Austin, Texas 2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forum

Hilton Austin Austin, TexasOctober 9 – 12, 2007

Austin, Texas

2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forum

Tuesday October 9, 2007

2:00 pm – 8:00 pm Registration Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer6:00 pm – 8:00 pm Reception Austin Grand Ballroom Salon J-K

Wednesday October 10, 2007

7:00 am – 5:00 pm Registration Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer8:00 am – 9:00 am Keynote Address Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H9:00 am – 10:00 am Plant Automation:

Readiness / Lessons Learned Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F9:00 am – 12:30 pm • FCC Q&A Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H

• Plant-wide SystemsPrinciples & Practices (P&P) Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G

10:00 am – 10:30 am Coffee Break Austin Grand Ballroom Salon Foyer10:30 am – 12:30 pm Plant Automation:

Readiness / Industry Perspectives Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F12:30 pm – 1:30 pm Lunch Austin Grand Ballroom Salon J-K1:30 pm – 3:00 pm Plant Automation:

A Crude Reality Check Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F1:30 pm – 5:00 pm • Crude & Vacuum Distillation and

Coking Q&A Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H• FCC P&P Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G

3:00 pm – 3:30 pm Refreshment Break Austin Grand Ballroom Salon Foyer3:30 pm – 5:00 pm Plant Automation:

Convergence of IT and PC Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Thursday October 11, 2007

7:00 am – 5:00 pm Registration Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer8:00 am – 8:30 am Lifetime Service Awards Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H8:30 am – 5:00 pm Cyber Security Roundtable Austin Grand Ballroom Salon J8:30 am – 10:00 am Plant Automation:

Supermodels (APC & Full Diagnosis) Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F8:30 am – 12:30 pm • Gasoline Q&A Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H

• Crude & Vacuum Distillation and Coking P&P Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G

10:00 am – 10:30 am Coffee Break Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer10:30 am – 12:30 pm Plant Automation: Operator Training Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F12:30 pm – 1:30 pm Lunch Governors Ballroom Salon C1:30 pm – 3:00 pm Plant Automation:

Energy Management Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F1:30 pm – 5:00 pm • Hydroprocessing Q&A Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H

• Gasoline P&P Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G 3:00 pm – 3:30 pm Refreshment Break Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer3:30 pm – 5:00 pm Plant Automation:

Panel on Energy Management Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Friday October 12, 2007

7:00 am – 11:00 am Registration Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer7:00 am – 7:30 am Rolls & Coffee Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer7:30 am – 9:00 am Plant Automation:

“The Future” Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F7:30 am – 11:00 am Hydroprocessing P&P Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G9:00 am – 9:30 am Coffee Break Austin Grand Ballroom Foyer9:30 am – 11:00 am Plant Automation:

Concluding Keynote Dr. J. Pat KennedyPresident and Owner, OSIsoft Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Schedule of EventsTable of Contents

1 Introduction

2 Session Information

2 Sponsors

3 Keynote Address

3 Wednesday Sessions

6 Peter G. Andrews Lifetime Service Awards Presentation

6 Thursday Sessions

12 Friday Sessions

12 Concluding Keynote

13 Q&A Panelists

17 NPRA Committees

18 Questions 1 - 15

19 Questions 16 - 22








28 Affiliate Directory

Cover photo courtesyShell PhotographicServices, ShellInternational Ltd.

2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forum

The 2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forumaddresses real problems and challenges that youface at your facility and will help you sort throughpotential solutions as you discuss them with panelists and other attendees. Today’s competitiverefining environment requires attention to plantsafety, superior technology, innovation, and excellence in operations. The shared knowledge of the refiners, petrochemical producers, catalystand chemicals suppliers, plant automation specialists, process licensors, engineering firms,and other industry experts at the Q&A andTechnology Forum keeps you moving in the rightdirection as you optimize your plant’s operation.

The 2007 Q&A and Technology Forum program will emphasize process safety and its primaryimportance in plant operations and design. Eachsession will include questions or presentations onproven practices for improving process safety.

Questions & AnswersQ&A sessions will have panels of industry expertsfrom refining companies and technology providerswho will respond to questions and engage atten-dees in a discussion of today’s tough issues.

Principles & PracticesThe Principles & Practices (P&P) sessions, whichcorrespond to and complement the Q&A sessions,will be ideal for operations superintendents, processengineers and others who can benefit from a session that is focused on practical issues, the fundamentals of good operations, and eliminationof persistent problems.Crude / Vacuum Distillation and CokingGasoline ProcessesFCCHydroprocessingPlant-wide Systems

October 9 - 12, 2007

Plant Automation & Decision SupportThe Plant Automation and Decision Support topicsare included in the Q&A and Technology Forumso that attendees whose responsibilities overlapbetween process engineering, unit operations,process control, and planning will be able to usetheir conference time effectively. This “conferencewithin a conference” will have 10 separate sessions that will provide a comprehensive arrayof topics for plant automation professionals.

Cyber Security RoundtableNew at this year’s Q&A and Technology Forum is the NPRA Cyber Security Roundtable onThursday, October 11. This Roundtable will show what tools are available for IT and DCS personnel in the refining and petrochemical industries. Attendees will learn how to use thesetools to anticipate a cyber security attack andavoid having a company’s operations disabled by such an attack.

This is the industry’s only one-day programdesigned specifically for IT and DCS personnel inthe refining and petrochemical industries.

Attendees will be able to attend any of the Q&A,P&P, Plant Automation or Cyber Security sessions.There will be one Keynote session for all atten-dees on Monday and the hospitality suites will beopen to every attendee.

•••••

2

Cyber Security Roundtable Principles & Practices Sessions

Plant Automation & Decision Support

Session Information

The Principles & Practices (P&P) sessionsare discussion-oriented sessions, primarilydesigned for the engineer whose overalloperating experience is less than 20 years.The P&P sessions will complement theinformation exchange that occurs in theQ&A sessions. Each of the sessions willaddress the fundamentals of good opera-tion and the foundational principles forthe technologies that are commonlyemployed. These sessions will usuallyhave short presentations followed by atime where attendees can ask furtherquestions or present their own particularproblems and benefit from the collectiveexperience of the other attendees. The five P&P sessions are:Crude & vacuum distillation and coking Gasoline processes FCC Hydroprocessing Plant-wide Systems (Process Safety, Flare Management, Asset Management)

Sponsors

•••••

•

•

••••

••••••••••

Screening MeetingDuPont™ STRATCO®

Panel MeetingUOP

Opening ReceptionAdvanced Refining TechnologiesChevron Lummus GlobalDuPont™ STRATCO®

DuraThermExxonMobil Research & Engineering Co.Grace DavisonJohnson Matthey Catalysts and TracercoRaschig-JaegerYokogawa Corporation of America

Hospitality BrochureBASF Catalysts LLC

Wednesday Morning Coffee BreakAspen Technology

Wednesday Afternoon Refreshment BreakTechnip USA

Thursday Afternoon Refreshment BreakBJ Chemical Services

Electronic Session CountersBaker Petrolite

Energy Management WebinarOSIsoft

Conference BagsGE Water and Process Technologies

Show DailyHydrocarbon Processing

NPRA also thanks our media supporters:FUEL, Hydrocarbon Engineering,Hydrocarbon Processing, Oil & GasJournal/Oil Gas & Petrochem Equipment,and PTQ

The NPRA Plant Automation and DecisionSupport topics are ideal for those individuals who are responsible for plantautomation, process control, planningand scheduling, IT and modeling/simulation. Unlike other plant automationand decision support programs, this program is designed by operating companies for operating companies.

There will be ten separate sessions underplant automation and decision support: Readiness/Lessons LearnedReadiness/Industry PerspectivesA Crude Reality CheckConvergence of IT and PCSupermodels (APC and Full Diagnosis)Operator TrainingEnergy ManagementPanel on Energy ManagementThe FutureConcluding Keynote

New this year at the Q&A andTechnology Forum is the NPRA CyberSecurity Roundtable. Unlike other cybersecurity seminars, this roundtable is tailored to the specific needs of the ITand DCS personnel in the refining andpetrochemical industries.

This roundtable will address six main topics considered by NPRA members to be top priorities in cyber security:

Making the Case for Cyber Security inthe Company’s BudgetHow to Integrate Business and DCSNetworks / ConnectivityRemote AccessWireless IssuesFuture of Cyber SecurityCyber Security and Physical Security –Working Together

In addition to illustrating the top cybersecurity issues, this roundtable will showwhich tools are available today for the ITand DCS personnel in the refining andpetrochemical industry.

3

PresiderSteve Williams, Aspen Technology

KeynoteThe Katrina ExperienceRoxan Kraft, Motiva Enterprises

The 2005 hurricanes taught the refiningindustry how to prepare for and recover from a disaster, but what about futurehurricanes and other incidents that coulddisrupt the industry? What can be doneto be ready for the next Katrina or 9/11?

Experiences from a Global Roll-out ofRefinery Planning and Scheduling Piet-Hein Daverveldt, Shell International

Supply chain management innovation isa critical competitive differentiator. It isessential to stay attuned to changingmarket conditions and customer require-ments. Shell’s scenario planning processprovides a framework for assessing howmarkets may evolve. Themes common toall scenarios include more intense com-petition, more price volatility and highercustomer expectations in terms of securityof supply and social and environmentalresponsibility. This places a premium onend-to-end supply chain optimization andexcellence in execution. Shell’s GlobalSupply Excellence project implementsglobally standardized processes andtools in its refineries and supplyenvelopes. It also heavily invests inchange management and training.Moreover it establishes the “sustain andimprove” capability for its processes,tools and competencies. Thus it fosters a world-class organization focused oncontinuous improvement and flawlessexecution.

