Page 1 

# FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM EPA-EIA

Question 1: Provide a list of the 112 refineries modeled.

Answer: The list of refineri es is included in Appendix A.

Question 2: In Sensitivity Case 3, what ar eas still have a Reid vapor pressure (RVP)

waiver?

Answer: The RVP waiver is based on Federal Fuel Volatility Regulations, 40

CFR 80.27, and is summarized, in part, in the Environmental Protection Agency

publication, “Guide on Federal and Stat e Summer RVP Standards for Conventional

Gasoline Only,” which is included in Appendix B.

Question 3: In Sensitivity Case 3, qua ntify the volumes of each RVP class.

Answer: There are three main types of gasoline that were modeled as part of

Sensitivity Case 3: 1) Reformulated (RFG), 2) California Air Resource Board

Reformulated (CARB), and Conventional, all containing 10 weight percent ethanol

(EtOH). The reformulated and CARB gasolin e RVP is governed by the volatility

specifications and calculated by complex m odels. The conventional gasoline RVP is set

via 40 CFR 80.27 as referenced in Question 2 above. The breakdown by class is as

follows:

Gasoline Type (RVP) Hydrocarbon Only Including Ethanol

E85 (7.0) 17.0 65.4

Conventional (8.8) 3,286 3,652

Conventional (8.0) 492 547

Conventional (7.8) 645 716

Conventional (7.0) 87 97

RFG Chicago / Milwaukee 376 418

RFG Southern 317 353

RFG Northern 803 892

CARB 790 877

Total 6,814 7,617 

## Gasoline by RVP Fuel Type

MB/DPage 2 

### Question 4: In Sensitivity Case 3, quantify th e volumes of depentani zed gasoline relative

to gasoline that is only debutanized

.

Answer: The table below shows the volu me of gasoline produced in refineries

that have at least one depentanizer and gasoline produced in refineries without a

depentanizer.

Question 5: To meet the Sensitivity Case 3 sulfur limits, quantify the volumes of

gasoline produced using fluidized cataly tic cracker (FCC) feed desulfurization

and vs. gasoline that was desulfurized directly.

Answer: Gasoline that is produced in an FCC can have the sulfur removed

through three possible scenarios: FCC feed hydrodesulfurization (HDS), FCC gasoline

desulfurization, or a combination of both. The gasoline produced in refineries is broken

down by category.

We have also included an aggregate of th e throughput of the three units in the

Base Case and Sensitivity Case 3. Base Case Sensitivity

Case 3 Base Case Sensitivity

Case 3

Refineries with Depentanizers 57 69 5,596 6,310

Refineries with no Depentanizers 55 39 2,711 1,307 Number of Refineries MB/D of Total Gasoline

Produced

(includes EtOH)

Base Case Sensitivity

Case 3 Base Case Sensitivity

Case 3

Refineries with FCC Gasoline HDS and no FCC Feed HDS 37 36 2,701 2,308

Refineries with FCC Feed HDS and no FCC Gasoline HDS 24 16 1,591 925

Refineries with Both FCC Feed HDS and FCC Gasoline HDS 29 38 3,535 4,020 Number of Refineries MB/D of Total Gasoline

Produced

(includes EtOH)

Base Case Sensitivity

Case 3

FCC 5,109 5,097

FCC Feed HDS 2,527 2,559

FCC Gasoline Desulfurization 1,375 1,693 Unit Throughput

(MB/D) UnitPage 3 

### Question 6: What publicly-available sources were used to determine sulfur reduction

costs?

Answer: Appendices C and D contain refe rences to the sources for the cost

estimate for an FCC gasoline hydrotreat er and an FCC feed hydrotreater.

Question 7: On revamp cost range of 30- 70 percent (%), what characterized a 30%

refiner and a 70% refiner?

