Best Practice

SABP-A-062 25 October 2015

Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee

Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards

Table of Contents
1. Introduction..................................................... 2
1.1 Definition.......................................................... 2
1.2 Purpose and Scope.......................................... 3
1.3 Intended Users................................................. 3
2. Initial Energy Assessment Objectives............ 3
3. Definitive Energy Assessment Methodology.. 4
3.1 Data Collection & Validation............................ 4
3.2 Process Modeling & Simulation....................... 4
3.3 Confirm Potential Energy Savings................... 5
3.4 System Hydraulics & Integrity Checks............. 5
3.5 Develop Process Datasheets........................... 5
3.6 Develop Process Flow Diagrams..................... 6
3.7 Project CAPEX and OPEX............................... 6
3.8 Economic Evaluation & Sensitivity Runs......... 8
3.9 Project Submission.......................................... 9
4. Definitive Energy Assessment
Process Life Cycle................................ 11
Appendices
Appendix I - Heat Exchanger Process Data sheet
Appendix II - Simple Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
Appendix III - Portfolio Analysis Department NPV
Calculation Template
Appendix IV - Economic Evaluation Sheet
Appendix V - Economic Evaluation Sensitivity Runs

Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: TBD

Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Kamel, Akram Hamed (kamelah) on +966-13-8809452

CopyrightSaudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.

Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

1. Introduction

Energy conservation and energy-based GHG emissions reduction became one of the
most important topics worldwide for the past 10 years. It is mandatory for each process
facility to find cost effective solutions to save energy and achieve more savings within
their operating facilities. It is of the same importance for new projects, grass roots to be
designed and operated in an energy-conscious manner. Energy efficiency represents a
significant largely untapped opportunity for meeting the dual goals of financial return
and environmental responsibility for all operating facilities.

Saudi Aramco has established the Corporate Energy Management Program (EnMP) to
direct and manage a sustainable process for energy efficiency optimization. A vital
contribution towards the success of the company wide energy conservation policy
comes through documenting the companys best practices in methodology, tools and
applications in the field of energy conservation and sharing such knowledge among our
facilities. Hence, a notable effort has been exerted in Saudi Aramco to produce Best
Practices to help its plants achieve their energy conservation targets and disseminate
energy conservation knowledge.

This definitive energy assessment study (DEAS) Best Practices a contribution towards
this knowledge-sharing goal. Energy assessments may be primitive, definitive, and
detailed. A variety of approaches, methods and tools are available to conduct such
definitive energy assessments to improve the energy efficiency of industrial processes.

This (DEAS) Best Practice is developed to provide guidelines for conducting definitive
energy assessments through an easy to use methodology. It is designed to be at-a-
glance resources for Saudi Aramco engineers seeking information that will enable them
to prepare the required business cases for the highest potential energy saving identified
initiatives, achieve their energy management optimization program targets, improve
operating facility KPIs, and satisfy the company-wide energy efficiency targets.

1.1 Definition

The term Energy Conservation refers to actively reducing the amount of

energy consumed, and ensuring that consumed energy is used as efficiently as
possible through elimination of waste, and rational use within a process or
system.

The term Energy Assessment refers to the methodology of collecting and

analyzing available energy utilities related data in order to establish the big
picture of the breakdown of energy consumption for a particular facility and
identify component-based energy saving opportunities within the facility.

Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

The term Definitive Energy Assessment refers to the process of transferring

identified energy optimization idea(s)/initiative(s) to an engineered solution(s).

1.2 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this best practice document is to describe a methodology and

introduce guidelines by which the identified potential energy saving initiatives
can be transferred to a real business cases with the required engineering
documents and techno-economic evaluation report ready for submission.

1.3 Intended Users

This Best Practice is intended for use by the energy engineers working in Saudi
Aramco plants, who are responsible for the energy efficient operation of their
industrial facility. Also, it can be used by all engineering services engineers
(P&CSD, FPD, and CSD). This particular document will enable them to
conduct definitive energy assessments systematically for pre-defined energy
optimization initiatives using the corporate energy guidelines.

In addition, the Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee shall

maintain and utilize this document as a reference for successfully evaluating and
implementing energy assessment recommendations for industrial facilities.

