the S02 continuous. emission analyzerhas exceeded the. range ofthe instrument or is out ofservice. 

## m. "Total Catalyst" shall mean all fonus ofcatalyst added to the FCCU, including but not limited to base catalyst and equilibrium catalyst, but excluding PollutantReducing Catalyst Additive. 

### JJJ. "Upstream Process Units" shall mean all amine contactors, amine scrubbers, and
sour water strippers at the Covered Refineries, as well as all process units at these refineries that produce gaseous or aqueous waste streams that are processed at amine contactors, amine scrubbers, or sourwater strippers. 

### 19

### KKK. "Weight 

### % Pollutant Reducing Catalyst Additive Rate" shall mean: Amount ofPollutant Reducing CatalYSt Additive (Ib/day) Amount ofTotal Catalyst added (Ib/day) 

### x 100%
V. AFFIRMATIVE RELIEF/ ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS A. NOx EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM FCCUs. 11. General
.. CITGO shall implement aprogram to reduce NOx emissions from the CoveredFCCUs. Pursuant to Section V.N ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall apply for permits containing NO, emission limits establishedunderthis Consent Decree. CITGO will monitor compliance with the emission limits through the use ofCEMS. 12. Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems ("CEMS"). Beginning no later than the dates listedbelow, CITGO shall, connnence operation of, calibrate and certifjr CEMS for 

### NOx,Oz, SOz, CO and Opacity at the following FCCUs: 

### Oz . SOz NOx CO Opacity Corpus Christi Date of April 1, 2007 Date ofEntry April 1, 2007 Date ofEntry East #1 .Entry Corplls Christi Date of Date ofEntry Date ofEntry Date ofEntry Date ofEntry East #2 Entry Lake Charles October 1, OctoberI, October 1, October 1, October 1, Unit A 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 Lake Charles October 1, October 1, October 1, October 1, October 1, UnitB 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 Lake Charles October I, OctoberI, October I, October I, October 1, UnitC 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 Lemont Date of Date ofEntry Date ofEntry Date ofEntry Date ofEntry Entry

20The CEMS shall be installed, calibrated and certified in accordance with 40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.13 and· Part 60 Appendices A and F, and the applicable perfonnance specification test of40 C.F.R. Part 60 Appendix B. However, in lieu ofthe requirements of40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix F §§ 5.1.1, 5T3, and 5.1.4, CITGO may conduct: (1) either aRelative AccuracyAudit ("RAA") or a Relative AccuracyTest Audit ("RATA'') once every three (3) years; and (2) a Cylinder Gas Audit ("CGA") each calendar quarter in which a RAA or RATA is not perfonned. The Parties agree that the CEMS may need to be moved and reinstalled because ofthe installation ofcontrol equipment, and that once moved will need to be re-calibrated and re-certified. Ifuse ofa continuous opacity monitor ("COMS") is not feasible on an FCCU with a Wet Gas Scrubber, CITGO shall submit to EPA an alternative monitoring plan no later than six (6) months prior to the date CITGO intends to commence. operation ofeach Wet Gas Scrubber ("WGS"). 

### 13. NOx Emission Limit at Corpus Cbristi FCCD 

### 2. Beginning no later than June 

### I, 2005, CITGO shall complywith an interim

### NO, emission limitof23 ppmvd at 0%02 on a 365- day rolling average basis and 60 ppmvd at 0% 

### O2 on a 24-hourrolling average basis from FCCU 

### 2 at the Corpus Christi EastRefmery ("Corpus Christi FCCU 2"). 14. [Intentionally leftblank] 15. [Intentionallylefiblank] 16.. NOx Minimization Study at Corous Christi FCCD 2. Byno laterthan June 1, 2005, CITGO shall begin a 2-month study ofthe Corpus Christi FCCU 2 regeneratorin an effort to minimize NOxemissions by minimizing regenerator oxygen and usage ofplatinum combustion promoterto the extent practicable without creating a safety problem, interfering with conversion orprocessing rates, yield selectivity or otherwise exceeding previously established
21and complied with operating limits, provided such cannotbe reasonably compensated for by adjustment(s) to other operating parameters. ("NOx Minimization Study"). By no laterthan August 31, 2005, CITGO shall submit the results ofsuch NOx Minimization Studyto EPA. As part ofthe NOx Minimization Study, CITGO shall provide ail ofthe parameters listed in Paragraph 19 on a daily average basis during the NOx Minimization Study. Upon requestby EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, readily available data that EPA determines itneeds to evaluate the NOx Minimization Study. 17. NOx Minimization Protocol for Corpus Christi FCCD 2. By no later than August 31, 2005, CITGO shall propose for EPA review and approval aprotocol for operation of Corpus Christi FCCU 2 in a waythat minimizes NOx emissions to the extentpracticable and without creating a safetyproblem, interfering with conversion orprocessing rates, yield selectivity or otherwise exceeding previously established and complied with operating limits, provided such cannot be reasonably compensated for by adjustment(s) to other operating parameters (UNOx Minimization Protocol"). 18. NOx Minimizatiou Demoustration at the Corpus Christi FCCD 2. Byno later than November 30, 2005, CITGO shall begin an 18c month demonstration ("Demonstration Period") ofCorpus Christi FCCU 2 to establish long term (I.e., 365-dayrolling average) and short term (e.g., 7-day or 24-hourrolling average) emission limits for NOx in ppmvd at 0% 

### Oz. During the Demonstration Period, CITGO shall operate Corpus Christi FCCU 2 in accordance with the EPA-approved NOx Minimization Protocol. 19. NOxMinimization Demonstration Report for Corpns Christi FCCD 2. Byno laterthan August 31, 2007, CITGO shall report the results ofthe demonstration (''NOx 22Minimization Demonstration Report") to EPA. The NOx Minimization Demonstration Report shall include, at a minimum, the NOx and O2 CEMS data recorded during the Demonstration Period andthe following data on a daily or daily average basis as measured directly (where available) or as calculated (where necessary):
a. Regenerator bed, dilute phase, cyclone and flue gas, temperatures; b. Coke burn rate in pounds perhour; c. FCCD feed rate in barrels per day; d. FCCD feed API gravity; e. FCCD feed sulfur and basic nitrogen (where available) content as a weight %; f. Estimated percentage, and where available, actual percentage ofeach type of FCCD feed component (i.e. atmospheric gas oil, vacuum gas oil, atmospheric towerbottoms, vacuum tower bottoms, etc.); g. Estimated percentage, and where available, actual percentage by volume ofthe FCCD feed that is hydrotreated; h. FCCD feed hydrotreatyrreactorpressures and temperatures; 

### i. CO boiler firing rate and fuel type, ifapplicable; J. CO boiler combustion temperature, ifapplicable; k. Total Catalyst addition and catalyst circulation rates; 

### 1. Conventional combustion promoter addition rates; m, Hourly and daily volume percent oxygen 

### in the regenerator fuel gas and at the point ofCEMs measurement; and n. Hourly and daily SOz, NOx, and CO mass emission rates in pounds per hour, tons per year, and concentrations 

### in ppmvd at 0% oxygen. . Upon request by EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data to EPA. In the NOx Minimization Demonstration Report, CITGO shall propose a short term (i.e., 7-day and 24-hour rolling average) and a 365-day rolling average concentration-based (ppmvd) NOx emission limits, as measured at 0% Oz. CITGO shall comply with the emission limits it proposes for Corpus Christi

# Fccu 2 beginning immediately upon submission ofthe 

### NOx Minimization Demonstration Report. CrrGO shall continue to comply with these limits unless and until CITGO is required to comply with the emissions limits set by EPA pursuant to Paragraph 20.
2320. Establishine NO:!; Emission Limits for Corpus Christi FCCU 2. EPA will use the data collected about the Corpus Christi FCCU 2 during the NOx Minimization Study and the Demonstration Period, as well as all other available and relevant information, to establish limits which can be met with a reasonable certainty ofcompliance but which shall be no lower than 20 ppmvd at 0% oxygen on a 365-dayrolling average basis and no higher than 23 ppmvd at 0% oxygen on a 365-dayrolling average basis for NOx emissions from Corpus Christi FCCU 2. Upon request by EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, readily available data that EPA detemrines it needs to evaluate the demonstration. EPA will establish a short-term 

### (e.g., 24-hour
or 7-dayrolling average) and a 365-dayrolling average concentration-based (ppmvd) NOx emission limit corrected to 0% oxygen, provided, however, that ifEPA establishes a 365-day rolling average concentration-based NOx limit of20 ppmvd at 0% oxygen, the short-term limit will then be 40 ppmvd at 0% oxygen (7-day rolling average). EPA will determine the limits based on:. (i) the level ofperformance during the baseline, Minimization Study and Demonstration Period; (ii) a reasonable certainty ofcompliance; and (iii) any other available and


## . . relevant information. EPA will notify CITGO ofits determination ofthe concentration-based NOx emissions limit and averaging times. EPA may establish alternative emissions limits to be applicable during alternative operating scenarios (e.g., during HydrotreaterOutages). CITGO shall immediately (or within thirty (30) days, ifEPA's limit is more stringent than the limit proposed.by CITGO) operate the FCCU so as to comply with the EPA-established emission limits. Disputes regarding the appropriate emission limits shall be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution provisions ofthis Decree; provided however, that during the period of

24dispute resolution, CITGO shal1 comply with the emission limits it proposed WlderParagraph 19. CITGO shal1 demonstrate compliance with its emission limits pursuant to Paragraph 31. 21. Conversion ofCorpus Christi FCCD 1 and the Lemont FCCD to Full Burn Operation. CITGO shal1 no later than December 31, 2006 either convert FCCD 1 at the Corpus Christi East Refinery ("Corpus Christi FCCD I") to Fu11Burn Operation, or accept and agree to complywith concentration based emission limits of20 ppmvd on a 365-dayrolling average and 40ppmvd on a 7-dayroIling average basis, both at 0% oxygen, at the Corpus Christi FCCD 

### 1. CITGO shal1 no laterthan December 31, 2007 either convert the FCCD at the Lemont Refinery ("LerilOnt FCCU') to Ful1 Burn Operation, or accept and agree to complywith concentration

.based emission limits of20 ppmvd on a 365-dayrol1ing average and 40 ppmvd on a 7-dayrol1ing

. average basis, both at 0% oxygen, at the Lemont FCCD. As part ofthe conversion to Ful1 Bum

.Operation, eITGO shall take into account changes that maybe necessary to accommodateLow NOx Combustion Promoter at the maximum operating rate ofeach FCeD while controIIing afterburn adequately and maintaining CO emissions at compliant levels. 22. Installation ofLow NO}: Burners in Lemont CO Boiler. Byno later than December 31,2007, CITGO shal1 instal1 low NOx burners designed to achieve 0.060 Ib/mmBTU HHV ofNOx in the FCCD CO Boiler at the Lemont Refinery (assuming no air preheat and the
use ofnatural gas) to reduce NOxemissions from combustion ofauxiliary fuel. 23. Dse ofLow NOx Combustion Promoters and NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives at the Corpus Christi 

### 1, Lake Charles 

### A, Lake Charles B, Lake Charles C and Lemont FCCDs: 

### In General. CITGO sha1l implement a program to reduce NOx emissions from the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles A, Lake Charles 

### S, Lake Charles C and Lemont FCCDs 25

### . (collectively, "Corpus Christi I, Lake Charles, and Lemont FCCUs"). As required underSection V.N. ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall apply for permits containing new NOx emission limits and will use CEMS to monitor for compliance with the emission limits. 24. NO" Baseline Data for the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles, arid Lemont FCCUs. CITGO shall for each FCCU listed in the following table, no later than the dates specified in the table, submit to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies areport ofat least

. twelve (12) months ofbaseline data, including baseline datafor the baseline periods specified in

the table:

FCCD Baseline Start Baseline End

. 

### Report Corpus Christi I April I, 2007 March 31, 2008 June 30, 2008 Lake Charles A October 1, 2005. September 30, 2006 December 31, 2006 Lake Charles B October 1, 2005 September 30, 2006
. December 31, 2006 Lake Charles C October 1, 2005 September 30, 2006 December 31, 2006 Lemont April 1, 2008 March 31, 2009 June 30, 2009 The. baseline data shall include at a minimum, the data set forth in Paragraph 19. 25. [Intentionally Left 

### Blank] 26. Low-NOx Combustion Promoter

- Short-Term Trials for the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles, and Lemont FCeDs.
a. Identification and Selection ofLew NOx Combustion Promoters for Trial Use. By the following dates, CITGO shall select and submit for EPA approval at least two commercially available Lew NOx Combustion Promoters that CITGO proposes to use for later short-term trials

26at the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles, and Lemont FCCDs and shall submita protocol for conducting the trials by the following dates: Corpus Christi 1: Lake Charles A: Lake Charles B: Lake Charles C: Lemont: December 31,. 2007 June 30, 2006 June 30, 2006 June 30, 2006 December 31, 2008 CITGO shall propose use. ofat least two Low NOx Combustion Promoters that are likely to perform the best at reducing NOx emissions in each FCCD. EPA will base its approval or disapproval on its assessment ofthe performance ofthe proposed PrOmoters 

### in otherFCCDs and the similarity ofthose FCCDs to ClTGO's FCCDs, with the. objective oftestingLow NOx Combustion Promoters likelyto have the bestperformance in reducing NOx emissions while adequately combusting CO in the FCCD regenerator.. 

### IfEPA objects to one ormote ofthe proposed Low NOx Combustion Promoters, EPA will explain the basis ofits objectionsin writing. In the event that CITGO submits less than two approvable Promoters, EPA shall identifY and by that identification approve the use. ofother Low NOx Combustion Promoters. by CITGO.

27b. Minimization ofUse. ofConventional Pt-Based Combustion Promoter. CITGO shall
commence and complete aprogram ofminiIirization ofuse ofconventional Platinum-based ("Pt-based") combustion promoterto the amount necessary to adequately control afterburn. CITGO shallcomplete this program in accordance with the protocol set forth in Appendix D by the following dates for each ofthe following FeCUs:

FeeD Commence Date Complete Date Corpus Christi I April 1,2008 June. 30, 2008 Lake Charles A October 1, 2006 December 31, 2006 Lake Charles B October 1, 2006 December 31, 2006 Lake. Charles C October 1, 2006 December 31·, 2006 Lemont April I, 2009 June 30, 2009
c. Short-Term Trials ofLow NOx Combustion Promoters.. CITGO shall conduct trials of at leasttwo. EPA-approved Low NOx Combustion Promoters that were selected and approved under Subparagraph 26a, and such otherLow NOx Combustion Promoters as CIIGO may elect, for each ofthe following FCCUs in accordance with Appendix D bythe following dates:

FCCD Cornrnence.Date Corpus Christi 1 July 1, 2008 Lake Charles A January 1, 2007 Lake Charles B January 1, 2007 Lake Charles C January I, 2007 Lemont July 1, 2009

28d. Report on Results ofShort-Term Trials. and Minimization Program for Conventional Pt-Based Combustion Promoters. CITGO shall submit a report to EPA that describes the results ofthe minimization ofuse ofconventional Pt-based combustion promoter and the performance ofeach Low NOx Combustion Promoterthat was tested bythe following dates for each ofthe following FCCDs:



## FceD Report Date Corpus Christi 1 December 31, 2008 Lake Charles A June 30, 2007 Lake Charles B June 30, 2007 Lake Charles. C June 30, 2007 Lemont, December 31, 2009 ill the report, CITGO shall propose to use thebestperforming Combustion Promoter,as demonstrated and explained by CITGO 

### (e.g. bypercentage. ofNOx emissions reduced and the concentration to which NO. emissions were reduced in the trials without creating a safety problem or limiting conversion rates, processing rates oryield selectivity).
e. EPA Approval ofCombustionPromoters. For each ofthe five FCCDs subject to this Paragraph, EPA will either approve the Low NOx Combustion Promoterproposedby CITGO, approve another Low NOx Combustion Promoter that was tested by CITGO, or approve the use ofa conventional Pt-based promoter based on the criteria in Appendix D. IfEPA objects to CITGO's selection ofLow NOx Combustion Promoteror conventional Pt-basedpromoter, EPA will explain the basis ofits objections in writing. Upon request by EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the trials.

29CITGO shall use the approved Low NOx Combustion Promoter, or ifapplicable, a conventional Pt-based combustion promoterunder the terms ofAppendix D. f. Discontinuance ofLow NOx Combustion Promoters. CITGO may, upon EPA approval, discontinue use ofa Low NOx Combustion Promoter at a particularFeCU ifClTGO demonstrates that, as to that particularFCCU, CITGO has adjusted otherparameters and the Promoterbeing used does not adequately control afterburn and/or causes. CO emissions to approach or exceed applicable limits and/or exceeds safe operation limits. or equipment design limits. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITGO shall not be required to adjust operating parameters in a way that would create a safetyproblem orlimit conversion rates, processing rates
oryield selectivity. g. Use ofConventional Pt-Based Combustion Promoter. CITGO may use conventional Pt-based combustion promoter on an intermittent basis during the short-term trials underthis Paragraph, and the short-termtrials, optimization studies and demonstration periods under Paragraphs 27, 28, and 29, as needed to avoid unsafe operation ofthe FCCU regenerator and to comply with CO emission limits. CITGO shall undertake all reasonable measures and/or adjust operating parameters with a goal ofeliminating such use. Notwithstandingthe foregoing, CITGO shall not be required to adjust operating parameters in a waythat would create a safety problem or limit conversion rates, processing rates or yield selectivity. 27. NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives

- Short-Term Trials at the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles and LemontFCCUs.
a. Identification and Selection ofNOx Reducing Catalyst Additives for Trial Use. CITGO shall select and submit for EPA approval at least two commercially available NOx 30Reducing Catalyst Additives that CITGO proposes to use for later short-tenn trials at the Corpus Christi 

### 1, Lake Charles and Lemont FCCDs and shall submit a protocol for conducting the trials by the following dates: FCCD Corpus Christi 1 Lake Charles A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont 

### Report Date December 31, 2009 

### June 30, 2008 December 31,2006 December 31,. 2006 

### June 30, 2009 CITGO shall propose use ofat least two NOx Reducing CatalystAdditives that are likely to performthe best at reducingNOx emissions in each FCCD. EPA will base itsapproval or disapproval on its assessment ofthe performance ofthe proposed Additives in otherFCCDs and the similarity ofthose FCCDs to CITGO's FCCDs, with the objective oftesting NOx Reducing CatalystAdditives likely to have the best performance in reducing NOx emissions. 

### IfEPA objects to one. ormore ofthe proposed NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives, EPA will explain the basis ofits objections in writing. In the event that CITGO submits less than two approvable NOx Reducing CatalystAdditives, EPA shall identifY and bythat identification approve the use of otherNOx Reducing Catalyst Additives by CITGO.

31b. Short-Tenn Trials. ofNOx Reducing CatalystAdditives. CITGO shall conduct trials ofat least two EPA-approvedNOx Reducing Catalyst Additives, and such otherNOx Reducing Catalyst Additives as CITGO may elect, for each ofthe following FCCDs in accordance with the protocol approved pursuant to Subparagraph 27.a as soon as. practicable, but by no later than the following dates:

FCCU Commence Date Complete Date Corpus Christi 1 July 1, 2010 December 31, 2010 Lake Charles A January 1, 2009 June 30, 2009

. Lake Charles B July 1, 2007 December 31, 2007

Lake Charles C July 1,2007 December 31, 2007

. Lemont January 1, 2010 June 30, 2010

c. Report on the Performance ofNOx Reducing Catalyst Additives. CITGO shall submit
areport to EPA that describes the performance ofeachNOx Reducing Catalyst Additive that was tested no later thanthe following dates for each ofthe following FCCDs: FCCU Corpus Christi 1 Lake Charles. A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont Report Date February 28, 2011 August 31, 2009 February 28, 2008

. February 28, 2008

August 31, 2010 In the report, CITGO shaH propose to use the. best performing NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive,
as demonstrated and explained by CITGO 

### (e.g. bypercentage ofNOx emissions reduced andthe concentration to which NOx emissions were reduced in the trials without creating a safety problem or limiting conversion rates, processing rates oryield selectivity, provided such cannot. reasonablybe compensated for by adjustment(s) to other operating parameters).
32d. EPA Approval ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives. EPA will either approve the NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive proposedby CITGO or approve another NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive that was tested. Upon request by EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs. to evaluate the trials
.. IfEPA objects to CITGO's selection ofaNOx Reducing Catalyst Additive, EPA will explain the basis ofits objections in writing. CITGO shall use the approved NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive selected pursuant to this Paragraph in the Optimization Studies and Demonstration Periods required

. pursuantto Paragraphs 28 and 29. 28. NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives - Optimization Studies at the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles and Lemont FCCDs.
a. Optimization Study Protocol. CITGO shall submit, for EPA approval, aproposed protocol consistentwith the requirements ofAppendix D for optimization studies to establish the optimized NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive and combustion promoter addition rates bythe following dates for each ofthe following FCCDs: FCCD Corpus Christi I Lake Charles A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont Deadline February28,. 2011 August 31, 2009 February 28, 2008 February 28,2008 August 31,2010 The protocol shall include identification ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive, methods to calculate effectiveness, cost effectiveness, methods for base loading, and percentNOx Reducing Catalyst Additive used at each increment tested.

33. b. Optimization Studies. CITGO shall commence and complete the optimization study ofeach NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive and combustion promoterselected under Paragraphs 27.d and 26.e in accordance with the approved protocol and with Appendix D by the following dates for each ofthe following FCCUs: FCCU Corpus Christi 1 Lake Charles A Lake Charles B

. Lake Charles C

Lemont Commence Date May I, 2011 November 1,2009 May 1,2008 May 1, 2008 November 1,2010 Complete Date October 31,2011 April 31,2010 October 31, 2008 October 31, 2008 April 30, 2011
c. Optimization StudyRSlports. By the following dates for each ofthe FCCUs subject to this Paragraph, CITGO shall report the results ofthe optimization studies and propose, for EPA approval, optimized addition rates ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives. and combustion promoters to be used for the demonstration period: FCCU Corpus Christi I Lake Charles A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont Deadline December 31, 2011 June 30, 2010
. December 31, 2008 December 31,2008 June 30, 2011 Upon request by EPA, CITGO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the optimization study. CITGO shall include in its report a description ofany model CITGO used to predict uncontrolled NOx concentration and mass emission rate unless CITGO agrees to add NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive at 2.0 weight% as the optimized addition rate. Such description shall describe how the model was developed, which parameters were considered, why parameters



### 34were eliminated, efforts and results ofmodel validation, the statistical methods. used to arrive at the equation to predictuncontrolled NOx concentration and mass emission rate and all data considered in developing the model on a daily average basis. Upon request byE,PA, CITGO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data thatEPA determines it needs to evaluate the model. d. EPA Approval ofthe. Optimized Addition Rates. ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives and Low NOx Combustion Promoters. EPAwill either approve or disapprove each of the optimized addition rates proposed by CITGO, CITGO will not berequired to add increasing increments ofNOx Reducing Catalyst Additive beyond an additive rate. that results in any ofthe following:
I. The FCCD meets 20 ppmvd NOx at 0% O2 on a 365-dayrolling average, . provided CITGO agrees to accept limits of20 ppmvd NOx at 0% O2 on a 365-dayrolling average basis at the conclusion ofthe Demonstration Period; ii Incremental NOx Reducing Factor < 1.8. lb NOx/lb additive;
Ill. Total cost ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive> $10,000/ton NOx removed;. or iv. FCCU is operating at 2.0 Weight % NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive. IfEPA disapproves the. proposed optimized addition rate for eitherthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additives orLow NOx Combustion Promoters, EPA will explain the basis ofits disapproval in writing, and will specifY the approved optimized addition rate.

3529; NOx 

### Reducing Catalyst Additives

- Demonstration Periods fOT 

### the Corpus Christi I. Lake Charles and Lemont FCCUs.
a. Demonstration Period. CITGO shall commence and complete demonstration ofthe NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive and the Low Nox Combustion Promoter at the final optimized addition rates selected in Paragraph 28.d, or ifapplicable, a conventional Pt-based combustion promoterunder the terms ofAppendix D, bythe following dates for each ofthe following FCCUs; 

### FCCD Corpus Christi 1 Lake Charles A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont 

### Commence Date January 1, 2012 July 1, 2010 January 1,2009 January 1,2009 July 1, 2011 

### Complete Date June 30, 2013 December 31, 2011 June 30, 2010

. June 30, 2010

December3I,2012 For Corpus Christi FCCD I and Lake Charles FCCU A, the NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive, Low NOx combustion Promoter and 

### 802Reducing Catalyst Additive demonstrations. shall occur simultaneously. During the demonstration period, CITGO shall add NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive and operate the FCCUs, CO floilers (where they exist) and FCCU feed-hydrotreaters (where they exist) in a manner that minimizes NOx emissions to the extent practicable without creating a safety problem or limiting conversion rates, processing rates or yield selectivity, provided such cannot be reasonably compensated for by adjustment(s) to other operating parameters.

36b. NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive Performance Demonstration Report 

### (''NOx Additive Demonstration Report"). CITGO will report the results ofthe demonstration ("NQx Additive Demonstration Report") to EPA by the following dates for each ofthe following FCCUs:
FCCU Corpus Christi I Lake Charles A Lake Charles B Lake Charles C Lemont Report Date September 30, 2013 March 31, 2012 September 30, 2010 September 30, 2010 March 31, 2013 EachNOx Additive Demonstration Report shall include, at a minimum, the NOx and O2 CEMS datarecorded during the Demonstration Period and all ofthe applicable parameters under Paragraph 19 for the Demonstration Period
.. In eachNOx Additive Demonstration Report,

. CrrGO shallpropose a short-term (Le., 24C hour and7-day rolling average) and a long-term (365- dayrolling average) concentration-based (ppmvd) NOx emission limit, both as measured at 0% O2, for the Corpus Christi I, Lake Charles, and Lemont FCCUs. CrrGO shall complywith the emission limits it proposes for each ofthese FCCUs beginning immediately upon submission of the NOx Additive Demonstration Report for thatFCCU. CITOO shall continue to comply with these limits unless and until CITGOis required to complywith the emissions. limits setby EPA pursuant to. Paragraph 30. Upon requestby EPA, CITOO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the demonstration. 30
..Establishing NOx Emissions Limits 

### at the Corpus Christi 1, Lake Charles 

### and Lemont FCCUs. EPAwill use the data collected during the baseline period, the Optimization Period, and the Demonstration Period, as well as all other available and relevant information, to establish limits for NOx emissions from the Corpus Christi I, Lake Charles and Lemont FCCUs.
37EPA will establish short,term (e.g., 24-hour or 7"day rolling average) and a 365-dayrolling average concentration-based (ppmvd) NOx emission limits, both corrected to 0% oxygen, which limits. can be metby CITGOwith a reasonable certainty ofcompliance. EPA will determine the limits based on:· (i) the level ofperformance during the baseline, Short-Term Trials, and Optimization and Demonstrationperiods; (ii) a reasonable certainty ofcompliance; and (iii) any other available and relevant information. EPA will notify CITGO ofits determination ofthe concentration-based NOx emissions limit and averaging times for each FCCD. EPA may establish altemative emissions limits to be applicable during altemativeoperating scenarios (e.g., during Hydrotreater Outages). CITGO shall immediately (or within thirty (30) days, ifEPA's limit is more stringent than the. limit proposedby CITGO) operate the FCCD so as to comply with the EPA-established emission limits
.. Disputes regarding the appropriate emission limits shall be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution provisions ofthis Decree; provided however, that during the period ofdispute resolution, CITGO shall add additives in the manner and amount applicable during the Demonstration Period (in lieu ofcomplying with the EPA limits). 30A. Emission Limit Option. .CITGOmay, at any time up to and including its proposing emission limits underParagraphs 19 and/or 29, accept and agree to comply immediately with concentration based emission limits of20 ppmvd on a 365-day rolling average and 40 ppmvd on a 7-day rolling average basis, both at 0% oxygen, for a particular FCCD. In such circumstances, CITGO shall be absolved ofany remaining obligations for that FCCU under Paragraphs 13 through 30 ofthis Consent Decree.

38

### 31. Demonstrating Compliance with FCCU NOx Emission Limits for aU Covered FCCUs. CITGO shall use NOx and O2CEMS to monitorperformance and to report compliance with the terms and conditions ofthis Consent Decree. CITao shall make. CEMS data available to EPA as. soon as practicable following an EPA request for such data. B. S02 EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM FCCUs 32.
.General. CITGO shall implement a program to reduce S02 emissions from the Covered FCCDs. CITGO shall apply for permits containing new S02 emission limits established underthis Consent Decree, and CITGO will monitor compliance with the emission limits through the use ofCEMS. 33. Installation ofWet Gas Scrubbers on the Lake Charles B, Lake Charles C, and Lemont FCCUs. CITGO shall install and commence operation ofa Wet Gas Scrubber ("WaS") and complywith a S02 emission limit of25 ppmvd at 0% O2on a 365-dayrolling average basis and 50 ppmvd at 0% O2on a 7-dayrolling average basis for each ofthe following FCCDs by the dates specified: FCCU Lake Charles FCCD B Lake Charles FCCD C Lemont FCCD Deadline December 31, 2006 December 31, 2007 December 31, 2007 34. Use ofS02 Reducing Additives at the Corpus Christi }, Corpus Christi 2, and Lake Charles A FCCUs: In 

### General. As described below, CITGO shall implement aprogram to reduce S02 emissions and establish lowerFCCD S02 emission limits at the Corpus Christi 1, Corpus Christi 2, and Lake Charles A FCCDs (collectively "Corpus Christi and Lake Charles A FCCDs"), by using S02 Reducing Catalyst Additives.
3935. SO, Baseline Data for the Corpus Christi andLake Charles A FCCDs. CITGO shaIl for each FCCU listed in the following table, no laterthan the dates specified in the table, submit to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies a report ofat least twelve (12) months of baseline data, includingbaseline data for the baseline periods specified in the table: FCCU Corpus Christi 1 Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A Baseline. Start April 1, 2007 October 1, 2005 October 1, 2005 Baseline. End March31,2008 September 30, 2006 September 30, 2006 R6J1ort June 30, 2008 December 31, 2006 December 31, 2006 The baseline data shall include at a minimum, the data set forth in Paragraph 19. 36. [Intentionally LeftBlank]. 37. SO, Reducing Catalyst Additives

- Short-Term Trials for the Corpns Christi and Lake Charles A FCCDs.


### a Identification and Selection ofS02Reducing Catalyst Additives for Trial Use. By the following dates, CITGO shall select and submit for EPA approval at least two commercially available S02 Reducing CatalystAdditives that CITGO proposes to use for short-term trials at the Corpus Christi and Lake Charles A FCCUs: Corpus Christi 1 Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A June 30, 2008 May31,2006 December 31, 2006 CITGO shall propose use ofat least two S02 Reducing Catalyst Additives that are likely to perfonn the best at reducing S02 emissions in each FCCU. EPA will base its approval or disapproval. on its assessment ofthe performance ofthe proposed Additives in other FCCUs and· the similarity ofthoseFCCUs to CITGO's FCCUs, with the objective oftesting S02 Reducirtg Catalyst Additives likely to have the best performance in reducing S02 emissions. IfEPA

40objects to one ormore ofthe proposed S02 Reducing Catalyst Additives, EPA will explain the basis ofits objections in writing. In the event that CITGO submits less than two approvable Additives, EPA shall identify and by that identification approve the use ofother S02 Reducing CatalystAdditives by ClTGO. b.**Short~** Term Trials ofS02 Reducing Catalyst Additives. ClTGO shall conduct trials of at leasttwo EPA-approved S02 Reducing Catalyst Additives selected under Subparagraph 37a, and such other S02 Reducing CatalystAdditives as ClTGO may elect, for each ofthe following FCCUs in accordance with Appendix D by the following dates: FCCU Corpus Christi I Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A Commence Date January I, 2009 January 1, 2007 July 1, 2007 Complete Date June 30, 2009 June 30, 2007 December 31,2007
c. Report on the Performance ofthe S02 Reducing Catalyst Additiyes. ClTGO shall

. submit a report to EPA that describes the performance ofeach S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive

thatwas tested under Subparagraph 3Th by the following dates for each ofthe following FCCDs: FCCU Corpus Christi 1 Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A Report Date August 31, 2009 August 31, 2007 February 28,2008 In the report, CITGO shall propose to use the best performing additive as demonstrated and explainedby ClTGO (e.g., by percentage ofS02 emissions reduced and the conceotration to which S02 emissions were reduced in the trials without creating a safety problem orlimiting conversion rates, processing rates oryield selectivity, provided such cannot reasonably be compensated for by adjustment(s) to other operating parameters).

41d. EPA Approval ofthe SO, Reducing Catalyst Additives. EPA will either approve the S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive proposed by CITOO or approve another additive that was tested. IfEPA objects to CITOO's selection ofS02 Reducing CatalystAdditive,**~P** A will explain the basis ofits objections in writing. Upon request by EPA, CITOO shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the trials. CITGO shall use the S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive selected pursuant to this Paragraph in the. Optimization Studies and Demonstration Periods required pursuant to Paragraphs 

### 38 and 

### 39. 38. SO, Reducing Catalyst Additives

- Optimization Studies atthe Corpus Christi and Lake Charles A FCCUs.
a. Optimization StudyProtocol. CITGO shall submit, for EPA approval, a proposed protocol consistent with the requirements ofAppendix D for optimization studies to establish the optimized S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive addition rates by the. following dates for each ofthe following FCCUs: Corpus Clrristi 1 Corpus Clrristi 

### 2 Lake Charles A August 

### 31, 2009 August 

### 31,2007 February 

### 28, 2008 The protocol shall include identification ofthe S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive, methods to calculate effectiveness, cost effectiveness, methods for base loading, and percent S02 Reducing. Catalyst Additive used at each increment tested.

42b. Optimization Studies. ClTOO shall commence and complete the optimization study ofeach EPA-approved S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive 

### in accordance with the approved protocol and Appendix D by the following dates for each ofthe following FCCUs: FCCU Corpus Christi I Corpus Christi 2' Lake. Charles A Commence Date November I, 2009 November I, 2007 May 1,2008 Complete Date April 30, 2010 Apri130, 2008 October 31, 2008
c. Optimization Study Reports. By the following dates for each ofthe FCCUs subject to this Paragraph, ClTOO shall report the. results ofthe optimization study and propose, for EPA approval, an optimized addition rate ofS02 Reducing Catalyst Additive to be used for the demonstration period: Corpus Christi. I Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A June 30, 2010 June 30, 2008 December 31, 2008 CITOO shall include in its report a description ofany model CITOO used to predict uncontrolled S02 concentration and mass emission rate unless ClTOO agrees to add S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive at 10.0 weight % as the optimized addition rate. Such description shall describe how the model was developed, which parameters were considered, why parameters were eliminated, efforts and results ofmodel validation, the statistical methods used to· arrive at the equation to predict uncontrolled S02 concentration and mass emission rate and all data considered 

### in developing the model on a daily average basis. Upon request by EPA, cITao shall submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the model orthe optimization study. ClTaO shall use the approved S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive rate during the Demonstration Periods required pursuant to Paragraph 39.



### 43d. EPA Approval ofthe OptimizedAddition Rate. ofthe SO, Reducing Catalyst Additive. EPA will either approve or disapprove the optimized addition rate proposedby CITGo. CITGO will not be required to add S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive beyond an additive rate that results in any ofthe following;
I. The FCCD meets 25 ppmvd S02 at 0%02on a 365-dayrolling average, provided CITGO agrees to accept limits of25 ppmvd S02 at 0%02on a 365·dayrolling average basis at the conclusion ofthe Demonstration Period; ii. Incremental S02 Pick-up Factor 

### < 2.0 Ib SO,llb additive; or 111. FCCD is operating at 10.0 Weight % S02 reducing catalyst additive. 

### IfEPA disapproves the proposed optimized addition rate for the S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive, EPA will explain the basis ofits. disapproval in writing, and will specifY the approved optimized addition rate. 39. S02 Reducing Catalyst Additives

- DemonstrationPeriods for tbe Corpus Cbristi and Lake Charles A FCCUs:
a. Demonstration Period. CITGO shall commence and complete demonstration ofthe final S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive at the optimized addition rates selected under Paragraph 38.dby the following dates. for each ofthe following FCCDs: FCCD Corpus Christi 1 Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A Commence. Date January 1, 2012 July 1, 2008 July 1,2010 Complete Date June 30, 2013 December 31, 2009 December31,2011 For Corpus Christi FCeD 1 and Lake Charles FCCD A, the NOx Reducing Catalyst Additive, Low NOx Combustion Promoter, and S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive demonstrations shall
occur simultaneously, During the demonstration for the Lake Charles FCCD A, CITGO shall 

### 44hydrotreat all of the FCCD feed to the Lake Charles FCCD 

### A. During the demonstration period, CIIGO shall add S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive and operate the FCCDs, CO Boilers (where they exist) and FCCD feed hydrotreaters (where they exist) in amanner that millimizes S02 emissions to the extent practicable without creating a safetyproblem or limiting conversion rates, processing rates or yield selectivity, provided such cannot be reasonably compensated forby adjustrnent(s) to other operating parameters. b. S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive Performance Demonstration Report ("S02 Additive Demonstration Report"). CrrGO will report the results. ofthe demonstration ("S02 Additive Demonstration Report") to EPA by the following dates. for each ofthe following FCCDs: FCCD Corpus Christi 1
. Corpus Christi 2 Lake Charles A Report Date September 30, 2013 March 31, 2010 March 31, 2012 Each S02 Additive. Demonstration Report shall include, at a minimum, the S02 and O2 CEMS datarecorded. during the Demonstration Period and all ofthe applicable parameters under Paragraph 19 for the DemonstrationPeriod. In each S02 Additive Demonstration Report, crrGO shall propose 7-day rolling average and 365-dayrolling average**concentration~based** (ppmvd) S02 emission limits as measured at 0% O2for the Corpus Christi and Lake. Charles A FCCDs. CrrGO shall comply with the emission limits itproposes for each FCCD beginning immediately upon submission ofthe S02 Additive Demonstration Report for that FCCD. crrGO shall continue to complywith these limits unless and until it is required to comply with the emissions limits set by EPA pursuant to Paragraph 40. Dpon request by EPA, CIIGO shall

45
.submit any additional, reasonably available data that EPA determines it needs to evaluate the demonstration. 40. Establishine S02 Emissions Limits (or the Corpus Christi and Lake Charles A FCCDs. EPA will use the data collected during the baseline period, the Short-Term Trials, the' Optimization Period, and the Demonstration Period, as well as all other available and relevant information, to establish limits for S02 emissions from the Corpus Christi and Lake Charles A
. FCCDs. EPA will establish a 7-day rolling average and a 365-day rolling average concentrationbased (ppmvd) S02 emission limit corrected to 0% oxygen, which limits can be met with a reasonable certainty ofcompliance. EPA will detennine the. limits.based on: (i) the level of performance during the baseline, Optimization and Demonstration periods; (ii) a reasonable certainty ofcompliance; and (iii) any other available and relevant information
.. EPA will notify CITGO ofits determination ofthe concentration-based S02 emissions limit and averaging times for each FCCD. EPA may establish alternative emissions limits to be applicable during alternative operating scenarios, including, for example, during Hydrotreater Outages. CITGO shall immediately (or within thirty (30) days, ifEPA's limit is more stringent than the limit proposed by CITGO) operate the FCCD so as to complywith the EPA-establishedemission

.limits. Disputes regarding the appropriate emission limits shall be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution provisions ofthis Decree; provided however, that during the period of dispute resolution, CITGO shall add additives in the manner and amount applicable during the Demonstration Period (in lieu ofmeeting the EPA limits). 40A. Emission Limit Option. CITGO may, at any time up to and including its proposing emission limits under Paragraph 39, accept and agrce to comply immediatelywith 46·

### 47C. PM EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM FCCUs. 43. General. CITGO shall control and further reduc;e particulate matter ("PM") emissions. from the Covered FCCUsby the installation and operation ofWGSs and/or third stage separators ("TSS'') or continued operation ofelectrostatic precipitators ("ESPs"). 44. PSD Emission Limits for Lake Charles and Lemont FCCDs
a. CITGO will install and commence operation ofa WGS designed to achieve an emission limit of0.5 pounds ofPM per 1000 pounds ofcoke burned on a 3-hour average basis for the following FCCUs byno laterthan the dates set forth below for each FCCU: Lake. Charles FCCD B Lake Charles FCCU C Lemont FCCU December 31, 2006 December 31, 2007 December 31, 2007 b. Unless CITGO agrees to accept an emission limit of0.5 pounds ofPM per 1000 pounds ofcoke burned on a 3-houraverage basis, EPA will use the data collected under Paragraph 47, as well as other, available and relevant informatiOn, to establish PM emission limits for each FCCUwhich can be met with a reasonable certainty ofcompliance but which shall be no lower than 0.5 pounds ofPM per 1000 pounds ofcoke burned on a 3-hour average basis. EPA will determine the liinits based on : (i) the level ofperformahce during the Performance Test(s); (ii) a reasonable certainty ofcompIiance; and (iii) any other available and relevant information. EPA

### will notifY CITGO ofits determination ofan appropriate emission limit or limits. During any dispute underthis Paragraph, CITGO shall continue to operate the WGSs. required under this Paragraph in a manner consistent with good airpollution control practices in lieu ofmeeting the EPA-established limit under this Paragraph.



