Lessons

Learned

From Natural Gas STAR Partners

OPTIONS FOR REDUCING METHANE EMISSIONS FROM 

PNEUMATIC DEVICES IN THE NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY

Executive Summary

Pneumatic devices powered by pressurized natural gas are used widely in the natural gas industry as liquid level

controllers, pressure regulators, and valve controllers. Methane emissions from pneumatic devices, which have

been estimated at 51 billion cubic feet (Bcf) per year in the production sector, 14 Bcf per year in the transmission

sector and <1 Bcf per year in the processing sector, are one of the largest sources of vented methane emissions

from the natural gas industry. Reducing these emissions by replacing high-bleed devices with low-bleed devices,

retrofitting high-bleed devices, and improving maintenance practices can be profitable. 

Natural Gas STAR partners have achieved significant savings and methane emission reductions through replacement, retrofit, and maintenance of high-bleed pneumatics. Partners have found that most retrofit investments pay

for themselves in little over a year, and replacements in as little as 6 months. To date, Natural Gas STAR partners

have saved 36.4 Bcf by retrofitting or replacing high-bleed with low-bleed pneumatic devices, representing a savings of $254.8 million worth of gas. Individual savings will vary depending on the design, condition and specific

operating conditions of the controller. 

This is one of a series of Lessons Learned Summaries developed by EPA in cooperation with the natural gas industry on superior

applications of Natural Gas STAR Program Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Partner Reported Opportunities (PROs). 

Method for Reducing Volume of Natural Value of Natural Cost of Payback

Methane Emissions Gas Savings Gas Savings Imlementation (Months)

(Mcf/yr) ($/yr)1 ($)

Replacement:

Change to low-bleed 50 to 200 350 to 1,400 210 to 3402 3 to 8

device at end of life.

Early-replacement of 260 1,820 1,850 13

high-bleed unit.

Retrofit 230 1,610 675 6

Maintenance 45 to 260 315 to 1,820 Negligible to 500 Immediate to 4

1

Cost of gas $7.00/Mcf.

2

Incremental cost of low-bleed over high-bleed equipment.
2

Technology

Background

The natural gas industry uses a variety of control devices to automatically

operate valves and control pressure, flow, temperature or liquid levels.

Control devices can be powered by electricity or compressed air, when

available and economic. In the vast majority of applications, however, the

gas industry uses pneumatic devices that employ energy from pressurized

natural gas. 

Natural gas powered pneumatic devices perform a variety of functions in all

three sectors of the natural gas industry. In the production sector, an estimated 400,000 pneumatic devices are used to control and monitor gas and

liquid flows and levels in dehydrators and separators, temperature in dehydrator regenerators, and pressure in flash tanks. In the processing sector,

about 13,000 gas pneumatic devices are used for compressor and glycol

dehydration control in gas gathering/booster stations and isolation valves in

processing plants (process control in gas processing plants is predominantly

instrument air). 

In the transmission sector, an estimated 85,000 pneumatic devices actuate

isolation valves and regulate gas flow and pressure at compressor stations,

pipelines, and storage facilities. Non-bleed pneumatic devices are also found

on meter runs at distribution company gate stations for regulating flow, pressure, and temperature. 

As part of normal operation, pneumatic devices release or bleed natural gas to the atmosphere and,

consequently, are a major source of

methane emissions from the natural

gas industry. The actual bleed rate

or emissions level largely depends

on the design of the device.

Exhibit 1 shows a schematic of a gas pneumatic control system. Clean, dry,

pressurized natural gas is regulated to a constant pressure, usually around

20 psig. This gas supply is used both as a signal and a power supply. A

small stream is sent to a device that measures a process condition (liquid

level, gas pressure, flow, temperature). This device regulates the pressure of

this small gas stream (from 3 to 15 psig) in proportion to the process condition. The stream flows to the pneumatic valve controller, where its variable

pressure is used to regulate a valve actuator. 

