Training and support
Download January 01, 2011

Tips for more efficient DEOS preparation

Complying with the Directive 39 requirement to complete and post the Dehydrator Engineering and Operations Sheet (DEOS) at each dehydration facility can be a very time-consuming activity. Tasks include gathering and validating field data, performing the calculations, and generating and posting the DEOS sheet. Here are some tips for improving this process:

  • Provide a clear data form for operators to complete. We recommend not pre-filling any information in the forms to ensure that data that is received is as current and accurate as possible. A confusing or misleading form will lead to unnecessary clarifications and delays.
  • Careful validation of field data is a necessary step – whether this is done in-house or externally, it is important that whoever is reviewing the field data has a solid understanding of the process so that they can recognize poor data. We also recommend comparing to the previous year’s data so that unexpected changes (e.g., a different pump model) can be flagged and corrected.
  • Once the data is validated, calculations can be completed. Simulation software such as Glycalc and HYSYS is very useful but is not error-free. It is crucial that a close review of simulation results be done to ensure that results are reasonable. Again, this requires a solid understanding of the process as well as the conditions under which the simulators can fail to give good results.
  • After calculations are completed, the DEOS can be created; it is recommended that significant departures from the standard form provided by the ERCB be avoided. The process of creating the DEOS can potentially be automated resulting in significant time savings.
  • All field data, analyses, and calculated data should be stored in a common location; while it is possible to manage separate files and Excel spreadsheets, it is far more efficient to manage the data in a central database. Managing the data in one location also helps to ensure that the overall effort of complying with Directive 39 for many units can be managed effectively.
  • Creating the Inventory List can be very time-consuming particularly when considering that the ERCB requires a calendar year report and emissions will need to be prorated on this basis. As with the DEOS, the creation of the inventory list can potentially be automated.

To find out more about the way Process Ecology has implemented an efficient system please see

By James Holoboff, M.Sc., P. Eng.

James has over 30 years of experience in process engineering and emissions management for the chemical and petroleum industries. He brings a strong background in the development and application of computer simulation models to Oil & Gas industry challenges. James worked for Hyprotech/Aspentech for almost 10 years in various capacities including Global Technical Support Manager and Business Development Manager for the Project Services Division. He then spent 5 years providing process engineering and simulation consulting to a number of operating companies and engineering firms. James has been a Managing Partner for Process Ecology for almost 20 years, during this time providing process engineering services, emissions reporting, project management, and software development support. James is a Chemical Engineering graduate from the University of Calgary and holds an MSc in Chemical Engineering from the same institution. In his spare time, when he’s not playing ice hockey or cycling, he is recovering from injuries incurred from those sports.



Latest articles

Certifying Natural gas for Methane Emissions Management: Insights into MiQ Framework

January 22, 2024

U.S. EPA and DOE Join Forces to Combat Methane Emissions: A Process Ecology Perspective

October 31, 2023

Critical Minerals and the O&G Industry

September 13, 2023