Montreal Refinery Horizon Project Delayed Coking Unit Presentation

Montreal Refinery Horizon Project: Delayed Coking Unit Presentation for Occupational Hygiene Association March 26, 2008 Colleen Stevenson MHSc, CIH, ROH

AGENDA 1. Purpose of Presentation 2. What is the Horizon Project? • What is a Delayed Coking Unit? 3. EH&S Deliverables on the Project 4. Examples of Interesting Issues

Purpose of this Presentation To share my EH&S experiences on a large scale project. Why? – – – To share learnings and network with others who may be doing something similar To demonstrate how EH&S professionals can be involved in the design of a facility to mitigate EH&S risks prior to operation To validate that the IH education/experience provides a background that positions us well for any disciplines within EH&S field

The Horizon Project- an upgrade to Montreal Refinery • • Involves the construction of a delayed coking unit (DCU) or a “coker” Involves the revamp of process units and offsites & utilities When its all said and done: – 271 Pieces of Equipment – 96 Km of Pipe – 9000 Tonnes sof Steel – 29, 400 Cubic Metres of Concrete – 800 Km of Cable and Wire – ~$1, 000, 000 Dollars – 6, 400, 000 Man-hours – People • Petro-Canada, Bantrel (Engineering Procurement, Construction Management firm), contractors, subcontractors

Montreal Refinery-Coker Simulation Picture

The Challenges 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Language Safety Culture in Quebec Cost Constraints Tight construction schedule Largest Downstream project Working with an EPCM on such a project

What the Heck is a Coker? • The benefit of a delayed coking unit is that it allows the refinery to use a lower cost crude; • It makes more valuable products like gasoline and distillates vs lower margin products like asphalt and heavy fuel oil; • reduces our imports of gasoline/distillates

Simple Coker Block Flow Diagram Extraneous Feeds Off gas Coke Drum Vacuum Tower Bottoms/Asphalt Charge Heater Coke Fractionator Light naphtha Heavy naphtha Kero Distillate Gas Oil

My Involvement/EH&S Deliverables Refinery Site 1. Involvement with Certificate of authorization process and stakeholder engagement 2. Involvement with design for the whole project – Ensure design meets regulatory compliance and internal practices – Meet deliverables for project management system 3. Involvement with on site safety/prevention program and construction – Creating the H/S Program including details around CSST Principle Contractor issues – HSE resources on site to support the project – Setting expectations with Sr. Management of Contractors to understand their H/S programs – Creation of Metrics – Stewardship TME (Port) – Storage area for coke at the Port of Montreal – Involvement with self assessment – Monitoring Canterm and C of A process Marsulex (Sulphur Plant) – plant next door that takes our H 2 S laden streams and converts it to sulphur (its the sulphur plant for Shell and PC) – Review t of expansion options and impact on emissions – Walk through and preliminary review of safety program

Assessments To Support Permits or Stakeholder Engagement • Dispersion modeling for combustion emissions using bylaw 90 equation for permit • Additional dispersion modeling and deposition modeling using Aermod for PM 10 and 2. 5 um • Baseline noise survey and then modeling estimate of new coker impact (occupational and community risk) • Community Risk/Impact Assessment • Soil Assessment for classification and occupational hazard risk • Economic Impact Assessment

Environmental Emission Impact Summary of air emissions (M T/ Y) Refinery Post Coker 2000 2005 2010 Differences 2010 vs 2005 656 538 616 14. 5% Sulphur dioxide (SO 2) 5, 079 3, 469 3316 -4. 4% Nitrogen oxide (NOx) 1, 705 1, 260 1322 4. 9% Volatile organic compound (VOC) 1, 021 865 541 -37. 5% Particulates 402 315 312 -1. 1% Benzene 26 18 5 -72 % 1, 281 1, 231 1124 -8. 7% Carbon monoxide (CO) CO 2 Equivalent (KMT / Y) CO 2 Equivalent Vapour recovery project for ship loading will reduce benzene emissions

Interesting Issues 1. PM 10 and PM 2. 5 emission modelling 2. Noise- City by-law 50 d. BA; Quebec MDDEP, 40 d. BA or ambient (43 d. BA) • Ongoing modelling to determine predictive compliance 3. Tank Dykes – Current gas oil and Sour Water W tank dyke capacity constraints – New SW tank will be added as part of project 4. Coker foundation work next to live butane spheres

Coke Handling and Particulate Emissions There are emission factors related to all coke handling sources. Credit for controlling emissions is taken. Final emission releases are calculated and then placed in a dispersion model to determine impact to the community

PM 2. 5 particulate emissions in community Draft Air Quality Regulation stipulates 24 hr average of 30 ug/M 3 Results from new coker unit and existing plant indicate 1. 8 ug/M 3 However background of City at closest air monitoring stations is 32 ug/M 3

Sour Water and Gas Oil Tanks Concerns included: 1) Dyke capacity 2) H 2 S concentrations in the event of catastrophic release

Coker Foundation Work Close to Butane Spheres • Significant schedule delays if coker foundation work is not started this year • Live butane spheres • Current berm around spheres needs to be removed and recontoured • Then rock removal 3 -4’ • Then build barrier wall • Then start foundation work • It would appear that this is a significant risk but how much? • We engaged Ertugral Alp-risk consultant

Summary • The education and experience in IH has left me well positioned to understand manage effectively, the complexities of this large scale project

Back up Slides

Project Management Deliverables