To close the valve pictured in Exhibit 1, 20-psig pneumatic gas is directed to

the actuator, pushing the diaphragm down against the spring, which,

Definition of High-Bleed

Pneumatic

Any pneumatic device that bleeds in

excess of 6 scfh (over 50 Mcf per

year) is considered a high-bleed

device by the Natural Gas STAR

Program.
3

through the valve stem, pushes the valve plug closed. When gas is vented

off the actuator, the spring pushes the valve back open. The weak signal

continuously vents (bleeds) to the atmosphere. Electro-pneumatic devices

use weak electric current instead of the weak gas stream to signal pneumatic valve actuation.

In general, controllers of similar design usually have similar steady-state

bleed rates regardless of brand name. Pneumatic devices come in three

basic designs: 

★ Continuous bleed devices are used to modulate flow, liquid level, or

pressure and will generally vent gas at a steady rate; 

★ Actuating or intermittent bleed devices perform snap-acting control

and release gas only when they stroke a valve open or closed or as

they throttle gas flows; and 

★ Self-contained devices release gas into the downstream pipeline, not

to the atmosphere. 

To reduce emissions from pneumatic devices the following options can be

pursued, either alone or in combination: 

1. Replacement of high-bleed devices with low-bleed devices having similar performance capabilities. 

2. Installation of low-bleed retrofit kits on operating devices. 

3. Enhanced maintenance, cleaning and tuning, repairing/replacing leaking gaskets, tubing fittings, and seals.

Exhibit 1: Pneumatic Device Schematic
Field experience shows that up to 80 percent of all high-bleed devices can

be replaced with low-bleed equipment or retrofitted. Exhibit 2 lists the generic options applicable for different controller requirements. 

In general, the bleed rate will also vary with the pneumatic gas supply pressure, actuation frequency, and age or condition of the equipment. Due to the

need for precision, controllers that must operate quickly will bleed more gas

than slower operating devices. The condition of a pneumatic device is a

stronger indicator of emission potential than age; well-maintained pneumatic

devices operate efficiently for many years.

Reducing methane emissions from high-bleed pneumatic devices through

the options presented above will yield significant benefits, including: 

★ Financial return from reducing gas-bleed losses. Using a natural

gas price of $7.00 per thousand cubic feet (Mcf), savings from

reduced emissions can range from $315 to $1,820 or more per year

per device. In many cases, the cost of implementation is recovered in

less than a year. 

★ Increased operational efficiency. The retrofit or complete replacement of worn units can provide better system-wide performance and

reliability and improve monitoring of parameters such as gas flow,

pressure, or liquid level. 

4

Exhibit 2: Options for Reducing Gas-Bleed Emissions by Controller Type

Action Pneumatic Types

Level Pressure Positioners/

Controllers Controllers Transducers

Replacements XX X

High-bleed with low-bleed (electro-pneumatic)

Retrofits XX X

Install retrofit kits

Maintenance XX X

Lower gas supply

pressure/replace

springs/re-bench

Repair leaks, clean X X X

and tune

Change gain setting X X

Remove unnecessary X

positioners

Economic and

Environmental

Benefits
5

★ Lower methane emissions. Reductions in methane emissions can

range from 45 to 260 Mcf per device per year, depending on the

device and the specific application.

Operators can determine the

gas-bleed reduction option

that is best suited to their situation, by following the decision process laid out below.

Depending on the types of

devices that are being considered, one or more options

for reducing pneumatic gas

bleed may be appropriate. 

Step 1: Locate and describe the high-bleed devices. Partners should

first identify the high-bleed devices that are candidates for replacement,

retrofit, or repair. The identification and description process can occur during

normal maintenance or during a system-wide or facility-specific pneumatics

survey. For each pneumatic device, record the location, function, make and

model, condition, age, estimated remaining useful life, and bleed rate characteristics (volume and whether intermittent or continuous). 

