EPA-4SO/2-77-025
October 1977
(OAQPS NO. 1.2-081)
                   GUIDELINE SERIES
        CONTROL OF REFINERY
VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEMS,
   WASTEWATER SEPARATORS
             AND PROCESS UNIT
                  TURNAROUNDS
  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
      Office of Air and Waste Management
    Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                                EPA-450/2-77-025
                              (OAQPS NO. 1.2-081)
   CONTROL OF REFINERY VACUUM
PRODUCING SYSTEMS, WASTEWATER
      SEPARATORS AND PROCESS
           UNIT TURNAROUNDS
             Emissions Standards and Engineering Division
                Chemical and Petroleum Branch
            U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               Office of Air and Waste Management
             Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
             Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
                     October 1977

-------
                   OAQPS GUIDELINE SERIES

The guideline series of reports is being issued by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to provide information to state and local
air pollution control agencies;  for example,  to provide guidance on the
acquisition and processing of air quality data and on the planning and
analysis requisite for the maintenance of air quality.  Reports published in
tnis series will be available - as supplies permit - from the Library Services
Office (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a
nominal fee, from the National  Technical Information Service,  5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
                       Publication No. EPA-450/2-77-025
                              (OAQPS No. 1.2-081)
                               11

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                     Page
Chapter 1.0  Introduction	  1-1
        1.1  Need to Regulate Petroleum Refineries	  1-1
        1.2  Sources and Controls of Hydrocarbons from Refineries  ..  1-2
        1,3  Regula tory Approach	  1-3
Chapter 2.0  Sources and Types of Emissions	,	  2-1
        2.1  Vacuum Producing Systems 	  2-1
        2.2  Wastewater Separators	  2-6
        2.3  Process Unit Turnarounds 	  2-7
        2.4  References 	  2-9
Chapter 3.0  Emission Control Techniques	  3-1
        3.1  Vacuum Producing Systems 	  3-1
        3.2  Wastewater Separators		  3-1
        3.3  Process Unit Turnaround	  3-2
        3.4  References	< 3-5
Chapter 4.0  Cost Analysis	  4-1
        4.1  Introduction 	  4-1
        4.2  Control of Emissions from Vacuum Producing Systems  	  4-5
        4.3  Control of Emissions from Wastewater Separators  	  4-11
        4.4  Control of Emissions from Process Unit Turnarounds  	  4-11
        4.5  Cost Effectiveness	  4-13
        4.6  References 	  4-15

-------
                                                                      Page
Chapter 5,0  Effects of Applying the Technology 	   5-1

        5.1  Impact of Control Techniques on Volatile Organic
             Compound Emissions	   5-1

        5.2  Other Environmental Impacts 	   5-2

        5.3  Energy Impact 	   5-2

        5.4  Summary 	   5-4

        5. 5  References	   5-4

Chapter 6.0  Enforcement Aspects	,	   6-1

        6.1  Affected Facility	   6-1

        6.2  Format of Regulation 	   6-1

        6.3  Compl iance and Monitoring	    6-2
                                    IV

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES

                                                               Page    Page

Table 2-1  Typical Vacuum Jet Non-Condensable Hydrocarbon Vapor
           Concentration	  2-3

Table 4-1  Technical Parameters Used In Developing Control
           Costs	  4-3

Table 4-2  Cost Parameters Used in Computing Annualized Costs  	  4-7

Table 4-3  Control Cost Estimates For Model Existing Petroleum
           Refinery Emission Sources 	  4-10

Table 5-1  Volatile Organic Compound Emission Reduction	  5-3

-------
                            LIST OF FIGURES


                                                                       Page
Figure 2-1  Vacuum Producing System Utilizing a Two Stage Contact
            (Barometric) Condenser 	  2-4

Figure 2-2  Vacuum Producing System Utilizing Booster Ejector For
            Low-Vacuum Systems	  2-5

Figure 3-1  Corrugated Plate Interceptor	  3-3

Figure 3-2  API Separator With Floating Roof Cover 	  3-3
                                     VI

-------
                  ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVERSION FACTORS

      EPA policy is to express all measurements in agency documents in

metric units.  Listed b^lo., are abbreviations and conversion factors

for British equivalents of metric units-
Abbreviations

kg  -  kilogram
m   -  cubic meter
m   -  square meter
m ton  -  metric ton
Mg  -  megagram
     3 ^
kg/10 ,11°  -  kilograms per thousand cubic
                                   meters
m /day  -  cubic meters per day
                       Conversion  Factor

                       kg  X  2.2 =  pound  (Ib)
                       Ib  X  0.45 =  kg

                       m3  X  0.16 =  barrel  (bbl)

                       bbl  X 6.29  =  m3

                       m2  X  10.8  =   square feet (ft2)

                       ft2 X 0.093 = m2

                       m ton X  1.1  =  ton
                       ton X 0.91  =  m ton

                       Mg   = m ton

                       kg/103m3 X  0.35 = lb/103bbl

                       lb/103bbl X 2.86 =  kg/103m3

                       m3/day X 0.16  =  bbl/day

                       bbl/day  X 6.29 =  m3/day
Frequently used measurements in this document
15,900 m/day

  5560 m3/day

    30.5 m

    61 m
100,000 bbl/day

 35,000 bbl/day

    100 ft

    200 ft
                                                   122 m

                                                   9.3m2

                                                   465m2

                                                 $81.80/nT
 400 ft

 100 ft2

5000 ft 2

$13.00/bbl
                                     vii

-------
                             1.0  INTRODUCTION

      This document is related to the control of volatile organic
compounds (VOC) from petroleum refineries.  The specific sources discussed
herein are vacuum producing systems, wastewater separators, and process
unit turnarounds, (i.e. shutdown, repair or inspection and start UD of a
process unit). A program for monitoring and maintenance of leaks from
pumps, compressors, valves, etc. will be discussed in a future document.
The VOC emitted from these sources are primarily C~ through Cfi paraffins
and olefins which are photochemically reactive (precursors of oxidants).

