DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
FOR
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
FOR THE
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD
AND THE
BUILDERS' PAPER AND BOARD MILLS
POINT SOURCE CATEGORIES
Lee M. Thomas
Administrator
Devereaux Barnes
Acting Director, Industrial Technology Division
Thomas P. O'Farrell
Chief, Consumer Commodities Branch
Wendy D. Smith
Project Officer
December 1986
Industrial Technology Division
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents the findings of a study of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard and the builders' paper and board
mills point source categories. The purpose of this study
was to develop effluent limitations guidelines representing
the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT) for
existing sources. These regulations were promulgated on
July 9, 1986 (51 PR 24974) under the authority of Sections
301, 304, 306, 307, and 501 of the Clean Water Act (the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, 33
USC 1251 et seq., as amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977,
P.L. 95-217 (the "Act")) and in response to the Settlement
Agreement in Natural Resources Defense Council, inc. v.
Train, 8 ERG 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified, 12 ERC~ 1833
(D.D.C. 1979).
The information presented in this document supports the
development of the BCT regulations for the pulp, paper, and
paperboard and the builders' paper and board mills point
source categories. Data used in the development of the BCT
effluent limitations guidelines were gathered during the
rulemaking efforts associated with the promulgation of best
practicable control technology currently available effluent
guidelines (BPT), best available technology
achievable effluent limitations guidelines
source performance standards (NSPS), and
standards for existing and new sources (PSES
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS were issued in
November 1982. At that time, BCT effluent limitations
guidelines were reserved until the promulgation of the
Agency's BCT methodology. The legal authority, data
gathering efforts, description of the industry,
subcategorization scheme, water use and waste
characterizations, and the applicable control and treatment
technologies are the same for this rulemaking as for the
November 1982 promulgation. Thus, this information will not
be repeated in this document except where changes have
occurred. The reader should refer to the following
documents for this information: 1) Proposed Development
Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards
Paper,
limitations
economically
(BAT), new
pretreatment
and PSNS).
for the Puli
_. _ and Paperboard and the Builders Paper
and Board Mills Point Source Categories, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-80/025-b,
December 1980, 2) Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Paper,
and Paperboard and the Builders' Paper and Board Mills Point
Source Categories, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-82/025; October 1982.
111
-------
The reader should also refer to the documents and record
supporting the promulgation of the Agency's BCT methodology
(51 PR 24974).
In this document, information specific to the BCT effluent
limitations guidelines is presented on the development of
control and treatment options and the estimation of cost,
energy, and non-water quality impacts. The methodology for
the development of the effluent limitations is also
presented.
IV
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wishes to acknowledge
the contributions to this project by the E.G. Jordan •: Co. of
Portland, Maine. Willard C. Warren III, Robert E. Handy, Charles
D. Cox, Neal A. Jannelle, Nancy E. Forrester, and Edward J. Doyle
all contributed to the drafting of the final documents and record
supporting the promulgated regulation. Special appreciation is
extended to Laurance C. Barbour who was the key contributor . on
this project. His attention to the many technical details of
this project and his hard work are greatly appreciated.
We wish to acknowledge the mill managers, engineers, and other
representatives of the industry without whose cooperation and
assistance in site visitions and information gathering, the
completion of this project would have been greatly hindered. The
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement and the American Paper Institute deserve special
recognition.
The EPA also thanks personnel in the EPA regional offices and
state agencies who supplied discharge monitoring report (DMR)
data and related information. Contributing to this effort were
EPA staff ..in Regions I, II, III, IV, VI, yill, IX, and X and
personnel, in the following state agencies: Maine, New Hampshire,
Connecticut, New York, Virginia, Delaware, Tennessee,
Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina,
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas,
Iowa, California Region I, and California Region V (Redding
Office).
Appreciation is expressed to those at EPA Headquarters who
contributed to the completion of this project, including: Debra
Maness and Mark Luttner, Office of Analysis and Evaluation,
Office of Water Regulations and Standards; Alexander McBride,
Alexandra Tarnay, and Rod Frederick, Monitoring and Data Support
Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards; Nandan
Kenkeremath, Gail Cooper, and Susan G. Lepow, Office of General
Counsel;- Richard Brandes, Office of Water Enforcement; Mahesh
Podar, .Office of Planning and Evaluation. Special appreciation
is extended to Robert W. Dellinger, Office of Solid Waste, who
headed .this project before his transfer from the Industrial
Technology Division. His knowledge and guidance, both before and
after his transfer, were invaluable.
This project would never have been completed without the long
hours and excellent assistance from Carol Swann. Her devotion to
the U.S. EPA and her consistent, self-denying performance are
exemplary. All associated with this project are truly grateful.
v
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
I
II
III
IV
CONCLUSIONS 1
BACKGROUND 5
DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS 7
INTRODUCTION 7
IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE TECHNOLOGY
OPTIONS 7
OPTION 1 8
Development of Option 1 Raw Waste Loads 8
Development of Option 1 Final Effluent
Characteristics 67
OPTION 2 75
CAC Treatment Performance 75
Development of Option 2 Effluent
Characteristics 82
OPTION 3 85
Attainment of BCT Options 2 and 3 85
OPTION 4 85
Attainment of BCT Option 4 85
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT VARIABILITY
ANALYSIS 144
Effluent Limitations Guidelines 144
Daily Maximum Variability Factors 144
Analysis of Daily Pollutant Discharge
Values to Determine Daily Maximum
Variability Factors 145
30-Day Maximum Variability Factors 146
Analysis of 30-Day Averages of
Pollutant Discharge Values to
Determine 30-Day Maximum
Variability Factors 146
Establishment of Applicable
Variability Factors 150
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS 163
INTRODUCTION , 163
METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS 163
General 163
Model Mill Approach 163
Mill and Site Specific Cost Factors 163
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control
and Treatment Technologies 171
Cost for Implementation of BCT
Control and Treatment Options 173
-------
SECTION
IV
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
General
Energy Requirements
Air Pollution
Noise Potential
Solid Waste Generation
Implementation Requirements
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE
APPLICATION OF BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES
REFERENCES
PAGE
242
242
249
249
251
251
254
257
260
viii
-------
LIST OF TABLES
SECTION £
1-1 BCT Effluent Limitations
PAGE
SECTION III
III-l Production Process Controls in Addition to
Those That Form The Basis of BPT Than Can Be
Employed to BCT Options 1 and 3 Raw Waste
Loads - Integrated Segment
III-2 Production Process Controls In Addition to
Those That Form the Basis of BPT Than Can Be
Employed to Achieve BCT Options 1 and 3 Raw
Waste Loads - Secondary Fibers Segment
III-3 Production Process Controls in Addition to
Those That Form the Basis of BPT Than Can Be
Employed to Achieve BCT Options 1 and 3 Raw
Waste Loads -, Nonintegrated Segment
III-4 BPT and BCT Option 2 Long-Term Average Raw
Waste Loads
III-5 Comparison of BCT Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
With Raw Waste Loads Predicted From Estimated
Reductions by Process Controls
III-6 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Dissolving
Kraft Subcategory
III-7 Summary Raw Waste 'Load Data - Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory
III-8 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - BCT Bleached
Kraft Subcategory
III-9 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Alkaline-Fine
111-10 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory
III-ll Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Semi-Chemical
Subcategory
111-12 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Unbleached
Kraft and Semi-Chemical Subcategory
11
12
15
16
17
19
21
22
24
26
28
IX
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
SECTION III (Continued)
PAGE
111-13 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp Subcategory 29
III-13a Dissolving Sulfite - Development of Option 1
BODJ5 Raw Waste Load 30
111-14 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Papergrade
Sulfite Subcategory 32
111-15 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Groundwood-
Thermo-Mechanical Subcategory 40
111-16 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Groundwood-CMN
Papers Subcategory 41
111-17 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Groundwood-Fine
Papers Subcategory 43
111-18 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Deink Subcategory 44
111-19 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Tissue from
Wastepaper Subcategory 50
111-20 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Paperboard from
Wastepaper Subcategory 51
111-21 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Wastepaper-
Molded Products Subcategory 55
111-22 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Builders'
Paper and Roofing Felt Subcategory 57
111-23 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Nonintegrated-
Fine Papers Subcategory 60
111-24 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers Subcategory 63
111-25 Summary" Raw Waste Load Data - Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers Subcategory 64
111-26 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory 65
111-27 Summary Raw Waste Load Data - Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategory 66
x
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
PAGE
SECTION III (Continued)
II1-28 BCT Options 1 and 3; Long-Term Average Raw
Waste Loads
111-29 BCT Option 1 - Long-Term Average Discharge
Characteristics
111-30 Number of Facilities That Attain-BPT and
BCT Option 1 - Final Effluent Characteristics
111-31 Summary of Chemically Assisted Clarification
Technology Performance Tests - NCASI Jar
Test Results
111-32 Summary of Chemically Assisted Clarification
Technology Performance Tests - Other Jar Test
Results
111-33 Summary of Chemically Assisted Clarification
Technology Performance Tests - Full Scale
Test Results
111-34 BCT Option 2 - Alum Dosage and Long-Term
Average - Final Effluent BODI5 and TSS
Concentrations
111-35 BCT Option 2 - Long-Term Average Discharge
Characteristics
111-36 BCT Option 3 - Long-Term Average Discharge
Characteristics
111-37 Facilities That Use Tertiary Chemically
Assisted Clarification And Attain BCT Options
2 and 3 Final Effluent Characteristics
111-38 Number of Facilities in Subcategories for
Which Primary Treatment is the Technology
Basis of BPT That Attain BPT and BCT Option 3
- Final Effluent Characteristics
111-39 BCT Option 4 - Long-Term Average Raw Waste
Loads
111-40 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Dissolving
Kraft Subcategory
ill-41 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory
68
73
74
77
80
81
83
84
86
87
88
90
93
95
XI
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
PAGE
SECTION III (Continued)
111-42 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - BCT Bleached
Kraft Subcategory 96
111-43 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Alkaline
Pine Subcategory 99
111-44 Discharge Monitoring Report Data:'- Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory , 100
111-45 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Semi-Chemical
Subcategory 104
111-46 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Unbleacnea
Kraft and Semi-Chemical Subcategory ! 105
111-47 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Papergrade
Sulfite Subcategory 108
111-48 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp Subcategory 110
111-49 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Groiindwood-
Thermo-Mechanical Subcategory 112
111-50 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Groundwood-
Pine Papers Subcategory •• 113
111-51 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Groundwood-
,CMN Papers Subcategory 114
111-52 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Deink
Subcategory 116
111-53 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Tissue from
Wastepaper Subcategory 121
111-54 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Paperboard
from Wastepaper Subcategory 123
111-55 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Wastepaper-
Molded Products Subcategory 126
111-56 Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Builders'
Paper and Roofing Felt Subcategory 126
111-57 Discharge Monitoring Report Data -
Nonintegrate'd-Fine Papers Subcategory 127
Xll
-------
SECTION
111-58
111-59
111-60
111-61
111-62
111-63
111-64
111-65
111-66
111-67
*
111-68
111-69
111-70
111-71
111-72
LISTS OF TABLES (Continued)
III (Continued)
Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Nonintegrated
-Tissue Papers Subcategory
Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Nonintegrated
Lightweight Papers Subcategory
Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory
Discharge Monitoring Report Data - Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategory
BCT Option 4 - Long-Term Average Discharge
Characteristics
Number of Facilities That Attain BPT and BCT
Option 4 - Final Effluent Characteristics
Percent Reductions Required to Attain BCT Option
4 BODS - Final Effluent Characteristics From
BCT Options 4 BOD5_ Raw Waste Loads
Percent BODS Reductions Attained at Some
Mills Meeting BPT BODJ5 and TSS Final Effluent
Levels
A Comparison of BCT Option 4 Design Criteria to
BPT Design Criteria
A Comparison of BCT Option 4 Design Criteria to
Criteria Used at .Integrated Mills Where BOD5_
Reductions Comparable to Those Required to
Attain BCT Option 4 are Achieved
Distribution of Daily Values About the Estimate
of the 99th Percentile
Variability Factors for Determining Maximum
Day Limitations
Results of Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Successive
30-Day Averages
Distribution of 30-Day Averages About the
Estimates of the 99th Percentile
Variability Factors for Determining Maximum
30-Day Limitations
PAGE
129
131
132
133
134
136
137
138
142
143
147
148
151
153
154
xiii
-------
LIST OP TABLES (Continued)
SECTION III (Continued)
111-73 Average Maximum 30-Day and.Maximum Day
Variability Factors for Subsets (1), (2), (3),
(4), and (5)
111-74 Summary of Variability Factors for BCT Options
1, 2, 3, and 4
PAGE
157
161
SECTION IV
IV-1 Model Mill Sizes by Subcat.egory 164
IV-2 Model Mill Sizes and Other Parameters Used To
Determine BCT Option 1 Costs 167
IV-3 Regional Cost Adjustment Factors 172
IV-4 Gross Operation and Maintenance and Energy
Costs and Savings for BCT Options 1 - Production
Process Controls for Medium Sized Direct
Dischargers ($l,000/yr) 174
IV-5 Cost Estimating Criteria : 175
IV-6 Model Mill costs of Implementing BCT Options 1,
2, and 3 176
IV-7 Model Mill Costs of Implementing BCT Option
4(a), Cost for Modification of Treatment
Systems 205
IV-8 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry - BPT Costs
of Implementation, BPT Annual Average Pollutant
Removals, and BPT Cost Effectiveness 233
IV-9 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry - BCT
Option 1 Cost of Implementation, BCT Option 1
Annual Average Pollutant Removals and BCT
Option 1 Cost Effectiveness . 234
IV-10 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry - BCT
Option 2 Cost of Implementation, BCT Option 2
Annual Average Pollutant Removals, and BCT
Option 2 Cost Effectiveness 235
IV-11 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry BCT Option
3 Cost of Implementation, BCT Option 3 Annual
Average Pollutant Removals, and BCT Option 3
Cost Effectiveness 236
xiv
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
PAGE
SECTION IV (Continued)
IV-12 Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry - BCT
Option 4 - cost of Implementation, BCT Option 4
Annual Average Pollutant Removals, and BCT
Option 4 Cost Effectiveness
IV-13 Sample Cost Calculations - BCT Option 1
Production Process Controls - 725 kg/1
Alkaline - Fine Mill
IV-14 Design Criteria BCT Option 2 Activated Sludge
for the Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers,
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers, and Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategories
IV-15 Design Basis for Estimates of Costs of
End-of-Pipe Treatment for Attainment of BCT
Option 4
IV-16 Design Parameters for BCT Option 4 - Example
Calculations
IV-17 Cost Summary for BCT Option 4 Activated Sludge
System Modification - Onit Process End-of-Pipe
Treatment - Example Calculations
IV-18 Energy, Usage at Existing Direct Discharging
Mills Through Implementation of BCT Options
IV-19 Total Wastewater Solid Generation at Existing
Direct .Discharging Mills Through Implementation
of BCT Options
237
240
243
244
247
248
250
253
SECTION V
V-l
BCT Effluent Limitations
259
xv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION III
III-l
III-2
Raw Waste Flow vs. Percent Sulfite Pulp
On Site
Raw Waste BOD5_ vs. Percent Sulfite Pulp
On Site
PAGE
36
37
SECTION IV
IV-1
Time Required to Construct Solids Contact
Clarifier/Biological System
255
xvx
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
EPA is establishing effluent limitations guidelines based on the
"best conventional pollutant control technology" (BCT) for the
pulp, paper, and paperboard and the builders' paper and board
mills point source categories as required by the Clean Water Act.
This final regulation controls the discharge of five-day
biochemical oxygen demand (BODji), total suspended solids (TSS),
and pH into waters of the United States by existing sources that
produce pulp, paper, and paperboard.
BCT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-1.
Best conventional pollutant control technology limitations
established for 23 subcategpries of the pulp, paper,
paperboard industry which are as follows:
are
and
40 CFR Part 430
o Subpart A
o Subpart B
o Subpart E
o Subpart F -
o Subpart G
o Subpart H
o Subpart I -
o Subpart J -
o Subpart K -
o Subpart N -
o Subpart O
o Subpart P -
o Subpart Q -
o Subpart R
o Subpart S
o Subpart T -
o Subpart U -
o Subpart V
o Subpart W -
o Subpart X
o Subpart Y -
o Subpart Z -
unbleached kraft,
semi-chemical,
paperboard from wastepaper,
dissolving kraft,
market bleached kraft,
board, coarse, and tissue (BCT) bleached
kraft,
fine bleached kraft,
papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash),
dissolving sulfite pulp,
groundwood-coarse, molded, and news (CMN)
papers,
groundwood-fine papers,
soda,
deink,
nonintegrated-fine papers,
nonintegrated-tissue papers,
tissue from wastepaper,
papergrade sulfite (drum wash),
unbleached kraft and semi-chemical (BPT
limitations for mills in this subcategory are
included in subpart D - unbleached kraft-
neutral sulfite semi-chemical (cross
recovery)),
wastepaper-molded products,
nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-fliter and noriwoven papers,
and,
nonintegrated-paperboard.
-------
TABLE I-I
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(kg/kkg or Ibs/lOOOlbs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
Subcategory „«„, __
i5t£$rii£l §E8!S£!!£
Dissolving Kraft
H.irkct Bleached KrnEt
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alka line-Fine2
o Fine Bleached Kraft
0 Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linrrboard
o Bac
Srral -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate1
Papergradc Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
o Bisill file-Surface
o Bisul file-Barometric
o Acid Sulfite - Surface
o Acid Sulfite - Barometric
Pnpergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
o Bisulflte-Surface
o Bisul file-Barometric
o Acid Sulfite-Surfacc
o Acid Sul file-Barometric
o Continuous Digesters
Groundwood-Thermo-Mcchanical'*
Grolindvood-CHN Papers
Rroiimteood-Finr Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
IJpiuk *
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastcpaper
I'aprrlmard From Wastcpaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Honcorrugating Medium Furnish
Wast<:p.iper-lloldpd Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Foltr>
Honlnlc^ratcd i Segment
Noninlegratcd-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Haninlegrated-Tissuc Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Kon Integra tcd-Filter
and ttonwovcn Papers
Honlntegraled-Papcrboard
BODS
12.25
8.05
7.1
5.5
7.1
2.8
2.8
4.35
4.0
21.5
23.0
24.95
16.55
18.05
16.8
18.5
13.9
15.3
15.5
16.9 -..
19.85
3.9
3.6
9.4
9.4
9.4
7.1
2.8
1.5
2.3
3.0
4.25
9.1
6.25
13.2
20.9
16.3
3.6
TSS
20.05
16.4
12.9
11.9
13.2
6.0
6.0
5.5
• 6.25
38.05
38.05
38.05
23.65
28.1
23.65
28.1
23.65
28.1
23.65
28.1
28.95
6.85
6.3
12.95
12.95
12.95
9.2
4.6
2.5
5.8
3.0
5.9
13.1
5.0
10.6
16.7
13.0
2.8
Maximum Day
BODS
23.6
15.45
13.65
10.6
13.7 .
5.6
5.6
8.7
8.0
41.4
44.3
48.05
31.8
34.7
32.3
35.55
26.7
29.4
29.75
32.5
38.15
7.45
6.85
18.1
18.1
18.1
13.7
5.7
3.0
4.4
5.0
8.2
17.4
11.4
24.1
38.0
29.6
6.5
TSS
37.3
30.4
24.0
22.15
24.5
12.0
12.0
11.0
12.5
70.65
70.65
70.65
43.95
52.2
43.95
52.2
43.95
52.2
43.95
52.2
53.75 ;
12.75
11.75
24.05
24.05
24.05
17.05
9.2
5.0
10.8
5.0
11.0
24.3
10.25
21.6
34.2
26.6
5.8
pH Range1
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
5.0-9.0.
6.0-9.0
5.6-9VO
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
5.0-9.0
1 pll shall lie within the indicated range at all times.
1 Includes fine bleached kraft and soda subcategorjes.
1 RPT limitations for acetate grade production in the dissolving sulfite pulp suhcategory have been remanded by the Court
of Appeals. Limitations havi- not yet been promulgated.
* BCT effluent limitations for the groimdwood-thermo-mechaniral pulp subcategory have not yet been established.
R In afMltinn to the above limitations settlpable solids are not to exceed 2.0 ml/1.
-------
40 CFR Part 431
o Subpart A - builders' paper and roofing felt.
BCT limitations are not being established for Subpart L of 40 CFR
Part 430, the groundwood-chemi-mechanical subcategory. When BAT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS regulations were proposed and later
promulgated for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, this
subcategory was excluded from regulation under authority of
paragraph 8(a)(iv) of the Revised Settlement Agreement. Because
sufficient data are still unavailable for this subcategory, BCT
effluent limitations for the groundwood-chemi-mechanical
subcategory are not being established at this time.
BCT limitations are also not established for the groundwood-
thermo-meehanical subcategory (Subpart M) because insufficient
data are available to develop costs and pollutant removals for
this subcategory.
BCT effluent limitations are established equal to best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT) effluent
limitations for each subcategory. BPT effluent limitations are
based on the anticipated performance of wastewater treatment
technology (either primary clarification or biological treatment)
applied to raw waste loads characteristic of the subcategory or
on transfer of technology performance from another subcategory.
Limitations for BOD5> and TSS are presented in kilograms of
pollutant per 1,000 kilograms of production (lb/1,000 Ibs).
Production shall be defined as the annual off-the-machine
production (including off-the-machine coating where applicable)
divided by the number of operating days during that year. Paper
production shall be measured at the off-the-machine moisture
content whereas market pulp shall be measured in air-dry tons (10
percent moisture). Production shall be determined for each mill
based on past production rates, present trends, or committed
growth. For non-continuous dischargers, maximum day effluent
concentrations shall apply.
Since BCT effluent limitations guidelines are being set equal to
the BPT effluent limitations guidelines for each subcategory,
there are no incremental costs or non-water quality environmental
impacts (including air pollution, solid waste generation, and
energy requirements) associated with the final BCT regulations.
-------
-------
SECTION II
BACKGROUND
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
established a comprehensive program to "restore and maintain the
chemical/ physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's
waters." (Section 101(a)). To implement the Act, EPA was
required to issue effluent limitations guidelines, pretreatment
standards, and new source performance standards for industrial
dischargers. . • .
EPA promulgated effluent limitations guidelines based on best
practicable control technology currently available (BPT) and best
available technology economically achievable (BAT) and also
issued new source performance standards (NSPS) and pretreatment
standards for existing (PSES) and new sources (PSNS) for the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry on November 18, 1982 (47 FR
52006).(4)
The 1977 amendments to the Clean Water Act added Section
301(b)(2)(E) establishing "best conventional pollutant control
technology" (BCT) for discharges of conventional pollutants from
existing industrial point sources. BCT is not an additional
limitation but replaces BAT for the control of conventional
pollutants. Conventional pollutants are those defined in Section
304(a)(4) [biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5_), total suspended
solids (TSS), fecal coliform, and pH], and any additional
pollutants defined by the Administrator as "conventional" (oil
and grease, 44 FR 44501, July 30 1979).
EPA originally published a methodology for carrying out the BCT
analysis on August 24, 1979 (44 FR 50732). The core of this
methodology was a comparison of the costs of removing additional
pounds of conventional pollutants for industry to the costs of
removing conventional pollutants for an average-sized publicly
owned treatment works (POTW). The 1979 methodology was
challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit,
and on July 28, 1981, the Court issued its decision. American
Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981). While
upholding the methodology that EPA had developed for the POTW
cost comparison test, the Court remanded the regulation to the
Agency for two reasons. First, the Court held that the Clean
Water Act requires EPA to consider two tests of "reasonableness"
as part of the BCT methodololgy: a POTW cost-comparison test and
an industry cost-effectiveness test. Since the 1979 methodology
contained only the POTW cost test, the Court directed EPA to
develop a separate industry cost-effectiveness test. If
candidate BCT effluent limitations are not found reasonable,
after evaluation of both tests, then BCT limitations will be
established as equal, to BPT. In no case may BCT be less
stringent than BPT. Second, the Court instructed the EPA to
correct certain statistical errors that had been made in
-------
calculating the POTW test.
The Agency proposed a revised methodology for the general
development of BCT limitations on October 29, 1982 (47 FR
49176). EPA also published new cost information and announced
that additional information on the development of the BCT
methodology was available on September 20, 1984 (49 FR 37046).
The Agency issued its final BCT methodology on July 9, 1986 (see
51 FR 24974). (3)
On January 6, 1981, EPA proposed BCT limitations for the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry (46 FR 1430); these regulations
were reproposed in 1982 when the revised BCT methodology was
issued in response to the American Paper Institute v. EPA
decision discussed above (47 FR 49176, October 29, 1982). The
final BCT limitations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry were developed based on the Agency's promulgated BCT
methodology.
METHODOLOGY AND DATA GATHERING EFFORTS
EPA first proposed BCT limitations for the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry on January 6, 1981.(8) Prior to this
proposal, a great amount of technical information was collected
to develop the final BCT limitations. The methodology and data
gathering activities associated with the January 1981 rulemaking
are detailed in Sections III, IV, and V of the preamble to those
proposed rules (46 FR 1430) and in the Proposed Development
Document supporting those rules. (See references number 8 and
number 1, respectively). The Agency then reproposed BCT
limitations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry on
October 29, 1982 (47 FR 49176). (6)
Following these proposals, the Agency received numerous public
comments. In order to respond fully to these comments, EPA
engaged in additional data gathering activities. In particular,
the Agency obtained, discharge monitoring reports (DMR) from
Regional and State permitting authorities and collected
additional conventional pollutant data under the authority of
Section 308 of the Clean Water Act to update its records and
broaden the existing data base. These activities are explained
in the preamble to the final BPT, BAT, PSES, PSNS, and NSPS
regulations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry (47 Ftf
52006; November 18, 1982) and in the Development Document
supporting those rules. (References number 4 and number 2,
respectively).
The Agency assessed all applicable control technologies capable
of conventional pollutant removal and identified four technology
options which could form the basis of BCT effluent limitations.
For each option, costs and pollutant removals were estimated.
The two tests in the Agency's BCT methodology were then applied
to each technology option.
-------
SECTION III
DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
INTRODUCTION
Many control and treatment technologies were discussed in the
development documents supporting the January 1981 proposed rules
and the November 1982 promulgated regulations. (References 1 and
2, respectively). Information was presented on the capabilities
of these technologies for removal of conventional, toxic, and
nonconventional pollutants from pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry wastewaters. From these technologies, EPA identified
alternative control and treatment options that represent a range
of conventional pollutant removal capabilities and costs. This
section presents the options that were considered in determining
BCT effluent limitations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry.
IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS
EPA identified the following four technology options that are
capable of removing significant amounts of conventional
pollutants.
(A) Option 1 - Effluent limitations based on the technology on
which BPT is based for each subcategory plus additional in-
plant production process controls. No additional end-of-
pipe technology beyond BPT is considered in this option.
(B) Option 2 - Effluent limitations based on chemically assisted
clarification of BPT final effluents for all integrated and
secondary fiber subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory (subcategories where BPT is based on
biological treatment). For the remaining nonintegrated
subcategories, for which primary treatment is the basis of
BPT, effluent limitations are based on biological treatment
of BPT final,effluents.
(C) Option 3 - Effluent limitations based on BCT Option 1 plus
chemically assisted clarification of biological treatment
effluent for all integrated and secondary fiber
subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory (subcategories where BPT is based on biological
treatment). For the remaining nonintegrated subcategories,
for which primary treatment is the basis of BPT, effluent
limitations are based on the application of BCT Option 1
plus biological treatment of primary effluents.
-------
(D) Option 4 - Effluent limitations based on the levels attained
at best performing mills in the respective subcategories.
The technologies for achieving Option 4 effluent limitations
vary depending on the types of treatment systems that are
employed at mills in each subcategory.
OPTION !_
BPT for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry was generally
based on the implementation of commonly employed production
process controls and end-of-pipe treatment. Biological treatment
was the end-of-pipe treatment for all the subcategories with the
exception of the nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories for which BPT was based on
primary treatment. The BCT Option 1 technology basis for control
of conventional pollutants is the implementation of commonly
employed production process controls in addition to the existing
BPT end-of-pipe treatment technologies.
Through the data gathering activities described in the
development documents supporting the proposed and final rules,
EPA identified additional commonly employed production process
controls that can further reduce raw waste loads. These controls
serve as the basis for defining BCT Option 1 where raw waste
loads are lower than those that form the basis of BPT effluent
limitations. The controls that are generally applicable to each
subcategory which form the basis of EPA's estimates of the BCT
Option 1 attainment costs are presented in Tables III-l through
III-3. The production process controls and the end-of-pipe
treatment systems, which form the basis of BPT for each
subcategory would continue to be applied.
The methodology used to develop raw waste loads and the
anticipated final effluent characteristics are discussed below.
Development of_ Option I_ Raw Waste Loads
BCT Option 1 flows are generally based on the average discharge
flow of mills where discharge flows are lower than the flows that
form the basis of BPT effluent limitations. BCT Option 1 raw
waste BODJ5 loads are generally based on the average raw waste
BODS load of mills where raw waste BODji load is lower than the
raw" waste BOD5_ load that forms the basis of BPT effluent
limitations. The discharge flows and the raw waste BOD5_ and TSS
loads that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations will
hereafter be referred to as the BPT flow and BPT raw waste BODJ5
and BPT raw waste TSS respectively; collectively, they will be
referred to as the BPT raw waste load (RWL).
The general methodology to determine BCT Option 1 flows and BOD5_
RWL was modified slightly for mills in the alkaline-fine papers
(including bleached kraft and soda subcategories), deink (fine
papers and tissue papers sectors), papergrade sulfite (drum
wash), and papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash) subcategories. BPT
-------
tn
o
CO
CO
m
E§
H
3 CO
g §
EH 3 &
< c
EH EH fl
O CO 4J
W EH < R>
CO IS I
EH £3 -H rH
rH 4H "
O rH 0L4
10 3
U CO
-rl
a
R
•o -a o
a c -H
.e a E
U Q
11) MH t
rH CO 1
.Q ^ -r
P C
CO
R
1 U
'rl i i i ' i I I
iX IX X XI iiiiX X
XX IX 1 IX IiiiX X
i X ii X II I I i i I i
IX ii X ii iiXii »
iX 1) X i i i I I i i i
IX IX X XI 111X1 X
iX IX X i i 111X1 X
IX ^.IX X ii 1X1X1 X
iX IX X i i xXiXi X
M
a ou
O 1-10)
•H < W
*j d
•at u >i D aj
hh^ s (Q j-i *o j-i -u '"^ n
CO O OO rW QJ C QJ -H >> 4)
>,d4J *H 0 d4-> >04JlMr-tH
•aoeo J3 P5 (OU Pi -H Jd 00 M O
O tld O d CUtQ S'rl J^ddd4JrH-Hd
O t»\ O -H O O i-l W ••-* 'O4-)(0'HOdr~1 +J <
l-lC)ati-4 S -H U J3 W +J W (U dr-I-H(U-i
o o dou •^•wtucoco o-uouw nj
O V4 00 U 3 i— 1 QJ *O P[ l4Ui4 d^3U.(U O O
3 O C , OV-fi-H dl-l to -P OCOO r-HCUOO CJ tn T3 -H ^ 03 4-1 COOJ-HCOUi-t
cQICOOO S tU O Vlht4 J3 QJ )-l UUOOO R)>-< ^
>i Ci) -O OJ U i— C QJCOCU U +J O QJ OCQ^CUi— If-lO O r-
•OCOH p.3Hr-l J3 JC COdftOO pr-l H-HJJ3 3
OOT300 r- ) -O (U *H W*OW CUdcOOJ COOitSOO-H-SC^ O
Ot-Hco 3*J >aj'oa)a.«J'H *H&I
S O tO CO PL» pj (U CO ^ < 3 CQ U W W J-d P5 < CO CO S i-H i-PCO
tH« ^i cMto ^i cn« ^reo.Q . m at ^ u 'O « voco
X X
Xi
X i
X >
1 1
1 1
i 1
XX
X I
X I
.
X i
/ -
'O
d
CO
d a) a*
o d .-H
•H -i-i 3 .u
*j .c: &. d
u u m
(U CO "O iH
rH r-H E OJ CU
i— 1 i— I J3
•H O VJ O U
Z U OJ CO O
Oi O rH
U iH £0 rH O
CI rH C^ Xl U
& -H
CO &. •
CH CO rH (N
r- (0
-------
c -a v
3 O C OJ
O O -H O
oo
C *H r-T
r-< KJ 3
O rH O.
to 3
01 W
Ell JJ
i §
01
co
t re
a .;
XI
i-H C
n -H
^ to
•-i
<
i X X i i i
i X i i i
i i i i i i
14
O
CO
L4
3
O
rH
re 01
01 H
re u
01
01 u
> o.
U £
D. 00
rH B
A U
ling
- vacuum
re o
01 CM
U 01
CO
4J 3
rH
C4-4 01
"c 3
re
01 JJ
3 S
•o
; water
•H
3
01
oo e
•rt J3
re re
01 e
O, 01
S O,
P.O.
01
eaning
u
V
•H
O
2
i
to
1
a
3
C
O -H
3
00 -H
(0 "D
O 1-4
J_» 0
W Oi
1— 1
aj a.
fO "O
3 c
Q
JJ M
-H JJ
£ M
^
t CO
U 3
°=«
OOf
jj c:
re o
3 3
00 CJ
e 3
•H *D
rH 01
01 O 14
00 0
U 01
4-> *J re
co a 3
00 .
-a: u c
o oo re
(O W O
•H "-1 ^e!
CO
H
3
•H
rH
"O
c
(9
es
»H
P-.
0)
W
CO
/ater
>lowdown
00 U
C Of
•i-4 i— 1
i— < -H
O O
O ,J3
M
(0
00 C
VJ O
00 00
VD i-J
ffl J3
U
01
JJ
nj
3
2
u
"3
(Q
rH
4J
J
M
3
(U
a
rH
i— 1
U
CO
55
0\
*er
effluent
O CH
00 01
C! rH
rH >,
O 0
003
re a
01
9-.
B
oa
10
-------
TABLE III-2
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT FORM THE BASIS
OF BPT THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED TO
ACHIEVE BCT OPTIONS 1 AND 3 RAW WASTE LOADS
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Builders'
Tissue Paperboard Wastepaper- Paper and
From From Molded Roofing
Deink Wastepaper Wastepaper Products Felt
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry
woodyard and
barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
b. Spill collection
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Segregate cooling water
d. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp
2. Color plant
b. Improve saveall
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing
e. Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning
f. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
g. Recycle press water
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water
i. Broke storage
j. Segregate cooling water
k. Gland water reduction
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Miscellaneous Controls
a. Cooling tower
b. Recycle of effluent
X
X
X
X
B-These production process controls were erroneously included as BPT production process
controls. They were included in EPA's determination of BCT Options 1 and 3 raw waste loads.
11
-------
TABLE III-3
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT FORM THE BASIS
OF BPT THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED TO
ACHIEVE BCT OPTIONS 1 AND 3 RAW WASTE LOADS
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategocy
Control
Nonintegrated- Noniategrated-
Fine Papers Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonintegrated-
Nonwoven Papers Paperboard
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Hill
a. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
b. Spill collection
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
A. Bleaching
a. Countcrcurrent washing
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate
S. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Segregate cooling water
d. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
7. Paper Hill
a. Spill collection:
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp
' 2. Color plant
b. Improve saveall
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing
e. Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning
C. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
g. Recycle press water
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water
i. Broke storage
j. Segregate cooling water
k. Gland water reduction
8. Steaa Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Miscellaneous Controls
a. Cooling tower
b. Recycle of effluent
12
-------
effluent limitations for mills in these subcategories were based
on data representative of facilities that only manufacture
products characteristic of their subcategory. However, many
mills in these subcategories manufacture some products typical of
other subcategories.. BPT RWLs and final effluent characteristics
for mills of this type are determined by first multiplying the
guidelines for each appropriate subcategory by the quantity of
product produced at the mill typical of that subcategory, and by
then summing over all subcategories. BPT effluent
characteristics and RWLs determined by this method are referred
to as prorated BPT final effluent characteristics and prorated
BPT RWLs, respectively.
BCT Option 1 for each of these subcategories was determined by
calculating the prorated BPT flow and BODJ5 RWL for each mill.
The facilities that had flows lower than their respective
prorated BPT flow were identified. The percent of each mill's
flow below its prorated BPT flow was determined as follows:
percent below BPT (raw waste)
= 100 x (prorated BPT flow - raw waste flow)
prorated BPT flow
The .values for the "percent below BPT" of the mills in the
subcategory with flows less than their respective prorated BPT
flows were averaged. The subcategory BCT Option 1 flow was then
calculated by decreasing the subcategory BPT flow by the average
"percent below BPT" characteristic of the subcategory, as
follows:
BCT Option 1 flow = ,
(BPT flow)x[l - (average percent below BPT/100)]
The same procedure was followed to determine the BCT Option 1
BODJ5 RWL.
EPA is setting the BCT Option 1 TSS RWLs for all subcategories
equal to the BPT TSS RWLs because 1) the TSS RWL has little
effect, if any, on final effluent BODE[ and TSS load since the TSS
final effluent concentration is a function of the BODJ5 raw waste
concentration, and 2) EPA wanted to ensure that the cost
estimates do not understate the cost of solid waste disposal
associated with primary clarification.
Because the BCT Option 1 RWLs were generally derived from actual
mill data, it was not necessary to apply the estimated RWL
reductions associated with the BCT Option 1 production process
controls tp specific subcategory BPT RWLs. However, for several
subcategories, where limited actual mill data were available, it
was necessary to apply these estimated RWL reductions. For these
subcategories, BCT Option 1 flow and BODS^ RWL were determined by
subtracting the predicted reductions from BPT flow and BODS^ RWL.
13
-------
BCT Option 1 controls which result in RWL reductions below BPT
RWLs are presented in Tables III-1 through III-3. [BPT long-term
average raw waste loads (which are identical to BCT Option 2
RWLs) are shown in Table III-4.] The controls are those that can
be employed at mills in each subcategory to achieve the BCT
Option 1 RWLs developed from actual mill data for each
subcategory (presented in Tables III-6 through 111-27). It was,
however, necessary to estimate the reductions associated with the
process controls used in each subcategory to determine the costs
of installing and operating the process controls. Table III-5
presents BCT Option 1 flows and BOD^5 RWLs for subcategories where
these parameters are based on actual mill data, For comparison,
the flows and BODJ5 RWLs predicted by subtracting the total
estimated RWL reductions for each subcategory from subcategory
BPT flows and BOD5_ RWLs are also presented. The comparison
demonstrates that the identified BCT Option 1 controls can be
applied in each subcategory to achieve BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWLs.
Descriptions of the specific procedures used to establish BCT
Option 1 RWLs for each subcategory follow. Modifications to the
general methodology are noted.
Dissolving
three mills.
presented
Kraft - The dissolving kraft subcategory
comprises
^Actual RWL data for these mills and BPT RWLs are
in Table III-6. There are only a few mills with
limited RWL data in this subcategory, and varying percentages of
dissolving pulp- are produced at these mills, therefore, the
general methodology was not used. EPA determined BCT Option 1
RWLs by subtracting estimated flow and BODJ5 RWL reductions
(attainable through the implementation of the specific BCT Option
1 production process controls applicable to this subcategory)
from the BPT RWL.
The BCT Option 1 production process controls identified as
applicable in this subcategory are: segregate woodroom cooling
water; improved brownstock washing; brownstock, recovery area,
and bleached pulp spill collection; replacement of barometric
condenser; addition of boil out tank; additional liquor storage;
high pressure showers for wire and felt cleaning; use of white
water for vacuum pump sealing; improved white water storage;
segregation of steam plant cooling water; and lagoon for boiler
blowdown and backwash waters. The total projected flow and BODS^
RWL reductions are 21.3 kl/kkg (5.1 kgal/t) and 6.2 kg/kkg (12.3
Ib/t), respectively. Because each of these production process
controls has been employed at dissolving kraft mills or other
bleached kraft mills,' EPA believes that these technologies can be
applied at all mills in this subcategory.
14
-------
TABLE II1-4
BPT AND BCT OPTION 2
LONG-TERM AVERAGE RAW WASTE LOADS
Integra ted _Segmen_t
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkal inc-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linprboard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4 185
Gronndwood^Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groiindwood-Fine Papers
fleink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Pnpnrbonrd From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorruga ting Medium Furnish
Wastepnper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Non i n t eg ra t qd_ JJegjnent
Noni ntcgrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Non Integra ted -Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintogratrd-Paperboard
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
229.9 (55.1)
173.6 (41.6)
147.7 (35.4)
128.9 (30.9)
52.6
52.6
43.0
58.4
275.4
275.4
275.4
302.1
6-227.3
88.1
99.3
91.4
101.8
101.8
101.8
105.2
30.0
;h 30 . 0.
88.1
: 60.1
63.4
176.5
95.6
203.2
320 . 9
250.0
53.8
(12.6)
dols)
(14.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72. 4)3
(44.5-54.5)
(21.1)
(23. P)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(25.2)
(7.2)
. (7.2)
(21.1)
(14.4)
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
- (59.9)
(12.9)
BODS
kg/kki
66.5
38.0
38.4
33.6
16.9
23.7
25.2
19.4
137.0
156.0
181.5
266.4
84-139.5
39.2
17.4
16.7
90.0
90.0
90.0
14.5
23.0
11.3
7.9
12.6
10.8
22.9
11.5
21.7
21.7
12.2
10.4
; db/t)
(133.0)
(75.9)
(76.7)
(67.2)
(33.8)
(47. 4)2
(50.4)
(38.8)
(274.0)
(312.0)
(363.0)
(532. 8) 3
(168-279)
(78.4)
(34.8)
(33.3)
(180.0)
(180.0)
(180.0)
(29.0)
(46.0)
(22.5)
(15..8)
(25.2)
(21.5)
(45.8)
(22.9)
(43.3)
(43.3)
(24.3)
X20.8)
1
kg/kkg.
113.0
45.0
66.5
75.0
21.9
21.9
12.3
20.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
90.0
39.9
48.5
52.5
202.5
202.5
202.5
110.5
" 11.0
11.0
14.8
.41.0
30.8
. 55.2
34.7
63.4
63.4
27.4
36.9
'SS
115/11
(226.0)
(90.0)
(133.0)
(150.0)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(24.6)
(41.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185. O)3
(180.0)
(79.8)
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(221.0)
(21.9)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(82.0)
(61.6)
(110.4)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.7)
(73.7)
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories .
2 BCT Option 2 RWt is as shown, BPT RWI, BOD5 is 16.9 kg/kkg (33.8 Ib/t)
3 BFT limitations tor acetate grade production in the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory have been remanded by
the Court of Appeals. As limitations have not yet been promulgated, raw waste loads (RWL) corresponding to
the BPT effluent limitations have not yet been established. The RWLs shown here are representative of the
RWKs .Tssnriatecl with the production nf acetate grade dissolving snlfite pulp.
Include
gor ies .
I'npergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Pnpergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
"
15
-------
W1
p
uH»)
5 :e o
* Ii
» a *
< O O
?!e§
Ssoy
M* O bl o
— S^ ^
3 o « >•
£j-Sa
gs|
IP
(ft W
ir
i*-
*j
•s,
.£
It «-
3
*
>
•o
41
«
3
U
r-t
<3|
**
•
.*
*
- .T
*•
§
a
o
u .
J
X
UN
31*
5'
•o *
41
*J
«
*3 .
U .
5\.
o en r- *o
«M so m tn
o *• «o eo
so n CM eM
sQ CM 00
* en o o
*o r-so
eo •- *r
•fe ~ m o
en en en
c
j
- O f- 00 sD
M O CO *- *ff
ict in ri en CM
*3
ej
to 69 •-• CM CM
CM »» — . »-
r- o eo *T
CM *T en en
»_*• «•*• *-^ *— *
en o o\ P-
t- CM F- i«
eo QO CM in
a* en tn CM
CM «* en en
o\ en so en
^r -* r. vo
•-« CM, ^- —
*r •* -^- eo
o o r- ~*
o CM cn r* co i
ON ov o *n "T
^* tM
^
»
•»ff
en
r*.
^
O\ ^-v
CO ^— '
r-
sO
en
0
•^ff
'-v
o o o «» en ^
so so so CM r- i
m m m o CM *—
r-. r- r- so o CTI m **
o r^ «j r«- fft r-
t vo ao in so o en
*-i .- CM CM
u at *-* *"
a j= o 4)
*j *j
a H
-1 - « &
.^ *J £ CC
VU >P4 *J
rH 5 U
<-M
I
I** trt o in
» -e e :
! IE.
« ae
U
«^
E 41
i o n
— 4» .r
9 *J W C.
. _: n o o .
: « b o ^- •->
I > *J « -* 4)
( -. — ^4 41 U
*j>i n
•SIS:
41 C —
tn =3 e
ta O O 6 O
T ^N
°;T ^
«e) i -s tn
CM s^ ^«
Mr i— '
r^ en
sO 1 -it -»
-. vo
re
u
C *J
0 C
A M U 41 b
— C* Z = 41
3 — Z — X
OT t- O U* —
lit b*
41 — -3 -C
•=000 >«
n o o o b
b 3 3 3 re
eo^c -= -o -a
4) 3 3 3 0
a. o o o o
n b b b 41
a. o u u en
so in
CM CM
•** CM
«* in
n
U 41
b C.
S.£
£ ,
4) VI
3 (A
.* U« t-
e
•MOO
u
o
— \ en CM CM r— r-
I so en en m CM
o *r *» oo en
i eo en eo en r"
\O M *• CM •-
J5 C 41
Mb bu
"e u. M
b b WC
4> 3 E *-• «
S"1" 3 3 *O
b O. E T3 -0 0
41 U 3 41 ,0 CC *»
o* *j —< si b e
« «
M •« 41 4)
ei E oc *-» TJ i- en
a o c re *— 4;
t; * ,u rj 2? £ s- 7,
S (ju.^J 3 E « 4)
I-* E SW U
•™^ cn i- enso^i" u ra 415
S *_f sUs.i^'w^ Z b (fl O (D 41
• 00 4) h U M
M b 3 41 U
"' Q; . 4) ^ O. J3 O
•HO OH **• >* tnl
o E o- . u a -e
O4 «N f- >.t34lin0003E
O> O O\ O10000SD r*J O ml C *- 4! 3
menr— inf^ON-^1 aj^HQ«(B«*J4iw
P* *MCM** UO«O ^* -^ re 4J w
^ S 03 £ 3 utnn
3 41 w o s J3 re
M CW'-tO3a«
to .n •« U re -n M •«
b re u o *J S ,
4) •o**ta*J u w re w
(0 M 5 O CM JS -D ^ -^
Cu *H *J o *J H i-
•O M *J J b £* O
B C-HUO-OP-l-fflW
(A 4) a <-H 3 <-* C O 41
b > .^•ommo.unw
41 O *•* E 4) — *9
C. 3 «*- b4t-34liniU
n e nib. *J4nia.~«C3.3
W CL, O bOb*»*C A O 3
U Z i£ii-i4|tMO4>'p*CQJu
S'^ — ^'JJ '"e ^"oo4iSb n^:
Qi O C 3J 2 b,A re M *7 CJ *J 5 *J
"bS5 4lb 41*J>«3C-C
cS£«"5) ^ a. oa^3»-2c.Cpo
U- tZ b f- »-: *> u* a, *Jbb 41 O 41 *J O — ' *J iJ
00 O 00 00 J= 0 00 00 T3 W O TJ Q. *J D. C.
4ITJ*J4I4100414I,4) 3 41 3 O 4) M O O
coocc-JWC^ u"^.ticlj-eejo
c ceooec *«>3^-tm3<:co,cs
000.00 ^ .g _ N „, „ «, *
c 3 .= z: r-
16
-------
rrt
(8
o
}_3
* PS
H PS
o u
w
9 PJ
0 O O
w d
W <1J
•H T3
*"O *rH
'•»*' 'i |
-s^ c
/-N O
ft u
rH
ft rH
4-> J3
rl 4->
Js! ' to
"3
00
d d
•H 0
p. -rl
rH 4->
O U
(0 . d
01 "T3
•rl O
•O (H
^- / CM
^~N ^">
.0) 43
v_/ ^^
17
-------
The resulting BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL are presented below:
Dissolving Kraft - Development of Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
BPT RWL
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
230.0 (55.1)
BOD5_
kq/kkg (Ib/t)
66.5 (133.0)
Reductions resulting from
application of specific
production process controls
21.3 ( 5.1)
6.2 (12.3)
Option 1 RWL
208.7 (50.0)
60.4 (120.7)
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS
RWL [113.0 kg/kkg (226.0 lb/t)].
Market Bleached Kraft - Data presented in Table III-7 for the
production of both bleached hardwood kraft (HWK) and bleached
softwood kraft (SWK) pulp are arranged in order of increasing
softwood pulp production. Of the mills where RWLs are lower than
or equal to those used to develop BPT, BOD5_ RWL is essentially
the same at both hardwood and softwood mills. However, mills
where bleached softwood pulp is produced have a higher average
flow. The average flows for softwood and hardwood mills where
flows are less than BPT flow are 152.7 kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t) and
120.6 kl/kkg (28.9 kgal/t), respectively. The higher flow, 152.7
kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t), has been chosen as representative of the
subcategory. This approach gives an adequate allowance for all
types of market kraft mills: hardwood, softwood, and mixtures of
both. The average BODS RWLs for softwood and
where
hardwood
BODS RWLs are less~~than the BPT RWL are 29.3 kg/kkg
mills
(58.6
lb/t) and 26.6 kg/kkg (53.2 lb/t), respectively. Since the data
for both types of wood pulps are substantially the same, the
higher BOD5_ RWL, 29.3 kg/kkg (58.6 lb/t), is chosen.
To obtain BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL, adjustments had to be
made to the average flow and BOD5_ RWL of mills where discharges
were lower than BPT flow and BOD5_ RWL because some facilities
utilized control technologies not considered as BCT Option 1
candidates by EPA. The reuse of evaporator and blow condensates
is not a recommended BCT Option 1 production process control
because of possible air pollutant emissions. However, many mills
in the market bleached kraft subcategory use this control and
their RWLs reflect the use of this control. EPA estimates that
the use of this control by mills in this subcategory results in
flow and BOD5_ RWL reductions of 2.1 kl/kkg (0.5 kgal/t) and 2.5
kg/kkg (5.0 lb/t), respectively. These reduction values were
added to the average flow and BOD5_ RWL of mills using this
18
-------
t-1
V i
' o
i O
i CQ
o>-.(n
tncOf>\oovoco
-3- CM CO CO 1-1
o
-<
4-i
S ml ml
o Q a
^-i 0 O
^ CQ CO
H H H
M « A
VII V« VII
co
OOGOvOCM
«
O
4J O O O O O O
W M W W W W W
.-I • •-(
03 ^^ iH
•H CO *H
3S =
-S E '
•H o aa
-------
control with flow or BOD5_ RWL less than the BPT RWL to obtain
values for BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWLs that do not reflect
the use of this control. The values so obtained are 154.8 kl/kkg
(37.1 kgal/t) and 31.8 kg/kkg (63.6 Ib/t) for flow and BOD5_,
respectively. This adjustment was made solely to obtain BCT
Option 1 RWLs. To identify the mills with flow or BODjj RWL less
than BPT flow or BOD5_ RWL, EPA compared unadjusted mill RWLs to
BPT RWLs which are also unadjusted.
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS
RWL. In summary, the BCT Option 1 RWL's for the market bleached
kraft subcategory are: flow - 154.8 kl/kkg (37.1 kgal/t), BODjj -
31.8 kg/kkg (63.6 Ib/t), and TSS - 45.0 kg/kkg (90.0 Ib/t).
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - RWL data
for bleached kraft mills where paperboard, coarse papers, and
tissue papers are manufactured are presented in Table III-8. Of
the eight mills for which data are presented, five are achieving
flows and three are achieving BOD5_ RWLs that are less than BPT
RWL. .For one of the mills (030039) attaining a lower flow and
BOD|> RWL, data correspond to biological treatment plant influent
rather than to a true raw waste. Therefore, the BOD5_ data from
this mill were not used to determine BCT Option 1 BOD5_ RWL. BCT
Option 1 flow and BODj^ RWL for this subcategory are the average
of those mills where RWLs lower than BPT RWLs are attained.
Application of this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWLs of 123.9 kl/kkg (29.7 kgal/t) and 35.1 kg/kkg (70.2 Ib/t).
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT
RWL, or 66.5 kg/kkg (133.0 Ib/t) of product.
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) -
Mills in the alkaline fine bleached kraft subcategory manufacture
fine papers and often a small amount of market bleached kraft
pulp, primarily from a furnish consisting of bleached kraft (or
soda) pulp and frequently from some purchased pulp. Four mills
in this subcategory also manufacture a small amount of groundwood
pulp from which they make fine papers.
The BPT BOD5_ RWLs for these subcategories were adjusted to
represent the raw waste loads of mills producing only fine papers
from alkaline pulp manufactured on-site. The methodology used 'to
develop BPT RWLs and effluent guidelines can be found on pages
233-238 in the development document supporting the Phase II BPT
regulations promulgated in January 1977. (9)
BCT Option 1 RWLs for this subcategory were determined by
comparing individual mill flow and BOD5_ RWLs to their respective
prorated BPT flow and BOD5_ RWLs as described above. Data are
presented in Table III-9 for 20 mills characteristic of the fine
bleached kraft subcategory. The nine mills with flows less than
their respective prorated BPT flows have flows that average 24.2
percent less than their prorated BPT flows. The seven mills with
BOD5_ RWLs less than their respective prorated BPT BOD5_ have BOD5_
RWLs, that average 16.2 percent less than their prorated BPT BOD5_
RWLs. The resulting flow and BOD5_ RWLs, determined by reducing
20
-------
•o
o
•H
H
•O
0
CO
S
0
rH
•H
m (0 fK tV fe (H (K
co r- i i co o in c\
. .ii . . • .
SS S £ S2.
r*» ON i i CM in co o
. .11 ....
i—i CM CO ON CO S-> S-, S~. S-> r.
!l!£'&rHS'£!Sl2
'-' ^ ^
SrocoR3S3S
cooorHooin'Ht— i
oosor^o^^cM
eocoincocMcocooN
OinrHOCMCOCO**
ONCOCOOOrHUO^^)
i-H rH rH
ON -^ s~\ \o O I oO r^
VO CO U O *H | *^ o
^-^ rH CM CO rH
CO
CO rH 1 t ON 1 1 1
-* co i t in i i i
CO CM
co i r^ ^ **f co in r*»
** 1 O r-C 00 00 ON CO
in o\ r*» oo in oo *^
CO CO 3 S S 0 S CO
rH
\O 1 CM CM 1 VO >* rH
co i in
ON \O CO CM
3- in ON O
CO CO CM rH
•P 22
CO *H 4-1
S O O
0) S 0) Q)
60 (0 60 60
tU EH DO)
CO
(U
ffi
d
•H
» QJ 43
W W 4J
S (0 -H
n d.'d
O CO rH
C U rH
•H QJ 60 -H
« d 2
CJ U 4-1 1
QJ S-( -i-t
3 Q H eg
rH S
MH TJ
iw QJ 13 S
U 4J rH
rH O M-I
*H QJ in EH
E U rH A*
t) (0 * VII
OJ 4J 4J
rQ W QJ X
§ H
-------
a
CO
n
\f
I
os -o
1 j
Is B i
0 g §
o w I£
S S ca *
I-t O Cti
to i o
S25
* S £
S
a a
1 S
« 5
CQ
S
CM
*"*
V
•H
O
Cu
O
W
u
•a
o
14
Cu
5 g
4J (3
1 14
00 4t
d >
»s "^
"O
01
4J
£2
o
u
Cu
g
ft) O(
3*
^
>iJ
£
CQ
•o
01
a
G
Cu
•a
a
V* BJ
** u
o
14
CU
U 41
4) 0
4J «
oo ft:
d >
M
J
S -3
u *-
S
CQ
•a
a
id
o
b
a
_
«
4-
c
6-
-N ^
O ff
u
*J 4.