The pneumatic device’s bleed rate can be determined through direct measurement or from data provided by the manufacturer. Direct measurement

might include bagging studies at selected instruments, high-volume sampler

measurements (see “Directed Inspection and Maintenance at Compressor

Stations” Lessons Learned) or the operator's standard leak measurement

approach. Operators will find it unnecessary to measure bleed rates at each

device. In most cases, sample measurements of a few devices are sufficient.

Experience suggests that manufacturers' bleed rates are understated, so

measurement data should be used when it can be acquired. 

Appendix A lists brand, model, and gas bleed information—as provided by

manufacturers—for various pneumatic devices. This is not an exhaustive list,

but it covers the most commonly used devices. Where available, actual field

data on bleed rates are included.

Step 2: Establish the technical feasibility and costs of alternatives.

Nearly all high-bleed pneumatic

devices can be replaced or retrofitted with lower-bleed equipment.

Consult your pneumatic device vendor or an instrumentation specialist

Five Steps for Reducing Methane

Emissions from Pneumatic Devices:

1. Locate and describe the high-bleed devices;

2. Establish the technical feasibility and costs

of alternatives;

3. Estimate the savings;

4. Evaluate the economics; and

5. Develop an implementation plan.

Decision

Process

Some high-bleed devices, however,

should not be replaced with low-bleed

devices. Control of very large valves that

require fast and/or precise response to

process changes often require highbleed controllers. These are found most

frequently on large compressor discharge and bypass pressure controllers.

EPA recommends contacting vendors

for new fast-acting devices with lower

bleed rates. 
6

for availability, specifications and costs of suitable devices. Low-bleed

devices can be requested by specifying bleed rates less than 6 standard

cubic feet per hour (scfh). It is important to note that not all manufacturers

report bleed rates in the same manner, and companies should exercise

caution when making purchases of low-bleed devices. 

Appendix B lists cost data for many low-bleed pneumatic devices and

summarizes the compatibility of retrofit kits with various controllers. This is

not an exhaustive list, but it covers the most commonly used devices. 

Maintenance of pneumatics is a cost-effective method for reducing emissions. All companies should consider maintenance as an important part of

their implementation plan. Cleaning and tuning, in addition to repairing leaking gaskets, tubing fittings, and seals, can save 5 to 10 scfh per device.

Tuning to operate over a broader range of proportional band often reduces

bleed rates by as much as 10 scfh. Eliminating unnecessary valve positioners can save up to 18 scfh per device. 

Step 3: Estimate the savings. Determine the quantity of gas that can be

saved with a low-bleed controller, using field measurement of the high-bleed

controller and a similar low-bleed device in service. If these actual bleed

rates are not available, use bleed specifications provided by manufacturers. 

Gas savings can be monetized to annual savings using $7.00 per Mcf and

multiplying bleed reduction, typically specified in scfh, by 8,670 hours per

year.

Gas Savings = (High-bleed, scfh) — (Low-bleed, scfh)

Annual Gas Savings = Gas Savings (scfh) * 8,760 hrs/yr * 1 Mcf/1000scf *

$7.00/Mcf

Step 4: Evaluate the economics. The cost-effectiveness of replacement,

retrofit, or maintenance of high-bleed pneumatic devices can be evaluated

using straightforward economic analysis. A cost-benefit analysis for 

Nelson Price Indexes

In order to account for inflation in equipment and operating & maintenance

costs, Nelson-Farrar Quarterly Cost Indexes (available in the first issue of each

quarter in the Oil and Gas Journal) are used to update costs in the Lessons

Learned documents.

The “Refinery Operation Index” is used to revise operating costs while the

“Machinery: Oilfield Itemized Refining Cost Index” is used to update equipment

costs.