1.1   NEED TO REGULATE PETROLEUM REFINERIES
      Many State or local  regulations governing petroleum refineries
require the same controls outlined  in this document.  Some areas still
exist, however, where these sources  are not controlled.  Estimated annual
nationwide emissions from vacuum producing systems, wastewater separators,
and process unit turnarounds are currently 730,000 metric tons.  This
represents 3.8 percent of total  VOC  emissions from stationary sources.
      Control  techniques guidelines  are being prepared for those
industries that emit significant quantities of air pollutants in areas
of the country where National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are
not being attained.  Petroleum refineries are a significant source of
VOC and tend to be concentrated  in areas where the oxidant NAAQS are
likely to be exceeded.
                                   1-1

-------
1.2   SOURCES MO CONTROLS OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS FROM REFINERIES
      Volatile organic compounds are emitted to the atmosphere from
vacuum producing systems by direct venting of non-condensable streams.
These VOC are controlled by venting to a firebox in many existing
refineries.  The installed capital cost of controlling vacuum pro-
ducing systems in a refinery that processes 15,900 cubic meters of
crude oil per day is estimated to be $23,700 when surface condensers or
vacuum pumps are used and $49,600 when contact condensers are used.
Due to the value of the recovered product, controlling vacuum producing
systems results in a credit of $115 or $106 per metric ton of emission
reduction, respectively, for the two systems.
      VOC are also emitted from uncovered wastewater separators.   Large
reductions in hydrocarbon emissions can be accomplished through covering
these separators.  The capital cost of covering a 465 square meter
forebay and separator at a 15,900 cubic meter per day refinery is
$62,800.  Again due to the value of the product recovered, the
operator realizes a net credit of $100 for each metric ton of emission
reduced.
      When a process unit is depressurized during a turnaround, VOC
can be emitted to atmosphere.  These emissions can be controlled by
piping the VOC to a flare or to the fuel gas system.  The capital cost
for piping is approximately $97,600 for a 15,900 cubic meter per day
refinery.  If no hydrocarbons are recovered (all flared), the cost
effectiveness is a cost of $5.00 per metric ton of emission reduction.
However, if the hydrocarbons are recovered as fuel gas, a net credit
of $100 per metric ton of emission reduction is realized by the operator,
                               1-2

-------
1.3   REGULATORY APPROACH
      Regulations for vacuum producing systems and wastewater separators
should be written in terms of equipment specifications and regulations
for process unit turnarounds should be written in terms of operating
procedures.  It is suggested that non-condensables from vacuum producing  systems
should be combusted in a firebox and the wastewater separators be  covered.
Also, all process units should be depressurized to a flare, fuel  gas
system or to some other combustion device before being opened for inspection
or maintenance.  These controls represent the presumptive norm that can
be achieved through the application of reasonably available control
technology (RACT).  Reasonably available control technology is defined
as the lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting
by the application of control technology that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility.  It may require
technology that has been applied to similar, but not necessarily identical
source categories.  It is not intended that extensive research and
development be conducted before a given control technology can be applied to
the source.  This does not, however, preclude requiring a short-term
evaluation program to permit the application of a given technology to a
particular source.  This latter effort is an appropriate technology-forging
aspect of RACT.
                                  1-3

-------
            2.0  SOURCES AND TYPES OF EMISSIONS





      Petroleum refining is the third largest industry in the United



States and represents a potential  volatile organic compound (VOC) emission



problem by virtue of the large quantities of petroleum liquid refined and



the intricacy of the refining process.   The major point sources of VOC



emissions from petroleum refineries considered in this document



include (1) vacuum producing systems, (2) wastewater separators, and



(3) process unit turnarounds.  The emissions from these sources will vary



from one petroleum refinery to another depending upon such factors as



refinery size and age, crude type, processing complexity, application



of control measures, and degree of maintenance.   Emissions from other



potential point sources of VOC emissions such as process heaters and



boilers, fluid catalytic cracker regenerators, sulfur plants, equipment



leaks, and storage tanks are not addressed.





2.1   VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEMS



      The vacuum producing systems attendant to vacuum distillation



and other refinery processes are potential sources of atmospheric



emissions of VOC.  Three types of vacuum producing systems may be used



for refinery distillation:



         Steam ejectors with contact condensers.



         Steam ejectors with surface condensers.



         Mechanical vacuum pumps,



                                   2-1

-------
Vacuum is created within a vacuum producing system by removal  of

non-condensable gases and process steam by steam jet ejectors.   Non-

condensables consist primarily of (1) light ends from incomplete

fractionation of the feed, (2) gases produced by cracking or overheating

of the feedstock, and (3) air dissolved in charge stock and in  water used

in generating steam.  A typical composition of the non-condensable stream

is 75 percent hydrocarbons, 9 percent hydrogen sulfide, 5 percent carbon

monoxide, 3 percent hydrogen and 8 percent air.   The uncontrolled hydro-

carbon emission factor for all types of vacuum producing devices is 170
                                          O O                         p
kilograms per thousand cubic meters (kg/10 m ) of refinery throughput.

The composition of the hydrocarbons is shown in Table 2-1.  It  can be

seen that about 85 weight percent or 145 kg/10 m  of these emissions

are VOC.

2.1.1  Steam Ejectors with Contact Condensers

      Direct contact or barometric condensers are used for maintaining

a vacuum by condensing the  steam used in the ejector jet plus steam removed

from the distillation column.  In the contact condenser, condensable

VOC and steam from the vacuum still and the jet ejectors are condensed

by intimately mixing with cold water.   The non-condensable VOC  is

frequently discharged to the atmosphere.   A two stage steam jet ejector

is shown in Figure 2-1 and a three stage ejector with a booster is shown in

Figure 2-2.  These are typical of vacuum producing systems used in existing

refineries.

                                 2-2

-------
         Table 2-1.  TYPICAL VACUUM JET O-CONDENSABLE HYDROCARBON
                                  VAPOR CCNCENTRATION3
Hydrocarbon
Methane*
Ethane*
Ethyl ene
Propane**
Butanes
Butenes
Pentanes
Pentenes
Hexanes
Hexenes
Benzene
Heptenes
Volume
Percent
23.0
10.5
0.8
12.5
26.1
3.2
16.5
4.4
1.9
0.8
0.2
0.1
Weight
Percent
7.8
6.7
0.5
11.7
32.3
3.8
25.3
6.6
3.5
1.4
0.3
0.1
                             100
100
*   Non-reactive hydrocarbons
**  Low reactive hydrocarbons
                                   ?_'

-------
Figure 2-1.  VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEM UTILIZING A TWO STAGE CONTACT

               (BAROMETRIC) CONDENSER4
                WATER
        INCOMING
   NONCONDENSABLES
     AND PROCESS
        STEAM
            BAROMETRIC LEG
                              BAROMETRIC
                              CONDENSERS
                                         	m STEAM
                                                    i
                                                   JL 2nd STAGE
                                                   t
                                             TO ATMOSPHERE
                                                OR TO A
                                             CONDENSER FOR
                                               JET STEAM
                                 HOT WELL
                           2-4

-------
           Figure 2-2.  VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEM UTILIZING BOOSTER

                         EJECTOR FOR LOW-VACUUM SYSTEMS5
JET STEAM
CONDENSER WATER
        INCOMING
    NONCONDENSABLES
   AND PROCESS STEAM
                   BAROMETRIC LEG
                                   H  HOT WELL
                                                                   3rd STAGE
                                            I
                                      TO ATMOSPHERE
                                      OR A CONDENSER
                                       OR TO OTHER
                                      NONCONDENSING
                                         STAGES
                                    2-5

-------
2.1.2  Steam Ejectors with Surface Condensers



      Modern refiners favor the use of surface condensers instead of



contact condensers.  In a surface condenser, non-condensables and



process steam from the vacuum still, mixed with steam from the jets, are



condensed by cooling water in tube heat exchangers and thus do not come



in contact with cooling water.  This is a major advantage since it reduces



by twenty-five fold the quantity of emulsified wastewater that must be



treated.   A disadvantage of surface condensers is their greater initial



investment and maintenance expense for the heat exchangers and additional



cooling tower capacity necessary for the cooling water.



