United States
Environmental Protection Air and Radiation EPA 430-R-96-010
Agency 6202J May 1996
EPA Methane Leak Measurements
at Selected Natural Gas Pipeline
Compressor Stations in Russia
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Division
RAO Gazprom
May 1996
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
• Table of Contents
I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.,,,,,..,.,, ...iii
. 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............. , ............„..„„„„, 1
1.1 Purpose of the Study... ,— 1
I 1.2 Overview of the Russian Gas System 2
1,3 The U.S. Natural Gas STAR Program ...4
I
I
2.0 FIELD MEASUREMENT PROGRAM ...„.„...,.,„„.„„........„„„„..... 7
2.1 Sources of Leaks at Compressor Stations[[[ 7
2,2 Field Measurements............ .,..,„..,...,....,.,..... 9
• 2.3 Leak Detection and Measurement Methodology 10
3.0 MEASUREMENT RESULTS „ ..,..,„..„.,„ ...„„„„ ......12
3.1 Chaplygin Compressor Station,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,.,,,,,,.. „„........,..,.,„„„„ 12
• 3.2 Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station ....,.,.,.....13
3.3 Petrovsk Compressor Station 16
I 3.4 Storojovka Compressor Station ,„.. „„„.,.,„ 18
m 3.5 Comparison of Station Results........... .„„.„....,.,...„.„.,...„„......„ 19
4,0 CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES .................22
• 4.1 Implications of Results for Overall Russian Gas System Emissions 22
_ 4.2 Applicability of Natural Gas STAR Best Management Practices to the Russian System 24
I
I
I
I
I
4.3 Next Steps. 25
REFERENCES.. ......„„ ...,,,...27
APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B: OVERVIEW OF LEAK DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Exhibits
EXHIBIT 1.2,1: MAP OF THE RUSSIAN GAS SYSTEM,,.....,., 3
EXHIBIT 1.2.2: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RUSSIAN GAS TRANSMISSION SYSTEM 4
EXHIBIT 1,3.1; NATURAL GAS STAR BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR REDUCING
METHANE EMISSIONS IN THE U.S , .....,,..,,.,..,8
EXHIBIT2.1.1: STANDARD RUSSIAN COMPRESSOR STATION LAYOUT,.,,...., 8
EXHIBIT 2.1.2: COMPRESSOR STATIONS IN THE FIELD MEASUREMENT PROGRAM 9
EXHIBIT 3.1.1: SUMMARY OF LEAK RATES AT CHAPLYGIN COMPRESSOR STATION ,...14
EXHIBIT 3.1.2: GAS LOSS BY LEAK SIZE - CHAPLYGIN , , 14
EXHIBIT 3.2.1: SUMMARY OF LEAK RATES AT PERVOMAISKAYA COMPRESSOR STATION....... 15
EXHIBIT 3.2.2: GAS LOSS BY LEAK SIZE-- PERVOMAISKAYA .,,15
EXHIBIT 3.3.1: SUMMARY OF LEAK RATES AT PETROVSK COMPRESSOR STATION .....16
EXHIBIT 3,3.2: GAS LOSS BY LEAK SIZE - PETROVSK 17
EXHIBIT 3.4.1: SUMMARY OF LEAK RATES AT STOROJOVKA COMPRESSOR STATION 18
EXHIBIT 3.4.2: GAS LOSS BY LEAK SIZE - STOROJOVKA.... ,,19
EXHIBIT 3.5.1: CROSS STATION COMPARISON 20
EXHIBIT 3,5.2: AVERAGE METHANE EMISSION FACTOR BY COMPONENT TYPE 21
EXHIBIT 4.1.1: EXTRAPOLATION OF FUGITIVE EMISSIONS RESULTS TO GAZPROM
COMPRESSOR STATIONS ...23
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the Fall of 1995, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with
RAO Gazprom, the Russian national gas production and transmission company, sponsored a
leak detection and measurement program at four compressor stations in Russia, The purpose
of the program was to measure leaks from natural gas compressor components as a first step
toward developing better overall estimates of methane emissions from Russian natural gas
pipeline compressors. This cooperative measurement program marks the first time that actual
leak measurements have been taken at Gazprom facilities. Previous emissions estimates
made by Gazprom and others have been calculated by subtracting from the total amount of
gas produced the sum of (1) all natural gas delivered to consumers and (2) gas used internally
by the natural gas system. Another objective of this leak detection and measurement program
was to begin to identify profitable opportunities to reduce fugitive emissions at Gazprom
compressor stations. This report represents the initial chapters of a larger report to be
developed jointly by EPA and Gazprom this summer on opportunities to reduce methane
emissions from sources in the Gazprom system,
To perform the leak measurements, EPA and Gazprom used the state-of-the-art High Flow
Sampling System developed in the U.S. by the Gas Research Institute and Indaco Air Quality
Services, Two of the four compressor stations surveyed are located at the southern end of the
Gazprom network near the city of Petrovsk; the others are near Moscow. The stations are
typical of Russian compressors, with an average throughput of between 65 and 190 million
cubic meters per day.
The results of this leak detection and maintenance program found that a small number of
compressor station components accounted for the vast majority of the measured leaks. This
was also true within component categories - that a few leaks were much larger and accounted
for most of the leaking natural gas. This finding is consistent with leak patterns in the U.S. At
the Gazprom facilities, the largest leaks were found at unit valve vents. Other large teaks were
found at recycle vents, station blowdown vents and start gas vents. The largest leak was
estimated at 294,556 cubic meters per year.
This study uses the leak rates measured during the survey to estimate emission factors
(average leak rates) for component types. The emission factors were then used to estimate a
total leak rate from all Russian compressors using Gazprom estimates of the number of
compressors systemwide. These findings should be considered preliminary due to the small
sample of components measured and the uncertainty surrounding the numbers and types of
components at all Gazprom compressor stations. Nevertheless, the findings demonstrate the
potential for profitable methane emissions reduction opportunities.
Specifically, the study highlights the probable effectiveness of directed inspection and
maintenance programs at Russian compressor stations. The distribution of leaks,
concentrated as they are in a few components, suggests that a directed inspection and
maintenance program could profitably reduce total leakage substantially by focusing on a few
types of components.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Methane Leak Measurements
at Selected Natural Gas Pipeline
Compressor Stations in Russia
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of the Study
In the Fail of 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") sponsored a methane
leak detection and measurement demonstration program at four natural gas pipeline
compressor stations in Russia. The purpose of this program was
(1) to measure leaks from natural gas compressor station components as a first step
toward developing better overall estimates of methane emissions from Russian
natural gas pipeline compressors; and
(2) to begin to identify profitable opportunities to reduce fugitive emissions at Russian
compressor stations.
The program was undertaken with the cooperation of Russia's RAO Gazprom ("Gazprom"),
which owns and operates the Unified Gas Supply System of Russia, and under the auspices of
the U.S./Gazprom Working Group, a cooperative public/private initiative with Gazprom, EPA,
and the U.S. Department of Energy {"DOE"). The Working Group, organized under the Gore-
Chernomyrdin Commission's Energy Policy Committee, coordinates a variety of energy
initiatives to improve Russia's energy infrastructure in an environmentally safe and economic
manner, utilizing U.S. private sector expertise. In particular, the goals of the U.S./Gazprom
Working Group are to develop projects that
» Increase the efficiency of natural gas production and delivery systems in Russia;
• Reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, such as methane (the principal
component of natural gas);
• Reduce emissions of regional air pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and carbon
monoxide;
• Reduce groundwater and soil contamination associated with natural gas production;
and
• Encourage U.S. and Russian commercial cooperation.
DRAFT; DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In addition to this recent measurement work, Working Group activities have also included valve
sealing and pipeline corrosion demonstration projects, a Spring 1995 U.S. study tour for
Gazprom technical experts to U.S. natural gas facilities, and a Fall 1995 conference in
Saratov, Russia on natural gas pipeline standards and project finance.
This cooperative measurement program marks the first time that actual leak measurements
have been taken at Russian facilities. Previous emissions estimates made by Gazprom and
others have been calculated by subtracting the sum of (1) all natural gas delivered to
consumers and (2) natural gas used internally by the natural gas system from the total amount
of natural gas produced. This report represents the initial findings for a larger report to be
developed jointly by EPA and Gazprom this summer on opportunities to profitably reduce
methane emissions from key sources in the Gazprom system.
1.2 Overview of the Russian Gas System
Russia, the world's largest producer, transporter, and exporter of natural gas, holds reserves
estimated at about 212 trillion cubic meters ("TCM"). In 1994, Russia produced just over 600
billion cubic meters ("BCM") of natural gas, consuming about 400 BCM internally and exporting
just over 100 BCM to western Europe and 80 BCM to the Commonwealth of Independent
States ("CIS") countries and the Baltic states. By way of comparison, the Russian natural gas
market is roughly the size of the U.S. natural gas market: U.S. domestic consumption was 590
BCM (or 20.75 trillion cubic feet) in 1994, domestic production was 560 BCM (the balance
accounted for by imports).
Approximately 90 percent of Russian gas production originates from western Siberia in the
Tyumen District. Other producing areas include the Orenburg region in the Northern
Caucasus, and the Komi region in the Northwest. See Exhibit 1.2,1.
About 95 percent of natural gas in Russia is produced by Gazprom - a joint stock company
partially owned by the Russian government. Gazprom also owns most of the country's
140,000 km high pressure transmission pipeline system and 16 storage facilities.1 Gazprom
has eight regional production divisions and fifteen regional transmission divisions, which are
referred to as "associations." The most important of the transmission associations are
Turnentransgaz, Uraltransgaz, Permtransgaz, Volgogradtransgaz, Mostransgaz, and
Yugtransgaz. Approximately 40 percent of Gazprom equity is held by the Russian
government, while the remaining 60 percent is distributed between Gazprom employees and
outside investors.2
Gazprom sells gas directly to some industrial customers, but mainly selis gas to local gas
distribution networks which resell directly to end users. The distribution networks are
controlled by a large number of regional and municipal companies, most of which operate
under the umbrella of the former state distribution company, Rosgazifikatsiya. About 60
percent of Rosgazifikatsiya is owned by the Russian government.3
I Gazprom, Annual Report 94; 1995.
OECD/IEA, Energy Policies of the Russian Federation: 1995 Survey. Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development, Paris, France,
3 Ibid.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, l^orwegicm Sea.* """, "-r",- *"k:'A "•"*-/- ~-"^?7»^ft
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Major characteristics of the current state of the Russian gas industry are given in Exhibit 1.2.2.
The largest portion of gas produced in Russia (54 percent) is used for electricity generation, 33
percent is consumed by industry, and the remaining 13 percent is consumed in residential and
commercial sectors.4 Gazprom's natural gas transportation system includes 140,000 km of
high-pressure pipelines, 230,000 km of low-pressure pipeline and about 250 compressor
stations, with about 4,000 compressors. The industry operates 31 gas storage facilities with a
total active working capacity of 40 BCM,S
Exhibit 1.2.2: Characteristics of the Russian Gas Transmission System
1. Gas production (10s m3/year)
2. Delivery of gas to gas transmission
pipelines (10s rn3/year)
3, Total compressor station power, 109
kW
4, Proportion of gas turbines compared
to total compression
5. Gas consumption for internal needs
during main transport (109 m3)
6, Proportion of gas used during main
transport (%)
1980
435
403
17.6
0.817
30.5
7,6
1985
643
603
35.6
0.840
52.3
8.7
1990
641
767
46.2
0.849
63.1
8.2
1991
643
682
39.2
0.820
54.4
7.8
1992
640
654
37
0.8
51.8
7,9
1993
617
.
.
-
49.75
-
1994
607
-
-
-
56.31
-
Source; Bordiugov, 199S; IEA, 1995.
1.3 The U.S. Natural Gas STAR Program
The work sponsored by EPA in Russia to measure methane emissions from natural gas
compressor stations parallels ongoing efforts in the U.S. under EPA's Natural Gas STAR
Program. The STAR Program is one of the activities included in the 1993 U.S, Climate
Change Action Plan, which outlines activities that the U.S. wili undertake to reduce U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. The Natural Gas STAR Program
is a voluntary, industry/government partnership between EPA and the U.S. natural gas industry
designed to reduce methane emissions from U.S. natural gas systems. (Methane—the primary
component of natural gas—is a potent greenhouse gas, 25 times more effective at trapping
heat than carbon dioxide.) The STAR Program for the transmission and distribution sectors
began in 1993; a new program for producers was launched in Spring 1995.
Companies that join the STAR Program (STAR Partners) agree to implement cost-effective
Best Management Practices ("BMPs") that reduce leaks and losses of natural gas. EPA
supports these activities by promoting information sharing, and technology transfer, removing
unjustified regulatory barriers to implementing STAR BMPs, and providing Partners with public
recognition for their success in reducing methane gas emissions.
4 Bordiugov, A., Methane Emissions at Russian Gas Industry Facilities. IdojarAs, Quarterly Journal of the
Hungarian Meteorological Service, Vol. 99, No. 3-4, July-December, 1995, p. 273..
5 IEA, 1995.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
In the first three years of the program, STAR Partners reduced methane emissions by 10
billion cubic feet ("Bcf), worth approximately $20 million. By the year 2000, STAR Partners
are expected to achieve reductions of over 35 Bcf of natural gas, worth over $70 million.
Savings of this magnitude provide enough additional natural gas to heat 500,000 homes and
are the carbon equivalent of removing over 3 million automobiles from the nation's roads.
Exhibit 1.3.1 Natural Gas STAR Best Management Practices for Reducing Methane
Emissions in the U.S.
BMP I
BMP I!
Distribution
Directed inspection and
maintenance (I&IUI) at
surface facilities
Identify and rehabilitate
leaking distribution pipe
BMP til
BMP IV
BMPV
BMP VI
Transmission
Directed I&M at compressor
stations
Greater use of turbines in
place of reciprocating
engines
Identify and replace high-
bleed pneumatic devices
Other practices
BMP I
BMP II
BMP III
Production
Identify and replace high-
bleed pneumatic devices
Install flash tank
separators on dehydrators
Other practices
The approach to reducing natural gas leaks developed by the Natural Gas STAR Program in
the U.S. has direct application in Russia (as well as in other countries). The major elements of
this approach include:
• Identify emissions reductions opportunities: EPA works closely with the U.S. natural
gas industry to better understand and quantify emissions sources. EPA and
Gazprom are undertaking a similar collaboration, building on this previous work in
the U.S.
* Identify and promote best management practices that cost-effectively reduce leaks.
In the U.S., STAR partners implement practices and technologies when the value of
the gas saved equals or exceeds the cost of reducing leaks. EPA and Gazprom will
outline similar cost-effective opportunities in a report to be published later this year.
• Develop and test new technologies for locating and reducing methane emissions.
In particular, EPA and its STAR Partners are working with GRl and the American
Gas Association's ("AGA") International Pipeline Research Committee to field test
the High Flow Sampler at transmission compressor stations in the U.S. (The High
Flow Sampler is the first device capable of directly measuring methane leak
volumes.) This research has helped to develop more accurate data on the nature
and behavior of leaks at U.S. natural gas facilities which aids in reducing overall
mitigation costs. The work in Russia with Gazprom is a further extension of this
effort.
The STAR Program has determined that directed inspection and maintenance programs are a
cost effective leak mitigation strategy at compressor stations in the U.S. Experience shows
that over 70 percent of overall methane losses at compressor stations can be attributed to 30
percent of the leaks. This finding allows pipeline operators to concentrate and direct their
inspection and repair efforts toward the few problem components where the payoff in saved
natural gas can be substantial. The results of the initial Russian measurements are generally
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
consistent with findings at U.S. facilities; that is, that a small number of leaks accounts for the
majority of the emissions. Directed inspection and maintenance programs, therefore, are also
expected to be cost-effective in Russia. Detailed cost-benefit analysis of this option will be
presented in the EPA/Gazprom opportunities report.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 FIELD MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
2,1 Sources of Leaks at Compressor Stations
The layout of a typical Russian compressor station is presented in Exhibit 2,1.1, Photographs
of the compressor stations where measurements were made are presented in Appendix A.
Compressor stations are located at intervals along the pipeline network to increase or maintain
pipeline pressures and thus allow the gas to flow. The pressures in the pipelines at the four
Gazprom compressor stations surveyed were between 50 and 75 kilograms per square
centimeter (about 700 to 1060 pounds per square inch).
Gas is drawn from the mainline large diameter pipes (about 1.2 meters in diameter) by the
suction created by the compressors. The natural gas first flows through a series of scrubbers,
where any condensed liquids or other impurities are removed from the gas stream, (See
Photo A.4.) From the scrubbers the gas enters the intake section of the station valve yard, a
large collection of pipes and valves that distributes gas to the various compressors of the
station. (See Photo A.1.) The many valves in the station valve yard also allow operators to
redirect gas flows as needed. For example, compressors that are down for maintenance can
be bypassed by closing the appropriate valves. Part of the gas stream may also be redirected
to fuel the compressor engines for gas-driven compressors. Electric compressors, which are
common in Russia, do not use fuel gas.
From the valve yard, natural gas is run through the compressors - the compressor stations
surveyed in this study had between 10 and 31 compressors each -- where the pressure is
increased to the level required by the pipeline system. The compressors themselves are
located in large shed-like buildings to contain noise and to protect them from the elements.
After compression, the gas is then returned to the discharge section of the station valve yard
and from there it flows through coolers to remove the excess heat generated by the
compression process. (See Photo A,5.) Once cooled, the gas is then pushed back into the
pipes of the mainline under the now much higher discharge pressure.
