DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
for
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
Anne M. Gorsuch
Administrator
Jeffery D. Denit
Director, Effluent Guidelines Division
Robert W. Dellinger
Senior Project Officer
and
Acting Chief, Wood Products and Fibers Branch
Wendy D. Smith
Project Officer
October 1982
Effluent Guidelines Division
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents the findings of a study of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard and the builders' paper and board mills point source
categories. The purpose of this study was to develop effluent
limitations guidelines for existing and new point sources and to
establish pretreatment standards for existing and new dischargers to
publicly owned treatment works. These regulations were promulgated in
October of 1982 under the authority of 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")) and in response to
the Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v.
Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified, 12 ERC 1833 (D.D.C. 1979).
The information presented in this document supports the following
promulgated regulations: best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT), best available technology economically achievable
(BAT), new source performance standards (NSPS), and pretreatment
standards for new and existing sources (PSNS and PSES) for the pulp,
paper, and paperboard and the builders' paper and board mills point
source categories. In this report, information is presented on data
gathering efforts, subcategorization, water use, pollutant parameters,
control and treatment technologies, development of regulatory options,
cost and non-water quality considerations, and the methodology for
development of effluent limitations.
m
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I CONCLUSIONS 1
SUBCATEGORIZATION 1
BPT 3
BAT 5
NSPS 5
PSES and PSNS 12
IMPACT OF THE REGULATIONS 12
Existing Sources 12
New Sources 17
II INTRODUCTION 19
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY 19
STATUS OF THE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES 21
SCOPE OF THIS RULEMAKING 23
SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY 24
Introduction 24
Existing Data Evaluation 26
Data Request Program 29
Screening Program 31
Industry Profile and Review of Subcategorization 42
Verification Program 44
Long-Term Sampling Program 56
Discharge Monitoring Data Acquisition Program 60
Supplemental Data Acquisition Program 61
PCB Data Acquisition Program 63
Data Obtained from Industry on proposed Regulations 63
Analysis of Treatment Alternatives 63
Analysis of Cost and Energy Data 66
III DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY 67
INTRODUCTION 67
RAW MATERIALS 67
STANDARD MANUFACTURING PROCESSES 67
Raw Material Preparation 68
Pulping 68
Use of Secondary Fibers 71
Bleaching of Wood Pulps 72
Papermaking 75
INDUSTRY PROFILE 77
Geographical Distribution 77
Method of Wastewater Discharge 77
Production Profile 83
-------
SECTION PAGE
IV SUBCATEGORIZATION 89
INTRODUCTION 89
INTEGRATED SEGMENT 90
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT 93
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT 95
MISCELLANEOUS MILLS 97
IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA 97
SUMMARY 97
Dissolving Kraft 98
Market Bleached Kraft 98
BCT (Board, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft 99
Fine Bleached Kraft 99
Soda 99
Unbleached Kraft 99
Semi-Chemical 99
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical 99
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 100
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) 100
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) 100
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical 100
Groundwood-CMN (Coarse, Molded, News) Papers 100
Groundwood-Fine Papers 101
Groundwood-Chemi-Mechanical 101
Deink 101
Tissue From Wastepaper 101
Paperboard from Wastepaper 101
Wastepaper-Molded Products 102
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 102
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 102
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 102
Nonintegrated-Ligntweight Papers 102
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers 102
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 102
V WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 103
WATER USE AND SOURCES OF WASTEWATER 103
Wood Preparation 103
Pulping and Recovery 105
Bleaching 109
Papermaking 111
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STRATEGY 112
Conventional Pollutants 112
TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 183
Screening Program 183
Verification Program 193
Long-Term Sampling Program 193
Summary 235
Supplemental Data on Nonconventional Pollutants 235
-------
SECTION PAGE
VI SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS 241
WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE 241
SELECTION OF WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE 241
Conventional Pollutants 241
Toxic Pollutants 241
Nonconventional Pollutants 243
Review of Previous Regulations 244
Identification of Other Compounds of Concern 246
VII CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY 275
INTRODUCTION 275
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS COMMONLY EMPLOYED BY THE
PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY 275
Woodyard/Woodroom 277
Pulp Mill 281
Brown Stock Washers and Screen Room 287
Bleaching Systems 290
Evaporation and Recovery 293
Liquor Preparation Area 303
Papermill 303
Steam Plant and Utility Areas 319
Recycle of Effluent 319
Chemical Substitution 321
OTHER PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS 323
Bleach Systems and Recovery 323
END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES COMMONLY EMPLOYED
BY THE PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY 330
Preliminary/Primary Treatment 330
Biological Treatment 331
Chemically Assisted Clarification 347
Filtration 361
Activated Carbon Adsorption 363
Foam Separation 377
Microstraining 379
Electrochemical Treatment 379
Ion Flotation 380
Air/Catalytic/Chemical Oxidation 381
Steam Stripping 381
Ultrafiltration 382
Reverse Osmosis/Freeze Concentration 383
Amine Treatment 383
Polymeric Resin Treatment 384
Vll
-------
SECTION PAGE
VIII DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS 387
INTRODUCTION 387
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE (BPT) 387
General 387
Development of Raw Waste Loads 388
Development of Final Effluent Characteristics 391
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (BCT) 395
General 395
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS-CONVENTIONAL
POLLUTANTS 396
General 396
Option 1 397
Attainment of NSPS Option 1 432
Option 2 442
Attainment of NSPS Option 2 470
Conventional Pollutant Variability Analysis 470
TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY
ASSESSMENT 489
Chlorophenolics 492
Zinc 504
Chloroform 504
Ammonia 509
Color 512
IX EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES 517
GENERAL 517
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 517
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 517
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 518
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS
OF BPT 518
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 520
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 522
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 522
Energy 524
Solid Waste 524
Air and Noise 524
-------
SECTION PAGE
X EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES 525
GENERAL 525
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 525
Toxic Pollutants 525
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY
ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE 526
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 526
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS
OF BAT 526
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BAT EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS 529
Zinc 529
Trichlorophenol 529
Pentachlorophenol 530
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 530
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution 530
Zinc Removal 530
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 530
XI EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES 533
GENERAL 533
XII NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 535
GENERAL 535
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 535
Conventional Pollutants 535
Toxic Pollutants 535
Nonconventional Pollutants 535
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS 535
Conventional Pollutant Control 535
Toxic Pollutant Control 535
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 536
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS
FOR NSPS 536
Conventional Pollutant Control Technology 536
Toxic Pollutant Control Technology 541
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS 542
Conventional Pollutants 542
Toxic Pollutants 542
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 544
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 544
-------
SECTION PAGE
XIII PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES 545
GENERAL 545
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 545
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT
STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES 545
PSES 545
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF
PSES 548
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSES 548
Zinc 549
Trichlorophenol 549
PentachJorophenol 549
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS 550
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution 550
Zinc Hydrosulfite Substitution 550
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 550
XIV PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES 553
GENERAL 553
REGULATED POLLUTANTS 553
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT
STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES 553
PSNS 553
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS
OF PSNS 553
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSNS 556
COST OF APPLICATION 557
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 557
XV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 559
-------
SECTION PAGE
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER
QUALITY ASPECTS 561
METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS 561
Introduction 561
Model Mill Approach 561
Mill and Site Specific Cost Factors 564
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control and Treatment
Technologies 567
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT 570
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BAT OPTIONS 573
Toxic Pollutant Control Options 573
Nonconventional Pollutant Control Options 576
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PSES AND PSNS 582
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF NSPS CONTROL AND TREATMENT
OPTIONS 583
Conventional Pollutant Removal 583
Toxic Pollutant Removal 583
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS 594
Energy Requirements 594
Air Pollution 596
Noise Potential 599
Solid Waste Generation 599
Implementation Requirements 605
APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY 607
APPENDIX C - LEGEND OF ABBREVIATIONS 625
APPENDIX D - REFERENCES 635
XI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE PAGE
SECTION I
1-1 BPT Effluent Limitations 4
1-2 BAT Effluent Limitations 6
1-3 BAT Effluent Limitations—Noncontinuous Dischargers 7
1-4 New Source Performance Standards—Conventional Pollutants 8
1-5 New Source Performance Standards—Conventional
Pollutants—Noncontinuous Dischargers 9
1-6 New Source Performance Standards—Toxic Pollutants 10
1-7 New Source Performance Standards—Toxic Pollutants—
Noncontinuous Dischargers 11
1-8 Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources 13
1-9 Pretreatment Standards for New Sources 15
SECTION II
II-l Status of Effluent Limitations Guidelines 22
I1-2 Response to Data Request 32
I1-3 Toxic and Additional Nonconventional Pollutants Under
Investigation in the Screening Program 33
I1-4 Subcategory Groups Selected for Screening Program 37
I1-5 Summary of Treatment Type and Percent Differences—
Contractor Screening for Mills Versus Raw Waste
Load Basis of BPT 38
I1-6 Typical Screening Program Survey 41
I1-7 Subcategoriration Scheme on Which BPT Was Based and
the Revised Subcategoriration Scheme 43
II-8 Verification Compounds—Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Industry 46
II-9 Verification Program Sampling Points 51
11-10 Typical Verification Sampling Program Survey 52
xm
-------
TITLE PAGE
11-11 Summary of Internal Standards 55
11-12 Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants Selected for
Analysis During the Long-Term Sampling Program 57
11-13 Summary of Direct Discharging Mills Versus DMR Data
Collected 62
11-14 Production Process Controls and Effluent Treatment
Technologies 64
SECTION III
III-l Bleaching Symbols 74
111-2 Summary of All Known Operating Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Mills by EPA Region 78
III-3 Summary of Method of Discharge and In-Place Technology—
All Known Operating Mills 81
111-4 Estimated Pulp Production - 1977 84
II1-5 Paper and Paperboard Products of Industry 85
III-6 Production Statistics—Paper and Paperboard Products
Industry 86
SECTION V
V-l Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Dissolving Kraft
Subcategory 11 3
V-2 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Market Bleached Kraft
Subcategory 118
V-3 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—BCT Bleached Kraft
Subcategory 121
V-4 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Alkaline-Fine 125
V-5 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Unbleached Kraft
Subcategory 130
V-6 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Semi-Chemical Subcategory 133
V-7 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical Subcategory 137
XIV
-------
TITLE PAGE
V-8 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Subcategory 139
V-9 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Papergrade Sulfite
Subcategory 140
V-10 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Groundwood-Thermo-
Mechanical Subcategory 149
V-11 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Groundwood-CHN Papers
Subcategory 150
V-12 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Groundwood-Fine Papers
Subcategory 153
V-13 Summary Raw Waste Load Data-Integrated Miscellaneous
Mills 157
V-14 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Deink Subcategory 160
V-15 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Tissue from Wastepaper
Subcategory 163
V-16 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Paperboard from Wastepaper
Subcategory 164
V-17 Methods of Wastewater Disposal at Self-Contained
Paperboard from Wastepaper Mills 169
V-18 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Wastepaper-Molded Products
Subcategory 170
V-19 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt Subcategory 171
V-20 Methods of Wastewater Disposal at Self-Contained
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt Mills 174
V-21 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Secondary Fibers
Miscellaneous Mills 175
v-22 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated-Fine
Papers Subcategory 176
V-23 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated-Tissue
Papers Subcategory 178
V-24 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers Subcategory 180
XV
-------
TITLE PAGE
V-25 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory 181
V-26 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Subcategory 182
V-27 Summary Raw Waste Load Data—Nonintegrated
Miscellaneous Mills 184
V-2B Summary of Initial Screening Program Analysis Results 185
V-29 Summary of Screening Analysis Results at 17
Verification Mills 190
V-30 Summary of EPA Regional StA Screening Program Results
at 42 Mills 191
V-31 Summary of Verification Program Analysis Results
for Toxic Pollutants 194
V-32 Summary of Verification Program Analysis Results for
Nonconventional Pollutants 218
V-33 Summary of Long-Term Sampling Program Analysis Results
for Toxic Pollutants 231
V-34 Summary of Long-Term Sampling Program Analysis Results
for Nonconventional Pollutants 232
V-35 Toxic Pollutant Sampling Data Base 236
V-36 Supplemental Color Data 237
V-37 Theoretical Raw Waste Ammonia Load 238
V-38 Summary of Available Ammonia Data for All Mills Using
Ammonia as the Chemical Pulping Base 239
SECTION VI
VI-1 Summary of Parameters Proposed or Promulgated for
Effluent Limitations Guidelines by Subcategory 245
VI-2 Criteria For Elimination of Toxic Pollutants Based
on Screening Program Results and Toxic Pollutants
Eliminated 248
VI-3 Projected Treatability for Verification Program
Toxic Pollutants 250
XVI
-------
TITLE PAGE
VI-4 Toxic Pollutants Eliminated from Assessment Based on
Verification Program Results—Detected Below Treatability
Level 253
VI-5 Summary of Toxic Pollutants of Concern By Subcategory 255
VI-6 Summary of Data Assessment-Toxic Pollutants of
Concern 256
VI-7 Criteria for Elimination of Toxic Pollutants Based on
Verification Program Results and Toxic Pollutants
Eliminated 260
VI-8 Exclusion of Toxic Pollutants of Potential Concern
from Pretreatment Standards 263
VI-9 Summary of Influent Concentrations for Resin and Fatty
Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives for All Verification
Facilities 265
VI-10 Summary of Effluent Concentrations for Resin and Fatty
Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives for All Verification
Facilities 267
VI-11 Summary of Influent Concentrations for Resin and Fatty
Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives for Verification
Mills Meeting BPT Effluent Limitations 269
VI-12 Summary of Effluent Concentrations for Resin and Fatty
Acids and Chlorinated Derivatives for Verification
Mills Meeting BPT Effluent Limitations 270
VI-13 Removals of Resin and Fatty Acids and Chlorinated
Derivatives 272
SECTION VII
VII-1 Production Process Control Technologies Identified as
the Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available 276
VIl-2 Production Process Control Technologies Identified as
the Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 276
VI1-3 Production Process Control Technologies Available for
Reduction of Effluent Volume and Pollutant Loadings 278
VII-4 Waste Load Reductions From Implementation of Hooker
APS II and APS III Systems 329
xvn
-------
TITLE PAGE
VII-5 Calculated Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutant Removal
Rates 333
VI1-6 Typical Design Parameters for Activated Sludge Processes 337
VII-7 Oxygen Activated Sludge Treatability ~ Pilot Scale 341
VII-8 Pilot RBC Final Effluent Quality for Bleached Kraft
Wastewater 343
VII-9 Summary of Chemically Assisted Clarification Technology
Performance Data 349
VII-10 Final Effluent Quality of a Chemically Assisted Clari-
fication System Treating Bleached Kraft Wastewater 351
VII-11 Final Effluent Quality of a Chemically Assisted Clari-
fication System Treating Wastewater from a Deink-
Newsprint Mill 352
VII-12 Color and Organic Carbon Removal After Application of
Massive Lime Treatment 355
VI1-13 Color Reductions Achieved After Application of
Chemically Assisted Clarification With Ferric Sulfate,
Alum, and Lime 358
VII-14 Comparison of Treatment Efficiencies On Kraft Effluents
by the Application of Chemically Assisted Clarification
Using Divalent Ions or Trivalent Ions 359
VI1-15 Lime Treatment of Bleached Kraft Caustic Extract in the
Presence of Metal Ion 360
VI1-16 Removal of BOD, COD, and Phosphate from Chemical
Pulping Wastewaters at Selected Lime-Magnesia Levels 362
VII-17 TSS Reduction Capabilities and Related Factors for the
Filtration Technology When No Chemicals Are Used 364
VII-18 TSS Reduction Capabilities and Related Factors for the
Filtration Technology When Chemicals are Used 365
VII-19 Final Effluent Quality Following Three Layer Pressure
Sand Filtration of the Effluent From an Aerated
Stabilization Basin Treating Paperboard From
Wastepaper Wastewater 366
xv m
-------
TITLE
VII-20 Final Effluent Quality Following Deep Bed Sand
Filtration of the Effluent From an Aerated
Stabilization Basin and Secondary Clarifier
Treating Paperboard From Wastepaper Wastewater
VII-21 Final Effluent Quality Following Rapid Gravity Sand
Filtration of the Effluent From an Activated Sludge
Plant Treating Paperboard from Wastepaper Wastewater
VII-22 Sand Filtration Results
VI1-23 Results of Pilot-Scale Granular Activated Carbon
Treatment of Unbleached Kraft Mill Waste
Powdered Activated Carbon Operating Data On a Chemical
Plant Wastewater
Full Scale "PACT" Process Results On Chemical Plant
Wastewater
Results of Pilot-Scale Activated Carbon Treatment of
Unbleached Kraft Mill Effluent
VII-24
VII-25
VII-26
SECTION VIII
VI11-1 Average Raw Waste Characteristics for the Nonintegrated
Segment of the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry
VIII-2 BPT Long-Term Average Final Effluent Characteristics
VII1-3 Summary of NSPS Option 1 Raw Waste Loads
VII1-4 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Dissolving Kraft
Subcategory
VI11-5 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Market Bleached Kraft
Subcategory
VII1-6 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—BCT Bleached Kraft
Subcategory
VIII-7 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Alkaline-Fine
VI11-8 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Unbleached Kraft
Subcategory
VIII-9 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Semi-Chemical
Subcategory
367
368
369
373
375
376
378
389
394
398
400
401
403
404
406
409
XIX
-------
TITLE PAGE
VIII-10 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical Subcategory 410
VIII-11 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Papergrade Sulfite
Subcategory 411
VIII-12 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp Subcategory 413
VIII-13 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Groundwood-Thermo-
Mechanical Subcategory 415
VIII-14 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Groundwood-Fine
Papers Subcategory 416
VIII-15 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Groundwood-CMN
Papers Subcategory 417
VII1-16 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Deink Subcategory 418
VIII-17 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Tissue from Waste-
paper Subcategory 420
VII1-18 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Paperboard from
Wastepaper Subcategory 421
VIII-19 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Wastepaper-Molded
Products Subcategory 424
VI11-20 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Builders' Paper
and Roofing Felt Subcategory 425
VIII-21 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Nonintegrated-Fine
Papers Subcategory 426
VIII-22 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Nonintegrated-Tissue
Papers Subcategory 427
VI11-23 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Nonintegrated-
Lightweight Papers Subcategory 429
VIII-24 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers Subcategory 430
VIII-25 Discharge Monitoring Report Data—Nonintegrated-
Paperboard Subcategory 431
-------
VI11-26 NSPS Option 1 Long-Term Average Discharge Characteristics 433
VIII-27 Number of Facilities That Attain BPT and NSPS Option 1
Final Effluent Characteristics 434
VIII-28 Percent Reductions Required to Attain NSPS Option 1 BODS
Final Effluent Characteristics From NSPS Option 1 BOD5_ ~
Raw Waste Loads 435
VII1-29 Percent BODS Reductions Attained at Some Mills Meeting
BPT BODS. an
-------
TITLE
PAGE
VIII-40 Calculation of Final Effluent Levels for Subcategories
For Which the NSPS Option 2 Raw Waste BOD5. Concentra-
tion is Greater Than the NSPS Option 1 Raw Waste BOD5.
Concentration ~ 468
VIII-4T NSPS Option 2 Long-Term Average Discharge Characteristics 471
VIII-42 Number of Mills Attaining BPT and NSPS Option 2 Final
Effluent Levels 472
VIII-43 Percent Reductions Required to Attain NSPS Option 2 BOD5_
Final Effluent Characteristics From NSPS Option 2 BOD5_
Raw Waste Loads 473
VIII-44 Distribution of Daily Values About the Estimate of the
99th Percentile 476
VII1-45 Variability Factors for Determining Maximum Day
Limitations 477
VIII-46 Results of Goodness-of-Fit Tests for Successive 30-Day
Averages 480
VII1-47 Distribution of 30-Day Averages About the Estimate of
the 99th Percentile 483
VIII-48 Variability Factors for Determining Maximum 30-Day
Limitations 484
VIII-49 Average Maximum 30-Day and Maximum Day Variability
Factors for Subsets (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and
(7) 487
VIII-50 Summary of NSPS Variability Factors 490
VIII-51 Summary of Uncorrected Trichlorophenol Results for
Mills Where Verification and Long-Term Sampling Were
Conducted and Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Not
Used 494
VIII-52 Summary of Uncorrected Trichlorophenol Results for
Mills Where Verification and Long-Term Sampling Were
Conducted and Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Used 495
VIII-53 Summary of Uncorrected Pentachlorophenol Results for
Hills Where Verification and Long-Term Sampling Were
Conducted and Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Not
Used 496
xx n
-------
TITLE
PAGE
VI11-54 Summary of Uncorrected Pentachlorophenol Results for
Mills Where Verification and Long-Term Sampling Were
Conducted and Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Used
VI11-55 Summary of Corrected Trichlorophenol Results for Mills
Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Not Used—NCASI Data
VIII-56 Summary of Corrected Trichlorophenol Results for Mills
Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Used—NCASI Data
VI11-57 Summary of Corrected Pentachlorophenol Results for
Mills Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Not Used
—NCASI Data
VI11-58 Summary of Corrected Pentachlorophenol Results for
Mills Where Chlorophenolic Biocides Were Used—NCASI
Data
VIII-59 Summary of Pentachlorophenol (PCP) and Trichlorophenol
(TCP) Discharge Characteristics for Direct Discharging
Mills
VI11-60 Summary of Pentachlorophenol (PCP) and Trichlorophenol
(TCP) Discharge Characteristics for Indirect Discharging
Mills
VI11-61 Summary of Uncorrected Chloroform Biological Influent
and Effluent Concentrations (ug/1) from the Verifi-
cation and Long-Term Sampling Programs (Chlorine
Bleaching Facilities Only)
VI11-62 Summary of Corrected Chloroform Effluent Data Submitted
by the NCASI
VIII-63 Maximum Day Chloroform Variability Factors Computed
Using Uncorrected Data
VI11-64 Predicted Range of Ammonia Raw Waste Load and Final
Effluent Concentrations
VI11-65 Summary of Anticipated Color Levels After Minimum
Lime/Alum Coagulation
SECTION IX
IX-1 BPT Effluent Limitations
IX-2 Variability Factors Used in the Development of BPT
Effluent Limitations
497
499
500
502
503
505
506
507
510
511
513
514
519
523
xxm
-------
TITLE PAGE
SECTION X
X-l BAT Effluent Limitations 527
SECTION XII
XII-1 New Source Performance Standards — Conventional
Pollutants 537
XI1-2 New Source Performance Standards — Conventional
Pollutants — Noncontinuous Dischargers 538
XII-3 New Source Performance Standards — Toxic Pollutants 539
SECTION XIII
XIII-1 Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources 546
SECTION XIV
XIV-1 Pretreatment Standards for New Sources 554
APPENDIX A
A-l Model Mill Sizes by Subcategory and Discharge Type 562
A-2 Regional Cost Adjustment Factors 565
A-3 Cost Estimating Criteria 568
A-4 Design Criteria for BPT Activated Sludge Treatment —
Wastepaper-Molded Products Subcategory 571
A-5 Cost of Implementation of BPT Activated Sludge Treat-
ment — Wastepaper-Molded Products Subcategory 572
A-6 Design Criteria for Chloroform Control at Nine Mills
Where Chloroform Volatilization is Inhibited 574
A-7 Cost for Chloroform Control at Nine Mills Where
Chloroform Volatilization is Inhibited 575
A-8 Cost for Color Reduction for Direct Dischargers 577
A-9 Costs for Ammonia Removal for Direct Dischargers 581
XXIV
-------
TITLE PAGE
A-10 Costs for Substituting Sodium Hydrosulfite for Zinc
Hydrosulfite 584
A-ll Design Basis for Estimates of Costs of End-of-Pipe
Treatment for Attainment of MSPS Options 1 and 2 585
A-12 Cost Summary for NSPS Option 1 586
A-13 Gross Operation and Maintenance and Energy Costs and
Savings for NSPS Option 2 Production Process Controls 588
A-14 Cost Summary for NSPS Option 2 589
A-15 NSPS Option 2 Production Process Controls — Sample
Cost Calculation 591
A-16 Design Parameters for NSPS Option 2 — Example
Calculation 592
A-17 Cost Summary for NSPS Option 2 Unit Process End-of-Pipe
Treatment — Example Calculation 593
A-18 Total Energy Usage at Existing Direct Discharging Mills 595
A-19 Additional Energy Usage at Existing Direct Discharging
Mills with the Implementation of Color Removal
Technology 597
A-20 Energy Usage at New Source Direct Discharging Mills 598
A-21 Total Wastewater Solid Waste Generation at Existing
Direct Discharging Mills 601
A-21 Wastewater Solid Waste Generation at New Source Direct
Discharging Mills 602
A-23 Additional Wastewater Solid Waste Generation at Direct
Discharging Mills with the Implementation of Color
Removal Technology 604
XXV
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
TITLE PAGE
SECTION II
II-l Location of Screening Program Mill Surveys 40
II-2 Location of Verification Program Mill Surveys 49
SECTION III
III-l Location of Operating Mills in the Industry 80
SECTION V
V-l General Flow Sheet—Pulping and Papermaking Process 104
V-2 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Dissolving Pulp—
Dissolving Kraft Subcategory 115
V-3 Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent Dissolving Pulp—
Dissolving Kraft Subcategory 116
V-4 Raw Waste Data (Flow and BOD£) Versus Percent Softwood
Used—Dissolving Kraft SubcaFegory 117
V-5 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used—Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory 119
V-6 Raw Waste BOD5 Versus Percent Softwood Used—Market
Bleached Kraft Subcategory 120
V-7 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used—BCT
Bleached Kraft Subcategory 122
V-8 Raw Waste BOD5. Versus Percent Softwood Used—BCT
Bleached KrafF Subcategory 123
V-9 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Softwood Used—Alkaline-
Fine 126
V-10 Raw Waste BOD5> Versus Percent Softwood Used—Alkaline-
Fine 127
V-ll Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent On Site Pulp Production—
Alkaline-Fine 128
V-l2 Raw Waste BODJi Versus Percent On Site Pulp Production—
Alkaline-Fine 129
XXVI 1
-------
TITLE PAGE
V-13 Raw Waste Flow Versus Production—Unbleached Kraft
Subcategory 131
V-14 Raw Waste BOD5 Versus Production—Unbleached Kraft
Subcategory 132
V-15 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Wastepaper Used—
Semi-Chemical Subcategory 135
V-16 Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent Wastepaper Used—
Semi-Chemical~Subcategory 136
V-17 Effect of Washing Process on Raw Waste BOD^—Paper-
grade Sulfite Subcategory ~ 143
V-18 Effect of Washing Process on Raw Waste Flow—Paper-
grade Sulfite Subcategory 144
V-19 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Sulfite Pulp On-Site 145
V-20 Effect of Cooking Process on Raw Waste BOD5.—Paper-
grade Sulfite Subcategory 146
V-21 Effect of Condenser Type on Raw Waste Flow—Paper-
grade Sulfite Subcategory 148
V-22 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Groundwood Pulp On
Site—Groundwood-CMN Papers Subcategory 151
V-23 Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent Groundwood Pulp On
Site—Groundwood-CMN Papers Subcategory 152
V-24 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Groundwood Pulp On
Site—Groundwood-Fine Papers Subcategory 154
V-25 Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Percent Groundwood Pulp On Site—
Groundwood-Fine Papers Subcategory 155
V-26 Raw Waste Flow Versus Percent Deink Pulp Produced—
Oeink Subcategory 161
V-27 Raw Waste BOD5_ Versus Deink Pulp Produced—Deink
Subcategory 162
SECTION VII
VII-1 Convert Hydraulic Barking Systems to Dry System 279
VI1-2 Flume Replaced by Mechanical Conveyor 280
XXVTM
-------
TITLE PAGE
VI1-3 Segregate Woodroom Non-Contact Cooling Water and
Condensate 282
VI1-4 Reuse of Digester Blow Condensate 283
VII-5 Reduce Groundwood Thickener Filtrate Overflow 285
VII-6 Pulp Mill Spill Collection—Digester Area 286
VI1-7 Addition of Third or Fourth Stage Pulp Washer 288
VII-8 Recycle Decker Filtrate 289
VI1-9 Cleaner Rejects to Landfill 291
VII-10 Jump Stage Washing in Bleach Plant 292
VII-11 Full Countercurrent Washing in Bleach Plant 294
VI1-12 Bleachery Jump Stage Washing and Caustic Extraction
Filtrate Collection—Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 295
VII-13 Complete Reuse of Evaporator Condensate—Kraft and
Soda Hills 297
VII-14 Replace Barometric Condenser With Surface Condenser 298
VI1-15 Addition of an Evaporator Boilout Tank 299
VII-16 Neutralization of Spent Sulfite Liquor 301
VII-17 Spill Collection - Evaporator, Recovery, Causticizing
and Liquor Storage Areas 302
VII-18 Green Liquor Dregs Filter 304
VII-19 Lime Mud Storage Pond 305
VII-20 Stock Spill Collection, Pulp Bleaching, and Papermachine
Areas—Papergrade Sul£ite 307
VII-21 Stock Spill Collection System—Pulp Bleaching, and
Dryer Areas—Bleached Kraft and Soda Mills 308
VI1-22 Stock Spill Collection System—Paper Mill Area—
Groundwood-CMN or Fine Papers 309
VII-23 Spill Collection System Color Plant—Alkaline-
Fine 310
XXIX
-------
TITLE PAGE
VI1-24 Papermill Improvements—Unbleached Kraft 312
VII-25 New Saveall on Pulp fc Paper Mill Effluents—Builders'
Paper and Roofing Felt 313
VII-26 New Saveall on Papermill Effluents—Wastepaper-Molded
Products 314
VI1-27 White Water to Vacuum Pumps and Collection Tank for
Pump Seal Water and Press Effluent 315
VII-28 Increased White Water Storage Capacity 317
VII-29 4-Stage Centricleaner System With Elutriation 320
VII-30 Improved Reuse of Clarifier Sludge 322
VI1-31 Rapson-Reeve Process—Closed Cycle Bleached Kraft
Pulpmill 325
VII-32 Rapson-Reeve Closed Cycle Mill—Salt Recovery System 327
VII-33 Billerud-Uddeholm Non-Polluting Bleach Plant 386
SECTION VIII
VIII-1 Final Effluent TSS Versus Raw Wastewater BOD5. 392
VIII-2 Final Effluent TSS Versus Final Effluent BOD5 for the
Groundwood-Fine Papers Subcategory 469
VI11-3 Average Biological Effluent Chloroform Versus Average
Biological Influent Chloroform 508
APPENDIX A
A-l Time Required to Construct Solids Contact Clarifier/
Biological System 606
XXX
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
SUBCATEGORIZATION
For the purpose of establishing best practicable control technology
currently available (BPT) effluent limitations, best available
technology economically achievable (BAT) effluent limitations, new
source performance standards (NSPS), pretreatment standards for
existing sources (PSES), and pretreatment standards for new sources
(PSNS), EPA subcategorized the pulp, paper, and paperboard and the
builders' paper and board mills point source categories into three
segments as follows:
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT (Board, Coarse, and Tissue) 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-Chemi-Mechanical
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN (Coarse, Molded, and News) Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Paperboard from Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Tissue from Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
-------
Noninteqrated Segment
Nonintegrated - Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight Electrical Papers
Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated - Paperboard
The subcategorization scheme from previous Agency rulemaking efforts
in 1974 and 1977 was revised based on current information. EPA
considered various factors including age, size of plant, raw material,
process employed, products, and waste treatability in reviewing the
adequacy of the original subcategorization scheme.
EPA made the following revisions to the original subcategorization
scheme relating to the integrated segment of the industry: 1) A review
of available data show that no significant differences in raw waste
loads exist at mills in the fine bleached kraft and soda
subcategories. Therefore, BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and
PSNS are identical for both subcategories. However, because of the
familiarity of permitting authorities and representatives of affected
mills with the original subcategorization scheme and the format of the
Code of Federal Regulations, EPA decided that the fine bleached kraft
subcategory and the soda subcategory should remain as separate
subcategories and that the BPT effluent limitations promulgated for
those subcategories in 1977 should not be revised. 2) In the
unbleached kraft subcategory, EPA determined that higher raw waste
loads occur at mills where bag and other products are manufactured
than at mills where only linerboard is produced. Therefore, two
subgroups were established, bag and linerboard, with different BAT
effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. 3) In the original
subcategorization scheme, there were separate subcategories for mills
where the sodium and ammonia-based neutral sulfite semi-chemical
(NSSC) pulping processes are employed. The Agency determined that a
single new subcategory, semi-chemical, best represents all variations
of the semi-chemical process. 4) The Agency established a new
subcategory, the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical subcategory, which
includes those mills originally included in the unbleached kraft-NSSC
(cross recovery) subcategory and all other mills where both the
unbleached kraft and any semi-chemical pulping processes are used. 5)
The Agency 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 condensers employed. Therefore, BAT effluent limitations,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS were established that are identical for the
papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash) and papergrade sulfite (drum wash)
subcategories. However, because of the familiarity of permitting
authorities and representatives of affected mills with the original
subcategorization scheme and the format of the Code of Federal
-------
Regulations, EPA decided that the papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash)
and papergrade sulfite (drum wash) subcategories should remain as
separate subcategories and that the BPT effluent limitations
promulgated for these subcategories in 1977 should not be revised. 6)
BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS regulations were not established for the
groundwood-chemi-mechanical subcategory, one of the original
subcategories for which BPT effluent limitations were established.
Insufficient data were available to determine the effect of the degree
of chemical usage in the pulping process on raw waste generation. BAT
permits and NSPS for mills in this subcategory will be determined on a
case-by-case basis.
In the secondary fibers segment, three revisions were made: 1) in the
deink subcategory, differences in raw waste loads resulting from the
production of fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint were
recognized, and different BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and
PSNS were developed for application at mills where these products are
manufactured; 2) a new subcategory, wastepaper-molded products, was
established to reflect distinct process and wastewater differences
associated with the manufacture of molded products from wastepaper;
and 3) the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory was segmented and
different effluent limitations and standards were developed to account
for higher raw waste loads resulting from the processing of recycled
corrugating medium. (EPA made this revision after proposal in
response to public comments.)
In the nonintegrated segment of the industry, three new subcategories
were 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-lightweight papers
subcategory, a further allowance is made to account for the production
of electrical grades of paper. Additionally, the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory was subdivided to account for higher raw waste
loads resulting from the use of cotton fibers in the production of
fine papers. (EPA made this revision after proposal in response to
public comments.)
BPT
BPT effluent limitations were established for the four new
subcategories (wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-
paperboard) and for the two new subcategory subdivisions (the cotton
fiber subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory and the
corrugated medium furnish subdivision of the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory). These limitations control three conventional
pollutants: biochemical oxygen demand (BOD£), total suspended solids
(TSS), and pH. BPT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-1.
Limitations for BOD15 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
-------
TABLE 1-1
Subcategory
Secondary Fiber* Segment
Paperboard Fro* Vaatepaper
o Corrugating Nediuai Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Nonintegrated Segaent
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(kg/kkg or Its/1000 Ibs)
Haximum 30-Day Average
BODS TSS
Maxii
BODS
Day
TSS
2.8
2.3
4.6
S.8
5.7
4.4
9.2
10.8
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated- Lightweight
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
9.1
Papers
13.2
20.9
16.3
3.6
BPT EFFLUENT
NONCONT1NUOUS
Annual Average
(ki/kkji or
lbs/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory BODS TSS
Secondary
Paperboard
Fibers Segstent
Froai Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medina Furnish 1.
Wastepaper-Holded Products 1.
6 2.1
3 3.2
13.1 17.4
10.6 24.1
16.7 38.0
13.0 29.6
2.8 6.5
LIMITATIONS
DISCHARGERS
MaxiBHJSi 30-Day Average
(.«/!)
BODS TSS
93 153
27 66
24.3
21.6
34.2
26.6
5.8
MaxiBua Day
(•8/D
BODS
189
51
TSS
306
122
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 5.1 7.2
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 7.4 6.0
o Electrical 11.6 9.5
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 9.1 7.4
Nonintcgrated-Paperboard 2.0 1.6
52
65
65
65
65
74
52
52
52
52
99
118
118
118
118
138
106
106
106
106
-------
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 were based on the anticipated performance of
wastewater treatment technology (either primary clarification or
biological treatment) applied to raw waste loads characteristic of the
subcategory or on transfer of technology performance from another
subcategory.
BAT
BAT limitations were established for the following toxic pollutants:
pentachlorophenol (PCP),
trichlorophenol (TCP), and
zinc.
BAT effluent limitations are shown in Table 1-2 and 1-3.
Effluent limitations for the control of pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol were established for all subcategories. The
technology basis of these limitations is the substitution of biocide
formulations that do not contain pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol
for formulations containing these toxic pollutants.
BAT effluent limitations for zinc were established equal to BPT
limitations for the three groundwood subcategories where zinc
hydrosulfite has been used as a bleaching chemical. Limitations were
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 for BODS and TSS are presented in kilograms of pollutant
per 1,000 kilograms of" production (lb/1,000 Ibs). Production shall be
defined as the annual off-the-machine production (including
off-the-machine coating where applicable) divided by the number of
operating days during that year. Paper production shall be measured
at the off-the-machine moisture content whereas market pulp shall be
measured in air-dry tons (10 percent moisture). Production shall be
determined for each mill based on past production rates, present
trends, or committed growth. For non-continuous dischargers, maximum
day effluent concentrations shall apply.
NSPS
Pollutants regulated under NSPS include the conventional pollutants
regulated under BPT (BOD5_, TSS, and pH) and the toxic pollutants
regulated under BAT (pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and zinc).
NSPS effluent limitations are presented in Tables 1-4, 1-5, 1-6, and
1-7.
-------
TABLE 1-2
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP1
TCP*
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Seai-Cheaical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
0.016
0.012
0.010
0.0088
0.00058 0.00053
0.00058 0.00053
0.0012 0.00043
0.00064 0.00059
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.021
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0010
0.0030 0.0011
0.00087 0.00030
0.00087 0.00030
0.0026 0.00088
0.0017 0.00060
NA
KA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
0.26
0.30
0.27
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Noninteg rated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
tfonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0018
0.0051
0.0028
0.0059
0.0093
0.0072
0.0016
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0.0025
0 . 00054
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP * 0.0036 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
*PCP ^ Pentachlorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
^Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
NA = Not applicable.
-------
TABLE 1-3
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NONCONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(concentrations mg/I)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP1
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Lioerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deiok
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
(0.011X41.6)/Y
(0.011X35.4)/Y
(0.011X30.9)/Y
(0.011)(12.6)/Y
(0.011X12.6)/Y
(0.029X10.3)/Y
(0.011)(14.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011X66.0)/Y
(0.011X66.0)/Y
(0.011)(72.7)/Y
(0.011X23.8)/Y
(0.011)(21.9)/Y
(0.029)(24.4)/Y
(0.029)(24.4)/Y
(0.029)(24.4)/Y
(0.029X25.2)/Y
(0.029)(7.2)/Y
(0.029)(7.2)/Y
(0.029)(21.1)/Y
(0.029)(14.4)/Y
(0.068)(55.1)/Y
(0.068)(41.6)/Y
(0.068)(35.4)/Y
(0.068)(30.9)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(10.3)/Y
(0.010)(14.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
(0.010)(23.8)/Y
(0.010X21.9)/Y
(0.068)(24.4)/Y
(0.068)(24.4)/Y
(0.010)(24.4)/Y
(0.010)(25.2)/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
(0.010)(14.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(23.8)/Y
(3.0)(21.9)/Y
NA
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Noointegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
(0. 029X15. 2)/Y
(0. 029)(42. 3)/Y
(0. 029X22. 9)/Y
(0.029)(48.7)/Y
(0. 029X76. 9)/Y
(0.029)(59.9)/Y
(0.029)(12.9)/Y
(0.010)(15.2)/Y
(0.010)(42.3)/Y
(0.010)(22. 9)/Y
(0.010)(48.7)/Y
(0.010)(76.9)/Y
(0.010)(59.9)/Y
(0.010)(12.9)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y * Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA 3 Not Applicable.
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.011X12.67) exp(0.017x))/Y
TCP = ((0.068X12.67) exp(0.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
1PCP = Pentachlorophenol
ZTCP = Trichlorophenol
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
^Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
-------
TABLE 1-4
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Seal-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite*
Groundwood-Therao-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papera
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within the range 5.0
30-Day
BODS
8.4
5.5
4.6
3.1
1.8
2.7
1.6
2.1
14.5
15.5
16.8
21.4
*
2.5
2.5
1.9
3.1
5.2
3.2
2.5
2.1
1.4
1.1
0.94
1.9
4.2
3.4
6.7
11.7
8.3
1.9
to 9.0
Average
TSS
14.3
9.5
7.6
4.8
3.0
4.8
3.0
3.8
21.3
21.3
21.3
21.5
*
4.6
3.8
3.0
4.6
6.8
6.3
5.3
2.3
1.8
2.3
1.4
2.3
4.9
2.6
5.2
9.2
6.6
1.5
at all tin*
Maximum Day
BODS
15.6
10.3
8.5
5.7
3.4
5.0
3.0
3.9
26.9
28.7
31.2
39.6
*
4.6
4.6
3.5
5.7
9.6
6.0
4.6
3.9
2.6
2.1
1.7
3.5
7.8
7.0
13.7
24.1
17.1
4.0
BS
TSS
27.3
18.2
14.6
9.1
5.8
9.1
5.8
7.3
40.8
40.8
40.8
41.1
*
8.7
7.3
5.8
8.7
13.1
12.0
10.2
4.4
3.5
4.4
2.7
4.4
9.5
6.0
12.0
21.1
15.0
3.5
*Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30-day average:
BODS * 2.36 exp(0.017x)
TSS~ » 3.03 exp(0.017x)
Maximum day:
BOD5 « 4.38 exp(0.017x)
TSS = S.81 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced cm-site in the final product
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
^Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
8
-------
TABLE I-5
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
NONCONTIGUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average Maxisnisi 30-Day Average
(kg/kkg or lbi/1000 lb«) Ot/1)
Subcategory BODS TSS
Integrated Segpent
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai-Chenical
Unbleached Kraft and Seai-Chenical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite'
Groundwood-Theftto-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Paper*
Groundwood-rine Papers
Secondary Fibera Segaent
Daink
o Fine Papers
o Tiaaue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Frosi Wsstepsper
Paperboard From Hastepaper
o Corrugating Mediua Furnish
o Noneorrugating Hediua Furnish
Wastepaper-Holded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonlntegrated Segnent
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrsted-Tiaaue Papers
?fonintegrated*Lightveight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Noaintegrated-Paperboard
pH-«ithin
4.4
2.9
2.4
1.6
0.96
1.4
0.84
1.1
7.6
8.1
8.8
11.2
*
1.3
1.3
1.0
1.6
2.7
1.7
1.3
1.1
0.73
0.60
0.49
0.98
2.2
2,3
4.5
7.9
5.6
1.3
the range
7.3
S.O
4.0
2.S
1.6
2.S
1.6
2.0
11.2
11.2
11.2
11.3
*
2.4
2.0
1.6
2.4
3.6
3.3
2.8
1.2
0.97
1.2
0.73
1.2
2.6
1.6
3.2
S.6
4.0
0.94
5.0 to 9,
BODS
40
36
34
29
47
S3
32
4J
39
63
68
78
62
44
34
31
46
62
49
36
161
105
48
83
48
33
43
42
42
42
42
.0 at all tinea
TSS
68
63
37
43
79
98
97
79
87
87
a?
79
80
80
54
46
69
84
92
79
171
137
92
122
36
38
33
33
33
33
33
Maxijsusi Day
(Bg/1)
BODS
74
68
63
S3
87
101
97
84
109
117
127
145
113
81
63
37
36
116
90
67
298
194
89
154
88
60
88
*?
87
87
87
TSS
129
120
109
85
131
188
186
151
166
166
166
131
133
153
104
88
131
162
177
151
328
263
176
234
107
72
76
76
76
76
76
*Papergrade Sulfite (See Equations in Table 1-4).
BODS Long-Tern Average = Maximum 30-day average +1,91
TSS Long-Tern Average » Haxiaun 30-day average * 1.90
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories
'Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blov Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drun Vaaa) subcategories.
-------
TABLE 1-6
NEW SOUHCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 lb«)
Subcategory
Maxlama Day
PCP»
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Seni-Chenical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Paper*
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papen
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Uastepaper
Paperboard Front Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
0.00058
0. 00058
0.0012
0.00064
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
'*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.016
0.012
0.010
0.0088
0 . 00053
0.00053
0.00043
0.00059
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.021
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0010
0.0030 0.0011
0.00087 0.00030
0.00087 0.00030
0.0026 0.00088
0.0017 0.00060
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
0.17
0.21
0.19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Konintegrated-Lightweight. Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Non integra ted-Paperboard
0.0018
0.0051
0.0028
0.0059
0.0093
0.0072
0.0016
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0 . 0025
0 . 00054
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.0l7x)
TCP = 0.0036 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
= Pentaehlorophenol
2TCP - Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subca tegones .
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories .
NA ~ Not applicable.
10
-------
TABLE 1-7
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
NONCONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(concentrations rag/1)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
De ink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medina Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweigbt Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP1
(0. 012X50. 7)/Y
(0. 013X36. 6)/Y
(0. 012X31. 7)/Y
(0. 014)(25. 1)/Y
(0. 015X9. 4)/Y
(0. 012)(11. 4)/Y
(0. 041X7. 3)/Y
(0.013)(11.5)/Y
(0. 012X59. 0)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0. 012X65. 7)/Y
*
(0.017)(13.8)/Y
(0.016)(16.8)/Y
(0. 016)(15. 4)/Y
(0. 045X15. 9)/Y
(0. 036X19. 5)/Y
(0.044)(16.2)/Y
(0.045)(16.3)/Y
(0. 065X3. 2)/Y
(0. 065X3. 2)/Y
(0. 107X5. 7)/Y
(0.155)(2.7)/Y
(0.047)(9.4)/Y
(0. 039X31. 1)/Y
(0. 035X19. 1)/Y
(0. 037X38. 2)/Y
(0. 033X66. 8)/Y
(0. 037X47. 5)/Y
(0. 033X11. 2)/Y
TCP2
(0. 074)(50. 7)/Y
(0. 077X36. 6)/Y
(0. 076)(31. 7)/Y
(0. 084)(25. 1)/Y
(0. 013X9. 4)/Y
(0. 011X11. 4)/Y
(0.014)(7.3)/Y
(0. 012X11. 5)/Y
(0. 076X59. 0)/Y
(0. 076X59. 0)/Y
(0. 076X59. 0)/Y
(0.075)(65.7)/Y
*
(0.015)(13.8)/Y
(0. 014X16. 8)/Y
(0.014)(15.4)/Y
(0.:04)(15.9)/Y
(0.085)(19.5)/Y
(0.015)(16.2)/Y
(0. 015X16. 3)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0. 023)(3. 2)/Y
(0.037)(5.7)/Y
(0.053)(2.7)/Y
(0. 016X9. 4)/Y
(0.014)(31.1)/Y
(0. 012X19. O/Y
(0. 013X38. 2)/Y
(0.012)(66.8)/Y
(0. 013X47. 5)/Y
(0.012)(11.2)/Y
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
MA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(13.8)/Y
(3.0)(16.8)/Y
(3.0)(15.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.015X9.12) exp(0.017ic))/Y
TCP a ((0.094X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
ZTCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached (Craft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
11
-------
The basis for NSPS for conventional pollutants is commonly employed
production process 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.
Standards are presented in kilograms of pollutant per 1,000 kilograms
of production (lb/1,000 Ibs). The production basis shall be
determined in the same manner as described under BAT.
PSES and PSNS
PSES and PSNS are established for the following toxic pollutants:
pentachlorophenol (PCP),
trichlorophenol (TCP), and
zinc.
PSES and PSNS are presented in Tables 1-8 and 1-9.
PSES and PSNS were based on chemical substitution to reduce
substantially the discharge of PCP, TCP, and zinc. Pretreatment
standards are needed because PCP, TCP, and zinc are known to pass
through publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). Additionally, PSES
and PSNS will minimize disposal 'problems associated with sludges
containing zinc.
Pretreatment standards were established in terms of maximum allowable
discharge concentrations (mg/1). They include a mathematical formula
that accounts for flow differences to assure that the standards do not
discourage the implementation of water conservation technologies at
indirect discharging mills. Mass limitations (kg/kkg or lb/1000 Ib of
product) are also provided as guidance in cases where it is necessary
to impose mass limitations for control of pollutants discharged from
contributing pulp, paper, and paperboard mills to POTWs. The
production basis shall be determined in the same manner as described
under BAT.
IMPACT OF THE REGULATIONS
Existing Sources
BPT. Only the wastepaper-molded products subcategory is expected to
incur BPT compliance costs. EPA anticipates that four mills in this
subcategory will be required to spend a total of $6.01 million for
capital investment and a total of $1.86 million annually (1978
dollars). Upon compliance with BPT effluent limitations for the
wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories and for the cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, EPA estimates that conventional
pollutant removals from subcategory/subdivision raw waste discharges
-------
TABLE 1-8
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
(concentrations mg/I)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Liner board
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medina Furnish
o Noncorrugatiog Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Product*
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightveight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP1
(0.011)(55.1)/Y
00.011)(41.6)/Y
00. 011)035. 4)/Y
(0.011)(30.9)/Y
(0.011)(12.6)/Y
(0.011)(12.6)/Y
(0.032)(10.3)/Y
00. 011)014. 0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.011)(21.1)/Y
(0.011)(23.8)/Y
(0.011)(21.9)/Y
00. 032)024. 4)/Y
00. 032)024. 4)/Y
00. 032)024. 4)/Y
(0.032)(25.2)/Y
(0.032)(7.2)/Y
(0.032)(7.2)/Y
(0.032)(21.1)/Y
00. 032)014. 4)/Y
(0.032)(15.2)/Y
00. 032)042. 3)/Y
(0.032)(22.9)/Y
00. 032)048. 7)/Y
(0.032)(76.9)/Y
(0.032)(59.9)/Y
(0. 032)012. 9)/7
TCP2
(0.082)(55.1)/Y
(0. 082)0*1. 6)/Y
00. 082)035. 4)/Y
(0.082)(30.9)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0. 010X10. 3)/Y
00. 010)014. 0)/Y
(0. 082)066- 0)/Y
(0.082)(66.0)/Y
(0.082)(66.0)/Y
(0.082)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
00.010)(23.8)/Y
(0. 010)021. 9)/Y
00. 082)024. 4)/Y
(0. 082)024. 4)/Y
00. 010)024. 4)/Y
00. 010)025. 2)/Y
00. 010)07. 2)/Y
(0. 010)07. 2)/Y
00. 010)021. 1)/Y
00. 010)014. 4)/Y
(0. 010)015. 2)/Y
(0. 010)042. 3)/Y
00. 010)022. 9)/Y
00. 010)048. 7)/Y
00. 010)076. 9)/Y
00. 010)059. 9)/Y
(0. 010)012. 9)/Y
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
03. 0)021. D/Y
03. 0)023. 8)/Y
03. 0)021. 9)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
MA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
*Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP « 0(0.011)012.67) exp00.017x))/Y
TCP = 000.082)012-67) exp00.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP * Pentachlorophenol
'TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
'Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
ODrun Wash) subcategories.
-------
TABLE 1-8 (continued)
PSKS OPTIONAL MASS LIMITS
(kg/kkg or lb/1000 lb«)
Max lama Day
Subcategory
Integrated gegaent
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
AlkaliM-Fine8
Unbleached Kraft
o Liaerboard
o Bag
Seoi-Cheaical
Unbleached Kraft and Seal-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viicoie
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The row -Mechanical
Oroundwood-CMN Paper*
Oroundwood-Fine Paper •
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tiaiue Paper*
o Newsprint
Tissue Fro* Wastepaper
Paperboard Fro* Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Waitepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonlntegrated-Flnc Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tlssue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightwelght Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonlntegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP1
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
O.OOOS8
0.00058
0.0014
0.00064
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.0033
0.0033
0.0033
0.0034
0.00096
0.00096
0.0028
0.0019
0.0020
0.0056
0.0031
0.0065
0.010
0.0080
0.0017
TCP*
0.019
0.014
0.012
0.011
0.00053
0.00053
0.00043
0.00059
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.025
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0084
0.0084
0.0010
0.0011
0.00030
0.00030
0.00088
0.00060
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0.0025
0.00054
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.26
0.30
0.27
NA
NA
::A
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
T * Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA * Not Applicable
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP « 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP a 0.0043 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulflte pulp produced on-slte in the final product.
ipCP = Pentacblorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
-------
TABLE 1-9
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
(concentrations mg/1)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Ligtvtweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Monintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
PCP1
(0. 012X50. 7)/Y
(0. 013X36. 6)/Y
(0. 012X31. 7)/Y
(0. 014X25. 1)/Y
(0. 015X9. 4)/Y
(0. 012X11. 4)/Y
(0. 045X7. 3)/Y
(0.013)(11.5)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0. 012X59. 0)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0.012)(65.7)/Y
*
(0.017)(13.8)/Y
(0. 016X16. 8)/Y
(0.016)(15.4)/Y
(0. 049X15. 9)/Y
(0. 040X19. 5)/Y
(0. 048X16. 2)/Y
(0. 049X16. 3)/Y
(0.072)(3.2)/Y
(0.072)(3.2)/Y
(0. 118X5. 7)/Y
(0.171)(2.7)/Y
(0. 052X9. 4)/Y
(0.044)(31.1)/Y
(0.038)(19.1)/Y
(0.041)(38.2)/Y
(0.037)(66.8)/Y
(0. 040X47. 5)/Y
(0. 037X11. 2)/Y
TCP2
(0.089)(50.7)/Y
(0.093)(36.6)/Y
(0. 092X31. 7)/Y
(0.101)(25.1)/Y
(0.013)(9.4)/Y
(0.011)(11.4)/Y
(0.014)(7.3)/Y
(0. 012X11. 5)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.091)(65.7)/Y
*
(0. 015X13. 8)/Y
(0.014)(16.8)/Y
(0-014)(15.4)/Y
(0.126)(15.9)/Y
(0. 103X19. 5)/Y
CO. 015X16. 2)/Y
(0.015)(16.3)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0. 037X5. 7)/Y
(0.053)(2.7)/Y
(0.016)(9.4)/Y
(0.014)(31.1)/Y
(0.012)(19.1)/Y
(0. 013X38. 2)/Y
(0.012)(66.8)/Y
(0.013)(47.5)/Y
C0.012)(11.2)/Y
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(13.8)/Y
(3.0)(16.8)/Y
(3.0)(15.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
SA
NA
NA
NA
SA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
N'A = Not Applicable
••'•'Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.015X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
TCP = ((0.114X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
JPCP = Pentachlorophenol
^TCP = Trichlorophenol
""Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrjiie Sulfite
(Drum Wdsh) subcalegones.
-------
TABLE 1-9 (continued)
PSN8 OPTIONAL MASS LIMITS
(kg/kkg or lb/1000 lb«)
Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai-Cheaical
Unbleached Kraft and Sen! -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Media* Furniah
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP1
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
0.00058
0.00058
0.0014
0.00064
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.0033
0.0033
0.0033
0.0034
0.00096
0.00096
0.0028
0.0019
0 . 0020
0.0056
0.0031
0.0065
0.010
0.0080
0.0017
TCP*
0.019
0.014
0.012
0.011
0.00053
0.00053
0.00043
0.00059
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.025
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0084
0.0084
0.0010
0.0011
0.00030
0.00030
0.00088
0.00060
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0.0025
0.00054
Zinc
HA
HA
MA
HA
HA
HA
HA
HA
NA
HA
NA
NA
HA
0.17
0.21
0.19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
*Pdpergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP = 0.0043 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
••includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
16
-------
will be 3.7 million kg/yr (8.1 million Ibs/yr) of BOD5 and 14.2
million kg/yr (31.3 million Ibs/yr) of TSS. EPA does not anticipate
any additional pollutant removals from the corrugating medium furnish
subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory since the
amended BPT effluent limitations are less stringent than the BPT
effluent limitations established in 1974 for the entire paperboard
from wastepaper subcategory.
EPA anticipates that compliance with BPT regulations will require the
energy equivalent of 604 thousand liters (3800 barrels) of residual
fuel oil per year which is 0.0017 percent of current industry usage.
The Agency estimates that BPT regulations will result in the
generation of 100 kkg (110 tons) of wastewater solids annually which
is equal to 0.0042 percent of current solid waste generation in the
industry. These wastewater solids have not been classified as
hazardous under RCRA regulations.
BAT and PSES. No incremental costs are expected as a result of BAT
and PSES regulations controlling pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol. A survey of chemical manufacturers shows that no
measurable increase in production costs can be expected through the
use of substitute biocides that do not contain chlorophenolics.
Therefore, the only incremental costs that might be incurred at these
mills as a result of implementation of the BAT effluent limitations
and PSES are associated with monitoring for PCP and TCP. However,
since monitoring is not required where facilities certify that
substitute chemicals are being used to control PCP and TCP and
substitution is the technology basis of BAT limitations and PSES, EPA
anticipates that monitoring will rarely be required.
Upon compliance with BAT effluent limitations and PSES, EPA estimates
that about 17,100 kg/yr (37,600 Ib/yr) of trichlorophenol and 11,640
kg/yr (25,600 Ib/yr) of pentachlorophenol will be removed from
industry wastewater discharges.
EPA estimates that attainment of BAT and PSES regulations controlling
zinc will result in annual compliance costs of $23,300 (1978 dollars)
at one indirect discharging mill. All other existing dischargers are
in compliance with the zinc regulations. EPA estimates that the total
quantity of zinc removed at the one indirect discharging groundwood
mill where zinc hydrosulfite is used will be 20,000 kg/yr (44,000
Ib/yr).
EPA anticipates that attainment of BAT effluent limitations and PSES
will result in no increased energy use nor will it contribute to air
pollution, noise generation, or solid waste generation.
New Sources
NSPS. The Agency anticipates that compliance with NSPS will result in
incremental capital costs of $19.9 million and total annual costs of
$6.9 million (1978 dollars) per year for the period between 1985 and
1990 based on the projected production growth rate. These costs are
17
-------
expected to cause an average price increase of 1.18 percent. Based on
this price increase, EPA estimates that the annual industry growth
rate will drop marginally from 3.0 to 2.9 percent. Substantial
reductions of BODS^, TSS, and zinc are ensured while discharges of
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol resulting from the use of
biocides will be virtually eliminated.
EPA projects that attainment of NSPS will result in an insignificant
increase in solid waste generation and about a two percent increase in
energy use compared to attainment of BPT effluent limitations.
PSNS. The technology basis for PSNS is identical to the technology
basis of PSES; therefore, there is no incremental cost, economic
impact, or non-water quality environmental impact attributable to
PSNS.
18
-------
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
19
-------
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.
The 1977 Amendments added Section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act establishing
"best conventional pollutant control technology" [BCT] for discharges
of conventional pollutants from existing industrial point sources.
Conventional pollutants are those defined in Section 304(a)(4)
[biological oxygen demanding pollutants (i.e., BOD5_), total suspended
solids (TSS), fecal coliform, and pH], and any additional pollutants
defined by the Administrator as "conventional" [e.g., oil and grease;
see 44 FR 44501, July 30, 1979].
BCT is not an additional limitation but replaces BAT for the control
of conventional pollutants. In addition to other factors specified in
section 304(b)(4)(B), the Act requires that BCT limitations be
assessed in light of a two part "cost-reasonableness" test. American
Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981). The first test
compares the cost for private industry to reduce its conventional
pollutants with the costs to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)
for similar levels of reduction in their discharge of these
pollutants. The second test examines the cost-effectiveness of
additional industrial treatment beyond BPT. EPA must find that
limitations are "reasonable" under both tests before establishing them
as BCT. In no case may BCT be less stringent than BPT.
EPA published its methodology for carrying out the BCT analysis on
August 29, 1979 (44 FR 50732). In the case mentioned above, the Court
of Appeals ordered EPA to correct data errors underlying EPA's
calculation of the first test, and to apply the second cost test.
20
-------
(EPA had argued that a second cost test was not required.) The Agency
has recently developed a revised BCT methodology (see 47 FR 49176,
October 29, 1982) .
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, EPA conducted a
two phase study. Phase I included certain portions of the industry
where pulp bleaching is not employed. Phase II included the remaining
portions of the point source category. Additionally, the Agency
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, 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, 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; D.C. Circuit1978).(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
21
-------
TAltl.E I I-I
TIMING AND STATUS OF IIFKI.UENT LIH1TATIONS
Sul.cat t'gory/Rrgii lj>l|°»
Dissolving Kliifl
M.irkol Bl<-dH_ C<
Promulgated Regulation*
"
Convents
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 2/19/76 2/19/76
2/19/76
.Sii/(He (Blow Pit Wdsh)
Sulfite (Drua Wash)
DiBsolving Sulfile Pulp
Drink
Noniiitpgrrftcd-Fiiie Papers
Noli 1 nlTitrated -Tissue Papers
Tissue fr'rugi W.istepaper
BPCTCA 2/19/76
BATF.A & NSPS 2/19/76
PSF.S & PSNS
UnMrji-ar<1 from Waslepaprr
BPCTCA, n/MKA & NSPS
PSKS & PSNS
1/15/74 1/15/74
Bui Idem' PJ|«T and Roofing Kelt
BPCTCA, BATI . K NSPS 1/14/74
PSES & PSNS
1/14/74
1/15/74
1/14/74
5/29/74 5/29/74
5/9/74 5/9/74
5/29/74
5/9/74
BPCTCA. BATEA, &
NSPS settJeablr solid*
Halts were also
promulgated.
-------
15952).(7) EPA is currently assessing the costs and economic impacts
associated with attainment of the proposed BPT limitation.
Promulgation of this rule will occur at a later date.
EPA published proposed effluent limitations guidelines for BAT, BCT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS for the pulp, paper, and paperboard and the
builders' paper and board mills point source categories in the Federal
Register on January 6, 1981 (46 FR 1430). (8) At the time of
proposal, the subcategorization scheme was modified to include 25
subcategories in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
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).(9) 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.
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
(BOD^), total suspended solids (TSS), pH, oil and grease, and fecal
coliform. BOD^, TSS, and pH are controlled for all subcategories of
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry by BPT and NSPS. EPA has
recently proposed a revised BCT methodology in response to the
American Paper Institute v. EPA decision mentioned previously. That
rulemaking included a reproposal of BCT limitations for the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry. This document does not address the
proposed BCT effluent limitations.
23
-------
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.(10) 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.
Since initiation of this rulemaking effort, three toxic pollutants
were removed from the list of 129 toxic pollutants:
dichlorodifluoromethane, trichlorofluoromethane, and bis-chloromethyl
ether (46 FR 2266, January 8, 1981, and 46 FR 10723, February 4,
1981).
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 were nonconventional
pollutants investigated by the Agency during this study. 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
data about the industry, which are also summarized in this section.
With these data, the Agency proceeded to develop final 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.
24
-------
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 wastewaters. 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, BAT,
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. The final 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.
To assemble the necessary data to allow promulgation of BPT effluent
limitations, pretreatment standards, and NSPS for the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry, twelve major tasks were 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. analysis of data from a long-term sampling program,
25
-------
7. development of a program for collection and analysis of discharge
monitoring data,
8. analysis of information gathered during the supplemental data
acquisition program,
9. evaluation of PCB data,
10. review of data obtained from industry comments on the proposed
regulation,
11. determination and analysis of appropriate treatment and control
alternatives, and
12. development and analysis of cost and energy data.
EPA completed several of the above-mentioned tasks to allow the Agency
to respond fully to comments on the proposed rules. EPA obtained
additional data on the presence and variability of toxic pollutants in
raw wastes and treated effluents by conducting a long-term (23 week)
sampling and analysis program at a deink and a fine bleached kraft
mill (Task 6). The Agency used data for the deink mill to support the
PCB effluent limitations and NSPS that EPA proposed concurrent with
the final regulations discussed in this document. The data for the
fine bleached kraft mill were gathered to investigate further the
variability of biological treatment in removing chloroform; however,
as described herein, EPA decided to withdraw the proposed chloroform
limitations.
EPA also obtained (1) discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) from
Regional and State permitting authorities to update its records to
include the most recent available data (Task 7) and (2) additional
conventional pollutant data under the authority of section 308 of the
Act to broaden and update our existing data base on the variability
associated with wastewater treatment systems (Task 8). EPA used these
data, as well as data on PCP and TCP that became available during the
PCB/chloroform sampling, to verify the accuracy of the analyses done
prior to proposal.
Industry, in some cases, provided comments on our proposed regulations
that included effluent data on the discharge of toxic pollutants. In
many cases, data were provided in a format that did not allow for
proper analysis by the Agency. In those instances, EPA requested
additional information in a format that would allow the Agency to
include the data when developing the final regulations (Task 10).
Existing Data Evaluation
To assess existing data on pollutants and their control/reduction in
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, several data sources were
investigated, including a) the EPA's administrative record, b)
information acquired from State regulatory agencies, EPA regional
offices, and research facilities, and c) the literature.
26
-------
Administrative Record. EPA reviewed the administrative records for
the previous effluent limitations guidelines studies of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard and the builders' paper and board mills point
source categories 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, EPA 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, had
recently completed a study that deals with toxic pollutants found in
the discharges from pulp, paper, and paperboard mills.(10) Results
show that pulp, paper, and paperboard mill effluents contained
numerous organic compounds which are not on EPA's list of 129 specific
toxic pollutants.
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 Canda
Point Claire, Quebec
HSA Reactors Ltd.
Toronto, Canada
Lundberg Ahlen, Inc.
Richmond (Vancouver), Canada
27
-------
The Literature. The Agency reviewed data available in the literature
to identify which of the 129 toxic pollutants, if any, might be
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),
o University microfilm's xerographic dissertation abstract service
(DATRIX II),
o Environment Canada's Water Resources Document Reference Center
through Canada's Inland Waters Directorate (WATDOC), and
o The Institute of Paper Chemistry's Abstract Service (PAPERCHEM
and Chemical Abstracts).
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), 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,
December 1974.
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.
28
-------
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.
Information was collected 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 data request program was developed with
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 facilities: kraft and soda,
sulfite, groundwood, deink, NSSC and CMP/TMP, paperboard from
wastepaper, builders' paper mills, and nonintegrated mills. After
numerous discussions with industry 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 program was developed through coordination with the
American Paper Institute (API) BAT Task Group. This industry
committee was formed to interact with EPA during the BATEA review
project and included representatives from individual companies and
technical associations. The committee participated in the review and
development of the survey forms and had considerable input into their
content. EPA made revisions to the data request forms in accordance
with discussions at three API BAT Task Group meetings.
The final data request forms included two parts: Part I requested
information required for selecting mills for the verification sampling
program; Part II requested information needed for a complete
assessment of the industry profile and subcategorization scheme. When
EPA representatives sought input from the industry task group on the
proper number of mills that should receive a data request form,
representatives of both large and small mills recommended 100 percent
29
-------
coverage of the industry. Therefore, under the authority of section
308 of the Act, data requests were sent to representatives of all
known operating pulp, paper, and paperboard mills during the last week
in September of 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.
Because the data request forms were complex, 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 about the forms. As a result of this
meeting, an errata sheet was prepared and distributed to
representatives of mills who had received the data request forms.(14)
Throughout the response period industry representatives asked numerous
questions 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 could request that EPA hold
certain information confidential. They were also allowed to send
copies of their completed forms to the NCASI and, where this was done,
EPA representatives were able to communicate with representatives of
NCASI regarding individual survey responses.
Data Processing System. Since EPA expected to receive 700 responses
to the data request, the Agency developed a multi-phase procedure for
receiving and processing responses. The first step in the processing
system was the development of mill codes to ensure anonymity and to
facilitate computer analysis of data obtained. Other 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 nonstandard and lengthy
responses were anticipated, the survey forms were manually reviewed
before input into the data processing system. This review ensured
consistency in 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. The same procedure was followed for responses
which indicated a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of a question.
It was necessary to contact representatives of approximately 35
percent of the mills from which data request forms were received to
verify responses.
Responses were stored as they appeared on the original survey form or
in coded form. If a question requiring a numeric response (i.e., year
or quantity) was answered but included a written explanation, a code
was inserted in the data base that indicated the presence of
30
-------
additional information. A similar code was used to indicate an answer
that had been calculated by the reviewing engineer (these answers
usually consisted of conversions to standard units). Codes for
"unknown" or "not available" information were also utilized as
appropriate. All codes and notes indicating additional information
were retrievable during the data analysis phase.
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. 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 completing forms and the percentage of the total
operating mills that this represented are shown in Table II-2.
An additional summary was prepared showing facilities that did not
respond to the data request or were 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 type 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 were incorporated into the 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 the technical studies
required, EPA expanded the list of "priority pollutants" to include
129 specific toxic pollutants.(10) Based on the information gathered
in the literature review, EPA identified an additional 14
nonconventional pollutants of concern specific to the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry.
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
analysis procedures used during screening, outlined in Sampling and
Analysis Procedures for Screening of Industrial Effluents for Priority
Pollutants" (EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, April, 1977) and Analysis
Procedures for Screening of Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Effluents for
Nonconventional Pollutants~TEPA. Washington, D.C., December, 1980),
allow for calculation of the approximate quantity of toxic and
nonconventional pollutants present in wastewaters. (15)(16) Specific
criteria were developed for selecting sampling mills so that these
facilities would be representative of the entire pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry.
31
-------
TABLE II-2
RESPONSE TO DATA REQUEST
Number of operating mills sent surveys: 642
Number of operating mills returning surveys: 610
Percentage response: 95%
Method of Discharge - Responding Operating Mills
Direct Dischargers: 319
Indirect Dischargers: 221
Combined Indirect and Direct Dischargers: 18
Self-Contained: 52
32
-------
TABLE II-3
TOXIC AND ADDITIONAL NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS UNDER INVESTIGATION IN THE SCREENING PROGRAM
CO
CO
1. *acenaphthenp
2. *acrolein
). *acrylonitrile
4. *benzene
5. *bpnzidine
6. *carhon tetrachloride
(tptrachloromethane)
*CIILORIJ4ATED JENZENES (other than DICHLOROBEN7F.NES)
7. chlorobenezene
8. 1 ,2,4-trichlorobrnzme
9. hrxachlorobenzrne
••''CHLORINATED ETHANES
10.
1 I.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
, 2-d i chl o roe th vS|>pcific compounds and chpmical classes as listpd in the consent decrpe.
-------
TABLE M-3 (Continued)
*IIALOETHERS (other than those listed elsewhere) *PHTHALATE ESTERS
OJ
40. 4-rhlorophenyl phenyl ether
41. 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
42. his(2-chtoroisopropyl) ether
43. bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
'HALOMKraANES (other than those listed elsewhere)
44. methylene chloride (dichloromethane)
45. methyl chloride (chloromethane)
46. methyl bromide (bromomethane)
47. bromoform (tribromomethane)
48. di< hlorobromomethane
49. trichlorofluoromrthane
50. dichlorodifluororaethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
52. *hexachlorobutadiene
53. *hexachlorocyclopentadiene
54. *isophorone
55. *naphthalene
56. v'ni t robenzene
*NJTROPHENOLS
57. 2-nitrophenol
58. 4-nitrophetiol
59. *2 ,4-dinitrophenol
60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
•'NITROSAMINES
61. N-nitrosodimethytnmine
62. N-nitrosodiphenylamine
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
64. '''pentochlorophenol
65. ^phenol
66. bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalatr
69. di-n-octyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
71. dimethyl phthalate
*POLYKUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
72. benzo|aJanthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)
73. benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-ben7.opyrene)
74. 3,4-benzo fluoranthene
75. benzo|klfluoranthene (11,12-benzo flnoranthene)
76. chrysone
77. acenaphthylene
78. anthracene
79. benzo[ghiJperylene ( 1,12-benzoperylene)
80. fluorene
81. phenanthrene
82. dibenzo(a,h]anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthrarene)
83. indenof1,2,3-cdlpyrene (2,3-o-phenylenepyrene)
84. pyrene
85. *tetrachloroethylene
86. *toluene
87. *trichloroethylene
88. *vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
PESTICIDES AND METABOLITES
89. *alHrin
90. *dieldrin
91. *chlordane (technical mixture & metabolites)
''•'Specific compounds and chemical classes as listed in the consent decree.
-------
TABLE II-3 (Continued)
CO
cn
*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. o-endosulfan
96. B-endosulfan
97. endosulfan sulfate
*ENDRIN AND METABOLITES
98. endrin
99. endrin aldehyde
*HEPTACHLOR AND METABOLITES
100. heptachlor
101. heptachlor epoxide
*HEXACHLOROCYCLOHEXANE (all isomers)
102. o-BHC
103. B-BHC
104. y-BHC (lindane)
105. 6-BHC
*POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCB's)
106. PCB-1242 (Arochlor 1242)
107. PCB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)
108. PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)
109. PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)
110. PCB-1248 (Arochlor 1248)
111. PCB-1260 (Arochlor 1260)
112. PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)
113. *toxaphene
114. ^antimony (total)
115. *arsenic (total)
116. *asbestos (fibrous)
117. *berylliura (total)
118. *cadmium (total)
119. *chromiura (total)
120. *copper (total)
121. *cyanide (total)
122. *1ead (total)
123. *mercury (total)
124. *nickel (total)
125. *selenium (total)
126. *sllver (total)
127. ^thallium (total)
128. *zinc (total)
129. 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodtbenzo-p-dioxin (TCUD)
ADDITIONAL NONCONVENT10NAL POLLUTANTS
130. abietic acid
131. dehydroabietic acid
132. isopimaric acid
133. priraaric acid
134. oleic acid
135. Ijnoleic acid
136. linolenic acid
137. 9,10-cpoxystcaric acid
138. 9,10-dichlorostearic acid
139. monochlorodehydroabietic aciH
140. dichlorodehydroabietic aciH
141. 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol
142. tetrachloroRuaiacol
143. xylenes
*Specific compounds and chemical classes as listed in the consent decree.
-------
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
developed are presented in Table 11-4.
EPA determined that one mill representative of each of these groupings
would be sampled during the screening program. To ensure that mills
would be representative of current industry practice, the following
four criteria were used to select mills:
o the mill should be a direct discharging mill to obtain the
maximum amount of data (both raw waste and treated effluent
data),
o a biological treatment system should be 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
should approximate the raw wastewater levels that formed the
basis of BPT effluent limitations for the specific mill
grouping (to ensure that the selected mill would be
representative of the industry grouping), and
o the manufacturing process should be representative of the
respective mill 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, and the raw waste characteristics at screening
program mills. Information is also presented 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 other mills
in the grouping. EPA selected these mills for inclusion in the
screening program because they satisfied all four selection criteria
better than other mills.
Because of insufficient data, representative mills could not be
selected for the following industry groupings:
Nonintegrated-Coarse Papers,
Nonintegrated-Specialty Papers (I),
Nonintegrated-Specialty Papers (II), and
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt.
For these industry groupings, EPA recognized that additional data
would become available as a result of the data request program.
Therefore, screening program visits to facilities in additional
industry groupings were delayed until these data could be obtained and
evaluated.
36
-------
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.
37
-------
TABLE II-5
SUMMARY OF TREATMENT TYPE AND PERCENT DIFFERENCES
CONTRACTOR SCREENING FOR MILLS VERSUS RAW WASTE LOAD BASIS OF BPT
Percent from BPT RWL
Subcategory Treatment Type Flow BODS
Fine Bleached Kraft ASB w/ Polishing Pond + 32% + 11%
Bleached Kraft - BCT/Market ASB w/ Polishing Pond +3% + 16%
Unbleached Kraft ASB - 25% - 21%
Unbleached Kraft/Neutral Sulfite ASB - 5% - 13%
Semi-Chemical (Cross Recovery)
Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical ASB w/ Polishing Pond 0% + 40%
Sulfite ASB + 14% - 6%
Groundwood Activated Sludge +9% - 11%
Deink Activated Sludge - 14% - 29%
Nonintegrated - Fine ASB +9% +4%
Nonintegrated - Tissue Primary Treatment + 16% + 32%
Paperboard from Wastepaper Activated Sludge 7% - 14%
co
-------
After completion of the 11 sampling visits, funding for this project
was depleted due to delays of supplemental appropriations from
Congress. Therefore, the screening program was delayed 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 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 included in 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 the
screening program.
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 t'o 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 of the program was prepared.(17)
These procedures 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 collecting 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 of the raw process water was
also taken on the second day of the sampling survey. Table I1-6 shows
the work items included during a typical screening sampling program
survey.
39
-------
< \
.
--
•
SCREENING PROGRAM SURVEYS
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENCY SURVEYS
FIGURE n - I
LOCATION OF SCREENING PROGRAM
MILL SURVEYS
-------
TABLE I1-6
TYPICAL SCREENING PROGRAM SURVEY
Day I of the Survey
Day 2 of the Survey
Day 3 of the Survey Day 4 of the Survey
1. Meet with mill personnel
and discuss Ltie program
2. Select sample locations
3. Set up automatic samplers
4. Collect all grab samples
required
5. Take pll aud temperature
readings at each sample
location twice during
24 hours
6. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composi I*" sample container
iced
1. Check automatic
samplers
2. Collect all grub
samples required
3. Take pH and tempera-
ture readings at each
sample location twice
during 24 hours
4. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample container
iced
1. Check automatic
samplers
2. Collect all grab
.samples required
3. Take pH and tempera-
ture readings at each
sample location twice
during 24 hours
4. Check automatic samplers
periodically and keep
composite sample container
iced
1. Distribute 72-hour com-
posite between the re-
quired composite samples
2. Break down automatic
samplers
3. Final meeting with mill
personnel to wrap up
the survey
4. Pack the samples and
equipment for shipment
5. Ship samples to the
appropriate 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 oJE Pu 1 p, Paper,
and Paperboard Effluents for Nonconventional Pollutants (EPA,
Washington, D.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.
o cyanide was analyzed in accordance with the total cyanide method
described in the 14th Edition of Standard Methods. (18)
Industry Profile and Review of_ Subcategorization
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.
42
-------
TABLE 11-7
SUBCATEGORIZATION SCHEME ON WHICH BPT WAS BASED AND
THE REVISED SUBCATEGORIZATION SCHEHI
BPT Subcategories
Pulp, Pager, and Paperboard
PhaseI
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
o Blow Pit Wash (plus allowances)
Papergrade Sulfite
o Drum Wash (plus allowances)
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Chemi-Mechanical
ThenBO-Mecbanical
CMN Papers
Fine Papers
Revised Subcategories
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 Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
*Grouadwood - Cheni-Mechanical
Groundwood - Thenno-Mechanical
Groundwood - CMN Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Croundwood
Groundwood
Groundwood
Groundwood
Soda
Deink
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Tissue From Wastepaper
Secondary
Segment
Bui Idlers' Paper and Bo_a rd _Mi lls
Phase I
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper1
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Monintegrated Segment
Noniategrated - Fine Papers1
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated - Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Mill Groupings
**Integrated Miscellaneous, including:
o Alkaline-Miscellaneous
o Kenwood Pulping
"•'^'Secondary Fiber Miscellaneous
**Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
* In subsequent Tables information on Groundwood-Chemi-Mechanical mills is
included with information on Integrated Miscellaneous mills.
** Groupings of miscellaneous mills - not Subcategories.
1 These Subcategories were subdivided after the Verification Program in response
to industry comments.
-------
As part of this updated industry-wide survey, EPA reviewed the
original subcategorizaton scheme using the more comprehensive data
obtained during the screening program, the data request program, and
related efforts. As a result, a new subcategorization scheme was
developed and is also shown in Table I1-7. This revised
subcategorization better reflects the industry as it now operates with
respect to raw materials, processing sequences, and product mix. EPA
used the revised subcategorization scheme 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 industry wastewaters.
Selection of. Significant Parameters. As discussed previously, after
completion of the11 screening sampling visits, funding for this
project was depleted due to delays of supplemental appropriations from
Congress. Monies allocated for completion of the technical study
became available 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,
EPA 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.
44
-------
EPA later determined that further analysis of the data tapes would be
unnecessary after completion of a thorough review of data gathered
during (a) screening studies conducted by EPA Regional field teams and
(b) 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 II-8.
Selection o.f 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 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. EPA established
the following three criteria for selection of representative mills
during verification sampling:
o the mill should be a direct discharging mill 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 should be 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 BOD£ should be equal to or less than
the annual average levels used in the development of BPT
regulations for a specific subcategory 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
selection criteria. A total of 93 percent of the mills in the
45
-------
TABLE 11-8
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*
chloroform
2,4-dichlorophenol
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
methylene chloride
dichlorobromomethane
trichlorofluoromethane
chlorodibromomethane
isophorone
naphthalene
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
chrysene
anthracene/phenanthrene
tetrachloroethylene
toluene
trichloroethylene
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
only
Sonconventional Pollutants
oleic acid
linoleic acid
linolenic acid
piraaric acid
isopimaric acid
denydroabietic acid
abietic acid
OTHER VERIFICATION POLLUTANTS
Priority Pollutants
bromoform
pentachlorophenol
carbon tetrachloride
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
butyl benzyl phthalate
parachlorometa cresol
acenaphthylene
pyrene
mercury
3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol
tetrachloroguaiacol
monochlorodehydroabietic acid
dichlorodehydroabietic acid
9,10-epoxystearic acid
9,10-dichlorostearic acid
xylenes
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
Nonconventional Pollutants
rolor
ammonu
"Includes 2.4,5 and 2,4,5 - irichloropheno]
-------
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 with
biological treatment systems existed 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, EPA sampled one mill where
only primary treatment was employed 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 the majority 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, EPA
found that an insufficient number of mills met the third criteria.
Therefore, mills were selected where final effluent levels of flow
and/or BOD5. 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, EPA
evaluated additional specific process and wastewater selection
criteria. Prior to final selection of mills to be included in the
verification program, the following were also considered:
1 . raw wastewater and final effluent flow and BOD!> 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),
5. the brown stock washer efficiency in terms of kilograms (pounds) of
soda loss (if applicable to the subcategory analyzed),
47
-------
6. bleach plant data (if applicable to the subcategory analyzed)
including:
a. bleaching sequence,
b. tonnage,
c. shrinkage,
d. brightness,
e. fresh water usage, and
f. type of washing system employed.
7. the type of evaporator condenser used (if applicable to the
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. EPA
evaluated all of the verification program analysis results 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 I1-2.
Sampling Program. The purpose of the verification program surveys was
to verify the presence and quantity of those toxic and nonconventional
pollutants detected during the screening program. The verification
program surveys were conducted to provide a more thorough examination
48
-------
FIGURE IE-2
LOCATION OF VERIFICATION PROGRAM
MILL SURVEYS
-------
of the possible sources of toxic and nonconvehtional 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 and also presents the sample points and the
sample duration proposed for each. EPA selected this format to meet
the verification program goals.
EPA representatives contacted representatives of the selected mills by
telephone; 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 program 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
of all of the samples collected by the Agency at each mill.
50
-------
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 and Roofing Felt Mills
1. Raw Water
2. Secondary Treatment Influent
3. 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
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
51
-------
TABLE 11-10
TYPICAL VERIFICATION SAMPLING PROGRAM SURVEY
Day 1 of the Survey
Day 2 of the Survey
Day 3 of the Survey
Day 4 of the Survey
tn
ro
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
-------
Generally, the NCASI samples were collected as follows:(21)
Influent
Raw Water to Treatment Final Effluent
Parameter
Extractable Organics Day 3 of Survey Day 1 of Survey Day 2 of Survey
Nonconventional
Pollutants
Metals
Mercury
Volatile Organics
Cyanide
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 where
wastepaper was used as a raw material source 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 PR 69464 (December 3, 1979)). (23) 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).(24)Gaschromatography/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. EPA
representatives obtained standards for each pollutant to be assayed in
the samples and determined the mass spectrum for each of these
standards daily throughout the analysis program.
53
-------
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.
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 11-11.
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 and 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 100 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 were maintained to document
instrument performance. The entire GC/MS system was further evaluated
with the analysis of a composite standard that contained all
pollutants of interest and the various deuterated internal standards.
This standard was analyzed with each sample set or with each change in
54
-------
TABLE 11-11
SUMMARY OF INTERNAL STANDARDS
Volatiles*
methylene chloride-d2
1,2-dichloroethane-d4
1,1,l-trichloroethane-d3
benzene-d3
toluene-d3
p-xylene-dlj)
Extractables
phenol-d5-TMS
naphthalene-d8
diamyl phthalate
stearic acid-d35-TMS
^Relative to benzene-d3
55
-------
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
determinat ions.
Long-Term Sampling Program
The long-term sampling program was undertaken to investigate the
variability and treatability of certain toxic and nonconventional
pollutants discharged from mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry.
Selection of_ Significant Parameters. Through an evaluation of
available data(primarily verification data), EPA identified certain
pollutants to be of potential concern in the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. These included chloroform, trichlorophenol,
pentachlorophenol, and PCBs, which are toxic pollutants, and resin
acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant derivatives, which are
nonconventional pollutants. The complete list of the pollutant
parameters selected for analysis during the long-term sampling program
is presented in Table 11-12.
Selection of Mills for the Long-Term Sampling Program. Candidate
mills for tHe long-term sampling program were listed for each of the
following five major industry sectors; bleached kraft, unbleached
kraft/semi-chemical, deink with bleaching, wastepaper without
bleaching, and bleached sulfite. The following criteria were
established for selection of the mills:
o the mills should be located close to the northeastern
quarter of the U.S. to minimize cost, and
o the final effluent flow and BOD!> for each mill chosen should
be equal to or less than the annual average levels that
formed the basis of BPT regulations to ensure that the mill
selected would be representative of the industry sector
after compliance with BPT regulations.
Due to budgetary concerns, only two mills could be chosen. Therefore,
the candidate mill list was reduced to include only mills representing
industry sectors that were best suited for this program. A review of
56
-------
TABLE 11-12
TOXIC Am NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS DURING THE
LONG-TERM SAMPLING PROGRAM
Toxic Pollutants
Chlorinated Phenolics:
2,4-dichlorophenol
trichlorophenol*
pentachlorophenol
Halonethane:
chlorofonn
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)2
PCS-1016
PCS-1221
PCS-1232
PCI-1242
PCI-1248
PCB-1254
PCB-1260
Npnconventional Pollutants
Chlorinated Phenolics:
4,5-dichloroguaiacol
3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol
4,5,6-trichloroguaiacol
tetrachloroguaiacol
Unsaturated Fatty Acids:
oleic acid
linoleic acid
linolenic acid
Unsaturated Fatty Acid Derivatives:
9,10-epoxystearic acid
9,10-dichlorostearic acid
Resin Acids:
abietic acid
dehydroabietic acid
isopimaric acid
levopimaric acid
neoabietic acid
palustric acid
pimaric acid
sandaracopimaric acid
Chlorinated Resin Acids:
monochlorodehydroabietic acid
dichlorodehydroabietic acid
Ethers:
dimethyl sulfide
dimethyl disulfide
Includes 2,4,5 and 2,4,6-trichlorophenol.
2Analyzed only at deink mill.
57
-------
screening and verification data showed that bleached kraft facilities
could have detectable levels of all the pollutants of concern (except
PCBs) in their wastewater. A further review showed that PCBs,
chloroform, and the chlorophenolics could be found in wastewater
discharges from deinking mills where bleaching is employed.
As a result, the candidate mill list was reduced to include only
bleached kraft and deink mills. EPA selected one mill from each
sector to provide full coverage of the toxic and nonconventional
pollutants of concern.
Sampling Program. The purpose of the long-term sampling program was
to investigate the variability and treatability of certain pollutants
specific to the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. The sampling
effort was primarily designed to collect long-term data on the levels
of the pollutants of interest in the final effluent of the mill's
wastewater treatment plant. Raw wastewater samples were collected to
determine the levels of the pollutants being discharged to the end-of-
pipe treatment system and to evaluate the relative efficiency of the
treatment system for removing the specific compounds.
Representatives of the selected mills were contacted by telephone and
a confirmation letter was sent explaining the program. At the initial
meeting with mill personnel, discussions included the need to obtain
pertinent mill operating information for the duration of the sampling
program.
Prior to beginning the sampling effort, EPA developed a long-term
sampling work booklet for each mill sampled.(25)(26) Each work booklet
detailed the specific procedures to be followed at each mill.
For the fine bleached kraft mill, sampling included collecting grab
and composite samples over a 72-hour period each week for twenty-three
weeks. Weekly composite sampling consisted of collecting three
consecutive 24-hour composites of the final effluent and one 72-hour
composite of the aeration influent. For this mill, the aeration
influent was the first point at which all wastewater streams were
combined.
At the deink tissue mill, sampling included collecting grab and
composite samples over a 72-hour period each week for twenty-three
weeks. Weekly composite sampling consisted of collecting three
consecutive 24-hour composites of the final effluent, and a 72-hour
composite of both the raw waste and primary clarifier effluent. The
primary effluent sample point was added to the program after EPA
learned that over fifty percent of the primary clarifier effluent is
recycled back to the mill. By sampling the primary effluent, EPA
could evaluate the treatability of the chemically assisted primary
clarification system for the pollutants of interest and could estimate
their levels entering secondary treatment.
At both mills, grab samples were taken three times per day at each
sample point. Collection of grab samples was necessary for analysis
58
-------
of the volatile organic compounds of interest. Also, pH and
temperature were recorded each time a grab sample was taken.
Split Sampling Program. As with the screening and verification
programs, 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 . bleached kraft mill. 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 included only six final effluent samples collected at the
bleached kraft mill; none were collected at the deink mill.
Analytical Methods Used During the Long-Term Sampling Program. The
analytical methods used to analyze wastewater samples from the
bleached kraft mill and the deink mill are discussed below.
Bleached Kraft Mill - The wastewater samples collected at the
bleached kraft mill were analyzed for all of the priority and
nonconventional pollutants (except PCB's) listed in Table 11-12.
The volatile organic compounds were analyzed by U.S.EPA Method 1624,
"Volatile Organic Compounds by Purge and Trap Isotope Dilution GC/MS."
The concentrations of dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide were
determined according to Method 624 because no labeled analogs were
available.
The semivolatile organic compounds were analyzed with a modified
version of U.S.EPA Method 1625, "Semivolatile Organic Compounds By
Isotope Dilution GC/MS." Method 1625 was modified to include SE54
fused silica wall coated open tubular gas chromatography (HRGC) and N-
methyl-N-trimethylsilyl-trifluoroacetamide (MSTEA) derivatization.
The modification was necessary to allow for analysis of resin and
fatty acid compounds found in wood pulping discharges. The
concentrations of those compounds for which no isotopic counterparts
were available were determined according to Method 625.
Deink Mill. The wastewater samples collected at the deink mill
were routinely analyzed for the priority pollutants only (see Table
11-12).
Chloroform concentrations were determined by U.S.EPA Method 1624. The
chlorophenolics were analyzed using Method 1625 as was done at the
bleached kraft mill.
The PCB concentrations were determined by U.S.EPA Method 617,
"Organochlorine Pesticides and PCBs." It was necessary to determine
the presence of the PCBs by Method 617 since Method 625 is not
sensitive enough at low levels for these compounds, the limits of
detection being about 30 ppb. The PCBs were not analyzed by isotope
dilution methods since labeled standards were not available. If any
PCBs were detected, they were confirmed by GC/MS (though quantitated
by GC/EC).
59
-------
To investigate the levels of the nonconventional pollutants at the
deink mill, fifteen final effluent samples were randomly selected and
analyzed. Volatile and semivolatile nonconventional pollutants were
analyzed by using Methods 624 and 625, respectively, as for the bleach
kraft samples.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control. The long-term sampling program
included the implementation of separate quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) procedures for each mill. Analyses of chloroform and
the chlorophenolics at both mills allowed similar QA/QC procedures for
these compounds; however, analyses for the nonconventional pollutants
at the bleached kraft mill and PCBs at the deink mill required the
development of different QA/QC procedures.
For the bleached mill, the QA/QC procedures used were primarily those
presented in the Federal Register (44 FR 69553, December 3, 1979) for
analysis of organic priority pollutants. (23) The QA/QC program
included routine QA/QC such as a preliminary, clean water precision
and accuracy study, and the use of method and field blanks. The
program also required that analytical methods be validated and
subsequent analyses be within the validated control limits.
Additional quality assurance was included for the analysis of the
nonconventional pollutants for which no labeled analogs exist. Three
levels of standard additions on duplicates of ten percent final
effluent samples were required to provide recovery information.
Also, a mass spectrometer linearity study was conducted three times
during the program. The study determined the dynamic performance
range of the entire analytical system for all compounds of interest,
surrogate standards, and internal standards.
For the deink mill, the use of labeled analogs for chloroform and the
chlorophenolics provided recovery information for these toxic
pollutants. Additional precision information was obtained by
analyzing one final effluent sample in duplicate each week.
Since no labeled analogs exist for PCBs, a separate QA/QC program was
developed. During the odd numbered sampling weeks (1, 3, 5, 7,...23),
one final effluent sample was analyzed in duplicate to obtain
precision information. During the even numbered weeks (2, 4, 6,
8,....22), one final effluent sample was analyzed first unspiked, to
establish background concentration of the analyte, and then spiked, to
provide recovery information.
Discharge Monitoring Data Acquisition Program
During the verification program, EPA obtained long-term conventional
pollutant data from each of the mills surveyed. These data were
obtained to analyze the effectiveness of in-place technology. After
reviewing these data, EPA found that effluent levels attained at some
mills were well below BPT limits. In addition, EPA was aware that the
data request program had preceded the start-up of new treatment
facilities at many mills. Based on this information, in December of
60
-------
1979, EPA decided to obtain additional long-term data to evaluate the
performance of treatment systems relative to BPT limitations.
This effort involved contacting personnel at EPA Regional offices and
States with permitting authority to obtain discharge monitoring report
(DMR) data to supplement the conventional pollutant data received
during the verification program. Discharge monitoring data were
obtained from five EPA Regional offices and from eleven States with
permitting authority. The resulting DMR data base included 12 to 30
months of DMR data for the period between July 1977 and December 1979
for approximately 250 direct discharging mills in the industry. The
data were used to develop the effluent limitations proposed for the
conventional pollutants BOD5_ and TSS (see 46 FR 1430, January 6,1981).
To update and expand this data base, EPA conducted a supplemental DMR
program to obtain additional data for direct, continuous discharging
mills for the period between July 1977 and March 1981. All pulp,
paper, and paperboard mills were identified by State, and EPA
developed a list of EPA Regional offices and State agencies with
permitting authority for these mills.
DMR data were received from the following EPA Regional offices and
States:
EPA Region I, II, III, IV, VI, VIII, IX, and X. _
Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York, Virginia, Maryland,
Delaware, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas, Iowa, California Region I, and
California Region V (Redding Office).
The number of direct discharging mills for which DMR data were
collected and the number of direct discharging mills in each
subcategory are presented in Table 11-13.
DMR data were evaluated to identify inconsistencies. EPA also
assessed 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. When EPA found that
long-term effluent levels were inconsistent due to production,
process, or treatment system changes, the data were further
scrutinized and reanalyzed or deleted from the data base. EPA
developed summaries of the DMR data for inclusion in the existing data
base. The DMR data are discussed and summarized in Section VIII of
this document.
Supplemental Data Acquisition Program
During the BATEA review program, EPA collected 13 months of daily
production and wastewater data from 54 mills to determine long-term
average, maximum day, and maximum 30-day average values. EPA used
61
-------
TABLE 11-13
SUMHARV OF DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
VERSUS DMR DATA COLIiCTiD
Number of Hills
Number of Direct Included in Discharge
Subcategory Discharging Mills Monitoring Data Base
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 3 3
Market Bleached Kraft 12 10
BCT Bleached Kraft 9 9
Alkaline-Fine 16 16
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 16 16
o Bag 11 11
Seal-Chemical 18 18
Unbleached Kraft and Seai-Chenical 9 9
Dissolving Sulfite.Pulp 6 4
Papergrade Sulfite 13 13
Groundwood - Therms-Mechanical 3 3
Groundwood - CMN Papers 3 3
Groundwood - Fine Papers 7 7
Integrated Miscellaneous 75 71
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Paper* 3 3
o Tissue Papers 11 11
o Newsprint 1 1
Tissue From Wastepaper 13 13
Paperboard From Wastepaper 45 43
Wastepaper-Molded Products 4 4
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 5 5
Secondary Fiber Miscellaneous 7 7
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated - Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish 16 16
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 5 5
Nonintegrated - Tissue Papers 15 15
Nonintegrated - lightweight Papers
o Lighweight Papers 10 10
o Electrical Paper* 4 4
Nonintegrated - Filter and Nonwoven Papers 5 5
Nonintegrsted - Paperboard 7 7
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous 26 26
Total 378 370
The total represents all direct discharging mills knovn to have operated for a
period of time during January 1978 and March 1981 and self-contained mills
which submit DMRs. The total incudes 35 Bills which share 14 joint treatment
systems. Each mill is listed separately on the table although only one set of
data are reported for each joint treatment system. The total also includes
some mills which discharge a portion of their wastewater to POTWs.
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
62
-------
these data to establish maximum day and maximum 30-day average
variability factors in developing proposed effluent limitations and
standards published on January 6, 1981 (46 FR 1430).
To broaden, update, and strengthen its data base, EPA conducted a
supplemental data request program. EPA selected mills for this
program based on final effluent discharge levels, wastewater
monitoring frequencies, and type of treatment system employed. Data
request forms were developed and submitted to representatives of each
selected mill. Daily operating data were gathered from 44 mills for a
period of approximately three years. The data were analyzed to
determine maximum day and maximum 30-day average variability factors.
One mill was subsequently identified as a noncontinuous, intermittent
discharger and was dropped from the study.
PCB Data Acquisition Program
EPA conducted an extensive study to evaluate the presence and levels
of PCBs discharged from pulp, paper, and paperboard mills where
recycled paper is used as furnish. EPA Regional offices. State
agencies with permitting authority, and environmental agencies were
contacted for information; those states which require PCB monitoring
were identified. Raw waste and final effluent data were obtained for
49 mills from data suplied by the States of New York, Wisconsin, and
Oklahoma and from an evaluation of discharge monitoring report and
verification sampling data.
Data Obtained From Industry on Proposed Regulations
The industry, through its comments on the January 1981 proposed
regulations, supplied additional toxic and nonconventional pollutant
data. Chloroform, ammonia, trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol
data supplied by industry representatives in their comments are
summarized in Section V.
Analysis of Treatment Alternatives
As a result of a review of available literature, EPA identified
numerous production process controls and effluent treatment
technologies that are 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, paper, and paperboard industry. The production
process controls and effluent treatment technologies evaluated and
their area of application are presented in Table 11-14. EPA evaluated
this information, along with the data developed through the data
request, screening, verification, and supplemental data request
programs, to determine reduction/removal capabilities of applicable
control and treatment technologies.
63
-------
TABLE 11-14
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS AND EFFLUENT TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Production Process Controls
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse 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
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent or jump stage washing
b. Evaporate caustic extract filtrate
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Recycle condensate
b. Replace barometric condenser
c. Boil out tank
d. Neutralize spent sulfite liquor
e. Segregate cooling water
f. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Green liquor dregs filter
b. Lime mud pond
c. Spill collection
d. 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 felt cleaning
d. White water use for vacuum pump seal water
e. Paper machine white water shower wire cleaning
f. Additional white water storage upsets and pulper dilution
g. Recycle press effluent
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water
i. Broke storage
j. Wet lap machine
k. Separate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
m. Addition of fourth stage cleaners
64
-------
TABLE II-14
(continued)
8. 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
10. Substitution of Chemicals
Other Technologies
a. Oxygen bleaching process
b. Rapson/Reeve process
c. Sequential chlorination
d. Displacement bleaching
Effluent Treatment Technologies
1. Primary Clarification 7.
2. Biological Treatment
a. Oxidation basins 8.
b. Aerated stabilization basin 9.
c. Activated sludge 10.
d. Rotating biological contactor 11.
e. Anaerobic contact filter 12.
f. Ammonia removal by nitrification 13.
3. Chemically Assisted Clarification 14.
4. Foam Separation 15.
5. Activated Carbon Adsorption
6. Steam Stripping
Reverse Osmosis/Freeze
concentration
Filtration
Dissolved Air Flotation
Ultrafiltration
Polymeric Resin Adsorption
Amine Treatment
Electrochemical Treatment
Microstraining
Oxidation
65
-------
EPA identified several technology options for consideration as the
basis of BPT and BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS.
These options include combinations of the technologies presented on
Table 11-14. EPA assessed the pollutant removal capabilities of these
technology options/ 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. EPA used these
data to characterize model facilities representative of each
subcategory of the pulp, paper, and paperboard and builders' paper and
board mills point source categories.
EPA developed appropriate model mill sizes for each subcategory to
properly account for economies of scale. The Agency estimated the
costs of implementation of various control and treatment options for
these model mills.
In developing cost data for implementation of available production
process controls and end-of-pipe treatment, EPA estimated the costs of
construction materials in terms of first quarter 1978 dollars.
Equipment and material suppliers were contacted to aid in developing
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 Appendix A of this
document.
EPA used its cost estimates to assess the 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) of each
of the identified control and treatment options. These economic
impacts are discussed in detail in a separate report: Economic Impact
Analysis of Effluent Limitations and Standards for the Pulp, Paper,
and Paperboard Industry (U.S. EPA, October 1982). (27)
EPA estimated baseline energy consumption and solid waste generation
and the incremental increase in energy and solid waste resulting from
implementation of various technology options. Information gathered
through the data request program and subsequent inputs from industry
representatives were used in establishing this baseline. Energy
consumption data are also presented in Appendix A of this document.
66
-------
SECTION III
DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
INTRODUCTION
EPA identified a total of 674 operating facilities (as of April 12,
1982) involved in the manufacture of pulp, paper and paperboard
products. 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 production of pulp, paper, and paperboard from wood and nonwood
materials such as jute, hemp, rags, cotton 1 inters, 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 mills
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.
67
-------
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
form suitable for chemical conversion or for further processing into
paper or paperboard. Pulping processes vary from simple mechanical
action, as in groundwood pulping, to complex chemical digesting
sequences such as in the alkaline, sulfite, or semi-chemical
processes.
Mechanical Pulping. Mechanical pulp is commonly known as groundwood.
There are two basic processes: a) stone groundwood where pulp is made
by tearing fiber from the side of short logs (called billets) using a
grindstone, and b) refiner groundwood where 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.
Because mechanical pulping processes do not remove the natural wood
binders (lignin) and resins inherent in the wood, 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. Natural oxidation
of the impure cellulose causes an observable yellowing early in the
life of such papers. Also, a physical weakening soon occurs. Thus,
the use of groundwood pulp in the manufacture of higher quality grades
of paper requiring permanence is not generally permissable.
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.
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
6R
-------
is only one operating soda mill in the United States. All other mills
have been converted to the kraft process.(28)
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 and the role of kraft continues to increase. Although sulfite
is still preferred for some grades of products, sulfite production is
declining.
Several major process modifications and achievements have resulted in
the widespread application of the kraft process. First, because of
their increasing cost, chemicals must be recovered for economic
reasons. In the 1930's, successful recovery techniques were applied
to this process; these techniques have vastly improved in recent
years. 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.(28) 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
combination with other pulps, sulfite pulps have many applications.
In addition, dissolving pulps (i.e., the highly purified chemical
cellulose used in the manufacture of rayon, cellophane, and
explosives) were produced solely by use of the sulfite process for
many years.
Initially, sulfite pulping 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
the spent liquor from this base is difficult and expensive to recover
or burn. If spent liquor is not recovered or burned, it must be
discharged as effluent, significantly increasing end-of-pipe treatment
costs. Attempts to use more than about 10 percent of the spent liquor
in various by-products failed. Also, calcium use has declined because
the availability of softwoods, which are most suitable for calcium-
based pulping, is diminishing.(29)(30) 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
expense of installing recovery/incineration technology or converting
sulfite processes to other pulping processes.(30)(31) Based on
industry survey responses, calcium-based cooking chemicals are used at
-------
six papergrade sulfite mills. A magnesium base is used at seven
facilities, an ammonia base at five mills, and a mixed base of sodium
and calcium is used at one mill.