To use these indexes in the future, simply look up the most current NelsonFarrar index number, divide that by the February 2006 Nelson-Farrar index 

number, and, finally, multiply by the appropriate costs in the Lessons Learned.
7

replacement or retrofit is appropriate unless high-bleed characteristics are

required for operational reasons. 

Exhibit 3 illustrates a cost-benefit analysis for replacement of a high-bleed

liquid level controller. Cash flow over a five-year period is analyzed by showing the magnitude and timing of costs (shown in parenthesis) and benefits.

In this example, a $513 initial investment buys a level controller that saves

19 scfh of gas. At $7.00 per Mcf, the low-bleed device saves $1,165 per

year. Annual maintenance costs for the new and old controllers are shown.

The maintenance cost for the older high-bleed controller is shown as a 

benefit because it is an avoided cost. Net present value (NPV) is equal to the

benefits minus the costs accrued over five years and discounted by 10 percent each year. Internal rate of return (IRR) is the discount rate at which the

NPV generated by the investment equals zero. 

Exhibit 4 illustrates the range of savings offered by proven methods for

reducing gas bleed emissions. For simplicity, it is assumed that the cost of

maintenance of the pneumatic device will be the same before and after the

replacement, retrofit, or enhanced maintenance activity.

As seen in Exhibit 4, sometimes more than one option to reduce gas bleed

may be appropriate and cost-effective for a given application. For the listed

options, please note that the payback period with respect to implementation

cost can range from less than one month to two years. 

Exhibit 3: Cost-Effectiveness Calculation for Replacement

Type of Costs Year Year Year Year Year Year

0123 45

Implementation Costs, $ (513)

(Capital Costs)1

Annual Savings, $ 1,165 1,165 1,165 1,165 1,165

(New vs. Old)2

Maintenance Costs, $ (34) (34) (34) (34) (34)

(New Controller)3

Avoided Maintenance, $ 70 70 70 70 70

(Replaced Controller)3

Net Benefit (513) 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,202 1,202

NPV4 = $4,042

IRR = 234%

Notes: 

1 Quoted cost of a Fisher 2680 device. Adjusted to 2006 equipment costs. See Appendix B.

2 Annual savings per device calculated as the change in bleed rate of 19 scfh x 8,760 hrs/yr = 167 Mcf/yr

at $7/Mcf.

3 Maintenance costs are estimated.

4 Net Present Value (NPV) based on 10% discount rate for 5 years. 
Exhibit 4: Economic Benefits of Reducing Pneumatic Device Emissions

Action Cost1 Bleed Rate Annual Payback IRR4

($) Reductions2 Savings3 Period (%)

(Mcf/yr/device) ($/year) (Months)

Replacement

Level Controllers

High-bleed to

low-bleed 513 166 1,165 6 226

Pressure Controllers

High-bleed to

low-bleed 1,809 228 1,596 14 84

Airset metal

to soft-seat 104 219 1,533 <1 >1,400

Retrofit

Level Controllers

Mizer 675 219 1,533 6 226

Large orifice

to small 41 184 1,288 <1 >3,100

Large nozzle

to small 189 131 917 3 >450

Pressure Controllers

Large orifice to

small 41 184 1,288 <1 >3,100

Maintenance

All types

Reduce supply

pressure 207 175 1,225 3 >500

Repair leaks, retune 31 44 308 2 >900

Level Controllers

Change gain setting 0 88 616 immediate ---

Positioners

Remove unnecessary 0 158 1,106 immediate ---

1 Implementation costs represent average costs for Fisher brand pneumatic instruments installed.

2 Bleed rate reduction = change in bleed rate scf/hr x 8,760 hr/yr.

3 Savings based on $7.00/Mcf cost of gas.

4 Internal rate of return (IRR) calculated over 5 years. 

8

Methane Content of Natural Gas

Non-associated natural gas found in the production sector contains

approximately 78.8% methane and pipeline quality natural gas found in the

transmission sector contains approximately 93% methane. Methane emission

reductions can be approximated by applying the appropriate methane content

to the natural gas savings calculated in this document.
9

The case studies in Exhibit 5 above present analyses performed and savings

achieved by two Natural Gas STAR partners who installed retrofit kits at gas

production facilities.