A significant part of a standard leak survey is directed at the compressors and the valves and
vents attached to them. A typical compressor station in Russia has centrifugal compressors
driven by an engine running off a portion of the gas being compressed. There are a number of
vents on the compressors that can be major leak sources. The fuel gas and starter gas vents
release gas from the engine and compressor starter into the atmosphere. The compressor
blowdown vents release gas from inside the compressors when they are depressurized. (In
Russia, compressors are routinely depressurized when brought off-line.) These blowdown
vents are composed of a pair of unit vatve vents, a smaller blowdown valve, and an open-
ended stack located in the station valve yard. The unit valve vent is kept open and the
blowdown valve closed when the compressor is running, while the reverse is true when the
compressor is not running. Leaks from either one can escape through the stack into the
atmosphere.
The various ball, gate, control and plug valves that control and direct the flow of gas
throughout the entire compressor station complex are also sources of leaks. Other possible
leak sources are pressure relief valves associated with the compressors, scrubbers, and
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Exhibit 2,1.1: Typical Russian Compressor Station Layout
Source: Gazprom
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
coolers. In addition, leaks can be found at the numerous flanges, small tubing joiners, and
pipe thread connectors located throughout the station. Al! of these components are usually
screened in compressor station surveys. Because of time restrictions on this study, only
limited sections of the four compressor stations, as outlined below, were surveyed and
measured.
2.2 Field Measurements
The field measurement program described in this report was conducted over two separate two-
week periods. The first measurements were made from October 17, 1995 to October 26,1995
at the compressor stations of Storojovka and Petrovsk, These stations are located near the
city of Saratov and operated by Yugtransgaz. The second set of measurements was
conducted from November 27, 1995 to December 7, 1995 at the Pervomaiskaya and
Chaplygin compressor stations. These stations are operated by Mostransgaz and located near
the town of Michurinsk. (Selected photographs from the field measurements are in Appendix
A.) Due to time constraints, a subset of the components at each site was selected for the
measurement program. In total, Indaco screened 1,800 components, finding leaks and taking
measurements at 348 of these. The number of compressors at each site, the operating
pressure, and the throughput of each station are described in Exhibit 2.2.1.
Exhibit 2.2.1: Compressor Stations in the Field Measurement Program
Site :
Chaplygin
Pervomaiskaya
Petrovsk
Storojovka
Natural Gas Turbine
Compressors
8 (6.3 MW)
2 (16 MW}
3 (25 MW)
6 (6MW)
5 (6.3 MW)
Electric Centrifugal
Compressors
None
28 (19.5 MW)
25 (4 MW)
7 (4 MW)
4 (6.3 MW)
Throughput*
(106/rn3/day
65
82
96
188
Gas Pressure
Inlet/Outlet
(kg/cm2)
50/75
50/75
59/67
N/A
* Average daily throughput.
At the Chaplygin compressor station, measurements were made only at blowdown/unit valve
vents, fuel gas vents, starter gas vents, and cooler blowdown vents, where significant leakage
was expected. No measurements were made on other components. The temperature during
these measurements ranged from approximately -15°C to -9°C with variable, light to strong
winds.
At the Pervomaiskaya compressor station, measurements were made at the field and valve
yard components, scrubbers, and at the components outside the compressor buildings. No
measurements were made on the compressors themselves or at the blowdown/unit valve
vents. The blowdown system was described as double blocked with two valves, so leakage
across the unit valves to the blowdown vents may not be as significant as at other sites. The
temperature during these measurements ranged from approximately ~9°C to -4°C with
intermittent snow and moderate winds.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
I
I
Measurements at the Petrovsk compressor station were made at components in the field and
valve yard and at blowdown/unit valve vents. The site was described as having European
I components rather than Russian components. Although the compressors were operating, time
limitations prevented measurements at the compressors themselves. The focus of the
. measurements at this site were the leaks across the unit valve leaks to the bfowdown vents.
I The temperature during these measurements ranged between approximately -4°C to 8°C with
moderate winds.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
At the Storojovka compressor station, measurements were made of components in the field
and vafve yard. The compressors at the facility were depressurized during the measurement
program due to construction at the station. Consequently, no measurements are available at
the compressors or at the blowdown/unit valve vents. The weather during the measurement
was blustery with temperatures between -4°C and 8°C with intermittent rain and strong winds.
2,3 Leak Detection and Measurement Methodology
An overview of leak detection and measurement technology is presented in Appendix B along
with a description of High Flow Sampling. Below is a description of the approach used in the
Russian measurements.
Leak detection was performed using both soap solution and screening with a methane
detection instrument. Soap solution was sprayed on components such as valves, pips thread
connectors, and tubing connectors. Any components at which bubbles formed were tagged.
Flanges and open ended lines were screened using Bascom-Turner CGI-201 Gas Sentries.
Any components screening above 500 part per million ("ppm") were tagged.
Orange metal tags were used to tag the leaks. The 3 by 5 inch tags were labeled by
permanent marker with a sequential leak number and a description of the leak location if
necessary. The size and color of the tag provide good visibility for relocating the leak for
subsequent high flow measurements. (Photo A.2 shows soap screening and tag at a small
ball valve.)
Once leaks were located and tagged, the High Flow Sampler was used to measure the teak
rate. Leak rates were measured by holding the nozzle of the High Flow Sampler within 1 cm of
the leak while holding the background probe approximately 5 cm to 10 cm away, depending on
the type and size of component tested. This allowed the background concentration to be
accurately determined during the leak measurement. An industrial stretch plastic was used to
block wind and leak momentum and to direct leak flow into the high flow sampler. Leak rate
measurements at flanges were made by sealing the flange circumference with either duct tape
or stretch wrap. Openings were left at opposite sides of the flange for air entry and exit In
addition, large leaks at open pipes and blowdown vents were measured using a rotometer—a
flowmeter used in this measurement program to measure particularly large leaks.
Leak rate data were recorded manually on data sheets printed for this purpose. These data
included leak tag number, a brief description of the teak (type of component and service), High
Flow Sampler anemometer velocity (which is calibrated to sample flow rate), background
concentration, and sample concentration.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 1°
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Quality assurance was conducted by making replicate measurements, which included using
different sample flow rates. Varying the sample flow rate provides data on the success of leak
capture. If the teak rate measured by the sampler remains constant as the sample flow is
increased, then the leak capture at both sample flow rates was successful. At flanges,
replicate measurements were made by reversing the air entry and exit locations. Other quality
assurance measures included a laboratory calibration of the entire high flow sampler system
before and after the first set of field measurements by introducing known flow rates of
methane into the instrument and comparing the known leak rates to the results calculated from
the high flow sampler data.
The number and type of components which were surveyed for leaks were recorded at each
facility. The categories included flanges, pipe thread connections, tubing connections, gate
and needle valves, plug and bail valves (included as one category), control valves, open
ended lines, pressure relief valves, station blowdown vents, compressor blowdown vents, and
unit valve vents. These component counts were used to calculate emission factors for each
component category by dividing the total leak rate by the total number of components. The
results of the measurement program are presented in the following section.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 11
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
i
3,0 MEASUREMENT RESULTS
This section summarizes the results of the leak survey and measurements at each of the
Gazprom compressor stations. For each station we present a table showing the leak results
by component type. Also presented is a graph that shows the distribution of emissions by the
number of leaks: this illustrates the concentration of emissions in a small number of large
leaks. For each compressor station, the tables identify the types of components surveyed and
number of leaks found, characteristics of the leaks (total, average size, largest, smallest), an
emission factor, and estimates of the costs of the leaks. Specifically --
» The first three columns show the types of components surveyed, the number of
components of each type that were surveyed, and the number of leaks found and
measured.
• The total emissions column is the sum of ali the leak rates measured expressed in
cubic meters per year. The average leak size is the total divided by the number of
leaks found.
« Then next two columns show the largest and the smallest leak for the specific
component type, expressed in cubic meters per year.
* The component emission factor is equal to the total emission volume for that
component type divided by the total number of components surveyed.
» The final two columns estimate leakage cost. The total leak cost for each
component type is calculated by multiplying the total emission volume by $56 U.S.
per thousand cubic meters (an estimate provided by Gazprom representing an
expected world price for natural gas). The average cost per teak is equal to the
total cost divided by the number of leaks found.
We have not summed the leaks for the individual compressor stations. Because only subsets
of components were measured, station totals would be irrelevant and possibly misleading. In
addition, because of the relatively small numbers of components measured, the calculated
emission factors per component type should be considered very preliminary.
3.1 Chaplygin Compressor Station
Exhibit 3.1.1 presents the results of the measurements at the Chaplygin compressor station.
Measurements at the Chaplygin station focused on leaks across the unit valves to the
blowdown vent (labeled unit valve vents in Exhibit 3.1.1} and leaks from the recycle vents, fuel
gas vents, starter gas vents, bypass vents, and cooler vents. The total teak rate from leaks
measured at this facility was 848,400 cubic meters per year. At a price of $56 (U.S.) per
1000 cubic meters of gas (the price quoted at the time of the measurements), this represents
an average loss of $47,500 per year. Leaks from components not measured at this station
(such as gate and ball valve stems) would increase the overall natural gas loss recorded.
The leaks across the unit valves to the blow down stacks represent the largest source at this
site (34.7 percent). Leaks at unit valves tend to occur when compressors are depressurized
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 12
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
i
i
and the unit valves are blocking gas at pipeline pressure from entering the compressor. Leaks
across the unit valves trave! through the open blowdown valve to the atmosphere in this
condition. When the compressor is operating, these unit valves are open and the biowdown
valve is closed. Consequently, when depressurized compressors with large leaks across the
unit valves are put into service, the unit valve leak disappears.
The blowdown valve is typically a much smaller valve (approximately 2 inches to 4 inches) than
the unit valves (12 inches to 36 inches) and in U.S. natural gas transmission systems has been
found to leak less than the unit valve by at least a factor of five (GRI, 1996). Significant leaks
can occur across blowdown valves when a compressor is in operation. No leaks were found at
the blowdown valves surveyed at Chaplygin,
The recycle vent on Unit 1 at Chaplygin was the single largest leak found in the survey (25
percent of the total). This is a leak across a 2 inch plug valve which was closed (but leaking)
during the measurement. Both the recycle and bypass vents may be affected by the status of
the compressor, depending on whether it is running or not, but not enough data are available
from Chaplygin to determine this effect. The other components surveyed at Chaplygin are not
subject to the changes discussed for the unit valves. The fuel gas vents, start gas vents, and
cooler vents should be relatively constant sources unless the systems on which they are
located are vented. Exhibit 3.1.2 illustrates the distribution of leaks measured at Chaplygin.
3.2 Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station
Exhibit 3.2.1 presents the results of the leak rates at the Pervomaiskaya compressor station.
At this station, leak measurements focused on valves, connectors, and open ended lines.
Again, these measurements are a subset of this station and do not represent the entire facility
leak rate. Additionally, time limitations prevented complete component counts at all of the
process areas where the leak measurements were made.
The largest emission factors at this station were for open ended lines, followed by control
valves, cooler blowdowns (which could be grouped with open ended lines), ball valves,
pressure relief valves, gate valves, tubing connectors, pipe thread connectors, needle vaives,
and flanges. As at Chaplygin, the largest 10 percent of the mechanical leaks account for a
vast majority of the leak total (see Exhibit 3.2.2). Ball valve measurements were made at both
the stem of the valve and at the body, such as from a bolted flange fitting that is part of the
valve's original manufacturing process. The leakage from the ball valve body accounted for
only 12 percent of the total ball valve leak rate. This suggests that future screening might be
confined to the stem only without missing a significant portion of the leak rate. This would
speed the leak detection process for this category of component by at least a factor of two.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
13
-------
1
Exhibit 3.1.1 : Summary of Leak Rates at Chapiygin Compressor Station
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
Component No. of
Components
Surveyed
Unit Valve" 6
Vents
Recycle 10
Vents
Fuel Gas 10
Vents
Start Gas 10
Vents
Bypass 10
Vents
Cooler Vents 24
No. of Total Average
Leaks Emissions Leak Size
Found m*/yr rn3/yr
3 294,556 98,185
1 213,299 213,299
4 206,361 51,590
6 117,585 19,598
2 12,330 6,165
3 4,269 1,423
" Based on a gas price of $58/1 000 ms
" Unit vaives may not leak year round because for part of the time,
this.
Largest - Smallest Emission
Leak leak Factor
m'/yf m'tyr ma/yr/comp -
134,582 76,178 49,093
213,299 213,299 21,330
105,520 2,494 20,636
76,178 1,262 11,759
11,700 630 1,233
2,675 99 178
Total Cost Average Cost
f/yr1 per Leak
S/yr*
$16,497.06 $5,499.02
$11,946,15 $11,946.15
$11,557.53 $2,889.38
$6,585.54 $1,098
$690.56 $345.28
$239.11 $79.70
the compressor »s running. See Section 4.1 for how we adjusted for
Exhibit 3.1.2: Gas Loss by Leak Size - Chapiygin
4 ft no/.
«5
1
2 "
" •""* I
mil 1 1
as
1
Top 10%
Largest 2 measured leaks account
for 46% of measured gas loss.
•
| m
I 11 1 m ™
•9
Third 10% Fifth 10% Seventh 10% Ninth 10%
Leaks Arranged by Size
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE v
-------
Exhibit 3.2,1: Summary of Leak Rates at Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station
i'x'Cibfliponent;-.:..-;
•: ••'-• :' •'"V:;'v:. ;•.:•;•
• :]••••••.:': •• •• . • : ' •.'
Ball Valve Stems
Ball Valve Bodies
Ball Valve Total
Gate Valves
Needle Valves
Gate/Needle
Valves Total
Control Valves
Flanges
Pipe Thread
Tybing
Connectors
Cooter Slowdown
Vents
Open Ended Lines
Pressure Relief
Valves
••>••'.• 'No,'Of:>\. •
.CornponentS:
•X 'Surveyed :--<
NR
NR
168
36
35
71
4
33
299
66
16
12
6
-••No;:ofv
VUeal«s:;:
•found-
54
12
66
20
15
35
4
4
29
13
16
6
3
"... ;»taix:-.
^Errtissions;-
::'-'K-m%ytX, •,:
44,329
5,892
50,221
8,205
3,809
12,013
3,081
3,330
38,658
9,280
8,046
9,388
1,646
::Average: :
teak-Size :-
•.Xm%rXX
821
491
761
410
254
343
770
832
1,333
714
503
1,565
549
• 'Largest. '
. :'Leafcr';:
:m3/yr:,>
9,400
1,949
9,400
1,211
1,630
1,630
2,136
3,077
14,243
3,823
1,977
9,062
767
Smallest:
X;ieakX'
••'•m'Air ;>;
0
0
0
43
7
7
103
57
12
0
108
0
112
•iErnissioo';:
•C'-Faetor.'X'.-
hi'/yr/cornp.:
NC
NC
299
228
109
169
770
101
129
141
503
782
274
TotalGost
•;;::^;;:
$2,482.73
$329.99
$2,812.73
$459.51
$213.31
$672.82
$172.55
$186,48
$2.165.10
$519.76
$450.63
$525.77
$92.17
-"Average'. .
•:Cost'per :
LeakS/yr1
$45.98
$27.50
$42.62
$22.98
$14.22
$19.23
$43.14
$46.62
$74.66
$39.98
$28.16
$87.63
$30.72
* Sased on a gas price of $56/1000 m3
NR = not recorded,
NC = not calculated.
Exhibit 3,2.2: Gas Loss by Leak Size ~ Pervomaiskaya
100% '
90% *
80% -
V)
g 70% -
M 80% -
"S
£ so% -
3
n
TO
S 40% -
"5
0s1
20%
10% -
il
m
m
m
«i
i
i
i
I
1
!
»
1
Largest 18 measured teaks account for
62% of measured gas toss.
i
1
0%
Top 10%
i
i
i
Hi
Hi
Third 10%
RSS8SS n».
Fifth 10% Seventh 10%
Leaks Arranged by Size
Ninth 10%
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
15
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3.3 Petrovsk Compressor Station
The measurement program at the Petrovsk compressor station focused on quantifying leak
rates across the unit valves, blowdown stacks on depressurized compressors and blowdown
valves on pressurized compressors. A limited number of measurements were made at valves,
connectors, and open ended lines in the field area of the station. The results of these
measurements are presented in Exhibit 3.3.1.
The largest emission sources at this station were found at the unit valves on depressurized
compressors. The emission factor for the unit valves on depressurized compressors at
Petrovsk is approximately twenty times larger than for Chaplygin unit valves (this illustrates the
uncertainty of the small data set that has been collected). As at Chapiygin, no leak rate was
observed across the blowdown valve on pressurized compressors. The total leak rate from the
four unit valve leaks was 4.36 million cubic meter per year with a value of $244,000 per year.
The largest of these leaks was equal to $145,000 per year, which is 59.6% of the leak rate
from the four. These results assume a full year of leaking from the closed position. The leak
totals would be halved if the compressors ran 50 percent of the time. Nevertheless, these are
significant leaks.
Exhibit 3.3.1; Summary of Leak Rates at Petrovsk Compressor Station
Component
Unit Valve
Vents
Slowdown
Valve Vents
Bali Valves
Plup Valves
Ball/Plug
Valves Total
Gate/Needle
Valves
Flanges : For
Qemonstratte
nOnty
Pipe Thread
Tubing
Connectors
Open Ended
Lines
No. of
Components •
Surveyed
4
4
31
22
93
24
13
No. Of
Leaks
Found
4
0
11
L__l_
12
13
2
2
1
1
Total
Emissions
ms/yr
4,358,181
0
15,336
77
15,413
1 1 ,024
19,508
66
12?