Semi-Chemical - Early applications of the semi-chemical process
during the nineteenth century involved the cooking of chips with a
neutral or slightly alkaline sodium sulfite solution. This process is
called the neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) pulping process. In
the 1920's, scientists at the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory
demonstrated the advantages of NSSC pulping, and the first NSSC mill
began operation in 1928 for production of corrugating medium.(28)
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.(32) 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.(28) 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.(28) Somewhat lower cost fluidized bed
recovery systems have been extensively used at NSSC mills. With
ammonia-based pulping, only sulfur dioxide recovery (S02_) 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.
Recently, 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 a balanced caustic make-up or selective recausticizing, a
balanced pulping liquor is assured. The process uses a 15 to 50
percent caustic solution (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
ash process uses a small amount of caustic along with the soda ash
(typically 7 to 8 percent NaOH as Na20).(33)
70
-------
There are valid reasons for conversion from the standard NSSC pulping
process:
1. A poor market for the saltcake (Na2S04_) 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 from burning the waste
liquors.
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 S02^
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 Na2S04) as in the conventional
kraft system. The liquor recovered from the kraft recovery furnace
will be comprised primarily of Na2C03_ and Na2S, not Na2S03_ 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 100
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 (Na2jS)
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.
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
71
-------
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 papermachine1s 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 that 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, 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 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 ojf Wood Pulps
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.
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
72
-------
Industry (TAPPI).(34) 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.(35)
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 are less
resistant to aging because of the resin acids still present, and 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.
Secondary fibers are often bleached to meet the requirements of
specific grades. Again, the choice of bleaching sequence depends on
73
-------
TABLE III-l
BLEACHING SYMBOLS
Symbol Bleach Chemical or Step Represented by Symbol
A Acid Treatment or Dechlorination
C Chlorination
D Chlorine Dioxide Addition
E Alkaline Extraction
H Hypochlorite Addition
HS Hydrosulfite Addition
0 Oxygen Addition
P Peroxide Addition
PA Peracetic Acid Addition
W Water Soak
( ) Simultaneous Addition of the Respective Agents
/ Successive Addition of the Respective Agents Without
Washing in Between
-------
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 a 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 resin,
synthetic sizing, or 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 retains the fiber layer and
permits water to drain through. (28) This layer is then removed from
the wire, pressed, and dried. Two basic types of papermachines and
variations 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
dictates 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 starches, 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
speed devices similar to calenders are used; these "super calenders"
76
-------
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
paperbpard industry. In addition, several mills were identified for
which responses to the data request survey were not received, which
were not operating at the time of the survey, or which were
inadvertently omitted from the program. EPA developed a profile of
these mills 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 operating as of April 12, 1982, for which
responses to the data request survey were received, and b) facilities
not responding to or not operating at the time of the survey.
Information is presented based on the revised subcategorization scheme
that is 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 610 operating mills
that responded to the data request program and for the 64 operating
mills that were not included in the program. A total of 22 mills of
those responding to the data request program are now closed.
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 fifty percent of the mills in the industry, 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 39 percent of the industry. Mills where 100 percent
of the wastewater generated is recycled or not discharged to navigable
waters (self-contained) make up 8 percent of the industry. A total of
19 mills (3 percent) 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 BOD!>
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
77
-------
TABLE 11 1-2
SUMMARY OK AM. KNOWN OPERATING PUI.P, PAI'KR, AND
1'Al'ERHOARU HI1.I.S BY EPA KKGIUN
Mi lib Nol RcspnmliitR To Or Not
"Mills Krspon.J iiijj To Survey _ _ 0|>cr.it ing At Time 01 S»rvt-y
EPA Region KPA Region
SulK-dlfgury I If. JH. IV. V VI Vf| VIif IX ~X .Total_ \~ II HI IV V . VI. ~~VI f VI I f I X "x Tolal
lnlegralf<[ Segment
Dissolving Kraft - - - 3 - . - ... 3 ------- --- 0
Maikel Bli'drbed Kialt 1--311- -21 9 1--)--- - - - t,
B(.T Bleached Kraft - - - 4 - 2 - - - 2 8 -----i- --- ]
Alkal iiif-Kine 315253- -1-20 ------- --- 0
Unb I rallied Krdft
o l.im-rboard ---II- 4- - -2 17 ... _- -- - . - 0
o B.IK ---523- --111 ------- ... o
SfUii-Clic-wica) 1-25811 --119 - - - - | - - ... |
llnl.lfdi h.'.l Kralt auj
Seaii-Chrmicdl --13-3- --3 10 - - - - - | - --- t
Dissolving Siilfile Pul[i ---]--- --5 ft ------- --- ()
PdlM-rgidilf Sulfite -11-9-- --3 14 ------- --- 0
liioun
-------
TABLE II 1-2 (c-ont.)
Mills Not Responding To Or Not
Mills Kcb^ionding To Survey Or»eriiting At Time Of Survey
Siibcdirgnry
No ni ntcgrated-Li ght weight Papers
o I. i ghtwei gtit Papers
o K Jert r ica 1 Papers
NOD intrgraleil-Filter and
Nun woven Papers
Noni integrated Miscellaneous
TOTAL
1
I
;j
3
3
16
101
^ V~A
II
4
-
3
I
1
8
68
ii i i v"
i
i
2 2
1 2
58 96
EPA Htgion
v "vi vn""v(ii "ix
3 -
- - - - -
3 - - - 1
31
l -
_9 r - - _-
160 41 9 2 38
X Totdl
11
4
14
1 9
if,
- _36
37 610
I " |l" III IV V"
- - - - -
1
11 It
11 11
1 2 I_ - _-
8 13 7 11 9
El'A Re;
VI V
-
-
-
_.- :
9 l
X Total
Includes Pdpergradc Sulfite (Blow Fit Wash) and Pdpcrgrade Sulfite (Drun Wash) subcategories.
-------
CC
o
FIGURE HI-I
LOCATION OF OPERATING MILLS IN THE INDUSTRY
-------
TABLE 111-3
SUMMARY OK METHOD OK DISCHARGE AND 1NPLACE TECHNOLOGY
All Known Operating Hills
Method of Uiictiargo Treatment Scheme - Direct Discharger
" ~ ~
Sillu jit-gory
Iiil.e|jr.ilc.-.l Segmriil
DibM-lvjiiK Kr.iK
Hjrkcl Hit-ached Kraft
BCT Bleached Krai I
A 1 ka 1 inr- Kine
Unbleached Krjfl
o Lilierbuarcl
u Bag
Semi -Cheiuica 1
Unl> leached Kr.i 1 1 and
Semi -Clieiui ca 1
Dissolving Snlfitr Pulp
P.ipergrade Snltitc.
C r oiimluood -Thermo -
Mechanical
Crmmclwocicl-CNN Papers
G runiitlwoocl -Fi nti Papers
I iilt-ifi a ted Mi sc c.* 1 1 a neons
Secondary l-ibers Segment
u Fine
ci Ni.-wsprinl
o Tissur
liSMiif from Wa&tefianer
Prtj'crboa rd From Wastepapt'r
Wai»tepaper- Molded
Prodnc-ts
Riiilclerb1 Paper
1 4
A
4
9
89
S
4
16
19
152
IS
60
22
J.J
/
Direi t
3
12
9
16
16
11
IS
9
6
11
3
2
7
62
3
1
11
10
40
4
4
7
13
2
Indirect No
Indirect Primary & Direct Contained Unknown Treatment
_ _
1 2
-
31 ...
I ...
- - -
2 ... l
1 - - 1
-
3 - -
1
2 - ...
2 - -
IS 1 731
11 ...
3 - -
3 - 11-
21 - 6 - 2
72 16 - 19 5 1
K - - 1 2 2
29 S 18 4
93 1-2 1
94 232
:i 2
Only ASB
1
1
3
2
1 3
3
1
-
1
2
1
-
-
4 14
_
-
3 1
2
1 8
1 1
1
2 1
6 3
1 1
ASB w/
Pond
1
3
4
4
3
3
8
5
-
-
-
-
-
14
1
-
-
3
13
-
2
-
1
-
ASB/w
Holding
La£oon
.
2
1
-
1
2
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
3
_
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
Activated
S 1 udge
1
3
-
5
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
1
6
19
2
-
6
-
7
-
-
2
1
-
Oxida-
tion
Pond Olhei
_
1
1
1 4
4 3
1
5
1
3
6
1
1
1
1 7
_
1
1
2
10
-
1
1
2
-
-------
TABLE 111-3 (coiit.)
_ _ Method o|_JHschajtge _
Indirect
w/ Indirect Self-
__Treat-pent Schegie • Direct Discharger
No
Niunber
of v/ Indirect Self- External Prinary
Suhcategqry _ __ .^fl*!^8 j9JJt?c_t IP^i-f^SL '>£l5ary ^^l?*f*r^ Coiitaincd Unknown Treatment Onl
Nuuiidegrateif-Tissue Papera 25
NouIntegra Led-Lightweight
Papers
o Lightweight Papers 11
o Electrical Papers 5
Nonintegrated-KiIler and
Nunvoverl r*ape rs 14
Nuiiililegrated-r'aperboa rd 16
Niijiiiitfgratcd Hist'el Janeous 40
TOTAL
674
12
5
6
23
338
11
7
10
9
202
1
2
3
41
ia
5
56
19
14
Includes Kine Bleached Kr«*f t and Soda subcalegorieti.
Include:, Papcrgrjde Sultite (Blow Pit Wash)
-------
substantial BOD5^ reductions if a large percentage of the BODj[ is
contained in settleable solids.
Production Profile
Pulp. Many types of pulp are manufactured. Some types, because of
fiber length and strength, are more suitable for production of certain
paper grades than others. The desired pulp can be produced by varying
the type(s) of raw material used, selecting an appropriate pulping
process, varying the type of cooking chemicals used, and varying the
time of cook. Through the use of improved processing techniques, most
paper and board are comprised of more than one type of pulp to achieve
desired properties.
Total daily pulp production is listed in Table III-4 by pulp
type.(36)(37)
Paper and Paperboard Products. The pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry manufactures a diversity of products. The various grades or
types of products are delineated according to end use and/or furnish.
The basic differences in the various papers include durability, basis
weight, thickness, flexibility, brightness, opacity, smoothness,
printability, strength, and color. These characteristics are a
function of raw material selection, pulping methods, and papermaking
techniques.
In addition to variations in stock preparation and sheet control on
the papermachine, the papermaking operation may enhance the basic
qualities of paper or may contribute other properties (i.e., wet
strength, greaseproofness, 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 III-5 presents a general list of the various products
manufactured by the industry.(38) The grades listed are, for the most
part, self-explanatory. Definitions according to industry usage may
be found in the publication, Paper and Pulp Mill Catalog and
Engineering Handbook, Paper Industry Management AssociationTPIMA),
1978.(37) In Table III-6, production statistics are presented for
products grouped under the following major classifications:
newsprint, tissue, fine papers, coarse papers-packaging and industrial
converting, paperboard, and construction products.
Newsprint includes paper made largely from groundwood pulp used
chiefly in the printing of newspapers.
Tissue is set apart 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
unique process and product requirements such as glassine, greaseproof,
electrical, and cigarette papers are produced.
83
-------
TABLE III-4
ESTIMATED PULP PRODUCTION - 19771
Production
Pulp Type (short tons x 1,000)
Dissolving and Special Alpha 1,465
Sulfite-Bleached 1,653
-Unbleached 389
Alkaline-Bleached 14,929
-Semi-Bleached 1,523
-Unbleached 18,411
Groundwood 4,481
Semi-Chemical 3,876
Other Mechanical 2,941
Screenings 110
Total 49,777
Market Pulp 4,881
Waste Paper Used 14,015
Sources 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).(36)(37)
2
Includes insulation and hard-pressed wood fiberboard not
evaluated within the scope of this study.
-------
TABLE III-5
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS CF INDUSTRY
A. Paper
B. Paperboard
I. Printing, Writing and Related
a. Newsprint
b. Groundwood paper, ancoated
1. Publication and printing
2. Miscellaneous groandwood
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
II. 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
I. Solid Woodpulp Furnish
a. Unbleached kraft packaging
and industrial converting
I. 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
III.
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
3. Container chip and filler
. Combination-bending
. Combination-nonbending
. Gypsum linerboard
. Special packaging and
industrial converting
Construction Products
a. Wet machine board
b. Construction paper and board
Construction paper
'Pos'-'s Pulp .ind Pap^r Directory, .Miller Fref-mnn Publications, San Francisco,
California, 1979 Edition.(38)
-------
TABLE II1-6
PRODUCTION STATISTICS
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
Production
Product (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
Source was Lockwood's Directory of the Paper and Allied Trades,
Vance Publishing (1978).(36)
Bfo
-------
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.
-------
SECTION IV
SUBCATEGORIZATION
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of subcategorization is to group together mills of similar
characteristics so that effluent limitations and standards
representative of each group can be developed. This subcategorization
scheme enables permits to be written on a uniform basis. In the
original (Phases I and II) rulemaking, EPA recognized two major
industry segments: integrated and nonintegrated. In recent efforts,
EPA has also recognized the secondary fibers segment to better
characterize the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. The original
subcategorization scheme established by the Agency follows:
Integrated Secondary Fibers
Unbleached Kraft Deink
NSSC - Ammonia Paperboard from Wastepaper
NSSC - Sodium Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Unbleached Kraft - NSSC Tissue from Wastepaper
(Cross Recovery)
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft Nonintegrated
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Soda Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit)
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Groundwood - Coarse, Molded, News (CMN) Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Groundwood - Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - Chemi-Mechanical
The factors considered in identifying these subcategories included raw
materials used, products manufactured, production processes employed,
mill size, mill age, and treatment costs.
As part of the BAT review program, the Agency collected data for
operating mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. EPA
reviewed the original subcategorization scheme to determine if the
subcategories adequately represent current industry characteristics.
This review led to the identification of four new subcategories
representative of portions not recognized in the original pulp, paper,
and paperboard subcategorization scheme. EPA also made other
revisions to several subcategories of this industry.
Conventional pollutant data were reviewed to determine the
relationship of raw wastewater characteristics to the processes
employed and the products manufactured at mills in the pulp, paper,
-------
and paperboard industry. In addition, EPA gathered toxic pollutant
data to evaluate the validity of the subcategorization scheme in
accounting for toxic pollutant generation.
The results of these analyses are described below for earh industry
segment.
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
The original subcategorization scheme included 16 subcategories within
the integrated segment. EPA reviewed the raw waste characteristics of
mills in this segment to determine if these mills still conform to the
original subcategory definitions or if differences exist because of
process or product variations. Based on this review, the Agency has
concluded that the original subcategorization scheme is generally
representative of the integrated segment.
Conventional pollutant and flow data support segmentation to account
for the 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 (sodium and
ammonia-based) is used. However, the original subcategorization
scheme 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, the
Agency has determined that a single semi-chemical subcategory best
represents all variations of this pulping process. This single
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, EPA determined 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., green liquor) are used on-site. Available data indicate that
there are no significant differences in wastewater or conventional
pollutant generation at mills where the neutral sulfite semi-chemical
pulping process or any other semi-chemical process are used.
-------
The original subcategorization scheme included the unbleached kraft
subcategory which covered all mills where unbleached linerboard, bag,
and other unbleached products are produced using the kraft pulping
process. EPA reviewed available data and determined that mills where
bag and other mixed products are manufactured have higher water use
and BODj[ raw waste loadings than mills where only linerboard is
produced. Therefore, two product sectors were established within the
unbleached kraft subcategory to account for these differences. The
product sectors are (a) linerboard and (b) bag and other 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. In
the soda process, which is similar to the kraft pulping 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 are similar to those of mills in the fine bleached kraft
subcategory. Accordingly, BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and
PSNS are identical for both the soda and fine bleached kraft
subcategories. However, because of the familiarity of permitting
authorities and representatives of affected mills with the original
subcategorization scheme and the format of the Code of_ Federal
Regulations, EPA decided that the fine bleached kraft subcategory and
the soda subcategory should remain as separate subcategories and that
the BPT effluent limitations promulgated for these subcategories in
1977 should not be revised. [For purposes of data presentation and
development of BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS, the
soda mill has been grouped with the fine bleached kraft mills to form
a new mill grouping called "alkaline-fine."]
In comments on the January 1981 proposed regulation (46 FR 1430,
January 6, 1981), industry representatives suggested that the BCT
bleached kraft and fine bleached kraft subcategories should be
redefined based on the ash or filler content of the final product.
They provided no data to support their argument but proposed that fine
bleached kraft mills where less than 12 percent filler are used should
be redefined as BCT bleached kraft mills and that all mills with
greater than 12 percent filler should continue to be called fine
bleached kraft mills. In addition, the commenters proposed that the
redefined fine bleached kraft subcategory should have less stringent
limitations than those of the BCT bleached kraft subcategory.
Based on industry's comments, EPA evaluated all available data on fine
bleached kraft mills with less than 12 percent filler. Regression
analyses indicate that there is no statistically significant
relationship between percent filler and raw waste generation.
91
-------
In fact, as shown below, raw waste loads at fine paper mills with less
than 12 percent filler more closely resemble fine rather than BCT
bleached kraft mill characteristics.
Average Raw Waste Load
Mill Grouping
BCT Bleached Kraft
Subcategory
Fine Bleached Kraft
Subcategory
Fine Bleached Kraft
Mills with Less Than
12 Percent Filler
Flow
147.4 kl/kkg
(35.4 kgal/ton)
128.7 kl/kkg
(30.9 kgal/ton)
109.9 kl/kkg
(26.4 kgal/ton)
BODS
38.4 kg/kkg
(76.7 Ib/ton)
38.6 kg/kkg
(67.2 Ib/ton)
31.3 kg/kkg
(62.5 Ib/ton)
TSS
66.5 kg/kkg
(133.0 Ib/ton)
75.0 kg/kkg
(150.0 Ib/ton)
35.3 kg/kkg
(70.5 Ib/ton)
Based on these data, EPA made
subcategorization scheme or changes
no changes to the original
in subcategory definitions.
At the time of the data request program, there were three mills where
the groundwood-chemi-mechanical pulping process was used. Because of
the limited number of mills where this process is employed and
inherent differences in chemicals used at these mills to produce a
variety of final products, insufficient data are available to develop
effluent limitations guidelines. At this time, EPA is unable to
determine the effects of chemical usage in the pulping process on raw
waste generation. The groundwood-chemi-mechanical subcategory remains
as defined in the previous rulemaking; however, national regulations
are reserved. Permits for mills in this subcategory will be
determined on a case-by-case basis. It should be noted that all toxic
pollutants detected in discharges from mills in this subcategory were
present in amounts too small to be effectively reduced by available
technologies.
In the previous rulemaking efforts, three subcategories were
established to characterize the sulfite pulping process: dissolving
sulfite pulp, papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash), and papergrade
sulfite (drum wash). Because process differences exist between the
manufacture of dissolving sulfite pulp and the manufacture of
papergrade sulfite pulp resulting in significantly different raw waste
characteristics, the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory will continue
to be recognized as a separate subcategory with allowances for the
different types of pulps manufactured (nitration, viscose, cellulose,
and acetate).
EPA's review of available data indicate 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. The Agency has 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 condensers employed. Therefore, BAT
effluent limitations, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS are identical for the
papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash) and papergrade sulfite (drum wash)
subcategories. However, because of the familiarity of permitting
authorities and representatives of affected mills with the original
subcategorization scheme and the format of the Code of_ Federal
Regulations, EPA decided that the papergrade sulfite (blow pit wash)
and papergrade sulfite (drum wash) subcategories should remain as
separate subcategories and that the BPT effluent limitations
promulgated for these subcategories in 1977 should not be revised.
[In this rulemaking effort, data for mills in both papergrade sulfite
subcategories have been combined in the development of effluent
limitations and standards.]
In comments received on the proposed regulation, industry
representatives recommended that a distinction should be made between
fine and tissue production at papergrade sulfite mills. EPA examined
raw waste load data for both papergrade sulfite subcategories to
determine if significant differences exist due to the production of
fine and tissue papers. The Agency determined that no significant
differences in raw waste load flow, BODj[, or TSS exist between fine
and tissue mills. Thus, there is no justification for a separate
tissue and fine paper delineation. EPA found that the percentage of
sulfite pulp produced on-site is a much more significant factor
affecting raw waste load than the type of product manufactured.
Promulgated regulations recognize this factor through the use of a
flow model that accounts for the effect of varying degrees of sulfite
pulping on raw waste generation (see Section V).
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
As noted previously, EPA has identified secondary fiber mills as a
separate segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. In the
original rulemaking effort, 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. Where molded
products are produced, the wastepaper furnish is processed without
deinking. Products include molded pulp items such as fruit and
vegetable packs, throw-away containers, and display items. Because
waste characteristics for molded products mills are not properly
represented by any of the original secondary fibers subcategories, a
new subcategory, the wastepaper-molded products subcategory, has been
established to include these mills.
Mills where paper is produced from wastepaper after deinking were
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. EPA
reviewed data for this subcategory to study the relationship between
-------
the type of product manufactured and raw waste loadings. As discussed
in Section V, distinct differences exist for mills where tissue
papers, fine papers, or newsprint are produced. As shown in Figures
V-26 and V-27, no definitive relationship exists between the
percentage of deink pulp produced on-site and the associated raw waste
characteristics. Therefore, the Agency determined that the deink
subcategory should remain as previously defined but that regulations
should reflect differences in the production of tissue papers, fine
papers, and newsprint.
During the comment period following proposal, industry representatives
suggested that the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory should be
modified to account for differences in raw waste loads resulting from
the processing of recycled corrugating medium compared to the
processing of other types of recycled wastepaper. Industry commenters
stated that paperboard from wastepaper mills where recycled
corrugating medium is processed have experienced higher BODS^ raw waste
loads today than in 1976 (the year generally represented by data
presented in Section V). In 1976, the average BOD5_ raw waste load for
mills where a 100 percent corrugating medium furnish is processed was
11.2 kg/kkg (22.4 Ib/ton). However, representatives of two mills
where a 100 percent corrugating medium furnish is processed submitted
data which reveal that the average BOD5_ raw waste load has increased
from about 10 kg/kkg (20 Ib/ton) in 1976 to the present level of 23
kg/kkg (46 Ib/ton). Additional supportive data were provided on the
quantity of extractable BOD!> now present in waste corrugating medium.
EPA has recognized this increase in BODS^ raw waste load by
establishing two subdivisions of the paperboard from wastepaper
subcategory: (a) the corrugating medium furnish subdivision and (b)
the noncurrugating medium furnish subdivision.
In addition, industry commenters stated that mills where linerboard
products are produced from wastepaper experience higher raw waste
loads than other paperboard from wastepaper mills because of
linerboard product requirements. EPA compared average raw waste
characteristics of all mills in the paperboard from wastepaper
subcategory to raw waste characteristics of mills manufacturing
varying percentages of: (a) linerboard products, (b) linerboard and
corrugating products, and (c) linerboard, corrugating, and folding
boxboard products. No significant correlations were apparent. EPA
also performed specific statistical analyses to determine if
significant relationships exist between BOD5_ raw waste loads and the
following independent variables: (a) type of raw materials used as
furnish, (b) product type, (c) pulper yield, and (d) mill size (as
total production). Again, no significant correlations were apparent.
In the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory, linerboard is commonly
produced from recycled corrugating medium. It is likely that these
commenters have experienced the same increases in BODS^ raw waste loads
due to the processing of recycled corrugating medium as discussed
previously. Therefore, establishment of the corrugating medium
furnish subdivision accounts for this BOD5_ increase and no further
segmentation of the subcategory is warranted.
-------
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
In the original rulemaking effort, EPA established two subcategories
in the nonintegrated segment of the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry: nonintegrated-fine papers and nonintegrated-tissue papers.
At nonintegrated mills where other types of products are produced, BPT
permits were written on a case-by-case basis. In this study, EPA
reviewed data on 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. Because the basic manufacturing process is similar at all
nonintegrated mills, EPA investigated the effects of product type on
raw waste characteristics.
Based on a review of the raw wastewater characteristics of
nonintegrated mills, EPA established three additional subcategories to
account for the manufacture of various products: the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories. Additionally,
within the nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategory, electrical
grade products are manufactured at several mills; 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.
In comments on the January 1981 proposed regulations, industry
commenters suggested that the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory
should be further segmented to account for the higher raw waste
loadings typical of mills where cotton fibers make up part of the raw
material furnish. They claimed that small mills where less than 91
kkg (100 tons) per day of product are manufactured also have higher
raw waste loads than do larger mills. Other commenters complained
that the proposal was unclear as to whether nonintegrated mills where
fine papers are produced from both wood pulp and cotton fibers were
included in the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. Some requested
that EPA establish limitations for these cotton fiber mills on a
case-by-case basis and exclude them from the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory.
In response to these comments, the Agency reexamined the
subcategorization scheme for the nonintegrated segment of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry and evaluated all available data for
nonintegrated mills where fine papers are produced.
-------
As shown below, EPA found that mills where a significant quantity of
cotton fibers are contained in the product (equal to or greater than
four percent of the total product) have significantly higher water
usage and BOD5_ raw waste loads than other nonintegrated mills where
fine papers are produced.
Furnish
All mills where the
total product contains
less than 4% cotton
fibers
All mills where the
total product contains
4% or more cotton fibers
Average Raw Waste Load
Flow BODS
52.2 kl/kkg
(12.5 kgal/ton)
124.4 kl/kkg
(29.8 kgal/ton)
10.9 kg/kkg
(21.8 Ib/ton)
18.0
(35.9
kg/kkg
Ib/ton)
The Agency concluded that mills where a significant quantity of cotton
fibers are used in the raw material are substantially different from
other mills in the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory where only
wood pulp is processed. Therefore, EPA established a separate cotton
fibers subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory.
Because the Agency has sufficient data to establish uniform national
standards and limitations for this subcategory subdivision, EPA
rejected the suggestion to rely on case-by-case limitations.
The Agency investigated industry's other contention that small mills
have higher raw waste characteristics than the other mills in the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. EPA removed the eight mills
where cotton fibers constitute a significant portion of the total
product from the data base since they are now a separate subdivision
of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. (All of the cotton
fiber mills are small in that less than 91 kkg (TOO tons) of fine
papers are produced per day.) EPA separated the remaining mills into
the following groups: (a) mills where more than 91 kkg (100 tons) of
paper are produced per day and (b) mills where less than 91 kkg (100
tons) of paper are produced per day. The raw waste loads for both
groups are substantially the same. Therefore, no further
subcategorization based on size is warranted.
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.
96
-------
MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
The subcategorization scheme does not account for all mills in each
industry segment because of the complex variety of pulping processes
employed, ttie different products manufactured, or because no
subcategory exists within which a particular mill can be placed.
Mills that do not logically fit the revised subcategorization scheme
are included in miscellaneous mill groupings in each segment
(integrated-miscellaneous, secondary fibers-miscellaneous, and
nonintegrated-miscellaneous). Permits for all mills in the
miscellaneous groupings will be established on a case-by-case basis.
For many mills, permits can be written by prorating effluent
limitations and standards from the appropriate subcategories; however,
for other mills, this will not be possible because operations are
employed that are not characteristic of any of the subcategory
delineations.
IMPACT OF TOXIC POLLUTANT DATA
As discussed in Section II and in Section VI, EPA conducted toxic
pollutant sampling programs 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 subcategorization scheme.
EPA reviewed the analytical results to determine if the revised
subcategorization scheme adequately addresses 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 toxic pollutants and allows for establishment of
effluent limitations and standards to ensure their control.
SUMMARY
In summary, after reviewing the original subcategorization scheme, EPA
made several revisions. Four new subcategories were identified, while
more subtle revisions have been made for several other subcategories
(i.e., product allowances, adjustments for furnish used, allowances
-------
for percentage
subcategorization
Integrated
of pulp
scheme is as
produced
follows:
on-site).
The
revised
Pit Wash)
Wash)
and
Secondary Fibers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium
Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium
Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Felt
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
o Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight Electrical
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
The subcategories that form the basis of the promulgated regulations
are defined as follows:
Dissolving Kraft
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
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT (Board, Coarse, and
Tissue) 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
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood - Coarse, Molded,
News (C, M, N) Papers
Groundwood - Fine Papers
Groundwood-Chemi-Mechanical
This subcategory
u.sing a "full
includes mills where a bleached pulp is produced
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.
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 and other products.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
This subcategory includes mills where a highly bleached and purified
pulp is produced 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 Sulf ite (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
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. The principal products 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,
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
and paper. The groundwood pulp is produced,
brightening, utilizing only mechanical defibration
grinders or refiners. The principal products made
of groundwood pulp
with or without
using either stone
by this process
i oo
-------
include coarse papers (C), molded fiber products (M), and newsprint
(N).
Groundwood-Fine 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.
Groundwood - Chemi-Mechanical
This subcategory includes the integrated production of
chemi-mechanical groundwood pulp and paper. The chemi-mechanical
groundwood pulp is produced using a chemical cooking liquor to
partially cook the wood; the softened wood fibers are further
processed by mechanical defibration using refiners, resulting in
yields of 90 percent or greater. -The pulp is produced with or without
brightening. The principal products include fine papers, newsprint,
and molded fiber products.
Deink
This subcategory includes the integrated production of deinked pulp
and paper from wastepapers using a chemical or solvent 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, paper diapers, and paper towels.
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 the predominant
portion of the raw material fibers. The principal products include a
wide variety of items used in commercial packaging, such as bottle
cartons.
-------
Wastepaper-Molded 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.
Noninteqrated-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, paper diapers, and paper towels.
Nonintegrated-Lightweight 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.
Nonintegrated-Filter 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, and technical papers.
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.
I 0
-------
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 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 to
facilitate 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.
103
-------
FIGURE V-1
GENERAL FLOW SHEET
PULPING AND PAPERMAKING PROCESS
RAW MATERIALS
FUNDAMENTAL PROCESS
9*8tOU3
WASTES
LI QUI?
SOLID
PULP LOOS
ACID SULFtTE LIQUOR
ALKALINE SULFATE LIQUOR _
(KM APT) 'IB*
NEUTRAL SULFITE LIQUOR ¥
WHITE WATER
FRESH WATER
•KHITC **TE* OK
REUSE MATCH
BLCACHM* ANO OTHER
NECESSARY CHEMICALS
FRESH WATER OR WHITE
WATER REUSE
FILLERS
DYI
size
ALUM
STARCH
FUEJH *ATt» OH
WHITI WATtH RtUSf
COATINi PI9MCNTS
AHOAONCSIVES
LOSt
LO* FLUME
•AMKEM IEANIN*
COOLIN* WATER
WASH WATCH
BARK REFUSE
WOOD PARTICLES
ANO IL1VENS
SAWDUST
•B^SLOW-SYSTEM
EMISSION
*.SMtLT TANK
EMISSION
LIME KILN EMISSION
RECOVERY FURNACE
EMISSION
EVAPORATION
EMISSION
•••TO EVAPORATION
ANO RECOVERY
SULFITE SPENT
LIQUOR
BLOW PIT COLLECTED
SPILLS
CONOENSATE
OREOS WASHING
•UD WASHINS
ACID PLANT
WASTE
RESIDUES
WASH WATERS
FIBER
WEAK LIOUOR KNOTS
FISEft
WASTE WATERS PISER
•LEACH WASTES FIBER
MBAT AND WATER
VAPOR
CLEAN- UP
WATER
WHITE WATER
CLEAN - UP
WASH WATER
DIRT
STOCK SPILLS
FIBER
FILLERS
BROKE
BROKE
COAT1NSS
FINISHED PAPER
PRODUCTS
104
-------
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. They are
discussed separately below.
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 thermo-mechanical process and the chemi-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 slivers. 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 may
contain one fixed and one rotary disc (or two rotary discs) 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.
105
-------
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.
The three basic types 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 digester in a solution of
caustic soda. When cooking is completed, the contents of the digester
are blown into a tank. The pulp is washed 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 digester vapors, and wastewater from the
washing, screening, and deckering operations.
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
to the addition of 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 diffusers 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 may
be 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
106
-------
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
direct 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 and
hemi-cellulose are dissolved. In making papergrade pulps, essentially
only the lignin is dissolved; final net yield is several percent
higher than for dissolving pulps.
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 preparation
with calcium carbonate and calcium oxide or aqua ammonia for the
manufacture of cooking liquor. Neither calcium nor ammonia is
recovered. Magnesium oxide and caustic soda are purchased as make-up
base chemicals for the magnesium and sodium base recovery systems
which recover about 90 percent of the base chemicals.
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.
107
-------
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
"side-hill" screens are used for thickening and to separate resinous
materials. The wastewater sources from the sulfite process include
digester area spills, digester relief and blow condensates, 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. Some evaporator condensate is discharged to the sewer,
while the rest may be used for washing and stock dilution.
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
maximize the 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 cleaning.
The pulp is conveyed to an agitated chest where it is diluted with
white water from the paper mill. Wastewater sources include digester
area spills, digester relief and blow condensates, 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
fluidized bed. The recovered chemical is recycled to the digester/
caustic make-up provides a balanced pH for liquor reuse. In any
semi-chemical recovery system, evaporator condensate may be sewered.
108
-------
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 is deinked before it is used as a pulp
source.
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 operation 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 centricleaners and
fine screens. Generally countercurrent washing is employed on washers
of various types. Flotation is employed at some mills for separating
the fiber from the undesirable materials; at others, various kinds of
deckering or thickening equipment are used. 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 those in the deinking
process.
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
109
-------
the tower, the pulp is usually neutralized to prevent reversal of the
reaction. Sometimes, if further brightening is required, a
hydrosulfite bleaching step follows peroxide bleaching.
Sodium or zinc hydrosulfite can be used in the same manner as
peroxide. Both acidic conditions and the presence of air in solution
decrease bleaching effectiveness. Wastewater discharge is limited to
that resulting from the washing of bleached mechanical pulp subsequent
to the peroxide or hydrosulfite bleaching step.
Bleaching of_ Chemical Pulp. The chemicals most commonly employed for
bleaching of chemical pulps are chlorine, calcium or sodium
hypochlorite, and chlorine dioxide. Alkaline solutions of caustic
soda are used for extracting chlorinated reaction products from
treated pulp. Hydrogen peroxide, sodium peroxide, or peroxyacetic
acid can be used in the finishing stages of bleaching. Sulfur dioxide
or sodium sulfite can be used as neutralizing and anti-chlor reagents
and in some instances to stabilize pulp brightness. However, the
chlorine compounds and alkalis are the most commonly applied
chemicals.
Chlorine and caustic soda are generally purchased in liquid form, but
can be manufactured at the mill by electrolysis of sodium chloride.
Hypochlorites are generally manufactured on-site by treatment of milk
of lime or caustic soda with chlorine. Chlorine dioxide is
manufactured on-site because of its instability. Other bleaching
chemicals 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.
Bleaching is ordinarily performed in a number of stages. This is done
to preserve the strength of the pulp by avoiding excessively rigorous
chemical treatment and to control consistency and temperature in
accordance with the demands of the particular treatment application.
Each stage consists of a reaction tower in which the pulp is retained
in contact with a particular chemical agent for a specified period of
time. It is then washed on vacuum washers or diffusers and discharged
to the next stage.
The chemical concentrations employed depend upon the consistency,
temperature, number of stages, specific chemicals used, species of
wood from which the pulp was produced, degree to which it was cooked,
and quality of product desired. Three stages are generally used in
semibleached kraft operations and for bleaching of sulfite papergrade
pulps. Since kraft pulps are dark in color, particularly when made
from softwoods, high-brightness kraft pulps usually require more
stages. Normally five are used, although at some mills six or more
stages are used. Three stages may be used for low-brightness soda
pulp and four stages for high brightness.
Wastewater is generated in the preparation of both hypochlorite and
chlorine dioxide and is discharged from the bleach plant from the
110
-------
first stage chlorine tower wash system and the first stage caustic
extraction wash tower.
Displacement bleaching is a new process which is being installed at
some U.S. mills. Bleaching chemicals are displaced through a high
consistency pulp mat rather than being conventionally mixed into the
pulp. Very rapid bleaching can be accomplished due to high reaction
rates. Filtrate withdrawal at one stage is fortified with make-up
chemical and reused. The bleaching stages can be located within a
single displacement tower. The major reactor is chlorine dioxide
followed by extraction with caustic soda. Wastewater sources include
the wastewater from preparation of chlorine dioxide and 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 or 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 and bonding 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
111
-------
than the cylinder machine. The cylinder machine is primarily used to
produce thick, heavyweight board products.
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 quality 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.
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STRATEGY
The purpose of this section is to present information on the
wastewater characteristics of mills in the subcategories identified in
Section IV. As outlined previously, three categories of pollutants
were under investigation: a) conventional pollutants, b) toxic
pollutants, and c) nonconventional pollutants. [When presenting data
in the tables that appear in this section, wastewater data in metric
units are conversions of parallel data in English units. However, BPT
raw waste characteristics are precisely those values published in this
and previous documents supporting development of BPT effluent
limitations guidelines.]
Conventional Pollutants
The Clean Water Act defined four conventional pollutants or pollutant
parameters: BOD^, TSS, pH, and fecal coliform. An additional
pollutant, oil and grease, was defined by EPA as a conventional
pollutant under procedures established in section 304 of the Clean
Water Act. As a result of past efforts, effluent limitations have
been established for the control of BOD{>, TSS, and pH in discharges
from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
Information on the raw waste characteristics of mills in each of the
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry was gathered
as part of the data request program described in Section II and is
presented in this section.
Dissolving Kraft. Table V-l presents available data on wastewater
discharge and raw waste loadings of BOD!> and TSS at mills
representative of the dissolving kraft subcategory. 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
hardwood is used. The proportion of dissolving pulp ranges from 49 to
72 percent with an overall average of 60 percent. Bleaching sequences
and practices vary on different lines at the individual mills.
However, at all three, jump-stage countercurrent washing is generally
practiced. Calculated bleached yield averages about 40 percent for
the softwood and 46 percent for the hardwood pulps.
112
-------
TABLE V-l
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production Profile
Mill No. Raw M.iterial
03200 l(l>) 100'ii 1IW
03 2002(1)) 100/: SW
0:320030)) 88% SW
Avt> rugc
F 1 ow
Dissolving Pulp (%) kl/kkg
72
49
59
60
BPT K.iw W;isU? Load
136
218
239
198
230
.9
.2
. 1
.2
.0
(kg
(32
(52
(57
(47
(55
al/t)
.8)
.3)
.3)
.5)
-1)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
109.5
39.4
59.8
69.6
66.5
(219.0)
(78.7)
(119.6)
(139. 1)
(133.0)
TSS
kg/kk£ (Ib/t)
120.4
132.0
81.6
111.3
113.0
(240.7)
(264.0)
(163.2)
(222.6)
(226.0)
SBPT(a)
F
BF
B
(.OF - Mill willi
-------
In order to evaluate the effect of the fraction of dissolving pulp
produced on raw waste load, raw waste flow and BODS^ have been plotted
in Figures V-2 and V-3 against the percentage of dissolving pulp
produced relative to total product manufactured on-site. Although no
relationship appears to exist for flow, BODS^ increases with increasing
percent of dissolving pulp produced. In addition, the effect of
pulping softwood versus hardwood on raw waste load has been evaluated
by plotting raw waste flow and BOD5^ against percent softwood in Figure
V-4. It has been suggested that raw waste loads would increase with
an increase in the percentage of softwood processed. However, the
highest BODS^ raw waste load occurs at the mill where only hardwood is
pulped. It must be noted that the highest percentage of dissolving
pulp relative to total final product is produced at this mill.
Further review of operating variables at the three mills indicates
that washing efficiency has a greater effect on BODj^ raw waste load
than either the amount of dissolving pulp produced or the percentage
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 was impossible to determine a specific relationship between raw
waste flow and BODij 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 BOD5_ and TSS at mills
representative of the market bleached kraft subcategory. Raw material
use ranges from 100 percent hardwood to 100 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 pulping. Figures V-5 and V-6 present
plots of the raw waste flow and EOD5_ versus the percentage of softwood
pulped. A trend is apparent with respect to raw waste load flow and
BODS^, with both generally increasing slightly as the production of
softwood increases. However, regression analysis of the relationship
of flow and BOD5^ versus percent softwood was inconclusive and no
definite relationship could be established.
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft. Table V-3
presents available data on wastewater discharge and BODS^ and TSS raw
waste loads at the eight mills representative of the BCT (paperboard,
coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft subcategory. 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. 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 could be established between either
raw waste flow or BOD5_ and the percentage of softwood pulped.
114
-------
FIGURE V-2
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
240(57.eu
200(480)-
160(384)
IZO(28.I)-
801 192)
40 ( 961-
0 (01
1O
20
30
40 50 60
PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
70
8O
-------
FIGURE V-3
RAW WASTE BOOS VERSUS PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
120(2401
IOOI200)-
80(160)
I 60(1201-
u>l
* 4OI (80S-
20 (40)-
0 IOJ
10
20
30
40 50 60
PERCENT DISSOLVING PULP
80
90
-------
I20(240)n
— 90(180)
60 ( 1201-1
o'
O
09
* 30( 60)
FIGURE V-4
RAW WASTE DATA (FLOW AND BODS)
VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
0(0) 1
20
40
60
80
100
300 (72H
200 (48)
100 (241-
I
0 (0)
20 40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
80
100
117
-------
TABLE V-2
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
MARKET BLFACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
00
Production Profile
Mill No.
030005
030009
030012
030042
030028
030031
030030
030018
030006
900074(b)
Average
BPT Raw
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Average?
HWK(%)
100
100
89
64
27
26
21
11
0
0
Waste Load
of Mills with
of Mil Is >70%
of Mills >70%
of Hills >70%
of Mills >70%
of Mills >70%
of Mills >70%
Pulp
SWK(%)
_
-
11
36
73
74
79
89
100
100
SBPT flow
SWK
SWK and
192.8
152.7
120.6
120.6
120.')
144.8
(kgal/t)
(17.6)
(32.4)
(36.7)
(18.8)
(37.0)
(79.8)
(40.6)
(44.3)
(43.1)
(32.3)
(38.3)
(41.6)
(30.8)
(46.2)
(36.6)
(28.9)
(28.9)
(28.9)
(34.7)
BODS
kg/kkg (lb/t)
17
-
35
37
35
44
44
39
41
23
35
38
32
37
34
26
26
26
29
.5
-
.7
.4
.5
.0
. 1
.2
.3
. 1
.3
.0
.2
.9
.2
.6
.6
.6
.3
(35.0)
( — )
(71.4)
(74.8)
(71.0)
(88.0)
(88.1)
(78.3)
(82.5)
(46.2)
(70.6)
(75.9)
(64.4)
(75.7)
(68.4)
(53.2)
(53.2)
(53.2)
(58.6)
TSS
kg/kkg
20.4
—
98.0
14.4
24.0
132.0
24.7
48.4
22.4
18.7
44.8
45.0
33.4
45.0
22.5
59.2
59.2
59.2
21.4
(lb/t)
(40.8)
(--)
(195.9)
(28.7)
(47.9)
(264.0)
(49.4)
(96.8)
(44.7)
(37.4)
(89.5)
(90.0)
(66.7)
(90.0)
(44.9)
(118.4)
(118.4)
(118.4)
(42.7)
(a)Produc-t ion data held confidential.
(b)Supplemcnl.il data (not from 308).
(c)F - Mill with
-------
FIGURE V-5
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
400 {961-,
150(84)-
500(721-
~ 250!«0)J
3 200(48!-
i
1
$ 150S3SI4
< '
c
100(24).
501 \
0 (0)
20 40 6O
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
80
100
119
-------
FIGURE V-6
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
8O(160).
70(140)-
60(1201-
40! 801-
8
o
u
5
30 ( 60S-
20 ( 40) •
10 ( 20H
0 (0)4-
40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
120
-------
TABIK V-3
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
BCT BLEACHED KkAFT SUBCATEGOKY
Production j'rofi^le
Puli) (t/d) "product (t/d)
Mill No .
030004
030010
030022
030024
030026(j)
030047
030032
030039(1>)
Average
IIW SW
436 535
335
352 943
512 368
1073
306 204
584 576
291 238
Board Tissue
548 343
231
907
714
884 59
583
895
487
Market &
Coarse
69
84
394(c)
106
210
--
348
107
Fl ow"
Total kl/kkg
960
315
1301
820
1153
583
1243
594
lipr Kaw Waste Load
Average of
Average oi
(a) Include
(l.)Waste 1
Mi 1 Is with
Mil Is with
s lumber mi
oad data re
SBPT flow
•?BI'T BODS
1 1 effluent in raw
waste figures.
rv influent: not inc
187.0
187.0
150.6
137.7
121.0
131.4
138. 1
_92.2
150.2
148.0
132.3
169.0
luded in
Kaw Waste Load
BOOS
(kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
(44
(44
C16
(33
(29
(31
(33
(22
(36
(35
(31
(40
av
-------
FIGURE V-7
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
220 (52.8H
200(48.0)-
i 160(38.4)
ui 140(33.6)-
120(28.8)
100 (24.0!
80 { 19.2)
20
40 60
SOFTWOCO USED
80
!00
122
-------
FIGURE V-8
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
80(160),
70 (140)-
60 (120)-
2 50(IOOH
i
I
S'
o
o
40 ( 301-
* 30 ( 601-
20 ( 40)-
10 ( 201-
0 !0)
20
40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD '.SED
80
:oo
123
-------
Alkaline (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcateqories). Table V-4
presents available data on wastewater discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw
waste loads at 20 mills that are representative of the alkaline-fine
mill grouping. Various grades of paper, both coated and uncoated, are
produced from combinations of hardwood and softwood kraft pulps and,
in some instances, on-site production of groundwood pulp. Attempts
were made to determine if the amount of groundwood production or the
extent of high use of filler and coating applications affects raw
waste 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 BOD5_ and percentage of softwood pulp used is apparent.
Additionally, no relationship is apparent between groundwood or high
clay filler use and flow or BOD5_.
Figures V-ll and V-12 present plots of raw waste flow and BODS^ 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 BOD5_ 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 V-5 presents available data on wastewater
discharge and raw waste loadings of BOD5_ and TSS at mills
representative of the unbleached kraft subcategory. Figures V-13 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). As shown on Table V-5 and Figures V-
13 and V-14, significantly different wastewater discharge exists for
the two groups. The bag and other product mills generally have higher
flow, BOD5^, and TSS raw waste loads.
Semi - Chemic a1. Table V-6 presents available raw wastewater data for
each of the 19 mills where a semi-chemical pulping process is
employed. Corrugating medium is the primary product of these mills;
various 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; BOD5_
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-sulfur pulping and green liquor
124
-------
TAIil.K V-4
SUMMARY RAW WASTE l.OAL) DATA
A1.KAUIIK-F1NK*
Product ion
Mi II N.I.
0 30001
0 JOOI3
0 UlOIMr )
030020 d )
0 1002 /(. )
030034 (< )
o too )/
030046
0 10049 I r )
0 tOO-') 1
0 (0052
0 100S7
031)0.')')
0 10060
1 10001
130002
Puli' ll/d)
nw sw"
101
146
124
--
292
341
449
408
449
1 13
237
181
(d)
(d)
5.35
(d)
35
129
123
174
199
109
476
232
224
218
31!
--
(.1)
(d)
--
(d)
Prof i lo
Purch (t/il)
Pulp Hroke(a) Ct
-------
FIGURE V-9
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
ALKALINE-FINE '"
180(43.2)
160 (38.4).
140 (33.6).
120 (28.8).
100 (24.01-
80 ( 19.2)-
60 ( 14.4).
40
(9.61-i
E
LEGEND
Q GROUNDWOOD USED
5! HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
A "5RCUNDWOOD AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
20 (4.81-i-
C 20 40 60
PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
'"'NCLUOF.S FINE BLEACHED KRAFT ino ICCi SUBCATEGORiF. S
30
100
126
-------
FIGURE V-10
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT SOFTWOOD USED
ALKALINE-FINE"1
ml
1
I
-------
FIGURE V-11
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT ON SITE PULP PRODUCTION
ALKALINE-FINE"1
208.3(50)-
166.7(40)-
125 0(301-
ro
oo
? 833(20)
*
1
a:
4 1 7 (10)
O (O )
1
.
• •
0 20 30 4O 50
ID
ts
60
PERCENT ON SITE PULP
®
®
LEGEND
® GROUNDWOOO USED
[•] HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
A UTILIZE SOME GROUNDWOOO AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS
70
80
90
100
FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
-------
70-
FIGURE V-12
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PERCENT ON SITE PULP PRODUCTION
ALKALINE-FINE"1 ® ®«-«t
60(I20>-
50000K-
40 (sot-
3O (BO-
ZO (40)-
IO (20)-
(I)
LEGEND
(§) GROuNOWOOO USED
® HIGH CLAY fILLEHS
A GROUNDWOOD AND HIGH CLAY FILLERS USED
20
40
50 60
PERCENT ON SITE PULP
70
eo
90
INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATEGORIES
-------
TABLE V-5
SUHNART RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORT
Production Profile
Furaish(t/d)
Hill Ho. Kraft WP
Lloarboard
010001 450 —
010002 923 "
010018 1,170 30
010019 1,127 39
010020 971 53
010023 323 39
010032 (a) (a)
010033 (a) (a)
010038 7SO 68
010040 1,193 83
010042 963
010043 1,539 10
010046 1,176
010047 1,299 —
010037 540
010063 (a) (a)
010064 664 31
Average
BPT Raw Waata Load
Average of Hills with
Average of Hills with
Bat and Other Producta
010003 243 12
010003 1,286
010006 1,685
010008 1,895
010028 400 10
010044 1,020
010053 748 Z
010060(c) 470
010062 231
010034 940
010035 (a) (a)
010048 (a) (a)
Average
BPT Raw Waate Load
Asauwd BPT Raw Waate
Average of Mills with
Average of Hills with
Parch
Broke Lincrbosrd
20
«
—
27
61
-•
(a)
(a)
5
--
--
-.
27
--
85
(a)
™
SBPT flow
SBPT BODS
m —
8
51
-.
..
82
12
25
10
48
(a)
(a)
Load
SBPT flow
S Aasuajed
450
934
1,081
1,144
965
563
(a)
(a)
789
1,220
963
1,549
1,102
1,194
620
(a)
666
— _
898
1,115
1,540
25
362
—
--
..
404
(a)
(a)
BPT BOD5
Product (t/d)
Bat
__
—
— -
--
«
-.
(a)
(a)
— •
-.
--
-.
«
—
--
(a)
--
283
332
478
434
279
712
726
443
234
453
(a)
(a)
Other Total
430
934
1,081
7 1,151
44 1,009
4 567
(a) (a)
(a) (a)
789
1,220
963
1,549
21 1,123
1,194
620
(a) (a)
666
283
1,230
1,594
1,974
95 399
1,074
726
443
234
68 925
(a)
(a)
Flow
kl/kkg
46.3
44.2
44.2
35.1
81.0
44.7
47.2
--
105.2
65.1
23.0
44.2
49.2
26.3
38.4
31.7
34.2
47.6
52.5
39.2
47.2
42.1
66.4
52.6
73.9
110.2
57.2
58.4
85.1
151.5
94.7
227.8
223.3
103.5
52.5
52.5
47.6
80.1
(ktal/t)
(11.1)
(10.6)
(10.6)
( 8.4)
(19.4)
(10.7)
(11.3)
(")
(23.2)
(15.6)
( 5.3)
(10.6)
(11.8)
( 6.3)
( 9.2)
( 7.6)
( 8.2)
(11.4)
(12.6)
(9.4)
(11.3)
(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)
(12.6)
(11.4)
(19.2)
Raw
Waate 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
16.6
16.9
16.4
12.4
__
20.3
12.5
18.8
—
12.5
30.5
—
20.6
36.8
34.2
32.9
24.3
16.9
24.3
12.5
16.9
(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)
(33.8)
(32.8)
(24.8)
(--)
(40.6)
(25.0)
(37.6)
( — )
(24.9)
(60.9)
( — )
(*1.1)
(73.5)
(68.4)
(65.7)
(48.6)
(33.8)
(48.6)
(25.0)
(33.8)
TSS
kx/kkg
26.9
24.7
14.1
4.8
27.6
9.8
17.4
--
13.9
11.4
5.7
13.9
20.1
10.8
—
9.9
24.3
15.8
21.9
15.2
15.4
__
20.5
—
45.7
13.3
17.8
23.2
—
8.6
24.3
56.3
73.2
31.4
21.9
21.9
—
23.2
(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)
(43.8)
(30.4)
(30.8)
(--)
(40.9)
( — )
(91.3)
(26.6)
(35.6)
(46.4)
( — )
(17.2)
(48.6)
(112.6)
(146.3)
(62.8)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(--)
(46. 3^
SBPT(b)
BF
BF
F
BF
BF
F
B
B
BF
F
BF
BF
F
r
BF
F
B
BF
B
B
B
(a)Production data held confidential.
(b)F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with S Asm
(c)Hill now closed.
ed BPT BODS.
130
-------
FIGURE V-13
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PRODUCTION
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
240 (57.6)
2IO (50.4)
ISO (43.2)
7 150(36.0)
M 120 (26.81-
3
90 (21.61-
60 ( 14.4).
30 ( 7.2).
0 (01-
LE8END
O UNBLEACHED KRAFT UNCRBOARD
Q UNBLEACHED KRAFT BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS
3 O
°0
400
800 1200 1600
PRODUCTION - tom/doy
2000 2400
131
-------
F1GURE V-14
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PRODUCTION
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
40(80
35 (TO)-
JO (60!-
20(401-
* ', 5(30t-
10 !20)'
5HOI-
046.$|
LEGEKD
0 UNBLEACHED KRAFT LINERBOARO
GJ UNBLfACHED KBAFT BAG AND OTHER PRODUCTS
O O
4QO
800 1200 1600
PRODUCTION- iom/00»
2000 2«CO
132
-------
TABLE V-6
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Furnish (t/d)
Mill No. Semi-Chen WP Broke
Product
(t/d)
kl/kkg
Flow
(kgal/t)
Raw
Waste
Load
BODS
kg/kkg
(lb/
t)
TSS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
SBPT(a)
I. Mills With Liquor Recovery and Less Than 1/3 WP
020002 248 90
020003(b) 582 61
020008 (b) 231 125
020009 (b) (c) (c)
020010 (c) (c)
020013 472 173
020014(d) 394 117
020017 (c) (c)
060004(b) 385 98
Average
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT
Average of Mills with SBPT
20
--
—
(c)
(c)
--
—
(c)
9
flow
BOD5
II. Mills With Liquor Recovery and
020001 204 116
020004(e) 160 106
020006 190 99
020007 183 123
02001 l(f) 235 157
020012 (c) (c)
Average
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT
Average of Mills with SBPT
III. Mills Without Liquor
020005 137 46
020015 118 50
Average
— —
—
--
--
--
(c)
flow
BOD5
Recovery
_ —
—
331
618
318
(c)
(c)
599
511
(c)
492
24.2
40.1
23.0
28.8
60.5
39.6
26.7
30.5
48.8
35.9
42.9
30.5
33.4
More Than 1/3
302
266
291
346
377
(.c)
183
169
19.2
25.0
16.3
10.4
34.2
26.4
18.8
42.9
18.8
17.9
47.2
20.4
33.8
(5.8)
(9.6)
(5.5)
(6.9)
(14.5)
(9.5)
(6.4)
(7.3)
(11.7)
(8.6)
(10.3)
(7.3)
(8.0)
WP
(4.6)
(6.0)
(3.9)
(2.5)
(8.2)
(6. a;
(4.5)
(10.3)
(4.5)
(4.3)
(11.3)
(4.9)
(8.1)
12.9
25.3
9.6
14.4
17.9
39.0
31.2
20.7
27.8
22.1
25.2
21.9
15.1
23.6
1.3
24.2
—
22.6
--
23.9
25.2
23.9
23.9
56.1
33.2
44.7
(25
(50
(19
(28
(35
(77
(62
(41
(55
(44
(50
(43
(30
(47
(2
(48
(
(45
±
(47
(50
(47
(47
(112
(66
(89
.7)
-5)
.2)
.8)
.7)
-9)
.3)
.3)
.6)
.1)
.4)
.7)
.1)
.1)
-6)
.4)
— )
.2)
.8)
.4)
.8)
.8)
.1)
.4)
.3)
30.2
13.2
6.9
17.8
49.3
37.8
18.8
44.5
54.6
30.3
12.3
24.2
29.7
8.1
0.2
--
--
6.0
--
8.1
12.3
8.1
8.1
52.4
27.9
40.1
(60
(26
(13
(35
(98
(75
(37
(89
(109
(60
(24
(48
(59
(16
(0
(
(
(11
i,.
(16
(24
(16
(16
(104
(55
(80
.4)
-3)
.7)
.6)
.5)
.5)
.6)
.0)
.2)
.6)
.6)
.3)
.4)
.1)
.3)
— )
— )
.9)
.1)
.6)
.1)
-1)
.7)
.7)
.2)
BF
F
BF
BF
B
F
F
BF
BF
BF
F
T
F
IV. Non Representative Mills
020018(g) 217 450
020016(g) 200 221
Average
Average of All Mills
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT
(Group I and II)
Average of Mills with SBPT
(Group I and II)
__
--
flow
BOD5
673
525
30.5
55.5
43.0
30.9
42.9
26.3
28.8
(7.3)
(13.3)
(10.3)
(7.4)
(10.3)
(6.3)
(6.9)
62.8
50.5
56.7
25.8
25.2
Z2.3
17.6
(125
(100
(113
(51
(50
(44
(35
.6)
.9)
.3)
.6)
.4)
.6)
.2)
61.5
42.2
51.9
30.1
12.3
22.2
26.1
(123
(84
(103
(60
(24
(44
(52
-0)
.3)
.7)
.2)
.6)
.3)
.2)
F
(a) F - Mill with SBPT flow; B - Mill with SBPT BOD5.
(b) No-sulfur pulping.
(c) Production data held confidential.
(d) Ammonia-base.
(e) A reverse osmosis system is used to treat internal process streams and allow for extensive
recycle of these treated streams. Not included in averages.
(f) Mill 020011 has combined effluent with other mills. Not included in averages.
(g) Mill 020018 makes recycled paperboard and corrugating. Mill 020016 makes tissue and
fine papers. These mills are not considered representative and are not included in averages.
133
-------
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 would be anticipated if data were available on green
liquor pulping.
Incomplete on-site chemical recovery existed at two mills at the time
of data acquisition. As expected, these mills exhibit significantly
higher BOD5^ raw waste loads 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 (020004) are not included in averages presented
in Table V-6. At this mill, a reverse osmosis system is 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 BODI5 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 BOD5^
raw waste load 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 five 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
134
-------
FIGURE V-15
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT WASTEPAPER USED
SEMI-CHEMICAL SbBCATEGORY
60(14.4)-,
50(12.0)
40 ( 961-
3 30( 7.2)
o
* 20{ 1.81
a:
IOC Z.4|-
O (0)
—i—
10
20
40
—I—
50
LEGEND
O NO SULFUR PULPING
A AMMONIA BASK
0 NON-REPRESENTATIVE MILLS
X NO LIQUOR RECOVERY
* SODIUM BASE
—I—
TO
80
—r
90
PERCENT WASTEPAPER USED
-------
OJ
CTl
FIGURE V-16
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS PERCENT WASTEPAPER USED
SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATEGORY
60lJO)-i
50(25)-
30 (IS I •
Q
O
1C
< 20(101-
51
*
O
0 (0)..-
0
LtGl.Np
O NO GUI fUH I'M I'lNG
^ AMMONIA UASt
EJ NOH RtPRt SENTATIVE Mil IS
X NO LlOUOH Rt(,OV£HV
» SO01UM HASt
IO
20
40 50
PERCENT WAS1EPAPER USED
80
-------
TAliLK V-7
SUMMARY RAW WASTF. LOAD DATA
UNBI.F.AaiF.D KRAFT AND SEMI-CHEMICAL SUBCATKGORY
F,irnish(%)(a)
Mill No. Semi-Chem
015001 (c)(20% bag pructiiction
Avrrajji- for mills using varying amounts of grivn
liquor for pulpitij^
KI'T Haw Waste Loart
Avrr.iRr. of Mills with
-------
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 where higher percentages of bag papers are produced. As shown
in Table V-7, the average raw waste loadings for the three mills where
greater than 20 percent of the final product is bag paper are lower
than the overall subcategory averages. In fact, the mill (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 for 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.
Papergrade Sulfite (Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade
Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories). Table V-9 presents available raw
waste load data for 17 mills characteristic of these subcategories.
138
-------
TABLE V-8
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Mill No.
Production
(t/d)
Flow
BODS
TSS
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
046001(a) 421
046002(b) 560
046003 620
046004(f) (e)
046005 (e)
046006(a) (e)
Average
BPT Raw Waste Loads are
Nitration
Viscose
Cellophane
Acetate
228.7 (54.8) 154.1 (308.2)
259.1 (62.1)(c) -- (--)
265.0 (63.5)(c)(d) 114.5 (228.9)
190.7 (45-7) 97.2 (194.4)
358.5 (85.9) 276.0 (552.0)
182.8 (43.8) 99.2 (198.3)
161.0 (321.9)
258.7 (62.0)
dependent on processes used
275.0 (66.0) 137
275.0 (66.0) 156
275.0 (66.0) 181
303.4 (72.7)(g) 266
29.3 (58.6)
(")
11.2 (22.3)
39.6 (79.2)
53.6 (107.1)
31.3 (62.7)
.0 (321
and are as follows:
.0 (274.0) 92.5 (185.0)
.0 (312.0) 92.5 (185.0)
.5 (363.0) 92.5 (185.0)
.0 (531.9)(g) 92.5 (185.0)
(a) Data obtained from responses by mill representatives to a 1981
questionnaire.
(b) Total raw waste BOD5 and TSS data are not available.
(c) Flow data obtained from telephone conversations with mill repre-
sentatives in 1981.
(d) Flow data based on 1981 process flow and corresponding 647 ton/day
production rate.
(e) Production data held confidential.
(f) Raw waste loads include wastewater from a dissolving sulfite pulp mill and
a paper mill. Therefore,data were not included in the averages.
(g) The flow and BOD5 are representative of the raw waste load associated with
the production of acetate grade dissolving pulp at the time the remanded BPT
BOD5_ limitation was promulgated in 1977.
139
-------
1AIII.K V-9
SUMMAKY KAW WASTE f.OAl) DATA
PAPKKCKAOE SUmTK SUBCATECOKY
Production Profn
1 Oil-site
Haw Waste Load
Mill No.
040001 (h)
040002(d)
(l/'JL
(c)
547
040006(c)(f)ril
04000 7(e Kg) 135
040008 (.1)
040009 (d)
040010(10
040011 (.1)
0400 1 2 (d)
0400 l)(d)
0400 1 4 (d)
0400 1 5
04001o(d)
040017(d)
0400 1 8 (d)
04001 9(i )
040020(d)
964
566
244
284
270
289
146
155
437
412
359
(<•')
671
Sulfite Pulp Process
Produced Tyjue Wash Base_
82
101
8'J
100
78
41
32
39
72
56
59
100
61
42
34
52
57
Corrug
Market
Tissue
Ti ssue
Market
Market
Ti ssu
Marke
Writi g
Marki-
Glabs i\e
Package
Wri t ing
Thin
Writi ng
Print ing
Printing
Wri t ing
Laninat ing
Market
Wr i t ing
Prim ing
Market
Tissue
Tissue
Tissue
BP
BP
BP
«P
BP/DK
I)K
BP
BP
DK
l)l(
RP
BP/DR
I)N
RP
I)K
I1R
I)R
NH3.BS
Ca.Na
A, BS
NII3.A
NH3.A
NII3.A
Mj(0,BS
Ca.A
Cd,A
NH3,A
MgO , BS
Ca,A
Cd , BS
N1I3.BS
Ca,A
Ca,A
NH3.A
NH3.A
Condenser
U
Ba,S
S
None
Ba,S
S
S
Ba,S
Vr
S
S
S
S
S
S
Vr
Ba
Flow
kl/kkg (k£al/l) kg/kk£
135.
313.
346.
196.
186.
83.
290.
97.
225.
136.
170.
—
159.
116.
131.
58.
100.
2
0
8
1
5
9
0
6
3
5
.3
4
4
4
8
6
(32.
(75.
(83.
(47.
(44.
(20.
(69.
(23.
(54.
(32.
(40.
( —
(38.
(27.
(31.
(14.
(24.
/,)
0)
I)
0)
7)
1)
7)
4)
0)
7)
8)
)
2)
9)
5)
1)
1)
68
84
-
421
-
48
27
45
58
41
109
-
109
97
74
-
36
.7
. 1
-
.3
-
.9
.9
.0
.5
.4
.4
-
.3
. 1
.2
-
.3
BOD5
"(Tb/l) k_B/_k
(137
(168
(--
(842
(--
(97
(55
(89
(117
(82
(218
(-
(218
(194
(148
(-
(72
.3)
.2)
)
.5)
)
.7)
.8)
.9)
.0)
.8)
.7)
-)
.5)
.2)
.4)
-)
.5)
--
21 .
--
--
--
28.
51 .
25.
90.
31.
19.
--
140.
37.
65.
--
11 .
TKS
k& 11I1/.L
0
6
3
9
0
9
3
2
1
1
9
(--)
(42.0)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(57. 1)
(102.5)
(51.8)
(180.0)
(63.7)
(38.6)
(--)
(280,3)
(74. 1)
( 1 30 . 2 )
(--)
(23 .7 _)
Ave r.igi;
58(j)
BIT Kaw Wast.- Load
blow Pit Wash
Ilisul I i te-Surfaie
Bi .su 1 I i tc-Baronict r i c
Acid Kill I i te-SurlaC.'
Acid Stil I i li'-BariiineLric
Drum Wrjsh
Bisult itc-Surlace
R i su 11 11 f-BaroiiirLr i c
Arid Sul liu-Surl.ice
Ai-iil Kill I i le-Bdioim'li ic
156.5 (37.5) 68.9 (137.7) 50.0 (99.9)
186.0 (44.5) 116.0 (232.0) 90.0 (180.0)
221.0 (53.0) 116.0 (232.0) 90.0 (180.0)
186.0 (44.5) 121.0 (242.0) 90.0 (180.0)
221.0 (53.0) 121.0 (242.0) 90.0 (180.0)
186.0 (44.5) 134.0 (168.0) 90.0 (180.0)
221.0 (53.0) 134.0 (168.0) 90.0 (180.0)
186 0 (44.5) 103.5 (207.0) 90.0 (180.0)
221.0 (53.0) 103.5 (207.0) 90.0 (ISO 0)
BF
B
BF
B
BF
BF
F
KF
-------
T/V-LK V-9 (Continued)
Average of NI13 base acid mills
Average of Nil:) li.ise bisulfite mills
Average- of MgO base bisulfite mills
Average of Ca base only and acirl only mills
Average ol Ca base acid mills with drum wash
Average of Mills with SRPT ROD5
170
159
1 10
128
131
lr>2
.7
.4
2
.9
.4
.7
(40
(38
(26.
(30.
(31.
(36
y)
.2)
4)
.9)
'.)
.6)
47
109
45
81
74
66
./.
.3
.2
.4
.2
. 1
(94
(218.
(90.
(162
(148
(1.12.
8)
r, )
.'»)
8)
4)
.^)
SI
140
30
36
6r>
36
.0
.2
.2
.9
. 1
.8
1 101
(280
( 6C
(71
( 1 30
(7:1
'»
.1)
4J
. /)
.2)
. 'i)
Mill is now closed.
(a) F - mill with S HPT flow; R - mill with $BPT BOD5 .
(b) Pulp w;is not hlcachpil .it this mill snd data a rp thrrrf»rr not inrludnl in .nvprag
(c) Production d.it.i IIP Id confidential.
(d) Raw wast«> flows from thpsr mills wr>rr used to ilevelop 'he- empirical relation bc.-twcrn raw wnste flow anil percent .sulfitc
pulp produced on-site (see Figure V-19).
(e) Pulp mill operations werp shut down shortly after data were gathered. This mill did rtot employ a recnvi-ry system. D.-iln
a rr not included in the averages.
(f) The pulp mill operations werp shut down. Operations a' this mill are now representative of the Nmti nt rx' .1 1 ed-T i ssii*- r.ip<
subc.Tlogory .
(g) Mill is now closed.
(h) This mill produces glassinp papprs. Data are not included in the averages as effluent is not considered typical ol
the subcatcgory.
(i) Only a portion of raw waste load was reported. Mill dita not included in averages.
( j ) The average percent sulfitc pulp produced on-site is b ised on those mills used to develop the empiric1;*! relation hclvc-rn
flow anil percent sulfite pulp (sec footnote d).
-------
At mills in these subcategories, a sulfite cooking process is employed
to produce pulps from which writing, printing, business, and tissue
papers are made; pulps are produced using calcium, sodium, ammonia,
and magnesium cooking bases. The average quantity of papergrade
sulfite pulp produced at these mills is 58 percent of the total raw
material furnish.
Spent liquor recovery systems employed in this subcategory range from
no recovery to the use of spent liquor evaporation systems in
conjunction with modern kraft-type and fluidized bed recovery furnaces
and incinerators. As shown in Table V-9, mills where recovery systems
are not employed have significantly higher flow and BOD5_ raw waste
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
been reviewed with respect to the type of washing system, condenser,
and cooking liquor used.
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 BODS^ and flow. Raw
waste flow and BOD5_ 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 BOD5_ 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 BOD5_ or flow for
mills using blow pit washing compared to drum washing was found.
As illustrated in Figures V-17 and V-18, the percentage of sulfite
pulp production relative to total production was 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 on-site
sulfite pulp production. The correlation coefficient squared
(rz=0.87) reflects the good statistical correlation of the regression.
Figure V-20 presents a plot of BOD5_ raw waste load 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 BOD5. raw waste load
and the cooking process (acid or bisulfite) or cooking base (calcium,
sodium, ammonia, and magnesium) used.
142
-------
120(240)
lOO(ZOO)-
7 60(1601-
60 ( 120)
40( 80H
-------
FIGURE V-18
EFFECT OF WASHING PROCESS ON RAW WASTE FLOW
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
350 (84H
JOO (
- 250(601-
.'OOI48J
150(361-
100(24)
SO f 1
S)
O
LE6ENO
WASHING PROCESS
O DRUM WASHING
El BLOW PIT WASHING
20
30
—,—
40
50
60 TO
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
80
90
100
-------
FIGURE V-19
RAW WASTE FLOW VS. PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
3OO(72)
250(60)
200(48)
*
o
In Ib0(36)
s
I
tOO(24)
50 (
10
L_EGt_N0
• - ACTUAL MILL DATA
1 -. HAW WASTE FLOW
*= PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
» = I2,6?B001'«
R* = 08?
STD, EHBOB EST. = 6.28
._! .. L
20 30
40 50 60 7O
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
BO
a..
90
100
-------
FIGURE V-20
EFFECT OF COOKING PROCESS ON RAW WASTE BODS
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY f
I23(250h
IOO (200)-
73 (ISO)-
o
o
to
u 30(IOO>
23
0 (0)
LEGEND
COOKING PROCESS COOKING BASE
• ACID SULFITE
H BISULFITE
C CALCIUM
No SODIUM
NHj AMMONIA
M«0 MAGNESIUM
• C
Be,No
• C
' NH3
»C
NH3
10
20
40 SO 60
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
70
SO
100
-------
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 are presented in Table
V-10. Included in the table are data representative of 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 reflect the BOD5_ contribution that would
be expected from the production of newsprint from TMP pulp.
EPA reviewed the raw waste load information used to establish BPT
effluent limitations for the groundwood-thermo-mechanical subcategory.
The Agency found that the raw waste load was actually based on a mill
where chemicals were added prior to refining. As shown in Table V-10,
EPA revised the BPT BOD5_ raw waste load to reflect the average load at
mills where wood chips are pre-softened by heating, with no addition
of chemicals.
Groundwood-CMN Papers. Available data on wastewater discharge and
BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loads are presented in Table V-l1 for six mills
where groundwood pulp is produced on-site using either stones or
refiners. Average on-site pulp production is 73 percent based on
total mill production. Major products include newsprint, molded, and
other coarse and specialty groundwood products. 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-ll. 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. Data are available on eight mills
representative of this subcategory. Table V-l2 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.
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.
147
-------
40O(96)-i
330(84)-
300(72)
~ 250(60)-
I 200(461-
*
o
150(36)-
100(24)-
50 (121-
0 (0)
10
FIGURE V-21
EFFECT OF CONDENSER TYPE ON RAW WASTE FLOW
PAPERGRADE SULFITE SUBCATEGORY
LEGEND
TYPES OF CONDENSERS
• SURFACE
(H BAROMETRIC
A VAPOR RECOMP
[•] COMBINED SURFACE AND BAROMETIC
20
4O 50 6O 70
PERCENT SULFITE PULP ON SITE
60
90
IOO
-------
TABT.F. V-10
SUMMARY RAW WASTE I.OAI) DATA
GROUNDWOOD-TII^RHO-HF.CHANICAI. SUBCATF.GORY
f."
vO
fu[p (%)
Mill No. TUP Other GWD (L/d)
070001 90 0 155
070002(b) 88 12 497
O4000.)(c)
Ave rage
MPT Rnw W,.ste Load
Assumed DPT Haw Waste Load
Average of Mills with SBPT flow
Average of Mills with S Assumed BPT BODS
Product
Type kl/k
Coarse, Uncoaled 81.
Printing
Newsprint 33.
Newsprint
57.
88.
88.
57.
57.
Flow
kg (kgal/t)
4 (19.5)
4
6
0
0
6
6
(8.
_tl
(13.
(21.
(21.
(13.
(13.
0)
-)
8)
1)
1)
8)
8)
19.
16.
28.
21.
39.
21 .
17.
17.
BODS
Lkk_8_
.0
.2
.5
.2
.2
.2
.6
.6
(38.0)
(32.3)
.(V7._0)
(42.4)
(78.4)
(42.4)
(35.2)
(35.2)
TSS
41.3
43.4
.„"
42.3
39.9
39.9
42.3
42.3
(_lb/
(82.
(86.
.._(_-
(84.
(79.
(79.
(84.
(84.
t)
-------
TABLK V-ll
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
GROUNDWOOO-CMN PAPERS SUBCATECORy
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
til 11 No
0520 It.
0.'>40()4(1
Or>40(l(,(i
or>40IO(l
o-^oi-,
Average
lil'T HJW
GWD Kurnisli Product
...%_. . (t/d) (t/_d)_. ._ TyEe
78.7 74 94 Newsprint, Fine
79.2 369 465 Newsprint
i) 61.5 39 64 Molded
) 72.4 (c) (c) Molded
• ) 72.7 8 11 Molded
70. 5 693 983 Newsprint,
Special ties
72.5
Wjatc Load
_kj/
99
46.
94.
109.
121 .
118.
98.
99.
I
^k£
.7
.7
.3
.3
.9
.9
.5
.3
•'1 ow
(Mf
(23.
(11
(22.
(26.
(29.
(28.
(23.
(23.
.9)
.2) 20.0
.6) 27.0
.2) 19.1
2)
5) 21.4
6) 21.9
.8) 17.4
BODS
(Ib/t)
(40.0)
(53.9)
(38.2)
(")
(42.7)
(43.7)
(34.8)
TSS
ks/kkg (J.
103.6 (207
56.4 (112
(
47.3 (94
69.1 (138
48.5 (97
b/t) JBP;
") F
.2) F
-7)
")
.5)
.1)
•0)
(d) K-Mi11 with
-------
160(36.4)'
140(33 6)
S I2QJ28.8)
*o
o
IOOS24.OJ-
80(19,2!-
60(14.41-
40 ( 9.6)
FIGURE V-22
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
55
TO T5
PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
9O
-------
FIGURE V-23
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
\>
35(70)-i
30(601-
5 25I5O)-
2OMO)-
15(30)-
10(201-
51 IO)J
50
55
60
65
7O 75
PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
80
85
90
95
-------
TAB1.K V-12
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
C;ROUNI)WOOI>-KINK PAPERS SUBCATECORY
Mill No.
052003
052 004
052005
052007
052008
052013
052014
054014
Avi? rage1
HPT Kaw
Average
Avt- rage
Production Profile
GW1) Pulp"" Product
. (%) (i/lL _...." Type
51 .
31.
39.
58.
41.
38.
34.
8_L
47.
Waste Load
0
0
1
0
8
5
0
5
0
of Mills with
of Mills with
535
481
755
224
787
(a)
285
76
*BPT flow
SBPT BOD5
Printing
Coated
Print ing
Printing
Coated
Coated
Coated
Printing
Specialties
Raw Was to Load
Flow
kl/l
88.
65
55
96
54
70
54
61
68
91
64
66
k8
1
i,
(16.
(21.
(15.
(16.
1)
8)
3)
2)
1)
8)
1)
11
4)
9)
4)
0)
12.2
28.6
27.8
--
10. 1
15.6
12.0
16.8
17.6
16.7
17.6
12.5
(24.
(57.
(55.
(-
(20.
(31.
(24.
(12.:
(35.
(33.
(35.
(24.
3)
2)
6)
-)
1)
2)
0)
6_)
1)
3)
1)
9)
61.0
79.2
56.7
--
56.0
41 .4
36.9
46.6
54.0
52.5
54.0
48.8
(II.
(122
( 1 58
(113
(
(112
(K2
(73
(y3
(107
( 105
(107
CJ7
A).
.0)
.<•)
.3)
--)
.0)
.7)
.7)
.2)
.9)
.0)
.9)
.6)
-------
Jl
IIO (26.4)
IOOI24.O)
a 9OIZI.6)
•—
o
8OII9.2)
§
I fO( 16.8)
-------
FIGURE V-25
RAW WASTE BOD5 VERSUS PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
30 (60)
25 (SO)-
20(401
13(30)
* 10(20)
5(10)
0(0)
20
30
40
50 60 70
PERCENT GROUNDWOOD PULP ON SITE
80
9O
100
-------
Integrated Miscellaneous Mills. Available data on wastewater
discharge and BODJi 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 specific 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 BODI5 data were 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. No apparent correlation exists between
flow and BOD5^ raw waste loads as a function of the percentage of
deinked pulp produced on-site.
However, because of differences in flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads, EPA
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.
Tissue from Wastepaper . Data are available for 21 mills
representative of this subcategory. Principal products are sanitary
and industrial tissue, including 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 ^
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
129 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.
156
-------
TABLE V-I3
SWWARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
INTEGRATED MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Production
Hill No. A
010010 4IK
0100! 1 3K
010012 209K
0)0013 I01K
010014 137K
010015 232K
010022 140K
010026 I35K
010027 (b)
010039
010050 615*
010056
010059
015010 638UK
030O03
0300O7
030008 20K
030011 251K
030014
0.10016
030017 (b)
030019 494
030021 69S
030025 1 68K
030029 (b)
030035
030036
030038 (c)
030040 185K
030041 164K
030043 (b)
030044 92K
030050
030053
030054 (b)
030055 (h)
030056
040003 721,
040004
040005
B
798U1C
156U
335UK
751UK
1,1931)
264U
—
505UIT
(b)
—
—
—
—
—
310U
633W
416UK
—
169K
—
(b)
--
—
—
(b)
—
—
—
I19KU
—
(b)
9671IK
(b)
(b)
413KU
—
--
--
C
903USK
8651!
336UK
—
—
68211
1,0070
—
(b)
61 7U
7 SOU
1,59008*
934US
2S9US
975US
528KU
406K
—
—
1,1371*
(b)
—
—
—
(b)
1 ,050K
—
1.4IOUK
—
—
(b)
670K
1,549X5
—
(b)
(b)
I68K 1
—
--
..
Profile (t/d FuroiibK*)
D
..
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
(b)
—
—
—
--
23K
878W
--
—
394K
527K
—
(b)
100KG
292E
439K
(b)
--
—
—
43IK
140K
(b)
854K
—
--
(b)
(b)
,019K
--
185).
--
B
_.
4S4
—
—
—
--
—
—
(b)
326
--
—
—
—
—
--
--
—
—
—
(b)
226
593
--
(b)
454
--
--
--
--
(b)
—
--
356
(b)
(b)
--
420 LOG
—
--
r
..
—
—
—
—
—
«
20RK
(b)
«
—
—
—
-„
—
.,
2*5
—
713
—
(b)
—
—
—
(b)
..
—
—
10IK
49K
(b)
—
--
..
(b)
(b)
--
--
_,
i?3r,P
G
112
—
9
—
—
—
—
33K
(b)
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
—
—
11K
—
(b)
--
—
—
(b)
--
—
.-
—
-_
(b)
—
—
__
(b)
(b)
--
--
..
--
Total
1,854
1,478
889
852
1,330
1,178
1,146
881
2.5)
( 188-6)
C2>' .3)
(35.4)
-------
TABI.K V-IJ (Coul i f
1 1 ill No .
052006
052009
052010
052011
052017
054001
054002
054003
054005
054008
054009
05401 1
054012
05401.)
054016
054017
06000 1
060002
000003 (< )
080010
08001 1
080012
080013
,._. 080014
^ 080015
OK0016
080020
080023
080025
080035 (
-------
T\BI.E V-13 (Continued)
Raw Waste Loot!
Mill No.
150018
150020
150026
150029
A
85T
8N
1ST
(b)
Production Profile (t/d furni ;h) (a
B C D E F G
-.- -. „_, -- -_ _-
123N
-.
(b) (b) (b) (b) (b) lb)
)
Total
85
131
18
(b)
Flow
kl/kkg_ (kgal/t) _kg/kk{
122.7 (29.4) 3.8
577.6
74.7 (17.9)
BODS T
[ (Ib/t) kg/kkg
( 7 . ( > ) 11.8
(1)55.2) 441.0
67.6
— —
sr
(ii./t)
(2:1.5)
(RB2.0)
(135.2)
(a) Product Designations
A. Market Pulp
B. Packaging and Converting Products
C. Board and Construction Products
D. Printing Writing and Related Papers
E. Newsprint
F. Sanitary Tissue
G. Other - Includes specialty, thin, synthetic,
non-wood (other than cotton writing),
construction, and molded papers.
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 synthetics)
M. Chemi-Mechanical
L. Sulfite
P. Greater than 50% purchased pulp
0. Thermo-Mechanical
X. Soda
Y. Deinked
(b) Production data held confidential.
(c) Mill is closed.
(d) Mill was an integrated miscellaneous mill at time of data collection, but has subsequently ceased pulping operations
and is now classified as Nonintegrated-Fine Papers (I otton Fiber Furnish).
-------
TABLE V-14
SUHHAK7 RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
OEINX SUBCATEGORT
Production Profile
Furnish (t/d)
Hill Ho.
Deink Fine
140005
140007
140008
140017
140019
Average
(t/d) (a)
188
155
77
(d)
43
X0>) WP
SI —
57 55
62 9
61 (d)
60 —
Pureh (t/d)
Pulp Broke
166
54
10
(d)
8
19
41
29
(d)
18
Product
(t/d)
379
349
128
(d)
65
Type
Uactd Print
Writing
Ctd & Unctd
Printing
Unctd Print
Writing
Ctd Print
Unctd Print
BPT lUw Watte Load
Average of
Average of
Hill* with
Hill* vitb
san flow
SBPT JOD5
Flow
kl/kkg
100.1
53.8
114.8
126.0
44.7
88.1
102.0
66.4
88.1
(kgal/t)
(24.0)
(12.9)
(27.5)
(30.2)
(10.7)
(21.1)
(24.4)
(15.9)
(21.1)
Raw
Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
17.4
55.0
72.8
20.4
20.9
37.3
90.0
31.1
37.3
(Ib/t)
(34.8)
(110.0)
(145.5)
(40.7)
(*!.«)
(74.6)
(180.0)
(62.2)
(74.6)
TSS
kg/kkg
197.3
162.1
189.0
216.0
106.0
174.1
202.5
155.1
174.1
(Ib/t)
(394.6)
(324.1)
(377.9)
(432.0)
(211.9)
(348.1)
(405.0)
(310.2)
(348.1)
SBPT
(c>
BF
BF
B
B
BF
Dei ilk Tiaaue
140010
140029(e)
140030(f)
140011
140014
140015
140018(g)
140021
140022
140024
140025
140028
(d)
20
60
(d)
(d)
(d)
36
170
56
(d)
92
(d)
Average
BPT Raw Waate Load
Average of Hills with
Average of Mill, with
Deink Mevsprint(g)
140002 (h)
140003 (h)
I40013(h)
Average
50 (d)
73
40 30
96 (d)
94 (d)
100 (d)
97
87
48
100 (d)
85
99 (d)
SBPT flow
SBPT BOD5
(d)
6
30
(d)
(d)
(d)
26
(d)
4
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
(d)
1
20
6
(d)
11
(d)
(d)
22
100
(d)
(d)
(d)
36
150
50
(d)
100
(d)
San Tissue
a«a Tissue
San Tiaiue
San Tissue
San Tissue
Tissue
Ind Wrap, Tissue
San Tiasue
San Tiasue
San Tiaaue
San Tiasue
San Tissue
118.1
--
75.1
90.6
90.6
139.8
25.5
205.7
166.9
203.2
62.6
156. 1
136.9
102.0
81.4
119.3
(19.5)
(28.6)
56
104
73
80
148
35
112
87
90
71
61
.7
.3
.2
.3
.3
.9
.6
.2
.0
. 1
.3
(113.4)
(208.5)
(146.3)
(160
(296
(71
(225
(174
(180
(142
(122
/
.5)
-5)
-8)
.1)
.3)
.0)
.2)
.6)
166
292
225
24?
320
161
375
251
202
226
192
.6
.1
.8
.3
.8
.6
.2
.0
.5
.5
. 1
(333
(584
(451
(494
(641
(323
(7jO
(501
(405
(453
(384
.2)
-2)
• 5)
.5)
.6)
•2)
^3)
• 9)
.0)
.0)
.2)
BF
F
BF
F
B
BF
67.6 (16.2) 15.9 (31.7) 96.8 (193.5)
(a) Wastepaper to deink proceas.
(b) Percentage of deink pulp used calculated by subtracting waatepaper, 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-
duction.
(c) F - Hill with SBPT flow.
B - Hill with SBPT BODS.
(d) Production data held confidential.
(e) Self-contained; not included in averages.
(f) Operates with low deink use. Not included in averages.
(g) Produces a coarse grade and recirculates approximately 50% of its treated effluent. Not included in averages.
(h) Production and raw watte load data held confidential.
160
-------
240(5/6)
200 (480)
S 160(38.4)-
*
o
I
120(28 81-
80(19.21-
40 ( 961-
0 (0||
20
FIGURE V-26
RAW WASTE FLOW VERSUS PERCENT DEINK PULP PRODUCED
DEINK SUBCAfEGORY
LfcGENO
PRODUCT TYPE
O DEINK - FINE
A OEINK - TISSUE
A A
O
30
SO 6O 70
PCHCCNT DEINK PULP USED
ao
90
100
-------
FIGURE V-27
RAW WASTE BODS VERSUS DEINK PULP PRODUCED
DEINK SUBCATEGORY
150(3001
125 (2SO>-
100 UOOl-
8
e
tol
I
*
73(190).
SO (I DOl-
25 ( 5OI-
0(OJ
LEGEND
PRODUCT TYPE
G OEINK-FINE
A DEINK - TISSUE
40
00
SO 6O 7O
PERCENT DEI NX PULP USED
• 0
9O
100
-------
TABLE V-15
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPER SUBCATEGORY
Raw Waste Load
Production
Flow
Mill No. (t/d) kl/kkg
(kgal/t)
BOOS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
TSS
kg/kkg
(lb/t)
SBPT(b)
I. Industrial Tissue
090002 19.5
085004 47.0
085006 (a)
090006(c) 10.5
100005 15.2
100011 11.2
100012(c) 7.0
100015 5.5
100001 (a)
Average w/o
Self-Contained Mills
II. Sanitary Tissue
090004 20.0
090010 (a)
100002 7.5
100003 83.0
100004 15.0
100007 (d) 20.0
100008 16.0
100013 20.0
100016 7.3
105007(c) 11.9
090014 40.7
100014(c)(d) 20.7
Average w/o
Self -Contained Mills
Overall Average w/o
Self-Contained Mills
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of All Mills
with SBPT flow
Average of All Mills
with SBPT BOOS
72.6
141.9
138.1
29.2
62.2
35.5
84.7
99.7
59.7
76.8
51.7
(17.4)
(34.0)
(33.1)
(7.0)
(U.9)
(8.5)
(20.3)
(23.9)
(14.3)
(18.4)
(12.4)
22.4 (44.7)
37.6 (75.1)
14.2 (28.4)
106.4
103.3
46.7
38.0
(212.8)
(206.5)
(93.3)
(76.0)
F
BF
6.5 (13.0)
20.2 (40.3)
18.8 (37.6)
8.7 (17.3)
13.3
65.3
59.4
9.2
(26.5)
(130.5)
(118.7)
(18.4)
BF
F
F
BF
156.5
237.9
22.1
138.5
9.2
120.2
111.0
105.0
68.0
88.9
(37.5)
(57.0)
(5.3)
(33.2)
(2.2)
(28.8)
(26.6)
(25.2)
(16.3)
(21.3)
9.3 (18.6)
53.5 (107.0)
22.0 (44.0)
22.5
21.5
14.5
12.1
9.7
(44.9)
(42.9)
(29.0)
(24.1)
(19.3)
88.9
128.0
68.2
70.7
68.3
110.5
30.0
37.4
(177.8)
(255.9)
(136.3)
(141.4)
(136.5)
(221.0)
(59.9)
(74.7)
B
(a) Production data held confidential.
(b) F-Mill with SBPT flow; B-Mill with SBPT BOOS.
(c) Extensive wastewater recycle performed; not included in averages.
(d) Mill is now closed.
163
-------
TABI.K. V-16
CTi
Mi 11
No.
A B _C I)
NoMforrugal ing Medium Fumi sh
SUMMARY RAW WASTK LOAD DATA
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPKR SUBCATK.GORY
production Profile ^t/d) (a) R.iw Waste Load
Percent
Corrugated Flow _ BOD5 TSS
E F _G Total Furnish kl/kkg (kgal/l) kg/kkg (Ib/l) kg/kkg (ll'/tj *BPT(I>)
085002
085009
110001 (c
110002
1 I0003(p
1 10004
110005
I 10006
1 1(1007
1 10008
110009
1 1001 1
110012
1 1 00 1 3
1 1 00 1 5
110016
110017
1 1 00 1 ft
110019
1 10020
110022
110023
110024
110026
110029
11(1031
110032
110033
110034
1 1 0035
1 10036
110037
1 10038
110039
110040
110041
1 10043
110044
110045
110046
) 300 250 240
45
) (c) (c) (c)
_
16
.
-
.
94
14
...
(410
-
_
-
_
_
138
223 90
_
2
-
_
9f> - -
.
_
_
-
-
(<) (c) (r)
(c) (r) (c)
8B - 16
130
108
100
_
170
-
(c)
-
130
127
170
58
-
35
208
C+D
-
-
-
18
9
Z3
-
-
-
-
-
74
-
-
150
61
89
92
(c)
(r)
-
30
-
175
-
-
-
(c) (<)
178
16
-
-
14
-
-
-
) -
-
-
-
25
23
-
-
-
-
133
150
-
-
165
27
-
57
-
(c) (c)
(<•) (c)
-
-
-
25
-
35
90
-
(r)
-
-
-
-
-
-
122
-
-
79
49
84
36
54
17
-
24
150
-
-
-
-
-
44
-
20
3
(c)
(c)
-
-
-
-
-
35
90
960
45
(r)
178
162
127
170
72
94
171
208
410
79
49
84
79
86
40
138
337
150
135
150
74
96
165
221
61
166
95
(c)
(r)
104
160
-
300
36
56
ft
59
31
19
10
46
24
18
45
7
40
18
22
0
0
0
49
20
17
26
56
71
0
63
44
6)
R2
II
5
9
28
16
IB
Ift
35
46
39
3/.
ft?
37.1
28.4
0.4
20.9
15.9
10.0
16.3
23.4
17.9
15.9
25.5
(8.9)
(6.8)
(0.1)
(5.0)
(3.8)
(2.4)
(3.0)
(5.6)
(4.3)
(3.8)
(6.1)
--nr I I -con ta
8.9
12.5
2.0
--
13.0
32. 1
Srt 1 f /"lift 1 -i
PI i - L<*n i «i
20 . 3
3.6
7.3
4.5
12.5
C.. 1 t _ /•'.,., 1 -»
i nrn
(17.7)
(25.0)
(3.9)
(--)
(25.9)
(64.6)
i f\ttr\
1 tl«'Cl - ~
( 40 6 )
(7.1)
(14.6)
(9.0)
(25.0)
12.6
19.3
10.8
--
12.1
23.'.
6.4
8.2
11.1
103
35 . 9
(25.2)
(3R.5)
(21.5)
(--)
(24.2)
(47.2)
(12. R)
(16.3)
(22.2)
(20.6)
(71.7)
n
K
KB
K
K
r
F
KB
FB
rB
K
_ c~ i r f.,., t -,;„„.!
2.5
__
76 4
4.2
9.6
7. 1
18.8
83
40.9
31.3
25.0
35.9
18.8
30.0
37. 1
(0.6)
(--)
(18.3)
(1.0)
(2.3)
(1.7)
(4.5)
(2.0)
(9.R)
(7.5)
(6.0)
(8.6)
(4.5)
(7.2)
(8.9)
--Srlf-Cnnla
__
14.1
3.2
— Sc 1 f -Con t a
7.5
13.0
3.7
--Sp 1 f -Cont a
12.5
15.4
9.7
5.2
i nrd
/ •)
\ /
(2R.21
(6.3)
( 14.9)
(26.0)
(7.3)
i ncfi
(24.9)
(30.8)
(19.4)
(10.4)
1.0 (1.9)
Sri f-("ontrtiiif*«i)
1.0 (2.0)
--
(--)
-_
21 .R
2. )
R.8
--
10. 7
1 .3
13.9
27.2
7.9
4. 1
1 . 1
39 . 3
7. 1
(-")
C-.4.6)
(4.5)
(17.5)
(--)
(21.4)
(2.6)
(27.8)
(54.3)
(15.7)
(R.I)
(2.2)
(7R.5)
(14.2)
1
Ml
FR
K
F
KB
Kfl
B
KB
KH
-------
TABLE ^ -16 (Com i lined)
Hi 1 1
No. A
110047
110048
110050
110051
1 1 0052
I 1005.3
110055 (153
110056 10
110059 (r)
110060 (r)
110061 (r)
110062
110064
110065
110066
110067
110068
110069
110070
110071
110072
110074
110075
110076
110077
110078
1 10079
i i nnft i -
1 lUV/o J *
110082
1 1 OOA1 ( r )
I J V/wO»> V, *• )
110084
110085(d)(e)
i i nnQ A
I HJUoo -
110087
110088
110089
110090
110091
110092
110093
110094
110095 (r)
110096 (r)
Pro,
B C
100
-
32
40
-
-
A+B+C)
(<*) (<~)
(c:) (c)
(c) (r)
(r) (r)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
An
ou
45
(r) (r-)
68
lie
~ 1 1 :>
-
-
54
24
-
49
-
(c) (c)
(«•) (c)
jurtion Profile (t/d) (a)
IV ' rent
Cor: ug.itrd
D
70
-
234
146
-
300
-
-
(c)
(r)
(r)
89
-
-
-
-
-
134
68
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
40
(.y
(102
Q e
0 J
442
43
35
3
36
200
91
-
(<:)
(r)
F.
100
-
-
-
-
-
-
55
(c)
(c)
(c)
3
-
-
120
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- •
-
30
1 r)
D+T.)
-
-
-
20
30
-
-
-
(c)
(r)
F
-
-
-
-
95
-
-
-
(r)
(c)
(c)
-
-
76
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
(r)
105
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
99
(c-)
(r)
G
-
53
5
9
-
-
-
(r )
(c)
(c)
(r)
4
11
-
-
58
437
-
-
58
152
63
68
99
175
63
61
52
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
('•)
(r)
ToL.il_
270
53
271
195
95
300
153
65
(0
(c)
(c)
96
11
76
120
58
437
1.34
68
58
152
63
68
99
175
63
61
An
ou
115
105
222
442
43
35
77
90
200
140
99
(r)
(< )
Fin nisli
23
8
24
33
26
34
99
47
44
56
1
32
26
23
--
20
23
49
34
47
61
0
69
66
54
81
75
81
19
65
11
33
41
29
11
22
27
6
30
21
30
29
kl/kkg
20.0
--
30.5
45.5
25.5
12.9
14.6
21.7
1 L J
i ** . f.
42. 1
--
31.3
34.6
--
5.4
28.8
7.5
30.9
4.2
--
.34.6
--
8.3
4.2
--
2.5
11.. 3
79.7
28 0
15.9
15.0
27.5
27. 1
--
11.7
1.3.4
1 .3
29.6
--
12.5
--
Flow
Kaw W.isLe l.o.nl
BOD5
(kg,il/L) kg/kkg
(4
(-
(7
CO
(6
(3
(3
(5
(10
(-
(7
(8
(-
(1
(6
(1
(7
(1
(-
(8
(-
(2
(I
(-
(0
(2
(19
(ft
\ o
(3
(3
(6
(6
(-
(2
(3
(0
(7
(-
(3
(-
.8)
-)
.3)
.9)
.1)
.1)
.5)
.2)
A ^
• ** /
.i)
-)
.5)
.3)
Scl
-)
.3)
.9)
.8)
.4)
.0)
-)
.3)
-)
.0)
.0)
-)
.6)
.7)
.1)
71
• ' )
.8)
.6)
S_ 1
.6)
.5)
-)
.8)
.2)
.3)
.1)
-)
.0)
-)
6 . 5
--
10.0
10.7
9. 1
8. I
16.4
9.2
in n
i
I 1 . /
26.2
--
8.6
8.2
TSK
(il'/l )
(4.1)
(...)
(71 ")
(26.?)
(10.0)
Ci.5l
(71.5)
(14.1)
( iM 8 )
(52. I)
(-- )
(17.7)
(16.4)
MU'T
I-'B
B
B
M)
f-'R
K
FR
f' M
B
f-Containrd
--
7.7
1.5
6.5
7.4
--
--
10.4
--
--
5. 1
--
--
5.2
K 9
3.2
10.2
ffni-il n
67.5
--
--
1 1.3
R.O
3.8
--
--
21.7
--
(--)
(15.3)
(3.0)
(12.9)
(14.8)
(--)
(--)
(20.8)
(--)
(--)
(10.2)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(10.4)
( 1 7 R\
\ 1 / . O )
(6.4)
(20.3)
: -. -, j
(135.0)
(--)
(--)
(22.6)
(15.9)
(7.5)
(--)
(--)
(43.3)
(--)
--
9.8
1 .5
--
16.5
--
--
26.6
--
--
2.5
--
--
6.9
3.5
10.8
4.6
15.8
16.9
--
--
7.5
8.9
2.2
2fl.O
--
•'. . 0
(--)
(19.6)
(3.0)
(--)
(T).O)
(--)
I--)
(53.7)
(--)
(--)
(4.9)
(-- )
(--)
(13.;)
(6.9)
(21 . 5 )
(9.1)
(31.5)
( il . 7 •
(--)
( -- )
(149)
(17. R)
(4.3)
f 55.'l 1
f--)
( 7 . ') )
(-- )
KB
in
FB
It
F'
R
1
FH
F
B
KB
IB
FR
1
I-'
1-
i-n
II!
1
r
-------
TABLE V-16 (Continued)
Production Profile (t/d) (a;
Hill
No.
110097
110098
1 10099
110100
1 10101
110102
110103
110)04
110105
110106
110107
110108
110110
110111
1101 12
110113
110114
110115
110116
110117
110118
110119
110120
110121
110123
110124
11012!)
110126
110127
110128
110129
110130
110133(c)
1 10134
110115
110118
110140
110141(x)
110142
110141
110144
1 l(M45(e)
1 101 46
11014.7(0
)
Rav Waste Load
Percent
Corrugated Flov BODS
A
1
40
(c)
(c)
27
(c)
fc)
20
61
B
282
(r)
6
74
(0
(r)
23
49
C
93
5
61
(c)
200
30
101
(c)
(c)
14
38
66
49
85
7
20
15
D
54
108
(c)
90
(r)
136
6
6
195
(c)
(c)
76
Crl
41
30
12
13
234
E
8
50
(c)
D+E)
(r)
(r)
3
96
24
(c)
(c)
(r)
42
115
F
198
(c)
192
(c)
(r)
(c)
(c)
(c)
11
220
16
G
112
(c)
70
(c)
(c)
(r)
27
70
54
12
69
(c)
(r)
5
122
123
Total
206
128
390
61
198
50
(c)
(c)
262
114
90
(c)
(c)
(c)
(c)
136
206
27
79
54
42
170
128
99
195
(O
(c)
90
(c)
(r)
38
(c)
118
220
104
211
208
62
234
43
64
115
Furnish
92
53
80
60
33
0
80
74
80
42
16
3
43
21
21
62
26
43
0
46
0
44
32
69
53
2
3
29
45
69
38
14
54
74
40
47
41
45
15
95
53
24
42
98
22
kl/kkg
15.9
13.8
8.8
12.9
9.6
1.3
12.1
9.6
17.1
8.8
15.9
6.7
5.4
14.6
28.0
10.8
7.1
18.4
45.5
1.3
23.4
52.2
6.7
14.2
18.8
10.0
20.0
9.2
7.1
10.8
(kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
(3.8) 10.3 (20.5)
(3.3) -- (--)
(2.1) - (--)
(3.1) -- (--)
(2.3) 3. .5 (7.0)
(0.3) 1.6 (3.1)
(2.9) 27.8 (55.6)
Self-Contalued
(2.3) 11.2 (22.4)
(4.1) 3.6 (7.2)
(2.1) 3.4 (6.8)
(3.8) 5.1 (10.1)
(1.6) 2.5 (5.0)
Self-Contained
(1.3) 4.4 (8.7)
(3.5) -- (--)
(6.7) 6.1 (12.1)
(2.6) 7.5 (15.0)
(1.7) 1.2 (2.4)
(4.4) 11.0 (22.0)
(10.9) 12.8 (25.5)
(0.3) 1.0 (2.0)
(5.6) 0.8 (1.5)
(12.5) 12.5 (25.0)
(1.6) - (--)
(3.4) 1.9 (3.8)
(4.5) 8.9 (17.7)
(2.4) 4.9 (9.8)
(4.8) -- (--)
(2.2) 7.0 (13.9)
(1.7) i.l (2.2)
(2.6) 1.8 (3.5)
kg/kkj
2.1
1.4
3.7
O.I
16.3
13.3
4.2
5.0
34.0
0.1
3.4
2.8
1.5
1.5
9.4
32.6
1.5
0.5
19.5
0.3
18.1
4.9
0.7
2.2
TSS
db/t)
(4.2)
(2.8)
(7.3)
(0.2)
(32.5)
(26.5)
(8.4)
(10.0)
(68.0)
(0.2)
(6.7)
(5.5)
(3.0)
(2.9)
(18.8)
(65.2)
(3-0)
(0.9)
(39.0)
(0.6)
(36.1)
(9.7)
I'-}
(1.4)
(4.4)
SBPT(b)
FB
F
F
F
FB
FB
F
FB
FB
FB
FB
FB
FB
F
FB
FB
FB
FB
FR
FB
F
FB
FH
KB
F
FB
KB
FB
-------
TABIK V-16 (Continued)
Production Profi 1 e (t/dj (a)
Raw Waste Load
Mi 11
P-rcent
Corrugated Flow
No. A B C D E F G Total Furnish
110149 - 3
110150 75 35 -
110151 20 28
110152 - - (115 C+D+F.)