2. Initial Energy Assessment Objectives

Preliminary review of plant process, engineering drawings and data gathering.

Understand the Big Picture of the plant-wide operations.
Understand process and utility energy demands.
From the available data, establish your current reality.
Establish your desired result Targeting.
Identify all opportunities for energy savings.
Propose quick-hit/law hanging savings.
Propose scope for definitive assessment with preliminary economic analysis.
Propose plant-wide energy-utility strategy or Total Energy Management.

Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

3. Definitive Energy Assessment Methodology

The scope of definitive energy assessment study shall include but not limited to
evaluate the previously identified energy saving initiatives and provide engineering
solutions to the top ranked technically endorsed ones to enhance the energy efficiency
of the process/ plant/ facility/ site energy systems including but not limited to power,
heating and cooling systems which are mandatory to satisfy process needs in the best
possible cost-effective way.

The DEAS methodology can be summarized as follows:

3.1 Data Collection and Validation

The first step is to collect all available process data related to the identified
initiative. The data quality is the main key for accurate results; therefore, data
validation is very important in this step to assure potential energy savings
identified by the initial assessment study. Process data sources include but are
not limited to any of the following:
a. Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs)
b. Material & Heat Balance Sheets
c. Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
d. Equipment Process Data sheets
e. Pumps & Compressors Curves
f. Real Time Data Historian (PI System)
g. Plant Laboratory Analysis (for streams actual composition)
h. DCS actual readings & trends
i. Plant local instrument readings, if required
j. Available data from previous Initial Energy Assessment Studies

3.2 Process Modeling and Simulation

The base case model development comes next, where the validated process data
are used to build the base case model and fine tune it till it matches the actual
plant results.

In the majority of cases a design process model would be sufficient to evaluate

the identified potential energy savings, while in some cases a rating model is
required to check the systems integrity especially when retrofitting an existing
heat exchanger network (HEN), where the actual heat transfer areas for existing

Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

exchangers are required to confirm the systems integrity and avoid pinch points
or exchanger temperature crosses.

The existing CHP or newly developed models should be updated by adding

the proposed initiatives and optimized under the new operating conditions.
The updated CHP will be used to evaluate and confirm the potential energy
savings.

3.3 Confirm Potential Energy Savings

At this stage and after the models are tuned and the CHP models are updated,
its easy to confirm the potential energy saving figures identified in the initial
energy assessment study by comparing the energy consumption between the
base case and the modified case after adding the new proposed initiatives taking
into account any further increase/decrease in utilities (HPS, MPS, LPS, fuel gas,
etc.) consumption.

3.4 System Hydraulics and Integrity Checks

As the initiatives show a confirmed high potential energy saving values, its
very important to confirm that the system hydraulics and integrity will not get
affected by the proposed modifications and hence smooth and steady operations
is guaranteed.

The modified loop line sized will be checked to confirm that the existing sizes
will withstand the proposed modifications and both velocity and pressure drops
are within acceptable engineering limits.

Existing pumps/compressors capabilities (flow & head) will be checked to

confirm that the proposed modification will not decrease its efficiency.
Its mandatory to ensure that the existing pumps/compressors best operating
points are met and the modification will not lead to increase the recycle around
them.

Integrity checks means checking the existing HEN rating, and ensuring the new
proposed modification potential savings will be achieved using the existing area
of heat transfer for the existing exchangers; otherwise, new heat transfer area
will be required and additional capital costs will be added that may impact the
initiative economics.

3.5 Develop Process Datasheets

In case the proposed initiative introduces new equipment to the existing system,
process datasheets should be developed to be used later during the project
economic evaluation. Minimum required information to be included in the
process data sheets can be summarized as follows:

Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

a. Process data: fluid flow rates, operating pressures, operating temperatures,

fluid densities, vapor fractions, Mwtsetc.
b. For heat exchangers: area of heat transfer, required duty, number of
shellsetc.
c. For pumps and compressors: inlet and outlet pressure or head, net positive
suction head (NPSH) required for pumps, required horsepower etc.
d. For cooling towers: required duty, wet/dry bulb temperature, cooling water
supply and return temperatures, circulation rate, blow down rate etc.