Answer: A 70% revamp cost would incl ude such things as adding or replacing

reactors and compressors. The 30% revamp cost would entail making changes to the

reactor, such as replaci ng internals and/or catalyst.1 

# APPENDIX A

MODELED REFINERY LIST

1 Alon USA LA

‐ Krotz Springs 39 ExxonMobil LA

‐ BatonRouge 77 Silver Eagle Rfg UT

‐ Woods Cross

2 Alon USA CA

‐ Downy 40 ExxonMobil MT

‐ Billings 78 Silver Eagle Rfg WY

‐ Evanston

3 Alon USA TX

‐ Big Spring 41 ExxonMobil TX

‐ Baytown 79 Sinclair WY

‐ Casper

4 American Rfg PA

‐ Bradford 42 ExxonMobil TX

‐ Beaumont 80 Sinclair WY

‐ Sinclair

5 BP CA

‐ Carson 43 Flint Hills Rsrc AK

‐ North Pole 81 Suncor CO

‐ Denver

6 BP IN

‐ Whiting 44 Flint Hills Rs rc MN

‐ Rosemount 82 Sunoco OH

‐ Toledo

7 BP OH

‐ Toledo 45 Flint Hills Rsrc TX

‐ Corpus Christi 83 Sunoco PA

‐ Philadelphia

8 BP TX

‐ Texas City 46 Flying J UT

‐ Salt Lake City 84 Tesoro AK

‐ Kenai

9 BP WA

‐ Cherry Point 47 Frontier KS

‐ El Dorado 85 Tesoro CA

‐ Martinez

10 Calumet Lubes LA

‐ Shreveport 48 Frontier WY

‐ Cheyenne 86 Tesoro CA

‐ Wilmington

11 Chalmette Rfg LA

‐ Chalmette 49 Gary

‐ Williams OK

‐ Wynnewood 87 Tesoro HI

‐ Kapolei

12 Chevron CA

‐ El Se gundo 50 Hess NJ

‐ Perth Amboy 88 Tesoro ND

‐ Mandan

13 Chevron CA

‐ Richmond 51 Holly NM

‐ Artesia 89 Tesoro UT

‐ Salt Lake City

14 Chevron HI

‐ Barbers Point 52 Holly OK

‐ Tulsa 90 Tesoro WA

‐ Anacortes

15 Chevron MS

‐ Pascagoula 53 Holly UT

‐ Woods Cross 91 Total TX

‐ Port Arthur

16 Chevron UT

‐ Salt Lake City 54 Hunt AL

‐ Tuscaloosa 92 U S Oil WA

‐ Tacoma

17 CHS MT

‐ Laurel 55 Husky OH

‐ Lima 93 United Rfg PA

‐ Warren

18 Citgo IL

‐ Le mont 56 Kern CA

‐ Bakersfield 94 Valero CA

‐ Benicia

19 Citgo LA

‐ Lake Charles 57 Lion AR

‐ El Dorado 95 Valero CA

‐ Wilmington

20 Citgo TX

‐ Corpus Christi 58 LyondellBasell TX

‐ Houston 96 Valero LA

‐ Norco

21 Coffeyville Resources KS

‐ Coffeyville 59 Marathon IL

‐ Robinson 97 Valero NJ

‐ Paulsboro

22 Connacher MT

‐ Great Falls 60 Marathon KY

‐ Catlettsburg 98 Valero OK

‐ Ardmore

23 ConocoPhillips CA

‐ St Maria/San Fran 61 Marathon LA

‐ Garyville 99 Valero TN

‐ Memphis

24 ConocoPhillips CA

‐ Wilmington 62 Marathon MI

‐ Detroit 100 Valero TX

‐ Co rpus Christi

25 ConocoPhillips LA

‐ Belle Chase 63 Marathon MN

‐ St. Paul Park 101 Valero TX

‐ Houston

26 ConocoPhillips LA

‐ Lake Charles 64 Marathon OH

‐ Canton 102 Valero TX

‐ McKee

27 ConocoPhillips MT

‐ Billings 65 Marathon TX

‐ Texas City 103 Valero TX

‐ Port Arthur

28 ConocoPhillips NJ

‐ Bayway 66 Motiva LA

‐ Convent 104 Valero TX

‐ Texas City

29 ConocoPhillips OK

‐ Ponca City 67 Motiva LA

‐ Norco 105 Valero TX

‐ Three Rivers

30 ConocoPhillips PA

‐ Trainer 68 Motiva TX

‐ Port Arthur 106 Ventura Refining OK

‐ Th omas

31 ConocoPhillips TX

‐ Sweeny 69 Murphy LA

‐ Meraux 107 Western NM

‐ Gallup

32 ConocoPhillips WA

‐ Ferndale 70 Murphy WI

‐ Superior 108 Western TX

‐ El Paso