150019 ------
Average of <100 pen cut corrugated furnish
(w/o self-contained mills)
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of <100 percent corrugated furnish
Average of <100 percent corrugated furnish
Corrugating Medium Furnish
110010 ------
110014 90
110025 45 408 -
110028 8.) -
110030 - 126 -
110049 (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c
110054 97
110057 (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c
110073 - 150 -
110139 23 87 - - - -
Average of 100 percent corrugated furnish
(w/o self-contained mills)
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of 100 percent corrugated furnish
Average of 100 percent corrugated furnish
3 73
60 57
48 55
115 18
1 I 0
mills
mills ^BPT flow
mills SBPT BODS
10 10 100
90 100
453 100
83 100
126 100
) (c) (c) 100
97 100
) (c) (c) 100
150 100
110 100
mills
mills «BPT flow
mills ?BPT BOD5
Average of All Mills (w/o self-contained mills)
Average of All Mills SRPT flow
(a) A = Linerlioard
B = CoiTiig^l ing
C = Chip f. Filter Board
n - Folding Board
E = Set-up Board
F - Gypsum Wai 1 hoard
C = Other Board Products
(h) F-Mills t included in averages of mills rmp
BODS .
iloying corrugating lurnish
BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (lb/t)
1.7
--
12.9
20.0
19.2
30.0
14.2
17.5
__
3.3
10.8
0.8
5.0
2.9
—
30.5
(0.4)
(--)
(3.1)
(^8J
(4.6)
(7.2)
(3.4)
(4.2)
(--)
(0.8)
(2.6)
(0.2)
(1.2)
(0.7)
(--)
(7.3)
—
—
4.3
"_
9.2
11.3
8.8
5.9
—
13.2
19.3
0.6
--
5.4
--
17.5
(")
(--)
(8.6)
LIT/..-
(18.4)
(22.5)
(17.5)
(11.7)
(--)
(26.4)
(38.6)
(1.2)
(--)
(10.7)
(--)
(35.0)
kg/kk;
—
--
6.4
— —
10.4
11.0
8.7
7.8
--
11.1
2.3
1.3
5.1
2.8
--
28.5
TSS
g (lb/t)
<::>
(--)
(12.8)
(-.- )
(20.8)
(21.9)
(17.4)
(15.5)
(--)
(22.2)
(4.6)
(2.6)
(10.2)
(5.6)
(--)
(57.0)
SBPT(b)
F
FB
F
FB
FB
FB
F
FR
B
Self-Contained
--
8.8
30.0
4.6
8.8
18.4
13.4
(--)
(2.1)
(7.2)
(1.1)
(2.1)
(4.4)
(3.2)
—
11.2
23.0
9.6
11.2
9.2
8.7
as corrugating data were not
(--)
(22.4)
(46.0)
(19.2)
(22.4)
(18.4)
(17.4)
provided by
--
8.5
11.0
4.5
8.5
10.2
8.3
mill
(--)
(17.0)
(21.9)
(9.0)
(17.0)
(20.3)
(16.6)
personnr 1 .
(g) Mill se' 1 f -rout a i ned through spray irrigation of mill pfHiM-nt.
-------
Attempts were made to determine if product mix has any affect on raw
waste load characteristics. Two types of multiple regression analyses
with one dependent variable were performed on the raw waste load data
presented in Table V-16. No significant correlation was 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 190 kkg/day (210 tons/day), with slow-speed
machines. All product types are being produced at self-contained
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. Various molded products are
produced at these mills including food packs (e.g., 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 169 kkg/day (186 tons/day) and
have an average size of 44.2 kkg/day (48.7 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.
The individual products are formed in one operation, pressed, and then
dried.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt. Table V-19 presents available data
on wastewater discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loadings at 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 23 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.
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
168
-------
Mill
Number
TABLE V-17
METHODS OF WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AT SELF-CONTAINED
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER MILLS
Method of Handling Wastewater
Sludge
Disposal
085002 Settling basins and sand filters with total recycle. Unknown
110007 Rotating screen, 2 clarifiers, partial reuse of clarified Landfill
wastewater, remainder to evaporation pond.
110015 Savealls and screening of wastewater with total recycle. Unknown
110016 Savealls with total recycle. Unknown
110018 Settling basin with total recycle. Unknown
110026 Savealls with total recycle. Unknown
110033 Savealls with total recycle. Unknown
110037 Screening, clarifier, and settling basin with total recycle. Reused
110044 Savcall v.vtli partial recycle LO process, primary ciaritier Reused
treats remaining wastewater with more recycle, remaining
wastewater (about 2%) treated by ASB with settling basin
and evaporation.
110064 Saveall with total recycle. Unknown
110073 Screen with total recycle. Emergency holding pond and Landfill
recycle also available.
110081 Saveall with total recycle. Emergency overflow to city Unknown
sewer.
110086 Screens, clarifier, settling basins, and clarifier with Landfill
total recycle.
110107 Clarifier with total recycle. Landfill
110116 Unknown. Unknown
110135 Clarifier with total recycle. Unknown
110141 Clarifier with partial recycle, remainder flows to spray Reused
irrigation system.
110142 Saveall with total recycle. Can discharge to POTW when Unknown
required.
110146 Saveall with total recycle. Unknown
169
-------
TABLE V-18
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Production Profile
Mi 11 No.
!">0002(a)(c)
i. 5 00(14 (c)
150005 (a)
l')0<)06(c)
15000?
1 50(109 (a)
1500 10 (a)
15001 1
_ 150021
N
O 150022
150023
150024
150025
J 50028
150030
Average (w/o
Kurni sh
WP
WP
WP
liWD, Pulp
Substitute
WP
News, GWD
Substitute
News
News, Blank,
Purch GWD, K
News, GWD,
Teat Moss
Box Cuttings
C,WD Substitute
(»WD, BLK
9% WP
K, CM), 55% WP
News
K, GWD Substitute
News
self-contained mill)
- (t/!L .
20.0
2.8
5.5
43.7
(b)
(b)
60.0
(b)
16.6
61.8
186.0
93.4
26.5
Hfi
. u
3.0
Product
..._.!H*
Pipe, Conduit
Egg Cartons
Containers
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Egg Cartons, Trays
Molded Products,
Peat Moss
Molded Products
(folded Products
Molded Products
Molded Products
Flower Pots
Molded Products
Average of Recycle Mills (w/o self-contained mill)
Average of Non-Hecycle Mills (w/o
self-contained mill)
Raw Waste Load
Flow
M/.
20
74
25
46
89
18
31
71
173
54
86
85
1 10
_^
68
23
88
kKa..
.4
.7
.0
,3
.7
.8
.3
.4
.2
.7
.8
.1
.2
-._
.4
.8
. 1
L5fi?
(4.
(17.
(6.
(11.
(21.
(4.
(7.
(17.
(41.
(13.
(20.
(20.
(26.
(_„
.L/JLL
9)
9)
0)
1)
5)
S)
5)
1)
5)
1)
8)
4)
4)
_)
(16.4)
(5.
(21.
7)
1)
.?Sik
4.6
--
2.4
10.4
15.9
--
9.4
10.5
5.2
7.6
8.6
5.1
0.2
7.3
5.5
7.9
BODS
kg .OJ>/.i)__
(9.2)
( — )
(4.7)
(20.7)
(31.7)
(--)
(18.8)
(20.9)
(10.4)
(15.2)
(17.2)
(10.2)
(0.4)
(14.5)
(10.9)
(15.8)
TSS
-.Jj/Ms
20. 1
--
8.4
18.9
23.7
0.5
15.0
23.4
11.2
16. »
10.9
12.8
0.9
" .
n.s
11.0
14.8
J]b£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)
( ."_ )
(27.0)
(22.0)
(29.6)
HI'T Raw Waste Load
88. 1
7.9 (15.8)
14.8 (2<>.6)
(a) Mill recycles significant amount o£ process waslewater.
(h) Production data held confidential.
(c) Mijl is closed.
-------
TARi.r v-iy
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
BUILDERS' TAPE:! AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATKGORY
Production Profile
Product
Mill No. Furnish (t/d)
120001 WP,
120002 WP,
120003 WP,
120004 WP,
120005 WP,
120006 WP,
120007 WP,
120008 WP,
120009 WP,
120010 WP,
120011 WP,
120012 WP,
120013(f) WP,
120014 WP,
120015 WP,
120016 WP,
120017 WP,
120018 WP,
120019 WP,
120020 WP,
120021(c) WP,
120022(f) WP,
120023(f) WP,
120024 WP,
120025 WP,
120026 TUP
120027 WP,
120028 WP,
120029 WP,
120030 WP,
120031 TUP
120032(f) WP,
120033 WP,
120034 WP,
WF
WF, Rag
Chips
Rags, GWD
GWI)
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
(d)
69
170
123
90
(d)
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
Type
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Roofing Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Asbestos Felt
Organic Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Roofing Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction Paper
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Roofing Felt
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
Construction Paper
»!?.(••)_..
s
u
s
u
s
s
s
s
s
s
u
u
u
u
u
1)
u
u
u
u
u
u
s
s
u
s
s
u
0
u
Subgroup
....._(.y.. _
w
w
T
G
G
G
W
W
W
T
T
T
W
T
T
T
T
T
W
T
T
W
G
T
w
T
T
T
W
kl7k
65.
3.
8.
4.
1.
26.
..
28.
7.
2.
13.
--
5.
7.
4.
48.
12.
19.
2.
9.
40.
5.
16.
43.
0.
__.
1
3
3
2
3
-_
3
8
5
9
8
0
1
2
--
4
5
2
1
6
9
8
7
4
8
--
Flow
._(*.
(15
(0
(2
(1
(0
(6
(6
(1
(0
(3
(1
(1
(1
(11
(3
(4
(0
(2
(9
(1
(4
(10
(0
E*?/.
.6)
.8)
.0)
.0)
.3)
.3)
_.
.9)
.8)
.7)
-3)
--
.2)
.7)
.0)
.6)
.0)
.6)
.5)
.3)
Raw Waste Load
BOD5
!_)__._ !?iB/kkg. .Oh/0..
(--)
(--)
(--)
5.5 (10.9)
4.2 (8.:))
•
Sel f -Con t. lined
(--)
(--)
2.1 (4.2)
12.8 (25. r>)
8.9 (17. R)
33.4 (66. R)
(-- )
11.2 (22.3)
(--)
C*» 1 ( f*t*nl •» i ntjl
Self -Contained
281.2 (562.4)
5.1 (10.1)
(--1
3.4 (6.R)
24.0 (48.0)
Self -Contained
.8) 22.1 (44.2)
.4)
.0)
.4)
.2)
2.2 (4.3)
6.2 (12.4)
25.7 (51.4)
(--)
Self-Contaitiril
.....
-
-
-
1.
2.
-
-
2.
5.
2.
10.
--
4.
--
7.
33.
8.
--
2.
71.
17.
6.
6.
40.
--
T
kk8
-
-
-
5
2
-
.
3
1
9
1
1
4
4
0
4
6
7
9
0
9
SS
. <»>.
(-
f-
(-
(2.
(4.
'-
(_
<4.
(Id.
(5.
(20.
( --
(R.
( --
(I'-.
(66.
( r>.
(--
(4.
(141.
(IS.
( 1 ).
(12.
(81.
( --
/'.).
-,
- 1
-)
9)
3)
-.
-'
.)
6)
1)
8)
2)
)
2}
)
7)
--
R)
9)
)
7)
2)
4)
R)
0)
R)
)
--
'RIT(_f)
F
F
m
Fn
K
Fl)
r'B
HI
F
KB
F
F'
FB
K
HI
F
K
HI
FR
F
F
-------
TABLK V-19 (Continued)
Mill No
Production Profile
Product
Raw Waste
Subgroup Flow
. Furnish (t/d) Type Finish(a) (b) kl/kkg
120035(f) WP, WF, Rag 71 Construction Paper S
Construction Felt
120036 WP, WF, Rag 54 Construction Paper S
Construction Felt
120037 WP, WF, Rag 49 Construction Paper U
Construction Felt
120038 WP, WF, Rag 51 Construction Paper S
Construction Felt
120041 (d) (d) Construction Paper S
120042 WP, WF, Rag 55 Construction Paper S
120043 WP, WF, Rag 43 Construction Paper 3
120044 WP, WF, Rag 21 Construction Paper S
120045 WP, WF, Rag 36 Construction Paper S
120046 WP, WF, Rag 72 Construction Paper S
120047 WP, WF, Rag 63 Construction Paper U
120049
120050
120052
120054
120056
120057
120058
120059
Average
Average
Average
Average
BPT Raw
Average
Average
(a) -S
(b) W
T
C
0
WP, WF 22 Construction Paper S
WP, WF, Rag 55 Construction Paper U
Pulp
WP, WF 39 Construction Paper U
WP, WF 60 Builders Board U
WP, WF 242 Builders Board S
TMP, WP 125 Construction Paper
TMP, WP, Rag 118 Construction Paper U
(w/o self-contained mills)
Subgroup W (w/o self-contained mills)
Subgroup T (w/o self-contained mills)
Subgroup G (w/o self-contained mills)
Waste Load
of Mills with ?BPT flow (w/o self-contained mills)
of Mills with SBPT BODS (w/o self-contained mills)
= Saturated; U = Unsaturated.
= Predominantly wastepaper furnish.
= Furnish includes TMP.
= Furnish includes other types of groundwood.
= Other furnish.
(c) Mill recycles significant amount of process wastewater. Not
W
W
W
W 5.4
tdj
W
W 4.6
W
W 0.4
W
W 4.6
W
W 10.0
W
0 7.9
T 13.8
8.3
14.6
13.4
2.9
60.0
11.3
9.2
included in averages.
Load
BODS
(kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
(1
(1
(0
(1
.3)
-1)
.1)
.1)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t) SBPT(e)
-Self-Contain
—
;
!
--) F
--) F
— ) F
— ) F
(2
-4)
5.0 (9.9)
7.6
(15
.2) FB
(
(1
(3
(2
(3
(3
(0
(14
(2
(2
— )
.9)
.3)
.0)
.5)
.2)
-7)
.4)
.7)
.2)
—
(
)
3.9 (7.7)
-Self-
14
Contain
.1
(28
-Self-Contain
5
7
15
4
17
11
6
.6
.7
.3
.8
.5
.2
.5
(11
(15
(30
(9
(35
(22
(13
-2)
.1)
-3)
.6)
.6)
.0)
.3)
.0)
—
6.5
15.3
6.3
19.3
11.2
1.8
35.0
12.1
5.4
(
(13
(30
(12
(38
(22
(3
(70
(24
(10
— )
.0) FB
.5) FB
.5)
.5)
.3)
.6)
.0)
-2)
.8)
(d) Production data held confidential.
(e) F
(f) Mi
- mill with SBPT flow; B - mill with < BPT BOD5.
11 is closed.
-------
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 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 less stringent 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
Fibers
Mills.
waste
Secondary
discharge and BOD5^ and TSS raw
secondary fibers mills are presented
these mills, processes are employed that
subcategories or unique processes
characterized by the current subcategorization
Available data on wastewater
loadings at all remaining
in Table V-21. Generally, at
are typical of two or more
are employed that are not
scheme.
Noninteqrated-Fine Papers. Data are available on 36 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 12 kkg/day (13 tons/day) to 987 kkg/day
(1,088 tons/day). The number of machines in use varies widely from
mill to mill; operating units are generally small.
Attempts were 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 BODS^ raw waste loadings do not appear
significantly different at mills where coated paper is produced
compared to mills where uncoated paper is produced. Another major
factor influencing raw waste characteristics is the frequency of
"waste significant" grade changes at mills in this subcategory. Data
are presented for overall subcategory averages comparing mills with
different frequencies of waste significant grade changes: no 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 generally increasing with the frequency of grade changes.
Noninteqrated-Tissue Papers. Available data on raw wastewater
characteristics for 26 mills representative of this subcategory are
shown in Table V-23. Both industrial and sanitary grades of tissue
papers are made, primarily from purchased pulps. Some wastepaper and
173
-------
TABLE V-20
METHODS OF WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AT
SELF-CONTAINED BUILDERS' PAPER AND
ROOFING FELT MILLS
Mill
Number
120006
120007
120017
120018
120020
120026
120027
120029
120034
120040(a)
120041
120048
120051
120055
120056
120058
120059
Method of Handling Wastewater
White water recycle, remainder to evaporation ponds.
Screening, lagoon, clarifier, and irrigation with some
recycle.
Total recycle.
Clarifier and recycle with overflow to city sewer in
cases of emergency.
Total recycle at time of 308 survey; now a
direct discharge.
Clarifier and recycle.
Primary and biological treatment and recycle.
Primary and biological treatment and recycle.
Total recycle.
Saveall, screening, settling pond, and recycle.
Saveall, screening, and recycle.
Saveall, screening, holding tank for process
spill recycle, and evaporation pond.
Neutralization, settling basin, and recycle.
Filtration and recycle.
Screening, clarifier, storage tank, and recycle.
Saveall, clarifier, saveall, and recycle.
Saveall and recycle.
Sludge
Disposal
Unknown
Lagoon
Unknown
Landfill
Unknown
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Landfill
Landfill
Lagoon
Landfill
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
(a) Mill is closed.
174
-------
TABLE V-21
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
SECONDARY FIBERS MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
N
tn
Mill
No.
080002
110042(a)
Il0080(b)
110122
110109
110132
110136
120039
140004
140006
140009
140012
140016
140020
140023
140026
140027
150008
Flow
(t/d)
20
240
536
(c)
533
275
61
350
72
161
138
304
(c)
278
98
319
201
44
Product
Groundwood Specialties
Gypsum Board, Roofing Felt
San Tissue, Linerboard, Corrugating
Electrical Insulation and Fiberboard
Foldingboard, Wetlap Pulp
San Tissue, Linerboard, Corrugating
Chip & Filler Board, Tube Stock
GWD Specialty, Pressboard, Other
Board
Gypsum Wall Board, Construction
Pjper
Sanitary Tissue
Fine, Specialties
Sanitary Tissue
Uncoated Fine Paper
Market Deink
Uncoated Fine Paper
Unctd Fine & GWD, GWD Specialties
Coated, Uncoated Fine
Uncoated Fine
Cotton Fiber, Specialties
kl/kkg
_ ^
35.9
28.0
--
35.5
33.4
--
14.2
34.6
102.7
55.1
34.2
8.3
98.9
99.3
92.2
56 . 3
45.5
(kgal/t)
(")
(8.6)
(6.7)
( — )
(8.5)
(8.0)
(--)
(3.4)
(8.3)
(24.6)
(13.2)
(8.2)
(2.0)
(23.7)
(23.8)
(22.1)
(13.5)
(10.9)
BODS
kg/kkg
_ _
--
--
--
25.0
9.0
--
34.3
--
22.0
13.7
--
34.6
--
14.5
38.4
29.0
3.5
(lb/t
(")
(--)
(--)
(--)
(50.0)
(18.0)
(--)
(68.6)
(--)
(44.0)
(27.3)
(--)
(69.2)
(--)
(28.9)
(76.8)
(58.0)
(7.0)
TSS
(lb/t)
91 .2
17.3
3.4
88.5
46.9
53.9
68.8
70.9
27.6
105.9
105 .0
7.6
(182.4)
(34.6)
15.7 (31.4)
(6.
(176.
(93.
(107.
(137.
(141.
(55,
(211
7)
9)
8)
8)
6)
7)
1)
8)
(210.0)
(a) Data is primary treatment effluent.
(b) Data is representative of secondary fibers miscellaneous operation; since data collection, the mill has
discontinued tissue production and is now classified .is a paperboard from wastepapet mill.
(c) Production data held confidential.
-------
TABLE V-22
SUMMAI'Y RAW WASTE I-OAD DATA
NONINTEGRA I ED-FINE PAPERS SUBCATFGORY
Production Profile
Mill
Number
Percent
Cotton
Furnish
Wood Fihrr Furnish
(t/d) Product
Gra1 grade change/day
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average SBPT Flow - no grade changes
Average SRPT BOD5_ - no grade changes
Average SBPT Flow - <1 grade change/day
Fow
Raw Waistc Load
BOD5 TSS
kg/kkg (lb_/_t_on) kg'/kkg (Hi/ton)
7_9_.7
52.2
48.4
56.8
50. 1
63.0
38.0
21. 7
39.2
18.1 (36.6)
(12.5)
(11.6)
(13.6)
(12.0)
(15.2)
(9.1)
(5.2)
(9.4)
10.9 (21.8)
7.7 (J5.4)
11.4 (22.7)
12.9 (25.8)
35. /.
184
44 5
35.6
(70.7)
(36.R)
(89.0)
(71.1)
10.8
7. 7
9.6
(21.5) .10. B (61.6)
(15.4)
(15.4)
(19.1)
17.0 (34.0)
17.0 (34.0)
29.7 (r>9.4)
*
•4
(.'
I |
1 '
1'
-
-
-
+
-f
+
-
0
I1
-
-
-
-
I.I
•f
t
I!
-
0
-
26.7
35 . 1
68.9
76.8
24.6
17.9
38.0
82.6
45.9
22.5
43.0
96.8
25.9
21 .7
44.7
86.0
110.6
33.0
61.3
11.7
50.5
48.4
73.9
53.0
54.2
71 .4
(6.4)
(8.4)
(16.5)
(18.4)
(5.9)
(4.3)
(9.1)
(19.8)
(II. 0)
(5.4)
(10.3)
(23.2)
(6.2)
(5.2)
(10.7)
(20.6)
(26.5)
(7.9)
(14.7)
(2.8)
(12.1)
(11.6)
(17.7)
(12.7)
(13.0)
(17.1)
9.0
--
6.9
5.9
SI r i
--
13.7
--
--
--
--
25.6
5.8
7. 7
10.5
16.9
14.9
10.8
13.8
3.3
11.1
--
--
3.8
--
--
(17.9)
(--)
(12.8)
(11.8)
~on t a i ned*
(--)
(27.3)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(51.2)
(11.5)
(15.4)
(20.9)
(33-8)
(29.8)
(21.6)
(27.6)
(6.5)
(22.1)
(--)
(--)
(7.6)
(--)
(--)
14.0
--
19.8
25.0
--
--
40. 7
44. 7
--
--
--
85.1'
10.?
17.0
43 . r)
115.2
47. R
41 .8
31 .5
4.'i
18.3
--
--
24.4
--
--
(27.9)
(--)
(39.6)
(50.0)
(--)
(--)
(81 .'))
(89.3)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(170.0)
(20.4)
(34.0)
(87.0)
(230.3)
(95.5)
(83.6)
(62.9)
(8.9)
(36.5)
(--)
(--)
(48. S)
(--
(--)
I-M
F
1!
,,
F
F
F
F
F
Hi
FH
FR
F
F
m
i
F
FH
1-
-------
TABI K V-22 (Continued)
Proilticlion Profile
Raw Waste Load
Grailo
Change
Flow
BOD5
TSS
Percent
Mill Cotton
Number Furnish (t/d) Product /Pnyla)__ _kl/kkg_ (kgal/ton) kj/kjy5/(lb/ton)_ _kg/kkg Ub/ton) 1 grade change/day
Average ?BPT B0115 - >1 grade change/day
Cotton Fihrr Furnish
39.6 (9.5)
37.6 (9.0)
51.7 (12.4)
4.8 (9.6)
10.0 (20.0)
7.1 (U.9)
17.) (34.6)
16.1 (32.2)
19.5 (39.0)
N
N
080003
080004
080032
080042
08004.3
080044
080050
24.0
26.0
4.3
5.0
15.0
16.1
16.7
25
13
(c)
43
30
71
3.3
Cotton
Cotton
Unctd Rag
Unctd Cotton,Carbon
Unctd Print,Artist,Cotton
Unctd Print Cotton
Unctd Print Cotton
Average
Avcrge - > 1 grade change/Hay
BPT Raw Waste Load
Average of Mills SBPT Flow
and S nPT BOD5- >1 grade change/day
1
1
1
1
149
88
118
78
269
141
25
124
176
176
130
.4
.9
. 1
.9
.2
.9
.5
.4
.5
.5
.2
(35
(21
(28
(18
(64
(34
(6
(29
(42
(42
(31
.8)
.3)
• 3)
.9)
-5)
.0)
•11
.8)
.3)
.3)
.2)
6.0
17.9
12.1
19.5
40.7
15.9
13.7
18.0
22.9
22.9
14.0
(12
(35
(24
(39
(81
(31
(27
(35
(45
(45
(28
.0)
• 7)
-2)
.0)
•4)
.7)
.3)
•9)
-8)
.8)
.0)
7.0
65.0
29.4
44.8
86.5
49.7
15.2
42.5
55.2
55.2
39.6
(14
(130
(58
(89
(173
(99
Op
(85
(110
(110
(79
0)
0)
7)
6)
0)
4)
_!)
0)
4)
4)
.1)
KB
FB
KB
FB
FB
FB
(a)-=l;U= unknown.
(b) F-MiJl with SBPT flow; B-Mill with «BPT BOD5.
(c) Production data held confidential.
(d) Raw waste load BOD5 data after primary treatment; B('Q5 data are not included in averages.
-------
TABLE V-23
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NON1NTF.CRATED-T1SSUE PAPERS SUBCATECOHY
OO
Production Profile
Furnish
Mill No. Purch CWI) DI WP
090001 23 -- -- 5
090005(e) (r) (c) (c) (c)
090007 (c) (c) (c) (c)
090008 (c) (c) (c) (c)
090009 (c) (c) (c) (c)
09001 l(e) 62 -- -- 12
090012 62
0900l:)(d) 34 1 -- 3
090016 (c) (c) (O (c)
090017 (c) (c) (c) (c)
0900I8(c) (c) (c) (c) (c)
090019 139 19 -- 48
090020 887 57 -- 5
090021 119 H -- 40
090022 154 7
090023 (c) (c) (c) (c)
090025 6
0'J0026 21 -- S 28
090027 140
090028(d)(e)(c) (c) (c) (c)
090029 41 -- -- 14
090030 (C-) (c) (c) (c)
090031 14 -- -- 4
090032 26 -- -- 4
090033 15 -- -- 1
Average
Average - ndustrial Tissue Only
Average - o grade changes
Averjge - 1 grade change/week
Average - 1 grade change/day
Average - 1 grade change/day
DPT KJW Waste Load
Ave ag.- of Hills ith SBPT flow -
Ave age of Mills ith SBPT BOD5 -
Ave age of Mills ilh SBPT flow -
Ave age of Mills ith SBPT BODS -
Av<- age of Mills ith SBPT flow -
Ave age of Mills ith SBPT BOU5 -
Ave .ige of Mills ith SBPT flow -
Av«- .igi- of Mills ith SBPT BODS -
(t/d)
20
(c)
(c)
(c)
(c)
70
59
37
U)
(c)
(c)
159
890
176
189
(c)
6
50
140
(c)
44
(c)
17
27
14
No grade
No gfade
<1 grade
<1 grade
<1 grade
<1 grade
>1 grade
>1 grade
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
Mixed Product
Sanitary Tis ue
Sanitary Tis ue
Sanitary Tis ue
Industrial T ssue
Sanitary Tis ue
Mixed Produc
Mixed Produc
Mixed Product
changes
changes
change/week
change/week
change/day
change/day
change/day
change/day
Grade
Chaoge/Dayd)
O
0
-
0
-
-
-1"
U
U
-/w
-
U
•fr
•fr
-
-/w
o
U
0
U
0
0
-/w
-
0
Flow
kl/kkg
104
23
78
96
89
78
35
63
56
56
80
103
79
170
66
30
286
74
17
143
94
32
98
177
29
85
99
57
55
122
125
96
39
41
40
--
78
78
79
—
.3
.0
.0
.8
.7
.9
.9
.8
.8
.3
.1
.5
.7
.7
.8
.9
.7
.7
.9
.6
.7
.5
.1
.8
.6
.5
.7
.2
.5
.7
.2
.0
.6
.3
.9
.9
.0
.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)
(20.5)
(23.9)
(13.7)
(13.3)
(29.4)
(30.0)
(22.9)
(9.5)
(9.9)
(9.8)
( — )
(18.9)
(18.7)
(19.1)
(--)
Raw Wsste 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
—
(lb/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
32.0
27.9
42.8
34.7
7.0
6.6
32.0
—
31.3
27.0
54.5
~~
db/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(b)
B
FB
FB
FB
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
FB
F
F
FB
r
FB
FB
(a) - = <1; -/w =
-------
purchased deink and groundwood pulps are also used in the
manufacturing operations.
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. Insufficient
data are available on the production of industrial tissue grades to
determine if there are significant differences in raw waste loads due
to differences in the type of products manufactured.
Noninteqrated-Liqhtweiqht Papers. Available data on raw wastewater
characteristics for 17 mills that are representative of this
subcategory are presented in Table V-24. Lightweight, thin, tissue,
and electrical papers are produced at mills in this subcategory. EPA
attempted to group mills based on product type as illustrated in Table
V-24. 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 BOD5_ raw waste loadings generally increase with the frequency of
grade changes.
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers. Available data on raw
wastewater characteristics for 14 mills representative of this
subcategory are presented in Table V-25. Average production is 15
kkg/day (16 tons/day). At these mills, a wide variety of filter and
nonwoven 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 nonwoven
type papers for personal, sanitary, and disposal uses.
As with the other subcategories in the nonintegrated segment of the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, 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-Paperboard. Available data on raw wastewater
characteristics for 11 mills that are representative of this
subcategory are presented in Table V-26. Major products manufactured
at mills in the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory include
electrical board, matrix board (used for typesetting), food board,
press board, and other board products. As shown in Table V-26, larger
quantities of wastewater are discharged at mills where electrical
grades or matrix board are produced. However, there is an inadequate
data base on which to characterize mills where electrical board .or
matrix board are made.
179
-------
Profile Profile
TABLE V-24
SUMMARY SAW WASH LOAD DATA
SOKINTEG8ATED-LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SOTCATEG08Y
Raw Waste Load
Furnish (t/d) Product Grade
Flow
Mill No. Purch W Misc Broke (t/d) Change/Day (a) kl/kkg
Electrical Paper
105003(f) 11.2 — -- — 11.2
105015 (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) 0
105017 (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) 0
105018(c) (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) 0
105071 26.0 -- — — 26.3 U
Average
Miscellaneous Tissue and Carbonized
090015 47.4 25.6 -- -- 64.2 *
105057 33.0 5.1 — — 34.0 0
105058 34.0 4.9 — — 35.0
Average
Printing & Thin Paper
080039(f) (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) «•
105014 (b) (b) (b) (b) (b)
105020 203.0 4.0 2.0 -- 203.0
Average
Carbonized, Thin, Cigarette - Less Waitepaper
080024 20.6 — -- S. 3 32.5 0
080021(d) 30.3 — -- — 26,9 0
080022 102.4 11.3 — — 110.5
090003 12.0 1-6 -- 4,4{e)18.0
105013 15.1 -- 5.3 -- 20.4
105016 (b) (b) (b) (b) (b)
Average
Average of All Mills
Average of Electrical
Average w/o Electrical
Average of Kills - no grade change and flow
5 the Average w/o Electrical
Average of mills - no grade change and B005
£ the Average w/o Electrical
Average of mills - <1 grade change/day and flow
£ the Average w/o Electrical
Average of mills - <1 grade change per day and
BODS S to the Average w/o Electrical
Average of Electrical mills - flow S the
Average of Electrical
(a! -=!; V ~ unknown.
(b) Production data held confidential.
(c) Represents a combination of process sewer and a very
must use high flow on thermal sewer to meet thermal
(tlj After primary clarification; not included in average
(ej Estimated to balance.
(f) lill is now closed.
446.9
313.0
269.2
755.3
254.1
320.9
224,9
147.3
208.7
193.6
236.6
170.7
202.4
203.2
60. 3
10.8
128.9
135.2
517.5
210.7
237.0
320.9
203.2
103.9
147.3
159.4
181.9
278.3
high flow
Discharge 1
BODS
(kg«l/t) kg/kkg (Ib/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)
(48^7)
(1-.3)
(2.6)
(30.9)
(32.4)
(124.0)
(50.5)
(56.8)
(76.9)
(48.7)
(24.9)
(35.3)
(38.2)
(43.6)
(66.8)
11.4
11.4
57.7
2.9
11.8
24.1
29.4
8.3
18.9
0.2
19.9
19.9
20.2
11.4
21.7
2.9
2.9
14.1
13.3
11.4
from a thermal sewer
iraits. Not included
(22.8)
(22.8)
(115,3)
(5.7)
(23.6)
(48.2)
(58.8)
(16,5)
(37.7)
(0,3)
(39.7)
/ \
,„ \"""f
(39.7)
(40. 3)
(22.8)
(43.3)
(5.7)
(5.7)
(28.1)
(26.6)
(22.8)
TSS
kg/kkg
19.1
19.1
149.9
5.2
25.7
60.3
127.1
15.6
71.4
0.1
57.0
57.0
57.1
19.1
63.4
5.2.
5.2
36.3
32.8
19.1
(Ib/t)
(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)
(10.3)
(10.3)
(72.6)
(65.5)
(38.1)
Apparently, mill
in averages.
1 80
-------
TABLE V-25
SUMMAKV
' kASTL LOAD DATA
NOKWOVF.N PAPERS SUBCATKGORY
Production Profile
Product
Mill No
1050C5
Grade
Raw Waste
Flow
(t/d) Type Change/Davfa) U/kkg (kg;
5.9
Saturated Filter &
328
.8
(78.
il/t;
.8)
Load
BODS
Kg/kkf
_
Ub/t)
(
--)
TSS
kg/kkg
24.3
ilb.'i;
(48
.6)
Nonvoven
105029
105030
105031
105033
4.1
(b)
0.7
(b)
Technics
Filter
Filter
Filter,
il £, Filter
Wall Cover
V
0
C
*
144
189
394
224
.0
.9
.3
.1
(34.
(45.
(94.
(53.
.5)
.5)
.5)
7)
18.
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
(36
(
(
(
.4)
— )
--)
--)
14.7
--
—
—
(29
I
(
(
.3)
--)
--)
--)
Miscellaneous
105034
105043
105044
105045
105051
105052
105053
105054
105055
Average
Average
Average
Average
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
(b)
Filter
Filter,
Filter.
Filter,
Filter,
Filter
Filter
Filter,
Filter,
Blotting, Photo
Blotting, Pkg
Pkg
Sat Tech
Photo, Wrap
Saturated
•f
4
C
f
-
0
0
u
»
of All Mills
of mills
of mills
of mills
- no grade
- <1 grade
- >1 grade
change
change/day
change/day
172
280
25
40
171
17
42
6
288
166
134
250
241
.3
.4
.9
. 1
.1
.9
. 6
*
.4
.1
.0
.0
.2
(4!
(67
(6
(9
(41
(4
(10
(1
(69.
(39.
(32
(59,
(57.
.3)
.2)
.2)
.6)
.0)
.3)
.2)
.6)
Jl
.8)
. D
.9)
.8)
-
25.
3.
-
5.
-
-
-
9.
12.
3.
5.
17.
-
0
8
-
0
-
-
-
0
2,
8
0
0
(
(49
(7
(
(9
(
(
(
(I?
(24
(7
(9
(33
--)
.9)
.5)
--)
.9'
— )
--;
--)
.9)
.3)
.5)
.9)
.9)
--
54. S
12 .R
—
19. i
—
—
--
36.3
27.4
12.8
21.9
46.5
(
(109
(25
(
OR
i
(
(
(76
(54
(25
(43
(93
--)
.5)
.5 i
— ;
.8';
-- i
--;
--)
.5)
.7)
.5)
.7)
.0)
Average of Mills - no grade change and flow
& the Average of Mills with <1 grade change/day 69.3
Average of Mills - no grade changes and BOD5
i the Average of All Mills ~ 25.9
Average of Mills - <1 grade change/day and
BOD5 £ the Average of All Mills and flow
S the Average of All Mills with <1 grade
change/day 171.1
Average of Mills->l grade change/day and
flow £ the Average of Mills with <1 grade change/day 198.2
Average of Milla >1 one grade change/day and
BOD5 £ the Average of All Mills
(a) -=<1;+=>1;U* Unknown.
(b) Production data held confidential.
288.4
116.6)
(6.2)
(41.0)
(47.5)
(69.1)
3.8
3.8
5.0
9.0
(7.5)
(7.5)
(9.9)
(17.9)
12.8 (25.5)
12.8 (25.5)
19.4 (38.8)
(--;
38.3 (76.5)
181
-------
TABLE V-26
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED-PAPERBOARD SI1BCATEGORY
CO
rv>
Production Profile
Furnish(t/d)
Mill No.
085001
085007
085008
085010
105001
105002
105048
105049
105070
105071
1)0021
Purch
60.0
(h)
32.0
(h)
33 5
9.2
46.0
44.0
(b)
17.1
47.4
WP
12
(h)
22
(b)
--
(h )
--
(b)
--
36.6
(t/d)
84.0
(b)
50.0
(b)
38.2
8.4
fh)
62.0
51.0
(h)
15.0
76.0
Product
Grade
Type Change/nay (.1) kl/kkg
Packaging, Bag
Matrix Board
Pkg, Bag, Specialty
Matrix Board
F.iod Board, Gift
Hi Dens Electrical
Impregnated Fiber
Impregnated Fiber
Electrical Board
Saturated Paper for
Vul canizing
Press Board
+
U
I)
11
o
U
-
-
U
II
U
29.6
184.9
62.6
168.2
30.0
273.3
48 8
38.8
53.0
221.6
105.6
63.0
Flow
(kgal/t)
(7.1)
(44.3)
(15.0)
(40.3)
(7.2)
(65.5)
(9. .3)
(12.7)
(53.1)
(25.3)
(15.1)
Raw Waste Load
BODS
kg/kkg
--
10.0
7.0
8.2
--
--
--
87.5
11.0
--
(It'/t)
(-)
(--)
(20.0)
(1.3.9)
(16.4)
(--)
(175.0)
(26.0)
(-- )
TSS
kg/kkg
--
25.0
46.4
43.2
--
--
--
136.5
42.4
--
( Ib/t )
(--)
(--)
(50.0)
(92.7)
(86.4)
( --)
(272.9)
(84.7)
(-- )
Average
Average w/o Klectrical
Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mill* - no grade change and flow
$ the Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mills - no grade change and BODS
^ the Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mills - < 1 grade change/day and flow
£ the Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mills - <1 grade change/day and BOD5
^ the Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mills - >1 grade change/day and flow
< Aver.ige w/o Electrical or Matrix
Average of Mills - >I grade change/day and BOD5
$ the Average w/o Electrical or Matrix
106
78
5.3
30
30
46
.8
.5
.8
.0
.0
.7
(25
(18
(12
(7
(7
(11
.6)
.9)
.2)
.2)
.2)
25.
9.
10.
8.
8.
2
6
4
2
2
(50.
(19.
(20
(16
06.
.3)
1)
.8)
4)
.0
58.
39.
36
41.
41.
7
3
9
2
'
(--)
(117.
(78.
(73.
(«,
(8ft.
(-
3)
5)
7)
4)
4)
.,
29.6
(7.1)
(a) - = <]; » = >1; U = Unknown.
(b) Production data held confidential.
-------
EPA attempted to evaluate data on wastewater discharge and BOD5_ waste
loadings as a function of the number of waste significant grade
changes per day. The data base is very limited and no correlation was
apparent between frequency of grade change and raw waste
characteristics.
Miscellaneous Nonintegrated Mills. Table V-27 presents available data
on wastewater discharge and BOD5_ and TSS raw waste loadings for all
remaining nonintegrated mills. At these mills, products
representative of two or more subcategories or unique products not
defined by the current subcategorization scheme are manufactured.
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.
183
-------
TABLE V-27
SUMMARY RAW WASTE LOAD DATA
NONINTEGRATED MISCELLANEOUS MILLS
Production Profile
Raw Waste Load
Production
.Mill No.
080006
080008
080026
080036
08SOOS
105004
105008
105010
105011
105012
105019
105022
105023
105024
105026
10S027
105028
105032
105035
105037
105038
105040
105041
105042
105050
105056
105059
105061
105062(b)
105065
105066
105067
105068
105069
105072
120053(b)
150003
150027
(t/d)
(•)
248
(•)
(a)
(«)
(a)
262
(a)
12
45
(a)
(•)
(a)
(•)
(a)
27
77
33
(a)
43
50
(a)
(a)
(a)
(«)
(a)
153
409
36
57
(a)
(a)
(a)
(»)
53
150
(a)
(a)
Product
Print, Photo
Print, Cotton, Pkg, Tissue
Print, Photo, Cotton,
Specialty Pkg
Print, Thin, Tiiaue, Release
Baie
Pkg, Conv
Spec Pkg, Glasaine
Print, Tech, Gasket, Sat
Spec Pkg, Sat
Spec Pkg, Glaaaine, Create
Prf
Spec Pkg, Glassine, Grease
Prf
Print, Write, Tape, Sat
Gasket
Unctd, Bristol, Pkg
Spec Pkg, Auto, Separated
Print, Pkg, Wet Str Glassine
Print, Poster, lad Conv Pkg,
Sat
Pkg
Print, Tech, Pkg, Sat,
Surgical
Gasket, Latex Sat
Asbestos, Gasket, Insul
Pkg, lad Conv
Pkg, Ind Conv
Pkg, Ind Conv, Sat, Bag
Briatol, Cable, Index,
Gasket
Copybase, Release, Specialty
Tape, Spec, Panels
Print, Thin, Pkg, Sat,
Tissue
Print, Ctd, Release,
Spec
Pkg, Print
Parchment
Print, Pkg, Cover, Masking
Tech, Asbestos, Pkg
Tech, Pkg, Lightweight
Print, Photo, Pkg, Sat
Writing, Tech, Cotton
Pkg, Ind Conv
Asbestos Gaskets
Asbestos, Electrical Board
Phenolic Board
Flow
kl/kkg
43.4
1.7
BOD
(kgal/t)
(10.4)
(0.4)est
kg/kkg
4.1
—
(Ib/t)
(8.1)
(--)
TSS
kg/kkg
34.7
1.0
(Ib/t)
(69.4)
(1.9)
. Self -Contained
53.0
63.4
116.0
—
83.5
—
--
96.4
122.3
170.3
159.8
108.5
122.3
59.3
31.3
164.0
89.3
125.2
127.7
—
106.4
184.0
160.2
44.2
53.0
—
110.2
223.3
222.8
105.6
66.8
171.5
—
—
--
(12.7)
(15.2)
(27.8)
(" )
(20.0)
(--)
(--)
(23. Oest
(29.3)
(40.8)
(38.3)
(26.0)
(29.3)
(14.2)
(7.5)e.t
(39.3)
(21.4)
(30.0)
(30.6)
(--)
(25.5)
(44.1)
(38.4)
(10.6)
(12.7)
(--)
(26.4)
(53.5)
(53.4)
(25.3)
(16.0)
(41. I)
(--)
( — )
(--)
8.0
4.4
—
—
36.7
—
--
—
16.5
10.2
4.5
10.5
14.7
8.1
3.4
—
2.0
10.0
13.6
—
14.4
17.4
6.9
8.3
6.5
--
—
4.3
4.8
18.6
24.9
7.4
—
--
~~
(15.9)
(8.7)
(--)
(--)
(73.3)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(32.9)
(20.4)
(9.0)
(20.9)
(29.3)
(16. I)
(6.8)est
(--)
(4.0)
(20.0)
(27.1)
(--)
(28.7)
(34.8)
(13.8)
(16.5)
(12.9)
(— )
(--)
(8.6)
(9.5)
(37.2)
(49.8)
(14.8)
(--)
(--)
(--)
17.5
18.1
—
—
—
—
--
.-
29.2
15.7
25.5
17.0
40.3
24.1
25.8
30.2
3.0
—
61.7
—
50.6
41.1
13.8
34.0
48.8
--
—
156.5
149.0
86.8
42.4
26.2
—
—
~~
(35.0)
(36.2)
(--)
(--)
(--)
(")
(--)
(--)
(58.4)
(31.3)
(51.0)
(33.9)
(80.6)
(48.2)
(51.5)
(60.4)
(6.0)
(" )
(123.3)
(--)
(101. I)
(82.2)
(27.6)
(68.0)
(97.6)
(--)
(--)
(312.
-------
TABLE V-28
SUMMARY OF INITIAL SCREKNING PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
TI.XII- I1.. I I n I,nit
I . at f'fl.iphl IlL'lit"
2. .11 >' roiuo I hattf )
7. flil.iriilx-nxtMif
«. 1, 2 ,4-11 i ch I u rulifiixoiif
') licXdClilorobenxtriH-
JO. J ,2-r.iflliyl ) cllit-r
19. 2- -t h lor i» t hy I vinyl i-lher (niixoil)
20. 2-fliKiron.iplilli.i It'll.'
21. 2 , i,ti-1 r ichlorufihi'iiu!
22. (I,J l\ll"ll ii- E'UIHt! t J ll't'Sul
23. i Ii lt> rui arm (t ri t Ii luromc than*')
24. 2-rh I Mroi'lu'no 1
2">. I , 2-.lii -li I >ir illicit/.ft it-
26 . I , 3-IOO Ave Delft, lotl <10 10-100
12
12
12
462
12
12
10 1 1
12
12
1 1 1
; 2 3
12
] 1 1
12
1 1 1
12
12
12
12
1 .'.
1 1 1
1 ..'
2 1222
12
12
12
1 1
\.'.
12
Jjg/j) Final Kflluctit
Not"
>100 Ave Delected
-------
TABLE V-28 iContinued)
Ti.x
10.
•\\ .
12.
t ', .
14 .
'15 .
id .
i?.
)«.
V).
40-
4 1 .
42.
4:s,
44.
4").
4t>.
47.
48.
4'J .
50.
51 .
5^.
vi.
54 .
55.
5ti.
57,
58.
iy .
It I'ol llll.llll
I , 2-1 r.nih-ili i lil or oflhy lene
_' ,4-ih i lili>ro|i|i>'»»\
1 J2--.li« lilt>ru|>r<>)».tr>*
1 , ,1-v! i t h 1 uroprupy Ivue
( I , i -if 1 1 h 1 <>rop r ojieiie )
2 , 4~"en/.eiif
i 1 noi-diil ii.-iie
4- rh 1 o e *jj'lu:iiy 1 plu'ityl ether
4--l'i iMiiophfiiy ) pln'iiyl ether
li i t.lJ-i-li IIMOI .sropyl ) ether
1» i s( 2 -t h J u roe i h<>xy ) methane
Mii-t hy idle ch loriije (djchloro-
Hielli.iiii')
iitflhy! ihluride (clilorometh^ne)
mt'fhyj brtimide (l»romometh*ne)
hruinolorin ( t ri hruroome thane)
.1 i ch 1 i/i ulirouioiru'lliane
t r i e hi ui fii 1 ut3ri>me thane
ilii lilonnli t liioiuiiiethaiie
I Illul ulliluotUOIHftitillte
ht>x. it'll i « I' ubii t^i! i one
hrx.u tihmn yi 1 upi-nt adiene
1 ^uplli> rune
il<100 Ave Detected <10 10-100 >100 Ave
12
11 1 1
12
12
12
12
12
12
65 19
10 2 1
12
12
12
12
4 2 54 I 1 6 4 81
12
12
12
111 1
11 1 23
12
111 1
12
12
11 1 5
1] 1 12
12
12
12
12
Final Effluent i
Not
Delected <10 10-100
11
9 2
11
11
11
11
11
11
9 2
10 1
11
11
11
11
I 2 4
11
11
11
li
10
11
1 1
11
11
1!
11
11
11
11
11
>100 Ave
4 55
1 19
-------
TABLE V-28 (Continued)
Toxic I'oljuljrit
05
N
60.
61.
62.
6'1.
64.
65.
66.
67.
6B .
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
7**.
75).
76.
77.
7B .
Vi.
tttl .
8!.
82.
8:).
84.
85.
8B .
4,6-dini tro-o-t resol
N-ni L rus cull me thy I .imi in-
N-ni i rosodipheiiyldmine
N-iii t rosoiU-n-piopylaiBine
peiilachloropheiiol
phtfitol
l>is(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
butyl benzyl plillialate
i;nzo
f ! iioraflthene
clirys»»'ii('
jceiiajihthy letie
aiithidcene
brunolglii Iperylone ( 1 , 12-benzo-
pery lene)
i I i*or*'ue
plienjriLhrt'fie
dibenzofa .hlaiithracene
( I ,2,5,6-di henzantlirdcene)
imletiol 1 ,2 , 3-cd Ipyrene
( 2 , 3-o-plieny 1 eut'py rene)
pyreiu-
loiri>clilorocthy lene
(OltltMlIf
Raw Water ((Jg/I)
Not
Detected <10 10-100 >100 Ave
11
11
11
11
11
092 6
713 5
11
4 33 1 16
10 1 1
10 1 1
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10 1 1
Raw Wastewater (pg/1)
Not
Detected 100
12
12
12
12
12
0 264
2 163
U
J 135
12
/ 1 4
12
12
12
12
U
1 I 1
1 '
.; 2 2
I.'.
K:
12
i.1
12
i::
lo 2
1' 8 2
Final eifjuoiit (pg/1)
Not
Ave Oetpcted <1() 10-100 >100
11
11
11
11
11
624 0 r> 5 1
66 5 11
1 1
85 5 32 1
11
774
11
11
1 1
11
11
1 1 1
11
!> 10 1
li
11
11
1 1
11
1 I
1 10 1
44 t> 1
Ave
89
22
16
1
1
7
4
-------
TAIlI.li V-2H (C..,itiniu-d)
loxi i- I'ol tin jut
H/. tr ii liloroelhy Irne
HK. vinyj chloride (rhloroethyI. 4,4'-DUE (p.p'-DDX)
94. 4,4'-l)l)l) (p.p'-TDE)
95. tt-endob'ulfan
96. (l-endobiil fan
97. endosu 1 t jn suit.He.
^ 98. ondriu
(X 99. endrin aldehyde
a lOO.Ileptjchlot
101 . hept at:hi or epox i de
I02.U-UIIC
lO.l.ii-Blir.
104. y-HIIC (lindune)
lOi 6-BIIC
I06.l>i:ii-1242 (Aroihlur 1242)
107.1'CB-1254 (Arochlor 1254)
IOK.I'CU-1221 (Aroih or 1221)
109.r-CU-12.-J2 (Aroch or 1232)
I IO.I'CB-1248 (Aroch or 1248)
II 1 .l'CB-1260 (Aroch or 1260)
I 12.PCn-1016 (Aroch or 1016)
m.Ti>xdi>lifin.-
1 I 4.Antimony (Total)
1 15.Arsenic (Total)
1 l6.Asl100
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
0
11
0
il
n
n
Not
Avc Del. rtcd <10 10-100
10 2
12
12
12
J2
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
1 1 1
12
12
12
12
12
12
1 0 10 2
:) o 11 i
12
1 0 12
NoL
>100 Avc Detected <10
1 11
1 1
11
1 1
11
1 1
1 1
1 1
11
11
1 I
11
11
11
11
1 1
11
1 1
11
1 1
1 10 1
1 1
11
1 1
11
1 1
11
7 0 10
5 0 10
1 1
1 0 11
10-100 MOO Ave
1
1 4
1 3
1
-------
TABLK V-28 (Continued)
CO
>0
Raw Water (M8/D
Toxic Pollutant
118. Cadmium (Total)
11 9. Chromium (Total)**
120. Copper (Total)**
121. Cyanide (Total)
122. Lead (Total)**
123. Mercury (Total)
124. Nickel (Total)**
125.Seleniun (Total)
126. Silver (Total)
127. Thallium (Total)
128. Zinc (Total)**
129. 2,3,7, 8-tetrarhlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin (TCDD)
130.Abietic Acid
131.Dehydroabietic Acid
132. Isopimaric Acid
133.Pinaric Acid
134.01eic 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
l43.Xylene
Not
Detected <10 10-100
0 11
065
0 1 10
0 11
065
0 11
065
0 11
0 10 1
0 11
0 9
*
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
Raw Wastewater (ug/1)
Not
MOO \ve 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
11
A
12
2
12
12
12
2
1
1
10-100
8
8
7
10
6
A
1
5
A
2
1
2
1
1
1
MOO
1
A
1
1
6
7
10
1
5
3
3
1
1
1
Final Kfflucnt (ug/1)
Not
Ave Uetrrted <10
2
42
81
26
36
1.5
35
3
2
2
555
365
700
9
87
99
192
18
5
41
5
1
1
4A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
••'<•
7
.s
11
8
6
10
1 1
11
11
11
1 T
10
10
11
11
7
11
5
11
3
11
10
11
1
1
2
1
1
10-100
4
11
6
7
1
7
.3
3
2
3
1
MOO Avr
1
12
VI
10
16
1 .")
1 38
2
6
2
4 124
1 94
2 89
12
16
6
1
1
*Not analyzed.
**Cormistent discrepancies existed between split sample results for thi ; compound.
-------
TABLE V-1'9
SUMMARY OK SCRF.KNINC ANALYSIS RESULTS AT 17 VERIFICATION MILLS
Average
Compound Ran^e Concentration
Ntimlu-r Compound Name .Sample Location ND _ £10 10-100 >100 (pg/1)
3D
62
Benzidine
Aery lonitri le
1 ,2-dichloroethylene
N-ni trosodipheny laniine
Raw Wastewater
Final Effluent
Raw Wastewater
Final Effluent
Raw Water
Raw Wastewater
15
11
16
11
16
16
1
1**
0
0
1
0
1
!**
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
3
0
1
. 1
.5
.A
.2
.2
.0
^Compounds listed are those detected -luring screening studies conducted at 17
verification mills that were not detected in any wastewatur samples taken at
the 11 mills sampled during initial .screening surveys.
*'"'KinaJ effluent from clarifier at a s.'J f contained mill.
-------
TABLE V-.10
SUMMARY OF tl'A KKfiJONAL S & A SCREENING PRI'ttiKAH RESULTS AT 42 MILLS
it' |H
II. 1, I , 1 -1 ri i hi o ro<; tli J tie
lr>. I , ! ,2 , '- let rui li 1 OKH-th.tne
17. bis (t b] i.rome.Uiy I ) rlher
18. bibf '2-i -liluroflhyl ) ether
21. ( b U. i at or in
2'). I , 1-di i Itlmoeihy Iciif
31 . 'i ,4-iii i hi oroplu'iiul
14. 2 , 4-J j met b;, ! pht:no I
.I). 2 ,<4-ilii»i I rut uliieiit:
Iti , 2 , A ~ d 1 If i I ru Lo 1 iJelie
4.J, 1.1 .s ( 2-i him uf I boxy ) nn-th.iiu-
^4. nu-iliylnu' ttiluriJe
47. I/1 oj«ol *>rii!
48 . d 11 li i oiwbromoiilet b.itu;
''i9 . t r M h Jui i^H no i owl h jjje
31. ihloro.ljb i"*tinoiiu't IMDC
j J fu'KdE'li 1 o ru<~y<' f open t .id i ffK'
V> , ri,»|>htlu, I cue
So in t rude iixi-rir
SH . 4 - n i t I'otibt-no 1
02 , N- lit ( r f.s<.d i plu-ny I .nit i ne
t»r>. pfit-iiol
(>t). t>i.s(2-«-lliy Ibrxyl } [ibtluil.ite
h7. liulyl beii.-.yl (ibt li.. I ,ilc
«iii. .1 i -n lint y I pin Ij-i l.i! c
71). di.-ibyl |.bth.,l,ilr
/I. ili:uctliyl ptitbaljif
82 . il i I>i-n £i> f a ,h j .inttir.it cue
ti'j. li't i jcli I oi oe I by I cue
86. U.lnrix-
rt7. t ri< hlui iii'lhyti'iie
112. rCli-1016 (Ar..Ki|.,i 1016)
No. of Hi I Is
fir re pol tut «HI[
wj.s lit;t.erttrd
10
9
0
0
1
21
3r>
16
0
0
I
16
1
B
2
1
10
1
2
10
34
27
9
17
12
1
li)
23
8
1
KJW Waste
No
Wht!
was
Filial Eftluent
:b
Concent raL ioils
f Mills
pollutant No. i>f Hills
lerted at Concent ratj on where pollutant
than 10 pg/I Range (jjR/l) was detected
3
4
0
0
1
10
26
0
5
5
0
0
1
13
0
2
1
]
1
2
1
1
0
4
25
1 I
2
It
5
1
1
2
7
()
1
ND-
NO-
4,900-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
NO-
<10
NI>-
ND-
ND-
<10-
ND-
ND-
00-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
NO-
ND-
ND-
ND-
.18
Nl>-
ND-
ND-
<10-
30
70
NO
NI)
7,200
263
5,500
<10
2211
85
ND
NO
74
1 0 , 000
88
48
14
16
74
50
IK
<10
54
940
624
240
380
67
31
40
200
<10
12
10
7
1
1
--
It
24
4
9
4
1
1
0
15
1
1
1
2
--
4
1
1
1
6
13
28
7
19
7
1
0
b
15
5
0
No. of Mills
where pollutant was,
detected at greater
than 10_(jg/l
2
1
1
1
--
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
I
0
NO-
NO -
NO-
80
16
24
12
ND-
ND-
NO-
ND-
NIJ-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
ND-
35-
Nl)-
14
1,200
86
41
•ilO
14
15
ND
3,600
13
<10
260
<10
NU-
ND-
NO-
17-
ND-
N»-
ND-
NO-
ND-
NO-
ND-
NO-
ND-
32
32
53
,740
30
15
10
Nl)
<10
200
15
NI)
-------
TABLE V-30 (Continued)
Kaw Waste __ _ _ ___ Final Effluent
-.'"'
114.
I !').
117.
118
1 19.
120.
121 .
122.
124.
I2'i,
Ub
127,
I2B,
til! 1.1 Is ,
C'y.in i tic ,
T.it.il Phenolic*
. Ant imtmy
Ar:;en i r
IU> ry 1 i i nm
Cadi.ii lift)
('hruiti i HID
Coppii i nm
Si Iver
TlJa I 1 i inn
Z i m
Tat <* 1 Hit-no ( i cs
No. oi Mills,
wliere pollutant
was *ie tec led
!2
8
4"J
y
40
41
15
29
27
3
3
4
50
40
No. of Sample;*
detected at
10 to 99 (Jj|/l
14
9
49
12
58
75
25
28
36
5
6
10
45
16
No. of Samples
detected at
100 to 999 ^g/l
4
0
0
0
24
ia
t>
24
20
0
0
0
52
46
No. of Samples No.
at greater wliere
...Lh?JLj 5B/J «a£
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
o
0
0
0
0
12
29
of Hills
pollutant
J?t£t!-?d_..
6
2
40
5
24
28
6
18
23
7
1
6
3V
32
No. oi" Samples
detected at
— L?_i?_2?_H8/L..
11
2
40
5
33
64
11
19
28
10
3
12
58
45
No. of Samples
detected at
IP-O.^L ???_««/ 1_.
0
0
0
0
17
3
0
13
13
0
0
0
25
21
No. of Sa
at g rea
than 1 a
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
The following pollutants were detected in at least one raw waste and one final effluent sample at a concentration of less than 10 M8/l:
6 c.irlioii tci r jcliloride 54. isophorone
7 chloroU-iizcne 59. 2,4-dini trophenol
24. J-clilor»phrnol 69. di-n-octyl phthalate
2!i. 1,2-dicli lorohenzene 81. phenaulhrene/anthrjcene
38. t*lliy Ihftizeiie 84. pyrcne
1'.). 11 uorjntlienc
Tlu' ft. I lowing no! tulanls weie tit: tot ted in at least one final effluent sample at a concentration of less than 10 M8/l;
14. I , 1 , 2 -11 i c 1' !«>rot'l htiue
20. 2-t li 1 oronaph I ha I ene
33 . 1 , *i-il i ch i tn oj»ropy J one
"fix fold,wing pollutants were detected in at least one raw waste sample at a concentration of less than 10
10. 1,2-dicliloroeUiaue 42. bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
II. 1 , 1 -di i htororlharie 45. methyl cliloride
22. pjr.ji'Mi>roirit.-t.i cresol 60. 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
-------
Verification Program
As described previously, the contractor's initial 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 program mills to further investigate the
presence of these three compounds in pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry discharges.
Verification samples were analyzed 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,
ammonia, 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 samples taken at mills in each subcategory and the
number of samples in 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.
Long-Term Sampling Program
As discussed in Section II, the Agency conducted a long-term sampling
program to obtain additional toxic and nonconventional pollutant data.
Tables V-33 and V-34 present summaries of toxic and nonconventional
pollutant data obtained during sampling of a deink mill and a fine
bleached kraft mill. Both tables present information on the number of
193
-------
TABLE V-31
SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION PROGRAM ANALYSIS KESULTS
FOR TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Total Total Number Of *Concentrat ion **Averjge
Number Of Samples Detected Analyses Kange (}lg/l) Concentration (|Jg/l) CompientB
Toxn Pol Iiitunt/Subcategory Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent ^iliy?"1 '.OQHSH? . £IfJH?Q^ Influent/Effluent
A. Brn/ene
Market Hlejrtted Kraft
bCT Bleaihcd Kratt
Unbleached Kraft
o BaK
Semi -CltfHi t:al
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving SuJfite Pulp
Paper grade Sul f J Le
DP ink
o Fine Fa fieri.
o Tissue Papers
J'i sttue From Waste* pa per
rapt* rou«* fu r rore Was ttrpape r
Roofing fell
Nonintrgral.eil-r iue Papers
Nouintegrjt e
-------
TAIJI.K V-.it (Continued)
Total Total NiiD.ber Of "Concentration ^Avcrdg*;
Niiiuhcr Of Saiapl rs Detected Analyses Kangc (pg/1 ) Concent rat i on (MK/ ' ) Comment s
Toxic 1\>I LlJl_J".!VSuk^J:eJl0jy _LniiHi'nL _J'f f i!1'!1.1.1- Influent Affluent l!i£l*Ju"l _ _ EHJ_!'Vnf- _ !!'* JueJ!V ?_£' luenf: Inl]j±£!!*/!>f I1 yenl
4. Henzene (continued)
Noni ritffjrdted-l'apt'i boa rd
Integrated Miscol Igneous
NonintogrJted Miscrllam?ous
6. Carbon 'futraehloride
7 . Clilorobrn/.cne
Deink
o Tissue Papers
10. 1 ,2-niehioroetlidne
Dei nk
o Tissue Pdpera
NonIntegrated-Fine Papers
UD
cn
11. 1 , I , 1-Trichloroet.hane
Alkaliiie-Kine
tlnbleuclied Krjft
and Seat i-Chemical
pjperfciaiie Sul f i te
Deink
o Fine Papers
PaperLourd Kron Wastepaper
Bui 1 tiers ' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
* Range tor those Mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
** Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
6
12
3
No I
3
3
3
3
6
3
9
6
12
3
15
3
9
3
12
6
3
6
12
3
ifetecti-d
3
3
3
3
6
3
9
6
12
3
15
3
__
3
12
6
3
2
3
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
1
3
3
3
7
2
7
0
3
3
3
1
I
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
__
0
0
3
3
0-
6-
0
37-
0
0-
0
0-
0
0-
3-
130-2
6-
0-
0-
0-
0
3-
4-
7-
4
11
47
5
2
71
7
,000
53
4
5
20
187
9
22
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
0
43
0
3
0
1
0
24
5
1,243
22
2
2
7
0
67
6
14
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
7
0
0
3
-.
0
0
2
10
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/llolding Ponds
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Hrinary 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-JI (Continued)
1.0
en
Number Of Samples Detected
Toxic Pol Jutjiit/SuliciUegory Influent Effluent Influent
H. I.l-Oichlococthane
Papergrjdt1 Sul t i Le
2\ . 2,4,6-Ti it hlorophenol
Market Bleached Kratt
BCT Blejilied Kraft
A J ka 1 ine-f ine
Dissolving Sulfite Pu Ip
Papr.-rgr.idf Sul f J l«?
Drink
o Kim* Papers
o T is silt- Papers
I'JJM- rboa rd From Was Lepaper
Nun I nt eg rated Mi see 1 1 a lie o us
22 . Paracliloruurta Cresol
i'\ . Ch lorn form
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alka 1 inc-Kine
Unbleached Kraft
Semi -Chemical
Unblfrtrhed Kraft
and Seiui -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sul f ite
Gruinidwood-Kine Papers
12
Not
6
y
9
4
12
3
3
3
15
3
12
6
3
Not
3
6
9
9
6
6
4
12
6
12
6
9
9
4
12
3
3
3
15
3
1 2
6
3
detected
3
6
•J
9
6
6
4
12
6
3
6
8
9
4
6
2
3
0
5
3
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
2
4
12
6
Anal yses
Effluent
0
6
1
7
4
6
1
3
0
2
3
3
0
3
6
8
9
0
0
4
12
6
Range
Int luent
5-
1-
0-
3-
7-
10-
0-
29-
0
0-
270-
0-
6-
0
360-
830-2
580-4
43-1
1-
0-
110-
62-8
17-
22
26
2\
23
15
370
16
65
5
420
18
30
900
,200
,000
,800
4
6
360
,600
240
(ug/1) Concentration pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
** Averjg*? for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-J1 (Continued)
'total Told 1 Number Of *Cuncent rat ion
Tux i «. I'o 1 1 u 1
-------
co
TABLE V-.'J1 (Continued)
Tola I TdI a 1 Number Of *Conccnt rat ion *«Average
Number 01 Samples Delected Ana ly.M-s Range (H8/1) Concent rat ion (|ig/1) Comments
»l lut jut/Suhr.it egory Inl luent Et fluent jnl Ineiii ti f l_ut*iil !"* lu?'_lL_ ^^fl'jiL"?1 lufj".6"1 ?f_LLll?Llk 1 nfluent/Effluent
.i 1 . 2 , K-;iched Kraft
" B.is
Sfini -riiemi ra 1
Ueink
u Newsprint
u Tissue 1'jperfc
'(issue From Waslepaper
Kuilders' I'.tpcr and
Koi.l IIIK Fell
Nmi i nl egr.it eil-Ti ssne Papers
Noniiitegiatrd-Fi Her
and Nonwoven Papers
N(»n integrated -Pa perboard
Integrated Mi si el laneous
Nniu in ex rat ed Hi seel luncous
V) . Kl iloranlliene
Dissolving Krafl
Dissolving Sulfile Pulp
• 1)
3
3
3
6
9
6
6
3
3
3
6
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
t.
3
3
''
6
9
6
6
--
3
3
6
3
--
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
.3
3
t.
1
3
0
1
0
3
2
2
3
0
3
1
3
0
3
0
1
0
3
1
2
0
1
1
1
2
0
0
1
0
2
Q
--
0
0
0
0
--
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0-
1-
0
0-
0
1-
0-
0-
0-
27-
0
2-
0-
1-
0
54-39
0
0-
0
2-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
5
5
82
2
2
4
45
74
5
11
,000
2
6
2
32
7
A
0- 3
0- 2
0
0
0- 3
0
0- 2
--
U
0
0
0
--
0
36- 300
0
0
0
0- 2
0
0
0
0
0- 1
2
4
0
27
0
2
1
j
2
33
0
27
2
5
0
13,081
0
1
0
3
1
13
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
Q
--
0
0
0
0
--
0
149
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Biological Trealment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
" KdiiK*-' tut those mills where* pollutant was delected in influent or effluent.
x* Average* tor Ihuse mills where polLutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total Total Number Of
Number Of Saapjes Detected Analyses
Influent
3
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
6
3
r 15
! 3
3
9
3
6
3
3
6
12
Effluent Influent Effluent
3
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
6
3
15
3
—
^_
3
6
3
3
6
12
7
3
4
4
3
3
10
1
3
3
3
6
2
0
4
0
1
2
,
1
4
0
6
0
5
6
1
1
12
0
3
0
2
3
1
—
__
0
2
3
2
0
4
^Concent ration
Rauge (MR/1)
**Average
Concentration (lig/1) Comaents
Influent Effluent
0-
0-
2-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-2
0-
11-
0-
17-
1-
0-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
1
4
3
290
21
220
3
,500
13
14
3
410
11
4
2
6
1
17
2
3
10
0
0-
0
0-
'-
0-
0-
2-3,
0
1-
0
0-
0-
0-
--
__
0
0-
5-
0-
0
0-
4
6
14
80
2
100
3
4
4
1
1
8
2
12
Influent tf fluent Influent/Effluent
1
2
2
50
6
58
2
291
4
12
1
174
5
2
1
0
2
0
1
7
1
1
2
0
2
0
4
5
13
1
271
0
2
0
0
2
1
1
--
-.
0
1
7
1
0
2
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatnent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Toxic Poilutant/Subcategury
44. Methylene Chloride
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o l.inerboa rd
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Sepi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Croundwood-Fine Papers
He ink
o Tisaue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Faperhoard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
BuiIders* Paper and
Hoofing Felt
Nonintcgrated-Fine Papers
Menintegraled-Lightweight
Papc rs
NonIntegra Led-Paperboard
integrated Miscellaneous
Range lor those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total Total Number Of *Concent rat ion **Average
Number Of Samples Detected Analyses Range (pg/1) Concentration (pg/L) Comments
T_°?ir f"' liUjiU/Snljcatcgory Influent Effluent _lnflneiil_ Effluent LsiiS*!!! E£flu«Mil Influent Effluent |nf i"?"1 /HfJ ly^ili
ro
o
o
47. Bromoform
48. Dj ch 1 orobromomethane
Dissolving Kraft
Alka 1 ine-Fine
('.ipergratle Sultite
Paperboard r'rooi Watttepaper
Knililert*' Paper and
Roufing Felt
49. Tri< lilorof 1 uoroaelhaue
Builders' Paper and
Routing Kelt
51. Di In oooclil oromethane
Builders' Caper and
Hoofing Felt
">4. Isopliurone
Unbleached Kraft
o l.incrhoard
55. Naphthalene
Scnti -Cheint ca 1
Oissolvinx SuJfite Pulp
Papergrudf Sul file
3
3
9
12
15
3
9
3
9
3
9
3
3
6
4
12
| C
J 3
3
3
9
12
IS
3
--
3
--
3
—
3
3
6
4
12
Q
1
1
3
3
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
3
2
3
3
Q
1
0
0
1
0
3
--
0
—
0
—
0
0
0
0
3
Q
0- 119
0- 4
13- 18
8- 40
0
0- 3
0- 14
0
0- 8
0
0- 5
0
8- 15
0- 5
3- 4
22- 230
Q
0- 62
0
0
0- 5
0
1- 2
--
0
--
0
--
0
0
0
0
7- 88
Q
40
1
15
26
0
1
5
0
3
0
2
0
11
3
4
102
21
0
0
2
0
1
--
0
--
0
--
0
0
0
0
36
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
* K.Jiige fur those mills wh^rc pollutant watt delected in i nf Jucnt or ef fluent.
•'• Average tor those mi/Is where pnl lulant was detected in inf lut-nt or ef f 1 ncnt.
-------
no
o
TABLE V-31 (Conlinued)
Total Total Number Of "Concentration *~"'Aver.iRe
Number Of .Samples Detected Analyses Kange (^lg/j) Concentration (MX/') Comments
Toxii Pol Iut.int/Snbc£le(jory l_n fluent Kfflijenl Influent Effluent Influent Kff1'!!!'!1 I"! ' L'PP1 _J:f' ! '"''^ Influent/KH'luent
S5. Naphtha lene (continued)
Dei ilk
o Fi fit* lepers
o Ti ssuir Papers
Inlr grated Mi seel la neons
59. 2 , 4-di n i I ropheuol
64. IVntacli 1 oropheno ]
BCT Bleached Kraft
Al kj 1 i lie-Fin.1
Semi - Cht'm i ca 1
Unl.leached Kraft.
and Seini -Chemi ca 1
Papernrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Paperboard Front Wastepaper
Wastepapt' r -Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Koofing Felt
Integrated Misccl lancoufl
Nanijltfgr.it ed Mi seel Ja/teous
65. Phenol
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
:)
3
:i
^
3
12
9
9
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
1 2
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
6
3
12
Not detected
9
9
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
15
3
3
--
—
3
12
6
3
3
6
3
2
0
Q
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
Q
2
0
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
3
0
0
3
1
—
—
0
2
0
2
3
5
67-
0-
0
Q
16-
0-
5-
6-
0-
0-
1-
3-
9-
10-
0
0-
850-
0-
0
17-
0
0-
0
0-
8-
13-
190
78
A3
4
31
11
5
7
12
12
24
61
19
1,200
6
160
29
200
110
26
0
0
0
Q
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
()
26
1
19
8
2
2
6
6
15
38
0
6
1,050
2
0
65
0
1 2
0
72
54
20
0
0
0
Q
18
0
19
1
1
0
1
1
12
34
0
1,200
1
—
--
0
0
27
18
1
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluf.it
Biological TredtmtMit
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
Primary Treatment
Primary w/llolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
* Range for those mills where polluianL wa& detected in influent or effluent.
"•'•"** Average tor those mills where pollutant was delected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic PoJ lutaiil/Siilu-ategory Influent Effluent
65. Phenol (continued)
BCT Bleached Kraft
Al ka 1 ine-Kine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linernuard
o Bag
Semi -Clienica 1
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergradc- Sulfite
Crouiidwood-t'ine Papers
Ueink
o Fine Papers
o Tiusue Papers
o Newsprint
Paperboard Fron Wastepapcr
Was tc-papc-r -Molded Products
builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Notii ntegratcd-Fine Papers
Noni ntegrated-Ti ssue Papers
Non integrated- Lightweight
Papers
Non intcgra ted-Ki Her
jnd Nonwoven Papers
Non integrated -Paperboard
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
15
—
3
3
--
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
Total Number Of ^Concentration **Average
Detected Analyses Range (pg/1) Concentration (pg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
9
6
3
6
6
6
4
11
6
3
3
0
0
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
4
3
2
2
0
3
6
4
2
3
0
6
0
4
6
4
0
0
0
0
3
2
--
1
3
—
3
0
2
2
2
2
1
3
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-
1-
0-
0-
0
8-
2-
92
14
110
140
400
100
19
640
51
41
150
4
1 Aft
1 **U
500
91
8
9
,400
280
150
25
11
2
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-
0-
17
2
4
24
10
250
5
520
13
3
,700
66
9
3
3
17
3
3
55
11
77
89
230
56
14
176
28
22
119
0
1
L. 1
H 1
0
457
41
6
8
1,233
134
94
6
5
1
2
0
64
6
5
1
3
0
14
0
5
41
2
0
0
0
0
427
1
—
1
1,433
—
38
0
4
2
2
10
1
2
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
POTV
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTV
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTV
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Range for those aills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
O
u
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxi£ Hoi lnt ant ,/Siitu .ili'gory lilt I iiunt Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
^Concentration
Range (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
**Average
Concentration (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
Comments
Influent/Effluent
65. Phrnol ( font i itni'tf J
Integrated Nisid Uincous
Noninl egra t ed M i .sccl 1 aneons
66. Bis(2-elhylhexyJ ) Phthalate
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached KrjH
Alk.i 1 ine-Fine
Unbleaclied Kralt
u LiiiRi hoard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
llnh leached Kraft
and Seuii -Chemi ral
Dissolving Sulfili! Pulp
Papergrjde Sulfil>-
Gruiifulwaod- t'i ne I'.ipers
Dei nk
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperfooard Kruin Wastepaper
W.js t«*paper-Mo 1 ded Products
Riiiltlers' Paper and
Hooting Fell
Nun inLegr j led-Fi ne Papers
\2
3
6
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
9
2
4
3
6
e
7
3
2
5
5
4
9
A
2
3
2
3
3
5
3
13
3
3
9
0
3
3
7
2
A
1
A
6
6
1
1
6
5
A
5
6
1
0
1
--
1
3
1
10
--
1
--
0
3
4
0-
0-
0-
15-
6-
0-
0-
3-
0-
0-
0-
2-
0-
0-
0-
A-
0-
8-
3-
0-
17-
0-
11-
1-
5-
0
A10-2
0-
68
5
1A
180
21
35
190
130
7
46
16
22
200
18
10
26
20
20
5
19
3A
83
18
4
80
,500
13
0-
0-
0-
0-
7-
0-
0-
0-
0-
3-
0-
3-
0-
2-
0-
3-
0-
—
0-
0-
0-
0-1
—
0-
--
0
28-2
0-
15
3
8
A
9A
11
A9
9
A
29
1A
38
91
1A
4
5
2
1
8
20
,200
2
,494
25
15
3
6
72
1A
8
29
A9
A
21
10
9
29
7
4
13
8
13
4
10
23
14
14
3
35
0
1,193
3
4
1
3
1
32
3
16
3
1
15
10
14
21
7
3
4
1
—
1
3
7
87
--
1
--
0
869
6
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
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Kdiigo for Ihobf mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
Aver.ige lor Lhosu mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
To I a I
Niiml'er Of Samples
Toxic I'til lut .int/Siili( .jl rgory l_ii fluent E^fhienl
Total Number Of
Delected Analyses
'•'•Concent rat ion **AveraRi;
Range (pg/1) Concent ration (pg/1) Comments
Influent _ Effluent 1 nf 1 nt-nt Effluent Inf 1 uent/EfI 1 uent
66. Uis(2-etliy Ihexyl ) Phthalale
Noui n I egrti li.'d-Ti ssue Papers
Nonintegrat ed-l.i xl'l-v-'e ight
Papers
Non i nl eg ra I ed- Ki 1 1 e r
and Non-Woven I'.ipers
Nou i u tegr j I ed-Papet hoa rd
Non i ut e&ra 1 ed Mist e i laueous
(>1. Hutyl Ben/yl Phtli.iljle
Unhleai hed KrJtt
o H,,g
Sem i -Chemi < a 1
Dissolving Siilfilr Pulp
DC ink
o Newsprint
Paper hoard Kiom W.islepaper
lill i Iclei s ' Paper and
Kuotiiig Kelt
Nou i n legra t ed-Ti s.sue Papers
08. IH-n-Biityl Phtlulute
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleat-lied Kraft
Bi'T Bleached Kraft
A 1 ka 1 i ne- K i ne
llnhleaclied Kraft
o Li net hoard
o Bag
Semi -Cheini ea 1
(font inued)
3
3
3
.i
i
6
1 2
t)
b
0
4
)
:i
15
3
9
)
:i
3
6
y
y
3
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
6
6
4
--
3
15
3
--
3
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
3
3
3
1
3
6
9
3
6
2
1
0
3
3
4
0
3
3
0
2
6
5
2
3
1
6
3
2
3
2
3
3
9
3
6
0
0
1
--
3
0
0
--
1
0
1
5
1
1
3
0
0
8-
6-
4-
0-
14-
4-
0-
6-
3-
0-
0-
0
3-
17-
0-
0
5-
620-
0
0-
3-
0-
0-
1-
0-
1-
73
13
7
1
160
31
25
15
150
3'J
1
8
190
170
12
950
13
4
27
2
10
1
11
8-
0-
6-
0-
13-
0-
0-
1-
1-
0
0
0-
--
38-
0
--
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
1-
0
0
38
13
7
4
61
7
220
26
11
2
81
0
15
3
19
23
2
2
30
8
5
1
85
11
g
11
34
23
1
0
5
80
51
0
9
797
0
7
4
9
1
7
1
4
23
7
7
2
31
2
25
15
6
0
0
1
--
63
0
0
--
5
0
1
8
4
1
1
0
0
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/llolding Pond
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
~- Range for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
'•'•••• Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
*€oQceetratiafl
**Average
IS3
O
in
Number Of Saaples Detected Analyses
Toxic PolIutBut/Subcatittory Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
68. Di-n-Butyl Phthslate (conti
Unbleached Kraft
and SeBi-Chestical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
He ink
o Fine Paper*
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue FroM Waatepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-I.ightweigbt
Papers
Noniotegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Hiscelisneoua
69. Di-n-Octyl Phthalate
70. Diethyl Phthalate
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
Unbleached Kraft
and Seaii-Chestical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
* Rauge fur those mills where
oued)
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
£
3
15
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
—
3
6
15
3
—
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
4
2
1
4
3
1
0
1
0
1
2
11
0
5
1
0
1
0
0
3
4
0
1
0
4
2
2
0
—
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
Range (MS/1) Concentration (Ml/1) CosMents
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0-
0-
0-
0-
3-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0*
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0-
0
0
110-
0-
12
2
3
8
9
10
2
17
85
21
25
3
3
230
7
0
0- 1
0
0- 11
0- 12
0- 12
0
—
0
0
30« 55
0
0
—
0
0
0- 5
0- 2
0
0- 61
0- 4
5
1
I
3
5
3
0
1
0
6
32
9
0
9
1
0
1
0
0
180
1
0
1
0
4
6
5
0
—
0
0
44
0
0
—
0
0
2
1
0
20
1
Biological Treataient
Biological TieatAent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
POTW
Prisiary Treataent
Biological Treatsient
Biological Treatment
Pristary Treatment
POTW
Prinary Treatsient
Biological Treatsient
Biological Treatment
Priaiary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatsient
Biological Treatatent
Not detected
3
6
6
4
12
3
6
6
4
12
pollutant was detected
** Average for those Bill* where pollutant
1
3
2
1
1
in
wab detected
0
0
0
0
1
influent or
in influent
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
effluent
7
2
20
9
5
0
0
0
0
0- 14
2
1
13
9
2
0
0
0
0
5
Biologic* TreatsKnt
Biologica Treatment
Biolosica Treatsient
Biologica Treataient
Biologica Treatswnt
or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Cunlinueil)
*Concent ration
**Avrrage
fV)
o
cr>
Tox
70.
76.
77.
78.
81.
84.
85.
Number Of Samples Detected
ir Pol lut ant/Subcategory Influent Effluent Influent
Di ethyl Ph thai ate (continued)
Ueink
o Newspr int
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastcpapcr
Bui Iders ' Paper and
Roo t i ng Felt
Nonintc-gr jted-Ti ssue Papers
Won i ntegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Chrysene
Areiuphthylenc
Anthracene
D J tisol vi ng Kra ft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Phenantlircne
Py rene
Di Sbol v i MK Kraft
Tetrach Lorot thy lene
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Bag
Papergradc Sulfite
Cronndwood-Fine Papers
Dei nk
o Fine
Tissue From Wastepaper
3
3
6
3
15
9
3
3
6
12
Not
Not
3
9
It
Not
3
9
9
6
12
6
3
3
6
--
3
6
3
15
3
3
6
12
detected
detected
3
9
A
detected
3
9
9
6
12
6
3
3
6
1
0
2
i
6
Q
6
1
0
1
5
1
1
0
1
3
1
2
0
1
3
2
0
Anal yses
Effluent
2
0
0
3
3
Q
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
Range
Infl uent
0-
0-
0
0-
12-
38-
Q
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
lMg/1) Concentration (pg/1) Comments
Effluent Influent Kffluenl Int Inent /Effluent
0- 6
0
0
220- 320
0- 310
Q
0
0
0- 130
0- t,
0
0
0- 1
0
0
0
0
0- 6
0
0
0- 57
0
1
0
26
79
23A
Q
29
12
0
4
2
2
1
0
2
3
1
1
0
1
95
74
0
2
0
0
273
71
Q
0
0
58
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
19
0
POTV
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
biologi cal Treatment
Biologi ca 1 Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biologica 1 Treat ment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
•v Range for those mills where pollutant was de tec-ted in Influent or effluent.
** Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Tox i r _Pol I uian t/Sulu-a le£tiry I n f J m-nl Effluenl
Tolal Number Of
Delected Analyses
Influent Effluent
*Concenlralion
Range (Mg/1)
InfJuonl Effluent
*~* Average
Concentration (pg/1)
Influent Effluenl
Comments
Influent/Effluent
85. Telrachloroelhy lenc (continued)
Paperbojrd From W;istepaper
Builders' Paper and
Routing Kelt
Non i ntegr;i t ed-Ti ssue Papers
Noni nlegra led -Pa per board
86. Toluene
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleac-lied Kraft
BCT Bleached Krji t
Al kal ine-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seini -Chemical
PO Unbleached Kraft
O arid Scin i -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfitc Pulp
Papergradc Snl file
Grouniiwood-r' i ne Pjpers
Dei uk
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsp r i n t
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wjslepapcr
Builders' P.iper and
Roofing felt
15
3
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
ro
o
CO
To x i c fo 1 1 u taut/Subcategory
86. Toluene (continued)
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonint egrated-Tissue Papers
Non Integra ted-Lightveight
Papers
Noui ntegra ted-Fi 1 ter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Papeiboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Hiscel laneous
87. Trichloroethylene
BCT Blrarhcd Kraft
Seni-Chemica1
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Dei nk
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
106. PCH-1242
Deink
o Fine Papers
Total
Number Of Samples
Influent Effluent
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration
**Average
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
6
6
12
3
3
3
15
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
6
6
6
U
3
3
3
15
3
3
Range (pg/1) Concentration (pg/1) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0
0
2-
0
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
2-
0-
1-
4-
0-
2-
130-
8-
0
0-
0
0-
0-
380
5
6
5
660
6
3
2
IS
3
33
8SO
13
5
38
2
1- 2
0
1- 15
0
0- 2
0
0
0- 1
0- ISO
0
0- 2
0
0
0
0
3- 11
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
130
0
2
2
0
2
99
4
1
2
9
1
IS
493
11
0
1
0
11
1
2
0
6
0
1
0
0
1
66
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
—
0
Biological Treatment
Prisury Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Prisury Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Prisury w/Nolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Prisury Treatment
POTW
Primary Trea talent
0-
9.9
0 Biological Treatment
* Range for those nills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
** Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
ro
O
107. PCB-I254
Unbleached Kraft
and Seni-Chemical
Deink
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Vastepaper
Paperboard from Vavtepaper IS
Bui liters' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noniiitegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintrgrated Miscellaneous 6
108. PCB-U21
109. PCB-1232
110. PCB-1248
Paperboard From Wastepaper 15
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
111. PCS 1260
Deink
o Tissue Papers
112. PCB 1016
119. Chromium
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alka1ine-Fine
Total Total Number Of
ber Of Samples Detected Analyses
luent Effluent Influent Effluent
6
3
3
6
3
IS
3
9
3
3
6
3
3
12
6
3
Not
Not
15
3
9
3
3
3
Not
3
6
9
9
6
3
3
6
3
IS
3
—
3
3
6
3
3
12
6
3
detected
detected
IS
3
--
3
3
3
detected
3
6
9
9
3
1
0
4
0
1
2
3
0
2
0
1
0
2
1
0
4
0
2
0
1
2
3
6
9
9
3
0
0
3
0
1
3
—
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
—
0
0
0
3
6
9
9
*Concent rat ion **Average
Range ((Jg/1) Concentration (|Jg/l) Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
0- <1
0- 4
0
0- <1
0
0- <1
0- <1
0- <1
0
0- <1
0
0- 28
0
0- <1
0- 7
0
0- 10
0
0- 7
0
0- 3
0- <1
5- 21
7- 20
4- 300
<2- 76
0- 2
0
0
0- <1
0
0- <1
41
—
0
0
0
0
0
0- <1
0
0
0- <1
0
—
0
0
0
<2- 19
9- 73
5- 240
2- 17
1
1
0
1
0
<1
<'
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollulaiit/Subrat
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
119. Chromium (continued)
Nonintegrated Miscel laneoua
<20. Copper
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papera
Drink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papera
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Ke 1 t
Nouintegrated-Fine Papers
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
1 ^
1 3
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
—
6
3
1 ^
1 3
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
1 ^
1 3
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
—
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
Concentration **Average
kange ((Jg/1) Concentration (Mg/1) Cossients
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
<1-
5-
39-
24-
18-
9-
<2-
12-
44-
16-
8-
<2-
12-
42-
22-
8-
57-
24-
8-
2"
150-
3-
25-
30-
185-
<1-
6-
n_
65-
22
39
42
37
70
48
16
46
120
64
35
220
62
80
37
21
89
100
15
650
188
34
44
270
210
20
62
jf
A3
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-
15-
13-
20
2
42
26
42
23
7
15
37
2B
28
100
24
11
40
110
18
42
162
5
97
81
26
•1-1
J J
17
11
18
40
31
46
22
9
24
79
38
17
71
28
61
29
13
76
55
13
46
yv
169
16
37
145
202
13
43
22
74
5
2
17
14
17
8
5
9
25
15
20
33
14
6
22
<1
—
47
8
15
152
4
—
—
93
18
19
25
14
Prlaury Treatwnt
Priaury v/Uolding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treataent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treataent
Primary
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
* Range for those nil la where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
** Average fur those nilla where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
rv>
I—"
rv>
Total
lumber Of
nf luent
3
3
3
6
12
is 6
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
3
Samples
Effluent
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
--
6
3
15
3
3
--
__
3
3
3
3
Total Nl
Detected
Influent
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
0
uber Of
Analyses
Effluent
2
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
3
3
3
—
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
3
3
0
*Concent rat ion
Range
Influent
10-
14-
6-
17-
2-
4-
60-
< 10
< 10-
32-
72-
<10
720-2
< 10
< 10
<10-
29-
< 10
< 10
90-1
25-
< 10
< 10-
0
54
28
120
300
68
59
100
25
162
110
,600
143
155
,200
170
13
(Mg/D
**Average
Concentration (pg/1)
Effluent
0-
9-
6-
< 1-
<1-
<1-
<2-
< 10
< JO-
40-
170-
<10
—
< 10
< 10
< 10-
< 10-
<10
—
—
25-
<10
<10
0
<10
10
13
10
31
12
31
15
95
200
34
25
190
Influent
37
19
61
78
33
29
81
<10
16
108
88
<10
1,560
< 10
< 10
27
74
<10
<10
368
108
<10
11
0
Effluent
4
10
9
4
13
8
\2
<10
11
72
185
<10
—
< 10
< 10
14
18
<10
--
__
117
<10
<10
0
Comments
Influent/Effluent
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
120. Copper (continued)
Nonintegrated-Lightweigtit
Papers
Nonintegrated-Fi1 let
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nouintegrated Miscellaneous 6
121. Cyanide
Seni-Chemical
Unblejctied Kraft
and Semi-Chenical
Deink
o Fine I'apprs
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperhujrd From Wastepaper IS
Wast (.'paper-Molded Products
builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Fi Her
and Nonwovcn Papers
* Range for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
** Average for those mills where pollutant was detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
ro
I—'
CO
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcatrgory Influent Effluent
121. Cyanide (continued)
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
fnti'grated Miscellaneous
Nun integrated Miscellaneous
1*2. l.ead
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
AJ ka 1 ine-r'ine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Piij>ergrade Sulfite
Groundwootl-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
P P
Paperboard Froi* Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
6
9
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
£
3
15
3
3
9
3
6
9
3
6
3
6
9
V
3
6
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
-
3
15
3
—
—
3
Total Number Of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
6
9
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
1,
**
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
9
3
6
9
3
0
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
12
6
3
3
3
—
3
15
3
—
--
3
*Concent rat ion ^Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration (|ig/D Comments
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent /Effluent
<10-
-------
TABU V-31 (Continued)
ro
t—•
JS»
Total
Number Of Samples
Toxic Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
122. Lead (continued)
Nonintegrated~f ine Papers
Nonintegrated-TisBue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lighlweight
Papers
Nonin leg rated -Filter
and Nontooveu Papers
Nonin tegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintrgrated Miscellaneous
123. Heccury
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seal -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
GrounJwoed-Fine Papers
Uciiifc
o Fine Papers
P
o Newsprint
Tissue Fro* Wastepaper
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
--
3
6
Tutsi Number Of
Detected Analyse*
Influent Effluent
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
j
3
3
3
6
6
3
3
3
2
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
5
4
12
6
3
3
—
3
6
Concentration **Aver»ge
Range (MS/D Concent rat loo (|i*/D CaaaratB
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
<1-
<1-
<1-
<2-
5-
<1-
1-
<2-9
<1-
<2-
<2-
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
PO
I—>
tn
Total Total Number Of
Number Of Samples Detected Analyses
Toxic Pol I ut nut /Subcatcgory Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
123. Mercury (continued)
WdStcpaper-Molded Produt Is
Hu i 1 ders ' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noii Integra ted- Fine Papers
Nmi i ntegt a ted- Lightweight
Papers
Noiuntegrated-Filter
ami Nonwoven Paper &
Ni>ni ntcgralcd-Papcrboard
1 nL egrated Mi seel laiieous
NOIU n( egrated Miscellaneous
124. Nickel
l)i ssol ving Krai t
Market bleached Kraft
BCT Bl Pitched Kraft
Al kal i ue-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Li lit.' rboa rd
o Rag
Se-roi -Oieuica I
Unl-leached Kraft
and St'uti -Cheated!
IH& solving Sul f i te Pulp
Pa|>rrgr<*de Sul f J te
(trouiidwood-Fiiu* Papers
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
15
--
3
3
--
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
A
6
6
4
12
6
15
—
3
3
--
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
Concentration **Average
Range (pg/1) Concentration (M8/O Commeota
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
<0. 5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
<0.5-
tft S
vu . j
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5-
<0.5
cO.5-
<2-
16-
<2-
<2-
<2-
<2-
<2-
<2-
8-
3-
<2-
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-
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
Total Total Number Of *Concentration **Average
Number Of Sample* Detected Analyses Range (pg/1) Concentration (pg/1) Comnenti
CTi
fox i r f'ol 1 utdnt /Subrj tegory Inf 1 uent
12V Nickel (couL imied)
Dei uk
o fine Papers
o Ti bsue Papers
o Nfw&pr i nt
TisijUf r'rooi Wastepaper
Pnperbo.i rtl from Wastepapor
W.is l epjper -Molded Products
Builder:,' Paper and
Koo f i UK felt
Noiiiiil».>j{r«jleil—iL in*? Pape rs
Non in leg rat ed-Ti ssue Papers
Non integrated- Lightweight
Papers
Won Integra ted- Fi 1 tcr
and Nonwoven Papers
Nun i n i eg rated -Pape rboj rd
Integrated Mi seel laueoti^
Won iiiLtixr<* t ft) Mi ace 1 1 aueous
128. Zinc
DJ ssol vi dg Kraft
rfdrkt/l Bleached Kraft
KCT Bleached Kraft
Al ka I i cic-Fi ne
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
•}
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
Effluent Influent
3
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
--
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
3
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
•j
9
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
9
9
Effluent
3
3
3
—
3
6
3
15
—
3
3
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
»
9
Influent
5-
4-
<1-
5-
5-
2-
42-
<2-
<2-
10-
84-
12-
S*)
Vjt
<1-
<2
<2-
<2
< 1
-------
TABLE V-31 (Continued)
128.
Total Total Nuiiber Of ^Concentration **Average
Number Of Samples Detected Analyses Range ((Jg/1) Concentration ((JR/1) Comments
r Pollutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent/Effluent
Zinc (continued)
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerhoard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Grnundwood-Fine Papers
Oeink
o Fine Papers
P
o Newsprint
Tissue from Wastepaper
P P P
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Noni utegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegr Jted-Tiasue Papers
Nonintegr Jted-Lightweight
Papers
NOM Integra ted -Fi 1 ter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nouintegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
•j
3
3
3
6
IS
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
•i
j
3
—
3
6
IS
--
3
3
—
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
•j
3
3
3
6
•t
j
IS
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
•j
3
—
3
6
15
—
3
3
—
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
37-
41-
78-
24-
42-
5-
53-
97-
1 70-
30-
300-
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
46
375
59
,560
600
,'720
330
465
,000
,100
91
185
52,000-54,000
46-
12-
11-
118-
72-2
12-
10-
40-3
160
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-
<3-
60-
19-
0-
9-
40-
<5-
15-1,
1-
<2-l,
100
150
120
46
77
420
86
38
62
36
33
183
Qflfl
7UU
210
73
900
160
35
140
29
8
17
66
210
800
7
000
71
136
143
40
70
104
74
206
200
40
335
54
677
1 433
U206
200
392
2,800
999
71
55
53,300
92
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
88
23
4
12
56
72
443
3
217
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTV
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Primary Treatment
* Range for those Bills where pollutant wae detected in influent or effluent.
'<* Average for those Bills where pollutant waa detected in influent or effluent.
-------
TABLE V-32
SUMMARY OF VERIFrCATION PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
FOR NONCONVENT10NAL POLLUTANTS
CD
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influrnt Effluent
130. Abietic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Llnerboard
o Bag
Sewi-Chenica 1
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
DlssolvinR Sulfile Pulp
Croundwood-Fioe Papers
Dp ink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
P
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastep.iper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
1 7
I *
6
3
3
3
6
3
IS
3
3
3
9
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
k
1 7
1 £
6
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
6
7
6
3
6
3
6
4
g
6
3
3
•i
j
3
4
3
15
3
3
3
9
0
3
3
6
3
2
6
3
6
3
4
2
3
0
3
6
0
1
—
Concent rat ion
Range (pg/1)
Influrnt Effluent
8600-18000
6-
0-
190-
350-
390
2700
1100
1200
3700-12000
220-
650-
94-
0-
11-
700-
2300-
370-
330-
0-
120-
18-
120-
190-
540-
290
2000
5200
4QO
«4VU
600
990
4100
680
740
150
260
1900
710
250
680
loo-:
J500
0-1800
0-
0-
0-
30-
35-
520
11
21
250
43
5SO-1000
0-
g_
0-
0-
50-
40-
0
35-
0-
0
0-
—
940
340
26
31
1 40
90
--
140
96
--
21
—
930-14000 -- --
0
0
—
0
--
Average
Concentration
(MR/D
Influent Effluent
11800
178
1041
470
753
69R3
257
1392
1949
137
182
837
3467
557
513
54
203
651
407
210
6.13
7559
0
1467
767
119
3
10
165
39
710
383
76
7
12
97
72
0
64
19
0
7
--
--
0
Comments
Bio] oft teal TrcHtmrrtl
Biologica 1 Trratmrnl.
Bi olofti ra 1 Trca Lmmt
Biolnftical Trratmmt
Blnlnftical Trfntmont
Biological TrcatmniL
Bi ologi ra1 Trfatmrnt
Biological Treatmrnt
Biologi ca t TrcatmpnL
Birr logical TiTritmpnl
Biologi caI Trent m^nt
Diologi ca1 Treat mrn(
POTW
Partial Final Kffhirnt
Biological Trcalm*'iil
Biological Treatment
Primary TreatrnfTit
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biologi ca1 Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Total Nunber
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subrategory Influent Effluent
130. Al.i-tic Acid (continued)
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
131. Dehydroahietic Acid
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving .Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
P
Tissue From Vastepaper
Paper board From Wastepaper
Wastppaper-Molded Products
6
3
3
12
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
IS
3
3
3
6
3
3
12
6
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
--
Total Nunber of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
5
3
0
8
3
0
6
9
6
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
2
Q
0
0
Q
6
1
0
2
6
9
6
3
6
4
6
4
9
6
3
3
3
4
3
12
3
3
—
Concentration
Range (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
0-
39-
0
Q_
0-
140-
0
3000-
10-
280-
140-
330-
660
75
i fton
I OUU
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- 18
0-. _
0
0
0__
0- 160
0- 24
0
0- 800
2-1000
48- 310
3- 7
6- 15
30- 200
0- 27
200- 330
6- 400
0- 950
10- 50
42- 62
130- 630
180- 300
0- 37
160- 300
0- 140
59- 120
2- 170
--
Averagr
Conrrntrat i on
(PR/I)
Influent Effluent
207
53
0
748
1029
177
0
3500
232
861
273
470
7142
168
607
1000
423
148
2267
3700
3267
1833
372
417
479
467
453
573
6
0
0
Q
61
8
0
520
431
123
5
11
85
14
235
171
246
26
49
343
253
20
250
55
96
61
--
Comments
Bi ol ofti ra 1
Trp.i tmr ill
Prim.iry Treatment
Biological
Biological
Primary Tr
Treatment
Treatment
ratmt-nl
Primary w/Hold J ng Pond
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biol ogicaj
Biological
Biologi ca 1
B Jolngi raj
Bi ol ogica 1
Bio 1 ogic.i I
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
P01V
Partial Final Ff f 1 unit
Biol ogirfl
RioLogica
Primary T
Biol ogica
Primary T
Biolog jca
POTW
Treatment
Treatment
eat men t
Treatment
eatnent
Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
ro
ro
O
Total Kiaaber
Toxic Pollutant/ of Smmplem
Subcategory Influent Effluent
Total Nuajber of
Detected Analyaea
Inflaent Effluent
Concentration Concentration
Range (pg/1) (pg/1)
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Coaacenta
131. Dehydroabietic Acid (continued)
Builder*' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papera
Nonlntegrated-Tlsaue Papera
Nonlntegrated-Fllter
and Nonvoven Papera
Nonlntegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
132. laoplaurlc Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Llncrboard
o Bag
Seni-Cheailcal
Unbleached Kraft and
Seaii-Chediral
Dissolving Sulflte Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Flne Papera
Deink
o Fine Papera
o Newsprint
o Tisaue Papers
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
g
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
—
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
0
2
0
6
10
£
3
3
3
8
6
3
6
6
6
4
6
4
3
3
3
3
--
3
6
3
3
0
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-
0
110-
0-
2_
10-
660-
66-
0-
54-
78-
380-
23-
260-
15-
0-
0-
420-
240-
J10-
120-
6000
170
720
660
230
—
50
—
780
2000
400
^uv
16
1300
180
250
110
450
160O
48
850
1760
230
110
900
690
180
270
—
60-
17-
49-
85-
0
0
0
0-
0-
0-
160-
160-
230-
0-
0-
0-
0-
0-
140-
0-
0-
0-
1-
—
14-
1-
--
200
66
ISO
112
—
—
—
180
310
220
270
590
500
86
3
10
32
16
260
230
84
6
9
—
24
20
2199
143
433
483
213
0
33
0
413
585
14
887
115
107
74
283
770
34
547
774
62
29
587
510
150
193
—
117
45
93
98
0
0
0
64
96
67
Of
200
380
407
21
1
6
15
7
187
115
17
3
5
—
18
13
POTV
Primary Treatawnt
Biological Treatment
Prlauiry Treatawnt
Primary TreaUwnt
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Priaury Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Priawry TreataKnt
Priaury w/Holdlng Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatment
Biological Treataient
Biological Treatawnt
Biological Treatment
Biological Treataient
POTV
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatawnt
-------
TABIX V-32 (Continued)
ro
ro
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
132. Isopimaric Acid (continued)
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Paper*
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Non Integra ted- Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscel laneous
133. Pimaric Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Finn
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unhlcarhed Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfitc
Groundwood-Fine Papers
6
3
IS
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
£
3
IS
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
Total Nunher of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
3
IS
3
3
3
9
0
6
0
3
0
6
8
3
0
3
3
7
6
3
6
4
6
3
2
3
o
0
4
1
0
—
—
0
0
0
1
0
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-
0
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
Q
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
Average
Concentration
(MR/D
Influent Effluent
32
28
128
84
48
94
1164
0
39
0
37
0
62
374
84
0
1357
157
115
63
43
1168
36
152
277
25
76
Q
0
3
8
0
—
—
0
0
0
2
0
0
31
11
0
710
430
22
0
1
32
4
106
31
17
5
Contents
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Trearsient
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Prfwary Treatjvent
Biological Treatment
Primary 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
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
IN)
IN)
FN)
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Suhcategory Influent Effluent
133. Pim.iric Acid (continued)
Deink
o Fine Papers
o New.sprint
o Tissue Pjpers
Tissue From Wastepaper
P.iperboard From Wastepaper
Wast epapcr-Mo Ided Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
8 P
Nonintegrated-Tiiisue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperhoard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Mi seel Iflneous
134. Oleir Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Blenched Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Al ka I ine-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Ba8
Semi -Chemira 1
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
3
--
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
—
--
3
6
3
3
3
A
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
3
3
3
3
3
11
3
3
0
9
0
5
0
2
0
3
4
3
0
3
6
7
6
3
6
6
6
0
--
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
o
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-
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
o
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
(pg/D
Influent Effluent
127
257
39
80
12
43
78
41
57
0
576
0
19
0
10
0
25
184
54
0
3667
345
1084
276
337
3133
115
618
0
--
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
--
—
0
o
0
0
0
0
25
0
0
333
153
17
41
38
70
33
407
Comments
Biological Treatment
I'OTW
Partial Final Kffluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological 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
-------
TABI.E V-32 (Continued)
to
Total Nuaber
Toxic Pollutant/ of Saaples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
134. Oleic Acid (continued)
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Croundvood-Fine Papera
Defnk
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Tissue Fro* Wastepaper
Paperboard Fro* Wastepaper
Wastopaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Ftne Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
NonintPgrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
135. Linoleic Arid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Cheni cal
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
IS
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
4
12
6
3
--
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
--
--
3
6
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
It
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
3
9
0
3
0
3
3
3
11
3
0
3
6
6
3
3
6
3
4
9
4
3
—
3
3
5
1
10
0
3
—
--
0
0
0
2
2
0
5
2
0
1
6
0
3
0
0
3
Concentration
Range (pg/1)
lufluent Effluent
28-
14-
17-
500-
1300-
190-
310-
98-
81-
34-
180-
460-
340-
830-
0
55-
0
210-
4-
2SO-
0-
48-
0
2200-
220-
180-
170-
150-
610-
66-
1860
330
450
1200
1500
710
560
270
200
940
450
540
360
3500
--
80
--
290
29
270
1900
68
—
3900
2300
1300
470
270
1700
160
31-
0-
0-
30-
—
470-
220-
0-
0-
0-
0
5-
—
--
0
0
0
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0
0-
26-
0
2-
0
0
13-
120
220
46
75
--
750
280
310
74
310
--
80
--
—
—
--
--
61
47
--
230
13
--
510
100
--
7
--
—
17
Average
Concentration
(ug/1)
Influent Kffluent
1157
129
174
967
1367
400
410
183
147
339
290
49.1
353
2237
0
65
0
260
13
260
450
55
0
2900
792
762
283
203
958
122
81
70
23
49
--
590
243
193
25
78
0
48
--
—
0
0
0
27
27
0
38
8
0
170
64
0
4
0
0
14
Comments
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Blologi CJtl Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Partial Final Effluent
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
BiologicaI Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biologica1 Treatment
Primary Treatment
Pr imary Treatment
Bio Iogical Treatment
Bio logical Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/HoIding Pond
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Rio]ogical Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
BiologicaI Treatment
Biologteal Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
ro
ro
-fc.