Plant Automation & Decision Support:Readiness / Lessons Learned

9:00 am – 10:00 amAustin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Keynote Address

8:00 am – 9:00 am Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H

WednesdayOctober 10, 2007

Carolyn MerrittFormer Chairman of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board

PresiderChris McDowell, Tesoro Petroleum

Flare Management /Flare Gas RecoveryChevron

Incorporating Safety Learnings intoNew Plant DesignU.S. Chemical Safety Board

Plant-wide SystemsPrinciples & Practices

9:00 am – 12:30 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon G

FCC Q&A

9:00 am – 12:30 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon H

PanelistsAram Asdourian, SunocoRex Heater, BASF CatalystsRegan Howell, HollyRalph Thompson, ChevronPatrick Walker, UOP Michael Wardinsky, ConocoPhillips

See page 18 for questions.

4

Crude & Vacuum Distillationand Coking Q&A

1:30 pm – 5:00 pm Austin Grand Ballroom Salon H

PanelistsBill Cates, Hunt RefiningBrian Doerksen, ConocoPhillipsRegan Howell, HollyEberhard Lucke, CB&IPaul Norton, SunocoRandy Rechtien, Baker Petrolite



PresiderAnne Keller, Jacobs Consultancy

Performing Accurate RefineryConfiguration Studies to Address theUpcoming EPA Benzene Reductions Robert Powell, KBC Advanced

Technologies

Most refiners will have to undertakedetailed studies to determine whatchanges will be needed to meet the newU.S. EPA benzene regulations. The mainproducers of benzene in a fuels refineryare the FCC and reformer. Control strate-gies involve either pre-fractionation ofbenzene-forming species from reformerfeed, or post-fractionation of a benzene-rich cut from the bulk of reformate. Thebenzene in the benzene-rich stream mustthen be extracted for sales or convertedvia saturation.

Most of these configuration studies arenow performed by LP models. Since thechoices are very subtle, the “granularity”of the LP makes it a less than perfecttoolset for this use. This presentation will demonstrate the capabilities of a new toolset for evaluating different processing schemes. The effects on gasoline production and refinery economics are quantified in detail.

Benchmarking Study SupportsBenefits of Smart Refineries Pete Sharpe, Emerson ProcessManagement

This presentation will illustrate a studythat involved a detailed review of twoprocess units, a coker and hydrocracker,comparing prior history from the previoustwo years to the past 12-18 months withthe new systems in place. This study wasdone following a recent process controlmodernization project to upgrade to thelatest “smart” technology. The metrics utilized, the variables studied and thepreliminary results from the first few setsof post-project data will be highlighted.

Plant Automation & Decision Support: A Crude Reality Check

1:30 pm – 3:00 pm Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F

PresiderRich Bowman, TOTAL Petrochemicals USA

A Scalable Automation and Decision Support Infrastructure that Enables a Proactive,Asset-Based Approach to EHS Compliance Bruce Taylor, Suncor EnergyDave Drerup, Data Systems and

Solutions

As a result of several major incidentsover the last several years and recommended corrective actions by the US Chemical Safety and HazardInvestigation Board (CSB), OSHAlaunched a national emphasis programinitially aimed at the US refining industrythat attempted to change Process SafetyManagement OSHA 1910.119 to a performance-based standard. In order to effectively address and benefit fromthis program, refiners need to evaluatetheir automation and decision supportinfrastructure in concert with their EHSsolutions to effectively enable a proactive,record-based, asset approach to complywith OSHA 1910.119 including scalability.

PanelistsRoxan Kraft, Motiva EnterprisesPiet-Hein Daverveldt, Shell InternationalBruce Taylor, Suncor EnergyDave Drerup, Data Systems and

Solutions

Plant Automation & Decision Support: Readiness /Industry Perspectives

10:30 am – 12:30 pm Austin Grand Ballroom Salon F

5


PresiderKen Peccatiello, Valero Energy

Process Safety: FCC EmergencyShutdown with Unburned Hydrocarbon in Reactor / Regeneratorfor a Long Period of Time Valero Energy

Main Fractionator Bottoms Product Ash ABB Lummus Global

Training Boot Camp: 7-7-7 (Days, Weeks, Months) BP

FCC Baseline Monitoring,Troubleshooting, and Unit PerformanceTesting Albemarle Catalysts

Feedstock Effects on Yield,Product Quality and Downstream Processing Grace Davison

FCC Principles & Practices

1:30 pm – 5:00 pm Austin Grand Ballroom Salon G

PresiderBlake Larsen, Western Refining

The Advantages of ImplementingWireless I/O over Wired AlternativesBrent McAdams, FreeWave Technologies

This presentation will explore new technologies that enable greater use ofspread spectrum radio for monitoringand control in industrial environments.Attendees will discover that wireless I/Ointerfaces are less expensive – in somecases costing tens of thousands of dollarsless than traditional wired alternativesand learn how to identify the key economic business drivers and to developa decision matrix to leverage existinginvestments in technology.

Plant Automation & Decision Support: Convergence of IT and Process Control

3:30 pm – 5:00 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Convergence of IT and ProcessControl in the Petrochemical IndustryJason Vick, Valero Energy

Many companies today struggle to findcost effective ways to integrate hundredsor even thousands of systems that areneither automated nor electronically con-trolled within their facility. Valero’s solutionto this dilemma is to converge cuttingedge mobile technology and their fieldworkforce to optimize their processes.

Department of Homeland SecurityBriefing on Cyber SecurityDarin Harris, Department of Homeland

Security

The Department of Homeland Security(DHS) will discuss the nation’s currentheightened threat environment. This presentation will focus in on the relation-ship of the threat environment with cyberthreats and security across the nation’scritical infrastructure. The DHS will discuss the general treats and some specific incidents that have occurredoverseas. The presentation will also highlight the recently released nationalintelligence assessment.

Implementing Security Solutions ThatCo-exist and Support the Mission ofExisting Control SystemsJonathan Pollett, Industrial Defender

This presentation starts with an overviewof the typical vulnerabilities with SCADA,DCS, and real-time process control sys-tems, and how to mitigate these inherentrisks using SCADA security technologythat can be implemented with zeroimpact on the operations of the system.

This presentation will describe anapproach to implementing security solutions for SCADA, DCS, and systemsthat support critical infrastructure that not only co-exist, but also support themission of the operational team. Thoseattending this presentation will gain amuch broader awareness of the uniquesecurity requirements for SCADA, DCS,and control systems, and will be able togo back to their environments and usethis methodology to begin laying out theirown security plan.

SCADA Protocols Detailed for Better SecurityGanesh Devarajan, TippingPoint-3Com

This presentation will cover basic networking ideas and safe practices.The main focus will be in the software vulnerability area. The presentation willdiscuss Modbus and DNP3 protocoldetails along with the function codes andinstruction. Due to the lack of authentica-tion in these protocols the discussion willcenter on how the messages can bespoofed and sent to the server. Finally, it will show how you can use Sulley tofuzz your own product.

Implementing a Standard SecurityArchitecture (SSA) in the Tesoro-Mandan Refinery ProcessControl Environment (PCE)Ron Muller, Tesoro

Tesoro has implemented a two-layer firewall architecture that allows the business and control engineering environments to manage their respective firewalls while providing secure access to shared systems.

Defense In-Depth – A Holistic Approach to Cyber SecurityMarilyn Guhr, Honeywell Process Solutions

Without an effective cyber security regimen, the fundamental mission ofprocess control, to ensure safe and reli-able operations, can be compromised byan ordinary cyber threat such as a virusor worm. Therefore, a comprehensivecyber security strategy that employs adefense in-depth model must be anessential element of every process con-trol and safety system implementation.

Cyber Security Roundtable

8:30 am – 5:00 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon J

6

ThursdayOctober 11, 2007

The Peter G. Andrews Lifetime ServiceAward honors members who have madelong lasting contributions to the valueand vitality of the NPRA Q&A meeting.Recipients of this award have served as Q&A panelists, screening committeemembers, and, most importantly, activeparticipants in the dialogue that is fundamental to the meeting. During their careers, the recipients have demonstrated a willingness to pass ontheir knowledge and expertise to future generations in this forum, have made significant contributions to the meeting’squality, and have emphasized the importance of sharing knowledge in making continuous improvements.

2007 NPRA Q&A Peter G. Andrews Lifetime Service Awards

8:00 am – 8:30 amAustin Grand Ballroom Salon H

Dr. J. Pat KennedyOSIsoft

Charles LeRoyValero Energy

Christina McDowellTesoro

7

The Convergence of Physical and Logical Security in Support of Compliance, Emergency Response and EfficiencyAndrea Gay, CA, Inc.

Real-world security projects to integratephysical and logical security (includingone for a US oil company) will be ana-lyzed. From assembling the team to suc-cessful project close, each project had itsshare of challenges and lessons learned.

The Future of Cyber Security:Changing Motivations, Tools, andAttackers Portend the FutureLeyton Pitzer, Pitzer Consulting

Any security program worth implement-ing will undoubtedly result in a host ofdisparate technical tools and applicationswhich combine to provide a holistic secu-rity package. A holistic security programwill also include the need for managingand performing recurring processes suchas policy review and asset and risk rank-ings. This presentation offers a look atsome of the factors influencing an on-going security program, considerationsfor implementing management tools anda look at some ideas on automation andthe use of technology to integrate manyof these seemingly unconnected systemsinto a manageable security program.