909
Average
Leak, Size
ftflyr
1,089,545
0
1,394
jj
1,284
848
9,754
33
127
909
Largest
Leak
nvVyr
2,596,536
0
3,805
I 77
3,805
5,099
17,688
57
127
909
Smallest
leak
«)3/yr
23,694
0
10
77
10
13
1,820
9
127
909
Emission
Factor
nrV/eomp
1,089545
0
497
501
1
5
70
Total Cost
$/yr1
$244,086.36
$0.00
$858.91
$4.32
$863.23
$617.41
$1,092,58
$3.67
$7.12
$50-90
Average •
Cost
per Leak
$/yr*
$61,021.59
$0.00
$78.08
$4.32
$71 .94
$47.49
$546.29
$1,84
$7.12
$50.90
* Based on a gas price of $56/1 000m3
Exhibit 3.3.2 illustrates the distribution of leaks. In this exhibit, the four largest leaks are shown
separately, since they are substantially larger than the rest of the leaks.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
16
-------
1
™ Exhibit 3.3.2: Gas Loss by Leak Size - Petrovsk
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
|
Four Largest Leaks
1 nnv
„ on I/. .
(n
R ono£ .
W
(0 7ftO/
yj 70/0
"0 fifl% -
5 cfto/
IB SU/B
ra
33
•8 ytftW. .
J5 *W%
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3,4 Storojovka Compressor Station
Measurements at the Storojovka compressor station were limited due to construction at the
site. Because this construction required that the entire compressor area be depressurized, no
measurements were possible to determine leak rates across unit valves or at any other
components associated with the main compressor station. The measurement program
focused on leak rates at valves, connectors, open ended lines, and station/pipeline blowdown
vents. Exhibit 3.4,1 summarizes the measurement data collected.
The largest leak rate observed at Storojovka was from a station blowdown vent which had a
leaking bypass valve. This vent was leaking at a rate of 278,900 cubic meters per year,
equivalent to $15,620, which accounts for about 60 percent of the total volume from all leaks
found (see Exhibit 3.4,2 for the distribution of leaks). Station blowdown vents had the largest
emission factor of all categories which were surveyed at this station; however, no information
is available for other typically large categories such as compressor unit valve leakage at this
site because the compressors were depressurized.
Ball and plug valves had the next largest emission factor for the components surveyed at
Storojovka. Leak rates were measured separately at ball valve bodies, ball valve stems, and
plug valves but have been grouped together for the calculation of emission factors. This is
also true for gate and needle valves, which were grouped as one category for counting
purposes at this site.
Exhibit 3.4.1: Summary of Leak Rates at Storojovka Compressor Station
^D-Compohwitf::-1.;-;'
Bail Valve Stems
Ball Valve Bodies
Plug Valves
Bail/Plug Valves
Total
Gate Valves
Needie Valves
Gate/Needle
Valves Total
Underground
Valves
Ball/Plug/
Underground
Total
Flanges
Pipe Thread
Tubing
Connectors
Open Ended Lines
Station Blowdown
Vents
•:.'•:; :;NOi -of -.-..
•Components •
•i:^:Surveyed-:.:-:
NR
NR
54
NR
NR
126
54
108
74
231
206
73
6
NOM ••
::l.e:ajeB..i
•Found-
4
2
29
35
22
6
28
8
43
0
7
6
8
3
:•••;: •:Total;:;;j'.:;:
:£niissidnfc
vO-fn^-vi
5,654
478
77,488
83,621
36,376
5,046
41,422
15,076
98,697
0
7,591
12,830
7,804
314,433
-.AveiageK
Lie^-SKe?-
'••''^ffp^
1,414
239
2,672
2,389
1,653
541
1,479
1,885
2,295
0
1,084
2,138
975
104,811
"liaijpestx
::-Leaic;;;.:
, :"rh?fyiU :•
4,192
464
35,545
35,545
11,216
3,929
11,216
4,183
35,545
0
7,197
9,016
3,871
278,904
Smallest
•^tiaik^:"
;SWtyr^[
122
15
0
0
16
64
16
186
0
0
6
44
0
4,550
^•Emission':-;;:
:/: ^factor- :::::;:;
.rtffiyr/compl
1,549
329
279
914
0
33
62
107
52,406
; Total-Cost/;
rk.s/yfe;-/
$316,67
$26.80
$4,339.51
$4,682.98
$2,037.23
$282.58
$2,319.81
$844.38
$5,527.36
$0.00
$425.13
$718.49
$437.05
$17,610.09
: Average Sosli:;
••Co-p*ril3&#e:--:-
:'^:-:;$/pr"- V
$79.17
$13.40
$149.64
$133.80
$92.60
$47.10
$82.85
$105.55
$128.54
$0.00
$60.73
$113.75
$54.63
$5870.03
* Based on a gas price of $56/1 000 m3
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
18
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
1
I
Exhibit 3.4.2: Gas Loss by Leak Size - Storojovka
100% -
90%-
80%-
0
§ 70%-
(i)
'„ of Total Measured G
I S & g §
5 * # # J?
i i i
S- iU/0
tu/e
0% -
1
i
— 1
i
|
i
L»
I
s
ft
I
I
«
*
\
I
If
P
iH!
§35*88
Largest 10 measured leaks account
for 82% of measured gas loss.
m
_argest 10%
IK
Third
1
10%
Fifth 1 0% Seventh 1 0%
Leaks Arranged by Size
Ninth 10%
3,5 Comparison of Station Results
Because only a subset of components at each station were surveyed, the total measured leak
rate at each station cannot be directly compared. Examining the similarities and differences
between emission factors of components at the stations provides a more useful comparison,
Exhibit 3.5.1 provides a comparison of emission factors at similar components between
stations and also presents average emission factors for all four sites. Exhibit 3.5.2 illustrates
the results of the emission factor estimate.
The largest average emission factor was for leakage across the compressor unit valves vents.
This value was 465,274 m3/year per compressor unit valve set. It must be remembered that
this leakage only occurs when the compressor is depressurized and not running. The amount
of time this occurs is unknown. [Insert Gazprom estimate?] For purposes of this report, we
have assumed that such components are depressurized on average half the time. No leaks
were observed for the reverse condition when the compressor is pressurized and the
blowdown valve is closed. The emission factor for unit valves at Petrovsk was four times
higher than at Chaplygin, Chaplygin is a newer station than Petrovsk and at least three of the
unit valve sets measured at Chaplygin had been replaced within the last year, which may
account for the smaller emission factor for these components.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
19
-------
Exhibit 3,5.1: Cross Station Comparison
Component
; (Comp)
Chaplyg'm
#of
Comp
Surveyed
Emission
Factor
nvVyr/comp
Total
Cost
$/yr
Petrovsk
#of
Comp
Surveyed
Emission
Factor
m3/yr/comp
Total
Cost
$/yr
Pervomalskaya
#.of
Comp
Surveyed
Emission
Factor
m'/yr/oomp
Total
Cost
S/yr
Storojovka
Comp
Surveyed
Emission
Factor
m'/yr/comp
TotaJ
Cost
..tflt
Cornp
' . Factor
• .Cast" •
Compressor Vents
Unit Valve
Vents
Recycle
Vents
Fuel Gas
Vents
Start Gas
Vents
Bypass
Verts
Slowdown
Vents
6
10
10
10
10
4
49,093
21,330
20,636
11,759
1,233
0
16,497
11,946
11,558
6,586
691
4
_
—
—
—
4
1,089,545
—
--
_
—
0
244,058
-~
~
~
~
—
—
""
—
•~
•~
-*
—
—
—
--
*•*
«
—
—
—
~»
_
~
—
Station Vents
Station
Slowdown
-
-
_
—
~
***
6
52,406
17,610
illllllli
Illil
II11S
lillli
Other Components
Ball/Plug
Valves*
Gate/Needle
Valves**
Control
Valves
Cooler
Slowdown
Pressure
Flanges***
Pipe Thread
Tubing
Open Ended
_
-
_
24
-
--
-
_
--
-
-
178
—
-
..
-
239
31
22
~
"
"
93
24
13
497
501
—
"
„„
1
5
70
863
47
4
7
51
168
71
4
16
6
, __
' 2Q9
66
12
299
I 169
770
503
274
—
129
141
782
2,813
673
173
451
92
186
2^165~
520
526
108
126
"™*
' 74
231
208
73
914
329
"***
_
_
62
107
4,683
2,320
_
425'
718
437
Illlllll
•: -': fvf 5*1*"! •- •'£$& ":•?-*•>'
:yli§^|S|S§i§i^i^
J§f§Pllte;
;*;s5:s?sp:»
* Groups ball valves and plug valves; assumes all underground valves are bal! valves.
** Groups needle and gate valves.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
Exhibit 3.5,2; Average Methane Emission Factor by Component Type
£
£•
Comport enl
Unit Valve Vent
Station Slowdown Vent
Recycle Vent
Fuel Gas Vent
Start Gas Vent
Bypass Vent
Contra! Valve
Ball/Plug Valve
Cooler Slowdown Vent
Gate/Needle Valve
Pressure Relief Valve
Open Ended Line
Tubing Connector
Pipe Thread Connector
Flange
Cornp. Slowdown Vent
0
• 1,233
HJ 770
i 535
I 308
| 294
| 274
185
75
74
24
° tt t tt
1 ' ' '7/77
5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 50,000 450,000 500,000
Emission Factor
(m3/yr/nuiiJber of components surveyed)
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
-------
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES
The objectives of this teak identification and measurement demonstration program were
(1) to measure leaks from natural gas compressor station components as a
first step towards developing better overall estimates of methane emissions
from Russian natural gas pipeline compressors; and
(2) to begin to identify profitable opportunities to reduce fugitive emissions at
Gazprom compressor stations.
The High Flow Sampler technology was successfully deployed in this measurement
program and Gazprom technicians were trained to use it. A High Flow Sampler device
has been loaned to Gazprom to continue their own measurements. The implications of
the measurements made in this program for overall Russian natural gas system
emissions estimates and potential strategies for reducing emissions are addressed
below.
! 4,1 Implications of Results for Overall Russian Gas System Emissions
Using the measurements taken at the four compressor stations, an estimate has been
developed of the overall leaks from Russian compressor facilities. This estimate is
based on a relatively small sample of leak screenings (1,800 components) and
• measurements (348 components), and did not include measurements from a large
I number of components that would normally be expected to have leak rates. (These
vary from station to station; at some no ball and gate valves were screened; at others
(flanges were not examined; at all stations only some components were reviewed.)
Therefore, the estimate of overall leakage should be considered preliminary. Any
refined estimation would benefit from follow-up measurements across a broader range
• of components and component types.
The approach used in this estimation and the results are shown in Exhibit 4.1. The
approach consisted of the following steps.
I
I
I
I
I
a
i
• Average emission factors (or leak rates) were calculated for all of the
component categories measured across the four compressor stations.
These emission factors are expressed as cubic meters per year per
component surveyed.
• The number of components in each category were estimated for the entire
Gazprom pipeline system. These estimates were based on a Gazprom
estimate that it has about 4,000 compressors in its system at about 250
compressor stations. Using the component counts at Pervomaiskaya, an
estimate of the number of each component associated with compressors
was developed. (For example, at Pervomaiskaya the number of biowdown
vents per compressor was 2.81 biowdown vents/compressor; there was one
unit valve vent per compressor.) Thus, with 4,000 compressors in the entire
Gazprom system, one may expect 4,000 unit valve vents-one per
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 22
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
compressor-and 11,250 station blowdown vents~2.81 per compressor-and
so on across all components.)
• An activity factor (percent of time a component leaks) was assumed for each
component to account for the fact that some components only leak when a
compressor is running and others leak only when a compressor is not in
service. For all but two components the activity factor is 1.0; for unit valve
vents and compressor blowdown vents, the activity factors are assumed to
be 0,50, meaning that these leaks occur about half the time.
• The product of these factors is an estimate of the total annual emissions for
ail compressor stations for each component type. The sum of these will
yield an estimate of the total emissions from all compressors.
The results of this estimation are shown in Exhibit 4.1.1, The estimate for the total
compressor station losses is about 2 BCM per year. This number is an estimate of the
total methane emissions attributable to leaks from those components at compressor
stations that are directly related to the numbers of compressors. Since this estimate
does not include compressor exhaust and engine start and stop emissions, the 2 BCM
does not represent the total estimated leakage from all compressor station
components.
The final column of Exhibit 4.1 shows the percentage that each category of
components contributes to the total estimated leak rate from the Russian gas system
compressors. This percentage contribution provides a guide for where efforts should
be focused to reduce fugitive emissions and natural gas loss at compressor stations. It
also indicates the sensitivity of the total estimate to the accuracy of emission factors,
component counts, and activity factors of the individual categories. For example, if the
activity factor for unit valves were to increase by 20 percent to 0,6 instead of 0.5, the
total leak rate from the system would increase approximately 10 percent.
The data collected during this field measurement program and the emission factors
calculated from these data represent only a limited subset of components at each of
the four facilities tested. More extensive measurements and component counts are
required to refine the emission factors. The major sources at compressor stations that
have not been quantified include emissions from compressor seal vents, components
on the compressors themselves (such as compressor seal vents), and fuel components
on gas powered turbines. It is not known if these components are significant sources,
but compressor seal vents are the most likely source to be significant compared to the
major leaks currently observed at the compressor stations. In addition, a better
understanding of activity factors is necessary before an accurate assessment of
fugitive emissions from the Russian transmission system can be made using the
approach outlined above.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 23
-------
Exhibit 4.1,1; Extrapolation of Fugitive Emissions Results to Gazprom
Compressor Stations
Component .
Compressor Unit
Valve Vents*
Station Slowdown
Vents
Ball/Plug Valves
Compressor
Recycle Vents**
Compressor Fuel
Gas Vents**
Compressor Start
Gas Vents**
Pipe Thread
Connectors
Gate/Needle
Valves**
Tubing Connectors
Cooler Slowdown
Vents
Compressor
Bypass Vents
Control Valves
Pressure Relief
Valves
Open Ended Lines
Flanges***
Compressor
Slowdown Vents
Avg. Emission
Factor per
• Component
m3/yr/comp
465,274
52,406
535
21,330
20,636
11,759
• 74
294
75
308
1,233
770
274
185
24
0
Estimated
No. of
Components
4000
11,250
224,000
4,000
4,000
4,000
398,667
94,667
88,000
21,333
4000
5,333
12,000
16,000
88,000
4,000
Estimate
d Activity
Factor
0,5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1,0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1-0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.5
Systemwide Compressor Station Total
Estimated
Emission Rate
per component
108 nr/year
930.5
589.6
119.9
85.3
82.5
47.0
29.6
27.9
6.6
6.6
4.9
4.1
3.3
3.0
2.1
0
1,942.9
Percentage of Total
Compressor-
Related Emissions
47.89%
30.34%
6.17%
4.39%
4.25% 1
2.42% I
1.53% I
1.43%
0.34% I
0.34% I
0.25%
0.21%
0.17%
—
0.15%
0.11%
_
0.00%
100.00%
Leak only occurs when compressor is depressurized (assumed to be 50% of the year); emission factor refers to total teak
from the suction and discharge valves.
** Emission factor based on teak fate measurements at one station only; dependence on compressor status is uncertain.
**• Emission factor based on teak rate measurements at one station only.
4.2 Applicability of Natural Gas STAR Best Management Practices to the Russian
System
As noted previously, the Natural Gas STAR program in the United States has identified
a number of best management practices ("BMPs") for natural gas pipeline companies
that reduce leaks at natural gas facilities in the U.S. Among the BMPs identified, one is
particularly applicable to fugitive emissions at Russian compressor stations: directed
inspection and maintenance at compressor stations.
The aim of a directed inspection and maintenance program is to focus resources on the
identification and repair of leaks that contribute most to overall emissions and for which
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
24
-------
the benefits of repair (in terms of the value of the natural gas saved relative to the costs
of the repair or maintenance activity) are correspondingly the greatest, A directed
inspection and maintenance program depends on two elements:
» Accurate leak measurements such as those performed with the GRI/lndaco
High Flow Sampler; and
• An ongoing assessment of leak trends to aid in determining where and how
often measurement surveys need to be made (e.g., quarterly, semi-annually
or annually) and which components need to be monitored.
The measurements undertaken in this study suggest that focusing on the largest leaks
at a compressor station can significantly reduce leak rates. This refers both to all leaks
at a station and leaks within categories of components where a few leaks dominate a
component category. For example, of the four leaking unit valves measured at the
Petrovsk station, repairing the largest would reduce the gas toss from the unit valve
category by 60 percent. Similarly, repairing the largest of the 29 leaking pipe threads at
Pervomaiskaya would reduce the leak rate from those components by almost 40
percent.
As an overall strategy, the results of this study suggest that significant reductions can
be achieved by focusing repair efforts on the vent systems at these stations.
Compressor unit valve vents account for the largest teak category by a wide margin. If
i these leaks could be repaired, 48 percent of the total estimated emissions potentially
I could be eliminated.
Each category of leaks may have specific best management practices for leak
I reduction once the leak rates are known. For example, it may be useful to inspect and
maintain vents more frequently than the other components due to the significance of
- leaks from vents. Such a program could include applications of special sealants in vent
I valves on a monthly basis. On the other hand, some component categories that are
shown to leak less may only require annual inspection and maintenance regimes.
I Research supported by the EPA currently is aimed at establishing the optimum time
* frames for such directed inspection and maintenance of various component categories
for transmission and distribution pipelines in the U.S. Whether the cycles identified as
I optimal for U.S. facilities would be similarly optimal for the Russian system remains to
* be seen. Facility managers and engineers will be best qualified to determine the
appropriate strategies once more information about the character and extent of leaking
I components is known for Russian facilities.