### 4845. PSD Emission Limits at the Corpus Christi 1, Corpus Christi 2, and Lake Charles A FCCUs. At any time during the life ofthe Consent Decree, CITGO may accept a PM emission limit of0.5 pounds ofPM per 1000 pounds ofcoke burned on a 3-hour average basis for the Corpus Christi 1, Corpus Christi 2, and/or Lake Charles A FCCDs that is/are. then reflected in a federally enforceable, non-Title V pennit. 46. NSPS PM Emission Limits for the Covered FCCUs. In accordancewith NSPS regulations at40 CPR, Part 60, Subpart

### J, CITGO shall comply with an emission limit of1.0 pounds ofPM per 1000pounds ofcoke burned on a 3-hour average basis for all ofthe Covered FCCUs by the foHowing dates:

Corpus Christi 

### #1 December 31: 2006 Corpus Christi #2 April 30, 2005 Lake Charles A March 31, 2010 Lake Charles B December 31, 2006 Lake Charles C December 31, 2007 Lemont December 31, 2007 The deadlines imposed above shall not affect ClTGO's obligation to complywith the MACT 2 (40 C.F.R. 

### § 63.640) in a timely manner. 47. PM Testine for the Covered FCCUs. CITGO shall follow the stack test protocol specified in 40 C.F.R. § 60.1 06(b)(2) using EPA Reference Method SB or SF to measure PM· emissions from the CoveredFCCDs. ClTGO shall propose and submit the stack testprotocol for approval to EPA by no later than three (3) months after a PM limit becomes effective for a particular Covered FCCD. ClTGO shall conduct the first stack test no later than three (3) months after EPA approves.the stack test protocol. Dntil tennination ofthe ConsentDecree, CITGO 

### 49shall conduct annual PM stack tests at each Covered FCCU. Upon demonstrating through at least three (3) annual tests that the PM limits are notbeing exceeded at a particular Covered FCCU, CITOO mayrequest EPA approval to conducttests less frequently than annually atthat Covered FCCU. Such approval will notbe unreasonably withheld. D. CO EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM FCCUs 48. CO Emission LimitsJor the Corpus Christi 2, Lake Charles A, Lake Charles D, Lake Charles C, and Lemont FCCDs. CITOO shall complywith emission limits of 100 ppmvd CO corrected to. 0% O2 on a 365-dayrolling average basis and 500 ppmvd CO corrected to 0% O2 on a I-hour average basis for the Corpus Christi 2 and Lemont FCCUs by no laterthan the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree. CITOO shall complywith the emission limits pursuant to this Paragraph for the Lake Charles A, Lake Charles Band Lake Charles C FCCUs byno laterthan the date ofinstallation ofCO CEMS pursuant to Paragraph 12 ofthis Consent Decree
.. 49. CO Emission Limits for the Corpus Christi 1 FCCU. CITOO shall comply with
an emission limit of500 ppmvd CO corrected to 0% O2 on a 1-hour average basis for the Corpus Christi 1 FCCU by no later than the date ofinstallation ofCO CEMs pursuant to Paragraph 12 of the Consent Decree. 50. Demonstrating Compliance with CO Emissions Limits at the Covered FCCUs. Beginning on the dates set forth in Paragraph 12, CITOO shall use CO and O2 CEMS to monitor emissions andto report compliance with the terms and conditions ofthis Consent Decree. CITGO shall make CEMS data available to EPA as soon as practicable following an EPA request for such data. 50E. NSPS APPLICABILITY TO FCCU REGENERATORS 51. Each ofCITGO'sFCCD regenerators at the Corpus Christi, Lake Charles, and Lemont Refmeries shall be an "affected facility," as. that term is used in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and J, and shall be subject to all ofthe requirements ofNSPS Subparts Aand J for each pollutant. CITGO shall complywith the requirements ofNSPS Subparts A and J for its FCCD regenerators for S02, PM and COby the following dates:

. S02 PM CO Corpus Christi FCCD January 1, 2012 December 31, 2006 April 1, 2007 1 Corpus Christi FCCD July 1, 2008 April 30, 2005 Date ofEntry ·2

Lake Charles FCCD January 1,2010 March 31,2010 October 1, 2005 A Lake Charles FCCD December 31, 2006 December. 31, 2006 October 1, 2005 B Lake Charles FCCD December 31, 2007 December 31, 2007 October 1, 2005 C Lemont December 31, 2007 December 31, 2007 Date ofEntry

F. NOx EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM HEATERS AND BOILERS 52. General
.. CITGO shall implement aprogramto reduce NOx emissions from the heaters and boilers at the Covered Refineries through the installation ofNOx controls orthe shut down ofunits and by applying for and accepting emission limits in apermit for the units controlled to meet the requirements ofParagraphs 54 and 58. CITGO will morutor compliance

51with the emission limits through the use ofCEMS,.PEMS, or stacktests as described 

### in more detail below. 53. Identification ofQualifying Controls. CITGO shall select one or any combination of the following "Qualifying Controls" to satisfy the requirements ofParagraphs 54 and 58:
a. SCR or SNCR; 

### -b. Current Generation orNext Generation Ultra-Low NOx Burners;

. c. other technologies which CITGO demonstrates to EPA's satisfaction should reduce NOx emissions to 0.040 pounds ofNOx permmBTU heat input or lower; d. permanent shutdown ofa heater orboilerwith revocationofits operating permit;

e. IfCurrent Generation orNext Generation Ultra-Low NOx Burners are technologically infeasible for a cylindrical heater and/orboiler, CITOO may propose an alternative single burner technology which CITGO demonstrates to EPA's satisfaction will reduce NOx emissions to 0.055 lbs permmBTU or lower;
or 

### £ in the case ofthe compressor engines at the Corpus Christi East Refinery, catalytic

. converters that are designed to achieve 2 grams ofNOx per Brake Horsepowerl

Hour (BhplHr). 54. Installation ofQualifying Controls. On orbefore June 30, 2011, CITGO shall use Qualifying Controls to reduce NOx emissions from the heaters and boilers listed in Appendix C (excluding those at the Paulsboro and SavarmahRefineries) by at least 50% ofthe revised
52n baseline identified under Paragraph 55A..For example andbased on the baseline identified in Paragraph 55, this amount would be 4,949 tons per year. The emission reductions required by this Paragraph 54 shall be demonstrated by satisfying the following inequality:



### • 

# I [(Ea'tual)'

- (Eallo""ble);];> XXXX 1=1

Where: [(The permitted allowable pounds ofNOx permillionBTU for heater orboileri)/(2000pounds per ton)] X [(the lower ofpermitted ormaximum heat input rate capacity in million BTU per hour for heater orboiler i) x (the lower of8760 or permitted hours per year)]; The tons ofNOx per yearprior actual emissions as listed in AppendixC for heater orboiler (unless prior actual emissions exceed allowable emissions, then use allowable); and The number ofheaters and boilers with Qualifying Controls from those listed in Appendix C that are selectedby CITGO to satisfy the requirements ofthe equation set forth in this Paragraph 54. CITGO shall have sole discretion to select the Qualifying Controls to be. applied on anyparticular heater, boiler or compressor engine and shall choose which heaters, boilers or compressor engines to control. Permit limits established to implement this Paragraph may use a 365-day rolling average for heaters and boilers that use a CEMS orPEMS to monitor compliance: CITGO shallinstall Qualifying Controls on two additional heaters orboilers with a heat input capacity of40 nunBtu/hr or more, one at the Paulsboro Refinery and the other at the Savannah Refinery.

5355. Baseline Heater and Boiler Information. Appendix C to this Consent Decree provides the following information for each heater orboiler larger than 40 mmBtulbr that operated during the baseline years listed in Appendix C at the Covered Refineries (excluding those. at the Paulsboro and Savannah Refineries):

a. the maximum heat input capacity or, ifless, the allowable heat input capacity in nunBtuJhr (HHV); b.· the actual emission rate for baseline years inpounds ofNOx permmBtu heat input (HHV) and tons per year; c. the type ofdata used to derive the emission estimate 

### (i.e., emission factor, stack test, or CEMS data); and,

. d. the utilization rate in annual average nunBtuJhr (HHV) for the baseline years.

55A. Revised Baseline Heater and Boiler Information
.. By.no laterthan February 28, 2005, CITGO shall submit a revised Appendix C to EPA for review and comment. This revision shall either (i) reflect that at least 75% ofCITGO's total estimated ton per year average NOx emissions (derived from 1999 and 2000 data for the LemontRefinery and 2001 and 2002 data for the Corpus Christi and Lake Charles Refineries) were derived from stack tests, CEMs, or portable analyzer or such other measurement device as maybe approved by EPA, or (ii) include results ofstack tests (Method 7E or an alternative method as approvedby EPA) on NOx emissions for the five heaters and boilers designated for stack tests in Appendix C. Appendix C (revised) will then be used to calculate the emission reductions required under this Section, including Paragraphs 54 and 57. The required reductions as specified in the inequality shall be 50% ofthe updated average CITGO NOx emissions (derived from 1999 and 2000 data for the

. Lemont Refinery and 2001 and 2002datafor the Corpus Christi and Lake Charles Refineries) in

tons per yearin the revised Appendix C. 5456. 

### NOxControl Plan. CITGO shall submit a detailed NOx control plan ("Control Plan") to EPA for review and conunent byno later than March 31, 2005, with annual updates (covering the prior calendar year) with the first report submitted pursuant to Section IX (Recordkeeping and Reporting) following the passage ofeach calendaryear until termination ofthe Consent Decree or until the. reductions required by Paragraph 54 are achieved, whichever occurs first. The Control Plan and its. updates shall describe the achieved and anticipated progress ofthe NOx emissions reductions program for heaters and boilers and shall contain the. following information for each heater and boiler greater than 40 mmBtulhr that CITGOplans to use to satisfythe requirements ofParagraphs 54, 57, 58, and, ifapplicable, 57A:

a. All ofthe information in Appendix C; be Identification ofthe type ofQualifying Controls installed orplanned with date installed or planned (including identification ofthe heaters and boilers to be permanently shut down); c. To the extent limits exist, the allowable NOx emission rates'(in lbsfmmBtu (HHV)), with averaging period) and allowable heat input rate. (in mmBtulhr (HHV)) obtained orplanned with dates obtained orplanned; d. The results ofemissions tests and annual average CEMS data (in ppmvd at 0% 

### 0z, and lbs/mmBtu) conductedpursuant to Paragraph 59 and tons per year; and e, The amount in tons peryear applied or to be applied toward satisfying Paragraph 54. Appendix C, the Control Plan, and the updates required by this Paragraph shall be for informational purposes only and shall notbe used to develop permit requirements or other operating restrictions. CITGO may change anyprojections, plans, or information (including, but not limited to, which units CITGO plans to control) that is included in the Control Plan or updates at any time.

5557. By September 30, 2008, CITGO shall install sufficient Qualifying Controls and have applied for emissionlimits sufficient to reduce NOx emissions by two-thirds ofthe NOx emissions.reductionsrequired byParagraph 54. In the first semi-annual update to be submitted to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies after September 30, 2008, CITGO shall include a report showing how it satisfied the requirement ofthis Paragraph. Consistent with Paragraph 54, CITGO shall install the remainder ofthe required Qualifying Controls byno laterthan June 30, 2011. 57

### A. Byno laterthan December 3 1,2005, CITGO shall infonn EPA and the CoPlaintiffs whether 

### it will install a cogeneration system at the Lake Charles Refinery. IfCITGO
so infonns EPA and the Co-Plaintiffs and installs the cogeneration system, the emission reduction required by Paragraph 54 shall be. raised by 525 tons peryear, but the interim emission reductiofl required byParagraph 57 shall be reduced to 1125 tons per year. 58. By no laterthan June. 30, 2011, CITGO shall have installed Qualifying Controls on at least 30% ofthe total heat input capacity in mrnBtu perhour (at lllIV) ofheaters and boilers with capacities greaterthan 40 mrnBtu/hr ateach ofthe following refineries: Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West, Lake. Charles. and Lemont. Any Qualifying Controls may be used to satisfY this requirement, regardless ofwhen the QualifyingControls were installed. 59. Forheaters. and boilers where Qualifying Controls are installed after the DatI'; of Lodging and beginning no later than 180 days after installing Qualifying Controls on and commencing operation ofa heater and boiler that will be used to satisfY the requirements of Paragraph 54, CIIGO shall monitor the heaters orboilers as follows:
56a. Forheaters and boilers with a capacity greaterthan 150 mmBtuIhr (HHV), install or continue to operate a NOx CEMS; b. For heaters and boilers with a capacity greater than 100 mmBtuIhr 

### (HHV) but less than or equal to 150 mmBtulhr (HHV), install or continue. to operate a NOx CEMS, or monitorNOx emissions. with a predictive emissions monitoring system ("PEMS") developed and operated pursuantto the requirements ofthe PEMS Program prepared by CITGO under this Paragraph. c. Forheaters and boilers with a capacity ofless than or equal to 100 mmBtuIhr (HHV), conduct an initial performance test and any periodic. tests that may be required by EPA orby the applicable State or local permitting authority under other applicable regulatory authority. The results ofthe initial performance testing shall be reported to EPA and Applicable Permitting Authority within 90 days ofcompleting the stacktest. CITGO shall use Method 7E to conduct initial performance testing required by Subparagraph 59c. Monitoring with a PEMS that is required bythis Paragraph shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements ofAppendix H. By no later than September 30, 2005, CITGO shall submit to EPA for review and commeut aPEMS Program in accordance with Appendix H. By no later than September 30,.2005, CITGO shall implement the specified monitoring requirements (CEMS, PEMS, stack test) based on the. capacity ofthe heater or boiler
as listed in Appendix C for units that utilize Qualifying Controls as ofthe Date ofLodging and which CITGO intends to use to achieve the NOx reductions. requiredby Paragraph 54.· 60. Demonstrating Compliance through 

### Use ofa NOx CEMS. CITGO shall install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and operate the CEMS required byParagraph 

### 59 in accordance with 40 C.F.R. 

### Part 60, Appendices A and F, and the applicable performance specification test of40 C.F.R. 

### Part 60, Appendix B. However, in lieu ofthe requirements of 40 C.F.R.Part 60, Appendix F §§ 5.1.1,5.1.3 and 5.1.4, CITGO may conduct either a Relative Accuracy Audit ("RAA") or a Relative Accuracy Test Audit ("RATA") once every three (3) years and shall

57conduct Cylinder Gas Audits ("CGA") eachcalendar quarter during which a RAA or a RATA is not perfOlmed. 61. The requirements ofthis Section V.F. do not exempt ClTGO from complying with any and all Federal, state, regional, and local requirements that may require technology, equipment, monitoring, or otherupgrades based on actions or activities. occurring after the. Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree, orbased upon new ormodified regulatory, statutory, orpermit requirements. However, nothing in this Section V.F. ismeant to prevent CrrGO from using the NOx reductions achieved pursuantto this Section towards future NOx emission reduction requirements except as prohibited under Section VI (Emission Credit Generation) ofthis Consent Decree.62. CITGO shall retain records demonstrating installation ofQualifYing Controls under Paragraph 54 and monitoring/test data under Paragraph 59 until termination ofthe Consent Decree. CrrGO shall submit such records to EPA uponrequest. G. SO, EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM AND NSPS APPLICABILITY OF HEATERS, BOILERS AND OTHER FUEL GAS COMBUSTION DEVICES 63. 

### General. CITGO shall undertake measures to limit SO, emissions from refinery heaters and boilers and other fuel combustion devices byrestricting H2S in refmery fuel gas and by agreeing not to burn Fuel Oil except as specificallypermitted under the provisions ofthis Section V.G. Flaring Devices are not subject to the provisions ofSection V.G., but rather are

. subjectto the provisions ofSections V.I., V.I. and V.K.

5864. NSPS 

### Applicability to Heaters. Boilers and Other Fuel Gas Combustion Devices (Other than Flaring Devices).
a. Upon the Date ofEntry, each heater and boilerthat combusts refinery fuel gas at the Covered Refineries shall be an affected facilitY, as that term is used in 40 C.F.R. Part 60,
.. Subparts A and 

### J, and shall be subject to, and comply with the requirements ofNSPS .Subparts A and J for fuel gas combustion devices, except for those heaters and boilers listed 

### in AppendixE, each ofwhich shall be an affected facility and shall be subject to and comply with the requirements ofNSPS Subparts A andJ for fuel gas combustion devices by the dates listed in AppendixE. b
.. By the date listed in Appendix F, each ofthe fuel gas combustion devices listed 

### in Appendix F shall be an affected facilitY, as that term is used in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and 

### J, and shall be subject to and comply with the requirements ofNSPS Subparts 

### Aand 

### J for fuel gas combustion devices.
c. WhereAppendix E or F specifies an alternative monitoring plan 

### ("AMP') submittal date (rather than a final NSPS Subpart 

### J compliance date), CITGO shall submit to EPA a timely and complete AMP application by the date(s) specified. To the extent that CITGO seeks approval ofan alternative monitoring method that is the same or substantially similarto the method identified in the "Alternative Monitoring Plan for NSPS Subpart J Refinery Fuel Gas" attached to EPA's December 7, 1999 letterto Koch Refining CompanyLP, which is attached hereto 

### in Appendix I, CITao may beginusing such method immediately upon submitting its application for approval to use such method. Ifan AMP is not approved, CITGO shall submit to EPA for approval a plan for complying with the monitoring requirements ofNSPS Subpart J for
59the particular equipment within ninety (90) days of receiving notice ofthe disapproval. The equipment will become an affected facility when the AMP has been approved or crrGO has fully implemented its approved plan. Suchplan may include a revised AMP application, physical or operational changes to the. equipment, or additional or different monitoring. d. FOr some heaters and boilers that combust low-flow VOC streams from vents, pumpseals,and other sources, it is anticipated that some ofthe AMP applications will rely in part \ on calculating a weighted average H2S concentration ofall VOC and fuel gas streams that are burned in a single heater orboiler and demonstrating with alternative monitoring that eitherthe S02 emissions from the heater orboiler will not exceed 20 ppm or that the. weighted average H2S concentration is not likelyto exceed 0.1 grains H2S per dry standard cubic foot offuel gas. EPA shall'not reject an AMP solely due to the AMP's use ofone ofthese approaches to demonstrating compliance with NSPS Subpart

### J. 65. EliminationlReduction ofFuel Oil Burning. Effective on the Date ofEntry, crrGO Shall notbumFuel Oil in any combustion unit at the Covered Refineries except during periods ofNatural Gas Curtailment. Nothing herein is intended to limit, or shall be interPreted as limiting, the. use oftorch oil during FCCU Startups. H. SULFUR RECOVERY PLANTS 66. Description ofSulfur Recovery Plants. CrrGO owns and operates Claus Sulfur Recovery Plants ("SRPs") at the Lemont, Lake Charles, Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi WestRefineries.

60a. Lemont SRP: The SRP at the Lemont Refinery ("Lemont SRP") consists offour Claus trains, Units 119 A, 119 B,.l21 C and121 D. There is a single Beavon Stretford Tail Gas Unit ("TGU") which serves as the control device for the two 121 Claus trains. b. Lake Charles SRP: The SRP at the Lake Charles Refinery consists offour Claus trains, A, C, D and E. There are two amine solution TGUs that serve the above-listed Claus trains.
c. Comus Christi (East) SRP: The SRP at the Corpus Christi (East) Refinery consists of two Claus trains. There is a single SCOT TGU which serves as the control device for the two Claus trains. d
.. Comus Christi (West) SRP: The SRP at the. Corpus Christi (West) Refmery consists of two Claus trains
.. There is a single SCOT TGU which serves as the control device for the. two Claus trains. 67. Claus Sulfur Recovery PlantNSPS Applicability. Each ofthe. following Claus SulfurRecoveryPlants shall be an "affected facility," as that term is used in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, as follows:
a. Effective on the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree, each SRP at the Lake Charles, Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi West Refineries shall be an "affected facility" under NSPS, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and J;

. b. Effective no laterthan 90 days after installation ofone ormore TGU(s) to control the emissions from the Lemont Claus trains 119 A and B; as required under Paragraph 69, the SRP at the Lemont Refinery shall be an "affected facility" under NSPS, 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and J; 61c. Notwithstanding Paragraph 67.b, above, effective on the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree until such time as the SRP at the LemontRefineryis an "affected facility," the Lemont Claus Trains 121 C and D ("Lemont Claus. Trains") shall be treated under this Consent Decree as an SRP that is. an "affected facility" that must complywith all provisions applicable to such an affected facility under 40 C.F.R. Part 60,. Subparts 

### A and 

### J. 68. 

### Claus Sulfur Recovery 

### Plant NSPS Compliance. By no later than the. effective date ofNSPS applicability for each ofthe SRPs and the Lemont Claus Trains as set forth in Paragraph 67, above, the SRPs and the Lemont Claus Trains shall complywith all applicable provisions ofNSPS set forth at 40 C.F.R.Part 60, Subparts 

### A and 

### J, including, .but not limited to, the. following:
a. Emission limit. CrrGO shall,. for 

### all periods ofoperation ofthe SRPs, complywith 40 C.F.R. § 60.104(a)(2) at each SRP except during periods ofStartup, Shutdown orMalfunction ofthe respective SRP, or during a Malfunction ofa TGU serving as a control device for the SRP. For the purpose ofdetermining compliance with the SulfurRecovery Plant emission limits. of40 C.F.R. § 60.1 04(a)(2), the "Startup/Shutdown" provisions set forth in NSPS SubpartA shall apply to each SRP and not to the independent start-up or shutdown ofa TGU serving as. a control device for the SRP. However, the Malfunction exemption set forth in NSPS Subpart 

### A shall apply to each SRP and to the TGU serving as the control device for the SRP
.

. b. Monitoring. CITGO shall monitor all emissions points (stacks) to the atmosphere for tail gas emissions and shall monitor and report excess emissions from each ofthese SRPs as required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 60.7(c), 60.13, and 60. I 05(a)(5), (6)or (7). During the life ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall conduct emissions monitoring from these SRPs with CEMS at all 62ofthe emission points, unless an S02 alternative monitoring procedure has been approved by EPA, per 40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.13(i), for any ofthe. emission points. Tl;1e requirement for continuous monitoring ofthe SRP emission points is not applicable to the Acid Gas Flaring Devices used to flare the Acid Gas or SourWater StripperGas diverted from the SRPs. 69. Lemont SRP Requirements.
a. CITGO shall install one ormore TGU(s) to control the emissions from the. Lemont Claus Trains 119 A and B by no laterthan December 31, 2008. Byno laterthan February 28, 2005, CITGO shall submit to EPA and IEPA a schedule for Lemont Claus trains 119 A and B that will ensure complianc.e with SRP NSPS. requirements by no laterthan December 31, 2008. b. CITGO shall also implement the following interim measures at the Lemont Claus Trains. 119 A and B: 

### i. CITGO shall continue to operate and maintain an S02 CEMS for monitoring the emissions from Lemont Claus Trains 119 A and B in accordance with 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart A, 

### § 60.13. ii
.. By no laterthan February 28, 2005, CITGO shall complete an optimization studyto minimize emissions and maximize sulfurrecover efficiencies atLemont Claus Trains. 119 A and B and shall submit a copy ofthat study toEPA and IEPA. This study shall meet the requirements set forth in Paragraph 70. CITGO shall promptly implement the physical improvements and operating parameters recommended in the study to optimize performance of Lemont Claus Trains119 A and B. 

### iii. By no laterthan April 30, 2005, CITGO shall submit a report to EPA and IEPA that proposes an appropriate interim performance standard (percent recovery efficiency and/or 63emission limitation) and, ifnecessary, a schedule for implementing related optimization study recommendations that are necessary to complywith CITGO's proposed standard. Beginningwith the date ofsuch submission, CITGO shall comply with its proposed interim performance standard or, ifnecessary, implement its proposed implementation schedule. iv. IfEPA determines. that a more stringent interim performance standard and/or a different implementation schedule is appropriate and can be achieved with areasonable certainty ofcompliance, after an opportunity for consultation with IEPA, EPA shall so notify CITGO. Unless CITGO disputes EPA's determination(s) within 90 days ofits 1\ receipt ofthat notice, it shall complywith such new standard within 90 days or, if necessary, such otherperiod as may be established by EPA basedupon the approved implementation schedule. CITGO shall continue to complywith the appropriate interim performance standard until such time. as CITGO completes installation ofthe TGU(s) in accord with the. scheduleunder Paragraph 69.a and operates the. Lemont SRP in

. compliance with NSPS Subpart

### J.

70. Optimization. The optimization studies required for the Lemont Claus Trajns 119 A and B shall meet the following requirements:
a. Detailed evaluation of plant design and capacity, operating parameters and efficiencies

- including catalytic activity, and material balances; b. An analysis ofthe composition ofthe acid gas and sour water stripper gas resulting from the processing ofcrude slate actually used, or expected to be used, in those Claus trains; c. A review ofeach critical piece ofprocess equipment and instrumentation within the Claus train that is designed to correctdeficiencies orproblems thatprevent the

.Claus train from achieving its optimal sulfurrecovery efficiency and expanded periods ofoperation;
64d. Establishment ofbaseline data through testing and measurement ofkey parameters throughoutthe Claus train; e. Establishment ofa thermodynamic process model ofthe Claus train; f. For any key parameters thathave been determined to be at less than optimal levels, initiation ofchanges designed to move such parameters toward their optimal values; g. Verification through testing, analysis ofcontinuous emission monitoring data or othermeans, ofincremental and cumulative improvements in sulfurrecovery efficiency, ifany; h. Establishment of-new operating procedures for long-term efficient operation; and I. Each study shall be. conducted to optimize the performance ofthe Claus trains in light ofthe actual characteristics ofthe feeds to the trains. 71. Sulfur Pit Emissions. CITGO shall continue to route orre-route all sulfurpit emissions at the Lemont, Lake Charles, and Corpus Christi East and West Refineries so that they
are eliminated, controlled, or included and monitored as part ofthe SRP's emissions subject to the. NSPS Subpart 

### J limit for S02' 40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.104(a)(2), byno later than the earlierof: (i) the first turnaround ofthe applicable Claus train that occurs on or after October 31, 2004; or (ii) March 30, 2007, provided, however, that ifLemont Claus Trains Il9A and/or Il9Belectto route such emissions to the TGU required under Paragraph 69.a, then by the date ofsuch TGU installation. 72. Sulfuric Acid Plant. By no laterthan December 31,2006, the Lake Charles Sulfuric Acid Plant shaH be an "affected facility," as that term is used in 40 C.F.R. Part60, Subparts A and 

### H, and shall comply with an emission limitation of3.5 pounds ofsulfur dioxide perton ofacid produced, three hour average, (production expressed as 100 percent sulfur acid); the acid mist standards found in 40 C.F.R.§ 60.83; and the emissions monitoring and testing requirements. in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and H. The Lake Charles Sulfuric Acid Plant



### 65shall**comply~ithth~** 3.5 lb SO, perton limit and the acid mist standards at all times except during periods ofStartup, Shutdown orMalfunction ofthe Sulfuric Acid Plant. 

### 73. Good Operation and Maintenance.
a. Byno laterthan February 28, 2005, CITGO shall submit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffa summary ofthe plans, implemented orto be implemented, at the Lemont, Lake Charles, and Corpus Christi East and West Refineries for enhanced maintenance. and operation of their SRPs, the Lake Charles Sulfuric Acid Plant and the appropriate Upstream Process Units. 'This plan shall be ternled a Preventive Maintenance and Operation Plan (''PMO Plan"). The PMO Plan shall be a compilation ofCITGO's approaches for exercising good airpollution control practices and for minimizing SO, emissions from sulfur processing and otherproduction processes at these refineries. PMO Plans shall have as their goals the elimination ofAcid Gas Flaring and operation ofSRPs between Scheduled Maintenance turnarounds with minimization ofemissions. The PMO Plan shall include, but notbe limited to, sulfur shedding procedures, startup and shutdown procedures ofSRP's, control devices and Upstream Process Units, emergencyprocedures and schedules to coordinate maintenance turnarounds ofthe SRP Claus trains :and any control device to coincide with scheduled turnarounds ofmajor Upstream Process Units. CITGO shall implement the PMO Plans at all times, including periods ofStartup, Shutdown and Malfunction ofits SRPs. Changes to a PMO Plan related.to minimizing Acid Gas Flaring and/or SO, emissions shall be summarized and reported by CITaO to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffin the semi·annual report required underParagraph 144. b. EPA, IEPA, and LDEQ do not, bytheir review ofa PMO Plan and/orby their failure to comment on a PMO Plan, warrant or aver in any manner that any ofthe actions that CITGO 

### 66may take pursuant tosuch PMO Plan will result in compliance with the provisions ofthe Clean Air Act or any other applicable federal, state, or local law or regulation. Notwithstanding the review by EPA or any"state agency ofa PMO Plan, CITGO shall remain solelyresponsible for compliance with the Clean Air Act and such other laws and regulations. I. HYDROCARBON FLARING 74. Good Air Pollution Control Practices. On and after the Date ofEntry, CITGO shall at all times and to the extentpracticable, including during periods ofstartup, shutdown,

.. upset and/or Malfunction, implement good airpollution control practices to minimize emissions

from its Hydrocarbon Flaring Devices consistent with 40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.11 (d). CITGO shall implement such good airpollution control practices to minimize Hydrocarbon Flaring Incidents by investigating, reporting and correcting all Hydrocarbon Flaring Incidents in accordance with the procedures in Paragraph 94. 75. NSPS Applicability ofHydrocarbon Flaring Devices: CITGO owns and operates the NSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Devices identified in Appendix B-1 to this Consent Decree. By·
no laterthan the dates identified in Appendix G,CITGO agrees that each such NSPS HC Flaring Deviceis an "affectedfacility" (as that term is used in NSPS, 40 C.F.R. Part 60) subject to, and required to comply with, the requirements of40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts A and 

### J, for fuel gas. combustion devices used as emergency control devices for quick and safe release ofgases.

. a. CITGO shall meet the NSPS Subparts A and 

### J requirements for each NSPS HC Flaring Device by using one or any combination ofthe following methods:
1. Operating andmaintaining a flare gas recovery system to prevent continuous or routine combustion in the NSPS HC Flaring Device. Use ofa flare gas recovery 

### 67system on a flare obviates the need to continnously monitor emissions as otherwise required by 40 C.F.R. § 60.105(a)(4);
n. Eliminating the routes ofcontinuous orintennittent, routinely-generated refinery fuel gases to anNSPS He Flaring Device and operatingthe Flaring Device such that it only receives. non-routinely generated gases, process upset gases, fuel gas released as a result ofreliefvalve leakage or gases released due to other emergency malfunctions; or
lll. Operating the NSPS He FlaringDevice as. a fuel gas combustion device, monitoring it for the continuous orintennittent, routinely-generated refinery fuel gases streams put into the flare header, with a CEMS as required by 40 C.F.R. § 60.105(a)(4) or with a parametric monitoring system approved by EPA as an alternative monitoring system under 40 C.F.R. § 60.13(i) and complying with emission limits when and as required byParagraph 76.a. CITGO shall implement the compliance option chosen for eachNSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Device according to the schedule 

### in Appendix G and identify the. option that was implemented for each NSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Device. in the first Semi-Annual Report due under Paragraph 144 after such compliance is. achieved. The Parties recognize that periodic maintenance may be required for properly designed and operated flare gas recovery systems. CITGO shall take all reasonable measures to minimize emissions while such periodic maintenance is being perfonned. b. Within 90 days afterbringing an NSPS Hydrocarbon FlaringDevice into compliance with NSPS Subparts A and 

### J, CITGO shall conduct a flare perfonnance test pursuant to 40 C.F.R.§§ 60.8 and 60.18, or an EPA-approved equivalent method. In lieu ofconducting the 68velocitytest required in 40 C.F.R. §60.18, CITGO may submit velocity calculations which demonstrate that the NSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Device meets the performance specification required by 40 C.F.R. §60.18. 76. Compliance with the Emission Limifat 40 C.F.R. &60.104(a)(1).
a. Continuous orIntermittent, Routinely-Generated RefineryFuel Gases. For continuous or intermittent, routinely-generated refinery gases that are combusted in any ofthe NSPS Hydrocarbon Flaring Devices, CITGO shall comply with the emission limit at 40 C.F.R: § 60.1 04(a)(l) by the dates specified in Appendix G. b. Non-Routinely Generated Gases. The combustion ofgases generatedby the Startup, Shutdown, orMalfunction ofarefineryprocess unit or releasedto an NSPS Flaring Device as a result ofreliefvalve leakage or other emergency Malfunction are exempt from the requirement to comply with40 C.F.R. § 60.104(a)(1). 

### J. CONTROL OF ACID GAS FLARING AND TAIL GAS INCIDENTS 77. Flaring History and Corrective Measures. CITGO has conducted a look-back analysis ofAG Flaring Incidents that occurred at the Covered Refineries from October 1, 1998, through September 30, 2003, and submitted a report on such incidents to EPA. 78. Future Acid Gas Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents:. CITGO shall investigate the.
cause offuture Acid Gas Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents, take reasonable steps to correct the conditions. that have caused or contributed to such Acid Gas Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents, and minimize Acid Gas Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents at the Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West, Lemont and Lake Charles Refineries.

6979. Investigation and Reporting. No later than forty-five (45) days following the end ofan Acid Gas Flaring Incident occurring after the Date ofEntry, CITGO shall submit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffareport that sets forth the following:
a. The date and time that the Acid Gas Flaring Incident started and ended. To the extent that the Acid Gas Flaring Incident involved multiple releases eitherwithin a twenty-four (24) hour period or within subsequent, contiguous, non-overlapping twenty-four (24) hourperiods, ClrGO shall set forth the starting and ending dates and times ofeach release; b. An estimate ofthe quantity ofsulfur dioxide that was emitted and the calculations

. that were used to determine that quantity;
c. The steps, ifany, that CITGO took to limitthe duration and/or quantity ofsulfur dioxide emissions. associated with the Acid Gas Flaring Incident; d. A detailed analysis that sets forth the Root Cause. and all significant contributing causes ofthat Acjd Gas Flaring Incident, to the extent determinable;
e. An analysis ofthe measures, ifany, that are available to reduce the likelihood ofa recurrence ofan Acid Gas Flaring Incident resulting from the same Root Cause or significant contributing causes in the future. Iftwo ormore reasonable alternatives exist to address the Root Cause, the. analysis shall discuss the alternatives, ifany, that are available, the probable. effectiveness and cost ofthe alternatives, and whether or not an outside consultant shouldbe retained to assist 

### in the analysis. Possible design, operation and maintenance changes shall be evaluated
.. IfCITGO concludes that corrective action(s) is (are) required under Paragraph 80, the report shall include a description ofthe action(s) and, ifnot aIreadycompleted, a schedule for its (their) implementation, includingproposed commencement and completion dates. IfCITGO concludes that corrective action is notrequired under Paragraph 80, the report shall explain the basis for that conclusion; 

### f. A statement that: (a) specifically identifies each ofthe grounds for stipulated penalties in Paragraphs 86 and 87 ofthis Decree and describes whether ornot the Acid Gas Flaring Incident falls under any ofthose grounds, provided, however, that ClrOO may choose to submit with the Root Cause Failure Analysis a payment ofstipulated penalties in the nature ofsettlement without the need to specifically identifY the grounds for the penalty. Such payment ofstipulated penalties shall not constitute an admission ofliability, nor shall itraise any presumption whatsoever about the nature, existence or strength ofCITGO's 

### 70potential defenses; (b) ifan Acid Gas Flaring Incident falls under Paragraph 88 of this Decree,. describes which Subparagraph 88.a or 88.b applies and why; and (c) ifan Acid Gas Flaring Incident falls under eitherParagraph 87 or 88.b, states whether or not ClTGO asserts a defense to the Flaring Incident, and ifso, a description ofthe. defense; g. To the extent that investigations ofthe causes and/orpossible corrective actions still are underway ou the due date ofthe report, a statement ofthe anticipated date by which a follow-up report fully conforming to the requirements of Subparagraphs 79.d and 79.e shall be submitted; provided, however, that if CITGO has uot submitted a report or a series ofreports containing the information required to be submitted under this Paragraph within the 45 day time period set forth in this Paragraph 79 (or such additional time as EPA may allow) after the due date for the initial report for the Acid Gas Flaring Incident, the stipulated penaltyprovisions ofSection XI shall apply, but CITGO shall retain the. right to dispute, under the dispute resolution provision ofthis. Consent Decree, any demand for stipulatedpenalties that was issued as a result ofClTGO's failure to submit the. report required under this Paragraph within the time frame set forth. Nothing in this Paragraph shaH be deemed to excuse CITGO from its investigation, reporting, and corrective action obligations under this Section for any Acid Gas Flaring Incident which occurs after an Acid Gas Flaring Incident for which CITGO has requested an extension oftime under this Subparagraph 79.g; and h. To the extent that completion ofthe implementation ofcorrective action(s), if any, is not finalized at the time ofthe submission ofthe report required under. this Paragraph, then, by nei laterthan thirty (30) days after completion ofthe implementation ofcorrective action(s), CITGO shall submit a report identifYing the corrective action(s) taken and the dates ofcommencement and completion of implementation. 80. CorrectiveAction.
a. In response to any AG Flaring Incident occurring after the Date ofEntry, CITGO shall take, as expeditiously as practicable, such interim and/or long-term corrective actions, ifany, as
are consistent with good engineering practice to minimize the likelihood ofa recurrence ofthe Root Cause and all significant contributing causes ofthat AG Flaring Incident.

