MHO I %0
DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
for
PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
and
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
for the
PULP, PAPER AND PAPERBOARD
and the
BUILDERS' PAPER AND BOARD MILLS
POINT SOURCE CATEGORIES
Douglas M. Costle
Administrator
Jeffery D. Denit
Acting Director, Effluent Guidelines Division
Robert W. Dellinger
Project Officer
December 1980
Effluent Guidelines Division
Office of Water and Waste Management
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 for the purpose of developing effluent limitations
guidelines for existing and new point sources and to establish
pretreatment standards for existing and new dischargers to publicly
owned treatment works to implement Sections 301, 304, 306 307 308
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")). This document was also
prepared in response to the Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources
Defe.n|| Council., Inc. v. Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. TTTGTr mo^TTfedT2
I oo j IU.U.C. 1979).
ERC
The information presented in this document supports regulations
proposed in December 1980. Information is presented to support best
available technology economically achievable (BAT) best conventional
?MoA^ant contro1 technology (BCT), new source performance standards
(NSPS), pretreatment standards for new and existing sources (PSNS and
D i !°T-,thenPV1P> PaPer, and Paperboard and the Builders' Paper and
Board Mills Point Source Categories. The report presents and
discusses data gathering efforts, subcategorization, water use
pollutant parameters, control and treatment technologies, development
It re9ula.tory options, cost and non-water quality considerations, and
the methodology for development of effluent limitations.
iii
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
I CONCLUSIONS
SUBCATEGORIZATION
BPT
BCT
BAT
NSPS
PSES and PSNS
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS
II INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
STATUS OF THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
SCOPE OF THIS RULEMAKING
SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY
Introduction
Existing Data Evaluation
Data Request Program
Screening Program
Industry Profile and Review of Subcategorization
Verification Program
Discharge Monitoring Data Acquisition Program
Analysis of Treatment Alternatives
Analysis of Cost and Energy Data
111 DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
INTRODUCTION
RAW MATERIALS
STANDARD MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
Raw Material Preparation
Pulping
Use of Secondary Fibers
Bleaching of Wood Pulps
Papermaking
INDUSTRY PROFILE
Geographical Distribution
Method of Wastewater Discharge
Production Profile
IV SUBCATEGORIZATION
INTRODUCTION
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
PAGE
1
3
3
7
7
12
12
15
15
16
17
19
19
21
23
26
37
39
51
52
54
57
57
57
57
58
58
61
62
65
67
67
67
71
77
77
78
80
81
81
-------
SECTION
PAGE
IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA
SUMMARY
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT (Board, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN (Coarse, Molded,News) Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
V WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
WATER USE AND SOURCES OF WASTEWATER
Wood Preparation
Pulping and Recovery
Bleaching
Papermaking
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STRATEGY
Conventional Pollutants
TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
Screening Program
Verification Program
Supplemental Data on Nonconventional Pollutants
VI SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
SELECTION OF WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Conventional Pollutants
Toxic Pollutants
Nonconventional Pollutants
Review of Existing Regulations
Identification of Other Compounds of Concern
81
82
83
83
83
83
83
84
84
84
84
84
84
85
85
85
85
85
86
86
86
86
86
86
87
87
89
89
89
91
95
97
98
98
167
167
167
176
219
219
219
219
220
221
222
224
vi
-------
SECTION
PAGE
VII CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS COMMONLY EMPLOYED BY THE
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
Woodyard/Woodroom
Pulp Mill
Brown Stock Washers and Screen Room
Bleaching Systems
Evaporation and Recovery
Liquor Preparation Area
Papermill
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
Recycle of Effluent
Chemical Substitution
OTHER PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
Bleach Systems and Recovery
END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES COMMONLY EMPLOYED
BY THE PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
Preliminary/Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Chemically Assisted Clarification
Filtration
Activated Carbon Adsorption
Foam Separation
Microstraining
Electrochemical Treatment
Ion Flotation
Air/Catalytic/Chemical Oxidation
Steam Stripping
Ultrafiltration
Reverse Osmosis/Freeze Concentration
Amine Treatment
Polymeric Resin Treatment
VIII DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
INTRODUCTION
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE (BPT)
General
Development of Raw Waste Loads
Development of Final Effluent Characteristics
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BCT)
General
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE (BAT)
General
251
251
251
253
257
263
266
269
278
282
295
295
297
299
299
306
306
307
322
336
341
349
351
351
352
352
353
353
354
355
355
359
359
359
359
360
362
363
363
364
381
383
386
413
413
vii
-------
SECTION
PAGE
Option 1 417
Option 2 418
Ammonia Removal „ 418
Color Removal 422
NSPS 426
General 426
Option 1-Conventional Pollutants 426
Option 1-Toxic Pollutants 438
Option 2-Substitution of Chemicals 441
PSES AND PSNS 441
General 441
Option 1 442
EFFLUENT VARIABILITY ANALYSIS 442
Effluent Limitations Guidelines 442
Daily Maximum Variability Factors 443
30 Day Maximum Variability Factors 444
Establishment of Variability Factors to be
Applied for Proposed Rulemaking 446
IX COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS 453
METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS 453
Introduction 453
Model Mill Approach 453
Mill and Site Specific Cost Factors 454
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control and Treatment
Technologies 460
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT 463
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS 463
Option 1 466
Option 2 466
Option 3 526
Option 4 526
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BAT OPTIONS 526
Option 1 526
Option 2 531
COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 531
Color Removal 531
Ammonia Removal 536
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PSES AND PSMS 537
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF NSPS 539
Option 1 539
Option 2 539
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS 539
Energy Requirements 539
Air Pollution 542,
Noise Potential 542
Solid Waste Generation 544
Implementation Requirements 547
Other Considerations 547
viii
-------
SECTION
PAGE
X EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE 549
GENERAL 549
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 549
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 549
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 550
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 550
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 550
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 552
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 552
Energy 552
Solid Waste 552
Air and Noise 553
XI EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
THE BEST AVAiramTTrCWOTOGT ECONOMICALLTTCTrrEVABLE"
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES ~~~" 555
GENERAL 555
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 555
Nonconventional Pollutants 555
Toxic Pollutants 556
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 556
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 557
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 557
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution 557
Zinc Removal- 557
Chioroform Removal 557
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BAT EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 559
Chloroform 559
Pentachlorophenol 559
Trichlorophenol 559
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 560
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution 560
Zinc Removal 560
Chloroform Removal . . . . 560
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 560
XII EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST CONVENTIO¥AL POLLUTANT CONTROr'TECHNOLOGYTFFLTjENT
LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES ~~~561
GENERAL 561
ix
-------
SECTION
PAGE
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 561
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY 561
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 562
RATIONAL FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY 562
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BCT EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 570
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 571
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 572
Energy 572
Solid Waste 572
Air and Noise 572
XIII NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 573
GENERAL 573
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 573
Conventional Pollutants 573
Toxic Pollutants 573
Nonconventional Pollutants 573
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS 573
Conventional Pollutant Control 573
Toxic Pollutant Control 573
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 574
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS
FOR NSPS 574
Conventional Pollutant Control Technology 574
Toxic Pollutant Control Technology 574
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 574
Conventional Pollutants 574
Toxic Pollutants 578
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 578
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 578
XIV PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES 579
GENERAL 579
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 579
Toxic Pollutants 579
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT
STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES 579
PSES EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 579
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
EXISTING SOURCES 581
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSES EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 581
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 581
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution 581
Zinc Hydrosulfite Substitution 581
-------
SECTION
XV
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
GENERAL
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Toxic Pollutants
IDENTIFICATION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
PSNS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW
SOURCES
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSNS EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS
COST OF APPLICATION
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
Zinc Hydrosulfite Substitution
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
XVI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX
C -
GLOSSARY
LEGEND OF ABBREVIATIONS
REFERENCES
583
583
583
583
583
585
585
585
585
585
586
587
589
607
617
xi
-------
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE
PAGE
SECTION I
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
SECTION II
II-l
11-2
11-3
11-4
11-5
11-6
11-7
11-8
11-9
11-10
11-11
11-12
11-13
SECTION III
III-l
III-2
III-3
BPT Effluent Limitations
BCT Effluent Limitations
BCT Effluent Limitations Non-Continuous
Dischargers
BAT Effluent Limitations
NSPS Effluent Limitations Conventional
Pollutants
NSPS Effluent Limitations Conventional
Pollutants Non-Continuous Dischargers
NSPS Effluent Limitations Toxic
Pollutants
PSES and PSNS Effluent Limitations
Status of Effluent Limitations Guidelines
Response to Data Request
Toxic and Additional Nonconventional
Pollutants Under Investigation in the
Screening Program
Subcategory Groups Selected for Screening
Program
Summary of Treatment Type and Percent
Differences for Mill Versus Raw Waste Load
Basis of BPT
Typical Screening Program Survey
Current and Revised Industry Subcategori-
zation
Verification Compounds Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Industry
Verification Program Sampling Points
Typical Verification Sampling Program
Survey
Summary of Internal Standards
Summary of Direct Discharging Mills Versus
DMR Data Collected
Production Process Control s and Effl uent
Treatment Technologies
Bleaching Symbols
Summary of Operating Pulp, Paper and Paper-
board Mills by EPA Region
Summary of Method of Discharge and In-
Place Technology, All Known Operating Mills
6
8
9
10
11
13
18
27
28
31
33
36
38
41
46
47
50
53
55
64
68
70
xiii
-------
TITLE
PAGE
III-4 Estimated Pulp Production - 1977
II1-5 Paper and Paperboard Products of Industry
II1-6 Production Statistics Paper and Paperboard
Products Industry
SECTION V
V-l Summary Raw Waste Load Data Dissolving
Kraft Subcategory
V-2 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory
V-3 Summary Raw Waste Load Data BCT Bleached
Kraft Subcategory
V-4 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Alkaline-Fine
V-5 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory
V-6 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Serai-Chemical
Subcategory
V-7 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Unbleached
Kraft and Semi-Chemical Subcategory
V-8 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp Subcategory
V-9 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Papergrade
Sulfite Subcategory
V-10 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Groundwood-
Thermo-Mechanical Subcategory
V-ll Summary Raw Waste Load Data Groundwood-
CMN Papers Subcategory
V-12 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Groundwood-
Fine Papers Subcategory
V-13 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Integrated
Miscellaneous Mills
V-14 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Deink Subcategory
V-15 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Tissue from
Wastepaper Subcategory
V-16 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Paperboard
•from Wastepaper Subcategory
V-17 Methods of Handling Wastewater at Self-
Contained Paperboard from Wastepaper
Mills
V-18 Summary Raw Waste Load Data
Wastepaper-Molded Products Subcategory
V-19 Summary Raw Waste Load Data
Builers' Paper and Roofing Felt Subcategory
V-20 Methods of Handling Wastewater at Self-
Contained Builders' Paper and Roofing
Felt Mills
V-21 Summary Raw Waste Load Data
Secondary Fiber Miscellaneous Mills
72
73
74
99
104
107
110
116
119
123
125
126
133
134
138
141
144
148
149
152
153
155
157
158
xiv
-------
-TITLE
PAGE
V-22 Summary Raw Waste Load Data
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers Subcategory
V-23 Summary Raw Waste Load Data
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers Subcategory
V-24 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers Subcategory
V-25 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory
V-26 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategory
V-27 Summary Raw Waste Load Data Nonintegrated
Miscellaneous Mills
V-28 Summary of Initial Screening Program Analysis
Results •••-:••
V-29 Summary of Screening Analysis Results at 17
Verification Mills
V-30 Summary of EPA Regional S&A Screening
Program Results at 42 Mills
V-31 Summary of Verification Program Analysis
Results for Toxic Pollutants
V-32 Summary of Verification Program
Analysis Results for Nonconventional Pollutants
V-33 Toxic Pollutant Sampling Data Base
V-34 Supplemental Color Data
V-35 Theoretical Raw Waste Ammonia Load
V-36 Average Raw Waste Load Data for Mills Using
Ammonia as the Chemical Pulping Base
SECTION VI
VI-1 Summary of Parameters Proposed or Promulgated
for Effluent Limitations Guidelines by Sub-
category
VI-2 Criteria For and Elimination of Toxic
Pollutants Based on Screening Program
Results
VI-3 Projected Treatability for Verification
Program Toxic Pollutants
VI-4 Toxic Pollutants Eliminated from Assessment
Based on Verification Program Results
Detected Below Treatability Level
VI-5 Summary of Toxic Pollutants of Concern By
Subcategory
VI-6 Summary of Data Assessment-Toxic
Pollutants of Concern
VI-7 Summary of New York State PCB Analysis
Results
VI-8 Criteria For, and Elimination of Toxic
Pollutants Based on Verification Program
Results
160
161
162
164
165
166
168
173
174
177
201
214
215
216
218
223
226
228
231
233
234
239
240
xv
-------
TITLE
PAGE
VI-9
VI-10
VI-11
VI-12
VI-13
SECTION VII
VII-1
VII_2
VII-3
VII-4
VI1-5
VII_6
VII-7
VI1-8
VII-9
VII-10
VII-11
VII-12
VII-13
Summary of Influent Concentrations for
Resin and Fatty Acids and Chlorinated Deriv-
atives for All Verification Facilities
Summary of Effluent Concentrations for Resin
and Fatty Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives
for All Verification Facilities
Summary of Influent Concentrations for Resin
and Fatty Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives
for Verification Mills Meeting BPT Effluent
Limitations
Summary of Effluent Concentrations for Resin
and Fatty Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives
for Verification Mills Meeting BPT Effluent
Limitations
Removals of Resin and Fatty Acids and
Chlorinated Derivatives
Production Process Control Technologies
Identified as the Best Practicable Control
Technology Currently Available
Production Process Control Technologies
Identified as the Best Available Technology
Economically Achievable
Production Process Control Technologies Under
Consideration for Establishment of the Best
Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
Waste Load Reductions From Implementation
of Hooker APS II and APS III Systems
Calculated Toxic and Nonconventional
Pollutant Removal Rates
Typical Design Parameters for Activated
Sludge Processes
Oxygen Activated Sludge Treatability Pilot
Seal e
Pilot RBC Final Effluent Quality for Bleached
Kraft Wastewater
Summary of Chemically Assisted Clarification
Technology Performance Data
Final Effluent Quality of a Chemically Assisted
Clarification System Treating Bleached Kraft
Wastewater
Color and Organic Carbon Removal After
Application of Massive Lime Treatment
Color Reductions Achieved After Application of
Chemically Assisted Clarification With Ferric
Sulfate, Alum, and Lime
Comparison of Treatment Efficiencies On Kraft
Effluents by the Application of Chemically
Assisted Clarification Using Divalent Ions
and Trivalent Ions
243
245
247
248
249
252
252
254
305
309
313
317
319
325
327
329
332
334
xvi
-------
fiTLE
PAGE
VII-14
VII-15
VII-16
VII-17
VI1-18
VII-19
VI1-20
VII-21
VII-22
SECTION VIII
VIII-1
VIII-2
VIII-3
VIII-4
VIII-5
VIII-6
VIII-7
VIII-8
VIII-9
VIII-10
VIII-11
VIII-12
VIII-13
VIII-14
Lime Treatment of Bleached Kraft Caustic Extract
In the Presence of Metal Ion 335
Removal of BOD, COD, and Phosphate From
Chemical Pulping Wastewaters at Selected Lime-
Magnesia Levels 337
TSS Reduction Capabilities and Related Factors
for the Filtration Technology When No Chemicals
Are Used 338
TSS Reduction Capabilities and Related Factors
for the Filtration Technology When Chemicals
are Used 339
Sand Filtration Results 340
Results of Pi lot-Scale Granular Activated
Carbon Treatment of Unbleached Kraft Mill
Waste 344
Powdered Activated Carbon Operating Data On
A Chemical Plant Wastewater 346
Full Scale "PACT" Process Results On
Chemical Plant Wastewater 348
Results of Pilot-Scale Activated Carbon
Treatment of Unbleached Kraft Mill Effluent 350
Average BOD5^ Raw Waste Characteristics for the
Nonintegrated Segment of the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Industry 361
Option 1 Production Process Controls
Integrated Segment 366
Option 1 Production Process Controls
Secondary Fibers Segment 368
Option 1 Production Process Controls
Nonintegrated Segment 369
Summary of BPT and Option 1 Raw Waste Loads 370
Option 1 Final Effluent Characteristics 382
Option 2 Final Effluent Characteristics 384
Option 3 Final Effluent Characteristics 385
Discharge Monitoring Report Data Dissolving
Kraft Subcategory 388
Discharge Monitoring Report Data Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory 389
Discharge Monitoring Report Data BCT
Bleached Kraft Subcategory 390
Discharge Monitoring Report Data Alkaline-
Fine 392
Discharge Monitoring Report Data Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory 393
Discharge Monitoring Report Data Semi-Chemical
Subcategory 395
xvii
-------
TITLE
PAGE
VII1-15 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Unbleached
Kraft and Semi-Chemical Subcategory 396
VIII-16 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Papergrade
Sulfite Subcategory 398
VI11-17 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp Subcategory 399
VIII-18 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Groundwood-
Thermo-Mechanical Subcategory 401
VIII-19 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Groundwood
Fine Papers Subcategory 402
VII1-20 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Groundwood-
CMN Papers Subcategory 403
VIII-21 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Deink Subcategory 404
VII1-22 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Tissue from
Wastepaper Subcategory 405
VIII-23 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Paperboard
from Wastepaper Subcategory 407
VI11-24 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Wastepaper-
Molded Products Subcategory , 408
VIII-25 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Builders'
Paper and Roofing Felt Subcategory 409
VIII-26 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Nonintegrated-
Fine Papers Subcategory 410
VIII-27 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers Subcategory 411
VII1-28 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers Subcategory 412
VIII-29 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory 414
VIII-30 Discharge Monitoring Report Data Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategory 415
VII1-31 Option 4 Final Effluent Characteristics 416
VIII-32 Summary of Results - Chloroform Verification
Sampling Program Effluent Sample Concentrations
in PPB at Facilities where Chloroform was
Detected 418
VIII-33 Summary of Results - Pentachlorophenol Verification
Sampling Program Influent to Bio-Treatment at
Facilities where Pentachlorophenol was Detected 420
VII1-34 Summary of Results - Trichlorophenol Verification
Sampling Program Influent To Bio-Treatment at
Facilities where Trichlorophenol! was Detected 421
VIII-35 Predicted Range of Ammonia Raw Waste Load and Final
Effluent Concentrations 423
VII1-36 Summary of Anticipated Color Levels After
Minimum Lime/Alum Coagulation 425
VIII-37 Production Process Controls Considered In
Establishment of NSPS Integrated Segment 427
VII1-38 Production Process Controls Considered in
Establishment of NSPS Secondary Fibers Segment 429
xvm
-------
TITLE
PAGE
VIII-39 Production Process Controls Considered in
Establishment of NSPS Nonintegrated Segment
VII1-40 Summary of NSPS Raw Waste Loads
VIII-41 NSPS Final Effluent Characteristics
VIII-42 Variability Factors for Determining Maximum
30-Day Average and Maximum Day Limitations for
Options 1, 2, 3, and 4
VIII-43 Results of Goodness-of-Fit Tests For Successive
30-Day Averages
VI11-44 Distribution of Maximum 30-Day Averages About
the Estimate of the 99th Percentile
VIII-45 Summary of Variability Factors
SECTION IX
IX-1 Model Mill Sizes by Subcategory and Discharge
Type
IX-2 Regional Cost Adjustment Factors '
IX-3 Gross O&M and Energy Costs and Savings for
Production Process Controls for Medium-Sized
Direct Dischargers
IX-4 Cost Estimating Criteria
IX-5 Design Criteria for BPT Activated Sludge
Wastepaper-Molded Products Subcategory
IX-6 Cost of Implementation of BPT Technology
Wastepaper-Molded Products Subcategory
IX-7 Treatment Cost Summary - Direct Discharge
Mills (Options 1, 2, 3)
IX-8 Treatment Cost Summary - Direct Discharge
Mills - Option 4
IX-9 Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Integrated
Segment Cost of Implementation of BCT
Technology Options
IX-10 Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Secondary
Fibers Segment Cost of Implemenation
of BCT Technology Options
IX-11 Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Nonintegrated
Segment Cost of Implementation of BCT
Technology Options
IX-12 Production Process Controls Sample Cost
Calculation - Direct Discharger 726 kkg/d
Alkaline-Fine Mill
IX-13 Design Criteria BCT Option 2 Activated Sludge
for the Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers,
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers,
Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven Papers,
and Nonintegrated - Paperboard Subcategories
IX-14 Design Basis for Estimates of Costs of
Attainment of Option 4 BCT Limitations
431
439
440
445
447
448
448
455
457
459
461
464
465
467
492
520
521
522
523
525
527
xix
-------
TITLE
PAGE
IX-15
IX-16
IX-17
IX-18
IX-19
IX-20
IX-21
IX-22
SECTION X
X-l
SECTION XI
XI-1
SECTION XII
XII-1
XII-2
XII-3
XII-4
XII-5
XII-6
XI1-7
SECTION XIII
XIII-1
XIII-2
XIII-3
SECTION XIV
XIV-1
Design Parameters for Option 4 Example
Calculation
Cost Summary for Option 4 Activated Sludge
System Modification Example Calculation -
Unit Process End-of-Pipe Treatment Costs
Costs for Color Reduction for Direct
Dischargers
Costs for Ammonia Removal for Direct
Dischargers
Costs for Substituting Sodium Hydrosulfite
for Zinc Hydrosulfite
Cost Summary for NSPS
Total Energy Usage by Existing Direct Discharging
Mills Through Implementation of BCT Options
Total Wastewater Solid Waste Generation at
Existing Direct Discharging Mills Through
Implementation of BCT Options
BPT Effluent Limitations
BAT Effluent Limitations
BCT Effluent Limitations
BCT Effluent Limitations Non-Continuous
Dischargers
BCT Analysis - Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
BCT Analysis
BCT Analysis
BCT Analysis
- Option 4
BCT Analysis-Proposed Regulation
NSPS Effluent Limitations Conventional
Pollutants
NSPS Effluent Limitations Conventional'
Pollutants Non-Continuous Dischargers
NSPS Effluent Limitations Toxic Pollutants
PSES Effluent Limitations
529
530
532
538
540
541
543
546
551
558
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
575
576
577
580
xx
-------
TITLE
PAGE
SECTION XV
XV-1
PSNS Effluent Limitations
584
-------
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
TITLE
PAGE
SECTION II
II-l
II-2
SECTION III
III-l
SECTION V
V-l
V-2
V-3
V-4
V-5
V-6
V-7
V-8
V-9
V-10
V-ll
V-12
V-13
V-14
V-15
V-16
V-17
Location of Screening Program Mill Surveys
Location of Verification Program Mill
Surveys
Location of Operating Mills in the
Industry
General Flow Sheet Pulping and Papermaking
Process
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Dissolving
Pulp Dissolving Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste BOD5 Versus Percent Dissolving
Pulp Dissolving Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste Data (Flow and BOD5) Versus
Percent Softwood Used Dissolving Kraft
Subcategory
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used
Market Bleached Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste BOD5 Versus Percent Softwood Used
Market Bleached Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used
BCT Bleached Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste BOD£ Versus Percent Softwood Used
BCT Bleached Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used
Alkaline-Fine
Raw Waste BODJ[ Versus Percent Softwood Used
Alkaline-Fine
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent On Site Pulp
Production Alkaline-Fine
Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent On Site Pulp
Production Alkaline-Fine
Raw Waste Flow Versus Production Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste BODj[ Versus Production Unbleached
Kraft Subcategory
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Wastepaper Used
Semi-Chemical Subcategory
Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent Wastepaper Used
Semi-Chemical Subcategory
Effect of Washing Process on Raw Waste
Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory
35
44
69
90
100
101
102
105
106
108
109
111
112
114
115
117
118
121
122
128
xxiii
-------
TITLE
PAGE
V-18
V-19
V-20
V-21
V-22
V-23
V-24
V-25
V-26
V-27
SECTION VII
VII-1
VII-2
VII-3
VII-4
VII-5
VII-6
VII-7
VII-8
VII-9
VII-10
VII-11
VII-12
VII-13
VI1-14
VII-15
Effect of Washing Process on Raw Waste Flow
Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory 129
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Sulfite Pulp
On Site 130
Effect of Cooking Process on Raw Waste BOD5
Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory ~~ 131
Effect of Condenser Type on Raw Waste Flow
Papergrade Sulfite Subcategory 132
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Groundwood
Pulp On Site Groundwood-CMN Papers Subcategory 136
Raw Waste BOD5 Versus Percent Groundwood
Pulp On Site "GYoundwood-CMN Papers Subcategory 137
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Groundwood
Pulp On Site Groundwood-Fine Papers
Subcategory 139
Raw Waste BODj[ Versus Percent Groundwood
Pulp On Site Groundwood-Fine Papers
Subcategory 140
Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Deink Pulp
Produced Deink Subcategory 145
Raw Waste BOD5^ Versus Deink Pulp Produced
Deink Subcategory 145
Convert Hydraulic Barking Systems to Dry
System 255
Flume Replaced by Mechanical Conveyor 256
Segregate Woodroom Non-Contact Cooling
Water and Condensate * 258
Reuse of Digester Condensate 259
Reduce Groundwood Thickener Filtrate
Overf1ow 261
Pulp Mill Spill Collection Digester Area 262
Addition of Third or Fourth Stage Pulp
Washer 264
Recycle Decker Filtrate 265
Cleaner Rejects to Landfill 267
Jump Stage Washing in Bleach Plant 268
Full Countercurrent Washing in Bleach
Plant 270
Bleachery Jump Stage Washing and
Caustic Extraction Filtrate Collection
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 271
Complete Reuse of Evaporator Condensate
Kraft and Soda Mills 273
Replace Barometric Condenser With Surface
Condenser 274
Addition of an Evaporator Boil out Tank 275
xxiv
-------
TITLE
PAGE
YII-16
VII-17
VI1-18
VII-19
VII-20
VII-21
VI1-22
VII-23
VI1-24
VII-25
VII-26
VII-27
VI1-28
VII-29
VI1-30
VII-31
VII-32
VII-33
SECTION VIII
VIII-1
SECTION IX
IX-1
Neutralization of Spent Sulfite Liquor 277
Spill Collection - Evaporator, Recovery,
Causticizing and Liquor Storage Areas 279
Green Liquor Dregs Filter 280
Lime Mud Storage Pond 281
Stock Spill Collection Pulp Bleaching and
and Papermachine Areas Papergrade Sulfite 283
Stock Spill Collection System Pulp Bleaching
and Dryer Areas Bleached Kraft and Soda Mills 284
Stock Spill Collection System Paper Mill
Area - Groundwood-CMM or Fine Papers 285
Spill Collection System - Color Plant -
Alkaline Fine 286
Papermill Improvements-Unbleached Kraft 288
New Saveall on Pulp & Paper Mill Effluents
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 289
New Saveall on Papermill Effluent :
Wastepaper-Molded Products * 290
White Water to Vacuum Pumps and Collection
Tank for Pump Seal Water and Press Effluent 291
Increased White Water Storage Capacity 293
4-Stage Centric!eaner System With Elutriation 296
Improved Reuse of Clarifier Sludge 298
Rapson-Reeve Process Closed Cycle Bleached
Kraft Pulpmill 301
Rapson-Reeve Closed Cycle Mill Salt Recovery
System 303
Billerud-Uddeholm Non-Polluting Bleach Plant 357
Final Effluent TSS vs Raw Wastewater BOD5 380
Time Required to Construct Solids Contact
Clarifier/Biological System 548
xxv
-------
LEGEND OF SYMBOLS ON FIGURES
PROCESS DESIGNATIONS
FLOW DIRECTION
—{XI- VALVE (NORMALLY OPEN)
VALVE (NORMALLY CLOSED)
CONTROL VALVE (SHOWN OPEN)
FLOOR D,RAIN
A
PUMP
BLOWER
SHOWERS
DISTRIBUTION NOZZLE
AGITATOR
INSTRUMENTATION
* •• • INSTRUMENTATION LINES
. PROBE
o...
0
0
CONTROLLER
CONDUCTIVITY CONTROL
CONSISTENCY CONTROL
UA) LEVEL ALARM
uc") LEVEL CONTROL
(LCA) LEVEL CONTROL 8 ALARM
(L\CJ LEVEL INDICATOR a CONTROL
,'PHC) pH CONTROL
rCA^ CONDUCTIVITY CONTROL 8 ALARM (RC) REMOTE CONTROL
^^y
FC ) FLOW CONTR'OL
HIGH LEVEL ALARM
TEMPERATURE CONTROL
} TEMPERATURE RECORDER 8 CONTROL
XXVI
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
SUBCATEGORIZATION
For the purpose of establishing BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS
effluent limitations, the integrated, secondary fibers, and
nonintegrated segments of the pulp, paper, and paperboard and
builders' paper and board mills point source categories have been
subcategorized as follows:
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag and Other Products
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Tissue from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated - Fine Papers
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Lightweight Electrical
Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated - Paperboard
-------
The subcategorization scheme from previous rulemaking was reviewed on
the basis of current information. Factors such as age, size of plant,
raw material, process employed, products, and waste treatability were
considered in reviewing the adequacy of the original subcategorization
scheme. This review led to a number of revisions to the original
subcategorization scheme.
In the integrated segment of the industry, a number of revisions have
been made. Although the fine bleached kraft and soda subcategories
remain as two separate subcategories, effluent limitations are
proposed that are the same for both; no significant differences in raw
waste loads exist at mills in these two subcategories. In the
unbleached kraft subcategory, differences in raw waste loads for the
production of linerboard and bag and other products result in
different effluent limitations for the two product types. A single
new subcategory, semi-chemical, is proposed to include mills that were
originally included in the ammonia-based neutral sulfite semi-chemical
(NSSC) and sodium-based NSSC subcategories. The unbleached kraft and
semi-chemical subcategory now includes those mills originally included
in the unbleached kraft-NSSC (cross recovery) subcategory and reflects
the similarities of all semi-chemical processes. Effluent limitations
are proposed that are identical for the papergrade sulfite {blow pit
wash) and papergrade sulfite (drum wash) subcategories. It has been
determined that a single factor, the percentage of sulfite pulp
produced on-site, is a better indicator of differences in raw waste
loadings at papergrade sulfite mills than the type of washing system
or condenser employed. BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS regulations are
not proposed for the groundwood-chemi-mechanical subcategory, one of
the original subcategories for which effluent limitations were
established. Insufficient data are available at this time to
determine the .effect of the degree of chemical usage in the pulping
process on raw waste generation.
In the secondary fibers segment, two revisions have been made. In the
deink subcategory, differences resulting from the production of fine
papers, tissue papers, and newsprint are recognized and different
effluent limitations have been developed for application at mills
where these products are manufactured. In addition, a new
subcategory, wastepaper-molded products, has been established to
reflect distinct process and wastewater differences associated with
the manufacture of molded products from wastepaper.
In the nonintegrated segment of the industry, three new subcategories
have been established to represent the differences in the manufacture
of specific products. The new subcategories are nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard. Within the nonintegrated-1ightweight papers
subcategory, a further allowance is made to account for the production
of electrical grades of paper.
-------
As described above, four new subcategories have been identified for
which BPT limitations do not exist: wastepaper-molded products,
nonintegrated-1ightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard. In order to develop BCT
effluent limitations, a BPT level determination is required in order
to perform the BCT cost-reasonableness test, which rests on the
incremental cost of removal of BODS and TSS from BPT to BCT.
BPT
Conventional pollutants for which BPT regulations are proposed include
BOD5., TSS, and pH. BPT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-1 .
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. Production shall be
determined for each mill based on past production rates, present
trends, or committed growth.
BPT effluent limitations are generally based on the average
performance of mills within the subcategory and on transfer of
technology from another subcategory.
BCT
Conventional pollutants for which BCT regulations are proposed include
BOD!5, TSS, and pH. BCT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-2.
It is proposed that non-continuous dischargers shall be required to
meet the annual average effluent limitations presented in Table 1-3.
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 pff-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 upon past production rates, present trends, or
committed growth.
BCT effluent limitations are generally based on the performance of
mills where BPT effluent limitations are being attained (best
performers) for all subcategories for which the BCT cost-
reasonableness test is passed. In those subcategories where the cost-
reasonableness test is failed, a less stringent option forms the basis
of BCT if it passes the cost-reasonableness test. The only exceptions
are the dissolving sulfite pulp and the builders' paper and roofing
felt subcategories for which BCT limitations are established at the
BPT level because of projected severe economic impact.
-------
TABLE 1-1
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Secondary Fibers Segment
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
BODS TSS BODS TSS
2.3 5.8 4.4 10.8
13.2 10.6 23.9 21.6
20.8 16.7 37.9 34.0
16.2 13.0 29.4 26.6
3.5 2.8 6.3 5.8
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual
(kg/kkg or
Subcategory BODS
Secondary Fibers Segment
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1.3
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight 7.4
Electrical 11.6
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 9.1
Nonintegrated-Paperboard ... 2-0
Average Maximum 30-Day Average
lbs/1000 Ibs) (mg/1)
TSS BODS TSS
3.2 27 66
6.0 65 52
9.5 65 52
7.4 65 52
1.6 65 52
Maximum Dav
(mg/1)
BODS TSS
51 122
118 106
118 106
118 106
118 106
-------
Subcategory
TABLE 1-2
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
BODS TSS
Maximum Day
BODS TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate ^
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
7.2
6.2
4.5
3.5
3.5
2.0
2.7
3.1
3.1
21.5
23.1
25.0
27.1
2.3
2.7
2.4
5.3
5.8
3.9
0.74
1.1
3.0
2.3
5.2
10.4
18.1
12.9
3.5
11.3
8.0
6.6
5.6
5.6
3.7
4.4
4.4
5.3
38.0
38.0
38.0
38.0
See Equations
3.7
3.8
3.5
12.2
10.5
7.5
5.9
5.9
3.5
4.5
5.3
5.3
41.4
44.3
48.1
52.0
Below
3.9
4.5
4.1
18.6
13.2
10.8
9.2
9.2
6.2
7.2
7.2
8.7
70.6
70.6
70.6
70.6
6.2
6.3
5.9
7.6
9.1
4.7
0.89
2.1
3.0
2.5
4.1
8.3
14.4
10.3
2.8
8.9
9.8
6.6
1.2
1.8
5.0
3.9
9.4
12.5
15.0
7.8
1.5
3.5
5.0
4.1
8.5
18.9 16.9
32.8 29.5
23.4 21.1
6.3 5.8
pH-Within the range 5.0 to 9.0 at all times
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30 day average:
BOD5 = 0.0020x2-0.104x+6.61
TSS = 0.0033x2-0.177x-H1.2
Maximum Day:
BOD5 = 0.0033x2-0.176x+ll.l
TSS = 0.0055x2-0.291x-H8.4
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
-------
TABLE 1-3
• BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average Maximum 30-Day Average Maximum Day
(ke/kke or lbs/1000 Ibs) (mjs/1) (mg/1)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate .
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Xonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Monintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Xonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within
BODS
4.1
3.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.2
1.5
1.8
1.8
12.1
13.0
14.1
15.2
TSS
6.2
4.4
3.6
3.1
3.1
2.1
2.4
2,4
2.9
20.9
20.9
20.9
20.9
See Equations Below
1.3
1.5
1.4
3.0
3.3
2.2
0.42
0.60
1.6
1.3
2.9
5.8
10.1
7.2
2.0
the range
2.1
2.1
2.0
4.2
5.0
2.6
0.49
1.2
1.6
1.4
2.4
4.7
8.2
5.9
1.6
5.0 to 9.0 at all
BODS
31
36
30
27
27
39
51
73
53
78
84
91
98
52
27
27
27
52
57
58
57
45
50
37
65
65
65
65
65
times
TSS
49
46
44
43
43
71
83
102
90
138
138
138
138
87
42
39
39
74
89
70
69
88
50
39
52
52
52
52
52
BODS
53
61
51
45
45
66
86
122
90
132
141
153
166
87
45
45
45
87
96
97
96
75
83
62
118
118
118
118
118
TSS
81
76
73
71
71
117
137
168
149
228
228
228
228
144
70
63
64
122
177
115
114
145
83
64
106
106
106
106
106
Papergrade Sulfite (see BCT Equations Table 1-2)
BODS Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average * 1.78
TSS~Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average T 1.82
'includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories
-------
BAT
Toxic pollutants proposed for regulation under BAT include:
chloroform,
pentachlorophenol,
trichlorophenol, and
zinc.
BAT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-4.
Chloroform is proposed for regulation in those subcategories where
chlorine bleaching is employed? dissolving kraft, market bleached
kraft, BCT bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, soda, dissolving
sulfite pulp, papergrade sulfite (drum wash), papergrade sulfite (blow
pit wash), and deink. Chlor'oform effluent limitations are based on
effluent levels attained at mills where BPT effluent limitations are
met.
Effluent limitations for the. control of pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol are proposed for all subcategories. The technology
basis of these limitations is the substitution of biocide and
slimicide formulations which do not contain pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol for formulations containing these toxic pollutants.
It is proposed that BAT effluent limitations for zinc be established
equal to BPT limitations for the three groundwood subcategories where
zinc hydrosulfite has been used as a bleaching chemical. Limitations
are based on the precipitation of zinc using lime although the most
likely technology employed to attain BAT is the substitution of sodium
hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite.
Limitations are presented in kilograms of pollutant per 1000 kilograms
(lb/1,000 Ibs) of production. The production basis is the same as
that defined under BCT. For non-continuous dischargers, maximum day
effluent concentrations shall apply.
NSPS '••'.'
Pollutants proposed for regulation under NSPS include the conventional
pollutants regulated under BCT (BOD5_, TSS, and pH) and the toxic
pollutants regulated under BAT (chloroform, pentachlorophenol,
trichlorophenol, and zinc). NSPS effluent limitations are presented
in Tables 1-5, 1-6, and 1-7.
The basis for proposed NSPS for conventional pollutants is "state-of-
the-art" internal control technology plus the application of end-of-
pipe treatment of the type that formed the basis of BPT effluent
limitations (i.e., biological treatment or primary treatment). The
technology basis for control of toxic pollutants is identical to that
which forms the basis of BAT effluent limitations.
-------
TABLE 1-4
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP
TCPJ
Zinc
Chloroform
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
0.0057
0.0043
0.0037
0.0032
0.0032
0.0013
0.0013
0.0011
0.0015
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0052
0.0044
0.0039
0.0039
0.0016
0.0016
0.0013
0.0018
0.0083
0.0083
0.0083
0.0083
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.055
0.042
0.035
0.031
0.031
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
See Equations Below
0.0022
0 . 0025
0.0023
0.0026
0.0030
0.0027
0.26
0.30
0,27
NA
NA
NA
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0025
0.0025
0.0017
0.00032
0.00059
0.0015
0.0016
0.0020
0.0040
0.0070
0.0050
0.0013
0.0031
0.0031
0.0020
0.00039
0.00071
0.0018
0.0019
0.0024
0.0048
0.0084
0.0059
0.0016
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.024
0.024
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Non-continuous dischargers shall not exceed the following maximum day effluent
concentrations:
Chloroform = 0.240 milligrams/liter
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc = 3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Chloroform = (0.00912x2-0.485x+30.72)/1000
PCP = (0.000950x2-0.0506x+3.2)/1000
TCP = (0.00114x2-0.0607xH-3.84)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
SA = Not applicable
-------
Subcategory
TABLE 1-5
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
BODS TSS
Maximum Pay
BODS TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 6.6
Market Bleached Kraft 4.8
BCT Bleached Kraft 3.5
Fine Bleached Kraft 2.3
Soda 2.3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 1.2
o Bag 2.1
Semi-Chemical 1.9
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical 2.0
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration 12.0
o Viscose 12.8
o Cellopane 13.9
o Acetate l 15.0
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical 0.89
Groundwood-CMN Papers 1.9
Groundwood-Fine Papers 1.5
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 2.5
o Tissue Papers . 3.6
o Newsprint 3.1
Tissue from Wastepaper 3.9
Paperboard from Wastepaper 0.74
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1.1
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 0.87
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine -Papers 1.5
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 3.4
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o.Lightweight 6.7
o Electrical 11.7
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers 8.2
Nonintegrated-Paperboard . . 1.9
10.4
6.2
5.1
3.6
3.6
2.2
3.5
2.7
3.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
See Equations
1.4
2.7
2.2
11.2
8.2
5.8
3.8
3.8
2.1
3.6
3.3
3.4
20.3
21.6
23.5
25.4
Below
1.5
3.2
2.6
17.1
10.2
8.4
6.0
6.0
3.7
5.8
4.5
5.7
38.5
38.5
38.5
38.5
2.3
4.4
3.6
3.6
5.6
6.0
4.7
0.89
2.1
1.3
1.6
2.6
5.1
8.9
6.3
1.5
4.3
6.0
5.1
6.6
1.2
1.8
1.5
2.5
6.1
12.1
21.2
15.0
. 3.5
6.0
9.2
9.9
7.8
1.5
3.4
2.2
2.6
5.3
10.4
18.1
12.9
3.1
pH-Within the range 5.0 to 9.0 at all times
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30 day average:
BODS = 0.0015x2-0.079x+5.02
TSS = 0.0025x2-0.134x+8,50
Maximum day:
BODS = 0.0025x2-0.134x+8.46
TSS = 0.0042x2-0.221x+14.01
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
''Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
-------
TABLE 1-6
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average
Ckg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate .
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Grounduood-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
Nenintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within
BODS
3.7
2.7
2.0
1.3
1.3
0.69
1.2
1.1
1.1
6.8
7.2
7.8
8.5
TSS
5.7
3.4
2.8
2.0
2.0
1.2
1.9
1.5
1.9
12.8
12.8
12.8
12.8
See Equations Below
0.5
1.1
0.85
1.4
2.0
1.7
2.2
0.42
0.60
0.49
'
0.82
1.9
3.7
6.5
4.6
1.1
the range 5 . 0
0.8
1.5
1.2
2.0
3.1
3.3
2.6
0.49
1.1
0.73
0.86
1.5
2.9
5;0
3.6
0.87
to 9.0 at
Maximum 30-Day Average
(mg/l)
BODS
31
36
30
27
27
39
51
73
53
49
52
57
61
52
27
27
27
52
57
45
58
57
45
78
37
42
42
42
42
42
all times
TSS
49
46
44
43
43
71
83
102
90
95 .
95
95
95
87
42
39
39
74
89
88
70
69
88
117
39
. 32
32
32
32
33
Maxium Dav
(mg/l)
BODS
53
61
51
45
45
66
86
122
90
82
88
95
103
87
45
45
45
87
96
76
97
96
75
131
62
77
76
76
75
76
TSS
81
76
73
71
71
117
137
168
149
156
156
156
156
144
70
63
64
122
147
146
115
114
145
193
64
66
66
65
65
67
Papergrade Sulfite (See Equations in Table 1-5)
BOD5_ Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average •=• 1.78
TSS Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average •!• 1.82
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
10
-------
TABLE 1-7
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP
TCP
Zinc
Chloroform
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag"
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite1
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
1
0.0053 0.0063
0.0034 0.0040
0.0029 0.0034
0.0021 0.0025
0.0021 0.0025
0.00078 0.00094
0.0011 0.0013
0.00067 0.00080
0.00095 0.0011
0.0062 0.0074
0.0062 0.0074
0.0062 0.0074
0.0062 0.0074
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Equations Below
0.00083 0.0010 O.IQ
0.0018 0.00.21 0.21
0.0014 0.0017 0.17
0.051
0.032
0.028
0.020
0.020
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.059
0.059
0.059
0.059
NA
NA
NA
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
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0012
0.0016
0.0017
0.0017
0.00032
0.00059
0.00027
0.0010
0.0020
0 . 0040
0.0070
0.0050
0.0012
0.0015
0.0019
0.0020
0 . 0020
0.00039
0.00071
O. 00033
0.0012
0.0024
0.0048
0.0084
0.0059
0.0014
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.012
0.015
0.016
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Non-continuous dischargers shall not exceed the following maximum day effluent
concentrations:
Chloroform = 0.240 milligrams/liter
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc = 3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Chloroform = (0.00693x2-0.369X+23.4)/1000
PCP = (0.000722x2-0.0384x+2.43)/1000
TCP = (0.000866x2-0.0461x+2.92)/10QO
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Not Applicable
11
-------
PSES and PSNS
PSES and PSNS effluent limitations are proposed for the following
toxic pollutants:
pentachlorophenol,
trichlorophenol, and
zinc.
PSES and PSNS effluent limitations are presented in Table 1-8. PSES
and PSNS limitations are based on chemical substitution to reduce
substantially the discharge of (a) pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol, toxic pollutants known to pass through biological
treatment systems, and (b) zinc, minimizing sludge disposal problems
and pass through.
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS
BCT effluent limitations will reduce the discharge of BOD5. and TSS to
navigable waters by a total of 168 million kg (370 million pounds) per
year, a 37 percent reduction below BPT levels.
The total investment cost of the proposed BCT, BAT, and, PSES
regulations are estimated to be $918 million (1978). Associated
annualized costs (including interest, depreciation, operation, and
maintenance) are estimated to be approximately $280 million (1978) per
year.
Compliance with the proposed regulations will require the energy
equivalent of 2.0 million barrels of residual fuel oil per year which
is 0.9 percent of current industry usage.
The proposed regulations will result in the generation of 112 thousand
kkg (123 thousand tons) of wastewater solids annually which are 1.4
percent of total industry solid waste generation. These wastewater
solids have not been classified as hazardous under RCRA regulations.
12
-------
TABLE 1-8
PSES AND PSNS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day*
Subcategory
PCP
TCPJ
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite1
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
1
0.0057 0.0069
0.0043 0.0052
0.0037 0.0044
0.0032 0.0039
0.0032 0.0039
0.0013 ' 0.0016
0.0013 0.0016
0.0011 0.0013
0.0015 0.0018
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Equations Below
0.0022 0.0026 0.26
0.0025 0.0030 0.30
0.0023 0.0027 0.27
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
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0025
0.0025
0 . 0025
0.0026
0.00075
0.0017
0.00 IS
0.0016
0.0024
0.0051
0.0080
0.0062
0.0013
0.0031
0.0031
0.0031
0.0032
0.00090
0.0021
0.0018
0.0019
0.0029
0.0061
0.0096
0.0075
0.0016
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Note: Maximum day concentration limitations for all subcategories:
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc = 3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = (0.000950x2-0.0506x+3.2)/1000
TCP = (0.00114x2-0.0607x+3.84)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Sot Applicable
13
-------
-------
SECTION II
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92-
500; the Act) established a comprehensive program to "restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters" (see section 101(a)). By July 1, 1977, existing
industrial dischargers were required to achieve "effluent limitations
requiring the application of the best practicable control technology
currently available" (BPT) (see section 301(b)(1)(A)). By July 1,
1983, these dischargers were required to achieve "effluent limitations
requiring the application of the best available technology
economically achievable [BAT], which will result in reasonable further
progress toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge of
pollutants" (see section 301(b)(2)(A)). New industrial direct
dischargers were required to comply with new source performance
standards (NSPS), established under authority of section 306, based on
best available demonstrated technology. New and existing dischargers
to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) were subject to pretreatment
standards under sections 307(b) and (c) of the Act. While the
requirements for direct dischargers were to be incorporated into
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.issued
under section 402 of the Act, pretreatment standards were made
enforceable directly against dischargers to POTWs (indirect
dischargers).
Although section 402(a)(l) of the 1972 Act authorized the setting of
requirements for direct dischargers on a case-by-case basis in the
absence of regulations, Congress intended that, for the most part,
control requirements would be based on regulations promulgated by the
Administrator of EPA. Section 304(b) of the Act required the
Administrator to promulgate regulations providing guidelines for
effluent limitations setting forth the degree of effluent reduction
attainable through the application of BPT and BAT. Moreover, sections
304(c) and 306 of the Act required promulgation of regulations for
NSPS, and sections 304(f), 307(b), and 307(c) required promulgation of
regulations for pretreatment standards. In addition to these
regulations for designated industry categories, section 307(a) of the
Act required the Administrator to promulgate effluent standards
applicable to all dischargers of toxic pollutants. Finally, section
501(a) of the Act authorized the Administrator to prescribe any
additional regulations "necessary to carry out his functions" under
the Act.
The Agency was unable to promulgate many of these toxic pollutant
regulations and guidelines within the time periods stated in the Act.
In 1976, EPA was sued by several environmental groups and, in
settlement of this lawsuit, EPA and the plaintiffs executed a
"Settlement Agreement," which was approved by the Court. This
15
-------
Agreement required EPA to develop a program and adhere to a schedule
for promulgating, for 21 major industries, BAT effluent limitations
guidelines, pretreatment standards, and new source performance
standards for 65 toxic pollutants and classes of toxic pollutants (see
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v..Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C.
1976), modified 12 ERC 1833 (D.D.C. 1979)).(1 )(2)
On December 27, 1977, the President signed into law the Clean Water
Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-217). Although this law makes several important
changes in the Federal water pollution control program, its most
significant feature is its incorporation into the Act of many of the
basic elements of the Settlement Agreement program for toxic pollution
control. Sections 301(b)(2)(A) and 301(b)(2)(C) of the Act now
require the achievement by July 1, 1984, of effluent limitations
requiring application of BAT for "toxic" pollutants, including the 65
"priority" pollutants and classes of pollutants which Congress
declared "toxic" under section 307(a) of the Act. Likewise, EPA's
programs for new source performance standards and pretreatment
standards are now aimed principally at toxic pollutant controls.
Moreover, to strengthen the toxics control program, Congress added a
new section 304(e) to the Act, authorizing the Administrator to
prescribe what have been termed "best management practices (BMPs)" to
prevent the release of toxic pollutants from plant site runoff,
spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, and drainage from raw
material storage associated with, or ancillary to, the manufacturing
or treatment process.
In keeping with its emphasis on toxic pollutants, the Clean Water Act
of 1977 also revised the control program for non-toxic pollutants.
Instead of BAT for "conventional" pollutants identified under section
304(a)(4) (including biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids,
fecal coliform, and pH), the new section 301(b)(2)(E) requires
achievement by July 1, 1984, of "effluent limitations requiring the
application of the best conventional pollutant control technology"
(BCT). The factors considered in assessing BCT include the
reasonableness of the relationship between the costs of attaining a
reduction in effluents and the effluent reduction benefits derived,
and the comparison of the cost and level of reduction for an
industrial discharge with the cost and level of reduction of similar
parameters for a typical POTW (see section 304(b)(4)(B)j. For non-
"toxic", non-"conventional" pollutants, sections 301(b)(2)(A) and
(b)(2)(F) require achievement of BAT effluent limitations within three
years after their establishment, or July 1, 1984, whichever is later,
but not later than July 1, 1987.
STATUS OF THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
The effluent limitations guidelines program for the pulp, paper, and
paperboard point source category has been active since 1972. In
proposing and then promulgating effluent limitations and standards for
the pulp, paper, and paperboard point source category, the EPA divided
the industry into two segments. These segments have been referred to
as Phases I and II. In addition to these segments, the Agency
16
-------
promulgated effluent limitations and standards for the builders' paper
and board mills point source category.
The timing and status of the effluent limitations guidelines and
standards that have been issued vary for the industry as shown in
Table II-l. EPA promulgated BPT, BAT, NSPS, and PSNS for the
builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory of the builders' paper
and board mills point source category on May 9, 1974 (39 FR 16578; 40
CFR Part 431, Subpart A).(3) EPA promulgated BPT, BAT, NSPS, and PSNS
for the unbleached kraft, sodium-based neutral sulfite semi-chemical,
ammonia-based neutral sulfite semi-chemical, unbleached kraft-neutral
sulfite semi-chemical (cross recovery), and paperboard from wastepaper
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard point source category
on May 29, 1974 (39 FR 18742; 40 CFR Part 430, Subchapter N, Subparts
A-E).(4) These five subcategories comprise Phase I. EPA promulgated
BPT for the dissolving kraft, market bleached kraft, BCT (paperboard,
coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, papergrade
sulfite (blow pit wash), dissolving sulfite pulp,
groundwood-chemi-mechanical, groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-
CMN papers, groundwood-fine papers, soda, deink, nonintegrated-fine
papers, nonintegrated-tissue papers, tissue from wastepaper, and
papergrade sulfite (drum wash) subcategories of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard point source category on January 6, 1977 (42 FR 1398; 40
CFR Part 430, Subchapter N, Subparts F-U).(5) These 16 subcategories
comprise Phase II.
Several industry members challenged the regulations promulgated on
May 29, 1974, and January 6, 1977. These challenges were heard in the
District of Columbia Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals.
The promulgated regulations were upheld in their entirety with one
exception. The Agency was ordered to reconsider the BPT BOD5_
limitation for acetate grade pulp production in the dissolving sulfite
pulp subcategory (Weyerhaeuser Company, et al. v. Costle, 590 F. 2nd
1011; B.C. Circuit 1978).(6) In response to this remand, the Agency
proposed BPT regulations for acetate grade pulp production in the
dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory on March 12, 1980 (45 FR 15952; 40
CFR Part 430, Subchapter N, Subpart K).(7)
SCOPE OF THIS RULEMAKING
The Clean Water Act of 1977 expanded the requirements for water
pollution control in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. In
EPA's initial rulemaking (May 1974 and January 1977), emphasis was
placed on the achievement of BPT, BAT, and NSPS based on the control
of familiar, primarily conventional pollutants, such as BOD, TSS, and
pH. In 1977, EPA also proposed PSES based on compliance with general
prohibitive waste provisions (42 FR 6476; 40 CFR Part 128).(8) By
contrast, in this round of rulemaking, EPA's efforts are directed
toward instituting BCT and BAT effluent limitations, new source
performance standards, and pretreatment standards for existing and new
sources that will result in reasonable further progress toward the
national goal of eliminating the discharge of all pollutants.
17
-------
TABf-E 11-1
STATUS Of EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
BODS
TiraiitK and Status of Effluent. Limitations
Hroj>oscdjti;guliitions__ PromulKateil HcRiilal ions
~TSS Zinc ~~pfl~ ' Color IIOD5 " TSS Zinc" pll
Color
Comments
CO
Dissolving Kratt
Hatket Bleached Krutl
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Uleiii.-iii.-il Krai I
Smla
nPCTCA
BATEA
NSl'S
(irouildwood-Chemi -Mechanical
Groundwoo.d-Thermo-Hechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
BPCTCA
BATEA & NSPS
PSNS & I'SES
Papergraile Snltite (blow pit wash)
Papergrade SulHte (drum wash)
DiSbotving SulliLe Pulp
Do ink
Noil integrated-Fiiie Papers
Nouinlegrated-Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
BPCTCA
BATEA, NSPS
Unbleached Kraft
Unbleached Kratt-NSSC
BPCTCA
BATEA, NSPS & PSNS
NS.SC-Ammonia
NSSC-Sodillin
BPCTCA
BATEA
NSPS & PSNS
Paperboard from Wastepaper
I1PCTCA, BA'l'EA, NSPS & PSNS
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
BPCTCA, BATEA, NSl'S & PSNS
2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76
2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76
1/6/77 1/6/77
1/6/77
2/19/76 2/19/76 2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76 2/19/76 2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76
1/6/77 1/6/77 1/6/77 1/6/77
2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76 2/19/76
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/15/74 1/15/74
1/14/74 1/14/74
2/19/76
2/19/76
1/6/77 1/6/77
1/6/77
BOD5 effluent limitations for
the production of acetate
grade pulp in the dissolving
sulfite pulp subcategory was re-
manded by the Court of Appeals
(9/78).
1/15/74 - 5/29/74 5/29/74
1/15/74 1/15/74 5/29/74 5/29/74
1/15/74
1/15/74
1/15/74
1/15/74
1/14/74
1/15/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/9/74 5/9/74
5/29/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/29/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/29/74
5/29/74
5/9/74
Settleable solids limita-
tions were also promulgated.
-------
In general, BCT represents the best control technology for
conventional pollutants that is reasonable in cost and effluent
reduction benefits. It replaces BAT for conventional pollutants. BAT
represents, at a minimum, the best economically achievable performance
in any industrial category or subcategory and, as a result of the
Clean Water Act of 1977, emphasis has shifted to control of toxic and
nonconventional pollutants. New source performance standards
represent the best available demonstrated technology for control of
all pollutants. Pretreatment standards for existing and new sources
represent the best economically achievable performance for control of
pollutants that pass through, interfere' with, or are otherwise
incompatible with the operation of POTWs.
As a result of the Clean Water Act of 1977, all pollutants were
divided into three categories: (a) conventional pollutants, (b) toxic
pollutants, and (c) nonconventional pollutants. Included in the
conventional pollutant category are 5-day biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD5J, total suspended solids (TSS), pH, oil and grease, and fecal
coliform. BOD5_, TSS, and pH are controlled for all subcategories of
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry by BPT, BCT, and NSPS.
The toxic pollutants consist of the 65 classes of pollutants listed in
the Settlement Agreement between EPA and the Natural Resources Defense
Council, Inc. (NRDC).(l) These pollutants are controlled by BAT, NSPS,
PSES, and PSNS. The list of 65 toxic pollutants and classes of toxic
pollutants potentially includes thousands of specific pollutants; the
expenditure of resources in government and private laboratories would
be overwhelming if analyses were attempted for all of these
pollutants. Therefore, in order to make the task more manageable, EPA
selected 129 specific toxic pollutants for study in this rulemaking
and other industry rulemakings.(9) The criteria for selection of these
129 pollutants included frequency of occurrence in water, chemical
stability and structure, amount of the chemical produced, availability
of chemical standards for measurement, and other factors.
Nonconventional pollutants are those not included in one of the
previous categories of pollutants. Discharge of these pollutants in
this category may be industry-specific and, if warranted, may be
regulated. In addition to industry-specific compounds, chemical
oxygen demand (COD),' ammonia, and color are included as
nonconventional pollutants. These pollutants are controlled by BAT
and NSPS regulations, if appropriate.
SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY
Introduction
EPA's implementation of the Act required a complex development
program, described in this section and subsequent sections of this
document. Initially, because in many cases no public or private
agency had done so, EPA and its laboratories and consultants had to
develop analytical methods for toxic pollutant detection and
measurement, which are discussed below. EPA then gathered technical
19
-------
data about the industry, which are also summarized in this section.
With these data, the Agency proceeded to develop proposed regulations.
First, EPA studied the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry to
determine whether differences in raw materials, final products,
manufacturing processes, equipment, age and size of manufacturing
facilities, water use, wastewater constituents, or other factors
required the development of separate effluent limitations and
standards of performance for different segments.(subcategories) of the
industry. This study required the identification of raw waste and
treated effluent characteristics, including: a) the sources and
volume of water used, the manufacturing processes employed, and the
sources of pollutants and wastewaters within the plant, and b) the
constituents of wastewaters, including toxic pollutants. EPA then
identified the constituents of wastewaters which should be considered
for effluent limitations guidelines and standards of performance.
Next, EPA identified several distinct control and treatment
technologies, including both in-plant and end-of-pipe technologies,
which are in use or capable of being used to control or treat pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry wastewater. The Agency compiled and
analyzed historical and newly generated data on the effluent quality
resulting from the application of these technologies. The long-term
performance, operational limitations, and reliability of each of the
treatment and control technologies were also identified. In addition,
EPA considered the non-water quality environmental impacts of these
technologies, including impacts on air quality, solid waste
generation, and energy requirements.
The Agency then estimated the costs of each control and treatment
technology for the various industry subcategories from unit cost
curves developed by standard engineering analysis as applied to the
specific pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewater characteristics. EPA
derived unit process costs from model plant characteristics
(production and flow) applied to each treatment process unit cost
curve (i.e., activated sludge, chemically assisted
clarification/sedimentation, granular activated carbon adsorption,
mixed media filtration). These unit process costs were combined to
yield total cost at each treatment level. The Agency confirmed the
reasonableness of this methodology by comparing EPA cost estimates to
treatment system costs supplied by the industry.
Upon consideration of these factors, as more fully described below,
EPA identified various control and treatment technologies as BPT, BCT,
BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. The proposed regulations, however, do not
require the installation of any particular technology. Rather, they
require achievement of effluent limitations representative of the
proper application of these technologies or equivalent technologies.
A mill's existing controls should be fully evaluated, and existing
treatment systems fully optimized, before commitment to any new or
additional end-of-pipe treatment technology.
20
-------
To assemble the necessary data to allow promulgation of effluent
limitations, pretreatment standards, and NSPS for the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry, eight major tasks were identified and completed,
including:
1. evaluation of existing data,
2. development of a data request program to obtain new information,
3. completion of a screening program,
4. completion of an industry profile and a review of industry
subcategorization
5. completion of a verification program,
6. development of a program for collection and analysis of discharge
monitoring data,
and control
7. determination and analysis of appropriate treatment
alternatives, and
8. development and analysis of cost and energy data.
Existing Data Evaluation
To assess existing data on pollutants and their control/reduction in
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, several data sources were
investigated1, including a) the EPA's administrative record, b)
information acquired from State regulatory agencies, EPA regional
offices, and research facilities, and c) the literature.
Administrative Record. The administrative records for the two
previous effluent limitations guidelines studies and for the builders'
paper segment were reviewed for information on:
o the use of chemical additives,
o the use or suspected presence of the 129 toxic pollutants,
o the use or suspected presence of other (nonconventional) pollutants,
o available production process controls, and
o available effluent treatment techologies.
Regulatory Agencies and Research Facilities. During the initial
months of the project, it was determined that the State regulatory
agencies and the EPA regional offices had very few past or ongoing
projects that related to the toxic pollutants and the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. The State of Wisconsin and EPA, however,
recently completed a study that deals with toxic pollutants found in
the discharges from pulp, paper, and paperboard mills.(10) Results
21
-------
show that pulp, paper, and paperboard mill
numerous organic compounds which are not on the
specific toxic pollutants.
effluents contained
EPA's list of 129
In addition, representatives of several research and other facilities
were contacted to obtain all available information on ongoing or
unpublished work. Facilities contacted included:
University of Washington
College of Forest Resources
Seattle, Washington
Washington Department of
Fisheries Laboratory
Quilcene, Washington
Simpson Paper Company
Anderson, California
University of California Forest
Products Laboratory
Richmond, California
State University of New York
College of Environmental Science
and Forestry
Syracuse, New York
B.C. Research, Inc.
Vancouver, B.C.
Institute of Paper Chemistry
Appleton, Wisconsin
Forest Products Laboratory
Madison, Wisconsin
University of Toronto
Toronto, Canada
Pulp & Paper Research Institute
of Canada
Point Claire, Quebec
HSA Reactors Ltd.
Toronto, Canada
The Literature.
to
Lundberg Ahlen, Inc.
Richmond (Vancouver), Canada
A review was made of data available in the literature
which of the 129 toxic pollutants, if any, might be
identify
present in the wastewaters discharged from pulp, paper, and paperboard
mills. This review also included a similar investigation of other,
nonconventional, pollutants. Specifically, the materials, chemicals,
and processes that might contribute to the discharge of both toxic and
nonconventional pollutants were identified. Also, data were sought on
technologies available to remove or control the 129 toxic pollutants
and nonconventional pollutants under investigation. Several automated
document data bases were searched to identify relevant literature that
included:
o The Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's Environmental Data Service (Environmental Data
Index - ENDEX and the Oceanic Atmospheric Scientific Information
System - OASIS),
University microfilm's xerographic dissertation abstract
(DATRIX II),
service
22
-------
Environment Canada's Water Resources Document Reference
through Canada's Inland Waters Directorate (WATDOC), and
Center
The Institute of Paper Chemistry's
and Chemical Abstracts).
Abstract Service (PAPERCHEM
Through these services, over one million articles/papers and 3,500
environmental data files were identified. Those that appeared to be
relevant were obtained and reviewed.
Also, several other summary documents were reviewed, including a) work
conducted by the Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada, b) a
report entitled, "Multi-Media Pollution Assessment in Pulp, Paper, and
Other Wood Products Industry," prepared for the U.S. EPA by Battelle-
Columbus Laboratories, December 1976, (11) and c) the U.S. EPA's
Office of Research and Development Publication Summary (December 1976
Cincinnati, Ohio), d) Environment Canada's Publication Summary of work
conducted under the Canadian Pollution Abatement Research Program
March 1977 and March 1978, and e) "A position paper documenting the
toxicity of pulp and paper mill discharges and recommending regulatory
guidelines and measurement procedures," prepared for the Canadian Pulp
& Paper Association by B.C. Research, Vancouver, B.C., Canada,
Through these reviews, several compounds on the toxic pollutant list
as well as certain nonconventional pollutants known to be toxic to
aquatic organisms, were noted as being present in the discharge from
pulp, paper, and paperboard mills.(12) As a result of this review, 14
additional compounds were added to the list of pollutants to be
studied including xylene, 4 resin acids, 3 fatty acids, and 6 bleach
plant derivatives.
Data Request Program
To develop an up-to-date profile of the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry, data from previous effluent limitations guidelines studies
were supplemented by undertaking a new data request program. The
program was developed to collect information on age and size of
facilities, raw material usage, production processes employed,
wastewater characteristics, and methods of wastewater control and
treatment.
Data Request Development. The process leading to the development of a
data request program included considerable input from industry
representatives. It was initially envisioned that a separate survey
form would be developed for each of eight basic types of manufacturing
Jx^L1.!;168' kraft and soda' sulfite, groundwood, deink, NSSC and
CMP/TMP, paperboard from wastepaper, builders' paper mills, and
nonintegrated mills. After numerous discussions with industry
23
-------
representatives, it was decided that only two survey forms would be
developed for the basic types of manufacturing facilities:(13)
(1) Multiple Pulping/Integrated Mills, including
Kraft and Soda Mills
Sulfite Mills
Groundwood Mills
Deink Mills
NSSC and CMP/TMP Mills
Paperboard from Wastepaper Mills
Builders' Paper Mills
(2) Nonintegrated Mills, including production of
Fine Papers
Coarse Papers
Paperboard
Tissue Papers and
Other Products
The data request development program was coordinated with the American
Paper Institute (API) BAT Task Group, an industry committee formed to
interact with EPA during the BATEA review project. This group
included numerous representatives of individual companies and
technical associations. The committee participated in the review and
development of the survey form and had considerable input into its
content. Revisions were made to the data requests in accordance with
discussions at three API BAT Task Group meetings.
The final data requests included two parts: Part I requested
information to be used to select mills to be sampled in the
verification program; Part II requested information to be used to
develop a profile of the industry and to assess the original (BPT)
subcategorization scheme.
During meetings with industry, EPA representatives requested input
from the industry task group on the proper number of mills that should
receive a data request form. Mill representatives of both large and
small mills recommended 100 percent coverage of the industry. The
data requests were forwarded to representatives of all known operating
pulp, paper, and paperboard mills under the authority of section 308
of PL 92-500 during the last week in September 1977. The responses to
Parts I and II were to be completed and returned to the Agency in
mid-November of 1977 and early January of 1978, respectively.
Due to the complex nature of the data request, representatives of the
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement,
Inc. (NCASI) requested that representatives of the EPA attend a
meeting on October 6, 1977, in Chicago, Illinois, to answer questions
from mill representatives on completing the data requests. As a
result of this meeting, an errata sheet was prepared and distributed
24
-------
to representatives of
forms.(14)
mills who had received the data request
Throughout the response period, numerous questions were asked, most of
which related to production information, raw material utilization,
process chemicals, and process description. Agency personnel or
representatives continually worked with industry to ensure that
questions were correctly interpreted.
Representatives of the surveyed mills were allowed to request that EPA
hold certain information confidential. They were also allowed to
release completed survey forms to the NCASI. In many cases this was
done and, as a result, EPA representatives can communicate with
representatives of NCASI regarding many individual survey responses.
Data Processing System. Since there were approximately 700
anticipated responses to the data request program, it was imperative
to develop a multi-phase procedure for receiving and processing
responses to the data requests. The first step in the processing
system was the development of mill codes to ensure anonymity and to
facilitate computer analysis of data obtained from the industry survey
request. Principal steps included data input, data verification, and
data processing.
As responses to the data requests were received, they were dated and
logged into the data processing system. Since numerous nonstandard
and lengthy responses were anticipated, the survey forms were manually
reviewed before the data were input. This review was primarily to
ensure compatibility with the data input format and reasonableness of
responses.
In the review for reasonableness, numeric responses totally out of
line with expected values were either reconciled with other responses
relating to a specific mill request or the respondent was contacted
for clarification and correction. The same was true for responses
which indicated a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of a question
or questions. In general, it was necessary to contact representatives
of 30 to 40 percent of the mills for which responses were received to
verify responses.
Responses were stored as they appeared on the original survey form or
through the use of codes. If a question requiring a numeric response
(i.e., year, quantity, etc.) was answered but included a written
explanation, a code was inserted in the data base which indicated the
presence of additional information. A similar code was used to
indicate an answer that had been calculated by the reviewing engineer;
such an answer normally consisted of conversions to standard units,
often confirmed by communication with the respondent. Codes for
"unknown" or "not available" information were also utilized as
appropriate. All codes and notes indicating additional information
could be retrieved so that all responses were accounted for during the
data analysis phase.
25
-------
Data Verification and Editing Techniques. Information contained in
the data files was verified by comparing the printed output file copy
with the original data request responses to ensure accuracy. Data
files were updated according to the verified printouts.
Response to Data Request. The response rate for both the integrated
and nonintegrated data request forms was good. The total number of
operating mills for which a response was received and the percentage
of the total operating mills that this represented are shown in Table
II-2.
A summary was prepared of facilities from which responses to the data
request were not received or which were inadvertently not sent a
survey form. A profile of these mills was developed with respect to
raw material usage, manufacturing processes, products manufactured,
wastewater characteristics, and the method of effluent discharge.
This profile was prepared by utilizing readily available sources,
including representatives of the facilities, EPA Regional personnel,
State permitting officials, existing files, literature, and industry
directories. These new data have been incorporated into an overall
industry profile.
Screening Program
As a result of the Settlement Agreement, the EPA was to determine the
presence or absence of 65 toxic pollutants or classes of pollutants in
industrial effluent discharges. Prior to commencing the technical
studies required, EPA expanded the list of "priority pollutants" to
include 129 specific toxic pollutants. (9) Based on the information
gathered through the literature review, an additional 14
nonconventional pollutants specific to the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry were identified. These pollutants were added to the list of
compounds for which analyses were conducted during the screening
program.
The screening program was established to determine the presence or
absence of the 129 toxic and 14 additional nonconventional pollutants
listed in Table I1-3 in pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters. The
procedures used to analyze wastewater samples during screening,
Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening gjE Industrial Effluents
for Priority Pollutants (EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, April, 1977) and
Analysis Procedures for Screening of Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Effluents for Nonconventional Pollutants (EPA, Washington, D.C.,
December, 1980), also allow for calculation of the approximate
quantity of specific toxic pollutants and the additional 14
nonconventional pollutants.(15)(16) Specific criteria were developed
for selecting mills to be sampled that would be representative of the
entire pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
Mill Selection for Sampling. A primary goal in mill selection was to
group mill types so that selected mills would be representative of the
entire pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. The 15 mill groupings
that were developed are presented in Table I1-4.
26
-------
TABLE II-2
RESPONSE TO DATA REQUEST
Number of operating mills sent surveys: 690
Number of operating mills returning surveys: 632
Percentage response: 93%
Method of Discharge - Responding Operating Mills
Direct Dischargers: 337
Indirect Dischargers: 232
Combined Indirect and Direct Dischargers: 12
Self-Contained: 51
27
-------
TABLE II-3
TOXIC AND ADDITIONAL NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS UNDER INVESTIGATION IN THE SCREENING PROGRAM
1. *acenaphthene
2. *acrolein
3. *acrylonitrile
4. *benzene
5. *benzidine
6. *carbon tetrachloride
(tetrachloromethane)
^CHLORINATED BENZENES (other than DICHLOROBENZENES)
7.
9.
chlorobenezene
1,2,4-tri chlo robenzene
hexachlorobenzene
"CHLORINATED ETHANES
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
co 11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
12. hexachloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
15, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
16. chloroethane
*CHLOROAKLYL ETHERS
17. bis(chloromethyl) ether
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
19. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
"CHLORINATED NAPTHALENE
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
^CHLORINATED PHENOLS (Other than those listed elsewhere;
includes chlorinated cresols
21. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
22. parachlorometa cresol
23. ""chloroform (trichloremethane)
24. *2-chlorophenol
^DICHLOROBENZENES
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene
"DICHLOROBENZIDINE
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
*DICHLOROETHYLENES
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30, Is2-trans-dichloroethylene
31. *2,4-dichlorophenol
"DICHLOROPROPANE AND DICHLOROPROPENE
32. 1,2-dichloropropane
33. 1,3-dichloropropylerie (1,3-dichloropropene)
34. 'v2,4-dimenthylphenol
*DINITROTOLUENE
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
37. *l,2-diphenylhydrazine
38. *ethylbenzene
39. *fluoranthene
"'Specific compounds and chemical classes as listed in the consent decree.
-------
TABLE II-3 (Continued)
*HALOETHERS (other than those listed elsewhere) *PHTHALATE ESTERS
to
40. 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
*HALOMETHANES (other than those listed elsewhere)
44. methylene chloride (dichloromethane)
45. methyl chloride (chloromethane)
46. methyl bromide (bromomethane)
47. bromoform (tribromomethane)
48. dichlorobromomethane
49. trichlorofluoromethane
50. dichlorodifluoromethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. ""hexachlorobutadiene
53. *hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. *isophorone
55. ""naphthalene
56. ^nitrobenzene
"NITROPHENOLS
57. 2-nitrophenol
58. 4-nitrophenol
59. ^2,4-dinitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
"'VNITROSAMINES
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
64. *pentachlorophenol
65. ""phenol
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
"POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
72. berizo (a)anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)
73. benzo (A)pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
74. 3,4-benzo fluoranthene
75. benzo (k) fluorantheue (11,12-benzo fluoranthene)
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthlene
78. anthracene
79. benzo(ghi)perylene (1,12-benzoperylene)
80. fluorene
81. phenathrene
82. dibenzo (a,h) anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)
83. indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene (2,3-0-phenylenepyrene)
84. pyrene
85. *tetrachloroethylene
86. *toluene
87. *trichloroethylene
88. *vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
PESTICIDES AND METABOLITES
89. *aldrin
90. *dieldrin
91. *chlordane (technical mixture & metabolites)
-"Specific compounds and chemical classes as listed in the consent decree.
-------
TABLE II-3 (Continued)
CO
o
*DDT AND METABOLITES
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE (p,p'-DDX)
94. 4,4'-DDD (p,p'-TDE)
*ENDOSULFAN AND METABOLITES
95. a-endosulfan-Alpha
96. b-endosulfan-Beta
97. endosulfan sulfate
*ENDRIN AND METABOLITES
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
^HEPTACHLOR AND METABOLITES
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
ftHEXACHLOROCYCLOHEXANE (all isomers)
102. a-BHC-Alpha
103. b-BHC-Beta
104. r-BHC (lindane)-Gamma
105. g-BHC-Delta
*POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCB's)
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
PCB-1242
PCB-ir.54
PCB-1221
PCB-1232
PCB-1248
PCB-1260
PCB-1016
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
(Arochlor
1242)
1254)
1221)
1232)
1248)
1260)
1016)
113. *toxaphene
114. *antimony (total)
115. *arsenic (total)
116. *asbestos (fibrous)
117. *beryllium (total)
118. *cadmiura (total)
119. *chromium (total)
120. *copper (total)
121. *cyanide (total)
122. *lead (total)
123. *mercury (total)
124. *nickel (total)
125. *selenium (total)
126. ^silver (total)
127. *thalliuro (total)
128. *zinc (total)
129. 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
ADDITIONAL NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
130. abietic acid
131. dehydroabietic acid
132. isopimaric acid
133. primaric acid
134. oleic acid
135. linoleic acid
136. linolenic acid
137. 9,10-epoxystearic acid
138. 9,10-dichlorostearic acid
139. monochlorodehydroabietic acid
140. dichlorodehydroabietic acid
141. 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol
142. tetrachloroguaiacol
143. xylenes
""Specific compounds and chemical classes as listed in the consent decree.
-------
TABLE II-4
SUBCATEGORY GROUPS SELECTED FOR SCREENING PROGRAM
*Bleached Kraft Fine Papers
*Bleached Kraft .... BCT/Market Pulp/Dissolving
*Unbleached Kraft
*Unbleached Kraft/Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical (Cross Recovery)
*Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical
*Sulfite
*Groundwood: Fine Papers
*Deink
*Nonintegrated: Fine Papers
Nonintegrated: Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated: .... Coarse Papers
Nonintegrated: ... Specialty Papers (I),
Nonintegrated: .... Specialty Papers (II)
*Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
*Screened during initial contractor screening studies.
31
-------
It was determined that one mill representative of each of these
groupings would be sampled during screening. To ensure that mills
would be representative of current industry practice, the following
four criteria were used in initial selection of mills:
o the mill is a direct discharging mill (this criteria was
established to obtain the maximum amount of data (both raw
waste and treated effluent data) at a minimum number of
mills),
o a biological treatment system is employed at the mill if BPT
limitations were based on biological treatment (if BPT
limitations were based on primary treatment, the system
could be a primary treatment system),
o the flow and BOD5_ raw wastewater characteristics of the mill
approximate the raw wastewater levels used in development of
BPT regulations for the specific mill grouping (this
criteria was established to ensure that the selected mills
would be representative of the industry grouping), and
o the manufacturing process is representative of the
respective mill grouping (this criteria was established to
ensure that, at the mill selected, processes employed were
representative of the normal manufacturing processes
employed at mills in the industry grouping).
Based upon these criteria, mills were selected for 11 of the 15
industry groupings. Table I1-5 presents a summary of the treatment
systems employed at screening program mills. Information is also
presented on flow and BOD5_ raw waste loadings at screening mills and
on raw waste loadings used in the development of BPT effluent
limitations for the 11 mill groupings. Raw wastewater characteristics
at some of the selected mills did not approximate the raw wastewater
characteristics that formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations as
closely as others in the grouping. They were selected because they
satisfied all four selection criteria better than other mills.
Because of insufficient data, it was impossible to
representative mills for the following industry groupings:
select
Nonintegrated-Coarse Papers,
Nonintegrated-Specialty Papers (I),
Nonintegrated-Specialty Papers (II),
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt.
and
For these industry groupings, it was recognized that additional data
would become available as a result of the data request program.
Therefore, screening program visits to facilities included in these
industry groupings were delayed until these data could be obtained and
evaluated.
32
-------
TABLE II-5
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT TYPE AND PERCENT DIFFERENCES
FOR MILL VERSUS RAW WASTE LOAD BASIS OF BPT
Percent from BPT RWL
Subcategory
Treatment Type
Flow
BODS
OJ
co
Fine Bleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft - BCT/Market/Dissolving
Unbleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft/Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical (Cross Recovery)
Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical
Sulfite
Groundwood
Deink
Nonintegrated - Fine
Nonintegrated - Tissue
Paperboard from Wastepaper
ASB w/ Polishing Pond
ASB w/ Polishing Pond
ASB
ASB
ASB w/ Polishing Pond
ASB
Activated Sludge
Activated Sludge
ASB
Primary Treatment
Activated Sludge
+ 32%
+ 3%
- 25%
- 5%
0%
+ 14%
+ 9%
- 14%
+ 9%
+ 16%
- 7%
+ 11%
+ 16%
- 21%
- 13%
+ 40%
- 6%
- 11%
- 29%
+ 4%
+ 32%
- 14%
-------
After completion of the 11 sampling visits, funding for this project
was depleted due to delays in receipt of supplemental appropriations
from Congress. This necessitated a delay in completion of the
screening program until the necessary funding could be allocated.
Supplemental Screening Surveys. In addition to the initial screening
program surveys, EPA Regional Surveillance and Analysis field teams
surveyed an additional 47 mills to provide supplemental information.
The analytical procedures used in the analysis of samples were those
detailed in Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening of
Industrial Effluents for Priority Pollutants (EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio,
April, 1977).(15) Therefore, the results are comparable to those
resulting from the 11 contractor screening surveys.
As is explained later in this section, at a total of 17 mills sampled
during the verification program, processes were employed that were
characteristic of the four mill groupings not a part of the initial
contractor screening program. These mills were included in a
supplemental screening effort during the verification program.
Figure II-l shows the location of the 58 mills sampled as part of
screening program.
the
Sampling Program. Three sample locations for each mill were chosen
for the sampling program: a) the raw process water prior to water
treatment, b) the raw wastewater discharge to the wastewater treatment
system, and c) the final effluent from the wastewater treatment
system(s).
The raw process water was selected to obtain background concentration
levels for any toxic pollutants present in the water supply prior to
use at the mill. The raw wastewater was sampled to provide data on
the toxic pollutants attributable to the industrial process that were
being discharged to the wastewater treatment system. The final
effluent was sampled to determine the presence and quantity of toxic
pollutants remaining after wastewater treatment.
Prior to the sampling program, a "Screening Program Work Booklet"
detailing the specific procedures to be followed during the program
was prepared.(17) The specific procedures used during sampling were
derived from and are consistent with Sampling and Analysis Procedures
for Screening of Industrial Effluents for Priority Pollutants (EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, April, 1977). (15) The screening surveys conducted
by the contractor during the initial screening program included the
taking of both composite and grab samples during the 3-day survey.
Composite sampling was conducted for a period of 72 consecutive hours
at the raw wastewater and final effluent sampling locations. Grab
samples were collected once daily at these two locations. A grab
sample was also taken of the raw process water on the second day of
the sampling survey. Table II-6 shows the work items included during
a typical screening sampling program survey.
34
-------
GO
U1
I
'SOUTH DAKOTA
•f-
.'NEW MEXICO
LEGEND
CD SCREENING PROGRAM SURVEYS
fT] SUPPLEMENTAL AGENCY SURVEYS
FIGURE 1C - I
LOCATION OF SCREENING PROGRAM
MILL SURVEYS
-------
TABLE II-6
TYPICAL SCREENING PROGRAM SURVEY
Day 1 of the Survey
Day 2 of the Survey
Day 3 of the Survey
Day 4 of the Survey
OJ
CTl
1. Meet with mill personnel
and discuss the program
2. Select sample locations
3. Set up automatic samplers
4. Collect all grab samples
required
5. Take pH and temperature
readings at each sample
location twice during
24 hours
Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample container
iced
1. Check automatic 1.
samplers
2. Collect all grab 2.
samples required
3. Take pH and tempera- 3.
ture readings at each
sample location twice
during 24 hours
4. Check automatic samplers 4.
periodically and keep
composite sample container
iced
Check automatic 1.
samplers
Collect all grab
samples required 2.
Take pH and tempera-
ture readings at each 3.
sample location twice
during 24 hours
Check automatic samplers 4.
periodically and keep
composite sample container
iced 5.
Distribute 72-hour
composite between the
required composite samples
Break down automatic
samplers
Final meeting with mill
personnel to wrap up the
survey
Pack the samples and equip-
ment for shipment
Ship samples to the approp-
riate analytical laboratory
-------
To minimize biochemical degradation of the sample, the composite
sampler jar was packed in ice during the 72-hr sampling period. Grab
samples were collected and immediately packed in ice. All composite
samples were also packed in ice immediately after the appropriate
containers were filled at the end of the 72-hr period at each
location.
Split Sampling Program. At each mill sampled, the screening survey
team also split samples, both grab and composite, for analysis by
representatives of the National Council of the Paper Industry for Air
and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI). The bottles for the NCASI
samples were prepared and delivered to each mill by NCASI personnel in
Gainesville, Florida. For these split samples, mill personnel assumed
responsibility for the bottles prior to and immediately after sample
collection. At most of the mills sampled, a member of the mill staff
was present during sample collection.
Sample Analysis Procedures. The screening program samples were
analyzed in accordance with EPA procedures. The organic compounds
were analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). (15)
Resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant derivatives were analyzed
in accordance with Analysis Procedures for Screening of Pulp, Paper,
and Paperboard Effluents for Nonconventional Pollutants (EPA,
Washington, B.C., December, 1980).(16) These procedures involve
derivatization of the acid extract with a methylating agent prior to
analysis by GC/MS.
Metals were analyzed by the following method(s):
o beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, silver,
arsenic, antimony, selenium, and thallium were first analyzed by
flameless atomic adsorption (AA). If the metal was above the
dynamic range of the flameless AA, the metal was then analyzed by
flame AA.
o zinc was analyzed by flame AA.
o mercury was analyzed by cold vapor flameless AA.
Cyanide was analyzed in accordance with the total cyanide method
described in the 14th Edition of Standard Methods. (18).
Industry Profile and Review of Subcategor i zat ion
Earlier efforts to develop a profile of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry resulted in establishing the original (BPT)
subcategories shown in Table II-7. During the screening program,
available data and newly obtained information resulting from the data
request program were reviewed to develop a revised profile of the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. This review recognized such
factors as plant size, age, location, raw material usage, production
process controls employed, products manufactured, and effluent
treatment employed.
37
-------
TABLE II-7
CURRENT AND REVISED INDUSTRY SUBCATEGORIZATION
Current Subcategories
Phase I
Unbleached Kraft
Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical - Ammonia
Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical - Sodium
Unbleached Kraft/Neutral Sulfite
Semi-Chemical (Cross Recovery)
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Phase II
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Papergrade Sulfite
- Blow Pit Wash (plus allowances)
Papergrade Sulfite
- Drum Wash (plus allowances)
Dissolving Sulfite (allowances by
grade)
Groundwood - Chemi-Mechanical
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - CMN Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Soda
Deink
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Revised Subcategories
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
- Linerboard
- Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
- Nitration
- Viscose
- Cellophane
- Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - CMN Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
- Fine Papers
- Tissue Papers
- Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper - Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated - Fine Papers
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers
- Lightweight
- Electrical
Npnintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Mill Groupings:
^Integrated Miscellaneous including:
- Alkaline-Miscellaneous
- Groundwood Chemi-Mechanical
- Nonwood Pulping
^Secondary Fiber-Miscellaneous
*Nonintegrated-Miscellaneo.us
^Groupings of miscellaneous mills -
not Subcategories.
38
-------
related efforts.
developed and
As part of this updated industry-wide survey, the existing
subcategorizaton was reviewed based on more comprehensive data
obtained during the screening program, the data request program, and
As a result, a new subcategorization scheme was
is also shown in Table II-.7. This revised
subcategorization better reflects the industry as it now operates with
respect to raw materials, processing sequences, and product mix. The
revised subcategorization was used in designing and conducting the
verification program, as discussed below. A more detailed explanation
of the rationale and process of subcategorization is presented in
Section IV of this document.
Verification Program
The verification program was undertaken to verify the presence of the
compounds found during the screening program and to obtain information
on the quantity of toxic and nonconventional pollutants present in
pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters.
Selection of Significant Parameters. As discussed previously, after
completion of the 11 screening sampling visits, funding for this
project was depleted due to delays in receipt of supplemental
appropriations from Congress. Monies allocated for completion of the
technical study became available only after a delay of seven months.
Keeping in mind the court-imposed deadlines, the Agency determined
that any further delay in initiation of the verification program was
intolerable. During the period of delay, a methodology was developed
that would allow initiation of the verification program immediately
upon availability of funding and would also provide for development of
the same high quality of data that would be obtained if the screening
program had been completed.
Specific toxic pollutants to be analyzed during the verification
program were selected on the basis of the best information available
to the Agency. This necessitated a heavy reliance on analytical data
gathered during the abbreviated screening program. All specific toxic
pollutants identified as present in discharges from the 11 sampled
mills would be analyzed during the verification program. In addition,
it was decided that both screening and verification studies would be
conducted simultaneously at all verification mills where processes
were employed that were representative of the four mill groupings not
previously a part of the screening program.
It was decided that GC/MS procedures would be used during the
verification program because this would allow storage of all
verification data on computer tapes. This would enable a review of
the data tapes upon a determination that other specific toxic
pollutants were, present in pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents that
were not identified at the 11 screening mills. This storage of data
ensured that the verification program would yield comparable results
to that which would have been obtained had screening results been
available from mills representative of all 15 mill groups.
39
-------
It was later determined that further analysis of the data tapes would
be unnecessary after completion of a thorough review of data gathered
during screening studies conducted by EPA Regional field teams and
during contractor verification sampling at those 17 mills where
processes were employed that were characteristic of the four mill
groupings not a part of the initial contractor screening program. All
additional compounds that were identified and were not analyzed during
verification sampling were present in amounts too small to be
effectively reduced by technologies known to the Administrator.
The compounds included in the verification program and the basis for
their inclusion are listed on Table I1-8.
Selection of Mills for Verification Program. Part I of the EPA Data
Request Survey Form, returned by representatives of 644 mills, was
used in selecting mills for verification program surveys.(13) One of
the first items that had to be addressed in selecting verification
mills was industry subcategorization. A revised subcategorization
scheme was developed based on initial evaluations of the information
submitted in Part I of the EPA Survey Form. Candidate mills for the
verification program were listed for each of the revised
subcategories. The following three criteria were established for
selection of representative mills during verification sampling:
o the mill is a direct discharging mill (this criteria was
established to obtain the maximum amount of data (raw waste load
and treated effluent data) at a minimum number of plants),
o a biological treatment system is employed at the mill if BPT is
based on biological treatment (if BPT is based on primary
treatment, the system could be a primary treatment system), and
o the final effluent flow and BOD5. were equal to or less than the
annual average levels used in the development of BPT regulations
for a specific siibcategory (this criteria was established to
ensure that the mill selected would be representative of the
subcategory after compliance with BPT regulations).
The raw wastewater samples taken at each verification mill allowed
characterization of the levels of toxic and nonconventional pollutants
that would be expected to be discharged at indirect discharging mills
to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). However, for some of the
subcategories, an insufficient number of direct dischargers existed
that met all selection criteria and it was necessary to sample at
indirect discharging mills.
All known operating mills where newsprint is produced from deinked
pulp were indirect discharging; therefore, only indirect discharging
mills could be selected as verification mills. An indirect
discharging mill where molded products are manufactured from
wastepaper was included in the verification program as an adequate
number of direct dischargers could not be found that met the remaining
40
-------
TABLE II-8
VERIFICATION COMPOUNDS
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
POLLUTANTS DETECTED IN SCREENING
Priority Pollutants
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,2-dichloroethane
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
trichlorophenol*
chloroforra
2,4-di.chlo rophenol
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
raethylene chloride
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
isophorone
naphthalene
phenol
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
Nonconventional Pollutants
oleic acid
linoleic acid
linolenic acid
pimaric acid
isopimaric acid
dehydroabietic acid
abietic acid
OTHER VERIFICATION POLLUTANTS
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
chrysene
anthracene/phenanthrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichlo roe thylene
chromium
zinc
nickel
copper
lead
PCB-1242 - wastepaper users
PCB-1254 - wastepaper users
PCB-1221 - wastepaper users
PCB-1232 - wastepaper users
PCB-1248 - wastepaper users
PCB-1260 -.wastepaper users
PCB-1016 - wastepaper users
cyanide - wastepaper users
only
only
only
only
only
only
only
onlv
trichloroguaiacol
tetrachloroguaiacol
monochlorodehydroabietic acid
dichlorodehydroabietic acid
epoxystearic acid
dichlorostearic acid
xylenes
Priority Pollutants
bromoform
pentachlorophenol
carbon tetrachloride
2 - chlorophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
butyl benzyl phthalate
para-chloro-meta-cresol
acenaphthylene
pyrene
mercury
detected by industry in split screening samples
detected by industry in split screening samples
detected by industry in split screening samples
usage indicated on at least one 308 questionnaire
usage indicated on at least one 308 questionnaire
usage indicated on at least one 308 questionnaire
added because compound is a chlorinated phenolic
not detected but added to verification list due to an
inadvertent error
originally reported in screening results; upon finalizing
screening data (subsequent to development of verification
program), it was determined that this compound was not
present
previously used in slimicide formulations
Monconventional Pollutants
color
ammonia
^Includes 2,4,5 and 2,4,6 - Trichlorophenol
41
-------
selection criteria. A total of 93 percent of the mills in the
builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory were either indirect
discharging (63 percent) or self-contained (30 percent). The only
direct discharging mill meeting the above criteria was sampled by an
EPA Regional Surveillance and Analysis field team as part of the
screening program. Therefore, three indirect discharging facilities
and one self-contained mill were included in the verification program.
For some subcategories, insufficient direct discharging mills existed
where biological treatment systems were employed that met the other
selection criteria. Therefore, some mills were sampled where only
primary treatment systems were employed. This was the case at one of
the three mills sampled in the tissue from wastepaper subcategory. In
the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory, one mill where only
primary treatment was employed was sampled because extensive
wastewater recycle was practiced that enabled attainment of BPT
limitations without the use of biological treatment. This is the case
at a significant number of mills in this subcategory.
In most of the nonintegrated subcategories, primary treatment is the
system employed at most of the mills. Therefore, some mills with only
primary treatment were selected for sampling. One of the three mills
selected in the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, one of the two
selected in the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory, one of the
two in the nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers subcategory, and
all three of the nonintegrated mills that could not be placed in a
specific subcategory had only primary treatment.
In some of the subcategories, after reviewing the wastewater data, it
was found that an insufficient number of mills met the third criteria.
Therefore, mills were selected where final effluent levels of flow
and/or BODS^ were in excess of the annual average levels upon which the
BPT limitations were based.
Those mills where the above criteria were met, with the exceptions
discussed above, were considered primary candidates for inclusion in
the verification program. After completion of this evaluation, more
specific process and wastewater selection criteria were evaluated.
Prior to final selection of mills to the included in the verification
program, the following were also considered:
1. raw wastewater and final effluent flow and BODS in relation to BPT
limitations,
2. average daily production rates and raw material usage,
3. the Kappa or permanganate number (if applicable to the subcategory
that was analyzed),
4. the type of debarking used, wet or dry (if applicable to the
subcategory analyzed),
42
-------
5. the brown stock washer efficiency in terms of kilograms (pounds) of
soda loss (if applicable to the subcategory analyzed),
6. bleach
including:
plant data (if applicable to the subcategory analyzed)
a. bleaching sequence,
(if applicable to the
b. tonnage,
c. shrinkage,
d. brightness,
e. fresh water usage, and
f. type of washing system employed.
7. the type of evaporator condenser used
subcategory analyzed), ;
8. the number of papermachines used (if applicable to the subcategory
analyzed),
9. the number of papermachines for which savealls were utilized for
fiber recovery (if applicable to the subcategory analyzed), and
10. the effluent treatment system used at the mill.
Based on this review, 59 mills were initially selected for inclusion
in the verification program. The number of mills selected was based
on the total required to represent each of the revised subcategories.
Two of the 59 facilities selected for sampling were not sampled during
the verification program. At one of the mills, union employees were
on strike; at the other mill, the aeration basin was being dredged
causing the discharge of much higher levels of solids than normally
were experienced. No adequate replacement mills were available. All
of the verification program analysis results were evaluated at the end
of the sampling effort to determine if additional sampling or
substitutions would be necessary and to assess the coverage obtained
during the verification program. As a result of this assessment, two
subcategories (dissolving kraft and dissolving sulfite pulp) were
identified for additional verification sampling because no mills in
these subcategories were included in the verification program,. Three
mills were selected and verification sampling was conducted at one
dissolving kraft and two dissolving sulfite pulp mills. In .total, 60
mills were sampled during the verification program.
The location of mills that were sampled as part of the verification
program is shown on Figure II-2.
43
-------
I J
jSOUTH DAKOTA \
\GEOR6IA
..— —"N_
C FLORIDA
FIGURE H-2
LOCATION OF VERIFICATION PROGRAM
MILL SURVEYS
-------
Sampling Program. The purpose of the verification program surveys was
to verify the presence and quantity of those toxic and nbnconventional
pollutants detected during the screening program. The verification
program surveys were conducted to provide a more thorough examination
of the possible sources of toxic and nonconventional pollutants
discharged, the quantity discharged to the end-of-pipe treatment
system, the levels in the final mill effluent, and the relative
efficiency of the treatment system for removing specific compounds.
Several different sampling procedures were examined for accomplishing
these goals. Table I1-9 presents the general format for sampling in
particular subcategories which were chosen to meet the verification
program goals and also presents the sample points and the sample
duration proposed for each.
Representatives of the selected mills were contacted by telephone and
a confirmation letter was sent verifying the scheduled survey. This
confirmation letter included submittal of two separate forms used to
obtain pertinent mill operating information for the survey period and
for identification of management practices (as defined in section
304(e) of the Clean Water Act of 1977) employed at the mills. (19)
A "Verification Program Work Booklet", similar to the "Screening
Program Work Booklet", was developed prior to initiation of the
sampling surveys.(20) The work booklet detailed the specific
procedures to be followed during the survey period.
The survey included collecting composite and grab samples during the
3-day survey. Composite sampling was normally performed for three
separate 24-hr periods at each sample location, except for the raw
process water source, where a single 72-hr composite sample was
collected. In addition, certain internal sewers were monitored,
usually for one 24-hr period. Compositing usually started between
8:00 and 11:00 a.m. on the first day of the survey and ended 24 hours
later. Table 11-10 shows the work items performed during each day of
a typical verification survey.
The composite samples were divided into five aliquots including a)
metals and color, b) extractable organics, c) COD, d) PCBs and
pesticides (where appropriate), and e) ammonia (where appropriate).
Internal sewers were not sampled for COD. Grab samples were taken
once per day at each of the sample locations including the raw process
water. The grab samples were taken for analysis of volatile organics,
mercury, and cyanide (where appropriate). Temperature and pH readings
were taken at least three times per day at each of the sample
locations.
Split Sampling Program. As with the screening program,
representatives of the National Council of the Paper Industry for Air
and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI) obtained split samples. NCASI
personnel shipped the necessary sampling containers to the mills. The
sampling team collected the samples for NCASI and returned them to
mill personnel for shipment to the appropriate NCASI laboratory for
analysis. The NCASI split sampling effort did not include collection
45
-------
TABLE II-9
VERIFICATION PROGRAM SAMPLING POINTS
Subcategory
Type of Samples and Sample Duration
Bleached Kraft/Sulfite Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Pulp Mill/Screening
3. Bleach Plant
4. Secondary Treatment Influent
5. Final Effluent
Groundwood Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Pulp Mill/Screening
3. Secondary Treatment Influent
4. Final Effluent
Unbleached Kraft/Semi-Chemical Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Pulp Mill/Screening
3. Secondary Treatment Influent
4. Final Effluent
Secondary Fiber Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Stock Preparation
3. Secondary Treatment Influent
4. Final Effluent
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Saturating
3. Secondary Treatment Influent
4. Final Effluent
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composite
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composite
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composite
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
Paperboard from Wastepaper & Nonintegrated Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Secondary Treatment Influent
3. Final Effluent
Grab samples (3 per day)
24-hr composites
24-hr composites
46
-------
TABLE 11-10
TYPICAL VERIFICATION SAMPLING PROGRAM SURVEY
Day 1
of the
Survey
Dav 2
of the
Survey
Day
3
of
thf>
Survey
Day
4 of
the
Survey
1. Meet with mill person-
nel and discuss the
program
2. Select sample locations
3. Discuss mill's manage-
ment practices and tour
mill to observe the
items covered
4. Set up the automatic
samplers
5. Collect all grab
samples required
6. Take pH and tempera-
ture readings at each
sample point twice
during 24-hours
7. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample con-
tainer iced
1. Distribute 24-hour
composite between the
required composite
samples
2. Rinse sample composite
container and start
automatic sampler for
the next 24-hr period
3. Collect all grab samples
required
4. Take pH and temperature
readings at each sample
location twice during
24-hours
5. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample
container iced
1. Distribute 24-hour
composite between the
required composite
samples
2. Rinse sample composite
container and start
automatic sampler for
the next 24-hr period
3. Collect all grab samples
required
4. Take pH and temperature
readings at each sample
location twice during
24-hours
5. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample
container iced
1. Distribute 24-hour
composite between the
required composite
samples
2. Break down automatic
sampler at each loca-
tion and pack equip-
ment
3. Final meeting with
mill personnel to
wrap up the survey
4. Pack samples in ice
and ship to the
appropriate laboratory
-------
of all of the samples collected by the Agency at each mill.
Generally, the NCASI samples were collected as follows:(21)
Parameter
Extractable Organics
Nonconvent ional
Pollutants
Metals
Mercury
Volatile Organics
Cyanide
Raw Water
Influent
to Treatment
Final Effluent
Day 3 of Survey Day 1 of Survey Day 2 of Survey
Day 3 of Survey
Day 3 of Survey
Day 3 of Survey
Day 2 of Survey
Day 1 of Survey
Day 2 of Survey Day 3 of Survey
Day 3 of Survey
Day 2 of Survey Day 3 of Survey
Day 2 of Survey
Analytical Methods for Verification Program Analysis. The samples
from each verification mill were analyzed for 18 volatile organics
(VOA), 33 extractable organics, and 6 metals. Included in the
extractable organics were 13 resin and fatty acids and bleach plant
derivatives, nonconventional pollutants specific to the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry. In addition, samples from mills utilizing
wastepaper as a source of raw material were analyzed for PCBs.
Copper, chromium, lead, nickel, zinc, and mercury were analyzed using
the same procedures described earlier in the discussion of the
screening program. Cyanide was analyzed in accordance with the total
cyanide method described in the 14th Edition of Standard Methods.(18)
Ammonia was analyzed by distillation and Nesslerization as described
in the same edition of Standard Methods.(18) Color was analyzed in
accordance with the procedures set forth in NCASI Technical Bulletin
Number 253.(22) Chemical oxygen demand (COD) was analyzed in
accordance with the procedures presented in the 14th Edition of
Standard Methods.(18)
The procedures used to analyze samples collected during verification
sampling provided for additional quality control and quality assurance
over those procedures used during the screening phase. These
verification procedures are the same as Methods 624 and 625 proposed
under authority of sections 304(h) and 501(a) of the Act (see 40 CFR
Part 136; 44 FR 69464 (December 3, 1979)). The Agency chose the
option of including additional quality control and quality assurance
procedures described in Procedures for Analysis of Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Effluents for Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants(EPA~
Washington, D.C., December, 1980).(23) Gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry (GC/MS), interfaced with a computer system, was the
primary analytical instrument for volatile and extractable organic
analysis.
The computer system interfaced with the mass spectrometer allowed
acquisition of continuous mass scans throughout the chromatogram.
Standards were obtained for each pollutant to be assayed in the
samples and the mass spectrum for each of these standards was
determined daily throughout the analysis program.
48
-------
Duplicate 125-ml samples were collected at each sampling point for
volatile organic analysis (VOA). Volatile samples were checked for
chlorine content in the field and preserved with sodium thiosulfate as
necessary. Volatile organic analysis utilized the purge and trap
method, which is a modified gas sparging, resin adsorption technique,
followed by thermal desorption and analysis by packed column GC/MS, as
outlined above.
The sampling team collected duplicate 1-liter samples of wastewaters
for analysis of extractable organic compounds. Extractable organic
samples were preserved in the field with sodium hydroxide to a pH of
approximately 10 or higher. For extractable organic analysis, the
sample was acidified to a pH of 2 or below, extracted with methylene
chloride, concentrated, and chromatographed on a GC/MS system equipped
with a support-coated open tubular (SCOT) capillary column.
Extracts prepared for analysis of PCBs were analyzed by electron
capture detection/gas chromatography (EC/GO. Extracts in which PCBs
were detected at a level of greater than 1 ug/1 were confirmed by
GC/MS.
Quality Control/Quality Assurance. The verification program included
the implementation of a quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA)
program consisting of internal standards, field blanks, method blanks
and replicate analysis. Deuterated internal standards were selected
to provide QC/QA data on primary groups of pollutants under evaluation
in the verification program. The deuterated compounds selected are
shown in Table II-l1.
These compounds were selected because of their similarity to the
compounds under investigation. By adding deuterated internal
standards to each sample analyzed by GC/MS, it was possible to assess
system performance on a per-sample basis. Recovery of the internal
standards in the volatile organic analysis assured that the apparatus
was leakproof land that the analysis was valid. For extractable
organic analyses, percent recoveries of the internal standards
indicated the complexity of the sample matrix and the validity of the
analysis. In each case, low recovery of internal standards signaled
possible instrument malfunction or operator error. For analysis of
volatile organic compounds, the area of the TOO percent characteristic
ion for each internal standard had to agree within 25 percent with the
integrated peak area obtained from analysis of the composite standard
or the GC/MS sample run was repeated. Extractable organic analysis
was repeated if internal standard recoveries were less than 20
percent.
To demonstrate satisfactory operation of the GC/MS system, the mass
spectrometers were tuned each day with perfluorotributylamine (PFTBA)
to optimize operating parameters according to the manufacturer's
specifications. Calibration logs vwere maintained to document
instrument performance. The entire GC/MS system was further evaluated
with the analysis of a composite standard that contained all
49
-------
TABLE 11-11
SUMMARY OF INTERNAL STANDARDS
Volatiles*
methylene chloride-d2
1,2-dichloroethane-d4
1,1, l-trichloroethane-d3_
benzen.e-d.3
toluene-d3
p-xylene-dlO
Extractables
phenol-d5-TMS
naphthalene-d8^
diamylphthalates-dO
stearic acid-d35-TMS
^•Relative to benzene-dS
50
-------
pollutants of interest and the various deuterated internal standards.
This standard was analyzed with each sample set or with each change in
instrument calibration/tune. This daily analysis of the composite
standard supplied data that a) verified the integrity of the
chromatographic systems, b) produced acceptable low-resolution mass
spectrum of each compound assayed, and c) verified machine
sensitivity.
The field and method blanks were included in the analytical program to
indicate possible sample contamination and confirm analytical
methodologies. Field blanks were spiked with deuterated internal
standards. Method blanks were spiked with the deuterated internal
standards and standards for compounds under evaluation, as discussed
previously. The mass spectrum for each of these standard compounds
was determined daily throughout the analysis program. The blanks
provided additional quality assurance, including: a) data . on clean
matrix recoveries and b) replicate analysis for precision
determinations.
Discharge Monitoring Data Acquisition Program
During the verification program, long-term conventional pollutant data
were requested at each of the mills surveyed. These data were
obtained to analyze the effectiveness of in-place technology. After
reviewing the data submitted, it was found that at some mills effluent
levels well below BPT limits were consistently attained. It was also
known that the data request program preceded the start-up of new
treatment facilities at many mills. Based on this information, it was
decided in December of 1979 that additional long-term data should be
obtained to evaluate the performance of treatment systems relative to
BPT limitations.
Due to time constraints, this data acquisition had to be accomplished
in a short period of time. Therefore, it was concluded that personnel
at EPA Regional offices and States with permitting authority should be
contacted and discharge monitoring report (DMR) data obtained. These
data were used to supplement conventional pollutant data obtained for
the verification program mills so that a more comprehensive data base
could be developed; these data would also allow for an accurate
assessment of the performance of existing in-place technology.
51
-------
Discharge monitoring data were obtained from the following EPA
Regional offices and States:
o EPA Region I
o EPA Region III
o EPA Region IV
o EPA Region VI
o EPA Region X
o Maine
o New Hampshire
o Vermont
o New York
o Virginia
o North Carolina
o South Carolina
o Georgia
o Wisconsin
o Ohio
o Minnesota
Data were also submitted by representatives of the State of
Mississippi. However, it was received well after other data were
collected and evaluated and covered only a three month period (July
1977 to September 1977). Therefore, these data have not been included
in the DMR data .base.
The number of direct discharging mills for which wastewater data have
been collected and the number of direct discharging mills in each
subcategory are presented in Table 11-12. Approximately 74 percent of
the direct discharging mills in the original data request program were
included in the DMR acquisition effort. In most cases, over 12 months
of data were obtained. The time period covered by the data ranged
from July 1977 to December 1979.
DMR data were evaluated to identify inconsistencies. An assessment
was made to determine the influence of treatment system startup on
effluent quality. If effluent loads were found to be unusually high
during startup, data were discarded to properly reflect effluent
characteristics subsequent to system startup.
Summaries of the DMR data have been developed for inclusion in the
existing data base. The DMR data are discussed and summarized in
Section VIII of this document.
Analysis of Treatment Alternatives
As a result of review of available literature, numerous production
process controls and effluent treatment technologies have been
identified as applicable for control of the discharge of conventional,
toxic, and nonconventional pollutants. These processes and systems
include those currently in use in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry and those demonstrated at a laboratory or pilot scale and/or
demonstration level within an industrial category including the pulp,
52
-------
TABLE 11-12
SUMMARY OF DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
VERSUS DMR DATA COLLECTED
Subcategory
Number of Direct
Discharge Mills
Number of Mills
Included in Discharge
Monitoring Data Base
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving SulfiteJPulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - CMN Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Secondary Fiber Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Lightweight Papers
Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Paperboard
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
Total
3
9
8
16
27
17
9
6
12
2
3
7
65
11
12
38
5
4
7
17
13
14
5
5
22
337
8~
7
12
20
10
8
4
11
2
2
6
49
11
7
23
2
2
7
10<
8
4
\1L
250
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Subcategories.
^Includes two new market bleached kraft mills started up since the data request program.
Includes one mill not included in data request program.
53
-------
paper, and paperboard industry. These data, along with the data
developed through the screening and verification programs, have been
analyzed to determine reduction/removal capabilities of applicable
control and treatment technologies.
The production process controls and effluent treatment technologies
under evaluation and their area of application are presented in Table
11-13.
Various technology options have been developed for consideration as
the basis of effluent limitations reflecting BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS,
PSES, and PSNS. These options include combinations of the
technologies presented on Table 11-13. The pollutant removal
capabilities of these technology options have been assessed and the
results of this analysis are presented in Section VIII of this
document.
Analysis of Cost and Energy Data
Through the data assessment phase, mill surveys, EPA data requests,
and DMR data requests, baseline data have been gathered for analysis.
Data obtained and evaluated include: a) age of mill, b) production
process controls employed, c) effluent treatment technology employed,
d) cost for the technology employed (if available), e) site conditions
(i.e., ledge, poor soils), and f) land availability. Such data have
been used to characterize model facilities representative of each
subcategory of the pulp, paper, and paperboard and builders' paper and
board mills point source categories.
The costs associated with attainment of proposed uniform national
effluent limitations and standards have been developed and are
applicable to model mills that are representative of many mills with
similar production processes and raw waste characteristics.
Appropriate model mill sizes have been developed for each subcategory
to properly account for economies of scale. The costs of
implementation of various control and treatment options for these
model mills have been determined.
In developing cost data for implementation of available production
process controls and end-of-pipe treatment, the costs of construction
materials have been estimated in first quarter 1978 dollars.
Equipment and material suppliers were contacted to aid in development
of these estimates. Installation, labor, and miscellaneous costs for
such items as electrical, instrumentation, and contingencies have been
added to determine a total construction cost, depending on the
controlling parameters. Cost data are presented in Section IX of this
document.
The costs associated with the proposed effluent limitations have been
used in the assessment of economic impacts, including price increases,
profitability, industrial growth, plant closures, production changes,
employment effects, consolidation trends, balance of trade effects,
and community and other dislocation effects. These economic impacts
54
-------
TABLE 11-13
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS AND EFFLUENT TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
Production Process Controls
1.- Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
Reuse relief and blow condensates
b. Reduce groundwood thickener overflow
c. Spill collection
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage washer or press
b. Recycle more decker filtrate
c. Reduce cleaner rejects and direct to landfill
d. Replace sidehill screens
4. Bleaching
6.
7 .
f.
g.
h.
i.
j .
k.
1.
8.
Countercurrent or jump stage washing
Evaporate caustic extract filtrate
Evaporation aad Recovery Areas
Recycle condensate
Replace barometric condenser
Boil out tank
Neutralize spent sulfite liquor
Segregate cooling water
Spill collection
Liquor Preparation Area
Green liquor dregs filter
Lime mud pond
Spill collection
Spare tank
Papermill
Spill collection
1. Paper 'machine and bleached pulp spill collection
. 2. Color .plant
Improve saveall
High pressure showers for wire felt cleaning
White water use for vacuum pump seal water
Paper machine white water shower wire cleaning
Additional white water storage upsets and pulper dilution
Recycle press effluent
Reuse of vacuum pump water
Broke storage
Wet lap machine
Separate cooling water
Cleaner rejects to landfill
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown and backwash waters
9. Recycle of Effluent
a. Filtrate
b. Sludge
Other Technologies
a. Oxygen bleaching process
b. Rapson/Reeve process
c. Oxygen pulping process
Effluent Treatment Technologies
1. Primary Clarification 7.
2. Biological Treatment 8.
a. Activated sludge 9.
b. Aerated stabilization basin" 10.
3. Chemically Assisted Clarification 11.
4. Foam Separation 12.
5. Activated Carbon Adsorption 13.
6. Steam Stripping
Reverse Osmosis
Filtration
Dissolved Air Flotation
Ultrafiltration
Polymeric Resin Adsorption
Amine Treatment
Electro-Chemical Treatment
55
-------
are discussed in detail in a separate report, Economic Impact Analysis
of Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines, New Source Performance
Standards and Pretreatment Standards for
Paperboard Point Source Category.(24)
Baseline energy consumption and the incremental increase in energy
resulting from implementation of various technology options have been
calculated. Information gathered through the data request program and
subsequent inputs from industry representatives have been used in
establishing this baseline. Energy consumption data are also
presented in Section IX of this document.
56
-------
SECTION III
DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
INTRODUCTION
A total of 706 operating facilities involved in the manufacture of
pulp, paper, and paperboard products have been identified by the
Agency. The mills vary in size, age, location, raw material usage,
products manufactured, production processes employed, and effluent
treatment systems employed. This highly diversified industry includes
the primary production of wood pulp and paper, and the production of
pulp, paper, or paperboard from nonwood pulp materials such as jute,
hemp, rags, cotton linters, bagasse, and esparto. The pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry includes three major segments: integrated,
secondary fibers, and nonintegrated mills. Mills where pulp alone or
pulp and paper or paperboard are manufactured on-site are referred to
as integrated mills. Those where paper or paperboard are manufactured
but pulp is not manufactured on-site are referred to as nonintegrated
mills. Mills where wastepaper is used as the primary raw material to
produce paper or paperboard are referred to as secondary fibers mills.
A wide variety of products, including pulp, newsprint, printing and
writing papers, .unbleached and bleached packaging papers, tissue
papers, glassine, greaseproof papers, vegetable parchment, special
industrial papers, and bleached and unbleached paperboard are
manufactured through the application of various process techniques.
The industry is sensitive to changing demands for paper and paperboard
products; operations are frequently expanded or modified at mills to
accommodate new product demands.
RAW MATERIALS
During the nineteenth century, wood began to supplant cotton and linen
rags, straw, and other less plentiful fiber sources as a raw material
for the manufacture of paper products. Today, wood is the most widely
used fiber source in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and
accounts for over 98 percent of the virgin fiber sources used in
papermaking.
In recent years, secondary fiber sources, such as wastepaper of
various classifications, have gained increasing acceptance. In 1976,
more than 22 percent of the fiber furnish in the U.S. was derived from
wastepaper.
STANDARD MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
The production of pulp, paper, and paperboard involves several
standard manufacturing processes including (a) raw material
preparation, (b) pulping, (c) bleaching, and (d) papermaking. Each of
these processes and their variations are described below.
57
-------
Raw Material Preparation
Depending on the form in which the raw materials arrive at the mill,
log washing, bark removal, and chipping may be employed to prepare
wood for pulping. These processes can require large volumes of water,
but the use of dry bark removal techniques or the recycle of wash
water or water used in wet barking operations significantly reduces
water consumption.
Pulping
Pulping is the operation of reducing a cellulosic raw material into a
pulp suitable for further processing into paper or paperboard or for
chemical conversion. Pulping may vary from simple mechanical action
to rather complex digesting sequences involving the use of chemicals.
The primary types of pulping processes are: a) mechanical pulping
(groundwood) and b) chemical pulping (alkaline, sulfite, or semi-
chemical processes).
Mechanical Pulping. Mechanical pulp is commonly known as groundwood.
There are two basic processes: a) stone groundwood, in which pulp is
made by tearing fiber from the side of short logs (called billets)
with a grindstone, and b) refiner groundwood, in which pulp is
produced by passing wood chips through a disc refiner.
In the chemi-mechanical modification of the groundwood process, wood
is softened with chemicals to reduce the power required for grinding.
In a relatively new process called thermo-mechanical pulping, chips
are first softened with heat and then disc-refined under pressure.
Mechanical pulps are characterized by yields of over 90 percent of the
original substrate. The pulp produced is relatively inexpensive and
requires minimal use of forest resources because of these high yields.
Mechanical pulping processes do not remove most of the natural wood
binder (lignin) and resins inherent in the wood; therefore, mechanical
pulp deteriorates quite rapidly. The pulp is suitable for use in a
wide variety of consumer products including newspapers, tissue
catalogs, one-time publications, and throw-away molded items. An
observable yellowing, resulting from natural oxidation of the impure
cellulose, is noted early in the life of such papers and a physical
weakening soon occurs. Thus, the use of extensive quantities of
groundwood pulp in the manufacture of higher quality grades of paper
requiring permanence is not generally permissible.
Chemical Pulping. Chemical pulping involves the use of controlled
conditions and cooking chemicals to yield a variety of pulps with
unique properties. Chemical pulps are converted into paper products
that have relatively higher quality standards or require special
properties. There are three basic types of chemical pulping now in
common use: a) alkaline, b) sulfite, and c) semi-chemical.
58
-------
Alkaline - The first alkaline pulping process (developed in the
nineteenth century) was the soda process. This was the forebearer of
the kraft process. The kraft process produces a stronger pulp and is
currently the dominant pulping process worldwide. At present, there
is only one operating soda mill in the United States. At all . others,
the process has been converted to the kraft process.(25)
Early in the twentieth century, the kraft process became the major
competitor of the sulfite process for some grades of pulp. Kraft pulp
now accounts for over 80 percent of the chemical pulp produced in this
country. Sulfite is still preferred for some grades of products, but
the role of kraft continues to increase, while sulfite production is
declining.
Several major process modifications and achievements have resulted in
widespread application of the kraft process. First, because of the
increasing cost of chemicals, chemical recovery has become an economic
necessity of this process. In the 1930's, successful recovery
techniques were applied and have since been vastly improved. Second,
the process was found to be adaptable to nearly all wood species. Its
application to the pulping of southern pines resulted in a rapid
expansion of kraft pulping to that area of the country.(25) Third, new
developments in bleaching of kraft pulps (primarily the use of
chlorine dioxide) spurred another dramatic growth period in the late
1940's and early 1950's. Use of this bleaching agent in simplified
bleach sequences of four or five stages enables production of high
brightness kraft pulps that retain strength.
Sulfite - Sulfite pulps are associated with the production of
many types of paper, including tissue and writing papers. In
with other pulps, sulfite pulps have many applications.
dissolving pulps (i.e., the highly purified chemical
used in the manufacture of rayon, cellophane, and
the sulfite process for
combination
In addition,
cellulose
explosives) were produced solely by use of
many years.
Sulfite pulping initially involved the use of calcium (lime slurries
sulfited with sulfur dioxide) as the sulfite liquor base because of an
ample and inexpensive supply of limestone (calcium carbonate). The
use of calcium as a sulfite base has declined in recent years because
a) it is difficult and expensive to recover or burn spent liquor from
this base (the lack of a spent liquor recovery system means that
pulping liquor is discharged as effluent, thereby significantly
increasing end-of-pipe treatment costs) and b) the availability of
softwoods, which are most suitable for calcium-based pulping, is
diminishing.(26)(27) Attempts to use more than about 10 percent of the
spent liquor in various by-products failed. As a result, at most
calcium-based sulfite mills, the process has been altered to include
the use of a soluble chemical base (magnesium, ammonia, or sodium).
This permits the recovery or incineration of spent liquor.
In recent years, some sulfite mills have been converted to the kraft
pulping process and others have been shut-down rather than incur the
59
-------
expense of implementation of recovery/incineration technology or
conversion of sulfite processes to other pulping processes.(27)(28)
Based on industry survey responses, calcium-based cooking chemicals
are used at six papergrade sulfite mills. At seven mills magnesium is
employed, at six an ammonia base is used> and at one mill a mixed base
of sodium and calcium is used.
Semi-Chemical - The early (nineteenth century) applications of
the semi-chemical process involved the cooking of chips with a neutral
or slightly alkaline sodium sulfite solution. This is termed neutral
sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) pulping. In the 1920's, scientists at
the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory demonstrated the advantages of
NSSC pulping. The first NSSC mill began operation in 1925 for
production of corrugating medium.(25)
The NSSC process gained rapid acceptance because of its ability to
utilize the vast quantities of inexpensive hardwoods previously
considered unsuitable for producing quality pulp.(29) Also, the
quality of stiffness which hardwood NSSC pulps impart to corrugated
board and the large demand for this material have promoted a rapid
expansion of the process.(25) Both sodium and ammonia base chemicals
have been used in the NSSC process.
In the past, the small size of mills, the low organic content and heat
value of the spent liquor, and the low cost of cooking chemicals.
provided little incentive for large capital investment for, NSSC
chemical recovery plants.(25) Somewhat lower cost fluidized bed
recovery systems have been extensively used at NSSC mills. However,
with ammonia-based pulping, only sulfur dioxide recovery (SO2_) is
practiced and recovery economics are marginal. With sodium-based
pulping, a by-product saltcake is obtained which cannot be recycled to
the semi-chemical process. This material can be sold for use at
alkaline pulp mills; however, sales have been very limited because of
the variable composition of the salt cake.
Advances have been made in semi-chemical pulping process technology
with respect to liquor recovery systems. Three no-sulfur semi-
chemical processes have been developed: a) the Owens-Illinois process,
b) the soda ash process, and c) the modified soda ash process. The
present use of the patented Owens-Illinois soda ash-caustic pulping
process permits ready recovery of sodium carbonate. With either a
balanced caustic make-up or selective recausticizing, a balanced
pulping liquor is assured. The process uses 15 to 50 percent caustic
(as Na20), with the remainder of chemicals consisting of soda ash.
Spent liquor is burned in a modified kraft-type furnace or fluidized
bed. Traditionally, the difficulty has been in reclaiming sodium
sulfite from NSSC liquors containing both sodium carbonate and sodium
sulfite.
In the soda ash process, soda ash is used at 6 to 8 percent of the
oven dried weight of wood charged to the digester. Spent liquor is
burned in a fluidized bed and the soda ash is recovered. Caustic
make-up provides a balanced pH liquor for reuse. The modified soda
60
-------
ash process uses a small amount of caustic along with the soda ash
(typically 7 to 8 percent NaOH as Na2p).(30)
There are valid reasons for conversion from the standard NSSC pulping
process:
1. A poor market for the saltcake (Na2SO4) by-product derived
from fluidized bed recovery of NSSC liquors.
2. High make-up chemical costs, as saltcake cannot be reused in
the NSSC process and sodium sulfite is not produced in most
recovery schemes.
3. Sulfur emission problems can result
liquors.
from burning the waste
Extensive use of a kraft-type recovery furnace for chemical recovery
from both kraft and semi-chemical pulping systems on a common site
(unbleached kraft/semi-chemical cross recovery) is often practiced.
Original practice was to apply all new cooking chemicals (i.e., Na2C03_
and/or Na2S03_) required for the semi-chemical pulping operation; often
a solution of sodium carbonate is prepared and sulfited with SO^.
Make-up chemical requirements are adjusted, along with production
rates, to balance the total liquor lost from both the kraft and
semi-chemical pulping systems. The ratio of kraft to NSSC is about
4/1 depending upon the overall efficiency of chemical recovery. Less
NSSC pulp can be made if the necessary make-up chemicals are added to
the liquor at the recovery furnace (as Na2SO£) as in the conventional
kraft system. The liquor recovered from the kraft recovery furnace
will be comprised primarily of Na2CO3_ and Na2S, not Na2SO3_ as desired
for production of NSSC pulp. This leads to the historic trend of
producing a balanced pulp ratio with make-up in the form of fresh
chemicals added as NSSC liquor.
Recently, the trend is toward the use of kraft green liquor as part of
the semi-chemical cooking liquor. This eliminates the reliance on TOO
percent new chemicals for the semi-chemical operation. This requires
adequate evaporator and recovery furnace capacity to process the extra
green liquor required for the semi-chemical process. The latter
approach can free the operation of the mill from adherence to strict
production ratios.
Unfortunately, it appears that as the use of green liquor (Na2S)
increases, the resulting pulp is reduced in brightness and strength.
Thus, while complete green liquor pulping has been practiced in a few
cases, only partial substitution is the likely long-term practice.
Use of Secondary Fibers
Processing of some secondary fibers allows their use without intense
processing. Other uses require that the reclaimed wastepapers be
deinked, a more rigorous process technique, prior to use.
61
-------
Non-Deink Wastepaper Applications. Some wastepaper can be used with
little or no preparation, particularly if the wastepaper is purchased
directly from other mills or converting operations where a similar
product grade is manufactured. Such material is usually relatively
free of dirt and can sometimes be directly slushed or blended with
virgin pulps to provide a suitable furnish for the papermachine. The
only cleaning and screening performed in such applications would occur
with the combined stock in the papermachine's own stock preparation
system.
At mills where low quality paper products (i.e., industrial tissue,
coarse consumer tissue, molded items, builders' papers, and many types
of paperboard) are made, extensive use is made of wastepaper as the
raw material furnish. Such operations typically involve a dispersion
process using warm recycled papermachine white water followed by
coarse screening to remove gross contamination<• and debris that may
have been received with the wastepaper. More extensive fine screening
and centrifugal cleaners may then be used before the papermaking step.
Manufacture of higher quality products, such as sanitary tissue and
printing papers, may involve the use of small percentages of
wastepaper. These products require clean, segregated wastepaper and a
more extensive preparation system, usually including a deinking
system.
Deinking. Deinking of wastepaper has been commercially applied since
the nineteenth century. However, large-scale operations such as exist
today were developed much more recently. Materials that must be
removed in order to reclaim a useful pulp include ink, fillers,
coatings, and other noncellulosic materials. Deinked pulp is used in
the manufacture of fine papers, tissue and toweling, liner for some
paperboards, molded products, and newsprint.
The use of detergents and solvents, instead of harsh alkalis, has
permitted effective reuse of many previously uneconomical types of
wastepaper. Similar advances, such as flotation deinking and recovery
of waste sludge with centrifuges, may yield more effective deinking
processes with lower waste loads.
Presently, however, the secondary fiber field is critically dependent
upon balancing available wastepaper type (pre or post-consumer) with
the demands of the product to be manufactured. Upgrading of low
quality wastepapers is difficult and costly, with inherently high
discharge of both BOD5_ and TSS to ensure adequate deinked pulp
quality.
Bleaching of Wood Pulps
*t
After pulping, the unbleached pulp is brown or deeply colored because
of the presence of lignins and resins or because of inefficient
washing of the spent cooking liquor from the pulp. In order to remove
these color bodies from the pulp and to produce a light colored or
white product, it is necessary to bleach the pulp.
62
-------
The degree of pulp bleaching for paper manufacture is measured in
terms of units of brightness and is determined optically using methods
established by the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper
Industry (TAPPI).(31) Partially bleached pulps (semi-bleached) are
used in making newsprint, food containers, computer cards, and similar
papers. Fully bleached pulp is used for white paper products. By
bleaching to different degrees, pulp of the desired brightness can be
manufactured up to a level of 92 on the brightness scale of 100.
These techniques are described in detail in a TAPPI monograph.(32)
Bleaching is frequently performed in several stages in which different
chemicals are applied. The symbols commonly used to describe a
bleaching sequence are shown and defined in Table III-l. The table
can be used to interpret bleaching "shorthand", which is used in later
sections of this report. For example, a common sequence in kraft
bleaching, CEDED, is interpreted as follows:
C = chlorination and washing,
E = alkaline extraction and washing,
D = chlorine dioxide addition and washing,
E = alkaline extraction and washing, and
D = chlorine dioxide addition and washing.
Almost all sulfite pulps are bleached, but usually a shorter sequence
such as CEH is sufficient to obtain bright pulps because sulfite pulps
generally contain lower residual lignin. This sequence involves
chlorination, alkaline extraction, and hypochlorite application, each
followed by washing.
Mechanical pulps (i.e., groundwood) contain essentially all of the
wood substrate including lignin, volatile oils, resin acids, tannins,
and other chromophoric compounds. The use of conventional bleaching
agents would require massive chemical dosages to enable brightening to
levels commonly attained in the production of bleached fully cooked
kraft or sulfite pulps. Generally mechanical pulps, which are less
resistant to aging because of the resin acids still present, are used
in lower quality, short life paper products, such as newsprint,
telephone directory, catalogs, or disposable products. For these
products, a lower brightness is acceptable. Groundwood may be used as
produced, at a brightness of about 58 to the mid 60's (GE Brightness),
or may be brightened slightly by the use of sodium hydrosulfite,
sodium peroxide, or hydrogen peroxide. Generally, a single
application in one stage is used, but two stages may be used if a
higher brightness is required.