Step 5: Develop an implementation plan. After identifying the pneumatic

devices that can be profitably replaced, retrofitted or maintained, devise a

systematic plan for implementing the required changes. This can include

modifying the current inspection and maintenance schedule and prioritizing

replacement or retrofits. It may be most cost-effective to replace all those

devices that meet the technical and economic criteria of your analysis at one

time to minimize labor costs and disruption of operation. 

Where a pneumatic device is at the end of its useful life and is scheduled for

replacement, it should be replaced with a low-bleed model instead of a new

high-bleed device whenever possible. 

When assessing options for replacement of high bleed pneumatic devices,

natural gas price may influence the decision making process. Exhibit 6

shows an economic analysis of early replacement of a high bleed pneumatic

device with a lower bleed device at different natural gas prices.

Exhibit 5: Case Studies on Retrofits To Reduce Gas Leaks at 

Natural Gas STAR Partner Sites

Study Implementation Emissions Annual Payback IRR

Costs ($) Reductions Savings (Months) (%)

(Mcf/yr) ($/yr)

Company 1:

Platform 1 8,988 2,286 16,002 7 177

Platform 2 13,892 3,592 25,144 7 180

Retrofit Liquidlevel controllers 5,452 1,717 12,019 6 220

Company 2:

Per device 702 219 1,533 6 218

Exhibit 6: Gas Price Impact on Economic Analysis

Internal Rate 

of Return (IRR)

Value of Gas

Saved

Net Present 

Value (i=10%)

Payback Period

(Months)

$3/Mcf

29

$780

31%

$1,107

$5/Mcf

$1,300

18

64%

$3,078

$7/Mcf

95%

13

$1,820

$5,049 $6,035

110%

11

$2,080

$8/Mcf $10/Mcf

$2,600

9

139%

$8,006
10

Instrument air, nitrogen gas, electric valve controllers, and mechanical control

systems are some of the alternatives to gas powered pneumatics implemented by partners. 

★ Instrument Air. These systems substitute compressed, dried air in place

of natural gas in pneumatic devices, and thus eliminate methane emissions entirely. Instrument air systems are typically installed at facilities

where there is a high concentration of pneumatic control valves and fulltime operator presence (for example, most gas processing plants use

instrument air for pneumatic devices). The major costs associated with

instrument air systems are capital and energy. Instrument air systems

are powered by electric compressors, and require the installation of

dehydrators and volume tanks to filter, dry and store the air for instrumentation use. Generally, partners have found that cost-effective implementation of instrument air systems is limited to field sites with available

utility or self-generated electrical power. The Lessons Learned study,

“Covert Gas Pneumatic Controls to Instrument Air,” provides a detailed

description of the technical and economic decision process required to

evaluate conversion from gas pneumatic devices to instrument air.

★ Nitrogen Gas. Unlike instrument air systems that require capital expenditures and electric power, these systems only require the installation of

a cryogenic liquid nitrogen cylinder, that is replaced periodically, and a

liquid nitrogen vaporizer. The system uses a pressure regulator to control

the expansion of the nitrogen gas (i.e., the gas pressure) as it enters the

control system. The primary disadvantage of these systems stems from

the cost of liquid nitrogen and the potential safety hazard associated

with using cryogenic liquids. 

★ Electric Valve Controllers. Due to advances in technology, the use of

electronic control instrumentation is increasing. These systems use small

electrical motors to operate valves and therefore do not bleed natural

gas into the atmosphere. While they are reliant on a constant supply of

electricity, and have high associated operating costs, they have the

advantage of not requiring the utilization of natural gas or a compressor

to operate. 

