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