Hydrosulfite may be used with conventional equipment. Bleaching may
be accomplished by direct addition (without air) to a tank or
pipeline. Gains of 5 to 10 brightness points are possible; washing is
not always necessary. Peroxides may -Be used to give similar
brightness gains or can be used in series with hydrosulfite stages.
However, higher consistencies and temperatures are required for cost-
effective bleaching. Buffering agents, chelating agents, and
dispersants are also used to improve bleaching efficiency.
63
-------
TABLE III-l
BLEACHING SYMBOLS
Symbol
Bleach Chemical or Step Represented by Symbol
A
C
D
E
H
HS
0
P
PA
W
C )
Acid Treatment or Dechlorination
Chlorination
Chlorine Dioxide Addition
Alkaline Extraction
Hypochlorite Addition
Hydrosulfite Addition
Oxygen Addition
Peroxide Addition
Peracetic Acid Addition
Water Soak
Simultaneous Addition of the Respective Agents
Successive Addition of the Respective Agents Without
Washing in Between
64
-------
Secondary fibers are often bleached to meet the requirements of
specific grades. Again, the choice of bleaching sequence depends on
whether the processed stock is composed of only fully bleached
chemical pulps or if appreciable groundwood is also contained. For
the latter, a brightness touch-up with peroxide or hydrosulfites may
be required.
For deinked groundwood-free stocks, bleaching can be employed to
eliminate the color of the dyes used in coloring or printing the
sheet. Bleach demand is minimal compared to that in a pulp mill
bleachery. Usually a single hypochlorite stage may suffice, although
a CH or CEH sequence may be used.
Papermakinq
Once pulps have been prepared from wood, deinked stock, or wastepaper,
further mixing, blending, and addition of non-cellulosic materials, if
appropriate, are necessary to prepare a suitable "furnish" for making
most paper or board products. Modern stock preparation systems have
preset instrumentation to control blending, addition of additives,
refining, mixing, and distribution of the furnish.
Two or more types of pulp are often blended to produce desired
characteristics. Often, relatively long fiber softwood pulp is used
to create a fiber network and to provide the necessary wet strength
required during the forming process. Softwood pulps are used in the
production of high strength, tear resistant paper products. Softwood
pulps can be blended with shorter fiber hardwood pulps by mixing in
large agitated tanks or in continuous stock blending systems.
Hardwood kraft pulp is not as strong as softwood pulp but contributes
valuable properties to the product such as smoothness, opacity, good
printability, and porosity.
To develop the maximum strength possible in paper, the fibers must be
"refined", or mechanically worked in close tolerance machines
(refiners). The fiber structures are opened, thus presenting more
bonding surfaces when the fibers are formed into sheets on the paper
machine and dried.
Many other materials may be used to provide the unique properties of
the many types of paper used today. If a printing paper is made,
fillers such as clay, calcium carbonate, talc, or titanium dioxide can
be added to improve smoothness, brightness, and opacity. Increased
ink or water resistance may be derived by the addition of starch,
either during forming or as a separate application to the semi-dry
sheet at the size press.
The various papermaking processes have basic similarities regardless
of the type of pulp used or the end-product manufactured. A layer of
fiber is deposited from a dilute water suspension of pulp on a fine
screen, called the "wire." The wire permits water to drain through and
retains the fiber layer.(25) This layer is then removed from the wire,
pressed, and dried. Two basic types of papermachines and variations
65
-------
thereof are commonly employed.- One is the cylinder machine in which
the wire is on cylinders which rotate in the dilute pulp furnish. The
other is the Fourdrinier in which the dilute pulp furnish is deposited
upon an endless wire belt. Generally, the Fourdrinier is associated
with the manufacture of paper and the cylinder machine with heavier
paperboard grades.
Either a Fourdrinier or cylinder forming machine may be used to make
paperboard. The primary operating difference between the two machines
is the flat sheet-forming surface of the Fourdrinier and the
cylindrical-shaped mold of the cylinder machine. In the cylinder
operation, a revolving wire-mesh cylinder rotates in a vat of dilute
pulp picking up fibers and depositing them on a moving felt. The
pressing and drying operations are similar to that of the Fourdrinier
machine.
In the Fourdrinier operation, dilute pulp, about 0.5 percent
consistency, flows from the headbox onto the endless, wire screen where
the sheet is formed and through which the water drains. A suction
pick-up roll transfers the sheet from the wire to two or more presses
which enhance density and smoothness and remove additional water. It
leaves the "wet end" of the machine at about 35 to 40 percent
consistency and goes through dryers, heated hollow iron or steel
cylinders, in the "dry end." Because of its higher speed and greater
versatility, the Fourdrinier is in more common use than the cylinder
machine.
With either machine, coatings may be applied in the dry end or on
separate coating machines. After initial drying on the paper machine,
the sheet may be treated in a size press, and then further dried on
the machine. Calender stacks and breaker stacks may be employed to
provide a smoother finish, either after drying or while the sheet is
still partially wet.
If smoothness and high density are required, calendering is employed
on the machine just before the sheet is wound on a reel. Control of
moisture in the sheet and of the pressure and number of nips applied
dictate the degree of densification.
It is increasingly common to impart further improvements in
appearance, printability, water resistance, or texture by "coating"
the dry paper sheet. This may be done either on-machine or on a
separate coater (i.e., off-machine). Coatings may be applied by
rolls, metering rods, air knives, or blades. The coating commonly is
a high density water slurry of pigments and adhesives which are
blended, metered onto the fast moving sheet, and then dryed. Binders
including various latices, polyvinylacetate (PVA), and other
synthetics are now used. Other types of coating operations may
involve the use of recoverable solvents for the application of release
agents, gummed surfaces, and other films.
Often with pigment type coatings, another operation is required to
obtain the desired coated sheet smoothness and gloss. Large high
66
-------
speed devices similar to calenders are used; these "super calenders"
have alternating steel and, fabric-filled rolls that impart the
polishing effect.
INDUSTRY PROFILE .
Information obtained from the data request program is the main source
.of information used to develop a profile of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. In addition, several mills were identified where
responses to the data request survey were not received or which were
inadvertently omitted from the program. A profile of these mills was
developed by contacting representatives of the mills, EPA Regional or
State authorities, and/or using industry directories. The industry
profile includes information on the geographical distribution of mills
by subcategory,.the method of wastewater discharge, and the type of
production techniques employed. More detailed profile information
will be presented in later sections of this report.
Geographical Distribution
Table III-2 presents the geographical distribution of mills by EPA
Region for: a) facilities for which responses to the data request
survey were received, and b) facilities not included in the survey.
Information is presented based on the revised subcategorization scheme
that will be discussed in greater detail in Section IV.
Figure III-l presents information on the total number of operating
facilities by State. The totals shown are for the 632 operating mills
that responded to the data request program and for the 74 operating
mills that were not included in the program. A total of 28 mills
ceased operations since the data request program.
Method of Wastewater Discharge
Table II1-3 presents information on the method of wastewater discharge
employed at the operating mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. At over half the mills in the industry (54 percent),
wastewater is treated on-site in treatment systems operated by mill
personnel. Mills where all or a portion of the wastewater generated
is discharged to a POTW make up 37 percent of the industry. Mills
where 100 percent of the wastewater generated is recycled or not
discharged to navigable waters (self-contained) make up 7 percent of
the industry. A total of 14 mills (2 percent) for which no survey
response was received were not categorized as to the method of their
discharge due to insufficient data.
Biological treatment systems are. currently employed extensively at
direct discharging pulp, paper, and paperboard mills to reduce BOD5_
and TSS loads. Aerated stabilization is the most common treatment
process employed. At a relatively large number of plants in the
nonintegrated and secondary fibers subcategories only primary
treatment is employed. Primary . treatment can often achieve
67
-------
TABLE 111-2
SUHHAKY Of OPERATING PULP, PAPER, AND
PAVERBOARD HILLS BY EPA REGION
CTi
00
Suhcategpry
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached ]£raft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard x
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfile2Pulp
Papergrade Snlfite
Groundwood-'f he rmo-Mechanica 1
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Ueink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nouintegrated Filter &
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
TOTAL
" ~~
'i~
_
3
.
_
1
-
-
1
2
1
18
1
4
5
20
3
2
3
11
3
7
3
6
13
•"" : '----
if~fn~
_
1 6
_ _
_
- 2
1
1 1
1
1
9 6
- .1
1 1
4 4
9 33
-
6
3 -
6 5
8 2
4 1
3 2
1 1
6 2
3
3
4
2
13
4
5
3
1
1
21
3
14
1
12
"
4
1
2
-
3
EPA Region
V VI VII 1
1 1 -
2
43-
23-
3
8 1 1
3
9 - -
11 6 -
5 - -
3 - -
46 3 4
51-
15 10 4
5 1 -
17
5
4 - -
3
31-
7 - -
nil "ix x -i
2 1
2
1 -
- 2
1
1
- 3
4
1 3 10
1 -
- 1
2 -
1 12 1
21
53
4 1
1 1
4
-
1
_ - -
- - 2
3
9
8
20
20
8
19
10
15
2
5
8
85
5
3
12
21
143
13
. 57
17
41
26
17
14
12
33
108 58 74 100 164 38 9
38 41 632
I II III
1
- - -
— .
_
1 - -
- 1 3
11-
1 5 1
2
- 21
- 2 -
111
1 - -
11-
12 2
EPA Region
IV~~ V VI VII VIII IX X Total
- - 0
- _ 1 - .-- 1
_ - 0
_ - 0
- 1 - - - -- 1
- 0
_ - - 0
- - 0
1 2
_ 0
- - - 1
o 7
- - - 0
1 - 1 - - 1 - 3
. . !_•--- 3
2 ------ 2
1 31-121 16
12 5
--4- - 2 - 9
22 -- - - - . 6
- 3
- - 1 2
. i - - - - 1
- 0
11--- - - - 4
- - 5
8 15 11 13 10
8 0
74
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
OS
vo
(NORTH DAKOTA
j ^MINNESOTA
! 4 10
Y*VOMIN6 1
-J
S--- I
]COLORAbo' 'n _. W5o«r\ 23
5 r^Aueic""" ~f
.L !
1—•— —
'«"''• MEXICO ~
LOCATION OF OPERATING MILLS
FIGURE HI-I
THE INDUSTRY
-------
TABLE 111-3
SUMMARY OF METHOD OF DISCHARGE AND INPLACE TECIIMOLOGV.
All Known Operating Mills
f
Subcategory I
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
llnhleaclied Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfile2Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Gi oundwood-Tlierino-
Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine .
Newsprint
Tissue
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded
Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Secondary Fibers -
Miscellaneous
Noniiitegrated Segment
Noniutegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Noniutegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated Filter &
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrate'd-Paperboard
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
TOTAL
_ .. — -
lumber
of
'lants
3
12
9
20
20
8
20
10
6
15
4
5
9
92
5
6
15
23
159
18
66
22
45
28
18
14
16
38
706
Direct '
3
12
9
16
19
8
18
9
6
12
4
2
7
68
3
2
11
13
46
7
10
9
19
14
14
5
8
24
378
Method of
Indirect
Indirect Primary
-
"" "*
3 1
1
- -
2
I
-
1
-
3
2
13 3
1 1
3
2
3 1
71 20
8 1
31 5
6 3
15 4
11 3
4
7 2
8
6 2
202 46
Discharge treataenE acncae - un«-«.i. »*t>-**-*K~~
fi— Ho ASB w/ ASB/w uxida-
Indirect Self- External Pri»ary Polishing Holding Activated tion
loire" Contained Unknown Treatment Only ASB Pond lagoon Sludge Pond Other
_ _ -.,11 - 1 - -
2-13 1 4-1
I - 4 3 1 - - 1
I . - - -.23 6 - 1 4
13 4 1 2.44
32 2 1 - -
I - 1-18 - 3-5
15 2 1-1
1 3 - - 2-2
I " - - - - - 3-6
2 "
2 - - 2 - -
- - - - 1 - 1
6 - 1
", '•>'•> - 6 14 15 3 19 1 W
4 2 £. ° A^ •
- - 1 - 2 - -
i --2- " """
" " f, -
1 6 I 2 4 1 3 I - I 2
I 19 3 3 ' 5 9 12 1 7-9
11 231 - - - - - 1
— L *• *•
L - 2 1 111
19 1 - ** ^
1 - 3 - 4 1 - - 3-1
. _ o l 3
4 2 1 - 742 -.213
-- 192- - xl
1 41 - - -'17
1-1 - -4 I - 2
14-2 - 1 - -
'- 42 1 15 - 5 - 1-2
12 54 14 14 71 57 72 20 70 10 64
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Tncludes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Suifite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
S2?!i4bSciiSS,:lf a large
«* «-.
Production Profile
Pulp. Many types of pulp are manufactured. Some are naturally more
suitable for production of certain paper grades than othe?s
Suitability is influenced by fiber length, strength and othJ? facto?s
which can be controlled through such means as varying the type(s) of
mae"al-use^ selecting an appropriate pulping* process, varying
th ° co?kin<3 chemicals used, and varying the tine of cook
USS °f imPr?ved Processing techniques, most paper and
are comprised of more than one type of pulp to achieve desired
is listed in Table III-4 by pulp
Total daily pulp production
type.(33)(34)'
Paper and Paperboard Products. The pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry manufactures a diversity of products! The varioCs grades or
ThTbasJr dT??-™ are.dej;neated according to end use and/or furnish.
«2e«hf differences in the various papers include durability, basis
weight, thickness, flexibility, brightness, opacity, smoothness
profitability, strength, -and color. These characterises are a
techniqCes "* material selection, pulping methods, and papermaking
In addition to variations in stock preparation and sheet control on
"je papermachine, the papermaking operation may enhance the basic
S^iinJh8 ° f paper orf m*y contribute other properties (i.e., wet
strength, greaseproof ness, printing excellence) through the use of
additives These additives include a variety of substances such as
starch, clay, and resins used as fillers, sizing, and coatings.
Table I I 1-5 presents a general list of the various products
manufactured by the industry. (35) The grades listed are, for the m2?
nS :e3? lanatory- Definitions according to industry usage may
6 PubllGation' £§£§£ & Pul£ Mill Catalog and Engineering
PaPe^.Ind'JStry Management Association (PIMA) ):<34-) - iS
production statistics are presented, for products grouped
under the following major classifications: newsprint, tissue, fine
industrial converting, paperboard,
used
«™f ?et aPa^t,.from other paper grades and includes many
different types of tissue and thin papers. These range from typical
sanitary tissue products to industrial tissue which includes packing
wadding, and wrapping papers. Also many special purpose grades with
^iS?-Pr?°eSS/nd Product requirements such as glassine, greaseproof?
electrical, and cigarette papers are produced.
71
-------
TABLE III-4
ESTIMATED PULP PRODUCTION - 1977^
Pulp Type
Production
(short tons x 1,000)
Dissolving and Special Alpha
Sulfite-Bleached
-Unbleached
Alkaline-Bleached
-Semi-Bleached
-Unbleached
Groundwood
Semi-Chemical
Other Mechanical
Screenings
Total
Market Pulp
Waste Paper Used
1,465
1,653
389
14,929
1,523
18,411
4,481
3,876
2,941*
1HT
49,777
4,881
14,015
1Sources used were Lockwood's Directory of the Paper and
Allied Trades, Vance Publishing (1978), and Paper and
Pulp Mill Catalog and Engineering Handbook, Paper Indus-
try Management Association (1978).(33)(34)
2Includes insulation and hard-pressed wood fiberboard not
evaluated within the scope of this study.
72
-------
TABLE III-5
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS OF INDUSTRY
A. Paper
B. Paperboard
II.
Printing, Writing and Related
a. Newsprint
b. Groundwood paper, uncoated
1. Publication and printing
2. Miscellaneous groundwood
c. Coated printing and converting
1. Coated, one side
2. Coated, two sides
d. Book paper, uncoated
1.. Publication and printing
2. Body stock for coating
3. Other converting and mis-
cellaneous book
e. Bleached bristols, excluding
cotton fiber, index, and bogus
1. Tab, index tag and file
folder
2. Other uncoated bristols
3. Coated bristols
f. Writing and related papers not
elsewhere classified
1. Writing, cotton fiber
2. Writing, chemical woodpulp
3. Cover and text
4. Thin paper
Packaging and Industrial Convert-
ing
a. Unbleached kraft packaging
and industrial converting
1. Wrapping
2. Shipping sack
3. Bag and sack, other than
shipping sack
4. Other converting
. Glassine, greaseproof
and vegetable parchment
b. Special industrial paper
III. Tissue and Other Machine Creped
a. Sanitary paper
1. Toilet tissue
2. Facial tissue
3. Napkin
4. Toweling, excluding wiper
stock
5. Other sanitary stock
b. Tissue, excluding sanitary and
thin
I. Solid Woodpulp Furnish
a. Unbleached kraft packaging
and industrial converting
1. Unbleached linerboard
2. Corrugating medium
3. Folding carton type
4. Tube, can and drum
5. Other unbleached packaging
and industrial converting
kraft
b. Bleached packaging and indus-
trial converting (85% or more
bleached fiber)
1. Folding carton type
2. Milk carton
3. Heavyweight cup stock
4. Plate, dish and tray
5. Linerboard
6. Tube, can and drum
7. Other, including solid
groundwod pulp board
c. Semi-chemical paperboard
II. Combination Furnish
a. Combination-shipping con-
tainer board
1. Linerboard
2. Corrugating medium
3. Container chip and filler
. Combination-bending
. Combination-nonbending
. Gypsum linerboard
. Special packaging and
industrial converting
III. Construction Products
a. Wet machine board
b. Construction paper and board
Construction paper
Posts, Pulp and Paper Directory. Miller Freeman Publications, San Francisco,
California, 1979 Edition.(35)
73
-------
TABLE III-6
PRODUCTION STATISTICS .
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
Product
Production
(short tons x 1000)
Paper
Newsprint 3,515
Tissue 4,097
Fine 13,929
Coarse - Packaging and Industrial Converting 5,740
Paperboard 27,881
Construction Products 5,567
1Source was Lockwood's Directory of the Paper and Allied Trades,
Vance Publishing (1978).(33)
74
-------
Fine papers include printing, reproductive, and writing papers.
Packaging and industrial converting coarse papers include kraft
packaging papers used for grocery and shopping bags, sacks and special
industrial papers.
Paperboard includes a wide range of types and weights of products made
on both cylinder and Fourdrinier machines for packaging and special
purposes. Paperboard is made from various pulps, wastepaper, or
combination furnishes. Board products include such items as shoe
board, automotive board, and luggage board, as well as common liner,
corrugating, box board, chip and filler, and gypsum board.
Construction products include various paper and board products. Paper
products include sheathing paper, roofing felts {including roll
roofing paper and shingles), and asbestos filled papers.
75
-------
-------
SECTION IV
SUBCATEGORIZATION
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of subcategorization is to group together mills of similar
characteristics to allow for development of effluent limitations and
standards representative of each group (subcategory) of mills. This
enables permits to be written on a uniform basis. In the original
(Phase I and II) rulemaking, two major segments were recognized:
integrated and nonintegrated. In the current efforts, the secondary
fibers segment is also recognized to better characterize the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry. The original subcategorization scheme
is as follows:
Integrated
Unbleached Kraft
NSSC - Ammonia
NSSC - Sodium
Unbleached Kraft - NSSC
(Cross Recovery)
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Groundwood - Coarse, Molded, News (CMN)
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - Chemi-Mechanical
Secondary Fibers
Deink
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Tissue from Wastepaper
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Papers
The factors considered in identifying these subcategories included raw
materials used, products manufactured, production processes employed,
mill size and age, and treatment costs.
As part of the BAT review program, an updated and thorough data base
has been collected for 632 operating mills in" the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. A review of the original subcategorization
scheme has been undertaken in order to determine the adequacy of the
original subcategories in representing current industry
characteristics. This review has led to the identification of four
new subcategories representative of portions of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry not recognized in the original subcategorization
scheme.
Conventional pollutant data have been reviewed to determine the
relationship of raw wastewater characteristics to the processes
77
-------
employed and the products manufactured at mills in the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry. In addition, toxic pollutant data have been
gathered and the subcategorization scheme has been reviewed for
validity in accounting for toxic pollutant generation.
The results of these analyses are described below
segment.
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
for each industry
The original subcategorization scheme includes 16 subcategories within
the integrated segment. Raw wastewater characteristics of mills which
conform to the original subcategory definitions have been reviewed in
order to determine if differences exist because of process or product
variations. Based on this review, it has been concluded that the
original subcategorization scheme is generally representative of the
integrated segment.
Conventional pollutant and flow data support segmentation to account
for different pulping processes: alkaline (kraft and soda), sulfite,
semi-chemical, and groundwood (refiner or stone, thermo-mechanical,
and chemi-mechanical). In addition, the production of dissolving
pulps, both alkaline and sulfite, results in the generation of
relatively large quantities of wastewater and wastewater pollutants
and should continue to be recognized in the subcategorization scheme.
Mills where pulp is bleached are characterized by higher waste
loadings and must continue to be recognized separately.
In the original efforts, there were two subcategories for mills where
the neutral sulfite semi-chemical pulping process is used, sodium and
ammonia-based. Based on data gathered during the current study, it is
evident that the original subcategorization did not account for the
full range of semi-chemical pulping operations that now exist (See
Section III). The neutral sulfite process is only one type of
semi-chemical process and its use is decreasing. Available data do
not support the development of separate subcategories for the new
semi-chemical processes. In fact, it has been determined that a
single new semi-chemical subcategory best represents all variations of
this pulping process. This new subcategory includes mills in the
original ammonia-based NSSC and sodium-based NSSC subcategories and
also mills where other variations of the semi-chemical process are
used.
Similarly, it is proposed that a new subcategory, the unbleached kraft
and semi-chemical subcategory, should be established to include all
mills within the original unbleached kraft-neutral sulfite
semi-chemical (cross recovery) subcategory and those mills where both
the unbleached kraft and another type of semi-chemical pulping process
{i.e., kraft green liquor) are used on-site. Available data indicate
no significant differences in wastewater or conventional pollutant
generation resulting from the use of neutral sulfite semi-chemical
pulping or any other semi-chemical process.
78
-------
The original subcategorization scheme includes the unbleached kraft
subcategory that includes all mills where unbleached linerboard, bag,
and other unbleached products are produced using the kraft pulping
process. Available data have been reviewed and it has been determined
that mills where bag and other mixed products are manufactured have
higher water use and BOD5. raw waste loadings than mills where only
linerboard is produced. Therefore/ it is proposed that two subgroups
be established within the unbleached kraft subcategory to account for
these differences. The subgroups are (a) linerboard and (b) bag
(including other mixed products).
Based on current data, there is only one mill where the soda pulping
process is used. At this mill, fine bleached papers are produced.
This alkaline pulping process is similar to the kraft pulping process.
In the soda process, a highly alkaline sodium hydroxide cooking liquor
is used as compared to the sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide cooking
liquor used in the kraft process. The raw waste loadings and flow
characteristics of the soda mill compared to similar characteristics
of mills in the fine bleached kraft subcategory show that no
discernable differences exist between the soda mill and fine bleached
kraft mills. Therefore, the soda mill has been grouped with the fine
bleached kraft mills for purposes of data presentation and guidelines
development to form a new mill grouping called "aikaline-fine." The
subcategorization scheme, however, will remain as defined in previous
rulemaking efforts: (a) the fine bleached kraft subcategory and (b)
the soda subcategory.
At the time of the data request program, there were three mills where
the groundwood-chemi-mechanical pulping process was used. Due to the
limited number of mills where this process was employed and inherent
differences in the degree to which chemicals are used at these mills
to produce differing final products, there is an insufficient data
base from which to develop BCT and BAT effluent limitations
guidelines. We are unable at this time to determine the effects of
the degree of chemical usage in the pulping process on raw waste
generation. The groundwood-chemi-mechanical subcategory will remain
as defined in the previous rulemaking. However, permits for mills in
this subcategory reflecting BCT and BAT will be determined on a
case-by-case basis. It should be noted that toxic pollutants were
detected in discharges from mills in this subcategory in amounts too
small to be effectively reduced by available technologies.
In the previous rulemaking efforts, there were three subcategories
established to characterize the sulfite pulping process: dissolving
sulfite pulp, papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash), and papergrade
sulfite (drum wash). Process differences exist between the
manufacture of dissolving sulfite and papergrade sulfite pulps that
significantly affect raw waste characteristics. It is proposed that
the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory continue to be recognized as a
separate subcategory with allowances for the different types of pulps
manufactured (viscose, nitration, acetate, cellulose)'.
79
-------
Review of available data indicates that no significant differences
exist between mills in the two original papergrade sulfite
subcategories due to the types of washing process employed or
condenser used.. As will be discussed in Section V, it has been noted
that the percentage of sulfite pulp produced on-site is the single
factor that best explains differences that exist in raw waste
generation at papergrade sulfite mills. Therefore, in this rulemaking
effort, data for mills in both papergrade sulfite subcategories have
been combined in the development of effluent limitations and
standards. Proposed effluent limitations and standards account for
variations in the percentage of pulp produced on-site to manufacture
final products. For purposes of rulemaking, the two subcategories
will remain as originally established, but effluent limitations and
standards will be identical for both.
/•*
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
As noted previously, in this study secondary fiber mills have been
identified as a separate segment of the pulp, paper and paperboard
industry. In the previous rulemaking efforts, four subcategories were
recognized that can be considered to be a part of the secondary fibers
segment: the deink, paperboard from wastepaper, tissue from
wastepaper, and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories.
Mills where molded products are manufactured from wastepaper were not
addressed in the original subcategorization scheme. At mills where
molded products are produced, the wastepaper furnish is processed
without deinking. Products include molded pulp items such as fruit
and vegetable packs and similar throw-away containers and display
items. Waste characteristics for mills where molded products are
manufactured are not properly represented by any of the original
secondary fibers subcategories. Therefore, a new subcategory, the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory, has been established to
include these mills.
Mills where paper is produced from wastepaper after deinking are
included in the original subcategorization scheme in the deink
subcategory. The principal products at these mills include printing,
writing and business papers, tissue papers, and newsprint. In
reviewing data for mills in the deink subcategory, consideration has
been given to the effect of the type of product manufactured on raw
waste loadings. As presented in Figures V-26 and V-27, it has been
determined that distinct differences exist for mills where tissue
papers, fine papers, or newsprint are produced. As discussed in
Section V, a further analysis indicates that no definitive
relationship exists between the percentage of deink pulp produced
on-site and the associated raw waste characteristics. Therefore, it
is proposed that the deink subcategory remain as previously defined
but that effluent limitations and standards reflect differences in the
production of tissue papers, fine papers, and newsprint.
80
-------
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
In the previous rulemaking efforts, only two subcategories were
established in the nonintegrated segment of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry: the nonintegrated-fine papers and
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategories. At nonintegrated mills
where other types of products were produced, permits were written on a
case-by-case basis. In this study, data have been reviewed relative
to process and product differences in an effort to further
subcategorize this industry segment. Other major types of products
manufactured at mills in this segment include lightweight and thin
papers, filter and nonwoven papers, paperboard, and specialty items.
As the basic manufacturing process is generally similar at
nonintegrated mills, the data review involved investigations of the
effects of product type on raw waste characteristics.
Based on a review of the wastewater characteristics of nonintegrated
mills, three additional subcategories have been established to account
for manufacture of various products: the nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories. Additionally, within the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategory, there are a group of
mills where electrical grade products are produced; at these mills,
larger quantities of wastewater are discharged than at mills where
electrical grades are not produced. Therefore, effluent limitations
and standards account for this higher wastewater discharge.
Another group of nonintegrated mills where unique grades of products
are manufactured could not be further divided into subcategories.
Permits for these mills will continue to be established on a
case-by-case basis.
MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
The subcategorization scheme does not account for all mills in each
industry segment because mills exist that do not logically fit the
revised subcategorization scheme. These mills have been included in
miscellaneous mill groupings (integrated-miscellaneous, secondary
fiber-miscellaneous, and nonintegrated-miscellaneous) because of the
complex variety of pulping processes employed and/or products
manufactured or because no subcategory has been established within
which a particular mill can be placed. Permits for many mills in the
miscellaneous groupings can and will be established through prorating
of effluent limitations and standards from the appropriate
subcategories; however, other mills must be permitted on a
case-by-case basis.
IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA
As discussed in Section II and in Section VI, a toxic pollutant
sampling program has been conducted to determine the level of toxic
pollutants discharged from mills in each of the subcategories. This
program was designed to take into account the revised
81
-------
subcategorization scheme. The analytical results from the program
have been reviewed to determine if the revised subcategorization
scheme adequately accounts for toxic pollutant discharges. Available
toxic pollutant data, summarized in Section VI, support the revised
subcategorization scheme. Specific toxic pollutants are present in
pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters because of the type of
bleaching process employed (chloroform and zinc) or because of their
addition as process chemicals (trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol).
The revised subcategorization scheme adequately accounts for the
presence or generation of these toxic compounds and allows for
establishment of effluent limitations and standards to ensure their
control.
SUMMARY
In summary, the original subcategorization scheme has been reviewed
and a number of revisions have resulted. Four new subcategories have
been identified, while more subtle revisions have been made for
several other subcategories (i.e., product allowances, allowances for
percentage of pulp produced on-site). The revised subcategorization
scheme is as follows:
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag and Other Mixed Products
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - Coarse, Molded, and
News (C, M, N) Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Groundwood-Chemi-Mechanical
Based on data obtained in the survey program, 465 of the 632 operating
mills for which responses to the data request have been received are
included in the revised subcategorization scheme; an additional 53
mills can be permitted by prorating of effluent limits based on the
revised subcategorization scheme. The subcategories that form the
Secondary Fibers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Felt
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter arid
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
82
-------
basis of proposed BCT and BAT effluent limitations,
PSNS are defined as follows:
Dissolving Kraft
NSPS, PSES, and
This subcategory includes mills where a highly bleached pulp is
produced using a "full cook" process employing a highly alkaline
sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide cooking liquor. Included in the
manufacturing process is a "pre-cook" operation termed pre-hydrolysis.
The principal product is a highly bleached and purified dissolving
pulp used principally for the manufacture of rayon and other products
requiring the virtual absence of lignin and a very high alpha
cellulose content.
Market Bleached Kraft
This subcategory includes mills where a bleached pulp is produced
using a "full cook" process employing a highly alkaline sodium
hydroxide and sodium sulfide cooking liquor. Papergrade market pulp
is produced at mills representative of this subcategory.
BCT (Board, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft
This subcategory includes the integrated production of bleached kraft
pulp and board, coarse, and tissue papers. Bleached kraft pulp is
produced on-site using a "full cook" process employing a highly
alkaline sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide cooking liquor. The
principal products include paperboard (B), coarse papers (C), tissue
papers (T), and market pulp.
Fine Bleached Kraft
This subcategory includes the integrated production of bleached kraft
pulp and fine papers. Bleached kraft pulp is produced on-site using a
"full cook" process employing a highly alkaline sodium hydroxide and
sodium sulfide cooking liquor. The principal products are fine
papers, which include business, writing, and printing papers, and
market pulp.
Soda
This subcategory includes the integrated production of bleached soda
pulp and fine papers. The bleached soda pulp is produced on-site
using a "full cook" process employing a highly alkaline sodium
hydroxide cooking liquor. The principal products are fine papers,
which include printing, writing, and business papers, and market pulp.
83
-------
Unbleached Kraft
This subcategory includes mills where pulp is produced without
bleaching using a 'full cook" process employing a highly alkaline
sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide cooking liquor. The pulp is used
on-site to produce linerboard, the smooth facing in corrugated boxes
and bag papers. '•
Semi-Chemical
This subcategory includes mills where pulp is produced using a process
that involves the cooking of wood chips under pressure using a variety
of cooking liquors including neutral sulfite and combinations of soda
ash and caustic soda. The cooked chips are usually refined before
being converted on-site into board or similar products. The principal
products include corrugating medium, insulating board, partition
board, chip board, tube stock, and specialty boards.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
This subcategory includes mills where pulp is produced without
bleaching using two pulping processes: unbleached kraft and
semi-chemical. Spent semi-chemical cooking liquor is burned within
the kraft chemical recovery system. The pulps are used on-site to
produce both linerboard and corrugating medium used in the production
of corrugated boxes.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
This subcategory includes mills where a highly bleached and purified
pulp is produced from softwoods using a "full cook" process employing
strong solutions of sulfites of calcium, magnesium, ammonia, or
sodium. The pulps produced by this process are viscose, nitration
cellophane, or acetate grades and are used principally for the
manufacture of rayon and other products that require the virtual
absence of lignin.
Paperqrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
This subcategory includes integrated production of sulfite pulp and
paper. The sulfite pulp is produced on-site using a "full cook"
process employing an acidic cooking liquor of sulfites of calcium
magnesium, ammonia, or sodium. Following the cooking operations the
spent cooking liquor is washed from the pulp in blow pits. The
principal products include tissue papers, newsprint, fine papers, and
market pulp.
Paperqrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
This subcategory includes the integrated production of sulfite pulp
and paper. The sulfite pulp is produced on-site employing a "full
84
-------
cook" process using an acidic cooking liquor of sulfites of calcium,
magnesium, ammonia, or sodium. Following the cooking operations, the
spent cooking liquor is washed from the pulp on vacuum or pressure
drums. Also included are mills using belt extraction systems for pulp
washing. Principal products made include tissue papers, fine papers,
newsprint, and market pulp.
Groundwood ^ Thermo-Mechanical
This subcategory includes the production of thermo-mechanical
groundwood pulp and paper. The thermo-mechanical groundwood pulp is
produced on-site using a "brief cook" process employing steam (with or
without the addition of cooking chemicals such as sodium sulfite)
followed by mechanical defibration in refiners, resulting in yields of
approximately 95% or greater. The pulp may be brightened using
hydrosulfite or peroxide bleaching chemicals. The principal products
include market pulp, fine papers, newsprint, and tissue papers.
Groundwood-CMN (Coarse, Molded, News) Papers
This subcategory includes the integrated production of groundwood pulp
and paper. The groundwood pulp is produced, with or without
brightening, utilizing only mechanical defibration using either stone
grinders or refiners. The principal products made by this process
include coarse papers (C), molded fiber products (M), and newsprint
(N).
Groundwood-F i ne Papers
This subcategory includes the integrated production of groundwood pulp
and paper. The groundwood pulp is produced, with or without
brightening, utilizing only mechanical defibration by either stone
grinders or refiners. The principal products made by this process are
fine papers which include business, writing, and printing papers.
Deink
This subcategory includes the integrated production of deinked pulp
and paper from wastepapers using an alkaline process to remove
contaminants such as ink and coating pigments. The deinked pulp is
usually brightened or bleached. Principal products include printing,
writing and business papers, tissue papers, and newsprint.
Tissue From Wastepaper
This subcategory includes the production of tissue papers from
wastepapers without deinking. The principal products made include
facial and toilet papers, glassine, paper diapers, and paper towels.
85
-------
Paperboard from Wastepaper
This subcategory includes mills where paperboard products are
manufactured from a wide variety of wastepapers such as corrugated
boxes, box board, and newspapers; no bleaching is done on-site. Mills
where paperboard products are manufactured principally or exclusively
from virgin fiber are not included within this subcategory, which
includes only those mills where wastepaper comprises at least 80
percent of the raw material fibers. The principal products include a
wide variety of items used in commercial packaging, such as bottle
cartons.
Wastepaper-Mo1ded Products
This subcategory includes mills where molded products are produced
from wastepapers without deinking. Products include molded items such
as fruit and vegetable packs and similar throw-away containers and
display items.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
This subcategory includes mills where heavy papers used in the
construction industry are produced from cellulosic fibers derived from
wastepaper, wood flour and sawdust, wood chips, and rags. Neither
bleaching nor chemical pulping processes are employed on-site.
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
This subcategory includes nonintegrated mills where fine papers are
produced from purchased pulp. The principal products of this process
are printing, writing, business, and technical papers.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
This subcategory includes nonintegrated mills where tissue papers are
produced from wood pulp or deinked pulp prepared at another site. The
principal products made at these mills include facial and toilet
papers, glassine, paper diapers, and paper towels.
Nonintegrated-Liqhtweiqht Papers
This subcategory includes nonintegrated mills where lightweight or
thin papers are produced from wood pulp or secondary fibers prepared
at another site and from nonwood fibers and additives. The principal
products made at these mills include uncoated thin papers, such as
carbonizing papers and cigarette papers, and some special grades of
tissue such as capacitor, pattern, and interleaf.
86
-------
Noninteqrated-FiIter and Nonwoven Papers
This subcategory includes nonintegrated mills where filter papers and
nonwoven items are produced from a furnish of wood pulp, secondary
fibers, and nonwood fibers, prepared at another site. The principal
products made at these mills include filter and blotting papers,
nonwoven packaging and specialties, insulation, technical papers, and
gaskets.
Noninteqrated-Paperboard
This subcategory includes nonintegrated mills where paperboard is
produced from wood pulp or secondary fibers prepared at another site.
The principal products made at these mills include linerboard, folding
boxboard, milk cartons, food board, chip board, pressboard, and other
specialty boards. Mills where electrical grades of board or matrix
board are produced are not included in this subcategory.
87
-------
-------
SECTION V
WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
WATER USE AND SOURCES OF WASTEWATER
Water is used in the following major unit operations employed in the
manufacture of pulp, paper, and paperboard: wood preparation, pulping,
bleaching, and papermaking. It can be used as a medium of transport,
a cleaning agent, and as a solvent or mixer.
Details of water use and sources of wastewater generation from each
major production area in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry are
discussed below. Figure V-l presents the water use and wastewater
sources from a typical integrated mill.
Wood Preparation
Wood preparation operations can be employed at mills where wood pulp
is manufactured on-site. Water is utilized in the wood preparation
process in three basic areas: a) log transport, b) log and chip
washing/thawing, and c) barking operations. Along with these basic
uses, water can also be used to protect against fires (in chip and
wood storage) and for storage of logs (in rivers or ponds).
Water can be used to transport whole logs to the wood preparation
area. This may take the form of river driving or flume transport.
The only wastewater generated by log transport operations is the
overflow from the transport flume.
In the log and chip washing/thawing operations, water is used in
sprays or showers to remove salt, dirt, and debris; these showers can
be activated by each log to minimize water use. Hot ponds are also
used in cases where frozen logs need thawing prior to wood
preparation.
/
Bark from whole logs is removed prior to chipping and removal can be
accomplished by dry or wet methods. In some cases, water is used as a
presoak to soften bonds between the wood and bark prior .to barking.
Wet barking operations can utilize high volumes of water which can be
used in three different ways: a) in high-pressure water jets
(hydraulic) to strip away bark by impingement, b) in vats for barking
drum immersion to facilitate in cleaning, lubrication, and barking,
and c) in showers to thaw frozen logs in the early stages of barking.
Wastewater discharged from all three types of wet barking can be
combined with flume overflow or log or chip wash water; coarse screens
can be used to remove large pieces of bark and wood slivers. Barking
wastewater can then be passed through fine screens with the screenings
combined with the coarse screening materials. The combined screenings
can be dewatered in a press and burned in a bark boiler. This
eliminates a source of solid waste while generating power.
89
-------
FIGURE V-1
GENERAL FLOW SHEET
PULPING AND PAPERMAKING PROCESS
n*w MAICRIAUS FUNDAMENTAL PROCESS tuia-rce
PULP LOQ »
DEBAI
(•ROI
AOID 9ULFITE LIQUOR
ALKALINE SULFATE LIQUOR _
(KRAFT) I»
NBUTRAL 3ULFITE LIQUOR f
CHEMIC
REUS
WHITE WATER OR MI »»
FRESH WATER
"HITfi WATER OH
REUSE WATER
BLEACHINS AND OTHER
NECESSARY CHEMICALS ~~]
FRESH WATER OR WHITE I"*"1
WATER REUSE "~*
FILLERS ~"1
DYE 1 _
ALUM 1
STARCH 1 I*1
SASgQUS LIQUID SOLID
WOOD
PREPARATION
WOOD PARTICLES
1 1 BARKER BEARINO AND SLIVERS
IKED LOB 1 COOLIN* WATER SAWDUST
LMDWOOO1 WOOD
iwowoow mtf9
I i
PULPIN*
*L CR
E PI
\
EMISSION LIQUOR
. , BLOW PIT COLLECTED
' SPILLS
EVAPORATION
!RF TIONTA9SEIAE1lY"- f !»»• SMELT TANK CONOENSATE RESIDUES
LP PRODUCT) EMISSION ORE 9 WASHING
... . ,™',,,1, .,,.J L1ME KILM BMisam" «"ip WASHINfl
t RECOVERY FURNACE ACID PLANT
EMIS*IQM WASTE
_ KRAFT S NEUTRM EVAPORATION
pSUCFITE RECOV. ^"^
L-CONOCMSATf —
WASHINS
SCBEEMHIC
1
p
THICKENINB
AND RECOVERY
FIBER
UNBLEACHED PULP
BLEACHINB
1
i
STOCK
PREPARATION
FRESH WATER OR '
WHITE WATER REUSE
•
PAPER
MACHINE
\
COATINB CHEMICALS ft
1
F1NISHIN6 AND
CONVERTINB
1
FINISHED PAPER
PRODUCTS
FILLERS
BROKE
COATIN9S
90
-------
Pulping and Recovery
In pulping operations, water is used as make-up, for dilution, and for
washing and cleaning. It can also be used to facilitate a process
mechanism, such as fiberization. With each different pulping process,
the demand and sources of wastewater discharge vary and are discussed
separately.
Mechanical Pulping (Groundwood). The two basic processes in
groundwood or mechanical pulping are the stone groundwood process and
the refiner groundwood process. These processes have also been
modified through the addition of steam and/or chemicals to reduce
power requirements for grinding. These newer processes are known as
the chemi-mechanical process and the thermo-mechanical process.
In stone groundwood pulping, billets are fed to grinders by hand or
automatically from a conveyor. Water is used as both a coolant and a
carrier to sluice pulp from the body of the grinder. More water is
added to dilute the pulp slurry, which is passed through coarse and
fine screens and centricleaners to remove dirt and silvers. The pulp
slurry is thickened on a decker and then discharged to a stock chest
for mill use, to be bleached, or to be thickened further for
transport. Wastewater from the thickening processes can be recycled
back to a white water chest to supplement process water flow to the
grinders. Overflow from the white water chest and wastewater from the
centricleaners are usually discharged to the treatment system.
In refiner groundwood pulping, wood chips are generally washed prior
to two stages of refining. Disc type refiners are used which contain
one fixed and one rotary disc between which wood chips pass with a
stream of water. After the pulp has passed through the refiners, it
is diluted with water, screened, and cleaned in centricleaners. After
cleaning, the pulp is handled in the same manner as stone groundwood.
Wastewater sources can include the white water tank overflow,
thickening wastewater, centricleaner wastewater, and wood chip wash
water.
In chemi-mechanical pulping, logs or wood chips are soaked or cooked
in liquor containing different chemicals such as sodium carbonate,
sodium hydroxide, and sodium sulfite. This can be done at atmospheric
pressure or under forced pressure for shorter periods of time. After
this treatment, the logs or chips are handled in a manner similar to
that used in stone or refiner groundwood pulping. Wastewater sources
are the same as those for stone or refiner groundwood pulping.
In thermo-mechanical pulping, wood chips are pre-softened with heat
and refined under pressure. After this treatment, chips are handled
in the same manner as stone or refiner groundwood pulping and the
potential wastewater sources are identical.
91
-------
Chemical Pulping. Chemical pulping involves the use of controlled
conditions and cooking chemicals to yield a variety of pulps
Chemical pulps are converted into paper products that generally have
higher quality standards than products made from mechanical pulps
S?fJ?ree kjsic typfs of chemical pulping are alkaline (soda or
kraft), sulfite, and semi-chemical pulping.
Kraft pulping was originally developed from the soda process. In the
soda process, wood chips are cooked in a solution of caustic soda.
When cooking is completed, the contents of the digester are blown into
a-i f*' -,-u Pulp 1S washe<3 on countercurrent drum washers and then
diluted with water, screened, and deckered to stock chest consistency.
Wastewater sources include spills from the digester area, condensed
di?kS?i£g WaSteW3ter from the """ing, screening, and
In the kraft pulping process, wood chips are cooked in a solution
consisting primarily of a mixture of caustic soda and sodium sulfide
which is known as white liquor. Both batch and continuous digesters
can be employed. In the manufacture of dissolving pulps, the wood
chips are sometimes steamed in the digester for a short period prior
«?o h 5S i addition °f the cooking liquor. This is known as
pre-hydrolysis. In this step, the chips are loaded into the digester
which is then partially or totally filled with water and the whole
mass is heated. As the temperature rises, wood acids are released,
the pH drops, and the acidic conditions degrade and solubilize the
hemi-cellulose molecules in the wood. After about two hours the
acidic sugar-rich liquors are drained and the kraft liquor is
introduced into the digester to start the cooking stage.
When cooking is completed, the chips are blown from the digester to a
tank where they separate into fibers. Steam from the tank goes to an
accumulator for heating process water. Drainings can be returned to
the white liquor storage tank to be used in succeeding cooks. The
pulp is transferred, along with the spent cooking liquor or "black
liquor , to a "brown stock" chest or tank, and from there to vacuum
drum washers or continuous diff users where spent liquor is separated
by countercurrent washing. In order to optimize chemical recovery
three or sometimes four stages of washing are used to allow a high
degree of liquor separation with a minimum amount of dilution. This
reduces the heat requirements of evaporation in the chemical recovery
operation. Where continuous digesters equipped with internal
diffusion washing are used, only one or two external washing steps mav
oe employed. •*
After washing, the pulp is diluted, screened, and deckered to a
consistency suitable for bleaching. Wastewater sources from the kraft
pulping Process can include spills from the digester area, digester
relief and blow condensates, wastewater from the "brown stock"
washers, and wastewater from the screen room and deckers.
Wastewater is also generated in the kraft liquor recovery system. The
liquor recovered from the washing operation is called "weak black
92
-------
liquor." This weak black liquor is concentrated in multiple effect
evaporators into a viscous mass called "strong black liquor. The
strong black liquor is further concentrated in the recovery furnace
contact evaporator or in a concentrator. The strong black liquor is
burned and the heat is recovered. During burning, the organic sodium
compounds are converted to soda ash and sulfates are converted to
sulfides. The molten smelt of salts is dissolved in water to form
"green liquor." The green liquor is clarified and causticized with
lime to convert the soda ash to caustic soda. After causticizing, the
combined sodium sulfide-caustic soda solution, known as white
liquor " is settled, sometimes filtered through press filters, and
reused. The lime mud (calcium carbonate) obtained after settling the
white liquor is washed and dewatered on rotary vacuum filters or
centrifuges and burned in rotary or fluidized bed kilns to form quick
lime. This is hydrated with green liquor in slakers for
reintroduction into the recovery cycle. The wastewater from the
vacuum filters or centrifuges is discharged to the wastewater
treatment system.
The sulfite process is used to make two distinctly different types of
pulp: papergrade and dissolving grade. The basic process is the same
for both, although there are significant differences in cooking
temperatures, strength of chemical application, and bleaching
practices. In the preparation of dissolving sulfite pulps, cooking is
continued until most of the lignin and part of the cellulose are
dissolved; in making papergrade pulps, only the lignin is dissolved.
In the sulfite process, wood chips are cooked with solutions of the
sulfites of calcium, magnesium, ammonia, or sodium. The cooking
liquor is manufactured at the mill from purchased and recovered
chemicals. Sulfurous acid is prepared by absorbing sulfur dioxide in
water. Sulfur dioxide is made at the mill by burning sulfur or is
purchased in liquid form; both forms can be supplemented by sulphur
dioxide from the recovery system. Process water is used to cool the
sulfur dioxide gas produced. Sulfurous acid is used in the
preparation of calcium carbonate and calcium oxide or aqua ammonia for
cooking. Neither calcium nor ammonia is recovered. Magnesium oxide
and caustic soda are purchased as make-up base for the magnesium and
sodium base recovery systems which retain about 90 percent of the
base.
When ammonia, calcium, magnesium, or sodium base cooking is completed,
the pulp is blown into a blow tank. It is then delivered to
multi-stage vacuum (drum) washers, where countercurrent washing
separates the spent liquor from the pulp. Blow pits rather than blow
tanks can be employed; in blow pits, pulp is washed by diffusion of
wash water through the pulp mass. Blow pit washing can be
supplemented with vacuum (drum) washing to increase washing
efficiency.
After washing, the pulp is diluted, screened, centrifugally cleaned,
and deckered to the desired stock chest consistency for bleaching. In
the manufacture of dissolving sulfite pulps, an extra set of
93
-------
side-hill screens are used for thickening and to separate resinous
materials. The wastewater sources for the sulfite process include
spills from the digester area, digester relief and blow condensate
and water losses from the vacuum (drum) or blow pit washing and
screening and deckering operations.
Wastewater is also discharged from the recovery system. The weak "red
liquor washed from the pulp is evaporated to a consistency suitable
for burning. Evaporator condensate is discharged to the sewer.
Historically, semi-chemical pulping has involved the cooking of wood
chips in a solution containing sodium sulfite. As discussed in
section III, the semi-chemical process can be modified to include
non-sulfur containing solutions of soda ash and caustic soda. Wood
chips are cooked at high temperatures for a period of about 10 to 20
minutes or at lower temperatures for longer periods of time
(generally, one to three hours). After cooking, the softened chips
are sometimes compressed in one or more stages of screw pressing to
?™if®JhJ recovery of spent liquor. The cooked chips are then
transferred to a disc mill for fiberization. The chips then undergo
vacuum or pressure washing and screening and/or centrifugal cleanina
The pulp is conveyed to an agitated chest where it is diluted with
white water from the paper mill. Wastewater sources include spills
from the digester area, digester relief and blow condensate, and water
losses from the screw press, washing, and screening operations.
Chemical recovery in the sodium-based NSSC process is considerably
more difficult than in the kraft process. The spent liquor is low in
solids with a relatively high proportion of inorganic to organic
constituents and does not burn easily. At many mills, spent liquor is
evaporated and burned without recovery of the chemical base
Evaporation is commonly accomplished in multiple-effect evaporators
The concentrated liquor is burned for disposal or recovery in a
fluidized bed reactor or a specially-designed furnace. In
sodium-based mills, the fluidized bed combustion units produce sodium
sulfate which is suitable for use in kraft mill liquor systems. No
successful system has been developed for ammonia recovery at
ammonia-based NSSC mills; the spent liquor is simply incinerated to
recover energy.
The no-sulfur semi-chemical processes allow for recovery of soda ash
after burning of spent liquor in a modified kraft-type furnace or
tluidized bed. The recovered chemical is recycled to the digester-
caustic make-up provides a balanced pH for liquor reuse. In all
semi-chemical recovery systems, evaporator condensate can be sewered.
Secondary Fiber Pulping. Secondary fiber sources, such as wastepaper
of various classifications, can be used to make several grades of
pulp. Some wastepaper can be used with little or no preparation
particularly if wastepaper is purchased directly from other mills or
converting operations where a similiar product grade is manufactured
However, some wastepaper requires deinking before it can be used as a
pulp source.
94
-------
In the deinking process, wastepaper is cooked in an alkaline solution
to which dispersants, detergents, and solvents are added. The process
is essentially a laundering ope. tat ion in .which the sizes, any coating
binder, and the pigment vehicle in the ink" are dissolved or dispersed;
the ink pigment is released along with filler and coating agents such
as clay, calcium carbonate, and titanium dioxide. Adhesives such as
starch and glue are also dissolved and dispersed. The wastepaper is
then cooked in a pulper with cooking time determined by examination of
a sample from the pulper. During this step, a trash boot and a ragger
may be used to remove such items as trash, rags, rope, and wire. The
stock is then usually screened, after which it is ready for cleaning.
This is accomplished by passing the stock through centri-cleaners and
fine screens. Generally countercurrent washing is employed on washers
of various types. Some mills employ flotation for separating the
fiber from the undesirable materials and others use various kinds of
deckering or thickening equipment. Fiber leaves the washers and is
delivered to a stock chest. Wastewater sources in deink pulping
include wastewater from the centrifugal cleaners, washers, deckers,
and thickeners and spills from the deinking process area.
In non-deinking operations, some wastepaper can be slushed or blended
with virgin pulps to provide suitable furnish for the papermachine.
The combined stock is generally cleaned and screened in the stock
preparation system in the papermachine area. In other non-deinking
operations, considerable quantities of books, envelope cuttings,
flyleaf shavings, and similar unprinted scrap are repulped and washed
free of fillers, adhesives, and sizing material; any ink removal is
incidental. Wastewater sources are similar to deinking.
Bleaching
After pulping, the unbleached pulp can be brown or deeply colored
because of the presence of lignins and resins or because of
inefficient washing of the spent cooking liquor from the pulp. In
order to remove or brighten these color bodies and to produce a
lightly-colored or white product, it is necessary to bleach the pulp.
Bleaching of. Mechanical (Groundwood) Pulp. The most common bleaching
agents used for stone and refiner groundwood are hydrosulfites and
peroxides; both can be used sequentially. In peroxide bleaching,
hydrogen or sodium peroxide is applied to the pulp in a mixing tank
along with caustic soda or other chemicals to raise the pH. Steam is
fed to the mixing tank to heat the mixture to the proper temperature;
pulp is then fed to a peroxide bleaching tower. After bleaching in
the tower, the pulp is usually neutralized to prevent reversal of the
reaction. Sometimes, if more bleaching is required, a hydrosulfite
bleaching step follows peroxide bleaching.
Sodium or zinc hydrosulfite can be used in the same manner as
peroxide; pH adjustment is not required either before or after the
hydrosulfite tower. Wastewater discharge is limited to that resulting
from the washing of bleached mechanical pulp subsequent to the
peroxide or hydrosulfite bleaching step.
95
_
-------
hlnM ^ Chemical Pul£. The chemicals most commonly employed for
bleaching of chemical pulps are chlorine, calcium or sodium
soda ano^l *"* ^^"S di°Me' Alkai^e solutions of cystic
r°SL.and calcium hydroxide are used for extracting chlorinated
reaction products from treated pulp. Hydrogen peroxide sodium
ddl
hi uf
bleaching Sulfur dioxide or sodium sulfite can be used as
SSSrnif109 I^K anti-c"l°r reagents and in some instance! ?o
stabilize pulp brightness. However, the chlorine compounds and
alkalis are the most commonly applied chemicals. P°unas ana
Chlorine and caustic soda are generally purchased in liquid form but
can be manufactured at the mill by electrolysis of sodium chloride
Hypochlontes are generally manufactured on-site by treatment of milk
of lime or caustic soda with chlorine. Chlorine dioxide is
on-site because of its instability. Other blearing
<-are Purchased in their common form; solutions are prepared
according to process needs. These are employed in relatively small
quantities as compared to the major bleaching agents. Y
Bleaching is ordinarily performed in a number of stages. This is done
eLm?^rre Jhe ?tren9th of the P«lP by avoiding excessively r goroCI
chemical treatment and to control consistency and temperature in
accordance with the demands of the particula/treatanen? application
Each stage consists of a reaction tower in which the pulp is retained
t?meC°niaC^WJhh a Pa£tic"lar chemical agent for a specified period of
to the next stSge. °n VaCUUm washers or diffusers and discharged
The chemical concentrations employed depend upon the consistency the
*5£?!2 U?6' Shf numter °f Sta9es' the specific chemicals Ssed, thl
Shf^i *4-°f W°°d 5r5m Which the pulP was Produced, and the degre4 to
which it was cooked as well as the quality of product desired Ihret
stages are generally used in semibleached kraft operations and fo?
bleaching of sulfite papergrade pulps. Since kraft pulps are da?k in
color, particularly when "made from softwoods, high-brightness kraft
?^£S V?uallY require more stages. Normally five are used alSSugh at
fnw hrtii? S1X or.m°re,Stages are USed' Three stages may be used for
low-brightness soda pulp and four stages for high brightness.
generated
extractonwas ower
in the preparation of both hypochlorite and
bleach P^ant ^om the
first
S \"SW PPcess which ^ being installed at
Bleaching chemicals are displaced through a high
Kathnr than ^ co™*ntionally ^^ into the
= » bleaching can be accomplished due to high reaction
rates. Filtrate withdrawal at one stage is fortified with make-un
chemical and reused. The bleaching stages can be located within S
single displacement tower. The major reactor is chlorine dioxidJ
followed by extraction with caustic soda. Wastewater sources in?ludS
96
-------
the wastewater from preparation of chlorine dioxide as well as wash
water introduced on the alkaline and acidic (C102) stages.
Bleaching of Deinked Secondary Fibers. Deinked fibers consisting
primarily of bleached chemical pulp are bleached in one stage with
chlorine or calcium or sodium hypochlorite. When pulps containing
considerable lignin are bleached after deinking, the three-stage CED
process (chlorination, caustic extraction, and chlorine dioxide),
commonly applied to kraft and sulfite pulps, is employed. In this
process, chlorine is applied to a dilute slurry of the pulp at ambient
temperature. The pulp is then thickened and treated with caustic
soda, washed, and treated with hypochlorite. A variety of equipment
and variations of this process are in use. When pulps containing
mostly groundwood are bleached, bleaching methods similar to those
used to bleach groundwood pulp are used; common bleaching chemicals
include peroxides and hydrosulfites.
Wastewater sources for bleaching of deinked pulps are similar to those
associated with the bleaching of other papergrade pulps. In the case
of pulps containing large amounts of lignin, wastewater discharge
includes chlorination and caustic extraction wash water. In the case
of secondary fibers containing high groundwood or chemical pulp,
wastewater discharge includes wash water resulting from a single wash
stage.
Papermaking
In stock preparation, pulp, either purchased (nonintegrated mills) or
produced on-site (integrated on secondary fiber mills), is resuspended
in water. The stock is mechanically treated in beaters or continuous
refiners to "brush" or fray the individual fibers to obtain the
necessary matting which produces the desired strength in the paper.
This process also cuts the fibers to some degree. Chemical additives
may be added either before or after stock preparation.
Either a Fourdrinier or cylinder forming machine may be used to make
paper or paperboard. The primary operational difference between the
two types is the flat sheet-forming surface of the Fourdrinier and the
cylindrical-shaped mold of the cylinder machine. The type of machine
used has little bearing on the raw waste load. Because of its higher
speed and greater versatility, the Fourdrinier is in more common use
than the cylinder machine.
Water is used for dilution and to transport pulp to the paper machine.
This water, called "white water" drains or is pressed from the paper
or paperboard on the "wet end" of the paper machine. White water is
of relatively high qualtiy and is normally reused on the paper machine
or in other areas of the mill. Wastewater sources in the papermaking
operation include water losses from the stock preparation area and
white water from the Fourdrinier or cylinder machine which overflows
the white water recycle tank.
97
-------
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STRATEGY
K °f t^s section is to present information on the
TW° haractenstics of mills in the subcategories identified in
• ** .ou«ine<* Previously, three categories of pollutants
onT investigation: a) conventional pollutants, b) toxic
pollutants, and c) nonconventional pollutants.
Conventional Pollutants
The Clean Water Act defined four conventional pollutants or pollutant
£ann^n?S: -?°D-', TSS' PH' and fecal conform. An additional
pollutant, oil and grease, has been defined by EPA as a conventional
pollutant under procedures established in Section 304 of the Clean
h^ ?CKi- v,Af *a ESSUlt Of past efforts, effluent limitations have
been established for the control of BODS, TSS, and PH in discharaes
from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry! aiscnarges
ra? waste characteristics of mills in each of the
pulp paper, and paperboard industry has been
n™,- he da£a request program described in Section I!
presented in this section.
Dissolving Kraft. Table V-l presents available data on wastewater
discharge and raw waste loadings of BODS and TSS at mills
MSnSrnt?tXS? °f1the dis?olvin9 kraft subcategoFy. At these mills?
blends of dissolving pulps and papergrade market pulps are produced
Raw material usage ranges from 100 percent hardwood to 100 percent
softwood. At one mill, a blend of 88 percent softwood and 12 percent
s VKd' The Proportion of dissolving pulp ranges from 49 to
Wlth a" overali. average of 60 percent. Bleaching sequences
and practices vary on different lines at the individual mills
However, at all three jumpstage countercurrent washing is generally
practiced. Calculated bleached yield averages about 40 percent for
the softwood and 46 percent for the hardwood pulps.
In order to evaluate the effect of percent dissolving pulp produced on
a v ,load'.ra? wfste flow and BODS have been plotted in Figures
? against the Percentage of dissolving pulp produced
t0tal. product manufactured on-site. Although no
.fars to ?xist for flow, BODS increases with increasing
percent of dissolving pulp produced. In addition, the effect of
£"7lptnL .S0ftw°od versus hardwood on raw waste load has been evaluated
by plotting raw waste flow and BODS against percent softwood in Figure
V-4. It has been suggested that raw waste loads would increase with
a"«hin!rrease X? Jhe Percentage of softwood produced. However, the
«„? 3 raw waste load BODS occurs at the mill where only hardwood is
SSlS ?4lativP ?nSf i-b? ?°te? tha^ th€ hi9hest Percentage of dissolving
pulp relative to total final product is produced at this mill.
°f ?Peratin9 variables at the three mills indicates
h« u efflclfncV has a greater effect on raw waste load BODS
than either the amount of dissolving pulp produced or the percentage
98
-------
to
TABLE V-l
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production Profile
- Flow
Mill No. Raw Material (a) Dissolving Pulp (%)
032001 (c) 100% HW
032002 (c) 100% SW
032003 (c) 88% SW
Average
BPT ;Raw Waste Load
72
49
59
60
kl/kkg
136
218
238
197
230
.8
.1
.9
.9
.0
(kgal/t)
(32.8)
(52.3)
(57.3)
(47.5)
(55.1)
BODS
kg/kkg
109.5
39.4
59.8
69.6
66.5
TSS
(Ib/t) kg/kkg
(219
(78
(119
(139
(133
.0)
.7)
.6)
.1)
.0)
120
132
81
111
113
.4
.0
.6
.3
.0
(lb/t)
(240.7)
(264.0)
(163.2)
(222.6)
(226.0)
^BPT(b)
F
BF
B
(a)HW - Hardwood; SW - Softwood.
(b)F - Mill with ^BPT flow; B - Mill with ^BPT BOD5.
(c)Production data held confidential.
-------
FIGURE V-2
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT DJSSOLVING PULP
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
o
o
240(57.6)n
200(48.0)-
_ 160(38.4)-
J3
O>
120(28.8)-
ui
80(19.2)-
40 ( 9.6)-
0 (0)-
10
20
30
40
—i—
50
—i—
60
—i—
70
—i—
80
—l
90
PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
-------
FIGURE V-3
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
120(240)1
100(200)
o 80(160)-
I 60(120)-
S
CD
ui
t-
$
S 40( (80)
^
ec.
20 (40)
0 (0)
10
20
30
40 50 60
PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
70
80
90
-------
120(240)
FIGURE V-4
RAW WASTE DATA (FLOW AND BOD5)
VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
~ 90(180)
o>
JC
JC
' 60(120)
SI
o
o
Ul
h-
I
K
30( 60)-
0(0)
20
40
—t—
60
—i—
SO
—I
100
300 (72)
c
o
j(
jc
•V.
3
u.
Ul
-------
of softwood pulped. The salt cake loss, as washable Na2_0, was higher
at the mill where, the BOD5^ raw waste load was .highest (e.g., the mill
where only hardwood is pulped). Based on the limited data available,
it is impossible to determine a specific relationship between raw
waste flow and BOD5^ relative to either the percentage of dissolving
pulp produced or the percentage of softwood pulped.
Market Bleached Kraft. Table V-2 presents available data on
wastewater discharge and raw waste BODJi and TSS at mills
representative of the market bleached kraft subcategory. Raw material
use ranges from TOO percent hardwood to TOO percent softwood.
Production ratios can and do shift and the capability.generally exists
to pulp all softwood if desired. To aid in identifying trends with
respect to raw waste load, the mills are listed sequentially in the
order of increasing softwood production. Figures V-5 and V-6 present
plots of the raw waste flow and BOD!> versus the percentage of softwood
pulped. A trend is apparent with respect to raw waste load flow and
BOD5_, with both generally increasing slightLy as the production of
softwood increases. However, regression analysis of the relationship
of flow and BODI5 versus percent softwood is inconclusive and no
definite relationship can be established.
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft. At mills in this
subcategory, bleached kraft pulps are produced for the on-site
production of paperboard, market pulp, and tissue and coarse grades of
paper. Table V-3 presents available production profile and raw
wastewater data for the eight mills representative of the BCT
(paperboard, coarse, and ti'ssue) bleached kraft subcategory. At most
of the mills, both hardwood and softwood pulps are produced; however,
at two only softwood pulp is used in the production of tissue and
board products. Figures V-7 and V-8 present plots of raw waste flow
and BOD5_ with respect to the percentage of softwood pulp in the
furnish. Based on a statistical analysis of the data, no significant
correlation can be established between either raw waste flow or BOD5_
relative to the percentage of softwood pulped.
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and
data are presented in Table V-4 for 20
of the alkaline-fine mill grouping
both coated and uncoated, are produced
and softwood kraft pulps and, in some
groundwood pulp. Attempts have been
of groundwood production or the extent
coating applications affects raw waste
Soda Subcategories). Available
mills that are representative
A variety of grades of paper,
from combinations of hardwood
instances, on-site production of
made to determine if the amount
of high use of filler and
characteristics.
Figures V-9 and V-10 present plots of the raw waste flow and BOD5_
versus the percentage of softwood pulped relative to the total product
manufactured. Those mills where paper is produced using some
groundwood pulp produced on-site and those where large amounts of clay
are used as a filler are also shown. No relationship between raw
waste flow or BOD15 and percentage of softwood pulp used is apparent.
Additionally, no relationship is apparent between groundwood or high
clay filler use and flow or BODS^.
103
-------
TABLE V-2
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Mill No.
030005
030009
030012(a)
030042
030028(a)
030031
030030
030018(a)
030006
030061(b)
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
BPT-Raw
HWK SBPT
SWK SBPT
Production
Profile
Raw Waste Load
Pulp Flow
Hardwood (%) Softwood (%) Product
100
• 100
89
64
27
26
21
11
0
0
_
-
11
36
73
74
79
89
100
100
bales
bales
bales
slush
board/
bales
bales
bales
bales
bales
(t/d)
369
592
409
341
723
582
515
of Mills with SBPT flow
of Softwood Mills
of Softwood Mills
of Hardwood Mills
of Hardwood Mills
Waste Load
(030005, 030009,
(030028, 030061)
with greater
SBPT flow
with greater
SBPT flow
030012)
than 70%
than 70%
SWK
HWK
kl/kk*
73.3
134.9
152.8
78.3
154.0
332.2
168.9
184.4
179.4
134.5
159.3
128.1
192.3
152.5
120.3
120.3
173.0
120.3
152.5
(kgal/t)
(17.6)
(32.4)
(36.7)
(18.8)
(37.0)
(79.8)
(40.6)
(44.3)
(43.1)
(32.3)
(38.3)
(30.8)
(46.2)
(36.6)
(28.9)
(28.9)
(41.6)
(28.9)(c)
(36.6)(c)
BODS
kg/kkg
17.5
35.7
37.4
35.5
44.0
44.1
39.2
41.3
23.1
35.3
32.2
37.9
34.2
26.6
26.6
38.0
26.6
29.3
(Ib/t)
(35.0)
(71.4)
(74.8)
(71.0)
(88.0)
(88.1)
(78.3)
(82.5)
(46.2)
(70.6)
(64.4)
(75.7)
(68.4)
(53.2)
(53.2)
(75.9)
(53.2)(d)
(58.6)(d)
TSS
kg/kkg
20.4
__
98.0
14.4
24.0
132.0
24.7
48.4
22.4
18.7
44.8
33.4
45.0
22.5
59.2
59.2
45.0
—
(Ib/t)
(40.8)
(195.9)
(28.7)
(47.9)
(264.0)
(49.4)
(96.8)
(44.7)
(37.4)
(89.5)
(66.7)
(90.0)
(44.9)
(118.4)
(118.4)
(90.0)
(--)
SBPT(e)
BF
F
BF
BF
BF
F
BF
(a)Production data held confidential.
(b)SuppJeroental data (not in 308).
(c)Based on mills having lower than BPT flow.
(d)Based on mills having lower than BPT BOD5.
(e)F - Mill with iBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BOD5.
-------
FIGURE V-5
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
350(84)
300(72)-
7 250(60)
o
2 200(48)
c
hJ
5 150(36)
K
100(24)
50(12)
40
r—1—
60
80
100
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
105
-------
FIGURE V-6
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
80(160)
70 (140)
60(120)
o 50(100)
o»
je
jt
1 40 ( 80)
§'
CD
5
K 30 ( 60)
20 ( 40) -
10 ( 20)-
0 (0)-
20 40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
106
eo
100
-------
TABLE V-3
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Pulp
IIU
tt/d)
su
030004 436 535
030010 — 335
030022 352 943
030024 512 368
030026(a) — 1073
030047 306 204
030032 584 576
030039O) 291 238
Average
BPT-Kaw Waste Load
Average of Miils with
Average of Mills with
Product lt/aj
Market &
Board Tissue Coarse
548 343
231
907 . —
714
884 59
583
895
487
SBPT flow
SBPT BOD5
69
84
394(c)
106
210
348
107
Total
960
315
1301
820
1153
583
1243
594
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
186.5
186.5
150.3
137.4
120.8
131.1
137.8
92.0
150.1
149.0
131.8
168.4
(44.8)
(44.8)
(36.1)
(33.0)
(29.0)
(31.5)
(33.1)
(22.1)
(36.0)
(35.4)
(31.7)
(40.5)
Raw Waste Load
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
57.3
37.2
33.0
57.5
46.3
64.1
42.6
29.2
48.3
38.4
52.6
35.1
(114.6)
(74.3)
(66.0)
(115.0)
(92.5)
(128.2)
(85.2)
(58.4)
(96.5)
(76.7)
(105.2)
(70.2)
TSS
ke/kkg
41.7
42.9
33.2
79.5
48.3
24.0
49.1
66.5
53.7
42.9
(Ib/t)
(83.3)
(85.7)
(--)
(--)
(66.3)
(159.0)
(96.5)
(47.9)
(98.2)
(133.0)
(107.3)
(85.7)
SBPT(d)
B
B
F
F
F
F
(a)Includes lumber mill effluent in raw waste figures.
(b)Effluent numbers reported are secondary influent and are omitted from the averages.
(c)236 t/d market, 158 t/d writing and related papers.
(d)F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BODS.
-------
FIGURE V-7
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
220 (52.8)-
200 (4&0)-
180(43.2)-
i 160(38.4)-
u 140(33.6)
fc
I
I
CE
120(28.8)
100 (24.0)
80 ( 19.2)
i
20
—r—
40
60
80
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
108
100
-------
FIGURE V-8
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
e
o
J3
0>
Jf
Jt
a>
i
§'
O
CD
UJ
t-
tfi
<
I
e
SO lloU)-
70 (140)-
60(120)-
50(100)-
40 ( SO-
SO ( 60)-
20 ( 40)
I0( 20)
O fO)
o •
^
•
9
20
40
6O
80
100
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
109
-------
TABLE V-4
SUMMARY KAW WASTE WAD DATA
ALKALINE-FINE*
Production Profile
Pulp (t/d)
Mil) No. 1IW SW
030001 101 35
030013. 146 129
030015(b) 124 123
030020(b) — 174
030027 Cb) 292 199
030034(b) 341 109
030037 449 476
030046 408 232
030049 (b) 449 224
030051 113 218
030052 237 311
030057 181
030059U)
030060(d)
130001 535
130002(c)
Average (Mills w/o GWD)
030033(a) 216 464
030045 (a) 270 460
030048(a)(b) 431 240
030058(a)(b)(c)
Average (Mills w/GWD)
Overall Average
Average High Clay Mills
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT
Average of Mills with SBPT
Purchased (l/d)
Pulp
23
25
11
118
18
90
60
4
9
194
—
132
129
28
55
11
flow
BOD5
Broke
10
154
45
27
78
—
102
—
33 1
—
72
—
70
—
139
10
Ctd
__
68
370
—
27
—
—
348
,137
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
412
524
527
Product (t/d)
Unctd
M-
120
—
—
310
—
114
342'
41
—
600
378
458
242
51
411
Other
191
322
—
417
345
708
914
50
—
612
87
—
—
233
184
388
18
Total
191
510
370
417
682
708
1,028
740
1,178
612
687
378
691
838
963
956
Raw
Flow
kl/kkg
101.6
122.4
165.1
115.7
80.7
119.1
"118.2
132.4
72.4
93.7
133.4
106.6
122.4
163.2
74.1
107.3
114.3
139.4
148.2 r
111.2
115.2
128.5
117.1
111.3
128.5
104.3
103.4
(kROl/t)
(24.4)
(29.4)
(39.7)
(27.8)
(19.4)
(28.6)
(28.4)
(31.8)
(17.4)
(22.5)
(32.0)
(25.6)
(29.4)
(39.2)
(17.8)
(25.8)
(27.5)
(33.4)
(35.6)
(26.7)
(27.7)
(30.9)
(-28.1)
(26.8)
(30.9)
(25.1)
(24.8)
Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
22.7
—
51.0
25.5
24.1
—
—
31.2
21.6
32.7
—
39.9
39.1
39.2
39.8
23.5
32.5
75.4
65.2
31.5
31.0
50.8
37.1
30.8
33.6
30.1
27.1
(Ib/t)
(45.4)
(--)
(101.9)
(51.0)
(48.2)
(--)
(")
(62.3)
(43.1)
(65.3)
(--)
(79.8)
(78.1)
(78.4)
(79.5)
(47.0)
(65.0)
(150.7)
(130.4)
(63.0)
(62.0)
(101.5)
(74.1)
(61.5)
(67.2)
(60.2)
(54.1)
TSS
kg/kkg
46.8
—
80.0
78.5
36.9
—
—
80.4
55.0
40.9
—
79.3
147.5
101.7
23.7
115.2
73.8
—
126.2
89.8
78.9
98.3
78.7
69.9
75.0
72.0
69.2
(Ib/t)
(93.5)
(--)
(160.0)
(157.0)
(73.8)
(--)
(--)
(160.8)
(109.9)
(81.7)
(--)
(158.5)
(295.0)
(203.3)
(47.4)
(230.3)
(147.6)
(~)
(252.3)
(179.6)
(157.8)
(196.6)
(157.4)
(139.7)
(150.0)
(144.0)
(138.3)
SBPT(e)
BF
F
BF
BF
F
F
B
BF
BF
F
F
. F
BF
BF
BF
(a)lnclude groundwood production.
(b)High clay mills.
(c)Productioii data held confidential.
(d)Coufidentiality claim.
(e)F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BOD5.
*Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
-------
FIGURE V-9
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
ALKALINE-FINE (>)
180(43.2)-,
160 (38.4)
140 (33.6)
e 120 (28.8)
o
e
o>
©
0
A
A
~2 IOO(24.0)
u.
UJ
80 ( 19.2)-
60 (14.4)
40 (9.6)
20 (4.8)
(I)
20
0 GROUNDWOOD USED
13 HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
A GROUNOWOOD AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
80
100
INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
111
-------
FIGURE V-10
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
ALKALINE-FINE(l)
80(l60)n
1 '
70(140)-
60(120)-
g 50(100)
o>
je
jc
•^
9
* 40(80)
I
uj
I
1 30 ( 60)
cc
20 ( 40)
I0( 20)
0 (0)
© GROUNDWOOD USED
{•] HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
A GROUNDWOOD AND HIGH CLAY FILTERS USED
0 20 40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
(''INCLUDES BLEACHED KRAFT FINE AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
112
80
100
-------
Figures V-l 1 and V-12 present plots of raw waste flow and BOD5_ versus
the percentage of pulp manufactured on-site relative to the total
product manufactured. No significant statistical correlation could be
ascertained. Two of the mills where some groundwood pulp is produced
exhibit high BODS, raw waste load; however, the other mills where
groundwood pulp is produced exhibit BOD5_ raw waste loads in the same
general range as for other alkaline-fine mills.
Unbleached Kraft.
Table
waste
V-5 presents available data on wastewater
discharge and raw waste loadings of BOD£ and TSS at mills
representative of the unbleached kraft subcategory. Figures V-l3 and
V-14 are presented to illustrate the effect of product type on raw
waste loads. Based on this analysis, the subcategory has been divided
into two separate groups: unbleached kraft (linerboard) and unbleached
kraft (bag and other products (primarily packaging grades)). As shown
on Table V-5 and Figures V-l 3 and V-14, significantly different
wastewater discharge is noted for the two groups. The bag and other
product mills generally have higher flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw waste
loads.
Semi-Chemical. Available data for each of the 19 mills employing a
semi-chemical pulping process are presented in Table V-6. Corrugating
medium is the primary product of those mills; a variety of chemical
processes, chemical bases, and liquor recovery systems are utilized at
mills in this subcategory.' Previously, sodium-based and ammonia-based
neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) processes were identified.
Ammonia-based cooking liquors are now used at only one mill. The raw
waste loads for the ammonia-based mill are not substantially different
from the other semi-chemical mills: flow and TSS raw waste loads are
well below the subcategory average; BODS^ is above the subcategory
average but is not the highest in the subcategory.
Many process innovations are being applied at mills in this
subcategory including the use of no-sulphur pulping and green liquor
pulping to displace the conventional NSSC cook. Insignificant
differences exist in raw waste loadings at the no-sulphur mills
compared to mills where the conventional NSSC process is employed.
Similar results are anticipated if data were available on green liquor
pulping. In proposed rulemaking, the Agency is seeking additional
information on differences in raw waste characteristics resulting from
the use of different semi-chemical cooking processes.
Incomplete on-site chemical recovery existed at two mills at the time
of data acquisition. As expected, these mills exhibit significantly
higher BODS^ than the other mills in this subcategory. Two additional
mills are not included in averages of data presented in Table V-6
because they are not representative of general practices of the
semi-chemical subcategory. At one, a variety of recycled paperboard
grades as well as corrugating media are produced; at the other, tissue
and fine papers are made as well as semi-chemical corrugating media.
Data for another mill (No.
presented in Table V-6.
020004) are not included in averages
At this mill, a reverse osmosis system is
113
-------
FIGURE V-11
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT ON SITE PULP PRODUCTION
ALKALINE-FINE01
208.3(50)-,
166.7(40)-
c
o
o
o>
125.0(30)-
i
o
<
<
83.3(20)-
41.7(10)
0 (0)
10
20
® GROUNOWOOO USED
[H HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
A UTILIZE SOME GROUNDWOOD AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS
30
40
50 60
PERCENT ON SITE PULP
'"INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
70
80
90
too
-------
70(I40H
FIGURE V-12
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT ON SITE PULP PRODUCTION
ALKALINE-FINE(I) <§>
60(120)-
50(100)-
40 (80)-
I
m
Q
o
CD
<
<
o:
30 (60)-
20 (40)-
® GROUNDWOOD USED
B HIGH CLAY FILLERS
A 6ROUNDWOOO AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
10 (20)-
~r~
30
10
(I)
20
40
50 60
PERCENT ON SITE PULP
INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
70
80
90
100
-------
TABLE V-5
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish
Hill No. Kraft WP
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
010001 450
010002 923
010018 1,170 30
010019 1,127 39
010020 971 55
010025 523 39
010032(a)
010033(a)
010038 750 68
010040 1,195 85
010042 965
010043 1,539 10
010046 1,176
010047 1,299
010057 540 —
Ol0063(a)
010064 644 51
Average
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Unbleached Kraft
Purch
Broke
20
—
—
27
61
-.
5
—
—
—
27
--
85
SBPT flow
SBPT BOD5
Linerbrd
450
934
1,081
1,144
965
563
789
1,220
965
1,549
1,102
1,194
620
666
Product (t/d)
Bag Other
__ __
—
—
7
44
4
—
—
—
—
21
—
—
—
Flow
Total
450
934
1,081
1,151
1,009
567
789
1,220
965
1,549
1,123
1,194
620
666
kl/kkg
46.2
44.1
44.1
35.0
79.9
44.5
47.1
—
104.9
64.9
22.9
44.1
49.1
26.2
38.3
31.7
34.1
47.3
52.4
39.0
47.2
(kgal/t)
(11.1)
(10.6)
(10.6)
( 8.4)
(19.4)
(10.7)
(11.3)
( — )
(25.2)
(15.6)
( 5.5)
(10.6)
(11.8)
( 6.3)
( 9.2)
( 7.6)
( 8.2)
(11.4)
(12.6)
(9.4)
(11.3)
Raw
Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
8.3
14.1
18.1
9.6
20.5
13.9
18.3
—
16.5
14.7
11.1
21.7
14.4
6.7
—
46.3
14.8
16.9
17.0
16.4
12.4
(Ib/t)
(16.5)
(28.2)
(36.1)
(19.1)
(41.0)
(27.8)
(36.5)
( — )
(32.9)
(29.4)
(22.2)
(43.4)
(28.7)
(13.4)
( — )
(92.6)
(29.6)
(33.2)
(34.0)
(32.8)
(24.8)
TSS
kg/kkg
26.9
24.7
14.1
4.8
27.6
9.8
17.4
—
15.9
11.4
5.7
13.9
20.1
10.8
—
9.9
24.3
15.8
22.0
15.2
15.4
(Ib/t)
(53.7)
(49.4)
(28.2)
(9.6)
(55.1)
(19.6)
(34.8)
( — )
(31.7)
(22.7)
(11.3)
(27.7)
(40.2)
(21.5)
( — )
(19.8)
(48.6)
(31.6)
(44.0)
(30.4)
(30.8)
SBPT
(b)
BF
BF
F
BF
BF
F
B
B
BF
F
BF
BF
F
F
BF
Bag and Other Products
Production Profile
Furnish
Mill Mo. Kraft WP
010003 243 12
010005 1,286
010006 1,685
010008 1,895
010028 400 10
010044 1,020
010055 748 2
010060 470
010062 231
010034 940
010035(a)
010048(a)
Average
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average o£ Mills with
Purch
Broke
..
8
51
--
--
82
12
25
10
48
SBPT flow
SBPT BOD5
Linerbrd
„
—
—
—
—
—
.-
—
--
—
Product (t/d)
Bag Other
'283
332 898
478 1,115
434 1,540
279 120
709 365
726
443
234
925
Flow
Total
283
1,230
1,594
1,974
399
1,074
726
443
234
925
kl/kkg
42.0
66.2
52.5
73.8
110.1
57.1
58.4
85.1
151.4
94.6
227.3
223.1
103.5
52.4
47.3
54.8
(kgal/t)
(10.1)
(15.9)
(12.6)
(17.7)
(26.4)
(13.7)
(14.0)
(20.4)
(36.3)
(22.7)-
(54.6)
(53.5)
(24.8)
(12.6)
(11.4)
(13.2)
Raw
Waste Loi
BODS
kg/kkg
20.3
12.5
18.8
—
12.5
30.5
—
20.6
36.8
34.2
32.9
24.3
17.0
12.5
12.5
(Ib/t)
(--)
(40.6)
(25.0)
(37.6)
( — )
(24.9)
(60.9)
(--)
(41.1)
(73.5)
(68.4)
(65.7)
(48.6)
(34.0)
(25.0)
(25.0)
id
TSS
kg/kkg
20
45
13
17
23
8
24
56
73
31
22
-
17
(Ib/t)
(-
.5 (40.
(-
.7 (91.
.3 (26.
.8 (35.
.2 (46.
(-
.6 (17.
.3 (48.
.3 (112.
.2 (146.
.4 (62.
.0 (44.
-
.8 (35.
SBPT
(b)
-) F
9)
-) BF
3)
6)
6) B
4)
-)
2)
6)
6)
11
8)
0)
6)
(a)Production. data held coafidential.
(b)F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BODS.
116
-------
FIGURE V-13
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PRODUCTION
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
240 (57.6)
2IO (50.4)-
ISO (43.2)
150(36.0)
3 120 (28.8)
i
I
u.
UJ
S
* 90(21.6)
§
60 (14.4)
30 ( 72)
0 (0)
O UNBLEACHED KRAFT LINERBOARD
H UNBLEACHED KRAFT BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS
0 O
Q.
400 80O
1200
PRODUCTION- tons/day
117
1600 2000 2400
-------
FIGURE V-14
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PRODUCTION
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
40(80)i
35(70)-
30 (60).
o
o
je
jt
25(50)
a 0(40)
2'
o
CQ
111
| I 5 (30)
a:
10(20)
5(10)
0 (0
046.3J
0 UNBLEACHED KRAFT LINERBOARD
B UNBLEACHED KRAFT BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS
O
o 0°
400
800 1200 1600
PRODUCTION- »ons/doy
118
2000 2400
-------
TABLE V-6
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATECORY
Production Profile
Furnish (t/d)
Mill No. Semi-Ghem
I. Mills With Liquor
020002 248
020003 (a) 582
020008(a) 231
020009 (a) (f)
020010 (f)
020013 472
020014(e) 394
020017(f)
060004(a) 385
Average
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
WP Broke
Recovery and
90 20
61
125
173
117
98 9
SBPT flow
SBPT BODS
II. Mills With Liquor Recovery and
020001 204
020004(c) 160
020006 190
020007 183
020011 (b) 235
020012(f)
Average (b)(c)
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
116
106
99
123
157
SBPT flow
SBPT BOD5
Product
(t/d)
Less Than
331
618
318
599.
511
492
Flow
kl/kkg
1/3 WP
24.1
40.0
22.9
28.7
60.5
39.5
26.6
30.4
48.7
35.7
42.8
30.3
33.3
(k«al/t)
(5.8)
(9.6)
(S.5)
(6.9)
(14.5)
(9.5)
(6.4)
(7.3)
(11.7)
(8.6)
(10.3)
(7.3)
(8.0)
Raw Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
12
25
9
14
17
39
31
20
27
22
25
21
15
.9
.3
.6
.4
.9
.0
.2
.7
J5
.1
.2
.9
.1
(Ib/t)
(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)
TSS
kg/kks>
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
(Ib/t)
(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)
SBPT(g)
BF
F
BF
BF
B
F
F
BF
More Than 1/3 WP
302
266
291
346
377
19.2
25.8
16.2
10.4
34.1
28.4
18.6
42.8
18.6
17.7
(4.6)
(6.0)
(3.9)
(2.5)
(8.2)
(6.8)
(4.5)
(10.3)
(4.S)
(4.3)
23
1
24
22
23
25
23
23
.6
.3
.2
.6
—
.9
.2
.9
.9
(47.1)
(2.6)
(48.4)
(45.2)
(47.8)
(50.4)
(47.8)
(47.8)
8.1
0.
6.
8.
12.
8.
8.
2
..
.„
0
..
1
3
1
1
(16.1)
(0.3)
(--)
(11-9)
(16.1)
(24.6)
(16.1)
(16.1)
BF
BF
F
F
III. Mills Without Liquor Recovery
020005 137
020015 118
Average
46
50
183
169
47.0 '
20.4
33.7
(11.3)
(4.9)
(8.1)
56
33
44
.1
.2
.7
(112.1)
(66.4)
(89.3)
52.
27.
40.
4
9
2
(104.7)
(55.7)
(80.2)
F
IV. Non Representative Mills
020018(d) 217
0200i6(d) 200
Average
Average of All Mills
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
(Group I and II)
Average of Mills with
(Group I and II)
450
221
SBPT flow
SBPT BODS
673
525
30.4
55.5
43.0
30.9
42.8
26.0
28.9
(7.3)
(13.3)
(10.3)
(7.4)
(10.3)
(6.3)
(6.9)
62,
50,
.8
.5
56.7
25.
.8
25.2
22.3
17.6
(125.6)
(100.9)
(113.3)
(51.6)
(50.4)
(44.6)
(35.2)
61.
42.
51.
30.
12.
22.
26.
5
2
9
1
3
2
1
(123.0)
(84.3) "
(103.7)
(60.2)
(24.6)
(44.3)
(52.2)
F
(a) No-sulfur pulping.
(b) Mill 020011 combined effluent with other mills. Not included in average calculations.
(c) A reverse osmosis system is used to treat internal process streams and allow for extensive
recycle of these treated streams. Not included in average calculations.
(d) Mill 020018 makes recycled paperboard as well as corrugating. Mill 020016 makes tissue and
fine papers as well. These mills are not, considered representative.
(e) Ammonia-based.
(f) Production data held confidential.
(g) F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BODS.
119
-------
utilized to treat some process wastewater and provide for extensive
internal recycle, thus substantially reducing raw waste loads. This
reliance on extensive production process controls is not typical of
the approach taken at most other mills in this subcategory.
Utilization of wastepaper in the furnish at mills in the semi-chemical
subcategory ranges from about 10 percent to 67 percent of total
production. Therefore, the effect of wastepaper usage on raw waste
load flow and BOD5_ has been evaluated to determine if the percentage
of wastepaper used affects raw waste load. .
Figures V-15 and V-16 present plots of raw waste flow and BOD5. versus
the percentage of wastepaper used in the furnish relative to the total
product. Flow tends to decrease with an increase in the percentage of
wastepaper used. However, a significant statistical correlation could
not be determined. No significant relationship exists between raw
waste BOD5_ and the percentage of wastepaper used.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical. The ten mills for which data are
available that are representative of the unbleached kraft and
semi-chemical subcategory are some of the largest mills in the
industry with an average production of approximately 1,360 metric
tons/day (1,500 tons/ day). Table V-7 presents available raw waste
load data for this subcategory. At all of these facilities,
unbleached kraft pulps are produced along with high yield unbleached
semi-chemical pulps. These products are commonly utilized in the
manufacture of linerboard and corrugating media. At some mills, other
types of kraft paper including board, bag, and converting papers are
also made on-site. Table V-7 also shows the percentage of each
product made at each mill along with the percentage of unbleached
kraft and semi-chemical pulp produced. Kraft pulp production averages
about four times as much as semi-chemical pulp production. This
reflects a typical balanced cross^-recovery system with fresh liquor
makeup to the semi-chemical process to counterbalance chemical losses
from that operation and the kraft pulping operation. The distribution
of production as well as the range in the ratio of semi-chemical to
kraft pulp are reasonably constant in this subcategory, except for one
mill where about ten times as much kraft is produced as semi-chemical
pulp.
Six mills are known to be utilizing varying amounts of green liquor
for pulping in the semi-chemical operation. This is done to enable an
increase in semi-chemical pulp production relative to unbleached kraft
production and/or to facilitate the recovery of chemical cooking
liquor. No trends are apparent with respect to raw waste loads
relative to either alterations of the semi-chemical process or to
variations in the products manufactured.
Because the production of bag papers in the unbleached kraft
subcategory has a significant effect on raw waste load, an
investigation was made of those unbleached kraft and semi-chemical
mills v/here higher percentages of bag papers are produced. As shown
in Table V-7, the average raw waste loadings for the three mills where
120
-------
60(14.4)
50(12.0)
40 ( 9.6)
IN)
o
o>
2 30 ( 7.2)
3
u.
ui
tn
<
-------
FIGURE V-16
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT WASTEPAPER USED
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
60(30)-i
50(25)-
ro
ro
7 40(20)
o
£
O<
30(15)
53'
o
m
i
< 20(10)
5)
0(0)
•
O
O NO SULFUR PULPING
A AMMONIA-BASED
Q NON-REPRESENTATIVE MILLS
X NO LIQUOR RECOVERY
10
—i—
20
30 40 50
PERCENT WASTEPAPER USED
60
70
80
90
-------
TABLE V-7
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT AND SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
oo
Semi-Chem UBK
Mill No i (%)(b) (%)
015001(a)(f) 17 86
015002(e) 20 67
015003(e) 16 85
015004(d)(f) 16 77
015005 (a) (f) 16 84
015006(a)(f) 9 90
015007(a)(f) 14 76
015008(a) 18 84
015009 (a) 28 65
010017(f) 13 91
Average 17 80
Corrug
(%)
21
24
20
18
21
12
21
16
38
16
21
Average for mills with over 20% bag
Brd
(%)
74
60
80
70
0
50
79
84
62
58
62
Bag Product
(%) (t/d)
5 1,745
17
0
12
79 1,394
38 2,598
0 1,700
0 1,133
0 716
26 1,428
18
production
Average for mills using varying amounts of
liquor for pulping
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average :of Mills with ^BPT
Average jof Mills with ^BPT
(a) Market pulp production
with bag production.
(b) Calculated percentage
flow
BOD5
is included with
based on
claimed
green
Flow
kl/kkg
58.3
47.0
50.1
67.4
30.4
50.4
52.0
80.7
57.5
36.6
53.0
39.1
49.2
58.2
47.8
51.8
(kgal/t)
(14.0)
(11.3)
(12.2)
(16.2)
(7.3)
(12.1)
(12.5)
(19.4)
(13.8)
(8.8)
(12.8)
(9.4)
(11.8)
(14.0)
(11.5)
(12.5)
board production data; production of
production. Other
fibers
BODS
kg/kkg
23.6
13.5
18.8
17.1
8.8
18.9
16.3
19.0
28.1
17.5
18.2
15.1
17.0
19.4
18.2
16.2
(lb/t)
(47.2)
(27.0)
(37.6)
(34.2)
(17.6)
(37.8)
(32.6)
(38.0)
(56.2)
(35.0)
(36.3)
(30.1)
(34.1)
(38.8)
(36.4)
(32.5)
converting papers
and/or losses not
accounted
kg/kkg
27.5
13.5
29.0
47.0
««
9.8
25.1
20.7
29.1
38.3
26.7
24.1
29.5
20.5
24.6
26.2
TSS
fib
(55
(27
(58
(94
(19
(50
(41
(58
(76
(53
(48
(59
(41
(49
(52
/t)
.0)
.0)
.0)
.0)
.6)
.2)
.4)
.2)
.6)
-3)
.1)
• 1)
.0)
.2)
.4)
-------
greater than 20 percent of the final product is bag paper are lower
than the overall subcategory averages. In fact, the mill (No. 015005)
where the highest percentage of bag paper is produced has the lowest
raw waste load flow and BOD5_ in the subcategory.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp. Table V-8 presents available data on
wastewater discharge and raw waste loadings of BOD5_ and TSS at mills
representative of the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory. At the six
mills where dissolving grade sulfite pulps are produced, the
capability exists of also producing papergrade pulps. Predominantly
softwoods are utilized with only small amounts of hardwood associated
with the production of dissolving grades of sulfite pulp. Both
magnesium and ammonia-based pulping operations are employed. In order
to facilitate the production of the high purity pulps required,
extensive washing and evaporation systems are used and often entail
two evaporator lines operating in series. Extensive bleaching
operations, frequently with six or more stages, are used "to purify the
cellulose. Consequently, large amounts of dissolved solids (including
BOD5_) are discharged from the bleaching operations as well as with
spent sulfite pulping liquors. Extensive use is made of jumpstage
countercurrent washing systems to minimize wastewater discharge. At
two mills, a system is used which enables the evaporation of the total
effluent from the caustic extraction stage, which has the highest BOD5_
loading discharged from the bleaching operation.
BPT effluent limitations are based on the grade of pulp produced,
including nitration, viscose, cellophane, and acetate grades. Data
gathered since the BPT program have been evaluated to verify the need
for effluent limitations by grade. However, insufficient data are
available to allow for presentation of raw waste load data by grade.
Complete data are lacking for half the mills.
Paperqrade Sulfite (Paperqrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Paperqrade
Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcateqories). Data are available for 17 mills
characteristic of this subcategory; available raw waste load data are
included in Table V-9. A sulfite cooking process is employed to
produce pulps from which writing, printing, business, and tissue
papers are made. At mills included in this subcategory, pulps are
produced using calcium, sodium, ammonia, and magnesium cooking bases.
Recovery systems employed in this subcategory range from no recovery
to the use of spent liquor evaporation systems in conjunction with
modern kraft type fluidized bed recovery furnaces and incinerators.
As shown in Table V-9, mills where recovery systems are not employed
have significantly higher raw waste flow and BOD5_ loadings than mills
where recovery is practiced. Two mills without recovery systems have
recently been closed leaving only one mill without an adequate
recovery system.
BPT effluent limitations were established for two separate papergrade
sulfite subcategories: drum wash and blow pit wash. Allowances were
provided for acid sulfite cooking of sulfite pulp and for mills with
barometric condensers. Therefore, available raw waste load data have
124
-------
TABLE V-8
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production
Mill No. (t/d)
046001 451
046002 557
046003(a) 620
04'6004(b)(c)
046005 (c)
046006(c)
Average
Flow
kl/kkg
200.3
289.4
290.6
190.3
357.3
210.3
269.6
(kgal/t)
(48.1)
(69.5)
(69.8)
(45.7)
(85.9)
(50.5)
(64.8)
BODS
kg/kkg
127.1
—
114.5
97.2
276.0
142.5
181.9
(lb/t)
(254.1)
(")
(228.9)
(194.4)
(552.0)
(285.0)
(363.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
—
—
11.2
39.6
—
141.0
141.0
(lb/t)
(")
(")
(22.3)
(79.2)
(")
(281.9)
(281.9)
(a)Primary effluent data was given, only flow is included in average.
(b)Raw waste loads include wastewater from a dissolving sulfite pulp mill
and a paper mill. Therefore, data not included in the average.
(c)Production claimed confidential.
125
-------
TABLE V-9
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
PO
CTi
Production Profile
Product
Process
Raw Waste Load
Flow
Mill No. Suifite t/d (%) Type Wash(a) Base(c) Condenser(d)
040001 (g)
040002 547
040006 (b) 131
040007(b) 135
040008 964
040009 566
040010 244
040011 284
040012(f) 270
040013 289
040014 146
040015 155
040016 437
040017 412
040018 359
i)40019(g)(b)
040020 671
Average
Ave age NH3 base
Ave age NH3 base
Ave age MgO base
Ave age Ca base
Ave age Ca base
Ave age of Mills
103
101
89
100
78
41
35
39
93
56
69
100
61
42
34
52
57
68
Corrug
Market
Market
Tissue
Tissue
Market
Market
Tissue
Market
Writing
Market
Glassine
Package
Writing
Thin
Writing
Printing
Printing
Writing
Laminating
Market
Writing
Printing
Market
Tissue
Tissue
Tissue
BP
BP
BP
BP
DR/BP
DR
BP
BP
DR
DR
BP
BP/DR
DR
BP
DR
DR
DR
N113
BS
Ca.Na
A, BS
NH3,A
NIB, A
NH3.A
MgO.BS
Ca,A
Ca,A
NH3.A
MgO.BS
Ca,A
Ca.BS
NH3.BS
Ca,A
Ca,A
N1I3.A
NH3.A
U
Ba,S
S
None
Ba,S
S
S
Ba,S
Vr
S
S
S
S
S
S
Vr
Ba
acid mills(b)
bisulfite
bisulfite
acid mills
acid mills
mills
mills
with drum wash
with S BPT BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
134.9
312.8
346.5
196.0
239.0
83.8
290.2
97.4
247.1
136.1
170.0
159.3
116.3
131.2
58.8
100.5
170.7
195.5
147.1
110.0
161.0
131.2
165.5
(32.4)
(75.0)
(83.1)
(47.0)
(57.4)
(20.1)
(69.7)
(23.4)
(59.4)
(32.7)
(40.8)
/ \
(38.2)
(27.9)
(31.5)
(14.1)
(24.1)
(41.0)
(47.0)
(35.3)
(26.4)
(38.7)
(31.5)
(39.7)
kg/kkg
68.7
84.1
—
421.3
—
48.9
27.9
45.0
58.5
41.4
109.4
109.3
97.1
74.2
44.0
36.3
66.7
47.4
89.0
45.2
70.7
74.2
62.9,
BOD5
TSS
(Ib/t) kR/kkg (Ib/t)
(137.3)
(168.2)
(--)
(842.5)
( — )
(97.7)
(55.8)
(89.9)
(117.0)
(82.8)
(218.7)
/ \
I )
(218.5)
(194.2)
(148.4)
(87.9)
(72.5)
(133.4)
(94.8)
(177.9)
(90.3)
(141.4)
(148.4)
(125.7)
("0
21.0 (42.0)
(--)
(— )
( — )
28.6 (57.1)
51.3 (102.5)
25.9 (51.8)
90.0 (180.0)
31.9 (63.7)
19.3 (38.6)
/ \
I — )
140.2 (280.3)
37.1 (74.1)
65.1 (130.2)
19.6 (39.1)
11.9 (23.7)
47.5 (94.9)
51.0 (101.9)
140.2 (280.3)
30.3 (60.4)
39.7 (79.4)
65.1 (130.2)
38.2 (76.4)
SBPT(e)
BF
B
BF
B
BF
B
BF
BF
F
BF
BF
BF
(a)BP - blow pit washing; DR - drum washing (as claimed at time of survey).
(b)Exuludes Mills 040006 and 040007, which have no recovery and have shut down pulping
operations. Also excludes mill 040019 because only a portion of raw waste load was reported.
(r)A - acid, BS - bisulfite, Ca - calcium, Na - sodium, NH3 - ammonia, MgO - magnesium oxide.
(d)S-sucface, Ba-barometrie, U-unknowii, Vr-vapor recompression.
(e)F-MiJls with SBPT flow; B-MLJls with £BPT BOD5.
(f)Yeast plant on-site.
(g)Production data held confidential.
-------
been reviewed with respect to the type of washing
and cooking liquor used.
system, condenser,
The trend in the industry has been to the use of drum washing systems.
Since 1976, drum washing (vacuum washing) systems have been installed
at two additional mills. Figures V-17 and V-18 present information on
the effect of washing processes on raw waste load BOD5_ and flow. Raw
waste flow and BODS^ data from five papergrade sulfite mills have been
excluded from the plots shown in Figures V-17 and V-18. Mill 040001
has been eliminated because pulp is not bleached at this mill. Mills
040007 and 040006 have been eliminated because recovery systems are
not employed at these mills. Mill 040010 has been eliminated because
of its significantly higher flow relative to other mills in the
subcategory. It should be noted also that BODS^ raw waste load at this
mill is the lowest in the subcategory. Mill 040019 has been
eliminated because only a portion of its raw waste load was reported.
No significant difference in either the raw waste BODf> or flow for
mills using blow pit washing compared to drum washing has been found.
As illustrated in Figures V-17 and V-18, the percentage of sulfite
pulp production relative to total production has been determined, to be
a more significant factor than the type of washing system employed.
Figure V-19 presents an equation, developed using a least squares fit
method, that relates raw waste flow to the percentage of sulfite pulp
production. The correlation coefficient squared (r2=0.91) reflects
the good statistical correlation of the regression.
Figure V-20 presents a plot of raw waste BOD5. versus the percentage of
sulfite pulp produced relative to total production. Information is
presented on the type of chemical base and cooking process. There is
no apparent correlation between BODS raw waste load and the cooking
process (acid or bisulfite) or cooking base (calcium, sodium, ammonia,
and magnesium) used.
Figure V-21 presents information on the effect of condenser type on
wastewater discharge. There is no apparent correlation between raw
waste flow and the type of condenser used.
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical.
Data
are available for two mills that
produce only groundwood-TMP pulp on-site. However, the number of TMP
installations employed at complex mills in the integrated
miscellaneous grouping has increased in recent years. All available
data on raw waste load characteristics resulting from
groundwood-thermo-mechanical pulping operations have been presented in
Table V-10. Included in the table are the data relating to TMP
production at an integrated miscellaneous mill where groundwood and
unbleached sulfite pulp are produced to manufacture newsprint and some
market pulp. The data for this mill reflects the BOD5. contribution
that would be expected from the production of newsprint from TMP pulp.
Groundwood-CMN Papers. Data are available and presented in Table V-ll
for six mills where groundwood pulp is produced on-site using either
stones or refiners. Average on-site pulp production is seventy-two
percent based on total mill production. Major products include
127
-------
I20(240H
100(200)-
80 ( 160)-
I—1 .0
r\3 c.
00 „
s1
o
oo
60(120).
40( 80)-
20( 40)-
0 (0)
20
FIGURE V-17
EFFECT OF WASHING PROCESS ON RAW WASTE BOD5
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
' T—
30
H70% RECOVERY
—i—
40
©
B 50% RECOVERY
O
WASHING PROCESS
©DRUM WASHING
Q8LOW PIT WASHING
50 60 70
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
80
—r~
90
100
-------
350 (84)
300 (72)
250(60)-
o
0>
en
jt
JC
t 200(48)
3
u.
bJ
150(36)
te
100(24)-
50 (12)
20
FIGURE V-18
EFFECT OF WASHING PROCESS ON RAW WASTE FLOW
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
Q
30
40
£3
50 60 70
PERCENT SyLFITg PULP ON SITE
WASHING PROCESS
O DRUM WASHING
El BLOW PIT WASHING
80
90
a
too
-------
300 (72)
250(60)-
c
o
- 200(48)-
co •*
o ^
je
I
O
<£
I
150(36)
100 (24)-
50(12)
10
RGURE V-19
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
y = .9llx I0-2x2-.485x+30.7
-T2 = 0.9I
X = CALCULATED POINTS
. * ACTUAL MILL DATA
20
30
—i—
40
—i—
50
—r—
60
—i—
70
~80~
90
too
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
-------
FIGURE V-20
o
00
to
I
I
EC
I25(250h
100 (200)-
75 (150)-
50(100*
25 (SO*
0 (0)
10
EFFECT OF COOKING PROCESS OH RAW WASTE BOD5
mPERGRADE SOLF8TE SUBCATEGORY
COOKING PROCESS
© ACID SULFITE
El BISULFITE
20
©C
QMqO
©C
QNH3
QMgO
COOKING BASE
C CALCIUM
No SODIUM
NH3 AMMONIA
MgO MAGNESIUM
©NH3
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
-------
FIGURE V-21
EFFECT OF CONDENSER TYPE ON RAW WASTE FLOW
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
400(96)n
350(84)-
300(72)-
c
o
C 250(60)-
cn
•v.
I
a:
200(48)-
150(36)-
100(24)-
50(12)-
0 (0)
10
20
TYPES OF CONDENSERS
© SURFACE
Q BAROMETRIC
A VAPOR RECOMP.
[U COMBINED SURFACE AND BAROMETIC
30
40 50 60
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
70
8O
A
90
100
-------
TABLE V-10
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
GROUNDWOOD-THERMO-MECHANICAL SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
co
CO
Pulp
Product Flow
Mill No. TMP % Other GWD % (t/d) Type kl/kkg (kgal/t)
070001 90 0
070002(a) 88 12
040003 (b)
Average
BPT - Raw Waste Load
155 Coarse, Uncoated 81.3 (19.5)
Printing
497 Newsprint 33.3 (8.0)
Newsprint -- (~~)
57.3 (13.8)
87.8 (21.1)
BODS TSS
kg/kkg
19.0
16.2
28.5
21.2
39.2
(Ib/t) kg/kkg
(38.0) 41.3
(32.3) 43.4
(57.0)
(42.4) 42.4
(78.4) 39.9
(lb/t)
(82.5)
(86.7)
C")
(84.6)
(79.8)
(a)Supplemental data submitted by mill for 3/79 - 7/79.
(b)Data for TMP portion of mill (supplemental data).
-------
TABLE V-ll
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
u>
Mill No.
052015
052016(a)
054004
054006(b)
054010
054015
Average
Furnish
GWD (%) (t/d) (t/d)
78.7 74 94
79.2 369 465
61.5 39 64
72.4
72.7 8 11
70.5 693 983
72.5
Product
Type
Newsp r int , Fine
Newsprint
Molded
Molded
Molded
Newsprint GWD
Specialties
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Flow
kl/kkg
99.5
46.6
94
109.2
121.6
118.7
108.6
99.0
(kgal/t)
(23.9)
(11.2)
(22.6)
(26.2)
(29.2)
(28.5)
(26.1)
(23.8)
BODS
kg/kkg
20.0
27.0
19.1
21.4
21.9
17.4
(lb/t)
(")
(40.0)
(53.9)
(38.2)
.(")
(42.7)
(43.7)
(34.8)
TSS
kg/kkg
—
103.6
56.4
--
47.3
69.1
48.5
(lb/t)
-------
newsprint, molded, and other course groundwood products and
specialties. Raw waste load characteristics are relatively constant
for all mills representative of this subcategory with the exception of
one mill (No. 052016) as presented in Table V-11. Average raw waste
loads for this subcategory are higher than those used in the
development of BPT limitations. Figures V-22 and V-23 present plots
of raw waste flow and BOD5_ versus the percentage of groundwood pulp
produced relative to total production. No correlation is evident for
either BOD5_ or flow relative to the percentage of groundwood pulp
used.
Groundwood-Fine Papers.
of this
Data are
subcategory.
available on eight mills
representative of this subcategory. Table V-12 presents available
data on flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw waste loadings. Printing grades of
paper, both coated and uncoated, are produced at these mills from
groundwood pulps produced on-site. Groundwood pulp relative to total
production varies from 31 to 82.5 percent and averages 47 percent.
The remainder of the furnish may be filler or coating pigments as well
as purchased softwood and, to a lesser extent, hardwood pulps used in
papermaking.
Raw waste flow and BOD5_ have been plotted versus the percentage of
groundwood pulp manufactured on-site relative to total production.
These plots are presented on Figures V-24 and V-25. No apparent
correlation exists between either BOD5_ or flow to percentage of
groundwood pulp manufactured.
Integrated Miscellaneous Mills. Available data on wastewater
discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loadings at all remaining mills
with on-site production of pulp(s) are tabulated in Table V-13. At
these mills, multiple pulping operations or miscellaneous pulping
processes not adequately described by integrated subcategory
definitions are employed. Information is also provided on the types
of pulp(s) produced and the various products manufactured on-site.
Deink. Flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw waste load data are available on 20
mills representative of this subcategory and are shown in Table V-14.
At these mills, printing grades of paper, tissue, or newsprint are
produced.
Raw waste flow and BOD5_ data have been evaluated to determine if the
type of product manufactured or the percentage of deinked pulp
relative to total production affects raw waste loadings. In Figures
V-26 and V-27 data on flow and BOD5_ are plotted relative to the
percentage of deink pulp produced on-site.
Based on this evaluation, it has been concluded that the deink
subcategory should be divided into three separate groupings: fine,
tissue, and newsprint. Generally deink mills where tissue is produced
exhibit the highest flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw waste loads, while mills
where newsprint is produced have the lowest raw waste loads. The
average raw waste loads for each of these product sectors is shown on
Table V-14.
135
-------
I30(3l.2)-i
120(28.8)-
£ 110(26.4)-
oo
o
o>
Q
UJ
i-
I
100(24.0)-
< 90(21.6)-
80(19.2)-
70 ( 16.8)
50
FIGURE V-22
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
—i—
55
—l—
60
65 70 75
PERCENT 6ROUNOWOOD PULP ON SITE
80
90
95
-------
CO
FIGURE V-23
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
35(70)
30(60)-
g 25(50).
i 20(40)-
Q
o
CD
Ul
t-
15(30)-
tc
10(20)-
5(10)
50
55
60
65 70 75
PERCENT GROUNOWOOO PULP ON SITE
80
85
90
95
-------
TABLE V-12
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Productioa Profile
Raw Waste Load
Mill No.
052003
052004
052005
052007
052008
052013(a)
052014
054014
Average
GWD
51.0
31.0
39.1
58.0
41.8
38.5
34.0
82.5
47.0
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Product
(t/d)
535
481
755
224
787
—
285
76
SBPT flow
^BPT BOD5
Type
Printing
Coated
Printing
Printing
Coated
Coated
Coated
Printing
Specialties
Flow
kl/kkg
87.8
65.8
55.4
96.6
54.5
69.9
54.5
61.2
68.2
91.0
64.2
66.7
(kgal/t)
(21.1)
(15.8)
(13.3)
(23.2)
(13.1)
(16.8)
(13.1)
(14.7)
(16.4)
(21.9)
(15.4)
(16.0)
BODS
kg/kkg
12.2
28.6
27.8
—
10.1
15.6
12.0
16.8
17.6
16.7
17.6
12.5
(lb/t)
(24.3)
(57.2)
(55.6)
(")
(20.1)
(31.2)
(24.0)
(33.6)
(35.1)
(33.3)
(35.1)
(24.9)
TSS — BPT
kg/kkg
61.0
79.2
56.7
—
56.0
41.4
36.9
46.6
54.0
52.5
54.0
48.8
(lb/t)
(122.0)
(158.4)
(113.3)
(")
(112.0)
(82.7)
(73.7)
(93.2)
(107.9)
(105.0)
(107.9)
(97.6)
(b)
BF
F
F
BF
BF
BF
F
(a)Production data held confidential.
(b)F-Mill with ^BPT flow; B-Mill with S8PT BOD5.
-------
oo
vo
FIGURE V-24
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
i iu izb.ij-
100(24.0)-
o 90(21.6)-
4-
\
0
Ch
J£
O»
J£
Jf,
\
JC
> 80(19.2)-
u.
UJ
VI
S
1 70(16.8)-
o:
60 (14.4)-
50(12.0)-
2
•
•
• - •'
•
••••••••. . . - . , . . - «
e
• «
1 1 1 ~i r~ i I i
0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
PERCENT 6ROUNOWOOD PULP ON SITE
-------
FIGURE V-25
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
30(60)i
25(50)-
20(40)-
O ^
I 15(30)
mi
a
o
at
ui
H
u>
10(20)-
5(10)-
0(0)
20
30
—i—
40
50 60 7O
PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
80
—I—
90
100
-------
TABLE V-13
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
INTEGRATED MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Raw Waste Load
Production Profile (t/d)
Mill No.
1)10010
010011
010012
010013
010014
010015
010022
010026
010027(a)
010039
010050
010056
01005'J
015010
030003
030007
030008
03001 1
031)014
030016
0300 17 (a)
030019
030021
030025
030029 (a)
030035
030036
030038
030040
030041
030043(a)
030044
030050
030053
030054(a)
030055(a)
030050
040003
040004
040005
A
41K
3K
209K
101K
137K
232K
140K
135K
—
6I5K
,i_
638K
__
20K
25 IK
494
098
168K
—
..
185K
164K
92K
__
721.
--
B
798UK
156U
335UK
751UK
1,1931)
264U
505UK
~~
_'_
__
310U
633UK
416UK
169K
— —
__
--
—
..
119KU
—
—
967UK
413KU
—
--
C
903USK
86511
336LK
—
—
682U
1.007U
617U
750U
1.590USK
934US
259S
975IJS
528KU
406K
1.I37UK
— —
•
1.050K
1,410UK
__
—
670K
1 ,549KS
I68K
__
__
--
D
..
—
—
—
—
—
—
--_
__
23K
878W
—
—
39 4K
527K
100KG
292E
439K
--
431K
140K
854K
._
1.019K
—
I85L
Flow
E F U Total kl/kk£
112 1,854
454 — - 1,478
9 889
852
1,330
1,178
1,146
208K 33K . 881
326 — — 943
— — - 1,590
934
920
2,163
1,161
245 -- 1,087
645
713 11K 1,420
1,137
226 — -- 820
593 -- — 1,583
607
454 — . ~ 1,504
1,410
101K — 836
49K — 353
1,616
356 -- -- 1,323
1,600
420LOG -- — 493
185
1731.1' — 173
131.6
57.9
123.6
109.5
86.6
42.0
60.8
179.4
110.7
BODS
(k£al/t) kg/kkg_ ..(Ib/t)
(31.6)
(13.9)
(29.7)
(26.3)
(20.8)
(10.1)
(14.6)
(43.1)
15.3
10.5
18.6
22.0
19.6
19.6
38.3
52.3
(26.6) 34.5
(30.6)
(21.0)
(37.2)
(43.9)
(39.1)
(39.2)
(76.5)
(104.5)
(68.9)
TSS
._ks/kkS_
9.4
22.2
12.4
59.1
17.2
27.3
_Clb/0_
(18.8)
(44.4)
(24.8)
(118.1)
(34.3)
(54.6)
Unknown
60.3
(120.5)
Unknown
73.3 (17.6)
57.4
104.9
72.9
138.2
173.2
156.9
131.1
254.4
88.3
97.4
245 . 2
83.7
N/A
160.3
128.6
-138.6
124.1
109.5
147.4
160.7
102.0
92.8
191.1
50.0
(13.8)
(25.2)
(17.5)
(33.2)
(41.6)
(37.7)
(31.5)
(61.1)
(21.2)
(23.4)
(58.9)
(20.1)
N/A
(38.5)
(30.9)
(33.3)
32.7 (65.4) ' 21.7 (43.4)
15.5
50.7
18.9
36.2
38.4
(31.0)
(101.4)
(37.7)
(72.3)
(76.7)
32.0 (63.9)
25.2 (50.3)
65.8 (131.5)
27.6
30.5
43.2
32.5
N/A'
27.9
24.7
19.5
(29.8) 35.9
(26.3) 28.5
(35.4est)47.8
(38.6)
(24.5)
(22.3)
(45.9)
(12.0)
30.6
28.8
39.6
98.7
58.8
(55.1)
(60.9)
(86.3)
(65.0)
N/A
(55.7)
(49.4)
(39.0)
(71.7)
(57.0)
(95.5)
(61.1)
(57.5)
(79.1)
(197.3)
(117.5)
29.5
55.0
20.2
229.0
8.3
76.3
52.3
57.5
53.2
28.5
66.7
74.4
N/A
N/A
59.2
24.4
86.6
43.1
113.1
43.4
26.3
94.3
12.2
17.7
(58.9)
(110.0)
(40.4)
(458.0)
(16.5)
(152.5)
(104.6)
(115.0)
(106.4)
(57.0)
(133.4)
(148.8)
N/A
N/A
(118.3)
(48.8)
'(173.2)
(86.1)
(226.2)
(86.8)
(52.5)
(188.6)
(24.3)
(35.4)
-------
TABU! V-1J (Coiilinm-d)
Wuslc Load
ro
Mill Nu. A
052000
Oh2009(a)
0520IO(a)
052011
052017 27G
054001
054002 112C
054003
054004(a)
054005 54K
054008
054009
054011
054012(i.)
054013
054016 290
054017U)
ObOOOI(a)
060002
060003 207H
080010
OHOOI l(aj
0800 12 (a)
080013(a)
0800 14 (a)
0800 15 (a)
0800 16 (a)
080020
080023
080025 (a)
080052
080054
085003
105006
105046
105063
105064
150001
I500I2U)
150014 79T
150015 5N
1500 16 (a)
150017 2T
150018 85T
150020 8N
Production I'rolile (t/d)
' "ll " C~" IT ~""E F ~ G """ Total
78GK 50G — ~ — 128
29K 517(3 — — — 546
— 27
3G 3
112
118GK 919GK -- — 1,037
99GK 1.412GKX — — 1,565
495GP -- — — 495
256GP — -- — 37GP 293
575 17 GSO 592
5R IOP — — 30 45
29 -- 1.201G 45 G+l, — 1,565
400MK — — -- 400
207
13GT -.- — -- 13
11T 11
-j- — 36TP — — — 36
;
-!- — 60PC -:- — 3P 63
53T — — — 53
30P -- -- — — 3
7.5
6T 6
32N 32
2 IT 21
150SN — — — — . 150
79
5
2
85
123N — — — 131
Flow BOU5
M/"i!
-------
TABLE V-13 (Continued)
ProdiicUmi Profjle ll/'O
Mill No. . A .B "... . C »
150026 1HT
140001(a)
Column Headings
'A. Market I'ulp
B. Packaging and Converting Products
C Board and Construction Products
I). Printing Writing and Related Papers
E. Newsprint
f. Sanitary Tissue
li. Other - Includes specialty, thin, synthetic
non-wood (other than
construction, and mol
flow
Raw Waste Load
~ """ "BODS" "
TSS
E t
;s
synthetic,
on writing),
papers .
G Total kl/KKg_ iliKi!1.
18 74.5 (17.
9) .... No |)ata 67.6 (135.2)
No Data
Unknown
Furnish .Designations-
G. Groundwood
K. Kraft, bleached
U. Kraft, unbleached
S. Semi-Chemical
T. Cotton
R. Recycled Pulp (Wastepaper)
N. Non-wood (Other than cotton, includes syntheses)
M. Chemi -Mechanical
L. Sulfite
P. Greater than 50% purchased pulp
0. Thernio-Mechanical
X. Soda
V. Deinked
CO
(a)Production data held coiitidential.
-------
TABLE V-14
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Mill No. Deink(b)
Deink Fine
140005 188
140007 155
140008 77
140017(f)
140019 43
Average
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Deink Tissue
140010(f)
140029 (e) 20
140030 60
140011(f)
140014(f)
140015 (g)
140018 36
140021 170
140022 56
140024(f)
140025 92
140028 (f)
Average
Furnish (t/d)
Purch Purch
%(c) WP Pulp Broke 1
51 — 166 19
57 55 54 41
62 9 10 29
60 — 8 18
SBPT flow
SBPT BODS
73 ~ 6
40 30 30
97 „ „ l
87 — — 20
48 ~ 26 6
85 -- 4 11
Average (excluding 140018 & 140030)
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT flow
Average of Mills with SBPT flow (excluding' 140018
Average of Mills with SBPT BODS (excluding 140018
Deink Newsprint
140002(f)(g)
140003C£)Cg)
140013Cf)(g)
Average
Product
Flow
;t/d) Type kl/kkz '
379 Unctd Print
Writing
349 Ctd & TJnctd
Printing
128 Unctd Print
Writing
Ctd Print
65 Unct Print
San Tissue
22 San Tissue
100 San Tissue
San Tissue
San Tissue
Tissue
36 Ind Wrap, Tissue
150 San Tissue
50 San Tissue
San Tissue
100 San Tissue
San Tissue
& 140030)
& 140030)
99.9
53.7
114.5
125.7
44.5
87.7
101.4
66.0
87.7
117.8
74.9
90.3
90.3
139.5
25.4
205.3
166.5
202.8
62.4
155.7
121.0
136.7
101.4
68.7
81.2
119.0
67.6
(kgal/t)
(24.0)
(12.9)
(27.5)
(30.2)
(10.7)
(21.1)
(24.4)
(15.9)
(21.1)
(28.3)
(18.0)
(21.7)
(21.7)
(33.5)
(6.1)
(49.3)
(40.0)
(48.7)
(15.0)
(37.4)
(29.1)
(32.8)
(24.4)
(16.5)
(19.5)
(28.6)
(16.2)
Raw
Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
17.4
55.0
72.8
20.4
20.9
37.3
90.0
31.1
37.3
55.8
56.7
104.3
73.2
....
80.3
148.3
35.9
112.6 •
83.4
.87.2
90.0
67.5
71.1
61.3
15.9
(Ib/t)
(34.8)
(110.0)
(145.5)
(40.7)
(41.8)
(74.6)
(180.0)
(62.2)
(74.6)
(111.6)
(113.4)
(208.5)
(146.3)
/ *
(160.5)
(296.5)
(71.8)
(225.1)
(166.7)
(174.3)
(180.0)
(135.0)
(142.2)
(122.6)
(31.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
197.3
162.1
189.0
216.0
106.0
174.1
202.5
155.1
174.1
133.9
166.6
292.1
225.8
247.3
320.8
161.6
375.2
240.4
251.0
202.5
211.5
226.5
192.2
96.7
(Ib/t)
(394.6)
(324.1)
(377.9)
(432.0)
(211.9)
(348.1)
(405.0)
(310.2)
(348.1)
(267.7)
(333.2)
(584.2)
(451.5)
, ,
(494.5)
(.")
(641.6)
(323.2)
(750.3)
(480.8)
(501.9)
(405.0)
(423.0)
(453.0)
(384.2)
(193.5)
SBPT
(a;
BF
BF
B
B
BF
B
BF
F
BF
F
.B
BF
(a)F - Mill with SBPT flow.
B - Mill with SBPT BODS.
(bJWastepaper to deink process.
P««'»«Se of deink Pulp used calculated by subtracting wastepaper, purchased pulp, and purchased broke from final
daily production, assuming this is equal to the amount of deink pulp utilized, then dividing by the final daily pro-
(d)Excludes Mills 140018 and 140030. Mill 140018 produces a coarse grade and recirculates approximately 50% of their
treated effluent; Mill 140030 operates with very low deink use.
(e)Self-contained; therefore excluded from average.
ff)Production data held confidential.
^Confidentiality claim.
144
-------
FIGURE V-26
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT DEINK PULP PRODUCED
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
'
200(48.0)-
o 160(38.4)-
75
cr
o>
ja
7 120(28.8)-
u.
m
fc
1
| 80 ( 19.2)
IE
40 ( 9.6)
0 (0
2
PRODUCT TYPE
O DEINK - FINE
A DEINK - TISSUE
/& 1L
A
A
• •
0
A ©
o
A A
A
0
0
V~ 30 «0 i 60 TO 80 90 .00
PERCENT DEtNK PULP USED
-------
FIGURE V-27
RAW WASTE BODS VERS.US DEINK PULP PRODUCED
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
CTl
150(300)
125 (250)
1 100(200)
V.
o>
J£
jt
X.
CP
J£
i 75(150)-
s1
o
-------
No apparent correlation exists between flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads
as a function of the percentage of deinked pulp produced on-site.
Tissue from Wastepaper.
representative of this
Data are
subcategory.
available
Principal
for 21
products
mills
include
industrial tissue, sanitary tissue, industrial packaging, wadding, and
packaging and wrapping tissue. At these mills, mixed wastepaper is
generally processed with little preparation, except for screening and
cleaning prior to paper production on the, papermachine.
Table V-15 presents available data on wastewater discharge and BOD5_
and TSS raw waste loadings. There are nine mills where industrial
grades and 12 where sanitary grades of tissue are made. There are no
significant differences in raw waste loadings for industrial grade
mills compared to sanitary tissue mills.
Paperboard from Wastepaper. Data are available for 146 mills
representative of this subcategory, which is the largest in terms of
number of mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. Raw
waste load data are presented in Table V-16. Flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw
waste loadings are low compared to other industry subcategories. Mill
sizes range from 0.5 to 871 kkg/day (0.6 to 960 tons/day), averaging
133 kkg/day (142 tons/day). Products made at mills in this
subcategory include linerboard, corrugated board, chip and filler,
folding boxboard, set-up box, gypsum board, and other construction
boards, packaging materials, and automotive boards. At most mills,
three or more types of products are produced on-site.
Attempts have been made to determine if product mix has any affect on
raw waste load characteristics. Two types of multiple regression
analyses with one dependent variable have been performed on the raw
waste load data presented in Table V-16. No significant correlation
has been found to exist between raw waste levels and product type.
At 19 mills, no discharge of wastewater is practiced; these tend to be
smaller mills, less than 140 kkg/day (210 tons/day), with slow-speed
machines. Every type of product is being produced at non-discharging
mills. Table V-17 presents a summary of the method used in handling
wastewater at each of the self-contained (zero discharge) mills.
Wastepaper-Molded Products. Table V-18 presents available data on
wastewater discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loadings for 15 mills
representative of this subcategory. A variety of molded products are
produced at these mills including food packs such as meat display
trays, egg cartons, and other containers of special design and items
such as molded sewer pipe and flower pots. These mills range in size
from 2.5 kkg/day (2.8 tons/day) up to 168.7 kkg/day (186 tons/day) and
have an average size of 44.0 kkg/day (48.6 tons/day). While these
operations utilize primarily a wastepaper furnish, some grades also
incorporate filler and sizing materials. Molding operations do not
utilize Fourdrinier or cylinder papermachines but employ forming
machines on which several vacuum pick-up forming dies are located.
147
-------
TABLE V-15
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production
Mill No. (t/d)
Industrial Tissue
090002 19.5
085004 47.0
085006 (a)
090006(c) 10.5
100005 15.2
i nnoi i ii9
100012(c) 7.0
100015 5.5
100001 (a)
Average w/o Self-
Contained Mills
Sanitary Tissue
090004 20.0
090010(a)
1AAAAO 7 C
100003 83.0
100004 15.0
100007 20.0
i nnnnft i A n
100013 20.0
100016 7.3
105007(c) 11.9
090014 40.7
1000l4(c) 20.7
Average w/o Self-
Contained Mills
Overall Average w/o
Self-Contained Mills
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills
with SBPT flow
Average of Mills
with SBPT BOD5
Flow
kl/kkg
72.4
141.5
137.8
29.1
62.0
35.4
84.5
80.4
59.6
76.7
51.6
(kgal/t)
(17.4)
(34.0)
(33.1)
(7.0)
(14.9)
(8.5)
(20.3)
(19.3)
(14.3)
(18.4)
(12.4)
BODS
kg/kkg
w
22.4
37.6
—
14.2
CA"! -C AA-~
(lb/t)
(")
(44.7)
(75.1)
( — )
(28.4)
-_ - j
TSS
kg/kkg
— —
106.4
103.3
46.7
38.0
(lb/t)
(")
(212.8)
(206.5)
(93.3)
(76.0)
^BPT(b)
F
BF
6.5
20.2
_ —
18.8
O 1 -C
. • y
(13.0)
(40.3)
(")
(37.6)
. . j
8.7 (17.3)
4- ' -J
13.3
61.5
__
59.4
9.2
(26.5)
(123.0)
(--)
(118.7)
(18.4)
BF
F
F
BF
O 1 -C MA**-** * A
156.1
237.7
22.1
138.2
9.2
93.9
87.6
104.8
67.8
88.6
(37.5)
(57.0)
(5.3)
(33.2)
(2.2)
(22.5)
(21.0)
(25.2)
(16.3)
(21.3)
9.3 (18.6)
53.5
—
22.0
—
22.5
21.4
14.5
12.1
9.7
(107.0)
( — )
(44.0)
( — )
(44.9)
(42.9)
(29.0)
(24.1)
(19.3)
88.9
128.0
—
68.2
—
70.7
66.1
110.5
30.0
37.4
(177.8)
(255.9)
( — )
(136.3)
(--)
(141.4)
(132.2)
(221.0)
(59.9)
(74.7)
B
(a)Production data held confidential.