I
I
I
I
4,3 Next Steps
This study has demonstrated the efficacy of high flow sampling to identify major
sources of emissions from Russian compressor station components. As noted in this
report, however, measurements were made at a relatively small number of components
at the four compressor stations. To expand upon the work initiated under this study
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 25
-------
and to generate better information on methane emissions from Russian compressors,
the following steps are planned:
1, Follow-up measurements will be performed at one or more of the
compressor stations. Such follow-up measurements should include
complete component surveys to document the numbers and types of
components as well as to identify those that are leaking. Such foliow-up
studies should also incorporate information on Russian compressor
technologies and on operations and maintenance policies.
2. In conjunction with Gazprom, EPA plans to provide on-going training for
Gazprom technicians in measuring leaks with the High Flow Sampler. This
training should be aimed at determining whether the High Flow Sampler or
another form of leak detection and measurement is suited for Gazprom
personnel and operations.
I 3, Gazprom and EPA will build upon these initial measurements, as well as
upon demonstration data collected in conjunction with the U.S./Gazprom
I Working Group, to identify cost-effective technologies and practices that
I reduce emissions of methane from all of Gazprom's major sources -
* compressor stations, pipelines and production facilities. This analysis will
parallel related work undertaken by EPA and the U.S. natural gas industry
1 and possibly form the basis for a Natural Gas STAR Program in Russia.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 26
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES
Bordiugov, A., 1995. Methane Emissions at Russian Gas Industry Facilities in WojMs,
Quarterly Journal of the Hungarian Meteorological Service, Vol. 99, No. 3-4, July-
December 1995.
CMA, 1989. Improving Air Quality: Guidance for Estimating Fugitive Emissions from
Equipment. Chemical Manufacturer's Association, Washington, DC 20037.
Gazprom, 1995. Annual Report 94. Informational and Advertising Center for the Gas
Industry.
Gritsenko, A.L, 1994. Gas Industry of Russia: Strategy of Development and Gas
Supply to Europe. Presented at the March 16-17,1994 meeting of the Moscow
International Energy Club, Paris, France.
Howard, T., R. Siverson, A, Wenzlick and B. Lott, 1994. A high flow rate sampling
system for measuring emissions from leaking process components. Presented at the
1994 International Workshop on Environmental and Economic Impacts of Natural Gas
Losses, Prague, Czech Republic,
OECD/lEA, 1995. Energy Policies of the Russian Federation; 1995 Survey,
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Paris, France,
U.S. EPA, 1993. Options for Reducing Methane Emissions Internationally; Vol. IS:
international Opportunities for Reducing Methane Emissions. Report to Congress,
p. 3-12.
Webb, M., and P. Marttno, 1992, Fugitive Hydrocarbon Emissions from Petroleum
(Production Operations. Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Air and Waste
Management Association, Paper No. 92-66,11.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE 27
-------
APPENDIX A; PHOTOGRAPHS
Exhibit A.1 Petrovsk Compressor Station
Unit valves outside compressor building.
(Saratov, Russia; October, 1995)
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-1
-------
Exhibit A.2 Petrovsk Compressor Station
Ball valve soap screening. Note bubbling foam (arrow) and tag.
(Saratov, Russia; October, 1995)
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-2
-------
Exhibit A.3 Storojovka Compressor Station
High Flow Sampler measurement (component hidden).
(Saratov, Russia; October, 1995}
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-3
-------
Exhibit A. 4 Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station
Screening a buried valve; scrubbers in background.
(Moscow Region, Russia; December, 1995)
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-4
-------
Exhibit A.5 Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station
High Flow Sample measurement at a cooler blowdown.
(Moscow Region, Russia; December, 1995}
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-5
-------
Exhibit A.6 Pervomaiskaya Compressor Station
High Flow Sampler measurement at a ball valve.
(Moscow Region, Russia; December, 1995}
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
A-6
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX B. OVERVIEW OF LEAK DETECTION AND MEASUREMENT
TECHNIQUES
This section provides an overview of techniques that are currently used to
detect and quantify leak rates at natural gas facilities. Of these techniques, the high
flow sampling method and the direct measurement approach using a rotameter (for
very large leaks) were applied at the Russian facilities,
A. Leak Detection Techniques
_ The most common methods of leak detection in natural gas systems are the
I use of soap solution and screening using a methane detection instrument Soap
solution leak detection is straightforward but requires the person performing leak
I detection to pay constant attention to the components being screened. Generally leaks
I respond in three ways to bubble solution. First, they may form bubbles that are
immediately obvious to the operator. Second, the bubble formation may be slower and
I may not be obvious until 1 - 2 minutes later. This requires the operator to look back
occasionally over the area which has been previously sprayed. Third, the leak may be
so large that it blows the leak solution away quickly and no further bubbles are formed,
(This requires the operator to watch the component to which the soap solution is applied
during the application.
Soap solution screening may not be suitable for all components. Flanges with
deep crevices and hot or moving parts fall in this category. (Soap solution is also not
useful for liquid component streams but this is not an issue at natural gas transmission
compressor stations.) A methane detection instrument should be used for these
components. Although Foxboro units such as the OVA-108 and the TVA-1QQQ have
been used for many past studies of using screening and correlation equations, lighter
weight and wider range instruments are available from other sources. For this study
the Bascom - Turner CGA 201 was used to screen any components that could not be
screened using soap solution. This screening was performed for leak detection only
B. Screening Techniques, Correlation Equations, and Bagging Measurements
Screening techniques, correlation equations, and bagging measurements
(technically called enclosure measurements) have been grouped together for
discussion because of their close relationship to each other. Screening techniques
originally started as a leak detection method only and guidelines have been outlined by
U.S. EPA Method 21. Correlations were then developed to relate the concentration
measured using a leak detection instrument to the leak rate. These correlations
compare leak rates measured using enclosure methods to the maximum concentrations
measured either 1 cm or 1 mm from the components using a leak detector such as
organic vapor analyzer (OVA) (CMA, 1989; Webb and Martino, 1992). Although these
correlations make it easy to estimate leak rates, the inaccuracies are often as high as
three orders of magnitude.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE B-1
-------
The most serious drawback of using screening concentrations and correlation
equations is their inability to accurately characterize leaks that are beyond the scale of
(typical leak detectors ("pegged sources"). The most common leak detector used when
correlations are applied is the Foxbora OVA-108 (and a recent version, the TVA-1000)
which uses a flame ionization detector. The sampling flow rate of the OVA-108 is
(approximately 1000 ml/min, so if as little as 10 ml/min of methane is captured, the
resulting concentration will be 10,000 ppm (1%) which is the upper limit of the
instrument Wind speed, distance of the probe from the leak, and characteristics of the
Iieak such as exit velocity affect how much of the leak actually is captured by the
sample probe. These uncertainties explain the large errors observed in applying
correlation equations. In practice, leak rates greater than 100 ml/min (often much less)
I will register offscaie. Leak rates greater than 1 liter/min (again, often much less) will
* result in a concentration greater than 10%, which will blow out the flame of the flame
ionization detector in the OVA,
• It is the pegged sources from the largest leaks that contribute most to the facility
emissions and losses. In general, 3% - 6% of the components in a U.S. natural gas
I facility will leak and approximately 0.5 % wl exceed the range of the leak detection
* instrument. One approach would be to repair al! of the pegged source leaks, or repair
a percentage of these leaks that is equal to the percent reduction of emissions that has
I been set as a goal. Unfortunately, this can be a costly and ineffective strategy, since
these leaks can vary tremendously and much effort can be spent in repairing leaks that
do not significantly reduce gas toss.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Bagging measurements are accurate but are too expensive and time consuming
to measure every leak at a facility. In this method, the leaking component is wrapped
with a nonpermeable material (such as tedlar or mylar) and a purge gas (air or nitrogen)
sweeps through the enclosure at a measured flow rate. For the case of methane (CH4)
the teak rate from the component can be calculated from the purge flow rate through
the enclosure and the concentration of methane in the outlet stream as follows:
CH4 ~ FPurae * CCH4
where:
QCH4 = leak rate of methane from the enclosed component (l/min),
Fpurge = *he purge flow rate of the clean air or nitrogen (l/min), and
CCH4 = ^e measured concentration of methane in the exit flow (percent).
C. High Flow Sampling
To overcome the shortcomings of current leak measurement methods discussed
previously, a high flow rate sampling system was developed for the Gas Research
Institute that is able to make measurements with the same accuracy as enclosure
measurements but at a speed approaching that of leak detection screening
measurements (Howard et al., 1994, Lott et al., 1995). The new sampler uses a high
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE B-2
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
flow rate of air to completely capture the gas leaking from the component. A methane
detector is used to measure the exit concentration in the air stream of the high flow
system. The high flow sampler essentially performs an enclosure measurement using
the flow regime induced by the sampler instead of a physical enclosure. Emissions are
calculated similarly to an enclosure measurement as follows:
QCH4 = FSampIer *
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
quantify emission rates from leaking components instead of estimating the emission
rates from screening correlations. The implications are two fold. First, emissions can
now be quantified far more accurately than was ever possible before, Previously it has
been uneconomical to perform enclosure measurements at ail leaking components or
even at all the components which resulted in "pegged source" (off scale) screening
values.
Secondly, with the leak rate database that can be generated for a specific
facility, the largest leaks can be targeted for priority repair. Generally, the majority of
emissions result from a relative small fraction of the leaking components. Repair of the
large leaks allows large (and quantifiable) reductions in emissions in an economic
manner.
D. Direct Measurements Using a Rotameter
Rotameters are used to supplement high flow measurements when the teaks
identified are extremely large. For the Russia measurements, rotameters were used for
10 of the 348 total measurements.
The largest emissions observed at compressor stations in the U.S. and in
Russia are generally from open ended lines (4" to 12" in diameter) which are used as
vents for blowdown valves. The largest leaks actually occur when compressors are
blown down and the blowdown valve is open, allowing leaks across the suction and
discharge valves to vent through the blowdown line. Metal plates with short pipe thread
fittings and full open quick connects were connected to rotameters to make direct
measurements at leaks of these vents. This provides the ability to change back and
forth easily between several rotameters which cover the range of 0.1 scfm to 330 scfm
of natural gas. The plates have closed cell foam pads to provide a tight seal to the rim
of the open ended lines, which often have rough edges. By having the rotameter
connect directly to the plate, the pressure drop of the system is minimized.
DRAFT: DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE B-4
-------
I
I APPENDIX C, DETAILED LEAK REPORTS
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DRAFT; DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE C-1
I
-------
Russian Screening Data Summary -- Leaks by Component Class
l7-May-96
::•:•:::-:.:....:...::::._..::::.. :.: :.:~~.: .. ::r::r;:::.^.:: ::.::,.:;:~:-.::::.:: •.:•....:::.:.:.•.--.:.-:. •....-.-.:.-:.-.:•. ..:::.::.:::....:.:.:
IndKo Ste Eraerlt»llon (nnte) Type
(t Ittp'WJIt ' _
High-Flow Sampler
Measurements
Velocity Samp Bkfntt
Itatamcter
Measurements
Measure- Seating Correction
inetrt Factor Faclfir
•••••
LeakRate LeakKate Cost Screen*** Screen
(1/min) (SCFH) ($/Year) Instrninl
••••BBBBBBBHi
Chaplygin
Recycle Vents
Unit I - Recycle Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Recycle Vents Total
Bypass Vents
Unit 9 - Bypass Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit 12-Bypass Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Bypass Vents Total
Starting Gas Vents
Unit 5 - Valve 10 Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit 11 - Start Dec-95 No Tag
Gas Manifold
Vent
Unit 10-Start Dec-95 No Tag
Gas Manifold
Vent
Unii 9 - Start Gas Dec-95 No Tag
Manifold Vent
Unit ! 2 - Start Dce-95 No Tag
Gas Manifold
Vent
Unit 7 - Starting Dec-95 No Tag
Gas Vent
Starting Gas Vents Total
Fuel Gas Vents
Unit 6 - Valve 9 Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit 12-Fuel Dec-95 No Tag
Gas Vent
OEL on Plug Valve (Running) 2 in d
DEL on Bali Valve (Blowndown) 2 in a
OEL on Bait Valve (Running) 2 in a
OEL on Bail Valve NR in a
OEL on Ball Valve (Blowndown) 3 in a
OEL on Ball Valve (Blowndown) 3 in a
OEL on Ball Valve (Blowndown) 3 in a
OEL on Bali Valve (Running) 3 in a
OEL on Bait Valve (Running) 3 in b
OEL on Ball Valve NR in a
OEL on Bail Valve (Running) 2 in a
6.5 0.45 0
7.3 8.00 0
4.75 3.55 0
6.8 t .90 0
5.9 t .00 0
6.8 10.50 0
8 13.00 0
5.2 !2,00 0
10.2 92.00 0
42 3.6 1.342 405.8208 859.89 $11,946
405.8 859.S9 $11,946
3,6 1.342 1.1983 2.54 $35
3.6 1.342 22.2607 47.17 $655
23.5 49,71 $691
3.6 1.342 6.6782 14.15 $197
3.6 1.342 5.2191 11.06 $154
3.6 1.342 2.4018 5.09 $71
13.6 1.342 26.5791 56.32 $782
3.6 1.342 37.9022 80.31 $1.116
30 3.6 1.342 144.9360 307.10 $4,266
223.7 474.0.1 $A,5S6
3.6 1.342 22.8514 48,42 $673
3,6 1.342 200.7613 425,39 $5,910
Page I of 17
-------
Site Date Leak ID#
Gazprom ~ Chaplygin 1 Unit 7 -
Unit 7 - Fuel Gas Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit 1 - Fuel Gas Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Fuel Gas Vents Total
Unit Valve Vents
Unit 4 - Valve 5 Dec-95 No Tag
Veni
Unit 5 - Valve 5 Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit 6 - Valve 5 Dec-95 No Tag
Vent
Unit Valve Vents Total
Cooler Vents
Cooler 4 Vent Dec-95 No Tag
Cooler 6 Vent Dec-95 No Tag
Cooler 6 Vent Dec-95 No Tag
Cooler Vents Total
Chaplygin Total
Pervomaiskaya
Gate Valves
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95 1004
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95 1005
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95 1014
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95 1019
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1065
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1066
Cooler A Outlel Nov-95 1068
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1 07 1
Cooler A Outlel Nov-95 1074
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1078
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1080
_ „ ^ .. ,.™..m~ —. —
High-Flow Sampler
„. „ . Measurements
ban Equip,
ttecriptinn *units> Type V«t«Ily S.mp Bk8»d
Fuel Gas Vent, . . continued
OEL on Ball Valve (Running) 2 in b
OEL on Ball Valve (Running) 2 in a 7.1 1,65 0
Unit Valve Veni (Blowndown) - 30 in h
Ball Valve
Unit Valve Vent (Blowndown) - 30 in b
Ball Valve
Unit Valve Veni (Blowndown) - 30 in r>
Ball Valve
OEL on Gate Valve 2 in a 4.6 0.10 0
OEL on Gate Valve 2 in a 4.85 1.45 0
OEL on Gate Valve 2 in a 5.4 2.35 0
i * f $ A "7S A
Gate Valve I "» a 1.8 0-75 0
Gate Valve ' '" a !J °'45 °
Gate Valve Stem/Pipe Thread -Sin a 5.6 0.60 0
Gate Valve Stem -75 in a 3.75 0.80 0
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly) tin a 3,9 1,20 0
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly) I in a 4 0.40 0
Gate Valve (Chcro-llaly) i in a 3,25 0.15 0
Gate Valve (Chew-Italy) 1 in a 3.7 0. IS 0
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly) I in a 1.6 0.90 0
Gate Valve (Chero-italy) I in a 3,8 0,45 0
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly) tin « L55 °-75 °
— - ~
Kntametcr
Measurements
, ., „ ., LeakRate LeakKate Cost Screen*** Screen
"I"" F«S ftir (I/mi.,) I^rmnt
34 3.6 1.342 164.2608 348.05 $4.835 0
3.6 1,342 4,7457 S0.06 $140 0
392,6 831,92 $11,558
53 3.6 1,342 256.0536 542,55 $7,537 0
30 3.6 1.342 144.9360 307.10 $4,266 0
33 3.6 1.342 159.4296 337.81 $4,693 0
560.4 1,187.47 $16,497
3.6 1.342 0.1885 0,40 $6 0
3.6 1.342 2.8441 6.03 $84 0
3.6 t.342 5.0926 10.79 $150 0
8.1 17.22 $239
16142 t,42fi 23 $47,516
0,5392 1,14 S16
0.2687 0.57 $8
1.3726 2.91 $40
1.2171 2.58 $36
1.8922 4.01 $56
0,6524 1,38 $!9
0,1986 0,42 $6
0.2266 0.48 $7
0,5720 1.21 $17
0.6963 1.48 $20
0,4620 0,98 $14
Page 2 of I
-------
Sit* Oate
Indaco
Leak IM
Description
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Cooler B Outlet, . . continued
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1099 Gale Valve (Chero--llaiy)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1101 Gate Valve (Chero-llaly)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1 105 Gate Valve (Chero-italy)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-9S 1108 Gate Valve (Chero--ltaty)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1121 Gate Valve
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1123 Gate Valve
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 1 26 Gate Valve
Gas Turbine I
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Gate Valves Total
Ball Valves
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrybber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Met)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
1156
1159
1001
1002
1003
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
101 1
1012
1023
1024
1027
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Bali Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Bail Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Size Equip.