Total Nwber
Toxic
Pollutant/
of
Saaples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
135.
136.
Linoleir Arid (continued)
Unbleached Kraft and
Sesii-ChesUcal
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Paperhoard Fro* Wastepaper
Vastepaper Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Nonlntegrated Miscellaneous
Linolenic Acid
Market Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Bag
Smi-Chenical
Papergr/ide Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
6
It
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 Nueber of
Detected
Influent
6
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
5
0
3
3
8
0
1
0
0
7
2
0
3
3
3
3
5
3
Analyses
Effluent
3
1
4
3
0
--
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
Concentration
Range
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Toxic Pollutant/
Subcatcgo ry_
ro
ro
en
136. Linolenic Acid (continued)
Deink
o Fine Papera
o Newsprint
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
137. Epoxystearic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Paperboard From Wastepaper
139. Chlorpdehydroabietic Acid
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentrat ion
Range (pg/1)
Influent Effluent
Average
Concentration
(MK/1)
Influent Effluent
212
<167
69
0
138
0
817
99
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biologic.il Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
6
12
15
3
3
6
9
9
6
A
12
3
3
3
12
6
12
15
3
3
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
3
3
12
3
1
3
0
3
A
5
0
A
6
3
3
0
A
2
1
0
0
3
3
5
3
3
3
0
2
0
1
99-
0-
310-
0
1300-
0-
0-
2-
0
45-
8-
330-
18-
0
0-
380
120
490
~~
1600
120
190
9 /.n.
«i*»U
360
3AO
730
28
--
8A
0-
0-
0
0
330-
0-
0-
3-
0-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
190
20
--
— —
700
140
31
18
241
93
__
26
--
3
266
40
413
0
1433
5U
78
A A
0
161
123
467
24
0
33
113
7
0
0
473
A2
11
9
108
39
0
14
0
1
Biolog1c.il
Rio) ogi cal
Biologj cal
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Primary Treatment
Biological
Biologj ca 1
Biological
Bio log! cal
Biological
Biological
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Tre.itmrnt
Treatment
Treatment
Partial Final Effluent
Biologica 1
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
-------
TABLK V-32 (Continued)
Average
ro
f\3
Total Rusher
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
140.
141.
142.
143.
Total Nixber of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration Concentration
Range (jlg/D (M«/D
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Cossaents
Dlchlorodehydroabietic Acid
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Sen! -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
o Fine Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Trichloroguaiacol
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
o Fine Papers
Tetrachlorogualacol
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Deink
o Fine Papers
Xylenes
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
12
6
9
9
4
12
3
6
9
9
4
12
3
9
3
6
6
6
9
9
6
4
12
3
12
6
9
9
4
12
3
6
9
9
4
12
3
9
3
6
6
3
2
2
0
1
3
2
1
3
1
4
1
3
2
6
6
9
1
]
3
2
3
3
2
3
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
3
0
1
5
1
0
3
0
0
0
3
30-
0-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
15-
0-
0-
6
2-
0-
4-
2-
4-
4
0-
4-
0-
22-
B-
0-
86
IS
32
—
280
5
12
5
21
1
9
—
6
28
23
17
17
2
16
8
44
10
4
11-
0-
0
0-
0
0-
0
0
0
0
0-
0
0-
10-
0
0-
0-
2
o
6-
0
0
0
1-
65
4
—
30
—
3
—
--
—
—
2
—
3
17
—
1
8
—
13
—
—
—
3
57
3
6
0
93
2
6
2
18
1
4
6
4
14
11
8
7
4
1
8
4
33
9
2
39
1
0
13
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
14
0
1
3
2
0
9
0
0
0
2
Biologica
Biologic*
Biologica
Biologica
Biologica
Biologica
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatawnt
Treatatent
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatawnt
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
ro
rv>
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
163. Xylenes (continued)
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
P
Nonintegrated-I.ightveight
Papers
Integrated Hiscel laneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
149. Color
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
AlkaJ ine-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
6
12
3
3
3
3
D
3
15
3
9
3
3
3
3
D
12
6
3
6
12
3
—
3
3
6
3
15
3
—
3
3
3
3
D
12
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
3
1
3
2
0
3
1
S
1
9
2
3
0
2
3
7
3
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
]
0
0
0
--
2
3
0
0
3
1
3
0
Concentration
Range (|Jg/l)
Influent Effluent
19-
0-
0-
5-
0-
0
0-
0-
0-
0-
3-
27
4
20
110
9
140
31
6
3
63
0- 28
140-37000
0
0-
5.
0-
7-
0
8
14
160
10
--
0
0
0
— —
0
0
0- 1 3
0
0
0
—
0- 32
160- 1600
0
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-
1420-
875-
630-
70-
340-
1820-
2220
1920
2030
1210
290
1900
8000
935-1326
1310-1920
1340-2040
430-1380
190- 240
350-2400
2350-6400
Average
Concentration
(M«/n
Influent Effluent Cements
22
1
7
46
5
0
28
10
3
1
18
14
13547
0
5
g
23
9
0
(Platinum
1475
1680
1233
850
173
1130
3915
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
—
16
800
0
0
3
1
147
0
Cobalt
1160
1597
1610
826
213
1208
3825
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
POTW
Biological Treatment
Partial Final Kffluent
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
POTW
Primary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary w/Holding Pond
Units)
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
-------
TABIK V-.12 (Continued)
Total Number
'Ionic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory _ Infjuent_ EffJLuenlL
Average
Total Ntiaiber of Concentration Concentration
Detected Analyses (PUtinuw Cobalt Units) (Platimni Cobalt Units)
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Com»ent«
ro
r\3
CO
Col or (font i nupfJ)
Utthlearhr*) Kraft andl
Semi -thrmjc.il
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Piiprrgradc Su I f i t«?
Cronndwood-Fine Papers
DP ink
o Fine Papers
*i Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Paprrboard Fro* Wastepaper
Was lepaper -Molded Products
Bui Iders ' Paper
and Pooling Felt
Noni ntegr s* ted-Fine Papers
Nan integrsted-TttiSue Papers
Non integrated -Light weight
Papers
and Nonwoven Paper*
Honintegrated-Paperboard
Non i ntCK rated H in eel I jineous
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
15
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
6
3
IS
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
3
15
3
3
3
9
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
12
3
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
3
15
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
3
2
3
3
5
12
3
200-
1070-
14-
<5-
48-
160-
210-
<5
5-
950-
82-
<5-
370-
7600-
<5
48-
<5
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Total Nunher
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcalegory Influent Effluent
150. Ammonia
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
111. COD
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Croundvood-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Vastepaper
Faperboard Fro* Vastepaper
Wastrpaper-Holded Products
Builders' Paper
and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
Concentration
Range
Influent Effluent
(isg/1)
4
12
2
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
14
3
3
3
8
3
6
3
3
4
12
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
5
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
3
2
2
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
3
14
3
3
3
8
3
6
3
3
3
3
3
6
9
9
3
6
6
6
4
12
6
3
—
3
3
5
3
15
3
3
—
—
3
6
3
3
6.2- 24.3
0- 260
1290- 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
164- 6400
8440- 9060
262- 346
560- 880
2560- 5120
11800-19500
87- 220
254- 763
16~ 20
26- 666
3.45- 9.5
6.8- 48
330- 780
370- 440
290- 470
110- 310
220- 490
345-1000
1055-1930
80- 464
1040-2170
690-2370
77- 200
50- 260
--
360- 500
77- 87
170- 220
110- 156
5- 540
2980-8320
66- 101
—
—
16100-24300
73- 110
22- 26
85- 110
102- 142
Average
Concentration
Influent Effluent
CoMments
(mg/1)
12
105
1400
735
765
576
617
1113
2410
897
2251
4901
625
1600
3733
2063
435
363
190
1333
8833
291
693
3923
16667
168
437
18
399
7
21
497
407
397
244
310
663
1493
310
1404
1342
136
170
—
430
82
192
131
201
4797
82
—
—
19133
87
25
95
119
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
Primary Treatment
-------
TABLE V-32 (Continued)
Average
Total Number
Toxic Pollutant/ of Samples
Subcategory Influent Effluent
151. COD (continued)
Non Integra ted-Lightveight
Papem
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintpgrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscel laneoun
Nonint.egratcd Miscel laneous
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
Total Number of
Detected Analyses
Influent Effluent
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
3
3
3
6
12
6
3
Concentration Concentration
Range (mg/1) (»g/D
Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
230-
77-
230-
<5-
uo-
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
Coanents
Biological Treatment
Prinary Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Biological Treatment
Primary Treatment
Primary "/Holding Pond
no
CO
o
-------
TABLE V-33
SUMMARY OF LONG-TERM SAMPLING PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
FOR TOXIC POLLUTAKTS
ro
CO
Total Nuaber of Samples
Total Number
of Detected Analyses Concentration Range(pg/1)
A^era^c Concent rat ion(pg/l)
21.
22.
31.
64.
Toxic
jtant/Subcategory
2 , 4,6-Trichlorophenol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tiasue Papers
Chloroform
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tiasue Papers
2,4-Dichlorophenol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tiasue Papers
Pentachlorophenol
Fine Bleached Kraft
PCB-1242
Deink-Tissue Papera
Raw
Waste*
0
23
0
23
0
23
0
23
Secondary
Influent*
23
19
23
19
23
19
23
19
Final
Effluent**
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
Raw
Waste
—
22
—
23
—
18
23
Seconday
Influent
13
IB
23
19
2
4
6
16
19
Final
Effluent
63
59
69
69
4
9
15
42
69
Raw
Waste
—
0-16
—
19-600
—
0-6
0-13
2.0-77
Second*/
Influent
0-5
0-15
227-772
60-800
0-1
0-2
0-11
0- 1 2
.0 0.6-9.6
final
Effluent
0-6
0-22
21-230
10-61
0-2
0-8
0-7
0-23
0.2-1.9
Raw
Waste
--
K.H
--
273
—
1.8
4 8
21.3
Secondly
Influent
1.8
8.4
404
262
0.1
0.4
1.2
3 8
3.8
Kinal
F.ff luei
2.7
3.7
58
:>2
0. 1
0.4
O.S
^ ^
0.8
*72-hour composite samples
**24-hour composite samples
-------
TABLE V-34
SUMHARY OF LONC-TF.RH SAMPLING PROGRAM ANALYSIS RESULTS
FOR NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
Total Number
ro
CO
ro
Toxic
Pol lutant/Subcategory
130. Abietic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tiasue Papers
131. Dehydroabietic Acid
Fine Blearhed Kraft
Deink-Tiasue Papers
132. Isnpinaric Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
133. Pimaric Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
1.34. Oleic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
135. Linoleic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
1.36. Linolenic Acid
Fine Blearhed Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
137. Epoxystraric Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
138. DlchloroRtearic Acid
Fine Blearhed Kraft
139. Nonochlorodehydro-
abietic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Total
Raw
Waste*
—
3
—
3
—
3
—
3
—
3
--
3
--
3
Number of
Secondary
Influent*
23
1
23
1
23
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
10
23
23
1
Sasiples
Final
Effluent**
69
11
69
11
69
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
30
69
69
11
of
Raw
Waste
—
3
—
3
3
—
2
—
1
—
3
—
1
3
--
1
Detected Anal
Seconday
yses
Final
Influent Effluent
23
1
23
1
23
21
0
19
0
23
I
3
0
10
o
20
19
0
59
0
55
7
61
25
2
44
1
55
0
2
1
18
44
25
0
Concentration Range (px/1)
Raw
Waste
--
55-156
--
180-405
--
0-13
—
0-322
—
120-286
--
0-90
1 1 -44
--
0-14
Seconday
Influent
200-12,000
34
12-1,800
275
140-4,900
0-530
0
0-6,700
0
390-12,000
49
0-480
0
85-490
0-640
0-217
0
Final
Effluent
0-8,000
0
0-1,300
0-16
0-3, "00
0-370
0-11
0-3,700
0-8
0-3,900
0
0-25
0-10
0-63
0-125
0-110
0
Average
Raw
Waste
--
110
--
291
36
--
4.3
--
107
--
187
--
30
26
A 3
--
4.7
Concentr
Seconday
Influent
1,890
34
259
275
775
70
0
1 , 1 30
0
2, 160
49
50
0
208
Q
175
66
0
2''8
U
'17
<•-,
154
0.5
II
1.4
119
0.7
108
0
0.6
0.9
9. 7
0.1
19
1.1
"v72-hour composite samp]en
**24-hour composite samples
-------
TABLE V-34 (Continued)
_Totaj Number of Sample s
Total Number
of Detected Analyses
Concentration Range(pg/1)
Average Conmit ration(pg/l )
Toxic
Raw
Pollutant/Subcategory Waste*
140.
141.
142.
153.
154.
ro
oo
to
155.
156.
157.
158.
161.
162.
Dichlorodehydro-
abietic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
3,4,5-Trichloro-
guaiacol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Tetrachloroguaiacol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Palustric Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Levopi marie Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
4,5,6-Trichloroguaicol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Keoabietic Acid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
4,5-Dlchloroguaiacol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Sandaracopimaric Arid
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
Dimethyl Sulfide
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-Tissue Papers
--
3
--
3
—
3
--
3
--
3
--
3
--
3
--
3
—
3
--
23
--
3
Secondary
Influent*
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
1
23
19
23
1
Final
Effluent**
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
11
69
69
69
11
Raw
Waste
--
0
--
0
—
0
--
3
--
1
--
0
--
0
—
0
—
1
—
1
--
0
Seconday
Influent
13
0
5
0
3
0
12
1
0
0
0
0
16
0
2
0
19
0
0
1
23
0
Final
Effluent
24
0
19
0
13
0
27
0
2
0
1
0
35
0
0
0
27
0
0
5
45
0
Raw Seconday
Waste Influent
0-41
0 0
0-4
0 0
0-2
0 0
0-1,800
20-59 17
0
0-37 0
0
0 0
0-5,200
0 0
0-1
0 0
0-690
0-44 0
0
0-11 0-10
448-3,740
0 0
Final
Effluent
0-33
0
0-7
0
0-6
0
0-1,100
0
0-66
0
0-2
0
0-3,000
0
0
0
0-570
0
0
0-8.4
0-230
0
Raw Secomlny
Waste Influent
9.6
0 0
0.6
0 0
0.2
0 0
170
39 17
0
12 0
0
0 0
818
0 0
0
0 0
125
15 0
0
0.5 0.5
1,370
0 0
Final
EffJuer
2.6
0
0.7
0
0.3
0
2r>
0
1 .5
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0.3
r>5
0
*72-hour composite samples
**24-hour composite samples
-------
TABLE V-34 (Continue.!)
Toxic
P°llutant^Subcategpry
163. Dimethyl Dinulfirte
Fine Bleached Kraft
Deink-TiRsuo Papers
^72-hour coraponite samples
•^''ZA-hour composite sample*
Total Nuaber of Sa«ple«
Raw Secondary Final
Waste* Influent* Effluent**
Total Number
of Detected Analyila
Raw Secondly Final
Waste Influent Effluent
23
1
69
11
21
0
Concentration Range(Mg/11_
Raw Seconiiay Final
Waste Influent Effluent
38-1,800
0
0-13
0
Average Coocentratjon(pg/1)
Raw Seconriay final
Waste Influent Effluent
743
0
0.6
0
ro
OJ
-------
samples taken, the number of samples where each pollutant was
detected, and the concentration ranges for each pollutant.
Summary
Table V-35 lists the total number of facilities sampled during the
screening, verification, and long-term sampling programs by
subcategory.
Supplemental Data on Nonconventional Pollutants
Color. Table V-36 presents additional color data obtained during
earlier EPA investigations (under Contract No. 68-01-3287). These
data were used to supplement color data obtained during verification
sampling.
Ammonia. Limited data are available on raw waste or final effluent
ammonia discharge levels at the eight mills where ammonia is used as a
cooking chemical. Theoretical calculations of the range of ammonia
concentrations in raw wastewaters were 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-37 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).
Limited data are available on actual ammonia raw waste loads. Table
V-38 presents available ammonia data for five of the eight mills where
ammonia is used for pulping. These data are generally within the
range presented in Table V-37 and tend to support the theoretical
calculations.
235
-------
TABU V-35
TOXIC POLLUTANT SAMPLING
DATA BASE
ro
oo
Subcategory or Hill Grouping
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Llnerboard
o Bag
Seal-Cheaical
No. Mills
EPA Region
Screening
1
A
2
5
4
0
3
Unbleached Kraft and Se»i-Che»ical 2
Dlaaolvlng Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Theno-Hechanl ca 1
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Flne Papers
Delnk
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Fro* Wastepaper
Paperboard Frosi Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonlntegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tlssue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nomroven Papers
Nonlntegrated-Paperboard
Integrated Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
Total
4
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
0
5
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
7
1
2
47
Sampled
Screening
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
11
Verification
1
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
2
4
0
0
2
1
2
1
3
6
2
4
3
2
1
2
2
4
0
3
60
Long-Ten
SaBpllnc,
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Total
Mill Visits
2
6
6
9
6
2
6
5
6
5
2
1
3
1
4
2
3
11
2
6
4
3
1
3
2
12
2
5
1203
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcatrgories.
2
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
Some siills saapled for screening and verification; 107 different facilities were
sampled.
-------
TABLE V-:)6
SUPPLEMENTAL COLOR DATA
Subcatesory
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
UCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Kine
Total NtiMber of Samples
Influent Effluent
Concentration Range
(Platinum CobaU Units)
Influent El fluent
Average Concentration
(Platinum Cobalt Units)
Influent Effluent
Comments
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
Bi olog ica 1
Biological
Biological
TreaLment
Trej tment
Treatment
Treatment
ro
OO
Jncludes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
-------
ro
CO
oo
TABLE V-37
THEORETICAL RAW WASTE ANi/ONIA LOAD
Assumed
Ammonia
Required(a)
Subca Legory (Ib/t)
Semi -Chemical 67
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 125
Papergrade Sulfite 100
BPT RWL Flow
(kgal/t)
10. '5
10.3
66.0
66.0
44 . 5
44.5)
Recovery Raw Waste Load
Efficiency NH3-N
%
50
90
50
90
50
90
(Ib/t)
33.5
6.7
62.5
12.5
50.0
10.0
(mg/1)
390
80
114
23
135
27
Reported average ammonia (as nitrogen) required per ton of pulp produced.(28)
-------
TABLE V-38
SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE AMMONIA DATA
KOR ALL MIIJ.S USING AMMONIA AS THE
CHEMICAL PULPING BASE
ro
CO
vo
Raw Waste Averages (N1I3-N)
Mil 1
..._. "8/1
lb/d
Ib/t
Months of
Data
Data Source
Semi -Chemical
020014
Dissolving
046005
046006
Papergi ade
04000 Z (a)
040001 (a)
040008
040012
040016
040019(c)
040019
040020
337
Sulfite Pulp
•'(
20
Sulfite
*
&
*
50
*
157
*
*
10,100
*
3,490
*
*
*
7,540
*
2,680
ir
*
20.2
*
6.9
*
*
*-
27.2
*
4.0
*
*
12
*
1
*
ir
*
9
*
1
*
*
DMR
Verification
Supplemental
Verif icat ion
Industry Submitted Data
A
B(d)
C
E
K
£
*
*
*
*
*
•ir
*
ir
*
*
*
*
*
*
ir
ir
*
*
*
j-jn.il Effluent Averages (NH3-N)
Months of
Blg/1
266
,
5
124
139
*
43
*
20.9
19
*
9.1
16.6
12.1
11.4
5.2
Ib/d Ih/t Data
7,990
*
788
3,130
4,860
*
6,170
•ff
1,590
1,406
*
1,790
993
1,260
1,520
716
16.0
*
1.6
31.3
*
*
21.4
*
2.4
1.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
12
*
1
14
12
•it
35
*
1
22
*
19
15
9
2
1
Data Source
DMR
Verif i cat ion
DMK
(b)
DMA, Supplemental
Veri f icat ion
DMR, Supplemental
Industry Submitted
Industry Submitted
Industry Submitted
Industry Submitted
Industry Submitted
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
* Data Not Available
(a) Mil] added ammonia to effluent for neutralization; Bill is now closed.
(L) Data from "Aerated Lagoon Treatoent of Sulfite Pulping Effluents," Report to U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series Program
12040 ELW, December 1970. (39)
fr) R.iw waste averages are for the pulp mill only.
(d) Effluent data is based on discharge from biological treatment receiving pulp mill
waste only. Concentration reported is that calculated for total mill discharge
assuming no ammonia is present in the balance of the mill wasteuater.
-------
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Agency has conducted an exhaustive study of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry to establish effluent limitations reflecting the
best practicable control technology currently available (BPT) 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 100 mills, the
following pollutant parameters have been identified as present in
pulp, paper, and paperboard wastewaters and should be subject to
limitation under BPT and BAT regulations, NSPS, PSNS, and PSES, as
appropriate:
Conventional Pollutants: BOD£, TSS, and pH.
Toxic Pollutants: Trichlorophenol -(TCP),
pentachlorophenol (PCP),
and zinc.
SELECTION OF WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The EPA's 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.
Toxic Pollutants
Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement in Natural Resources Defense
Council, Inc. v. Train, 8 ERC 2120 (D.D.C. 1976), modified, 12 ERC
1833 (D.D.C. 1979)(1)(2), provides guidance to the Agency on
-------
exclusions of specific toxic pollutants, subcategories, or categories
from regulations under the effluent limitations guideline?, 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
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
242
-------
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.
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
243
-------
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 reduced by
technologies known to the Administrator.
Review of Previous Regulations
Conventional, toxic, and nonconventional pollutants have been limited
under promulgated effluent limitations guidelines and new source
performance standards applicable to wastewater discharges from the
pulp, paper, and paperboard and builders' paper and board mills point
source categories (see 39 FR 16578, 39 FR 18742, and 42 FR 1398).
(3)(4)(5) Table VI-1 presents a summary of the pollutants that have
been regulated or have been addressed in previous Agency rulemakings
for each of the subcategories of the industry.
Conventional Pollutants. Regulations limiting the discharge of BOD5_,
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
section 306 based on the best available demonstrated technology and in
sections 301(b)(2)(E) and 304(a)(4) through identification of the
"best conventional pollutant control technology" (BCT). As discussed
in Sections II and XI, this document does not address establishment of
BCT limitations.
Toxic Pollutants. The only toxic pollutant regulated in the past was
zinc (see 42 FR 1398). (5) This pollutant was 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 hydrosulfite as a bleaching
chemical.
Responses obtained during a survey of the industry indicated that zinc
hydrosulfite was still used at one mill. Since the potential exists
for the discharge of zinc due to the continued use of zinc
hydrosulfite, EPA decided to continue to regulate this pollutant in
those subcategories where zinc is currently regulated.
Nonconvent ional Pollutants. Two nonconventional pollutants were
controlled under prior regulations: settleable solids and color.
Settleable solids were limited under regulations applicable to the
builders' paper and roofing felt subcategory of the builders' paper
and board mills point source category. (3) Settleable solids are
measured during the analysis for suspended solids (TSS), a
conventional pollutant. Therefore, EPA concluded that (a) settleable
solids will be controlled by NSPS for TSS and by limitations, when
established, that reflect the best conventional pollutant control
technology (BCT) and (b) that BAT limitations for control of
settleable solids are unnecessary and redundant.
-------
TABLE VI-1
SUMMAKY OF PARAMETERS PROPOSED OR PROMULGATED
FOR EFKLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES BY SIIBCATE<;ORY
ro
Subcatc-gory
I nj. eg rated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market. Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alfcali lie-Fine *
Unbleached Kraft
Semi -f h(*ou cal
Unbleached Kraft and Seui-Che«ical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp2
Fapergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Cheai-Mechanical
Groundwood-Theroio-Hechanical
Groiindwood-CMM Papers
Groumlwood-Fine Papers
Serondary Fibers Segaent
Deink
Tissue Fro« Wastepaper
Papcrboard Fron Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products4
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Seguent
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Noninlegrated-Ti&aue Papers
Noni ntcgrated-Lightweight Papers*
Noni nLegrjted-Filter and Nonwoven Papers'*
Noni itt t'grated-PapcrboH rd4
Conventional Pollutants
BODS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
rs<
TSS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
>C
X
X
X
-
pH Seltleable Solids
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
-
Toxic Pollutant Nonconvent iona 1 Pollutant
Zinc
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
X
X
X
X
-
-
-
-
-
Color
*
A
*
*
X
X
X
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
.
-
-
X Regulations were proposed and promulgated for this pollutant or pollutant parameter.
~~ Regulations were proposed for this pollutant or pollutant parameter.
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories,
2 The RPT BOD5 effluent linitatiou for acetate grade production iu the Dissolving Sulfite Pulp subcategory was
remunJed to EPA.
•* Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drua Wauh) subcategories.
4 These dirt* new subcdtfgor ies for which the Agency is establishing effluent limitations and standards lor the
first t i me.
-------
BAT limitations were 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 (see
39 FR 18742). (4) EPA proposed BAT color limits for the dissolving
kraft, market bleached kraft, BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue)
bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, and soda subcategories. 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 prior
BAT limitations were proposed and promulgated, EPA concluded that the
discharge of color in pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents is not of
uniform national concern. Therefore, EPA proposed to withdraw all
color limitations and will control color 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
are presented in Sections VII, VIII, and Appendix A 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, EPA
investigated the potential for discharge of other toxic and
nonconventional pollutants from the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. A total of 129 specific toxic pollutants and 14 additional
nonconventional pollutants were the subject of extensive study (see
Section II). EPA conducted screening and verification studies that
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, EPA determined the specific
toxic pollutants to be investigated during the verification program
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 program only if
the pollutant was not detected in wastewater samples collected during
the initial contractor screening program, with the exception of seven
2*6
-------
metals: antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, selenium, silver, and
thallium. Based on initial screening results, EPA 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 Conducted During
Verification Sampling-Table V-29 presents the results of screening
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 those
specific toxic pollutants that EPA excluded from regulation based on
screening program results and the reasons for those exclusions.
Verification Program. Table I1-8 presents a list of all compounds for
which EPA obtained chemical analyses during the verification program.
A summary of the analysis results is presented in Table V-31.
Toxic Pollutant Assessment. EPA assessed the analytical results of
those toxic pollutants detected in verification program samples 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 specific toxic pollutants were
developed by personnel in the Office of Quality Review, Effluent
Guidelines Division.(40) 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.(41) The basis for comparing the results for
mercury was proposed pretreatment standards for the metal finishing
industry. (42) Table VI-3 presents projected treatability levels for
those compounds included in the Agency's verification program. EPA
compared verification analysis results 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, EPA eliminated 19 toxic pollutants 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); EPA determined that these pollutants are "present in
247
-------
TABLE VI-2
CRITERIA FOR ELIMINATION OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
BASED ON SCREENING PROGRAM RESULTS
AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS ELIMINATED
Paragraph 8 (a) (ill)
"For a apecific pollutant, the pollutant is not
detectable "
1. acenaphthene 88.
2. acrolein 89.
8. 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 90.
9. bexachlorobenzene 91.
12. hexachloroethane
16. chloroethane 92.
19. 2-chloroethylvinyl ether (mixed) 93.
26. 1,3-dichlorobenzene 94.
28. 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine 95.
32. 1,2-dichloropropane 96.
37. 1,2-diphenylhydrazine 97.
40. t-chlorophenylphenyl ether 98.
41. 4-bromophenylphenyl ether 99.
46. methyl broaide (broBomethane) 100.
SO. dichlorodifluoroBcthane 101.
52. hexachlorobutadiene 102.
57. 2-nitrophenol 103.
61. N-nitrofodiaethylaaine 104.
63. N-nitrosodi-n-propylanine 105.
72. benzo[a]anthracene 113.
(1,2-benzanthracene) 116.
73. benzo[a]pyrene (3,4-benzopyrene) 129.
74. 3,4-benzofluoranthene
75. beozo[k)fluoranthene
(11,12-benzo fluoranthene)
79. benzo[ghiJperylene
(1,12-benzoperylene)
80. fluorene
83. indeno[l,2,3-cdjpyrene
vinyl chloride (chloroethylene)
aldrin
dieldrin
chlordane (technical nixture and
•etabolitea)
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE (p.p'-DDX)
4,4'-ODD (p,p'-TDE)
a-endoiulfan
B-endoiulfan
endoaulfan sulfate
endrin
endrin aldehyde
heptachlor
heptachlor epoxide
a-BHC
9-BHC
Y-BHC (lindane)
5-BHC
toxaphene
aabestoa (fibrous)
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
248
-------
TABLE VI-2 (Continued)
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii)
"For a specific pollutant.....i» present la amounts
too small to be effectively reduced by technologies
known to the Administrator "
3. acrylonitrile 53.
S. benzidlne 56.
14. 1,1,2-trichloroethane 58.
17. bis(chloronietbyl)ether 60,
20. 2-cbloronaphthalene 62.
25. 1,2-dichlorobenzene 71.
27. 1,4-dichlorobenzene 114.
30. 1,2-dicnloroethylene 115.
33. 1,3-diehloropropylene 117.
(1,3-dichloropropeae) 118.
34. 2,4-di«ethylphenol 125.
35. 2,4-dinitrotoluene 126.
36. 2,6-dinitrotoluene 127.
42. bis(2-chioroiSQpro]jyl3 ether
43, bis(2~chl0roethoxy) methane
45. methyl chloride (cblortwietkane)
hexacnlorocyclopentadiene
nitrobenzene
4-nitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-o-creaol
N-nitrosodiphenylaniine
dimethyl phthalate
antimony
arsenic
beryllium
cadmium
selenium
silver
thallium
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii)
"For a specific pollutant is detectable in the
effluent from only a small nunber of sources
and the pollutant is uniquely related to only those
sources "
18. bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
29. 1,1-dichloroethylene
82. dibenzo(a,h]anthracene
(1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene)
249
-------
TABLE VI-3
PROJECTED TREATABILITY FOR VERIFICATION PROGRAM TOXIC POLLUTANTS
Verification Compound Source for
Toxic Compounds (Priority Pollutants) Comparison Level (ps/1) Concentration Used
4.
6.
7.
10.
11.
13.
15.
21.
22.
23.
24.
31.
38.
39.
44.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
54.
55.
59.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
76.
77.
78.
81.
84.
85.
86.
87.
106.
107.
108.
benzene
carbon tetrachloride
chlorobenzene
1,2-dichloroe thane
1,1, 1-trichloroethane
1 , 1-dichloroe thane
1, 1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
2,4, 6-trichlorophenol
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
ethylbenzene
fluoranthene
oethylene chloride
broraoform
dichlorobronoroe thane
trichlorofluorome thane
dichlorodifluo rone thane
chlorodibromooe thane
iaophorone
naphthalene
2,4-dinitrophenol
pentachlorophenol
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
chry»eue
acenaphthylene
anthracene
phenanthrene
pyrene
tetrachloroe thy lent
toluene
trichloroethylene
PCB 1242 (Arochlor 1242)
PCB 1254 (Arochlor 1254)
PCB 1221 (Arochlor 1221)
50
50
50
100
100
100
50
25
50
100
50
50
50
10
100
50
100
100
100
100
50
50
25
10
50
10
1 - 10
25
10
25
1
10
10
10
1
50
50
100
1
1
1
*
*
*
•ft
*
*
*
*
*
,v
*
it
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
-V
•Je
•:;
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*.v
£
*
250
-------
TABLE VI-3 (continued)
Verification Compound Source for
Toxic Compounds (Priority Pollutants) Comparison Level (|Jg/l) Concentration Used
109. PCB 1232 (Arochlor 1232) 1 *
110. PCB 1248 (Arochlor 1248) 1 *
111. PCB 1260 (Arochlor 1260) 1 *
112. PCB 1016 (Arochlor 1016) 1 *
119. chromium 2500 **
120. copper 1800 **
121. cyanide 230 **
122. lead 300 **
123. mercury 100 ***
124. nickel 1800 **
128. zinc 1800 **
References
*Murray P. Strier, "Treatabilitv of Orgnnic Priority Pi] lut.ints - Part C - Thei- Estimated
(30 Day Average) Treated Effluent Concentration - A Molecular Engineering Approach,"
Table I, 1978. (40)
** Development Document for Existing Source Pretreatment Standards for the Electro-
plating Point Source Category, EPA 440/1-79-003, August 1979. (41)
*** Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for
the Metal Finishing Point Source Category. EPA 440/l-82/091b, August 1982. (42)
251
-------
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 any
of 60 mills where verification surveys were conducted:
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
2,4-dinitrophenol
Chrysene
Phenanthrene
Parachlorometa cresol
EPA included chrysene and 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 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.
EPA included 2,4-dinitrophenol 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, EPA
included both anthracene and phenanthrene 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.
EPA added parachlorometa cresol to the list of verification compounds
because it is a chlorinated phenolic. Based on literature reviews,
EPA determined that potential existed for the presence of chlorinated
phenolics in pulp, paper, and paperboard effluents. However,
parachlorometa cresol was not detected in wastewater samples at any of
the 60 verification mills.
The toxic pollutants bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and methylene
chloride were eliminated from further consideration because they were
•252
-------
TABLE VI-4
TOXIC POLLUTANTS ELIMINATED FROM ASSESSMENT
BASED ON VERIFICATION PROGRAM RESULTS
DETECTED BELOW TREATABILITY LEVEL
6. carbon tetrachloride
(tetrachloromethane)
7. chlorobenzene
10. 1,2-dichloroethane
13. 1,1-dichloroethane
15. 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane1
22. parachlorometa cresol2
39. fluoranthene
44. methylene chloride3
(dichloromethane)
48. dichlorobromomethane
49. trichlorofluoromethane
51. chlorodibromomethane
54. isophorone
2,4-dinitrophenol1
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate3
di-n-octyl phthalate
chrysene4
acenaphthylene
anthracene
phenanthrene 5
PCB-1221 (Arochlor 1221)
PCB-1232 (Arochlor 1232)
PCB-1016 (Arochlor 1016)
chromium (total)
copper (total)
mercury (total)
59.
66.
69.
76.
77.
78.
81.
108.
109.
112.
119.
120.
123.
124. nickel (total)
1 Not detected during verification sampling; detected in final effluent(s)
during screening program below treatability level.
2 Not detected in raw waste or final effluent samples during screening or
verification programs.
3 Laboratory contaminant.
4 Not detected during verification sampling; detected in raw waste stream(s)
below treatability levels during screening program.
s Not detected during verification sampling; co-elutes with anthracene using
screening procedures.
253
-------
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, EPA
identified for each subcategory those toxic pollutants with
concentrations equal to or in excess of specified treatability levels
in either the raw wastewater or treated effluent. 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, EPA
evaluated all available data. 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.
As a result of this evaluation, EPA eliminated 20 toxic pollutants
from further consideration in the assessment of the necessity for
development of uniform national guidelines. Paragraph 8 of the
Settlement Agreement provides guidance for the elimination of these
specific toxic pollutants. Table VI-7 lists those criteria cited in
Paragraph 8 and the specific toxic pollutant(s) eliminated based upon
the criteria.
Based on this analysis, the Agency proposed uniform national standards
for the control of three additional specific toxic pollutants besides
zinc: chloroform, trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol (see 46 FR
1430; January 6, 1981).
Subsequent to proposal, EPA reviewed its analysis of toxic pollutant
discharges from the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. EPA
determined that uniform national standards for the control of
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol should be promulgated.
Trichlorophenol (TCP) and pentachlorophenol (PCP) were consistently
detected in treated effluents in excess of treatability levels at
those mills where slimicide and biocide formulations containing these
compounds were used. Additionally, P.CP and TCP are likely to pass
through publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). Technology (chemical
-------
TABLE VI-5
SUMMARY OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
OF CONCERN BY SUBCATKGOKY
fO
Jl
Jl
SulndU.ii..iy A" 1
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Al ka 1 i ne-Fi ne '
llnlilrjc lied Kraft
a Linertioaril
o Bag
Seni -Cheulira 1
Unbleached Kraft and
Si-nu -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfjtc Pulp
I'apergrade Siilfitc2 X
(jf oim.lwoud-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Paprrboard From Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Ke 1 1
Noli integrated Segilelit
Noniutegratcd-Kine Papers
Noniutegrated-Ti ssue Papers
Non j ll t eg ra t ed - L i gh t we i gh t
Nunintegrated-Fi 1 ter and
Noiiwoveu Papers
*Toxic Pollutants are as follows:
A. Benzene 31.
11. 1 , 1, 1-Trichloroethane 38.
21. Tr ich joropheriol 47.
2:i. Chloroform 55.
24. 2-Chlorophenol 64.
1 Includes tine BJeached Kraft and
.' 21. ?J_._2.A. _?i
X - -
X X - -
X - -
X - -
X - -
x x x x x
X - -
X - -
X
2 ,4-Dichloropheuol
Ethy Ibenzene
Bronof orm
Naphtha lene
Pentachlorophenol
38 __ 47 55 64
X
X
X X
X
X X
X - - -
X - X
X
X - - -
-
Toxic Pollutants-
65 67 68 70 84 B5 86 87 106 107 110 111 121
X---X----
X----XX--
X-----X--
XXXX
X--X-X---
xxxx - x
XX-X--X-- - X - X
X-X--X
122 128
-
-
X
X
X X
X X
X
X X
65. Phenol 85. Tetrachloroethylene 110. PCB 1248
67. Butyl Benzyl Pbtbalate 86. Toluene 111. PCB 1260
68. Di-n-Butyl Phthalate 87. Tricbloroethylene 121. Cyanide
70. Dietbyl Phthalate 106. PCB 1242 122. Lead
84. Pyrene 107. PCB 1254 128. Zinc
liu I uilea l",ipergra
-------
TABLE VI-6
SUMMARY OF DATA ASSESSMENT - TOXIC POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
cn
o>
Toxic Pollulant/Subc«te«.ory
4. Benzene
Papergrade Sulfite
11. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Papergrade Sulfite
Integrated Mittcel laneous
21. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Market Bleached Kraft
Papergrade Sulfite
Deink
o Tissue Papers
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
23. Chloroform
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
24. 2-Chlorophenol
Papergrade Sulfite
31. 2,4-Dichlorophenol
Papergrade Sulfite
38. Ethylbenzene
Market Bleached Kraft
Tissue Frosi Wastepaper
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papen
Influent Effluent
12
12
12
12
12
12
6
12
6
18
9
3
6
9
9
4
12
6
3
6
12
12
12
6
12
6
18
9
3
6
9
9
4
12
6
3
6
12
12
12
• of Sample* iu Excess Concentration
Treatability Levels Range lJg/1
if luent
3
3
1
1
3
3
3
1
3
6
9
8
4
11
3
3
3
3
Effluent
1
0
0
0
3
3
3
1
0
0
0
3
0
12
0
2
0
0
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
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
Average
Concentrations Mft/1
Influent
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
Effluent Comments
Detected in tinal cfflu-
at low levels.
7
0
5
210
41
430
19
67
12
6
52
13
433
26
145
55
10
0-120
180-220
21-50
90-130
65
203
37
106
(b)
6
9
6
9
1
1
0
0
0-82
2-74
0
0
27
27
0
0
Detected in two tiua 1
effluent samples at one
•ill where biological
employed.
(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 aull(s) where BPT efiluent
limitations are not attained.
-------
TABLE Vi-b (Continue.!)
Nuuiher of Samples in Excess Concentration
Nusibe£ _of_Sa«p_les_ A_na_lyzed of Treatability Levels Range pg/1
Influent Effluent
in
47. Rromoforn
Paurrbotird Frupi Wastepaper
55. Naphthalene
Papergrade Sulfitc
Dei nk
o Kinir Papers
o Tissue Papers
18
12
18
uent
1
2
3
2
2
I
2
1
2
2
5
6
3
2
I
5
2
5
6
3
6
1
3
2
9
12
2
1
1
Effluent
1
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
3
3
-
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
Influent
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
59-500
51-1400
44-150
8-150
10-68
Effluent
0-62
7-88
0
0
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
0-520
-
22-66
0-3
0
Average
Concent rat ions pg/1
TnfluenT Effluent
40
102
142
48
36
(b)
(b)
64. Pentachlorophcnoi
BCT Bleached Kraft 99 23 5-31 16-21 19 19
Alkaline-Fine 99 10 6-11 0-1 8 1
Papcrgrade Sulfite 12 12 20 9-12 0 110
Groundwood-Kine Papers 6 6 1 0 3-12 0-2 6
Do ink
o Kine Papers 33 22 9-24 4-20 15 12
o Tissue Papers 66 23 10-61 27-38 38 34
Paperboard From Wustepaper 18 18 53 0-1,200 0-1,400 356 400
Builders' Paper and Roofing Fell 12* 0 6 17-160 - 65
Integrated Miscellaneous 12 12 3 0 12-29 0-5 23 3
Noiiinlegrate.l Miscellaneous 99 22 0-200 0-68 72 27
65. Phenol
Dissolving Kraft 33 10 8-110 10-29 54 18
BCT Bleached Kraft 99 50 44-92 0-17 67 7
Unbleached Kraft
o Unerboard 33 20 41-110 3-4 77 3
o Bag 66 50 50-140 0 89 0
Seoii-Chemical 66 60 160-400 3-24 230 14
Unbleached Kraft and
Seni-Chemical 66 30 30-100 0 56 0
Papergrade Sulfile 12 12 62 78-640 0-250 333 80
Grojndwood-Kinc Papers 66 10 15-51 0-5 34 2
Deink
o Tissue Papers 66 30 76-150 0 119 0
Tissue Froa Wastepaper 99 20 24-140 0-6 77 2
Paperboard From Wastepaper 18 18 93 59-500 0-520 204 144
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 12 0 12 0 51-1400 - 409
Nonintrgrated-Finc Papers 99 21 44-150 22-66 94 38
NoninLegrated-Ki1ter and Nonwoven
Papers 66 10 8-150 0-3 64 1
Integrated Miscellaneous 12 12 10 10-68 0 31 0
(a) Detected in Final effluent samples at levels lower than the 30-day average treatabi1ily comparison value.
(b) Delected in final effluent sunples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatahility comparison value only at mill(s) where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained.
*1 mill was self-
contained and 3 dis-
charge to POTWs.
(b)
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued)
Nuaiber ol Samples io Excess Concent rat ion
Nuaiber of Samples Analyzed of Treatability Level 5 Range pg/1
Average
Jt
CD
Tuxi
67.
68.
70.
84.
85.
86.
c Pol lutant/Subcatcgory
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Unbleached Kraft
o Bag
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Deink
o Newsprint
Paperhoard From Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Nonintegraled-Tissue Papers
Ui-N-Butyl Phthalate
BCT Bleached Kraft
Paperhoard Fron Wastepaper
Noni ntegra ted-Paperboa rd
Uiethyl Phthalate
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard Proa Wastepaper
Builders' Paper and Hoofing
Noniiitegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Pyrene
Dissolving Kraft
Tet rachloroethylene
Deink
o Fine Papers
Tissue from Wastepaper
Toluene
Alkal ine-Fine
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood-FJne Papers
Deink
o Fine Papers
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Influent
6
4
3
18
Felt 12
6
9
18
6
9
18
Felt 12
6
6
3
3
9
9
12
6
3
Felt 12
6
12
Effluent
6
4
0
18
0
6
9
18
6
9
18
0
6
6
3
3
9
9
12
6
3
0
6
12
Influent
2
0
3
7
3
3
1
1
3
1
7
3
1
0
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
3
Effluent
0
1
-
3
0
1
0
3
1
0
5
-
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
-
0
6
Inf 1 uent
0-39
0
3-8
0-190
5-12
620-950
0-27
0-85
110-230
0-55
12-690
0-180
0-35
0-12
0-6
22-180
0-220
1-180
10-70
1-63
11-150
0-620
2-380
0-660
Effluent
0
2
-
0-81
0
0-15
0-23
30-55
0-61
0
0-320
-
0
0-130
0
0
0-57
0
3-66
0
0
-
1-15
70-150
Influent
23
0
5
61
9
797
16
32
180
26
183
42
12
4
2
95
74
62
44
23
58
120
130
147
Effluent
0
2
-
21
0
5
8
44
20
0
138
-
0
58
0
0
19
0
29
0
0
-
6
99
Comment s
Detected in final
effluent samples at
very low levels.
Detected in fianl
effluent samples at
very low levels.
Detected at low levels
in final effluent
samples of only two
mills where BPT limits
are attained.
(a)
Only detected hi one
final effluent sample.
(b)
(a) Detected in final effluent samples at level* lower than the 30-day average treatahllity comparison value.
(b) Detected in final effluent samples at levels higher than the 30-day average treatability comparison value only at •il](s) where BPT effluent
limitations are not attained.
-------
TABLE VI-6 (Continued)
Nimber of Saaples Analyzed
rv;
tn
Toxic Pol lutant/Subcategory Influent Effluent
87.
106
107
110.
111.
121.
122
l'28.
(a)
(bl
Tri chloroethylene
Deink
o Fine Papers
. PCB-1242
Drink
o Fine Papers
. PCB-12S4
Unbleached Kraft and Sesu-
Cheaucal
DC ink
Nonintegra ted-Fi 1 ter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nodintfgrated Miscellaneous
PCB-1248
Paperboard Fro* Wastcpsper
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
. PCB 1260
Deink
o Tissue Papers
Cyanide
Deink
o Newsprint
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
. l,ca
-------
TABLE VI-7
CRITERIA FOR ELIMINATION OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS
BASED ON VERIFICATION PROGRAM RESULTS
AND TOXIC POLLUTANTS ELIMINATED
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
47. bromoform
55. naphthalene
65. phenol
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
70. diethyl phthalate
84. pyrene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
121. cyanide
122. lead
Paragraph 8 (a) (iii)
"For a specific pollutant is detectable in the
effluent from only a small number of sources and
the pollutant is uniquely related to only those sources.
38. ethylbenzene
85. tetrachloroethylene
107. PCS 1254
110. PCB 1248
111. PCB 1260
260
-------
substitution) is available that will virtually eliminate the discharge
of PCP and TCP associated with the use of chlorophenolic-containing
biocides in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. The Agency has
determined that removal of PCP at POTWs is on the order of only 54
percent. (43) Limited data are available on the TCP removal capability
of POTWs; however, available data on the capability of biological
treatment to remove TCP indicates that reductions approaching 100
percent do not occur (see Table V-31).
After reviewing all available information, EPA decided to withdraw the
chloroform regulations that were proposed for the nine subcategories
where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach
pulp. The technology basis of the proposed limitations was biological
treatment capable of attaining BPT effluent limitations. Proposed
limits were based on the highest concentrations found after biological
treatment at mills in the nine subcategories where BPT limitations are
being achieved. EPA's review of all available chloroform data,
including data provided in comments on the proposed rules, identified
nine mills where closed biological systems (either oxygen-activated
sludge or deep tank aeration systems) are employed that inhibit
chloroform volatilization. The Agency also determined that the nine
mills with closed systems are likely to exceed the proposed chloroform
limit even when BPT effluent limitations are attained. The Agency
decided to withdraw the proposed BAT limitations for chloroform since
(a) installation of biological treatment assures adequate treatment of
chloroform for all but nine mills and (b) the proposed BAT chloroform
limitations cannot be achieved at the nine mills without major
modification of the existing closed biological treatment systems.
Further, the incremental removal of chloroform that would occur at
these nine mills is not justified in light of the non-water quality
impacts that would result from the application of chloroform removal
technology. EPA estimated that compliance with proposed chloroform
limitations would increase the energy used to operate wastewater
treatment systems at these nine mills by over 70 percent.
The Agency also decided to withdraw the proposed NSPS for chloroform
because EPA anticipates that chloroform will be effectively controlled
at new sources through the application of open biological treatment
systems; closed biological treatment systems are now employed at only
about 4.7 percent of the existing direct discharging mills.
At proposal, EPA was aware that some wastepapers are contaminated with
PCBs which were once used in the manufacture of carbonless copy paper.
However, only limited data were available on the discharge and
treatability of PCBs in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
Thus, PCB effluent limitations were not proposed for those
subcategories where wastepaper is processed. Instead, the Agency
sought comments and additional data on the discharge of PCBs and
explained that EPA would evaluate all available data between proposal
and promulgation to determine whether BAT limitations for control of
PCBs are appropriate.
261
-------
After proposal, the Agency obtained all available information on the
discharge of PCBs in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and
determined that PCB-1242 is a pollutant of concern in discharges from
mills in the deink subcategory where fine or tissue papers are
produced. Therefore, concurrent with the final regulation, EPA
proposed BAT effluent limitations and NSPS for control of PCB-1242 in
the deink subcategory. The proposed regulation is the subject of
another document. (44)
Prior to promulgation, based on the guidance provided in Paragraph 8
of the Settlement Agreement, EPA reexamined the toxic pollutants of
potential concern for this industry as they relate to pretreatment
standards. Table VI-8 lists those toxic pollutants of potential
concern for which the Agency did not establish pretreatment standards
and the reasons therefor.
Nonconventional Pollutant Assessment. During the screening and
verification programs, EPA investigated discharge levels 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 eight 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, EPA eliminated it 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, EPA decided not to
establish uniform national regulations 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
the permit issuing authority is aware that xylene is used at a mill,
EPA recommends that the permit writer undertake a closer examination
of the levels being discharged to determine if xylene should be
limited in the NPDES permit.
EPA assessed data on the remaining four resin acids, three fatty
acids/ and five bleach plant derivatives. 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 BOD!5
and TSS were attained. Tables VI-9, 10, 11, and 12 present these
summaries.
Data available to the Agency show that biological treatment (the
technology basis of BPT in those subcategories where high levels of
-------
TABLE VI-8
EXCLUSION OF TOXIC POLLUTANTS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN FROM
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS
Toxic Pollutant
Reason for Exclusion
4. benzene
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
11. 1,1,1-trichloroethane
23. chloroform
24. 2-chlorophenol
31. 2,4-dichlorophenol
38. ethylbenzene
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
Average POTW removal is 61 percent1
However, the only POTW sampled by
EPA that receives wastewater from
a mill where chlorine is used to
bleach pulp removed 97.8 percent
of the raw waste chloroform1.
Direct discharger removal averages
96.7 percent. Pass through is
unlikely.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
47. bromoform
55. naphthalene
65. phenol
67. butyl benzyl phthalate
68. di-n-butyl phthalate
Average raw waste discharge is
below treatability
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but two mills in two
different subcategories.
POTW removal is 83 percent1.
Direct discharger removal ranges
from 0 to 100 percent; average
removal is approximately 91
percent. Pass through is
unlikely.
POTW removal is 99 percent1.
through is unlikely.
Pass
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but three mills in three
different subcategories.
263
-------
TABLE VI-8 (cont.)
70. diethyl phthalate
84. pyrene
85. tetrachloroethylene
86. toluene
87. trichloroethylene
106. PCB-1242
107. PCB-1254
110. PCB-1248
111. PCB-1260
121. cyanide
122. lead
POTW removal is 99 percent1. Pass
through is unlikely.
Average raw waste discharge is
below treatability.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but two mills in two
different subcategories.
POTW removal is 91 percent1. Direct
discharger removal ranges from
39.1 to 100 percent. Average
removal is approximately 90
percent. Pass through is unlikely.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but one mill.
POTW removal is comparable to
proposed BAT2. Pass through is
unlikely.
Never used in the manufacture of
carbonless copy paper. Found at
low levels only periodically.
Never used in the manufacture of
carbonless copy paper. Found at
low levels only periodically.
Never used in the manufacture of
carbonless copy paper. Found at
low levels only periodically.
POTW removal is 61 percent1. Direct
discharger removal ranges from
31.2 to 91.6 percent; average
removal is approximately 70
percent. Pass through is unlikely.
Below treatability in raw waste
at all but four mills in four
different subcategories.
1Based on information contained in Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works, US Environmental Protection Agency, September 1982. (43)
2Based on a comparison of information contained in Fate of Priority Pollutants
in Publicly Owned Treatment Works, US Environmental Protection Agency, September
1982 (43) and information contained in the Development Document for Proposed
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for Control of Polychlorinated
Biphenyls in the Deink Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Point
Source Category US Environmental Protection Agency, October 1982 (44).
264
-------
TABLE VI-9
SUMMARY OF INFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
2-
Dehydro- Iso-
M
0
01
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached
Kraft1
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1'
Unbleached Kraft
o Li nerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chewica 1
Unbleached Kraft
jnd Sewi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite3
Croundwood-Fine
Papers
Hi seel tdneous
Treatment
Type
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biologic.) 1
Biological
Biologica 1
Abietic
130
11,800
13
1,043
470
753
6,983
257
1,392
1,949
137
182
1,029
jbieUc
131
3,500
26
861
273
470
7,142
168
607
1,000
423
148
585
pimaric
132
887
--
107
74
283
770
34
547
774
62
29
374
Piaaric
133
1,357
--
115
63
43
1,168
36
152
277
25
76
384
Oleic
134
3,667
383
1,084
276
337
3,133
115
618
1,157
129
174
450
Lino-
leic
135
2,900
1,320
762
283
203
958
122
441
510
63
337
290
Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro-
lenic atearic atearic droabietic droabietic (uaiacol
136 137 138 139 140 141
817 — 1,433
126 -- — 3
— 78 31
71 -- --44 64
—
1,543
98
266
161 93 6
58 40 -- 123 2 4
250
33 2
Tetrachloro-
guaiacol
142 Total
26,361
5 1,876
8 4,062
7 1,571
2,089
21,697
830
4,023
4 5,931
1 1,067
1,196
3,147
Sec on da ry Fi hers Segment
Drink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
Ti SSUP KroM
Was I epaper
Pape rboa rd From
WasLcpdper
Biological
POTW
Biologi ca L
Biological
Primary
Biological
Primary
Biological
837
3,467
e e 7
, 33 /
513
203
54
407
651
2,267
3,700
3 1 267
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
750
X f
33
178
—
—
—
63
212 -- -- 467 6 14
167
—
—
--
—
69 413
8 5,962
10,218
*
3,207
838
653
1,289
2,220
*Average concent rat ions pg/1.
1 Data ai one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
2 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
3 Includes Pdpcrgrade Sull'ite (Blow Pit Wash) and Tapergrade Sulfite (Drua Waah) subcategorieu.
-------
TABLE VI-9 (Continued)
Type
Wastcpaper-MoJ Jed
Product.!* Biological
POTW
Bui Idcra ' Paper atid
Hoofing Kelt PUTW
Primary
Nnnintegrat ed Segment
Nonintegrated-Kine Primary
Papers Bio log i ca 1
Nonintegrated-
T issue Papers Biological
Pr iaary
Non i ul eg rated- Light -
\j weight Papers Biologi cal
& Noiii ntegrated-Filtcr
01 and Nonwoven
Papers Biological
Noniutegraled-
Pape rboa rd Bi o I og i ca 1
Nonintegrated
Mi srei laneous Primary w/
Holding
Pond
Primary
130
210
633
7,559
__
207
—
53
—
—
748
—
177
Dehydro-
131
453
573
2,199 1
143
483
433
—
213
--
33
413
14
174
Iso-
132
48
94
,164
--
..
39
—
37
—
—
62
—
84
Lino- Lino-
133 134 135 136
57 493 207
353 123
576 2,237 897 138
--
19 65 67
13
10 260
.-
--
25 260
—
54 55 33
Epoxy- Dlcbloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
137 138 139 UO 141 142 Total
1,468
1,776
14,770
143
483
830
13
573
—
33
1,508
14
577
*Averjge conrtMit rat ions pg/ 1 .
-------
TABLE VI-10
SUMMARY OK EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS-' FOK RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND C11I.OK1NATEI) DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached
Kraft1
BCT Blrathe.1 Kraft
Alkaline-Fine*
Unbleached Kraft
o Li nu rhoarJ
o Bag
Semi -Cheat ira 1
Unbleached Kraft am
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp
Papergrade SuLfite2
Groundwood-Fine
Pjpers
Integrated
Mi seel Janeous
Seconda r^ Fibers Scj
DC ink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Ti SBUe Papers
Tissue From
Wan Lcpaper
Paperhoard Froa
Waslepaper
Waslcpaper-Molded
Products
Type
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
1
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biologica 1
Biological
£aent
Biological
POTV
Partial Flow,
Biological
Biological
Primary
Biological
Primary
Biological
Biological
130
1,467
--
119
3
10
165
39
710
383
76
7
61
12
—
97
72
84
—
—
19
7
Uchydro-
131
520
4
123
5
11
85
14
235
171
246
26
96
49
—
343
253
250
20
96
55
6]
Iso-
132
380
—
21
1
6
15
7
187
115
17
3
31
5
—
18
13
--
—
8
3
—
133
710
--
22
—
1
32
4
106
31
17
5
25
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
--
134
333
69
17
41
38
70
33
407
81
70
23
38
49
—
590
243
25
193
—
78
48
Lino- Lino-
135 136
170
55 47
—
4
—
—
14 35
59
8
34
72
1
99
—
—
—
—
—
—
5
—
Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachloro-
137 138 139 140 141 142 Total
473 — — -- 4,053
175
11 1 — 1 315
13 58
66
367
9 13 — — 168
113 -- -- -- -- -- 1,817
108 -- — 2 899
7 -- 39 1 2 509
136
1 — -- -- 253
14 9 237
—
14 -- -- -- 1,062
581
359
213
104
160
116
POTW
-------
TABLE VI-10 (Continued)
SUMMARY OF EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOR RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES FOR ALL VERIFICATION FACILITIES
ro
o*
CD
1- 2-
Dehydro- I»o- Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Telrachloro-
TreaUMnl Abietic abietic piaaric Pinaric Oleic leic lenic atearic stearic droabictic droabietic guaiacol guaidrol
Type 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 [3?_ UP HI 142 Total
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt POTV
Primary
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Priswry
Papers Biological
Nonintegratcd-
Tissue Papers Primary
Biological
NonIntegraLed-Light-
weight Papers Biological
Nonintegraled-Filter
and Nonwoven
Papers
NonintegraLed-
Paperboard
Nonintegrated
Miscellaneous
117
93
45
98
27
27
Biological
Biological
Primary w/
Holding
Pond
Primary 8
--
64
200
67 11
--
—
—
--
117
93
49
U7
27
3
64
200
94
^Average concentration
1 Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected in the final effluent.
2 Includes Fine Bleached KrafL and Soda subcategories.
3 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories.
-------
TABLE VI-11
SUMMAKY 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- Oichloro- Chlorodehy- Chlorodehy- Trichloro- Tetrachioro-
Treatnent Abietic abietic piraaric Pinaric Oleic leic lenic stearic stearic droahietic droabietic guaiacol guaijcol
Type 130 131 132 133 134 J35 136 [37 138 U?._... L*P J*l ...I*?.. .]
integrated Segment
Market Bleached
Kraft' Biological
BCT Bleached Kraft Biological
Alkaline-Fine2 Biological
Unbleached Kraft
o I.inerbbard Biological
Seni-Chemical Biological
Unbleached Kraft and
Seni -Chemical Biological
Papergrade Siilfite3 Biological
Gruundwood-Fine
Papers Biological
Integrated Biological
Mi see 1 laneuus
Secondary Fibers Segioent
Ueiuk
o Fine Papers Biological
o Tissue Papers Biological
Tissue Frosi
Uaslepaper Primary
Biological
Paperboard From
Vastepaper Biological
Non i nte£ rated Segment
Nonintegraled-Fine Primary
Papers Biological
Nonintegrated-
Tiasue Papers Primary
Biological
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven
Papers Biological
Non Integra ted-
Pdperbodrd Biological
13
350
470
753
—
1,633
—
305
2,700
837
513
203
54
426
--
207
53
—
—
1,477
26
547
273
470
153
750
18
245
1,400
2,267
1,833
417
372
357
483
433
213
—
33
667
--
51
74
283
29
590
--
55
1,020
587
193
28
32
173
—
39
37
—
--
117
--
58
63
43
11
243
--
76
747
127
80
43
12
150
--
19
10
—
—
25
383 1,320 126 -- -- 3
533 257 — — -- 116
276 283 71 -- -- 44
337 203
69
937 730
97
38
1,280 307 -- -- -- 54
967 470 212 -- -- 467
410 178
147
183
342 -- -- 413
-_
6i 67
260
13
—
260
5 1,876
1,912
7 1,571
2,089
262
4,88)
115
719
7,508
5,962
3,207
651
1,861
483
830
573
13
33
2,546
*Average concentrations pg/1
1 Data at one mill were not included due to upset conditions being reflected iu the final effluent.
2 includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
J Includes Paprrgrade SirJiite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drm Wash) subcategories.
-------
TABLE VI-12
SUMMARY OF EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS* FOK KESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND UILON1HATED DKKIVATJVES FOK VERIFICATION MJIJ.S MKKTING BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
1- 2-
Dehydro- Iso~ Lino- Lino- Epoxy- Dichlaio- Clilorodehy- Cith>ra
-------
resin acids, fatty acids, and bleach plant derivatives are generated)
is very effective in reducing raw waste loadings of resin acids, fatty
acids, and bleach plant derivatives (see Table VI-13). Almost no data
are available for potential BAT treatment technologies such as foam
separation, chemically assisted clarification, ion exchange, or
activated carbon. In addition, analytical methods have not been
developed for measuring these nonconventional pollutants. For the
above reasons, EPA cannot establish BAT effluent limitations
guidelines and NSPS for control of resin acids, fatty acids, and
bleach plant derivatives on a national basis.
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 eight
mills in three subcategories where ammonia-based cooking chemicals are
used in the pulping process. The Agency did not propose establishment
of ammonia limitations because there were very limited data available
on ammonia discharges from these eight mills. EPA sought additional
data and requested comments on the necessity for establishment of
uniform national standards for control of ammonia in the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry.
Some commenters stated that ammonia should not be regulated on a
uniform national basis because of the absence of wide-spread receiving
water quality problems from routine industrial discharges of ammonia.
They stated that ammonia occurs naturally in the environment, is
readily metabolized to nitrite and nitrate, and, therefore, is best
regulated on a case-by-case basis. Other commenters urged the Agency
to collect additional data on the level of ammonia discharges and
applicable treatment technologies to determine whether effluent
limitations were necessary.
After reviewing the comments and all available ammonia data, EPA
decided not to establish ammonia limitations. In reaching that
decision, the Agency confirmed that there are only eight mills in
three subcategories where ammonia-based cooking chemicals are used in
the pulping process. Resulting ammonia raw waste concentrations range
from 20 to 340 mg/1. After application of BPT, about 12 to 32 mg/1 of
ammonia remain, depending on the subcategory considered. When BPT
effluent limits are met, about 3.6 million kg (8.0 million pounds) per
year of ammonia are removed from industry raw wastes.
EPA identified two technologies capable of removing additional ammonia
from pulp, paper, and paperboard industry wastewaters: (a) conversion
of existing biological treatment systems to operate in a nitrification
mode and (b) conversion to the use of a new chemical base (i.e.,
sodium or magnesium). These technologies are discussed in detail in
Sections VII and VIII and Appendix A of this document.
The Agency investigated the ammonia removal capability of these
technologies and also estimated the economic impact that would result
from establishing ammonia limitations. Uncertainties exist in the
271
-------
TABLE VI-13
REMOVALS OF RESIN AND FATTY ACIDS
AND CHLORINATED DERIVATIVES
All Verification Milli
Verification Mills
Meeting BPT Liaitationi
Concentration (Mft/1)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seoi-Chenical
Unbleached Kraft and
S (Mi-Chemical
Sulfite Dissolving Pulp
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated Miscellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Newsprint
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paper-board From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Pi
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
1 Data at one mill were not
Treatment Type
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
Biological
POTW
Partial Flow,
Biological
Biological
Prinary
Biological
Primary
Biological
Biological
POTW
Felt POTW
Primary
Primary
Biological
Primary
Biological
ipers Biological
Biological
Biological
Primary w/Holding Pond*
Primary
included due to upset conditions
Influent
26,361
1,876
4,062
1,571
2,089
21,697
830
4,023
5,931
i nfi7
L t UO /
1,196
3,147
5,962
10,218
4,492
3,207
838
653
1,289
2,220
1,468
1,776
14,770
143
483
830
573
13
—
33
1,508
14
577
Effluent
4,053
175
315
58
66
367
168
1,817
899
COQ
OUV
136
253
237
—
1,062
581
359
213
104
160
116
—
—
117
93
49
127
27
—
3
64
200
94
being reflected in
Percent Concentration (Mg/1)
Removal
85
91
92
96
97
98
80
55
85
«9
D*t
89
92
96
—
76
81
57
67
92
93
92
—
--
18
81
94
72
0
—
91
96
0
84
the final
Influent
__
1,876
1,912
1,571
2,089
—
262
4,883
719
7. SOS
5,962
—
—
3,207
838
653
—
1,861
—
—
—
—
483
830
573
13
—
33
2,546
—
•"
effluent.
Effluent
__
175
245
58
66
—
13
2,194
69
423
237
—
--
581
359
213
--
133
--
—
—
—
93
49
127
27
—
3
128
—
"
Percent
Removal
_„
91
87
96
97
«
95
55
inn
iUU
90
94
96
--
—
82
57
67
—
93
—
—
--
—
81
94
78
0
—
91
95
—
— —
2 Includes Fine Bleacbed Kraft and Soda subcategories .
3 Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pic Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories.
* Treatment system detention time is three days.
272
-------
modifications required to convert existing pulp, paper, and paperboard
biological treatment systems to operate in a nitrification mode (i.e.,
proper detention time, sludge age, and operating temperature).
Therefore, the Agency assumed that ammonia limitations, if
established, would be attained through conversion, to a different
(non-ammonia) chemical base.
The Agency estimates that an additional 2.02 million kg (4.45 million
pounds) per year of ammonia could be removed from wastewater
discharges from the eight mills where ammonia - based cooking
chemicals are used. Capital and total annual costs at the eight mills
would be $120 million and $36.3 million, respectively (1978 dollars).
These costs would result in production cost increases ranging from 2.9
to 15.4 percent and might cause the closure of four of the eight
mills.
Because of these projected severe economic impacts, the Agency
determined that establishment of uniform national standards for
control of ammonia is unwarranted. If required to protect water
quality, ammonia limitations are best established on a case-by-case
basis.
273
-------
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) in-plant
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 within 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 were identified that are commonly employed within the
industry to control pulping, bleaching, washing, liquor recovery, and
papermaking processes.(45)(46)(47)(48) 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, 610 of which were
still in operation as of April 12, 1982. 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:
o woodyard/woodroom,
275
-------
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
276
-------
o pulp mi 11,
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 degree of
production process control was implemented at most mills. In this
section, some specific production process controls that are applicable
to each industry subcategory are described. Additional controls that
may be applicable at individual mills, rather than all mills in a
subcategory, are also described. Table VII-3 summarizes the control
items that have been identified and discussed.
Woodyard/Woodroom
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loading in 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.
277
-------
TABLE VII-3
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES
AVAILABLE FOR REDUCTION OF EFFLUENT VOLUME AND
POLLUTANT LOADINGS
Woodyard/Woodroora
Closeup or dry operation
Segregate cooling water
Pulp Mill
Reuse 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 jumpstage 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
Chemical Substitution
278
-------
•Aft* COLLECTION CONVKYOMt
tXJ
LEGEND
—. exirriNfl
-.— — —.- NEW
/•""X
^"-V
,
('net
II
II
II
II
• AftKIN* DRUMS
IMI mt mmn
. f
•O Li. CTIAW MAIN
FIGURE "SJL- I
CONVERT HYDRAULIC BARKING
SYSTEM TO DRY SYSTEM
-------
O— — —
— —
OUTLINE CLIVATION OP CONVEYORS
WOODROOM
CONVEYOR
ro
Co
O
n
TYPICAL CONVEYOR SECTION
LEGEND
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE "SO.- 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).(28)(49)(50) 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.
Segregation of_ 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 can result in
effluent flow reduction in the range of 1.3 to 4.2 kl/kkg (0.3 to 1.0
kgal/t), depending 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
BODI> 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 Relief and Blow Condensates. Digester relief and blow
condensates may be major contributors to the total BODS^ 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 VI1-4 illustrates a system for
reusing blow condensates. This control is an applicable technology
for all of the kraft and soda subcategories. Digester blow condensate
is collected in a tank and pumped to the area of greatest benefit.
The collection tank should be equipped with a conductivity alarm to
alert the operator of unusually strong condensate. Areas where blow
condensates can be reused include: (a) addition at the salt cake
dissolving tank and (b) use at the lime kiln for mud washing.
If digester condensates, including relief condensates, are stripped or
further treated (i.e., reverse osmosis) to reduce BOD5_, they can be
reused in other process areas including (a) addition at the first
281
-------
STEAM
FRESH
WATER
WOOORO
1 '
1
oo I'LCN». ••!••*
ro \. t \
F I
•
•
DM HEATER CHIP 1 BLOWER BAKKINS 1 DRUM TRUNNIONS CHIP 1 SCREE
AND \ MOTOR 1 1 MOTOI
jU-'
h--*i (LCN|....i
1 1 VTX 1
t- H»l f"W**-
•• *
J
1
1
-•»«l»l
\f CONOENSATE TANK j f COOLIN8 WATER |
i * A TANK T
f SEWER T SEWER
STEAM PLANT
CONOENSATE
TANK
WATER COLLECTION
TANk"AT* rTEAM^LANT
LE6ENP
EXISTINS
NEW
3DI-3
SEGREGATE WOODROOM NON-CONTACT
COOLING WATER AND CONDENSATE
-------
DISESTER BLOW
ro
CO
co
COMPENSATE
1 V
t
4
X
»
»
T
i
i
^,!_
IOIOESTER
CONPENSATE
, TANK
1
••**
"N
CAUSTICIZINO AREA
SKWCM
LEGEND
EXISTINS
NEW
FIGURE 3DE-4
REUSE OF DIGESTER BLOW CONOENSATE
-------
shower of the last stage brown stock washer or (b) addition directly
to the black liquor.
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.(51)(52)(53)
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-f ine papers subcategory, excess thickener filtrate
overflows to the seVer at a rate of up to 16.7 kl/kkg (4.0 kgal/t) of
pulp produced.(54) This overflow represents a small source of fiber
loss and contributes 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0 Ib/t) of TSS at a typical mill.
Modifications shown in Figure VII-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
make-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 Ib/t) of BOD5_. (55) 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 VII-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
storage tanks. Any liquor recovered could be diverted to its
appropriate tank or to a spare liquor tank. This technology is
considered applicable for the dissolving, market, BCT (paperboard,
284
-------
ro
O3
tn
MKmmwHm
WTEft MAKtlN*
1 f.C. V
*
CLEANERS
rprcu
U
i
y
\
WATER MAKE-UP
MINOCMI
THICKCNEH
TMICKCNIN
FILTRATE
CHEtT
SEWEM
f—— ~
1
I
LEGEND
EXISTING
NEW
! ^EEE] \
f~IL Z-. I
FRESH WATER J
-v,.
MEAT
EXCHANGER
|_ MACHINE! _^
FIGURE mi-5
REDUCE GROUNDWOOD
THICKENER FILTRATE OVERFLOW
-------
PULP HILL FLOOR DRAIN*
LLLL
ro
CO
en
LEGEND
i__<__ .•
CXISTIN*
NEW
,...
j
8UMP
•CWCR
LAVOON
FIGURE YE-6
PULP MILL SPILL COLLECTION
DIGESTER AREA
-------
coarse, and tissue), and fine bleached kraft and soda subcategories;
modified systems could also be used in the three sulfite and some
groundwood and deink subcategories.
Brown Stock Washers and Screen Room
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loadings in the
washer and screen room areas include: a) addition of a third or fourth
stage washer or improved washing efficiency by replacement with a
properly sized system, b) recycle of more decker filtrate, and c)
discharge of cleaner rejects to landfill.
Addition o_f a Third o_£ Fourth Stage Washer. This control is
applicable to mills in the kraft, soda, semi-chemical, both papergrade
sulfite, and deink (newsprint product sector) subcategories. The
control includes the addition of a fourth-stage washer to all kraft
and soda washing lines and a third stage washer to all semi-chemical
and papergrade sulfite washing lines. The addition of another washer
stage is illustrated in Figure VII-7. This control is primarily a
BOD5_ reduction measure as dissolved solids losses from the pulping
operation are reduced.
Improved washing facilitates bleaching and results in lower bleaching
chemical costs. In terms of raw waste load, the main effect is a
reduction in BOD5_ ranging from about 2.5 kg/kkg (5.0 Ib/t) for
dissolving kraft mills to as much as 4.0 kg/kkg. (56)(57)(58)
Recycle of_ More Decker Filtrate. This control item was considered in
the establishment of BPT effluent limitations. It is generally
applicable to the alkaline (kraft and soda), groundwood, and deink
subcategories. Tightening up by using decker filtrate on brown stock
washer showers can substantially reduce decker filtrate overflow to
the sewer, thus reducing effluent flow and BOD5_. Efficient washing on
the decker is required to reduce liquor carry-over to bleaching. At
many mills in the subcategories mentioned, a considerable quantity of
decker filtrate is reused in the screen room as dilution water. A
schematic of this control is shown in Figure VII-8.
Typically, reductions of about 4.2 kl/kkg (1.0 kgal/t) of flow and 0.5
to 1.0 kg/kkg (1.0 to 2.0 Ib/t) of BOD5_ can be realized through
implementation of this production process control.(59)(60) Use of this
technology requires a detailed study at each mill; the efficiency of
the existing washing and screening systems should be taken into
account prior to further modification. This production process
control is now being practiced to a limited degree and can be
considered as an applicable control technology at new source mills.
Cleaner Rejects to Landfill. Centricleaner rejects and continuous
screen rejects from the 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
287
-------
*»RO ITAM
WASHER
HOOD
• FAN
'4V'
4 TH STABE
WASHER
HOT WATER
RELOCATED
•HUEDOEft CONVEYOR
rv>
CO
oo
LEGEND |
— — — — N
fl
FOAM ft
XISTINB
EW
INK
IND
BH01
1
~"^
14
STACK
rERS
I
L_ui. ,
r (I
»
911
LH
____.
_ I
^ ^
0 STAAE
)UOR FIL1
TANK
» ••
'
BL
R4
•^ !
1
1 if
• BROWN STOCK
V...^ 8TORABE
1
|
1 1
.1 f_
r
i
ACK 4 TH STABE BLACK
TV LIQUOR FILTRATE
TANK
* ILLUSTRATION ASSUMES EXISTENCE OF
THREE STAGES OF WASHING
FIGURE 21-7
ADDITION OF THIRD OR
FOURTH STAGE PULP WASHER
-------
•HIT! WATCH
TANK
r\>
oo
UAtT
•EOnLfTQCKWASHCM
LEGEND
MCOVtRt
0 __._«.— BLEACH fLAMT
eCKCM
SEWER
FIGURE 1OE-8
RECYCLE DECKER FILTRATE
-------
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.
EPA assumed that adequate clarification is already 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 that
may be implemented to reduce effluent flow from multi-stage
bleacheries.
Counter cur rent oj: Jump-Stage Washing. This control is applicable at
all 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.
In newer mills where all bleach plant washers, pumps, pipelines,
repulpers, and other equipment are constructed of 317 stainless steel
or equivalent, full countercurrent washing may be implemented. Fresh
water or preferably pulp machine or papermachirne white water is used
for the last stage washer showers and for dilution after high density
290
-------
ACCEPTS
THIRD OH
FOURTH STASE
PULP MILL
CLEAN!**
8IDIHILL SCREEN
DUMPSTER TO
LANDFILL
TO REUSE
«..._..
OR SEWER
REJECTS
SUMP
ACCEPTS
TANK
FIGURE 3ZE-9
CLEANER REJECTS TO LANDFILL
-------
• HITI W«t«K
ro
-------
bleached pulp storage. All washer filtrate is used on showers and for
dilution of pulp from the preceding stage. Compared to a bleach plant
with all fresh water showers, the conversion to full countercurrent
washing can reduce bleach plant effluent volume by up to 80 percent.
Figure VII-11 presents a schematic for a full countercurrent washing
system.
Full countercurrent bleaching using chlorine dioxide necessitates the
use of 317 stainless steel or titanium materials of construction for
all washers, pumps, and pipelines in the system. If not already in
place, such equipment is extremely expensive; by contrast, jump-stage
washing sequences can often be readily implemented using existing
major equipment with relatively minor alterations, such as the
addition of pumps and pipelines to service additional showers.
Earlier studies proposed the use of full countercurrent washing or
jump-stage washing in multi-stage kraft and soda pulp mill bleach
plants. Jump-stage washing or modifications of such a system are
utilized at many mills. Bleach plant water use has declined sharply
as a result of these changes. Flow reductions of 8.3 to 25.0 kl/kkg
(2.0 to 6.0 kgal/t) are possible through improved countercurrent reuse
of filtrates in the bleaching sequence at mills in the alkaline (kraft
and soda) and sulfite subcategories. For the simpler papergrade
sulfite bleach plants, savings would be about 29.2 kl/kkg (7.0
kgal/t). (53X61 X62)
Evaporate Caustic Extraction Stage Filtrate. This control is an
applicable control technology at mills in the dissolving sulfite pulp
subcategory. The hot caustic extraction stage would have a three-
stage washing system similar to a red stock washer with carefully
controlled hot showers. The effluent from this stage would be
evaporated and incinerated or disposed of separately from the rest of
the bleachery effluent; therefore, flow would be kept at a minimum.
Implementation of this control will greatly reduce the BOD5_ loadings,
from 41.4 to 104.4 kg/kkg (82.8 to 208.8 Ib/t), depending upon the
grade of dissolving sulfite pulp produced.(63) A flow diagram for the
bleaching end of this system is shown in Figure VI1-12.
Evaporation and Recovery
Production process controls that reduce raw waste loadings in the
evaporator and recovery areas include: a) recycle of condensates, b)
replacement of the barometric condenser with a surface condenser, c)
addition of a boil-out tank, d) neutralization of spent sulfite
liquor, e) segregation of cooling water, and f) various spill
collection measures. These controls are discussed below.
Recycle o_f Condensates. Reuse of evaporator condensates was
identified as part of the best practicable control technology
currently available. (48) 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
293
-------
FRESH
PAPER MACHINE
WHITE WATER
OR
FRESH WATER
WATER
WASHER
[TJ
I FILTRAT
I TANK
SEWER
71
FILTRATE TOWER
Lu
SEWER
V
SEWER
u
V
SEWER
ug
SEWER
.EGEND
EXISTING
. —.—• NEW
FIGURE 3nr-n
FULL COUNTERCURRENT
WASHING IN BLEACH PLANT
-------
RED HUlP WASHER
HOT WATER
vo
en
*'"' J
Kl>-—•- — — — ——-tX-J
EWER
WASHER
FILTRATE
LEGEND
— — — —..
EXISTING
WASHER
FILTHATE
TANK
SIDE HILL_ __
'SCREENS
ft x_AN »tweR
I \._s WASHER
~* ~ FILTRATE
TANK
TOWER FIGURE 301-12
BLEACHERY JUMP STAGE WASHING
AND CAUSTIC EXTRACTION FILTRATE
COLLECTION-DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP
-------
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 BOD5_ 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 VI1-13.
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 a 0.5 kg/kkg (1.0 Ib/t) BOD5_
reduction and less than a 4.2 kl/kkg (1.0 kgal/t) flow
reduction.(53)(64) This technology is applicable at new mills.
Addition of_ a Boilout Tank. This control is applicable at mills in
the dissolving 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 VII-15.
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
296
-------
CAUSTIC
•iLcV
V y
AREA
CONDKN8ATC
TANK
IO
1
I
o
LAST STA9C
BROWN STOCK
WAtKER
LEGEND
.....
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE -ZE- 13
COMPLETE REUSE OF EVAPORATOR CONDENSATE
KRAFT AND SODA MILLS
-------
TO EXISTING BAROMETRIC
r\i
10
oo
EVAPO
MILL
PROCESS
WATER i
MAIN
i
(
1
LEGEND
•»«_ •.
- ^
RATORS
w
SEPARATO
f
I
*" T T
'~N -1
• ••• «lTRCf ••Q-1^
, "" if
' SEWEI
EXISTINS
NEW
,1^1 ^
\ J ' j
"*V f-
SURFACE / \ T
CONDENSER 1 \ JL
H-1
R I __
INTERCONOCNSEliT
\ / CONDENSATE J"^
jY j
-------
l\3
U3
1
SHOWN STOCK . _ _
WA SHINS " " ~J^
WIAK SLACK tVAt»04lATOMS
LIQUOft TANK I
*"*
•W
-**H
CON DIN SAT I
TANK
\
SKI
'")• ; r*
LEGEND • I 1
^
1»JNNSMBB«"^N«1N»» KXlBTIHtt i^sAlM ^B» »J^ .JJAr «^b^«t «^r* •*• 1
i ,
HE COVER Y
"^ J 101LER """
V STRONS SLACK
•KWIM LIOUON STONASI
•fa*)
*
*
SHOWN STOCK
"^y " "^ CAUSTICtZINO AREA
1
1
»*N I
J-i.
I I
i I
1 1
»*i i
BOILOUT""
TANK
FIGURE 2E- 15
ADDITION OF AN EVAPORATOR B01LOUT TANK
-------
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 Ib/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 organi.cs
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.
Segregation of_ 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.(53)(54) 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 VII-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
spills to be sent to the spill tank for recovery. A flow diagram for
a typical system is shown in Figure VII-17.(57)(65)(66)
300
-------
WASHERS
AiSORPTION
TOWER
PLOW METER y ?
>•<«• '%«•
MED LIQUOR
STORASE
co
o
S MB STACE MEB
LIO.UOR WASHER
LEGEND
ABSORPTION
TOWER
IXISTINS
HEADER
L^L__
MIX TANK
•IPHCJ
MfO SLURRY
TANK
/""\
I PC I
^_'
v •
MEAT
»H h*i
EVAPORATORS I
CONDENSATE
STORASE TANK
CONOCNSATC
TANK
EVAPORATOR
M p.
WASH
FRESH WATER
HEADER
FIGURE H- 16
NEUTRALIZATION OF
SPENT SULFITE LIQUOR
-------
RECOVEI
KVAPORA
AREA
CAUSTIC
AREA
1 FGFMH
— -
WEAK
•LACK
LIQUOR
X-N
•
•
1
L.
IY »f— I
TOR 11
J
SEWER
5!
[_
~~1
- NEW
\
su
su
SI
ia
ll
1
"
1
r ,
*?'
MP
IMP
WHITE
LIQUOR
H...'LC*
J-^7
1
_l**^«"
1
;^^7
1
i
• I
H
i
3
***1
1
(
4
"*"*^
i
1
r^"r
k
•-*J • • • •
'
......
t
X—N
-^
""l
i""::rz"i i
• f § • i
..... I V t f
JUR«E , , T » T ^L. WEAK SLACK
LAOOOIT 1 | | r*^UOUOR ^
IMEEN LIQUOR
SPILL TANK *" '
V WHITE LIQUOR^
LA«OOIT ^
_SUR«E FIGURE YTT- i?
L*"00ir SPILL COLLECTION-EVAPORATOR,
RECOVERY.CAUSTICIZING AND
LIQUOR STORAGE AREAS
-------
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.(28) 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.
Installation of_ a 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 VII-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.(58) 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.
Papermill
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)
303
-------
OTECN LIQUOR CLANIFICR
OM*t MIXCft
f
2
oo
O
••At.
- .^^"
"H.™ iri™* "^^^1
) i
i s i
— k
:i__, ?
•.|^..j.
.|LC
PUMP 1 SIPAMATOII
•IWtft
MEM
| WASH III
SEVER
WEAK WASH
f
~f
I r—ll._^
I ' _ x
CONDIMSATI
__ J L
TU
ILL
| DMMS riLTBH
f
MVM
LE6END
• XI*TIM*
FIGURE H- 18
6REEN LIQUOR DREGS FILTER
-------
LIME MUO STORASE
\
1
\
f
CO
O
tn
MUO MIXER
TO STORAGE, FILTER,KILN
LEGEND
-.
EXISTING
NEW
PLOATIN*
OH
f
MUO FILTER
CONCRETE LIME MUO
HOLOIN0 TANK
CONTAMINATED
CONOENSATE"
(HI«H PRESSURE)
DUMP TANK
FIGURE HL- 19
LIME MUO STORAGE PONO
-------
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 VII-20 through VII-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 0.6 to 0.8
kg/kkg (1.2 to 1.6 Ib/t) of BOD!>.
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 VII-23.
Improvement o_f_ Savealls. The use of savealls was identified as part
of 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,
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
306
-------
•LEACH PLANT
HI«H DENSITY BLEACHED PULP
•TOMACC
PAPERUACHIMEt
JL:
L' *
SCWER r1' ***"*
•LEACH TOWERS
CO
o
•LEACHED
UNBLEACHED *
I
•ROKE TANKS
IT
-*-
•TOCK CHECT
••3-;
•OH
^_tXZ?£,_J
LA40ON
FLOOR TRENCHES
*
LEGEND
EXISTING
NEW
SUMP
FIGURE YE-20
STOCK SPILL COLLECTION
PULP BLEACHING 8 PAPERMACHINE AREAS
PAPERGRADE SULFITE
-------
SMD-tTH STASK BLKACH TOWINS
•LCACHKD STOCK TANKS PULP ONYKN WIT INO
co
o
00
SND-rTH STASK SLKACH WASHIRS
o 0|0|0
.? ? f J
J—I—I—Li»I—it--.n
*
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
LEGEND
KXISTIN*
— — — — MIW
*
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I.
CAV*.**"*--^
SLKACH PLAHT
HISH OCNSITY
,
ILCAH
SUMP
SLtACMtO STOCK
STOMASK TANK
SUNSK
FIGURE HE-21
STOCK SPILL COLLECTION SYSTEM
PULP BLEACHING AND DRYER AREAS
BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA MILLS
-------
PARC* MACHINES
STOCK PREP AREA-STOCK TANKS
CO
o
Y*
r« w
I t 5 PURCHAS
PULP
r-
ii ii i! i
n n i |
IL IL 1" I -Jm-
!! r ,
!! fc
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
'Jr- -
J, C ,
T I
I V /'~N
j * "•.u..^-c*i i^..
LEGEND ! J .^.-J
i_ J^K**;?- -**-*]
• UUP 7_j>.
— — — EXISTING •"»«• *-C«-
1 SUR«
- -C±JU
^f'* N..I
' ' JT"
1 1 T^
1 1 f**^
4 ^ JN^S
J STOCK "TANK "* LE*?.
"Tl
i..
e j AROUND
WOOD
r-
=j_ a
PAPER MACHINE
PAPER MACHINE
•ROKE *"
PAPER MACHINE
CHASED STOCK
CHEST
^•ROUNPWOOO STO£M
IE LACOON
NEW STOCK SPILL COLA
CHEST
FIGURE •ZI-
-ECTION SYST
PAPER MILL AREA
GROUNOWOOO-CMN OR FINE PAPERS
-------
GO
o
(
1
f
L
Jr
f
i
i
id
LEGEND
i
^. !
~ L _
™ryr" ^
j£]
SPARE f~*> \^
]• }*
V^-^*T 1
SUMP
fc, |
* \
i i
STORAGE TANKS
.1, j
^>^^ mm mm mm ~ mf
1
;
•IX TANKS
J
OH SIZE PRESS
FIGURE 1
L INCLUDES FINE BLEACHED KRAFT AND SODA SUBCATE60RIES
SPILL COLLECTION SYSTEM
COLOR PLANT-ALKALINE-FINE1
-------
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 VI1-24 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.(60)
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, nonintegrated-fine papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategories.
Application is, however, generally universal in the
industry.(60)(67)(68)(69)(70)
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.(67)(68)(69)(71)(72)
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
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
311
-------
oo
r*
1 *•* ~""^>.
"'flu. ft N' ..-
I 9TOCK J •"*
i tMtt J :••••:
4*t"* Jr+*-itr'^'t
L£6CMO •
-. IXUTIK*
niTMi
"1
1
1
t
a.«m
WHITI
WATtK
***
• CMftT^
iir-**—
J
*-T
1
v
LIHD OMIT
-
f
•~t,
1
^
(Tj HAL ••TtK
t r
i_j
IXIiTIH* •HITI
1
1
^^ TT *•***{
MAD (OX WlUt COUCH »(!•(•
1 1 Vo""' o o o
\^L^^SirA v^^^^
•mt 1 »IT i [ | / WITO
i^— c^_T ! ^T 1
^7 j^j--^^^.^-:
Ov
^7
! m r S
-i T -» -» rJ W
1 • 1 < ( 1 t T t 1 f
t t ?»»•-*.*
HIM TO IKIITIN* '
•IAL iom« 1
VACUUM PUMPS 1
_-. J
r ^ "-~~--~- — in r ---- - - r
r"i.i_.:i i: i
! ' ^
i 1 ! (-'
* 1 f. V
CM.LICTOII j :
""J : FIGURE 3!
PAPERMILL IMPR
UNBLEACHEC
-------
SWEETENER STOCK
CO
CO
PAPERUILL SEWER
PULPMILL SEWER
TO PROCESS DILUTION
TO MACHINE SHOWERS (WIRE)
TO COOLIN0 TOWER (VACUUM SEALS)
TO MACHINE SHOWERS (KNOCKOFF)
FIGURE 3ZH-25
NEWSAVEALLON PULPS PAPERMILL EFFLUENTS —
BUILDERS' PAPER 8 ROOFING FELT
-------
SWEETENER STOCK
OJ
VACUUM
SAVEALL
OUMMTC.R
TO
LANDFILL
JL
• RBY
STOCK
CHEST
TO PULPERS
Vv
r
•••
1
CL
W»
WJ
rs»
m—
f\
EAR CLOUDY
IITE WHITE
kTSR WATER
ICftT CHEAT
t
ff
i
\3
i
SEWER
SEWER WATER FROM
MILL SUMP
SHOWERS,VACUUM
SEVEN
FIGURE 2H-26
NEW SAVEALLON PAPERMILL
EFFLUENT-WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS
-------
PROM PAPER MACHINE
OJ
t— '
CJI
WHITE WATER TO
VACUUM PUMP SEALS
" "
1 Pftfrufi
L.E.UkfflM
1 t
1
TO
1
-A
i *
i i
tXISTINi COLLECT*
V
*l,-
1
V^
*
**
•1
If1
--• *-
1 '
1
Sr, ,
k {
i
FRESH
WATER
PROM
PRESSES
] <
»MM«P
! '
*!.
I
i r
ON "-*- •" — |
TANK |
VACUUM PUMPS | LfVIL eO*t«Ot
j AND ALARM
I i (UiAl
! + * *l W
1 COLLECTK>* '
1 1
TH £AVff ALt_ ^•(MVM* •» «•» -j^ -niriirfcasT" %.- TUMK .
I W IP^W •> Ml» k ^•••r^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^i" f ^^tWP^^k ^^••^V^L-J •• * * « * » * «
FIGURE 231-2?
WHITE WATER TO VACUUM PUMPS AND COLLECTION TANK
FOR PUMP SEAL WATER AND PRESS EFFLUENT
-------
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.(60)
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-line printing or
specialty grades, at least during periods of use of new felts.
Reuse o_f_ 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 a pump 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
be saved.(49) Typically, flow reductions are estimated at less than
8.3 kl/kkg (2.0 kgal/t).
Additional Broke Storage. An additional broke storage chest could be
installed at most mills in the nonintegrated-lightweight papers
316
-------
FRESH WATER MAKE-UP
THICKENER
-:_!"
CO
--J
.|...
I
I-''
BOILER SLOWDOWN
SAVEALL WHITE
WATER
&
•*• TO PROCESS
KNOCK OUT SECTION OF
EXISTING WALL OR CONNECT
WITH LARGE DIAMETER PIPE
LEGEND
EXISTING
NEW
FIGURE SH-28
INCREASED WHITE WATER STORAGE CAPACITY
-------
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 o£ Cool ing 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, calender 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. ( 52) ( 60) 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
losses may aid in the dewatering of combined primary/biological
sludges.
Addition of_ Fourth Stage Cleaners. The addition of a
stage can reduce the flow and solids being discharged
fourth cleaner
from a three
318
-------
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
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.
Addition of Laqoon(s) 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. (53)
Recycle of_ Effluent
At mills in several secondary fibers 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
can yield savings in the cost of raw materials and the cost of
handling and disposing of the primary waste solids.
319
-------
CLEANERS
PROCESS
CLEANER
FEED
oo
rv>
O
LEGEND
EXISTING
«- — — .. NEW
FEED TANKS
FIGURE 3DE-29
4-STAGE CENTRICLEANER
SYSTEM WITH ELUTRIATION
-------
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.(67)
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-lightweight
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 less
costly and equally effective control option would be chemical
substitution. This substitution of chemicals 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:
1. Organo-bromides,
2. Organo-sulfur compounds, and
3. Carbamates.
321
-------
INSIDE MILL
OUTSIDE MILL
oo
ro
no
BALES
LEGEND
EXISTING
NEW
TO PROCESS
PAPER MILL SEWER
SEWER
FIGURE 3OI-30
IMPROVED REUSE
OF CLARIFIER SLUDGE
-------
Substitution to the use of alternate slimicide and biocide
formulations can lead to the virtual elimination of pentachlorophenol
and trichlorophenol from these sources.
Nonconventional Pollutants. Ammonia is used as a cooking chemical at
eight 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_. The equipment changes
necessary to receive and feed a 50 percent solution of NaOH are not
likely to be significant.
After conversion to the use of sodium-based chemicals, spent liquor
could be incinerated, and sulfur dioxide, sodium sulfate, carbonate,
or sulfide could be recovered. These compounds could be sold for use
at nearby kraft mills or for other industrial uses; however, markets
are not likely to be readily available.
Reducing, smelting furnaces that produce a high-sulfidity, kraft-like
green liquor are now employed at sodium-based sulfite mills. The
Agency anticipates that it would be necessary to replace the existing
recovery boilers at ammonia-based mills if chemical substitution to a
sodium base were employed. Additionally, it is likely that, because
the heat value of sodium spent liquor is lower than ammonia spent
liquor, evaporator modification may be required if excess capacity
does not now exist.
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.(73)(74) 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.(75)(76)(77)(78)
323
-------
Oxygen Bleaching. Oxygen bleaching is currently used at only one mill
in the United States, the Chesapeake Corporation in Virginia.(79)
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.(80)
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 02_ stage at a low level. For this reason, the 02_
bleaching sequences being used generally have the 02_ stage preceding
any C12_ 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 02_ stage effluent, a BOD5_ reduction 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. (81 )
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.(73) 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 ADDED sequence. The
capital cost of adding an oxygen stage was reported to be $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.(74)
Oxygen bleaching 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. (53)(76) The
concepts of the closed-cycle mill, as proposed by ERCO-Envirotech,
Ltd. and illustrated in Figure VII-31, are included in the system 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.(82) The bleach
sequence for the closed-cycle bleached kraft mill is DCEDED. The
washing design is straight countercurrent; excess E, stage filtrate
324
-------
VENT
PUR6E
(DRE88 a 0RIT)
.PUR9E
CO
f\)
en
TO ATMOSPHERE
H2O
CONDCNSATE
HoO
1
CONOEN8ATE
STRIPPING
N«CL
LIQUOR
PREPARATION
BLACK LIQUOR
EVAPORATOR
c
PULPIN9
CHEMICALS
N«OH,NaaS
COOKIN6
WASHING
.WOOD
•LCACHIN9
OeCOEO
UNBLCACH
POLP
ED
CLOj
H20
FRESH
BLEACHED
WATER
PULP
FIGURE HI-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 C10i2; however, some must be purged
from the cycle. Figure VII-32 is a schematic of the salt recovery
process.
ERCO-Envirotech stated that use of the design features of the
closed-cycle mill 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 C102_ generating capacity and any major bleachery
modifications requiring more corrosion resistant materials will result
in yet higher costs.(77) 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.(75)(76) 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.(82)
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.(83) In addition, liquor pump failures and evaporator scaling
were the primary problems experienced in the initial operation of the
SRP. Presently, liquor pump failures are no longer a problem and new
evaporator boil out procedures (using Et filtrate) have significantly
reduced scaling problems. At the request of representatives of the
government of the province of Ontario, mill personnel had planned on
constructing a biological treatment system. However, biological
326
-------
CO
ro
COIKIIITIUTU
LMIUM mat*
TO
HE-' HEAT EXCHANGED
WL « WHITE LIQUOR
FIGURE Ytt-32
RAPSON-REEVE
CLOSED CYCLE MILL
SALT RECOVERY SYSTEM
-------
treatment is not currently contemplated because the effluent from this
facility combined with that from another mill at this site is able to
achieve provincial effluent standards. 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.(83)
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.(84)
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.(85)
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.(84)
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 VI1-4. This process is reported to involve the use of existing
or slightly modified bleach plant equipment and produces pulp with
328
-------
TABLE VI1-4
WASTE LOAD REDUCTIONS FROM IMPLEMENTATION OK
HOOKER APS II AMI) APS III SYSTEMS1
CO
ro
10
APSli
1
Effluent
' No. , Operation
rol standard
/
Countercurrent wash-jump
stage, split flow
Replace chlorination with
sequential chlorination -
75:25 J):C ratio
Rf cycle D/C et fluent to dilute
incoming brown stock
Dilute sequential chlorination
75
45
45
25
16
kl/kkg
.1-83.
.9-54.
.9-54.
.0-33.
.7-25.
(kgal/tj
4
2
2
4
0
(18 -
(11 -
(11 -
( 6 -
( 4 -
20)
13)
13)
8)
6)
W
12.
12.
11.
11
5,
&S
5
5
.0
.0
.0
BODS
_{lb/ton)
(25)
(25)
(22)
(22)
(10)
% BODS Color
Reduction kg/kkg
325
325
12 188
12 188
60 43.5
(Ib/tJ
(650)
(650)
(376)
(376)
( 87)
% Color
Reduction
-
-
42
42
87
stock with pjrt El and recycle
remainder to recovery via brown
stock washers and smelt dis-
solving system
5. Use salt sepjration process to
purge NaCl and separate Na2S04
from pn-cipil ator catch
APS-I1I
6. Treat D/C effluent in a resin
packed column and regenerate
resin with a portion of El
t-lll uent
16.7-25.0 ( 4 - 6) 5.0 (10)
16.7-25.0 (4-6) 4.5 ( 9)
60
64
43.5
11.5
( 87)
( 23)
87
'Call, K.J. , ami F'.ll. Thompson, "The Ant i-Pol I nt ion Sequence - A 'lew Route
lo Ueduced Pollutants in Bleach Plant Effluent," TAPPJ, 56(11), 1973.(84)
-------
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.(86) 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.(87) 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 tan-ks 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 C102_ 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).(86)
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.(86)
END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES COMMONLY EMPLOYED BY THE PULP,
PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
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.
330
-------
The initial process of removing organic and inorganic solids can be
accomplished by sedimentation (with or without flocculants or
coagulants), flotation, 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 wastewaters 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.(88) 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.(89)
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_ 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 observed that very little reduction of fatty acids, resin acids,
or their chlorinated derivatives occurs during primary
clarification.(90) This observation suggests that these compounds are
not associated with the raw wastewater solids measured in the TSS test
procedure. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been observed to
undergo significant reductions through primary treatment.(91) At a
deink 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 72 milligrams per liter (mg/l).(91)
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
V). Biological treatment systems have been designed and operated to
achieve 80 to 95 percent and higher BOD5_ reductions when applied to
pulp, paper, and paperboard mill effluents. Biological treatment can
331
-------
also yield an effluent nontoxic to fish a high percentage of the
time.(92)
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.(93) 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.
A recent study involved investigation of influent and effluent
concentrations of toxic and nonconventional pollutants after full-
scale biological treatment.(90) Removal rates of these pollutants, as
derived from the published design and treatment data, are shown in
Table VII-5.(90) The relative removal rates generally agree with
those obtained in laboratory studies.(90)(93)
BOD!> 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.(92) 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 resin and
fatty acid content and toxicity was better than the correlation
between BOD5_ and toxicity.
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, in certain instances,
contribute significantly to the BOD£ waste loads. In addition, excess
settleable solids tend to fill the basins, thus reducing detention
time.
332
-------
u
TABLE VII-5
CALCULATED TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAI. POLLUTANT REMOVAL RATES1(a)
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 Phenol ics
Tri chl oroguaiacol
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)
12-Day
ASB
1.5
1.85
1.25
0.3
0.55
0.15
10.4
0.03
0.10
Mill 14(b) Mill 15(b)
7-Day 15-Day
ASB ASB
1.0 0.45
1.1 0.72
3.0 0.12
0.1 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.
(b) Aerated stabilization basin (ASB) biomass assumed to l>e 200 mg/1.
(c) Activated sludge (AS) biomass reported to be 2,500 mg/1.
NOTE: Blank spaces indicate no data.
*Source: Easty, Dwight B., L.G. Borchardt, and B.A. Waber; , Institute of Paper Chemistry,
Removal of Wood Derived Toxics from Pulping and Jileaching Wastes, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, EPA 600/2-78-031, 1978.(90)
-------
Typical design BOD5_ loads range from 56 to 67 kilograms per hectare
(kg/ha) of surface area/day (50 to 60 Ib/acre/day).(48) Retention
times can vary from 20 to 60 days or more.(48) 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 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 low levels
of BOD5_. (94) 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.(95)(96) 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.(97)
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.
334
-------
The toxicity removal efficiency of an ASB treating unbleached kraft
waste was evaluated over a one-month period in late 1976.(98)
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 BOD5_, 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.(92) 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 9 mg/1. (92) Mean BOD5_
removals with surge equalization were 85 percent for the five day
basin and 77 percent for the three day basin. Mean effluent BOD5_
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 ASBs than for higher rate
processes (i.e., activated sludge).(99)
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 mg/1 common to
335
-------
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 VI1-6 summarizes
standard design parameters for the activated sludge process and
several of its modifications.(100)
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 or more, and the activated sludge is
returned at a typical rate of 25 to 100 percent of influent flow rate.