2.1.3  Mechanical Vacuum Pumps



      Steam jet have been traditionally favored over vacuum pumps.



Recently, however, due to higher energy costs for generating-steam, and



cost for disposing of wastewater from contact condensers, vacuum pumps



are being used.   In addition to energy savings, vacuum pumps have greatly



reduced cooling tower and/or wastewater treatment requirements compared



to steam ejector systems.  Aside from the stripping steam, the ejected



stream is essentially all hydrocarbon so it can be vented through a small



condenser before being combusted in a flare or sent to the refinery fuel



gas system.





2.2   WASTEWATER SEPARATORS



      Contaminated wastewater originates from several sources in



petroleum refineries including, but not limited to, leaks, spills, pump



and compressor seal cooling and flushing, sampling, equipment cleaning,



                                   2-6

-------
and rain runoff.  Contaminated wastewater is collected in the process



drain system and directed to the refinery treatment system where oil



is skimmed in a separator and the wastewater undergoes additional



treatment as required.



      Refinery drains and treatment facilities are a source of emissions



due to evaporation of VOC contained in wastewate^.   VOC will  be emitted



wherever wastewater is exposed to the atmosphere.  As such, emission points



include open drains and drainage ditches, manholes, sewer outfalls, and



surfaces of forebays, separators and treatment ponds.   Due to the



safety hazards associated with hydrocarbon-air Fixtures in refinery



atmospheres, current refinery practice is to seal sewer openings and use



liquid traps downstream of process drains, thus minimizing VOC emissions

                                           q

from drains and sewers within the refinery.   The emission factor


                                      33                         9
for wastewater separators is 570 kg/10 m  of wastewater processed.    All



of these emissions are assumed to be reactive.





2.3   PROCESS UNIT TURNAROUNDS



      Refinery units  such as reactors, fractiorators, etc. are periodically



shut down and emptied for internal inspection end maintenance.  The process



of unit shutdown, repair or  inspection and start-up is termed a unit



turnaround.   Purging the contents of a vessel to provide a safe



interior atmosphere for workmen  is termed a vessel blowdown.  In a  typical



process unit turnaround liquid contents are pulped from  the vessel  to  some



available storage facility.  The  vessel is then depressurized, flushed



with water, steam, or nitroqen and ventilated.  Depending on  the refinery



                                  2-7

-------
configuration, vapor content of the vessel  may be vented to fuel  gas
system, flared, or released directly to atmosphere.   When vapors  are
released directly to atmosphere, it is through a blowdown stack which is
usually remotely located to ensure that combustible  mixtures will not
be released within the refinery.  The emission factor for refinery process
unit turnaround is 860 kg/10 m  of refinery throughput.
                                   2-8

-------
2.4   REFERENCES



      1.  Personal communication be::«een R. Fritz, Exxon Research and



Engineering, Florham Park, New Jerse-,and Monsanto Research Corporation,



May 3, 1976,



      2.  "Revision of Evaporative -. rrocarbon Emission Factors,"



EPA Report No. 450/3-76-039, Radian lorporation, August 1976.



      3.  "Screening Study for Vacua- Distillation Units in Petroleum



Refineries," EPA Report No. 450/3-7?-330, Monsanto Research Corporation,



December 1976.



      4.  Ibid.



      5.  Ibid.



      6.  "A Program to Investigate Carious Factors in Refinery Siting,"



Council  on Environmental Quality anc the Environmental Protection Agency,



Radian Corporation, July 1974.



      7.  Monroe, E.S., "Vacuum Pumcj Can Conserve Energy."  The Oil



and Gas  Journal, February 3, 1975.



      8.  Letter with attachments fr:m R. E. Van Ingen, Shell Oil



Company  to Don R. Goodwin, EPA.  Je^ary 10, 1977.



      9.  "Emissions to the Atmosphe-e From Eight Miscellaneous Sources



in Oil Refineries."  Joint District. redera1 and State Project for the



Evaluation of Refinery Emissions.  :fjort No. 8, June 1958.



     10.  "Revision of Evaporative Emission Factors," op. cit.
                                   2-9

-------
                 3.0  EMISSION CONTROL TECHNIQUES



     This chapter describes existing technology for control of volatile


organic compound (VOC) emissions from vacuum producing systems, wastewater


separators, and process unit turnarounds.  The effect these controls have


on the emission of other air pollutants, water pollution, solid waste and


energy is discussed in Chapter 5, Effects of Applying the Technology.



3.1   VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEMS


      Steam ejectors with contact condensers, steam ejectors with


surface condensers, and mechanical vacuum pumps all discharge a stream


of non-condensable VOC while generating the vacuum.  Steam ejectors


with contact condensers also have potential VOC emissions from their


hot wells.  VOC emissions from vacuum producing systems can be prevented


by piping the non-condensable vapors to an appropriate firebox, incinerator,,


or (if spare compressor capability is available) compressing the vapors


and adding them to refinery fuel  gas.   The hot wells associated with

                                                             2
contact condensers can be covered and the vapors incinerated.   Controlling


vacuum producing systems in this manner will  result in negligible emissions


of hydrocarbons from this source.   Such systems are now in commercial


operation and have been retrofitted in existing refineries.



3.2  WASTEWATER SEPARATORS


     Reasonable control of VOC emissions from wastewater separators consists


of covering the forebays and separator sections thus minimizing the amount 01
                                 3-1

-------
oily water exposed to atmosphere.  Commercially operating systems
include (1) a solid cover with all openings sealed totally enclosing
the compartment liquid contents and (2) a floating pontoon or double-
deck type cover, equipped with closure seals to enclose any space
between the cover's edge and compartment wall.   Also, any gauging
and sampling device in the compartment cover can be designed to provide
a projection into tha liquid surface to prevent VOC from escaping.
The sampling device can also be equipped with a cover or lid that is
in a closed position at all times except when the device is in actual
use.  Figure 3-1 shows a corrugated plate interceptor (CPI) wastewater
separator.  The CPI Is smaller than the API separator (Figure 3-2)  and
is especially effective when used in the processing unit area for initial
                     c
oil-water separation.    A CPI is inherently controlled by a fixed roof
cover.  Figure 3-2 shows an API wastewater separator with a floating
roof cover.  The emission factor for wastewater systems controlled by
                                              33                        6
covering the forebay and separator is 30 kg/10 m  of refinery throughput.