U .A
3 z
tj
c
^
*
;.
c
*j c
D
rH J
.2 e
.
r
i
•x.
-1
«— '
.as
^
oc
<
S
CQ
^
•SH
S
vS
0
^^
^
£
0
£
c
^
I
CQ
^
i
«
<
«
»
^
^
^
f
• ^
\ £
: ^-
^
3 \-
3 *™
: r
3
J
U
tf
C
H
H
C
tnicP^oo! 1 IQcococnt-i^cooeo^eo
co or^co o\ocNCf\--< oor-incor^o
coiomoNi i iooy oin^in VOVOCO^NO r^ vo f^ ^* ^* ^^
fj F-*in-tfin t-4i-»mr-»c4 ^^SSSlJTJ
oj inc^c'jr** cocONOcjco cotrjcocococN
e7(NCMinr^cgin0-Ir-CflvO-Tl/)0>Ot---TN
«-t- r-oo.»«1n.Tr.*vo»,noovor.«aooc>Jencn>oirtc^eo^r-
SSS-«o3'-'m-aii~<^'-c
c\ r^ d f-* i*« *~* en >o ^o tA^oirt"^fiovO'~(*^s«
ScsSSf5SSS5mcntocMcniNcoto««m»r~cMvocn-»-*inr-.o;a
r- f<
5lSSSSmoSS5inr--i£r-225gJ
: : : i : co : : : ! ! i : : : ggg 1 5
!
*^ ! II-HIOI i*-*mmicoeoi'O'O'acoi
iiiiiNiicoimiitt ^-./-\^-» i ^
i: i i ( 1^1 'g'g1 ' ' '333C
ss^gssss ; ss-sassgggs^
j ! ! ! ! S ! ! ! ! i ! ! ! ! ^^ ! n
s_^ S^ N»/ V
iiiiiroiir^iinitti 33 ' ' s
co^S5S rH
•— ' Cfl
co d
s o
•H
0) 3 *•>
D re 02 O
O li
3 01 H H
•n > cu o
-H < CQ CQ
HK
"tS
CU
re ^
14 r-f
^ <
*CJ &•*
-a cu •&
§ §3E
fj> O Pi *•*
i-« O
.- 00 4J «*H
oi d
M S -t (J
Cu*C 01
0) CU *O
CU OJ W re rH
rH c n cu 0)
3 -H .n J5
u ' d re
01 4) -rl '-H 4J
d d UH w
•H -H H 1 "O
i-H rH CU rH
jj « » « g
rH rH -O ^ -H
CO (U 41 O 4->
4J '4H O
i i re 3
u E- -O
Jrf Jrf O CM O
rH rH t-l CQ V4
< < 04 ^ DM
322 S
cu
CQ
5
re
s
CU
^
41
00
re
0)
re
0)
00
d
o
rH
1
CU
CQ
41
4J
0
)H
Cu
X
0
o
M
CQ
13
4)
4-t
Q
O
Cu
d
re
5
(A
0)
rH
4J
d
• 01
u
01
cu
VII
8<
3
22
-------
BPT flow and BODj[ RWL by 24.2 percent and 16.2 percent, are 97.6
kl/kkg (23.4 kgal/t) and 28.2 kg/kkg (56.3 Ib/t). A further
adjustment was made to these values to obtain the BCT Option 1
flow and E;OD5_ RWLs. Because of possible air pollutant emissions,
the reuse of evaporator and blow condensates is not a recommended
BPT Option 1 production process control. However, many mills in
the bleached kraft subcategory use this control and RWLs loads
reflect the use of the control. EPA estimates that use of this
control by mills in these subcategories results in flow and BOD_5
RWL reductions of 2.1 kl/kkg (0.5 kgal/t) and 2.3 kg/kkg (4.5
Ib/t), respectively. These reduction values were added to the
flow and BODji RWLs developed above to obtain values for BCT
Option 1 flow and BODJ5 RWLs that do not reflect the use of this
control. The values obtained are 9.9.7 kl/kkg (23.9 kgal/t) and
30.4 kg/kkg (60.8 Ib/t) for flow and BOD5_.
EPA identified the mills with flow or BOD5_ RWLs less than BPT
BODjj RWLs by comparing unadjusted mill RWLs to BPT RWLs which are
also unadjusted. The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the
same as BPT, TSS RWL [75.0 kg/kkg (150.0 Ib/t)].
Unbleached Kraft - Data are presented in Table 111-10 for mills
characteristic of this subcategory. In the development of BPT
effluent limitations guidelines, the unbleached kraft subcategory
included mills manufacturing unbleached kraft linerboard, bag,
and/or other mixed products. Data provided in response to the
data request program suggest that there are differences between
waste characteristics of mills manufacturing linerboard and those
manufacturing bag or other mixed products. Therefore, the
unbleached kraft subcategory was divided into three sectors: 1)
mills that manufacture more than 90 percent linerboard; 2) mills
that manufacture more than 90 percent bag and other products; and
3) mills that manufacture substantial fractions of both
linerboard and bag and other products (but less than or equal to
90 percent of either). The following summarizes the subcategory
averages for the first two sectors.
Unbleached Kraft-Raw Waste Load Summary
Flow BODS TSS
Unbleached Kraft-
Linerboard
Unbleached Kraft-
Bag and Other
Products
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
47.6 (11.4) 16.5 (32.9) 15;7 (31.4)
77.6 (18.6)
23.7 (47.4)
15.7 (31.3)
23
-------
TABLE 111-10
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish(t/d)
Hill Ho. Kraft WP
Purch
Product (t/d)
Broke tinerboard
tinerboard (>90% linerboard)
010001 450
010002 923
010018 1,170 30
010019 1,127 39
010020 971 55
010025 523 39
010038 750 68
010040 1 , 195 85
010042 965
010043 1,539 10
010046 1,176
010047 1,299
010057 540
010063 (a) 90£% bag and other products)
._
—
(a)
(a)
12
25
10
toad
SBPT flow
S Assumed
Mixed Products (S1OX linerboard
010005 1,286
010006 1,685
010008 1,895
010034 940
010044 1,020
Average
8
51
—
48
82
„
25
(a)
(a)
—
—
—
BPT BODS
and £1O%
898
1,115
1,540
404
362
283
279 95
(a) (a)
(a) (a)
726
443
234
bag and other
332
478
434
453 68
712
283
399
(a)
- (a)
726
443
234
products)
1,230
1,594
1,974
925
1,074
42.1
110.2
47.2
48.4
58.4
85.1
151.5
77.6
52.5
52.5
45.9
99.3
(d)
66.4
52.6
73.9
94.7
57.2
69.0
(10.1)
(26.4)
(11.3)
(11.6)
(14.0)
(20.4)
(36.3)
(18.6)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(11.0)
(23.8)
(15.9)
(12.6)
(17.7)
(22.7)
(13.7)
(16.5)
_^
—
18.3
25.6
30.5
—
20.6
23.7
16.9
23.7
22.0
19.4
20.3
12.5
18.8
36.8
12.5
20.2
(--)
( — )
(36.5)
(51.2)
(60.9)
( — )
(41.1)
(47.4)
(33.8)
(47.4)
(43.9)
(38.8)
(40.6)
(25.0)
(37.6)
(73.5)
(24.9)
(40.3)
13.3
17-4
--
23.2
—
8.6
15.6
21.9
21.9
17.4
13.0
20.5
--
45.7
24.3
17..8
27.2
(--)
(26.6)
(34.8)
( — )
(46.4)
( — )
(17.2)
(31.2)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(34.8)
(26.0)
(40.9)
( — )
(91-3)
(48.6)
(35.6)
(54.1)
F
BF
F
B
(a)Production data held confidential.
OOF - Hill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with S Assumed BPT BOD5.
(c)Mill ROW closed.
(d)For purposes of costing, mills in this product sector were assigned to the linerboard or the bag and other
product sectors in accordance with the majority of their products.
24
-------
In establishing BCT Option 1 RWLs, EPA evaluated data for both
the linerboard and bag sectors. BCT Option 1 RWLs for both
sectors are based on the averages of those mills attaining RWLs
lower than BPT RWLs. The average values for flow and BOD5_
obtained by the application of this methodology are 38.4 kl/kkg
(9.2 kgal/t) and 12.4 kg/kkg (24.8 Ib/t) for the unbleached
kraft-linerboard sector and 45.9 kl/kkg (11.0 kgal/t) and 19.4
kg/kkg (38.8 lb/t) for the unbleached kraft-bag and other product
sector.
To obtain BCT Option 1 flows and BOD5_ RWLs for the linerboard
sector and the bag and other products sector, adjustments were
made to the average flow and BODE5 RWLs of mills where discharges
were lower than BPT flow and BOD5_ RWLs because of the use of
control technologies not considered by EPA to be BCT Option 1
candidates. Because of possible air pollutant emissions, the
reuse of evaporator and blow condensates is not a recommended BCT
Option 1 production process control. However, many mills in all
sectors of the unbleached kraft subcategory use this control and
their ,RWLs reflect the use of this control. EPA estimates that
the use of this control by mills in this subcategory results in
flow and BOD5_ RWL reductions of 2.1 kl/kkg (0.5 kgal/t) and 2.5
kg/kkg (5.0 lb/t) for mills in each sector. These reduction
values were added to the average flow and BODS^ RWLs of mills with
flow or BOD5_ RWLs less than BPT RWLs to obtain values for BCT
Option 1 flow and BOP5. RWLs that do not reflect the use of the
control. The values obtained are 40.5 kl/kkg (9.7 kgal/t) and
14.9 kg/kkg) (29.8 lb/t) for flow and BOD5_ for the linerboard
sector, and 48.0 kl/kkg (11.5 kgal/t) and 21.9 kg/kkg (43.8 lb/t)
for flow and BODJ5 for the bag and other products sector.
To identify the mills with flow or BODji RWLs less than BPT, EPA
compared unadjusted mill RWLs to BPT RWLs which are also
unadjusted. The BCT Option 1 TSS RWLs. for both sectors are equal
and are assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [21.9 kg/kkg
(43.8 lb/t)].
Semi-Chemical - Available RWL data for semi-chemical mills are
presented in Table III-ll. The data are presented according to
wastepaper use and use of liquor recovery. Variable amounts of
wastepaper are utilized at mills in this subcategory according to
relative market conditions and pricing. Because of this
variation, two mill groups were considered in the development of
BCT Option 1 RWLs. The groups are: (a) mills with liquor
recovery where less than one-third of the furnish is wastepaper
and (b) mills with liquor recovery where more than one-third of
the furnish is wastepaper. Review of the data in Table 111-10
indicates a significant difference in the average flows of the
two groups [35.9 kl/kkg (8.6 kgal/t) versus 18.8 kl/kkg (4.5
kgal/t)] but no significant difference in the average BOD5_ RWLs
[22.1 kg/kkg (44.1 lb/t) versus 23.9 kg/kkg (47.8 .lb/t)].
Therefore,, the BCT Option 1 flow is based on the average of those
mills with liquor recovery where less than one-third wastepaper
is processed and a flow lower than BPT flow is attained. The BCT
Option 1 BOD5_ RWL is the average BOD5_ RWL of both groups Of mills
25
-------
TABLE III-ll
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
Furnish (t/d) •
Mill No. Scsi-Chem WP Broke
Product
Flow
BODS
(t/d) kl/kkg (kRal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
SBPT (a)
1. Hills With Liquor Recovery and Less Than 1/3 WP
020002 248 90 20
020003(b) 582 61
020008 (b) 231 125
020009(b) (c) (c) (c)
020010 (c) (c) Cc)
020013 472 173
020014(d) 394 117
020017 (c) (c) (c)
060004 (b) 385 98 9
Average
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT flow
Average of Mills with SBPT BOD5
II. Hills With Liquor Recovery and
020001 204 116
020004(e) 160 106
020006 190 99
020007 183 123
020011 (f) 235 157
020012 (c) (c) (c)
Average
BPT Raw Watte Load
Average of Hills with SBPT flow
Average of Hills with SBPT BOD5
III. Hills Without Liouor Recovery
020005 137 46
020015 118 50
Average
IV. Non Representative Hills
020018 (g) 217 450
020016 (g) 200 221
Average
Average of All Hills
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT flow
(Group I and II)
Average of Hills with SBPT BOD5
(Group I and II)
331
618
318
(c)
(c)
599
511
(c)
492
24.2
40.1
23.0
28.8
60.5
39.6
26.7
30.5
48.8
35.9
42.9
30.5
33.4
More Than 1/3
302
266
291
346
377
(c)
183
169
673
525
19.2
25.0
16.3
10.4
34.2
28.4
18.8
42.9
18.8
17.9
47.2
20.4
33.8
30.5
55.5
43.0
30.9
42.9
26.3
28.8
(5.8)
(9.6)
(5.5)
(6.9)
(14.5)
(9.5)
(6.4)
(7.3)
(11.7)
(8.6)
(10.3)
(7.3)
(8.0)
WP
(4.6)
(6.0)
(3.9)
(2.5)
(8.2)
(6.8)
(4.5)
(10.3)
(4.5)
(4.3)
(11.3)
(4.9)
(8.1)
(7.3)
(13.3)
(10.3)
(7.4)
(10.3)
(6.3)
(6.9)
12.9
25.3
9.6
14.4
17.9
39.0
31.2
20.7
27. 8
22.1
25.2
21.9
15.1
23.6
1.3
24.2
--
22.6
--
23.9
25.2
23.9
23.9
56.1
33.2
44.7
62.8
50.5
56.7
25.8
25.2
22.3
17.6
(25.7)
(50.5)
(19.2)
(28.8)
(35.7)
(77.9)
(62.3)
(41.3)
(55.6)
(44.1)
(50.4)
(43.7)
(30.1)
(47.1)
(2.6)
(48.4)
(")
(45.2)
(--)
(47.8)
(50.4)
(47.8)
(47.8)
(112.1)
(66.4)
(89.3)
(125.6)
(100.9)
(113.3)
(5.1.6)
(50.4)
(44.6)
(35.2)
30.2
13.2
6.9
17.8
49.3
37.8
18.8
44.5
54.6 ,
30.3
12.3
24.2
29.7
8.1
0.2
—
—
6.0
--
8.1
12.3
8.1
8.1
52.4
27.9
40.1
61.5
42.2
51.9
30.1
12.3
22.2
26.1
(60.4)
(26.3)
(13.7)
(35.6)
(98.5)
(75.5)
(37.6)
(89.0)
(109.2)
(60.6)
(24.6)
(48.3)
(59.4)
(16.1)
(0.3)
(--)
(--)
(11.9)
( — )
(16.1)
(24.6)
(16.1)
(16.1)
(104.7).
(55.7)
(80.2)
(123.0)
(84.3)
(103.7)
(60.2)
(24.6)
(44.3)
(52.2)
BF
F
BF
BF :
: B
F
F
BF
BF
BF
F
F
F
. F
(a) F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BOD5.
(b) No-sulfur pulping.
(c) Production data held confidential.
(d) Ammonia-base.
(e) A reverse osmosis system is used to treat internal process streams and allow for extensive
recycle of these treated streams. Not included in averages.
(f) Hill 020011 has combined effluent with other mills. Not included in averages.
(g) Hill 020018 makes recycled paperboard and corrugating. Mill 020016 makes tissue and
fine papers. These mills are not considered representative and are not included in averages.
26
-------
where a BOD5_ RWL lower than BPT BOD5_ RWL is attained.
Application of this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWL of 30.5 kl/kkg (7.3 kgal/t) and 17.6 kg/kkg (35.2 Ib/t). The
BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL
[12.3 kg/kkg (24.6 Ib/t) ]..
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - Table III-1.2 presents
available RWL data for this subcategory. BCT Option 1 RWLs for
this subcategory are the averages of those mills where RWLs lower
than BPT RWLs are attained. Application of this methodology
yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL of 48.0 kl/kkg (11.5
kgal/t) and 16.3 kg/kkg (32.5 Ib/t). The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is
assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [20.5 kg/kkg (41.0
lb/t)J.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - Table 111-13 presents available RWL
data for this subcategory. In previous effluent limitations
guidelines development, EPA recognized that a variety of products
are made at dissolving sulfite pulp mills that result in
different waste characteristics. However, the data request
program provided only limited RWL data by product types for this
subcategory. Consequently, EPA estimated the RWL reductions
attainable through the application of specific production process
controls.
Several specific production process control modifications are
applicable in this subcategory, and these are shown in Table III-
1. Each of these controls has been employed at dissolving
sulfite pulp mills. In general, most of the items under
consideration result in minor flow reductions with the exception
of recycle of the hydraulic barking water. Smaller but
significant flow reductions can also be obtained from the
following modifications: 1) cooling water segregation, 2) more
extensive use of white water i'n the pulp and paper mills, 3)
liquor and pulp dryer spill collection, 4) caustic filtrate
evaporation, 5) reuse of vacuum pump seal water, and 6) high
pressure showers. These controls can reduce wastewater discharge
by 41.7 kl/kkg (10.0 kgal/t). Predicted BOD5_ reductions
resulting from the application of these controls (excluding
caustic filtrate evaporation) total 6.4 kg/kkg (12.8 Ib/t).
Caustic filtrate evaporation results in BOD5_ RWL reductions
varying from 40.0 kg/kkg (80.0 Ib/t) for nitration grade pulp
production to 103.0 kg/kkg (206.0 Ib/t) for acetate grade pulp
production. This technology is an expensive production process
control, yet one that can result in significant BOD5_ reduction.
It has been employed at mills 046002 and 046006.
Another control, neutralization of spent sulfite liquor, is
applicable to mills that use MgO as a base and results in
significant BODJ5 reductions varying from 26.5 kg/kkg (53.0 Ib/t)
for nitration grade pulp production to 30.5 kg/kkg (61.0 Ib/t)
for acetate grade pulp production.
The resulting BCT Option 1 BOO5_ RWLs are presented below. BOD5_
RWLs are presented separately for mills which employ MgO as a
27
-------
CO
OT
H
a
0
m
3
o
(n
4J
U
9
•O
o
5
f.
n
•H
C
U
&
H
n
v«
*-^
—
3
*— '
OC
M
OC
/••N
•il
ci
M
^A
«
-U
FH"
OC
^5
Jtf
«^
rH
.Atf
•o
^
eg
o
H
S
CO
pa
•o
co <• ^ CA o I-H co so
in «oo*** O C3 O
w oq
VIJ VH
5 5
•o 33
CO
O CQ W
1-3 rH »H
4) -H
• oo §
ffl U
43 rt
-rt
3 rH
•O "H
•S g
e -S
u
CO 4)
lU *rt rH
O -H
ti U
W (0 4J
B a co
S B 0 rH
CO *J E
*J 4) 3
B B 3 O
o a1 w
U CJ 4) B
W <4H ,Q rH
CO 0 3 fH
O CO 4)
rH d CJ
O CO
1U -H • *rt
0 *J S E
-v» U O
•O 3 *H -TJ
G -O AJ 4i
CO CU 4) SH
f Cn 00
0) .* o D
J3 CO *J
•rt 4J i-H B
U "° -H B
4) B E CU
00 l*H -rt «rt T3
(Q 4J 4J 4-> 1-4
4J H U « *« 4)
C CU 3 4J « J3
O V« O 4> Jtf CO
k4 U CO -U
41 J3 CU W 13 co
•rt CU CUJ3
T3 3 rH 4) 0 B
CU 3 *J CO O
*J t-l CU 4) -rt
rt rH U] rH *J
. ,-t .H U -rt ^ CJ
3 E 4) 3
U Jri co 4) T3
rH 1 W 4J S O
rt rt co o ij
u PM r: a 01 Cw
,— \ *-N /-s /-^ ^—v
^ cS ^ S vfi
28
-------
TABLE III-13
I
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production
Mill No. (t/d)
Flow
BODS
TSS .
kl/kkg (kgal/t) teg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
046001(a) 421
046002(b) 560
046003 620
046004(f) (e)
046005 (e)
046006(a) (e)
Average
BET Raw Waste Loads are
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
228.7 (54.8) 154.1 (308.2)
259.1 (62.1)(c) -- (--)
265.0 (63.5)(c)(d) 114.5 (228.9)
29.3 (58.6)
190.7 (45.7)
358.5 (85.9)
182.8 (43.8)
258.7 (62.0)
97.2 (194.4)
276.0 (552.0)
99.2 (198.3)
161.0 (321.9)
11.2
39.6
'(22.3)
(79.2)
dependent on grade of pulp produced and are as
275.0 (66.0)
275.0 (66.0)
275.0 (66.0)
302.1 (72.4}(S)
137.0 (274.0) 92.5
156.0 (312.0) 92.5
181.5 (363.0) 92.5
266.4 (532.8)(g) 92.5
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
C185.0)
(a) Data obtained from responses by mill representatives to a 1981
questionnaire.
(b) Total raw waste BOD5 and TSS data are not available.
(c) Flow data obtained from telephone conversations with mill repre-
sentatives in 1981.
(d) Flow data based on 1981 process flow and corresponding 647 ton/day
production rate.
(e) {'reduction data held confidential.
(f) Raw waste loads include wastewater firom a dissolving sulfite pulp mill and
ai paper mill. Therefore, data were not included in the averages.
(g) The BPT BODS limitation for acetate grade production has been remanded by the Court
of Appeals." EPA has not yet promulgated the BOOS limitation. The flow and 80D5
ahown here are representative of the raw waste load associated with the production
of acetate grade dissolving pulp at the time the remanded BPT BOD5 limitation
Has promulgated in 1977.
29
-------
TABLE III-13a
•o
CO
o
_l
OJ
o
1
Ol
>r_
M-
3
cn
c
'>
f-«-"
o
o
CD
4-5
CO
4J
CO
o
£
C
o
4J
co
l_
4->
s
^— ^
4->
•^
.n
^^
cn
Jxf
\y*
**^^
cn
^u£
^-^
O
to
CO
***>
CO
to
CO
cn
>~
o
"cL
CD
,[ *
O
C
o
•o
4^
CO
.c:
i *
to
*l_
E:
l-H
CO
OJ
CO
in
^-
•
to
tO
OJ
^-^
o
CO
to
CO
in
•
i— i
CO
l-H
^^
o
OJ
1—1
CO
o
to
in
i — i
^—^
o
•
^*
p*^
OJ
o
•
»^
ro
r— i
CT>
C
i *
r__
3
to
CD
3
0; to
c
in|o
a -i—
O 4-5
CQ U
3
I— -a
a. CD
ca c£.
^
co
CO
t-i
-_~
•3-
•
CTl
O
f— 1
^_
C3
^j-
r-1
CO
r^
•
i —
in
i— i
^— ^
CO
•
CO
f— f
O*t
•
»M
r-.
^—^
OJ
CTl
<— 1
OJ
^_^
to
CTl
0
i— <
^^
CO
•
to
OJ
1— 1
«d-
•
CO
VO
^-^
OJ
•
in
CO
i— i
^— *
to
•
OJ
CT>
^^
CO
•
OJ
CTv
^_ ^
<•
•
to
^-^
OJ
•
1— 1
co
i— i
*~~*
to
•
o
CTl
0 0
.r- 1
C 4-5 IO IS
o o r- a;
•i- 3 O
4J -a t- L«|
ca o 4-5 ca
0 t- c O
•i- a- o ca
i — O
Q. O r-t
Q-T- to
c£ D- O
CD
CO
CD
O
t— i
co
OJ
CO
in
•> i— i
o co
1 — i-H
Q.
CD
to
O
O
to
>
^-^
4-5 O
fO •
-C OJ
4-5 ,— l
CO
to « — •
^~
•— o
•n- •
s to
I— 1
c
o
•r-
4-5
CO
C_
4_>
•^
z:
^— ^
o
•
^~
p«-.
OJ
O^^r
O
•
f*^
CO
r-t
cn
c
•r—
4-5
3
to
CD
3 '
a: to
c
g£
0 4-5
ca o
3
1— X!
OL. O)
ca ctL
^_^
CO
CTl
r-
OJ
CTl
•
CTl
CO
«-H
^_^_
O
•
CO
LO
CvJ
v_-*
LO
•
to
OJ
I— t
^-^
co
OJ
o
OJ
^ -
«d-
•
»-(
o
i— i
*— *
OJ
•
0
VO
i— i
•*— -•
i— i
•
o
co
^— ^
CO
•
o
CO
r— 1
^^*
«*
•
C3
CTl
x— ^
OJ
•
r-H
CO
r-H
**— *
**O
•
in
to
^— ^
CO
•
in
r— 1
^_^>
CTi
•
OJ
r--
^-^.
OJ
•
CO
OJ
.— i
^-^
l-H
•
^~
to
0 0
•r- —1
0 "tj r- Di
•r- 3 O
4J -o t- in
(O o -1-5 ca
o t_ c o
•r- OL. O CQ
_„ f^J)
d. O i-l
C3.-1- tO
eC M— to c:
•i- CD O
E o o -i-
O CD O 4-5
i- Q. C- CL
<»- >4-5
t_ CO
O 4-5 •
cn *r— ~o
CD E CD jr
4-5 -r- x: 4J
(O i — to -i- 1—
O -r- S D-
jQ in|i — CD
3 ca -O ~o
to co (O CD T15
CQ 4^ 4-J QJ
Q. to CO T3
i — CD CD -i— C
3 JC O CO
Q.4-* t= O E
CD to CD
CD T3 OJ to t-
4-5 CD -Q CO
•r-4-5 CD
I*- CO 4-5 _l .E
i — cn CD 3 4-5
3 f— ^j f^
10 3 , to CD
, — 4J co CD E
o CD .c jr 10
to >, 4-5 tO
to to
•i— 4-5 C M— CD
-O O O O -C
C T- 4-5
CD 4-5 o>
JC 10 CO > 4-5
4-5 CO 4-> •!- CO
I— *r- 4J
c E co i"*
•r- >,••- 4-5 i —
CJ i — C 3
C C CD CX
O CD 4^ to
•r— Cn CZ CD QJ
4-5 c£ CD t_ 4-5
(J 3 Q.-I-
3 CD •— O) *«-
T3 J= <*-«-•—
0 1- <*- 3
C. CD tO C/)
CX •!-
• t— cn
CD C/> OL, ^-^ d
•O f— CQ 4-5 -r- •
CO IO *"^, 5" P^
t- CD O jD f— r—
cn ex 4-5 r— o cn
ex to 1-1
CD «£ cnco to
4-> C . -r- C
(O <»- T- OJ T3 T-
4-5 O "O CO
CD c tn CD -a
O 4-5 O -T3 CD
ro (_ ex 10 4.5
3 to cn *- co
<_ o CD ^£ cn cn
o 0 t- m <—
<*- t- -^ CD 3
CD O cn4-5 E
C JC O -Ski « O
O 4-5 4-5 £_
•r- —i «d- CD ex
4J >)3 • O
IO JD Qi tO CO tO
4-5 "to CO
•r- T3 in|oJ <»- 5
E CD ca o
•r- T3 0 <«-. C
r- C CO O C O
IO 0 •!-
in E * —i ••- 4-5
ca CD 3 4-5 co
O t- "Qi O 4-5
CQ CD 3 .r-
c: t- in -c E
|_ CD O Q 0 -r-
o. CD t- o t- i —
CQ ja CD CQ ex
t- in
CD to CD CD CD O
j: 10 x: .c j= o
1— J= r— 1— 4-5 CG
l-H
30
-------
base and for mills which do not employ MgO as a base because
lower BODS^ levels can be attained at mills employing MgO through
neutralization of spent sulfite liquor. Based on engineering
calculations supported by the literature or material balances,
EPA believes that the application of the specific production
process controls identified above can achieve the required degree
of effluent reduction. This is further supported by available
data. The controls on which BCT Option 1 are based are installed
at mill 046006. As illustrated in Table 111-12, when acetate
grade pulp is produced at mill 046006, the BCT Option 1 flow and
BOD5_ RWLs are attained.
The BPT flow is 275.0 kl/kkg (66.0 kgal/t) except for mills where
acetate grade pulp is produced where the BPT flow is assumed to
be 302.1 kl/kkg (72.4 kgal/t). The flow value of 302.1 kl/kkg
(72.4 kgal/t) is representative of the production of acetate
grade dissolving sulfite pulp at the time the remanded BPT BOD5_
limitation was promulgated in 1977. Flow reduction through
implementation of production process controls is 41.7 kl/kkg
(10.0 kgal/t). It is the same for all mills since no flow
reduction results from neutralization of spent sulfite liquor.
This results in BCT Option 1 flow of 233.7 kl/kkg (56.0 kgal/t)
for the nitration, viscose, and cellophane pulp grades and 260.4
kl/kkg (62.4 kgal/t) for the acetate pulp grade. The BCT Option
1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [92.5
kg/kkg (185.0 lb/t)] . ' ' ••
Papergrade
Papergrade
Sulfite
Sulfite
Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and
[Papergrade
(Drum Wash) Subcategories3
- Table
_ 111-14
presents available RWL data for 17 mills characteristic of these
subcategories. At mills in these subcategories, a sulfite
cooking process is employed to produce pulps from which writing,
printing,- business, and tissue papers are made. Pulps are
produced using calcium, sodium, ammonia, and magnesium cooking
bases. The quantity of papergrade sulfite pulp produced at these
mills varies from 32 to 100 percent of the total raw material
furnish.
Spent liquor recovery systems employed in this subcategory range
from no recovery to the use of spent liquor evaporation systems
in conjunction with modern kraft-type and fluidized bed recovery
furnaces and incinerators. As shown in Table 111-14, mills where
recovery systems are not employed have significantly higher flow
and BODJ5 RWLs than mills where recovery is practiced.
BPT effluent limitations were established for two separate
papergrade sulfite subcategories (drum wash and blow pit wash)
with allowances for mills having acid sulfite cooking and
barometric condensers. Available RWL data have been reviewed
with respect to the type of washing systems, condensers, and
cooking liquors used.
31
-------
11
•rl
14-1
O
P-I
d
o
•H
U
a
o
PH
CO
W
01
U
0
PJ
ft
rH
01 a
4J PH
•H
CO 01
1 4J
G *ri
o m
rH
&£ a
co
M
M
01
10
d
0)
a o) a
)-( S-l CO
O Cd -H
CJ 2 H
CM rH
00 O
rH
^r-
o -a-
f rH
rH CM
O O
O O
O O
O O
co at co co co co
d " "
O « Cd
^""N
^
col colcol pq -
•X* • i"1"* tC A (rj flj
S S S o cj cj
60
2
« pq p7 0 « M
60 O! 01 60
Ol4->4-lO)4-ld4-ld60d
a oi oi a 01 -H o) -H « -iH d
WS-jHWM-HS-4WO-H,d
•rH ^ Cd *H flj J^ 03 (d. Cd M &H
6H22H2S2rHCiiS
en ' O 00 rH CM ON
oo o r~- >* co co
I-H
rn in -O- vo * OO
rH rH CTl in CM CM
HH 60 S G S
01 O) T3 T3 J3 13
vo r- oo cr. o I-H
O O O O rH I-)
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
t-i CO
^"•\
d
^ N"—/
CO
col pq
HH *"
S o
60
2
PH Pi
60 60 60
d d d
•rl -H -H
•H d d
W -H -H
3: (-1 S-l
* ^
CM m
r— vo
vo a\
00 OO
C\I CM
J
l^> pj
13 -0
CM ' CO
rH rH
o o
o o
o o
co
<_
K)
CJ
PM
60
d
•H
•rl
cr.
in
vo
H Cd
> pq
^j ^3
^ colcol
CTJ ffi ffi
o S ^
Q-; (•>< fv;
n S S
0) 01 01
a a a
W CO CO
•r) -iH -H
H H. EH
>* CM r~-|
co in ml
CTl /-v rH
•in o r^
-------
< K
•a o u
•H o « q
*> >J 3 3
a u o
o u 1-1
o H M
^ < M H
.-» S [B W
V S 3 §
S2W*
"ii2
sis
Hl£
•c,
&
eg
e E
« O«
J=
oooo oooo
tnom \o
"
%oena\io\(n.
oooo
oooo
oooo
oooo
^H, 00
o\inoooco«-i I-H
oooo oooo
CMesicMCM cooor*-r—
COCOW-S^Xrf'S^' >^V-'S-'V-' .X^ •
iocn^o\OM3cnor*.F-ONO3cooNovincnr*
r-*f)Cni-
-------
"O
3
•H
4J
O
U
^
M
HI
M
a
EH
mills furnish. Prorated BPT (for
te levels* for Nl-fine/tissue paper!
w
r? "
to 3
tU CO
•H
•O
OJ /->
W Pi
3 |H
3
Pi Pi
rH
3 QJ
P.4J
•rl
•O "H
D rH
CO 3
to u
J3
U &«
3
OJ
T3 4J
B -rl
CO
a co
QJ B
> -H
to
J3 -0
OJ
.B -0
0 3
•rl rH
J3 U
3 e
W
rH 4.)
rH 0
•H B
E
•O j,
QJ ^4
•*-> O
CO OJ
OJ rH CO
IH a 4J
CO
QJ 4J rrj
4J O
U B B
CO O
3 to >H
tO 4J
330
CO 3
iH O
3 14
w waste flow and percent sulfite
co
B
cu
OJ
3
4J
QJ
B
O
•H
to
iH
tu
rl
rH
CO
U
•H
•H
Pi
tu
J3
4J
O
iH
QJ
OJ
•o
O
4J
•O
OJ •
10 /-x
3 rH
1
tQ M
rl M
t employ a recovery system. Data
o
d
•o
•rt
TJ
rH
i-H
•H
E
•H
gH
.
TJ
0)
41
4J
CO
00
8
4)
S
CO
.p
CO
TJ
0)
Jj
CO
rH
£
-G
n
QJ M B
OJ 0 •
W ^4 -O W
rH 3 QJ
r-l 00 4J 00
•rl -H 3 10
E til J3 H
n OJ
QJ OJ >
n OJ
JS ^-^
4J
eS
O >rl
U CO
d
waste flows
p produced o
4) tQ
H
4) OJ
O -rl
•H
*J TJ
e of the Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
•H
JJ
jj
d
0)
4)
IH
ft
01
M
O
d
0)
CO
rH
rH
•rl
CO
-H
5
4J
CO
w
0
CO
QJ
O
•
3
O
•o
4J
3
-B
OJ
OJ
3
to
B
O
•rl
4J
to
rl
QJ
P.
CO 01 O
H -0
01 3 'rH
ft rH rH •
O O -rl >»
rH -H O
rH ft 00
•H 4J rH 01
E 0 3 -P
d ft CO
ft u
5 rH »-H 4)
CO 3 3 K
PS ft (^ «
||
TJ
0)
CO
0
rH
CJ
CO
•H
rH
rH
•H
uent flow is not considered typical
have been included in the averages.
rH TJ
4H d
<+-! tO
4)
W H W
tO O 4)
&0 00
CO 41 tO
0) -P H
00 tO 01
CO U >
U J3 CO
4) 3
> co d
tO -rl
4)
01 ,d TJ
.d 4J 01
4J »O
d . O rH
•H O
rH d
TJ to -H
0) CJ
TJ -rl -P
3 ft O
rH >, d
U 4-J
B to
•H *O 4J
QJ 10
4J J4 13
O QJ
B T3 rH
•rl rH
QJ W *H
tj
to
4-> OJ 13
to rl QJ
•O CO 4J
3 rH 0
0 rH Pi
• -H CO
W J3 3
L. 4J
QJ rrj
Pi U CO
moo
OJ to OJ
B 4J 4J
•H CO M
M 13 CO
u 3
to ml
•H O 3
OOO CO
PP i4
OJ 14-1
u • o
s mill produ
subcategory
y a portion
•H QJ iH
J5 J3 B .
El 4J O 1
op the empirical relations between
m).
rH
01 4>
4) O
TJ d
O O
•P 0
MH
0) 4)
n 0)
3 co
rH ft
rH rH
•H 3
E ft
4) P
n d
O 01
.d u
4J M
4)
O
0) co
to
co ml
•H
W s-~*
1 TJ
d
O 01
Jj
TJ O
41 d
3 O
TJ O
O 4H •
ft 4> CO
41 P
ft 10 JJ
rH, •*-' -H
d E
rH 3
4) 3 to
•P ft
•H CO
MH a) *J
rH JJ tO
3 -rt TJ
CO (4H
•P 3 r*.
d w en
01 rH
average per
w and percen
a are from a
01 O 4J
13 rH CO
H MH Q
es.
waste BOD5 and percent sulfite pulj
00 S
CO (0
4)
> d
CO 4)
4)
01 ?
•P 4)
d "°
•r) d
o
TJ -rl
41 4->
t3 cO
3 rH
rH 4)
cj IH
d
•H rH
CO
4J U
O -H
d i-i
•H
OJ ft
CO 0)
CO 4)
CO JJ
o
ft
o
• rH
i-H 4)
•H 4)
E TJ
CO O
•H 4-1
TJ
41
OJ 0) •
cfl 4» OJ
E S !
rH
O 10 rH
[A rH rH
rH rH
«-g g
W 3
•H 01 00
ft 41 UH
3 -P 4)
Ql (U
EM
rH O *~*
to LI
U (W QJ
hemi-mechani
waste BODS
duced on-siti
load typical of the subcategory.
l/ll/'-N
§g
PQ CQ
01 *O
4J 01
CO 4->
CO CO
S IH
o
& rt
CO ft
SH *-**
tO 0)
CO CO >
CO ti 01
rj fli fv
•° > c
•• to 3
4> CO
^ E
O JH UH
IH 01 O
0) -P,
tH 1 0)
4) 00 E
rd d -H
•P O -P
rH
TJ 1 (0
d
to E-t TJ
0-1 0)
g".§
3 TJ ca
O< 41 rH
•H JJ CJ
rH tO
iH CO
0> O CO
•rl ft
4H ^-? 00
3 X-S
w .B
o w
4J O <0
B rH 3
OJ
Pi II E
W 3
H 14
QJ P4 T3
N ca
•H 1
CO OJ CA
I-l 4J Q
4J to
OJ O 00
cue
4, &3
o d to
d CO CO
4)
TJ
S
X
O
1
•rl
CO
01
CO
£
, 00
- B
CO O
•H -H
B 01
O W
tO Pi
1 O
u
totu
- o '
e PI
3 o
•H >>
TJ
O 1
CO
t^
1 >
CO *>
55 C
-C ^
•rt d
u d
CO I
i
CO CJ
CJ -H
0) 01
4J E
•H O
MH u
rH CO
3 ,0
to
•rl t
^1
-d 3 co
CO 4J 1 CQ
41 P
o to -H en -
0) U
rH rH 3 * CO
rH 0 TJ 4H
.H 4J rH >H tH
E d ,0 CJ 3
tu co n
U U 1
U 3 0 -H U
to rl J5 QJ Oi
•< W pi f-< Cu ffl
1 1
< CO
34
-------
The review is discussed in the development document supporting
the November 1982 final regulations.(2) No apparent correlations
were found between flow and washing processes or between flow and
type of condenser used. Also, no apparent correlations were
found between BOD5_ RWL and washing processes or cooking
processes.
Available data indicate that the percent of sulfite pulp (ratio
of sulfite pulp manufactured on-site to total paper produced) at
a mill is a better predictor of flow and BOD5_ RWL than
adjustments to the RWL made for any combination of processes used
by the mill. Figure III-l presents the long-term average flow
versus percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site for all mills
with flows typical of this subcategory. Data from mill 040001
were omitted because pulp was not bleached at the mill. Mill
040002 data were deleted because a significant amount of chemi-
mechanical pulp is manufactured. Data from mills 040006 and
040007 were omitted because no recovery systems are operated and
at least some market pulp is manufactured.
Data from mill 040010 were not included because a product is
manufactured requiring unusually high quantities of water. Data
were not available or were incomplete for mills 040015 and
040019. Mills 040014, 040016, and 040017 have partial recovery
systems but are expected to have flows typical of the
subcategory; therefore, flow data from these mills have been
included in the calculations.
Figure III-2 presents long-term average BOD5_ RWL data versus
percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site for mills expected to
have typical RWLs. Data from mills 040001, 040002, 040006,
040007, 040015, and 0400019 were omitted for the reasons given
above. BODJ5 data were not available for mill 040008. Data from
mills 040014, 040016, and 040017 were not included because these
mills have less than full recovery systems resulting in higher
than normal BOD5_ RWLs. The BOD5_ data point is shown for mill
040018, but was not used in any calculations because it is much
greater than BOD5_ RWLs for any of the other mills shown and may
not be typical of the subcategory. BOD5_ data for mill 040010
were included because the mill is expected to have a raw waste,
BOD5_ discharge typical of the subcategory although its flow
discharge is not typical.
Included on the flow and BOD5_ RWL versus percent sulfite plots
are two points representing flow and BOD5_ RWL for the manufacture
of nonihtegrated-fine papers and nonintegrated-tissue papers.
These are the expected RWLs for a mill which produces zero
percent sulfite pulp on-site. The values shown are average RWLs
for nonintegrated-fine papers mills (Table 111-23) and
nonintegrated-tissue papers mills (Table 111-24) with no grade
changes. These data are used in the equation development that
follows. .
The curve shown on the flow plot (Figure III-l) represents an
equation developed using a least squares fit method relating flow
35
-------
ID
H
CO
o
a.
-J
Q.
UJ
H;
U.
D
,co
q£
U.
CO
O
LL
HI
CO
s
£
CC
m
H
CO
w z
S ww,_
o
z
m
OK
K
O (OK
2'°'"!
il o'
" N t-
o
to
o
cvl
Jo
o
o
IS
o
to
CM
o
o
CM
o
in
•9-
CVI
o
o
(»/|DB)()6l()|/l>| -MOTd 31SVM MVH
36 .
-------
Ill
55
z
o
0_
_J
15
O.
HI
CO
CM.
*£
" m
UIO
§CC
OCL
Q
LJ
LU
O
U5I
O
o
m
m
CO
1
£
DC
Ul
t
CO
UJ ^
1- 5
to o
$_
o.
< <«£?
< "o'u
° H Q0 t
, 0. UJ 03 U.
-j m K ^
Z^ _ CC t—
O ri) CO
_j £ UJ<£
O 3 tC — _ O
Z t- 0 2* OC
ui o ce o < uj
e> < o> z cc o-
Ul _ _ ,-, ii «
-i • o D »x
ffc_
m
II
x 5;
«a- uj
*1 tc
— o
uj * K
CD O .
ii 0
" M t-
>. cc co
-
CO
CO
n
UJ
I-
8 «.
=>
CL
UJ
v>
I-
§
o:
0
'J-
O
-------
to percent sulfite pulp produced on-site. The correlation
coefficient squared (r2 = 0.69) reflects good statistical
correlation of the regression. It should be noted, however, that
several other relatively simple'curves show better correlation
with the data but predict the impossible result that total flow
decreases for a mill which increases production by purchasing
more pulp (i.e., greater production with lower percent sulfite
pulp manufacture on-site).
Also presented on Figure III-l are points representing the
prorated BPT flow for each of the mills shown. Because the curve
of flow versus percent sulfite lies among the prorated BPT flow
points, the curve will be used to represent BPT flow in the
following discussion. The four mills with flows less than their
respective prorated BPT flows have flows that average 17.4
percent less than their prorated BPT flows. An equation
representing BCT Option 1 long-term average flow as a function of
the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site was determined by
reducing the equation representing BPT flow as a function of
percent sulfite pulp by 17.4 percent. The equation for BCT
Option 1 flow is as follows:
flow (kl/kkg) = 1.89x +41.94
[flow (kgal/t) = 0.453x + 10.05]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
The curve shown on the BODj5,v plot (Figure III-2) represents an
equation developed using a least squares fit method relating
long-term average raw waste BODJ5 to percent sulfite pulp produced
on-site. The correlation coefficient squared (r2 = 0.79)
reflects good statistical correlation of the regression.
In addition to long-term annual average data, the figure presents
prorated BPT BODj^ RWL for each mill. The above equation relating
BODS^ to percent sulfite pulp is based on data representative of
mills which do not employ neutralization of spent sulfite liquor,
which is a recommended BCT Option 1 process control for
papergrade sulfite mills which employ MgO;as a base. The two
mills (040009 and 040013) that use MgO do not neutralize spent
sulfite liquor; thus, BODS^ RWL data from these mills have been
included.
Because this curve of mill BODj[ RWL versus percent sulfite pulp
lies below all of the prorated BPT points corresponding to the
six mills used to develop'the curve, the curve is assumed to
represent the relationship between BCT Option 1 long-term average
.BODJ5 RWL and percent sulfite pulp. The equation for BCT Option 1
BOD5^ RWL, in terms of the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site
for mills not using MgO is as follows:
38
-------
5^ KWL (kg/kkg) =0.62x+9.3
[BOD5_ RWL (lb/t) = 1.24 x + 18.6]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
The BCT Option 1 BODj[ RWL equation must be modified for mills
that use MgO, as neutralization of spent sulfite liquor reduces
BODS^ RWL by an estimated 10 kg/kkg (20 lb/t) for mills that
manufacture paper from a furnish of only sulfite pulp, 100
percent of which is manufactured on-site. The BODjj equation for
mills using MgO can be found by subtracting 0.10 x kg/kkg (0.20 x
lb/t) from the above equations to obtain:
BODjj RWL (kg/kkg) = 0.52 x + 9.3
[BODI5 RWL (lb/t) = 1.04 x + 18.6]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site
Neutralization of spent sulfite liquor does not reduce flow,
no adjustment to the flow equation is necessary.
and
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS
RWL [90.0 kg/kkg ('180.0 lb/t)] for a mill that manufactures paper
from a furnish of only sulfite pulp. TSS RWL for mills with less
than 100 percent sulfite pulp must be calculated by prorating
with the BPT TSS for the nonintegrated-fine or tissue paper
subcategories, as appropriate.
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - Table II1-15 presents available
RWL data for this subcategory. Sufficient data are not available
to establish BCT guidelines.
Groundwood-CMN Papers - Table 111-16 presents available RWL data
for mills in this subcategory. No mills in this subcategory
attain BODS^ RWLs that are lower than the BPT RWLs. Because the
existing performance is inadequate and does not achieve the
pollution reduction that is possible at mills in this
subcategory, the BCT Option 1 RWLs were calculated by subtracting
the predicted RWL reductions resulting from implementation of
applicable production process controls from the BPT RWLs.
The production process controls capable of attaining RWL
reductions are: 1) segregation of cooling water in the woodroom,
2) addition of pulp mill and paper mill spill collection systems,
3) use of white water in vacuum pumps, 4) recycle of press
effluent and vacuum pump seal water, and 5) addition of
centralized storage capacity for white water reuse. The total
projected flow and BOD^ RWL reductions are 29.2 kl/kkg (7.0
kgal/t) and 4.1 kg/kkg.(8.2 Ibs/t), respectively. Because each
of these production process controls has been employed at
39
-------
TJ
d
3
o
SH 4J
PC* U
1 5
li «
Q S
CO
§rH
m S3
rH rH
i u a;
W EH <
M 00 X
M < U
§ 2 g
S *"
CO O
e
o
g
(U
rH
O
U
O<
B
O
•H
CJ
O
[0
H
in
«
o
m
3
0
r-l
(K
4J
U
3
•o
o
H
A
rH
3
OH
4J
rH
A:
^
00
4J
j5
a
^
00
^
r-l
E5
00
V— '
M
;*
r-l
I
^^
TJ
4J
O
H
4J
O
cu
o
fS
S
in r- i vo oo
. i
CO 00 CO t-
CO ^Jf 1 CO ON
rH CO CM ON
*J *^ ^Cf CO
^ ^ ^ ^
o en oj d* r**
O c
«
0
U
c
£3 4J 4->
ioo C cj
" C -H «H
W 4J & O<
t-l C! W »
« -H & ?
0 JJ Q) U
0 CU S Z
m r- i
in ON i
O CM 1
rH |
TJ
a
O 00 1 O
o\ co i i-;
o
w
a
^ v^ cj 5
I-H CM CO 00 cfl
O O 0 « P5
O O O tl
O O O I) H
r*- ' r— ^3* > PLI
o o o < pa
a
o >*
•H i-H
4J 4J
« d
t4 OJ
0) U
& H
0 3
O
r-l
flj CO
• -H
ON C rH
r— to i— i
7 1 8.
1 -O
ON O 01
•^ u o
CO 01 i-H
O 1 01 W
|« TJ 3
O 01 O
rH O U 01
rH 3 M B
•rl -O OJ
£ C3 in rH
•3 B rH
>> O O 01
,0 U -H U
00 4J w
•O O 'H
0) IH »H E
•1-1 O Ol
4J PH TJ
•H 01 O V
e > 4-1
.0 -ri eo a
3 4J B JH
tt «J •!-( 00
4-1 & V
n ti I-H 4J
4-1 01 3 B
is w a< -H
•O 01
t-l H W
rH O, 01 10
OJ 01 A
B O 01
01 01 -H
E U 0) 4H
Ol W W -H
rH 3 VI
(24 n co w
04 4J o nj
3 '« 01 rH
CO O ,0 U
•^f N_^
40
-------
4
,J
CO
n
CO
*»
rt CQ
CO
?
s
>H Q
' < §
S£
° 5
§ i
O CO
f-l M
I W OS g
M H W 0
1— I C/3 Cw i-H
M < •< N
3 ga
i IS
co 5
S
o
u
tj
w o
i-H H
•H PK
IM
o
u
CLi
c
c
'^j
L
O XI
h v
CH.H
u
. a
I*
s
1
•N - . '
^. i i CM r- i tn ** o
H vl> ^ r^ CM •*-* -^ co r^
„/ O rH OM CO OX
CM r-l v-/| T-H v-'
^^ v— ' ^^
«) - . " :
i i.i \o »* i co . r* in
v. i i i • '
ot co xo r> ox oo
^j O ID ** xo t^'
1-1
Jj
D i o ox CM i r^j . r*. oo
livl'OCOOON-'»* o r*^ ox r— i t^ r^
CM CM r-( CM CM ri
4-> |
•^ ^-s ^-\ f~* /-v *^» ^ r^ /~i
i— t O\ CM ^3 CM CM inl xO 00
WCOr-HCMM^OxCO COCO
5 fl- ci- 3 • fl S 'S| 33
ec • "
^jji-^r^-cocooxox mco
r— 1 Ox vO *Jt" C3% rH 00 OO OA
jjSOx^rOxOCM^H OxOx
a ' 2 ' r-i co
- en vo ^o *-^ I-H co
^o ^-' o\ en a co co
— . r~- ^ co *— ' , en
4J .CO , ^
^ . . -0
• s
r^.cMini**f^'in. m»-3
&4COOX1-ICMCMO CM4J
r-. t^- O i — r--r-- r^-M
w
co
1 m'-o-tfvooin oo«
i-Hr-COOrHr-H COPS
oo.o ooo .« e*
^SSmmmin 5;&
EOOOOOO <«
•
-H
' d
-s
*H .
•a
o
u
•a
•O 0)
CJ J^
o a
CJ (0
•o
O c!
c o
•H
U 4->
•H U
rH "O
iH O
•H U
n ja
41
-------
groundwood-CMN mills, groundwood mills in other subcategories, or
mills in other subcategories where similar pulp or papermaking
processes are employed, EPA believes that these technologies can
be applied at mills in the groundwood-CMN papers subcategory.
Based on engineering calculations supported by literature or
material balances, the Agency believes that the application of
these production process controls can achieve the required degree
of effluent reduction. The resulting BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWLs are presented below:
Groundwood-CMN Papers—Development of Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
Flow BOD5_
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
BPT RWL
Reductions Resulting From
Implementation of Specific
Production Process Controls
Option 1 RWL
99.3 (23.8)
29.2 ( 7.0)
70.1 (16.8)
17.4 (34.8)
4.1 ( 8.2)
13.3 (26.6)
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS
RWL [48.5 kg/kkg (97.0 Ib/ton)].
Groundwood-Fine Papers - Available RWL data for this subcategory
are presented in Table 111-17. BCT Option 1 RWLs for this
subcategory are based on averages of those mills where RWLs
are lower than BPT RWLs are attained.
that
Application of this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWL of 64.3 kl/kkg (15.4 kgal/t) and 12.5 kg/kkg (24.9 lb/t).
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS
RWL [52.5 kg/kkg (105.0 lb/t)].
Deink - Flow, BOD5_, and TSS RWL data are available for 20 mills
representative of this subcategory and are shown in Table 111-18.
As discussed in the development document supporting the November
1982 final regulations, differences in flow and BOD5_ RWLs
justified the division of the deink subcategory into three
sectors: fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint.(2) BCT
Option 1 RWLs were developed for the fine papers and tissue
papers product sectors. 'Most mills in the fine papers and tissue
papers sectors use some purchased pulp with deinked furnish.
Because BPT flow and BOD5_ RWL were developed for mills producing
a product made entirely from pulp deinked on-site, BPT final
effluent levels for individual mills were prorated between final
effluent levels for the deink subcategory and the nonintegrated-
fine papers or nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategories as
appropriate. Therefore, BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL were also
developed for 100 percent deink mills.
42
-------
o
a;
4J
tfi
X *
05 S
< 8 (§
Q <
il
O CO
T* [£} Q£
M H W
r-H W (If
M < <
3= a.