336
-------
TABLE VJI-6
TYPICAL DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESSES1
Parameter
u>
CO
—I
Process Modification
Volumetric loading
(Ib 8005/1,000 cu ft)
MLSS (mg/1)
Detention Time
V/Q (hr)
Conventional
Complete mix
Step aeration
Modified aeration
Contact stabilization
Extended aeration
Pure oxygen systems
20-40
50-120
40-60
75-150
60-75
10-25
100-250
(a) Contact unit.
(b) Solids stabilization unit.
MLSS = Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids
V = Volume
Q = Flow
1,500-3,000
3,000-6,000
2,000-3,500
200-500
(1,000-3,000)(a)
(4,000-10,000)(b)
3,000-6,000
6,000-8,000
1
4-8
3-5
3-5
.5-3
.5-1.0)(
(3-6)(b)
18-36
1-3
Source: Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering, McGraw-Hill Co., 1972 (100)
-------
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 30 to 60
minutes or more, 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 or more 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 (18 to 36
hours or more) 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
338
-------
extended-aeration process offers the stability of an ASB system and
the high treatment efficiency of the activated sludge process.
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.(92) 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 9 mg/1.
Mean BOD5_ 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.(92)
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.(92) 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.(92) 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.(92)
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
339
-------
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.(101) Effluent TSS after clarification was
generally in the range of 40 to 60 mg/1.(101) A summary of pilot-scale
information is presented in Table VII-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.(102) Final BOD5_ and TSS
concentrations ranged from 23 to 42 mg/1 and 61 to 111 mg/1,
respectively.(102) The effluent from the oxygen activated sludge
system was found to be acutely toxic.(102) Total resin acids before
and after oxygen activated sludge treatment were 25 and 6 mg/1,
respectively.(102) 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.(90) 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.(103)
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.(90) 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
340
-------
TABLE VII-7
OXYGEN ACTIVATED SLUDGE TREATABILITY
PILOT SCALE1
Production Process
Alkaline-Unbleached
Alkaline-Unbleached
Alkaline-Unbleached
Retention
(Hr)
1
1
2
.3 -
.8 -
.0 -
2.2
3.0
2.9
BODS (mg/1)
Influent
277
214
265
- 464
- 214
- 300
Effluent
20
16
25
- 41
- 22
- 30
TSS
Influent
57 -
123 -
95 -
86
123
120
(mg/1)
Effluent
46
36
60
- 61
- 36
- 70
aSource: Technical data supplied by Union Carbide Corp.(101)
-------
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 BODS^ 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 in the range of 20 to 25 mg/1 are
attained. (104) At one mill, BOD5_ and TSS levels in the range of 5 to
10 mg/1 are attained. (104) At another mill, 96 percent BOD5_ and 99
percent TSS reductions are attained using the Z/A process.(105)
A pilot study comparing a two-stage to a single-stage activated sludge
system was recently performed. The authors concluded that the two-
stage system achieved a higher toxicity reduction in treating bleached
kraft wastewater than did a single-stage system.(106)(107 )
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. (108) 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 08 )
Two pilot plant evaluations reported essentially complete
detoxification of board mill, integrated kraft, and magnesium-based
sulfite mill effluents. (1 09) 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 TSS data were
reported, (109) 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.
342
-------
TABLE VII-8
PILOT RBC FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY FOR
BLEACHED KRAFT WASTEWATER1
70% of Time 90% of Time
Hydraulic Final Effluent Final Effluent
Loading Rate BOD5 Less Than BOD5 Less Than
(gpd/sq ft) (mg/1) (mg/1)
3 70 90
2 30 45
1 22 39
Note: Raw Effluent BOD5 = 235 mg/1.
1Source: 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, TAPPI Environmental Conference, April 17-19,
1974.(108)
343
-------
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
pretreatment.
A laboratory study of this process showed that 80 to 88 percent ^
removal from sulfite wastewaters have been achieved. ( 1 1 0) The major
advantage of the process is a low solids production rate of 0.08
kilograms of solids per kilogram of BODS^ removed (0.08 pounds of
solids per pound of BODS^ removed). This is because methane gas,
rather than biological solids, is the by-product of anaerobic
digestion. The author concludes that the cost for the anaerobic
process was approximately the same as that for aerated
stabilization. (110)
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 stated that all processes of
growth are dependent on chemical reactions and the rates of these
reactions are influenced by environmental conditions, including
temperature. ( 1 1 1 ) 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 measure 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, the
growth rate of microorganisms is predictable and reproducible and
related to the amount of organic matter present in a wastewater,
measured as BOD5^, and the rate at which the organic matter is consumed
by the microorganisms present .( 1 1 2)
The heterogeneous population of bacteria found in aerobic biological
systems treating wastewaters at temperatures resulting from the
production of pulp, paper, and paperboard includes three types of
bacteria: psychrophilic, mesophilic, and thermophilic organisms.
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 (111) depicted the rate of growth for mesophilic
organisms with the maximum rate occurring in the range of 35° to 40°C
344
-------
(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.(103)
However, the predominant group found at all normal operating
temperatures in aerobic systems are the mesophiles.(100)
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.(100)(113)(114)(115)(116)(117)(118)
Soluble BOD5_ reduction by microorganisms approximates first-order
kinetics.(100) A temperature decrease of 10°C (18°F) from the optimal
temperature would necessitate an 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.,
decreasing microbial (solids) wastage rates will increase
waste/microbe contact time when microbial activity is reduced in
colder temperatures). An additional study relates the specific
effects of changes in temperature on BOD5_ and suspended solids
reduction to performance for specific systems.(99)
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,
Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter, oxidize 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., BOD!3 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
dioxide, carbonates, and bicarbonate) have a large influence on
microbial growth rates.(119)
Aerobic nitrifiers require relatively large quantities of molecular
oxygen to complete the oxidation of ammonia. The theoretical oxygen
345
-------
requirements, based on the biochemical equations of nitrification,
were determined to be 4.57 kg of 02_ required/kg of ammonia nitrified
(4.57 Ib of 02_ required/lb of 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 3.9 kg of 02/kg of ammonia nitrified (3.9 Ib of 02/lb of ammonia
nitrified).(120)
Since the nitrifiers have slower growth rates, a biological system
designed for nitrification requires a longer detention time and 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).(120) 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. (119)
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 provided that proper operating conditions are
maintained.(100)(117)(121)(122)(123)(124)(125) 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.
(120)
The sensitivity of the nitrification process to environmental
conditions is well documented in the literature previously cited.
Temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen levels are parameters having
interrelated effects on the nitrification process. This sensitivity
and the difficulty in maintaining optimum environmental conditions can
be overcome through treatment system design and operation. To offset
the decrease in the nitrification rate that can occur if optimum
conditions are not maintained, longer aeration basin detention time
and longer sludge ages can be employed and maintained. Additionally,
provisions can be made to (a) neutralize the effluent to maintain a
346
-------
proper pH, and (b) heat or cool the effluent and/or cover the aeration
basins to maintain proper temperature.
Chemically Assisted Clarification
Dissolved and colloidal particles in treated effluents are not readily
removed by simple settling. Colloidal particles can be agglomerated
by the addition of chemical coagulants. Coagulants in common use
include lime, alum, ferric chloride, ferric sulfate, and magnesia.
Detailed discussions of the chemistry of coagulants are
available.(126)
Rebhun et al. suggest that the most efficient method of pulp and paper
mill effluent flocculation is a solids-contact type clarifier.(127)
Ives suggests a theory for the operation of solids-contact clarifiers
that considers their integrated role as flocculators, fluidized beds,
and phase separators.(128) Ives states that the criterion for good
performance is the dimensionless product of velocity gradient, time,
and floe concentration. He also 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.(128)
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. 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 BOD£
and TSS can be achieved. The desired alum dosage to attain these
347
-------
levels can be expected to vary depending on the chemistry of the
wastewater to be treated. The optimum chemical dosage is dependent on
PH.
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 level of 6.1. Polyelectrolyte is
also added at a rate of 0.9 to 1.0 mg/1 to improve flocculation.
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 mg/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.(129) 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 of
polyelectrolyte were 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 BOD!5 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.(129) A
detailed summary of the results of the study of full-scale systems is
presented in Table VII-9.U29)
In October of 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 extensive pilot-scale studies were
completed. The purpose of operating 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
348
-------
TABLE SOI -9
SUMMARY OF CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE DATA
CO
-&
(.0
*.)*,
r..».
r*f"
kyoitMiK
.i/
i 11
.,~,*.^
B..<«®
1 1-^
"""
1 ltWC^/1000 ca fi./B
tlw - • day* it 1 21
fell..!* .1,*.
r/n - o.Oi t* o.i
KL*» - IOOO-1MO •«/!
» K»r. •! 2 PU>
day* dvtantloB vlck luk-
!•" 4 I *•*(•! i 11 lut
la. 4 Ik WO/HMO r«.lt.
r/H - o.or
MLli - 4M*
jjii2- «-..*.
«,»
*
NO
af 10
S"»
la N«t
10 Bc/1
ol pail*
July Jl.
1*7*
,r or ru
Jf 10
"".
"U"*?
££.'!
ol a^
IrM
Ayr 11
Ikly )
...Ctj.
al 10
4*1*
1.8 2
ol 4
111.) I*/
ol 4
• llfcOM
111 U/0
".!•*"'
.ll!!!1
la M«y
•7»
ad t CM Ay
1)T4 ta
. '*'•
1*.4 •!
*-'•''"
C
1"
data
ni.a
al 10
•Mthl
l?7 7
el *
•nth
Ml. I I./
Ml.) lb/
4*y
If » *** ""
Par .,.,.,.
p-rlad flew-
•q.lt.
7 kour*
1 e7 m
•• U
iVis..
"-
HOC
1U) »*l/0
;;-;-:
A.tr.|.
.i-.
it I 1C*
•*•(•(•
0.1 ••/!
^ir"
10-10 ac/1
l*««/l"
-4.4
!.,«-*. 1
» •!/»"* . .
tint fco> W-
0-i •«/!
10-1} •!/)
".^
•»,
».-;.
UUD
I.I M«d.
30 •«/!
7M 1»/L,
)t 0*c 7
11 CMC T
100 U/i>
•U «2
*
..
4
r£
Itally
• luy
».!M.
CAOUOklJl
:;.,
40 ••/!
Dally
HLOOOOMl
I. 1 Kill
/OOO U/u
-;»j--
u.iJ.
;;~.
ISS
/-..r
NUl
•uulbk
1 •» PtLD
~»;IF
[>*i. >x>l
—•
!V '""j
.. r r,n
»»,
i'"'
..
.O.IJM
..-..
,L.IJ..
•*" •,
hl(l^*r
J
Ili'^l.
""
OOO (.1
;!,"'"
l£L.
^j;;:.
-------
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).(130) Table
VII-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.(131) However, this lower dosage
rate has not been confirmed by long-term operation.
A chemically assisted clarification system treating effluent from an
aerated stabliization basin at a southeastern U.S. deink-newsprint
mill began operation in 1979. Typical alum dosage rates are 450 mg/1;
polymer is also added at a rate of 1 to 1.5 mg/1. Caustic is added to
maintain final effluent pH within permitted levels. Table VII-11
summarizes available effluent data for this facility subsequent to
treatment system start-up and stabilization.
Amberg, e£ al. (132) reported on a cellulose mill located on the shore
of Lake Baikal in the USSR. The mill produced 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 was 1,000 kl/kkg (240 kgal/t).
The mill had strong and weak wastewater collection and treatment
systems. The average BOD5_ for the weak wastewater system was 100
mg/1, while the strong wastewater BOD5_ was 400 mg/1. Only 20 percent
of the total wastewater flow was included in the strong wastewater
system. Each stream received preliminary treatment consisting of
neutralization to pH 7.0, nutrient addition, and aerated equalization.
Effluent from equalization was discharged to separate aeration and
clarification basins. These basins provided biological treatment
using a conventional activated sludge operation. Aeration was
followed by secondary clarification. Suspended solids were settled
and 50 percent of the sludge was returned to the aeration process.
Waste sludge was discharged to lagoons. The separate streams were
combined after clarification and were 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 had an overflow rate of approximately 20.4 cu m per day/sq
m (500 gpd/sq ft).
Chemical clarification overflow was discharged to a sand filtration
system. The sand beds were 2.9 m (9.6 ft) deep with the media
arranged in five layers.(133) The sand size varied from 1.3 mm (0.05
in) at the top to 33 mm (1.3 in) at the bottom. The filter was loaded
at 0.11 cu m per minute/sq m (2.7 gpm/sq ft). Effluent from sand
filtration flowed to a settling basin and then to an aeration basin;
350
-------
TABLE VII-10
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY OF A CHEMICALLY ASSISTED
CLARIFICATION SYSTEM TREATING BLEACHED KRAFT WASTEWATER
Date
September 1979
October 1979
November 1979
December 1979
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
June 1980
July 1980
August 1980
September 1980
October 1980
November 1980
December 1980
January 1981
February 1981
March 1981
BOD5
Average
for Month
11
8
9
21
8
7
13
9
11
25
5
10
13
11
20
33
17
17
29
(rag/1)
Maximum Day
21
12
18
83
16
14
46
16
22
49
9
21
25
28
44
93
—
43
53
TSS 1
Average
for Month
87
40
28
21
28
31
44
32
38
39
22
40
40
34
60
50
30
47
49
tog/l)
Maximum Day
254
92
47
56
36
68
113
96
80
65
50
84
72
75
107
139
43
82
93
351
-------
TABLE VII-11
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY OF A CHEMICALLY ASSISTED
CLARIFICATION SYSTEM TREATING WASTEWATER
FROM A DEINK-NEWSPRINT MILL
BOD5 (mg/1) TSS (mg/1)
Date
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
June 1980
July 1980
August 1980
September 1980
October 1980
November 1980
December 1980
January 1981
February 1981
March 1981
Average
for Month
39
28
25
17
20
30
22
21
16
14
15
23
50
38
25
Maximum Day
88
59
46
33
53
56
44
35
35
22
32
37
92
45
51
Average
for Month
18
18
16
19
20
28
13
18
21
15
15
23
32
21
14
Maximum Day
45
48
43
45
53
76
35
46
109
28
105
69
84
50
56
352
-------
both basins were operated in series and provided a seven hour
detention time.
The effluent quality attained was as follows:
Parameter Raw Waste Final Effluent
BOD5 (mg/1) 300 2
Suspended Solids (mg/1) 60 5
pH - 6.8-7.0
Individual treatment units were not monitored for specific pollutant
parameters.
Nonconventional 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
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.(134)(135)
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, Louisiana. 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 TOO percent decker
effluent was treated. Color removal ranged from 90 to 97 percent with
an average of 94 to 95 percent (136). Organic carbon removal ranged
from 55 to 75 percent and generally increased with higher colored
353
-------
effluent. The values reported are shown in Table VII-12. 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 treatment 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.(137)(138) A previous EPA document reported data on full-scale
minimum lime treatment systems.(47) 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
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.(47)
Case Studies-Pilot and Laboratory Scale Systems. 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.(139) Great Southern
operates an integrated unbleached kraft mill. Treatment consisted 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.(140)
Of the three chemical coagulants, it was 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
354
-------
TABLE VII-12
COLOR AND ORGANIC CARBON REMOVAL AFTER
APPLICATION OF MASSIVE LIME TREATMENT1
GO
cr\
en
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,640(a) 140(a)
900(b) 234(b)
Color
Removal
(%)
94.2
94.8
95.1
95.5
95.0
93.6
91.5(a)
74.0(b)
Organic
Carbon
(mg/D
Before
Treatment
1,446
1,016
905
798
569
450
270(a)
268(b)
After
Treatment
373
253
248
245
183
173
120(a)
126(b)
Organic Carbon
Removal
(%)
74.2
75.1
72.6
69.3
67.8
61.6
55.6(a)
53.0(b)
(a) Very little paper mill white water reuse for decker pulp washing or as make-up water.
(b) Practically all water used in decker system was white water from paper mill.
'Oswalt, J.L., and J.G. Land Jr., Color Removal from Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents by Massive Lime
Treatment, EPA Project 12040 DYD, 1973.(136)
-------
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 were submitted to the Agency in comments on the
contractor's draft report.(141) Data submitted for bleached and
unbleached kraft wastewaters indicate that significant removals of
suspended solids occur at alum dosages in the range of TOO to 350
mg/1,(142}(143)(144) For wastewaters discharged in the manufacture of
dissolving sulfite pulp, effluent BODS^ and TSS data were submitted for
dosage rates of 250 mg/1; however, it was stated that dosages required
to achieve effluent TSS concentrations on the order of 15 mg/1 would
be in the range of 250 to 500 mg/1.(145) Subsequent to the comment
period, the NCASI assembled jar test data for several process types
and submitted the data to the Agency.(146) Data for chemical pulping
subcategories indicate that alum dosages in the range of 100 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.
To x i c 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.(90) 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 Alum-Treated
Effluent Effluent
Range (mg/l) Range (mg/1)
Total Resin and Fatty Acids 2.82 - 3.75 Undetected
Total Chlorinated Derivatives 0.43 - 0.45 Undetected - 0.04
Chloroform 0.025 - 0.032 0.018 - 0.022
BOD5_ 43.0 -51.0 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
356
-------
to reduce effluent color at two bleached kraft mills and one
unbleached kraft paperboard mill.(147)(148) Their results, as shown
in Table VII-13, 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 CaC03.
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.(149) 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, et al. performed laboratory studies on color reduction with a
combined ferric chloride and lime treatment system.(150) 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 VII-14 presents a summary of the
results.(150)
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-15 shows the results of these 24
experiments.(150)
357
-------
TABLE V7I-13
COLOR REDUCTIONS ACHIEVED AFTER APPLICATION OF CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
WITH FERRIC SULFATE, ALUM, AND LIME1
OJ
oo
Ferric Sulfate Alum
Optimum Color Final Optimum Color
U^sage Reduction Color Value Optimum Dosage Reduction
Mill Type- (mg/J) (%) (Pt-Co. Units2) pH (mg/1) (%)
Bleach.-.) !iOO 92 250 3.5-4.5 400 92
KruM
Hlifache.l 275 91 125 3.5-4.5 250 93
Kratt
Unhl^a.liL-.! 250 95 150 4.5-5.5 250 91
Krj£t I'dpi- (-board
Line
Final Optimum Color Final
Color Value Optimum Dosage Reduction Color Value Optimum
(Pt-Co. Units2) pH (mg/1) (%) (PL-Co. Units2) pH
200 4-5 1,500 92 300 12. -12. 5
100 4-5 1,000 85 200 12. -12. 5
100 5-6 1,000 85 150 12. -12. 5
'Sources; Olthof, M.G., "Color Removal From Textile and Pulp and Paper Wastewaters by Coagulation," Vanderbilt University, PhD Thesis, 1974.(147)
Olthof, M.G. and Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr., "Laboratory Study of Color Removal from Pulp and Paper Wascwaters by Coagulation," TAPPI,
Vol. S7, No. 8, August 1974.(148)
"I'l
-------
TABLE VII-14
COMPARISON OF TREATMENT EFFICIENCIES ON KRAFT EFFLUENTS BY THE APPLICATION OF
CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION USING DIVALENT IONS OR TRIVALENT IONS1
Decker Filtrate
Salt
Concentration
(rag/1)
Mg(C
ZnCl
Bad
"°2
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
2
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
2
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
800
1000
Final
pH
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.8
8.0
8.0
8.1
8.0
7.2
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.2
6.0
7.2
7.3
7.2
7.1
7.0
6.9
6.7
6.4
6.2
5.7
Color
Removal
—
0
2.5
5.0
2.5
2.5
7.5
7.5
--
2.5
5.0
7.5
12.5
17.5(a)
22.5
45.4
..
5.0
16.7
21.7
23.3
26.7
28.3
41.2
42.5
61.2
Caustic Extract
Final
pH
8.2
8.4
8.7
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.2
8.1
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
7.1
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.8
6.9
7.0
7.1
7.1
Color
Removal
(t)
Decker
Salt
Concentration Final
(mg/1) pH
Alum (A12
Filtrate
Color
Removal
(X)
Caustic
Final
pH
Extract
Color
Removal
(SO,), 18H-0)
4 J 1
0 7.
0
6.8
11.4
11.4
11.4
12.0
22.8
—
0
3.9
3.9
13.6
13.4
22.9
44.0
..
0
0
0
1.3
4.1
1.1
23.7
35.9
45.2
100
200
250
7.
5.
4.
300 4.
350
400
600
FeCl3-pH
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
FeCl3-pH
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
4.
4.
4.
unadjusted
7.
5.
5.
4.
3.
3.
3.
3.
adjusted
7.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
2
3
1
7
6
5
5
5
2
8
0
I
8
7
4
1
2
2
7
3
5
9
9
a
-.
59.1
87.1
90.9
88.1
88.2
88.2
86.8
--
27.3
75.5
76.4
77.3
77.3
75.5
76.4
..
0
21.1
12.6
38.9
58.3
50.9
72.5
7.9
6.5
4.8
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.3
4.1
6.7
6.1
5.6
5.1
4.8
4.4
4.1
3.S
6.7
8.4
8.9
8.7
9.1
8.6
8.1
7.8
—
7.7
63.1
85.2
84.6
85.2
84.6
86.5
--
0
24.4
26.9
51.3
74. S
91.7
90.7
..
0.6
67.4
83.1
97.2
97.3
97.3
97.4
Ca(OH)2
(a)
0
100
200
250
300
350
400
600
Calculated
..
—
—
—
—
—
• •
—
Value.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
8.6
10.3
11.3
11.6
11.7
11.8
11.9
12.1
—
20.0
22.5
22.5
25.0
32.5
62.5
72.5
'Source: Dugal, H.S., Church, J.O., Leekley, R.M., and Svanaon, J.W., "Color Removal in a Ferric Chloride-Lin
Vol. 59, No. 9, September 1976.(150)
System," TAPPI ,
359
-------
TABLE VII-15
LIME TREATMENT OF BLEACHED KRAFT CAUSTIC EXTRACT IN
THE PRESENCE OF METAL ION Ha)
Fed
(mg/I)
0
25
50
100
200
300
500
800
0
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
Sludge
Volume(b)
(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
TOC
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
(a)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 rag/liter.
(b)Total volume of kraft bleach caustic extract after lime and FeCl 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.(150)
360
-------
Another flocculation and precipitation process is in full-scale
operation in Japan; it has also been 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.(151)
Chlorination and caustic extraction stage effluents are treated.
Metallic iron is first dissolved in the chlorination stage effluent.
Retention times of 1.5 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 is 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 through the addition of lime and lime
magnesia.(152) 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 that, with the addition of 1,000 mg/1 of
lime, approximately 90 percent of the color was removed. Magnesia
alone proved to be ineffective at moderate doses; 4,000 mg/1 were
required to obtain approximately 50 percent color reduction.
Therefore, it was concluded that the use of magnesia alone could not
be justified.
The use of magnesium hydroxide in combination with lime was highly
effective. The magnesium 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 gave the same color removal as the
addition of 1,000 mg/1 of lime alone. Additionally, sludge production
was less with the lime - magnesia process. Table VII-16 shows some
typical results of the lime - magnesia process for removing color,
BOD, COD, and phosphate for the five mills. Recovery techniques were
suggested, but none were investigated in connection with this study.
This would indicate that additional testing would have to be done to
prove the feasibility of this lime - magnesia recovery process before
attempting it on a larger scale. An evaluation concluded that the
system is costly, but the benefits might favor its use.
Filtration
This process refers to granular bed (rather than membrane) filtration.
The granular material may be sand, or coal, diatomaceous earth, and/or
garnet in combination with sand. The various media, grain sizes, and
bed depths may be varied for optimal results. It is common 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
backwashings. The addition of a proper chemical flocculant prior to
filtration can further improve performance.
Filtration technology was evaluated as part of a study conducted for
the EPA.(129) Results obtained during this study of nine pulp, paper,
361
-------
TABLE VII-16
REMOVAL OF BOD, COD, AND PHOSPHATE FROM CHEMICAL PULPING WASTEWATERS AT SELECTED LINE - MAGNESIA LEVELS1
Treatment
OJ
cn
rv>
Mill
A
11
C
D
E
(c-)BOD
(b)COD
Effluent (
Kraft (combined effluent,
80% bleached) biological
treatment
Kraft (high BOO stream,
unbleached) no biological
treatment
Kraft (combined effluent)
biological treatment
Sulfite (NH base, com 2
bined effluent) biological
treatment
NSSC (combined effluent) 6
biological treatment
determined after filtration
determined after filtration
CaO
»ji/l)
500
500
500
,000
,000
through
through
(a)Phosphate analysis (values in mg/1 of P)
MgO
(«*/!)
100
100
100
400
3,000
Before Treatment
Color
2
1
2
1
36
Reeve-Angel
Reeve-Angel
deter
•ined
,570
,070
,620
,790
,300
glass
glass
BOD(a) COD(b)
-
130
60
60
525
filter
filter
by modified
420
(560)
340
(560)
500
(720)
2,430
(1,300)
8,640
(4,960)
papers and
After Treatment Removal
Phosphute(c) Color BOD COD Phosphate Color BOD COD
1.05 137 16 100 F0.01 94.7 - 76
0.7 78 105 580 0.07 92.7 19
1,310
3.0 185 30 100 0.06 92.9 50 80
0.8 298 67 460 0.07 83.4 - 81
31.5 12,800 320 1,040 0.80 64.7 39 88
subsequent adjustment to pH 7°
Phosphat
99.0
90.0
98.0
91.3
97.5
papers. Bracketed values are for unfiltered effluents'
ascorbic acid method"
'Source: Vincent, D.L., Colour Removal Froo Biologically Treated Pulp and Paper
Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat,
Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report 210-1, March 31, 1974.(152)
-------
and paperboard and other industrial facilities where filtration was
used are shown in Tables VII-17 and VII-18. Also summarized in the
tables are the results of pertinent published results from other
filtration studies. Table VII-17 summarizes those systems where
coagulants were not used prior to filtration, while Table VII-18
addresses those where coagulants were employed.
At those facilities where chemical coagulants were not utilized, final
effluent levels of TSS ranging from 5.9 to 35 mg/1 were achieved
across" the filter; TSS reductions ranged from 45 to 79 percent. Those
where coagulants were used prior to filtration achieved final effluent
TSS levels ranging from 5.0 to 27.5 mg/1 with removals of 52 to 85
percent. At the paperboard mill employing single medium sand
filtration without chemical addition, an effluent TSS level of 7 mg/1
was attained.
Tables VII-19, VII-20, and VII-21 summarize available effluent data
for three midwestern mills where paperboard is produced from
wastepaper. At these mills, biologically-treated effluent is sand
filtered without the use of coagulants. Table VII-19 presents
effluent data after treatment in an aerated stabilization basin
followed by a three-layer, pressure sand filter. The system was
designed to remove 50 percent of the biological solids but, in
practice, removes only 30 to 40 percent. Table VII-20 presents
effluent data after treatment in an aerated stabilization basin
followed by secondary clarification and deep bed sand filtration.
Table VII-21 presents effluent data after treatment in an activated
sludge system followed by a gravity rapid sand filtration system.
An EPA-sponsored laboratory study evaluated the efficiency of sand
filtration of four pulp and paper mill effluents.(140) A flow rate of
0.20 cu m per minute/sq m (5 gpm/ft2_) was used and the results are
shown in Table VI1-22. As seen, in one of the two cases where
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
363
-------
TABLE VII-17
TSS REDUCTION CAPABILITIES AND RELATED FACTORS
FOR THE FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY
WHEN NO CHEMICALS ARE USED
A ,
*
c a., -.,-, i,,,..
>: . f i '•">! .t»Jr
.' |n(..n i...f,.
r iM.,-11.,1 fu.
• lut..i.. I*
ir.lct Foud.
•ro«ht»n. HI
i.™"i""»K>
dw.(jvlty LOUOLII
pilot n..,t
Oi i r>[ i..«rv
F «pf iboi: J j.r . ).,i »,
<:••»(•(
tuHll. •••1»
tc.l puU k (•>>• ic
food pri>c««*lii*
pulp Bill
BLSS - 1200 .«/!
Detention (1M - K>
AorftdC* Ho- - 4 I' ffci-
DO «ln - 1 0 •«'!
1000 cu l(. F/H - HD
KLSS - wr, un •!» -
[Wt*ntlo« tl«H - :; hr. f
A.rrtg* (low - 1 IV r«T.
Ac(l«*t*J Xidlgc: <««^lrt«
• U, P'H - 01 IL WX>/Ib
tUUSi. W.SS - l.WKJ ^/l
DO «ln *
1^ (*-b. «*.hirU»\ Mim>,r,
*vBr«gt fl™ - It 11 rtL.
k.rtv.tid »lud,* co^>trt*
• l«. 70. S It. K*>/]MX) fu (t
F/H - .•>, KU>S - ).ViO •«/]
DO *1n -
D*(*om.p UH - H htf f
i H.;O
A.*l.|* (low - J-G W.O
1UOC cu li. F/N *
M.SS -
DO •)• -
tet«BllOfl IIM ' *« hi. fr
0.1 M«
A**r«i* llo« - I-» N.O
Activated «l»d|* co^.l«l. Mil
F/H -
W3i -
DO •!« -
D*t«D(lori !!•• -
Jtv*tag* t)o« -
A«r«t*d )«•!»• - Ib MD/IOOO
<« fl - DO aJ» -
Totil Mr>tl»« u«Iy • <•>•
«..,^. Mo- -
Lrtt.r.tlo.. i
u| (1*1 1, <*•(• for
MI
«B
of 3 »othlr •Mr..*-
DOC! OOt iMlurf* Old
•*•>»•• lor )
08 ««/l
1% ••/!
«> •*/! tr«k M^IM
TSS Sit* -
•2.5 17.0
-1.^ - 76.)
•S.O - 8V.2
•I JS - ^10
• MH
b«tH*D 1 fc ]0v
fllori -
11 ICD i
llll*r* -
I.* •>«/••< (l
•t 19.11 *;o t 9
(iliar. -
1 1 IP«/m It
•t J .0 HLD k 1
• ( 1.1) HCO 4 )
(llt*r. -
J.I1. f(*/.q (1
2 (fw/iq ft
l.k io 1.4 (»•;•«
(t
FlH.t MrdU: »u. "f
M4la. fVptt., U.S. . I.S. .
iu.1 !•*, O.t to 08 «
In d*ptb IlltiitlcM.
<•«•! - 24"; W: - MD
15 - Hli ••rrf - IT
UC - MO. KS - HD
1 ftcJU. i Hi. «. »ad - 11"
UC - U. rS • ND
1 »*J1»' »•«!
«.
Co* - 1*" Sp.C* .-!.&
oc rs - HD
tend - 9". UC i U - M>
. C-rn.i • r. UC * U -
U
MD
1 »4t« - T at co*rM
fMl, )- MdlM MM -
i" ol CMlM UAd -
•^ - !.«!, OC - 1.14
1) •*/!, •*•!**•
of 12 •ot.thly
1.0 «t/l. .*„.»•
Ol •> •unthly lv«I-
Of 1 Bcnthlj »v*r-
•t«»
)fi«/»
1.4 »4/l M»oti
•M*T»a»
11 ^/l
*cr!.«nnl^""l.m
Ml
HI
MO
•cntion
V>I
•rportrd by
»««-*r<-b^r*
771. Kuv. M. 197*
tu F«b, U, H7i
701. au^an iv*r-
**•
VJ1
-------
TABLE VII-18
TSS REDUCTION CAPABILITIES AND RELATED FACTORS
FOR THE FILTRATION TECHNOLOGY
WHEN CHEMICALS ARE USED
11 U Wot/1000 [
OJ
o-)
CJ1
b.i*eilo« UM - I JO hi.
* 1.0 MLO
•„,»». (l» • 10 *U>
*..r»,r fla. - 0. i M
ISS flu - p.ic
l.Ihi - «b.
l.Ou - tvl
J Vj • •).*
OC t IS - HP.
w: « fc. - i.o
li 1.1 - 10 tm
10.1 •*/!
t**I.|« ol I
•MiUr •<••!
-------
TABLE VII-19
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY FOLLOWING
THREE LAYER PRESSURE SAND FILTRATION OF THE EFFLUENT FROM AN AERATED
STABILIZATION BASIN TREATING PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER WASTEWATER
BOD5 (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
Date
September 1978
October 1978
November 1978
December 1978
January 1979
February 1979
March 1979
April 1979
May 1979
June 1979
July 1979
August 1979
September 1979
r%_i_.* ... i r* ~ r*
Wt.btSL«C.A. A > * >
November 1979
December 1979
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
June 1980
July 1980
August 1980
September 1980
October 1980
November 1980
December 1980
January 1981
February 1981
March 1981
Average
for Month
11
9
9
11
14
16
14
10
10
12
14
17
19
io
—
14
17
19
18
17
13
13
12
16
12
12
5
14
11
—
7
Maximum
Day
17
15
14
14
19
19
19
17
17
16
19
40
28
4..J
24
25
35
35
25
33
18
23
30
30
39
10
34
35
—
35
Average
for Month
12
12
8
7
11
13
12
14
11
11
14
17
21
4.U
21
22
23
18
20
18
12
17
19
23
12
17
7
16
12
--
11
Maximum
Day
20
16
12
16
18
20
24
20
20
16
20
30
24
•+U
22
32
34
49
36
46
40
44
44
46
40
50
24
50
48
--
40
366
-------
TABLE VII-20
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY FOLLOWING DEEP BED SAND FILTRATION OF THE
EFFLUENT FROM AN AERATED STABILIZATION BASIN AND SECONDARY CLARIFIED
TREATING PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER WASTEWATER
BODS (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
Date
December 1978
January 1979
February 1979
March 1979
April 1979
May 1979
June 1979
July 1979
August 1979
September 1979
October 1979
November 1979
December 1979
January 1^80
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
June 1980
July 1980
August 1980
September 1980
October 1980
November 1980
December 1980
January 1981
February 1981
March 1981
April 1981
Average
for Month
38
44
41
44
54
32
20
29
30
31
35
29
39
38
27
30
34
24
30
—
32
33
44
52
36
45
41
104
39
Maximum
Day
42
62
46
52
70
62
36
32
40
60
44
50
56
70
40
50
75
36
59
—
46
51
68
62
53
78
61
310
54
Average
for Month
49
54
44
55
51
53
27
37
30
33
40
46
59
45
44
48
52
31
28
--
22
38
48
66
64
56
67
55
57
Maximum
Day
60
100
65
66
89
88
42
44
37
46
54
60
75
70
65
70
85
44
61
--
33
50
70
78
92
75
95
80
99
367
-------
TABLE VII-21
FINAL EFFLUENT QUALITY FOLLOWING RAPID GRAVITY SAND FILTRATION OF THE
EFFLUENT FROM AN ACTIVATED SLUDGE PLANT TREATING
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPAPER WASTEVATER
BOD5 (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
Date
February 1979
March 1979
April 1979
May 1979
June 1979
July 1979
August 1979
Septeaber 1979
October 1979
November 1979
December 1979
January 1980
February 1980
March 1980
April 1980
May 1980
June 1980
July 1980
August 1980
September 1980
October 1980
November 1980
December 1980
January 1981
February 1981
March 1981
Average
for Month
13
8
12
6
6
18
13
8
36
29
12
5
6
6
7
6
8
2
3
6
4
6
5
7
11
10
Maximum
Day
34
15
22
8
9
31
34
20
110
86
17
12
11
22
20
20
16
3
10
16
8
9
21
16
49
37
Average
for Month
47
29
20
19
12
21
9
12
39
54
29
11
9
8
8
9
14
7
9
8
11
18
10
14
31
19
Maximum
Day
205
76
58
88
52
84
52
36
75
134
80
24
21
40
33
21
50
18
19
33
26
19
37
38
120
82
368
-------
TABLE VII-22
SAND FILTRATION RESULTS1
TSS Removal (%)
Mill No.
1
2
3
5
Initial TSS (mg/1)
110
5.5
70
60
w/ chemicals
64
71
w/o chemicals
14
36
68
23
1Peterson, R.R. and Graham, J.L., "Post Biological Solids Characteriza-
tion and Removal from Pulp Mill Effluents," EPA-600/2-79-037, January
1979.(140)
369
-------
applied to a well-treated biological effluent, it is capable of
reducing BOD5_ to less than 2.0 mg/l.(153)
The primary means of removal is 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 48,540 sq ft/lb).(154)
Activated carbon will not remove certain low molecular weight organic
substances, particularly methanol, a common constituent of pulping
effluents.(155) Additionally, carbon columns do a relatively poor job
of removing turbidity and associated organic matter.(156) Some highly
polar organic molecules such as carbohydrates also will not be removed
through the application of activated carbon treatment.(156)(157)
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.(158) 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.(159)
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
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.{154)
It can be economically advantageous in many 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.
o Quench the regenerated carbon in water.
370
-------
o 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.(160) 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 was
anticipated to achieve 80 percent BOD5_ reduction and 98 percent TSS
reduction once the steady state conditions were met.(161)
Pilot testing by Beak Consultants, Ltd., with laboratory analysis
confirmed by B.C. Research, indicates that approximately 80 percent of
each of the following resin and fatty acids were removed from raw
bleached kraft effluents by application of granular carbon adsorption:
pimaric, isopimaric, abietic, dehydroabietic, oleic, linoleic, and
linolenic.(162) Initial total resin acid and fatty acid concentrations
were 10.6 and 3.9 mg/1 as reported by Beak Consultants, Ltd. and 12.6
and 2.2 mg/1 as reported by B.C. Research. Total resin acid and total
fatty acid concentrations in the treated effluent were 1.49 and
2.4 mg/1 as reported by Beak Consultants, Ltd. and 2.25 and 0.4 mg/1
as reported by B.C. Research. A contact time of 7.5 minutes with a
carbon exhaustion rate of 0.6 to 0.7 kg per 1,000 liters (5.0 to 6.0
Ib per 1,000 gallons) was employed in the study. Detoxification of
the raw woodroom wastewater was successful. However, the authors
report that the carbon system did not detoxify whole mill effluent
during a simulated black liquor spill, even with a contact time of 30
minutes.
371
-------
It is noteworthy that the carbon exhaustion rate for BOD5_ removal was
20 times shorter than that for toxicity removal. These results imply
that (a) carbon life may be significantly increased if competing
organics are removed prior to carbon adsorption and (b) carbon
adsorption capacity for resin and fatty acids is greater than that for
other biodegradable organics.
Several researchers have considered the reuse of wastewaters following
carbon adsorption treatment. Kimura showed that the use of activated
carbon following biological treatment and sand filtration was capable
of completely detoxifying kraft board mill wastewater. In this
application, the final effluent was recycled as process water.(163)
According to Smith and Berger, pulp and papermill wastewater suitable
for reuse can be obtained using granular carbon without a biological
oxidation step, particularly if the raw wastewater exhibits a BOD5_ of
200 to 300 mg/1.(164) Color due to refractory organic compounds
contained in pulping effluents can also be reduced by such treatment.
Table VII-23 presents the pilot plant results obtained by the authors.
Condensate streams account for only about 2 to 10 percent of total
wastewater flow, but contribute significantly higher proportions of
toxicity and BOD5_ when discharged. Tests by Hansen and Burgess showed
that 70 to 75 percent of the BOD5, COD, and TOC in kraft evaporator
condensate could be removed using 0.46 kg of carbon per 1,000 liters
(3.8 Ib of carbon per 1,000 gallons) of wastewater.(157) Treatment
with granular activated carbon reduced the effluent toxicity effects
on bay mussels by a factor of up to 17. The toxicity removal
efficiency was found to be much more dependent on contact time than
were BOD5_ and COD removals. For example, a contact time of 30 minutes
and a carbon dosage of 40.1 g/1 (0.334 Ib/gal) resulted in an 80
percent COD reduction to 186 mg/1 and an 85 percent larval survival in
a 10 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.(165) 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.(166) This treatment
technique also enhances color removal, clarification, system
stability, and BOD5_ and COD removal.(167)(168) 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.(169)(170) Pilot tests have also shown that powdered
372
-------
TABLE VII-23
RESULTS OF PILOT-SCALE GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON
TREATMENT OF UNBLEACHED KRAFT MILL WASTE1
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
0
12
209
74
1,205
Remova 1
V •»
100
95.5
59.6
42.2
0.4
, D.R. and Berger, H.F., "Wastewater Renovation," TAPPI, Vol. 51, No. 10,
October 1968.(164)
373
-------
activated carbon can be used successfully with rotating biological
contactors.(171)
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.(172) 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 VII-24 presents the results
of this investigation.(172)
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.(172)
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.
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 VI1-25. The carbon dosage was 182 mg/1, while
the hydraulic retention was 14.6 hours.(173)
Comparison of the laboratory and full-scale results in Tables VII-23
and VII-24 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 developed a fine activated
carbon system for which they filed a patent application.(158) 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.
374
-------
TABLE VII-24
POWDERED ACTIVATED CARBON
OPERATING DATA ON A CHEMICAL PLANT WASTEWATER1
Parameter
Soluble BOD5 (mg/1)
Color (APHA Units)
Raw Effluent
300
1,690
Final Effluent
23
310
Percent Removal
92.3
81.6
1Source: 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.(172)
375
-------
TABLE VII-25
FULL SCALE "PACT" PROCESS RESULTS
ON CHEMICAL PLANT WASTEWATER1
Parameter Raw Effluent Final Effluent Percent Reduction
Soluble BODS (rag/1)
Color (APHA Units)
504
1,416
15.2
311
95
78
1Robertaccio, 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.(173)
376
-------
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.(158) 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 the 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.(158) 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
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.
The authors found that nonadsorptive mechanisms accounted for a
significant amount of color and TOC removal in the clarification-
carbon process. They 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.(158) Table VII-26 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
377
-------
CO
^J
CO
TABLK VI[-26
RESULTS OF PILOT-SCALE ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT OF
UNBLEACHED KJWFT MILL EFFLUENT1
Columns
Preceded By
Biological
Oxidation &
Description of Clarification
Carbon Process Inf. Eff. Removal
BOD (rag/l)
TOC (mg/l) 148 57 61%
Turbidity (JTU)
Color (Pt-Co Units) 740 212 71%
Hy driiil ic
Load (gpra/sq ft) 2.13
Carbon Granular
Contact Time (Hill) 140
Fresh Carbon
Dosage 8
(11) cjrbon/
1000 gal.)
pH
Columns Colunns Columns
Preceded By Preceded By Preceded By
Primary Primary Lime Treatment
Clarification Clarification & Clarification
Inf. Eff. Removal Inl. Eff. Removal Inf. Eff. Removal
26% Removal
220 83 62% 310 121 61% 177 100 44%
5-15
925 185 80% lloO 202 83% 252 76 70%
1.42 0.71 1.42
Granular Granular Granular
108
20.5 28 2.5
11.3
FACET System
Inf." Eff. "Removal
158
157
101
36%
73(a) 54%
Intermediate
J.y
'Source: Timpe, W.G. and Lang, E.W., "Activated Carbon Treatment ol Unbleached Kraft Effluent for Reuse - Pilot Plant
Results," TAPPI Environmental Conference, San Francisco, Hay 1973.(158)
(a) Kiltered
-------
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.(174)
Several full-scale foam separation facilities have been built for the
removal of detergents from municipal wastes.(175)(176) 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.(177} 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.(177) 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 was 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 were performed using foam separation as a pretreatment
prior to the application of activated sludge and aerated stabilization
treatment of bleached kraft effluent.(178) These studies indicated
that the detoxification efficiency of biological treatment can improve
from 50 to 85 percent of the time without foam separation to over 90
percent of the time with foam separation.(178)
Microstraining
At two nonintegrated papermills, full-scale coagulation/microstraining
facilities are used for treating rag pulp and fine paper
effluents.(179)(180) 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 of 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.(179)
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
379
-------
compounds reduces the BOD5_, color, and toxicity of the effluent. A
significant advantage of the process is that no sludge is produced.
Oner found that an 80 percent reduction of color in whole mill
bleached kraft effluent and a 90 percent reduction of color in caustic
extract could be achieved through electrochemical treatment.(181)
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 extracts.(182) 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.(183) The primary drawback of the process is failure of the
carbon cell to perform for extended periods.(183)
Another variation to this process involves the use of hydrogen gas
bubbles generated in the process to float solids and separate scum.
Selivanov found that an electrochemical unit with graphite anodes and
stainless steel cathodes could cause coagulation in kraft white
water.(184) 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
aluminum anode.(185) 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, et^ al. investigated
the process on a laboratory scale.(186) 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
380
-------
percent of the color from bleached kraft effluents. No specific
removals of toxicity or toxic pollutants were reported.
Ai r/Catalyt i c/Chem i ca1 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 dealt principally with COD or TOC
as a measure of performance. Barclay, e_t al. completed 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.(187) 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^, E202 or C102_), or with air or oxygen in the
presence of catalysts such as certain metal oxides.
o Sulfite wastes can be partially detoxified by simple air
oxidation for a period of seven days.
o Ozone oxidation achieved only slight detoxification of sulfite
wastes after two hours and partial detoxification after eight
hours.(187)
o Major BOD5_ reductions can only be achieved under conditions
similar to those required for nearly complete oxidation.
No data specifically relating to toxic pollutant removal were
reported.
Steam Stripping
Steam stripping involves the removal of volatiles from concentrated
streams. Hough and Sallee report that steam stripping at a kraft mill
is capable of removing 60 to 85 percent of the BODI5 from condensate
streams.(188) 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.(189)
Steam stripping was evaluated for its ability to detoxify condensates
from sulfite waste liquor evaporators.(190) 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
381
-------
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.(191) 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
Wastewater treatment by ultrafiltration involves removal of
macromolecules from wastewater by means of membranes of specified
molecular size. Wastewater is forced through the membranes under
pressure. The size of the molecules to be removed dictates the
permeability (size opening) of the ultrafiltration membrane.
Data are available from Easty for nonconventional pollutant removal
from two bleached kraft caustic extraction effluents utilizing two
types of ultrafiltration systems.(90) 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
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.
Lewell and Williams studied color, 1ignosulfonate, COD, and solids
removals from sulfite liquor after the application of
ultrafiltration.(192) Removals on the order of 30 to 50 percent were
382
-------
observed for color, lignosulfonate, COD, and TSS. No toxicity or
toxic pollutant data were reported. Costs (1971) were estimated at
$0.40/kl ($1.50/kgal) for a 3785 cu m (1.0 mgd) permeate flow. The
authors concluded that ultrafiltration could not compete economically
with lime as a means of removing lignosulfonate, color, COD, and
solids.(192)
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.(90) 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 °Fj. 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.(90) The maximum removal capacity
is not known since final concentrations were below detection limits.
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, et al. on three bleachery
effluents.(193) 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.(193) It was reported that the purified effluent was of
sufficient quality that it could be returned to the process for
reuse.(193) Wiley did not investigate final disposal of the
concentrate.
Amine Treatment
This treatment
amines to
tment is based upon* the ability of high molecular weight
form organophilic precipitates. These precipitates are
383
-------
separated and redissolved in a small amount of strong alkaline
solution (white water). By so doing, the amine is regenerated for
use, with no sludge produced.(194)
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, BODj^, and toxicity reductions of
bleached kraft mill effluents.(195) 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
Kemamine T-1902D in a solvent of Soltrol 170.
Polymeric Resin Treatment
Polymeric resin wastewater treatment processes make use of adsorption
and ion exchange mechanisms to remove pollutants from the wastewater.
Resin columns are commonly employed; they are reactivated after
completion of the treatment cycle by means of acid or alkaline
solutions. It has been reported that weakly basic ion exchange
resins, based on a phenol/formaldehyde matrix, are superior in
treating pulp and paper bleach plant effluents.(196) Prior to resin
treatment, it is advantageous to screen and filter the waste streams
and adjust the pH to 2 or 3.
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.
Based on the experience gained through operation of the full-scale
system in treating the caustic first extraction stage effluent (E,),
treatment was expanded' to include chlorination stage washer effluent
(Cj). The first full-scale continuous installation began in December
of 1980 at Skoghall, Sweden. In this system, a full countercurrent
wash is used, and the effluent from the E, stage is reused on the C,
stage washer after color and toxicity removal through the application
of resin adsorption.(75)(197)
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. The chlorination stage effluent reactivates the resin and
is simultaneously decolorized and detoxified. The total mill BODI5
384
-------
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.(197)
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. (198) 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 100 ug/1.
Another study has shown synthetic resin to be capable of removing a
higher percentage of COD from biological effluent than carbon. (199)
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.(200)(201) Wilson and
Chappel reported that treatment with Amberlite XAD-2 resin resulted in
a nontoxic semi-chemical mill effluent.(202)
385
-------
MOM SCMCNW6
r*CSH MTCK WTMf .
BACK TO
SCMCf NWS H.AHT
CO
CO
en
ID dtCOVEKt SYSTEM
Ef FLUENT
C CULMINATION
E, tXTMCTXM ITAM {HINT I
H HYPOCHUMITK
CMUMINE IXOXIOf «TMC (PIWT)
Et EXTRACTION STA«f (SECOND)
Og CHLOWNE MOXIOC STME (SECOND)
FIGURE OT- 33
BILLERUO-UOOEHOLM
NON-POLLUTING BLEACH PLANT
-------
SECTION VIII
DEVELOPMENT OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
INTRODUCTION
In Section VII, many control and treatment technologies are discussed
and information is presented on their capabilities for removal of
conventional, toxic, and nonconventional pollutants from pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry wastewaters. From these technologies, EPA
identified alternative control and treatment options for detailed
analysis that represent a range of pollutant removal capability and
cost. This section presents the options that were considered in
determining BPT and BAT effluent limitations and NSPS, PSES, and PSNS
for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry.
For BPT, treatment options have been developed for control of
conventional pollutants for new subdivisions of two existing
subcategories (paperboard from wastepaper and nonintegrated-fine
papers) and for four new subcategories (wastepaper-molded products,
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard). 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
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. As discussed in Section IV, two existing
subcategories have been divided into subdivisions: the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory is separated into the corrugating medium
furnish subdivision and the noncorrugating medium furnish subdivision;
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory is separated into the wood
fiber furnish subdivision and the cotton fiber furnish subdivision.
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,
and for mills in the corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the
paperboard from wastepaper 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. The best
387
-------
practicable control technology currently available for mills in the
cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory has been identified as biological treatment which is also
the technology on which BPT limitations are based for all other mills
in the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory.
In Table VIII-1, subcategory average BOD5_ and TSS raw waste
characteristics for the three new nonintegrated subcategories are
compared to the BOD5_ and TSS raw waste characteristics that formed the
basis of BPT effluent limitations 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-lightweight 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 o_f_ Raw Waste Loads
Paperboard from Wastepaper. Available raw waste load data for mills
in the subcategory are presented in Table V-16. As discussed in
sections IV and V, the raw waste load BOD5. at mills where corrugating
medium furnish is processed has increased since BPT was promulgated.
At that time, the average raw waste load BOD5_ for mills where
corrugating medium furnish is processed was 11.3 kl/kkg (22.5 Ib/t).
Recent data submitted by representatives of mills 110025 and 110080
indicate that the current raw waste load BOD5_ for mills where recycled
corrugating medium is processed is 23.0 kg/kkg (46.0 Ib/t).
Therefore, raw waste loads for mills where corrugating medium furnish
is processed have been revised to account for the higher raw waste
BODS and are: flow - 30.0 kl/kkg (7.2 kgal/t); BOD5_ - 23.0 kg/kkg
(46?0 Ib/t), and TSS - 11.0 kg/kkg (21.9 Ib/t).
EPA evaluated available data for the mills where all other kinds of
wastepaper are processed; the Agency found that the original BOD5_ raw
waste load is still representative. Therefore, BPT raw waste Toads
for noncorrugating medium furnish mills are as originally developed
for the subcategory: flow - 30.0 kl/kkg (7.2 kgal/t); BOD5 - 11.3
kg/kkg (22.5 lb/t); and TSS - 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. Raw waste loads on
which BPT limitations are based are equal to the average of raw waste
loads at mills where extensive recycling of effluent is not practiced.
This yields flow, BOD5_, and TSS raw waste loads of 88.1 kl/kkg (21.1
kgal/t), 7.9 kg/kkg (15.8 Ib/t), and 14.8 kg/kkg (29.6 Ib/t),
respectively.
388
-------
TABLE VIII-1
AVERAGE RAW WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
FOR THE NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
OF THE PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD INDUSTRY
Subcategory
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
BPT Technology
Basis
Biological Treatment
Primary Clarification
None*
None*
Hone*
Subcategory/Subdivision
Raw Waste Characteristics
Average BODS Average TSS
209 og/1
144 mg/1
120 ng/1
107 mg/1**
73 mg/1
122 mg/1**
678 mg/1
342 mg/1
323 mg/1
312 mg/1**
165 mg/1
685 mg/1**
'•''Mills in these subcategories were permitted on a case-by-case basis using
"best engineering judgement." BPT for these subcategories has been identi-
fied as primary treatment, the same technology basis as for the Nonintegra-
ted-Tissue Papers subcategory because of the similarity of raw waste BODS
characteristics.
**Does not include production of electrical grades of papers.
389
-------
Noninteqrated-Fine Papers. Available raw waste load data for this
subcategory are presented in Table V-22. Data for the subcategory
were reevaluated based on comments from industry. As discussed
previously, EPA determined that raw waste load flow, BOD5_, and TSS
were comparable for mills where more than 90.7 kkg (100 tons) of
product per day are manufactured and those where less than 90.7 kkg
(TOO tons) per day are produced, excluding mills where cotton fiber
comprises a significant portion of the final product. EPA determined
that the cotton fiber mills have higher raw waste flow and BOD5_ than
other mills in the subcategory. Based on this review, the subcategory
has been separated into two subdivisions: wood fiber furnish and
cotton fiber furnish. The raw waste loads on which BPT limitations
are based for nonintegrated mills where a significant portion of the
final product (greater than 4 percent) is comprised of cotton fibers
are equal to the average of raw waste loads at these cotton fiber
furnish mills, or: flow - 176.5 kl/kkg (42.3 kgal/t); BOD5_ - 22.9
kg/kkg (45.8 lb/t); and TSS - 55.2 kg/kkg (110.4 Ib/t).
Noninteqrated-Liqhtweight 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 BODS^
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-203.2 kl/kkg (48.7 kgal/t); BOD5-21.7 kg/kkg (43.3
lb/t); and TSS-63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 lb/t). EPA 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-320.9 kl/kkg (76.9 kgal/t); BOD5_ - 21.7 kg/kkg (43.3 lb/t); and
TSS - 63.4 kg/kkg (126.8 lb/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 occurred per
day exhibited raw waste load flows that were equal to or lower than
the subcategory average raw waste loads. Therefore, the proposed BPT
flow basis was revised to reflect the highest average for the various
grade change delineations. The BPT raw waste load flow is based on
those mills with less than one waste significant grade change per day.
The raw waste loads for flow, BOD5_, and TSS are 250.0 kl/kkg (59.9
kgal/t), 12.2 kg/kkg (24.3 lb/t), and 27.4 kg/kkg (54.7 lb/t),
respectively.
390
-------
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. The 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
In the Phase II Development Document, EPA developed the following
relationship between the anticipated final effluent BOD5^ concentration
and the BOD5_ concentration entering a biological treatment system
based on treatment plant performance at those mills used to establish
BPT effluent limitations (see Phase II Development Document, page 402)
(48):
Log BOD5. effluent (mg/1) = 0.601 Log BOD5. influent (mg/1) - 0.020
EPA used this relationship in establishing allowances to be added to
BPT effluent limitations if wet barking, log or chip washing, or log
flumes or ponds were employed at individual mills (see Phase II
Development Document, page 558).(48)
In Figure VIII-1, EPA has plotted the BOD5_ raw waste concentration
that formed the basis of BPT versus the final effluent TSS
concentration that formed the basis of BPT for the dissolving kraft,
market bleached kraft, fine bleached kraft, BCT (board, coarse, and
tissue) bleached kraft, dissolving sulfite pulp, papergrade sulfite,
soda, groundwood, and deink subcategories. It is apparent that final
effluent TSS concentrations are related to raw waste BOD5_
concentrations when biological treatment is employed. This
relationship is defined by the following equation:
Final effluent TSS (mg/1) = (8.95) (Raw Waste BOD5_ (mg/1))0-31
As discussed previously, BPT for the corrugating medium furnish
subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory and the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory has been identified as
biological treatment. Therefore, the above relationships, which
predict the BOD5_ and TSS final effluent concentrations that result
from the application of biological treatment consistent with the
biological treatment systems that form the basis of BPT effluent
limitations for the major portions of the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry, are applicable. The long-term average BPT BOD5_ and TSS
final effluent concentrations for mills in the corrugating medium
furnish subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory and
the wastepaper-molded products subcategory are based on the predicted
performance of biological treatment applied to the
subcategory/subdi vision average BOD5> raw waste concentrations.
Long-term average BPT final effluent loads were calculated as the
product of the long-term average BOD!> and TSS final effluent
concentrations and the flows that form the basis of BPT for these
subcategory/subdivisions.
391
-------
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
90-
• •
^ 40H
9
v>
to
30-
REGKESSION EQUATION t
M« O.TO
^ « 0.099
• B.99ia>l
20-
10-
100
200 500 400 9OO 600 700 800 »00
RAW WASTEWATER BODS • ">9/>
FIGURE
FINAL EFFLUENT TSS VS
RAW WASTEWATER BOD&
392
-------
As discussed previously, BPT for the cotton fiber furnish subdivision
of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory has been identified as
biological treatment. The BPT BOD5_ effluent limitation promulgated
for the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory in 1977 is much less
stringent than BODj^ effluent limitations for other subcategories with
comparable BODS^ raw waste characteristics. Therefore, EPA did not
base the long-term average BPT BOD5_ final effluent concentration for
this new subdivision on the relationship between BODS^ final effluent
concentration and BOD5_ raw waste concentration discussed previously.
Rather, the long-term average BPT BOD5^ final effluent concentration
for the cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory is based on the transfer of the performance of
biological treatment characteristic of all other mills in the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. EPA applied the same percent
reduction in BODS^ (77.7 percent) that forms the basis of BPT
limitations promulgated in 1977 for the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory to the BODS^ raw waste load for mills in the
newly-established cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. The long-term average BPT TSS
final effluent characteristics were developed from the relationship
illustrated in Figure VIII-1. Long-term average loads were calculated
as the product of the long-term average BODS^ and TSS final effluent
concentrations and the flow that forms the basis of BPT for this new
subdivision.
As discussed previously, BPT for the nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories has been identified as primary treatment. As shown in
Table VIII-1, raw waste characteristics for these new subcategories
are comparable to raw waste characteristics for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. EPA believes that it is
reasonable to predict that the application of primary treatment in
these three new subcategories will yield final effluent concentrations
identical to those that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations for
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. Therefore, the long-term
average BPT final effluent concentrations for the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories are based on a
transfer of performance from the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory. Long-term average loads were calculated as the product
of (a) the long-term average BPT BOD5> and TSS final effluent
concentrations that were developed for the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory and (b) the raw waste load flows that form the basis of
BPT for the three new subcategories.
BPT long-term average final effluent characteristics for the four new
subcategories and two new subdivisions of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry are presented in Table VII1-2.
393
-------
TABLE VIII-2
BPT LONG-TERM AVERAGE
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
BODS
TSS
Subcategory
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
kl/kkg
30.0
88.1
(kgal/t)
(7.2)
(21.1)
kg/kkg
1.6
1.3
Ub/t)
(3.1)
(2.6)
kg/kkg
2.1
3.2
(lb/t)
(A. 2)
(6.4)
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 176.5 (42.3) 5.1 (10.2) 7.2 (14.3)
Nonintegrated-Ligbtweight Papers
o Lightweight 203.2 (48.7) 7.4 (14.7) 6.0 (12.0)
o Electrical 320.9 (76.9) 11.7 (23.3) 9.5 (18.9)
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 250.0 (59.9) 9.1 (18.1) 7.4 (14.7)
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 53.8 (12.9) 2.0 (3.9) 1.6 (3.2)
394
-------
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 (oil and grease/ 44 FR
44501, July 30, 1979).
BCT is not an additional limitation, but replaces BAT for the control
of conventional pollutants. In addition to other factors specified in
section 304(b)(4)(B), the Act requires that BCT limitations be
assessed in light of a two part "cost-reasonableness" test (American
Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981)). The first test
compares the cost for private industry to reduce its conventional
pollutants with the costs to publicly owned treatment works for
similar levels of reduction in their discharge of these pollutants.
The second test examines the cost-effectiveness of additional
industrial treatment beyond BPT. EPA must find that limitations are
"reasonable" under both tests before establishing them as BCT. In no
case may BCT be less stringent than BPT.
EPA published its methodology for carrying out the BCT analysis on
August 29, 1979 (44 FR 50732). In the case mentioned above, the Court
of Appeals ordered EPA to correct data errors underlying EPA's
calculation of the first test, and to apply the second cost test.
(EPA had argued that a second cost test was not required.)
In a previous document, EPA identified four technology options that
are capable of removing significant amounts of conventional
pollutants, including:
(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.
(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
BPT is based on biological treatment). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary treatment is the
basis of existing 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
395
-------
BPT is based on biological treatment). For the remaining
nonintegrated subcategories, for which primary treatment is the
basis of existing 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.
Because EPA has not yet promulgated a revised BCT methodology in
response to the American Paper Institute v. EPA decision mentioned
earlier, this document does not include specific information on these
four technology options. For further discussion of these four
technology options, see (a) 46 FR 1430; January 6, 1981 and (b)
Proposed Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and the Builders' Paper
and Board Mills Point Source Categories, U.S. EPA, December 1980.(203)
EPA is deferring a final decision on the appropriate BCT limitations
until EPA promulgates the revised BCT methodology.
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS—CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
General
Section 306 of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires that new source
performance standards (NSPS) be established for industrial dischargers
based upon the best demonstrated technology. NSPS include the control
of conventional, toxic, and nonconventional pollutants. In the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry, the Agency has determined that NSPS
should control the same pollutants controlled under BPT and BAT. This
section includes a discussion of those technology options considered
as the basis of control of conventional pollutants at new sources.
Two options have been developed for the control of conventional
pollutants under NSPS:
Option 1 - Control of conventional pollutants based on the
effluent limitations attained at best performing mills in the
respective subcategories. The technology basis of NSPS Option 1
varies depending on the type of treatment that formed the basis
of BPT effluent limitations for each subcategory.
Option 2 - Control of conventional pollutants based on (a) the
application of production process controls to reduce wastewater
discharge and raw waste loads and (b) 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.
396
-------
Option ]_
Option 1 standards are based on the levels attained at best performing
mills in the respective subcategories. This approach is described in
detail below and, in the majority of cases, involves an assessment of
actual effluent data. After determination of NSPS Option 1 effluent
standards, the Agency identified appropriate technologies that could
achieve these limitations. As discussed below, except for the
paperboard from wastepaper, tissue from wastepaper, wastepaper-molded
products, and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories, EPA has
defined NSPS Option 1 to include the application of end-of-pipe
treatment of those raw waste loads that formed the basis of BPT
effluent limitations. Therefore, except for the four subcategories
mentioned above, the NSPS Option 1 raw waste loads which are presented
in Table VIII-3 are identical to the raw waste loads that formed the
basis of BPT effluent limitations.
The technologies for achieving Option 1 effluent limitations vary
depending on the technology basis of BPT effluent limitations for each
subcategory. As discussed in detail later in this section, for all
subcategories in the integrated segment and for the nonintegrated-fine
papers and deink subcategories, where BPT was identified as biological
treatment, the activated sludge process is the technology basis of
NSPS Option 1. Treatment system design criteria were established that
reflect attainment of NSPS Option 1 effluent standards through
implementation of end-of-pipe treatment of the raw waste loads that
form the basis of BPT effluent limitations for these subcategories.
Treatment schemes were identified and used in the development of cost
estimates presented in Appendix A. Specific design criteria are also
presented in Appendix A. The activated sludge system includes spill
prevention and control systems, equalization, aeration basins and
provision for operation in the contact stabilization mode, and
clarification and sludge handling equipment.
At mills in the nonintegrated subcategories where BPT effluent
limitations are based on primary treatment, the technology basis of
NSPS Option 1 is primary clarification. Design criteria were
established that reflect attainment of NSPS Option 1 effluent
characteristics through implementation of end-of-pipe treatment of the
raw waste loads that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations for
these subcategories. The primary clarification system includes
chemical coagulant addition and sludge handling capability.
At 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. NSPS Option 1 for these
subcategories is identical to NSPS Option 2 and includes the
application of production process controls and biological treatment,
in the form of conventional activated sludge. The end-of-pipe
biological treatment systems are identical in size to those which form
the basis of BPT effluent limitations for these subcategories (i.e.,
biological treatment system design is based on attainment of BPT
397
-------
TABLE VII]-3
SUMMARY OF NSPS OPTION 1
RAW WASTE LOADS
Flow
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Seni-Cheaical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundvood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard Fron Wastepaper
o Corrugating Mediun Furnish
o Noncorrugating Mediun Furnish
Vastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segaent
kl/kkg (kg«l/t)
BODS
52.5
52.5
42.9
275.0
275.0
275.0
303
141
88.0
99.0
91.0
4
9*
102.0
102.0
67.6
68.0
13.4
13.4
23.8
11.3
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish 63.0
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 176.5
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 96.0
Nonintegrated-Lightweigbt Papers
o Lightweight 203.2
o Electrical 320.9
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers 250.0
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 53.8
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
230.0 (55.1)
173.0 (41.6)
148.0 (35.4)
129.0 (30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
58.4 (14.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72.7)
(34.0)*
(21.1)
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
66.5 (133.0)
38.0 (75.9)
38.4 (76.7)
33.6 (67.2)
16.9 (33.8)
24.3 (48.6)
25.2 (50.4)
19.4 (38.8)
137.0
156.0
181.5
266.0
(274.0)
(312.0)
(363.0)
(531.9)
92.5* (184.9)*
21.2
17.4
16.7
(42.4)
(34.8)
(33.3)
9C.O (180.0)
90.0 (180.0)
15.9 (31.7)
9.7 (19.3)
23.0 (46.0)
11.3 (22.5)
5.5 (10.9)
6.5 (13.0)
10.8 (21.5)
22.9 (45.8)
11.5 (22.9)
21.7
21.7
12.2
10.4
(43.3)
(43.3)
(24.3)
(20.8)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
113.0 (226.0)
45.0 (90.0)
66.5 (133.0)
75.0 (150.0)
21.9
21.9
12.3
92.
92.
92.
92.
90.0
39.9
48.5
52.5
63.4
63.4
27.4
36.9
(43.8)
(43.8)
(24.6)
20.5 (41.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(180.0)
79.8
97.0
105.0
202.5 (405.0)
202.5 (405.0)
202.5 (405.0)
110.5 (221.0)
11.0 (21.9)
11.0 (21.9)
14.8 (29.6)
35.0 (70.0)
30.8 (61.6)
55.2 (110.4)
34.7 (69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.8)
(73.7)
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
'includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Hash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Driw Wash) subcate-
gories.
*NSPS Option 1 raw waste flow and BOD5 vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final
product. Flow (kl/kkg) * 52.87 •xp(0.017x), where x • percent sulfite pulp produced
on-site in final product. Raw waste loads shown are for a Bill where on-site paper-
grade pulp production is 58 percent of the total product.
398
-------
effluent limitations through the application of activated sludge
systems to treat the raw waste loads that form the basis of BPT
effluent limitations for these four subcategories.) NSPS Option 1 and
2 final effluent loads are lower than BPT effluent limitations
because, after implementation of in-plant production process controls
which reduce wastewater flow, the detention time of the biological
treatment system has been increased, thus reducing the load of BOD5_
and TSS.
General Methodology. This option involves the determination of
effluent characteristics 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
and the supplemental data request programs. These data are summarized
in Tables VIII-4 through VIII-25.
The final effluent loads characteristic of the best performing mills
in a subcategory form the basis of NSPS Option 1 BOD5_ and TSS
discharge characteristics for that subcategory. EPA has generally
defined best performing mills as those mills where both the long-term
average BOD5_ and TSS effluent loads are equal to or less than the
long-term average BOD5_ and TSS BPT effluent limitations through
implementation of 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. In those cases where
Option 1 long-term average BOD5_ effluent concentrations corresponding
to BPT flow were less than 15 mg/1, the long-term average BOD5_
concentration was revised upward to 15 mg/1. The Agency believes that
15 mg/1 is a realistic estimate of the lowest attainable long-term
average BOD5_ concentration representative of the capability of
biological treatment in treating pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
wastewaters.
A description of the specific procedure used in establishing NSPS
Option 1 effluent characteristics for each subcategory follows. As
described, in some instances, EPA slightly modified the approach to
determining "best performers."
Dissolving Kraft - As illustrated in Table VIII-4, the general
methodology as described above was followed. BPT effluent limitations
are being attained at mills 032002 and 032003.
Market Bleached Kraft - As illustrated in Table VIII-5, the
general methodology was used to calculate NSPS Option 1 effluent
characteristics for the market bleached kraft subcategory. Mills
030028, 030030, 030031, 666666, 777777, and 900074 in this subcategory
are best performers and 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
399
-------
c
o
TABLE VIII-4
DISCHARGE MONITORING REi'ORT DATA
DISSOLVING KRAFT SUBC/TEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mill How
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t)
032001 124.
-------
TABLE VIII-3
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
MARKET BLEACHED KRAFT S'JBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tens Average Level»
Hill
Niuiber
030005
030009
030012
030028(a)
030030 (a)
030031 (a)
666666 (a)
777777(a)
9000 74 (a)
030011 (a )(b)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Leve 1 s
Average of
Hills
Attaining BPT
BOOS and TSS
Flow
BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) ks/kkg (Ib/t)
61.3
76.4
119.0
142.6
151.8
281.8
85.9
135.5
121.6
140.4
173.0
(14.68)
(18.32)
(28.52)
(34.18)
(36.38)
(67.53)
(20.59)
(32.46)
(29.13)
(33.65)
(41.6)
4.8
6.2
5.8
4.3
2.7
4.5
2.6
1.5
4.0
3.6
4.5
3.3
(9.65)
(12.40)
(11.60)
(8.55)
(5.41)
(8.94)
(5.16)
(3.08)
(7.94)
(7.25)
(9.0)
(6.62)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
5.0
4.8
19.5
7.8
3.7
9.0
6.8
6.5
2.6
3.7
9.0
5.7
(9
(9
(39
(15
(7
(18
(13
(12
(5
(7
(18
(11
.97)
.66)
.03)
.65)
.37)
.03)
.57)
.98)
.16)
.34)
.0)
.44)
Start
Date
08/78
01/78
01/78
08/78
01/78
07/77
02/79
07/79
09/78
08/78
Number
Flow
29
39
36
31
38
33
23
16
31
21
Of Months Data
BODS
29
39
36
31
38
43
23
16
31
21
TSS
29
39
36
31
38
43
23
16
31
21
(a) TSS and BODS are less than or equal lo BPT.
(b) This Bill is an integrated miscellaneous mill where Market blea bed kraft comprises approximately 40 percent of the
production. Prorated BPT was determined for this Bill. The pe cent effluent BODS and TSS reductions being
attained were then applied to BPT BOU5 and TSS effluent levels or the subcategory to obtain the effluent levels
shown.
-------
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 comparing BOD5_ and TSS effluent
loadings to BPT limitations determined by prorating limitations from
appropriate subcategories. The percentage reductions attained at this
mill were then applied to market bleached kraft BPT limitations.
Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for mill 030011 are 19.5 percent
and 59.2 percent below prorated BPT limitations.
BCT (Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue) Bleached Kraft - As
illustrated in Table VIII-6, the general methodology was used to
calculate NSPS Option 1 effluent characteristics for the BCT
(paperboard, coarse, and tissue) bleached kraft subcategory. Mills
030010, 030022, and 030032 are best performers and were used to
determine long-term average final effluent loads. In addition to
these mills, two additional mills (030036 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 manufacture paperboard, coarse
papers, or tissue papers. The approach used to include data for these
mills involved comparing BOD5_ and TSS effluent loadings to BPT
limitations determined by prorating limitations from appropriate
subcategories. The percentage reductions attained at these two mills
were then applied to the BCT (paperboard, coarse, and tissue) bleached
kraft BPT limitations. Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for mill
030036 are 32.2 and 4.7 percent below prorated BPT limitations while
characteristics for 030044 are 68.0 and 40.1 percent below prorated
BPT limitations.
Alkaline-Fine (Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda Subcategories) - As
illustrated in Table VIII-7, the general methodology was used to
calculate NSPS Option 1 effluent characteristics for the alkaline-fine
mill grouping (bleached kraft fine and soda subcategories). Mills
030020, 030027, 030046, and 030052 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 comparing BOD5_ and TSS effluent loadings to BPT
limitations determined by prorating limitations from appropriate
subcategories. The percentage reductions attained at these two mills
were then applied 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, EPA determined that the resulting BOD5_ effluent
concentration was below 15 mg/1. Therefore, the corresponding BOD5_
effluent concentration and effluent load were revised upward as shown
in Table VIII-7.
402
-------
o
u
TABU VIII 6
DISCHARGE MOMITORIKG REPORT DATA
BCT BLEACHED KRAFT ; UBCATKGOKY
Final Effluent
Long-Tem Average Levels
Hill
Number
030004
030010(a)
O30022(a)
030026
030032 (a)
030047
900010
030036 (a )(b)
030044(a)(b)
Bit-Final
Effluent
Levels
Average of
Hills
Attaining BPT
BOOS and TSS
Flow
kl/kki
208.0
170.9
150.0
136.0
106.8
151.7
121.1
129.8
117.3
148.0
(kf.l/t)
(49.84)
(40.95)
(35.94)
(32.59)
(25.60)
(36.35)
(29.02)
(31.11)
(28.12)
(35.4)
BOOS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
4.6
2.5
3.9
4.9
2.5
5.4
4.5
2.7
1.3
4.0
2.6
(9.18)
(4.92)
(7.81)
(9.73)
(5.09)
(10.73)
(9.03)
(5.43)
(2.56)
(8.0)
(5.16)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
4.2
4.3
1.
8.
4.
4.
4.
6.
4.3
7.1
4.3
(8
(8
(3
(17
(8
(8
(9
(13
(8
(14
(8
.49)
.69)
.54)
.25)
.95)
.56)
.03)
.53)
.50)
.2)
.64)
Start
Date
10/78
07/77
01/78
07/77
01/78
10/78
06/78
07/77
05/78
Muaber
Flow
28
43
39
42
38
25
31
33
34
Of Months Data
BODS
28
43
39
44
38
25
31
33
34
TSS
28
43
39
41
38
25
31
33
34
(a) TSS and BODS are leaa than or equal to BPT.
(b) Mills are Integrated Miscellaneous Bills where BCT bleached I raft comprise approximately 80 and SO percent of
the production, reapectively. Prorated BPT was deteniined Tlie percent effluent BODS and TSS
reductiona being attained were then applied to BPT BODS and 'iSS effluent levels for the subcstegory
to obtain the effluent level* shown.
-------
TABLE VI11-7
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
ALKALINE-FINE
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mi 1 1
Number
OJ0001
030013
030020(a)
030027(a)
030033
030034(a)(b)
030046(a)
030048
030052(a)
030058
0300fj7
030059
030060
130002
0300H(a)(c)
030044(a)(c)
BPT- Final
K» fluent.
Levels
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BODS and TSS
Opt ion 1
Adjusted BOD5
(a) TSS and
lli) Data are
Flow
BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
107.2 (25.69)
138.4 (33.17)
112.3 (26.92)
63.4 (15.20)
147.1 (35.24)
69.6 (16.67)
137.6 (32.97)
110.3 (26.44)
127.7 (30.59)
124.0 (29.72)
114.2 (27.37)
143.4 (34.37)
247.5 (59.32)
70.1 (16.81)
140.4 (33.66)
117.3 (28.12)
129.0 (30.9)
2.7 (5.47)
2.7 (5.36)
1.3 (2.65)
0.7 (1.34)
6.8 (13.68)
1.0 (2.02)
2.1 (4.13)
5.7 (11.48)
3.1 (6.16)
4.1 (8.23)
7.1 (14.24)
2.7 (5.31)
31.8 (63.60)
2.3 (4.56)
2.5 (4.99)
1.0 (1.98)
3.1 (6.2)
1.8 (3.54)
1.9 (3.87)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ih/t)
10.9 (21.82)
8.5 (17.08)
2.5 (5.03)
2.1 (4.20)
21.4 (42.73)
2.7 (5.33)
3.1 (6.29)
13.4 (26.89)
3.8 (7.58)
7.4 (14.76)
5.8 (11.55)
11.2 (22.34)
25.1 (50.28)
8.5 (17.00)
2.7 (5.34)
3.9 (7.85)
6.6 (13.1)
3.5 (6.05)
Start
Date
11/78
01/78
12/78
04/78
01/78
10/79
07/77
01/78
01/80
07/77
07/77
05/78
02/78
07/78
08/78
05/78
Nuaber
Flow
26
27
24
33
35
18
27
36
12
33
44
36
33
18
21
34
Of Months Data
BODS
27
35
24
33
35
18
27
36
12
33
43
36
32
18
21
34
TSS
27
34
24
33
35
18
27
36
12
33
43
36
33
18
21
34
BOOS are less than or equal to BPT.
not included in
the average because this mill enpl
(<•) Mills are integrated miscellaneous mills
where fine papers
oys tertiary chemically assisted
comprise approximately 60 and 40
clarification.
percent
of the production, respectively. Prorated BPT was deterriiifd. The percent effluent BOD5 and
TSS reductions being attained 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.
-------
Unbleached Kraft - As discussed previously, EPA has established
two subdivisions of this subcategory: (a) the linerboard product
sector and (b) the bag and other products product sector. EPA's
review of the BPT final effluent characteristics for the unbleached
kraft subcategory indicated that the final effluent BOD5_ concentration
that forms the basis of BPT for this subcategory is considerably
higher for the linerboard product sector than for other subcategories
with comparable raw waste BOD5_ and, therefore, considerably
underestimates the pollutant reduction capability in this sector.
Therefore, to determine a more realistic set of best performing mills
in the linerboard product sector, the BPT final effluent BOD5_ load was
revised downward based on the relationship of BOD5_ influent to
effluent presented previously and in the Phase II Development Document
(see page 402).(48) Employing this methodology, the adjusted final
effluent BOD5_ long-term average load becomes 1.6 kg/kkg (3.2 Ib/t).
After adjustment of the BOD5_ final effluent load, the general
methodology was followed for the linerboard product sector as
illustrated in Table VIII-8. The mills in this product sector where
revised final effluent loads are attained include mills 010002,
010019, 010020, 010025, 010040, and 010046. For the linerboard
product sector, data for those mills with oxidation pond(s) (010020,
010025 and 010046) were excluded from the calculation.
As discussed in Section V, BOD5_ raw waste loads for the bag and other
products product sector are substantially higher than those that
formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations. To determine a more
realistic set of best performing mills for this product sector, EPA
revised the BPT final effluent BOD5_ load based on the relationship of
BOD5_ influent to effluent presented previously and in the Phase II
Development Document (see page 402). (48) The Agency used the product
sector average BOD5_ raw waste load in this calculation. Employing
this methodology, the final effluent BOD5_ long-term average load was
adjusted upward to 2.0 kg/kkg (4.0 Ib/ton).
After adjustment of the BOD5_ final effluent load, the general
methodology was followed for the bag and other products product sector
as illustrated in Table VIII-8. The mills in this product sector
where revised final effluent loads fcre attained are mills 010006 and
010008.
Semi-Chemical - A review of the 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_ and, therefore, considerably underestimates
the pollutant reduction capability in this sector. Therefore, to
determine a more realistic set of best performing mills, the BPT final
effluent BOD5_ load was revised downward based on the relationship of
BOD5_ influent to effluent presented previously and in the Phase II
Development Document (see page 402).(48) Employing this methodology,
the adjusted final effluent BOD5_ long-term average load becomes 1.9
kg/kkg (3.8 Ib/t).
405
-------
TABLE VIII-8
DISCHARGE MONITORING KEPORT DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUIICATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tern Average Levels
Mill
Number
Linorboard
010001
010002(a)
010018
01001900
010020(a)(b)
010025(a)(b)
010032
010033
010038
010040(a)
010043
010046(a)(b)
010047
010057
010063
010064
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels
BODS Comparison
Level For NSPS
Flow
kl/kkg
46.4
52.7
54. 8
49.8
81.0
43.0
61. 5
68.1
111.3
62.3
42.6
33.3
22.0
42.9
29.3
21.7
52.5
(kgal/t)
(11.12)
(12.64)
(13.13)
(11.93)
(19.41)
(10.31)
(14.74)
(16.32)
(26.66)
(14.93)
(10.20)
(7.97)
(5.28)
(10.27)
(7.03)
(5.19)
(12.6)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
1.8
1.4
3.1
1.1
1.1
0.5
2.5
1.9
3.6
1.3
0.7
1.3
1.9
4.2
2.6
1.8
1.9
1.6
(3.50)
(2.88)
(6.13)
(2.29)
(2.21)
(1.06)
(4.99)
(3.83)
(7.21)
(2.54)
(1.33)
(2.65)
(3.73)
(8.46)
(5.23)
(3.54)
(3.7)
(3.2)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
3.1
2.7
3.5
2.7
1.0
0.6
2.2
0.4
6.0
1.1
5.0
0.8
0.9
2.6
5.3
3.0
3.6
(6
(5
(6
(5
(1
(1
(4
(0
(11
(2
(9
(1
(1
(5
(10
(6
(7
-14)
.44)
.97)
.47)
.99)
-11)
.30)
-77)
.98)
.20)
.91)
.69)
.81)
.24)
.54)
.02)
.2)
Start
Date
01/78
07/78
10/78
09/77
09/78
09/78
01/78
07/77
01/78
10/78
06/79
07/77
07/77
07/77
06/78
01/78
Number
Flow
36
33
11
36
13
31
06
29
40
25
20
29
38
36
34
35
Of Months
BODS
36
33
11
36
13
31
32
29
40
25
22
36
38
35
34
38
Data
TSS
36
33
11
36
13
31
32
29
40
25
22
35
38
35
34
38
Average of Milla
Attaining BFT TSS
and BODS Comparison
Level
1.3 (2.57)
2.2 (4.37)
-------
TABU VI11-8 (Continued)
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tens Average Levels
Mill Flow
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t)
Bag Paper and Other
010003 52
010005 64,
01 0006 (a) 54
010008(/i) 43
010028 148
010034 84
01003S 168
010044 57
010048(a)(c) 134,
010055(a)(d) 42
010062 136
BPT-Final
Effluent Levels 52
BODS Comparison
Level For
NSPS
Average of
.4
.1
.5
.3
.6
.8
.9
.5
.7
.9
.0
.5
Mills Attaining BPT
anil BODS comparison
BODS
kg/kka (Ib/t)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
Start
Date
Mixed Products
(12.
(15.
(13.
(10.
(35.
(20.
(40.
(13.
(32.
(10.
(32.
(12.
TSS
level
56)
35)
07)
37)
61)
31)
48)
78)
28)
28)
60)
6)
2
2
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
.0
.1
.0
.0
.9
.3
.4
.6
.4
.5
.5
.9
.0
.5
(4.
(4.
(3.
(2.
(3.
(4.
(6.
(3.
(2.
(3.
(4.
(3.
(4.
(3.
01)
20)
98)
02)
83)
64)
80)
19)
72)
00)
92)
7)
0)
00)
4.4
3.3
3.0
2.5
3.8
3.4
6.7
5.4
3.6
2.4
3.8
3.6
2.7
(8
(6
(5
(4
(7
(6
(13
(10
(7
(4
(7
(7
(5
.77)
.51)
.95)
.93)
.50)
.71)
.35)
.88)
.22)
.85)
.67)
.2)
.44)
12/78
06/79
07/77
07/77
03/79
01/78
12/78
09/78
02/80
06/80
07/77
Number Of Months Data
BODS "" TSS
Flow
25
22
42
23
23
37
27
24
16
07
45
25
22
42
39
23
37
28
24
16
07
45
25
22
42
39
23
37
28
24
16
07
45
(a) TSS is less than or equal to BPT; BODS is less than or equal to the BODS Comparison Level.
(t>) Data are not included in the averages because treatment includes an oxidation pond.
(c) Data are not included in the averages because mill employs a two stage biological treatment system.
(J) Mill is not included in the averages because less than 12 mouths of data are available.
-------
After adjustment of the BOD5_ final effluent load, the general
methodology was applied as illustrated in Table VIII-9. Mills in this
subcategory where revised effluent limitations are attained include
mills 060004, 020003, and 020009. In addition to these mills, two
additional mills (020011 and 110068) which discharge to a joint
treatment system were included in the calculation. A significant
portion of the wastewater discharged to the joint treatment system is
associated with the production of semi-chemical pulp. The approach
used to include data for these mills involved comparing BOD5_ and TSS
effluent loads to BPT limitations determined by prorating limitations
from appropriate subcategories. The percentage reductions attained at
these mills were then applied to the revised semi-chemical BPT
effluent limitations. Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for mills
020011 and 110068 are 36.7 and 34.9 percent below prorated
limitations.
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_ and,
therefore, considerably underestimates the pollutant reduction
capability in this sector. Therefore, to determine a more realistic
set of best performing mills, the BPT final effluent BOD5_ load was
revised downward based on the relationship of BOD5_ influent to
effluent presented previously and in the Phase II Development Document
(see page 402).(48) Employing this methodology, the adjusted final
effluent BOD5_ annual average load becomes 1.9 kg/kkg (3.7 Ib/t).
After adjustment of the BOD5_ effluent load, the general methodology
was applied as illustrated in Table VIII-10. Mills where revised
effluent limitations are attained include mills 015001 and 015004.
Papergrade Sulfite (Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pijt Wash) and
Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcategories) - In reviewing this
subcategory, as discussed in Sections IV and V, EPA determined that
wastewater discharge is a function of the percentage of sulfite pulp
manufactured on-site. In Section 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 flow and actual long-term
average BOD5_ and TSS final effluent loads for each mill, long-term
average BOD5_ and TSS final effluent concentrations were computed.
These individual values were compared to 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). Mills
where the calculated final effluent concentrations are lower than 51
mg/1 of BOD5_ and 70 mg/1 of TSS were selected as best performing
mills. Five mills (040001, 040011, 040013, 040015, and 040019) were
found to be best performers; however, as illustrated in Table VIII-11,
408
-------
TABLE VI]1-9
DISCHAKGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
SEMI-CHEMICAL SIIBCATECORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels _
Mill
Flow
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t)
020001
020002
020003(a)
020004(a)(b)
020006
020007
020008(a)(c)
020009 (a)
020010
0200il(a)(d)
020012
020014
020015
020016
020017
060004(a)
900011
BHT-Final
Effluent Level
BODS Comparison
Level For
NSPS
26.1
25.4
40.5
24.4
13.6
11.2
11.7
28.5
23.6
17.6
31.5
26.5
34.5
37.9
18.7
36.9
49.8
42.9
(6
(6
(9
(5
(3
(2
(2
(6
(5
(4
(7
.26)
.08)
.71)
.84)
.26)
.69)
.80)
.84)
.65)
.22)
.55)
(6.35)
(8
(9
(4
(8
(11
(10
.27)
.09)
.47)
.85)
.94)
.3)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
3
3
0
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
3
3
11
2
2
1
4
3
1
. 1
.4
.4
.4
.7
.1
.1
.9
.0
.2
.7
.8
.1
.6
.5
.3
.3
.2
.9
(6
(6
(0
(2
(5
(6
(2
(3
(3
(2
(7
(7
(22
(5
(4
(2
(8
(6
(3
.10)
.88)
.71)
.80)
-41)
.28)
-11)
.80)
.94)
.40)
.46)
.54)
.13)
.19)
.99)
.53)
.54)
.4)
.8)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
4
3
1
0
4
3
2
3
3
2
6
7
11
4
2
1
6
4
.5
.7
.5
.6
.4
.1
.2
.4
.3
.6
.4
.1
.8
.6
.7
.3
.4
.1
(8
(7
(2
(1
(8
(6
(4
(6
(6
(5
(12
(14
(23
(9
(5
(2
(12
(8
.93)
.49)
.95)
.29)
.89)
-11)
.30)
.75)
.51)
.27)
.76)
.10)
.67)
.25)
.36)
.61)
.85)
.1)
Average of Mills
Attaining BPT TSS
and BOD5 Comparison
Level
Start
Date^
12/77
07/78
04/78
01/78
05/78
07/77
08/78
10/78
10/78
11/78
07/77
07/78
06/79
06/80
07/78
10/78
08/77
Number Of f!on_t_hs_ Da ta
Flow" BOI)5 "" TSS
20
29
25
39
36
27
28
27
30
27
44
30
22
07
29
27
33
20
29
25
39
36
23
28
26
30
28
43
30
22
07
29
27
31
20
29
25
39
;)6
23
28
27
30
28
43
:io
22
07
29
27
31
1.2 (2.36) 2.2 (4.40)
(a) TSS is less than or equal to BPT; BOD5 is less than or equal to the BODS Comparison Level.
(b) Data are not included in the average because mill employs inverse osmosis.
(c) Data are not included in the average because this mill occasionally spray irrigates some effluent.
(J) This semi-chemical mill shares a joint treatment system with a paperboard from wastepapcr mill. It contributes
approximately 46 percent of the total production of both mills. Prorated BPT was determined. The percent
effluent BOD5 and TSS reductions being attained were then applied to the BPT TSS effluent level and BOO1)
comparison level for the subcategory to obtain the effluent levels shown.
-------
TABLE VIII-10
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
UNBLEACHED KRAFT AND SEMI-CHKMICAL SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mi 11
Flow
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t)
010017
015001 (a)
015002 (b)
015003
015004(a)
015005
015006
01 SOO 7
01 '.009 (c)
BrT- Final
Effluent Levels
BODS Comparison
Level For
NSHS
37.3
43.6
36.3
41.4
52.9
36.7
47.6
56.3
51.0
58.4
(8.94)
(10.46)
(8.70)
(9.91)
(12.68)
(8.80)
(H-41)
(13.48)
(12.23)
(14.0)
BODS
kft/kkg (lb/t)
2.6
1.9
1.7
3.9
0.9
2.4
3.3
2.1
4.8
3.0
1.9
(5.23)
(3-70)
(3.32)
(7.78)
(1-70)
(4.84)
(6.69)
(4.14)
(9.55)
(5.9)
(3.7)
TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t)
4.1
3.1
3.8
2.7
1.6
1.6
4.3
5.1
5.2
3.6
(8
(6
(7
(5
(3
(3
(8
(10
(10
(7
.25)
-19)
.50)
.39)
.20)
.14)
.64)
.18)
.38)
-1)
Start
Date
03/78
01/78
09/77
01/78
06/79
01/78
01/78
10/78
07/77
Number
Flow
34
39
42
40
13
32
38
29
18
Of Months Data
BODS
34
39
41
40
13
32
38
29
18
TSS
34
39
41
40
13
32
38
29
18
Average of Hills
Attaining BrT TSS
anil BODS Comparison
Level
1.4 (2.70)
2.4 (4.70)
(a) TSS is less than or equal to BPT; BODS is less than or equal to BODS Comparison Level.
(b) Mill discharges some effluent to percolation ponds in the summer. Data are not representative of
entire effluent discharge.
(c) Mill now produces bleached kraft products. Data presented .ire for the period prior to addition of
bleaching processes.
-------
TABLE VI 1J- 11
DISCHARGE MON1TOKING KKPORT DATA
PAPKRGRADE SULFITE SUUCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Stdrt
Date
07/77
07/79
07/80
07/77
04/80
07/77
11/79
06/78
06/77
07/77
07/77
06/79
09/79
BHT final effluent levels are based on the processes used to manufacture sulfite pulp.
Mill
Nurher
040001 (d)(e)
040002
040008(b)
04()OIO(c)
040011(d)(e)
040012
0400 1 3 (e)
0400 1 5 (e)
040016
040017
040018(1)
04()019(e)(g)
040()09(e)(h)
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
123.
305 .
219.
258.
60.
258.
100.
40.
116.
84.
85.
45.
89.
3
3
1
3
9
1
9
1
4
3
7
3
3
(29
(73
(52
(61
(14
(61
(24
(9
(27
(20
(20
(10
(21
.55)
.16)
.51)
.90)
.60)
.85)
-17)
.62)
.89)
• 21)
.53)
.86)
.41)
BODS
TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t) kg/kt
10
14
10
6
1
11
4
12
6
5
1
2
1
.7
.9
.3
.4
.4
.1
.5
.3
.5
.3
.8
.8
.5
(21.
(29.
(20.
(12.
(2.
(22.
(8.
(24.
(13.
(10.
(3.
(5.
(2.
.30)
86)
52)
72)
89)
21)
95)
68)
07)
57)
61)
66)
95)
9.1
25.4
12.4
6.1
2.5
14.2
7.4
12.7
14.9
10.0
1.7
3.5
4.8
ig (lb/t)
(18.
(50.
(24.
(12.
( 4.
(28.
(14.
(25.
(29.
(20.
( 3.
( 7.
( 9.
10)
,78)
,89)
15)
,92)
30)
88)
,34)
74)
09)
48)
,09)
66)
Number Of Months Data
Flow
32
19
9
46
14
31
17
36
35
45
27
19
21
BOD5
34
21
9
46
14
33
17
36
16
45
27
19
21
TSS
3.5
21
9
45
14
32
17
36
44
45
27
19
21
NSHS
Comparison Levels * * 51 mg/1
Calculated Comparison Level Flows
anil Theoretical Concent rat ions (i ):
040013
040015
040019
137.0 (32.83)
289.4 (69.35)
128.0 (30.67)
32.69 mg/1
42.67 mg/1
22.13 Bg/1
70 »g/l
54.35 mg/1
43.81 mg/1
27.72 Bg/1
Average Concentration
32.5 mg/1 42.0 mg/1
Option 1 Long-Term Average Final Effluent
B005 (kg/kkg) =1.72 exp (0.017x)
TSS (kg/kkg) = 2.22 exp (0.017x)
Where x equals the percent sulfite pulp
produced on-site.
Levels:
(a) Data are not considered in the average because pulp is not bleached at this Bill. Mill is now closed.
(h) Data are not considered in the average because less than 12 months data are available.
(c) Data are not considered in the average because glassine papers are produced at
this will which is not typical of the subcategory.
(J) Data are not considered in the average because mill employs .1 2-stage biological treatment system.
(c) Theoretical concent rations are below the NSPS comparison levels.
(f) Pulp Bill wastes are discharged to a POTW.
(g) A portion of the wastewater discharge is not treated in the biological treatment system.
(h) This papergrjde sulfite mill shares a joint treatment system with an alkaline-fine mill. It contributes approx-
mjtely 48 percent of the total production of both mills. Prorated BPT was calculated and this mill was found
to tueet BPT levels. Data for this mill were not considered in the averages as the final effluent is not
typical of the subcategory.
(i) The theoretical concentration is equal to the long-term aver.ige (lb/t) divided by (the theoretical comparison
level flow for the mill times 0.00834 Ib/kgal).
" Comparison Level flow is based on the following equation rel.iting flow (kgal/t) to percent sulfite pulp (x)
(produced on-site) in the final product, with theoretical concentrations calculated using this equation and
the annual .iverage discharge levels reported above for each mill:
flow (kgjl/l) = 12.67e
How (k]/kks) = 52.87e
0.017x
0.017x
-------
mill 040011 was excluded from the calculation because its treatment
system, a two stage biological system, is not considered to be
sufficiently representative of the technology on which BPT is based.
Mill 040001 was also excluded from the calculation because pulp is not
bleached at this mill.
Long-term average NSPS Option 1 loads were calculated as the product
of the average of the long-term average concentrations of the three
mills which were found to be best performers, and the flow
corresponding to that calculated from the relationship shown in the
footnote to Table VIII-11. The flow and, therefore, the long-term
average NSPS Option 1 loads will vary from mill to mill depending on
the percentage of sulfite pulp produced at a given mill.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - As no best performing mills have been
identified in the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory, the Agency
relied on transfer of mill performance in the papergrade sulfite
subcategories to determine long-term final effluent loads. NSPS
Option 1 effluent loads were determined by applying the following
methodology:
a. The average TSS reduction of 40.0 percent for the papergrade
sulfite subcategories has been transferred directly to the
dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory.
b. The long-term average BOD5_ effluent concentrations that formed
the basis of BPT for papeFgrade sulfite mills 040013, 040015, and
040019 are 42, 50, and 47 mg/1, respectively. These
concentrations and the flow relationship shown in the footnote on
Table VIII-11 were used to determine a baseline BOD5_ long-term
average load for each mill. ~
c. The percentage reduction of BOD5_ discharge at mills 040013,
040015, and 040019 were compared to the baseline calculated in
"b" above.
d. This reduction of 29.9 percent was applied to each product sector
of the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory to yield the NSPS
Option 1 long-term average BOD5_ loads.
Table VIII-12 illustrates the calculation of NSPS Option 1 long-term
average loads and presents available discharge data for the dissolving
sulfite pulp subcategory. EPA has determined that the characteristics
and treatability of wastewaters discharged from mills in the
dissolving sulfite pulp and the papergrade sulfite subcategories are
similar. In fact, BPT effluent limitations for both subcategories
were developed from the same relationship between BOD5_ raw waste
concentrations and BOD5_ final effluent concentrations. (48) Therefore,
the Agency believes that new dissolving sulfite pulp mills will be
able to attain the long-term average discharge characteristics
presented in Table VIII-12.
412
-------
CO
TABLE VI11-12
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
DISSOLVING SULFITE PULP SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tern Average Levels
Mill
Flov
Number kl/kkg
046001
046002
046003
046O04(a)
046005
046006
BPT final cffl ut
Nitration
Viscose
Ce 1 lophane
Acetate
224
397
277
174
352
135
275
275
275
303
.0
.0
.5
.5
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0
.4
BOD*
(kgal/t) kg/kkg
(53,
(95
(66,
(41,
(84
(32
(66.
(66
(66
(72
.68)
.14)
.50)
.82)
.47)
.36)
.0)
.0)
.0)
.7)
35.
47.
40.
10.
41.
.4
6
, 1
.3
.1
(Ib/t)
(70.
(95.
(80.
(20.
(82.
86)
17)
26)
.68)
.28)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ih/t)
22.
42.
11.
28.
51.
26.2 (52.30) 14.
*nd on grade of pu Ip •
12.1 (24.2) 20.
13,
14.
17,
.0
.1
.8
(25.
(28.
(35.
9)
,1)
.5)
20.
20.
20.
4
3
9
9
7
2
a
9
9
9
9
(44.74)
(84.59)
(23.74)
(57.86)
(103.32)
(28.40)
nu f a c tii red ,
(41.8)
(41.8)
(41.8)
(41.8)
Stjrt
_Da_te
07/77
01/79
12/80
04/79
11/79
07/77
Number Of Months Data
Flow BOD5 TSS
41
26
7
18
14
42
43
26
7
18
14
42
43
26
7
17
14
42
as follows:
Basis tor Determining NSPS Coaparlson Leveli(b)
040013 42 «g/l 70
040015 50 mg/1 70 ng/1
040019 47 ng/1 70 Bg/1
Average
Percentage
Below Comparison
Level to be Appl ied
to Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp Suhcatpgory(c) 29.9 40.0
Option 1 long-tern average final effluent levels depend on grade of pulp Manufactured, as follows:
Ni t rat ion
Viscose
Cel lophane
Acetate
8.5 (16.96)
9.1 (18.15)
9.9 (19.70)
12.4 (24.88)
12.5 (25.08)
12.5 (25.08)
12.5 (25.08)
12.5 (25.08)
(a) This nill shares a joint treatnent system with a paper Bill.
(b) Concentrations are those forcing the basis of BPT for these papergrade aulfite Billtt and are process-dependent.
(c) These are the average percentages below BIT concentration bases (reported above) of the theoretical concentrations
shown on Table VIII-11.
-------
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - As illustrated in Table VIII-13,
the general methodology was followed; BPT effluent limitations are
being attained at mill 070001.
Groundwood-Fine Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-14, the
general methodology was followed. BPT effluent limitations are being
attained at mills 052003, 052007, 052008, 052014, and 054014. In
addition to these mills, another mill (052009) was included in the
calculation. At this integrated miscellaneous mill where BPT effluent
limitations are attained, groundwood pulp is produced, a significant
portion of which is used to manufacture fine papers. The approach
used to include data for this mill involved comparing BOD5_ and TSS
effluent loadings to BPT limitations determined by prorating
limitations from appropriate subcategories. The percentage reductions
attained at this mill were then applied to groundwood-fine papers BPT
limitations. Effluent BOD5_ and TSS characteristics for mill 052009
are 14.6 percent and 26.5 percent below prorated BPT limitations.
Upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to the
flow that forms the basis of BPT for the groundwood-fine papers
subcategory, EPA determined that the resulting BOD5_ effluent
concentration was below 15 mg/1. Therefore, the corresponding
long-term average BOD5_ effluent concentration and effluent load were
revised upward as shown in Table VIII-14.
Groundwood-CMN Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-15, the
general methodology was followed in establishing BPT effluent
limitations. At mill 054015, BPT effluent limitations are attained.
For the nine month period prior to December 1978, the long-term
average TSS for this mill was 2.2 kg/kkg (4.4 Ib/t). In November
1978, the NPDES authority increased the allowable TSS discharge. For
the period after November 1978, the long-term average TSS is 5.2
kg/kkg (10.4 Ib/t). This mill has demonstrated that 2.2 kg/kkg (4.4
Ib/t) can be attained. Therefore, the long-term TSS effluent load is
based on performance at mill 054015 prior to December 1978.
Upon calculation of the concentration of BOD5_ corresponding to the
flow that forms the basis of BPT for the groundwood-CMN papers
subcategory, EPA determined that the resulting BOD5_ effluent
concentration was below 15 mg/1. Therefore, the corresponding
long-term average BOD5_ effluent concentration and effluent load were
revised upward as shown in Table VIII-15.
Deink - As shown in Table VII1-16, three product sectors have
been considered: fine papers, tissue papers, and newsprint.
For the deink-fine papers product sector, the general methodology was
followed. BPT effluent limitations are being attained at mills
140007, 140008, and 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
414
-------
TABLE VIIJ-13
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
GKOUNDWOOD-THERMO-MECHANICAL SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mi 1 1 Flow
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t)
070001(a) 87,9 (21.07)
070002 33,8 (8,10)
BIT-Final
Effluent Levels 88.0 (21.1)
BODS Comparison
Level for NSPS
Average of Hills'
Attaining BPT
TSS and BODS
Comparison Level
BODS TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
1.6 (3.18) 2.1 (5.45)
3.6 (7.29) 6.2 (12.38)
3.1 (6.2) 4.6 (9.2)
2.3 (4.5)
1.6 (3.18) 2.7 (5.45)
Start Number Of Months Dal
Date Flow BODS TS!
05/79 20 20 20
06/79 22 22 22
(a) TSS ia less than or equal to BPT; BODS is less than or equal to the BODS Comparison Level.