A sample heat exchanger process data sheet is shown in Appendix I.

3.6 Develop Process Flow Diagrams

At this stage the available information is enough to allow developing simple

process flow diagrams (PFDs) for both base and modified cases. The main
purpose of this diagram is to represent the new modifications required to the
entire process and highlight all required changes to the original configuration.
Its recommended to use different colors for the new added equipment, re-routed
streams, and modified existing equipment. A sample of a simple PFD is shown
in Appendix II.

3.7 Project CAPEX and OPEX

Economic evaluation, capital cost estimates, and operating costs are the key
factors in approving/rejecting any proposed initiative; therefore, more care is
required when estimating the new proposed modification CAPEX and OPEX.
a. Project CAPEX
The best approach for accurate and realistic projects CAPEX is the
company Project Management Office Department (PMOD). At early stages
and before issuing project BI number the best approach for CAPEX
estimation is the vendor budgetary quotation. If such quotations are not
available cost estimate correlations can be used to identify the new
equipment costs. Examples for cost estimate correlations for heat
exchangers:

Heat-Exchanger Cost, CE
CE= CB * FP * FD * FM....(eq.1)
where:
CE = Heat Exchanger Cost, USD

Exchanger Base Cost, CB

Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

CB = EXP (8.551 - 0.30863 * ln(A) + 0.06811 * (ln(A)) 2)

where:
CB = Base Cost of the HE, USD
A = Heat Transfer Area in ft2
Lower Limit: 150 ft2; Upper Limit: 12000 ft2

Exchanger-type cost factor, FD

Exchanger Type FD, correlation
Fixed Head FD = EXP (-1.1156 + 0.0906 * ln(A))
Kettle Reboiler FD = 1.35
U-Tube FD = EXP (-0.9816 + 0.0830 * ln(A))
where:
FD = Exchanger-type cost factor

Design-pressure cost factor, FP

Operating Pressure FP, correlation
100-300 psig FP = 0.7771 + 0.04981 * ln(A)
300-600 psig FP = 1.0305 + 0.07140 * ln(A)
600-900 psig FP = 1.14 + 0.12088 * ln(A)
where:
FP = Design-pressure cost factor

Material-of-Construction Cost Factor, FM

Material FM, correlation
SS316 FM = 0.8608 + 0.23296 * ln(A)
SS304 FM = 0.8193 + 0.15984 * ln(A)
SS347 FM = 0.6116 + 0.22186 * ln(A)
Nickel 200 FM = 1.5092 + 0.60859 * ln(A)
Monel 400 FM = 1.2989 + 0.43377 * ln(A)
Inconel 600 FM = 1.2040 + 0.50764 * ln(A)
Incoloy 825 FM = 1.1854 + 0.49706 * ln(A)
Titanium FM = 1.5420 + 0.42913 * ln(A)
Hastelloy FM = 0.1549 + 1.51774 * ln(A)

Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

where:
FM = Material-of-construction cost factor
A simpler correlation for heat exchanger capital cost estimate is: Taal, M., et
al., Cost estimation and energy price forecasts for economic evaluation of
retrofit projects. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2003. 23(14): p. 1819-1835.
Heat Exchanger Cost USD = 30,800 + 1644 * A (m2)^0.81. (eq.2)
The basic capital cost estimated either from eq-1 or 2 should be multiplied
by a factor of 2-4 to cater for the installation cost.
b. Project OPEX
The project operating cost is the extra estimated utility consumption
required by the proposed modification to achieve the identified
potential savings. The utility consumed could be either continuous or
non-continuous. Fuel, electricity, steam, and cooling water are considered
the main continuous utility terms, while nitrogen, service water, utility air
are the non-continuous utilities. Our main focus while calculating the
initiatives OPEX will be on the continuous utilities. Accordingly, the
continuous utilities consumption must be accurately calculated during the
initiatives evaluation to account for their operating costs during the
economic evaluation phase.

3.8 Economic Evaluation and Sensitivity Runs

Preliminary economic evaluation is very essential at this stage to make the right
decision either to proceed with the proposed modification or defer it to a later
stage. The main component for accurate economic evaluation is the latest energy
values forecasted for the coming 20 years issued by Kingdom Economic &
Energy Analysis Department (KEEAD) under Corporate Planning Admin Area.