1 * &• '
H ^
o
o
(U
r-)
MH
O
J-l
C!
o
•H
jJ
U
13
O
CM
S
m
VI
CO
£
m
a
8
£
o
rH
to
4-1
O
a
-o
0
&4
rH
-J
^
,0
4->
^s
rH
^^
oc
fl
^,
01
4J
rH
00
&
~^~
Jfi
+J
r-
(j
0
s
0)
a
H
13
4J
8
O
rH
H
PM h fc fa fe ' "h -pu
O»*co i Or^-r-o] ONOON\O
CMUOrH rHOOI^-ON OOOON
^ ^ *-'• ^ ^ ^ ^
O CM f*» 1 O ^3" ON \O O m O 00
I-H ON \O *OrH\OvO ^"CM^OO
\o - r*> , in in *tf co H CO Cfl CO -H 0)
OnOC^CLi.. CJCJOfljCO
m t-i m . m ^o a ml
cocoincMcococor- So
in*J
mcocoin^cocooo -^-co
O CQ W
1_^ rH r-H
rH rH
d'inr^oocO'j'-3' ooeo oooo
OOOOOrHr-HrH COM COCO
OOOOOOOO M £S
CM CM CM CM CM - CM CM -^. CU H (UttJ
OOOOOOOO
4J r-l
•O .t-i
-------
e-j
O
Q >> 01
< W O
ft* £\ ^
^E pL^
jH
yj
5
02
^
TD
-M
rf
U
•H
d
}_[
a
F>H
4-)
U
•o
o
PH
^
TJ
4->
^
U
1
rl»^
d
•H
01
Q
01
^
•O
^
4-1
01
0
w
a
PH
^
U
/•%
,Q
^
•a
4J
•
C
r_
r-
•r
. \
•H
M
PH 00
d
T3 -H
4J 4-J
U -H
Cj ' W
Ol
f^.
co
ON
rH
\0
VO
rH
1
1
0
m
00
oo
rH
0)
d «-N
•H rH
rT. v^x
IT)
v* O
d o
•H O
oi vr
O «-i
"W
u
!§|
t« 4J
t3 *H
^-N
X)
V— >
/-s
•a
v^/
*^/
t~*
•o
s_^
CM
m
T3
^M/
^^«
CM
NM/
r~.
o
o
0
rH
4J
•H
PL, W
4-> 4J
^ s
oo
CM
rH
a\
CM
o
Oi
CM
\o
r^
/-\
IH
^v^
oo
o
o
o
I-H
4J
d
4-> vH
'M
p , 13
•O U
4-> d
r^^-»
-o -a
^^ ^^
^N /""v
•a -a
^o^a
v— * ^^
/-% ^-\
T3 13
V*
•
CM r«.
VO vO
^— N /" \
»^3 tJJ
S.^ V— /
OI
a
M
/•"•s /"^ (A
rH (N -i-l
*<^ ^^ £H
r» 0*1
rH rH JiJ
o o d
O O -H
CM O
*— ' CM
/—\ 1 I
•O 1 1
^*^
T3 CO
/-v 1 O
•O 1 CO
v»x
r»>
•
O CO VO
m r*^ r**
f-\ O 1
T3 CM 1
^
^-^
rH
^*/
/— s /— N /— ^
rH 01 CO
O CTl O
rH CM CO
O O O
O O O
-* -j-
'O 'O TJ
SSS
^o^o^o
>«^ ^^^ ^^
vO ^ O
ON O\ O
rH
TJ TJ t3
*~* ^ ^
s- \ s-\ /~^
I-H -J- -3"
rH >fr IT)
rH rH i— 1
O O O
O O O
s rH ^M'
t /**\ r-* /"N
1 •« r-i *O
s-x s-/
CO t3 *O
! ^o ! T?
*«_x ^x
CO O LO CTN
tO O 00 Cn
rH
1 ^^ C*J *****
t T3 C^ T3
^^ ^^
/— N
' r-t
*^— '
/"*» y*"N /*™S /™^
VO r-i rH »r^
CN ^tf lO 00
-------
-» CO I*- CN O
CN -— r— n \o
m en m ^ CM
r*. o »« en O
'enm.3'JNin
r— '01 o en r*
CN CN CO -« m
vO N N vO P-
n « m •« en.
isi
CftvOOSCN
O CN **
r« 00 O
o ^ m en en
US
o\ o o o i-<
— CM CN CM N
'
-------
4J
§
u
00
i
•MARY RAW WASTE LOAD DAW
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
tn
13
CU
to
3
D.
3
CU
CO
O
0
CU
r*
3
cu
•o
4J
~
41
0
O
•H
4J
CO
b
41
4J
-4
b 3
CU Cu
e e
41 4)
•O TJ
O **j
b 41
cu on
CU CO
CO 4J
cu e
4) 4)
4J U
a b
CQ 41
«• ^ p-
a
41
O CO J5
f— 4
CQ
•H
Id confident
CU
CO
4J
CO
b e
41 o
CU'H
a 4J
cu u
en 3
4J -O
a o
eg b
3: Cu
o -a
effluent. Not included in averages.
41
U
i
ta
•H
a
f
CO
S
•f4
X
0
o«
a.
CO
veragei
culate;
a b
s u
t included i
grade and re
a
e 41
tn
• • b
t3 CO
4J O
C CJ
CO CO
a os
O 41
U U
1 3
uj 13
•3 2
CQ Cu
41 t«
tial.
ecycle averages.
e b
41
•o e
HI
e -o
O 4)
o -a
3
13 -4
1-4 U
4i e
CO
41 *-*
05 S
CO
CO CM
O 1
1-4
r- oo
CO
^4 CO .
41
U
b
3
O
U
CO
CO
41
r-4
U
41
er recycle)/ flow before
M
CO
5
o
ffl 1
.— v 41
"J 41
i b
H 11
Cu b
ea o
41
0 3
2 ,2
II ^
fi"
93 O
a
e >—
CO
£ II
41
b r-4
41 U
41 41
J3 b
3434
ss
)/(% deinked pulp/ 100)
cu
Cu
o
41
•o
inl
O3
^-^
O
0
Cu
a.
2
ull
"8
m«n
a
§3
41 —
CO
3
••-!
•o
O M
« ca •a
Cu <0
•-4 f-4 4i a
CU 3 CO 4J — 4
r-4 CU 3 M
3 C co 41
Cu-0 C 3 ij
•O J4 3 CO
41 C fi CO 3
CO 41 41 3
ji -a 4J II co
cj I b
b »4 00 >
3 C CU •
cu i a • •
<-4 Cu 41
II O
O 11 O -4
.1—1 4J
cu ml
* u a cu
a. o 3
• S3 -a
41 Cu
b . < ml
cu cu< a
*
u
e
o
u
e
41
3
e
b
CO
€
•H
b
CU
u
e
o
CJ
CU
3
Luent cone. - primary eff
c
b
CO
S
b
sf?
X
O
o
i primary = 1
^_t
00
3
O
u
J=
e
o
u
zt
•c
(U
u
"*4
3"*
^_^
a
46
-------
The methodology, discussed above/ was used to develop BCT Option
1 flow for both the deink-fine papers and deink-tissue papers
sectors. Prorated BPT flow, based on the percent of deinked
furnish used, was determined for each mill. The two deink-fine
paper mills and the six deink-tissue paper mills with flows less
than their respective prorated BPT flows have flows that average
42.9 and 14.3 percent less than their prorated BPT flows,
respectively. Data from mill 140018 was not included in the
average because it produces a coarse grade of pulp atypical of
other mills in the subcategory; data from mill 140028 was not
included because it produces 46 percent market pulp. BCT Option
1 flows for the fine papers and tissue papers sectors were found
by decreasing BPT flow (the same for both sectors) by 42.9
percent and 14.3 percent, respectively, to obtain 58.0 kl/kkg
(13.9 kgal/t) for deink-fine papers and 87.2 kl/kkg (20.9 kgal/t)
for deink-tissue papers.
Because recycle of primary effluent is a recommended BCT Option 1
control, it was also necessary to determine BCT Option 1 flow
after recycle for both sectors. Mills that recycle primary
effluent were identified and the percent of the effluent recycled
to process was determined for each mill as follows:
percent recycle = 100 (raw waste flow - flow to secondary treatment)
raw waste flow
Data from mill 140018 was not included in the average because it
produces a coarse grade of pulp; data from mill 140021 was not
included because its flow before recycle is greater than the
prorated BPT flow for this mill.
The average flow recycled for each sector (based only on mills
that recycle) was 24.2 percent for deink-fine papers and 40.3
percent for deink-tissue papers. The average percent flow was
then subtracted from BCT Option 1 raw waste flows for each sector
to find the BCT Option 1 biological treatment influent (and
effluent), as follows: •-. ,
BCT Option 1 flow = BCT Option 1 flow x (1-percent recycled)
(after recycle) (raw waste) 100
The final effluent BCT Option 1 flows were found to be 44.2
kl/kkg (10.6 kgal/t) for deink-fine papers and 52.2 kl/kkg (12.5
kgal/t) or deink-tissue papers.
When the BPT BOD5_ RWL was developed, EPA concluded that there was
no difference between BOD5_ RWLs for the fine papers and tissue
papers sectors of the deink subcategory. A review of the
currently available data suggests that the BOD5_ RWL for the
deink-fine papers sector is substantially lower than that for the
deink-tissue papers -sector. Since prorated BPT BOD5_ was
considered an inaccurate measure of performance for BOD5_ RWL for
47
-------
this subcategory, another method was used to determine the
average BOD5_ RWL of mills which deink 100 percent of their
furnish.
The method used is described in detail on pages 233-238 in the
December 1976 development document supporting the Phase II
promulgated BPT regulations. (9) Actual BODjj RWLs for each mill
were adjusted to equal the values that would be estimated for the
mill if it did not purchase pulp but deinked 100 percent of its
furnish. EPA adjusted the BOD§ RWLs by subtracting the estimated
contribution by purchased pulp to the BODJ5 RWLs. This can be
expressed as follows:
Adjusted BODJ5 RWL = [BODS^ RWL - (1-p) x (BODS^ PP) ]/p
where BODJ5 RWL = Actual mill BODJ5 RWL,
p = the fraction of deinked pulp in the furnish
(i.e. percent/100),
(BODI5 PP) = BODJ5 due to purchased pulp, and
(1-p) = the fraction of purchased pulp in the furnish.
The estimated contribution to the BODJ5 RWL by purchased pulp was
based on average BODE[ RWL for the nonintegrated-fine or tissue
papers subcategory (as appropriate) without regard to significant
grade changes. These averages, presented in Table 111-22 and
Table 111-23 are 10.9 kg/kkg (21.8 Ib/t) for nonintegrated-fine
papers and 10.4 kg/kkg (20.8 lb/t) for nonintegrated-tissue
papers.
The BCT Option 1 BODS^ RWL for each sector was then found by
averaging the adjusted BODI5 loads for all mills in the sector.
The average of all mills in each sector is assumed to be BCT
Option 1 because the data are representative of the period of
time since the implementation of BPT effluent guidelines;
therefore, the mills' performance reflects the implementation of
BPT production process controls. BCT Option 1 BODJ5 RWL was found
to be 68.9 kg/kkg (137.7 lb/t) for deink-fine papers and 94.6>
kg/kkg (189.2 lb/t) for deink-tissue papers.
Sufficient data are available to indicate that the BODj[ reduction
by primary clarification is substantial for mills in this
subcategory. Primary influent, and biological treatment system
influent (primary effluent) BODI5 concentrations are presented for
five deink mills in Table 111-17 with the percent BODJ5 reduction
by primary clarification for each mill. The average percent
reduction for all five mills was found to be 42.8 percent. It
was assumed that this average reduction can be attained by means
of chemically assisted clarification (CAC). The average is
conservative as only three of the five mills actually employ CAC.
48
-------
The biological treatment influent BODJ5 load was determined by
reducing the raw waste (primary influent) BODJ5 by 42.8 percent.
Thus, the biological treatment influent BOD5_ is 39.4 kg/kkg (78.8
Ib/t) for deink-fine papers and 54.1 kg/kkg (10.8 Ib/t) for the
deink-tissue papers sectors.
For both the fine papers and tissue papers sector, the BCT Option
1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [202.5
kg/kkg (405 Ib/t)].
Sufficient data are not available to establish BCT guidelines for
the newsprint sector of the deink subcategory.
Tissue From Wastepaper - In the tissue from wastepaper
subcategory, extensive use of production process controls to
reduce wastewater discharge is practiced. As seen in Table
111-19, RWL data were reviewed considering the production of
industrial and sanitary tissue. No significant differences were
found between the two product sectors.
BCT Option 1 RWLs for this subcategory are based on averages of
those mills where RWLs that are lower than BPT RWLs are attained.
Mills 090006, 100012, 105007, and 100014 are excluded from BCT
Option 1 RWL averages because extensive wastewater recycle is
used and flows are significantly lower than for other mills.
Application of this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWL of 68.0 kl/kkg (16.3 kgal/t) and 9.7 kg/kkg (19.3 Ib/t). The
BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL
[110.5 kg/kkg (221.0 Ib/t)].
Paperboard From Wastepaper - Available RWL data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-20. As discussed in the
development document supporting the November 1982 promulgated
regulations, EPA determined that the BOD5_ RWL is substantially
higher when recycled corrugating medium is processed than when
other types of wastepaper are processed, but no such correlation
exists between wastewater flow and the type of furnish used.(2)
Therefore, two sectors were .identified to account for BODjj RWL
differences that result from the type of furnish used. .-. BCT
Option 1 flows for both sectors are based on the average of those
mills where flows are lower than BPT flow. Application of this
methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow of 13.4 kl/kkg (3.2 kgal/t).
BCT Option 1 BOD5_ RWLs for the corrugating medium furnish and
noncorrugating medium furnish sectors are the same as the BPT
RWLs, 23.0 kg/kkg (46.0 Ib/t) and 11.3 kg/kkg (22.5 Ib/t). The
BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL
[11.0 kg/kkg (21.9 Ib/t)].
Wastepaper-Molded Products - Available RWL data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-21. Extensive recycle of
effluent is practiced at several mills. BCT Option 1 RWLs are
based on averages for those mills where extensive recycle is
practiced. Application of this methodology yields Option 1 flow
and BOD5_ RWL of 23.8 kl/kkg (5.7 kgal/t) and 5.5 kg/kkg (10.9
Ib/t). The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the
49
-------
TABLE 111-19
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production
Mill No. (t/d)
Flow
kl/kkg
I. Industrial Tissue
090002 19.5
085004 47.0
085006 (a)
090006(c) 10.5
100005 15.2
100011 11.2
100012(c) 7.0
100015 5.5
100001 (a)
Average w/o
Self-Contained Mills
II. Sanitary Tissue
090004 20.0
090010 (a)
100002 7.5
100003 83.0
100004 15.0
100007(d) 20.0
100008 16.0
100013 20.0
100016 7.3
105007(c) 11.9
090014 40.7
100014(c)(d) 20.7
Average w/o-
Self-Contained Mills
Overall Average w/o
Self-Contained Mills
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of All Mills
with SBFT flow
Average of All Mills
with SBPT BODS
72.6
141.9
138.1
29.2
62.2
35.5
84.7
99.7
59.7
76.8
51.7
(kgal/t)
(17.4)
(34.0)
(33.1)
(7.0)
(14.9)
(8.5)
(20.3)
(23.9)
(14.3)
(18.4)
(12.4)
BODS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
22.4 (44.7)
37.6 (75.1)
14.2 (28.4)
TSS
kg/kkg
106.4
103.3
46.7
38.0
(lb/t)
(212.8)
(206.5)
(93.3)
(76.0)
SBPT(b)
F
BF
6.5 (13.0)
20.2 (40.3)
18.8 (37.6)
8.7 (17.3)
13.3
65.3
59.4
9.2
(26.5)
(130.5)
(118.7)
(18.4)
BF
F '
F
BF
156.5
237.9
22.1
138.5
9.2
120.2
111.0
105.0
68.0
88.9
(37.5)
(57.0)
(5.3)
(33.2)
(2.2)
(28.8)
(26.6)
(25.2)
(16.3)
(21.3)
9.3 (18.6)
53.5 (107.0)
22.0 (44.0)
22.5
21.5
14.5
12.1
9.7
(44.9)
(42.9)
(29.0)
(24.1)
(19.3)
88.9
128.0
68.2
70.7
68.3
110.5
30.0
37.4
(177.8)
(255.9)
(136.3)
(141.4)
(136.5)
(221.0)
(59.9)
(74.7)
B
(a) Production data held confidential.
(b) F-Hill with SBPT flow; B-Mill with SBPT BOD5.
(c) Extensive wastewater recycle performed; not included in averages.
(d) Mill is now closed.
50
-------
Oi
la
55
< CJ
Q 00
Q
S
o as
gl
%&
§ $
,1
K
fa
cu
T3
OJ
4J 4J .
£SH CQ ft[ [
CM in m i CM s-* CM
m co rH \_^ *a; i . r-
VO CO CO rH VD
CM ON O 1 CM 1 CO
i-H i-H rH rH CM
r^ o" ON /-^ ON /-x vo*
r- m co i m i >*
e
C ON m o o co
J 00 CM CM I CO 1 CM C.
rH t-H CO
: t
i
0 0
Co
o
m
CM
(^•\ /™N vo ^^ in
1 1 ON 1 -*
CO CO
1 1 ON t CM
CM
/—•> /~*» CM /*"% CO
1 1 00 I vO
1 ^— '
3
-1
1
i
3 rH CM
.) 1 1 -v m o
1 3;cMrHtMinr-- vDcor*-oino-»*voinrHrHvoin«—^/—s^*o Ovo
•cocoincoinr-ONvocMvovDON u uovc i oco
rHCOi-HrHi-H rHCM rH *•—' "^^ rH t-l CO
co m I-H i CM m i i i i
U U I I I I I
co o in /"N ^^
i i i i i i co m i ivo.i i i i o o i i i it
co ON co . "** o rH ON CM ^^ ^~\ o m
rH CMI r i i ir-i iinvocooNUUicoir^
CO CO
I CO CM
rH CM
U U I 1 II I
• 0)
-^-^-
-------
£
ca
v«
e
« oa oa
f*H (*4 fe
K
je
jf
rH
* 1 1 CO
vo m &
1 I vO 1 1 CM 1 1 vO
CM
II • 1 1 -III
1 t O 1 1 O 1 1 1
'
-a- -H
ii • i i • i i »
i i o i r in i i ic.
i
0
/— \ /— H /-^ /*** *— \ ^S
O /•"•» co ^™^ o o ^™* vo r*-
rH | CO 1 CM rn t O CM
CM VO CO CM in CO
* 1 CM rH
CO *"
o\ in rH m
VO rH O\ rH
^xcM>^CO
in oo vo co
rt o *sf in
O h* vO O
i rn rn w* CM '
1 V-'^ ^
H
0
i
! CM ON N CM
> in co fo d t
rH
-1 i
5 • "
Q 0
/~\ ,— N /-N ^"S
rH t«« CO VO
O\ VO CO CO
r-> o ON o
ON co m m
P" CM rH rH
r- *~{
CO 1
co ^
ON
VO 1
• 1
iA i
y co v-*
' C*
0
^ !
-O
^
u
Q
vo* in
vD vO
in rH
CM CM
^— ' r- t H* *«* in
in ON CM o
i r» co CM cc
i • • • i
i CM in r^ i
CO O CO
1 . * • 1
1 rH CO CO 1
/-s 00 CM CO rH
i CM co o r-
r- -* co vo
I r4 CO rH O\
H rn CM
s—\
\ h- 1
O
i i u u
o
u
a.
B
O
1
Si i i i i i In 'c? 1? 'u'v
CO O O *™t ^~N O O
I ICMII II I I III I I I 1 m O I W I I I ICMCOI I
f-H . V_/ +
o 3'CO CO O ON I. U U
§CM O
I
co*a-iioiuuuoiiitiiiiiiiii
& ^^^^^^
i
I I I I t I I I I 1 I I U t
I I I I I I U O
'
-
voeoovOrHCM^invor^ooc^o^cMooooooooooooooooggpooo
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
52
-------
§
VII
in
S3
§
13
3
•o
1)
5
a
O
O
B — B . S*
CM/T^CO^^CO/— v/-\^-NCM lO
** 1 CM i r*. I l l O CM
rH O CO rH
lO CO CO CM OH 1 1 1 rH CM
i-H rH i-H rH
sesss
x-v 10 *
CO O 0
CO O O
rH rH CM
6 ,
I i i
i t i
•
• 1 I
CO 1 1
U ^— '
3
H
<3
J 4
3 0 .
3 r- i i - t
•
-t 4
-t r
1)
1 C
CM *— V/-N
CM 1 1
CM
O\ 1 1
SS
>* —' rH CM -^^ rH -—' rH r-l'w''1—' *~s *~s *~' ^'rHCMrHCMCM CM
' ' ' '
I' 00 ^ *~* ^"^ C>J ^"^ <^^> ^^ ^^* '"^ ^"^ '"^ '"^ '"N '^ ^^ ^^ TH o VO
I 'I IcSl UOOWI I U-OOOI I I I 01 I 10 i I I OUI 0001 UrieMlt-il I 1 I I I
o
^
Cu
O ^~N ^~N /~» ^^t
I I 1 lO CJ CJ U I W I
V-' V—* ^-^ +.
Q
III 17 I I ON 'o' I CM
3
•o
o
^ _
IIOOI I I OOOIrHONOOOUCOl
O Cvl CO
ON10 i3 i i'u1/u"o'i i i'u/i o i • i 't? i co I'o'o i"i/w/wi-iooo«oovo i
-------
5
i
***
c
o
5
o
CM
1
i-<
£2
BO
-,
|
U
*l
5
I
U
w
o
u
cu
u
1
£
t
CO
VI
G
J3
f-rf
(A
Jtf
|
«j
•^»
.a
m
i
SJ
^
il
e
» £
C •
.2
^
JC
•a
V
•J *j .n
e a £
use
DM O (W
w
—
(9
O
H
O
ta
CO
:c £c
u, ca u*
u*
r-s <"> /-> 03 x-*|
III • I 1
t t 1 CM 1 1
^
r*> \
III • 1 1
i i i oo i]
CO \
III • t 1
1 1 1 -T I 1
^** /™*Ol
*T ^\^+ f* COl
• 1 1 * *l
O 1 1 CO ^l
^WV^^
r* o% oj
*- I 1 CM Ol
•-> CM|
co r- in eo o
f* m m ^
ro o eo in -«
i t i i
i i i i t
lit i
CJ
m
CO CM 1 ,1
in o
t CM CM 1 1
1C* O *•• CM O>
*r in m in «
o o o o o
CO
o
^
^
o
l-<
^
CO
CM
C\
G"
»T
CM
O^
ta
u
•H
C
3
•o
eo
3
O /-*
u ta
u E
u
u u
ft. C
•H
O (9
O *J
V O
u
**•* 1
fj gj
u o
< ^-*
0?
CM
^
O
£
in
CM
CO
-
N1
t-!
o
o
CO
•o
3
(0
^
3
ce
ca
C?tn
c:s
^^/
^ CO
eo r*
m r*>
r— i—
CO CTt
co in
•fl1 CM
co >
IS1
*M m
ra ea
VB VH
(0 (A
r-* i— <
U IA
C *C
w u
3 3
•a "o
« n
eo eo
3 3
O O J3
>rH
c c u
O U 3
V V E
p. a- 3
•H
o o *o
o o u
V V
CO
O O -H
eo eo ec
(C C 3
Li JJ U
> > o
< < u
ca cq
(fa U4
^^G
^CM^
^H CO
^^G1
1 SO CO
CM CO
1
s~*CO VO
1 O CM
CO CO
1 CO O
O O O
o o o
2 ° on
o
*- 1 I
1 1 I
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
i a\ o
in
1 1 »ff
o -*3- in
o o o
o o o
ca tu ca CQ
£«£~S -
GSiiiK -i-
ro ^-i co in
rn m CM 1 CO 1
W'r-^^y-^o' ^
1-1 i o i m t
~ ".!
vo
o o o o o o «-
o o o o o o o
S1 ^ o^-^ S G
^ « ^^ CM *
in o mm CM co
CO i-* *» CO O CO
•9' O CM *ff *3" -O"
S S 2S, S S
tM 0 XO « (M r-
~ m en ^ en co
•-< CM »*•
!C; ^ ^^ ^ c7
CM p^ i-< CM J. Oi > > > >
,
u-il
0
O
CQ
- £
ca •
VII -<
.n
X! -H
•H e
SE u
10 •!-*
1-4 C •
•D •* O M
u E o M
o -o ca t; -H
CQ Li --HE
W *~ 01
1-1 *a o 3 ^ CM
oounUf-i .-ing
Jj «r-t -rt CQ O (D « I-
(g^Jbi CQ ^ £-t *13 iw
J3 00 U! C & E CQ C C
Jw 3 -H 3 3 VII O O
•H o Ji o 4J >> .-4uu
II II 1! 11 It II Ij S O O
1 U W
» ro
O OC
0) -H
U >.
f-H U
*g ^*
O 00
3
to o
01 i->
b
. a* -c
•o > 01
0) ffl C
O C (C
•o o
0 *0 1*
C 3 U-«
•H C (A
(-4 *J i— i
.-( O •«
£ Z E
0) iw OC
54
-------
S"
09
a
'O
41
w
NO
,,
ON
•i
^
s
•rt
3
§
u
«
Ifll
•*4
04
O
*
CM
— ^
U
•^^
fl
*J
0
o
a
i r
•^ ^
f
I •
<
t^ «
,
ON
2
»
N O
oCJ
S-
S*'
O ^
S5
la
4J
U
3
^
U 0
a.
r-4
3
a.
M
gS
^-4 X~t
(9 U
t/) ^*O
§i
a o
en o O r»
^ >^ en ^
p» in o **
en o in en
CM i-4 CM
p> i oo a\
^ -L 09 O
en i-i CM
91 *» in
m ai o
ff4 *"4
in in in ~*
S2 CE
r» oo en •»
en oo j- i-
M
o u a
u • u •
ca tn. ta « «a
<«N s~\
(Q a
Is* ON O >~4
§o o o
O 0 O
in in in in
en MS r-
CM en <-t
-4 22 2
o m -r*
eM vo -a
in P^ oo
in <"4 03
r-* en o
CM P* 00
p* in oo
...
M 01 a
u u u
333
•a n -o
0 O 0
a. 01 a. 04
•c z •« •o
4) 4J 41 .
^ ** ^ ^
O 41 O O
E a. z £
•O O3 O
M3 ^« \o
«-4 \O 00
. *"*
41
4J
X 01 3
an u
§"§ S2^«
O O U J3 Nj
£ ^ueg^s
U M U * .
<-4 ci * »n
<**) NO
9 -•
r-t •^ CM
•^ oo ^
oo en oo
vO CM 00
.-V
_
—> 's
•M1 4J
*u 2
B B
•H O
(Q U
C «*
0 -4
1 M
^v -4 O
-t 41 ^.
—IMS
'S£«
•^3-4
4) <-< rt
B -"4
•MUZ
U *- 41
O '"4 ^
o z u
1 U *»
I 1 41 U
) U4 »-4 4)
: <-4 u ee
• 41 >. 1
a u e
« o
o as z
'a' IM H4
-> o o
41 41 41
) 00 00 00
1 flj co eo
3 U U U
} 4) 41 4)
1 > > >
4 < < <
ON
CM
03
•*
m
ejN
p.
—
CM
*"*
S
(Q
4J
w
(Q
SB
3
OS
"E
03
e a
n o
u u
•^ U ~4
E A4 Z
55
-------
BPT TSS RWL [14.8 kg/kkg (29.6 Ib/t)].
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - Available RWL data for mills
Inthis subcategory are presented in Table 111-22. The mills
have been divided into the following four groups based oh the
furnish employed: mills with a predominantly wastepaper furnish,
mills with furnish including TMP, mills with furnish including
other types of groundwood, and mills with other types of furnish.
The May 1974 development document supporting the promulgated
Phase I regulations (Reference Number 30) for this subcategory
did not indicate the basis for BPT BOD5_ and TSS RWLs. The BPT
BODJ5 final effluent mass load was found by assuming that an 87.5
percent reduction of BOD5_ by biological treatment was
representative of BPT and by applying that reduction to the BOD5_
RWL from a single mill. The BPT final effluent TSS load also was
based only on BPT flow and the final effluent TSS concentration
from the same mill. Therefore, instead of the BPT BOD5_ RWL, the
BODS RWL of the mill that was the basis for BPT effluent
limitations [12.6 kg/kkg (25.2'lb/t)] was used for comparison to
determine BCT Option 1 raw waste BOD5_. BCT Option 1 flow for
this subcategory is the average flow of all mills in the
subcategory where flows lower than the BPT flow are attained.
The average BODj[ RWL is higher for the group of mills using
furnish including TMP than for the other three groups of mills in
the subcategory. Therefore, BCT Option 1 BOD5_ RWL is the average
BOD5_ RWL of mills at which groundwood TMP is used and where BODS^
RWLs are attained that are lower than the comparison level [12.6
kg/kkg (25.2 lb/t)].
Application of these methodologies yields BCT Option i flow and
BOD5 RWL of 11.3 kl/kkg (2.7 kgal/t) and 7.4 kg/kkg (14.8 lb/t).
The BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the TSS RWL
[41.0 kg/kkg (82.0 lb/t)] of the mill from which the comparison
level BODS^ RWL and BPT BOD5_ final effluent were obtained.
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers - Available RWL data for mills in the
wood fiber furnish sector and the cotton fiber furnish sector of
this subcategory are ' presented in Table 111-23. In the
development of BCT Option 1 RWL, data were reviewed considering
waste significant grade changes in three specific delineations:
1) none, 2) less than one, and 3) greater than one waste
significant grade change per day. A correlation is apparent;
flow and BODE^ RWL increase with Increasing frequency of grade
changes. BCT Option 1 RWLs for the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory are based on the highest averages for the various
grade change delineations for mills where RWLs are attained that
are lower than the BPT RWLs. Application of this methodology for
the wood fiber furnish sector yields BCT Option 1 for flow and
BOD£ RWL of 39.2 kl/kkg (9.4 kgal/t) and 7.5 kg/kkg (14.9 lb/t).
Application of this methodology for the cotton fiber furnish
sector yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL of 130.2 kl/kkg
(31.2 kgal/t) and 14.0 kg/kkg (28.0 kg/kkg). The BCT Option 1
TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [30.8 kg/kkg
(61.6 lb/t) for the wood fiber furnish sector and 55.2 kg/kkg
(110.4 lb/t) for the cotton fiber furnish sector].
56
-------
*• s
93
CM
CM
I
hi CO I
"
CO -' U 4J
e e
o o
o\ u o
01
O I—
CM O
CO O
00 CM
/— ^
in
o
f--»
«
/-N
CO
O\
O\
O
•»»
/— \ ^-S /-N
O -» OJ
-* d d
%_/ .-i •— >
r* —• -a- o qii oo i. ^
i •
CM in o i -» i co
f*4 CO
O 00
m o
r-l CO CO
in co vo
\O CM
E
•O
, _ . . I . I CM
i • CM cn i «-« i
CM •-» cn . i-t >-«
* oo cn i CM ,
i oo i— co i in r- eo
CM "-* ^r
33HE-3HHH
CO W CO 3 P
r-H U
r^ i
•pH 1H
u u
tl
<
•o
J
a
M
s -
(Q
•0 OS
hj 01
•k> i-^
in
S 0
u
11
H£
OH O
CQ CJ
t3 W
V
C O
•rt -^s.
33
s
o in
0 Q
I O
U4 a
»— <
«1 rH
10 01
O 01
3
o- a
o
S «
•S'd
tM fll
a
a« o
« o
VII V«
j= ^
jj *j
r-t rH
.-H r-t
•i-t -H
r: s
O 0
OO 60
ti M
V flJ
< <
J=
u
•H
e
u
=1
V
o
«3
&
OJ
U
3
>
' 4-
c
n
£
*£
a
bi
j
*
Q
:
OJ
fll flj
s-s-
cu a.
C C JJ
O O rt
•H -H 01
u o
3 3 00
U U -H
W W M-(
c d o
o o o
U O OS
CM \O
cn «-*
00
fl)
OS
•s.s
flu aT -
r-t CM
.8§
o o
a,
a
d 4
CJ
3 00
US
e o
0 0
u as
^
t3
s
%
CO
o
0
o
CM
&« a. a. o« a. a.
^ cLi cu &* &< 0-* "
dCdddd*J^
OOOOOO'r-'r-t
«S -S -H -H -H -H OJ
-------
•0
a
c
u
5
19
P£
*•*
^i
g
u
P4
1
£J
H*
I
H
«
iH
*H
W
O
u
a*
§
Product!
M
/j
in
*
g
S
P.
3
2
80
S
Product
u
£
33
2
a
ex
.x
"^
.X
^
g
1
61
JC
^
rH
a
61
|
lH
Jt
2
^^
K
X
°c
n.
4
a
£
4-
£
t
(
1
U
c
3=
a
~
e
0
U
i
3
*o
c:
§
o
0
ta
1
deluding Other 1
^
0
C
£
3
tc
z
e*
\o o o . NO NO
cn o CM cn en
v^ r- oo O-v^
v^ >— ^
00 O O 00 00
T* in »-* «-* r*
cn
O O O O ft) J-
CJ CJ CJ "*^ i-l W
/^ 3. B 'B
a on
r-l 3 10 3
rH TJ 0 ^i tw
cnoo -rf « 1-1 u •
~m " , 5 H 1
s a a s s
S S ^^ (H
O 3 4-1 4J U
0 (0 -H -H CU
§§§ rH Oi-4 WW O
U > rH rH £
- . . CJ 5 -H --H «J
fMfrtCU O4Jr4 gE (H
v-' 3 O O O W
11 3 -rt tU 01 rH
§0 O U O. " rl
O O CJ fH £ CJ O
CUO>> •
f-*r-rn «ccau<;< sr
CO
S «aoooo rHorHvo
VO VOi/^rHvovrj OOC>1<^
en •» rn
^^
l eMrH
B B
Ci 0 vOOW T-tMtN
<*4 dun cn p^csenco »-* rHin
"tl CJ
e i co
m w ? S^w o r^^
r^ rH>^ rHrH 1C4
^ c^ O ON c^ M
*rl MH CJ
E rH , CO
O, U ™ 4J •-*
£ •„ 5-S. §^,1
2 JH co a u Q
B CO CO ,*J v^ /-s I O
000 0 01 t« 03
•H 03 « O lOl rH rH
jj CJ Q rH CJ rH
CJ cfl w I O -n w CJ
3 u IH • >« » e >
UCJCJ ' rH^ .0-2.4)
ttlrHrH . MCJ US
C •« .rt > B ^ B
033 OCJ .rl(5
« « « •j^Si.S
^> -2- C B rH K
M O O >« CO
rH 3 W U O.
rH -O O 'rl 1 6-« E
OO£N -rl "S" rH«S
M ^1 ^ H §* M VII VII
01 01 Cu O
B -a pa cj o J3 j:
'H CO *^^ 4J ^J
CO CO VII VII S -rl ^H
O 3 *J *J n w w
j- CJ CO -H -r4 rH rH rH
CJ |13BS*» '7lrHll
h U4 CO *H *H *H
* Q, « J> rHrH t-H i-HrH
ArH-- CJO'rl'H rHrHrH
SflLlSS ^W CHUJ
>-^30 OO 0 OO
w
CJ 3*H CJCJ CJ CJOJ
rH>a-\o 00 (Q14 OOOO 00 0000
mmin «JCBCuO >> > > >
rH FH rH . 0 B
U M 4J S CJ 1
CO CJ CO "O
U Ct< b 'H CQ
3 CO * CJ 4J >4H
U bOi £ B B —
cfl CJ S 4J CO O S
« iJ fH O CJ U O
B M 'H rH
P CO CO CO 14H TJ 4H
3 CJ CJ «H rH
II -O -O • B 01 H
>> 3 3 J3 00 £ fc
4J U U 'rl CO CO VII •
— CB,55cOW.clj
CJ B 3 CJ *O 4J M
*J -|H J3 .fi » O U
I||sf253.s
II II II II II rH 0 1 rH
•H U .rl
'BJ? 2S2S
58
-------
/— N
J
d
o
,o
CM
CM
I
M
M
r-H
W
CQ
H
"8
o
41
4J
*
*
«
HI
rH
•H
m
o
^
d
c
4-
C
•€
o
M
CM
41
^
CQ
VII
4->
*^.
i-H
CO
CO
H 01
^
01
4J
I-
m ^^
2
g
^e
0
/_
4J
fl
01
3 ^
0 v-
rH
fxj
01
^
Jd
-^
^
a
3
O f-
u £
00 v—
,£]
3
CO
t"
n
^_
J
1
fs
4-1
3*
T;
s
04
/•
f
^
O
n
.,H
e
^i
41
p.
10
p
OJ
Ifl
10
iH
ti
<4
CH
1
}-
PH
j_
W
r-
£
o
oq ' cd
"
/•^ ^^- ^^
in i co co
rH ^ -^ rH
V— •* 1— 1 *k«y
o \o o\
CO 1 rH \O
r-
rH /-. O CO
• 1
o i co
e d
1 i i O O i I 1 1 1 1 1 O 1
1 | l CJ O 1 1 1 1 1 1 U 1 * I
* 4 *W M-l
i—4 i-H i— 1
0) 4)
1 ) CQ •' , O
| | y~ "\ 1 /"~S 1 ^~\ 1 .i*"^ 1 /""* I
| | CO • I rH | rH | r-l 1 ^ 1
i— t • l— I O rH S_^ V— / V—-' . ^-r'
1 1 -^ . 1 vO 1 *»»-»»»*>
S^ i
CO P .W cnW&QWCOCOWPWWPP
r-H &«rH & r-l & i-t O4aJO.4&*&&4O«P t* fc* »*
/-S - -/-..- ' ';
V— '
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
CM CM CM CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
a\
CO
CM
'*-f
m
-*
. 1— 1
ON
CO
CM
o
CM
rH
/— \
CM
CO
v"-^
+&
CO
rH
/-^
rH
- i— 1
•H
' E
, 0)
d
•rH
CO
4J
O
I
r-j
3;
0 CM
m m
CO CM
m vo.
r^ CM
I-H rH
CQ
CO
"O Cti
CO
. O r-l
HH «J
• co d
S o
S -H
PS co
eu o
cr» m
CO' rH
CM rH
^"^
m co
MH 10
.
m o
VII VII
.d -a
4J 4J
'•H -rf
» 3
W W
rH i-H
rH i-H
'H >rl
s e
O 0
U 01
00 00
10 10
1-1 M
0) 0)
< <
TJ
O
rj
3
O
O
-------
1
u
w
1
1
o
<£
sg
a m
g co
o co
TABLE III
SUMMARY RAW WAST
NONINTEGRATED-HHE PA1
Le
•HI
S
04
O
ft
D
U
i
u
Oi
S
in
§
o
rH
u
ej 00
•0 B
Is
Percent
Hill Cotton
B
a
VI
rCT
e
«
o
*^
ft
•
«-*.
B
0
rH
ra
J
rH
ra
19
a
u
3
O
•O
*•*
Number Furnish
0)
* en NO
h* i o\
d 1 CO
O CO
1 1
rH *J | 1
3
0\ t <
in at i i
co m sr
rH *— ' v— *
CO \O ON
NO sf r**
r- CM rH
4-991
e
•HI
14
*J -H C
O U U 1
CO CO 1
1^ r*.
O -» 1
CO
r- i i
CM 1 1
^
CO 1 1
v^ *— '
O NO O\
co CM in
CO CO -*
1 1 1
B B
<£ " c
4J B -H 0
O -rt t, O
BUS:
s Ok .
O 9 Oj
rt" S
O O rH
o o o
o o o
««B »«„ e>
osroocoinvo»o\in co Co
i lOO^r^oincocMcovoi icoi i ivo
i ir-.cMcococomcovo^-'Coii-a'i i ico
ocMOincMcocointnco sf co
i iinor^coinr-rHrH r*» o
r^ r» ON
O r>. CM
00 rH ON
CO CM CO
M "O
W 41 *^v
4) 00 4)
00 C 00
re jc re
JA U J3
w u
4)
4) *O 4t
-o re -o
n IH re
u oo IH
0
d v
1 ','
3 to S
o a o
rH O rH
CQ CQ 03
VII VII VII
a; 4) 4)
00 00 00
re eg re
rl JJ kl
« jj a;
< < <
60
-------
•»
n
o
*'
S
0
fi°
(Q
CS
•o
4)
"rj
d
o
u
en
M
1
M
a
ij
CQ
<
H
flj
•H
'0
04
. d
o
•rl
U
1
Oj
,0
s
m
VII
d
0
^
J3
H
00
r^
01
/•^
C
o
4J
£3
Q 1-1
0
J>i
. " C
C
4->
Ct
0 j!
OI
J<
.M
s
fl
o oo >,
•o d n
rt « £
0 0
J
•j
' c
£
4J . .
ft) O ••-
U 4J
U 4J
rH .
•H
NO CM O
*# CM ON
CO CO CO
CO rH in
* ,_* ON
r-l r- 1 rH
O C? ON
ON O t*
co o m
sfg-:
in o > > O
CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ
O O F*" VO O *J CO
•^ O CO ON CO ON O
•••* co in oo r^ ON co
^ ^
o o -* co in r*- CM
•f"* in ON H
'
o r- CM o » ON r-i r-i r-
rH CO CM CO CO CO CM
O ON I-H m r*- ON r--
vo r^ CM ON o in co
CO CO CO ON in O rH
in -( co oo + -f p
d
o
4-)
o
o
d *
o 4J d c
x> w o .c
W -H fJ 4-
O XJ O C
•» -i-i 'iH •»•
m O ». in i-
P5 O CU fx, 0.
d c
4J 4-> U U U U t
o o d d d d c
o u p ta P P .=
m CO *— * CO O rH Cf
o o co o o -H r*
CM CM rH rH r-
CO •* CM CM CO co
rH rH rH rH
-
ST
Q
•O
1 — .
V
>> d
n n
•0 J3
^ SO
00 rH U
i d fe •o
00 rH ml
- S 3§
u ca
A « ' eo QJ «} oo
i n & K o vn
5 U 14 U
3 Cj 5, (-4 U -O
3 > > O4 > d
3 «c < ca < n
- CO
4)
(0
' 'd
•1-1
•o
QJ
3
irH
d
4J
O
a
co
T3
ml
1
CQ
. •,
C
in! S
CM O '
%4
& !•
ca >«
VII SJ
n
J= E
4-> • -H
's n a,
•r4
rH 'd 0)
. -H 0) 4J
d s -o UH
S 1 *H (0
o ca w
d d a
j£! •- O 4J
d s o «
so -a
rH *O
|| 44 rH ml
•EO O
* 04 ^ S
•-ca «
rH VII 4J V
A O O
•o o
II J3 rH
*J d
•(••HOIU
S -H 4-J
• - 4J M
rH rH O CO
V rH 3 S
•H 13
M a o s
1 V4
-------
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers - Available RWL data for this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-24. In the development of
BCT Option 1 RWL, data were reviewed considering the frequency of
waste significant grade changes. In general, flow and BODJ5 RWLs
increase with increasing frequency of waste significant grade
changes.
BCT Option 1 RWLs for this subcategory are based on the highest
averages for the various grade change delineations for mills
where RWLs are attained that are lower than the BPT RWLs.
Application of this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
RWL of 79.7 kl/kkg (19.1 kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t). The
BCT Option 1 flow is the average of flows at mills with greater
than one waste significant grade change per day. The BCT Option
1 BOD5_ RWL is the average BODJ5 at mills where less than one waste
significant grade change occurs per day. The BCT Option 1 TSS
RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [34.7 kg/kkg
(69.4 lb/t)].
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers - Available RWL data for the two
sectors of this subcategory, lightweight papers and lightweight
electrical papers, are presented in Table 111-25. In the
development of BCT Option 1 RWL, data were reviewed considering
the frequency of waste significant grade changes. Flow and BOD5_
RWL increase with increasing frequency of waste significant grade
changes. BCT Option 1 flows for each sector are the highest
average flow for the various grade change delineations for mills
where flows are attained that are lower than the BPT flow. BCT
Option 1 BODJ5 RWL loads are the highest average BOD5_ RWL of the
various grade change delineations for mills where BOD5_ RWL is
lower than the BPT BODj[ RWL. The BCT Option 1 BOD5_ for the
lightweight electrical papers product sector is identical to that
for the lightweight papers product sector. Application of this
methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_ RWL of 159.4 kl/kkg
(38.2 kgal/t) and 13.3 kg/kkg (26.6 lb/t) for the lightweight
papers sector and flow and BOD5_ RWL of 278.8 kl/kkg (66.8 kgal/t)
and 13.3 kg/kkg (26.6 lb/t) for the lightweight electrical papers
sector. For both sectors, the BCT Option 1 TSS RWL is assumed to
be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 lb/t)].
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers - Available RWL data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table 111-26. In the
development of BCT Option 1 RWLs, data were reviewed considering
waste significant grade changes. BCT Option 1 RWLs are based on
the highest averages for the various grade change delineations
for mills where RWLs are lower than the BPT RWLs. Application of
this methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BODS^ RWL of 198.2
kl/kkg (47.5 kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 lb/t). The BCT Option
1 TSS RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [27.4
kg/kkg (54.7 lb/t)].
Nonintegrated-Paperboard - Available RWL data for this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-27. In the development of
BCT Option 1 RWL, data were reviewed considering the frequency of
waste significant grade changes. BCT Option 1 RWLs are the
62
-------
j; 11 ....i . ... i *"!... i i . i i »*! so o ^ -T in in ov enm»ff>-'rj^'eO'—•
s^ ~ *•* m •« ^fnSiNv"'C' S S- S/ S w i? S Sr i2 S "" S £ i?
3
o in W W in b\ Jc Vn Vo" m" W co '— o» o . in o^ "co i" ON" r* — i
c\i*»'.-trgeNj "«-»•—'<-" — »— — CM—'^I-''-^ \o«-ti-'pncj'«-'fN)«3' •«-' —' ^..™«M
§.-^ m O O 09 i
jd .- . . .
^{^oo'«cvaoinpn\o\oq(nff»p\oot\o5>«oor--g; y55>p^tOyiT! ^ 5J*^?.'?00??V
<§ "
H U
s§
CO
S
Y RAW
D-TIS
61 O
^ *-».
ffl 0)
W OC
u c
a
.c
u
I I O i =2 O 3 O O i i O
W 3 3 3
H n w 01
35333 = 2=!
BlWWttttWWWUUU
QJ 6J OJ W ft)
3 3 3 W 3
U W
H w u u u .
^6-,HHHHHE-«HE-'HH^*^'5'Ut-'OH'l-£-''-*E-'O'C'O
re OOO.O nooo
kl kl kl kl kl kl kl Ukl klk! kl kl 0^ fi. CM kl Du kl kt kl kf k( Qa CM CM
CO tn-^s.'X.11"^'**.-^.'**.
OJUDiuajajajaj
0060600000600000
cccccncc
jsjzx£j:-jsj=x:
uououuuu
•O'^'O'O'O'D'O'O
60600COOOOOOOOCO
K Z V V V V A A
: ml * ml
i.2'1
CJUUUt 1
uuuu
u o u « m ^*
S U ^.'^ •»».
en oo eo oo oo
•H e e c c
f-
JM « 01
*< H t- w
v BM re o
CQ 4J "O —
II vii « e u
4) 0) U 91 0) 0)
60 00 « M 00 OC
to re n 10 09 n
kl kl kl hJ kt kl
0) 0> f 4) V 0>
>>>>>>
«C60006000600000
rerereraaiorere
i fe a. LM Z
63
-------
Profile Profile
TABLE 111-25
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Furnish (t/d) Product Grade
Hill Ho. Purch WP Hisc Broke (t/d) Change/Day(a)
Electrical Paper
105003(0 11.2 ~ -- -- 11.2
105015 (b) Cb) (b) Cb) (b) 0
105017 (b) Cb) (b) Cb) (b) 0
10S018(c) (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) 0
105071 26.0 — -- -- 26.3 B
Average
Hiacellaneous Tissue and Carbonized (Lightweight Papers)
090015 47.4 25.6 — — 64.2 +
105057 33.0 5.1 -- — 34.0 0
105058 34.0 4.9 — — 35.0
Average
Printing & Thin Paper (Lightweight Papers)
080039CO (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) +
105014 (b) (b) Cb) (b) (b)
105020 203.0 4.0 2.0 -- 203.0 - '
Average
Flow
kl/kkg
446.9
313.0
269.2
755.3
254.1
320.9
224.9
147.3
208.7
.193.6
236.6
170.7
202.4
203.2
(kgal/t)
(107.1)
(75.0)
(64.5)
(181.0)
(60.9)
(76.9)
(53.9)
(35.3)
(50.0)
(46.4)
(56.7)
(40.9)
(48.5)
(48.7)
BODS
kg/kkg
11.4
11.4
57.7
2.9
11.8
24.1
29.4
8.3
18.9
(Ib/t)
(-)
(")
(--)
(— )
(22.8)
(22.8)
(115.3)
(5.7)
(23.6)
(48.2)
(58.8)
(--)
(16.5)
(37.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
19.1
19.1
149.9
5.2
25.7
60.3
127.1
15.6
71.4
(Ib/t)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(— )
(38.1)
(38.1)
(299.8)
(10.3)
(51.4)
(120.5)
(254.2)
(--)
(31.1)
(142.7)
SBPT
(K)
F
F
FB
FB
B
F
FB
Carbonized, Thin, Cigarette ~ Less Wastepaper (Lightweight Papers)
080024 29.6 — -- 5.3 32.5 0
080021 (d) 30.3 ~ ~ — 26.9 O
080022 102.4 11.3 — — 110.5
090003 12.0 1.6 — 4.4(e)18.0
105013 15.1 ~ 5.3 — 20.4
105016 (b) (b) Cb) Cb) (b)
Average
Average of All Hills
Average of Electrical
Average w/o Electrical
BPT Raw Waste Load Electrical Papers
DPT Raw Waste Load Lightweight Papers
Average of mills - no grade change and flow
£ 8PT flow - Lightweight Papers w/o Electrical
Average of mills - no grade change and BODS
S BPT BODS
Average of mills - <1 grade change/day and flow
£ BPT flow - Lightweight Papers
Average of mills - 1; U = unknown.
(b) Production data held confidential.
(c) Represents a combination of process sewer and a very high flow from a thermal sewer. Apparently, mill
must use high flow on thermal sewer to meet thermal discharge limits. Not included in averages.
Cd) After primary clarification; not included in average.
(e) Estimated to balance.
(f) Hill is now closed.
(g) F - Hill with S BPT flow; B - Mill with £ BPT BOD5.
64
-------
U
&H
CO
VII
1
CO
CO
H 00
••^
^
+J
rH
m
Q
CQ 00
3§
01
jj
rH
OJ
rid
S
o
f>H M
.M
rH
(0
i i i en
i • i i i t • • i * i i i
c s- ~ c
1 CMlil t O CO 1 O 1 1 1 O
1 *III 1 • • 1 • 1 1 i •
co in co in ON
CO in in ITJ 1^ COCMCMvOOCOCMVOrH
CO -31 in -3" CO rHf^vOONrH^QrHON
r- CO CT\-31*-3' CMOmOrHr^CMsOCO
COi-HrHCOCMrHCM rH CM
o
o oo
<£ J-i JH n)
D i- m •> ' •> ij TJ
H-U) > OOOOJ3 3=0)
V r~* 0 fi C O *J
4J -H O -f-J -H 3" in co' co ^* in in ****
m CM -j- c\ m CM CM
^ ^-*
-sf co cn in *3* co co '•
r- CM r-i \o r« CM CM
Ico in ON c?\ co in in .1
CM *— "-- ' CO CM >•— * *— '
CM CO O O CM CO CO 1
. . . . . , . |
CM CO (/"»" r-- CM CO CO
I-H rH rH
. co t-H o\ co ; & *^ CM m
C?\ CM ON f*« ' OS MD M3 r**
co co in in in *•* ^^ ^
I ^-^
t-l r>* TJ C !>>
(Q (Q . EM fll Q
(U -lrH''H rH r-f r-l
rH -H .H -rl 0) i-t
> > > CLi > > >
«£
(-1
en
NO
-a-
03
CO
CM
•o
a
CO
CO
•o
01
00
CO
.C
CJ
0)
•o
CO
14
OO
01
e
o
I-H
A
1
in
i-H O
J pn
•H
E EH
a.
<« M
O
VII
01
oo m
co a
n o
01 a
in
a
CO
VII
CS
rH fH
01 OH
J3 CO
d &
+ o
•rl iH
• - 4J i-H
I-H O -H
v a E
•o
II O I
ti
I OH ta
65
-------
I
«s
en
s
m
o
g
1
o
£
U
•o
u
u
4J
U
3
•O
8
Pu
5
*j
i^
to
•H
g
5
m
VI
5
5
00
IX
JO
rH
J*
4J
rH
M
0<
.is
r-1
*
f~*
(9
(9
Q
V
00
c
J3
0)
5
^
^
4J
&
U
3
0^
i-t
•rl
S
II •••III!
in m co
11 • • • i i i i
in vo co
CM \O fH v-^ rH
VDOVOCMOCOCOCOO
O\*^CMCOOCOCOOOCO
CMCOVOVO co£ rH U
r-t «) 4J U J*
flj 4J U flj QJ (U
•rl »« -rl !£. pQ ,Q
00 U -rl U W -H -rl
PQ »Q Q^ »fj O CD
J-l CO M * 4J TJ *O
oo o * o n w m *J 4J
C CQ oo CQ <9 coon
•rl C] O tfl C C
oo x tt x M e - oo oo
ra -H -H aj w QJ QJ
O jJ 00 JJ O *J p^ O<
CUKP-t33t*-iWK^tHi— •
0^-sO^tM^f^O 0
co m co vo in
rH ^ CM ^ 1 1 ^O 1 1
^S^S^^S4^0-
vo co co -*
BJ *O -H R)
U OJ N O
•rl *J -rl ffl
rl (9 C
4J u n M
«J *J rH 0)
W CO > (ij
2*°. °
rH r^
^^ 1 \O
rO 1 CT)
2>rH sf
^S 5
o o o
in m o
O O rH
to ir> r^*
rH ^^
t^> CO O\
OO ON VO
in co co
ICO ^00
o o% o
in «-< CM
CM VO »*
in a\ o
CM rH
VO CO C^
in co CM
CM r-c t-H
co in co
VO CO CO
o r- in
rH
x
'Ci
4J
s
(4
o
I— 1 rH
rt ai
u u
M rl
*J 4J
u u
CJ OJ
i— 1 rH
Cd W
o o
"& ^
,
CO
•a
01
00
d
Jd
u
01
•a
CO
00
rH
V
I
ca-
rH
rH
'rH
s s
<« rH
0 <4H
01 EH
00 CU
co m
hi
01 VII
1
v_/
1
1
/~,
1
1
101
a
o
pp
•§
«
>»
<9
TJ
* '
T3
,
CO
TJ
01
1
u
(U
13
«
M
00
i-H
A
,
n
rH
r-|
=§'
0
EH
01 CM
oo m
co
hi VII
01
a
o
m
m
VII
5
«J -H
3»
d i
• 01
a -o m
? -H
O 4H •"
d d 3
-MOO
B U rH
II rH H
p ja m
•- co vii
rH JJ
A CO XI
-O 4J
" a'g
+ 0
•H rH
•* JJ r-l
rH U >rl
V5a
II O I.
66
-------
highest averages for the various grade change delineations for
mills (excluding those that produce electrical or matrix board)
with RWLs that are lower than the BPT RWLs. Application of this
methodology yields BCT Option 1 flow and BODS RWL of 46.7 kl/kkg
(116.2 kgal/t) and 8.2 kg/kkg (16.4 Ib/t). The BCT Option 1 TSS
RWL is assumed to be the same as the BPT TSS RWL [36.9 kg/kkg
(73,7 Ib/t)].
Summary of Option !L Raw Waste Loads - Table 111-28 presents a
summary of BCT Option 1 raw waste loads.
Development of BCT Option 1 Final Effluent Characteristics
BCT Option 1 includes (a) the implementation of production
process controls that are applicable to each subcategory but have
not been widely applied at mills in the subcategory and (b) the
end-of-pipe treatment technology which is the basis for BPT for
each subcategory. Biological treatment was the effluent
treatment technology identified as the basis for BPT for most
subcategories. Because of flow reductions resulting from the
application of production process controls, the end-of-pipe
systems have longer detention times than if BPT RWLs were being
treated in the systems. Therefore, they are more effective in
removing conventional pollutants. The reduced BODj> load to the
treatment system will also result in further reductions in the
effluent BODJ5 and TSS loads.