71b. If EPA does not notify CITGO in Writing within forty-five (45) days ofreceipt ofthe report(s) required byParagraph 79 that it objects to one or more aspects ofthe proposed corrective action(s) and schedule(s) ofimplementation, ifany, then that (those) action(s) and schedule(s) shall be deemed acceptablefor purposes ofcompliance with Paragraph 80.a ofthis Decree. EPA does not, however, byits failure to objectto any corrective action that CITGO may take in the future, warrantor aver 

### in any manner that any corrective actions in the future. shaH result in compliance with the provisions ofthe Clean Air Act or its implementing regulations.
c. IfEPA objects, in whole or in part, to the proposed corrective action(s) andlor the schedule(s) ofimplementation or, where applicable, to the absence ofsuch proposal(s) andlor schedule(s), it shall notify CITGO and explain the basis fodts objection (s) in writing within forty-five (45) days following receipt ofthe report(s) required by Paragraph 79, and CITGO shall respond promptlyto EPA's objection(s).- d. Nothing in this Section V.L shall be construed to limit the right ofCITGO to take such corrective. actions as it deems necessary and appropriate immediately following an AcidGas Flaring Incident or 

### in the. period during preparation and review ofany reports required under this Paragraph. 8!. [Intentionally Left Blank] 82. [Intentionally Left Blank] 83. [Intentionally Left Blank] ·84. [Intentionally Left Blank] 85. Stipulated Penalties for Acid Gas Flaring Incidents. The provisions ofParagraphs 86 through 89 are to be used by EPA in assessing stipulated penalties for AG Flaring Incidents 72occurring after the Date ofEntry ofthis Consent Decree and by the United States in demanding stipulatedpenalties under this Section V.I. Theprovisions ofParagraphs 86-89 do not apply to .HC Flaring Incidents. 86. The stipulatedpenalty provisions ofParagraph 181 shall apply to any Acid Gas Flaring Incidel1t for which the RootCause was one ormore orthe following acts, omissions, or events:


### a Error resulting from careless operationbythe persounel charged with the**responsibil~ty** for the SulfurRecoveryPlant, Sulfuric Acid Plant, TGU, or Upstream Process Units; b. Failure to follow written procedures;
c. A failure ofequipmentthat is due to a failure by CITGOto operate and maintain· that equipment in a manner consistentwith good engineering practice; or 87. Ifthe Acid Gas. Flaring Incident is not a result ofone ofthe Root Causes identified in Paragraph 86, then the stipulatedpenaltyprovisions ofParagraph 181 shall apply ifthe Acid Gas Flaring Incident:
a. Results in emissions ofsulfurdioxide at a rate greater than twenty (20.0) pounds per hour continuously for three (3) consecutiv<;hours or more and CITGO failed to act in accordance with its PMO Plan .and/orto take any action during the Acid Gas Flaring Incident to limit the duration and/or quantity ofSOz emissions associated with such incident; or b. Causes the total number ofAcid Gas Flaring Incidents in a rolling twelve (12) month period to exceed five (5) per refinery. 88. With respectto anyAcid Gas Flaring Incidentnot identified in Paragraphs 86 or 87, the following provisions shall apply:
a. First Time: Ifthe Root Cause ofthe Acid Gas Flaring Incident was not a recurrence ofthe same Root Cause thatresulted in aprevious Acid Gas Flaring Incident that occurred since Date ofEntry, then: 

### 73

### (i) Ifthe Root Cause ofthe Acid Gas Flaring Incident was sudden, infrequent, and not reasonablypreventable through the exercise ofgood engineering practice, then that cause shall be designated as an agreed-upon malfunction for purposes ofreviewing subsequent Acid Gas Flaring Incidents; (ii) 

### Ifthe Root Cause ofthe. Acid Gas Flaring Incident was sudden and infrequent, and was reasonablypreventable through the exercise ofgood. engineeringpractice, then CITGO shallimplement corrective action(s) pursuant to Paragraph 80, and the stipulatedpenalty provisions ofSection XI shall not apply. b. Recurrence: Ifthe Root Cause isarecurrence ofthe same Root Cause that resulted in aprevious Acid Gas Flaring Incidentthat occurred since the Date of Entry, then CITGO shall be liable for stipulatedpenalties under Section XI unless: (i) the. Flaring !ricidentresulted from aMalfunction; or (H) the Root Cause previouslywas. designated as an agreed-upon malfunction under Paragraph 88.a.i; or (Hi) the AG Flaring !ricidenthad as its Root Cause. the recurrence ofaRoot Cause for which CITGO had previously developed, or was in the process ofdeveloping, a corrective action plan and for which CITGO hadnot yet completed implementation. 89. Defenses. CITGO mayraise the following affirmative defenses in response to a demand by the United States for stipulated penalties:
a. Force majeure. b. As to Paragraph 86, the Acid Gas Flaring !ricident does not meet the identified criteria.
c. As to Paragraph 87, Malfunction d. As to Paragraph 88, the !ricidentdoes not meet the identified criteria and/orwas due to a Malfunction. 90. In the event a dispute under Paragraphs 85 through 89 is brought to the Court pursuant to the Dispute Resolution provisions ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO may also assert a


### 74Startup, Shutdownand/orupset defense (including ofan individual sulfur recovery unit within
an SRP), but the United States shall be entitled to assert that such defenses are not. available; If CITGO prevails in persuading the Court that the defenses ofStartup, Shutdown and/or upset are available for AG Flaring Incidents under 40 C.F.R. 60.104(a)(I), CITGO shall not be liable for stipulated penalties for emissions resulting from such Startup, Shutdown and/or upset. 

### Ifthe United States prevails in persuading the Court that the defenses or Startup, Shutdown and/or upset are not available, CITGO shall be liable for such stipulated penalties. 91. Otherthan for a Malfunction or force majeure, ifno Acid Gas Flaring Incident occurs at eitherthe Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West, Lake Charles. orLemontRefinery for a rolling 36 month period, then the stipulated penalty provisions ofSection V.I
.. shall no longer apply to. that Refinery. EPA may elect to reinstate the stipulated penalty provision ifsuch Refinery has. an Acid Gas Flaring Incident which would otherwise be subject to stipulated penalties. EPA's decision shall notbe subject to dispute. resolution. Once reinstated, the stipulated penalty provision shall continue for the remaining life ofthis Consent Decree for that Refmety. 

### 92. Emission Calculations.

a. Calculation ofthe Ouantity ofSulfur Dioxide Emissions Resulting from AGFlaring. Forpurposes ofthis Consent Decree, the quantity ofS02emissions resulting from anAG Flaring Incident shall be calculated by the following formula: Tons ofS02= [FR][TD][ConcH2 S][8.44 x 10.5]. The quantity ofS02 emitted shall be rounded to one decimal point. (Thus, for example, for a calculation that results in a number equal to 10.050 tons, the quantity ofS02 emitted shall be 

### 75rounded to 10.1 tons.) Forpurposes ofdetennining the occurrence of, orthe total quantity of S02 emissions resulting from, an AG Flaring Incident that is comprised ofintennittent AG Flaring, the quantity ofS02emitted shall be equal to the sum ofthe quantities ofS02flared during each 24-hourperiod starting when the Acid Gas was first flared. b. Calculation ofthe Rate. ofS02Emissions During AG Flaring. Forpurposes ofthis Consent Decree, the rate. ofS02 emissions resulting from an AG Flaring Incident shall be expressed in tenns ofpounds per hour and shall be calculatedby the. following fonnula: ER = [FR][ConcH2 S][O.169]. The emission rate shall be rounded to one decimal point. (Thus, for exampie, for a calculation that results. in an emission rate of 19.95 pounds ofS02 per hour, the emission rate shall be rounded to 20.0 pounds ofS02 per hour; for a calculation that results in an emission rate of20.05 pounds 0[S02 perhour, the emission rate shall be rounded to 20.1.)
c. Meaning ofVariables and Derivation ofMultipliers Used in the Equations in this Paragraph 92: ER= FR=
TD=

8.44 X 1O,s = 0.169 = Emission Rate in pounds ofS02 perhour Average Flow Rate to Flaring Device(s) during Flaring Incident in standard cubic feet perhour Total Duration of Flaring Incident in hours Average Concentration ofHydrogen Sulfide in gas during Flaring Incident (or immediately prior to Flaring Incident ifall gas is being flared) expressed as a volume fraction (scfH2 S/scfgas) [lb mole 

### H 2

### S/379. scfH2S][64lbs SO/lb mole H2 S] [Ton/2000 lbs] [lb mole 

### H 2

### S/379 scfH2S][1.0 Ib mole SO/lIb mole H2S][64Ib SO,l1.0 lb mole S02] 

### 76The flow ofgas to the AG Flaring Device(s) ("FR") shall be as measured by the relevant flow

. meter Or reliable flow estimation parameters. Hydrogen sulfide concentration ("ConcH,S") shall

be determined from the SulfurRecoveryPlant feed gas analyzer, from knowledge ofthe sulfur content ofthe process gas being flared, by direct measurement by tutwiler or draeger tube analysis orby any othermethod approved by EPA orthe Co-Plaintiffs. In the event that any of these datapoints is unavailable or inaccurate, the missing data pointes) shall be estimated according to best engineeringjudgment. The report required under Paragraph 79 shall include the dataused in the calculation and an explanation ofthe basis for any estimates ofmissing data points. 93. Tail Gas Incidents. 

### a. Investigation. Reporting. Corrective Action and Stipulated Penalties. ForTail Gas Incidents, CITGO shall follow the same investigative, reporting, corrective action and assessment ofstipulated penalty procedures as those set forth in Paragraphs 79 through 91 for Acid Gas Flaring Incidents. Those procedures shall be applied to TGU shutdowns, bypasses ofa TGU, or other events which result in a Tail Gas Incident, including unscheduled Shutdowns ofa Claus SulfurRecovery Plant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, stipulated penalties shall not apply to a Tail Gas Incident attributable. to the scheduled startup or shutdown ofan individual train at the SRP located at the Lake Charles Refinery, provided that CITGO demonstrates thatit has implemented good airpollution control practices. This Paragraph 93 shall apply after the effective date ofNSPS applicability at each of the Covered Refmeries' SRPs, as provided in Paragraph 67 above. b: Calculation ofthe Quantity ofSOl Emissions Resulting from a Tail Gas Incident. Forthe purposes ofthis Consent Decree, the quantity ofSOl emissions resulting from a Tail Gas Incident shall be calculatedby one ofthe following methods, based·on the type ofevent: 771.

ii.

Where: IfTail Gas is combusted in a flare, the SO, emissions are calculated using themethods outlined in Paragraph 92; or

IfTail Gas exceeding the 250 ppmvd (NSPS J limit)is emitted from a monitored SRP incinerator, then the following formula applies: 20.9 - % O2 

## L [FRIo,]! [Cone. S02

- 250];[0.169 x 10.(;][ 20.9 

## 1 i"'l

Emissions from Tail Gas Unit at the SRP incinerator, pounds ofSO, over a 24 hourperiod Hours when the incinerator CEM was exceeding 250 ppmvd S02 on a rolling twelve hour average, corrected to 0% 02, in each 24 hour period of the Incident
. 1 

### '" Each hourwithin TDTGI FRIn,. '" IncineratorExhaust Gas Flow Rate (standard cubic feet per hour, dry basis) (actual stackmonitor data or engineering estimate based on the acid gas feed rate to the SRP) for each hour ofthe Incident Cone. S02 '" The average S02 concentration (CEMS data) that is greater than 250ppm in the incinerator exhaust gas, ppmvd corrected to 0% 02' for each hour of the Incident % O2 0, concentration (CEMS data) in the incinerator exhaust gas in volume % on dry basis for each hour ofthe Incident 0.169 X 10-6 = [lb mole ofS02 

### .! 379 S02 ] [641bs 

### S02/lb mole S02 ] 

### [1 X 10-6 ] Standard conditions = 60 degree F; 14.7Ibro"jsq.in. absolute In the event the concentration S02 data point is inaccurate or not available or a flow meter for FRIo" does not exist or is inoperable, then CITGO shall estimate emissions based on best engineeringjudgment.

78K. CONTROL OF HYDROCARBON FLARING INCIDENTS 94. For Hydrocarbon Flaring InCidents occurring after the Date ofEntry, CrrGO shall follow the same investigative, reporting, and corrective action procedures as those set forth in Section V.I. for Acid Gas Flaring Incidents; provided however, that in lieu ofanalyzing possible corrective actions under Paragraph 79.e and taking interim and/or long-term corrective action under Paragraph 80 for a Hydrocarbon Flaring Incident attributable to the startup or shutdown of
a unit that CrrGO has previously analyzed under this Paragraph, CITGO may identifY such prior analysis when submitting the. reportrequired under this. Paragraph. Byno later than the dates specified in Appendix G for identified coker flares, CrrGO will install equipment to minimize HC Flaring from cokerblowdown cycles. Prior to the completion ofthese projects, CrrGO shall notbe required to identifY orimplement corrective action(s), as under Paragraph 80, for HC Flaring Incidents from cokerblowdown cycles, unless. more than 500 lbs. ofS02 would have been released ifsnch equipment had been installed and in use. crrGO shall submit the Hydrocarbon Flaring Incident(s) reports 

### as part ofthe Semi-annual Progress. Reports required pursuant to Section IX. Stipulated penalties under Paragraphs 85

- 91 and SectionXI shall not applyto HydrocarbonFlaring Incident(s). The formulas at Paragraph 92, used for calculating the quantity and rate ofsulfur dioxide emissions during AG Flaring Incidents, shallbe used to calculate the quantity and rate ofsulfur dioxide emissions during HC Flaring Incidents. Neither this Paragraph 94 nor Section V.J. ofthis Consent Decree shall apply to Hydrocarbon Flaring Device 343 B-5 Flare Central at the Lake Charles Refinery
.. L. BENZENE WASTE NESHAP PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS 95. In addition to continuing to complywith all applicable requirements of40 C.F.R. Part 61, SubpartFF ("Benzene Waste NESHAP" or "Subpart FF"), CrrGO agrees to undertake

79the measures set forth in Section V.L. to ensure continuing compliance with Subpart FF and to minimize or eliminate fugitive benzene waste. emissions at each Covered Refinery. 96. Current Subpart FF Status.
a. CITGO has determined that the Lake Charles, Lemont, and Corpus ChristiEast Refineries each has a total annual benzene (TAB) ofgreaterthan 10 megagrarns (Mg) peryear. Commencing on the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree,. each ofthe above referenced refineries shall comply with the compliance option set forth at 40 

### C.F.R. § 61.342(e) (herein referred to as the "6BQ Compliance Option"); and b. CITGO has determined that the Corpus Christi West, Paulsboro and Savannah Refmeries each has a TAB ofless than 10Mglyr and that the Corpus Christi West Refmery has. a TAB ofgreaterthan 1.0 Mglyr. 97. Refinery Compliance Status Changes.. Commencing on the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree and for the duration ofthe ConsentDecree, CITGO shall not change the compliance option ofthe Lake Charles, Lemont, or Corpus Christi EastRefineries from the. 6BQ Compliance Option to the compliance options set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 61.342(c) or (d). 

### Ifat any time. from the Date ofEntry ofthe ConsentDecree. through its termination, the Paulsboro, Savannah or Corpus Christi West Refineries are determined to have a TAB equal to or greater than 10 Mglyr, each such refinery shall comply with the 6 BQ Compliance Option. 98. One-Time Review and Verification ofEach Refinery's TAB and Compliance with the Benzene Waste NESl!AP, including the 6 BO Compliance Option.
a. Phase One ofthe Review and Verification Process. Byno laterthan April 30, 2005, CITOO shall complete a review andverification ofthe Lake Charles, Lemont, CorpusClrristi East, Corpus Christi West, and Savannah Refineries TAB and its compliance with the Benzene Waste NESHAP, including the 6 BQ Compliance Option (ifapplicable). elTOO shall complete
80a review and verification ofthe Paulsboro RefineryTAB and compliance with the Benzene Waste. NESHAP by no later than August 31, 2005. CITGO's review and verification process at each Covered Refinery shall include, but not be limited to:
1. an identification ofeach waste streamthat is required to be included in the Refinery's TAB where these waste streams meet the definition ofa waste under 40 C.F.R. 

### § 61.341**~,** slop oil, tank water draws, spent caustic, spent caustic hydrocarbon layer, desalterrag layer dumps, desalter vessel process sampling points, other sample wastes, maintenance wastes, and turnaround wastes); ii.. a review and identification ofthe calculations. and/or measurements used to determine the flows ofeachwaste stream for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy offue annual waste. quantity for each waste stream;
111. an identification ofthe benzene concentration in each waste stream, including sampling for benzene concentration at no less than 10 waste streams per Refinery for the Lake. Charles, Lemont, Corpus Christi East and Corpus Christi West Refineries, and no less than 5 waste streams perRefinery for the Paulsboro and SavanIIalI Refineries, consistent with the requirements of40 C.F.R. 

### § 61.355(c)(I) and(3); providedhowever, that previous analytical data or documented knowledge ofwaste streams maybe used, 40 C.F.R. 

### § 61.355(c)(2), for streams not sampled; iv. an identification ofwhether ornotthe stream is controlled consistent with the requiremeuts ofSubpart FF; and
v. an identification ofany existing noncompliance with the requirements ofSubpartFF. Byno laterthan thirty (30) days following the completion ofPhase One ofthe review and verification process, CITGO shall submit a Benzene Waste NESHAP Compliance Review and Verification report ("BON Compliance Review and Verification Report") that sets forth the results ofPhase One, including butnot limited to the items identified in Subparagraphs (i) through (v) ofthis Paragraph.

81b. Phase Two ofthe. Review and Verification Process. Based on EPA's review ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report(s), EPA may select up to 20 additional waste streams. at each Covered Refinery for sampling for benzene concentration. ClTGO shall conduct the required sampling underrepresentative conditions and submit the results to EPA within sixty (60) days ofreceipt ofEPA's request. CITGO shall use the results ofthis additional sampling to recalculate the TAB and the uncontrolled benzene quantity, except where such results are not accurate due. to identified laboratory or analytical error, and to amend the BON Compliance Review and Verification Report, as needed. To the extent that EPA requires CITGO to re-sample any waste stream sampledby CITGO on or after January 1, 2003, CITGO may average the results ofsuch sampling events. CITGO shall submit an amended BON Compliance Review and Verification Report within ninety (90).days following the. date ofthe completion ofthe required Phase Two sampling, ifPhase Two sampling is requiredby EPA. 99. [Intentionally Left Blank] 100. 

### Implementation ofActions Necessary to Correct Non-Compliance or to Come Into Compliance.
a. Amended TAB. Reports. lfthe results ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report(s) indicate(s) that the reports submittedby CITGO pursuantto 40 C.F.R. § 61.357(c) or 6L357(d) for the Covered Refineries have notbeen filed or are inaccurate and/or do not satisfy the requirements ofSubpartFF, CITGO shall submit, by no laterthan sixty (60) days after completion ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report(s), .an amended TAB report to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies. b. Submittal ofCompliance Plans for the Paulsboro, Savannah. and Comus Christi West Refineries. Ifthe results ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report indicate that the TABs at the Paulsboro, Savannah, or Corpus Christi West Refineries exceed 10 Mglyr, 

### 82CITGO shallsubmit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiff; by no laterthan 180 days after completion ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report, a plan that identifies with specificitythe compliance strategy and schedule that CITGO will implement to ensure that the subjectRefmery complies with the 6 BQ Compliance Option as soon as practicable. Ifthe results ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report indicate that theTAB at the Paulsboro, Savannah, or Corpus Christi West Refineries is: (i) below I Mg/yr; or (ii) less than 10 Mg/yrbut equal to or greater than 1 Mg/yr, CITGO shall comply with the applicable Benzene Waste NESHAP regulations for such categories ofrefineries.
c. Submittal ofCompliance Plans for the Lake Charles, Lemont, and Corpus Christi East Refineries. Ifthe results ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report indicate that the uncontrolled benzene quantity at the Lake Charles, Lemont, or Corpus Christi East Refineries exceeds 6 Mg/yr, CITGO shall submit to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies, by no later than 180 days after completion ofthe BON Compliance Review and Verification Report, aplan thatidentifies with specificity the compliance strategy and schedule that CITGO will implement to ensure that the subject Refinery complies with the 6 BQCompliance Option as
soon as practicable. d. Review andApproval ofPlans SubmittedPursuant to Paragraphs 100.b and 100.c
.. Any plan submitted pursuant to Paragraphs 100.b or 100.c shall be subjectto approval or disapproval by EPA, which shall act after an opportunity for consultation with the. appropriate Co-Plaintiff. Within sixty (60) days after receiving any notification ofdisapproval from EPA, CITGO shall submit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffa revised plan that responds to all

83identified or alleged deficiencies. Upon receipt ofapproval or approval with conditions, 

## crroo shall implement the plan according to the schedule provided in the approved plan.
e. Certification ofCompliance with the 6 BO Compliance. Option. By no later than thirty (30) days after completion ofthe implementation ofall actions, ifany, required pursuantto Paragraphs 100.b, tOO.c, orlOO.d to come into compliance with the 6 BQ Compliance Option, 

## crroo shall submit a report to EPA and the appropriate Co·Plaintiffcertifying that, as to the subjectRefinery, the Refinery complies with the. Benzene Waste. NESHAP. 101. Carbon Canisters: 

## crroo shall complywith the requirements ofthis Paragraph at all locations at the Covered Refmeries where a carbon canister(s) is utilized as a control device under the Benzene Waste NESHAP.
a. 

## crroo shall continue to. use primary and secondary carbon canisters and operate them in series at all Covered Refineries where such systems are. in use as ofthe Date ofEntry of the Consent Decree and shall maintain a complete, accurate and up-to-date list at each such Covered Refmery that identifies the location where each secondary carbon canister is installed and whether VOC or benzene is used to monitor for breakthrough at each such canister.under Paragraph tOI.d, including the date ofany change to the constituent beirig monitored for breakthrough. b. Except as expressly permitted under Paragraph lO1.f, 

## crroo shall not use single carbon canisters for any new units or installations that require controls pursuant to the. Benzene Waste NESHAP at any ofits Covered Refineries.



### 84c. Fordual carbon canister systems, "breakthrough" between the primary and secondary canister is defined as any reading equal to or greaterthan 50 ppm volatile organic compounds, excluding ethane and methane (hereinafter in Section V.L. only "VOC"), or 5 ppm benzene. d. ClTGO shall monitor for breakthrough between the primary and secondary carbon canisters monthly or in accordance with the frequency specified in 40 C.F.R. 

### § 61.354(d), whichever is more frequent. This requirementshall commence: (i) uponDate ofEntrywhere dual carbon canisters currently are in service; and (ii) within seven days after installation ofa new, dual carbon canister system.
e. CITGO shall replace the original primary carbon canisters immediatelywhen breakthrough is detected between the primary and secondary canister. The original secondary carbon canister will become the new primarycarbon canister and a fresh carbon canister will become the secondary canister. Forpurposes ofthis Paragraph, "immediately" shall mean within twelve (12) hours ofthe detection ofa breakthrough for canisters of55 gallons or less,. and within twenty-four (24) hours. ofthe detection ofa breakthrough for canisters greater than 55 gallons. In lieu ofreplacing the primary canister immediately, CITGO may electto monitor the outlet ofthe secondary canister the day breakthroughbetween the primary and secondary canister is identified and each calendar day thereafter. This daily monitoring shall continue until the primary canister is replaced. 

### Ifthe constituentbeing monitored (eitherbenzene orVOC) is detected atthe outlet ofthe secondary canister during this period ofdaily monitoring, the primary canistermustbe replaced within twelve (12) hours ofthe detection ofa breakthrough. The original secondary carbon canister will become the new primary carbon canister and a fresh carbon canisterwill become the secondary canister. 85f. Temporary Applications. CITGO mayutilize properly sized single canisters for short-term operations such as with temporary storage tanks or as temporary control devices. For canisters operated as. part ofa single canister system, breakthrough is defined for purposes oftms Decree as anyreading ofVOC above background orbenzene above Ipprn. Beginning no later than October 31, 2004, CITGO shall monitorforbreakthrough from single carbon canisters each day such canister is used. ClTGO shall replace the. single carbon canisterwith a fresh carbon canister, discontinue flow, orroute the stream to an alternate, appropriate device immediately when breakthrough is detected
.. For this Paragraph, "immediately" shall mean within twelve (12} hours ofthe detection ofa breakthrough for canisters of55 gallons or less and within twenty-four (24). hours ofthe detection ofa breakthrough for canisters greaterthan 55 gallons. IfClTGO discontinues flow to the single carbon canister or routesthe stream to an alternate, appropriate control device, such canistermust be replaced before it is returned to service. g. ClTGO shall maintain areadily available supply offresh carbon canisters at each Covered Refinery at all times or otherwise ensure that such canisters are readily available to implement the requirements ofthis Paragraph 1Q1. h. ClTGO shall maintain records associated with the requirements ofthis Paragraph, including carbon canistermonitoring readings and the constituents being monitored for at least five (5) years after suchreadings occur.

, 102. Annual Program. By no laterthan May 31, 2005,. ClTGO shall establish or modify its written management ofchange procedures to provide for an armual review of process information for each Covered Refinery, including but not limited to construction projects, to



### 86ensure that all new benzene waste streams are included in the Covered Refinery's waste stream . inventory. CITGO shall conduct such reviews on an annual basis. 103. Laboratory Audits. CITGO shall

### co~atidjts ofall laboratories that perform analyses ofCITGO's Benzene Waste NESHAP samples to ensure that proper analytical and quality assurance/quality control procedures are followed for such samples.
a. Byno later than September 30, 2005, CITGO shall complete initial audits ofeach laboratory used by it. In addition, CITGO shall conduct a similar audit ofany laboratory to be used for analyses ofbenzene samples prior to such use. 

### IfCITGO has completed an audit ofany laboratory on or afterJune 30, 2003, initial audits ofthose laboratories pursuant to this subparagraph shall not be required. b. Ifand to the extent that a Covered Refinery submits its. Benzene WasteNESHAP samples to laboratories audited and certified byNew Jersey for the testing method required by the Benzene Waste NESHAP (as required for the Paulsboro RefineryunderNew Jersey law), CITGO need not separately audit such laboratory(ies) under this Paragraph.
c. During the life ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall conduct subsequent laboratory audits, such that each laboratory is audited every two (2) years. d. CITGO may conduct audits itself; retain third parties to conduct these audits, or use audits conducted byothers as its own, but the responsibility and obligation to ensure compliance with this Consent Decree and Subpart FF are solely ClTGO's. 104. Benzene Spills. For each spill at each Covered Refinery after the Date ofEntry of this Consent Decree, CITGO shall review the spill to determine ifany benzene waste, as defined by Subpart FF, was generated. For each spill involving the release ofmore than 10 pounds of 

### 87benzene in a 24 hour period, CITGO shall: (i) include the benzene waste generated by the spill in the relevant Covered Refinery's TAB, as required by 40 C.F.R. 

### § 61.342;. and (ii) as appropriate, account for such benzene waste in accordance with the. applicable compliance option. 105. Training.
a. By no laterthan May 31, 2005; CITGO shall develop and begin implementation of annual (i.e., Once each calendar year) training for all employees who draw benzene waste samples for Benzelle Waste NESHAP purposes. b. Forthe LakeCharles, Corpus Christi East, and Lemont Refineries, by no later than September 30, 2005, CITGO shall complete the development ofstandard operatiIlg procedures for all control devices and treatment processesused to comply with the Benzene Waste

. NESHAP. By no later than December 31, 2005, CITGO shall complete an initial training program regarding these procedures for all operators assigned to applicable control devices and treatment processes. Comparable training shall also be provided to any persons who subsequently become operators, priorto their assumption ofthis duty. "Refresher"training in these procedures shall be perfonned on a three year cycle.
c. Ifand when the Paulsboro, Savannah, or Corpus Christi West Refineries' TAB reaches 10 Mg/yr ormore, CITGO shall complete the development ofstandard operating procedures for all control devices and treatmentprocesses used to compiy with the Benzene Waste NESHAP. CITGO shall complete an initial training program regarding these procedures for all operators assigned to the relevant equipment. Training shall be provided to anypersons who subsequentlybecome operators, priorto their assumption ofthis duty. "Refresher" training shall be perfonned on a periodic basis. CITGO shall propose a schedule for the initial and 

### 88refresher training at the same time that CITGO proposes aplan pursuant to Paragraph 100.b that

. identifies the compliance strategy and schedule that CITGO will implement to come into

compliance with the 6 BQ Compliance Option. d. CITGO shall assure that the employees ofany contractors hired to perform any ofthe requirements ofSection V.L ofthis Consent Decree are properly trained to implement such requirements that they are hired to perform, as under Paragraph 105.a-c. 106. Waste/Slap/Off-Spec Oil Management. By no later than February 28,2005,. for

. each Covered Refinery, CITGO shall submit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffschematics

that: (a) depictthe waste management units (including sewers) that handle, store, and transfer waste/slop/off-spec oil streams; (b) identify the control status ofeach waste management unit; and (c) show how such oil is transferred within each Refinery. Representatives from CITGO and EPA thereaftermay confer about the appropriate characterization ofeach Covered Refinery's waste/slop/off-spec oil streams and the necessary controls, ifany, for the waste management ,units handling such oil streams for purposes ofeach Covered Refinery's TAB calculationandlor

compliance with the 6BQ Compliance Option. Ifrequested by EPA, CITGO shall promptly submit revised schematics that reflect the Parties' agreements regarding the characterization of these oil streams and the appropriate control standards. CITGO shall use these schematics 

### in preparing the end-of-line sampling plans required under Paragraph 107. 107. Ouarterly Sampling at Egd afLine and Point ofWaste Generation for Refineries nnder the 6 DO Compliance Option. eITOO shall conduct quarterly sampling at the Lake Charles, Lemont, and Corpus Christi EastRefineries under the terms ofthis Paragraph for the purpose ofcalculating quarterly, uncontrolled benzene quantities. 

### 89a. By no laterthan September 30, 2005, CITGO shall submit to EPA for approval,a sampling plan designed to identify the quarterlybenzene quantity in uncontrolled benzene waste streams, including waste/slop/off-spec oil. The sampling plan ("EOL Plan") shall include, but need notbe limited to: (i) proposed sampling locations and methods for flow calculations at the "end ofline" ofuncontrolled benzene waste streams; (ii) a simplified flow diagram that identifies significant, uncontrolled benzene waste streams that feed into. eachproposed sampling location; (iii) proposed sampling, at the "point ofwaste generation," ofeach waste stream that contributes 0.05 Mglyr or more to a Refinery's BQ; and (iv) quarterly sampling at all "end ofline" and point ofwaste generation locations identified in Paragraph 107.a (i) and (iii). b. Ifchanges in processes, operations, or other factors. lead CITGO to conclude. that its approved EOL Plan may no longerprovide an accurate measure ofthe Refinery's quarterly benzene quantity in uncontrolled benzene waste streams, CITGO shall submit a revised EOL Plan to EPA for approval.
c. CITGO shall commence samplingunder its EOL Plan during the fourth calendar quarter 0[2005 (regardless ofwhether or not the Planis approved at that time). CITGO shall take, and have analyzed, at least three representative samples from each identified sampling location. CITGO shall use the average ofall samples taken and the identified flow calculations to detennine its quarterlybenzene quantity in uncontrolled waste streams and to estimate a calendaryear value for each Refmery.

90108. Quarterly Sampling at End ofLine and Point ofWaste Generation for the Paulsboro, Savannah, and Corpus Christi West Refineries.
a. TAB. is under I Mglyr. 

### Ifthe results ofthe BON Compliance and Review Report indicate that the TAB for the Paulsboro. or Savannah Refineries is less than 

### 1 Mgfyr, no quarterly sampling shall be required. b. TAB is less than 10 MgIyrbut equal to or greaterthan 1 MgIyr. Ifthe. results ofthe BON Compliance and Review Report indicate that the TAB for the Paulsboro, Savannah, or Corpus Christi West Refineries is less than 10 Mgfyrbut equal to or greater than 1 Mgfyr, CITGO shall comply with.the provisions. ofParagraph 107 except that: (i) the EOL Plan shall be dhe byno later than December 31, 2005;. (ii) the quarterly sampling shall commence during the first month ofthe first full calendar quarter of2006 (regardless ofwhether or not the. Plan is approved at the. time); and (iii) after eight (8) quarters ofquarterly sampling, and based upon an evaluation ofthe prior samplingresults, CITGO may submit a request to EPA to modify the frequency ofthe sampling. EPA,. after an opportunity for consultation'with the appropriate CoPlaintiff, shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to such modification.
c. TAB is 10 Mglyror greater. Ifthe results ofthe BON Compliance and Review Report indicate that the TAB for the Paulsboro, Savannah, or Corpus Christi West Refineries is 10 Mgfyr or greater, CITGO shall comply with the provisions ofParagraph 107 except that: (i) the EOL Plan shall be due by no later than ninety (90) days after the date ofthe submission ofthe final BON Compliance and Review Report; and (ii) the quarterly sampling shall commence during the first month ofthe first full calendar quarter immediately following CITGO's

91submission ofthe EOL Plan to EPA (regardless ofwhether ornot the Plan is approved at the time). 109. 

### Calculation ofQuarterly and Projected Calendar YearUncontrolled Benzene Quantities and TABs. For any Covered Refinerythat is orbecomes subject to the 6 BQ Compliance Option at any time during the duration ofthis Consent Decree, at the end ofeach

. Calendar Quarter following commencement ofquarterly sampling, CITGO shall calculate a quarterly uncontrolled benzene quantity and shall estimate a projected calendaryearuncontrolled benzene quantitybased on the quarterly EOL sampling results, noncEOL sampling results, and the approved flow calculations. If, at any time during the duration ofthis Consent Decree, the TAB at the Paulsboro, Savaunah, or Corpus Christi WestRefmeries is less than 10 Mglyrbut equal to or greaterthan 1 Mglyr, CITGO shall calculate, at the end ofeach Calendar Quarter following commencement ofquarterly sampling, a quarterly TAB and aprojected calendar year TAB. based on the quarterly EOL sampling results, non-EOL sampling results, and the. approved flow calculations. CITGO shall submit the uncontrolled benzene quantity and, ifapplicable, TAB. calculations in the progress reports due under Section IX ofthis Decree. 

### 110. Corrective Measures.
a. Applicability, If, at any Covered Refinerythat is orbecomes subject to the 6 BQ Compliance Option at any time during the duration ofthis Consent Decree, the calculations in Paragraph 109 indicate that the quarterly uncontrolled benzene quantity exceeds 1.5 Megagrams
orthe projected calendaryearuncontrolled benzene quantity exceeds 6.0 Megagrams, CITGO shall submit a written report to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffthat evaluates all relevant information and identifies whether any action should betaken to reduce benzene quantities in its 92waste streams for the remainder ofthe calendar year. Ifadditional actions are determined to be necessary to ensure compliance with the 6 BQ Compliance Option, CITOO will include in its written report a plan as specified in Paragraph 

### II O.b. 

### If, at any time during the duration ofthis Consent Decree, the TAB at the Paulsboro or Savannah Refmeries is equal to or greater than I Mglyr, and the calculations in Paragraph 109 indicatedthat the quarterly TAB exceeds 2.5 Megagrams or the projected calendar year TAB exceeds 10.0 Megagrams, CITOO shall submit a written report to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffthat evaluates all relevant information and identifies whether any action should be taken toxeduce benzene quantities in its waste streams for the remainder ofthe calendaryear. Ifadditional actions are determined to be necessary to
ensure that its TAB remains below 10 Mglyr, CITOOwill include in its written report a plan as specified in Paragraph 

### II O.b. b. Corrective Measures Plan. CITOO shall, in any such corrective measures plan required by this Paragraph, identify: (i) the cause ofthepotentially elevated benzene quantities; (ii) all corrective actions that CITOO has taken or plans to take to ensure. that the cause will not recur; and (iii) a specific strategy and schedule that CITOO shall implement to ensure that CITOO complies with the 6 BQ Compliance Option or generates less than 10 Mglyr, as applicable. CITOO shall submit such plan and schedule, along with its report under Paragraph 11O.a, by no laterthan 60 days after the end ofthe Calendar Quarterin which one or more ofthe conditions specified inthe Paragraph 110.a is satisfied. CITOO shall implement its plan in accordance with the schedule provided therein.
c. Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review. After a second consecutive quarter in which at least one ofthe conditions in Paragraph IIO.a· continues to exist and ClTGO is not 93then able to identifY the canse(s) and/or appropriate corrective measures to ensure compliance with the 6 BQ option or that the refinery's TAB remains below 10 Mg/yr, CITOO shallretain a third-party contractor to undertake a comprehensive TAB study and compliance review ("Thirdparty TAB Study and Compliance Review") at the subject Refinery. By no later than the hist day ofthe next following quarter, CITOO shall submit a proposaltoEPA that identifies the contractor, the contractor's scope ofwork;. and the contractor's schedule for the Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review. Unless EPA disapproves or seeks modifications ofthe. proposal within 30 days after its receipt, CITOO shall authorize the contractorto commence work. CrTOO shall ensure that the work is completed in accordance with the schedule provided therein. No later than thirty (30) days after CITOOreceives. the results ofthe Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review, CITOO shall submit the results to EPA. After the report is subinitted to EPA, CITOO and EPA shall discuss informallythe results ofthe Third-Party TAB Study and

. Compliance Review. No laterthan ninety (90) days after CITOO receives the results ofthe

.Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review or at such other time as CITOO and EPA may agree, CITOO shall submit to EPA a plan and schedule for remedying any deficiencies identified in the Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review and any deficiencies that EPA identified following the Third-Party TAB Study and Compliance Review. Unless EPA disapproves or seeks. modifications ofthe proposal within thirty (30) days after its receipt, CITOO shall implementthe remedial plan in accordance with the schedule included in its plan. Ill. Miscellaneous Measures. The provisions ofthis Paragraph shall apply: (i) to the Lake Charles, Lemont, and Corpus Christi East Refineries, as ofthe Date ofEntry ofthis

94Consent Decree; and (ii) to the Paulsboro, Savarmah, and Corpus Christi West Refmeries only if the TAB reaches or exceeds 10 Mg/yr. CITGO shall:
a. Conduct monthly visual inspections ofand, ifappropriate, refill all Subpart FF water traps within each Refinery's individual drain systems; b. IdentifY and mark at the drain all area drains that are segregated storrnwater drains by
no later than February 28,2005;
c. IfCITGO utilizes conservation vents, visually inspect all Subpart FF conservation vents or indicators on process sewers for detectable leaks on a weeklybasis, reset any vents where leaks are detected, and record the results ofthe inspections. After two (2) years ofweekly inspections, andbased upon an evaluation ofthe recorded results, CITGO may submit a request to the appropriate EPA Region to modifY the frequency ofthe inspections. EPA shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to such modification. Nothing in this subparagraph shall require CITGO to monitor conservation vents on fixed rooftanks; and d
..Conduct quarterly monitoring and repair ofthe oil-water separators consistent with the "no detectable emissions" provision in 40 C.F.R. § 61.347. 112. Recordkeeping 

### and Reporting Requirements. CITGO shall submit to EPA, as and to the extentrequired, the following materials in the progress report(s) pursuant to Section IX (Reporting and Recordkeeping) for the six month period covered by the report:
a. An identification ofall laboratory audits, ifany, completed during the six month period, including a description ofthe methods used in the audit and the results ofthe audit; b. A description ofthe measures taken, ifany, dllring the six month period to comply with the training provisions ofParagraph 105; and
95c. A summary ofthe sampling results required under Paragraphs 107 and 108, including the quarterly and projected annual uncontrolled benzene quantities or TABs, 

## as applicable. M. LEAKDETECTION AND REPAIR ("LDAR") PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS. 113. In orderto minimize or eliminate fugitive emissions ofvolatile organic compounds ("VOCs''), benzene, volatile hazardous airpollutants ("VHAPs"), and organic hazardous airpollutants ("HAPs'') from equipmentin lightliquid and/or in gas/vapor service,

. CITGO shall undertake the enhancements identified in this Section V.M. to its LDARprograms

for each Covered Refinery under 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart GGG; Part 61, Subparts J and V; Part 63, Subparts F, H, and CC;. and applicable state and local LDAR requirements. The terms "equipment," "in light liquid service" and "in gas/vapor service" shall have the definitions set

. forth in the applicable provisions of40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart GGG;Part 61, Subparts 

### J and V; Part 63, Subparts F, Hand CC; and applicable state and local LDAR regulations. CITGOis not requited to include in the enhanced program described herein any equipment or units not otherwise subject to the applicable federal, state or local LDAR regulation, nor is any requirement ofthis Section V.M. intended to change the criteria for identifying valves orpurnps that are subject tothe various LDAR programs. 114. [IntentionallyLeft Blank] 115. Written Refinery-Wide LOAR Program. Byno laterthan April 30, 2005, CITGO shall develop and maintain a written program for compliance with all applicable federal and state LDAR regulations at each Covered Refinery. CITGO shall update the program as may be necessary to ensure continuing compliance. Such program shall include, at a minimum: 

### 96

### a. A leakrate goal for each CoveredRefinery and a target for achievement on a process-unit-by-process-unit basis; b. A procedure to identify all equipment in light liquid and/or in gas/vapor service thathas the potential to leak VOCs, HAPs, VHAPs, and benzene within each CoveredRefinery's process units;
c. Procedures for identifying leaking equipment within each Covered Refinery's process units; d. Procedwes forrepairing and keeping track ofleaking equipment;
e. Procedures for identifying and including in the LDARprogram new equipment; f 

### A process for evaluating new and replacement equipment to promote consideration and instaIlation ofequipment that wiII minimize leaks. and/or eliminate chronic leakers; g. A definition or designation of"LDARPersonnel" responsible for the day-today implementation ofthe LDARprogram and the designation ofan "LDAR Coordinator" who has. the authority and responsibility for implementing the enhanced LDARprogram at each Covered Refmery (byname orposition); and h. A procedure for regularly communicating LDAR information to appropriate CITOnpersonnel. 116. Trainfug. 