33 Countrymark IN

‐ Mt. Vernon 71 NCRA KS

‐ McPherson 109 Western VA

‐ Yorktown

34 Deer Park TX

‐ Deer Park 72 Pasadena Refining TX

‐ Pasadena 110 WRB Refining IL

‐ Wood River

35 Delek TX

‐ Tyler 73 Placid LA

‐ Port Allen 111 WRB Refining TX

‐ Borger

36 Ergon WV

‐ Newell 74 Shell CA

‐ Martinez 112 Wyoming Rfg WY

‐ Ne wcastle

37 ExxonMobil CA

‐ Torrance 75 Shell WA

‐ Anacortes

38 ExxonMobil IL

‐ Joliet 76 Shell Chemical AL

‐ Saraland

# APPENDIX B

GUIDE ON FEDERAL AND STATE SUMMER RVP

STANDARDS FOR CONVENTIONAL GASOLINE ONLY

# Guide on Federal and State Summer

RVP Standards for Conventional

Gasoline Only

### EPA-420-B-10-018

March 2010 

### Transportation and Regional Programs Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

# Guide on Federal and State Summer

RVP Standards for Conventional

Gasoline Only

## Guide on Federal and State Summer RVP Standards

for Conventional Gasoline Only

This guide is intended for quick reference purposes only. Federal volatility regulations (40 CFR 80.27)

apply to “designated volatility nonattainment areas” and to “designated volatility attainment areas,” as

defined in 40 CFR 80.2(cc) and 80.2(dd), respectively. For this quick reference guide, we have listed

RVP (Reid Vapor Pressure) limits by county, which may not coincide precisely with the borders of a

nonattainment or attainment area. We have not listed RVP limits which may apply through voluntary

agreements for supply of lower RVP fuel than what is otherwise required for an area. For a brief

description of the federal fuel volatility regulations, see below. For specific information regarding

borders, please consult your respective EPA regional office.

Summary of Federal Fuel Volatility Regulations at 40 CFR 80.27:

 For all regulated parties except retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers, maximum standards

generally take effect May 1.

 Standards for June l to September 15 are maximum standards for all regulated parties including

retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers, unless state has an extended summer season as part of

the federally-approved SIP (e.g. Arizona, Eastern Texas).

 Gasoline alcohol blends meeting requirements of 40 CFR 80.27(d) have 1.0 psi waiver of applicable

RVP standard unless:

1) the State has adopted and enforces a SIP-a pproved RVP standard which does not provide for the

1.0 psi waiver (e.g. Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas);

2) the State has received EPA approval to opt-out of the 1.0 psi waiver provision per Section 1501(c)

of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 [Clean Air Act 211(h)(5), as amended]; or

3) the State uses reformulated gasoline (RFG), which has a more stringent VOC performance

standard. Additional information about RF G can be found at www.epa.gov/otaq/rfg.htm.

 Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories are exempted from federal volatility regulations.

Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

AL Jefferson Birmingham 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

AL Shelby 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

AL All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

AR All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

AZ Maricopa (part) Phoenix 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

(Sept. 30)

AZ All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

CA (See EPA RFG list) B



### 1

### 2 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

CA All counties implement a version of the California Reformulated Gasoline Program, which enforces

RVP standards more stringent than the federal r equirements. Standards and compliance periods

vary by air basin; please refer to the California Air Resources Board website for additional details:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/fuels.htm

CO Adams 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Arapahoe 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Boulder Boulder 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Broomfield 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Denver Denver 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Douglas 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Jefferson 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Larimer (part) 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO Weld (part) 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

CO All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

CT (See EPA RFG list) B

DC (See EPA RFG list) B

DE (See EPA RFG list) B

FL Broward 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL Dade Miami 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL Duval Jacksonville 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL Hillsborough Tampa 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL Palm Beach 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL Pinellas 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

FL All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

GA See Footnote C for list of

45 counties affected Atlanta area 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

GA All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

ID All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

IL Madison E. St. Louis 9.0 7.2 D 7.2 7.2 7.2

IL Monroe 9.0 7.2 D 7.2 7.2 7.2

### 3 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

IL St. Clair 9.0 7.2 D 7.2 7.2 7.2

IL All other conventional

gasoline counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

IL (See EPA RFG list) B

IN Clark 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

IN Floyd 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

IN All other conventional

gasoline counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

IN (See EPA RFG list) B

IA All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

KS Johnson 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

KS Wyandotte Kansas City 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

KS All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

KY All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

KY (See EPA RFG list) B

LA Ascension 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Beauregard 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Calcasieu Lake Charles 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA E Baton Rouge Baton Rouge 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Iberville 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Jefferson 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Lafayette 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Lafourche 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Livingston 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Orleans New Orleans 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA Point Coupee 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA St Bernard 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA St Charles 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA St James 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

### 4 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

LA St Mary 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA W Baton Rouge 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

LA All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MA (See EPA RFG list) B

MD All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MD (See EPA RFG list) 2

ME Androscoggin 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME Cumberland Portland 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME Kennebec Augusta 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME Knox 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME Lincoln 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME Sagadahoc 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME York 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

ME All others 9.0 A,E 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MI Lenawee 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Livingston 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Macomb 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Monroe 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Oakland 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI St. Clair 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Washtenaw Ann Arbor 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI Wayne Detroit 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MI All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MN All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MT All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MO Clay 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MO Jackson Kansas City 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

MO Platte 9.0 7.0 A 7.0 7.0 7.0

### 5 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

MO All other conventional

gasoline counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

MO (See EPA RFG list) B

MS All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NC Davidson 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Davie (part) 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Durham 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Forsyth Winston-Salem 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Gaston 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Granville (part) 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Guilford Greensboro 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Mecklenburgh Charlotte 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC Wake Raleigh 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NC All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NE All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NH All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NH (See EPA RFG list) B

NJ (See EPA RFG list) B

NM All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

ND All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NV Washoe Reno 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

NV All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NY All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 A,E 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

NY (See EPA RFG list) 2

OH Butler 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Clark 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Clermont 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Clinton 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

### 6 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

OH Greene 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Hamilton Cincinnati 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Miami 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Montgomery Dayton 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH Warren 9.0 7.8 A 7.8 7.8 7.8

OH All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

OK All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

OR Clackamas 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

OR Multnomah Portland 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

OR Washington 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

OR Marion (part) Salem 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

OR Polk (part) 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

OR All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

PA Allegheny Pittsburgh 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Armstrong 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Beaver 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Butler 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Fayette 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Washington 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA Westmoreland 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

PA All other conventional

gasoline counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

PA (See EPA RFG list) B

RI (See EPA RFG list) B

SC All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

SD All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

TN Davidson Nashville 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TN Rutherford 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

### 7 Month & RVP PSI Max

State County/

Parish City May June July Aug Sept

1-15

TN Shelby Memphis 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TN Sumner 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TN Williamson 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TN Wilson 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TN All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