(units) Type
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
I in a
! in a
t in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
24 in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
in a
in a
24in a
Kittai
High-Flow Sampler Measui
Measurements
Measure- Seal
Velocity Samp Bkgnrt ,ntl!, Fie
5,5 0.98 0
4.05 0.25 0
3.35 0.10 0
3,65 0,15 0
1.5 4.00 0
3.15 0.85 0.05
3.65 0.30 0
2.05 0,10 0
2,9 0.60 0
4,8 10.00 0
5.3 2.90 0
1.7 2,25 0
2,9 4.00 0
2.3 10,00 0
1,4 0.20 0
1.4 0.10 0.05
3,5 1.90 0
3.4 0.90 0
4.9 1.45 0
3.45 0.83 0
3.55 1.22 0
2 5,00 0
neter
entente
_ . LeakRate
Ii»g Cwrecitet
lor Fuctor (l/tnln)
2.1820
0.4135
0,1366
0.2235
2.3042
1.0190
0.4463
0.0827
0.7043
15.*
17.8841
6.1335
1.5018
4.5388
8.4523'
0.1115
0.0279
2.6655
! .2383
2.8738
1.1530
1,7483
3.8399
LeakRate
(SCFH)
4.62
0.88
0,29
0.47
4.88
2,16
0.95
0.18
1,49
33.0H
37.89
13.00
3,18
9.62
17.91
0,24
0.06
5.65
2.62
6.09
2,44
3.70
8.14
C«st Screen*** S
(I/Year) In
$64
$12
$4
$7
$68
$30
$13
,$2
$21
$460
$526
$181
$44
$134
$249
$3
$1
$78
$36
$85
$34
$51
$113
~ " "" Page .
-------
Site !>»'* L
... ., -
Imtaco
eafc ID*
•;;.:.:.: --..•„.• -"-. ••vi:.-.".:.
Rescript Inn
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya f Scrubber 4 (Gas Turbine Mel). .
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95 1028 Ball Valve Crank
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intcf)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber I (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber I (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intet)
Cooler A inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Intel Nov-95
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
1029
1030
103!
1032
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1050
1053
1054
1055
1059
1061.1 A
1061.28
1062.1 A
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Crank
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Body
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Bail Valve Body
Ball Valve Stem
Bail Valve Stem
Ball Valve Crank
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Bail Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stern (Biffi)
.
Size Equip.
(anits) Type
. continued
in a
in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in .a
4 in a
24 in a
24 in a
4 in a
4 in a
4 in a
6 in a
6 in a
4 in a
*r 111 3
.
6m a
24 in a
4 in a
o in s
.
6 in a
Sin a
Sin a
Sin a
Rotar
High-Flow Sampler Measw
Measurements
Me«s»r«" Seal
Vetodij Stmf BkfBd nuai FK
3.2 0.30 0
3.9 0.25 0
41 AA n
£,ou ^
3 7 0 55 0
41 1 "}/i A
.3 1 .21) w
5,7 1 .00 0
1.78 0.05 0
S.77 0.15 0
1.74 0.20 0
1,78 0.10 0
1.56 0.20 0
6.5 5.00 0
1.75 0.45 0
1,72 2.10 0
1.72 0.30 0
1 .62 0.05 0
1.35 0.50 0
3.45 0.45 0
1.49 0.03 0
1.33 0.05 0
1,55 0.35 0
f \ \ SA A
O.I I.JU «
2.55 1.95 0
neter
orients
„ LeakRate L
liw Correction
mr F«lor (I/mm)
0.3905
0,3980
4.1481
0.8275
2.0890
2,3196
0.0358
0.1066
0.1396
0,07 ! 5
0,1247
12.7327
0.3152
""""
t.4209
0.2067
0,0325
0.2675
0.6313
0,0149
0.0265
0.2165
3.7074
1 .9802
eakRate Cost Screen*** Sci
(SCFH) (I/Year) '«*«>
0.83
0.84
8.79
1.75
4.43
4.91
0.08
0.23
0,30
0.15
0.26
26.98
0.67
3.01
0,44
0.07
0.57
t.34
0.03
0.06
0.46
7.86
4.20
Sll
$12
$122
$24
$61
$6S
$1
S3
$4
$2
$4
$375
$9
$42
$6
$1
$8
$19
$0
$1
$6
$109
$58
Page 4
-------
Site Oatt-
Imlaco
Leak »>#
Descriptiwt
Sim Equip.
(units) Type
Kotan
High-Flow Sampler Me8s|jr
Measurements
Measure. Seal
VfrMx-My Samp Bkgnd men| pac
racier
cments
«* Cornctkm l>«akRa«e I
tor Fitter ' (l/min)
.cakRate
(SCFH)
Cost
($/Y«ar»
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya / Cooler A Inlet, , . continued
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Cooler A inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Gullet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlel Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Iniet Nov-95
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlel Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Qas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unil Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine t
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unil Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine I
Unit Valve Area-* Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
1 062,2 B
1063
1064,1 A
1 064.2 B
1070
1073
1079
1082
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1100
1102
H03
1104
1107
II 10
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131,1 A
1131.28
1132
1133
1151
1155
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stern (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Bat! Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Sfem {Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stern (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Siem (Btffi)
Bail Valve Stem (Btffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Btffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Btffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Top Joint (Grove)
Ball Valve Body Flange
Bali Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Bail Valve Body Flange
Ball Valve Body Flange Bolt
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve
8 in a
8 in a
8in a
8 in a
10 in a
IOin a
IOin a
iOin a
IOin a
IOin a
IOin a
IOin a
IOin a
IOin a
10 in a
10 in a
IOin a
IOin a
IOin a
30 in b
8 in a
Sin a
8in a
Sin a
8 in a
Bin a
2 in a
6 in a
.75 in a
3.3 0,05 0
1.2 0.25 0
J.48 0.35 0
5 1.40 0
2.9 0,10 0
1 .64 0,05 0
3,55 0.30 0
3.05 0.50 0
1.09 0.50 0
1.61 0.00 0
3.4 0.88 0
5.9 0.10 0
3.1 0.45 0
3.3 0,25 0
3,05 0.17 0
2.9 0.10 0
2.6 0.10 0
3,35 0.25 0
5.11 0.40 0
0.00 0
5.5 ft. 20 0
.92 0.00 0
3 0.05 0
3,35 0.70 0
1.46 0,45 0
3 0.45 0
3,35 0,05 0
2.9 0.20 0
.1 0.00 0
0.0673
0.1186
0.2063
2.8334
0. i 1 80
0,0329
0.4339
0.6185
0.2138
0.0000
1.2042
0.2424
0.5662
0.3359
0.2110
0,1180
0.1055
0.34 1 1
0.8359
0,0000
0.4511
0.0000
0.06 n
0.9507
0.2613
0.5476
0,0684
0.23S7
0.0000
0.14
0.25
0.44
6.00
0.25
0.07
0.92
1.31
0,45
0.00
2.55
0.51
1.20
0.71
0.45
0.25
0.22
0.72
1.7?
0.00
0.96
0.00
0.13
2.01
0.55
1.16
O.N
0,50
0,00
$2
$3
$6
$8.3
S3
S!
SL3
•SIS
$6
SO
$35
57
$17
$10
$6
$3
$3
$10
$25
$0
$13
$0
$2
$28
$8
$16
S2
$7
$0
Screen*** Screen
Instrmnt
Page 5 of 17
-------
Inriaco
Date Lei
rvomaiskai
Nov-95
r Total
'alves
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
lives Total
alves
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
N«v-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
• Nov-95
ik lit"
ya 1 Unit
1164
1 137
1138
1153
1157
1067
1069
1072
1075
H>77
1081
1083
1097
1098
1106
1109
1124
1125
1161
Description
Valve Area-
Ball Valve
Control Valve
Control Valve
Control Valve
Control Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle Vatve
Needle Valve
Site
Gas Turbine 3
Gas Turbine I
Uni! Valve Are;
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Are
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Are
Gas Turbine 3
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler A Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Cooler 8 Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Unit Valve Arcs
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1163
Gas Turbine 3
Needle Valves Total
Pressure Relief Valves
Serubber 5 (Cos Nov-95 1022
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1139
Cas Turbine 2
Needle Valve
Pressure Relief Valve
Pressure Relief Valve
Size Equip.
(unlls) Type
continued
Sin a
High-Flow Sampler
Measurements
Velocity Samp IlkgniJ
2 0.00
Rotameter
Measurements
Measure- Scaling Correction
iiB-nt Factor Factor
LeakRate LeahRatc Cost Screen*** Screen
(l/min) (SCFH) ($/Year) Instrmnt
0.0000 0.00 $0
9S.« 202.46 $2,813
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
! in a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
) in a
1 in a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
,5 in a
.5 in a
6 in a
2 in a
6
4,8
4.5
2.85
3.85
3.55
1.79
1.67
1.28
1.47
1.5
1.46
1.09
1.57
3.25
1.3
4.8
5.3
1.32
6.2
5.2
1.68
0.10
0.70
0.28
0.35
OJO
0.05
0.15
1.48
0.45
0.40
0.15
0.40
0,37
0.30
0.18
1.60
0.50
0.03
0.58
0.10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.0644
0.1968
1 ,2824
0.3182
5.9
0.5494
0.1449
0.0360
0.1004
0.7389
0.2632
0.2390
0.0874
0.1712
0.2319
0.3967
0.0903
3.1010
1.0830
0.0131
7.2
1.4581
0.2133
8.61
0.42
2.72
0,67
12.42
1.16
0.3 j
0.08
0.21
1.57
0.56
0.51
0.19
0.36
0.49
0.84
0.19
6.57
2.29
0.03
1535
3.09
0.45
$120
$6
$38
59
$173
$16
$4
$1
$3
$22
$8
$7
$3
$5
$7
$12
$3
S9I
$32
$0
$213
$43
$6
ri _ _ j£ _ £• t T
-------
Intiaco
Site Date L«ak im
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Unit
Unit Vnlvc Area-- Nov-95 1 1 58
Gas Turbine 3
Pressure Relief Valves Total
Open Ended Lines
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95 1013
Turbine inlet)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95 1060
Cooler A Gullet Nov-95 1084
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1085
(Blowtiown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1086
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1087
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95. 1088
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1089
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Omlet Nov-95 1090
{Biowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1091
{Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 lilt
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1112
{Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1113
(Slowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1114
(Slowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1115
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1116
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1117
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1118
(Blowdown)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 134
Gas Turbine 1
Description
Valve Area~-Gas Turbine 3. .
Pressure Relief Valve
OEL on Gate Valve
OEL on Ball Valve
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove).
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve
Sh* Equip,
(units) Type
. continued
1 in a
.5 in a
1 in a
2in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
.75 in a
Rotai
High-Flow Sampler mmm
Measurements
Mttttm- Sen)
Velocity Samp Blcgmt men* Fm
5.3 0,68 0
1.6 0.15 0
1.87 0.70 0
5.4 1.73 0
5 0.10 0
3.2 0.25 0
4.9 0.22 0
4.9 0.33 0
4.9 0.17 0
5.7 0.30 0
5.5 0.75 0
5.4 0.95 0
4.85 0.43 0
5 0.18 0
4.95 0.30 0
5.1 0.53 0
5.1 0.20 0
4,95 0.18 0
5 0.70 0
t.49 0.00 0
neter
•ements
„. .. LwkRate
ing CflrrecfcUm
tor Ficlor (l/rttin)
1.4595
3.1
0.0961
0.5237
3.7614
0.2050
0.3255
0,4414
0.6614
0.3413
0.7008
1 .6823
2.0875
0.8422
0.3586
0,6077
1.0935
0.4180
0.3549
1.4267
0.0000
LcakRate
(SCFH)
3.09
6.63
0.20
Lit
7.97
0.43
0.69
0.94
1.40
0.72
1.48
3.56
4.42
1.78
0.76
1,29
2.32
0,89
0.75
3.02
0.00
Cost Screen***
($/Year)
$43
$92
$3
$15
SHI
$6
$10
$13
$19
SfO
$21
$50
$61
$25
$!!
$18
$32
$12
$10
$42
$0
DftJ*
Screen
Instrmnt
Page 7 of 17
-------
:: - .'.•--.--•-..:. ::: : :::::::::::;.- =:....r:i:..:
Site Oale
.r. •::•."—-.::;....
Ifldaco
Leak ID*
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Unit
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 140
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Open Ended Lines
Tube Fittings
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine (niet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-9S
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
1143
1166
Total
1021
1120
It41
1142
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1152
1162
1165
1169
• ::: - -
Description
Valve Area-Gas Turbine 2. ,
OBL on Tube Valve
OEt
OEL on Solenoid Operator
Tube Fitting
Tube and Pipe Thread
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
Tube Ball Valve
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
Tube Filling (w/ ice)
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
Tube Fitting
Size Equip,
(units! Type
, continued
.5 in a
Oin a
.5 in a
.5 in a
1 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
.Sin a
.Sin a
.5 in a
,5 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
.75 in a
Rotar
High-Flow Sampler Measu*
Measurements
Measure- Sea
Vrfodtjr S«Bl|> Bkpirf me,) F«t
0 0.00 0
1.69 0.00 0
3.8 12.50 0
3.15 0,20 0
.97 0.80 0
3.4 I.I 5 0
3.9 2.95 0
2.75 1.10 0
2.3 1,75 0.15
1 ,34 0.00 0
.8 0.25 0
2.95 0.40 0
1.26 0.00 0
1.3 0.00 0
3.45 5.50 0.05
1.12 1.00 0
neter
ement.s
lng on**. LeakRat*
tor Ftclor (l/ttllil)
0.0000
0.0000
17.2410
33.2
0.2564
0.3015
1,5783
4.5714
1.2170
i .4649
0.0000
0.0772
0.4787
0.0000
0.0000
7.2736
0.4377
17,7
LeakRate
(SCFH)
0.00
0.00
36.53
70.28
0.54
0,64
3,34
9,69
2.58
3.10
0,00
0.16
1,01
0,00
0.00
15.41
0.93
37.41
Cost Screen*"
(I/Year)
$0
$0
$508
$976
$8
$9
$<16
$135
$36
$43
SO
$2
$14
SO
$0
$214
$13
$520
Tube Fittings Total
Pipe Threads
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
1015
1016
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
.5 in a
.75 in a
3.4 0.30 0
3.45 1,10 0
0.4153
{.5330
O.B8
3.25
$12
$45
— —
Screen
Instrmnl
Page 8 of 17
-------
.:v: :•-::::.-.::: :..:..:.. :::..:;7:.:':: ..^.
Site Date
Indaco
teak ID*
Description
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Scrubber 5 (Gas Turbine Inlet). ,
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95 101? Pipe Thread
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Ma)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Oas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Fnlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler 8 Outlet Nov-95
Unil Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine I
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unil Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
1018
1020
1025
1026
1033
1034
1035
1047
1048
1049
1051
1052
1056
1057
1058
1076
JI22
1135
U36
1144
1154
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread »
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Size Etjuip.
(units) Type
. continued
1 in a
,75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
,75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
1 in a
1 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
2in a
.75 in a
....
Kotur
High-Flow Sampler Mcas.ii
Measurements
Measure- Sea
V«!<>dty Samp Bkgnd m,n, F>«
3.55 2.70 0
3.45 0.90 0
3.4 1.10 0
3.45 0.58 0
3.1 0.55 0.1
1.6 0.15 0
1.66 0.95 0
1.63 1.80 0
3.45 0.55 0
4.25 0.55 0
4.15 0,65 0
1.76 0.20 0
1.78 0.20 0
1.16 2,75 0
5.1 0,50 0
1,64 0,75 0
1.07 0.20 0
t -j I |rt A
E ,j E . Ill U
1.29 0,05 0
IJ7 0.05 0
2.85 5.50 0.1
2.9 30.00 0
-
nctcr
ernents
tag comcuoo 1-eakRate
lor Fatter (t/min)
3.8124
1 .2568
1,5105
0.8056
0,5656
0.0961
0,6269
1.1556
0,7708
0.9524
1 .0976
0.1413
0.1429
1.2265
1.0417
0.4898
0.0841
0.5622
0.0256
0.02.11
5.9324
27.0981
LeakRatc
(SCFH)
8.08
2,66
3.20
1.71
1.20
0,20
1.33
2,45
1.63
2.02
2,33
0,30
0.30
2.60
2.21
1.04
0.18
1,19
0,05
0.05
12.57
57.42
Cost Screen***
($/Ycar)
$112
$37
$44
$24
$17
$3
SIR
$34
$23 ,
$28
$32
$4 •
$4
S36
S3!
SI4
$2
$17
$1
SI
$175
$798
Pae
Screen
Inslrmnt
Page 9 of 17
-------
~ ' "~
Jfidacd
Silt I>««e Leah l»#
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Unit
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 I 1 67
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95 H6K
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 170
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 M7I
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 172
Gas Turbine 3
Pipe Threads Total
Flanges
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95 1046
Turbine inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1119
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1145
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 160
Gas Turbine 3
Flanges Total
Pervomaiskaya Total
Storojovka
Underground Valves
Field Area Oct-95 1004
Field Area Oci-95 1008
Field Area Oct-95 1011
Field Area Oct-95 1053
Field Area Oct-95 1054
Field Area Ocl-95 1055
Field Area Ocl-95 1073
Field Area Oct-95 1074
Underground Valves Total
Plug Valves
Field Area Ocl-95 1001.1 A
Field Area Oct-95 1007
Field Area Ocl-95 1014
Size Equip.
Description (lm"s) T«?