In the December 1976 development document supporting the final
BPT regulations for Phase II subcategories, an equation was
developed relating the anticipated final effluent BOD_5
concentration to the BOD5_ concentration entering a biological
treatment system (See Phase II Development Document, page
402).(9) This equation, based on treatment plant performance
data, is as follows:
Log BODJ5 effluent (mg/1) = (0.601 x Log BOD_5 influent (mg/1)] - 0.020
This equation is used to predict long-term average BCT Option 1
final effluent BODS^ loads based on the application of biological
treatment to the BCT Option 1 RWLs of the subcategories for which
the equation was developed (dissolving kraft, market bleached
kraft, BCT bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, soda and the
groundwood subcategories, and the fine papers and tissue papers
sectors of the deink subcategory).
The use of the equation has been transferred to the unbleached
kraft, semi-chemical, unbleached kraft and semi-chemical,
paperboard from wastepaper (non-corrugating medium furnish), .
tissue from wastepaper, and builders' paper and roofing felt
'subcategories to predict BCT Option 1 long-term average final
effluent BODI5 loads. Biological treatment was the BPT technology
basis for each of these subcategories. In addition, the required
BODJ5 removals from BPT RWL to BPT final effluent levels for these
subcategories are approximately equal to the removals required
67
-------
TABLE 111-28
BCT OPTIONS 1 AND 3
LONG-TERM AVERAGE RAW WASTE LOADS
Flow
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai-Cheaical
Unbleached Kraft
and Seai-Chenical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp2
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Grounduood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Froa Wastepaper
Paperboard Froa Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish'
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Konintegrated Segment
Xonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Konintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Honuoven Papers
Honintegrated-Paperboard
kl/kkg
208.7
154.8
123.9
99.7
40.5
48.0
30.5
48.0
233.7
233.7
233.7
260.4
(«)
--
70.1
64.3
44.2
52.2
~
68.0
13.4
13.4
23.8
11.3
39.2
130.2
79.7
159.4
278.8
198.2
46.7
(kgal/t)
(50.0)
(37.1)
(29.7)
(23.9)
(9.7)
(11.5)
(7.3)
(11.5)
(56 .-0)
(56.0)
(56.0)
(62.4)
(<)
—
(16.8)
(15.4)
(10.6)
(12.5)
—
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.4)
(31.2)
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11.2)
kg/kk*
60.4
31.8
35.1
30.4
14.9
21.9
17.6
16.3
90.6 (64.1)
92.6 [65.6]
109.6 [80.1]
157.0 [126.5]
(4)
--
13.3
12.5
68.9
94.6
--
9.7
23.0
11.3
5.5
7.4
7.5
14.0
9.0
13.3
13.3
9.0
8.2
BODS
(Ib/t)
(120.7)
(63.6)
(70.2)
(60.8)
i (29.8)
(43.8)
(35.2)
(32.5)
(181.2 (128.21)
(185.2 [131.2])
(219.2 (160.21)
(314.0 (253.01)
(«)
(26.6)
(24.9)
(137.7)
(189.2)
«
(19.3)
(46.0)
(22.5)
(10.9)
(14.8)
(14.9)
(28.0)
(17.9)
(26.6)
(26.6)
(17.9)
(16.4)
kg/kk«
113.0
45.0
66.5
75.0
21.9
21.9
12.3
20.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
90.0
--
48.5
52.5
202.5
202.5
--
110.5
11.0
11.0
14.8
41.0
30.8
55.2
34.7
63.4
63.4
27.4
36.9
TSS
(Ib/t)
(226.0)
(90.0)
(133.0)
(150.0)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(24.6)
(41.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(J85.0)
(185.0)
(180.0)
--
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
—
(221.0)
(21.9)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(82.0)
(61.6)
(110.4)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.7)
(73.7)
* Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2 Values in brackets are for mills which employ MgO. Neutralization of spent sulfite liquor is a BCT Option 1
internal control for mills employing MgO, with consequently greater reductions in BODS.
3 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Fie Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
* BCT Options 1 and 3 raw waste flow and BOD5 vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the
final product. The following equations can be used to obtain annual average effluent
characteristics for Papergrade Sulfite mills:
Mills Kot Employing MgO
Flow (k£/kkg) = 34.64 + 1.561 x
Flow (kgal/t) x 8.30 +• 0.374 x
BODS (kg/kkg) = 9.3 + 0.620 x
BODS (Ib/t) s 18.6 ••• 1.24 x
Mills Employing MgO
34.64 + 1.561 x
8.30 + 0.374 x
9.30 + 0.520 x
18.6 + 1.040 x
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
68
-------
for the subcategories on which the relationship was based.
The relationship was also used to predict BCT Option 1 long-term
average final effluent BODS levels for the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory and the corrugating medium furnish sector of
the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory since it was used to
determine the BPT final effluent BODS loads from BPT BOD!5 RWLs
for this subcategory and sector (see October 1982 Development
Document suporting the November 1982 regulations, pg. 391) (2).
The methodology used to develop the BODJ5 BCT Option 1 final
effluent level for the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory is
discussed below.
Another equation relating secondary treatment system influent
BODS concentration and anticipated final effluent BOD5.
concentration was developed based on data from mills producing
papergrade sulfite and dissolving .sulfite pulp. This was
developed at the same time as the above equation (See December
1976 Phase II Development Document, reference number 9, pg. 400):
Log BODS^ effluent (mg/1) = [0.496 x log BODS influent (mg/1)] +0.309
This relationship predicts long-term average final effluent BODS
loads based on the application of biological treatment to the BCT
Option 1 RWLs in the papergrade sulfite and dissolving sulfite
pulp subcategories.
EPA also developed a relationship between raw waste BODJ5
concentration and final effluent TSS concentration; this
equation's derivation is presented in Section VIII of the
development document supporting the November 1982 final
regulations, reference number 2, and is as follows:
Final effluent TSS (mg/1) = 8.95 x [Raw Waste BODS (mg/1)]0'31
This equation was developed from data representative of the
dissolving kraft, market bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, BCT
(board, coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft, dissolving sulfite
pulp, papergrade sulfite, soda, groundwood, and deink
subcategories. This equation was used to determine BCT Option 1
long-term average final effluent TSS concentrations for all of
the above subcategories except the deink subcategory and has also
been applied to develop BCT Option 1 long-term average TSS
concentrations for all the remaining subcategories for which
biological treatment is the basis for BPT.
BCT Option 1 final effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations have been
developed from BCT Option 1 raw waste BOD5_ concentrations using
the appropriate equation relating secondary influent BODS
concentration to final effluent BOD5_ concentration and the
equation relating secondary influent BOD5_ concentration to final
effluent TSS concentration. BCT Option 1 long-term average final
69
-------
effluent BODS and TSS mass loads were calculated by multiplying
the long-term average final effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations
and the flow basis for BCT Option 1. This methodology was used
to develop BCT Option 1 BODJ5 and TSS final effluent
characteristics for all the subcategories in the integrated
segment (except groundwood-TMP), all subcategories in the
secondary fibers segment (except for the deink subcategory, which
is discussed below), and for TSS for the nonintegrated-fme
papers subcategory.
As will be shown in the discussion of the development of BCT
Option 4, the final effluent levels for BOD5_ and TSS for the fine
papers and the tissue papers sectors of the deink subcategory
determined using the BCT Option 1 methodology are nearly
identical to the corresponding effluent levels determined using
the BCT Option 4 methodology. Therefore, the same effluent level
will be used for both BCT Option 1 and BCT Option 4 for these
sectors of the deink subcategory. The final effluent BOD5_ loads
determined using the BCT Option 1 methodology were slightly
higher than those determined using the BCT Option 4 methodology
for both sectors. Thus, the BCT Option 1 final effluent BOD5_
effluent level was selected for the BCT Option 1 and BCT Option 4
levels. The final effluent TSS loads determined using the ^BCT
Option 4 methodology were slightly higher than those determined
using the BCT Option 1 methodology for both sectors; therefore,
the BCT Option 4 final effluent TSS level was selected for the
BCT Option 1 and BCT Option 4 levels. The technologies are
considered interchangeable.
The development of BCT Option 1 final effluent levels for the
papergrade sulfite subcategories followed the general methodology
but requires further detailed discussion. BCT Option 1 final
efflent levels for BOD5_ and TSS for the papergrade sulfite
subcategories were developed using a) the BCT Option 1 flow and
BODS RWL equations relating these parameters with the percent
sulfite pulp manufactured on-site (discussed above in the
development of RWLs) and b) the equations relating raw waste BOD5_
concentration to final effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations.
Cumbersome multi-term exponential equations were avoided when it
was found that, for values of percent sulfite pulp greater than
one percent, the relationships between final effluent BOD5_ and
TSS and percent sulfite pulp are virtually linear. To develop
the relationship between final effluent BOD5_ and the percent
sulfite pulp, the flow and BOD5_ RWL were predicted for several
values of percent sulfite pulp using the equations for flow and
raw waste BODS^ (for mills that do not employ MgO) . The flow and
BODS values were used to determine the influent BOD5_
concentrations at the various values of percent sulfite pulp.
These concentrations were substituted in the equation (for
sulfite mills) relating influent BOD5_ concentration to effluent
BODS concentration to obtain predicted final effluent BOD5_
concentrations at each value of percent sulfite pulp. These
effluent concentrations, with the associated flow values, were
used to calculate final effluent BOD5_ loads for each value of
percent sulfite pulp. The BOD5_ effluent mass loads were plotted
70
-------
versus percent sulfite pulp, and the following relationship
between BCT Option 1 final effluent BOD5 loads and. percent
sulfite pulp was obtained using a linear regression:
BCT Option 1 Final Effluent. BOD!5
(for mills that do not employ MgO)
final effluent BODSi (kg/kkg) = 0.062x + 1.14
[final effluent BODI5 (Ib/t) = 0.124x + 2.28]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
The process was repeated using the relationship between raw waste
BODS concentration and final effluent TSS concentration to
determine final effluent TSS as function of percent sulfite pulp.
The BCT Option 1 TSS equation is as follows:
BCT Option 1 Final Effluent TSS
(for mills that do not employ MgO)
final effluent TSS (kg/kkg) = 0.090x + 1.76
[final effluent TSS (Ib/t) = 0.179x + 3.52]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
These equations, representing BOD^j and TSS as a function of the
percent sulfite pulp, were used to compute the BCT Option 1 long-
term average final effluent characteristics for papergrade
sulfite mills which do not employ MgO as a base.
Using the BCT Option 1 flow equation and the BOD5_ equation
developed for papergrade sulfite mills which employ MgO as a
base, the procedures outlined above -were followed to develop BCT
Option 1 final effluent BODJ5 and TSS equations for papergrade
sulfite mills employing MgO as a base. The equations used to
calculate BCT Option 1 final effluent BODJ5 and TSS
characteristics are as follows:
BCT Option 1
(For mills that employ MgO as a base)
final effluent BOD5^ (kg/kkg) = 0.057x + 1.14
[final effluent BOD5. (Ib/t) = 0.114x + 2.27]
final effluent TSS (kg/kkg) = 0.085x +.1.76
[final effluent TSS (Ib/t) = 0.169x + 3.51]
71
-------
The BCT Option 1 raw waste BODJ5 concentrations for both the wood
fibers and cotton fibers sectors of the nonintegrated-fine paper
subcategory are approximately equal to the corresponding BPT raw
waste BODS^ concentrations for these sectors as shown below:
BODS Concentration (mg/1)
BPT BCT Option 1
190
Wood fiber sector
Cotton fiber sector
170
130
107
Therefore/ for both sectors of this subcategory, BCT Option 1
maximum 30-day average concentrations of BOD^j are expected to be
equal to the corresponding BPT maximum 30-day average
concentrations. The long-term annual average values shown in
Table 111-29 are obtained by .dividing the maximum 30-day average
values by the BCT Option 1 maximum 30-day variability factor for
BODI5.
Primary treatment is the end-of-pipe technology basis for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated
paperboard subcategories. The BCT Option 1 long-term average raw
waste BODiS concentration for the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory is approximately equal to the BPT long-term average
raw waste BODS^ concentration (112 mg/1 vs. 120 mg/1). Therefore,
BCT Option 1 long-term average final effluent concentrations of
BODE^ and TSS are expected to equal the corresponding BPT long-
term average final effluent concentrations which are 36.6 mg/1
for BODj[ and 29.8 mg/1 for TSS. Because the wastewater
characteristics of the remaining nonintegrated subcategories are
similar to those of the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory,
BCT Option 1 long-term average BODJ5 and TSS effluent
concentrations of the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory
have been transferred to the remaining nonintegrated
subcategories (excluding nonintegrated-fine papers). Thus, BCT
Option 1 final effluent BODE[ and TSS loads for each of the
nonintegrated subcategories (excluding nonintegrated-fine papers)
are determined by multiplying the BCT Option 1 BODE[ and TSS
effluent concentrations (equal to the BPT effluent concentrations-
for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory) by the
subcategory BCT Option 1 flow.
Table 111-29 presents a summary of the BCT Option
average BODJ5 and TSS effluent loads.
1 long-term
BCT Option 1 final effluent loads have been attained in 19 of the
20 subcategories where BPT is attained. Table 111-30 summarizes
the number of mills attaining BCT Option 1 final effluent loads
and the number of direct discharging mills in each subcategory
for which data were available. BCT Option 1 limits are attained
at 70 percent of the mills in the integrated segment, 63 percent
of the mills in the secondary fibers segment, and 80 percent of
72
-------
TABLE 111-29
BCT OPTION 1
LONG-TERM AVERAGE DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
kl/kkg
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 208.7
Market Bleached Kraft 154.8
BCT Bleached Kraft 123.9
Alkaline-Fine1 99.7
Unbleached Kraft
o Bag 48.0
Semi-Chemical 30.5
Unbleached ,Kraf U
and Semi-Chemical 48.0
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp2
o Nitration 233.7
o Viscose 233.7
o Cellophane 233.7
o Acetate 260.4
Papergrade Sulfite3 (4)
Groundwood-Therrao-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers 70.1
Groundwood-Fine Papers 64.3
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 44.2
o Tissue Papers 52.2
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper 68.0
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish 13.4
a Noncorrugating Medium Furnishl3.4
Wastepaper-Molded Products 23.8
Builders' Paper and Roofing Feltll.3
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish 39.2
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 130.2
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 79.7
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 159.4
o Electrical 278.8
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers 198.2
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 46.7
(kgal/t)
(50.0)
(37.1)
(29.7)
(23.9)
CO T\
{y . 1 )
(11-5)
(7.3)
(11.5)
(56.0)
(56.0)
(56.0)
(62.4)
(«)
—
(16.8)
(15.4)
(10.6)
(12.5)
--
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.4)
(31.2)
(.19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11.2)
BODS
kg/kkg
6.0
3.6
3.5
3.0
1^
• J
1.8
1.3
1.5
9.2 [7.7]
9.2 [7.8]
10.1 [8.6]
12.7 [11.4]
(<)
—
1.6
1.5
2.5
3.2
—
1.3
1.1
0.73
0.60
0.53
1.5
3.8
2.9
5.8
10.2
7.3
1.7
(Ib/t)
(12.0)
(7.3)
(7.0)
(5.9)
ft T\
12. 7 )
(3.6)
(2.7)
(3.0)
(18.3 [15.4])
(18.5 [15.6])
(20.1 [17.2])
(25.4 [22.8])
—
(3.1)
(2.9)
(5.0)
(6.5)
~
(2.6)
(2.2)
(1.5)
(1.2)
(1.1)
(3.0)
(7.5)
(5.8)
(11.7)
(20.4)
(14.5)
(3.4)
TSS
kg/kkg
'10.8
7.2
6.4
5.3
2^
. 3
2.9
2.0
2.6
13.3 [11.9]
13.4 [12.0]
14.1 [12.8]
17.0 [15.9]
(<)
—
3.2
2.9
3.3
4.2
—
1.3
1.2
0.97
1.1
0.76
1.8
5.0
2.4
4.7
8.3
5.9
1.4
(Ib/t)
(21.6)
(14.4)
(12.8)
(10.5)
(si?)
(3.9)
(5.2)
(26.5
(26.7
(28.1
(33.9
(<)
—
(6.4)
(5.9)
(7.6)
(8.3)
—
(5.7)
(2.4)
(1.9)
(2.3)
(1-5)
(3.6)
(9.9)
(4.7)
(9.5)
(16.6)
(11.8)
(2.8)
[23.8])
[24.0])
[25.5])
[31.7])
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft-and Soda subcategories.
2 Values in brackets are for mills which employ MgO. Neutralization of spent sulfite liquor is a
BCT Option 1 internal control for mills employing MgO, with consequently greater reductions in BOD5.
3 Includes Papergrade Sulfite Blow Pit Wash and Papergrade Sulfite Drum Wash subcategories.
* BCT Option 1 effluent characteristics vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product. The
following equations can be used to obtain annual average effluent characteristics for paper grade
sulfite mills: Mills not employing MgO Mills employing MgO
Flow (kl/kkg) = 34.64 + 1.561x Flow (kJt/kkg) = 34.64 + 1.561x
BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 1.14 <• 0.062x BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 1.14 + 0.057x -
TSS (kg/kkg) = 1.76 + 0.090x TSS (kg/kkg) = 1.76 + O.OSSx
where x = the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site.
73
-------
TABLE 111-30
NUMBER OF FACILITIES THAT ATTAIN BPT AND BCT OPTION
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
Mills with
Available
Data
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Grounduood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers3
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers3
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter3
and Nonwoven Papers3
Nonintegrated-Paperboard3
3
10
9
16
15
7
15
8
0
2
1
2
12
2
7
3
11
9
3
36
4
5
12
2
. 11
4
1
1
4
Mills
Attaining
BPT F.E.
Levels (a)
1
7
5
6
7
3
4
2
0
0
0
0
4
1
6
2
7 :
7
2
23
1
4
5
1
6
4
1
1
1
Mills
Attaining
BCT Option 1
F.'E. Levels (a)
1
5
3
5
4
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
4
1
5
0
6
1
1
18
0
3
2
. I ,
5
4
1
1
1
includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
3Includes only mills that do not use secondary treatment.
(a) F.E. = Final Effluent
74
-------
^ mills in the nonintegrated segment where BPT effluent
limitations are attained.
OPTION 2^
Chemically assisted clarification (CAC) technology is an end-of-
pipe technology which has been demonstrated consistently to
achieve significant reductions in the discharge of conventional
pollutants from biological treatment systems on a full-scale
basis. Hence, EPA has selected CAC technology as the basis for
the development of BCT Option 2 effluent limitations for all
integrated and secondary fibers subcategories and for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. For these subcategories,
primary treatment is the technology basis of BPT; For the
remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary
pretreatment is the technology basis of BPT, the Option 2
technology includes the addition of biological treatment.
Presented below is a discussion of the available information on
CAC performance with pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
effluents. Following this discussion, the methodology used to
develop Option 2 effluent limitations is reviewed.
CAC Treatment Performance
The available literature indicates that approximately 40 pulp,
paper, and paperboard mills in the U.S. have investigated CAC as
a means of improving the quality of their wastewater discharge.
Most of the information is contained in reports of bench or pilot
scale studies, although several full scale installations have
been reported. A major portion of the information (data from 34
mills) is contained in the National Council of the Paper Industry
for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Technical Bulletin No.
364, "Laboratory and Field Experience With Chemically Assisted
Clarification of Pulp and Paper Biologically Treated Effluents,
January 1982." (10)
Technical
32 mills
performed
indicate
However,
assumed
were used
and full
Bulletin No. 364 provides jar test data for a total of
in 17 subcategories. Although the jar tests were all
on biologically treated effluent, the report did not
if samples had been clarified prior to alum addition.
based on the reported level of influent TSS, it is
that in most instances, samples of clarified wastewater
In addition, four companies contributed pilot plant
scale performance data for the report.
The NCASI jar test data indicate that optimum alum dosage for TSS
reduction varies widely from mill to mill with little apparent
correlation to the type of biological treatment preceding CAC.
Subcategory trends can be seen, however. Fifteen of the 32 mills
supplying jar test data to NCASI were wholly in kraft pulping
subcategories. The average minimum alum dosage at the kraft
mills to achieve optimum TSS reduction without use of
polyelectrolytes was 336 mg/1. Optimum performance was defined
as the minimum alum dosage to achieve an effluent TSS
75
-------
concentration of 15 mg/1 or less, or if a TSS concentration of 15
mg/1 could not be achieved, the optimum performance was defined
as the alum dosage that gave the greatest TSS reduction. The
average dosages ranged from 148 to 550 mg/1. The effluent TSS
concentrations ranged from 5 to 229 mg/1 and averaged 34 mg/1;
the average is 18 mg/1 when the highest value is excluded. A
final TSS concentration of 15 mg/1 or less was achieved in
approximately 50 percent of the trials. Attempts to attain a TSS
level of 15 mg/1 using only alum as a coagulant were unsuccessful
at four of the five kraft mills. It should be noted that in most
instances the pH of the wastewater was not adjusted for optimum
performance prior to alum addition. The data are not sufficient
to judge if polyelectrolytes were of benefit.
In comparison, jar test- data from the following nine mills
indicated that alum dosages of 400 to 800 mg/1 were typically
needed for optimum TSS removals in the soda (1 mill), ..sulfite (5
mills), semi-chemical (2 mills), and groundwood thermb-mechanical
(1 mill) subcategories. However, one mill producing bleached
sulfite pulp had difficulty achieving additional TSS removal even
with alum dosages of 2,000 to 3,000 mg/1. Another mill producing
dissolving pulp reported no TSS reductions at alum dosages up to
300 mg/1. A final effluent concentration of 15 mg/1 was seldom
achieved at these nine mills. Variable performance and influent
TSS concentration, and the limited amount of subcategory-specific
data make extrapolation of optimum alum dosage and optimum
performance data difficult for these subcategories.
An additional five mills supplied jar test results to NCASI
representing groundwood (1 mill), deink (1 mill), nonintegrated-
fine papers (2 mills), and nonintegrated-tissue papers (1 mill)
subcategories. The data clearly indicate that the alum dosage
required for optimum TSS control in these subcategories is less
than in those subcategories discussed previously. The average
minimum alum dosage with no polyelectrolyte addition for this
group was 160 mg/1 with a range of 125 to 186 mg/1. The average
effluent TSS in jar test trials at these mills using alum and no
polyelectrolyte was 19'mg/1. As in previously discussed trials,
the pH of the wastewater was not adjusted prior to alum addition.
The NCASI jar test data are summarized in Table 111-31.
The other major source of jar test data was provided in a
December 1979 letter to EPA commenting on the September 1979
draft report entitled "Preliminary Data Base Review of BATEA
Effluent Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards
for the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category."(11)
The commenter provided jar test information collected at nine
different mills. It is believed, however, that data for at least
four of these mills were also reported by NCASI. The commenter's
letter included data on mills producing the following: unbleached
kraft (1 mill), sulfite (1 mill), unbleached kraft and semi-
chemical (1 mill), paperboard from wastepaper ' (2 mills),
groundwood (1 mill), bleached kraft and sulfite (1 mill)", and
bleached kraft and groundwood (2 mills). The average minimum
alum dosage among eight of these mills for optimum TSS reduction
76
-------
TABLE 111-31
SUMMARY OF CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION TECHNOLOGY PEFORMANCE TESTS
NCASI JAR TEST RESULTS
Alum Polymer pH adj.,
and Mill System(a) la
Bleached
NCASI Ho.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Bleached
NCASI Mo.
Bleached
NCASI Mo.
' No.
Kraft
1
2
3
4
4
4
6
11
5
7
10
12
13
Kraft
8
Kraft
9
9
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
ASB
ASB
ASB
ASB
ASB
-
-
24
6
6
6
12
-
21
30
-
17
37
Out In
-
-
7
1
7
11
4
>-
6
12
-
2
<10
1660
136
47
11
11
11
60
-
33
55
. -
25
47
Out
41
36
9
5
1
4
10
10-30
9
26
-
13
10
(mg/1) (mg/1)
360
190
321
600 0
300 2
0 4
280
300-500
187
339
490 0
170 0
550 0
Final
Y,
Y,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
Y,
N,
N,
N,
N,
-
5
5
5
4
6
7
4
-
5
6
-
3
pH(b)
.0
.0
.7-6
.9
.9
.9
.9
.6-5
.5
.7-5
.2
.9
.3
and Bleached Sulfite
AS
17
and Dissolving
ASB
ASB
-
9
2
Kraft
-
7
; 44
Pulp
40
46
25
5
16
332
700
550 1
N,
N,
N,
5
5
5
.5
.8
.7
Unbleached Kraft
NCASI No.
No.
No.
No.
Mo.
14 .
14
IS
16
17
ASB
ASB
ASB
ASB
ASB
137
137
50
19
31
81
90
14
5
9
514
514
137
124
84
229
240
19
29
13
300 0
200 1
300 0
143 0
400 0 . 004
N,
N,
N,
N,
Y,
7
7
6
6
6
.1
.5
.0-6
.6-7
.2
.2
.2
77
-------
(U
o
u
CO
i
1
•o
« r-l
« §
Ol -rl
o e
3 ^v
r-l «
< 6
T
00 rH
en
CO
co
CTl CM
m c\
m
m
55*
O O CM
m m m
00
00
CO
«* o
rH CM
CM
i -a- CM
CM rH
CO 00
in
CO
en
cn
T3
cn
CO
oe
w
CM
cn
CO
«J
ffl
a
o
V N
00 -H
•O r-l
3 -H
cn «t
•a cn.
0)
4J t3
4J
•rl «
4-> IH
U ••->
(U O •«
6 fi «
.p
W W W
3
-------
was 366 mg/1 and ranged from 50 to 700 mg/1. Alum was reported
ineffective for TSS control at one paperboard from wastepaper
mill. The trends observed in the NCASI data were repeated in
these data. The type of treatment preceding CAC had .^ip apparent
effect on alum dosage. The highest dosages were required by the
sulfite and the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical effluents and
the lowest alum dosage (125 mg/1) was required for groundwood
effluent, TSS removals averaged 64 percent and effluent TSS
concentrations averaged 18 mg/1 at the eight mills where CAC was
effective. These jar test data are summarized in Table ItI-32.
In addition to the jar test work reported to the Agency, H. Chen
has discussed pilot plant performance at two mills in a separate
technical paper.(12) These mills were among the nine discussed
above. Chen's results indicated that alum coagulation followed
by addition of 3 to 5 mg/1 of non-ionic polymer was effective in
reducing effluent TSS from 84 to 20 mg/1. Chen reported that at
pilot clarifier overflow rates greater than approximately 300
gpd/ff*, TSS removal performance deteriorated significantly.
Performance of CAC was reported for two full-scale trials and one
full-scale installation by NCASI, and for full-scale
installations by three individual mills in response to a 1983 EPA
questionnaire. Data from these three latter full-scale
installation are also referenced in the development document
supporting the November 1982 regulations.(2) These data are
summarized in Table 111-33.
Several important conclusions can be drawn from this tabulated
full-scale data. First, the data confirm that CAC can be used
effectively at full-scale installations to reduce TSS levels in
final effluents. Second, alum dosages within the range of 100 to
350 mg/1 may be optimum for full-scale installations in the kraft
and groundwood subcategories. Furthermore, pH adjustment and use
of ^ polyelectrolytes in conjunction with alum should be
anticipated. Third, although one mill reported an average TSS
discharge concentration of 11 mg/1, the full-scale data from
other mills suggest that such low effluent concentrations may not
be universally achievable, and that long-term average
concentrations of 20-30 mg/1 are more likely to be achieved.
This is of particular interest since this level is higher than
the 15 mg/1^of TSS on which EPA previously based BCT Options 2
and 3. This does not mean that a long-term average TSS
concentration of 15 mg/1 cannot be designed for or achieved, only
that _additional data are needed to support this low level. In
addition, the performance of CAC cannot be characterized in terms
of "percent removal" but seems to be bound by a lower residual
TSS concentration which is likely related to clarifier design and
operation.
It should be noted that, based on available data, alum dosage did
not appear stoichiometrically related to initial TSS
concentration. This .was noted by personnel reporting data from
several mills and is evident from review of the available data.
However, a relationship between wastewater alkalinity and alum
79
-------
10
1)
MAM
SOU
•!-) B) S
"O 0) O
fl rH X!
W *§ •*
ftp CM
80
-------
g
H
g
jj?j
o
sa
CK
X
o
S
g
o
e
a
<*i 2
«O H
I l 5B
\o m
1 rH
ft I
O
o
o o
m o
1 CM
O 1
CM O\
CO \O
i r«-
c\
1-4
I 1
1 . 1
1 O
CO
1 Ut
f-
'-' ,
•
flj **H
rH Ot
CJ
O CO
CM <
*J *J
<0 (0
•o -o
CJ 01
CJ U
CQ CQ
0) 01
rH rH
«tf
T-H CO
0 O.
CO CO
< <
CJ CJ
.
Jj
3
(0
CO
3
t
CO
01
\o
CM
m
1-1
CO
u
CJ
^^
u
u
\— '
m
"
o
•
CQ
rH
CJ
O
CM
Ol
•H
0)
C
•H
rH
CO
Jtf
<
- O
' o
m
o
/••»
CJ
/f^
CJ
^^
u
CJ
1
^o
CJ
01
1
JS
CJ
1
o
o
o
s
u
>» /-s
u
V) /-N
01 CJ
^H ,^^
CJ
rt
rH
o /~\
0) CJ
In
CM CJ
W • CJ
0
00
O\ ^N
CM U
N«* • Vu/
CO
IT)
en cj
m ^
°I 'i?
CM
.
0"
•H
.
1
aa u
K •^
V
c:
•H
i e
4) 1-J
w a
00 4)
41 Z
4J 1
•H e
e -H
O 41
2 a
CM r-<
o o
o o
g g
c
o
•H
CO
CJ
•H
•H
u u
a 01
rH >rl
CJ *W
•O ^
U) U
W >t
CO M
(0 (0
t;
>> 'C
rH 0
rH L)
CO CU
CJ W
-C •
u u
«3
1 rH
U
CJ
< 0
U CO
XI CJ
81
-------
demand was reported at certain mills. Several investigators also
reported that the optimum pH for TSS reduction was in the range
of 5 to 6. Based on this information, it is hypothesized that
most of the mills reporting data were effecting "sweep
coagulation" as described by Packham and by Stumm and O'Melia.
(References 13 and 14, respectively). In sweep coagulation,
metal coagulants are added to the suspension being treated until
the solution becomes supersaturated with the metal hydroxide. At
that point, an amorphous metal hydroxide precipitate forms which
enmeshes and sweeps suspended material from the supernatant
liquid as it settles. The minimum solubility of aluminum
hydroxide, a hydrolysis product of alum, occurs at approximately
pH 5.5 under equilibrium conditions, which may explain the
optimum pH range of 5 to 6.
Development of_ Option 2^ Effluent Characteristics
BCT Option 2 requires the addition of chemically assisted
clarification to further treat BPT final effluent discharges from
all integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and from the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. Based on the demonstrated
performance of the full and pilot-scale systems, chemically
assisted clarification can be predicted to achieve a long-term
average TSS effluent concentration of 25 mg/1. Option 2 BODjS
effluent concentrations have been estimated by assuming that a
certain percentage of the BPT BOD5_ is soluble (i.e., not
removable by CAC) and the remaining BOD5_ will be removed in
direct proportion to TSS removal. Based on available
information, EPA has estimated the soluble portion of BPT final
effluent BOD5_ to be 23 percent. (32) Table 111-34 contains a
summary of the estimated effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations for
Option 2. Long-term average loads are calculated from the long-
term average concentrations and BCT Option 2 flow, and are
presented in Table 111-35.
For the remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary
treatment is the technology basis of BPT, the Option 2 technology
is BPT technology plus the addition of biological treatment. The
predicted final effluent BOD5_ concentration for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory is based on the equation
relating BOD5_ secondary influent concentration to BOD5_ final
effluent concentration (see the Phase II Development Document,
reference number 9, page 402).
The long-term average final effluent BOD5_ concentration for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory was transferred to the
remaining nonintegrated subcategories where biological treatment
is the technology basis of BCT Option 2. Similarly, the long-
term average final effluent TSS concentration was developed using
the relationship between influent BOD5_ concentration and final
effluent TSS concentration discussed previously in this section.
The long-term average BOD5_ and TSS concentrations determined by
application of this methodology are 17.0 mg/1 and 39.5 mg/1.
BOD!5 and TSS loads are calculated from these long-term average
concentrations and BCT Option 2 flow.
82
-------
TABLE IIi-34
BCT OPTION 2
ALUM DOSAGE AND LONG-TERM AVERAGE
FINAL EFFLUENT BODS AND TSS CONCENTRATIONS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood TMP
Groundwood CMN
Groundwood Fine
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating
o Noncorrugating
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builder's Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-F&NW
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Alum
Dosage
(mg/1)
300
300
300
300
300
300
700
700
700.
700
700
700
700
—
150
150
150
150 :'
—
150
700
700
150
150
150
150 ,
—
—
--
—
*"**
• Flow
(kgal/t)
55
41
35
30
12
12
10
.1
.6
.4
.9
,6
.6
.3
14.0
66
66
66
72
*
--
23
21
24
24
—
25
7
7
21
14
15
42
22
48
76
59
12
.0
.0
.0
.4
.8
.9
.4
.4
•2
.2
.2
.1
.4
.2
.3
.9
.7
.9
.9
.9
BODS
(mg/1)
18
15
17
14
16
20
29
21
21
22
24
30
#
—
16
16
26
26
--
24
26
20
11
25
23
20
17
17
17
17
17
.9
.6
.0 •-.
.6
.1
.3
.3
.7
.3
.7
.6
.1
.2
.2
.3
.3
.0
.3
.6
.5
.5
.1
.3
TSS
(mg/1)
25
• 25
25
25
25
25
. 25
25
25
25
25
25
25
—
25
25
25
25
--
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
39
39
39
39
39
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Subcategories. Flow and BODS vary with the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site.
83
-------
TABLE 111-35
BCT OPTION 2
LONG-TERM AVERAGE DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
BOD.5.
TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kl/kkg (kgal/t) . Kg/kkg (Ib/t)
k8/kkB (Ib/t)
229.9
173.6
147.7
128.9
52.6
52.6
43.0
275
275
275
302.1
99.3
91.4
101.8
101.8
30.0
30.0
88.1
60.1
63.4
176.5
95.6
203.2
320.9
250.0
53.8
(55.1)
(41/6)
(35.4)
(30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
58.4 (14.0)
(66 .-0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72.4)
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
105.2 (25.2)
(7.2)
(7.2)
(21.1)
(14.4)
'(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76,9)
(59.9)
(•12.9)
4.3
2.7
2.5
1.9
0.8
1.1
1.3
1.3
5.9
6.2
6.8
9.1
1.6
1.5
2.7
2.7
2.5
0.8
0.6
1.0
1.5
1.5
3.6
1.6
3.5
.5.5
4.2
0.9
(8.7)
(5.4)
(5.0)
(3.*)
(1.7)
(2.1)
(2,5)
(2.5)
(11.7)
(12.5)
(13.5)
(18.2)
(3.2)
(3.0)
(5.4)
(5.4)
(5.0)
(1-6)
(1.2)
(2.0)
(3.1)
(2.9)
(7.2)
(3.2)
(6.9)
(10.9)
(8.5)
(1.8)
5.7
4.3
3.7
3.2
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.5
6.9
6.9
6.9
7.5
2.5
2.3
2.5
2.5
0.8
0.8
2.2
1.5
1.6
4.4
3.8
8.0
12.7
9.9
2.1
(11.5)
(8.7)
(7.4)
(6.4)
(2.6)
(2.6)
(2.1)
(2.9)
(13.8)
(13.8)
(13.8)
(15.1)
(5.0)
(4.6)
(5.1)
(5.1)
2.6 (5.3)
(1.5)
U;5)
(4.4)
(3.0)
(3.2)
(8.8)
(7.5)
(16.0)
(25.3)
(19.7)
(4.2)
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
3 BCT varies with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product. These equations can be
used to obtain annual average effluent characteristics! for Papergrade Sulfite mills:
Flow (kl/kkg) = 41.93 + 1.890x
BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 0.0803 (O.lSlx + 2.95) [(10.05 + 0.453x)/(0.266x + 4.45)
1»^f<3 J
TSS (kg/kkg) = 0.1043 (10.05 + 0.453x)
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
84
-------
BCT Option 2 annual average effluent characteristics are
presented for each subcategory in Table II3>35. Attainment of
these levels is discussed in the next section.
OPTION 3_
BCT Option 3 technology is defined as BPT technology and the
application of production process controls to reduce waste
effluents (BCT Option 1) plus the addition of CAC for all
integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory (subcategories for which
the technology basis of BPT is biological treatment). Option 3
is based on the addition of solids-contact clarifier(s) using
alum as a coagulant and polymer as a flocculant aid. For the
remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary
treatment was the technology basis of BPT, final effluent levels
are based on the application of BCT Option 1 plus the addition of
biological treatment. The production process controls available
for application in each subcategory for RWL reduction are
presented in Tables III-l through III-3. Annual average final
effluent levels were developed as described above for BCT Option
2 using the BCT Option 1 flows and are presented in Table 111-36.
Attainment of BCT Options 2!. and 3_
There are two mills (030034 and 080027) using full scale CAC
technology in the subcategories for which CAC is the technology
basis for BCT Options 2 and 3, for which BCT Options 2 and 3
effluent characteristics can be determined. As shown in Table
111-37, both mills have long-term average final effluent BOD5_ and
TSS effluent levels less than their respective BCT Option 2 BOD5_
and TSS effluent characteristics. One of these mills (080027)
also attains BCT Option 3 BOD_5 and TSS effluent characteristics.
There are no other mills employing tertiary CAC technologies for
which BCT effluent levels have been developed.
The BCT Option 2 technology basis for mills in the nonintegrated-
tissue papers, nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-
filter and nonwoven papers and nonintegrated paperboard
subcategories is the BPT technology basis for these subcategories
plus the addition of biological treatment. The BCT Option 3
technology basis is the same as the Option 2 technology basis
plus the addition of the BCT Option 1 process controls specific
to these subcategories. As shown in Table 111-38, each
subcategory in this segment has at least one mill which now
employs biological treatment. BCT Option 2 levels are attained
at 19 of the 33 mills for which there are data, and BCT Option 3
is attained at 15 of the 33 mills.
OPTION 4_
BCT Option 4 effluent levels are generally based on actual
effluent data. This approach is in contrast to the other BCT
options for which limitations are based on the predicted
85
-------
TABLE 111-36
BCT OPTION 3
LONG-TERM AVERAGE DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
BODS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Groundwood-Therrao-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o F,ine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastcpaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furni:
Wastepaper-Molded Products
kl/kkg
210.7
154.8
123.9
99.7
40.5
48.0
30.5
48.0
233.7
233.7
233.7
260.4
r 3\
—
70.1
64.3
44.2
52.2
--
68.0
13.4
sh!3.4
23.8
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 11.3
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegra ted-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Honintegrated-Tissue Papers
39.2
130.2
79.7
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 159.4
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
278.8
198.2
46.7
(kgal/t)
(50.0)
(37.1)
(29.7)
(23.9)
(9.7)
(11.5)
(7.3)
(11.5)
(56.0)
(56.0)
(56.0) •
(62.4)
(3\
—
(16.8)
(15.4)
(10.6)
(12.5)
--
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.4)
(31.2)
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11.2)
kfi/kkR
4.0
2.4
2.1
1.5
0.7
1.0
0.9
1.0 :
5.0[4.7)
5.3(4.7)
5.7(5.0]
7.9(6.2)
(3 \
—
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.4
--
1.6
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.9
2.6
1.3
2.6
4.5
3.2
0.8
(Ib/t)
(7.9)
(4.8)
(4.2)
(2.9i
(1-3)
(1.9)
(1.8)
(2.1)
(9.9(9.4))
(10.6(9.4))
(11.5(10.0))
( 3}
—
(2.3)
(2.1)
(2.3)
(2.7)
(3.3)
(0.7)
(0.5)
(0.5)
(0.6)
(1.8)
(5.3)
(2.6)
(5.2)
(9.1)
(6.5)
(1.5)
kR/kkR
5.2
3.9
3.1
2.5
1.0
1.2
0.8
1.2
5.8
5.8
5.8
6.5
C ^ )
— -
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.3
1.7
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.3
1,0
3.3
3.1
6.2
10.8
7.7
1.8
(Ib/t)
(10.4)
(7.7)
(6.2)
(5.0)
(2.0)
(2.4)
(1.5)
(2.4)
(11.7)
(11.7)
(11.7)
(13.1)
C )
—
(3.5)
(3.2)
(2.2)
(2.6)
""_
(3.4)
(0.7)
(0.7)
(1.2)
(0.6)
(2.0)
(6.5)
(6.2)
(12.3)
(21.6)
(15.3)
(3.6)
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
3 The expected lower BOD5_ discharge chracteristics for mills in this subcategory that employ
MgO as a base (and for which, consequently, neutralization of spent sulfite liquor is a
BCT Options 1 and 3 process control) have been conservatively set equal to the BCT
Option 3 BODS effluent characteristics for mills that do not employ MgO.
BCT varies with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product. These equations can be
used to obtain annual average effluent characteristics for Papergrade Sulfite mills:
Flow (kl/kkg) = 34.64 + 1.56lx
BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 0.0803 (O.l61x + 2.95) (8.3 + 0.374x) [I/ (0.266x + 4.45)
+ 1.43/(10.05 + 0.453x)]
TSS (kg/kkg) * 0.1043 (8.3 + 0.374x)
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
86
-------
p.
en
i
)B4
Cl]
ea
S
<
x en
o u
I-l H*
§S
f» as
*•* £•
1 5
u 5
a 5
en z
"* !=
^ CM
^* cri
33
U X
2 CM
Ufl
S'
H M
as en
£§
)•*
bl t-
8§
*" &
£
z
en «
u <
H ii
»•*
CM
en
r1
41
a
<
a
b
H
o;
e
o
•£
tn
e
a
£
°
0
A
^^
«
•*
•3
-*
ffl
e
tm.
^
*•*
QC
Jt
"5
•J
m
1
01
a
b
4)
•*
B
b
W
1
aa
s
o
e
o
o
o
a
J
OO
JC
•^
«
•*
^
a
e
0
o
$*
m
*^
a
c
a
•*>,
a
~"
c
3
tM
w
a
e
CM
4J
•^
£
^
a
j
*N
^f
>
b
- o
00
^
<.
V,
32
Ul O
«tf O4
tf^ O
C\ CM
>S >3
o ^o
ffl »"*
m *+
c^ <^
•** %-*
^ %c
« 0
S aa
O4 ^*
**-"• ^^
• •
— o
^ ^
m
*M PM
i^N • ^\
CM C4
0 00
^ N«/
O 9
• •
"" ' °
1
41
(0 • ^ G9
b is b
1 4> , b 41
u a> ao a.
C <0 4) 19
•* O> «J CU
-* e
« 41 -M 41
MS e s
< CM Z CM
<• P*
-------
60 O
d -rl
•H 4J
d .
•H O
•H 4->
2 <
IS
o w
CM >—'
d rH
60 O 41
d 'rl ^
•H 4-1 0)
d Pirn1
W -rl O
•H 4-> H W
•H 4-> CJ •
y* ^fl PQ p4
60
«
d • W
U -rl pq i-H
r-4 « 0)
rH 4J EH >
•H 4-> PH
O U 01
^ >.
H W
W
•P U
o]
W rH
i-H -H 03
rH OS 4->
2
3
CO
4J
(8
60
(U
4J
d
•H
d
o
60
•H
1
•o
O
3
d
o
"O
c
a)
erboard
PI
«3
1
IU
4->
IS
\i
60
01
rj
•H
d
O
(U
3
0)
•iH
h
II
W
88
-------
performance of specific technologies.
EPA has generally defined BCT Option 4 to include the application
of additional end-of-pipe treatment to BPT RWLs. The BCT Option 4
methodology, as discussed below, differs for the paperboard from
wastepapeir, tissue from wastepaper, wastepaper-molded products,
and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories. Except for
these four subcategories, the BCT Option 4 RWLs are identical to
the BPT RWLs and are presented in Table 111-39. Because
sufficient data are not available to establish pollutant removals
and associated costs of removal, BCT Option 4 has been reserved
for the groundwood TMP subcategory and the newsprint sector of
the deink subcategory.
After the BCT Option 4 effluent levels were determined, the
Agency identified appropriate technologies that could achieve
them. The technologies for achieving Option 4 effluent levels
vary depending on the type of treatment systems that are used at
mills in each subcategory. Treatment systems commonly used at
mills in the integrated segment, the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory, and the fine and tissue papers sectors of the deink
subcategory (where BPT has been identified as biological
treatment) include aerated stabilization basin (ASB) systems,
activated sludge systems, and oxidation ponds. Design
characteristics for the various treatment types were reviewed and
compared with those of best performers. Based on this review,
feasible upgrade schemes for each treatment type have been
identified and used in the development of cost estimates
presented in Section IV. Brief descriptions of the upgrade
schemes that are the basis of cost estimates are presented below.
ASB treatment systems can be upgraded through the addition of
spill prevention and control systems, by increasing aeration
capacity, and by providing additional settling capacity. ASB
systems located in colder climates can be converted to the
extended aeration activated sludge process.
Activated sludge systems can be. upgraded through the addition of
spill prevention and control systems, by providing equalization,
by increasing the capacity of aeration basins (providing for
operation in the contact stabilization mode), and by increasing
the size of clarification and sludge handling equipment.
Oxidation ponds are upgraded through the addition of rapid sand
filtration to remove algae that can contribute to the discharge
of high levels of suspended solids.
At mills in the nonintegrated subcategories .. (except for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory), where BPT effluent
limitations are based on primary treatment, the technology basis
of BCT Option 4 is primary clarification. Design criteria, were
established that reflect attainment of BCT Option 4 effluent
levels by treating the-BPT RWLs for these subcategories with end-
of-pipe treatment. The primary clarification system includes
chemical coagulant addition and additional sludge handling
89
-------
TABLE 111-39
BCT OPTION 4
LONG-TERM AVERAGE RAW WASTE LOADS
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
229.9
173.6
147.7
128.9
52.6
52.6
43.0
58.4
275.4
275.4
275.4
302.1
Papergrade Sulfite2 185.6-227.3
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
—
99.3
91.4
101.8
101.8
—
68.0
13.4
13.4
23.8
11.3
63.4
176.5
95.6
203.2
320.9
250.0
53.8
(55.1)
(41.6)
(35.4)
(30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
(14.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72.4)
(44.5-54.5)
—
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
__
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
BODS
TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t) ks/kkg
66.5
38.0
38.4
33.6
16.9
23.7
25.2
19.4
137.0
156.0
181.5
266.4
84-139.5
—
17.4
16.7
90.0
90.0
—
9.7
23.0
11.3
5.5
7.4
10.8
22.9
11.5*
21.7
21.7
12.2
10.4
(133.0)
(75.9)
(76.7)
(67.2)
(33.8)
(47.4)
(50.4)
(38.8)
(274.0)
(312.0)
(363.0)
(532.8)
(168-279)
—
(34.8) .
(33.3)
(180.0)
(180.0)
--
(19.3)
(46.0)
(22.5)
(10.9)
(14.8)
(21.5)
(45.8)
(22.9)
(43.3)
(43.3)
(24.3)
(20.8)
113.0
45.0
66.5
75.0
21. -9
21.9
12.3
20.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
90.0
— "•
48.5
52.5
202.5
202.5
— "•
110.5
11.0
11.0
14.8
35.0
30.8
55.2
34.7
63.4
63-4
27.4
36.9
(lb/t)
(226.0)
(90.0)
(133.0)
(150.0)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(24.6)
(41.0)
(185.0)
(185..0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(180.0)
~~
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
__
(221.0)
(21.9)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(70.0)
(61.6)
(110.4)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.7)
(73.7)
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
z Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
90
-------
capability.
At the .mills in the remaining subcategories (paperboard from
wastepaper, tissue from wastepaper, wastepaper-molded products,
and builders' paper and roofing felt), extensive use is made of
production process controls to reduce wastewater discharge. BCT
Option 4 for these subcategories includes the application of
production process- controls and the biological treatment systems
which formed the basis of BPT. Option 4 is identical to BCT
Option 1, and the end-of-pipe biological treatment systems are
the same as those which form the basis of BPT effluent
limitations for these subcategories. Therefore, BCT Option 1 and
4 final effluent loads are lower than BPT effluent limitations
because after implementation of flow and BODj> RWL reducing in-
plant production process controls, the detention time of the
biological treatment system has been increased and the effective
BODji and TSS influent loads are reduced.
To determine the effluent levels and appropriate technologies of
BCT Option 4, "best performing" mills were identified; attainable
pollutant reductions were determined through a review of
discharge monitoring reports (DMR) and long-term conventional
pollutant data from the industry. This information was obtained
as a result of the verification and supplemental data request
programs and the subsequent data requests associated with the
1981 proposal and the 1982 promulgation of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry regulations. These data are summarized in
Tables 111-36 through 111-57.
The final effluent levels characteristic of the best performing
mills in a subcategory form the basis of BCT Option 4 BODj^ and
TSS discharge characteristics for that subcategory. EPA has
generally defined best performing mills as mills where 1) both
the long-term average BODjj and TSS effluent loads are equal to or
less than the long-term average BOD!5 and TSS BPT effluent levels
and 2) the end-of-pipe technology is of a type similar to that
which forms the basis of BPT. Generally, long-term average final
effluent BOD5_ and TSS discharges per kkg (ton) of product
attained at best performing mills were averaged; corresponding
concentrations of BODJ5 were then determined at BPT flow. In
cases where BCT Option 4 long-term average BODS^ effluent
concentrations corresponding to BPT flow were less than 15 mg/1,
the long-term average BOD_5 concentration was revised upward to 15
mg/1. The Agency,believes that 15 mg/1 is a realistic estimate
of the lowest attainable long-term average BOD5_ concentration
'that biological treatment can achieve in treating pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry wastewaters.
The methodology to determine BCT Option 4 BODj[ and ; TSSy final
effluent characteristics was modified slightly for mills in the
dissolving kraft, alkaline-fine papers (including the fine
bleached kraft and soda subcategories), papergrade sulfite (drum
wash and blow pit) subcategories, and the fine papers and tissue
papers sectors of 'the deink subcategory. BPT effluent
limitations for these subcategories were based on data
91
-------
representative of facilities that only manufacture products
characteristic of each specific subcategory. However, many mills
in these subcategories manufacture some products typical of other
subcategories. BPT raw waste loads and final effluent
characteristics for mills of this type can be determined by
multiplying the guidelines for each appropriate subcategory by
the quantity of product produced at the mill typical of that
subcategory, and then summing over all subcategories. BPT
effluent characteristics or RWLs determined by this method are
referred to as prorated BPT effluent characteristics or prorated
BPT RWLs. BCT Option 4 BOD5_ and TSS long-term final effluent
characteristics for each of these subcategories were determined
by calculating the prorated BPT BOD5 and TSS final effluent
characteristics for each mill. The facilities were identified
that attained both BODS and TSS final effluent levels lower than
their respective prorated BPT BODjJ and TSS effluent
characteristics. The percent reduction of final effluent Ipng-
term average BODj[ below prorated BPT BODI5 was determined for each
best performer as follows:
percent reduction = 100 x (prorated BPT FE BOD5 - FE BOD5),
prorated BPT FE BOD5_
where FE = final effluent.
The percent reductions of BOD5_ for all best performers in the
subcategory were averaged. The subcategory BCT Option 4 final
effluent BOD5 was then found by decreasing the subcategory BPT
final effluent BODJ5 by the average percent reduction
characteristic of the subcategory, as follows:
BCT Option 4 FE BODS^ = BPT FE BOD5^ x (1 - average percent reduction)
The same procedure was followed to determine the BCT Option 4
final effluent TSS levels. BCT Option 4 flow is equal to BPT
flow.
The subcategory BCT Option 4 final effluent BODJ5 and TSS
characteristics, as determined above, are representative of mills-
which manufacture only products typical of their subcategory and
do not require proration.
A description of the specific procedure used to establish BCT
Option 4 effluent characteristics for each subcategory follows.
In some instances, EPA slightly modified the approach in
determining "best performers."
Dissolving Kraft - The dissolving kraft subcategory is comprised
of three mills, all of .which produce dissolving kraft pulp and 28
to 51 percent bleached, kraft market pulp (see Table 111-40).
Table 111-40 presents available final effluent long-term average
92
-------
•«
31
to
£
o 2
p S
*w
O
1) 3
ft O
e rt
S
« S
-
^
3
Hri 03
bl M
s
•rt
'<;
H S
is
oil
fog
«s
e
*" 4J S
M b H
S Si
eu
K
s)5
b J
> £
"*
b 6
01 C
e *
g
n 4.
H^
TS
4J 1
« J
b J
O •»
b e
H4 SB 0. J
>H 65 EH
PS
< 0 C3
" 2
S rt
0 M
w a
a *J
e
V
3
as
n §!
a
a
••4
«4
e
•? -o
Ml B J
U O i
-»
S-l''
R) -I
U "•
Ic
e
>x "
1-
u
-i a E'Hca x
•O'O 1*401 bu B
M tM CM fc4lM> 41 « 1- 4J H H
CO «i O 4J CL. O4
o o o • o> H M «
4J E B 4J
y -H
>2 J5 i -H
3 41 rH
d x u
n i 4->
E <-v oo e
4J cm
n IH o 3
4J « IT-I 1-1 -
u b *w
3 J£ Is' (4-1
•0 '"41
O -0 H
CU\C M £ '
o eo
e 4t o> *o
b £l B 4J
4) b n
1*4 -O O b
1*4 4) b O
X 0
O 4J
b O
4) O O i-4
com — B
B 3
W H II O
d cu oi
41 pa H
u pa o
a. -o e
^ 01 B
c a 4j j=
O rH 15 4J
3 b
13 a, o ca
ot b w
U 4J CU 01
(Q *4-l rH
b B 41
H C KJ inl
04 -H u a •
en > 41 o
t-4 rH 03
. -o o
01 W U *O
4-1 M s e
a -H 41 n
b a* 41 «
CU ^s CU H
3 S vi
93
-------
data. BPT final effluent limits for this subcategory are
representative of mills which manufacture 100 percent dissolving
kraft pulp. Thus, it is necessary to prorate BPT effluent levels
for these mills between dissolving kraft and market bleached
kraft BPT effluent levels.