-------
O1
TABLE VIII-14
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
GROUNDWOOD-FINE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tera Average Levels
Hill
Number
052003(a)
052004
052007(a)
052008(a)
052009(a)(b)
052014(a)
054014(a)
BPT-rinal
Effluent Levels
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
71.6 (17.16)
53.8 (12.89)
78.7 (18.87)
41.3 (9.89)
78.5 (18.82)
37.1 (8.89)
J5.6 ( 8.52)
91.0 (21.9)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
0.8 (1.64)
2.2 (4.47)
0.9 (1.87)
0.4 (0.87)
1.7 (3.41)
0.3 (0.57)
1.3 (2.50)
2.0 (4.0)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
3.0 (5.94)
3.1 (6.11)
2.6 (5.14)
1.3 (2.53)
2.5 (5.07)
0.4 (0.74)
2.3 (4.61)
3.5 (6.9)
Start
Date
08/77
09/77
01/78
01/78
07/77
02/78
05/78
Average of Mills
Attaining BPT
BODS and TSS
Option 1
Adjusted BOOS
0.9 (1.81)
1.4 (2.74)
2.0 (4.01)
Nuaber Of Months Data
Flow
8
45
38
36
37
39
33
BODS
41
45
38
36
30
39
33
TSS
41
45
38
33
30
40
33
(a) TSS and BOD5 ate less than or equal to BPT.
(b) Mill is an integrated miscellaneous mill where groundwood-fine papers comprise .ipproximately 66 percent
of the production. Prorated BPT was determined. The percent effluent BOD5 and TSS
reductions being attained were then applied to BPT BOD5 and TSS effluent levels for the subcategory
to obtain the effluent levels shown.
-------
TABLE VIII-15
DISCHARGE MONITORING RKPORT DATA
CROUNDWOOD-CMN PAPERS SUBCATECORY
Final Effluent
Long-Tern Average Levels
Hi 11
Number
052015
01>40I5(a)(b)
0540I5(I>)
Flow BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (It./t)
69.0 (16.53) 3.8 (7.68)
109.5 (26.25) 1.0 (1.99)
112.2 (26.89) 1.2 (2.48)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
2.8 (5.57)
2.2 (4.41)
5.2 (10.44)
Start
Oate__
01/78
01/78
12/78
Number Of Months
Flow BOD5
24
9
25
25
9
25
JJata
TSS
25
11
25
Rl'T-Filial
F.I fluent Levels 99.0 (23.8)
Average of Mills
Al (.lining BPT
B01)r> and TSS
Option I
Ad jus led BOD5
2.2 (4.4)
1.2 (2.35)(b)
1.5 (2.98)
3.8 (7.5)
2.2 (4.41)
(a) TSS and 601)5 are less than or equal to BPT.
(li) Hill operated at the lower effluent levels listed above until their permitted TSS limits were relaxed, after which
it operateil jt the higher levels. Long-term average BOD5 wa;. determined by averaging data over the entire period for
which there are DMR data (weighted average of the two perioils).
-------
TABLE VIII-16
DISCHARGE MONITOKING KEPORT DATA
DEINK SUBCATI.GORY
CO
Final Effluent
Long-Tera Average Levels
Mi 1 1
Nuinlx'r
FI'IK- Papers
1 4000 7 ( j )
140008 (a)
I400l'j(a)
BrT-Final
hi Hue nt
Levels
Flow BODS TSS
kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
48.0 (11.50) 2.2 (4.37) 4.0 (8.00)
55.5 (13.29) 3.2 (6.45) 3.2 (6.43)
11.2 (7.48) 2.0 (3.98) 3.8 (7.50)
102.0 (24.4) 5.3 (10.6) 7.1 (14.2)
Start
Date
03/78
07/77
07/77
^
Number
Flow
39
46
44
Of Hon
BOD5
39
46
43
Average of Mil Is
Attaining BPT
BOI)r> and TSS
Newsprint
90001/(a)(b)
BPT Kinal
El fluent
l.tvels
Tissue Papers
1400l4la)
14001.S(a)
140018(a)(c)
140021 (a)
140022
140024
140025(a)
1400:iO(a)(d)
900015(a)
900018
'JO 00 20
BHT- Final
F.I t 1 lien I
I.f ve 1 s
Average of
Mills
AUjining BPT
BOD5 arid TSS
(j) TSS and
2.5 (4.93) 3.7 (7.31)
56.1 (13.44) 1.4 (2.82) 1.1 (2.18)
102.0 (24.4) 5.3 (10.6) 7.1 (14.2)
84.3 (20.20) 4.4 (8.75) 7.1 (14.14)
94.6 (22.67) 3.4 (6.84) 4.7 (9.43)
17.6 (4.22) 3.1 (6.20) 1.4 (2.84)
100.1 (23.99) 2.2 (4.40) 4.1 (8.16)
108.7 (26.06) 12.4 (24.75) 5.1 (10.16)
7.9 (1.90) 12.1 (24.14) 7.2 (14.40)
57.9 (13.87) 4.3 (8.68) 4.5 (8.92)
68.1 (16.33) 2.0 (3.91) 2.5 (5.05)
39.4 (9.43) 2.3 (4.53) 2.3 (4.53)
55.0 (13.18) 8.1 (16.25) 2.7 (5.40)
134.4 (32.20) 9.1 (18.26) 15.4 (30.76)
102.0 (24.4) 5.3 (10.6) 7.1 (14.2)
3.3 (6.64) 4.5 (9.04)
BOD5 are less than of equal to BPT.
(b) This mill employs chemically assisted secondary clarificatii
Option I
(c) Data are
(,)) Data are
final effluent loads.
nut included in the average because less than 12 m<
not included in the average because only a small p.
01/80
07/77
11/77
12/79
09/77
03/79
07/77
04/78
07/77
02/79
07/77
01/79
>n. Data were not iif:ed in
>nths data are available.
•rcentage of deinked pulp
15
44
43
10
42
26
44
26
45
22
29
24
developing NSPS
is produced.
15
44
43
9
42
26
44
26
47
22
45
24
TSS
39
46
44
15
44
43
10
42
26
44
26
47
22
45
24
-------
eliminated because insufficient data were available; mill 140030 was
eliminated because of a very low on-site production of deinked pulp.
Mills 140014, 140015, 140021, 140025, and 900015 are included in the
calculation of long-term effluent loads.
At the time of promulgation of BPT effluent limitations for the deink
subcategory, there were no direct discharging deink mills where
newsprint was produced. Now there is only one direct discharging mill
in the deink-newsprint product sector. It is not appropriate to base
NSPS Option 1 effluent loads for this product sector on the
performance of this mill because the end-of-pipe treatment technology
employed is more advanced than that identified as BPT for this
subcategory.
The manufacture of newsprint from deinked newsprint is a relatively
new papermaking process. Flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads at
deink-newsprint mills are considerably lower than those that formed
the basis of BPT effluent limitations for the deink subcategory. EPA
determined NSPS Option 1 final effluent loads based on the predicted
performance of biological treatment applied to the deink-newsprint
sector average BOD5^ raw waste concentration. This methodology is
described in detail previously in this section in the discussions of
the best practicable control technology currently available. NSPS
Option 1 long-term average BODI3 and TSS effluent loads were calculated
as the product of the long-term average final effluent concentrations
and the average flow for the product sector.
Tissue from Wastepaper - In the tissue from wastepaper
subcategory, extensive use of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge is practiced. NSPS Option 1 for this subcategory
is identical to NSPS Option 2 and includes the application of
production process controls and biological treatment. The methodology
for development of long-term average effluent characteristics is
described in detail later in this section (see NSPS Option 2).
Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are presented in
Table VIII-17.
Paperboard from Wastepaper - In the paperboard from wastepaper
subcategory, extensive use of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge is practiced. NSPS Option 1 for this subcategory
is identical to NSPS Option 2 and includes the application of
production process controls and biological treatment. The methodology
for development of long-term average effluent characteristics for both
subdivisions of this subcategory is described in detail later in this
section (see NSPS Option 2). Available effluent data for mills in
both subdivisions of this subcategory are presented in Table VIII-18.
Wastepaper-Molded Products - In the wastepaper-molded products
subcategory, extensive use of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge is practiced. NSPS Option 1 for this subcategory
is identical to NSPS Option 2 and includes the application of
production process controls and biological treatment. The methodology
for development of long-term average effluent characteristics is
419
-------
PO
o
TABLE VII1-17
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
TISSUE FROM WASTEPAPEK SUBCATEGORY(a)
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mil 1
Number
085004(g)
090002(b)(g)
090004(K)
090010(c)(g)
0
-------
•IABLE VIII-18
DISCIIARGK MONITORING KKPORT DATA
HAPERBOAKD FROM WASTKPAMiR SUBCATEGORY(a)
-b
no
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Hill
Number
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
BODS
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
Nuncor ruga ting Medium Furnish
1 10001 00 (i)
1 10019(i)
1 10020
I10022(b)
110023
1 10031 (i)
110032(c)(i)
110034(i)
110043(i)
1 10052(i)
110060(d)
H0061(e)(i)
110062(i)
110067(1)
11006y(i)
110070(i)
110074(i)
1 J0077(i)
110080
110094(1)
20
29
35
68
11
7
25
6
17
23
2
19
10
15
29
18
3
2
32
21
.7
.9
.8
. 1
.9
.6
.8
.0
.1
.8
.6
.6
.4
.4
.3
.7
.8
.3
.6
.8
(4.
(7.
(8.
(16.
(2.
(1.
(6.
(1.
(4.
(5.
(0.
(4.
(2.
(3.
(7.
(4.
(0.
(0.
(7.
(5.
96)
16)
57)
31)
85)
83)
18)
44)
09)
71)
63)
69)
49)
69)
01)
49)
91)
54)
82)
23)
110096(i) — (f)
110IOO(d)(g)
110)03(c)(i)
1 10104(h) (i)
1 101 10(1)
1 I0113(i)
110119
-
18
1
4
17
12
--
.5
.0
.9
.3
.1
--
(4.
(0.
(1.
(4.
(2.
-
44)
23)
18)
14)
91)
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
2
. 1
.0
.8
.7
.3
.1
.9
.1
.8
.4
.2
.8
.5
.4
.2
.3
.1
.2
.8
.5
.1
.4
.2
.1
.2
.8
.7
(0
(1
(1
(3
(2
(0
(1
(2
(1
(0
(4
(1
(1
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
(5
(0
(0
(8
(0
(2
(0
(1
(5
.27)
.97)
.66)
.46)
.58)
.27)
.76)
.11)
.56)
.77)
.45)
.58)
.09)
.86)
.46)
.57)
.24)
.33)
.62)
.95)
.15)
.83)
.35)
.27)
.39)
.69)
.34)
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
.3
. 1
.4
.2
.3
.2
.1
.8
.2
.5
.2
. 1
.6
.8
.7
.3
.3
.2
.8
.7
.0
.5
.3
.4
.8
.6
.5
(0.67)
(2.28)
(2.79)
(4.45)
(2.62)
(0.38)
(2.21)
(1.56)
(2.32)
(1.02)
(0.36)
(2.28)
(1.21)
(1.63)
(1.48)
(0.52)
(0.62)
(0.41)
(5.57)
(1.35)
(0.04)
(3-04)
(0.66)
(0.70)
(1.61)
(3.22)
(0.93)
Start
Date
07/77
OS/77
08/77
01/78
07/77
07/77
04/78
05/79
07/77
09/77
04/78
07/77
01/79
07/78
01/79
07/77
09/78
01/78
01/80
07/77
10/78
05/78
02/79
01/79
04/79
07/77
07/78
Number Of Months Data
Flow" UOU3 TSS
37
25
41
20
45
42
34
22
29
13
16
46
27
29
24
43
30
15
14
45
27
0
26
24
25
46
9
:)6
:n
42
20
4r>
41
ts
16
43
It
16
46
27
:io
25
43
30
15
14
45
27
8
26
27
25
46
21
38
38
42
20
45
42
35
17
43
13
16
46
27
30
25
40
30
15
14
45
27
8
26
27
25
46
21
-------
ro
ro
TABLE VilI-18 (Continued)
DISCHARGE MONITORING KEPORT DATA
PAPERBOARD FROM WASTEPA1 ER SUBCATEGORY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Leve1s
Mil 1
Number
110127
110131(b)(h)
1 10134
IlOlAl(e)
110144
110147
1 101Sl(i)
900023(c)(i)
900()24(g)(i)
900026(1)
Bl'T- Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
12.6
16.2
1 1 .2
8.0
8.5
6.0
15.7
2B.4
2.1
34.2
30.0
(3.02)
(3.88)
(2.69)
(1.92)
(2.04)
(1.43)
(3.76)
(6.80)
(0.50)
(8.20)
(7.2)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
0.9
4.9
.7
.5
.6
.7
.2
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.9
(1.81)
(9.82)
(3.31)
(2.99)
(3.23)
(3.35)
(2.45)
(0.62)
(0.08)
(0.24)
(1.7)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.8
1.1
2.4
0.6
1.3
1.4
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.8
1.2
(11
(1
(2
(4
(1
(2
(2
(1
(0
(0
(I
(2
Vt)
50)
23)
82)
12)
54)
82)
72)
74)
12)
52)
3)
Start
Date
07/77
01/78
10/78
07/77
01/80
07/77
07/77
07/77
10/77
02/79
Number
Flow
34
24
27
39
16
25
9
45
36
19
Of Months Data
BOD5
34
21
27
42
16
25
9
44
33
20
TSS
34
21
27
42
16
26
9
44
33
20
Corrugating Medium Furnish
110025(i)
110054
BHT-Final
Effluent
Level s
7.6 (1.82)
58.6 (14.05)
6.7 (1.60)
30.0 (7.2)
0.8 (1.6?)
1.7 (3.35)
0.9 (1.71)
1.6 (3.1)
1.5 (3.04)
0.4 (0.88)
0.6 (1.23)
2.1 (4.2)
03/79
07/78
07/77
21
12
46
21
12
46
21
12
46
(j) NSPS Option 1 final effluent levels are the sane as those determined for NSPS Option 2.
(li) Mill is now closed.
(c) Biological treatment ia followed by sand filtration.
(d) Mill is scheduled to discharge to a FOTW.
(e) This mill spray irrigates a portion of its final effluent; djta presented are not representative of total discharge.
(f) Flows are generally less than 0.005 kgal/ton.
(g) Mill has no external treatment system.
(h) Mill has primary treatment only.
(i) HODS and TSS are less than or equal to prorated BPT for this. mill. Prorated BPT has been determined for each mill
based on tin- percent corrugated medium furnish employed by the mill.
-------
described in detail later in this section (see NSPS Option 2).
Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are presented in
Table VIII-19.
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt - In the builders' paper and
roofing felt subcategory, extensive use of production process controls
to reduce wastewater discharge is practiced. NSPS Option 1 for this
subcategory is identical to NSPS Option 2 and includes the application
of production process controls and biological treatment. The
methodology for development of long-term average effluent
characteristics is described in detail later in this section (see NSPS
Option 2). Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are
presented in Table VIII-20.
Noninteqrated-Fine Papers - Two subcategory subdivisions have
been considered: wood fiber furnish and cotton fiber furnish.
For the wood fiber furnish subdivision of_ the noninteqrated-fine
papers subcategory, as illustrated in Table VIII-21, the general
methodology was followed; however, data relating to mills where only
primary treatment is employed were excluded from the computations.
Data were reviewed with respect to waste significant grade changes.
No significant difference due to grade change was noted and the
combined data were used. BPT effluent limitations are attained
through the application of biological treatment at mills 080007,
080027, 080041, and 080046. Mill 080027 was also excluded from the
calculations because chemically assisted clarification is employed at
that mill.
For the cotton fiber furnish subdivision of_ the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcateqory, EPA determined NSPS Option 1 effluent loads based
on the transfer of the performance of biological treatment
characteristic of the wood fiber furnish subdivision. EPA applied the
average percent reduction for BOD^> and TSS from the best performing
mills in the wood fiber furnish subdivision (41.0 percent for BOD5_ and
51.1 percent for TSS) to BPT final effluent loads for the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision. EPA determined that the characteristics and
treatability of wastewaters discharged from mills in both subcategory
subdivisions are similar. Therefore, the Agency believes that new
mills in the cotton fiber furnish subdivision will be able to attain
the NSPS Option 1 long-term average discharge characteristics.
Available effluent data for mills in this subdivision of the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory are presented in Table VIII-21.
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers - As illustrated in Table VIII-22,
the general methodology was followed; however, because BPT was
identified as primary clarification, 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, 090022, 090024, and
090028. Data were reviewed with respect to waste significant grade
changes in three specific delineations: none, less than one, and
greater than one waste significant change per day. For mills with
423
-------
ro
TABLE VIII-19
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY(a)
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mill
Nuiiibc'r
150007(L)
150011
Ib0021(»>)(c)
1. 50025 (d)(e)(f)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
56.7
48.2
1456. 2
1 05 . 5
88. 1
(13.58)
(11.55)
(348.96)
(25.29)
(21.1)
kg/
12
3
1
0
1
BODS
TSS
kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t)
.0
.2
.9
.7
.3
(24
(6
(3
(1
(2
.05)
.36)
.87)
.38)
-6)
13.3
3.5
4.0
0.7
3.2
(26
(6
(7
(1
(6
.51)
.91)
• 91)
.37)
.4)
Start
Date
10/79
09/78
07/77
01/78
Number Of Months Data
Flow BODS TSS
12 12 12
28 28 28
30 30 30
12 11 11
(a) NSPS Option 1 final effluent levels are the same as those determined for NSPS Option 2.
(b) This mill has no external treatment system.
(c) Mill is now closed.
(il) Effluent combined with non-contact cooling water.
(e) This mill has primary treatment only.
(t) TSS and BOU5 are less than or equal to BPT.
-------
ro
on
TABLE VII1-20
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPOKT DATA
BUILDERS' PAPER AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATEGORY(a)
Final Effluent
Long-Tern Average Levels
Mill
Number
120004(c)
120006(b)(c)
120008
120020(b)(c)
120021(c)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg
2.3
115.8
27.4
13.0
0.2
60.1
(kgal/t)
(0
(27
(6
(3
(0
(14
.54)
-74)
.56)
.11)
.05)
.4)
BOD5
kg/kkg
0.2
1.0
1.6
0.1
0.4
1.6
(Ib/t)
(0.31)
(2.09)
(3.11)
(0.11)
(0.77)
(3.2)
TSS
kg/kkg
0.5
0.3
1.7
0.1
0.0
1.6
(Ib/t)
(1
(0
(3
(0
(0
(3
.01)
.67)
.30)
.21)
.08)
.2)
Start
Date
07/77
07/77
07/77
07/78
10/79
Number
Flow
42
47
31
34
4
Of Mon
BODS
39
47
32
34
19
(a) NSPS Option 1 final effluent levels are the same as those determined for NSPS Option 2.
(b) This mill has primary treatment only.
(c) TSS and BOD5 are less than or equal to BPT.
TSS
42
40
32
34
19
-------
T\B[.E VIII-21
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTEGRATED-I--INE PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
ro
Final Effluent
Long-Tern Average Levels
Mill Flow BODS TSS
Number kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg ( Ib/t)
Wood Fiber Furninh
080007(a) 55.5 (13.31) 1.4 (2.88) 1.6 (3 28)
080009(b) 65.5 (15.69) 3.3 (6.60) 1.7 (3.48)
080018 30.2 (7.24) 2.8 (5.57) 2.0 (3.94)
080027(a)(c) 30.6 (7.34) 0.9 (1.82) 0.7 (1.31)
080030(h) 22.5 (5.39) — — 24.2 (48 48)
080033(b) 45.4 (10.87) 4.7 (9.40) 2.6 (5.25)
080040(b)(d) 103.0 (24.69) 13.4 (26.71) 14.6 (29 21)
080041(a) 113.9 (27.29) 1.7 (3.40) 1.4 (2 72)
080046(a) 53.2 (12.75) 1.1 (2.21) 1.8 (3 54)
080048(b)(d) 65.0 (15.57) 11.0 (22.09) 1.1 (2.15)
080049(b) 46.4 (11.11) 4.1 (8.17) 5.3 (10.60)
080051 53.5 (12.82) 2.7 (5.42) 2.5 (5 04)
105047(a)(b) 49.4(11.84) 1.8 (3.51) 1.1 (218)
900059(b) 40.4 (9.69) 3.0 (6.04) 1.6 (3 20)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels 63.0 (15.2) 2.4 (4.8) 3.3 (65)
Average of
Mills
Attaining BPT
BOD5 and TSS 1.4 (2.83) 1.6 (3.18)
Cotton Fiber Furnish
080003(a) 169.4 (40.59) 3.7 (7.33) 2.7 (5.44)
080032(e) 68.7 (16.46) 2.0 (3.98) 0.8 (1.65)
080042(d) 67.4 (16.15) 10.7 (21.35) 29.3 (53.61)
080044 155.4 (37.25) 6.9 (13.77) 2.2 (4.49)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels 176.5 (42.3) 5.1 (10.2) 7.2 (14.3)
(a) TSS and BODS are less than or equal to BPT.
(b) Data are not included in the average because this 'Mill employs
(c) Data are not included in the average because the mill employs
(d) This mill now discharges to a POTW.
(e) This mill discharges a variable amount of raw want'-water to a
Start 1
Date 1
08/77
01/78
09/78
01/78
07/77
07/77
07/77
11/78
03/79
04/79
08/78
10/79
07/77
11/77
07/77
01/79
07/78
11/79
primary treatment only.
chemically assisted clarification.
POTW.
Number
Flow
40
36
2r>
38
27
40
9
2fi
25
24
31
16
39
40
46
28
1H
13
Of Mon
B0!)5
4]
36
25
38
0
41
9
28
25
24
31
16
45
40
46
27
1H
14
TSS
40
:'6
2.5
38
27
41
9
2fl
25
24
31
If.
4r>
46
2S
IS
14
-------
ro
TABLE VIII-.!2
DISCHARGE MONITORING KEPOKT DATA
NONINTEGRATED - TISSUR PAPERS SUBCATEGOKY
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Mi 1 I
Flow
Nuul.er kl/kkg (kgal/t)
040006
090001 (a )(b)
090005(a)(b)(c)
090007(a)(b)
0'JOU08(a)
()900H(a)(c)
090013(a)
090019
090022(a)
090024(a)
090028(a)(c)
090031
090032
555555
BFT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Average of A] 1
Mills Attaining
BPT BODS
and TSS
91
70
11
92
57
53
29
80
62
81
91
97
133
73
96
.9
.8
.4
.7
.3
. 1
.5
.4
.1
.8
.8
.9
.9
.3
.0
(22.
(16.
(2.
(22.
(13.
(12.
(7.
(19.
(14.
(19.
(22.
(23.
(32.
(17.
(22.
03)
96)
73)
21)
74)
72)
06)
26)
87)
61)
00)
47)
08)
57)
9)
BOOS
TSS
kg/kkg (~lb/t) kg/kkg aWO
4
1
0
0
2
2
i
2
3
1
2
2
2
4
3
1
.9
.6
.2
.2
.2
.4
. 1
.9
.0
.0
.2
.0
.4
.9
.5
.6
(9
(3
(0.
(0,
(4,
(4,
(2,
(5
(6
a
(4,
(4.
(4
(9.
(7,
(3
.70)
.12)
.42)
.47)
.44)
.88)
.28)
.82)
.09)
.90)
.34)
.01)
.76)
.79)
.0)
.10)
2.6
1.0
0.2
0.6
0.7
1.2
0.6
3.3
2.7
0.7
1.9
3.2
3.4
7.6
2.9
1.1
(5.
(1.
(0.
(1.
(1.
(2.
(1.
(6.
(5.
(1-
(3.
(6.
(6.
(15.
(5.
(2.
28)
97)
45)
28)
31)
30)
24)
54)
46)
41)
82)
41)
88)
19)
7)
14)
Average of Mills Attaining
BCT BODS and TSS
-No waste significant grade
changes per day
-Less than one waste sign!'
ficant grade change per day
1.6 (3.17)
2.7 (5.49)
0.68 (1.36)
1.9 (3.88)
Start
Dale
08/79
07/77
09/77
07/77
07/77
07/77
08/77
07/77
07/77
07/77
01/78
07/77
08/77
04/79
(a) TSS and BOD5 are lets than or equal to BPT.
(b) Data not included in the average becauae the Mill employs biological treatment.
(c) Mil] is now closed.
Number Of Monllijs Data
Flow BOI)5 TSS
21
24
29
36
47
28
40
46
20
22
36
36
26
21
22
42
29
36
47
28
40
46
28
22
36
36
44
21
22
42
29
36
47
27
40
46
26
22
36
36
44
21
-------
data available on grade change, EPA found that a significant
difference in long-term average discharge levels due to grade change
existed. Therefore, the NSPS Option 1 effluent loads are based on the
highest long-term average loads, which occurred at those mills with
less than one grade change per day (mills 090011 and 090022).
Noninteqrated-Liqhtweiqht Papers - For both product sectors in
this new subcategory, EPA determined NSPS Option 1 effluent loads
based on the transfer of performance from the best performing mills in
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. EPA applied the average
percentage reductions beyond BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory (21.6 percent for BODJ5 and 31.9 percent for TSS) to the
final BPT limitations for this subcategory. As explained previously,
EPA determined that the characteristics and treatability of
wastewaters discharged from mills in the nonintegrated-lightweight
papers subcategory and the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory are
similar. Therefore, the Agency believes that new mills in the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers subcategory will be able to attain
the NSPS Option 1 long-term average discharge characteristics.
Available effluent data for mills in this subcategory are presented in
Table VIII-23.
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwjaveji Papers - For this new
subcategory, EPA determined NSPS Option 1 effluent loads based on the
transfer of performance from the best performing mills in the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. EPA applied the average
percentage reductions beyond BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory (21.6 percent for BOD!> and 31.9 percent for TSS) to the
final BPT limitations for this subcategory. As explained previously,
EPA determined that the characteristics and treatability of
wastewaters discharged from mills in the nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers subcategory and the nonintegrated-tissue papers
subcategory are similar. Therefore, the Agency believes that new
mills in the nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers subcategory will
be able to attain the NSPS Option 1 long-term average discharge
characteristics. Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table VII1-24.
Nonintegrated-Paperboard - For this new subcategory, EPA
determined NSPS Option 1 effluent loads based on the transfer of
performance from the best performing mills in the nonintegrated-tissue
papers subcategory. EPA applied the average percentage reductions
beyond BPT for the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory (21.6
percent for BOD5. and 31.9 percent for TSS) to the final BPT
limitations for this subcategory. As explained previously, EPA
determined that the characteristics and treatability of wastewaters
discharged from mills in the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory and
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory are similar. Therefore,
the Agency believes that new mills in the nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategory will be able to attain the NSPS Option 1 long-term average
discharge characteristics. Available effluent data for mills in this
subcategory are presented in Table VIII-25.
428
-------
TABLE V11J-23
OISCHAKGE HONITORINfi KEPOKT DATA
NONINTEGRATED - LIGHTWEIGHT PAPERS SUBCATEGORy
Final Effluent
^ ___ LoDg'Term Average l.eyel_ii_
Mi] 1
Flow
BOD5
Kl/kkg (kgal/t) kg/kkg (lb/t)
TSS_
.kg'/k'kg (lb/t)
Start
Date
Number Of Months Data
Flow
BODS
TSS
I. < jj>i t ue i gh I
08002 ](d)(d)
080022(d)
0«0<>24(d)
090003 (b)(d)
090()l5(a)(il)
IOr>(H3(a)
1 05020 (d)
BFT- Final
Ef< luc-nl
66.
82.
41!.
63
117
319
IB').
.0
.0
.2
.4
.6
.9
.9
(15.
(19.
81)
.65)
(10.82)
(15.
(28
(76,
(45.
,20)
.18)
.65)
.51)
0.
1.
0.
3,
2,
7.
1,
9
3
6
.1
.3
.2
.3
(1
(2.
(1
(6
(4
(14,
(2,
.74)
.63)
.27)
.15)
.51)
.49)
.65)
0.
2.
0,
2,
2,
8.
1.
5
1
7
.0
. 1
.9
.8
(1.08)
(4.15)
(1.48)
(3.90)
(4.26)
(17.72)
(3.59)
07/77
01/78
01/78
08/77
11/78
07/77
01/78
34
31
23
41
30
34
3?
34
31
23
43
30
36
3?
34
29
23
43
30
36
37
201.2 (48.7)
7.4 (14.7)
6.0 (12.0)
E J tM t r i
417.3(100.00)
678.1(162.49)
4.6
3.7
(9.17)
(7.41)
3.4
3.1
(6.78)
(6-17)
01/78
07/77
23
41
23
44
23
44
B»'T- Final
Eli turiil
I.evc-Js
320.9 (76.9)
11.6 (23.2)
9.5 O9.0)
(a) This mill ti.is biological treatment.
0>) This mill has no external treatment.
(c) Mil) is now closed.
(ii) TSS and ROD") are less than or equal to BPT.
Uj.lion 1 levels are based on transfer of technology from Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers Suhcategory.
-------
TABLE VII1-24
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA
NONINTKGRATED - FILTER AND NONVOVKN PAPERS SUBCATEGORY
-Fa
Co
O
Final Effluent
Loan-Term Average Levels
Hill
Nunber
105033(a)(b)
105034(a)(b)
105051 (b)
105055(a)(b)
BPT-Final
Effluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
170.5
204.3
168.1
249.9
250.0
(40.86)
(48.95)
(40.28)
(59.88)
(59.9)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
1.8
3.8
1.4
1.5
9.1
(3.56)
(7.51)
(2.83)
(2.99)
(18.1)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
1.1
2.8
2.2
2.9
7.4
(2.
(5.
(4.
(5.
(14.
18)
63)
33)
77)
«)
Start
Date
07/77
07/77
07/77
12/77
Nuober
Flow
43
39
12
33
Of Months Data
BODS
44
44
12
33
TSS
44
44
12
33
(a) This Bill has biological treatment.
(b) TSS and BODS are less than or equal to BPT.
Option 1 levels are based on transfer of technology front Nonlntegrated-Tlssue Papers subcategory.
-------
CO
TABLE VIII-25
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT DATA ,
NONINTEGRATED - PAPERBoARD SUBCATEGOKY*
Final Effluent
Long-Term Average Levels
Hill
Number
085001 (a) (d)
085007
105002
105048(b)(d)
J05049(b)(c)
1 10021 (a)
BPT-Kinal
Et fluent
Levels
Flow
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
19.8 (4.75)
167.9 (40.24)
238.0 (57.04)
26.1 (6.26)
51.3 (12.30)
57.2 (13.70)
53.8 (12.9)
BOD5
kg/kkg (lb/t)
0.7 (1.43)
1.5 (3.09)
4.8 (9.66)
0.3 (0.59)
5.5 (10.99)
1.5 (3.03)
2.0 (3.9)
TSS
kg/kkg (lb/t)
0.4 (0.72)
2.2 (4.45)
2.2 (4.30)
0.2 (0.49)
0.5 (1.04)
2.7 (5.34)
1.6 (3.2)
(a) This mill h.is biological treatment.
(b) This mill has no external treatment.
(c) This mill now discharges to a POTV.
(d) TSS and BOU5 are less than or equal to BPT.
Start
Date
07/77
07/77
07/77
01/78
03/78
07/77
Numbe r
Flow
44
46
30
33
11
41
Of Months
BODS
45
43
28
32
11
40
Data
TSS
44
40
28
33
11
40
Option 1 levels are based on transfer of technology from Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers subcategory.
-------
The NSPS Option 1 long-term average final effluent loads developed as
described above are presented in Table VI11-26.
Attainment of_ NSPS Option 1_. Table VI11-27 summarizes the number of
mills attaining BPT and NSPS Option 1 long-term average final effluent
loads along with the number of direct discharging mills in each
subcategory for which data were available. At 44 percent of the mills
in the integrated segment, 62 percent of the mills in the secondary
fibers segment, and 76 percent of the mills in the nonintegrated
segment where BPT effluent limitations are attained, NSPS Option 1
limits are also attained.
EPA compared the NSPS Option 1 final effluent loads presented in Table
VIII-26, the NSPS Option 1 raw waste loads shown in Table VIII-3, and
the raw waste and final effluent loads that form the basis of BPT
effluent limitations. The Agency found that, for all subcategories,
compliance with NSPS Option 1 final effluent loads would require a
higher BODS^ percent reduction than required by compliance with BPT
effluent limitations. Therefore, the end-of-pipe systems that form
the basis of NSPS Option 1 must be more efficient in removing BOD5.
than the systems that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations.
To determine if these higher percent reductions are demonstrated in
this industry, for all mills used in developing NSPS Option 1
long-term average final effluent loads, EPA compared BODj^ effluent
loads to BODjj^ raw waste loads. Raw waste and final effluent data
presented in Sections V and VIII, respectively, were used; in some
cases, more recent raw waste load data were available and were used in
the analysis. The percent reductions in BOD5^ being attained at actual
mills were then compared to those that form the basis of NSPS Option
1, which are presented in Table VIII-28. In completing this
assessment, EPA investigated eight major industry sectors: bleached
kraft, unbleached kraft/semi-chemical, sulfite, groundwood, deink,
other secondary fibers, nonintegrated-fine papers, and other
nonintegrated. As shown in Table VI11-29 and as discussed below,
mills in every major sector achieve the percent reductions of BOD5_
that form the basis of NSPS Option 1. Because waste characteristics
and waste treatability are similar between the subcategories in each
sector, EPA has determined that mills representative of all
subcategories in each sector are capable of achieving equivalent
reductions.
In the bleached kraft sector, BOD5_ reductions that form the basis of
NSPS Option 1 range from 91 to 94 percent. BOD5_ percent reductions
within this range are being attained at mills 030010, 030030, 030032,
030046, and 032002. BOD5_ reductions of greater than 94 percent are
being attained at mills 030020, 030027, and 777777.
In the unbleached kraft and semi-chemical sector, BOD5_ reductions that
form the basis of NSPS Option 1 range from 92 to 95 percent. BOD5_
percent reductions within this range are being attained at mills
010008, 0150C4, and 060004 and at mills 010020 and 010025 where
432
-------
TABLE VIII-26
NSPS OPTION 1
LONG-TERM AVERAGE
DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
Flow BODS
kl/kkg (kgal/t)
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
230.0
173.0
148.0
129.0
52.5
52.5
42.9
(55.1)
(41.6)
(35.4)
(30.9)
(12.6)
(12.6)
(10.3)
58.A (14.0)
275.
275,
275.
303.
88.0
99.0
91.0
102.0
102.0
67.6
68.0
13.A
13.A
23.8
11.3
(66.0)
(66.0)
(66.0)
(72.7)
*
(21.1)
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
4.8
3.3
2.6
1.9
1.3
1.5
1.2
1.4
8.5
9.1
9.9
12.4
*
1.6
1.5
1.4
2.5
3.3
1.7
1.3
(9.64)
(6.62)
(5.16)
(3.87)
(2.57)
(3.00)
(2.36)
(2.70)
(16.96)
(18.15)
(19.70)
(24.88)
*
(3.18)
(2.98)
(2.74)
(4.93)
(6.64)
(3.43)
(2.56)
1.1 (2.25)
0.73 (1.46)
0.60 (1.19)
0.49 (0.98)
TSS
kg/kkg (Ib/t)
8.2
5.7
4.3
3.0
2.2
2.7
2.2
2.4
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
*
2.7
2.2
2.0
1.7
4.5
3.3
2.8
(16.33)
(11.44)
(8.64)
(6.05)
(4.37)
(5.44)
(4.40)
(4.70)
(25.08)
(25.08)
(25.08)
(25.08)
*
(5.45)
(4.41)
(4.01)
(7.31)
(9.04)
(6.57)
(5.66)
1.2 (2.41)
0.97 (1.93)
1.2 (2.30)
0.73 (1.45)
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
63.0
176.5
96.0
203.7
320.9
250.0
53.8
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
1.4
3.0
2.7
5.8
9.1
7.1
1.5
(2.83)
(6.01)
(5.49)
(11.56)
(18.26)
(14.22)
(3.06)
1.6
3.5
1.9
4.1
6.4
5.0
1.1
(3.18)
(7.00)
(3.88)
(8.16)
(12.88)
(10.03)
(2.16)
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories .
*NSPS vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product. These equations can be
used to obtain annual average effluent characteristics for Papergrade
Sulfite mills:
Flow (kl/kkg)
BOD5_ (kg/kkg)
TSS (kg/kkg)
= 52.87 exp(0.017x)
= 1.72 exp(0.017x)
= 2.22 exp(0.017x)
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
433
-------
TABLE VIII-27
WMBEt Of f&CILITIES THAT ATTAIH BFT AHD 8SPS OPTION 1
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
«ill» with
Available
Data
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seai-Chcaicil
Unbleached Kraft
and Seal-Cheaical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viacoae
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrsde Sulfite2
Groundvood-Thermo-Mech»nic»l
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fin* Papera
Second* ry Fiber* Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tiasue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Froa Waitepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Mediuai Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furni»h
Wa»tepaper-Molded Product*
Builders ' Paper and Roofing Felt
Honintegrated Segment
Honintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tis*ue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
3
9
7
14
16
10
15
9
0
2
1
2
11
2
2
6
3
10
1
9
3
37
4
5
12
2
14
7
2
4
5
Hill.
Attaining
BPT F.E.
Levels (a)
2
7
3
5
9
3
4
3
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
3
3
6
1
7
2
21
1
4
5
1
9
6
2
4
2
Mills
Attaining
NSPS Option 1
F.E. Levels(a)
1
1
1
3
4
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
2
0
3
1
2
1
18
0
3
2
0
6
6
2
4
2
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda *ubcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategorie*,
(a) F.E. = Final Effluent
434
-------
TABLE VIII-28
PERCENT REDUCTIONS
REQUIRED TO ATTAIN NSPS OPTION 1 BOD5
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
FROM NSPS OPTION 1 BODS RAW WASTE LOADS
Percent Reduction*
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemi ca1
Unbleached Kraft
and Serai-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Themo'Hechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Mediun Furnish
o Noncorrugating Mediun Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Vonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
c Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
93
91
93
94
92
94
95
93
94
94
95
95
95
93
91
92
97
96
89
87
95
94
89
92
87
87
76
73
58
41
85
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
"Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
*Percent reduction
= [raw waste load (Ib/t) - final effluent (lb/t)J x 100/raw waste load (Ib/t)
except for Papergrade Sulfite subcategories for which percent reduction is defined in
terras of concentrations (mg/1).
435
-------
TABLE VI11-29
PERCENT BOD5 REDUCTIONS
ATTAINED AT SOME MILLS MEETING
BPT BODS AND TSS FINAL
EFFLUENT LEVELS
Percent Reductions
Percent Reduction
to attain NSPS
Option 1 BODS
Sector/Mill Number F.E. Levels(a)
Bleached Kraft 91-94
030010
030020
03002*
030030
030032
030046
032002
777777
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical 92-95
010008
010020(c)
010025(c)
015004
020003
060004
Sulfite 94-95
040009 (d)
0400 1 6 (e)
0400 1 7 (e)
040019
Groundwood 91-93
052003
052007
052008
052014
054014
054015
070001
Deink 89-97
140007
140008
140014
140015
140019
140021
Other Secondary Fiber 87-95
C85004
100005
110001
110025
110031
110043
110052
110057
110062
110069
110110
12000*
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 87
080041
080046
Raw Waste
Load BOD5(b)
(lb/t)
74.3
51.0
46,9(1)
88.]
66,1(1}
62,3
78.7
71,8(2)
37.6
41.0
27.8
34.2
50.5
37.4(1)
163.0(3)
218,5
194.2
93.1(4)
24.3
38.8(5)
20.1
24.0
33.6
42.7
38.0
110. 0
145.5
130.4(6)
72.2(5)
41.8
160.5
44.7
28.4
25.0
38.6
7.1(5)
23.5(5)
18.1
35.0
22.9
14.8
22.4
10.9
29.8
27.6
Final Effluent
BOD5(b)
(lb/t)
4.9
2.7
1.3
5.4
5.1
4.1
7.5
3.1
2.0
2.2
1.1
1.7
0.7
2.5
2.95(3)
13.07
10.57
3.92(4)
1.6
1.9
0.9
0,6
2.5
2.5
3.2
4.4
6.5
8,8
6.8
4.0
4.4
3,6
3,7
0.3
1.7
0.3
1.6
0.8
1.7
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.3
3.4
2.2
From Raw Waste
BODS to Final
Effluent B005
93
95
97
94
92
93
91
96
95
95
96
95
99
93
98
94
95
96
93
95
96
98
93
94
92
96
96
93
91
90
97
92
87
99
96
96
93
96
95
95
97
98
97
89
92
436
-------
TABLE VIII-29 (cont.)
Other Nonintegrated
090008
090013
090022
105020
105051
41-85
30.6
12.6
18.2
16.5
9.9
4.4
2.3
6.1
2.7
2.9
86
82
66
84
71
(a) These represent the range of the percent reductions required to attain the subcategory NSPS Option 1
final effluent BODS levels from NSPS Option 1 raw waste loads.
Percent reduction > [raw waste BODS (Ib/t) - final effluent BODS (lb/t)J
x 100/raw waste BODS (Ib/t)
except for the Papergrade Sulfite subcategories for which the percent reduction is defined in terms of
concentrations (ng/1).
(b) The sources of the raw waste load data and the final effluent data are the 308 Survey and long-tern average
BOD5 levels from the Discharge Monitoring Reports respectively except as noted below:
(1) Data are fron the Supplemental Data Request Prograa.
(2) One year raw waste data obtained from Bill representatives.
(3) The raw waste BOD5 load is the total load from mills 040009 and 030051, which share a joint treatment
system. Final effluent 4*ta are from the joint treatment system.
(4) The percent reduction is based on influent to and effluent from the biological treatment system.
Data are from the Supplemental Data Request Program.
(5) Data are from the Verification Data Request Program.
(6) The percent reduction is based on raw waste BODS to biological treatment and total final effluent
from both biological and primary treatment.
(c) The treatment system used at this mill is a storage oxidation basin.
(d) This mill shares a joint treatawnt system with a fine bleached kraft mill. Approximately 40 percent of the
combined output of the two mills is sulfite pulp. Prorated BPT was calculated for the combined mills and
it was determined that the treatment system attained BPT levels.
(e) This mill attains the BOD5 comparison level but not the TSS comparison level.
437
-------
oxidation ponds are employed. A BOD5_ reduction of greater than 95
percent is being attained at mill 020003.
In the sulfite sector, BOD5_ reductions that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1 range from 94 to 95 percent. A 96 percent BOD5_ reduction is
now attained at mill 040019. (At mill 040019, only pulp mill wastes
are biologically treated.) [The BPT long-term average BOD5_ effluent
load is now attained at mills 040016 and 040017; however, the BPT
long-term average TSS effluent load is exceeded. At mills 040016 and
040017, BOD5_ percent reductions of between 94 and 95 percent are
attained. Also, mill 040009, a papergrade sulfite mill, shares a
joint treatment system with a bleached kraft mill. About 60 percent
of the BOD5_ raw waste load is associated with the papergrade sulfite
operations. At mill 040009, a BODS^ reduction of over 98 percent is
attained.]
In the groundwood sector, the BOD5_ reductions that form the basis of
NSPS Option 1 range from 91 to 93 percent. BOD5_ percent reductions
within this range are being attained at mills 052003, 054014, and
070001 . BOD5_ reductions of greater than 93 percent are being attained
at mills 052007, 052008, 052014, and 054015.
In the deink sector, BOD5_ reductions that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1 range from 89 to 97 percent. BOD!> percent reductions within
this range are being attained at mills 140007, 140008, 140014, 140015,
and 140019. A BOD5_ percent reduction of 97 percent is being attained
at mill 140021.
In the other secondary fibers sector, BOD5_ reductions that form the
basis of NSPS Option 1 range from 87 to 95 percent. BOD5_ percent
reductions within this range are being attained at mills 085004,
100005, 110043, 110057, and 110062. BOD5. reductions of greater than
95 percent are being attained at mills 110001, 110025, 110031, 110052,
110069, 110110, and 120004.
In the nonintegrated-fine papers sector, the BOD5_ reduction that forms
the basis of NSPS Option 1 is 87 percent. BOD5_ percent reductions
equal to or in excess of 87 percent are being attained at mills 080041
and 080046.
In the other nonintegrated sector, the BOD5_ reductions that form the
basis of NSPS Option 1 range from 41 to 85 percent. BODS^ reductions
within this range are being attained at mills 090013, 090022, 105020,
and 105051. A BOD!> percent reduction of greater than 85 percent is
being attained at mill 090008.
As shown above, end-of-pipe biological treatment is capable of
attaining the percent reductions in BOD5_ that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1 in all subcategory sectors where biological treatment is the
technology basis of BPT effluent limitations. Both the activated
sludge process and aerated stabilization basins are capable of
attaining these reductions. In northern climates, available data show
that the activated sludge process is superior in its ability to
438
-------
control pulp, paper, and paperboard industry discharges.(203) In the
nonintegrated subcategories where primary treatment forms the basis of
BPT effluent limitations, end-of-pipe primary treatment is capable of
attaining the percent reductions in BODjj that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1.
Some commenters on the January 1981 proposed regulations expressed
concern that few existing mills in the integrated segment were
attaining the proposed NSPS. These commenters stated that EPA had
overstated the capability of biological treatment to reduce BODS^ raw
waste loads in this segment. As discussed above, biological treatment
systems now employed in the integrated segment are capable of reducing
BODS^ to the extent required by NSPS Option 1 . Because the
conventional activated sludge system that forms the basis of NSPS
Option 1 must achieve a higher BODS^ percent reduction than required by
compliance with BPT effluent limitations, the Agency conducted further
investigations to ensure that the system that forms the basis of NSPS
Option 1 has been properly sized to ensure that the higher BOD£
reductions would be attained at all mills.
In the development document supporting proposed rules, EPA published
the design criteria for end-of-pipe biological treatment systems that
the Agency believed to be capable of attaining the effluent
concentrations required to attain proposed .NSPS. These design
criteria, which are identical to NSPS Option 1 design criteria, are
presented in Table VIII-30. (This table also presents the design
criteria for aerated stabilization basins and extended aeration
activated sludge systems that EPA believes are equivalent to the
conventional activated sludge systems that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1. See Section IX of the development document supporting
proposed rules. (203)). As shown, these systems are considerably
larger than those that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations.
Table VIII-31 compares EPA's design criteria to the actual design
criteria for treatment systems employed at mills where the percent
reductions of BODS^ that are necessary to attain NSPS Option 1 are
achieved. As shown, conventional activated sludge systems (and the
equivalent aerated stabilization basins and extended aeration
activated sludge systems) that form the basis of NSPS Option 1 ate
larger than the systems generally employed at actual mills where the
percent reductions required to achieve NSPS Option 1 limits are
attained. Therefore, the larger end-of-pipe treatment systems that
form the basis of NSPS Option 1 for the integrated segment, at a
minimum, are capable of attaining the percent reductions in BODI5 that
are required by NSPS Option 1.
In summary, the percent reductions in BOD!> that form the basis of NSPS
Option 1 are being attained at mills in"~each subcategory or at mills
in related subcategories where wastewaters have similar
characteristics and treatability. These reductions are being attained
through the use of treatment systems that are even smaller than those
that form the basis of NSPS Option 1. Mill personnel in many
subcategories of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry have not
439
-------
TABLE VIII-30
A COMPARISON OF
NSPS OPTION I DESIGN CRITERIA
TO BPT DESIGN CRITERIA
Activated Sludge BPT NSPS
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 24 20
Equalization (hours) 12 12
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours) 8 12
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m) 0.8 0.5
Aeration (kg BOD5/d/HP) 19 11.2
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 20 16
Extended Aeration
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 24 20
Equalization (hours) 12 12
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours) 30 48
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m) 0.3-0.6 0.2
Aeration (kg BOD5/d/HP) 19 11.2
Secondary Clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 20 16
Aerated Stabilization Basin
Primary Clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 24 20
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (days) 13 13
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/1000 cu m) 18.4 18.4
Aeration
o Organic (kg BOD5/d/HP) 15.3 15.3
o Mixing (HP/1000 cu m) (a) 2.6
Settling (days) 1 10
(a) Aerator mixing was not considered in BPT design criteria.
440
-------
TABLE VIII-31
A COMPARISON OF NSPS OPTION I
DESIGN CRITERIA TO
CRITERIA USED AT INTEGRATED MILLS
WHERE BOD5 REDUCTIONS COMPARABLE TO THOSE REQUIRED
TO ATTAIN NSPS OPTION I ARE ACHIEVED
Activated Sludge
NSPS
Design
Criteria
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 20
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours) 12.0
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m) 0.5
Aeration (kg BOD5/HP) 11.2
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 16
Extended Aeration
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 20
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (hours) 48
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m) 0.2
Aeration (kg BOD5/HP) 11.2
Secondary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 16
Aerated Stabilization Basin
Primary clarification (cu m/d/sq m) 20
Aeration Basin
o Detention Time (days) 13
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/d/cu m) 18.4
Aeration
o Organic Loading (kg BOD5/HP) 15.3
o Mixing (HP/1000 cu m) 2.6
Settling (days) 10
Average
20
7
0
17
18
35
45
0
17
25
19
9
30
16
2
9
.8
.9
.0
.2
.3
.5
.7
.5
. 7
.0
.9
Actual
Median
20
6
0
14
17
28
29
0
13
24
20
9
22
16
1
9
.9
.9
.9
.4
.2
.9
.7
.1
.2
.3
.9
Mill
Minimum
10
2
0
11
15
12
19
0
7
6
8
0
13
11
0
0
.9
.6
. 1
.0
.1
.3
.9
.2
.9
.6
.2
Maximum
28
16
1
29
23
63
117
1
32
43
25
15
94
24
6
22
.4
.2
.4
.6
.1
.8
.2
.9
.0
.6
.2
441
-------
chosen to use these larger systems, but the technology is readily
available for application at new mills. Because (a) larger systems
can be readily designed, constructed, and operated at new sources in
every subcategory and (b) the wastewater and operating characteristics
of new mills are similar to those mills where the NSPS Option 1
reductions are now achieved, EPA has determined that all new mills in
every subcategory will be capable of attaining NSPS Option 1
limitations based on the use of expanded end-of-pipe treatment
systems.
Option 2_
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. The technology basis for control of conventional
pollutants for NSPS Option 2 is implementation of additional commonly-
employed production process controls and end-of-pipe treatment
technologies.
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 (46) (48)) and the data request
program responses from 644 mills, EPA identified additional commonly
employed production process controls that can further reduce raw waste
loads. These controls serve as the basis for defining a NSPS
technology option (NSPS Option 2) in which raw waste loads are lower
than those that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations. The
controls that are generally applicable to each subcategory and which
form the basis of EPA's estimates of the cost of attainment of NSPS
Option 2 raw waste loads are presented in Tables VII1-32 through
VI11-34. NSPS Option 2 also includes the application of end-of-pipe
treatment systems that are identical in design to those that form the
basis of NSPS Option 1 for each subcategory.
The methodology used to develop raw waste loads and anticipated final
effluent characteristics are discussed below.
Development of_ Raw Waste Loads. NSPS Option 2 raw waste flows and
BODf> loads are generally based on the average discharge flow and BODIi
raw waste loads at mills where discharges are lower than those that
form the basis of BPT effluent limitations. The NSPS Option 2 raw
waste TSS has been assumed to be the same as that which forms the
basis of BPT because (a) the TSS raw waste loads have little, if any
effect on final effluent BODJ> and TSS loads (as discussed previously,
the TSS final effluent concentration is a function of the BODS^ raw
waste concentration) and (b) to ensure that EPA's cost estimates do
not understate the cost of solid waste disposal associated with
primary clarification. Because the Option 2 raw waste loads generally
were derived from actual mill data, in the majority of cases it was
not necessary to predict what reductions would be attained through
442
-------
TABLE VI11-37.
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS FORMING THE BASIS OF
COST ESTIMATES FOR NSPS OPT/ON 2
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
Control
1_. Voodya rd/Wood rooa
Subcategory
•m
woodya rd
rat ion
ng water
Market
Dissolving Bleached
Kraft Kraft
-
X
BCT
Bleached Alkaline-
Kraft Fine1
X
-
Un-
bleached
Kraft
X
-
Unbleached Dissolving
Semi- Kraft and
Chemical Secni -Chemi cal
X X
-
Sulfite
Pulp
X
X
Papcrgrade
Sulflte2
X
-
(Ironnd-
wood-
TMP
X
X
Ground- Ground-
wood- wood-
CMN Finn
Papers Pani'r.s
X
-
Reuse blow condensates
Reduce groundwood thirfc-
ener overflow
Spill Collection
Vaj»he_r«_and Screen Room
Add 3rd or 4th stage
h. Dec kerfilt rate reuse
CO
k._ Bleaching
a. Countcrcurrent washing
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage f i 1 1 rate
5 . Ev.iporat ion and Reco ve ry A rr a s
a - Replace baromet ric condenser X
b . Add hoi 1 out tank X
r. Neutralize spent sulfitr
lignor
d. Segreitate cooling water
e. Spill Collection X
f. Reuse evaporator condrnsate
6^ Jaiquor Preparation Area
a. Spill Collection X
___
Spi 1 1 Collection:
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp
2 . Co lor pl*nt
-------
TABLE VIII-32 (Continued)
-p.
-p.
Market
Dissolving Bleached
Control Kraft Kraft
7.
r .
d.
* .
i .
j-
n.
8.
Paper Hill (continued)
High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning X
White vater use for vacuiui
pimp sea] ing X
Paper machine white water
f
upsets and pulper dilution
Broke storage
Wet lap machine
White vater to pulp aill
Gland water reduction
Stead Plant and Utility Areas
BCT Un-
Bleached Alkaline- bleached
Kraft Fine' Kraft
-
X
.
X
...
- -
Unbleached
Senl- Kraft and
Chemical Semi -Chemical
-
-
X
X X
-
- -
Dissolving
Sulfite
Pulp
X
X
x
-
X
-
Papergrade
Sulfite2
X
X
x
-
-
Groimd-
wootl-
TMP
X
-
X
-
X
-
-
Croiind-
wood-
CMN
Papers
X
X
X
X
X
-
-
Gronnd-
WOOrl-
Fi fie
Paper*
X
X
X
x
X
-
"
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters
9. Miscellaneous Controls
a. Cooling Tower
b. pH Monitor
c. Level alams
d. Filters
e. Recycle of effluent
(a)
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subratrgorirs.
Costs were included with pulp Mill collection costs.
-------
TABLE VIII-33
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS FORMING THE BASIS OF
COST ESTIMATES FOR NSPS OPTION 2
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
Control
Subcategory
Deink
Tissue
From
Wastepaj)er
Paperboard
From
Wastepaper
Wastepaper-
Molded
Products
Builders'
Paper and
Rooflog
Felt
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry
woodyard and
barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse 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
b. Decker filtrate reuse
*. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing (1)
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filcrate
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
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
1 . Paper machine and
bleached pulp X
2. Color plant
b. Improve savea11
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 pimp water X
i. Broke Storage
j . Vet lap machine X
k. Segregate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
ra. White water to pulp mill
n. Gland water reduction
445
-------
TABLE VIII-33 (Continued)
Subcategory
Control
Deink
Tiiiue Piperboard Waitepaper-
Froa Fro* Molded
Waitepaper Wa»tepaper Product*
Builden'
Paper and
Roofing
Felt
8. Steaa Plant and Utility Areai
a. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon Cor boiler blowdovn
and backvaab wateri
9.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Hiacellaneoui Controli
Cooling tower
pH Monitor
Level all rat
Filten
Recycle of effluent
X
-
-
X
X
X
-
X
X
X X
X
-
-
X
•
(1) Countercurreot cashing wai included only for the Ttnue product lector of the
Drink lubcategory.
446
-------
TABLE VI11-34
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS FORMING THE BASIS OF
COST ESTIMATES FOR NSPS OPTION 2
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Nonintegrated- Nonintegrated-
Fine Papers Tissue Paperj
Nonintegrated-
Li&htweight Papers
Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonintegrated-
Noowoven Papers Paperboard
1 . Woodya r 'd/ Wood room
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse 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
b . Decker filtrate reuse
4. Bleaching
a. Counter-current washing
b . Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a . Replace barometric condenser
b. Add boil out tank
c . Neutralize spent sulf ite
liquor
d. Segregate cooling water
e. Spill collection
f . Reuse evaporator condensate
6^jJiLotuor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
1 . Paper machine and
bleached pulp
2. Color plant
b. Improve saveall
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing
e . Paper machine white wa ter
showers for wire cleaning
f. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
g. Re cy depress wa ter
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 co pulp mill
n. Gland water reduction
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water X
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters X
9^. Misjrelj.jneous Controls
j. Cooling tower
b. pH monitor
c. Leve L alarms
d. Filters
e. Recycle of effluent
447
-------
application of each of the production process controls available to
the mills within a specific subcategory. However, in several
instances where only limited data were available, EPA found it
necessary to predict the raw waste load reductions attainable through
the application of specific production process controls identified as
NSPS Option 2 technologies.
The controls that serve as the basis of reductions of raw waste loads
beyond those considered in developing BPT effluent limitations are
presented in Tables VIII-35 through VIII-37. The controls are those
that can be employed at mills in each subcategory to achieve the NSPS
Option 2 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
loads 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 100 percent dissolving
kraft pulp. EPA determined NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads by
subtracting predicted waste load reductions from the raw waste loads
that formed the basis of BPT. Estimates were 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 - 198.2
kl/kkg (47.5 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 EPA's
estimates of attainable raw waste load reductions are: improved
brownstock washing, improved utilization of digester blow condensates,
brownstock and bleached pulp spill collection, additional liquor
storage, and improved white water use. The total projected flow and
BOD5. reductions are 18.4 kl/kkg (4.4 kgal/t) and 8.2 kg/kkg (16.3
Ib/t), respectively. Because each of these production process
controls has been employed at dissolving kraft mills and/or at
bleached kraft mills representative of other subcategories, EPA
believes that these technologies can be applied at new source mills in
this subcategory. Based on engineering calculations supported by the
literature or material balances, the Agency believes that the
application of these production process controls can achieve the
required degree of effluent reduction.
448
-------
TAI'LE VIJJ-35
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT FORM THE BASIS OF
BPT THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED TO
ACHIEVE NSPS OPTION 2 RAW WASTE LOADS
INTEGRATED SEGMENT
_ Subcategory
Control
Market BCT UP- Unbleached Dissolving Ground- wo mi-
Dissolving Bleached Bleached Alkaline- ble.-iched Semi- Kraft and Siilfite Papergrade wood- CNN
Kraft Kraft Kraft Lin.?J ]?.'a_lX Chemical Semi-Chemical Pulj> Suirite2 TMI> _ Paju-rs
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water X
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse blow condensates X
b. Reduce gronndwood thick-
ener overflow
c. Spill collection X
3. Washers and Screen Room
a. Add 3rd or 4th stage
washer or press X
b. Decker filtrate reuse
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser X
b. Add boil out tank X
c. Segregate cooling water
d. Spill collection X
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection X
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
I. Paper machine and
bleached pulp X
2. Color plant
Grnunil-
K i rrr
I'anr is
-------
TABLE VIII-35 (Continued)
_ Stihcategory
Ground- liround-
Market BCT Un- IJnblcached Dissolving Ground- wood- wood-
Uissolving Bleached Bleached Alka1i ne- bleached Semi- Kraf t and Sulfi te Papergrade wood- CHN Fine
Control _ _ KraU Kcaft _Krdtl ._ FJM_ll. -****<: CluMiiical _^cmij:t:h^BiiraJ^ _ Pylj> _SiiJlite2 IMP fty??.™ _•*!!_>?"_
'_• j>aVcf H' 1 {_ (cont inued)
b. Improve saved II ------ _ __ ___
c. High pressure Hbowers for
wire and ft-lt (leaning X----- - X- ___
d. White water use for vacuum
pu«p sealing X-XX-- - XX -XX
e. Paper machine white water
showem for wire cleaning ______ _ __ ___
f. Wh i te water storage for itp-
sels and j>ulj>*-r dilution ______ - x- -X-
g. Recycle press waler X---XX X -X -XX
h. Hcn.se of vacuum t>unu water ---XXX X XX -XX
i . Broke storage ______ _ __ ___
j. Wet lap machine ---X-- - -X XXX
k. Segregate cooling water ------ _ -- ___
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
B. White water to pulp Mill ------ - x- ___
n. Gland water reduction ______ - --. ___
?_• ??*•* JM^iL?- ?nrt ut.*J_ity ._*£*•*
a. St'gregjte cooling water X----- - X- --X
b. Lagtxiii for hoi ler blowdown
and bdckwdbh w/itrra X X X X - - - - X
S. Hi bceUaiieoiis Control a
a. li i gh 1 eve I a 1 a rres - -____ . _ - „__
b. Coo ling I owe r ------ - _____
c. Recycle of effluent - _____ _ __ __-
includes Fine blcached Kraft and Soda subcatcgorLes.
Includes P<*t>orgrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sultite (Drum Wash) subcategor ies.
-------
TABLE VIII-J6
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS IN ADDITION' TO THOSE THAT FORM THE BASIS
OF EPT THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED TO
ACHIEVE NSPS OPTION 2 RAW WASTE LOADS
SECONDARY FIBERS SEGMENT
Subcategory
Control
Tissue
From
Deink Wastepaper
Paperboard
From
Wastepaper
Wastepaper-
Molded
Products
Builders '
Paper and
Roofing
Felt
1. Vcodyard/W'oodroom
a. Close-up or dry
woodyard and
barking operation
b. Segregate cooling water
2. Pulp Hill
a. Reuse 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
b. Decker filtrate reuse
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
a. Replace barometric condenser
b. Add ooil out tanK
c. Segregate cooling water
d. Spill collection
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp
2. Color plant
b. Improve saveall
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing
e. Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning
f. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution
g. Recycle press water
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water
i. Broke storage
j. Wet lap machine
k. Segregate cooling water
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill
m. White water to pulp mill
n. Gland water reduction
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
3. Segregate cooling water
b. Lagoon for boiler biowdown
and backwash waters
9. Miscellaneous Controls
a. High level alarms
b. Cooling tower
c. Recycle of effluent
B-These production process controls were erroneously included as BPT production process
controls. They were included in EPA's determination ot N'SPS Opt.ion 2 raw waste loads.
451
-------
TABLE VIII-37
PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS IN ADDITION TO THOSE THAT FORM THE BASIS
OF BPT THAT CAN BE EMPLOYED TO
ACHIEVE NSPS OPTION 2 RAW WASTE LOADS
NONINTEGRATED SEGMENT
Subcategory
Nonintegrated-
Nonintegrated- Nonintegrated- Nonintegrated- Filter and Nonintegrated-
Control Fine Papers Tissue Papers Lightweight Papers Nonwoven Papers Paperboard
1. Woodyard/Woodroom
a. Close-up or dry woodyard
and barking operation ... _
b. Segregate cooling water - - -
2. Pulp Mill
a. Reuse 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 ... .
b. Decker filtrate reuse - -
4. Bleaching
a. Countercurrent washing ... .
b. Evaporate caustic extraction
stage filtrate ... -
5. Evaporation and Recovery Areas
i. .Tspljce bjrc.netric condenser - -
b. Add boil out tank ... -
c. Segregate cooling water - -
d. Spill collection ... .
6. Liquor Preparation Area
a. Spill collection ... -
7. Paper Mill
a. Spill collection:
1. Paper machine and
bleached pulp X X X -
2- Color plant X - - - -
b. Improve saveall - - X X -
c. High pressure showers for
wire and felt cleaning X - X X -
d. White water use for vacuum
pump sealing X - X X
e. Paper machine white water
showers for wire cleaning ... XX
f. White water storage for up-
sets and pulper dilution X -
g. Recycle press water ... - X
h. Reuse of vacuum pump water X - - - X
i. Broke storage X - -
j. Wet lap machine - -
k. Segregate cooling water XXX - -
1. Cleaner rejects to landfill - -
m. White water to pulp mill ... -
n. Gland water reduction ... - -
8. Steam Plant and Utility Areas
a. Segregate cooling water ... XX
b. Lagoon for boiler blowdown
and backwash waters XXX - -
9. Miscellaneous Controls
a. High level alarms - X - -
b. Cooling tower - - - X
c. Recycle of effluent - - X XX
452
-------
The resulting NSPS Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads are
presented below:
Dissolving Kraft - Development of Option 2 Raw Waste Loads
Flow BOD5_
kl/kkq (kqal/t) kq/kkq (Ib/t)
BPT RWL 230.0 (55.1) 66.5 (133.0)
Reductions Resulting from
Application of Specific
Production Process Con-
trols 18.4 (4.4) 8.2 (16.3)
Option 2 RWL 211.6 (50.7) 58.4 (116.7)
The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 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.
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 pulp
production. Of the mills where raw waste loads are lower than or
equal to those used to develop BPT, raw waste load BODj[ 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 152.7 kl/kkg (36.6 kgal/t) and 120.6 kl/kkg (28.9 kgal/t),
respectively. The proposed Option 2 flow has been chosen as the
higher of the two, 152.7 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_ raw waste load 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 TSS raw waste load for Option 2
has been assumed to be the same as that used as the basis of BPT. In
summary, the Option 2 raw waste loads for the market bleached kraft
subcategory are: flow - 152.7 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, five are achieving flows and
three are achieving BOD5_ raw waste loads that are less than those
which formed the basis of BPT. For one of the mills (030039)
attaining a lower flow and BODjr raw waste load, data correspond to
453
-------
biological treatment plant influent rather than to a true raw waste.
These data were not used in any calculations of attainable NSPS Option
2 raw waste loads. Option 2 raw waste loads for this subcategory are
based on the averages of those mills where raw waste loads that are
lower than those which formed the basis of BPT are attained.
Application of this methodology yields Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads of 132.3 kl/kkg (31.7 kgal/t) and 35.1 kg/kkg (70.2 lb/t)f
respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to
be the same as that used as the basis of BPT, or 66.5 kg/kkg (133.0
lb/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 15 mills in this subcategory
where flow and/or BOD5_ raw waste loads are lower than those which
formed the basis of BPT. Option 2 raw waste loads for this
subcategory are based on the averages of those mills where raw waste
loads that are lower than those which formed the basis of BPT are
attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 2 flow and
BOD5_ raw waste loads of 104.7 kl/kkg (25.1 kgal/t) and 27.1 kg/kkg
(54.1 lb/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has
been assumed to be the same as that used as the basis of BPT, or 75.0
kg/kkg (150.0 lb/t) of product.
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
sectors.
Unbleached Kraft-Raw Waste Load Summary
Flow BOD5 TSS
kl/kkq (kgal/t) kq/kkq (lb/t) kq/kkq (lb/t)
Unbleached Kraft -
Linerboard: 47.6 (11.4) 16.6 (33.2) 15.8 (31.6)
Unbleached Kraft -
Bag and Other
Products: 103.5 (24.8) 24.3 (48.6) 31.4 (62.8)
454
-------
In establishing NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads, EPA evaluated data for
both the linerboard and bag product sectors. NSPS Option 2 raw waste
loads for the linerboard product sector 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. For the bag and other products
product sector, NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads are based on the
averages of those mills where (a) raw waste flow is lower than that
which formed the basis of BPT and (b) raw waste BOD5_ is lower than the
product sector average raw waste load. Application of this
methodology yields unbleached kraft-linerboard Option 2 raw waste
loads for flow and BOD5_ of 39.2 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 loads for flow and BOD5_ of 47.6 kl/kkg (11.4 kgal/t) and
16.9 kg/kkg (33.8 Ib/t), respectively. The TSS Option 2 raw waste
loads 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. Variable amounts of
wastepaper are utilized at mills in this subcategory according to
relative market conditions and pricing. Because of this variation,
two mill groups were considered in the development of NSPS Option 2
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. Review of the data in Table V-6 indicates significant
differences in flow between the two groups [35.9 kl/kkg (8.6 kgal/t)
versus 18.8 kl/kkg (4.5 kgal/t)], but no significant difference in
BOD5 [22.1 kg/kkg (44.1 Ib/t) versus 23.9 kg/kkg (47.8 Ib/t)].
Therefore, the Option 2 raw waste load 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 load lower than that which
formed the basis of BPT is attained. The Option 2 raw waste load for
BOD5_ is based on data from both groups of mills where a BOD5_ raw waste
load lower than that which formed the basis of BPT is attained.
Application of this methodology yields NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads
of flow and BOD5 of 30.5 kl/kkg (7.3 kgal/t), and 17.6 kg/kkg (35.2
Ib/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been
assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 12.3
kg/kkg (24.6 Ib/t) of product.
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical - Table V-7 presents available
raw waste load data for this subcategory. NSPS Option 2 raw waste
loads for this subcategory are based on averages of those mills where
raw waste loads that are lower than those which formed the basis of
BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 2 raw
waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 48.0 kl/kkg (11.5 kgal/t) and 16.3
kg/kkg (32.5 Ib/t), resepctively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2
has been assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT,
or 20.5 kg/kkg (41.0 Ib/t) of product.
455
-------
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp - Table V-8 presents available raw waste
load data for this subcategory. In previous effluent limitations
guidelines development, EPA recognized that a variety of products are
made at dissolving sulfite pulp mills that result in different waste
characteristics.(48) However, in the data request program, only
limited data were provided for this subcategory on raw waste load by
product types. Consequently, EPA estimated 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-35. Each
of these controls has been employed at dissolving sulfite pulp mills
and, therefore, can be applied at new source mills in this
subcategory. In general, most of the items under consideration result
in minor flow reductions with the exception of recycle of the
hydraulic barking water. Flow reductions resulting from cooling water
segregation, more extensive use of white water in the pulp and paper
mills, and additional spill collection can reduce wastewater discharge
by 29.2 kl/kkg (7.0 kgal/t). Additional applicable production process
controls include implementation of liquor spill and pulp dryer spill
collection systems and improved recycle of decker filtrate. Predicted
BOD5i reductions resulting from the application of these controls in
addition to white water reuse total 5.0 kg/kkg (10.0 Ib/t). Another
applicable control, caustic filtrate evaporation, results in BOD^
reductions varying from 41.4 kg/kkg (82.8 Ib/t) for the nitration
grade to 104.4 kg/kkg (208.8 Ib/t) for the acetate grade. This
technology is an expensive production process control, yet one that
can result in significant BODj> reduction. This technology has been
employed at mills 046002 and 046006.
The resulting NSPS Option 2 BODS^ raw waste loads are presented below.
Based on engineering calculations supported by the literature or
material balances, EPA believes that the application of the specific
production process controls identified above can achieve the required
degree of effluent reduction. This is further supported by available
data. The controls on which NSPS Option 2 are based are installed at
mill 046006. As illustrated in Table V-8, when acetate grade pulp is
produced at mill 046006, the NSPS Option 2 flow and BOD5^ raw waste
loads are attained.
456
-------
Dissolving Sulf ite-Development of Option 2 BOD5_ Raw Waste Load
BOD5_ - kg/kkg (Ib/t)
Nitration Viscose Cellophane Acetate
BPT - RWL 137 (274) 156 (312) 181.5 (363) 266.0 (531. 9)1
Reductions Resulting
from Application of
Specific Production
Process Controls 46.4 (92.8) 63.4 (126.8) 71 .9 (143.8) 109.4 (218.8)
Option 2 BOD5_ RWL 90.6 (181.2) 92.6 (185.2) 109.6 (219.2) 156.6 (313.1)
discussed in Section II, the BPT BOD5_ limitation for acetate
grade production in the dissolving sulfite pulp subcategory was
remanded by the Court of Appeals. The Agency has not yet promulgated
the BOD5_ limitation. Therefore, a BODj> raw waste load corresponding
to BPT effluent limitations has not yet been established. The BOD5_
raw waste load of 266.0 kg/kkg (531.9 Ib/t) is representative of the
BOD5_ raw waste load associated with the production of acetate grade
dissolving sulfite pulp at the time the remanded BPT BOD5_ limitation
was promulgated in 1977.]
The flow basis of BPT is 275.0 kl/kkg (66.0 kgal/t) except for mills
where acetate grade pulp is produced where the flow basis of BPT has
been assumed to be 303.4 kl/kkg (72.7 kgal/t). (The flow value of
303.4 kl/kkg (72.7 kgal/t) is representative of the wastewater flow
rate associated with the production of acetate grade dissolving
sulfite pulp at the time the remanded BPT BOD5_ limitation was
promulgated in 1977.) Flow reduction through implementation of
production process controls is 29.2 kl/kkg (7.0 kgal/t). This results
in an Option 2 flow of 246.2 kl/kkg (59.0 kgal/t) for the nitration,
viscose, and cellophane pulp grades and 274.2 kl/kkg (65.7 kgal/t) for
the acetate pulp grade. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 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 (Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and
Paperqrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) Subcateqories) - 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. The
NSPS Option 2 flow is based on flow data for those mills where
discharge flow is lower than that defined by the regression equation
presented previously. 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
the NSPS Option 2 flow. At four mills, discharge flow is less than
the predicted flow, with the average percent reduction being 28
percent. Therefore, NSPS Option 2 flow is defined as 72 percent of
the flow defined by the regression analysis.
457
-------
EPA based the NSPS Option 2 BOD5_ raw waste load on the average of
those papergrade sulfite mills where the BOD5_ raw waste load is lower
than that which formed the basis of BPT, or 66.1 kg/kkg (132.2 Ib/t).
As discussed in Section V, there is no definable relationship between
BOD5_ raw waste load and the percentage of sulfite pulp produced
on-site. Because the average quantity of sulfite pulp produced
on-site is 58 percent of the raw material furnish, EPA assumed that
this BOD5_ raw waste load is representative of a mill where 58 percent
of the raw material furnish is sulfite pulp produced on-site.
Therefore, for a model mill where 58 percent of the raw material
furnish is sulfite pulp produced on-site, Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads would be 101.8 kl/kkg (24.4 kgal/t) and 66.1 kg/kkg (132.2
Ib/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 was assumed
to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or 90.0 kg/kkg
(180.0 Ib/t) of product. The BOD5_ and TSS concentrations for this
model mill form the basis of BOD5_ and TSS raw waste concentrations for
NSPS Option 2, regardless of the percentage of sulfite pulp produced
on-site.
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical - Table V-10 presents available raw
waste load data for this subcategory. As explained in Section V, the
flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads that formed the basis of BPT effluent
limitations are not reflective of raw waste loads characteristic of
the groundwood-thermo-mechanical subcategory. Therefore, EPA
developed revised BPT raw waste loads for this subcategory. NSPS
Option 2 raw waste loads are based on averages of those mils in this
subcategory where raw waste loads that are lower than the revised BPT
raw waste loads are attained. Application of this methodology yields
Option 2 raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 57.6 kl/kkg (13.8
kgal/t) and 17.6 kg/kkg (35.2 Ib/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste
load for Option 2 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.
Groundwood-CMN Papers - Table V-ll presents available raw waste
load data formills in this subcategory. At no mills in this
subcategory are BOD5_ raw waste loads being attained that are lower
than raw waste loads that formed the basis of BPT. Because the
existing performance is inadequate and does not achieve the pollution
reduction that is possible at mills in this subcategory, the NSPS
Option 2 raw waste loads were 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 loads that formed the basis of BPT.
The production process controls that have been identified as
applicable in this subcategory that form the basis for EPA's estimates
of attainable 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 29.2
kl/kkg (7.0 kgal/t) and 2.9 kg/kkg (5.7 lbs/t)7 respectively. Because
each of these production process controls has been employed at (a)
458
-------
groundwood-CMN mills, (b) groundwood mills representative of other
subcategories, or (c) mills in other subcategories where similar pulp
or papermaking processes are employed, EPA believes that these
technologies can be applied at new source mills in this subcategory.
Based on engineering calculations supported by the literature or
material balances, the Agency believes that the application of these
production process controls can achieve the required degree of
effluent reduction. The resulting NSPS Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads are presented below:
Groundwood-CMN Papers—Development of Option 2 Raw Waste Loads
Flow BOD5_
kl/kkq (kgal/t) kq/kkq (Ib/t)
BPT RWL 99.3 (23.8) 17.4 (34.8)
Reductions Resulting From
Implementation of Specific
Production Process
Controls 29.2 ( 7.0) 2.9 ( 5.7)
Option 2 RWL 70.1 (16.8) 14.6 (29.1)
The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 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. NSPS Option 2 raw waste
loads for this subcategory are based on averages of those mills where
raw waste loads that are lower than those which formed the basis of
BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 2 raw
waste loads for flow and BOD5 of 64.3 kl/kkg (15.4 kgal/t) and 12.5
kg/kkg (24.9 Ib/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2
has been assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT,
or 52.5 kg/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.
For mills where fine papers are produced from deinked wastepaper, NSPS
Option 2 raw waste loads are based on averages of those mills where
raw waste loads that are lower than those which formed the basis of
BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 2 raw
waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 66.4 kl/kkg (15.9 kgal/ton) and 37.3
kg/kkg (74.6 Ib/ton), respectively.
For mills where tissue papers are produced from deinked wastepaper,
NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads are based on averages of those mills
459
-------
where raw waste loads that are lower than those which formed the basis
of BPT are attained. Application of this methodology yields Option 2
raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 81.4 kl/kkg (19.5 kgal/ton) and
61.3 kg/kkg (122.6 Ib/ton), respectively.
As explained earlier in this section, for mills where newsprint is
produced from deinked wastepaper, NSPS Option 2 is identical to NSPS
Option 1 . Flow and BODj[ raw waste loads are based on the average raw
waste loads of all mills in this product sector. This results in
Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 67.6 kl/kkg (16.2 kgal/t)
and 15.9 kg/kkg (31.7 lb/t), respectively.
For all three product sectors, the TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has
been assumed to be the same as that which formed the basis of BPT, or
202.5 kg/kkg (405 lb/t) of product.
Tissue from Wastepaper - In the tissue from wastepaper
subcategory, extensive use of production process controls to reduce
wastewater discharge is practiced. As seen in Table 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.
NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads for this subcategory are based on
averages of those mills where raw waste loads that are lower than
those which formed the basis of BPT are attained. Mills 090006,
100012, 105007, and 100014 are excluded from Option 2 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 2 raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_
of 68.0 kl/kkg (16.3 kgal/t) and 9.7 kg/kkg (19.3 lb/t), respectively.
The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to be the same as
that which formed the basis of BPT, or 110.5 kg/kkg (221.0 lb/t) of
product.
Paperboard from Wastepaper - Available raw waste load data for
mills in this subcategory are presented in Table V-16. As discussed
previously, EPA determined that BOD5^ raw waste loads are substantially
higher when recycled corrugating medium is processed than when other
types of wastepaper are processed. No such correlation exists between
wastewater flow and the type of furnish used. As discussed
previously, two subcategory subdivisions have been identified to
account for BOD5_ raw waste load differences that result from the type
of furnish used. NSPS Option 2 flows for each subcategory subdivision
are based on the average of those mills where raw waste flows are
lower than those which formed the basis of BPT. Application of this
methodology yields NSPS Option 2 raw waste flow of 13.4 kl/kkg (3.2
kgal/t). NSPS Option 2 BOD5_ raw waste loads for the corrugating
medium furnish and noncorrugating medium furnish subdivisions are the
same as those which formed the basis of BPT, or 23.0 kg/kkg (46.0
lb/t) and 11.3 kg/kkg (22.5 lb/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste
460
-------
load for Option 2 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 promulgated. A review of data
request responses reveals that extensive recycle of effluent is
practiced at several mills. NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads are based
on averages for those mills where extensive recycle is practiced.
Application of this methodology yields Option 2 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 TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to
be the same as that which forms the basis of 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. NSPS Option 2 raw
waste loads 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 2 raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 11.3 kl/kkg (2.7 kgal/t)
and 6.5 kg/kkg (13.0 Ib/t), respectively. The TSS raw waste load for
Option 2 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. As discussed
previously in Section IV and V, two subdivisions have been considered:
the wood fiber furnish subdivision and the cotton fiber furnish
subdivision. 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
correlation is apparent; flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads tend to
increase with the frequency of waste significant grade changes. NSPS
Option 2 raw waste loads for the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory
are based on the highest averages for the various grade change
delineations for mills where raw waste loads that are lower than those
that formed the basis of BPT are attained. Application of this
methodology for the wood fiber furnish subdivision yields NSPS Option
2 raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 39.2 kl/kkg (9.4 kgal/t) and
7.5 kg/kkg (14.9 Ib/t), respectively. Application of this methodology
for the cotton fiber furnish subdivision yields NSPS Option 2 raw
waste loads for flow and BOD5 of 130.2 kl/kkg (31.2 kgal/t) and 14.0
kg/kkg (28.0 kg/kkg). The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 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 for the wood fiber furnish subdivision
and 55.2 kg/kkg (110.4 Ib/t) of product for the cotton fiber furnish
subdivision.
Noninteqrated-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
461
-------
general, wastewater discharge and BOD5_ raw waste loads increase with
an increase in the frequency of grade changes.
NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads for this subcategory are based on the
highest averages 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. Application of this methodology yields Option 2
raw waste loads for flow and BOD5_ of 79.7 kg/kkg (19.1 kgal/t) and 9.0
kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively. The Option 2 flow is based on those
mills with greater than one waste significant grade change per day.
The Option 2 BOD5_ raw waste load is based on those mills with between
zero and less than one waste significant grade change per day. The
TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to be the same as
that which forms the basis of BPT, or 34.7 kg/kkg (69.4 Ib/t) of
product.
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 promulgated. 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 NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads, data were
reviewed with respect to waste significant grade changes. Wastewater
discharge and BOD5_ raw waste loads increase with the frequency of
grade changes. Option 2 raw waste flows for each product sector are
based on the highest average for the various grade change delineations
for mills where raw waste flows that are lower than those which formed
the basis of BPT are attained. Option 2 BOD5_ raw waste loads 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. The Option 2 BOD5_ raw waste loads for the
lightweight electrical papers product sector is identical to that for
the lightweight papers product sector. Application of this
methodology yields Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads (a) for the
lightweight papers product sector of 159.4 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 278.8 kl/kkg (66.8 kgal/t) and
13.3 kg/kkg (26.6 Ib/t), respectively. For both product sectors, the
TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to be the same as
that which forms the basis of 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
promulgated. In the development of NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads,
data were reviewed with respect to waste significant grade changes.
Option 2 raw waste loads 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 BPT. Application of this
methodology yields Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw waste loads of 198.2
kl/kkg (47.5 kgal/t) and 9.0 kg/kkg (17.9 Ib/t), respectively. The
462
-------
proposed TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to be the
same as that which forms the basis of 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 promulgated. The subcategory average
raw waste loads, exclusive of electrical and matrix board production,
form the basis for BPT.
As for the other nonintegrated subcategories, raw waste load data were
reviewed with respect to frequency of waste significant grade changes.
Option 2 raw waste loads are based on the highest averages for the
various grade change delineations for mills with raw waste loads that
are lower than those that form the basis for proposed BPT.
Application of this methodology yields Option 2 flow and BOD5_ raw
waste loads of 46.7 kl/kkg (11.2 kgal/t) and 8.2 kg/kkg (16.4 Ib/t),
respectively. The TSS raw waste load for Option 2 has been assumed to
be the same as that which forms the basis of BPT, or 36.9 kg/kkg (73.7
Ib/t) of product.
Summary of Option £ Raw Waste Loads - Table VIII-38 presents a
summary of Option 2 raw waste loads.
Development of Effluent Characteristics. As discussed.previously in
this section, NSPS Options 1 and 2 are identical for the tissue from
wastepaper, wastepaper-molded products, paperboard from wastepaper,
and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories and for the
newsprint product sector of the deink subcategory. For the tissue
from wastepaper, wastepaper-molded products, paperboard from
wastepaper, and builders' paper and roofing felt subcategories, NSPS
Options 1 and 2 are based on the application of in-plant production
process controls and biological treatment. The biological treatment
systems are identical in size to those which form the basis of BPT
effluent limitations for these subcategories. For the newsprint
product sector of the deink subcategory, the end-of-pipe biological
treatment system, is identical in design to that which forms the basis
of BPT effluent limitations for the deink subcategory. Because the
end-of-pipe treatment systems that form the basis of NSPS Options 1
and 2 for these four subcategories and the subcategory sector are
identical to the biological systems that form the basis of BPT
effluent limitations for these subcategories, the relationships
discussed previously in this section apply.
The NSPS Option 1 and 2 long-term average BODji final effluent
concentrations for each of the four subcategories and the subcategory
product sector were determined from the equation that relates raw
waste BOD£ concentration to final effluent BODS^ concentration as
presented previously in this section and in the Phase II Development
Document (at page 402 (48)):
Log BOD!> effluent (mg/1) = 0.601 Log BOD5. influent (mg/1) - 0.020
463
-------
TABU VIII-38
SUHMAR? OF HSPS OPTION 2
RAW WASTE LOAM
no* BODS
Integrated Serpent
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Liacrboard
o Bag
S«*i-Che»ical
Unbleached Kraft
and Se»i-Cheaic«l
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite*
Groundwood-Therno-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMH Papers
Oroundwood-Fine Papers
kJ7fckg fcgal/t
211,6 (50.73
152.7 (36.6)
132.3 (31.7)
104.7 (23.1)
39.2
47.6
30.5
246.2
246.2
246.2
274.2
101
8*
57.6
70.1
64.3
Secondary Fibers Segnent
Deink
o Fine Papers 66.4
"o Tissue Papers 81.4
o Newsprint 67.6
Tistue Fro* Waitepaper 68.0
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish 13.4
o Noacorrugating Mediua Fumishl3.4
Waatepapcr-Molded Products 23,8
Builders * Paper and Roofing Felt 11,3
Nonintegrmted Seitnent
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish 39.2
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 130.2
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 79.7
Nonintegrated-Ligbtweight Papers
o Lightweight 159.4
o Electrical 278.8
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 198.2
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 46.7
(9.4)
(11.4)
(7.3)
48.0 (11.S)
(59,0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(65.7)
(24.4)*
(13.8)
(16.8)
(15.4)
(15.9)
(19.5)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3,2)
(3.2)
(5,7)
U.7)
(9.4)
(31.2)
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66.8)
(47,5)
(11.2)
fcg/Mtg Ib/t
58.4 (116.7)
29.3 (58.6)
35.1 (70.2)
27.1 (54.1)
12.4 (24.8)
16.9 (33.8)
17.6 (35.2)
16.3 (32.5)
90.6 (181.2)
92.6 (185.2)
109.6 (219.2)
156.6 (313.1)
66.1* (132.2)*
(35.2)
(29.
17.6
14.6
12.5
.1)
(24.9)
37.3 (74.6)
61.3 (122.6)
15.9 (31.7)
9.7 (19.3)
23.0 (46.0)
11.3 (22,5)
5.5 (10.9)
6.5 (13.0)
7.5 (14,9)
14.0 (28.0)
9.0 (17.9)
13.3
13.3
9.0
8.2
(26.6)
(26.6)
(17.9)
(16.4)
TSS
Ib/t
113.0
45,0
66,5
75.0
21.9
21.9
12.3
92.5
92.5
92.5
92.
90.
39.
48.
52.5
63.4
63.4
27.4
36.9
(226.0)
(90.0)
(133.0)
(150.0)
(43.8)
(43.8)
(24.6)
20.5 (41.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(185.0)
(180.0)
(79.8)
(97.0)
(105.0)
202.5 (405.0)
202.5 (405.0)
202.5 (405,0)
110.5 (221.0)
11.0 (21.9)
11.0 (21-9)
14.8 (29.6)
35.0 (70.0)
30.8 (61.6)
55.2 (110.4)
34.7 (69.4)
(126.8)
(126.8)
(54.7)
(73.7)
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda aubcategories.
"Include* Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Fit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
aubcategories.
*NSPS flow and BODS vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product:
Flov (kl/Ucg) * 31.06 exp(0.017x), where x equals the percent aulfite pulp produced
on-site in the final product. Raw waste loads shown are for a «ill where on-site
papergrade pulp production is 58 percent of the total product.
464
-------
The long-term average TSS final effluent concentrations were
determined from the relationship presented in Figure VIII-1. NSPS
Option 1 and 2 long-term average BOD!> and TSS final effluent loads
were calculated as the product of the long-term average final effluent
concentrations and the flow basis of NSPS Options 1 and 2.
For the remaining subcategories and subdivisions of subcategories, the
end-of-pipe treatment systems that form the basis of NSPS Option 2 are
identical in design to those that form the basis of NSPS Option 1 for
these subcategories. However, these end-of-pipe systems have longer
detention times and increased clarifier capacity than the systems that
form the basis of BPT effluent limitations. Therefore, as discussed
under NSPS Option 1, they are more effective in removing conventional
pollutants. In those subcategories where raw waste BOD5_
concentrations are equal to or lower than NSPS Option 1 raw waste BOD5_
concentrations, these systems are capable of attaining long-term
average BOD!> and TSS final effluent concentrations equal to or lower
than NSPS Option 1 long-term average BOD5. and TSS final effluent
concentrations.
As shown in Table VIII-39, NSPS Option 2 BOD5. raw waste concentrations
are equal to or lower than the NSPS Option 1 BOD£ raw waste
concentrations for the dissolving kraft, market bleached kraft, fine
bleached kraft, soda, unbleached kraft, semi-chemical, papergrade
sulfite, dissolving sulfite pulp, nonintegrated-tissue papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories, the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, and
the fine and tissue product sectors of the deink subcategory. For
these subcategories and subcategory subdivisions, NSPS Option 2
long-term average BOD5^ and TSS final effluent concentrations are equal
to NSPS Option 1 long-term average BODS^ and TSS final effluent
concentrations. NSPS Option 2 long-term average BOD5, and TSS final
effluent loads were calculated as the product of the long-term average
final effluent concentrations and the flow basis of NSPS Option 2.
As shown in Table VIII-39, NSPS Option 2 raw waste BOD5. concentrations
are greater than NSPS Option 1 raw waste BODjj concentrations in the
BCT bleached kraft, unbleached kraft and semi-chemical, groundwood-
TMP, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-fine papers subcategories
and the wood fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine
papers subcategory. As discussed previously, BODiS and TSS final
effluent concentrations increase as raw waste BOD!> concentration
increases. Therefore, NSPS Option 2 final effluent concentrations for
these five subcategories and for the subcategory subdivision are
greater than NSPS Option 1 final effluent concentrations. Long-term
average BOD£ final effluent concentrations were based on the percent
reductions in BOD5. that are characteristic of NSPS Option 1. EPA
calculated the percent BOD5_ reduction for NSPS Option 1 for each of
the subcategories and subdivisions. The Agency applied these percent
reductions to the NSPS Option 2 raw waste BOD5. concentrations to
develop the long-term average BOD5. final effluent concentrations
characteristic of NSPS Option 2. [This is in contrast to proposed
465
-------
TABLE VIII-39
COMPARISON OF NSPS OPTION 1 RAW WASTE LOADS AND FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS
WITH NSPS OPTION 2 RAW WASTE LOADS AND FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS
NSPS Option 1
NSPS Option 2
Raw Waste
Flow
kl/kk«
Integrated Segnent
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seni-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Front Wastepaper
Paper-board Fran Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medina Furnish
230.
173.
148.
129.
52.
52.
<>2.
58.
275.
275.
275.
303.
*
88.
99.
91.
102.
102.
67.
68.
13.
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish 13,
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
0 Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegra ted-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegra ted-Paperboard
23,
11
63
176
96
203
320
250
53
0
0
0
0
5
5
9
it
0
0
0
4
0
,0
.0
0
,0
.6
,0
,4
.4
.8
.3
.0
.5
.0
.2
.9
.0
.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)
(72.7)
*
(21.1)
(23.8)
(21.9)
(24.4)
(24.4)
(16.2)
(16.3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(15.2)
(42.3)
(22.9)
(48.7)
(76.9)
(59.9)
(12.9)
BODS
•«/l
289
219
260
261
322
462
587
332
498
567
659
877
652
241
175
182
885
885
235
142
1724
843
229
577
170
130
120
107
68
49
193
Final
Effluent
BOOS
mg/1
21.0
19.1
17.5
15.0
24.5
28.6
27.5
23.1
30.8
33.0
35.8
41.0
32.5
18.1
15.0
15.0
24.2
32.6
25.4
18.8
84.2
54.8
25-0
43.6
22.3
17.0
28.7
28.5
28.5
28.5
28.5
TSS
•«/l
35.5
33.0
29.3
23.5
41.6
51.8
51.2
40.3
45.6
45.6
45.6
41.4
42.0
31.0
22.2
22.0
35.9
44.4
48.6
41.6
90.2
72.3
48.3
64.2
25.1
19.8
20.3
20.1
20.1
20.1
20.1
Raw Waste
Flow
kl/kkg
211.6
152.7
132.3
104.7
39.2
47.6
30.5
48.0
246.2
246.2
246.2
274.2
*
57.6
70.1
64.3
66.4
81.4
67.6
68.0
13.4
13.4
23.8
11.3
37.6
129.8
79.7
159.4
278.8
198.2
46.7
kgal/t
(50.7)
(36.6)
(31.7)
(25.1)
(9.4)
(11.4)
(7.3)
(11.5)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(59.0)
(65.7)
*
(13.8)
(16.8)
(15.4)
(15.9)
(19.5)
(16.2)
(16-3)
(3.2)
(3.2)
(5.7)
(2.7)
(9.4)
(31.2)
(19.1)
(38.2)
(66. S)
(47.5)
(11.2)
BODS
•8/1
276
192
266
2S8
316
356
578
339
368
376
445
313
650
306
208
194
563
754
235
142
1724
843
229
577
190
108
112
83
48
45
176
Final
Effluent
BODS
mg/1
21.0
19.1
17.9
15.0
24.5
28.6
27.5
23.6
30.8
33.0
35.8
41.0
32.5
22.9
17.8
16.0
24.2
32.6
25.4
18.8
84.2
54.8
25.0
43.6
24.9
17.0
28.7
28.5
28.5
28.5
28.5
TSS
mg/1
35.5
33.0
30.0
23.5
41.6
51.8
51.2
41.4
45.6
45.6
45.6
41.4
42.0
42.0
28.6
24.2
35.9
44.4
48.6
41.6
90.2
72.3
48.3
64.2
29.5
19.8
20.3
20.1
20.1
20.1
20.1
1 Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
'Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories.
*NSPS Option 1 and Option 2 vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product and are as fallows:
NSPS Option 1 Flow = 52.87 exp(0.017x) kl/kkg
= 12.67 exp(0.017x) kgal/ton
NSPS Option 2 Flow = 38.06 exp(0.017x) kl/kkg
= 9.12 exp(0.017x) kgal/ton
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product
466
-------
NSPS in which the Agency assumed BODjj and TSS final effluent
concentrations would be identical to those characteristic of the best
performing mill option (equivalent to NSPS Option 1 in this document)
even when the raw waste BODjj concentration increased after the
application of production process controls. ] EPA also adjusted the TSS
final effluent concentrations accordingly. The methodology on which
the TSS final effluent concentrations were adjusted is based on
investigations conducted by McKinney. (204)
McKinney investigated the mathematics of complete-mixed activated
sludge systems and developed the following relationship to determine
the effluent BODS^ discharged from activated sludge systems.
Effluent BOD5 = F + kMa
F = soluble ^
k = metabolism constant at 20°C over a 5-day period
Ma = active or living mass of microorganisms
The constant, k, can be determined for each subcategory by plotting
the final effluent BOD5_ concentration versus the final effluent TSS
concentration for various levels of treatment. The constant is equal
to the slope of the straight line defined by the above relationship.
For each subcategory for which the NSPS Option 2 BODI5 raw waste
concentration is greater than the NSPS Option 1 BOD5_ raw waste
concentration, EPA determined k by plotting the long-term average BOD5.
final effluent concentration corresponding to BPT effluent limitations
and to NSPS Option 1 versus the long-term average TSS final effluent
concentration corresponding to BPT effluent limitations and NSPS
Option 1, respectively.
From the relationship developed by McKinney, if the increase in final
effluent BOD£ concentration between NSPS Option 2 and NSPS Option 1 is
associated with an increase in TSS discharged (i.e., the increased
BOD£ is all insoluble BOD5.) , the increase in the TSS final effluent
concentration can be determined from the following relationship:
ATSS = (ABOD5)/k
The NSPS Option 2 long-term average TSS final effluent concentrations
for the BCT bleached kraft, unbleached kraft and semi-chemical,
groundwood-TMP, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-f ine papers
subcategories and for the wood fiber furnish subdivision of the
nonintegrated-f ine papers subcategory were determined based on the
above relationship.
An illustration of how the Agency applied its methodology to compute
long-term average BOD5. and TSS effluent concentrations in those
subcategories where NSPS Option 2 raw waste BODS^ concentrations are
greater than NSPS Option 1 raw waste BOD!> concentrations is presented
in Table VIII-40 and Figure VIII-2.
467
-------
TABLE VIII-40
CALCULATION OF FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS FOR SUBCATEGORIES FOR WHICH THE
NSPS OPTION 2 RAW WASTE BOD5 CONCENTRATION IS GREATER THAN
THE NSPS OPTION 1 RAW WASTE BOD5 CONCENTRATION
EXAMPLE: GROUNDWOOD FINE PAPERS
Sample Calculation
BOD5:
NSPS Option 1 BOD5 raw waste load (RWL) = 182 rag/1 (see Table VIII-39)
NSPS Option 1 BOD5 final effluent (F.E.) = 15.0 mg/1 (see Table VIII-39)
Percentage BOD5 reduction = 100 x (182 - 15.0)/182 = 91.76%
NSPS Option 2 BOD5 RWL = 194 mg/1 (see Table VIII-37)
NSPS Option 2 BOD5 FE level is defined as the NSPS Option 1 percentage reduc-
tion applied to NSPS Option 2 BOD5 RWL = (194 mg/1) (1.00 - 0.9176) = 15.99 mg/1
NSPS Option 2 BOD5 long-terra average final effluent load
= (NSPS Option 2 flow)x(NSPS option 2 BOD5 FE concentration)
= (64.3 kl/kkg)(15.99 mg/1) = 1028 gm/kkg
=1.0 kg/kkg
TSS:
NSPS Option 2 TSS FE level is equal to the NSPS Option 1 TSS FE level plus
ATSS where
ATSS = ABOD5/k
ABOD5 is NSPS Option 2 BOD5 FE minus NSPS Option 1 BOD5 FE
= 15.99 rag/1 - 15.00 mg/1
= 0.99 mg/1
k is the constant defined by the McKinney relationship and is the slope of the
FE TSS versus FE BOD5 curve for the subcategory (see Fig. VIII-2).
k = 0.436
NSPS Option 1 TSS FE level =22.0 (see Table VIII-39)
NSPS Option 2 TSS FE level = NSPS Option 1 TSS FE level plus ABOD5/k
=22.0 mg/1 + 0.99 mg/1 / 0.436
= 24.27 mg/1
NSPS Option 2 TSS long-term average final effluent load
= (NSPS Option 2 flow)x(NSPS Option 2 TSS FE concentration)
= (64.3 kl/kkg)(24.27 mg/1) = 1561 gm/kkg
=1.6 kg/kkg
468
-------
FIGURE VW-2
FINAL EFFLUENT TSS VS FINAL EFFLUENT BO05
FOR THE GROUNDWOOD-FfNE PAF€RS SU8CATEGORY
30
FINAL EFFLUENT
ZO-
CTi
4
K
u
u
z
o
u
"I
a
o
IB
HSPS OPTION I
FIHAL CFFtUEMT
10-
SLOPt k * 0 43«
10
20
TSS CONCENTRATION
30
-------
Summary of NSPS Long-Term Average Final Effluent
Characteristics-Table VII1-41 presents a summary of the NSPS long-term
average BODS^ and TSS effluent loads.
Attainment of_ NSPS Option 2_
NSPS Option 2 final effluent loads have been attained in 18 of the 22
subcategories where BPT is attained and in each of the eight major
industry sectors discussed earlier in this section (bleached kraft,
unbleached kraft/semi-chemical, sulfite, groundwood, deink, other
secondary fiber, nonintegrated-fine papers, and other nonintegrated).
Table VIII-42 summarizes the number of mills attaining NSPS Option 2
final effluent loads and the number of direct discharging mills in
each subcategory for which data were available. At 23 percent of the
mills in the integrated segment, 60 percent of the mills in the
secondary fibers segment, and 72 percent of the mills in the
nonintegrated segment where BPT effluent limitations are attained,
NSPS Option 2 limits are also attained.
EPA reviewed the percent reductions required to attain NSPS Option 2
effluent loads (see Table VI11-43). The percent reductions of BOD5.
that form the basis of NSPS Option 2 are equal to or less than those
that form the basis of NSPS Option 1. As discussed previously, these
percent reductions have been attained in all of the eight major
sectors of the industry.
Conventional Pollutant Variability Analysis
Pollutant quantities discharged from a wastewater treatment system
vary. EPA accounts for this variability 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, BOD£ and TSS, regulated
under 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 the other is referred to as a
long-term average. Two types of variability factors are derived for
the guidelines: a daily maximum factor and a 30-day maximum factor.
The daily maximum factor is the ratio of (a) a value that would be
exceeded rarely by the daily pollutant discharge to (b) the long-term
average daily discharge. The 30-day maximum factor is the ratio of
(a) a value that would be exceeded rarely by the average of 30 • daily
discharge measurements to (b) the long-term average daily discharge.
The long-term average daily discharge quantity is an expression of the
long-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
long-term average for the same pollutant (denoted by LTA), the daily
470
-------
TABLE VIII-41
MSPS OPTION 2
LONG-TERM AVERAGE
DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
Flow
kl/kkg
Int_egfa_t_e_d__Seg_Hient
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
0 Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Cheoi cal
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Theroo-Mechani ca 1
Grauadwood-CMK Papers
Grouadwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
'i Fine Pacers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Waatepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
211
152
132
104
39
47
30
48
246
246
246
274
*
57
70
64
66
81
67
68
13
o Noncorrugating Medium Furaishl3
Wastepaper-Malded Products
Builders' Paper and Hoofing Felt
Noniutegrated Segment
Xonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nouintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
23
11
37
129
79
159
278
198
46
.6
.7
.3
,7
.2
,6
.5
.0
.2
.2
.2
.2
.6
.1
.3
.4
.4
.6
.0
.4
.4
,3
.3
,6
.8
.7
.4
.8
.2
.7
Ckgal/t)
(50
(36
(31
(25
(9
(11
(7
(11
(59
(59
(59
(65
*
(13
(16
(15
(15
(19
(16
(16
(3
(3
(5
(2
(9
(31
(19
(38
(66
(47
(11
.7)
.6)
.7}
.1)
.4)
.4)
.3)
.5)
.0)
.0)
.0)
.7)
-8)
.8)
.4)
.91
.5)
.2)
.3)
.2)
.2)
-7)
.7)
.4)
.1)
.1)
-2)
-8)
.5)
.2)
BODS
kg/kkg (Ib/t) kg/kkg
4
2
2
1
0
1
0
1
7
3
3
11
*
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
a
0
0
2
2
4
7
5
1
.4
.9
.4
.6
.n
.4
.8
.1
.6
.1
.8
.2
.3
.3
.0
.6
.7
.7
.3
.1
.73
,60
.49
.98
.2
.3
.5
.9
.6
,3
(8.
(5.
(4,
(3.
(1.
(2.
(1.
(2.
(15.
(16.
(17.
(22.
*
(2.
(2.
(2.
(3.
(5.
(3.
(2.
(2.
(1.
(1.
(0.
(1.
(4.
(4.
(f.
(15.
(11.
(2,
87)
82)
73)
14)
92)
71)
67)
26)
16)
22)
61)
48}
64)
SO)
05)
211
31)
43)
56)
25)
46)
19)
98)
96)
42)
58)
07)
86)
28)
66)
7.
5.
4.
2.
1.
2.
1.
2.
11.
11'.
11.
11.
*
1.
2.
I.
2.
3.
3.
2.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
2.
1.
3.
5.
4.
0.