3.3  PROCESS UNIT TURNAROUND
     As stated in Chapter 2 a typical process unit turnaround would
include pumping the liquid contents to storage, purging the vapors  by
depresburizing, flushing the remaining vapors with water, steam or
nitrogen, and ventilating the vessel so workmen can enter.  The major
potential source of VOC emissions is depressurizing the vapors to the
atmosphere.  After t^e vapors pass through a knockout pot to remove
the condensable hydrocarbons, the vapors can be either added to the
fuel gas system, flared, or directly vented to atmosphere.  Atmospheric
emissions will be greatly reduced if the vapors are combusted as fuel gas
                                3-2

-------
Figure  3.1  Corrugated  Plate Interceptor
                     LIGHT
                    COMPONENTS
                            HEAVY
                            OMPONENTS
 Figure 3.2   API Separator with Floating Roof Cover'
                                                8
                                      PUM
                                                 Lilt
                     3-3

-------
or flared until the pressure in the vessel is as close to atmospheric


pressure as practicably possible.   The exact pressure at which the vent


to the atmosphere is opened will depend on the pressure drop of the


disposal system.  Most refineries  should easily be able to depressurize


processing units to five psig or below before venting to the atmosphere.


Many refineries depressurize a vessel to almost atmospheric pressure


followed by steaming the vessel to the flare header before opening to


atmosphere.  '  '    In some refineries the hydrocarbon concentration

                                                                       19
is as low as 1 to 30 pe-vent before the vessel is vented to atmosphere.


The emission factor for controlling process unit turnaround by de-


pressurizing to flare is 15 kg/"0  m  of refinery throughput.
                                   3-4

-------
3.4   REFERENCES



      1.  Kinsey, R.H. Air Pollution Engineering Manual, 2nd Edition,



AP-40, EPA May 1973.



      2,  Letter with Enclosures from B.A. McCrodden, Standard Oil



Company of Ohio, to J. L, Delaney, Monsanto Research Corporation,



June 16, 1976.



      3.  "Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors,"



EPA Report No, 450/3-76-039, Radian Corporation, August 1976.



      4.  Emissions to the Atmosphere from Eight Miscellaneous



Sources in Of! Refineries," Joint District, Federal and State



Project for the Evaluation of Refinery Emissions.  Report No. 8.



June 1958,



      5.  Trip Report on Visit to Four New Orleans, Louisiana



Petroleum Refineries from Kent C. Hustvedt to James F. Durham, EPA,



dated December 8, 1976.



      6.  "Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors,"



op. cit.



      7.  "Evaluation of Pollution Potential of Proposed Hampton



Roads Energy Company Refinery, Portsmouth, Virginia," Pacific



Environmental  Sciences, Inc., EPA Report No. 450/3-76-037, November 1S'76.



      8.  Kinsey, R.H. op. cit.



      9.  Letter with attachments from Carleton B, Scott, Union Oi"



Company of California, to Don R. Goodwin, EPA, December 3, 1976.
                              3-5

-------
     10.  Letter with attachments from L. Kronenberger, Exxon Company,



U.S.A.,to Don R. Goodwin, EPA, February 2, 1977.



     11.  Letter with attachments from I.H.  Gilman, Standard Oil



Company of California, to Don R.  Goodwin, EPA, November 30, 1976.



     12.  Letter with attachments from R. E.  Van Ingen, Shell Oil



Company, to Don R. Goodwin, EPA,  January 10,  1977.



     13.  "Revision of Evaporative Hydrocarbon Emission Factors,"



op. cit.
                             3-6

-------
                           4.0 COST ANALYSIS
4.1  INTRODUCTION
4.1.1  Purpose
     The purpose of this chapter is to present estir.:ted costs for
control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from refinery
sources at existing petroleum refineries.
4.1.2  Scope
     Estimates of capital and annualized costs are presented for
controlling emissions from three existing refinery sources (facil ities)--
vacuum producing systems, waste water separators, and process unit
turnarounds.  The two emission control  techniques used to control the
three sources are (1) covers for wastewater separators and (2) piping
to firebox(es) or flare header system(s) for emissions from vacuum
producing systems and process unit turnarounds.  Control costs are
developed for an existing medium size model petroleji refinery with
throughput of 15,900 m^/day.  Cost effectiveness measures, such as
annual ized costs/credits perMg of controlled emissions, are shown for
the three facilities.
4.1.3  Use of_ Model Emission Sources
     Petroleum refineries vary considerably as to s~:e, configuration
and age of facilities, product mix, and degree of control.  Because of
the difficulties of typifying refinery configurations, this cost analysis
is based on a medium size model refinery rather than on a series of
typical refineries.

                                  4-1

-------
     Table 4-1 lists the technical parameters used for the three


model emission sources—vacuum producing systems, wastewater separators,


and process unit turnarounds.   Parameters are shown for two types of


vacuum producing systems—those using surface condensers or mechanical


vacuum pumps and those using contact (barometric) condensers.   The


parameters were selected as being representative of existing facilities

                                                                      2
based on information from an American Petroleum Institute oublication,


petroleum refineries, equipment vendors, a major refinery contractor,3


and a leading oil industry journal survey.   Although model point source


control costs may differ, sometimes appreciably, with actual costs


incurred, they are the most useful means of determining and comparing


emission control costs.


4.1.4  Bases for Capital and Annualized Cost Estimates


     Capital cost estimates represent the total investment required


to purchase and install a particular control system.  Cost estimates


were obtained from petroleum refineries, equipment vendors and a major


refinery contractor.  Retrofit installations are assumed.  Costs for


research and development, production losses during installation and


start-up, and other highly variable costs are not included in the


estimate^.  All capital costs  reflect second quarter 1977 dollars.


     Annualized control cost estimates include operating labor, maintenance,


utilities, credits for petroleum recovery, and annualized capital charges.


Credits for petroleum recovery have been calculated using EPA emission


factors for the emission sources.  For the purposes of recovery credits,


all emissions are considered to be equivalent to light crude oil.
                                   4-2

-------
 II.
Ill
      Table 4-1.  TECHNICAL PARAMETERS USED IN
                  DEVELOPING CONTROL COSTS9


Refinery Throughput:

15,900 m3/day

VOC Emission Factors:
Before
Control
(Kg/lOV)
145
570
860
Control
Efficiency
(%)
100
95
98
After
Control
(Kg/103mJ)
0
30
15
 IV.
Vacuum Producing Systems:

Wastewater Separators:

Process Unit Turnarounds:

Recovered Emissions Factors



Vacuum Producing Systems;k

Wastewater Separators:

Process Unit Turnarounds:0



Operating Factor:

   365 days per year.