These energy values in addition to the confirmed energy savings figures, and
estimated CAPEX and OPEX are the key elements required for the new
initiatives economic evaluation exercise. The proposed modifications net
present value (NPV) and simple payback calculation will be used to identify the
initiatives economic feasibility.

Furthermore, sensitivity runs will help in supporting the proposed initiatives

economic viability.

Samples of portfolio analysis department NPV calculation template, economic

evaluation sheet, and sensitivity runs are shown in Appendices III, IV & V
respectively.

Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

3.9 Project Submission

The agreed upon detailed business case calculation and key findings will be
enfolded in a technical engineering report with confirmed energy savings and
supported economic analysis and submitted to the concerned facilitys technical
division. The facility will review and submit the business case in a timely
manner and be ready to defend the case whenever required by the FPD during
project evaluation.

The DEAS methodology can be represented as shown in Figure 1 below:

Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

Latest Energy
Prices
Develop Process
Datasheets

System
Data Process Models Hydraulic & YES Calculate Project
Collection (Design/Rating) Integrity CAPEX & OPEX
Check

Develop PFDs
YES
Re-Evaluation

NO
Confirm
Potential Economic
Energy Evaluation &
Savings Sensitivity
NO Runs Check
NO

YES

Project
Archive Submission

Figure 1 - Definitive Energy Assessment Study (DEAS) Methodology Overview

Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

4. Definitive Energy Assessment Process Life Cycle

The process life cycle consists of four essential tasks that can be conducted by a small
energy focus group to cover the following activities:
i. Review initial energy assessment potential energy saving initiatives.
ii. Grant management approval on high potential opportunities.
iii. Start DEAS process cycle.
iv. Project submission & follow-up.

This section details a step by step approach that will be followed to conduct future
DEAS for any facility. These tasks are summarized in the 10-Steps procedures below:
a. Review and consider all identified potential energy saving opportunities during the
initial energy assessment study for the facility.
b. Re-evaluate the identified initiatives and confirm technical viability.
c. Revalidate the economic feasibility of the identified initiatives after updating energy
values using the latest figures issued by Corporate Planning.
d. Rank the technically viable initiatives based on NPV and develop an initiatives
priority list.
e. Preliminary planning and engagement of the facility is mandatory to agree on top
ranked highest potential initiatives and grant facility management support.
f. Enable development of DEAS for the most favorable/top ranked agreed upon
energy saving initiatives as detailed in Section 3 above.
g. Submit the final report to the facility for the technical and economical engineered
feasible solution for the selected initiative.
h. Technical support will be provided to the FPD during the initiative evaluation,
whenever required.
i. Technically rejected initiatives should be archived in an energy projects tracking
database.
j. Economically unfeasible initiatives should be re-evaluated after future energy
values are updated.

The definitive energy assessment study determines the feasibility of each identified
opportunity, and provides decision-makers with the information they need to make a
final investment decision. Furthermore, comprehensive and detailed analysis builds
confidence in the findings among the project team and senior management.

The DEAS process life cycle can be represented as shown in Figure 2 below.

Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

Latest Energy
Prices
Evaluate
Identified EI

Agree on High
Review Facilitys Potential YES Start DEAS
IEAS Projects with Process Cycle
the Facility Facility TSD to
prepare
business case
Develop
Priority List

NO

NO

YES
Project Submission
to FPD
Archive

Capital-BI NO
Communicate
Conceptual Design with FPD for
FEED Package Technical
YES Support

BI-19

Figure 2 - Definitive Energy Assessment Study (DEAS) Process Life Cycle

Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SABP-A-062
Issue Date: 25 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Definitive Energy Assessment Study Guidelines

Revision Summary
25 October 2015 New Saudi Aramco Best Practice providing a methodology and introduce guidelines by which
the identified potential energy saving initiatives can be transferred from idea(s)/initiative(s) to
an engineered solution(s) with the required engineering documents and techno-economic
evaluation report ready for submission.

Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee SABP-B-024
Issue Date: 15 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process

Appendix I - Heat Exchanger Process Data sheet 1 of 2

Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee SABP-B-024
Issue Date: 15 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process

Appendix I - Heat Exchanger Process Data sheet 2 of 2

Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee SABP-B-024
Issue Date: 15 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process

Appendix II - Simple Process Flow Diagram (PFD)

Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee SABP-B-024
Issue Date: 15 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process

Appendix III - Portfolio Analysis Department NPV Calculation Template

CAPEX (2015 US$ MM) 0.0

Investment Profile (%)
2016 30.0%
2017 40.0%
2018 30.0%
Sustaining Capital (%) 0.0%
OPEX (US$ MM/Year) 0.0
Pet Coke Transport Costs (US$/ Ton) 0.0
Investor Tax Rate (%) 0.0%
Nominal Saudi Aramco Tax Rate (%) 0.0%
Inflation (%)
CAPEX 3.0%
OPEX 3.0%
Discount Rate Third Party Invest. (%) 0.0%
Discount Rate Saudi Aramco (%) 4.9%

Page 17 of 19
 INPUT DATA
Sales Gas Saved (MMBTU/h) 56.8 Select Energy Price NPV-2014 hrs per year 7884 hrs Summary Gen.
Power Sales (MW) 0.0 Select Alternative NEW
Next Planned Update: TBD

Cap. Multiplication Factor 1.01

Issue Date: 15 October 2015

CAPEX (2015 US$ MM) 10.4 Summary Ref. Ref.Yr Cap. 2015
Investment Profile (%) NPV (US$ MM) 23.2 Ref.Yr Opx. 2019
2016 30.0% IRR (%) 19% LC Period 20
2017 40.0% PROFITABILITY INDEX 3.208 End of LCC, yr 2038
2018 30.0%
Sustaining Capital (%) 0.0%
HP-MP- HP-LP- HP-MP- HP-MP-LP HP-LP- HP-MP-LP-
OPEX (US$ MM/Year) 0.3 Summary Ref. BAU STG STG STG + MP- MS-STG Cond MS- Cond MS-
Pet Coke Transport Costs (US$/ Ton) 0.0 NPV (US$ MM) 23.2 0 53.8 50.8 31.0 39.8 21.4 (20.5)
Investor Tax Rate (%) 0.0% IRR (%) 19% 0 19% 18% 11% 14% 9% 2%
Nominal Saudi Aramco Tax Rate (%) 0.0% PROFITABILITY INDEX 3.2 0 3.4 3.1 1.8 2.3 1.5 0.7
Inflation (%) Pwr-Gen. STGs 0 4.0 11.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0
CAPEX 3.0% Capital Cost, MM$ 0 23.5 25.5 39.0 33.0 45.5 51.0
OPEX 3.0%
Discount Rate Third Party Invest. (%) 0.0%
Discount Rate Saudi Aramco (%) 4.9%

CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

(US$ MM) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042

CAPEX (3.2) (4.4) (3.4)

SUSTAINING CAPITAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

INITIAL BOOK VALUE 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
DEPRECIATION 0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
END BOOK VALUE 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

REVENUES- Fuel gas saved (MM $) 2.418 2.5973 2.7764294 2.91077 3.0451162 3.1346784 3.2690218 3.358584 3.4481462 3.53770848 3.62727072 3.67205184 3.76161408 3.85117632 3.89595744 3.94073856 4.0303008 4.07508192 4.313128926 4.409290489 0 0 0 0
REVENUES- Power Export (MM $) 0.0 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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

TRANSPORT COSTS 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
OPEX (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.4) (0.5) (0.5) (0.5) (0.5) (0.5) (0.5) (0.5) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
EBITDA 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

DEPRECIATION 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TAXABLE INCOME 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TAX 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
INCOME AFTER TAX 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

NET CASH FLOW (3.2) (4.4) (3.4) 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee

Appendix IV - Economic Evaluation Sheet

NPV (US$ MM) 23.2

IRR (%) 19.4%
PROFITABILITY INDEX 3.21
Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process
SABP-B-024

Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Standards Committee SABP-B-024
Issue Date: 15 October 2015
Next Planned Update: TBD Lubricant Condition Monitoring Process

Appendix V - Economic Evaluation Sensitivity Runs

Page 19 of 19