(b)F-Mill with SBPT flow; B-Mill with SBPT BOD5.
(c)Extensive wastewater recycle performed; data not included in ^BPT averages.
148
-------
TABLE V-16
SUMMARY RAW 'WASTE LOAD DATA
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Production
Mill
No.
110001
110002
110003(c)
110004
110005
110006
1 10007
110008
110009
110010
110011
110012
110013
110014
110015
110016
110017
1 10018
110019
110020
110022
110023
110024
110025
1 10026
110028
110029
110030
110031
110032
110033
110034
110035
110036
110037
110038
110039(c)
110040(c)
110041
110043
110044
110045
110046
110047
110048
110049(0
110050
110051
110052
110053
110054
110055
110056
110057(c)
110058(c)
110059(c)
110060(c)
110061(c)
110062
110064
110065
110066
A
300
.
-
-
-
„
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
250
.
-
-
-
_
-
- •
-
-
_-
90
-
-
C
240
45
16
-
_
94
-
14
-
(410
-
-
-
D
170
.
-
130
127
170
58
-
-
35
208
C+D)
-
-
-
- - - -
18
-
-
-
.
45
„
-
-
-
-
96
-
-
-
-
-
88
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
138
223
408
83
-
126
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
97
-
-
-
90
-
„
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
16
130
108
100
-
100
-
32
40
-
-
-
9
23
-
.
-
.
-
-
-
74
-
-
150
61
89
92
-
30
-
175
-
70
-
234
146
-
300
-
Profile (t/d)
E F
_
-
178
16
-
14
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
25
23
-
-
-
-
„
133
-
150
-
-
165
27
-
57
-
-
-
-
25
-
100
-
-
-
95
-
-
G
_
- •
-
-
-
_
- •
10
122
-
-
-
79
49
84
36
54
17
-
24
-
150
-
-
-
-
.
-
44
-
20
3
-
- •
-
.
36
-
53
5
9
-
-
-
(153 A+B+C)
10
-
.
-
-
-
- '
~
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
55
89
.
-
-
-
3
-
76
120
-
4
11
-
-
Total
960
45
178
162
127
170
72
94
10
171
208
410
90
79
49
84
79
86
40
138
337
453
150
83
135
126
150
74
96
165
221
61
166
95
104
160
108
300
36
270
53
271
195
95
300
97
153
65
96
11
76
120
kl/kkg
28.3
0.4
20.8
15.8
—
—
16.2
—
—
17.9
—
—
3.3
Raw Waste Load
Flow BODS
(kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
(6.8) 12.5 (25.0)
(0.1) 2.0 (3.9)
(5.0) - (— )
(3.8) 13.0 (25.9)
(--) " (--)
(--) — C--)
(3.9) 20.3 (40.6)
(--) - (")
(--) - (")
(4.3) '7.3 (14..6)
(--) — (--)
(--) " (")
(0.8) 13.2 (26.4)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
19.3 (38.5)
10.8 (21.5)
(--)
12.1 (24.2)
(--)
(--)
6.4 (12.8)
(--)
(--)
11.1 (22.2)
(--)
(-)
11.1 (22.2)
SBPT(a)
F
FB
F
F
F
FB
F'
Self-Contained
Self-Contained —
2.5
—
—
76.2
--
4.2
6.2
0.8
9.6
5.0
7.1
—
(0.6) - (-)
(") - (")
(--) - (")
(18.3) 14.1 (28.2)
(--) - (")
(1.0) 3.2 (6.3)
(1.5) 11.0 (21.9)
(0.2) 0.6 (1.2)
(2.3) 7.5 C14.9)
(1.2) -- (--)
(1.7) -- (-)
(--) -- (--)
(--)
(--)
( — )
29.8 (59.6)
(")
2.3 (A. 5)
2.4 (4.7)
1.3 (2.6)
8.8 (17.5)
5.1 (10.2)
(--)
(— )
F
FB
FB
FB
FB
F
F
----- — Self-Contained
18.7
8.3
(-- ) ~ (--)
(4.5) 13.0 (26.0)
(2.0) 3.7 (7.3)
(--)
10.7 (21.4)
1.3 (2.6)
F
FB
Self-Contained
40.8
31.2
25.0
35.8
18.7
(9.8) 12.5 (24.9)
(7.5) 15.4 (30.8)
(6.0) 9.7 (19.4)
(8.6) 5.2 (10.4)
(4.5) • 1.0 (1.9)
13.9 (27.8)
27.2 (54.3)
7.9 (15.7)
4.1 (8.1)
1.1 (2.2)
FB
B
FB
Self-Contained
30.0
—
20.0
—
2.9
—
—
25.4
12.9
—
14.6
—
30.4
—
42.0
—
31.2
—
(7.2) 1.0 (2.0)
C--) -- (--)
(4.8) 6.5 (13.0)
(--) " (")
(0.7) 5.4 (10.7)
(--) ~ (")
(--) — (--)
(6.1) 9.1 (18.1)
(3.1) 8.1 (16.2)
(--) - (--)
(3.5) 16.4 (32.7)
(--) -- (--}
(7.3) 48.8 (97'.6)
(--) -- (--)
(10.1) 16.5 (32.9)
(--) - (--)
(7.5) . 9.1 (18.1)
(--) - (")
39.3 (78.5)
(--)
2.1 (4.1)
(--)
2.8 (5.6)
(--)
(--)
5.0 (10.0)
2.8 (5.5)
(--)
11.8 (23.5)
(--)
47.7 (95.3)
(--)
26.2 (52.3)
(— )
8.6 (17.2)
(--)
FB
FB
FB
FB
FB
F
B
Self-Contained
—
5.4
(— ) — . ( — )
' (1.3) 7.7 (15.3)
( — )
9.8 (19.6)
FB
149
-------
TABIE V-16 (Continued)
Production Profile (t/d)
Mill
Ho. A B
110067
110068
110069
110070
110071
110072
110073 - 150
110074
110075
110076
110077
110078
110079
110081
110082
110083(c)
110084
110085
110086
110087
110088
110089
110090
110091
110092
110093
110094
110095(c)'
1 10096 (c)
110097 I
110098 40
110099 - 282
110100
110101
110102
110103(c)
110104(c)
110105(c)
110106
110107
110108
110110(c)
HOlll(c)
iioii3(c)
110114
110115 - 6
110116
110117
110119
110120
110121 - 74
110122(c)
110123(c)
110124 27
110125
110126
110127(c)
110128(c)
110129
110130(c)
Flow
C
_
_
_
-
.
_
-
-
_
-
-
_
-
60
45
..
68
115
-
.
54
24
49
.
93
5
-
61
-
-
-
-
..
-
200
_
.
_
30
101
_
.
14
D E
_ _
_
134
68
_ _
.
-
-
-
-
_
-
40 30
_
(102 D+E)
85
442
43
35
3 20
36 30
200
91
.
-
54 8
108
-
-
50
-
(114 D+E)
90
136
-
.
6 3
.
_
96
-
6 24
195
76
F G Total
58
437
-
-
58
152
-
63
68
99
175
63
61
_
105
52
_
-
.
-
_
.
-
99
112
21
-
-
198
-
192 70 (d)
-
. -
-
-
27
70
54
12
-
-
69
-
-
58
437
134
68
58
152
150
63
68
99
175
63
61
60
115
105
222
200
442
43
35
77
90
200
140
99
206
128
390
61
198
50
262
114
90
136
206
27
79
54
42
170
128
99
195
90
kl/kkg
«
30.8
. 4.1
--
34.6
(kgal/t)
(--)
("-)
(7.4)
(1.0)
(--)
(8.3)
Raw Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
--
7.4
--
--
10.4
(Ib/t)
(-)
(--)
(14.8)
( — )
(--)
(20.8)
TSS
kg/kkg
—
—
16.5
—
--
26.6
(Ib/t)
(--)
("")
(33.0)
( — )
(""")
(53.2)
£BPT(a
B
F
B
.... — --Self-Contained
—
8.3
4.1
—
2.5
11.2
( — )
(2.0)
(1.0)
(--)
(0.6)
(2.7)
--
—
5.1
--
--
( — )
( — )
(10.2)
( — )
( — )
(— )
--
—
2.5
—
—
6.9
( — 1
( — )
(4.9)
(--)
( — )
(13.7)
F
FB
F
F
27.9
15.8
15.0
27.5
27.1
—
11.7
13.3
1.2
29.6
«
12.5
- —
15.8
13.7
8.7
12.9
--
--
—
--
1.2
—
(6.7)
(3.8)
(3.6)
(6.6)
(6.5)
C— )
(2.8)
(3.2)
(0.3)
(7.1)
("•)
(3.0)
(--)
(3.8)
(3.3)
(2.1)
(3.1)
(-")
(--)
(--)
(--)
(0.3)
( — )
8.9
3.2
10.2
67.5
—
—
11.3
8.0
3.8
—
—
21.7
--
10.3
—
—
—
—
—
—
--
1.6
—
(17.8)
(6.4)
(20.3)
(135.0)
( — )
( — )
(22.6)
(15.9)
(7.5)
( — )
( — )
(43.3)
(--)
(20.5)
( — )
( — )
( — )
( — )
( — )
( — )
(--)
(3.1)
( — )
10.8
4.6
15.8
16.9
—
—
7.5
8.9
2.2
28.0
--
4.0
--
2.1
—
1.4
—
--
—
-—
--
.1
—
(21.5)
(9.1)
(31.5)
(33.7)
( — )
(--)
(14.9)
(17.8)
(4.3)
(55.9)
( — )
(7.9)
( "* ~ )
(4.2)
( — )
(2.8)
( — )
( — )
( — )
( — )
(~~)
(.2)
( — )
FB
FB
FB
F
F
F
FB
FB
F
F
FB
F
F
F
FB
— Self-Contained
--
9.6
17.1
15.8
6.7
--
(--)
(2.3)
(4.1)
(3.8)
(1.6)
( — )
--
11.2
3.6
5.1
2.5
—
(--)
(22.4)
(7.2)
(10.1)
(5.0)
( — )
--
13.3
4.2
34.0
0.1
—
\~" )
(26.5)
(8.4)
(68.0)
(0.2)
( — )
FB
FB
FB
FB
— Self-Contained
5.4
14.6
27.9
10.8
7.1
—
18.3
45.4
«
23.3
52.0
—
—
6.7
(1.3)
(3.5)
(6.7)
(2.6)
(1.7)
(--)
(4.4)
(10.9)
( — )
(5.6)
(12.5)
( — )
(")
(1.6)
4.4
«
6.1
7.5
1.2
—
11.0
12.8
—
0.8
12.5
—
—
—
(8.7)
( — )
(12.1)
(15.0)
(2.4)
( — )
(22.0)
(25.5)
( — )
(1.5)
(25.0)
( — )
( — )
(--)
3.4
--
2.8
1.5
1.5
—
9.4
32.6
—
0.5
19.5
--
—
--
(6.7)
( — )
(5.5)
(3.0)
(2.93
(--)
(18.8)
(65.2)
( — )
(0.9)
(39.0)
(•-)
(--)
(--)
FB
F
FB
FB
FB
FB
FB
F
150
-------
TABLE V-16 (Continued)
Production Profile (t/d)
Mill
So. A B C D E F G
110131(c)
110133(c)
110134 38
110135(c)
110138 - - 66 41 - 11
110139 23 87
110140 - - - - - 220
110141 20 - 49 30 - - 5
110142 61 - - 12-16 122
110143 - - 85 - - - 123
110144 * 7 13 42 - -
1 tmA£ -.MTTT ITAQ PT nQPH— — — — — — — — — .
110146 23 20
110147 49 15
110148 115
110149 - 3 - - - - -
110150 25 35
110151 20 28 - - • -
110152 - - (115 C+D+E)
150019 - ' - - - - 1
085002 ------ 35
085009 - - - - - - 90
Average with Self-Contained Mills
Average without Self-Contaiued Mills
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills gBPT flow (without Self-Contained
Average of Mills SBPT BOD5 (without Self-Contained
A Linerboard
B Corrugating
C Chip & Filler Board
D Folding Board
E Set-up Board
F Gypsum Wallboard
G Other Board Products
Raw Waste Load
Flow
Total
38
118
110
220
104
211
208
62
43
64
115
3
60
48
115
1
90
mills)
oflls)
fcl/kkg
(kgal/t)
(->
BODS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
(")
TSS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
SBPT(a
(— ) — (— ) — (— )
• --
10.0
20.0
( — )
(2.4)
(4.8)
—
4.9
—
(--)
(9.8)
( — )
—
4.9
—
( — )
(9.7)
( — )
FB
F
— Self-Contained
—
—
( — )
(— )
—
—
(--)
(--)
—
--
( — )
(")
— _ -. -Self-Contained — :
•--
—
1.7
—
— ,
12.9
20.0
37.1
14.1
17.6
30.0
12.8
15.4
(— )
(— )
(0.4)
( — )
( — )
(3.1)
(4.8)
• (8.9)
(3.4)
(4.2)
(7.2)
(3.1)
(3.7)
—
—
—
—
—
4.3
( — )
( — )
(--)
( — )
( — )
(8.6)
—
. —
' —
—
—
6.4
( — )
( — )
(--)
( — )
( — )
(12.8)
(--) — ( — )
8.9 (17.7)
7.6
10.0
11.3
8.8
6.0
(15.1)
(20.0)
(22.5)
(17.5)
(11.9)
12.6
8.3
10.7
11.0
7.9
7.7
(25.2)
(16.5)
(21.4)
(21.9)
(15.7)
(15.3)
F
FB
F
B
(a)F-Mills SBPT flow; B-Mills with SBPT BOD5.
(b)Production from 2 mills
(c)Production data held confidential.
151
-------
TABLE V-17
METHODS OF HANDLING WASTEWATER AT
SELF-CONTAINED PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER MILLS
Mill
Number
110007
110015
110016
110018
110026
110033
110037
110044
110064
110073
110081
110086
110107
110116
110135
110141
110142
110146
085002
Method of Handling Wastewater
Rotating screen, 2 clarifiers, partial reuse of clarified
wastewater, remainder to evaporation pond.
Savealls and screening of wastewater with total recycle.
Savealls with total recycle.
Settling basin with total recycle.
Savealls with total recycle.
Savealls with total recycle.
Screening, clarifier, and settling basin with total recycle.'
Saveall with partial recycle to process, primary clarifier
treats remaining wastewater with more recycle, remaining
wastewater (= 2%) treated by ASB with settling basin and
evaporation.
Saveall with total recycle.
Screen with total recycle. Emergency holding pond and
recycle also available.
Saveall with total recycle. Emergency overflow to city
sewer.
Screens, clarifier, settling basins, and clarifier with
total recycle.
Clarifier with total recycle.
Unknown .
Clarifier with total recycle.
Clarifier with partial recycle, remainder flows to spray
irrigation system.
Saveall with total recycle. Can discharge to POTW when
required .
Saveall with total recycle.
Settling basins and sand filters with total recycle.
Sludge
Disposal
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Reused
Reused
Unknown
Landfill
Unknown
Landfill
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Reused
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
152
-------
TABLE V-18
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
Mill No.
150002 (a)
150004
150005 (a)
150006
150007 (b)
150009 (a) (b)
150010 (a)
en 150011 (b)
CO
150021
150022
150023
150024
150025
150028
150030
Furnish
WP
Mixed WP
WP
GWD & Pulp
Substitute
Wastepaper
News & GWD
Substitute
News
News & Blank
Purch GWD & K
News, GWD,
Peat Moss
Box Cuttings
GWD Substitute
GWD, BK
9% Wastepaper
K, GWD, 55%
Wastepaper
News
Kfiwn Siihsi-i t-iit-
, unXJ OUUo 1* -L L-ULi
News
Average without Self-Contained
Average (Recycle Mills) without
(t/d)
20.0
2.8
5.5
43.7
60.0
16.6
61.8
186.0
93.4
26.5
no
• \J
3.0
Mill
Product
Type(s)
Pipe & Conduit
Egg Cartons
Containers
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Egg Cartons &
Trays
Molded Products
& Peat Moss
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Flow
kl/kkg
20.4
74.5
25.0
46.2
89.5
18.7
31.2
71.2
172.8
54.5
86.6
84.9
109.9
(kgal/t)
(4.9)
(17.9)
(6.0)
(11.1)
(21.5)
(4.5)
(7.5)
(17.1)
(41.5)
(13.1)
(20.8)
(20.4)
(26.4)
BODS
kg/kkg
4.6
—
2.35
10.35
15.9
—
9.4
10.5
5.2
7.6
8.6
5.1
0.2
(lb/t)
(9.2)
( — )
(4.7)
(20.7)
(31.7)
( — )
(18.8)
(20.9)
(10.4)
(15.2)
(17.2)
(10.2)
(0.4)
TSS
kg/kkg
20.1
--
8.4
18.9
23.7
0.5
15.0
23.4
11.2
16.8
10.9
12.8
0.9
(lb/t)
(40.1)
( — )
(16.7)
(37.7)
(47.3)
(1-0)
(30,0)
(46,7)
(22.3)
(33.6)
(21.7)
(25.6)
(1.8)
in _._,,._ i>f.*-o c t f 4- • j
Molded Products
Self-Contained Mill
Average (Non-Recycle Mills) without Self-
•Contained Mill
68.1
23.8
87.8
(16.4)
(5.7)
(21.1)
7.3
5.5
7.9
(14.5)
(10.9)
(15.8)
13.6
11.0
14.8
(27.0)
(22.0)
(29.6)
(a)Recycle Mills
(b)Production data held confidential.
-------
The individual products are formed in one operation, pressed, and then
dried.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt. Data are available for 57. mills
representative of this subcategory. At these mills, a variety of
construction papers are produced, including roofing felt and shingles
for the building trade. Both saturated and unsaturated papers are
produced at mills in this subcategory. Generally, the asphalt
saturation process utilizes a closed-cycle application system;
saturating operations are also done at off-site converting plants.
A mixed wastepaper furnish is predominantly used. Generally, this is
very low grade material, consisting of some corrugating and a great
deal of mixed waste. At twenty-three of these mills, some coarse
defibrator groundwood-type (TMP or other groundwood) pulps are
produced on-site. This pulp is characterized by a yield of over 90
percent and is very coarse because there is little, if any, screening
subsequent to the pulping step. Even at mills where groundwood pulps
are produced, well over half of the total furnish is wastepaper.
Table V-19 presents available data on water use and BOD5_ and TSS raw
waste loadings. No significant difference in the raw waste load
characteristics are apparent between groups of mills where saturated
and unsaturated papers are produced. The average BOD5. raw waste
loading is higher at mills where TMP pulp is produced than at mills
where essentially only wastepaper is utilized in the furnish. Where
other groundwood pulps are produced on-site, lower average raw
wastewater characteristics are exhibited than at mills where
TMP/wastepaper or only wastepaper are used. These differences may not
be as significant as indicated by the averages shown in Table V-19.
While there are many mills in this subcategory, raw waste load data
are available for a lower percentage of mills when compared to other
subcategories. Mills in each of the furnish groupings exhibit raw
waste loadings significantly lower than those which formed the basis
of BPT effluent limitations.
Final product quality requirements are minimal compared to other paper
or board products. Therefore, the opportunity exists for recycling
wastewater and reusing sludge in the process. At 17 mills in the
subcategory, no wastewater is discharged. At a total of eight of
these mills a furnish is used that is predominately TMP pulp, at three
a furnish is used that is predominately groundwood pulp, at four a
furnish is used that is predominately wastepaper, and at two a
combination of wood flour, wastepaper, and purchased pulp is used.
Table V-20 presents information on the method of handling of
wastewater at self-contained mills.
Miscellaneous Secondary Fibers Mills. In Table V-21, data are
presented on wastewater discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loadings
for all of the remaining secondary fibers mills not previously
presented. Generally, either processes are employed that are typical
154
-------
TABLE V-19
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
BUILDERS' PAPER AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATECORV
cn
Ol
Production Profile
Product
Mill No.
120001
120002
1 20003 (d)
120004
120005
120006
120007
120008(d)
120009
120010
120011
120012
120013
120014
120015
120016
120017
120018
120019
120020
120021 (c)
120022
120023
120024
120025
120026
120027
120028
120029
120030
120031
120032
120033
120034
Furnish (t/d)
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP
nr ,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
TMP
WP,
WP,
WP,
WP,
TMP
WP,
WP,
WP,
WF
WF, Rag
Chips
Rags, GWD
GWD
GWD
GWD
WF
WF
WF
Chips
TMP
Chips
Baled Pulp
Chips
GWD
TMP
TMP
TMP
Chips TMP
GWD
WF, Rag
Chips
TMP
WF, Rag
, Chips
GWD
TMP
TMP
WF, Rag
, Chips
TMP
TMP
WF, Rag .
32
116
69
170
123
90
40
29
345
228
97
21
92
30
73
88
156
82
172
53
75
126
44
71
20
193
39
28
167
77
60
30 r
Type
Construction
Construction
Roofing Felt
Construction
Construction
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Asbestos felt
Organic Felt
Construction
Construction
Construction
Roofing Felt
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofinn Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction
Construction
Construction
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Construction
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
-Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Paper
Finish(a)
S
U
S
U
U
S
S
S
S
S
S
U
U
U
U
S
U
U
JJ
U
U
U
,u
U
S
S
U
U
S
S •
U
U
U
Subgroup
Code(b)
W
W
T
G
G
G
G
W
W
W
T
T
T
W
T
T
T
T
T
T
W
T
• T
W
T
G
T
T
W
T
T
T
W
Flow
Raw Waste Load
BODS TSS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
65.0 (15.6)
3.3 (0.8)
8.3 (2.0)
4.2 (1.0)
1.3 (0.3)
(-) - (-)
( — ) — ( — )
( — ) — ( — )
5.5 (10.9) 1.5 (2.9)
4.2 (8.3) 2.2 (4.3)
Self-Contained
26.3 (6.3)
.
28.8 (6.9)
7.4 (1.8)
2.8 (0.7)
13.8 (3.3)
5.0 (1.2)
7.0 (1.7)
( — ) — ( — )
( — ) — ( — )
2.1 (4.2) 2.3 (4.6)
12.8 (25.5) 5.1 (10.1)
8.9 (17.8) 2.9 (5.8)
33.4 (66.8) 10.1 (20.2)
( — ) — ( — )
11.2 (22.3) 4.1 (8.2)
( — ) — ( — )
Self-Contained-
Self-Contained
4.0 (1.0)
48.3 (11.6)
12.5 (3.0)
19.2 (4.6)
2.0 (0.5)
9.6 (2.3)
7.4 (14.7)
281.2 (562.4) 33.4 (66.8)
5.1 (10.1) 8.0 (15.9)
( — ) — ( — )
3.4 (6.8) 2.4 (4.7)
24.0 (48.0) 71.6 (143.2)
Self-Contained
Self-Contained
40.8 (9.8)
22.1 (44.2) 17.7 (35.4)
— Self-Contained
5.8 (1.4)
16.6 (4.0)
43.4 (10.4)
0.8 (0.2)
2.2 (4.3) 6.9 (13.8)
6.2 (12.4) 6.0 (12.0)
25.7 (51.4) 40.9 (81.8)
( — ) — ( — )
Self-Contained
-------
TABCE V-19 (Continued)
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
Ul
CT)
Hill No. Furnish (t/d)
120035 WP, WF, Rag 71
120036 WP, WF, Rag 54
120037 WP, WF, Rag 49
120038 WP, WF, Rag 51
120040 WP, WF, Rag 44
120041 30
120042 WP, WF, Rag 55
120043 WP, WF, Rag 43
120044 WP, WF, Rag 21
120045 WP, WF, Rag 36
120046 WP, WF, Rag 72
120047 WP, WF, Rag 63
120048 WP, WF, Rag 40
120049 WP.WF 22
120050 WP, WF, Rag 55
120051 WF, Purch 60
Pulp
120052 WP, WF 39
120054 WP, WF 60
120055 TMP, WF 334
120056 WP, WF 242
120057 TMP, WP 125
120058 TOP, WP, Rag 118
120059 TMP, WP 140
Average
Product
Type
Construction Paper
Construction Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Builders Board
Construction Paper
Builders Board
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Builders Paper
Finii
S
S
U
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
U
S
S
U
U
U
U
S
S
U
U
Subgroup
:h(a) Code(b)
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
0
W
0
T
0
T
T
T
Average Subgroup W (excluding self-contained mill.s)(b)
Average Subgroup T (excluding self-contained mills)(b)
Average Subgroup G (excluding self-contained mills) (b)
BPT-Raw Waste toad
Average of Hills with SBPT flow
Average of Mills with SBPT BOD5
Flow BODS
kl/kkg (ksal/t) ke/kkg (Ib/t)
(") -- (")
(--) — ( — )
( — ) — ( — )
5.4 (1.3) -: (— )
TSS
ks/kkg (Ib/t)
-- (")
( — )
( — )
(--)
Self-Contained
4.6 (1.1) — (--)
0.4 (0.1) — (--)
4.6 (1.1) - (--)
(--)
(-->
(--)
Self-Contained
10.0 (2.4) 5.0 (9.9)
( — ) — ( — )
8.9 (1.9) 3.9 (7.7)
7.6 (15.2)
( — )
6.5 (13.0)
Self-Contained
— Self-Contained
13.8 (3.3) 14.1 (28.2)
15.3 (30.5)
Self-Contained
Self-Contained
8.2 (2.0) 5.6 (11.1)
14.7 (3.5) 7.7 (15.3)
13.2 (3.2) 15.3 (30.6)
2.8 (0.7) 4.9 (9.6)
60.0 (14.4) 17.5 (35.0)
11.1 (2.7) 6.5 (13.0)
9.2 (2.2) 6.5 (13.0)
6.2 (12.5)
19.3 (38.5)
11.2 (22.3)
1.9 (3.6)
35.0 (70.0)
12.1 (24.2)
5.4 (10.8)
(a)S = Saturated; U = Unsaturated.
(b)W = Predominantly wastepaper furnish.
T = Furnish includes TMP.
G = Furnish includes other types of groundwood.-
0 = Other furnish.
(c)Represents waste load to primary clarifier, which includes a high degree of
recycle to process. These figures are not included in averages.
(d)Confidentiality claim.
WP = Wastepaper
WF = Wood flour
TMP = Thenno-mechauical pulp
GWD = Groundwood pulp
-------
TABLE V-20
METHODS OF HANDLING WASTEWATER AT
SELF-CONTAINED BUILDERS' PAPER AND
ROOFING FELT MILLS
Mill
Number
120006
120007
120018
120017
120020
120026
120027
120029
120034
120041
120040
120048
120051
120056
120055
120059
120058
Method of Handling Wastewater
White water recycle, remainder to evaporation ponds.
Screening, lagoon, clarifier, and irrigation with some
recycle .
Clarifier and recycle with overflow to city sewer in
cases of emergency.
Total recycle.
Total recycle.
Clarifier and recycle.
Primary and biological treatment and recycle.
Primary and biological treatment and recycle.
Total recycle.
Saveall, screening, and recycle.
Saveall, screening, settling pond, and recycle.
Saveall, screening, holding tank, and evaporation pond.
Neutralization, settling basin, and recycle.
Screening, clarifier, storage tank, and recycle.
Filtration and recycle.
Saveall and recycle.
Saveall, clarifier, saveall, and recycle.
Sludge
Disposal
Unknown
Lagoon
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Landfill
Landfill
Lagoon
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
157
-------
oo
TABLE V-21
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
SECONDARY FIBERS MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
Mill
No.
080002
110042(a)
110080
110109
110132
110136
120039
140004
140006
140009
140012
140020
140023
140026
140027
150008
1400l6(b)
Flow
(t/d)
20
240
536
533
275
61
350
72
161
138
304
278
98
319
201
44
Product
Groundwood Specialties
Gypsum Board, Roofing Felt
San. Tissue, Linerboard, Corrugating
Foldingboard, Wetlap Pulp
San. Tissue, Linerboard, Corrugating
Chip & Filler Board, Tube Stock
GWD Specialty, Pressboard, Other
Board
Gypsum Wall Board, Construction
Paper
Sanitary Tissue
Fine, Specialties
Sanitary Tissue
Uncoated Fine Paper
Uncoated Fine Paper
Unctd Fine & GWD, GWD Specialties,
Coated , Uncoated Fine
Uncoated Fine
Cotton Fiber, Specialties
Market Deink
kl/kkg
35.8
27.9
35.4
33.3
—
14.2
34.6
102.4
55.0
34.1
98.7
99.1
91.9
56.2
45.6
8.3
(kgal/t)
(")
(8.6)
(6.7)
(8.5)
(8.0)
( — )
(3.4)
(8.3)
(24.6)
(13.2)
(8.2)
(23.7)
(23.8)
(22.1)
(13.5)
(10.9)
(2.0)
BODS
kg/kkR
—
—
25.0
9.0
••
34.3
—
22.0
13.7
—
—
14.5
38.4
29.0
3.5
34.6
(lb/t)
(")
( — )
( — )
(50.0)
(18.0)
( — )
(68.6)
( — )
(44.0)
(27.3)
( — )
( — )
(28.9)
(76.8)
(58.0)
(7.0)
(69.2)
TSS
kg/kkg
__
—
—
91.2
17.3
- __
15.7
3.4
88.5
46.9
53.9
70.85
27.6
105.9
105.0
7.6
68.8
(lb/t)
(")
( — )
( — )
(182.4)
(34.6)
( — )
(31.4)
(6.7)
(176.9)
(93.8)
(107.8)
(141.7)
(55.1)
(211.8)
(210.0)
(15.2)
(137.6)
(a)Data after primary treatment.
(b)Production data held confidential.
-------
of two or more subcategories or unique processes are employed that are
not characterized by the current subcategorization scheme.
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers. Data are available on 39 mills
representative of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. Table
V-22 presents available data on wastewater discharge and BOD5. and TSS
raw waste loadings. Products include high-quality coated and uncoated
printing, writing, and other business papers, and specialty items.
The mills vary in size from as little as 12 kkg/day (13 tons/day) up
to 989 kkg/day (1,088 tons/day). The number of machines in use varies
widely from mill to mill. Operating units are generally small.
Attempts have been made to relate factors such as coated versus
uncoated production and the production of cotton or specialty items to
raw waste load parameters. As shown in Table V-22, the mills where
fine papers are produced from cotton fibers tend to have considerably
higher raw waste load characteristics in terms of flow and BOD5^
Wastewater discharge and BODI3 raw waste loadings do not appear
significantly different at mills where coated paper is produced
compared to mills where uncoated paper is produced. The major factor
influencing raw waste characteristics is the number of "waste
significant" grade changes per day at mills in this subcategory. Data
are presented for overall subcategory averages comparing mills with
different frequencies of waste significant grade changes: no claimed
grade changes, less than one per day, and more than one per day. A
distinct correlation is seen, with wastewater discharge and BOD5^ raw
waste loading increasing with the frequency of grade changes.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers. Data are available for 26 mills
representative of this subcategory. Both industrial and sanitary
grades of tissue papers are made primarily from purchased pulps. Some
wastepaper and purchased deink and groundwood pulps are also used in
the manufacturing operations.
Available data on raw wastewater characteristics are shown in Table
V-23. The data presented in Table V-23 have been examined to
determine if there is a significant difference in raw waste load due
to differences in the type of products manufactured. However,
insufficient data are available on the production of industrial tissue
grades and this analysis is inconclusive.
As with the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, the major factor
influencing raw waste loadings is the frequency of waste significant
grade changes. In general, wastewater discharge and BOD5 raw waste
loadings increase with the frequency of grade changes.
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers. Data are available for 17 mills
that are representative of this subcategory. Lightweight, thin,
tissue, and electrical papers are produced at mills in this
subcategory.
Table V-24 presents available data on wastewater discharge and BOD5_
and TSS raw waste loadings. Attempts have been made to group mills
159
-------
TABLE V-22
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Hill
No.
Q80001(c)
080003
080004
080005
080007 (a)
080009
080017 (e)
080018
080019
080027
080028
080029
080030
080031(c)
080032(c)
080033
080034(c)
080035
080037
080038 (c)
080040
080041
080042
080043
080044
080045
080046
080047
080048
080049 (c)
080050
080051
080053
080055 (c)
105021
105022(c)
105027
105036 (c)
105047
105061
105072
Average
Grade
Changes
Production Profile Per
(t/d)
25
13
63
165
1088
125
135
54
381
81
116
74
15
14
742
587
412
43
30
71
144
455
191
173
33
35
267
115
27
103
409
53
Product Day(b)
Unctd, Print
Cotton
Cotton
Print, Thin
Unctd Print
Ctd S Unctd Print
Ctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Ctd S Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Print, Write, Ind
Conv
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd & Rag
Unctd
Unctd
Cotton
Ctd Print, Board
Ctd & Unctd Print
Ctd Print
Print, Write, Pkg
Unctd, Cotton, Carbon
Unctd, Print, Artist
Unctd, Print Cotton
Unctd, Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print, Cotton
Unctd Print
Unctd Print
Unctd Print, Sat
Ctd Print, Electrical
Unctd, Bristol, Pkg
Pkg
Base Stock, Thin
Ctd Pkg
Pfcg, Print
Pfcg, Ind Conv
(-)
(u)
(u)
(+)
(o)
(+)
(u)
(u)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)
0*0
(•*")
(-)
(u)
(o)
(u)
(-)
(-)
(u)
(+)
(-)
(-)
(u)
(•*•)
(•*•}
(u)
(u)
(-)
(o)
(-)
(-0
(-)
(")
(u)
(+)
Average w/o Cotton
Average w/o Cotton - Ho grade changes
Average w/o Cotton - <1 grade change/day
Average w/o Cotton - >1 grade change/day
Raw Waste Load
Flow
kl/kfcg
26
148
88
34
68
76
.7
.9
.2
.9
.6
.5
24.5
17
37
82
45
22
. 42
117
96
25
250
21
44
85
110
78
268
141
32
61
11
50
48
25
73
52
54
71
.9
.9
.4
.8
.5
.8
.8
.5
.8
.0
.6
.5
.7
.2
.6
.3
.4
.9
.2
.6
.3
.3
.4
.6
.8
.1
.1
121.9
121
79
52
171
76
68
48
58
95
.9
—
.5
.9
.0
.6
.3
.1
.9
.5
BODS
TSS
(kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg
(6.4)
(35.8)
(21.3)
(8.4)
(16.5)
(18.4)
(5.9)
(4.3)
(9.1)
'(19.8)
(11.0)
(5.4)
(10.3)
(28.3)
(23.2)
(6.2)
(60.1)
(5.2)
(10.7)
(20.6)
(26.5)
(18.9)
(64.5)
(34.0)
(7.9)
(14.7)
(2.8)
(12.1)
(11.6)
(6.1)
(17.7)
(12.7)
(13.0)
(17.1)
(29.3)
(29.3)
(")
(19.1)
(12.7)
(41.1)
(18.4)
(16.4)
(11.6)
(14.2)
(23.0)
9.0
6.0
17.9
—
—
(17.9)
(12.0)
(35.7)
( — )
(")
5.9 (11.8)
14.0
7.0
65.0
—
—
25.0
(Ib/t)
(27.9)
(14.0)
(130.0)
( — )
( — )
(50.0)
—
13.7
—
— •
—
—
12.1
25.6
'5.8
31.4
7.7
10.5
16.9
14.9
19.5
40.7
15.9
10.8
13.8
3.3
11.1
--
13.7
—
3.8
—
—
16.5
14.7
--
—
6.5
7.4
13.7
12.5
7.7
11.0
17.0
(--)
(27.3)
( — )
(--)
( — )
(")
(24.2)
(51.2)
(11.5)
(62.8)
(15.4)
(20.9)
(33.8)
(29.8)
(39.0)
(81.4)
(31.7)
(21.6)
(27.6)
(6.5)
(22.1)
(™)
(27.3)
( — )
(7.6)
( — )
(--)
(32.9)
(29.3)
( — )
(--)
(12.9)
(14.8)
(27.3)
(25.0)
(15.4)
(21.9)
(34.1)
—
40.7
44.7
—
—
—
29.4
85.0
10.2
51.8
17.0
43.5
115.2
47.8
44.8
86.5
49.7
41.8
31.5
4.5
18.3
--
15.2
—
24.4
—
—
29.2
40.3
—
18.3
48.8
26.2
38.4
38.3
17.0
41.8
42.8
(--)
(81.3)
(89.3)
(--)
( — )
( — )
(58.7)
(170.0)
(20.4)
(103.5)
(34.0)
(87.0)
(230.3)
(95.5)
(89.6)
(173.0)
(99.4)
(83.6)
(62.9)
(8.9)
(36.5)
( — )
(30.3)
( — )
(48.8)
( — )
(••)
(58.4)
(80.6)
( — )
(36.6)
(97.6)
(52.3)
(76.8)
(76.5)
(34.0)
(83.5)
(85.6)
SBPT(d)
FB
B
F
B
F
F
F
F
F
F
FB
FB
FB
F
F
FB
F
F
F
FB
F
FB
B
BPT-Raw
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Waste Load
of Mills
of Hills
of Mills
of Mills
of Mills
of Mills
SBPT
SBPT
SBPT
SBPT
SBPT
SBPT
flow;
BODS;
flow;
BODS;
flow;
BODS;
no grade
no grade
<1 grade
<1 grade
>1 grade
>1 grade
change
change
change/day
change/day
change/ day
change/day
63.2
37.9
21.6
39.3
39.6
39.8
123.8
(15.2)
(9.1)
(5.2)
(9.4)
(9.5)
(9.6)
(29.8)
10.8
7.7
7.7
9.1
6.3
—
6.7
(21.5)
(15.4)
(15.4)
(18.1)
(12.5)
( — )
(13.3)
30.8
17.0
17.0
30.2
24.4
—
25.6
(61.6)
(34.0)
(34.0)
(60.4)
(48.7)
(--)
(51.2)
(a)Data after primary treatment; not included in average.
(b)Grade Changes Per Day: o - (o)
u - unknown
(c)Production data held confidential.
(d)F-Mill with SBPT flow; B-Mill with SBPT BODS.
(e)Not included in average.
160
-------
CTl
TABLE V-23
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-TISSUE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish
Mill No. Purch GWD
090001 23
090005(c)
090007 (c)
090008(c)
090009(c)
090011 62
090012 62
090013(a) 34 1
090016(c)
090017 (c)
090018(c)
090019 ' 139 19
090020 887 57
090021 119 11
090022 154 7
090023(c)
090024(c)
090025 6
090026 21
090027 140
090028(c)(a)
42
090029(a) 41
090030(c) 263
090031 14
090032 26
090033 15
Average(a)
Average-Only Industri
Dl WP
5
12
—
3
48
5
40
—
—
5 28
—
23 1
14
—
4
4
1
al Tissue
(t/d)
20
70
59
37
159
890
176
189
6
SO
140
44
17
27
14
Product
Type
Industrial Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Mixed Product
Mixed Product
Mixed Product
Sanitary Tissue
Mixed Product
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Industrial* Tissue
Sanitary Tissue
Mixed Product
Mixed Product
Mixed Product
Grade
Chg/Day(b)
(o)
(o)
(-)
(o)
(-)
(-)
(-/w)
(u)
(u)
(-/w)
(-)
(u)
(+)
(+)
(-)
(-/wj
(o)
(-)
(u)
(o)
(u)
(o)
(o)
(-)
(-)
(o)
Average - no grade changes
Average - less than one grade change per week
Average - less than o
Average - more than o
BPT-Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
Average of Mills with
le grade change per day
le grade change per day
SBPT flow -
SBPT BODS -
SBPT flow -
SBPT BODS -
SBPT flow -
SBPT BODS -
SBPT flow -
SBPT BODS -
No grade
No grade
less than
less than
less than
less than
more than
more than
changes
changes
one grade change pe
one grade change pe
one grade change pe
one grade change pe
one grade change pe
one grade change pe
week
week
day
day
day
day
Flow
kl/kkg
104.3
22.9
78.0
96.8
89.7
78.8
35.9
63.8
56.7
56.3
80.1
103.5
79.7
170.7
66.7
30.9
-
286.7
74.7
17.9
143.5
94.7
32.5
98.1
177.8
29.6
84.9
104.3
57.0
41.0
119.5
125.2
95.3
39.5
41.4
41.0
—
78.7
78.1
79.7
—
(kgal/t)
(25.0)
(5.5)
(18.7)
(23.2)
(21.5)
(18.9)
(8.6)
(15.3)
(13.6)
(13.5)
(19.2)
(24.8)
(19.1)
(40.9)
(16.0)
(7.4)
(68.7)
(17.9)
(4.3)
(34.4)
(22.7)
(7.8)
(23.5)
(42.6)
(7.1)
(20.4)
(25.0)
(13.7)
(9.8)
(28.6)
(30.0)
(22.9)
(9.5)
(9.9)
(9.8)
(18.9)
(18.7)
(19.1)
(--)
Raw Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
4.5
5.6
8.0
15.3
9.9
—
—
6.3
18.0
14.9
12.8
—
22.9
—
9.1
—
. —
14.6
17.4
0.7
—
1.7
—
—
1.0
10.4
4.5
4.8
14.9
10.9
22.9
11.5
2.3
2.7
14.9
—
10.0
9.0
22.9
—
(Ib/t)
(9.0)
(11.2)
(15.9)
(30.6)
(19.7)
( — )
(12.6)
(36.0)
(29.7)
(25.6)
( — )
(45.7)
( — )
(18.2)
( — )
(29.1)
(34.8)
(1.3)
( — )
( — )
(3.3)
( — )
(2.0)
(20.8)
(9.0)
(9.6)
(29.7)
(21.7)
(45.7)
(22.9)
(4.5)
(5.4)
(29.7)
(19.9)
(17.9)
(45.7)
(--)
TSS
kg/kkg
5.0
11.5
28.5
47.1
25.7
—
—
40.0
53.2
48.3
43.9
—
54.5
31.2
26.9
15.8
—
14.6
53.8
4.1
—
6.6
—
—
5.8
28.0
5.0
13.4
32.1
27.9
42.9
34.7
7.0
6.6
32.1
—
31.3
27.0
54.5
—
(Ib/t)
(10.0)
(22.9)
' (57.0)
(94.2)
(51.4)
( — )
(80.0)
(106.4)
(96.5)
(87.8)
( — )
(108.9)
(62.3)
(53.7)
(31.5)
(29.1)
(107.6)
(8.2)
( )
( — )
(13.1)
( — )
(11.5)
(56.0)
(10.0)
(26.7)
(64.0)
(55.8)
(85.6)
(69.4)
(13.9)
(13.1)
(64.0)
(62.5)
(54.0)
(108.9)
(--)
SBPT(d)
B
FB
FB
FB
F
F
F
F
F
F
FB
F
F
FB
FB
FB
(a)Flow, BOD5, and TSS includes Whitewater stream. These figures are
(b)Grade change per day: o - (o) <1 - (-)
>l ~ (+) u - unknown
(-/w) - (less than one grade change per week)
(c)Pcoduction data held contidential.
(d)F-MHl with SBPT flow; B-Mill with gBPT BODS.
not included in the subcategory averages.
-------
TABLE V-24
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish (t/d) Product
Raw Waste Load
Grade
Hill Ho. Purch WP Misc Broke (t/d) Ch8/Day(d)
Electrical Paper
105003 11.2 -- -- -- H.2
105015 (e)
105017 (e)
105018(»)(c)
105071 26.0 -- — -- 26.3
Average
Miscellaneous Tissue and Carbonizing
090015 47.4 25.6 -- — 64.2
105057 33.0 5.1 -- — 34.0
105058 34.0 4.9 -- " 35.0
Average
Printing S Thin Paper
080039 (c)
105014(e)
105020 203.0 4.0 2.0 — 203.0
Average
Carbonize. Thin, Cigarette - Less Wastepaper
080024 29.6 — — 5.3 32.5
08002Kb) 30.3 — — — 26.9
080022 102.4 11.3 — ~ 110.5
090003 12.0 1.6 ~ 4.4(c)18.0
105013 15.1 -- 5.3 -- 20.4
105016(e)
Average
Average of All Mills
Average of Electrical
Average w/o Electrical
(o)
(o)
(o)
(u)
Of)
(o)
Flow
kl/kkg
445.9
312.3
268.5
753.6
253.6
320.1
224.4
147.0
(-) 208.2
193.2
(+) 236.1
(-)
170
.3
(-) 201.9
(o)
(o)
(-)
(")
(-)
Average of mills with no grade changes and
flow less than or equal to the average w/o electrical
Average of mills with no grade changes and BODS less
than or equal to the average w/o electrical
Average of mills with less than one grade change
and flow less than or equal to the average w/o
Average of mills with less than one grade change
and BODS less than or equal to the average w/o
Average of mills with more than one grade change
and flow less than or equal to the average w/o
Average of mills with more than one grade change
and BODS less than or equal to the average w/o
per day
electrical
per day
electrical
per day
electrical
per day
electrical
202
60
10
-•
129
134
516
210
236
320
202
72
78
159
181
.8
.2
.8
.5
.9
.3
.2
.4
.1
.9
.7
.9
.2
.7
— — .
(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)
(14.5)
(2.6)
(~~)
(30.9)
(32.4)
(124.0)
(50.5)
(56.8)
(76.9)
(48.7)
(17.5)
(19.0)
(38.2)
(43.6)
(— )
(")
BODS
ks/kkg
-
—
11.4
11.4
57.7
2.9
11.8
24.1
29.4
(Ib/t)
IE
( —
TSS
kg/kkg
|
')
(22.8)
(22.8)
(115.3)
(5.7)
(23.6)
(48.2)
(58
.8)
-
19.
19.
-
•~
1
1
149.9
5.2
23.7
60.4
127.1
(.-- J
8.3
18
_.
.9
0.2
••
19
••
19
20
11
21
1
1
14
13
.9
.9
.2
.4
.7
.6
.6
.1
.3
""
(16
(37
(.
(0
('
(39
(39
(40
(22
(43
(3
(3
(28
(26
(
.5)
-7)
--)
.3)
•")
-7)
3
.3)
.8)
.3)
.0)
.0)
.1)
.6)
— )
--)
•"" "
15.6
71.4
0
57
57
57
19
63
—
.1
"*""
.0
.0
.1
.1
.4
2.7
2
36
32
.7
.3
.8
(Ib/t)
8
( — )
(38.1)
(38.1)
(299.8)
(10.3)
(51.4)
(120.5)
(254.2)
( )
(31.1)
(142.7)
(--)
(0.2)
( )
(114.0)
(114.0)
(114.1)
(38.1)
(126.8)
(5.3)
(5.3)
(72.6)
(65.5)
C")
(--)
Apparentlyf mill
(a)Represents a combination of process sewer and a very high flow from a. thermal sewer. Apparentl
must use high flow on thermal sewer to meet thermal discharge limits. Not included in average.
(b)After primary clarification; not included in average.
(c)Estiaated to balance.
(d)Grade change per day o - (o)
u - unknown
(e)Pcoduction data held confidential.
162
-------
based on product type as illustrated in the table. Differences
between these groups are minor with one exception. At those mills
where electrical papers are produced, larger quantities of water are
discharged than at mills where non-electrical lightweight grades are
produced.
As with the nonintegrated-fine papers and nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategories, the major factor influencing raw waste loadings is the
frequency of waste significant grade changes. Wastewater discharge
and BODS^ raw waste loadings increase with the frequency of grade
changes.
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers. Data are available on 14
mills representative of this subcategory. Average production is 16
kkg/day (18 tons/day). At these mills, a wide variety of filter and
non-woven papers are produced such as open-blotting type papers, hand
sheet testing blotters, oil and air filter papers (often saturated
with resins), vacuum cleaner bags, and a growing variety of non-woven
type papers for personal, sanitary, and-disposal uses.
Table V-25 presents all available data on BOD5. and TSS raw waste
loadings and wastewater discharge. As with the other subcategories in
the nonintegrated segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard category,
the major factor influencing raw waste loadings is the frequency of
waste significant grade changes. In general, wastewater discharge and
BOD5_ raw waste loadings increase with the frequency of grade changes.
Noninteqrated-Paperboard. Data are available for 11 mills that are
representative of this subcategory. Major products manufactured at
mills in this subcategory include electrical board, matrix board (used
for typesetting), food board, press board, and other board products.
Table V-26 presents all pertinent data available on wastewater
discharge and BOD5. and TSS raw waste loadings. As shown in the table,
at mills where electrical grades or matrix board are produced, larger
quantities of wastewater are discharged. However, there is an
inadequate data base on which to characterize mills where electrical
board or matrix board are made.
An attempt has been made to review data on wastewater discharge and
BODS^ waste loadings as a function of the number of waste significant
grade changes per day. The data base is very limited and no
correlation is apparent between frequency of grade change and raw
waste characteristics.
Miscellaneous Noninteqrated Mills. Table V-27 presents available data
on wastewater discharge and BODS^ and TSS raw waste loadings at all
nonintegrated mills not previously presented. At most of these mills,
products representative of two or more subcategories or unique
products not defined by the current subcategorization scheme are
manufactured.
163
-------
TABLE V-25
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-FILTER AND NONWOVEN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Product: Grade
Mill Ho. (t/d) Type Chg/Day(a)
105005 5.9 Saturated Filter & (-)
Honwoven
105029 4.1 Technical & Filter (u)
105030 (b) Filter (o)
105031 0.7 Filter Co)
105033(b) Filter, Wall Cover (+)
Miscellaneous
105034(b) Filter (+)
10504300 Filter, Blotting, Photo (+)
105044(b) Filter, Blotting, Pkg (o)
10504500 Filter, Pkg (u)
10505Kb) Filter, Sat Tech (-)
10505200 Filter (o)
105053 (b) Filter (o)
105054(b) Filter, Photo, Wrap (u)
105055 (b) Filter, Saturated (•»•)
Average of All Mills
Average of mills with no grade changes
Average of sills with less than one grade
change per day
Average of sills with more than one grade
change per day
Average of mills with no grade changes and flow
equal to or less than the average flow for
mills with less than one grade change per day
Average of aills with no grade changes and BOD5_ equal
to or less than the average BOD5 for all mills
Average of mills with less than one grade change per
day and flow equal to or less than the average flow
for mills with less than on grade change per day
Average of Bills with less than one grade change per
day and BODS equal to or less than the average BODS
for all mills
Average of mills with more than one grade change per
day and flow equal to or less than the average flow
for mills with less than one grade change per day
Average of sills with more than one grade change per
day and BODS equal to or less than the average
BOD5 for all mills
Raw Waste Load
Flow
fcl/kkg
327.8
143.5
189.2
393.1
222.1
171.8
279.5
25.6
39.9
170.6
17.8
42.2
6.6
287.5
165.5
133.6
249.2
240.2
68.7
25.6
170.6
170.6
197.0
287.5
(kgal/t)
(78.8)
(34.5)
(45.5)
(94.5)
(53.7)
(41.3)
(67.2)
(6.2)
(9.6)
(41.0)
(4.3)
(10.2)
(1.6)
(69.1)
(39.8)
(32.1)
(59.9)
(57.8)
(16.6)
(6.2)
(41.0)
(41.0)
(47.5)
(69.1)
BODS
kg/kkg
18.2
--
—
—
—
25.0
3.8
--
5.0
—
--
9.0
12.2
3.8
5.0
17.0
3.8
3.8
5.0
5.0
—
9.0
(Ib/t)
(--)
(36.4)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(49.9)
(7.5)
(--)
(9.9)
(— )
(--)
(— )
(17.9)
(24.3)
(7.5)
(9.9)
(33.9)
(7.5)
(7.5)
(9.9)
(9.9)
(-)
(17.9)
TSS
kg/kkg
24.3
14.7
—
--
--
—
54.8
12.8
--
19.4
—
—
--
38.3
27.4
12.8
21.9
46.6
12.8
12.8)
19.4
19.4
—
38.3
(Ib/t)
(48.6)
(29.3)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(109.5)
(25.5)
(--)
(38.8)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(76.5)
(54.7)
(25.5)
(43.7)
(93.0)
(25.5)
(25.5)
(38.8)
(38.8)
(--)
(76.5)
(a)Grade change per day o - (o)
u - unknown
(b)Prcduction data held confidential.
164
-------
TABLE V-26
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish
Mill No. Purch
085001 60.0
085007 (b)
085008 32.0
0850 10 (b)
105001 33.5
105002 9.2
105039(b)
105048 46.0
105049 44.0
105070(b)
105073 17.1
110021 47.4
Average
t/d)
WP
12
22
—
—
—
--
—
36.6
(t/d)
84.0
50.0
38.2
8.4
62.0
51.0
15.0
76.0
Product
Type
Packaging, Bag
Matrix Board
Pkg, Bag, Specialty
Matrix Board
Food Board, Gift
Hi Dens Electrical
Latex & Sat Gaskets
Impregnated Fiber
Impregnated Fiber
Electrical Board
Saturated Paper for
Vulcanizing
Press Board
Grade
Chg/Day(a) kl/kkg
O)
(u)
(u)
(u)
(o)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(u)
(u)
Average w/o Electrical
Average w/o Electrical or
Matrix
29.
184.
62.
167.
30.
272.
48.
38.
52.
221.
105.
62.
106.
78.
53.
5
2
5
6
0
5
7
7
9
0
3
9
3
2
8
Flow
(kgal/t)
(7.1)
(44.3)
(15.0)
(40.3)
(7.2)
(65.5)
(11.7)
(9.3)
(12.7)
(53.1)
(25.3)
(15.1)
(25.6)
(18.8)
(12.9)
Raw Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
„
—
. 10.0
7.0
8.2
. —
—
—
'
87.5
13.0
—
25.1
9.6
10.4
(Ib/t)
(--)
(— )
(20.0)
(13.9)
(16.4)
(--)
(--)
( — )
("0
(175.0)
(26.0)
( — )
(50.3)
(19.1)
(20.8)
TSS
kg/kkg
_.
25.0
46.4
43.2
—
—
— i
136.5
42.4
—
58.7
39.3
36.9
(Ib/t)
(— )
(--)
(50.0)
(92.7)
(86.4)
(--)
( — )
(--)
(--)
(272.9)
(84.7)
( — )
(117.3)
(78.5)
(73.7)
Average of mills with no grade changes and flow less than
or equal to the average flow w/o electrical or matrix 30.0 (7.2)
Average of mills with no grade changes and BOD5 less than
or equal to the average BOD5 w/o electrical or matrix 30.0 (7.2)
Average of mills with less than one grade change per day
and flow less than or equal to the average flow w/o electrical
or matrix 46.8 (11.2)
Average of mills with less than one grade change per day and
BOD5 less than or equal to the average BOD5 w/o electrical
or matrix — (—)
Average of mills with more than one grade change per day and
flow less than or equal to the average flow w/o electrical
or matrix 29.5 (7.1)
Average of mills with more than one grade change per day and
BOD5 less than or equal to the average BOD5 w/o electrical
or matrix — (—}
8.2 (16.4)
8.2 (16.4)
43.2 (86.4)
43.2 (86.4)
(a) Grade change per day o - (o)
u - unknown
(b)Production data held confidential.
165
-------
TABLE V-27
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Raw Waste
Production
Hill Ho. t/d
080006(a)
080008 248
080026 (a)
080036 (a)
085005 (a)
105004(a)
105008 262
105010(o)
105011 12
105012 45
105019(a)
105023 (a)
105024(a)
105026(a)
105028 77
105032 33
105037 63
105038 50
105040(a)
105041(a)
105042(a)
105050(a)
105056(a)
105059 153
105035(a)
105062 36
105065 57
105066 (a)
105067(a)
10S068(a)
105069 (a)
120053 150
150003(a)
150027 (a)
Flow
Product
Print, Photo
Print, Cotton Pkg Tissue
Print, Photo, Cotton,
Specialty Pkg
Print, Thin, Tissue, Release
Base
Pkg, Conv
Spec Pkg, Glassine
Print, Tech, Gasket, Sat
Spec Pkg Sat
Spec Pkg, Glassine, Grease
Prf
Spec Pkg, Glassine, Grease
Prf
Print, Write, Tape, Sat
Gasket
Spec Pkg, Auto, Separated
Print, Pkg, Wet Str Glassine
Print, Poster, Ind Conv Pkg,
Sat
Print, Tech, Pkg, Sat,
Surgical
Gasket, Latex Sat
Pkg & Ind Conv
Pkg & Ind Conv
Pkg & Ind Conv, Sat, Bag
Bristol, Cable, Index,
Gasket
Copybase, Release, Specialty
Tape, Spec, Panels
Print, Thin, Pkg, Sat,
Tissue
Print, Ctd, Release,
Spec
Asbestos, Gasket, Insul
Parchment
Print, Pkg, Cover, Masking
Tech, Asbestos , Fkg
Tech, Pkg, Lightweight
Print, Photo, Pkg, Sat
Writing, Tech, Cotton
Asbestos Gaskets
Asbestos, Electrical Board
Phenolic Board
kl/kkg
43.3
1.7
ksal/t
(10.4)
(0.4)est
Load
BOD5
kg/kkg
4.1
Ibs/t
(8.1)
(— )
TSS
kK/kkg
34.7
1.0
Ib/t
(69.4)
(1.9)
52.8
63.2
115.6
(12.7)
(15.2)
(27.8)
8.0
4.4
—
(15.9)
(8.7)
( — )
17.5
18.1
"~
(35.0)
(36.2)
( )
Not Available
83.2
—
--
96.1
169.7
159.3
108.2
59.1
31.2
89.0
158.1
127.3
--
106.1
183.6
159.7
44.1
163.5
—
109.8
222.6
222.1
105.2
66.6
«
—
(20.0)
(--)
(--)
(23.1)est
(40.8)
(38.3)
(26.0)
(14.2)
(7.5)est
(21.4)
(38.0)
(30.6)
( — )
(25.5)
(44.1)
(38.4)
(10.6)
(39.3)
(™)
(26.4)
(53.5)
(53.4)
(25.3)
(16.0)
(--)
("0
(--)
36.7
~~
~~
—
10.2
4.5
10.5
8.1
3.4
2.0
--
13.6
-~
14.4
17.4
6.9
8.3
—
~-
--
4.3
4.8
18.6
24.9
—
—
(73.3)
( )
( — )
(-- )
(20.4)
(9.0)
(20.9)
(16.1)
(6.8)est
(4.0)
( — )
(27.1)
( — )
(28.7)
(34.8)
(13.8)
(16.5)
(")
( — )
( — )
(8.6)
(9.5)
(37.2)
(49.8)
( — )
( — )
(--)
-~
~—
—
15.7
25.5
17.0
24.1
25.8
3.0
29.5
61.7
— —
50.6
41.1
13.8
34.0
30.2
~~
—
156.5
149.0
86.8
42.4
— ••
-~
(.NAJ
( )
( )
(--)
(31.3)
(51.0)
(33.9)
(48.2)
(51.5)
(6.0)
(58.9)
(123.3)
( )
(101.1)
(82.2)
(27.6)
(68.0)
(60.4)
( )
( — )
(312.9)
(297.9)
(173.6)
(84.7)
( )
(— )
(--)
(a)Production data held confidential.
166
-------
TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
Screening Program
As part of the overall project investigations, a screening program was
undertaken to provide information on the presence or absence and the
relative levels of toxic and nonconventional pollutants discharged at
mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. As explained in
Section II, screening was a three-phase effort. The first phase was
the initial screening conducted by the contractor covering 11 of the
15 mill groupings established as representative of the pulp, paper
and paperboard industry. The second phase included screening at 17 of
the verification program mills where processes were employed that were
characteristic of the four mill groupings not included in the initial
screening program. The third phase involved 47 screening surveys
conducted by EPA Regional Surveillance and Analysis (S&A) field teams
Collection and analysis of screening samples collected at the 17
verification mills and at the 47 mills sampled by Regional S&A field
teams adhered to the procedures specified in Sampling and Analysis
Procedures for Screening of Industrial Effluents for Priority
Pollutants (EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, April, 1977).(15)
Table V-28 presents a summary of the data collected during these 11
screening survey programs. A summary of the analysis results for the
second phase of the screening program conducted by the contractor at
the 17 verification mills is presented in Table V-29. The results
shown in Table V-29 are for only those compounds that were not
detected in any wastewater samples taken at the 11 mills sampled
during initial screening surveys.
Table V-30 presents a summary of the analysis results for the 42
regional surveys for which data are available. At 31 of the 47
facilities surveyed by the Regional S&A teams, 3 individual 24-hour
composite samples were collected and analyzed rather than a single
72-hour composite. Analysis results for the screening surveys
conducted by the Regional S&A teams are in general agreement with
those conducted by the Agency contractor.
Verification Program
As described previously, the screening survey results, industry survey
responses, and available literature were reviewed to develop a list of
parameters to be studied in verification sampling. Table II-8
presents a list of the priority and nonconventional pollutants
analyzed as part of the verification program. During verification
sampling at 17 mills where processes were employed that were
characteristic of the four mill groupings not a part of the initial
contractor screening program, screening studies were also conducted.
As a result of this supplemental screening program, three additional
priority pollutants not -included on the verification compound list
were identified. However, as shown earlier on Table V-29, the level
and frequency of discharge of these compounds did not warrant a review
of the existing GC/MS data tapes for the remaining 43 verification
167
-------
TABLE V-28
SUMMARY OF- INITIAL SCREENING PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
Raw Wastewater (Ms/1)
Final Effluent Qjg/1)
Not
Toxic Pollutant Detected <10 10-100
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7
CTl 8.
00 9.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitrile
benzene
benzidine
carbon tetrachloride
(tetrachloromethane)
chlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-trichlorobenzene
hexachlorobenzene
. 1 ,2-dichloroethane
. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
. hexachloroethane
. 1 , 1-dichloroethane
. 1, 1 ,2-trichloroethane
. 1,1,2,2-telrachloroethane
. chloroethane
. bis(chloroiuethyl) ether
. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
. 2-chloroethyl vinyl ether (mixed)
. 2-chloronaphthalene
. 2,4,6-trichlorophenol
. parachlorometa cresol
. chloroform (trichloroniethane)
. 2-clilorophenol
. 1 ,2-dichlorobenzene
. 1 ,3-dichlorobenzene
. 1 ,4-dichJorobenzene
. 3,3' -dichlorobeuzidine
. I , i-dichloroethyleiie
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
9 2
11
11
11
11
11
11
Hot
>100 Ave Detected
12
12
12
4
12
12
10
12
12
11
7
12
11
12
11 '
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
1 2
12
12
12
12
12
12
Not
<10 10-100 >100 Ave Detected <10 10-100 >100 Ave
11
11
11
62 365-
11
11
1 1 8 11 ,
11
11
1 1 10 1 -
23 6 11
11
1 1 10 1
11
1 1 11
11
11
11
11
11
1 2 11
11
2 2 6 269 3 53
11
11
11
11
11
11
1
1
1
16
-------
TABLE V-28 (Continued)
o>
Raw Water (Hg/l) Raw Wastewater (ME/! ) Final Rffl,,«,h f,,an^
Toxic Pollutant
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
1 ,2-trans-dichloroethylene
2 , 4-dichlorophenol
1 ,2-dichloropropane
1 ,3-dichloropropy]ene
(1,3-dichloropropene)
2 , 4-di methylphenol
2, 4-dini tro toluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1 ,2-diphenylhydrazine
elhylbenzene
f luoratithene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis(2-cliloroisopropyl) ether
bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
methylene chloride (dichloro-
me thane)
methyl chloride (chloromethane)
methyl bromide (bromomethane)
broraofono (tribromomethane)
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluorome thane
dichlorodif luoromethane
chlorodi bromomethane
hexachlorobutadiene
hexachlorocyclopentadiene
isophorone
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
2-nitrophenol
4-nilrouhenol
2, 4-dini trophenol
not
Detected <10 10-100
11
11
11
11
U
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
3 24
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
Not
>100 Ave Detected
12
11
12
12
12
12
12
12
10
12
'12
12
12
2 54 1
12
12
12
11
11
12
11
12
12
1 1
• 1 1
12
12
12
12
Not
<10 10-100 >1QQ Ave Detected
11
11 n
I 9
11
•11
1 1
-1 1
11
5 199
2 l 10
11
11
11
11
1 6 4 81 1
11
1 1
11
1 1 11
1 23 10
11
1 1 11
11
11
1 5 11
1 12 11
11
11
11
11
<10 10-100 >100 Ave
2 1
2 1
1 1
24 4 55
1 19
-------
TABLE V-28 (Continued)
Raw Water (MK/D Raw Wastewater (pg/D
Final Effluent (ug/1)
Not
Toxic Pollutant " Detected <10 10-100
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
4,6-diuitro-o-cresol
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-ni trosodiphenylamine
N-ni trosodi-n-propylaraine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
dj-n-butyl phthalate
di-ii-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
benzo (a)anthracene (1 ,2-benzanthra-
cene)
benzo(a)i-yrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
3,4-benzo £luoranthene
benzo(k) fluoranthene (11,12-benzo
fluoranthene
chrysene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
benzo(ghi )perylene (1,12-benzo-
perylene)
t luorene
phenanthrene
dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
(1,2,5 ,6-dibenzauthracene)
indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
(2,3-o-pheriylenepyrene)
pyrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
11
11
n
n
11
092
7 1 3
11
433
10 1
10 1
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10 1
Not
>100 Ave Detected
12
12
12
12
12
6 0
5 2
12
1 16 3
1 12
1 7
12
12
12
12
12
11
12
8
12
12
12
12
12
12
10
1 2
Not
<10 10-100 >100 Ave Detected <10 10-100
11
11
11
11
11
2 6 4 624 0 55
1 6 3 66 5 05
11
1 3 5 85 5 32
11
14 774
11
11
11
11
11
1 1 11
11
22 9 10 1
11
11
11
11
11
11
2 1 10 1
82 4461
>100 Ave
1 89
1 22
1 16
1
1
7
4
-------
TABLE V-28 (Continued)
Raw Water (|Jg/l)
Raw Wastewater (|Jg/l)
Toxic Pollutant
87. trichloroethylene
88. viuyl chlori
89. aldriu
90. dieldriu
91. clilordane (t
metabolites)
92. 4,4'-DDT
93. 4,4'-DDE (p,p'-DDX)
94. 4,4'-DDD (p.p'-TDE)
95. a-endosulfan-Alpha
96. b-endosulfan-Beta
97. endosulfan sulfate
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
100.heplach.lor
lOl.heptachlor epoxide
102:a-BHC-Alpha
103.b-BHC-Beta
104.r-BIIC (lindane)-Gamma
105.g-BllC-Delta
106.PCB-1242 (A
107.PCB-1254 (A
108.PCB-I221 (A
109.PCB-1232 (A
110.PCB-1248 (A
Hl.PCB-1260 (A
112.PCB-1016 (A
U3.Toxaphene
114.Antimony (Total)
115.Arsenic (Total)
116.Asbestos (Fibrous)
117.Beryllium (Total)
;ne
(chloroethylene)
niical mixture &
•DDK)
•TDE)
Ipha
sta
rate
tide
i- Gamma
ilor 1242)
ilor 1254)
ilor 1221)
ilor 1232)
ilor 1248)
ilor 1260)
ilor 1016)
)
us)
1)
Not
Detected <10 10-100
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
0 11
0 11
11
0 11
Not Not
>100 Ave Detected <10 10-100 >100 Ave Detected <10 10-100 >100 Ave
10 2
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11 1
12
12
12
12
12
12
1 0 10 2
3 0 11 1
12
1 0 12
1 11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
1 10 1
11
•11
11
• 11
11
11
7 0 10 1
5 0 10 1
11
1 0 11
1
4
3
1
-------
TABLE V-28 (Continued)
IN3
Final Effluent (pjj/1)
Not
Toxic Pollutant Detected
118. Cadmium (Total)
119. Chromium (Total)**
120. Copper (Total)**
121. Cyanide (Total)
122. Lead (Total)**
123. Mercury (Total)
124. Nickel (Total)**
125. Selenium (Total)
126. Silver (Total)
127. Thallium (Total)
128. Zinc (Total)**
129 .2,3,7, 8-tutrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin (TCOD)
130.Ahietic Acid
131.Dehydroabietic Acid
132. Isopimaric Acid
133.Pimaric Acid
134.01eir Acid
135.1.inoleic Acid
136.Linolenic Acid
137.9,10-Epoxystearic Acid
138.9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid
139.Monochlorodehydroabietic Acid
140.Uichlorodehydroabietic Acid
141 .3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol
143.Xylene
0
0
0
0
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
j 1
11
<10 10-100
11
6 5
1 10
11
6 5
11
6 5
11
10 1
11
0 9
Not
>100 Ave Detected <10
1
8
27
10
10
1.2
13
2
5
2
2 55
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
11
2
3
6
11
11
12
8
11
11
11
11
3
0
11
4
12
2
12
12
12
0
0
0
2
1
1
10-100
8
8
7
10
6
4
1
5
4
2
1
2
1
1
>100
1
4
1
1
6
7
10
5
3
3
1
1
1
Not
Ave Detected
2
42
81
26
36
1.5
35
2
2
555
365
700
87
99
192
18
5
41
1
44
0
0
0 •
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
5
8
6
10
11
11
10
11
<10 10-100
11
7
0
11
5
11
3
10
0
0
1
1
' 2
1
4
6
7
1
7
3
3
2
3
1
>100 Ave
1
12
53,
10
16
1.5
1 38
2
6
4 124
1 94
2 89
12
16
6
I
1
-Not analyzed.
"••"'Consistent discrepancies existed between split sample results for this compound.
-------
TABLE V-29
SUMMARY OF SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS AT 17 VERIFICATION MILLS
Average
impound
f umber Compound Name
5
3
30
62
Benzidine
Acrylonitrile
1 ,2-dichloroethylene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Sample Location
Raw Wastewater
Final Effluent
Raw Wastewater
Final Effluent
Raw Water
Raw Wastewater
ND
15
11
16
11
16
16
Range
<10 10-100
1
1**
0
0
1
0
1
1**
1
2
0
1
Concentration
>100
0
0
0
0
0
0
(Mg/1)
1.1
1.5
1.4
3.2
0.2
1.0
-Compounds listed are those detected during screening studies conducted at 17
verification mills that were not detected in any wastewater samples taken at
the 11 mills sampled during initial screening surveys.
Tinal effluent from clarifier at a self contained mill.
173
-------
TABLE V-30
SUMMARY OF KPA REGIONAL S & A SCREENING PROGRAM RESULTS AT 42 HILLS
No. of Mills
Toxic pollutants where pollutant
detected above 10 MR/1 was detected
4.
H.
15.
17.
18.
20.
21.
23.
29.
31.
34.
35.
36.
43.
44.
4/ .
48.
49.
51.
53.
55.
56.
58.
62.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
70.
71.
82.
85.
86.
87.
112.
benzene
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
bis (chlo rouiethyl) ether
bis(2-chloroetliyl) ether
2-chloronapbthalene
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
chloroform
1 , 1-dichloroethylene
2,4-dichloroplienol
2,4-dimethylphenol
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2 , 6-di ni troto 1 uene
bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
methylene chloride
broinoforffl
dichlorobroraome thane
t ri chlo ro f 1 uoromethane
chlo rodibroiuome thane
hexachlorocyclopeatadiene
naphthalene
nitrobenzene
4-iiitrophenol
N-ni t rosod i pheny lamine
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)
10
9
0
0
1
—
21
35
4
16
9
0
0
1
16
1
8
5
2
1
10
3
1
2
10
34
27
9
17
12
5
1
10
23
8
1
Raw Waste
No. of Hills
where pollutant No. of Mills
was detected at Concentration where pollutant
greater than 10 MK/1 Range (MR/1) was detected
3
4
0
0
1
—
10
26
0
5
5
0
0
1
13
0
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
0
4
25
11
2
4
5
1
1
2
7
0
1
NO-
ND-
4,900-
-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
30
70
ND
ND
7,200
263
5,500
<10
223
85
ND
ND
74
ND-1 0,000
<10
ND-
ND-
ND-
<10-
ND-
ND-
<10-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
38
ND-
ND-
ND-
<10-
88
48
14
16
74
50
18
<10
54
940
624
240
380
67
31
40
200
<10
12
10
7
1
1
—
1
16
24
4
9
4
1
1
0
15
1
1
1
2
—
4
1
1
1
6
13
28
7
19
7
1
0
6
15
5
0
Final Effluent
No. of Hills
where pollutant was
detected at greater Concentrations
than 10 MR/1 Range (pg/1)
2
1
1
1
—
0
3
16
1
1
0
1
1
0
10
1
0
1
0
—
0
0
0
1
2
4
12
2
2
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
35-
ND-
-
ND-
ND-
ND-
17-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
<10-
80
16
24
12
<10
14
1,200
86
41
<10
14
15
ND
3,600
13
<10
260
<10
<10
<10
-------
TABLE V-30 (Continued)
Raw Waste
Final Effluent
Metals,
Total Cyanides
and Total Phenol ics
114,
US
118
119,
120.
122.
124.
125.
126.
127,
128,
. Antimony .
. Arsenic
. Cadmi uiu
. Chromium
. Copper .
. Lead
. Nickel
, Selenium,
. Silver -
, Thallium
. Zinc
Total Cyanides
Total Phenolics
Mills
where pollutant
was detected
12
8
9
•40
41
29
27
3
3
4
50
15
40
No. of Samples
detected at
10 to 99 M«A
14
9
12
58
75
28
36
5
6
10
45
25
16
No. of Samples
detected at
100 to 999 Mg/1
4
0
0
24
18
24
20
0
0
0
52
6
46
No. of Samples
at greater
than 1 rag/1
0
0
0
. 0
2
0
• o
0
0
0 :
•12
1
29
No. of Samples
where pollutant
was detected
6
2
5
24
28
18
23
7
1
6
39
6
32
Ho. of Samples
detected at
10 to 99 M8/1
11
2
5
33
64
19
28
10
3
12
58
11
45
No. of Samples
100 to 999 pg/1
0
0
0
17
3 •
13
13
0
0
0
25
0
21 ,
No. of Samples
at greater
than 1 mg/1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
2
en
The following pollutants were detected in at least one raw waste and one final effluent sample at a concentration of less than 10 l>g/l:
6. carbon.tetrachloride
7. chlorobenzene
24. 2-chiorophenol
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
38. ethylbenzetie
39.. -f luoranthene
54. isophorone
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
81. phenanthreue/anthracene
84. pyrene
The following pollutants were detected in at least one final effluent sample at a concentration of less than 10 (Jg/1:
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
33. 1f3-dichloropropylene
The following pollutants were detected in at least one raw waste sample at a concentration of less than 10 |Jg/l:
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
22. para-chloro-meta-cresol
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene
42. bts(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
45. methyl chloride
60. 4,6-dlnitro-o-cresol
77. acenaphthylene
-------
program mills to further investigate the presence
compounds in pulp, paper, and paperboard discharges.
of these three
Analysis of verification samples was done by GC/MS procedures that
included a quality control/quality assurance program developed
specifically for the analysis of pulp, paper, and paperboard
wastewater samples. As discussed in Section II, these procedures were
developed to provide higher quality analytical results than could be
obtained using the screening procedures.
In the verification program, data were obtained on 42 organic priority
pollutants, 6 metals, cyanide, 14 nonconventional organics (xylene, 4
resin acids, 3 fatty acids, and 6 bleach plant derivatives), color,
and COD.
Table V-31 presents a summary of the verification program priority
pollutant analysis results by compound and subcategory. The table
shows the number of mills sampled in each subcategory and the number
at which the specific compound was detected. The ranges of
concentrations and the average concentration of specific compounds at
those mills where the compound was detected are also shown. Results
for both raw waste and final effluent sampling points are presented.
Table V-32 presents a summary of the results of analysis for the
.additional nonconventional pollutants investigated during verification
sampling. 'The same methodology and format utilized in Table V-31 has
been used to present summary information in Table V-32.
Summary. Table V-33 lists the total number of facilities sampled
during the screening and verification sampling programs by
subcategory.
Supplemental Data on Nonconventional Pollutants
Color. Table V-34 presents additional color data obtained during
earlier EPA investigations (under Contract No. 68-01-3287). These
data have been used to supplement color data obtained during
verification sampling.
Ammonia. Limited data are available on raw waste or final effluent
discharge levels at the nine mills where ammonia is used as a
Theoretical calculations of the range of ammonia
ammonia
cooking chemical.
concentrations in raw wastewaters have been developed based on typical
rates of ammonia loss during pulping and pulp washing (losses due to
volatilization have not been considered in these calculations). Table
V-35 presents theoretical raw waste loads of ammonia in the
subcategories where ammonia is used as the base chemical in pulping
(semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite pulp, and both papergrade sulfite
subcategories).
176
-------
TABLE V-31
SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
FOR TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
4. Benzene
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders1 Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers •
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
6
9
6
6
6
4
12
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
6
9
6
6
6
4
12
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
6
3
3
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
1
0
1
3
3
2
7
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
3
1
2
2
0
0
5
1
3
1
1
0
0 •
1
—
0
0
2
0
1
Concentration Average
Range (lig/1) Concentration ([Jg/D Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
0
0-
5-.
1-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0
0
0
0-
0
0-
0
0
0-
0
0
3
1
6
5
2
150
7
6
1
4
1
2-
0-
0-
0-
0
0
0-
0-
2-
0-
0-
0
0
0-
—
0
0
0-
0
0-
3
2
3
3
96
3
3
4
1
3
2
4
1
0
1
5
3
1
57
2
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
o
1
.0
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
16
1
3
1
1
0
0
1
—
0
0
i
0
i
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatoient
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
. Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
CO
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
4. Benzene (continued)
Nonintegra ted-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegra ted-Mis eel laneous
7 . Chi orobenzene
Oeink
Tissue Papers
10 . 1 , 2-Dichl o roe thane
Deink
Tissue Papers
Nonintegra ted-Fine Papers
11. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Noiiintegrated-Mi scellaneous
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
9
6
12
3
15
3
9
3
12
6
3
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
9
6
12
3
15
3
—
3
12
6
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
2
3
2
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
1
3
3
3
7
2
7
0
3
3
3
•
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
--
0
0
3
3
Concentration Average
Range ((Jg/1) Concentration ((Jg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
6-
0-
0
37-
0
0-
0
0-
0
0-
3-
130-2
6-
0-
0-
0-
0
3-
4-
7-
4
11
1
47
5
2
71
7
,000
53
4
5
20
187
9
22
0- 2
0- 2
0- 2
0
0
0
0
0
1- 2
0
0
0
6- 8
0
0
2- 4
—
0
0
1- 5
4- 17
1
9
1
0
43
0
3
0
1
0
24
5
1,243
22
1
2
7
0
67
6
14
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
7
0
0
3
—
0
0
2
10
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Ponds
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
-------
TABLE V-31 (Coutinued)
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory
Total
Number Of Samples
Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration
Range (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
Average
Concentration (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
Comments
Influent/Effluent
13. 1,1-Dichloroethane
Papergrade Sulfite
21. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenoi
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
!->
IQ Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
23. Chloroform
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
12
12
5- 22
6
9
9
4
12
3
3
3
15
3
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
4
12
6
6
9
9
4
12
3
3
3
15
3
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
4
12
6
6 "
8
9
4
6
2
3
0
5
3
1
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
3
2
4
12
6
6
1
7
4
6
1
3
0
2
3
1
3
0
3
6
8
9
0
0
0
4
12
6
1-
0-
3-
7-
10-
0-
29-
0
0-
270-
0-
6-
0
360-
830-2
580-4
43-1
1-
1-
0-
110-
62-8
17-
26
21
23
15
370
16
65
5
420
18
30
900
,200
,000
,800
2
4
6
360
,600
240
3-
0-
0-
1-
2-
0-
39-
0
0-
420-
0-
6-
0
40-
6-
0-
2-
0
0
0
1-
120-1
4-
6
2
8
7
270
21
43
6
450
3
28
86
20
11
110
42
,200
36
11
8
11
11
181
7
48
0
2
360
6
18
0
647
1,405
1,550
1,148
1
2
3
268
2,677
99
5
1
3
5
106
7
41
0
1
430
1
19
0
67
12
6
52
0
0
0
13
433
15
12 0 "Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/llolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
CO
O
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic PolluUmt/Subcategory Influent Effluent
23. Chloroform (continued)
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paper board from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Integrated-Hiscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
24. 2-Chlorophenol
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
31. 2,4-Dichlorophenol
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
9
3
6
3
6
3
12
6
3
12
3
6
9
9
4
12
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
3
—
3
6
3
6
3
12
6
3
12
3
6
9
9
4
12
Total Hi
.. Detected
Influent
3
3
3
3
1
0
11
0
3
0
3
3
3
3
4
3
0
2
1
4
4
2
2
6
imber Of Concentration Average
Analyses Range ((Jg/1) Concentration (Hg/1) Comients
Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
3
3
—
3
0
1
3
0
—
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
3
0
4
2
1
7
3
670-9
1,000-1
1
12-
0-
0
0-
0
2-
0
0-
4-
2-
15-
0-1
3-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
2-
,700
,800
46
9
40
21
26
9
4
51
,100
15
120
2
8
4
6
4
220
95-
48-
—
2-
0-
0-
0-
0
—
0
0-
4-
4
2-
0-
2-
0
21-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
240
61
10
1
20
6
6
3
14
6
50
8
1
5
1
130
4,190
1,367
1
25
3
0
15
0
10
0
6
7
3
27
417
8
0
65
1.
4
2
3
2
103
145
55
—
5
0
1
4
0
—
0
3
5
4
3
5
4
0
27
0
4
1
2
1
53
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued) .
CO
I—>
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration (pg/1) . Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
31. 2,4-Dichlproplienol (continued)
Dei uk
Vine Papers
Tissue Papers
38. Ethylbenxene
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
BAt>
ag
Semi-Chemical
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
RooCiug Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nouintegrated-Paperboard
fntegrated-Miscellaneous
Noaintegrated-Hiscellaneous
39. Fluoranthene
Dissolving Kraft
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
3
3
3
6
9
6
6
6
3
3
3
6
3
9
3
6
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
4
3
3
3
6
9
6
6
6
3
3
6
3
3
6
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
4'
1
3
0
1
0
3
2
1
2
3
6
3
1
3
0
3
1
0
3
1
0
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
1
0-
1-
0
0-
0
i-
0-
0-
0-
27-
0
2-
0-
1-
0
54-39
0-
0
2-
0-
0
0
0-
0-
5
5
82
2
2
3
4
45
74
5
11
,000
2
6
2
7
4
0- 3
0- 2
0
0
0- 3
0
0- 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
36- 300
0
0
0- 2
0
0- 32
0
0
0- 1
2
4
0
27
0
2
1
1
2
33
0
27
2
5
0
13,081
1
0
3
1
0
0
2
, 1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
149
0
0
1
0
13
0
0
1
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/SubcateRory Influent Effluent
44. Mcthylene Chloride
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groimdwood-Fine Papers
l_j Deink
00 Tissue Papers
r^ Newsprint "
Tissue from Wastepaper
.Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
6
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
6
12
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
1
3
7
3
3
4
4
3
3
10
1
3
1
0
3
3
6
0
2
0
4
0
1
2
1
1
4
0
2
6
2
0
5
6
1
1
12
0
3
—
0
0
2
3
3
1
—
—
0
2
3
2
0
4
Concentration Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration ((Jg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
1-
0-
2-
2-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-2
0-
11-
0-
0
17-
1-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
1
2
4
3
3
290
21
220
3
,500
13
14
3
410
11
4
2
6
1
17
2
1
10
0
0-
0-
0-
0
0-
1-
0-
0-
2-3,
0
1-
—
0
0
0-
0-
3-
0-
—
—
0
0-
5-
0-
0
0-
2
4
1
6
14
80
2
100
3
4
4
142
1
1
8
2
12
\
1
1
2
3
2
50
6
58
2
291
4
12
1
0
174
5
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
7
1
1
2
0
1
2
1
0
4
5
13
1
271
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
50
1
—
—
0
1
7
1
0
2
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic PolluCant/SubcateRory Influent Effluent
Paperboard from Wastepaper
48. Dichlorobromomethane
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Alkaline-Fine
Papergrade Sulfite
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
15
3
3
9
12
15
3
9
3
15
3
3
9
12
15
3
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
0
1
1
3
3
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
3
0
Concentration Average
Range (ng/1) Concentration (|Jg/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0
0-
0-
13-
8-
0
0-
0-
0
119
4
18
40
3
14
0
0- 62
0
0
0- 5
0
1- 2
0
0
40
1
15
26
0
1
5
0
0
21
0
0
2
0
1
0
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
00
OO
49. Trichlorofluoromethane
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
0-
0
POTW
Primary Treatment
51. Dibromochloroiuethane
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
0-
0
POTW
Primary Treatment
54. Isophorone
Unbleached Kraft
Liuerboard
55. Naphthalene
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Suifite
6
4
12
6
4
12
8-
0-
3-
15
22- 230
0
0
7- 88
11 0 Biological Treatment
3 , 0 Biological Treatment
3 0 Biological Treatment
102 36 Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
00
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Polliitant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
55. Naphthalene (continued)
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Integrated-Miscellaneous
64. Pentachloropheitol
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Seini -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Buildera' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Noaintegrated-Miscellaneous
65. Phenol
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
3
3
3
6
3
12
9
9
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
12
9
9
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
12
6
3
3
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
2
0
0
3
1
3
3
1
1
6
3
3
3
0
5
3
1
0
6
0
4,
0
2
3
6
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
3
0
0
3
1
—
—
0
2
0
2
3
5
Concentration Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration (ng/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
67-
0-
0
0
16-
0-
5-
6-
0-
0-
1-
3-
9-
10-
0
0-
850-1
0-
0
17-
0
0-
0
0-
8-
13-
190
78
43
4
31
11
5
7
12
12
24
61
19
,200
6
160
29
200
110
26
0
0
0
0
0-
0
16-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
4-
27-
0
1,100-1
0-
_„
—
0
0-
0
0-
10-
0-
27
21
1
2
1
2
20
38
0
,400
4
5
68
29
2
142
48
0
0
26
1
19
8
2
2
6
6
15
38
0
6
1,050
2
0
65
0
12
0
72
54
20
0
0
0
0
18
0
19
1
1
0
1
1
12
34
0
1,200
1
0
1
0
27
18
1
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
CO
on
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
65. Phenol (continued)
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
g
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi— Chemical.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nouintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated Paperboard
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
3
15
3
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
9
6
3
6
6
6
4
11
6
3
3
1
0
6
0
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
4
5
2
0
3
6
4
2
3
0
6
0
4
8
4
0
0
0
4
0
3
2
1
3
.__
3
0
4
2
2
1
3
Concentration Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration (Mg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
25-
4-
41-
50-
160-
30-
12-
0-
15-
8-
76-
0-
0
4-
0
430-
6-
4-
7-
1,100-1
51-
44-
0-
0-
0-
0
8-
2-
92
14
110
140
400
100
19
640
51
41
150
4
140
500
91
8
9
,400
280
150
25
11
4
150
10
0-
0-
3-
0
3-
0
1-
0-
0-
0
0
0
0-
0
310-
0-
0-
1,200-1
—
22-
0 .
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
17
2
4
24
10
250
5
6
520
13
3
,700
66
9
3
17
3
3
55
11
77
89
230
56
14
176
28
22
119
1
0
41
0
457
41
6
8
1,233
134
94
6
3
2
0
64
6
5
1
3
0
14
0
5
41
2
0
0
0
2
0
427
1
1
1,433
—
38
0
3
2
10
1
1
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
GO
O1
Tota'l
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
65. Phenol (continued)
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
66. Bis (2-eUiylhexyl) Phthalate
Dissolving* Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint.
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
9
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
—
3
—
3
3
6
Total Ni
Detected
Influent
9
2
4
3
6
8
7
3
2
5
5
4
9
4
2
3
3
2
3
5
3
13
3
3
9
0
3
3
Miber Of
Analyses
Effluent
7
2
4
1
4
1
3
0
1
3
3
2
5
6
1
0
—
1
1
3
1
10
—
0
—
0
3
4
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (|Jg/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
0-
0-
15-
6-
0-
0-
3-
0-
0-
0-
2-
0-
0-
0-
4-
5-
0-
3-
0-
17-
0-
1-
1-
4-
0
410-2
0-
68
5
14
180
21
35
190
130
7
46
16
22
200
18
10
26
17
20
5
19
34
83
8
4
80
,500
13
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
1-
0-
0
—
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-1
—
0
—
0
22-2
0-
15
3
8
2
94
10
31
4
8
12
11
91
14
2
1
1
8
20
,173
,494
25
15
3
6
72
14
8
29
49
4
21
10
9
29
7
4
13
10
8
4
10
23
14
4
2
35
0
1,193
3
4
1
3
1
22
1
6
0
1
3
3
5
10
5
1
0
0
1
4
7
83
0
0
863
6
Biological Treatment
Primary w/llolding Pond
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
00
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxir P"l 1 iitaiit/SubcateBory Influent Effluent
66. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate (continued)
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 6 6
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Non-Woven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Noriintegra ted-Miscellaneous
67. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Ueink
Newsprint
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Hoofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
68. Di-n-Butyl Phthalate
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chepiical
3
3
6
12
3
6
6
4
3
3
15
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
5
6
4
3
15
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
g
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
3
1
3
6
9
3
6
2
1
0
3 -
3
4
0
3
3
2
6
5
2
3
1
6
5
0
2
2
0
9
3
5
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
1
5
1
1
3
0
0
Concentration Average
Range (Mg/1) Concentration (pg/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
6-
4-
0-
14-
4-
0-
6-
3-
0-
0-
0
3-
17-
0-
5-
620-
0-
3-
0-
0-
1-
0-
1-
73
7
1
160
31
25
15
150
39
1
8
190
170
12
950
13
4
27
2
10
1
11
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0
0-
38
0
•
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
1-
0
0
33
3
47
219
18
11
2
81
0
15
1
19
23
2
2
19
5
1
85
11
8
11
34
23 '
1
0
5 '
80
51
0
9
797
7
4
9
1
7
1
4
10
0
1
18
0
25
7
5
0
0
1
63
0
0
3
1
8
4
I
1
0
0
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-3I (Continued)
00
00
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Tnflnonr Rfflnpnf
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Inflt
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (llg/1) Comments
lent Effluent Influent KfFl,,»nf Tnri...n»/» *i ........
68. Di-n-Butyl Phthalate (continued)
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
70. Diethyl Phthalate
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
15
3
9
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
6
4
12
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
g
3
1 *1
13
3
6
3
3
6
12
3
5
6
4
12
2
I
4
3
1
1
0
o
1
2
1 1
Q
5
1
1
Q
0
3
4
2
1
j
1
Q
4
2
2
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
1
2
- 0
0'
0
0
0
0-
0-
~
0-
3-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0
0
110-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
12
2
3
8
9
10
2
17
85
21
25
3
3
230
7
7
2
20
9
5
0
0- 1
0
0- 11
0- 12
0- 12
0
0
0
30- 55
0
0
0
0- 5
0- 1
0
0- 6
0- 4
0
0
0
0
0- 14
5
1
1
3
5
3
1
0
0
6
32
9
0
8
1
1
0
0
180
1
2
1
13
9
2
0
1
0
4
6
5
0
0
0
44
0
0
0
2
1
0
20
1
0
6
0
0
5
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
00
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxi" B-.ii..i-."t/snl.r»V.Bonr«. Influent Effluent
70.
78.
84.
85.
Diethyl Phthalate (continued)
Deink
Fine Papers 3
Newsprint 3
Tissue from Wastepaper 3
£
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Hiscellaneous
Anthracene
Dissolving Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Pyrene
Dissolving Kraft
Tetrachloroethylene
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Paper grade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine
Tissue from Wastepaper
V
3
15
3
6
6
12
3
9
4
3
9
9
g
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
. £
3
!5
3
6
6
12
3
9
4
3
9
9
6
12
6
3
3
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
1
1
0
2
3
6
0
6
1
1
5
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
0
1
3
2
0
2
0
0
3
3
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (Hg/D Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
0-
0
0-
12-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0
0-
1-
0-
0-
0-
0-
22-
0-
0
10
4
55
210
690
180
35
12
6
5
3
6
5
3
2
2
180
220
0- 6
0
0
220- 320
0- 310
0
0
0- 130
0- 4
0
0
0- 1
0
0
0
0
0- 6
0
0
0- 57
0
3
1
0
26
79
234
0
29
* "12
4
2
2
1
0
2
3
1
1
0
1
95
74
0
2
0
0
273
71
0
0
58
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
19
0
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
ID
O
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/SubcateRory Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Infli
Concentration Average
Range ((Jg/l) Concentration (Mg/1) Comments
lent Effluent Influent Rf flnont! Tnflnonf IKff !„„„»
85. Tetrachloroethylene (continued)
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper aud
Roofing Kelt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
86. Toluene
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
15
9
3
6
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
9
3
15
3
--
3
6
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
--
3
1
0
1
0
0
3
. 2
3
6
8
3
4
3
3
1
9
6
3
3
3
3
5
1
8
3
8
0
0
0
—
0
3
0
0
0
. 0
0
0
0
3
0
0
7
3
0
1
- 0
2
0
6
3
—
0
0-
0
0-
0
0
2-
0-
1-
0-
0-
1-
0-
3-
2-
0-
0-
2-
11-
10-
5_
~
1-
0-
0-
0-
1-
0-
0
3
2
4
1
5
4
180
3
23
7
4
1
70
63
150
20
on
zu
4
4
2
39
6
620
0
0
—
0
8- 9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1- 4
0
0
0- 66
0- 2
0
0- 1
0
0- 8
0
2- 5
2- 5
—
0
1
0
1
0
0
3
1
3
1
23
2
6
5
3
1
23
13
58
15
14
. 3
2
1
10
4
81
0
0
0
_„
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
14
1
0
1
0
2
0
2
3
0
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Ot Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
86. Toluene (continued)
Nonintegrated-Fiue Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nouintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Noointegrated-Miscellaneous
87. Trichloroethylene
BCT Bleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Dei nk
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
106. PCB-1242
Ueink
Fine Papers
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
6
6
12
3
3
3
15
3
9
3
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
6
6
12
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
0
0
3
2
1
0
3
6
0
1
3
3
2
3
3
3
0
5
0
5
1
1
3
0
3
2
0
0
4
7
3
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
Concentration Average
Range (pg/l) Concentration (|4g/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
0
2-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0-
1-
4-
0-
2-
130-
8-
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
380
5
6
5
660
3
2
15
3
33
850
13
5
38
2
9.9
1- 2
0
1- 15
0- 2
0
0
0- 1
0- 150
2- 6
0- 2
0
0
0
0
3- 11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
130
2
2
0
2
99
0
1
2
9
1
15
493
11
0
1
0
11
1
3
2
0
6
1
0
0
1
66
4
1
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holdiug Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
l\3
Total
Huntber Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
107. PCB-1254
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Deiuk
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Hoofing Felt
Noninlegrated-Fine Papers
Noniutegrated-Filter
and Nouwoven Papers
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nouintegrated-Miscellaneous
110. PCB-1248
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and.
Roofing Felt
119. Chromium
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkal ine-Fiiie
6
3
6
15
9
3
3
g
3
3
12
6
15
9
3
3
6
9
9
£
3
6
15
3
--
3
3
3
12
6
15
—
3
3
6
9
9
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
1
0
4
0
1
2
3
0
2
0
1
0
2
1
0
4
0
2
0
3
6
9
9
3
0
0
3
0
1
3
—
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
—
0
3
6
9
9
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (ng/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent -infi«,nnafei. — »
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
CO
Tot
. . Number Of
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent
119. Chromium (continued)
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fiue Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noniutegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-I.ightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoveu Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
y
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
al
Samples
Effluent
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6 -
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
3
3 -
3
6
12
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
6
3
6
2
3
3
6
12
Concentration Average .
Range ((Jg/1) Concentration (Hg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
12-
18-
8-
18-
6-
1-
29-
12-
4-
8-
180-
5-
24-
290-
1-
<2
2-
5-
5-1
<1-
26
42
76
46
66
20
49
18
54
13
63
27
870
280
14 .
8
250
370
6
8
3
4
1
8
,800
12
5-
5-
16-
8-
11-1
3-
2-
6-
<1-
5
150-
*:
230-
<2-
<2-
0-
<\~-
<1-
8
17
23
47
,100
16
6
9
20
3
28
17
195
4
350
3
3
3
2
4
13
18
7
18
29
29
33
23
5
42
15
on
zy
8
20
17
91
230
9
5
81
337
3
5
12
3
1
6
675
5
7
12
19
19
285
8
2
5
12
y.
13
5
8
165
3
290
1
2
2
3
1
3
6
5
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
. Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/SubcateKorv Influent Effluent
119. Chromiuai (continued)
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
120. Copper
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
. 6
6
6
It
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
3
3
— —
—
3
6
3
6
Total Nuober Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
. 6
3
15
3
3
— —
—
3
6
3
6
Concentration Average
Range (Mg/1) Concentration ((Jg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent /Efflux
<1-
5-
39-
24-
18-
9-
<2-
12-
44--
16-
8-
<2-
12-
42-
22-
57-
8-
24-
8-
2-
150-
3-
25-
30-
185-
<1-
6-
17-
22
39
42
37
70
48
16
46
120
64
35
220
62
80
37
89
21
100
15
650
188
34
44
270
210
20
62
88
1-
<2-
<2-
4-
<2-
<1-
<2-
4-
5-
2-
6-
8-
5-
<2-
12-
- —
<1
3-
<2-
<2-
143-
2-
__
—
87-
<1-
16-
13-
20
2
42
26
42
23
7
15
37
28
'28
100
24
11
40
110
18
42
162
5
97
81
26
33
11
18
40
• 31
46
22.4
9
24
79
38
17
71
28
61
29
76
13
55
13
96
169
16
37
145
202
13
43
48
5
2
17
14
17
8
5
9
23
15
20
33
14
6
22
1
'47
8
15
152
' 4
— _
_._
'93
18
19
20
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW .
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment-
Biological Treatment
Primary
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABIE V-31 (Continued)
cn
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (pg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent F.ffluent Influent/Effluent
120. Copper (continued)
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscel laneous
121. Cyanide
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard front Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noni utegra ted-Lightwei ght
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
0
2
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
3
3
0
10-
14-
6-
17-
2-
4-
60-
<10
<10-
32-
72-
720-2
< JO
<10
29-
90-1
25-
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
to
O1
Toxic PoIliUaut/SubcateRory
12!. Cyanide (continued)
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
122. Lead
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kratt
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Dei nk
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Hoofing Felt
Total
Number Of Samples
Influent Effluent
6
9
jus 3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
!r 15
3
:s 3
3
9
3
6
9
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
3
3
~~
—
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
9
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
9
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
3
12
6
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
Concentration Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration ((ig/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Rf flnpnt
<10— ]
<10-
<10
0
5-
<1-
<1-
<2-
<2-
5-
47-
9-
11-
<2-
4-
64-
<2-
28-
<1-
4-
<2-
<2-
135-
2-
<2-
36-
210-
1,650
20
7
18
54
10
<20
24
31
42
25
86
16
320
44
260
30
120
8
900
230
33
<20
880
360
<10-
<10
<10
0
<2-
<1-
3-
<1-
2-
2-
22-
<2-
0-
<1-
4-
24-
<1-
-
<1-
4-
<2-
<2-
60-
7-
—
50-
80
15
29
45
15
10
34
50
24
30
42
19
30
22
3
120
3
140
130
18
190
310
11
10
0
6
9
17
6
13
14
95
24
16
25
9
149
22
163
12
44
5
137
198
22
13
264
273
26
10
10
0
8
9
18
6
5
16
35
13
15
11
8
28
10
—
2
38
2
23
92
12
—
_.
137
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
IO-
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
122. Lead (continued)
Nouintegrated-Fine Papers
Noniutegrated-Tissue Papers
Noniritegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
123. Mercury
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
3
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
6
3
6
2
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
5
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
3
6
Concentration Average
Range ((Jg/1) Concentration (Mg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
<1-
<1-
5-
<1-
1-
. <2-9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
0.6-
<0.5-
8
10
32
12
22
6
,000
40
40
30
. 0.6
1.8
2.4
1.2
1.2
<1- 5
6- 21
<2
0- <1
<1- 1
<2- 10
<2- 20
<2- 26
<2- 10
<2
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5- 0.9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0- <0.5
<0.5
<0.5- 1.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
•
<0.5
<0.5- 0.9
<0.5- 2.0
3
5
8
9
8
4
3,334
12
16
11
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.7
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
1.2
<0.5
1.0
0.6
3
13
2
1
1
6
9
7
7
2
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.7
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.8
0.8
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
00
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
123. Mercury (continued)
Paperboard from Vastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Jfanintegrated-Fine Papers
Noniiitegrated-Tissue Papers
Monintegraled-Lightweight
Papers
Nouintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Noniutegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Noriintegrated-Miscellaneous
124. Nickel
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bat»
ag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sult'ite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
15
3
3
— —
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
Total Nuaber Of Concentration Average
Detected Analyses Range (|4g/l) Concentration (|Jg/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
15
3
3
— «
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5-
2-
16-
<2-
<2-
<2-
8-
3-
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
1.5
8
59
120
33
9
12
22
29
45
48
8
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
__
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
2-
8-
1-
3-
<2-
6-
i:
2.2
0.7
0.6
15
18
30
16
6
10
17
12
269
18
10
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.6
<0.5
0.6
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.8
5
31
36
16
5
6
12
10
25
15
5
<0.5
0.7
<0.5
<0.5
__
<0.5
0.6
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
10
14
12
' 8
5
5
10
5
130
9
5
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTH
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
1.0
1C
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration Average
Range ((ag/1) Concentration ((Jg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
124. Nickel (continued)
Dei nk
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noniutegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Noniutegrated-Lightweight
Papers
NoninLegrated-Filter
and Nonwoveu Papers
Noninlegrated-Paperboard
Integral ed-Miscell aueous
Noni ntegrated-Miscellaneous
128. Zinc
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6 .
9
9
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6 .
9
9
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
5- .
4-
5-
5-
2-
42-
10-
84-
12-
<2-
<2
<1-
8-
73-
100-
74-
67-
20
9
30
4
25
92
139
130
2
48
160
65
12
10
2
3
29.
9
8
44
78
185
200
290
<':
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
1N3
O
O
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutaiil/Siibcategory Influent Effluent
128. Zinc (continued)
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Serai -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue trorn Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Holded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightwei ght
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Noni lit egrated-Paperboard
lutegrated-Miscellaneous
Non Integra ted-Hi seel laneous
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
—
3
3
—
3
6
6
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6 '
6
3
' 3
3 •
6
12
3
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
—
3
3
—
3
6
6
3
'3"
3
6
12
3
6
Concentration Average
Range (|Jg/l) Concentration (Mg/D Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
37-
41-
78-
24-
42-
5-
53-
97-
170-
300-
30-
52-
31-3
1,100-1
26-4
120-
262-
2,500-3
5-2
49-
6-
120
230
230
58
85
150
90
352
260
375
46
59
,560
,600
,720
330
465
,000
,100
91
185
46-54,000
12-
1 I'-
ll 8-'
72-2
12-
10-
40-3
22
15
193
,050
710
48
,840
27-
16-
31-
15-
37-
25-
9-
30-
51-
—
5-
22-
<5-
1,000-1
40-
—
26-
1,900-2
--
75-
19-
0-
9-
40-
<5-
15-1
1-
100
150
120
46
77
420
86
38
82
36
33
183
,900
210
53
,900
160
35
140
8
17
66
210
,800
7
,000
71
136
143
40
70
104
74
206
200
335
40
54
677
1,433
1,206
200
392
2,800
999
71
55
26,713
16
13
159
710
259
25
802
67
81
69
25
60
118
45
33
71
—
19
27
88
1,500
113
—
52
2,400
--
118
18
56
4
12
56
72
443
3
217
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
.Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary Treatment
-------
TABIE V-32
SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION PROGRAM ANALYSIS
RESULTS FOR NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
Average
ro
O
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
130. Abietic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and.
Roofing Felt
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
5
7
6
3
6
3
6
4
8
6
3
3
3
3
4
3
15
3
3
3
9
0
3
3
6
3
2
6
3
6
3
9
4
2
3
3
0
3
6
0
1
—
—
0
Concentration Concentration
Range (|lg/D (M8/D
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
8600-18000
0- 390
0- 2700
190- 1100
350- 1200
3700-12000
220- 290
650- 2000
94- 5200
0- 490
11- 600
700- 990
2300- 4100
370- 680
330- 740
0- 150
120- 260
18- 1900
120- 710
190- 250
540- 680
930-14000
0
100-2500
0-1800
15- 520
0- 11
0- 21
30- 250
35- 43
580-1000
0- 940
8- 340
0- 26
0- 31
50- 140
40- 90
0
35- 140
0- 96
0
0- 21
-- --
-- --
0
\11800
177
1043
470
753
6983
257
1392
1949
137
182
837
3467
557
513
54
203
651
407
210
633
7559
0
1467
767
119
3
10
165
39
710
383
76
7
12
97
72
0
84
19
0
7
— —
—
0
Comments
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
IN5
O
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
130. Abietic Acid (continued)
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Paper
Noniritegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
131. Dehydroabietic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
--
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
5
0
3
5
8
3
0
3
6
9
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
2
0
0
0
6
1
0
2
4
9
6
3
6
4
6
4
9
6
3
3
3
4
3
12
3
3
—
Concentration
Range (fjg/1)
Influent Effluent
0-
0
39-
0-
0-
140-
0
300-
10-
280-
140-
330-
660
-_
75
1800
4100
240
—
5200
560
1400
430
640
950-27600
79-
230-
190-
2-
28-
1400-
2600-
2200-
1400-
150-
220-
130-
410-
340-
550-
230
1000
1870
1300
360
2900
4800
4700
2400
840
650
920
530
530
620
0-
0
0
0
0-
0-
0
0-
18
__
--
160
24
—
800
0-1000
48-
3-
6-
30-
0-
200-
6-
0-
10-
42-
130-
180-
0-
160-
15-
59-
2-
—
310
7
15
200
27
330
400
950
50
62
630
300
37
300
140
120
170
—
Concentration
(MS/D
Influent Effluent
207
0
53
748
1029
177
0
3500
232
861
273
470
7142
168
607
1000
464
148
2267
3700
3267
1833
372
417
479
467
453
573
6
0
0
0
61
8
0
520
430
123
5
11
85
14
235
171
246
26
49
__
343
253
20
250
55
96
61
—
Comments
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/IIolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
INi
O
CO
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
Concentration Concentration
Range (pg/1) (M8/D
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Comments
131. Dehydroabietic Acid (continued)
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nouintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nouwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
132. Isopimaric Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Suifite Pulp
Papergrade Suifite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
9
3
6
3
6
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
—
3
6
3
6
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
2
0
1 *>
10
6
3
3
3
8
6
3
6
6
6
4
6
4
3
3
3
3
—
3
6
3
3
0
0
4
9
4
3
3
3
7
3
2
3
3
6
3
7
5
3
—
3
3
670-
110-
58-
160-
190-
0-
0
110-
0-
2-
10-
660-
66-
0-
54-
78-
380-
23-
260-
15-
0-
0-
420-
240-
110-
120-
6000
170
720
660
230
50
—
780
2000
400
16
1300
180
250
110
450
1600
48
850
1760
230
110
900
690
180
270
—
60-
17-
49-
85-
0
0
0-
0-
0-
160-
160-
230-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
140-
0-
0-
0-
1-
—
14-
1-
—
200
66
150
112
—
—
180
310
220
270
590
500
86
3
10
32
16
260
230
84
6
9
—
24
20
2199
143
433
483
213
33
0
413
585
174
14
887
115
107
74
283
770
34
547
774
62
29
587
510
150
193
—
117
45
93
98
0
0
64
96
67
200
380
407
21
1
6
15
7
187
115
17
3
5
. —
18
13
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
132. Isopimaric Acid (continued)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegra Led-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegra ted-Hiscellaneous
133. Pimaric Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Line rboard
Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
1-2
6
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
0
6
0
3
6
8
3
0
3
3
7
6
3
6
4
6
3
2
3
0
0
It
1
0
—
—
0
0
0
1
0
6
2
0
3
3
6
0
1
6
2
6
3
1
1
Concentration
Range (pg/1)
Influent Effluent
21-
13-
12-
65-
41-
80-
160-
0
8-
0
23-
8-
0-
69-
0
970-
120-
0-
20-
38-
420-
0-
37-
180-
0-
31-
43
45
600
100
56
120
3000
—
140
—
46
190
1400
110
—
1900
200
350
93
51
2500
130
370
450
64
150
0
0
0-
0-
0
—
—
0
0
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0
620-
320-
0-
0
0-
10-
0-
39-
20-
0-
0-
—
—
15
23
—
—
—
—
—
~
6
—
77
22
—
790
530
74
—
3
60
13
190
38
52
15
Concentration
(M8/D
Influent Effluent
32
.28
128
84
48
94
1164
0
39
0
37
62
374
84
0
1357
157
115
63
43
1168
36
152
277
25
76
.
0
0
3
8
0
—
—
0
0
0
2
0
31
11
0
710
430
22
0
1
32
4
106
31
17
5
Comments
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Uolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
ro
O
cn
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
133. Pimaric Acid (continued)
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Nonintegra ted-Miscellaneous
134. Oleic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
3
3
3
3
3
11
3
3
0
9
0
5
0
2
3
4
3
0
3
6
7
6
3
6
6
6
0
— "
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
2
6
4
6
3
3
4
6
Concentration
Range (pg/1)
Influent Effluent
92-
220-
31-
36-
2-
19-
0-
35-
48-
0
130-
0
0-
0
0-
22-
0-
40-
0
3000-
250-
0-
16-
160-
1700-
21-
210-
160 • '
310
52
160
18
78
210
48
64
—
1600
—
40
—
15
29
1300
65
—
4500
520
2900
970
500
6700
200
1200
0
• —
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0
0
0
0
0-
0
0
0-
22-
0-
15-
4-
0-
0-
130-
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— "
—
—
— -
—
—
48
—
—
810
250
92
130
65
150
56
800
Concentration
(Mg/1)
Influent Effluent
127
257
39
80
12
43
78
41
57
0
576
0
19
0
10
25
384
54
0
3667
345
1084
276
337
3133
115
618
0
— '
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
— •
0
0
0
0
0
25
0
0
333
153
17
41
38
70
33
407
Comments ' '
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
ro
O
CD
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
134. Oleic Acid (continued)
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
6
' 3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
6
6
12
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
• 3
3
9
0
3
0
6
3
11
3
0
4
12
4
3
—
3
3
5
1
10
0
3
—
0
0
0.
4
0
5
2
0
Concentration
Range (pg/l)
- Influent Effluent
28-
14-
17-
500-
1300-
190-
310-
98-
81-
34-
180-
460-
340-
830-
0
55-
0
4-
250-
0-
48-
0
1860
330
450
1200
1500
710
560
270
200
940
450
540
360
3500
—
80
—
290
270
1900
68
—
31-
13-
0-
30-
—
470-
220-
0-
0-
0-
0
5-
—
—
0
0
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0
120
220
46
75
—
750
280
310
74
310
—
80
—
—
—
—
—
61
—
230
13
—
Average
Concentration
(MS/D
Influent Effluent
1157
130
174
967
1367
400
410
183
147
339
290
493
353
2237
0
65
0
136
260
450
55
0
81
76
23
49
—
590
243
193
25
78
0
48
—
—
0
0
0
27
0
38
8
0
Comments
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatnent
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
135. Linoleic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT B]cached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Serai-Chemical
3
6
9
9
3
6
6 .
3
6
9
.9
3
6
6
3
6
6
3
3
6
3
1
4
0
3
O
0
3 '
2200-
220-
180-
170-
150-
610-
66-
3900
2300
1300
470
270
1700
160
0-
0-
0-
2-
0
0
13-
510
100
—
7
—
—
}7
2900
792
762
283
203
958
122
170
53
0
4
0
0
14
Biological
Biological.
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Contiuued)
Average
O
-vl
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
135. Linoleic Acid (continued)
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Dei ilk
Pi ne Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegra ted-Fine Papers
Noiiintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Nouintegra ted-Miscellaneous
136. I.iuolenic Acid
Market Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
12
6
3
6
9
6
6
12
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
12
6 :
3
6
9
6
6
12
6
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
6
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
5
0
3
3
8
0
1
0
0
7
2
0
1
3
3
3
5
3
3
1
4
3
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0 ,
1
1
0 .
0
0
0
0
3
0
0 :
Concentration
Range (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
98-
240-
8-
180-
260-
160-
38-
74-
0-
0
170-
110-
0-
0
6-
0
0
0-
0-
0
0-
42-
670-
54-
0-
120-
820
1000
270
620
650
1200
86
320
87
—
240
150
3600
—
200
~ •
—
830
77
-'-
210
93
3170
140
130
480
0-
0-
0-
11-
. 0
—
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0 -
0
0
0
31-
0
0
170
25
160
150
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
~
—
—
9
6
—
—
—
—
—
39
—
--•
Concentration
(HS/1)
Influent Effluent
441
510
63
337
470
750
55
178
63
0
207
123
897
0
67
0
0
290
33
0
70
71
1543
98
58
250
59
8
34
72
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
35
0
,0
Comments
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological "Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment'
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
PO
O
OD
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
136. Linolenic Acid (continued)
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
137. Epoxystearic Acid
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Paperboard from Wastepaper
139. Chlorodehydroabietic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkal ine-Fiue
Sepii -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
3
3
15
3
9
3
3
6
12
15
3
3
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
3
6
12
3
--
15
3
--
3
3
6
12
15
3
3
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
3
6
12
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
3
3
0
3
0
3
3
1
3
0
3
4
5
9
0
4
6
3
3
0
4
3
-~
1
0
—
0
0
2
1
0
0
3
3
5
0
3
3
3
0
2
3
1
Concentration
Range (pg/1)
Influent Effluent
85-
<100-
55-
0
84-
0
800-
99-
0-
310-
0
1300-
0-
0-
2-
0
45-
8-
330-
18-
0
0-
330
<200
83
—
170
—
850
380
120
490
—
1600
120
190
240
360
340
730
28
84
79-
.._
0-
0
—
0
0
0-
0-
0
0
330-
0-
0-
0
4-
0-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
120
—
14
—
—
—
~
190
20
—
700
140
31
18
241
93
—
26
3
Concentration
(Mg/1)
Influent Effluent
212
167
69
0
138
0
817
266
40
413
0
1433
50
78
44
0
161
123
467
24
0
33
99
__
5
0
0
0
113
7
0
0
473
42
11
0
9
108
39
0
14
0
1
Comments
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment .
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
Average
Concentration Concentration
Range (|jg/l) (Hg/1)
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Comments
140. Dichlorodehydroabietic Acid
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Suifite Pulp
Papergrade Suifite
Deink
Fine Papers
Integrated-Miscellaneous
141. Trichloroguaiacol
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Suifite Pulp
Papergrade Suifite
Deiuk
Fine Papers
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
12
6
9
9
4
12
3
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
12
6
9
9
4
12
3
3
2
2
0
1
3
2
1
3
1
4
1
3
2
3
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
I
0
2
3
30-
0-
0-
0
0-
6-
0-
0-
15-
0-
0-
6
2-
0-
86
15
32
--
280,
5
12
5
21
1
9
—
6
28
11-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0
0
0
0
Or
0
0-
10-
65
4
—
30
00
3
—
—
—
—
2
—
2
17
57
3
6
0
93
2
6
2
18
1
4
6
4
14
39
1
0
13
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
14
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
142. Tetraculoroguaiacol
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Suifite Pulp
Papergrade Suifite
Deink
Fine Papers
143. Xylenes
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag-
Semi-Chemical
6
9
9
4
12
6
9
9
4
12
6
6
9
1
1
0
1
5
1
0
4-
2-
4-
4
0-
23
17
17
—
2
0
0-
0-
2
0
—
1
8
—
—
11
8
7
4
1
0
1
3
2
0
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
4- 16
0-
8
22- 44
8- 10
0- 4
6- 13
0
0
1-
33
9
2
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
t\5
H-»
O
" Total- Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
143. Xylenes (continued)
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Hiscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
149. Color
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Liuerboard
Bag
Stiiui -Chemical
6
12
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
9
3
6
3
6
12
6
3
6
12
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
3
—
3
6
3
6
12 -
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
3
1
3
2
0
5
1
5
1
9
2
3
2
3
7
3
0
0
0
0
--
0
0
1
0
0
0
—
0
3
0
3
1
' 3
0
Concentration
Range (pg/1)
Influent Effluent
19- 27
0- 4
0- 20
5- 110
0- 9
0
0- 140
0- 31
0- 6
0- 3
3- 63
0- 32
140-37000
0- 8
5- 14
0- 160
7- 10
0
0
0
0
— —
0
0
0- 13
0
0
0
-_ __
0
160-1600
0
1- 4
0- 4
6- 340
0
(Platinum Cobalt Units)
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
1086- 2220
1420- 1920
875- 2030
630- 1210
70- 290
340- 1900
1820- 8000
935-1326
1310-1920
1340-2040
430-1380
190- 240
350-2400
2350-6400
Average
Concentration
(Mg/D
Influent Effluent
22
1
7
46
5
0
28
10
3
1
18
16
13547
5
8
23
9
0
(Platinum
1475
1680
1233
850
173
1130
3915
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
—
0
800
0
3
1
147
0
Cobalt Units)
1160
1597
1610
826
213
1208
3825
Comments
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Hplding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological. Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological. Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
149. Color (continued)
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
IJeiiik
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Was tepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper
aud Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscell aneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
4
12
6
- 3
—
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
—
6
3
6 :
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
0
6
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
6
3 '.'
15
3
3
—
—
--
6
3
6
2
3
3
5
12
6
3
Concentration Concentration
(Platinum Cobalt Units) (Platinum Cobalt Units)
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Comments
200-
1070-
14-
<5-
48-
160-
210-
<5
<5-
5-
<5-
950-
82-
<5-
370-
0
<5
48-
<5
<5
<5
10-
<5-
<5-
<5
<5
1080 :
2600
7100
300
140
420
220
—
470
40
570
970
170
125
1980
—
830
—
'"--
100
14
4660
—
, ',"170-
390
850-3600
. <5-3150
<5-
31-
—
100-
<5
14-
14-
<5-
880-
23-
- —
—
—
<5
6-
<5
0-
<5
<5-
0-
48
90 .
—
190
—
50
50
200
920
810
--
--
--
—
82
--
<5
.-
20
50
<5-4590
<5
<5
—
~
425
1506
3046
139. '
103;
320
217
5
88
23
159
960
121
53
936
0
5
311
5
5
5
43
7
1060
5
5
258
1668
1500
21
68
—
153
5
31
38
86
897
302
'
—
'
5
34
5
3
5
10
15
938
5
5
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW .
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary .Treatment ,
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment.
Biological Treatment
Biological. Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
ro
I—«
ro
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
150. Ammonia
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
151. COD
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Ueink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper
and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
Concentration Average
Range Concentration
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Comments
(rau/1) (»R/1)
4
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
6
4
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
6
3
2
2
6
9
. 9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
14
3
3
3
8
0
•' '6
3
6
3
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
5
3
15
3
3
—
—
0
6
3
6
6.2- 24.3
0- 260
0--1510
530- 920
300- 1270
400- 820
550- 670
590- 1840
1940- 2820
648- 1296
1744- 3170
780- 8700
450- 1020
700- 2850
1980- 4720
1700- 2400
370- 512
230- 500
160- 250
0- 6400
• 8440- 9060
- 262- 346
560- 880
0- 5120
"'• o
87- 220
' '254- 763
16- 666
3.45- 9.5
6.8- 48
330- 780
370- 440
290- 470
110- 310
220- 490
345-1000
1045-1930
80- 464
1040-2170
690-2370
77- 200
50- 260
— —
360- 500
72- 87
0- 220
110- 156
5- 540
2980-8320
66- 101
— —
— —
0
73- 110
22- 26
85- 142
12
105
933
735
765
576
617
1113
2410
897
2251
4901
625
1600
3733
2063
435
363
190
1244
8833
291
693
3487
0
168
437
209
7
21
497
407
397
244
310
663
1493
310
1404
1342
' 136
170
—
430
80
160
131
201
4797
82
—
—
0
87
25
107
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
' Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
151. COD (continued)
Nonintegrated-Ligbtweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Monwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Hiscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analysis
Influent Effluent
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
Concentration Concentration
Range (mg/1) («g/l)
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
230-
77-
230-
<5-
140-
125-
130-
475
136
250
370
2240
230
810
45-
13-
40-
12-
92-
28-
81-
90
57
56
97
590
80
98
313
104
240
203
848
184
493
69
28
49
46
255
48
89
Comments
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
ro
i-»
co
-------
TABLE V-33
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING
DATA BASE
Subcategory or Mill Grouping
No. Mills Sampled
EPA Region
Screening Screening
Verification
Total
Mill Visits
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite2Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter &
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
1
4
2
5
4
0
3
2
4
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
7
1
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
2
4
0
0
2
1
2
1
3
6
2
4
3
2
i
2
2
4
0
3
2
6
6
8
6
2
6
5
6
5
2
1
3
1
3
2
3
11
2
6
4
3
1
3
2
12
2
5
Total
47
11
60
118'
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
Some mills sampled for screening and verification; 106 different facilities were
sampled.
214
-------
TABLE V-34
SUPPLEMENTAL COLOR DATA
Subcategory
Total Number of Samples
Influent Effluent
Concentration Range
(Platinum Cobalt Units)
Influent Effluent
Average Concentration
(Platinum Cobalt Units)
Influent Effluent
Comments
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
6
12
12
21
6
12
12
23
1310-1780
1010-2360
1040-3380
650-1480
1170-1710
1040-2360
1160-1830
480-1830
1545
1733
1625
953
1460
1830
1480
953
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
-------
TABLE V-35
THEORETICAL RAW WASTE AMMONIA LOAD
Ammonia
Required (a) (b)
Subcateeorv (lb/t)
Semi-Chemical 67
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 125
Papergrade Sulfite 100
BPT RWL Flow
(kgal/t)
10.3
10.3
66.0
66.0
44.5
44.5
Assumed
Recovery
Efficiency
%
50
90
50
90
50
90
Raw Waste Load
r NH3-N
Ub/t)
33.5
6.7
62.5
12.5
50.0
10.0
(mg/1)
390
80
114
23
135
27
(a) Reported average figure required per ton of pulp produced (25).
(b) As nitrogen.
216
-------
Limited data are available on actual ammonia raw waste loads. Table
V-36 presents available ammonia data for five of the nine mills where
ammonia is used for pulping. These data are generally within the
range presented in Table V-35 and tend to support the theoretical
calculations.
217
-------
Subcategory and Mill No.
TABLE V-36
AVERAGE RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
FOR MILLS USING AMMONIA AS
THE CHEMICAL PULPING BASE
Ammonia(a)
(mg/1)
(Ib/t)
Data Source
Semi-Chemical
020014
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
046005
046006
337
20
20.4
6.9
DMR data
Verification Survey data
Papergrade Sulfite
040001
040008
040012
040016
040019 (b)
040020
98
--
47
-«•
157
32.5
— —
26.1
— —
4.0
(c)
DMR data
Verification
Survey data
(a) As nitrogen.
(b) Pulp mill only.
(c) "Aerated Lagoon Treatment of Sulfite Pulping Effluents," Report to U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series Program 12040 ELW,
December 1970.(36)
218
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Agency is in the process of an exhaustive study of the pulp.
paper, and paperboard industry, the purpose of which is to establish
effluent limitations reflecting the best conventional pollutant
control technology (BCT) and the best available technology
economically achievable (BAT), new source performance standards
(NSPS), and pretreatment standards for new and for existing sources
(PSNS and PSES). After completion, of a review of existing
regulations, a review of available literature, and an evaluation of
data obtained during sampling at over TOO mills, the following
pollutant parameters have been identified as present in pulp, paper,
and paperboard wastewaters and should be subject to limitation under
BCT and BAT regulations, NSPS, PSNS, and PSES, as appropriate.
Conventional Pollutants:
Toxic Pollutants:
BOD5., TSS, and pH.
Trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol,
chloroform, and zinc.
In addition, the Agency is seeking public comment on the
nonconventional pollutant ammonia because only limited information is
available on the discharge of this pollutant. Ammonia is known to be
used as a pulping chemical at nine mills in four subcategories of the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry: semi-chemical, dissolving
sulfite pulp, and both papergrade sulfite subcategories.
SELECTION OF WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The determination of pollutant parameters of significance in
wastewater discharges from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
involved a review of existing regulations and an evaluation of data
obtained after completion of an extensive sampling program.
All pollutants detected in pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters are
subject to limitation except if excluded for one or more of the
following reasons:
Conventional Pollutants
1. The pollutant is indirectly measured by measurement for another
parameter.
2. The pollutant is indirectly controlled when a selected parameter
is controlled.
3. Insufficient data are available on which to base limitations.
219
-------
Toxic Pollutants
Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources Defense
CouncilT Inc. v. Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified 12 ERC 1833
(DJXC. T979)(l)T2l7~provides guidance to the Agency on exclusions of
specific toxic pollutants, subcategories, or categories from
relations unde? the effluent limitations guidelines, standards of
performance, .and pretreatment standards:
"8(a) The Administrator may exclude from
regulation under the effluent limitations and
guidelines, standards of performance, and/or
pretreatment standards contemplated by this
Agreement a specific pollutant or category or
subcategory of point sources for any of the
following reasons, based upon information
available to him:
(i) For a specific pollutant or a
subcategory or category, equally or more
stringent protection is already provided by
an effluent, new source performance, or
pretreatment standard or by an effluent
limitation and guideline promulgated pursuant
to Section(s) 301, 304, 306, 307(a), 307(b)
or 307(c) of the Act;
(ii) For a specific pollutant, except
for pretreatment standards, the specific
pollutant is present in the effluent
discharge solely as a result of its presence
in intake waters taken from the same body of
water into which it is discharged and, for
pretreatment standards, the specific
pollutant is present in the effluent which is
introduced into treatment works (as defined
in Section 212 of the Act) which are publicly
owned solely as a result of its presence in
the point source's intake waters, provided
however, that such point, source may be
subject to an appropriate effluent limitation
for such pollutant pursuant to the
requirements of Section 307;
(iii) For a specific pollutant, the
pollutant is not detectable (with the use of
analytical methods approved pursuant to
304(h) of the Act, or in instances where
approved methods do not exist, with the use
of analytical methods which represent
state-of-the-art capability) in the direct
discharges or in the effluents which are
'introduced into publicly-owned treatment
220
-------
works from sources within the subcategory or
category; or is detectable in the effluent
from only a small number of sources within
the subcategory and the pollutant is uniquely
related to only those sources; or the
pollutant is present only in trace amounts
and is neither causing nor likely to cause
toxic effects; or is present in amounts too
small to be effectively reduced by
technologies known to the Administrator; or
the pollutant will be effectively controlled
by the technologies upon which are based
other effluent limitations and guidelines,
standards of performance, or pretreatment
standards; or
(iv) For a category or subcategory, the
amount and the toxicity of each pollutant in
the discharge does not justify developing
national regulations in accordance with the
schedule contained in Paragraph 7(b).
(b) The Administrator may exclude from
regulation under the pretreatment standards
contemplated by this Agreement all point
sources within a point source category or
point source subcategory:
(i) if 95 percent or more of all point
sources in the point source category or
subcategory introduce into treatment works
(as defined in Section 212 of the Act) which
are publicly owned only pollutants which are
susceptible to treatment by such treatment
works and which do not interfere with, do not
pass through, or are not otherwise
incompatible with such treatment works; or
(ii) If the toxicity and amount of the
incompatible pollutants (taken together)
introduced by such point sources into
treatment works (as defined in Section 212 of
the Act) that are publicly owned is so
insignificant as not to justify developing a
pretreatment regulation..."
Nonconventional Pollutants
1. The pollutant is indirectly measured by measurement for another
parameter.