Vacuum Producing Systems Using either Surface Condensers p_r_
Mechanical Vacuum Pumps:

VPS Throughput:6  5,560 m3/day

Piping:           61.0 m length

Valves:           6 plug type

Flame Arrestor:   One metal gauze type
                                     Recovered  Petroleum

                                     170  Kg/103m3

                                     540  Kg/103m3

                                       0  Kg/103m3  (none)

                                  or 845  Kg/103m3  (all)
                                  4-3

-------
  VI-  Vacuum Producing Systems Using Contact (Barometric)  Condensers
          VPS Throughput:6         5,560 m3/day
          Piping:                  122.0 m length
          Valves:                  12 plug type
          Flame Arresters:         2 metal gauze  type
          Hot well cover area:  *   9.3 m2
 VII.  Wa s t ewa t e r Se p a ra to r Are a:^
          465 m2
 III. Process Unit Turnarounds:
          Number of Process Units:    10
          Piping:                     30.5 m length  per unit
          Valves:                     2 plug type per  unit
  1^-  Diameters of Piping, Valves and Flare Arrestors:"
          5.1 cm to 20.3 cm
 Except as noted, parameter values are taken from Chapters  1,2,3 and 5.
 It is assumed that all  of the emissions (170 Kg per 103m3  of refinery
 throughput) will be recovered, but that only the reactive  emissions
 (85 weight percent of the total  or 145 Kg per 103m3 of throughput)  will
 be counted as controlled emissions.
 Recovering none or all  of the emissions corresponds to the minimum or
 maximum amounts possible; the actual  amount recovered by a refinery
 may be anywhere between these values.
 EPA estimate.
 Based on average size of VPS for U.S. refineries per Reference 4.
 References 5 and 6.
-Reference 2.
References 3,7 and 8,
                                   4-4

-------
     The annualized capital charges are sub-divided into capital

recovery costs  (depreciation and interest costs) and costs for property

taxes, insurance and administration.  Depreciation and interest costs

have been computed using a capital recovery factor based on a 10 year

depreciation life of the control equipment and an interest rate of 10%

per annum.  Costs for property taxes, insurance and administration are

computed at 4% of the capital costs.  All annualized costs are for one

year periods commencing with the second quarter of 1977.


4.2  CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM VACUUM PRODUCING SYSTEMS


4-2.1  Mode], Cost Parameters

     The recommended technique for vacuum producing systems (VPS) is

by piping controlled VQC emissions to a firebox, (see section 3.1).

Table 4-2 presents cost parameters for VPS control equipment and

includes cost data for four typical diameters and two common materials

of piping, valves and flame arresters.  Piping cost parameters are

given for 30.5m lengths so that actual lengths needed by refineries may

be estimated in multiples of 30.5 m.  These parameters are based on

data from petroleum refineries^'"5'<»12,13 equipment vendors ''

                           •3 Q
a major refinery contractor *  and EPA estimates.

4.2.2  Control  Costs

     Table 4-3 shows the estimated costs of controlling VOC emissions

from two types of vacuum producing systems--VPS using contact (barometric)

condensers and VPS using surface condensers or mechanical vacuum pumps.

The former VPS control  equipment consists of two pipe lines (with

valves, flame arrestor and by-pass) and a hot well cover.  The latter


                                    4-5

-------
VPS control equipment is only one pipe line (with valves, flame



arrester and by-pass).  This cost analysis assumes that all  of the



emissions will be recovered, but that only the reactive emissions



will be counted as controlled emissions.   Thus, the petroleum credit



is based on recovering 170 Kg of emissions per 103p3 of refinery



throughput while the controlled emissions is based on 145 Kg of emissions



per lOV of refinery throughput (85 weight percent of total emissions).



It is also assumed that existing refineries have all other equipment



needed to control emissions, such as compressors, condensers, hot



wells, accumulators, Dumps and etc.  Thus, the costs of this equipment



are not included in the analysis.



     From Table 4-3, it is seen that the control technique for VPS



using surface condensers or mechanical vacuum pumps has an estimated



capital cost of $23,700, but should result in a net annualized credit




(savings) of about $96,700 for a medium sized refinery.   The cor-



responding estimates for VPS using contact (barometric)  condensers are



$51,600 and $89,000.   The credits are due to the value of the recovered



petroleum.   These cost estimates are based on the use of 15.2 cm diameter



304 stainless steel  piping, 316 stainless steel  plug valves, 316 stainless



steel  metal  gauze flame arresters and 6.3 mm plate 304 stainless steel



hot well  covers.   Stainless steel  control devices are used because of the



potential  corrosive nature of the hydrocarbon streams.
                                   4-6

-------
Table 4-2.  COST PARAMETERS USED IN COMPUTING ANNUALIZED COSTS
    I.   Recovered Petrol earn Value:a
           $8l.80/m3
   II.   Piping
        Installed Capital  Cost per 30.5m:
           Material                            Diameter
                                 5.1  cm    10.2 cm    15.2 cm    20.3 cm
           Carbon Steel           $1120     $1770      $2325      $2890
           304 Stainless  Steel   $2780     $5290      $7760      $10,470
        Annual Operating  and Maintenance Cost:0
           4% of Installed Capital  Cost
        Life:d  10 years
  III.   Plug Type Valves:
        Purchase Prices:6                      Diameter
          ASTM A 216-60
          316 Stainless Steel
        Installation Cost:f
           10 hr @ $!3.00/hr
        Annual  Operating and Maintenance Cost:d
           15% of Installed Capital  Cost
        Life:6  10 years
5.1 cm
$125
$150
10.2 cm
$360
$450
15.2 cm
$675
$870
20.3 cm
$1200
$1410
                                  4-7

-------
IV.   Metal  Gauze F1ame Arrestors:

     Purchase Prices:9                          Diameter

                                       5.1 cm   10.2 cm   15.2 cm   20.3 cm

       Ductile iron  with 4.8mm
       stainless steel grid            $230     $550      $980      $1730

       316 stainless steel  with
       4.8mm stainless steel  grid      $550     $1280     $2030     $3830

     Installation Cost:^

       10 hr @ $13.00/hr

     Annual  Operating and Maintenance Cost: '9

       15% of Installed Capital Cost

     Life:9  10 years


 V.   Hot Well Covers: (9.3 m2 area)

     Installed Capital Cost:1"'"'1   $4,200

     Annual  Operating and Maintenance Cost:c

       4% of Installed Capital Cost

     Life:   10 years9


VI.   Wastewater Separator and Forebay Covers;

     Installed Capital Cost;J

       $135/m2

     Annual  Operating and Maintenance Cost:f

       10% of Installed Capital Cost

     Life:   10 years
 EPA estimate for light crude oil.
                                    4-8

-------
 References 3 and 9; based on  piping material cost plus labor
 cost of $15.00/hr for field welding and  $13.00/hr for erection,


 Referece 6.