5
0
0
5
6
5
6
0
2
2
2
3
4
0
6
4
6
3
8
2
97
2
73
2
6
6
2
6
0
94
TSS
Clb/t)
(15.03)
(10.06)
(7.94)
(4.92)
(3.26)
(4.92)
(3.12)
(3.97)
(22.42)
(22.42)
(22.42)
(22.66)
it
(4.84)
(4.01)
(3.11)
(4.761
(7.22)
(6.57)
(5.66)
(2.41)
(1.93)
(2.30)
(1.45)
(2.31)
(5.15)
(3,24)
(6.40)
(11.19)
(7.95)
(1.88)
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcatsgories,
zlnclades Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
*SSPS vary with the percent sulfite pulp in the final product. These equations can
be used to obtain annual average effluent characteristics for Papergrade
Sulfite mills:
Flow (kl/kkg) = 38.06 exp(C.O:?x)
BOD5 (kg/kkg) s 1.24 exp(0.017x)
TSS (kg/kkg) » 1.60 exp(0,Q17x)
where x equals the percent sulfite pulp produced on-site rn the final product.
471
-------
TABLE VIII-42
NUMBER OF MILLS ATTAINING BPT AND NSPS OPTION 2
FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Pip«?r«
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
a Corrugating Medium Furnish
Hills with
Available
Data
3
9
7
14
16
10
15
9
0
2
1
2
11
2
2
6
3
10
1
9
3
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish 37
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
.Voointegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated- Filter
and Non woven Papers
Nonintegrated-Papberboard
4
5
12
2
14
7
2
4
5
Mills
Attaining
BPT F.E.
levels(a)
2
/
3
5
9
3
4
3
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
5
3
6
1
7
2
21
1
4
5
1
9
6
2
4
2
Mills
Attaining
NSPS Option 2
F.E. levels(a)
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
2
1
2
1
18
0
3
1
0
6
6
2
4
2
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
(a) F.E. = Final Effluent
472
-------
TABLE VIII-43
PERCENT REDUCTIONS
REQUIRED TO ATTAIN NSPS OPTION 2 BODS
FINAL EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
FROM NSPS OPTION 2 BODS RAW WASTE LOADS
Percent Reduction*
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 92
Market Bleached Kraft 90
BCT Bleached Kraft 93
Alkaline-Fine1 94
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 92
o Bag 92
Semi-Chemical 95
Unbleached Kraft
and Semi-Chemical 93
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration 92
o Viscose 91
o Cellophane 92
o Acetate 93
Papergrade Sulfite2 95
Groundwood-Therrao-Mechanical 93
Groundwood-CMN Papers 91
Groundwood-Fine Papers 92
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 96
o Tissue Papers 96
o Newsprint 89
Tissue Front Wastepaper 87
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish 95
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish 94
Wastepaper-Molded Products 89
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 92
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish 87
o Cotton Fiber Furnish 84
Nonintegrated-Tiasue Papers 74
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight 66
o Electrical 40
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers 37
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 84
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcate-
gories.
*Percent reduction
= (raw waste load (Ib/t) - final effluent (lb/t)] x 100/raw waste load (Ib/t)
except for Papergrade Sulfite subcategories for which percent reduction is defined in
terms of concentrations (mg/1).
473
-------
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), the limit for the average of 30 daily observations is
VF-,0 x LTA.
Daily Maximum Variability Factors. Historically, in this industry,
the daily maximum variability factor has been defined as 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 describe the data adequately, 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
percentiles. Such methods do not require that the particular form of
the underlying distribution be known, and make no restrictive
assumptions about the distributional form of the data. (Nonparametric
methods are discussed in many texts. See, for example, J. D. Gibbons,
Nonparametric Statistical Inference, McGraw-Hill (1 971).(205)) EPA has
applied nonparametric methods to pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
effluent data to obtain 50 percent confidence level (or tolerance
level) estimates of the 99th percentile of the distribution of daily
pollutant discharge. That is, an estimate of the 99th percentile was
determined such that the probability that the estimate (which is of
the form: the rth largest of n measurements) is greater than or equal
to the 99th percentile of the daily pollutant discharge (denoted as
K.,,) is no less than 0.5. That is, n daily pollutant discharge
values were obtained and ordered from smallest to largest in value.
The rth smallest pollutant discharge value (where r is less than or
equal to n), denoted by X(r_), is chosen such that the probability that
X(r) is greater than or equal to K.9, is at least 0.5 (i.e., P[X(r) >
K.,,] > 0.5). Utilizing this approach, the value of r is determined
such that
"I*/ x— K.(
474
-------
where p = .99
and /n\= n!
i! (n-i)S
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.
Pollutant Discharge Values To Determine Daily
for
Analysis of Pail
Maximum Variability Factors - Daily measurements
the conventional
pollutants, BOD5_ and TSS^ were submitted by mill representatives.
Values for facilities employing primary and/or biological treatment
were obtained through the supplemental data request program. Values
for facilities employing chemically assisted clarification were
obtained through the supplemental data request program and the
verification sampling program. These values were used to calculate
daily maximum variability factors and 30-day maximum variability
factors.
Initially, a parametric approach 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 and frequency histograms 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, EPA decided to use nonparametrlc 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
the ratio of the 99th percentile estimates
discharge values. The effects of daily
model that was developed
(see
determined by calculating
to the average of the daily
dependence were examined using a time series
for the timber products point source category
Final Development
Timber Products
Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Point Source Category, USEPA, Washington, D.C.,
(206)). The results show that maximum day variability
to daily dependence and that the
representative variability factors
January 1981 (206)). The
factors are relatively insensitive
nonparametric methods used yield
for data examined in this study.
This is further supported by additional analyses conducted by the
Agency. On a mill-specific basis, each daily value was compared to
the corresponding mill-specific 99th percentile estimate. Table
VIII-44 displays the aggregate results of comparing each daily value
to its corresponding 99th percentile estimate of the daily maximum
discharges of BOD5_ and TSS. The percentage of daily values exceeding
the 99th percentile estimate is substantially the same as the expected
one percent. Table VIII-45 displays mill-specific values for maximum
475
-------
TABLE VIII-44
DISTRIBUTION OF DAILY VALUES ABOUT
THE ESTIMATE OF THE 99th PERCENTILE
Percentage of Points Percentage of Points
S99th Percentile >99th Percentile Totals
TSS 99.2% 0.8% 100.0%
(29,755)* (247)* (30,002)*
BOD5 99.2% 0.8% 100.0%
(28,860)* (244)* (29,104)*
* Actual number of daily data points given in parentheses.
476
-------
TABLE VI1I-45
VARIABILITY FACTORS FOR DETERMINING
MAXIMUM DAT LIMITATIONS(a)
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT:
PRIMARY CLARIFICATION:
CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFJCATON:
SUBSETS (1), (2), (3), AND (4)
SUBSETS (5) AND (6)
SUBSET (7)
Mill
Number
MILLS WITH
032002
032003
030005
030032
030046
030027
030020
010002
010019
010005
020017
020009
060004
015001
015001
040012
040009
040019
040010
040010
070001
054015
052008
030044
140007
140019
140015
140015
140021
140021
140025
140030
100005
090004
110077
110031
080041
080046
BODS
Number
of Data
Points
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
1,000*
875*
859
916*
721*
986*
1,002*
568*
429*
1,004
914
332
957*
642
97*
522*
759*
127
369
541*
926
993*
952*
693*
778*
982*
153
710*
119
409*
295*
999*
141*
999
373
421*
968
396*
TSS
Msxinun
Day
Average
2.00
2.15
3.11
2.17
2.83
3.42
2.64
1.80
2.99
3.32
2.75
2.52
1.94
3.39
2.72
2.56
2.05
3.70
2.27
1.57
3.88
3.74
6.73
1.86
4.79
3.61
2.54
3.28
5.34
2.94
2.29
3.25
4.42
2.56
3.29
4.49
2.56
1.94
Number
of Data
Points
1,003*
837*
881
55*
730*
992*
998*
630*
424*
1,004
914
341
956*
652
104*
610*
759*
303
369
541*
971
954*
961*
701*
779*
983*
153
710*
119
409*
740*
999*
357
999
279
418*
974
396*
Max! nun
Day
Average
2.41
2.12
2.04
(b)
4.16
4.76
2.26
1.52
2.25
2.46
2.17
2.46
2.87
2.76
2.47
1.90
2.17
2.91
1.97
2.32
5.98
4.78
5.93
2.34
7.40
3.76
2.36
3.65
2.61
2.99
1.73
4.29
3.68
2.94
2.70
4.42
4.27
1.98
Mills Used to
Calculate Averagi
by Subsets
(D(2)(3)(4)
(1)
(1)
(D(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)
(1)
(D(2)(3)
(1)
O)(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)
d)(2)(3)
(1)
(D(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)(4)
U)(2)(3)
(O(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)
(1)
(1 )(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)
U)(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
U)(2)(3)(4)
(O(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)(4)
U)(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1 )(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)
(D(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)(4)
(O(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
-------
TABLE VIII-45 (cent.)
MILLS WITH PRIMARY CLARIFICATIOK
090008
090019
090019
090022
090022
080022
105020
105020
MILLS WITH
060001
080027
964*
797
181*
52
85*
898*
354
440*
CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
381*
456*
1.92
1.80
1.76
(b)
(b)
3.47
4.36
3.75
2.83
2.56
976*
797
181*
368
595*
898*
354
440*
379*
454*
5.49
2.59
2.09
3.36
2.68
2.85
4.01
2.93
2.39
2.92
(5)(6)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)(6)
(5)(6)
(5)(6)
(7)
(7)
*Denotes refrigerated data
(a)Subset Descriptions:
Oo (1)A11 mills with biological treatment.
(2)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than BPT.
(3)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than BPT. Biological treatment in the
technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(4)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than NSPS Option 1 levels. Biological
treatment is the technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(5)Mills with primary treatment; final effluent levels at or better than BPT limits. Primary clarification is
the technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(6)MilIa with primary treatment; final effluent levels at or better than NSPS Option 1 levels. Primary
clarification is the technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(7)A11 nills with chemically assisted clarification.
(b)Insufficient data for analysis.
-------
day variability factors for BOD5_ and TSS, obtained by calculating the
quotient of the 99th percentile estimates and long-term average
pollutant values.
30-Day Maximum Variability Factors. The approach for deriving 30-day
maximum variability factors is suggested by a statistical result known
as the Central Limit Theorem. This theorem states that the
distribution of a mean of a sample of size n drawn from any one of a
large class of different distributional forms will be approximately
normally distributed. For practical purposes, the normal distribution
provides a good approximation to the distribution of the sample mean
for samples as small as 25 or 30 (see e.g., Miller and Freund,
Probability and Statistics for Engineers, Prentice - Hall, 1965, pp.
132-34).(207)
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 were used to construct one 30-day average to be
included in the analysis. If the next 30 measurements were available
during February 16 to March 25, these would constitute the next 30-day
average and so on. The mill-specific 30-day averages so constructed
were found to fit the normal distribution adequately on the basis of
goodness-of-fit tests. These tests were performed using the mean of
the 30-day means and the standard deviation of the 30-day means to
estimate the mean and standard deviation of the hypothesized
distribution. The results of the goodness-of-fit tests are summarized
in Table VIII-46 and are consistent with the Central Limit Theorem.
Using X30 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.
EPA also examined the effects of daily dependence, monthly dependence,
and seasonality using a time series model. A simpler version of this
time series model was used to determine maximum 30-day average
variability in establishing effluent limitations guidelines and
standards for the Timber Products Processing Point Source Category
(see Final Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards for the Timber Products Point Source Category,"U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., January 1981
(206)). The results show that, although seasonality has the most
important effect on maximum 30-day average variability factors, the
method used in this study for estimating 99th percentiles accounts for
seasonality and provides representative maximum 30-day average
variability factors.
This is further supported by additional analyses conducted by the
Agency. On a mill-specific basis, each 30-day average was compared to
the corresponding mill-specific 99th percentile estimate. Table
479
-------
TABLE VI11-46
RESULTS OF COODNKSS-OF-FIT TESTS FOR SUCCESSIVE .10-DAY AVERAGES(a)
cx>
o
801)5
Subcategory Name
Diftiiolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Rlearhed Kraft
Alkaline-Fine(d)
Unbleached Kraft
o Mnerboard
o Bag
Semi -fhemi oal
Unbleached Kraft and
Srmi -Cbemi cal
Paper-grade Sulfite(f)
Groundwood-Fine Papers
G rou ndwood -The rmo-
Mechanical
Oroundwocid-CMN P.ipers
Integrated Mi ncel laneous
Deink
o Fine Papers
Hill
Number
032002*
032003*
030005
030032*
030046*
030027*
030020*
010002*
010019*
010005
020017
020009
060004*
015001
015001*
040012*
040009*
040019
040010
040010*
052008*
070001
054015*
030044*
060001*
140007*
1400)9*
Number
of
Means
33
29
28
30
24
32
33
18
14
33
30
11
31
21
3
17
25
4
12
IS
30
30
33
23
12
25
32
SI;
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
-
0
0
-
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
Test
itistic
.0530
.0899
.2274
. 1045
.2295
.0949
.1647
.1593
.1801
.1679
.1272
.1782
.0904
.2332
.2398
.1207
.1672
.0684
.2569
.1407
.0777
.0808
.2234
.2416
.1483
Critical
Value at
a = .01
0.
0,
0,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0
0
0
0.
0.
o
0
-
0
0
-
0
0
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
.1795
.1896
.1922
.1870
.2062
. 182.3
.1795
.2390
.2610
.1795
.1870
.2840
.1852
.2248
.2450
.2000
.2750
.2390
.1852
.1870
1795
2124
2750
.2000
. 1823
Decislon(b)
NS
NS
Sig a = 0.01
NS
Sig a = 0.01
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Sig o = 0.01
-(c)
NS
NS
-(c-)
NS
NS
Sig o = 0.01
NS
NS
NS
NS
Sig a = 0.01
NS
Number
of
Means
33
27
29
1
24
33
13
21
14
33
30
11
31
21
3
20
25
10
12
IB
32
.12
31
23
1?
?S
:)2
Test
Statistic
0
o
0
-
0.
0
0.
0
o
0
o
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
o
0
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.1085
.0719
.1289
.2715
1840
.0718
.1376
. 1989
.1815
.1234
.2581
.0984
.1180
. 1270
.1820
.2316
.2321
.2044
I4RO
.1622
1502
1819
2248
2020
1183
TSS
Critical
Valnr at
a - .01
0
0.
0
-
0.
0.
0
o
0
0
0
0.
0
0
-
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.1795
.1948
1896
.2062
.1795
1795
.2248
.2610
. 1795
. 1870
. 2840
. 1852
2248
2310
2000
2940
2750
2390
1871
182.1
i«r>;'
2124
2750
7.000
1821
Dc-cisi
NS
NS
NS
-(r)
Six a
Sic. a
NS
NS
NS
SIR u
NS
NS
NS
NS
-(<•)
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
S i p. n
NS
ion(h)
^001
= 0.01
= 0.01
= 0.01
-------
TABLE VII1-46 (cent.)
OO
Tissue From Vastepaper
Paperboaid From Vafitepaper
Nonintrgraled-Fine Papers
Nonintegrat ed-Tissue Papers
140015
140015*
140021
140021*
1 40025*
140030*
100005**
090004
110077
110031*
080041
080046*
080027*
090008*
090019
090019*
090022
090022*
5
23
3
13
9
.13
4
33
12
14
32
13
14
32
26
6
1
2
0.1679
0.2082
-
0.1681
0.1469
0.1826
_
0.0896
0.2026
0.2303
0.1606
0.1270
0.2383
0.1333
0.1243
0.1816
-
-
0.
0.
-
I)
0.
0
-
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
-
-
.4050
.2124
2680
.3110
1 795
.1795
2750
.2610
.1823
.2680
.2610
. 1823
. 1974
.3640
NS
NS
-(c)
NS
NS
Sig a = 0.01
-(c)
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS(e)
NS
NS
NS
-(c)
-(c)
5
23
3
11
24
33
11
33
9
13
.12
13
15
32
26
6
12
19
(1.
0,
-
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0,
0
0
0
1427
1410
1518
0981
1526
1966
. 1 499
1 320
2212
1173
2576
.2009
.2080
,0781
.2375
.1178
.0974
0.4(150
0.2124
-
0.26RO
0.2062
0. 1795
0.2R40
0.1795
0.31 10
0.26RO
0. 1S2.1
0.26RO
0.2570
0. 1823
0. 1974
0 . 3640
0.2750
0.2:150
NS
NS
-<< )
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
Sig a - 0.01
NS
NS
NS
NS
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
080022*
105020
105020*
29
11
14
0.1050
0.1801
0.1277
0
0
0
.1896
.2840
.2610
NS
NS
NS
29
11
l/i
0
0
0
.1371
.2010
1749
0. 1896
0.2840
0.2610
NS
NS
NS
'''Refrigerated BOD5 and TSS data.
^'Refrigerated BOD5 data only.
(a )Li 11 ief. ors, H., "On the Kolmogorov-Smi rnov Tests for Normality with Mean and Variance Unknown," J. Am. Statistical A.ssor.,
Vol. 62, 1967. (208)
(b)Reject H at the level a if teat statistic exceeds critical value for the particular sample size N. NS denotes hypothesis
test results not significant (i.e., do not reject H : data comes fron a normal distribution).
(c)Insufficient data for analysis.
(d)Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
(e)Altnough the set of successive 30-day averages was not found to be normally distributed, the set of successive 31-day averages
was found to be normally distributed using the Lilliefors Test.
(f)Intludes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subratrgories.
-------
VIII-47 displays the aggregate results of comparing each 30-day
average to its corresponding 99th percentile estimate of the
distribution of 30-day averages of pollutant values for BODS^ and TSS.
The percentage of 30-day averages exceeding the 99th percentile
estimate is substantially the same as the expected one percent. Table
VIII-48 displays mill-specific maximum 30-day average variability
factors for BOD£ and TSS, obtained by calculating the quotient of the
99th percentile estimates and long-term average pollutant values.
Establishment of Variability Factors To Be Applied for Rulemakinq
(BiologicalTreatment). Tables VIII-45 and VIII-48 present the
individual mills'30-day average and daily maximum variability factors
for BOD£ and TSS for those mills with biological treatment systems.
For many subcategories, biological treatment is the technology basis
for achieving the effluent reduction required under NSPS guidelines.
Variability factors compiled for each mill were averaged across mills
and one daily and one 30-day average variability factor were
determined for BOD!> and TSS. These two variability factors were 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 were determined for
each of four subsets of mills. These subsets were developed from a
group of mills with biological treatment systems and are as follows:
Subset Number Subset Description
(1) Mills with biological treatment systems.
(2) Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels at or better than BPT limita-
tions. 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).
(3) Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels at or better than BPT. Biological
treatment is the technology on which BPT
effluent limitations are based for these
mills.
(4) Mills with biological treatment systems and
effluent levels at or better than NSPS Option 1
long-term average effluent loads. Biological
treatment is the technology on which BPT effluent
limitations are based for these mills.
482
-------
TABLE VIII-47
DISTRIBUTION OF 30-DAY AVERAGES ABOUT
THE ESTIMATE OF THE 99th PERCENTILE
Percentage of Points
£99th Percentile
Percentage of Points
>99th Percentile
Totals
TSS
BODS
98.2%
(961)*
98.1%
(930)*
1.8%
(18)*
1.9%
(18)*
100.0%
(979)
100.0%
(948)
* Actual number of successive 30-day averages given in parentheses.
483
-------
TABLE VII1-48
VARIABILITY FACTORS FOR DETERMINING
MAXIMUM 30-DAY LIMITATrONS(a)
CO
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT:
PRIMARY CLARIFICATION:
CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIF1CATON:
SUBSETS (1), (2), (3) AND (4)
SUBSETS (5) AND (6)
SUBSET (7)
Mill
Number
MILLS WITH
032002
032003
030005
030032
030046
030027
030020
010002
010019
01 0005
020017
020009
060004
015001
015001
040012
040009
040019
040010
040010
070001
054015
052008
030044
140007
140019
140015
140015
140021
140021
140025
140030
100005
090004
110077
110031
080041
080046
Number
of Data
Points
BIOLOGICAL
1,000*
875*
859
916*
721*
986*
1 ,002*
568*
429*
1,004
914
332
957*
642
97*
522*
759*
127
369
541*
926
993*
952*
693*
778*
982*
153
710*
119
409*
295*
999*
141*
999
373
421*
968
396*
BODS
Maximum
30-Day
Average
TREATMENT
1.49
1.56
2.02
1.86
2.00
1.47
1.73
1.56
1.68
2.00
2.02
1.65
1.46
2.55
(b)
1.76
1.51
(b)
1.91
1.30
1.89
2.12
2.82
1.34
2.42
2.09
1.77
1.80
(b)
1.71
1.58
2.08
(b)
2.11
2.08
2.37
1.85
1.39
TSS
Number
of Data
Points
1,003*
837*
881
55*
730*
992*
998*
630*
424*
1,004
914
341
956*
652
104*
610*
759*
303
369
541*
971
954*
961*
701*
779*
983*
153
710*
119
409*
740*
999*
356
999
279
418*
974
396*
Maximum
30-Day
Average
1.50
1.39
1.39
(b)
2.52
2.14
1.55
1.38
1.35
2.00
1.81
1.52
1.79
2.11
(b)
1.56
1.66
1.94
1.49
1.49
2.25
2.22
2.43
1.46
2.52
1.65
1.40
1.94
(b)
1.63
1.28
2.24
2.35
2.02
1.82
2.44
2.08
1.53
Mills Used to
Calculate Averages
by Subsets
U)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1)
(1)
U)(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)
(1X2H3)
(1)
(1X2X3)
(1)
UX2X3)
(1X2X3)
(D(2)(3)
(1)
(1)(2)(3)
(1X2X3X4)
U)(2)(3)
(1X2X3)
(1)(2)(3)
(1)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)
(1X2X3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
UX2X3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)(4)
UX2)(3)
(1X2X3X4)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
(D(2)(3)
(1)(2)(3)(4)
-------
TAI'LE VIII-48 (cent.)
HILLS WITH PRIMARY CLARIFICATION
090008
090019
090019
090022
090022
080022
103020
10S020
MILLS WITH
060001
080027
964*
797
181*
52
85*
898*
354
440*
CHEMICALLY
381*
456*
1.32
1.45
1.53
(b)
(b)
1.64
1.62
1.48
ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
2.05
2. 10
976*
797
181*
368
595*
898*
354
440*
379*
454*
1.92
1.44
1.29
1.30
1.33
1.46
1.86
1.55
1.41
2.15
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
Q^ UOUUU1 JO1" f. . UJ JtV" !.•*! (7)
in 080027 456* 2.10 454* 2.15 (7)
^Denotes refrigerated data
(a)Subset Descriptions:
(1)A11 mills with biological treatment.
(2)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than BPT.
(3)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than BPT. Biological treatment, is the
technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(4)Mills with biological treatment; final effluent levels at or better than NSPS Option 1 levels. Biological
treatment is the technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(5)MilIs with primary treatment; final effluent level* at or better than BPT limits. Primary clarification is
the technology basis of BPT effluent Units.
(6)Mills with primary treatment; final effluent level* at or better than NSPS Option 1 levels. Primary
clarification is the technology basis of BPT effluent limits.
(7)A11 mills with chemically assisted clarification.
(b)Insufficient data for analysis.
-------
Maximum daily and maximum 30-day average variability factors for these
four subsets are shown in Table VIII-49. Based on the results, where
biological treatment is the basis of NSPS technology options, EPA has
based the 30-day average and daily maximum effluent limitations for
BOD5_ and TSS on the 30-day average and daily maximum variability
factors developed for subset (4), using refrigerated data, because (a)
subset (4) most resembles treatment system performance that will be
required of new sources and (b) refrigeration of samples will be
required by permitting authorities.
Hence, for BOD.5 and TSS, the 30-day average and daily maximum
variability factors to be applied for those technology options where
biological treatment is the technology basis are as follows:
30-Day Average Variability Factors
(From Mills with Biological Treatment)
BOD5. = 1.91
TSS = 1.90
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
(From Mills with Biological Treatment)
BOD5. = 3.54
TSS =3.64
Establishment of Variability Factors To Be Applied For Rulemakinq
(Primary Treatment). Wastewater data from mills where primary
clarification is employed were also collected as part of the
supplemental data request program. Daily maximum and maximum 30-day
variability factors for subcategories with such treatment were
determined using the methods described previously and applied to data
from mills with biological treatment systems.
Tables VIII-45 and VIII-48 present mill-specific daily maximum and 30-
day average variability factors, respectively. Table VIII-49 presents
maximum, minimum, and average variability factors for BOD5_ and TSS for
those mills with primary clarification. For the nonintegrated
subcategories, with the exception of the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory, primary clarification is the technology basis for both
NSPS technology options considered. Variability factors for each mill
were averaged and applicable daily maximum and 30-day average BODS^ and
TSS variability factors were determined.
486
-------
TABLE VI11-49
AVERAGE M\XIMUM 30-DAY AND MAXIMUM DAY
VARIABILITY FACTORS FOR SUBSETS (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7)
Subset
BODS
Maxima
30-Day
Average
Maximum
Day
Average
'ITiS
Maximum
30-Day
Maximum
Day
Averagi'
(1) ALL MILLS WITH BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT
(A) With Refrigerated Sanple Collection
Minimum
Maximum
Average
(B) With Unrefrlgerated Sample Collection
.pa
CO
Maximum
Average
(2) MILLS WITH BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT; FINAL EFFLUENT
LEVELS AT OR BETTER THAN BPT
(A) With Refrigerated Sample Collection
Minimum
Maximum
Average
(B) With Unrefrigerated Saaple Collection
Minimum
Maximum
Average
.30
.82
.79
.65
.55
1.99
30
82
78
77
55
2 . 02
1.57
6.73
2.97
2.27
5.34
3.17
1.57
6.73
2.99
2.27
5.34
3.23
1.28
2.52
1.80
39
35
1.86
1.28
2.52
1.82
40
35
1.52
7.40
3.24
1.97
5-98
2.93
5?
40
28
97
9R
1.93
3.12
(3) MILLS WITH BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT; FINAL EFFLUENT
LEVELS AT OR BETTER THAN BPT. BIOLOGICAL TREATHt NT
IS THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF BPT EFFLUENT LIMITS
(A) With Refrigerated Sample Collection
Minima 1.
Maxiaua 2
Average 1.
(B) With Unrefrigerated Sample Collection
Minimum 1
Maximum 2
Average 2.02
(4) MILLS WITH BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT; FINAL EFFLUENT
LEVELS AT OR BETTER THAN NSPS OPTION 1 LEVELS.
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT IS THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITS
.30
.82
78
77
.55
1.57
6.73
2.99
2.27
5.34
3.23
1.28
2.52
1.82
1.40
2.35
1.93
52
40
28
97
98
3.12
(A) With Refrigerated Sample Collection
Minimum
Maxiaua
; Average
(B) With Unrefrigerated Sample Collection
Minimum
Maximum
Average
1.39
2.82
1.91
77
08
1.93
1.93
6.73
3.54
2.54
5.34
3.72
1.50
2.44
1.90
1.40
2.35
1.88
98
93
3.65
36
68
2.85
-------
TABLE VIII-49 (cont.)
(5) HILLS WITH PRIMARY CLARIFICATION; FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS
AT OR BETTER THAN BPT LIMITS. PRIMARY CLARIFICATION IS
THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF BPT EFFLUENT LIMITS
(6)
(A) With Refrigerated Saaple Collection
Minima
Max latin
Average
(B) With Unrefrigerated Sample Collection
Minima
Maxima
Average
.32
.64
.49
.45
.62
1.54
HILLS WITH PRIMARY CLARIFICATION; FINAL EFFLUENT LEVELS
AT OR BETTER THAN NSPS OPTION 1 LEVELS. PRIMARY CLARIFI-
CATION IS THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF BPT EFFLUENT MHITS
1.76
3.75
2.73
1.80
4.3
3.08
1.29
1.92
1.51
30
86
1.53
2.09
5.49
3.21
2.59
4.01
3.32
CO
CO
(A) With Refrigerated Saaple Collection
Hiniaua
Haxlaua
Average
(B) With Unrefrigerated Saaple Collection
Minlaua
Haxiaua
Average
(7) MILLS WITH CHEMICALLY ASSISTED CLARIFICATION
(A) With Refrigerated Saaple Collection
Miniaua
Haxiaua
Average
(B) With Unrefrigerated Sample Collection
No Data Available.
1.32
.64
.48
.62
.62
.62
2.05
2.10
2.08
1.92
3.75
3.05
36
36
4.36
2.56
2.83
2.70
.46
.92
.64
.86
.86
.86
1.41
2.14
1.78
,85
49
3.76
01
01
4.01
2.39
2.92
2.66
-------
Minimum, maximum, and average variability factors were determined for
each of two subsets of mills. These subsets were developed from the
group of mills with primary clarification and are as follows:
Subset Number Subset Description
(5) Mills with effluent levels at or better
than BPT with primary clarification as
the technology basis of BPT effluent
limits.
(6) Mills with effluent levels at or better
than NSPS Option 1 with primary clari-
fication as the technology basis of
BPT effluent limits.
Average maximum daily and maximum 30-day average variability factors
for these two subsets are shown in Table VII1-49. Based on the
results, where primary clarification is the basis of BPT and NSPS
technology options, EPA has based the 30-day average effluent
limitations for BODjj and TSS on the 30-day average variability factors
developed for subset (6), using refrigerated data, because (a) subset
(6) most resembles treatment system performance that will be required
at new sources and (b) refrigeration of samples will be required by
permitting authorities.
The resulting BOD£ and TSS 30-day average and daily maximum
variability factors to be applied for those technology options where
primary clarification is the technology basis are as follows:
30 Day Average Variability Factors
BOD5_ = 1 .48
TSS « 1.64
Daily Maximum Variability Factors
BOD5_ = 3.05
TSS =3.76
A summary of the variability factors established for conventional
pollutant NSPS is presented in Table VIII-50.
TOXIC AND NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
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
489
-------
TABIE VIII-50
SUMMARY OF NSPS VARIABILITY FACTORS
BODS TSS
Maximum 30-Day Maximum Maximum 30-Day Maximum
Average Day Average Day
1.91 3,54 1,90 3.64
The above variability factors apply for the following subcategories:
Dissolving Kraft Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Market Bleached Kraft Groundwood-CMN Papers
BCT Bleached Kraft Groundwood-Fine Papers
Alkaline-Fine
(including Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda) Deink
Unbleached Kraft Tissue From Wastepaper
Seai-Chemical Paperboard From Wastepaper
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical Wastepaper-Molded Products
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit and Drum Wash) Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
1.48 3.05 1.64 3.76
The above variability factors apply for the following subcategories:
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
490
-------
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. The best available
technology economically achievable must be implemented no later than
July 1, 1984, for the control of toxic and nonconventional pollutants.
The Clean Water Act requires that pretreatment standards for existing
sources (PSES) and pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS)
control 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.
In Section VI, EPA recommended that effluent limitations be
established for the following three toxic pollutants:
trichlorophenol,
pentachlorophenol, and
zinc.
Another toxic pollutant that could prove to be of concern is
chloroform. However, as discussed in Section VI, the Agency
determined that promulgation of uniform national BAT limitations and
PSES, PSNS, and NSPS controlling the discharge of chloroform is not
justified.
The most important nonconventional pollutants associated with the
production of pulp, paper, or paperboard are color, ammonia, and resin
acids and their derivatives. Uniform national pollutant discharge
standards are not being established for these nonconventional
pollutants. Color and ammonia may be controlled by permitting
authorities on a case-by-case basis as dictated by water quality
considerations. Limited information exists on the levels of resin
acids and their derivatives present in wastewater discharges from the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. This sparsity of data makes it
impossible at this time to establish uniform national standards
limiting the discharge of these compounds.
Control and treatment options have been identified for the control of
toxic pollutants (trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, zinc, and
chloroform) and for the control and treatment of the nonconventional
pollutants (ammonia and color), should a case-by-case determination be
made that they should be regulated.
491
-------
Chlorophenolics
Trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be controlled through the
substitution of slimicides and biocide formulations that do not
contain chlorinated phenolics to replace formulations that contain
these toxic pollutants. Substitution would ensure that substantial
quantities of the toxic pollutants pentachlorophenol and
trichlorophenol would be removed from pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry wastewaters.
Chemicals containing pentachlorophenol (PCP) were being used at ten of
the 60 facilities sampled during the verification program and at
neither of the two mills sampled during the long-term sampling
program. Chemicals containing trichlorophenol (TCP) were used at six
of the verification mills and neither of the mills sampled in the
long-term sampling program. Chlorophenolics were detected and
reported at consistently higher levels at facilities where these
compounds were used. As a result, chemical substitution is an
applicable technology option for control of Chlorophenolics. The data
used in assessing the capability of chemical substitution were
obtained during the verification sampling program, the long-term
sampling program, and from industry comments on the January 6, 1981
proposed regulations. These data have been adjusted according to the
following formula: Adjusted concentration = (Measured concentration) x
(Unit flow basis of BPT effluent limitations)/(Actual mill unit flow).
This adjustment was made to reflect the actual mass discharge of TCP
and PCP from the sampled mills. This ensures that TCP and PCP data
used in assessing the capability of chemical substitution relate the
quantity of chlorinated phenolics discharged directly to production.
Data from mills where Chlorophenolic-containing biocides are used were
not included in assessing the capability of chemical substitution
since EPA was interested in determining what reductions occurred when
biocides were not used. Only verification and long-term sampling data
were used in this assessment because industry data were generated
using a different analytical method. Industry data were used to
determine if Agency assessments were realistic. Data from the
verification and long-term sampling programs were combined and are
presented in Tables VIII-51 through VIII-54. The additional TCP and
PCP data submitted by industry are summarized in Tables VIII-55 to
VIII-58.
EPA learned that chemical substitution does not prevent all discharges
of TCP and PCP. TCP is a suspected bleach plant by-product when
chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp.
PCP, historically used as a biocide in this and other industries, is a
known contaminant in wastepaper. In order to differentiate between
PCP and TCP present from the use of biocides and the PCP and TCP
present from other sources, EPA analyzed the quantity of PCP and TCP
present in the wastewaters from mills where chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp and from mills
where PCP contamination is likely to occur. EPA then used these
quantities to determine what effluent limitations were attainable if
492
-------
the PCP/TCP contribution from biocides were eliminated. (As explained
previously, EPA is not setting limits to control PCP and TCP
discharges resulting from bleaching or raw material contamination.)
Where PCP and TCP were present but not attributable to a particular
source, EPA established the effluent limitation at the highest
discharge level found. To assess the capability of chemical
substitution, the industry was segmented into the following five
groupings:
(1) Integrated mills where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds
are used to bleach pulp (at these mills, TCP formation is
possible, but PCP contamination is unlikely);
(2)
Integrated mills, excluding the semi-chemical subcategory, where
chlorine-containing compounds are not used to bleach pulp (at
these mills, TCP formation is unlikely and PCP contamination is
unlikely);
(3) Deink mills where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are
used to bleach pulp (at these mills, TCP formation is possible
and PCP contamination is likely);
(4) The semi-chemical subcategory and other secondary fiber mills (at
these mills, TCP formation is unlikely and PCP contamination is
likely); and
(5) Nonintegrated mills (at these mills, TCP formation is unlikely;
because some wastepaper is used at a number of these mills, PCP
contamination is possible).
As shown in Tables VIII-51 and VIII-52, wastewaters from mills where
chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp have
higher levels of TCP than wastewaters from other groups of mills.
Tables VIII-53 and VIII-54 show that wastewaters from mills where
wastepaper is used have higher PCP levels than wastewaters from other
groups of mills.
Efforts to characterize the distributional form of the available final
effluent data included fitting the normal and lognormal distributions
to these data and using several power transformations to make the data
symmetric. Results of these analyses showed that it was inappropriate
to apply parametric methods (i.e., methods that assume the data follow
a particular distributional form) to the data. Therefore,
nonparametric methods were used to compute estimated 99th percentiles.
In this analysis, data reported as less than minimum reportable
concentrations (MRC) were set equal to the MRC.
The 99th percentile (Q99) is defined as the observation numbered
closest to .99N. That is,
Q,, = X (.99N) if .99N is an integer
= X ([.99N]+1) if .99N is not an integer,
493
-------
TABLE VIII-51
SUMMARY OF UNCORRECTED TRICHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE VERIFICATION AND LONG-TERM SAMPLING
WERE CONDUCTED AND WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE NOT USED
Mill Number
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (|jg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration
Average
Range
Number of
Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
140014(b) 47
140014(c)
140021 8
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
030013 2
030020 3
030030 19
030047 9
046004 9
046006 5
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
110020 5
110032 1
110043 1
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
Not Detected
27-70
0-19
0-6
2-4
12-24
7-10
9
4-6
3-7
0-3
0-2
3
19
23
3
3
3
1
3
39
26
4
36-42
8-68
0-25
0-11
0-2
5
0
1
3-4
0
0
0-4
3
16
69
69
3
3
3
1
3
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) This mill biologically treats only a portion of the total mill effluent. Data shown are representative of
the secondary influent and effluent only.
(c) The final effluent data shown are for the total effluent, and are based on an effluent monitoring program
conducted by the mill.
494
-------
TABLE VIII-52
SUMMARY OF UNCORRECTED TRICHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE VERIFICATION AND LONG-TERM SAMPLING
WERE CONDUCTED AND WHERE CKLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE USED
Mill Number
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (ng/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
140007 3
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
030004 6
030005 1
030027 10
030032 10
030046 8
040013 152
040017 6
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
110087(b) 278
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT HTTLIZE WASTEPAPER
Not Detected
0-8
0-10
0-2
7-12
4-17
6-12
144-161
5-6
209-324
1
2
4
0
2
92
1
331
0-11
0-3
1-2
3-4
0
1-2
74-118
1-2
323-346
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) This mill is a high recycle facility and utilizes primary treatment only. The influent
data shown are for the influent to primary. The final effluent data shown are primary
effluent data.
495
-------
TABLE VII1-53
SUMMARY OF UNCORRECTED PENTACKLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE VERIFICATION AND LONG-TERM SAMPLING
WERE CONDUCTED AND WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE NOT USED
Mill Number
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration (|jg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
1400U(b) 37
140014(c)
140021 4
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
030013 1
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
020017 1
110020 10
110031 2
110032 2
120050(d) 17
Z. MILLS THAI DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAi-ER
Not Detected
9-55
0-11
0-11
0-2
0-16
0-5
0-5
11-25
33
16
19
23
29-36
8-21
0-22
0-7
0-1
0
0
0
3
16
69
69
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) This mill biologically treats only a portion of the total mill effluent. Data shown are
biological influent and effluent only.
(c) This mill biologically treats only a portion of the total mill effluent. The final
effluent data shown are for the total effluent, and are based on an effluent monitoring
program conducted by the mill.
(d) This mill is a high recycle facility and discharges to a POTW.
496
-------
TABUE VIII-54
SUMMARY OF L'NCORRECTED PENTACHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE VERIFICATION AND LONG-TERM SAMPLING
WERE CONDUCTED AND WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE USED
Mill Number
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration ((Jg/l)(j)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
140007
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
030004
030046
040013
040017
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
015007
110087(b)
150011
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
052004
28
7
0
6
2
811
2
5-13
7-46
5-10
0-1
5-6
0-6
657-927
0-5
3-8
28
1
0
0
0
923
1
2-10
24-31
0-1
0
0
846-1076
0-3
0-1
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) This mill is a high recycle facility and utilizes primary treatment only. The influent data shown are
for the influent to primary. The final effluent data shown are primary effluent data.
497
-------
where X(.99N) is the (.99N)th ordered value in a sample of N values
ordered from low to high on the random variable X, and [.99N] is the
largest integer contained in (.99N). For example, if N = 200, Q99 is
the 198th ordered daily value, since .99N = 198. If N is 201, .99N =
198.99, so that [.99N] = 198, and Q9, = 199. [Computation of
percentiles is discussed in several texts. See, for example, R.A.
Fisher, Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 14th Edition, New
York, Hafner Publishing Company (1973) ] (209).
Assessment of_ Trichlorophenol Discharge Characteristics For Mills
Where Chlorine or Chlorine-Containing Compounds Are Used to Bleach
Pulp. The source of TCP at mills where chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp and where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides are not used, is the bleaching
process. At these mills, TCP levels are directly related to the
quantity of pulp bleached and, therefore, should not be affected by
water use. Therefore, discharge levels (on a mass basis) at new mills
with lower flows should be equivalent to discharge levels at existing
mills. A summary of available data is presented in Table VIII-51.
TCP discharge characteristics were assessed using the 99th percentile
estimated for each mill from verification and long-term sampling final
effluent data. The maximum 99th percentile estimate is 68 ng/1,
computed from 16 observations from mill 140014. This value was
compared to data submitted by industry representatives and was not
exceeded by any other value.
The Agency also assessed TCP discharge characteristics of indirect
discharging mills where chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds are
used to bleach pulp. EPA determined that some treatment of TCP occurs
in biological systems. Data from mill 140014 were used in this
analysis. Table VIII-51 presents a summary of these data, which were
obtained during the verification and long-term sampling programs. The
discharge level for direct dischargers (68 ng/1) was adjusted upward
to reflect the level of TCP present after biological treatment [i.e.,
EPA determined that 17 percent removal of TCP occurred during
verification sampling at mill 140014: (47 *g/l - 39 ng/l)/(47 ng/1) =
17 percent]. This results in a discharge" level of 82 ng/l for
indirect discharging mills where chlorine or chlorine-containing
compounds are used to bleach pulp and where chlorophenolic-containing
biocides are not used. As discussed previously, TCP levels are
directly related to the quantity of pulp bleached and should not be
affected by water use. Therefore, discharge levels (on a mass basis)
at new mills should be equivalent to discharge levels at existing
mills. Data submitted by industry representatives (see Table VIII-55)
shows that this level was not exceeded.
Assessment of_ Pentachlorophenol Discharge Characteristics For Mills
Where Wastepaper j^s Used. The source of PCP at mills where
wastepapers are processed and chlorophenolic - containing biocides are
not used is raw material contamination. At these mills, PCP levels
are directly related to the quantity of wastepaper processed and,
therefore, should not be affected by water use. Therefore, discharge
levels on a mass basis at new mills with lower flows should be
498
-------
TABLE VIII-55
SUMMARY OF CORRECTED TRICHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE NOT USED
NCASI DATA
Mill Identification
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (|Jg/l)(a)
Number of
Observations
Average
12.1
13.7
21.0
11.0
14.1
9.2
10.
66,
A
C
D
E
F
G
I
K
L 12.8
MOO
N 10.5
0(b)
P
QUO
R
S
T
A-100 18.0
B-100 31.5
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data.
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data.
9.0
14.1
23.9
3.2
Range
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
10.5-13.6
12.1-15.3
13.9-28.0
8.4-13.5
13.2-14.9
8.3-10.1
8.6-11.8
60.5-73.2
12.8
10.2-10.8
7.8-10.1
4.0-24.1
20.6-27.2
3.1-3.3
12.4-25.4
24.1-37.8
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
13
11
Final Effluent
Concentration (ng/l)(a)
Average
Range
Number of
Observations
9.2
12.0
6.3
4.0
1.0
6.2
6.6
0.1
3.7
3.3
6.5
1.6
1.2
1.1
5.5
23.7
7.2-11.7
10.5-13.6
1.3-8.3
2.9-7.4
0.4-1.9
5.3-7.5
1.7-10.6
0.0-0.7
2.7-5.0
1.4-5.2
5.0-8.5
0.0-5.3
0.8-1.9
0.2-1.9
0.8-25.4
16.4-27.1
9
10
10
10
9
10
10
10
8
10
10
10
10
10
63
36
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) Mill biologically treat! only a portion of the total mill effluent.
Data were not representative of total Bill effluent and were eliminated from the data base.
499
-------
TABLE VIII-56
SUMMARY OF CORRECTED TRICHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE USED
NCASI DATA
Mill Identification
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1.
2.
MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
40.0
3.7
6.9
11.6
28.6-51.3
3.0-4.4
6.9
11.2-12.0
23.8
2.0
6.2
11.6
18.9-32.4
0.7-4.9
3.9-8.8
8.8-15.6
10
10
10
8
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
500
-------
equivalent to discharge levels at existing mills. A summary of the
available data is presented in Table VIII-53. As with TCP, PCP
discharge characteristics were assessed using the 99th percentile
estimated for each mill from verification and long-term sampling final
effluent data. The maximum 99th percentile estimate is 22 ug/1,
computed from 69 observations from mill 140021. Industry
representatives did not submit final effluent data for mills where
wastepaper is processed (see Table VI I 1-57).
Discharge characteristics of indirect discharging mills were also
assessed to reflect the treatability of PCP in biological systems.
Data from mill 140014 were used in this analysis. Table VIII-53
presents a summary of the data, which were obtained during the
verification program. The maximum discharge level for direct
dischargers (22 *g/l) was adjusted upward to reflect the level of PCP
present after biological treatment [i.e., EPA determined that 11
percent removal of PCP occurred at mill 140014 during verification
sampling: (37 ».g/l - 33 ».g/l)/(37 *g/l) = 11 percent]. This results
in a level of 25 *g/l for indirect discharging mills where wastepaper
is processed and chlorophenolic-containing biocides are not used. As
discussed previously, PCP levels are directly related to the quantity
of wastepaper processed and. should not be affected by water use. EPA
compared this level to data submitted by industry to determine if the
Agency assessment is realistic. EPA found that the discharge level of
25 *g/l was exceeded; a maximum value of 31.9 *g/l was reported for
mill IV (see Table VIII-57). The Agency then adjusted its evaluation
of the maximum discharge level characteristic of indirect discharging
mills upward to 32
EPA then reassessed its evaluation of the maximum discharge level
characteristic of direct discharging mills. The Agency adjusted the
maximum discharge level for indirect discharging mills (32 *g/l)
downward to reflect the degree of treatment that occurs through
biological treatment. This results in a level of 29 *g/l as the
maximum PCP discharge level characteristic of direct discharging
mills.
Assessment of_ Trichlorophenol Discharge Characteristics For Mills
Where Chlorine or Chlorine-Containing Compounds Are Not Used. As
shown in Table VI I 1-51, TCP has been measured at only very low "levels
(all measurements were less than 10 »«g/l) at mills where
chlorine-containing compounds are not used to bleach pulp and where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides are not used. Therefore, the
Agency has assumed that 10 *g/l is the maximum TCP discharge level at
these mills.
Assessment of_ Pentachlorophenol Discharge Characteristics For Mills
Where Wastepaper i^ Not Used. As shown in Table VIII-53, PCP has been
measured at only very low levels (all measurements were 11 *g/l or
less) at mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides are not used.
Therefore, the Agency has assumed that 11 ug/1 is the maximum PCP
discharge level at these mills.
501
-------
TABLE VIII-57
SUMMARY OF CORRECTED PENTACHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE CH10ROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE NOT USED
NCASI DATA
Mill Identification
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (MR/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration (|Jg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS THAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Datj
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
A
C
D
E
F
G
I
K
L
M(b)
N
0(b)
P
Q(b)
R
S
T
A-100
B-100
0.7
1.6
1.3
2.0
1.3
2.5
0.0
0.8
3.5
0.0
0.8
3.0
2.0
0.4
0.2
1.2
0.5-0.8
1.6
0.9-1.7
1.9-2.1
1.3
2.4-2.6
0.0
0.7-0.8
3.5
0.0
0.7-0.9
0.0-5.9
1.5-2.5
0.2-0.6
0.0-1.1
0.5-1.7
2
2
2
13
11
0.3
0.8
0.5
1.2
0.9
2.7
0.1
0.0
2.1
0.0
0.2
0.9
0.5
0.2
0.0
0.9
0.0-0.5
0.5-1.7
0.0-1.1
0.0-2.0
0.7-1.1
2.2-3.1
0.0-0.8
0.0
0.8-2.9
0.0
0.0-0.9
0.0-2.5
0.0-1.1
0.1-0.3
0.0
0.0-1.6
9
10
10
10
9
10
10
10
8
10
10
10
10
10
63
36
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
I(c) 6.9 6.1- 7.5
II(c) 7.8 6.1- 9.9
III(c) 7.9 5.6- 9.0
IV(c) 22.4 12.7-31.9
V(c) 9.5 6.4-13.8
VI(c) 18.6 13.9-23.5
VII(c) 15.0 10.4-19.6
VIII(c) 4.2 2.0- 5.5
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
(b) Mill biologically treat* only a portion of the total aill effluent. Data were not representative of total
•ill effluent and were eliminated from the data base.
(c) Data for mills I-VIII are froa untreated wastewater samples from mills that manufacture vastepaper board.
Most of these Bills discharge to POTWs. It is assumed that they do not bleach.
502
-------
TABLE VIII-58
SUMMARY OF CORRECTED PENTACHLOROPHENOL RESULTS
FOR MILLS WHERE CHLOROPHENOLIC BIOCIDES WERE USED
NCASI DATA
Mill Identification
Influent to Bio-Treatment
Concentration (pg/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
Final Effluent
Concentration lpij/l)(a)
Number of
Average Range Observations
MILLS TRAT BLEACH PULP USING CHLORINE
OR CHLORINE CONTAINING COMPOUNDS
I. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
B
H
J
V
MILLS THAT DO NOT BLEACH
18.4
16.0
8.8
4.1
1.9-34.9
6.8-25.1
8.8
3.7- 4.5
12.5
4.9
11.3
6.4
1.0-23.9
1.0-13.4
9.0-15.7
3.6-10.4
10
10
10
1. MILLS THAT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
2. MILLS THAT DO NOT UTILIZE WASTEPAPER
No Data
(a) Concentrations are adjusted to BPT flow.
503
-------
Tables VIII-59 and VIII-60 present a summary of the TCP and PCP daily
maximum discharge characteristics for each of the five industry
groupings.
Zinc
At groundwood mills, zinc hydrosulfite can be used for the bleaching
of pulp. Significantly higher quantities of zinc are discharged from
mills where zinc hydrosulfite is used than from mills where other
bleaching chemicals are used. In 1977, EPA issued BPT regulations
controlling the discharge of zinc from groundwood mills based on the
application of lime precipitation. The Agency determined that the BPT
zinc limitations are now being achieved at all existing direct
discharging groundwood mills through chemical substitution (sodium
hydrosulfite in place of zinc hydrosulfite). Therefore, the original
BPT effluent limitations for zinc ensure that only low levels of zinc
are being discharged from direct discharging groundwood mills.
EPA believes that application of zinc limitations and standards based
on the same maximum discharge concentration as BPT effluent
limitations will have the identical effect as the original BPT
regulations: sodium hydrosulfite rather than zinc hydrosulfite will be
used to bleach groundwood pulp. This would ensure that only low
levels of zinc would be discharged from both direct and indirect
discharging mills.
Therefore, for BAT and PSES, zinc limitations and standards were
determined as the product of (a) the maximum discharge concentration
that forms the basis of BPT effluent limitations for control of zinc
and (b) the flows that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations for
each of the groundwood subcategories. For NSPS and PSNS, zinc
standards were determined as the product of (a) the maximum discharge
concentration that forms the basis of BPT effluent limitations for
control of zinc and (b) the flows that form the basis of NSPS for each
of the groundwood subcategories.
Chloroform
The data used to assess chloroform discharge characteristics were
obtained during the verification and long-term sampling programs and
from industry comments on the January 6, 1981, proposed regulations.
The Agency's review of available data indicates that there is no
correlation between biological effluent and biological influent
chloroform. Table VIII-61 presents a summary of the representative
data; these data are plotted in Figure VII1-3 and show that chloroform
is effectively controlled by BPT technology when BPT effluent
limitations are attained, with the exception of mills employing pure
oxygen or deep tank activated sludge systems. The fact that mills
where volatilization is inhibited discharge higher levels of
chloroform suggests that air stripping is the removal mechanism.
504
-------
TABLE VIII-59
SUMMARY OF PENTACHLOROPHENOL (PCP) AND
TRICHLOROPHENOL (TCP) DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
FOR DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
PCP TCP
Mill Category (Mg/D (M8/D
1. Integrated Mills Where Chlorine is 11 68
Used to Bleach Pulp
2. Integrated (excluding Semi-Chemical) 11 10
Mills Where Chlorine
is Not Used to Bleach Pulp
3. Deink (excluding
Newsprint) Mills 29 68
4. Other Secondary Fiber
and Semi-Chemical Mills 29 10
5. Nonintegrated Mills 29 10
505
-------
TABLE VIII-60
SUMMARY OF PENTACHLOROPHENOL (PCP) AND
TRICHLOROPHENOL (TCP) DISCHARGE CHARACTERISTICS
FOR INDIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
PCP TCP
Mill Category (pg/1) (pg/1)
1. Integrated Mills Where Chlorine is 11 82
Used to Bleach Pulp
2. Integrated (excluding Semi-Chemical) 11 10
Mills Where Chlorine
is Not Used to Bleach Pulp
3. Deink (excluding Newsprint)
Mills 32 82
4. Other Secondary Fiber and
Semi-Chemical Mills 32 10
5. Nonintegrated Mills 32 10
506
-------
TABLE VIII - 61
SUMMARY OF UNCORRECTED CHLOROFORM
BIOLOGICAL INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS (pg/1)
FROM THE VERIFICATION AND LONG-TERM SAMPLING PROGRAMS
(CHLORINE BLEACHING FACILITIES ONLY)
Biological Influent
Subcategory/ Treatment
Mill Number System (a)
FACILITIES
MEETING BPT LIMITS
Average Range Number of
Observations
Biological Effluent
Average
Range Number of
Observations
Data Source(
Market Bleached Kraft
030005
030030
ASB
ASB
1,633
1,177
1300-2200
830-1600
3
3
17
7
12-20
6-7
3
3
(V)
(V)
BCT Bleached Kraft
030032
ASB
2,833
1400-4000
3
2
0-4
3
(V)
Alkaline-Fine(c)
030020
030027
030046
Papergrade
040018
Deink-Fine
140007
ASB
AS
ASB
Sulfite(d)
AS(c)
Papers
AS
1,081
1,400
963
3,100
4,190
43-1700
1100-1800
690-1100
1500-4700
670-9700
3
3
3
3
3
43
110
4
56
145
39-46
110
2-6
45-69
95-240
3
3
3
3
3
(V)
(V)
(V)
(V)
(V)
Deink-Iissue Papers
140014
140015
140021
FACILITIES
AS(e)
AS
AS
EXCEEDING BPT LIMITS
1,367
25
262
1000-1800
12-46
60-800
3
3
19
55
5
32
48-61
2-10
10-61
3
3
69
(V)
(V)
(L)
Dissolving Kraft
032001 AS
BCT Bleached Kraft
030C04 ASB
Alkaline-Fine(c)
030013 AS
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
647 360-900
877 580-1400
404 227-772
23
67 40-86
5-6
58
21-230
69
AS = Activated Sludge System
ASB = Aerated Stabilization Basin
CTAS = Deep Tank Activated Sludge System
FF = Trickling Filter
tb) V = Verification Sampling Program
L = Long-term Sampling Program
It) Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories
M) Includes Fapergrane Sulfitp (Blow Pit) and Pipergrjde Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories
le; Only pulp mill waste receives activated sludge treatment; data represents only that waste stream.
(V)
(V)
(L)
046004
046006
Papergrade
04C011
040017
AS
ASB
Sulfite
AS+TF
DTAS
320
250
2,033
4,867
320
110-360
1800-2200
1100-8600
1
3
3
3
42
3
573
380
42
1-5
530-620
130-600
1
3
3
3
(V)
(V)
(V)
CV)
507
-------
cc
o
u_
o
(C
o
600 -i
500 -
400-
FIGURE VIII-3
AVERAGE BIOLOGICAL EFFLUENT CHLOROFORM VERSUS
AVERAGE BIOLOGICAL INFLUENT CHLOROFORM
LEQEND
O MILLS MEETING BPT LIMITS
A MILLS NOT MEETING BPT LIMITS
cn
O
O>
i 300-
4
O
(9
O
J 200-
(9
4
(C
100 •
A
O
A
o
An O
0
G
O
1000
2000 3000
AVERAGE BIOLOGICAL INFLUENT CHLOROFORM
4000
5000
-------
Data from the verification and long-term sampling programs were
combined and are presented in Table VIII-61. The additional
chloroform data submitted by industry are summarized in Table VIII-62.
Only verification and long-term sampling data were used in this
assessment because industry data were generated using a different
analytical method. Industry data were used to determine if Agency
assessments are realistic.
Efforts to characterize the distributional form of the available final
effluent data included fitting the normal and lognormal distributions
to available data. Results of these analyses showed that it was
inappropriate to apply parametric methods to the data. Therefore,
nonparametric methods were used to compute estimated 99th percentiles
and resulting maximum day variability factors. These methods have
been described in detail earlier in this section.
EPA computed mill-specific maximum day variability factors based on
available long-term chloroform data. As shown in Table VIII-63, the
average maximum day variability factor for chloroform is 2.94. EPA
determined maximum anticipated chloroform discharge levels as the
product of (a) the average of the mill-specific maximum day
variability factors and (b) the maximum mill-specific long-term
average for that group of mills where BPT effluent limits are now
being attained. As shown in Table VIII-61, the maximum mill-specific
long-term average discharge concentration of chloroform is 145 ug/1.
This results in a maximum discharge level of 426 ug/1 (2.94 x 145 ug/1
= 426 ug/1).
EPA compared this level to data submitted by industry to determine if
the Agency assessment is realistic. The Agency found that the
discharge level of 426 ug/1 was exceeded twice; a maximum value of 450
ug/1 was reported for mill 8 and a maximum value of 610 ug/1 was
reported for mill 13 (see Table VIII-62).
Ammonia
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
Appendix A.
Substitution of a cooking liquor that does not contain ammonia, such
as sodium hydroxide, is anticipated to eliminate virtually all 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
509
-------
TABLE VIII-62
SUMMARY OF CORRECTED CHLOROFORM EFFLUENT DATA
SUBMITTED BY THE NCASI
(M8/D
Mill Treatment Number of
Number System (a) Average Range Observations
FACILITIES WITH BIO-TREATMENT MEETING BPT LIMITATIONS
8 AS 388 345-450 4
9 AS 288 235-315 3
11 AS 128 62-175 5
13 ASB 576 520-610 5
FACILITIES WITH BIO-TREATMENT EXCEEDING BPT LIMITATIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
10
12
14
0 AS
(OS
2
(OS
2
CCAS
AS
AS
DTAS
AS
AS
ASB
1018
1261
1688
1669
186
232
1179
81
398
160
340-1855
1040-1415
1405-2490
1260-2160
150-210
145-330
915-1350
30-125
360-420
40-275
5
5
9
9
5
5
5
5
4
5
(a) AS = Activated Sludge System
0 AS = Pure Oxygen Activated Sludge System
DTAS = Deep Tank Activated Sludge System
ASB = Aerated Stabilization Basin
510
-------
TABLE VIII-63
MAXIMUM DAY CHLOROFORM VARIABILITY , .
FACTORS COMPUTED USING UNCORRECTED DATA('aJ
Mill
Number
030013
140021
Number of Maximum Day Long -Term Does Mill Meet
Observations Variability Factor Mean (|Jg/l) BPT Limits?
69
69
Mean Variability Factor
3.97
1.91
2.94
58 No
32 Yes
(a)Data not adjusted based on BPT flow.
511
-------
industry. Existing biological treatment systems could be modified to
achieve ammonia removal through nitrification. A review of available
literature indicates ammonia removal on the order of 90 percent may be
achieved through the application of a biological treatment system
designed to convert ammonia to nitrate.(100)(117)(121)(122)(123)(124 )
Table VIII-64 presents predicted final average effluent levels of
ammonia based on nitrification technology for the semi-chemical,
dissolving sulfite pulp, and both papergrade sulfite subcategories.
Color
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.
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-36. For those
subcategories where highly-colored effluents are discharged, the
ranges of color levels remaining after the application of bi6logical
treatment are presented in Table VII1-65.
Anticipated final effluent color levels resulting from the application
of lime or alum coagulation are also shown in Table VIII-65. For
alum, EPA assumed that the entire effluent would be treated. Based on
the studies discussed in Section VII, the Agency determined that an 85
percent reduction in color can be attained through the application of
alum coagulation.
EPA assumed that only the more highly-colored process streams, such as
the first stage caustic extraction effluent and/or the decker
filtrate, would be 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
512
-------
TABLE VIII-64
PREDICTED RANGE OF AMMONIA FINAL EFFLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
Final Effluent(a)
BPT RWL Flow Ammonia
Subcategory kgal/t Ib/t mg/1
Semi-Chemical 10.3 0.7-3.4 8-39
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 66.0 1.3-6.3 2-11
Papergrade Sulfite 44.5 1.0-5.0 3-14
(a) As nitrogen.
513
-------
TABU VIII -65
SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED COLOR LEVELS
AFTER MINIMUM LIHK/ALUM COAGULATION
cn
Range of Color Levels
(Platiniisi Cobalt Unita}
Range of Color Levels
Treated by Line/Aim
(Platinuai CobaIt Unita)
Subcategory
Dissolving Kraft
v/Lime Coagulation
v/Aluai Coagulation
Market Bleached Kraft
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Aluai Coagulation
BCT Bleached Kraft
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Aluai Coagulation
Alkaline-Fine1
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Aliiot Coagulation
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
w/Liste Coagulation
w/Aluai Coagulation
o Bag
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Aluai Coagulation
Sf»i-Che«ical
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Alim Coagulation
Unbleached Kraft aud Semi-Chemical
w/Li«c Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
v/Lime Coagulation
w/Aluuj Coagulation
Papergr.ide Sulfite2
w/Liwt' Coagulation
w/Alum Coagulation
'includes Finer Bleachrd Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2 Includes I'apcrgrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) snbcategories.
Color Level Reduction
(Platinuai Cobalt Unita)
935-1710
935-1710
1040-2360
1040-2360
1 160-2040
1160-2040
430-1480
430-1480
190-240
190-240
350-2400
350-2400
2350-6400
2350-6400
Iheuical
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
2350-2400
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
Range of Anticipated Color
Levels In the Final Effluent
(PlaUnua Cobalt Units)
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
-------
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. EPA 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, EPA assumed
that lime coagulation would be 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, EPA 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-65.
Costs to achieve these color reductions are presented in Appendix A.
515
-------
-------
SECTION IX
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL
The best practicable control technology currently available (BPT)
generally is based upon the average of the best existing performance,
in terms of treated effluent discharged, by plants of various sizes,
ages, and unit processes within an industry or subcategory. Where
existing performance is uniformly inadequate, BPT may be transferred
from a different subcategory or category. Limitations based on
transfer of technology must be supported by a conclusion that the
technology is, indeed, transferable and a reasonable prediction that
it will be capable of achieving the prescribed effluent limits (see
Tanners' Council of_ America v. Train, 540 F.2d 1188 (4th Cir. 1976)).
BPT focuses on end-of-pipe treatment technology rather than process
changes or internal controls except where such changes or controls are
common industry practice.
BPT considers the total cost of the application of technology in
relation to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from the
technologies. The cost/benefit inquiry for BPT is a limited
balancing, which does not require the Agency to quantify benefits in
monetary terms (see, e.g., American Iron and Steel Institute v. EPA,
526 F.2d 1027 (3rd Cir. 1975)). In balancing costs in relation to
effluent reduction benefits, EPA considers the volume and nature of
existing discharges, the volume and nature of discharges after
application of BPT, the general environmental effects of the
pollutants, and the costs and economic impacts of the required
pollution control level. The Act does not require or permit
consideration of water quality problems attributable to particular
point sources or industries, or water quality improvements in
particular water bodies (see Weyerhaeuser Company v. Costle, 5907 F.2d
1101 (D.C. Cir. 1978)).
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Pollutants regulated under BPT are BOD5_, TSS, and pH.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE
The best practicable control technology currently available for the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory was identified as biological
treatment. This is the same technology on which BPT limitations are
based for all other subcategories of the secondary fibers segment of
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry that are subject to BPT
regulations issued in 1974 and 1977 (39 FR 18742 and 42 FR 1398).
517
-------
EPA also determined that wastewater discharges from the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers/ and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories are similar in
nature to discharges from the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
For these subcategories, the best practicable control technology
currently available was identified as primary clarification, which is
the technology on which BPT limitations are based for the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory.
Biological treatment was identified as the best practicable control
technology currently available for the corrugating medium furnish
subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory and the
cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory. Biological treatment is the technology on which BPT
limitations are based for all other mills in the paperboard from
wastepaper and the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategories that are
subject to BPT regulations issued in 1974 and 1977 (39 FR 18742 and 42
FR 1398).
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BPT effluent limitations are presented in Table IX-1.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF BPT
The Clean Water Act requires the establishment of BCT limitations for
industry subcategories from which conventional pollutants are
discharged. In order to develop BCT limitations, a base level BPT
determination is desirable because the "cost-reasonableness test",
required as part of the BCT determination, rests on the incremental
cost of removal of BOD5. and TSS from BPT to BCT.
As discussed in Section IV, 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. Additionally, as a
result of comments received on the proposed rule, two subcategories
were segmented to reflect raw waste load differences resulting from
the types of raw material furnish used. EPA established the
corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory to account for the higher raw waste loads that
result from the processing of recycled corrugating medium. The cotton
fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory
was established to account for the higher raw waste loadings typical
of nonintegrated mills where significant quantities of cotton fibers
(equal to or greater than four percent of the total product) are used
in the production of fine papers.
To provide uniform national BPT effluent limitations for all segments
of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry and to aid in development
of BCT limitations, the Agency established BPT effluent limitations
for the wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-lightweight papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
518
-------
TAR1.E IX-1
Bl'1 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
CONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(kf Akg or lhs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum 30-Day Average
Siibcalegory _ _ BOD5 TSS
Secondary Fibers Segment
Maxiaum Day
BODS TSS
cn
Paperhoard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
N?".i-D^p8rated Segment
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
o Cotlon Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrat ed-Lightweight Tapers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintcgrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Noninteg rated- Paper hoard
2.8
2.3
9.1
4.6
5.8
13. 1
5.7
lt.lt
17.4
9.2
10.8
24.3
13.2
20.9
16.3
3.6
10.6
16.7
13.0
2.8
24.1
38.0
29.6
6.5
21.6
34.2
26.6
5.R
BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NONCONTINIIOUS DISCHARGERS
Suhcalegory
Annual Average
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
" TSS
Secondary _F^be_rs Segment
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wrf.vtcpapcr-Molded Products
Non i ii leg ra t ed_Segjneii t
Nunintpgratrd Fine Papers
o Cotlon Fiber Furnish
Non integrated-Li ghtwei ght Pape rs
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Noninlegratcd-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Noninlrgraled-Paperboan)
5.1
7.2
Maximum 30-Day Average
(mg_/l)
BOU5 TSS
Maximum Day
_
BOD5
TSS
i i sh
1.6 2.1
J . 3 3.2
93
27
153
66
189
51
306
122
•S2
74
99
138
7.4
11.6
9. 1
2.0
6.0
9.5
7.4
1 .6
65
65
65
65
52
52
52
52
118
118
118
118
106
106
106
106
-------
subcategories. Additionally, EPA amended the existing BPT limitations
for the paperboard from wastepaper and the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategories.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Biological treatment was identified as the best practicable control
technology currently available for the wastepaper-molded products
subcategory, the corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the
paperboard from wastepaper subcategory, and the cotton fiber furnish
subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. The
long-term average BPT BOD£ final effluent concentrations for the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory and the corrugating medium
furnish subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory were
developed from the equation presented in Section VIII that relates the
final effluent BODjj concentration to the raw waste BOD5. concentration
entering a biological treatment system. This relationship is based on
biological treatment system performance at those mills used to
establish BPT effluent limitations for the major portions of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry.
The BPT BOD!5 effluent limitation promulgated for the nonintegrated-
fine papers subcategory in 1977 is much less stringent than BODS^
limitations established for other subcategories with comparable BOD!>
raw waste characteristics. Therefore, EPA did not base the long-term"
average BPT BOD5^ final effluent concentration for the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory on
the relationship between BODj[ final effluent concentration and BODi>
raw waste concentration discussed above. Rather, the long-term
average BPT BODI5 final effluent concentration for this new subdivision
was developed by applying the same percent reduction of BOD5. that
forms the basis of BPT effluent limitations for all other mills in the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory.
As discussed in Section VIII, a relationship was also developed which
predicts the anticipated final effluent TSS concentration resulting
from biological treatment of wastewaters discharged from pulp, paper,
and paperboard mills. This relationship is based on BPT effluent
limitations promulgated in 1977 for a major portion of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry. EPA based the long-term average BPT
TSS final effluent concentrations for the wastepaper-molded products
subcategory, the corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the
paperboard from wastepaper, and the cotton fiber furnish subdivision
of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory on this relationship.
Long-term average BODi> and TSS final effluent mass loads were
calculated by multiplying attainable final effluent concentrations by
the effluent flow rates characteristic of each
subcategory/subdivision.
In making the decision to base BPT effluent limitations for the new
subcategory and the two new subdivisions mentioned above on biological
treatment, the Agency determined that biological treatment is
520
-------
available and is now employed at many mills in the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory, the corrugating medium furnish subdivision of
the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory, and the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. For
the wastepaper-molded products subcategory and the corrugating medium
furnish subdivision of the paperboard from wastepaper subcategory, BPT
limitations are based on the ability of biological systems to treat
the same pollutants (BODj[ and TSS) to levels representative of BPT
effluent limitations established for other subcategories with
comparable BODj[ raw waste characteristics. For the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, BPT
limitations are based on the ability of biological treatment to remove
the same pollutants (BOD£ and TSS) to the same degree as occurs at all
other mills in the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory.
When applied at mills in the wastepaper-molded subcategory, the
corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory, and the cotton-fiber furnish subdivision of
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory, biological treatment is
capable of attaining the BPT effluent limitations presented in Table
IX-1 .
Primary treatment was identified as the best practicable control
technology currently available for the nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-
paperboard subcategories. The wastewater characteristics of these
three nonintegrated subcategories are similiar in nature to those of
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. Long-term average BPT
final effluent BOD!> and TSS concentrations were transferred from the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory to the nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, norrintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories. Long-term average final
effluent loads were calculated by multiplying attainable final
effluent concentrations by the effluent flow rates characteristic of
these subcategories.
The Agency determined that primary treatment is available and could be
employed at mills in the three new nonintegrated subcategories. Raw
waste characteristics at mills in the nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, nonintegrated-lightweight papers, and nonintegrated-
paperboard subcategories are comparable to those at mills in the
nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. The BPT limitations are
based on the ability of primary clarification to treat the same
pollutants (BOD!> and TSS) to the same levels as now occurs at mills in
the nonintegrated-tissue papers subcategory. When applied at mills in
the nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and the nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories,
primary treatment is capable of attaining the BPT effluent limitations
presented in IX-1.
BPT maximum 30-day and maximum day effluent limitations were
determined by multiplying long-term average effluent limitations by
521
-------
appropriate variability factors developed in the 1974 and 1977 BPT
rulemaking (see Table IX-2).
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
EPA anticipates that only one of the six subcategories for which new
or revised BPT limitations were established will incur compliance
costs. Four mills in the wastepaper-molded products subcategory are
expected to invest a total of $6.01 million and incur total annual
costs of $1.84 million (1978 dollars).
Upon compliance with BPT effluent limitations for the four new
subcategories, the Agency estimates that conventional pollutant
removals from industry raw waste discharges will be 3.5 million kg/yr
(7.7 million Ibs/yr) of BOD5_ and 13.5 million kg/yr (29.8 million
Ibs/yr) of TSS. These represent removals of 66 percent BOD5_ and 89
percent TSS from the raw waste levels of these pollutants for the four
new subcategories.
EPA does not anticipate any additional pollutant removals from the
corrugating medium furnish subdivision of the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory as a result of this rulemaking since the
amended BPT effluent limitations are less stringent than the BPT
effluent limitations established in 1974 for the entire paperboard
from wastepaper subcategory. BPT limitations were relaxed for this
new subcategory subdivision to account for an increase in BOD5_ raw
waste loads since the implementation of BPT in 1977.
Existing permits for the two direct discharging mills in the cotton
fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory
are more stringent than the final BPT effluent limitations for this
new subcategory subdivision; therefore, EPA anticipates no additional
removal of conventional pollutants as a result of this regulation.
(Compliance with final BPT effluent limitations would mean that
conventional pollutant removals from raw waste discharges from the two
direct discharging mills in the cotton fiber furnish subdivision of
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory would be 165,200 kg/yr
(363,400 Ibs/yr) of BOD5_ and 691,400 kg/yr (1.5 million Ibs/yr) of
TSS. These represent removals of 53 percent BOD5_ and 77 percent TSS
from the raw waste levels of these pollutants for this subdivision.)
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act require EPA to consider the
non-water quality environmental impacts (including air pollution,
solid waste generation, and energy requirements) of certain
regulations. In conformance with these provisions, EPA considered the
effect of this regulation on air pollution, solid waste generation,
and energy consumption. The BPT regulation was reviewed by EPA
personnel responsible for non-water quality related programs. While
it is difficult to balance pollution problems against each other and
against energy use, EPA believes this regulation will best serve often
competing national goals. The Administrator determined that the
522
-------
TABLE IX-2
VARIABILITY FACTORS USED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BPT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS1
Maximum 30-Day Average Maximum Day
Subcategory BOD5 TSS BOD5 TSS
Secondary Fibers Segment
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish 1.77 2.18 3.54 4.36
Wastepaper-Molded Products 1.78 1.82 3.42 3.38
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 1.78 1.82 3.42 3.38
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers 1.79 1.76 3.25 3.60
Nonintegrated-Filter and 1.79 1,76 3.25 3.60
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 1.79 1.76 3.25 3.60
1 These variability factors were developed in the BPT rulemaking.(46)(48)
Variability factors for the Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated-
Filter and Nonwoven Papers, and Nonintegrated-Paperboard subcategories are
based on the variability factors originally developed for the Nonintegrated-
Tissue Papers subcategory because BPT is based on primary treatment for each
of these nonintegrated subcategories. Variability factors for the Cotton
Fiber Furnish subdivision of the Nonintegrated-Fine Papers subcategory and
the Wastepaper-Molded Products subcategory are based on variability factors
applicable to those Phase II subcategories where BPT was based on biological
treatment. Variability factors originally developed for the Paperboard
From Wastepaper subcategory were applied to the Corrugating Medium Furnish
subdivision of the Paperboard From Wastepaper subcategory.
523
-------
non-water quality impacts identified below are justified by the
benefits associated with compliance with the regulation.
Energy
EPA estimates that attainment of BPT will require the use of the
equivalent of 604 thousand liters (3800 barrels) per year of residual
fuel oil, an increase of 0.0017 percent of current industry energy
usage.
Solid Waste
EPA estimates that attainment of BPT will result in an additional 100
kkg (110 tons) per year of wastewater treatment solids. This is equal
to 0.0042 percent of current wastewater solids generated in the
industry.
Air and Noise
Attainment of BPT will have no measurable impact on air or noise
pollution.
52*
-------
SECTION X
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL
As a result of the Clean Water Act of 1977, the achievement of BAT has
become the principal national means of controlling wastewater
discharges of toxic pollutants. The factors considered in
establishing the best available technology economically achievable
(BAT) level of control include the costs of applying the control
technology, the age of process equipment and facilities, the process
employed, process changes, the engineering aspects of applying various
types of control technologies, and non-water quality environmental
considerations such as energy consumption, solid waste generation, and
air pollution (Section 304(b)(2)(B)). In general, the BAT technology
level represents, at a minimum, the best economically-achievable
performance of plants of shared characteristics. Where existing
performance is uniformly inadequate, BAT technology may be transferred
from a different subcategory or industrial category. BAT may include
process changes or internal controls, even when not common industry
practice.
The statutory assessment of BAT "considers" costs, but does not
require a balancing of costs against effluent reduction benefits (see
Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011 (D.C. Cir. 1978)). In assessing
BAT, EPA has given substantial weight to the reasonableness of costs.
The Agency has considered the volume and the nature of discharges, the
volume and nature of discharges expected after application of BAT, the
general environmental effects of the pollutants, and the costs and
economic impacts of the required pollution control levels. Despite
this expanded consideration of costs, the primary determinant of BAT
is effluent reduction capability using economically achievable
technology.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Toxic Pollutants
The Agency decided to regulate three different toxic pollutants
present in wastewater discharges from mills in the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry: zinc, trichlorophenol (TCP), and
pentachlorophenol (PCP). BAT effluent limitations were established in
all subcategories for TCP and PCP. Zinc is regulated in the
groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers, and ground-
wood-fine papers subcategories.
625
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE
The Agency selected substitution of chemicals as the basis for control
of trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol. Fungicides and slimicides
containing trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced by
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants.
In the groundwood subcategories, the BAT limitations for zinc are
identical to BPT limitations for control of this toxic metal. The
technology basis for BPT limitations is lime precipitation; however,
EPA found that mills in the groundwood subcategories have complied
with the BPT effluent limitations through the substitution of sodium
hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical, for zinc hydrosulfite.
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
BAT effluent limitations are presented in Table X-l.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF BAT
An evaluation of verification data indicated that pentachlorophenol
and trichlorophenol are not effectively removed through the
application of primary or biological treatment, the technology bases
of BPT effluent limitations for all subcategories. EPA selected
substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol as the basis for BAT limitations
because chemical substitution greatly reduces the discharge of these
toxic pollutants. Total removal is not achieved because some
wastepapers are contaminated with low levels of PCP and because low
levels of TCP are formed when pulp is bleached with chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds. EPA estimates that alternative
chemicals are currently being used at approximately 80 percent of the
mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, supporting the
Agency's decision to base effluent limitations on chemical
substitution. A survey of chemical suppliers shows that no measurable
increase in production costs can be expected as a result of using
biocides that do not contain chlorophenolics.
The presence of significant quantities of zinc in groundwood mill
effluents at the time of development of BPT limitations was due to the
use of zinc hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical. After promulgation of
BPT effluent limitations guidelines, the discharge of zinc from pulp,
paper, and paperboard mills was substantially reduced to levels below
treatability through the substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc
hydrosulfite. Regulation of zinc at BPT levels was, therefore,
selected as the basis of BAT effluent limitations.
In commenting on proposed BAT effluent limitations, some commenters
stated that tertiary treatment (i.e., chemically assisted
clarification or CAC) should form the technology basis of the BAT
effluent limitations for the toxic pollutants pentachlorophenol (PCP),
trichlorophenol (TCP), and zinc. Chemically assisted clarification
526
-------
TABLE X-l
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP1
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Croundwood-Thermo-Mechani ca1
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
0.0025 0.016
0.0019 0.012
0.0016 0.010
0.0014 0.0088
0.00058 0.00053
0.00058 0.00053
0.0012 0.000^3
0.00064 0.00059
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.019
0.019
0.019
0.021
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0069
0.0030 0.0010
0.0030 0.0011
0.00087 0.00030
0.00087 0.00030
0.0026 0.00088
0.0017 0.00060
NA
.VA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
.VA
NA
NA
*
0.26
0.30
0.27
NA
NA
VA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fiae Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Non Integra ted-Paperboard
0.0018
0.0051
0.0028
0.0059
0.0093
0.0072
0.0016
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0 . 0025
0.00054
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP = 0.0036 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
NA = Not applicable.
527
-------
TABLE \'-1 (continued)
BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
NONCONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(concentrations rag/1)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Non in teg rated- Paperboard
PCP1
(0.011H55.D/Y
(0.011)(41.6)/Y
(0.011)(35.4)/Y
(0.011)(30.9)/Y
(0.011)(12.6)/Y
(0.011)(12.6)/Y
(0.029)(10.3)/Y
(0.011)(14.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.011)(21. 1)/Y
(0.011)(23.8)/Y
(0.011)(21.9)/Y
(0.029)(24.4)/Y
(0.029)(24.4)/Y
(.0.029)124. 4)/Y
(0.029)(25.2)/Y
(0.029)(7.2)/Y
(0.029)(7.2)/Y
(0.029)(21.1)/Y
(0.029)(14.4)/Y
(0.029)(15.2)/Y
(0.029)(42.3)/Y
(0.029)(22.9)/Y
(0.029)(48.7)/Y
(0.029)(76.9)/Y
(0.029)(59.9)/Y
(0.029)(12.9)/Y
TCP2
(0.068)(55.D/Y
(0.068)(41.6)/Y
(0.068)(35.4)/Y
(0.068)(30.9)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(10.3)/Y
(0.010)(14.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(66.0)/Y
(0.068)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.010)(21. 1)/Y
(0.010)(23.8)/Y
(0.010)(21.9)/Y
(0.068)(24.4)/Y
(0.068)(24.4)/Y
(0.010)(24.4)/Y
(0.010)(25.2)/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
(0.010)(14.4)/Y
(0.010)(15.2)/Y
(0.010)(42.3)/Y
(0.010)(22.9)/Y
(0.010)(48.7)/Y
(0.010)(76.9)/Y
(0.010)(59.9)/Y
(0.010)(12.9)/Y
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(21. 1)/Y
(3.0)(23.8)/Y
(3.0)(21.9)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable.
'•'•"Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.011)(12.67) exp(0.0!7x))/Y
TCP = l(0.068)(12.67) exp(0. 017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
"TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories .
""Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) ana Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
528
-------
(CAC) is an end-of-pipe treatment technology primarily employed to
achieve a further reduction in suspended solids beyond the levels
attained through the application of biological or primary treatment
only. No data were submitted with comments, nor was the Agency aware
of any data, that would allow the EPA to establish a relationship
between removal of suspended solids and removal of the three toxic
pollutants (PCP, TCP, and zinc). Therefore, the Agency was unable to
establish regulations for control of PCP, TCP, and zinc based on CAC.
Further, based on available data, the Agency determined that PCP, TCP,
and zinc can be effectively controlled through chemical substitution.
As discussed later in this section, limitations based on chemical
substitution will lead to significant removals of regulated toxics.
Thus, EPA based final regulations controlling PCP, TCP, and zinc on
chemical substitution.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BAT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Zinc
BAT limitations for zinc are identical to BPT limitations for control
of this toxic metal. Limitations are based on the maximum anticipated
discharge concentration of zinc after the application of lime
precipitation. As explained previously, the Agency expects that these
limitations will be attained through substitution of sodium
hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite in bleaching groundwood pulp.
Trichlorophenol
The Agency assessed TCP discharge characteristics at mills in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into account whether
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the manufacturing
process. EPA found that TCP discharges were significantly lower at
those mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used.
To determine the discharge levels of TCP that result from substitution
of chlorophenolic-containing biocides, the Agency assessed all
available data for mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of TCP were discharged from mills where
chlorine-containing compounds were used to bleach pulp than from other
mills. This is because low levels of TCP are formed in the bleaching
process at mills where chlorine-containing compounds are used to
bleach pulp. EPA determined the maximum discharge levels of TCP for
mills where chlorine-containing compounds were used in the bleaching
process and for mills where no chlorine-containing compounds were
used. Based on all available data, the maximum discharge
concentration of trichlorophenol at direct discharging mills where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides are not used and
chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp was determined
to be 68 ug/1. The maximum discharge concentration of trichlorophenol
at direct discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides
were not used and where chlorine-containing compounds were not used to
bleach pulp was determined to be 10 ug/1.
529
-------
Pentachlorophenol
The Agency assessed PCP discharge characteristics at mills in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into account whether
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the manufacturing
process. EPA found that PCP discharges were significantly lower at
those mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used.
To determine the discharge levels of PCP that result from substitution
of chlorophenolic-containing biocides, the Agency assessed all
available data for mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of PCP were discharged from mills where
wastepapers were processed than from other mills. This is caused by
low level PCP contamination of wastepaper. EPA determined the maximum
discharge levels of PCP for mills where wastepaper was processed and
for mills where wastepaper was not processed. Based on all available
data, the maximum discharge concentration of pentachlorophenol at
direct discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not used and where wastepaper was processed was determined to be 29
ug/1. The maximum discharge concentration of pentachlorophenol at
direct discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not used and where wastepaper was not processed was determined to be
11 ug/1.
Mass limitations for each subcategory in kg/kkg (lbs/1000 Ibs) were
calculated as the product of the anticipated maximum day TCP and PCP
effuent concentrations and the flows that form the basis of BPT for
each subcategory.
A more detailed discussion of the development of BAT effluent
limitations is presented in Section VIII.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
Other than costs associated with monitoring for TCP and PCP, EPA
estimates that there is no cost associated with this technology;
substitute chemicals are available at comparable costs. Since the
final BAT regulation does not require monitoring where facilities
certify that substitute chemicals are being used to control PCP and
TCP, EPA anticipates that monitoring will rarely be required.
EPA estimates that the total mass of regulated pollutants removed from
industry wastewaters that are discharged directly to navigable waters
will be about 13,700 kg/yr (30,200 Ib/yr) of trichlorophenol and 9,590
kg/yr (21,100 Ib/yr) of pentachlorophenol.
Zinc Removal
There is no cost or pollutant removal associated with this technology.
BAT limitations are equivalent to existing BPT limitations.
530.
-------
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act require EPA to consider the non-
water quality environmental impacts (including air pollution, solid
waste generation, and energy requirements) of certain regulations. In
conformance with these provisions, the Agency considered the effect of
this regulation on air pollution, solid waste generation, and energy
consumption. EPA anticipates that attainment of these limitations
will result in no increased energy usage nor will it contribute to air
pollution, noise generation, or solid waste generation.
531
-------
SECTION XI
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANT CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
GENERAL
The 1977 amendments added section 301(b)(2)(E) to the Act,
establishing "best conventional pollutant control technology" (BCT)
for discharges of conventional pollutants from existing industrial
point sources. Conventional pollutants are those defined in section
304(a)(4) (biological oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD5J, total
suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform, and pH), and any"additional
pollutants defined by the Administrator as "conventional" (oil and
grease; 44 FR 44501, July 30, 1979).
BCT is not an additional limitation but replaces BAT for the control
of conventional pollutants. In addition to other factors specified in
section 304(b)(4)(B), the Act requires that BCT limitations be
assessed in light of a two part "cost-reasonableness" test. American
Paper Institute v. EPA, 660 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981). The first test
compares the cost for private industry to reduce its conventional
pollutants with the costs to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs)
for similar levels of reduction in their discharge of these
pollutants. The second test examines the cost-effectiveness of
additional industrial treatment beyond BPT. EPA must find that
limitations are "reasonable" under both tests before establishing them
as BCT. In no case may BCT be less stringent than BPT.
EPA published its methodology for carrying out the BCT analysis on
August 29, 1979 (44 FR 50732). BPT and BAT limitations, NSPS, PSES,
and PSNS were proposed for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry on
January 6, 1981 (46 FR 1430). At that time, BCT effluent limitations
were also proposed. However, EPA was later ordered by the Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to correct data and methodological
errors in its BCT cost test and to develop a new BCT methodology (see
American Paper Institute v. EPA. 660 F.2d 954 (4th Cir. 1981)).
Revised BCT limitations were recently reproposed along with the new
BCT methodology (see 47 FR 49176, October 29, 1982).
This document does not address BCT limitations. (For a discussion of
control and treatment options known to be capable of reducing the
discharge of conventional pollutants in pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry wastewaters, see the January 1981 proposal and Development
Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standard's
for the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and the Builders' Paper and Board'
Mills Point Source Categories (U.S. "EPA, December, 1980
533
-------
SECTION XII
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
GENERAL
The basis for new source performance standards (NSPS) under section
306 of the Act is the best available demonstrated technology. At new
plants, the opportunity exists to design the best and most efficient
production processes and wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore,
Congress directed EPA to consider the best demonstrated process
changes, in-plant controls, and end-of-pipe treatment technologies
that reduce pollution to the maximum extent feasible. It is
encouraged that at new sources, reductions in the use of and/or
discharge of both water and wastewater pollutants be attained by
application of in-plant control measures.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
Conventional Pollutants
Conventional pollutants regulated under NSPS are: BOD!>, TSS, and pH.
Toxic Pollutants
Toxic pollutants controlled under NSPS, as for BAT, are
pentachlorophenol (PCP), trichlorophenol (TCP), and zinc.
Nonconvention_al Pollutants
No nonconventional pollutants are regulated under NSPS.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF NSPS
Conventional Pollutant Control
The technology basis for control of conventional pollutants under NSPS
is a combination of commonly employed production process controls and
end-of-pipe treatment of the type that forms the basis of BPT effluent
limitations (either primary or biological treatment).
Toxic Pollutant Control
The technology basis of final NSPS for zinc, trichlorophenol, and
pentachlorophenol is substitution of chemicals. Fungicide and
slimicide formulations containing trichlorophenol and
pentachlorophenol can be replaced with formulations that do not
contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc hydrosulfite, a chemical used to
bleach groundwood pulps, can be replaced with sodium hydrosulfite.
535
-------
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
New source performance standards for conventional pollutants are
presented in Tables XII-1 and XI1-2. New source performance standards
for toxic pollutants are presented in Table XII-3.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS FOR NSPS
Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
Final NSPS, like proposed NSPS, are based on commonly employed
production process controls and end-of-pipe treatment of the type that
forms the basis of BPT effluent limitations (either primary or
biological treatment). However, the Agency has modified the
methodology used at proposal to determine the conventional pollutant
final effluent loadings that result from application of these
technologies.
In establishing final NSPS, EPA considered a broader set of mills in
determining the raw waste flow and BOD!> reductions that will result
from application of in-plant production process controls. The raw
waste flows that form the basis of final NSPS have been demonstrated
at mills in every subcategory of the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry. The BOD!^ raw waste loads that form the basis of final NSPS
have been demonstrated in 23 of 24 subcategories. The Agency also
adjusted its method of calculating attainable effluent concentrations
of BODI5 and TSS to account for those situations where BODj[ raw waste
concentrations increase after the application of in-plant production
process controls. These modifications resulted in final NSPS that are
less stringent than if the proposed methodology were used. (This
revised methodology is discussed in detail in Section VIII of this
document.)
The end-of-pipe treatment systems that form the basis of final NSPS
are the same as those commonly employed to comply with BPT effluent
limitations but are considerably larger, especially in the integrated
segment. Therefore, they are more efficient in controlling
conventional pollutants. (For example, the detention time for
activated sludge treatment is 12 rather than 8 hours). These larger
systems are now employed at mills in many subcategories of this
industry. Although these larger systems are not employed at mills in
all subcategories, the technology is readily available. The Agency
determined that these systems can be designed, constructed, and
operated at new sources in every subcategory of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry and, in combination with commonly employed
production process controls, are capable of meeting the final NSPS.
The combination of reduced raw waste loads (attainable through the
application of commonly employed in-plant production process controls)
and more efficient end-of-pipe treatment systems (that can be designed
and employed in this industry) form the basis of NSPS. This
combination of technologies results in conventional pollutant
limitations that have not been achieved at existing mills in every
536
-------
TABLE XII-1
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Maximum
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Cheraical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within the range 5.0
30-Dav
BODS
8.4
5.5
4.6
3.1
1.8
2.7
1.6
2. 1
14.5
15.5
16.8
21.4
*
2.5
2.5
1.9
3.1
5.2
3.2
2.5
2.1
1.4
1.1
0.94
1.9
4.2
3.4
6.7
11.7
8.3
1.9
to 9.0
Average
TSS
14.3
9.5
7.6
4.8
3.0
4.8
3.0
3.8
21.3
21.3
21.3
21.5
*
4.6
3.8
3.0
4.6
6.8
6.3
5.3
2.3
1.8
2.3
1.4
2.3
4.9
2.6
5.2
9.2
6.6
1.5
at all ti
Maximum Day
BODS
15.6
10.3
8.5
5.7
3.4
5.0
3.0
3.9
26.9
28.7
31.2
39.6
*
4.6
4.6
3.5
5.7
9.6
6.0
4.6
3.9
2.6
2.1
1.7
3.5
7.8
7.0
13.7
24.1
17.1
4.0
—
TSS
27.3
18.2
14.6
9.1
5.8
9.1
5.8
7.3
40.8
40.8
40.8
41.1
*
8.7
7.3
5.8
8.7
13.1
12.0
10.2
4.4
3.5
4.4
2.7
4.4
9.5
6.0
12.0
21.1
15.0
3.5
*Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
Maximum 30-day average:
BODS = 2.36 exp(0.017x)
TSS = 3.03 exp(0.017x)
Maximum day:
BODS = 4.38 exp(0.017x)
TSS = 5.81 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product
'includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
zlncludes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
537
-------
TABLE XII-2
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS
NONCONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
Annual Average H*xl«ma 30-Day Average
(ki/kk« or lba/1000 lb«) (•«/!)
Subcateiory
Integrated Segaent
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Seal-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Seai-Cheaical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscoae
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite1
Groundwood-Therao-Mechanica 1
Groundwood-CMH Papera
Groundwood-Fine Paperi
Secondary Fiber* Segaent
Deink
o Fine Paper*
o Tinue Paper*
o Newsprint
Tissue Froe Wtstepaper
Paper-board From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Median Furnish
o Noncorrugating Mediua Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Producta
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightveight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
pH-Within
BODS
4.4
2.9
2.4
1.6
0.96
1.4
0.84
1.1
7.6
8.1
8.8
11.2
*
1.3
1.3
1.0
1.6
2.7
1.7
1.3
1.1
0.73
0.60
0.49
0.98
2.2
2.3
4.5
7.9
5.6
1.3
the range 5.
TSS
7.5
5.0
4.0
2.5
1.6
2.5
1.6
2.0
11.2
11.2
11.2
11.3
*
2.4
2.0
1.6
2.4
3.6
3.3
2.8
1.2
0.97
1.2
0.73
1.2
2.6
1.6
3.2
5.6
4.C
0.94
,0 to 9.
BODS
40
36
34
29
47
55
52
45
59
63
68
78
62
44
34
31
46
62
49
36
161
105
48
83
48
33
43
42
42
42
42
.0 at all tiaes
TSS
68
63
57
45
79
98
97
79
87
87
87
79
80
80
54
46
69
84
92
79
171
137
92
122
56
38
33
33
33
33
33
Maxiaua Day
(•I/O
BODS
74
68
63
53
87
101
97
84
109
117
127
145
115
81
63
57
86
116
90
67
298
194
89
154
88
60
88
87
87
87
87
TSS
129
120
109
85
151
188
186
151
166
166
166
151
153
153
104
88
131
162
177
151
328
263
176
234
107
72
76
76
76
76
76
*Papergrade Sulfite (See Equations in Table 1-4).
BOD5 Long-Tern Average = Maxiaun 30-day average -f 1.91
TSS Long-Tern Average * Maximun 30-day average * 1.90
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories
Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drua Wash) subcategorie*.
538
-------
TABLE XII-3
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
(kg/kkg or lbs/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory
PCP1
Maximum Day
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundvood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
0.0025 0.016
0.0019 0.012
0.0016 0.010
0.0014 0.0088
0.00058 0.00053
0.00058 0.00053
0.0012 0.00043
0.00064 0.00059
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
019
019
019
0.021
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.00087
0.00087
0.0026
0.0017
0.0069
0.0069
0.0010
0.0011
0.00030
0.00030
0.00088
0.00060
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*
0.17
0.21
0.19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Noointegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
0.0018
0 . 005 1
0.0028
0.0059
0.0093
0.0072
0.0016
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0.0025
0.00054
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP = 0.0036 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
"TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Suifite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
NA = Not applicable.
539
-------
TABLE XII-3 (continued)
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
NONCONTINUOUS DISCHARGERS
(concentrations rag/1)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
N'onintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightveight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
PCP1
(0.012)(50.7)/Y
(0.013)(36.6)/Y
(0.012)(31.7)/Y
(0. 014)(25. 1)/Y
(0. 015X9. 4)/Y
(0. 012)(11. 4)/Y
(0. 041X7. 3)/Y
(0.013)(11.5)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0.012)(59. 0)/Y
(0. 012X59. 0)/Y
(0.012)(65.7)/Y
*
(0.017)(13.8)/Y
(0.016)(16.8)/Y
(0. 016)(15. 4)/Y
(0. 045X15. 9)/Y
(.0. 036X19. S)/Y
(0. 044)(16. 2)/Y
(0. 045)(16. 3)/Y
(0. 065X3. 2)/Y
(0.065)(3.2)/Y
(0.107)(5.7)/Y
(0.155)(2.7)/Y
(0. 047)(9. 4)/Y
(0. 039X31. 1)/Y
(0.035)(19.1)/Y
(0.037)(38.2)/Y
(0.033)(66.8)/Y
(0. 037X47. 5)/Y
(0. 033X11. 2)/Y
TCP2
(0. 074)(50. 7)/Y
(0.077)(36.6)/Y
(0.076)(31.7)/Y
(0. 084X25. 1)/Y
(0. 013X9. 4)/Y
(0.011)(11.4)/Y
(0.014)(7.3)/Y
(0.012)(11.5)/Y
(0. 076X59. 0)/Y
(0.076)(59.0)/Y
(0.076)(59.0)/Y
(0.075)(65.7)/Y
*
(0. 015X13. 8)/Y
(0. 014X16. 8)/Y
(0.014)(15.4)/Y
(0.104)(15.9)/Y
(0.085)(19.5)/Y
-(0. 015X16. 2)/Y
(0.015)(16.3)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0. 023X3. 2)/Y
(0.037)(5.7)/Y
(0. 053X2. 7)/Y
(0.016)(9.4)/Y
(0.014)(31.1)/Y
(0.012)(19.1)/Y
(0.013)(38.2)/Y
(0. 012)(66. 8)/Y
(0.013)(47.5)/Y
(0.012)(11.2)/Y
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(13.8)/Y
(3.0)(16.8)/Y
(3.0)(15.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
'•'"Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.015X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
TCP = ((0.094X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
Vhere x equals percenc suliite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
•PC? = Poni.icalorophencl
''TCP = TrichLorophenol
•JInciu
-------
subcategory. This is because the more efficient treatment systems
have not been employed at mills in every subcategory where raw waste
loads have been reduced to the levels on which NSPS are based. There
is no reason why the NSPS end-of-pipe treatment systems would be less
efficient in controlling the conventional pollutant raw waste
concentrations that result from implementation of in-plant controls
than if these controls were not employed. Therefore, the fact that in
some subcategories there is no mill that currently meets final NSPS
does not mean that the technologies which form the basis of NSPS are
not demonstrated. In fact, final NSPS have been attained at mills
where every major pulping and bleaching process (bleached kraft,
unbleached kraft, groundwood, semi-chemical, sulfite, deink, and other
secondary fiber) and papermaking process are employed. The
technologies that form the basis of final NSPS either are now employed
or are available for application in every subcategory of the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry and represent the best demonstrated
control technology for conventional pollutants.
Toxic Pollutant Control Technology
EPA selected substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol as the basis for NSPS because
chemical substitution greatly reduces the discharge of these toxic
pollutants from new sources. Total removal is not achieved because
some wastepapers are contaminated with low levels of PCP and because
low levels of TCP are formed when pulp is bleached with chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds. EPA estimates that alternate chemicals
are currently being used at approximately 80 percent of the mills in
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, supporting the Agency's
decision to base effluent limitations on chemical substitution. A
survey of chemical manufacturers shows that no measurable increase in
production costs can be expected as a result of using biocides that do
not contain chlorophenolics.
The substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite to
control the discharge of zinc ensures substantial reductions in the
discharge of zinc at new direct discharging groundwood mills where
zinc could be used as a bleaching chemical. This technology is
readily transferable to new direct discharging mills as EPA found that
substitution of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite has been
widely practiced at direct discharging groundwood mills to attain
existing BPT effluent limitations.
In commenting on proposed NSPS, some commenters stated that tertiary
treatment (i.e., chemically assisted clarification or CAC) should form
the technology basis of NSPS for the toxic pollutants
pentachlorophenol (PCP), trichlorophenol (TCP), and zinc. Chemically
assisted clarification (CAC) is an end-of-pipe treatment technology
primarily employed to effect a further reduction in suspended solids
than can be attained through application of biological treatment only.
No data were submitted with comments, nor was the Agency aware of any
data, that would allow the EPA to establish a relationship between
removal of suspended solids and removal of the three toxic pollutants
541
-------
(PCP, TCP, and zinc). Therefore, the Agency was unable to establish
regulations for control of PCP, TCP, and zinc based on CAC. Further,
based on available data, the Agency determined that PCP, TCP, and zinc
can be effectively controlled through chemical substitution. As
discussed previously, chemical substitution will lead to significant
removals of regulated toxics. Thus, EPA based final NSPS controlling
PCP, TCP, and zinc on chemical substitution.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NSPS
Conventional Pollutants
NSPS long-term average final effluent characteristics were calculated
by multiplying (a) effluent concentrations determined from analysis of
control technology performance data for end-of-pipe treatment systems
and (b) typical wastewater flow for new sources in each subcategory
after implementation of in-plant controls. For most subcategories, as
discussed in Section VIII, the NSPS wastewater flow was based on the
average of flows less than the flow basis of BPT effluent limitations.
Long-term average BOD5^ and TSS effluent concentrations were determined
from actual effluent data for operating mills in the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry. The development of final effluent concentrations
for each subcategory is discussed in detail in Section VIII.
EPA calculated"maximum 30-day and daily maximum mass limitations by
multiplying attainable long-term average final effluent loads by
appropriate variability factors as discussed in Section VIII.
Toxic Pollutants
Zinc. NSPS for zinc were determined as the product of (a) the maximum
discharge concentration that forms the basis of BPT effluent
limitations for control of zinc and (b) the flows that form the basis
of NSPS for each of the three groundwood subcategories. As explained
previously, the Agency expects that this standard will be attained
through substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite in
bleaching groundwood pulp.
Trichlorophenol. The Agency assessed TCP discharge characteristics at
mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into account
whether chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the
manufacturing process. EPA found that TCP discharges were
significantly lower at those mills where chlorophenolic-containing
biocides were not used. To determine the discharge levels of TCP that
result from substitution of chlorophenolic-containing biocides at new
sources, the Agency assessed all available data for existing mills
where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of TCP were discharged from existing
mills where chlorine-containing compounds were used to bleach pulp
than from other mills. This is because low levels of TCP are formed
in the bleaching process at mills where chlorine-containing compounds
are used to bleach pulp. EPA determined the maximum discharge levels
542
-------
of TCP for existing mills where chlorine-containing compounds were
used in the bleaching process and for existing mills where no
chlorine-containing compounds were used. Based on all available data,
the maximum discharge concentration of trichlorophenol at existing
direct discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not used and chlorine-containing compounds were used to bleach pulp
was determined to be 68 ug/1. The maximum discharge concentration of
trichlorophenol at existing direct discharging mills where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used and where
chlorine-containing compounds were not used to bleach pulp was
determined to be 10 ug/1.
Mass limitations applicable to existing direct discharging mills in
each subcategory were calculated as the product of the anticipated
maximum day TCP effluent concentrations and the flows that form the
basis of BPT for each subcategory. As explained in Section VIII, TCP
discharges are directly related to the quantity of pulp bleached and,
therefore, should not be affected by water use. Therefore, discharge
levels (on a mass basis) at new mills with lower flows should be
identical to discharge levels at existing mills. Thus, NSPS are
identical to BAT effluent limitations for TCP.
Pentachlorophenol. The Agency assessed PCP discharge characteristics
at mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into
account whether chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the
manufacturing process. EPA found that PCP discharges were
significantly lower at those mills where chlorophenolic-containing
biocides were not used. To determine the discharge levels of PCP that
result from substitution of chlorophenolic-containing biocides at new
sources, the Agency assessed all available data for mills where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides- were not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of PCP were discharged from existing
mills where wastepapers were processed than from other mills. This is
caused by low level PCP contamination of wastepaper. EPA determined
the maximum discharge levels of PCP for existing mills where
wastepaper was processed and for existing mills where wastepaper was
not processed. Based on all available data, the maximum discharge
concentration of pentachlorophenol at existing direct discharging
mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used and where
wastepaper was processed was determined to be 29 ug/1. The maximum
discharge concentration of pentachlorophenol at existing direct
discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not
used and where wastepaper was not processed was determined to be 11
ug/1.