Valve Area-Gas Turbine 3. . . continued
Pipe Thread I in »
Pipe Thread/Weld I in °
Pipe Thread(near Gate Valve) 1 in a
Pipe Thread on Gate Valve I in a
Pipe Thread( near Gate Valve) 1 in a
Flange '" a
Flange 2in a
Flange 30in a
Flange ' in »
Ball Valve (Underground) 36 in a
Ball Valve (Underground) 36 in a
Ball Valve (Underground) m a
Valve - Underground ? a
Valve - Underground ? a
Valve - Underground ? a
Underground Valve ? a
Underground Valve ? a
»
Plug Valve 80 ram a
Plug Valve (Station Vent) 80 mm a
Plug Valve Actuator '" a
High-Flow Sampler
Measurements
Vtlocily Sump Bkpid
41 n j A A
, t V. 1 '/ t'
1.63 0.15 0
2,75 2.80 0
.97 0.20 0
3.75 14.00 0
3 8S 0,15 0
1.37 0.25 0
2.55 6.00 0
2.65 0.10 0
4.2 0.55 (
4.7 3.15 C
3.55 2.50 0.1
5.5 2.90 C
4.65 0.90 f
4.95 1.90 C
4,85 0.15 C
4 0.35 <
4,55 0.60 (
4.5 3.00 (
1.99 0.40 (
LeakRate Cost Screen*** Screen
(i/min) (SCFH) ($/Year) Inslrmnt
0.1677
0.0979
3.0455
0.0758
18.7968
0.2400
0.36
0.21
6.45
0.50
$5
$3
$90
0.16 $2
39.83 $553
73,6 155.85 $2,)fiS
$7
0. i 362
5,8551
0.1076
6.3
258.1
1.1763
7.3570
4.2445
7.9593
2.1263
4.7344
0.3726
0.7139
28,7
1 .3909
6.7148
0.4000
0.29
12.4S
0.23
13.42
546.'M
2.49
15.59
8.99
16.86
4.51
10.03
0.79
15!
60.78
2.95
14.23
0.85
$4
S172
S3
$l«
-------
Site tote
IndlKo
Leak »)*
Description
Sfc* Equip.
(units) Type
Ktltlil
High-Ftow Sampler MeM
Measurements
Measure- Sen
Vttodt; Sunp Bkpitf nwBt p,
iieler
reroents
i* c»rr«fl« l*»kRa«*
-tor Fuctor (Vinin)
LeakRate
(SCFH)
Cost Screen*** Screen
($/Year) Instrmnt
Gazprom ~ Storojovka / Field Area. . . continued
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oc(-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-9S
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oci-95
Field Area Oct-95
Plug Valves Total
Gate Valves
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oei-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
FieW Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
1018
1018
1020
1023
1024
1025
1026
1050,28
1051
1052
1061
1079
1080
1088
1089
1092
1093
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1102
1103
(104
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1013
1021
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Stem
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Body Flange
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Valve
Rug Vaive
Gate Valve Scrubber 5
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
3 in a
3 in a
6 in a
3 in a
3 in a
3in a
6in a
4 in a •
4 in a
6in a
1 in a
12in a
i2in a
6 in a
6 in a
12 in a
1 2 in a
12 in a
I2in a
12 in a
12 in a
12in a
12in a
I2in a
I2tn a
12 in a
50 mm a
50 mm a
50 mm a
50 mm a
50 mm a
1 in a
,5 in a
1,6 0.00 0
1.6 0.00 O.I
3,7 0.70 0
3.55 0,70 0
1.61 0.10 0
3.75 0,30 0
1,46 0.75 0
4.25 3.48 0
,9 0.00 0
1.325 0.15 0
1.2 (1.02 0
4.8 1.85 0
3.7 0.30 0
5.7 3,50 0
3.24 7.00 0
5.87 29.00 0
1.2 0.05 0
4,7 4.00 0
4 0.90 0
1.16 0.15 0
1.07 0.10 0
1.3 0.15 0
.83 0.05 0
1.04 0,05 0
5 2,15 0
4.9! 7,50 0
5.1 3.10 0
4,6 4.00 0
4,9 3.70 0
4.45 2.70 0
2.19.3 24.00 0
1.4 0.10 0
1.86 0.10 0
0.0000
0.0000
1,3145
1,2604
0.0806
0,5734
0,5427
7.3063
0.0000
0-0987
0,0089
4.4708
0,5657
9.9007
10,8100
67,6300
0.0297
9,2649
1.8255
0,0859
0,0526
01)968
0.0201
0.0256
5.3987
17.5600
147.4
7,8677
9,0654
8,9653
5.9930
21.3400
0.0697
0,0936
0.00
0.00
2,79
,2.67
0.17
1.21
1.15
15,48
0.00
0,21
0,02
9.47
1.20
20.98
23.31
151.47
0,06
19.63
3.87
0.18
0.11
0.21
0.04
0,05
11.44
,35.60
3!«5
16,67
19.21
19.00
12.70
47.50
0.15
0,20
$0
$0
$39
$37
$2
$17
$16
$215
$0
$3
$0
$132
$17
$291
$318
$1,991
$1
$273
$54
$3
$2
$3
$!
$1
S(59
$517
$4,340
$232
$267
$264
$176
$628
$2
$3
Page II of 17
-------
Site Date
Gazprom ~ Storojovka
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
FieW Area Ocl-95
FieW Area Oct-95
FieW Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
FieW Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oct-95
Gate Valves Tntal
Ball Valves
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Bait Valves Total
Needle Valves
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oet-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Needle Valves Tnta
indae®
Leak (Off
Description
She Equip,
(units) Type
Rotar
High-Flow Sampler Mcasm
Measurements
Me«sure- Sc»
Velocity -Simp Bttpid „„„, FK
neter
•ements
tor Factor (1/min)
(SCFH)
Cos! Screen*** Screen
(Wear) Instrmnt
/ Field Area. . . continued
1028
1029
1 058.2 B
1063
1068
1076
1077
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1101
1005
1006
1012
1016
1062
1090
1 03 1
1066
1067
1069
1070
1072
/
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve* 2 Pipe Th.
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate VaJve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gale Valve
Gate Valve
Gate VaJve
Ball Valve Body Flange
Ball Valve Vent (for F-4)
Ball Valve Vent
Ball Valve Body Flange
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Needle VaJve
Needle Valve Stem
Needle Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Needle VaJve
1 in a
I in a
2 in a
2 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
4 in a
2 in a
2 in a
4 in a
4 in a
2 in a
1 in a
1 in a
36 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
36 in a
1 in a
12 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
1 in a
4,55 0,55 0
t.t-t (US 0
1.87 1,49 0
4.6 0.20 0
1.13 0.1.3 0
3 3.60 0
1.4 0,50 0
1.7 0.10 0
4 1 .45 0
1.2 0.05 0
1.29 0,25 0
4.75 1.15 0
3.45 0,40 0
,64 0,15 0
I.I 0.30 0
,6 0.10 0
1.83 0.55 0
3.25 1.25 0
3.85 0,45 0
1.18 0,40 0
5,7 2.80 0
i .23 0.20 0
.58 0.45 0
1.3 0,45 0
,59 1. 00 0
,72 3.98 0
0,931 20.00 0
1.2756
0,0844
1,3823
0,4707
0.0697
5,3066
0.3473
0.0853
2.9250
0.0297
0.1598
2.7691
0,7018
0.0455
0.1622
«9.2
0,0283
0.5038
2.0462
JX882I
0.2326
7.9750
11,7
0.1217
0.1221
0,2895
0.2749
1.3161
7.4800
9.6
2.70
0.18
2,93
1 .00
0.15
It. 24
0.74
0.18
6.20
0.06
0,34
5.87
1 .49
0.10
0.34
I4X.93
0.06
1.07
4.34
1.87
0.49
16.90
24.72
0.26
0.26
0.61
0.58
2.79
16.58
21. OB
$38
$2
$41
$14
$2
$156
$10
S3
$86
SI
$5
$82
$21
SI
$5
$2,fl37
$1
$15
$60
$26
$7
$235
$343
$4
$4
$9
$8
$39
$220
$283
Station Blowdown Vents
Field Area Oet-95 1009
Station Slowdown (Plug valve)
200 mm a
4.15 4.25
8.6569
18.34 $255
Page 12 of 17
-------
tndacw
Site Rale Leak !!>#
Description
She Equip.
(units) Type
Gazprom ~ Storojovka / Field Area. . . continued
Field Area Oct-95 tOIO
Field Area Oct-95 1017
Station Slowdown Vents Total
Open Ended Lines
Field Area Oct-95 1001. 2 B
FieidArea Oct-95 1015
Field Area Oct-95 1022
FieidArea Oct-95 1027
FieidArea OcI-95 1030
FieidArea Oct-95 1050,1 A
Field Area Oct-95 1058,1 A
Field Area Oct-95 1060
Open Ended Lines Total
Tube Fittings
Field Area Oct-95 1002
FieidArea Ocl-95 1003
FieidArea Oct-95 1075
FieidArea Oct-95 1078
FieidArea Oct-95 1091
FieidArea Oct-95 1094
Tube Fittings Total
Pipe Threads
FieidArea Oci-95 1019
FieidArea Oct-95 1056
FieidArea Ocl-95 105?
FieidArea Oct-95 1059
FieidArea Oct-95 1064
FieidArea Oci-95 1065
Reid Area Qcc-95 1071
Pipe Threads Total
Storojovka Total
Gazprom Total
Station Slowdown (Bypass)
Station Vent
OEL on Plug Valve
OEL on Plug Valve
OEL on Plug Valve
Pig Launch (OEL on Ball Valve)
Solenoid Box OEL
OEL on Plug Valve
OEL on Gate Valve
OEL on Gate Valve
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitling
Tube Fitting
Tube Fitling
Tube Fining/Gate Valve
Tube Fitting
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread (on Gale Vlv)
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
•
1 50 mm b
6 tn a
SO mm a
2 in a
3 in a
30 in a
0 a
4 in a
2 in a
i in a
.5 in a
.Sin a
t in a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
Sin a
1 in a
I in a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
i in a
High-Flow Sampler
Measurement
Velocity Sump Bkgnrt
4.41 35.50
Rotanieter
Measurements
Measure-
ment
Soling
Factor
Correction
Factor
LeakRafc LeakRate Cost
(i/min) (SCFH) ($/Year)
Screen*** Screen
Instrmnt
4.4
.51
4.5
4.65
i.!4
4.85
.99
.38
1.97
1.38
5.1
1.34
1,13
2.35
1.4
1,37
4.58
.53
.91
1.24
1.93
1.70
0.10
3.30
1.10
0.00
0.4.3
0.08
0.05
1.65
7.00
7.00
0.15
0.15
0.90
0.05
0.05
6.20
0.05
0.90
0.05
0.25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.15
0
!)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
no
3.6 1.34 530.6400 1,124.37 $15,620
58.9400 133.23 $1,735
598.2 1,275.94 $17,6l«
3.7676
0.0236
7.3645
2.5936
0.0000
1.0528
0.0364
0.0084
14.8
1.6124
4.3903
17.1600
0.0999
0.0836
1.0621
24.4
0.0349
0.0341
13.6900
0.0123
0.3958
0 0307
0.2426
14.4
918.5
2,790.8
7.98
0.05
15.60
5.50
0.00
2,23
0.08
0.02
31.46
3.42
9.30
36.98
0.21
0.18
2.25
52.33
0.07
0.07
29.47
0.03
0.84
0.07
0.51
31.06
1,9*5.66
5,932.79
$111
$!
$217
$76
$0
$31
$1
SO
$437
$47
$129
$505
$3
$2
$31
$718
$1
$1
$403
$0
$12
$!
$7
$425
$27,038
$82,152
Page 13 of 17
-------
-
Stte Date
Yatratr/ga/
Pctrovsk
Plug Valves
Valve Field Oct-95
Plug Valves Total
Gate Valves
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Outside Turbine Oet-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field ' Oct-95
Vaive Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Gate Valves Total
Ball Valves
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oel-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Vaive Field Oet-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Ball Valves Total
::::::.:::::; "". . . :
.cuk ID*
1006
1004
IOOS
1009
1011
1014
1015
1019
1021
1022
1025
1026
1030
1031
1007
1008
1012
1013
1016
1017
1018
1020
1023
1028
1029
-;-:-. ••;:,::-:::/:•::::,.:•.:..:•: .:-.
Description
m^^m
Ping Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Vaive
Gale Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Bali Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
,_~~^— — — ,-, —
Stee Equip,
(units) Type
^M^H^MH
I^^^^^^^^H
2 in a
1 in a
1 m a
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
I met a
2 in a
4 in a
2 in a
2 in a
„„„ — — — -••• —
Rotar
High-Flow Sampler Measm
Measurements
Measure- S«n
Velocity Samp Wtgnd ,,itni Fa<
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^•W|^M|
HHHHBHIi^H
2.9 0.10 0
4 5 00 0
3.25 0.05 0
25 0 10 0
2.5 0.40 0
2 005 0
1,5 0.15 0
I 03 005 0
45 0 25 0
2.76 0,20 0
2 9 3 01 0
3 9 2 90 0
j 07 0 10 0
9 0 10 0
22 0,10 0
2.95 3.40 0
i 91 3,20 0
1 11 360 0
j.74 6.00 0
.76 0.05 0
2,2 7,00 0
3.8 0.05 0
3,4 4,00 0
—
neter
cmenls
LeakRate I
Ing Correction
lor Factor (l/mtn)
0.1469
-------
Site
Dale
Inctaco
Leak 10$ Description
Size
(units)
Equip.
Type
High-Flaw Sampler
Measurements
Vrfodfj- Stmp Mfni
Rotameter
Measurements
Measure' ScaliBR CorreeUcn
meat Factor Fsrfer
LeakRate LeakRate Cost Screen*** Screen
(l/min) (SCFH) (I/Year) Instrmnl
Unit Valve Vents
Yutranzgaz ~ Petrovsk I Compressor Suction/Discharge Valves (Compressors Depresmrized),,. continued
Compressor Oct-95 1003 Ball Valve
Suetion/Oischarg
e Valves
(Compressors
Oepressurizcd)
Compressor Oc!-95 1004 BalJ Valve
Suclicm/Diseharg
e Valves
(Compressors
De pressurized)
Compressor Oct-95 1007 Ball Valve
Suctkm/Discharg
e Valves
(Compressors
De pressurized)
Compressor Oct-95 1008 Bail Valve
Suction/Digcharg
e Valves
(Compressors
Dcpressurized)
Unit Valve Vents Total
Station fiiowdown Vents
Compressor Oct-95 1001 Ball Valve
Slowdown Valve
Vents
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Oct-95 1002
Slowdown Valve
Vente
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Oci-95
Btowdown Vilve
Vents
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Ocl-95 1006
Blowdown Valve
Venls
(Compressors
Running)
Bait Valve
1005 Bal! Valve
Bali Valve
1000 mrn a
1000 mm c
1000 mm c
1000 mine
4,48 25.00 0
100 mm a
100 mm a
i 00 mm a
0 0.00 0
0 0.00 0
o o.oo o
0 0.00 0
130
63
24
45.5938 96.61 $»,342
f.342 4,940.1363 10,467.60 $145,423
1.342 2,394.0661 5,072.76 $70,474
1.342 912.0252 1,932,48 $26,847
8,291.8 !7,5
-------
Silt
Date Uak I0i
Description
Si» Equip.
(tjnits) Type
High-Plow Sampler
Measurements
Velocity Samp Bkgnd
Rotameter
Measurements
Measure- Seating Correction
tnenf Factor Factor
LeakKate LeakRate Cost Screen*** Screen
(Vmrn) {SCftI) ($/¥ear) Instrmnt
Station Slowdown Vents Total
Open Ended Lines
Yutranzgaz ~ Petrovsk I Valve Field... continued
Valve Field Oct-95
Open Ended Lines Total
Tube Fittings
Valve Field Oct-95
Tube Fittings Total
Pipe Threads
Outside Turbine Oc(-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Pipe Threads Total
Flanges
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Flanges Total
Petrovsk Total
Yutranzgaz Total
0.0
0.00
$0
1027
otal
1010
1001
1024
1002
1003
DEL on Bail Valve Sin a 4.55 0.75 0
Tube Fitting 1 in a 2.4 0.20 0
Pipe Thread Hn a M5 0.15 0
Pipe Thread 1 in a .7 0.05 0
Flange 24 in a 3.5523.00 0
Flange 24 in o 2.7 2.60 0
1.7290
1.7
0.24! 9
0.2
0.1080
0.0167
-------
Site
Date
Inctacu
Leak IIW
Description
Size Equip,
(units} Type
High-Flow Sampler
Measurements
Vetodly Simp Bkgixi
Kittamtter
Measurements
M«»yre- Sealing Correction
mtnl factor Fldfir
LeakRate Leak Rate Cost
(l/min) (SCFH) ($/Year»
Screen***
Screen
Instrmnt
NA = Not Applicable
NR = Not Reported
a = High Flow Sampler - Ver.l
b = Omega Rolamcler w/Glass
Float
c = King Rolamcter
* Replicate
** Vent Leaking inside Also
«** Screening with organic vapor analyzers not done for component 2"
or below per NGPL implementation of inspection and maintenance
Page 17 of 17
-------
Russian Screening Data Summary - Leaks by Leak Size
n-May-96
Site
ttiftnffim
Chaplygin
Unit ! - Recycle
Vent
Unit 4 - Valve 5
Vent
Unit 12 -Fuel
Gas Vent
Unit 7 - Fuel Gas
Vent
Unit 6 - Vaive 5
Vent
Unit 7 - Starting
Gas Vent
Unit 5 - Valve 5
Vent
Unit 12 -Start
Gas Manifold
Vent
Unit 9 - Start Gas
Manifold Vent
Unit 6 - Valve 9
Vent
Unit 12 - Bypass
Vent
UnitS- Valve 10
Vent
Unit 1 1 - Start
Gas Manifold
Vent
Cooler 6 Ven!