### By no later than May 31,2005, CITOD 

### shall begin to implement the foIlowing training programs at each Covered Refinery:
a. For personnel newly-assigned to LDAR responsibilities, 

## crroo shall require LDAR training priorto each employee beginning such work; b. For all personnel assigned LpAR responsibilities, CITGO shaIl provide and require completion ofannual LDAR training. Initial armual LDAR training for all suchpersonnel wiII be completed no laterthan September30, 2005.
c. For all other operations and maintenance personnel (including contract personnel) at each Covered Refinery, C1TGO shall provide and require completion ofan initial training program that includes instruction on aspects of LDAR that are relevantto the person's duties. Initial LDAR training for all
97such personnel will be completed no later than September 30, 2005. "Refresher" training shall be perfonned annually; and d. Ifcontract employees are perfonning LDAR work, CITGO shall assure thatits contractor complies with the training requirements in Subparagraphs 116.a-c,· as appropriate, for all such contractor employees andshall require the contractorto provide its training infonnation and records to CITGO. 117. LDAR Audits. CITGO shall implement at each Covered Refinery the refinerywide audits set forth in this Paragraph to ensure each Covered Refmery's compliance with all applicable LDARrequirements. The LDAR audits shall include, butnot be limited to, comparative monitoring, records review to ensure monitoring and repairs were completed in the required periods, component identification procedures, tagging procedures, data management procedures and observation ofthe LDAR technicians' calibration and monitoring techniques. During the 

### WAR audits, leak rates shall be calculated for each process unit where comparative monitoring was perfonned.
a. Initial Compliance Audit. Byno later than September 30, 2005, CITGO shall complete a refinery-wide audit ofits compliance with the LDAR regulations at each Covered Refinery, provided, however, that ifCITGO elects to conduct a third-party audit at the Paulsboro and/or Savannah refineries under Paragraph 117.b, such audit must then be completed byno later than March 31, 2006. Each audit shall include, at a minimum, the audit requirements set forth in this Paragraph. Within 60 days ofcompletion ofeach audit, CITGO shall either certifY compliance with all LDARrequirements or submit a report to EPA and the appropriate CoPlaintiffon areas oinon-compliance identified as a result ofits refinery-wide audit, including a proposed compliance schedule for correcting such non-compliance.

98b. Third-Party Audits. CITGO shall retain a contractor(s) with expertise in the LDAR program requirements to perform a third-party audit ofeach Covered Refinery's LDAR program. The first third-party audit at Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West, Lake Charles and Lemont shall be completedpursuant to Subparagraph 117.a ofthis Paragraph (lrritial Compliance Audit). Subsequent third-party audits shall be held every four (4) years thereafterfor the life ofthis Consent Decree. CITGO is. required by this ConsentDecree to perform only one third-party audit at the Paulsboro and Savannah Refmeries during the term ofthis Consent Decree.
c. Internal Audits. CITGO shall conduct internal audits ofeach Covered Refinery's LDAR Program by sending personnel familiar with the LDARprogram and its requirements from one ormore ofCITGO's other Refineries or locations. to. audit another CITGO Refinery
.. CITGO shall complete the first round ofthese internal LDAR audits no laterthan two (2) years after the date ofthe completion ofthe Initial Compliance Auditrequired in Subparagraph 117.a. Internal audits ofthe Lake Charles, Lemont, Corpus Christi East, and Corpus Christi West Refineries shall be held every four years thereafter. Internal audits ofthe Paulsboro. and Savannah Refineries shall be held every two (2) years thereafter. d
.. AuditFrequency. To. ensure that an audit at each Covered Refinery occurs at least every two years, third-party and internal audits shall be separatedby no more than two years.
e. Alternative. As an alternative to the internal audits required by Subparagraph 117.c, CITGO may electto retain third-parties to undertake these audits, provided that an audit ofeach Covered Refinery occurs every two (2) years. 118. Implementation ofActions Necessary to Correct Non-Compliance. Ifthe results ofany ofthe audits conducted pursuant to Paragraph 117 identifY any areas of 

### 99noncompliance, CITGO shall implement, as soon as practicable, all steps necessary to correct or otherwise address such fjTea(s) ofnon-compliance and to prevent a recurrence ofthe cause ofthat non-compliance, to the extent practicable. For the life ofthe Consent Decree, CITGO shall retain the audit reports generated pursuant to Paragraph 117 and shall maintain awritten record ofall corrective actions that CITGO takes in response to deficiencies identified in any audits. In the first semi-annual report after the completion ofan audit, see Section IX ofthis Consent Decree (Recordkeeping and Reporting), ClTGO shall submit a summary, including findings, of each such audit report and a list ofcorrective actions taken during the reporting period. In each subsequent semi-annual report under Section IX ofthis Corlsent Decree, ClTGO shall submit a list ofcorrective actions taken during thatreportingperiod and a notice, where appropriate, that all corrective actions have. been completed in response to a particular audit at a Covered Refinery.119. Internal Leak Definition for Valves and Pumps. CITGO shall utilize the following internal leak definitions for valves and pumps in light liquid and/or gas/vapor service, unless otherperroit(s), regulations, or laws require the use oflower leak definitions.
a. LeakDefmition for Valves. By no later than February 28, 2006, ClTGO shall utilize
an internal leak: definition of500 ppm VOCs for valves at the Lake Charles, Lemont, Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West, and Paulsboro Refineries, excluding pressure reliefdevices. By no later than December 31, 2006, CITGO shall utilize an intemalleak definition of500 ppm VOCs for valves at the SavannahRefinery, excluding pressure reliefdevices. b. Leak Definition for Pumps. Byno later than February 28, 2006, ClTGO shall utilize
an intemalleak definition of2000 ppm for each Covered Refinery's pumps. 100120. Reporting, Recording, Tracking, Repairing and Remonitoring Leaks of' Valves and Pumps Based on the Internal Leak Definitions.
a. Reporting. Forregulatory reporting purposes, CITGO may continue to report leak rates in valves. and pumps againstthe applicable regulatory leak definition, ormay use the lower, internal leak definitions specified in Paragraph 119. b. Recording. Tracking. Repairing and Remonitoring Leaks. CITGO shall begin recording, tracking, repairing andre-monitoring allleaks in excess ofthe internal leak definitions ofParagraph 119 atsuch time. as those definitions become applicable. CITGO shall make a first attempt to repair and re-monitor leaks within five (5) days. ofidentification. Within thirty (30) days ofidentification, CITGO shall eithercomplete repairs andre'monitoring ofleaks orplace

..such component on the Covered Refinery's delay ofrepairlist pursuant to Paragraph 128. 121. LDAR Monitoring Frequency.
a. Pumps. Unless more frequent monitoring is required by applicable federal, state andlpr local requirements, CITGO shall monitor all pumps at all Covered Refineries at the internal leak definition on a monthlybasis. b. Valves. Unless more frequent monitoring is required by applicable federal, state andlorIocal requirements, CITGO shall monitor all valves at all Covered Refineries, otherthan

. difficult-to-morutor orunsafe-to-monitor valves, at the intemalleak definition on a quarterly basis. 121 A. Monitoring After Turnaround orMaintenance. CITGO shall have the option ofmonitoring affected valves and pumps withinprocess unit(s) after completing a documented maintenance, startup, or shutdown activity without having the results ofthe monitoring count as 101a scheduled monitoring activity, provided that CITGO monitors according to the following schedule:

. L For events. involving 1000 or fewer valves and pumps, monitor within one (1) week ofthe documented maintenance, startup, or shutdown activity; ii. Forevents involving greaterthan 1000but fewer than 5000 valves and pumps, monitor within two (2) weeks ofthe documented maintenance, startup, or shutdown activity; and iii. For events involving greaterthan 5000 pumps and valves, monitor within four (4) weeks ofthe documented maintenance, startup, or shutdown activity. 122. Initial Attempt at Repair ofValves. Beginningno laterthan September 30, 2005, at the Lake Charles, Lemont, Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West and Paulsboro Refineries and beginning no later than December 31, 2006, at the Savannah Refmery, CITGO shall make an "initial attempt" to repair any valve at any Covered Refinery that has a reading greater than 200 ppm ofVOCs, excluding pressure reliefdevices, control valves and components that LDAR personnel are not authorized to repair. CITGO or its designated contractor shan make this "initial attempt" at repair and remonitor the leak within five. (5) days ofidentification. Ifthe re-monitored leak reading is. below the applicable leak definition, no. further action will be necessary. Ifthe re-monitored leakreading is greaterthan the applicable leak definition, CITGO shall repair the valve according to the requirements ofParagraph 128, except that no first repair attempt requirement shall apply. IfCITGO can demonstrate with statistically significant monitoring data over a period ofat least two years that "initial attempts" to repair at 200 ppm
worsen or do not improve overall mass refinery emissions or emission rates from. emitting 102components in a reasonable, cost-effective manner, CITGO may requestEPA to amend this requirement. 123. Electronic Monitorine, Storing. and Reporting ofLDAR Data.

. a. Electronic Storing and Reporting ofLDAR Data. Beginning on the Date ofEntry of the Consent Decree, CITGO shall continue to maintain an electronic database for storing and reporting LDAR data at all Covered Refineries. b. Electronic. Data Collection During LDAR Monitoring and TransferThereafter. By
no later than December 31, 2004, CITGO shall use data loggers and/or electronic data collection devices during all LDAR monitoring at the Lake Charles, Lemont,. Corpus Christi East, Corpus Christi West and Paulsboro Refineries. CITGO, or its designated contractor, shall use its best efforts to transfer on a daily basis the. electronic data from electronic data logging devices to the electronic database. maintained pursuant to Paragraph 123.a. For all monitoring events 

### in which
an electronic data collection device is. used, the collectedmonitoring data shall include a time and date stamp, and identification ofthe instrument and operator. ClTGO may use. paper logs where necessary ormore feasible (e.g., small rounds, re-monitoring, or when data loggers are not available orbroken), and at all times at the Savannah Refinery. Ifpaper logs are used, CITGO shall record, at a minimum, the identity ofthe technician, the date, the monitoring starting and ending times, all monitoring readings, and an identification ofthemonitoring equipment. CITGO shall transfer any manuallyrecorded monitoring data to the electronic database maintained pursuant to Paragraph l23.a within seven (7) days ofthe monitoring event. 124. 

### DAfoe ofLDARData. By no later than the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree, CITGO (or a third-party contractorretained by CITGO) shall have developed and begun 103implementing procedures for quality assurance/quality control ("QA/QC") reviews ofall data generatedby LDAR monitoring technicians such that: (a) monitoring data is reviewed for QA/QC by the monitoring technicians daily after collection;. and (b) all monitoring data is subject to a QA/QC review at least once per quarter, including butnot limited to the number of components monitored per technician, time betweenmonitoring events, and abnormal data patterns. 125. [Intentionally LeftBlank] 126. [Intentionally LeftBlank] 127. Calibration/Calibration .Drift Assessment.
a. Calibration. CITGO shall conduct 

### all calibrations ofLDAR monitoring equipment at all Covered Refineries in accordance with 40 C.F.R. Part 60, EPAReference TestMethod 21. b. Calibration DriftAssessment. Beginning no later than the Date ofEntry ofthis Decree, CITGO shall conduct calibration drift assessments ofLDAR monitoring equipment at each Covered Refinery at the end ofeach monitoring shift, at a minimum. CITGO shall conduCt the calibration drift assessment using, at a minimum, a 500 ppm calibration gas. Ifany calibration drift assessment after the initial calibration shows a negative drift ofmore than 10% from the previous calibration, CITGO shall re-monitor all valves that were monitored using that instrument and that had a reading greater than 100ppm since its last calibration and shall remonitor all pumps that were monitored using that instrument and thathad a reading greater than 500 ppm since its last calibration.
c. CITGO shall maintain records ofall instrument calibrations for a period of 1 year following the date ofcalibration.
104128. Delay ofRepair. Beginning no laterthan February 28, 2006, CITGOshal1 take the following actions for any equipment at any Covered Refinery that CITGO intends to place on the "delay ofrepair" list, under applicable regulations:
a. Require sign-offby the unit supervisor (as identified in the Covered Refinery's written LDAR program) within thirty (30) days ofidentifying that a piece ofequipment is leaking at a rate greater than the applicable leak definition that such equipment is teclmically infeasible to repairwithout a process unit shutdown. b. Include equipment that is placed on the "delay ofrepair" list in CITGO's regular LDAR monitoring, as required in Paragraph 121.
c. Use the "drill and tap" method (or an equivalent), otherthan on a control orpressure reJiefvalve, ifit is leaking at a rate of 10,000 ppm or greater, unless CITGO can demonstrate that .there is a safety, mechanical, ormajor environmental concern posedby repairing the leak in this manner. CITGO shall, ifnecessary, perform two "drill and taps" (or equivalents) within thirty (30) days. ofdetecting the leak. Forpurposes ofthis Paragraph, the second attempt maybe. made through the same hole created during the first attempt. d. Use best efforts to isolate and repairpumps identified as leaking at a rate of2000 ppm or greater.
e. Ifa new method develops that is similarly effective as the "drill and tap" method for repairing non-control valves, CITGO will advise EPA and appropriate Co-Plaintiffs prior to implementing such new method. 129. Chronic Leakers. CITGO shall replace, repack, orperform similarly effective repairs on chronically leakiug, non-control valves during the next process unit turnaround after 105identification. A component shall be classified as a "chronic leaker" under this Paragraph ifit leaks above 10,000 ppm twice in any consecutive four quarters, unless the component has not leaked in the twelve (12) consecutive quarters priorto the relevant process unit turnaround. 130. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for this Section
a. Consistent with the requirements ofSection IX (Recordkeeping and Reporting), CITGO shall include. the following information in each Covered Refinery's Semi-Annual Progress Report in which the identified activity occurred or was required:
I.

n.

Ill.

IV.



### ,
v. VI.

VII.

VIII.

IX. Notification that training has been implemented as required by Paragraph 116; Notification that the. lower leak definitions and increased monitoring frequencies have been implemented according to Paragraphs 119 and 121' 

### , Notification that the "initial attempt atrepair" program under Paragraph 122has been implemented; Notification that the 

### QAlQC procedures for reviewing data generated by LDAR technicians underParagraph 124 have been implemented; An identification ofeach Covered Refinery's LDAR Coordinator; Notification that a trackingprogram for new valves and pumps added during maintenance and construction has been developed and is being implemented; Notification that the calibration drift assessment procedures under Paragraph 127 have been implemented; Notification that the "delay ofrepair" procedures under Paragraph 128 have been implemented; and A copy ofeach Covered Refinery's written refinery-wide LDAR program underParagraph 115.

106

### b. In each Covered Refinery's Progress Report submitted**pur~uant** 

### to Section IX, CITGO shall also include the following information on LDARmonitoring: 

### i. a list ofthe process units monitored during the reporting period; ii. the number ofvalves and pumps present in each process unit; iii. the number ofvalves and pumps monitored in eachprocess unit; iv. the number ofvalves and pumps found leaking;
v. thenuniber of"difficult to monitor" pieces ofequipment monitored;
VI. 

### the projectedmonth and year ofthe. next monitoring event for that unit; vii. a list ofall equipment currently on the "delay ofrepair" list,. the date 

### , . each component was determined to be leaking at arate greater than 

### 10,000 ppm, the date ofeach drill and tap or equivalentmethod of repair, its associated monitoring results, and whether such activities were completed in atimely mannerunderParagraph 128; viii. the number, date and results 

### Ofeach initial attempt at repair, including a list ofall initial attempts/remonitoring that did not occur in atimely manner under Paragraph 122; and
lX. 

### all instances when CITGO failed to complywith the requirements in Paragraph 120.b. (Recording, Tracking, Repairing and Remonitoring Leaks). To the extent other required reports to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffaddress the above. information, CITGO mayincorporate such otherreport(s) by reference in lieu ofseparately submitting such information underthis Paragraph 130.b.

107

### N. INCORPORATION OF CONSENT DECREE REOUIREMENTS INTO FEDERALLY ENFORCEABLE PERMITS 131. Currently Effective Limits and Standards. By no laterthan March 

### 31,.2005, CITGO shall submit applications to the Applicable State Agencyto incorporate the emission' limits and standards required by the ConsentDecree that are effective as ofthe Date ofEntry of the Consent Decree into airpennits (otherthan Title V permits) which are federally enforceable unless such permits with such limits have already been issued or applied for. Following submission ofthe permit application, CITGO shall cooperate with the Applicable State Agency by promptly submitting to the Applicable State Agency all available information that the Applicable State Agency seeks following its. receipt ofthe permit application. CITGO. shall file any applications necessaryto incorporate the requirements ofthose permits into the Title V permits ofthe Covered Refmeries. 132. Future Limits and Standards. Byno

### late~ than thirty 

### (30) days after the effective date or establishment ofany emission limits and/or standards under Section V ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall submit applications to the Applicable State Agency to incorporate those emission limitations. and/or standards into airpermits (otherthan Title V permits) which
are federally enforceable unless such permits with such limits have already been issued or applied for. Following submission ofthe permit appliCation, CITGO shall cooperate with the Applicable State Agencyby promptly submitting to the Applicable. State Agency all available information that the Applicable State Agency seeks following its receipt ofthe permit application. CITGO shall file any applications necessary to incorporate the requirements ofthose permitsinto the Title V pemlits ofthe Covered Refineries. 

### 108133. Mechanism for Title V Incorporation. The P<lrties agree that the incorporation ofthe requirements ofthis Consent Decree into Title V permits shall be in accordance with state Title V rules, including applicable administrative amendmentprovisions ofsuch rules. 134. Obtaining Construction Permits. CITGO agrees to use itsbest efforts to obtain all required, federally enforceable permits for the construction ofthe pollution control technology and/or the installation ofequipment necessaryto implementthe affirmative reliefand

. environmental projects set forth in this Section V and in Section Vill. To the extent that CITGO must submit permit applications for construction or installation to the Applicable State Agencies, CITGO shall cooperate with the Applicable State Agencybypromptly submitting to the

. Applicable State Agency all available. information that the Applicable State Agency seeks

following its. receipt ofthe permit application. This Paragraph 134 is not intendedto prevent . CITGO from applying to the Applicable State. Agency for apollution control project exemption. VI. EMISSION CREDIT GENERATION 135. Summary. This Section addresses the use ofemissions reductions thatwill result from the installation and operation ofthe controls required bythis Consent Decree ("CD Emissions Reductions") for the purpose ofemissions netting or emissions offsets
.. It allows CITGO to use a fraction ofthe. CD Emissions Reductions if: (1) the emissions units for which CITGO seeks to use the CD Emissions Reductions are modified or constructed for purposes of compliance with TierII gasoline or low sulfurdiesel requirements; and (2) the emissions from those modified ornewly-constructed units are at orbelow the levels outlined in Paragraph 137(2).

109136. General Prohibition. CITOO shall not generate or use any NOx, SO" PM,

.VOC, or CO emissions reductions that result from anyprojects conducted or controls required pursuant to this ConsentDecree as netting reductions or emissions offsets in any PSD, major non-attainment and/or syothetic minor New Source Review ("NSR") permit orpennit proceeding. 137. Exception to General Prohibition. Notwithstanding the general prohibition set forth inParagraph 136, CITGO mayuse 300 tons per year ofNOX, 300 tons peryear ofS02 and 20 tons per year 6fPM from the CD Emissions Reductions. as credits or offsets in any PSD, major non-attainment and/or syothetic minorNSR permit or**pe~it** proceeding occurring after the Date ofLodging ofthe ConsentDecree, provided that the new or modified emissions unit: (I) is. being constructed or modified for purposes ofcompliance withTier 2 gasoline or low sulfur diesel requirements; and (2) has. a federally enforceable, non-Title V Pennit with tht: following limits, as applicable:
1. Forheaters and boilers, a limit of0.020 lbs NOx permillion BTU or less on a 3-hour rolling average basis;
11. For heaters and boilers, a limit of0.1 0 grains ofhydrogen sulfide per dry standard cubic. foot offuel gas or 20 ppmvd S02 corrected to 0% O2both on a 3-hourrolling average; 111. For heaters and boilers, no Fuel Oil blUIiing or solid fuel firing capability; iv. ForFCCUs, a limit of20 ppmvd NOx correctedto 0% O2or less. on a 365-day roIling average basis;
v. For FCCDs, a limit of25 ppmvd S02 correctedto 0% O2or less on a 365-day roIling average basis; and
VI. For SRPs, NSPS Subpart 

### J emission limits.

110Utilization ofthe exception set forth above is subject to each ofthe following conditions:
I. Under no circumstances shall CITGO use CD Emissions Reductions for netting and/or offsets prior to the time that actual CD Emissions Reductions have occurred; ii. CD Emissions Reductions maybe used only atthe Covered Refinery that generated them;
Ill. The CD Emissions Reductions provisions ofthis Consent Decree are for purposes. ofthis Consent Decree only and neither CITGO, nor any other entity may use CD Emissions Reductions for anypurpose, including in any subsequent pennitting or enforcementPFoceeding, except as providedherein; and iv. CITGO still shall be subjectto all federal and state regulations applicable to the PSD, major non-attainment and/or minor NSR pennitting process. 137A. Notwithstanding the general prohibition set forth in Paragraph 136 and for purposes ofNOx "offsets" under LAC 33:III.510.C.l.b.vii only, the parties agree that 50% ofthe NOx emissions reduction made. at the Lake Charles Refinery to demonstrate compliance with Paragraphs 54, 57 and 57A [heater and boilerNOx reductions] are not "otherwise required bythe Act orby state regulations," provided that such new major stationary source ormajor modification, as defined in LAC 33:III.509.B. is either located at the Lake Charles Refinery or is
a cogeneration project in which CITGO is a participant; has or will have a federally enforceable, non-Title V pennit; and that such pennit contains limits which are either no less stringent than
. those specified in Paragraph 137(2), or determined by LDEQ (after an opportunity for consultation with EPA) underLAC 33:III.510 or other, similar authority (e.g., LAC 33:11I.509). 138. Outside the Scope ofthe General Prohibition. Nothing in this Section VI is intended to prohibit CITGO from seeking to: (1) utilize or generate emissions credits or

111reductions from Covered Refinery units to the extent that the proposed credits orreductions represent the difference between the emissions limitations set forth in this Consent Decree for these refinery units and the more stringent emissions limitations that CITGO may elect to accept

. for these refinery units in a permitting process; or (2) utilize or generate emissions credits or

reductions on refmery units that are not subjectto an emission limitation pursuant to this Consent Decree. VII. MODIFICATIONS TO IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULES 139. Securing Permits or Approvals.
a. For any work under Sections V or VIII ofthis Consent Decree thatrequires a federal, state and/or localpermit orEPA approval (e.g., EPA approval ofcatalyst additives in Section V), CITGO shall be responsible for submitting in 11 timely fashion applications for federal, state and local permits and request for EPA approval for work and activities required so that permit or approval decisions can be made in a timely fashion. CITGO shall use its best efforts to secure EPA approvals and/orto: (i) submit permit applications (i.e., applications for permits to construct, operate, ortheir equivalent) that complywith all applicable requirements; and (ii) secure approval ofpermits after filing the applications, including timely supplying additional information, ifrequested. Ifit appears that the failure ofEPA or any other govenunental entity to actupon a timely-submitted permit application orrequest for EPA approval may delay CITGO's performance of work according to an applicable implementation schedule, CITGO shall notifY the EPA and the Applicable Federal and State Agencies ofany such delays as soon as practicable after CITGO reasonably concludes that the delay could affect its ability to complywith the iinplementation schedule set forth in this Consent Decree.
112b. CITGO shall propose for approval by EPA a modification to the applicable schedule ofimplementation setting out the time necessary to comply after the permit or approval has been' received by CITGO. EPA, after an opportunity for consultation with the appropriate CoPlaintiff, shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to requests for modifications ofschedules ofimplementation ifthe requirements ofthis. Paragraph are met. All modifications to any dates initially set forth in this Decree orin any approved schedule ofimplementation shall be signed in

· writing by EPA and CITGO, and neither the United States nor ClTGO shall be required to file

such modifications with the Court in order for the modifications to be effective. The procedures ofthis Paragraph may be used more than once, ifnecessary. Stipulatedpenalties shall not accrue
norbe due and owing during any period between an originally-scheduled implementation date

· and an approved modification to such date. The failure ofEPA or an other govenunental entity

to act upon a timely-submitted permit or approval application shall not constitute a force majeure event triggering the requirements ofSection XIV; this Paragraph shall apply. 

### 140. Commercial Unavailability ofControlEquipment and/or Additives. a.ClTGO shall be solely responsible for compliance with any deadline or the

· performance ofany work described in Sections V and 

## vm ofthis ConsentDecree thatrequires

· .the acquisition and instal1ation ofcontrol equipment and/or catalyst additive
.. Ifit appears that

the commercial unavailability ofany control equipment and/or catalyst additive may delay CITGO's performance ofwork according to an applicable implementation schedule,ClTGO shaH notify the Applicable Federal and State Agencies ofany such delays as soon as practicable after CITGO reasonably concludes thatthe delay could affect its ability to complywith the implementation schedule set forth in this Consent Decree. CITGOshall then contact a 113reasonable munber o(vendors ofsuch equipment or additive and obtain (or request) a written representation (or equivalent communication to EPA) from the vendor thattlie equipment or additive is commercially unavailable. b. CITGO shall propose for approval byEPA a modification to the applicable schedule ofimplementation, refer to. this Paragraph 140 ofthis Consent Decree, identifYthe milestone date it contends it will notbe able to meet, provide the Applicable Federal and State Agencies with written correspondence to the vendor identifYing efforts made to. secure the control equipment or

.catalyst additive; and describe the specific efforts CITGO has taken and will continue to take to find such equipment or additive. CITOO may propose a modified schedule ormodification of otlier.requirements ofthis ConsentDecree to .address such conimercial unavailability.
c.. Section XV ("Retention ofJurisdictionlDispute Resolution") shall govern the resolution ofany claim ofcommercial unavailability. EPA, after an opportunity for consultation with the appropriate Co·Plaintiff, shall not unreasonablywithhold its consent to requests for modifications ofschedules ofimplementation ifthe requirements ofthis Paragraph are met. All modifications to any dates initially set forth in this ConsentDecree or in any approved schedule ofimplementation shall be signed in writing byEPA and ClTOO, and neither the United States.
nor ClTOO shall be required to file such modifications with the Court in order for the modifications to be effective. The procedures ofthis Paragraph maybe used more than once, if necessary. Stipulated penalties shall notaccrue norbe due and owing during any periodbetween
an originally-scheduled implementation date and an approved modification to such date. The failure by CITOO to secure control equipment and/or catalyst additive shall not constitute a force majeure event triggering the tequirementsofSection XIV; this Paragraph shall apply. 

### 114VIII. ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL PROJECTS 

### 141. In accordance with the requirements and schedule set forth in this Section VlII, crrGO shall spend no less than $5,000,000 to implement the Supplemental Environmental Project ("SEP") described in Paragraph 

### 142 below. CrrGO may carry out its responsibilities for the SEP identified below directly orthrough contractors selectedby CITGO. 

### 142. The CompressorReplacement/Emissions Reduction SEP: CrrGO shall no. later than December 31, 2007, replace three. (3) existing natural gas-fired, wet gas compressors at the Corpus Christi 1 FCCU with a single electric driven compressor, thereby eliminating emissions from the existing compressors ofNOx, CO and other. products generated by the combustion of natural gas. 

### 143A. crrGO is responsible for the satisfactory completion ofthe SEP(s) required under this ConsentDecree in accordance with this Section VlII. Upon completion ofa specific SEP, crrGO shall submit to EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffa cost report certified as accurate under penalty of perjuryby a responsible corporate official. IfCrrGO doesnotexpend the entire projected 

### $ 5,000,000 cost ofthe SEP described in Paragraph 

### 142, CrrGO shall pay a stipulated penalty equal to the difference between the amount expended as demonstrated in the certified costreport(s) and the projected cost. The stipulatedpenalty shallbe paid as provided in Paragraph 225 (payment ofStipulated Penalties) ofthe Consent Decree. As an alternative to payment ofthe above penalty, CrrGO mayrequest approval from EPA and the appropriate CoPlaintiffto use unexpended SEP monies for other SEPs, after an opportunity for consultation with the appropriate Co-Plaintiff.

115l43B. By signing this Consent Decree, CITGO certifies that it is not required, and has
no liability under anyfederal, state or local law or regulation or pursuant to any agreements or orders ofany court, to perform or develop the SEP described in Paragraph 142. CITGO further certifies that ithas not applied for orreceived, and will not in the future apply for or receive:. (1)
. credit as a Supplemental Environmental Projector otherpenalty offsetin any other enforcement action for the SEP described in Paragraph 142; (2) credit for any emissions reductions resulting from the SEP described in Paragraph 142 in any federal, state or local emissions trading or early reduction program; or (3) a deduction from any federal, state, or local tax based on its participation in, performance of, or incurrence. ofcosts related to SEP described in Paragraph 142. l43C: CITGO shall include in each Report required byParagraph l43A, aprogress report for each SEPbeing performed under this Section VllI ofthis ConsentDecree. In addition, the final Reportrequired byParagraph 143 submitted after all SEPs identified in this. Section V11I is completed, shall contain the following information withrespect to each SEP:
a. A detailed description ofeach project as implemented; b. A briefdescription ofany significant operating problems encountered, including any that had an impacton the environment, and the solutions for each problem;
c. Certification that each project has been fully implemented pursuant to the provisionsofthis Consent Decree; and

116d. A description ofthe environmental and public health benefits resulting from implementation ofeach project (including quantification ofthe benefits and pollutant reductions, iffeasible). 1430. CITGO agrees that in any public statements regarding these SEPs, CITGO must clearly indicate that these projects are being undertaken as part ofthe settlement ofan errforcel1,lent action for alleged violations ofthe Clean Air Act and corollary state statutes.. IX. 

### RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING 144. CITGO shall submit semi-annual reports to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies that contain the following information;
a. a progress report on the implementation ofthe requirements ofSection V (Affirmative Relief/Environmental Projects) at each Covered Refinery; b.
. a summary ofthe emissions data, including a separate identification ofany exceedence(s), for each Covered Refinery as. required by Section V ofthis Consent Decree for the six (6) month period coveredbythe report;
c. a description ofanyproblems anticipated with respect to meeting the requirements ofSection V ofthis Consent Decree at each Covered Refinery; d. any such additional matters as CITGO believes shouldbe brought to the attention ofthe Applicable Federal and State Agencies.
e. additional items required by another Paragraph ofthis ConsentDecree to be submitted with a semi-annual report. Semi-annual reports shall be submitted byAugust 31 (covering the period from January 1 to June 30) and February 28 (covering the period from July 1 to December 31), with the first such report due on February 28, 2005. Each portion ofthe semi-annual report which relates to a particular Covered Refinery shallbe certifiedby either the person responsible for environmental



### 117management and compliance for that Covered Refinery, orby a person responsible for overseeing implementation ofthis Decree across CITGO, as follows: I certifyunder penalty oflaw that this information was prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my directions and my inquiry ofthe person(s) who manage the system, or the person(s) directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. 

### X. CIVIL PENALTY 145. Within thirty (30) days ofthe Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree, CITGO shall pay a civil penalty of$3,600,000 as. follows: (1) 

### $. 2,300,000 to the United States; (2) $ 100,000 to the State ofGeorgia; (3) $ 350,000 to the State oflllinois; (4) $ 750,000 to the State of Louisiana; and (5) $. 100,000 to the State ofNew Jersey.
a Payment ofmonies to the United States shall be made by Electronic Funds Transfer ("EFT") to the United States Department ofJustice, in accordance with current EFT procedures, referencing USAO File Number2004V01515, DOJ Case Number 90-5-2-1-07277, and the civil action case name and case number ofthis action in the Southern District ofTexas. The costs of such EFT shall be the responsibility ofCITGO. Payment shall be made in accordance with instructions provided to CITGO by the Financial Litigation Unit ofthe U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District ofTexas. Any funds received after 11 :00 a.m. (EST) shall be credited on the next business day. CITGO shall provide notice ofpayment, referencing USAO File Number 2004V01515, DOJ Case Number 90-5-2-1-07277, and the civil action case name and case number to the Department ofJustice and to EPA, as provided in Paragraph 270 (Notice).

118b. Payment ofthe civil penalty owedto the State ofGeorgia under this Paragraph shall be made by certified or corporate check made payable to the Georgia Department ofNatural Resources and sent to the following address: Chief AirProtection Division 4244 International Parkway Suite 120 Atlanta, Ga. 30354
c. Payment ofthe civil penalty owed to the State ofIllinois under this Paragraph shall be made. by certified check made payable to the Illinois Attorney General State Projects and Court Ordered Distribution Fund to be usedat the discretion ofthe Illinois Attorney General's Office for the advancement ofenviromnental protection activities in Illinois and sent to the following address: Phyl1is Dunton Enviromnental Bureau Illinois Attorney General's Office 188 West Randolph Street, 20 tb Floor Chicago, Illinois 60601

. d
.. Payment ofthe civil penalty owed to the State ofLouisiana under this Paragraph shall be made by certified check made payable to the Louisiana Department ofEnviromnental Quality and sent to Darryl Serio, Fiscal Director; Office ofManagement and Finance, LDEQ, P.O. Box 4303, Baton Rouge, LA 708214303.



### 119e. Payment ofthe civil penalty owed to the State ofNewJersey under this Paragraph shaIl be made by certified checkmade payable to the State ofNew Jerseyand sent to the foIlowing address: Administrator, Air Compliance & Enforcement New JerseyDepartment ofEnvironmental Protection P.O. Box 422 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0422 146. [IntentionaIlyLeft Blank} 147. The cost ofthe SEPs. and the civil penalty set forth herein together constitute the sole penalty imposed for the violations alleged hereunderwithinthe meaning ofSection I62(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. 

### § 162(f), and, therefore, CITGO shaIl not treat these penalty payments as tax deductiblefor purposes ofnet income taxes imposed under federal, state,
or local law
. 148
.. Upon the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree, the ConsentDecree shall constitute an enforceablejudgment for purposes ofpost-judgment coIlection in accordance with Federal Rule ofCivil Procedure 69, the Federal Debt CoIlection Procedure Act, 28 U.S.C. 

### §§ 3001-3308, and other applicable federal authority. 

### XI. STIPULATED PENALTIES 149. CITGO. shaIl pay stipulated penalties to the UnitedStates and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs for each failure by ClTGO to complywith the terms ofthis. Consent Decree as provided herein. Stipulatedpenalties shall be calculated in the amounts specified in Paragraphs 150 through 224. Stipulated penalties for failure to comply with the concentration-based, rolling average emission limits referenced in Section V shaIl not start to accrue until there is

120·noncompliance for 5% ormore ofthe applicable unit's operating time during any calendar quarter. Forthose provisions where a stipulated penalty ofeither a fixed amount or 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance is available, the decision ofwhich alternative to seek shall rest exclusively within the discretion ofthe EPA and the appropriate Co-Plaintiff. A. Requirements for NOx Emission Reductions from .FCCUs. 150. For failure to meet the Interim NO, Emission limits set forth in Paragraph 13, or any emissions limitproposedby CITGO or established byEPA (final orinterim) for NOx pursuantto Paragraph 19, 20,21,29,30 or 30A, per day, perunit: $750 for each calendar day in
a calendar quarter in which the short-term rolling average exceeds the applicable. limit; and $2,500 for each calendar day in a calendarquarter on which the specified 365-OOyroning average exceeds the applicable limit. 151. For failure to prepare and/or submit written deliverables required by Paragraphs 17, 19,20 ifapplicable, or 24, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1Sl through 30th day after deadline 31 Sl through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $200 $500 $1000 152. For failure to timely commence, complete or substantially comply with the requirements ofany minimization studies, demonstration periods, trials or studies required by Paragraphs 16, 18, and 26-29, per unit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1 Sl through 30th day after deadline 31 Sl through 60'h day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

121 Penalty per day $200 $500 $1000153. For failure to install, certifY, calibrate, maintain, and/or operate all CEMS required by Paragraph 31, per day, per CEMS: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" tmough 30th day after deadline 31" through 60'h day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper 

### day $500 $1,000 $2,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater. 154. For failure to convert Corpus Christi FCCD 1 or Lemont FCCD to Full Bum Operation, as required by Paragraph 21, perunit: Period ofNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day after deadline 31" throllgh 60'h day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $2,500 $6,000 $10,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whicheveris greater. 155. Forfailure to install Low NO, Burners at the Lemont Refinery, as required by Paragraph 22: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" through 30th day after deadline 31 ,t through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

156. [IntentionallyLeft

### Blank] Penaltyper day. $2,500 $6,000 $10,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater.



### B. Requirements for SO, 

### Emission Reductions from FCCUs. 157. Foreach failure to meet S02 emission limits set forth in Paragraph 33, or any emission limit proposedby CITGO or established by EPA (interim or final) for 302pursuant to Paragraphs 39, 40 or 40A, per day, per unit: $750 for each calendar day in a calendar quarter on

122which the specified 7-day rolling average exceeds the applicable limit; $2,500 for each calendar day in a calendar quarter on which the specified 365-day rolling average exceeds the applicable limit. 158. For failure to prepare and/or submit written deliverables required by Paragraphs 35-42, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 

### I" through 30'h day after deadline 31 " through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $200 $500 $1000 159. For failure to timelycommence, complete or substantially complywith the

. requirements regarding the use ofS02 Reducing Catalyst Additives, including the requirements

regarding demonstration periods, short-term trials, or optimization studies, as set forth in Paragraphs 37-39, perunit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" through 30th day after deadline 31 " through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penalty per day $750 $1,500 $2,000, or an amount equal to 1.2times the economic benefit ofthe delayed compliance whichever is greater 160. For failure to install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and/or operate a S02 CEMS, as required byParagraph 41, perunit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance I" through 30'h day after deadline 31" through 60'h day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

123 Penaltyper day $500 $1,000. $2,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater.160A. For failure to comply with the plan required by Paragraph 42 for operating FCCUs in the event ofa hydro1reater outage, per-unit, per-day: Period ofNon-Compliance I" through 30th day after deadline 31 st through 60th day after deadline Beyond.60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $250
. $1,000 $2,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is. greater. C. Requirements for PM Emissions Reductions from FCCDs. 161. For each failure to meet any PM emission limit, as. required by Paragraphs 44, 46, or, ifapplicable, Paragraph 45: $500 for the first day ofnon-compliance in which the specified short-term rolling average exceeds the applicable limit, and $1,500 for each day thereafter until CITGO demonstrates compliance. with the applicable limit. 162. For failure to submit written de1iverables, or to. conductrequired stacktests, as required by Paragraph 47: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" through 3Othday after deadline 31" through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline 163. [Intentionally LeftBlank] Penalty per day $200 $500 $1000

D. Requirements for CO Emissions Reductions from FCCDs. 164. For each failure to meet the CO emission limits, as required in Paragraphs 48 and 49: $750 for each calendar dayin a calendar quarter on which the specified I-hour average exceeds the applicable limit; and $2,500 for each calendar day in a calendar quarter on which the specified 365-dayrolling average exceeds the applicable limit.