TX See Footnote F for list of

95 counties affected Eastern Texas 7.8 A,E 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

(Oct 1)

TX El Paso El Paso 7.0 A,E 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

TX Hardin 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TX Jefferson Beaumont 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TX Orange 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

TX All other conventional

gasoline counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

TX (See EPA RFG List) B

UT Davis 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

UT Salt Lake Salt Lake City 9.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8

UT All others 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

VA All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

VA (See EPA RFG List) B

VT All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

WA All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

WV All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

WI All conventional gasoline

counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

WI (See EPA RFG List) B

WY All counties 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0

### 8 Notes to Federal and State RVP Standards

A 

### State has received a waiver under Clean Air Act 211(c)(4)(C) to adopt a state fuel program, more

stringent than federal requirements, into the federally-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP).

State fuel program may also define a volatility level and compliance date for refiners and/or

terminals different than the compliance date for retailers. Potentially affected parties should

refer to the SIP or contact the State for more information about proper compliance.

B 

### Indicates there are counties or areas in counties in the state which have reformulated gasoline

(RFG) requirements. See EPA's "List of Federal Reformulated Gasoline Program Areas” at

www.epa.gov/otaq/rfg/whereyoulive.htm . RFG areas must meet a VOC emissions performance

reduction standard per 40 CFR 80.4l.

C 

### GA - Atlanta area counties include: Banks, Barrow, Bartow, Butts, Carroll, Chattooga,

Cherokee, Clarke, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Da wson, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Floyd, Forsyth,

Fulton, Gordon, Gwinnett, Hall, Haralson, Heard, Henry, Jackson, Jasper, Jones, Lamar,

Lumpkin, Madison, Meriwether, Monroe, Morga n, Newton, Oconee, Paulding, Pickens, Pike,

Polk, Putnam, Rockdale, Spalding, Troup, Upson, and Walton.

D 

### Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair counties are RF G covered areas; however, a SIP requirement of

7.2 psi RVP is still in place.

E 

### State fuel program in federally-approved SIP does not provide for use of a 1.0 psi ethanol waiver

under 40 CFR 80.27(d). The 1.0 psi ethanol waiver is not applicable during the entire volatility

control period defined in the SIP (e.g. May 1 – September 15).

F 

### TX - Eastern Texas counties include: Anderson, Angelina, Aransas, Atascosa, Austin, Bastrop,

Bee, Bell, Bexar, Bosque, Bowie, Brazos, Burleson, Caldwell, Calhoun, Camp, Cass, Cherokee,

Colorado, Comal, Cooke, Coryell, De Witt, Delta, Ellis, Falls, Fannin, Fayette, Franklin,

Freestone, Goliad, Gonzales, Grayson, Gregg, Grimes, Guadalupe, Harrison, Hays, Henderson,

Hill, Hood, Hopkins, Houston, Hunt, Jackson, Jasper, Johnson, Karnes, Kaufman, Lamar,

Lavaca, Lee, Leon, Limestone, Live Oak, Ma dison, Marion, Matagorda, McLennan, Milam,

Morris, Nacogdoches, Navarro, Newton, Nueces, Panola, Parker, Polk, Rains, Red River,

Refugio, Robertson, Rockwall, Rusk, Sabine, Sa n Jacinto, San Patricio, San Augustine, Shelby,

Smith, Somervell, Titus, Travis, Trinity, Tyler, Upshur, Van Zandt, Victoria, Walker,

Washington, Wharton, Williamson, Wilson, Wise, and Wood.1 

# APPENDIX C

GASOLINE HYDROTREATING ISBL COST ESTIMATE

Five published sources were used for the co st of a new gasoline hydrotreating unit.