Future of Cyber Security ManagementRick Kaun, Matrikon

This presentation offers a look at some of the factors influencing an on-goingsecurity program, considerations forimplementing management tools and alook at some ideas on automation andthe use of technology to integrate manyof these seemingly unconnected systemsinto a manageable security program.


The Risk-to-Mission AssessmentProcess (RiskMAP) for Process Control SystemsChalton (Jim) Watters, MITRE Corporation

The session will demonstrate RiskMAP,the proven Risk-to-Mission AssessmentProcess now being commercialized foruse in industry. RiskMAP translatesbetween the technical terms of networkrisk and the business terms of corporaterisk so that all can understand anddecide on risk mitigation strategies.

Making the Case for Cyber Security inYour Company’s BudgetCliff Pedersen, Suncor

Process Control Networks (PCN) are thecommunications ‘spinal cord’ that tie theprocess and control systems of operatingplants together, but historically they havenot been adequately separated from thebusiness networks to ensure security andprotection of the plant. Suncor EnergyInc. has embarked on a project toaddress the inherent inadequacies at itsOil Sands plants with the objective ofestablishing secure integration of itsPCNs with the business network accord-ing to industry best practices. This pres-entation will describe the justification(economic, exposure and cultural), thescope, the design and engineering con-siderations, and the intent to position theimplementation for future operations andbusiness needs.

Wireless Application Security –Securing the Plant Application NetworkSteve Beck, Apprion

The challenges of securing petrochemicalplants and refineries can be complicatedand expensive. Understanding key wire-less security issues will help simplify andprioritize the cyber security issues yourfacility needs to address. Some of the top

wireless security issues include:Authentication and access control thusensuring a person or device is who theysay they are and restricting access toapplications, data, and resources.Data encryption and integrity to provideconfidentiality through scrambling of data.Data integrity to ensure what was sentmatches what was received.RF jamming.Rogue APs detection through modernAPs, controllers, and management solutions that can detect and alert onattempts to associate rogue clients.

Security Risk Assessment Practicesfor Wireless Instrumentation SolutionsTom Culling, Chevron

This presentation will present the overallsecurity architecture of wireless instru-mentation solutions, and how all this fitsin with various industry standardizationefforts. Included is a presentation of thedevelopment of a risk assessmentmethodology for assessing this new technology within Chevron and how collaboration between Emerson, ChevronEngineering, and Chevron IT overcamebarriers to adopting this new technology.

•

•

•

••

8

PresiderSteve Williams, Aspen Technology

Using Advanced Process Control to Drive Regulatory EmissionsComplianceDennis Cima, Mustang Engineering

and Constructors

This presentation explores a methodologyfor EMS and APC integration and providesa case study for the potential benefitsand technical challenges for success.

Integration of Fault Detection andDiagnosis Techniques in ComplexProcesses: Application to An FCC UnitCarlos Agudelo, Instituto Colombiano

del Petroleo – Ecopetrol

Many approaches have been tested todetect and diagnose faults in complexprocesses. It has been proposed that ahybrid architecture integrating some ofthese approaches might lead to a betterresult. We propose an integration archi-tecture which uses knowledge from theoperational and fault states of theprocess to build a logic program anduses a rigorous dynamic model in orderto detect and diagnose the definedfaults. Tests using this integration archi-tecture have been made on a Model IVfluid catalytic cracking unit, and theresults are presented.

Application of an Adaptive MPC ControllerYucai Zhu, Tai-Ji Control

An adaptive MPC technology is intro-duced which contains three modules:MPC control module, online identificationmodule, and monitor module. When an MPC design is delivered, the MPCcommissioning and maintenance can bedone automatically under the supervisionof the operator. Two TPA unit applicationshave been carried out with success.


Plant Automation & Decision Support:Supermodels (APC and Fault Diagnosis)


PresiderBill Cates, Hunt Refining

Process Safety: Coker Incident Lyondell Houston Refining

Hardware for Desalting Heavy Crudes NATCO

Chemicals for Desalting Heavy Crudes Champion Technologies

Production Methods of WesternCanadian Crudes Crude Quality

Issues for Refiners ProcessingOpportunity CrudesCITGO Petroleum

Burner Upgrades for Process Furnace Retrofits Universal Combustion

Retrofitting Process Heaters Therma Tran

Crude & Vacuum Distillationand Coking Principles &Practices

8:30 am – 12:30 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon G

Gasoline Processes Q&A

8:30 am – 12:30 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon H

PanelistsTina Drumheller, Frontier El Dorado

Refining Pedro Fernandez, Jacobs Consultancy Kleber Hadsell, TesoroEdward Lowe, Pasadena Refining

SystemGregory Mullins, Marathon Petroleum Jay Ross, Axens North America


9


PresiderCliff Pedersen, Suncor Energy

Operator Training Bryan Aitken, Lambton College,

School of Technology

The Chemical Production EngineeringTechnology (CPET) program is uniqueglobally and is recognized for its academic excellence and outstanding graduate placement as it meets the precise needs of industry. The combina-tion of engineering knowledge and practical knowledge of plant operationshas proved to produce operations personnel with the necessary skills tomeet the present and future demands of the processing industries. This presentation will include a look at thetools that are used in terms of collegefacilities and simulations, as well as thevery unique co-op models and industryparticipation in the program.

Plant Automation & Decision Support:Operator Training

10:30 am – 12:30 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon F

Leveraging Today’s Process Control Expertise George Buckbee, ExperTune

This session provides practical tech-niques and examples for leveragingprocess control expertise globally. Real-world examples will demonstrate the bottom-line value of each technique.This presentation highlights several methods to increase the leverage ofprocess control engineers including: Educating engineers to know andcommunicate the economic value of theirwork.Reducing or eliminating labor-intensive,routine, and low value tasks.Accelerating the troubleshooting process.Using the power of networking to leverage expertise globally.Focusing resources on the biggest payback opportunities.

Overcoming the Challenge of Meeting the CompetencyRequirements of IEC 61511 Chuck Miller, Emerson Process

Management

The recently adopted Industry GuidelinesIEC 61511 and ANSI/ISA 84 mandatethat systems requiring a Safety IntegrityLevel (SIL) analysis be designed, operated and maintained by competentpersonnel. This presentation comparesthe various resources available for structured training and the options operating companies have in meeting the requirements in support of the safetylife cycle.

Making Sense of Knowledge and Intelligence Initiatives in Today’s Petroleum Industry David Haake, IBM Global Business

Services

This presentation discusses some of the key opportunities that petroleum companies face to provide better knowledge and intelligence especially to their front-line workers at key times to improve performance measurement,decision-making, and access to information that helps them take action.

•

•

••

•

10


Presider Craig Harclerode, OSIsoft

Refinery Utilities System OptimizationUsing an On-line ToolSrinivasan Vanchinathan, Sunoco

Sunoco’s Philadelphia refinery has implemented an automated on-line advisory utilities optimization system(Visual MESA) that continually monitorsand makes recommendations on the optimal means of generating and utilizingenergy while reducing overall utilities system operating cost. This paper provides a detailed account of implementation experience, challenges,and means of sustaining such on-line advisory systems.

Energy Management in the 21st CenturyJ. Pat Kennedy, OSIsoft

The volatility, uncertainty, and cost ofenergy are predicted to continue toincrease in the 21st century. Globalwarming concerns will lead to more challenges and opportunities for refinerswith the integration of carbon manage-ment and alternative energy sources intothe energy equation. There is muchdebate about how to best deal withgreenhouse gas (carbon) emissions, butfrom a production planning perspective,managing energy production and use willget much more complicated. Additionally,deregulation in the electrical generation,transmission, and distribution (T&D) sector coupled with supply/demandimbalances has resulted in the need for a dynamic energy response capability in the Oil & Gas sector with increasedenergy supply/demand integration. These changes reinforce the value of a more evolutionary approach that supports a continuous improvementorganizational culture for energy management and optimization.

This presentation provides the rationalefor building a dynamic energy responseand enterprise real-time energy and carbon management capabilities into the automation and decision support systems to address the complexity of new regulation in the energy supply world. A summary of specific recommendations will be presented tohelp Oil & Gas organizations prepare for tomorrow, today.

Closed-Loop Real-Time Optimizationof Refinery Energy System with No Operational Intervention Tetsuji Tani, Idemitsu Kosan

This paper presents key aspects of asuccessfully implemented EnergyClosed-Loop Real Time Optimization (E-CL-RTO) application at Idemitsu AichiRefinery in Japan. This optimizer mimicsthe behavior of a skilled operator workingcontinuously to optimize operations. The E-CL-RTO has been found to havereliably provided optimal targets to vari-ous pieces of equipment automaticallywithout any operator intervention resultingin a more uniform operating strategyacross various shifts and operators.