124165. ForfailUre to install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and/or operate a CO CEMS, as required by Paragraph 50,per unit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 

### I't through 30th day after deadline 31 " through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $500 $1,000 $2,000, or, an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofd¢layed compliance, whichever is greater. E. Requirements Related to NSPS Applicability to FCCD Re2enerators. 166. Forfailure to complywith NSPS Subparts A and 

### J limits for S02 or COat each ofClTGO's FCCD regenerators at the Corpus Christi, Lake Charles, and Lemont Refineries, as required by Paragraph 

### 51, per urnt, per dayin a calendar quarter: Period ofNon-Compliance I" through 30th day 31" through 60th day Over 60 days Penaltyper day· $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater. F. Requirements for NOx Emission Reductions from Heaters and**Boilers~** 167. For failure. to install selected Qualifying Controls on heaters and boilers orto reduce NOx emissions as required by Paragraphs 53, 54, 57, 57A or 58,per day: Period ofNon-Compliance
. 

### I" through 30th day after deadline 31 " through 60" day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

125 Penaltyper day $2,500 $6,000 $10,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater.168. For failure to complywith the applicable monitoring requirements. as set forth in Paragraphs 59, pet unit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" through 30th day after deadline 31" through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60'h day after deadline Penaltyper day $500 $1,000 $2,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times. the econonllc benefit ofdelayed compliance,
. whichever is greater. 169. For failure to install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and/or operate a NOx CEMS, as reql,lired by Paragraph 60, per unit, per?ay: Period ofNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day after deadline 31 stthrough 601h day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $450 $1,000 $2,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whicheveris greater.

per day: 170. Forfailure to submit the written deliverables required by Paragraphs 55A or 56,

Period ofNon-Compliance I" through 30th day after deadline 31 st through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day Penaltyper day $200 $500 $1,000
. G. Requirements for SO, Emission Reductions from Heaters and Boilers. 171. For burning in any heater orboiler or in any other identified equipment listed in Appendix E any refinery fuel 

### gas in violation ofthe applicable requirements ofNSPS Subparts A and 

### J after the date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree or, ifthe heater or boileris listed in Appendix E, after the date set forth in Appendix E on which the respective unit becomes an "affected

126facility" subjectto NSPS Subparts A & J, as set forth in Section V.G., per unit, per day in a calendar quarter: ' Period ofNon-Compliance I st through 30th day Beyond 31 st day Penalty per day $2,500 $5,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater. 171a. ForburningFuel Oil in a manner inconsistent 

### with the requirements of Paragraph 65, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day Beyond 31 st day Penalty per day $1,750 $5,000 

### H. Requirements for Sulfur Recovery Plants. 172. For failure to route all sulfurpit emissions in accordance with the requirements • ofParagraph 71, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day 31 st through 60fu day Beyond 601h day Penaltyper day $1,000 $1,750 $4,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the amount ofdelayed compliance whichever is. greater. 173. For failure to complywith the NSPS Subparts A and 

### J emission limits at the Lemont, Lake Charles, and Corpus. Christi East and West Refineries, as specified in Paragraphs 67, 68 and 69, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day 31 st through 601h day Over 60 days Penalty per day $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the of delayed compliance, whichever is greater.

127174. For failure to comply with the NSPS Subparts A and H emission limits at the Lake Charles Sulfuric Acid Plant, as specified in Paragraph 72, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1stthrough 30th day 31 " through 601h day Qver 60 days Penalty per day $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 or an amount equal to 1.2 times the of delayed compliance, whichever is greater. 175. For failure to complywith the monitoring requirements set forth in Paragraph 68b, perunit, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance 1stthrough 301h day afterdeadline Beyond 31 " day after deadline Beyond 60'h day after deadline Penaltyper day $500 $1,500 $2,000 176, Forfailure to develop Preventive Maintenance and Operation Plans as specified in Paragraph 73,. perunit, per day: Period ofDelay orNon-Compliance 1stthrough 30th day after deadline Beyond 31 ,t day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penalty per day $500 $1,500 $2,000 177. For fuilure to timely commence and complete the optimization study or to substantially complywith any ofthe otherrequirements otherthan installation ofTGU at the Lemont Claus Trains 119 A and B, required by Paragraphs 69 and 70, per day, perrequirement: Period ofNon-Compliance 1,t through 30th day after deadline Beyond 31 st day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

128 Penalty per day $500 $1,500 $2,000178. For failure to install TGUs at the Lemont Claus trains 119 A and B in compliance with Paragraph 69: Period ofNon-Compliance 

### 1" through 30th day after deadline 31 sl through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day after deadline

I. Requirements for Flarine; Devices. Penaltyper day $2,500 $6,000 $10,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater.

179. For failure to comply with NSPS Subparts A and 

### J, including emission limits, for the Flaring Devices identified in Appendix B-1 and B-2 after the compliance dates specified in Appendix G, per device: Period ofNon-Compliance I st through 301h day after deadline Beyond 31 st day afterdeadline Beyond 60th day after deadline Penaltyper day $500 $1,500 $2,000 Provided, however, that ifstipulatedpenalties could be assessedunder both Paragraphs 179 and 181, the provisions ofParagraph 181 shall control. 180. [IntentionallyLeft Blank]

129

### J. Requirements for Control ofAcid Gas Flaring and Tail Gas Incidents. 181.. ForAG Flaring Incidents andiorTail Gas Incidents for which CITGO is liable under Section VJ.:

Tons Emitted in Length ofTime from Length ofTime from Length ofTime Flaring Incident or Commencement of Commencement of ofFlaring within Tail Gas Incident Flaring within the Flaring within the Flaring the Flaring Flaring Incident to Incident to Tennination of Incident is Tennination ofFlaring Flaring within the Flaring greaterthan 24 within the Flaring Incident is greaterthan 3 hours; Length of Incident is. 3 hours. or hours but less than or Time. ofthe Tail less; Length ofTime of equal to 24 hours; Length Gas. Incident is the Tail Gas Incident is ofTime ofthe Tail Gas greaterthan 24 3 hours orless Incident is greater than 3 hours hours but less than or equal to 24 hours ·5 Tons or less $500. per Ton $750 per Ton $1,000 perTon Greaterthan 5 $1,200 per Ton $1,800 per Ton $2,300per Ton, Tons, but less. than up to, but not or equal to 15 exceeding, Tons $27,500 in any one calendar day Greater than 15 $1,800 perTon, up to, $2,300 per Ton, up to, but $27,500 per Tons but not exceeding, not exceeding, $27,500 in calendar day for $27,500 in anyone . anyone calendar day each calendar calendar day day over which the Flaring Incident lasts Forpurposes ofcalculating stipulatedpenalties pursuant to this Paragraph, only one cell within the matrix shall apply. Thus, for example, for a Flaring Incident in which the Flaring starts at 1:00 p;m. and ends at 3:00 p.m., and for which 14.5 tons ofsulfur dioxide are emitted, the penalty would be $17,400 (14.5 x $1,200); the penalty would not be $13,900 [(5 x $500) 

## + (9.5 x $1200)]. Forpurposes ofdetermining which column in the table set forth in this
130Paragraph applies under circumstances in which Flaring occurs intermittently during a Flaring Incident, the Flaring shall be deemed to commence at the time that the Flaring that triggers the initiation ofa Flaring Incident commences, and shall be deemed to terminate at the time ofthe termination ofthe last episode ofFlaring within the Flaring Incident. Thus, for example, for Flaring within a Flaring Incident that (i) starts at I :00 p.m. on Day I and ends at I:30 p.m. on Day I; (ii) recommences at 4:00 p.m. on Day I and ends at4:30 p.m. on Day I; (iii) recoriunences at 1:00 a.m. on Day 2 and ends at 1:30 a.m. on Day 2; and (iv) for which no further Flaring occurs within the. Flaring Incident, the Flaringwithin the Flaring Incident shall be deemed to last 12.5 hours

-- not 1.5 hours

-- and the column for Flaring of"greaterthan 3. hours but less than or equal tQ 24 hours". shall apply. 182. For failure to timely submit any report requiredby Section V.I., or for submitting any report that does not substantially conform to its requirements: Period ofNon-Compliance Days 1-30 Days 31-60 Over 60 days Penaltyper diw $750 $1,500 $3,000 183. For those corrective action(s) which CITGO: (i) agrees to undertake following receipt ofan objectionbyEPA pursuantto Paragraph 80; or (ii) is required to undertake following dispute resolution, then, from the date ofEPA'sreceipt ofCITGO's report under Paragraph 79 ofthis Consent Decree until the date that either: (i) a fmal agreement is reached



### 131between EPA and CITOO regarding the corrective action; or (ii) a court orderregarding the corrective action is entered, CITOO shall be liable for stipulatedpenalties as follows:
a. Period ofNon-Compliance Days 1-120 Days 121-180 Days 181

- 365 Over 365 Days Penaltyper day $50 $100 $300 $3,000 or b. 1.2 times the economic benefitresulting from CITOO's failure to implement the corrective action(s). 184. For failure to complete anycorrective action under Paragraph 80 ofthis Decree in accordance with the schedule for such corrective action agreed to by CITOO or imposed on CITGO pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions oftbis Decree (with any such extensions thereto as to which EPA and CITGO may agree in writing): Period ofNon-Compliance Days 1-30 Days 31-60 Over 60 Penaltyper day $1,000 $2,000 $5,000 K. Requirements for Control ofHydrocarbon Flaring Incidents. 185. For each failure to perform a Root Cause analysis or submit a written report or perform corrective actions for a Hydrocarbon Flaring Incident, as required by Paragraph 94: Period ofDelay orNon-Compliance Ist through 30th day 31 st through 60th day Beyond 60th day, Penaltyper day per Incident $500 $1,500 $3,000 

### L. Requirements for Benzene Waste NESHAP Program Enhancements. For each violation in which a frequency is specified in Section V.L., the amounts identified below shall apply on the first day ofviolation, shall be calculated for each incremental period ofviolation (or

132portion thereof); and shaH be doubled beginning on the fourth consecutive, continuing period of violation. Forrequirements where no frequency is specified, penalties will not be doubled. 186. For failure to complete the BON Compliance Review and Verification Reports as required by Paragraph 98: $7,500 permonth, perrefinery. 187. Forfailure to submit a plan that provides for actions necessaryto correct noncompliance as required byParagraph 100(b) or (c), orfor failure toimplement the actions necessary to correct non-compliance and to certify compliance as required by Paragraph l00(d) and 1OO(e), perrefinery: Period ofNon-Compliance Ist through 301h day after deadline 31 ,tthrough 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day

188. [Intentionally Left Blank

## 1 189. [Intentionally Left Blank] Penalty per day $1,250 $3,000 $5,000, or an arnount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whichever is greater.

190. For failure to comply with the requirements set forth in Paragraph 101 related to the use, monitoring, and replacement ofcarbon canisters: $1,000 perincident ofnon-compliance, per day. 191. For failure to implement the training requirements ofParagraph 105: $10,000 per quarter. 192. For failure to establish an annual review program to identify new benzene waste streams as required by Paragraph 102: $2,500 per month, perrefinery.

133193. For failure to perform laboratory audits as required by Paragraph 103: $5,000 per month, per audit. 194. For failure to submit ormaintain anyplans or other deliverables required by Paragraph 106 (Waste/Slop/OffSpec Oil Management): $2,000 per deliverable. 195. [Intentionally Left Blank] 196. For failure to conduct sampling in accordance with the sampling plans required byParagraph 107 and 108: $30,000 per quarter, per stream, whicheveris greater, but not to exceed $150,000 per quarter, perrefinery. 197. For failure to submit the plans orretain the third-party contractorrequired by Paragraph 110: $10,000 permonth. 198. For failure to conduct monthly visual inspections ofall SubpartFF water traps as required by Paragraph 111(a): $500 per drain not inspected; 199. For failure to identify/mark segregated stormwater drains as required in Paragraph 111(b): $1,000 per weekper drain; 200. For failure to monitor Subpart FF conservation vents as required byParagraph 111 (c): $500 per vent not monitored; 201. For failure to conduct monitoring ofoil-water separators as required by Paragraph 111(d): $1,000 permonth, per unit. 202. Forfailure to submit any ofthe written deliverables required by Section V.L. (except for those deliverables for which stipulatedpenalties are specified in Paragraphs 186, 187, 194 or 197)

- $1,000 perweek, per deliverable.

134203. Ifit is detennined through a federal, state, or local investigation that any Covered Refmery has failed to include all benzene-containing waste streams in its TAB calculation submitted pursuantto Paragraph 98, 

## crrao shall pay the following, per waste stream: Waste Stream for waste streams 

### < 0.03 Mglyr for waste streams. between 0.03 and 0.1 Mglyr for waste streams between 0.1 and 0.5 Mglyr for waste streams> 0.5 Mglyr Penalty $250 $1,000 $5,000 $10,000 M. Requirements for Leak Detection and Repair Program Enhancements. For each violation in which a frequency is specified in Section V.M., the amoWlts identified below shall apply on the first day ofviolation, shallbe calculated for each incremental period of violation (orportion thereof), and shall be doubled beginning on the fourth consecutive, continuing period ofviolation
.. Forrequirements where no frequency is specified, penalties will not be. doubled. 204. [Intentionally Left Blank] 205. For failure to develop an LDAR Program as required by Paragraph 115: $3,500 per week, perrefinery. 206. For failure to implement the training programs specified inParagraph 116: $10,000 per month, perprogram, perrefinery. 207. For failure. to conduct any ofthe audits described in Paragraph 117: $5,000 per month, per audit, perrefinery.

135208. For failure to implement any actions necessary to correct non-compliance as required in Paragraph 118: Period ofNon-Compliance 1" through 30th day after deadline 31 st through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day Penalty per day $1,250 $3,000 $5,000, or an amount equal to 1.2 times the economic benefit ofdelayed compliance, whicheveris. greater 209. For failure to perform monitoring utilizing the lower intemalleakrate. definitions
as specified in Paragraph 119: $100 per component, but not greaterthan $10,000 per month, per process unit. 210. For failure to.make first repair attempts within 5 days and/or take other actions required by Paragraph 120: $100 per component but not greater than $10,000 permonth, per refinery (except that Paragraph 211 shall apply in lieu ofthis Paragraph 210 where both paragraphs are potentially applicable). 211. Forfailure to implementthe "initial attempt" repairprogram set forth inParagraph 122: $100 per component, butnotto exceed $10,000 permonth,.perprocess unit. 212
.. For failure to implement the 

### QAlQC procedures described in Paragraph 124: $1,000 per incident, but not greater than $10,000 per month perprocess unit. 213. For failure to implementthe LDAR monitoring program as required by Paragraph 121 :$1 00 per component, but not greater than $10,000 per month, perprocess unit. 214. For failure to designate an individual as accountable for LDAR performance as required byParagraph 115g, or for failure to implement the maintenance tracking program required by Paragraph 115d: $3,500 per weekper refinery.

136215. For failure to use dataloggers or maintain electronic data as required by Paragraph 123: $5,000 per month. 216. For failure to conduct and record the calibrations and the calibration drift assessments orremonitor valves and pumps based on calibration drift assessments in Paragraph 127: $100 permissed event. 217. For failure to complywith the requirements for delay ofrepair set forth at Paragraph 128: $5,000 per valve orpump, perincident ofnon-compliance. 218. For failure to submitthe written deliverables required by Section V.M.: $500per weekper deliverable. 219. For each valve orpump that CITGO failed to include in its LDARprogram within ninety (90) days ofthe date ofcompletion ofthe initial audit under Paragraph 117, CITGO shall pay $175. 

### Ifit is determined through a federal, state, or local investigation that CITGO has failed to include all valves orpumps in its LDAR program, CITGO shall pay $225 per componentthat it failed to include. 220. For failure to complywith the requirements for chronic leakers set forth at Paragraph 129: $5,000 per valve. 

### N. Requirements to Incorporate Consent Decree Requirements into Federally-Enforceable Permits. 221. For each failure to submit an application as required by Paragraphs 131 and 132: Period ofNon-Compliance Days 1-30 Days 31-60 Over 60 Days

137 Penalty per day $800 $1,500 $3,000O. Requirements for Reporting and Recordkeeping. 222. For failure to submit reports 

### as required by Section 

### IX, perreport, per day: Period ofNon-Compliance I stthrough 30th day after deadline 

### 3Ist through 60th day after deadline Beyond 60th day Penaltyper day $300 $1,000 $2,000 P. Requirements for Environmentally Beneficial Projects and Civil Penalties. 223. For failure to timely complete implementation ofthe SEPs required under Section VID, perproject, per day: Period ofDelay orNon-Compliance 1st through 30th day after deadline 31" through 60tl• day after deadline Beyond 60th day Q. Requirement to Pay StipUlated Penalties. Penalty per day $1,000 $1,500 $2,000

224. For failure to. pay stipulatedpenalties 

### as required byParagraph 225 ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall be liable for $2,500 per day, and interest on the amount overdue at the rate specified in 28 U.S.C. 

### § 1961(a). R. Pavment ofStipulated Penalties. 225. GITGO shall pay stipulated penalties upon written demand by the United States or the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs, no laterthan sixty (60) days after CITGO receives such demand. Demand from eitherthe United States orthe appropriate Co-Plaintiffs shall be deemed a demand

.from both, butthe United States and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs shall consult with each other priorto making a demand. Stipulatedpenalties owed by CITGO shall be paid 50 percent to the United States and 50 percent to the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs. Stipulated penalties shall be paid to the United States and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs in the maImer set forth in Section X (Civil 138Penalty) ofthis Consent Decree. A demand for the payment ofstipulated penalties will identify the particular violation(s) to which the stipulated penalty relates, the. stipulatedpenalty amount the United States or the appropriate Co-Plaintiffis demanding for each violation (as can be best estimated), the calculation method underlying the demand, and the grounds upon which the demand is based. After consultation with each other, the United States and the appropriate CoPlaintiffmay, in theirumeviewable discretion, waive payment ofany portion ofstipulated penalties that may accrue under this ConsentDecree. Payment ofstipulated penalties shall relieve ClTGO from liability to EPA and appropriate Co-Plaintifffrom civil penalties underits permits for the same violation. S, Stipulated Penalties Dispute. 226. Should ClTGO dispute the United States' and/or the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs' demand for all or part ofa stipulatedpenalty, it may avoid the imposition ofa stipulatedpenalty for failure to pay a stipulatedpenalty under Paragraph 224 byplacing the disputed amount demanded in
a commercial escro;.v accountpending resolution ofthe matter and by invoking the dispute resolution provisions ofSection XV within the time. provided in Paragraph 225 for payment ofstipulated penalties. Ifthe dispute is thereafter resolved in ClTGO's favor, the escrowed amount plus accrued interest shall be returned to CITGO; otherwise, the United States and the appropriate Co-Plaintiff shall be entitled to the amount that was determined to be due by the Court, plus the interest thathas accrued in the. escrow account on such amount. The United States and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffs

139reserve the right to pursue any othernon-monetary remedies to which they are legally entitled, includingbutnot limited to, injunctive relieffor CITGO's violations ofthis Consent Decree. 

### XII. INTEREST 227. After the date on which a payment is due under this. Consent Decree, CrrGO shall be liable for interest on the unpaidbalance ofthe civil penalty specified in Section X, and for interest on any unpaid balance ofstipulatedpenalties to be paid in accordance with Section XI. All such interest shall accrue at the rate established pursuant to 28. U.S.C. 

### § 1961(a) --i.e., a rate equal to the. coupon issue yield equivalent (as determinedbythe Secretary ofTreasury) ofthe average accepted auction price for the last auction of52-weekU.S. Treasurybills settledprior to the Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree. Interest shall be computed daily and compounded annually. Interest shall be calculated from the date payment is due under the ConsentDecree through the date ofactual payment. Forpurposes ofthis Paragraph 227, interest pursuant to this Paragraph will cease to accrue onthe amount ofany stipulatedpenaltypayment made into an interestbearing escrow account as contemplated byParagraph 226 ofthe Consent Decree. Monies timelypaid into escrow shall notbe considered to be an unpaid balance underthis Section. 

### XIII. RIGHT OF ENTRY 228. Any authorized representative ofan Applicable Fedenil or State Agency, including independent contractors, upon presentation ofcredentials, shall have a right ofentry upon the premises ofthe facilities ofthe Covered Refineries, at anyreasonable time for the purpose ofmonitoring compliance with the provisions ofthis Consent Decree, including inspecting plant equipment, and inspecting and copying all records maintained by CITGO 140pursuant to the requirements ofthis ConsentDecree or in the ordinary course ofCITGO's business that are deemed necessary by EPA or the applicable Co-Plaintiffto verifY compliance with this Consent Decree. CITGO shall retain records required under this Consent Decree for the period ofthe Consent Decree. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall limit the authority ofan Applicable Federal or State. Agency to conducttests, inspections, or other activities under any statutory orregulatoryprovision. 

### XIV. FORCE MAJEURE 229. Ifany event occurs which causes ormay cause a delay or impediment to performance in complying with anyprovision ofthis Consent Decree, CITGO shall nOtifY the Applicable Federal and State Agencies in writing as soon as practicable, but in any event within ten (10) business days ofthe date when CITGO first knew ofthe event or should have known of the event by the exercise. ofdue diligence. In this notice, CITGO shall specificallyreference this Paragraph 229 ofthis Consent Decree and describe the anticipated length oftime. the delay may persist, the cause or causes of the delay, and the measures taken or to be taken by CITGO to prevent or minimize the delay and the schedule by which those measures shall be implemented. CITGO shall take all reasonable steps to avoid orminimize such delays. The notice required by this Section shall be effective upon the mailing ofthe same by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Applicable EPA Regional Office as specified in Paragraph 270 (Notice). 230. Failure by CITGO to substantially comply with the notice requirements of Paragraph 229 as specified above shall render this Section

### XN (Force Majeure) voidable by the United States, in consultation with the Applicable State Agency, as to the specific event for

141which CITGO has failed to comply with such notice requirement, and, ifvoided, is ofno effect
as to the particular event involved. 231. The United States, after consultation with the Applicable State Agency, shall notifY CITGO 

### in writing regarding its claim ofa delay orimpediment to performance within thirty (30) days ofreceipt ofthe force majeure notice providedunderParagrapb 229. 232. Ifthe United States, after consultation with the Applicable State Agency, agrees that the delay or impediment to performance has been orwill be caused by circumstances beyond the control ofCITGO, inclUding any entity controlledby CITGO, and that CITGO co.u1d not have prevented the delayby the exercise ofdue diligence, the Parties shall stipulate to an extension of tbe required deadline(s) for. all requirement(s) affected by the delay by a period equivalent to the delay actually caused by such circumstances or such otherperiod as may be appropriate under the circumstances. Such stipulation shall be filed as a modification·to the ConsentDecree pursuant to the modification procedures established in this Consent Decree
.. CITGO shall not be liable for stipulatedpenalties for the period ofany such delay. 233. Ifthe United States, after consultation with the Applicable State Agency, does. not accept CITGO's claim ofa delay orimpediment to performance, CITGO must submit the matter to the Court for resolutionto avoid payment ofstipulatedpenalties, by. filing a petition for determination with the Court. In the event the United States and the appropriate Co-Plaintiffdo not agree, the position ofthe United States on the force majeure claim shall become the final Plaintiffs' position. Once CITGO has submitted this matter to the Court, the United States and the Applicable State Agency shall have twenty (20) business days to file theirresponses to the petition. Ifthe Court determines that the delay orimpedimentto performance has been or will be
142caused by circumstances beyond the control ofClTGO, including any entity controlled by CITGO, and that the delay could not have been preventedby ClTGO by the exercise. ofdue diligence, CITGO shall be excused

# as to that event(s) and delay (including stipulated penalties), for allrequirements affected by the delay for a period oftime equivalent to the delay causedby such circumstances or such otherperiod as maybe determined by the Court. 234. CITGO shall bear the burden ofprovingthat any delay ofany requirement(s) of this Consent Decree was causedby orwill be cansed by circumstances beyond its control, including any entity controlled by it, and that it could not have prevented the delayby the exercise ofdue diligence. ClTGO shall also. bear the burden ofproving the duration and extent ofany delay(s) attributable to such circumstances. An extension ofone compliance date based
on a particular event may, but will not necessarily, result in an extension ofa subsequent compliance date or dates. 235. Unanticipated orincreased costs or expenses associated with the performance of CITGO's obligations under this ConsentDecree shall not constitute circumstances beyondits control, or serve as the basis. for an extension oftime. underthis Section XN. 236. Notwithstanding any otherprovision ofthis ConsentDecree, this Court shall not draw any inferences nor establish any presumptions adverse to eitherParty as a result ofCITGO serving a force majeure notice or the Parties' inability to reach agreement. 237. As part ofthe resolution ofany matter submitted to this Court under this Section XN, the Parties by agreement, orthe Court, by order, may in appropriate circumstances extend or modify the schedule for completion ofwork under the Consent Decree to account for the delay in the work that occurred or will occur as a result ofany delay orimpediment to 143perfonnance agreed to by the United States or approved by this Court. CITGO shall be liable for stipulatedpenalties for its failure thereafterto complete the work in accordance with the extended or modified schedule. 

### XV. RETENTION OF JURISDICTIONJDISPUTE RESOLUTION 238. This Court shall retainjurisdiction ofthis matter for the purposes of implementing and enforcing the tenns and conditions ofthe Consent Decree and for the purpose ofadjudicating all disputes (including, butnot limited to, detenninations under Section V (Affinnative RelieflEnvironmental Projects) ofthe ConsentDecree) among the. Parties that may arise under the provisions ofthe Consent Decree, until the Consent Decree terminates in

.accordance with Section XVIII ofthis Consent Decree (Tennination). 239. The dispute resolution procedure set forth in this Section XV shallbe available to resolve all disputes arising under this Consent Decree, except only as otherwise. provided in
. Section XIV regarding Force Majeure, provided that the Partymaking such application has made
a good faith attempt to resolve the matter with the otherParty. 240. Dispute resolution shall be commenced by one ofthe Parties under the Consent Decree by giving written notice to another Party advising ofa dispute pursuant to this Section XV. The notice shall describe the nature. ofthe dispute, and shaH state the noticing Party's position with regard to such dispute. The Party receiving such a notice shall acknowledge receipt of the notice and the Parties shall expeditiously schedule a meeting to discuss the dispute informally not laterthan fourteen (14) days after the receipt ofsuch notice. 241. Disputes submitted to dispute resolu\ion shall, in the first instance, be the subject ofinformal negotiations between the Parties. Such period ofinfonnal negotiations shall not 144extendbeyond thirty (30) calendar days from the date ofthe first meeting between representatives ofthe Parties, unless the Parties agree that this period should be extended. 242. In the event that the Parties are unable to reach agreement during such informal negotiation period, the United States orthe Applicable State Agency, as applicable, shallprovide CITGO with a written summary ofits position regarding the dispute. The position advanced by the United States or the Applicable State Agency, as. applicable, shall be. considered binding unless, within forty-five (45) calendar days ofCITGO's receipt ofthe written summary ofthe United States' or the Applicable State Agency's position,. CITGO files with the Court a petition which describes the nature ofthe dispute. The United States orthe Applicable State Agency shall respond to the petition within forty-five (45) calendardays offiling. 243. In the event that the. United States and the Applicable State Agency make differing determinations ortake differing actions that affect CITGO's rights or obligations under this Consent Decree, the determination or action ofthe United States shall control. 244. Where the nature ofthe dispute is such that a more timely resolution ofthe issue is required, the time periods set forth 

### in this Section XV maybe shortened uponmotion ofone of the Parties to the dispute. 245. The Parties do not intend that the invocation ofthis Section XV by a Party cause the Courtto draw any inferences nor establish any presumptions adverse to eitherParty as a result ofinvocation ofthis Section or their inability to reach agreement. 246. As part ofthe resolution ofany dispute submitted to dispute resolution, the Parties, by agreement, orthis Court, by order, may, in appropriate circumstances, extend or ; . . modify the schedule for completion ofwork under this Consent Decree to account for the delay 145

### in the work that occurred as a result ofdispute resolution. CITGO shall be liable for stipulated penalties for its failure thereafter to complete the work in accordance with the extended or modified schedule. 

### XVI. EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT 247. Definitions. For purposes ofSection XVI, the following definitions apply:
a. "Applicable NSRlPSD Requirements" shall mean: (i) PSD requirements at Part C ofSubchapter I ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7475, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. § 52.21, all as amended from time to time; (ii) "Plan Requirements for Non-Attainment Areas" at Part D of SubchapterI ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. 

### §§. 7502-7503, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 GF.R. §§ 51.165 (a) and (b); Title 40, Part 51, Appendix S; and 40 C.F.R. § 52.24, all as amended from time to time; and (iii) Any applicable state laws orregulations thatimplement, adopt, or incorporate the specific federal regulatoryrequirements identified above regardless ofwhether such state or local laws orregulations have been formally approved by EPA as being a part ofthe applicable state implementationplan. b. "Applicable NSPS Subparts. A and 

### J Requirements" shall mean the standards, monitoring, testing, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, found at 40 C.F.R. 

### §§ 60.100 through 60.109 (Subpart J), relating to a particularpollutant and a particular affected facility, and the corollary general requirements found at 40 C.F.R. 

### §§ 60.1 through 60.19 (Subpart A) that are applicable to any affected facility covered by Subpart J.
c. "Post-Lodging Compliance Dates" shall mean any dates in this Section XVI after the Date ofLodging. Post-Lodging Compliance Dates include dates certain**~.g.,** "December 31, 2005"), dates after Lodging represented in terms of"months afterLodging" (J<.g., "Twelve 146Months after theDate ofLodging"), and dates after Lodging represented by actions taken (S;.g., "Date ofCertification''). The Post-Lodging Compliance Dates represent the dates by whichwork is required to be completed or an emission limit is required to be metunder the applicable provisions ofthis Consent Decree. 248.
. Liabili1y Resolution regarding the Applicable NSRlPSD Requirements, With respect to emissions ofthe following pollutants. from the following units, entry ofthis ConsentDecree shall resolve. all civil liability ofCITGO to the United States and the CoPhiintiffs for violations ofthe Applicable NSRJPSD Requirements. resulting from construction or modification from the date ofthe pre-Lodging construction ormodification (including reconstruction) up to the following dates: Unit LemontFCCU

Lake Charles FCCU A

Lake Charles FCCU 

### B

Lake Charles FCCU C Pollutant S02 NOx 

## fM CO S02 NOx CO PM S02 

### NOx PM CO

S02 NOx PM CO 147 Date December 31, 2007 March 31, 2013 December 31, 2007 Date ofEntry March 31, 2012 March 31, 2012 October 1, 2005 March 31, 2010 December. 31, 2006 September 30, 2010 December 31, 2006 October 31, 2005

December 31, 2007 September 30, 20 I 0 December 31,2007 October 31, 2005Corpus Christi FCCU 

### # 1 S02 September 30, 2013 NOx September 30, 2013 PM December 31, 2006 CO Date ofEntry Corpus Christi FCCU 

### #:2 S02 March 31, 2010 NOx August 31,2007 CO Date ofEntry PM April 30, 2005 All Heaters and Boilers listed in Appendix C NOx June 30, 2011 All Heaters and Boilers other than those. in. Appendix C NOx Date ofLodging All Heaters and Boilers listed in Appendix E S02 Dates listed in Appendix E All Heaters and Boilers other than those listed in Appendix E S02 Date ofLodging All Fuel Gas Combustion Devices listed in Appendix 

### F S02 Dates listed in Appendix 

### F All Flaring Devices lisfed in Appendices B-1 orB-2, andG S02 Date. listed in Appendix G Lake Charles. Sulfuric Acid Plant S02 December 31, 2006
249. 

### Reservation ofRi2hts regardin2 Applicable NSRlPSD Requirements: Release for Violations Continuin2 Uter the Date ofLodging Can be Rendered Void. Notwithstanding the resolution ofliability in Paragraph 248, the release ofliability by the. United States and the Co-Plaintiffs to CITOO for violations ofthe Applicable NSRJPSD Requirements during the period between the Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree and the 148Post-Lodging Compliance Dates shall be rendered void for aparticularemissions unit ifCITGO materially fails to comply with the obligations and requirements ofSections V.A.

- 

### VD. and V.F. for that unit; providedhowever, that the release in Paragraph 248 shall notbe rendered void ifCITGO remedies such material failure and pays any stipulated penalties due as a result ofsuch material failure. 250. Exclusions from Release Coverage reearding Applicable NSRlPSD Requirements: Construction aud/or Modification Not Covered by Paraeraph
. Notwithstanding the resolution ofliability in Paragraph 248, nothing in this Consent Decree precludes the United States and/orthe Co-Plaintiffs from seeking from CITGO, injunctive relief, penalties, or other appropriate relieffor violations. by CITGO ofthe Applicable NSRJPSD Requirements resulting from construction ormodification that: (I) commencedprior to or coinIllences after the Date. ofLodging ofthe ConsentDecree forpollutants or units not covered by the Consent Decree; or (2) commences afterthe Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree for units coveredby this Consent Decree. 251. Increases in emissions from units coveredbythis Consent Decree, where the increases result from the Post-Lodging construction ormodification ofany units within the Covered Refineries, are beyond the scope ofthe release in Paragraph 248. 252. Resolution ofLiability Regarding Applicable NSPS Requirements. With respect to emissions ofthe following pollutants from the following units, entry ofthis Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability ofCITGO to the United States and the Co-Plaintiffs for violations ofthe Applicable NSPS Subparts A and 

### J Requirements from the date that the claim(s) ofthe United States and the Co-Plaintiffs accrued up to the follOWing dates: 149

### Unit Pollutant Date All Covered FCCUs S02 Dates listed 

### in Paragraph 248 PM (including opacity) Dates listed 

### in Paragraph 248 CO Dates listed in Paragraph 248 All Heaters and Boilers listed 

### in Appendix E S02 Dates listed in Appendix E All Heaters and Boilers other than those listed in Appendix E S02 Date ofLodging All Fuel Gas Combustion Devices listed in Appendix F S02 Dates listed in Appendix F Corpus ChristiEast and S02 Date ofEntry Corpus Christi West SRPs Lake Charles SRP Total Reduced Sulfur Date ofEntry LemontSRP S02 December 31, 2008 Flaring Devices listed in Appendices B·! or G S02 Date listed 

### in Appendix G In 

### addition and with respect to the Lake Charles Refmery sulfuric acid plant, entry ofthis ConsentDecree shall resolve all civil liability ofCITGO to the United States and the State of Louisiana for violations ofthe Applicable NSPS Subparts A and H requirements from the date the.claim(s) ofthe United States and the State ofLouisiana accrued up to December 31,2006. 253. Reservation ofRights regarding Applicable NSPS Subparts A andJ Requirements: Release for NSPS Violations Occurring After the Date ofLodging Can be Rendered Void. Notwithstanding the resolution ofliability in Paragraph 252, the release ofliability by the United States**a~d** 

### the Co-Plaintiffs to ClTGO for violations ofany


### ISOApplicable NSPS Subparts A and 

### J Requirement that occurredbetween the Date ofLodging and the Post-Lodging Compliance Dates shall be rendered void for a particular emissions unit if CITGO materially fails to complywith the obligations and requirements ofSections V.E., V.G., V.H., V.I., VJ.and V.K., and Paragraphs 44-46 and 48-49 for that unit; provided however, that the release in Paragraph 252 shall not be rendered void ifCITGO remedies such material failure and pays any stipulated penalties due as. a result ofsuch material failure, 254. Prior NSPS Applicability Determinations. Nothing in this. ConsentDecree shall affect the status ofanyFCeD, fuel gas combustion device, or sulfUr recoveryplant currently subject to NSPS as previously determined by any federal, state, or local authority or any applicable permit 255,. Resolution ofLiability Regarding Benzene Waste NESHAP Requirements. Withrespect to theNational Emission Standard for Benzene Waste Operations, 40 e,F.R. Part 61, Subpart FF ("Benzene Waste NESHAP"), and any applicable state, regional, or local regulations that implement, adopt or incorporate the Benzene. WasteNESHAP, entry ofthis Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability ofCITGO to the United States and the CoPlaintiffs for violations that: (1) commenced and ceasedpriorto the Date ofEntry ofthe. Consent Decree; and/or (2) are based on events identified in the BON Compliance Review and Verification Report required under Paragraph 98 and are correctedpursuant to the requirements ofParagraph 100. 256. Resolution ofLiability Regarding LDAR Requirements. With respect to the Leak Detection and Repair requirements relating to equipment in light liquid service and gas and/or vapor service set forth at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subparts VV and GGG; 40 C.F.R. Part 61, 151Subparts J and V; and 40 C.F.R. Part 63; Subparts F, H, and CC (collectively "LDAR Requirements"), and any applicable state. regional, or local regulations or State Implementation Plan requirements that implement, adopt orincorporate the LDAR Requirements or set similar standards, entry ofthis Consent Decree shall resolve the civil liability ofCITGO to the United States and the. Co-Plaintiffs for violations that:. (I) commenced and ceasedpriorto the Date of Entry ofthe Consent Decree; and/or (2) are based on events identified in the initial audit required underParagraph 117(a) and are corrected pursuant to the requirements ofParagraph 118
.