2. The pollutant is indirectly controlled when a selected parameter
is controlled.
221
-------
3. Insufficient data are available on which to base limitations.
4. The pollutant is not of uniform national concern (i.e., the
pollutant is present at only a small number of sources and is
uniquely related to those sources) and should be regulated on a
case-by-case basis, as appropriate.
5. The pollutant is present but cannot be effectively
technologies known to the Administrator.
Review of Existing Regulations
reduced by
Conventional, toxic, and nonconvent ional pollutants have been limited
under promulgated effluent limitations guidelines and performance
standards applicable to wastewater discharges from the pulp, paper,
and paperboard point source category. Table VI- 1 presents a summary
of the pollutants that have been regulated or have been proposed to be
regulated in previous Agency rulemaking for each of the subcategories
of the industry.
Conventional Pollutants. Regulations limiting the discharge of
TSS, and pH were proposed and/or promulgated for the original 22
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry (see Section
IV). These pollutants are subject to regulation as specified in
sections 301 (b) (2) (E) and 304(a)(4) through identification of the
"best conventional pollutant control technology" (BCT) .
Toxic Pollutants. The only toxic pollutant presently regulated is
zinc. This pollutant has been regulated in the
groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-
fine papers subcategories; at the time of promulgation of BPT effluent
limitations, zinc was commonly discharged at mills in these
subcategories due to the use of zinc hydrosulf ite as a bleaching
chemical.
Responses obtained during a survey of the industry indicated that zinc
hydrosulf ite was still used at a limited number of mills in the
industry. Since the potential exists for the discharge of zinc due to
the continued use of zinc hydrosulf ite, this pollutant will be
regulated in those subcategories where zinc is currently regulated.
Nonconventional Pollutants.
Two nonconventional pollutants are
currently controlled under existing regulations: settleable solids and
color. Settleable solids are limited under regulations applicable to
the builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory of the builders'
paper and board mills point source category. Settleable solids are
measured during the analysis for suspended solids (TSS), a
conventional pollutant. Therefore, it has been concluded that
settleable solids will be controlled by limitations reflecting the
best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT) and that BAT
limitations for control of settleable solids are unnecessary and
redundant.
222
-------
PO
GO
TABLE VI-I
SUMMARY OF PARAMETERS PROPOSED OR PROMULGATED
FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES BY SUBCATEGORY
Conventional Pollutants
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Dei nk
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperhoard from Wastepaper
Wastepapf r-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-E'ine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Noni ntegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
BOD5
X
X
X.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
TSS
X
X
X ,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
gH Settleable Solids
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
_
-
_
_
_
„
'
-
_
-
-
.
-
-
X
-
-
-
-
Toxic Pollutant
Zinc
Nonconventional Pollutant
Color
X Regulations were proposed and promulgated for this pollutant or pollutant parameter.
* Regulations were proposed for this pollutant or pollutant parameter.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
The BPT BOD5 effluent limitation for acetate grade production in the Dissolving Sulfite Pulp Subcategory was
remanded to EPA.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
BAT limitations have been established for control of color in
discharges from mills in the unbleached kraft, sodium-based neutral
sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC), ammonia-based neutral sulfite semi-
chemical (NSSC), and unbleached kraft/NSSC (cross recovery)
subcategories. It has also been proposed that the discharge of color
should be limited in discharges from the dissolving kraft, market
bleached kraft, BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft,
fine bleached kraft, and soda subcategories through implementation of
BAT limitations. However, as discussed in Section II, BAT limitations
were never promulgated for these subcategories. Additional
subcategories where highly-colored effluents are discharged include
both papergrade sulfite subcategories and the dissolving sulfite pulp
subcategory.
As a result of further investigations by the Agency since the current
BPT and BAT limitations were proposed and promulgated, it has been
concluded that the discharge of color in pulp, paper, and paperboard
effluents is not of uniform national concern. Therefore, color will
be controlled on a case-by-case basis as dictated by water quality
considerations. While uniform national color limitations will not be
established, the capabilities and costs of various end-of-pipe
treatment techniques for the removal of color will be presented in
Sections VII, VIII, and IX of this document as a reference for use by
permit writers.
Identification Of. Other Compounds Of Concern
In addition to the pollutants controlled by existing regulations, the
potential for discharge of other toxic and nonconventional pollutants
has been investigated as a part of EPA's ongoing studies. A total of
129 specific toxic pollutants and 14 additional nonconventional
pollutants have been the subject of extensive study (See Section II).
Screening and verification studies have been conducted that have led
to the exclusion of many 'specific toxic pollutants from regulation
based on the guidance provided in Paragraph 8 of the Settlement
Agreement.
Screening Program. As discussed in Section II, the screening program
consisted of three separate investigations: a) the initial contractor
screening program, b) contractor screening studies conducted during
verification sampling, and c) screening studies conducted by Regional
Surveillance and Analysis (S&A) field teams.
Results of_ Initial Contractor Screening Program-Table 11-3
presents the list of toxic and additional nonconventional pollutants
analyzed as part of the screening program. Table V-28 presents a
summary of the results of the contractor's initial screening studies.
As previously discussed in Section II, it was determined that the
specific toxic pollutants to be investigated during the verification
program would be based on this abbreviated initial screening program
and on other available data including information obtained in
literature reviews and during the industry survey program. Specific
pollutants- were eliminated from investigation during the verification
224
-------
program only if the pollutant was not detected in wastewater samples
collected during the initial contractor screening program, with the
exception of seven metals: antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,
selenium, silver, and thallium. Based on initial screening results,
it was determined that these seven metals were -present in amounts too
small to be effectively reduced by the application of available
control and treatment technologies.
Results of Contractor Screening Studies
Verification Sampling-Table V-29 presents the results of screening
Conducted During
''•• . • '" i i n* i ii* JT-~ —— —•.. •— •- w M ^. wiw S^JU *-* •*+* L. *~-\~ 11 ± 11\^
studies conducted by the contractor during verification sampling at 17
mills where processes were employed that are representative of those
segments of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry not included in
the contractor's initial screening investigations.
Results of_ Regional S&A Screening Studies-Table V-30 presents the
results of screening studies conducted by EPA Regional S&A field
teams.
Exclusion of Toxic Pollutants From Regulation Based on the
Results of_ the Screening Program-Table VI-2 presents a list of ~Thos~e
specific toxic pollutants that have been excluded from regulation
based on screening program results.
Verification Program. Table I1-8 presents a list of all compounds for
which chemical analyses were obtained during the verification program.
A summary of the analysis results has been presented in Table V-31 .
Toxic Pollutant Assessment. Analytical results of those toxic
pollutants detected in verification program samples have been assessed
to identify those pollutants of potential concern and to determine
which pollutants should be subject to limitation through the
implementation of uniform national standards.
Anticipated treatability levels for the specifie toxic pollutants were
developed by personnel in the Office of Quality Review, Effluent
Guidelines Division.(37) Projected treatability for metals (zinc,
nickel, copper, lead, and chromium) and cyanide were based on the
proposed pretreatment regulations for the electroplating industry
point source category.(38) The basis for comparing the results for
mercury was its solubility concentration. Table VI-3 presents
projected treatability levels for those compounds included in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard verification program. Verification
analysis results have been compared with the treatabilities listed on
Table VI-3 to determine if additional removal of these compounds might
be possible through the application of various control and treatment
technologies known to be capable of removing specific toxic compounds.
Based on this comparison, 20 toxic pollutants were eliminated from
further consideration in the assessment of pollutants of potential
concern in discharges from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
These toxic pollutants were eliminated in accordance with Paragraph
8(a)(iii); it has been determined that these pollutants are "present
225
-------
TABLE VI-2
CRITERIA FOR AND ELIMINATION OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
BASED ON SCREENING PROGRAM RESULTS
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii)
"For a specific pollutant, the pollutant is not
detectable "
1. acenaphthene 88.
2. acrolein 89.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 90.
9. hexachlorobenzene 91.
12. hexachloroethane
16. chloroethane 92.
18. bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 93.
19. 2-chloroethylvinyl ether (mixed) 94.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 95.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 96.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 97.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 98.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 99.
40. 4-chlorophenylphenyl ether 100.
41. 4-bromophenylphenyl ether 101.
42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 102.
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane 103.
45. methyl chloride (chloromethane). 104.
46. methyl bromide (bromomethane) 105.
50. dichlorodifluoromethane 113.
52. hexachlorobutadiene 116.
53. hexachlorocyclopentadiene 129.
57. 2-nitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
61. N-nitrosodimethylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
72. benzo (a) anthracene
(1,2-benzanthracene)
73. benzo (A) pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene)
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. benzo (k) fluoranthene
(11,12-benzo fluoranthene)
79. benzo(ghi)perylene
(1,12-benzoperylene)
82. dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
(1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)
vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane (technical mixture and
metabolites)
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE (p,p'-DDX)
4,4'-ODD (p,p'-TDE)
a-endosulfan-Alpha
b-endosulfan-Beta
endosulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
a-BHC-Alpha
b-BHC-Beta
r-BHC (lindane) - Gamma
g-BHC-Delta
toxaphene
asbestos (fibrous)
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
226
-------
TABLE VI-2 (Continued)
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii)
3. acrylonitrile
5. benzidine
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane
17. bis(chloromethyl)ether
20. 2-chloronaphthalene
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
30. 1,2-dichloroethylene
33. 1,3-dichloropropylene
(1,3-dichloropropene)
34. 2,4-dimethylphenol
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene
"For a specific pollutant is present in amounts
too small to be effectively reduced by technologies
known to the Administrator "
56. nitrobenzene
58. 4-nitrophenol
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
71. dimethyl phthalate
80. fluorene
83. indeno (l,2,3,-c,d) pyrene
114. antimony
115. arsenic
117. beryllium
118. cadmium
125. selenium
126. silver
127. thallium
227
-------
TABLE VI-3
PROJECTED TREATABILITY FOR VERIFICATION PROGRAM TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Verification Compound
Toxic Compounds (Priority Pollutants)
Compound Concentration
Used For Comparison (pg/1)
Source for
Concentration Used
QD
benzene
chlorobenzene
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1 , 2,2-tetrachloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroethane
2,4, 6- trichlorophenol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
2 , 4-dichlorophenol
ethylbenzene
f luoranthene
methylene chloride
bromoform
dichlorobromome thane
trichlorofluorome thane
dichlorodifluorome thane
chlorodibromoine thane
isophorone
naphthalene
phenol
bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
anthracene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
acenaphthylene
trichloroethylene
PCB 1242 (Arochlor 1242)
PCB 1254 (Arochlor 1254)
PCB 1221 (Arochlor 1221)
50
50
' 5100
50
5100
25
5100
50
50
50
10
5100
50
5100
5100
5100
5100
50
50
50
10
1.0 - 10.0
25
10
25
10
50
50
10
5100
1.0
1.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
•n
*
*
*
*
-------
TABLE VI-3 (continued)
IN3
l\5
IQ
Verification Compound
Toxic Compounds (Priority Pollutants)
Compound Concentration
Used For Comparison (|Jg/l)
Source for
Concentration Used
i — ifc K i w —
chrysene
phenathrene
parachlorometa cresol
2, 4-dinitrophenol
PCB 1232 (Arochlor 1232)
PCB 1248 (Arochlor 1248)
PCB 1260 (Arochlor 1260)
PCB 1016 (Arochlor 1016)
carbon tetrachloride
1 , 2-dichloroethane
pentachlorophenol
pyrene
zinc
nickel
copper
lead
chromium
cyanide
mercury
1.0
10.0
50.0
25.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
50
100
10
1
1800
1800
1800
300
2500
230
100
*
*
Jt.
*
*
vV
*
*
*
*
JU
tft
*.
^.JL,
**
**
**
**
**
7V**
References
*Murray P. Strier, "Treatability of Organic Priority Pollutants - Part C - Their Estimated
(30 Day Average) Treated Effluent Concentration - A Molecular Engineering Approach,"
Table I, 1978.
**Treatability levels as specified in the Pretreatment Regulations for the Electroplating
Industry point source category.
on solubility of mercury.
-------
in amounts too small to be effectively reduced by technologies known
to the Administrator." These . toxic pollutants are listed in Table
VI-4.
The following compounds were not detected in samples collected at
of 60 mills where verification surveys were conducted:
any
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
2,4-dinitrophenol
Chrysene
Phenanthrene
Para-chloro-meta-cresol
Chrysene and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane had been included in the
verification program because they were detected during the screening
program in the raw wastewater from one mill at a level of less than
one microgram per liter. These compounds were not detected in either
raw wastewater or final effluent samples from any of 60 mills during
verification sampling and analysis, including four mills in the same
industrial subcategory as the one mill where they were detected during
the initial screening program. During screening studies conducted by
Regional S&A field teams, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane was detected in
the final effluent of one mill at a level lower than the projected
treatability level presented in Table VI-3.
The compound 2,4-dinitrophenol was included on the list of
verification compounds because its use was reported at one mill for
which a survey response was received. However, it was not detected in
samples collected at any of the 60 mills where verification surveys
were conducted. During screening studies conducted by Regional S&A
field teams, 2,4-dinitrophenol was detected in the final effluent of
one mill at a level lower than the projected treatability level
presented in Table VI-3.
Phenanthrene was included in the verification program because the
analysis procedures utilized during the screening program did not
provide a basis for distinguishing between anthracene and phenanthrene
because they co-elute. During screening, the presence of either
anthracene or phenanthrene or both was indicated. Therefore, both
anthracene and phenanthrene were included on the list of compounds to
be investigated during verification sampling. The procedures utilized
during the verification program allowed for distinction between
phenanthrene and anthracene. Phenanthrene was not detected at any of
the 60 verification mills.
Para-chloro-meta-cresol was added to the list of verification
compounds because it is a chlorinated phenolic. Based on literature
reviews, it was determined that potential existed for the presence of
chlorinated phenolics in pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents.
However, para-chloro-meta-cresol was not detected in wastewater
samples at any of the 60 verification mills.
230
-------
TABLE VI-4
TOXIC POLLUTANTS ELIMINATED FROM ASSESSMENT
BASED ON VERIFICATION PROGRAM RESULTS
DETECTED BELOW TREATABILITY LEVEL
6. carbon tetrachloride
(tetra chlo romethane)
7. chlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
22. parachlorometa cresol
39. fluoranthene
44. methylene chloride
(dichloromethane)
48. dichlorobromomethane
49. trichlorofluoromethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
54. isophorone
59. 2,4-dinitrophenol ,
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate~
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
76. chrysene
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene ,
81. phenathrene
84. p'y rene
108. PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)
109. PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)
112. PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)
119. chromium (total)
120. copper (total)
123. mercury (total)
124. nickel (total)
Not detected during verification sampling; detected in final effluent(s)
during screening program below treatability level.
Not detected in final effluent(s) during screening or verification program.
3
Laboratory contaminant.
Not detected during verification sampling; co-elutes with anthracene using
screening procedures.
231
-------
The toxic pollutants bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and methylene
chloride have been eliminated from further consideration at this time
because they were reported to be laboratory contaminants. Therefore,
verification data on these compounds may not be valid. The toxic
pollutant methylene chloride is used in the preparation of sample
containers and in extraction procedures used in the analysis of
semi-volatile organic toxic and nonconventional pollutants.
Based on the comparison of available verification data to the
treatability levels developed by the Office of Quality Review, those
toxic pollutants with concentrations equal to or in excess of
specified treatability levels in either the raw wastewater or treated
effluent have been identified for each subcategory. Table VI-5
presents a summary of the toxic pollutants of potential concern for
each subcategory based on this comparison.
Upon determining the toxic pollutants of potential concern, an
evaluation of available data was performed. The purpose of this
analysis was to determine those pollutants of potential concern that
should be limited through implementation of uniform national
standards. Table VI-6 presents data summaries used in the
determination of which toxic pollutants occur at sufficient levels and
frequency to require implementation of uniform national standards.
The summary includes the range and average concentrations of the toxic
pollutants found in raw wastewater and final effluent samples
collected at all mills where levels exceeded the treatability levels
presented in Table VI-3. Average concentrations were calculated based
on those mills in a subcategory where the specific pollutant levels
exceeded the treatability level. This method allows presentation of
levels of pollutants that would approximate the average concentrations
expected at mills where the pollutant is present due to use of
similar processes or process chemicals.
Additional PCB data were obtained from the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation to supplement that obtained during
verification sampling.(39) All available PCB data have been summarized
to form the basis of decisions on the necessity for establishment of
uniform national guidelines for the control of PCBs. Table VI-7
presents a summary of the PCB data obtained from the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation.
As a result of this evaluation, 20 toxic pollutants were eliminated
from further consideration in the assessment of the necessity for
development of uniform national guidelines. Paragraph 8(a) of the
Settlement Agreement provides guidance for the elimination of these
specific toxic pollutants. Table VI-8 lists those criteria cited in
Paragraph 8(a) and the specific toxic pollutant(s) eliminated based
upon the criteria.
It has been determined that uniform national standards should be
established for the control of three additional specific toxic
pollutants: chloroform, trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol.
Chloroform was consistently detected at levels in excess of the
232
-------
I\3
OO
GO
TABLE VT-5
SUMMARY OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
OF CONCERN BY SUBCATEGORY
Toxic Pollutants
Stibcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Liuerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite2Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Sec
-------
TABLE VJ-6
SUMMARY OF DATA ASSESSMENT - TOXJC POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
ro
GO
Number of Samples Alia lyzed
I'oxic
4.
11.
21.
23.
24.
31.
38.
Pol 1 ulant/Subra tegory
Benzene
Papergrade Sulfite
1,1,1 -Tricbloroethane
Papergrade SulfiLe
Integrated Miscellaneous
2,4, 6-Tri chloropheuo I
Market Bleached Kraft
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Nouiutegrdted Miscellaneous
Chloroform
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
2-Chlorophenol
Pdpergrade Sulfite
2 , 4-Di chlorophenol
Papergrade Sulfite
Ethylbenzene
Market Bleached Kraft
Tissue from Wastepaper
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Influent
12
12
12
6
12
6
18
9
3
6
9
9
4
12
6
3
6
12
12
12
6
9
6
Effluent
12
12
12
6
12
6
18
9
3
6
9
9
4
12
6
3
6
12
12
12
6
9
6
Number of Samples in Excess Concentration
of Treatabtlity levels Kange MR/1
Influent
3
3
1
1
3
3
3
1
3
6
9
8
4
11
3
3
3
3
2
3
1
1
3
Effluent
1
0
0
0
3
3
3
]
0
0
0
3
0
12
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
Influent
140-150
130-2,000
3-187
13-26
330-370
29-65
270-420
6-30
360-900
830-2,200
580-4,000
43-1,800
110-360
62-8,600
130-240
670-9,700
1,000-1,800
450-1,100
0-120
180-220
0-82
2-74
54-39,000
Effluent
7-96
6-8
0
5-6
170-270
39-43
420-450
6-28
40-86
6-20
0-11
2-110
1-42
120-1,200
16-36
95-240
48-61
2-14
21-50
90-130
0
0
36-300
Average
Concentrations \ig/l
Influent Effluent
147
1,243
67
20 •
350
48
360
18
647
1,405
1,550
1,148
268
2,677
170
4,190
1,367
833
65
203
27
27
13,081
40
7
0
5
210
41
430
19
67
12
6
52
13
433
26
145
55
10
37
106
0
0
149
Contents
Detected in final efflu-
ent samples of one mill
at low levels.
(a)
(a)
(b)
Detected in two fiual
effluent samples at one
mill where biological
treatment is not
empl oyed .
(a) Detected in final effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatability comparison value.
(b) Detected in final effluent samples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at mill(s) where BPT effluent
limitations are riot attained.
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued)
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategc
Number
iry Ii
of Samples Analyzed
ifluent Effluent
Number of Samples in Excess
of Treatability Levels
Concentration
Range M8/1
Influent Effluent
Average
Concentrations |4g/l
Influent Effluent
Comments
OO
in
44. Methyleue Chloride
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Unbleached Kraft and
Serai-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
47. Broraoform
Paperboard from Wastepaper
55. Naphthalene
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
64. Pentachlorophenol
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Paperboard from Waslepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofin;
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
65. Phenol
Dissolving Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
J.inerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Laboratory contaminant
6
12
9
18
18
12
6
12
9
18
18
12
:s
;paper
>fing Felt
sous
Laneous
rs
er
3
6
9
9
12
6
3
6
18
12*
12
9
3
9
3
- 6
6
6
12
6
6
9
3
6
9
9
12
6
3
6
18
0
12
9
3
9
3
6
6
6
12
6
6
9
2
1
2
1
2
2
5
6
3
2
1
5
2
5
6
3
6
1
3
2
1-290
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
3
3
-
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0-220
0-2,500
17-410
0
0-119
22-230
67-190
0-78
5-31
6-11
9-12
3-12
9-24
10-61
0-1,200
17-160
12-29
0-200
8-110
44-92
41-110
50-140
160-400
30-100
78-640
15-51
76-150
24-140
0-5
0-80
2-3,100
0
3-142
0-62
7-88
16-21
0-1
0
0-2
4-20
27-38
0-1,400
0-5
0-68
10-29
0-17
3-4
0
3-24
0
0-250
0-5
0
0-6
98
113
379
174
0
40
102
142
48
19
8
11
6
15
38
356
65
23
72
54
67
77
89
230
56
333
34
119
77
27
357
0
50
21
36
19
1
0
1
12
34
400
3
27
18
7
3
0
14
0
80
2
0
2
(b)
(b)
*1 mill was self- -
contained and 3 dis-
charge to POTWs.
(b)
(a) Detected in final effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatability comparison value.
(10 Detected in final effluent samples at leveU higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at mill 60 where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained.
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued}
Number of Samples in Excess Concentration
Number of Samples Analyzed
Average
ro
CO
CTi
Toxic Pollutant/SubcateKory
65
66.
67.
. Phenol (cont.)
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven
Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Bis(2-elhylhexyl)Phthalate
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Serai-
Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nouintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nouintegrated Miscellaneous
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Unbleached Kraft
Bag
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Newsprint
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Hoofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Influent
18
12
9
6
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
4
12
6
3
6
9
18
12
9
6
6
6
12
9
6
4
3
18
12
6
Effluent
18
0
9
6
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
4
12
6
0
6
9
18
0
9
6
6
6
12
9
6
4
0
18
0
6
Influent
9
12
2
1
1
3
3
2
5
2
4
3
1
3
1
1
2
2
8
6
4
2
3
2
4
6
2
.0
3
7
3
3
Effluent
3
3
1
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
0
1
1
2
1
_
0
0
4
0
4
2
1
0
5
2
0
1
_
3
0
1
Influent
59-500
_
44-150
8-150
10-68
15-180
6-21
0-35
6-190
3-130
0-46
0-16
2-22
0-200
0-18
5-17
0-26
6-19
0-83
20-80
0-2,500
6-73
14-160
4-31
0-25
3-150
0-39
0
3-8
0-190
5-12
620-950
Effluent
0-520
22-66
0-3
0
0-2
0-75
0-10
0-31
0
0-8
0-12
0-11
0-91
2-14
„
0-1
6-8
0-1,173
4-2,494
0-33
0-47
0
0-219
0-18
0
2
_
0-81
0
0-15
Influent
204
409
94
64
31
72
14
16
42
49
21
10
9
38
9
10
11
14
17
49
599
19
85
11
8
26
23
0
5
61
9
797
Effluent Comments
144
38
1
0
Laboratory contaminant
1
22
3
9
0
3
3
5
13
7
_
1
7
83
438
10
18
0
25
6
0 Detected in final
2 effluent samples at
very low levels.
21
0
5
(a) Detected in Hnai effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatability comparison value.
0>) Detected iu final effluent samples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at mill(s) where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained.
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued)
rv>
co
Toxic Pollutant/Siibcategpry
68. Di-N-Butyi Phthalate
BCT Bleached Kraft
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Noniutegrated-Paperboard
70. Diethyl Phthalate
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing '.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
84. Pyrene
Dissolving Kraft
85. Tetrachloroethylene
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
86. Toluene
Alkaline-Fine
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
Fine Papers
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
87. Trichloroethylene
Deink
Fine Papers
106. PCB-1242
Deink
Fine Papers
107. PCB-1254
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-
Chemical
Deink
Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Fiiter
.Papers
Non iulegrated-Mi seel1aneous
Number of Samples in Excess Concentration
Number of Samples Analyzed of Treatability levels Range MS/1
a Q 1
ird
fing Felt
>rd
6
18
12
g
6
18
6
u
18
0
6
6
1
3
1
7
3
1
0
0
3
1
0
5
0
2
0-27
0-85
110-230
0-55
12-690
0-180
0-35
0-12
0-23
30-55
0-61
0
0-320
0
0-130
Average
Concentrations Mg/1
Influent Effluent
16
32
180
26
183
42
12
4
8
44
20
0
138
0
58
Comments
Detected in final
effluent samples at
very low levels.
Detected at low levels
in final effluent
samples of only two
mills where BPT limits
are attached.
0-6
3
9
9
12
6
3
12
6
12
3
9
9
12
6
3
0
6
12
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
0
1
0
1
0
0
-
0
6
22-180
0-220
1-180
10-70
1-63
11-150
0-620
2-380
0-660
0
0-57
0
3-66
0
0
-
1-15
70-150
95
74
62
44
23
58
120
130
147
0
19
0
29
0
0
-
6
99
130-850
0-9.9
493
Only detected in one
final effluent sample.
(b)
:mi-
Nonwoven
leous
6
6
6
9
6
6
6
9
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0-3.8
0-28
0-7.1
0-2
0
0
0
0
1
9
2
1
0
0
o-
Only detected in one fin:
effluent sample
low levels.
at very
(a) Detected in final effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatability comparison value.
(b) Detected in final effluent samples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at mill(s) where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained.
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued)
ro
oo
00
Tqxi<
110.
121.
122.
128.
Nunber
Humber of Samples in Excess Concentration
of Samples Analyzed of Treatability Levels Ranpo iip/1
: Pollutant/Snbcategory Influent
PCB-1248
Pauerboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Cyanide
Deink
Newsprint
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonilltegrated-Paperboard
Lead
Deink
Fine Papers
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Zinc
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
NoaiiiLegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonilltegrated-Paperboard
Noni ntegra ted-Miscel laneous
18
12
3
12
6
3
18
12
6
9
18
12
6
6
9
Effluent
18
0
0
0
6
3
18
0
6
9
18
0
6
6
9
Influent Effluent
3
2
. 3
4
1
1
1
2
3
1
5
5
3
1
1
0
„
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Influent
8.3-10
0-7.4
720-2,600
155-1,200
21-1650
64-320
130-900
180-880
3,300-9,000
118-3,560
550-4,720
1,200-3,000
52,000-54,000
170-2,050
42-3,840
Effluent
0
16-80
24-30
<2-140
50-190
6-20
110-183
75-1,900
60-140
54-210
<2- 1,000
Average
Concentrations ue/1
Influent Effluent
9
4
1,560
499
610
149
443
355
6,667
1,316
1,811
2 267
53,333
1,273
1,347
0
42
28
51
137
11
148
469
88
138
401
(a)
(a)
(a)
(b)
(a) Detected in final effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatability comparison value.
(b) Detected in final effluent samples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at mill(s) where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained. ,
-------
TABLE VI-7
SUMMARY OF NEW YORK STATE
PCS ANALYSIS RESULTS
Effluent (pg/D
Treatment Type/Type of Product
Biological
Board
Groundwood Pulp/Board
Groundwood Pulp/Molded
Deinked Pulp/Fine Paper
Primary Only
Tissue
Deinked Pulp/Tissue Paper
Deinked Pulp
No Treatment
Tissue
Board
D/S
6 /
1 /
1 /
1 /
4 /
1 /
1 /
2 /
1 /
L
6
I
1
1
4
1
1
2
1
Range Median
<0.01 - 14 <0.25
<0.06 - 5 0.23
<0.1 - <0.3 <0.2
<0.05 - <1 <0.05
0 - 18 <1.0
<0.1 - 4.5 1.1
0.56 - <1 <1
0.2 - 3.6 <1.0
0.7 - 5.7 2.6
Comment
75 Samples
12 Samples
13 Samples
12 Samples
43 Samples
11 Samples
12 Samples
17 Samples
10 Samples
1D/S - Number of mills where PCB's were detected /Number of mills sampled.
239
-------
TABLE VI-8
CRITERIA FOR, AND ELIMINATION OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
BASED ON VERIFICATION PROGRAM RESULTS
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii) "For a specific pollutant .... is present in amounts
too small to be effectively reduced by technologies
known to the Administrator ..."
4. benzene
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
24. 2-chlorophenol
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol
38. ethylbenzene
47. bromoform
55. naphthalene
65. phenol
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
85. tetrachloroethylene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
106. PCB 1242*
107. PCB 1254*
110. PCB 1248*
111. PCB 1260*
121. cyanide
122. lead
*PCB's have been found at part per billion levels at mills where wastepaper
is used as a raw material. Under Paragraph 12 of the Settlement Agreement,
the Administrator may establish more stringent effluent limitations, guide-
lines, standards, or other necessary controls upon a determination that the
discharge of PCB's would interfere with attainment or maintenance of water
quality in a specific portion of the navigable waters.
240
-------
anticipated treatability in the raw waste discharge at those mills
where pulp is bleached with chlorine or with a chemical containing
chlorine. The chlorophenolics (trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol)
were consistently detected in excess of treatability levels at those
mills where slimicide and biocide formulations containing these
compounds were used.
In addition, available data show that.PCBs have been found at levels
ranging from <.l to 69 ug/1 in discharges from deink mills and other
mills where recycled paper is used as a raw material.(10)(39) The
higher discharge levels occurred prior to July of 1977, the statutory
deadline for attainment of BPT effluent limitations. Upon
implementation of BPT, the discharge of PCBs has been reduced to
substantially lower levels (with the upper range on the order of 10
ug/1). Due to the large flows involved in the production of paper,
even these lower levels may result in the discharge of significant
quantities of PCBs from deink and other recycle mills.
Under Paragraph 12 of the Settlement Agreement, the Administrator may
establish more stringent effluent limitations, guidelines, standards,
or other necessary controls upon a determination that the discharge of
PCBs would interfere with the attainment or maintenance of water
quality in a specific portion of the navigable waters.
It has been demonstrated that improved removal of suspended solids
will result in additional reductions in the discharge of PCBs and it
may be inferred that tighter suspended solids control may lead to a
reduction in the discharge of PCBs.(10) Available data, however, do
not allow the establishment of national guidelines because a definite
correlation between TSS and PCBs cannot be established at the present
time. Because of the potential for significant environmental harm
from the discharge of PCBs, the Agency intends to obtain additional
data concerning treatment technology and the discharge levels of PCBs.
EPA will evaluate all available data between proposal and promulgation
to determine whether BAT limitations for control of PCBs are
appropriate.
Nonconventional Pollutant Assessment. During the screening and
verification programs, investigations included a total of 14
additional nonconventional pollutants (xylene, four resin acids, three
fatty acids, and six bleach plant derivatives) specific to the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry and ammonia (used at nine mills as a
cooking chemical). Table V-32 presents a summary of the verification
program results for these nonconventional pollutants. One of the
bleach plant derivatives, 9,10-dichlorostearic acid, was detected only
once in an internal process sewer sample at a market bleached kraft
facility. Therefore, it has been eliminated from further
consideration because it was not detected in final effluent samples at
any of 60 mills.
Another nonconventional pollutant, xylene, was detected in significant
quantities in the final effluent at only one verification mill, where
it was known that xylene was used. Therefore, it is recommended that
241
-------
uniform national regulations not be established for control of xylene
in the pulp, paper, and paperboard point source category; the
pollutant (a) was detectable at potentially significant levels in the
effluent of only one source within the category where the pollutant is
uniquely related to only that source or (b) was present in amounts too
small to be effectively reduced by technologies known to the
Administrator. If it is known that xylene is used at a mill, it is
recommended that the permit writer undertake ,a closer examination of
the levels being discharged to determine if xylene should be limited
in the NPDES permit.
Data on the remaining four resin acids, three fatty acids, and five
bleach plant derivatives have been evaluated. Verification program
results for raw waste and final effluent discharges were summarized
for each compound by subcategory. A similar summary was completed for
all of the verification mills where BPT effluent limitations for BODS
and TSS were attained. Tables VI-9, 10, 11, and 12 present these
summaries.
As shown in Table VI-13, in almost all cases, significant reductions
of resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant derivatives are attained
through application of existing biological treatment systems employed
at the mills where verification sampling was conducted. Low levels of
these compounds were generally present in final treated effluents.
Other than verification data, very little additional information is
available on the levels of resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant
derivatives present in wastewater discharges from the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. Data are generally limited to assessment of the
removal capability of biological treatment systems. Almost no data
are known to exist that relate to other applicable treatment
technologies such as foam separation, chemically assisted
clarification, ion exchange, or activated carbon. EPA's Office of
Research and Development has only just begun investigations into the
capabilities of various control and treatment systems in removing
resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant derivatives. This sparcity
of data makes it impossible at this time to establish uniform national
standards limiting the discharge of these compounds.
Wastewaters discharged from mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry are generally nutrient deficient. It is normally necessary
to add nutrients, such as ammonia and phosphorus, to ensure efficient
operation of biological treatment systems. However, there are nine
mills in the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite pulp, and both
papergrade sulfite subcategories where ammoni-a is used as the base
chemical in pulping. Sources of ammonia discharges at these mills are
blow condensates and unrecovered cooking liquors.
At the present time, no treatment processes are known to be utilized
in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry to specifically remove
ammonia. Few data are available on the levels of ammonia being
discharged at these nine mills; therefore, BAT limitations for the
control of ammonia will not be proposed at this time. The Agency is
seeking all available information on the levels of ammonia discharged
242
-------
TABLE VI-9
SUMMARY OF INFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FAIT* ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
1-
2-
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached
Kraft
BCT Bleached graft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp 3
f\i Papergrade Sulfite
-P* (Jroundwood-Fine
Papers
Treatment
Tvoe
1 ypK
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Abietic
130
11,800
11
1,043
470
753
6,983
257
1,392
1,949
137
182
Dehydro- Iso-
abietic pimaric
131 132
3,500
26
861
273
470
7,142
168
607
1,000
464
148
887
107
74
283
770
34
547
774
62
29
Pimaric
133
1,357
115
63
43
1,168
36
152
277
25
76
Oleic
134
3,667
383
1,084
276
337
3,133
115
618
1,157
130
174
Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy-
leic lenic steairic stearic droabietic
135 136 137 138 139
2,900 — 817 — 1,433
-
1,320 70 — — 3
762 — - — 78
283 71 — ~ **
203 — — — —
958 1,543
122 98
441 — 266
510 - - -- 161
63 58 40 — 123
337 250
Chlorodeby- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
140 141 142 Total
26,361
5 1,818
318 4,062
64 7 "; 1,571
— [ 2,089
"' 21,697
— ' 830
— , 4,023
93 6 4 5,931
2 4 1 1,109
1,196
.Secondary Fibers Segment
Dei ilk
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tisane from
Wastepaper
•Paperboard from
Wastepaper
Biological
837
POTW 3,467
Partial Flow, 557
Biological
Biological
Primary
Biological
Primary
Biological
513
203
54
407
651
2,267
3,700
3 ,267
1,833
417
372
467
479
587
510
150
193
28
32
84
128
127
257
39
80
43
12
41
78
967
1,367
400
410
147
183
290
339
470 212 — — ^67
750 167
55 .. - - 24
— — — --
—
-_
__ — — — — — —
63 69 413 — —
6 14 8 5,962
10,218
— ", 4,492
3,029
Y. 838
— — — 653
1,289
2,220
*Average concentrations fig/1.
?Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
2lncludes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
3Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE VI-9 (CoiiLinuc.l)
no
.,„ Type
1- 2-
llehydro- Iso- Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dicbloro- Chloroduhy- Chlorodcliy- Trichloro- Tetracbloro-
Treatment Abietic abietic pimaric Pimaric Oleic leic lenic stearic stearic droabietic droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
Tvue I30 131 '3' 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 To
Wastepapur-Molded
Products Biological
POTW
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Fell TOTW
Primacy
Notiintegrated Segment
Noni n teg ra ted-Fine Primary
Papers Biological
Noni ntegra ted-
Tissue Papers Biological
Noniiitegrated-Light-
weigbt Papers Biological
Nonintegrated-Fi Iter
and Nonwoveu
Papers Biological
Non integrated-
Paperboard Biological
lutegrated-
Hi scellaneous Biological
Nonintegrated-
Miscellaneous Primary w/
Holding
Pond
Primary
210
633
7,559
—
__
207
53
—
—
748
1,029
—
177
453
573
2,199
143
483
433
213
—
33
413
585
14
174
48
94
1,164
—
..
39
37
. —
—
62
374
—
84
57
—
576
—
..
19
10
—
—
25
384
—
54
493 207
353 123
2,237 897 138 ' —
—
65 67
136
—
—
260
450 290 — — — 33
—
55 33
*iw AMJ 1*1^, 1UL4IL
1,468
1,776
14,770
143
483
830
449
33
1,508
2 — -- 3,147
!4
577
"•'•'Average concentrations |lg/J.
-------
TABLE Vl-10
SUMMARY OF EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RF.SIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
Dehydro- Iso-
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached
Kraft
BCT Bleached graft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Treatment
Type
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Abietic
130
1,467
—
119
3
10
165
39
abietic
131
520
3
123
5
11
85
14
piraaric
132
380
—
21
1
6
15
7
Pimaric
133
710
—
22
—
1
32
4
Oleic
134
333
69
17
41
38
70
33
Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro-
leic lenic stearic stearic
135 136 137 138
170
—
—
4
~
—
14 35
Chlorodehy-
droabietic
139
473
—
11
—
~
—
9
Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
140 141 142
—
—
1 — 1
— 1 3
—
__ — — — —
13
Total
4,053
72
315
58
66
1 367
168
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp 2
Papergrade -Sulfite
pv Groundwood-Fine
CTT Papers
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
710
383
76
7
235
171
246
26
187
115
17
3
106
31
17
5
407
81
76
23
59 -- 113
8
34 — 7
72
—
108
39
—
2
1 1
_ _ __ __
1,817
899
514
136
Secondary Filiers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Paper
Tissue from
Wastepaper
Paperboard from
Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded
Products
Biological
POTW
Partial flow,
Biological
Biological
Primary-
Biological
Primary
Biological
biological
POTW
12
—
97
72
84
—
—
19
7
"
49
343
253
250
20
96
55
61
"
5
—
18
13
--
—
8
3
—
"
49 — 99
—
590 -- -- — -- 14
243
25
193
—
78 -'- 5
48
14 9 , 237
„_ __- — — — —
1,062
581
— — — 359
213
104
160
116
'"Average concentration (Jg/1
I
2
Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
'Includes Papergiade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE VJ-10 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
ro
*>
CTi
Dehydro- Iso-
Treatment Abieljc abietic pimaric Pimaric Oleic
130 131 132 133 134
1- 2-
Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
leic lenic atearic stearic droabietic droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 Total
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
NoninLeRrdted Segment
Papers
Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers
Nonantegrated-Light-
weight Papers
Noaintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-
Haperboard
Integraled-
Miscellaneous
Notiintegrated-
Miscellaneuus
POTW
Primary
nt
Primary
Biological
Biological
Biological
r
Biological
Biological
Biological
Primary w/
Holding
Pond
Primary
117
93
6 45 ~ —
98 2 — 27
_-
3
64
61 96 31 25 38 1 — — — 1
200
8 67 11 — 8
117
93
51
127
~
3
64
253
200
94
*Average concentrations |ag/l
-------
r\)
TABLE VI-11
SUMMARY OF INFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR VERIFICATION MILLS MEETING BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
1- 2-
Dehydro- Iso- Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
Treatraent Abi«*ic abietic pimaric Pimaric Oleic leic lenic stearic stearic droabietic droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
130
131
132
133
134
135 136
Integrated Segment
Market Bleached
Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Semi-Chemical
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
11
350
470
753
—
26
547
273
470
153
—
51
74
283
29
—
58
63
43
11
383 1,320 70 — — 3
533 257 — -- — 116
276 283 71 -- — 44
337 203
69
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Grouudwood-Fine
Papers
Secondary Fibers Sei
Deiuk
fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from
Wastepaper
Paperboard from
Wastepaper
Biological
Biological
Biological
fluent
Biological
Biological
Primary
Biological
Biological
1,633
—
305
837
513
203
54
426
750
183
245
2,267
1,833
417
372
357
590
--
55
587
193
28
32
173
243
76
127
80
43
12
150
937 730
97
38
967 470 212 — — 467
410 178
147
183
342 — — 413
itu A*t .1 J,*t£ lOLrtO.
5 1,818
— -- __ i 912
647 1,571
2 089
-- — __ 262
4 883
— __ 280
719
6 14 8 5,962
-- -- -- ^ 9fl7
J 1 ^U I
838
653
1,861
Nonlntegrated Segment
Nonirttegra ted-Fine
Papers
Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers
Primary
Biological
Biological
—
207
53
483
433
213
39
37
19
10
65 67
136
__
-- __ — 830
449
"'Average concentrations jjg/l
Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
Includes Kiiie Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABU: vi-i2
SUHHAKY OF EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CI1I.OK1HATED DERIVATIVES FOR VERIFICATION MILLS MEETING BI'T EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
1- 2-
Dehydro- leo- Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tctrachloro-
Treatraent Abietic abietic pimaric Pimaric Oleic lelc lenic stearic stearic droabietic droabietic guaiacol guaiacol
~.._._ ,,n 10, IQO !•»•) IIA 1^1 i« 137 138 139 Up 141 142 Total
Type i ju
Integrated Segment
Market Bleached
Kraft Biological
BCT Bleached Kraft Biological 55
Alkaline-Fine Biological 3
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard Biological 10
Semi-Chemical Biological
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical . Biological 830
Papergrade Sulfite Biological
Groundwood-Fine
Papers Biological . 12
ro
OO Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers Biological 12
Tissue Papers Biological 72
Tissue from
Wastepaper Primary 84
Biological
Paperboard from
Wastepaper Biological 16
Nonintegrated Segment
Nouintegrated-Fine Primary
Papers Biological 6
Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers Biological
1J1 1J4
3
122 19
5 1
11 6
2
263 203
—
36 5
49 5
253 13
250
20
42 5
93
45
98 2
69
29 15 — — ~ ~ 5
41 4
1 38
11
167 613 118
25
5 11
49 ~ 99
243 — — ~ ' —
25
193
70
—
— — -- — --
27
72
245
1 3 58
. ,
—
25
ftQ
14 9 237
—
359
213
133
93
51
127
*Average concentrations
Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
2
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
^Includes Pajwrgrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE VI-13
REMOVALS OF RESIN AMD FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES
All Verification Mills
Verification Mills
Meeting BPT Limitations
Concentration (pg/1)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Sulfite Dissolving Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Newsprint
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integra ted-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
Treatment Type
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
POTW
Partial Flow,
Biological
Biological
Primary
Biological
Primary
Biological
Biological
POTW
POTW
Primary
Primary
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological ,
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary
Influent
26,361
1,818
4,062
1,571
2,089
21,697
830
4,023
5,931
1,109
1,196
5,962
10,218
4,492
3,029
838
653
1,289
2,220
1,468
1,776
14,770
143
483
830
449
—
33
1,508
3,147
14
577
Effluent
4,053
72
315
58
66
367
168
1,817
899
514
136
237
—
1,062
581
359
213
104
160
116
—
—
117
93
51
127
—
3'
64
253
200
94
Percent
Removal
85
96
92
96
97
98
80
55
85
54
89
96
—
76
81
57
67
92
93
92
—
—
18
81
94
72
—
91
96
92
0
84
Concentration C|Jg/l)
Influent
—
1,818
1,912
1,571
2,089
—
262
4,883
280
719
5,962
—
•
3,207
838
653
—
1,861
—
—
—
--
483
830
449
—
—
—
—
--
Effluent
~
72
245
58
66
—
13
2,194
25
69
237
--
--
581
359
213
—
133
--
—
—
— —
93
51
127
—
—
—
—
—
Percent
Removal
—
96
87
96
97
—
95
55
91
90
96
—
—
82
57
67
—
93
—
—
—
— —
81
94
72
—
--
—
—
—
Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
2
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
4
Treatment system detention time is three days.
249
-------
at mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and on available
methods for control of ammonia. Section VII of this document
summarizes available information on applicable techniques for control
of ammonia and Section IX presents preliminary estimates of the cost
of ammonia removal through end-of-pipe treatment or chemical
substitution.
250
-------
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
This section describes the control and treatment technologies in use
and available for application at pulp, paper, and paperboard mills to
reduce wastewater and/or wastewater pollutant discharge. There are
two major technology approaches that may be employed: a) production
process controls and b) effluent treatment technology. Production
process controls are those technologies implemented to reduce the
effluent volume and pollutant loading discharged from the
manufacturing facility. Effluent treatment technologies are those
end-of-pipe treatment systems used to reduce the discharge of
pollutants contained in mill effluents. In most instances, pollution
abatement programs developed for use at individual mills include both
approaches. In some cases, production process controls and effluent
treatment technologies can yield comparable results. For example,
suspended solids removal equipment may be employed internally at a
mill to allow for reuse of clarified water in the process and
recovered solids in the product; at another mill, end-of-pipe
technology may be relied on to a greater extent to produce similar
effluent characteristics.
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS COMMONLY EMPLOYED BY THE PULP, PAPER AND
PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY "
Many alternative approaches have been taken within the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry in implementing process controls to reduce
effluent volume and waste loads. In earlier development documents,
technologies have been identified that are commonly employed within
the industry to control bleaching, washing, liquor recovery, and
papermaking processes.(40) Tables VII-1 and 2 present the production
process control technologies on which BPT and BAT effluent limitations
were based. Pollution abatement is not the sole driving force for
implementation of production process controls. In many cases, the
concern for consistent production of high quality products with
minimum loss of substrate results in the development of process
controls that reduce raw waste loadings. Production process controls
have always been a part of integrated pulp and papermaking operations,
their primary function being the control of product characteristics
and improvement of process economics.
As part of the data request program, production process control
information was received for a total of 644 mills, 632 of which are
still in operation. Production process controls at these mills are
generally applied in eight specific mill areas and also include
provision for the recycle of effluent. The following discussions
relate to production process controls applicable to the:
i
o woodyard/woodroom,
251
-------
TABLE VII-1
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
IDENTIFIED AS THE
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
High. Level Alarms on Tanks
Decker Filtrate for Sulfite Pit
Dilution or Vacuum Washer
Showers
Prehydrolysate Disposal by Burning
Evaporator Condensates for Brown Stock
Washer Showers
Recook Screen Room Rejects
Use of CL02 Waste Acid for Tall Oil
Manufacture or Add to Black Liquor
for Recovery
Use of Green Liquor Dregs Filter
White Water Showers for Wire Cleaning
Broke Storage and Overflow Prevention
Install Saveall
Use of Mill Wastewater in Woodyard
Knot Collection Disposal or Reuse
Turpentine Collection
Soap Collection
Sulfite Red Liquor Evaporation and
Disposal
Countercurrent Washing — Deink
Close-up Screen Room with Reuse of
Decker Filtrate
Jump State Countercurrent Wash in
Bleach Plant with Reuse of
Chlorination Filtrate
Reuse Kiln Scrubber Water
Evaporator Condensate Used as Causti-
cizing Makeup
White Water Storage During Upsets and
Reuse as Pulper Dilution Water
TABLE VII-2
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
IDENTIFIED AS THE
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
Cooling Water Segregation and Reuse
Dry Barking
Evaporator Surface Condenser
Evaporator Boilout Tank
Caustic Area Spill Collection
Reuse Vacuum Pump Seal Water
Stock and Liquor Spill Collection
Lime Mud Pond
Filter and Reuse Press Effluent
Paper Mill Stock Spill Collection
High Pressure Showers for Wire
and Felt Cleaning
252
-------
o pulp mill,
o washers/screen room,
o bleachery,
o evaporation and recovery area,
o liquor preparation area,
o papermill,
o steam plant and utilities,
o recycle of effluent, and
o substitution of chemicals.
In order to comply with BPT effluent limitations, some
production process control has been implemented at most
this section, some specific production process controls
applicable to each industry subcategory are described.
controls that may be applicable at individual mills, rather
mills in a subcategory, are also described. Table VII-3
the control items that have been identified and discussed.
Woodyard/Woodroom
degree of
mills. In
that are
Additional
than all
summarizes
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loading in the
woodroom area include: a) conversion to mechanical or dry systems or
close-up of wet operations and b) the segregation and reuse or direct
discharge of uncontaminated cooling waters. These controls, their
applicability within the various subcategories, and their general
effectiveness are described below.
Close-Up or Dry Operation. This production process control is
commonly practiced at most mills; however, it has not been commonly
employed at mills in the dissolving sulfite pulp and groundwood-fine
papers subcategories. For mills in the dissolving sulfite pulp
subcategory, discharge of wastewater from hydraulic barking systems
can be eliminated through installation of a collection tank and
cleaning system to enable recycle of water; pulp mill wastewater can
be used as make-up to the system. At mills in the groundwood-fine
papers subcategory, conversion to dry barking and the use of
mechanical conveyors is possible. In colder climates it may be
necessary to use steam in the barking drums. These controls are
illustrated in Figures VII-1 and VII-2.
Application of these controls in the barking area of the woodroom will
result in reduced water use and a lower water content in the bark.
With drier bark, combustion (and heat reclamation) is possible without
further processing.
253
-------
TABLE VII-3
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
Woodyard/Woodroom
Close-up or dry operation
Segregate cooling water
Pulp Mill
Reuse relief and blow condensates
Reduce thickener overflow (groundwood)
Spill collection
Brown Stock Washers and Screen Room
Add third or fourth stage washer
Recycle more decker filtrate
Cleaner rejects to landfill
Bleaching Systems
Countercurrent or jump-stage wash
Evaporate caustic extraction stage filtrate
Evaporation and Recovery
Recycle of condensates
Replace barometric condenser with surface condenser
Boilout tank
Neutralize spent sulfite liquor
Segregate cooling water
Spill collection
Liquor Preparation Area
Installation of green liquor dregs filter
Lime mud pond
Papermill
Spill collection
Improvement of savealls
Use of high pressure showers for wire and felt cleaning
Whitewater use for vacuum pump sealing
Papermachine Whitewater use on wire cleaning showers
Whitewater storage for upsets and pulper dilution
Recycle of press water
Reuse of vacuum pump water
Additional broke storage
Installation of wet lap machines or other screening devices
Segregate cooling water
Cleaner rejects to landfill
Fourth stage cleaners
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
Segregate cooling water
Lagoon for boiler blowdown and backwash waters
Recycle of Treated Effluent
254
-------
BARK COLLECTION CONVEYORS
r\s
01
en
***}
< RC I
u
(RC>
BARKING DRUMS
1 V y 'INLET END
$
S """" f
60 LB. STEAM MAIN
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE inn- i
CONVERT HYDRAULIC BARKING
SYSTEM TO DRY SYSTEM
-------
OUTLINE ELEVATION OF CONVEYORS
WOODROOM
CONVEYOR
ro
en
cr>
1
1
L_
"^<**^ UNLOADING DECK
"^ **41*^
-*%**
i I'/*1
! i
i ]
i
i «
'-, A-L,
1 S\Vr XX V^ ** 1 • ^s.
! i ! C
"N. CONVEYOR A
^\ 4* 1
1 ^"—V' J
L, ~\
•^ T
1 n n n i
- T t|H>k!l''{[> i "^
1 1* iJ •• I
L j -« -.„ .. .-.i
^. ^ ^
\
^^ U£S!&f$iG^f
?n
-J
TYPICAL CONVEYOR SECTION
FLUME
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE 30L-2
FLUME REPLACED BY
MECHANICAL CONVEYOR
-------
Close-up of the woodroom by conversion to dry debarking or a closed-
cycle hydraulic system typically results in flow reductions of 8 3 to
12.5 kl/kkg (2 to 3 kgal/t) and TSS reductions in the range of 5 to 10
kg/kkg (10 to 20 Ib/t).(25)(41)(42) Factors affecting the level of
reduction are the source of water used in the woodroom, the type of
barking operation employed, the type of wood processed, seasonal
factors, and the ultimate disposal technique.
Segregate Cooling Water. This control item involves the collection of
water used for motor, chip blower, and bearing cooling. This
non-contact cooling water can be returned to an existing water
collection tank. At mills in some subcategories, this control could
also include the return of condensate from the heating system to the
steam plant through a separate line. The technology is illustrated in
Figure VII-3.
Woodroom non-contact cooling water segregation has been neglected at
most mills in the integrated subcategories. It is designated as an
applicable production process control technology in the integrated
subcategories where woodrooms are employed. Its implementation can
result in a measurable flow reduction and significant energy savings
Segregation of cooling water via a separate discharge typically
reduces effluent flow by approximately 2.1 kl/kkg (0.5 kgal/t). Flow
reduction ranges from about 1.3 to 4.2 kl/kkg (0.3 to 1.0 kgal/t)
depending on the subcategory. Little reduction in BOD5 or TSS raw
waste loads result from application of this technology."
Pulp Mill
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loadings in the pulp
mill area include: a) reuse of digester relief and blow condensates,
b) reduction of groundwood thickener overflow, and c) spill collection
in the brown stock, digester, and liquor storage areas. These
controls and their applicability are described below.
Reuse Rglief and Blow Condensates. Digester relief and blow
condensates may be major contributors to the total BOD5 discharge from
a mill. Particularly with continuous digesters, the relatively small
flows are highly contaminated with foul smelling organic mercaptans
and other organic compounds. Figure VII-4 illustrates a system for
controlling relief and blow condensates. This control is an
applicable technology for all of the kraft and soda subcategories
Digester condensate is collected in a tank and pumped to the area of
greatest benefit, and could be (in order of general preference):
1. added at the first shower of the last stage brown stock washer,
2. added at the salt cake dissolving tank,
3. used for mud washing or smelt dissolving, or
4. added directly to the black liquor (extra evaporation costs).
257
-------
ro
en
STEAM
^
t^
fOOOROOM HEATER CHIP 1 BLOWER
AND IMOTOR
r» 1 *
1
r^cY.....*
0
A * "" *
SEWERX-N J
f^^^^s, |LC|****I«4I *
1 1 VTX '
C-M*4 f^*tX>-
FRESH
*** *^ WATER
BARKING! DRUM TRUNNIONS CHIP (SCREEN
1 1 MOTORS
u""*1
1
^^ ^^^^^feMkM
m^^ ^^^^^^^^W
f CONDENSATE TANK I *f COOL INS WATER §
y , TANK y
SEWER | SEWER
' WATER COLLECTION f
*^_ .___.._..« -J
STEAM PLANT
CONDENSATE
TANK
ANK AT STEAM PLANT
EXISTIN6
«, — — -,- NEW
FIGURE 2JI- 3
SEGREGATE WOODROQM NON-CONTACT
COOLING WATER AND CONDENSATE
-------
DIGESTER
ro
en
ONDENSATE
1
'/CAY **
. I
1
1
1
1
1
1
"—-I
1 ••
1
1
1
I
*4.
DIGESTER
CONDENSATE
TANK
-HX>
LA)
•I LA 1
CAUSTICIZING AREA
SEWER
EXISTING
-.-- — — NEW
FIGURE 3Z3H-4
REUSE OF DIGESTER CONDENSATE
-------
The collection tank should be equipped with a conductivity alarm to
alert the operator of unusually strong condensate.
If digester condensates are stripped or further treated (i.e., reverse
osmosis) to reduce BOD5_, they can be reused in other process areas.
Wastewater BOD5_ reductions ranging from 0.9 to 3.0 kg/kkg (1.8 to 6.0
Ib/t) can be achieved by incorporating digester relief and blow
condensates back into the black liquor recovery cycle.(43)(44)(45).
Wastewater reduction at alkaline (kraft and soda) pulp mills through
the reuse of increasingly dirtier condensates to replace fresh water
results in higher concentrations of volatile organic sulfur compounds
in wash water and dilution water. While a net reduction in BOD5_ may
result, the possibility of releasing these volatile compounds through
brown stock washer vents, screening operations, and smelt tank
dissolving operations is increased.
Until recently, emission regulations dealt only with the particulate
and TRS emissions from the recovery furnace itself. With an increased
concern for reduction of overall emission levels, a higher degree of
scrubbing, collection, and combustion or disposal of volatile organics
may have to be considered prior to implementation of condensate reuse
techniques.
Reduce Groundwood Thickener Overflow. At a typical mill in the
groundwood-fine papers subcategory, excess thickener filtrate
overflows to the sewer at a rate of up to 16.7 kl/kkg (4.0 kgal/t) of
pulp produced.(46) This overflow represents a small source of fiber
loss and contributes 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0 lb/t) of TSS at a typical mill.
Modifications shown in Figure VI1-5 can be implemented to close up the
white water system, essentially eliminating thickener filtrate
overflow to the sewer. A small bleed would be maintained to control
the build-up of pulp fines in the final accepted groundwood. Water
maj<;e_Up to the groundwood system would be excess papermachine white
water. A heat exchanger would be required during the warmer months of
the year to control heat build-up in the filtrate. Fresh water used
as cooling water in the heat exchanger would subsequently be returned
as make-up to the papermachine systems or discharged via the thermal
sewer to balance mill white water heat load.
Spill Collection. Improved spill collection systems can be employed
in the digester, liquor storage, and brown stock areas. A system
designed to recover leaks, spills, dumps, and weak liquor overflows
could result in a recovery of approximately 1.5 to 3.5 kg/kkg (3.0 to
7.0 lb/t) of BOD5_. (47) In the brown stock area, the combination of
stock and liquor spills would generally be combined with the brown
stock entering the first stage washer vat. This control is designated
as an applicable technology in 10 subcategories. A pulp mill liquor
spill system is illustrated in Figure VI1-6.
A separate spill collection system can be employed using a sump in
conjunction with conductivity measurements to detect and collect any
leaks, spills, or overflows from the pulp mill digester and liquor
260
-------
ro
MACHINE WHITE
WATER MAKEUP
I F.C. !•'
\ /
CLEANERS
POPCLJ
* '
I
-T* —
EXISTING
««„-.«,. NEW
FRESH WATER
| CZZ
I r
Tk
i
HEAT
EXCHANGER
MACHINES
FIGURE ¥31-5
REDUCE GROUNDWOOD
THICKENER FILTRATE OVERFLOW
-------
01
ro
PULP MILL FLOOR DRAINS
I J I J
( CAi-
j
SUMP
-c-
SEWER
SURGE
LA SOON*
EXISTING
-.-._-.- NEW
FIGURE 3ZH-6
PULP MILL SPILL COLLECTION
DIGESTER AREA
-------
ofL ^^ar^S %£' b|h . ^ertea to its
considered applicable for ?hJ ,USo^ • ' , Thls technology is
coarse, and tiSsSe?, and fine Reached kra??'^ ^ BCT T1"
o5 of
identified in establishing BP? Umi?at?Sns ItT^n^ tech™10^ was
an available technology for establishing if not reconsidered as
production process cont?ol is being practiced to » ? • *-°5 .BCT' This
should be considered in establ?lhS2nt"f ° 3 limited degree and
263
-------
*3 RD 8TAOE
WASHER
*
HOOD
a FAN
4TH 8TAQE
WASHER
HOT WATER
-s >. _ _ _ __'_ — -* —n n
—1—r T rr -T ' I lUl
^TM^
~~\ !
RELOCATED
SHREDDER CONVEYOR
2ND 8TA8E
SHOWERS
IN3
01
-J
I
I
JL
»
FOAM TANK
EXISTIN©
3RD STAflE «.=s.
LIQUOR FILTRATE
TANK
I
I
I
4 TH 8TA6E BLACK
LIQUOR FILTRATE
TANK
_«..»« NEW
ILLUSTRATION ASSUMES EXISTENCE OF
THREE STAGES OF WASHING
ID
BROWN STOCK
STORAGE
FIGURE 3Z3E-7
ADDITION OF THIRD OR
FOURTH STAGE PULP WASHER
-------
CTl
cn
WHITE WATER
TANK
LAST STAGE
BROWN STOCK WASHER
EXISTING
— -- NEW
*.__.
~1 j HEAT RECOVERY
f
PLANT
DECKER
SEAL
TANK
SEWER
FIGURE 3ZIE-8
RECYCLE DECKER FILTRATE
-------
Cleaner Rejects to Landfill. Centricleaner rejects and continuous
screen rejects froifTthe screen room are generally sewered directly and
processed in the wastewater treatment plant. Most of these rejects
are removed in the primary clarifier and handled in the solids
dewatering system; primary solids are often mixed with solids from the
secondary clarifier. Dry collection of screen and cleaner rejects
with separate discharge to landfill, as shown on Figure VII-9, will
reduce TSS raw waste loads.
Typically 2.0 to 3.0 kg/kkg (4.0 to 6.0 Ib/t) of TSS would be removed
from the raw waste in most of the integrated subcategories. However,
this may not affect final effluent characteristics, depending on the
existing primary clarifier solids loading. If the clarifier is
overloaded, TSS reduction can have an appreciable effect on overall
treatment plant performance. If the existing clarifier can readily
accommodate this loading, it may be advantageous to continue sewering
these wastes. The accompanying fibrous material, when mixed with
biological solids, can aid in dewatering of the combined solids. This
technology is considered applicable for the tissue from wastepaper
subcategory for the purpose of purging dirt from the effluent; this
allows for recycle of effluent and recycle of sludge to the furnish.
It is assumed that adequate clarification is provided at mills in the
remaining subcategories.
Bleaching Systems
The extent of bleaching varies widely within the industry. Single
stage operations are often used at groundwood and deink mills, while
three bleaching stages (i.e., CEH) are common at sulfite and
semi-bleached kraft mills. Five or six stages (i.e., CEDED) are often
used at fully bleached kraft mills. In multi-stage bleaching,
effluents from the first two stages are commonly sewered, although
some of the first stage chlorination filtrate may be used to dilute
incoming washed brown stock. Bleachery effluent is a major source of
process wastewater discharged from integrated bleached kraft and
sulfite mills. The following technologies address further steps tnat
may be implemented to reduce effluent flow from multi-stage
bleacheries.
Countercurrent or Jump-Stage Washing. This control is applicable at
HI—kraft—and soda mills and at many sulfite mills. In jump-stage
washing, the filtrate from the second chlorine dioxide washer is used
on the showers of the first chlorine dioxide washer; the filtrate from
the first chlorine dioxide washer is then used on the showers of the
chlorine washer. Filtrate from the second caustic washer is used on
the first caustic washer. Jump-stage washing, instead of: straight
Countercurrent washing, is necessary if the first and second caustic
washers are constructed of materials that are not sufficiently
corrosion resistant (i.e., 304 stainless steel or rubber covered
carbon steel rather than the more resistant 317 stainless steel or
titanium). Water reduction to levels typical of the discharge from
three stage bleacheries may be obtained. Figure VII-10 presents a
schematic for jump-stage washing.
266
-------
ACCEPTS
ACCEPTS
FEJED
ro
CTl
FOURTH 8TA0E
PULP MILL
CLEANERS
THIRD 8TA9E
PAPER MILL
CLEANERS
REJECTS
EXISTING
REJECTS
SUMP
SIDEHILL SCREEN
I OUMP8TER TO
1 LANDFILL
TO REUSE
*>.._..
OR SEWER
ACCEPTS
TANK
FIGURE 3EIV 9
CLEAMER REJECTS TO LANDFILL
-------
WHITE WATER
FRESH WATER
DECKER
1X3
O*l
CO
1
-1»*
c
-r
i-
WAS
k*
CHLORINE
TOWER
DECKER
CHEST
SEWER
STEAM
CI02
i^O
U-_
^_ (
1 i
1
" " • i L
f W«.'
SEWER
r • •
SEWER
1 JJ
1
1 NoOH 1 '
M
_ „
{
SEWER
L
|D2
1
1
1
/
1
> PROCESS
' 1
U-41
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE 3ZIE-IO
JUMP STAGE WASHING IN
BLEACH PLANT
-------
for
? a ea
with an
1
UnerCUe Washing ma* be implemented Irish
Papermachine white water is uled
s
the Precedi"9 ^age. Compaed to a
'
plant
u o
syltem. Presents a schematic for a full countercurrent washing
us" ofUn3?7Csta?n^«ea?hT "^"S chlorine Dioxide necessitates the
^Ihers I^^^^X ZSZ1'!?
place, such equipment is extremely expensive; by contrast i
3 S^ssr sffi.-js.tK. ^is, ^ssjs.-Ss
addition of pumps and pipelines to service additional showers.
Earlier studies have proposed the use of full countercurrent wa^hinn
^
i
For the simple
Cau!tic Extraction Stage Filtrate. This control is an
00 Thl tehch»ol°W ^^tlB in the dissolving sS?f i?e pu?p
bleaching end of this system is shown in Figure Vll-72?
Evaporation and Recovery
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loading in i-h^
evaporator and recovery areas include: a) recycle of condensltes b?
269
-------
PAPER MACHINE
WHITE WATER
OR
FRESH WATER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
EXISTING
______ NEW
FIGURE 3Z3E-II
FULL COUNTERCURRENT
WASHING IN BLEACH PLANT
-------
HOT WATER
<*** f-ttxf-eto-
RED PULP WASHER
sTToW'E'RS
x- SHOWERS ]
« • -I FC I I
* S' I
(A>- —*- — — — — —t>«-J
Hf
t
-4x4K
, -
I
V
1
i
!W
1
^f
/•
I RC
i ^_
hi
1
MIXER TOWER
MIXER
TOWER
no
-Vl
PULP J
"DILUTION"
SEWER
WASHER
FILTRATE
TANK
FILTRATE
SSTORAQE
|T AN 1C
^BLEACHED PULP
3TORAOE
EXISTING
r HOT WATER
'RELOCATED
IREPI'LPER
I
I
WASHER I
FILTRATE
TANK
WASHER
FILTRATE
TANK*
EVAPORATORS
MIXER
-«.««- NEW
SEWER
WASHER
FILTRATE
TANK
Ut MILL I
SHEENS' """
TOWER FIGURE 301-12
BLEACHERY JUMP STAGE WASHING
TANK AND CAUSTIC EXTRACTION FILTRATE
COLLECTION-DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP
1 SEWER
'WASHER
FILTRATE
-------
Recycle of Condensates. Reuse of evaporator condensates was
identified" as part of the best practicable control technology
currently available. (40) The analysis of survey responses indicates
that considerable progress has been made in utilizing essentially all
condensates. Only in the BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue)
bleached kraft and the semi-chemical subcategories does extensive
increased recycle of condensate appear feasible when compared to
present modes of operation. At BCT bleached kraft mills, improved use
of condensate is projected to eliminate up to 7.5 kg/kkg (15.0 Ib/t)
of BODS from the raw waste. At semi-chemical mills, where lower
levels" of substrate are dissolved, the reuse of condensate represents
a far lower BOD5_ saving, generally less than 0.25 kg/kkg (0.50 Ib/t).
A flow schematic for this system is shown in Figure VII-13.
Replace Barometric Condenser. At most mills in all integrated
subcategories, except for dissolving kraft, surface condensers are
used. Similarly, in the dissolving kraft subcategory, barometric
condensers can be replaced with surface condensers, thus assuring a
clean, warm condenser water stream that can be reused. This also
results in a smaller concentrated stream of condensate that may be
reused in the causticizing area or in the brown stock washer area or
that can be steam stripped and reused for other purposes. Existing
barometric condenser seal tanks could be reused as the seal tanks for
new surface condensers. The air ejectors would be retained as
stand-by, for use during system start-up. A cooling water pump would
be provided to pump mill process water through the condenser and
return it to the process water main.
In summer, the cooling water may be too hot to return entirely to
process. Automatic temperature control could be implemented to divert
excess water to a non-contact water thermal sewer and return only an
acceptable amount to the process water line. A new condensate pump
could be provided to pump to the required discharge point or to
washers where the condensate could be reused. This production process
control is illustrated in Figure VII-14. Implementation of this
technology would result in less than 0.5 kg/kkg (1.0 Ib/t) BOD5_
reduction and less than 4.2 kl/kkg (1.0 kgal/t) flow
reduction.(45)(56) This technology is applicable at new mills.
Addition of a Boilout Tank. This control is applicable at mills in
thedissolving kraft and market bleached kraft subcategories. Water
for the boilout would be pumped to the evaporators from the boilout
tank, which would be full at the start of the process. When the
concentration, of the black liquor from the evaporators starts to
decrease, the flow could be diverted to the weak black liquor tank.
When the concentration decreases further to a predetermined value, the
flow could be diverted to the boilout tank. Overflow from the
condensate tank, which occurs during boilout because of an increased
rate of evaporation, could also be diverted to the boilout tank.
After the boilout is complete and weak black liquor is again fed to
the evaporator, weak black liquor flow would be initially diverted to
the weak black liquor tank and eventually to the strong black liquor
tank. This system is shown in Figure VI1-15.
272
-------
CAUSTIC
/• N
•(LCI-
AREA
CONDEN8ATE
TANK
ro
^sl
co
I
o
LAST STAGE
BROWN STOCK
WASHER
EXISTING!
NEW
FIGURE 1OE- 13
COMPLETE REUSE OF EVAPORATOR CONDENSATE
KRAFT AND SODA MILLS
-------
TO EXISTING BAROMETRIC
ro
FR
EVAPO
MILL
PROCESS
WATER i
MAIN
i
i
wunutn^cn & utv> i wr><7
f """I !
i i i —
r *i ili
T ! > 1 • i
nu 1, , •-. j ' § X
RATORS ~" j j i^t tj^r'-l
i i LAJ r |
W| , SURFACE /\ T 1
j JCONPENSER ^J_\ X J
SEPARATOR 1 1 I.- '.,...,...-.,. , .
j j INTERCONDENSERT 1
\ J~ CONDENSATE J^1 j
^R 1 •
i
i i
•^ § i
s \ I *
• •• • »(TRCj*» • • (/"i |
^•^ lit S~~\ .. 1
f V / T — 1
SEWER X^7 W «
PROCESS 9
EXISTING " ' X^***"1 — i1
STEAM
1
— i
i
i
l
i
i
1 TO ATMOSPHERE
f ON START-UP
!ir*1 A
_J l-x-' *
• A !
» V i
i L— J
* f
(VENT
II
* — k
r
u •
«»«»,«,«- NEW
SEWER
FIGURE 31- 14
REPLACE BAROMETRIC CONDENSER
WITH SURFACE CONDENSER
-------
on
BROWN STOCK
WASHERS
V
L
1.
V &
YEAK BLACK 1
IQUOR TANK
EVAPORATORS
*
••
* * •*»
•**—
^^^^^^^
^^^^^
•
8E\
.(LC
V^-x
«
•
-^
»
P"**^
1
'" | 8J
) |
1
_ . •
RONG BLAC
QUOR STORA
§ ""
1
RECOVERY
BOILER
K
8E
BROWN STOCK
WASHER AND
CAUSTI.CIZING AREA
CONDEN8ATC
TANK
SEWER
n
i._i
EXISTING
«,«..«... NEW
I
I
I
BOILOUT
TANK
SEWER
FIGURE 3Z3E- 15
ADDITION OF AN EVAPORATOR BOILOUT TANK
-------
Neutralize Spent Sulfite Liquor. In both the dissolving sulfite pulp
and both papergrade sulfite subcategories (particularly at mills with
MgO systems), neutralization of spent sulfite liquor before
evaporation will reduce raw waste loadings of BOD5_. Neutralization
gives a significant reduction in the carry-over of organic compounds
to the condensate. Depending on the mode of operation, this reduction
can range from 1.0 to 1.5 kg/kkg (2.0 to 3.0 Ib/t) of BOD5_ at
papergrade sulfite mills and up to 25.0 kg/kkg (50.0 lb/t) of BOD5_ at
dissolving sulfite mills. Figure VII-16 shows the modifications. At
sulfite mills where a MgO or a sodium base is not used, an organics
removal system could be used to enable recycle of evaporator
condensate. The reduction in BOD5_ load is of the same order of
magnitude as with spent sulfite liquor neutralization, but could
involve a greater capital cost. Organics removal is essential to
prevent build-up in the system when extensive condensate recycle is
practiced. At most mills where this technology is applicable, this
control strategy has been implemented. It is also applicable for use
at new mills.
Segregate Cooling Water. Segregation and reuse of cooling water in
the evaporator and recovery area of semi-chemical mills can result in
substantial flow reductions. Estimated flow reductions of
approximately 1.7 kl/kkg (0.4 kgal/t) result.(45)(46) At some of these
mills, extensive reuse of'cooling water is practiced; however, smaller
streams are typically discharged to the sewer. Elimination of the
discharge of these sewered streams would reduce the flow to the
treatment facility. The equipment requirements are similar to those
shown earlier in Figure VI1-3 for application in the woodroom area.
Spill Collection. Spill collection in the evaporator, recovery,
causticizing, and liquor storage areas could be implemented to varying
degrees at mills in three kraft subcategories. The spill collection
system applicable at mills in each subcategory varies widely,
depending on the existing level of implementation. This technology
involves the use of the following techniques, all of which are being
used at some mills in certain subcategories:
o spill collection in the evaporator and recovery boiler area,
o spill collection in the liquor storage area,
o spill collection in the causticizing area, and
o addition of a spare liquor tank to accept spills from any of these
three areas and a pump to return a spill to its point of origin.
All spill collection systems involve the use of a sump and a pump to
divert the spill to the spill tank. If the tank were full, spills
could be diverted to a spill lagoon. The spill collection sump for
the liquor storage area could be equipped with a conductivity
controller which allows surface run-off and low conductivity spills to
be diverted to the spill lagoon, while allowing high conductivity
276
-------
ro
WASHERS
ABSORPTION
1TOWER
FLOW METER
ILCAI.-.-^
IPHCJ
MgO SLURRY
TANK
RED LIQUOR
STORAGE
| V^
LJTllL
MIX TANK
9 RO STAGE RED
LIQUOR WASHER
( )
V — /
• ••( FC }• ••
f
...•••• 1
^r+Jm i
ABSORPTION
TOWER
XISTING
^ ^S
'
^1
i
1
- '• • , '.. 1
•-"•'• . *
1
S \ i
^
-------
spills to be sent to the spill tank for recovery. A flow diagram for
a typical system is shown in Figure VII-17.(49)(57)(58)
Liquor Preparation Area
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loads in the liquor
preparation area include installation of a green liquor dregs filter
and lime mud pond, as described below.
Installation of Green Liquor Dregs Filter. At an alkaline (kraft or
soda) pulp mill with a modern recovery furnace, green liquor dregs
contribute approximately 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0 Ib/t) of TSS.(25) Diversion
of this material from the primary clarifier can have a beneficial
effect. The dregs are usually pumped from a gravity-type dregs washer
or clarifier at very low consistencies with accompanying high strength
alkaline liquor entrainment. This may have an appreciable effect on
pH at the clarifier. In addition, the material tends to be of a fine
colloidal nature and can be difficult to settle.
At many modern mills, belt-type filters have been installed to improve
washing and sodium recovery from the dregs. This results in a drier
material that can readily be disposed of at a landfill site. For
mills having only a gravity type unit, a small vacuum filter can be
employed. Condensate can be applied for washing the cake on the
filter with subsequent use of the filtrate in the dregs washer itself.
This creates a countercurrent system that is effective in the recovery
of sodium and for dry dregs disposal. Generally, such projects are
justified on the basis of alkali saving. This decision depends on the
capability of the existing primary clarifier and sludge thickening
operations. Figure VII-18 presents a schematic of this control
technology. Such devices are generally applicable at all mills in the
alkaline (kraft and soda) subcategories. However, if adequate primary
clarification is provided, this technology may result in little
improvement in overall treatment system performance.
Lime Mud Pond. At kraft pulp mills, the use of a lime mud pond can
reduce TSS discharges caused by upsets, start-ups, and shutdowns in
the white liquor clarification and mud washing area.
A spill collection diversion system, incorporating a pond for liquors
containing high quantities of lime mud, allows for reuse of this mud.
It also assures minimum upsets at the primary clarifier in the case of
a dump of a unit containing high concentrations of lime. Such a dump
could occur during a period of outage or repair. Figure VI1-19
presents a schematic of this control technology. Typical long-term
savings average 1.5 to 2.5 kg/kkg (3.0 to 5.0 Ib/t) of TSS in kraft
pulp mills.(50) However, this control technology may result in little
improvement in overall treatment system performance at facilities with
adequate primary clarification. It may, however, be justified at many
mills on the basis of the resulting savings in lime cost.
278
-------
WEAK
BLACK
LIQUOR
WHITE
LIQUOR
/• N
,vCA,
INi
-vl
RECOVERY A
EVAPORATOR
AREA
SEWER
CAUSTIC
AREA
1
1 - — *. *
w jf ^ 4HD MMfr MM CB
?» ^ „
-., ILCA) A
I- •...
SUMP "" J-D' •
1 1 fc""
1 1 T
1 L JJV-Aiu'MCr, ?* <^^"^^°i
^ r *l>wl*fflP»' 1 H
SUMP £•£* ** '
L.
R — • —
t i '
1 | ^ «*•••*
l~?uMp~"r - i-o*"'
STING '
•
1"
i
SURGE |
LAQOOW 1
SURGE
Ej-21^1--
SURGE
„ «>jfc,
f — i i
S-'* f T-i
1 1 j
i ;
! L_ i
| SPILL TANK
I
1
I
-»»i
^
WEAK BLACK
^UQUO^""""
I GREEN LIQUOR
. cTA*RIFIER
W WHITE LIQUOR
CLARIFIER
„»«..» NEW
FIGURE IDE- 17
StDILL COLLECTION-EVAPORATOR,
RECOVERY, CAUSTICIZING AND
LIQUOR STORAGE AREAS
-------
GREEN LIQUOR CLARIFIER
ORE3S MIXER
ro
00
o
SEAL
WATER
L
VACUUM
PUMP
•
SEWER
I
SEPARATOR
I'
i
I DREOS
| WASHER
**
WEAK WASH
HOOD
EXHAUST
A
i
•
SEWER V /I
LC )
— ll
CONDENSATE
I LA i
V s
X-I-X I I
I DUMPSTER
I TO
_i LANDFILL
DREOS FILTER
SEWER
EXISTING
— — —-- NEW
FIGURE ZE- 18
GREEN LIQUOR DREGS FILTER
-------
LIME MUD STORAGE
CO
MUD MIXER
EXISTING
LJ— l-J— I-
, — — «.. NEW
CONCRETE LIME MUD
HOLDING TANK
CONTAMINATED
CONDENSATE
(HIGH PRESSURE)
FIGURE 3OE- 19
LIME MUD STORAGE POND
-------
Papermi.ll
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loading in the
papermill area include: a) papermachine, bleached pulp (furnish), and
color plant spill collection, b) saveall improvements, c)
high-pressure showers for wire and felt cleaning, d) white water use
for vacuum pump sealing, e) white water showers for wire cleaning, f)
white water storage for upsets and pulper dilution, g) recycle of
press effluent, h) reuse of vacuum pump water, i) provision for
additional broke storage, j) installation of wet lap machines, k)
segregation of cooling water, 1) collection of cleaner rejects for
landfill disposal, and m) addition of fourth stage cleaners. These
specific controls, their applicability to the various subcategories,
and their general effectiveness are described individually in the
following paragraphs.
Spill Collection. Papermachine and bleached pulp (furnish) storage
area spill collection is applicable at mills in all of the bleached
kraft and soda, sulfite, groundwood, and nonintegrated subcategories.
The extent of application of this control varies by subcategory,
depending on factors such as the number of machines and the extent to
which spill collection already exists at the various mills. For the
bleached kraft, soda, and sulfite subcategories, spill collection
systems could be installed to handle overflows and equipment drains
along with spills from the bleached stock storage area, the stock
preparation areas, and the papermachine or pulp machine wet ends. As
shown in Figures VI1-20 through VI1-22, these systems would generally
require installation of a new sump, a new stock tank, and a pump to
return the spills to a point where they could be blended back into the
process. This control can result in substantial stock savings and a
reduction in TSS load. Savings estimates vary widely, but may
typically be 2.0 to 2.5 kg/kkg (4.0 to 5.0 Ib/t) of TSS and 0.7 kg/kkg
(1.4 Ib/t) of BOD5_.
Collection of color plant spills can be implemented at mills in all
subcategories where fine coated papers are manufactured. One spill
collection system could be applied for each machine which has a coater
or size press. With this system, spills and wash water would be
collected in a sump and stored for reuse. The system provides for
control of spills in all the storage and mix tank areas of the color
plant and at the coater, tanks, and screens. Implementation of this
control would result in savings of expensive coating pigments and
adhesives as well as a reduction in the TSS load. A flow diagram is
shown in Figure VI1-23.
Improvement of Savealls.
of
The use of savealls was identified as
_ part
the best practicable control technology currently available. At
most mills, savealls have been employed. The present emphasis on
savealls is to improve their performance. Mills in many subcategories
could benefit from saveall improvements such as the installation of
new vacuum disc savealls or the reworking of existing savealls by
adding some new equipment. Savealls can be employed on all types of
machines producing all types of products including fine papers, board,
282
-------
BLEACH PLANT
HIOH DENSITY BLEACHED PULP
STORAGE
PAPERMACHINE8
OiOiO
BLEACH TOWERS
no
00
oo
BLEACHED
b. — —— «—<4xHl
8TORA0E |
UNBLEACHED
BROKE TANKS
J.
3
mat «
4
^ L_J^J ' ,, ' L_
1
II
it
I I
JLiJ
I I
I I
I I
Li
STOCK CHEST
•
-------
5RD-6TH STAGE BLEACH TOWERS
BLEACHED STOCK TANKS PULP DRYER WET END
f\5
OD
f
HI
3RD-6TH STAGE BLEACH WASHERS
OiOiOO
. I ? t? 111
IH —
T II
ii
i
I
I
I
U~
U-
rr
i
1
1
1
(•**(*>
rrr.j1
I I
I I
I I
Jl
EXISTING
SUMP
— NEW
£——•- — •1 /-•>
'-N f t i7
ILCAI..J. .fl> /I
V- / I ' i
BLEACH PLANT
HIGH DENSITY
lYrscHAReT 7uHp
'
_^ j-^e;
•H
I BLEACHED STOCK
| STORAGE TANK
I
'BLEACH PLANT
TEED""PUIIP
•0-
i
8UROE_LA000Ny FIGURE OT-2 I
STOCK SPILL COLLECTION SYSTEM
PULP BLEACHING AND DRYER AREAS
BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA MILLS
-------
PAPER MACHINES
STOCK PREP AREA-STOCK TANKS
ro
oo
en
1
1 «
II
II
2
_i
: , ~>
• ' . !
1
l__
i
L
r~~
j
11
SUMP
i
3
1!
_ J
,.£C*'
J
fa
»
i
£-D»
D4-M
^ — .___j*j i i-j
i
I PURCHASE
r- r-
a i
A)'ir* .* !! No. 1 PAPER
" I j f1^ BROK
! || TN0.2 PAPER
I 1 . , tetvufa* «n» ^i» ••»
| j 1 1 r0^ BROK
A \ 11 ^!NA8 PAPER
l^j.1 L>4^?1^w^'^"""1*1"<>4M*a"BR6aK
1 STOCK'TANK " i LnS^l8!1
£ _J' j/^ CHES-
. — -m -J iJS£UHOWO<
GROUND
WOOD
— -— — |
MACHINE
E
MACHINE
MACHINE
Ei ••
r **
DD STOfil
CHEST ""
EXISTING
1 SURGE LAGOON
,«.„,„««, NEW
FIGURE "SOE- 22
STOCK SPILL COLLECTION SYSTEM-
PAPER MILL AREA
GROUNDWOOD-CMN OR FINE PAPERS
-------
*1
•
1
f
9
_1 •»._ __
1
1
i
•
ro
oo
CT)
EXISTING
NEW
STORAGE TANKS
1 _
r*\ W C
f#-I-J.
!\
.J^
i
SPARE
TANK
-. .
"1
1
1
1
.J
1
f
1
1
|
1
1 /""**
1
t
-L-
MIX TANKS
JV_> • »
./ ii t
1
____ 1
SUMP
DRAIN FROM COATER
OR SIZE PRESS
'• INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
FIGURE 301- 23
SPILL COLLECTION SYSTEM
COLOR PLANT--ALKALINE-FINE1
-------
tissue papers, molded products, and newsprint. Most of the savealls
being installed today are of the vacuum disc filter type. They are
flexible in handling various types of stock and shock loadings and
exhibit high separation *> efficiencies. As a control item, their use
results in flow and solids reductions. Nearly all stock saved is
stored or reused immediately. The clear white water can be readily
reused within the mill, replacing some fresh water uses. If not
reused, it becomes a relatively clear overflow to the sewer.
Significant flow reductions can be attained when an effective saveall
is used in that extensive filtrate recycle becomes possible.
At mills with existing savealls, entire installations are not likely
to be required. In these cases, a new saveall could replace the
existing saveall on the largest machine,, making use of existing pumps,
tanks, and piping. The existing saveall could be repiped for the next
smaller machine, and so on down the line, so that each machine may
have a larger, more effective saveall. Figures VII-24 through VII-26
illustrate typical saveall installations. The resulting overall white
water balance determines the net savings, but flow reductions of from
about 0.8 to 41.7 kl/kkg (0.2 to 10.0 kgal/t) are possible depending
on the type of mill and level of white water reuse.(52)
Use of_ High Pressure Showers for Wire and Felt Cleaning. High
pressure showers to replace low pressure, high volume showers (i.e.,
those used for felt cleaning, return wire cleaning, and couch roll
cleaning) may save up to 90 percent of the water used in conventional
shower applications and may be more 'effective. It is generally
considered that felt cleaning showers are operated at 35.2 kg/sq cm
(500 psi) and Fourdrinier showers at ,21.1 kg/sq cm (300-psi). A
typical installation is shown in Figure VII-24. High pressure showers
are applicable at mills in the dissolving kraft, dissolving sulfite
pulp, deink, nqnintegrated-fine papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategories.
Application is, however, generally universal in the
industry.(52)(59)(60)(61)(62)
White Water Use for Vacuum Pump Sealing. Excess clarified white water
has been successfully used to replace fresh water on mill vacuum
pumps. The vacuum pump seal water may then be recycled or discharged.
At a minimum, the equivalent quantity of fresh water use is directly
displaced. Corrosion and abrasion may be deterrents to implementation
of this system, particularly at low pH or high filler levels. As
shown in Figure VII-27, fresh water addition may be required and can
be provided to maintain temperatures below 32°C (90°F). This
technology can be applied at mills in all subcategories. Resulting
reductions in waste loadings depend on the overall water balance, but
flows of 94.6 to 380 liters/minute (25^ to 100 gpm) per pump are
common.(59)(60)(61)(63)(64)
Papermachine White Water Use on Wire Cleaning Showers. Clarified
white water from the papermachine saveall, containing low levels of
additives and fillers, can be used on wire cleaning showers. White
water can be used on Fourdrinier showers and knock-off showers as
287
-------
HEAD BOX
WIRE
COUCH
PRESSES
1 - — .
tX N
SAVEALU | {' t ' ;• • (HLA)
1M \ * ""*
L,_J XCH-V U_J«3-- — — — SWEETNER
,T\ 1
V i •
1 1
i X ,
Jf 1
* t. , :
i—i *
CLEAR CLOUDY
WHITE WHITE
WATER WATER
CO SEWER WHITE I WATER CHEST^
oo A y
i n J
(HLAl
\_S
i * ICA)
| STOCK ."«
4i^ Hx>-^r ^^T
1
1
1
T
— — EXISTIN9
!
I
^y v^i)/ X^^Q
• ~~l \ ^°-^ °-rf | /COUCH
,, f WIRE 1P1T 1 /••'' i«"
1 O I 1 1 / w** • e
i ^^ — ' u-.L.^^,
" * — -Li—~ T Ti—"M"
V»-^ **"
©
V ' '
•^ ; i
(T; SEAL WATER "'•'"&. • '
ii f ^ ^ ^ ^ r°~^^s
• ' 1 M f 1 *i CM (*l
..__. J-_KiJ —V —V »-J "tl •— J "ll
1 : i ^ • i r' i 'i 'I ' I
EXISTING WHITE WATER f i t ft*
SEAL SOXES 1
VACUUM PUMPS I
-*. J
1 /•«. - -~ - - ,-^-x 1
1 1 «*. — -.-—--. — _______.,_
1 1 1
, 1 « '-N
j f I f J V
COLLECTOR ' I
1 BOX |
L* -^^-f'Ti^oJ al : FIGURE
f PAPERMILL IMF
3(
H
R
,
1
T
3R
r
rrr
0\
UNBLEACHED KRAFT
-------
VACUUM
SAVEALL
DUMPST^R
TO
LANDFILL
ro
CO
STOCK
CHEST
TO PULPERS^
PAPERMILL SEWER
PULPMILL SEWER
TO PROCESS DILUTION
TO MACHINE SHOWERS (WIRE)
TO COOLING TOWER (VACUUM SEALS)
TO MACHINE SHOWERS (KNOCKOFF)
FIGURE 2H-25
NEW SAVEALL ON PULP a PAPERMILL EFFLUENTS--
BUILDERS1 PAPER a ROOFING FELT
-------
SWEETNER STOCK
ro
to
o
VACUUM
SAVEALL
DUMPSTER
TO
LANDFILL
QREY
STOCK
CHEST
SEWER WATER FROM
MILL SUMP
TO PULPE
CLEAR
WHITE
WATER
CHEST
CLOUDY
WHITE
WATER
CHEST
TO PROCES
DILUTION
TO MACHINE FO
SHOWERS,VACUUM SEALS
TO PUMP
SEALS
SEWER
FIGURE 3ZJI-26
NEW SAVEALL ON PAPERMILL
EFFLUENT- WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS
-------
FROM PAPER MACHINE
WHITE WATER TO
VACUUM PUMP SEALS
.o4
FRESH
WATER
ro
t,
I
P)
ji
TO EXISTING COLLECTION
TANK
FROM
PRESSES
I
J
VACUUM PUMPS
I
LEVEL CONTROL
AND ALARM
TO SAVEALL -*•—« -H
I
I COLLECTION
1 TANK
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE ZSIE-27
WHITE WATER TO VACUUM PUMPS AND COLLECTION TANK
FOR PUMP SEAL WATER AND PRESS EFFLUENT
-------
shown earlier in Figures VII-24 through VII-26. The system includes a
white water supply pump, supply piping, and showers. A fresh water
backup supply header is provided with controls for introduction of
fresh water to the white water chest in the event of low volume in the
chest. The effect of implementation of this control varies widely by
machine and type of mill.
White Water Storage for Upsets and Pulper Dilution. As illustrated in
Figure VII-28, this system consists of an additional storage tank to
store excess white water that would overflow, from the existing clear
white water tank. Where possible, the tank could be adjacent to or
added onto the existing tank to eliminate pumping costs.
The white water from this tank can be used in the pulper or bleach
plant. The tank would be sized to hold adequate white water needed
for pulp dilution after pulping, bleach plant washing, or continuous
washing requirements. A fresh water header is provided to the tank
for makeup.
A separate system may be needed for each machine, depending on the
variability of furnish. Each machine may have its own pulper and
require a completely separate white water system. Increased storage
facilities can provide significant flow reductions; BOD5 and TSS
reductions may also result.(52)
Recycle of Press Water. Effluent from the press section of a
papermachine contains fibrous fines and fillers that can be
reintroduced into the white water system and recovered. Water from
the vacuum presses, as well as pressure rolls, can be piped to a
collection tank (or wire pit) often without the need for pumping.
From the tank, the water can be pumped to the saveall system to
reclaim the fiber and fillers and to make the water available for use
in the white water systems. This would reduce solids and may reduce
flow to the wastewater treatment plant. Generally, a separate system
would be required for each machine.
Felt hairs, previously a deterrent in some systems, have been largely
eliminated with the advent of synthetic felts. Thus, provision for
the removal of felt hairs has not been contemplated in the system,
although such provision may be required on top-of-the-1ine printing or
specialty grades, at least during periods of use of new felts.
Reuse of Vacuum Pump Water. Recycle of vacuum pump water (most of
which is seal water) and/or use of white water as seal water (Figure
VII-27), will nearly eliminate fresh water additions for these uses.
Installation of the system would require piping, a collection tank,
and aipump to return the water to storage for reuse. One system is
needed for each machine.
At many mills, specific collection systems are not employed for press
effluent and vacuum pump seal water. By combining the two systems,
cost reductions could be realized. Up to 21.0 kl/kkg (5.0 kgal/t) may
292
-------
FRESH WATER MAKE-UP
THICKtNER
co
KNOCK OUT SECTION Of
EXISTING WALL OR CONNECT
WITH LARd£ DIAMETER PIPE
EXISTING
BOILER SLOWDOWN
SAVEALL WHITE
WATER
I''
TO PROCESS
NEW
FIGURE 1ZH-28
INCREASED WHITE WATER STORAGE CAPACITY
-------
be saved.(41) Typically,
8.3 kl/kkg (2.0 kgal/t).
flow reductions are estimated at less than
Additional Broke Storage. An additional broke storage chest could be
installed at most mills in the nonintegrated-lightweight papers
subcategory. The system consists of a central broke storage chest,
pumps, and piping. This enables excess broke to be brought to the
chest and returned to the proper machine once the upset is over. At
some mills, more than one chest would be required, depending on the
number of machines and product mix. Generally, the tank is sized to
hold 30 minutes of broke from the couch pit. It would allow for
breaks or grade changes to occur with a minimum of overflow to the
sewers. Up to 10.0 kg/kkg (20.0 Ib/t) TSS might be saved at a mill
where grades are changed frequently.
Installation of Wet Lap Machines or Other Screening Devices. Wet lap
machines or other screening devices can be installed at mills in
several subcategories as part of an overall stock spill collection
system. The wet lap machine would be preceded by a screen for removal
of rejects and dirt from spilled stock. Rejects would be hauled to
landfill. The accepts would be fed to the wet lap machine, allowing
recovered stock to be stored in a convenient form for later
reintroduction to the system or for use at another mill.
At some mills, devices such as sidehill or inclined screens may be
effective at lower cost. However, the wet lap machine is very useful
as a means of providing excess broke storage.
Segregation of Cooling Water. Improvements in cooling water
segregation in the papermill could be employed resulting in reductions
in water usage. Implementation of this control requires modifications
to eliminate the discharge of pump seal, calendar stack, bearing, and
other cooling waters from the sewer. These waters could be collected
in a sump and, depending on warm water requirements, either pumped to
the mill water system or discharged via a separate thermal sewer. At
least 4.2 kl/kkg (1.0 kgal/t) would be expected to be reduced in most
nonintegrated mills.
Cleaner Rejects to Landfill. Collection and screening of rejects from
sources such as pulp cleaners, papermill cleaners, pressure screens,
and centrifugal screens will eliminate up to 40 percent of the solids
to the treatment plant from these sources.(44)(52) The system would
consist of piping from the reject sources to a collection tank, pump
and piping to the screen headbox, a sidehill screen, and rejects
dumpster. In the case of remote cleaner reject sources, an accepts
tank and pump and piping from the accepts tank to the source for
sluice water would be required. Savings of 1.5 to 5.0 kg/kkg (3;0 to
10.0 Ib/t) TSS are possible. Figure VII-9 presented earlier, shows
this modification.
For mills where ample primary clarifier capacity is provided,
implementation of this technology may not result in significant
improvement in overall treatment plant performance. These fiber
294
-------
losses may aid in the dewatering of combined primary/biological
sludges.
Fourth Stage Cleaners. The addition of a fourth cleaner stage can
reduce the flow and solids being discharged from a three stage system
by 80 to 90 percent. The pulp stock savings alone can be ample
justification for implementing such a system, shown in Figure VII-29.
This control strategy may be an alternative to collection and
screening of rejects depending on relative mill operating parameters.
Again, if ample primary clarification is provided, this control may
not result in significant improvement in overall treatment plant
performance.
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
j
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loads in the steam
plant and utility areas include: a) segregation of cooling waters and
b) installation of lagoons for boiler blowdown and backwash waters.
These controls are discussed below.
Segregation of Cooling Water. At mills in many subcategories, this
control technology has been implemented; however, this technology is
not widely practiced at mills in several subcategories. This control
requires modifications to sewers and floor drains to segregate cooling
water from the mill process sewer and installation of a warm water
storage tank. The sources of cooling water that are to be handled by
this system differ at mills in the various subcategories. Generally,
they include miscellaneous streams such as pump and bearing cooling
water, air compressor cooling water, and major water sources such as
turbine and condenser cooling waters. This control is a flow
reduction measure, but will also result in energy savings.
Lagoon for Boiler Blowdown and Backwash Waters. This control could be
effective at mills in many of the subcategories. At mills in several
other subcategories, a separate discharge for these sources has been
provided or these waters are reused in the process. The boiler
blowdown water and the backwash waters can be pumped to a new lagoon,
from which they are discharged to receiving waters. This keeps these
sources segregated from the wastewater treatment facility and provides
sufficient settling time to effectively remove suspended solids. pH
adjustment may be required in some cases. Implementation of this
control technology will .reduce the flow to the wastewater treatment
facility. While universally applicable, the technology is widely
practiced at mills in only a few subcategories. (45)
Recycle of Effluent
At mills in several secondary fiber and nonintegrated subcategories,
fresh water usage is reduced by recycling clarified effluent to the
mill for use as hose water and pump seal water. At industrial tissue
mills, purchased wastepaper requirements may be reduced through
recycle of primary clarifier solids to the process. The major benefit
of effluent recycle is flow reduction. Recycle of clarifier solids
295
-------
CLEANERS
PROCESS
CLEANER
FEED
IV5
-------
can yield savings in the cost of raw materials and the cost of
handling and disposing of the primary waste solids.
One system to recycle clarified effluent would consist of a holding
tank, piping from the clarifier to the holding tank, and a pump and
piping from the holding tank to existing headers. The solids recycle
system, as shown in Figure VI1-30, would consist of a pump with
suction from the existing waste solids discharge line and piping to
the pulpers. This technology would be difficult to implement at mills
with severe product quality constraints. It is most likely that this
technology would be implemented at mills where industrial and
institutional grades of tissue paper are produced. Solids recycle
occurs primarily at secondary fiber mills.(59)
At some secondary fiber mills, effluent is now recycled. Saveall
improvements could permit the use of more effluent on machine showers
and eliminate the use of fresh water on the machine. Such recycle
schemes are now commonly employed in the paperboard from wastepaper,
wastepaper-molded products, and builders' paper and roofing felt
subcategories. Savealls may serve as a means of recycling both
effluent and reclaimed stock in these latter subcategories. At mills
in the nonintegrated-tissue papers and nonintegrated-1ightweight
papers subcategories, a settling basin can be installed to collect
discharges from floor drains for reuse of this water rather than fresh
water for hoses and seal water. This system could also be employed at
mills in the deink and nonintegrated-fine papers subcategories.
Chemical Substitution
It is often possible to use different process chemicals to accomplish
the same goal. For example, both zinc hydrosulfite and sodium
hydrosulfite can be used to bleach mechanical (groundwood) pulps. In
recent years, at most groundwood mills a substitution to the use of
sodium hydrosulfite rather than zinc hydrosulfite has been made. This
was prompted, at least in part, by the establishment of BPT effluent
limitations controlling the discharge of zinc. Rather than invest in
costly end-of-pipe treatment, mill management determined that a least
costly and equally effective control option would be chemical
substitution. This substitution of chemicals has resulted in
attainment of BPT effluent limitations.
Other opportunities exist to minimize the discharge of toxic and
nonconventional pollutants through chemical substitution and are
discussed below.
Toxic Pollutants. Slimicide and biocide formulations containing.
pentachlorophenol are used at mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. Initially, pentachlorophenol was used as a replacement for
heavy metal salts, particularly mercuric types. Trichlorophenols are
also used because of their availability as a by-product from the
manufacture of certain herbicides. Formulations containing the
following three types of materials are also currently being used;
297
-------
INSIDE MILL
rv>
UD
oo
BALES
EXISTING
TO PROCESS
—^_—. NEW
OUTSIDE MILU
PAPER MILL SEWER
SEWER
FIGURE inr-so
IMPROVED REUSE
OF CLARIFIER SLUDGE
-------
1 . Organo-bromides,
2. Organo-sulfur compounds, and
3. Carbamates.
Substitution to the use of alternate slimicide and biocide
formulations can lead to the virtual elimination of pentachlorophenol
and trichlorophenol.
Nonconventional Pollutants. Ammonia is used as a cooking chemical at
nine mills in the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite pulp, and both
papergrade sulfite subcategories. One method for reducing ammonia
(NH3_) discharges is the substitution of a different chemical, such as
sodium hydroxide, for ammonia in the cooking liquor. The quantity of
sodium hydroxide required, based on chemical composition and
stoichiometry, is 150 kg per kkg (300 pounds per ton) of pulp, about
three times the required amount of NH3_. At most mills where NH3_ is
currently used, the conversion to a different chemical base is not
difficult if the design features and capacity for spent liquor
incineration are adequate. The current practice of incinerating spent
liquor can continue. The recovery of sulfur dioxide, sodium sulfate,
carbonate, or sulfide may or may not be practiced. These compounds
could be sold for use at nearby kraft mills or for other industrial
uses, but markets are not likely to be readily available. The
equipment changes necessary to receive and feed a 50 percent solution
of NaOH are not likely to be significant. The type of furnace
currently being used for spent liquor incineration at ammonia-based
mills is not presently known; the possibility exists that older
furnaces may need to be replaced because of a lack of sufficient
capacity or features not compatible with sodium-based liquor
incineration.
OTHER PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
In the previous discussion, production process controls commonly
employed in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry have been
reviewed and summarized. Other production process controls have been
implemented to a limited extent; these controls are generally
applicable in the pulping, bleaching, and recovery areas of the mill.
Several of these control items are discussed below.
Bleach Systems and Recovery
The bleach plant is commonly the largest contributor of wastewater
pollutants from kraft and soda mills where pulp is bleached. For this
reason, much effort has been spent on investigating the possibility of
recycling bleach plant effluent to the liquor recovery system, where
organic constituents can be burned. One process that has been
investigated is the use of oxygen bleaching. The oxygen bleaching
concept has just recently begun to be applied in commercial
use.(65)(66) Other processes that allow return of bleach plant
effluent to the liquor recovery cycle are the Rapson-Reeve closed-
cycle process and the Billerud Uddeholm nonpolluting bleach
plant.(67)(68)(69)(70)
299
-------
Oxygen Bleaching. Oxygen bleaching is currently used at only one mill
in the United States, the Chesapeake Corporation in Virginia.(71)
Oxygen bleaching is used outside the U.S., at one mill in Canada, one
in South Africa, one in France, one in Japan, and three in Sweden.(72)
The advantage of oxygen bleaching comes from the recycling of the
alkaline 02_ stage effluent to the black liquor recovery system. In
order to recycle the effluent, it is necessary to keep the chloride
content of the 0!2 stage at a low level. For this reason, the 02_
bleaching sequences being used generally have the 02_ stage preceding
any Cl:2 or C102^ stage. The exception to this is at the Chesapeake
Corporation, where a CDOD sequence is used that does not allow for
recycle of the 02^ stage to the recovery system.
In work done by the NCASI, effluent characteristics from conventional
and oxygen bleaching sequences were compared. The conventional
sequences CEHDED and CEDED were compared in the lab to those from
OCEDED and OCED for both hardwood and softwood alkaline pulps. By
recycling all of the O2_ stage effluent, a BOD5_ reducton of 81 percent
and a color reduction of 89 percent over the conventional sequences
were achieved for softwood pulps. For hardwood, reductions of 81
percent of BOD5_ and 92 percent of color were achieved. (73)
At the Cellulose d'Aquitaine mill in St. Gaudens, France, total BOD5_
load and the total color load have reportedly been reduced by about 30
and 50 percent, respectively. An existing CEDED sequence has been
converted to an OCEDED sequence.(65) The claimed operating cost for
the new oxygen bleach sequence is $2.10/ton (1975) less than for the
old sequence.
The Enstra oxygen bleaching operation in South Africa has achieved a
cost reduction of $5.00/ton (1972) with an AODED sequence. The
capital cost of adding an oxygen stage was given as $2.0 million
(1972) for a 270 kkg/day (300 tons/day) mill and $4.0 million (1972)
for a 680 kkg/day (750 tons/day) mill.(66) The technology is still
being developed and is not routinely used in alkaline pulp mills in
the United States.
Rapson-Reeve Closed-Cycle Process. The Rapson-Reeve closed-cycle
process encompasses some standard design features likely to be
employed at many kraft pulp mills in the future. (68)(74) The
concepts of the closed-cycle mill, as proposed by ERCO-Envirotech,
Ltd. and illustrated in Figure VII-31, are included in the system
under development at Great Lakes Paper Co., Ltd., Thunder Bay,
Ontario.
One of the features of the closed-cycle process is the use of
approximately 70 percent chlorine dioxide in the first stage. It has
been claimed that the use of chlorine dioxide will decrease effluent
BOD5_, color, chemical oxygen demand (COD), dissolved solids, and
toxicity even at a mill that is not completely closed.(75) The bleach
sequence for the closed-cycle bleached kraft mill is DCEDED. The
washing design is straight countercurrent; excess E, stage filtrate
300
-------
CO
o
PURGE
(DREGS a GRIT)
PURGE
TO ATMOSPHERE
HgO
LIQUOR
PREPARATION
FURNACE
I
BLACK LIQUOR
EVAPORATOR
WHITE LIQUOR
EVAPORATOR
i
C
NdCL
PULPING
CHEMICALS
NaOH,Nfl2S
.WOOD
COOKIN6
WASHING
VENT
H20
ICONDENSATE
HoO
i
CONDENSATE
STRIPPING
BLEACHING
DcEDED
I
BLEACHING
CHEMICAL
MANUFACTURE
CL02
GLo
Ma OH
BLEACHED
UNBLEACHED
PULP
PULP
-6*
"SEWER
FRESH
WATER
FIGURE 3Z3E-31
RAPSON - REEVE PROCESS
CLOSED CYCLE BLEACHED KRAFT PULP MILL
-------
can be pumped to the salt recovery process, used for cooking liquor
dilution, or used on the brown stock washers. The DC filtrate can be
used for brown stock washing, screen room dilution, or sent to the
lime kiln scrubber.
Of these features, the only one that is unique to the closed-cycle
mill is the salt recovery process. The salt recovery process (SRP) is
necessary in the closed-cycle mill in order to remove the sodium
chloride that would otherwise build up in the system. In the
closed-cycle mill, the white liquor is evaporated and sodium chloride
is crystalized and removed from the white liquor. Recovered salt is
to be reused for the generation of C1O2_; however, some must be purged
from the cycle. Figure VII-32 is a schematic of the salt recovery
process.
ERCO-Envirotech have stated that use of the design features of the
closed-cycle mill will result in a) energy savings, b) fiber savings,
c) yield increase, d) decreased water consumption, e) decreased
chemical costs, and f) savings in effluent treatment costs. According
to ERCO-Envirotech, for a closed-cycle kraft mill producing 635 air
dry kkg/day (700 air dry tons (ADT) per day), an SRP system would have
a capital cost of $4.2 million (1977). Implementation of production
process controls could run as high as $3.8 million (1977), making the
total cost for a closed-cycle mill about $8 million or more. The
additional C1O2, generating capacity and any major bleachery
modifications requiring more corrosion resistant materials will result
in yet higher costs.(69) Original estimates predicted that savings of
$4 million per year (1977) could be achieved when compared to a mill
having none of the features of the closed-cycle mill.
Full-scale operating experience has been less favorable than the early
literature had projected. Some contaminated effluent is being
discharged and, while the salt recovery system has been operated, the
recovered salt has not been used on-site.(67)(68) It was originally
thought that chemical costs would be lower for a closed-cycle mill
than for a conventional mill. However, actual chemical costs at Great
Lakes Paper Co., Ltd. have been higher than for a conventional
mill.(75)
On implementation of the closed-cycle system, corrosion problems
occurred at the Thunder Bay facility. A combination of high
temperatures (480°C (900°F)) and high chloride levels resulted in
badly corroded tubes in the recovery boiler superheater. The damaged
equipment was replaced with equipment made of Incaloy 880 and the
superheater has been operated at lower temperatures (390°C (730°F)).
This has permitted operation of the system without noticeable
pitting.(76)
The Thunder Bay facility was designed to operate effluent-free at a
production rate of 730 kkg/day (800 t/d). However, actual production
has been increased to about 870 kkg/day (960 t/d) and the SRP has been
unable to handle the resulting increased load.(75) Liquor pump
failures and evaporator scaling are the primary problems now being
302
-------
w
o
oo
CONCENTRATED
WHITE LIQUOR WATER
TO DieeSTERS
*r
^
V
_£
>
y
i
PURIFIED
SODIUM
CHLORIDE
•ODIUM
CARBONATE
8URKEITE
H.E.= HEAT EXCHANGER
FIGURE 301-32
RAPSON-REEVE
CLOSED CYCLE MILL
SALT RECOVERY SYSTEM
-------
experienced in the SRP. At the request of representatives of the
government of the province of Ontario, mill personnel are now planning
the construction of a biological treatment system to be completed by
the end of 1981. While the goal of an effluent-free mill has not been
realized, reductions in the BOD5_ raw waste load of 50 to 75 percent of
that of a typical market bleached kraft mill have been attained. Even
higher reductions have been achieved when the SRP has been operated
within the specified design load.(76).
Sequential Chlorination. Another method of reducing the pollution
load from the bleach plant is with sequential chlorination.
Sequential chlorination is based on initially contacting the
unbleached pulp with C102^ equal to a portion of the equivalent
chlorine demand. The reaction is rapid; the remainder of the chlorine
demand is satisfied with chlorine addition. Strength and viscosity
improvements have been noted and total chemical application has been
reduced.(77)
MacMillian Bloedel Research views the use of sequential chlorination
as an interim solution while oxygen bleaching technology, C102_
generation, and salt recovery systems are developed. When these
technologies are fully developed, lower capital expenditures may be
realized.(78)
Hooker Chemical has investigated the use of sequential chlorination;
their work has dealt with modification of fully bleached sequences.
The first sequential chlorination system studied by Hooker Chemical
was the APS-I. In this system, the standard CEHD or CEDED sequence is
modified by replacing conventional chlorination with sequential
chlorination at a D:C ratio of 50:50 and substituting a
hypochlorination stage for the first extraction stage. The system can
be used for hardwood or softwood pulps. Substantial reductions in
effluent color and toxicity and moderate reductions in BOD5_ are
reported. (77) 'i
Chemical costs for the APS-I system are reported to be equivalent or
slightly higher than for conventional sequences. Estimated capital
costs range from $20,000 to $500,000 (1973) depending on the mill size
and condition of the existing bleach plant. Pulp quality is
equivalent to that from conventional bleaching sequences.
The Hooker APS-II and APS-III systems operate differently than the
APS-I. Chlorination is replaced by sequential chlorination, at a D:C
ratio (75:25) and conventional caustic extraction is employed. This
minimizes the chloride content of the bleach plant effluent and
permits recycling of the effluent into the kraft recovery system to
allow incineration of a major organic waste load. The APS-II and
APS-III systems suggest a sequence of antipollution steps that may be
implemented one at a time. These steps and the BOD5_ and color
reductions obtained through implementation of each step are shown in
Table VII-4. This process is reported to involve the use of existing
or slightly modified bleach plant equipment and produces pulp with
304
-------
TABLE VII-4
-' ;. WASTEI LOAD REDUCTIONS FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF
"BOOKER APS II AND APS III SYSTEMS*
Effluent
BOD5
Step No., Operation
Control standard
APS-II
1. Countercurrent wash-jump
stage, split flow
2. Replace chlorination with
sequential chlorination -
75:25 D:C ratio
% BODS
Color
75.1-83.4 (18 - 20) 12.5
45.9-54.2 (11 - 13) 12.5
45.9-54.2 (11 - 13) 11.0
oo
o
3. Recycle D/C effluent to dilute 25.0-33.4 ( 6 - 8) 11.0
incoming brown stock "
4. Dilute sequential chlorination 16.7-25.0 ( 4 - 6) 5.0
stock with part E_l and recycle
remainder to recovery via brown
stock washers and smelt dis-
solving system
5. Use salt separation process to 16.7-25.0 ( 4 - 6) 5.0
purge NaCl and separate Na2S04
from precipitator catch
APS-1II
6. Treat D/C effluent in a resin 16.7-25.0 (4-6) 4.5
packed column and regenerate
resin with a portion of El
effluent
(25)
(10)
( 9)
60
64
325
(650)
43.5 ( 87)
11.5 ( 23)
I Color
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/ton) Reduction kj/kkg (Ib/t) Reduction
(25)
(22)
(22)
(10)
— '
12
12
60
.. 325
188 ;
188 ,
43.5
(650)
(376)
(376)
( 87)
-
42
42
87
87
96
*Gall, R.J., "The Anti-Pollution Sequence - A New Route to Reduced Pollution in Bleach Plant Effluent," TAPPI,
56(11), 1973.(77)
-------
properties equivalent to or superior to that of conventional
processes. Hooker also claims reduced chemical and operating costs.
The process allows for recovery of caustic, sodium sulfate, and sodium
chloride that would normally be sewered.
Displacement Bleaching. There are presently only two mills in the
country where a displacement bleaching process is used. The first was
at the Temple Eastex mill in Evadale, Texas, where operation of
displacement bleaching began in 1975.(79) This was followed by the
start-up of a system at Weyerhaeuser Corporation in Plymouth, North
Carolina, in 1976. Both systems are Kamyr designs, with a
conventional D/C first stage tower and washer preceding an EDEDW
displacement tower. The caustic is applied at the repulper of the
conventional washer. The pulp is then pumped into the bottom of the
displacement tower (D,) at about 10 percent consistency. The
displacement tower has a retention time of about 90 minutes. Each
stage in the tower is followed by a stage of diffusion washing with
the filtrate being extracted to a seal tank and then partially
reused.(80) A final displacement tower (D2) provides up to 4 hours
detention and washing using paper machine white water at the Plymouth
mill.
There are four filtrate tanks for the displacement towers. These
tanks are of a stacked design with one set of tanks for each caustic
extraction stage and one set for each chlorine dioxide stage. Caustic
extract is generally reused on the conventional washer and is mixed
with the NaOH added at the repulper of the conventional washer prior
to pumping to the displacement tower. Some chlorine dioxide stage
filtrate is also mixed with C1O2_ to be reused on the D, and D2 stages.
Overflows from the seal tanks are sewered. Water use for a D/CEDED
displacement bleach sequence is typically 12.5 to 18.8 kl/kkg (3;0 to
4.5 kgal/t) compared to a conventional tower washer system often
exceeding 50.0 kl/kkg (12.0 kgal/t).(79)
The benefits associated with displacement bleaching are lower water
use and slightly lower initial capital costs. Based on limited':data,
it appears that chemical usage may actually be higher than for
conventional bleaching systems.(79) .»
END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
COMMONLY EMPLOYED BY THE: PULP,
Many types of wastewater treatment systems are employed at mills in
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. This section describes- the
treatment systems employed by the industry and presents information on
other applicable effluent treatment technologies. ; -
Preliminary/Primary Treatment ;'-
Wastewater must often be screened to remove materials that"could
seriously damage or clog downstream treatment equipment.
Automatically cleaned screens are commonly employed prior to primary
treatment and generally represent the preferred practice.
306
-------
The initial propess, of removing organic and inorganic solids can be
accomplished : .by sedimentation (with or without flocculants or
coagulants),. tfl,ptat ion, or filtration. Primary treatment can involve
mechanical clarifiers, flotation units, or sedimentation lagoons.
The most widely ,, applied technology for removing solids from pulp,
paper, and paperboard mill w.astewaters is the;,mechanical clarifier.
In the mechanical clarifier, solids are removed by simple
sedimentation. Dissolved air flotation (DAF), units have also been
applied to remove solids from paper mill effluents.(81) DAF units are
somewhat limited-in use because of their inability to handle high
pollutant concentrations and shock loads. Fine screens,
microstrainers,, and pressure filters are not commonly used in the
industry for solids removal. Adequate fine screening systems cost
approximately the same ;as an equivalent clarifier and reportedly have
more inherent operating problems.(82)
Because of the biodegradable nature of a portion of the settleable
solids present in pulp, paper, and paperboard .mill wastewaters,
clarification can result in- some BOD5_ reduction. :Typical BOD5_ removal
through primary clarification of integrated pulp and paper mill
effluent can vary between 10 and 30 percent. The exact BOD5_ removal
depends on the percentage of soluble BOD5_ present in the raw
wastewater. Primary clarification can result in significantly higher
BOD5_i reductions at nonintegrated mills than at. integrated mills.
Responses to the.data request program indicate that approximately 50
percent of the raw wastewater BOD5_ is commonly removed at
nonintegrated mills through the Application of primary clarification.
Easty has recently observed that very little;reduction of fatty acids,
resiniacids, or their chlorinated derivatives . occurs during primary
clarification.(83) This observation suggests that these compounds are
not associated with the raw wastewater solids measured in the TSS test
procedure. Polychlorinated bi-phenyls (PCBs) have been observed to
undergo; significant reductions through primary treatment.(10) At a
wastepaper tissue mill, PCBs were reduced from 25 to 2.2 micrograms
per liter (ug/1) through primary clarification, while TSS were reduced
from 2,020 to 77 milligrams per liter (mg/1).(10) It has not yet been
established whether reductions occur for other chloro-organic
compounds. ;; , . , ,,.; .. .,,.....
Biological Treatment
Currently, the most common types of biological treatment used in the
pulp,,,paper, and paperboard industry include' oxidation basins, aerated
stabilization basins-, and the activated sludge process or its
modifications. Other biological systems that have been used include
rotating biological contactors and anaerobic contact filters.
A principal benefit obtained from biological treatment is the
reduction of oxygen demand. Significant reductions in toxic
pollutants have also been observed through application of biological
treatment as illustrated by recent data gathering efforts (see Section
307
-------
V). Biological treatment systems have been designed and -operated to
achieve 80 to 90 percent and higher BOD5_ reductions when applied to
pulp, paper, and paperboard mill effluents. Biological treatment can
also yield a nontoxic effluent a high percentage of the time.(84)
Due to the fluctuation of influent wastewater characteristics,
specific toxic pollutant removal capabilities are not readily
measureable unless long-term field sampling is employed. In a
laboratory study, Leach, Mueller, and Walden determined the specific
biodegradabilities of six nonconventional pollutants in pulp, paper,
and paperboard mill wastewaters.(85) The relative ease with.;which
these six compounds were degraded was, in descending order:
dehydroabietic acid, pimaric acid, tetrachloroguiacol,
monochlorodehydroabietic acid, dichlorodehydroabietic acid, and
trichloroguaiacol. The researchers reported that : chlorinated bleach
plant derivatives are more difficult to degrade than are the
nonchlorinated wood derivatives. \i
A recent study involved investigation of influent and effluent
concentrations of toxic and nonconventional pollutants after^full-
scale biological treatment.(83) Removal rates of these pollutants, as
derived from the published design and treatment data, are shown in
Table VII-5.(83) The relative removal rates generally agree- with
those obtained in laboratory studies.(83)(85)
i
BOD5_ and toxic pollutant removals from bleached kraft wastewater
through application of activated sludge treatment and aerated
stabilization were investigated in an attempt to establish a relation
between pollutant concentration and toxicity.(84) The authors
concluded that, in: general',' a reduction in BOD5_ to about 45 mg/1 was
sufficient to achieve detoxification of the waste. Also, a -total
resin and fatty acid concentration of less than 1 mg/1 was necessary
to effect detoxification. The correlation between total resign and
fatty acid content and toxicity was better than the correlation
between BOD5_ and toxicity. _ \\
• ! • f *
Oxidation Basins. The first type of biological treatment systems,used
in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry were oxidation basins.
These are large natural or manmade basins of various depths; natural
aeration from the atmosphere" is relied on as the primary oxygen
source. Additionally, limited oxygen is provided by ;algal
photosynthesis. The amount of oxygen provided through photosynthesis
is dependent upon the basin configuration (depth) and its restriction
in light penetration. Since oxidation through natural aeration is a
relatively low-rate process, large land areas are required to
effectively treat high strength wastes. Because of availability of
land and a warm climate that enhances bioactivity, most oxidation
basins are found in southern states. This technology can be more
effective if settleable solids are removed from the wastewater prior
to discharge to the basins. Solids can contribute significantly to
the BOD5_ wastewater loads. In addition, excess settleable solids tend
to fill the basins, thus reducing detention time.
308
-------
TABLE VII-5
CALCULATED TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT REMOVAL RATES (a)*
CO
o
IQ
Mill 9(b)
10-Day
ASB
Resin Acids
Abietic 0.85
Dehydroabietic 1.05
Isopimaric 0.30
Pimaric 0.10
Unsaturated Fatty Acids
Oleic
Linoleic
Linolenic
Other Acidics
Epoxysteric Acid
Dichlorosteric Acid
Chlorinated Resin Acids
Monochlorodehydroabietic
Dichlorodehydroabietic
Chlorinated Phenolics
Trichloroguaiacol
Tetrachloroguaiacol
Chloroform
Mill ll(b)
6-Day
ASB
0.86
2.65
0.37
0.14
0.7
2.6
0.4
0.10
0.05
0.03
0.02
2.2
Mill 12(c)
3.5-Hr
AS
0.3
0.6
0.26
0.3
0.35
0.30
0.006
0.019
2.1
Mill 13(b) Mill I4(b)
12-Day 7-Day
ASB ASB
1.5 1.0
1.85 1.1
1.25 3.0
0.3 0.1
0.55
0.15
10.4
0.03
0.10
Mill 15 (b)
15 -Day
ASB
0.45
0,72
0.12
0.15
0.67
0.47
0.03
0.12
>"¥• ."
0.01
0.03
(a) Removal rates shown as micrograms removed per milligrams/liter (mg/1) of biomass per day.
TbJ Aerated stabilization basin (ASB) biomass assumed to be 200 mg/1.
TcT Activated sludge (AS) biomass reported to be 2,500 rag/1.
NOTE: Blank spaces indicate no data.
^Source: Easty, Dwight B., L.G. Borcharot, and B.A. Wabers, Institute of Paper Chemistry, Removal of Wood
Derived Toxics from Pulping and Bleaching Wastes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, OH, EPA 60012-78-031, 1978.(83)
-------
Typical design BOD5_ loads range from 56 to 67 kilograms per hectare
(kg/ha) of surface area/day (50 to 60 Ib/acre/day).(40) Retention
times can vary from 20 to 60 days or more.(40) This method of
treatment has two principal advantages: a) it can be capable of
handling (buffering) accidental discharges of strong wastewater
without significant upset and b) it requires no mechanical devices
with inherent maintenance problems. Oxidation basins have been used
to effectively treat pulp, paper, and paperboard industry wastewaters.
Generally, suspended solids are effectively removed in oxidation
basins. However, high levels of suspended solids have been noted due
to algal carryover. Literature presenting data on the removal of
toxic and nonconventional pollutants through application of oxidation
basin technology is limited.
Aerated Stabilization Basins (ASBs). The aerated stabilization basin
(ASB) evolved from the necessity of increasing performance of existing
oxidation basins due to increasing effluent flows and/or more
stringent water quality standards. Induced aeration provides a
greater supply of oxygen, thus substantially reducing the retention
time required to achieve treatment comparable to that attained in an
oxidation basin. Nitrogen and phosphorus (nutrients) are usually
added prior to the ASB if the wastewater is determined to be nutrient
deficient. These additions are commonly made in the form of ammonia
and phosphoric acid. The longer the retention period of the waste
undergoing biological oxidation, the lower the nutrient requirement.
The specific detention time used depends upon the characteristics of
the wastewaters to be treated. Retention times of 8 to 10 days, and
sometimes up to 15 days, have been used in order to obtain BOD5_ levels
of less than 30 mg/1.(87)(88)(89) The specific detention time used
depends upon the characteristics of the wastewaters to be treated.
Aeration is normally accomplished using either mechanical surface
aerators or diffused air. Oxygen transfer efficiencies under actual
operating conditions range from 0.61 to 1.52 kilograms (kg) of oxygen
per kilowatt-hour (kwh), or. about (1.0 to 2.5 Ib of oxygen per
horsepower-hour) depending on the type of equipment used, the amount
of aeration power per unit volume, basin configuration, and the
biological characteristics of the system.(90)(91) It is necessary to
maintain a dissolved oxygen (DO) level of 0.2 to 0.5 mg/1 in the basin
to sustain aerobic conditions.
BOD5_ and suspended solids levels, oxygen uptake, and DO levels
throughout the basins are related to aerator location and performance
and basin configuration. There have been extensive studies of eleven
existing aerated stabilization basins that have led to development of
design criteria to aid in the design of future basins.(92)
Some solids accumulate in the bottom of ASBs that can be removed with
periodic dredging. Solids accumulation diminishes as the detention
time and degree of mixing within the basin increases. At some mills,
a quiescent zone, settling basin, or clarifier is used to improve
effluent clarity and to reduce suspended solids.
310
-------
The toxicity removal efficiency of an ASB treating unbleached kraft
waste was evaluated over a one-month period in late 1976.(93)
Although the raw wastewater exhibited an LC-50 of from one to two
percent by volume, all but one of the 26 treated effluent samples were
either nontoxic or exhibited greater than 50 percent fish survival
after 96 hours of exposure. The one failure was attributed to a black
liquor spill at the mill. Average reductions of 87 percent BODS, 90
percent toxicity, and 96 percent total resin acids were achieved.
Dehydroabietic acid was the only resin acid identified in the treated
effluent; pimaric, isopimaric and abietic acids tended to concentrate
in the foam from the effluent.
Pilot-scale ASB treatment of bleached kraft wastewater was evaluated
over a five month period.(84) Two basins, one with a five day and one
with a three day hydraulic detention .time, were studied with and
without surge equalization. The raw wastewater BOD5_ varied from 108
mg/1 to 509 mg/1 and was consistently toxic. The median survival
times (MST) of fish ranged from 7 to 1,440 minutes, while total resin
and fatty acid concentrations ranged from 2 to 8 mg/1.(84) Mean BODS
removals with surge equalization were 85 percent for the five day
basin and 77 percent for the three day basin. Mean effluent BODS
levels with surge equalization were 40 mg/1 for the five day basin and
59 mg/1 for the three day basin. Detoxification was attained 98
percent of the time by the five day basin with surge equalization and
85 percent of the time by the three day basin with surge equalization.
Mean reported effluent BOD5_ values for the five day and three day
basins without equalization were 51 mg/1 and 67 mg/1, respectively
The detoxification rate without equalization dropped to 73 percent for
the five day basin and 70 percent for the three day basin. The
authors concluded that surge equalization appeared to have a more
significant effect on detoxification than BOD5_ removal. Since the
surge capacity of an aerated stabilization basin is related to
hydraulic detention time, the eight to ten day basins which are
commonly employed in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry in the
United States could have a higher capacity for shock loading than
those used in this study.
Aerated stabilization basins provide a high degree of BOD5_ reduction
and also can remove or reduce the wastewater toxicity. ASB capital
and operating costs may be lower than those for the activated sludge
process. The treatment efficiency is not as dependent on ambient air
temperature as with oxidation basins; however, efficiency can be more
dependent on ambient air temperature for ASB's than for higher rate
processes (i.e., activated sludge).
Activated Sludge Process. The activated sludge process is a high-rate
biological wastewater treatment process. The biological mass
(biomass) grown in the aeration basins is settled in a secondary
clarifier and varying amounts of this biomass are returned to the
aeration basins, building up a large concentration of active
biological material. It is common to maintain 2,000 to 5,000 mg/1 of
active biological solids in the aeration basin section of the
activated sludge system compared to the 50 to 200 sng/1 common to
311
-------
aerated stabilization basins. Loadings in excess of 1.6 kilograms of
BOD5_ per cubic meter (100 Ibs of BOD5_ per 1,000 ft3.) of aeration
capacity per day are sometimes used, allowing for relatively small
aeration basins.
The characteristically short detention times tend to make the
activated sludge process more susceptible to upset due to shock loads.
When the process is disrupted, it may require several days for
biological activity to return to normal. Particular operator
attention is required to avoid such shock loadings at mills where this
process is employed. The necessity for strict operator attention can
be avoided through provision of sufficient equalization to minimize
the effects of shock loadings.
Compared with aerated stabilization basins, the activated sludge
process has less shock load tolerance, greater solids handling
requirements, and higher costs. However, the activated sludge process
requires less land than ASBs. Thus, it may be preferred in cases
where sufficient land for ASB installation is either unavailable or
too expensive.