Plant Automation & Decision Support:Energy Management


Hydroprocessing Q&A

1:30 pm – 5:00 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon H

PanelistsShaun Boardman , Jacobs Engineering

Group Paul Ceccato, Criterion Catalysts &

Technologies Gary Everett, Lyondell Houston RefiningScott Harper, Consumers’ Co-operative

RefineriesYvonne Jeanneret, CITGO Petroleum Gregory Mullins, Marathon Petroleum


11

Presider Dan Kennedy, Pasadena Refining

Process Safety:Debutanizer Overhead Corrosion

Ethanol Blending

Safe Operation of HF Alkylation Units(API Recommended Practice 751)Chevron

Isomerization 101 and Benzene ManagementUOP

Gasoline Processes Principles & Practices

1:30 pm – 5:00 pmAustin Grand Ballroom Salon G


PresiderCraig Harclerode, OSIsoft

PanelistsSrinivasan Vanchinathan, SunocoTetsuji Tani, Idemitsu KosanJ. Pat Kennedy, OSIsoft

Plant Automation & Decision Support: Panel on Energy Management


Notes

12

PresiderFred Hill, Marathon Petroleum

PREDICT Software for CorrosionControl Monitoring UOP

Basic Principles for Water WashCorrosion Control Shell Global Solutions

In-situ Sulfiding Criterion Catalysts & Technologies

Pre-sulfiding and Pre-sulfided/Pre-activated Catalyst Eurecat

Refiner’s Sulfiding Experience Valero Energy

Spent Catalyst Contaminants and the Catalyst Vendor Perspective Haldor-Topsoe

Hydrotreating Catalyst Regeneration Technology TriCat

Refiner’s Experience with Spent Catalyst Management Consumer’s Co-Op

Hydroprocessing Principles & Practices

7:30 am – 11:00 amAustin Grand Ballroom Salon G

Plant Automation & Decision Support:Concluding Keynote


Dr. J. Pat KennedyOSIsoft

With refining profitability stronger than wehave seen since the mid 1970’s, the challenge is to invest money, not only tomake an immediate return, but to providelong term benefits in the case of a return tolower margins.

Dr. Kennedy will review the evidence thatthe survivors in the refining industry overthe next 10 years will be those whoaggressively and effectively invest in andleverage automation and information management to empower their organiza-tions. By viewing information as a key corporate asset and a core element of an overarching corporate strategy, investments in enterprise infrastructuresand systems can provide high returns wellinto the 21st century. Technology projectscan also become the money pits that consume huge amounts of time andmoney without any return – the key is finding the difference. By taking a holisticapproach to their automation and information investments and replacing theevolved, obsolete infrastructure installedover the last 20 years, leading refiners canposition themselves for profitability andsurvivability during the next, inevitable,down cycle.

FridayOctober 12, 2007

PresiderCliff Pedersen, Suncor Energy

Refinery of the Future…Simplicity Eddie Habibi, PAS

The “refinery of the future” is a complex,integrated ecosystem operating some-what as a service function to the petroleumdownstream value chain. By driving thesupplier and user community towardsopen, usable standards, we can abstractthe complexities, and allow an interopera-ble, information infrastructure to help simplify the petroleum refining operation.

Maximize Competitive Advantage withIntegrated Supply Chain Management A.K. Pradhan, Indian Oil

Indian Oil Corporation Limited, India’sleading refining and marketing companyemploys a top down integrated approachfor supply chain management using LPmodels and enterprise-wide resourceplanning (ERP) as backbone. It optimizesthe entire supply chain from crude procurement and refinery production to product logistics and products exchanges.

Visualization in the Refinery of the Future Robert Edwards, Tesoro

Packaging and delivering complex infor-mation that is constantly changing for allof the aspects of refinery-centric supply,operations, maintenance, and distributionactivity will be a key factor in the successof the refinery of the future. Visualizationstarts with vision. This presentation willexamine the evolution of visualizationtools and techniques, look to the future ofsuch tools and what they mean to therefining industry, and address some of the business drivers and challenges associated with formulating and enactinga visualization strategy.

Plant Automation & Decision Support: “The Future”


Aram Asdourian is the Lead ProcessEngineer at the Sunoco PhiladelphiaRefinery where he manages a team ofengineers providing Technical Support forthe FCCU’s, hydrotreaters and crude/vacuum distillation units. He has worked inthe refining industry for 19 years in varioustechnical roles with Tosco Refining; Hess Oil, Virgin Islands; and Sunoco.

Aram holds a BS in Chemistry/Biology from West ChesterUniversity, a BS in Chemical Engineering from Drexel Universityand a MBA from Villanova University.

Shaun Boardman is the Group Managerfor Hydroprocessing for JacobsConsultancy. He has over 24 years ofexperience in oil refining, including refineryoperations, hydrotreating catalyst applica-tions, process optimization, process designand refinery reconfiguration analysis.

Shaun holds a BSChE from the University of Natal’s HowardCollege in South Africa.

Bill Cates is a Senior Refinery Engineer atHunt Refining in Tuscaloosa, Alabamawhere he consults to any refinery depart-ment requiring operating or process engineering expertise. Bill worked at CrossOil in Smackover, Arkansas for 21 yearsholding positions as Project Engineer,Process Engineer, Maintenance Manager, Engineering Managerand Operations Manager. During the majority of his tenurethere, he was the only engineer on staff and functioned as themechanical engineering, civil engineering and inspectiondepartments in addition to the technical process adviser andtroubleshooter to the operations personnel.

Bill has a BS in Chemical Engineering from Louisiana TechUniversity.

Paul Ceccato is a Senior TechnicalServices Engineer for Criterion Catalysts& Technologies with over 18 years ofexperience in hydroprocessing technolo-gy. Prior to joining Criterion, Paul heldnumerous refinery positions in TechnicalServices, Process Engineering, andOperations supervision which focused on hydrotreating, hydrocracking, coker and FCCU operations. Other assignmentsincluded project and turnaround production planning andmechanical reliability coordination. With Criterion, Paul supportscatalytic applications in the areas of hydrotreating, hydrocrack-ing, tail gas treatment and reforming. He is responsible forspecifying catalytic systems, monitoring, troubleshooting andoptimizing process unit performance, establishing operationalprocedures, and participating in the design and revamp of newand existing hydrotreating units.

Paul has a BSChE from the University of California at Berkeley.

Brian Doerksen is Principal Engineer inRefining Technical Services, CokeTechnology for ConocoPhillips where hehas worked for 27 years. He began in theCentral Engineering and MaintenanceEngineering departments in Ponca City,Oklahoma, mainly supporting CoP’s cok-ing units, and coker licensing work and then spent 13 years in the Westlake, Louisiana refinery in positions ranging fromengineering to Maintenance Superintendent.

Brian has a BSME from Kansas State University.

Tina Drumheller is the Process SafetyManager for the Frontier Refining, ElDorado facility. Since coming to Frontier,she has held a variety of positions inprocess engineering and operations.Prior to that, she worked in chemicalmanufacturing operations.

Tina holds a BSChE from Arizona State University.

13

NPRA Q&A Panelists

Photo not available

Kleber Hadsell is a senior process engineer for Tesoro Corporation at theirMandan, North Dakota refinery and has21 years of experience in the petroleumrefining industry. During that time he hasheld assignments including refiningresearch and development; operationsengineering in alkylation, isomerization, reforming, FCC, andcrude distillation; economics and scheduling; and capital project development.

Kleber received a BS in Chemistry from Colorado StateUniversity and a MS degree in Chemical Petroleum andRefining Engineering from the Colorado School of Mines.

Scott Harper was recently promoted tothe position of Superintendent – ProcessTechnology at Consumers’ Co-operativeRefineries Limited (CCRL), Regina,Saskatchewan, Canada. In this role Scottoversees the work of both the ProcessControl group and the ProcessEngineering group. He began his career as a Unit OperationsEngineer with CCRL and spent over 12 years in the OperationsDepartment. During that time he was responsible for monitoringand advising on the day-to-day operations of the naphthahydrotreaters, isomerization unit, catalytic reformer, hydrocrack-er, atmospheric residuum desulphurization unit, hydrogenplants, sulphur plant, sour water stripper, DGA reclamation,crude and vacuum units, and the gas-oil hydrotreater. Duringhis career Scott has also worked as a unit area maintenancesupervisor for 13 maintenance turnarounds.

Scott graduated with a BSChE from the University of Calgary in 1990.

Rex Heater is a Senior Account Managerfor BASF Catalysts where he providessales and technical support to FCC customers throughout the US. Rex has34-years of experience in the refiningindustry beginning with Conoco where hewas a Process Engineer at the PoncaCity refinery and then at the Billings refinery. While with Conoco, Rex was assigned to a number of refinery units and was involved with several projects, including a coker/calciner expansion. In 1976 Rex joined Farmland Industries at theirCoffeyville, KS refinery. At Farmland Rex served in a number ofpositions from Process Engineer to Refinery Superintendent.

Rex has a BSChE from the University of Kansas.

Gary Everett is Senior Refining Consultantfor Houston Refining L.P. a LyondellCompany in Houston, Texas. In his currentposition he is responsible for providingstrategic technical guidance to HoustonRefining management and LyondellChemical corporate staff responsible forthis major, heavy sour crude refinery complex. Prior to thisassignment Gary managed the Process Design and Technologygroup which provided process engineering support for majorprojects like RFG and ULSD fuels projects. Most of the 35 yearsexperience with ARCO and Lyondell has been focused onhydroprocessing technologies, many of which have beenlicensed worldwide while Gary was Director of TechnologyLicensing for Lyondell.

Gary holds a BSCHE from Michigan State University and aMSChE from Illinois Institute of Technology.

Pedro Fernandez is a Group Manager forJacobs Consultancy. He has over 25 yearsexperience in research, development, andsupply of process technology for the petro-leum, petrochemical, and gas processingindustries. His responsibilities have rangedfrom process unit startups and technologydesign, to business and project development and management.Recent project assignments have involved the analysis andconceptualization of alternative gasoline production and refineryconfiguration strategies. Prior to joining Jacobs Consultancy, heheld a variety of technical and management positions at UOP.