Since BPT levels for mills in this subcategory are determined by
proration, the modified methodology, as described above, was used
to develop BCT Option 4 BODji and TSS effluent levels. Prorated
BPT BODI5 and TSS limitations were calculated for each mill, and
are presented in Table 111-40. Prorated BPT effluent limitations
are being attained at mill 032002. BOD5_ and TSS effluent levels
at this mill are 33.3 percent and 40.9 percent less than prorated
BPT BODJ5 and TSS effluent levels, respectively. Therefore, BCT
Option 4 effluent levels (representative of mills which produce
100 percent dissolving kraft pulp) are 33.3 percent and 40.9
percent less than the BPT BOD5_ and TSS effluent levels,
respectively, for the dissolving kraft subcategory. BCT Option 4
flow and final effluent BODjj and TSS levels for the dissolving
kraft subcategory are 229.9 kl/kkg (55.1 kgal/t), 4.6 kg/kkg (9.2
Ib/t) and 6.5 kg/kkg (13.1 Ib/t), respectively.
Market Bleached Kraft - As illustrated in Table
111-41, the
methodology was used to calculate BCT Option 4 effluent
Mills 030028,
general
levels for the market bleached kraft subcategory.
030030, 030031, 666666, 777777, and 900074 are best performers in
this subcategory and were used to determine long-term average
final effluent levels. In addition to these mills, the
integrated-miscellaneous group mill 030011 was included in the
calculation. At this mill, where prorated BPT effluent levels
are being attained, bleached kraft pulp is produced, a
significant portion 'of which is market pulp. The approach used
to include data for this mill involved comparing BODj^ and TSS
effluent levels to BPT effluent levels determined by prorating
effluent levels from appropriate subcategories. The percentage
reductions attained at mill 030011 were then applied to market
bleached kraft BPT effluent levels. BOD5_ and TSS effluent levels
for mill 030011 are 19.5 percent and 59.2 percent below prorated
Using characteristics from the seven "best
the resulting BCT Option 4 flow and final
_ TSS levels for the market bleached kraft
subcategory are 173.6 kl/kkg (41.6 kgal/t), 3.3 kg/kkg (6.6 Ib/t)
and 5.7 kg/kkg (11.4 Ib/t), respectively.
BPT effluent levels
performing mills",
effluent BODS and
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - As
illustrated in Table 111-42, the general methodology was used to
calculate BCT Option 4 effluent characteristics for the BCT
bleached kraft subcategory. Mills 030010, 030022, 030032 are
best performers and were used to determine long-term average
final effluent levels. In addition to these mills, mills 030036
and 030044 were included in the calculation. At these
integrated-miscellaneous group mills where BPT effluent levels
are being • attained, bleached kraft pulp is produced, a
significant portion of which is used to manufacture paperboard,
coarse papers, or tissue papers. The approach used to include
94
-------
a 4J
*j ra
en a
C
•H' O)
ta £-'
01
i-l .0
3 I
£ 55
ocoincor-»ocom\or-
O
00
O
c\
CLi CO
flQ CO
c *o
) -H G
0 C CO
w -H
i-i « ml
r-i *j a
01
00 «-H
e
U 01
oi .a
a.
o *w
•* oi
*J
U OI
V 3
iJ -O
a oi
0, O
a,T3
ni B o
•rt O O
1* £3 60
a. oi
E J-> ^
O S ID
U 01 U
3 A
•o e
01 01 U
a u o
BS CO TJ CO
3 01
O O C u-ll
4J 01 -H Q
ceo
p-l CO U fl3
ffl -H 01
3 rt *J H
O" 0) 01 CU
01 O 13 09
CO
W •* CO O
o. E a 4J
S -o tj
CO 01 H 01
j; i> Hi .H
JJ CO 03 ^
u o,
co wo o.
CO 9J U CO
oi a a
<-> s a c
•H J-l 0»
01 O J3
CO CO CU
a1"
0)
rH -H -O
-H *J 4)
S o e •
3 >H c
co -o
-------
B
O
Z
S3
4J a
II rH 4J S
Oj <« 1) > >H 4J O
a.
o
O to
00 H
O. B i-l
r,. m m
a 3 >
i-H 11
•oH,=
01 -a B
S1
w
?* 2 °.
t-4 a *J
u
J3 H TJ
3 Ot 4)
O f-H (U ft
jJ -H *J «
i-H U C C
3 3 W J3 O
O1 O CU *J J5
OJ 0) W
C 4)
U (Q • U U
O rH X 4» i-H
r-( f—( a 4)
CUV >
CO U > *O OJ
.C W -H 0) iH
4J -H *J C!
S U -i-l 4J
W 0) "3 C
U *O ft -P 0)
at at M jj 3
01
(0
00 UH
00 * C 0)
to 0) C -H
jj O 0)
-------
data for these mills involved comparing BOD5_ and TSS effluent
levels to BPT effluent levels determined by prorating effluent
levels from appropriate subcategories. The percentage reductions
attained at these two mills were then applied to the BCT bleached
kraft BPT limitations. Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for
mill 030036 are 32.2 and 4.7 percent below prorated BPT
limitations, and effluent characteristics for mill 030044 are
68.0 and 40.1 percent below prorated BPT effluent levels. The
resulting BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS
levels for the BCT bleached kraft subcategory are 147.7 kl/kkg
(35.4 kgal/t), 2.6 kg/kkg (5.2 Ib/t) and 4.3 kg/kkg (8.6 Ib/t),
respectively.
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) -
Mills in the alkaline-fine paper subcategory manufacture fine
papers and often a small amount of market bleached kraft pulp,
primarily from a furnish consisting.of bleached kraft (or soda)
pulp and frequently some purchased pulp. Four mills in this
subcategory also manufacture small amounts of groundwood pulp
which is combined with alkaline pulp to produce groundwood-fine
papers.
BPT final effluent levels for this subcategory are representative
of mills which manufacture only fine papers from alkaline or soda
pulp, 100 percent of which is manufactured on-site. Thus, it is
necessary to prorate BPT effluent levels for mills in this
subcategory between effluent levels for alkaline fine papers and
other appropriate subcategories including market bleached kraft,
groundwood-fine papers, and nonintegrated-fine papers.
Since BPT effluent levels for mills in this subcategory are
determined by proration, the modified methodology described above
was used to develop BCT Option 4 BODEi and TSS effluent levels.
Prorated BPT levels were calculated for each mill and are
presented with available long-term average effluent wastewater
data in Table 111-43. Prorated BPT effluent levels for BOD5_ and
TSS are being attained at mills 030020, 030027, 030034, 030046,
and 030052. Mill 030034, which employs tertiary chemically
assisted clarification, is not included in the averages since
this technology is not considered similar to the BPT technology
basis. •
However, mills 030011 and 030044 were included in the
calculations. At these integrated-miscellaneous group mills,
where prorated BPT levels are being attained, bleached kraft pulp
is produced, a significant portion of which is used to produce
fine papers.
The percent reduction in BOD5_ and TSS below prorated BPT BOD5_ and
TSS effluent levels for each of these mills is presented in Table
111-43. The average of the percent reductions below prorated BPT
effluent levels are .42.8 percent and 51.0 percent, 'respectively
for BOD5_. and TSS.. Thus, BCT Option 4 effluent levels
(representative of mills which produce only fine papers from
alkaline or soda pulp produced on-site) for BOD5_ and TSS .are. .42.8
97
-------
and 51.0 percent less than BPT long-term average effluent levels
for the alkaline-fine papers grouping of subcategories. The BCT
Option 4 TSS final effluent level is shown in Table 111-43.
However, upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_
corresponding to the BPT flow for the fine bleached kraft
subcategory, EPA determined that the resulting BOD5_ effluent
concentration was below 15 mg/1. Thus, the BCT Option 4 BOD5_
effluent concentration was set equal to 15 mg/1 and the effluent
level was revised correspondingly. The resulting Option 4 BOD5_
effluent characteristic is shown in Table 111-43. BCT Option 4
flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the alkaline-fine
papers subcategory are 128.9 kl/kkg (30.9 .kgal/t), 1.9 kg/kkg
(3.9 Ib/t) and 3.2 kg/kkg (6.4 Ib/t), respectively.
Unbleached Kraft - As discussed previously, EPA has established
twosectors of this subcategory: (a) the linerboard sector and
(b) the bag and other products sector. EPA's review of the BPT
final effluent levels for the unbleached kraft subcategory
indicate that the BPT final effluent BOD5_ concentration is
considerably higher for the linerboard sector than for other
subcategories with comparable raw waste BOD5_ and underestimates
the pollutant reduction capability in this sector. Therefore, to
determine a more realistic set of best performing mills in the
linerboard sector the BPT final effluent BOD5_ concentration was
revised downward using the BPT raw waste BOD5_ concentration and
the relationship between BOD5_ influent concentration and effluent
concentration presented here previously and in the December 1976
development document supporting the January 1977 Phase II BPT
regulations (see reference 9, page 402). Using this methdology,
the adjusted final effluent BOD5_ long-term average comparison
level is 1.6 kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t).
The general methodology was then followed for the linerboard
sector using the comparison level BOD5_ as illustrated in Table
111-44. The comparison level final effluent BOD5_ and BPT final
effluent TSS levels for mills in this sector are attained at
mills 010002, 010019, 010020, 010025, 010040, and 010046. Data
for mills with oxidation ponds (010020, 010025, and 010046) were
excluded from the calculation. Mill 010008 was included in the
calculation. Substantial quantities of both linerboard and bag
and other products are manufactured at this mill where prorated
comparison level final effluent BOD5_ and BPT final effluent TSS
levels (the same for both sectors) are being attained. The
approach used to include data for mill 010008 involved comparing
the mill's BOD5_ effluent loading to the comparison level
determined by prorating the BOD5_ comparison levels for the two
sectors. The percent reduction below the prorated comparison
level (40.1 percent) was then applied to the comparison level for
the linerboard sector to obtain the long-term average final
effluent BODS level shown with the linerboard data [0.97 kg/kkg
(1.93 Ib/t)]. No adjustment to the final effluent TSS was
required because the TSS comparison levels are equal to BPT final
effluent TSS levels and are the same for both sectors.
98
-------
*J 0) <•-•
W Li E-
01 o n-
I
w re f-
to t* cu
f O CO
2|^
Oil (9
cooooooooocv^eoOf^-r-eooooooogo
• o o o *T n
\o \o
as
-; *j w 5
oooooooooooooo'oo
oooooooooooooooo otret
m QO
CO 9%
t- ~
§
U
n
u
01
ml
94 0
i O
§ _".
• - C jj
•*• 3
S- *» •->
0. Q.-C
ea o <
X
n
01
re
«
C —
00
Of OI
e *j
-H U
X. 3
n w
Li 01
O ±J
f*« W
Cb O.
S3 O
II Q.
Q
OT Irf
S|
Si 0
0 u
m o
O M
u e
v. i
O *J
IM W
'E!
ffi
Ll
•o re
0) — <
B 'E
• £»
cu +
* *J
— re
.e -n
U 01
n .c
4J V
re «-(
01 W
y 01
*J Ll
u a
,*2
re
E X
U U4
3 re
1Z
Li
*J JS
C U
oi m
W 01
01 «-*
•o v
• tM Lt
Of
00 Li
re o
Is
v ta
u >_«
a.
c
O '•"
-o £
O> 0)
to &.
re «-
* o.
ta oi
£"-
m oi
£
0) ^-i
re -K
LI n
o
£ S
2
si
CQ
•b
re
Li
c
Li
a.
^4,
00
CO
Li
n
i
i
60
e
o
1
•s
4J
m
Li
£
*S
X
o
0
II
CO
•o
£
C
re
w
K
0)
""*
C
u
Oj
£
u
>
01
4J '
e
0>
3
iw
01
£
CQ
•o
V
s
0
Li
a.
o
n
3
cr
0)
o
e
re
to
to
o>
o
re
ml
c
s
e
CO
en
*""
u
c
o
4J
• •4
Ll
re
u
*7
0)
U
••4
n
re
£
re
u
1
u
re
• *J
V
o
c.
E '
'E
to
•J
u
re
Jj
Si
a
01
R
Oi
£
c
•0
•e
o
•o
^
o
c
°"
•o
c
"
" ^
o
o
o
CO
E
J
re
c
o
U '
3
O
c.
0)
**
0 .
*J
1
0!
o
' ,
01
re
E
0
Ll
a.
ra
01
u
••J
Li
C.
E
O .
tfl
'i.
n
c.
c
***
01
•i
V)
—
E
3
O
01
c
ts
0)
u
n
E
—
o>
re
L.
6C
*»
C >.
"" "o!
Oi >
Li —
n «j
to 01
^H a,
E Li
2
99
-------
u
0>
,0
is
01 01
a M
1-1 I?
.
U.H
CO CO iH CO r—C
OOr-IOOOOOrHO O.O O O O O
ooofoovi-tvovoi-i^-coincovoco^cn
in co r-t 01 c*j o • c*jinen\or-.)VOCg•
r-H r-4 CO rH i
§
co n
oooooooooooooooo
H <
p-< I
pa
ml <
u ra >
> 4J a 01
-------
(
r-1
0)
0)
3 £
3 U
t-4 CO
3 >
Is
-H S
0
|
(Q
•J
(Q
3
Ul
fi
*j
M
a
H
o
Jj
1
3
4J
CO
-P
CO
!n
V
IT
1
^
(X
1™
•r
r
CO
H
1
5
o
ft
» « m •» to **
o ON in o\ ON in CM cv • o in AM
cMi-ieSf-fr-tesj^H FH cj ^ "O
w g
a , ?
73 ^*
2 S
^SSSSSSS « "S
"ojcMin-ffNooeMin CM o> c
3 C3CCC5C C E JS 3
^•vom^coONO m g
o! cs. oo -^ co m -o co CM olo *-t
^ U^2N°N°'*£j— 1 *" ' ^*H Q
O W « *0 *•*
pH O C « «
•O 01 « -H ft *J
a /-s x-s > >H cso
CQ JD o 4) ij -HO:
W X ^-N X P^ (L O *J 'C
01 cQfljeQ(Q*J{3 *J inl t*
a. ^-^ s_, ec Q o> 2^3 x
oa ooooooo paw ca >J < r: ra x:
CM CM ON r* •*
CM -» en en CM
CM CM ON f- -^
CM ** en en CM
CM CM en r- -»
CM * •*
en en e>j en in
O OO CM -31 ON
CM ON O NO »-*
•^ en CM -» en
*-" o O en vfi
CM CM i-« CM i-« .
/-^ ^N *— V /— V r^
in r*» r*» p^ oo
en o en en r*
in en o o en
•^ in en oo m
•^ -^ en "^ r*
so in "7 oo in •
in NO co *7 ^
o o o en *3-
o o o.o o
o o o o o
o o o o o
•o c
0) O
4J -H C
fl) jJ -H
^ o ra
o 3 •*•*
JJ -O ,fl
3 u mi4J
•o u ca
O » O K
b CQ O
ft U 4J
r-( 4J 0
0) > 01 W
JS 0) 3
O »W 0
C tH 3
t-4 CM O
0) flj -H 4J ti
> ^ e ft
01 60 CO 0)
1-5 « ft U .C
,0 e f u
C * O 0) flJ
O *O 0) U ft 0)
w c us
H o *J ml oi *w
tj .ft a J3 o
(B T3 O H
cu e e pa ^
E O co 01
5-H 0) * >
4J T3 JS *•— <• 0)
Cfl %J £H (0 pH
SIT3 « ^
••-» O OS
O x ja • -u o
(33 O S-i W U W
0) 4J 0) -H
o» e c u w u
JS ffl *H 3 CO
4J i-H *O 4J ft;
U ODE
O 0) 01 fc« 3 O
3 4J O
rH i-H IH h inl
CO U J5 01 ft O
3 d -U J3 O
O» -H O -U JS 03
01 -Q O *J
4J O 0)
U C C 5* .Q J3
O
jj 01 "O
U M 3 *O 41 *O
*J p-t C E (1) « in r-4 •
ffl flj CO U 41 C
H P*. O > 3
O 0> D *J 01 0
*j .c g u y r-( x:
4J U U 01 W
i— I O U ui C
BJ e *w jj o»
3 -H lJ 3 4J U fi
O1 0) *J U -H 01
01 TJ ft U 3 ^ >
0) CIS *O CO 0)
Ui T3 *J m O ft i-4
O 3 w 3 U £
•-4 oi e ft o inl
C U X> (0 U Q
co e so o
J3 -H rt 3 *O CQ
4J JJ 4J O)
W O *H 01 O C
we w -js ^ 01
V rH CO *J O 3
rH 4) rH tl fl
)-i -H w a ft m
ui ra E v- 0) tM
•H O 01 3 01
co w *J 3 O
CO eo J2 4) 0> 0) £
H a H u A ja j->
CO .£ O
101
-------
As discussed previously in this section, BODJ5 RWLs for bag and
other products mills are substantially higher than the BPT BOD5_
RWL. To determine a more realistic set of best performing mills
for this sector, EPA revised the BPT final effluent BOD5_ level
based on the relationship between BODJ5 influent concentration and
effluent concentration presented here previously and in the
development document supporting the January 1977 Phase II
regulations (see reference 9, page 402). EPA used the sector
average BOD5I RWL, 23.7 kg/kkg (47.4 Ib/t) (see Table 111-10), as
the basis for this calculation. Using this methodology, the
comparison level final effluent long-term average BOD5_ was
adjusted upward to 2.0 kg/kkg (4.0 Ib/t).
The general methodology was followed for the bag and other
products sector using the comparison level BOD5_ as illustrated in
Table 111-44. The revised comparison level final effluent BOD5_
and the BPT final effluent TSS level for mills in this sector are
attained at mills 010033 and 010055. Data for mill 010033 have
been excluded from the calculation because the mill uses an
oxidation pond which is not considered a BPT technology. • Mill
010008 was included in the calculation because substantial
quantities of both linerboard and bag and other products are
manufactured at this mill and prorated final effluent comparison
level BODS^ and BPT final effluent TSS (the same for both sectors)
are being attained. To include data for this mill, EPA compared
the ' final effluent BODj[ level to the comparison level determined
by prorating the BODS^ comparison levels of the two sectors. The
percent reduction below the prorated comparison level (40.1
percent) was then applied to the comparison level for the bag and
other products sector to obtain the long-term average final
effluent BODE[ level shown with the bag and other product data,
[1.2 kg/kkg (2.37 3,b/t)]. No adjustment to the final effluent
TSS was required because the TSS comparison levels equal the BPT
final effluent TSS levels and are the same for both sectors. BCT
Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the
linerboard sector of the unbleached kraft subcategory are 52.6
kl/kkg (12.6 kgal/t), 1.2 kg/kkg (2.4 Ib/t) and 2.3 kg/kkg (4.5
Ib/t) respectively, and 52.6 kl/kkg (12.6 kgal/t), 1.5 kg/kkg
(3.1 Ib/t) and 2.7 kg/kkg (5.4 Ib/t) for the bag and other
products sector.
Semi-Chemical - A review of the BPT final effluent levels for the
semi-chemical subcategory indicated that the BPT final effluent
BODI5 concentration is considerably higher than for other
subcategories with comparable raw waste BODJ5 and underestimates
the pollutant reduction capability in this subcategory.
Therefore, to determine a more realistic set of best performing
mills, the BPT final effluent' BOD5_ level was revised downward
based on the relationship between BODJ5 influent concentration and
effluent concentration presented here previously and in the
development document supporting the January 1977 BPT regulations
(see reference 9> page 402). Using this methodology, the
adjusted long-term average comparison level final effluent BODS
is 1.9 kg/kkg (3.8 Ib/t).
102
-------
The general methodology was applied using the comparison level
BODS as illustrated in Table 111-45. The revised comparison
level final effluent BOD5_ and BPT final effluent TSS level are
attained at mills 060004, 020003, and 020009. In addition to
these mills, data from a joint treatment system (treating
effluent from mills 020011 and 110068) were included in the
calculation. A significant portion of the wastewater discharged
to the joint treatment system is associated with the production
of semi-chemical pulp. The approach used to include data for
this joint treatment system involved comparing BOD5_ and TSS final
effluent levels to BPT levels (determined by prorating BPT levels
from appropriate subcategories). The percentage reductions below
prorated BPT levels attained at this treatment system were then
applied to the semi-chemical comparison level BOD5_ and BPT TSS
final effluent level to obtain the effluent BOD5_ and TSS final
effluent levels shown in Table 111-45. BOD5_ and TSS final
effluent levels for the treatment system shared by mills 020011
and 110068 are 36.7 and 34.9 percent below prorated BPT levels.
BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BQD5_ and TSS levels for the
semi-chemical subcategory are 43.0 kl/kkg (10.3 kgal/t), 1.2
kg/kkg (2.4 Ib/t) and 2.2 kg/kkg (4.4 Ib/t), respectively.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - A review of the BPT final
effluent levels for the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical
subcategory indicated that the BPT final effluent BOD5_
concentration is considerably higher than for other subcategories
with comparable raw waste BOD5_ and underestimates the pollutant
reduction capability in this subcategory. Therefore, to
determine a more realistic set of best performing mills, the BPT
final effluent BOD5_ level was revised downward based on the
relationship between BOD5_ influent concentration and effluent
concentration presented here previously and in the development
document supporting the January 1977 Phase II BPT regulations
(see reference 9, page 402). Using this methodology, the
adjusted long-term average comparison level final effluent BOD5_
is 1.9 kg/kkg (3.7 Ib/t).
The general methodology was applied using the comparison level
BOD5_ as illustrated in Table II1-46'. The BOD5_ comparison level
and~BPT TSS final effluent level are attained at mills 015001 and
015004. BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels
for the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical subcategory are 58.4
kl/kkg (1.4.0 kgal/t), 1.4 kg/kkg (2.7 Ib/t) and 2.4 kg/kkg (4.7
Ib/t), respectively.
Papergrade Sulfite (Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories) In reviewing
these subcategories, as shown earlier in this section in the
discussion on BCT Option 1 RWL development, EPA found that
wastewater flow and BOD5_ RWL are a function of the percentage of
sulfite pulp manufactured on-site. An equation was developed
relating flow to percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site. The
equation, which is representative of BPT flow for the papergrade
sulfite subcategories, is (see Figure III-l):
103
-------
NOt-«m
ja a^*TO>cMo3i—i o Jfi
< o3 j: ^-t -sT
>oina-*»cn(-4^-icofnr*-M\o*Tr-.cQ\co^ «>« o
CMC^<-T04iH~4.-4 *H E O* E
J9 U •O 41 U CO O
*—' "—' v^ >^ m pr»ooo\O'-icgNTinvoP^-Tp-r --«o> o ooeo
ooooooooi-*r-H—-ip-(Oi-H u*3 •-( a -H aa »•
OOOOOQOOOOQOOOOOO I cH ml 4) CO U* « (
g ooooooooooooooooo &4>M o > a. _
K K OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOt Odb) CO i-] 2 <<
S 8*1
§ 2§
O V 03
a
C H
01 • •-*
3 PH 0>
-4 p-t • >
iw S 4) i—I
01 C
01 0) E C
s a i- oi
O «J 0) 3
w a -u -M
w 4j -a <«
4J » 0) 1-i *-»
*3 *•"-
IA
., - _ 01 01
u c . •-» >
41 O <8 CA p-4 01
41 UJ JS i-f OH
kj fl) JJ -H BJ 4J
* (A U 3 C 41
>, O JS 01 3
O S *J J= rH
—I .-H 01 O JJ >«
S ^ W 01 4)
: 41 S >,tw hi
W O 01 Ot
: ^ w 3 js
l-l -H 4J C 4J
•pi js c o -a
i g *J 41 -P* 01 C
i £ *J C -11
i 01 0) *J U •!•* (0
I Uj W flj 3 «i j-»
3 3 41 T3
U U
4) 01
4J O
a o
*J 00 JJ
e PM e
01 0) "H « -H >
ao oo o *J oi s-<
- - o ja o
., RJ . , ,,
- w 5-1 *j
- 41 41
- > >
oc
v) 4>
e u
oi *J -H w
O 01 01 U
SiS u
SI?-, 8LH5
—4 >-H fl -O
: a o u \o c, •-*
1 C C •* *T (5 01
: .H -H i >
) 4» >MO1 4J
' J5 ^ Q f-t
- u o
. u ca e
"* (5 O
6 S 4J M
u •* e -H
w x u f
o s «
a o H
0)
o o
c e
104
-------
to CO
Q H
01
si
O
O I/I
x: a
otnci •»
01 CO -H
01 C >-H H b
»H O f-H to
••* E ft- 6
01 H CO 0
i^] to EO cml
N»» ^^ >«' '^ C C O CM IU -H O
r-fHtNco^Tirj^r^-cft -HO; cj . ooeo
i—IOOOOOOOO tn3 >H co-HOa^H
OOOOOOOOO 1 £ glWCO JJuTS?
ooooooooo ta 01 eaiJZ <<;toij
M^ O
0 e
41 • O
> 'H
4J -H
e m •
01-
^ S 2
U b
> o. u
01 OJ 0
!->'-> -H
b
e j-> a.
o o
to C "0
•X O
U U -H
to b b
1« to IU
: O.
55 ^
«ie 5
§ u
CQ • O
b M-l
o ti
w e tu
E k*
to 01
§•« «
0) JS 4J
H i— 1, (Q
W i— 1 *J (— 1 1)
CO -H C -H i— t
E- E V S ^3
^~ x-s
X— ^-/ ,<—
105
-------
flow (kl/kkg) = 1.890 x + 41.94
[flow (kgal/t) = 0.453 x + 10.05]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
As presented earlier, another equation (based on actual mill BODjj
RWL data) was assumed to represent BCT Option 1 BODjj RWL since
the linear regression curve representing this equation lies below
the prorated BPT BODS^ RWLs of all the mills on which the equation
is based (see Figure III-B). A "BPT-1-ike" raw waste BODjj^
equation was developed from the BCT Option 1 BODji RWL equation
and was used as the basis for BCT Option 4 comparison level final
effluent BODJ5 and TSS equations.
The BCT Option 1 BODjj RWL equation, from which the "BPT-like"
BODJ5 equation was derived, was developed from BODjj RWL data from
mills 040009, 040010, 040011, 040012, 040013, and 040020. All of
these mills have long-term average BODjj^ RWL less than their
respective prorated BPT BODjj RWLs, except for mill 040009 (see
Table 111-13). The percent of each mill's BODjj RWL below its
prorated BPT BODE[ RWL was calculated. The BODjj RWL of the five
mills with BOD_5 levels less than their respective prorated BPT
levels averaged 28.0 percent below BPT. The 28 percent reduction
was used to back-calculate a "BPT-like" BODjj^ RWL equation in the
following manner. In the general discussion of the methodology
used to determine BCT Option 1 raw waste loads, found at the
beginning of Section III, the following equation was presented:
BCT Option 1 flow = (BPT flow) x
(1- average percent reduction)
100
Substituting the BCT Option 1 raw waste BODjj equation for the
left side of the equation using 28 percent as the percent
reduction, and solving for the BPT term (now BODjj rather than
flow) the following "BPT-like" equation is obtained:
Raw waste BODJ5 (kg/kkg) = 0.86 x + 12.9
[Raw waste BODE[ (Ib/t) = 1.72 x + 25.8]
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
The equations developed above represent BPT flow and BPT BODjj RWL
for the papergrade sulfite subcategories. These equations were
used to develop final effluent BODj[ and TSS comparison level
equations which were used to identify BCT Option 4 best
performers.
The comparison level equations which are functions of percent
sulfite pulp were developed by applying the methodology explained
in the discussion of the development of BCT Option 1 final
effluent BODj5> and TSS equations for the papergrade sulfite
106
-------
subcategories and by using the BPT-like flow and the BOD5 RWL
equations and the relationships between raw waste BODJ5
concentration, final effluent BODJ5 concentration, and final
effluent TSS concentration. Raw waste BODji concentrations for
several values of percent sulfite pulp were predicted from the
BPT flow and raw waste BODE[ equations. These concentrations were
substituted in the equation relating influent BODS^ concentration
and final effluent' BOD5_ concentration to obtain final effluent
BODS^ concentrations which, with the corresponding flows, were
used to calculate final effluent BODE[ levels for each value of
percent sulfite pulp used. The final effluent BOD5_ levels and
the associated values of percent sulfite pulp were used to
develop an equation relating final effluent BOD5_ to percent
sulfite pulp by means of linear regression. The procedure was
repeated to develop an equation relating final effluent TSS to
percent sulfite pulp. The equations are:
Final effluent BOD5. (kg/kkg)
[Final effluent BODI5 (Ib/t)
Final effluent TSS (kg/kkg)
[Final effluent TSS (Ib/t)
= 0.081 x + 1.48
= 0.161 x + 2.95], and
= 0.113 x + 2.23
= 0.226 x + 4.45],
where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
These equations predict final effluent BODj[ and TSS levels as a
function of the percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site for a
papergrade sulfite mill that discharges BPT RWLs to a biological
treatment system representative of BPT. Since the equations
predict effluent levels attained after biological treatment of
BPT-like RWLs, EPA has used these equations as BODS^ and TSS final
effluent comparison levels to identify a realistic set of BCT
Option 4 best performers for the papergrade sulfite
subcategories.
Values of comparison level final effluent BODS^ and TSS were
calculated for each mill, as shown in Table 111-47, based on
mill-specific percent sulfite pulp produced on-site (see Table
111-14) and the comparison level equations. Best performers were
identified as those mills that had long-term average BOD5> and TSS
final effluent levels less than their respective BODJ5 and TSS
comparison levels. The mills attaining BOD5^ and TSS comparison
levels are 040009, 040011, 040013, 040018, and 040019. Mills
040011, 040018, and 040009 were excluded from calculations. Mill
040011 was not included in the following calculations because it
employs a two-stage biological treatment system which is not
considered representative of the technology on which BPT is
based. Mill 040018 discharges pulp mill wastes to a POTW and
thus, was excluded from further calculations. Mill 040009 shares
a joint wastewater treatment system with an alkaline-fine papers
mill. Although the BODI5 and TSS effluent levels are lower _than
corresponding prorated BPT comparison levels for the joint
treatment system, data from this treatment system was excluded
from further calculations.
107
-------
35!
43
«J
£
W
x:
*j
c
o
% Lean than
ape COEDS rieon Number of
u
|
Level (a) Lc
o
u
a
§
% Less than
te Comparison Cc
2
g
?
N
3
a
§
t-3
O
U
*l<
«
1
S
U
1
g
Ai
a
1
rH
*r4
W
s
tn
s
03
|
£
rH
xt
^
Cl
.id
JS
4J
XI
o
,*
Jtf
JC
H
4»
>
tS
xT
w
X
0(
^
ji
e
j«:
ii
\vf
e<
Ji
j«
0
j-i
/-%
rH
C
J£
ec
JC
J
u
^
2:
tocM 7«Ti-«eorHen3'CMrHCM
eMcrtovo-*rHr^y3irtiOt^.ej\rH
COrH >»!-(COrHeOCO->*eMrHCM
CO «M CO
CM ^> OA
CM m co
ocootme4Oca*3'*3>a\coa\vo
r-r*oor-io\cnoocoKo-3'Ovo
coo**c4COO\O
O»CNOOCMr-.f«OaococMvocM
«voO«vO10-HOrH«M
r^ »-* r* ^H f-t
CO O f»
CO O i-*
co m *a-
ovocMCMent-ttncor^-r^rHvoin
r-e^ocMcMCMoo^fOOcoineM
CMM CM i-* *-* M '-' C4 fH rHN^s^'^'
O^OvOrHrH^CMxOin-HeH^
mrHr-oco-TcMinr^r-icMcMm
»-.cMinr-teN»n^o^r^-*cor>.
S22Se^222SSSD
cooNf-^^i^^m^^^mco
inrHtncnvoeorHvoaocMtnco^
cAcocMrH^rrH^ro^p^ooorH
CMr^iO^ rHvOCM^-^CMCMCMrHOJ
4>
^COCMCMCM'-'rH G •<* V
W O B >
M W 4J 41
00 -rl rH M < tn
•*-* ^^ B d H
*— » y— »/-\ .— \ /—i ,,/-s/r>/-s j4 ft W o
u -a aj 4-i oo js oo oo grHu-a
^.^ \—»*^S-» *-f \^\^^_/ 4IOr-t-rld
tOOrHrHrHrHrHr-lrHrHrlO B SB
C3OOOOOOOOOOO tnd fttnl
ooooooooooooo < H ^w o m
*4*
Xl
rH
00 \O
Jtf CM
JJ CM
00 O
r* -^T
O
CO
CM
CM
M *J
00 rH
x9
O r-
O O
!+ +
co m
rH CM
^
M 41
rH 0 --N
4» H X
tj > ftj x^
3 4-1 rH
rH d 0 9
4H O O4
4H « W
W T4. e 41
rH a 01 *H
B ft £-i tn
rH r2
d 3-8
O
• W 4t
i-i
0 0
I
d
o
01
•H
It
B
U
d
4)
3
rH
4)
1
•H
11
3
o
c
•H
4}
•H
g
4->
U
4H
3
d
ft
"3
• ft
£
•H
>
13 .
3 W
£ S
" «
id
. 41 CO
d
w d
ft B
&f
-5
rH
4)
4]
d
O
W
•rl
CO
I
**
rH
4H
pH
2-r;
*erage)/(fi
s now close
« -H
§rH
rH •
2 in "
M B
O rH >H
(-4 rH (1J
-H >
I g B
rH U 41
4» -H H
> X! B
41 4J
rH (0
U 4J
d (0 B
o -o
W "O
S 4) O
u ,a
d o
4i d d
(H w x:
41 ft M
rH tn
B ft rH
4-1 M W
x_/ 3 3
X U U
41 41
g -0 -0
IH 0) 4)
00 00
> B B
41
O
•H -H -H
41 4)
d w M
x: o o
s§g
3ercent
)ata ai
lata a
X» 0 -D
s,
4)
«
U
1
-i
o
rH
3
S
-SJ
d
u
•H
j5
IH
1
"d
rH
•rl
W
•H
e produced at t
B
ine papers
£
00
u
3
U
41
41
B
•rl
4)
W
O
§
4J
4)
h
O
4)
A
+J
*J
S
•rl
a
-
rH
U
•rl
£
41
'
B
£
S
d
4)
1
41
4J
tage biological
Levels .
employs a
s comparis
rH -H
rH U
B g.
V) 41
3 ^
u d
4) B
41
00 M
B 4)
rH
5 I
41 d
01 rH
p 1
§£
n ml
4J Q
£J w
nately 48 percent of the total
s mill were not considered in
S
(0 4H
S3
a a
It contrib
I levels.
a.
rH 4J
:«
an alkaline-fi
ill was found t
ory.
X! S 00
4-> 11
s 3 3
U 3
ta d
>> B 41
M x:
4) B O
E rH
BUB
41 rH O
u a g.
• d B
a -rl 3 *J
« ca w
W "O
B B 41
•O XI ^ 3
B rH 4>
U g • rH
4) 4-1 g
U rH 41
41 41 XI «
rH 41 O B
ft « -O
rH -rl Q 4)
X! >rl
108
-------
The percent reductions in BODI5 and TSS below the BCT Option 4
comparison levels for BOD5_ and TSS for each of the best
performers were determined and are presented in Table 111-47.
The averages of these reductions are 41.7 percent and 39.3
percent for BODS^ and TSS. Equations representing BCT Option 4
final effluent levels for BODJ5 and TSS were obtained by reducing
the comparison level final effluent BOD5_ and TSS equations by
41.7 percent and 39.3 percent and are as follows:
BOD5_ (kg/kkg)
[BOD5_ (Ib/t)
TSS (kg/kkg)
[TSS (ib/t)
= 0.047 x + 0.86
= 0.094 x + 1.72]
= 0.069 x + 1.35
= 0.137 x + 2.70]
Where x = percent sulfite pulp manufactured on-site.
Dissolving
in Table 111-48.
Sulfite Pulp - Available effluent data are presented
No best performing mills have been identified
in the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory; therefore/ EPA relied
on transfer of treatment system performance in the papergrade
sulfite subcategories to the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory
to determine BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent
levels.
The technology transfer from the papergrade sulfite subcategories
to the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory is reasonable because
EPA has determined that the characteristics and treatability of
dissolving sulfite pulp wastewaters and the papergrade sulfite
subcategories are similar. In fact, BPT effluent limitations for
both subcategories were developed from the same relationship
between BODS^ influent concentration and BODS^ effluent
concentration. Therefore, the Agency believes that dissolving
sulfite pulp mills can attain the BCT Option 4 long-term average
final effluent levels developed.
As shown in the discussion of the development of BCT Option 4
final effluent characteristics for the papergrade sulfite
subcategories, best performing mills in the papergrade sulfite
subcategories attained BOD5 and TSS effluent levels averaging
41.7 percent and 39.3 percent below the BOD5_ and TSS effluent
comparison levels. Thus, BCT Option 4 long-term average final
effluent BOD!5 and TSS levels for mills in the dissolving .sulfite
pulp subcategory are assumed to be 41.7 percent and 39.3 percent
below BPT BODJ5 and TSS long-term average final effluent levels
for each of the dissolving sulfite grades. They are as follows:
109
-------
3
O
e
X
c
c
o
14
J!
1
X
M
U
a
o
03
s
C
£
(9 J.
W C
«
H
n
rH
s-^
JJ
r-l
M
01
J.S
U
JJ s
u cu
3 ej
•w S m
IM cu a
< §
1 e
JJ
H
&
ix
Ol
^£
•H V
p4 £•<
1
B
O
|
C
^
rH
3
.M
U
Z.
Jfi
rnl
rH £
C SE
co vo r* r*
m
J
0
,3.
r*.
•»
T
•* CM
•» CM
rH «T
Ov K
rH O
CM O
CO •»
CO CO
O CM
N_,
r~ CM
l/> rH
OS 0
CM CO
CM CM
co in
rH CM
rH vo
•» CM
!•>• \O
** CO
*T CM
00 CO
m o
CM in
m co
CO rH
in vo
0 0
0 O
vo VO
o o
a
o
rH
rH
£
u
a
M
"fll
u
s
u
a
3
c
o
0.
rH
3
W
o
(9
H
d
o
•a
d
cu
&
•D
u
rH
1
JJ
e
3
1— t
r m co in
CM CM CM CO
rH O rH GO r-
CM CO "3- r* rH
rH rH rH rH %T
O O O -tf
vO vO vO CM
\o vo vo r*
0) O 01
O O O *•* U h JJ
m Ji m CM a **
r*. r- r- o B "O rH
CM CM CM CO ^ 01 3
o d >•< t»
M-l 0 J-.
t4 CO CU U
at 4) OJ 01 J3 3
55 > O < •< PH CT »J 4J W
•
^
CU
n
•o
d
ea
TJ
i-i
3
jJ
O
(0
3
d
o«
rH
a
o
CJ
00
a
o
•rj
&0
•t? rH
U ,Q
H C
*o o
d .a
Rt en
S'S
03 &Q
l-i H
O
o
ca M-i
rH
> Ot
01 03
rH
d
4J R}
d £
0) J-*
iH (A
<4-t ca
M-< 0)
0> rH
« CO
d •
•H ON
t« CO
oo d
R> a
jig'
CO O
01 0
1
rH
d
-t «
d JJ
o
•U ca
fc 0)
O rH
,^
^y
in
CM
*^
r-»
,-^ ^^^ ^^
^- ^y QH
in in r*
CM CM CM
\-s\*s *~s
r-» r» o
CM CM CM H
•H
rZ
l-H ^ CO
in vo o
rH rH CM
v—' N~/ ^^
vO CM
O O R)
(J i-H JJ
W fH 0)
•H 01 U
> U <
U
00 0)
d >»
•H 00
> d *J
rH >H, O
» r5 C
co o ca
•H ca to
•o « -fi
•H
41 "O 01
£ 13
4J 4) fl)
U*l R) 00
O J-i
00 0)
I> 41 CO
jJ CO 0)
(Q 4J CJ
d u
01 eg u
CO 0
n o
41 c CM
Vj O 03
-H
o u •
d 3 r-
T3 r-
0) O ON
(0 cL *"*
Q 41 -S
JJ J3
-O 0)
jj jj ra
d -H oo
CU S rH
3 3
rH "OS
M-< at o
M-l 4-t I-I
•H
U CO
O «
rH CO S
rH CO
•H R) d
E O
n -H
01 CO co
cu *a jJ
a, *w 'E
O *H
n rH
ot
js > ml
•H JJ O
9 eg 03
E d H
0) 01 O-
JJ CO 03
CO CU
>. i-t "0
w S* »a
jj w d
d R)'
CU 01 E
E ^ S
4-J CO )-l
CO
0) CO 0>
Ja rH X
JJ CU JJ
JJ >> 41 41
d UTrH E
*H O *H
O 00 JJ JJ
"•> 41 d
JJ 01 01 -
« Rl 3 JS t3
U fH JJ CU
CO J3 **H 4-)
0) 3 4-1 jJ ra
u ca cu RJ 00
tO ,rH
J3 O. W CU 3
Cfl i— 1 C/3 rH E
3 H 3 O
rH O* CU S-l
rH T) Q*
H 01 d CU CU
E JJ R! JJ U
•H -H
H rH O -H CU
J3 3 O 3 4)
H (fl Q3 ta U3
CO J3
2
•*-.'
cu
JJ
o
d
o
*2
01
4>
CO
aJ
o
R)
d
3
O
ca
U
3
rH
R!
>
d
o
"0
a.
ca
CO
03
^,
110
-------
BCT Option 4 Long-term Average Final Effluent
BODS TSS
Grade
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
kg/kkg
7.1
7.6
8.2
10.4
(14.1)
(15.1)
(16.4)
(20,8)
kg/kkg
12.7
12.7
12.7
14.0
(lb/t)
(25.4)
(25.4)
(25.4)
(27.9)
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical - Available effluent data are
presented in Table 111-49. Sufficient data are not available to
determine BCT Option 4 pollutant removals or the associated costs
of implementation.
Groundwood-Fine Papers - As illustrated in Table 111-50, the
general methodolody was followed„ BPT effluent levels are being
attained at mills 052003, 052007, 052008, 052014, and 054014. In
addition to these mills, mill 052009 was included in the
calculation. At this integrated miscellaneous group mill where
BPT effluent levels are attained, groundwood pulp is produced, a
significant portion of which is used to manufacture fine papers.
The approach used to include data for mill 052009 involved
comparing the final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels to BPT final
effluent BODS and TSS levels determined by prorating limitations
from approprTate subcategories. The percentage reduction below
prorated BPT attained at this mill was then applied to
groundwood-fine papers BPT final effluent levels. BODjj and TSS
final effluent levels for mill 052009 are 14.6 percent and 26.5
percent below prorated BPT limitations.
Upon calculation of the BOD5_ concentration corresponding to BCT
Option 4 flow, EPA found that the resulting long-term average
final effluent BODji concentration was less than 15 mg/1.
Therefore, the BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent BOD5_
concentration was set at 15 mg/1 and the effluent load was
revised correspondingly upward, BCT Option 4 flow and final
effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the groundwood-fine papers
subcategory are 91.4 kl/kkg (21.9 kgal/t), 1.4 kg/kkg (2.7 lb/t)
and 2.0 kg/kkg (4.0 lb/t), respectively.
Groundwood-CMN Papers - As illustrated in Table 111-51, the
general methodology was followed. J3PT effluent levels are
attained at mill 054015. For the nine month period prior to
December 1978, the long-term average TSS effluent level for this
mill was 2.2 kg/kkg (4.4 lb/t). In November 1978, the NPDES
authority increased the allowable TSS discharge. For the period
after November 1978, the long-term average TSS effluent level was
5.2 kg/kkg (10.4 lb/t). This mill has demonstrated that 2.2
kg/kkg (4.4 lb/t) can be attained. Therefore, the .long-term
average TSS effluent level is based on performance at mill 054015
111
-------
. *
in NO
0 0
-------
^
< OS
H O
< 0
Q W
os cj
£§
oSM
in en
1 O OS
HH 5E U
rH. r-t CU
rH Pi •<
O 0-1
W H w
co. z a
•< O rH
1
Cd Q
o o
re o
CJ 2;
2g
o as
C3
w
>
4j
c
OJ tu
3 M
<44 1J
«|
1 e
i
00
1
flj
JJ
0
W
-C
e
o
o
4)
3
4J
flj
en
en
en
H
S
i
•j
o
rH
r-4
<— 1
•H
r:
en
£
in
a
o
03
o
0
eg
Q
^
*J
,J3
i— 1
w
^ti
•it
rH
1
61
*•*
i-H
«J
.£
00
Jd
**^
i-H
Ll
J!
|
X
r-4 in CO
»^
«J3 co r*-
r-H en oo
RJ CQ
en ^3" r*
§O O
O O
in in un
o o o
en
en
en
\o
en
03
rH
O
en
in
CM
en
i-H
CO
O
^
o
en
CO
CT\
en
,_,
CQ
CO
0
o
CM
in
o
o o en
en *^ en
o en en
en en en
r- o\ T rH /— \ rn"
o >- \o a\ o
in o *-J vo *«^
m ^- en in o
CM o CM en CM
/^\ /— v
en o CM ^r rH CM
r-cocn o a, vr
rH O rH CM O rH
CM ON CM y-N
CO 00 CO (—4
**s •«— ' Ci
in rH vO O
oo r^ tn I-H
r* en en .en
«
« rH
rH rH
^ > " a! en £'
^^ )j M-I H pa
BJCQflJ flJU CT3 •-t'O
cy»vr-^ -HCU OOGCQ cju
OrHrH Cw3 CQ-H Otfl
OOO IrH iHCQinl 'H3
CMCM-J f-t'W 0) -U O JJ'"-)
inmtn .OJ^H >uo ats
ooo caw <-
CU
vC
^3
OJ
J_t
•H
X
0
CM
CO
01
•H
A
|
CJ
01
CO
D
e
•H
1
O
o
*o
c
3
O
00
— ' *-^
en
H
T3
e
AJ
S
§
a
OJ
3
iw
^)
4J
e
•H 4)
«J rH
4J 4J
OO 3
C rH
OJ MH
j3 4)
H *
ca 4->
13 -c
4> -H
CQ 4-1
Li X)
O O
fii O
0 >»
4) Q
A 00
0 0
u ca
15 CU
OJ .C
Ll U
113
-------
to
J-> CO
« co
O H
w
.c
Jj
d
o m
U-l S
0
i-i
1 o
55 PH
J-l 0)
(0 •!->
tH +J «
< 2 CO Q
I8
gs
g§
Id en
M
5c r*i
s <
o P*
§ §
W O
g g
§w
rH
WO J>
Q O flJ
4-> 1-3
d
QJ ft)
:3 OJ
r-H ffl
MH QJ
nj ^
<
i-H
(0 £
G )-
rM H
0
d
c
j
2
£
CO
":
i—
in
§ -
cq ^
o
rH .
rH
•H
E
m i—t m
CM rH CM
m c\ m
CM CM
•j- o\ m
00 CO 00
r-* r- r^
rH i-H CM
0 0 r-l
^ ^ c?
m -a* »*
m •* o
V^ *fc^ rH
CO CM CM
CM CM in
oo en co
r*. 1-4 CM
CO O CM
CO rH r-H
co m o\
m CM oo
rH CM CM
o m CM
o\ en CM
\O O rH
rH rH
,O
^— '
3c5
m m m
rH rH rH
O O O
CM ** -^ .
.OOO
"
1
^**v rH
in E CM CO O
0) M CO O
rH O 00
(3 4J CJ *t3 rH 'O
fl d 0) -H fl V
•H 4-J O O4 "O
8 w
OJ OJ
u >
OJ O
3
CO 4J
J-> CO
•rl -O •
E
•H 00
i-H C
•H
cn oo
CO CO
H H
V
•0 >
oi n
4J
4-1 >,
•rl rO
OJ 0)
)-C E
0) 0)
jj OJ •
•U "^
•rl W *O
4J CO O
C S -rl
inl oj
01 o tt
> O
o pa o
CO QJ 4J
00
•^ co aj
OJ U X!
4J OJ 4J
01 >
•rl CO IH
rH O
E
EH w ij OJ
CXl rH OJ 00
£Q OJ -tJ CO
> 1 U
O OJ 00 OJ
4J rH C >
O CO
rH 4J ij
§C3 TJ
D • OJ
0" 3 W 4J
01 r-l rH XI
IH -H
O OJ OJ OJ
rH S
CO OJ M
XI » OJ CO
4-J O XI 4J
rH 00 CO
W -H T3
W OJ XI
OJ XI K
rH 4J OJ 3
XI 1=1
01 4J 4->
U CO OJ
CO 4J U
ta co co
Ull OJ
SCO OJ W
U 4-> OJ
OJ. co X!
13 P4 V4 4J
ffl ° Qj X!
i-H 0 CJ
W rH -H
H E -H S
114
-------
prior to December 1978.
Upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to
BCT Option 4 flow, EPA found that the resulting long-term average
final effluent BOD5_ concentration was less than 15 mg/1.
Therefore, the BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent BOD5_
concentration was set at 15 mg/1, and the effluent load was
revised correspondingly upward. BCT Option 4 flow and final
effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the groundwood-CMN papers
subcategory are 99.3 kl/kkg (23.8 kgal/t), 1.5 kg/kkg (3.0 Ib/t)
and 2.2 kg/kkg (4.4 Ib/t), respectively.
Deink - Available effluent data for this subcategory are shown in
Table 111-52. EPA has divided the deink subcategory into three
sectors: fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint. BCT Option 4
effluent limitations have been developed for only the fine and
tissue papers sectors of the deink subcategory. Most mills in
these sectors employ some purchased pulp; BPT limitations were
based on mills producing products from a furnish of deinked pulp,
100 percent of which was deinked on-site. Therefore, BCT Option
4 limitations were also developed for mills employing a furnish
of deinked pulp, 100 percent of which is produced on-site. The
modified methodology, based on comparison with prorated BPT
effluent levels, was used to develop BCT Option 4 effluent
levels.
Since most mills in the fine and tissue papers sectors achieve
BOD5_ and TSS effluent levels below their respective prorated BPT
levels, EPA did not feel that the average of data from all of
these mills truly reflected the performance of BCT. Thus, to
identify a realistic set of best performers, EPA developed
effluent comparison levels for each of the sectors based on BPT
flow, BPT comparison level BODji RWLs, chemically assisted primary
clarification, and the application of the equations relating
secondary influent BOD5_ concentration to effluent BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations.
At the time of BPT development, no distinction was made between
the sectors of the deink subcategory; therefore, the same BPT
BOD5_ RWL was applied to all sectors. BOD5_ RWLs have been
developed for the fine and tissue papers sectors by adjusting
individual mill BOD5_ RWLs to the levels that would be expected if
each mill deinked 100 percent of its furnish (see discussion of
the development of BCT Option 1 RWLs for the deink subcategory).
The adjusted BOD5_ RWLs, 68.9 kg/kkg (137.7 Ib/t) for deink-fine
papers and 94.6 kg/kkg (189.2 Ib/t) for deink-tissue papers, were
taken as the basis of the BCT Option 4 final effluent comparison
levels.
Data presented in Table 111-18 indicate that mills in the . deink
subcategory achieve substantial BOD5_ reduction through primary
clarification. The average reduction in BOD5_ was found to be
42.8 percent with chemical assistance (see discussion of the
development of BCT Option 1 RWLs for the deink subcategory).
Thus, the BOD5_ RWLs (presented above) that are the basis for the
115
-------
« a u *>
* a a ^
8
*j
e
o o co
•9 m ^*
u o w
U »J J*
M a a •*-*
r* *o vp
Cv •-" M
tX SO %0
cocoa3c6incor*r-o& ih flo
13
«M O
«B
3S
3-
•rt
Zi
o
CM
o
116
-------
I
•o as
TABLE 111-52 (Cont1
IARGE MONITORING REPO
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
c
CO
S
c
TO 1
"o 1o
n'° "
v w c
.a js a
E u
3 C
2 O .
a p
b
U .«
TO J
CO C
13 •
V t~
W C 4J JL
CO (0 (Q ^.
Jfi SI
. •« £a
0) ,-
00 4.
n *•».
V i-
g Z'-
S
*J OJ "a
C E-i ^
0) i ^
3 00-^
, »-H d fl
*« hj v-
td
i-H d x—
CO O JJ
d to -»>
•H •* ^
fcfcl U r—
(0 ^-^
O '*—/
'3
•a > x-s
«J 0> «
*J i-3 JC
O 01
a. c5
T3
CO d 4-» J?
N- '
ra "*
<*-> 4i e
41 t A
3 oo ^
*H . C 00
*w O ^e
"« d ^>
C O 4-1
•H W X,
01
0) 41 01
S-l Jd
fc ^^
4) /-s
4J *ao^
3 S "«
»-* > 0,
*w S ^C J*
•. W «-H E
r-< 41 'a
C I ^
•H 00 *^v
fjj C »H
^
^1 "§
•H 3
y? sr
O
0
3
a
%
D
^
J
j
3
•,
^ ,
H x}1
!
.
en
en
j
c w
0 CO Vi
W W 4), W f
•H e-4 a*"ij c
•U 3; U l"«T3U /"
> 4) U v 0 C 01 c
S
la
, t3
•o
S5
2"
e
1
•s
0 • 4.) O
•W *J B G I
(0 0) 1 O O 01
E *J 00 -H g 4J
fl) C 4-t Q
u Li o i y-t c fl)
*o d -H nj
o -H H n -d «
i-v C CM nj 4J -H
O< O CO i-4
C CJ W CO
o) ^ *j t7 1-1 5
l-l fl) (0
4) ^^« ti "O 0) 4)
^ w o • e co to
I*H U 14 H O 3 3
H 4) & eu u flj flj
T3 Ot^v CQ O) U U
(Q tO 0) D
£ CU X 0 A A
0) O Of 0) 01
0) 3 O r-4 *J 00 00
00 to r-< CQ to co n]
co co 3 •!-( )-i U
<-> *H -|| C71 CO D 41
d ** - 4) w > >
0) -»» H co co co
U 01 &* H
•4 e CQ o >> a) oi
1 0> CO (0
d T3 *j JK u d d
O 4) fl) *J 'i-l -H «H
O CO O CO 4) -O -O
41 tl S-l (0 .C 4) 4)
M OO & 4) >\ U U
W -H J3 S- O C C
N C 4-> CO i— I -H -i-l
o a
H d co ml E •«-> *J
U (0 Q 0) O O
Q n 01 o d d
O i— l CQ i—4
3 *w .-H 4) 01
U 4J t) -H U Jj
J H C d E «J «J
fl Pu 4) (0
^ CQ U CO CO CO
D >— ' Jj CO -H 4-1 U
-I 0) W ^ (0 (0
w -t- Oi H E- Q 0
0 -fl t) *O 0) *W
117
-------
Option 4 comparison level for the two sectors are reduced by 42.8
percent to obtain the secondary influent BOD5_ waste loads, which
are 39.4 kg/kkg (78.8 Ib/t) and 54.1 kg/kkg (108.2 Ib/t.) for the
deink-fine and tissue papers sectors, respectively.
Corresponding secondary influent BOD5_ concentrations were then
calculated.
These influent concentrations, with the equations relating
influent BODS^ concentration and effluent BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations (discussed previously and in the Phase II
Development Document, reference 9, pg. 402, and the October 1980
Proposal Development Document, reference 1, pg. 380) were used to
predict final effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations. BCT Option 4
BOD5 and TSS effluent comparison levels were determined from
thei~e concentrations by multiplying eaph by BPT flow. The
comparison levels, shown below, were used to identify best
performers in the two sectors.