The activated sludge process is very flexible and can be adapted to
many waste treatment situations. The activated sludge process has
many modifications that can be selected as most appropriate. Various
types of activated sludge processes that have been applied to treat
pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters include: a) conventional, b)
complete-mix, c) tapered aeration, d) step aeration, e) modified
aeration, f) contact stabilization, g) extended aeration, h) oxidation
ditch, and i) pure oxygen. Another process, the Zurn-Attisholz
process consists of a two stage system. Table VII-6 summarizes
standard design parameters for the activated sludge process and
several of its modifications.
In the conventional activated sludge process, both influent wastewater
and recycled sludge enter the aeration basin at the head end and are
aerated for a period of about four to eight hours or more. Mechanical
surface aerators similar to those used in aerated stabilization basins
are used; the use of diffused air is becoming more common. Normally,
the oxygen demand decreases as the mixed liquor travels the basin
length. The mixed liquor is settled and the activated sludge is
generally returned at a rate of approximately 25 to 50 percent of the
influent flow rate.
In the complete-mix activated sludge process, influent wastewater and
recycled sludge enter the aeration basin at several points along the
length of the basin. The mixed liquor is aerated at a constant rate
as it passes from the central channel to effluent channels at both
sides of the basin. The contents of the basin are completely mixed
and the oxygen demand remains uniform throughout. The aeration period
is from three to five hours, and the activated sludge is returned at a
typical rate of 25 to 100 percent of influent flow rate.
312
-------
TABLE VII-6
TYPICAL DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESSES
Process Modification
Conventional
Complete mix
Step aeration ,
Modified aeration
Contact stabilization
Extended aeration
Pure oxygen systems
Volumetric loading
(Ib BOD5/ 1,000 cu ft)
20-40
50-120
40-60
75-150
60-75
10-25
100-250
Parameter
Detention Time
MLSS (mg/1) V/Q (hr)
1,500-3,000
3,000-6,000
2,000-3,500
200-500
(1,000-3,000)*
(4,000-10,000).
3,000-6,000
6,000-8,000
4-8
3-5
3-5
1.5-3
(0.5-1.0)*
(3-6).
18-36
1-3
^Contact unit.
.Solids stabilization unit.
co MLSS = Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids
co V = Volume
Q = Flow
-------
The tapered-aeration process is a modification of the conventional
process with the primary difference being the amount of air supplied.
At the head of the basin, where wastewater and returned sludge come
into contact, more oxygen is required. As the mixed liquor traverses
the aeration basin, the oxygen demand decreases so aeration is
decreased. Since the oxygen supply is decreased with the oxygen
demand, a lower overall oxygen requirement can be achieved.
The step-aeration process also is a modification of the conventional
activated sludge process. In this modification, the wastewater is
introduced at several points in a compartmentized basin while the
return activated sludge is introduced at the head of the basin. Each
compartment of the basin is a separate step with the several steps
linked together in series. Aeration can be of the diffused or
mechanical type and is constant as the mixed liquor moves through the
tank in a plug-flow fashion. The oxygen demand is more uniformly
spread over the length of the basin than in the conventional activated
sludge process, resulting in better utilization of the oxygen supply.
The aeration period is typically between three and five hours and the
activated sludge is returned at a typical rate of 25 to 75 percent of
influent flow rate.
The contact-stabilization process takes advantage of the absorptive
properties of activated sludge through operation in two stages. The
first is the absorptive phase in which most of the colloidal, finely
suspended, and dissolved organics are absorbed in the activated sludge
in a contact basin. The wastewater and return stabilized sludge enter
at the head of the contact basin, are aerated for a period of 20 to 40
minutes, and settled in a conventional clarifier. The second stage is
the oxidation phase, in which the absorbed organics are metabolically
assimulated providing energy and producing new cells; In this stage,
the settled solids from the absorptive stage are aerated for a period
of from three to six hours in a stabilization basin. A portion of the
solids are wasted to maintain a constant mixed liquor volatile
suspended solids (MLVSS) concentration in the stabilization basin.
Contact stabilization has been applied successfully at several
facilities to treat kraft mill wastewaters.
The extended-aeration process is a complete-mix activated sludge
process in which the aeration period is relatively long (24 to 48
hours) and the organic loading relatively low. Because of these
conditions, the process is very stable and can accept intermittent
loads with minimal or no upset. The solids settled in the clarifiers
are recirculated to the influent of the aeration basins. Through this
process, a mass of biological solids are built up in the aeration
basin. This biomass assists in achieving high treatment efficiencies
through removal of dissolved organic matter in the wastewater by
oxidation. Excess secondary solids, if present, are wasted from the
process. Oxygen may be provided by either mechanical or diffused
aeration. This process has been applied successfully throughout the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. In northern climates, where
temperature can impact the system performance, the extended-aeration
314
-------
process offers the stability of an ASB system and the high
efficiency of the activated sludge process.
treatment
The oxidation ditch activated sludge process is an extended-aeration
process in which aeration and circulation are provided by brush rotors
placed across a race track-shaped basin. The wastewater enters the
ditch at one end, is aerated, and circulates at about 0.3 to 0.6
meters per second (1 to 2 fps). Operation can be intermittent, in
which case clarification takes place in the ditch, or continuous, in
which case a separate clarifier and piping for recycling of settled
solids are provided.
The ability of activated sludge basins to detoxify bleached kraft mill
effluents was analyzed over a five month period.(84) Two pilot-scale
activated sludge systems {8-hr and 24-hr detention) were operated with
and without surge equalization. Raw wastewater BOD5_ varied from 108
to 509 mg/1. The raw wastewater was consistently toxic. Reported raw
wastewater median survival times (MST) to fish ranged from 7 to 1,440
minutes. Total resin and fatty acid concentrations in the raw
wastewater ranged from 2 to 8 mg/1.
/
Mean BOD!? removals for the 8-hr and 24-hr activated sludge systems
with a 12-hr surge equalization basin achieved an average of 72
percent and 76 percent BOD5 removal, respectively. Effluent BOD5
concentrations for the 24-hr system ranged from 5 mg/1 to 263 mg/1,
with a mean of 59 mg/1. The 24-hr system detoxified the effluent 87
percent of the time. Final effluent BOD5_ concentrations for the 8-hr
system ranged from 14 to 270 mg/1 with a mean of 70 mg/1. The
effluent was detoxified 89 percent of the time.(84)
The 24-hr activated sludge system, when operated without equalization,
was subjected to more vigorous mixing plus the addition of 10 mg/1
alum. Under these conditions, an average of 90 percent BOD5_ removal
was obtained and detoxification was achieved 100 percent of the time.
The 8-hr activated sludge system, when operated without surge
equalization, was also subjected to more vigorous mixing with no
addition of alum. Under these conditions, an average of 84 percent
BOD5_ removal was obtained, although detoxification was attained only
55 percent of the time.(84) The authors concluded that equalization
did not affect BOD5_ removal efficiency, but improved the
detoxification efficiency by 15 to 30 percent. Addition of alum to
the activated sludge system appeared to reduce toxicity. The authors
speculated that the mechanism of toxicity removal was a chemical
reaction.(84) Failures to detoxify were attributed in some instances
to hydraulic shocks, black liquor spills, or inadequate treatment
system operation, although in many instances no cause could be
determined.(84)
The pure oxygen activated sludge process uses oxygen, rather than air,
to stimulate biological activity. This scheme allows for a lesser
detention time and a lower aeration power requirement than for the
conventional activated sludge process; however, additional power is
required for oxygen generation which may result in a net increased
315
-------
power requirement. Waste secondary solids volumes that must be
dewatered and disposed of are similar to those produced by air
activated sludge systems.
Field test data by Union Carbide Corp. confirms that the oxygen
activated sludge process is capable of achieving final effluent BOD5_
concentrations on the order of 15 to 30 mg/1 when applied to
unbleached kraft wastes.(94) Effluent TSS after clarification was
generally in the range of 40 to 60 mg/1.(94) A summary of pilot-scale
information is presented in Table VI1-7.
A sulfite-newsprint effluent was treated using an oxygen activated
sludge pilot plant facility over an 11 month period. BOD5_ reductions
during this time were over 90 percent. (95) Final BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations ranged from 23 to 42 mg/1 and 61 to 111 mg/1,
respectively.(95) The effluent from the oxygen activated sludge
system was found to be acutely toxic.(95) Total resin acids before
and after oxygen activated sludge treatment were 25 and 6 mg/1,
respectively.(95) Ammonia was found at levels on the order of 50
mg/1. The treated effluent was air stripped to determine if ammonia
was the major cause of the high toxicity. Although air stripping
reduced the ammonia concentration to less than 1 mg/1 and the total
resin acid concentration to 1 mg/1, the effluent remained acutely
toxic.
Easty studied two examples of pure oxygen activated sludge systems:
one treating integrated bleached kraft wastewater and the other
treating unbleached kraft pulp mill wastewater.(83) Both
significantly reduced all identified pollutants. The pollutants
evaluated included resin and fatty acids, their chlorinated
derivatives, and chloroform. The first system incorporated an oxygen
activated sludge basin with hydraulic detention of 190 minutes and a
sludge recycle rate of 35 percent. The pH was maintained between 6.2
and 7.5. It was determined from Easty's data that 43 to 92 percent of
identified pollutants were removed, with the chlorinated resin acids
exhibiting relatively low ' removal efficiencies. This is consistent
with observed biodegradabilities of bleach plant derivatives.(96)
The second oxygen activated sludge system was operated at a detention
time of 3.7 hours and a mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS)
concentration of 2,500 mg/1.(83) Bench-scale alum/polyelectrolyte
coagulation followed. The effluent was adjusted to a pH of 5 with
alum; 1 mg/1 of polyelectrolyte was added. Essentially complete
removal of all identified resin and fatty acids was obtained. It
should also be noted that initial concentrations in the raw waste were
relatively low. Since no data were reported for the oxygen activated
sludge system without chemically assisted clarification, the relative
effects of each of the two processes on removal efficiencies could not
be determined.
The Zurn/Attisholz (Z/A) process is a two-stage activated sludge
system. The first stage operates at a DO of less than 1.0 mg/1; the
DO level in the second stage is maintained at 4 to 5 mg/1. Nutrient
316
-------
Production Process
TABLE VII-7-
OXYGEN ACTIVATED SLUDGE TKEATABILITY
PILOT SCALE*
Retention
(Hr)
BODS (rng/1)
Influent
Effluent
TSS (mg/1)
Influent
Effluent
Alkaline-Unbleached 1.3 - 2.2
Alkaline-Unbleached 1.8-3.0
Alkaline-Unbleached 2.0 - 2.9
277 - 464 20 - 41
214 - 214 16 - 22
265 - 300 25 - 30
57 - 86 46 - 61
123 - 123 36 - 36
95 - 120 60 - 70
'"'Source: Technical data supplied by Union Carbide Corp. (94)
317
-------
and power requirements for the two-stage system are similar to those
for the conventional activated sludge process. A total Z/A detention
time of four hours may be required to achieve BOD5_ and TSS reductions
comparable to activated sludge and aerated stabilization basin
systems.
Seven full-scale Zurn/Attisholz systems are currently in use at pulp,
paper, and paperboard mills in the United States. These installations
treat wastewaters from the following types of manufacturing:
Deink(Fine or Tissue) (5 mills)
Papergrade Sulfite (1 mill)
Groundwood-Fine Papers (1 mill)
At most of the mills where the Zurn/Attisholz process is used, final
effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations are attained in the range of 20
to 25 mg/l.(97) At one mill, BOD5_ and TSS levels in the range of 5 to
10 mg/1 are attained. (97) At another mill, 96 percent BOD5_ and 99
percent TSS reductions are attained using the Z/A process.(98)
A pilot study comparing a two-stage to a single-stage activated sludge
system has recently been performed. It was concluded that the two-
stage system achieved a higher toxicity reduction in treating bleached
kraft wastewater than did a single-stage system.(99)(100)
Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC). This system involves a series of
discs on a shaft supported above a basin containing wastewater. The
discs are 40 to 45 percent submerged in the wastewater and are slowly
rotated; a biological slime grows on the disc surfaces. Closely
spaced discs with a diameter of 3.7 meters (12 ft) mounted on a 7.6
meter (25 ft) shaft can result in 9,300 square meters (100,000 sq ft)
of surface area.
Pilot-scale evaluations of an RBC system treating bleached kraft
wastewater with an average influent BOD5_ concentration of 235 mg/1
have resulted in substantial BOD5_ reductions. (101 ) The degree of
removal is related to the hydraulic loading rate, as seen in Table
VI1-8. Secondary waste solids production reportedly ranged from 0.3
to 0.5 kg of solids per kg of BOD5_ removed (0.3 to 0.5 Ib of solids
per Ib of BOD5_ removed) .(1 01 )
Two pilot plant evaluations reported essentially complete
detoxification of board mill, integrated kraft, and magnesium-based
sulfite mill effluents. (1 02) Final effluent BOD5_ of 59 mg/1 for the
kraft mill, 65 mg/1 for the board mill, and 338 mg/1 for the sulfite
mill were reported. Raw wastewater BOD5_ levels-for these mills were
290 mg/1, 285 mg/1, and 1,300 mg/1, respectively. No ^SS data were
reported. (102) This pilot plant work indicates good toxicity and BOD5_
reduction capabilities. However, to date, mill-scale systems in the
United States treating pulp mill wastewater have encountered operating
difficulties.
318
-------
Hydraulic
Loading Rate
(gpd/sq ft)
TABLE VII-8
PILOT RBC FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY FOR
BLEACHED KRAFT WASTEWATER*
70% of Time
Final Effluent
BOD5 Less Than
(mg/1)
90%.of Time
Final Effluent
BOD5 Less Than
(mg/1)
3 70
2 30
1 22
90
45
39
Note: Raw Effluent BOD5 •= 235 mg/1.
*Source: Gillespie, W.J., D.W. Marshall, and A.M. Springer, A Pilot Scale
Evaluation of Rotating Biological Surface Treatment of Pulp and
Paper Wastes, NCASI, Technical Bulletin No. 278, 1974.(101)
319
_
-------
Anaerobic Contact Filter. This process involves the use of a basin
filled with crushed rock or other media. Wastewater is passed through
the media at a temperature of 32° to 35°C (90° to 95° F) under
anaerobic conditions; detention times on the order of three days are
common. Steam stripping, nutrient addition, neutralization, and
dilution of waste liquor with wash water may be required as
pretreatments.
A laboratory study of the process showed that 80 to 88 percent BOD5.
removal from sulfite wastewaters to levels as low as 34 mg/1 have been
achieved.(103) The major advantage of the process is a low solids
production rate of 0.08 kilograms of solids per kilogram of BOD5_
removed (0.08 pounds of solids per pound BOD5_ removed). This results
because methane gas is the by-product of anaerobic digestin rather
than biological solids. The author concludes that the cost for the
anaerobic process was approximately the same as that for aerated
stabilization.(103)
Partial detoxification of sulfite mill wastewater was obtained in a
laboratory-scale system.(88) The anaerobic contact filter altered the
LC-50 from 4.5 percent to 7.8 percent for rainbow trout. No specific
data concerning specific toxic pollutants were reported.
Impact of_ Temperature Variations. All biological treatment systems
are affected by temperature, particularly by large and/or sudden
temperature changes. The effect of temperature variations on aerobic
biological systems has been demonstrated in both theory and practice;
therefore, temperature is of importance in the choice of design and
operation of treatment systems. McKinney has stated that all
processes of growth are dependent on chemical reactions and the rates
of these reactions are influenced by environmental conditions,
including temperature.(104) The discussion below presents theoretical
and operating data on temperature variations and their effects.
Included is an evaluation of the effect of temperature on biological
treatment system performance as measured by BOD5_ and TSS removals.
BOD5_ is a measurement of the dissolved oxygen used by microorganisms
for the biochemical oxidation of organic matter in a wastewater.
Biochemical oxidation occurs in two stages: a first stage in which
the carbonaceous (organic) matter is oxidized and a second stage in
which nitrification occurs. The oxidation of the carbonaceous matter
results from the biological activity of bacteria and other organisms
in the wastewater. For a stated set of environmental conditions,
growth of microorganisms will follow a predictable and reproducible
pattern closely allied to the amount of organic matter present in a
wastewater, measured as BOD5_, and its rate of utilization by the
microorganisms present.(105)
The heterogeneous population of bacteria found in aerobic biological
systems treating wastewaters at temperatures such as those resulting
from the production of pulp, paper, and paperboard encompass three
classified groupings of bacteria: psychrophilic, mesophilic, and
thermophilic organisms.
320
-------
Seasonal wastewater temperature variations change the specific growth
rate of the heterogeneous population, and to a lesser extent, the
relative distribution of the types of bacteria comprising the
population. McKinney (104) has depicted the rate of growth for
mesophilic organisms with the maximum rate occurring in the rangeof
35° to 40°C (95° to 104°F). Similar growth rate/temperature
distributions exist for both psychrophilic and thermophilic organisms,
with the optimal growth rate occurring in the range of 10° to 15°C
(50° to 59°F) for psychrophiles, and 60° to 65°C (140° to 149°F) for
thermophiles.(96) However, the predominant group found at all normal
operating temperatures in aerobic systems are the mesophiles.(106)
A number of studies have been conducted to quantify various aspects of
microbial growth, temperature, and BOD5_ reduction. Degradation of
organic matter in pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters has been
evaluated and found to proceed at rates similar to other wastewater
sources.(107)(108)(109)(110)(111)(112)(113)(114)
Soluble BOD5_ reduction by microorganisms approximates first-order
kinetics.(106) A temperature decrease of 10°C (18°F) from the optimal
temperature would necessitate ah increase in detention or reaction
time of approximately 35 percent to attain the same effluent BOD5_
level as that attained at the optimal temperature. Conversely, an
increase in temperature of 10°C (18°F) would theoretically shorten the
detention time by 25 percent to attain the same effluent BOD5. level.
The above concept is of substantial practical importance in treatment
system design, since flexiblity in design allows treatment systems to
sustain efficient operation over a wide range of conditions (i.e.,
increasing microbial (solids) recirculation rates will increase
waste/microbe contact time when microbial activity is reduced in
colder temperatures). Additional studies relate the specific effects
of changes in temperature on BOD5_ and suspended solids reduction to
performance for specific systems.(115)(116)
Ammonia Removal Through Nitrification. One method of ammonia removal
is through single-stage nitrification in a biological treatment
system. Nitrification is the process where specific bacteria,
Nitrosommanas and Nitrobacter, convert ammonia to nitrite nitrogen and
then to nitrate nitrogen.
Biological treatment systems presently employed at mills in the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry are generally designed and operated for
oxidation of organic material (i.e., BOD5_ reduction). It is possible,
however, to design and operate these systems to accomplish BOD5_ and
ammonia reduction in a single step or in a series of steps.
Nitrifying organisms exhibit a very slow growth rate in comparison to
organic assimilation and are very sensitive to environmental
conditions and growth inhibitors, such as toxic organic wastes and
heavy metals. Growth rates and, thus, nitrification rates, are
profoundly influenced by such environmental factors as pH,
temperature, and dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations. Since the
nitrifiers are autotrophic, inorganic carbon sources such as carbon
321
-------
dioxide, carbonates, and bicarbonate have a large influence on
microbial growth rates.(117)
Aerobic nitrifiers require relatively large quantities of molecular
oxygen to complete the oxidation of ammonia. The theoretical oxygen
requirements, based on the biochemical equations of nitrification,
have been determined to be 4.57 kg 02_ required/kg ammonia nitrified
(4.57 Ib 02. required/lb ammonia nitrified). Generally, this oxygen
demand may be satisfied by atmospheric molecular oxygen furnished
through conventional aeration techniques. However, since the
nitrifiers are autotrophic and obtain their carbon requirements from
such compounds as carbon dioxide and bicarbonates, the oxygen
contained in these compounds may also be available for metabolism.
Thus, depending on the alkalinity of the wastewater, the actual oxygen
which must be furnished by aeration equipment may be lower than the
theoretical 4.57 ratio. Discounting the ammonia required for BOD5_
removal, the nitrifiers will also utilize a fraction of the available
nitrogen for synthesis of cellular components. This ammonia demand is
estimated to be equivalent to 0.7 to 0.9 oxygen equivalents;
therefore, the theoretical oxygen ratio of 4.57 would be reduced to
about 4.1 kg 02/kg ammonia nitrified (4.1 Ib 02/lb ammonia
nitrified).(118)
Since the nitrifiers have slower growth rates, a biological system
designed for nitrification requires a longer detention time (i.e.,
longer sludge age). Insufficient nitrification will result unless the
sludge wastage rate is lowered to accommodate the nitrifier
requirements. Therefore, the wastage rate is usually controlled to
maintain a sufficient sludge age in the system to accomplish
nitrification. Published data for municipal wastes indicate that a
sludge age greater than four days in the activated sludge process is
adequate for 90 percent nitrification at 20°C (68°F).(118) Laboratory
experiments conducted on pulp and paper wastewaters (weak black
liquor) with influent ammonia and BOD5_ concentrations of 264 mg/1 and
511 mg/1 indicate that a sludge age of approximately 14 days is
required for conversion of 90- percent of the ammonia to nitrate. (117)
In the absence of severe inhibitors, a single-stage activated sludge
system can be properly designed to achieve BOD5_ removal and
nitrification in a single aeration basin. Available literature
indicates that 90 percent ammonia removal can be achieved through
nitrification.(107)(112)(119)(120)O21)(122) In low strength wastes,
ammonia removal to levels of less than 10 mg/1 is achieveable
depending on the variability of the influent ammonia concentration.
(118)
Chemically Assisted Clarification
Dissolved and colloidal particles in treated effluents are not readily
removed from solution by simple settling. These particles can be
agglomerated by the addition of chemical coagulants. Coagulants in
common use include lime, alum, ferric chloride, ferric sulfate, and
322
-------
magnesia. Detailed discussions of the
available.(123)
chemistry of coagulants are
Rebhum and others suggest that the most efficient method of pulp and
paper mill effluent flocculation is a solids-contact type
clarifier.(124) Ives suggests a theory for the operation of solids-
contact clarifiers that considers their integrated role as
flocculators, fluidized beds, and phase separators.(125) His theory
suggests that the criterion for good performance is the dimensionless
product of velocity gradient, time, and floe concentration. He
suggests that model floe blanket studies can be meaningful for full-
scale operation provided that the concentration of floe in the blanket
and the blanket depth are the same in both model and prototype.(125)
Ives also suggests a number of design considerations for solids-
contact clarifiers. For floe particles to form a blanket in a
circular tank, the upflow velocity of the water must be equal to the
hindered settling velocity of floe suspension. It is important that
the floe removed from the blanket balance the rate of floe formation.
The clarifier should be symmetrical; the inlet flow should be
uniformly dispersed and the collection at the outlet should also be
uniform. The clear water zone should have a minimum depth equal to
half the spacing between collection troughs.
Upon floe formation, settling is accomplished in a quiescent zone.
The clarification process results in waste solids that must be
collected, dewatered, and disposed of. The quantity, settleability,
and dewaterablity of the waste solids depend largely on the coagulant
employed. In some cases the coagulant can be recovered from the waste
solids and reused.
Case studies of full, pilot, and laboratory-scale chemical
clarification systems are discussed in the following sections.
Case Studies-Full Scale Systems. Several full-scale, chemically
assisted clarification systems have been constructed in the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry and in other industrial point source
categories. Data on the capability of full-scale systems to remove
conventional and nonconventional pollutants are presented below.
. Conventional Pollutants - Recent experience with full-scale
alum-assisted clarification of biologically treated kraft mill
effluent suggests that final effluent levels of 15 mg/1 each of BOD5_
and TSS can be achieved. The desired alum dosage to attain these
levels can be expected to vary depending on the chemistry of the
wastewater to be treated.
pH.
The optimum chemical dosage is dependent on
Chemical clarification following activated sludge is currently being
employed at a groundwood (chemi-mechanical) mill. According to data
provided by mill personnel, alum is added at a dosage of about 150
mg/1 to bring the pH to an optimum of 6.1. Polyelectrolyte is also
added at a rate of 0.9 to 1.0 mg/1 to improve flocculation.
323
-------
Neutralization using NaOH is practiced prior to final discharge to
bring the pH within acceptable discharge limits. The
chemical/biological solids are recycled through the activated sludge
system with no observed adverse effects on biological organisms.
Average reported results for 12 months of sampling data (as supplied
by mill personnel) show a raw wastewater to final effluent BODS
reduction of 426 mg/1 to 12 rag/1 and TSS reduction of 186 mg/1 to 12~
mg/1.
Treatment system performance at the mill was evaluated as part of a
study conducted for the EPA.(126) Data obtained over 22 months shows
average final effluent BOD5_ and TSS concentrations of 13 and 11 mg/1,
respectively. As part of this study, four full-scale chemically
assisted clarification systems in other industries were evaluated.
Alum coagulation at a canned soup and juice plant reduced final
effluent BOD5_ concentrations from 20 mg/1 to 11 mg/1 and TSS levels
from 65 mg/1 to 22 mg/1. Twenty-five mg/1 of alum plus 0.5 mg/1
polyelectrolyte are added to the biologically treated wastewater to
achieve these final effluent levels. Treatment plant performance was
evaluated at a winery where biological treatment followed by
chemically assisted clarification was installed. Final effluent
levels of 39.6 mg/1 BOD5_ and 15.2 mg/1 TSS from a raw wastewater of
2,368 mg/1 BOD5_ and 4,069 mg/1 TSS were achieved. The influent
wastewater concentrations to the clarification process were not
reported. The chemical dosage was 10 to 15 mg/1 of polymer.(126) A
detailed summary of the results of the study of full-scale systems is
presented in Table VI1-9.(126)
In October, 1979, operation of a full-scale chemically assisted
clarification system treating effluent from an aerated stabilization
basin at a Northeast bleached kraft mill began. This plant was
designed and constructed after completion of extensive pilot-scale
studies. The purpose of the pilot plant was to demonstrate that
proposed water quality limitations could be met through the use of
chemically assisted clarification. After demonstrating that it was
possible to meet the proposed levels, studies were conducted to
optimize chemical dosages. The testing conducted showed that the alum
dosage could be reduced significantly by the addition of acid for pH
control, while still attaining substantial TSS removal. In the
pilot-scale study, it was shown that total alkalinity, a measure of a
system's buffering capacity, was a reliable indication of wastewater
variations and treatability. Through this study, it was shown that
there is a direct relationship between total alkalinity and alum
demand. High alkalinity (up to 500 mg/1) caused by the discharge of
black liquor or lime mud results in high alum demands. Therefore, a
substantial portion of alum dosage can be used as an expensive and
ineffective means of reducing alkalinity (pH) to the effective pH
point (5-6) for optimum coagulation. The use of acid to assist in pH
optimization can mean substantial cost savings and reduction in the
alum dosage rate required to effect coagulation. In one instance, use
of concentrated sulfuric acid for pH reduction, reduced alum demand by
45 percent. Acid addition was also effective in reducing alum dosage
for wastewaters with a low alkalinity (approximately 175 mg/1).(127)
324
-------
TABLE 3ZH -9
SUMMARY OF CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
TECHNOLOOY PERFORMANCE DATA
Major
Industrial
Pulp
Paper
Synthetic
Fiber
Manufact-
urer
fot: "Site"
Canned
Food*
Mine
Making
Iiidtititrlal
B-1J
B-H
Syalea
B-IO
B-II
Subuategory
! round wood
heni-Mech.
Dae r on®
and ethlyene
glycol
Cunned aoup.
Juices
Wine
Deacriptlon of
baa in
2 IbBOO^/lOOO cu.ft./D
Hydraulic detention
time - B daya at 2.25
MOD
Nitrogen & phosphorous
added
Activated sludge
(extended aeration)
F/H - 0.05 to 0.1
lb.B005 applied/lb MLSS
MLSS - 2000-2500 mg/l
Hydraulic detention tine
30 hours at 2 HOD
Nitrogen & phosphorous
added
2 stage trickling filter
filter followed by
aerated lagoon with 5
18" diameter x 12 feet
long.
: Activated sludge
18.6 ll> BOD/1000 cu.ft.
F/M • 0.07
M1.SS - 4069
Detention Tine - 8 days
0.176 HGD
Phosphorous and nitrogen
added
AVERAGE OF PERIOD - CLARIFIES
Influent Effluent
BOD, TSS BOD5 1 TSS
1
i
Average verage Average | Average
of 12 f 12 of 12 J of 12
taonthu months oonths j aonths
of dally f dally of dally t of daily
data ata data > data
N.D. 295.7 140.7 1 172.8
Ib/day Ib/day j Ib/day
average verage average 1 average
of 10 f 10 of 10 J of 10
months con t ha months | months
of daily f daily of daily! of daily
data ata data data
315.5 37.7 198.2 | 177.2
Ib/day b/day Ib/day 1 Ib/day
1
Data not rovided. Average i Average
of 4 I of 4
quarterly quarterly
with j with
chttBlcals chenlcals
113.3 lb/0 203.8 lb/
Data not rovided. Average j Average
of 4 | of 4
quarterly quarterly
1 averages j averages
without | without
chemicals chemical u
151 Ib/D 665.3 lb/
1
j
1
Annual Aunual figures provided
average average! without back up
June '75 June '75 data j
'76 '76 1
20 ng/1 65 mg/l 11 mg/l ! 22 mg/l
No back No back Annual J Annual
provided provide June '75J June '75
to Hay | to May
'76 1 '76 -
1
1
1
1
1
Average Average! Average o£ period
from from 1976 to July 31,
April 2 April 2 . 1976 {
1976 to 1976 to |
July 31 July 31 39.6 mg/l 15.2 mg
1976 1976 Data after post
aeration and
2368 Dg 4069 mi, 1 chlorlnatlon
!
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
MAXIMUM BAY
Clarlfler Effluent
BOD5 1 TSS
504.4 1502.6
Ib/day Ib/day
473.3 1400.2
Ib/day Ib/day
Data not
1)
Data not
Data no
provided.
trovlded.
provide*
Data a er pout
aerati and
chlorl tlon
70 ng/ 36 mg/
1 for pe ad April
1976 t July 31,
1976
MAXIMUM 30
CONSECUTIVE
DAYS AVERAGE
CUrifler Effluent
BOD5 f TSS
Baaed
on 12
aonths
of daily
data
201.3
Ib/day
Baaed
on 10
nonths
of daily
data
239,7
Ib/day
Data not
Data not
Data no
'
Based
on 12
months
of daily
data
250.5
Ib/day
Based
on 10
months
of dally
data
257.9
Ib/day
provided .
provided.
provided .
Data n t avallabl
26,
Recent Removals
Across Clarifler
BOD5 1 TSS
1
Based on annual
average
Based on neun of
30 consecutive day
averages
N.D. 67%
1
r
Based on
average
29X !
Baaed on
30 conae
averages
35X j
'
annual
(10 months)
76Z
mean of
76X
Data not avail-
able for
calculations
I
Data not avail-
able for
calculations
1
1
1
1
Ho back, up data
calcula
.
.
ion
.
from A rll 26,
1976 t July 31,
1976
N/A 99. 6Z
Surface
Overflow
Hates and
Detention
Time
For annual
ave. Elow of
1.6 HGD
369 gal/day/
sq.ft.
For uax.day
flow of 2.8
-641 gal/day/
sq.ft.
For annual
average flow
of 1.9 MGD -
432 gal/day
For max. day
flow of 2.5
MGD - 564 gal/
so. ft.
For average
jierlod flow-
2.097 MGD
220 gal/D/
sq.ft.
7 hours
detention
For average
period flow-
1.67 HGD
176 gal/D/
SQ.ft.
7 hours
detention
558 gal/day/
@ 4.3 HGD
• 3.5 hours
detention
time
flow 0.17 MG
MCD
140 gal/D
.shift
11.5 hours
Chemicals
Added and
toaage Rate
Average
Alum -
Silica -
Alum -
150 mg/l
average
Polymer
0.5 mg/l
average
Polymer
only
cationic
0-10 ng/1
.verage
•one
added
Campbell
soup had no
record of
when cheoil—
added or no
added
added at
lagoon ef-
fluent weir
25 DR/1
Polyraer addt
at flow opl
ting box be
tore clarif
0.5 mg/l
Polymer at
J 10-15 rag /I
Testing
period for
proper dosa
HPDES Permit
Average
Maximum Day
BOD5 I TSS
1
30 Day J 30 Day
average ) average
275 lb/D'400 Ib/D
ORDER 1 No. 74-69
NPDES NO.j CA0004821
1 July'75] effective
1
1
1
Average clou of
2.2 «gd. I
Max. day { Max. Day
550 Ib/D | 800 Ih/D
30 OB/1 1 40 mg/l
1
1
t
1
1 i
Dally j Daily
average J average
750 lb/D,1040 Ib/D
1 .
NPDES NO. ' NC0000663
31 Dec. 73 to
31 Dec. 76
Ave. flow 2.5 HOD
1
Dally I Dully
100 Ib/D J2000 Ib/U
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dally average -
45 mg/l TSS
Dally maximum -
90 ng/1 TSS
30 mg/l BODj
Dally maxlraun -
75 mg/l H0!>5
NO. 11221 «AD
(J 1
•d 1
i
1
era j
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
Process Season -
Dally average -
30 mg/L - BOD5
Daily maximum -
[e 50 rag/1 - BODs
Daily average -
20 mg/l - TSS
Daily maximum -
50 mg/l TSS
I
'
Average of Period
Plant Influent
Flow BOD5 TSS
HGD 475.7 .6 Ibs/
1.95 mg/l 000 gal.
average average verage
of 12 of 12 f 12
months months months
data data ata
1.9 MGD .7 Ibs/
000 gal
Average N.D. verage of
of 10 0 months
months f daily
of daily ata
data
- -' ' - _ _ _ .
Data not rovided.
4.3 HGU 473 mg/l 364 mg/l
Nunber Number Number
provided provided provided,
up data up data up data
provided provided provided
0.177 2368 mg 215.5 mg/l
MGD
Average of period prll 26, 1976
to July 31. 1976 ._
Caution - does no include the"
the pre si*g Seas which is t\ta
season f highest oadlng.
CO
ro
en
- Hl(L A|ipl liable
-------
Table VTI-10 summarizes effluent quality of the full-scale system
since startup; this system has been operated at an approximate alum
dosage rate of 350 mg/1 without acid addition. Recent correspondence
with a mill representative indicated that, with acid addition, this
dosage rate could be reduced to 150 mg/1.(128) However, this lower
dosage rate has not been confirmed by long-term operation.
Scott, et al. (129) reported on a cellulose mill located on the shore
of Lake Baikal in the USSR. The mill currently produces 200,000 kkg
(220,000 tons) of tire cord cellulose and 11,000 kkg (12,100 tons) of
kraft pulp per year. Average water usage is 1,000 kl/kkg (240
kgal/t). The mill has strong and weak wastewater collection and
treatment systems. The average BOD5_ for the weak wastewater system is
100 mg/1, while the strong wastewater BOD5_ is 400 mg/1. Only 20
percent of the total wastewater flow is included in the strong
wastewater system. Each stream receives preliminary treatment
consisting of neutralization to pH 7.0, nutrient addition, and aerated
equalization. Effluent from equalization is discharged to separate
aeration and clarification basins. These basins provide biological
treatment using a conventional activated sludge operation. Aeration
is followed by secondary clarification. Suspended solids are settled
and 50 percent of the sludge is returned to the aeration process.
Waste sludge is discharged to lagoons. The separate streams are
combined after clarification and are treated for color and suspended
solids removal in reactor clarifiers with 250 to 300 mg/1 of alum and
1 to 2 mg/1 of polyacrylamide flocculant, a nonionic polymer. The
clarifiers have an overflow rate of approximately 20.4 cu m per day/sq
m (500 gpd/sq ft).
Chemical clarification overflow is discharged to a sand filtration
system. The sand beds are 2.9 m (9.6 ft) deep with the media arranged
in five layers.(130) The sand size varies from 1.3 mm (0.05 in) at the
top to 33 mm (1.3 in) at the bottom. The filter is loaded at 0.11 cu
m per minute/sq m (2.7 gpm/sq ft). Effluent from sand filtration
flows to a settling basin and then to an aeration basin; both basins
are operated in series and provide a seven hour detention time.
The effluent quality attained is as follows:
Parameter
(mg/1)
Suspended Solids (mg/1)
pH
Raw Waste
300
60
Final Effluent
2
5
6.8 - 7.0
Individual treatment units are not monitored for specific pollutant
parameters.
Nonconvent ional Pollutants. The development of coagulation
processes for color removal has been traced by many investigators.
Investigators concluded that lime precipitation was a coagulation
process for color removal which afforded the possibility of chemical
326
-------
TABLE VII-10
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY OF A CHEMICALLY ASSISTED
CLARIFICATION SYSTEM TREATING BLEACHED KRAFT WASTEWATER
BOD (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
Date
Average
for Month
Maximum Day
Average
for Month
Maximum Day
September 1979
October 1979
November 1979
December 1979
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
11
8
9
21
8
7
13
9
11
21
12
18
83
16
14
46
16
22
87
40
28
21
28
31
44
32
38
254
92
47
56
36
68
113
96
80
327
-------
recovery utilizing existing mill equipment. Based on the results of
this early work, research continued towards development of a lime
precipitation process. The overriding problem in this work continued
to be the difficulty of dewatering the lime-organic sludge. Specific
studies were conducted for resolving the sludge problem with limited
success.(131)(132)
Continuing efforts to improve the dewatering of the lime sludge led to
consideration of using large dosages of lime for color reduction. It
was believed that a large quantity of rapidly draining materials would
reduce the effect of the organic matter on dewatering. This thinking
led to the development and patenting of the "massive lime" process by
the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement. In this process,
the mill's total process lime is slaked and reacted with a highly
colored effluent stream, usually the caustic extraction effluent. The
lime sludge is then settled, dewatered, and used for causticizing
green liquor. During the causticizing process", the color bodies are
dissolved in the white liquor and eventually burned in the recovery
furnace. Although the massive lime process had been demonstrated as
an effective color removal system, the process was not taken beyond
the pilot stage for several years.
The first installation of the massive lime color system was operated
at a mill in Springhill, Louisianna. The 33.4 liter per sec (530 gpm)
demonstration plant was used to treat the bleach plant caustic
extraction and unbleached stock decker wastewaters. These streams
contributed 60 to 75 percent of total mill color. In the process, the
lime slurry dosage was 20,000 mg/1.
The demonstration plant at Springhill was first tested using 100
percent bleach plant caustic extraction effluent. Various amounts of
unbleached decker effluent were then added until 100 percent decker
effluent was treated. Color removal ranged from 90 to 97 percent with
an average of 94 to 95 percent (133). Organic carbon removal ranged
from 55 to 75 percent and generally increased with higher colored
effluent. The values reported are shown in Table VII-11. BOD5_
removals of 25 to 45 percent were reported with lower values found
during treatment of most highly-colored effluent. The net effect of
the process was estimated as a 72 percent reduction of total mill
color.
The massive lime process, as developed, required lime dosages of
approximately 20,000 mg/1. Because of this, only a relatively small
effluent stream could be treated with the quantity of lime used for
causticizing green liquor. Additionally, this process required
modifications to the recovery system. These restrictions led to the
development of an alternative process employing "minimum lime"
treatment. Lime dosages of 1,000 to 2,000 mg/1 are common to this
process.(134) Previous EPA documents have reported data on full-scale
minimum lime treatment systems.(134) Two systems treating unbleached
kraft and NSSC effluents are known to be operating. Color levels of
1,200 to 2,000 color units are reported to be 80 to 90 percent removed
with lime dosages of 1,000 to 1,500 mg/1. A full-scale system
328
-------
TABLE VII-11
COLOR AND ORGANIC CARBON REMOVAL AFTER
APPLICATION OF MASSIVE LIME TREATMENT*
CO
ro
to
Composition of Treated Effluent
Bleach Plant Caus-
tic Extraction
Stage Effluent
(%)
100
67
60
50
33
20
0
0
Kraft
Decker
Effluent
(%)
0
33
40
50
67
80
100;
100
Effluent Color
(APHA Color Units)
Before After
Treatment Treatment
21,546 1,265
14,325 745
12,125 594
10,043 451
6,612 331
4,660 298
l,64of 140 J
900 234
Organic Carbon
Color
Removal
(%)
94.2
94.8
95.1
95.5
95.0
93.6
91.5
74. 02
Before
Treatment
1,446
1,016
905
798
569
450
270,
268
(mg/1)
After
Treatment
373
253
248
245
183
173
120,
1262
Organic Carbon
Removal
(%)
74.2
75.1
72.6
69.3
67.8
61. 6n
55. 6l
53.0
Very little paper mill white water reuse for decker pulp washing or as make-up water.
Practically all water used in decker system was white water from paper mill.
^Oswalt, J.L., and J.G. Lund Jr., Color Removal from Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents by Massive Lime
Treatment, EPA Project 12040 DYD, 1973.(133)
-------
treating the first caustic extract of a bleached kraft mill has been
shut down. When operating, lime dosages of 1,500 to 3,000 mg/1 were
used to remove 90 percent of a color load that ranged from 8,000 to
10,000 color units.(134)
Case Studies-Pilot and Laboratory Scale. Several laboratory and
pilot-scale studies of the application of chemically assisted
clarification to treat pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters have
been conducted. Available data on the capability of this technology
to remove conventional and nonconventional pollutants based on
laboratory and pilot-scale studies are presented below.
Conventional Pollutants - As part of a study of various solids
reduction techniques, Great Southern Paper Co. supported a pilot-scale
study of chemically assisted clarification.(135). Great Southern
operates an integrated unbleached kraft mill. Treatment consists of
primary clarification and aerated stabilization followed by a holding
pond. The average suspended solids in the discharge from the holding
pond were 65 mg/1 for the period January 1, 1973 to December 31, 1974.
In tests on this wastewater, 70 to 100 mg/1 of alum at a pH of 4.5
provided optimum coagulation. Three alum dosages were tested. At the
optimum dosages, the removals after 24 hours of settling ranged from
83 to 86 percent. Influent TSS of the sample tested was 78 mg/1.
Effluent TSS concentrations ranged from 11 to 13 mg/1.
In a recent EPA-sponsored laboratory study, alum, ferric chloride, and
lime in combination with five polymers were evaluated in further
treatment of biological effluents from four pulp and paper mills.(136)
Of the three chemical coagulants, it is reported that alum provided
the most consistent flocculation at minimum dosages, while lime was
the least effective of the three. However, the study provides
inconclusive results in determining the optimum chemical to be used or
the optimum chemical dosage for removal of TSS from
biologically-treated effluents. These inconclusive findings are the
result of a number of factors, including (a) the lack of determination
of an optimum pH to effect removal of TSS, (b) the lack of
consideration of higher chemical dosages when performing laboratory
tests even though data for some mills indicated that better removal of
TSS was possible with higher chemical dosage (a dosage of 240 mg/1 was
the maximum considered for alum and ferric chloride, while 200 mg/1
was the maximum dosage used for lime), (c) the testing of effluent
from one mill where the TSS concentration was 4 mg/1 prior to the
addition of chemicals, and (d) the elimination of data based simply on
a visual determination of proper flocculation characteristics.
Laboratory data on alum dosage rates for chemically assisted
clarification have been submitted to the Agency in comments on the
contractor's draft report.(137) Data submitted for bleached and
unbleached kraft wastewaters indicate that significant removals of
suspended solids occur at alum dosages in the range of 100 to 350
mg/1.(138)(139)(140) For wastewaters discharged in the manufacture of
dissolving, sulfite pulp, effluent BOD5_ and TSS data were submitted for
dosage rates of 250 mg/1; however, it was stated that dosages required
330
-------
to achieve effluent TSS concentrations on the order of 15 mg/1 would
be in the range of 250 tq 500. mcj/1. (141 ) Subsequent to the comment
period, the NCASI has asselfe'i'ed jar ^est'^data for several process
types and submitted it to the Agency.(142) Data for chemical pulping
subcategories indicate that, alum dosages in the range of 50 to
700 mg/1 will effect significant removals of TSS. The average dosage
rate for all chemical pulping wastewaters was 282 mg/1. Data
submitted for the groundwood, deink, and nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategories indicate that dosages in the range of 100 to 200 mg/1
will significantly reduce effluent TSS.
Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants
As
part of
an
EPA-sponsored "study, biologically-treated effluent from a kraft mill
was further treated using alum precipitation technology on a
laboratory-scale.(83) Existing full-scale treatment at the mill
consisted of a primary clarifier, an aerated stabilization basin, and
a polishing pond. Twenty-four hour composite samples of the polishing
pond effluent were taken on three separate days. The samples were
adjusted to a pH of 4.6 with alum; four drops of polymer per liter of
sample were added. The results are summarized below:
Polishing Pond
Effluent
Range (mg/1)
Alum-Treated
Effluent
Range (mq/1)
Total Resin and Fatty Acids
Total Chlorinated Derivatives
Chloroform
BODS
2.82
0.43
0.025
43.0
3.75
0.45
0.032
51 .0
Undetected
Undetected - 0.04
0.018 - 0.022
0 -,14.0
Other researchers have, investigated modifications of chemically
assisted clarification technology using lime. This research has
concentrated primarily on color removal. Investigations have included
the use of alternative coagulants in combination with lime. Olthof
and Eckenfelder reported on the use of ferric sulfate, lime, and alum
to reduce effluent color at two bleached kraft mills and one
unbleached kraft paperboard mill.(143)(144) Their results, as shown
in Table VII-12, provide both an optimum pH and optimum dosage for
each case. All three coagulants were able to achieve a reduction in
color from 1,000 to 3,000 platinum-cobalt (Pt-Co) units to 125 to 300
Pt-Co units. Note that the dosage required for color reduction is
higher than that generally applied for BOD5_ and TSS reduction only.
Olthof and Eckenfelder concluded that ferric sulfate used for color
removal of pulp, paper, and paperboard mill wastewaters can be an
attractive alternative to lime treatment. , This conclusion was drawn
from the fact that the required optimum dosage of ferric sulfate was
25 to 33 percent that of the optimum lime dosage. In addition, the
effluent quality which results from use of ferric sulfate was better
than that resulting from lime. Lime treatment results in a high pH
and a great deal of calcium in solution. Common practice is to use an
additional treatment step, recarbonation, which reduces the pH prior
to biological treatment and allows for recovery of calcium as CaCO3.
331
-------
TABLE VII-12
COLOR REDUCTIONS ACHIEVED AFTER APPLICATION OF CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
WITH FERRIC SULFATE, ALUM, AND IIME*
Ferric Sulfate
Alum
CO
CO
ro
Mill Type
Bleached
Kraft
Bleached
Kraft
Uiibleuched
Optimum Color Final Optimum Color Final
Optimum Color Final
Dosage Reduction Color Value Optimum Dosage Reduction Color Value Optimum Dosage Reduction Color Value Optimum
(mg/1) (%) (Pt-Co. Units**) pH (raft/1) ft) (Pt-Co. Units**) pH (me/1) (%) fPt-Co. Units**) oH
500 92 250 3.5-4.5 400 92 200
275 91 125 3.5-4.5 250 93 100
250 95 150 4.5-5.5 250 91 100
Kraft Paperboard
4-5 1,500 92 300 12. -12. 5
4-5 1,000 85 200 12. -12. 5
5-6 1,000 85 150 12. -12. 5
*Sources: Olthof, M.6., "Color Removal From Textile and Pulp and Paper Wastewaters by Coagulation," Vanderbilt University, PhD Thesis, 1975.(143)
Olthof, M.G. and Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr., "Laboratory Study of Color Removal from Pulp and Paper Hasewaters by Coagulation," TAPPI,
Vol. 57, No. 8, August 1974.(144)
**Platinum-Cobalt Units
-------
The use of ferric sulfate and alum prior to biological treatment does
not require recarbonation and may not require neutralization. Berov
studied the need for neutralization of kraft mill effluents which were
treated with alum for color removal.(145) He concluded that if the
chemically treated process effluent pH did not fall below 5.8,
neutralization was not needed prior to biological treatment.
Dugal, Church, Leekley, and Swanson performed laboratory studies on
color reduction with a combined ferric chloride and lime treatment
system.(146) This study sought to establish conditions for improving
the lime treatment systems by using multivalent ions with the lime for
color precipitation. Earlier investigations of the lime precipitation
treatment system removal demonstrated 85 to 90 percent removal of
color; it was determined that the remaining color bodies had an
apparent average molecular weight of less than 400. Preliminary
studies with multivalent ions and lime showed almost total color
removal.
Tests were run in the laboratory on the decker filtrate and caustic
extraction discharge from International Paper Company's mill at
Springhill, Louisiana. Various salts such as barium chloride, ferric
chloride, magnesium hydroxide, and zinc chloride were used in the
initial experiments. Based on data from these initial experiments,
ferric chloride was selected for further analysis. In general, it was
determined that trivalent ions are more effective color-removing
agents than divalent ions. Table VI1-13 presents a summary of the
results.(146)
Twenty-four experiments were run using ferric chloride and/or lime at
various concentrations. Color removal up to 98.7 percent was attained
and it was concluded that a synergistic effect between lime and ferric
chloride existed. Table VII-14 shows the results of these 24
experiments.(146)
Another flocculation and precipitation process is in full-scale
operation in Japan; it is also being investigated through laboratory
studies in Sweden. The process involves using iron salts and lime to
obtain color removals in the range of 85 to 95 percent.(147)
Chlorination and caustic extraction stage effluents are treated.
Metallic iron is first dissolved in the chlorination stage effluent.
Retention times of T.5 to 2 hours and temperatures near 50°C (122°F)
are needed to dissolve a sufficient amount of the metallic iron. The
resulting solution is then combined with the caustic extract and the
pH adjusted within the range of 9 to 10 with lime. No chemical
dosages were listed for the lime required or the amount of metallic
iron consumed.
Vincent studied the decolorization of biologically treated pulp and
paper mill effluents by lime and lime - magnesia additions.(148)
Laboratory-scale studies were conducted on effluents from three kraft
mills, one sulfite mill, and one NSSC mill. All except one of the
kraft mill effluents had been treated in a biological system before
chemical treatment. Separate testing with lime and magnesia showed
333
-------
TABLE VII-13
COMPARISON OF TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES ON KRAFT EFFLUENTS BY THE APPLICATION OF
CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION USING DIVALENT IONS OR TRIVALENT IONS*
Decker Filtrate
Caustic Extract
Decker Filtrate
Caustic Extract
Salt
Concentration Final
(**/!) PH
Hs(OH)2
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.8
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.0
Color
Removal
—
0
2.5
5.0
2.5
2.5
7.5
7.5
Final
PH
8.2
8.4
8.7
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.2
Color
Removal
—
0
6.8
11.4
11.4
11.4
12.0
22.8
Salt
Concentration
(mg/1)
Alum (A12(S04)3
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
Final
pH
18H20)
7.2
7.3
5.1
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.5
Color
Removal
59.1
87.1
90.9
88.1
88.2
88.2
86.8
Final
pH
7.9
6.5
4.8
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.3
4.1
Color
Removal
„„
7.7
63.1
85.2
84.6
85.2
84.6
86.5
ZnClj FeCl -pH unadjusted
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
B»C12
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
800
1000
Ca(0«)2
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
£00
'Calculated
7.2
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.0
—
2.5
5.0
7.5
12.5
17. 5a
22.5
45.4
8.1
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
—
0
3.9
3.9
13.6
13.4
22.9
44.0
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
7.2
5.8
5.0
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.4
3.1
27.3
75.5
76.4
77.3
77.3
75.5
76.4
6.7
6.1
5.6
5.1
4.8
4.4
4.1
3.8
__
0
24.4
26.9
51.3
74.8
91.7
90.7
FeClj-pH adjusted
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.0
6.9
6.7
6.4
6.2
5.7
—
—
~
—
—
—
—
~
Value.
—
5.0
16.7
21.7
23.3
26.7
28.3
41.2
42.5
61.2
-_
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
7.1
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.8
6.9
7.0
7.1
7.1
8.6
10.3
11.3
11.6
11.7
11.8
11.9
12.1
—
0
0
0
1.3
4.1
1.1
23.7
35.9
45.2
20.0
22.5
22.5
25.0
32.5
62.5
72.5
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
7.2
8.2
8.7
8.3
8.5
8.9
8.9
8.8
0
21.1
12.6
38.9
58.3
50.9
72.5
6.7
8.4
8.9
8.7
9.1
8.6
8.1
7.8
0.6
67.4
83.1
97.2
97.3
97.3
97.4
*Source: Dugal, H.S., Church, J.O., Leefcley, R.M., and Swanson, J.W., "Color Removal i
Vol. 59, No. 9, September 1976.(146)
n a Ferric Chloride-Lime System," TAPPI
334
-------
TABLE VII-14
LIME TREATMENT OF BLEACHED KRAFT CAUSTIC; EXTRACT IN
THE PRESENCE OF METAL ION *
FeCl
(mg/1)
0
25
50
100
200
300
500
800
o
25
50
100
200
300
500
800
0
25
50
100
200
300
500
800
Lime
(mg/1)
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
18,000
18,000
18,000
18,000
18,000
18,000
18,000
18,000
Sludgeb
Volume
(ml)
6.2
8.2
8.2
8.5
13.3
14.4
22.0
30.1
6.2
7.0
7.3
9.7
14.1
19.1
33.5
62.0
8.9
8.7
9.0
9.4
11.2
12.2
14.3
16.8
Final
PH
11.58
11.50
11.42
11.42
11.49 •
11.50
11.40
11.32
11.79
11.70
11.70
11.70
11.70
11.71
11.78
11.73
11.98
11.99
11.98
12.00
12.01
12.01
12.01
12.00
Color
Removal
81.4
81.7
85.7
90.0
91.4
91.6
95.8
95.5
87.2
88.0
89.5
91.8
93.6
95.2
96.8
97.5
93.4
94.9
95.0
95.9
96.3
97.3
98.2
98.7
TOG
Removal
66.6
66.0
71.0
78.0
76.4
74.3
81.0
83.2
68.6
75.4
73.0
75.2
79.6
81.6
86.0
87.3
80.4
79.5
77.6
81.7
84.0
81.5
87.7
88.7
BOD
Removal
6.5
4.3
0.0
12.8
23.5
27.7
36.2
40.5
23.5
23.5
25 . 5
29.8
34.0
36.2
44.7
51.0
32.0
32.0
38.4
36.2
36.2
46.8
46 . 8
51.0
Untreated caustic extract had a pH of 8.83, a color of 4400 units, a TOC of 220
mg/liter, and a BOD of 47 mg/liter.
bTotal volume of kraft bleach caustic extract after lime and FeCl3 addition was
100 ml. Sludge volumes were measured after a 15-minute settling time.
*Source: Dugal, H.S., Church, J.O., Leekley, R.M. and Swanson J W., "Color
Removal in a Ferric Chloride-Lime System," TAPPI, Vol. 59, No. 9,
September 1976.(146)
335
-------
if i-ho addltion of 1,000 mg/1 of lime, approximately 90
«.? \ C°lor was removed- Magnesia alone proved to be
ineffective at moderate doses; 4,000 mg/1 were required to obtain
S0^ately *° PerCe^ C0l°r Deduction. Therefore, it wSs concIuleS
that the use of magnesia alone could not be justified.
°f mag"esium hydroxide in combination with lime was highly
m « A€. ma9nesiurn was added as a soluble salt prior to the
lime slurry A dosage of 50 to 100 mg/1 of magnesia prior to the
addition of 500 mg/1 of lime gavS the saml color removal as th!
waslesS Siti'thS T9/1 °f Ume al0ne' Additionally, Sud^odSctiSS
tvDical result it %h magnesia Process. Table VII-15 shows some
~i£icaj: results of the lime - magnesia process for removina color
2?2' C?°^ a£d PhosPhate for the five mills. Recover? teSSiqSSs iSre
Ihifwoufd SS^S?ne *FF investigated in connection with thifstudy
This would indicate additional testing would have to be done to prove
the feasibility of this lime - magnesia recovery process beforJ
attempting it on a larger scale. An evaluation concluded that thl
system is costly, but the benefits might favor its use.
Filtration
Sa?anSSr SS? ^° granular ^ed 'rather than membrane) filtration.
9 " material may be sand, or coal, diatomaceous earth, and/or
combination with sand. The various media, grain sizes and
arinTy ^^It* ^ °ptimal results' Ifc *•* ^Sn to ' vary
grain sizes, with the larger sizes at the top of the filter bed to
improve TSS removal and to extend filter run time between
n H diti°n °f a Pr°per chemical nocculant prtor to
can further improve performance.
Filtration technology was evaluated as part of a recent stndv
conducted for the EPA. (126) Results obtained during IhiSstuX of
?aper'/nd PaPjrboard and other industrial facilities Whe?i
is used are shown in Tables VII-16 and VII-17 Also
summarized in the tables are the results of pertinent published
results from other filtration studies. Table VII-16 summarizes thoSe
across the filter; TSS reductions ranged from 45 to 79 percent ThoSe
where coagulants were used prior to filtration achieved^nlfef fluent
SwceJr At179?^09 ,fr°K 5;° t0^7'5 mg/1 with removals of 52 to 35
percent. At the paperboard mill employing single medium sand
was a?ta?ned * Chemical addition, an efflLnt TSS lev* of 7 lg/1
labo^atory study evaluated the efficiency of sand
0 20 rn n, o°Ur ^ ?nd pa?er mil1 ef f l"ents. { 1 36 ) A flow rate of
shown in Table VI Tm?SUteASq " (5 gPm/ft^} was used a"d the results are
snown in Table VI 1-18. As seen, in one of the two cases where
336
-------
co
TABLE VII-15
REMOVAL OF BOD, COD, AND PHOSPHATE FROM CHEMICAL PULPING WASTEWATERS AT SELECTED LIME - MAGNESIA LEVELS*
Mill Effluent
treatment
1) Sulfite 0
bined effl
treatment
Oli
Tjreausent, ^ „_.,_„, After Treatment
L3U flgU _ _J£ .....^ -~n ; r-3 o.i . nnn rrm PKncnhatf
(ms/D
bined effluent, 500
ed) biological
;h BOD stream, 500
[). no biological
ibined effluent) 500
. treatment
IH base, com- '2,000
.nent) biological
>ined effluent) 6,000
L treatment ;
after filtration through
after filtration through
(mg/1) Color BOD CUU fnospnate umui. w ^^ -•• — r
100 2,570 - 420 1.05 . 137 16 100 <0.01
(560) .
100 1,070 130 340 0.7 78 105 580 0.07
(560) 1.310
100 2,620 . 60, 500 3.0 185 30 100 0.06
(720)
400 1,790 60 2,430 0.8 298 67 460 0.07
(1,300) . ' ",
3,000 36,300 525 8,640 31.5 12,800 320 1,040 0.80
: • (4,960) -
- '
Reeve-Angelvglass filter papers ani) subsequent adjustment to pH 7.
Reeve-Angel glass, filter papers. Bracketed values are for imfiltered .effluents .
Removal
Color BOD COD Phosphate
94.7 - 76 99.0
92.7 19 - 90 5
92.9 50 80 98.0
- •
83.4 - 81 91.3
64.7 39 88 97|5
' - ' '.'
/sis (values in mg/1 of P) determined by modified ascorbic acid method. . . , ;
t, D.L!. Colour Removal F
,tr. .
' Canadian Forestry Service,, Department of the Environment Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report
-------
TABLE 3ZH-16
TSS REDUCTION CAPABILITIES AND RELATED FACTORS
FOR THE FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY
WHEN NO CHEMICALS ARE USED
A-2
A-4
Greater South-
them Paper Co.
Cedar Springs,
GA, Pilot study
Clinton Corn
Processing Co.
Clinton, IA
Welch Foods
Brockton, NY
New Brunswick
Research & Pro-
ductivity Council
Pilot Plant
Manmade fiber pro-
cessing
sulfite seolcheia-
ical pulp & paper
grape processing
pulp alii
Biological Treat «nt ?roccia
Activated lludgot F/H - 0.3
KtSS - 1200 MB/1
Detention clu - HD
Average flow - 4.37 HCD
DO »ln - 1.0 as/1
Activated sludge: 10 Ib BOD/
1000 cu ft. F/H - HD
HLSS - ND, DO Bin -
Detention time - 24 hra 9
1.15 HGD, Mechanical Aeration
Average flow - 1.15 HCD
Activated oludge: cotaplete
mix, F/H - .02 Ib BOD/lb
HLUSS. HLSS - 3,500 ng/1
DO aln -
Detention tine - 12 hra 8
23 HCD, Mechanical Aeration
Average flov - 19.11 HCD
Activated uludge - complete
nix, 20.5 Ib BOD/1000 cu ft
P/H - .5, HLSS - 3,500 ng/1
DO aln -
-Detention tlno - 12 hra @
2 HGD
Average flow.- 2.0 MGD
Activated sludge - 18 Ib BOD/
1000 cu ft, F/M -
HLSS -
DO min -
Detention tine - 48 hrs 9
0.5 MGD
Average flow - 2.8 MGD
Aerated stabilization basin:.
Activated sludge complete nix
F/H - -
HLSS -
DO nin -
Detention time -
Average flow ,- ... -
Aerated lagoon - Ib BOD/1000'
cu f t - DO nln -
Detention time - 12.5 days
Total aeration only 8 days
Average flow -
Concent ration I
10.8 »g/l Averago
of daily data for
KD
HD
ND
49.5 mg/1 average
of 2 monthly averages
Does not include old
aeration system flow
average for 3
runs -
68 ng/1
28 Kg/1
40 ng/1 grab samples
Filter Influent
TSS Sim -
<1.25 - 19.0
<2.5 - 57.0
<1.25 - 28.5
<2.5 - 76.3
<5.0 - 89.2
<1.25 - 53.0
<2.5 - 88.3
<5.0 - 97.5
<1.25 - 69.3
<2.5 - 91.6
<5.0 - 95.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
<5u - 60Z
between 5 & lOu
301
at 4.37 HCD t 3
filter* -
3.2 gp«/«q ft
at 1.15 HGD t 3
filters -
2.4 gpm/sq ft
at 19.11 HGD t 9
filters -
3.5 gpn/sq, ft
at 2.0 HOD i 3 -
filters -
3.7 gpa/aq ft
at 2.83 HGD & 3
filters -
2.15 gpm/sq ft
2 gpm/sq ft
2.4 to 3.6 gpm/stj
ft
Filter Hedla: Ho. of
Media, Depth. U.S., E.S..
2 aedla: coal, land -
coal - 18", 0.6 to 0.8 •>
•and - 9" 0.4 to 0.5 «•
in depth filtration
2 aedla: coal, sand -
coal - 24"; DC - ND
ES - ND. sand - 12"
UC - ND, ES - ND
in depth filtration
2 media: coal, sand -
coal - 24"; UC - ND
ES - ND. sand - 12"
UC - ND, ES - ND
in depth filtration
1 media: sand "
sand - 6'0"; ES -
2-3 on, Sp.Cr. - 2.7
4 mediss: 2 coal, sand,
garnet -
Coal - 12" Sp. Or. -1.45
UC & ES - ND
Coal - 12" Sp.Cr. -1.5
UC t, ES - ND
Sand - 9", UC & ES - ND
Garnet - 3", UC & ES -
ND
ND
3 media - 7" of coarse
coal, 3" medium sand -
ES - .56, UC - 1.32
5" of coarse sand -
ES - 1.42, UC - 1.34
5.9 Kg/1, average
of daily data June
1976
ND
11 mg/1, average
of 12 monthly
averages
7.0 mg/1, average
of 5 monthly aver-
ages Feb 76-June 76
16.2 mg/1, average
of 2 monthly aver-
ages
average for 3
runs -
35 mg/1
8.4 mg/1 season
average
21 ng/1
Fcrccat Removal
Acroia niter, Avg.
TSS - 45X
ND
ND
ND
67Z, Includes post
aeration
50%
Reported by
Researchers -
77Z, Nov. 25, 1974
to Feb. 16, 1975
70%, season aver-
age
501
*8ased on one grab ttanple.
ND - No Data
-------
oo
co.
TABLE "SCH-17
TSS REDUCTION CAPABILITIES AND RELATED FACTORS
FOR THE FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY
WHEN CHEMICALS ARE USED
Source of Data
A-9
A-4
A-5
A-B
A-6
Cellulose mill on
Lake Baikal USSR
full scale
Llterature-
Araouo Oil
Yorktown.VA.
ype of Uustewater
Carpet Yarn Dyeing
Hun-mflde fiber
processing
Reconstituted
tobacco
Paper towels
and napkins
Pet food
manufacturer
and kraft paper pulp
Oil refining
Biological Treatment Proceso
Description
Activated sludge - extended air
16 Ib BODs/lOOO cu. ft.
FM -
HLSS - 3 50 ft- AGO 0 mg/1
DO Hin -
Detention time - 48 hra.
6 0.5 HGD
Average flow - 0.44 MCD
Activated sludge -
18 Ib 6005/1000 cu. ft.
F/M -
HLSS -
W) Hln. -
Detention tine - 26 hrs 0
2.83 HOD
Average flow - 2.83 HGD
Activated altidge -
15.1 Ib BOU5/1000 cu.ft.
F/H - .07
HLSS - 3500 Bg/1
DO Hln -
Detention tine - 120 lira
@ 1 .0 HGD
Average flow - 1.0 HGD
Aerated stabilisation
baaln
Activated sludge - complete nix
H.D.
K/H - H.D.
HLSS - 3500 ng/1
DO Hln -
Detention tine - 90 hra
9 0.3 HGD
Mechanical aeration
Average flow - 0.3 HGD
HLSS - 2500 mg/1
DO Hln -
Detention time - 8 hra
@ 76 MCD
Average flow -
Aerated lagoon -
F/M-
HLSS -
DO. Min. -
Detention time -
Average flow -
Filter Influent TSS
Concentration and
Source of Data
H.D.
53.2 og/1
Average of 10 Monthly
average!) - from grab
samples
Doea not include old
anotion syflten flow
, H.D.
143 ng/1
Average of 6 monthly
averageu of one grab
sample
H.D.
H.D.
57,6 ng/1
Filter Influent
TSS Size - Percent
-------
TABLE VII-18
SAND FILTRATION RESULTS*
TSS Removal
Mill No.
1
2
3
5
Initial TSS (mg/1)
110
5.5
70
60
w/chemicals w/o chemicals
64 14
36
71 68
23
*Peterson, R.R. and Graham, J.L., "Post Biological Solids Characteriza-
tion and Removal from Pulp Mill Effluents," EPA-600/2-79-037, 1979.(136)
340
-------
coagulation was not employed prior to filtration, substantially better
results were obtained than when coagulants were added. It was
explained by the authors that natural coagulation, that may have
occurred during shipment of samples, could have affected the results.
Activated Carbon Adsorption
Currently, there are two basic approaches for the use of activated
carbon: a) use in a tertiary, sequence following primary and
biological processes and b) use in a "physical-chemical" treatment in
which raw wastewater is treated in a primary clarifier with or without
chemical coagulants prior to carbon adsorption.
The tertiary approach involves the reduction of biodegradable organics
prior to discharge to the carbon system. This provides for longer
carbon life. In a physical-chemical treatment mode, biodegradable and
refractory organics are removed solely through adsorption on the
activated carbon. Activated carbon can achieve high removals of
dissolved and colloidal pollutants in water and wastewater. When
applied to a well treated biological effluent, it is capable of
reducing BOD5_ to less than 2.0 mg/l.(149)
The primary means by which removal occurs is by surface adsorption.
The key to the carbon adsorption process is the extremely large
surface area of the carbon, typically 3.54 to 9.92 square meters per
gram (sq m/g) (17,300 to 48,500 sq ft/lb).(150)
Activated carbon will not remove certain low molecular weight organic
substances, particularly methanol, a common constituent of pulping
effluents.(151) Additionally, carbon columns do a relatively poor job
of removing turbidity and associated organic matter.(152) Some highly
polar organic molecules such as carbohydrates also will not be removed
through the application of activated carbon treatment.(152)(153)
However, most of these materials are biodegradable and, therefore,
should not be present in appreciable quantities in a well bio-oxidized
effluent.
Activated carbon may be employed in several forms including: a)
granular, b) powdered, and c) fine. The ultimate adsorption
capacities for each may be similar.(154) The optimal carbon form for
a given application should be determined by laboratory and/or pilot
testing. Each of the three forms of carbon listed above is discussed
below.
Granular Activated Carbon. Granular activated carbon has been used
for many years at municipalities and industrial facilities to purify
potable and process water. In recent years, it has also been used for
removal of organics in wastewater.(155)
Granular activated carbon (GAC) treatment usually consists of one or
more trains of carbon columns or beds, including one or more columns
per train. The flow scheme may be down through a column, up through a
packed carbon bed, or up through an expanded carbon bed. The optimum
341
_
-------
o
o
column configuration, flow scheme, and carbon requirements can best be
determined through field testing. Design aspects for various systems
are readily available in the literature.(150)
It is economically advantageous in most granular activated carbon
applications to regenerate the exhausted carbon. Controlled heating
in a multiple-hearth furnace is currently the best procedure for
removing adsorbed organics from activated carbon. Typically, the
regeneration sequence is as follows:
o Pump exhausted carbon in a water slurry to the regeneration
system for dewatering.
o After dewatering, feed the carbon to a furnace at 816° to 927°C
(1,500° to 1,700°F) where the adsorbed organics and other
impurities are oxidized and volatized.
Quench the regenerated carbon in water.
Wash the carbon to remove fines; hydraulically transport the
regenerated carbon to storage.
o Scrub the furnace off-gases and return the scrubber water for
treatment.
The West Wastewater Treatment Plant at Fitchburg, Massachusetts treats
combined papermill and sanitary wastes at a 57,000 cu m/day (15 mgd)
chemical coagulation/carbon adsorption facility.(156) Approximately 90
percent of the flow originates from three papermills, with the
remaining 10 percent originating from municipal sanitary wastewater.
The industrial wastewater undergoes 5 minutes of rapid mixing and 30
minutes of flocculation prior to mixing with the chlorinated sanitary
wastewater. The combined waste is then settled after lime and alum
addition. The wastewater is then pumped to twelve downflow pressure
carbon filters. Initial operation of the system has resulted in a 96
percent suspended solids reduction and a 39 percent BOD5_ reduction in
the pretreatment system. The granular activated carbon filters
initially yielded total reductions of suspended solids and BOD5_ of 99
and 97 percent, respectively. Final effluent concentrations were
reported as 5.0 mg/1 BOD5_ and 7.0 mg/1 TSS. No data have been
reported concerning toxicity or toxic pollutant removal/ reduction
from the plant.
Since the plant was started up in late 1975, it has been plagued with
a number of mechanical and operational problems. As a result, the
system has been unable to achieve the removal capabilities predicted
after initial operation. The plant was designed to produce an
effluent quality of 8 mg/1 of BOD5 and TSS on a monthly average. The
pretreatment facility has consistently yielded a 55 percent BOD5_
reduction and 95 percent TSS reduction. The carbon filters have
provided 55 percent BOD5_ reduction and 70 percent TSS reduction of the
remaining pollutants after pretreatment. Overall, the system is
342
-------
anticipated to achieve 80 percent BOD5_ reduction and 98 percent TSS
reduction once the steady state
-------
TABLE VII-19
RESULTS OF PILOT-SCALE GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON
TREATMENT OF UNBLEACHED KRAFT MILL WASTE"
Parameter
PH
Color (Pt-Co Units)
BODS (mg/1)
COD (mg/1)
Suspended Solids
(mg/1)
Total Solids (mg/1)
Note: Columns were
Desired Range
6.8-7.3
0-5
0-2
0-8
0-5
50-250
loaded at 3.6-4.0
Raw Waste
7.8
1,280
265
517
128
1,210
gpm/sq ft
After Lime
Treatment
11.9
28
82
320
115
1,285
After Carbon
Treatment
10 5
o
12
209
74
1,205
Removal
(%)
i nn
95.5
59.6
42.2
0.4
*Sraith, D.R. and Berger, H.F., "Wastewater Renovation," TAPPI, Vol. 51 No 10
October 1968.(160) '
344
-------
percent condensate solution. However, an extended contact time of 19
hours under otherwise similar conditions resulted in an increase to
only 82 percent COD reduction or 163 mg/1, while larval survival in 10
percent solution increased to essentially 100 percent.
Weber and Morris found that the adsorption capacity of granular
activated carbon increased with a decrease in pH.(161) The effect on
the rate of adsorption with changes in temperature was not well
defined.
Powdered Activated Carbon. A recent variation of activated carbon
technology involves the addition of powdered activated carbon to
biological treatment systems. The adsorbant quality of carbon, which
has been known for many years, aids in the removal of organic
materials in the biological treatment process.(162) This treatment
technique also enhances color removal, clarification, system
stability, and BOD5_ and COD removal.(163) (164) Results of pilot
testing indicate that this type of treatment, when used as a part of
the activated sludge process, is a viable alternative to granular
carbon systems.(165)(166) Pilot tests have also shown that powdered
activated carbon can be used successfully with rotating biological
contactors.(167)
At a large chemical manufacturing complex, a full-scale, 151,000 cu
m/day (40 mgd), powdered activated carbon system was started up during
the spring of 1977.(168) This system includes carbon regeneration.
The waste sludge, which contains powdered carbon, is removed from the
activated sludge system and is thickened in a gravity thickener. The
sludge is then dewatered in a filter press prior to being fed to the
regeneration furnace. The regenerated carbon is washed in an acid
solution to remove metals as well as other inorganic materials. Fresh
carbon is added as make-up to replace the carbon lost in the overflow
from the activated sludge process or from the regeneration system.
The process was originally developed because biological treatment
alone could not adequately remove the poorly biodegradable organics in
the effluent. Data were taken during operation of a laboratory-scale
powdered activated carbon unit using a carbon dosage of 160 mg/1 and a
hydraulic retention of 6.1 hours. Table VH-20 presents the results
of this investigation.(168)
It is noteworthy that the estimated capital costs of using powdered
activated carbon rather than a conventional activated sludge system at
this chemical plant were within 10 percent of each other. Operating
cost of the powdered activated carbon system was estimated to be about
25 percent greater than for conventional activated sludge alone.(168)
The powdered activated carbon system described above is a very comlex
treatment system that involves operations that may not be required at
other installations. The need for a filter press system or acid
cleaning system as well as a carbon regeneration furnace must be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
345
-------
TABLE VII-20
POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON
OPERATING DATA ON A CHEMICAL PLANT WASTEWATER*
Parameter
Raw Effluent
Final Effluent
Percent Removal
Soluble BOD5 (mg/1)
Color (APHA Units)
300
1,690
23
310
92.3
81.6
*Source: Heath, H.W., Jr., E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company, "Combined
Powdered Activated Carbon-Biological (PACT) Treatment of 40
MGD Industrial Waste," presented to Symposium on Industrial
Waste Pollution Control, American Chemical Society National
Meeting, March 1977.(168)
346
-------
In a follow-up study on the full-scale powdered activated carbon
activated sludge plant, the average results of three months of data
are reported in Table VII-21. The carbon dosage was 182 mg/1, while
the hydraulic retention was 14.6 hours.(169)
Comparison of the laboratory and full-scale results in Tables VII-19
and VI1-20 reflect an increase in BOD5_ and color removal for the full-
scale system over that of the laboratory-scale unit.
Fine Activated Carbon. Timpe and Lang have developed a fine activated
carbon system for which they have filed a patent application.(154) It
is a multi-stage, countercurrent, agitated system with a continuous
transfer of both carbon and liquid. One of the major aspects of the
fine activated carbon system is the use of an intermediate-size carbon
in an attempt to combine the advantages of both powdered and granular
carbon while minimizing their limitations. Equipment size and carbon
inventory are decreased due to the increased adsorption rate of the
intermediate-size carbon,
Timpe and Lang report that the fine activated carbon system showed
distinct advantages over the granular activated carbon system. They
ran extensive pilot plant tests for treating unbleached kraft mill
wastewater with granular and fine activated carbon.(154) Four
different treatment processes were investigated using a 110 liter per
minute (30 gpm) pilot plant: (a) clarification followed by downflow
granular activated carbon columns, (b) lime treatment and
clarification followed by granular activated carbon columns, (c)
biological oxidation and clarification followed by granular activated
carbon columns, and (d) lime treatment and clarification followed by
fine activated carbon effluent treatment (subject of a patent
application.)
All treatment processes were operated in an attempt to obtain a
treated effluent with less than 100 APHA color units and less than 100
mg/1 TOC that would allow for reuse of the wastewater in the
manufacturing process. The lime-carbon treatment achieved the desired
effluent criteria and was considered the most economical of three
processes utilizing carbon columns. A relatively small lime dosage of
320 to 600 mg/1 CaO without carbonation prior to carbon treatment was
reported to be the optimum operating condition for the lime-carbon
process. It was determined that the effluent should contain about 80
mg/1 Ca for successful optimization of treatment. The required fresh
carbon dosage was 0.3 kg of carbon per 1,000 liters treated (2.5 Ib
per 1,000 gallons treated).
Timpe and Lang reported lower rates of adsorption, resulting in larger
projected capital and operating costs, for the biological-carbon and
primary carbon processes in treating unbleached kraft mill
effluent.(154) The lower rates of adsorption were believed to be
caused by coagulation of colloidal color bodies on the carbon surface.
They also determined that the use of sand filters prior to the
activated carbon was not necessary. The carbon columns operated with
a suspended solids concentration of 200 mg/1 without problems when
347
-------
TABLE VII-21
FULL SCALE "PACT" PROCESS RESULTS
ON CHEMICAL PLANT WASTEWATER*
Parameter
Raw Effluent
Final Effluent
Percent Reduction
Soluble BODS (mg/1)
Color (APHA Units)
504
1,416
15.2
311
95
78
*Robertaccio, F.L., "Combined Powdered Activated Carbon - Biological
Treatment: Theory and Results," Proceedings of the Open Forum on Manage-
ment of Petroleum Refinery Wastewaters, June 1977.(169)
348
-------
backwashed every day or two. Filtration or coagulation of the
effluent from the fine activated carbon process was necessary in order
to remove the color bodies that formed on the outer surfaces of the
activated carbon granules.
It was found that nonadsorptive mechanisms accounted for a significant
amount of color and TOC removal in the clarification-carbon process.
It was felt that the removals were not due to any biological
degradation that might have occurred in the carbon columns. The color
colloids were subsequently removed as large settleable solids during
the backwashing process.(154) Table VII-22 tabulates the pilot plant
results obtained from Timpe and Lang's investigation.
Foam Separation
Foam separation techniques have been evaluated to determine their
effectiveness in treating surface active substances (i.e., resin
acids) in pulp, paper, and paperboard mill wastewaters. This process
involves physical removal of surface active substances through foam
generation. In this process, fine air bubbles are introduced into a
basin or structure containing the effluent. The air bubbles cause
generation of foam in which the surface active compounds are
concentrated. Jet air dispersion has been found to be the most
efficient technique for foam generation when compared to turbine and
helical generation systems.(170)
Several full-scale foam separation facilities have been built for the
removal of detergents from municipal wastes.(171)(172) The Los
Angeles County Sanitation District system operated a system treating a
flow of 45,000 cu m/day (12 mgd) at a seven minute detention. Water
reclamation was the primary purpose of the unit, which operated
successfully and trouble-free during two years of continuous
operation.(173) This system, like other municipal systems, has ceased
operation due to regulations that require the use of biodegradable
detergents.
A bleached kraft whole mill effluent was analyzed for total resin acid
content before and after treatment in a pilot-scale foam separation
unit.(173) Two mill effluents were treated in a two hour detention
time foam separation pilot unit. The resin acid content in all cases
was reduced by between 46 and 66 percent. The range of total resin
acid content in the influents and effluents were 2.6 to 5.1 mg/1 and
0.1 to 1.0 mg/1, respectively. In all cases the treated effluent was
rendered nontoxic to fish.
Pilot studies have been performed using foam separation as a
pretreatment prior to the application of activated sludge and aerated
stabilization treatment of bleached kraft effluent.(174) These
studies have shown the detoxification efficiency of biological
treatment to improve from 50 to 85 percent of the time without foam
separation to over 90 percent of the time with foam separation.(174)
349
-------
TABLE VII-22
RESULTS OF PHOT-SCALE ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT OF
UNBLEACHED KRAFT MILL EFFLUENT*
Description of
Carbon Process
Columns
Preceded By
Biological
Oxidation &
Clarification
Inf. Eff. Removal Inf. Eff. Removal Inf. Eff. Removal Inf. Eff. Removal Inf. Eff. Removal
Columns
Preceded By
Primary
Clarification
Columns
Preceded By
Primary
Clarification
Columns
Preceded By
Lime Treatment
& Clarification
FACET System
co
BOD (mg/1)
TOC (mg/1) 148 57
Turbidiuy (JTU)
Color (Pt-Co Units) 740 212
•- .
Hydraulic
Load (gpm/sq ft) 2.13
Carbon Granular
Contact Time (Min) 140
Fresh Carbon
Dosage
(Ib carbon/
1000 gal.)
PH
(a)Filtered
8
61%
71%
220 83 62%
310 121 61%
925 185 80% 1160 202 83%
20.5
28
26% Removal
177 100 44%
5-15
252 76 70%
1.42
Granular
0.71
Granular
1.42
Granular
108
, 2.5
11.3
158 101 36%
157 73(a)
Intermediate
3.9
^Source: Timpe, W.G. and Lang, E.W., "Activated Carbon Treatment of Unbleached Kraft Effluent for Reuse - Pilot Plant
Results," TAPPI Environmental Conference, San Francisco, May 1973.(154)
-------
Micro-straining
At two nonintegrated papermills, full-scale coagulation/microstraining
facilities are used for treating rag pulp and fine paper
effluents.(175)(176) Coagulant usage includes the addition of 1 mg/1
of polymer plus the addition of alum or caustic for pH adjustment.
Typically, suspended solids and BOD5_ reductions to 10 mg/1 and 50
mg/1, respectively, are achieved. When properly operating, treatment
approaching that achievable through the application biological
treatment has been obtained. It has been observed that upsets caused
by such practices as paper machine washup with high alkaline cleaners
affect the effectiveness of the technology.(175)
Electrochemical Treatment
Electrochemical treatment technology involves the application of an
electrical current to the effluent to convert chloride to chlorate,
hypochlorite, and chlorine. The chlorine and hypochlorite can oxidize
organic compounds and be reduced again to chloride ions. The process
then repeats in a catalytic fashion. The oxidation of organic
compounds reduces the BOD5_, color, and toxicity of the effluent. A
significant advantage of the process is that no sludge is produced.
Oher found that whole mill bleached kraft effluent could be reduced in
color by 80 percent and caustic extract could be reduced in color by
more than 90 percent through electrochemical treatment.(177) Similar
results were achieved when using a lead dioxide or a graphite anode.
The lead dioxide anode required less energy. No toxicity or toxic
pollutant data were reported.
In a variation of the process, Barringer Research Ltd. investigated
the use of a carbon fiber electrochemical reactor to treat kraft
caustic bleach extracts.(178) The high surface to volume ratio of the
carbon greatly decreased the reactor volume requirements. At an
effluent to water volume ratio of 60 percent (v/v), toxicity was
reported to be reduced from 10 percent mortality in 22 hours to zero
percent mortality in 96 hours. Color reduction of 90 percent and BOD5_
and COD reductions of 50 percent and 60 percent, respectively, were
reported. This process is in full-scale use in the mining industry
but no pilot or mill-scale unit has been applied in the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry.(179) The primary drawback of the process is
failure of the carbon cell to perform for extended periods.(179)
Another variation to this process involves the use of hydrogen gas
bubbles generated in the process to float solids and separate scum.
Seliyanov found that an electrochemical unit with graphite anodes and
stainless st eel cathodes could cause coagulation in kraft white
water.(180) Release of hydrogen bubbles in the process caused solids
removal by flotation. Total suspended solids were reduced to 2 to 4
mg/1. No toxicity data were reported.
Herer and Woodard found significant color and TOC reductions in
bleachery wastes by application of electrolytic cells using an
351
-------
aluminum anode.(181) Color removals from chlorination and caustic
extraction effluents were 92 percent and 99 percent, respectively,
while TOC removals were 69 percent and 89 percent, respectively.
Specific concentrations, however, were not reported.
Ion Flotation
This process involves the addition of a surfactant ion of opposite
charge to the ion to be removed. The combining of these ions results
in a precipitate, the colligend. The colligend is removed by passage
of air bubbles through the waste and collection of the resulting
floating solids.
Many of the chromophoric (color producing) organics in pulp, paper,
and paperboard mill wastewaters are negatively charged, making this
process suitable for the removal of color. Chan investigated the
process on a laboratory scale.(182) A variety of commercial grade
cationic surfactants were tested and Aliquat 221 produced by General
Mills was found to be very effective. The process removed over 95
percent of the color from bleached kraft effluents. No specific
removals of toxicity or toxic pollutants were reported.
Air/Catalytic/Chemical Oxidation
Complete oxidation of organics found in pulp, paper, and paperboard
mill wastewaters to carbon dioxide and water is a significant
potential advantage of oxidation processes. Partial oxidation coupled
with biological treatment may have economic and/or technical
advantages over biological treatment alone.
Past studies of oxidative processes have dealt principally with COD or
TOC as a measure of performance. Barclay has done a thorough
compilation of related studies and found that most were performed with
wastewater other than those resulting from the production of pulp,
paper, and paperboard.(183) Some tentative conclusions, though, may
still be drawn:
o Complete oxidation with air can occur under extreme temperature
and pressure, high intensity irradiation, with air at ambient
conditions in the presence of excessive amounts of strong
oxidants (03_, 1320^ or C1O2^, or air or oxygen in the presence of
catalysts such as certain metal oxides.
o Sulfite wastes can be partially detoxified
oxidation for a period of seven days.
by simple air
o Ozone oxidation achieved only slight detoxification of sulfite
wastes after two hours and partial detoxification after eight
hours.(183)
o Major BOD5_ reductions can only be achieved under conditions
similar to those required for nearly complete oxidation.
352
-------
No data specifically
reported.
Steam Stripping
relating to toxic pollutant removal were
Steam stripping involves the removal of volatiles from concentrated
streams. Hough reports that steam stripping at a kraft mill is
capable of removing 60 to 85 percent of the BODS from condensate
streams.(184) The ability of the process to remove specific
pollutants (including toxic and nonconventional pollutants) depends on
the relative boiling points of the pollutants with respect to that of
water (i.e., the pollutants must be volatile). Resin acids have
boiling points in the range of 250°C (482°F) and thus are not readily
stripped through application of this process.(185)
Steam stripping was evaluated for its ability to detoxify condensates
from sulfite waste liquor evaporators.(186) This stream accounted for
10 percent of the whole mill effluent toxicity and 28 percent of the
total BOD5_ load. Toxicity in the condensate stream was attributed to
acetic acid, furfural, eugenol, juvabione, and abietic acid. The
application of steam stripping had no observable effect on the
toxicity of the stream, although the total organic content was
reduced.
Steam stripping of kraft mill digester and evaporator condensates was
employed on a mill scale for control of total reduced sulfur (TRS)
compounds and toxicity.(187) The 96-hour LC-50 of the condensate was
altered from 1.4 percent to 2.7 percent. Thus, the stream remained
highly toxic, even after steam stripping. The process did remove 97
percent of the TRS compounds. Production process changes such as
minimizing condensate volume, installation of spill collection
systems, reduction of fresh water use, and conversion to dry debarking
along with the application of steam stripping resulted in a nontoxic
effluent.
Ultrafiltration
Ultrafiltration utilizes membranes of a specified molecular size to
treat wastewater. The process relies on an external pressure•(i.e.,
pumping) to input the driving force to the wastewater as it is
transported through the membranes. The size opening for the
ultrafiltration membrane depends on the size of the molecules to be
removed from the wastewater.
Data are available from Easty for nonconventional pollutant removal
from two bleached kraft caustic extraction effluents utilizing two
types of ultrafiltration systems.(83) Good removals of epoxystearic
acid, dichlorostearic acid, trichloroguaiacol, and tetrachloroguaiacol
were obtained in each case. Chlorinated resin acids were effectively
removed by one system but not the other.
The first system employed only one spiral wound membrane, with a
surface area of 3.7 sq m (40 sq ft). Filtration of suspended solids
353
-------
larger than 10 micrometers (0.004 in) was accomplished prior to
ultrafiltration. The system was operated at 28.4 liters per minute
(7.5 gpm) and a pH of 11 to 11.5. The system achieved 50 to 80
percent reduction of chlorinated phenolics but only 0 to 15 percent
removal of chlorinated resin acids. The lower percent removals of
chlorinated resin acids reflect a low initial concentration of these
pollutants in the waste.
The second system treated an effluent volume of 12.5 liters per minute
(3.3 gpm) using a tubular cellulose acetate membrane with a surface
area of 1.1 sq m (12.1 sq ft). The system operated at a pH of 9.5 to
10.5 and inlet and outlet pressures of 15.0 ATM (220 psi) and 6.8 ATM
(100 psi), respectively. Filtration of all particles larger than 10
micrometers (0.004 in) was accomplished prior to ultrafiltration.
This system removed approximately 80 to 85 percent of all chlorinated
resin acids, chlorinated phenolics, and other acids.
Color, lignosulfonate, COD, and solids removals from sulfite liquor
after the application of ultrafiltration were studied by Lewell and
Williams.(188) Removals on the order of 30 to 50 percent were
observed for color, lignosulfonate, COD, and TSS. No toxicity or
toxic pollutant data -were reported. Costs (1971) were estimated at
$5.70/kl ($1.50/kgal) for a 3785 cu m (1.0 mgd) permeate flow. It was
concluded that ultrafiltration could not compete economically with
lime as a means of removing lignosulfonate, color, COD, and
solids.(188)
Reverse Osmosis/Freeze Concentration
Reverse osmosis employs pressure to force a solvent through the
membrane against the natural osmotic force. This is the same type of
process as ultrafiltration except that the membranes used for reverse
osmosis reject lower molecular weight solutes. This means that lower
flux rates occur; there is also a need for a higher operating pressure
difference across the membrane than those necessary for
ultrafiltration.
Reverse osmosis is employed at a Midwest NSSC mill where 270 kkg/day
(300 tpd) of corrugating medium are produced. The system allows
operation of a closed white water system. Easty reported that the
system achieved BOD5_ reductions of approximately 90 percent and
removed essentially all resin and fatty acids.(83) The 320 liter per
minute (85 gpm) reverse osmosis unit employs 288 modules, each with
1.55 sq m (16.7 sq ft) of area provided by 18 cellulose acetate tubes.
The system operates at 41 ATM (600 psi) and 38°C (100 °F). During
Easty's testing, the white water feed contained 300 mg/1 TSS and
40,000 to 60,000 mg/1 total dissolved solids. Initial resin and fatty
acid levels were: abietic, 1.5 mg/1; dehydroabietic, 2.62 mg/1;
isopimaric, 2.75 mg/1; pimaric, 0.82 mg/1; oleic, 4.86 mg/1; linoleic,
7.23 mg/1; and linolenic, 0.27 mg/1.(83) The maximum removal capacity
is not known since final concentrations were below detection limits.
354
-------
Reverse osmosis can be followed by freeze concentration whereby the
effluent is frozen to selectively remove pollutants. Freeze
concentration takes advantage of the fact that when most aqueous
solutions freeze, the ice crystal is almost 100 percent water. This
process was evaluated by Wiley on three . bleachery effluents.(189)
Reverse osmosis alone resulted in a concentrate stream of roughly 10
percent of the volume of the raw feed. Freeze concentration reduced
the concentrate stream volume by a factor of five while essentially
all the impurities were retained in the concentrate. Thus the two
processes employed in tandem resulted in a concentrate stream
consisting of roughly two percent of the original feed volume that
contained essentially all of the dissolved solids.(189) It was
reported that the purified effluent was of,sufficient quality that it
could be returned to the process for reuse.(189) Wiley did not
investigate final disposal of the concentrate.
Amine Treatment . •; •
This treatment is based upon the ability of .high molecular weight
amines to form organophilic precipitates. These precipitates are
separated and redissblved in a small amount of strong alkaline
solution (white water). By so doing, the amine is regenerated for
use, with no sludge produced.
The Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada (PPRIC) conducted a
study to determine the optimum process conditions for employing high
molecular weight amines for color, BOD5_, and toxicity reductions of
bleached kraft mill effluents.(190) While no specific data on toxic
or nonconventional pollutants were reported, whole mill bleached kraft
effluent remained toxic after application of the treatment in two
reported tests. Likewise, acid .bleach effluent could not be
detoxified. However, alkaline bleaching wastewater was detoxified in
three out of. four samples at 65 percent dilution. Final effluent
concentrations for BOD5_, COD, and color after ; treatment of bleached
kraft whole .mill wastewater were 80 to 350 mg/1, 380 to 760 mg/1, and
80 to 450 APHA units, respectively. .Reported removals were 10 to 74
percent, 36 to 78 percent, and 94 to 98 percent, respectively, using
Kemaminest-1902D in a solvent of Soltrol 170.
Polymeric Resin Treatment . •
Polymeric resin treatment involves the use of resins in columns to
treat wastewater. The process utilizes adsorption and ion exchange
mechanisms to remove pollutants from the wastewater. The columns are
reactivated after; the treatment cycle is completed. Reactivation can
be achieved by utilizing an acid or alkaline solution.
The resin adsorption approach is being pursued by three companies:
Billerud Uddeholm, Rohm'and Haas, and Dow Chemical Company. The Rohm
and Haas and the Dow Chemical processes are at the pilot plant stage.
The Billerud Uddeholm color removal process has been operated as a
full-scale batch process in Skoghall, Sweden, since 1973.
355
-------
Based on the experience gained through operation of the full-scale
system in treating Ej caustic effluent, the concept has been expanded
into treatment of the Ca and El effluents from the plant. The first
full-scale continuous installation will start-up in the fall of 1980
at Skoghall, Sweden. In this system, a full countercurrent wash will
be used and the effluent from the Et stage will be reused on the
stage washer after color and toxicity removal through the
of resin adsorption.(67)(191)
application
The pollutants may be removed from the resin by elution with caustic
or oxidized white liquor. The eluate at 10 percent concentration is
mixed with the weak black liquor to be evaporated and burned in.the
recovery boiler. The resin is reactivated with the chlorination
effluent. As the chlorination stage effluent reactivates the resin,
it is simultaneously decolorized and detoxified. The total mill BOD5_
load is reduced by 30 percent and the color load by 90 percent. The
flow diagram of this process is shown in Figure VII-33.
The operating costs for the Billerud Uddeholm system are reported as
$3.74 per kkg of production ($3.40 per ton of production) (1980). The
investment cost of an installation for treatment of the effluent from
a 310 kkg/day (340 tpd) kraft pulp mill bleach plant is $4.0 million
(1980) including close-up of the bleach plant. The costs will vary
depending on wood species, kappa number, and local conditions.(191)
These costs are based upon a resin life of one and one-half years.
The Rohm and Haas process involves the use of Amberlite XAD-8 resin to
decolorize bleaching effluent after filtration. The resin can be
reactivated without the generation of waste sludge. This reactivation
may be accomplished by using mill white liquor. In one study, the
adsorption capacity of Amberlite XAD-2 resin was compared to
Filtrasorb 300 activated carbon. (192) The resin was more effective
in removing most aromatic compounds, phthalate esters, and pesticides;
carbon was more effective at removing alkenes. Neither adsorbant was
effective in removing acidic compounds. The tests involved use of
laboratory solutions -of 100 organic compounds at an initial
concentration of TOO ug/1.
Another study has shown synthetic.resin to be capable of removing a
higher percentage of COD from biological effluent than carbon. (193)
Also, resin treated wastewater quality was improved when further
treated with carbon, although the reverse was not true. The economics
of this system could prove favorable since.resin may be regenerated in
situ. Thus, total regeneration costs may be more economical than for
either system alone since carbon life could be significantly extended.
Elimination of toxic constituents from bleached kraft effluents has
been achieved with Amberlite XAD-2 resin.(194)(195) Wilson and
Chappel have reported that treatment with Amberlite XAD-2 resin
resulted in a nontoxic semi-chemical mill effluent. (196)
356
-------
FROM SCREENING
J^-T~ V
BACK TO H:N==*"igli
SCREENING PLANT I^>L-—-~
FRESH WATER INTAKE-
CO
01
TO RECOVERY SYSTEM
FRESH
WATER
EFFLUENT
FIGURE 2H-33
1UD-UDDEHOLM
NON-POLLUTING BLEACH PLAMT
-------
-------
SECTION VIII
DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
INTRODUCTION
In Section VII, many demonstrated control and treatment technologies
were discussed and information was presented on their capabilities for
removal of conventional, toxic, and nonconventional pollutants from
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry wastewaters. Alternative control
and treatment options were selected from these technologies for
detailed analysis that represent a range of pollutant removal
capability and cost. This section presents the options that were
considered in determining BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS effluent
limitations. For BPT, treatment options have been developed for
control of conventional pollutants for four new subcategories
(wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and . nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard. For BCT, control and treatment options have
been developed for control of conventional pollutant discharges
directly to navigable waters. For BAT, control and treatment options
have been developed for control of toxic and nonconventional
pollutants being discharged directly to navigable waters. NSPS
treatment options for the control of toxic, conventional, and
nonconventional pollutants have been developed for new point source
direct discharging mills. Options for control and treatment of toxic
and nonconventional pollutants discharged to POTWs have been developed
for existing and for new indirect discharging mills (PSES and PSNS).
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE (BPT)
General
Four new subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
have been identified: wastepaper-molded products,
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard. The Clean Water Act requires
the establishment of BCT limitations for industry subcategories that
discharge conventional pollutants. In order to develop BCT
limitations for the four new subcategories, a base level BPT
determination is desirable because the "cost-reasonableness test"
rests on the incremental cost of removal of BOD5. and TSS from BPT to
BCT.
As stated previously, the Act establishes the requirements for
development of BPT limitations, which are basically the average of the
best existing performance. The best practicable control technology
currently available for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory has
been identified as biological treatment, which is also the technology
on which BPT limitations are based for all other subcategories of the
secondary fibers segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
359
-------
In Table VIII-1, subcategory average BOD5_ raw waste characteristics
for the three new nonintegrated subcategories are compared to those
for the nonintegrated-fine papers and the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategories. This comparison indicates that raw waste loads for
these new subcategories are comparable to those of the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. The technology basis of BPT
effluent limitations for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory
is primary treatment. Primary treatment, /therefore, has been selected
as the basis for development of BPT effluent limitations for the
nonintegrated-1ightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories.
The development of raw waste loads and final effluent characteristics
for each subcategory is discussed below.
Development of Raw Waste Loads
Wastepaper-Molded Products. Available raw waste load data for mills
in this subcategory are presented in Table V-18. BPT raw waste loads
have been based on the average of raw waste loads at mills where
extensive recycling of effluent is not practiced. This yields BPT
flow, BOD5., and TSS raw waste loadings of 87.8 kl/kkg (21.1 kgal/t),
7.9 kg/kkg (15.8 Ib/t), and 14.8 kg/kkg (29.6 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Lightweight Papers. Available raw waste load data for
this subcategory are presented in Table V-24. BPT raw waste loads for
this subcategory are based on the average of raw waste loads at mills
in this subcategory. Two product sectors have been considered: (a)
lightweight papers and (b) lightweight electrical papers. At mills
where lightweight electrical papers are produced, substantially larger
quantities of water are discharged than at mills where non-electrical
grades are produced. At the only mill for which BOD5_ data are
available where lightweight electrical grades are produced, the BODI3
raw waste load is lower than the average for non-electrical grades.
Average raw waste loads associated with the production of lightweight
papers are flow-202.9 kl/kkg (48.7 kgal/t); BOD5-21.7 kg/kkg (43.3
Ib/t); and TSS-63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 Ib/t). It has been assumed that
BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loads associated with the production of
electrical grades are the same as for non-electrical grades. This
results in raw waste loads for the lightweight electrical papers
product sector of: flow-320.1 kl/kkg (76.9 kgal/t); BOD5_ - 21.7 kg/kkg
(43.3 Ib/t); and TSS - 63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers. Available raw waste load
data for mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-25.
Initially, it was assumed that the subcategory average raw waste loads
would form the basis for proposed BPT effluent limitations. In
reviewing raw waste load flow data with respect to frequency of waste
significant grade changes, it was determined that none of the four
mills where more than one waste significant grade change occured per
day exhibited raw waste load flows that were equal to or lower than
the subcategory average raw waste loadings. Therefore, the proposed
BPT flow basis was revised to reflect the highest average for the
360
-------
TABLE VIII-1
AVERAGE BOD_5 RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
FOR THE NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
OF THE PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
Subcategory
BPT Technology
Basis
Subcategory Average BOD^
Raw Waste Characteristics
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Biological Treatment
Primary Clarification
None*
None*
None*
170 mg/1
120 mg/1
107 mg/1**
73 mg/1
122 mg/1**
*Mills in these subcategories were permitted on a case-by-case basis using
"best engineering judgement." BPT for these subcategories has been identified
as primary treatment, the same technology basis as for the Nonintegrated-Tissue
Papers subcategory because of the similarity of raw waste BOD_5 characteristics.
**Does not include production of electrical grades of papers.
361
-------
various grade change delineations. This yields raw waste loads for
flow, BOD5_, and TSS of 249.2 kl/kkg (59.9 kgal/t), 12.2 kg/kkg (24.3
Ib/t), and 27.4 kg/kkg (54.7 Ib/t), respectively.
Noninteqrated-Paperboard. Available raw waste load data for this
subcategory are presented in Table V-26. The subcategory average raw
waste loads, exclusive of electrical and matrix board production, form
the basis for proposed BPT. These raw waste loads for flow, BOD5_, and
TSS are 53.8 kl/kkg (12.9 kgal/t), 10.4 kg/kkg (20.8 Ib/t), and 36.9
kg/kkg (73.7 Ib/t).
Development of Final Effluent Characteristics
The development of long-term average BPT final effluent
characteristics for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory is
based on the predicted performance of biological treatment applied to
the subcategory average raw waste loads. This methodology is
described in detail later in this section in the discussions of the
best conventional pollutant control technology (see BCT Option 1).
The development of long-term average BPT final effluent
characteristics for the nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories is based on a transfer of technology from the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. Long-term average loadings
are based on the product of (a) the long-term average BPT final
effluent concentrations that were developed for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory and (b) the raw waste load
flows that were developed above.
BPT long-term average final effluent loadings for the four new
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry are:
wastepaper-molded products
flow - 87.8 kl/kkg (21.1 kgal/t)
BOD5_ - 1.3 kg/kkg (2.6 Ib/t)
TSS - 3.2 kg/kkg (6.4 Ib/t)
nonintegrated-
lightweight
flow
BOD5.
TSS
lightweight
flow
BOD5_
TSS
-lightweight papers-
papers product sector
202.9 kl/kkg (48.7 kgal/t)
7.4 kg/kkg (14.7 Ib/t)
6.0 kg/kkg (12.0 Ib/t)
electrical papers product sector
320.1 kl/kkg (76.9 kgal/t)
11.7 kg/kkg (23.3 Ib/t)
9.5 kg/kkg (18.9 Ib/t)
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers
flow - 249.2 kl/kkg (59.9 kgal/t)
BOD5 - 9.1 kg/kkg (18.1 Ib/t)
TSS - 7.4 kg/kkg (14.7 Ib/t)
362
-------
nonintegrated-paperboard
flow - 53.8 kl/kkg (12.9 kgal/t)
BOD5_ - 2.0 kg/kkg (3.9 Ib/t)
TSS - 1.6 kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t)
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BCT)
General
Section 301(b)(2)(E) of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires that BCT
effluent limitations are to be established for control of conventional
pollutants from existing industrial point sources. Conventional
pollutants are those defined in section 304(a)(4) and include BOD,
suspended solids, fecal coliform, and pH and any additional pollutants
defined by the Administrator as conventional (e.g., oil and grease).
BCT is not an additional limitation, but replaces BAT for the control
of conventional pollutants. BCT requires that limitations for
conventional pollutants be assessed in light of a
"cost-reasonableness" test, which involves a comparison of the cost
and level of reduction of conventional pollutants from the discharge
of publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) to the cost and level of
reduction of such pollutants from a class or category of industrial
sources. As part of its review of BAT for certain "secondary"
industries, the Agency promulgated the methodology to be used in this
cost test (See 44 FR 50732 (August 29, 1979)). This methodology
compares subcategory removal costs (dollars per pound of pollutant,
measuring from BPT to BCT) with costs experienced at POTWs. The cost
per pound for each subcategory is calculated as the cost per pound of
removal of BOD5_ and TSS measured as the difference between (a) the sum
of BPT 30-day maximum BOD5. and TSS limitations and (b) proposed 30-day
maximum BOD5_ and TSS limitations. EPA has determined that costs at
POTWs are $1.27 per pound of BOD5_ and TSS removed (1978 dollars); if
removal costs for a subcategory are less than that cost, they are
considered reasonable (See 44 FR 50732 (August 29, 1979)).
Four technology options have been developed for consideration
basis of BCT effluent limitations, including:
as the
(A) Option 1 - Base effluent limitations 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 contemplated in this option. For the
nonintegrated-1ightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories,
proposed BPT effluent limitations have been based on primary
treatment rather than biological treatment. • For the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory, proposed BPT has been
based on biological treatment.
(B) Option 2 - Base effluent limitations on the addition of
chemically assisted clarification of BPT final effluents for all
integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory (for these subcategories
363
-------
BPT is based on biological treatment). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary treatment is the
basis of existing or proposed BPT, effluent limitations are based
on the addition of biological treatment.
(C) Option 3 - Base effluent limitations on BCT Option 1 plus
the addition of chemically assisted clarification for all
integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and for the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory (for these subcategories
BPT is based on biological treatment). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary treatment is the
basis of existing or proposed BPT, effluent limitations are based
on the application of BCT Option 1 plus the addition of
biological treatment.
(D) Option 4 - Base effluent limitations 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 1_
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 of the original subcategories with the exception of
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory for which BPT was based on
primary treatment. Option 1 under consideration for BCT includes
implementation of additional production process controls. By
reviewing the previously published production process control items
that formed the basis of BPT and BAT effluent limitations (see Phase I
and Phase II Development Documents) and the data request program
responses, additional production process controls were identified as
available for implementation to further reduce raw waste loads.
Additionally, through the data request program, raw waste load data
were gathered for 632 operating mills.
Reduction in flow and effluent loadings result in improved treatment
plant performance through increased detention time and reduced BOD
loading. The methodology used to develop raw waste loads and
anticipated final effluent characteristics are discussed below.
Development of_ Raw Waste Loads. Option 1 raw waste loads have
generally been defined as the average of raw waste loads that are
lower than the raw waste loads developed in the establishment of
existing or proposed BPT effluent limitations. In several instances
where only limited data were available, it was necessary to predict
the raw waste load reductions attainable through the application of
specific production process controls identified as BCT Option 1
technologies.
364
-------
The use of this methodology means that specific reductions were not
generally assigned to each of the production process controls
considered applicable and available to the mills within a specific
subcategory. The controls that are generally applicable to each
subcategory and which form the basis of cost estimates of attainment
of BCT Option 1 effluent limitations are presented in Tables VII1-2
through VIII-4. The controls are those that can be employed at mills
in each subcategory to achieve the Option 1 raw waste loads developed
from actual mill data (presented in Section V) for each subcategory.
Dissolving Kraft - The dissolving kraft subcategory is comprised
of three mills. Raw waste load data for these mills and the raw waste
loadings that formed the basis of BPT are presented in Table V-l.
Very few mills are included in this subcategory and varying
percentages of dissolving pulp are produced at these mills; therefore,
the general methodology was not used as there was insufficient raw
waste load data available corresponding to the production of TOO
percent dissolving kraft. Option 1 raw waste loads were determined by
subtracting predicted waste load reductions from the raw waste loads
that formed the basis of BPT. Predictions are made of the raw waste
load reductions attainable through the implementation of specific
production process controls applicable to this subcategory. As
summarized, the subcategory average raw waste loads are: flow-197 9
kl/kkg (47.6 kgal/t), BOD5-69.6 kg/kkg (139.1 Ib/t), and TSS 111.3
kg/kkg (222.6 Ib/t). The raw waste loads for BPT are: flow-230.0
kl/kkg (55.1 kgal/t), BOD5_-66.5 kg/kkg (133.0 Ib/t), and TSS-113.0
kg/kkg (226.0 Ib/t). The production process controls that have been
identified as applicable in this subcategory and that form the basis
for raw waste load reductions are: improved brownstock washing,
improved utilization of digester relief and blow condensates,
brownstock and bleached pulp spill collection, additional liquor
storage, and improved white water use. Raw waste load reductions
resulting from implementation of these controls were estimated and are
presented below:
Dissolving Kraft - Development of Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
BPT RWL
Reductions Resulting from
Application of Specific
Production Process Con-
trols
Option 1 RWL
Flow
kl/kkq (kqal/t)
230.0 (55.1)
18.5 (4.4)
211.5 (50.7)
BOD5_
kg/kkq (Ib/t)
66.5 (133.0)
8.2 (16.3)
58.3 (116.7)
The TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as
that used as the basis for BPT, or 113.0 kg/kkg (226.0 Ib/t) of
product.
365
-------
TABLE VIII-2
OPTION 1 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
OJ
C-i
p
L<
I
a
b
2
a
b
Market BCT Un-
Dissolving Bleached Bleached Alkaline- bleached
outrol Kraft Kraft Kraft Fine1 Kraft
. Woodyard/Woodroom
. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation - - - - -
. Segregate cooling water X X X X X
. Pulp Mill
. Reuse relief and blow
condeusates X X X X X
. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow - - - - -
_....... \r V V Y -
Unbleached
Semi- Kraft and
Chemical Semi-Chemical
XV
A
~ ~
~_
Dissolving
Sulfite Papergrade
Pulp Sulfite
X
x -
_
X X
Ground-
wood-
TMP
„
X
„
-
wood-
CMN
Papers
_
X
_
_
X
wood-
Fine
Papers
X
X
_
X
X
c. Spill collection X
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press X
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser X
b. Add boil out tank X
c. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection X
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a.. Spill collection . X
b. Spare tank X
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp spill
collection X
2. Color plant
See Footnotes at end of table.
-------
TABLE VIII-2 (Continued)
CO
01
Subcategory
Control
Dissolving
Kraft
Market
Bleached
Kraft
BCT
Bleached Alkaline-
Kraft
Fine
Un-
bleached
Kraft
Semi-
Chemical
Unbleached
Kraft and
Semi-Cheraical
Dissolving
Sulfite Papergrade
Pulp Sulfite
Ground-
wood-
TMP
Ground-
wood-
CMN
Papers
7 Paper Hilt (cont.)
b. Improve saveall
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning X
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing X
e. Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning
f. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
g. Recycle press water X
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water
i. Broke storage
j. Wet lap machine
k. Segregate cooling water
I. Cleaner rejects to landfill
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Se'gregate cooling water " X
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
& backwash waters X
9. Recycle of Treated Effluent
Ground-
wood-
Fine
Papers
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite-(Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE VII1-3
OPTION 1 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Deink
Tissue Paperboard
from from
Wastepaper Wastepaper
Wastepaper-
Molded
Products
Builders'
Paper and
Roo f ing
Felt
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close—up or dry voodyard and
barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse relief and blow
condensates
b. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
c. Spill collection
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection
3. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
b. Spare tank •
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp spill
collection
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. Wet lap machine
k. Segregate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Recycle of Treated Effluent
368
-------
TABLE VIII-4
OPTION 1 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Nonintegrated- Nonintegrated-
Fine Papers Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated—
Filter and Nonintegrated-
Nonwoven Papers Paperboard
1. Woodyard/Uoodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse relief and blow
condensates
b. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
c. Spill collection
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
b. Spare tank
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp spill
collection
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. Wet lap machine
k. Segregate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Recycle of Treated Effluent
369
-------
TABl£ VII1-5
SUMMARY OF BPT AND OPTION J
RAW WASTE LOADS
CO
>-J
O
BPT
Flow
Integrated Segment.
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate 0
Paper-grade Sulfite 185
Groundwood-Thermo -
Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders ' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegra ted-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Fii ter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegra ted-Paperboard
kl/kkg
Z30.0
173.5
147.6
128.9
52.5
52.5
43.0
58.4
274.6
274.6
274.6
274.6
.6-227.3
88.0
99.1
91.3
101.7
101.7
101.7
105.1
30.0
87.8
60.0
63.4
95.5
202.9
320.7
249.2
53.8
(kgal/t)
(55.1)
(41.6)
(35.4)
(30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
(14.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(44.5-54.5)
(21.1)
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(25.2)
(7.2)
(21.1)
(14.4)
(15.2)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
BODS
kg/kkg
66.5
38.0
38.4
33.6
16.9
16.9
25.2
19.4
137.0
156.0
181.5
274.0
84-139 ;5
39.2
17.4
16.7
90.0
90.0
90.0
14.5
11.3
7.9
17.5
10.8
11.5
21.7
21.7
12.2
10.4
(lb/t)
(133.0)
(75.9)
(76.7)
(67.2)
(33.8)
(33.8)
(50.4)
(38.8)
(274.0)
(312.0)
(363.0)
(548.0)
(168-279)
(78.4)
(34.8)
(33.3)
(180.0)
(180.0)
(180.0)
(29.0)
(22.5)
(15.8)
(35.0)
(21.5)
(22.9)
(43.3)
(43.3)
(24.3)
(20.8)
TSS
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
14.8
35.0
30.8
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)
(79.8)
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(405 . 0)
(221.0)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(70.0)
(61.6)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.8)
(73.7)
Flow
kl/kkg
211.5
152.5
131.8
104.3
39.0
47.3
30.3
47.8
245.5
245.5
245.5
245.5
133.6
57.3
70.0
64.2
66.2
81.2
67.6
67.8
12.8
23.8
11.1
39.8
79.7
159.2
278.1
198.1
46.8
(kgal/t)
(50.7)
(36.6)
(31.7)
(25.1)
(9.4)
(11.4)
(7.3)
(11.5)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0) _
(59.0)
(32.1)
(13.8)
(16.8)
(15.4)
(15.9)
(19.5)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.1)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9-6)
(19.1)
(38.2) ,
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11.2)
Option 1
BODS
kg/kkg
58.3
29.3
35.1
27.1
12.4
12.5
17.6
16.2
90.6
92.6
109.6
164.6
62.8
21.2
14.5
12.5
37.3
61.3
15.9
9.7
6.0
5.5
6.5
6.7
9.0
13.3
13.3
9.0
8.2
(lb/t)
(116.7)
(58.6)
(70.2)
(54.1)
(24.8)
(25.0)
(35.2)
(32.5)
(181.2)
(185.2)
(219.2)
(329.2)
(125.7)
(42.4)
(29.1)
(24.9)
(74.6)
(122.6)
(31.7)
(19.3)
- (H.9)
(10.9)
(13.0)
(13.3)
(17.9)
(26.6)
(26.6)
(17.9)
(16.4)
TSS
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;
1202.5
110.5
11.0
14.8
35.0
30.8
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)
(79.8)
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(221.0)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(70.0)
(61.6)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.8)
(73.7)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2BPT flow and raw waste BOD5 vary due to type of wash. Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash).
-------
Market Bleached Kraft - Data presented in Table V-2 for the
production of both bleached hardwood kraft (HWK) and bleached softwood
kraft (SWK) pulp are arranged in order of increasing softwood
production. Of the mills where raw waste Ibads are lower than those
used to develop BPT, raw waste load BOD5_ is essentially the same at
both hardwood and softwood mills. However, when considering flow
data, mills where bleached softwood pulp is produced have a higher
average flow. The average flow for softwood and hardwood mills where
flows are less than that which formed the basis of BPT are 152.5
kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t) and 120.3 kl/kkg (28.9 .kgal/t), respectively.
The proposed Option 1 flow has been chosen as the higher of the two,
152.5 kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t). This approach gives an adequate allowance
for all types of market kraft mills: hardwood, softwood, and mixtures
of both. The average BOD5_ for softwood and hardwood mills where BOD5_
raw waste loads are less than the BPT basis are 29.3 kg/kkg (58.6
Ib/t) and 26.6 kg/kkg (53.2 Ib/t), respectively. Since the data for
both types of wood pulps are substantially the same, the higher BOD5_
raw waste load, 29.3 kg/kkg (58.6 Ib/t), has been assumed. The
proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the
same as that used as the basis of BPT. In summary, the Option 1 raw
waste loads for the market bleached kraft subcategory are: flow-152.5
kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t), BOD5.-29.3 kg/kkg (58.6 Ib/t), and TSS-45.0
kg/kkg (90.0 Ib/t).
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - Raw waste
load data for bleached kraft mills where paperboard, coarse papers,
and tissue papers are manufactured are presented in Table V-3. Of the
eight mills for which data are presented, four are achieving flows and
three are achieving BODS^ raw waste loads that are less than those
which formed the basis of BPT. For one of the mills attaining a lower
BOD5_ raw waste load, data correspond to biological treatment plant
influent rather than to a true raw waste. These data were not used in
any calculations of attainable BCT Option 1 raw waste loads. Option 1
raw waste loads for this subcategory are based on the averages of
those mills where raw waste loadings that are lower than those which
formed the basis of BPT are attained. Application of this methodology
yields Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 131.8 kl/kkg (31.7
kgal/t) and 35.1 kg/kkg (70.2 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that
used as the basis of BPT, or 66.5 kg/kkg (133.0 Ib/t) of product.
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) - Data
are presented in Table V-4 for 20 mills characteristic of the fine
bleached kraft subcategory. There are 14 mills in this subcategory
where flow and/or BOD5_ raw waste loads are lower than those which
formed the basis of BPT. Option 1 raw waste loads for this
subcategory are based on the averages of those mills where raw waste
loadings that are lower than those which formed the basis of BPT are
attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 1 flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads of 104.3 kl/kkg (25.1 kgal/t) and 27.1 kg/kkg
(54.1 Ib/t), respectively. The^proposed TSS raw waste load for Option
1 has been assumed to be the same as that used as the basis of BPT, or
75.0 kg/kkg (150.0 Ib/t) of product.
371
-------
Unbleached Kraft - . Data are presented in Table V-5 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 in waste characteristics
for mills manufacturing linerboard and bag or other mixed products.
The following summarizes the subcategory averages for the two product
types.
Unbleached Kraft-Raw Waste Load Summary
Flow BODS TSS
kl/kkq (kqal/t) kq/kkq (Ib/t) kq/kkcTTlb/tj
Unbleached Kraft -
Linerboard:
47.3 (11.4)
Unbleached Kraft -
Bag and Other
Products: 103.5 (24.8)
16.9 (33.2)
24.3 (48.6)
15.8 (31.6)
31.4 (62.8)
Option 1 raw waste loads for this subcategory are based on the
averages of those mills where raw waste loadings that are lower than
those which formed the basis of BPT are attained. A delineation has
been made between the production of (a) linerboard and (b) bag and
other products. Application of this methodology yields unbleached
kraft-1inerboard Option 1 raw waste loadings for flow and BODS of 39.0
kl/kkg (9.4 kgal/t) and 12.4 kg/kkg (24.8 Ib/t), respectively, and
unbleached kraft-bag and other products raw waste loadings for flow
and BOD5_ of 47.3 kl/kkg (11.4 kg gal/t) and 12.5 kg/kkg (25.0 Ib/t),
respectively. The proposed TSS Option 1 raw waste loadings for both
product sectors have been assumed to be the same as that used as the
basis of BPT, or 21.9 kg/kkg (43.8 Ib/t) of product.
Semi-Chemical - Available raw waste load data for semi-chemical
mills are presented in Table V-6. The data are presented according to
wastepaper use and use of liquor recovery. As a result, two mill
groups were considered in the development of Option a raw waste loads.
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.
Variable amounts of wastepaper are utilized at mills in this
subcategory according to relative market conditions and pricing and
must be taken into consideration. Review of the data in Table V-6
indicates significant differences in flow between the two groups [35.7
kl/kkg (8.6 kgal/t) versus 18.6 kl/kkg (4.5 kgal/t)], but no
significant difference in BOD5_ [22.1 kg/kkg (44.1 Ib/t) versus 23.9
kg/kkg (47.8 Ib/t)]. Therefore, the Option 1 raw waste loading for
flow is based on an average of those mills with liquor recovery where
less than one-third wastepaper is processed and a raw waste loading
372
-------
lower than that which formed the basis of BPT is attained. The Option
1 raw waste loading for BOD5. is based on data from both groups of
mills where a BOD5_ raw waste loading lower than that which formed the
basis of BPT is attained. Application of this methodology yields
Option 1 raw waste loads of flow and BOD5_ of 30.3 kl/kkg (7.3 kgal/t),
and 17.6 kg/kkg (35.2 lb/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste
load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that which formed
the basis of BPT, or 12.3 kg/kkg (24.6 lb/t) of product.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - Table V-7 presents available
raw waste load data for this subcategory. Option 1 raw waste loadings
for this subcategory are based on averages of those mills where raw
waste loadings that are lower than those which formed the basis of BPT
are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw
waste loadings for flow and BOD5_ of 47.8 kl/kkg (11.5 kgal/t) and 16.2
kg/kkg (32.5 lb/t), resepctively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for
Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that which formed the
basis of BPT, or 20.5 kg/kkg (41.0 lb/t) of product.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - Table V-8 presents available raw waste
load data for this subcategory. In previous effluent limitations
guidelines development, it was recognized that a variety of products
are made at dissolving sulfite pulp mills that result in different
waste characteristics.(40) However, in the data request program, only
limited data were provided for this subcategory on raw waste load by
product types. Consequently, predictions are made of the raw waste
load reductions attainable through the application of specific
production process controls.
Several specific production process control modifications are
applicable in this subcategory and are shown in Table VIII-1. In
general, most of the items under consideration result in minor flow
reductions with the exception of recycle of the hydraulic barking
water. Flow reduction resulting from cooling water segregation, more
extensive use of white water in the pulp and paper mills, and
additional spill collection results in a wastewater reduction of 29.1
kl/kkg (7.0 kgal/t). Additional applicable production process
controls include implementation of liquor spill and pulp dryer spill
collection systems, increased white water use, and improved recycle of
decker filtrate. Predicted BOD5_ reductions resulting from the
application of these controls total 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0 lb/t). Another
applicable control, caustic filtrate evaporation, results in BOD5_
reductions varying from 41.4 kg/kkg (82.8 lb/t) for the nitration
grade to 140.9 kg/kkg (281.8 lb/t) for the acetate grade. This
technology is an expensive production process control, yet one that
can result in significant BOD5_ reduction. This technology has been
employed at mills 046002 and 046006.
373
-------
The resulting Option 1 BOD5_ raw waste loads are presented below:
Dissolving Sulfite-Development of Option 1 BOD5_ Raw Waste Load
BOD5 - kg/kkg (Ib/t)
Nitration
BPT - RWL 137 (274)
Reductions Resulting
from Application of
Specific Production
Process Controls 46.4 (92.8)
Viscose
156 (312)
Cellophane
181.5 (363)
Option 1 BOD5_ RWL 90.6 (181.2)
63.4 (126.8) 71.9 (143.8)
92.6 (185.2) 109.6 (219.2)
Acetate
274 (548)
109.4 (291.8)
164.6 (329.2)
The flow basis of BPT is 274.6 kl/kkg (66.0 kgal/t); flow reduction
through implementation of production process controls is 29.1 kl/kkg
(7.0 kgal/t). This results in an Option 1 flow of 245.5 kl/kkg (59.0
kgal/t). The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 92 5
kg/kkg (185.0 Ib/t) of product.
Paperqrade Sulfite (Paperqrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and
Paperqrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories) - Table V-9 presents
available raw waste load data for this subcategory. In the
development of BPT effluent limitations, two papergrade sulfite
subcategories were established: blow pit wash and drum wash. However,
as discussed previously in Sections IV and V, the percentage of
sulfite pulp produced on-site is a better indication of raw waste load
characteristics than the type of pulp washing system employed.
Therefore, Option 1 flow is based on the results of the regression
analysis presented in Section V and varies depending on the percentage
of sulfite pulp produced on-site. A similar relationship for BOD5 raw
waste load does not exist and Option 1 BOD5_ raw waste loading has been
developed based on the average of those mills where the BOD5_ raw waste
load is lower than that which formed the basis of BPT. It is assumed
that this BOD5_ raw waste load is representative of a mill where 56
percent of the raw material furnish is sulfite pulp produced on-site.
For this model mill, Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loadings would
be 133.6 kl/kkg (32.1 kgal/t) and 62.8 kg/kkg (125.7 Ib/t),
respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 90 0
kg/kkg (180.0 Ib/t) of product.
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - Table V-10 presents available raw
waste load data for this subcategory. In this subcategory, the
overall averages of flow and BOD5_ raw waste load data for all mills
form the basis of Option 1 raw waste loads as all mills have raw waste
loads less than those on which BPT effluent limitations are based.
This results in flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 57.3 kl/kkg (13.8
kgal/t) and 21.2 kg/kkg (42.4 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that
which formed the basis of BPT, or 39.9 kg/kkg (79.8 Ib/t) of product.
374
-------
Groundwood-CMN Papers - Table V-ll presents available raw waste
load data for mills in this subcategory. At no mills in this
subcategory are BOD5_ raw waste loadings being attained that are lower
than raw waste loadings that formed the basis of BPT. Option 1 raw
waste loadings are based on the subtraction of predicted raw waste
load reductions resulting from implementation of available production
process controls applicable at mills in this subcategory from the raw
waste loadings that formed the basis of BPT.
The production process controls that have been identified as
applicable in this subcategory that form the basis for prediction of
raw waste load reductions are: segregation of cooling water in the
woodroom, addition of pulp mill and paper mill spill collection
systems, use of white water in vacuum pumps, recycle of press
effluent, and addition of centralized storage capacity for white water
reuse. The total projected flow and BOD5_ reductions are 29.1 kl/kkg
(7.0 kgal/t) and 2.9 kg/kkg (5.7 Ibs/t), respectively. The resulting
Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads are presented below:
Groundwood-CMN Papers—Development of Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
Flow
BODS
kl/kkq (kgal/t) kq/kkq (Ib/t)
BPT RWL
Reductions Resulting From
Implementation of Specific
Production Process
Controls
Option 1 RWL
99.1 (23.8)
29.1 ( 7.0)
70.0 (16.8)
17.4 (34.8)
2.9 ( 5.7)
14.5 (29.1)
The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be
the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 48.5 kg/kkg (97.0
Ib/ton) of product.
Groundwood-Fine Papers - Available raw waste load data for this
subcategory are presented in Table V-12. Option 1 raw waste loadings
for this subcategory are based on averages of those mills where raw
waste loadings that are lower than those which formed the basis of BPT
are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw
waste loadings for flow and BOD5_ of 64.2 kl/kkg (15.4 kgal/t) and 12.5
kg/kkg (24.9 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for
Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that which formed the
basis of BPT, or 52.5 kl/kkg (105.0 Ib/t) of product.
Deink - Available raw waste load data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table V-14. A delineation has been made
between mills producing fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint.
375
-------
For mills where fine papers are produced from deinked wastepaper,
Option 1 raw waste loadings are based on averages of those mills where
raw waste loadings that are lower than those which formed the basis of
BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw
?*soe, lo,?din?S for flow and BOD5 of 66.2 kl/kkg . (15.9 kgal/ton) and
37.3 kg/kkg (74.6 Ib/ton), respectively.
For mills where
Option 1 raw waste
raw waste loadings
BPT are attained.
waste loadings for
61.3 kg/kkg (122.6
tissue papers are produced from deinked wastepaper,
loadings are based on averages of those mills where
that are lower than those which formed the basis of
Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw
flow and BOD5_ of 81.2 kl/kkg (19.5 kgal/ton) and
Ib/ton), respectively.
For mills where newsprint is produced from deinked wastepaper, Option
1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads are based on the average raw waste
loadings of mills in this product sector. This results in Option 1
flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 67.6 kl/kkg (16.2 kgal/t) and 159
kg/kkg (31.7 Ib/t), respectively.
For all three product sectors, the proposed TSS raw waste load for
Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that which formed the
basis of BPT, or 202.5 kg/kkg (405 Ib/t) of product.
Tigsue from Wastepaper - In the tissue from wastepaper
subcategory, wastewater is not discharged at several mills. As seen
in Table V-15, raw waste load data were initially reviewed taking into
account the production of industrial and sanitary tissue. It was
determined that no significant differences exist between the two
product sectors. In addition, self-contained mills have been
identified where both types of tissue are produced.
Option 1 raw waste loadings for this subcategory are based on averages
of those mills where raw waste loadings that are lower than those
VSrSU., formed the basis of BPT are attained. Mills 090006, 100012,
105007, and 100014 are excluded from Option 1 raw waste averages
because extensive wastewater recycle is employed and raw waste flows
are significantly lower than for other mills. Application of this
methodology yields Option 1 raw waste loadings for flow and BODS of
67.8 kl/kkg (16.3 kgal/t) and 9.7 kg/kkg (19.3 Ib/t), respectively.