Pedro holds a BSChE from Universidad AutonomaMetropolitana in Mexico and a MSChE from the University of Delaware.

14

NPRA Q&A Panelists

Regan Howell is currently ProcessEngineering Manager for Holly Refining &Marketing at the Woods Cross, UT refinerywhere he is responsible for the ProcessEngineering group. He has held variousengineering, planning & economics, andoperations positions in small-to-mid-sizerefineries. He spent five years redefining maintenance practicesand implementing Computerized Maintenance and MaterialsSystem (CMMS) packages; first as an operations supervisor in a refinery and later as a project manager for a software company. He has experience with FCCs, crude distillation, SRUs,utilities and wastewater, hydrotreating, solvent deasphalting,and aromatics extraction.

Regan holds a BSChE from the University of Utah.

Yvonne Jeanneret is the ProcessTechnology Manager at CITGO Petroleum’sLemont, Illinois refinery. She is responsiblefor the Operations Process EngineeringGroup, Process Design, and ProcessTechnologists. Yvonne has 25 years ofexperience in process design, operationsengineering, operations area management, strategic planning,and planning and economics management.

Yvonne holds a BSChE from the University of Wisconsin,Madison.

Edward Lowe is Superintendent for thecatalytic reforming, HF alkylation, and sul-fur recovery units at Pasadena Refining’sPasadena, TX refinery. Edward has overtwenty years experience in the chemicalindustry working for world class chemicalmanufacturing organizations and has beenPlant Manager for several facilities. His experience includesproduction, maintenance, and process safety management.

Edward has a BS degree in Commerce & Engineering fromDrexel University and a BSChE from the New Jersey Institute of Technology.

Eberhard Lucke is the Process DesignManager of the Delayed Coking groupfor CB&I. Eberhard has more than 16years of experience in the oil refiningindustry, of which 14 have been dedicat-ed to delayed coking. He started hiscareer with Veba Oel AG in 1991 as atechnical engineer and was eventually named unit engineer ofthe delayed coker’s operations team and was responsible forday-to-day optimization, monitoring, energy optimization, troubleshooting, operator training and operations scheduling.

Eberhard has a MSChE from the University of Essen, Germany.

Greg Mullins is currently the TechnicalServices Manager at Marathon’s DetroitRefinery where an expansion projectincreasing capacity by 30% and produc-ing 100% low sulfur fuels was recentlycompleted. During his career, he hasheld various positions including processand project engineering as well as technical and operationalsupervision and management. Greg is a member of AICHE andChairman of the Wayne State University Chemical EngineeringIndustrial Advisory Board.

Greg holds a BSChE degree from Wayne State University.

Paul Norton is the Crude Unit Specialistfor Sunoco R&S. He is responsible forcoordination of standard crude unit prac-tices across Sunoco facilities, and theidentification of crude unit capital proj-ects that are aligned with the company’sstrategic operating goals and its vision oftop tier performance in safety, reliability and energy utilization.He has 30 years of experience in refining, starting his career inOperations, moving into the Technical Services Dept., and on toprocess design within the Engineering Dept. where he wasresponsible for grassroots designs as well as significantrevamps of existing units. He has 15 years of experience inrefinery Technical Services covering a wide variety of unitsincluding crude, and vacuum units, and 12 years of experiencein process design.

Paul holds a BSChE from Drexel University.

15

NPRA Q&A Panelists

16

Randy Rechtien is a Senior TechnicalSupport Engineer for Baker PetroliteCorporation in St. Louis, Missouri. In hiscurrent position, he is responsible for optimizing and troubleshooting refineryadditive applications with an emphasis oncorrosion control programs. During his 17-year career, he has implemented process improvements in a wide range of refinery areas, including crude units, FCCU’s,hydroprocessors, cokers and finished fuels. Prior to his tenurewith Baker Petrolite, he worked as a Technical Service Engineerfor AEA Technology-Hyprotech where he employed simulationmodeling techniques to enhance the performance of refineryand petrochemical processes. Randy is a member of AIChEand NACE and has authored or co-authored several publications.

Randy holds a BSChE from Rice University in Houston, Texas.

Jay Ross is a technology manager cover-ing the field of transportation fuels includ-ing FCC, catalytic reforming, isomerizationand biodiesel production. He has over 25years of experience in the refining andpetrochemical industries including processengineering design, R&D, licensing andtechnical assistance. He has served on NPRA and ERTC expertpanels and has authored several patents and numerous technicalpapers and articles.

Jay holds a BSChE degree from Princeton University.

Ralph Thompson is Senior ProcessEngineer, Chevron Corporation, ElSegundo, California. Ralph providesadvanced process support in the FCCUand alkylation areas for the El Segundorefinery. He also provides training, trou-bleshooting, environmental, project, andstartup support for Chevron’s other North American FCCUs.Prior to joining Chevron in 1991, he was the Technical ServicesManager for the Sinclair Refinery in Sinclair, Wyoming. His 30+ year career has also included process engineering positions with Exxon in the areas of refinery process design and technology development.

Ralph has an MSChE from the University of Wyoming.

Patrick Walker is a member of UOP’s FCCOperating Technical Services group. Pathas 15 years international experience withdesign and operation of FCC units. Pat’sexperience includes basic engineering,process and project design of FCC unitreactors, regenerators, main columns andgas concentration units for new units and revamps, as well as process design studies and proposals. Pat’s current responsibilities include home office support for checkout and commissioning of new and revamped FCC units, troubleshooting, and training.

Pat also provides technical service support to UOP’s engineering,research and project sales activities.

Michael Wardinsky is the FCC NetworkLead for ConocoPhillips RefiningTechnology Services group, based inPonca City, Oklahoma. His current respon-sibilities include the development, imple-mentation and sharing of best practices forseventeen FCCU’s operated byConocoPhillips and conducting benchmarking studies and facil-itating FCC unit reviews to identify improvement opportunities.

Michael received a BS in Chemistry from the University ofWashington and MS and PhD degrees in Chemical Engineeringfrom Brigham Young University.

NPRA Q&A Panelists

17

NPRA Committees

NPRA Q&A Screening CommitteeThe Q&A Screening Committee is a forum whereNPRA members can discuss operations in therefining and petrochemical industries with specialemphasis on process technology. The Q&AScreening Committee and panelists met on June25-27 in Kansas City, MO, where the Committeeselected 101 questions deemed most interestingand beneficial to the conference from those sub-mitted. If you submitted questions which are notadequately covered by the selected questions,you may still present them from the floor duringthe appropriate session of the Q&A session. Thefollowing are members of the 2007 ScreeningCommittee:

Matthew Baebler, TesoroVito Bavaro, Shell Global SolutionsSandie Brandenberger, ConocoPhillipsDavid Brossard, ChevronKen Bruno, Albemarle CatalystsTim Campbell, Axens North AmericaRobert Carpenter, GE Water & Process Tech.Bill Cates, Hunt RefiningKen Chlapik, Johnson Matthey CatalystsGeri D’Angelo, Advanced Refining TechnologiesBob Davis, R.E. Davis ChemicalLarry Denk, AggrekoKevin Dodds, Albemarle CatalystsDaryl Dunham, ConocoPhillipsGary Everett, Lyondell Houston RefiningMike Facker, Western RefiningCJ Farley, BASF CatalystsJon Finch, Flying J Angelo Furfaro, UOPTom Germany, CalumetJoey Hagmann, Placid RefiningStephen Haik, Motiva EnterprisesTerrance Higgins, Hart Energy Publising Fred Hill, Marathon Petroleum David Hunt, Grace DavisonJeff Johns, ChevronCheryl Joyal, BP Daniel Kennedy, Pasadena RefiningGarry Kirker, Valero EnergyLawrence Kremer, Baker PetroliteLarry Lacijan, UOP Jerry Lane, BP Warren Letzsch, Shaw Stone & WebsterLarry Lew, ChevronGlenn Liolios, DuPont-STRATCOSam Lordo, NALCOBob Ludolph, Sunoco Tariq Malik, CITGO PetroleumRon Marrelli, Holly Refining & MarketingChris McDowell, TesoroHarvey McQuiston, Shaw Stone & WebsterDavid Mendrek, Murphy Oil USARik Miller, ConocoPhillipsPaul Moote, Sinclair Oil

Brian Moyse, Haldor Topsoe A/SDonald Mulraney, CB&IMart Nieskens, Shell Global Solutions Kenneth Peccatiello, Valero EnergyRoger Pelham, Pelham ConsultingRandy Peterson, DuPont-STRATCORon Pinaire, Flint Hills ResourcesKevin Proops, Solomon AssociatesKerry Rock, CDTechBob Roddey, Roddey Engineering ServicesGene Roundtree, ExxonMobil Research &

Engineering Glen Scheirer, ExxonMobil Research &

Engineering Jeff Spearman, Barnes and ClickBrent Stratton, Valero EnergyJohn Tedesco, GE Water & Process Tech.Michael Toole, United RefiningSal Torrisi, Criterion Catalysts & TechnologiesSteve Tragesser, KBRLee Turpin, Turpin ConsultingKeith Whitt, Shell Global Solutions Bill Wilson, BP Products North AmericaIrl Zuber, Motiva EnterprisesJeff Hazle, NPRA