 Reference 3.


eReference 7.


 EPA estimate.


^Reference 8.


 Reference 5.


1 Reference 10.


^References 11, 12 and 13.
                                  4-9

-------
                                     Table 4-3.  CONTROL COST ESTIMATES FOR MODEL EXISTING PETROLEUM REFINERY EMISSION SOURCES
                                                                    (Throughput:  15,900 m3/day)

Facility Size
ar.d
Control Devices
Installed Capital Cost
($000)
Annual Operating and
Maintenance Cost ($000)e
Annual i zed Capital
Charges ($000)f
Annual Recovered
Petroleum Credits
($000)
Net Annual! zed Cost/
(Credit) ($000)^
Controlled Emissions
(Mg/yr)i
Cost (Credit) per Mg
of Controlled Emis-
sions ($/Mg)J
Affected Emission Sources (Facilities)
Vacuum Producing Systems (VPS)
a
5560 m^/day throughput
61.0 m piping
6 valves
1 flame arrestor
23. 7C
1.9
4.8
(103.4)9
(96.7)
840
(115.10)
b
5560 m3/day throughput
122.0 m piping
12 valves
2 flame arresters
9.3m2 hotwell cover area
51. 6C
3.9
10.5
(103".4)g
(89.0)
840
(106.00)
Wastewater Separators
(WWS)
465m2 separator
and forebay area
62. 8d
6.3
12.7
(328. 7)9
(309.7)
3100
(99.90)
Vocess Unit Turnarounds
(PUT)
10 process units
30.5 m piping per unit
2 valves per unit
97. 6C
6.1
19.8
0.0k
25. 9^
4900
5.30k

Totals for the Control
of All Three
Emission Sources
VPSa+WWSJ-PUT
184.1
14.3
37.3
(432.1)1
(380. 5)1
8840
(43. OO)1
VPSb+WWS+PUT
212.0
16.3
43.0
(432. I)1
(372. 8)1
8840
(42. 20)1
 I
o
                      aVacuum Producing Systems using either surface condensers or mechanical vacuum pumps.
                      bVacuum Producing Systems using contact (barometric) condensers.
                      cUsing 15.2 cm diameter 304 stainless steel piping and 15.2 cm diameter 316 stainless steel plug valves; when required, using
                       15.2 cm diameter stainless steel metal gauze flame arrestor(s) and 6.3 mm 304 stainless steel plate for hotwell cover.

                      dProduct of cover area (465m2) and unit cost ($135/m2).
                      eP1ping, valves, flame arresters, hotwells covers and wastewater separator covers O&M costs are 4*, 15%, 15*, 4*, and 10*,
                       respectively, of Installed capital costs.
                      fCapital recovery costs (using capital recovery factor with 10* annual interest rate and 10 year equipment life) plus 4* of installed
                       capital costs for property taxes, insurance, and administration.

                      ^Reference 14.
                      ^Sum of annual operating and maintenance cost, annualized capital charges, and annual recovered petroleum credits.
                      1Product of (Throughput per day) x (Controlled emissions per throughput) x (365 days per year).

                      •^Net Annualized Cost/(Credit) divided by Controlled Emissions per year.
                      kThese values assume that none of the PUT emissions are recovered; however, 1f all PUT emissions are recovered then the Annual
                       Petroleum Credits would be approximately $514,300, the Net Annualized Credit would be about $488,400, and the Credit per Mg of
                       Controlled Emissions would be $99.70.
                      Hhese values assume that none of the PUT emissions are recovered; however, if all PUT emissions are recovered then the credits
                       (savings) will increase about $514,300; thus, the credits per Mg of Controlled Emissions will increase to approximately $101,20
                       and $100.40, respectively.

-------
4.3  CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM WASTEWATER SEPARATORS
4.3.1  Model Cost Parameters
     The recommended control  technique  consists of covering wastewater
separators and forebays  (see  Section  3.2).   Table 4-2 shows the cost
parameters for wastewater separator and forebay covers.   These parameters
                                                                  11 12 13
are based on data in section  114 letters from petroleum refineries'  '*
and EPA estimates.
4.3.2  Control Costs
     Table 4-3 presents  the estimated costs of controlling VOC emissions
from wastewater separators and forebays based on a cover area of 465 m2
for a medium size (15,900 m3/day) refinery.^  This cost analysis assumes
that the cover totally encloses the separator and forebay areas so that
all of the controlled emissions will  be captured.  Thus, the petroleum
credit is based on recovering 540 Kg  of emissions per 103m3 of throughput.
It is also assumed that existing refineries will have all other equip-
ment needed to recover petroleum from the controlled emissions.
     Although this control technique  has an estimated capital cost of
$62,800, it should result in  a net annualized credit (savings) of about
$309,700 for a medium size refinery.   This credit (savings) is due to
the value of the recovered petroleum.
4.4  CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM PROCESS UNIT TURNAROUNDS
4.4.1  Mode1 Cost Parameters
     The technique recommended for process unit turnarounds (PUT) is
to pipe the controlled emissions to flare header systems or to

                                4-11

-------
fireboxes (see Section  3.3).   Table 4-2 presents cost parameters
for PUT control  devices  including cost data of four sizes and two
different materials  of  piping and valves.   Piping cost data are given
in 30.5 m multiples.  These cost parameters are based on data from
petroleum refineries, equipment vendors, a major refinery contractor
and EPA estimates.
4,4.2  Control Costs
     The estimated  costs of controlling VOC emissions from ten process
units are shown in  Table 4-3.  Each process unit has 30.5 m of piping
and two valves.   Because of the potential  corrosiveness of the streams,
the cost estimates  are  based on using 15,2 cm diameter 304 stainless
steel piping and 316 stainless steel plug  valves.  This analysis assumes
that none of the controlled emissions will be captured; thus, there
are no oetroleum recovery credits.   However, some refineries already
have facilities for recovering the hydrocarbons; therefore, the credit
of recovering the emissions is also shown in Table 4-3.  Further, it
is assumed that existing refineries have all other equipment needed
to control emissions,  such as knockout pots, flare header systems and
etc.  Therefore, the only control costs are piping and  valve costs.
     The PUT control  method has an estimated capital cost of $97,600
and a net annualized cost of approximately $25,900 with no petroleum
recovery.  But, if  all  the emissions are recovered and are equivalent to
light crude oil, this control method should provide an annualized
credit (savings) of about $488,400 for a medium sized refinery.
                                 4-12