The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be
the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 110.5 kg/kkg (221 0
Ib/t) of product.
Paperboard from Wastepaper - As shown in Table V-16 and discussed
in Section V, this subcategory was extensively reviewed with respect
? t^hf. tyP63 of paperboard manufactured. No relationship that had
statistical validity could be developed to relate raw waste load to
product type. Option 1 raw waste loadings for this subcategory are
based on averages of those mills where raw waste loadings that are
lower than those which formed the basis of BPT are attained.
Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw waste loadings for
flow and BOD5 of 12.8 kl/kkg (3.1 kgal/t) and 6.0 kg/kkg (11.9 Ib/t)
376
-------
respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 11.0
kg/kkg (21.9 Ib/t) of product.
Wastepaper-Molded Products - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-18. This is a new
subcategory for which BPT is now being proposed. A review of data
request responses reveals that extensive recycle of effluent is
practiced at several mills. Option 1 raw waste loads are based on
averages for those mills where extensive recycle is practiced.
Application of this methodology yields Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads of 23.8 kl/kkg (5.7 kgal/t) and 5.5 kg/kkg (10.9 Ib/t),
respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which is proposed for BPT, or 14.8
kg/kkg (29.6 Ib/t) of product.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - Raw waste load data for mills
in this subcategory are presented in Table V-19. Option 1 raw waste
loadings for this subcategory are based on averages of those mills
where raw waste loadings that are lower than those which formed the
basis of BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields
Option 1 raw waste loadings for flow and BOD5_ of 11.1 kl/kkg (2.7
kgal/t) and 6.5 kg/kkg (13.0 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that
which formed the basis of BPT, or 35 kg/kkg (70 Ib/t) of .product.
Noninteqrated-Fine Papers - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-22. Data were
reviewed with respect to waste significant grade changes in three
specific delineations: none, less than one, and greater than one waste
significant grade change per day. A distinct correlation exists; flow
and BOD5_ raw waste loadings increase with the frequency of waste
significant grade changes. Option 1 raw waste loadings for this
subcategory are based on averages of those mills with greater than one
waste significant grade change per day where raw waste loadings that
are lower than those which formed the basis of BPT are attained.
Application of this methodology yields Option 1 raw waste loads for
flow and BOD5. of 39.8 kl/kkg (9.6 kgal/t) and 6.7 kg/kkg (13.3 Ib/t),
respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 30.8
kg/kkg (61.6 Ib/t) of product.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers - Available raw waste load data for
this subcategory are presented in Table V-23. As was done in the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, data were reviewed taking into
consideration the frequency .of waste significant grade changes. In
general, wastewater discharge and BOD5_ raw waste loads increase with
an increase in the frequency of grade changes.
Option 1 raw waste loadings for this subcategory are based on the
highest averages for the various grade change delineations for mills
where raw waste loadings that are lower than those which formed the
basis of BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields
377
-------
Option 1 raw waste loadings for flow and BODS of 79.7 kg/kkg (19 l
kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively? The Option 1 flow
is based on those mills with more than one waste significant grade
change per day. The Option 1 BOD5 raw waste load is based on those
mills with between zero and less than one waste significant qrade
change per day.
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers - Available raw waste load
data for this subcategory are presented in Table V-24. This is a new
subcategory for which BPT is being proposed. Proposed BPT is based on
the subcategory average raw waste loads. Two product sectors have
been considered - lightweight papers and lightweight electrical
papers.
In the development of Option 1 raw waste loads, data were reviewed
with respect to waste significant grade changes. Wastewater discharge
and BOD5_ raw waste loadings increase with the frequency of grade
changes. Option 1 flow raw waste loadings for each product sector are
based on the highest average for the various grade change delineations
for mills where raw waste loads that are lower than those which formed
the basis of BPT are attained. Option 1 BOD5. raw waste loadings are
based on the highest average for the various grade change delineations
for mills where raw waste load BOD5_ is lower that that which forms the
basis of proposed BPT. It is assumed that no significant difference
in BOD5_ raw waste load occurs as a result of the production of
lightweight electrical grades. Application of this methodology yields
Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads (a) for the lightweight papers
product sector of 159.2 kl/kkg (38.2 kgal/t) and 13.3 kg/kkg (26.6
Ib/t), respectively and (b) for the lightweight electrical papers
product sector of 278.1 kg/kkg (66.8 kgal/t) and 13.3 kg/kkg (26.6
Ib/ton), respectively. For both product sectors, the proposed TSS raw
waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the same as that
proposed for BPT, or 63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 Ib/t) of product.
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers - Available raw waste
load data for mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-25
This is a new subcategory for which BPT is currently being proposed!
In the development of Option 1 raw waste loads, data were reviewed
with respect to waste significant grade changes. Option 1 raw waste
loadings are based on the highest averages for the various grade
change delineations for mills where raw waste loads are lower than
those which form the basis of proposed BPT. Application, of this
methodology yields Option 1 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 197 0
kl/kkg (47.5 kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively. The
proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been assumed to be the
same as that which forms the basis of proposed BPT, or 27.4 kg/kkg
(54.7 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Paperboard - Available raw waste load data for this
subcategory are presented in Table V-26. This is a new subcategory
for which BPT is currently being proposed. The subcategory average
raw waste loads, exclusive of electrical and matrix board production
form the basis for proposed BPT.
378
-------
As for the other nonintegrated subcategories, raw waste load data were
reviewed with respect to frequency of waste significant grade changes.
Option 1 raw waste loadings are based on the highest averages for the
various grade change delineations for mills with raw waste loadings
that are lower than those that form the basis for proposed BPT.
Application of this methodology yields Option 1 flow and BOD5. raw
waste loads of 46.8 kl/kkg (11.2 kgal/t) and 8.2 kg/kkg (16.4 Ib/t),
respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 1 has been
assumed to be the same as that which forms the basis.of proposed BPT,
or 36.9 kg/kkg (73.7 Ib/t) of product.
Summary of_ Option T_ Raw Waste Loads - Table
summary of BPT and Option 1 raw waste loads.
VII1-5 presents a
Development of Effluent Characteristics. In the previous discussions,
BCT Option 1 raw waste loads for each subcategory were developed.
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 serves as the basis for BPT for each
subcategory. Biological treatment was the effluent treatment
technology identified as the basis for BPT for most subcategories. In
the Phase II Development Document, a relationship was developed
relating the anticipated final effluent BOD5_ concentration to the BOD5_
concentration entering a biological treatment system (See Phase II
Development Document, page 402), This relationship is based on
treatment plant performance data and is as follows:
Log BOD5_ effluent = 0.601 Log BOD5_ influent - 0.020
This relationship is used to predict long-term average final ' effluent
BOD5_ loads based on the application of biological treatment to Option
1 raw waste loads in the dissolving kraft, market bleached kraft, BCT
(board, coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft,
papergrade sulfite, dissolving sulfite pulp, soda, groundwood, and
deink subcategories for which the relationship was developed. This
relationship is also used to predict long-term average final effluent
BOD5_ loads in the wastepaper-molded products and builders' paper and
roofing felt subcategories. For, the unbleached kraft, semi-chemical,
unbleached kraft and semi-chemical, and nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategories, the Option 1 raw waste concentrations of BOD5_ are
approximately equal to those which formed the basis of BPT.
Therefore, for these subcategories, Option 1 maximum 30-day average
concentrations of BOD5_ are expected to be equal to those used in
establishing BPT effluent limitations. For the paperboard from
wastepaper and tissue from wastepaper subcategories, where at many
mills extensive production process controls are employed. Option 1
final effluent loads of BOD5. and TSS are based on actual mill data and
are equivalent to those developed for BCT Option 4. ;
In Figure VIII-1, the BOD5_ raw waste concentration that formed the
basis of BPT is plotted versus the final effluent TSS concentration
that formed the basis of BPT for the dissolving kraft, market bleached
379
-------
100
90
80
70-
60-
50-
_. 40
Ol
I
i
CO
2 30-
u.
Ul
<
20-
10-
REGRESSION EQUATION : y = 8.95x°-31
R2 =0.70
% - 0.055
100
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
RAW WASTEWATER BOD5 - mg/l
380
FIGURE 2HI - I
FINAL EFFLUENT TSS VS
RAW WASTEWATER BODS
-------
kraft, fine bleached kraft, BCT (board, coarse, and tissue) bleached
kraft, dissolving sulfite pulp, papergrade sulfite, soda, groundwood,
and deink subcategories. The resulting relationship forms the basis
for determination of Option 1 final effluent long-term average TSS
concentrations for these subcategories. This relationship has also
been applied for development of long-term average TSS concentrations
for the builders' paper and roofing felt, nonintegrated-fine, and
wastepaper-molded products subcategories. For the unbleached kraft,
semi-chemical, and unbleached kraft and semi-chemical subcategories,
Option 1 maximum 30-day average concentrations of TSS are predicted to
be equal to those used in establishing BPT effluent limitations
because Option 1 raw waste concentrations of BOD5_ are approximately
equal to those that formed the basis of BPT. Therefore, approximately
the same concentration of biological solids will be discharged to the
secondary clarifiers.
For the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory, primary treatment was
the end-of-pipe technology basis of BPT. Option 1 raw waste BOD5
concentration is approximately equal to that which formed the basis of
BPT effluent limitations. Therefore, Option 1 long-term average final
effluent concentrations of BOD5_ and TSS are expected to equal those
that formed the basis of BPT. Because the wastewater characteristics
of the remaining nonintegrated subcategories are similar to those of
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory, Option 1 long-term
average BOD5_ and TSS effluent concentrations have been transferred to
these subcategories in determining Option 1 long-term average final
effluent loads.
TABLE VII1-6 summarizes raw waste and long-term average final effluent
BOD5_ and TSS loadings developed for BCT Option 1 .
Option 2^
Chemically assisted clarification is an end-of-pipe technology which
has been demonstrated on a full-scale basis to consistently achieve
significant reductions in the discharge of conventional pollutants.
As discussed earlier, a full-scale system has been operated at a
groundwood mill for a number of years. The system consistently
achieves BODS and TSS concentrations of less than 15 mg/1 at an alum
dosage of 150~mg/l. In addition, in October of 1979, a full-scale
system went on-line at a bleached kraft mill. The alum dosage
initially used to effect optimum coagulation was 300 to 400 mg/1
without pH adjustment. Recent studies conducted by mill personnel
indicate that, with acid addition for pH adjustment, the alum dosage
may be reduced substantially to about 150 mg/1.(128) Since start-up,
with one exception, a monthly average BOD5_ effluent of 15 mg/1 has
been achieved. The monthly average TSS has varied from 21 to 44 mg/1
with the highest occuring after a caustic spill at the mill. It
should be noted that the TSS influent to the chemically assisted
clarification system from the biological treatment system does not
meet BPT effluent limitations and is reported to be about two to three
times the long-term average BOD5_ concentration that formed the basis
of BPT.
381
-------
TABLE VIII-6
OPTION .1 FINAL EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
BODS
TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo - Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kg/kkg
5.9
3.5
3.6
2.8
1.2
1.4
1.8
1.9
8.2
8.3
9.2
11.8
5.2
1.9
1.7
1.5
2.9
4.2
j_.
2.2
0.4
0.6
0.5
1.5
2.9
5.8
10.1
7.2
1.7
(lb/t)
(11.8)
(6.9)
(7.2)
(5.6)
(2.3)
(2.8)
(3.5)
(3.7)
(16.4)
(16.6)
(18.4)
(23.5)
(10.3)
(3.8)
(3.3)
(2.9)
(5.7)
(8.3)
(4.4)
(0.83)
(1.2)
(1.0)
(3.0)
(5.8)
(11.6)
(20.2)
(14.4)
(3.4)
kg/kkg
10.8
7.0
' 6.7
5.3
2.5
3.0
2.2
2.8
13.8
13.9
14.6
16.6
8.1
3.2
3.3
3.0
4.2
5.7
2.6
0.5
1.2
0.7
1.8
2.4
4.7
8.2
5.9
1.4
(lb/t)
(21.6)
(13.9)
(13.4)
(10.5)
(4.9)
(6.0)
(4.3)
\ ' " -^ /
(5.6)
\ — * a \j j
(27.5)
(27 7)
(29.2)
(33.1)
(16.1)
\ -i. \j • J- j
(6.4)
(6.6)
\\J • \S /
(5.9)
(8.4)
(11.4)
(5.2)
(0.98)
(2.3)
(1.4)
(3.5)
(4.7)
(9.4)
(16.4)
(11.7)
(2.8)
2Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
"Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories. Effluent characteristics are calculations for a mill
where Papergrade Sulfite Pulp produced on-site accounts for 56% of final
production.
382
-------
BCT Option 2 is the addition of chemically assisted clarification to
further treat BPT final effluent discharges from all integrated and
secondary fiber subcategories and from the nonintegrated-fme papers
subcategory (for these subcategories BPT is based on biological
treatment). Option 2 is based on the addition of solids-contact
clarifier(s) using alum as a coagulant and polymer as a flocculant
aid. Based on the demonstrated performance of the full and
pilot-scale systems, it is predicted that chemically assisted
clarification will achieve long-term average effluent concentrations
of 15 mg/1 for both BOD5. and TSS. Long-term average mass loadings
have been determined by multiplying • the long-term avfrage
concentrations by the wastewater flows that formed the basis of BPT
effluent limitations.
For the remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for which Primary
treatment is the basis of BPT, the Option 2 technology includes the
addition of biological treatment. The predicted BOD5 final effluent
concentrations for these nonintegrated subcategories are based on the
relationship developed in the Phase II Development Document (See page
402) relating BOD5 effluent concentration to BOD5 raw waste load
concentration. The long-term average final effluent BOD5
concentration for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory was
transferred to the remaining nonintegrated subcategories where
biological treatment forms the technology basis of BCT Option 2.
Similarly, the TSS long-term average final effluent concentration was
developed using the relationship of influent BOD5 to final effluent
TSS presented in Figure VIII-1. The resulting long-term average BOD5
and TSS concentrations determined by application of this methodology
are 17.0 mg/1 and 39.5 mg/1, respectively. BOD5 and TSS mass loads
are calculated as the product of these long-term average
concentrations and the flow basis assumed to reflect the best
practicable control technology currently available.
Option 2 annual average effluent characteristics are presented for
each subcategory in Table VII1-7.
Option 3_
BCT Option 3 includes the application of BCT Option 1 plus the
addition of chemically assisted clarification for all integrated and
secondary fiber subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory (for these subcategories BPT is based on 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 basis of BPT, effluent limitations are based on the
application of Option 1 plus the addition of biological treatment.
The production process controls available for application in each
subcategory for raw waste load reduction are presented in Tables
VIII-2 through VIII-4. Annual average final effluent characteristics
were developed as described above for BCT Option 2 using the reduced
flows. They are presented in Table VII1-8.
383
-------
TABLE VTII-7
OPTION 2 FINAL EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
BODS
TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo - Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kg/kkg
3.5
2.6
2.2
2.0
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.9
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
3.0
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.6
—
1.6
0.5
1.1
0.9
>
1.0
1.6
3.5
5.5
4.3
0.9
(lb/t)
(6.9)
(5.2)
(4.4)
(3.9)
(1.6)
(1.6)
(1.3)
(1.8)
(8.3)
(8 3)
(8.3)
(8.3)
(6.0)
(2.6)
(3.0)
(2.7)
(3.1)
(3.1)
-T —
(3.2)
(0.9)
(2.1)
(1.8)
(1.9)
(3.2)
(6.9)
(10.9)
(8.5)
(1.8)
kg/kkg
3.5
2.6
2.2
2.0
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.9
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
3.0
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.6
„„,
1.6
0.5
1.1
0.9
1.0
3.8
8.0
12.7
9.9
2.1
(lb/t)
(6.9)
(5.2)
(4.4)
(3.9)
(1.6)
(1.6)
(1.3)
(1.8)
(8.3)
(8.3)
(8.3)
(8.3)
(6.0)
(2.6)
(3.0)
(2.7)
(3.1)
(3.1)
(3.2)
(0.9)
(2.1)
(1.8)
(1.9)
(7.5)
(16.0)
(25.3)
(19.7)
(4.2)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories. Effluent characteristics are calculations for a mill
where Papergrade Sulfite Pulp produced on-site accounts for 56% of final
production.
384
-------
TABLE VIII-8
OPTION 3 FINAL EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
BODS
TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bae
J-SCLg
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate „
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo - Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kg/kkg
3.2
2.3
2.0
1.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
2.0
0.9
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.0
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.6
1.3
2.6
4.6
3.3
0.8
(lb/t)
(6.3)
(4.6)
(4.0)
(3.1)
(1.2)
(1.4)
(0 9)
(1.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(4.0)
(1.7)
(2.1)
(1.9)
(2.0)
(2.4)
(2.0)
(0-4)
(0.7)
(0.3)
(1.2)
(2.6)
(5.2)
(9.1)
(6,5)
(1.5)
kg/kkg
3.2
2.3
2.0
1.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
2.0
0.9
1.1
1.0
.1.0
1.2
1.0
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.6
3.1
6.2
10.8
7.7
1.8
(lb/t)
(6.3)
(4.6)
(4.0)
(3.1)
(1.2)
at \
.4)
(0.9)
(1.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(7.4)
(4.0)
(1.7)
(2.1) '
(1 . 9)
(2.0)
(2.4)
(2.0)
/ r\ / \
(0.4)
(0.7)
(0.3)
(1.2)
/ £ O \
(6.2)
(12.3)
(21.6)
(15.3)
(3.6)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfij« CDrum
Wash) Subcategories. Effluent characteristics are calculations for a mill
where Papergrade Sulfite Pulp produced on-site accounts for 56/o of final
production.
-------
Option 4
a« ies
appropriate
limitations
limitations.
limitations
BCT Option 4 effluent limitations are based on the levels attained at
best performing mills in the respective sub.categories. The approach
described in detail below of establishing effluent limitations based
on actual effluent data is in contrast to other options where
limitations are based on predicted performance of specific
'4. Jfter .determination of Option 4 effluent limitations,
technologies were selected that could achieve these
and that reflect the cost of attainment of these
The technologies for achieving Option 4 effluent
vary depending on the type of treatment systems that are
*™ -iiS -n fuCh- subcate<3°ry. Treatment systems commonly
employed at mills in the integrated segment and the nonintegrated-f ine
papers and deink subcategories, for which BPT has been identified as
biological treatment, include aerated stabilization basins, 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, probable upgrade schemes for each
treatment type have been identified and used in the development of
cost estimates presented in Section IX. Specific design criteria are
!ir PrSSKnJed in ?ection IX- . ^ief descriptions of the upgrade
schemes that form the basis of cost estimates are presented below.
Aerated stabilization basin treatment systems are upgraded through the
addition of spill prevention and control systems, by increasing
aeration capacity, and by providing additional settling capacity
Conversion to the extended 'aeration activated sludge process was
^Sif!red £? be the probable method of upgrading the performance of
aerated stabilization basins located in colder climates.
Slud9e systems are upgraded through the addition of spill
f"d control systems, by providing equalization, by
increasing the capacity of aeration basins and by 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. '
in the nonintegrated subcategories in which existing or
v • effluent limitation? are based on primary treatment,
existing primary treatment systems are upgraded by reducing clarifier
?oaaulSnf.r ^ £ pfovide for be"er settling, by adding chemical
coagulants, and by increasing sludge handling capability.
,,b!St Performing 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. Option
tJhr ^ subcategories is based on the application of the same
technology as discussed in BCT Option 1 : the technology on which BPT
386
-------
is based plus the application of additional production process
controls.
General Methodology. This option involves the development of effluent
limitations based upon the capabilities of and technologies employed
at "best performing" mills. Best performers were selected and
attainable pollutant reductions were determined through a review of
discharge monitoring reports (DMR) and long-term conventional
pollutant data obtained as a result of the verification program.
These data are summarized in Tables VIII-9 through VIII-30.
The removal capability characteristic of the best performing mills in
a subcategory forms the basis of establishment of BOD5_ and TSS
effluent limitations for that subcategory. Best performing mills are
defined as those mills where both BOD5 and TSS BPT long-term average
effluent limitations are attained using end-of-pipe technology of a
type that is 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 BOD5_ and TSS were then determined at
BPT flow. It was next determined whether the calculated
concentrations of BOD5. and TSS are attainable through the application
of end-of-pipe treatment technology only. If so, annual average BCT
effluent limitations are based on these long-term averages. If it was
determined that these concentrations were unattainable, the long-term
average effluent limitations were revised upward to levels that are
attainable through the application of end-of-pipe treatment only. A
description of the specific procedure used in establishing BCT
effluent limitations for each subcategory follows.
Dissolving Kraft - As illustrated in Table VIII-9, the general
methodology as described above was followed. BPT effluent limitations
are being attained at mill 032002.
Market Bleached Kraft - As illustrated in Table VIII-10, the
general methodology was used to calculate BCT Option 4 effluent
characteristics for the market bleached kraft subcategory. Mills
030028, 030030, and 030061 in this subcategory were used to determine
long-term average final effluent loads. In addition to these mills,
another mill (030011) was included in the calculation. At this
integrated-miscellaneous mill, where BPT limits 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
application of the percentage reductions of BOD5 and TSS below BPT
limitations, determined by prorating limitations from appropriate
subcategories, to market bleached kraft BPT limitations. Effluent
BOD5. and TSS characteristics for mill 030011 are 13.7 percent and 58.0
percent below prorated BPT limitations.
BCT (Paperboard,
illustrated in Table
Coarse,
VIII-11,
and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - As
the general methodology was used to
calculate BCT (best conventional pollutant control technology) Option
4 effluent characteristics for the BCT (paperboard, coarse, and
387
-------
TABLE VIII-9
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
032001
032002 (a)
032003
BPT-Final
Effluent
Level
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BODS and TSS
kl/kkg
143.3
213.8
242.9
229.6
213.8
Flow
(kgal/t)
(34.4)
(51.3)
(58.3)
(55.1)
(51.3)
BODS
kg/kkg
18.8
4.1
6.3
6.9
4.1
(lb/t)
(37.6)
(8.1)
(12.6)
(13.8)
(8.1)
TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t)
27.8 (55.5)
6.2 (12.4)
11.4 (22.7)
11.1 (22.1)
6.2 (12.4)
(a)TSS and BODS are less than or equal to BPT.
388
-------
TABLE VIII-10
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
030005
030009
030012
030028(a)
030030(a)
030031
030061 (a)
030011 (a) (b)
777777
BPT-Final
Effluent
Level
Flow
kl/kkg
60.0
75.8
118.3
136.7
155.0
292.5
144.6
145.8
87.5
173.3
(kgal/t)
(14.4)
(18.2)
(28.4)
(32.8)
(37.2)
(70.2)
(34.7)
(35.0)
(21.0)
(41.6)
BODS
kg/kkg
4.6
5.2
6.1
4.0
2.7
5.0
3.5
3.9
2.1
4.5
(lb/t)
(9.1)
(10.4)
(12.2)
(8.0)
(5.3)
(10.0)
(6.9)
(7.8)
(4.2)
(9.0)
TSS
kg/kkg
4.8
2.7
16.7
7.7
3.9
9.9
2.3
3.8
9.7
9.0
(lb/t)
(9.6)
(5.4)
(33.3)
(15.4)
(7.7)
(19.7)
(4.6)
(7.6)
(19.4)
(18.0)
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BODS and TSS
145.5
(34.9)
3.5
(7.0)
4.4
(8.8)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)This is an integrated-miscellaneous mill where approximately 40 percent mar-
ket bleached kraft pulp is produced. Prorated BPT was determined for this
mill. The percent effluent BOD5 and TSS reductions being attained at the
mill were then applied to BPT BOD5 and TSS effluent levels for the subcate-
gory to obtain the effluent levels shown.
389
-------
TABLE VIII-11
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
BCT BLEACHED, KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
030004
030010(a)
030022 (a)
030026
030032 (a)
030039
030044(a)(b)
030047
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg
221.3
171.7
146.7
161.7
106.3
87.9
115.0
141.7
147.5
Ckgal/t)
(53.1)
(41.2)
(35.2)
(38.8)
(25.5)
(21.1)
(27.6)
(34.0)
(35.4)
BODS
kg/kk*
4.8
2.4
3.9
5.5
2.1
5.0
1.6
5.6
4.0
(lb/t)
(9.6)
(4.7)
(7.7)
(n.o)
(4.2)
(9.9)
(3.3)
(11.1)
(8.0)
TSS
kg/kkg
4.5
3.9
1.9
10.7
3.6
3.4
5.0
4.5
7.1
(lb/t)
(9.0)
(7.8)
(3.7)
(21.3)
(7.2)
(6.8)
(10.0)
(9.0)
(14.2)
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BODS and TSS
134.9
(32.4)
2.5
(5.0)
3.6
(7.2)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)This is an xntegrated-miscellaneous mill where approximately 35 percent BCT
bleached kraft papers are produced. Prorated BPT was determined for this
mill. The percent effluent BOD5 and TSS reductions being attained at
the mill were then applied to BPT BODS and TSS effluent levels for the
subcategory to obtain the effluent levels shown.
390
-------
tissue) bleached kraft subcategory. Mills 030010, 030022, and 030032
were used to determine long-term average final effluent loads. In
addition to these mills, another mill (030044) was included in the
calculation. At this integrated-miscellaneous mill, where BPT limits
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 data for this mill
involved application of the percentage reduction of BOD5_ and TSS below
BPT limitations, determined by prorating limitations from appropriate
subcategories, to the BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue) bleached
kraft BPT limitations. Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for mill
030044 are 59.2 and 29.7percent below prorated limitations.
Alkaline-Fine: (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) - As
illustrated in Table VIII-12, the general methodology was used to
calculate BCT Option 4 effluent characteristics for the alkaline-fine
mill grouping (bleached kraft fine and soda subcategories). Mills
030020, 030027, and 030046 were identified as best performing mills
and were used to determine long-term average final effluent loads. In
addition to these-mills, two additional mills (030011 and 030044) were
included in the calculation^. At these integrated-miscellaneous mills,
where BPT limits are being attained, bleached kraft pulp is produced,
a significant portion of which is used to produce fine papers. The
approach used to include data for these mills involved application of
the percentage reductions of BOD5_ and TSS below BPT limitations,
determined by prorating limitations from appropriate subcategories, to
the fine bleached kraft BPT limitations. Effluent characteristics for
these mills relative to prorated BPT limitations are discussed above.
Upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to the
flow that formed the basis of BPT for the fine bleached kraft
subcategory, it was determined that the resulting effluent limitation
would be too restrictive. Therefore, the BOD5_ effluent limitation was
revised upward as shown in Table VIII-12.
Unbleached Kraft
review
final effluent
indicated that
of the BPT
characteristics for the unbleached kraft subcategory
the final effluent BOD5_ concentration that forms the basis of BPT for
this subcategory is considerably higher than for other subcategories
with comparable raw waste BOD5_: Therefore
performing mills, the BPT final effluent BOD5
to determine best
_ loading was revised
downward based on the relationship of BOD5_ influent to effluent
presented above and in the Phase II Development Document (See page
402).(40) Employing .this methodology, the
final effluent BODS
long-term average load becomes 1.6 kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t).
After adjustment of the BPT BOD5_ effluent load, the general
methodology was followed for both the linerboard and bag and other
products product sectors as illustrated in Table VIII-13. For the
linerboard product sector, TSS data for those mills with oxidation
pond(s) (010020 and 010025) were excluded from the calculation. The
mills in this product sector where revised BPT effluent limitations
are attained include mills 010002, 010019, 010020, 010025, and 010040.
391
-------
TABLE VIII-12
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA-
ALKALINE-FINE1
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
030001
030013
030020 (a)
030027 (a)
030033
030034
030046(a)
030048
030052
030059
030060
130002
030011 (a) (b)
030044 (a) (b)
BPT-Final Ef-
fluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BOD5_ and TSS
Option 4 Ad-
justed BOD5
Flow
kl/kkg
118.8
138.8
89.2
72.9
142.1
93.3
165.0
115.8
147.5
132.5
321.3
90.4
145.8
115.0
128.8
117.6
(kgal/t)
(28.5)
(33.3)
(21.4)
(17.5)
(34.1)
(22.4)
(39.6)
(27.8)
(35.4)
(31.8)
(77.1)
(21.7)
(35.0)
(27.6)
(30.9)
(28.2)
BODS
kg/kkg
6.5
2.7
1.1
0.8
7.7
1.6
2.4
6.5
6.0
2.1
49.5
2.7
2.7
1.8
3.1
1.7
2.0
(lb/t)
(13.0)
(5.3)
(2.1)
(1.5)
(15.4)
(3.1)
(4.8)
(12.9)
(12.0)
(4.1)
(98.9)
(5.3)
(5.4)
(2.5)
(6.2)
(3.3)
(3.9)
TSS
kg/kkg
12.9
7.9
2.4
2.1
26.0
8.0
3.7
15.4
4.3
10.1
33.8
10.1
2.8
4.6
6.6
3.1
(lb/t)
(25.7)
(15.7)
(4.7)
(4.1)
(52.0)
(16.0)
(7.4)
(30.7)
(8.6)
(20.2)
(67.5)
(20.1)
(5.5)
(9.2)
(13.1)
(6.1)
(a)TSS and BOD5_ are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)These mills are integrated-miscellaneous mills where fine papers comprise
approximately 60 and 50 percent of the production, respectively.. Prorated
BPT was determined for these mills. The percent effluent BOD5_ and TSS re-
ductions being attained at the mills were then applied to BPT~~BOD5_ and TSS
effluent levels for the subcategory to obtain the effluent levels shown.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
392
-------
TABLE VIII-13
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Unbleached Kraft - Linerboard Group
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number kl/kkg
(U0002(a) 52.9
010018 54.6
010019(a) 50.4
010020(a)(b) 80.8
010025(a)(b) 47.9
010033 68.8
010038 103.8
010040(a) 71.3
010043 35.8
010063 30.4
010064 24.2
BPT-Final 52.5
Effluent Levels
BOD5 Comparison
Level for
Option 4
Average of 60.7
Mills
Attaining BPT
TSS, and BOD5
Comparison Level
Flow
(kgal/t)
(12.7)
(13.1)
(12.1)
(19.4)
(11.5)
(16.5)
(24.9)
(17.1)
(8.6)
(7.3)
(5.8)
(12.6)
(14.6)
BODS
kg/kkg
1.2
3.1
1.3
1.1
0.7
2.0
3.9
1.5
1.3
2.7
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.2
(Ib/t)
(2.3)
(6.1)
(2.6)
(2.2)
(1.4)
(3.9)
(7.7)
(3.0)
(2.6)
(5.4)
(3.3)
(3.7)
(3.2)
(2.3)
TSS
kg/kkg
2.3
3.5
2.7
1.0
0.8
0.4
6.8
1.2
5.2
5.5
3.0
3.6
2.1
(Ib/t)
(4.6)
(7.0)
(5.4)
(2.0)
(1.5)
(0.8)
(13.6)
(2.3)
(10.3)
(11.0)
(5.9)
(7.2)
(4.1)
Unbleached Kraft - Bag Group
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number kl/kkg
010003 , 51.3
010005(a) 55.4
010028 137.9
010034 86.7
010035 191.2
010048 198.3
010062 137.5
010044 45.8
010055 53.3
BPT-Final 52.5
Effluent Levels
BOD5_ Comparison
Level for
Option 4
Average of 55.4
Mills
Attaining BPT
TSS, and BODS
Comparison Level
Flow
(kgal/t)
(12.3)
(13.3)
(33.1)
(20.8)
(45.9)
(47.6)
(33.0)
(11-0)
(12.8)
(12.6)
(13.3)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.2
1.5
1.8
2.1
3.8
3.0
2.9
1.4
3.0
1.9
1.6
1.5
(Ib/t)
(4.3)
(3.0)
(3.6)
(4.1)
(7.7)
(6.0)
(5.8)
(2.7)
(5.9)
(3.7)
(3.2)
(3.0)
TSS
kg/kkg
4.6
2.4
3.0
2.9
9.6
6.9
4.4
3.7
5.2
3.6
2.4
(Ib/t)
(9.2)
(4.8)
(6.0)
(5.8)
(19.3)
(13.8)
(8.8)
(7.3)
(10.4)
(7.2)
(4.8)
(a)TSS is less than or equal to BPT; BODS is less than or equal to the BODS
comparison level.
(b)TSS data not included in the average because mill's treatment system is
an oxidation pond.
393
-------
For the bag and other products product sector,
limitations are attained at mill 010005.
Semi-Chemical
review
of
the
revised BPT effluent
BPT
final effluent
characteristics for the semi-chemical subcategory indicates that the
final effluent BOD5_ concentration that forms the basis of BPT for this
subcategory is considerably higher than for other subcategories with
comparable raw waste BOD5_. Therefore, to determine best performing
mills, the BPT final effluent BOD5_ loading was revised downward based
on the relationship of BOD5_ influent to effluent presented above and
in the Phase II Development Document (see page 402).(40) Employing
this methodology, the final effluent BOD5_ long-term average load
becomes 1.9 kg/kkg (3.8 Ib/t).
After adjustment of the BPT BOD5_ effluent load, the general
methodology was applied as illustrated in Table VIII-14. Mills in
this subcategory where revised BPT effluent limitations are attained
include mills 060004 and 020009.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - A review of the BPT final
effluent characteristics for the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical
subcategory indicates that the final effluent BOD5_ concentration that
forms the basis of BPT for this subcategory is considerably higher
than for other subcategories with comparable raw waste BOD5_.
Therefore, to determine best performing mills, the BPT final effluent
BOD5_ loading was revised downward based on the relationship of BOD5_
influent to effluent presented above and in the Phase II Development
Document (see page 402).(40) Employing this methodology, the final
effluent BOD5_ annual average load becomes 1.8 kg/kkg (3.7 Ib/t).
After adjustment of the BPT BOD5_ effluent load, the general
methodology was applied as illustrated in Table VIII-15. Mill 015001
is the only mill where revised BPT effluent limitations are attained.
Paperqrade Sulfite (Paperqrade Sulfite
Paperqrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
(Blow
In
Pit Wash) and
Subcategories) - In reviewing this
subcategory, as discussed in Sections IV and V, it has been determined
that wastewater discharge is a function of the percentage of sulfite
pulp manufactured on-site. In Sectionship V, a mathematical
relationship is presented based on mill data that relate wastewater
flow to the percentage of sulfite pulp produced on-site. From this
relationship, theoretical wastewater flows were obtained for each mill
in the subcategory based on the percentage of sulfite pulp produced at
each mill. Using the calculated wastewater flows and annual average
BOD5_ and TSS final effluent concentrations of 51 mg/1 and 70 mg/1,
respectively (the highest long-term average concentrations that formed
the basis of BPT regulations for the two papergrade sulfite
subcategories), long-term average BOD5_ and TSS final effluent loads
were computed for each mill. These individual values were used as the
baseline for determination of best performing mills by comparison to
long-term average discharge data for each mill. Mills where the
calculated final effluent loadings are attained were selected as best
performing mills. Three mills (040001, 040012, and 040019) were found
394
-------
TABLE VIII-14
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
020001
020002
020006
020009 (a)
020010
020012
020014
020016
020017
060004(a)
BPT-Final
Effluent Level
BOD5_ Compari-
son Level for
Option 4
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT,
Flow
kl/kkg
22.1
24.6 ,
14.2
27.5
41.3
28.8
27.9
44.6
23.3
39.2
42.9
33.4
TSS,
(kgal/t)
(5.3)
(5.9)
(3.4)
(6.6)
(9.9)
(6.9)
(6.7)
(10.7)
(5.6)
(9.4)
(10.3)
(8.0)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.1
3.4
2.9
1.9
2.8
3.6
3.8
5.4
3.1
1.6
3.2
1.9
1.8
(lb/t)
(4.1)
(6.7)
(5.7)
(3.7)
(5.6)
(7.1)
(7.6)
(10.8)
(6.1)
(3.2)
(6.4)
(3.8)
(3.5)
TSS
kg/kkg
3.6
3.2
4.8
3.5 '
4.4
8.4
7.0
8.0
3.7
1.4
4.1
2.5
(lb/t)
(7.2)
(6.3)
(9.6)
(6.9)
(8.8)
(16.8)
(13.9)
(15.9)
(7.3)
(2.7)
(8.1)
(4.8)
and BOD5_ Compari-
son Level
(a)BOD^ is less than or equal to the BOD5_ comparison level; TSS is less than or
equal to BPT.
395
-------
TABLE VIII-15
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT AND SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
010017
015001(a)
015002
015003
015004
015006
015007
015009
BPT-Final
Flow
kl/kkg
38.3
49.2
38.8
46.7
45.8
50.0
48.3
52.1
58.3
(kgal/t)
(9.2)
(11.8)
(9.3)
(11.2)
(11.0)
(12.0)
(11.6)
(12.5)
(14.0)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.0
1.8
2.2
5.1
2.3
3.5
2.2
4.6
3.0
(lb/t)
(4.0)
(3.5)
(4.3)
(10.1)
(4.6)
(6.9)
(4.4)
(9.1)
(5.9)
TSS
kg/kkg
3.9
2.9
4.4
3.2
4.3
4.9
4.1
5.2
3.6
(lb/t)
(7.7)
(5.8)
(8.7)
(6.3)
(8.6)
(9.8)
(8.1)
(10 3)
(7.1)
Effluent Levels
BOD,5_ Compari-
son Level for
Option 4
49.2
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT, TSS,
and BODjj^ Compari-
son Level
(11.8)
1.9
1.8
(3.7)
(3.5)
2 9
(5.8)
(a)BODj[ is less than or equal to the BODj[ comparison level; TSS is less than or
equal to BPT.
396
-------
to be best performers; however, as illustrated in Table VII1-16, BCT
Option 4 effluent limitations were based on performance at mill
040012. Mill 040001 was excluded from the basis because no bleached
pulp is produced at this mill. Mill 040019 was excluded because only
a portion of the wastewater discharge is treated in a biological
treatment system.
BCT Option 4 effluent loadings were determined by applying the
following methodology:
a. The percentage reductions of BOD5. and
040012 were compared to the baseline.
TSS discharges at mill
b. These reductions of 42.7 percent for BOD5 and 31.4 percent for
TSS were applied to the baseline concentrations of 51 mg/1 of
BOD5. and 70 mg/1 of TSS to yield BCT Option 4 long-term average
concentrations of 29 and 48 mg/1 of BOD5 and TSS, respectively.
c. Long-term average BCT Option 4 loadings are calculated as the
product of the long-term average concentrations and the flow
relationship shown in the footnote to Table VIII-16.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - As no best performing mills have been
identified in the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory, transfer of
technology from the papergrade sulfite subcategories has been applied.
BCT Option 4 effluent loadings were determined by applying the
following methodology:
a. The TSS reduction of 31.4 percent determined for the papergrade
sulfite subcategories has been transferred directly to the
dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory.
b. The long-term average BOD5. effluent concentration that formed the
basis of BPT for papergrade sulfite mill 040012 is 47 mg/1. This
concentration and the flow relationship shown in the footnote on
Table VIII-16 were used to determine a baseline BOD5. long-term
average loading.
c.
d.
The percentage reduction of BOD5. discharge at mill
compared to the baseline calculated in "b" above.
040012 was
This reduction of 37.7 percent was applied to each product sector
of the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory to yield the BCT
Option 4 long-term average BOD!5 loading.
Table VIII-17 illustrates the calculation of BCT Option 4 long-term
average loads and presents available discharge data for the dissolving
sulfite pulp subcategory.
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - As illustrated in Table VIII-18,
the general methodology was followed; BPT effluent limitations are
being attained at mill 070001. Upon calculation of the concentration
of BOD5. corresponding to the flow that forms the basis of BPT for the
397
-------
TABLE VIII-16
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
,PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
040001 (a) (b)
040002
040012(a)
040013
040015
040016
040017
040008
040011
040010
040019 (a) (c)
Flow
kl/kkg
128.8
333.7
215.8
106.2
36.2
150.8
90.0
328.3
57.9
258.8
53.3
BPT Final Effluent Levels
(kgal/t)
(30.9)
(80.1)
(51.8)
(25.5)
(8.7)
(36.2)
(21.6)
(78.8)
(13.9)
(62.1)
(12.8)
depend on
BODS
kg/kkg ,,
•^
11.4
20.5
7.8
14.8
17.7
5.0
4.9
• 173.9
27.2
5.4
2.8
the processes
(Ib/t)
(22.8)
(41.1)
(15.7)
(29.5)
(35.3)
(10.0)
(9.9)
(347.9)
(5'4.5)
(10.8)
(5.7)
used to
TSS
kg/kkg
"9.2
25.7
12.9
8.6
13.4
18.4
10.2-
11.1-
8.8
6.6 " "
2.5
manufacture
(lb/t)
(18.4)
(51.4)
(25.8)
(17.3)
(26.7)
(36.9)
(20.5)
(22.2)
(17.5)
(13.1)
(5.0)
sulfite pulp.
Basis for *
Determining
Option 4 Com-
parison Levels
Average of 215.8
Mills with
BOD5_ and TSS
Less Than Com-
parison Levels
Percentage
Below the
Option 4 Com-
parison Levels
(Mill 040012)
Calculated Option
4 Concentrations
Based Upon Per-
centage Below
Option 4 Compari-
son Levels
51 mg/1
(51.8)
7.8
(15.7)
42.77.
29.0 mg/1
70 mg/1
12.9 ' (25.8),
31.4%
48;0 mg/1
(a)BOD5_ and TSS levels are below Option 4 comparison level.
(b)Data not included in the average because pulp is not bleached at this mill.
(c)Data not included in the average because entire wastewater discharge is not
treated in the biological treatment system.
*Comparison level flow based on the following mathematical expression relating
flow to percent sulfite pulp in the final product:
Y - 0.00911x2-0.485x+30.7
where x equals the quantity of sulfite pulp produced on-site as a percentage of
final product.
398
-------
TABLE VIII-17
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Mill Flow
Number kl/kfcg (ksal/t)
046001 210.0 (SO. 4)
046002 402.9 (96.7)
046004 175.0 (42.0)
046005 139.6 (33.5)
BODS
kg/kfc* (Ib/t)
32.6 (65.1)
51.4 (102.8)
13.9 (27.8)
26.6 (53.1)
TSS
kg/kkg
21.1
40.3
56.7
13.9
(Ib/t)
(42.2)
(80.6)
(113.4)
(27.9)
BPT Final Effluent Levels depend on type of pulp manufactured and are as follow:
Nitration 275.0 (66.0)
Viscose 275.0 (66.0)
Cellophane 275.0 (66.0)
Acetate 275.0 (66.0)
Basis for * *
Determining
BCT Option 4
Comparison
Levels
Average of 215.8 (51.8)
Papergrade
Sulfite Mill
040012 Where
BODS and TSS is
Less Than Com-
parison Level
Percentage
Below Base-
line Comparison
Level to be
Applied to Dis-
solving Sulfite
Pulp Subcategory
Calculated Option 4 Final Effluent
Nitration 275.0 (66.0)
Viscose 275.0 (66.0)
Cellophane 275.0 (66.0)
Acetate 275.0 (66.0)
^Comparison level flow based on the
12.1 (24.2)
13.0 (25.9)
14.1 (28.1)
15.2 (30.4)
47 mg/1
7.8 (15.7)
37.7%
Levels are as follows:
7.6 (15.1)
8.1 (16.1)
8.8 (17.5)
9.5 (18.9)
following mathematical
20.9
20.9
20.9
20.9
70
12.9
31.
14.4
14.4
14.4
14.4
expression
(41.8)
(41.8)
(41.8)
(41.8)
mg/1
(25.8)
4%
(28.7)
(28.7)
(28.7)
(28.7)
re-
lating flow to percent sulfite pulp in the final product:
Y = 0.00911x2-0.485x+30.7
where x equals the quantity of sulfite pulp produced on-site as a percentage
of final product.
399
-------
groundwood-thermo-mechanical subcategory, it was determined that the
resulting effluent limitation would be too restrictive. The BOD5_
final effluent load was, therefore, revised upward as shown in Table
VIII-18.
Groundwood-Fine Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-19, the
general methodology was followed. BPT effluent limitations are being
attained at mills 052003, 052007, 052008, 052014, and 054014. Upon
calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to the flow
that forms the basis of BPT for the groundwood-fine papers
subcategory, it was determined that the effluent limitation would be
too restrictive. Therefore, the BOD5_ effluent limitation was revised
upward as shown in Table VIII-19.
Groundwood-CMN Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-20, the
general methodology was followed in establishing BPT effluent
limitations. At mill 054105, BPT effluent limitations are attained.
However, the long-term average TSS of this mill was not chosen as the
basis of TSS effluent limitations because it is unreasonably high when
compared to levels attained in other groundwood subcategories
(thermo-mechanical and fine papers). In the groundwood-fine papers
subcategory, mills where BPT effluent limitations are attained
discharge, on the average, TSS levels that are 43.5 percent below BPT
levels. This percent reduction in TSS has been transferred to the
groundwood-CMN papers subcategory.
Upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to the
flow that forms the basis of BPT for the groundwood-CMN papers
subcategory, it was determined that the effluent limitation would be
too restrictive. Therefore, the BOD5_ effluent limitation was revised
upward as shown in Table VIII-20.
Deink - As shown in Table VIII-21, two product sectors have been
considered: fine papers and tissue papers.
For the deink-fine papers product sector, the general methodology was
followed. BPT effluent limitations are being attained at mills
140007, 140008, 140019.
For the deink-tissue papers product sector, the general methodology
was followed, although mills 140018 and 140030 were not included in
the calculation of attainable effluent levels. Mill 140018 was
eliminated due to an extremely low flow compared to other mills in the
subcategory; this low flow is the result of extensive recycle of
treated effluent. Mill 140030 was eliminated because of a very low
on-site production of deinked pulp. Mills 140014, 140015, 140021, and
140025 are included in the calculation of effluent limitations.
Tissue from Wastepaper - As illustrated in Table VIII-22, the
general methodology was followed. BPT effluwnt limitations are being
attained at mills 085004, 090004, 100005, and 100013. The technology
basis for attainment of BCT Option 4 effluent limits is the
application of production process controls rather than additional
400
-------
TABLE VIII-18
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
GROUNDWOOD-THERMO-MECHANICAL SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
070001 (a)
070002
BPT-Final
Flow
kl/fckg
77.9
34.2
87.9
(kgal/t)
(18.7)
(8.2)
(21.1)
BOD5
kg/kkg
1.3
5.2
3.1
(lb/t)
(2.5)
(10.3)
(6.2)
TSS
kg/kkg
2.1
7.1
4.6
(lb/t)
(4.1)
(14.1)
(9.2)
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD5 and
TSS
Option 4
Adjusted BODS
77.9
(18.7)
1.3
1.3
(2.5)
(2.6)
2.1
(4.1)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
401
-------
TABLE VIII-19
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill Flow
Number kl/kkg
052003 (a) 129.2
052004 59.2
052007 (a) 80.8
052008(a) 55.0
0520l4(a) 33.3
0540l4(a) 36.3
BPT-Final 91.3
Effluent Levels
Average of 66.9
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD5
and TSS
Option 4
Adjusted BOD5_
(kgal/t)
(31.0)
(14.2)
(19.4)
(13.2)
(8.0)
(8.7)
(21.9)
(16.1)
BODS TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg
1.0 (1.9) 3.1
3.0 (5.9) 3.3
1.1 (2.1) 2.8
0.5 (0.9) 1.4
0.2 (0.4) 0.3
1.4 (2.7) 2.4
2.0 (4.0) 3.5
0.8 (1.6) 2.0
1.4 (2.7)
(Ib/t)
(6.1)
(6.6)
(5.5)
(2.8)
(0.5)
(4.8)
(6.9)
(3.9)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
402
-------
TABLE VIII-20
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Mill
Number
054015 (a)
052015
BPT-Final
Flow
kl/kkg
108.3
66.7
99.2
k (kgal/t)
(26.0)
(16.0)
(23.8)
BODS
kg/kkg
1.0
3.6
2.2
(lb/t)
(1.9)
(7.1)
(4.4)
TSS
kg/kkg
3.7
2.7
3.8
(lb/t)
(7.4)
(5.3)
(7.5)
Effluent Levels
Average of 108.3
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD5
and TSS
Option 4
Adjusted BOD5
and TSS
(26.0)
1.0
1.5
(1.9)
(3.0)
3.7
2.1
(7.4)
(4.2)'
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
*TSS value is transferred from the groundwood-fine papers subcategory and
represents a 43.5 percent reduction below BPT levels.
403
-------
TABIE VIII-21
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
Deink - Fine Papers Sector
Final Effluent
Mill
Number
140007 (a)
140008 (a)
140019 (a)
BPT-Final
Effluent levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BODS
and TSS
Deink - Tissue
kl/kkg
51.7
79.6
30.0
101.7
53.8
Papers
Flow
(kgal/t)
(12.4)
(19.1)
(7.2)
(24.4)
(12.9)
Sector
BODS
kg/kkg
2.3
4.8
1.9
5.3
3.0
(Ib/t)
(4.6)
(9.5)
(3.7)
(10.6)
(5.9)
TSS
kg/kkg
3.8
5.0
3.7
7.1
4.2
(lb/t)
(7.6)
(9.9)
(7.3)
(14.2)
(8.3)
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Hill
Number
1400l4(a)
140015 (a)
140018Ca)(b)
140021(a)
140022
140024
140025 (a)
140030(a)(c)
kl/kkg
87.9
91.3
20.8
116.3
125.0
55.4
60.0
62.5
BPT-Final 101.7
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BODS and
TSS
88.9
Flow
(kgal/t)
(21.1)
(21.9)
(5.0)
(27.9)
(30.0)
(13.3)
(14.4)
(15.0)
(24.4)
(21.3)
BODS
kg/kkg
4.0
3.2
4.7
2.5
8.3
8.6
3.5
1.1
5.3
3.3
(lb/t)
(7.9)
(6.3)
(9.3)
(4.9)
(16.5)
(17.1)
(619)
(2.1)
(10.6)
(6.5)
TSS
kg/kkg
6.8
4.1
1.4
4.7
8.0
8.1
4.5
1.9
7.1
5.0
(lb/t)
(13.5)
(8.2)
(2.8)
(9.4)
(16.0)
(16.2)
(9.0)
(3.8)
(14.2)
(10.0)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)At this mill, treated effluent is recycled, resulting in lower flow rates
than typical of this subcategory. Therefore, data for this mill were not
included in the average.
(c)Only a small amount of deinked pulp is produced at this mill as a percentage
of final product. Therefore, data for this mill were not included in the
average.
404
-------
TABLE VIII-22
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
085004(a)
090004(a)
090014
100001
100005 (a)
100013 (a)
100016
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD5
and TSS
Flow
kl/kkg
50.8
58.3
86.7
56.3
17.9
50.0
72.9
105.0
44.3
(kgal/t)
(12.2)
(14.0)
(20.8)
(13.5)
(4.3)
(12.0)
(17.5)
(25.2)
(10.6)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.3
3.2
4.1
2.9
1.1
2.3
10.8
4.0
2.2
(lb/t)
(4.5)
(6.3)
(8.1)
(5.8)
(2.2)
(4.6)
(21.6)
(8.0)
(4.4)
TSS
kg/kkg
2.1
3.8
3.4
6.4
0.8
3.7
29.2
5.1
2.6
(lb/t)
(4.1)
(7.5)
(6.7)
(12.8)
(1.6)
(7.4)
(58.3)
(10.1)
(5.2)
(a)TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
405
-------
end-of-pipe technology beyond that which forms the basis of BPT
effluent limitations.
Paperboard from Wastepaper - As illustrated in Table VIII-23, the
general methodology was followed. BPT effluent limitations are being
attained at the following twelve mills: 110019, 110031, 110043,
110052, 110057, 110061, 110070, 110077, 110094, 110096, 1100110, and
110122. The technology basis for attainment of BCT Option 4 effluent
limits is the application of production process controls rather than
additional end-of-pipe technology beyond that which forms the basis of
BPT effluent limitations.
Wastepaper-Molded Products - Review of control and treatment
practices in this subcategory indicate that extensive internal
controls are employed at a significant number of mills. Therefore,
BCT Option 4 for this subcategory is identical to BCT Option 1.
Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are presented in
Table VIII-24.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - Review of control and
treatment practices in this subcategory indicate that extensive
internal controls are employed at a significant number of mills.
Therefore, BCT Option 4 for this subcategory is identical to BCT
Option 1. Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are
presented in Table VIII-25.
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-26, the
general methodology was followed; however, data relating to mills
where primary treatment is employed were excluded from the
computations. BPT effluent limitations are attained through the
application of biological treatment at mills 080007, 080027, 080041,
and 080046.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-27,
the general methodology was followed; however, data relating to mills
where biological treatment is employed were excluded from the
computations. BPT effluent limitations are attained through the
application of primary treatment at mills 090008, 090011, 090013,
090019, 090022, 090028, and 090032.
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers - For both product sectors in
this new subcategory, percentage reductions beyond BPT for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory were applied to the BPT
limitations currently being, proposed for this subcategory. The
percent reductions applied were 35.7 and 38.6 percent, respectively,
for BOD5_ and TSS. Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table VII1-28.
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers - For this new
subcategory, percentage reductions beyond BPT for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory were applied to the BPT
limitations currently being proposed for this subcategory. The
percent reductions applied were 35.7 and 38.6 percent, respectively,
406
-------
TABLE VIII-23
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
110019(a)
110020
110022
110023
110031(a)
110032
110043 (a)
110052(a)
110057(a)
110061(a)
110069
110070(a)
110077(a)
110087
110094(a)
110096(a)
HOllO(a)
110113
110119
110122(a)
110131
110134
110144
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD_5
and TSS
kl/kkg
26.3
34.6
67.9
14.2.
7.9
37.1
15.0
23.8
7.1
19.6
35.4
30.0
2.1
2.9
24.2
0.04
5.0
17.5
56.7
10.4
15.4
9.2
7.5
30.0
14.3
Flow
(kgal/t)
(6.3)
(8.3)
(16.3)
(3.4)
(1.9)
(8.9)
(3.6)
(5.7)
(1.7)
(4.7)
(8.5) :
(7.2)
, (0.5)
(0.7)
(5.8)
(0.01)
(1.2)
(4.2)
(13.6)
(2.5)
(3.7)
(2.2)
(1.8)
(7.2)
(3.4)
.BOD5
kg/kkg
0.8
0.8
1.7
1.3
0.2
1.2
0.7
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.3
0.2
0.2
7.5
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.8
3.1
0.4
4.8
1.2
1.4
0.9
0.44
(lb/t)
(1.6)
(1.6)
(3.3)
(2.5)
(0.3)
(2.4)
(1.3)
(0.8)
(1.6)
(1.5)
(0.6)
(0.4)
(0.3)
(12.9)
(1.0)
(0.1)
(0.3)
(1.5)
(6.1)
(0.8)
(9.6)
(2.3)
(2.7)
(1.7)
(0.83)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.9
1.3
2.1
1.3
0.2
1.7
0.9
0.5
0.6
1.0
1.3
0.3
0.2.
0,2
0.8
0.1
0.5
1.5
0.5
0.2
1.1
2.0
1.3
1.2
0.52
(lb/t)
(1.8)
(2.6)
(4.1)
(2.6)
(0.4)
(3.4)
(1.7)
(1.0)
(1.2)
(2.0)
(2.5)
(0.6)
(0.3)
(0.4)
(1.5)
(0.1)
(0 9)
(3.0)
(0.9)
(0.3)
(2.1)
(4.0)
(2.5)
(2.3)
(0.98)
(a)TSS and BOD_5 are less than or equal to BPT.
407
-------
TABLE VIII-24
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY(a)
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
150011
150021
Flow
kl/kkg
72.1
159.6
(fcgal/t)
(17.3)
(38.3)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.2
1.9
(lb/t)
(4.4)
(3.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
1.6
4.0
(lb/t)
(3.1)
(7.9)
(a) BCT Option 4 final effluent levels are the same as those determined for
BCT Option 1.
408
-------
TABLE VIII-25
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
BUILDERS1 PAPER AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATEGORY(a)
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill Flow
Number kl/kkg
120008 28.8
120020 9.6
BPT-Final 60.0
Effluent Levels
(kgal/t)
(6.9)
(2.3)
(14.4)
BODS
kg/kkg
1.6
0.05
1.6
(lb/t)
(3.2)
(0.1)
(3.2)
TSS
kg/kkg
1.8
0.15
1.6
(lb/t)
(3.5)
(0.3)
(3.2)
(a)BCT Option 4 final effluent levels are the same as those determined for
BCT Option I.
409
-------
TABLE VIII-26
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Flow
Number kl/kkg
080003 151.3
080007 (a)
080009
080027 (a)
080030
080033
080041 (a)
080044
080046 (a)
080048
080049
105047 (a) (b)
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BODJ5
and TSS
56.7
70.4
29.6
22.5
49.6
109.2
98.8
60.0
52.1
52.9
54.2
63.3
63.9
(kgal/t)
(36.3)
(13.6)
(16.9)
(7.1)
(5.4)
(11.9)
(26.2)
(23.7)
(14.4)
(12.5)
(12.7)
(13.0)
(15.2)
(15.3)
BODS
kg/kkg
3.8
1.3
3.5
1.1
5.5
4.4
1.7
3.1
1.2
8.1
3.9
1.7
2.4
1.3
(lb/t)
(7.5)
(2.6)
(7.0)
(2.1)
(10.9)
(8.8)
(3.4)
(6.1)
(2.3)
(16.2)
(7.8)
(3.3)
(4.8)
(2.6)
TSS
kg/kkg
2.7
1.7
1.7
0.8
24.1
3.0
1.2
1.6
1.9
0.7
4.5
1.2
3.3
1.4
(lb/t)
(5.4)
(3.3)
(3.3)
(1.5)
(48.1)
(6.0)
(2.3)
(3.2)
(3.7)
(1.4)
(8.9)
(2.3)
(6.5)
(2 7)
(a)TSS and BOD_5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)At this mill, primary treatment is employed.
category are based on biological treatment.
included in the average.
BPT limitations for this sub-
Therefore, these data were not
410
-------
TABLE VII1-27
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-TISSUE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
090001 (a) (b)
090005 (a) (b)
090007 (a) (b)
090008 (a)
0900 11 (a)
090013(a)
090019 (a)
090022 (a)
090028 (a)
090032 (a)
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining
BPT BOD_5
and TSS
Flow
kl/kkg
71.3
22.1
97.1
52.1
63.3
27.9
71.3
67.1
81.7
115.8
95.4
68.5
(kgal/t)
(17.1)
(5.3)
(23.3)
(12.5)
(15.2)
(6.7)
(17.1)
(16.1)
(19.6)
(27.8)
(22.9)
(16.4)
BODS
kg/kkg
1.4
0.4
0.3
2.0
3.1
1.1
2.5
3.2
2.0
2.1
3.5
2.3
(lb/t)
(2.8)
(0.8)
(0.5)
(4.0)
(6.2)
(2 1)
(5.0)
(6.4)
(3.9)
(4.1)
(7.0)
(4.5)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.9
0.5
0.8
0.7
1.3
0.6
2.7
2.6
1.8
2.8
2.9
1.8
(lb/t)
(1.8)
(0.9)
(1.5)
(1.3)
(2.6)
(1.1)
(5.3)
(5-2)
(3.5)
(5.5)
(5.7)
(3.5)
(a)TSS and BOD_5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(b)At this mill, a biological treatment system is employed. BPT limitations for
this subcategory are based on primary treatment. Therefore, these data were
not included in the average.
411
-------
TABLE VIII-28
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
080024(a)
090003 (a)
090015 (a)
105003 (a)
105013 Ca)
105014 (a)
105015 (b)
105018 (b)
BPT-Final
Flow
kl/kkg
48.3
50.8
133.8
416.7
159.2
169.6
447.1
687.9
202.6
(kgal/t)
(11.6)
(12.2)
(32.1)
(100.0)
(38.2)
(40.7)
(107.3)
(165.1)
(48.7)
BODS
kg/kkg
0.7
1.8
2.1
4.6
3.6
1.9
8.7
4.0
7.4
(lb/t)
(1.4)
(3.6)
(4.1)
(9.2)
(7.1)
(3.7)
(17.4)
(7.9)
(14.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.8
0.9
2.1
3.4
4.2
1.5
2.4
3.0
6.0
(lb/t)
(1.6)
(1-8)
(4.1)
(6.8)
(8.4)
(2.9)
(4.8)
(6.0)
(12.0)
Effluent
Levels (Light-
weight)
Calculated 202.6 (48.7)
Option 4 -
Final Effluent
Levels (Light-
weight)
BPT-Final 319.9 (76.9)
Effluent
Levels (Elec-
trical)
Calculated 319.9 (76.9)
Option 4 -
Final Effluent
Levels (Elec-
trical)
4.8
(9.5)
11.7
7.5
(23.3)
(15.0)
3.7
9.5
5.8
(7.4)
(18.9)
(11.6)
(a)Lightweight paper grade.
(b)Electrical paper grade.
412
-------
r
for BOD5 and TSS. Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table VII1-29.
Noninteqrated-Paperboard - For this new subcategory, percentage
reductions beyond BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory
were applied to the BPT limitations currently being proposed for this
subcategory. The percent reductions applied were 35.7 and 38.6
percent, respectively, for BOD5_ and TSS. Available effluent data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table VIII-30.
The BCT Option 4 final effluent:characteristics developed as described
above are presented in Table VII1-31.
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE (BAT)
General
The factors considered in establishing the best available technology
economically achievable (BAT) level of control include environmental
considerations such as air pollution, energy consumption, and solid
waste generation, the costs of applying the control technology, the
age of process equipment and facilities, the process employed, process
changes, and the engineering aspects of applying various types of
control techniques (Section 304(b)(2)(B)). In general, the BAT
technology level represents, at a minimum, the best existing
economically achievable performance of plants of shared
characteristics. Where existing performance is uniformly inadequate,
BAT technology may be transferred from a different subcategory or
industrial category. BAT may include process changes or internal
controls, even when not common industry practice.
The primary determinant of BAT is effluent reduction capability using
economically achievable technology. As a result of the Clean Water
Act of 1977, the achievement of BAT has become the national means of
controlling the discharge of toxic pollutants. Best available
treatment technology economically achievable must be implemented no
later than July 1, 1984, for the control of toxic and nonconventional
pollutants. In Section VI, it is recommended that effluent
limitations be established for the following four toxic pollutants:
chloroform,
trichlorophenol,
pentachlorophenol, and
zinc.
The most important nonconventional pollutants associated with the
production of pulp, paper, or paperboard are color, ammonia, and resin
acids and their derivatives. It has not been recommended that uniform
national pollutant discharge standards be established for these
nonconventional pollutants. It has been recommended that color be
controlled on a case-by-case basis as dictated by water quality
considerations. The Agency is seeking public comment on ammonia
discharges from integrated mills where ammonia is used as a cooking
413
-------
TABLE VIII-29
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-FILTER AND NONWOVEN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
105033
105034
105051
105055
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg
216.7
202.1
16.7
255.4
249.2
(kgal/t)
(52.0)
(48.5)
(4.0)
(61.3)
(59.9)
BODS
kg/kkg
2.8
4.4
0.2
1.6
9.1
(lb/t)
(5.5)
(8.7)
(0.3)
(3.1)
(18.1)
TSS
kg/kkg
1.3
2.4
0.2
2.9
7.4
(lb/t)
(2.5)
(4.8)
(0.4)
(5.8)
(14.7)
Calculated
Option 4 -
Final Effluent
Levels
249.2
(59.9)
5.8
(11.6)
4.5
(9.0)
414
-------
TABLE VIII-30
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Annual Average Levels
Mill
Number
085001
105002*
105039
105048
110021
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Calculated
Option 4 -
Final Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg
25.0
187.1
10.8
17.5
62.1
53.7
53.7
(kgal/t)
(6.0)
(44.9)
(2.6)
(4.2)
(14.9)
(12.9)
(12 9)
BODS
kg/kkg
0.8
3.8
0.2
0.2
1.6
2.0
1.3
(lb/t)
(1.6)
(7.6)
(0.4)
(0.4)
(3.1)
(3.9)
(2.5)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.1
1.8
0.3
0.2
2.3
1.6
1.0
(lb/t)
(0.2)
(3.5)
(0.5)
(0.3)
(5.1)
(3.2)
(2.0)
*Nonintegrated Electrical Paperboard.
415
-------
TABLE VIII-31
OPTION 4 FINAL EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
BODS
TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo - Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Honintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kg/kkg
4.1
3.5
2.5
2.0
1.2
1.5
1.8
1.8
7.6
8.1
8.8
9.5
1.3
1.5
1.4
3.0
3.3
~
2.2
0.44
0.6
0.5
1.3
2.3
4.8
7.5
5.8
1.3
(Ib/t)
(8.1)
(7.0)
(5.0)
(3.9)
(2.3)
(3.0)
(3.5)
(3.5).
(15.1)
(16.1)
(17.5)
(18.9)
See Equations
(2.6)
(3.0)
(2.7)
(5.9)
(6.5)
—
(4.4)
(0.83)
(1.2)
(1.0)
(2.6)
(4.5)
(9.5)
(15.0)
(11.6)
(2.5)
kg/kkg
6.2
4.4
3.6
3.1
2.1
2.4
2.5
2.9
14.4
14.4
14.4
14.4
Below
2.1
2.1
2.0
4.2
5.0
—
2.6
0.52
1.2
0.7
1.4
1.8
3.7
5.8
4.5
1.0
(Ib/t)
(12.4)
(8.8)
(7.2)
(6.1)
(4.1)
(4.8)
(4.8)
(5.8)
(28.7)
(28.7)
(28.7)
(28.7)
(4.1)
(4.2)
(3.9)
(8.3)
(10.0)
—
(5.2)
(0.98)
(2.3)
(1.4)
(2.7)
(3.5)
(7.4)
(11.6)
(9.0)
(2.0)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Subcategories.
Papergrade Sulfite Equations
BOD5 (Ib/t) = 0.0022x2-0.117x+7.43
TSS (Ib/t) = 0.0036x2-0.194x+12.30
BOD5 (kg/kkg) = 0.0011x2-0.059x+3.71
TSS (kg/kkg) = 0.0018x2-0.097x+6.14
Where x equals the percent sulfite pulp in the final product.
416-
-------
chemical; limited information is currently available on the discharge
of this nonconventional pollutant. Limited information exists on the
levels of resin acids and their derivatives present in wastewater
discharges from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. This
sparcity of data makes, it impossible at this time to establish uniform
national standards limiting the discharge of these compounds.
Two control and treatment options have been identified for the control
of toxic pollutants. Control and treatment technologies have also
been identified for control of the nonconventional pollutants ammonia
and color, should a case-by-case determination be made that they
should be regulated.
The control and treatment options identified for consideration as the
basis of BAT effluent limitations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry are:
Option 1 - Control of toxic pollutants at the levels attainable
through the proper application and operation of the technologies
that formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations.
Option 2 - Substitution of chemicals.
Option ]_
The technology basis for BPT in the pulp, paper, and paperboard point
source category was biological treatment for all subcategories, except
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory for which primary
treatment was the technology basis. It has also been proposed that
primary treatment form the basis of BPT effluent limitations for the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-fliter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories. Effluent
limitations were also established to control the discharge of zinc
from the groundwood-fine papers, groundwood-CMN papers,
and
groundwood-thermo-mechanical subcategories. Zinc was regulated on the
basis of precipitation using lime. At groundwood mills, zinc
hydrosulfite can be used for bleaching of pulp. From mills where zinc
hydrosulfite is used, significantly higher quantities of zinc are
discharged than from mills where other bleaching chemicals are used.
In recent years, at most groundwood mills, a substitution to the use
of sodium hydrosulfite rather than zinc hydrosulfite has been made.
Application of this BAT option would ensure that at mills in the nine
subcategories where pulp is bleached with chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds, the resulting high levels of chloroform
will be substantially reduced through biological treatment. Extension
of the existing BPT effluent limitations for zinc ensures that only
low levels of zinc will be discharged from the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry.
Analysis of data obtained during the verification program demonstrates
the capability of biological treatment to remove large quantities of
chloroform from wastewaters discharged from integrated mills where
417
-------
pulp is bleached with chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds.
Chloroform data are presented in Table VII1-32 for facilities where
chlorine bleaching is used. The data are ranked in the order of
increasing concentration and those facilities where BPT effluent
limitations are attained have been identified. The average final
effluent concentration at facilities where BPT is attained is 52.2
ug/1 with a maximum reported value of 240 ug/1.
Under this option, (a) maximum day chloroform limitations are
established for the nine subcategories where chlorine-containing
compounds are used to bleach pulp based on a maximum concentration of
240 ug/1 and (b) existing BPT effluent limitations for zinc are
applied to the three groundwood subcategories.
Option 2
This BAT option is the substitution of slimicides and biocide
formulations that do not contain chlorinated phenolics to replace
formulations that contain these toxic pollutants. Through
substitution, the toxic pollutants pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol would be virtually eliminated from pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry wastewaters.
Chemicals containing pentachlorophenol were being used at 11 of the 60
facilities sampled during. the verification program.
Trichlorophenol-containing chemicals were used at six mills.
Chlorophenolics were detected and reported at consistently higher
levels at facilities using these compounds. As a result, chemical
substitution has been considered as an applicable BAT technology
option.
Data on pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol concentrations found in
primary effluents are presented in Tables VII1-33 and VII1-34. The
data are ranked in order of increasing concentration for mills where
chlorophenolic-containing chemicals are used and for mills where
chlorophenolic-containing chemicals are not used. The average
concentrations at facilities not using the compounds is 7.2 ug/1 for
pentachlorophenol and 6.9 ug/1 for trichlorophenol. Maximum
concentrations found at non-users were 24.4 ug/1 and 26 ug/1 for
pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol, respectivey.
Under this option, maximum day pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol
limitations are established for all subcategories based on maximum
concentrations of 25 and 30 ug/1, respectivey.
Ammonia Removal
The discharge of ammonia can be controlled at mills where ammonia is
used as a base chemical through (a) substitution to a different base
chemical or (b) through the application of biological treatment in a
mode to allow conversion of ammonia to nitrate. Estimates of the
costs associated with ammonia removal technology are presented in
Section IX.
418
-------
TABLE VIII-32
SUMMARY OF RESULTS - CHLOROFORM
VERIFICATION SAMPLING PROGRAM
EFFLUENT SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB
AT FACILITIES WHERE CHLOROFORM WAS DETECTED
Facilities w/Bio-Treatment
Meeting BPT Limitations
Facilities w/Bio-Treatment
Exceeding BPT Limitations
0
2
2
2
3
4
4
6
6
7
7
10
12
18
20
39
45
46
95
100
110
110
110
122
137
144
240
1
2
5
5
6
6
9
10
11
40
42
48
56
61
75
86
130
340
390
410
530
570
600
620
1200
Maximum = 240 ppb
Average = 51.9 ppb
Maximum = 1200 ppb
Average = 210.1 ppb
419
-------
•TABLE VIII-33
SUMMARY OF RESULTS - PENTACHLOROPHENOL
VERIFICATION SAMPLING PROGRAM
INFLUENT TO BIO-TREATMENT SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB
AT FACILITIES WHERE PENTACHLOROPHENOL WAS DETECTED
Facilities Not Using PCP
Facilities Using PCP
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5
10
10
10.5*
11
14.8*
19
24.4*
Maximum = 24.4
Average =7.2
*Concentration adjusted to BPT Flow
as this was at a high recycle facility
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
6
7
7
9
9
10
11
11
11
12
12
20
24
30
44
61
79*
102*
112*
Maximum = 112
Average = 20.0
420
-------
TABLE VIII-34
SUMMARY OF RESULTS - TRICHLOROPHENOL
VERIFICATION SAMPLING PROGRAM
INFLUENT TO BIO-TREATMENT SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB
AT FACILITIES WHERE TRICHLOROPHENOL WAS DETECTED
Facilities Using TCP
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
9
9
11
13
13
15
16
22
26
1
2
4
5
10
11
11
12
14
19
21
23
25*
29
36*
39*
49
65
330
350
370
Maximum = 370
Average =67.9
Maximum = 26
Average = 6.9
Concentration adjusted to BPT Flow as this was at
high recycle facility.
421
-------
Substitution to a cooking liquor that does not contain ammonia, such
as sodium hydroxide, is anticipated to virtually eliminate ammonia
from raw waste discharges. As a result, ammonia may have to be added
to the influent to the biological system to ensure effective
wastewater treatment. This would result in final effluent discharges
of ammonia that are similar to those discharged from all point sources
where wastewaters are nutrient deficient.
There are currently, no biological treatment systems designed for
ammonia removal in use at mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. Existing biological treatment systems could be modified to
achieve ammonia removal through nitrification. A review of available
literature indicates that ammonia removal on the order of 90 percent
may be achieved through the application of biological treatment in a
mode to allow conversion of ammonia to
nitrate.(107)(112)(119)(120){121)(122) Table VIII-35 presents
predicted final average effluent levels of ammonia based on
nitrification technology for the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite
pulp, and both papergrade sulfite subcategories.
The Agency is seeking comment on the capability of biological
treatment systems to remove ammonia and on the ability to modify
current pulping processes to eliminate the use of ammonia-based
chemicals.
Color Removal
As discussed in Section VI, colored effluents may be of concern as
dictated by water quality considerations. Color removal technology
options have been identified and are discussed below.
In Section VII, four technologies were discussed that are capable of
removing color from pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents. These were
as follows:
1. Minimum lime coagulation,
2. Alum coagulation,
3. Activated carbon adsorption, and
4. Polymeric resin ion exchange.
422
-------
TABLE VIII-35
PREDICTED RANGE OF AMMONIA RAW WASTE LOAD
AND FINAL EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
ro
co
Raw Waste(a)
(a) As nitrogen.
Final Effluent(a)
Subcategory
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
BPT RWL Flow
kgal/t
10.3
66.0
44.5
Ammonia Load
Ib/t mg/1
6.7-33.5 80-390
12.5-62.5 23-114
10.0-50.0 27-135
Ammc
Ib/t
0.7-3.4
1.3-6.3
1.0-5.0
mi a
mg/1
8-39
2-11
3-14
-------
These four technologies were evaluated based on the following
criteria:.
1. Stage of color reduction technology development,
2. Operating problems experienced,
3. Total operating cost,
4. Wastewater streams treated, and
5. Color reduction efficiency.
Based on these five criteria, minimum lime and alum coagulation were
identified as the most likely technology options to be used to control
color in pulp, paper, and paperboard industry wastewaters. Available
color data are presented in Tables V-32 and V-33. For those
subcategories where highly-colored effluents are discharged, the
ranges of color levels remaining after the application of biological
treatment are presented in Table VII1-36.
Anticipated final effluent color levels resulting from the application
of lime or alum coagulation are also shown in Table VIII-36. For
alum, it has been assumed that the entire effluent is treated. Based
on the studies discussed in Section VII, it has been determined that
an 85 percent reduction in color can be attained through the
application of alum coagulation.
It has been assumed that only the more highly-colored process streams,
such as the first stage caustic extraction effluent and/or the decker
filtrate, are treated with lime in the dissolving kraft, market
bleached kraft, BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft,
fine bleached kraft, soda, dissolving sulfite pulp, and both
papergrade sulfite subcategories. The cost to treat the entire
wastewater discharge stream at mills in these subcategories is
substantially greater using the lime coagulation process than if only
selected streams are treated for color removal. It has been
determined that approximately 70 percent of the total color load can
be attributed to the first stage caustic extraction effluent and
decker filtrate at mills in these eight subcategories.
In determining attainable, final effluent color levels, it has been
assumed that lime coagulation is applied to treat the entire effluent
at mills in the unbleached kraft, semi-chemical, and unbleached kraft
and semi-chemical subcategories. Based on the studies discussed in
Section VII, it has been determined that an 80 percent reduction in
color can be attained through the application of lime coagulation.
This removal is reflected in the anticipated final effluent color
levels shown in Table VIII-36.
Costs to achieve these color reductions are presented in Section IX.
424
-------
TABLE VIII-36
SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED COLOR LEVELS
AFTER MINIMUM LIME/ALUM COAGULATION
Range of Color Levels
Range of Color Levels
Treated by Lime/Alup
Color Level Reduction
Range of Anticipated Color
Levels in the Final Effluent
(Platinum Cobalt Units)
Subcategory (rla
Dissolving Kraft
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Market Bleached Kraft
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
BCT Bleached Kraft
w/Lime Coagulation
W/Alum Coagulation
Alkaline-Fine
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Unbleached Kraft
Bag ^
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Semi -Chemical
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Papergrade Suflite
w/Lime Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
935-1710
935-1710
1040-2360
1040-2360
1160-2040
1160-2040
430-1480
430-1480
190- 240
190-240
350-2400
350-2400
2350-6400
2350-6400
170- 390
170- 390
850-3600
850-3600
<5-3150
<5-3150
655-1197
935-1710
782-1652
1040-2360
812-1428
1160-2040
301-1036
430-1480
190- 240
190- 240
350-2400
350-2400
2350-6400
2350-6400
170- 390
170- 390
595-2520
850-3600
<5-2205
<5-3150
524- 958
795-1454
582-1322
884-2006
650-1142
986-1734
241- 829
366-1258
152- 192
162- 204
280-1920
298-2040
1880-5120
1998-5440
136- 312
145- 332
476-2016
723-3060
<5-1764
<5-2678
411- 752
140- 257
458-1038
156- 354
510- 898
174- 306
189- 651
64- 222
38- 48
28- 36
70- 480
52- 360
470-1280
352- 960
34- 78
25- 58
374-1584
127- 540
<5-1386
<5- 472
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Suifile (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
Section 306 of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires that new source
performance standards (NSPS) be established for industrial dischargers
based upon best demonstrated technology. NSPS include the control of
conventional, toxic, and nonconventional pollutants. In the pulp
paper, and paperboard industry the same pollutants proposed for
control under BCT and BAT are proposed for control under NSPS.
Two options have been developed for the control of conventional and
toxic pollutants under NSPS. The summary of control and treatment
options under consideration are:
Option 1 - Control of toxic and conventional pollutants based on
tne application of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge and raw waste loadings and end-of-pipe
treatment in the form of biological treatment for all
subcategories except nonintegrated-tissue papers
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard, where end-of-pipe
treatment is in the form of primary clarification.
Option 2 - Control of toxic pollutants by chemical substitution.
Option 1_ - Conventional Pollutants
The tecnnol°gy basis for control of conventional pollutants for NSPS
is the implementation of production process controls and end-of-pipe
treatment technologies. The controls serve as the basis for the
reduction of raw waste loads beyond those established for BPT and BCT
in the design of a new mill, some production process controls are
economically justifiable through savings in stock, chemicals, and
heat, while other items are implemented solely for environmental
reasons (i.e., reduction of raw waste loads). These items are
presented in Tables VII1-37 through VII1-39.
Development of Raw Waste Load. NSPS raw waste flows for the
integrated segment and the deink subcategory are generally based on
the average discharge flow from mills where discharges are lower than
the flow basis of BCT Option 1. For the remaining subcategories,
Option 1 flows generally form the basis of NSPS discharge flows. The
NSPS raw waste BOD5 load has been assumed to equal the raw waste BODS
established in BCT Option 1 for all subcategories. The NSPS raw waste
TSS has been assumed to be the same as that which forms the basis of
BPT.
Dissolving Kraft - The dissolving kraft subcategory is comprised
of three mills. The raw waste load data for these mills and the raw
waste loadings that formed the basis of BPT and BCT Option 1 are
presented in Table V-l. BCT Option 1 flow was determined based on a
prediction of the flow reduction that would occur after implementation
426
-------
TABLE VIII-37
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROIS CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHMENT OF NSPS
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategory
ro
-vl
Control
Market BCT
Dissolving Bleached Bleached
Kraft Kraft Kraft
Un-
Alkaline- bleached
Fine
Kraft
Semi-
Chemical
Unbleached
Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving
Sulfite Papergrade
Pulp Sulfite
Ground-
wood
TMP
Ground-
wood
CMN
Papers
Ground-
wood
Fine
Papers
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
add barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse relief and blow
conderisates
b. Reduce groundwood thick-
.ener overflow
c. Spill collection
d. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
3. Washers and Screen Koom
X"
X
a .
b.
4.
a.
b.
5.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
a .
b.
Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press X X
.Decker filtrate reuse ;-
Bleaching
Countercurrent washing - X
Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection - ' . - - -
Evaporation and Recovery Areas
Replace ' barometric condenser X
Add boil out tank X -
Neutralize spent sulfite •
liquor - -
Segregate cooling water - X
Spill collection X
Reuse evaporator condendsate - , -
Liquor Preparation Area-
Spill collection - -
Spare tank
X X ..X X
X .X -
'-
X X X
.'-'"- X X
X - X X
' '. - X
x - -
x x x - , -|
x -• - - x
x - - -
- x - -
X
x : -
x - -
x - - - -
x - x - -
x - x
See Footnotes at end of table.
-------
TABLE VUI-37 (Continued)
-fa
ro
oo
Coi
7.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
£.
g-
h.
i.
j.
k.
1.
m.
8.
Market BCT Uu- Unbleached Dissolving
Dissolving Bleached Bleached Alkaline- bleached Semi- Kraft and Sulfite Papergraije
itrol Kraft Kraft Kraft Fine Kraft Chemical Semi-Chemical Pulp Sulfite
Paper Mill
Spill collection
1 . Paper machine and
bleached pulp spill
collection X X X X - X
2. Color plant - - - X - -
Improve saveall ------
High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning X
White water use for vacuum
ptunp sealing X - X -
Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning - - - -
White water storage for up-
sets and ptiiper dilution - - - -
Recycle press water X -
Reuse of vacuum pump water - - - -
Broke storage - - - X X
Wet lap machine - - - X
Segregate cooling water - - - X X
Cleaner rejects to landfill ------
White water to pulp mill ___---
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
-
-
-
-
-
X
X
-
-
X
-
X
-
-
X
-
-
X
X
-
-
-
-
X
-
-
-
X
X
X
-
X
X
-
-
-
-
X
-
-
-
-
Ground-
wood
TOP
X
-
-
X
-
-
X
-
-
-
X
-
-
—
Ground-
wood
CMN
Papers
X
-
—
X
X
-
X
X
X
-
—
X
-
—
Ground-
wood
Fine
Papers
X
X
"*
X
X
-
X
X
X
-
-
X
-
"
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdovm
and backwash waters X
L Recycle of Treated Effluent
a. Cooling Tower
b. pU monitor
c. Leve1 a1a rms
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE VIII-38
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHMENT OF NSPS
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
Subcategory
itrol
Deink
Tissue from
Wastepaper
Paperboard
from
Wastepaper
Wastepaper-
Molded
Products
Builders' Paper
and
Roofing Felt
•JD
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse relief and blow
condensates
b. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
c. Spill collection
d. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
b. Decker filtrate reuse
X
X
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a..Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection
f. Reuse evaporator condensate
-------
TABLE VIII-38 (Continued)
Subcategory
Control
Deink
Tissue from
Wastepaper
Paperboard
from
Wastepaper
Wastepaper-
Molded
Products
Builders' Paper
and
Roofing Felt
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
b. Spare tank
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection
1. Paper machine and
• bleached pulp spill
- collection
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. Wet lap machine
k. Segregate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
m. White water to pulp mill
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Recycle of Treated Effluent
a. Cooling tower
b. pH monitor
c. Level alarms
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
TABLE VIII-39
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS CONSIDERED IN ESTABLISHMENT OF NSPS
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Noninte- Noninte-
grated- grated-
Fine Tissue
Papers Papers
Noninte—
grated-
Lightweight
Papers
Noninte-
grated-
Filter and
Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-
Paperboard
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard and
barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse relief and blow
condensates
b. Reduce groundwood thick-
ener overflow
c. Spill collection
d. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press
b. Decker filtrate reuse
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporator caustic extract
filtrate collection
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c. Neutralize spent sulfite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection
f. Reuse evaporator condensate
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
b. Spare tank
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp spill
collection
X
X
431
X
X
-------
TABLE VIII-39 (Continued)
Subcategory
Control
Noninte- Noninte-
grated- grated-
Fine Tissue
Noninte-
Noninte- grated-
grated- Filter and
Lightweight Nonwoven Nonintegrated-
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
1.
m.
8.
2. Color plant
Improve saveall
High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning
White water use for vacuum
pump sealing
Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning
White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
Recycle press water
Reuse of vacuum pump water
Broke storage
Wet lap machine
Segregate cooling water
Cleaner rejects to landfill
White water to pulp mill
Steam Plant and Utility Areas
X X
X X
X
- _
-
X X
X
- -
~ _
X X
- _
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
x
x
x
x
X
•P
X
_
_
-
raperpoarq
Y
4tX
x
x
x
-
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown -
and backwash waters
9. Recycle of Treated Effluent
a. Cooling tower
b. pH monitor
c. Level alarms
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
432
-------
of specific production process controls applicable to this
subcategory. Because very few mills are included in this subcategory
and because varying percentages of dissolving pulp are produced at
these mills, the flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads for NSPS have been
assumed to be the same as those determined for BCT Option 1. The TSS
raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that
determined for BPT. In summary, the NSPS raw waste loads for the
dissolving kraft subcategory are: flow - 211.4 kl/kkg {50.7 kgal/t),
BOD5_ - 58.4 kg/kkg (116.7 Ib/t), and TSS - 113.0 kg/kkg (226.0 Ib/t).
Market Bleached Kraft - Data presented in Table V-2 relate to the
production of both hardwood kraft (HWK) and softwood kraft (SWK) pulp,
arranged in order of increasing softwood production. The NSPS flow
has been chosen as that of the best softwood kraft mill, 134.7 kl/kkg
(32.3 kgal/t). The proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BCT Option 1, or 26.3
kg/kkg (58.6 Ib/t). The proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT, or 45.0 kg/kkg
(90.0 Ib/t).
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - Raw waste
load data for bleached kraft mills where board, coarse papers, and
tissue papers are manufactured are presented in Table V-3. Of the
eight mills for which data are presented, three mills are achieving
flows less than that determined for BCT Option 1. The average flow of
the three mills is 114.7 kl/kkg (27.5 kgal/t) and forms the flow basis
of NSPS. The proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed
to be the same as that determined for BCT Option 1, or 35.1 kg/kkg
(70.2 Ib/t). The proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BCT, or 66.5 kg/kkg
(133.0 Ib/t).
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) - Data
are presented in Table V-4 for 20 mills included in the fine bleached
kraft subcategory. The NSPS flow for this subcategory is based on the
average discharge flow at the four mills where flows are lower than
that determined for BCT Option 1. The average flow at these four
mills is 84.7 kg/kkg (20.3 kgal/t) and forms the basis of NSPS. The
proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that determined for BCT Option 1, or 27.1 kg/kkg (54.1 Ib/t). The
proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that determined for BPT, or 75.0 kg/kkg (150.0 Ib/t).
for mills
Table V-5.
in the unbleached kraft
NSPS flows for this
Unbleached Kraft - Data
subcategory are presented in
subcategory are based on the averages of those mills where flows are
lower than the flow for BCT Option 1. A delineation has been made
between the production of (a) linerboard and (b) bag and other
products. Application of this methodology yields an unbleached kraft
linerboard flow of 31.3 kl/kkg (7.5 kgal/t) and an unbleached kraft
bag and other products flow of 42.1 kl/kkg (10.1 kgal/t). The
proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for the unbleached kraft linerboard and
the unbleached kraft bag and other products product sectors have been
433
-------
assumed to be the same as that determined for BCT Option 1 or 12.4
kg/kkg (24.8 Ib/t) and 12.5 kg/kkg (25.0 Ib/t), respectively. The
proposed TSS NSPS raw waste load for both the product sectors has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT, 21.9 kg/kkg (43.8
Ib/t).
Semi-Chemical - The available raw waste load data for
semi-chemical mills are presented in Table V-6. Again, as previously
described for BCT option 1, NSPS flow is based on the average
discharge flow at those mills (with liquor recovery where less than
one-third of the total furnish is wastepaper) where flow is lower than
that determined for BCT Option 1. Applying this methodology yields an
NSPS flow of 26.7 kg/kkg (6.4 kgal/t). The proposed BOD5_ raw waste
load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for
BCT Option 1, or 17.6 kg/kkg (35.2 Ib/t). The proposed TSS raw waste
load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for
BPT, or 12.3 kg/kkg (24.6 Ib/t).
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - Table V-7 presents available
raw waste load data for mills in this subcategory. NSPS flow for this
subcategory is based on the average discharge flow at those mills
where flow is lower than that determined for BCT Option 1.
Application of this methodology yields an NSPS flow of 37.9 kl/kkg
(9.1 kgal/t). The proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BCT Option l, or 16.3
kg/kkg (32.5 Ib/t). The proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been
assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT. or 20.5 kg/kkg
{41.0 Ib/t). y
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - Table V-8 presents available raw waste
load data for mills in this subcategory. Limited data are available
on raw waste loads relative to product types (e.g., pulp grade). The
raw waste loads for NSPS have been assumed to be the same as those
previously determined for BCT Option 1 and are determined by
predicting the raw waste load reductions attainable through the
application of specific production process controls applicable at
mills in this subcategory.
The resulting NSPS raw waste loads are:
Flow
kl/kkq (kgal/t)
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
246.0
246.0
246.0
246.0
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
BOD5_
kg/kkq (Ib/U
90.6
92.6
109.6
164.6
(181 .2)
(185.2)
(219.2)
(329.2)
TSS
kq/kkq (Ib/t)
92.5
92.5
92.5
92.5
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
Paperqrade Sulfite (Paperqrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and
Paperqrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcateqories) - Table V-9 presents
available raw waste load data for mills in this subcategory. The NSPS
434
-------
flow is based on flow data for those mills where discharge flow is
lower than the BCT Option 1 flow as defined by the regression equation
presented in Section V. The percentage reductions in flow below that
defined by the regression equation, taking into account the percentage
of sulfite pulp produced on-site, were averaged and form the basis of
NSPS flow. At five mills, discharge flow is less than BCT Option 1
flow as defined by the regression equations, with the average percent
reduction being 24 percent. NSPS flow for this subcategory has been
defined as 76 percent of the flow basis of BCT Option 1. The proposed
BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS, assuming 56 percent of the raw material
furnished is sulfite pulp produced on-site, has been assumed to be the
same as that determined for the representative mill in BCT Option 1 or
62.9 kl/kkg (125.7 Ib/t). The proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS
has been assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT, or 90.0
kg/kkg (180.0 Ib/t).
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - Table V-10 presents available raw
waste load data for the mills in this subcategory. NSPS flow for this
subcategory is based on the average of those mills where flow is lower
than that determined for BCT Option 1. Application of this
methodology yields an NSPS flow of 33.4 kl/kkg (8.0 kgal/t). The
proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that determined for BCT Option 1, or 21.2 kg/kkg (42.4 Ib/t). The
proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that determined for BPT, or 39.9 kg/kkg (79.8 Ib/t).
Gr ou ndwood-CMN Papers - Table V-11 presents available raw waste
load data for mills in this subcategory. BCT Option 1 flow and BOD5_
raw waste loads are based on the subtraction of predicted raw waste
load reductions resulting from the implementation of specific
production process controls applicable in this subcategory. NSPS flow
and BOD5_ waste loadings have been assumed to be the same as that
determined for BCT Option 1, or 70.1 kl/kkg (16.8 kgal/t) and 14.6
kg/kkg (29.1 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load for
NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT, or
48.5 kg/kkg (97.0 Ib/t).
Groundwood-F i ne Papers - Available raw waste load data for the
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-12. NSPS flow is
based on the average discharge flow at those mills where flow is lower
than that determined for BCT Option 1. Application of this
methodology yields an NSPS flow of 56.7 kl/kkg (13.6 kgal/t). The
proposed BOD5_ raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that determined for BPT or 12.5 kg/kkg (24.9 Ib/t). The proposed
TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that
determined for BPT, or 52.5 kg/kkg (105.0 Ib/t).
Deink - Available raw waste load data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table V-14. A delineation has been made
between mills where fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint are
produced.
435
-------
For mills where fine papers and tissue papers are produced from
deinked wastepaper, NSPS flows are based on the average discharge flow
at those mills where flow is lower than that determined for BCT Option
1. This methodology yields an NSPS flow for the fine papers and
tissue papers product sectors of 49.2 kl/kkg (11.8 kgal/t) and 62.6
kl/kkg (15.0 kgal/t), respectively.
The NSPS flow for the deink newsprint sector has been assumed to
be the same as that determined for BCT Option 1, or 67.6 kl/kkq (16.2
kgal/t).
For all three product sectors, the proposed BOD5_ loadings for
NSPS have been assumed to be the same as that determined for BCT
Option 1. The BCT Option 1 raw waste BOD5 loadings for the fine
papers, tissue papers, and newsprint product sectors are 37.3 kg/kkg
(74.6 Ib/t), 61.3 kg/kkg (122.6 Ib/t), and 15.9 kg/kkg (31.7 Ib/t),
respectively. For all three products sectors, the proposed TSS raw
waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined
for BPT, or 202.5 kg/kkg (405.0 Ib/t).
Tissue from Wastepaper - Available raw waste load data for mills
in this subcategory are presented on Table V-15. NSPS flow and BODS
raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the same
as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 68.0 kl/kkg (16.3 kgal/t) and
9.7 kg/kkg (19.3 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste load
for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for BPT,
or 110.5 kg/kkg (221.0 Ib/t).
Paperboard from Wastepaper - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-16. NSPS flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 12.9 kl/kkg (3.1 kgal/t)
and 6.0 kg/kkg (11.9 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste
load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for
BPT, or 11.0 kg/kkg (21.9 Ib/t).
Wastepaper-Molded Products - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-18. NSPS flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 23.8 kl/kkg (5.7 kgal/t)
and 5.5 kg/kkg (10.9 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste
load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that proposed for
BPT, or 14.8 kg/kkg (29.6 Ib/t).
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - Available raw waste load data
for mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-19. NSPS flow
and BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be
the same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 10.8 kl/kkg (2.7
kgal/t) and 6.5 kg/kkg (13.0 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that
determined for BPT, or 35.0 kg/kkg (70.0 Ib/t).
436
-------
Noninteqrated-Fine Papers - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-22. NSPS flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 40.0 kl/kkg (9.6 kgal/t)
and 6.7 kg/kkg (13.3 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS raw waste
load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that determined for
BPT, or 30.8 kg/kkg (61.6 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Tissue Papers - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-23. NSPS flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 79.6 kl/kkg (19.1
kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that
determined for BPT, or 34.7 kg/kkg (69.4 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Liqhtweiqht Papers - Available raw waste load data
for mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-24. As in BCT
Option 1, two product sectors have been considered, lightweight papers
and lightweight electrical grade papers. The NSPS flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads for both product sectors have been assumed to be the same
as those determined for BCT Option 1. The proposed TSS raw waste
loads for NSPS, for both product sectors, have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BPT, or 63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 Ib/t). The
following summarizes the NSPS raw waste loads for this subcategory.
Flow
kl/kkg (kqal/t)
Lightweight Papers 159.3 (38.2)
Electrical Grade
Papers 278.6 (66.8)
BOD5.
kg/kkq (Ib/t)
13.3 (26.6)
13,3 (26.6)
TSS
kq/kkq (Ib/t)
63.4 (126.8)
63.4 (126.8)
Noninteqrated-Filter.and Nonwoven Papers - Available raw waste
load data for mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-25.
NSPS flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been
assumed to be the same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 198.1
kl/kkg (47.5 kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively. The
proposed TSS raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same
as that proposed for BPT, or 27.4 kg/kkg (54.8 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Paperboard - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented on Table V-26. NSPS flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads for this subcategory have been assumed to be the
same as those determined for BCT Option 1, or 46.7 kl/kkg (11.2
kgal/t) and 8.2 kg/kkg (16.4 Ib/t), respectively. The proposed TSS
raw waste load for NSPS has been assumed to be the same as that
proposed for BPT, or 36.9 kg/kkg (73.7 Ib/t).
437
-------
Summary of NSPS Raw Waste Loads
summary of NSPS raw waste loads.
- Table VII1-40 presents
Characteristics.
™ . NSPS effluent limitations
are based on the levels attained at the best performing mills in each
respective subcategory Best performing mills are defined as those
mills in a subcategory that attain both BODS and TSS BPT annual
average effluent limitations using end-of-plpe technology of a type
that is similar to that which forms the basis of BPT.
The end-of-pipe treatment technology on which BPT and NSPS are based
is biological treatment, with the exception of the
§aPers' nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
»» and nonwoven Papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories. The technology on which BPT and NSPS are based for
these four nonintegrated subcategories is primary treatment.
NSPS long-term average final effluent limitations are calculated as
the product of BCT Option 4 long-term average final effluent
nSw^^r?tl0nS^ a?d NSPS flows' The only exception occuJs for
newsprint production in the deink subcategory. For the newsprint
product sector, the final effluent BOD5 long-term avIraSe
c ha? been emulated using the equation that relates raw
«« - concentration to final effluent BODS concentration as
presented previously in this section and in the Phase II Development
Document (See page 402). This relationship is based on
plant performance data and is as follows:
Log BOD5_ effluent = 0.601 Log BODS, influent -0.020
A Average final effluent TSS concentration for newsprint
production in the deink subcategory has been determined from the
relationship presented in Figure VIII-1 .
Summary of NSPS Long-Term Average Final Effluent Characteristics
and TSS effluent^SSd" & Summary of the NSPS long-term average BOD5
Option 1 - Toxic Pollutants
nnnH ?f N?PS ?ption ] leads to the control of the toxic
pollutant chloroform in the nine subcategories where chlorine or
both
sul£ite'
Chloroform. Under NSPS Option 1, maximum day chloroform limitations
are established as the product of (a) the maximum concentration of 240
V? -«. °f chloroform detected at verification mills where BPT
limitations are attained and (b) NSPS flow
438
-------
TABLE VIII-40
SUMMARY OF NSPS
• ,._ • • RAW WASTE LOADS
Flow BODS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft "
Alkaline-Fine ' :.
Unbleached Kraft '•
Linerboard '
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose - • . . •• .
Cellophane
Acetate . " «
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN. Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper' ;
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders ' Paper and
Roofing Felt • • \ '.
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers • '
Lightweight .... ^ .
Electrical
Nouintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
kl/kkg
211.4
134.7
114.7
84.7
31.3
,42.1
26.7
37.9
246.0
246.0
246.0
246.0.
. See
33.4
70'. 1
, 56.7
49.2
62.3
67.6
68.0
" 12.9
23.8
, ir.3
40.0
79.6
159.3 .
278.6
198.1
46.7
(kgal/t)
(50.7)
(32.3)
(27.5)
(20; 3)
(7.5)
(10.1)
(6 .'4)
(9.1) .
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
Equation* ,
(8.0)
(16.8)
. . (13.6)
(11.8)
,(15.0)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.1)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.6) .
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11.2)
kR/kkg
58.4
29.3
35.1
27.1
12.4
. 12.5
17.6
16.3
90.6
92.6
109.6
164.6
62.9
21.2
14.6
12.5
37.3
61.3
15.9
9.7
6.0
5.5
6.5,
6.7
9.0
13.3
13.3
9.0
8.2
(Ib/t)
(116.7)
(58.6)
(70.2)
(54.1)
(24.8)
(25.0)
(35.2)
(32.5)
(181.2)
(185.2)
(219.2)
(329.2)
(125.7)
(42.4)
(29.1)
(24.9)
(74.6)
(122.6)
(31.7)
(19.3)
(11-9)
(10.9)
(13.0)
(13.3)
(17.9)
(26.6)
(26.6)
(17.9)
(16.4)
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
14.8
35.0
30 . 8
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)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(180.0)
(79.8)
(97.0)
(105.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(405.0)
(221.0)
(21.9)
(29.6)
(70.0)
(61.6)
(69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.8)
(73.7)
*NSPS flow varies due to type of wash (Blow Pit or Drum Wash).
Use Equation Flow = 0.76(o.009llx -0.485x+30.7)
where x = percent sulfite pulp produced onsite.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
439
-------
TABLE VIII-41
HSPS FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo - Mechanical
Groundwood-CMH Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue fron Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Konintegrated-Iightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Konintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Konintegrated-Paperboard
kl/kkg
211.4
134.7
114.7
84.7
31.3
42.1
26.7
r 37.9
246.0
246.0
246.0
246.0
*
33.4
70.1
56.7
49.2
62.3
67.6
68.0
12.9
23.8
11.3
40.0
79.6
159.3
278.6
198.1
46.7
(kgal/t)
(50.7)
(32.3)
(27.5)
(20.3)
(7.5)
(10.1)
(6.4)
(9.1)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
*
(8.0)
(16.8)
(13.6)
(11.8)
(15.0)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.1)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.6)
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47.5)
(11-2)
BODS
kR/kfcg
3.7
2.7
2.0
1.3
0.7
1.2
1-1
1.2
6.8
7.2
7.8
8.5
*
0.5
1.1
0.9
1.5
2.0
1.7
2.2
0.42
0.6
0.5
0.8
1.9
3.8
6.5
4.6
1.1
(Ib/t)
(7.4)
(5.4)
(3.9)
(2.5)
(1.4)
(2.4)
(2.2)
(2.3)
<13.5)
(14.4)
(15.6).
(16.9)
*
(1.0)
(2.1)
(1.7)
(2.9)
(4.0)
(3.4)
(4.4)
(0.83)
(1.2)
•(1.0)
(1.6)
(3-8)
(7.5)
(13.0)
(9.2)
(2.2)
TSS
kg/kkg
5.7
3.4
2.8
2.0
1.2
1.9
1.5
1.9
12.8
12.8
12.8
12.8
*
0.8
1.5
1.2
2.0
3.1
3.3
2.6
0.49
1.2
0.7
0.9
1.5
2.9
5.1
3.6
0.9
(Ib/t)
(11.4)
(6.8)
(5.6)
(4.0)
(2.4)
(3.8)
(3.0)
(3.8)
(25.6)
(25.6)
(25.6)
(25.6)
*
(1.6)
(3-0)
(2.4)
(4.0)
(6.1)
(6.6)
(5.2)
(0.98)
(2.3)
(1.4)
(1.7)
(2.9)
(5.8)
(10.1)
(7.1)
(1.7)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Subcategories.
*Use equations
Flow, (kgal/t) = 0.76(30.7 - 0.485x + 0.00911x2), where x = Percent Sulfite Pulp
BODS (Ib/t) = Flow(29.0)(0.00834)
TSS~(lb/t) = Flow(48.0)(0.00834)
440
-------
Option 2_ - Substitution of Chemicals
Biocide and slimicide formulations containing trichlorophenol and
pentachlorophenol are used in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. Zinc hydrosulfite can be used to bleach mechanical (i.e.,
groundwood) pulp. This technology option involves the control of
pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and zinc through chemical
substitution.
Trichlorophenol and Pentachlorophenol. Slimicide and biocide
formulations containing chlorophenolics can be replaced with
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants. This ensures
the virtual elimination of pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol from
pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters. Under NSPS Option 2, maximum
day limitations controlling the discharge of trichlorophenol and
pentachlorophenol are established for all subcategories as the product
of (a) the maximum concentrations reported at mills where these
chemicals are not used (25 ug/1 for pentachlorophenol and 30 ug/1 for
trichlorophenol) and (b) NSPS flow.
Zinc. Under NSPS Option 2, maximum day limitations controlling the
discharge of zinc are established for the three groundwood
subcategories (groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers,
and groundwood-fine papers) as the product of (a) the maximum day
concentration of zinc (3 mg/1) that forms the basis of BPT effluent
limitations and (b) NSPS flow. These limitations can be met by
substitution of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite.
PSES and PSNS
General
The Clean Water Act requires that pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES) and pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS)
prevent the discharge of pollutants which pass through, interfere
with, or are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The
Act also requires pretreatment for pollutants that limit sludge
management alternatives at POTWs, including the beneficial use of
sludges on agricultural lands.
One technology option is under consideration as the basis of PSES and
PSNS. Three toxic pollutants have been found in pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry wastewaters that can pass through POTWs or could
cause sludge disposal problems, including:
trichlorophenol,
pentachlorophenol, and
zinc.
The toxic pollutant chloroform has been found to be effectively
controlled through the application of biological treatment, the type
of treatment most commonly used at POTWs. Therefore, it is not
proposed that chloroform be regulated under PSES or PSNS.
441
-------
Option J_
Option 1 is the control of toxic pollutants based on chemical
substitution. Sodium hydrosulfite can be substituted for zinc
hydrosulfite in the bleaching of mechanical pulps. This substitution
ensures the discharge of only low levels of zinc to POTWs from
indirect discharging pulp, paper, and paperboard mills. As discussed
in BAT Option 2, slimicide and biocide formulations that do not
contain pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol can be substituted for
formulations that contain these toxic compounds.
Under this option, maximum day limitations are established for zinc
(three groundwood subcategories), pentachlorophenol (all
subcategories), and trichlorophenol (all subcategories) based on
maximum concentrations of 3 mg/1, 25 ug/1, and 30 ug/1, respectively.
EFFLUENT VARIABILITY ANALYSIS
Pollutant quantities discharged from a wastewater treatment system
vary. This variability is accounted for in deriving limitations
regulating the amount of pollutants that may be discharged from a
treatment system. The statistical procedures employed in analyzing
variability for the conventional pollutants, BOD5_ and TSS, regulated
under BCT and NSPS for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry are
described below.
Effluent Limitations Guidelines
An effluent limitation is an upper bound on 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 another 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 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
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-run 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 plant-specific long-term average for
the same pollutant (denoted by LTA), the plant-specific daily
limitation is the product of the variability factor and the long-term,
average (VF x LTA). Similarly, given a 30-day maximum variability
factor (VF30), a plant-specific limit for the average of 30 daily
observations is VF30 x LTA.
442
-------
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
The daily maximum variability factor is the ratio of an estimated 99th
percentile of the distribution of daily pollutant discharge values to
the estimated long-term average daily pollutant discharge. The 99th
percentile of daily pollutant discharge represents a pollutant
discharge value below which 99 percent of all pollutant discharge
values fall. 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 utilize a parametric approach, a
distribution with a known functional form is fit to the data. Past
guideline development has utilized such distributions as the normal,
lognormal, and three-parameter lognormal distributions. If a
distribution is found to adequately describe the data, a 99th
percentile can be calculated through the use of the known functional
form of the assumed distribution.
Nonparametric methods may also be used to estimate distribution
percent iles. 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).) (197)
Nonparametric methods were applied 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. That is, an estimate of the 99th
percentile is 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.99) is no less than 0.5. That is, n daily pollutant
discharge values are 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.,9 is at least 0.5
(i.e., P[X(r) > K.99] > 0.5). Utilizing this approach, the value of r
is determined such that ,-,
PEX(r)
\ '
1- P[X(r) < K.99]
* /
1- I (i)p1
(1-p)
"-1
0.5
where p = .99
and
i! (n-i)!
443
-------
The estimate is interpreted as the value below which 99 percent of the
values of a future sample of size n will fall with a probability of at
least 0.5.
Analysis of Daily Pollutant Discharge Values To Determine Daily
Maximum Variability Factors. Daily measurements for the conventional
pollutants, BOD5_ and TSS, were submitted by representatives of the
mills sampled during the verification program. These values were used
to calculate daily maximum variability factors and 30-day maximum
variability factors.
Initially, a parametric approach toward estimation of the 99th
percentile of daily pollutant discharge values was considered.
Mill-specific daily pollutant discharge values for BOD5_ and TSS were
fit to hypothesized normal and lognormal distributions. To assess
whether mill-specific sets of daily pollutant values could be
adequately described by the normal or lognormal distributions,
Kolmogorov-Smirnov goodness-of-fit tests were performed. 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, a decision was made 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. Table VIII-42 displays mill-specific
values for maximum day variability factors for BOD5_ and TSS.
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
e.g., Miller and Freund, grobability and Statistics for Engineers,
Prentice - Hall, 1965, pp!132-34).(198) This approach is
nonparametric since no restrictive assumption is made regarding the
form of the distribution of the underlying population of daily
pollutant discharge values.
Analysis of 30-Day Averages of Pollutant Discharge Values To Determine
30-Day Maximum Variability Factors. The mill-specific data for each
pollutant were divided into periods with 30 days of measurements.
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 available
from January 1 to February 15, these 30 measurements would be 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,
444
-------
TABLE VIII-42
VARIABILITY FACTORS FOR DETERMINING
MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVERAGE AND MAXIMUM DAY LIMITATIONS
FOR OPTIONS 1, 2, 3 AND 4
BODS • TSS
Number Maximum
Mill of Data 30-Day
Number Points Average
Hills with Biological Treatment
030005
030004
030047
030032
030027
030046
030020
010019
010055
010003
020017
020002
015002
015007
046006
046004
040019
040011
040013
040017
052007
052004
080054
140007
140014
140015
100005
110032
110031
110052
080046
090005
085001
110021
105068
032001
345
389
383
346
382
376
394
178
224
258
395
404
165
394
391
369
163
331
394
426
390
378
393
384
390
385
59
106
167
91
394
152
103
97
84
363
Mills with Chemically Assisted
060001
381
(1) All mills with biological
Minimum
Maximum
Average
(2) Mills with
Minimum
Maximum
Average
effluent levels
2.40
1.62
2.23
1.88
1.43
1.90
1.65
1.66
1.71
1.75
2.72
2.23
2.05
1.94
1.52
1.81
1.84
2.15
1.66
1.49
1.93
1.98
2.07
3.26
1.32
2.07
~
~
2.35
™
1.75
2.00
--
--
~
2.01
Maximum
Day
3
2
4
2
2
"2
2
2
2
3
4
3
2
4
2
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
2
4
2
3
4
3
1
2
2
3
3
2
4
.15
.28
.28;
.21
.40
.60
.58
.92
.31
.22
.13
.74
.56
.34
.00
.54
.69
.63
.33
.72
.76
.25
.95
.83
.70
.06
~
.06
.35
.97
.31
.90
.52
.77
.63
.11
Number Maximum
of Data 30-Day
Points Average
357
391
388
32
396
382
394
175
223
242
392
410
165
394
391
371
396
333
395
426
393
377
393
393
393
385
192
107
167
91
394
201
103
106
273
374
1
1
1
: 1
2
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.35
.47
.76
—
.80
.35
.41
.18
.65
.53
.02
.75
.47
.61
.73
.98
.67
.78
.85
.47
.61
.90
2.15
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
.75
.75
.75
.25
--
.05
~
.89
.88
--
--
.87
.78
Maximum
Day
2.10
2.16
2.87
— .
4.27
3.20
2.19
1.75
1.90
2.62
6.13
2.25
2.15
4.15
2.37
3.55
3.40
3.66
2.29
2.64
3.53
4.29
3.51
6.88
4.13
2.83
2.84
2.27
2.50
3.55
2.54
2.77
4.13
3.03
3.78
4.01
Mills Used to
Calculate Averages
by Criteria
(1) (2) (3) & (4)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
CD
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
CD
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
CD
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
CD
CD
CD
CD
CD
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C2)
C3)
C3)
(3) (4)
C3)
C3) C4)
C3)
C3)
C3) C4)
(3) C4)
(3)
C3)
C3) C4)
C3) C4)
C3) (4)
C3)
C3)
Clarification
2.05
2
.83
379
1
.41
2.39
treatment systems.
1.32
3.26
1.95
better
1.32
2.35
1.81
1
4
3
.97
.83
.09
than BPT with
1
3
2
.97
.76
.88
biological
1
3
1
treatment
1
2
1
.18
.02
.82
systems .
.18
.35
.75
1.75
6.88
3.21
1.75
4.27
2.98
(3) Mills with effluent levels better than BPT with biological treatment as the technology basis of BPT effluent
limits.
Minimum 1.32 1.97 1.18 1.75
Maximum 2.35 3.76 2.35 4.27
Average 1.79 2.83 1.74 2.92
(4) Mills with effluent levels better than BCT Option 4 with biological treatment as the technology basis of BPT
effluent limits.
Minimum 1.43 2.40 1.41 2.19
Maximum 2.35 3.69 2.25 4.27
Average 1.81 2.97 1.77 2.95
445
-------
these would constitute the next 30-day average and so on. The
mill-specific 30-day averages so constructed were found to adequately
fit the normal distribution 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 VIII-43 and are
consistent with the Central Limit Theorem. Using 3t30 and S30 to
denote the mean and standard deviation of the 30-day averages,
respectively,__ for a particular mill, the 99th percentiles were
estimated as X30 + 2.33 S30.
On a mill-specific basis, each 30-day average was compared to the
corresponding mill-specific 99th percentile estimate. Table VIII-44
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 BOD5. and TSS. The percentage of
30-day averages exceeding the 99th percentile estimate is close to the
expected one percent. Table VIII-42 displays mill-specific maximum
30-day average variability factors for BODS^ and TSS, obtained by
calculating the quotient of the 99th percentile estimates and average
pollutant values.
Establishment of Variability Factors to be Applied for Proposed
Rulemakinq
Table VIII-42 presents the individual mills' 30-day average and daily
maximum variability factors for BODfTand TSS for those mills with
biological treatment systems. For many subcategories, biological
treatment is the technology basis for achieving the effluent reduction
required under NSPS/BCT guidelines. Variability factors compiled for
each mill were averaged across mills and one daily and one 30-day
average variability factor were determined for BOD5_ and TSS. These
two variability factors are to be used in the establishment of 30-day
average and daily maximum effluent limitations controlling the
discharge of conventional pollutants from those subcategories where
biological treatment forms the technology basis.
Minimum, maximum, and average variability factors are determined for
each of four subsets of mills. These subsets are developed from a
group of mills with biological treatment systems and are as follows:
Subset Number
(1)
(2)
Subset Description
Mills with biological treatment systems.
Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels 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).
446
-------
TABLE VIII-43
RESULTS OF GOODNESS-OF-FIT TESTS* FOR SUCCESSIVE 30-DAY AVERAGES
BODS
TSS
Subcategory
Name Mill Number
Dissolving Kraft
032001
Market Bleached Kraft
030005
BCT Bleached Kraft
030004
030047
030032
Fine Bleached Kraft
030027
030046
030020
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
010019
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
010055
010003
Semi-Chemical
020017
020002
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
015002
015007
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - Nitration
046006
046004
Papergrade Sulfite (d)
040019
040011
040013
040017
Groundwood - Fine Papers
052007
052004
Integrated Miscellaneous
080054
Deink (Fine Papers)
140007
Deink (Tissue Papers)
140014 V
140015
Tissue from Wastepaper
100005
Paperboard from Wastepaper
110032
110031
110052
Nouintegrated - Fine Papers
080046
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
090005
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
085001
110021
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
105068
Stream
Number
49
49
69
69
69
49
69
49
49
69
49
69
49
49
49
49
49
79
49
69
49
49
49
49
49
79
49
69
49
49
79
49
49
49
49
69
Critical
# of Test Value @
Means Statistic a = .01
12
11
12
12
11
12
12
13
5
7
8
13
13
5
13
13
12
5
11
13
14
13
12
13
12
13
. 12
—
5
13
5
—
—
— —
.2548
.2256
.1297
.2783
.1961
.1113
.3259
.1425
.2433
.1179
.3233
.2063
.2364
.2033
.2382
.1633
.1859
.2236
.2053
.1254
.1520
.1979
. 1805
.2086
.2296
.1280
.1428
—
—
.2314
—
.1244
.2293
—
—
— —
.275
.284
.275
.275
.284
.275
.275
.268
.405
.348
.331
'.268
.268
.405
.268
.268
.275
.405
.284
.268
.261
.268
.'275
.268
.275
.268
.275
—
—
.405
—
.268
.405
—
—
— —
Critical
Decision # of Test Value 1? Decision
(a) Means Statistic a = .01 (a)
NS(b)
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Sig a =.01
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
(c)
(c) .
NS
(c)
NS
NS
(c)
(c)
(c)
12
11
13
12
—
13
12
13
5
7
8
13
13
5
13
13
12
13
11
13
14
13
12
13
13
13
12
6
—
5
—
13
6
—
—
9
.1258
.1616
.1014
.2364
—
.1771
.3722
.1355
.2981
.1498
.2069
.2237
.1833
.3043
.1968
.1745
.1332
.1507
.1696
. 1425
.1300
.1755 .
.2009
.2353
.2080
.1305
.1536
.1982
—
.2069
—
.2087
.1659
—
—
.2141
.275
.284
.268
.275
—
.268
.275 Sig
.268
.405
.348
.331
.268
.268
.405
.268
.268
.275
.268
.284
.268
.261
.268
.275
.268
.268
.268
.275
.364
—
.405
—
.268
.364
—
—
.311
NS
NS
NS
NS
(c)
NS
a =.01
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
(c)
NS
(c)
NS
NS
(c)
(c)
NS
(a) Reject H at the level a if test statistic exceeds critical value for the particular sample size N.
(b) NS denotes hypothesis test results not significant (i.e., do not reject H : data comes from a normal distribution).
(c) Data not used in maximum 30 day analysis because there was insufficient data to obtain 5 successive 30 day averages.
(d) Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
*Lilliefors, H. (1967) "On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests for Normality with Mean and Variance Unknown," Journal of
American Statistical Association, V. 62, pp. 399-402. (198)
447
-------
TABLE VIII-44
DISTRIBUTION OF MAXIMUM 30-DAY AVERAGES
ABOUT THE ESTIMATE OF THE 99th PERCENTILE
(Alternate Method)
Percentage of Points
S99th Percentile
Percentage of Points
>99th Percentile
Totals
TSS
BODS
98.5%
(391)*
98.0%
(346)*
1-5%
(6)*
2.0%
(7)*
100.0%
(397)*
100.0%
(353)*
*Actual number of data points given in parentheses
448
-------
(4)
Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels better than BPT. Biological
treatment is the technology on which BPT
effluent limitations are based for these
mills. .
M^lls with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels better than BCT Option 4
("best performing mills") long-term average
effluent loads. 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
four subsets are shown in Table VII1-42. The 30-day average
variability factors determined for each of the four subsets of mills
show little or no real differences when compared with those
variability factors used in the development of the BPT Phase II
effluent limitations guidelines. Based on these results, where
biological treatment is the basis of BPT and NSPS technology options,
a determination has been made to base the 30-day average effluent
limitations for BOD5 and TSS on the 30-day average variability factors
developed for BPT Phase II effluent limitations. Hence, for BODS and
TSS, the 30-day average variability factors to be applied for those
technology options where biological treatment is the technology basis
are as follows:
30-Day Average Variability Factor
(From Phase II BPT Guidelines)
BOD5. = 1 .78
TSS = 1 .82
The average daily maximum variability factors for BOD5_ and TSS for
each of the four subsets of mills with biological treatment systems
are given in Table VIII-42. These variability factors are
substantially lower than the variability factors used in developing
the BPT Phase II daily maximum effluent limitations. Because these
variability factors are based on recent operating data, the decision
has been made to apply them in the determination of effluent
limitations for those technology options where biological treatment is
the technology basis. The daily maximum variability factors for the
four subsets are not substantially different; hence, daily maximum
variability factors for those options where biological treatment is
the technology basis are as follows:
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
(From Mills with Biological Treatment)
BOD5. = 3.0
TSS =3.0
449
-------
Chemically assisted clarification is the basis for some BCT technology
options. At present, mill 060001 is the only mill for which long-term
wastewater data are available. Therefore, the variability factors
determined for mill 060001 have been applied as the factors for
calculating effluent limitations for those technology options based on
chemically assisted clarification. The BODS^ and TSS maximum 30-day
average and daily maximum variability factors for mill 06001 are shown
in Table VIII-42.
Sufficient wastewater data were not available from mills where primary
treatment is employed. Hence, variability factors for subcategories
with such treatment could not be appropriately determined. Therefore,
variability factors to be applied in establishment of effluent
limitations for those technology options considered in those
nonintegrated subcategories where primary treatment is the technology
basis are transferred from the Phase II BPT limitations. The transfer
will be from those subcategories where primary treatment is the
technology on which BPT effluent limitations are based.
Table VIII-45 summarizes the variability factors to be used for
calculating BCT effluent limitations guidelines, for the conventional
pollutants BOD£ and TSS, for various technology options.
450
-------
TABLE VIII-45
SUMMARY OF VARIABILITY FACTORS
BCT
Option
1&4
2&3
BODS
Maximum 30-Day
Average
1.78
2.05
Maximum
Day
3.00
2.83
TSS
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
Fine Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
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
451
-------
-------
SECTION IX
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Previous sections have described the respective BPT, BCT, BAT, PSES,
PSNS, and NSPS control options that have been considered as the basis
for proposed rules. This section summarizes the cost, energy, and
other non-water quality impacts of the various control and treatment
options as required by section 301(b) of the Clean Water Act. The
other non-water quality aspects addressed in this document are (a)
implementation requirements, (b) air pollution, (c) noise pollution,
and (d) solid waste.
METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS
Introduction
This section describes how estimates of the cost of implementation of
the control and treatment technology options have been developed. The
actual cost of implementing these control and treatment options can
vary at each individual facility, depending on the design and
operation of the production facilities and local conditions. Control
and treatment costs that are representative of each subcategory of the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry have been developed based on
engineering estimates and are presented below. Where possible, the
costs estimates have been compared to costs reported by industry and
were revised, where appropriate. Accounting procedures used at
different mills vary, thus complicating the use of industry cost data
in some instances.
Costs have been developed for model mills. In order to assess the
overall impact of the various treatment and control options on the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, costs have been developed for 25
distinct subcategories and sub-groups of the various subcategories.
Costs have been developed for BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS treatment
options for direct dischargers and for PSNS and PSES technology
options for indirect dischargers. The model mill approach, mill and
site specific cost factors, and cost estimating criteria are discussed
below.
Model Mill Approach
The costs of implementation of various control and treatment options
are estimated in order to determine the economic impact of each
technology option and to enable the comparison of the cost of removal
of conventional pollutants with the cost of removal of conventional
pollutants at POTWs. In order to develop costs, model mills have been
developed that are representative of mills in each of the
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
Based on the review of data obtained through the data request
program, model mills have been developed for 25 distinct subcategories
453
-------
and subgroups of the industry. In order to properly reflect the
effect of mill size on costs, as many as three different model mill
sizes have been selected for the respective subcategories. Model mill
sizes have been based on the actual variation of size within each
subcategory and are presented by subcategory in Table IX-1.
Mill and Site Specific Cost Factors
Specific mills in a subcategory can be expected to differ in certain
respects from the representative model mills. These differences can
alter the costs for 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 requirements, site limitations, raw
wastewater quality, and production capacity. In addition, at certain
mills different combinations of production processes are now being
employed.
Location. Differences exist in construction practice, labor rates,
and energy costs due to geographic location. Model mill costs have
been based on national averages. Regional cost factors are presented
in Table IX-2 for the purpose of adjusting model mill costs to be
representative of specific geographic areas.(200)(201)(202)(203)
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).
Longer detention time requires higher capital and operating costs.
The costs presented are reflective of design in areas of moderate
climate and represent the median values anticipated to be incurred.
Climate can also affect the construction details of the various
components. Open pit pumps, above ground piping, and exposed process
equipment are characteristics of warm climate mills, while at mills in
colder climates such designs cannot be utilized. Model mill cost
estimates reflect design based on cold climates. At those mills in
warm climates, lower costs may be realized than are reflected in the
cost estimates.
Production Capacity. Economies of scale can be realized with
increasing size and are likely to vary depending on the equipment ,to
be constructed. In order to account for the effect of mill size, each
control and treatment option has been evaluated over a representative
range of mill sizes for each subcategory.
Mill age can have an impact on the cost of implementing various
production process controls. This factor has been 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 production process controls may be
454
-------
TABLE IX-1
Subcategory
MODEL MILL SIZES BY
SUBCATEGORY AND DISCHARGE TYPE
Indirect Dischargers (kkg/d)
New
Direct Dischargers (kkg/d)
Existing
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
1
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-
Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
2
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
45
544
907
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
,-^NA
NA
NA
45
544
907
68
454
680
NA
NA
NA
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
23
45
163 v
NA
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
1,361
454
680
454
454
454
454
91
454
454
455
-------
TABLE IX-1 (Continued)
Indirect Dischargers (kkg/d)
Existing New
Direct Dischargers (kkg/d)
Existing New
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
NA
45
145
635
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
36
45'
145
635
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
36
45
145
635
18
45
136
91
204
32
195
907
32
163
907
9
54
181
5
18
41
9
36
68
9
91
454
45
68
136
227
45
227
45
23
45
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Subcategories.
456
-------
TABLE IX-2
REGIONAL COST ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Region/State
Northeast
North Central
South
Plains/Mountain
West
Alaska
Capital Cost (203) 0 & M Cost (201)(202)
1.03 0.97
1-02 1.15
0.90 0.81
0.96 ; 0.99
1-09 1.12
1.38 1.78
Energy Cost (200)
1.38
1.18
1.17
1.02
0.79
1.16
457
-------
implemented. This results from the fact that at older mills extensive
rebuilding or expansion programs have been implemented, often
resulting in conditions that allow for ease of installation of
additional production process controls.
Material and Energy Savings. The production process controls
considered can result in more efficient mill operation and substantial
savings of material and energy. Material and energy savings have been
taken into account where appropriate and net costs of operation,
maintenance and energy have been presented. Table IX-3 compares
operating and maintenance and energy costs to savings realized from
the implementation of various production process controls in each
subcategory.
Other Savings. The savings in materials and energy that may result
from implementation of production process controls are supplemented by
other possible savings that could not be accounted for in Table IX-3.
Such additional savings include the benefits that result from improved
recovery systems and the manufacture of by-products such as black
liquor soap, turpentine, solvents, 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 common to all mills in a
subcategory, but may be realized at some mills depending on such
factors as location and production processes employed.
Retrofit Requirements. The model mill costs presented are based on
the assumption that production process and effluent treatment controls
that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations have been installed
and that all facilities are currently attaining BPT effluent
limitations. For those cases where mills are not currently attaining
existing BPT effluent limitations, an additional cost for retrofitting
existing treatment may be incurred if predicted levels of discharged
pollutants are to be attained. These costs are not accounted for in
the cost estimates presented in this document as these costs have been
accounted for in previous rulemaking efforts.(40)
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 impact of mill-by-
mill variations are lessened because the options being considered are
not land intensive. In addition, where treatment facilities such as.
clarifiers are added, the cost of pumping to these facilities has been
included. For those facilities where gravity flow is possible, costs
have been considerably overstated.
Analysis of information obtained during the data request program
indicates that for two-thirds of the operating facilities, land
availability was not a problem. For that reason and because of the
extensive variability of land acquisition costs, the cost of land
acquisition has not been included in cost estimates.
458
-------
TABLE IX-3
GROSS O&M AND ENERGY COSTS AND SAVINGS FOR
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
FOR MEDIUM-SIZED DIRECT DISCHARGERS ($l,000/yr)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard and Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tis sue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Mill Size
(kkg/d)
907
544
726
726
907
386
1,361
544
408
272
544
454
363
45
36
145
45
91
195
163
54
18
36
Gross
Cost
230 . 7
91.5
124.9
146.4
61.5
52.9
106.3
859.6
161.3
13.4
37.0
108.7
85.6
32.5
38.6
4.6
19.3
42.6
27.5
16.8
19.0
14.6
10.7
O&M*
Savings
524.3
191.3
296.6
282.1
310.0
39.8
273.6
541.2
433.6
47.3
128.5
209.2
125.3
32.8
4.9
0.0
0.0
18.6
33.0
50.0
2.0
2.9
5.1
Gross
Cost
691.0
307.5
438.4
362.6
134.7
70.4
200.9
1,222.7
206.2
10.7
22.0
37.8
54.6
7.4
9.4
2.0
11.2
13.8
38.2
8.1
20.1
5.5
4.4
Energy
Savings
80.6
9.2
7.1
41.2
7.2
20.6
9.4
138.0
107.5
2.2
45.1
63.4
38.7
5.4
11.0
0.0
8.4
5.7
76.2
12.6
24.8
9.0
3.0
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
.Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit -Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum -Wash)
Subcategories.
*Exclusive of energy costs.
459
-------
Raw Wastewater Characteristics.
Flow, BOD5_,
those of the
_ and TSS loadings at
individual 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 representative costs
within an acceptable confidence interval without requiring that
specific engineering studies be conducted 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. Management
will choose the technology that is most cost effective for that
facility.
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control and Treatment Technologies
In order to develop cost estimates for the various control and
treatment options under consideration, criteria have been developed
relating to capital, operation and maintenance, and energy costs.
These criteria are presented in Table IX-
4.(200)(201)(202)(204)(205)(206)(207) The pre-engineering cost
estimates developed for this study are expected to have a variability
consistent with this type of estimate and are on the order of 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 first quarter
1978.(205)
Equipment costs are based on supplier quotes, published literature,
engineering experience, and data request program mill responses.