Grade
Deink-Fine Papers
Deink-Tissue Papers
BCT Option £ Comparison Levels
BODS TSS
kq/kkg
3.5
4.2
(Ib/t)
(7.0)
(8.4)
kg/kkg
5.8
6.4
(Ib/t)
(11.6)
(12.7)
The BCT Option 4 comparison levels reflect performance of mills
which deink 100 percent of the pulp used in their furnish.
Therefore, the comparison levels for mills that purchase pulp
must be prorated with BOD5_ and TSS effluent levels reflecting BPT
performance for the nonintegrated-fine papers and nonintegrated-
tissue papers subcategories, as appropriate. Comparison levels
for mills in the fine papers sector were determined by prorating
the deink-fine papers final effluent comparison levels for BOD5_
and TSS with the BPT final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory (wood fibers sector).
However, the BPT final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels of the
nonintegrated tissue papers subcategory do not reflect biological
treatment of RWLs, whereas RWLs from mills in the tissue papers
sector of the deink subcategory do receive biological treatment.
To predict final effluent levels reflecting biological treatment
of RWLs from nonintegrated-tissue papers mills, the relationships
between influent BOD5_ concentration and effluent BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations were applied to the BPT raw waste BOD5_
concentration of the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
The final effluent BOD5_ and TSS loads, obtained by multiplying
the predicted BOD5_ and TSS effluent concentrations by the BPT
flow for the nonintegrated tissue papers subcategory are 1.6
kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t) for BOD5_ and 3.8 kg/kkg (7.5 Ib/t) for TSS.
Prorated comparison levels for deink-tissue mills that purchase
118
-------
pulp are, thus, determined by prorating the BOD5 and TSS effluent
comparison levels with the BOD5_ and TSS levels obtained as above
for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
Prorated comparison levels are presented in Table 111-52, with
available effluent data for mills in the deink subcategory.
Mills in the fine papers sector that attain prorated comparison
levels are 140007 and 140019. Mills in the tissue papers sector
that attain prorated comparison levels are 140014, 140015,
140018, 140021, 140022, 140030, and 900015. Mills 140018 and
140022 were not used to determine BCT Option 4 effluent levels as
only 10 months of data are available for each mill. Mill 900015
was also not used because it employs a state-of-the-art treatment
system that is not representative of BPT.
The percent reductions in BOD5_ and TSS below the prorated
comparison levels for BOD5_ and TSS were determined for each best
performer. The average percent reduction of all best performers
(in the fine papers sector and the tissue papers sector combined)
was found to be 33.9 percent for BOD5_ and 34.4 percent for TSS.
Data for both sectors were combined because of the similar RWL
treatability of the two sectors and the similarity in design
parameters for BCT Option 4 treatment systems.
BCT Option 4 final effluent levels for BOD5_ and TSS for mills in
the fine papers sector of the deink subcategory that use pulp,
100 percent of which is deinked on-site, are, therefore, 33.9
percent less and 34.4 percent less than the sector's effluent
comparison levels. The final effluent levels for mills in the
tissue papers sector are also 33.9 percent and 34.4 percent less
than that sector's effluent comparison levels for BOD5_ and TSS,
respectively. These values are presented in the following table
with the final effluent levels developed using the BCT Option 1
methodology for comparison.
Option 1
Option 4
kg/kkg
2.5
2.3
Deink-Fine Papers
BODS
(Ib/t)
(5.0)
(4.6)
TSS
kg/kkg
3.3
3.8
(Ib/t)
(6.5)
(7.6)
Option 1
Option 4
Deink-Tissue Papers
BOD 5
kg/kkg
3.3
2.8
(Ib/t)
(6.5)
(5.5)
TSS
kg/kkg
4.0
4.2
(Ib/t)
(8.0)
(8.3)
119
-------
As shown, the BODj[ and TSS effluent characteristics obtained for
both sectors of the deink subcategory employing the Option 4
methodology are nearly equal to the values obtained employing the
BCT Option 1 methodology.
Thus, the same effluent levels can be attained by use of BCT
Option 1 process controls (including chemically assisted primary
clarification and recycle of primary clarifier effluent) or by
upgrading the wastewater treatment system (including chemically
assisted primary clarification). Therefore, BCT Option 1
effluent characteristics have been set equal to BCT Option 4
effluent characteristics. Since it is assumed that these
effluent levels can be attained by the use of either set of
technologies (process control or end-of-pipe treatment), the
higher effluent characteristic of each pair has been chosen as
the BCT Option 1 and Option 4 final effluent characteristics, as
follows:
BCT Option 1 & BCT Option 4 Final Effluent Characteristics
-BODS TSS
Deink-Fine Papers
Deink-Tissue Papers
kg/kkg
2.5
3.3
db/t)
(5.0)
(6.5)
kg/kkg
3.8
4.2
(7.6)
(8.3)
Sufficient data are not available to determine BCT Option 4
pollutant removals or determine the associated costs of
implementation for the newsprint sector of the deink subcategory.
Tissue from Wastepaper - Extensive use of production process
controls to reduce wastewater discharge is practiced in the
tissue from wastepaper subcategory.
BCT Option 4 for this subcategory is identical to BCT Option 1
and includes the application of production process controls and
biological treatment. The methodology for development of long-
term average effluent levels is described in detail previously in
this section under the Development of BCT Option 1 Effluent
Characteristics. BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and
TSS levels for the tissue from wastepaper subcategory are 68.0
kl/kkg (16.3 kgal/t), 1.3 kg/kkg (2.6 lb/t) and 2.8 kg/kkg (5.7
lb/t), respectively. Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-53.
Paperboard from Wastepaper - Extensive use of production process
controls to reduce wastewater discharge is practiced in the
paperboard from wastepaper subcategory. BCT Option 4 for this
subcategory is identical to BCT Option 1 and includes the
application of production process controls and biological
treatment. The methodology for development of long-term average
effluent characteristics for both subdivisions of this
subcategory is described in detail previously in this section
(see Development of BCT Option 1 Effluent Characteristics). BCT
120
-------
-i <
«ls
ij l-l «
to x <
Si*
a s
en to
1-1 KJ
°s
»--
oooooooooo
M
w
H
a
o
y
aj •
O.X)
01
0) M
u o
e r-i
o o
>. 3
r* O
e a
o
4J ^
•H .c
1H -
- o >»o-
>» jj rH CQ
—> c
o o
Jj
c -o
O '
(U [Q fl}
3 4) -P
r-i 1-, C
L4 JJ
JJ -H C3 r-l
fi U 0) «J
OJ O* S 3
i £ OJ *J O*
4J ij ra u
ca u
. a> e >-< n
. J-i 0) *J O
I U OJ
ja >» c
>* u «
u « m J3
« to E *J
U rH
a
MH X OJ •-*
(U u -
^3- fl
e i ,
o <->
•H u ra
4J « t3
Q.-C
O
U M
a* u
41
•H T3 rH
CO £ . >v V
O W O W
r* -H r^ «
&5 I'.nl
OJ tu Q
O O
r-t r^ r^ 03
r-( — r-l
•H t- -H t3
E EC
rH W « U
<1J
cs -H oa
•H si co
i » H E-<
121
-------
Option 4 flow and final effluent BODS^ and TSS levels for the
noncorrugating medium sector of the paperboard from wastepaper
subcategory are 13.4 kl/kkg (3.2 kgal/t), 0.73 kg/kkg (1.5 Ib/t)
and 0.97 kg/kkg (1.9 Ib/t), respectively, and for the corrugating
medium sector are 13.4 kl/kkg (3.2 kgal/t), 1.1 kg/kkg (2.2
Ib/t), and 1.2 kg/kkg (2.4 Ib/t), respectively. Available
effluent data for mills in both sectors of this subcategory are
presented in Table 111-54.
Wastepaper-Molded Products - Extensive use of production process
controls to reduce wastewater discharge is practiced in the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory. BCT Option 4 for this
subcategory is identical to BCT Option 1 and includes the
application of production process controls and biological
treatment. The methodology for development of long-term average
effluent characteristics is described in detail previously in
this section under Development of BCT Option 1 Effluent
Characteristics. BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and
TSS levels for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory are
23.8 kl/kkg (5.7 kgal/t:)/ 0.60 kg/kkg (1.2 Ib/t) and 1.1 kg/kkg
(2.3 Ib/t), respectively. Available effluent data for mills in
this subcategory are presented in Table 111-55.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - Extensive use of production
process controls to reduce wastewater discharge is practiced in
the builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory. BCT Option 4
for this^ subcategory is identical to BCT Option 1 and includes
the application of production process controls and biological
treatment. The methodology for development of long-term average
effluent characteristics is described in detail previously in
this section under Development of BCT Option 1 Effluent
Characteristics. BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and
TSS levels for the builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory
are 11.3 kl/kkg (2.7 kgal/t)f 0.53 kg/kkg (1.1 Ib/t) and 0.76
kg/kkg (1.5 Ib/t), respectively. Available effluent data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table 111-56.
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers - Two sectors of the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory have been identified: the wood fiber furnish
and cotton fiber furnish sectors.
As illustrated in Table 111-57, the general methodology was
followed for the wood fiber furnish sector. However, data for
mills where only primary treatment is used were excluded from the
computations.
Data were reviewed with respect to waste significant grade
changes. No significant difference due to grade change was
noted; thus, the combined data were used. BPT effluent levels
are attained through the application of biological treatment at
mills 080007, 080027, 080041, and 080046. Mill 080027 was
excluded from the calculations because chemically assisted
clarification is employed at that mill. BCT Option 4 flow and
final effluent BOD_5 and TSS levels for the wood fibers sector of
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory are 63.4 kl/kkg (15.2
122
-------
ffl
J
W OS
•3- 3 W
in P-J
i o <
w a oi
W M W
M 05 H
O CO
U H <
1-3 IH S
o o
CO 09
H-l «
a H
I
O-i
a i
rH H
IH a)
^ >
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOi—IOOOOOO
OCslCM-*CMOeNi—ICMr-iOr-lr—I i—J i—(OOOl/li—I O CO O O rH CO O
CO
ooi
OiHi-COJrHOrHOr-lOOr-HOOOOOOCNOOrHOOOi-HO
0
4J
,0
m
O .-
" • i—i O 00 r*- CO rH Q\ i—I CO -i" CN 00 ID a v>i i—• >-N «w i —
OMOrHrHOOn-IOOCNOOOOOOOCMOOvfrOrHOOCN
X!
U
fl
I
. - ^
fe —.
*o oaimoor-ir-*ir)vor^.(r)
-------
(3
4J
(3
a
to
JS
4J
a
OJ
1
1 *-
a 6
•S u
(n H
01
u
rf .a
OfHCSOi-HpHOOOO
\o en r^
i-t en r-t
co r-* o\
O rl CS
-H 0 00 -H
^•—v_< e
oooooooooo
r-(i-Hr-lr-(r^f-.-,
rH >» U
3 CO (U
•a fa s
OJ ft CJ
J3 « 00
u
O i-H 0)
CQ M
It W 4J
fa 4) C
*J rH 41
U
>»
-------
***
>?-••"
•3? 3
!•« W
cj
3 b3 0)
g £ 4J *j
alls
P H rH «
CO UH U
< HH «l
3= w >
r-H
B §
*H 0)
1
t>0
d
5
CD
i
W
J3
4J
d
0
£
UH
O
14
01
rQ
z
4J
14
n
4J
CO
CO
CO
H
§
OQ
1
rH
•H
£
CO
m
§
CQ
S
0
iH
0)
n
a
Q1
*^,
J3
r-l
ta
"M
4J
3
JS
Jri
U
x**v,
4-1
rH
a
oc
s
JS
2
01
rH
CM
rH
tM
fH
OV
^^
O
Q
m
%o
£M
™\
in
rH
rH
CM
OS
iH
r-4
O
rQ
0
CO
o
CO
o
CO
r>
^.
o
^
o\
o
w
<-^
CO
CO
ON
rH
vo
ON
CO
?>
CM
VO
in
/-\
u
1-1
CM
O
in
rH
rH
•-1
rH
rH
CM
rH
CO
~^
rH
O
r^ /-%
CO s» -.
r-. CM
O CO
CO VO
r-l CM
1— CO
O rH
/"\
Ov ^**
CM rH
in rH
CM CM
m po
0 00
r-|
^«^
•H
y^ rH
•O n 4J
v-' C 13
in >H
-H m M ij
1-4
d
o
• H
a
o
B
03
VI
O
*o
d
1
0)
•o
v
01
o
JJ
OJ
a
i
_§
a
n
n
0)
01
•g
01
3
s
01
a
•rl
O U
4J
» d
M!
£ W
U -O
.
o
jj
a
«
&
IH
CO
rH
s
Ul
•iH
V
CU
O
3
o1
01
o
d
a
u
u
01
rH
01
(Q
ml
a
*T3
§
VH
125
-------
s
CO
Q
4-1
a
0
2
s ^
W w 4^
P -4-1 CO
< < CO Q
H U
gg
CO
E-i
O3 E-I
2j3
voSe
U-) O
1 CS Z
I-H S5 r-H
I-H rH pn
W « O
SO •*"••
rHM«
S
E-* 33 <;
gg
§ ^
W PH CO
U rH
CO - 1)
I-H CO !>
Q Ofi OJ
W 4-1 >-q
q e
Sa w
rH R)
m 01
w >
rH
co E
a S
•H 0)
PH EH
1
pj
O
CO
4->
3
^^
«
JaS
^
ex
u"»
a
O
PQ
jj
—
rH
^^
CM CU <4H U
rH
a
O
•rl
4-1
a.
o
H
PQ
14
O
MH
•O
11
a
u
4-1
U
•O
11
1
(A
CO
CU
S
CO
to
u
. J3
U
CO
u
r-l
1>
01
I-H
4J
C
a
rH
>H
01
rH
CO
«
.
rH
O
I*
U
e
4J
a
it
4J
&
m
e
•H
H
P<
10
r-l
•H
S
to
•H
H
/— >
e
EH
Cu
fd
o
4-*
r— 1
CO
S
-------
1
S
o
0,
r~s
T»
w Z
W l-H
HH OS
IS
S£
S
-J
(0
jj
Q
w
x:
*j
i
14H
• o
bl
01
1
*J
W
jj
CO
W
E-«
1
1
•«•
s
y]
ii
1
|
*
V
K
Q
d
U
Jtf
J4
40
J«S
^
1
0
^
j->
•;
,
o\oir)oOf^'~*ci^oo in *^ ^^ vo in. o
.-•££• " ,-*-
a'ssssasssassss «.-
cncnen^HootnwcMcncMomeMrt - • vo
^— ' '»-' "^
CM i-H
oo vo m oo i -3>r-*3pcMO^|'»ff in.O co
c*j \o in f~t i ^ ^o co 0*1 CM oo in <_>' .
mSSSSSSSSS^SSS «
mjnr-r-ino^^CNjtn-jcM-HOv in -
mm^voin
o oooococooocoeococooococooo &» <^-i «
S OOOOOOOOOOOOi-
>. W
O >>
i-H O
••a
fn oo m f^
en c^ po r^>
r^ en i™* en
N-^ >-/ CM ^H
en eM o ^o
3 14 U
0*. 0) 4)
0)' > >
e
3
S *
04 01
o o> 0)
J= -C
C *J *J
CO -B -O
to OJ oi
J) 73 -O
— 3 a
a o o
oes
03
a> o)
e
Q
3 M.
O -H
e -o
10 CO
cn CN oj -*
o tn ^- -*
o o o o
o o o o
oo eo oo oo
o o o o
e e
•H 01 W
b 3 -<
I ^4 0)
S3 U J
«
« to
H a i
1i -C
H H
127
-------
kgal/t), 1.4
respectively.
kg/kkg (2.8 Ib/t) and 1.6 kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t),
EPA based BCT Option 4 effluent levels for the cotton fibers
furnish sector of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategories on
the transfer of the performance of biological treatment
characteristic of the wood fiber furnish sector. EPA applied the
average percent reduction of BOD5_ and TSS below BPT effluent
levels at the best performing mills in the wood fiber furnish
sector (41.0 percent for BODS^ and 51.1 percent for TSS) to BPT
final effluent levels for the cotton fiber furnish sector. EPA
determined that the characteristics and treatability of
wastewaters discharged from mills in both subbategory sectors are
similar. Therefore, the Agency believes that| mills in the cotton
fiber furnish sector will be able to attain the BCT Option 4
long-term average discharge characteristics.! BCT Option 4 flow
and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the cotton fibers
sector of the nonintegrated-fine papers subpategory are 176.5
kl/kkg (42.3 kgal/t), 3.0 kg/kkg (6.0 lb/t)!and 3.5 kg/kkg (7.0
Ib/t), respectively. Available effluent data for mills in this
sector of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory are presented
in Table 111-57. i
i
i
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers - The general; methodology was
followed/as illustrated in Table 111-58. However, because BPT
was identified as primary clarification, d£ta for mills where
biological treatment is employed were excluded from the
computations. BPT final effluent levels are attained through the
application of primary treatment at mills 09o6o8, 090011, 090013,
090022, 090024, and 090028. Data were reviewed with respect to
waste significant grade'changes in three specific delineations:
none, less than one per day, and greater than one per day. For
mills with data available on grade change, EPA found that long-
term average discharge levels varied with grade change frequency.
BCT Option 4 effluent levels are based on the delineation with
the highest average long-term average final effluent levels:
mills with less than one grade change per day (mills -090011 and
090022). BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS
levels for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory are 95.6
kl/kkg (22.9 kgal/t), 2.7 kg/kkg (5.5 lb/t)|and 1.9 kg/kkg (2.9
Ib/t), respectively.
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers - EPA based BCT Option 4
effluent levels on the transfer of performance from the best
performing mills in the nonintegrated-tissue;papers subcategory
for both product sectors in the nonintegrated-lightweight papers
subcategory. EPA applied the average percentage reductions
beyond BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue paper^ subcategory (21.6
percent for BOD5_ and 31.9 percent for TSS) to BPT final effluent
levels for this subcategory. As explained in the development
document supporting the January 1981 proposed regulations, EPA
has determined that the characteristics and treatability of
wastewaters discharged from mills in :the nonintegrated
lightweight papers subcategory and the rionintegrated-tissue
papers subcategory are similar. !
128
-------
re
jj i
Q i
ta
.C
e
O L
Z c
h-t >
Z cy ^~
§ e ** -ii
3 M r-
fH re ^.
'ui- in
LH 0} Q 01
w > o £
r-l "* " ^
CQ C 0
S 5 ^
•H QJ
(u H
W 4J
a -^
O f-H
^ «
0
1 «
3
(U
M
C /-.
>,
CU (0
•O Q
s
cu
s-g
•H 3
«goj^or-r^OvOvor-^r-r-r-r-r-t~.^.co^r-ov
oooooooooooooo
cor^inco-*o>3- fi cy o
JJ (B *J 00
< w « c
S s s c -s « u
—v ZT *H OO C 4)
i^li 33 S1 'SS°-S
XXX^^iC^^ ^>~— IH re w a, c u
seSeSS S2"2 «- °^>i -s«5M
Illlllllllllll ^P "^ sflil
oooooooooooooS SwJS
-------
The Agency, therefore, believes that mills in both sectors of the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategory will be able to
attain the BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent levels.
As shown on Table 111-59, BCT Option 4 floW and final effluent
BOD5 and TSS levels for the lightweight papers sector are 203.2
kl/kkg (48.7 kgal/t), 5.8 kg/kkg (11.6 lb/t)i and 4.1 kg/kkg (8.2
Ib/t)! BCT Option 4 flow and final effluent BOD5 and TSS levels
for the lightweight electrical papers arej320.9 klAkg <7.°;9
kgal/t), 9.1 kg/kkg (18.3 Ib/t), and 6.4 kg/kkg (12.9 Ib/t),
respectively. [
Noninteqrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers - EPA based BCT Option 4
effluent levels for the~nonintegrated-fliter; and nonwoven papers
subcategory on the transfer of performance from the best
performing mills in the nonintegrated-tissue; papers subcategory.
EPA applied the average percent reductions below BPT for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory (21,6 percent for BOE>i
and 3l!9 percent for TSS) to the BPT final effluent levels for
this subcategory. As explained in the development document
supporting the January 1981 proposed rules,i EPA determined that
the characteristics and treatability of wastewaters discharged
from mills in the nonintegrated-fliter and nonwoven papers
subcategory will be able to attain the BCT Option 4 long-term
average discharge levels.(1) Available effluent data for mills
in this subcategory are presented in Table HII-60. BCT Option 4
flow and final effluent BOD5_ and TSS levels for the
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers subcategory are 250.0
kl/kkg (59.9 kgal/t), 7.1 kg/kkg (14.2 lb/t)| and 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0
lb/t), respectively.
Nonintegrated-Paperboard - EPA based BCT Option 4 effluent levels
5H—the transfer of performance from the bes^t performing mills in
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory [for this subcategory.
EPA applied the average percent reductions below BPT for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory (21.6 percent for BOD5
and 3l!9 percent for TSS) to the final BPT .limitations for this
subcategory. As explained in the development document supporting
the January 1981 proposed rules, EPA (determined that the
characteristics and treatability of wastewat.ers discharged from
mills in the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory and
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory are[similar. Therefore,
the Agency believes that mills in the nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategory will be able to attain the BCT Option 4 long-term
average discharge levels. BCT Option 4 flow and BOD5_ and TSS
levels for the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory are 53.8
kl/kkg (12.9 kgal/t), 1.5 kg/kkg (3.1 lb/t), and 1.1 kg/kkg (2.2
lb/t), respectively. ' Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table 111-61. ;
The BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent levels,
developed as described above, are presented!in Table 111-62.
130
-------
4J
IS
a
1
c
o
S
«W
O
V
,0
z
^
8
[I] 4J
S «
*3; (0
U *>
< fa w
H 3
<; W
S
H OS
ai M
28!
ON (r
TJS
FH a: CD
M S 3
[d H IH
2 P 3
E-SU - m
Ed 1 W
O H
Z C tl
• w 4J 0(
Z s re
^ S S S
ta < o
•-> e
re u
-C 01
•H {-«
ta 1
0<
C
Jj
g
f
1— t
p-
M
M
H
in
1
o
b
u
I
jj
"•*•.
£
^
^J
0
5
•C
e
^,
0
jr*tn O r*»^« o
^-!TFH m
ONQcjeMcoFH KO encn a\
S3S2SSS P 53 3
FHe^FHvoa- avr«. en
o\en'OFHeneMen »ff var* \D
o FH o en N f*» FH i^» «^ en ^
FH
F-« m e^j o co m *"• *•*'* o ON /"•*
oovoooeM^vOin r** O** o*
FHFHFHFHevir*.^ -^ o\o r*.
o o CM *a- vo a^ y\ w en -^ w
NOe^tnenr^ONOv en P- eo o
VOCO^'VO.-JJHOO g -J pi
*^\ t~* /~* /~* **>
4J • -O . "O -O -O T)
•H B T3 T) XI tO KJ TJ »U U Ua «4J
3 f-4r4^*(*iincoo -Haiw b H ba^
J5 O O O O O O O 1 ^ 11 u OO- li-lll
oe ooooomin s-<1"> t> inm HI«>
•H ooooooo\a\oo iXiiMa> ^ oo aitwu
J O O O O O — 1 -* 05 OJ Ul td 'H'H CO td iJ
-
BQ
O .
•
J e a
s u a
0)
4J re
re oi LJ
0) U 0
U J->
jJ C
FH re
FH re x;
W ti
•HI) U
O X • 0>
FH 0) 'O FH
•H O W 0)
XI C O J-
FH (Q
w w u
-s-sgi1
•H FH C 03
•H -H « -O
£ E -H C
•H -H FH CO
pi i-j ..j r^)
fl) Xl O *D
O
00
U
JJ
re
u
3
CO
M
.4
0)
a
re
CU
3
W
W
•H
£-
1
^
re
00
s
e
c
55
^
W-l
00
O
O
c
0)
tw
ti
01
U*4
u
c
re
e
u
re
0)
re
w
r-4
01
01
FH
O
•F4
Jj
•~°
131
-------
as'
co co
-------
CO
4J
co
Q
to
4J
a
o
s
o
14
o
f
is
">! tJ
O CO
O *J
gg
ss
m
M w
o
i-< S §
^o o
I O CQ
i-H 55 pj
>H PS CU
3 W ^
ta 55 i
?! E Q
W fcV* W
0 < H
O *J i-3
2; c
a M
rH P3
m K m
IW O
o\ r^- co
f-n \O CO
r-( CM
/—s. .
^
fl)
i-( r- cs
o o o
o o o
in in in
CO CO O
O O r-H
CO i-H O
CO i-H -3-
CM .-TO
CO r-4 -^p
CO rH M
CO r-f »*
CO CO T**
rH CO f^
O O O
o% ** ^d" ^-\
-* O CO CM
O iH ih CO
CM m f> \o
O O CM f-t
CT\ O^ CO <*^
in CTS o , o\
O O CO CO
co m m o
o tn f-i CM
vo o o /-^
CM co r^- cyi
^3 CM CO CM
v_/ \^ / •»_/
rH CO CM CO
VO rH f^- CO
csj u^ m m
^-N /^\
t3 U
J3 ,O etf (0 4-> •
^-^ ^^ ^^ ti a
CO CT> i-H *H 0) W
<}•
O O rH P-t 4H (U
r-H r-H rH CQ W ^
' fr
o
00
u
Jj
n)
u
"a
ta
Oi
P-.
d
(A
tfl
•H
1
•o
u
4J
CQ
00
gj
•H
c
o
^
E
s
M
o
l-t
o
H a
CU A
03 U
O *J
• • m
• JJ • i-H O
4J d a to
C CO CO
Sqj nj }_i g
JH o (0
t-t j-> O IH
j_l 4J fl jJ
i-H CO
i-H CO- W J3 d
U h 00
•H
-------
TABLE 111-62
BCT OPTION 4
LONG-TERM AVERAGE DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
kl/kkR
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemica 1
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
229.9
173.6
147.7
128.9
52.6
52.6
43.0
58.4
275.4
275.4
275.4
302.1
(3)
—
99.3
91.4
101.8
101.8
--
68.0
13.4
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnishl3.4
Wastepaper-Molded Products
23.8
Builders' Paper and Roofing Feltll.3
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
63.4
176.5
95.6
(kgal/t)
(55.1)
(41.6)
(35.4)
(30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
(14.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72.4)
(3)
—
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
—
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
4.6
3.3
2.6
1.9
1.2
1.5
1.2
1.4
7.1
7.6
8.2
10.4
(3)
—
1.5
1.4
2.5
3.2
—
1.3
1.1
0.73
0.60
0.53
1.4
3.0
2.7
(9.2)
(6.6)
(5.2)
(3.9)
(2.4)
(3.1)
(2.4)
(2.7)
(14.1)
(15.1)
(16.4)
(20.8)
(3)
(3.0)
(2.7)
(5.0)
,(6-5?.
(2.6)
(2.2)
(1-5)
(1.2)
(1.1)
(2.8)
(6.0)
(5.5)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
6.5
5.7
4.3
3.2
2.3
2.7
2.2
2.4
12.7
12.7
12.7
14.0
(3)
2.2
2.0
3.3
4.2
..
2.8
1.2
0.97
1.1
0.76
1.6
3.5
1.9
(13.1)
(11-4)
(8.6)
(6.4)
(4.5)
(5.4)
(4.4)
(4.7)
(25.4)
(25.4)
(25.4)
(27.9)
(3)
(4.4)
(4.0)
(7.6)
(8.3)
(5.7)
(2.4)
(1.9)
(2.3)
(1.5)
(3.2)
(7.0)
(3.9)
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
203.2
320.9
250.0
53.8
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
5.8
9.1
7.1
1.5
(11.6)
(18.3)
(14.2)
(3.1)
4.1
6.4
5.0
1.1
(8.2)
(12.9)
(10.0)
(2.2)
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
3 BCT Option 4 effluent characteristics vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final
product. The following equations can be used to obtain annual average effluent charac-
teristics for Papergrade Sulfite mills:
Flow (kl/kkg) = 41.93 + 1.890x
BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 0.86 + 0.047x
TSS (kg/kkg) = 1.35 + 0.069x
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
134
-------
Attainment of BCT Option <4
Table 111-63 summarizes the number of mills attaining BPT and BCT
Option 4 long-term average final effluent levels and the number
of direct discharging mills in each subcategory for which data
were available. BCT Option 4 limits are attained at 37 percent
of the mills in the integrated segment, at 63 percent of the
mills in the secondary fibers segment, and at 74 percent of the
mills in the nonintegrated segment. Percent reductions required
to attain BCT Option 4 BODJ5 final effluent characteristics are
shown in Table 111-64.
EPA compared the BCT Option 4 RWLs shown in Table 111-39, the BCT
Option 4 final effluent levels presented in Table 111-62, and the
BPT RWLs and final effluent levels. The Agency found that, for
all subcategories, compliance with BCT Option 4 final effluent
loads would require a higher BODE[ percent reduction than required
by .compliance with BPT effluent limitations. Therefore, the end-
of-pipe systems that form the basis of BCT Option 4 must be more
efficient in removing BOD!5 than the systems that form the basis
of BPT effluent limitations.
For all mills used to develop BCT Option 4 long-term average
final effluent levels, EPA compared BODj[ final effluent levels to
BODji RWLs to determine if the higher percent reductions
associated with BCT Option 4 are demonstrated in this industry.
The raw waste and final effluent data presented in this section
were used; however, in some cases, more recent RWL data were
available so these data were used in the analysis. The percent
reductions in BODS^ attained at actual mills were then compared to
those that form the basis of BCT Option 4, and are presented in
Table 111-65. To complete this assessment, EPA investigated
eight major industry sectors: bleached kraft, unbleached
kraft/semi-chemical, sulfite, groundwood, deink, other secondary
fibers, nonintegrated-fine papers, and other nonintegrated. As
shown in Tables 111-63 and 65 and as discussed below, mills in
every major sector achieve the percent reductions of BODS^ that
form the basis of BCT Option 4. The subcategories in each sector
have similar waste characteristics and waste treatability. EPA
has determined that all mills representative of subcategories in
a sector are capable of achieving equivalent reductions.
In the bleached kraft sector, the BODS^ reductions (or the BOD5_
removal from BCT Option 4 RWL to BCT Option 4 final effluent
levels) ranged from 91 to 94 percent. A BOD55 reduction within
this range occurs at mills 030010, 030030, 030032, 030046, and
032002. BOD5_ reductions of greater than 94 percent are being
attained at mills 030020, 030027, and 777777.
In the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical sector, BOD5_ reduction
ranges from 93 to 95 percent. A BOD5_ reductions within this
.range occurs at mills 010008, 015004, and 060004 and at mills
010020 and 010025 where oxidation ponds are used. A BOD5[
reduction of greater than 95 percent is being attained at mill
020003.
135
-------
TABLE 111-63
NUMBER OF FACILITIES THAT ATTAIN BPT AND BCT OPTION 4
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers3
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers3
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter3
and Nonwoven Papers3
Nonintegrated-Paperboard3
Mills with
Available
Data
3
10
9
16
15
7
15
8
0
2
1
2
12
2
7
3
11
9
3
36
4
5
12
2
11
4
1
1
4
Mills
Attaining
BPT F.E.
Levels(a)
1
7
5
6
7
3
4
2
0
0
0
0
4
1
6
2
7
7
2
23
1
4
5
1
6
4
1
1
1
Mills
Attaining
BCT Option 4
F.E. Levels(a)
1
2
1
2.
2
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
0
6
1
1
18
0
3
2
0
5
4
1
1
1
1lncludes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
3Includes only mills that do not use secondary treatment.
(a) F.E. = Final Effluent
136
-------
TABLE 111-64
PERCENT REDUCTIONS
REQUIRED TO ATTAIN BCT OPTION 4 BOD5
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
FROM BCT OPTION 4 BODS RAW WASTE LOADS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Percent Reduction*
93
91
93
94
93
94
95
93
95
95
96
96
92-96
91
92
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper •
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintearated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
97
96
873
953
933
89 3
933
87
87
76
73
58
42
85
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories. The percent reduction is a function of the percent sulfite pulp
manufactured on-site.
3BCT Option 4 is identical to BCT Option 1 for this subcategory, and reductions
are those predicted by equation relating biological treatment system influent
BOD5 to effluent BOD5.
*Percent reduction
= [raw waste load (Ib/t) - final effluent (lb/t)] x 100/raw waste load (Ib/t)
137
-------
TABLE I11-65
PERCENT BOD5 REDUCTIONS
ATTAINED AT SOME MILLS MEETING
BPT BOD5 AND TSS FINAL
EFFLUENT LEVELS
Percent Reductions
Percent Reduction
Sector/Mill Number
Bleached Kraft
030010
030020
030027
030030
030032
030046
032002
777777
Unbleached Kraft
and Serai-Chemical
010008
010020(c)
010025 (c)
015004
020003
060004
Sulfite
040009 (d)
040019
Grounduood
052003
052007
052008
052014
054014
054015
070001
Deink
140007
140014
140021
140030
Other Secondary Fiber
08S004
100005
110001
110025
110031
110043
110052
110057
110062
110069
110110
120004
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
080041
080046
to attain, BCT Raw Waste
Option 4 BODS Load BOD5(b)
F.E. Levels(a) (Ib/t)
91-94
74.3
51.0
46.9(1)
.88.1
66.1(1)
62.3
78.7
71.8(2)
93-95
37.6
41.0
27.8
34.2
50.5
37.4(1)
92-96
(3)
93.1(4)
91-92
24.3
38.8(5)
20.1
24.0
33.6
42.7
38.0
96-97
125.5(1)
179.7(5)
284.3(6)
143.0(7)
87-95
44.7
28.4
25.0
38.6
7.1(5)
23.5(5)
18.1
35.0
22.9
14.8
22.4
10.9
87
29.8
27.6
Final Effluent
BOD5(b)
(lb/t)
4.9
2.7
1.3
5.4
5.1
4.1
7.5
3.1
2.0
2.2
1.1
1.7
0.7
2.5
(3)
3.92(4)
1.6
1.9
0.9
0.6
2.5
2.5
3.2
4.4
5.8
4.4
3.9
3.6
3.7
0.3
1.7
0.3
1.6
0.8
1.7
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.3
3.4
2.2
From Raw Waste
BODS to Final
Effluent BODS
93
95
97
94
92
93
91
96
95
95
96
95
99
93
94(3)
96
93
95
96
98
93
94
92
97
97
99
97
92
87
99
96
96
93
96
95
95
97
98
97
89
92
138
-------
<-*
jj
d
Q
y
N— <"
in
^o
i
t— i
3
H
P
0)
3
>-H
MH
MH
rH
«
d
*H
f*
O Ot
•H P rH in
4J W CO Q
u rt d. O
3 15 *rt ffl
Hj p^
01 5 4-1
03 rt o d
OS P 0)
4J 3
u o a 4-1
CJ tt O 4H
i-l fe ffl W
rt.
*i
3
4H ,O P
PC] in) pfl
Q rH
rH O x— '
rt ffl
•rt
2
0} *— '
P in I**™1*
W Q P
« o -**.
3 ffl pC
3 TJ ^
OS O
d
o ^
•ri E-t inl «
P U Q ^
, cj ffl O w
3 ffl r-
-o d 01
0) -rl -31 >
OS « 01
P d H^
P P O
d rt -H
Ol P Ed
CJ 0 ft
l>i 4J O E**
Ot
Oi
(
e
2
s
•j
c
00 oo *o QO i"**
^* co i-i r- c*
-41 CM \O CM
1-4 0)
rH
ot
s *"
J3 O
H PS
~
•— '
,— ^
^^
rH
ml
§.
ffl
d
3
0)
rt
c
MH 4J
~d.
^
rH Q
ml™
a cu
§4-1
a
CO CO
S 14
s o
CQ O
^
II
d
o
•H
4->
CJ
3
CJ
4J
d
CU
U
CJ
a.
CJ
00
^
CU
CO
CU
4J
1
o
T3
d
CO
> 0
V4 rH
3 4!
CO T3
O CU
en 4J
o
J«
4J w
CQ
CJ
CQ P4
CJ
CO 0
CO CU
•0
4-1 rH
d CJ
3 -H
rH 4->
I4H CU
CJ Q,
W
rH CJ
CQ U
c
•H tt
' CJ o
^ a,
"c M
co e
CO V4
4J O
CO 4-1
t) --H
•o o
o
rH CJ
00
CU %4
4-" CO
eel u
•rl
3 a
co
14 CU
J3
CJ 4J
4J g
O MH
U) CQ
CU rH
U CU
-I >
S CU
0 rH
«S'
J3 O
. H «
A
^^
a.
§ 1
O P
'tf M
0 >>
^-^ W
Sti
•rl CU
e s
4J
4J CJ
•H H
rH
3 4J
".S
U 0
T3 •<-)
CQ
LJ CU
5)X
V4 4^
CU
a s
CO O
O4 U
MH
CJ
4J a
o
U rH
o
0 01
•H IH
P MH i-H
« rt
• 4J d d
S d O *H
rt 0) -H MH
J-4 W 4-»
00 01 (J rH
O rH 3 rt
rl ft "O P
cu 01 o) o
)-i i-i 4-»
W rH 0) 01
0) 1-4 .d rd
c^'s
01 no
OS S P 4J
o d ^
rt
s
o
•0 ""
^ 4J
f d
rH CU
3
0 rH
VO MH
en cj
il
" S
CO
r- 4J
rH d
^ 3
X rH
MH
u d
-?'H
0
in
c\ 13
V- 1 CQ
A
i-l W
in -H
o
en o
O -H
4->
*^j ej
eo -O
CJ
a\ u
a
O 4->
o d
*J eu
M CJ
rH O,
rH
•r) CJ
*~s
•
CQ
o
H
CM
4-1
ta
s
er
• CJ
i w
oi 2
1°
4-1 O
3 CQ
CU 'H
PS MH
•H
4J CJ
°t
(0 4J
4J
d s
CJ O
S 14
3 eo
en
eo
in
U)
• 4J
CO O
u ft
22
oJ oo
00-S
•rl O
rH 4J
S d
5^
S cj
U 00
4J CQ
1 JZ
00 U
hj O
s s
O 0
MH MH
rt rt
« CO
/— V .r— S
d
•H
to
d
o
•H
P
•3
X
o
0)
00
rt
o
P
rt
•H
rH
1— t
•H
s
U)
•H
P
fl
•o
0)
W
3
s
W
w
d
01
s
rt
.01
M
H
,
•r-) -H «
S
eo 4J
O d
ca S eu
CJ 4J S
U 4J
(Q CJ eo
-d J3 eu
W 4J rl
4J
rH MH
i-H O CJ
•rl J3
£ 4J 4J
3
en O, 4J
•rl ,4J CO
J3 3 J3
H O 4J
V
. ^"^
139
-------
In the sulfite sector, BOD5 reductions range from 92 to 96
percent. A 96 percent BODJ5 reduction occurs at mill 040019 where
only pulp mill wastes are biologically treated. The BPT long-
term average BOD5_ effluent level is now attained at mills 040016
and 040017; however, the BPT long-term average TSS effluent level
is exceeded. At mills 040016 and 040017, BOD5_ percent reductions
of between 94 and 95 percent occur. Also, mill 040009, a
papergrade sulfite mill, shares a joint treatment system with a
bleached kraft mill. About 60 percent of the BOD5_ RWL is
associated with the papergrade sulfite operations. At mill
040009, a BOD5_ reduction of over 98 percent occurs.
In the groundwood sector, BOD5_ reduction ranges from 91 to 92
percent. A BODES reduction occurs within this range at mill
054014. BOD5_ reductions of greater than 92 percent occur at mills
052001, 052007, 052008, 052014, 054015, and 070001.
In the deink sector, BOD5_ reductions range from 96 to 97 percent.
A BOD5_ reduction within this range occurs at mills 140007,
140014, 140019, and 140030. A BOD5_ reduction of 99 percent
occurs at mill 140021.
In the other secondary fibers sector subcategories, BODJ5
reductions range from 87 to 95 percent. A BOD5_ reduction within
this range occurs at mills 085004, 100005, 110043, 110057, and
110062. A BOD5_ reduction of greater than 95 percent occurs at
mills 110001, 110025, 110031, 110052, 110069, 110110, and 120004.
In the nonintegrated-fine papers sector, the BOD5_ reduction is 87
percent. BOD5_ reductions of at least 87 percent occur at mills
080041 and 080046.
In the other nonintegrated sector subcategories, the BOD5_
reductions range from 42 to 85 percent. A BOD5_ reduction within
this range occurs at mills 090013, 090022, 105020, and 105051. A
BOD5_ percent reduction of greater than 85 percent occurs at mill
090008.
As shown above, end-of-pipe biological treatment is capable of
attaining the percent reductions in BOD5_ that form the basis of
BCT Option 4 in all subcategory sectors where biological
treatment is the technology basis of BPT effluent limitations.
Both the activated sludge process and aerated stabilization basin
systems are capable of attaining these reductions. In northern
climates, available data show that the activated sludge process
is superior in its ability to control pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry discharges (see development document supporting the
January 1981 proposed regulations). In the nonintegrated
subcategories where primary treatment is the basis of BPT
effluent limitations, primary treatment is also capable" of
attaining the BOD5_ reductions required by BCT Option 4.
Some commenters on the January 1981 proposed regulations
expressed concern that few existing mills in the integrated
segment were attaining the proposed BCT Option 4 levels. These
140
-------
commenters stated that EPA had overstated the capability of
biological treatment to reduce BOD_5 RWLs in this segment. As
discussed above, biological treatment systems now employed in the
integrated segment are capable of reducing BODS to the extent
required by BCT Option 4. Because the biological treatment
systems that are the basis of BCT Option 4 must achieve a higher
BODjj percent reduction than that required by BPT technology, the
Agency conducted further investigations to ensure that these
systems have been sized properly to ensure that the higher BODjj
reductions could be attained at all mills.
In the development document supporting the January 1981 proposed
rules, EPA published the design criteria for end-of-pipe
biological treatment systems believed to be capable of attaining
the proposed BCT Option 4 effluent levels.(1) These design
criteria are identical to the BCT Option 4 design criteria in
Table 111-66 of this document. This table also presents design
criteria for aerated stabilization basins and extended aeration
activated sludge systems that EPA believes are equivalent in
pollutant removal capability to the conventional activated sludge
systems that form the basis of BCT Option 4 (see Section IX of
the development document supporting the proposed rules).(1) As
shown, these systems are considerably larger than those that form
the basis of BPT effluent limitations.
Table 111-67.compares EPA's design criteria to the actual design
criteria for treatment systems that achieve the percent
reductions of BODjj required for meeting BCT Option 4 levels. As
shown, conventional activated sludge systems (and the equivalent
aerated stabilization basins and extended aeration activated
sludge systems) that form the basis of BCT Option 4 are larger
than the systems generally employed at actual mills attaining the
required BCT Option 4 percent reductions. Therefore, the larger
end-of-pipe treatment systems that form the basis of BCT Option 4
for the integrated segment are capable of attaining the BOD5_
reductions that are required by BCT Option 4.
In summary, the percent BODj[ reductions that form the basis of
BCT Option 4 are being attained at mills in each subcategory or
at mills in-related subcategories where wastewaters have similar
characteristics and treatability. These reductions are being
attained by the use of treatment systems that are even smaller
than those that form the basis of BCT Option 4. These larger
systems have not been chosen for use by mills in many
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, but
the technology is readily available for application at all mills.
Because (a) the upgrade of in-place treatment systems can be
readily designed, constructed, and operated at mills in every
subcategory and (b) the wastewater and operating characteristics
remain unchanged, EPA has determined that all mills in every
subcategory will be capable of attaining BCT Option 4 limitations
by use of expanded end-of-pipe treatment systems.
141
-------
TABLE 111-66
A COMPARISON OF
BCf OPTION 4 DESIGN CRITERIA
TO BPT DESIGN CRITERIA
Activated Sludge
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Equalization (hours)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours)
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m)
Aeration (kg BOD5/d/HP)
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Extended Aeration
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Equalization (hours)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours)
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m)
Aeration (kg BOD5/d/HP)
Secondary Clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aerated Stabilization Basin
Primary Clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (days)
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/1000 cu m)
Aeration
o Organic (kg BOD5/d/HP)
o Mixing (HP/1000 cu m)
Settling (days)
BPT
24
12
8
0.8
19
20
24
12
30
0.3-0.6
19
20
24
13
18.4
15.3
(a)
1
BCT
Option 4
20
12
12
0.5
11.2
16
20
12
48
0.2
11.2
16
20
13
18.4
15.3
2.6
10 .
(a) Aerator mixing was not considered in BPT design criteria.
142
-------
TABLE IH-67
A COMPARISON OF BCT OPTION 4
DESIGN CRITERIA TO
CRITERIA USED AT INTEGRATED MILLS
WHERE BODS REDUCTIONS COMPARABLE TO THOSE REQUIRED
TO ATTAIN BCT OPTION 4 ARE ACHIEVED
Activated Sludge
BCT
Option 4
Design
Criteria
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours)
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m)
Aeration (kg BODS/HP)
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Extended Aeration
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours)
o Organic Loading (kg BODS/d/cu m)
Aeration (kg BODS/HP)
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aerated Stabilization Basin
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m)
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (days)
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m)
Aeration
o Organic Loading (kg BODS/HP)
o Mixing (HP/1000 cu m)
Settling (days)
20
20
20
Actual Mill
yerage Median Minimum Maximum
20 20 10 28
12.0
0.5
11.2
16
7.8
0.9
17.0
18
6.9
0.9
14.9
17
2.9
0.6
11. i
15
16.4
1.2
29.4
23
35
19
28
20
12
63
43
0.2
11.2
16'
45.2
0.3
17.5
25
29.4
0.2
13.9
24
19.0
0.1
7.3
6
117.6
1.1
32.8
43
25
13
18.4
15.3
2.6
10
9.7
30.5
16.7
2.0
9.9
9.7
22.1
16.2
1.3
9.9
0.9
13.2
11.9
0.6
0.2
15.2
94.9
24.0
6.6
22.2
143
-------
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT VARIABILITY ANALYSIS
Pollutant quantities discharged from a wastewater treatment
system vary. EPA accounts for this variability in deriving
limitations controlling wastewater discharges. The statistical
procedures employed in analyzing variability for the conventional
pollutants, BODS^ and TSS, regulated under BCT for the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry are described below.
Effluent Limitations Guidelines
An effluent limitation is an upper bound oh the amount of
pollutant discharge allowed per day or average of 30 days. The
limitations are determined by calculating the product of two
numbers which may be derived from effluent data: one is referred
to as a variability factor and the other is referred to as a
long-term average. Two types of variability factors are derived
for the guidelines: a daily maximum factor and a 30-day maximum
factor. The daily maximum factor is the ratio of (a) a value
that would be exceeded rarely by the daily pollutant discharge to
(b) the long-term average daily discharge. The 30-day maximum
factor is the ratio of (a) a value that would be exceeded rarely
by the average of 30 daily discharge measurements to (b) the
long-term average daily discharge. The long-term average daily
discharge quantity is an expression of the long-term performance
of the treatment or discharge process in units of average daily
kilograms (pounds) of pollutant discharged. Given a daily
maximum variability factor for a pollutant (denoted by VF) and a
long-term average for the same pollutant (denoted by LTA), the
daily limitation is the product of the variability factor and the
long-term average (VF x LTA). Similarly, given a 30-day maximum
variability (VF3Q), the limit for the average of 30 daily
observations is VF3Q x LTA.
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
Previously,
factor has
percentile
values to
discharge.
represents
in this industry, the daily maximum variability
been defined as the ratio of an estimated 99th
of the distribution of daily pollutant discharge
the estimated long-term average daily pollutant
The 99th percentile of daily pollutant discharge
a pollutant discharge value below which fall 99
percent of all pollutant discharge values. Estimates of the 99th
percentile of daily pollutant discharge distribution may be
calculated from available effluent data. Percentiles may be
estimated using either a parametric or nonparametric approach.
To use a parametric approach, a distribution with a known
functional form is fit to the data. Distributions such as
normal, lognormal, and three-parameter lognormai distributions
have been used for past guidelines development. If a
distribution describes the data adequately, a 99th percentile can
be calculated through the use of the known functional form of the
assumed distribution.
144
-------
Wo/iparametric methods may also be used to estimate distribution
percentiles. Such methods do not require that the particular
form of the underlying distribution be known, and make no
restrictive assumptions about the distributional form of the
data. Nonparametric methods are discussed in many texts. See,
for example, J.D. Gibbons, Nonparametric Statistical Inference,
McGraw-Hill (1971).(15) EPA has applied nonparametric methods to
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry effluent data to obtain 50
percent confidence level (or tolerance level) estimates of the
99th percentile of the distribution of daily pollutant discharge.
An estimate of the 99th percentile was determined such that the
probability that the estimate (which is of the form: the rth
largest of n measurements) is greater than or equal to the 99th
percentile of the daily pollutant discharge (denoted as K.gg)
is no less than 0.5. That is, n daily pollutant discharge values
were obtained and ordered from smallest to largest in value. The
rth smallest pollutant discharge value (where r is.less than or
equal to n), denoted by X(r), is chosen such that the probability
that X(r) is greater than or equal to K.gg is at least 0.5
(i.e., P[X(r) > K.gg] > 0.£5). Using this approach, the
value of r is determined such that
« 1-
(l-p)n-1 > 0.5
where p = .99
and /n\= n!
i i! (n-i)!
The estimate is interpreted as the value below which 99
of the values of a future sample of size n will fall
probability of at least 0.5.
percent
with a
Analysis of Daily Pollutant Discharge Values to Determine Daily
Maximum Variability Factors
Daily measurements for the conventional pollutants, BOD5_ and TSS,
were submitted by mill representatives. Values for facilities
employing primary and/or biological treatment were obtained
through the supplemental data request program. Values for
facilities employing chemically assisted clarification were
obtained through the supplemental data request program and the
verification sampling program. These values were used to
calculate daily maximum variability factors and 30-day maximum
variability factors.
Initially, a parametric approach was considered to estimate the
99th percentile of daily pollutant discharge values. Mill-
specific daily pollutant discharge values for BOD^5 and TSS were
fit to hypothesized normal and lognormal distributions.
Kolmogorov-Smirnov goodness-of-fit tests and frequency histograms
were then performed to assess whether mill-specific sets of daily
pollutant values could be adequately described by the normal or
145
-------
lognormal distributions. The goodness-of-fit tests indicated
that, in general, neither the normal nor lognormal distribution
adequately represent the mill-specific daily pollutant discharge
values of BOD5_ and TSS. Because of these results, EPA decided to
use nonparametric estimates of the 99th percentile of the daily
data.
The 50 percent tolerance level criterion described above was used
to estimate the 99th percentile. Mill-specific daily maximum
variability factors were determined by calculating the ratio of
the 99th percentile estimates to the average of the daily
discharge values. The effects of daily dependence were examined
using a time series model that was developed for the timber
products point source category (see reference 16 Final
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Timber Products Point Source Category, U.S.
EPA, Washington, D.C., January 1981)). The results show that
maximum day variability factors are relatively insensitive to
daily dependence and that the nonparametric methods used yield
representative variability factors for data examined in this
study.
The conclusions above are supported by additional analyses
conducted by the Agency. Each daily value was compared to the
corresponding mill-specific 99th percentile estimate on a mill-
specific basis. Table 111-68 displays the aggregate results of
comparing each daily value to its corresponding 99th percentile
estimate of the daily maximum discharges of BODj[ and TSS. The
percentage of daily values exceeding the 99th percentile estimate
is substantially the same as the expected one percent. Table
111-69 displays mill-specific values for maximum day variability
factors for BOD5_ and TSS, obtained by dividing the 99th
percentile estimates by the long-term average pollutant values.
30-Day Maximum Variability Factors
The approach for deriving 30-day maximum variability factors is
suggested by a statistical result known as the Central Limit
Theorem. This theorem states that the distribution of a mean of
a sample of size n drawn from any one of a large class of
different distributional forms will be approximately normally
distributed. For practical purposes, the normal distribution
provides a good approximation to the distribution of the sample
mean for samples as small as 25 or 30 (see reference 17, Miller
and Freund, Probability and Statistics for Engineers, Prentice-
Hall, 1965, pp. 132-134).
Analysis of 30-Day Averages of Pollutant Discharge
Determine 30-Day Maximum Variability Factors
Values to
The mill-specific data for each pollutant were divided into
periods with 30 days , of measurement. These periods, were
constructed without regard to whether the days fell into a
calendar month period or whether measurements on adjacent days
were available. For instance, if 30 daily measurements were
146
-------
TABLE 111-68
DISTRIBUTION OF DAILY VALUES ABOUT
THE ESTIMATE OF THE 99th PERCENTILE
Percentage of Points
Percentile
Percentage of Points
>99th Percentile
Totals
TSS
BODS
99.2%
(29,755)*
99,2%
(28,860)*
0.8%
(247)*
0.8%
(244)*
100.0%
(30,002)*
100.0%
(29,104)*
* Actual number of daily data points given in parentheses.
147
-------
!S
CQ CA
SH H
W 03
WWW'
ea ra eo
5w£ ""'
CO < <
S r1 _
u
no m
4J 2 ^
u -J
•a > ta •--
" < *J *-N
w cn
SUM'-'
4J ^ /^
« a a N
£-S5-M
t& S
£ I
. a
•nab
X Q «
^ O B
|w£
O
31
oo co r^
CM CM to CM
.
1A8
-------
m
\-/
a
1
2! C?
rH ^— '
Z
rH »
.— N p2 (0 rH -tf ,—• %
•Q r«] s_ ' \~s %••' in
u S to ~
3 Id Z W 03
C 0 O H H f-i
•H >-4 Ed Ed [d
*j as H w w w
c o < Z E-i < U
3 f-4 3 — 4 > §
S § to
o a 1-4
hH 1— 4 tO
oa K co
Cu <
3
1
O
4J
"O
)
I
to
rH
H
**
CO
0
S
§
QJ y"s
oo m
« •*-•
u /^
CU ^T
V M <-'
*J ji /-.
CD 3 tN
r-l M •^
3 /^
(J >» f-4
(Q
ft)
01
'1-4 ' (0 14
X O 0)
<8 >
E <
a
14 U U
u « *J
s> a e
a n-4 'c
Z 0 O4
.§ §•'!
X Q >
5 u oo
0 CD O
CU i-l ^
Ij - CJ O
4j e
>> •&
rH U U
CD TO W
•H -H • '
00 ti E-
O &4 ^4
o
MM O
jj
•H O
: . - .E >
&4 Pri rH 4J
C C £ g
fcl b £ &
4J 4J 14
4J 4J 14
^J tl) • CU 4J
ji ja 4J o
U t4 CU
0 0 J= _M
B M 0 . .C
(0 U 4-> 'i-l
41 4) 3 ,
> > w ..