★ Mechanical Control Systems. These devices have been widely used in

the natural gas and petroleum industry. They operate using a combination of springs, levers, flow channels and hand wheels. While they are

simple in design and require no natural gas or power supply to operate,

their application is limited due to the need for the control valve to be in

close proximity to the process measurement. Also, these systems are

unable to handle large flow fluctuations and lack the sensitivity of pneumatic systems.

Other

Technologies
11

Each of these options has specific advantages and disadvantages. Where

Natural Gas STAR partners do install these systems as replacements to gas

powered pneumatic devices, they should report the resulting emissions

reductions and recognize the savings.

Natural Gas STAR partners offer the following Lessons Learned: 

★ Hear it; feel it; replace it. Where emissions can be heard or felt, this is a

sign that emissions are significant enough to warrant corrective action. 

★ Control valve cycle frequency is another indicator of excessive emissions. When devices cycle more than once per minute, they can be

replaced or retrofitted profitably. 

★ Manufacturer bleed rate specifications are not necessarily what users will

experience. Actual bleed rates will generally exceed manufacturer’s

specifications because of operating conditions different from manufacturer’s assumptions, installation settings and maintenance. 

★ Combine equipment retrofits or replacements with improved maintenance activities. Do not overlook simple solutions such as replacing

tubes and fittings or rearranging controllers. 

One Partner’s Experience

Marathon Oil Company surveyed 158 pneumatic control devices at 50 production

sites using the Hi-Flow Sampler to measure emissions. Half of these controllers

were identified as non-bleed devices (e.g. weighted dump valves, spring operated

regulators, enclosed capillary temperature controllers, non-bleed pressure switches).

High-bleed devices accounted for 35 of 67 level controllers, 5 of 76 pressure controllers, and 1 of 15 temperature controllers. Measured gas emissions were 583 scfh

total; 86 percent of emissions came from level controllers, with leaks up to 48 scfh,

and averaging 7.6 scfh. Marathon concluded that “control devices with higher emissions can be identified qualitatively by sound prior to leak measurement, making it

unnecessary to quantitatively measure methane emissions using technologically

advanced equipment.”

One Partner’s Experience

Union Pacific Resources replaced 70 high-bleed pneumatic devices with low-bleed

pneumatic devices and retrofitted 330 high-bleed pneumatic devices. As a result,

this partner has estimated a total reduction of methane emissions of 49,600 Mcf per

year. Assuming a gas price of $7 per Mcf, the savings corresponds to $347,200. The

costs of replacing and retrofitting all the devices, including materials and labor, is

$166,300 at 2006 costs, resulting in a payback period of less than one year.

Lessons

Learned
12

★ The smaller orifices in low-bleed devices and retrofit kits can be subject

to clogging from debris in corroded pipes. Therefore, pneumatic supply

gas piping and tubing should be flushed out before retrofitting with

smaller orifice devices, and gas filters should be well maintained. 

★ When replacing pneumatic control systems powered by pressurized natural gas with instrument air or other systems, do not forget to account

for the savings from the resulting methane emission reductions. 

★ Include methane emission reductions from pneumatics in annual reports

submitted as part of the Natural Gas STAR Program. 

Adams, Jim, Norriseal, personal contact.

Burlage, Brian, Fisher Controls International, Inc., personal contact.

Colwell, Chris, Masoneilan, personal contact.

Fisher Controls International, Inc. Pneumatic Instrument Gas Bleed

Reduction Strategy and Practical Application.

Garvey, J. Michael, DFC Becker Operations, personal contact.

Hankel, Bill, Ametek - PMT Division, personal contact.

Henderson, Carolyn, U.S. EPA Natural Gas STAR Program, personal contact.

Husson, Frank, ITT Barton, personal contact.

Loupe, Bob, Control Systems Specialist Inc., personal contact.

Murphy, John, Bristol Babcock, personal contact.

Radian Corporation. Pneumatic Device Characterization. Draft Final Report,

Gas Research Institute and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January

1996. 