.257. Reservation ofRiehts Regardine the Benzene Waste NESHAP and LDAR Requirements. Notwithstanding the resolution ofliability in Paragraphs 255 and 256, nothing in this ConsentDecree precludes the United States and/or the Co-Plaintiffs from seeking from CITGO civil penalties and/or injunctive reliefand/or other equitable relieffor violations by

.CITGO ofBenzene Waste NESHAP and/orLDAR requirements that: (I) commencedprior to the. Date ofEntry ofthis ConsentDecree and continued after the Date ofEntryifCITao fails to identifY in its Paragraph 98 report or its Paragraph 117(a) audit, as applicable, such violations, and/orfails to correct such violations pursuantto Paragraphs 100 or 118, as applicable; or (2) commenced after the Date ofEntry ofthe ConsentDecree but are not identified in CITGO's Paragraph 98 report or its Paragraph 117(a) audit,. as. applicable and/or are not corrected pursuant to Paragraphs 100 or 118, as applicable.
. 258. With respect to the claims which formed the basis ofthe notices and orders identified in Appendix A, the United States and the Co-Plaintiffs release CITGO from any and

152all civil liability underthe Clean Air Act and any corresponding state or local laws orregulations arising out ofany acts or omissions by CITGO which formed the .basis for such claims. 258A. With respect to any claims for a stipulatedpenalty under this Consent Decree, assessment ofand payment ofsuch stipulated penaltyby CITGO shall resolve all civil liability of CITGO to the United States and the Co-Plaintiffs under the Clean Air Act and any similar state
or local laws or regulations, for any and all violations based on the facts. or circumstances giving rise to the claim for and assessment ofthe stipulated penalty. 259. Audit Policy. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended to limit or disqualify CITOO, on the grounds that information was not discovered and supplied voluntarily, from seeking to applyEPA's Audit Policy or any state audit policy to any violations or

.**non~compliance** that CITGO discovers during the. course ofany investigation, audit, or enhanced monitoring that CITGO is reqnired to undertake pursuant to this Consent Decree. 260.ClaimlIssue Preclusion. In any subsequent administrative orjudicial proceeding initiated by the United States or the Co-Plaintiffs for injunctive relief, penalties, or other appropriate. reliefrelating to CITGO for violations. ofthe PSDINSR, NSPS, NESHAP, and/or LDAR requirements, not identified in this Section XVI ofthe Consent Decree and/or the Complaint:
a. CITGO shall not assert, and may not maintain, any defense or claim based upon the principles ofwaiver, res jUdicata, collateral estoppel, issue preclusion, or claim-splitting. Nor may CITGO assert, or maintain, any other defenses based upon any contention that the claims raised by the United States or the Co-Plaintiffs in the subsequent proceeding were or should have been brought in the instant case. Nothing in the preceding sentences is intended to affect the 153ability ofCITGOto assert that the claims are deemed resolvedby virtue ofthis Section XVI of the Consent Decree. b. The United States and Co-Plaintiffs. may not assert or maintain that this Consent Decree constitutes a waiver or determination of, or otherwise obviates, any claim or defense whatsoever, orthat this Consent Decree constitutes acceptance by CrrGO ofany interpretation or guidance issued by EPA related to. the matters addressed in this Consent Decree. 261. Imminent and Substantial Endangerment. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit the authority ofthe United States, Georgia, Illinois, louisiana, orNew Jerseyto undertake any action against anyperson, including CITGO, to abate. or correct conditions which may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health, welfare, orthe environment. 

### XVII. GENERAL 

### PROVISIONS 262. Other Laws. Except as specificallyprovided by**thi~** Consent Decree, nothing in this ConsentDecree shall relieve CITOO ofits obligations to complywith all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. Subject to Section XVI, nothing contained in this Consent Decree shall be construed to prevent or limit the rights ofthe United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, or New Jersey to seek or obtain otherremedies or sanctions available under other federal, state mlocal statutes orregulations, by virtue ofClTOO's violation ofthe Consent Decree or ofthe statutes and regulations upon which the Consent Decree is based, orfor CITGO's violations ofany applicable provision oflaw, other than the specific matters resolved herein. This shall include the right ofthe United States, Georgia, TIlinois, Louisiana, or New



### 154Jersey to invoke the authority ofthe Court to order CITGO's compliance withthis Consent Decree in a subsequent contempt action. 263. Post-Permit Violations. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to prevent or limit the right ofthe United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, orNew Jerseyto seek injunctive ormonetaryrelieffor violations ofpermits issued as a result ofthe procedure required under Section V.N. ofthis Decree; providedhowever, that with respect to monetaryrelief, the United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, orNew Jerseymust electbetween filing a new action for such monetary reliefor seeking stipulated penalties underthis Consent Decree, ifstipulated penalties also are available for the allegedviolation(s). 264. Failure ofCowpliance. The United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, orNew Jersey do not, by their consent to the entry ofthis Consent Decree, warrant or averin any manner that CITGO's complete compliance withthe Consent Decree will result in future compliance with the provisions ofthe CAA, the Georgia 

### Air QualityAct, OCGA 12-9-1; the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, 415 !LCS 5/8: Title II 

### Air Pollution; Louisiana Air Control Law, LSA

- R.8. 30:2051-2065; the New JerseyAir Pollution Control Act, 26:2C-l to 25.2; and the Texas Clean AirAct, Acts 1989, 71" Leg., ch. 382. Notwithstanding the. review or approval by EPA orthe. Co-Plaintiffs, including their applicable state agencies, ofanyplans; reports, policies
orprocedures formulated pursuant to the Consent Decree, CITGO shall remain solelyresponsible for compliance with the terms ofthe Consent Decree, all applicable permits, and all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, except as provided in Section XIV (Force Majeure). 265. Service ofProcess. CITGO hereby agrees to accept service ofprocess by mail with respect to all matters arising under orrelating to the Consent Decree and to waive the formal 155service requirements set forth in Rule 4 ofthe Federal·Rules ofCivil Procedure and any applicable local rules ofthis Court, including but not limited to, service ofa summons. The persons identified by CITGO at Paragraph 270 (Notice) are authorized to accept service of process with respect to all matters arising under orrelating to the Consent Decree. 266. Post-LodginglPre-Entry Obligations. Obligations ofCITGO under this Consent Decree to perform duties scheduled to. occur afterthe Date ofLodging ofthe Consent Decree, butpriorto the Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree, shall be legally enforceable on and afterthe Date ofEntry ofthe Consent Decree. Liability for stipulated penalties, ifapplicable, shall accrue for violation ofsuch obligations and payment ofsuch stipulated penalties may be demanded by the United States, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, and/orNew Jersey as provided in this. Consent Decree, provided that stipulatedpenalties that mayhave accrued between the Date ofLodging ofthe ConsentDecree and the. Date ofEntry ofthe ConsentDecree maynotbe collected unless and until this Consent Decree is enteredby the Court. 267. Costs. Each Partyto this action shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees. 268. Public Documents. All information and documents submitted by CITao to the Applicable Federal and State Agencies pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be subject to public

.inspection in accordance with the respective statutes and regulations that are applicable, unless subject to legal.privileges orprotection oridentified and supported as business confidential in accordance with the respective state orfederal statutes orregulations. 269. Public Notice and Comment. The Parties agree that the Consent Decree maybe entered upon compliance with the public notice procedures set forth at 28 C.F.R. 

### § 50.7, and upon notice to this Court from the United States Department ofJustice requesting entry ofthe 156ConsentDecree. The United States reserves the right to withdraw or withhold its consentto the Consent Decree ifpublic comments disclose facts or considerations indicating that the Consent Decree is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. Further, the Parties acknowledge and agree that final approval by CocPlaintiff, the State. ofLouisiana, through the Department of Enviromnental Quality, and entry ofthis Consent Decree is SUbject to the requirements ofLa. R.S. 30:2050.7, which provides forpublic notice ofthis ConsentDecree in newspapers of general circulation and the officialjournals ofparishes in which CITGO facilities are. located, an opportunity for public comment, consideration ofany comments, and concurrence bythe State Attorney General. 270. Notice. Unless otherwise provided herein, notifications to or communications betweentheParties shall be deemed submitted on the date they are postmarked. Notifications and communications shall be sent by U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid, orprivate courier service, except for notices under Section XN (Force Majeure) and Section XV (Retention JurisdictionlDispute Resolution) which shall be sent by overnight mail orby certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Each report, study, notification or other communication ofCITGO shall be submitted as specified in this Consent Decree, with copies to EPA Headquarters and the Applicable EPA Region and the Applicable State Agency. Ifthe date on which a notification or other communication is due falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the deadline for such submission shall be enlarged to the next business day. Except as otherwise provided herein, all reports, notifications, certifications, or other communications required under this Consent Decree to be submittedor sent to the United States, EPA, the Co-Plaintiffs and/or CITGO shall be addressed as follows: 157As to the United States: Chief Environmental Enforcement Section Environment and Natural Resources Division U.S. Department ofJustice P.O. Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044-7611 Reference Case. No. 90-5-2-1-07277 As to EPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Director, Air Enforcement Division Office ofRegulatoryEnforcement Ariel Rios Building 1200PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W. Mail Code 2242-A Washington, DC 20460 EPA Region 

### 2: Director, Division ofEnforcement and Compliance Assistance U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 21 sl Floor 290 Broadway New York, NY 10007 Chief, Air Compliance Branch Division ofEnforcement and Compliance Assistance 21 sl Floor 290 Broadway New York, NY 10007 EPA Region 4: Chief, AirEnforcement & EPCRA Branch Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 61 Forsyth Street, 

### S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303

158**-~.\.;"',** 

# ... EPA Region 

### 5: Air and Radiation Division U.S. EPA, Region 5 77 West Jackson Blvd. (AE-17J) Chicago, Illinois 60604 ATTN: Compliance Tracker Office ofRegional Counsel U.s. EPA, Region 5 

### 77 West Jackson Blvd
.. (C-14J) Chicago, Illinois 60604 

### EPA Region 6: Chief Air, Toxics, and Inspections Coordination Branch Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas. 75202-2733 

### The State ofGeorgia: Chief Air Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 4244 International Parkway Suite 120 Atlanta, Ga. 30354 

### The State oflllinois: Chief, Environmental Bureau Office ofthe lllinois. Attorney General 188 West Randolph Street, 20'h Floor Chicago, lllinois 60601

159

### The State ofLouisiana: PeggyM. Hatch Administrator, Enforcement Division Office ofEnvironmental Compliance Louisiana Department ofEnvironmental Quality P.O. Box 4312 Baton Rouge, La. 70821-4312


### The State ofNew Jersey: New Jersey Department ofEnvironmental Protection Southern Regional Office Air Compliance & Enforcement Manager One Porl Center 2 Riverside Drive, Suite. 201 Camden, New Jersey 08103 

### As to CITGO: Manager, Environmental Services 

## crroo 1293 Eldridge Parkway Houston, Texas 77077 General Counsel CITGO 1293 Eldridge Parkway Houston, Texas 77077 Any Party may change either the notice recipient or the address for providingnotices to itby serving all otherparties with a notice setting forth such new notice recipient or address
.. In addition, the nature and frequency ofreports required bythe Consent Decree may be modified by mutual consent ofthe Farties. The consent ofthe United States to suchmodification must be in

. the form ofa written notification ofconsent from the Department ofJustice, but need notbe filed

with the Court to be effective.
160271. Approvals. All EPA approvals shall be made in writing. All PlaintiffIntervener approvals shall be sent from the offices identified in Paragraph 270. 272. Paperwork Reduction Act. The information required to be maintained or submitted pursuant to this Consent Decree is not subjectto the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,44 U.S.C. 

### §§ 3501**et~.** 273. Modification. The Consent Decree contains the entire agreement ofthe Parties andshall notbe modified by anyprior oral orwritten agreement, representation orunderstanding. Prior drafts ofthe Consent Decree shall not be. used in any action involving the interpretation or enforcement ofthe Consent Decree. Non-material modifications to this Consent Decree, including modifications to. the schedules for catalyst additive programs under Sections. V.A and 

## v.n and to the frequency ofreporting obligations, shall be in writing, signed bythe Parties, but need notbe filed with the Court. Material modifications to this Consent Decree shall be in writing, signed by the Parties, and shall be effective upon filing with the Court. 

### XVIII. TERMINATION 274. This ConsentDecree shall be subject to termination upon motion by the United States, in consultation .withthe Co-Plaintiffs, or CITGO (underthe procedure identified in Paragraph 276). Priorto eitherparty seeking termination, 

### CITao shall have. completed and satisfied all ofthe following requirements ofthis Consent Decree:
a. installation ofcontrol technology systems as specified in this ConsentDecree; b. compliance with all provisions contained in this Consent Decree, which compliance maybe established for specific parts ofthe Consent Decree in accordance with Paragraph 275, below; 161

### c. payment ofall penalties and othermonetary obligations due underthe terms of the Consent Decree; no penalties or othermonetary obligations due hereunder
canbe outstanding or owed to the United States or the Co-Plaintiffs; d. completion ofthe "environmentallybeneficial" projects set forth in Section VIII;
e. application for and receipt of permits incorporating the surviving emission limits and standards established under Section V.N.; and f. operation for at least one year ofeachunit in compliance with the emission limits established herein, and certification ofsuch compliance for each unit within the first six. (6) monthperiod progress report following the conclusion ofthe. complianceperiod. 

### 275. Certification ofCompletion.
a. Prior to moving for termination, CITGO may certifycompletion ofone ormore. of the following subsections ofthe Consent Decree, provided that all ofthe related requirements have been satisfied: i. 

### Subsection V.A.

- V.E.; relating to FCCUs; 

### ii. Subsections V.F.

- V. G., relating to Heaters, Boilers and OtherFuel Gas Combustion Devices;
Ill. 

### Subsections. V.H

- V.K, relating to SRPs and Flaring;
IV. 

### Subsections V.L and V.M, relating to Benzene Waste NESHAP and LDAR; and
v. Section VIII, relating to Environmentally Beneficial Projects.

162b, Within 90 days after CITGO concludes that'any ofthe parts ofthe Consent Decree identified in this Paragraph 275 have been completed, CITGO may submit a written report to the Parties listed in Paragraph 270 (Notice) describing the activities. undertaken and certifying that

. the applicable Paragraphs have been completed in full satisfaction ofthe requirements ofthis

Consent Decree, and that CITGO is in substantial and material compliance with all ofthe other requirements ofthe Consent Decree, The report shall contain the. following statemeht, signedby aresponsible corporate official ofCITGO: To the best ofmy knowledge, after thorough investigation, I certify that the information contained in or accompanying this submission is true, accurate and complete, I am aware that there are significantpenalties for submitting false information, including the possibility offine and imprisonment for knowing violations,
c. Upon receipt ofCITGO's certification, EPA, after reasonable opportunity for review and commentby the Applicable State AgencieS,shall notify CITGO whetherthe requirements set forth in the applicable Paragraphs have been completed in accordance with this Consent Decree, The parties recognize that ongoing obligations under such Paragraphs remain andnecessarily continue (e,g, reporting, record keeping, training, auditing requirements), and that CITGO's certification is that it is in current compliance with all such obligations, I, IfEPA concludes. that the requirements have not been fully complied with, EPA shall notify CITGO as to the activities that must be undertaken to complete the applicable Paragraphs ofthe Consent Decree, CITGO shall perform all activities described in the notice, subject to its right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures set forth in Section XV (Dispute Resolution),
IL IfEPA concludes that the requirements ofthe applicable Paragraphs have been completed in accordance with this ConsentDecree, EPA will so certify in writing to CITGO, This certification shall constitute

163the certification ofcompletion ofthe applicable Paragraphs for purposes ofthis Consent Decree.
d. Nothing in Paragraph 275(c) shall preclude the United States orthe Co-Plaintiffs :trom seeking stipulatedpenalties for a violation ofany ofthe requirements ofthe Consent Decree regardless ofwhether a Certification ofCompletion has been issued under Paragraph 275 ofthe Consent Decree. In addition, nothing in Paragraph 275(c) shall permit CIrGO to fail to implement any ongoing obligations under the Consent Decree regardless ofwhether a Certification ofCompletion has been issued with respect to Paragraph 275 ofthe Consent Decree. 276. Atsuch time as CIrGO believes that it has satisfied the requirements for termination set forth in Paragraph 274, CIrGO shall certify such compliance. and completion to the United States and the Co-Plaintiffs in writing as provided in Paragraph 270 (Notice). Unless, within 120 days ofreceipt ofCITGO's certification under this Paragraph, eitherthe United States
orthe Co-Plaintiffs. objects in writing withspecific. reasons, CIrGO may move this Court for an order that this. ConsentDecree be terminated. 

### Ifeitherthe United States orthe Co-Plaintiffs objects to the certification by CITGO under this. Paragraph, then the matter shall be. submitted to the Court forresolution under Section XV (Retention ofJurisdictionlDispute. Resolution) ofthis Consent Decree. In such case, CIrGO shall bearthe burden ofproving that this Consent Decree should be terminated.

164XIX. SIGNATORIES 277.
.Each ofthe undersigned representatives certifies that he or she is fully authorized to enter into the Consent Decree on behalfofsuch Parties,. and to execute and to bind such Parties to the Consent Decree. This ConsentDecree may be signed in counterparts. Dated and entered this _. day of ".2004



### UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

165

# • PLANTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

THOMAS L. SANSONETTI

. Assistant Attorney General

Environment and Natural Resources Division U.S. Department ofJustice Washington, DC 20530

# ~TL~~. NICHOLAS F. PERSAMPIERI -, Trial Attorney Environmental Enforcement Section Environment and Natural Resources Division U.S. Department ofJustice· P.O. Box 7611 Washington, DC 20044·7611 

# fl&w...V,

·:rnotAS V. SKINNER

. Acting Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Mail Code: 220lA Washington, DC 20460

166 

# 9
..22· 

# (/1 DATE·

DATE

### .. PLAnmFF TIIE STATE

### OF GEORGIA

CAROLA: COUCH, PHD
.

.Director Environmental Protection Division



### .**DepartIn~t** 

### ofNatural Resources

. .State ofGeOrgia·

167

### ·PLAINTlFF

### tHE STATEOF ILLINOIS 

## Ro Chief Environmental Bureau AssistantAttomeyGeneral 188 

### WestRandolph St. 

### 20 th 

### Floor



### . Chicago, llIinois 60601
.

. .J"



### 168 Date:.-U¥"=-f--=-1-_-,-_. .

. UISIANA, THROUGHTHEDEPARTMENT OF
Date:

# ~~?/6Y OLDLEG9 T,P ASsistant Secretary

. Office ofEnVironmental Compliance LouisianaDeparttnent ofEnViron:rnerital Quality

TED
... S SeniorA mey (LA .BarNo: 20456) Legal Division LouisianaDepartment ofEnviromnental Quality :(225)219-3985



### 169

# , PLAINTIFF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY' PETER C. HARVEY

.Attorney General ofNew Jerney

# 'By'~~(3~

SCOTT B. DUBIN
. DeputyAttorney General Department ofLaw and Public Safety Division ofLaw RJ Hughes Justice Complex 25 Market St. 7th FloorWest P.O. Box 093 Trenton,

EDWARD M. CHOROMANSKI Administrator, Air Compliance 

### &. Enforcement
. New JerseyDepartment ofEnviromnental Protection P.O. Box 422 401 East State Street, Floor 4 Trenton, New Jersey 08625



### 170

# Date:.~_· --,<tI_V_'7_i 

## r-/-=-o-l-1

__

# Date:·~_'?7Ac..::2-,--3:::"If-h=-O.Ltf_· _ITt·
. :...._....



### DEFENDANT CITGO PElROLEUM CORPORATION By

# (j"lt~JERRY E. rnOMPSoN ChiefOperating Officer**H'Iol,,,yr~D** CHEMICALS COMPANY, L.P.
Date: 

# ./Iv"! I

DEFENDANT PDV MIDWEST REFINING, L.L.C.
By

# ~e~**JE~rn MPSO~** **~c**

President
DEFENDANT CITGO ASPHALT REFINING COMPANY



## .._.- ," ' .. "." , ',:' President

,172 Date: 

### t( 

# /Z}[O'Y 

# , ..APPENDIX A STATE AND. FEDERAL COMPLIANCE ORDERS AND NOTICES
EPA FOV 5-99-IL-28 (dated 6.8·99) EPA NOV 5-01-IL-04 (dated 1·19-01) EPA FOV 5-01-IL-II (dated 7-13-01) IEPA Violation Notice. A-2002-00346 (dated 11/13/02) IEPA Violation Notice E-2003-00004 (dated 1-13-03) LDEQ Notice. ofViolation andPotential Penalty AE-NP-99-0226 (dated 10-29-99) LDEQ Compliance Order and Notice. ofPotential PenaltY AE-CN-OI-0304 (dated 6-6-02) LDEQ Compliance Order and Notice ofPotential Penalty AE-CN-02-0191 (dated 3-10-.03) TCEQ Agreed Order DocketNo. 2001-1469-AIR-E (dated February 2004) TNRCC Agreed Order Docket No. 1999-0057-AIR-E (dated June 2002)APPENDIXB LIST OF. HYDROCARBON FLARINGDEVICES COJllus ChristiEast Refinery FluorFlare
. Cumene Flare Comus Christi West Refmery Flare Lemont Refinery 844C-I North Plant Flare 844C-2 South Plant Block2Flare 844C-3 South Plant Block 3. Flare

. 844C-4 Needle Coker Flare

844C-5 Alky Flare· Lake Charles. Refinery 328B-! Flare Alky 330B-4 Flare NGL/Girbitol 343B-5 Flare Central 343B-6 Flare Central 343B·7 Flare Central 3!9B-8 Flare C4 Recovery
. 3I5B-9 Flare Benzene 327B-II Flare C-Re£'CKll 320B-j2 Flare Unicracker 399B-16 Flare CFH 360CB-701 (CB-II) PFU CAIOOI.CLAW B-I04 COP!fIER II· PaulsbClro Refinery FlareAPPENDIX B-1 LIST OF NSPS HYDROCARBON FLARING DEVICES Comus Christi EastRefinery FluorFlare Cumene Flare Comus Christi West Refinery Flare LemontRefinery 844C·l North PlantFlare 844C-2 South Plant Block 2 Flare 844C-3 South Plant Block 3 Flare 844C-4 Needle. Coker Flare 844C-5 AlkyFlare Lake. Charles. Refmety 327B-ll Flare C-Ref/CKIJ 320B-12 Flare Unicracker 399B-16 Flare CFH 360CB-701 (CB-ll) PFU CAIOOI CLAW B-104 COPrrIEIUI Paulsboro Refinery Flare

### APPENDIX B-2 LIST OF. NSPS ACID. GAS FLARING DEVICES Comus. Christi East Refinery Acid Gas Flare SWSFlare Comus Christi West Refinery Acid Gas Flare SWSFlare LemontRefinery 844C-2 South PlantBlock 2 Flare 844C-3 South PlantBlock 3 Flare Lake Charles Refmery 327B-II Flare C-Refi'CK II 320B-12 Flare UnicrackerAPPENOIXC LIST OF CITGO HEATERS AND: BOILERS INFORMATION REDACTEDAS CONFIDemAL BUSINESS INFORMATION

79 BoilerB-l,B-IA 890_6 146UI**~493,3** 80).0 813,2 Rctbctcd 

## R",""" F&TS Tc:n' 145 Furnace B-So3-,504j05 700.0 172,9 191.7 41:>.6 475.1 

# ....,'" RedGtcd Sta<:kTest Pmnit· 261 M·' 77 BoUer B-IC 616.7 474.9 505.5 349.8 372.3 Redacted Redacted FIlTS**Tt~** j 18 Boiler B-IB 53].6 450.3
. 47LO 314.5 391.7 

## ....,'" Rcdm:tcd AP.42 j 25 FumaceB-4 456.6 242.6 218.9 403.5 364.2 

## """""'''' Redacted AP-42 2' fUrnace B_I04 456.6 28<ll 189.9 456.S 472.8 Redaeted R.edacted
. F&TS**Te~** '35 Boiler :B-5A**1~7.6** 81.) 76.5 185.6 174.1 

## """"'''' R"""'" Stack Tl"lIt PSI).LA.51 136 BOllerB-5 331.6 92.9 89.6 212.1 204.6 

## R"""'" N.edacted Stack fest PSD-LA-57 

# " FI,I11'JfleC n-403,404,405 330.0 46_1 SU 183_8: 21S.3**R~led** 

# """'''''**.F&'rST~in**

..!O B0l1el':B-2 267.1 193.4 ta1.2 160.9 150.7 

# """"'" R ,'" AP-4'



## " Bol!erB-2A 267.1 132.6 117.8 1611.2 149.4 l!.e(iacled Redacted JI&'l'S'festln

.**.i~.** Fumnec:..--p-1 "345 245.0 Ilg.!! 136.1 134.1 153.1**Red~ed** 

# """"'''' StackTesl =ni1_2EiI5 

## .,

82**~~B-3,1i':?!L_.,** .• 229.:1 303.9 309.5 252.8 257.4**R~ed** R.ted AP-4' 83 Bl;li1er B-3A,B-3C 229_5 155.0 153,7 128:9- 127.8 Redacted Redao;ted AP_42 '44 f\ll'I;&Ce B-SOI,502,506 19a.5 73.3 69.8 88".2 83.9 

## R"""'" Redacr:oo. StlIckTM Sl)..LA-21i 

# , 107 FI.lJlllltI:BcIOZ-B-I06 185.0 

## "'"' 65.6 76.7 54.6 

## R"""" 

# """"'" AP-4' 

# " BoilerBF-4 \67.0 45.0 

## '"' 31.4 

## '"' Redacted 

## ""-, AP-4' 

## '" FlrmU:<:t B-20 I .158.8 1l0.1 93.3 158.0 133_2 Rr.m;u;ted 

# ""-'" fl&"tS'testin 

# , 140 FUJ1'NIt;I: 8-202 158.8 90.5 87.1 150.6 144.8 

## R""''''' 

# ""''''''' AP-4' ; 

# "**A~t"f~B-6** 156_2 too.4 94.4 83.5 78.5 

## R"""'" 

# ",- AP-42 

## " C eatF'w't1a.:e 8-6 156.2 24.5 29.1 68.3 80.9 

# """"'" Redacloo. F&TSTesdn 

## " Tkliler BF-I 139.0 II4.3 138.8 95_1 115.4 

# """"'" RedaCled AP-4' 

# " Boil<::r 51'-2 139.0 124.6 140.9 l03.7 117.2**R~W:led** 

# """"'''' M_42 33 lklilerBF-3 139.0 1j6.4 134.5 113.4 111.9 RedacUld 

# """','" Al"-42 177 Furnace 8_101 116_9 18_0 130 97.6 10.6 :Redacled ktdacted StaekTClIt mnli -2308 

## ., 14 F'!Jrllace BA-I.2A&.2B 115.6 102.2 110:5 85.0 91.9 

## """"'" 

## """""'" Ai'_42 2001 -»-421 2002 ' Stm:kTcrt (Permit

_ _'2 Fllfl'ill(;e D-IOI· 112.9 70.0 92.4" 85.1 101.3 Redacted Red;u,:ted 2714 VO 2001-AP-421 2002 Sw.:1; Test (Pmnil- _lQ.._-**Fl,lffiiI~B-:lOI** 109.7 74.6 ''"I 91.3 101.0 Rcdllt-I-ec) 

## R"""'''' 

## '" 0

94 FumIlCC 8--IC 10·0 134".5 143_7 111.8 119.5 

## R"""" R"""od AP-42 

# " FUI1IaCe B-2C 

## '" 47.0 46.4 109.4 108.1 

## R""''''' Redacted AP-4' 118**FIU1lIP;B-JO~** 88.0 14.4 10.7 78.4· 58.4 

## R,"'"" R"""'" SlaCk Te$I; Permil- 2308 M-2 

## " B CIl.t**,FlIm&{;~** 8-6 81.4 16.6 15.2 38,6 35.5 Redacted RedclCied AP-4'

__L_**t::'!'!1~.C;** Bb..-_'

____ 77.5 33-4 37.4 77,8 67.1 Redacted RcdM:ted AP-42 2001- AP-42 

## , Fllrnace SA-IOI 17_5 33.5 23.1 78.0 10.3 Re-latt¢d RcdllC!ed**i002~** AP'-42

- LowNox burner 65 F\lrtI!lCe Il-201 75.6 41.7 44"' 97.1 103.2 Redatt=d 

# .....,'" Al'-4l n Fllm&o:o!:Il-IOI 74.8 22.0 

## ""' 51.2 54.3 Redact="d**R~ed** AP-42 73 FU111l1l:e B-1 0I #2 74.8 22_0 23.3 51.2 .54.3 

## R"""" 

## """"" AJ'"-4;2 

# " Flll'\4lCe BA_I &2 

# . ., 11.3 II.3 26.4 U;;2 

# """"'" Red/ll;t:ed AI'-4Z**.,._l:!~._.** f.Wlla¢e B-20I 1\'"5 22.;Z ;l.4
..9 5l.S 58-0 Redoolcd Redlll:ted AP-4' ---§.--" FvmkcN-2.A 1\4,' 20,Z 10.3 47-1 47.2 RedlM:ted Redacled AP-4'



# ,**I:mn_~.N.:~_** .. 1\4"' 23.2 21.1 54.0 49_2 Rcdac.led RedlM:ted AP·42 

## ,**FlIJlII\I;:~J:4:~c;:'",-** ____ 1\4"' 21.1 2(l,9 .<19,2 48.7 Rroamd Redacted AP.42 17**Fumacp~A-1** & 2 1\4,' 19,9 20,1 41$.3 46.8 Redaeted Redacted AP·42 84 FllJ1'IaceJl-401 60' 17.5 15_7 40"' JQ.,:i Redac.ted R.cdiIeled AP-4' 74 Fllrnace 8-'5 58.4 14.0 14.2 32.5 33_1 Red\\l:led Redacted AP-42 85**~B-406** 573 10.6 11.5 24.8 ;':6.7**R~ted** Redacted AP-42 86 fumace 8-402 55.9 14.3 16.2 33.3 31.:11 Redlltted**R~w;:ted** AP-42 1\4 Furnace B-2()2 53.0**1~.3** 16.6 42.7 ,>7 Il:cdaeLed**Re~ted** Ar'-42 

## " FUmaceB-2A 44"' 19.6 21.1 458 49.1 Reuacled ""","" :AP-42 

## " FumaceB-l02 43-3 27.7 23.3 40.1 JJ.7 Re4;u:Ied Redacted Stack Test Permil_ 74**M~3** 

# " Furnace D·I #1--- 39.0 24,' 22.4 56.3 52.1 Redar;led Redaclild »-42 

# " FumliCeB·j #2 39.0 24,' 22,4 56.3 52.1 Redacled Redacted AP-42**".",.<,,~:. ":!.:~,;;">,-;.,:.**  -, .. ';"\:"";' 

# , 'I1KI:ie Imits id=rtlfic:d wilh this
..hc:l:ktnBri; tu'e: to be lested**rorNO~** l:JI"Iimons. With prior consrni from EPA. CITGO may substitute any other heater or boiler with 1I d=rign firing nile;:> 100

MMBI,.Ihr fUld for which AJ'-42 fm::tt;:rll are el\JTen\1y being Il$OO to (l$limm the baseli
...e NO.**~ions_** 'APPENDIXC LIST OF CITGO HEATERS AND BOILERS INFORMATION REDACTED AS CONFlDENTlAL BUSINESS INFORMATiON

. Prc:rio\IS1y used**A~-42,** Sth ed. (31911).Tw1e 1.4-2 ([adar =O.214351·lb.lMMBm). 10110101 mack Icstill& by ARl resulted In 4308-1 325.0 181_7 1.98.9 183.9 201.3 Ikdaeled 

## '''''''''' cumnt**r~or.** Based on 101912000 nacktest by 1Illl-IA 3.22.0 250.0 261.1 m.2 2119.6 

## """""" RedActed AI" Dued·01\ 101912000**~tack** test by lIIB-IB 322.0 234.2- 2S0,Z 259.8 217.'.5 Redacted Redacted ARJ Previl;)\l!;Jy used AP-42. 5th at (3f5l1l). Tableo 1.4--2 (tal:tar= O.274511b./MMBtu), 9f6l0t !>(flC:k terting by AJU**resul~** irl C\ltI"dll 431B-19 149,<t 3n 39.0 11&.8 122-6 Ri:dacteod 

# ."""'

# .. factOr. 43IB-Repl;u;:=lllRI Rep!nee(\'ll';llt b 431B-19 in 2002..**Des!~ed** fur O.061b_ NOitMMBtu. 249_0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Redal:ted Redacted 41Z2198 'laCk test .. 0.161 1b/MMBtl:l. ULNB imtlIIIed MaJ-ch '00. EF '" O.06lb1MMBtu (C!it). 10/1912000 MllCk (¢Sf 'byARI Il1B,2 219_8 104.& 38_5 148.6 14",9 """'too 

## ."""'

# .. showed EF= 0.036 lb./MMBtu. 116B·l 125.6 103.il 104.] 863 86.6 

## ''''''''' '"",too 

### AP-' Sthcd 3/98 TDbleo 1.4-2 1238-.2 121.2 91.9 104.4 76.4 86.8 

### ''''''''' 

# ."""" AP"42 5th cd. 3/98) rltble 1.4-2 112B·I; 021 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Redllct.ed
. Redacted AP-42 5th cd. ]{!l Table 1,4-2- 116B-2 106.9 129.2 104.0 107.5 86.5**Redae~'"** Rt:dacted AP-42 5th cd_ 3198 Tabk: IA-2 PennitBuisisO.16JJ:>,IMMDtll- AP 42, 5th cd, (31911), Table 1.4-2 if**109:B~62** 103.0 37.6 649 5n 92,6 Redac!ed 

## """"",, 0.098039. 118:8-1 93.11 18.9 

# '" 440 5t.7**~8Cled** ReWed AP-42 5th ed. 3/98 Tabk 1.4.2 113B-1
. 88,8 16.38 16.1 7L9 70.8 

# ....... Redilcto:d 

### " ;"d SEP. 9/97 staclc.**~I** 1l3B-2 lrl!.8 15.11 15,6 69.5 68.5 

## "'''''''

# ..**R~dact~d** Ponci 9f97 5taeJ.;**l~** ()f 1136-1 113B-3 88.8 26.8 27.4 71.7 73.2 

# .."""'" Redacted P=nit. 10/85 sw:k tef;.t results 125Bn-2· S:l.J 40.4 37,0 94".0 8<5.2**:R~dacted** Redacted AP-42 5th ed. 3/98 •nble L4_2 125B-1 69.3 31.6 13,2 73.5 30,8 Ralaeted 

## ,"""'

# .. AP·42 5th.,;'l. 31!j.8 TlIble 1.4-2 1238-3, 55.3 9.9 10,2 23.2 23.8 Redacted Redacted AP-42 5th ed_ 3f98 Table 1.4-2 -123J:J-1 45_6 79 9.9 18,3 23,0- 

# ."""', """""

# .. AP·42**SIb~.** 3198 •Table 1.4-2**I23B~5** . 42.0 12,8 12,2 29.9 1-IIA 

# ."""'

# .. Redal:tcd Al'·42 Sth cd. 31911 Table 1.4-2

. .....:.,ArPENDIXC LIST Of CITGQ HEATERS AND, BOILERS .INFORMATION REDACTED AS CONFIDENTIAL BUSiNESS**I~FORMAnON** 

### ."t_ 

## '''' 59.' 47.3 173.\1 111,4 

# .","'

# .. """"'" NOxCEM BMtPbmt 311.8 94.' IOH 154.1 111.9 

## .,"""" """"'" AP-42 EletPlanl 120**~9.3 ~1I.6**  Il8 116J 

## """',

# .. .""''''' StB(;k Test 5199 East Plant 

# '" 82.6 99.4 99_2 119.5 

# ."""

# .. Rcdaete<l AP·42 

# EM'''' \21.7 80_9 88.9 97.2 IOU 

# ."""

# .. Rodactcd AP·42 &sf. P[;ml 222 16.1 H.S !ilS.9 108.3 

# . """

# .. ."""

# .. NOx IOOdel Plant II. 403 4
.... n.l lOlA 

# """"'" 

# ._.. AJ>·42 I!au:Planl 200.6 41.9 43.5 79.S 78.2 

# ."""'" ."""'" NOxJmdcl EastPl;mt 252.4 120.7 ;',32.] J96.a 

# ."""'" 

# ."""

# .. AP-42**NlIi~l** EMt»liUlt 4B 19.4 19.2 44.2 43.9 

# ........ Rod""'" AP-42 EllStplltllt 41.6 U.2 12.1 30.1 29 RedBC1ed 

# ."""'" AP-42 flllllt 164.3 0.0 0.0 0,.0- 0.0 

## """"'" Redacted AP-42 

# ""'- 400 130.4 U2.2 391.6 397.1 Rlida.cted 

# ."""'" Stack TI.'.lII 5199 li1l!ltPllint 52,' to.S 

## ,., 23.9 15.8 

# ."""'" """'t'" AP-42 Basi Plant 5-2.8 10.1 

# ... " 16.3 

# ...,,,,,,,**Redac~ed** AP-42 WatPlIlllt 2906 45.0 47.s 205.4 m.• 

# ."""', ."""', NOxmodel Westrhlnf 144.8 101,4 71.6 121.4 116,11: R"",""**~,** AP-42 Westp\ant
. 132.7 511:.2 62.1 94.9 10L2 Redacted' Redacted AP-42 Westplanl 76.6 32.6 31.8 74.4 72.7 RcdaCl.cd**~da.l:t.ed** AP-42 We.rtPlam 82.3 27.9 2!'J.4 67.7 71.::i R"""'" 

## "''''''''' Swelt Te$t 1/15198' westplatlt 98'.9 25.7 21.8 ::i0.2 42_:5 Redacted Redacr.ed Slack Tll$l 3126/84 W 

# .. ." 98.9 21.6 20.3 46 4M, hdiil:ted Redacted Stack 'fest 3/22184 Wm: Plant 411.2 19.4 20.9
...4 41.7 

## """''''' 

# """"'" AP-42 Wen l1ant 98.9 l1,2- ".4 39.3 39,R 

# """",' Redack:d AP-42 Wes.t Plant 49_9**1~.9** 13.7 ".2 31.3 

## "''''''''**~Ied** AP-42 WmPl:mt 62 7.5

- 7.7**2.~** 27.1 R""'Iod Redacted SllICkTCllt**1'16I9~** 'x,
..",,',:**I.~'** 

## ."""'" AP-42 Nat.t 

## """'"" AP-<2 Rtdal:tcd AP-42APPENDIXD / DETERMINING THE OPTIMIZED ADDITION RATES OF CATALYST ADDITIVES AT THE FCCUs
I. PURPOSE This Appendix defines a process by which CITGO shall determine for the FeCDs the Optimized Addition Rates for Low NOX Combustion Promoters, NOX Reducing Catalyst Additives and S02 Reducing"Additivesduring the Optimization Periods. II. ESTABLISHING AN OPTIMIZED LOW NOX COMBUSTION PROMOtER ADDITION RATE A. Overview. Establishing an Optimized Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition

. . Rate for the FCCDs is a three-step process: (1) establishing a minimum addition rate for the conventional combustion promoterthat CITGO currently uses such that the effectiveness ofthe conventional combustion promoter is maintained (the "MinimumConventional Combustion PromoterAddition Rate"); (2) replacing the conventional combustion promoter with aparticular Low NOX Combustion Promoter at an addition rate that is the functional equivalent ofthe Minimum Conventional Combustion Promoter Addition Rate (the "Initial Low NOX Combustion Promoter Addition Rate"); and (3) increasing the addition rate up totwo times the Initial Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition Rate ifthe Initial Low NOX Combustion Addition Rate is not effective (the "Optimized Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition Rate"). B•. "Effectiveness" Determinations. The effectiveness ofconventional combustion promoter shall be detennined by the following criteria: (1) afterburn is controlled adequately and regenerator temperature and combustion levels are adequately maintained; and I(2) temperature excursions are broughtunder control adequately. The effectiveness ofLow NOX Combustion Promoter shall be determined by those two criteria and by whether a measurable reduction in NOX emissions occurs. C. Establishing the Minimum Conventional Combustion Promoter Addition Rate, CITGO shall reduce its historical usage ofconventional combustion promoters to the point that the addition rate is the minimum necessary to retainthe effectiveness ofthe conventional combustion promoterthat CITGO is using ("Minimum Conventional Combustion Promoter Addition Rate"). D. Establishing the Initial Low NOX Combustion Promoter Addition Rate. Based
on the activity ofconventional combustion promoterhistoricallyused and the activity oftheLow NOX combustion. promoter, CITGO shall replace conventional combustion promoter with Low NOX Combustion Promoter at a rate that is the functional equivalent in promotion activity ofthe Minimum Conventional Combustion PromoterAddition Rate. This functionally equivalent rate shall be called the Initial Low NOX Combustion PromoterAdditionRate. E. Establishing the Optimized Low NUX Combustion Promoter Addition Rate. If the Low NOX Combustion Promoter is not effective at the Initial Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition Rate, CITGO shall increase, by up to two times, the Initial Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition Rate. If, at two times the Initial Low NOX Combustion PromoterAddition Rate, the Low NOX Combustion Promoter is not effective, CITGO may discontinue the use ofLow NOX Combustion Promoter.