NPRA Manufacturing CommitteeGary Fuller, Placid RefiningChair

Rick Leicht, National Cooperative Refinery Assoc.Vice Chair

Eric Bluth, Pasadena Refining SystemAl Cabodi, U.S. Oil & RefiningErnie Cagle, Murphy Oil USAJay Churchill, ConocoPhillipsJoe Coco, Flint Hills ResourcesSteve Cousins, Lion OilLarry Cunningham, Afton ChemicalAlan Davis, ChevronJoel Elstein, Flying JRick Fontenot, Lyondell ChemicalPaul Fritz, Sinclair OilJim Gillingham, Valero EnergyWilliam Haywood, TesoroFred Hill, Marathon Petroleum Steve Jackson, Hunt RefiningVince Kelley, SunocoRobert Kent, CITGO Petroleum Pat Kimmet, CHSDave Lamp, HollyMike Lewis, Motiva Enterprises Keith Osborn, Coffeyville Resources Jaspal Singh, Indian Oil CorporationStephen Smiejan, HessJim Stump, Frontier El Dorado RefiningNina Thornton, TOTAL Petrochemicals USA

Jeff Hazle, NPRASecretary

NPRA Plant Automation &Decision Support Committee and Associate MembersBlake Larsen, Western RefiningChair

Cliff Pedersen, Suncor EnergyVice Chair

Craig Acuff, Valero EnergyDarrell Bond, Celanese Paul Bonner, HoneywellRich Bowman, TOTAL Petrochemicals USASteve Elwart, ErgonCraig Harclerode, OSIsoftPhil Hodges, Pasadena Refining SystemPaul Millner, ChevronKurt Rickard, Lyondell Chemical CompanyAnne Keller, Jacobs Consultancy Frank Vanderham, Matrikon Doug White, Emerson Process ManagementSteve Williams, Aspen Technology

Daniel J. Strachan, NPRASecretary

NPRA Plant Automation Program CommitteeRich Bowman, TOTAL Petrochemicals USASteve Elwart, ErgonCraig Harclerode, OSIsoftBlake Larsen, Western RefiningAnne Keller, Jacobs ConsultancySteve Williams, Aspen Technology

18

FCC

Reliability and Safety1. Historically, instrument air was used

to purge FCC reactor instruments.More recently, dry gas or nitrogen istypically used for this service. Pleaseexplain the reasons for moving awayfrom air and provide examples ofoperating upsets which haveoccurred when using air to purgeinstruments.

2. Which type of valve technology ordesign is typically utilized in units withhigh catalyst withdrawal rates? Doyou continuously withdraw catalyst?From a reliability and safety perspec-tive, what type of hardware are youusing for control? What is the bestwithdrawal line design?

3. Carbonate stress corrosion cracking(CSCC) has been identified as acause of failure in FCC main fractionator overhead systems. What changes in feed quality, unitoperation, or configuration would lead to increased risk of CSCC? What parameters do you monitor todetermine whether a system is susceptible to CSCC? While CSCCcan be alleviated through post-weldheat treating, has the problem beensignificant enough to warrant eithercomprehensive PWHT in potentiallyaffected areas or localized PWHTwhen problem areas are identified?

4. Does your refinery/company adopt atime-based rather than inspection-based replacement strategy for FCCreactor and regenerator hardwaresuch as feed nozzles, air distributor,cyclones, cyclone support systems,and flue gas expansion joint bellows?If so, what is the planned service lifefor this equipment?

5. What is the shortest possible timebetween oil out and entry for maintenance on large inventory, high capacity FCC units? How is thisachieved?

6. Some CO and waste heat boilersoperate with bypass stacks separatedby seal pots or isolation valves.Maintenance of these seal systemscan be expensive and these seal systems can be sources of poor reliability. What design upgrades andoperating practices have enabledyou to eliminate these bypass systems?

Environmental7. Is your company either considering,

or actually implementing, FCC projectsthat include reduced CO2 emissions(greenhouse gas reduction-GHGR)as an offset/credit?

8. What level of PM2.5 particulateremoval do you expect (or haveachieved) with flue gas fines separa-tion and removal equipment such asthird-stage separators, fourth-stageseparators, electrostatic precipitators,or wet gas scrubbers?

Catalysts9. Are there specific lab studies or

commercial examples regarding theeffect of regenerator temperature on catalyst deactivation and particleintegrity, specifically attrition properties, apparent bulk density,and morphology?

10. What is your recent experienceregarding the maximum level of equilibrium catalyst metals (Ni, V, Na,Fe, Ca) in FCC units processingresidual feedstocks? Have there beenany recent improvements in vanadiumpassivation technologies? At nickellevels approaching 10,000 ppm, haveyou experienced increased catalystdeactivation as evidenced by lowerequilibrium zeolite surface area?

Process11. What process or catalyst options are

available for shifting yield selectivitiesfrom gasoline to distillate while minimizing the impact on light olefinyields? How are the product propertiesimpacted? How does change-out rateimpact the viability of the catalystoptions?

12. For FCC units with closed riser termination device (RTD)/cyclone systems, do you operate with the primary separator sealed or unsealedin the stripper bed? What differencesin performance do you see betweenthese modes? Which do you prefer?

13. With the move toward greater utiliza-tion of “opportunity crudes” such asCanadian synthetic crudes, whatshifts do you expect in FCC productyield and quality and how will thisimpact the operation of the FCC unit?

14. What reactions lead to acetoneformation and how can they be

mitigated? We have measured acetone concentrations between 100 and 1200 ppm in the FCCbutanes/butylenes stream.

15. What variables influence gasolinearomatics? In particular, pleaseaddress feed properties, catalyst,and FCC operating conditions.

Q&A and Tecnology Forum:Questions 1 – 15

19

16. A number of refiners are adding achloride dispersant to address FCCmain fractionator overhead systemplugging issues. What is your experi-ence with these products and haveyou had issues with downstreamgasoline product quality?

17. What minimum nozzle velocities arerequired in air and steam distributorsto prevent catalyst backflow and subsequent erosion? Please considerboth upward and downward pointingnozzles.

18. Some refiners have installed gasinjection in FCC secondary cyclonediplegs to increase capacity andavoid defluidization problems. Pleasedescribe your experience operatingwith gas addition in the diplegs andany maintenance issues. What advicewould you give to others consideringthis installation?

19. FCC revamps commonly includetechnology upgrades which increasethe catalyst circulation rate whichthen increases the stripper flux andreduces the stripper residence time.Please describe your experience with the high flux stripper and its performance. What is the maximumflux you have achieved? What is theminimum residence time you haveachieved? Will the use of high efficiency stripper internals reducethe required residence time?

20. Several refiners are considering continuous operation of the combus-tion air heater to maintain a minimumregenerator temperature when processing light, severely hydrotreatedfeedstocks. What control systems,design features, and other generalprecautions should be considered?

21. When operating with one or more catalyst coolers on a regenerator,what control philosophy do youemploy (e.g. constant heat duty, constant regenerator temperature,etc.)? What are the advantages anddisadvantages for each approach?How does operating in full or partialburn impact the control decision??

22. With the introduction of modern risertermination devices (RTD’s) and the advent of severe FCC feedhydrotreating, what is your experience(typical values) with the ash contentof the main fractionator bottoms(MFB) product (please provide typicalvalues for: wt% ash, BS&W, particlesize distribution, etc.)? Pleasedescribe the testing methodology utilized and the recommended testingfrequency for this stream. Whatprocess, practices, and/or equipmentchanges can be, or have been,employed to reduce the ash contentof the MFB product?


Notes

20

Crude/Vacuum Distillationand Coking

Process Safety23. High acid crude processing increases

mechanical integrity risk. What stepsdo you take to ensure piping andvessel integrity when running thesecrude oils? Please discuss:

• Safe limits of operation (SLO’s) for crude acid number, sulfur, temperature and velocity;

• Metallurgy upgrades;• Chemical additives;• Inspection techniques, including

smart pigging, eddy current testing,UT and inspection frequencies; and

• Inspecting furnace convection sections and other equipment thatare difficult to access.

24. How do you manage risk of heaterfirebox explosion? Please describeyour heater shutdown systems. Towhat extent do you rely on APIRecommended Practice 556,Instrumentation, Control, andProtective Systems for Fired Heatersand Steam Generators? Do you double block and vent both fuel gasand pilots? Do you use the fuel control valve as a block valve or arethese separate valves? How often doyou test the components of the heatershutdown system?

25. Coker drum operations have severalareas of risk. Please describe yourcurrent practices and plans for minimizing risk in the following areas:

• Bottom head; • Top head; • Drilling; and• Switching.

Is remote operation of unheading anddrilling operations a feasible target?

Opportunity Crudes26. What is your experience with crude

containing high levels of mercury?What are the operational and safetyissues?

27. What are the low-temperature aqueous corrosion impacts of processing high TAN crudes? Howdo you mitigate those impacts?

Desalting28. How do you increase the capacity

and performance of existing desaltersystems without major capital invest-ment?

29. What operating strategies do youemploy when desalting high conductivity crudes? What operationaland/or equipment changes mitigatethe problems caused by high conductivity?

30. What options are available to minimize the impact of high BS&Wcrudes on desalter operation andwastewater treating?

31. What are the challenges in desaltingheavy or synthetic crudes such asthose from western Canada orVenezuela? What are your experi-ences?

32. What are the best practices for minimizing desalter make-up and,consequently, desalter effluent volumes? Is it technically or economically feasible to utilizedesalter effluent as make-up water for cooling water or boiler feed water service?


21

Crude/Vacuum Distillation33. What resid cut point have you

achieved during deep-cut operations?Please comment on vacuum unitdesign practices and the impact ofdeep-cut operations on downstreamprocesses.