Tingley, Kevin, U.S. EPA Natural Gas STAR Program, personal contact.

Wilmore, Martin R., Shafer Valve Company, personal contact.

Ulanski, Wayne. Valve and Actuator Technology. McGraw-Hill, 1991.

References
13

The following chart contains manufacturer-reported bleed rates. Actual bleed

rates have been included whenever possible. Discrepancies occur due to a

variety of reasons, including: 

★ Maintenance. 

★ Operating conditions. 

★ Manufacturer vs. operating assumptions. 

It is important to note that manufacturer information has not been verified by

any third party and there may be large differences between manufacturerreported bleed rates and those found during operations. Until a full set of

information is available, companies should be careful to compare bleed rates

in standard units (CFH) when comparing manufacturers and models. During

this study we found that manufacturers reported information in a wide range

of different units and operating assumptions. 

Gas Bleed Rate for Various Pneumatic Devices

Consumption Rate (CFH)

Controller Model Type Manufacturer Field Data

Data (where available)

High-Bleed Pneumatic Devices

**Fisher 4100 Series Pressure controller (large 35

orifice)

**Fisher 2500 Series Liquid-level controllers 10-34 44-72

(P.B. in mid range)

*Invalco AE-155 Liquid-level controller 44-63

*Moore Products – Positioner 42

Model 750P

*Invalco CT Series Liquid-level controllers 40 34-87

**Fisher 4150/4160K Pressure controller (P.B. 0 2.5-29

or 10)

**Fisher 546 Transducer 21

**Fisher 3620J Electro-pneumatic positioner 18.2

Foxboro 43AP Pressure controller 18

**Fisher 3582i Electro-pneumatic positioner 17.2

**Fisher 4100 Series Pressure controller (small 15

orifice)

**Fisher DVC 6000 Electro-pneumatic positioner 14

**Fisher 846 Transducer 12

**Fisher 4160 Pressure controller (P.B. 0.5) 10-34

**Fisher 2506 Receiver controller (P.B.0.5) 10

**Fisher DVC 5000 Electro-pneumatic positioner 10

**Masoneilan 4700E Positioners 9

**Fisher 3661 Electro-pneumatic positioner 8.8

Appendix A
14

**Fisher 646 Transducer 7.8

**Fisher 3660 Pneumatic positioner 6

**ITT Barton 335P Pressure controller 6

*Ametek Series 40 Pressure controllers 6

Low or No-Bleed Pneumatic Devices

**Masoneilan SV Positioners 4

**Fisher 4195 Series Pressure controllers 3.5

**ITT Barton 273A Pressure transmitter 3

**ITT Barton 274A Pressure transmitter 3

**ITT Barton 284B Pressure transmitter 3

**ITT Barton 285B Pressure transmitter 3

**Bristol Babcock Transmitter 3

Series 5457-70F

**Bristol Babcock Liquid-level controllers 3

Series 5453-Model 

624-II

**Bristol Babcock Pressure controllers 3

Series 5453-Model 10F

**Bristol Babcock Pressure controllers 3

Series 5455 Model 

624-III

**ITT Barton 358 Pressure controller 1.8

**ITT Barton 359 Pressure controller 1.8 1.8

**Fisher 3610J Pneumatic positioner 16

**Bristol Babcock Recording pneumatic <6

Series 502 A/D controllers

**Fisher 4660 High-low pressure pilot <5

**Bristol Babcock Transducers 0.42

Series 9110-00A

Fisher 2100 Series Liquid-level controllers 1

**Fisher 2680 Liquid level controllers <1

*Norriseal 1001 (A) Liquid-level controller 0.2 0.2

(snap)

*Norriseal 1001 (A) Liquid-level controller 0 0

(‘Envirosave’)

*Norriseal 1001 (A) Liquid-level controller 0.007 0.007

(throttle)