2III. ESTABLISHING AN OPTIMIZED NOXREDUCING CATALYST ADDITIVE ADDITION RATE A.· Overview. The Optimized NOXReducing Catalyst Additive Addition Rate shall be determined by evaluating NOX emissions reductions and annualized costs at three different addition rates. B. The Increments. The three addition rates or "increments" shall be: 1.0 Weight % NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive 1.5 Weight % NOX Reducing CatalystAdditive 2.0 Weight % NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive Where Weight % is ofthe total catalyst added to the FCCU. C. The Procedure
.. CITGO shall successively addNOX Reducing CatalystAdditive at each increment set forth above. Once a steady state has been achieved at each increment, CITGO shall evaluate the performance ofthe NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive in terms ofNOX emissions reductions and projected annualized costs. The final Optimized NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive Addition Rate shall occur at the addition rate where either: (1) the FCCU meets 20 ppmvdNOX (corrected to 0% 02) on a 365-day tolling average, in which case CITGO shall agree to accept limits of20 ppmvdNOX (corrected to 0% 02) on a 365-day rolling average basis at the conclusion ofthe Demonstration Period; or (2) the total annualized cost-effectiveness ofthe NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive used exceeds $10,000 per ton ofNOX removed as measured from an uncontrolled baseline (as estimated based on current operating pammeters as comparedto operating parameters during the baseline period); or (3) the Incremental NOX Reduction Factor is less than 1.8, where the Incremental NOX Reduction Factor is defmed as: 

### FE, c 

### PE,'I 

### CAR;

- CAR;.1 

### PR, where: Pollutant (NOX) reduction rate at increment i in pounds per day from the baseline model

### PR,-t CAR, =

= Pollutant (NOX) reduction rate at the incrementprior to increment i in pounds per day from the baseline model NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive Rate at increment i in pounds per day NOX Reducing CatalystAdditive Rate at the increment priorto increment i in pounds per day Ifthe conditions ofeither (1), (2), or (3) above are not met at any addition rate less than 2.0 Weight % NOX Reducing Catalyst Additive, then the Optimized Addition Rate shall be 2.0 Weight % NOX Reducing CatalystAdditive. Ifan additive limits the FCCU's abilityto control CO emissions to below 500 ppmvd CO at 0% 02 on an I-hourbasis or 100 ppmvd CO at 0% Ox on a 365-day basis, and cannotbe reasonably compensated for by adjusting otherparameters without adversely impacting conversion (yield selectivity) orprocessing rales, then the additive rate shall be reduced to a level at which the additive no longer causes such effects.

IV. ESTABLISHING AN OPTIMIZED S02 REDUCING CATALYST ADDITIVE ADDITION RATE A. Overview. The Optimized S02 Reducing CatalystAdditive Addition Rate shall be determined by evaluating S02 emissions reductions and annualized costs at three different addition rates. B. The Increments. The three addition rates or "increments" shall be: 5.0 Weight % S02 Reducing CatalystAdditive 7.5 Weight % S02 Reducing CatalystAdditive 10.0 Weight % S02 Reducing Catalyst Additive Where Weight % is ofthe totill catalyst added to the FCCU. C. The Procedure. CITGO shall successively add S02 Reducing CatalystAdditive ateach increment**~et** forth above. Once a steady**~tate ha~**  been achieved at each increment, CITGO shall evaluate the performance ofthe 802 Reducing**Cataly~t** Additive in**term~** of802**emi~~ions reduction~.**  The final Optimized 802 Reducing**Cataly~t** Additive Addition Rate**~hall** occur at the additionrate where either: (1) the FCCD**meet~** 25 ppmvd 802 (corrected to 0% 02) on a 365-day rolling average and 50 ppmvd 802 (corrected to 0% 02) on a 7-day rolling average, in which**ca~e** CITGO**~hall** agree to accept**limit~** of25 ppmvd 802 (corrected to 0% 02) on a 365-day rolling average and 50 ppmvd 802 (corrected to 0% 02) on a 7-dayrolling average at the**conc1u~ion** ofthe**Demon~tration** Period; (2) the addition of 802 Reducing**Cata1y~t** Additive**litnit~** the FCCD**feed~tock proc~~ing**  rate cir convemion (yield**~electivity)** capability in a mannerthat cannot be**rea~onably compen~ated**  for by the**adju~tment** ofother**parameter~,** then the maximum addition rate**~han** be reduced to a level atwhich the additive no longer**interfere~** with the FCCD**proces~ing** or**conver~ion** rate; provided, however, that inno**ca~e, ~ha11**  the maximum addition rate be**le~~** than 5.0 weight %; or (3) the Incremental 802 Pick-up Factor**i~ le~~than**  2.0, where the Incremental 802 Pick-up Factor**i~** defined**a~:** 

### PR,

- PRi., 

### CAR;

- CAR;., PR; 

### PR;., CAR; 

### CAR;., =



### =

= where: Pollutant (802) reduction rate at increment i in**ponnd~** per day from the**ba~eline** model Pollutant (802) reduction rate at the incrementprior to increment i in**ponnd~** per day from thc**ba~eline** model Pollutant (802) Reducing**Cataly~t** Additive Rate at increment i in**ponnd~** per day Pollutant (802) Reducing**Cataly~t** Additive Rate at the incrementprior to increment i in**pound~** per day Ifthe**condition~** ofeither (1), (2), or (3) above are not met at any addition rate**le~~** than 10.0 weight % 802 Reducing**Cataly~t** Additive, then the Optimized Addition Rate**~hall** be 10.0 weight % 802 Reducing**Cata1y~t** Additive. In no C$e**~hall** the Optimized Addition Rate**~hall** 5

### be less than 5.0 weight % 802 

### Reducing CatalystAdditive.

6APPENDIXE NSPS SUBPART J COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR HEATERS AND BOILERS AND STREAMS IN FUEL GAS

... Plant· Unit Completion/Submittal Date Corpus Christi East Refinery Cumene Depropanizer Off·Gas AMP 6. months after Date. ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refmery Hydrar Stabilizer OH OffGas AMP. 6. months. afterDate. ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refinery Hydrar Stripper OffGas AMP. 

### 6. months. after Date. ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refmery Hydrar Hydrogen AMP 

### 6. months after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refmery Hydrar Degassing Drum OffGaS AMP 6. months. after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refinery C4SHP DME Stripper OffGas AMP 6. months after Date. ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refmery Tanks. 140 and 141 Vents AMP. 

### 6. months after Date. ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refinery C5 Merox DisulfideSeparator AMP 6. months after Date. ofEntry Spent AirVent Corpus Christi East Refinery Unibon Recycle Hydrogen Purge AMP 6. months after Date. ofEntry Corpus Christi West Refinery Merox Disulfide. Separator Spent AMP 6. months after Date. ofEntry Air Vent Lemont Refinery 114B-l July 2005 Lemont Refinery 114B-2 July 2005 Lemont Refinery 114B-3 July 2005 Lemont Refinery U5B-I July 2005

. Lemont Refinery 115B-2 July 2005

Lemont Refmery 116.B-I July 2005 Lemont Refinery 116.B-2 July 2005

. . Lemont Refmery 116.B-3 July 2005 Lemont Refinery 116.B-4 July 2005 Lemont Refinery 1I8B-l July 2005Plant

. Unit Completion/Submittal Date Lemont Refinery 118B-5l July 2005 Lemont Refinery l22B-l July 2005 Lemont Refinery l22B-2 July 2005 Lemont Refinery 123B-I October 2005 Lemont Refinery 123B-2 October 2005 Lemont Refinery 123B-3

. October 2005 Lemont Refinery l23B-4 October 2005 Lemont Refinery 123B-5 October 2005 Lemont Refmery 125B-I. July 2005 .. LerilOnl Refinery 125B-2 July 2005 Lake. Charles Refmery C-RefonnerB-501 March 2005 Lake Charles Refinery C-Reformer B-502 March 2005 Lake Charles Refinery C-RefonnerB-503 March 2005 Lake Charles Refinery C-RefonnerB-504 March 2005 Lake Charles Refmery C-Refonner B-505 March 2005 Lake Charles. Refinery C-ReformerB-506 . March2005 Lake Charles Refinery Boilet BF-l September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery Boiler BF-2 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery Boiler BF-3 September 2005 LakeCharles Refinery Boiler BF-4 September 2005 Lake Charles Refmery Boilcr BF-5 September2005 Lake Charles Refinery Duo-Sol Furnace N-2A September 2005 Lake Charles Refmery Duo-Sol Furnace N-2B September 2005 Lake. Charles Refinery Duo-Sol Furnace. N-2C September 2005 Lake. Charles Refmery Duo-Sol Furnace S-I September 2005 Lake Charles Refincry Duo-:';ol Furnace S-2 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery Duo-Sol Furnace P-2 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery Furfural Furnace BA-I,2A&2B September 2005 Lake Charles. Refinery Furfural Furnace BA-3 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery MEK-I FurnaceBAcl &2 September 2005 .Lake Charles Refincry MEK-2 Furnace BA-l & 2 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery MEK-2 Furnace. BA-3 September 2005 Lake Charles Refinery Lube Vaeeum BA-I AMPby February 2010 Lake Charles Refinery Lube Vacuum BA-lOI AMPby September 20II Lake Charles Refinery TAME Hydrogen Unit Shutdown
.. Ifrestarted, AMP by startup date.Plant Unit Completion/Submittal Date Lake Charles Refinery C Dock Butane. Unloading· AMP by December 2005APPENDIXF FUEL GAS COMBUSTION DEVICES COMPLIANCE. SCHEDULE
Plant Unit Stream AMP. Submittal Date Corpus Christi East Refinery Marine. EmissionControl 

### 6. months. after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refinery NESHAP FF Incinerator

. 

### 6. months. after Date ofEntry Corpus. Christi East Refinery CPl Vapor Combustor 

### 6. months. after Date ofEntry Lemont Refinery 333B-401. Barge Dock Benzene 

### 6. months. after Date ofEntry Vapor Combustor

. Lemont Refinery 335B-l Fuels Rack Emission 

### 6. months after Date. ofEntry Control Lake Charles Refinery B-700 WWT Combustor June 2007

. Lake Charles Refinery B-13 A-Dock Vapor Combustor December 2005 Lake Charles Refinery B-14 B&C Dock Vapor Combustor December 2005 Lake Charles Refinery B-15 D Dock Vapor Combustor December 2005 Lake Charles Refinery VCU-OI Fuel Loading Rack December 2005 Combustor PaUlsboro Refinery Marine Emission Combustor August200SAPPENDIXG NSPS SUBPART 1. COMPLIANCE. SCHEDULE FOR NSPS FLARING DEVICES Plant Flare Completion /Submittal Date Corpus Christi East Refinerv Cumene.Flare December 2007 Comus Christi East Refmerv FluorFlare December 2007 Corpus Christi East Refinery Acid Gas Flare AMP by 6. months after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi East Refmery SWSFlare AMP by 6. months after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi West Refmery Flare (*) December 2006. Corpus Christi West Refmery Acid Gas Flare AMP by 6. months after Date ofEntry Corpus Christi West Refinery SWS Flare AMP by 6. months after Date. ofEntrv Lemont Refmerv 844C-I. North PlantFlare Date.ofEntrv Lemont Refmery 844C-2 South Plant Block 2 Date ofEntry Flare (*)

. Lemont Refmery 844C-3 South Plant Block 3 Date ofEntry Flare (*) Lemont Refinerv 844C-4 Needle CokerFlare(*) Date ofEntrv Lemont Refinery 844C-5 Alky Flare AMP by 6. months after Date. ofEntrv Lake. Charles Refmery 327B-ll Flare C-Ref/CK 11(*) September 2010 Lake Charles Refinery 320B-12 Flare Unicracker February 2010 Lake Charles Refinery 399B-I6. Flare. CFH December 2008 Lake Charles Refmery 36.0CB-70I. (CB-1I) PFU .AMP by December 2005



### - Lake Charles. Refmery CAIOOI CLAW AMP by June 2007 Lake Charles Refinery B-I04 COPITIERII December 2011 Paulsboro Refmery Flare AMP by August 2006.(*) Identifies flares for which CITGO will install equipment to minimize hydrocarbon flaring from cokerblowdown cycles under Paragraph 94.APPENDIXH PREDICTIVE EMISSIONS MONITORING SYSTEMS FOR HEATERS AND BOILERS WITH CAPACITIES BETWEEN 150 AND 100 mmBTUIHR A Predictive Emissions Monitoring Systems ("PEMS") is a mathematical model that predicts the gas concentration ofNOx in the stack based on a set ofoperating data. Consistent with the CEMS data frequencyrequirements of40 C.F.R. Part 60, the PEMS shall calculate a poundper million BTU value at least once every 15 minutes, and all ofthe dataproducedin a calendar hour shall be averaged to produce a calendarhourly average value inpounds permillion BTU. The types of information needed for a PEMS are described below. The list of instruments and data sources shown below represent an ideal case. However at a minimum, each PEMS shall include continuous monitoring for at least items 3-5 below. COPC will identify and
use existing instruments and refinery data sources to provide sufficient data for the development and implementation ofthe PEMS. Instrumentation: 1. Absolute Humidity reading (one instrumentper refmery, ifavailable) 2. Fuel Density, Composition and/or specific gravity

- On line readings (itmaybe possible ifthe fuel gas does not vary widely, that a grab sample and analysis may be substituted) 3. Fuel flow rate 4. Firebox temperature 5. Percent excess oxygen

I

### 6. Airflow to the firebox (ifknown orpossibly estimated) 7. Process variable data c 

### steam flow rate, temperature and pressure - process stream flow rate, temperature & 

### pressure, etc. Computers & Software: 

### Relevant data will be collected and stored electronically, using computers and software. The hardware and software specifications will be specified in the source-specific PEMS. Calibration and Setup: 

### I. Datawill be collected for aperiod of7 to 10 days ofall the datathat is to be used to construct the mathematical model. The data will be collected over an operating range that represents 80% to 100% ofthe normal operating range ofthe heater/boiler; 2. A "Validation" analysis shall be conducted to make sure the system is collecting dataproperly; 3. Stack Testing to develop the actual emissions data for comparison to the collected parameter data; and 4. Development ofthe mathematical models and installation ofthe model into the computer. The elements ofa monitorine protocol for a PEMS will include: I. 

### Applicability
a. IdentifY source name, location, and emission unit number(s); b. Provide expected dates ofmonitor compliance demonstration testing. 2. Source Description
2a. Provide a simplifiedblock flow diagram with parametermonitoring points and emission sampling points identified (e.g., sampling ports in the stack);

b. Provide a discussion ofprocess or equipment operations that are known to significantly affect emissions ormonitoring procedures (e.g., batch operations, plant schedules, product changes). 3. Control EquipmentDescription
a. Provide a simplifiedblock flow diagram with parameter monitoring points and emission sampling points identified (e.g., sampling ports in the stack); b. Listmonitored operating parameters and normal operating ranges;
c. Provide a discussion ofoperating procedures that are known to significantly affect emissions (e.g., catalytic bedreplacement schedules).· 4.
. Monitoring System Design
a. Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain a continuous PEMS; b. Provide a general description ofthe software and hardware components of the PEMS; including manufacturer, type ofcomputer, name(s) ofsoftware product(s), monitoring technique (e.g., method ofemission correlation), Manufacturer literature and other similarinformation shall also be submitted, as appropriate;
c. List all elements used in the PEMS to be measured (e.g., pollutant(s), other exhaust constituent(s) such as O2 for correction purposes, process parameter(s), and/or emission control device parameter(s»); 3

### d. List all measurement or sampling locations (e.g., vent or stack location, process parametermeasurement location, fuel sampling location, work stations);
e. Provide a simplified block flow diagram ofthe monitoring system overlaying process or control device diagram (couldbe included inSource· Description and Control EquipmentDescription); f. Provide a description ofsensors and analytical devices (e.g., thermocouple for temperature, pressure diaphragm for flow rate); g; . Provide a description ofthe data acquisition and handling system operation including sample calculations (e.g., parameters to be recorded; frequency ofmeasurement, data averagingtime, reporting units, recording
. process); h. Provide checklists, data sheets, and report format as necessary for compliance determination (e.g., forms forrecord keeping). 5. Support Testing and Data forProtocol Design
a. Provide a description offield and/or laboratorytesting conducted in developing the correlation (e.g., measurement interference check, parameter/emission correlation testplan, instrument range calibrations); b. .Provide graphs showing the correlation, and supporting data (e.g., correlation test results, predicted versus measuredplots, sensitivity plots, computer modeling development data). 6. Initial Verification Test Procedures
4

### a. Perfonn an initial relative accuracy test (RA test) to verify the perfonnance ofthe PEMS for the equipment's operatingrange. The PEMS must meet the relative accuracy requirement ofthe applicable Perfonnance Specification in 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Appendix B. 

### The test shall utilize the test methods of40 CFRPart 60, Appendix A;

.b. Identify the most significant independentlymodifiable parameter affecting the emissions. Within the limits ofsafe unit operation, and typical ofthe anticipatedrange ofoperation, test the selected parameter for three RA test data sets at the low range, three at the nonnal operating range and three at the high operating range ofthatparameter, for a total ofnine RA test data sets: .Each RA test dataset shouldbe between 21 and 60 minutes in duration;
c. Maintain a log or sampling report for each required stacktest listing the emission rate; d. Demonstrate the ability ofthe PEMS to detect excessive sensorfailure modes that would adversely affectPEMS emission detennination. These failure modes include gross sensor failure or sensor drift;

.e. Demonstrate the ability to detect sensor failures that would cause the

.PEMS emissions determination to drift s\gnificantly from the original PEMSvalue; f. The PEMS may use calculated sensorvalues based upon the mathematical relationships established with the other sensors used in the PEMS.
5

### Establish and demonstrate the number and combination ofcalculated
sensorvalues which would cause PEMS emission determination to drift significantly from the original PEMS value. 7. Quality Assurance Plan
a. Provide alist ofthe input parameters to the PEMS (e.g., transducers, sensors, gas chromatograph, periodic laboratory analysis), and a description ofthe
sensorvalidation procedure (e.g., manual or automatic check); b. Provide a description ofroutine control checks to beperformed during operatingperiods (e.g., preventive maintenance schedule, daily manual or automatic sensor drift determinations, periodic instrument calibrations);
c. Provide minimum data availabilityrequirements and procedures for supplying missing data (including specifications for equipment outages for QAlQC checks); d. List corrective action triggers (e.g., response time deterioration limit on pressure sensor, use ofstatisticalprocess control (SPC) determinations of problems, sensorvalidation alarms);
e. Listtrouble-shooting procedures and potential corrective actions; f. Provide an inventory ofreplacement and repair supplies for the sensors; g. SpecifY, for each inputparameter to the PEMS, the drift criteria for excessive
error (e.g., the drift limit ofeach input sensorthat would cause the pEMS to exceed relative accuracyrequirements); h. Conduct a quarterly electronic data accuracy assessment tests ofthe PEMS;
61. Conduct semiannual RA tests ofthe PEMS. Annual RA tests may be conducted ifthe most recent RAtest result is less than or equal to 7.5%. Identifythe most significant independently modifiable parameter affecting the emissions. Within the limits ofsafe unit operation and typical ofthe anticipatedrange ofoperation, test the selectedparameter for three RA test datapairs at the low range, three at the nonnal operating range, and three at the high operating range ofthat parameter for a total ofnine RA test data sets. Each RA test data set should be between 21 and 60 minutes in duration. 8. PEMS Tuning
a. Perfonn tuning ofthe PEMS provided that the fundamental mathematical relationships in the PEMS model are not changed. b. Perform tuning ofthe PEMS in case ofsensorrecaJibration or sensor replacement provided that the fimdamental mathematical relationships in the PEMS model are not changed.



### 7

### DATED; DECEMBER7, 

### i999; SIGNED; JOHN B. 

### RASNIC Phillip E. Guillemette
. Director ofEnviton:irie:ntaIMfairs
. KochRefining C9IhPllllY

## LP
. . P.O. Box' 64596 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55164-0596. DearMr. Guillemette:
. This is in response to your August 14,1998, and January 6, 1999,letteis to Administrator CarolBrowner, and your July 9, 1999, supplemental submittal. Please find enclosed, ourDecember 2, 1999, response addressing applicability issues ofllie New Source Performance Standards NSPS Subpart



### . J to refinery fuelgasesand fuelgas combustion devices. Also enclosedis our genirra1 "Alternative

MonitoringPlanforNSPS Subpart J Refinery Fuel Gases': addressing yourrequest for approval ofan alternative plan to continuous monitoring of refinery fuel gases.. while yourJuly 9, 1999, supplemental submittal andthe September 3.,1999, letterfrom 

## Mr. James Mahoney; 

### your SeniorVice President ofOperations, request thatwe approve a proposed flare managementpolicy, we are unable to do so at this time. We continueto.review the issue. We appreciate your willingness to meet with us to answetquestionson these difficult issues, and hope we can work out aresolution thatprovides cl:uification forwhat the Ertvironmental Protection**Ag~cyconsiders** to be

."good airpollution control practice for minimizing emissions" un.der NSPS SubpartJ for flate systems;

· As we continue to work on an agreement for a flaring policy, based on oUrpast discussions with
.

representatives from Koch, we believe that many ofyontcurrent and plannedpractices to minimize
..

· flaring events (assumingproper documentation ofthose practices) are elements of"good

### airpollution

control" and provide adequate protection ofhmnan health and the environment.
. . I trust that the enclosed information will 

### be useful to you. Jfyouhave any questions, pleasefeel free to contact Tom Rippofmy staffat (202) 564-7003.. Sincerely, 

### s/JOHN B. 

### RASNIC '. John B. Rasnic, Director Manufacturing, Energy and Transportation Division

. Office ofCompliance Enclosures
.

· cc: James Mahoney, Koch

Preparedby:t.ripp:mlw:12/3/99:2:30 PM:2pp:564--7003 :2223A:kochco-Lwpd

### DATED: DECEMBER 2,1999; SIGNED: KEN GIGUELLO for

Phillip 

### E. Guillemette Director ofEnviromnental Affairs ·Koch Reflniilg Company. LP 

### P.O. Box 

### 64596
.

. . SaintPflul, MinneSot;l. 55164-0596 Dear Mr. Guillemette:
. This is in response to yourAugust 14. 

# i 998, and January 6, 1999, letters. to Administrator Browner. Koch Refining Company LP
..(Koch) seeks. clarification fromthe. Enviromnental Protection Agency (EP A)regarding the· applicability ofNew SourCl: Performance Standard Subpart J (NSPS. SubpartJ) to: fuel gas. combustion deviceii (FGCDs): and fuel gases; "process upset" conditions; and to'certainideIitifiedgas streams.at itS RosemouiIt, Minnesotarefinery
..

. Althoughyou requestedthatEPAreview and revise NSPS Subpart J in your. August 14, 1998,

.. letter, itis ow: currentunderstanding that you are not requesting thatNSPS. SUbpart He

reviewed/revised as. part ofa response. to yow: letters.
.

.You writethatNSPS. SubpartJ is, inpart, intended to neduce sulfur.emissions from gases generated as a byproduct ofthe. refining process that 

### are. used as. fuel in a re01ulery's heaters and boilers••To accomplish this, NSPS SubpartJ imposes monitoring requirements and limits. for certain fuel gas. streams. that are. combusted in relmery FGCDs
.. You assert that "fuelgas", and. "FGCD" are. vaguely defined, and it is. oftenunclear as to whattypes ofunits.. and streams are coveredunder the. standard
.. Wedisagfee withyoUr characterization that "fuel gas" and "FGCD" 

### are. not clearly defined. The. definitions are purposeliilly broad, and the. exemptions are spedfic.· We also disagree with your characterizations that the rule is limited to only refinery generated.gases burned as fuel in relmeiy process. heaters and boilers. The rule. clearly inciudes routine. combustion ofrefinery. gases in flares and otherwaste. gas dispos<tl devices. In youdetter, you develop a position on exemptions from NSPS. Subpart J baSed 'onthe conunendable use ofa flare gas recovery system. You describe. yourrefinery 

### flare. gasrecovery system, and state that:
.•• [a]s designed, the flare gas recovery systemhassuffident capacity to recovergases that are routed to. the. system under n<innal operating conditions.. •• '. Underprocess upset conditions. the 

### flare gas recovery system's capacitymay be exceeded and excess gases are routed to the flare for combustion ·Preparedby:tnpp:miw:9/20/99:2:14 PM:pp:564-7003:2223A:kochS.wpd

### 2

. . Because you believe that yourrefinery gases areroured to the flare only as a result ofprocess upsets, you believe that the flaring ofthose gases are not subjectto NSPS Subpart 

### J; We do:not
.
, agree thatall ofthe events. you describe as "process upset conditions" ID€;etthe. regulatciiy
.

definition ofmalfunction or the interpretation of''upset'', and, therefore, may not be qualifiedfor exemption from NSPS Subpart J. In addition, we note that any. malfunction orupsetinvolving combustion ofprocess upset gas in an NSPS-affected FGCD would stillbe. subjectto NSPS SubpartA (General Provisions) §60.11(jl) obligations. YourAugust 14, 1998, letter focuses, on three areas:
How NSPS Subpart J appliesto FGCDs andJuelgases;

• How the. process upsetgas exemption applies;

• HowNSPSSubpartJ applies to the. 26miscellaneous'gas.streaJl1s
.



### . Our**respons~** addresses. those issues in order.
How NSPS Subpart

### J Appliesto FGCDs. and Fuel Gases The. provisions ofNSPS SUbpartJ are, in part, applicable to affected FGCDs. To control' stilfuroxide(SOJ emissions. to the
..atmosphere .fromaffected FGCDs, NSPS SubpartJ §60.l04(a)(l) limits. the. amount ofhydrogen sulfide (H2S) allowed in the fuel gas burned in those devices. Except for fuel gas. released to. a flare, as a result ofreliefvalve leakage or other emergency malfunctions, you mustnotbum fuel gas containing greaterthan 230 mgldscm ofH 2S in any affected FGCD. Additionally, the combustion ofa process upset gas in a FGCD is. exempt from the HiS limit
... The combustion/flaring ofthose exempted gases in an NSPS-affected FGCD is still subjectto §60.11 (d) ofthe. GeneralProvisions 'as described later.
. NSPS Subpart J§60.l04(a)(1) applies to gas combustion deVices, uthe following are. true: .' 1). The gas is a "fuel gas" [§60.101(d)]:
.

• • • any gas which is. generated at a petroleum refinery and which
. is combusted. 'Fuelgas also includes natural gas when the. natural gasis combined and combusted 

### in any proportionwith a gas generated at a refinery. Fuel gas.does. notinclude gases generated 'by catalytic. crackingunit catalystregenerators 

### andfluid coking burners.
. . . 2) Thefuel gas is combusted in a "FGCD" [§60.101(g)]:

### 3 any equipment, such as. procesS heaters, boilers. and flares. used to combustfuel gas, except facilities in'whichgases**are~ombusted** to

, . produce sulfur orsulfuric, acid.
3)
.The FGCD is an "affectedFGCD". An affectedFGCD is any FGCD for which construction or modification coinmenced after June 11, 1973.§60.1 OO(b)

, ' ' Additionally, when deteImining the. applicability ofNSPS, Subpart

### J to any

### particular

, combination ofcombustion device and gas stream, the following general concepts apply:

• Unl.ike the definition ofprocess upset gas, the definition offuel.gas does notrequiTe, that the gas be generated by a, "refinery procesS unit", itmust·merely be generated at the refinery; ,

• There. is no general exemption for gas streams with low sulfur content;

• There is no general exemption for low volume orintermittent gas streams; • A FGCD need not genemte a product to, beregulated. Flares. do not generate. products or energythat are, recovered for use, but they are clearly FGCDs since theyare specifically named 

### in the definition. " Your refinery flares (constructed after June 11, 1973) are affected FGCDs as defined by, NSPS Subpart

### J. When the capacity of yourrefinery flare, gas recovery system is exceededas the result ofnormal operations '(not malfunctioIiS), NSPS SubpartJ for FGCDs applies, to those NSPS refinery flares. For any fuel gas stream sUbject to NSPSSubpart J;'youmaypetition for alternative monitoring underthe General Provisions at §60.13(i). ForEPA to approve alternative rnonitoring, you mnst submit sufficientinformation to show thatyour alternativemonitoring plan ,wIll yield similarI:esults to therequired moiritoring underNSPS Subpart

### J.
. How the Process Upset Gas Exemption Applies As. mentioned above, §60.104(a)(I) exempts the combustion ina FGCDofprocess upset'

,gases and exempts the, combustion in a flare, offuel gas that is released to the flare as a result of reliefvalve leakage or other emergency malfunction. Not all ofthe events you describe as " "process upset conditions". meet the. qualifications for, exemption from NSPS Subpart

### J. Therefore; the 26 gas streams do notreceive a blanket exemption from the. regulation. Some, of , the gases generated underKoch's described events are. not gases generated as. a result ofupsets, but are generated as a result ofnormal operations
.. Additionally, not allofyoUI: process upsets

### 4 result in flaring. Process upsetgas is defmed at §60.l01(e) as:

.•.• imy gas generated by a petroleum refmery process unit as a result ofstart-up, shut-down,.upset or malfunctioh
.

.Malfunction is. defined in the. General Provisions at §60.2as:
•. ' ; any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable f;1i1ure of

### airpollution control equipment, process equipment, or. a process to operate 

### hi a normal or

### usual manner. Failures 1hatare
. caused in partby poor mainten<U!ce. or careleSS. operation are not malfunctions. Upset is. nQt defined inNSPS SubpartJ orin the. Generai Provisions. 'However, 

### hi EPA's 1973 Backgrol'ind IDformation for ProposedNeW: Sourcel'erformanceStaildards for Petroleum**Refineries,PI~~22** I 736. (1973. BID), page 25,. EPA writes. that the. proposed standard doe& not apply to extraordinary situiitions, such as emergency gas. releases. In EPA's 1974Background Information for New Source PerformanceStandard& for Petroleum Refineries, PB·23 1601 .' '(1974 BID), page 20, EPA

### further explained the. statementfuthe1973.BlD that:**Becaus~** the. frequencY ofproces&upsets and thevolumes ofgase& which must be. disposedofare highly unpredictable, it is. not feasible to. design or operate agas treating facility thatwould preventsulfur dioxide emiliSions from flare systemS in these situations
... A facility designed to. removehydrogen sulfide. from all ptoces&upset gases priorto combustionwollld have to be designed to. handle. theilDmediate release ofgases from all**proCl~Ss** writs if eachunit experiencedthe worst possible upset ormalfunction at the same. time
.. The costofsuch a large gas treatment facility '., would impose. a severe and'unreasonable. economic: bUrdenupon a.

. refmery; From the language 

### hi the I974 BID, it is. clear

## th~t a facility .does not have. to be. designed to.-treat and dispose ofgases produced in a woist Cllse sceriario at afacility. However, iti& clear .thatmore frequent and predicable process events (which Koch would describe as ''upsets'', but which do notmeetthe interpretationfor llpsets) are. subject to. the. standard, and that it is not· =reasonable. for the. faciIityto bave. sUffiCient capacitYtohandIe these routine process. events.

. In a similarissue, EPA successfully argued

# i~ a

# cas~ before an Administrative Law Judge
. 

### (ALJ);.thatthe term "syStem**bre~down"** (which is used in40 CFR §60.13(e), but is Undefined) was akin to a malfunction as defined in the Gerienil Provisions at §60.2
.. In the March 9, 1995, decision (see Enclosure. I), the

# ALl wrote that:
.

### 5 While the actual words. "systembreakdown" do not appearhere [inthe. defInition ofmalfunctionJ, this. definition incorponites analogous phrases.. • • • Thus using the defmitioiwfmal:!iiD.ction

. as a guide, a systembreakdown would constitute somethingsudden

andunforeseen •. , , • Accordingly, it is. found that a system breakdown requires there to be. an occurrence. whichis umorseen, . sudden andunavoidable. The same logic. that went into the.

### ALl's. decision applies here; the exemptionwas intended for infrequent and unpredictable. events, thus, ''upset'' is analogous to malfunctiOli.

. Therefore, the malfunction/upset exemption underNSPS SubpartJ applies onlyto . extraordinary, infrequent, and not reasonablypreventable upsets. Additionally, the

.malfunctiortlupset·callllotbe the. result ofpoormaintenance or careless operations
.. Once you

determinethe cause ofa malfunction/upset, you should workto correctthe root cause in orderto preventit from occurring again. Eachtime that is done,nlalfunctionslupsets shouldbecome less frequent
..

. . Process ilpset gases exempted underNSPS Subpart

### J are. still required to comply>Vith the good air pollution control practices as. requiredunder §60.ll(d). At

### all times, includingperiods. ofstart-up, shut-down, and malfunction, owners andoperators. shall, to the extentpracticable, maintain and operate any affectedfacility mcluding associated air pollution control equipmentin a manner consistentwith good air
.

.pollution control practice for minimizing emissions.
. ., .•.

. How 

### NSPS Subpart J 

### Applies to 

### the 26 

### Specific Gas Streams •. (Unless stated otherwise, itis assumed that all ofthe following gas. streams .are generated
. "af' the refInery and are combtisted
.. The. general coricepts:identified onpage 2 ofthisletter should beincorporated into. EPA's.responses when those concepts address the positioil(s) presented by Koch fOf a**particul~** gas stream.)

### 6 A. Commercial Grade Natural Gas Kqch's position: NSPS SubpartJ Is inapplicable because. tJUs streamis

### inher~nt1y low in sulfur andhas no • . po.tential for signIficant sulfur dioxide emissions. '

.EPA's.responSe: Refinery generated, commercial grade; natural gas is subjectto. NSPSSubpartJ ifitis combustedin 

## an .affectedFGCD.·
.

. R:efmery generated, commercial grade, naturalgas meets. the definition offuel gas.. Note:
.. Commercial gradenatural gas purchased from an outside. source iSnot generated "at" the. refmerya6d is. riot, itself, a fuel gas.. EPA has previously detertnined that an ' NSPS 3ffected gas combustion device is notrequiredto,haye an instailed SO.orH.S CEMifthat device hasbeen confirnied to notburnrefinery fuel gas, in 

### any mixtUre. and at anytime (e.g:,

## To.be. exempt frc;mi NSPSSubpartJ, a combustion device. must.i>ei1red only withpurchased gas from a dedicated line, andmustbe, isolated**fromthe.refin~'s** fuelgas system)
... See the December4, 1991, memorandum from Jolm B. Ramie
..' (Enclosure, 2)
. B. Hydrogen PlantPSA Purge Gas

.**Ko~'s** position:

. . NSPS Sl,lbpartJ is inapplil;able because, this streamis inherently loW: in sulfur,andhaS no potentialforsignificant sulfur dioxide emissions, ' EPA's response:

.**~.** . . . ., , . .

The COinbustiouofHydrogen PlautPSAPurge gas'hi the#2 HydrilgenPlantprocess "heateris. subject to NSPS Subpart J,
. .

1)Hydrogen PlautPSA Purge. Gas

### ~eetsthe definitio.\l offuelgas... 2)The Hydrogen purge gas is burned in the#2 Hydrogen Pillritprocess heater. The.

### #2

.HydrogenPIantprocess heatermeets th.e definition ofFGCD. : .

3) The #2 Hydrogen Plantprocess heateris an "affected'.' FGCD. C. Commercial Grade Propane. (LPG)

### 7

Koch's position: NSPS SubpartJ isinapplicable. because. this·stream is. inherently low in sulfur

# and has: no potential for significant sulfur dioxide emissions. EPA's response: Refinery generated, commercial grade, propane gas is subjectto NSPS Subpart J ifitis combustedin.an affected FGCD. Refinery. generated, commercial grade, propane. gas meets the. de.finition offuel gas.. Note: COnunercial grade propane gas purchased from an outside. source is not generated "at" the refinery 3I!dis not, itself, a fuel gas. To be exempt fromNSPS. Subpart

### J, a . combustion device. mustbe. fired onlywith purchased gas from a dedicated line, andmust be. isolated from the refinery's fuel gas system. . D. Commercial:GradeHydrogen
. Koch's position: NSPS Subpart Jis inapplicable because this. stream iii inherently low in sulfur andhas no . potential for sigllificant sulfurdioxide emissions,
. EPA's. response: Refinery generated,conunercial grade, hydrogen is subject to NSPS. Subpart J ifit is combustedin an affected FGCD. Refinery generated, commercial grade, hydrogenmeets the. definition offuel gas.

### C~mmerciai grade hydrogen purchased from an outside souree is not generated "at" the refinery and is not, itSelf, a fuel gas. To be exemptfrom NSPS. Subpart], a combustion device mustbe fired only withpurchased.gas from a dedicated linll, and must be. isolated from the refinery's fuel gas system: . , . . .

### 8 E.
.D¢layed CokerBlowdoWli Koch's Position: NSPS Subpart

### J is inapplicablebecause this. stream falls underthe Subpart 

### J exemption·· for prOcess upset gas..

.EPA's position: Any cokerblowdown gas generated as a normal part ofoperations that is. directed to the refinery flares; issilbjecttoNSPS SubpartJ. 1) Vapor from the delayed cokerblowdownprocess meets the definition offuelgas.

.Cokerblowdownvapor is generated as a normal part ofoperations, and not the: result ofaprocess upset or malfunction. Nor is. it exemptbecauseitis genetttted during a "shutdown" since the. cokiog process has. not shutdown
.. Rather, the streamto the cokers is merely shifted from one cokiog 

### drum to. anotherto. maintain continuous operation of the cokerimit.
. . 2)
.The. hydrocarbon vapors. from the. blQwdown process are. directed to your flare. gas recovery system: When the. refinery flare. gas recovery system's capacity is exceeded, the excess gas flared. 3) As described earlier, the refinery flares. are. affected FGCPs. F. Rail Loading Rack Thermal Ondizer

. Koch's Position: NSPS SubpartJ is.inapplicable because. the. thermal oxidizeris not a "FGCD" su]jject to SnbpartJ, and vapors routedlo. the. thermaloxidizer are low in sulfur and are. not a"fuel gas" gerierated by a refinery. process. EPA's response: Vaporfrom loadingrack operations is subjectto NSPS Subpart Jifit is combusted in an affected FGCD.
. . 1)·Vapors from loading racks located at the.iefinery meet the definition offuel gas. 2) Although the oxidizermay be added as a control device. underthe refinery MACT, it still meets the definition ofFGCD underNSPS SubpartJ and is. subjectto NSPS SubpartJ. The refinery MACT (40 CFRPart 63 Subpart CC) is designed to limitthe

# , 9 release. ofhazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and not SO. from petroleum refineries.

· .Combustion ofthose HAPs is not the. only control option available for compliance with

the.refinery MACI. Other compliance alternatives under the refinery MACIthat do not

·involve combustion will not trigger the. NSPS SubpartJ requirements. 

## G. Soil VaporExtractionThermal Oxidizer

.Koch's Position: NSPS Subpart

### J is. inapplicable. to this streambecause. vapors. recovered from soil remediation are. not a"fue1 gas", and thetherma) oxidizeris. not a "FGCD", .EPA's response: Extracted soilvapor is subject to NSPS. Subpart J ifit is combusted iuan affected FGCD. 1) VaporS extractedfrom the. soil withinthe. refinery meet the. definition offuel gas.