4) 41 rH E
rH rH 4) • (U
iJ 4J 41 O W
4) 4J 4J W
9 a . *» • a
rH rH B M U 4J
IM 'w 4) *J *H C
44 lw 3 «H **H 4J
4) 4) • rH E *«•* £
68 lw -H .W *J :
j .S 5 1 " .3 " S
C *W WH rH (Q 4) *O
41 C 3 U 9t
= .- .» 4J -H rH 4-> U •
AJ ^ *j fi MH **-t w «) w
« C C 41 <« -r* MH 11
4I4)4>3*~4)W iJOO
4J *J *J *w C H W u tn u
flj « M-l 4) Ot 'H 4)
1-H 41 4) 4) E CQ >* W rH >
flj u u 4J 1-4 >. an
•H CU 4) O W , « -r* C
OOrHi-Hffll-l U C CO-H
0) O -H >H O >t W OJ I-l O4>
•.g .- -H 00 00 H « J5 O -r4 *O
M 43^0^0^1430 «« ^^
"So j3'o'o'w-H>»43 (D MW
4J C W 4J 4J 0)
.H U rH -H -r4 O *H 43 rH C O 4)
MH 4) -M O 4) -H -H
41 Q EncaCn4JSU u-U
£ Mr- 1 43 rH -rl «O
CQ «! rH^r4-H4)-H,J3rH 4H
o 3 i-HCMco
-------
available from January 1 to February 15, these 30 measurements
were used to construct one 30-day average to be included in the
analysis. If the next 30 measurements were available during
February 16 to March 25, these would constitute the next 30-day
average and so on. The mill-specific 30-day averages so
constructed were found to fit the normal distribution adequately
on the basis of goodness-of-fit tests. These tests were
performed using the mean of the 30-day means and the standard
deviation of the 30-day means to estimate the mean and standard
deviation of the hypothesized distribution. The results of the
goodness-of-fit tests are summarized in Table 111-70 and are
consistent with the Central Limit Theorem. Using X3Q and
830 to denote the mean and standard deviation of the 30 day
averages, respectively, for a particular mill, the 99th
percentiles were estimated as X3Q +2.22 830-
EPA also examined the effects . of daily dependence, monthly
dependence, and seasonality using a time series model. A simpler
version of this time series model was used to determine maximum
30-day average variability in establishing effluent limitations
guidelines and standards for the Timber Products Processing Point
Source Category (See reference 16, Final Development Document for
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Timber
Products Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., January 1981). The results show that,
although seasonality has the most important effect on maximum 30-
day average variability factors, the method used in this study
for estimating 99th percentiles accounts for seasonality and
provides representative maximum 30-day average variability
factors.
The conclusions above are supported by additional analyses
conducted by the Agency. On a mill-specific basis, each 30-day
average was compared to the corresponding mill-specific 99th
percentile estimate. Table 111-71 displays the aggregate results
of comparing each 30-day average to its corresponding 99th
percentile estimate of the distribution of 30-day averages of
pollutant values for BODS^ and TSS. The percentage of 30-day
averages exceeding the 99th percentile estimate is substantially
the same as the expected one percent. Table 111-72 displays
mill-specific maximum 30-day average variability factors for BOD5_
and TSS, obtained by dividing the 99th percentile estimates by
the long-term average pollutant values.
Establishment of Applicable Variability Factors
Biological
individual mills'
factors for BODS
Treatment_ - Tables 111-69 and 111-72 , present the
30-day average and daily maximum variability
and TSS for those mills with biological
treatment systems. , For many subcategories, biological treatment
is the technology basis for achieving the effluent reduction
required under BCT guidelines. Variability factors compiled for
each mill were averaged across mills, and one 30-day average and
one daily variability factor were determined for BOD5_ and TSS.
These two variability factors were used to establish 30-day
150
-------
s~\
CO
i
a
i
o
CO
sa
rt
en
CO
CJ
S 1
HH OS
HH °
1 1
H 6-
H
p*4
O
CO
CO
. o
O1
CO
(->
CO
as
^^^
,0
c:
- o
•rt
W
• rt
U
S
O
•iH
4J
W -H
OJ JJ
6-t «
en
QJ V
,a c
E 4H «
3 O jl
,-v
<3
"c
C
u
1
r-H 4J.rt
at re o
0
•rt 0) O
4J 3
•rt r-H 1
o > a
n
3
g
U
W 0
p-H
O
W
U
a
r—~\
U
CO -- -
55 1
xO
ON
CO
1— I
O 1
o\
CO
CM
O 1
en rt
CM
rt
O
O
.11
a
00
•rt CO
CO B5
CM 0
CM r-
C7* CO
r-H rt
O O
r—
•O i-t
4) t«5
x:
O ^3
nj CJ
oi -C
r-H CJ
CO to
0)
Jj i— 1
(U P3
-M
U f-«
S CQ
O O
O O
11 II
£5 S
00 00
CN in m
CM i— ( i- 4
OOO
r^- co r*-
CN i— 1 O
OOO
•^ PO CO
CJ CO CO
o
o
II ,
a
00 .
iis
OOO
« O^ \O
C^ O r-.
OOO
** CM cn
CM CO fO
OOO
OOO
CO f) CO
OOO
^
OJ
•H
t-H
CO
rM
<
o
o
M
a
oo
5= 55 CO
co o m
•^ i—* CT\
CM CM r- 1
o o o
CO CJ\ CO
i— 1 r- 1 r— (
O O 0
CN rH CO
. cn cn co
o.o m
^ i— 1 ON
cn \o r-
CM CM r-H
o o o
CO i— 1 ON
ON O r-.
in oo vo
r-H i— I r^H-
o o o
CO -* CO
' r-* i— 1 CO
0 O O
o o o
I— -i i— . r-H
O O 0
4J
MH
£ «
0
•c ^a -
4) .U
ja cu
u c oo
OJ s-J CQ
r-H
-Q 0 0
.g
cn co co
H5 55 2=
CO CO OO
OOO
CO CO CO
r-H CM O
OOO
O r-H r-H
CO r-H CO
w cn co
jz; zz ^
CO CO CO
r-H CM r-H
OOO
r— • oo o
CM r- ON
i-H r-H O
OOO
,O rH '(— 1
CO r-H CO
§o o
o o
CM CM -vD
OOO
'n
u
'E
0)
j=:
CJ
I
•H
1
cn
u
cn s-'
2 t
00
CM
O I
o
CO
r— 1
O 1
CM
r— t
o
0
II
as
.2^
CM
CM
o • i
CO
CO
CM
' O 1
f-H CO
CM
r- 1 rH
o o
-O1
CO
iJ-H
(0 «
NS -H
6 -
tJ 4) ,
CO -H
cu E
i-H co
CM CM CM CM
O O 1 O O
oo r— CM -d"
ON O r- oo
CO CM vO "sO
CM r-H .-HO
o o i o o
r*« m "3" CM co
r-l CM i-H --H
o o o o o
O O 0 O O
^^
OJ
4.J
ill
i-H
CO
00
1H
CU
ex
rt
OH
CO CO
-Z Z
CO CO
CM CM
OO CO
i-H i-H
o o
O CM
CO CM
-J vO
rt l-H
0 0
CM CM
CO CO.
!
o
o
II
a
00
co -z.
CM O
in r^
rt 'rt
o o
\o o
in -»
CM rt
o o
0 0
CO CO
o - o
0 0
CM 0
in r*-
0 0
in
(U
OH O
„ 8.
tU * rt
t i re
O O -rt
o o c
3 3 p
•O - "O J3
C B U
3 3 _
-------
*— 0
<0
S^r
2
u
W
<
>•
«c
<=>
t
O
CO
e
>
^^ rH
•O CO
CJ CO
3 W
C O
2 3
B CO
8 K
^ P
_ rW
S M
i a
>-< u
r-4 H
a s
CO (U
S i
o
1
CO
i
u
fc
o
£
J5
i
8
CO
o
^
n
p
,-s
•3
c
o
•iH
M
'tJ
CU
G
r-l 4J r-t
to eo o
u
j§°
rl rH H
U «
o > a
u
*H
4J
a *J
E-t ^
CO
u
£ c
3 O T r* rH i—tvor^ COONONCMCN CMOO
rHi-HCNCNcMCO OO r^CO •^'^JCN OrHrHCMCM CNCMCN
oooooo oo oo ooo ooooo ooo
o o o o o o oo oo ooo ooooo oinm
^T-J^^r-ff-^T OON rHrH OOCOCO ONONONONOS MCOOO
^-t ,_H ,-H ,-H ,_( r-t r-tO rHr-H OOO OOOOO WO'-HrH
cu
ft
cu to cu •*-*
ft JH ft J"
« S « ob
)H ft ft CU -H
a] CU CQ <"
ft JJ CM CU S
eo W 3 «-*
ft co cu w x:
M >
H 3 ^ C C C
W CU *iH -rl -H
O U ft G G C
•H CO O O 0
^H CU 55 . 55 2=
CO
cu
*. 00
eo
O ' -H CU
CO CO >
CO CU CO
< X!
rH O CQ
CO ft "O
CJ >t 1
•H JS rH
(A CO
•H CU CU
4J 4J >
eo O *iH
CO CU to
II g |
1—3 1 « .14-4
= CU JJ
*• N CU
G 'H « CO
5 CO <^™> •
O C CO *rt rH CO
•a JH E X! T3
G CO G (0
G 3 rH
C CJ 3 to
rH . CO 'O CU
eo rH CO G 6-1
g ca 4-i CU 3
CJ eo 13 O W
O -H 13 « *W H
55 ' j-> Jj O
•H OO 4J IM
O (JO • CU G -H
MH X CO ft rH
CO CU CQ CO i-H
CO -O 4J -rH P-i flj -H
4-J CU CJ U 3 >-^
CO CU CU O 'O
-H
•H 10 W .5 CO CO
S -HO 3
CO *J 13 eo 4-> >>
1 CO TJ -H eo "O
O CO • CO 14-1
U CU 3 O 3
o 4-1 • -a o cn xi
00 W -H • C rH *»«t
o cu^-'coeQfficuiH
eo E 4J -H ^-^ > 4J
4-1 i-H *J M 4-> -ri CO
CO • O 4H Ci '>»**"< OOOX! S
GeO OCOCU-H^WCJCU'J-'JH
CB 'O S O rH U CO "O O O
CM fl) CU CQ C
tnlinl '*-' cu 4-> 4J i— t u 4->
QQ - JSOCOCQOOCUCU
§O • • *-> c "a i-t w xi
03 33 r— CU CU
T3 T3 -ON « 4J G -H S'xi 2
CUCU COi— i— 1 CU tti CU 4J
4J 4-) U O3 -H T3
eaeo o ^xcoucocoxlG
f-ih *4-4CN CU--HCUCU003
aicu cuvo^J-i^w-o-nrio
0000 -H CJ MH330^4H
•H'H i-H 'CU4-lDrHr-(Xl
UI-I r-4r~l-i-)COC/)CJCj4JCO
«*4WH -rtOCUCUGGCrHCQ
-]C JC (0 Xl CJ -O CU *«
152
-------
TABLE III-71
DISTRIBUTION OF 30-DAY AVERAGES ABOUT
THE ESTIMATE OF THE 99th PERCENTILE
Percentage of Points
Percentile
Percentage of Points
>99th Percentile
Totals
TSS
BODS
98.2%
(961)*
98.1%
(930)*
1.8%
(18)*
1.9%
(18)*
100.0%
(979)
100.0%
(948)
* Actual number of successive 30-day averages given in parentheses.
153
-------
o
3=
*"* ^
S co
Ctj 2C
£-t O
W *-4
Q E~*
<
1 [14 S
S w3
o ^*
3GS
§< t
Cu O
IX en
H S
sl
* s
1
01
5
IN
^
rH *3" *-*
\^\-> If)
CO W ^
en co en
CQ CQ CQ
«««
H Z Z
|2|
P <: o
S S S
U M tu
H|s
g°0
rH >< Id
o eg t-.
S £ w
0 S en
HH o; en
M 5 M W
U < JJ /->
P 0) CO ^
ta « 3 e>
^ 'i ^ v""'
•H U >* i-
2= ^ .0 ^
U
1 (0 S
£ Q O
•H i b
X O U
«J O >
z <
CO
n
a
U « K
|B|
z'S.S
III
ra o >
n
i
n
U *J M
4J « 4J
1!I
o
rH ic>ic^'C
^^ ^~^ /— S ^^ **^ **~* /~^ /— ^ /"^ /— * *~* S~^ **"* /*^ /TS *™ H ^™\ /~N if" V /"" \ /"^i IT— s ,*— \ ^- s ^^ /— v ^»j ,— >. ^.-^ ,1— ^ ^—^ /*^1 ^.^ ,— ^ s* % /~\ «•", ^~
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^T ^f ^"^ r*^ ^^ ^^ r— 4i-4i— li— Ir— tfHrHir— 1 r^ ^f-4rHrHir— (i— 4r-frH*^i— 4i— IrHf-^i— li— liHr^rH/H
SSS^S2ScnS§«SS5^S2S35SS3^SSSS^2SSSS23§S
^. * . * ii *. i*. * * - , •!« Jf Jf •% . -i; -I: % -Jt -{j ^s ^: -j; ^j .;? j; j:
SOTSSmS^*^^^^®^^®^^^^^^^
o^coco r^e^oNxo^e^e^cnoNvfifHNOP^mcoincr.aNONr^r^^i^r^^^t^t^fn.Sc^^
r-* ,-(
1
ij j; j. j^ jj I, ij jj ^, 1^ .^ .^ . ,^ «» j. i. t, i
S or2SSSSSS'~lolcn'"'co^>
g rH* 0»^«*-0_»«0«<0 ^^rHen^CnOOVvO^^rHr-rH-JCM^rH^Cn^r^n
o
m
H
3
1
154
-------
0)
w
01 CO
4) w •
4J ,jQ >
- S 3 '
rH rH CO '
rH 3
•H U >»
S rH ,0 '
10
10
a
oo
o
rH in
rH CM
* •¥.
a* > *H U
•H 00 00 H « J3
J3 O O W 10 TO (J
rH -rH -iH E -O
5 5 65-3 -..
3 "g ,3 "SIS.
-a » i » 8 1
rHMjSrHjJ
,
«)
O
rH 1 —
O CM
O O
O O
*O CO
0 O
155
-------
average and daily maximum effluent limitations controlling the
discharge of conventional pollutants from the subcategories where
biological treatment forms the technology basis.
Minimum, maximum, and average variability factors were determined
for each of three subsets of mills. These subsets were developed
from a group of mills with biological treatment systems and are
as follows:
Subset Number
(1)
(2)
(3)
Subset Description
Mills with biological treatment systems.
Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels at or better than BPT
limitations. Biological treatment is not
necessarily the treatment technology on which
BPT is based for some of these mills (i.e.,
primary treatment forms the basis of BPT
effluent limitations applicable to discharges
from some of these.mills).
Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels at or better than BPT.
Biological treatment is the technology on
which BPT effluent limitations are based for
these mills.
Maximum daily and maximum 30-day average variability factors for
these subsets are shown in Table 111-73. Maximum daily and
maximum 30-day average variability factors for these three
subsets are shown in Table 111-73. The 30-day average
variability factors determined for each of the three subsets of
mills are nearly equal to the variability factors used in the
development of the BPT Phase II effluent limitations guidelines.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the BCT 30-day average
effluent variability factors for BOD5^ and TSS are identical to
the 30-day average variability factors developed for BPT Phase II
effluent limitations for subcategories for which biological
treatment is the basis of BPT. Hence, the 30-day average
variability factors for BODS^ and TSS, to be applied to those
technology options where biological treatment is the technology
basis, are as follows:
30-Day Average Variability Factors
^ =1.78
TSS = 1.82
156-
-------
IN O CO
>n -» CM
CM O CO
in >ff CM
i—i r*» co
r^ oo CM
ON O\ I— I
00 CM I
-3 CM •
I CM CM O in CO
i in oo -» co e*
I CM i-4 i-4 CM i-4
00 CM CM
CM in oo
o in co
-3- co o\
^ CM -H .-4 CM .
3 -
CM CO CM
CM in eo
X I 01
a o >
S3 co <
i CM e\ in in cr*
i oo r^- MD in o
4 CM ~* i-H CM ^-4
o CM oo r~ m CM
CO oo r- r~ uo O
P^ {-M ^ ^H CM CM
mp
ted
ith Ref
Mi
Maxim
Average
With Unrefrige
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Av
Un
Mi
Ma
Av
157
-------
r
/-^
m
^s
Q -
23 CO
5 ^"^
^-»-( -
*" §S
e
c <|C?
O ^— '
\^<: co
o t-<
CO 1 Ex]
r-» o co
HH S
*"* £ «
352
cn •A
< 3 cn
H OS
2g
1-H
t-H
<
HH
1
§01
M
H 2
Is!
cn
cn
H
E 01
S re re
•H a u
X 1 01
re o ^
E 01
3 00
E a
re a >
33 ^C
in
Q
03
e ai
3 >. M
•H Q U
X 1 01
re o >
3£ CO 3'
•H U 1-H -H O
+J '4J f_"| 4J (JJ
U i-H (— 1 U rH
•OJ -H OS 4) r-H
i-H O •< i— i O
U «
H 00 < U 00
)H «H -H (H QJ *r4 *H JiJ g U *H *H U (U O
o3sss:z:< w.osss3H -H
CO
vj
5 S HH 5 0?
**"»
^^
158
-------
The average daily maximum variability factors for BODS^ and TSS
for each of the three subsets of mills with biological treatment
systems are given in Table 111-73. These variability factors are
lower than the variability factors used to develop the BPT Phase
II daily maximum effluent limitations. Because these variability
factors are based on recent operating data, EPA has decided to
apply them to determine effluent limitations for the technology
options where biological treatment is the technology basis. As
the daily maximum variability factors for the three subsets are
approximately equal, the daily maximum variability factors for
the options where biological treatment is the technology basis
are as follows:
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
BODjj = 3.0
TSS =3.0
Primary Treatment - Wastewater data from mills where primary
clarification is employed were also collected as part of the
supplemental data request program. Daily maximum and maximum 30-
day variability factors for subcategories with such treatment
were determined using the methods which were applied to data from
mills with biological treatment systems and are described
previously.
Minimum, maximum, and average variability factors were determined
for the following subset of mills. This subset was developed
from the group of mills with primary clarification and is as
follows:
Subset Number
(4)
Subset Description
Mills with effluent levels at or better than
BPT with primary clarification as the
technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
Maximum daily and maximum 30-day average variability factors for
the subset of mills with primary clarification are shown in Table
111-73. Both the maximum daily and the 30-day average
variability factors determined for the subset are nearly equal to
the variability factors used in the development of the BPT Phase
II effluent limitations guidelines. Therefore, EPA has
determined that the maximum daily and the 30-day average
variability factors for BOD5_ and TSS are identical to the maximum
daily and the 30-day average variability factors developed for
BPT Phase II effluent limitations for subcategories for which
primary treatment is the basis of BPT. Hence, for BODJ5 and TSS,
the maximum daily and the 30-day average variability factors to
be applied for the technology options where primary treatment is
the technology basis are as follows:
159
-------
30-Day Average Variability Factor
BODJ5 = 1.79
TSS =1.76
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
=3.25
=3.60
TSS
Chemically Assisted Clarification - Chemically assisted
clarification is the basis for some BCT technology options. At
present, mill 060001 and 080027 are the only mills for which
long-term wastewater data are available. However, mill 080027
uses a rotating biological surface treatment system, which is not
representative of BPT technology and data from this mill are not
included in the averages. Therefore, the variability factors
determined for mill 060001 have been applied as the factors for
calculating effluent limitations for the technology option based
on chemically assisted clarification. The BODJ5 and TSS maximum
30-day average and daily maximum variability factors for mill
060001 are shown in Table 111-73.
Table 111-74 summarizes the variability factors to be used to
calculate BCT effluent limitations guidelines for the
conventional pollutants BODJ5 and TSS for the various technology
options.
160
-------
TABLE 111-74
SUMMARY OF VARIABILITY FACTORS
FOR BCT OPTIONS 1, 2, 3, and 4
BODS
TSS
BCT
Option
1 & 4
2 & 3
Maximum 30 -Day
Average
1.78
2.05
Maximum
Day
3.00
2.83
Maximum 30-Day
Average
1.82
1.41
Maximum
Day
3.00
2.39
The above variability factors apply for the following subcategories:
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
(including Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda)
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit and Drum Wash)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
1 & 4
2 & 3
1.79
1.78
3.25
3.00
1.76
1.82
3.60
3.00
The above variability factors apply for the following subcategories:
Nonintegrated-^Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
161
-------
-------
SECTION IV
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
INTRODUCTION
Previous sections described the BCT control options that were
considered as the basis of regulations. This section summarizes
the cost, energy, and other non-water quality impacts of the
various control and treatment options. Other non-water quality
aspects addressed in this document are implementation
requirements, air pollution, noise pollution, and solid waste
generation.
METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS
General
The actual cost of implementing control and treatment options can
vary at each individual facility depending on the design and
operation of the production facilities and local conditions. EPA
developed control and treatment costs, based on engineering
estimates, that are representative of each subcategory of the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. Where possible, the cost
estimates were compared to costs reported by industry
representatives and were revised where appropriate. However,
accounting procedures used at different mills vary which
complicates the use of industry cost data.
To assess the overall economic impact of the various treatment
and control options on the pulp, paper, ,and paperboard industry,
EPA developed model mill cost estimates for 31 distinct
subcategories and subcategory sectors. The model mill approach,
mill and site specific cost factors, and cost estimating criteria
are discussed below.
Model Mill Approach
To estimate the costs associated with the BCT control options,
EPA developed up to three different model mills for each of the
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. EPA
based model mill sizes on the actual variation of size within
each subcategory; model mill sizes are presented by subcategory
in Table IV-1.
Mill and Site Specific Cost Factors
Specific mills in a subcategory may differ from.the subcategory
model mills. These differences result in mill-to-mill variations
in the costs associated with achieving the various effluent
quality levels specified for each subcategory. Among the factors
affecting costs are location, climate, mill age, savings
resulting from implementation of various controls, retrofit
163
-------
TABLE IV-1
MODEL MILL SIZES
SUBCATEGORY
Direct Dischargers
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
1
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-
Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
2
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
(kkg/d)
907
318
544
1,451
272
726
1,179
181
726
1,089
408
907
1,361
408
907
1,361
181
386
544
635
1,361
2,359
408
544
91
408
907
272
45
544
907
68
454
680
163
363
726
Ct/d)
1,000
350
600
1,600
300
800
1,300
200
800
1,200
450
1,000
1,500
450
1,000
1,500
200
425
600
700
1,500
2,600
450
600
100
450
1,000
300
50
600
1,000
75
500
750
180
400
800
164
-------
TABLE IV-1 (continued)
MODEL MILL SIZES
SUBCATEGORY
Direct Dischargers
Subcategory
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
• •
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
(kkg/d)
23
45
163
NA
9
36
45
145
635
18
45
136
91
204
32
195
907
9
45
91
32
163
907
9
54
181
5
18
41
9
36
68
(t/d)
25
50
180
NA
10
40
50
160
700
20
50
150
100
225
35
215
1,000
10
50
100
35
180
1,000
10
60
200
5
20
45
10
40
75
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
165
-------
requirements, site limitations, raw wastewater quality, and
production capacity. In addition, at certain mills, different
combinations of production processes are employed.
Location. Differences exist in construction practice, labor
rates,and energy costs due to geographic location. EPA based
model mill costs on national averages. Regional cost factors are
presented in Table IV-2 so that model mill costs may be adjusted
to represent specific geographic areas.(18)(19)(20)(21)
Climate. Biological treatment systems constructed in cold
climates often require longer detention times than those
constructed in warmer climates; this is due to bio-kinetic
relationships (see Section VII of reference 1, the December 1980
development document supporting the proposed regulations).
Longer detention times require higher capital and .operating
costs. The costs presented reflect design in areas of moderate
climate and represent the median anticipated values.
Climate can also affect the construction details of the various
components. Open pit pumps, above ground piping, and exposed
process equipment are characteristic of warm climate mills; mills
in colder climates cannot use such designs. Model mill cost
estimates reflect design based on cold climates, so costs at
mills in warm climates may be lower than these estimates.
Production Capacity. Economies of scale are likely to vary
depending on the equipment to be installed or constructed. Each
control and treatment option was evaluated over a representative
range of mill sizes for each subcategory to account for
variations and the effect of mill size.
Age. Mill age can affect the cost of implementing various process
controls; this was considered in the development of model mill
costs by accounting for the relative difficulty of installing and
replacing process equipment and effluent sewers.
The chronological age of a mill, however, is not always a good
measure of the relative ease with which controls may be
implemented. As a result of extensive rebuilding or expansion
programs implemented at older mills, conditions often allow for
ease of installation of additional production process controls.
Material and Energy Savings. More efficient mill operation and
substantial savings of material and energy can result from
installation of production process controls. Material and energy
savings were considered where appropriate and net costs of
operation, maintenance, and energy were calculated.
Other Savings. There are other savings that may result from
implementation of production process controls in addition to
savings in materials and energy. Such additional savings, which
are not accounted for in the cost estimates presented in this
document, result from improved recovery systems and manufacture
of by-products such as black liquor soap, turpentine, solvents,
166
-------
U 01
H V V
v a> s
41 a
A H
1 o
9 a
2 a
a
tM 4
o e
z at
!-4
a
I I I I I I I
I I 1 I
I I I I I
I.I I I
to
JS
1a
u
I CO
a •
1-
X
T3 i-t
•H flj
a r
|
rt Si
1°
167
-------
K U .
u a e
i i i i
§J!
8?
•a
o .
a, J
a.
i i i i i i
i i i i i i i
it i i i
M
0)
O.
a
•o
o
a
a £
EQ M
cu -H
e
«
•H
[U
•o o
!-< O
•HO:
a
u o
u o
e 3
•H
c o
o
z:
u
o
i
r
168
-------
/•"%
"S
•H
e
o
u
M
a
<
S
W
OS M
W O
§ u
OM *"*
0- 2
0! >-l
H O
E-
|5
W
o)
, « ^-f rH
3 3 3
C
3 tw M-t
O O
4-*
o *a -o
•O 00 00
W 00 3A Jfi
0) JC
•H JS <• \O
Ja CO 00
O ^ «-i O
OO IT) rH CJ
01 -31
« ts fl e
U C (Q (Q
J3 n
3 O- &
" ^-i "3 *3
(o 3 a. fo
•o cu
W t-H n) <8
« u u
*O W *H *rt
0) J3 J=
4J J2 (J U
>
(0 1-
Cu o
00
^ u
e 4J
M U
0) <-N J3
• e J3 3
tn *rt to w
41 f— 4 m
•H iri -H
fH 0) JJ J3
JS -H 4J
J-l W Ol
oi n ^
j= 3 3 o
u o » 00 W
-H »-H O W J-l
E J=l i-( « 4) C
03 3 E O oo CM ja
O O J-* U to
H W C >v-0 J5
0> OJ O 3
E S 01 ft U U
n^rAs^V3
169
-------
glues, and human and animal nutrients. The recycle of effluent
streams may also allow for heat recovery that can represent
savings at some mills, particularly in colder climates. Such
savings may not be possible at all mills in a subcategory, but
may be realized at some mills depending on such factors as
location and production processes employed.
Retrofit Requirements. EPA based BCT model mill costs on the
assumptions that 1) production and effluent treatment controls
that form the basis for BPT effluent limitations have been
installed and 2) all facilities are currently attaining BPT
effluent limitations. Mills that are not currently attaining
existing BPT effluent limitations may incur higher costs for
additional treatment to attain predicted levels of pollutant
discharges. These costs are not included in the estimates
presented in this document as they have been incorporated in
previous rulemaking efforts.
Site Limitations. The implementation of additional production
process controls or end-of-pipe treatment technologies can
require additional land. Spatial relationships and the physical
characteristics of available land can affect construction costs.
The impacts of mill-by-mill variations are lessened because the
options under consideration are not land intensive. Also, where
treatment facilities such as clarifiers are added, the cost of
pumping to these facilities is included. Costs are considerably
overstated for those facilities where gravity flow is possible.
Analysis of information obtained during the data request program
indicates that for two-thirds of the operating facilities, land
availability is not a problem. For that reason and because of
the extensive variability of land acquisition costs, the cost of
land acquisition was not included in cost estimates.
Raw Wastewater Characteristics.
individual
Plow, BODS,
_ and TSS loads at
mills may vary from those of the model mill. These
variations can affect the cost of effluent treatment. However,
the model mill approach to cost development yields pre-
engineering estimates not requiring specific engineering studies
at each mill in the industry. It is likely that the approach to
achieving effluent limitations chosen by management at individual
mills will vary from that considered in establishing the specific
limitations. EPA anticipates that mill management will choose
the technology that is most cost-effective for each facility.
Combinations of Production Processes. Production processes and
the products manufactured frequently vary among mills in the same
subcategory. Model mill costs (for BCT Option 1) reflect, these
differences when it'was possible to generalize the differences
for a particular subcategory. For example, in many integrated
subcategories, mills purchase varying quantities of pulp; as a
result, the relative sizes of their pulp and paper mills differ.
(See the development of subcategory raw waste loads in Section
III.) The costs for a model mill in subcategories where process
differences were accounted for reflect the use of processes
170
-------
normal for a mill of the particular model mill size.
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control and Treatment Technologies
EPA developed capital, operation and maintenance, and energy cost
estimates based on the criteria presented in Table IV-3.(19-23)
The pre-engineering estimates developed for this study are
expected to have a variability consistent with this type of
estimate and are approximately plus or minus 30 percent.
Capital Cost Criteria. All costs presented in this section,
except as noted, are in terms of first quarter 1978 dollars.
Since construction costs escalate, these estimates may be
adjusted through use of appropriate cost indices. The most
accepted and widely-used cost index in the engineering field is
the Engineering News Record (ENR) construction cost index. The
ENR index value of 2,683 used in .this report was taken from the
"U.S. - 20 Cities Average" for the first quarter 1978.(22)
Equipment costs were based on supplier quotes, published
literature, engineering experience, and data request program
responses. Capital costs include allowances for lost production
during construction or for additional power facilities as
warranted. Additional costs such as engineering and
contingencies were based on a percentage of capital and vary from
15 to 25 percent depending on the technology.
A total labor rate of $23.00 per hour was assumed for
installation of production process controls. This wage rate is
based upon a $19.00 national average wage rate including fringe
benefits plus a net supervision rate of $4.00 per hour.(26)
Annual Fixed Charges. The annual fixed charges are the annual
costs that are directly related to the construction of pollution
abatement facilities. These charges commonly include such items
as depreciation of the control equipment and interest on the
capital borrowed for construction. In addition, such costs as
maintenance materials, spare parts, insurance, and taxes are
expressed as a percentage of initial capital expenditures.
The useful life of each structure and mechanical unit varies.
Mechanical equipment operating in demanding service conditions
may have a useful life of 5 to 10 years whereas a building may
have a useful life of 40 to 50-years or more. Depreciation costs
are the accounting charges for the eventual replacement of a
given asset (equipment or structure) at the end of its useful
life. A NCASI report shows an average depreciation rate in the
industry of 16.5 years.(27)
Interest is the annual charge for financing the capital
expenditures for construction of a facility. Such financing may
be through corporate bonds, conventional lending markets, or tax-
exempt municipal revenue bonds. Municipal revenue bonds have
lower interest rates than corporate bonds. A NCASI report states
that 44 percent of the pollution abatement expenditures in 1976
171
-------
Region/State
TABLE IV-3
REGIONAL COST ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Operation
and
Maintenance
Capital (210) (211)(212)
Energy (213)
Northeast 1.03
North Central 1.02
South 0.90
Plains/Mountain 0.96
West 1.09
Alaska 1.38
0.97
1.15
0.81
0.99
1.12
1.78
1.38
1.18
1.17
1.02
0.79
1.16
172
-------
were financed through tax-exempt municipal bonds.(27)
To calculate total annual costs, EPA used an average fixed charge
of 22 percent of the capital expenditures. This figure includes
all of the above items. EPA realized that these charges may vary
and are dependent upon several factors, such as the complexities
of the system installed, financing availability, insurance
coverage, property tax credits, spare parts inventory, and
maintenance materials.
Energy Costs. An average national electric power cost for large
industrialusers (200,000 kwh monthly; 1,000 kw demand) was
estimated at $0.0366/kwh. This figure was derived from average
cost information by state and on electric rates from
approximately 200 public and private utilities.(21) Information
concerning actual revenues from approximately 200 public and
private utilities indicated a cost of $0.0281/kwh. (21.) Based on
that data, energy costs were estimated at $0.0325/kwh.
Fuel for steam generation was estimated at $12 per barrel. (23)
Operating and Maintenance Labor. The average nonsupervisory
labor rate in the pulp and paper industry was reported to be
$7.14 per hour in February 1978.(19) Average total benefits for
the pulp, paper, lumber, and furniture industry for the year 1977
were reported as 34 percent of wages.(20) Although no industry-
wide data concerning supervisory costs were available, the
proposed control and treatment technologies under consideration
are anticipated to require only minimal additional supervisory
labor.
A supervisory and benefits cost of 45 percent of the labor rate
was assumed. This results in a total labor rate of $10.35/hr.
Chemicals. Chemical costs were based, on quotes from chemical
suppliers and chemical marketing reports. The chemicals used in
the technologies under evaluation include alum, polymer,
phosphoric acid, sulfuric acid, anhydrous ammonia, and sodium
hydroxide.
Costs for Implementation of BCT Control and Treatment Options
Four control and treatment options have been considered for the
control of conventional pollutants from direct discharging mills
in the pulp, paper and paperboard industry. Cost estimates have
been prepared for each control and treatment option for all model
mills in each subcategory. Table IV-4 presents gross operation
and maintenance and energy costs and savings for BCT Option 1
production process controls for medium sized direct dischargers.
Table IV-5 shows EPA's cost estimating criteria. Table IV-6
presents capital, operating and maintenance, energy, and total
annual costs of implementation for model mills for BCT Options 1,
2, and 3. Table IV-7 presents these costs for BCT Option 4. The
total capital and annual costs for compliance with BPT and the
four BCT Options are presented by subcategory in Tables IV-8
• 173
-------
TABLE IV-4
GROSS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AND
ENERGY COSTS AND SAVINGS FOR
BCT OPTION 1 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
FOR MEDIUM SIZED DIRECT DISCHARGERS ($l,000/yr)
Subcategory
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
Gross
Operation and
Maintenance1
Cost Savings
Gross Energy
Cost Savings
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine2
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Therrao-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and.
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegra ted-Paperboard
907
544
726
726
907
386
1361
408
408
544
454
368.3
186.6
245.5
337.2
154.9
85.3
247.5
682.3
163.3
55.7
76.4
1126.6
675.2
977.0
584.2
199.2
138.8
203.3
2222.5
35.1
199.8
121.6
494.8
279.1
327.5
189.4
180.4
65.3
270.8
1236.6
151.6
13.6
.8
578.4
215.4
235.0
523.8
190.6
182.1
221.1
856.1
654.9
753.0
59.8
163
163
9
145
45
204
195
45
163
54
18
36
67.1
79.6
9.3
25.8
30.8
39.4
33.0
19.9
24.5
24.4
14.0
3.4
38.2
34.2
0.8
4.5
1.0
19.1
15.1
3.5
55.7
4.2
5.2
0.27
7.6
11.2
0.7
.49
5.2
16.4
5.3
2.6
4.1
0.7
0.5
0.27
259.0
131.3
4.3
172.7
124.1
284.7
22.8
5.3
7.8
110.0
50.1
17.2
Excludes energy costs.
2Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
3Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
174
-------
TABLE IV-5
COST ESTIMATING CRITERIA1
1.
2.
3.
4.
Capital costs
Annual fixed
Energy:
Operation and
Labor:
are as of first quarter 1978:
(amortized) costs are 22% of capital
Electrical
Fuel
Maintenance :
General
Solids disposal
ENR = 2,683
expenditures
$0.0325/kwh
$12.00/barrel
$10.35/hr
$ 8.00/hr
Chemicals:
alum
polymer
85% phosphoric acid
anhydrous ammonia
50% sodium hydroxide
100% sulfuric acid
$110/kkg ($100/t),
dry basis
$5.51/kg ($2.50/lb)
$0.44/kg ($0.20/lb)
$154/kkg ($l40/t),
dry basis
$!65/kkg ($150/t)
$56/kkg ($51/t)
1Sources of Cost Data:
Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April: 1978. (19)
Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A.,
April 1978. (20)
Energy User News, Vol. 3, No. 32, August 7, 1978. (21)
Engineering News Record, March 23, 1978. (22)
Monthly Energy Review, U.S Department of Energy, March 1979. (23)
Municipal Sludge Landfills, EPA-625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Process Design Manual, October 1978. (24)
Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978. (25)
175
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST 1000
($1000)
0 & M COST 1000
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST 1000
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST 1000
($1000/YR)(D)
7001
-758
-84
1540
12578
4681
231
7679
18939
4313
213
8692
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the Option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost •*• energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings,were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
176
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
350,
600
1600
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
2596
3612
7356
-263
-489
-1405
40
65
158
571
795
1618
5774
7909
14168
1503
2350
5584
75
117
276
2848
4207
8977
7949
10952
20480
1356
2117
4998
68
105 .
246
3172
4632
9749
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
177
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3'
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
300
800
1300
300
800
1300
300
800
1300
300
800
1300
2446
4850
7308
-246
-731
-1214
38
92
145
538
1067
1608
4901
8731
11666
1156
2600
3981
58
129
196
2292
4649
6744
6897
12768
17868
1016
2253
3426
51
112
170
2584
5174
7526
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
178
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
ALKALINE-FINE SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION '(B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
200
800
1200
200
800
1200
200
800
1200
200
800
1200
2477
7031
10714
-1
-247
-459
-64
-334
-559
545
1547
2357
3519
7851
9981
775
2326
3306
39
115'
164
1588
4168
5665
5523
13799
19305
646
1878
2649
33
93
131
1894
5007
7028
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
All costs are in 1st .quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess,of total OSM and energy expenditures.
179
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
. UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
LINERB6ARD SECTOR
MILL.SIZE t/D (C)
BCT OPTldH (B)
2
3
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
(S1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
1727
3441
5228
-12
-44
-64
-4
-10
-16
380
757
1150
3470
5490
6960
744
1359
1890
37
68
94
1545
2635
3516
4682
8111
11150
609
1094
1513
31
55
76
1670
2934
4041
(A) All costs ace in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of Cost savings, total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
180
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS SECTOR
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
1727
3441
5228
-12
-44
-64
-4
-10
-16
380
757
1150
3470
5490
6960
744
1359
1890
37
68
94
1545
2635
3516
4997
8622
11802
690
1257
1747
35
63
87
1825
3217
4431
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 .dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost) ;
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
181
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/XR>(D)
200
425
600
200
425
600
200
425
600
200
425
600
944
1895
2860
-7
-54
-79
-52
-117
-167
208
417
629
2233
3765
4131
572
486
1290
21
45
45
1084
1359
2245
2786
4675
6244
386
756
787
17
28
35
1016
1812
2196
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
182
-------
TABLE IV-6 ;
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
UNBLEACHED KRAFT AND SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
700
1500
2600
700
1500
2600
700
1500
2600
700
1500 .•:;•
2600
2706
5499
7658
39
44
-3
11
50
80
646
1304
1762
5237
8159
11294
1860
3589
5888
64
120
196
3076
5504
8569
7372
12745
17658
1200
3058
3358
66
151
240
2888
6013
7483
(A)
CB)
(C)
(D)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
183
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
NITRATION GRADE
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
. O & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
13148
16237
-1540
-2142
381
506
2892
3572
10171
12066
4951
6430
168
217
7356
9302
22208
26976.
4214
5463
141
182
9239
11579
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
CC) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost •*• energy cost +. 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
184
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTIHG
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
CELLOPHANE GRADE
MILL
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D),
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
SIZE T/D CO
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
1
13148
16237
-1540
-2142
381
506
2892
3572
BCT OPTION (B)
2
10171
12066
4951
6430
168
217
7356
9302
3
22242
27014
4225
5477
141
183
9259
11602
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to, meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain'kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
185
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
VISCOSE GRADE
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
O&M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST .
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
13148
16237
-1540
-2142
381
506
2892
3572
10171
12066
4951
6430
168
217
7356
9302
22212
26984
4215
5466
141
182
9242
11584
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
186
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
ACETATE GRADE
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
13148
16237
-1540
-2142
" 381
506
2892
3572
10749
12745
5386
6994
182
237
7933
10035
22889
27778
4675
6059
157
203
9866
12373
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
187
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS I, 2 AND 3
PAPERGRADE SULFITE (DRUM WASH) SUBCATEGORY
AND PAPERGRADE SULFITE (BLOW PIT WASH) SUBCATEGORY
MILL
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
SIZE T/D (C)
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
1
1274
3066
5592
55
128
230
-111
-503
-1123
280
674
1230
BCT OPTION (B)
2
2862
6769
10810
752
2489
5011
29
92
183
1411
4070
7572
3
3839
9105
15227
654
2109
4216
25
78
154
1523
4189
7720
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost + energy cost •*• 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
188
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
. 3
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
O&M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($10QO/YR)(D)
50
600
1000
50
600
1000
50
600
1000
50
$00
1000
436
1237
1939
2
-144
-243
-63
'.- " -739
-1230
96
272
427
1256
5177
6980
207
1016
1523
13
68
102
497
2222
3160
1489
5540
7725
180
801
1178
11
53
78
518
2072 ,.
2955.
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter .1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed tp meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance,
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 tp obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & (1 and energy costs 3re net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger o,f (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy'expenditures.
189
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
75
500
750
75
500
750
75
500
750.
75
500
750
819
1698
2476
12
-45
-95
-20
-59
-140
180
374
545
1505
4531
5728
243
832
1129
15
55
75
589
1884
2465
2098
5451
7238
211
660
888
13
43
58
685
1903
2539
(A) AH costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost.savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
190
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
FINE PAPERS SECTOR
MILL
CAPITAL' COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
SIZE T/D (C)
180
400
800
180
400
800
180 ,
400
800
180
400
800
1
620
996
1501
29
80
166
-251
-174
-32
136
219
330
BCT OPTION (B)
2
2790
4426
6615
482
836
1409
30
53 .
92
1126
1863
2956
3
2410
3799
5688
305
490
917
18
30
49
853
1355
2083
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits'. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d. ',.'•.
(D) O & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost xs
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of, capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
191
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
TISSUE PAPERS SECTOR
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR) (D)
25
50
180
25
50
180
25
50
180
25
50
180
273
400
814
18
25
45
-17
-33
-120
61
88
179
934
1353
2790
167
231
482
9
13
30
382
542
1126
936
1366
2764
130
174
331
7
10
20
343
484
959
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
this larger of (OSM cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
192
-------
TABLE IV-6
MOPEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBQATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
.10
40
10
40
10
40
10
40
208
465
9
18
-4
-15
51
105 .
562
1203
108
198
6
12
237
474
649
1401
96
161
5
9
243
478
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (OSM cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
193
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
CORRUGATING MEDIUM FURNISH SECTOR
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
50
160
700
50
160
700
50
160
700
50
160
700
331
572
1703
13
21
57
-54
-172
-753
73
126
375
887
1685
3794
200
393
1091
8
15
39
403
779
1964
920
1659
4148
126
245
430
5
10
23
334
620
1365
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
194
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
NONCORRUGATING MEDIUM FURNISH SECTOR
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
50
160
700
50
160
700
50
160
700
50
160
700
331
572
1703
13
21
57
-54
-172
-753
73
126
375
863
1652
3710
195
385
1068
8
15
38
392
763
1922
912
1640
4095
124
241
418
5
9
22
330
611
1341
(A) All costs are in 1st'quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d. ,
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
195
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
(S1000/YR) (D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
20
50
150
20
50
150
20
50
150
20
50
150
555
676
1149
25
30
50
-46
-119
-361
122
149
253
713
1206
2184
127
196
353
8
12
23
292
474
857
919
1277
2238
81
114
183
4
6
11
287
401
687
(A)
(B)
CC)
(D)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d,
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
196
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
BUILDERS' PAPER AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATEGORY -
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
(A) All costs are
(B) All mills are
100
225
100
225
100
225
100
225
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
assumed to meet BPT limits.
619
876
19
20
-118
-268
136
193
Therefore, no costs
1359
2173
217
348
14
23
530
849
are shown
1222
1811
117
165
6
9
392
573
for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kfcg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
197
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
'NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
WOOD FIBER FURNISH SECTOR
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
288
640
1575
11
18
20
-2
-17
-87
73
141
347
843
2321
5635
149
381
1107
9
24
73
343
916
2419
931
2367
. 5780
129
280
759
7
18
50
341
818
2081
(A) AH costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
198
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
COTTON FIBER FURNISH SECTOR
MILL
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
SIZE T/D (C)
10
50
100
10
50
100
10
50
100
10
50
100
1
192
375
556
9
16
24
0
-3
-6
51
96
141
BCT OPTION (B)
2
724
1771
2625
130
285
433
8
18
28
297
693
1038
3
802
1855
2746
123
252
372
6
15
23
305
675
1000
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to,meet BPT limits., Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the'option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
199
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-TISSUE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR) (D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
35
180
1000
35
180
1000
35
180
1000
35
180
1000
206
415
876
0
-31
-238
0
-4
-26
45
91
193
782(642) 908(783)
2180(1778) 2360(1996)
6555(5592) 6703(5815)
64(40) 60(38)
116(75) 107(69)
276(201) 246(176)
12(12) 10(10)
37(59) 33(50)
159(330) 135(275)
248(193) 270(220)
633(525) 659(557)
1877(1761) 1856(1731)
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
200
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY'
LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SECTOR
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
(A) All costs are
(B) All mills are
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
assumed to meet BPT limits.
185
472
923
8
20
38
-18
-109
-364
41
104
203
Therefore, no
568(470)
1711(1385)
3683(3049)
55(35)
101(64)
172(116)
9(7)
29(42)
75(140)
189(146)
506(411)
1057(927)
costs are shown
672(593)
1945(1639)
4073(3516)
51(33)
91(58)
150(99)
7(6)
24(33)
61(110)
207(169)
543(451)
1108(983)
for BPT
and cost- at the option is increment of cost-required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) O & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost +22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
201
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
ELECTRICAL PAPERS SECTOR
BCT OPTION (B)
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
C$1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
CS1000/YR) (D)
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
192
409
837
9
20
42
-18
-109
-363
42
90
184
749
2300
4961
63
122
219
12
41
112
239
669
1422
881
2503
5363
60
113
198
10
37
99
264
700
1477
(A)
(B)
(C)
CD)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost -i- 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
202
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-FILTER AND NONWOVEN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
MILL
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(D)
SIZE T/D (C)
5
20
45
5
20
45
5
20
45
5
20
45
1
217
311
424
8
9
7
-12
-50
-112
48
68
93
BCT OPTION (B)
2
432
1005
1668
48
73
98
7
15
27
149
309
491
3
593
1182
1851
45
68
89
6
13
23
181
340
519
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to meet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain k)cg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
203
-------
TABLE IV-6
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
BCT OPTIONS 1, 2 AND 3
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SUBCATEGORY
MILL SIZE T/D (C)
BCT OPTION (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(D)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
10
40
75
10
40
75
10
40
75
10
40
75
46
76
143
2
3
6
-4
-17
-32
10
17
32
260(225)
601(498)
880(718)
38(26)
56(36)
68(43)
4(2)
9(7)
13(14)
99(77)
197(153)
275(215)
283(252)
625(535)
949(801)
37(25)
53(34)
65(41)
4(2)
8(7)
12(12)
103(82)
199(159)
286(230)
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) All mills are assumed to neet BPT limits. Therefore, no costs are shown for BPT
and cost at the option is increment of cost required to attain the option performance.
(C) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(D) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost is
the larger of (O&M cost + energy cost + 22% of capital cost) and (22% of capital cost);
i.e., no savings were credited in excess of total O&M and energy expenditures.
204
-------
TABLE IV-7
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COS'T
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
1000
1000
1000
1000
Costs for Modification to Treatment Svstems(A) (B)
ASB Alternative(E)
1 2
10346
14316
142
301
741
741
3159
4191
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
indicated for a treatment system type, no mills
Activated Oxidation
Sludge Pond
8126
12096
522
681
593
593
2903
3935
with that type of system current
Primary
Treatment
ly exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary- to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs C22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
205
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mil
Size(D)
(ton/ day)
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
in 1st quarter
indicated for a
1
Costs
ASB Alternative(E
1
3893
5805
5878
9618
12703
18123
84
160
107
257
172
389
237
237
408
408
1105
1105
1177
1674
1808
2781
4071
5481
1978 dollars.
treatment system
2
7465
9377
10797
14537
21573
26993
' 442
518
611
760
1149
1366
242
242
404
404
1048
1048
2326
2824
3390
4362
6943
8352
type , no
for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
) Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
3110
5022
4456
8196
8860
14280
248
324
325
475
555
772
140
140
233
233
608
608
1071
1569
1538
2511
3112
4521
mills with that type of system currently exist
1^.4-i'sxn rtT-Afoac «-*rtn t- rn 1 a . Value below is COSt
(C)
(D)
(E)
in this -subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production pr
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
206
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A)(B)
ASB Alternative(E)
1 2
Activated
Sludge
Oxidation
Pond
Primary
Treatment
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
300
800
2980
4750
6214
9614
6521
8291
12677
16077
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
1300
300
9027
13707
69
140
17806
22486
477
548
800
107
243
886
1022
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
1300
300
800
1300
300
800
1300
134
321
146
146
394
394
645
645
871
1331
1867
2751
2765
3982
1231
1418
219
219
559
559
898
898
2131
2591
4234
5118
6045
7262
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for a treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy +• fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
207
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
ALKALINE-FINE SUBCATEGORY(F)
CAPITAL COST
(§1000)
0 & H COST
C$1000/ YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)CC)
(A) All coses are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
200
800
120C
200
800
1200
200
800
1200
200
800
1200
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
ASB Alternative(E)
1
2015
3005
5612
9152
7651
12331
56
95
101
243
122
309
85
85
347
347
524
524
585
842
1683
2603
2329
3546
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
indicated for treatment system
2
4719
5709
11840
15380
15667
20347
385
425
918
1060
1210
1397
137
137
508
508
753
753
1561
1818
4030
4951
5410
6627
type, no mills
Activated
Sludge
1938
2928
4767
8307
6306
10986
183
222
368
509
459
646
79
79
291
291
432
432
688
946
1708
2628
2279
3495
with that type
Oxidation Primary
Pond Treatment
1568
2558
4753
8293
6574
11254
258
297
897
1038
1292
1479
16
16
56
56
80
80
618
876
1998
2919
2818
4035
of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
(F) Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
208
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
LINERBOARD SECTOR
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
ASB Alternative (E)
1
2215
3888
5202
64
86
102
81
180
270
632
1122
1516
2
4531
7662
10067
302
472
601
134
282
413
1433
2440
3229
Activated
Sludge
3033
5119
6713
194
271
325
91
191
279
953
1588
2081
Oxidation Primary
Pond Treatment
1464
2772
3834
238
489
704
15
30
44
575
1129
1592
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: O & M
+ energy •*• fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D)' Multiply T/D hy .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
209
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS SECTOR
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & H COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
450
1000
1500
Costs for
ASB Alternative (E)
1
2215
3888
5202
64
86
102
81
180
270
632
1122
1516
2
4628
7802
10235
328
518
663
136
284
417
1481
2518
3331
Modification to Treatment Systems ( A) (B)
Activated Oxidation Primary
2943
4987
6553
178
245
291
91
190
278
916
1532
2010
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & H and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
210
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
200
425
600
200
425
600
200
425
600
200
425
600
Costs for
ASB Alternative (E)
1
1168
1962
2501
48
64
73
42
88
123
347
583
746
2
. 2610
4233
5314
210
313
379
89
178
246
873
.1422
, 1794
Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
Activated
Sludge
1728
2792
3495
144
194
224
47
91
124
571
899
1117
Oxidation Primary
Pond Treatment
651
1190
1568
96
189
258
6
12
16
245
462
618 : ;
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. -
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy +• fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
211
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPllON 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
UNBLEACHED KRAFT AND SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGQRY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR) (C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
, (ton/day)
700
1500
2600
700
1500
2600
700
1500
2600
700
1500
2600
Costs for
ASB Alternative(E)
1
3397
5869
8768
84
116
149
136
287
494
967
1694
2572
2
6619
11075
16200
409
642
908
229
468
791
2094
3546
5263
Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge •. , Pond , . .Treatment
4355
7243
10531
255
364
480
143
290
486
1357
2247
3283
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system Currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual Costs (22% of Capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
212
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MOD^L MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
NITRATION GRADE
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
ASB Alternative(E)
1 ,- 2
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A)(B)
Activated
Sludge
Oxidation
Pond
Primary
Treatment
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
O & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
7880
10180
9983
13093
146
238
170
295
825
917
1103
1227
2704
3394
3469
4402
17829
20939
807
899
974
1098
1068
1160
1418
1542
5039
5729
6314
7247
8598
11708
467
559
551
675
539
631
717
841
2533
3223
3159
4092
(A)
(B)
•(C)
(D)
(E)
All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings: Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
213
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
CELLOPHANE GRADE
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/ day)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
ASB Alternative(E)
1
7880
10180
9983
13093
146
238
170
295
825
917
1103
1227
2704
3394
3469
4402
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
indicated for treatment system
2
14747
17047
18249
21359
949
1041
1153
1277
1077
1169
1431
1556
5271
5961
6599
7532
type, no mills
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
6955
9255
8616
11726
475
567
561
685
539
631
717
841
2544
3234
3173
4106
with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
214
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL HILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
VISCOSE.GRADE
Model Mill
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A)CB)
Size(D) ASB Alternative(E)
(ton/day) 1 2
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
in 1st quarter
indicated for
7880
10180
9983
13093
146
238
170
295
825
917
1103
1227
2704
3394
3469
4402
1978 dollars.
treatment system
14546
16846
18016
21126
869
961
1052
1176
1072
1164
1424
1548
5141
5831
6439
7372
type, no mills
Activated Oxidation Primary
. - • Sludge Pond Treatment
6946
9246
8606
11716
470
562
555
680
539
631
717
841
2538
3228
3165
"- 409S
with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances..
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
215
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
ACETATE GRADE
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & K COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
450
600
450
600
450
600
450
600
in 1st quarter 1978
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
ASB Alternative (E)
1
8488
10788
10762
13872
153
245
178
303
904
996
1209
1333
2925
3615
3755
4688
dollars.
indicated for treatment system
2
15875
18175
19598
22708
1191
1283
1457
1581
1100
1192
1462
1586
5783
6473
7230
8163
type, no mills
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
7454
9754
9244
12354
509
601
603
728
590
682
785
909
2739
3429
3422
4355
with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
216
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY (F)(G)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
C$1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill
Size(D) ASB
(ton/day) 1
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
indicated for treatment systen
Costs for Modification to Treatment Svstems(AUB)
Alternative (E)
2
3223
3973
9261
11261-
16780
21240
232
262
545
625
902
1080
153
153
652
652
1429
1429
1094
1289
3234
3754
6022
7182
i type, no mills
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
1357
2107
3620
5620
6359
10819
140
170
291
371 .
451
629
49
49
195
195
424
424
487
682 :
1283
1803
2274
3433
with that type of system currently exist
CC)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(G)
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy. + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 a Conversion to extended aeration.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
Costs are based on 52.7 percent sulfite pulp produced on-site.