**Becker VRP-B-CH Double-acting pilot pressure 0-10

control system (replaces 

controllers and positioners)

**Becker HPP-5 Pneumatic positioner 0-10

(Double Acting)

**Becker EFP-2.0 Electro-pneumatic positioner 0

**Becker VRP-SB Single-acting pilot pressure 0

control system (replaces 

controllers and positioners)
15

**Becker VRP-SB GAP Replaces pneumatic “gap” 0

Controller type controllers

**Becker VRP-SB-PID Single-acting pilot pressure 0

Controller control system specifically 

designed for power plant type 

feeds (replaces controllers 

and positioners)

**Becker VRP-SB-CH Single-acting pilot pressure 0

control system (replaces 

controllers and positioners)

**Becker HPP-SB Pneumatic positioner 0

(Single Acting)

Actuator Model Size Manufacturer Data Field Data

*Shafer RV-Series 33” x 32” 1,084

Rotary Vane Valve 36” x 26” 768

Actuators 26” x 22” 469

25” x 16” 323

20” x 16” 201

16.5” x 16” 128

14.5” x 14” 86

12.5” x 12” 49

12” x 9” 22

11” x 10” 32

9” x 7” 12

8” x 6.5” 8

6.5” x 3.5” 6

5” x 3” 6

Actuator Model Size Number of Number of 

Snap-acting Throttling 

Strokes per CF Strokes per CF

**Fisher Valve 20 21 39

Actuators

**Fisher Valve 30 12 22

Actuators

**Fisher Valve 34/40 6 10

Actuators

**Fisher Valve 45/50 3 5

Actuators

**Fisher Valve 46/50 2 3

Actuators

* Last updated in 1996.

** Last updated in 2001.
16

Controllers Compatible with MIZER Retrofits

Type Brand/model Number

Liquid-level controllers C.E. Invalco – 215, 402, AE-155

Norriseal – 1001, 1001A

Pressure controllers Norriseal - 4300

Suggested Retail Prices for Various Brand Low-Bleed Pneumatic Devices

(Estimates Based on Best Information Available at Time of Publication)

Brand/Model Price per Device

**ITT Barton 335P (pressure controller) $920

**ITT Barton 273A (pressure transmitter) $1,010

**ITT Barton 274A (pressure transmitter) $1,385

**ITT Barton 284B (pressure transmitter) $1,605

**ITT Barton 285B (pressure transmitter) $1,990

**ITT Barton 340E (recording pressure controller) $1,400

**ITT Barton 338E (recorder controller) $2,800

**Ametek Series 40 (pressure controllers) $1,100 (average cost)

**Becker VRP-B-CH $1,575.00

**Becker HPP-5 $1,675.00

**Becker VRP-SB $1,575.00-$2,000.00

**Becker VRP-SB-CH-PID $2,075.00

**Becker VRP-SB-CH $1,575.00

**Becker HPP-SB $1,675.00

**Mizer Retrofit Kits $400-$600

**Fisher 67AFR (airset regulators) $80

**Fisher 2680 (liquid-level controllers) $380

**Fisher 4195 (pressure controllers) $1,340

**Bristol Babcock Series 9110-00A (transducers) $1,535-$1,550

**Bristol Babcock Series 5453 (controllers) $1,540

**Bristol Babcock Series 5453 40 G (temperature controllers) $3,500

**Bristol Babcock Series 5457-624 II (controllers) $3,140

**Bristol Babcock Series 502 A/D (recording controllers) $3,000

**Bristol Babcock Series 5455-624 III (pressure controllers) $1,135

**Bristol Babcock Series 5453-624 II (liquid level controllers) $2,345

**Bristol Babcock Series 5453-10F (pressure controllers) $1,440

* Last updated in 1996.

** Last updated in 2001.

Appendix B
17

United States

Environmental Protection Agency

Air and Radiation (6202J)

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20460

October 2006