-------
4.5  COST EFFECTIVENESS



     The cost effectiveness  of controlling the three existing



refinery VOC sources is also shown in Table 4-3.   Control  of both



types of vacuum producing systems (with surface condensers or mechanical



vacuum pumps and with contact condensers) and wastewater separators



should result *n estimated credits (savings) of $115.10 per Mg, $106.00



per Mg, and $99.90 per Mg, respectively, of controlled emissions for



the model medium size refinery.  Another cost effective measure is that



the Net Annualized Credit is 4.1 times, 1.7 times and 4.9 times, respec-



tively, the Installed Capital Cost of the control devices.  Control of



process unit turnarounds is  estimated to cost $5.30 per Mg if the con-



trolled emissions are flared.  But, if all controlled emissions are



recovered as fuel, then estimated credits (savings) of $99.70 per Mg



should be obtained.   It should be noted that recovering none or all of



the PUT emissions correspond to the minimum or maximum amounts possible;



the actual amount recovered  by a refinery may be anywhere between these



amounts.



     Control of all  three VOC emission sources should result in net



annual credits (savings) regardless of the type of vacuum system con-



densers and whether or not controlled emissions are recovered from



process unit turnarounds (PUT).  However, it can be seen from Table 4-3



that the least cost effective control is for a refinery that uses contact



condensers and flares controlled emissions from PUT, while the most cost



effective control pertains to a refinery that uses surface condensers





                                4-13

-------
or mechanical vacuum pumps  and recovers all  PUT controlled emissions.
The estimated credits (savings)  per Mg of controlled emissions are
$42.20 for the former refinery configuration and $101.20 for the latter
configuration.  The Net Annualized Credit is 1.8 times and 4.9 times,
respectively, the Installed Capital Cost of  the two configurations.
                               i-14

-------
4.6  REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 4.0
 1.  K. C. Hustvedt, U.S.  EPA.   Memo  to  J.  F.  Durham,  U.S.  EPA,
     dated July 6, 1977.

 2.  "Hydrocarbon Emissions  from Refineries,"  American Petroleum
     Institute Publication No.  928, July,  1973.

 3.  W. Shoemaker, Fluor  Corporation.  Memo to file  by R.  H.  Schippers,
     U.S. EFA, dated July 18,  1977.

 4.  "Annual Refinery Survey,"  Oil  and Gas  Journal,  March  28, 1977.

 5.  A. Frederickson, Murphy Oil  Co., Meraux,  Louisiana.   Memo to
     file by R. A. Quaney, U.S.  EPA,  dated  October 4,  1977.

 6.  T. Hoover, Southwestern Refining Co.,  Corpus  Christi, Texas.
     Memo to file by R. A. Quaney,  U.S.  EPA, dated October 6, 1977.

 7.  T. Norton, Union Pump Co.,  Battle Creek,  Michigan.   Memo to
     file by R. A. Quaney, U.S.  EPA,  dated  October 3,  1977.

 8.  J. Columbus, Protecto Seal  Co.,  Bensenville,  Illinois.  Memo
     to file by R. A. Quaney,  U.S.  EPA,  dated  October  3,  1977.

 9.  W. Shoemaker, Fluor  Corporation.  Memo to file  by R.  A,  Quaney,
     U.S. EPA, dated October 4,  1977.

10.  F. Walters, Burlington  Engineering  &  Sales Company,  Graham,
     North Carolina.  Memo to  file  by R. A. Quaney,  U.S.  EPA, dated
     October 11, 1977.

11.  I. H. Gilman.  Section  114 letter from Standard Oil  Company of
     California, dated November 30, 1976.

12.  C. B. Scott.  Section 114 letter from Union Oil Company  of
     California, dated December 3,  1976.

13.  L. Kronenberger.  Section 114  letter  from Exxon Company, U.S.A.,
     dated February 2, 1977.

14.  R. H. Schippers, U.S. EPA.   Miscellaneous Refinery Emission Credit
     memo to file, dated  August 5,  1977.
                                4-15

-------
              5.0  EFFECTS OF APPLYING THE TECHNOLOGY

      The reduction in atmospheric emissions and other environmental
consequences of applying the control  technology presented in Chapter 3
are discussed in this section.   A comparison will  be made between volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions that will occur from refineries applying
the emission controls outlined  in Chapter 3 and the emissions from refineries
that previously had a lesser level of control.   These reductions will be
described in terms of reductions per  1000 cubic meters of throughput.
Other beneficial and adverse impacts  which may  be directly or indirectly
attributed to the operation of  these  systems will  also be assessed.
5.1   IMPACT OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES ON VOLATILE  ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS
      The control techniques discussed in Chapter 3 are basically
consistent with what many existing State and local  regulations require.
Table 5-1 shows the percent of  January 1, 1977, refinery throughput  that
is located in States with regulations for control  equivalent to the
controls presented in Chapter 3.  In  addition,  many refineries located
in States without controls will have  considerably less emissions than
the uncontrolled emissions factors would indicate.   Still there are many
areas where emission reductions similar to those shown in Table 5-1 car,
be attained through application of controls.
                                   5-1

-------
      Table 5-1 can be used to determine the emission reduction resulting
from controlling a previously uncontrolled refinery.  The annual emission
reduction for a 15,900 cubic meter per day (medium sized) refinery would
be almost 8900 metric tons.  The emission reduction would be correspondingly
less if any of the emission sources already have some degree of control.

5.2   OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IHPACTS
      The controls outlined in Chapter 3 will have minimal impact on water
pollution and solid waste.  When VQC vapors are captured and com-
busted as refinery fuel gas, there can be appreciable increases in
emissions of sulfur dioxide^  In certain instances i.t may be necessary  to
remove the hydrogen sulfide from the hydrocarbon stream before  it can
be combusted.  In all sources where sulfur is present, applying the control
techniques will result in an appreciable reduction in odors.

5,3          IMPACT
      Combusting  VOC from vacuum producing systems and process
unit turnarounds  and covering wastewater separators will  not reauire an
appreciable increase in energy use.   If the vacuum producing system
non-condensables  (170 kilograms per 1000 cubic meters of refinery
throughput) are combusted in a process heater or boiler,  large fuel
savings can result.  The annual fuel  savings for a 15,900 m  refinery
would be about 1300 cubic meters of crude oil.  Additional fuel savings
can be accomplished from combusting the process unit turnaround vapors
as fuel  gas.