Capital costs include allowances for lost production during
construction or for additional power facilities as warranted.
Additional costs such as engineering and contingencies are 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 has been 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.(208) Construction and
installation cost estimates for effluent treatment have been
determined as an appropriate varying percentage of capital.
Annual Fixed Charges. The annual fixed charges are those 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
460
-------
TABLE IX-4
COST ESTIMATING CRITERIA*
1. Capital costs are as of first quarter 1978: ENR = 2,683
2. Annual fixed (amortized) costs are 22% of capital expenditures
3. Energy: Electrical
Fuel
4. Operation/Maintenance:
Labor: General
Solids disposal
Chemicals:
alum
polymer
85% phosphoric acid
anhydrous ammonia
50% sodium hydroxide
100% sulfuric acid
$0.0325/kwh
$12.00/barrel
$10.35/hr
$ 8.00/hr
$110/kkg, dry basis
$4.41/kg
$0.44/kg
$154/kkg, dry basis
$165/kkg
$56/kkg
*Sources of Cost Data:
Energy User News, August 7, 1978. (200)
Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April 1978. (201)
Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A., April 1978. (202)
Municipal Sludge Landfills, EPA-625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Process Design Manual, 1978. (204)
Engineering News Record, March 23, 1978. (205)
Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978. (206)
Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Department of Energy, March 1979. (207)
461
-------
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 as compared to a structure (such
as a building), which has a useful life of 40 to 50 years or more.
Depreciation costs are those accounting charges for the eventual
replacement of a given asset (equipment or structure) at the end of
its useful life. Depreciation of the capital assets may be by
accumulation of digits (rapid depreciation) or method of averages
(straight-line). A NCASI report shows an average depreciation rate in
the industry of 16.5 years. (209)
Interest is that 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
compared to corporate bonds. A NCASI report states that 44 percent of
the pollution abatement expenditures in 1976 were financed through
tax-exempt municipal bonds. (209)
Costs for taxes, insurance, spare parts, and maintenance materials are
often expressed as a percentage of the capital investment. For the
purpose of calculating total annual costs, an average fixed charge of
22 percent of the capital expenditures has been used. This figure
includes all of the above items. It is realized that these charges
may vary and are dependent upon several items, 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
industrial users (200,000 kwh monthly, 1,000 kw demand) was estimated
at $0.0366/kwh. This figure is derived from average cost information
by state and is based on .electric rates from approximately 200 public
and private utilities.(200) Information concerning actual revenues
from approximately 200 public and private utilities indicates a cost
of $0.0281/kwh. (200) Energy costs are estimated at $0.0325/kwh, an
average of the two figures.
Fuel for steam generation has been estimated at $12 per barrel. (207)
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.(201) Average total benefits for the pulp, paper,
lumber, and furniture industry for the year 1977 are reported as 34
percent of wages.(202) Although no industry-wide data concerning
supervisory costs are available, the proposed control and treatment
technologies under consideration are anticipated to require only
minimal additional supervisory labor.
462
-------
A supervisory and benefits cost of 45 percent of the labor rate has
been assumed. This results in a,tptal labor rate of $10.35/hr.
Chemicals. Many of the technologies under evaluation include the use
of chemicals. These chemicals include alum, polymer, phosphoric acid,
sulfuric acid, anhydrous ammonia, and sodium hydroxide. Chemical
costs are based on quotes from chemical suppliers and chemical
marketing reports.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT
Four new subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
(wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-1ightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-
paperboard) have been identified. In order to develop BCT limitations
for the four new subcategories, a base level BPT determination is
necessary because the "cost-reasonableness test" rests on the
incremental cost of removal of BODS^ and TSS from BPT to BCT. In
Section VIII, BPT has been identified for these four new
subcategories. In this section, estimates of the incremental cost to
achieve BPT effluent limitations are presented.
For the nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories, BPT has
been identified as primary treatment. At the direct discharging mills
in these three nonintegrated subcategories, end-of-pipe treatment
consists of primary treatment (or its equivalent) or more advanced
treatment technology (i.e., biological treatment). Therefore, it is
anticipated that the incremental cost of attainment of BPT in these
subcategories is zero.
BPT has been identified as biological treatment for the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory. In general, at the direct
discharging mills in this subcategory, primary treatment or its
equivalent is in-place. The incremental costs for attainment of BPT
effluent limitations are based on the addition of a biological
treatment system. Major unit operations include a) wastewater
pumping-, b) flow equalization, c). nutrient addition, d) addition of an
activated sludge basin with aerators, e) flotation thickening with
chemical addition, f) solids dewatering with chemical addition, g)
biological sludge transportation to landfill, and h) landfill of
biological solids.
The design criteria on which costs have been determined for each of
the major unit processes are presented in Table IX-5. The total
capital and total annual costs for compliance with BPT 'are presented
for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory in Table IX-6.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS
Four control and treatment options have been considered for the
control of conventional pollutants from direct discharging mills.
Cost estimates have been prepared for each control and treatment
463
-------
TABLE IX-5
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BPT ACTIVATED SLUDGE
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Wastewater Pumping
Design flow: 1.5 x average annual flow
Basis for power cost: 12 m total dynamic head, 70% efficient
Flow Equalization
Detention time: 12 hrs in concrete basin
Secondary Clarification
Overflow rate: 20 cu m/d/sq m
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Activated Sludge Basin
Number of basins: 2
Loading rate: (use larger valve)
0.8 kg BOD5_ applied/cu m/d
8 hr hydraulic retention time
Nutrient feed: BOD5_ removed:N:P * 100:5:1
Aeration design requirements:
1.5 organic peaking factor
1 kg 0 /kg BOD5_ removed
19 kg 6 /aerator hp/d
Length/width ratio: 4/1
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Sideslopes: 1/1
Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening for Biological 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 Transportation
Haul distance: 10 mi
Sludge content: primary and biological sludge at 30 percent solids (w/w)
Primary/Biological Sludge Landfill
Sludge content: primary and biological sludge at 30% percent solids (w/w)
Landfill design: normal landfill compaction and covering techniques
464
-------
TABLE IX-6
COST OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT TECHNOLOGY
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Mill Size
(kkg/d)
Capital
($1.000)
Operation &
Maintenance
($l,000/yr)
Energy
($l,QOO/yr)
Total
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
18
45
136
891
1,542
3,015
81
113
176
11
19
41
288
471
879
465
-------
option for each of the model mills in the respective subcategories.
Table IX-7 presents capital, operating and maintenance, energy, and
total annual costs of implementation for model mills for Options 1, 2
and 3. Table IX-8 presents these costs for BCT Option 4. The total
capital and annual costs for compliance with BCT options are presented
by subcategory in Tables IX-9, IX-lO, and IX-11 for the integrated,
secondary fibers, and nonintegrated segments of the industry. Details
of each of the respective control and treatment options are discussed
below.
Option 1_
The respective control items on which the costs for implementation of
BCT Option 1 have been developed are presented in Tables VII1-1 to
VIII-3. Table IX-12 presents a summary of the costs of installation
and operation of BCT Option 1 production process controls at a 730
kkg/day (800 ton/day) alkaline-fine mill.
Option 2_
BCT Option 2 is BPT technology plus the addition of chemically
assisted clarification for all integrated and secondary fiber
subcategories and for the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory (those
subcategories where BPT is based on biological treatment). In the
remaining nonintegrated subcategories, where the basis for BPT is
primary treatment, Option 2 is BPT technology plus the addition of
biological treatment.
The costs for the chemically assisted clarification system are based
on the following items:
1 ,
2,
3,
wastewater pumping,
sulfuric acid feed system,
chemically assisted clarification
clarifier),
(solids
contact
5.
6,
7,
8,
9
chemical coagulation with alum (at a dosage appropriate for
each subcategory) and polyelectrolyte addition (at 1 mg/1),
neutralization with 10 mg/1 sodium hydroxide,
solids dewatering,
dissolved air flotation thickening,
chemical sludge transportation to landfill, and
chemical sludge landfill.
Normally, the topography of the effluent treatment site does not
permit gravity flow through the entire treatment process.
466
-------
TABLE IX-7
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - OIRFCT DISCHARGE MILLS (A|
SUBCATEGORY DISSOLVING KRAFT
MILL SIZE I/0(EI
EXIST. LEVEL
BPT (81
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
I t. 10 00 I
1000
5259
J.23S2ICI
13039
1ZQ45ICI
177.16
O fc H» COST
(SIOOO/YR) (Dl
1000
_2252
4432
-2133.
4142
ENERGY COST
(»IOOO/YR) (01
1000
610
.22*.
243
_S22
a.17
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(»1000/YRt (D|
1000
I 767
_&211
77O6
-ZS.Z.L
903B
(At ALL COSTS AHE IN 1ST OUARTEW |<»78 DOLLAIJS.
(til ALL MILLS ARE ASSOMfcO TO MKET HPT LIMITS. THEREFOHE NO COSTS AI'E SH3WN FOR HPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCWMFNT
OF COST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
(C» VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST BASED UN CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT 15O MG/L
VALUE llfeLUW Ib FOH DOSAGE AT 3OO MG/L.
(Ol 0 C M AND 6NERGV COSTS AHi: NEI AFTER UFUUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: DC"* » ENERGY •• FIXED AMNUAL COSTS.
(El MULTIPLY r/O UY .907 TO OBTAIN KKG/O
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE HILLS (A)
S.UQCATEGORV MARKET MLEACHED KRAFT
MILL SIZE T/D«E»
EXIST. LEVEL
OPT (U|
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
It 1000)
O G M COST
ItlUOO/YRI (D|
-p.
O1
oo
ENERGY COST
(tlOOO/YRI IOI
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(ilOOO/YFI) (D|
J50
600
1600
350
600
160O
350
600
1600
JSO
600
1600
1646
2083
4262
174
298
795
602
757
I 7J2
5752
-III*
7B86
JUJ216
14129
—2J61
1388
-145:3
2I5A
_3231
5077
___ 7.2
75
__ ma
__ 253
275
_224Z
2776
_323S
4063
7010
_3274
9446
174 10
__ 3*2
1327
195J
455O
217
—351
358
£21
')tT
Jl 30
329J.
4457
«I447
|A( ALL CObTb ARE IN 1ST QUARTER I
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - OIRECI DISCHARGE MILLS 1*1
SUUCATEGORY BCT BLEACHED KRAFT
EKIS1. LEVEL
MILL SIZE T/DIEl OPT til) I
PROPOSED OPTION
2
'.O
CAPITAL CQSt
(11000)
O C M COSI
(SIOOO/YHI 101
ENEHGY COST
Itiooo/vR) (oi
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
t*1000/YR) (0)
300
BOO
1300
300
aoo
1300
300
800
1300
300
800
1300
1737
3141
42SS
162
431
701
610
I 122
1637
5054
_fl4.ai
8946
11349.
I 20 1 6
__Sfl4
1120
2*72
_2516
3757
___ 56
60
__125
134
_iaa
205
-L2&0.
2335
-3Z51
467<»
65 1 4
11163
I 1636
15582
. I 105
_iaza
2275
3430
210
554
866
2797
54 7B
_fiaaa
6743
ICI VALUE ABOVF. L I Nt IS COST OAI.UD ON CAC OOSAGL OF ALUM AT ISO MG/L
VALUE BELOW IS F()'» OCISiAGE A'l 300 MG/L.
10) (3 t M AND ENliKGY COSTS ARE NET AFTtH OPOUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OtM » FNE»OY » F IXfcO ANNUAL COSTS.
• LI KULflf'LY T/O JiY .<>07 fO OtITAIN KKG/I)
Of-' COST HROUIWEO TO ATTAIN P
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT OlSCHAHGE MIULS (AJ
bUbCATfcGURY ALKALINF-FINf. (F)
MILL SIZE T/Olt-'l
EXIST. LEVEL
OPT
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
•TREATMENT COST SUMMARY -DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS |A|
bUUCATEGORY UNBLEACHED KRAFT LltCRBOARO
MILL SIZE T/OIEI
EXIST. LEVEL
HPT |U|
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
(tlOOOl
450
IOOO
816
I 528
34 Ml
_51fla
5511
3809
6267
ISOO
_6.5fiJL
6984
-Zbifl
7944
O C M COST
I tIUOO/YR) ID I
ENERGY COST
(ilOOO/YR) |O|
450
1000
1500
450
1000
29
57
I2fl
__ 525
704
1272
1758
3&
38
65.
68
618
Zfil
1041
-Ittll
1422
31
H8
__iaa
I ft 3
1500
191
95
?6H
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(tlOOO/YRI ID|
450
266
1533
1567
IOOO
464
2600
2644
1500
619
2flfifi
3455
_2232
3494
(At ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARIF.R 1978 DOLLARS.
Itij ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO MFEI BPT LIMITS. THEREFORE NO COSTS ARE SHUtfN FOR HPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCREMFNT
OF COST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
1C I VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST HA^EO ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM At. 150 MG/L
VALUE BELOW IS FOR DOSAGE AT 3OO MG/L.
-------
->J
IV)
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
FREATHENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILt.S (A)
bUHCATfcC.URY UNULEACHED KRAFT DAG
CAPI TAL COST
I « 10 001
0 & M COST
(S1000/YR)
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE. MILLS |A|
SUUCATtGORY SF.MI-tHf.MICAL
MILL SIZE T/OIEI
EXIST. LEVEL
HPT IUI
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
I * 1000)
200
425
600
951
1294
2801
1027
_2Z51
2943
2591
3756
3581
5B04
CO
O C W COST
(IIUOO/YRI (O|
cNERGY COST
ISIUOO/YR) ID)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ftlOOO/YH) (01
200
425
6OO
200
425
60O
200
425
6QO
20
13
23
5O
7O
253
348
745
355
323
574
.531
729
__ia
19
__22
31
_-JZ
39
aoa
1270
-1J22
1561
401
__sai
648
38
18
62
70
23
95
S54
940
1395
2040
:::
»
-.
1C I VALUE AOOVE. LINE IS COST BAsEO ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT ISO MG/L
VALUE BELO« IS FO>< DOSAGE AT 3OO MG/L.
«0) O e. M AND FNI1KGV COSTS ARE MET AFTER DEDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL CObT INCLUDES: OfcM » ENEHGV t FIXED ANNUAL COSTS.
»fcl MULTIPLY T/U flY .907 TO OBTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE 1X-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS |A|
SUBCATEGQRY UNHLEACHUD KRAFT C SEMI-CHEMICAL
MILL SIZC T/OIEt
EXIST. LEVEL
OPT (U|
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
I»10001
O t M COST
(MUOO/YRI (O)
ENERGY COS!
(11000/YRI (O(
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(tlOOO/YRI |O|
700
tsoo
2600
700
1500
2600
70O
1500
26OO
7OO
1500
26OO
2651
3071
78
92
192
600
77f>
1017
-4W2ICI
463O
_fiZZ2
7220
-3312.
9985
1035
1897
3019
___ 52
56
___ 25
102
—151
163
-1ZZ3
2147
3657
-52QSICI
6149
-SZZ2
9162
11522
12059
—Z4.2
9H8
-11 3*
1638
-1Z55
2562
__ US
141
—Z/.S
280
4U1
2514
-J3.2Z
3997
SHI 2
(A| ALL CUSTS AHE IN 1ST QUARTER 1978 OOLLAMS.
101 ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO *FCT BPT LIMITS. THEReFOHP NO COSTS ARE SHOWN FOR HPT AN,) COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCRFMFNT
CCI VALUE AUnvE LINE IS COST BASED ON CAC OOSAGE OF ALUM AT ,50 MG/L ^ "" "5°"'RE° '" AT™N «"""«eO PERFORMANCE.
VALUE BELOW IS FOR UOSAC.E AT 30O MG/L.
»OI 0 t M ANIJ ENERGY COSTS ARE NET AFTER OF OUC TI ON OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OtM » ENERGY » HXED ANNUAL COSTS.
(El MULMPLY r/u uv .907 TO outAiN KKG/O
-------
TABLE IX-> (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARV - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (Al
SiUBCATEGORY DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP
MILL SIZE T/OIEI
EXIST. LEVEL
HPT (Ul
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
I 1, 1000 I
45O
60O
13188
16033
-92311 Cl
BB35
222ZSCCI
21479
10*77
25062
n t, c cusr
(11000/YHI (D|
450
600
627
310
2530
1.215. §-
3241
_2125
2<>32
_222Z
3264
-p.
^J
01
ENERGY COST
|£IOOO/YR» I
450
600
918
1085
137
1042
175
1244
TOTAL ANNUAL COS1
I t 1000/YRI ID I
450
6OO
4447
4931
-3.112
4700
5835
B7B4
10304
|A» ALL COSTS AHE IN IST OUAHTEH iv>8 OULLAHS.
(,)) ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO MEET HPT LIMITS. THEREFORE NU COSTS A»E SMIJWN FOR HPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS
(Ul
(t I
OF COST REQUIRFO TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE
VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST HASED ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT ISO HC./L
VALUE FIFI.UW IS FOH DOSAGE AT 30O MG/L.
0 & M AND fNt-RGY COSTS ARK Mr T AFTER OfOUt.TION OF COr.T SAVIMf.5.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OfcM t ENERGY » FIXfD ANNUAL CObll, .
MULTIPLY T/D f3Y ,<>OT TO UHTAIN KKG/D
-------
SUBCATtCtJPY
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (A)
— PAPEHGRAOE SULFITE(F)'
MILL SIZE T/DIEI
EXIST. LEVEL
BPT |H|
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
1 $10001
O t M COST
ItlOOO/YRI ID)
-vl
01
ENERGY COST
ItlOOO/YRI 10)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
t*IOOO/YR| 101
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
100
450
1000
1609
.1.130
5914
64
29
99
320
460
831
1621
-2Q1ZICI
2989
-&Z44.
7151
iflflia
11466
~ASfe
598
_i2sa
I 962
_24fiZ
3668
3fl
32
2*
100
200
-1123
I3oa
-2231
3608
-5136
6528
4155
_flSfl2
9184
14.aifl
I52H2
—442
549
_iaaa
2707
53
54
—IZfl
I 74
—4.53
468
-14,0.2
15.15
-3122
3665
-5C95
6650
(A) ALL COSTS AHE IN 1ST UUARTFR 1978 DOLLARS.
IUI ALL MILLS ARC ASSUMED TO Mfc'fT UPT LIMITS. THEREFORE NU COSTS ARE SHOWN FOR HPT ANO COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCHFMffNT
1C, VALUE AHOVf LINE IS COST HASEO ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM Ar ,50 MG/L ^ '**' REQUIReD TO AfTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
VALUF HELOM IS FOR OOSAlif- AT 300 MG/L.
|0| 0 t M ANO ENERGY COSTS ARE Nf: T AFTER INDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDED: OCM » ENERGY » FIXED ANNUAL CO'JlS,
IE) MULTIPLY I/O UY .907 TO OBTAIN KKG/0
(F) INCLUDES PAPERGRADE SULFITE (BLOW PIT WASH) AND PAPERGRADE SULFITE (DRUM WASH) SUBCATEGORIES
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMAHV - DIRECT OlSCHArtGE MILLS 47
(A) ALL COSTS
|U( ALL MILLS
(Cl VALUE AtlOVE LINE IS CUS1 I1ASEU ON CAC OOSAGE OF ALUM AT ISO MG/l
VALUE flELOW l:> KIR OO!>AGE AT 300 MG/L.
(Dl O 6 M AND ENERGY COSTS ARt NET AFTER OfDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES'. OC.W * ENlfMCY » FIXFO ANNUAL COSTS.
(El CULTIF'LY f/l) BY .907 Tfl OUT A IN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - OIRf-CT DISCHARGE HILLS (A|
00
MILL
CAP! TAL COS I
1 * 1 0001
O G M COST
<»IOOO/YFM [O|
ENERGY COST
I $ IUOO/YR) |OI
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(HOOO/YR) (Dl
EXIST. LEVEL
SIZE T/OJfcl HPT (U|
50
600
IOOO
SO
600
IOOO
50
6OO
IOOO
50
600
IOOO
UWUUU— V.MN t'AH^H1*
PROPOSED OPTION
I 2
571 -LifillCI
1452
92* _55**
5877
1 856 _Z*62
7922
>•> __22*
273
0 _ittfl9
1421
0 _A4a&
2150
o j.j.
i*
o li
76
o iQa
1 16
1*5 5*4.
61*
204 _23*3
28*5
*OP _JJOO
4092
3
1HH9
_5S2S
6tfl7
«552
H930
__222
268
aas
1222
1222
1027
12
13
62
92
98
__&*s
702
_223*
2698
-1222
3966
|A| ALL COSTS ARE IN ISf QUARK n 1978 DOLLARS.
IOI ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMfcD TO MfitT HPT LIMITS. THFRKFORE NO COSTS A'»E SHOWN FOR HPT AND COST AT PROPOSER OPTION IS INCREMENT
tlF COST REOUIRFD TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFOKVANcr.
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS |AI
bUBCATEGORV GHOUNOWOOO-FINE PAPERS
EXIST. LEVEL
MILL SI/E T/Dlet OPT
6531
2B63
6212
6566
B334
U t M COST
(«IOOO/rRi (Dl
75
500
z6
327
—B&3.
I 169
309
03't
WD
ENERGY COST
(IIOOO/VRI (Ol
75
500
1608
16
17
52
62
I? 69
14
14
47
49
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(HOOO/YHI (D)
rso
75
500
750
• Bt>
ai
86
740
-20.20.
2418
68
-_Z55
822
32O4
2462
.2322
32 3B
::;
sa s
-
-.
«C» VALUE ABOV6 LINfc IS CDST OA:>EO UN CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT 150 MG/L
VALUE IIELOW IS FOR OOSAGE AT .300 MG/L.
ID I O t, M AND ENERGY COSTS ARE NET AFTER DEDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOIAL ANNUAL COS..T INCLUDES: OtM » ENEHGY « F I XR D ANNUAl COSTS.
It) MULTIPLY T/O BY .907 TO OBTAIN KKG/O
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - OIRf-CT DISCHARGE HILLS (A)
OO
o
MILL
CAPI TAL COST
1 HOOOI
O C M COST
(SIOOO/VR) (O|
ENERGY COST
•tlUOO/VR| |D|
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
1 IIOOO/YR) (Ol
•RXIS1. LtVfcU
SIZE T/DtF| OPT (HI
ISO
400
BOO
1 80
4OO
aoo
IflO
400
aoo
180
400
HOO
SN r INC t'AHEICSj
1
496
915
1502
D
0
0
6
16
33
116
217
360
PROPOSED OPTION
2
_32szici
3503
-5342
5523
'221
8252
—fiflfe
735
1021
1292
laai
2207
— «~j22
37
_6.a
69
—Ufc
123
15H3
232a
2652
-3662
3
-22. 05 1C I
3491
_5«Z1
559->
aei2
8463
621
a 74
1U54
14Qi
1748
— . — j}5
36
&a
70
— 12&
1 30
-1331
1462
2£Q9
2425
_J4S1
3«6I
(A| ALL C01.TS AHE IN 1ST OUARTFR 1978 OOLLAHb.
IUI ALL MILLS ARE' ASSUMED TO «FET HPT LIMITS. THEREFORF NU COSTS AHE SHOWN FOR MPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCRFWNT
.,, „.. 11E .an... , ,.r OF COST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN 1'RO'HJSED PERFORMANCE.
ICI VALUE ABOVf LINE IS COST BASED ON CAC OObAGE OF ALUM Al ISO MGXL
VALUE BELO* IS Fl»« DOSAGE AT 3OO MG/L .
101 0 G M AND ENeitGY COSTS ARF NET AFTfcX INDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: Of.M > FIMfrHC.Y » FIXED ANNUAL CJStS.
(£1 WULIIPLY I/O (1Y .907 TO OUTAIN KKG/l)
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (A)
S.UOC ATE GORY OEINK Tib SUE »APERS
MILL SHE T/OIEI
EXIST. LtVfL
HPT (HI
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
1*10001
50
233
1176
_i5*a
iron
.12 3.21 c I
1255
_1Z21
IB 36
0 t M CUST
(MUOO/YRI (0)
CO
ENERGY COST
1 SIOOO/VR) (U|
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(HOOO/YRI 10)
180
25
SO
180
25
50
180
25
50
1 3
2
«<»
3S03
—212
236
—224
:i36
__526
735
12
II
15
16
3&
37
513
-_SSS
742
3698
—222
236
—2S5
319
667
11
I I
i&
16
Jfl
39
__5ua
530
__Z32
753
I HO
IIS
I5B3
1558
I At ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTFR 1978 DOLLARS.
(til ALL MILLS AHf: ASSliftO TO MFFT OPT LIMITS, THERFFOHE NO COSTS AWE OHUWN FOR >JPT ANO COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCUFMFMT
OF COST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PRCIPOSKO PERFOMMANCE.
(Cl VALUE AUflVE LINE IS COST !IAs»=O ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM At 150 MG/L
VALUE MfLOW IS Ff)» DOSAC.E AT .TOO Md/L.
IOI 0 C M AND INfRGY COSTS ARE NET AFTfR OtDUCTION Of CO5.T SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL CUST INCLUDES: ()f,M t rNF-t'GV » FIXtD ANNUAL COSTS.
It I MULIII'LY I/U tlY .907 TO OttTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT Dl SCHARGg MILLS JAI
bUaCATEGOHY riuSUU FROM WASTEPAPgR
MILL SIZE T/DCEI
ex I ST. LEVEL
HPT It))
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
(S 1000)
10
121
270
690
-1325
1*36
706
1500
O C M COST
(91000/YRI
10
10)
—122
143
1 36
CO
ro
269
24fi
27?
ENERGY COST
(tlOOO/YRI (O)
10
40
a
8
14
13
I
7
11
II
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ItlOOO/YR) (I) |
to
40
56
93
—284
305
—555
604
331
622
«A| ALL COS1S, AHe IN 1ST QUARTER 1978 DOLLARS.
C«l ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO MEET OPT LIMITS. THEREFOhC NO COSTS ARE SHOWN FOU HPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION I-, INCREMENT
irt „„.,.„ .„„ r np cr|ST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
1C I VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST HASED ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT ISO MG/L
VALUF BELOW IS FOR DOSAGE AT 30O MG/L.
IDI O C M AND ENERGY COSTS ARfc NET AFTF.R DEDUCTION OF COS! SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COiT INCLUDES: OLM » F.NEKGY > FIXED ANNUAL COSTS.
It I MULTIPLY T/D HY .907 10 OHTAIN KKG/D
-------
•TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COiT SUMMARY- DIRECT DISCHARGE HILLS |A|
SUBCATEGORV PAPERBUARD FHLlM WASTEPAPt-R
EXIST. LEVEL
MILL SIZE T/DIEI HPT IBI 1
CAPI TA'L COST so — 52
ISIOOOI
160 — 93
PROPOSED OPTION
2
__Zl2OSFD OPTION IS INCREMENT
OF CO^T PKOUIHED TO ATTAIN PRUPUSKO PEflf OKMANCF .
ICl VALUE ABOVE L I Nf IS COST OASEO ON CAC OOSAGf. OF ALUM AT ISO MG/L .
VALUE UtLUW IS Ftia DOSAuE AT 100 MC./L.
101 O C M AND FNtHGY COSTS ARE NF I AFTFK riFDUCTICN OF COST SAVINGS.
TOfAL ANNUAL COST INCLUOEi.: OSM > FNf.-l'GV * FlXtO ANNUAL COSTS.
IM MULIIPLV I/O HY .907 TO OI1TAIM KKG/II
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
THEATHENT COaT SUHMAHY - DIRECT OlbCHAOGG MILLS I A}
SUilCATf.GOHV WASTe»'APeR-WULO«=D PRUOUCTS
MILL SIZE r/o(ti
tXISI. LEVEL
RPT (in
PROPOSED OPriON
2
00
CAPITAL CUSI
< * 10 00 I
O f. » COST
(ilOOO/VR|
ENERGY COST
(tlOOO/YRI |D)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(*100O/YR| (D)
20
50
150
20
50
150
20
50
150
20
50
150
23B
71,,
,9
69*
2101
o-j
,of)
20.,
137
__J.fi2
210
—226
JBT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
JCI VALUt ABOVt LINE IS COST UASEO ON CAC DOSAGt OF ALUM AT 150 MG/L
VALUE OELOW IS FOR DOSAGE AT 300 MCJ/L.
(D) 0 t M AND ENERGY COSTS ARt NF T AFTER Or-OUCTICN OF COST SAVINGS^"
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDED: Ot,M t CNEUGY ^ FIXED ANNUAL COST-..
It I MULTIPLY i/o ur .<>07 TO OBTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLb (A|
SUI1CATEGOPY BUILDERS* PAPEH fc «GOFIMG FELT
MILL SI/.E T/Dlt:l
EXIST. LEVEL
HPT (H»
PROPOSED OPrI ON
2
CAPITAL COST
( till00)
100
223
351
400
1§3.7 I c I
1618
2572
1228
-166*
1699
0 6. M COSF
(11000/YRI
(01
100
225
24
32
301
2S2
494
12&
20<»
295
CO
en
ENERGY COS.T
(tlOOO/YRI |U|
225
15
15
25
26
16
IOTAL ANNUAL COST
(SIOOO/YR) |D|
100
225
I 10
139
681
—263.
I 104
__S.92
501
—622
710
(AJ ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTER |Q7fl DULLAHS.
ID I ALL MILLS AHE ASSOMEO TO MEhT HPf LIMITS. THEREFORE MU COSTS ARE SKJWN FOR HPT AND COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCREMENT
OF CObT HEOUIWEl) TO ATTAIN PROPOSEO PERFOHMAMCf .
(Cl VALUE ABOVE LINe IS COST BASED ON CAC DOSAGE OF ALUM AT ISO MQ/L
VALUE BELOW IS FOH OOSAGE AT 3OO Mr,/L.
(Dl 0 L M AND CNEHGY COSTS AHt ME- T AFTHR DF-'OUCriON OF CO^f bAVlNG:..
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: fJUM * ENCKGy » FIXfD ANNUAL COSTS.
(fcl "ULIIPLY T/L> £IY .907 TO OUTAIN KKO/O
\
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE HILLS (A)
SUaCATfcGORY NONINTEGRAT6D-FINE PAPERS
MILL SIZE T/D(fc|
EX I SI. LEVEL
OPT (fj)
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAPITAL COST
ISIOOO)
O C M COST
<*1000/YR|
CO
CF>
ENERGY COST
ISIOOO/YRI toi
TOTAL ANNUAL CObT
(SIOOO/YRI |D|
35
215
1000
35
215
1000
35
215
IOOO
35
215
IOOO
423
6.16
243fl
__3S2ICI
042
-232L
2534
6164
IBI
__xzz
464
1484
9B
140
53?
402
1O79
-2422
2952
-252Z
2708
.1122
7362
—142
IAVINGr,.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: tlfcM » FNFMC.Y » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS.
It I MULTIPLY r/u OY .907 TO OUTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS |A|
-pb
00
^1
MILL
CAPITAL COST
( * 10001
O G M COST
|»IOOO/YR) (D|
ENERGY COSI
fStOOO/VR) (O|
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ItlOOO/YR) ID)
;>ljni.Aie:uLjr*T — — — — — iNurfir4lc*mMici'ii^>:»wc. r
t-XIST. LEVEL
SIZE T/'DIEI OPT 10} 1
35 — 124
IBO — 373
IOOO — 1769
.15 — 3
IBO — O
IOOO — 0
35 — 0
IBO — 0
IOOO ~ 0
35 — 29
180 — U2
IOOO — J93
**r~ c fTCf
PROPOSED OPTION
2
546
_23fl*
1521
4B74
—112
37
""«
209
12
JH
59
330
I6H
466
1611
3
6 15
1722
60 as
LI a
37
222
65
56.7.
191
12
10
.3.3.
49
275
__36J
113
__2S3
492
1 795
•A> ALL CUSIS ARE IN 1ST QUARTER |97B DOLLARS.
(Ol ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO Mf:ET HPT LIMITS. THEREFORE MU COST:> AlJfc -,IIOWN FOR t»P f AND CO^f AT I'ROPOStO CPTION IS INCREMENT
OF COST REQUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSEO PETOKMANCE.
(CI VALUE AUOVfc LINf IS COST OAtiEO ON ACTIVATLO SLUDM; SYSTEM.
VALUF HFLOW IS FOR AF.RATED SI AH IL I 7A Tl ON DASIN SYSTt.M.
(Ol Of, M AND FNfrRCY CObF:. ARfc NET AFTEM Of OUCT I ON OF CObT ">AV/INf.s.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: Otf t FNFWnY * (•' I XED ANNUAL COSTS.
(Kl MULTIPLY I/D HV .9oc TO OBTAIN KKG/IJ
-------
TABtE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMtNT* COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE: MILLS (A)
SUBCATEGOOY NONINTEGRATED-LTWT PAPERS ILTWTI
MILL SIZE T/DIEI
EXIST. LEVEL
HPT IB)
OROPUSED OPTION
2
3
-2§air.i
-
00
00
CAPITAL COST
1*10001
0 6 M COST
(*tOOO/YR| |D|
ENERGY COST
<*IOOO/YR| |
TOTAL ANNUAL CObf
IttUOO/YRI |D|
10
60
200
10
60
ZOO
10
60
200
10
60
200
273
477
1212
17
42
69
121
309
398
-21SQ
1177
_**55
2579
B2
31
60
109
—Jta
24
3H
51
121
127
351
-132Z
79B
2JB3
1464
34 16
32
36
70
2
7
2fl
30
96
42)
-1SS5
«AI ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST OUARTFR 1978 DULLANS.
IB I ALL MILLS ARE ASSUMED TO MEET QPT LIMITS. THEREFORE NO CUSTs> APE >HOW^4 FOR UPT ANO CO:>T AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCREMENT
OF COST RKOUIR6D TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
JCI VALUE ABfJVK LINt: IS COST OASEO ON ACTIVAri-l) SLUDGE SVSTLW.
VALUE RELOW IS Kill' AERATED STAIIILI ?A TI ON HASIN S
IOI O C M AND ENERGY COiT:. ARE NET AFTFW UErlJUCTION OF COST SAVING*.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OCM » ENeKC.V » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS.
IE I MULTIPLY I/O UY .907 TO OUTAIN KKG/O
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT OlSCHAuqE MILLS CA|
4=a
CO
HILL
CAPITAL COST
( * 10001
0 G M COST
ENERGY COST
(tiuoo/yni (O)
TOTAL ANNUAL COSI
(tlOOO/YR) |D|
bl/UC. A 1 tH*UKT • — ~ NUPI 1 ni cvtKH 1 cu-t. t w t r-wr-
EXIST. LEVEL
SIZE T/DIEI HPT (111 , I
10 — 278
60 — 477
200 — 1212
10 — 7
60 — 17
ZOO — .. . . . 42 -
10 — 0
60 — 0
200 — 0
10 — 69
60 — 123
2OO — 309
I_ '* J \ U. l_ t-V, « f
PROPOSED OPTION
2
522
-2921
1602
3603
21
36
73
•— S2
11
12
2Z
59
51
162
flfifl
485
1133
3
_11Q2(C|
731
-\ll\
-«66
97
40
ZQ*
ni
1 66
10
to
23
47
42 ;':
151
331
210
ao.z
534
l?'57
(A| ALL CUSTS AHE IN 1ST QUARTfc'M I97B DOLLARS.
Ill) ALL MILLS AHE AiSUMtO TO MEl T HPT LI Ml T i>t ' THEREFORE HO COSTS ARE SHOWN FOR HPT AMO COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCREMENT
OP COST PEOUIREO TO ATTAIN PMOPOSEO PERFORMANCE.
(Cl VALUE AQOVl L I Nf IS COST BASED ON ACTIVATED SLUDGE SYS-fEf.
VALUE BELOW |j FUK AERATED ST Af3 IL I / A TI ON (lAbIM SYSTEM.
(O| 0 C M AND rUERGY COSTS ARE NET AFTER DEDUCTION OF COSI SAVINGS.
TO1 AL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OGM •• f. NFRf.Y t FIXEO ANNUAL COSTS.
(tl MULTIPLY I/O (IY .<>07 1O OHTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IK-7 (continued)
COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS IAI
SI/UCATtGURV ----- NUNINieCRATED-FILr AND NONWOV PAPPUS
MILL SIZE TVOIEl
EXIST. LEVEL
IIPT |BI
PROPOSED OPTION
2
CAP!TAL CUSI
( * 10 001
20
ion
36'.
_522
-------
TABLE IX-7 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DlSCHARGK MILLS I A)
SURCATt.GORY NONI NTt GRATED- PAPEHHOARD
KILL SIZE T/0(EI
EXIS1. LEVEL
BPT (BI
PROPOSED OPTION
CAPITAL COST
I * 1000 I
10
2OR
268
389
192
421
.1222
613
__62SCC|
386
_1222
652
_15fi2
944
O t M COST
(ilOOO/YRI
10
(Dl
64
23
62
29
32
36
75
IO
-1J2
4O
43
ENERGY COST
I*IOOO/VR| ID)
10
&
3
6
3
—11
7
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(*IOOO/YR) (Dl
75
10
40
75
14
54
69
-302
133
12
IS
211
t 19
1 86
SQ2
265
|A> ALL CUSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTER I97B DOLLARS.
tUt ALL MILLb ARE ASSUMED TO MEtT HPT L|M|Tb. fHF.Rf-.FURE NO COSTS ARE SHOWN FOR BP f AMD COST AT PROPOSED OPTION IS INCREMENT
OF COST HEOUIRED TO ATTAIN PROPOSED PERFORMANCE.
(CJ VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST BASED ON ACTIVATED SLUDGE SYSTEM.
VALUE BELOW I1.-, FOR AERATED bTAfl ILI /A TI CN HA*TN SYSTEM.
IDI 0 C M AND ENERGY COSTS ARt NET AFTFR OF DUCT I ON Of-. COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OfcM * ENERGY » F I Xf.O ANNUAL CUSTS.
(El MULTIPLY I/O flY .907 TO UUTAIN KKG/D
-------
TABLE IX-8
TREATMENT COaT SUMMARY - DIRECT OlSCHARGt HILLS (AI-QDTIUN 4
SUUCATEGURY ----- DISSOLVING KRAFT
SYSTEM COSTS FOfl MQOI FICAT lONClll
MILL SI7E
1000
-ASB ALTERNATIVE-lFl-
2
ACTIVATED
KLUDGE
OXIDATION
POND
PRIMARY
TRFATMHMT
CAPITAL
( tlOOOl
COST
_2*-2§
I J460
12222
16960
11SLI
21 7d7
12S22
14593
O C M CUST
(ilOOO/YM)
1000
__1JLT
44.11
736
703
-Pi
to
ro
ENEHGY COST
(HOOO/YHI (C|
1000
—623
f.9.1
202
107
664
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ItlOOO/YDI |CI
1000
.2200
393?
8<>24
6616
4577
IA| ALL COSTS AHf: IN ISI OUARTFP I <> / fl OOLLAHS.
IB! IF NO COST IS INDICATEO IN A GIVEr4 THL AT ML NT SYSTFM, tin VULS WITH TH*T SYSTFM CUR«FNTLY F.XIST IN THIS 8UHC ATf fiOR V.
VALUE AHOVe LINK IS COST W/O PRODUCTION CHnCFbS CdNTPflL..
VALUE UfcLOW Ib COaT WITH PRUDUCTION PI'OC.FSS CONTROLS SO AS ID ELIM|N*T? GUIOPLINF! ALLC1WANC FS.
ICI QCt' AND f NfiKGY COSTS ARE NF. T AFTFR l>* HOC T I ON OF - COS T SAVINGS.
IOTAL ANNUAL CObT INCLUDES: lltM » FNEKGY > f IXtO ANNU'.L COSTS(22X|.
It) fULfU'LY T/O IIY .907 TO OHIAIN KKG/D
eO AFRATIHN
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
THEATMENT cnsr SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE:. MILLS IAI-OPTION 4
CO
TREATMENT
SYSTEM COSTS FIW
MODIFICATION! Bl
CAPITAL CUSI
I tlOOO)
o t w COST
(S1000/VHJ JC»
ENERGY CObI
(SIOOO/YRI (C!
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ItlOOO/YH) |CI
(Al ALL COSIS ARE
(til IF NO COST IS
MILL SIZE T/OIEI
350
tiOO
1600
350
600
1600
350
600
1600
.150
600
1600
IN ISI QUARTER
INDICATED IN A
1
S592
_S»59.b
9246
lidZZ
17092
62
146
82
362
22B
22B
192
-Ifiii
1044
_UflZ
1604
1976 HOLLARS.
GIVEN TREATMENT
-3222
1196?
20066
-14.05
1402
232R
-SJ.&E1
532*
aa
•JO
344
-2H112
1316
-4.UUL
5102
IOOH1
SYSTIM, Nf) f'lLLf.
-6622
U609
-2Z21
1 3443
12JZJ
24 793
-2U2
359
3Z2
S29
B9I
224
212
9J9
~2477
-iifiZS
WITH THAT
ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
SLIJOOr- POND TREATMENT
_4.3J.a
6230
9877
I727B
364
5?6
863
13.4.
134
__212
551
SSI
1869
1246 ,
29IH
jaua
5215
SYSTFM CUKRENTLY EXIST IN THIS SUHC ATCC.ORY.
VALUE A DOVE L INL IS CUST w/0 PROOUCf 1(1H PWDCFSS CON F DHL..
VALUE UtLUW IS CObf WITH PPOOUCT ION 'PROtfiSil CONTOOLS S(l A'.5 TO FLIMINATF C.UIDF'LI Nf: ALLGWANCFS.
(CJ 0 C M AND JNGHGY COSTS ARE NIT T AFTF.B DFOUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TUTAL ANNUAL CO&T INCLUDES: OKM » ENERGY » FIXf.l) ANNUAL COSTS I i.12X1 .
(tl MULIICLV r/U tlY .907 TO OllfAIN KKG/O
(Fl I-AODII IOHAL AIKAIION AND SI.TILING. 2=AUIIiriON C)l; Ctlt Ml (. ALL Y A1 S I •'. Te. D CL AIM P I (. A T I lltl • IsCOM V (»«; I ON TO rxTFNOtn AfcRAMON
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TnEATMtNT COST SUMMARY - nifJECl DISCHARGE HILLS IA»-lJPTtaN 4
SUDCATEGO"r llf. T ULK ACHEO KRAFT
THtAIHfcNI i>Yf«TfcM CUbTS FUf» MODI Fl CAT I DN( H \
ASH ALT6'RNAT| VEJFI ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SIZF T/Dlfl I 2 3 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 300 _2flj!7 _§!£!
1*1000) 4"j97 6'MI
aoo _§722 _2U4 JLUS25
9190 12534 1*295
1300 _tt!2S 12165 12.235
1.5005 16845 20065
a G M COST 300 56 _1E2Z 212
(tlOOO/YHI (Cl 127 1167 310
uoo ea -22.16 *as
22* 26^2 542
UOO __lli _a£-Z2 __53!
298 3859 724
ENERGY COST 300 1*0 7J. J.2*
C«IOOO/YRI ICI 140 71 194
aoo _J14 _163 __43I
, 374 16.1 487
UOO __fettl 232 __IZ4 —
«.07 ?S2 774
TOTAL ANNUAL COST 300 &!!» -22S3 -1643 '_
(tlOOO/YHI 1C) 1279 27b6 47'J 4173
uoo _i5!ifl _6{-ao _i526
.3767 . 7PI7 591 3
• — — — ™^_ __ __ _ _ ^_.»_--._-.»_ _^_- _.«__ __._ _ — _^ —_ _.____.___ -.__— — _— — —_—— ^« •,«.— — — .._«- __ _«._•»«.««». — —. _i~.«_«_ _._«.»^_~. —.^ __—— — „__ __ — ^_^^_-—— ___ — -. —— — —
(Al ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUAHTCR I97R DULLAI'S.
|UI IF NO COST IS INDICATED IN A GIVEN tf?f-. A r MfcNT bYSft", Nil VHL-i WITH M«AT SY'.TFM CII>4IIENIL V EXIST IN THI'. SUIIC ATI; C.CIR Y.
VALUE AUUVt LINf- IS COST X/O PROOUCTION PROCESS CONTI'OLb.
VALUE BELOW Ib COST WITH PRODUCTION OUnCFSI CONTROLS SO AS TO PLIMINATC C5UH>FLIN(- ALLOWANCES.
(Cl O G M AND tfNEHGY CObTS ARE NET AFTER ()M)UCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COS.T INCLUDED: CI(,M » ENKHOY » FIXED ANNl/AL COST->I22XI.
IE I MULIIPLY I/O ar .907 TO OBTAIN K.KG/1)
. IF I 1=ADOITIONAL AK.KATION AND SETTLING. ? = (\OO I T I ON OF CHr.1IC.ALLV ASSI-.TLO Cl. AH I f- 1C A T I UN . 3 = CON Vf RV> I ON Tl) tXTF.NDf-O AfPATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (A|-OPTION 4
TREATMENT
MILL Slie T/U(tl 1
CAPITAL COST 200 _122fi
I»IOOOI 2918
BOO _§244
8784
1 200 ZQB2
11769
O e M CUST 200 4.5.
ItlOOO/YRI (Cl 85
BOO aa
*> ?2<*
10
171 1 200 iaa
2BH
ENERGY COST 200 BJ
(tlOOO/YR) (Cl 81
8OO 3.3J.
331
I2OO 4.26
496
TOTAL ANNUAL COS! 200 552
(tiooo/YRi (ci nio
BOO 15f'Z
248H
1200 _2l_t>&
33 "
SYSTEM COSTS FOR MOOI Fl C A T 1 ONI 11 1
-ASH ALTERNATI VE1FI'
4710
-S21Z
U7b7
111*13
1 509 .1
112
779
-2161
2303
_ifi4.9
3237
43
48
—142
149
_ 214.
214
1&0.5
1863
4113
sojq
5555
6771
3
-JIS15
4825
_2S!il
13421
1J14SJ
17820
ia*_
223
J12
52 I
4Z9
6(1 5
_ Ii2
132
_ 433
4rt3
Z12
712
1152
141 7
IOJ.6.
.J 'i'i 7
•> "aa
'o3OO
IVATED
SLUDGE
-25&1
_427£
981 7
3241
12921
_125
234
3Z6
517
465
653
ra
78
2Z&
276
425
405
fljfc
IO94
2Q:S»
295.1
a^iii
J'»oo
OXIDATION PRIMARY
POND TREATMENT
_156fi
2558
_«laa
8293
tl5Z4
11254
253
297
B2Z
1038
1222
1479
16
16
5fi
56
aa
80
_6ia
876
-122S
2919
2Uifl
4035
IHAf SYSTEM CtWWEMTLV EXIST IN TH|!> -.UMC A Tf GOR Y .
(AJ ALL CUSIS ARE IN 1ST OUARTFR lr»76 DOLLARS.
(Bl IF NO COST IS INDICATED IN A GIVEN TREATMENT SYSTEM,-Nil «ILL^ w
i/ALUE AHOVE LINE IS COST W/O PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTPULS.
VALUE IJELOW IS COST WITH PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS SO AS ID FLIMIMATF GUIDT-LINF ALLOWANCES.
(Cl Of, M ANI> ENERGY COSTS ARI: NET AFTER OfOUCTION OF. C(I5. T SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: qtM » F.N6RGY * FIXF.D ANNUAL COSTS (22%i.
(El fULTIt'LY T/U MY .907 TO ODTAIN KKG/D-
(F> l-AODl I IONAL AERAIIUM UNO StTTLING. 2=ADDITION OF CHI Ml C ALLY ASSIiTl-.l) CL M' 11 I C A T I UN . 3=CI1N VlrRS I ON TO fXTFNDEO AERATION
(G) INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT 1)1 SCH Atif.C MILLS (AI-OPT1UN
TREATMENT SYSTEM COST1? FOR MODI FICAT ION(B 1
HILL
CAPITAL CUST
I t 10001
O G M CUbT
(*IOOO/YR| (C|
ENERGY COST
(SIOOO/YRI (Cl
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(HOOO/YRI (Cl
SIZE T/DIEI
450
IOOO
1500
450
IOOO
450
IOOO
1500
450
IOOO
ISOO
I
J.H7B
1B7B
.1299
4420
46
rz
77
si
ei
179
263
POP
S4U
969
131 H
2
3656
5749
7262
695
125.1
_lZ3.a
1 730
42
49
24
94
1JJ
111
1549
2M2
_3.4&L
3461
3
_i__l
3651
_!>22&
U214
183
*~274
341
125
2f>2
3d 4
1 II 1
1906
-2532
251?
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
-25Z2
2579
-42S5
42BS
S5«3
__iaa
tan
271
130
_ Z2
79
16?
2J&
2J6
3.15
1 175
-1Z24
' 1794
OXIDATION PRIMARY
POND TREATMFNT
14^4
1464
2772
3034
—23S
238
4.32
489
ZQ4
704
15
15
;30.
44 :
575
1129
1522
1592
(A| ALL CUSIS ARE IN 1ST OtlARTFH I97H DOLLARS. :
(Ul IF NO COST IS INI1 ICATt.O IN A GIVEN TRKArMfiNr iV>TF"t Ni'l "ILLS WITH THAT SYSIEM CURHFNTLY EXIST IN FtllS ,UMC ATt GUP Y.
VALUE ABOVf. LINl IS COST »/CI PRODUCTIliri PROCESS COM TI-'OLS .
VALUE BELOW IS COST K I Til PRODUCTION PHOCKSS CONTROLS SO AS TO F'LI-MINATF£ OlMUF I I Nl: AH.OWANCFS.
»CI O t M AND fNEUriY COSTS AR6 NET AFTER IK OUC TI ON OF COiT SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDE:,: rtl.it • ENERGY t FIXFO ANNUAL COSTS (22X1.
(El KULIIIH.Y T/O BY .^07 TO OUT A IN KKO/D
(F| 1=AUOIT lOhAL AlftAIIUN AND SITTLING. ?=AOniTlON [IF CHFVICAI.LY ASSI>Tl.f> Cl. AH I F IC A T I ON . .! = C!1N V(. H«> I ON TO t.XTF-MDt.D AF.RATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (AI-OPTIQN
UNBLEACHED KRAIPT RAG
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSIS FOR MQO| F I C A T I ON( H 1
MILL
CAPITAL COST
1 $ IUOOI
O & M COST
1 t IDOO/YRI 1C I
FNFRGY COST
( HOOO/YRI (C |
TUIAL ANNUAL CO'-.T
(»iooo/rni |c|
SIZE T/DIEI
450
IOOO
1500
450
IOOO
1500
450
IOOO
I50O
450
IOOO
1500
1
_iaza
187«
4229
3299
_442fl
4420
46
46
64
_ _zz
77
01
__IZ2
1 79
26S
268
540
2l>2
•J6<)
M-I«
»SB ALTFHNATIVE
2
3646
5734
72*2
__&2J
693
1249
1724
42
49
24
94
133
_JL54*
1544
^604
JS.5L
34!il
3
362O
61HI
B 15B
172
172
256
Ji6
316
125
125
__2&1
261
3B3
I0'»3
tazz
1 877
i> 494
ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
25«a
254 n
42.19
_552Z
5527
ifll
iai
25B
313
79
162 '
215
fl21
B2I
1J52 _
1353
1 7t>4
lAI ALl CUSTS ARr IN 1ST OUARTF.f! 1978 O'lLLAUS .
Ibl IF NO COST I". INOICATC.D IN A GIVEN TRGAIMhMI SYSlt«. NO MILLS WITH IMAT SYHIfM CU>-'l'eNfLY PXIST IN THIS SUHC A Tc G()R Y.
VALUE ABOVE LINE IS COST W/U PRODUCTION PHOCESS CCIN1RULS.
VALUE BEX.IIW IS COST WITH PRUDUCTION PROCF t.r. COMflUJLS bfj AS TO ELIMINATE GUIOCLINR ALLOWANCES.
ICl O C M AND ENERGY CrjbfS ARE Nf T AFTER I1FDUCTIQN OF CO-. T SAVINGS.
IIITAL ANNUAL COST INCIUDgS: OfcW * ENERGY » FIXFU ANNUAL COSIS(32X|.
DI f KINAL AfRAriOM AND StTTLING. J.- ADD I I I ON Of7 CHt' M| C, ALLY A'.HI.T'.O CL AU I F I C A f |l)M . 3 = COM VI. R^ I UN TO t:XTF.Nnr-O AERATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TRCATMtflT COST SUMMARY - DIPfcCT OISCHARGh HILLS JAJ-OPTION
MILL SIZE r/DIEI
CAP1 TAL COST 200
I * 1 0 00 1
425
000
O C M CUSI 200
ISIOOO/YRI ICI
425
J^ 60°
00
ENERGY COST 200
(HOOO/YHI |C|
425
bOO
TUTAL ANNUAL COl>T 20O
ISIOOO/VRI |CI
425
600
TREATMENT
1
945
1558
_12fe2
1 969
31
4tt
40
*6
46
25
25
52
73
?64
435.
• 435
552
5'j?
SYSTfcM COSTS FDD MODI FICATIONt H 1
-ASQ At. rrtniATi veiFi-
2
212?
3210
-igf
36H
589
746
25
25
4J
43
56
56
66O
1 3J9
I6SH
3
20H4
3429
4 3 14
128
1B3
183
2L3
211
ao
no
160
^.-221
221
— 666
664
1 098
-0.323
1 393
IVATED
SLUDGE
-15J2
1530
2433
3026
138
1U2
189
__221
221
43
B2
82
111
III
51Z
517
_Sfl&
806
221
997
OXIDATION
POND
65 1
2250
-i56fi
1568
26
96
1B2
231
__25fl
258
6
6
12
12
16
16
245
__462
738
61B
618
PRIMARY
TREATMENT
(At ALI- COS IS ARF IN 1ST OUARTFR 1978 OULLAHS.
Mil If MO C0>f I-. INDICATED IN A GIVEN TRfcAI'W-NT SYSTEM. NO f/lLLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY EXISI IN THIS SUHC ATEGOR Y.
VAIUF ABQVfc LINf: IS COST 'O/O PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE HELUW IS COST WITH P»ODUCTION PKflCESS CONTROLS SO AS TO ELIMINATE GUIDELINE ALLOWANCES.
(Cl O f. M AND f-_NF«GY CObTb ARE NET AF f ER OF UUC TI ON OF COST bAVlNGb.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OCM » ENEHOY * FIXF.D ANNUAL COSTSI22VI.
It I MULTIPLY 1/U HY ,'iOf TO OUTAIN KK<,/1)
IF» I=AOD|T JllflAL At. RAT I UN AND SETTLING. ?=AOI>ITION OF CMFMICALLY A>>SI->TF-.D CL AH I F 1C A f I UN . 3 = C()N VERs I ON TO I.X TFNDF.D AERATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS 1AI-OPTION
TREAIMENI SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICATIONS!
• — i-ASB ALTEH^ATIV!
MILL, size 'T/IMEI i 2
CAPITAL COS 1 700 2^O4
( IIOOOI • 2<>04
1500 5Oge
5028
2600 753J.
7531
OCW COST 70Q fe3
I flOOO/YR) (C| b3
1500 31
91
2SOO - 112
ENFHGY COST 700 134
ItlOOO/YRI (Cl 134
ISOO __2.fl5
285
?600 422
TOIAL ANNUAL COIil -70O ' »1 jft
1 t iooo/rr<» ic i H3o
IbOO _l4tS2
2'6OO ^2.S>3
2?t,«
_5fi2S
5005
7774
12ZJ.4
10734
102'*
-1SZ2
2987
Zl
71
133
21 3
22C2.
220,7
-3Z22
556?
3 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
_5§Si} 3620
55U3 3620
_26ll 5254 •
961 I 5954
14412 ^a625
14412 8605
241 243
_365 354
365 354
500 475
lUZ _ 121 _
IH7 121
aifl 24.1 _I;
378 241
635 _ s.o.2. _ _
635 402
1656 ll&l
1 656 1161
2S5.Z L2C5
2857 I905
_4_3tt5 2ZZ&
4105 2770
I A) ALL COSTS AHP IN IST QUARTER 1970 DOLLARS.
(Ul If- NO CO'iT I'.' It-ID ICATEO IN A GIVEN f'»fc *1 Mt SJT SYSIfM, ND MILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY EXIST IN THIS SUIIC ATI CO" Y.
VALUE ABOVF LINt IS COST W/O PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL1..
VALUE UELOW IS COST WITH PRODUCTION PHOCEbM CONTROLS '.in AS TH ELIMINAT'-" GUI l»fLI NK . ALLOW ANCES.
(Cl 0 C f AM) FNFRf.Y CfJ>.Ts ARF NET AF TFR W OUCT I GN CIF-COSI .AVING>.
TOTAL ANfJUAL COST INCLOOrS: OtM t FNFNGY « flXO) ANNUAL COSIS(i'2X|.
(I I MUI. MM. Y J/U 'IV . -J07 III OUT A IN KKl./O
(Fl l=AI)f)I MOIjftL AMJAIIDN AND SETTLING, 'i = M)l.i I t I ON OF CIK'IICALIY A'.^l.T:'. O CL AIM (: ICA T I ON , l=C(IMVt >)•• I UN Til 1-KTFMDf.O AI.WAIIOM
-------
TABLE IX-S (contlntisd)
TRfATMKNT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS •AI-OPTION *
SUUCATEGORY DISSOLVING SULFI TG PULP NITRATION
THE*rMENI SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICATION!Ul
^^ ALTFHNAMVEJFI ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
HILL SIZF. T/OlEI I « 3 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
_^ __ _—__ __._,_,_..».._---> __..____>—,_•_».-•»».•— — — -----• — — -•«-•••"'•-••••••-••-• — ••• •_•- — •>- — — '•••• — "••——-•"••'»•»«"••••—•"• .•_>_•,_..->•_.-•» •_,__•«..*-».--•-• — -»••-•• — ••«• «•• — ••••-••-•— -»•--» —*•"••---••••••«••••• — — •••"•••
CAPITAL COST 450 .SfiZfl -2fl5J. 14&Z2 -3612
<*|OOOI «! 78 11351 16979 10917
600 _Z_UL_ iaz_a laaza uaaz
10417 I.1BJB 2I4B5 13707
o c M cusr . 450 as _2&2tt _5£6 — *ZZ
ItlUOO/YRI Kl 177 8620 6IB 564
600 2B -a^Ji?. —6^5 _-55&
222 3361 749 67B
O1
O
o _____ _— -
ENERGY COST 450 __2 i_fe -LSttZ —512
(*IOl)U/VR| ICI 459 2JB 1599 611
600 _2fl itti -iflttfl __6U6
614 313 2125 HI I
TOTAL ANNUAL COiT 450 _i__5 _4fefife __Zfe2 _2flttZ
lilOOO/YRI ICI *«35 S356 59S2 1S77
t.oo __L2a _az_5 ____a _4azt
JI2B 67l« 7601 4SU4
'. — _--__- — — _____ —
(Al ALL COSTS APE IN 1ST I1UARTFR l'»7fl DOLLARS,
(Ell IF NO COST I* INDICATED IN A GIVEN TH»:»1MtNT SYSThM, NO KILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY F XIST IN THIS <5UMC ATI-. GORY.
VALUF AtiOVI: I. INC IS COST H/
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continuad)
TREATMENT COif SUMMARY - OIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS t'A|-OPTION 4
SUBCATEGORY DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP VISCOSE
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICAT|ON( U I
•• ASB ALTERNATIVES) ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SI/E T/DlEJ I 2 3 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL CDS r 450 _£2Z§ -2251 15.613 -SSIZ
(110001 31 78 II3SI 16979 10917
600 _zaaz 1322U laazs issaz
10417 I 383fl 21485 11707
o c * COST 450 ^5 -2523 52Z 4ZJ
J4IOOO/YRI |C I 177 2620 619 565
600 as _3,E3.Z __62Z __S&6
222 J.36I 751 660
O
(—»
FjNE-KGv cn^r 450 J6Z X4& _15!>Z .512
IHOOO/YPI 1C I 45ILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY fcXIST IN THIS SUIIC ATI" COR Y.
VALUE AOOVe LINf IS COST W/O PUfJOUCTION PHOCF.bS CONTROLS.
VALUE HELOW IS COST WITH PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS SO AS TO fLIMIHATF GUIDELINE ALLOWANCES.
Itl 0 t M ANO (NffRGV COSTS ARE NF T AFTER OF IHIC TI ON OF CUST SAVINfiG.
TOTAL ANNUAL CO;»T INC.l.UDF>: O&M » ENFRGY » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS I ?2JS) .
I'E I VOL I I I'L V I/O I1Y .
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - niltECT O« SCMARCE MILLS (AI-OPTION *
SUUCATEGORY DISSOLVIMG SULFITE PULP CELLOPHANE
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICATIOUCD!
ASU ALTFRNATIVEIFJ ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SIZE T/OIE1 I * ' » SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 450 _5Q2fl _2S51 M&Z2 _S61Z
(tlUOUl BI7B I13SI I697Q 10117
600 _zaar iaz2.a maza laaaz
10417 13838 21405 I 37O7
o c M CUST <*50 flS _252S 5£2 —4Z5
(Cl 177 2«>20 621 567
600 23 _32ai 622 55S
222 3361 754 682
cn
O
no
cosr
(ilOOU/VP| (
450
r>oo
459
4_2fi
23«
—lfl'1
31 3
__5i2
I S<>9
2125
81 I
TOTAL ANNUAL CO-..T
ltiono/\ri)i (c)
450
6OO
2435
31 28
535T.
67 in
5955
35BO
76(15
45O9
•At ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST OUARTFR I97H DOLLARS.
101 IF NO COST IS INDICATED IN A GIVEN TWf-.AIMbNT SYSTEM. NO MILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY I XI ST IN THIS SUUCATC-C.ORY.
VALUE AllIlVE LINE IS COST W/U PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL >.
VALUE IIELOW IS C.TST WITH PRODUCTION PHCICC SS CONTROLS SO AS TLI ELIMINATE GUIDELINE ALLOWANCES.
f-'tXED ANNUAL COSTSJ22XI .
• tl MULTIPLY T/IJ OY .
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT OlSCHARCf MILLS (AI-OPTION 4
SUOCATfcT.QRV — DISSOLVING SUl-FITE PULP ACETATE
TREATMENT SYSTFM COSTS FOR MODI FICATION|B)
__-,-_________—_ -___—_________________«__________ ___ ___ _
ASB ALTFHNATI VE I F » ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL size. Typiei 12 3 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
— *—
CAPITAL COST 450 _5&ZS _2S51 14612 -3611
IVIOQOI U17B 11.151 16970 I Oil 7
600 _ziuz lazsa xaj25 isaaz
10417 I39JB 21485 13707
u c M cu;.r 4so as _252a saa *z&
<«IOOO/VR> |C| |7f 2620 622 568
600 23 _J2ai __fi.H 5fiS
222 .1361 755 68*
cn ' - - _ • .... ...
oo
ENERGY CO.-.T 450 __362 __JL«6 _1S2£ __512
J6IOOO/YRI 1C I 059 23H 1591 611
__lfi2 _2flUQ _
614 313 2125 Rll
TOTAL ANNUAL COST 450 _US5 _«&&& _52fefi 2H21
(*IOOO/YR| |CI 243S 5356 S9S6 1581
600 _2t25 _5Zfl5 _6&Z4 _J5ZI
JI2« 67IH 7607 451O
"" ' - — -—— .— __....__„_—__ ___._. —«.. -___ —. .— ___ _ - — ___—.„ ___«_JW« .
IA |.ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTfH |«>7B OULLARS.
(HI IF NO COST IS INUICATtn IM A GIVEN IWATMtUT SYSTEM. N(l VICLS WITH THAT SYSTFM CUHWENTLV UXIST IN THIb sUfIC ATC COR Y.
VALUE AUOVf. LIME IS CO'IT »/«! PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE (1ELIJW IS COST »|TH PHOniJCTION PHOCFSS CONTIHH.S SO AS TO FLlMINATf! GUIOELI NE ALLOW ANC ES.
ITION OF C'IFMICALLY ASST.Ttn CLARIFICATION, .1=CONVE WSI ON TO f.XTFNf)F.r> AERATION
-------
TABUI IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COiT SUMMARY - DIRECT Oi SCMAKGE MILLS IAJ-UPTION
SUUCATfcGORY PAPFHG'IAOF SULFITE(G)
cn
O
MILL SIZE T/DCE'I
CAPI TAL COS'T 100
(•i. 10001
450
1000
n t M COST 100
( * 1 0 OO/ Y R 1 I C I
450
1000
ENfUGY CObT 100
(tlOOO/VRI (Cl
450
IOOO
TOTAL ANNUAL COST 100
IHUOO/Vfl) |CI
45O
IOOO
(Al ALL COST'. AUf; SN 1ST Q'JARTFR
Illl If- Nl) CUST IS INDICAIFU IN A
TRtATMUNT
1
2220
6415
72541
JS
fcH
153
207
55
55
2.S-6.
246
54S
54B
Ml
1BIO
.1594
1978 DOLLARS.
C.I VFN TRKATCl NT
SYSTEM CIISTS F0« MODI Fl CAT tONCUJ
_ •
ASTJ ALTrRNATIV
2
-Z112
9112
ii*ia
15870
6OO
1869
3707
3?
Ifll
101
203
_12Zfl
I4t>5
3V75
7401
SYSTEM. Nil ^11
3
-2123
3923
11250
1&Z&4
21224
ISA
4|9
§15
713
1*1
141
583
589
1200
995
1 190
_23&2
34FS2
666?
_LS WITH THAT
ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
2790
5555
.7555
14149
lb.1
191
399
435
664
62
240
513
6.7.J.
B68
17JJJ. _ _
2301
4289
SYSTFM CUI»(JF.NTLY FXIST IN THIS SUI1C ATC C.OR Y.
VALUF AHOVS LINK IS CUST »'/!) PRODUCI I UN PUIlCfSS CIJNTIitlLS.
VALUt HLLUW IS CO:.I Wlfll f'UUKUC T I ON "RdC.t" Vi CDNTHOL'i SO A'j in FLMINATE GUIOFLINF ALLOWANCFS.
CCJ O fc M AND F NF.IJGY COSTS AOF. W T AFTER IIFUUCTICN OF COST SAVINGS.
TIIIAL ANNUAL C1JSI INCLUOFS: OfcM •• ENFKGY » F IXF D AMNUAL COSTSI22XI.
(LI MIJL I IPLY I/U HY ,')QT Til OlH/'Ifi KKG/D
l»-l izAunir turiAL AKHATIOM *NO SITTLING. 2 = AimiMCN or CHEMICALLY ASSI:>TM> CLARIF ICATIHN. 3 =
(G) INCLUDES PAPERGRADE SULFITE (BLOW PIT WASH) AND PAPERGRADE SULFITE (DRUM WASH) SUBCATEGORIES
AC'JAIION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMtNT COST SUMMARY - DIRF.CT DISCHARGE MILLS IAI-OPTION 4.
SUBCATECUHV GRUUNOmiOO-THERMO-MECHANlCAL
TREATMENT bYbTEM COSTS FOR MODI F| C AT I ON( B I
— — —•— —— —— •———— — — — — —_-—____•— ___ ____ _»«...«______ — ••.•.•. »_«._„ «.._«,_. «.« _«._, .» «„.« .._ _«. . _ ...— — — ... _«-._ _.•.•..«__ _. • •• ~._ ~«____ _ •••.-«•. .__ .
AS6 ALTERNATI VEIFI—; ACTIVATEO OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SI/E T/OIEI , . I 2 3 SLUOGF POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 3OO _i&2i -1303 _iSL2
(*IOOOI 26«l 4253 4760
O t W COST 3OO Jg 5^5
»tlOOO/YR| /INI) INFRGV COSTS ARfc Nf T AFTER Of UUC T I ON OF COST SAVINCiS.
TOTAL ANMUAL COST INCLUDES: Df,V| f ENKIU.Y t EIXEO ANNUAL COSTS ( 2 ?X| .
lh( «")l I ICL Y I/O IIY .'107 IO Olll A IN KKG/D
(I 1 l-ni)Di r IDNM. AM'AIION AND Sf:TTL|Nt.. ?=AI)O|TION UF CHL MIC ALLY ASSI.T(f) Cl. AR ir- ICA T IIJM . 3 =CflM VI' RSI ON TO FX TENDED At-HATION
-------
TABtB IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DlbCHAtttH- MILLS (AI-OPTION
SUBCATEGORY Gf>OUND«OOD-CM*l PAPbRS
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTh FU« MODIFICATlOMIn}
CAPI IAI COST
1 t 10 001
HILL SIZE T/DIE»
SO
ASB
I
94R
ALTFRNATIVCIFI
2
-J.2S5
UibS
•3
-112&
1536
ACTIVATED
SLUOGE
1175
OXIDATION
POND
PRIMARY
TREATf4ENT
u t, v COST
I itooo/ YRI
1C)
U1
o
en
ENERGY CO:>f
ISIOOO/YRI ici
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
itiooa/YRi ici
600
IOOO
50
600
IOOO
SO
600
IOOO
SO
60O
IOOO
5344
6984
/7I7
J4
-_52
131
__za
I 79
__21
.21
9539
__122
215
10956
6.5
82
984
?S7
14S4
13
6R
10?
L&fi
264
• 156ft
_16&2
2329
r.95
_2iaa
25B1
36S4
287
385
20
20
155
_2i6
246
— ill
440
-IfeZZ
2140
J04I
5553
-S.2ZZ
7817
&i
301
395
15
15
25
__laa
146
__2fi5
371
1617
2263
IAI
(til
ALL COSTS ARC
IF- Nil CO'iT IS
IN IST QUARIFH
INOICATtO IN A
1978 DOLLARS .
GIVEN TPtATMfcNT
SYSTfct'
I. NO "ILLS
WITH THAT
SYSTFM
CURRENTLY
K XIST
IN THIS
SUHCATtGORY.
ICI
CLI
II I
VALUE AMOVE LINF. IS COST W/O PROOUCIIUN PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE flELOW IS COS1 WITH PRODUCTION PMOCFSS CONTROLS SO AS TO ELIMINATE GUIDELINE AU.OWANC.F3.
O & M AND FNEHGY COSTS ARfc NET AFTER DEDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: OtM » ENERGY » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS(22KI.
WJLTIfLY r/0 HY .907 rrj OIIFAIN K»CG/U
UADOITIONAL AFKATIDN AND SfcTTLING. 2=AUOITION OF CHtMICALLY ASSI'.TtrO
CL AW 1 1 1C A T 1 UN . 3=CON Vt US 1 ON TU tXTFNDEO AfcRATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS |A|-OP»!ON 4
SUUCATEGOHY GRUUNOVHOOD-FINE PAPERS
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODI F ! C A T ION« It (
ASQ ALTITHMA Tl VEIF • ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SI/6 T/OIEt I . ? 3 I.LUOGE POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 75 213
1*10001 147 B
500 _2_iO
5030
750 __342
6302
II! C M CUST 75 22.
tblOOO/YRI JCt 112
50O 2fl4
273
O »5'0 _____ 2*1
*-J 326
ENERGY COST 75 . 1.2
«*IOOO/VR» JCI IQ
500 22 ._
7t
750 112
112
TOTAL ANNUAL COST 7S _J2&
ItlOOO/YHI 1C I ~ " ~ ~ 056
500 _ian ;_
750
:
(A| ALL COSTS Attfi IN 1ST OUARTFR l<>7« DOLLARS.
(B( ir NO CCJ-.T IS INUICATb'O IN A GIVEN UUATWfcNT SYSTlrN1. Nil WILLS WI TiJ THAT SYSTEM CU'T'eNTLY tXIST IN THIS 5UIIC ATFCOI' Y.
VALUE ABI1VF UNI. IS COST W/Q PRODUCTION PIVOCGSS CONTROLS.
VALUF HE.I.UW IS COST WITH f'UOOUCTION PM(|C.(:!>S CONTROLS SCI AS TO FLIMIUATF GUIOfLIN^ ALLOWANCES.
IC( Q f, M AND f NFRGY CO'..T-j ARH NET AFTER O^UUCTICN OF CO..T -lAVIN!'.-..
TOTAL ANNUAL cosi INCLUDES: OI,M •» FNirwr.Y » F ixtfo ANNUAL COSTS(22%|.
(LI fULIU'LV l/t) HY ,'10'f TO OtlTAlN KKG/D
IFI |-AI>ni r HINAI. At'NAIlUN -\NO SKTHING. ?3AI>niT|ON Of CHFI/I C ALLY As s I . Tl O CL AH I F I C A f I MM . 3-COM Vt «:.. I ON TO FXftNOf-O AEUATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMAKY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS IAI-UPTIOH 4
SUBCATeGQRY OEINK FINE PAPERS.
TREATMENT SYSTEM CUSTS FOR MQOIFJCATIONCHI
- - ^^ ALTERHAMVeiFI ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SI*E T/DIEI I 2 •' SL»nGE POND TREATMENT
_«. — _ ____ -.— — -..•.• — — — — •—-•-••• — -•—•••'— — -• — ••••••-•••-——-"™™~~~~~"""'~' -"•— — "•""'
CAPITAL COST 110 _152fi
[110001 1596 J031 J542 2522
~2HIO ~4P.KI 6172 *265
800 _*!•£•&
4640 7233 10155 6BJ6
O G W COST ISO 42 —456 —12& —2S*
(tlOOOXYRI (Cl *Z «Sfi l96 20/*
400 £>B _ Zfi& 322 —222
60 7fa»S 300 299
O BOO a* _L2fe2 4*6 —43.J.
03 (,4 1^69 **<> 411
ENERGY COST IBO 52 *2. IZ& 29.
(ttOOO/YRI ICI S2 42 176 91)
400 114 Z9. —3.Z3 —i-B&
||4 79 37B 1H6
• •• f to 1^(1
BOO 2'' ll51 B*fl
400 Z22 -12P.Z _2S=I5 _1424
T
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS IA|-OPriON
IIUBCATEGORY oeiNK TISSUE PAPERS
TREATMENT SVSTfcM COSTS FOR MODIFICATION(HI
on
O
us
MILL
CAPI TAL COST
1 t IUOOI
O 6 M CO SI
(tlOOO/VU) (Cl
KNEHGY COST
(tlUOO/YR) ICI
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
ItlOOO/YRI JCI
SIZE T/biei
25
so
tao
25
50
180
25
50
180
?S
50
1
429
429
Sfifl
66B
_1526
1596
21
21
26
*,2
42
^
7
15
53
53
j 33
123
IBS
2
1025
1025
1483
3022
166
__225
225
449
449
11
1 1
11
17
42
603
4O3
__562
569
3
967
967
1494
1 494
3499
75
75
121
101
137
187
22
29
5.4
54
112
177
312
31 7
434
SLUDGE
740
74 O
1112
1112
-24Z2
2479
32
99
114
1 14
125
195
la
IR
3Q
30
20.
90
269
269
— J32
3H9
POND TREATMENT
I BO
__445
445
I5S
1 133
130
IAI ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTER 1978 DOLLARS.
(Ill IF NO COST IS INDICATED IN A GI VFN TREATMENT SYSTEM. NO MILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY EXIST IN THIS 3UUC ATf GOR Y.
VALUE AHOVE LINE IS COST W/O PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE HtLOw Ib COST WITH PfODUCTION PWOCE sS CONTROLS 'ill Ai TO ELIMINATE GUIDELINE ALLOWANCES.
(Cl O C M AND TNF.RGY COST5 ARC NF T AFTER DEDUCTION OF COST SAVINGS.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: Oi.M t ENFRGY * FlXfO ANNUAL COSTS (22X).
(tl MULTIPLY I/O tlY ,'JO/ TO OtlTAIN KKG/O
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE HILLS (M-OPT ION A
SUFiCATEGORY TISSUE FROM WASTEPAP£.R
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIF|CATION(HI
CAPI TAL CO5I
< * 10 001
MILL SIZE T/OtF.I
10
I
__L22
122
2 3
SLUDGE
__122
122
POND
TREATMENT
__122
122
40
_ 2Z2
272
2Z2
272
__2Z2
272
OEM COST
(HOOO/YR) (C)
10
_22
29
22
29
22
29
cn
i—»
o
34.
3*
34
FNEHGY CObI
(I 1000/YHI (Cl
10
40
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
<»1000/Y!7| |CI
10
55
55
55
55
94
24
94
(A| ALL CrjSfli AIJC IN 1ST QUARTER I97B OULLAIJs.
(Ul IF NO COST IS INDICATKD IH A GIVEN TNfcATMtNT SYSTfM, NO WILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CUHHENTLY EXIST IN THIS SUI'CATtGORY.
VALur Auovr, LINE is COST w/o PROOUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE !lfc.LOW IS COS.F WIIH PRflPUCTION PUflCR-,'. CONTROLa «>O AS TO ELIMINATE GUIDELINE ALLOWANCED.
(Cl 0 6 M AMI) FNEHGY COSIS A«fc NF T AFTER O-OUCTION OF C'JS t SAVINGS.
TOTAl ANNUAL COSt INCLUDES: (Ifcvt » t'NFHGV t TIXF.O ANNUAL COSTS 1^2X1.
IEI MUl. III'LY T/D HY .MG7 TO OC.TAIM KKG/l)
(FI I=AL)OI r IOMM AE'HAIION AND SETTLING. ;> = A()l> I r I OH OF CHEMICALLY ASS'l>Tin CLAP IK 1C A T ION . .1=CO-MVfi»f. I ON Til EXTFNDFiO AFRATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT OlbCHARGr. M!LL:» (AI-OPTION
:>UUCATEGURY PAPFRPOARO FROM WASTEPAPER
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODI FlCATIONCBI
MILL
CAPI TAL COST
« no ool
o e M COST
(11000/YR) (Cl
ENERGY COST
(SIOOO/YRI ICI
TOTAL ANNUAL CtlLiT
(SIOOO/YRI (Cl
(Al ALL COSTS ARE IN
(U» IK NO CO". I I -. I MO
VALUE A HOVE L I Nt
SIZE T/0(EI
50
160
70O
50
16U
700
50
160
roo
so
160
roo
IS! QUARTER l'»78
ICATHO IN A GIVEN
•
5?
52
<»5
95
_J>24
2O4
a
3
&
5
Ifl
10
_1
1
2
1
2
t
1*
14
27
27
ti'<
b CL AH 1 K 1C A T I (IN , 3=CON Vf-'R'. I UN
TO fiXTfrNDEO AERATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (AI-UPTION 4
SUBCATfcGORY — WASTEPAPER-WLDED PRODUCTS
TREATMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICATIONS!
-ASO ALTFHNATI VElFJ-
MILL •alii- T/OJEI
20
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
OX II)Af I UN
POND
PRIMARY
TREATMENT
CAPITAL C1JST
ISIUOOI
—225
235
50
ISO
-III
711
U G M CUSt
(11000/YR) |CI
20
2
9
Ol
I—"
ro
so
ISO
IB
38
ENf.HGY COST
ItlOOO/YRI (Cl
20
50
t
I
J
3
ISO
_2
9
TOTAL ANNUAL COST
(ilOOO/YRI 1C I
20
62
50
-1S.&
106
150
-2U4
203
(Al ALL COSTS AUE IN 1ST OUARTRR 1978 DOLLARS. ,
07 TO OHfAIN KKG/U
|F| I-AOOIT1MNAL AI'RAIIOM AND SI-TILIIwG. ? = AOI> I T I ON (jf CHEMICALLY ASSIT.lfO CL AH I F 1C A T Ill'l . J=CO"I VE RS I ON TO EX TFNTJEI) AfcRATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT CO!iT SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (AI-OPTION <»
SUHCATEGORY BUILDERS' PAPER 6 ROOFING FELT
TREATMENT SYbTEM COSTS FOR MODIFICATION: OGM » ENfHGV * TIXF.O ANNUAL COST-i I 22X1' •
it! WUI. IIPLY r/IJ IIY .S)07 TO OUTAIN KKG/O
If-l ! = A!_)DI I IIJNAL At: HAT I ON A Nil StTTLINl.t ^=AOn|TION OF CMfMfCALLY ASSI'iTtO CL AH I F 1 C A T I ON i 3 =f.OM Vt PS I ON T(l fKIf'Hl>f£O AfffATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
THEATMCNT COST SUMMAKY - DIRECT Dl SCMARGK MILLS IAI-I1PTION 4
SUBCATeGOQY NQNINTfcGKATED-FIN€ PAPERS
TREATMENT ^vbiEM COSTS FO» MCIDIFICATION(HI
ASO ALTERNATIVEtFI ACTIVATLO OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SIZE T/DtEl 1 2 3 hLUDC.F. POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 35 2.2J.
I HOOOI P21
215 762
7t>9
1000 _22U2
22O9
0 E M COST 35 22
(IIOOO/YK) |C» 22
215 3.2
30
1000
ENERGY CObT 35 2
(SIOOO/VB) 1C I 2
215 12
12
1000 5fl
58
IOTAL ANNUAL CObT 35 .73 ,_
I t 1000/YRI tCI 73
215 an
?ll
1000 aas
585
— — — — — — ——— — — ——-._ — _ —..—_ • —__—__«.____,-____ __ _ __——__—.~_~ __ __-_—•__ _•_«.__-.
(A» ALL costs AHE IN isi QUARTER i«97n DIILLAKS. :
(Hi IF HO CU-.I |-» INDICATED IN A GIVEN IRKATMCNT SYSTHM. NO MILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY FXIST IN THIS SUdC A Tt COP Y.
VALtJE AUUVP LINt IS COST W/O OUOOUCTIIJN PMQCESS CDflTHULS . :
VALUE IJfcLO* IS COST WITH PRODUCT IUN "UtlCFSS CUNTROIO !i() AS TT r.L|M|MATK ijUIDf-LINr ALLOWANCES.
(C| Q t M AND f HiZttGY CO->Tb ARE NE I AFTLH DriJIJCTION Uf CO'. T -.AV/INCJS.
HIIAL ANNUAL COST I NCLUOEb: OCM *• fiN^I'.'iY » FIXED Af4NUAL CQSIS (,; 2X) .
(LI MULTIPLY T/0 (1Y ,-iOT TO (HIT AIM KKG/O j
IIs) l=AuDI I IfltlAL AfpAIlUN ANO SE Til ING. ?. = M>- I I I PN (JF C.tlfMICALLY A.sI.Tl.l) CL AH I f- 1C A F I ON . 3 =CON VI '»:. l;r)N f IJ KXfFNOFn AIRATIDN
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (AI-OPTION 4
SUBCATEGIJRY WON I NTtGH ATED- TI S'iUE PAPERS
TREAIMI-'NT SYSTI.M COST'S Foa MOOl F1C AT I ON< 0 I
MILL SI/E i/DIEI
15
-ASH ALFFRNATlVFIFI-
2
ACTIVATFO
SLUDGE
OXIDATION
POND
PRIMAHY
TREATMENT
CAPIFAL CUbf
I 110 00 I
IBO
__5Z§
575
1370
1000
360'1
o t f C.USF
(ilOOO/YRI ICI
3!5
ISO
isa
376
en
(-*
en
ENEHGY COST
(JIOOO/YH) ICI
IOOO
IBO
1274
4
15
15
IOOO
16
76
TUTAL ANNUAL COST
(ilOOO/YRI |C|
35
tao
__2aa
288
692
IOOO
-2144
2144
(Al ALL COSTS AHE IN 1ST QUARTEO 197R DOLLARS.
(Ul IF NO COST IS INDICATED IN A GIVEN THEAlMtf.NT SYSTE-M, NO fILLS WITH IHAT SYSTEM C^. CONIUDLi >O AS TO ULIMINAI'R GU1DF.L1NE ALLOWANCES.
1C) o c. M AND CNE-WGY COSTS API: NFT AFTER OFOUCTION OF cusr SAVIMCS.
TOtAL ANNUAL CQSI IMCLUOFS: Ofc« * ENFRC.Y • FIXED ANNUAL C(1STSI^2X).
Jt» WJLIIPLY F/O BY .'J07 TO OflTAIN KKG/O
\H I = AOO|I IIINAL Ar:UA1IC)N AND SI: TILING. 2 = AI)OiriON OF CHfM'CALLV ASS IS Tf.ll CL Af I F 1C AT IHN . J=COMV»-RS I UN TO exFFNOEO AL:»ATIQN
-------
TABU! IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT CObT SUMMARY - OIRFCI DISCHARGE. HILLb (AI-OPT1QN
SUOCATfcCOnr NONINTEGRATED-LrwT PAPERS (LTHT)
SYSTEM COSTS FOR MQOI FICATIONC01
HILL SIZE T/DIKI
10
-ASH ALTFRNATIVFIFJ
2 .1
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
OXIDATION
POND
PHlHAPY
TREATMENT
CAPI TAL COST
1*10001
_446
446
135
O C H COST
(S1OOO/YHI (Cl
cn
i—»
cri
ENCHGY COST
(1IUOO/YRI CCI
ZOO
10
60
200
10
2208
__12S
I2B
.106
._&«!&
666
TOTAL ANNUAL CO.'.T
Itiuoo/vni (ci
60
200
10
60
200
11
I I
J4
34
229
566
I IBS
«A| ALL CUSIS AHE IN 1ST QUARTER 1978 ODLLAPS.
IUI IF tlO CU-. T l> IND1CAIEO IN A C, I VEN THtAIMbNT SYSTEM. Nil WILLS WITH THAT SYSffM CtWRENTLY EXIST IN THIS SUliC ATI GORY.
VALUE ABOVE LINfc IS COST */O PRODUCT I ON PROCFSS CUNUHH.S.
VALUF UELUW IS CI1SI WITH PRODUCTION DMOCI:SS CONTPIIL«J ^,'t AS TO ELIMINATE GUIOFLINE ALLOWANCES.
(Cl O C M AM) fNFRGY CO.,!-. APt NIT T AFTER bCOUCTION OF CO:. I SAVING-*.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST INCLUDES: ntM » ENt.IGY • flXFO ANNUAL COSISI22XI.
IE) WJLIIPLY T/0 bY .VOT TO OtlTAIri KKii/U . "
If-t I- AUDI I Iill-.AL AIHAIIUU AND SfcTTLING. 2=AODITI(IN OF .CHI: "I L Al LV . ASSIa T5 II CL A«< I f I C A T I fj'-l . J=C(IN V H •• I UN TO HXTKNOEO AE°ATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - OIPECT DISCHARGE MILLS (A|-OI>TtON 4
bUUCATGGO<»Y NONINTfcGRATED-LTwT PAPFRb (ELECT!
TRf.ATMCNT SVSThM COSTS FOR MORI Fl CAT I ONI 8 I
ASH ALTERNATI VEIF » ACTIVATED OXIDATION PRIMARY
MILL SI7E T/OIEI I 2 3 SLUOGF. POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST IO W.-562.
I t 1000 I 5»>4
60 _14b3
1463
200 - _2SZ!i
2879
O C M CUST 10 156.
i4IOOO/YRJ |Ct 156
60 4fl5.
4O5
ZOO 232 *•
: OI.M » f-tff.KdV » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS ( 22*1 .
ILI MULIIHLY i/o IIY .<»o/ TO OHTAIN KKG/O
IF I l = Al)(M t 1OMAL AFRAMDN AND SETTLING. ,» =Al)[l I f | ON O17 CHfMU.ALLY ASSl.TcD CLARII IC.ATIOM. 3 = C(1NVF."S I ON TO IXITNOLO AERATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TRFATWRNT COST SUMMARY - HIR6CT DISCHARGE MILLS (AJ-UPTION 4
SUUCATeGORY NUNINTF.GRATED-FILT AND NONMOV PAPERS
TREATMENT SYSTtM COSTS FOa MODIFICATION(Bl
ASH ALTFHNATIVEIFI ACTIVATED OXIDATION PHI"APY
MILL SI7E T/D1FI I ? .1 SLUDGE POND TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST 5 _ _ _ 35^
If 10001 " ~ ~35,
20 __ZS2
707
*s -1237
1007
O 6 » COST 5 _ _ _ le&
UIOOO/YRI |CI ~,06
20 __12i
191
cn
£ *s __222
292
ENERGY CObl 5 _ y
ItlOOO/VRI (Cl ~ ~ 2
20 5
; s
*5 _; ___ia
10
TOTAL ANNUAL CO'Jf 5 _ _ ^a5
ItlOOO/YWI 3 CUNfMOLu *') Ab TO KHMINATF. GUIDELINE ALLOWANCES. !
(Cl 0 0 M AND E.NERGY CO:.!'. ARt NF T AFTF.H W OUC TI ON OF CO!. T SAVINf.S.
TOTAL ANNUAL COST I NCLUIJfS: Of,M » ENERGY » FIXED ANNUAL COSTS C ?- XSI .
(LI MULTIPLY I/O f!Y .907 IO Otll A IN KKG/O
If) IsAuDII IDtiAL. Af.RAIlDN AND Sf I Tl. I NO . a=AD"|ri(]N OF CHfwlCALLY A'.^.I-.Ti;O CL A" IT ICA TI f)N'. 3= CON VE RS I ON TO EXTFNDf-O AERATION
-------
TABLE IX-8 (continued)
TREATMENT COST SUMMARY - DIRECT DISCHARGE MILLS (A)-OPTION 4
SUBCATEGORY NONINTEGHATEO-PAPERBOAHO
TRtAlMENT SYSTEM COSTS FOR MODIFlCATION(BI
MILL SIZE I/DO: I
10
-ASB ALTfcHNAT.I VE|F|-
2
ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
ax IDATiUN
POND
PRIMARY
TREATMENT
CAPITAL COST
111000)
239
231
4O
471
75
652
O & V CUST
10
ICI
72
79
121
131
cn
75
173
6NEHGY COiT
(iiuoo/vni (
10
40
1
I
a
»
TUfAL ANNUAL COST
lillGOO/YRI (Ct
10
133
238
75
liA| ALL COSTS ARE IN 1ST QUARTER 1978 DOLLARS.
I'll IF NO COST IS INDICATfD IN A GIVEN TREATMENT SYSTfW. NO CILLS WITH THAT SYSTEM CURRENTLY EXIST IN THIS SlIMC. ATK GOR Y.
VALUE AtiOVF LINK IS COST W/O PRODUCMON PROCESS CONTROLS.
VALUE DtLCIW IS COS1 WITH PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS 511 AS TO KL I
ICI 0 t f AND ENERGY CO>>TS ARF. NET AFTF.R OfOUCTION OF COST ,->AVING^.
I TOTAL ANNUAL COSI INCLUDES: OfcM » ENf.t.'OY » FIXED ANNUAL COSTSJ22XI.
Jtl MULTIPLY i/u IIY ,<;07 TO OHTAIN RKG/D
l(=l l = Al>DI I IOH»L A6PATION AND Se T IL I N(i . 3=AI)OITION OF CHEMICALLY AShl..Tf.
(iUIDELINR ALLOWANCED.
CL AIM f- 1C A T I UN . 3 = COMV£r N:i I ON TO FXIENOI-D A(:PATION
-------
TABLE IX-9
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
COST OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS
(Costs in $1000)
Subcategory
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Total
Capital Cost
Options
1
10,520
22,740
•20,230
70,940
16,190
9,680
28,540
20,390
81,370
31,950
440
2,140
4,350
151,600
471,080
2
39,120
90,800
75,390
117,340
77,490
51,470
48,410
64,640
55,590
64,400
7,050
15,460
21,140
347,950
1,076,250
3
53,210
111,550
96,540
194,030
92,760
63,200
75,870
81,910
136,980
98,140
7,450
18,070
34,240
500,400
1,564,350
4
25,030
72,540
55,930
102,210
61,590
46,140
31,930
58,980
61,900
57,510
4,330
9,510
11,210
344,230
943,040
1
3,530
8,750
7,570
19,400
5,030
3,130
8,370
6,360
27,610
8,300
110
500
950
47,550
147,160
Total Annual Cost
Options
2
23,120
49,180
39,580
61,490
37,490
24,260
20,750
32,850
30,340
33,010
2,800
6,680
8,730
150,230
520,510
3
27,110
53,860
46,700
77,060
39,770
27,530
27,469
36,570
55,620
39,550
2,800
7,460
11,940
192,560
645 ,990
4
7,700
21,950
16,630
31,270
19,030
13,630
9,880
17,370
21,470
18,040
1,420
2,920
3,390
104,780
289,480
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
-------
TABLE IX-10
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
COST OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS
(Costs in $1000)
en
INi
Capital Cost
Options
Subcategory
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Uastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
1
380
1,770
1,890
2,550
1,180
660
4,380
2
9,640
21,270
9,560
40,460
3,210
1,380
11,700
3
9,920
22,530
10,930
32,440
3,930
2,080
13,930
4
1,350
9,370
1,890
2,550
1,180
660
4,900
1
90
440
670
740
320
180
1,150
Total Annual Cost
Options
2
4,100
9,230
3,840
14,920
1,290
530
3,970
3
3,630
9,060
4,530
13,450
1,440
840
4,270
4
380
3,140
670
740
320
180
1,750
Totals
12,810
97,220
95,760
21,900
3,590
37,880
37,220
7,180
-------
TABLE IX-11
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
COST OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS
(Costs in $1000)
ro
ro
Subcategory
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
1
14,270
1,080
0
0
600
3,270
Capital Cost
Options
2
36,920
12,740
1,510
800
1,680
10,780
3
44,000
13,160
4,240
900
2,400
12,230
4
11,700
4,240
1,740
0
1,740
2,720
1
3,280
240
0
0
150
750
Total Annual Cost
Options
2
14,900
4,120
500
270
600
3,220
3
15,250
4 440
1,380
330
1,230
3,530
4
3 230
2 1 ^fl
790
fl
730
1,260
Total
19,220
64,430
76,930
22,140
4,420
23,610
26,160
8,140
-------
TABLE IX-12
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
SAMPLE COST CALCULATION - DIRECT DISCHARGER
726 kkg/d Alkaline-Fine Mill -
A.
C
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
apital
No.
Segregate cooling water in wood room
Reuse of relief and blow condensate
Fourth stage brown stock washer
Spill collection for pulp mill brownstock area
Spill collection for liquor storage and in
evaporator areas
Countercurrent washing in bleacaery
Spill collection in bleach plant and paper machine
areas
Spill collection in color plant area
Machine white water used on vacuum pumps
Increased white water storage and use in pulp mill
Lagoon for separate discharge of boiler blpwdown
and water treatment backwash
TOTAL
Cost*
$ 33,800
24,400
1,189,800
317,200
292 ,000
2,827,400
566,100
140,300
70,100
127,300
153,500
$5,741,900
B. Energy Requirements
Reduction/
Increase In Increase in
Electricity Use Steam Use
(kg/kkg)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Segregate cooling water
Reuse condensates
Fourth stage washer
Spill collection in pulp mill
Spill collection for liquor storage and
in evaporator
Countercurrent washing
Spill collection in bleach plant and
paper machine areas
Spill collection in color plant area
Machine white water used on vacuum pumps
Increased white water storage and use
Lagoon for boiler blowdown and water
treatment backwash
0.33
1.32
8.27
2.65
1.65
2.31
3.31
0.50
1.49
0.00
0.50
-14
152
-5
-36
TOTAL
22.33
97
Cost*
Cost of electric power = $0.0325/kwh x 22.32 kwh/kkg
Steam saving = (14 + 5 + 36) kg/kkg x 2425 Btu/kg x
$1.24/million Btu
Steam cost for added evaporation = 152 kg/kkg
x $4.81/kkg
Net Increase in Cost of Energy
$ 0.73/kkg
$-0.17/kkg
$ 0.73/kkg
$ 1.29/kkg
C. Annual
As an example of the details of the annual cost, Item 3 - additional
brown stock washer, is used. This is based on a 544 kkg/d pulp line.
Fixed cost = 22% of $1,189,800 capital cost
Maintenance = 4.5% of capital cost
Added labor
Electric power = 250 kw x 24 hrs/day x 352
operating days/yr x $0.0325/kwh
TOTAL
$261,800
53,400
0 .
68,600
$383,900
*First quarter 1978 dollars
523
-------
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 MGD), 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(s) following the existing secondary clarifier(s). It is
likely that at many mills, an existing secondary clarifier(s) 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 for the
addition of a chemical recovery system, if it is 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 three groundwood subcategories.
For the three 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. (143)(144)
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 and/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 effectively dewatered. 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 requires that
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 improve
dewaterability. The cost of dewatering of alum sludge has been
determined assuming the use of a separate horizontal belt filter press
dewatering system to dewater chemical solids only. It is assumed that
dewatered sludge is landfilled.
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 IX-13.
524
-------
TABLE IX-13
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 BOD5 applied/cu m/day
6 hr hydraulic retention time
Nutrient feed: BODS^ removed:N:P = 100:5:1
Aeration design requirements:
1 kg 02/kg BOD5 removed
17 kg 02/aerator 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
525
-------
Option 3_
BCT Option 3 is BCT Option 1 plus the addition of chemically assisted
clarification for all integrated and secondary fibers subcategories
and for the nonintegrated-f ine papers subcategory (those subcategories
for which BPT is based on biological treatment). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, as with Option 2, BCT Option 3 is BCT
Option 1 plus the addition of biological treatment. BCT Option 3
costs, therefore, include BCT Option 1 costs plus the cost of the
™~S f~plPe treatment systems identical in design to that discussed in
BCT Option 2; lower raw waste loadings characteristic of Option 1 are
assumed.
Option £
The costs of achieving BCT Option 4 effluent limitations are based on
upgrading of the technology on which BPT effluent limitations are
based to attain effluent levels characteristic of best performing
mills. The design bases for cost estimates relating to each of the
major types of treatment systems used throughout the industry are
Desi9n parameters for "Parading of an activated sludge system operated
at a 910 kkg/day (1,000 t/d) dissolving kraft mill are presented in
are presented I end~°f-Pipe unit Process treatment costs
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BAT OPTIONS
The costs of removal of toxic and nonconventional pollutants from
wastewaters generated by the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry have
been determined for two BAT options. The BAT options that have been
developed for the control of toxic pollutants from direct discharging
mills (see Section VIII) include: (a) application and operation of the
technologies that formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations and (b)
substitution of slimicides and fungicides containing trichlorophenol
an°/orpentachlorophenol with those that do not. The costs associated
with, these respective technology options are presented below.
Option ]_
The technology on which existing BPT regulations are based includes
biological treatment for all subcategories except the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory, where regulations are based
on primary clarification, and the nonintegrated-f ilter and non-woven
papers, nonintegrated-lightweight papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories, where BPT limitations are proposed on the basis of
primary clarification. In addition, effluent limitations have also
been established to control the discharge of zinc from mills in the
groundwood-fine papers, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-thermo-
mecnanical subcategories. Zinc was regulated on the basis of
precipitation with lime. The technology actually employed at mills in
these subcategories to comply with BPT effluent limitations was the
526
-------
TABLE IX-14
DESIGN BASIS FOR ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF ATTAINMENT
OF OPTION 4 BCT LIMITATIONS
I. • Integrated Segment
A. Activated sludge
1. Spill collection system with shock pond
2. Equalization
a. 12 hr at peak flow
3. Increase in aeration basin capacity
a. 50 percent additional aeration over BPT
b. 50 percent additional detention over BPT
c. Include costs to allow operation in a contact stabilization
mode
4. Additional clarification to decrease overflow rate from 20 to
16 cu m/d/sq m
5 Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids pro-
duction over BPT
Aerated Stabilization Basin
1. Spill collection system with shock pond
2. Three options of upgrading system
a. Additional aeration and settling
(1) Increase aeration to a total of 2.6 hp/1000 cu m capacity
(2) Additional 9 days of settling beyond BPT
b. Conversion to activated sludge (extended aeration)
(1) Configuration includes 12 hr of equalization at peak
flow, 2 days of aeration capacity, clarification
(16 cu m/d/sq m), and settling basin (size depends on
remaining basin capacity after conversion)
(2) Relocate existing aerators in equalization basin
(3) Install new aerators in aeration basin
(a) Design basis of 1.5 kg 02/kg BOD_5 removed
(4) Install solids handling equipment
c. Addition of chemically assisted clarification (cac)
(1) Same design criteria as other options including cac
Oxidation Ponds
1. Addition of mixed media filtration to control algae
a. Design basis of 235 cu m/d/sq m
527
-------
TABIE IX-14 (Continued)
paper, molded)
II. Secondary Fibers Segment
A. Deink subcategories (fine, tissue)
1. Activated sludge
a. Same design basis as integrated subcategories
2. Aerated stabilization basins
a. Same design basis as integrated subcategories
B. Wastepaper subcategories (board, tissue, builders'
1. BPT end-of-pipe treatment
2. Option 1 internal controls
III. 'Nonintregrated Segment
A. Fine paper subcategory (BPT = biological treatment)
1. Activated sludge and rotating biological contactors
a. All attain best performance levels
2. Aerated Stabilization Basins
a. Addition of 12 hr of equalization at peak flow
b. Additional 1 day of quiescence
3. Primary treatment attaining BPT limits
a. Addition of an aerated stabilization basin of the
overall design as above.
B. All other nonintegrated subcategories (BPT = primary treatment)
1. Biological treatment
a. Generally, all attain best performance levels
b. Two special cases
2. Primary treatment
a. Additional clarification to decrease overflow rate from
same
24
to 16 cu m/d/sq m
b. Addition of chemically assisted clarification (flash mixing
prior to clarifiers)
c. Expand solids handling system based on increase in solids
production over BPT
528
-------
TABLE TX-15
DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR OPTION 4
EXAMPLE CALCULATION
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Effluent Guidelines:
Flow (kl/kkg)
•BOD5. (kg/kkg)
TSS (kg/kkg)
BPT
230
6.9
11.05
BCT
230
4.1
6.2
Design Parameters:
Flow: 907 kkg/d x 230 kl/kkg x cu m/kl = 209,000 cu m/d
BOD5> Removed: 907 kkg/d x (6.9 kg/kkg - 4.1 kg/kkg) = 2540 kg/d
Biological Solids Produced:
Assuming 32 percent of BOD_5_ removed becomes solids:
907 kkg/d x [0.32 x (6.9 kg/kkg-4,1 kg/kkg)] = 813 kg/d
Assuming all of TSS removed becomes solids:
907 kkg/d x (11.05 kg/kkg-6.2 kg/kkg) = 4 399 kg/d
Total solids removed: 813 kg/d + 4,399 kg/d = 5,212 kg/d
529
-------
TABLE IX-16
COST SUMMARY FOR OPTION 4 ACTIVATED SLUDGE SYSTEM MODIFICATION
EXAMPLE CALCULATION - UNIT PROCESS END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT COSTS
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Effluent Flow = 230,000 cu m/d
BODS^ Removed = 2540 kg/d
Total Solids Produced (Dry Basis)
5212 kg/d
Capital
Treatment ($1000)
Process Spill Collection
System
Spill Basin
Pumping from Spill Basin
Spill Neutralization
Flow Equalization with Aeration
(peaking factor s 1.3) 1
Wastewater Pumping (peaking
factor =< 1.3) 1
Activated Sludge Basin
Modification 1
Additional Aeration 1
Secondary Clarifier
Modification 2
Nutrient Addition
Flotation Polymer
Flotation Thickening
Dewatering Polymer
Horizontal Belt-Filter
Primary and Biological Sludge
Transportation
Primary and Biological Sludge
Landfill
Subtotal 10
320
63,
35
53
,686
,849
,816
,278
,028
0
0
677
0
670
0
148
,623
Amortized
Capital
($1000/yr)
70
14
8
12
371
407
400
281
446
0
0
149
0
147
0
33
2,338
0 & M
($1000/yr)
10
1
2
7
20
25
41
40
51
24
41
37
41
27
131
46
544
Energy
($1000/yr)
31
0
1
0
72
121
0
391
35
0
0
9
0
4
0
0
664
Total
Annual Cost
($1000/yr)
. Ill
15
10
19
463
553
441
712
532
24
41
195
41
178
131
79
3,545
530
-------
substitution of zinc hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical,
hydrosulfite.
with sodium
As this technology option is identical to BPT, there are no
incremental costs associated with implementation of this technology
option. Substantial reductions in the discharges of chloroform and
zinc are anticipated when compared to raw waste loadings of these
toxic compounds.
Option ,2
Slimicide and biocide formulations containing chlorophenolics can be
replaced with formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants.
Based on the results of verification sampling, process chemicals
containing pentachlorophenol were used at ten of the 60 sampled mills
and process chemicals containing trichlorophenol at five of the
sampled mills. Correspondence with mill personnel indicate that at
three of the mills, pentachlorophenolic-containing process chemicals
are no longer used and at two of the mills,
trichlorophenolic-containing process chemicals are no longer used.
Inquiries of chemical suppliers as to the relative costs of
substitution to the use of process chemicals that do not contain these
toxic pollutants indicate that no definable cost difference will
result from implementation of this technology option.
COSTS FOR REMOVAL OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
Technologies available for removal of nonconventional pollutants
include: (a) color removal by minimum lime or alum coagulation; and
(b) ammonia removal by biological nitrification or substitution of
chemical pulping bases. The method of developing cost data and the
costs associated with these respective technologies are presented
below.
Color Removal ;
Estimates of costs for color removal have been prepared for two
alternative treatment technologies: minimum lime coagulation and alum
coagulation. Costs are presented in Table IX-17 for both technologies
for those subcategories identified as having high levels of color in
effluent discharges.
Minimum Lime Coagulation. Minimum lime coagulation treatment for
color load reduction in the four bleached kraft, the dissolving
sulfite pulp, and the two papergrade sulfite subcategories is applied
only to highly-colored wastewater streams. These streams normally
represent only about one-quarter to one-third of total wastewater
discharge from a mill. The streams required to be treated would be
the highly-colored bleach plant wastewater (first stage caustic
extraction waste stream) and the screen room (decker or pulp mill)
wastewater. For the remaining subcategories (unbleached kraft,
semi-chemical, and unbleached kraft and semi-chemical), minimum lime
is applied to total wastewater discharge. This is done because the
531
-------
TABLE IX-17
COSTS FOR COLOR REDUCTION
FOR DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Dissolving Kraft
907 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Market Bleached Kraft
318 kkg/d
Lime
en Alum
00
ro
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1451 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
BCT Bleached Kraft
272 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
726 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1179 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
5,591
13,039
2,100
5,752
2,880
7,886
5,145
14,129
1,897
5,054
3,450
8,996
4,545
12,018
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
1,230
3,031
462
1,313
634
1,809
1,132
4,095
417
1,155
759
2,073
1,000
2,781
0
Labor
($l,000/yr)
151
912
89
476
101
597
143
914
86
444
111
671
132
830
& M
Chemicals
($l,000/yr)
867
3,520
174
912
278
1,561
1,070
4,163
146
676
370
1,801
610
2,927
Energy
($l,000/yr)
1,218
243
245
75
405
116
771
275
205
60
545
134
875
205
Total
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
3,466
7,706
970
2,776
1,417
4,083
3,116
9,447
854
2,335
1,785
4,679
2,617
6,743
-------
TABLE IX-17 (Continued)
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Alkaline-Fine
181 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
726 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1089 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Unbleached Kraft
(Linerboard and Bag)
408 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
907 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1361 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
1,380
3,678
3,450
8,199
4,350
10,423
2,724
3,481
4,350
5,511
5,572
6,984
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
304
838
759
1,894
957
2,419
599
791
957
1,260
1,226
1,602
0
Labor
($l,000/yr)
82
371
111
658
127
784
100
342
132
472
158
560
& M
Chemicals
($l,000/yr)
92
400
370
1,592
556
2,391
308
362
684
800
1,027
1,198
Energy
($l,000/yr)
140
41
545
122
805
173
355
38
781
68
1,166
95
Total
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
618
1,650
1,785
4,266
2,445
5,767
1,363
1,533
2,555
2,600
3,578
3,455
-------
TABLE IX-17 (Continued)
Amortized
0 & M
Total
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Semi-Chemical
181 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
386 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
en Unbleached Kraft &
•P* 634 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1361 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
2359 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Dissolving Sulfite
408 t/d
Lime
Alum
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
1,366
1,927
2,337
2,943
2,833
3,581
Semi-Chemical
3,746
4,630
5,988
7,220
8,235
9,985
Pulp
3,750
8,835
4,470
10,477
Capital
($l,000/yr)
301
434
514
665
623
813
824
1,056
1,317
1,658
1,812
2,303
825
2,033
983
2,419
Labor
($l,000/yr)
81
225
94
299
103
341
121
418
167
573
215
723
117
661
129
748
Chemicals
($l,000/yr)
114
130
235
275
339
388
532
617
1,142
1,324
1,964
2,296
450
1,869
598
2,493
Energy
($l,000/yr)
141
19
278
31
390
39
613
56
1,293
102
2,257
163
645
137
850
175
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
638
808
1,122
1,270
1,456
1,581
2,091
2,147
3,921
3,657
6,248
5,485
2,037
4,700
2,560
5,835
-------
TABLE IX-17 (Continued)
en
co
en
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Papergrade Sulfite
91 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
408 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
907 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
1,230
2,989
3,270
7,151
- 5,235
11,466
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
271
678
719
1,646
1,152
2,660
0
Labor
($l,000/yr)
79
317
108
584
144
827
& M
Chemicals
($l,000/yr)
83
281
355
1,278
780
2,841
Energy
($l,000/yr)
120
32
500
100
1,100
200
Total
Annual Cost
($l',000/yr)
553
1,308
1,682
3,608
3,176
6,528
-------
flow is much lower for these mills and the color does not tend to be
concentrated in streams of lesser flow.
The cost for the minimum lime system is based on the following items:
1. wastewater transfer pump,
2. mixing (in-line mixer),
3. lime feed system,
4. polymer feed system,
5. clarifier,
6. sludge holding tank with mixer,
7. lime mud dewatering system,
8. fluidized bed for lime mud incineration, and
9. pH adjustment following minimum lime treatment in those
cases where the total mill effluent is treated.
A wastewater transfer pump with ancillary piping transports the first
caustic stage effluent from the bleach plant to the minimum lime
treatment system. An in-line mixer combines the lime slurry with the
wastewater. For the purpose of the cost estimate, a lime dosage of
2,250 mg/1 is assumed. Wastewater then flows to a color reduction
clarifier. A polymer is metered into the wastewater stream prior to
the clarifier to aid in settling the lime precipitate. Other settling
aids (such as fiber fines) can also be used at this point in the
minimum lime process.
Sludge from the clarifier is pumped to a sludge holding and mixing
tank or directly to the lime mud dewatering system. After the lime
mud has been dewatered to approximately 60 percent solids, it is
transferred to a fluidized bed for drying and calcining. At this
point, recovered lime is transferred back to the slaker for reuse in
the color control process. . Ninety percent recovery of lime is
assumed.
In those cases where the total mill wastewater is treated using
minimum lime coagulation, the decolored wastewater is treated to lower
the pH below the maximum discharge allowable (9.0). Sulfuric acid is
the chemical used for pH control. This pH adjustment system includes
two neutralization tanks in series, each equipped with a mixer, and
the chemical feed and storage equipment required for sulfuric acid
addition.
Alum Coagulation. Alum coagulation is another available technology
for removing color and can be applied to the total mill effluent for
each of the subcategories from which highly-colored effluents are
discharged. The costs for the alum coagulation system are based on an
identical system as that identified in the discussions of BCT Option
*•* »
Ammonia Removal
Estimates of the costs of ammonia removal at direct discharging mills
where ammonia-based cooking chemicals are used have been prepared.
536
-------
These costs have been based on (a) substitution to a non-ammonia-based
cooking liquor and (b) ammonia removal through biological
nitrification. Model mill costs for direct dischargers are presented
in Table IX-18 for the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite pulp, and
papergrade sulfite subcategories.
Costs for substitution of chemical bases have been developed and are
presented in Table IX-18. The costs include installation of a new-
spent liquor furnace, although this may not be necessary, and the
substitution of sodium-based cooking for ammonia-based cooking. The
capital costs for a new furnace do not include increased evaporator
capacity or other auxiliary items.(210) A major cost item would be the
increased cost of chemicals, with costs for NH3_ and Na£CO3_ reported at
$0.088/kg ($0.04/lb), and $0.154/kg ($0.07/lb), respectively. At this
cost penalty of $0.066/kg ($0.03/lb), an increased cost of $5.50/kkg
($5/ton) of pulp is realized. No cost credit is taken for the
recovery or resale of chemicals. Energy costs for the suggested
change, after calculating losses and savings, are estimated to be
zero.
Costs for ammonia removal through the application of end-of-pipe
treatment were also developed. It has been assumed that existing
mills are meeting BPT effluent limitations using the technology on
which BPT effluent limitations are based. Existing biological systems
can be converted to the extended aeration mode of activated sludge.
Ammonia removal would be accomplished through single-stage
nitrification. Nitrification is the process where specific bacteria
convert ammonia to nitrite nitrogen and then to nitrate nitrogen (see
Section VIII). Conventional activated sludge systems and aerated
stabilization basins can be converted to the extended aeration mode by
system modification. Design criteria are a volumetric loading of 0.24
kg BODS/cu m/day (15 Ib BOD5/1000 ft3_/day), air requirements of 1.5 kg
02/kg BOD5_ removed (1.5 Ib 02/lb BOD5_ removed) and 3.1 kg 02,/kg NH3_
removed (3.1 Ib 02/lb NH3_ removed), aeration capacity of 17 kg
02/hp/day (37 Ib 02_/hp/day), and a 48 hour aeration basin detention
time. All other criteria are equivalent to that considered in
estimating the cost of activated sludge systems in developing
estimates of the cost of attainment of BPT effluent limitations.(40)
Table IX-18 presents the estimated costs to implement this end-of-pipe
technology. The costs include an allowance for repositioning of
existing aeration equipment in the aeration basin. Table IX-18 also
presents an estimate of costs assuming that raw waste load reductions
to BCT Option 1 levels have been implemented. These estimates assume
no reduction in the ammonia raw waste load.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PSES AND PSNS
Toxic pollutants being considered for control under PSES and PSNS
include zinc, trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol. The methodology
for reduction of these pollutants is substitution of process
chemicals. Slimicide and fungicide formulations containing
chlorophenolics can be replaced by those that do not. Based on the
537
-------
TABLE IX-18
COSTS FOR AMMONIA REMOVAL
FOR DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Subcategory
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp
Papccgrade Sulfite
Mill
Size
Ckkg/d)
181
386
544
408
544
91
408
907
Control*
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
Capital
($1,000)
1,500
510
850
277
4,275
2,857
1,021
1,586
528
9,084
3,846
1,429
2,079
733
12,825
12,640
2,841
5,429
700
23,787
16,181
3,785
6,886
930
31,685
1,896
369
1,207
215
4,882
6,647
1,575
4,235
881
14,600
13,070
3,498
8,287
1,957
30,200
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
331
112
186
61
941
628
225
349
116
1,998
846
314
457
161
2,822
2,780
625
1,194
154
5,233
3,560
833
1,515
205
6,971
417
81
265
47
1,074
1,462
347
932
194
3,212
2,875
769
1,823
430
6,644
0 & M
($l,000/yr)
52
29
39
18
455
71
46
52
28
966
81
56
58
34
1,364
161
77
115
0
779
181
92
129
0
1,038
65
24
51
16
264
117
59
94
38
1,188
161
94
129
61
2,640
Energy
($l,000/yr)
137
117
71
51
0
291
249
150
108
0
411
351
212
152
0
889
612
92
0
0
1,185
816
123
0
0
105
85
61
41
0
475
384
276
186
0
1,055
854
614
413
0
Total
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
520
258
296
130
1,396
990
520
551
252
2,964
1,338
721
727
347
4,186
3,830
1,314
1,401
154
6,012
4,926
1,741
1,767
205
8,009
587
190
377
104
1,338
2,054
790
1,302
418
5,762
4,091
1,717
2,566
904
12,511
*Hote - Controls are as follows:
I - Modification of Activated Sludge at BPT flow
II - Modification of ASB at BPT flow
III - Modification of Activated Sludge at Option 1 flow
IV - Modification of ASB at Option 1 flow
V - Change chemical base and add recovery system
538
-------
results of verification sampling, the use of these chemicals is not
widespread. Inquiries of chemical suppliers as to the relative costs
of substitute chemicals indicate that no defineable cost difference
will result from chemical substitution.
PSES and PSNS regulations for the control of the toxic pollutant zinc
are also proposed for the groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN
papers, and groundwood-fine papers subcategories. The technology
basis of the proposed PSES and PSNS is substitution of zinc
hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical, with sodium hydrosulfite. The
costs of this substitution have been estimated and are presented in
Table IX-19.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF NSPS
Option ]_
This option involves the application of (a) production process
controls to reduce wastewater discharge and raw waste loadings and (b)
end-of-pipe treatment in the form of biological treatment for all
subcategories except nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-filter
and non-woven papers, nonintegrated-1ightweight papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard, where end-of-pipe treatment is in the form
of primary clarification. For all integrated and secondary fibers
subcategories and the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, cost
estimates are based on the installation of the contact stabilization
activated sludge process. For the remaining nonintegrated
subcategories, cost estimates are based on the installation of
chemically assisted primary clarification at a dosage rate of 150 mg/1
of alum. NSPS model mill costs associated with the implementation of
NSPS Option 1 are presented in Table IX-20.
Option 2
Slimicide and biocide formulations containing chlorophenolics can be
replaced with formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants.
Correspondence with chemical , suppliers as to the relative cost of
substitution to the use of process chemicals that do not contain these
toxic pollutants indicate that no definable cost difference will
result from the implementation of this control technology.
In the groundwood subcategories, zinc hydrosulfite, a bleaching
chemical, can be replaced by sodium hydrosulfite. The costs of this
substitution at new sources in these subcategories are presented in
Table IX-19.
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
Energy Requirements
The implementation of some of the various control and treatment
options considered as the basis of proposed rules are expected to
affect existing energy demand. Estimates of the energy requirements
539
-------
TABLE IX-19
COSTS FOR SUBSTITUTING SODIUM HYDROSULFITE
FOR ZINC HYDROSULFITE
Subcategory
Cost Increase Due
Mill Size Sodium Hydrosulfite Used to Substitution
(kkg/d) (kg/kkg) (kkg/yr) ($l,000/yr)
PSES, PSNS (Indirect Dischargers - Existing and New)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
NSPS (Direct Dischargers - New)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
272
45
544
907
68
454
680
454
454
454
1.0
3.7
6.7
1.0
3.7
6.7
95.2
58.9
712.5
1,188.0
160.8
1,073.8
1,608.3
158.9
594.6
1,073.8
37.8
23.3
279.1
465.2
63.4
422.6
633.8
63.0
232.6
422.6
540
-------
TABLE IX-20
COST SUMMARY FOR NSPS
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper -
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Mill Size
(kka/d)
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
1,361
454
454
454
454
680
454
454
454
454
91
454
454
9
91
454
45
68
136
227
45
227
45
45
23
45
Capital
, ($1,000)
33,102
20,654
17,069
19,037
8,180
13,601
8,941
21,225
40,406
40,217
40,358
43,002
39,788
9,138
10,177
10,944
11,189
4,943
13,249
12,027
1,286
1,856
4,371
1,476
1,741
2,469
4,446
1,647
4,077
2,711
2,948
1,698
1,616
0 & M
($l,000/yr)
3,383
1,695
1,433
1,949
737
1,146
694
1,536
2,405
2,416
2,540
2,959
2,463
1,004
1,136
1,070
2,207
806
2,316
2,167
209
224
453
209
272
369
518
366
847
504
546
322
353
Energy
($l,000/yr)
1,865
781
655
655
140
292
303
950
2,376
2,377
2,382
2,672
2,168
231
228
162
280
"75
331
211
11
38
168
13
36
66
41
8
49
14
17
7
7
Total
Annual Cost
($l,000/yr)
12,530
7,019
5,843
6,791
2,677
4,430
2,965
7,155
13,671
13,641
13,801
15,091
13,385
3,245
3,602
3,640
4,949
1,969
5,561
5,023
503
670
1,583
547
691
978
1,537
736
1,793
1,114
1,212
702
716
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
541
-------
of each specific technology option are presented in this section. In
some cases, production process controls are expected to result in a
net energy saving. It is possible that, even where a net energy
saving is achieved in terms of net heat energy, energy costs can
increase because of the relative amounts of fuels and electricity used
and their respective prices.
Total energy usage prior to implementation of the various technology
options (baseline energy usage) has been determined based on data
contained in the API monthly energy reports. Average power and fuel
usages have been determined from information obtained as a result of
the data request program. An energy balance has been developed for
each model mill; the balance takes into account the energy of spent
liquor and hogged fuel, if appropriate.
Table IX-21 summarizes the estimate of total energy used at direct
discharging mills for the base case and after application of each
specific technology option. Total energy is presented in heat energy
units (Btu). In order to properly reflect energy requirements of the
respective alternatives, electrical energy (kwh) is converted 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 proposed BCT Option 1 production process controls are
expected to have little direct impact on air emissions. However, if
additional steam is required, more 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 relief and blow condensates, neutralization of
spent sulfite liquor before evaporation, and more complete use of
evaporator condensates. These controls tend to retain more
sulfur-containing compounds in the liquor system. As sulfur levels
increase along with increased total liquor solids to recovery,
emissions can increase. With modern recovery systems of adequate
capacity, emission levels of mercaptans, hydrogen sulfide, and other
compounds to the atmosphere would not increase beyond allowable
limits. Generally, the normal variations in firing rates, sulfidity,
and liquor solids overshadow the effects resulting from implementation
of the production process controls considered in BCT Option 1.
Noise Potential
There is no identifiable potential for substantially increased noise
associated with any of the proposed control and treatment technology
542
-------
TABLE IX-21
TOTAL ENERGY USAGE AT EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS(a)
(billions of Btu/yr)
Subcategory
Baseline(b) Option 1
Optiog 2(c) Option 3(c) 6ption
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 50,538 976 262
Market Bleached Kraft 68,856 1,823 386
BCT Bleached Kraft 87,326 2,121 377
Alkaline-Fine(d) 128,775 2,428 547
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard 139,382 557 323
Bag 86,048 344 200
Semi-Chemical 51,786 248 177
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical 124,954 532 302
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 40,529 2,319 279
Papergrade Sulfite(e) 56,305 354 362
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical 3,628 5 27
Groundwood-CMN Papers 9,061 -40 60
Groundwood-Fine Papers 17,301 -192 111
Integrated-Miscellaneous 454,353 6,262 1,945
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deinfc
Fine Papers 3,486 -5 29
Tissue Papers 8,715 -14 130
Tissue from Wastepaper 2,634 -17 43
Paperboard from Wastepaper 30,725 26 180
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1,345 1 12
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 1,705 8 19
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous 7,425 -106 47
Nonintegrated Segment
1,220
2,022
2,466
2,893
819
505
364
793
2,573
625
31
12
-104
7,849
19
108
21
163
8
18
-71
494
1,185
1,171
1,394
516
451
421
877
1,540
849
74
124
71
4,966
77
185
0
20
3
4
20
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
Total
Residual Fuel Oil
(10 barrels/yr)
Percent of Baseline Energy
27,947
7,639
6,777
796
1,362
6.066
1,425,464
227
«
-831
-40
-100
-11
-1
-102
16,545
2.6
1.1
134
87
81
23
21
57
6,221
1.0
0.4
-718
35
-33
10
17
-54
21,591
3.4
1.5
64
13
5
0
5
20
14,549
2.3
1.0
(a)Minus sign indicates a net energy savings.
(b)Baseline energy use is based on data contained in API monthly energy reports.
(c)Based on an alum dosage of 300 mg/1 in chemically assisted clarification for subcategories Dissolving Kraft
through Papergrade Sulfite, and Integrated-Miscellaneous; 150 mg/1 for Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical, Groundwood-
CMN Papers and Groundwood-Fine Papers, Deink, Tissue from Wastepaper, Paperboard from Wastepaper, Wastepaper-
Molded Products, Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt, Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous, and Nonintegrated-Fine
Papers. Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers, Nonintegrated-Paperboard, and Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous energy usage was based upon operating an
activated sludge system.
(d)Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
(e)Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
543
-------
options. 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.(211) Along with sludge generated as a result of wastewater
treatment, chemical ash, pulping wastes, wood wastes, and other types
of solid waste are generated.
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 likely 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.(211)
About 2,700,000 metric tons (3,000,000 tons) of landfilled bark and
wood waste and in 1977. approximately 1,000,000 metric tons
(1,100,000 tons) of coal ash were generated in 1977.(211)
Miscellaneous pulp, paper, and paperboard industry solid waste
includes wastepaper reclamation waste (i.e., strapping, dirt, metal,
and ink) at 1,700,000 metric tons (1,900,000 tons) in 1977.(211) Other
wastes include evaporator residue and tall oil residue; these are
generated in insignificant quantities when 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).(40) This source of solid
waste is insignificant when 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 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. These
estimates have been based on sludge production criteria outlined in
544
-------
Section VII. A summary of anticipated sludge generation is shown
in Table IX-22. • .
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 economically recover and reuse
alum, chemically assisted clarification would become less expensive
and sludge disposal requirements would be reduced.
Acceptable techniques for solid waste disposal include incineration,
composting, pyrolysis - gasification, and landfill. In 1975, it was
reported that about 10 percent of wastewater sludges were incinerated
and about 85 percent were disposed of by land application.(212)
Incineration is a preferred method for disposal of organic wastes with
low moisture contents. For the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
these include log sorting and mill yard wastes.
Composting is an emerging technology that theoretically could be
applied to pulp, paper, and paperboard mill wastewater treatment
sludges. Through proper composting, sludge is 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 from which economic effectiveness has been
proven or operating experience obtained have yet to be utilized.
Land application of wastewater treatment plant sludges is a viable
disposal option. Sludge can be applied to a field that will be used
for agricultural production. The organics, nutrients, and sludge bulk
can serve to enhance crop production capacity. A prerequisite for the
technique is that adequate and suitable land is 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.
Environmental safety procedures and knowledge of proper landfill ing
practices have increased widely in recent years. The EPA has
established operating and design criteria for several landfill
techniques for sludges ranging from 20 to 30 percent solids.(206)
These techniques include a) area fill layer, b) area fill mound, c)
diked containment, d) narrow trench, e) wide trench, f) co-disposal
with soil, and g) co-disposal with refuse.
The cited reference describes required site and operating conditions
for each method. Information on existing landfill practices and site
conditions is limited. It is not anticipated that environmental
problems would result from the landfilling of the chemical sludge, as
long as appropriate disposal techniques are employed.
545
-------
TABLE IX-22
TOTAL HASTEWATER SOLID WASTE GENERATION AT EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
THROUGH IMPLEMENTATION OF BCT OPTIONS
(1000 kkg/yr, dry solids)
Baseline(a)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine(c)
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft &
Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergradc Sulfite(d)
Groundwood-Therao-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated-Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Fine Papers
Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paparboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Holded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
Honinfegrated Segment
Honintegrated-Fine Papers
Honintegrated-Tissue Papers
Honlntegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintcgrated-Filcer and
Nonwoven Papers
Jtonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous
Total
Percent of baseline vastewater
solid waste
Percent of baseline total
solid waste
Primary
91.0
65.2
112.6
199.1
81.6
50.4
23.4
71.7
68.7
118.3
6.6
19.2
38.9
543.2
26.7
66.7
10.2
17.4
0.5
3.3
17.6
34.4
10.9
8.1
0.5
1.5
7.8
1,695.5
—
—
Biological
35.3
32.6
43.0
65.0
35.7
22.0
22.6
36.5
65.0
64.8
3.4
5.2
9.9
213.5
5.7
14.0
1.5
5.6
0.1
0.7
3.7
6.5
0
0
0
0
0.5
692.8
—
•—
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
Option 2(b)
31.7
35.1
41.3
62.5
29.4
18.1
11.1
29.1
28.7
38.6
1.5
4.4
8.3
196.9
4.0
9.9
1.7
4.4
0.3
0.7
3.1
7.9
2.1
1.6
0.1
0.3
1.6
574.4
24.1
9.5
Option 3(b)
30.0
41.2
38.5
55.8
24.5
17.0
8.7
25.6
26.5
31.0
1.5
4.0
7.3
176.2
3.8
9.4
1.5
3.1
0.1
0.5
2.6
6.5
1.9
1.4
0.2
0.3
1.4
520.5
21.8
8.7
Option 4
4.2
11.4
9.5
12.2
5.7
3.4
3.3
6.7
11.6
5.9
0.4
0.6
0.7
42.0
0.8
1.5
0
0
0
0
0.7
1.9
0.9
0.3
0
0.1
1.3
125.1
5.2
2.1
(a)Baseline wastewater solid waste production is based on estimated BPT raw waste loads; baseline solid waste
other than wastewater solids is 6,016,600 kkg/yr.