Unil 1 - Fuel Gas
Vent
Cooler 6 Venl
Unit 10 - Start
Gas Manifold
Venl
Oat*
Dee-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dcc-95
Dec -95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Dec-95
Leak ID#
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
No Tag
High-Hov
c. _ , Measti
Sax Equip.
Dracriptten (units> Type v,l«i.y
OEL on Plug Valve (Running) 2 in n » 4-75
OEL on Ball Vatve (Blowndown) 3 in a 6.8
OEL on Gate Valve 2 in a 5'4
OEL on Bali Valve (Running) 2 in a 7.1
OEL on Gate Valve 2 in a 4.85
OEL on Bait Valve (Blowndown) 3 in a 5.9
-
Rotameter
v Sampler Measurements
remcnts
Measure- Scsrflag Correction
Samp BfefiRd meO| Factor Factor
^^Hi^HBI^HI
42 3.6 1.342
53 3.6 1.342
92.00 0 3.6 1.342
34 3.6 1 .342
33 3.6. 1.342
30 3.6 1.342
30 3.6 1.342
13.00 0 3.6 1.342
10.50 0 3.6 1.342
12.00 0 3.6 L342
8.00 0 3.6 1.342
3.55 0 3.6 1.342
1.90 0 3.6 1.342
2.35 0 3.6 1.342
1,65 0 3,6 1.342
I.4S 0 3.6 1.342
1.00 0 3.6 1.342
LeakRate
«l/niin)
•^n
••B
405.8208
256.0536
200.7613
164.2608
159.4296
144.9360
144,9360
37.9022
26.579!
22.8514
22.2607
6.6782
5.2191
5.0926
4.7457
2.8441
2.4018
LeakRate
(SCFH)
•I^H
BB1
859.89
542.55
425.39
348.05
337.81
307.10
307.10
80.3)
56.32
48.42
47.17
14.15
I 1 .06
10.79
10.06
6.03
5.09
Cost
($/Y«ar)
m^m
•m
$11,946
$7,537
$5,910
$4,835
$4.693
$4,266
$4,266
$1,116
$782
$673
$655
5197
$154
${50
SHO
$84
$71
Screen***
H^B
••••
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Pen
Screen
Instrmnl
•m
•••B
•
it
0
11
l>
IJ
1)
"
0
(s
o
u
o
u
o
fe 1 of IS
-------
Site Oafc
Gazprom ~ Chaplygin
Unit 9 - Bypass Dec-95
Vent
Cooler 4 Venl Dee-95
Chaplygin Total
Pervomaiskaya
Unil Valve Area-- Nov~95
Gas Turbine 2
Unis Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 6 {Gas Nov-95
Turbine tnlet)
Unil Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine fnle!)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nav-95
Turbine Intel)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Jntef)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Intfaeo
Leak 1M
/Unit 9-
NoTag
No Tag
1154
1172
1001
1166
1042
too?
• 1165
1002
1 144
1145
1142
1006
1030
1137
1027
[017
J084
I06I.2B
1125
Description
Bypass Vent. , . continued
OEL on Ball Valve (Blowndown)
OEL on Gate Valve
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread(nearGafe Valve)
Ball Valve
OEL on Solenoid Operator
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
Ball Valve
Pipe Thread
Flange
Tube Bal) Vatw
Ball Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Control Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Pipe Threat!
OEL on Ball Vatve (Grove)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Needle Valve
Size Equip,
(units) Type
2 in a
2 in a
.75 in a
1 in ;i
6 in a
.5 in a
6'm a
6 in a
.5 in a
6in a
2 in a
30 in a
,5 in a
6 in a
IS m U
2in a
24 in a
1 in a
2 in a
Sin a
1 in a
Rota
High-FIow Sampler Measu
Measurements
^Censure- $c«
Velocity S«rnp Hkjnt! „,,„, fm
6.5 0.45 0
4,6 0.10 0
2,9 30.00 0
3.75 14.00 0
4.8 10.00 0
3.8 12.50 0
6.5 5,00 0
2.3 10.00 0
3.45 5.50 0.05
5.3 2.90 0
2.85 5.50 O.I
2.55 6,00 0
3.9 2.95 0
2.9 4,00 0
4 2.60 0
6 1.68 0
2 5.00 0
3.55 2.70 0
5.4 1 .73 0
6.! 1.50 0
4.8 1.60 0
meter
remerrts
HOB c«r«B« L*akRa«*
Elor Ftrior (I/ruin)
3,6 1.342 1.1983
3.6 1.342 0.1885
1,614.2
27.09S1
18.7968
17.8841
17.2410
12,732?
8.4523
7.2736
6.1335
5.9324
5,8551
4.5714
4.5388
4.1481
4.0644
3.8399
3.8124
3.7614
3.7074
3.1010
Leakkate
(SCFH)
2.54
0.40
3,420.23
57.42
39.83
37.89
36.53
26.98
17.91
(5-4f
13,00
12.57
12.41
9,69
9.62
8.79
8.61
8.14
8.08
7.97
7.86
6.57
Cost Screen*** Screen
($/Vcar) Ins
-------
Site
Date
IO# Description
~-~- ~S
Unit Valve Area-
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine intet)
Cooler A Inlet
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber * (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler 8 Outlet
Cooler B Outlet
Scrubber 3 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Intet
Cooler A Gurtel
Scrubber 4 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet
(Slowdown)
Unit Valve Area-
Gas Turbine 2
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area-
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area-
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet
(Slowdown)
Scrubber 2 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas
Turbine Inlet)
Nov-95 1012
Nov-95
Nov-95
1064.2 B
1010
Ball Valve Body Conn (Bifft)
Ball Valve
Nov-95 1036 Ball Valve Stem
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
1121
1099
1032
Nov-95 H H
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
.062.1 A
1065
1024
Nov-95 .
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
Nov-95
1091
Gate Valve
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly)
Ball Valve Stem
OEL on Ball Valve (Grovel
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly)
Ball Valve
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
1020
1003
1147
1158
1022
1118
1044
1014
Ball Valve
Pressure Relief Valve
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Ball Valve Body
Gate Valve Stem/Pip*
She
(units)
Type
High-Row Sampler
4 in a
I in a
1 in a
2 in a
gin a
1 in a
2in a
.5 in a
.75 in a
.7 Sin a
6 in a
.5 in a
I in a
6 in a
4 in a
Botarnrter
Measurements
racnt
4.9 1.45 0
3.5 1.90 0
5.7 LOO 0
1.5 4.00 0
5,5 0.98
4.3 1.20
0
0
0.95 0
2.55 1.95
3,9 1.20
0
0
3.55 1.22 0
5.5 0.75 0
3.4 1.15 0
3,45 1-10 °
3.4 1.10 °
1.7 2.25 fl
2.3 1.75 0.15
5.3 0,68 0
0
2.10 0
5.6 0,60
„ _*** Screen
tertR*. Legate O* ^ lBg|rmBl
(SCrHJ <
1 045*1
2.6655
2.3042
2.0890
2.0875
i ,9802
1.8922
t .7483
t .5783
1,5330
1,51
, ,-
6.45
tots
5.65
4.88
4.62
4.43
4,42
4,20
4.01
3.70
SOT
$64
$61
$61
$58
$56
$51
1.4
1.4595
1.4581
t.4267
1.4209
1.3726
3,56
3.34
3.25
3.18
3.09
3.01
$44
$44
$43
$43
$42
$42
$40
Page 3 of 15
-------
;.:;.:: ::.:.."• ::..-:::..: :Y: \: :. -:.•:..
Slit- Rate
Imlaco
Leak ID#
Gazprom - Pervomaiskaya 1 Unit
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 153
Gas Turbine 2
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber I (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber ! (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 3 {Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
~~~ .
1018
ion
1056
1019
1146
1094
1035
1023
1049
1115
1161
1057
1123
1048
1131. 1 A
1112
1110
1031
1025
1047
1077
1159
Description
Valve Area-Gas Turbine 2. ,
Control Valve
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve
Pipe Thread
Gale Valve Stem
Tube Fitting (w/ ice)
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve
Pipe Thread
OBL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Needle Valve
Pipe Thread
Gate Valve
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve Body Flange
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Needle Valve
Gate Valve
Size Equip.
(units) Type
continued
2in a
.75 in a
6 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
.5 in a
lOin a
,75 in a
in a
.75 in a
2in a
.5 in a
.75 in a
I in a
.75 in a
8 in a
2 in a
10 in a
6 in a
.75 in a
.75 in a
I in a
1 in a
Kotar
High-Flow Sampler Measui
Measurements
MwKiire- S£»
Vetfidlj Swnp Bkgnd meni fat
4.5 0.70 0
3.45 0.90 0
3.4 0.90 0
1. 16 2.75 0
3.75 0.80 0
2.75 1.10 0
3.4 0.88 0
t .63 I .SO 0
3.45 0.83 0
4.15 0.65 0
5. 1 0,53 0
5.3 0.50 0
5. 1 0.50 0
3.15 0.85 0.05
4.25 0,55 0
3.35 0.70 0
4.85 0.43 0
5.11 0.40 0
3.7 0.55 0
3.45 0.58 0
3.45 0.55 0
1.28 1.48 0
2.9 0.60 0
ueter
ements
LeakRute
Ing CnrreclNm
•tor Firior (l/min)
1 .2824
1.2568
i.2383
1 .2265
1.2171
1.2170
1 .2042
1.1556
1,1 530
1 ,0976
1 .0935
1,0830
1.0417
1.0 1 90
0.9524
0.9507
0.8422
0.8359
0.8275
0.8056
0.7708
0.7389
0.7043
LeakRate
(SCFH)
2.72
2.66
2,62
2,60
2.58
2.58
2.55
2.45
2.44
2.33
2.32
2.29
2.21
2.16
2.02
2.01
1.78
1.77
1,75
i.7l
1.63
1.57
1.49
C«st Screen*** Screen
<$/Year) Instrrnnt
S38
S37
$36
$36
$36
$36
$35
$34
$34
$32
$32
$32
$31
$30
$28
$28
$25
$25
$24
$24
$23
$22
$21
Page 4 of 15
-------
Site Date
itidaco
Leak ID*
Description
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya / Cooler A Outlet (Slowdown), ,
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber I (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Gullet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooier A Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Cas Turbine 3
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
(Slowdown)
1090
1078
1088
1066
1054
1034
1082
11 14
1074
1096
1026
1122
1067
1132
1004
1060
1058
1 1 50
1080
1128
1126
108?
1169
1079
If 16
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Gale Valve (Chero-ltaly)
OEL on Rail Valve (Grove)
Gale Valve (Chero-ltaty)
Ball Valve Stem
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
OEL on Bail Valve (Grove)
Gate Valve (Chero-Itaty)
Bali Valve Stem (Biffi)
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Needle Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Gate Valve
OEL on Bat! Valve
Pipe Thread
Tube Fitting
Gate Valve (Chero-ttaly)
Ball Valve Body Flange
Gafc VaJve
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Tube Fitting
Bail Valve Stem (Biffi)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Size Equip.
(units) Type
. continued
2 in a
1 in a
2in a
1 in a
4 in a
,75 in a
lOin a
2 in a
1 in a
lOin a
.75 in a
1 in a
1 in a
8 in a
1 in a
1 in a
,75 in a
.5 in a
! in a
Sin a
1 in a
2 in a
.75 in a
10 in a
2 in a
Rotatr
High-Flow Sampler Me*mr
Measurements
Measure- SsOH
Velocity Sun? BkgMl BIM,I Fsc
5.7 0.30 0
3.8 0.45 0
4.9 0.33 0
4 0.40 0
3.45 0.45 0
1.66 0,95 0
3.05 0.50 0
4.95 0.30 0
1.6 0.90 0
3. 1 0.45 0
3.1 0.55 O.I
1.3 1.10 0
3.85 0.35 0
3 0.45 0
1.8 0.75 0
1.87 0.70 0
1.64 0.7S 0
2.95 0.40 0
1,55 0.75 0
5.5 0.20 0
3.65 0.30 0
4.9 0.22 0
1.12 1.00 0
3.55 0.30 0
S.t 0.20 0
icter
entente
nc com**™ L«>JcRate
or Factor (l/min)
0.7008
0.6963
0.6614
0.6524
0.6313
0.6269
0.6185
0.6077
0,5720
0.5662
0.5656
0.5622
0.5494
0.5476
0,5392
0.5237
0.4898
0.4787
0.4620
0,4511
0.4463
0,4414
0.4377
0.4339
0.41 HO
LeakRatc
(SCFH)
(.48
1.48
1.40
1.38
1.34
1.33
1.31
1.29
1.21
1.20
1.20
1.19
1.16
1.16
1.14
l.tl
1,04
1. 01
0.98
0.96
0.95
0.94
0.93
0.92
0.89
Cost Screen*** Scree
(Wear) Instrm
$2!
S20
$19
SI9
$19
$18
$18
$!8
$17
$17
$17
$17
$16
$16
S!6
$15
$14
$14
$14
$13
$13
$13
$O
$13
$12
Page S of 15
-------
Site Bate L
iiiri fl
e;>k IDtt
Description
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya / Scrubber 5 (Gas Turbine Inlet).
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95 1015 Pipe Thread
Turbine inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Intel)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 4 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Gullet Nov-95
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
(Blowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(Blowdown)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
(BSowdown)
Unit Valve Area-- iV.\
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Cooler B Outlel Nov-95
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 1 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler A Oulkl Nov-95
1101
1029
1109
1028
1113
1117
1089
1107
1100
1086
1157
1043
1120
1005
1053
1081
1I3I.2B
1021
1095
1083
1046
1151
1106
107 1
Gale Valve (Chero-Italy)
Ball Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Ball Valve Crank
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi)
OEL on Ball Valve (Grove)
Control Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Tube and Pipe Thread
Gate Valve
Ball Valve Crank
Needle Valve
Ball Valve Body Flange Boll
Tube Fitting
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Needle Valve
Flange
Ball Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Gale Valve (Chero-ltaly)
She Equip.
(unMsJ Type
, . continued
.Sin a
1 in a
in a
1 in a
in B
2 in a
2 in a
2 in a
IOin a
iOin a
2 in a
2 in a
6in a
1 in a
1 in a
24 in a
! in a
8 in a
,5 in a
IOin a
1 in a
in a
6 in a
1 in a
1 in a
Ratari
High-Flow Sampler Measur
Measurements
Measure- Seal
Velocity S»ni|> Btcpiil meitt f»e
3,4 0.30 0
4.05 0.25 0
i Q ft *?^ n
„>,;* U.£J V'
3.25 0.30 0
i *i ft ~*A n
J./ U..HJ */
5 A t G A
o. 1 8 u
4.95 0.18 0
4.9 0.17 0
3.35 0.25 0
3,3 0.25 0
3.2 0.25 0
2.85 0.28 0
1.75 0.45 0
.97 0.80 0
i e n 4S O
1 .3 U.4*.' "
1,35 0.50 0
t A~J A d"\ 0
I ,** ( \j,*vj *•'
1.46 0.45 0
3.15 0.20 0
5.9 0.10 0
1 K A A A A
1 .3 U.^W w
3 85 0.15 0
2.9 0.20 0
t Cl A 1"7 A
I . „) / \!.3 r w
XT 0.15 0
nctcr
ements
_ LeakRate
>«g i,fliTeeooti t
0.4153
0.4135
0,3980
0.3967
0.3905
0.3586
0.3549
0.3413
0.3411
0.3359
0.3255
0.3182
0,3152
0.3015
0.2687
—
0.2675
0,2632
0.2653
0.2564
0,2424
0.2390
0.2359
0.2357
0.2319
0.2266
Leak Kate
,^^.|^,|i y,
0.88
0.88
O.H4
0.84
0,83
0.76
0.75
0.72
0.72
0.71
0.69
0.67
0.67
0.64
0.57
0.57
0.56
0,55
(5.54
0,51
0.51
0.50
0.50
0.49
0.48
Cost
/y ^
$12
$12
S12
S12
$11
$11
$to
$10
$10
$10
$10
$9
$9
$9
$8
$8
$8
$8
$8
$7
$7
$7
$7
$7
$7
. ^1,,™ ~™ — • — ' -~,,.~ "~— — — *
Inslrmnt
Page 6 of 15
-------
..,- :•. ...:.... "• •.:•: T. ...::. .:"::.. . ' .:: ... •'-"—• .'..-
Indaco
Site Date Leak ID*
- • -
High-Flow Sampler
„ Measurements
Size Kf|ui|>. ft
Description ^ _ "" * J^.. . _* ,*__ ___...,_..._
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Cooler B Outlet, . , continued
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1108 Gate Valve (Chero-ltaly) 1 in a 3,65 0,15 0
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95 1061, 1 A Ball Valve Stem (Biffi) 8in a 1.55 0.35 0
CooierB Inlet Nov-95 1092 Ball Valve Stem (Biffi) 10 in a «•<» 0.30 0
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1139 Pressure Relief Vatve 2 in a 5.2 0.10 0
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1102
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95 1045
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95 1064.1 A
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1085
(Slowdown)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1068
Unit Vatve Area- Nov-95 1 1 38
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1098
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 167
Gas Turbine 3
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1069
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95 1052
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95 1 05 1
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95 1039
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1 1 05
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1119
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95 1041
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95 1063
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1103
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1070
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95 1008
Turbine Intel)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95 1 1 60
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95 1038
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95 1104
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95 1075
.
