FIG. 4 NONTRADITIONAL EXECUTION
EPC frm advances
design to point required
for LSTK proposal
Refner accepts LSTK proposal
(or elects to pursue FEED
package under traditional
update project cost
FIG. 5 PROJECT SCHEDULE, DELEK TYLER REFINERY EXPANSION
Phase 1, conceptual review
Phase 2, conceptual design
Phase 3; detailed design, cost estimate
Procurement, delivery; long-lead equipment
Procurment, delivery; all other equipment
Field construction, diesel hydrotreating
Mechanical completion, diesel hydrotreating
Field construction, naphtha hydrotreating
Mechanical completion, naphtha hydrotreating
Field construction, crude and vacuum distillation
Mechanical completion, crude and vacuum distillation
2013 Task 2014 2015
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st
also recognized that a number of other
improvements could be implemented
at a reasonable cost as part of the proposed project.
Phase 2 identified the most cost-effective modifications needed at each
process unit and confirmed the project’s design basis.
This approach, which placed much
of the design work ahead of establishing the basis for design, deviated from
traditional project methodology and
can be troubling for some refiners.
It, however, led to the most cost-effective design for revamp and debottlenecking, especially with the refiner’s
staff working in collaboration.
Delek allowed employees from
across a broad spectrum of responsibilities to contribute to project development and design, maximizing the
project’s overall economic return.
Fig. 1 shows the traditional approach to project development. Fig.
2 shows the nontraditional approach
TM&C, KPE, and Delek used for the
Tyler expansion project.
The Phase 2 study considered the
potential impact of infrastructure limitations and constructability issues.
These steps typically occur later in the
traditional project approach, but tailoring the eventual process modifications to the constraints presented by
the refinery’s plot plan and ancillary
units was the only way to achieve cost-effective design.
In order to limit spending, Phase 2’s
scope took in only fundamental process design.
Upon completion and review of
the Phase 2 process design in August
2013, Delek approved a third and final study phase to flesh out the project
to the extent needed for a go-or-no-go
Phase 3 included:
• Piping and instrumentation dia-
• Equipment sizing and quotations.
• Identification of bulk civil, piping,
structural, and electrical needs.
• Final plot plans.
API crude. This recovery would require a vacuum tower top replacement
similar to that used at the Cheyenne
refinery, which would yield as much
as 2,000 b/cd of additional straight-run diesel from the AGO and LVGO
Another 1,000-b/cd of distillate
could be recovered from the HCGO
stream via additional heat removal in
the upper sections of the coker fractionator. This volume of distillate recovery suggested that another 12,000-
b/cd of crude runs were possible when
only considering the FCC capacity
Based upon its own outlook for
long-term prices, TM&C developed
proforma refinery economics for a
75,000-b/cd operation, which indicated a potential increase in pretax net
refinery margin of about $40 million/
year following project completion.
This economic potential prompted
a second, more detailed process study
to identify cost-effective modifications
to the crude tower and downstream
units geared toward increasing overall
refinery capacity to as much as 75,000
b/d. Aware of the potential for the re-
finery to face even lighter feedstock
options, Delek requested that any new
additions and modifications accom-
modate crude oil with a gravity up to
42.5º API. Delek, TM&C, and KPE
ting to a significant design effort, so a
phased approach to the process study
The initial phase would solely focus
on the degree of distillate recovery that
could be obtained and how much expansion that would allow in terms of
additional space in the FCC.
As much as 3,000 b/cd of distillate
could be recovered from the refinery’s
typical 62,000-b/cd charge rate of 41°