(c)Based on an alum dosage of 300 mg/1 in chemically assisted clarification for subcategories Dissolving Kraft
through Papergrade Sulfite, and Integrated-Miscellaneous; 150 mg/1 for Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical, Groundwood-
CMH Papers and Groundwood-Fine Papers, Deink, Tissue from Wastepaper, Paperboard from Wastepaper, Wastepaper-
Molded Products, Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt, Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous, and Honintegrated-Fine
Papers. Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers, Nonintegrated-Paperboard, and Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous wastewater solid waste production was based
upon operating an activated sludge system.
(c)Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
(d)Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
546
-------
Implementation Requirements
Availability of Equipment. It is expected 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.(213)
This availability is based on two major factors. This first factor is
the short training time that is required for construction labor (6 to
12 months). The second factor 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 do
not involve major process changes. Therefore, any implementation of
production process controls could be accomplished in scheduled
shut-down periods between now and July 1, 1984. 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 IX-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 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 modifications. As noted earlier, these benefits
include savings resulting from improved raw material usage and better
operating efficiency. The economic savings associated with these
benefits have been estimated and are presented in Table IX-3.
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.
547
-------
MONTHS
SIZEtmgtf
UNDER
5
CONV.
UNDER
5
TURN
KEY
5-10
CONV.
5-10
TURN
KEY
OVER
10
CONV.
OVER
10
TURN
KEY
1
••
••i
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm*
mm
mm
mmm
mm
mmm
3
• •
M 1
• •
"*
•I •
• •
4
i •
• •
i •
••
> •
•i
5
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mmm
6
••
mm
mm
m •
mmm
mmm
7
REVIEW TIME |
™
1 ""
"
••
8
Illl
Ill:
TIME
REVIEW
""
mm
9
III
III
III
II
UJ
z
I-
REVIEW
10
III
ill
Illl
Ill
III
III
II
III
III
Illl
mi
in
in
12
ill
in
mi
mi
in
HI
13
III
III
III
III
III
III
14
• •
in
III
mi
mi
IS
III
ill
in
16
•• •
III!
Illl
ir
mi
mi
18
19
-
20
• •
Z\
imm
m •
22
23
HI
• •
mm
24
• •
• M
mm
25
26
27
• i
m*
28
• •
..
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
-
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
5Z
cn
-P>
CO
mmmmmm, m, mmmmmmm PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
llimiiiimiimiiiiil DESIGN ENGINEERING
____ PROCUREMENT
mmmmmmmmmmmmmam CONSTRUCTION
FIGURE IX-1
TIME REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT
SOLIDS CONTACT CLARIFIER/BIOLOGICAL SYSTEM
-------
SECTION X
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
GENERAL
The effluent limitations which were required to be achieved by July 1,
1977, are based on the degree of effluent reduction attainable through
the application of the best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT). The best practicable control technology currently
available generally is based upon the average of the best existing
performance, in terms of treated effluent discharged, by plants of
various sizes, ages, and unit processes within an industry or
subcategory. Where existing performance is uniformly inadequate, BPT
may be- transferred from a different subcategory or category.
Limitations based on transfer technology must be supported by a
conclusion that the technology is, indeed, transferable and a
reasonable prediction that it will be capable of achieving the
prescribed effluent limits (see Tanners' Council of America v. Train,
540 F. 2d 1188 (4th Cir. 1976)). While best practicable control
technology currently available focuses on end-of-pipe treatment
technology rather than process changes or internal controls, it can
include process changes or internal controls when the changes or
controls are normal practice within an industry.
BPT considers the total cost of the application of technology in
relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from the
technologies. The cost/benefit inquiry for BPT is a limited
balancing, which does not require the Agency to quantify benefits in
monetary terms (see, e.g., American Iron and Steel Institute v. EPA,
526 F 2d 1027 (3rd Cir. 1975)). In balancing costs in relation to
effluent reduction benefits, EPA considers the volume and nature of
existing discharges, the volume and nature of discharges expected
after application of BPT, the general environmental effects of the
pollutants, and the costs and economic impacts of the required
pollution control level. The Act does not require or permit
consideration of water quality problems attributable to particular
point sources or industries, or water quality improvements in
particular water bodies (see Weyerhaeuser Company v. Costle, 11 ERC
2149 (D.C. Cir. 1978)).
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Pollutants proposed for regulation under BPT are BOD5_, TSS, and pH.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE ~~
As stated above, the Act establishes the requirements for development
of BPT limitations, which are basically the average of the best
existing performance. The best practicable control technology
549
-------
currently available for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory has
been identified as biological treatment, which is also the technology
on which BPT limitations are based for all other subcategories of the
secondary fibers segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
It has also been determined that wastewater discharges from the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories are similar in
nature to discharges from the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
For these subcategories, the best practicable control technology
currently available has been identified as primary clarification,
which is the technology on which BPT limitations are based for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BPT effluent limitations are presented in Table X-1 .
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Four new subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
have been identified: wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard. The Clean Water Act requires the
establishment of BCT limitations for industry subcategories from which
conventional pollutants are discharged. In order to develop BCT
limitations for the four new subcategories, a base level BPT
determination is desirable because the "cost-reasonableness test",
required as part of the BCT determination, rests on the incremental
cost of removal of BOD5, and TSS from BPT to BCT. Therefore, the
Agency is proposing BPT limitations for the wastepaper-molded
products, nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Biological treatment has been identified as the best practicable
control technology currently available for the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory. The long-term average BPT final effluent BOD!>
concentration for the wastepaper-molded products subcategory has been
developed from the equation presented in Section VIII that relates
final effluent BOD5_ concentration to the BODS^ concentration entering a
biological treatment system. A relationship has also been developed
from which a determination has been made of the anticipated final
effluent TSS concentration resulting from the application of
biological treatment to wastewaters resulting from the production of
molded products from wastepaper. Long-term average final effluent
loads have been calculated by multiplying attainable final effluent
concentrations by the effluent flow rate characteristic of this
subcategory.
550
-------
oh
en
Subcategory
TABLE X-l
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum S'O-Bay Average
BODS TSS
Maximum Day
Secondary Fibers Segment
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Nonintegrated Segment
2.3
5.8
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
BODS
4.4
TSS
10 .*8
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Uonintegrated-Paperboard
13.2
20.8
16.2
3.5
10.6
16.7
13.0
2.8
23.9
37.9
29.4
6.3
21.6
34.0
26.6
5.8
Subcategory
Annual Average
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
BODS
TSS
Maximum 30-Day Average
(mg/1)
BODS
TSS
Maximum Day
(mg/1)
BODS
TSS
Secondary Fibers Segment
Wastepaper-Molded Products
NoQintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Lightweight
Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
1.3
7.4
11.6
9.1
2.0
3.2
6.0
9.5
7.4
1.6
27
65
65
65
65
66
52
52
52
52
51
122
118
118
118
118
106
106
106
106
-------
Primary treatment has been identified as the best practicable control
technology currently available for the nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories. The wastewater
characteristics of these three nonintegrated subcategories are
similiar in nature to those of the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory. Long-term average BPT final effluent BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations have been transferred from the nonintegrated-tissue
papers subcategory to the nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories. Long-term average final effluent loads have been
calculated by multiplying attainable final effluent concentrations by
the effluent flow rates characteristic of these subcategories.
Maximum 30-day and maximum day effluent limitations were determined by
multiplying long-term average effluent limitations by appropriate
variability factors calculated through statistical analysis of
long-term conventional pollutant data. The statistical analysis is
described in detail in Section VIII.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
The total costs (1978) of attainment of BPT effluent limitations have
been estimated to be about $6.01 million dollars in capital cost with
an associated total annual cost of about $1.84 million dollars per
year.
Conventional pollutant removals from industry raw waste discharges
have been estimated to be 3.5 million kg/yr (7.7 million Ibs/yr) of
BOD5_ and 13.5 million kg/yr (29.8 million Ibs/yr) of TSS. These
represent removals of 66 percent BOD5_ and 89 percent TSS from the BPT
raw waste levels of these pollutants for the four new subcategories.
considered in
are discussed
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Non-water quality environmental impacts have been
Section IX. The impacts of the BPT pollutant controls
below.
Energy
Attainment of BPT will require the use of the equivalent of 604
thousand liters (3.8 thousand barrels) of residual fuel oil per year,
a 0.0017 percent increase over estimated current industry energy
usage. This is a 1.8 percent increase in current energy usage at
mills in the wastepaper-molded products subcategory.
Solid Waste
Attainment of BPT will result in an additional
tons/yr) of wastewater treatment solids.
100 kkg/yr (110
552
-------
Air and Noise
Attainment of BPT will have no measurable impact on air or noise
pollution.
553
-------
-------
SECTION XI
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL
As a result of the Clean Water Act of 1977, the achievement of BAT has
become the principal national means of controlling wastewater
discharges of toxic pollutants. The factors considered in
establishing the best available technology economically achievable
(BAT) level of control include the costs of applying the control
technology, the age of process equipment and facilities, the process
employed, process changes, the engineering aspects of applying various
types of control techniques, and non-water quality environmental
considerations such as energy consumption, solid waste generation, and
air pollution (Section 304(b) (2) (B.)). In general, the BAT technology
level represents, at a minimum, the best economically achievable
performance of plants of shared characteristics. Where existing
performance is uniformly inadequate, BAT technology may be transferred
from a different subcategory or industrial category. BAT may include
process changes or internal controls, even when not common industry
practice.
The statutory assessment of BAT "considers" costs, but does not
require a balancing of costs against effluent reduction benefits (see
Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 11 ERC 2149 (D.C. Cir. 1978)). However, in
assessing the proposed BAT, EPA has given substantial weight to the
reasonableness of costs. The Agency has considered the volume and the
nature of discharges, the volume and nature of discharges expected
after application of BAT, the general environmental effects of the
pollutants, and the costs and economic impacts of the required
pollution control levels. Despite this expanded consideration of
costs, the primary determinant of BAT is effluent reduction capability
using economically achievable technology.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Nonconventional Pollutants
No nonconventional pollutants are proposed for regulation by BAT. The
regulation of color was considered but it has been concluded that the
discharge of color in pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents is not of
uniform national concern and is more appropriately controlled on a
case-by-case basis as dictated by water quality considerations. The
Agency proposes to withdraw BAT color regulations that were previously
promulgated for the unbleached kraft, sodium-based neutral sulfite
semi-chemical, ammonia-based neutral sulfite semi-chemical, and
unbleached kraft-neutral sulfite semi-chemical (cross-recovery)
subcategories.
555
-------
The regulation of ammonia was also considered. However, at the
present time, no treatment processes are known to be utilized in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry to specifically remove ammonia.
Only limited data are available on the levels of ammonia being
discharged at nine mills in the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite
pulp, and both papergrade sulfite subcategories where ammonia is used
as a cooking chemical. The Agency is currently seeking public comment
on ammonia discharges from integrated mills where ammonia-based
cooking chemicals are used. Information is sought on raw waste and
final effluent levels of ammonia, available end-of-pipe technologies
and their capability to remove ammonia, the feasibility of change to a
different chemical base, and the costs associated with the application
of end-of-pipe or production process controls.
Limited information exists on the levels of resin acids, fatty acids,
and bleach plant derivatives present in wastewater discharges from the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. This sparcity of data makes it
impossible at this time to establish uniform national standards
limiting the discharge of these compounds. As discussed in Section
VI, significant reductions of resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach
plant derivatives are attained through application of existing
biological treatment systems. Low levels of these compounds were
generally present in final treated effluents at mills where
verification sampling was conducted.
Toxic Pollutants
Four different toxic pollutants of concern are discharged from mills
in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry: chloroform, zinc,
trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol. The toxic pollutants proposed
for regulation in all subcategories are trichlorophenol and
pentachlorophenol. Chloroform is proposed for regulation in the
dissolving kraft, market bleached kraft, BCT (paperboard, coarse, and
tissue) bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, papergrade sulfite
(blowpit wash), papergrade sulfite (drum wash), dissolving sulfite
pulp, soda, and deink subcategories. Zinc is proposed for regulation
in the groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers, and
groundwood-fine papers subcategories.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE
The Agency has selected substitution of chemicals as the basis for
control of trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol. Fungicides and
slimicides containing trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be
replaced by formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants.
In the groundwood subcategories, the proposed BAT limitations for zinc
are identical to BPT limitations for control of this toxic metal. The
technology basis for BPT limitations is lime precipitation; however,
it has been determined that zinc discharges from mills in the
groundwood subcategories have been greatly reduced to levels in
compliance with BPT effluent limitations guidelines through the
556
-------
substitution of
hydrosulfite.
sodium hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical, for zinc
The control of chloroform is based on the application and proper
operation of biological treatment, which forms the basis of existing
BPT regulations. The necessity for additional end-of-pipe treatment
or production process controls is not required.
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BAT effluent limitations are presented in Table XI-1.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALY
ACHIEVABLE
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
The substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol has been selected as the basis
for BAT limitations as it represents a no cost alternative that will
virtually eliminate the discharge of these toxic pollutants. At
facilities where trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol were detected
and used as a slimicide or fungicide, the average concentrations were
found to be 67.9 ug/1 and 20.0 ug/1, respectively. At those
facilities where these chemicals were not used, average concentrations
of trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol were 6.9 ug/1 and 7.2 ug/1,
respectively. Alternatives to chemical substitution would involve the
addition of costly end-of-pipe treatment; an evaluation of
verification data indicates that pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol
are not effectively removed through the application of primary or
biological treatment, the technology bases of BPT effluent limitations
for all subcategories. EPA projects that alternative chemicals are
currently being used at approximately 80 percent of the mills in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, supporting the Agency's decision
to base effluent limitations on chemical substitution.
Zinc Removal
The presence of significant quantities of zinc in groundwood mill
effluents at the time of development of BPT limitations was due to the
use of zinc hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical. After promulgation of
BPT effluent limitations guidelines, the discharge of zinc has been
substantially reduced by the substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for
zinc hydrosulfite. Regulation of zinc at BPT levels has, therefore,
been selected as the basis of BAT effluent limitations.
Chloroform Removal
Biological treatment, the basis of BPT effluent limitations for all
subcategories where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used
to bleach pulp, has been selected as the basis for limitation of
chloroform. Biological treatment systems are capable of substantial
removals of chloroform. Chloroform levels that averaged 1.58 mg/1 in
557
-------
TABLE XI-1
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kfcg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi- Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP2
0.0057
0.0043
0.0037
0.0032
0.0032
0.0013
0.0013
0.0011
0.0015
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
TCP3
0.0069
0.0052
0.0044
0.0039
0 . 0039
0.0016
-0.0016
0.0013
0.0018
0 . 0083
0.0083
0.0083
0.0083
Zinc Chloroform
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.055
0.042
0.035
0.031
0.031
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.066
0.066
0.066
0.066
See Equations Below
0.0022
0.0025
0.0023
0.0025
0.0025
0.0017
0.00032
0.00059
0.0015
0.0016
0.0020
0.0040
0.0070
0.0050
0.0013
0.0026
0.0030
0.0027
0.0031
0.0031
0.0020
0.00039
0.00071
0.0018
0.0019
0.0024
0.0048
0.0084
0.0059
0.0016
0.26
0.30
0.27
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.024
0.024
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Non-continuous dischargers shall not exceed the following maximum day effluent
concentrations:
Chloroform = 0.240 milligrams/liter
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc = 3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Chloroform = (0.00912x2-0.485x+30.72)/1000
PCP = (0.000950x2-0.0506x+3.2)/1000
TCP = (0.00114x2-0.0607x+3.84)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Dr_a
Wash) Subcategories
T?CP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Not applicable
558
-------
pulp, paper, and paperboard raw wastewaters were reduced to an average
of 0.052 mg/1 after the application of biological treatment at mills
where BPT effluent limitations are attained,
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Chloroform
The methodology used for determination of the BAT maximum day effluent
limitations for chloroform involved the ranking of final effluent data
for chloroform discharges from mills in those subcategories where
chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp.
The highest concentration found in effluents from mills where
biological treatment was employed and BPT effluent limitations are
attained was 240 parts per billion. That concentration was selected
as the maximum day effluent concentration for the establishment of
chloroform limitations. Mass limitations for each subcategory in
kg/kkg ,(lbs/l,000 Ibs) were then determined by multiplying this
concentration by the flow upon which BCT was based for each
subcategory.
Pentachlorophenol
The methodology used for determination of the BAT maximum day effluent
limitations for pentachlorophenol involved the ranking of raw waste
data for pentachlorophenol discharges from mills where it was known
that pentachlorophenol was not used during verification sampling. The
highest concentration found at facilities where pentachlorophenol was
not used was 24.4 parts per billion. Therefore, the maximum day
effluent concentration was set at 25 parts per billion, a level that
was not exceeded at any facilities where pentachlorophenol was not
used. Mass limitations for each subcategory in kg/kkg (lbs/1000 Ibs)
were determined by multiplying this concentration by the flow on which
the proposed BCT limitations are based for each subcategory.
Trichlorophenol
The methodology used for determination of the BAT maximum day effluent
limitations for trichlorophenol involved the ranking of raw waste data
for trichlorophenol discharges from mills where it was known that
trichlorophenol was not used during verification sampling. The
highest concentration found at facilities where trichlorophenol was
not used was 26 parts per billion. Therefore, the maximum day
effluent concentration was set at 30 parts per billion, a level that
was not exceeded at any facilities where trichlorophenol was not used.
Mass limitations for each subcategory in kg/kkg (lbs/1000 Ibs) were
determined by multiplying this concentration by the flow on which the
proposed BCT limitations are based for each subcategory.
559
-------
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
There is no cost associated with this technology; substitute chemicals
are available at comparable costs. The total mass of regulated
pollutants removed from industry wastewaters that are discharged
directly to navigable waters has been estimated to be about 61,000
kg/yr (135,000 Ib/yr) of trichlorophenol and 21,000 kg/yr (46,000
Ib/yr) of pentachlorophenol.
Zinc Removal
There is no cost or pollutant removal associated with this technology.
BAT limitations are being proposed that are equivalent to existing BPT
limitations.
Chloroform Removal
There is no cost associated with this technology; it is assumed that
BPT effluent limitations have been attained through implementation of
biological treatment technology at all mills where chlorine or
chlorine-containing chemicals are used to bleach pulp. The total mass
of chloroform removed from raw wastewaters discharged directly to
navigable waters through attainment of BPT effluent limitations has
been estimated to be 4.8 million kg/yr (10.6 million Ib/yr).
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No non-water quality impacts have been identified resulting from
implementation of proposed BAT effluent limitations. Attainment of
these limitations will result in no increased energy usage nor will it
contribute to air pollution, noise generation, or solid waste
generation.
560
-------
SECTION XII
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) - BOD, TSS, Fecal Coliform, and pH - and any additional
pollutants defined by the .Administrator as "conventional" (oil and
grease).
BCT is not an additional limitation, but replaces BAT for the control
of conventional pollutants. BCT requires that limitations for
conventional pollutants be assessed in light of a new
"cost-reasonableness" test, which involves a comparison of the cost
and level of reduction of conventional pollutants from the discharge
of POTWs to the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants from a
class or category of industrial sources. As part of its review of BAT
for certain "secondary" industries, the Agency promulgated the
methodology for this cost test (see 44 FR 50732 (August 29,
1979)). (214) This methodology compares subcategory removal costs
(dollars per pound of pollutant, measuring from BPT to BCT) with costs
experienced at POTWs.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Pollutants proposed for regulation under BCT are BOD5., TSS, and pH.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The Agency has considered four technology options for consideration in
establishing BCT effluent limitations, including (1) BPT technology
plus the implementation of additional production process controls to
reduce raw waste loads, ensuring additional removal of BOD and TSS;
(2) BPT technology plus the addition of chemically assisted
clarification for those subcategories where BPT was based on
biological treatment, or BPT technology plus the addition of
biological treatment for those subcategories where BPT was based on
primary treatment only; (3) BCT Option 1 plus the addition of
chemically assisted clarification for those subcategories where BPT
was based on biological treatment, or BCT Option 1 plus the addition
of biological treatment for those subcategories where BPT was based on
primary treatment only; and (4) upgrade of existing BPT to attain
effluent levels characteristic of best performing mills. Best mill
performance for a subcategory is generally the average performance at
all mills where BPT effluent limitations are attained. Because the
various control and treatment technologies employed at different
561
-------
facilities within the respective subcategories differ, implementation
of BCT Option 4 technology is specific to the in-place effluent
treatment technology employed.
The Agency has selected Option 4 as the basis for BCT effluent
limitations for all subcategories for which the BCT
cost-reasonableness test is passed with two exceptions (the dissolving
sulfite pulp and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories). In
those subcategories where the cost-reasonableness test is not passed,
the less stringent Option 1 has been selected as the basis for BCT
effluent limitations if it passes the cost-reasonableness test.
Option 1 forms the basis of BCT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers,
nonintegrated-1ightweight papers, and the nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers subcategories.
For the dissolving sulfite pulp and builders' paper and roofing felt
subcategories, BCT is proposed to be equal to BPT effluent limitations
because of projected severe economic impacts. For the nonintegrated-
paperboard subcategory, which is a new subcategory, the basis for BCT
was selected at a level equivalent to proposed BPT as the Agency was
unable to identify a technology beyond BPT that passes the BCT
cost-reasonableness test.
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BCT effluent limitations are presented in Tables XI1-1 and XI1-2.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY
EPA has selected Option 4 as the basis for proposed effluent
limitations for all subcategories for which the BCT
cost-reasonableness test passes. EPA has determined that costs at
POTWs are $1.27 per pound of BOD5_ and TSS removed (1978 dollars); if
removal costs for a subcategory are less than that cost, they are
considered reasonable (44 FR 50732 (August 29, 1979). In those
subcategories where the cost-reasonableness test fails, the less
stringent Option 1 forms the basis of BCT if it passes the
cost-reasonableness test. The only exceptions are the dissolving
sulfite pulp and the builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories
for which BCT is established at the BPT level because of projected
severe economic impacts. The results of the BCT cost test for Option
1, Option 2, Option 3, and Option 4 are presented in Tables XII-3,
XII-4, XII-5, and XII-6. These tables present ranges of costs and
average costs for each subcategory. In Table XI1-7, the results of
the BCT cost-reasonableness test are summarized for the technology
options selected as the basis for BCT effluent limitations.
There are several factors that weighed heavily in the Agency's
decision to select Option 4 as the primary basis of proposed BCT
limitations. This option yields significant removals of BOD5_ and TSS
at significantly lower costs to the industry than Options 2 and 3 and
has been proven through full-scale operation throughout the entire
562
-------
Subcategory
TABLE XI I-1
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
BOD5 TSS
Maximum Day
BODS TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 7.2
Market Bleached Kraft 6.2
BCT Bleached Kraft . 4.5
Fine Bleached Kraft 3.5
Soda 3.5
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 2.0
o Bag 2.7
Semi-Chemical 3.1
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical 3.1
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration 21.5
o Viscose 23.1
o Cellopane 25.0
o Acetate 1 27.1
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thenno-Mechanical 2.3
Groundwood-CMN Papers 2.7
Groundwood-Fine Papers 2.4
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 5.3
o Tissue Papers 5.8
Tissue from Wastepaper 3.9
Paperboard from Wastepaper 0.74
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1.1
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 3.0
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 2.3
NoDiintegrated-Tissue Papers 5.2
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 10.4
o Electrical 18.1
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers 12.9
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 3.5
11.3
8.0
6.6
5.6
5.6
3.7
4.4
4.4
5.3
38.0
38.0
38.0
38.0
See Equations
3.7
3.8
3.5
12.2
10.5
7.5
5.9
5.9
3.5
4.5
5.3
5.3
41.4
44.3
48.1
52.0
Below
3.9
4.5
4.1
18.6
13.2
10.8
9.2
9.2
6.2
7.2
7.2
8.7
70.6
70.6
70.6
70.6
6.2
6.3
5.9
7.6
9.1
4.7
0.89
2.1
3.0
2.5
4.1
8.3
14.4
10.3
2.8
8.9
9.8
6.6
1.2
1.8
5.0
3.9
9.4
pH-Within the range 5.0 to 9.0 at all times
12.5
15.0
7.8
1.5
3.5
5.0
4.1
8.5
18.9 16.9
32.8 29.5
23.4 21.1
6.3 5.8
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30 day average: • • .
BOD5 = 0.0020x2-0.104x+6.61
TSS = 0.0033x2-0.177x+11.2
Maximum Day:
BOD5 = 0.0033x2-0.176x-Hl.l
TSS = 0.0055x2-0.291x-H8.4
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
•4ncludes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
563
-------
TABLE XII-2
BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft S Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Grounduood-CMN Papers
Grounduood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
De ink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintcgrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintcgrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintcgrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within
BODS
4.1
3.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.2
1.5
1.8
1.8
12.1
13.0
14.1
15.2
See Equation
1.3
1.5
1.4
3.0
3.3
2.2
0.'42
0.60
1.6
1.3
2.9
5.8
10.1
7.2
2.0
the range 5.0
TSS
6.2
4.4
3.6
3.1
3.1
2.1
2.4
2.4
2.9
20.9
20.9
20.9
20.9
s Below
2.1
2.1
2.0
4.2
5.0
2.6
0.49
1.2
1.6
1.4
2.4
4.7
8.2
5.9
1.6
to 9.0 at
Maximum 30-Day Average Maximum Day
(mR/1) (rag/1)
BODS
31
36
30
27
27
39
51
73
53
78
84
91
98
52
27
27
27
52
57
58
57
45
50
37
65
65
65
65
65
all times
TSS
49
46
44
43
43
71
83
102
90
138
138
138
138
87
42
39
39
74
89
70
69
88
50
39
52
52
52
52
52
BODS
53
61
51
45
45
66
86
122
90
132
141
153
166
87
45
45
45
87
96
97
96
75
83
62
118
118
118
118
118
TSS
81
76
73
71
71
117
137
168
149
228
228
228
228
144
70
63
64
122
177
115
114
145
83
64
106
106
106
106
106
Papergrade Sulfite (see BCT Equations Table 1-1)
BODS Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average * 1.78
TSS Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average 4- 1.82
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories
564
-------
*!TABLE xii-s
BCT ANALYSIS - OPTION 1
Subcategory
Average Cost
Range of Cost
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Ipraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwobd-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegra ted-Lightwe ight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
1.04
0.29
0.31
0.95
0.40
0.65
0.42
0.77
0.20
0.08
0.44
0.73
0.14
0.51
0.10
0.64
0.44
0.37
0.44
0.75
0.78
3.95
1.00-1.07
0.25-0.40
0.28-0.45
0.89-1.63
0.27-1.28
0.43-0.80
0.31-0.69
0.58-1.10
0.16-0.44
0.07-0.11
0.31-1.83
0.60-1.82
0.09-0.70
0.17-1.94
0.05-0.31
0.53-1.04
0.31-0.58
0.20-2.10
0.35-0.86
0.47-3.24
0.71-3.65
2.89-17.86
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
565
-------
Subcategory
TABLE XII-4
BCT ANALYSIS - OPTION 2
Subcategory
Average Cost
Range of Cost
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.48
0.61
0.46
0.74
0.64
0.54
0.48
0.30
0.42
0.64
1.06
1.13
0.60
2.00
1.84
2.85
3.16
0.78
5.62
5.23
6.09
14.63
0.46-0.49
0.50-0.75
0.42-0.63
0.64-1.16
0.50-1.03
0.48-0.83
0.42-0.62
0.29-0.31
0.37-0.66
0.57-0.86
0.84-2.44
0.93-2.39
0.34-1.76
1.01-5.05
0.93-6.47
2.30-4.97
2.57-3.72
0.50-3.17
4.03-12.69
3.48-16.66"*
4.91-9.81
13.41-40.15
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
566
-------
TABLE XII-5
BCT ANALYSIS - OPTION 3
Subcategory
Average Cost
Range of Cost
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite.Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.53
0.63
0.52
0.82
0.62
0.65
0.49
0.53
0.38
0.55
0.92
0.97
0.52
1.80
1.05
1.66
1.30
0.68
2.67
2.54
3.33
9.56
0.52-0.55
0.51-0.79
0.47-0.73
0.74-1.34
0.49-1.12
0.69-0.86
0.41-0.66
0.49-0.58
0.31-0.67
0.48-0.78
0.67-2.22
0.80-2.22
0.29-1.73
0.87-4.66
0.52-4.16
1.33-2.93
0.96-1.64
0.42-3.17
1.93-6.17
1.52-7.82
2.65-5.40
8.31-31.04
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)- and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
567
-------
Subcategory
TABLE XII-6
BCT ANALYSIS - OPTION 4
Subcategory
Average Cost
Range of Cost
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite^Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.31
0.48
0.44
0.46
0.67
1.02
0.98
0.43
0.42
0.62
0.65
0.75
0.68
0.47
0.10
0.64
0.43
0.23
1.56
1.44
1.44
3.45
0.29-0.35
0.36-0.81
0.30-0.83
0.31-0.72
0.44-2.07
0.55-1.82
0.68-2.10
0.26-0.77
0.25-0.97
0.60-0.62
0.54-1.57
0.62-1.59
0.43-1.75
0.23-1.52
0.05-0.31
0.53-1.04
0.54-0.61
0.15-0.79
0.81-4.31
0.52-3.87
0.58-3.74
0.79-15.05
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2 '
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
568
-------
TABLE XII-7
BCT ANALYSIS - PROPOSED REGULATION
Subcategory
Average Costs Range of Costs
Subcategory ($/lb) ($/lb)
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thenno-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.31
0.48
0:44
0.46
0:67
1.02
0.98
*
0.42
0.62
0.65
0.75
0.68
0.47
0.10
0.64
*
0.23
l:.44
0,75
0.78
**
0.29-0.35
0.36-0.81
0.30-0.83
0.31-0.72
0.44-2.07
0.55-1.82
0.68-2.10
JL.
0.25-0.97
0.60-0.62
0.54-1.57
0.62-1.59
0.43-1.75
0.23-1.52
0.05-0.31
0.53-1.04
*
0.15-0.79
0.35-0.86
0.47-3.24
0.71-3.65
**
Selected
BCT Option
4
4
,4
4
4
4
4
BPT
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
BPT
4
1
1
1
BPT
*BCT equals BPT due to severe economic impact.
**BCT equals BPT as no regulatory option passes-the BCT cost test.
1Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
569
-------
range of process types found in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. Option 4 effluent limitations are being attained at 21, 20,
and 29 of the direct discharging mills in the integrated, secondary
fibers, and nonintegrated segments, respectively. Reliance on Option
2 would mean that effluent limitations would now be attained at only
5, 15, and 22 mills in the integrated, secondary fibers, and
nonintegrated segments, respectively. Option 3 effluent limitations
are now being attained at only 3, 6, and 20 mills in the integrated,
secondary fibers, and nonintegrated segments, respectively. While
chemically assisted clarification is a proven and available
technology, uncertainties exist as to the chemical dosage rate
required to effect optimum treatment plant performance. Chemical
dosage rate has a direct bearing on costs. Because of the heavy
reliance on the determination of B.CT based on a cost-reasonableness
test, these uncertainties of dosage rate could have a significant
impact on a final determination of BCT. The Agency feels that it is
reasonable to establish BCT effluent limitations that are currently
being attained at a significant number of mills through the
application of readily available technology, biological treatment (all
subcategories except nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, and nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers) or
primary treatment. The proposed limitations allow considerable
flexibility to the industry in their approach to achieving BCT.
Combinations of internal controls, treatment system modifications, and
even additional end-of-pipe treatment in the form of chemically
assisted clarification can be employed to attain the proposed
limitations in the most cost effective manner.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BCT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The methodology used for development of BCT Option 4 effluent
limitations involved the assessment of conventional pollutant removal
capability at the best performing mills in each subcategory. Best
performing mills are mills where both BOD5_ and TSS annual average BPT
effluent limitations are attained using end-of-pipe technology that is
similar to that which forms the basis of BPT. In general, the
long-term average final effluent BOD5. and TSS discharges per kkg (ton)
of product that are attained at the best performing mills were
averaged and corresponding concentrations calculated at BPT flow.
These concentrations have been reviewed to determine if they are
attainable through the application .of treatment technology similar to
that which forms the basis of BPT effluent limitations. If it has
been determined that these concentrations are not generally attainable
through the application of end-of-pipe treatment only, the effluent
concentrations have been adjusted upward to attainable levels. The
attainable final effluent concentrations have been multiplied by the
effluent flow rate used in the establishment of BPT effluent
limitations to establish long-term average mass limitations. This
methodology has been modified in certain subcategories, as described
in Section VIII, where sufficient data does not exist or where no best
performing mills have been identified. For four subcategories in the
secondary fiber segment (paperboard from wastepaper, tissue from
wastepaper, wastepaper-molded products, and builders' paper and
570
-------
roofing felt), it has been determined that BCT Option 4 is identical
to BCT Option 1; at best performing mills^in these four subcategories,
extensive use is made of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge.
The methodology used for the development of Option 1 effluent
limitations involves the prediction of the capability of the
end-of-pipe technology on which BPT effluent limitations were based
for each subcategory after the application of production process
controls to reduce flow and BODI5 raw waste load. This methodology is
explained in detail in Section VIII. BCT Option 1 forms the basis of
proposed BCT effluent limitations for the nonintegrated-tissue papers,
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, and nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers subcategories.
For the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory, BCT effluent limitations
identical to proposed BPT effluent limitations have been developed by
transferring technology from the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory. Attainable effluent concentrations are based on those
that form the basis of BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory because of the similar characteristics of wastewaters
discharged from mills in these two subcategories. Attainable effluent
concentrations have been multiplied by the average flow from mills in
the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory to yield long-term average
mass limitations.
For the dissolving sulfite pulp and builders' paper and roofing felt
subcategories, BCT effluent limitations are equal to those previously
promulgated under BPT because of projected severe economic impacts.
Maximum 30-day and daily maximum effluent limitations have been
determined by multiplying long-term average effluent limitations by
appropriate variability factors calculated through statistical
analysis of long-term conventional pollutant data available from 36
mills. The statistical analysis is described in detail in Section
VIII. . .
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
The total costs (1978 dollars) of attainment of BCT effluent
limitations have been estimated to be approximately $918 million in
capital cost with an associated total annual cost of $280 million per
year at current industry capacity.
Conventional pollutant removal from industry wastewaters has been
estimated to be 57 million kg/yr (126 million Ibs/yr) of BOD5. and ill
million kg/yr (245 million Ibs/yr) of TSS. These represent removals
of 34 percent BOD5_ and 40 percent TSS from total BPT discharge levels
of these pollutants.
571
-------
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Non-water quality environmental impacts have been considered and are
discussed in detail in Section IX. The impacts of the selected BCT
pollutant control option are discussed below.
Energy
Attainment . of BCT will require the use of the equivalent of 320
million liters (2.0 million barrels) of residual fuel oil per year a
0.9 percent increase over estimated current energy usage.
Solid Waste
Attainment of BCT will result in an additional 112,000 kkg/yr (123 000
tons/yr) of wastewater treatment solids. This amounts to about 1 3
percent of current total industry solid waste generation and about
five percent of current wastewater treatment solids generation.
The solid wastes generated through wastewater treatment at pulp
paper, and paperboard mills have not been listed as hazardous in
regulations recently promulgated by the Agency under Subtitle C of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (see 45 FR 33066
(May 19, 1980)). A recent study by EPA's Office of Solid Waste
indicates that most leachates from this industry are non-hazardous
under RCRA testing protocols.(211) Accordingly, it does not appear
likely that the industry will be subject to the comprehensive RCRA
program establishing requirements for persons handling, 'transporting
treating, storing, and disposing of hazardous waste.
Air and Noise
Attainment of BCT
pollution.
will have no measurable impact on air or noise
572
-------
SECTION XIII
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
GENERAL
The basis for new source performance standards (NSPS) under section
306 of the Act is the best available demonstrated technology. At new
plants, the opportunity exists to design the best and most efficient
production processes and wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore,
Congress directed EPA to consider the best demonstrated process
changes, in-plant controls, and end-of-pipe treatment technologies
that reduce pollution to the maximum extent feasible. It is
encouraged that at new sources, reductions in the use of and/or
discharge of both water and toxic pollutants be attained by
application of in-plant control measures, but it is expected that the
toxic pollutants present in the discharges from the industry today
will also be present in the discharges from new sources.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Conventional Pollutants
Conventional pollutants proposed for
same as for BCT: BOD5., TSS, and pH.
Toxic Pollutants
regulation under NSPS are the
Toxic pollutants proposed for regulation under NSPS, as for BAT, are
chloroform, pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and zinc.
Nonconventional Pollutants
No nonconventional pollutants are proposed for regulation under NSPS.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS
Conventional Pollutant Control
The technology basis for control of conventional pollutants under NSPS
is a variation of the combination of those production process controls
that form the basis of BPT and BCT Option 1 with end-of-pipe treatment
identical to BCT Option 4. The conventional pollutants BOD5. and TSS
are controlled at levels comparable to or more stringent than BCT
Option 4 for all subcategorie's because of further reductions
attainable at new plants where retrofit problems do not exist.
Toxic Pollutant Control
The technology basis on which effluent limitations have been proposed
for zinc, trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol is substitution of
chemicals. The technology basis for the limitation of chloroform in
573
-------
the nine subcategories where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds
are used to bleach pulp is biological treatment.
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
New source performance standards for conventional pollutants are
presented in Tables XIII-1 and XII1-2. New source performance
standards for toxic pollutants are presented in Table XIII-3.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS FOR NSPS
Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
The production process controls to be implemented under NSPS represent
the best demonstrated technology in the industry. In a new mill, they
can be integrated in the overall process design to provide maximum
effectiveness in minimizing water use and wastewater discharge. The
controls to be implemented are a combination of those considered in
the establishment of BPT effluent limitations and those considered in
BCT Option 1 and have been well-demonstrated within the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry. The end-of-pipe treatment technologies on
which NSPS are based are identical to those that form the basis of BCT
Option 4.
Toxic Pollutant Control Technology
Substitution of chemicals for control of zinc, trichlorophenol, and
pentachlorophenol has been selected as the basis of NSPS as it ensures
that virtually no trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol and only low
levels of zinc will be discharged from new sources in the pulp, paper
and paperboard industry.
Application of biological treatment at mills in those nine
subcategories where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used
to bleach pulp ensures that high levels of chloroform in raw
wastewaters will be substantially reduced.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Conventional Pollutants
NSPS long-term average mass limitations have been established by
multiplying (a) effluent concentrations determined from analysis of
control technology performance data and (b) typical wastewater flow
for new sources in each subcategory. For each subcategory, the NSPS
wastewater flow was based on either (a) the average of flows less than
the flow basis of BCT Option 1 or (b) the flow basis of BCT Option 1.
Long-term average effluent concentrations for BODS and TSS are
equivalent to those developed in BCT Option 4. ~
Maximum 30-day and daily maximum mass limitations have been calculated
by multiplying attainable long-term average final effluent loads by
appropriate variability factors as discussed in Section VIII.
574
-------
iubcategon
TABLE XIII-1
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
BODS TSS
Maximum Day
BODS TSS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate j
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Tnermo-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
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
6.6
4.8
3.5
2.3
2.3
1.2
2.1
1.9
2.0
12.0
12.8
13.9
15.0
0.89
1.9
1.5
10.4
6.2
5.1
3.6
3.6
2.2
3.5
2.7
3.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
23.4
See Equations
1.4
2.7
2.2
11.2
8.2
5.8
3.8
3.8
2.1
3.6
3.3
3.4
20.3
21.6
23.5
25.4
Below
1.5
3.2
2.6
17.1
10.2
8.4
6.0
6.0
3.7
5.8
4.5
5.7
38.5
38.5
38.5
38.5
2.3
4.4
3.6
2.5
3.6
3.1
3.9
0.74
1.1
0.87
1.5
3.4
6.7
11.7
8.2
1.9
3.6
5.6
6.0
4.7
0.89
2.1
1.3
1.6
2.6
5.1
8.9
6.3
1.5
4.3
6.0
5.1
6.6
1.2
1.8
1.5
2.5
6.1
12.1
21.2
15.0
3.5
pH-Within the range 5.0 to 9.0 at all times
6.0
9.2
9.9
7.8
1.5
3.4
2.2
2.6
5.3
10.4
18.
12.
3.
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30 day average:
BOD5 = 0.0015x2-0.079x+5.02
TSS = 0.0025x2-0.134x+8.50
Maximum day:
BOD5 = 0.0025x2-0.134x+8.46
TSS = 0.0042x2-0.221x+14.01
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
575
-------
TABLE XIII-2
NSPS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
NON-CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory BODS TSR
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Oroundwood-Themo-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Grounduood-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
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within
3.7
2.7
2.0
1.3
1.3
0.69
1.2
1.1
1.1
6.8
7.2
7.8
8.5
See Equations
0.5
1.1
0.85
1.4
2.0
1.7
2.2
0.42
0.60
0.49
0.82
1.9
3.7
6.5
4.6
1.1
5.7
3.4
2.8
2.0
2.0
1.2
1.9
1.5
1.9
12.8
12.8
12.8
12.8
Below
0.8
1.5
1.2
2.0
3.1
3.3
2.6
0.49
1.1
0.73
0.86
1.5
2.9
5.0
3.6
0.87
the range 5.0 to 9.0 at all
Maximum 30-Day Average Maxium Day
(mg/1) (m«/l)
31
36
30
27
27
39
51
73
53
49
52
57
61
52
27
27
27
52
57
45
58
57
45
78
37
42
42
42
42
42
times
49
46
44
43
43
71
83
102
90
95
95
95
95
87
42
39
39
74
89
88
70
69
88
117
39
32
32
32
32
33
e-i
O J
61
51
45
45
66
86
122
90
82
88
95
103
87
AE
HO
AC
*#O
45
87
96
76
97
96
75
131
62
77
76
If.
/D
75
76
iao_
O-)
oi
76
73
71
71
117
137
168
149
156
156
156
156
144
7fl
/ U
64
147
146
115
114
145
193
64
66
66
fLC
OJ
65
67
Papergrade Sulfite (See Equations in Table 1-4)
BOD5 Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average -r 1.78
TSS Annual Average = Maximum 30 day average <• 1.82
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories.
576
-------
TABLE XIII-3
NSES EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory _____
Intezrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate j
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
PCP2
0.0053
0.0034
0.0029
0.0021
0.0021
0.00078
0.0011
0.00067
0.00095
0.0062
0.0062
0.0062
0.0062
See
0.00083
0.0018
0.0014
TCP3
0 . 0063
0.0040
0.0034
0 . 0025
0 . 0025
0.00094
0.0013
0.00080
0.0011
0.0074
0.0074
0.0074
0.0074
Equations
0.0010
0.0021
0.0017
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
. NA
NA
NA
Below
0.10
0.21
0.17
Chloroform
0.051
0.032
0.028
0.020
0.020
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.059
0.059 '
0.059
0.059
NA
NA
NA
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
0.0012
0.0016
0.0017
0.0017
0 . 00032
0.00059
0.00027
0.0015
0.0019
0.0020
0 . 0020
O.OOO39
0.00071
0.00033
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.012
0.015
0.016
NA
NA
NA "
NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter & Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-PaperT>oard
0.0010
0.0020
0.0040
0.0070
0.0050
0.0012
0.0012
0.0024
0.0048
0.0084
0.0059
0.0014
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Non-continuous dischargers shall not exceed the following maximum day effluent
concentrations:
Chloroform = 0.240 milligrams/liter .
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc =3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Chloroform = (0.00693x2-0.369x+23.4)/1000
PCP = (0.000722x2-0.0384x+2.43)/1000
TCP = (0.000866x2-0.0461x+2.92)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories
2
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Not Applicable
577
-------
Toxic Pollutants
The methodology used for development of NSPS maximum day effluent
limitations for chloroform, pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and
zinc involves the multiplication of (a) the maximum anticipated
concentrations of these pollutants and (b) typical wastewater flow for
new sources in each subcategory. The flow basis of NSPS toxic
limitations is the same as that used in the development of NSPS
conventional pollutant limits.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
The cost of attainment of NSPS varies by subcategory as discussed in
Section IX. Substantial reductions of BOD5., TSS, chloroform, and zinc
are ensured while discharges of trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol
will be virtually eliminated.
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Non-water quality environmental impacts have been considered and are
discussed in Section IX. Energy costs and the cost of disposal of
solid wastes have been included in Agency estimates of the cost of
attainment of new source performance standards. Energy use and solid
waste generation will vary at new sources depending on mill size and
the subcategory of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
considered. Attainment of NSPS will have no measurable impact on air
or noise pollution.
578
-------
SECTION XIV
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
GENERAL
Section 307(b) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
standards for existing sources (PSES) that must be achieved within
three years of promulgation. PSES are designed to prevent the
discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with, or are
otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The Clean Water
Act of 1977 adds a new dimension by requiring pretreatment for
pollutants, such as heavy metals, that pass through POTWs in amounts
that would violate direct discharger effluent limitations or limit
POTWs' sludge management alternatives, including the beneficial use of
sludges on agricultural lands. The legislative history of the 1977
Act indicates that pretreatment standards are to be technology-based,
analogous to the best available technology for removal of toxic
pollutants. The general pretreatment regulations (40 CFR Part 403),
which serve as the framework for these proposed pretreatment
regulations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, can be found
at 43 FR 27736 (June 26, 1978).
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Toxic Pollutants
The toxic pollutants proposed for regulation in all subcategories are
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol. It is also proposed that zinc
be limited in the groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers,
and groundwood-fine papers subcategories. Pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol have been observed to pass through biological
treatment systems. Control of the toxic metal zinc minimizes sludge
disposal problems and pass through of this pollutant.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
EXISTING SOURCES
The Agency has selected substitution of chemicals as the basis for the
control of trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, and zinc being
discharged to POTWs. Fungicide and slimicide formulations containing
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced with
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc
hydrosulfite, a chemical used to bleach groundwood pulps, can be
replaced with sodium hydrosulfite.
PSES EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
PSES effluent limitations are presented in Table XIV-1.
579
-------
TABLE XIV-1
PSES EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day*
Subcategory
PCP
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechaaical
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
0.0057 0.0069
0.0043 0.0052
0.0037 0.0044
0.0032 0.0039
0.0032 0.0039
0.0013 0.0016
0.0013 0.0016
0.0011 0.0013
0.0015 0.0018
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
0.0069 0.0083
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Equations Below
0.0022 0.0026 0.26
0.0025 0.0030 0.30
0.0023 0.0027 0.27
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0026
0.00075
0.0017
0.0015
0.0031
0.0031
0.0031
0.0032
0.00090
0.0021
0.0018
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Honintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Ifonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0016
0.0024
0.0051
0.0080
0.0062
0.0013
0.0019
0 . 0029
0.0061
0.0096
0.0075
0.0016
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Note: Maximum day concentration limitations for all subcategories:
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc =3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = (0.000950x2-0.0506x+3.2)/1000
TCP = (0.00114x2-0.0607x+3.84)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
o
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Not Applicable
580
-------
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
The substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol represents a no cost alternative
that will virtually eliminate the discharge of these toxic pollutants
to POTWs. The substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc
hydrosulfite to control the discharge of zinc represents a low cost
alternative that ensures substantial reductions in the discharge of
zinc at indirect discharging groundwood mills where zinc is used as a
bleaching chemical. This technology is readily transferable to
indirect discharging mills as it has been determined that substitution
of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite has been widely
practiced at direct discharging groundwood mills to attain existing
BPT effluent limitations.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSES EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
PSES effluent limitations for the control of pentachlorophenol,
trichlorophenol, and zinc have been developed using the same
methodology as for development of BAT effluent limitations for control
of these toxic pollutants.
Proposed PSES effluent limitations are expressed as allowable maximum
daily concentrations (milligrams per liter). Mass limitations (kg/kkg
or lb/1000 Ib of product) are provided as guidance in cases where it
is necessary to impose mass limitations for control of pollutants
discharged from contributing pulp, paper, and paperboard mills to
POTWs. Mass limitations are determined by multiplying maximum
allowable concentrations by the flow on which BPT limitations are
based for each subcategory.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
There is no cost associated with this technology; substitute chemicals
are available at comparable costs. The total mass of regulated
pollutants removed from discharges to POTWs has been estimated to be
10,000 kg/yr (22,000 Ib/yr) of trichlorophenol and 3600 kg/yr (8000
Ib/yr) of pentachlorophenol.
Zinc Hvdrosulfite Substitution
The cost (1978 dollars) of implementation of this technology is
estimated to be $23,300 per year. Only one indirect discharging
groundwood mill has been identified where zinc hydrosulfite is used to
bleach pulp. The total mass of zinc removed from discharges to POTWs
from groundwood subcategory wastewaters is estimated to be 20,000
kg/yr (44,000 Ib/yr).
581
_
-------
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The non-water quality impacts of PSES have been considered.
Compliance with PSES will result in no increase in energy usage nor
will it result in any increase in air pollution, noise pollution, or
solid waste generation.
582
-------
SECTION XV
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
GENERAL
Section 307(c) of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires EPA to
promulgate pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS) at the same
time that it promulgates NSPS. New indirect dischargers, like new
direct dischargers, have the opportunity to incorporate the best
available demonstrated technologies including process changes,
in-plant control measures, and end-of-pipe treatment and to use plant
site selection to ensure adequate treatment system installation.
Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS) are to prevent the
discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with, or are
otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The Clean Water
Act of 1977 adds a new dimension by requiring pretreatment for
pollutants, such as heavy metals, that limit POTWs sludge management
alternatives, including the beneficial use of sludges on agricultural
lands. The general pretreatment regulations (40 CFR Part 403), which
serve as the framework for these proposed pretreatment regulations for
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, can be found at 43 FR 27736
(June 26, 1978).
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Toxic Pollutants
The toxic pollutants proposed for regulation in all subcategories are
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol. It is also proposed that zinc
be limited in the groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers,
and groundwood-fine papers subcategories. Pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol have been observed to pass through biological
treatment systems. Control of the toxic metal zinc minimizes sludge
disposal problems and pass through of this pollutant.
IDENTIFICATION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
As for PSES, the Agency has selected substition of chemicals as the
basis for the control of trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, and zinc
being discharged to POTWs. Fungicide and slimicide formulations
containing trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced with
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc
hydrosulfite, a chemical used to bleach groundwood pulps, can be
replaced with sodium hydrosulfite.
PSNS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
i
PSNS effluent limitations are presented in Table XV-1.
583
-------
TABLE XV-1
PSNS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day*
Subcategory
PCP2
TCPJ
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft
Soda
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellopane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
0.0057
0.0043
0.0037
0.0032
0.0032
0.0013
0.0013
0.0011
0.0015
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0069
0.0052
0.0044
0.0039
0.0039
0.0016
0.0016
0.0013
0.0018
0.0083
0.0083
0.0083
0.0083
NA
NA
' NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
See Equations Below
0.0022
0.0025
0.0023
0.0026
0.0030
0.0027
0.26
0.30
0.27
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 0.0025 0.0031 NA
o Tissue Papers 0.0025 0.0031 NA
o Newsprint 0.0025 0.0031 NA
Tissue from Wastepaper 0.0026 0.0032 NA
Paperboard from Wastepaper 0.00075 0.00090 NA
Wastepaper-Molded Products 0.0017 0.0021 NA
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 0.0015 0.0018 NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 0.0016 0.0019 NA
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 0.0024 0.0029 NA
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 0.0051 0.006} NA
o Electrical 0.0080 0.0096 NA
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers 0.0062 0.0075 NA
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 0.0013 0.0016 NA
*Note: Maximum day concentration limitations for all subcategories:
PCP = 0.025 milligrams/liter
TCP = 0.030 milligrams/liter
Zinc =3.0 milligrams/liter
Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = (0.000950x2-0.0506x+3.2)/1000
TCP = (0.001l4x2-0.0607x+3.84)/1000
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp in the final product
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Wash) Subcategories.
PCP = Pentachlorophenol
TCP = Trichlorophenol
NA = Not Applicable
584
-------
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
The substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol represents a no cost alternative
that will virtually eliminate the discharge of these toxic pollutants.
The substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite to
control the discharge of zinc represents a low cost alternative that
ensures substantial reductions in the discharge of zinc at new
indirect discharging groundwood mills where zinc could be used as a
bleaching chemical. This technology is readily transferable to new
indirect discharging mills as it has been determined that substitution
of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite has been widely
practiced at direct discharging groundwood mills to attain existing
BPT effluent limitations.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSNS EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
PSNS effluent limitations for the control of pentachlorophenol,
trichlorophenol, and zinc have been developed using the same
methodology used in the development of PSES effluent limitations for
control of these toxic pollutants.
Proposed PSNS effluent limitations are expressed as allowable maximum
daily concentrations (milligrams per liter). Mass limitations (kg/kkg
or lb/1000 Ib of product) are provided as guidance in cases where it
is necessary to impose mass limitations for control of pollutants
discharged from contributing pulp, paper, and paperboard mills to
POTWs. Mass limitations are determined by multiplying maximum
allowable concentrations by the flows on which BPT limitations are
based for each subcategory.
COST OF APPLICATION
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
There is no cost associated with this technology; substitute chemicals
are available at comparable costs.
Zinc Hvdrosulfite Substitution
The cost (1978 dollars) of substitution to the use of sodium
hydrosulfite results in an increased cost of from $0.40 to $2.63 per
kkg ($0.36 to $2.39 per ton) of pulp bleached depending on the product
produced.
585
-------
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .
The non-water quality impacts of PSNS have been considered.
Compliance with these regulations will result in no increase in energy
usage nor will it result in any increase in air pollution, noise
pollution7 or solid waste generation.
586
-------
SECTION XVI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wishes to acknowledge the
contributions to this project by the Edward C. Jordan Co., of
Portland, Maine. Donald R. Cote, P.E., Group Vice President, Willard
C. Warren III, P.E., Project Manager, John C. Tarbell, P.E., Assistant
Project Manager, and Charles D. Cox, P.E., Senior Project Engineer,
were the key contributors in completion of the detailed technical
study and the drafting of the initial report on which this document is
based. Other personnel of the Edward C. Jordan Co., and its
subcontractors who contributed in the project investigations are
Robert E. Handy, P.E., R. Bruce Ringrose, P.E., Neal A. Janelle, James
H. Fitch, Jr., P.E., Nancy E. Forrester, Anne M. Thompson, Dianne J.
Oakes, Nancy Rosengren, Connie Michaud, Raymond H. Myers, Ph.D.,
Statistical Consultant of Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and Roger A.
Novack, Ph.D. of Gulf South Research Institute.
Special appreciation is expressed to Conrad R. Bernier, P.E., Senior
Project Engineer, of the Washington, D.C. office of the Edward C.
Jordan Co., whose contributions in the preparation of technical
materials, Federal Register notices, and this document were numerous.
Without his special assistance and dedication, the monumental task of
completion of this project would not have been possible.
We wish to acknowledge the mill managers, engineers, and other
representatives of the industry without whose cooperation and
assistance in site visitations 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 BAT Task Group deserve special
recognition.
The U.S. EPA Pulp and Paper
recognized, including:
Danforth G. Bodien
Joseph Davis
Jack Newman
Frank Early
Michael Strutz
John Moebes
Robert Gross
Vincent Carpano
Paul Didier
Jack Wunder
Technical Working Group must also, be
U.S. EPA, Region X
U.S. EPA, Region III
U.S. EPA, Region V
U.S. EPA, NEIC-Denver
U.S. EPA, OR&D - Cincinnati
U.S. EPA, Region IV
State of South Carolina
State of Virginia
State of Wisconsin
State of Wisconsin
We would also like to acknowledge the special contributions of Kevin
J. Walter of the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.
587
-------
Appreciation is expressed to those at EPA Headquarters who contributed
to the completion of this project, including: Allen Leduc, Dale M.
Ruhter, Edward Sharter, Gail Goad, William Webster, David Gibbons, and
Devereaux Barnes, Office of Analysis and Evaluation, Office of Water
Regulations and Standards; Alexandra Tarnay, Lynn Delpire, Rod
Frederick, Edmund M. Notzon, Monitoring and Data Support Division,
Office of Water Regulations and Standards; L. Michael Flaherty, Donald
Ehreth, and Joseph A. Krivak, Criteria and Standards Division, Office
of Water Regulations and Standards; Richard Gardner, Nancy Othmer, and
Susan G. Lepow, Office of General Counsel; Richard Brandes, Office of
Water Enforcement; Richard Raines, Office of Planning and Evaluation;
and Matthew Straus, Office of Solid Waste.
Within the Effluent Guidelines Division, John E. Riley, Robert B.
Schaffer, Jeffery D. Denit, Arthur Shattuck, Craig Vogt, Mark
Mjonness, Teresa Wright, and Lois Jennings made significant
contributions. The performance and long hours contributed by Carol
Swann are appreciated as are the efforts of Maureen Treacy, Kaye
Storey, Pearl Smith, and Nancy Zrubek.
-------
..AJIifNDIX A
GLOSSARY
Abaca - Manila fiber, or manila hemp, obtained from the leafstalk of a
variety of plantain or banana, native to the Philippine Islands. Its
principal usage is marine cordage, but is also used for rope, papers,
and tea bags.
Active Alkali - A measure of the strength of alkaline pulping liquor
indicating the sum of caustic soda and sodium sulfide expressed as
Na20.
Activated Sludge Process - A high rate biological oxidation process.
The significant feature of the process is the recycle of a
biologically-active sludge formed by settling the microorganism
population from the aeration process in a clarifier. Waste is treated
in a matter of hours rather than days.
Aeration - The process of being supplied or impregnated with air.
Aeration is used in biological treatment to dissolve oxygen in the
wastewater. This dissolved oxygen is required by microorganisms as
they feed on organic matter in the wastewater.
Air Dry Ton (APT) - Measurement of production
content of 10 percent by weight.
including a moisture
Alkali - NaOH + Na20, expressed as Na20 in alkaline cooking liquors.
Alpha-cellulose - The true cellulose content of a fibrous material.
Available Chlorine - The oxidizing power of a bleaching agent
expressed in terms of elemental chlorine.
Bagasse - Crushed stalks- of sugarcane after the sugar has been
removed.
Bag Paper - Paper used in making grocery bags or sacks.
Bale - A standard bale of wastepaper is 72 in. long, 32 in. wide, and
28 in. deep, with a content of about 37 cubic feet and weighing 900 to
1,000 Ibs. The size and weight may vary with the grade of paper. A
bale of pulp varies in weight from 400 to 500 Ibs and is approximately
30x30x13 in. in size. A bale of rags varies in weight from 700 to
1,300 Ibs and will vary in dimensions according to the press used.
Typical dimensions are 26x30x72 in., 26x42x72 in., or 26x52x54 in. A
bale of bags weighs 61 to 62 Ibs.
Barometric Leg - A pipe drawing water from a decker or similar piece
of equipment discharging below the surface of the water in a receiving
tank. A syphon action is created thus drawing a vacuum on the decker.
589
-------
Barker - A piece of equipment designed to remove the bark from a log.
Barking - The operation of removing bark from pulpwood prior to
processing. This is carried out by means of a knife, drum, mechanical
abrasion, hydraulic barker, or by chemical means.
Basis Weight - The weight of a sheet of paper of a given area.
effected by the density and thickness of the sheet.
It is
Beater - A machine consisting of a tank or "tub," usually with a
partition or "midfeather," and containing a heavy roll revolving
against a bedplate. Both roll and bedplate may contain horizontal
metal bars set on edge. Pulp or wastepapers are put into the tub of
the beater and water is added so that the mass may circulate and pass
between the roll and the bedplate. This action separates the material
and frees the fibers preparatory to further processing. Fillers,
dyestuffs, and sizing materials may be added to the beater and thus
incorporated with the paper stock. Many modifications in design have
been developed without changing the basic principles. See also
Refiner.
Biological Oxidation - The process by which bacterial and other
microorganisms oxidize complex organic materials to simpler compounds
and use these for growth and energy. Self-purification of waterways
and biological waste treatment systems such as activated sludge,
trickling filter and aerated stabilization depend on this principle.
Black Liquor - The used cooking liquor recovered from the digester.
It may also be referred to as spent cooking liquor. Strong black
liquor refers to the liquor after it has been concentrated by an
evaporator to a level suitable for combustion. Prior to evaporation,
it is referred to as weak black liquor.
Bleaching - The brightening and delignification of pulp by the
addition of oxidizing chemicals such as chlorine or reducing chemicals
such as sodium hypochlorite.
Blow -
boiler.
Ejection of the chips from a digester, or waste solids from a
Slowdown - The liquid and solid waste materials ejected from a
pressure vessel such as a boiler.
Blow Pit - A large tank under a digester which receives the discharged
chips and liquor from the digester. A constructed stainless steel
plate within the blow pit acts to break up the chip structure into
individual fibers of pulp upon impact.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) - Quantity of dissolved oxygen
utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter in a specified
time (5 days) and at, a specified temperature. It is not related to
the oxygen requirements in chemical combustion, being determined
- 590
-------
entirely by the biodegradability^of the»paterial and by the amount of
oxygen utilized by the microorganisms during oxidation.
Boil-out - A procedure, usually utilizing heat and chemicals, to clean
equipment such as evaporators, heat-exchangers, and pipelines.
Bone Dry - See Oven Dry.
Break - A term used to denote a complete rupture of a web of paper or
paperboard during manufacture or some subsequent operation which
utilizes rolls of paper.
Breaker Stack - Two rolls, one above the other, placed in the dryer
section of a papermachine to compact the sheet and smooth out its
surface defects.
Breast Roll - A large diameter roll around which the Fourdrinier wire
passes at the machine headbox, just at or ahead of the point where the
stock is admitted to the wire by the stock inlet. The roll is covered
with corrosion-resistant metal or fiberglass and is usually driven by
the Fourdrinier wire.
Brightness - As commonly used in the paper industry, the reflectivity
of a sheet of pulp, paper, or paperboard for specified light measured
under standardized conditions.
Brightness Unit - An increment of measurement to assess the brightness
of paper.
Bristol - Paper characterized by its cardlike features.
Broke - Partly or completely manufactured paper that does not leave
the machine room as salable paper or paperboard; also paper damaged in
finishing operations such as rewinding rolls, cutting, and trimming.
Brown Stock - Pulp, usually kraft or groundwood, not yet
treated other than in the pulping process.
bleached or
Calcium Hypochlorite - A chemical commonly used in the paper industry
for bleaching pulp, and in water treatment as a germicide.
Calender Stack - Two or more adjacent and revolving rolls which
provide even thickness control of the sheet and the final finishing of
its surface.
Capacity - Production of a unit, usually in tons per day.
Causticizinq - Process of making white liquor from green liquor by
addition of slaked lime. Most Na2CO3^ is thereby converted to NaOH.
Cellulose - The major polysaccharide component of the cell walls of
all woods, straws, bast fibers and seed hairs. It is the main solid
591
-------
constituent of wood plants and is the principal raw material of pulp,
paper and paperboard.
Central Limit Theorem - A statistical theorem. If any random variable
X may be represented as a sum of any N independent random variables,
then in general, the sum X, for large N, is approximately normally
distributed. The importance of the theorem is that the mean x of a
random sample from any distribution is approximately normal with mean
t> and variance r2/N if the sample size is large.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) - A measure of the oxygen-consuming
capacity of organic and inorganic matter present in water or
wastewater. It is expressed as the amount of oxygen consumed from a
chemical oxidant in a specific test.
Chemical Wood Pulp - Pulp obtained by digestion of wood with solutions
of various chemicals. The principal chemical processes are the
sulfite, sulfate (kraft), and soda processes.
Chest (or
furnish.
Stock Chest) - A tank used for storage of wet fiber or
Chipper - A machine consisting essentially of a revolving disk
equipped with heavy radially-arranged knives, which cuts pulpwood and
sawmill waste into slices or chips, diagonal to the grain.
Chips - Small pieces of wood used to make pulp.
Chlorine Dioxide - A chemical ClO^ used in pulp bleaching as a water
solution, usually in one or more of the latter stages of a multistage
sequence. It is prepared by a variety of processes at the plant site
usually from sodium chlorate, acid, and a reducing agent.
Chromophoric - Relating to color in a molecule, that can be attributed
to the presence of a chemical group or groups.
Clarifier - In wastewater treatment, a settling tank which removes
solids from wastewater through gravitational settling. The settled
material, called sludge,- is removed from the tank bottom by a rake
arm.
Clay - In general, a natural, earthy, fine-grained material which
develops plasticity when wetted, but is hard when baked or fired.
Used as filler and for coating paper sheets.
Cleaner - A device which creates a cyclone effect to remove dirt and
other rejects from pulp using the differences in density to aid in
separation.
Coarse Papers - Paper used for grocery and shopping bags,
special industrial papers.
sacks, and
592
-------
Coated - A term applied to paper and paperboard, whose surface has
been treated with clay or some other pigment and adhesive mixture or
other suitable material/ W^improve^the finish with respect to
printing quality, color, smoothness, opacity, or other surface
properties. The term is also applied to lacquered and varnished
papers.
Color - Refers to standard APHA Platinum Cobalt Test, using standards
for color intensity of water samples. Commonly, standards are
prepared at various concentrations which later may be referenced as
units of color, derived from flow and concentration standard.
Color Plant - The portion of a fine papermill where pulp is dyed or
colored prior to being made into paper.
Color Unit - A measure of color concentration
methods.
in water using NCASI
Composite Sample - A mixture of grab samples collected at the same
sampling point at different times.
Confidence Level (or Confidence Interval) - An interval about a sample
quantity which is likely to contain the population value, with some
specified assurance.
Consistency - The percentage, by weight, of air dry (or oven dry)
fibrous material in a stock or stock suspension. It is also called
density or concentration.
Converting - Any operation in which paper is made into a product, not
necessarily the final product to be made.
Cooking - Heating of wood, water, and chemicals in a closed vessel
under pressure to a temperature sufficient to separate the fibrous
portion of wood by dissolving ligriin and other nonfibrous
constituents.
Cooking Liquor - The mixture of chemicals and water used to dissolve
lignin in wood chips.
Corrugating Medium - A paperboard used at corrugating plants to form
the corrugated or fluted (wave-like) member in making such products as
corrugated combined board and corrugated wrapping materials.
Cotton Linters - Short fibers surrounding the cotton seed.
Couch Pit - A pit or catch basin located under the couch roll on a
fourdrinier machine to receive water removed at the couch or wet broke
in case of a wet end break.
Couch Roll - This term refers to a roll primarily involved in
dewatering and picking off, or couching, of the newly formed paper web
from the wire on which it was formed and partially dewatered. The
593
-------
couch roll is involved in the transfer of the web to the wet press
felt for further dewatering.
Countercurrent Washing - Refers to a method of washing used on the
bleach plant or brownstock washers where fresh water is applied on the
last stage showers, and the effluent from each stage is used on the
washer showers of the preceding stage.
Creped - A light crinkled characteristic imparted to paper by a
creping device to increase surface area, absorption, and elasticity.
This is a customary procedure in tissue papers and fine decorative
papers.
Cylinder Machine - One of the principal types of papermaking machines,
characterized by the use of wire-covered cylinders or molds on which a
web is formed.
Debarking - See "Barking".
Decker - A piece of equipment commonly used to thicken pulp. It
consists of a wire-covered drum in a pulp vat. A vacuum is applied to
the center of the drum, commonly by a barometric leg, to pull water
out of the stock slurry.
Deflaker - A high-speed mixing and agitating machine through which a
fibrous stock suspension in water is pumped to obtain complete
separation and dispersion of each individual fiber, and break up of
any fiber lumps, knots, or bits of undefibered paper.
Deinkinq' - The operation of reclaiming fiber from waste paper by
removing ink, coloring materials, and fillers.
Density - Weight per unit volume.
Diffusion Washing - Washing pulps with an open ended vessel by
diffusing or passing the wash media through the pulp mass.
Digester - The vessel used to treat pulpwood, straw, rags or other
such cellulosic materials with chemicals to produce pulp.
Disk Refiner - A motor-driven refiner whose working elements consist
of one or more matched pairs of disks having a pattern of ribs
machined into their faces and arranged so that one disk of the pair is
rotated. The other disk is usually stationary, but may be driven in
the opposite direction of rotation.
Dissolved Oxygen - Amount of oxygen, expressed in milligrams per
liter, dissolved in water.
Dissolved Solids - The total amount of dissolved material, organic and
inorganic, contained in water or wastes.
594
-------
Dissolving Pulp - A special grade of chemical pulp made from wood or
cotton 1 inters for use in the, manufacture of regenerated cellulose
(viscose rayon and cellophane) or cellulose derivatives such as
acetate and nitrate.
Doctor Blade - A thin plate or scraper of wood, metal, or other hard
substance placed along the entire length of a roll or cylinder to keep
it free from the paper, pulp, or size, thus maintaining a smooth,
clean surface.
Dregs
mill.
Dregs - The inert rejects from the green liquor clarifier of .a pulp
the green liquor
Dregs Washer - A piece of equipment used to wash
(Na2C03.) off the dregs prior to their disposal.
Dry End - The mill term for the drying section of the papermachine,
consisting mainly of the driers, calenders, reels, and slitters.
Esparto - A grass whose bast fibers are used to produce
book and printing papers and medium class writing papers.
high-class
Evaporators - Process equipment used to concentrate spent pulping
liquors prior to burning.
Extended Aeration - A modification of the activated
that employs aeration periods of 18 hours or more.
sludge process
Extraction Water - Water removed during a pulp manufacturing process.
Fatty Acid - A naturally-occuring organic compound of wood.
Felt - The endless belt of wood or plastic used to convey and dewater
the sheet during the papermaking process.
Fiber - The cellulosic portion of the tree used to make
and paperboard.
pulp, paper,
Filler - A material, generally nonfibrous, added to the fiber furnish
of paper. In paperboard manufacturing, the inner ply or plies of a
multiple layer product.
Fine Papers - Papers for printing, reproduction and writing.
Fines - Very short pulp fibers or fiber fragments and ray cells.
are sometimes referred to as flour or wood flour.
They
Finishing - The various operations in the manufacture and packaging of
paper performed after it leaves the papermachine. Finishing
operations include supercalendering, plating, slitting, rewinding,
sheeting, trimming, sorting, counting, and packaging. Ruling,
punching, pasting, folding, and embossing are also sometimes
considered as finishing operations.
595
-------
Flour - A term applied to the fine fibers or fiber fragments of a
pulp. They are also known as fines.
Flume - A sloped trough with flowing water used to transfer pulpwood
from one point to another.
Fourdrinier Machine - A papermaking machine employed in the
manufacture of all grades of paper and paperboard. It may be divided
into four sections, the wet end, the press section, the drier section,
and the calender section.
Freeness - A measure of the rate with which water drains from a stock
suspension through a wire mesh screen or a perforated plate. It is
also known as slowness or wetness.
Furnish - The mixture of fibers and chemicals used to manufacture
paper.
Gland - A device utilizing a soft wear-resistant material used to
minimize leakage between a rotating shaft and the stationary portion
of a vessel such as a pump.
gland Water - Water used to lubricate a gland. Sometimes called
"packing water".
Glassine Paper - Paper used as protective wrapping of foodstuffs and
products including tobacco products, chemicals, metal parts, as well
as for purposes where its transparent features are useful (i.e.,
window envelopes). This paper is grease resistant and has high
resistance to the passage of air and many essential oil vapors.
Gloss - The property of a surface which causes it to reflect light
specularly and is responsible for its shiny or mirror-like appearance.
Grab Sample - A sample collected at a particular time and place.
Grade - The type of pulp or paper product manufactured.
Greaseproof Paper - Paper used when resistance to oil and grease
penetration is necessary. ,
Green Liquor - Liquor made by dissolving the smelt from the kraft
process water and weak liquor preparatory to causticizing.
Green Liquor Clarifier - A piece of equipment used to separate the
dregs from the green liquor, allowing recovery of the green liquor for
processing into white "cooking" liquor.
Grinder - A machine for producing mechanical wood pulp or groundwood.
It is essentially a rotating pulpstone against which logs are pressed
and reduced to pulp,
596
-------
Grindstone - A natural - OK ^Hjfrif ical^jstone which is channeled or
grooved and used for the manufacture of mechanical, chemi-mechanical,
and groundwood pulp.
Groundwood Papers - A general term applied to a variety of papers,
other than standard newsprint, made with substantial proportions of
mechanical wood pulp together with chemical wood pulps, and used
mainly for printing and converting purposes.
Hardwood - A term applied to wood obtained from trees of the angio-
sperm class, such as birch, gum, maple, oak, and poplar. Hardwoods
are also known as porous woods.
Headbox - The area of the papermachine that uniformly spreads and
distributes the dilute stock suspension and from which the stock flows
through a slice onto the wire.
Hemicellulose - The secondary component of cell walls of wood
consisting primarily of short-chained . (low molecular weight)
polysaccharides.
Hemp - A tall plant native to Asia having stems that yield a coarse
fiber used in the cordage and textile industry. Enters the paper
industry as old cordage or rough textile waste.
Hot Ponds - Heated ponds of water used to thaw frozen logs.
Impregnation - The process of treating a sheet or web of paper or
paperboard with a liquid such as hot asphalt or wax, a solution of
some material in a volatile solvent, or a liquid such as an oil. It
is also used as a term to describe a treatment in which fibrous raw
materials are infused with a chemical solution prior to a digesting or
fiberizing process. Sometimes called pre-impregnation.
Integrated - A term used to describe a pulp and paper mill operation
in which all or some of the pulp is processed into paper at the mill.
Jordan - A refiner whose working elements consist of a conical plug
rotating in a matching conical shell. The outside of the plug and the
inside of the shell are furnished with knives or bars commonly called
tackle.
Jumpstaqe Countercurrent Washing - Another type of countercurrent
washing in which fresh water is used on the last two stages and
filtrates from the acid stages are used on the preceding acid stage
with the filtrate from the final alkaline stage being used on the
preceding alkaline stage.
Jute - The glossy fiber of either of two East Indian plants of the
linden family used chiefly for sackling burlap and twine. In
papermaking, cuttings from burlap manufacture, washed sugarbagging and
wool tares used in wrapping cotton bales are used as raw material
sources.
597
-------
Kappa Numbers - The permanganate number of a pulp measured under
controlled conditions and corrected to be the equivalent of 50 percent
consumption of the permanganate solution in contact with the specimen.
It gives the degree of delignification of pulp through a wider range
than does the- older permanganate number test.
/
Kiln - A furnace or oven used in the pulp and paper industry to burn
lime and calcium carbonate to produce CaO, which is used again with
green liquor to form white liquor.
Knots - An imperfection in paper or lumps in paper stock resulting
from: 1) incompletely defibered textile materials; the term applies
especially to rag paper manufacture; 2) small undefibered clusters of
wood pulp; and 3) the basal portion of a branch or limb which has
become incorporated in the body of the tree.
Knotter - A mechanical device, usually a screen, for removing knots
from wood pulp.
Kolmogorov - Smirnov Goodness of Fit Test - A nonparametric
statistical test of goodness of fit for an observed continuous
frequency distribution to the expected frequency distribution
representing the hypothesis.
Kraft - A descriptive term for the (alkaline) sulfate pulping process,
the resulting pulp, and paper or paperboard made therefrom.
Lap - See Wet Lap.
Lignin - A non-degradable organic compound of wood which is removed
during pulping.
Lime Mud - A solid residue generated from the white liquor
in the lime recovery/white liquor preparation process.
clarifier
Linerboard - A paperboard made on a Fourdrinier or cylinder machine
and used as the facing material in the production of corrugated and
solid fiber shipping containers.
Market Pulp - A pulp manufactured explicitly for purchase.
Mathieson Process - A process of producing chlorine dioxide, using S02_
as a reducing agent.
Mechanical Pulp - Pulp produced by physical means without the use of
chemicals or heat, often referred to as groundwood.
Metering Rod - A rod used to apply coating to the surface of a
metering even thickness coating layers on the surface.
sheet,
Molded Pulp Products - Contoured products, such as egg packaging
items, food trays, plates, and bottle protectors, made by depositing
598
-------
fibers from a pulp slurry onto a forming mold of the contour and shape
desired in the product.
Mud Filter - A piece of equipment used to thicken and wash lime mud
prior to burning it in the lime kiln.
Mud Washer - A piece of equipment used to wash the sodium base
chemicals from the lime mud prior to burning it in the lime kiln.
Newsprint - Paper, made largely from groundwood pulp with a small
percentage of chemical pulp added for strength, used chiefly in the
printing of newspapers.
Nip - The point at which two adjacent rolls come together.
Nonparametic Methods - Statistical methods which do not require the
assumption of a distributional form, such as a normal distribution.
Nonwood Fibers - Fibers not of the wood family used to produce pulp,
paper, and paperboard. Such as vegetable fibers (cotton, flax, jute,
hemp, cereal straw, bagasse, bamboo, esparto, abaca, sisal,
pineapple), animal fiber (wool), mineral fiber (asbestos, glass), and
man-made or artifical fiber (rayon, nylon, orlon, dacron).
Normal Distribution - A statistical distribution identified by a bell
shaped curve which is the most important of all continuous
distributions. This distribution curve is symetrical about the mean.
Nutrients - Elements, pr compounds, essential as raw materials for
organism growth and development (as in activated sludge process).
Opacity - A measure of the index of transparency of paper, by
measuring the quantity of light that is transmitted through the paper
sheet.
Oven Dry - A pulp or paper which has been dried to a constant weight
at a temperature of 100° to 105°C (212° to 221°F).
Oxidation Pond - A low-rate biological process
takes place in a man-made pond.
by natural aeration processes such
treatment
supplied
photosynthesis, and partial pressure.
in which biological
Dissolved oxygen is
as wind, algae,
Paperboard - One of the two broad subdivisions of paper products.
Paperboard is heavier in basis weight, thicker, and more rigid than
paper. In general, all sheets 12 points (0.012 in.) or mdre*in
thickness are classified as paperboard. There are a number of
exceptions based upon traditional nomenclature. For example, blotting
paper, felts, and drawing paper in excess of 12 points are classified
as paper while corrugating medium, chipboard, and linerboard less than
12 points are classified as paperboard. Paperboard is made from a
wide variety of furnishes on a number of types of machines,
principally cylinder and fourdrinier. The broad classes are: 1)
599
-------
container board, which is used for corrugated cartons; 2) boxboard
which is further divided into, a) folding boxboard, b) special food
board, and c) setup boxboard; and 3) all other special types such as
automobile board, and building board.
Parametric Methods - Classical statistical methods which are effective
for samples taken from normally distributed populations.
Permanganate Number jjC No.) - This method (T-214-TAPPI Std.) is used
to determine the relative "hardness" or bleach requirements of pulp.
By definition, it is the number of milliliters of 0.1 N potassium
permanganate solution absorbed by 1 gram of moisture-free pulp under
specified control conditions.
Peroxide - A chemical
groundwood pulps.
used in bleaching of wood pulps, usually
Porosity - A measure of time required for 100 cm3 of air to flow
through a sample area. Also termed "air resistance" (in seconds per
100 cm3).
Precipitators - Equipment used to remove ash and other fine solids
from gases exiting the boilers and furnaces in a mill.
Precook - Prehydrolysis.
: - ,: •/
Prehydrolysis - Pre-steaming of chips in the digester prior to
cooking; usually associated with improved bleaching of kraft pulps.
Press - In a papermachine, a pair of rolls between which the paper web
is passed for one of the following reasons: 1) water removal at the
wet press; 2) smoothing and leveling of the sheet surface at the
smoothing press; and 3) application of surface treatments to the sheet
at the size press.
Printabilitv - The ability of a paper surface to accept printing ink.
pth Percentile - A real number which divides the area under a
probability density function corresponding to a continuous
distribution into two parts of specified amounts (i.e., 99th
percentile divides the density function into one percent and 99
percent of the population).
Pulp - Cellulosic fibers after conversion from wood chips.
Pulper - A mechanical device used to separate fiber bundles in the
presence of water prior to papermaking.
Pulping - The operation of reducing a cellulosic raw material, such as
pulpwood, rags, straw, and reclaimed paper into a pulp suitable for
papermaking.
600
-------
Pulpwood - Those woods which are suitable for the manufacture of
chemical or mechanical wood pulp. The wood may be in the form of logs
as they come from the forest or cut into shorter lengths suitable for
the chipper or the grinder.
Rag Paper - A paper product manufactured by use of such materials as
cotton or linen threads/ flax and hemp/ raw cotton, and other textile
fibers and cotton 1inters, as well as rags.
Recovery Furnace or Recovery Boiler - A boiler which burns the strong
black liquor.
Red Stock - Sulfite pulp after the pulping
treatments, such as bleaching.
process, prior to other
Reel - 1) A term applied to the untrimmed roll of paper of full
machine width wound on a large shaft at the dry end of the
papermachine. 2) The shaft on which the paper is first wound when it
leaves the driers. 3) A term for the operation of winding paper into
a reel.
Refiner - A machine used to rub, macerate, bruise, and cut fibrous
material, usually cellulose, in water suspension to convert the raw
fiber into a form suitable for formation into a web of desired
characteristics on a papermachine. See also Deflaker, Disk Refiner,
Jordan.
Refining - A general term applied to several operations, all of which
involve the mechanical treatment of pulp in a water suspension to
develop the necessary papermaking properties of the fibers and to cut
the fibers to the desired length distribution. See Refiner.
Rejects - Material unsuitable for pulp or papermaking which
separated in the manufacturing process.
has been
Repulping - The operation of rewetting and fiberizing pulp or paper
for subsequent sheet formation. See also Pulper.
Resin - A special additive used to produce wet—strength
board.
in paper or
Resin Acid - A naturally occuring organic compound in wood.
Rewinder - The term rewinder is often used for the winder in the
finishing room, distinguishing it from the winder which follows the
slitter at the end of the papermachine.
Rewinding - The operation of winding the paper accumulated on the reel
of papermachine onto a core to give a tightly wound roll suitable for
shipping or for use in the finishing or converting department.
Rosin - A brittle yellow or amber-colored natural resin that is
obtained from southern pine, (typess gum rosin, wood rosin, and
601
-------
tall-oil rosin).
paper.
Used in papermaking for internal (beater) sizing of
The logs can be any
E~l Process - A modification of the Mathieson process.
Roundwood - Logs as received in the woodyard.
length and usually have not been debarked.
Saltcake Loss - The loss of cooking chemical from
primarily at the brownstock washers or screen room.
the kraft cycle,
Sample Mean - The average of a population calculated from the sample;
it is the most commonly used measure of the center of a distribution.
Its value equals the sum of the values of the observations divided by
the number of observations.
Saveall - A mechanical device used to recover papermaking fibers
other suspended solids from a wastewater or process stream.
and
Screening - 1) The operation of passing chips over screens to remove
sawdust, slivers and oversize chips. 2) The operation of passing pulp
or paper stock through a screen to reject coarse fibers, slivers,
shives, and knots.
Screw Press - A device used to recover spent liquor from cooked chips.
Scrubbers - Equipment for removing noxious gases from the exhaust of
certain areas in the mill, such as the bleachery or washers.
Sheet - A term used extensively in the paper industry meaning: 1) A
single piece of pulp, paper, or paperboard; 2) the continuous web of
paper as it is being manufactured; 3) a general term for a paper or
paperboard in any form and in any quantity which, when used with
appropriate modifying words, indicates with varying degrees of
specificity, attributes of the product such as quality, class, use,
grade, or physical properties (Examples: a bright sheet, a kraft
sheet, a folding boxboard sheet); and 4) to cut paper or paperboard
into sheets of desired size from roll or web.
Shive - A bundle of incompletely separated fibers which may appear
the finished sheet as an imperfection.
in
Side-Hill Screens - Steeply sloped screens usually used to remove some
water from suspensions of stock or other solids while retaining the
solid on the screen surface.
Size - Any material used in the internal sizing or surface sizing of
paper and paperboard. Typical agents are rosin, glue and gelatin,
starch, modified celluloses, synthetic resins, latices, and waxes.
Size Press - A unit of a paper machine, usually located betweeni two
drier sections, used to apply, meter and distribute evenly size onto
paper.
602
-------
Sizing - 1) Relates to a property of paper resulting from an
alteration of fiber surface characteristics. In terms of internal
sizing, it is a measure of the resistance to the penetration of water
and various liquids. In terms of surface sizing, it relates to the
increase of such properties as water resistance, abrasion resistance,
abrasiveness, creasibility, finish, smoothness, surface bonding
strength, printability, and the decrease of porosity and surface fuzz.
2) The addition of materials to a papermaking furnish or the
application of materials to the surface of paper and paperboard to
provide resistance to liquid penetration and, in the case of surface
sizing, to affect one or more of the properties listed in 1).
Slaker - A device used to regenerate white liquor in the green liquor
recovery process.
Slasher - A saw or set of saws used to cut long logs to desired
length.
Slitter - A set of knives used to slit a reel of paper into the
desired widths as the reel is rewound.
Sludge - Semi-fluid mixture of fine solid particles with a liquid.
May contain fibrous and filler materials, and/or biological solids.
Slurry - A suspension of solid particles in a liquid.
Smelt - The molten inorganic cooking chemicals from the recovery
boiler.
Soda Process - The first process for the manufacture of chemical wood
pulp. Involves boiling wood in caustic alkali at a high temperature.
Softwood - Coniferous woods, such as pines, spruces, and hemlocks.
Solvay Process - A modification of the Mathieson process.
Spent Cooking Liquor - Cooking liquor after digestion containing
lignaceous, as well as chemical, materials.
Stock - 1) Pulp which has been beaten and refined, treated with
sizing, color, filler, etc. and which, after dilution, is ready .to be
formed into a sheet of paper. 2) Wet pulp of any type at any stage in
the manufacturing process. 3) Paper in inventory or in storage. 4)
Paper or other material to be printed, especially the paper for a
particular piece of work. 5) A term used to describe a paper suitable
for an indicated use, such as coating raw stock, milk carton stock,
tag stock, and towel stock.
Stock Preparation - A term for the several operations which occur
between pulping (or bleaching) and formation of the web on a
papermachine. It may include, for example, repulping, beating,
refining, and cleaning.
603
-------
Stone - See Grindstone.
Sulfidity - Sulfidity is a measure of the amount of sulfur in kraft
cooking liquor. It is the percentage ratio of NaS, expressed as NaO,
to active alkali.
Thickener - A device using vacuum or gravity type suction mesh screen
to remove excess water from pulp.
Tolerance Level - Provides an interval within which at least a
proportion of the population lies with probability 1-c or more (i.e,
99 percent of the observations lie below a given value with 70 percent
confidence).
Unbleached - A term applied to paper or pulp which has not been
treated with bleaching agents.
Vegetable Parchment - A wet strength, paper product
for moist materials.
used as wrapping
Virgin Wood Puli
sources of fiber.
- Pulp made from wpod, as contrasted to wastepaper
Viscosity - The resistance to flow in a liquid; a measurement used
stock preparation as an indicator of pulp condition.
in
Washer - A piece of equipment/ usually either a decker or side hill
screen type, equipped, with showers to wash chemicals from pulp stock
or reject solids.
Wastepaper - A general term used to specify various recognized grades
such as No. 1 news/ new kraft corrugated cuttings, old corrugated
containers, manila tabulating cards, coated soft white shavings, etc.,
which are used as a principal ingredient in the, manufacture of certain
types of paperboard, particularly boxboard made on cylinder machines
where the lower grades may go into filler stock, and the higher grades
into one or both liners.
Web - The sheet of paper coming from the papermachine in
width or from a roll of paper in any converting 'operation.
its full
Wet End - That portion of the papermachine between the headbox and the
drier section. See Fourdrinier Machine.
Wet Lap Machine - A machine used ,to form pulp into thick rough sheets
sufficiently dry to permit handling and folding into bundles (laps)
convenient for storage or transportation.
Wet Laps - Rolls or sheets of pulp of 30 to 45 percent consistency to
facilitate transportation of market pulp, and prepared in a process
similar to papermaking.
604
-------
Wet Press - The dewatering unit used on a papermachine between the
sheet-forming equipment and the drier section.
Wet Strength - The strength of paper after
water.
complete saturation with
Wet Strength Additives - Chemicals such as urea and melanine
formaldehydes used in papermaking to impart strength to papers used in
wet applications.
White Liquor - The name applied to liquor made by
liquor.
causticizing green
White Water - A general term for all papermill waters which have been
separated from the stock or pulp suspension, either on the
papermachine or accessory equipment, such as thickeners, washers, and
savealls, and also from pulp grinders.
Winder - The machine which winds into rolls, the paper coming from the
papermachine reel.
Wire - An endless moving belt made of metal or plastic, resembling a
window screen, upon which a sheet of paper is formed on a Fourdrinier
machine.
Wire Pit - A pit under the wire of a Fourdrinier machine, which
receives some of the water drained or pulled out of the paper sheet.
Wood Flour - Finely ground wood or fine sawdust used chiefly as a
filler.
Wood Preparation - A series of operations utilized to prepare wood to
"a suitable
paperboard.
state for further development into pulp, paper, and
These operations include barking, washing, and chipping.
Woodroom - The area of a pulp mill that handles the barking, washing,
chipping or grinding of logs, and processing of purchased chips.
Woodyard - The area of a mill where roundwood is received and stored
prior to transport to the woodroom.
Yankee Machine - A papermachine using one large steam-heated drying
cylinder for drying the sheet, instead of many smaller ones. Commonly
used for manufacturing tissue.
Yield - In pulp and papermaking, the ratio of product to raw material.
605
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
LEGEND OF ABBREVIATIONS
A: Acid or Dechlorination
AA: Atomic Adsorption
ADT: Air Dry Tons
APHA: American Public Health Association
API: American Paper Institute
ASB: Aerated Stabilization Basin
ATM: Atmospheres
Avg: Average
Ba: Barometric
BAT: Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
BCT: Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
BCT Bleached Kraft: Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue Bleached Kraft
B1K: Bleached Kraft
BMP: Best Management Practices
BOD5_: Biochemical Oxygen Demand (five day)
BP: Blow Pit Wash
BPT: Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
Brd: Board or Paperboard
BS: Bisulfite
Btu: British thermal units
C: Chlorination Stage (bleach)
°C: Degrees Centigrade
Ca: Calcium
CAC: Chemically Assisted Clarification
607
-------
CaO: Calcium Oxide
CPR: Code of Federal Regulations
Chg: Change
CMN: Coarse, Molded, Newsprint
CMP: Chemi-Mechanical Pulp
COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand
Cont: Contained
Conv: Converting
Corrug: Corrugating
Ctd: Coated
cu ft: cubic feet
cu m: cubic meter
cu in/day: cubic meter per day
d: day
D: Chlorine Dioxide Stage (bleach)
DAF: Dissolved Air Flotation
Dens: Density
DI: Deinked
Diss: Dissolving
DMR: Discharge Monitoring Report
DO: Dissolved Oxygen
DR: Drum Wash
E: Extraction Stage (caustic bleach)
E. Coli.: Escherichia Coliform
EC/GC: Electron Capture Detection/Gas Chromatography
EFF: Effluent
ENR: Engineering News Record
608
-------
EPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Est: Estimate
Excl: Excluding
F:. Fine
fps: feet per second
°F: degrees Fahrenheit
ft: feet
ft3: cubic feet
FW: Fresh Water
Fwp: From wastepaper
GAC: Granular Activated Carbon
gal: gallons
GC/MS: Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
gpd/sq ft: gallons per day per square foot
gpm: gallons per minute
GWD: Groundwood
GW. Spec.: Groundwood Specialties
H: Hypochlorite stage (bleach)
ha: hectare
hp: horsepower
hr: hour
HS: Hydrosulfite (bleach)
HW: Hardwood
H202: Hydrogen peroxide
HWK: Hardwood Kraft
Ind: Industrial
-------
Inf: Influent
Insul: Insulation
JTU: Jackson Turbidity Unit
K: Kraft
K.99: 99th Percentile of a Population
kg: kilogram, 1000 grams
kg/ha: kilograms per hectare
kg/kkg: kilograms per 1000 kilograms
kg/sq cm: kilograms per square centimeter
kgal: 1000 gallons
kgal/ton or kgal/t: 1000 gallons per ton
kkg: 1000 kilograms (metric ton)
kkg/day: 1000 kilograms/day
kl/kkg: kiloliters per thousand kilograms
kw: kilowatt
kwh: kilowatt hour
1: liter
Ib: pound
Ib/ac/day: pound per acre per day
Ib/gal: pound per gallon
Ib/t: pounds per ton
log: logarithm
mach: machine
MD: Maximum Day Limit
mg: million gallons
mgd: million gallons per day
mg/1: milligrams per liter
610
-------
MgO: Magnesium Oxide
min: minute
misc: miscellaneous
mkt: market
ml: milliliter
MLSS: Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids
MLVSS: Mixed Liquor Volatile Suspended Solids
MST: Median Survival Time
M30DA: Maximum 30 Day Average Limit
n: Number of daily observations
N.A.: Not Available or Not Applicable
Na: Sodium
Na2CO3: Sodium Carbonate (Soda Ash)
NaOH: Caustic Soda (Sodium Hydroxide)
Na2S: Sodium Sulfide
Na2SO4: Salt Calke (Sodium Sulfate)
Na2S03: Sodium Sulfite
NCASI: National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement
NH3: Ammonia
No.: Number
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSPS: New Source Performance Standards
NSSC: Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical
0: Oxygen (bleach)
O3: Ozone
O&M: Operation & Maintenance
611
-------
P: Peroxide (bleach)
PA: Peracetic Acid (bleach)
PCB: Polychlorinated B-iphenyl
PCP: Pentachlorophenol
PFTBA: Perfluorotributylamine
pH: alkalinity
PIMA: Paper Industry Management Association
pkg: packaging
POTW or POTWs: Publicly Owned Treatment Works
ppb: parts per billion
PPRIC: Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada
Pt-Co units: Platinum Cobalt Units
ppm: parts per million
%: percent
Prf: Proof
Print: Printing
prod.: production
PS: Post Storage
PSES: Performance Standards for Existing Sources
psi: pounds per square inch
psig: pounds per square inch gage
PSNS: Performance Standards for New Sources
purch: purchased
PVA: Polyvinylacetate
QC/QA: Quality Control/Quality Assurance
RBC: Rotating Biological Contactor
RCRA: Resource Conservation Recovery Act
612
-------
RWL: Raw Waste Load
S: Sulfite Condenser
S&A: Sampling and Analysis
San: Sanitary
sat: saturated
SB: Settling Basin
SCOT: Support-Coated Open Tubular Capillary Column
Semi-chem: Semi-chemical
S02: Sulfur Dioxide
spec: speciality
sq ft: square feet
sq m: square meter
sq m/g: square meter per gram
SRP: Salt Recovery Process
SS: Stainless Steel
SSL: Spent Sulfite Liquor
Std Meth: Standard Methods
Str: Structural
SW: Softwood
SWK: Softwood Kraft
t: ton
TAPPI: Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry
TCP: Trichlorophenol
TDH: Total Dynamic Head
Tech: Technical
Temp: Temperature
TMP: Thermo-Mechanical Pulp
613
-------
TOG: Total Organic Carbon
TOD: Total Oxygen Demand
ton: 2000 pounds
t/d or tpd: tons per day
TS: Total Solids
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
TVS: Total Volatile Solids
U: Unknown
UBK: Unbleached Kraft
Unctd: Uncoated
USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Vibra: Vibrating
VOA: Volatile Organic Acid
Vr: Vapor recompression
vs: versus
V/Q: Volume to flow
v/v: percent by volume
W: Water Soak
WATDOC: Canada's Inland Waters Directorate
WF: Wood Flour
w/: with
w/o: without
WP: Wastepaper
WW: White Water
w/w: water to water
/»: micron
614
-------
ug/1: micrograms per liter
yr: year
Z/A: Zurn/Attisholz
less than
less than or equal to
greater than
greater than or equal to
plus
minus
615
-------
-------
APPENDIX C
REFERENCES
1. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al. v. Train, United
States District Court for the District of Columbia, (8 ERC 2120),
June 7, 1976.
2. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al. v. Costle> United
States District Court for the District of Columbia, (12 ERC 1833),
March 9, 1979.
3. Federal Register, 39 FR 16578, 40 CFR 431, May 9, 1974.
4. Federal Register, 39 FR 18742, 40 CFR 430, May 29, 1971.
5. Federal Register, 42 FR 1398, 40 CFR 430, January 6, 1977.
6. Weyerhaeuser Co., e_t al. v. Douglas Costle, United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, September 5, 1978.
7. Federal Register, 45 FR 15952, 40 CFR 430, March 12, 1980.
8. Federal Register, 42 FR 6476, 40 CFR 128, February 2, 1977.
9. Rationale for the Development of. BAT Priority Pollutant
Parameters, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Effluent Guidelines
Division, Washington, D.C., May 24, 1977.
10. Investigation of. Chlorinated and Nonchlorinated Compounds in the
Lower Fox River Watershed, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
905/3-78-004, Chicago, Illinois, September 1978.
11. Choi, P.S.K., W.J. Mueller, J.A. Jacomet, D.L. Hessel, J.A.
Gerling, and T.J. Collier, Multi-Media Pollution Assessment in Pulp,
Paper, and Other Wood Products Industry, December 1976.
12. Priority Pollutant Information and Data Assessment, Edward C.
Jordan Co., Inc., Portland, Maine, June 1977.
13. Survey Form Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry, Part I. and Part
II, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 1977.
14. Survey Form Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry, Errata Sheets,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 1977.
15. Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening of Industrial
Effluents for Priority Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, April 1977.
617
-------
16. Procedures for Screening of_ Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Effluents
for Fourteen Nonconventional Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., December 1980.
17. Screening Program Work Booklet,
September 1977.
Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.,
18- Standard Methods for the Examination of. Water and Wastewater.
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association
and Water Pollution Control Federation, 14th Edition, 1975.
19. Process Data - Verification Program Mill Survey for Priority
Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D C.
July 1978.
20- Verification Program Work Booklet, Edward C. Jordan, Co., Inc.,
July 1978 (and all subsequent revisions).
21. Private Communication with National Council of the Paper Industry
for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., December 15, 1978.
22. An Investigation of Improved Procedures for Measurement of Mill
Effluent and Receiving Water Color, National Council of the Paper
Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), Technical
Bulletin No. 253, December 1971.
23. Procedures for Analysis of Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Effluents
£or To**-c and Nonconventional Pollutants. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., December 1980.
24. Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed Effluent Limitations
Guidelinesr New Source Performance Standards and Pretreatment
Standards for the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Point Source~Categorv,'
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA
440/2-80-086, December, 1980.
25. Pulp and Paper Manufacture; The Pulping of Wood, Vol. I, 2nd
Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1969. ~
26. Rydholm, S.A., Pulping Processes, Interscience Publishers, New
York, 1965.
27. Scott, R.H. and H.K. Willard, "The U.S. Sulfite Industry Faces
Present and Future Waste Control Needs," TAPPI, Vol. 56, No 9
September 1973. '
28. Gehm, H.W., State-of-the-Art Review of Pulp and Paper Waste
Treatment, EPA Contract No. 68-01-0012, April 1973.
29. Brown, R.W., et al., "Semi-Chemical Recovery Processes and
Pollution Abatement," Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada, T-202, March
1 960.
618
-------
30 Hanson, James P., "No Sulfur Pulping Pushing Out NSSC Process at
Corrugating Medium Mills," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 52, No. 3, March 1978.
31. TAPPI Standard Method T235m-60.
32. The Bleaching of. Pulp, TAPPI, Monograph Series, No. 27 1963.
33. Lockwood's Directory of_ the Paper and Allied Trades, Vance
Publishing, 1978 Edition.
34. Paper and Pulp Mill Catalog and Engineering Handbook, Paper
Industry Management Association (PIMA), 1978 Edition.
35. Post's Pul£ and Paper Directory, Miller Freeman Publications, San
Francisco, California, 1979 Edition.
36 Aerated Lagoon Treatment of. Sulfite Pulping Effluents, Report to
the V7S~. Environmental Protection Agency, . Water Pollution Control
Research Series Program No. 12040 ELW, December 1970.
37 Strier, Murray, Treatability of. Organic Priority Pollutants -
Part C - Their Estimated (30 Day Average) Treated Effluent
Concentrations - A Molecular Engineering Approach, 1978.
38. Development Document for Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
for the Electroplating Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental
pFotecTTon Agency" Washington, B.C., EPA 440/1-79-003, August 1979.
39. Zambrano, John J. and Kevin J. Walter, "A Survey of PCB in
Wastewater from Paper Recycling Operations," New York State Department
of Conservation, presented at the Northeast Regional Meeting of the
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement,
Inc., November 1978.
40 Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines for the
Bleached—KraftT 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.
41 Erco Inc., "Process Design Manual for Pollution Control in the
Pulp and' Paper Industry, Part II," Unpublished Project for EPA
Contract No. 68-01-1821, 1973.
42. Thompson, R., P.J. Savage, C.Y. Chai, "In-Plant Reduction of
Suspended Solids at Espanola," 1974 Air and Stream Improvement
Conference, Toronto, Ontario.
619
-------
43. SSVL, "The Environmental Care Project Half Year Report - January
1973, Printed for Swedish Pulp and Paper Mission to North America,
January 1973.
44. SSVL Environmental Care Project- Technical Summary 1974.
f,5/.,,Kramer' J' D>' C'F- Cornell, D.C. Pryke, and G. Rowlandson,
Spill and Effluent Control in the Closed-Cycle Bleached Kraft Pulp
Mill," TAPPI Environmental Conference, 1979.
46. Czappa, D. J.,
November 1978.
"In-Mill Close-up," TAPPI, Vol. 61, No. 11,
47. Becker, K.E., "Crown Simpson Finds Process Revisions Less Costly
than Primary Treatment," TAPPI, Vol. 62, No. 6, June 1979.
48- A Study of the Relation Between Residual Soda and
Water-Extractable Components of. Vacuum Drum Washed Kraft Pulp and "of
Repulped Corrugated Container Effluent Characteristics. NCASI,"Stream
Improvement Technical Bulletin No. 277, October 1974."
49. Edde, H. and E. Sebbas - Bergstrom, "Internal Pollution Controls
in the Pulping Industry," Journal WJPCF, Vol. 46 No. 11, 1974.
50. Rapson, William H. "Using Caustic Extraction Effluent in
Production of Bleached Pulp," Canadian Patent 802,084, December 24,
196,8.
51. Twitchell, J. and L. Edwards, "Kraft Mill Material Balance
Calculations for Brown Stock Washing, Screening and Oxygen Bleachinq,"
TAPPI, Vol. 57, No. 9, September 1974.
52. "Summary Report on the Evaluation of Internal Process Control
Technology Used in the Pulp and Paper Industry for Effluent
Reduction, Unpublished Contractor's Report to EPA, October, 1977.
53. CIP Research, Ltd., Water Re-use and Recycle in Bleacheries.
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa,
Ont., CPAR Report No. 47-1, 1972.
54, Kalish, John, "Swedish Mill Modernizes and Looks to New Future
for Sulfite Process," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 51, No. 9, September 1977.
55. Internal Memorandum from H.J. Wilk (ITT Rayonier Inc., Olympia
Research Division) Concerning Sulfite Effluent BOD, July 25, 1975.
56. Rath, P., "Process Wastewater: Reclamation or Disposal,
Environmental Conference, April 26-28, 1976.
TAPPI
57. "Pollution Reduction by Internal Measures at Bleached Kraft
Mills," Paper Trade Journal, Vol. 156, No. 44, October 1972.
620
-------
58. "Proceedings of the 1976 NCASI Central-Lakes States Regional
Meeting," NCASI Special Report 77-02, March 1977.
59. Relation Between Process Water Quality Characteristics and Its
Reuse Potential in. Combination Board Mills, NCASI Technical Bulletin
No. 282, September 1975.
60. The Relationship Between Process Water Quality Characteristics
and its Reuse Potential in the Noninteqrated Manufacture of Tissue and
Toweling, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 289, November 1976.
61. Casey, J.P., Pulp and Paper Chemistry and Chemical Technology,
2nd Edition, Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, 1960.
62. Broughton, Robert W., "Needled Felts Get Another Lease on Life
With New Shower Method," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 43, No. 11, November
1969.
63, Mulford, J.E. and R. Cooke, "Reuse of Nash Vacuum Pump Seal
Water," TAPPI, Vol. 52, No. 12, December 1969.
64. Brown, G.W., "Computer Simulation of Papermaking to Evaluate
Water Reuse Strategies," (Mead Corp. Unpublished Paper).
65. David, E., et al_., "Oxygen Bleaching - Two Years of Operating
Experience in France," Pulp and Paper International, June 1976.
66. Myburgh, C.J., "Operation of the Enstra Oxygen Bleaching Plant,"
TAPPI, Vol. 57, No. 5, May 1974.
67. Andersson, K.A., "The Non-Polluting Bleach Plant," TAPPI, Vol.
60, No. 3, March 1977.
68. Rapson, W.H., D.W. Reeve, et al., "The Closed Cycle Bleached
Kraft Pulp Mill - 1978," TAPPI, Vol. 198, No. 189.
69. Rapson, W.H., D.W. Reeve, and J.A. Isbister, "The Closed Cycle
Concept Kraft Mill at the Great Lakes Paper Co., Ltd. - A Status
Report," Proceedings of the PIMA Conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
June 22, 1978.
70. Anderson, L.G. and S. Lindberg, "Uddeholm Cleans Bleach Effluents
and Solves Chlorine Removal," Pulp and Paper International, Vol. 16,
No. 6, June 1974.
71. Lowe, K.E., "Chesapeake Launches Oxygen Bleaching," Pull
Paper, October 1973.
and
72. MacLeod, M., and N. Liebergott, "Evolution and Revolution in Pulp
Bleaching - A Current Perspective," Pulp and Paper, May 1976.
73. Carpenter, W.L., I. Gelman, et al., "A Comparison of Effluent
Characteristics from Conventional and Oxygen Blocking Sequences -
621
-------
Results of a Laboratory Study," CPPA-TAPPI International Pulp
Bleaching Conference, June 1973, Preprint.
74. Kramer, J.D., C.F. Cornell, B.C. Pryke, and G. Rowlandson, "Spill
and Effluent Control in the Closed-Cycle Bleached Kraft Pulp Mill "
TAPPI Environmental Conference, 1979.
75. Mattson, D., Unpublished Trip Report on ERCO Envirotech - Closed
Cycle Kraft Mill, E.G. Jordan Co., Washington, D.C., October 19,
1 978.
76. Cox, C., Unpublished Trip Report to Great Lakes Paper Co.
Thunder Bay, Ontario, October 1, 1980.
77. Gall, R.J. and F.H. Thompson, "The Anti-Pollution Sequence - A
New Route to Reduced Pollution in Bleach Plant Effluent," TAPPI Vol
56, No. 11, November 1972. '
78. Moy, W.A., K. Sharpe, and G. Betz, "New Bleach Sequence for SBK,
Cuts Effluent Color and Toxicity," Pulp and Paper, Canada, May 1975.
79. Jenkin, T.E., "Eastex Displacement Bleaching Update," TAPPI
Alkaline Pulping Conference Preprint, 1976.
80• Displacement Bleaching, Unpublished Report on Mill Visit to
Weyerhaeuser Corp., Plymouth, N.C., E.G. Jordan Co., March 14, 1979.
81. Gould, M. and J. Walzer, "Mill Waste Treatment by Floatation at
Delair," Chem 26, November 1972.
82. Fuller, R.S., "Screening of Effluents," TAPPI, Vol. 56, No. 6,
83. Easty, Dwight B., L.G. Borchardt, and B. A. Wabers, Institute of
Paper Chemistry, Removal of Wood Derived Toxics from Pulping and
Bleaching Wastes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati^
84. Walden, C.C. and J.C. Mueller, B.C. Research, Investigation of
the Effect of BOD5 Reduction Systems on Toxicitv, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 150-1, 1973.
85. Leach, J.M., J.C. Mueller, and C.C. Walden, "Biodegradability of
Toxic Compounds in Pulp Mill Effluents," Presented at 63rd Annual
Meeting of the Technical Section, CPPA, February 1977.
86. Leach, J.M. and A.N. Thakore, Identification of the Toxic
Constituents in Kraft Mill Bleach Plant Effluents. Distrlbuted~by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Repart No. 245-1, 1974.
622
-------
87. Nowacki, J., "Nutrient Salt Reduction in the Biological
Purification of Kraft Mill Effluents," Fortachr Wassechen inrev
Grengzch, 111, 35, 1960.
88. Nowacki, J., "Influence of Addition of Phosphorus and Nitrogen to
Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents," Preqeqlad Papier 25_, (6) 211, Poland,
June 1969.
89. Tracy, J.C., "Secondary Waste Treatment Nutrient and Aerator
Studies," Southern Pulp and Paper Manufacturer, February 1970.
90. Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr., Industrial Waste Water Control,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1966.
91. Edde, J., "Field Research Studies of Hydraulic Mixing Patterns in
Mechanically Aerated Stabilization Basin/' Proceedings International
Congress on Industrial Waste Waters, Stockholm, Sweden, 1970.
92. McKeown, J.J. and D.B. Buckley, "Mixing Characteristics of
Aerated Stabilization Basin," TAPPI, 8th Water and Air Conf., 1971.
93. Chandrasekaran K., R.J. Reis, G.C. Tanner, and H.I. Rogers,
"Removing Toxicity in an Aerated Stabilization Basin," Pulp and Paper,
Canada, Vol. 79, No. 10, October 1978.
94. Technical data supplied by Union Carbide Corp.
95. Nova Scotia Forest Industries, Ltd., "Pilot Plant Study of UNOX
System," (PAR 25-2), March 1973.
96. Brock, T.D., Biology of. Microorganisms, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1970.
97. Personal Communication with R. Van Soest, Van Luben Consultants,
Ltd., Montreal Canada, October 4, 1978.
98. Rice, B. and R. Van Soest, "Practical Experience of a New
Effluent Plant One Year After Start-Up," TAPPI, Vol. 58, No. 10,
October 1975.
99. "Two Stage Activated Sludge Better Than Single for Toxicity
Reduction," Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry, November 5, 1977.
100. An Assessment of Kraft Bleachery Effluent Toxicity Reduction
Using "Activated Sludge, Wastewater Technology Centre, Fisheries and
Environmental Protection Service, Environment Canada, EPS 4-WP-77-3,
1977.
101. Gillespie, W.J., D.W. Marshall, and A.M. Springer, "A Pilot
Scale Evaluation of Rotating Biological Surface Treatment of Pulp and
Paper Wastes", NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 278, 1974.
623
-------
102. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd. and NCASI, Development of Biosurf
Process Parameters for the Pulp and Paper Industry. Distributed—by
CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 102-1 and 102-2, 1973-74.
103. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd., Anaerobic Contact Filter Process
for the Treatment of Waste Sulfite Liquor. Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Serivce, Dept. of the Environment,
Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 103, 1973.
104. McKinney, R.E., Microbiology for Sanitary Engineers. McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1962.
105. Clark, J.W. and W. Viesman Jr., Water Supply and Pollution
Control. International Textbook Company, 197CK
106. Private Communication with E.J. Kirsch, Purdue University.
107. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering. McGraw-Hill Book
Co., 1972.
108. Streeter, H.W. and E.B. Phelps, A Study of Pollution and Natural
Srjfic^?? — — Ohio' Public Health Bulletin No. U6, United
States Public Health Service, February 1925.
109. Vamvakias, J.G. and J.P. Miller, "Temperature Response of
Aerated Stabilization Basins With and Without Nutrients," Fifth
Paper-Industry and Stream Improvement Conference, Canadian Pulp and
Paper Association, Technical Paper T87.
110. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd. Biological Treatment Study
Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, September 1972. " .
111. McKeown, J.J., D.B. Buckley, and I. Gellman, "A Statistical
Documentary on the Performance of Activated Sludge and Aerated
Stabilization Basin Systems Operating in the Paper Industry," Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference XXIX, 1974.
112. A Manual of Practice for Biological Waste Treatment in the Pulp
and Paper Industry. NCASI Technical Bulletin. No. 214, April~9687
U3^ Burns/ °-B-/ Jr.., and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., "A Statistical Study
of the Five Years' Operation of West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's
Waste Treatment Plant," Purdue Industrial Waste Conference XVIII,
I y o j •
114. Dorr Oliver, Inc., Stamford, Connecticut.
115. McKeown, J.J., The Effect of Temperature on Treatment Plant
Performance and Related Temperature Studies. NCASI Technical Bulletin
JNO. 312, 1978.
624
-------
116. Water Treatment Plant Design, American Water Works Association,
Inc., 1969.
117. Adams, C.E. and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., "Nitrification Design
Approach for High Strength Ammonia Wastewaters," Journal WPCF, March
1977.
118. Adams, C.E., "Removing Nitrogen From Wastewater," Environmental
Science & Technology, August 1973, pp. 696-701.
119. Process D€?sign Manual for Nitrogen Control, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Technology Transfer, October 1975.
120. Gulp, R.L. and G.L. Gulp, Advanced Wastewater Treatment, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1971. •
121. Environmental Science Services Corporation, Water Resource
Management Series, Volume 1 - Manual of Treatment Processes, 1970.
122. Liptak, E.G., Environmental Engineer's Handbook, Vol. 1 '- Water
Pollution, Radnor; Chilton Book Co.,, 1974. -~~
123. Stumm, W. and
Interscience, 1970..
J.J. Morgan, Aquatic Chemistry, Wiley
124. Rebhun, M.., C.H. Saliternik, and H.r Sperber, "Purification of
Paper Mill Effluents by Flocculation," TAPPly Vol. 50, No. 12,
December 1967.
125. Ives, K.Jl, "Theory of Operation of Sludge Blanket Clarifiers,"
Proceedings - The Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 39, Session
1967-1968, January 1,968. ; • ' _
126. Filtration and Chemically Assisted Clarification of. Biologically
Treated Pulp and Paper Mill Industry Wastewaters, Draft Report to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.,
1979. .. •/ •;.,..,;;•;.•;.,,s -'••;• •••••'. ...• , '•';- .-,,;'-.• : ••>/.•.;'• •; ' -'-' . : . ^
127. Rice, N., A.A. Kalinske, and W.I. Arnold, A Pilot Study of.
Advanced Wastewater Treatment for the-Ticonderoga Mill, August 1977.
128. Personal Communication with Dana DoIIoff,
Co., June 26, 1980.
International Paper
129. Amberg, H.R., I. Gellman, and R.H. Scott, "The Status of Water
Pollution Control in the Soviet Union," TAPPI, Vol. 58, No. 11,
November 1975.:"' .
130. Scott, R.H., "Sophisticated Treatment of Baikal Pulp Mill in
USSR," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 48, No. 4, April 1978.
625
-------
131. Treatment of Ca1c i urn-Organ i c Sludges Obtained from Lime
Treatment of Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents - Part I, NCASI "Technical
Bulletin No. 62, 1955. " ~
132« Treatment of Calcium-Organic Sludges Obtained From Lime
Treatment of Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents - Part II, NCASI "Technical
Bulletin No. 75, 1955. " —
133. Oswalt, J. L., and J.G. Lund Jr., Color Removal from Kraft Pulp
Mill Effluents by Massive Lime Treatment, EPA Project 12040 DYD, 1973.
134; Development Document for Interim Final and Proposed Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Proposed New Source Performance Standards
for the Bleached Kraft. Groundwood. Sulfite. Soda, DeinkTand
Non-Integrated Paper Mills Segment of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard"
Point Source Category - Vol. 1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-76/047-A, January 1976.
135. Smith, O.D., R.M. Stein, and C.E. Adams Jr., "How Mills Cope
With Effluent Suspended Solids," Paper Trade Journal. Vol. 159, No.
17, July 1975. —
136. Peterson, R.R. and J.L. Graham, CH2M Hill, Inc., Post Biological
Solids Characterization and Removal from Pulp Mill Effluents EPA
600/2-79-037, 1979. ~
137. Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent Limitations
Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Point Source Category. Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc., June
1979.
138. Amberg, H.R., Crown Zellerbach Corp., Comments on E.G. Jordan
Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September 1979.
139. Cashen, R.F., St. Regis Paper Co., Comments on E.C". Jordan's
Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September 18, 1979.
140. Button, E.F., ITT Rayonier Inc., Comments on E.G. Jordan's Draft
Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September, 1979.
141. Barton, Curtis A., The Proctor & Gamble Co., Comments on E.C.
Jordan's Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA
Effluent Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for
the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September
i y / y •
626
-------
142. National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), "Summary of Data-Chemically Assisted
Clarification of Biologically Treated Wastewaters," Presented in
Meeting with U.S. EPA/Edward C. Jordan Co., Portland, Maine,
February 7, 1980.
143. Olthof, M.G., "Color Removal from Textile and Pulp and Paper
Wastewaters by Coagulation," Vanderbilt University, Ph.D. Thesis,
1974.
144. Olthof, M.G. and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., "A Laboratory Study of
Color Removal from Pulp and Paper Wastewaters by Coagulation," TAPPI,
Vol. 57, No. 8, August 1974.
145. Berov, M.B., et al., "Optimum Conditions for Chemical Treatment
of Effluents," Bum. Prom., No. 2: 17, 1975 (Russia); Abstract Bulletin
Institute of Paper Chemistry, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1975.
146. Dugal, H.S., J.O. Church, R.M. Leekley, and J.W. Swanson, "Color
Removal in a Ferric Chloride - Lime System," TAPPI, Vol. 59, No. 9,
September 1976.
147. Prahacs, S., A. Wong, and H.G. Jones, "Amine Treatment Process
for Decolorization of Pulp Mill Effluents-Laboratory Studies,"
A.I.Ch.E. Symp. Ser. 70, No. 139, 1974.
148. Vincent, P.L., Colour Removal From Biologically Treated Pulp and
Paper Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Dept. of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 210-1, March 31, 1974.
149. Environmental Quality Systems, Inc., Technical and Economic
Review of Advanced Waste Treatment Processes, Office of the. Chief of
Engineers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1973.
150. Process Design Manual for Carbon Adsorption,. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Technology Transfer, October, l'973.
151. Timpe, W.G., et al., "The Use of Activated Carbon For Water
Renovation In Kraft Pulp and Paper Mills," Seventh TAPPI Air and Water
Conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota, June 1970.
152. Bishop, D.F., et al^., "Studies on Activated Carbon Treatment,"
Journal WPCF, Vol. 39, No. 2, 1967.
153. Hansen, S.P. and F.J. Burgess, "Carbon Treatment of Kraft
Condensate Wastes," TAPPI, Vol. 51, No. 6, June 1968.
154. Timpe, W.G. and E.W. Lang, "Activated Carbon Treatment of
Unbleached Kraft Effluent for Reuse - Pilot Plant Results," TAPPI
Environmental Conference, San Francisco, California, May 1973.
627
-------
155. Davis, John C., "Activated Carbon, Prime Choice to Boost
Secondary Treatment," Chemical Engineering, April 11, 1977.
156. Callahan, W.F. and A.B. . Pincince, "An Activated Carbon
Wastewater Treatment System at Fitchburg, Mass.," TAPPI, Vol. 60, No.
11, November 1977. . ;
157. Taylor, James L., "Full Scale Experience with Activated Carbon
Treatment of Paper Industry Wastewater," Preceedings of 1979 NCASI
Northwest Regional Meeting, NCASI Special Report No. 80-03, February
1980.
158. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd., Optimization of_ Physical/Chemical
Treatment Processes, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 176-1, 1974.
159. Kimura R. and K. Izumisawa, "Approach to Entirely Closed
Boardmill by Activated Carbon," Kamipa Gikvoshi, Vol. 30, No. 1,
January 1976. ' " ' ;
160. Smith, D.R. and H.F. Berger, "Waste Water Renovation," TAPPI,
Vol. 51, No. 10, October 1968.
161. Weber, W.J., Jr. and J.C. Morris, ,. "Kinetics of Adsorption in
Columns of Fluidized Media,". Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 37, No. 4, April 1965.
162. Dewalle, F.B., "Organic Matter Removal By Powdered Activated
Carbon added to Activated Sludge," Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, April, 1977.
163. Grulich, G.,, "Treatment of. Organib Chemicals Plant Wastewater
with DuPont PACT Process," Presented at AICHE Meeting, February, 1972.
164. Button, , D..G.
September 9, 1975.
and F.L.; Robertaccio,... U.S. :• Patent 3,904,518,
165. Crame, L.W., "Activated Sludge Enhancement: A Viable Alternative
to Tertiary Carbon Adsorption," Proceedings of the Open Forum on
Management of Petroleum Refining Wastewater, June 1977.
166. Grieves, C.G., et al., "Powdered Carbon Improves Activated Sludge
Treatment," Hydrocarbon Processing, October 1977.
167. Dehnert, J.F., "Case History - The Use of Powdered Activated
Carbon with a Biodisk Filtration Process for Treatment of Refinery
Wastes," Proceedings of the Open Forum on Management of Petroleum
Refinery Wastewater, June .1977.. ,: .
168. Heath, W.H., Jr., "Combined Powdered Activated Carbon -
Biological ("PACT") Treatment of 40 MGD Industrial Waste," Presented
to Symposium on Industrial Waste Pollution Control at the 173rd
American Chemical Society National Meeting, March 1977.
628
-------
169. Robertaccio, F.L., "Combined Powdered Activated Carbon-Biological
Treatment: Theory and Results/' Proceedings of the Open Forum on
Management of Petroleum Refinery Wastewaters, June, 1977.
170. Ng, K.S., B.C. Research, Pilot Plant Evaluation of. Mechanical
Foam Breaking and Jet Foam Generation Systems, {Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 508-1, 1976.
171. Brunner, C.A. and D.G. Stephan, "Foam Fractionation," Industrial
and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 57, No. 5, May 1965.
172. Miller, J.K.P. and L.K. Legatski, "Investigation of a High
Pressure Foam Wastewater Treatment Process," Federal Water Quality
Adm., Water Pollution Control Research Series 17030 ESX 04/70, 1970.
173. Ng, K.S., B.C. Research, Study of. Foam Separation as a Means of.
Detoxifying Bleached Kraft Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 233-1 and 2, 1974-75.
174. Walden, C.C. and J.C. Mueller, B.C. Research, Investigation of
the Effect of BODS Reduction Systems on Toxicitv, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment,
Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 150-2, 1974.
175. Bliss, F.R., Polishing of Paper Mill Effluents
straining, Strathmore Paper Co. unpublished paper, 1973.
by Micro-
176. Bliss, F.R., Papermill Wastewater Treatment by Microstraining,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, EPA 600/2-76-
252, 1976. ,
177. Oher, Klaus, B.C. Research, "Electrochemical Decolorization of
Kraft Mill Effluents," Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
February 1978.
178. Barringer Research Ltd., Electrochemical Process for Treatment
of Kraft Mill Effluent, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Department of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, as
CPAR Report No. 523-1, 1976.
179.
Ltd.
Personal Communication with Dr. Sankar Das Gupta, HSA Reactors,
180. Selivanov, V.G., V.P. Svitel'skii, V.G. Ryumin, and N.B.
Samborskii, "Purification of Effluents from the Manufacture of Paper
and Board by Electrochemical Method," Bumazh. Prom. No. 8:24-25,
August 1976.
181. Herer, D.O. and F.E. Woodard, "Electrolytic Coagulation of
Lignin From Kraft Mill Bleach Plant Wastewaters," TAPPI, Vol. 59, No.
1, January 1976.
629
-------
182. Chan, A., D.W. Herschmiller, and D.R. Manolescu, Environcon,
Ltd., Ion Floatation for Color Removal From Kraft Mill Effluents.
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Department
of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 93-1, 1973.
183. Barclay, H.G., C. Heitner, and S. Prahacs, Review of Catalytic
Oxidation of Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents. Distributed "by CPAR
Canadian
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry
Report No. 147-1, 1973.
Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
184. Hough, G.W. and R.W. Sal lee, "Treatment of
Condensates," TAPPI, Vol. 60, No. 2, February 1977.
Contaminated
185. East, R.C. PhD., Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. CRC Press,
1974-75. -- -
186. Eco Research Ltd., Reduction of Toxicitv of Condensates from
Sulfate Waste Liquor Evaporators . Distributed by CPAR Secretarial
orestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No.
Canadian
* y / D •
324-1,
187. Liem, A.J., V.A. Naish, and R.S. Rowbottom, Domtar Research
Centre, An Evaluation of the Effect of Inplant Treatment Systems on
the Abatement of Air and Water Pollution from a Hardwood Kraft Pulp
Mill, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service,
Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 484-1, October 1977.
188. Lewell, P. A. and M. Williams, Ultraf iltration of Sulfite Liquor.
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa,
Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 8-1F, 1971 .
189. Wiley, A.J., L.E. Dambruch, P.E. Parker, and H.S. Dugal, Inst. of
Paper Chem., "Treatment of Bleach Plant Effluents by Combined Reverse
Osmosis and Freeze Concentration Process, " Paper presented at TAPPI
Environmental Conference, April 1978.
190. Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada, The Use of High
Molecular Weight Amines for the Purification of Pulp Mill EffTuentsT
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service"!! Ottawa
Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 1-2, 1971.
191. Lindberg, S. "and L.B.
TAPPI, Vol. 63, No. 3, 1980.•
Lund, "A Nonpolluting Bleach Plant,"
192. Chriswell, C.D., et al., "Comparison of Macroeticular Resin and
Activated Carbon as Sorbents," Journal of the American Water Works
Association, December 1977.
193. Byung, R.K., V.L. Snoeyink, and F.M. Saunders, "Adsorption of
Organic Compounds by Synthetic Resins," Journal Water Pollution
Control Federation, January 1976.
630
-------
194. Rogers, I.E.t J.A. Servizi, and R.W. Gordan, "An Effective Method
for Isolation of the Fish-Toxic Organic Solutes from Pulp Mill
Effluents/1 Environment Canada Bi-Monthly Research Notes, Vol. 28, No.
4 1972. .
195. Leach, J.M. and A.N. Thakore, "Identification of the
Constituents of Kraft Pulping Effluent that are Toxic to Juvenile Coho
Salmon," Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vol. 30,
No. 4, April 1973.
196. Wilson, M.A. and C.I. Chappel, Reduction of Toxicitv of Sulfite
Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry
Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 49-3, 1974.
197. Gibbons, J.D., Nonparametric Statistical Inference, McGraw-Hill,
1971. :
198. Miller, arid Freund, Probability and Statistics for Engineers,
Prentice Hall, 1965.
199. Lilliefors, H., "On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests for Normality
with Mean and Variance Unknown," Journal of the American Statistical
Association, Vol. 62, 1967.
200. Energy User News, Vol. 3, No. 32, August 7, 1978.
201. Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April 1978.
202. Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A., April
1978.
203. Robert S. Means Co., Building Construction Cost Data 1977, 35th
Edition, 1976.
204. Municipal Sludge Landfills, EPA 625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Process Design Manual, October 1978.
205. Engineering News Record, March 23, 1978.
206. Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978.
207. Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Department of Energy, March 1979.
208. Robert S. Means Co., Building Construction Cost Data 1979, 37th
Edition, 1978. ,
209. 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 7706, August 1977.
631
-------
210. Edde, H., "Influence of Pulping Yield on the Cost of Modernizing
Sulfite Pulp Mill Liquor Recovery," Proceedings of the 1978 TAPPI
Environmental Conference.
211. 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.
212. McKeown, J.J., "Sludge Dewatering and Disposal," TAPPI, Vol.
62, No. 8, August 1979. .
213. Communication with Mr. Howard Fullerton of the U.S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
214. Federal Register. 44 FR 50732, August 29, 1979.
632
-------
CONVERSION TABLE
Multiply (English
English Unit
acre ^
acre- feet
British Thermal
Unit
British Thermal
Unit /pound
cubic feet
per minute
cubic feet
per second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Farenheit
feet
gallon
gallon per
minute
pounds per
square inch
Units)
ac
ac ft
BTU
BTU/lb
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
•F
ft
gal
gpm
psi
By
Conversion
0.405
1233.5
0.252
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555(F-32)*
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
0.06803
To Obtain
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg eal/kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
ec
m
1
-I/ sec
atm
(Metric Units)
Metric Unit
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram-
calories
kilogram calor-
ies per kilo-
gram.
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centi-
meters
degree Centi-
grade
meters
liter
liters per
second
atmospheres
(absolute)
* Actual conversion, not a multiplier
-------
CONVERSION TABLE
Multiply (English
English Unit
gallon per ton
horsepower
inches
million gallons
per day
pounds per square
inch (gauge)
pounds
board feet
ton
mile
square feet
Units)
gal/ton
hp
in
M6D
psi
Ib
b.f.
ton
mi
ft2
By
Conversion
4.173
0.7457
2.54
3.7 x 10-3
(0.06805 psi +1)*
0.454
0.0023
0.907
1.609
0.0929
To Obtain
1/kkg
kw
cm
cu m/day
atm
kg
cu m, m'
kkg
km
m2
(Metric Units)
Metric Unit
liters per
metric ton
kilowatts
centimeters
cubic meters
per day
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters
metric tons
kilometers
square meters
*Actual conversion, not a multiplier
•SU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1981-341-085/4619
------- |