34. What impacts are oil field additiveshaving on crude unit operations?What mitigation strategies do youuse? Please describe your experi-ences.

Crude Heater35. Please describe your experience

with the latest generation of ultra-lowNOx burners. Please comment onoperating performance (NOx levelachieved); flame height; operability;and sensitivity to fuel gas compositionvariability.

36. During a unit turnaround, how are you assessing remaining life for convection and radiant coils in theshort time available?

37. What practices do you currentlyemploy for exterior scale and processside coke removal in processheaters? What criteria are used todetermine level of cleanliness?

Coker Heater38. What mitigation strategies have you

used to reduce delayed coker furnacefouling? Were they successful?

39. Is there a correlation between vacuumtower operating severity and delayedcoker furnace fouling?

40. Does your refinery (or refineries) haveplugged headers (mule ears) on oneend or both ends of the heater? Isthis common in the industry? Are youplanning to phase them out?

41. How do you justify replacing majorcapital assets such as coker heatersand coke drums?

Coke Drums42. What advances have been made

on coke drum life expectancy, either through new drum designs oroperating best practices?

43. What on-line inspection techniques(after a drum cut) have you employedon coke drums? Have you used laserID measurement or video inspectionto detect incipient cracks?

44. Which coke drum weld seams aremore prone to cracking (cone-to-shellattachment or 2nd or 3rd seam frombottom)? What techniques have youemployed to repair these cracks?

Coker Operations45. Please describe your insulation sys-

tem best practices for minimizingheat loss from a coke drum. Are thereany correlations between coke drumoverhead vapor temperature andcoke make and/or liquid yield?

46. What procedures do you use (or areconsidering) to reduce coke drumemissions during the decoking steps?

47. When a full drum is switched to blow-down to begin cooling, we often seea rapid rise in foam level which isimmediately reduced once water isintroduced into the drum. What maybe causing this and how might it bemitigated?

Coker Operations48. For refiners who have implemented or

are implementing coke drum blow-down vapor recovery: How did theadditional backpressure on the blowdown drum impact coke drumcooling and vapor recovery to thecoker compressor and/or the flarerecovery compressor? Were additionalrelief valves required to maintain theunit’s relief capacity?


Notes

22

Gasoline Processes

Process Safety49. In the past year, a sulfuric alkylation

unit released a significant amount ofsulfur dioxide to atmosphere whenlight hydrocarbon flowed from thereaction zone through the acid blowdown system and into the spentacid tank. What measures do yourecommend for preventing this?

50. What is the proper firefighting mediato use when putting out a fire whenboth spent sulfuric acid and heavyhydrocarbon are present (e.g. in aspent acid tank or a diked area whichhas a layer of hydrocarbon floatingon the spent acid)?

51. Reforming unit stabilizer column toptrays and overhead condensers canexperience fouling with ammoniumchloride salts which are commonlyremoved by on-line water washing ofthe column overhead. What practicesdo you employ to reduce the risk ofrapid corrosion and the potential failure associated with this foulingand subsequent water washing procedure?

52. Have you found highly condensedaromatics (i.e. red oil) around thereforming unit, especially around heatexchangers and/or valve leaks? What safety precautions do you recommend for handling this material?

Alkylation53. In a hydrofluoric acid alkylation unit,

what can you do to prevent pluggingin the acid-soluble oil caustic neutralizer?

54. In a sulfuric acid alkylation unit, whatcan you do to minimize foamingand/or plugging in caustic wash orwater wash systems?

55. Have you incorporated coalescingmedia into your acid settlers toreduce acid carryover? If so, whatwere the benefits and/or problems?

56. In a sulfuric acid alkylation unit, therehave been problems keeping theacid wash electrostatic precipitator(EP) operational. What steps do yourecommend to improve the reliabilityof the EP?

57. What sulfur concentrations do youhave in your alkylate and what haveyou done to decrease the sulfur con-tent?

58. In a sulfuric acid alkylation unit, therefrigeration compressor’s controlsmaintain a positive suction pressureby opening the anti-surge recyclevalve. This limits refrigeration and,therefore, unit capacity. Do you operate the refrigeration compressorin vacuum? Is oxygen entrainment a concern? What have you done to debottleneck the refrigeration section?

59. For a hydrofluoric acid (HF) alkylationunit, what instrumentation do you recommend for controlling HF acidlevels throughout the unit?

Isomerization60. How do you detect leaks in an

isomerization unit’s steam chargeheater? Have you been able to detecta leak before a significant portion ofthe catalyst bed was deactivated?

61. Have you found that you needed toinstall a methanator upstream of achlorided catalyst isomerization unitto remove carbon monoxide (CO)from the feed? What is the source ofthe CO and how much of a differencehas the addition of the methanatormade to catalyst life? What is theexpected payout for the cost of themethanator?

Naphtha Hydrotreating62. How much coker naphtha can be

added to the naphtha hydrotreaterfeed before you need to add a separate diolefin reactor?

63. What is the upper limit for mercury incatalytic reformer feed? What level ofmercury in naphtha is removed in anaphtha hydrotreater? Does the useof cobalt/molybdenum (CoMo) ornickel/molybdenum (NiMo) catalystmake a difference in mercuryremoval? What is the typicalhydrotreating catalyst capacity formercury loading? If the mercury content in the naphtha is particularlyhigh, is there an alternate method of mercury removal?

64. For an FCC heavy gasolinehydrotreater, how much arsenic(ppbw) do you see in the feed andhow do you handle it?


23

65. Have you been successful in reducingnaphtha hydrotreater reactor pressuredrop by the use of chemical injectionto the reactor? What were the keys tosuccess, and how much time did thechemical injection procedure add tocycle length?

66. We have experienced ammoniumchloride fouling at several of our siteswith the location of the deposits varying from unit to unit. Of particularconcern are deposits around therecycle gas compressors. Whatwashing fluid do you recommend foreliminating these deposits from thecompressors? Can you mitigate thesedeposits by modifying the operatingconditions? What is the best strategyto minimize ammonium chloride formation?

67. Have you seen increased catalystdeactivation in FCC gasolinehydrotreaters due to CO getting intothe unit? What is the deactivationmechanism? What was the source ofthe CO and how did you mitigate itseffects? How much deactivation didyou experience?

68. Please discuss coalescer operationand rating for naphtha service including the impacts that largeswings in feed water content andinorganic solids contamination haveon coalescer performance. Are thereany good references on this topic?From a diagnostic standpoint, howcan free and dissolved water contents be accurately sampled andmeasured? Are any commercial dataavailable which show a componentwater balance around a coalescerwhere the balance actually closes?


Reforming69. How do you address polymer

deposits on combined feed exchang-ers in continuous regenerationreformers? Do you have parallelexchangers equipped with valvingthat enables one heat exchanger tobe taken off-line and cleaned whilethe unit continues to operate? Thisproblem has resulted in reducedrates or reduced hydrogen to hydrocarbon (H2/HC) ratio.

70. A continuous reformer running at veryhigh temperature and low H2/HC ratiohas sulfur injected as recommendedby the licensor. However, there is stilla large amount of coke build upbetween the scallops and the reactorwall. What is the likely cause of thiscoke formation and what steps doyou recommend to resolve this problem?

71. Do you use an oxygen stripperupstream of naphtha hydrotreater/continuous regeneration reformingunits to remove absorbed oxygenfound in purchased naphtha or naphtha that has been in storage? If so, what are the operating parame-ters of the oxygen stripper? Are thereadditive alternatives?

72. The mandatory addition of highethanol concentrations to gasoline isreducing the reformate’s requiredoctane. What changes need to bemade to a regenerator to allow it torun in a low coke mode?

73. With the new stronger scallopdesigns, what is the next weakest linkthat will break when the catalyst bedpressures build to the point wheresomething has to break? What causeshigh reactor bed pressure and what are you doing to address theproblem?

Notes

24

Hydroprocessing

Safety74. What are your best practices for

mitigating the risk of hydrogen backflow to tankage during a hydrotreaterfeed pump trip?

75. How do you protect against heatertube failures? Are operator observations adequate or mustdesign and other monitoring features be incorporated? What are these features?

76. How are you applying API RP 579,Recommended Practice for Fitness-for-Service, to hydroprocessing unitfired heaters and steam/methanereformers? Are the inspection techniques and asset life modelingsufficient for improving turnaroundmanagement and extending turnaround cycles?

77. With the increasing number of larger,multi-bed reactors installed for highseverity operation (ULSD, FCC feedtreating, heavy crude, etc.), how areyou managing the additional timerequired to prepare the reactors forunloading (lower explosive limit (LEL),inert atmosphere, etc.)?

78. Are you using partial stroke testing on critical service high rate depres-suring valves to ensure valve availability in hydrocrackers andhydrotreaters? What do you do to test other emergency shutdown valve systems?

Hydrogen Management79. Given ULSD-related increases in

hydrogen consumption, sulfur/nitrogen removal, and the associatedimpact on existing downstreamprocesses such as amine system,sour water stripper (SWS), and sulfurrecovery units (SRUs), how have you changed your FCC feed treateroperating strategy?

80. Do you have experience operatingPSA (pressure swing absorption)units for hydrogen recovery frompurge gases with significant quantitiesof H2S? Does the H2S cause anyproblems? Are maintenance intervalsaffected? What is a typical valve service interval for a PSA unit inhydrogen recovery operations?

Catalyst81. With the newer regeneration/rejuvena-

tion processes for catalysts with Type II active sites, what has beenyour experience with reuse of thesecatalysts in ULSD or other services?