                                  5-2

-------
         Table 5-1.  VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSION REDUCTION

Affected
Facility
Vacuum producing
system
Wastewater
separator
Process unit
turnaround

Percent /I
controlled
25
80
40

Uncontrolled /2
refinery
emissions
(kg/103m3)
145
570
860

Controlled /_3
refinery
emissions
(kg/103m3)
Neg.
30
15

Emission /4
reduction
(kg/103m3)
145
540
845
           Total
1575
45
1530
/!_    Percent of January 1,-1977, refinery throughput located in states with
                                                          2 3
      controls equivalent to those discussed in Chapter 3. '
12^    As defined in Chapter 2.
A3    As defined in Chapter 3.
/4_    Reduction in emissions resulting from controlling a previously
      uncontrolled refinery -
                                    5-3

-------
5.4   SUMMARY
      This chapter has shown that although many refineries are already
under state and local regulations, there are large reductions in emissions
that would occur from controlling the remaining refineries.  These controls
can be implemented with minimal other environmental impacts and potential
energy savings.

5.5   REFERENCES
      1.   Annual Refining Survey.   The Oil and Das Journal.  March 28,  1977.
      2.   "Screening Study for Vacuum Distillation Units in Petroleum
Refineries," EPA Report No, 450/3-76-040, Monsanto Research Corporation,
December 1976.
      3.   "Screening Study for Miscellaneous Sources of Hydrocarbon
Emissions in Petroleum Refineries," EPA Report No. 450/3-76-041, Monsanto
Research Corporation, December 1976.
                                     5-4.

-------
                      6.0  ENFORCEMENT ASPECTS





      The purpose of this chapter is to define facilities to which



regulations will apply, to select appropriate regulatory format, and



to recommend compliance and monitoring techniques.





6.1   AFFECTED FACILITY



      In formulating regulations it is suggested that the affected



facility be defined as each individual source within a petroleum refinery



complex.  A petroleum refinery complex is defined as any facility engaged



in producing gasoline, kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual fuel oils,



lubricants or other products through distillation of petroleum or through



redistillation, cracking, rearrangement or reforming of unfinished



petroleum derivatives.  Included in the sources are vacuum producing systems,



wastewater (oil/water) separators, and process units that are opened for



maintenance and inspection.  These sources are discussed in Chapter 2.



In certain instances the emission reduction potential for controlling



one of these sources can be so small that it would not justify applying



controls, such as a vacuum producing system on a lube unit with negligible



non-condensable VOC.  These cases should be addressed on a case by case



basis by the proper air pollution control agency.





6.2   FORMAT OF REGULATION



      It is recommended that equipment specifications be used in



                                    6-1

-------
regulating volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from refinery



vacuum producing systems and wastewater separators and that process unit



turnaround VOC emissions be controlled by specifying operating procedures,





6.3   COMPLIANCE AND MONITORING



      The equipment specifications recommended for petroleum refineries



include 1) combustion of non-ccmdensables from condensers, hot wells or



accumulators for vacuum producing systems, and 2) covers for all forebays



and wastewater separators.   It is recommended that upon adoption of



equipment specifications, t-e air pollution control agency should have



the refinery operator submit a plan for achieving compliance with the



regulation.  In many cases, the refinery will already be in compliance



with the equipment regulations and they should so state.  When the



refinery is not in compliance with the suggested regulations, the agency



and the operator should agree on a timetable for compliance.  Included



in this timetable should be dates for ordering, receiving, installation,



and startup of necessary equipment.  Pollution control equipment should



be checked by an air pollution control agency inspector at least once a



year to ensure the equipment is operating properly.



      When a process unit is shut down for a turnaround the agency should



require that the vessel be depressurized to vapor recovery, flare or a



firebox.  Here again the refinery operator should submit a plan for achieving



compliance with the regulation.  Each fractionator, reactor, stabilizer, etc.



should be addressed, preferably grouped in the most likely combination for



a given unit turnaround.  No VOC should be .directly discharged to atmosphere





                                    6-2

-------
until vessel pressure is less than 5 psig.   The refinery operator
should keep a record of each process unit turnaround  listing as a minimum
the date the unit was shut down,  the approximate vessel  hydrocarbon
concentration when the hydrocarbons were first  discharged to atmosphere,
and the approximate total  quantity of hydrocarbons  emitted to the atmosphere.
These records should be kept for  at least two years and  be made available
to the air pollution control agency inspector during  any compliance
inspection of the refinery.
                                     6-3

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                                readtasiructior.son the reverse before completing/
1. REPORT NO,
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
    Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems,
    Wastewater Separators  and Process Unit Turnarounds
_______                                        _____

    Kent C. Hustvedt,  ESEQ
    Robert A. Quaney,  SASQ	
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION'NO,
                                                           5. REPORT DATE
                                           1
                                                           o. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION coos
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
    U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
    Office of Air and  Waste  Management
    Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
    Research Triangle  Park,  North Carolina 27711
                                                           8. PERFORMiNG ORGANIZATION REPO'f T !\O.
                                                           \	QAgps  NO.  i .?-n8i
                                                           i10, PROGRAM ELEMENT NO,
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                           13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                           14, SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
         |_Jbis report  provides the necessary guidance for development of
    regulations to  limit  emissions of volatile  organic compounds  (VOC)  from
    refinery vacuum producing systems, wastewater separators and  process unit
    turnarounds.  \This  guidance includes equipment specifications  for vacuum
    producing~sysfems  and wastewater separators,  and operating procedures for
    process unit  turnarounds, all  of which represent reasonably available control
    technology (RACT).  An example cost analysis  for evaluating the  cost
    effectiveness of these refinery controls is also presented.
17,
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b,IDENTIFIERS/QPEN ENDED TERMS
                           c. COSATI Field/Group
    Air Pollution
    Control Equipment
    Hydrocarbons
    Petroleum Refining
    Vacuum Producing Systems
    Wastewater Separators
    Process Unit Turnaround
Air  Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Hydrocarbon Emission
  Control
                                                                                 13
                                                                                 14
                                                                                 07
                                                                                 13
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
    Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
   Unclassified
                                                                         21. NO. OF PAGES
                                                                             47
                                              20, SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                 Unclassified
                                                                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
CNVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
     Technical Publications Branch
      Office of Administration
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
        OFFICIAL BUSINESS

   AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
     POSTAGE AND PEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
          EPA - 335
                                                                       SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE
                                                                              BOOK
                            Return this sheet if you do NOT wish to receive this material l,~~l
                            or if change of address is needed f~~l,  (Indicate change, including
                            ZIP code.)
                          PUBLICATION NO. EPA-450/2-77-025
                                       (OAQPS NO.  1.2-081)

-------