Ball Valve Stem (Biffi) lOin a 3.05 0.17 0
Ball Valve Stem 4» » '•" OJS °
Bolt Valve Stem (Biffi) »)in a 2.6 O.I 0 0
i - ,, s fti n i s 0
Needle Valve . ' '" a i.f,/ o.is w
„. . . . ~~ ™-™ — * — "—
Rotameter
Measurements
LeakRate LeakRate Cos! Screen**" Screen
*^T r,ctof pHr™ (l/mta) (SCFH) ($nr«ar) Inslrmnt
-.-.:— •,:.^;::-::--~...- "..:~.-:. " -.---- : ••••• "•"• •••"•' '
0.2235 0.47 $7
0.2165 0.46 $6
0.2138 0.45 $6
0.2133 0.45 $6
0.2110 0.45 $6
0.2067 0.44 $6
0.2063 0.44 $6
0.2050 0.43 $6
0.1986 0.42 $6
0.1968 0.42 $6
0.1712 0.36 $5
0.1677 0,36 $5
0.1449 0.31 $4
0.1429 0.30 $4
0.1413 0.30 $4
O.i 3% 0,30 $4
0.1366 0.29 $4
0.1362 0.29 $4
0.1247 0.26 $4
0.1186 0.25 $3
O.I 1 80 0.25 $3
0. 1 1 BO 0.25 $3
0.1 1 15 0.24 $3
0.1076 0,23 $3
0.1066 0.23 S3
0.1055 0.22 $3
0.1004 0.21 $3
-
Page 7 of
-------
.. : . :. ' ' .,: •: ". : V :::::::.r:.-,:
Site Dalt
Endaco
Leak IM
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya / Unit
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 5 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler B Outlet Nov-95
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Vatve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine I
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 3 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Cooler A Outlet Nov-95
Scrubber 2 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Scrubber 6 (Gas Nov-95
Turbine inlet)
Cooler A Inlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Scrubber I (Gas Nov-95
Turbine Inlet)
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
,,„».„__ ™.,~ —
1168
1013
1033
1124
1097
1076
1156
1149
1171
1040
1133
1 062.2 B
1130
1072
1037
1073
1050
1009
1059
1135
1136
1055
JI63
1164
Description
- — .,...-
, —
Valve Area-Gas Turbine 3. .
Pipe Thread/Weld
OEL on Gate Valve
Pipe Thread
Needle Valve
Needle Valve
Pipe Thread
Gate Valve
Tube Pitting
Pipe Thread on Gate Valve
Ball Valve Body
Bail Valve Stern
Ball Valve Body Conn (Btffi)
Ball Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Ball Vatve Crank
Ball Valve Stem (Bifft)
Ball Valve Stem
Bail Valve
Ball Valve Stem
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve Stern
Needle Valve
Ball Valve
Ste Equip.
(units) Type
. continued
1 in a
.5 in a
.75 in a
1 in a
1 in a
. .5 in a
1 in a
4 in a
2 in a
gin a
1 in a
24 in a
10 in a
6 in a
6 in a
6 in a
.75 in a
,75 in a
6 in a
,5 in a
3 in a
Rotar
High-Flow Sampler Measur
Measurements
Measure- Scat
Velocity S»n»Jt Bkpid metrt F«C
„ „,.
1.6 0.15 0
1 f. n ] < A
13018 0
1 A7 ft ?O 0
2 0*5 0 tO 0
1.78 0,10 0
3.35 0.05 0
3,3 0.05 0
3 0 05 0
1 79 005 0
I.7R 0.05 0
1.64 0,05 0
1,62 0.05 0
1.4 0.10 0.05
1.33 0.05 0
1.29 0.05 0
1.17 0.05 0
1.49 0.03 0
1.32 0.03 0
2 0,00 0
neter
emcnts
lor Factor (I/mm)
0.0979
0.0961
0,0961
0,0903
0.0874
0.0841
0.0827
0.0772
0.0758
0,0715
0.0684
00673
0,0611
0.0360
0.0358
0.0329
0.0325
0.0279
0.0265
0.0256
0,0231
0.0149
O.OJ3I
0.0000
,eakRstc
C«st Screen*** Screen
(SCTHS <$/Vear) Instrmnt
0.2!
0.20
0.20
0.19
0.19
0,18
0,18
0.16
0.16
0.15
0,14
0,14
0.13
0,08
0,08
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.00
$3
$3
$3
S3
S3
$2
$2
$2
$2
$2
$2
$2
$2
$1
$1
SI
$1
Si
$1
$1
$1
$0
$0
so
Page 8 of I
-------
Site Date LI
IndncA
euk lIMf
Gazprom ~ Pervomaiskaya 1 Unit
Unit Valve Area— Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Cooler B Inlet Nov-95
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine i
Unit Vatve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 1
Unit Valve Area™ Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unii Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Unit Valve Area-- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 3
Unit Valve Area- Nov-95
Gas Turbine 2
Pervnmaiskaya Total
Storojovka
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oel-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Ocl-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
Field Area 0GI-9S
Field Area Oct-95
Field Area Oct-95
Scrubber Area Oct-95
1155
1093
1129
1127
1143
1134
1152
1148
1162
1140
1010
1092
1017
1005
M04
1075
1057
1089
1088
1095
1002
1003
1009
1090
1053
1001
Description
Valve Area-Gas Turbine
Ball Valve
Ball Valve Body Conn (Biffi)
Ball Valve Stem
Ball Valve Top Joint (Grove)
OF,L
OEL on Ball Valve
Tube Fitting
Tube Filling
Tube Fitting
OEL on Tube Valve
Station Slowdown (Bypass)
Plug Valve
Station Venl
Gate Valve
Plug Valve
Tube Fitting
Pipe Thread
Plug Valve Crank
Plug Vaive
Plug Valve .
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Station Slowdown (Plug valve)
Ball Valve
Valve - Underground
Gate Valve Scrubber 5
Si« Er|«tp.
(units) Type
continued
.75 in a
10 in a
8 in a
30 in b
flin »
.75 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
.5 in a
,5 in a
Rotam
High-Flow Sampler Measort
Measurements
Meas
-------
Site
Gazprom ~
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Scrubber Area
Reid Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
FieJd Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Date
Storojovka
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Ocl-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-9S
Oct-95
Oct-95
Ocl-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-9S
Indaco
teak ID*
Description
Site Equip.
-------
Site
Gazprom
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
FieW Area
Field Area
FieW Area
FieW Area
FieW Area
Field Area
FieM Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Date
Indsco
Leak !!>#
Description
Size Equip.
(units) Type
Kutar
High-Flow Sampler Mwsu|
Measurements
Mfttsitfe" Sea
Velocity Simp Wend „„„, fm
neter
fiTifnts
b« Correct »'e*kRa««
tor Factor (1/mirt)
LeakRate
(SCFH)
Cost Screen*** Screen
($/Ye»r) Instrmnl
~ Storojovka 1 FieM Area, , , continued
Ocl-95
Oel-95
Ocl-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Qet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oe»-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Q&-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oet-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
1006
1063
1014
1064
1073
1077
1067
1069
1071
1062
not
»Q«4
1066
1031
1078
1052
1099
1021
1097
1081
1029
1091
1024
1013
1068
J098
1087
1058.1 A
1019
1056
1065
1083
1093
IMS
1102
Bali Valve Vent (for F-4)
Gate Valve
Plug VaJve Actuator
Pipe Thread
Underground Valve
Gate Valve
Needle Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Vafve
Needle Valve Stem
Needle Valve
Tube Fitting
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Gate Valve
Plug Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Tube Fitting/Gate Valve
Plug Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve* 2 Pipe Th.
Plug Valve Crank
Gate Valve
GEL on Gate Valve
Pipe Thread
Pipe Thread (on Gale Vlv)
Pipe Thread
Gate Valve
Plug Valve Crank
Bait Vajve Body Flange
Plug Valve Crank
.5 in a
2 in a
in a
1 in ;i
? a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
t in a
1 in a
f in a
4 in a
I in a
1 in a
1 in a
6 in a
I2in a
.Sin a
I2in a
4 in a
1 in a
1 in a
3 in a
1 in a
f in a
12 in a
1 in a
2 in a
Sin a
I in a
1 in a
2 in a
12 in a
36 in a
12 in a
1,83 0.55 0
4.6 0,20 0
1,99 0,40 0
.91 0.90 0
4.85 0.15 0
1.4 0.50 0
1.3 0.45 0
.59 1 .00 0
1.93 0.25 0
1.18 0.40 0
1.1 0.30 0
1.29 0.25 0
.58 0.45 0
1.23 0.20 0
(.34 0.15 0
1.325 0.15 0
1.3 0.15 0
1.86 0.10 0
1.16 0.15 0
1,7 0.10 0
1,14 0.15 0
t.13 0.15 0
1.61 0.10 0
1.4 0,10 0
1.13 0.13 0
1.07 0.10 0
.64 0.15 0
.99 0.08 0
t .4 0.05 0
1.37 0.05 0
. 1.24 0.05 0
1.2 0.05 0
1.2 0.05 0
.6 0.10 0
! .04 0.05 0
0.5038
0.4707
0.4000
0.3958
0.3726
0.3473
0.2895
0.2749
0.2426
0.2326
0.1622
0. 1 598
0.1221
0.1217
0.0999
0.0987
0.0968
0.0936
0.0859
0.0853
0.0844
~0.0836
0.0806
0.0697
0.0697
0.0526
0.0455
0,0364
0.0349
0.0341
0.0307
0.0297
0.0297
0,0283
0.0256
1.07
1.00
0.85
0.84
0.79
0.74
0.61
0.58
0.51
0,49
0.34
0.34
0.26
0.26
0,21
0,21
0.2)
0.20
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.17
0.15
0.15
tt.il
0.10
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.05
$15
$14
$12
$12
$11
$10
$9
$8
$7
$7
$5
S5
$4
$4
S3"
$3
$3
S3
$3
$3
S2
$2
$2
$2
$2
$2
1!
$1
$1
$1
$t
$t
$1
$1
SI
Page H of IS
-------
.
Site
Gazprom ~
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Areo
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
FieM Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Field Area
Rate
Storojovka
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oel-95
Oa-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Ocl-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oel-95
Oct-95
Ocl-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
Oct-95
ffidstco
Leak li>#
Description
/ Field Area. . , continued
1015 OEL on Plug Valve
1 100 Plug Valve Crank
1059 Pipe Thread
1061
1060
1044
1037
1042
1035
1038
1039
1040
1043
1041
1036
1046
1034
1033
1032
1047
I04g
1049
1045
1018
1018
1051
1030
Plug Valve
OEL on Gate Valve
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
NO LEAKS
Plug Valve
Plug Valve
Plug Valve Body Flange
Solenoid Box OEL
High-Flow Sampler
_. Measurements
Size Equip, (v
(units) Type Velocity Sump Bkgnd
2 in a .51 OJO 0
12 in a .83 0.05 0
t in a .53 0.05 0
t • i ^ n ft? rt
i in a * •*- v-"* u
tin a .38 0.05 0
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 a
0 »
0 a
0 a
0 a
3 in a 1.6 0.00 0
3in a 1.6 0.00 O.I
4 in a .9 0.00 0
0 a LI4 0.00 0
Storojovka Total
Gazprom
Total
Rotameter
Measurements
„ , ^ LeakRate
tenure- Selling Correction _
menl Fwtar Furtnr (l/mm>
0.0236
0.0201
0.0123
0.0089
0.0084
O.OO(K)
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0,0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
o.oooo
0.0000
0.0000
918,5
2,790.8
LeakRate Cost Screen*** Screen
(SCFH) ($/Year) Instrmnt
0,05 SI
0.04 $ !
0.03 $0
0.02 $0
0.02 $0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
•o.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0.00 $0
0.00 $0
0.00 $0
0.00 $0
1,946.18 $27,038
$,91.1.31 $82,152
Page 12 of 15
-------
Sit* Dale
[Yutran/»5i/
iBBIII
Suction/Discharg
e Valves
(Compressors
Depressurized)
Compressor Oct-95
Suction/Discharg
e Valves
(Compressors
Dcpressurized)
Compressor Oct-95
Sucjion/Dfscharg
e Valves
(Compressors
Depressurized)
Compressor Oct-95
Suction/Discharg
e Valves
(Compressors
Depressurized)
Oulside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
ViiJve fiefd Oct-95
Valve Field Oet-95
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Vatve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve FieJd Ocl-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Induce
Leak 1D#
1004
1007
1008
1003
1002
1004
102.1
1029
1026
1018
1008
1025
1003
1012
1017
1027
ion
1022
1010
1016
Description
•BPIH^WF
Ball Valve
Bait Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Flange
Crate Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Gale Valve
Bail Valve
Ball Valve
Gate Valve
Flange
Ball Vatv«
Ball Valve
OEL on Bait Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Tube Fitting
Ball Valve
Size Eqwrp.
(units) Type
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^1
1000 mine
(000 mm e
1 000 mm c
{ 000 mm a
24 in a
1 in a
4 in a
2 in a
I in a
2 in a
2 in a
t in a
24 in a
2 in a
2 in a
Sin a
1 in a
2 in a
1 in a
1 me! a
Rota
High-Flow Sampler Measu
Measurements
Velocity Sump Biigtid „„,, f,
••
4.48
3.55
4
2,2
3.4
3.9
1.74
2.95
2.9
2.7
1.95
I.M
4.55
2.5
2.76
2.4
1
^^^^
130
63
24
25.00 0
23.00 0
5,00 0
7,00 0
4.00 0
2.90 0
6.00 0
3.40 0
3.05 0
2.60 0
3.20 0
3.60 0
0.75 0
0.40 0
0.20 0
0.20 0
0.45 0
meter
remenls
Hwf Correction
ctor Factor (l/min)
1.342 4,940.1363
1.342 2,394.0661
[.342 912.0252
45.5938
33.6537
9.70)4
7.2402
6.6445
5.5977
4,9207
4.9166
4.3493
3.4623
3.0344
1.8920
1.7290
0.5034
0.2790
0.2419
0.2189
LeakRatc
(SCFH)
•B
10,467.60
5,072.76
1.932.4R
96,61
71.31
20,56
15.34
14.08
11.86
10.43
10.42
9.22
7.34
6.43
4.01
3.66
1.07
0.59
0.51
0.46
Cost Screen*** Screen
($/Y«ar} Inslrmnl
$145,423
$70,474
$26,847
$1,342
$991
$286
$213
$196
$165
$145
$145
JJ28
$102
$X9
$56
$51
$15
58
$7
$6
Page 13 of 15
-------
Silt Date
Yutranzgaz - Petrovsk
Valve Field Oci-95
Valve Field OcS-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Ocl-95
Outside Turbine Oct-95
Buildings
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Valve Field Ocl-95
Valve Field Oet-95
Valve Field Oct-95
Compressor Oct-95
Slowdown Valve
Venls
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Oct-95
Slowdown Valve
Venis
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Oct-95
Slowdown Valve
Vents
(Compressors
Running)
Compressor Oct-95
Slowdown Valve
Venls
(Compressors
Running)
Petrovsk Total
Intact*
Leak 1W
/ Valve
1006
1009
I0t5
1007
1001
1028
1013
IOCS
1030
1021
1014
1031
'1019
1020
1024
1002
1006
1001
1005
Description
Field. . . continued
Plug Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Ball Valve
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Gale Valve
Gale Valve
Gate Valve
Gate Valve
Bail Valve
Pipe Thread
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Ball Valve
Size Equip,
(units) Type
2 in a
1 in a
2 in a
6 in a
1 in a
2 in a
2 in a
1 in a
2 in a
t in a
\ in a
I in a
1 in a
6 in a
1 in a
100 mm a
High-Flow Sampler ^
Measurements
Messttre-
Velocity Sump Bkfn* mtvl
2.9 0.10 0
2.5 0.10 ' 0
1.5 0.15 0
2.2 0.10 0
1.45 0.15 0
3.8 0.05 0
1.7 0.10 0
3.25 0.05 0
1.07 0.10 0
.45 0.25 0
2 0.05 0
.9 O.tO . 0
1.03 0.05 0
.76 0.05 0
.7 0.05 0
0 0.00 0
100 ram a
100 mm a
100 mm a
0 0.00
0 0.00
0 0.00
LenkRate LeakRate Cost
(1/min) (SCFH) (I/Year)
0,1469
0,1262
O.IM9
0.1 JOS
0.1080
0.0967
0.0849
0.0825
0.0524
0,0510
0.0502
0.0437
0.0252
0.0182
0.0167
0.0000
0.31
0.27
0.24
0.23
0.23
0.20
0.18
0.17
0.11
0.1!
0.1 1
0.09
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.00
$4
$4
$3
$3
$3
$3
$3
$2
$2
$2
S!
$1
$1
SI
$0
$0
Screen*** Screen
Instrmnt
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.00
0.00
0.00
so
$0
$0
8,381.3 17,759.11 $24*,721
8,381.3 17,759.11 $246,721
Yutmnzgaz Total
Page 14 of 15
-------
Site
Date
Indaco
Leak ID* Description
Size
(units)
Equip.
Type
High-Flow Sampler
Measurements
Velocity Simp Bkgnd
Rotameter
Measurements
Me*s&rG' SM!J*S£ Correction
mutt factor Faclor
LeakHale LeakKate Cost
(l/min) (SCFH) ($/Year)
Screen***
Screen
Inslrmnl
NA = Not Applicable
NR m Not Reported
a = High Flow Sampler • Ver.t
b s Oinef» Rotameter w/Glass
Ptoat
c = King Rolameler
» Replicate
** VenJ Leaking Inside Also
*** Screening wiflt organic vapor analyzers not done for components 2"
or below per NGPL implementation at inspection and maintenance
Page 15 of 15
------- |