. . . 2) The. thermal oxidizer isa FGCD since itcombustsa fuel gas. H.Wastewater Treatment Plant Thermal Oxidizer Koch's');'osition: NSPS Subpart J is inapplicable because. vapors from the wastewater'treatment plant are not a "fuelgas", andthe.then:ilal oxidizeris nota "FGCD". EPA'Hesponse: Vapor

### from the refinery's WWfP. is subjectto NSPS Subpa,rtJifitis combtisted iIi an affected FGCD.

· '1) The refinery is operating a wastewater treatmentplant (WWTP) at the refinery, The.

vapors collected from theWWTP. meet.the definition dEfue} gas.' otherregulations (i.e., NSl'S QQQ) that may covervapors from the WWTP do not specifically exempt the WWTP vapors from applicability underNSPS Subpart J. 2) Although athennaloxidizermay be a control device for otherregulations (i.e" NSPS
.

· QQQ), itmeets the definition bfFGCD forNSPS Subpart J,

### 10

. .

# Note~ Ymit: claim that EPA's. approval ofthe State ImplementationPlan (SIP) orderfor

· theDakota CountylPine Bend Area ofAir Quality Control Region 131 is evidence of

· EPA's determination thatNSPS Subpart J is. inapplicable to this gas streamiii not correct

In approving the SIP order, the gas strealll wasnotcharacterized asbeing combusted in

· an NSPSSubpart Japplicable fuel gas combustion deviee, and EPA was notasked to

make a detenniruition ofthe applicability ofNSPS Subpart J to, aily. gas. streams or affected fuel gas combustion devices. Itmerely. represerits EPA's. approval of the State's requirements
... Additionally, EPA included language. in Amendment Threeto the Findings and Orderby. Stip1.llation in paragraphsD and H indicating that the. order does notrelieve

.Koch ofthe obligatiori to. comply with all applicable laws. andregulations, and thatthQse requirements may. be.lrtore stringent Therelevantpages ofAmendment Thee are . included as Enclosure 3.
. .

.I.. Merox**Off~G** ..s**(34-U~3** Thennal Oxidizer)

.. Koch's Position: NSP$. SubpartJ is inapplicable to this streainbecanse the. thermal oxidizerwas . constructedpriorto June 11, 1973, and has not been modified orreconstrticted. EPA's. response: Any fuel gas combusted in the 34-H-3 thermal oxidizeris not subjectto. NSPS SubpartJ §60.1 ()4(a)(l) as iong as the thermal oxidizeris not modified orreconstructed.
. 1) Merox causticregeneratorvent gas, vapors from spent caustic storage tanks, sour

· water flash drums, and fresh amine storage tanks. meet the definition offuel gas. .

1)
.The 34-H-ltbermal

### oxidiz~ meetsthe, definition ofFGCD: 3). Basedon your statementthat the. 34-H-lthermal oxidizer

## ~as constructed before June II, 1973, it.is notan "affected"I:GCnuniess ithas since been.modified or

· reconstructed. J.. CansticNelltraJizer Off-Gas Koch's Position:. NSPSSubpartJ is inapplicable to, the streambecause. the. 

### Co boiler was cbrurtructed prior toJune. iI, 1971imd'has not beenmodified orreconstructed.
.11 EPA's response:.

. . .

· Any gas conibustedin the. CO boileris. not subjecttQNSPSSubpart 1 §60,1 O4(a)(l) as.

long as the COboileris not modified orreconstructed. I) The off-gas from the spent caustic neutralizers meets the. defiirition offuel gas.

· 2). The.spent caustic off-gas isrouted to the. COboiler
.. The COboilermeets. the

defiirition ofFGCD.
.



### .. ·3) Based onyour statementthatthe. CO boiler was constructed beforejune!l, 

### 1973,

and has not been modified orreconstructed, itis not an "affected" 

### FGOD.
.
. '. . K. Reformer CatalystRegeneration Streams Koch's-Position: NSPS Subpart 1 is. iriapplicable because these. streams. are. inherently low in 

### sulfur,. and they fall under the. SubpartJ exemption.for**pro~ess** upset gas... . EPA's resPonse: Any regeneration gas generated as a normalpm:t ofoperations that is directed to the
.

· refinerY; flares, is subjecttoNSPS Subpart J
.. Additionally, Jockhopper gas that is not·

directed to the refinery. flare. gas recovery systembut is. directed to. a refmery heateris
. subjectto NSPS Subpart Hffue refinery heateds anaffected FGCD,
.. . 

### :1). Reformer catalystregerieration gas.streams meet fue. defiirition offuel.gas.

.. Gas. produced dUring fue routine switching 0;1'reformer reactors, as describedby Koch; does normeetfue process upsetgas definition because the gas is. generated as a normalpart**ofciperations~** .Nor is it exemptbecause it is generated during a "shutdown"·. sincefuerefon:O.er process has. notshutdown
... Rather, operations merely shiftfrom one reactorto anofuer so that spentcatalyst may be regenerated while .fue.reformerunit**~ontinuesoperation.** .

· 2) Reformercatalystregeneratioll gas produced during fui: switchingprocess is. directed

to yout flare gas recovery system or, for final lockhopperdepressurization, to arefmery

·**heater~** When the. refinery flare. gas recovery system's capacity is exceeded, the excess**gasflared~** . .. ..

3) 

### As. described earlier; fue refinery .flares 

### an: affected FGCDs
.

. L. Vacuum Unit Off-Gas

### 12
Koch's Position: NSPSSubpllrtJ ii;inapplicable because

### this. stream fallS. underthe SubpartJ exemption forprocess upset gas.' , .

. 

### . According to your description, equipmentleaks may allow airto enter tlie process

· creating a potentialfor the. formation ofcombustible mixtures
...

### Un~er noimal operation,

vacumn gasesa:re routedto. the fuel gas·system.·. The. onlytime vapuumunit off-gas· ." potentially may be. combusted 

### in a fuel gas'combustion device. is wh6nthere has. been a "pr(lcess upset as definedundeI' NSPS Subpart

### J §60.lOl(e).
. EPA'sresponse: . Vacuurnunit off-gas that meets the. definition ofprQcess upset gas is. subjectto NSPS
.
. . SubpartA §60.11(d).• I) VacuUmunit off-gasmeetS the defInition offuelgas.

· 2). Any gas generated by a petroleumrefinery process 

### Unitas aresult ofstart-up, shutdown, upset ormalfunction is a process upset gas. 3). Vacumn unitoff-gas generaiedduringperiods ofa malfunction ofthe.

## vac~Um .

.distillation colurnJ: meetsthe. definition ofproclisupset gas.

. Additionally, 

## ill. our August 10; 1999, meeting, we discussedthe: effect ofshutdowns ofKoch's low pressure off-gas recovery compressor and flare gas. recovery compressor.

### .K~chhas a compressOI: system designed to recover discharges (off-gas) from the vacuumgenerating equipment. Therecovered off-gasis. nonnally routed to tho:: refinerY fudgas recovery system for H,Sremoval. 

### in the event of

## an off-gas recovery compressor shut-down, the. off-gas is routed to therefuiery flare. gas recovery system and.'



### .IS. nolsent to. the flare. On]ywhen both compressors malfunction wotildthe. gas be routed to. the flare
.. Ifboth compressors are. down at the same time due to'malfunctions as .

· definedunderNSPS SubpartA §60:2, then the vacultDiunit off-gas would meet the • exemption under NSPS SubpartJ §1O4(a)(I) fOT other emergencymalfunctions, (iff-

. gases exempted from the. eroissionrequiremeilts linderNSPS Subpart:T §60.104(a)(I) are .

. still subjecttoN8PS SubpartA §60.ll(d). .'

### 13 M. Slop Oil FlashDrum Koch's Position:

· NSPS SubpartJ is inapplicable. because this. stream falls underthe SUbpartJ exemption

forprocess upsetgas; EPA's. response: 

### Any. vapor from the slop oilprocess which is generated as a normal part ofoperations that is. directed

# to the. refinery flares; is. subject to NSPS Subpart

### J.
. I) In general, vapors. generated by the. slop oil process at Koch meet the definition of

### fuel gas.. Sending off-specification products. to the slop oil system does not qualify as. a

· process.upset.

2) When the. refinery's flare gas. recovery's system is exceeded, excess gas is. sent to. the refim:ry's flares
..Process**tipsets/malfun~ons** are notthe onJy reasonsthat Koch'sflare gas recovery system's capacity may 

### be,**exceeded~.** The refinery'sflare gas recovery system may he exceeded as. a result ofnormal operations (e.g:, delayed cokerj)lowdown). 3) As described earlier,the refinery flares. are affectedFGCDs. 

### N. Alkylation UnitAcidNeutralization Pit Off-Gas· Koch's Position: NSPS Subpart

### J is. inapplicable. tothis streambecause. the sulfuric acid alkylation units.is not a "FGCD", and this. stream falls. underthe SubpartJ exemption for process. upset gas. EPA'S response: If the off-gas from the alkylation unit acidneutralization is not combusted,NSPS SubpartI is. not applicable•. Only gases**gen~ated** a)ld combusted atthe refinery
.

· (including purchased gas that is
..mixedwith fuel gas) meet the definition offuel gas. 

### 0.·
. Flare Pilot andPnrge Koch's. Position: NSPS Subpart Jis inapplicable because pilot and purge gas. is nota "fuel gas", and this stream is. inherentlylow in ,sulfur andhas no. potential for significant sulfur dioxide
.

.emissions.
. .

### 14 EPA's reSponse: As. identified in yourletter, EPAissued a deternlination (March 22, 1977)regarding refinery pilot lights. Wereaffirm our earlierposition thatNSPS. SubpartJ is inapplicable to refinery pilot lights. ','Since a pilot light ensures that a combustiendevice will operate properly, the pilot light, by itse1f,is notthe combustion device. P. Miscellaneous Process Streams Routed. to. Flare Gas, Recovery System Koch's Position: NSPS SubpartJ is inapplicable because this. stream fulls underthe. SubpartJ exemption for process upset gas. ' EPA's. response: Any vapors from the. refinery's. miscellaneousprocess.,streams generated as. a normal part ofoperations that is, .directedto the. refinery flares, is. subject to NSPS. Subpart 

### J. I) Vapors from miscellaneous processstrearnsmeetthe, definition offuel gas because they are not specifically exempted from the definition offuel gas.. 2) When the.,refinery's flare gas recovery systemis. exceeded, excessgas is sent to the refinery's. flares
.. Process. upsets/malfunctions are notthe. only reasons that Koch's flare
. gas recovery system's capacity. maybe exceeded; The refinery's. flare gas recovery . system may be exceeded as a result ofnormal operations. ' 3) As described earlier, the refinery. flares are affected FGCDs. 

### Q.
. Butane Storage Tank 517. Thermal Oxidizer Koch's PoSitiOli: NSPS. Subpart Jis. 4tapplicable. because this stream is not generated by a Refinery , process, it is inhereJitly low in sulfur,and itis subject to the. SubpartJ exemptionfor processupsets. To date, thethennal oxidizerhas never beenused.

,EPA's reSJlonse: '
. Butanevapors generated as a resUlt ofa refrigerator system malfunctionare'not subject to NSPS SubpartJ control requirements, butare subjectto NSPS SubpartA §60J I(d).

### 15 I) Butane vapors meetthe**d~finmon** offuel gas. 2) Ifbutane. vapors 3wfonnedas. a result ofrefrigeiation system malfunction, the. vapors are routed to tank5l7. thennal oxidizer.
. . 

### 3). NSPS Subpart 

### J §6I.l04(a)(I) exempts the. combustion in a flare ofprocess upset

.gases. orfuel gas that is. releasedto the flare. as a.result ofreliefvalve. leakage or other emergency malfunction. R.. FCC CatalystRegeneratotOff-Gas Koch's Position.:

. . NSPS SubpartJ is inapplicable because this stream is subjectto the express exemption for catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators. .

. EPA's. response: FCC catalystregenerator offcgas.does. notmeet the definition

### ~ffuel gas and, therefore,. is
.

.exempt from NSPS Subpart J §60.104(a)(I)
.. S. MEA 3ndMDEA Regenerator. Off-Gas Koch's Position: NSPS SubpartJ fuel gas n;quirement& are. inapplicable because.this stream falls underthe exemption for facilities that are. part of):he sulfurproduetion process. .

• EPA's. response; Sendingthese streams. to. the. sulfurrecovery uoit (SRU) does not SUbjectthem tothe NSPS SubpartJ'Standardfor

## the combustiollofa fuel gas in aFGCD. I) MEA and MDEA regenerator off-gas streams. meet the. definition offuel gas.'

. .' . . .' . 2) Because these

## r~cycled strearnsaresentto the front oflhe SR.U, and the SRU is a facility'in whichgases are. cornbustedto:produce. sulfur or sulfuric acid, these streams. are not being combusted in a FGCD
..

### 16 T. Sour WaterT:mkPurge Gas
. Koch's Position: This streamfalls wider the Subpart J exemption for sulfurproductionfacilities andhas previouslybeen detennined by USEPAto. b\lnot subject toNSPS Subpli!t J fuel gas requirements. EPA's response:

. . Ifthe: st:uldbyincinerator: was. constructed ormodified afterJune. 

### H, 1973, it is an affectedFGCDandthe. combustion ofsout\Vater tank purge. gas is subjectto NSPS

. . . Subpart 1. I}. Sourwatertank purge gas. meets the defmition offuel gas. 

### ·2) SoUr watertanks store. process

### wat~ from

### vario~ refinery. process units
... These tanks are notpart ofthe. SRU since.they are notpart ofthe unitthfit recovers sulfur from HzS by a vapor-phase catalytic reaction ofS02 and H"S.
. 3) At Koch's.facility, the sour water tankpurge. gas is sent to directly to aSRU standby incinerator (affected FGCD) for thermal oxidationwithout going through the. SRU.

, , .. . Note: Again,Y0l1 claim that EPA's approval of the State.Implementation Plan (SIP)

.order for the Dakota County/Pine Bend Area ofAir Quality Control Region 131 is evidence ofEPA's detennination thatNSPS. Subpart J is inapplicable to this gas. stream. For the reasons. stated in. ourresponse to stream H, yourbeliefis not correct. . 

### U. Sour. Water Stripper Overhead 

### Gas Koch's Plisition:

.NSPS SubpartJ. fuel gas requirements arc. inapplicable.

## b~ause. this stream is.part ofthe
.. sulfurproduCtionprocess andfalls**~der** the SubpartJ exemption for proC\lss. upset gas. .. EPA'sresponse:
. Introducing these. streams into the SRUdoes not subject themto NSPS: SubpartJ requirements applicable to the combustion ofafud gas in a FGCD. 1) Sourwater stripper overhead gas meets the. definition offuel gas.

. . 2) Sourwater strippers are not part ofthe. SRU since. they are. notpart ofthe. unit that recovers sulfur from

### Hzs by a vapor-phase catalytic reaction of802and HzS.

. .

### 17 3

## J Koch sends the sourwater strippeuwerhead gas to the. SRU. The SRU is. not a FGCD because. it is a facility in which gases are combusted to produce sulfur or sulfuric acid. Note:
.. Koch indicates that this gas may be routed to 

### a FGeD (bypassing the. SRU) during periods ofstartcup, shut.down ormalfunction ofthi:SRU•. Itmaintainsthat such· combustion is not subjectto Subpart 1's. sulfur oxide standard because. these. gases are exemptprocess upset gases.

. .

. Exemptions from rules ofgeneral applicability are to. be. coristrued narrowly.

Nonetheless,EFA. recogirizes that there. are certain limited circumstancesun.derwhich normalprocessesmay

### be. bypassedbecause. upset conditions.·existin some, upstreariJ.·
. process unit (e.g;; ifilpstream gas quillity will cause a malfunction in a downsiJ:eam unit,
. the gas is. diverted to a flare iustead).
. 

### ,
• Itis therefinery's. burden to demonstrate.that a malfunctionhas. occurred each time. a

. downstreamunit is. bypassed (or otherwise.demonstrate that its: actions are. exempt from

regulation). EPA notes. that a.malfunction mustbeinfrequent,ndtreasonably .'

. preventable and not attributable. to poor maintenance or careless operation:. For example,

a "malfuilCtion" caused by the same or similar conditions as had occUrredpreviously will lose. its exempt character andbe subject to all applicable standards. and requirements
.

.Periods ofroutine. orperiodic mairitenance. to downstreamunits. are notmalfunctions at . eitherthe. upstream

## m: the downstream**unit~** Gases. generated inthe upstream 1,Inits. are notthen process upset gases, theii:combustion is subject fully to applicable. NSrS Subpart J standards and the bypassing(withoutproperconti:01s)of

### a downstream unitthatis
..' undergoing routine. orperiodic maintenance. would notbe permitted. 

### Ifthe capacity ofthe SRU is exceeded dueto. process upset

## gas~s, such gases may be
. flared (but only to the. extent attributable to such**upsetgas)~.** Such instances. are also subjectto §60J I(d). See discussionabove.
. V. Ammonia Acid Gas. Flare Koch's. Position:

_.. , . .- . :
. NSPS Subpart J is inapplicable because. this stream fallsunderthe Subpart J exemption for process upset gas.. The acid gas flare is. used only for ammOl)ia acid gas that cannotbe processed in the sRU due to start'up, shut-down ormalfunction..
. EPA's response: Process upset gases. are. those.gases generated by a refinery process. unit during periods of start-up, shut-doWn, upset ormalfunction. Such gases are subject to 60.11(d)
.. See discussion above.

### 18 I) Anunonia acid gas meets. the defmition Qffuel gas...

. . 2) Combustion ofa fuel gas ina flare constructedor modified afterJune II, 1973, is· subject to SubpartJ standards for sulfur oxides, but combustion ofprocess. upset gases is

. exempt from those standards.
. .**Note~** Exemptions from rules ofgeueral applicability are to be construed narrowly.

Nonetheless, EPA recognizesfuat there. are ce)1ain limited circumstances uilderwhich normal processes may be bypassed because upset comlitions exist 

### in. some upstream process unit (e.g., ifupstream gas quality win cause a malfunctionin a downstre:iIii unit, the gas is divertedto. a flare iristead).
. .. . It is the. refinery's. burden to demonstrate that a malfunctionhas. occurred each time a

. downstream unit isbypassed (or otherwise demonstrate. that its actions are exempt from

regulation)
.. EPAnotes that a:rnalfUllction mustbe infrequent, not reasonably preventable andnot attributable to poor maintenance. or careless operation•. 'For example, a "malfunction" caused by the same or similar conditions. as. had occurredprevious.ly will. los.e iis. exempt character andbe. subject to all applicable standards. and requirements
.

.. Periods ofroutine. orperiodic maintenanceto downstream umtsare not malfunctions. at .

eitherthe upstream orthe downstream unit.. Gases generatedinupstream units are not then process. upset gases, their combusiion is subject fully to. applicable NSPS SubpartJ standards. andthe. bypassing ofa downstream 1lllit that is. undergoing routine orperiodic. maintenance would not 

### be permitted:
. .. . Based on information EPA has, numerous episodes o{ combustion of

### amm()nia acid gaS: in a flare subject to NSPS SubpartJ suggests thilt there are operation and maintenance problems with those. refinery. units generating and/orprocessingthat gas.. 

## w. SUlfurDegassing OfJ.-Gas

.**Koch~s** Pos.ition: This stream falls. under theSubpart Jexemption forsuifur production facilities and has previously been determinedby USEPA to

### be not subjectto SubpartJfuel gas .. requirements.
. . . EPA's responSe: Ti).e. sulfur degassing off-gas is generatedwithinthe SRU, .it is SUbjectto·therequitements
. OfNSPS SubpartJ §60.l04(a)(2) and is. exempt from §60.l04(a)(I). Please note that some other sulfurpit degasificationprocesses wouldnotbe considered asintegral.parts of 

## aClaus sulfurrecovery'plant; asdefined,.and consequently, their exhaust gases couldbe s\)bjectto. §60:104(a)(I).
. . . /.19 It is ourunderstanding that Koch uses theShell sulfur degasification process.• This process involves a vaporphase reaction that converts'much ofthe dissolved H28 into' elemental sulfurwithin the. stripping column oftlie. sulfurpit. Forpurposes. ofthe regulation, this. conversion process. is. equivalentto the, Claus. process. It appears, from yourMay 14,1999, Generic Tail Gas. Treatment Unit (TGTU}Flow Chart, that the. sulfurdegassing off-gas is generated within the sulfurpit ofeach SRU and then routed to the emergencybypas.s. incinerator to, be combusted., It is. combusted along with sour watertank off-gas, fuel gas. andany tail gas. from the SRU thatbypassedJhe TGW. That combustion results. 

### iii an exhaust thatis. a combination oigases, some . subject to §60.l04(a)(I) and others to §60.104(a)(2)
.. Accordingly, each stream going to the. emergencybypass. incinerator. mustbe. monitored separately, or the, more, stringent of ' the two, limits. applies (inthis. case, theFGCb liInit). Streams subject to the same

.. standaros maybe. eombined and 01MY the. combined stream need then bemonitored.

Note:. Again, yot! cIaiIn thatEPA's, approval ofthe State. Implementation Plan (SIP) order for the.Dakota CouritylPine Bend Area ofAir Quality ControlRegion 131 is evidence ofEPA's. detenrtinlition thatNSP8Subpart lis inapplicable. to this gas stream. For the reasons stated in oui: response to stream H, yOmbeliefis. not correct. . X. SRU TGTU Process Heater. Koch's Position: NSPS St!bpart 

### J fuel gas requirements are. inapplicable because this stream falls underthe exemption for facilities in which gases are combustedto p.roduce sulfur.

. . . 'EPA's response: NSPS. Subpart 1§60.l04(a)(2).prolubits. the. discharge ofany gases. into the atmosphere from any ClauS sulfurreeovery. plant containing excess amQunts of

## SO,. According to your diagrams, the exh,!ust from the heater/reactor goes into a liqilld-gas. H2S.recoverY
. system. The. recovered H2S is. then recycled back to the feed line ofthe SRU. Since the S02 is. converted into H2S and is. notdischarged into the atmosphere, NSPS Subpart J requirements are not applicable to the direct-fired heater onthe reducinggas. reactor within the TGTU.·
. Although WI; agree that this. direct fired heater. is.not subject to NSPS Subpart J §60.104(a)(1). [as discussed above], we do not agreewith Koch's.interpretation ofthe
. heater being exemptbecause itis part ofthe. s.u1furrecovery plarit.
.Koch argues thatthe exemption for sulfurrecovery plants. applies to this.heater
.. It does. not.. The heater and reducing gas generator are notinthe SRU; the. H,S stream that they generate. is. desired for iIripro1ling the efficiency ofthe SRU, but is. not essential for the operation ofthe SRU;
. and the recycled H2S stream would be "fuel gas" ifcorobusted anywhere, otherthan in the SRU or a sulfuric acid plant atthe refmery (the. two combustion devices exempted from

### 20

· being "FGCDs"). 

### Y. SRU TGTU Incinerator Koch;s Position: This. urut is. subject to, and complieswith Subpart J requirements for sulfurplants. EPA's response: Based on yo'iJrMay 14, 1999, Generic Tail GasTreatment Urut Flow Chart, Koch's. TGtus meet the definition of"reduction control systems"
... Each TGTU has attached to it an incinerator. Koch is. burrung refinery fuel gaS and gas from the. tail gas absorberin the tGTUincinerator. The. exha:ust from Koch'.s TGTU incinerators isa combination of exhausts from two different types. ofNSPS affe.cted facilities (i.e., an SRU and an FGCD). Therefore, the TGTU. incinerator is subject to both the H2 S limitfor the. fuel gaS (§60.104(a)(I)) and theS021irrlit for the exhaust from a reduetion control system :. followed byincimiration(§60.104(a)(2)(i)). The more. stiingent ofthe. two limits. applies

· (in this case, the. FGCD limit) unless. compliance can be. determined independently for'

each requirement
... Koch monitors. the. refinery fuel gas fotH2 S priorto combllstion and monitors. the. S02leveis in the. exhaustfrom the. TGTU. inCinerator. Since. compliance. for el\chrequirement can be. determined separately, Koch does not have tomaintain the TGTU incinerator's combined emissions below the.FGCD S02 emission level, but the S02, level (adjusted for the. combustion ofthe fuel gas) mustmeet the limits Under §60'.l04(a)(2)(i). This. detertniJ1\ltionhas already been established by EPA in an April?, 1992letter. (Enclosure.4) Z. Propane Flare. atKoch Pipeline Company. Pipeline Terminal Koch's. Position: NSPS SubpartJ is inapplicable becaus!,: this streamfalls. under the Subpart J exemption for process upset gas. EPA's response: Based 

### OJi.the description provided, EPA understands that the only time any vapors. are generated and combusted atthis terminal is during periods ofshtit-down ormalfuriction.

·As such, and ifa Pllrt ofthe refinery, these gases are process. upset gases excluded from SubpartJ, butwould stiUbe. sJlbjectto §60.Il(d). EPA also understands. that this pipeline terininal:is a separate source and is. different from 

### /.he refinery, and the onlyphysical connectionto. the,refinery is via a product pipeline. Since it does not appear to be part ofthe refinery, these vapors would not be a fuel gas because theY'are not generated at a refinery
..

### 21 In ytmrJuly 9,1999, 

### Supplemental Submittal, you requested thaIEPA Headquartersaet on yoUrproposedAlternative. Monitoring Plan (AMP)and proposedFlare Gas Recovery.
. Performance Policy atthe'same. time as 

### isSUing this. applicability determination.· You state thatif EPA does not act onthose requestS atthe same. 

### time, you will assumethatyourrequests would ultimatelybe denied. In 

### ourAugust 10, 1999, 

### meeting,we made itcleatthat we ate willing to work with you on those tworequests, but they do not affectthe applicability oftheregulation: We are. confidentthat we. canresolve the issues. relatingto those. two requests, and thatyour requests will be approved in 

### someform, but it

### will take. time. to. 

### work outthe. remaining details. Therefore,we. have. deCidednotto del;t.y ourresponse to your original letter. from August 14, 1998, while. we. continue.

## to worktogether on the AMP. and flaring policy.

,. '.



### · This determination has

### been·c09rdinatedwith EPA's. Office. ofRegulatoryEJ1forcement, the Emission SUmdards. DiVision ofthe Office ofAir Quality Planning and8tandards,the Office ofGeileral Counsel;and Severalof EPA's Regional offices
.. If you have any questions, please contactTomRipp ofmy staffat(202) 564-7003. 

### Sincerely,



### .SIKEN.GIGLffiJ:,LO 

### for John B
..Rasnic, Director Manufacturing, Energy and Transportation Division Office ofCompliance

cc: Jim Jackson,. ORE



### · DianeMcCorikey;OQC

Jim.Durlmm,Oi\QPS Annette Lang,nOJ Patrick Foley,.Regiol) ill 

### Patrie McCoy, Region V Jonathan York, 

### RegionVI

· Bill Peterson, Region VII

Lee Hanley, Region VIn 

### PaulBoys, Region X GlennaEmanuel,OC

### ALTERNATIVE MONITORING PLAN 

### for NSPS 

### SubpartJ 

### Refmery Fuel 

### Gas Conditions for Approval ofthe AltemativeMonitoring Phm for Miscellaneous. RefineryFuel Gas Streams"
.. .

. .

. '. Refinery fuel gas streams/systems. eligible for the Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) shouldbe inherently low: in H2S content, and suCh H2S content should be relatively stable•. The refinerrequestirigati AMP. shouldprovide sufficientinformationto allow for a detennination of appropriateness ofthe AMP. for each gas stream/systemrequested
.. Such information should

. include, butneed notbe.l#nited to:



# ••

• • A descriptionoithe gas stream/system to be consideredincIuding submission ofa portion ofthe. appropriate piping diagrams indicating the boundaries. ofthe. gas stream/system, andthe affected fuel gas combustion device(s) to be considered and an identification of

. the. proposed sampling pointfor the alternativemonitoring;

A statement thatthere are no crossover or entrypoints. for sour. gas (high H2S content) to be introduced into the. gas stream/system
.. (This shouldbe shown inthepiping diagrams); 

### An e:,c.planation of theconditions that ensures low: amounts. ofsulfur in the gas stream

. (i.e., control equipment orproduct specifications) at all times; 

# • . , . . The supponingtestresults. from sampling the requested gas stream/system using appropriate. H2 Snionitoring (i.e., detectortube. monitoring following the Gas Processor Association's: TesHorHydrogen Sulfide and Carbon Dioxide. in Natural Gas. Using. Length ofStain TUbes, 1986Revision), at minimum:

• forfrequently operated gas streams/systems

- two weeks ofdaily monitoring 

### (14 samples);
. . .

• . .for infrequently operated gas streams/systems, 7 samples shall be collectedunless

,other additional information would supportreduced sampling. Note:. All samples are. grab samples. • A description ofhow: thetwQ weeks. (or seven samples for infrequently operated gas streams/systems) ofmonitoring results. compares to thetypical rangeofH2S. concentration (fuel quality) expected for the gas stream/system going to. the. affected fuel gas combustion device
... (e.g., The two weeks ofdaily detectortube results for a frequently operated loading rackincluded the. entire range ofproducts loaded out, and, therefore,

.shouldbe representative oftypicaloperating conditions affectingH 2S contentin thegas stream going to the loading rack 

### flare);' • Identification ofa representative process parameterthat can function as an indicatorofa
, stable and low H2S concentration for each fuel gas streanVsystem, (e.g., reviewof
.

gasoline sulfur content as an indicator ofsulfur content in the. vapors directed to a loading

. rack flare);
. .

• Suggestedprocess parameter limit for each streamlsystem, the rationale. for the parameter limit and the schedule. forthe acquisition and review ofthe process parameter data
.. The refiner willcollect the proposed piocessparameterdata in conjunction with the. testing of the fuel gas stream's stable and low H2S concentration.
. 

### 1The. following shall be. used for measuring HzS in fuel gas. within these types ofAMPs unless therefInerrequests, in writing, for approval ofan alternative. methodology:

• ConductHzS testing using deteCtortubes. ("length-of-stain tube" type measurement);

• Detectortuberanges O-lOIO-l(jO ppm (N 

### =1011) shall be used forroutine**testing~** and

• Detectortuberanges 0-500ppm shall be. used for testing ifmeasured concentration exceeds 100 ppm HzS.
. DataRalige and Variability Calculation and Acceptance Criteria

.For each step ofthe monitoring schedule, sample range and variability will be determined by calculatingthe average. plus 3. standard deviations for.thattest data set.

• Ifthe. average plus 3. standard deviations for the. test data set is. less. than 

### 81 ppm H2S; the sample range and variability are. acceptable and the. refIner can proceed to the. next stepQf the monitoring schedule.
. Note: 81. ppm is one-halfthe. maximum allowable. fuel gas standard under NSPS Subpart

### J, and the Agencybelieves. that using 

### 81 ppin acceptance criteriaprovides a sufficientmargin for ensuring that the. emission limit is. not exceeded under nonnal operating conditions.
. .
• Ifthe data shows an unacceptable range andvariability at any step (the average plus. 3 standard deviations is equal to or greaterthan 

### 81 ppm H2S), then move. to Step 7. Agency

. approval is required to proceed to the next step. ifthe. average plus 3. standard. deviations is betwe.en 

### 81 ppm and 162

## ppm H2S. As an example, lIpproval maybe grantedbased on a review ofthe testdata and anypertinentinformation which demonstrates that sample variability during the test periodwas due. to.unusual circumstances
.. Supplemental t:est· data may be taken to demons.trate thatprocess variability is within the plan requirements
..

. Datamay be. removed from the variability calculations for cause after agency approval.

• For Steps 3. and 4, ifthe data shows. an unacceptable range and variability (the average plus. 3. standard deviations is equal to or greater than 

### 81 ppm HzS), the. source will drop backto the previous step's monitoring schedule.

• Ifat anytime, one detector tube sample va!ue.is equal to or greaterthan 

### 81 ppm H2S, then begin sampling as specifIed in Step 6
..Note: Standard deviation cannotbe. calculated for a data set containing one.point.
. . Monitoring Schedule for Approved AMPs For gas streams.·whichmust meetproduct specifIcations

## for sulfur content, onetime ouly detection tube sampling along with a certifIcation that the gas stream is subject

### to product or

. pipeline specifIcations is. suffIcient for the AMP. Ifthe gas stream composition changes (i.e., Dew gas sources are added), or ifthe gas stream will no longer be required to meetproduct or pipeline specifications, then the gas. stream mustberesubmitted for approval under the AMP
.. 

## . . The following are examples ofstreams. needing one. time only monitoring: 

### 2• Certified commercial grade naturnl gas;

• Certified commercial grade LPG;

• Certifiedcoinmercial grade hydrogen;

• Gasoline vapors from a loading rack that only loads .gasoline meeting a product specification for: sulfur content.

. . .

.For other gas streams, the. 

### HzS content ofeach refinery fuel gas streanlisystem with an approved AMP shallbe. monitored per the following schedule:
. . Step 

### 1:

. The refmer wil1conductrandomH2

### 8 sampling once. per quartetforaperiod ofsix quarters 

### (6 samples)withaminimum on month between samples. 

### A minimum 

### 0:f9. samples

. arerequired for infrequently generated and combusted fuel gas streams beforeproceeding to

Step4
.. Continueto monitor and record the. selectedprocess parameterin accordance. with the.
.. establishedschedule, and at times. when conducting H2S testing
.. Move to. Step 

### 4 ifthe calculated range: and variability ofthe datameets. theestablished acceptance criteria
.. Submittest data (raw

.. measurements plUS calculated average and variability) to the. agencyquarterly
..

Step 

### 4:

.**Th~** refiner will conductrandom H2S sampling twice peryear for a period oftwo years (4 samples); sample randomlyin the. 1st and 3rd quarters with a minimum or 3 months between samples
.. Continue tomonitor and recordthe selected process parameter 

### in accordance with the established schedule; and at times. when conducting 

### H2S testing. Move. to Step 5. ifthe calculated range andvariability ofthe datameets the. established criteria. Submittestdata (raw
. measurements plus calculated aveiage and variability) to the agency semiannually
..

. Step.5:


### 3The refinerwill continue to conducttesting onserrri-annualbasis. Testing is to occur randomlyonce every semiannual period with a minimum of3. months between samples.
. . Continueto monitor and record the selectedprocess parameterin accordance. with the established
. schedule, and at times. whenconductingHzS testing. 

### Ifanyone. sample is. equal to or greaterthan 81 ppin H2S, then proceed to the sampling specified in Step 7. Note: Standard deviationcannot be calculated for a data set containing onepoint.
. Step 6: 

### If, at any time, the selected process pariuneter. data indicates a potentialchange in H2S concentration, Ofa single detectortube sample valueis equal to. otgreaterthail 

### 81 ppm H2S, then.

·the fuel gas stream shall be sampled with detector tubes on a dailybasis for 

### 7 days (odor
. infrequently generated gas streams.
- 7 samples during the same period ofan indicated change. in HzS concentration, or as otherwise apptovedbythe agency). 

### Ifthe average. detector tube result plus 3. standard deviations for those seven samples. is. less. than 

### 81 ppm H2S, the. date and value. of
. change iIi the selectedprocess parameter indicator and the sampleresults shall be included in the next quarterlyreport, and the. refiner shall resume moiritoringin accordance. with the. schedule. of the current step. 

### Ifthe. average plus 

### J standard deviations. for those seven samples is. equal to or greater than 

### 81 ppm H2S,. sampling shall follow the requirements ofStep 

### 7.
. Step. 

### 7: 

### Ifsample detector tube. data indicates a potential for the. emission limit to be. exceeded

· (the average plus 3. standard de.viationsis. equal to or greater

### than 8

## r PPm.. HzS), as determined in the DataRange andYariability Calculation and Acceptance Criteria orin Step 6, the. refmer. shall notify the. agency ofthose results. before the end ofthe nextbusiness dayfollowing the last sample day. The fuel gas stream shall subsequently be tested daily for atwo week period (or 

### 14 samples during the same event or as otherwise approved by the agency for infrequently generated •gas streams). Afterthe two weekperiodis complete,sampling will continue once. per.week, \ffitil the agency approves .a.revised sampling schedule. ormakes a determinationto withdraw approval. ofthe gas stream/system from the. 

### AMP
.. Note:
.At anytime, a detector tube value. in excess of

·the 

### 162 ppm limitis. evidence. that the emission standardhas been exceeded.

· General Provisions ofApproved AMPs Upon agency**tequest~** therefiner shall conduct a test audit for any gas. stream with an approved

### AMP. The. audit Sball consist ofdaily detector tube. samples collected over 

### a oneweek period 

### (7 samples). Forfuel gas streams infrequently generated and combusted in affected fuel

. ... gas combustion devices, an audit shall consiSt of3 consecutive sampling events.. (e.g., Rail loading may occur once. permoIith, ail audit would consist of

### 3. consecutiveIoading events.) The United States Environmental ProtectionAgency, with due. notice, reserves the. right to withdraw approval ofthe 

### AMP. for any gas stream/system.
.. Thll source. shallkeep records ofthe. Hz 

### 8 detector tube test data and the. representative process parameter data and fuel source for at least two Years.
. 

### Ifanew fuel gas. stream is introduced into a fuel gas stream with an approved

## AMP; the refiner shall again apply for·an AMP and repeat Steps. 1 5. Example: 

### 4An AMP Application for a HydrOgenPlant PSA Off-Gas. Stream COlIlbusted Exclusivei y in the

. Hydrogen Plant ProQess Heater:

Process Description Hydrogen production for the. refineryby the steam methane reforming process. 

### COzis. the .primary impurityin thehydrogenproduced; small amounts ofCO and methane
..are also present.. Unpurified hydrogen is passed overmolecular sieve absorbentbeds.to. remove these impurities. The offgas from regeneration ofthe. absorbentbeds is. called PSA off-gas. It is sent to the hydrogenplantheaterto recoverheat and control CO emissions. Piping Diagrams· Piping diagrams shouldbe supplied to showmonitoring location and todemonstrate. that there. is no potential for eross over or entrypoirits for sour gas. Basis for PSAOff-Gas Low H.S Content .' '.

. .

. Since PSA off-gas is a byproduct ofhydrogen purification, anYHzS in the PSApurge gas must

come from the hydrogen unit feed. Levels ofHzS in thePSA gas are. negligible because. HzS must be controlled to prevent . deactivation ofthe. unit's catalyst

. . .

. H2Sis a pernianeilt catalystpoison. The hydrogen unit has 2 scrubbers to remove H2S fromthe



### feed gas to. protectthe. unit's catalystfrom HzS poisoning. The scrubbers. are. operated in series. The lead scrubbermust exhibit at least a 70% reduction inH 2S content.. Ifnot, the. scrubberis taken offline. and the absorbentis replaced. After the. absorbent is replaced, the scrubberis placed on line. as. the second scrubberin series
... This. maximizes. the amount ofH2Sremovaland assures maximum scrubbingpotential when one. scrubber is. offline forabsorbentreplacement. Process. ParameterMonitoring andSuggestedProcess. ParameterLimit Operation ofthe scrubbers is checked on a monthlybasis with detectortubes. The feed gas. H2S content is. measured at the inlet and outlet ofthe. lead scrubber
... Ifnatural gas is. used as. hydrogen plant feed; bothrea<lings are below the 1 ppm detection limit. Ifrefinery fuel gas. is the feed gas,

.30 ppm to 40.ppm H2S is normally detected at the inlet.
.. A lead scrubber outletreading of

### 10. -12

ppm H2S would trigger.absorbentreplacement
.. The suggestedprocess parameterlimit is 20 ppm H2S at the lead HzS absorber outlet. Absorber outlet HtS measurements will be taken in cOrUunction with the PSA gas measurements during Steps 2 and

### 3.
. .



### 5