217
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
GROUNDWOOD CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)CC)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs ace
(B) If no cost is
Model Mi
Size(D)
(ton/day
50
600
1000
50
600
1000
50
600
1000
50
600
1000
in 1st quarter
indicated for
11 Costs for
ASB Alternative(E)
) 1 2
554
964
3752
5552
5638
8178
23
40
74
146
96
197
22
22
265
265
444
444
167
274
1165
1633
1780
2441
1978 dollars.
treatment system type, no mills
Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
557
967
2681
4481
3798
6338
69
85
216
288
280 .
382
13
13
101
101
162
162
204
310
907
1375 -
•1278
1939
with that type of system currently exist
. _ «»n»A« f f*r\n + ^t\"l G \7a 1 M*s l-tal ftW T S COSt
(C)
CD)
(E)
in this subcategory. _
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: O
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion.to extended aeration.
& M
218
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A)(B)
ASB Alternative(E)
1 2
Activated
Sludge
Oxidation
Pond
Primary
Treatment
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1.000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
75
500
750
75
500
750
75
500
750
75
500
750
680
1180
2258
3978
2963
4933
Zi
99
191
260
234
313
17
17
82
82
118
118
246
246
769
1216
1004
1516
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. Value above line is cost w/o production process controls. Value below is cost
with those production process controls necessary to eliminate guideline allowances.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
219
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
FINE PAPERS SECTOR
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & H COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(§1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D) f
(ton/day)
180
AOO
800
180
400
800
180
400
800
180
400
800
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
\SB Alternative(E)
1 2
418
703
1143
66
105
161
14
31
64
171
291
477
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
1812
2873
4342
192
300
454
33
65
121
624
997
1530
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 S M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: O & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 * Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration-
220"
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
TISSUE PAPERS SECTOR
Model Mill
Costs for
Si?e(D) ASB Alternative(E)
(ton/day) 1 2
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
25
SO
180
25
50
180
25
50
180
25
50
180
147
203
418
24 .
34
66
2
4
15
59
82
172
Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
' Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
602
864
1749
72
97
183
8
13
3-'- . ' ' - '
212
300
602
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars. '
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs ate net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
•*• energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T'/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
221
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
EKERGY COST
($1000/VR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are in
(B) If no cost is in
Model Mill
Size(D)
10
40
10
40
10
40
10'
40
Costs i<
ASB Alternative(E)
1 2
BCT OPTION 4 IS
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludee Pond Treatment
IDENTICAL TO BCT OPTION 1
FOR THIS SUBCATEGORY. THERE ARE NO
TREATMENT SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FOR BCT
OPTION 1. SEE TABLE IV-6 FOR MODEL MILL
COSTS .
IdicateTfoTtreatmenfsy^e.n type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
rcl 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings.
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
fnl Multinlv T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d. '*.'•-„
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeratxon.
Total annual cost includes: 0 ft M
222
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
ASB Alternative(E)
1 2
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A)(B)
tive(E) Activated Oxidation Primary
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
50
160
700
50
BCT OPTION 4 IS IDENTICAL TO BCT OPTION 1
160 FOR THIS SUBCATEGORY. THERE ARE NO ' . '
TREATMENT SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FOR BCT
700 OPTION 1. SEE TABLE IV-6 FOR MODEL MILL
COSTS .
50
160 , •
700 :
50
160
700 :
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no wills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
223
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C]t
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
Size(D) ASB Alternative (E) Activated Oxidation Primary
(ton/day) 1 2 Sludge Pond Treatment
50
160
700
50
BCT OPTION 4 IS IDENTICAL TO BCT OPTION 1
160 FOR THIS SUBCATEGORY. THERE ARE NO
TREATMENT SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FOR BCT
700 OPTION 1. SEE TABLE IV-6 FOR MODEL MILL
COSTS.
50
160
700
50 .
160
700
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
(C)
(D)
(E)
in this subcategory.
0 S M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.,
224
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
BUILDERS' PAPJER & ROOFING FELT SUBCATEGORY
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
(A) All costs are
(B) If no cost is
Model Mill ' Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A ) IB J
SizefD) ASB Alternative (E) Activated Oxidation Primary
(ton/dav) 1 2 Sludge Pond Treatment
20 '
50 _ ;
150 ......
20 •-'_•..
BCT OPTION 4 IS IDENTICAL TO BCT OPTION 1
50 FOR THIS SUBCATEGORY. THERE ARE NO
TREATMENT SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FOR BCT
150 OPTION 1. SEE TABLE IV-6 FOR MODEL MILL ;
COSTS.
20
50
150
20
50
150
in 1st quarter 1978 dollars. .
indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory. . . n
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d,
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
225
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
WOOD FIBER FURNISH SECTOR
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
C$1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems(A) (B)
ASB Alternative(E) Activated Oxidation . Primary
1 2 Sludge Pond Treatment
257
873
2542
29
47
78
5
29
139
90
268
776
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 - Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
226
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
COTTON FIBER FURNISH SECTOR
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Model Mill
Size(D)
(ton/day)
10
50
100
10
50
100
10
50
100
10
50
100
Costs for
ASB Alternative (E)
1 2 .
221
649
1043
27
41
51
4
19
38
80
203
318
Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
Activated Oxidation Primary,
Sludge Pond '- Treatment
451
1168
2182
68
159
349
8
30
59
175
446
888
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
227
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-TISSUE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (AHB)
CAPITA! COST
($1000)
0 & H COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
C$1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Size(D) ASB Alternative(E)
(ton/day) 1 2
35
180
1000
35
180
1000
35
180
1000
35
180 ,
1000
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
569
1357
3575
157
373
1265
4
15
76
286
686
2127
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 s Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
228
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SECTOR
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B>
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Size(D) ASB Alternative (E)
(ton/day) 1 2
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
6O
200
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
442
1124
2189
127
303
661
2
11
33
227
561
1176
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
229
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
ELECTRICAL PAPERS SECTOR
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR) (C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
<$1000/YR)(C)
Size(D) ASB Alternative (E)
(ton/day) 1 2
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
10
60
200
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
558
1447
2849
154
401
931
3
17
52
281
736
1610
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy •*• fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
230
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-FILTER AND NONWOVEN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Size(D) ASB Alternative(E)
(ton/day) 1 2
5
20
45 '
5
20
45
5
20
45
5
20
45
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
348
700
1077
105
189
290
2
' . 5
10
183
348
537
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) 0 & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d. ,
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
231
-------
TABLE IV-7 (continued)
MODEL MILL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BCT OPTION 4
COSTS FOR MODIFICATION OF TREATMENT SYSTEM
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SUBCATEGORY
Model Mill Costs for Modification to Treatment Systems (A) (B)
CAPITAL COST
($1000)
0 & M COST
($1000/YR)(C)
ENERGY COST
($1000/YR)(C)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
($1000/YR)(C)
Size(D) ASB Alternative(E)
(ton/day) I 2
10
40
75
10
40
75
10
40
75
10
40
75
Activated Oxidation Primary
Sludge Pond Treatment
235
465
643
78
130
171
1
2
4
131 .
235
317
(A) All costs are in 1st quarter 1978 dollars.
(B) If no cost is indicated for treatment system type, no mills with that type of system currently exist
in this subcategory.
(C) O & M and energy costs are net after deduction of cost savings. Total annual cost includes: 0 & M
+ energy + fixed annual costs (22% of capital cost).
(D) Multiply T/D by .907 to obtain kkg/d.
(E) 1 = Additional aeration and settling. 2 = Conversion to extended aeration.
232
-------
01
*- >
w~
o •*•»
"B
H-
UJ I
ii!
l~
JO
s
I o
r
nj *
=*•*--
c e=:
t= m
-TH o ro T-* o •»-!
™<
I f- CD CD OO
I CN "ODD CO
-oo-.
O* 00 «M CM *-* ^t" T-4
vir^-*?" «o ^~ 0*0
c-4 r^ «r r- OD ocj
i-H *O !T3 -^H O4 C^ O -
»i o ^^ *-i r
rororo
§o--o»r
r^ c>4 r^ o^ CM r^- -oooooo oo
>OOOOOO ! OO
" C-4 O^ ^ O I r*5 O-
~
ro >rH r-j »i ro-o 1-1
j^jotopjoo-oo
ggooog
^
oooo
-
oo oo - co ro ro
tu
>
QJ
dl
i m
c:
•*-
t-
fe
(U
>
Hi
fi
T
iro e
--1 01
^JO
IS
2 01
.. - — >
ICO
1*0
r«, c
!£-°*
l^-li
II—: «IJ X
i m-t: •-
liV .4^ 23 O
12: e—• o>-
ii.t nj—' 01
I ^^ o —
I ^s 0.11
i ui— u
11_—• ai^
I . •*-
1S:±: 2 t
•g
01
c
. 9! .H •=> — J
— j= in
=3 LJ Ift u.
il- ai j- a»
= sz m a.
m QJ i a. m
-t-^* o rbria.
e tt_
-<*- H— l_ Qj
o — > — ' OJ2: d
on IU j
<= —'-I
-
nj i-: en to i— LJ u-
III
» Ol 13 ~O T3
"
1X1 Q, O O O
•— ro i_ t_ i_
Q O. CD CD O
tn
fc
fi. UM
«TJ Z3
iU. O-~O
QJ HI 0£
O.-»- U
i- a.3
QI nj
0.0.
OJ Vi
c: ui
o "O ^_
:_ QI-
233
-------
in
in
ai
r-o
^H^Tf-i 00*0^0 r-a ao iri i P-CJ
I OD-^H
in
O!
S
CMi-irocMOt-<-o
»H»- u in i-
•o ft 0' i— 0)
5 2Z OJ O-
rti 01 Or I Cx TJ
»--!- o mo.
en
QI
to
-n OJ
i— T—
2 u
"a cnoi.c
QJ s= — ' u
ai
(=
—
.cu-
-- ~
*— • OJ
flj
ii i- roi£tocnt-£JU- •-
a-* .0
J^ >-
Q'
c
— -a
e
ai
-oooo
i — * a» •— «T» 1
•»- linu-H-Ji:-O
co -o •« i>-
5ijT-^-iro<-
• o O ^5 ~
iro
»H CM oo
•«r-or--
o- «r ^r i-< «r
M •»-"
•«r
-------
in
§mOiH<-i-iinocj
-o o cj coro r- co 1-1
otooc£iHCsot-«rcjot i o;
£
BO
oo ro CH in in o in CM ro ^r r-- o -^
r-^-^-oo-^fuTO-r-ir^-r* o*-
o* rj 03 po r*- r*- o -o *r -*-i **• *H
uTro^-ioor^-rof'jrjnr-j «T
lfJ'T'^ocMroi>*o^ors-'«T o
OOOi-ir-CDI^-OCD-rtCOliT CM
1-1 «r n KI -< ro T CM o-- cj o- o
*'-
''-
cj ro co -a- •«»• M ** cj -o
p-'TC'imr — O'^rO'-i
p-r- T-ii-t-^
ai
-2 r i
n> o i to I
gg "°
5*
I
I
I •»
2-58
- o ••
J.CJi-1
*V -V4-
o —
•2
s
tn
Ol
*~
10
-o i-< in » c*j C
-
en o ro CD CD i
in CM «r -o r-j
CM ro UT CD o--
r^i r-j «a- co
r^- ro ro «-i CK r
o r- M in as i
-
in
•o r^ i
oop
o u~3 oo ^r f
o- •«?• r-j ~o ••r
"*o
«T
- ^r cj ro ro o- co
jrocj*rini-icj
1H CJ
oo r j oo <• r»- OJ £Z LJ Ql
U ---
Ql ^
6 -^
I U
e
-f H— o m ft
-
CO
in
fc
tp U>Cl- 13
" '-gS
,5s8
i- in
e 01 (=-o o o o
01 .£: — ro o o o -
'CJ m-2 fe-0-0-0
in 01 ID o -^ cu
1- O.3 U o o.
a-Ll- E I u-
. -
ai in o «u u.
c in oi ja a. ai
r — .- s |_ fling
= U. >— Ul 01 •»- — '
in a. in —
CJ CJ »-< T-l T-<
ro to *-*»-«*-*
I in
I in o» •»-*
I 01 ^* tu CT>
ID. - Ul CL- —
I nj i— .— Of
>Sj- ui er QI 3
I
o~in «sr -o cj r- \r> c-j o- i
o- o o- •c- cj ON cj o~
1OD Oi o
j-G i_ <
m
• o -*-•*-
1 1-—• CU
I «n o cr>
|_4 o. rq
I—' U
' S
p=o
ICO >-
-Cu. I U
s-§
5-in
I IQ (U to ^*i iu
-o
a>— •
I-JO'O'O.C— "O'U . 1-*-
m— cuajcTiTtaicu i in
• OI OJ-cTi OI Ql I—• oi
I— > OV» Ul OJ
I'Ol 6 U S
I 1- S—-CM 3 1=
I => 1= O- Q)
I in •*— c o r^
•<-<==:— oi
in m «ti-i- > in
iu^—'&+'2:
I .—•
-------
S3
^S'~°
•— K r—
t-t OO
O05
ee
-o
cNinKboino-ow I
CnX>
ro —'
g*
c; QJ
£~
— "e
***—
o 3
* —• — -
roT«rinrocNin«rro CN
o-.o
CN<3
-oca
* O
^
4 O
>OCKf-
3 OCK
3 o~m
to
*ae*— A
-So fe
f-l P- O-
lOWG
^H U*7 "•O OO
o p™ O^ P~~
-omo
i co *H
03 r-4 -o r- •<>• CD *r
•«r o to en r— in
•=£§
^in Iff
3-si
O.Uv-4
(3 ~
i
•g
n>
i_-
!<£»
.J= 01 UTS
; ^S-S^ £
D
i
CO —* iC l/i
=J U Ul U
"c:"" ai te Q.
rtj O) CD i CL t:
•*- H— O *T) U-
^, eci_
.. 1^. -| ^ Q)
m —' —' O12: c:
— 1- 3 3 X: XT —
nj ii en en i—o u.
•— -a CP 01 TD x> -o
6 01 (=xj o o o
in e=
ST
tn
—
o r- oo in e> &• »H
« M C-l CJ tM -O tO -O
3-oroMi-oeM
ro«rm«a--«r
roqpin
•F-HOO
ocor-jo-r-i
i H-
I M-
i at
i
in
O!
3
OOOOOO j
01
£
I ,
is
"BjOiN
'P"^2T!
._.! OJ e
!« *- g
in
c
nj
r^jHogr-auTM jg-£5
ItlJ *O "^
u >.
0) i-
raja
j -=J O.
i in— _
i u—• 0)
- O CTi w ^
Q. T> *?* Ul
—' U O*
M_ Ol Vt
O > *-.-.
tti ttl^C
CO >* «?!•*-
r~.*~ «-*
C>..— rti C: u
i-ft" n o> o
1= 1= * OJH-
^ (TJ f- ***• OIPUOl j=0>>-333
_IH -- •— ra e o-o ra-' a>T3-o-o
o at cct — ^ oj — -O i—
OJ XT f CT> ^ I— I1*- i
CL uiix —
ro x; •— Oi
cu in c 01 3
— I— 3-4-
i cu <= 3 inx:
11= t-u. in D< •
IZu. ui— LJ i
I Oi I T*-
i£^fe>|
i— > e>*» in 01
i o U-'TJ in
i 01 e <=
I 1- 01—«M 3 C
I m j_ H3 o Oi
I 3 <= 0.01
i in
Xj U. •*• «- •— |J *- »J
Ll_l=!_U3Ul-U
o*co<«-aicux:ua>ai
•|»3||Iii3||
._ ai
o 4^ Q.™ «P
u s—'C5*-x:
—- ID n
—-—*«*-!— epl—
—> o oEj_a!O
o o I mx> UTS OIH-
Z2K i^^-^^-^-^
236
-------
tfl
U)
cu
MOO
O CO
in
o
O
a.xi
O— •
SB""
> in i
f§5
ro £=•+•* o
•*•* o -o
O -O CM CM Ift Kl «T
•r- in r- r- CM «r oo
ro in ro r^ -^«i in to T o r j o £ r-
--''" 1
UT 03 0 00 rO 03 -T CM O o-o i>-
- P- o en *cr 03 in
j Is- CO f*> ••— * O O*-
in CN r-4 ro &- o
^ o in o ^* in
ro c J oo m -i-t o r-- CM
-• ^rr-ocxic^r?
CT« ID ^Z
<= — • u
— CQ m
rj
aJ
*O
m.
ai t- cu
s: m Q.
LJ I Q. rt:
- •_ CU
a j=Z—'
I— CJU-
III
— -O CP QJ-O-OTD
e 01 e-a o => o
ej3Ul
in c:. — <
01
a>
i— O.13 o
CU Ol O t£.
O--*- !—
ro ulCo- "O
QJ ^1 ~O *Q
in •*- cu
•I- I/I ET3 U-
in QJ TO o ~^ cu
cu t t» *t~ »u
CLLI. £ f O.
*U O"C3 i—
Ci_ OJ l- i- QJ *•
13 LL. ai -f -f-
C=00 P !=• -- ' P J=
ai
s
cu
s
». 9 CL 'o
in—' ^ u
in
x:
D—•• OJ
M- in xi i
e= nj in *^H
tn n «ti •*- in
o -»— CL n?
u =J— -Ox:
237
-------
through Table IV-12. The costs of implementation of BPT are
included because they are one of the bases for the "cost
reasonableness tests" as explained in Section II. Model mill
costs for attainment of BPT final effluent levels from BPT RWLs
are taken from previous development documents adjusted to first
quarter 1978 dollars, as necessary, and used in conjunction with
actual mill production to estimate the total subcategory costs
presented in Table IV-8. The BCT costs represent the incremental
costs of attaining BCT final effluent levels from BPT final
effluent levels. The development of the costs of implementation
of BCT Options 1, 2, 3 and 4 are discussed briefly below.
In addition to subcategory costs, Tables IV-8 through IV-12
present total annual average pollutant removals by subcategory.
The BPT pollutant removals are the pounds of BODji and TSS that
must be removed to attain BPT final effluent levels from BPT
RWLs. The BCT pollutant removals are the incremental pounds of
BODS^ and TSS that must be removed to attain the various BCT final
effluent levels from BPT final effluent levels.
Tables IV-8 through IV-12 also present cost effectiveness ratios
for the two "cost reasonableness tests" by subcategory. The
first of these ratios, the cost in dollars per pound of pollutant
removed ($/lb) is presented for BPT and BCT options 1, 2, 3, and
4. The second, the industry comparison test, is the ($/lb) for
each of the .BCT options divided by the ($/lb) for BPT and is
presented for each BCT option.
Option IL. This option involves the application of production
process controls to reduce RWLs and the application of end-of-
pipe treatment identical to that which formed the basis of BPT
effluent limitations guidelines. As discussed earlier, the
implementation of production process controls can result in
material and energy savings. EPA estimated the economic savings
associated with the production process controls that form the
basis of BCT Option 1. These estimates are presented in Table
IV-4. Improved by-product recovery may also result; however, no
estimates of savings resulting from by-product recovery were
included in the figures presented in Table IV-4.
For BCT Option 1, the costs of installation of each process
control were developed for several model sizes in terms_ of
parameters that are the normal measure of size for the various
controls (flow, volume, etc.). Costs were usually developed for
one to three model sizes reflecting the range of equipment size
found in the pulp and paper industry. Generalized cost equations
representing capital costs of installation, energy usage and
energy savings, and other operation and maintenance costs and
savings for each control, were developed as functions of size
from the different model sizes.
The capital cost equations represented the costs of installation
of a single unit of a control. A single unit of some controls
such as liquor preparation area spill collection systems would
normally be installed at a mill; however, other controls such as
238
-------
fourth stage brown stock washers would be installed in multiples,
one in each pulp washing line at a mill. Thus, the cost of
installation of some controls is not only a function of mill size
but of the number of units of the control required for the mill.
The generalized cost equations for each control were next adapted
for use in the specific subcategories for which the controls were
required. The cost of implementation of BCT Option 1 for mills
in each subcategory is estimated by summing the cost equations
for each BCT Option 1 control appropriate for that subcategory.
The sum may be considered a complex subcategory cost equation.
The total model mill cost estimates are functions of parameters
such as the quantity of paper produced, quantity of pulp
produced,, number of washer lines, number of bleach lines, number
of evaporators, and the number of paper machines at each
individual mill.
The model mill costs presented in Table IV-6 are derived from the
subcategory cost equations at the model mill. The other
parameters used for the subcategory model mills are presented in
Table IV-2. The total estimated costs of the implementation of
BCT Option 1 for each subcategory, as shown in Table IV-9, were
based on the model subcategory cost equations, EPA's estimated
production for actual mills in each subcategory, and values of
other relevant parameters for each mill taken from the surveys
and questionnaires discussed previously.
Example calculations for the costs of BCT Option 1 production
process controls for an alkaline-fine model mill are presented in
Table IV-13.
Option 2_. BCT Option 2 consists of BPT technology plus the
addition of chemically assisted clarification for all integrated
and secondary fiber subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory (the subcategories for which biological
treatment is the technology basis for BPT). In the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary treatment is the
technology basis for BPT, Option 2 is identified as BPT
technology plus the addition of biological treatment.
The costs for the chemically assisted clarification system are
based on the following items:
1. wastewater pumping,
2. sulfuric acid feed system,
3. chemically assisted clarification (solids contact
clarifier),
4. chemical coagulation with alum (at a dosage appropriate for
each subcategory) and polyelectrolyte addition (at 1 mg/1),
5. neutralization with 10 mg/1 sodium hydroxide,
6. solids dewatering,
7. dissolved air flotation thickening, ,
8. chemical sludge transportation to landfill, and
9. chemical sludge landfill.
239
-------
olo
I I I O O
I I I •
(fl vs
js oo r.
u c >
O -H •».
i> >
to o ^
en
o *•>
o o
(M O
• i i av
M i i »
o r-
§
S
e
•H U
o
u
^-S^\ ^ O
o o o o
O O O O
> u
u u a
tn a K
d-Sti
sac
O U Q
U i-<
0 CO C
o
o o o o
o o o o
0\ CM CM 00_
m e
i o i
I -H C
I 4J O
I O 1H
i eg *J
i-l U I
I r-t V
i u :
,£
00-H .
00 "V •
U TJ
CO < <
er o
•H *H
01
•a 3
CO O
0..-J •
r^ co cv o «-*
eg rs a 4J CJ
tl *J 4J M J5
O O O U
H t- H O
>
n
CO
u
Jj
M
a
>,
r-l "^
CQ
O a
(A
1-3
4J
^ o
U 00 ^
O b
J3 0) >"
n C *H
-"o
•Q !•(
«1 O II
•o *J ^-^
•c o
< f-
240
-------
Normally, the topography of the effluent treatment site does not
permit gravity flow through the entire treatment process.
Consequently, it is assumed that it will be necessary to
construct an effluent pumping facility that is capable of pumping
the maximum daily flow of the treatment facility.
The design assumes the use of a solids-contact clarifier to
accomplish flocculation, settling, and sludge removal. For flows
in excess of 18,900 cubic meters per day (5 MOD), the use of two
parallel units, each capable of handling 50 percent of the daily
flow, is assumed.
At mills where activated sludge treatment is employed, _the
chemical clarification design reflects an additional solids-
contact clarifier following the existing secondary clarifier. It
is likely that an existing secondary clarifier could be modified
to allow for the addition of chemicals; this would result in
significantly lower capital expenditure. An additional clarifier
allows for the recycle of biological sludge that has not been
contaminated by the addition of chemicals; this would allow the
addition of a chemical recovery system, if it were determined
that such a system is economically advantageous.
The primary flocculant used in the design is alum. The alum
dosage rate used for the purpose of cost estimates is 300 mg/1
for all integrated subcategories except the groundwood-fine
papers and groundwood-CMN papers subcategories. For these
groundwood subcategories, the secondary fibers subcategories, and
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, the dosage rate is 150
mg/1. Alum tends to lower the pH of the effluent. Optimum alum
flocculation is reached at a pH of 4.0 to 6.0. Provision for the
addition of sulfuric acid is included to optimize alum
requirements. If the effluent pH changes to a value where the
effectiveness of flocculation deteriorates or the effluent does
not meet pH limitations, neutralization may be required.
Therefore, neutralization with sodium hydroxide is included in
all cases where alum assisted clarification is considered.
Waste chemical solids from the secondary clarification process
may require thickening before they can be dewatered effectively.
If these solids are not thickened, the capacity of a dewatering
unit is greatly reduced. Air flotation has been selected as the
specific thickening process used in the development of costs.
Air flotation of solids often improves when a flocculant, such^as
a polymer, is added to the waste solids prior to the thickening
process.
Alum sludge is gelatinous and difficult to dewater. Mixing with
primary sludge and/or the addition of polymer can , enhance
dewatering. The cost of dewatering alum sludge has _been
estimated assuming the use of a separate horizontal belt filter
press dewatering system to dewater chemical solids only.
Dewatered sludge is assumed to be landfilled.
241
-------
Design criteria for the activated sludge treatment system
applicable to the nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven_papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories are presented in Table IV-
14.
Option 3^. BCT Option 3 is defined as BCT Option 1 plus the
addition of chemically assisted clarification for all integrated
and secondary fibers subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory (those subcategories for which biological
treatment is the technology basis of BPT). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, BCT Option 3 is defined as BCT
Option 1 plus the addition of biological treatment. BCT Option 3
costs, therefore, include BCT Option 1 costs plus the cost of the
end-of-pipe treatment systems identical in design to those
discussed in BCT Option 2; lower RWLs characteristic of Option 1,
are assumed.
Option _4. For most subcategories, BCT Option 4 for conventional
pollutant control is based on the levels attained by best
performing mills. Best mill performance for a subcategory is
generally the average performance at all mills where BPT is
attained using BPT technology (see Section III).: End-of-pipe
treatment is biological treatment for all subcategories except
the nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, nonintegrated-lightweight papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories (where end-of-pipe
treatment is chemically assisted primary clarification at a
dosage rate of 150 mg/1 of alum). BCT Option 4 is identical to
BCT Option 1 for the paperboard from wastepaper, tissue from
wastepaper, wastepaper molded products, and builders' paper and
roofing felt subcategories.
The design basis for the upgraded treatment systems for this
option is presented in Table IV-15. Costs associated with
implementation of this option are presented in Table IV-12.
Tables IV-16 and IV-17 present example design parameters and cost
estimate calculations for BCT Option 4 end-of-pipe treatment for
a dissolving kraft mill.
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
General
This section summarizes the development of the incremental energy
usage and air and noise pollution associated with attaining BCT
Options 1, 2, 3, and 4 relative to BPT levels. Also described
are the quantities and types of solid wastes currently generated
by the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and estimated to be
generated by the implementation of the BCT Options. Current, and
some potential, technologies for the disposal of solid wastes are
discussed. Lastly, the availability ;of equipment and labor
necessary and the -time required to implement BCT are described.
242
-------
TABLE IV-14
DESIGN CRITERIA BCT OPTION 2 ACTIVATED SLUDGE
FOR THE NONINTEGRATED-TISSUE PAPERS, NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS,
NONINTEGRATED-FILTER AND NONWOVEN PAPERS, AND
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SUBCATEGORIES
Wastewater Pumping
Design flow: 1.3 to 2.0 x average annual flow depending on subcategory
Basis for power cost: 12 m total dynamic head, 70% efficient
Neutralization
Number of units: 1 .
Detention time: 1 min. at peak daily flow
Mixer: 264 hp/1000 cu m
Dosage: 10 mg/1 sodium hydroxide
Secondary Clarification
2 units for flows greater than 18,927 cu m/d
Overflow rate: 20 cu m/d/sq m
Sidewater depth: 4m
Activated Sludge Basin
Number of basins: 2
Loading rate (use larger value):
0.8 kg BODS^ applied/cu m/day
6 hr hydraulic detention time
Nutrient feed: BODJ5 removed:N:P = 100:5:1
Aeration design requirements:
1 kg 02/kg BOD5 removed
17 kg 02/aeration hp/d
Length/width ratio: 4/1
Sidewater depth: 4m
Side slope: 1/1
Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening for Secondary Solids
Sludge loading rate: 10 kg/hr/sq m
Hydraulic loading rate: 46.9 cu m/d/sq m
Chemical dosage: 4 kg of polymer/kkg of solids
Solids Dewatering
Type: horizontal belt-filter press
Loading rate: 318 kg of dry solids/hr/m of belt width
Chemical dosage: 4 kg of polymer/kkg of solids
Primary/Biological Sludge Landfill
Sludge content: primary and biological sludge at 30 percent solids (w/w)
Landfill design: normal landfill compaction and covering techniques
243
-------
TABLE IV-15
DESIGN BASIS FOR ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF END-OF-PIPE
TREATMENT FOR ATTAINMENT OF BCT OPTION 4
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
A. Mills with. Activated Sludge Treatment Systems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Addition of a liquor spill collection system with shock pond.
Provide aeration for BPT equalization basin: 2.6 hp/lOOOm (10
b-p/mg).
Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20 m /d/m
(600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
Increase aeration basin capacity.
a. 50 percent additional aeration over BPT.
b. 50 percent additional detention over BPT.
c. Includes costs to allow operation in a contact stabilization
mode.
o o
Reduce secondary clarification overflow rate from 20 to 16 m /d/m
(500 to 400 gpd/ft ).
Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids production
and removal over BPT levels.
B. Mills with Aerated Stabilization Basin (ASB) Treatment
1. Two options of upgrading ASB system.
a. Additional aeration and settling.
(1) Addition of a liquor spill collection system with shock
pond.
(2)
20
Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to
m /d/m (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
(3) Additional 9 days of settling beyond BPT.
(4) Increase aeration to a total of 2.6 hp/1000 m (10 hp/mg).
Conversion to activated sludge (extended aeration).
(1) Addition of a liquor spill collection system with shock
pond.
(2) Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20
ra /d/m (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
(3) ASB reconfigured with earthen dikes so as to create a
12-hr equalization basin at peak flow, and a 2-day
aeration basin.
(4) Relocate existing aerators into equalization basin.
(5) Install new aerators in aeration basin.
(a) Design basis of 1.5 kg 0 /kg BOD5_ removed.
Insta.ll a^new secondary clarifier with an overflow rate of
(6)
(7)
16 nfVd/m2 (400 gpd/ft ).
Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids
production and removal over BPT levels.
C. Mills with Oxidation Ponds.
1.
2.
Addition of mixed media filtration to control algae.
Design basis,of 235 m /d/m (4 gpm/ft ).
244
-------
TABLE IV-15 (continued)
DESIGN BASIS FOR ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF END-OF-PIPE
TREATMENT FOR ATTAINMENT OF BCT OPTION 4
II. SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
A. Deink Subcategories
1. Mills with activated sludge systems.
a. Addition of a spill collection system with shock pond.
b. Provide aeration for BPT equalization basin: 2.6 hp/1000 m
(10 hp/mg).
c. Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20
m /d/m (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
d. Addition of polymer to primary clarifier: dosage at 1 mg/1.
e. Reduce9secondary clarification overflow rate from 20 to 16
m /d/m (500 to 400 gpd/ft ).
f. Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids
production and removal over BPT levels.
2. Mill with Aerated Stabilization Basin Systems.
a. Addition of a spill collection system with shock pond.
b. Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20
nf/d/m" (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
c. Addition of polymer to primary clarifier:
B. All Other Secondary Fiber Subcategories.
1. BPT end-of-pipe treatment.
2. BCT Option 1 internal controls.
III. NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
dosage at 1 mg/1.
A. Fine Papers Subcategory
1. Mills with activated sludge treatment systems.
2.6 hp/1000 m~
Provide aeration for BPT equalization basin:
(10 hp/mg).
Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20
m /d/m (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
Increase aeration basin capacity.
(1) 50 percent additional aeration over BPT.
(2) 50 percent additional detention over BPT.
(3) Includes costs to allow operation in a contact
stabilization mode.
(4) Reduce secondary clarification overflow rate from 20 to 16
m /d/m (500 to 400 gpd/ft ).
(5) Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids
production and removal over BPT levels.
245
-------
TABLE IV-15 (continued)
DESIGN BASIS FOR ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF END-OF-PIPE
TREATMENT FOR ATTAINMENT OF BCT OPTION 4
III. NONINTE6RATED SEGMENT (continued)
2. Mills with aerated stabilization basin treatment.
a. Addition of 12 hours of equalization at peak flow.
b. Reduce primary clarification overflow rate from 24 to 20
m /d/m (600 to 500 gpd/ft ).
c. Addition of 1 day of quiescent settling.
d. Increase of aeration to 2.6 hp/1000 m (10 hp/mg).
B. All Other Nonintegrated Subcategbries
1. Additional clarification to decrease overflow rate from 24 to 16
m /d/m (600 to 400 gpd/ft ).
2. Addition of chemically assisted clarification (flash mixing prior to
clarifiers).
3. Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids production
over BPT.
246
-------
TABLE IV-16
DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR BCT OPTION 4
EXAMPLE CALCULATION
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Effluent. Guidelines:
Flow (kl/kkg)
BOD5 (kg/kkg)
TSS (kg/kkg)
BPT
229.9
6.9
11.05
BCT
229.9
4.6
6.5
Design Parameters:
3 3
Flow: 907 kkg/d x 229.9 kl/kkg x m /kl = 208,500 m /d
BOD5 Removed: 907 kkg/d x (6.9 kg/kkg - 4.6 kg/kkg) = 2086 kg/d
Biological Solids Produced:
Assuming 32 percent of BOD5_ removed becomes solids:
907 kkg/d x [0.32 x (6.9 kg/kkg-4.6 kg/kkg)] = 668 kg/d
Assuming all of TSS removed becomes solids:
907 kkg/d x (11.05 kg/kkg-6.5 kg/kkg) = 4,127 kg/d
Total solids removed: 668 kg/d + 4,127 kg/d = 4,795 kg/d
247
-------
TABLE IV-17
COST SUMMARY FOR BCT OPTION 4 ACTIVATED SLUDGE SYSTEM MODIFICATION
UNIT PROCESS END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT
EXAMPLE CALCULATION
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Treatment
Process Spill Collection System
Spill Basin
Pumping from Spill Basin
Spill Neutralization
Aeration in Equalization Basin
(peaking factor - 1.3)
Primary Clarifier Modification
Activated Sludge Basin
Modification
Additional Aeration
Secondary Clarifier
Modification
Nutrient Addition
Flotation Polymer
Flotation Thickening
Dewatering Polymer
Horizontal Belt-Filter
Primary and Biological Sludge
Transportation
Primary and Biological Sludge
Landfill
Subtotal
Capital
($1,000)
320
63
35
53
257
847
1,816
1,278
2,028
0
0
645
0
645
0
138
8,126
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
70
14
8
12
57
186
400
281
446
0
0
142
0
142
0
30
1,788
Operation
and
Maintenance
($l,000/yr)
10
1
1
7
23
25
41
40
51
19
38-
36
38
.26
124
43
522
Energy
($l,000/yr)
31
0
1
0
75
48
0
391
35
0
0
8
0
4
0
0
593
Total
Annual
($1,000)
111
15
10
19
155
259
441
712
532
19
38
186
38
172
124
73
2,903
248
-------
Energy Requirements
EPA anticipates that some of the various control and treatment
options considered as the basis of final rules could affect
existing energy demand. Estimates of the energy requirements of
each specific technology option are presented in this section.
In some cases, the implementation of production process controls
may result in a net energy saving. It is possible that, even
where net heat energy savings are achieved, energy costs can
increase because of the relative amounts of fuels and electricity
used and their prices.
EPA determined total energy usage prior to implementation of the
various technology options, or the baseline energy usage, based
on data in the American Paper Institute monthly energy reports.
Average power and fuel usages were determined from information
obtained as a result of the data request program. An energy
balance was developed for each model mill; the balance takes into
account the energy of spent liquor and hogged fuel, if
appropriate.
Table IV-18 presents an estimate of energy usage at direct
discharging mills for the base case (attainment of BPT effluent
limitations) and for the BCT Options 1, 2, 3, and 4. Total
energy is presented in heat energy units (Btu). In order to
account properly for energy requirements of each alternative, EPA
converted electrical energy (kwh) to heat energy (Btu) at a
conversion of 10,500 Btu/kwh, which reflects the average
efficiency of electrical power generation.
Air Pollution
Most of the production process controls identified in BCT. Option
1 are expected to have little direct impact on air emissions.
However, if additional steam is required, some increase in sulfur
dioxide generation could occur. Such an increase would be
directly proportional to the increased boiler firing rate and the
sulfur content of the fuel used. This situation is not unique to
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, but exists for all
industrial categories. Air pollution control techniques are
available to minimize such increases.
Production process controls that help retain more spent liquor in
the liquor recovery cycle include improved brown stock washing,
decker filtrate reuse, use of blow condensates, neutralization of
spent sulfite liquor before evaporation, and more complete use of
evaporator condensates. These controls tend to retain more
sul-fur-containing compounds in the liquor system. Emissions can
increase as sulfur levels increase with total liquor solids to
recovery. Using modern recovery systems of adequate capacity,
atmospheric emission levels of mercaptans, hydrogen sulfide, and
other compounds would not increase beyond allowable limits.
Generally, the normal variations in firing rates, sulfidity, and
liquor solids have a greater effect than implementation of the
production process controls considered.
249
-------
TABLE IV-18
ENERGY USAGE AT EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS1
Net Energy Usage (109 Btu/yr)
Subcategory Baseline2
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 50,538
Market Bleached Kraft 68,856
BCT Bleached Kraft 87,326
Alkaline-Fine3 128,775
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 139,382
o Bag 86,048
Semi-Chemical 51,786
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical 124,954
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 40,529
Papergrade Sulfite4 56,305
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical 3 , 628
Groundwood-CMN Papers 9,061
Groundwood-Fine Papers 17,301
Secondary Fibers' Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 3,486
o Tissue Papers 8,715
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper 2,634
Paperboard From Wastepaper5 30,725
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1,345
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 1,705
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers5 27,947
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 7,639
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers56 ,777
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 796
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 1,362
Total 957,620
Residual Fuel Oil
(106 barrels/yr) 152
Percent of Baseline Energy
Option 1
-625
-177,
-108
-4,714
-1,828
51
-1,181
-723
786
-2,844
--
-968
-771
-268
-871
—
-62
-3,024
—
—
-245
-308
-273
-268
-5
-25
-753
-722
-31
-121
-57
'-19,109
-3.0
-2.0
Option 2
263
569
461
570
431
118
297
385
305
300
—
57
128
31
201
—
40
177
111
--
20
27
160
149
11
92s
110s
1046
6s
296
22s
4,793
0.8
0.5
Option 3
-383
335
292
-4,253
-1,480
160
-1,000
399
1,043
-2,589
--
.-923
-672
-251
-729
—
-31
-2,912
— -
--
-235
-296
-156
-160
4
54s
-661s
-636s
-25s
.976
-37s
-15,220
-2.4
-1.6
Option 4
707
1,598
1,606
1,609
937
288
746
1,014
1,276
854
,
124
188
30
127
—
-62
-3,024
—
—
-245
-308
232
217
15
33
41
38
3
9
.6
, 7,786
1.2
0.8
'Minus sign indicates a net energy savings.
2Baseline energy use is based on data contained in API monthly energy reports
and BPT Development Documents.
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
""Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
sTotals are,sums of energy use for subcategory sectors.
6Energy use is calculated for activated sludge treatment systems for northern
facilities and aerated stabilization basins for southern facilities.
250
-------
Noise Potential
There is no identifiable potential for substantially increased
noise associated with any of the control and treatment options
considered. Existing effluent treatment processes are not a
significant source of noise.
Solid Waste Generation
A study by Energy Resources Company quantified the various solid
wastes generated in 1977 in the pulp/ paper, and paperboard
industry.(29) In addition to sludge generated as a result of
wastewater treatment, other types of solid wastes generated by
this industry include chemical ash, pulping wastes, and wood
wastes.
The kraft and sulfite processes produce the majority of chemical
pulping wastes, consisting of green liquor dregs, lime wastes
(slaker rejects and unburned rejects from lime .kilns), and
cooking chemical recovery process wastes. Green liquor dregs are
normally sewered and, therefore, are unlikely to be included in
wastewater sludge estimates. Lime wastes and recovery wastes
(normally oxides of the cooking chemical base from the sulfite
process) were estimated to be 535,000 metric tons (589,000 tons)
in 1977.(29)
About 2,700,000 metric tons (3,000,000 tons) of landfilled bark
and wood waste and approximately 1,000,000 metric tons (1,100,000
tons) of coal ash were generated in 1977.(29)
Miscellaneous pulp, paper, and paperboard industry solid waste
included 1,700,000 metric tons (1,900,000 tons) of wastepaper
reclamation waste (i.e., strapping, dirt, metal, and ink) in
1977. Other wastes include , evaporator residue and tall oil
residue; these are generated in insignificant quantities compared
to other solid wastes. Total 1977 process solid waste excluding
wastewater treatment sludge was about 5,900,000 metric tons
(6,500,000 tons).
In a 1974 study, it was estimated that pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry personnel generated about 0.23 kg (0.5 Ib) of
refuse per employee per shift, resulting in a total annual
industry generation rate of 16,600 metric tons (18,300 tons).
(48) This source of solid waste is insignificant compared to
process-related sources. .•. -
Wastewater treatment facilities produce both primary and
biological sludges that are usually dewatered prior to disposal.
The amount of wastewater treatment sludge generated depends on a
number of conditions including: (a) raw waste characteristics,
(b) the existence, efficiency, and/or type of primary treatment,
(c) the type of biological treatment system employed, and (d) the
efficiency of' biological solids removal from the wastewater.
Installation of chemically assisted clarification is expected to
251
-------
have a significant impact on the amount of wastewater sludge
generated. To assess this impact, the amount of primary and
biological sludges generated at each model mill in each
subcategory has been estimated. The amount of additional sludge
resulting from implementation of chemically assisted
clarification has also been estimated. EPA estimated the amount
of primary and biological sludges generated at direct discharging
mills in each subcategory. These estimates were based on sludge
production criteria outlined in Section VII of the December 1980
Development Document.(1)
Table IV-19 presents an estimate of solid wastes generated at
direct discharging mills for the base case (attainment of BPT
effluent limitations) and for BCT Options 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Acceptable techniques for solid waste disposal include
incineration, composting, pyrolysis - gasification, and landfill.
McKeown reported that, in 1975, about 10 percent of wastewater
sludges were incinerated and about 85 percent were disposed of by
land application.(33) Incineration is a preferred method for
disposal of organic wastes with low moisture content such as log
sorting and mill yard wastes.
The potential exists for recovery of chemical coagulants (e.g.,
alum) used for effluent clarification. However, at this time, an
economical recovery technology has not been employed on a full-
scale basis. Should technology become available to recover and
reuse alum economically, chemically assisted clarification would
become less expensive and sludge disposal requirements would be
reduced.
Composting is a technology that theoretically could be applied to
pulp, paper, and paperboard mill wastewater treatment sludges.
Through proper composting, sludge can be converted to non-
pathogenic organic material that may be used as a soil
conditioner.
Pyrolysis-gasification may play a future role in solid waste
disposal. Commercial-scale units have yet to be used for which
economic effectiveness has been proven or from which operating
experience has been obtained.
Land application of wastewater treatment plant sludges can be a
viable disposal option. Sludge can be applied to a field that
will be used for agricultural production. The organic nutrients
and sludge bulk can serve to increase crop production. A
prerequisite for the technique is that adequate and suitable land
will be available within a reasonable proximity of the plant.
Landfills are the most prevalent means of. solid waste disposal in
the industry. The primary environmental problem associated;with
landfill disposal of wastewater sludges is the potential for
leachate contamination of ground and surface waters.
252
-------
TABLE IV-19
TOTAL WASTEWATER SOLID GENERATION AT EXISTING
DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS
Wastewater Solid Waste Generation (1,000 kkg/yr)
Baseline1
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine2
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag , . • ,
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Oroundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Noncorrugating Furnish
o Corrugating Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Prii
96
95
143
219
109
29
26
77
58
106
-.
19
48
35
114
-
10
15
-
-
0
4
mary
.1
.6
.1
.5
.1
.7
.8
.5
.4
.8
-
.4
.3
.4
.0
-
.1
.1
-
-
.7
.9
Biological
37
47
54
71
47
13
25
39
55
58
-
5
12
7
23
•
1
. 4
-
•r
0
1
.3
.7
,7
.7
.7
.1
.9
.5
.3
.5
*
.3
.2
.6
.9
-
.5
• 8
-
-
.2
.1
BCT
Option 1
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
BCT
Option 2a
24
52
43
52
38
10
27
60
53
49
-
2
5
1
5
-
0
11
-
.1
0
.4
.5
.6
.0
,6
.5
.1
.3
,0
.4
-
.6
.6
.5
.9
-
.8
.1-
-
-
.4
0.5
BCT
Option 3a
2.3
44
37
40
28
9
18
48
41
40
-
2
4
0
3
-
0
5
-
-
0
0
.0
.6
.9
.4
.0
.3
.7
.3
.6
.4
-
.2
.6
.8
.4
-
.5
.4
*•
-
.1
.2
BCT
Option 4
1.8
14.0
21.0
22.9
4.1
1.0
6.7
5.5
10.7
10.9
«
0.6
1.9
2.2
3.3
—
0.0
0.0
--
—
0.0
0.0
Noniategrated Segment
Monintegrated-Fine Papers 32.4
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish -•-
S'onintegrated-Tissue Papers .10.2
NonIntegrated-Lightweight
o Lightweight 8.5
•j .Electrical 0.4
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 0.6
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 2.1
Total 1264.7
6.2
514.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
O.Q
0.0
0.0
5.8
0.0
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
352.7
1.8
1.8
1.9
0.1
0.4
0.2
112.8
Percent of Baseline
Wastewater
Solid Waste
Percent of baseline
total
solid waste
0.0
25.0
5.7
19.8
4.5
6.3
1.4
Baseline wastewater solid waste production is based on estimated BPT -raw waste loads; baseline sol^d waste other than
wastewater solids is 6,016,600 kkg/yr.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories. . -
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories.
253
-------
Environmental safety procedures and knowledge of proper
landfiHing practices have increased widely in recent years. EPA
has established operating and design criteria for several
landfill techniques for sludges ranging from 20 to 30 percent
solids. These techniques include area fill layer, area fill
mound, diked containment, narrow trench, wide trench, co-disposal
with soil, and c6-disposal with refuse.
Implementation Requirements
This section describes the availability of equipment and labor
necessary to implement BCT Options 1, 2, 3, and 4, and the time
required to effect the implementation.
Availability of Equipment. EPA expects that present
manufacturing capabilities are such that required equipment can
be readily produced. Any increased demand for either production
process control equipment or wastewater treatment equipment
should be met without major delays. No geographical limitations
are anticipated because of the ability of this industry to-, use
local independent contractors for fabrication of certain pieces
of equipment.
Availability of_ Labor Force. Manpower necessary for
implementation of technology alternatives could come from two
sources: a) mill personnel and b) outside contractors. On jobs
that cannot be completed during a normal shut-down or are
considered too complex for mill personnel, an outside contractor
can be hired to perform the necessary tasks.
A Bureau of Labor Statistics study concluded that the
availability of construction laborers to perform the required
work is sufficient.(34) This availability is based on two major
factors. The first is the short training time that is required
for construction labor (6 to 12 months), and the second is the
willingness of construction labor to relocate. Therefore,
availability of labor is not anticipated to be a problem in
implementing the technology alternatives.
Implementation Time. The production process controls considered
donotInvolve major process changes. Therefore, any
implementation of production process controls could be
accomplished in scheduled shut-down periods. Additional time is
available for completion of certain projects during routine
maintenance and clean-up, typically done every two to three
weeks.
For end-of-pipe treatment facilities, normal construction
techniques and crews would be required. The bar graph presented
in Figure IV-1 shows the estimated time required to implement the
BCT Option 2 and 3 technologies, respectively. It is anticipated
that the time required for implementation of BCT Option 4
technology would' be comparable " to that . required for
implementation of the end-of-pipe technology considered in BCT
Options 2 and 3. However, due to the wide variety.of treatment
254
-------
CM
If)
U>
O
IO
CO
K)
»-
IO
IO
IO
in
IO
IO
• 10
IO
CM
IO
m
X
01
CM
CO
CM
I-
CM
4
CM
IO
CM
Tj-
CM
IO
CM
CM
CM
CV
~D
CM
O>
CO
f-
UJ
m
v
it
r\
—
O
en
CO
c-
u>
m
•a-
IO
CM
-
u
t
i
B
8'
I
1
I
1
i
=
s
=
=
=
-
3WI1
B, , .<
tc >
S « i
i «
1
B
•91
=
E
z
•a
=
W3IA38
I
B
I'
K
U z
0 «0 C
3 i-
•
~
=
s
=
ami
1
i
i
1'
2 t
« S
1
1
i
|
I
1
1
1
1
=
=
S
=
M3IA3M
1
1'
I
I
I
2 *£
i 0*
|
I
i
1
I
1
i
i
i
™
=
S
=
s
I
=
S
3WI1
I
I
i
-
**• >
m o z
> ~ o
0 o
i
1
I
1
s
= •
-
5
~
5
M3IA3M
1
1
I
9
i
te. -r >•
§2|S
po
S
e: to
«-§
1 o
255
-------
schemes employed at mills in the industry, implementation time is
expected to vary from mill to mill.
Other Considerations
Benefits other than improved water quality can result from
production process technology modification. As noted earlier,
these benefits include savings resulting from improved raw
material usage and better operating efficiency. The economic
saving associated with these benefits have been estimated and are
presented in Table IV-4. Improved by-product recovery may also
result; however, no estimates of savings resulting from by-
product recovery have been included in the cost estimates
presented previously.
256
-------
SECTION V
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL
The 1977 amendments added section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act,
establishing "best conventional pollutant control technology"
(BCT) for discharges of conventional pollutants from existing
industrial point sources. Conventional pollutants are those
defined in section 304(a)(4) (biological oxygen demanding
pollutants (BOD5J, total suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform,
and pH), and any additional pollutants defined by the
Administrator as "conventional" (oil and grease; 44 FR 44501,
July 30, 1979).
BCT is not an additional limitation but replaces BAT for the
control of conventional pollutants. In addition to other factors
specified in section 304(b)(4)(B), the Act requires that BCT
limitations be assessed in light of a two part "cost-
reasonableness" test. The first test compares industry's cost for
reducing its conventional pollutants to the cost of publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs) for similar levels of conventional
pollutant reduction. The second test examines the cost-
effectiveness of additional industrial treatment beyond BPT. EPA
must find that limitations are "cost-reasonable" under both tests
before establishing them as BCT. In no case may BCT be less
stringent than BPT.
EPA originally published a methodology for carrying out the BCT
cost test on August 29, 1979 (44 FR 50732). Using that
methodology, BCT effluent limitations were proposed for the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry on January 6, 1981 (46 FR 1430).
However, EPA was later ordered by the Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit to correct data and methodological errors in its
BCT cost test and to develop a new BCT methodology (see American
Paper Institute v. EPA, 660' F.wd 954 (4th Cir. 1981)). Revised
BCT limitations were reproposed along with
methodology on October 29, 1982 (47 FR 49176).
issued its final BCT methodology on July 9,
24974).
the revised BCT
The Agency then
1986 (see 51 FR
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Pollutants regulated under BCT are BOD5_, TSS, and pH.
257
-------
REFERENCES
Proposed Development Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards for the Pulp/ Paper/ and Paperboard
and the Builders' Paper and Board Mills Point Source
Categories/ U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-80/025-b,
December 1980.
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Pulj
Paper, and Paperboard and the
Builders' Paper and Board Mills Point Source Categories,
U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C./ EPA 440/1-82/025, October 1982.
3. 51 Federal Register 24974, July 9, 1986.
4. 47 Federal Register 52006, November 18, 1982.
5. 44 Federal Register 50732, August 24, 1979.
6. 47 Federal Register 49176, October 29, 1982.
7. 49 Federal Register 37046, September 20, 1984.
8. 46 Federal Register 1430, January 6, 1981.
9. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines for
the Bleached Kraft, Groundwood, Sulfite, Soda, Deink, and
Non-Integrated Paper Mills Segment of the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-76/047-b,
December 1976.
10. National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement (NCASI) Technical Bulletin No. 364, "Laboratory
and Field Experience With Chemically Assisted Clarification
of Pulp and Paper Biologically Treated Effluents," January
1982.
11. Amberg, H.R., Crown Zellerbach Corp., December 1979 letter
commenting on the September 1979 draft report entitled
"Preliminary Data Base Review of BATEA Effluent Limitations
Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category."
12. Chen, H.T. "Pilot Plant Evaluation of Three Tertiary
Technologies for Pulp and Paper Mill Effluent," Proc.
Environmental Conference Technical Association for the Pulp
and Paper Industry, New Orleans, LA, April 29-29, 1981.
13. Packham, R.F., "Some Studies of the. Coagulation of Dispersed
Clays with Hydrolyzing Salts," J. Coll. Sci., 20. 81-92
(1965).
14. Stumm, W. and O'Melia, C.R., "Stoichiometry of Coagulation,"
J. Amer. Water Works Assoc., 60, 514-539, (1968).
260
-------
15. J.D. Gibbons, Nonparametric Statistical Inference/ McGraw-
Hill, 1971.
16. Final Development Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards for the Timber Products Point
Source Category, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-
81/023, January, 1981.
17. Miller and Freund, Probability and Statistics for Engineers/
Prentice-Hall, 1965.
18. Robert S. Means Co., Building Construction Cost Data 1977/
35th Edition, 1976.
19. Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April
1978.
20. Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A.,
April 1978.
21. Energy User News, A Fairchild Business Newspaper, Vol. 3,
No. 32, August 7, 1978.
22. Engineering News Record/ March 23, 1978.
23. Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Department of Energy, March
1979.
24. Process Design Manual ^ Municipal Sludge Landfills, EPA-
625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October
1978.
25. Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978.
26. Robert S. Means Co./ Building Construction cost Data 1979,
37th Edition, 1978.
27. A Survey of Pulp and Paper Industry Environmental Protection
Expenditures and Operating Costs-1976, National Council of
the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc.
(NCASI), NCASI Special Report 77-06, August 1977.
28. Edde, H./ "Influence of Pulping Yield on the Cost of
Modernizing Sulfite Pulp Mill Liquor Recovery/" Proceedings
of the 1978 TAPPI Environmental Conference.
29. The Energy Resources Company/ Disposal Practices for
Selected Industrial Solid Wastes/ Final Report for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency/ Office of Solid Waste,
Contract No. 68-01-5814, May 1980.
261
-------
30
31,
32,
33,
34,
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt Segment of the Builders' paper and Board Mills
Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., EPA 440/l-74-026a, May 1974.
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards for the Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical Pulp Segment of the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Mills Point Source Category^ U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency,
1974.
Washington, D.C., EPA 440/l-74-025a, May
Rogers D., "Deep Tank Aeration/Flotation, Clarification Adds
a New Treatment Dimension," Industrial Wastes,
January/February, 1983.
McKeown, J.J., "Sludge Dewatering and Disposal-A Review of
Practices in the U.S. Paper Industry," TAPPI, Vol. 62, No.
8, August 1979.
Communication between Joseph Aloisio and Mr. Howard
Fullerton of the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
*VS. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1993-715-003-87068
262
------- |