82. What are the primary catalyst concerns when restarting the unitafter a total power failure?

Process83. What are the “best in class” practices

for ensuring adequate reservequench in both ULSD hydrotreatersand hydrocrackers? How do youdetermine the reserve quenchrequirement?

84. With tightening fuel regulations andthe increased severity of distillatehydrotreater operations, have youexperienced any unanticipated problems such as corrosion, foulingor catalyst issues?

85. Please identify the possible causes of increased pressure drop in middleand lower catalyst beds. What solutions have you implemented toprevent pressure drop events?

86. Given that FCC product yields canusually be improved significantly byfeed hydrotreating, what level of performance (e.g., hydrogen uptake,basic nitrogen removal, desulfuriza-tion, etc.) might justify a new FCCfeed treater installation?

87. With the projected shift to makingmore diesel and less gasoline, haveyou modified the FCC feed treater to add conversion capability andmake more diesel? What changes in catalyst type, reactor volume, pressure, or product separation areneeded to do this?


25

88. Operating a FCC feed treater in aromatic saturation mode generallyincreases FCC liquid yields. Haveyou found that this increased severityleads to more refractory sulfurspecies in the LCO? If so, whatoptions do you have to compensate?

89. When co-processing diesel and VGOfor ULSD and FCC feed treatingrespectively, does this require a spe-cialty catalyst and/or a modification ofoperating parameters? What is theimpact on the FCC unit?

90. What levels of arsenic have youobserved in opportunity crudes andhow are the arsenic levels distributedthrough the various crude distillationfractions?

91. As these opportunity crudes arebeing processed and the use ofarsenic trap catalysts is becomingincreasingly common, higher levels of arsenic remain behind on spentcatalyst. Are there special or additional precautions and proceduresthat need to be implemented for thesafety of the personnel that handlethis spent catalyst?


92. Are you aware of any “runaway” reactions in ULSD hydrotreaters (a runaway is defined as a self-perpetuating reaction characterizedby a large temperature increase)?Please discuss the factors that cancause such a runaway.

93. The recommended hydrogen circula-tion rate for ULSD service is typicallyhigher than in pre-ULSD days (i.e. > 5:1 hydrogen available/hydrogenconsumed). How are units operatingat ratios less than 3:1 performingcompared to predictions?

94. In hydrotreaters with high heatrelease (i.e. hydrocrackers, FCC feedtreaters, and ULSD units) what criteria are used to determine distri-bution throughout the beds during theentire cycle? Is there a recommendedthermocouple arrangement and density? Is there an optimal or “bestin class” arrangement?

95. Are you using advanced controltechniques to optimize ULSD unit

operations? Have you utilized feedback/feed forward controls successfully? What variables haveyou considered in these advancedcontrol schemes? Are there specificanalyzer recommendations for thisservice?

Notes

26

NotesQ&A and Tecnology Forum:Questions 96 – 101

Process96. What best practices do you employ

for the use of diesel fuel additivessuch as lubricity, conductivity, pour point stability, and cetaneimprovement?

97. How are you dealing with previouslyprocessed diesel streams that don’tmeet ULSD specifications (e.g. dieselfrom FCC feed treaters, ARDS, H-Oilor LCFiner units and biodiesel)?

98. What factors affect ULSD hydrotreaterend of run (EOR)? Have there beenany issues (other than color specifi-cation) due to high temperature atEOR? How do LCO percentage,operating pressure, feed gravity, andfeed endpoint affect the EOR color?

99. Initially, common carrier pipelinesestablished very strict ULSD sulfurmaximums to ensure that the productmet end-use specifications. Morethan a year later, these same pipelineoperators are considering relaxingtheir specifications. What optionswould you consider to take advantageof these changes?

100. How do you manage or avoid contamination due to the swingbetween jet fuel (up to 3000 ppmsulfur) and seasonal production ofULSK (ultra-low sulfur kerosene, <15 ppm sulfur)?

101. New North American hydrocrackerunits have been designed to makeULSD rather than gasoline (typical of older designs). What design, catalyst, and process changes havebeen implemented to make thisproduct shift and ensure that themore stringent ULSD specificationsare met?

27

Notes

28

Affiliate Directory

BASF Catalysts LLCTeresa Garcia1800 St. James PlaceSuite 400Houston, TX 77056Phone: [email protected]

BJ Chemical ServicesTerry JacobsP.O. Box 1499Hobbs, NM 88240Phone: [email protected]

Champion Technologies, Inc.Rhonda Puyau3200 S.W. FreewaySuite 2700Houston, TX 77027Phone: [email protected]

Chevron Lummus GlobalLori De Amaral100 Chevron WayBuilding 10Suite 3338Richmond, CA 94801Phone: [email protected]

Criterion Catalysts & Technologies L.P.Joyce HurstTwo Greenspoint PlazaSuite 100016825 Northchase DriveHouston, TX 77060Phone: [email protected]

DuPont™ STRATCO®, BELCO®

& Sulfur Solutions Pam Pryor11350 Tomahawk Creek ParkwaySuite 20016825 Northchase DriveLeawood, KS 66211Phone: [email protected]

DuraTherm, Inc.Steve CorbinP.O. Box 58466Houston, TX 77258-8466Phone: [email protected]

Emerson Process ManagementSarah Danaher7070 Winchester CircleBoulder, CO 80301Phone: [email protected]

ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Co.Charlene Kegerreis3225 Gallows RoadRoom 3A2321Fairfax, VA 22037-0001Phone: [email protected]

GE Water & Process TechnologiesJohn Tedesco4636 Somerton RoadTrevose, PA 19053Phone: [email protected]

Grace Davison/ARTElizabeth Mettee7500 Grace DriveBuilding 25, 2nd FloorColumbia, MD 21044Phone: [email protected]

ABB Lummus Global, Inc.Scott Shorey3010 Briarpark DriveHouston, TX 77042Phone: [email protected]

Air Products / Technip Hydrogen AllianceShirley Miller7201 Hamilton BoulevardAllentown, PA 18195-1501Phone: [email protected]

Albemarle CatalystsNick Sommers2625 Bay Area BoulevardHouston, TX 77058Phone: [email protected]

ArkemaHank Rothfeder 2000 Market StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19103Phone: [email protected]

Aspen Technology Inc.Denise Staubach200 Wheeler RoadBurlington, MA 01803Phone: [email protected]

Axens North America, Inc.Katherine Bui1800 St. James PlaceSuite 500Houston, TX 77056Phone: [email protected]

Baker Petrolite CorporationScott Bieber12645 West Airport BoulevardSugar Land, TX 77478Phone: [email protected]

Gulf Chemical & Metallurgical Corp.Nancy C. WollamP. O. Box 2290Freeport, TX 77542-2290Phone: [email protected]

Haldor Topsoe, Inc.Theresa Deisch17629 El Camino RealSuite 300Houston, TX 77058Phone: [email protected]

Honeywell Process SolutionsMargarita Ceballos1250 W Sam Houston Pkwy SHouston, TX 77042Phone: [email protected]

INTERCAT Inc.Jennifer Rennick2399 Hwy 34 SouthSuite C1Manasquan, NJ 08736Phone: [email protected]

Intertek PARCMichelle Kozlowski100 William Pitt WayPittsburgh, PA 15238Phone: 412-423-1120 [email protected]

Invensys SimSci-EsscorKathy Beckman26561 Rancho Parkway, SouthLake Forest, CA 92630Phone: [email protected]

Johnson Matthey PTCTina MossTwo TransAm Plaza DriveSuite 230Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181Phone: [email protected]

Koch Heat Transfer Company, LPKaren Wanjura12602 FM 529Houston, TX 77041Phone: [email protected]

Nalco CompanyBen Schiltz7705 Highway 90ASugar Land, TX 77478Phone: [email protected]

OnBase by Hyland SoftwareJohn McDonough 28500 Clemens Rd.Westlake, OH 44145Phone: [email protected]

OSIsoftCraig R. Harclerode738 Highway 6 SouthSuite 260Houston, TX 77079Phone: [email protected]

Process Dynamics, Inc.Jon Skeds2434 Deane Solomon RoadFayetteville, AR 72704Phone: [email protected]

Raschig-Jaeger TechnologiesJohn P. Halbirt1611 Peachleaf StreetHouston, TX 77039Phone: [email protected]

Saudi AramcoRoy Debellefeuillec/o Y. MunizAramco Services Company9009 West Loop SouthHouston, TX 77096Phone: [email protected]

Shaw Stone & WebsterChris Santner1430 Enclave ParkwayHouston, TX 77077-2023Phone: [email protected]

Süd-Chemie Inc.Jill ParmanP.O. Box 32370Louisville, KY 40232Phone: [email protected]

Technip USAPaul W. Fisher11700 Old Katy Road, Suite 150Houston, TX 77079Phone: 281-249-7929 [email protected]

UOP LLCMargaret Oak25 East Algonquin RoadDes Plaines, IL 60017-5017Phone: [email protected]

Yokogawa Corporation of America Kay Campbell12530 West Airport Blvd.Sugar Land, TX 77478Phone: [email protected]

Companies in bold are sponsors.

202.457.0480 www.npra.org

1899 L Street, NWSuite 1000Washington, DC20036.3896

© 2007 National Petrochemical & Refiners Association

National Petrochemical & Refiners Association

Austin, Texas 2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forum

Documents

Transcript of Austin, Texas 2007 NPRA Q&A and Technology Forum