## REFERENCE DATA FOR ESTIMATION OF THE ISBL COST FOR A

NEW GASOLINE HY DROTREATING UNIT

Investment Cost

(USGC Basis) Applicable

Date Technology Reference

$110 million

‐ 35 MB/D 2003 ExxonMobil ExxonMobil Press Release

$115 million

‐ 35 MB/D 2004 ExxonMobil ExxonMobil Press Release

$200 million

‐ 70 MB/D 2005 ExxonMobil Oil & Gas Journal

$69 million

‐ 15.9 MB/CD 2005 Axens Hydrocarbon Processing

$18 million

‐ 8 MB/CD 2003 NA Alon Press Release

NA

– Not identified



### An assumed 20 percent outside battery limits (O SBL) cost was subtracted from the costs

to obtain an inside battery limits (ISBL) cost. The ISBL cost was then adjusted to a mid-2009

basis using the Nelson-Farrar Refinery Constructi on Cost Index (NCI) published periodically in

the Oil and Gas Journal . The cost was then adjusted to a 35 thousand barrels per day (MB/D)

basis using a capacity scale factor of 0.67. Th e average of the five figures is $114.4 million

(MM). This initial cost estimate from these public sources was disc ussed with refiners that have

built several of the units in recent years. They indicated that the actual costs were substantially

more than what was indicated by the 2003 to 2005 da ta. The one refiner willing to quantify their

actual costs indicated th at current costs were roughly doubl e the cost calculated for mid-2009

using the NCI. We considered their estimat e credible; therefore, the value of $228.8MM was

used.1 

# APPENDIX D

FCC FEED HYDROTREATER ISBL COST ESTIMATE

Thirteen published sources were used for the cost of a new ultra low sulfur diesel unit

(ULSD) and mild hydrocr acker (hydrocracker).



## REFERENCE DATA FOR ESTIMATION OF THE ISBL COST FOR A

NEW FCC FEED HY DROTREATER UNIT

Unit Type Investment Cost

(USGC Basis) Applicable

Date Reference

ULSD $75 million

‐ 16.4 MB/CD 2006 PRNewswire

ULSD $130 million

‐ 36 MB/CD 2006 BP Press Release

ULSD $194 million

‐ 45 MB/CD 2005 Reuters

ULSD $40 million

‐ 10 MB/CD 2006 Oil Price Information Service

ULSD $75 million

‐ 24 MB/CD 2006 CB&I Press Release

ULSD $33 million

‐ 10 MB/CD 2007 Oil Price Information Service

ULSD $35 million

‐ 10 MB/CD 2007 Platts

ULSD $110 million

‐ 16 MB/CD 2007 HPI Construction Boxscore

ULSD $260 million

‐ 55 MB/CD 2007 Oilgram News

ULSD $100 million

‐ 45 MB/CD 2006 Oil and Gas Journal

ULSD $47.6 million

‐ 20 MB/CD 2006 El Paso Times

Hydrocracker $160 million

‐ 48 MB/CD 2003 Oil and Gas Journal

Hydrocracker $412 million

‐ 50.5 MB/CD 2007 Valero Website



### An assumed 20 percent outside battery limits (O SBL) cost was subtracted from the costs

to obtain an inside battery limits (ISBL) cost. The ISBL cost was assumed to be between the

reported total installed co st of ULSD units and mild hydrocracker units. The ISBL cost was then

adjusted to a mid-2009 basis using the Nels on-Farrar Refinery Construction Cost Index

published periodically in the Oil and Gas Journal . The costs were then adjusted to a 352 

### thousand barrel per day (MB/D) basis using a cap acity scale factor of 0.67. The average of the

thirteen figures is $163.6 million.

While the cost of an FCC feed HDS unit base d on the available data is less than the

adjusted cost of an FCC gasoline HDS unit, none of the refiners with whom we spoke offered

any actual cost data on FCC feed HD S units. It is likely that the cost we used for FCC feed HDS

units is low, but we did not have a basis for adjusting the number upward.