Mass limitations applicable to existing direct discharging mills in
-each subcategory were calculated as the product of the anticipated
maximum day PCP effluent concentrations and the flows that form the
basis of BPT for each subcategory. As explained in Section VIII, PCP
discharges are directly related to the quantity of wastepaper
processed and, therefore, should not be affected by water use.
Therefore, discharge levels (on a mass basis) at new mills with lower
543
-------
flows should be the same as discharge levels at existing mills. Thus,
NSPS are identical to BAT effluent limitations for PCP.
A more detailed discussion of the development of toxic pollutant NSPS
is presented in Section VIII.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
The cost of attainment of NSPS varies by subcategory as discussed in
Appendix A. EPA estimates that compliance with NSPS will result in
incremental capital costs of $19.4 million and total annual costs of
$6.9 million (1978 dollars) for the period 1985 to 1990 based on the
projected production growth rate. (27) Substantial reductions of
BODS., TSS, and zinc are ensured while discharges of trichlorophenol
and pentachlorophenol resulting from the use of biocides will be
virtually eliminated.
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Non-water quality environmental impacts were considered and are
discussed in Appendix A. Energy costs and the cost of disposal of
solid wastes were included in Agency estimates of the cost of
attainment of new source performance standards. Energy use and solid
waste generation will vary at new sources depending on mill size and
the subcategory of the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry
considered. EPA anticipates that attainment of NSPS will have no
measurable impact on air or noise pollution.
544
-------
SECTION XIII
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
GENERAL
Section 307(b) of the Act requires EPA to promulgate pretreatment
standards for existing sources (PSES) that must be achieved within
three years of promulgation. PSES are designed to control the
discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with, or are
otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The Clean Water
Act of 1977 requires pretreatment for toxic pollutants that pass
through the POTW in amounts that would violate direct discharger
effluent limitations or interfere with the POTWs treatment process or
chosen sludge disposal method. The legislative history of the 1977
Act indicates that pretreatment standards are to be technology-based,
analogous to the best available technology for removal of toxic
pollutants. EPA has generally determined that there is pass through
of pollutants if the percent of pollutants removed by a well-operated
POTW achieving secondary treatment is less than the percent removed by
the BAT model treatment system. The general pretreatment regulations,
which served as the framework for the categorical pretreatment
regulations for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry can be found
at 40 CFR Part 403 (43 FR 27736, June 26, 1978; 46 FR 9462,
January 28, 1981).
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
EPA established PSES for control of the toxic pollutants
trichlorophenol (TCP) and pentachlorophenol (PCP) in all
subcategories. PSES were also promulgated for zinc in the
groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-
fine papers subcategories. Pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol have
been observed to pass through biological treatment systems. Control
of the toxic metal zinc is necessary to minimize sludge disposal
problems and pass through of this pollutant.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
EXISTING SOURCES
The Agency selected substitution of chemicals as the basis for the
control of trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, and zinc being
discharged to POTWs. Fungicide and slimicide formulations containing
trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced with
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc
hydrosulfite, a chemical used to bleach groundwood pulps, can be
replaced with sodium hydrosulfite.
PSES
PSES are presented in Table XIII-1.
-------
TABLE XIII-1
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR EXISTING SOURCES
(concentrations mg/1)
Maximum Day
Subcategory
PCP1
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundvood-The mo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
(0.011)(41.6)/Y
(0.011)(35.4)/Y
(0.011)(30.9)/Y
. 6)/Y
(0.
(0.032X10.3)/Y
(0.011X14.0)/Y
(0.011X66.0)/Y
(0.011)(66.0)/Y
(0.011X66.0)/Y
(0.011)(72.7)/Y
(0.011)(23.8)/Y
(0.032X24.4)/Y
(0.032)(24.4)/Y
(0.032X24.4)/Y
(0.032)(25.2J/Y
(0.032X7.2)/Y
(0.032)(7.2)/Y
(0.032)(21.1)/Y
(0.032X14.4)/Y
(0.082)(55.1)/Y
(0.082)(41.6)/Y
(0.082)(35.4)/Y
(0.082)(30.9)/Y
(0.010X12.6)/Y
(0.010)(12.6)/Y
(0.010)(10.3)/Y
(0.010)(14.0)/Y
(0.082)(66.0)/Y
(0.082X66.0)/Y
(0.082)(66.0)/Y
(0.082)(72.7)/Y
*
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
(0.010X23.8)/Y
(0.010)(21.9)/Y
(0.082)(24.4)/Y
(0.082)(24.4)/Y
(0.010)(24.4)/Y
(0.010H25.2J/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(7.2)/Y
(0.010)(21.1)/Y
(0.010)(14.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(23.8)/Y
(3.0)(21.9)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightveight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
(0. 032X15. 2)/Y
(0. 032)(42. 3)/Y
(0. 032)(22. 9)/Y
(0. 032)(48. 7)/Y
(0. 032X76. 9)/Y
(0. 032)(59. 9)/Y
(0.032)(12.9)/Y
(0.010)(15.2)/Y
(0. 010)(42. 3)/Y
(0.010)(22.9)/Y
(0.010)(48.7)/Y
(0.010)(76.9)/Y
(0.010)(59.9)/Y
(0. 010)(12. 9)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
^Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.011X12.67) exp(0.017x))/Y
TCP = ((0.082X12.67) exp(0.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
''TCP - Trichlorophenol
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
•"Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Suifite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
546
-------
TABLE XIII-1 (continued)
PSES OPTIONAL MASS LIMITS
(kg/kkg or lb/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-The rue-Mechanical
Groundvood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue Frosi Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Konintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Konintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP1
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
0.00058
0.00058
0.0014
0.00064
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.0033
0.0033
0.0033
0.0034
0.00096
0.00096
0.0028
0.0019
0 . 0020
0.0056
0.0031
0.0065
0.010
0.0080
0.0017
Maximum Day
TCP2
0.019
0.014
0.012
0.011
0.00053
0.00053
0 . 00043
0.00059
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.025
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0084
0.0084
0.0010
0.0011
0.00030
0.00030
0.00088
0.00060
0.00064
0.0018
0.00096
0.0020
0.0032
0.0025
0.00054
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.26
0.30
0.27
NA
NA
VA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
*Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0.00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP = 0.0043 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
'PCP = Pentachlorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
3lncludes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
^Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
547
-------
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF_ THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PSES
EPA selected substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol (TCP) or pentachlorophenol (PCP) as the basis for PSES
because chemical substitution greatly reduces the discharge of these
toxic pollutants to POTWs. Total removal is not achieved because some
wastepapers are contaminated with low levels of PCP and because low
levels of TCP are formed when pulp is bleached with chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds. EPA estimates that alternative
chemicals are currently being used at approximately 80 percent of the
mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, supporting the
Agency's decision to base effluent limitations on chemical
substitution. A survey of chemical manufacturers shows that no
measurable increase in production costs can be expected as a result of
using biocides that do not contain chlorophenolics.
The substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite to
control the discharge of zinc ensures substantial reductions in the
discharge of zinc at indirect discharging groundwood mills where zinc
is used as a bleaching chemical. This technology is readily
transferable to indirect discharging mills as EPA found that
substitution of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite has been
widely practiced at direct discharging groundwood mills to attain
existing BPT effluent limitations. EPA also determined that
substitution to the use of sodium hydrosulfite will not affect the
viability of indirect discharging groundwood mills.
In commenting on the proposed regulations, some commenter> stated that
tertiary treatment (i.e., chemically assisted clarification or CAC)
should form the technology basis of the PSES for the toxic pollutants
pentachlorophenol (PCP), trichlorophenol (TCP), and zinc. Chemically
assisted clarification (CAC) is an end-of-pipe treatment technology
primarily employed to effect a further reduction in suspended solids
than can be attained through application of biological treatment only.
No data were submitted with comments, nor was the Agency aware of any
data, that would allow the EPA to establish a relationship between
removal of suspended solids and removal of the three toxic pollutants
(PCP, TCP, and zinc). Therefore, the Agency was unable to establish
regulations for control of PCP, TCP, and zinc based on CAC. Further,
based on available data, the Agency determined that PCP, TCP, and zinc
can be effectively controlled through chemical substitution. As
discussed later in this section, PSES based on chemical substitution
will lead to significant removals of regulated toxics. Thus, EPA
based final PSES controlling PCP, TCP, and zinc on chemical
substitution.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSES
PSES for the control of pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and zinc
were developed using the same general methodology as for development
of BAT effluent limitations for control of these toxic pollutants.
-------
Zinc
PSES for zinc are identical to BPT limitations for control of this
toxic metal. Standards are based on the maximum anticipated discharge
concentration of zinc after the application of lime precipitation. As
explained previously, the Agency expects that this standard will be
attained through substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc
hydrosulfite in bleaching groundwood pulp.
Trichlorophenol
The Agency assessed TCP discharge characteristics at mills in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into account whether
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the manufacturing
process. EPA found that TCP discharges were significantly lower at
those mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used.
To determine the discharge levels of TCP that result from substitution
of chlorophenolic-containing biocides, the Agency assessed all
available data for mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of TCP were discharged from mills where
chlorine-containing compounds were used to bleach pulp than from other
mills. This is because low levels of TCP are formed in the bleaching
process at mills where chlorine-containing compounds are used to
bleach pulp. EPA determined the maximum discharge levels of TCP for
mills where chlorine-containing compounds were used in the bleaching
process and for mills where no chlorine-containing compounds were
used. Based on all available data, the maximum discharge
concentration of trichlorophenol at indirect discharging mills where
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used and chlorine-
containing compounds were used to bleach pulp was determined to be 82
ug/1. The maximum discharge concentration of trichlorophenol at
indirect discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides
were not used and where chlorine-containing compounds were not used to
bleach pulp was determined to be 10 ug/1.
Pentachlorophenol
The Agency assessed PCP discharge characteristics at mills in the
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry taking into account whether
chlorophenolic-containing biocides were used in the manufacturing
process. EPA found that PCP discharges were significantly lower at
those mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were not used.
To determine the discharge levels of PCP that result from substitution
of chlorophenolic-containing biocides, the Agency assessed all
available data for mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides were
not employed.
EPA found that higher levels of PCP were discharged from mills where
wastepapers were processed than from other mills. This is caused by
low level PCP contamination of wastepaper. EPA determined the maximum
discharge levels of PCP for mills where wastepaper was processed and
-------
for mills where wastepaper was not processed. Based on all available
data, the maximum discharge concentration of pentachlorophenol at
indirect discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides
were not used and where wastepaper was processed was determined to be
32.0 ug/1. The maximum discharge concentration of pentachlorophenol
at indirect discharging mills where chlorophenolic-containing biocides
were not used and where wastepaper was not processed was determined to
be 11 ug/1.
PSES are expressed as allowable maximum daily concentrations
(milligrams per liter). Final pretreatment standards include a
mathematical formula that accounts for flow differences to assure that
the standards do not discourage the implementation of water
conservation technologies at indirect discharging mills. Mass
limitations (kg/kkg or lb/1000 Ib of product) are provided as guidance
in cases where it is necessary to impose mass limitations for control
of pollutants discharged from contributing pulp, paper, and paperboard
mills to POTWs. Mass limitations were calculated as the product of
the maximum allowable concentrations and the flows that formed the
basis of BPT limitations for each subcategory. A more detailed
discussion of the development of PSES limitations is presented in
Section VIII.
COST OF APPLICATION AND EFFLUENT REDUCTION BENEFITS
Fungicide and Slimicide Substitution
Other than costs associated with monitoring for TCP and PCP, EPA
estimates that there is no cost associated with this technology;
substitute chemicals are available at comparable costs. Since PSES do
not require monitoring where facilities certify that substitute
chemicals are being used to control PCP and TCP, EPA anticipates that
monitoring will rarely be required.
EPA estimates that the total mass of regulated pollutants removed from
discharges to POTWs will be 3390 kg/yr (7460 Ib/yr) of trichlorophenol
and 2050 kg/yr (4510 Ib/yr) of pentachlorophenol.
Zinc Hydrosulfite Substitution
EPA estimates that the cost (1978 dollars) of implementation of this
technology will be $23,300 per year. Only one indirect discharging
groundwood mill was identified where zinc hydrosulfite was used to
bleach pulp. EPA estimates that the total mass of zinc removed from
discharges to POTWs from groundwood subcategory wastewaters will be
20,000 kg/yr (44,000 Ib/yr).
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act require EPA to consider the
non-water quality environmental impacts (including air pollution,
solid waste generation, and energy requirements) of certain
regulations. In conformance with these provisions, the Agency
550
-------
considered the effect of this regulation on air pollution, solid waste
generation, and energy consumption. EPA anticipates that compliance
with PSES will result in no increase in energy usage nor will these
regulations result in any increase in air pollution, noise pollution,
or solid waste generation.
-------
SECTION XIV
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
GENERAL
Section 307(c) of the Clean Water Act of 1977 requires EPA to
promulgate pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS) at the same
time that it promulgates NSPS. New indirect dischargers, like new
direct dischargers, have the opportunity to incorporate the best
available demonstrated technologies including process changes,
in-plant control measures, and end-of-pipe treatment and to use plant
site selection to ensure adequate treatment system installation.
Pretreatment standards for new sources (PSNS), like PSES, are to
control the discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with,
or are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The Agency
considers the same factors in promulgating PSNS as it considers in
promulgating PSES.
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
EPA established PSNS for control of the toxic pollutants
trichlorophenol (TCP) and pentachlorophenol (PCP) in all
subcategories. PSNS were also promulgated for zinc in the
groundwood-thermo-mechanical, groundwood-CMN papers, and groundwood-
fine papers subcategories. Pentachlorophenol and trichlorophenol have
been observed to pass through biological treatment systems. Control
of the toxic metal zinc minimizes sludge disposal problems and pass
through of this pollutant.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR
NEW SOURCES
As for PSES, the Agency selected substitution of chemicals as the
basis for the control of trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, and zinc
being discharged to POTWs. Fungicide and slimicide formulations
containing trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol can be replaced with
formulations that do not contain these toxic pollutants. Zinc
hydrosulfite, a chemical used to bleach groundwood pulps, can be
replaced with sodium hydrosulfite.
PSNS
PSNS effluent limitations are presented in Table XIV-1.
RATIONALE FOR THE SELECTION OF THE TECHNOLOGY BASIS OF PSNS
EPA selected substitution of fungicides and slimicides not containing
trichlorophenol or pentachlorophenol as the basis for PSNS because
chemical substitution greatly reduces the discharge of these toxic
pollutants to POTWs from new sources. Total removal is not achieved
because some wastepapers are contaminated with low levels of PCP and
553
-------
TABLE XIV-1
PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NEW SOURCES
(concentrations mg/1)
Maximum Dav
Subcategory
PCP1
TCP2
Zinc
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
(0.012)(50.7)/Y
(0.013X36.6)/Y
(0.012X31.7)/Y
(0.014)(25.1)/Y
(0.015X9.4)/Y
(0.012X11.4)/Y
(0.045X7.3)/Y
(0.013X11.5)/Y
(0.012X59.0)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0.012)(59.0)/Y
(0.012X65.7)/Y
*
(0.017)(13.8)/Y
(0.016X16.8)/Y
(0.016)(15.4)/Y
(0.049)(15.9)/Y
(0.040)(19.5)/Y
(0.048X16.21/Y
(0.049)(16.3)/Y
(0.072)(3.2)/Y
(0.072X3.2)/Y
(0.118)(5.7)/Y
(0.171)(2.7)/Y
(0.052)(9.4)/Y
(0.044)(31.1)/Y
(0.038)(19.I)/Y
(0.041)(38.2)/Y
(0.037)(66.8)/Y
(0.040)(47.5)/Y
(0.037)(11.2)/Y
(0.089X50.7)/Y
(0.093)(36.6)/Y
(0.092)(31.7)/Y
(0.013)(9.4)/Y
(0.011)(11.4)/'
(0.014)(7.3)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.092)(59.0)/Y
(0.091)(65.7)/Y
*
(0.015X13.8)/Y
(0.014)(16.8)/Y
(0.014)(15.4)/r
(0.126)(15.9)/Y
(0.103X19.5)/Y
(0.015)(If.2)/Y
(0.015)(16.3)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0.023)(3.2)/Y
(0.037)(5.7)/Y
(0.053)(2.7)/Y
(0.016)(9.4)/Y
(0.013)(38.2)/Y
(0.012)(66.8)/Y
(0.013X47.5)/Y
N'A
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3.0)(13.8)/Y
(3.0)(16.8)/Y
(3.0)(15.4)/Y
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Mill wastewater discharged per ton of product.
NA = Not Applicable
••''Papergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = ((0.015X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
TCP = ((0.114X9.12) exp(0.017x))/Y
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-site in the final product.
1PCP = Pentachlorophenol
''TCP = Trichlorophenol
3Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
4Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
554
-------
TABLE XIV-1 (continued)
PSNS OPTIONAL MASS LIMITS
(kg/kkg or lb/1000 Ibs)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine3
Uobleached Kraft
o Linerboard
0 Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Seoi-Cbesical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite4
Grouadwood-Therno-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMH Papers
Groiuidwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Corrugating Median Furnish
o Noncorrugatiog Medina Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegr«ted-FiB* Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Sonintegrated-Tlisue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Hlectrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
PCP*
0.0025
0.0019
0.0016
0.0014
0.00058
0.00058
0.0014
0.00064
0.0030
0.0030
0.0030
0.0033
*
0.00097
0.0011
0.0010
0.0033
0.0033
0.0033
O.U034
0 . 00096
0.00096
0.0028
0.0019
0.0020
0.0056
0.0031
0.0065
0.010
0.0080
0.0017
Maximum Day
TCP2
0.019
0.014
0.012
0.011
0.00053
0.00053
0.00043
0.00059
0.023
0.023
0.023
0.025
*
0.00088
0.00099
0.00092
0.0084
0.0084
0.0010
o.aoit
0 . 00030
0.00030
0 . 00088
0.00060
0.00064
0.0018
0,00096
0.0020
0.0032
0 . 0025
0.00054
Zinc
NA
NA
NA
NA
KA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
0.17
0.21
0.19
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Y = Hill waatewater discharged per ton of product.
NA * Not Applicable
*P«pergrade Sulfite Equations:
PCP = 0,00058 exp(0.017x)
TCP = 0.0043 exp(0.017x)
Where x equals percent sulfite pulp produced on-aite in the final product.
'PCP * Pentachlorophenol
2TCP = Trichlorophenol
3!ncludes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
•"includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit tfash) and Papergrade Sulfite
(Drum Wash) subcategories.
555
-------
because low levels of TCP are formed when pulp is bleached with
chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds. EPA estimates that
alternate chemicals are currently being used at approximately 80
percent of the mills in the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry,
supporting the Agency's decision to base effluent limitations on
chemical substitution. A survey of chemical manufacturers shows that
no measurable increase in production costs can be expected as a result
of using biocides that do not contain chlorophenolics.
The substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite to
control the discharge of zinc ensures substantial reductions in the
discharge of zinc at new indirect discharging groundwood mills where
zinc could be used as a bleaching chemical. This technology is
readily transferable to new indirect discharging mills as EPA found
that substitution of zinc hydrosulfite with sodium hydrosulfite has
been widely practiced at direct discharging groundwood mills to attain
existing BPT effluent limitations.
In commenting on proposed PSNS, some commenters stated that tertiary
treatment (i.e., chemically assisted clarification or CAC) should form
the technology basis of PSNS for the toxic pollutants
pentachlorophenol (PCP), trichlorophenol (TCP), and zinc. Chemically
assisted clarification (CAC) is an end-of-pipe treatment technology
primarily employed to effect a further reduction in suspended solids
than can be attained through application of biological treatment only.
No data were submitted with comments, nor was the Agency aware of any
data, that would allow the EPA to establish a relationship between
removal of suspended solids and removal of the three toxic pollutants
(PCP, TCP, and zinc). Therefore, the Agency was unable to establish
regulations for control of PCP, TCP, and zinc based on CAC. Further,
based on available data, the Agency determined that PCP, TCP, and zinc
can be effectively controlled through chemical substitution. As
discussed previously, chemical substitution will lead to significant
removals of regulated toxics. Thus, EPA based final PSNS controlling
PCP, TCP, and zinc on chemical substitution.
METHODOLOGY USED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PSNS
PSNS for the control of pentachlorophenol, trichlorophenol, and zinc
were developed using the same general methodology used in the
development of PSES effluent limitations for control of these toxic
pollutants. PSNS are expressed as allowable maximum daily
concentrations (milligrams per liter). Final pretreatment standards
include a mathematical formula that accounts for flow differences to
assure that the standards do not discourage the implementation of
water conservation at indirect discharging new sources. Mass
limitations (kg/kkg or lb/1000 Ib of product) are provided as guidance
in cases where it is necessary to impose mass limitations for control
of pollutants discharged from contributing pulp, paper, and paperboard
mills to POTWs.
PSNS mass limits for PCP and TCP are identical to PSES mass limits.
The allowable maximum daily concentrations for new source indirect
556
-------
dischargers were calculated by dividing the PSES mass limits by the
flow basis on which NSPS are based for each subcategory. As discussed
in Section VIII, mass limits for zinc were determined as the product
of the maximum zinc discharge concentration that forms the basis of
BPT limitations and the flows that form the basis of NSPS for each of
the three groundwood subcategories.
A more detailed discussion of the development of PSNS is presented in
Section VIII.
COST OF APPLICATION
The technology basis of PSNS is identical to the technology basis of
PSES — chemical substitution to limit the discharge of PCP, TCP, and
zinc. Therefore, there is no incremental cost attributable to PSNS.
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act require EPA to consider the non-
water quality environmental impacts (including air pollution, solid
waste generation, and energy requirements) of certain regulations. In
conformance with these provisions, the Agency considered the effect of
this regulation on air pollution, solid waste generation, and energy
consumption. EPA anticipates that compliance with PSNS will result in
no increase in energy usage nor will it result in any increase in air
pollution, noise pollution, or solid waste generation.
557
-------
SECTION XV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wishes to acknowledge the
contributions to this project by the E C. Jordan Co., of Portland,
Maine. Donald R. Cote, P.E., Vice President-Operations, Willard C.
Warren III, P.E., Project Manager, John C. Tarbell, P.E., Assistant
Project Manager, Conrad R. Bernier, Senior Project Engineer, Robert E.
Handy, P.E., Project Engineer, and Charles D. Cox, P.E., Senior
Project Engineer, were the key contributors in completion of the
detailed technical study and the drafting of the initial report on
which this document is based. Other personnel who contributed in the
project investigations were Neal A. Jannelle, Laurance C. Harbour,
Nancy E. Forrester, Deborah A. Luciano, and Edward J. Doyle, of the
E.G. Jordan Co. and Raymond H. Myers, Ph.D., Statistical Consultant of
Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and Roger A. Novack, Ph.D., formerly
of Gulf South Research Institute.
We wish to acknowledge the mill managers, engineers, and other
representatives of the industry without whose cooperation and
assistance in site visitations and information gathering, the
completion of this project would have been greatly hindered. The
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement
and the American Paper Institute BAT Task Group deserve special
recognition.
The EPA also thanks personnel in the EPA regional offices and state
agencies who supplied discharge monitoring report (DMR) data and
related information. Contributing to this effort were EPA staff in
Regions I, II, III, IV, VI, VIII, IX, and X and personnel in the
following state agencies: Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York,
Virginia, Delaware, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Kansas, Iowa, California Region I, and
California Region V (Redding Office).
The U.S. EPA Pulp and Paper Technical Working Group must also be
recognized for their valuable contributions:
Danforth G. Bodien U.S. EPA, Region X
Joseph Davis U.S. EPA, Region III
Jack Newman U.S. EPA, Region V
Gary Milburn U.S. EPA, Region V
Frank Early U.S. EPA, NEIC-Denver
Michael Strutz U.S. EPA, OR&D - Cincinnati
Michael Tiami U.S. EPA, Region IV
Charles Whittier U.S. EPA, Region VI
Robert Gross State of South Carolina
Vincent Carpano State of Virginia
Paul Didier State of Wisconsin
559
-------
Appreciation is expressed to those at EPA Headquarters who contributed
to the completion of this project, including: Louis DuPuis, Renee
Rico, John Kukulka, Henry Kahn, Richard Kotz, Allen Leduc, Dale M.
Ruhter, Edward Sharter, Gail Coad, William Webster, and David Gibbons,
Office of Analysis and Evaluation, Office of Water Regulations and
Standards; Alexander McBride, Fred Leutner, Alexandra Tarnay, Lynn
Delpire, Rod Frederick, Edmund M. Notzon, Monitoring and Data Support
Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards; L. Michael
Flaherty, Donald Ehreth, Patrick Tobin, and Joseph A. Krivak, Criteria
and Standards Division, Office of Water Regulations and Standards;
Richard Gardner, Nancy Othmer, Bruce Diamond, Gail Cooper, and Susan
G. Lepow, Office of General Counsel; J. William Jordan and Richard
Brandes, Office of Water Enforcement; Richard Raines and Mahesh Podar,
Office of Planning and Evaluation; and Matthew Straus, Office of Solid
Waste.
Within the Effluent Guidelines Division, Robert Southworth, Linda
Wilbur, Devereaux Barnes, John E. Riley, Robert B. Schaffer, Jeffery
D. Denit, Arthur Shattuck, Craig Vogt, Mark Mjonness, Teresa Wright,
Gregory Aveni, Maureen Treacy, and Lois Jennings made significant
contributions. The performance and long hours contributed by Carol
Swann are appreciated, as are the efforts of Glenda Colvin, Glenda
Nesby, and Pearl Smith.
We also wish to acknowledge Raymond C. Loehr, Ph.D., Professor of
Agricultural Engineering and Environmental Engineering, Cornell
University, a special friend of the Effluent Guidelines Division, who
helped us over the last hurdle.
5bO
-------
APPENDIX A
COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
Previous sections described the respective BPT, BAT, PSES, PSNS, and
NSPS.control options that were considered as the basis of regulations.
This section summarizes the cost, energy, and other non-water quality
impacts of the various control and treatment options. 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 EPA developed estimates of the cost of
implementation of the control and treatment technology options
considered in regulation development. 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. EPA developed control and treatment
costs that are representative of each subcategory of the pulp, paper,
and paperboard industry based on engineering estimates. Where
possible, the cost estimates were 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 order to assess the overall impact of the various treatment and
control options on the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry, EPA
developed model mill costs for 31 distinct subcategories and
sub-groups of the various subcategories. Costs were developed for
BPT, 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
were estimated in order to determine the economic impact of each
technology option. In order to develop costs, EPA developed model
mills that are representative of mills in each of the subcategories of
the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. In order to properly
reflect the effect of mill size on costs, as many as three different
model mill sizes were selected for the respective subcategories. EPA
based model mill sizes on the actual variation of size within each
subcategory; model mill sizes are presented by subcategory in Table A-
1 .
561
-------
TABLE A-l
MODEL MILL SIZES BY
SUBCATEGORY AND DISCHARGE TYPE
Subcategory
Indirect Dischargers (kkg/d)
Existing New
Direct Dischargers (kkg/d)
New
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi -Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-
Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thenno-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o 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
NA
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
1,361
454
680
454
454
454
454
91
454
454
562
-------
TABLE A-l
(continued)
Indirect Dischargers (kkg/d)
Subcategory Existing New
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
NA
45
145
635
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
36
45
145
635
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Direct Dischargers (kkg/d)
Existing New
9
36
45
145
635
18
45
136
91
204
32
195
907
9
45
91
32
163
907
9
54
181
5
18
41
9
36
68
9
91
454
45
68
136
227
27
45
227
45
23
45
1Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
563
-------
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
employed.
Location. Differences exist in construction practice, labor rates,
and energy costs due to geographic location. EPA based model mill
costs on national averages. Regional cost factors are presented in
Table A-2 for the purpose of adjusting model mill costs to be
representative of specific geographic areas.(210)(211)(212)(213)
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 characteristic 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 was evaluated over a representative range
of mill sizes for each subcategory.
Age. Mill age can impact the cost of implementing various process
controls. This factor was considered in the development of model mill
costs by accounting for the relative difficulty of installing and
replacing process equipment and effluent sewers.
The chronological age of a mill, however, is not always a good measure
of the relative ease with which controls may be implemented. 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.
564
-------
Region/State
TABLE A-2
REGIONAL COST ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Operation
and
Maintenance
Capital (210) (211)(212)
Energy (213)
Northeast 1.03
North Central 1.02
South 0.90
Plains/Mountain 0.96
West 1.09
Alaska 1.38
0.97
1.15
0.81
0.99
1.12
1.78
1.38
1.18
1.17
1.02
0.79
1.16
565
-------
Material and Energy Savings. Where production process controls were
considered, more efficient mill operation and substantial savings of
material and energy can result. Material and energy savings were
taken into account where appropriate and net costs of operation,
maintenance, and energy are presented.
Other Savings. There are other possible savings that may result from
implementation of production process controls in addition to savings
in materials and energy. Such additional savings, which are not
accounted for in the cost estimates presented in this document,
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. EPA based BAT model mill costs on the
assumptions that (a) production process and effluent treatment
controls that form the basis of BPT effluent limitations have been
installed and (b) 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.(48)
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 is
included. For those facilities where gravity flow is possible, costs
are considerably overstated.
Analysis of information obtained during the data request program
indicates that for two-thirds of the operating facilities, land
availability is not a problem. For that reason and because of the
extensive variability of land acquisition costs, the cost of land
acquisition was not included in cost estimates.
Raw Wastewater Characteristics. Flow, BODj[, and TSS loadings at
individual mills may vary from those of the model mill. These
variations can affect the cost of effluent treatment. However, the
model mill approach to cost development yields representative costs
within an acceptable confidence interval without requiring specific
engineering studies at each mill in the industry. It is likely that
the approach to achieving effluent limitations chosen by management at
566
-------
individual mills will vary from that considered in establishing the
specific limitations. EPA anticipates that mill management will
choose the technology that is most cost-effective for each facility.
Cost Estimating Criteria for Control and Treatment Technologies
EPA developed capital, operation and maintenance, and energy cost
estimates based on the criteria presented in Table A-3.
(211)(212)(213)(214)(215)(216)(217) The pre-engineering cost estimates
developed for this study are expected to have a variability consistent
with this type of estimate and are on the order of plus or minus 30
percent.
Capital Cost Criteria. All costs presented in this section, except as
noted, are in terms of first quarter 1978 dollars. Since construction
costs escalate, these estimates may be adjusted through use of
appropriate cost indices. The most accepted and widely-used cost
index in the engineering field is the Engineering News Record (ENR)
construction cost index. The ENR index value of 2,683 used in this
report was taken from the "U.S. - 20 Cities Average" for first quarter
1978. (214)
Equipment costs were based on supplier quotes, published literature,
engineering experience, and data request program mill responses.
Capital costs include allowances for lost production during
construction or for additional power facilities as warranted.
Additional costs such as engineering and contingencies were based on a
percentage of capital and vary from 15 to 25 percent depending on the
technology.
A total labor rate of $23.00 per hour was assumed for installation of
production process controls. This wage rate is based upon a $19.00
national average wage rate including fringe benefits plus a net
supervision rate of $4.00 per hour.(218) Construction and
installation cost estimates for effluent treatment were determined as
an appropriate varying percentage of capital.
Annual Fixed Charges. The annual fixed charges are those annual costs
that are directly related to the construction of pollution abatement
facilities. These charges commonly include such items as depreciation
of the control equipment and interest on the capital borrowed for
construction. In addition, such costs as maintenance materials, spare
parts, insurance, and taxes are expressed as a percentage of initial
capital expenditures.
The useful life of each structure and mechanical unit varies.
Mechanical equipment operating in demanding service conditions may
have a useful life of 5 to 10 years compared to a building which may
have a useful life of 40 to 50 years or more. Depreciation costs are
those accounting charges for the eventual replacement of a given asset
(equipment or structure) at the end of its useful life. Depreciation
of the capital assets may be by accumulation of digits (rapid
depreciation) or method of averages (straight-line). A NCASI report
567
-------
TABLE A-3
COST ESTIMATING CRITERIA1
1. Capital costs are as of first quarter 1978: ENR = 2,683
2. Annual fixed (amortized) costs are 22% of capital expenditures
3- Energy: Electrical $0.0325/kwh
Fuel $12.00/barrel
4. Operation and Maintenance:
Labor: General $10.35/hr
Solids disposal $ 8.00/hr
Chemicals: alum $110/kkg, dry basis
polymer $4.41/kg
85% phosphoric acid $0.44/kg
anhydrous ammonia $154/kkg, dry basis
50% sodium hydroxide $l65/kkg
100% sulfuric acid $56/kkg
1Sources of Cost Data:
Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April 1978. (211)
Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A.,
April 1978. (212)
Energy User News, Vol. 3, No. 32, August 7, 1978. (213)
Engineering News Record. March 23, 1978. (214)
Monthly Energy Review, U.S Department of Energy, March 1979. (215)
Municipal Sludge Landfills. EPA-625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Process Design Manual, October 1978. (216)
Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978. (217)
568
-------
shows an average depreciation rate in the industry of 16.5 years
(219)
Interest is that annual charge for financing the capital expenditures
for construction of a facility. Such financing may be through
corporate bonds, conventional lending markets, or tax-exempt municipal
revenue bonds. Municipal revenue bonds have lower interest rates
compared to corporate bonds. A NCASI report states that 44 percent of
the pollution abatement expenditures in 1976 were financed through
tax-exempt municipal bonds. (219)
Costs for taxes, insurance, spare parts, and maintenance materials are
often expressed as a percentage of the capital investment.
For the purpose of calculating total annual costs, EPA used an average
fixed charge of 22 percent of the capital expenditures. This figure
includes all of the above items. EPA realizes that these charges may
vary and are dependent upon several factors, such as the complexities
of the system installed, financing availability, insurance coverage,
property tax credits, spare parts inventory, and maintenance
materials.
Energy Costs. An average national electric power cost for large
industrial users (200,000 kwh monthly, 1,000 kw demand) was estimated
at $0.0366/kwh. This figure was derived from average cost information
by state and on electric rates from approximately 200 public and
private utilities.(213) Information concerning actual revenues from
approximately 200 public and private utilities indicated a cost of
$0.0281/kwh. (213) Based on that data, energy costs were estimated at
$0.0325/kwh.
Fuel for steam generation was estimated at $12 per barrel. (215)
Operating and Maintenance Labor. The average nonsupervisory labor
rate in the pulp and paper industry was reported to be $7.14 per hour
in February 1978.(211) Average total benefits for the pulp, paper,
lumber, and furniture industry for the year 1977 were reported as 34
percent of wages.(212) Although no industry-wide data concerning
supervisory costs were available, the proposed control and treatment
technologies under consideration are anticipated to require only
minimal additional supervisory labor.
A supervisory and benefits cost of 45 percent of the labor rate was
assumed. This results in a total labor rate of $10.35/hr.
Chemicals. Chemical costs were based on quotes from chemical
suppliers and chemical marketing reports. Many of the technologies
under evaluation include the use of chemicals, including alum,
polymer, phosphoric acid, sulfuric acid, anhydrous ammonia, and sodium
hydroxide.
569
-------
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT
EPA identified four new subcategories of the pulp, paper, and
paperboard industry (wastepaper-molded products, nonintegrated-
lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, and
nonintegrated-paperboard). In Section VIII, BPT was identified for
these subcategories. In this section, estimates of the incremental
cost to achieve BPT effluent limitations are presented.
For the nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories, BPT was
identified as primary treatment. At the direct discharging mills in
these three nonintegrated subcategories, in-place end-of-pipe
treatment consists of primary treatment (or its equivalent) or more
advanced treatment technology (i.e., biological treatment).
Therefore, EPA anticipates that the incremental cost of attainment of
BPT in these subcategories is zero.
BPT was identified as biological treatment for the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory. In general, at the direct discharging mills in
this subcategory, primary treatment or its equivalent is in-place.
EPA's estimate of the incremental costs for attainment of BPT effluent
limitations was based on the addition of a biological treatment
system. Major unit operations include (a) wastewater pumping, (b)
flow equalization, (c) nutrient addition, (d) addition of an activated
sludge basin with aerators, (e) flotation thickening with chemical
addition, (f) solids dewatering with chemical addition, (g) biological
sludge transportation to landfill, and (h) landfill of biological
solids.
The design criteria on which costs were determined for each of the
major unit processes are presented in Table A-4. The total capital
and total annual costs for compliance with BPT are presented for the
wastepaper-molded products subcategory in Table A-5.
BPT limitations were also promulgated for new subdivisions of the
paperboard from wastepaper and nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategories. As a result of comments on the proposed rules, EPA
obtained additional data relating to mills in these subcategories (see
(Section IV). The Agency determined that higher raw waste loads
result at paperboard from wastepaper mills where corrugating medium is
used as furnish; therefore, BPT effluent limitations applicable to
discharges from these mills were modified. As discussed previously,
less stringent BPT effluent limitations than were previously in effect
now apply to existing direct discharging mills in the paperboard from
wastepaper subcategory where recycled corrugating medium is processed.
For this reason, no costs are associated with attainment of these
modified BPT limitations.
Subsequent to proposal, the Agency reexamined the subcategorization
scheme for the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. As discussed
previously, EPA's review of data for the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory revealed that segmentation was warranted because mills
570
-------
TABLE A-4
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BPT ACTIVATED SLUDGE TREATMENT
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Wastewater Pumping
Design flow: 1.5 x average annual flow
Basis for power cost: 12 m total dynamic head, 70% efficient
Flow Equalization
Detention time: 12 hrs in concrete basin
Primary Clarification
Overflow rate: 24 cu m/d/sq m
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Secondary Clarification
Overflow rate: 20 cu m/d/sq m
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Activated Sludge Basin
Number of basins: 2
Loading rate (use larger value):
0.8 kg BOD5 applied/cu m/d, or
8 hr hydraulic detention time
Nutrient feed: BOD5 removed:N:P = 100:5:1
Aeration design requirements:
1.5 organic peaking factor
1 kg 0 /kg BOD5 removed
19 kg 6 /aerator hp/d
Length/width ratio: 4/1
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Sideslopes: 1/1
Dissolved Air Flotation Thickening for Biological Solids
Sludge loading rate: 10 kg/hr/sq m
Hydraulic loading rate: 46.9 cu m/d/sq m
Chemical dosage: 4 kg of polymer/kkg of solids
Solids Dewatering
Type: horizontal belt-filter press
Loading rate: 318 kg of dry solids/hr/m of belt width
Chemical dosage: 4 kg of polymer/kkg of solids
Primary/Biological Sludge Transportation
Haul distance: 16 km
Sludge content: primary and biological sludge at 30 percent solids (w/w)
Primary/Biological Sludge Landfill
Sludge content: primary and biological sludge at 30 percent solids (w/w)
Landfill design: normal landfill compaction and covering techniques
571
-------
TABLE A-5
COST OF IMPLEMENTATION OF BPT ACTIVATED SLUDGE TREATMENT
WASTEPAPER-MOLDED PRODUCTS SUBCATEGORY
Operation
Mill and Total
Size Capital Maintenance Energy Annual
(kkg/d) ($1.000) ($l>000/yr) ($1.000/yr) ($1.000)
18 891 81 11 288
45 1,542 113 19 471
136 3,015 176 41 879
572
-------
where cotton fibers comprise a significant portion of the final
product (equal to or greater than four percent) have higher raw waste
flow and BODi> than mills where only wood pulp is processed. In this
rulemaking, EPA established BPT limitations applicable to discharges
from these mills that are less stringent than for other faciliti.es in
the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory. The Agency anticipates
that there will be no costs associated with attainment of BPT effluent
limitations in the cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the
nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory because existing permits for the
two direct discharging mills are more stringent than the BPT effluent
limitations.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BAT OPTIONS
Toxic Pollutant Control Options
The Agency evaluated two options for control of toxic pollutants in
pulp, paper, and paperboard industry discharges. They are (a) control
of zinc at groundwood mills through the application of lime
precipitation and control of pentachlorophenol (PCP) and
trichlorophenol (TCP) through substitution of biocides containing PCP
and TCP with those that do not and (b) control of chloroform through
the application of additional aeration.
Option 1_. This includes the application of lime precipitation, the
technology basis of BPT effluent limitations, for control of zinc in
the groundwood subcategories and chemical substitution to control PCP
and TCP in every subcategory. The Agency determined that at all
direct discharging groundwood mills, BPT zinc limits are now being met
through substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc hydrosulfite as a
bleaching chemical. Therefore, the Agency anticipates that there will
be no incremental costs associated with attainment of zinc limits
based on this technology option.
The technology basis for control of PCP and TCP in all subcategories
is substitution to the use of biocides not containing these compounds.
Based on the results of verification sampling, process chemicals
containing pentachlorophenol were used at ten of the 60 sampled mills;
chemicals containing trichlorophenol were used at six of the sampled
mills. Correspondence with mill personnel indicate that: (a) at six
of the mills, PCP-containing process chemicals are no longer used and
(b) at four of the mills, TCP-containing process chemicals are no
longer used. Inquiries of chemical suppliers on the relative costs of
substitute chemicals indicate that no definable cost difference will
result from chemical substitution.
Option £. This technology option includes the application of
additional aeration at nine mills where (a) chlorine or
chlorine-containing compounds are used to bleach pulp and (b) closed
biological systems are used that inhibit volatilization of chloroform.
Table A-6 presents the design criteria for the additional aeration
step and Table A-7 presents chloroform control costs for the nine
mills.
573
-------
TABLE A-6
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR CHLOROFORM CONTROL
AT NINE MILLS WHERE CHLOROFORM
VOLATILIZATION IS INHIBITED
Earthen Basin
Loading rate (use larger value):
*0.8 kg BOD5 applied/cu ra/d, or
8 far hydraulic detention time
Aeration design requirements:
19 kg 02 BOD5/d/aerator HP
Sidewater depth: 4 m
Sideslopes: 1/1
Leachate collection
Synthetic liner
* Based on BODS raw waste load.
574
-------
TABLE A-7
COST FOR CHLOROFORM CONTROL AT NINE MILLS WHERE
CHLOROFORM VOLATILIZATION IS INHIBITED
Treatment
System/ Mill
Subcategory Number
Capital
($1,000)
Operation
and
Maintenance
($l,000/yr)
Energy
($l,000/yr)
Total
Annua 1
($1,000)
Oxygen Activated Sludge
Integrated-Miscellaneous
010010
010012
010015
010059
2,217
1,235
1,539
1,223
53
36
41
36
484
252
320
250
1,025
560
700
555
Alkaline-Fine and Papergrade Sulfite1
030051 and 040009 3,133
DeepTank Aeration
66
699
1,454
Dissolving Sulfite
Papergrade Sulfite
TOTAL
046002
046005
040017
4,622
3,897
1,581
19,447
85
76
42
435
1,075
895
332
4,307
2,177
1,828
722
9,021
Joint treatment.
575
-------
Nonconventional Pollutant Control Options
Technologies available for removal of nonconventional pollutants
include: (a) color removal by minimum lime or alum coagulation; and
(b) ammonia removal by biological nitrification or substitution of
chemical pulping bases. The method of developing cost data and the
costs associated with these respective technologies are presented
below.
Color Removal. Estimates of costs for color removal were prepared for
two alternative treatment technologies: minimum lime coagulation and
alum coagulation. Costs are presented in Table A-8 for both
technologies for those subcategories identified as having high levels
of color in effluent discharges.
Minimum Lime Coagulation - Minimum lime coagulation treatment for
color load reduction in the four bleached kraft, the dissolving
sulfite pulp, and the two papergrade sulfite subcategories is applied
only to highly-colored wastewater streams. These streams normally
represent only about one-quarter to one-third of total wastewater
discharge from a mill. The streams required to be treated would be
the highly-colored bleach plant wastewater (first stage caustic
extraction waste stream) and the screen room (decker or pulp mill)
wastewater. For the remaining subcategories (unbleached kraft,
semi-chemical, and unbleached kraft and semi-chemical), minimum lime
is applied to the total wastewater discharge because (a) the flow is
much lower for mills in these subcategories and (b) the color does not
tend to be concentrated in streams of lesser flow.
The costs for the minimum lime system are based on the following
items:
1. wastewater transfer pump,
2. mixing (in-line mixer),
3. lime feed system,
4. polymer feed system,
5. clarifier,
6. sludge holding tank with mixer,
7. lime mud dewatering system,
8. fluidized bed for lime mud incineration, and
9. pH adjustment following minimum lime treatment in those
cases where the total mill effluent is treated.
A wastewater transfer pump with ancillary piping transports the first
caustic stage effluent from the bleach plant to the minimum lime
treatment system. An in-line mixer combines the lime slurry with the
wastewater. For the purpose of the cost estimate, a lime dosage of
2,250 mg/1 was assumed. Wastewater then flows to a color reduction
clarifier. A polymer is metered into the wastewater stream prior to
the clarifier to aid in settling the lime precipitate. Other settling
aids (such as fiber fines) can also be used at this point in the
minimum lime process.
576
-------
TABLE A-8
COST FOR COLOR REDUCTION
FOR DIRECT DISCHAKGERS
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Dissolving Kraft
907 kkg/d
Lirae
Alum
Market Bleached Kraft
318 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1451 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
BCT Bleached Kraft
272 kkg/d
Line
Alum
726 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1179 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Alkaline-Fine
181 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
?26 kleg/rt
Liine
Alum
1089 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Unbleached Kraft
408 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
90? kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1361 kkg/d
time
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
5,591
13,039
2,100
5,752
2,880
7,886
5,145
14,129
1,897
5,054
3,4^0
8,996
4,545
12,018
1,380
3,678
3,450
8,199
4,350
10,423
2,724
3,48!
4,350
5,511
5,572
6,984
Amortized
Capital
C$l,000/yr)
1,230
3,031
462
1,313
634
1,809
1,132
4,095
417
1,155
759
2,073
1,000
2,781
304
83S
759
1,894
957
2,419
599
791
357
1,260
1,226
1,602
Operation and
Labor
(51,000/yr)
151
912
89
476
101
597
143
914
86
444
in
671
132
830
82
371
111
658
127
784
100
342
132
472
158
560
Maintenance
Chemicals
(Sl,000/yr)
867
3,520
174
912
278
1,561
1,070
4,163
146
676
** ">A
1,801
610
2,927
92
400
370
1,592
556
2,391
308
362
684
800
1,027
1, 198
Energy
($l,000/yr)
1,218
243
245
75
405
116
771
275
205
60
5-ij
134
875
205
140
41
545
122
SOS
173
355
38
781
68
1,166
95
Total
Annual
($1,000)
3,466
7,706
970
2,776
1,417
4,083
3,116
9,447
854
2,335
i , 733
4,679
2,617
6 , 743
618
1,650
1,785
4,266
2,445
5,767
1,363
1 ,533
2,555
2,600
3,578
3 , 455
577
-------
Subcategory and
Mill Size
Semi-Chemical
181 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
386 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Unbleached Kraft and
634 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
1361 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
2359 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Dissolving SulTite P
408 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
544 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Papergrade Sulfite2
91 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
408 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
907 kkg/d
Lime
Alum
Capital
($1,000)
1,366
1,927
2,337
2,943
2,833
3,581
Semi-Chemical
3,746
4,630
5,998
7,220
8,235
9,985
alp
3,750
8,835
4,470
10,477
1,230
2,989
3,270
7,151
5,235
11,466
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
301
434
514
665
623
813
824
1,056
1,317
1,658
1,812
2,303
825
2,033
983
2,419
271
678
719
1,646
1,152
2,660
TABLE A- 8
(continued)
Operation and
Labor
($l,000/yr)
81
225
94
299
103
341
121
418
167
573
215
723
117
661
129
748
79
317
108
584
144
827
Maintenance
Chemicals
($l,000/yr)
114
130
235
275
339
388
532
617
1,142
1,324
1,964
2,296
450
1,869
598
2,493
83
281
355
1,278
780
2,841
Energy
(Sl,000/yr)
141
19
278
31
390
39
613
56
1,293
102
2,257
163
645
137
850
175
120
32
500
100
1,100
200
Total
Annual
($1,000)
638
808
1,122
1,270
1,456
1,581
2,091
2,147
3,921
3,657
6,248
5,485
2,037
4,700
2,560
5,835
553
1,308
1,682
3,608
3,176
6,528
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories
578
-------
Sludge from the clarifier is pumped to a sludge holding and mixing
tank or directly to the lime mud dewatering system. After the lime
mud has been dewatered to approximately 60 percent solids, it is
transferred to a fluidized bed for drying and calcining. At this
point, recovered lime is transferred back to the slaker for reuse in
the color control process. Ninety percent recovery of lime was
assumed.
In those cases where the total mill wastewater is treated using
minimum lime coagulation, EPA assumed that the decolored wastewater
would be further treated to lower the pH below the maximum allowable
discharge (9.0). EPA assumed that sulfuric acid would be the chemical
used for pH control. This pH adjustment system includes two
neutralization tanks in series, each equipped with a mixer, and the
chemical feed and storage equipment required for sulfuric acid
addition.
Alum Coagulation - Alum coagulation is another available
technology for removing color and can be applied to the total mill
effluent for each of the subcategories from which highly-colored
effluents are discharged. The costs for the alum coagulation system
are based on the following items:
1 ,
2,
3,
wastewater pumping,
sulfuric acid feed system,
chemically assisted clarification
clarifier),
(solids
contact
5,
6,
7.
8,
9,
chemical coagulation with alum (at a dosage appropriate for
each subcategory) and polyelectrolyte addition (at 1 mg/1),
neutralization with 10 mg/1 sodium hydroxide,
solids dewatering,
dissolved air flotation thickening,
chemical sludge transportation to landfill, and
chemical sludge landfill.
Normally, the topography of the effluent treatment site does not
permit gravity flow through the entire treatment process. Thus, EPA
assumed that it would be necessary to construct an effluent pumping
facility that is capable of pumping the maximum daily flow to be
treated.
The design assumes the use of a solids-contact clarifier to accomplish
flocculation, settling, and sludge removal. For flows in excess of
18,900 cubic meters per day (5 MGD), EPA assumed the use of two
parallel units, earh capable of handling 50 percent of the daily flow.
579
-------
At mills where activated sludge treatment is employed, the chemical
clarification design reflects an additional solids-contact
clarifier(s) following the existing secondary clarifier(s). It is
likely that at many mills, an existing secondary clarifier(s) could be
modified to allow for the addition of chemicals; this would result in
significantly lower capital expenditure. An additional clarifier
allows for the recycle of biological sludge that has not been
contaminated by the addition of chemicals; this would allow for the
addition of a chemical recovery system, if it were determined that
such a system is economically advantageous.
The primary flocculant is alum at a dosage rate of 300 mg/1. Alum
tends to lower the pH of the effluent. Optimum alum flocculation is
reached at a pH of 4.0 to 6.0.(147)(148) Provision for the addition of
sulfuric acid was included to optimize alum requirements. If the
effluent pH changes to a value where the effectiveness of flocculation
deteriorates and/or the effluent does not meet pH limitations,
neutralization may be required. Therefore, EPA included
neutralization with sodium hydroxide in the design.
Waste chemical solids from the secondary clarification process may
require thickening before they can be effectively dewatered. If these
solids were not thickened, the capacity of a dewatering unit would be
greatly reduced. EPA selected air flotation as the specific
thickening process in the development of costs. Air flotation
requires that a flocculant, such as a polymer, is added to the waste
solids prior to the thickening process.
Alum sludge is gelatinous and difficult to dewater. Mixing with
primary sludge and/or the addition of polymer can improve
dewaterability. The cost of dewatering of alum sludge was determined
assuming the use of a separate horizontal belt filter press dewatering
system to dewater chemical solids only. EPA assumed that dewatered
sludge would be landfilled.
Ammonia Removal. EPA estimated the costs of ammonia removal at direct
discharging mills where ammonia-based cooking chemicals are used.
These costs were based on (a) substitution to a non-ammonia-based
cooking liquor and (b) ammonia removal through biological
nitrification. Model mill costs for direct dischargers are presented
in Table A-9 for the semi-chemical, dissolving sulfite pulp, and
papergrade sulfite subcategories.
Costs for substitution of chemical bases were developed based on
installation of a new spent liquor recovery furnace and additional
evaporation capacity to allow for a change from ammonia-based cooking
to sodium-based cooking.(220) Increased evaporator capacity would be
required to increase the solids content of the sodium-based spent
liquor and to account for the increased tendancy for scaling (and
subsequent need for more frequent washing). Spent sodium-based liquor
has a lower heat value than spent ammonia-based liquor; EPA took this
into account in its cost estimates. Another major cost item would be
the increased cost of chemicals, with costs for NH3_ and Na2C03_
580
-------
TABLE A-9
COSTS FOR AMMONIA REMOVAL
FOR DIRECT DISCHARGERS
Subcategory
Semi -Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite2
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
181
386
544
408
544
91
408
907
Control '
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
I
II
III
IV
V
Capital
($1,000)
1,500
510
850
277
6,010
2,857
1,021
1,586
528
9,440
3,846
1,429
2,079
733
11,610
12,640
2,841
5,429
700
26,570
16,181
3,785
6,886
930
31,580
1,896
369
1,207
215
7,450
6,647
1,575
4,235
881
18,370
13,070
3,498
8,287
1,957
29,650
Amortized
Capital
($l,000/yr)
331
112
186
61
1,322
628
225
349
116
2,077
846
314
457
161
2,554
2,780
625
1,194
154
5,845
3,560
833
1,515
205
6,948
417
81
265
47
1,639
1,462
347
932
194
4,041
2,875
769
1,823
430
6,523
Operation
and
Maintenance
($l,000/yr)
52
29
39
18
200
71
46
52
28
425
81
56
58
34
600
161
77
115
0
927
181
92
129
0
1,236
65
24
51
16
179
117 .
59
94
38
806
161
94
129
61
1,790
Energy
($l,000/yr)
137
117
71
51
134
291
249
150
108
285
411
351
212
152
402
889
612
92
0
1,125
1,185
816
123
0
1,500
105
85
61
41
220
475
384
276
186
990
1,055
854
614
413
2,200
Total
Annual
($1,000)
520
258
296
130
1,656
990
520
551
252
2,787
1,338
721
727
347
3,556
3,830
1,314
1,401
154
7,897
4,926
1,741
1,767
205
9,684
587
190
377
104
2,038
2,054
790
1,302
418
5,837
4,091
1,717
2,566
904
10,513
'Control:
I - Modification of Activated Sludge at NSPS Option 1 (equal to BPT) raw waste loads
II - Modification of ASB at N'SPS Option 1 (equal to BPT) raw waste loads
III - Modification of Activated Sludge at NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads
IV - Modification of ASB at NSPS Option 2 raw waste loads
V - Change chemical base and add recovery system
^Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash) subcategories
581
-------
reported at $0.088/kg ($0.04/lb), and $0.154/kg ($0.07/lb),
respectively. At this cost penalty of $0.066/kg ($0.03/lb), an
increased cost of $5.50/kkg ($5/ton) of pulp is realized. No cost
credit was taken for the recovery or resale of chemicals.
EPA also developed costs for ammonia removal through the application
of end-of-pipe treatment. EPA assumed that BPT effluent limitations
are being met at existing mills through the use of the technology that
formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations. The Agency also assumed
that existing biological treatment systems would be converted to the
extended aeration mode of activated sludge. Ammonia removal would be
accomplished through single-stage nitrification. Nitrification is the
process where specific bacteria convert ammonia to nitrite nitrogen
and then to nitrate nitrogen (see Section VII). Conventional
activated sludge systems and aerated stabilization basins can be
converted to the extended aeration mode by system modification.
Design criteria include a volumetric loading of 0.24 kg BOD5/cu m/day
(15 Ib BOD5/1000 ftVday), air requirements of 1.5 kg 02/kg BOD5_
removed (T.5 Ib 02_/lb BOD5_ removed) and 3.1 kg 02_/kg NH3_ removed (3.1
Ib 02/lb NH3_ removed), aeration capacity of 17 kg 02_/hp/day (37 Ib
02/hp/day), and a 48 hour aeration basin detention time. All other
criteria are equivalent to those considered in estimating the cost of
activated sludge systems in developing estimates of the cost of
attainment of BPT effluent limitations.(48) The sludge ages for the
modified biological treatment systems range from 24 to 37 days for the
four subcategories of concern (dissolving sulfite pulp, semi-chemical,
and both papergrade sulfite subcategories). They are two to five
times greater than those cited in the literature (see Section VII).
Table A-9 presents the estimated costs to implement this end-of-pipe
technology. The costs include an allowance for repositioning of
existing aeration equipment in the aeration basin. Table A-9 also
presents an estimate of costs assuming that conventional pollutant raw
waste load reductions to NSPS Option 2 levels were implemented. These
estimates assume no reduction in the ammonia raw waste load.
The sensitivity of the nitrification process to environmental
conditions is well documented (see Section VII). Temperature, pH, and
dissolved oxygen levels have interrelated effects on the ability of a
biological treatment system to nitrify ammonia. The cost estimates in
Table A-9 do not include provisions to heat or cool the effluent or to
cover the aeration basin for temperature control.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PSES AND PSNS
The toxic pollutants zinc, trichlorophenol, and pentachlorophenol can
be controlled at new and existing indirect discharging mills through
substitution of process chemicals. Slimicide and fungicide
formulations containing chlorophenolics can be replaced by those that
do not contain these compounds. Inquiries of chemical suppliers
indicate that no definable cost differences will result from the
application of this technology.
582
-------
EPA estimated the cost of substitution of sodium hydrosulfite for zinc
hydrosulfite at indirect discharging mills. These costs are presented
in Table A-l0.
COSTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF NSPS CONTROL AND TREATMENT OPTIONS
Conventional Pollutant Removal
Option ]_. NSPS Option 1 for conventional pollutant control is based
on the levels attained by best performing mills in each subcategory.
Best mill performance for a subcategory is generally the average
performance at all mills where BPT is attained using BPT technology
(see Section VIII). End-of-pipe treatment is in the form of
biological treatment for all subcategories except the
nonintegrated-tissue papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers,
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard
subcategories, where end-of-pipe treatment is in the form of
chemically assisted primary clarification (at a dosage rate of 150
mg/1 of alum). The design basis of this option is presented in Table
A-ll. Costs associated with implementation of this option are
presented in Table A-l2.
Option 2^ This option involves the application of (a) production
process controls to reduce wastewater discharge and raw waste loadings
and (b) end-of-pipe treatment in the form of biological treatment for
all subcategories except the nonintegrated-tissue papers,
nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven papers, nonintegrated-lightweight
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories, where end-of-pipe
treatment is in the form of chemically assisted primary clarification
(at a dosage rate of 150 mg/1 of alum). The design basis of NSPS
Option 2 end-of-pipe treatment is the same as for NSPS Option 1. As
discussed earlier, the implementation of production process controls
can result in material and energy savings. EPA estimated the economic
savings associated with the in-plant controls that form the basis of
NSPS Option 2. These estimates are presented in Table A-l3. Improved
by-product recovery may also result; however, no estimates of savings
resulting from by-product recovery were included in the figures
presented in Table A-l3. NSPS Option 2 model mill costs are presented
in Table A-l4.
Example calculations for the costs of NSPS Option 2 production process
controls for a new alkaline-fine mill are presented in Table A-l5.
Tables A-l6 and A-l7 present example design parameters and cost
calculations, respectively, for NSPS Option 2 end-of-pipe treatment
for a new dissolving kraft mill.
Toxic Pollutant Removal
PCP, TCP, and zinc can be controlled at new sources through chemical
substitution. Slimicide and biocide formulations containing
chlorophenolics can be replaced with formulations that do not contain
these toxic pollutants. Correspondence with chemical suppliers as to
the relative cost of substitution to the use of process chemicals that
583
-------
TABLE A-10
COSTS FOR SUBSTITUTING SODIUM HYDROSULFITE
FOR ZINC HYDROSULFITE
Subcategory
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
Sodium Hydrosulfite Used
(kg/kkg) (kkg/yr)
Cost Increase Due
to Substitution
($1.000/yr)
PSES, PSNS (Indirect Dischargers - Existing and New)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
NSPS (Direct Dischargers - New)
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
272
45
544
907
68
454
680
454
454
454
1.0
3.7
6.7
1.0
3.7
6.7
95.2
58.9
712.5
1,188.0
160.8
1,073.8
1,608.3
158.9
594.6
1,073.8
37.8
23.3
279.1
465.2
63.4
422.6
633.8
63.0
232.6
422.6
584
-------
TABLE A-11
DESIGN BASIS
FOR ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT FOR ATTAINMENT OF
NSPS OPTIONS 1 AND 2
I. Integrated Segment and Peink and Nonintegrated-Fine Papers Subcategories
A. Primary Treatment
1. Clarification at an overflow rate of 20 cu ra/d/sq ra
B. Activated Sludge Treatment
1. Equalization with aeration
a. 12 hr detention at peak flow
2. Increase in aeration basin capacity with:
a. Aeration design requirements of:
1.5 kg 0 /kg BOD5
11.2 kg 62/aerator hp/d
b. Detention at 1.5 times BPT levels
c. Provisions for operation in a contact stabilization mode
3. Clarification at an overflow rate of 16 cu m/d/sq m
4. Solids handling system
II. All Other Secondary Fibers Subcategories(a)
A. Primary Treatment
1. Clarification at an overflow rate of 24 cu m/d/sq m
B. Activated Sludge Treatment
1. Equalization with aeration
a. 12 hr detention at peak flow
2. Aeration basin
a. Volume at the larger of 0.8 kg BODS applied/cu m/d, or 8 hr
hydraulic detection time
b. Aeration design requirements of:
1 kg 02/kg BODS
19 kg 02/aerator hp/d
3 Clarification at an overflow rate of 20 cu n/d/sq n
4. Solids handling system
III. All Other Nonintegrated Subcategories
A. Primary Treatment
1. Chemically assisted clarification with 150 mg alun/1 (flash mixing
prior to clarifiers) at an overflow rate of 16 cu m/d/sq m
2. Solids handling system
(a) End-of-pipe treatment system design for both NSPS Options 1 and 2 are
based on the flow and BOD5 raw waste load that forms the basis of BPT
effluent limitations.
585
-------
TABLE A-12
COST SUMMARY FOR NSPS OPTION
Operation and
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Uubleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
1,361
454
454
454
454
680
454
454
454
454
91
454
454
Maintenance and Total
Capital Energy Annual
($1,000) ($l,000/yr) ($1,000)
32,093
20,388
17,992
20,787
13,060
20,247
13,130
26,709
30,429
31,721
33,404
39,312
37,319
12,219
11,496
11,248
17,131
6,089
17,131
11,171
4,930
2,403
1,918
2,517
1,802
2,825
2,334
3,762
6,059
6,366
6,777
8,251
7,194
1,636
1,357
1,363
3,027
968
3,027
2,343
11,990
6,889
5,876
7,090
4,675
7,280
5,223
9,638
12,753
13,344
14,125
16,899
15,404
4,324
3,886
3,838
6,796
2,307
6,796
4,300
Tissue From Wastepaper
1,384
208
512
5S6
-------
TABLE A- 12
(continued)
Operation and
Mill Maintenance
Size Capital and Energy1
Subcategory (kkg/d) ($1,000) ($l,000/yr)
Total
Annual
($1,000)
Secondary Fibers Segment (continued)
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish '
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter
and Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
91
454
91
454
45
68
136
227
27
45
227
45
45
23
45
2,465
6,146
2,585
6,528
2,271
2,652
3,929
5,889
2,564
2,148
5,711
2,119
2,470
1,307
1,291
299
747
326
842
252
343
492
604
304
371
912
524
600
321
342
842
2,099
895
2,279
752
927
1,356
1,899
868
843
2,169
990
1,144
609
626
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
587
-------
TABLE A-13
GROSS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AND
ENERGY COSTS AND SAVINGS FOR
NSPS OPTION 2 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS ($l,000/yr)
Subcategory
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine2
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated- Lightweight
Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated- Paperboard
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
1,361
454
680
454
454
454
454
91
454
454
9
91
454
45
68
136
227
27
45
227
45
23
45
Gross
Operation and
Maintenance1
Cost
230.7
208.3
188. 1
263.7
120.0
183.2
151.4
386.5
922.7
1,130.1
105.2
48.3
131.2
60.9
35.8
97.4
60.9
9.3
24.1
50.6
19.3
17.6
25.8
32.3
9.0
9.7
26.0
29.8
20.2
13.0
Savings
524.3
89.6
185.4
120.2
176.5
350.7
137.2
449.2
776.3
1,172.7
124.5
38.0
299.6
186. 1
37.2
186.1
186.1
1.8
18.0
90.0
0.0
14.0
27.9
38.5
10.8
15.8
78.7
19.0
4.6
6.4
Gross Energy
Cost
691.0
363.3
288.5
309.3
109.3
218.6
204.5
788.9
1,237.4
1,517.0
33.3
40.3
80.5
123.8
29.4
138.2
123.8
4.8
46.3
231.7
11.2
27.5
55.1
48.3
13.5
7.0
33.8
16.5
7.8
5.3
Savings
80.6
55.9
23.1
82.9
119.2
210.6
80.4
336.9
116.9
253.6
20.4
150.8
152.3
112.7
41.8
198.1
112.7
2.2
22.0
110.0
8.4
4.3
8.6
100.2
28.1
8.0
18.6
16.7
11.2
6.2
'Excludes energy costs.
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
•"Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
588
-------
TABLE A-14
COST SUMMARY FOR NSPS OPTION 2
Mill
Size
Subcategory (kkg/d)
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi -Chemical 1
Cissclviri,{ Euifiti Pulp
o Nitration
o Viscose
o Cellophane
o Acetate
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Croundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper jnd Hooi'ini< Fell
907
680
ASA
680
ASA
907
ASA
,361
ASA
ASA
ASA
ASA
680
ASA
ASA
ASA
ASA
91
ASA
ASA
9
91
ASA
91
ASA
A5
68
136
Capital
($1,000)
33,102
21.83A
17,699
20,233
8,635
1A.057
9,138
22,250
37,905
38.0A9
39,239
A2.99A
41,705
10,329
9, ASS
11,382
11,536
5,191
1A.055
11,171
1.38A
2.A65
6,1A6
2.585
6,528
2,271
2,652
3,929
Operation
and Total
Maintenance Energy Annual
($l,000/yr) (Sl.OOO/y'r) ($1,000)
3,371
1,742
1,439
1,983
738
1,145
689
1,554
2,369
2,386
2,520
2,947
2,503
1,029
1,073
1,071
2,260
316
2,393
2,185
196
233
301
A!5
1,865
829
665
687
1A6
298
306
968
2.0A8
2,06A
2,208
2,672
2,195
2A6
185
167
2A7
79
346
158
12
2993
7A73
3263
8A23
19
<«2
77
12,518
7,375
5,998
7,121
2.78A
A, 536
3,005
7,417
12,756
12,821
13,361
15,077
13,873
3,547
3,345
3,742
5.0A5
2,037
5,830
A, 800
512
8A2
2,099
895
2,279
752
927
1,356
589
-------
TABLE A-14
(continued)
Subcategory
Mill
Size
(kkg/d)
Capital
($1,000)
Operation
and
Maintenance
($l,000/yr)
Energy
($l,000/yr)
Total
Annual
($1,000)
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and Nonwoven
Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
227
27
45
227
45
45
23
45
4,339
2,129
1,647
4,077
2,711
3,081
1,698
1,616
504
261
354
835
492
565
310
341
42
18
8
49
14
19
7
7
1,500
747
724
1,781
1,102
1,262
690
704
'Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
^Separate operation and maintenance and energy costs for the Paperboard From Wastepaper
subcategory are not presented. These estimates include updated "pre-BPT" inter-
nal control costs presented in the Phase I BPT Development Document which reported
operation and maintenance and energy costs as a single figure. (46)
590
-------
TABLE A-15
NSPS OPTION 2 PRODUCTION PROCESS CONTROLS
SAMPLE COST CALCULATIONS
680 kkg/d Alkaline-Fine Mill
A.
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Capital
No. Item
Dry Operation of Woodroom
Disposal of Digester Blow Condensates
Addition of Fourth Stage Brown Stock Washer
Spill Collection for Pulp Mill Brown Stock
Full Countercurrent Washing in Bleachery
Boil Out Tank for Evaporators
Spill Collection in Liquor Preparation Area
Segregation of Cooling Water in Utility Area
Boiler Slowdown and Backwash Lagoon
pH Monitors on Sewers
Cost
$1,433,300
24,200
838,000
300,000
2,731,000
46,400
349,000
69,700
124,800
8,000
$5,924,400
B. Energy Requirements
Item No.
Item
Increase
in Electricity
Use
(kwh/kkg)
Reduction or
Increase
in Steam Use
(kg/kkg)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Dry Operation of Woodroom
Disposal of Digester Blow Condensates
Addition of Fourth Stage Brown Stock Washer
Spill Collection for Pulp Mill Brown Stock
Full Countercurrent Washing in Bleachery
Boil Out Tank for Evaporators
Spill collection in Liquor Preparation Area
Segregation of Cooling Water in Utility Area
Boiler Slowdown and Backwash Lagoon
pH Monitors on Sewers
Cost of Electric Power = $0.0325/kwh x 16.35
Steam Saving = 107.9 kg/kkg x 2425 Btu/kg x
Net Increase in Cost of Energy =
__
1.22
7.70
2.48
2.15
0.46
1.55
0.33
0.46
--
16.35
kwh/kkg =
$1.24/106Btu
(48.7)
--
--
--
(33.6)
--
(4.8)
(20.8)
--
--
(107.9)
Cost
$ 0.53/kkg
= - 0.32/kkg
$ 0.21/kkg
C. Annual Cost-Example
3 Addition of Fourth Stage Brown Stock Washer
Fixed Cost = 22% of $838,000
Maintenance = 4.5% of capital
Added Labor
Electric Power = 233 kw x 24 hr/d x 352 d/yr
x $0.0325/kwh
Cost
$ 184,360
37,710
0
63,972
$ 286,042
591
-------
TABLE A-16
DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR .VSPS OPTION 2
EXAMPLE CALCULATION
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Raw Waste:
Flow = 211.6 kl/kkg
BOD5 = 58.4 kg/kkg
TSS =113.0 kg/kkg
Design Parameters:
Flow:
907 kkg/d x 211.6 kl/kkg x 1 cu m/kl = 191,000 cu m/d
BOD5 Removed (assume 15 percent of BOD5 is removed in primary
system; therefore, 85 percent of BOD5 applied will be removed by biological
system):
907 kkg/d x 0.85 x 58.4 kg BOD5/kkg = 45,000 kg BOD5/d
Basin Volumes (assume 0.8 kg BOD5/cu m):
Stabilization = 907 kkg/d x 58.4 kg BOD5/kkg x 1.25 cu m/kg BOD5 = 66,200 cu m
Contact = one-half stabilization = 0.5 x 66,200 cu m = 33,100 cu m
Aeration (assume 11.2 kg BOD5/d/HP):
907 kkg/d x 58.4 kg BOD5/kkg x 0.0893 HP/kg BOD5 = 4,730 HP
Solids Production:
Primary (assume 75 percent of raw waste TSS applied is removed):
0.75 x 907 kg/d x 113.0 kg TSS/kkg = 76,900 kg/d
Biological (assume additional 10 percent of raw waste TSS is removed and
32 percent of BOD5 applied becomes solids):
907 kkg/d x [(0.10 x 113.0 kg TSS/kkg) + (0.32 x 58.4 kg BOD5/kkg)]
= 27,200 kg/d
592
-------
TABLE A-17
COST SUMMARY FOR NSPS OPTION 2
UNIT PROCESS END-OF-PIPE TREATMENT
EXAMPLE CALCULATION
907 kkg/d Dissolving Kraft Mill
Treatment
Operation
Amortized and Total
Capital Capital Maintenance Energy Annual
($1,000) ($1.0QO/yr) ($l,QOO/yr) ($l,000/yr) ($1.000)
Flow Equalization with Aeration
(peaking factor = 1.3)
Wastewater Pumping (peaking
factor = 1.3}
Preliminary Treatment
Primary Settling
Acid Neutralization
Alkaline Neutralization
NaOH For Biological Treatment
Stabilization Basin
Contact Basin
Aeration
Secondary Clarification
Flow Monitoring
Outfall
Diffuser
Foam Collection Tank
Nutrient Addition
Flotation Polymer
Flotation Thickening
Dewatering Polymer
Horizontal Belt-Filter
Primary and Biological Sludge
Transportation
Primary and Biological Sludge
Landfill
Subtotal
1,591
350
19
66
435
1,744
328
3,969
55
55
0
3,061
1,758
3,312
6,427
43
23
414
92
0
0
1,552
0
2,218
0
1,202
27,843
384
72
873
12
12
0
673
387
729
1,314
10
5
91
20
0
0
342
0
488
0
264
6,125
25
27
51
22
22
223
94
71
0
74
63
0
0
0
417
218
61
828
91
789
274
3,371
112
0
5
10
10
0
0
0
946
38
0
0
0
0
0
0
55
0
13
0
0
1,255
520
99
929
44
44
223
768
458
1,675
1,525
73
5
91
20
417
218
458
828
592
789
539
10,751
593
-------
do not contain these toxic pollutants indicate that no definable cost
difference will result from the implementation of this control
technology.
Zinc can be controlled at new source groundwood mills by replacing
zinc hydrosulfite, a bleaching chemical, with sodium hydrosulfite.
The costs of this substitution at new sources in the three groundwood
subcategories are presented in Table A-10.
ENERGY AND NON-WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
Energy Requirements
EPA anticipates that the implementation of some of the various control
and treatment options considered as the basis of final rules could
affect existing energy demand. Estimates of the energy requirements
of each specific technology option are presented in this section. In
some cases, the implementation of production process controls may
result in a net energy saving. It is possible that, even where a net
energy saving is achieved in terms of net heat energy, energy costs
can increase because of the relative amounts of fuels and electricity
used and their respective prices.
EPA determined total energy usage prior to implementation of the
various technology options (baseline energy usage) based on data
contained in the API monthly energy reports. Average power and fuel
usages were determined from information obtained as a result of the
data request program. An energy balance was developed for each model
mill; the balance takes into account the energy of spent liquor and
hogged fuel, if appropriate.
Table A-18 summarizes the estimate of total energy used at direct
discharging mills. Total energy is presented in heat energy units
(Btu). In order to properly account for energy requirements, EPA
converted electrical energy (kwh) to heat energy (Btu) at a conversion
of 10,500 Btu/kwh, which reflects the average efficiency of electrical
power generation.
BPT. EPA estimates that attainment of BPT in the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory will require the use of the equivalent of
approximately 604 thousand liters (3.8 thousand barrels) of residual
fuel oil per year, a 0.0017 percent increase in estimated current
industry energy usage and a 1.8 percent increase in current energy
usage at mills in the wastepaper-molded products subcategory. For the
nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and nonwoven
papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategory and the cotton fiber
furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers subcategory,
in-place technology or current permit conditions are such that EPA
anticipates that no incremental energy usage will result from
implementation of BPT effluent limitations.
594
-------
TABLE A-18
TOTAL ENERGY USAGE AT EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
(109 Btu/yr)
Subcategory
Baseline1
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine2
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite3
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Integrated-Miseellaneous
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
Nonintegrated-Miseellaneous
Total
Residual Fuel Oil
(106 barrels/yr)
50,538
68,856
87,326
128,775
139,382
86,048
51,786
124,954
40,529
56,305
3,628
9,061
17,301
454,353
3,486
8,715
2,634
30,725
1,345
1,705
7,425
27,947
7,639
6,777
796
1,362
6,066
1,425,464
227
Baseline energy use is based on data contained in API monthly energy reports.
2Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
3Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
595
-------
BAT. Because the technology basis of BAT effluent limitations is
chemical substitution, implementation of BAT will not result in any
increase in energy usage at existing direct discharging mills.
EPA estimates that implementation of chloroform removal technology at
the nine mills where closed biological treatment systems are employed
would increase the energy used to operate wastewater treatment systems
by over 70 percent.
If color were regulated based on the technologies discussed in Section
VIII, energy usage would increase at existing direct discharging
mills. Table A-19 presents the Agency's estimate of the total energy
increase that would result from implementation of color removal
technology at all direct discharging mills where highly-colored
effluents are discharged. EPA estimates that the energy increase over
current total energy usage at these mills would be equivalent to about
2.5 percent for minimum lime coagulation and 0.5 percent for alum
coagulation.
Establishment of ammonia limits at the eight mills where ammonia-based
cooking chemicals are employed might mean that the equivalent of 78
million liters (489 thousand barrels) and 44 million liters (277
thousand barrels) of residual fuel oil per year, respectively, would
be required through conversion to a different chemical base or
modification of existing biological treatment to operate in a
nitrification mode (assuming that raw waste loads are identical to
those that formed the basis of BPT limitations). This represents 6.2
and 3.5 percent, respectively, of current energy usage at these eight
mills.
NSPS. Table A-20 presents an estimate of energy usage at new source
direct discharging mills for the base case (attainment of BPT effluent
limitations) and for NSPS Options 1 and 2. In order to properly
account for energy requirements of each alternative, EPA converted
electrical energy (kwh) to heat energy (Btu) at a conversion of 10,500
Btu/kwh, which reflects the average efficiency of electrical power
generation.
Pretreatment Standards. Because the technology basis of PSES and PSNS
is chemical substitution, implementation of PSES and PSNS will not
increase energy usage at indirect discharging mills.
Air Pollution
None of the technology options considered for BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, or
PSNS are expected to result in significant increases in air pollution.
The technologies that form the bases of BAT effluent limitations and
pretreatment standards do not generate air emissions. Operation of
biological and primary treatment systems to comply with BPT effluent
limitations and NSPS will not generally increase air emissions to any
significant extent.
596
-------
TABLE A-19
ADDITIONAL ENERGY USAGE AT EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COLOR REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY
(109 Btu/yr)
Subcategory
Baseline
Lime
Alum
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine1
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite2
Integrated-Miscellaneous
50,538
68,856
87,326
128,775
139,382
86,048
51,786
124,954
40,529
56,305
413,779
1,312
1,348
1,533
2,439
3,708
2,289
1,595
3,828
1,354
1,810
8,994
262
385
378
548
323
199
178
1,066
279
362
1,922
Total
Residual Fuel Oil
(106 barrels/yr)
1,248,278
198
30,210
5
5,902
0.9
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
597
-------
TABLE A-20
ENERGY USAGE AT NEW SOURCE DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
Mill
Size
Subcategory Ckkg/d)
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline-Fine2
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard
o Bag
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical 1
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite2
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Papers
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o 7iue Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Noncorrugating Medium Furnish
o Corrugating Medium Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
907
680
454
680
454
907
454
,361
454
680
454
454
454
••54
91
454
454
9
91
454
91
454
45
136
227
27
45
227
45
45
23
45
Energy Usage (109 Btu/yr)
Baseline1
14,886
8,178
6,163
9,303
4,876
9,752
4,050
10,364
6,824
9,696
4,134
5,316
4,968
3,17o
635
3,176
3,079
45
623
3,115
625
3,126
237
785
1,010
122
415
2,075
572
572
240
409
\SPS
Option 1
456
209
141
182
62
120
82
198
431
443
130
73
69
154
34
154
51
4
17
84
19
95
6
25
19
7
3
12
5
7
T
2
NSPS
Option 2
603
268
215
222
47
96
99
313
726
369
709
60
54
80
26
112
51
4
17
84
19
95
6
25
14
6
3
16
5
6
2
2
'Baseline energy use is based on data contained in API monthly energy reports
and BPT Development Documents.
''Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
3Includes Papergradn Sulfite (Bl^w Pit Wash) and Papergrade Suil'ite (Drum Wash)
subcategories .
598
-------
Most of the NSPS production process controls identified in NSPS Option
2 are expected to have little direct impact on air emissions.
However, if additional steam is required, some increase in sulfur
dioxide generation could occur. Such an increase would be directly
proportional to the increased boiler firing rate and the sulfur
content of the fuel used. This situation is not unique to the pulp,
paper, and paperboard industry, but exists for all industrial
categories. Air pollution control techniques are available to
minimize such increases.
Production process controls that help retain more spent liquor in the
liquor recovery cycle include improved brown stock washing, decker
filtrate reuse, use of blow condensates, neutralization of spent
sulfite liquor before evaporation, and more complete use of evaporator
condensates. These controls tend to retain more sulfur-containing
compounds in the liquor system. As sulfur levels increase along with
increased total liquor solids to recovery, emissions can increase.
With modern recovery systems of adequate capacity, emission levels of
mercaptans, hydrogen sulfide, and other compounds to the atmosphere
would not increase beyond allowable limits. Generally, the normal
variations in firing rates, sulfidity, and liquor solids overshadow
the effects resulting from implementation of the production process
controls considered.
Noise Potential
There is no identifiable potential for substantially increased noise
associated with any of the control and treatment technology options
considered. Existing effluent treatment processes are not a
significant source of noise.
Solid Waste Generation
General. A study by Energy Resources Company quantified the various
solid wastes generated in 1977 in the pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry.(221) In addition to sludge generated as a result of
wastewater treatment, other types of solid waste generated by this
industry include chemical ash, pulping wastes, and wood wastes.
The kraft and sulfite processes produce the majority of chemical
pulping wastes, consisting of green liquor dregs, lime wastes (slaker
rejects and unburned rejects from lime kilns), and cooking chemical
recovery process wastes. Green liquor dregs are normally sewered and,
therefore, are likely to be included in wastewater sludge estimates.
Lime wastes and recovery wastes (normally oxides of the cooking
chemical base from the sulfite process) were estimated to be 535,000
metric tons (589,000 tons) in 1977. (221)
About 2,700,000 metric tons (3,000,000 tons) of landfilled bark and
wood waste and approximately 1,000,000 metric tons (1,100,000 tons) of
coal ash were generated in 1977.(221)
599
-------
Miscellaneous pulp, paper, and paperboard industry solid waste
included 1,700,000 metric tons (1,900,000 tons) of wastepaper
reclamation waste (i.e., strapping, dirt, metal, and ink) in
1977.(221) Other wastes include evaporator residue and tall oil
residue; these are generated in insignificant quantities when compared
to other solid wastes. Total 1977 process solid waste excluding
wastewater treatment sludge was about 5,900,000 metric tons (6,500,000
tons).
In a 1974 study, it was estimated that pulp, paper, and paperboard
industry personnel generated about 0.23 kg (0.5 Ib) of refuse per
employee per shift, resulting in a total annual industry generation
rate of 16,600 metric tons (18,300 tons).(48) This source of solid
waste is insignificant when compared to process-related sources.
Wastewater treatment facilities produce both primary and biological
sludges that are usually dewatered prior to disposal. The amount of
wastewater treatment sludge generated depends on a number of
conditions including: (a) raw waste characteristics, (b) the
existence, efficiency, and/or type of primary treatment, (c) the type
of biological treatment system employed, and (d) the efficiency of
biological solids removal from the wastewater. EPA estimated the
amount of primary and biological sludges generated at direct
discharging mills in each subcategory. These estimates were based on
sludge production criteria outlined in Section VII and are shown in
Table A-21.
Toxic Pollutant Control. Chemical substitution, the technology basis
of BAT, PSES, PSNS, and NSPS toxic pollutant control options will not
result in any increase in solid waste generation. Additionally,
implementation of chloroform removal technology at the nine mills
where closed systems are employed would not increase solid waste
generation at these mills.
Conventional Pollutant Control. Attainment of BPT in the wastepaper-
molded products subcategory may generate an additional 100 kkg/yr (110
tons/yr) of solid waste. This is equal to 0.0042 percent of current
wastewater treatment solids generated in the industry and 20 percent
of the current wastewater solids generated in the wastepaper-molded
products subcategory.
For the nonintegrated-lightweight papers, nonintegrated-filter and
nonwoven papers, and nonintegrated-paperboard subcategories and the
cotton fiber furnish subdivision of the nonintegrated-fine papers
subcategory, in-place technology or current permit conditions are such
that EPA anticipates that no incremental solid waste generation will
result from implementation of BPT effluent limitations.
Table A-22 presents an estimate of the solid waste generation at new
source direct discharging mills for the base case (attainment of BPT
effluent limitations) and for NSPS Options 1 and 2.
600
-------
TABLE A-21
TOTAL WASTEWATER SOLID WASTE GENERATION AT
EXISTING DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
(1,000 kkg/yr, dry solids)
Baseline1
Subcategory Primary Biological
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 91.0 35.3
Market Bleached Kraft 65.2 32.6
BCT Bleached Kraft 112.6 43.0
Alkaline-Fine2 199.1 65.0
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 81.6 35.7
o Bag 50.4 22.0
Serai-Chemical 23.4 22.6
Unbleached Kraft and
Serai-Chemical 71.7 36.5
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 68.7 65.0
Papergrade Sulfite3 118.3 64.8
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical 6.6 3.4
Groundwood-CMN Papers 19.2 5.2
Groundwood-Fine Papers 38.9 9.9
Integrated-Miscellaneous 543.2 213.5
Secondary Fibers Segment
Deink
o Fine Papers 26.7 5.7
o Tissue Papers 66.7 14.0
Tissue from Wastepaper 10.2 1.5
Paperboard from Wastepaper 17.4 5.6
Wastepaper-Molded Products 0.5 0.1
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 3.3 0.7
Secondary Fibers-Miscellaneous 17.6 3.7
Nonintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers 34.4 6.5
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers 10.9 0
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers 8.1 0
Nonintegrated-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers 0.5 0
Nonintegrated-Paperboard 1.5 0
Nonintegrated-Miscellaneous 7.8 0.5
Total 1,695.5 692.8
1Baseline wastewater solid waste production is based on estimated BPT raw
waste loads; baseline solid waste other than wastewater solids is 6,016,600
kkg/yr.
2Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
3Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
601
-------
TABLE A-22
WASTEWATER SOLID WASTE GENERATION AT NEW
SOURCE DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS
Subcategory
Mill Waatewater Solid Waste Generation (1,000 kkg/yr)
Size NSPS NSPS
(kkg/d) Baseline1 Option 1 Option 2
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 907
Market Bleached Kraft 680
BCT Bleached Kraft 454
Alkaline-Fine2 680
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 454
o Bag 907
Semi-Chemical 454
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical 1,361
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 454
Papergrade Sulfite3 680
Groundwood-Therrao-Mechanical 454
Groundwood-CMN Papers 454
Groundwood-Fine Papers 454
Secondary Fibers Segment
37.9
11.9
11.2
17.9
11.8
22.6
27.2
7.7
7.9
8.4
38.8
12.7
11.6
18.7
4.2
8.3
3.4
12.4
23.9
28.2
8.0
8.2
8.7
37.1
11.2
11.0
17.4
3.8
7.5
2.7
11.3
17.7
24.7
6.8
7.8
8.2
o Fine Papers
o Tissue Papers
o Newsprint
Tissue From Wastepaper
Paperboard From Wastepaper
o Noncorrugating Furnish
o Corrugating Furnish
Wastepaper-Molded Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
N'onintegrated Segment
Nonintegrated-Fine Papers
o Wood Fiber Furnish
o Cotton Fiber Furnish
Nonintegrated-Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated-Lightweight Papers
o Lightweight
o Electrical
Monintegrateri-Filter and
Nonwoven Papers
Nonintegrated-Paperboard
454
91
454
454
9
91
454
91
454
45
136
227
27
45
227
45
23
45
29.9
6.0
29.9
29.9
0.28
0.34
1.7
0.40
2.0
0.22
1.5
2.3
0.51
0.43
2.1
0.66
0.66
0. 13
0.27
30.4
6.1
30.3
28.1
0.28
0.35
2.0
0.43
2.1
0.21
1.4
2.5
0.54
0.55
2.7
0.95
1.0
0.22
0.41
28.6
5.8
29.2
28.1
0.28
0.35
2.0
0.43
2. 1
0.21
1.4
2.3
0.49
0.53
2.7
0.92
0.99
0.21
0.41
'Baseline wastewater solid waste generation is based on estimated BPT raw waste loads.
^Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
•'Includes Pjpprgrade Sulfite ;Elow Pit Wash; anJ Papcrgrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
602
-------
Nonconventional Pollutants. If color were regulated based on the
technologies discussed in Section VIII, solid waste generation would
increase at existing direct discharging mills. Table A-23 presents
the Agency's estimate of the total increase in solid waste that would
result from implementation of color removal technology at all direct
discharging mills where highly-colored effluents are discharged.
EPA estimates that implementation of ammonia removal technology
(conversion to a different chemical base or modification of existing
biological treatment to operate in a nitrification mode) would not
result in any measurable increase in solid waste generation.
Disposal Methods. Acceptable techniques for solid waste disposal
include incineration, composting, pyrolysis - gasification, and
landfill. McKeown reported that, in 1975, about 10 percent of
wastewater sludges were incinerated and about 85 percent were disposed
of by land application.(222) Incineration is a preferred method for
disposal of organic wastes with low moisture contents such as log
sorting and mill yard wastes.
Composting is an emerging technology that theoretically could be
applied to pulp, paper, and paperboard mill wastewater treatment
sludges. Through proper composting, sludge can be converted to
non-pathogenic organic material that may be used as a soil
conditioner.
Pyrolysis-gasification may play a future role in solid waste disposal.
Commercial-scale units from which economic effectiveness has been
proven or operating experience obtained have yet to be utilized.
Land application of wastewater treatment plant sludges is a viable
disposal option. Sludge can be applied to a field that will be used
for agricultural production. The organics, nutrients, and sludge bulk
can serve to enhance crop production capacity. A prerequisite for the
technique is that adequate and suitable land is available within a
reasonable proximity of the plant.
Landfills are the most prevalent means of solid waste disposal in the
industry. The primary environmental problem associated with landfill
disposal of wastewater sludges is the potential for leachate
contamination of ground and surface waters.
Environmental safety procedures and knowledge of proper landfill ing
practices have increased widely in recent years. The EPA has
established operating and design criteria for several landfill
techniques for sludges ranging from 20 to 30 percent solids.(216)
These techniques include a) area fill layer, b) area fill mound, c)
diked containment, d) narrow trench, e) wide trench, f) co-disposal
with soil, and g) co-disposal with refuse. The cited reference
describes required site and operating conditions for each method.
603
-------
TABLE A-23
ADDITIONAL WASTEWATER SOLID WASTE GENERATION
AT DIRECT DISCHARGING MILLS WITH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF COLOR REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY
(1,000 kkg/yr)
Subcategory Baseline Lime Alum
Integrated Segment
Dissolving Kraft 126.3 36.0 31.6
Market Bleached Kraft 97.8 35.7 37.0
BCT Bleached Kraft 155.6 41.6 41.3
Alkaline-Fine1 264.1 65.3 62.5
Unbleached Kraft
o Linerboard 117.3 98.5 29.4
o Bag 72.4 60.8 18.2
Serai-Chemical 46.0 40.2 11.0
Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical 108.2 102.7 29.1
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 133.7 35.8 28.7
Papergrade Sulfite2 183.1 49.6 38.7
Integrated-Miscellaneous 549.7 241.4 164.6
Total 1854.2 807.6 492.1
Includes Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda subcategories.
2Includes Papergrade Sulfite (Blow Pit Wash) and Papergrade Sulfite (Drum Wash)
subcategories.
604
-------
Implementation Requirements
Availability of_ Equipment. EPA expects that present manufacturing
capabilities are such that required equipment can be readily produced.
Any increased demand for either production process control equipment
or wastewater treatment equipment should be met without major delays.
No geographical limitations are anticipated because of the ability of
this industry to use local independent contractors for fabrication of
certain pieces of equipment.
Availability o_f Labor Force. Manpower necessary for implementation of
technology alternatives could come from two sources: a) mill
personnel and b) outside contractors. On jobs that cannot be
completed during a normal shut-down or are considered too complex for
mill personnel, an outside contractor can be hired to perform the
necessary tasks.
A Bureau of Labor Statistics study concluded that the availability of
construction laborers to perform the required work is sufficient.(223)
This availability is based on two major factors. This first factor is
the short training time that is required for construction labor (6 to
12 months). The second factor is the willingness of construction
labor to relocate. Therefore, availability of labor is not
anticipated to be a problem in implementing the technology
alternatives.
Implementation Time. For end-of-pipe treatment facilities, normal
construction techniques and crews would be required. The bar graph
presented in Figure A-1 shows the estimated time required to implement
the BPT and NSPS technologies.
605
-------
MONTHS
SIZE (mod
UNDER
6
CONV
UNDER
5
TURN
KEY
5-10
CONV.
5-10
TURN
KEY
OVER
10
CONV.
to
TURN
KEY
1
mm
mm
mm
mm
mmt
I
mm
mmt
mm
mm
mm
3
• •
• i
• i
••
•i •
4
1 M
1 •
1 •
mm
•
S
mm
mm
mm
mm
mmt
6
mm
mm
mm
m •
mm
r
REVIEW TIME
m
i m
mm
mm
«
III
III
HI
S
»-
REVIEW
mm
mm
9
III
III
II
II
ui
Z
K-
*
a
>
Ul
a:
10
III
III
III
Ilii
III
III
It
III
III
nil
in
III
III
12
ill
in
HI
HI
in
HI
IS
ill
HI
ill
mi
ill!
Ill
14
III
III
Illl
III
19
ill
III
ill
16
ill
mi
IT
III
llii
1*
19
2C
21
22
23
••
24
••
25
26
2T
28
29
30
SI
32
33
34
35
•
36
••
3T
mm
M
• •
3*
40
41
42
43
44
45
•A
41
41
49
50
SI
52
cn
o
cr>
mmmtmmmmtmmmmmm PRELIMINARY EN01NEERIN9
Illllllilllilliillllllll DESIGN ENGINEERINS
„________ PROCUREMENT
i* CONSTRUCTION
FIGURE A-f
TIME REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT
SOLIDS CONTACT CLARIFIES/BIOLOGICAL SYSTEM
-------
APPENDIX B
GLOSSARY
Abaca - Manila fiber, or manila hemp, obtained from the leafstalk of a
variety of plantain or banana, native to the Philippine Islands. Its
principal usage is marine cordage, but is also used for rope, papers,
and tea bags.
Active Alkali - A measure of the strength of alkaline pulping liquor
indicating the sum of caustic soda and sodium sulfide expressed as
Na20.
Activated Sludge Process - A high rate biological oxidation process.
The significant feature of the process is the recycle of a
biologically-active sludge formed by settling the microorganism
population from the aeration process in a clarifier. Waste is treated
in a matter of hours rather than days.
Aeration - The process of being supplied or impregnated with air.
Aeration is used in biological treatment to dissolve oxygen in the
wastewater. This dissolved oxygen is required by microorganisms as
they feed on organic matter in the wastewater.
Air Dry Ton (APT) - Measurement of production including a moisture
content of 10 percent by weight.
Alkali - NaOH + Na2_0, expressed as Na20 in alkaline cooking liquors.
Alpha-cellulose - The true cellulose content of a fibrous material.
Available Chlorine - The oxidizing power of a bleaching agent
expressed in terms of elemental chlorine.
Bagasse - Crushed stalks of sugarcane after the sugar has been
removed.
Bag Paper - Paper used in making grocery bags or sacks.
Bale - A standard bale of wastepaper is 72 in. long, 32 in. wide, and
28 in. deep, with a content of about 37 cubic feet and weighing 900 to
1,000 Ibs. The size and weight may vary with the grade of paper. A
bale of pulp varies in weight from 400 to 500 Ibs and is approximately
30x30x13 in. in size. A bale of rags varies in weight from 700 to
1,300 Ibs and will vary in dimensions according to the press used.
Typical dimensions are 26x30x72 in., 26x42x72 in., or 26x52x54 in. A
bale of bags weighs 61 to 62 Ibs.
Barometric Leg - A pipe drawing water from a decker or similar piece
of equipment discharging below the surface of the water in a receiving
tank. A syphon action is created thus drawing a vacuum on the decker.
607
-------
Barker - A piece of equipment designed to remove the bark from a log.
Barking - The operation of removing bark from pulpwood prior to
processing. This is carried out by means of a knife, drum, mechanical
abrasion, hydraulic barker, or by chemical means.
Basis Weight - The weight of a sheet of paper of a given area. It is
effected by the density and thickness of the sheet.
Beater - A machine consisting of a tank or "tub," usually with a
partition or "midfeather," and containing a heavy roll revolving
against a bedplate. Both roll and bedplate may contain horizontal
metal bars set on edge. Pulp or wastepapers are put into the tub of
the beater and water is added so that the mass may circulate and pass
between the roll and the bedplate. This action separates the material
and frees the fibers preparatory to further processing. Fillers,
dyestuffs, and sizing materials may be added to the beater and thus
incorporated with the paper stock. Many modifications in design have
been developed without changing the basic principles. See also
Refiner.
Biological Oxidation - The process by which bacterial and other
microorganisms oxidize complex organic materials to simpler compounds
and use these for growth and energy. Self-purification of waterways
and biological waste treatment systems such as activated sludge,
trickling filter and aerated stabilization depend on this principle.
Black Liquor - The used cooking liquor recovered from the digester.
It may also be referred to as spent cooking liquor. Strong black
liquor refers to the liquor after it has been concentrated by an
evaporator to a level suitable for combustion. Prior to evaporation,
it is referred to as weak black liquor.
Bleaching - The brightening and delignification of pulp by the
addition of oxidizing chemicals such as chlorine or reducing chemicals
such as sodium hypochlorite.
Blow - Ejection of the chips from a digester, or waste solids from a
boiler.
Slowdown - The liquid and solid waste materials ejected from a
pressure vessel such as a boiler.
Blow Pit - A large tank under a digester which receives the discharged
chips and liquor from the digester. A constructed stainless steel
plate within the blow pit acts to break up the chip structure into
individual fibers of pulp upon impact.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) - Quantity of dissolved oxygen
utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter in a specified
time (5 days) and at a specified temperature. It is not related to
the oxygen requirements in chemical combustion, being determined
608
-------
entirely by the biodegradability of the material and by the amount of
oxygen utilized by the microorganisms during oxidation.
Boil-out - A procedure, usually utilizing heat and chemicals, to clean
equipment such as evaporators, heat-exchangers, and pipelines.
Bone Dry - See Oven Dry.
Break - A term used to denote a complete rupture of a web of paper or
paperboard during manufacture or some subsequent operation which
utilizes rolls of paper.
Breaker Stack - Two rolls, one above the other, placed in the dryer
section of a papermachine to compact the sheet and smooth out its
surface defects.
Breast Roll - A large diameter roll around which the Fourdrinier wire
passes at the machine headbox, just at or ahead of the point where the
stock is admitted to the wire by the stock inlet. The roll is covered
with corrosion-resistant metal or fiberglass and is usually driven by
the Fourdrinier wire.
Brightness - As commonly used in the paper industry, the reflectivity
of a sheet of pulp, paper, or paperboard for specified light measured
under standardized conditions.
Brightness Unit - An increment of measurement to assess the brightness
of paper.
Bristol - Paper characterized by its cardlike features.
Broke - Partly or completely manufactured paper that does not leave
the machine room as salable paper or paperboard; also paper damaged in
finishing operations such as rewinding rolls, cutting, and trimming.
Brown Stock - Pulp, usually kraft or groundwood, not yet bleached or
treated other than in the pulping process.
Calcium Hypochlorite - A chemical commonly used in the paper industry
for bleaching pulp, and in water treatment as a germicide.
Calender Stack - Two or more adjacent and revolving rolls which
provide even thickness control of the sheet and the final finishing of
its surface.
Capacity - Production of a unit, usually in tons per day.
Causticizinq - Process of making white liquor from green liquor by
addition of slaked lime. Most Na2C03^ is thereby converted to NaOH.
Cellulose - The major polysaccharide component of the cell walls of
all woods, straws, bast fibers and seed hairs. It is the main solid
609
-------
constituent of wood plants and is the principal raw material of pulp,
paper and paperboard.
Central Limit Theorem - A statistical theorem. If any random variable
X may be represented as a sum of any N independent random variables,
then in general, the sum X, for large N, is approximately normally
distributed. The importance of the theorem is that the mean x of a
random sample from any distribution is approximately normal with mean
n and variance rz/N if the sample size is large.
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) - A measure of the oxygen-consuming
capacity of organic and inorganic matter present in water or
wastewater. It is expressed as the amount of oxygen consumed from a
chemical oxidant in a specific test.
Chemical Wood Pulp - Pulp obtained by digestion of wood with solutions
of various chemicals. The principal chemical processes are the
sulfite, sulfate (kraft), and soda processes.
Chest (or Stock Chest) - A tank used for storage of wet fiber or
furnish.
Chipper - A machine consisting essentially of a revolving disk
equipped with heavy radially-arranged knives, which cuts pulpwood and
sawmill waste into slices or chips, diagonal to the grain.
Chips - Small pieces of wood used to make pulp.
Chlorine Dioxide - A chemical C102. used in pulp bleaching as a water
solution, usually in one or more of the latter stages of a multistage
sequence. It is prepared by a variety of processes at the plant site
usually from sodium chlorate, acid, and a reducing agent.
Chromophoric - Relating to color in a molecule, that can be attributed
to the presence of a chemical group or groups.
Clarifier - In wastewater treatment, a settling tank which removes
solids from wastewater through gravitational settling. The settled
material, called sludge, is removed from the tank bottom by a rake
arm.
Clay - In general, a natural, earthy, fine-grained material which
develops plasticity when wetted, but is hard when baked or fired.
Used as filler and for coating paper sheets.
Cleaner - A device which creates a cyclone effect to remove dirt and
other rejects from pulp using the differences in density to aid in
separation.
Coarse Papers - Paper used for grocery and shopping bags, sacks, and
special industrial papers.
610
-------
Coated - A term applied to paper and paperboard, whose surface has
been treated with clay or some other pigment and adhesive mixture or
other suitable material, to improve the finish with respect to
printing quality, color, smoothness, opacity, or other surface
properties. The term is also applied to lacquered and varnished
papers.
Color - Refers to standard APHA Platinum Cobalt Test, using standards
for color intensity of water samples. Commonly, standards are
prepared at various concentrations which later may be referenced as
units of color, derived from flow and concentration standard.
Color Plant - The portion of a fine papermill where pulp is dyed or
colored prior to being made into paper.
Color Unit - A measure of color concentration in water using NCASI
methods.
Composite Sample - A mixture of grab samples collected at the same
sampling point at different times.
Confidence Level (or Confidence Interval) - An interval about a sample
quantity which is likely to contain the population value, with some
specified assurance.
Consistency - The percentage, by weight, of air dry (or oven dry)
fibrous material in a stock or stock suspension. It is also called
density or concentration.
Converting - Any operation in which paper is made into a product, not
necessarily the final product to be made.
Cooking - Heating of wood, water, and chemicals in a closed vessel
under pressure to a temperature sufficient to separate the fibrous
portion of wood by dissolving lignin and other nonfibrous
constituents.
Cooking Liquor - The mixture of chemicals and water used to dissolve
lignin in wood chips.
Corrugating Medium - A paperboard used at corrugating plants to form
the corrugated or fluted (wave-like) member in making such products as
corrugated combined board and corrugated wrapping materials.
Cotton Linters - Short fibers surrounding the cotton seed.
Couch Pit - A pit or catch basin located under the couch roll on a
fourdrinier machine to receive water removed at the couch or wet broke
in case of a wet end break.
Couch Roll - This term refers to a roll primarily involved in
dewatering and picking off, or couching, of the newly formed paper web
from the wire on which it was formed and partially dewatered. The
611
-------
couch roll is involved in the transfer of the web to the wet press
felt for further dewatering.
Countercurrent Washing - Refers to a method of washing used on the
bleach plant or brownstock washers where fresh water is applied on the
last stage showers, and the effluent from each stage is used on the
washer showers of the preceding stage.
Creped - A light crinkled characteristic imparted to paper by a
creping device to increase surface area, absorption, and elasticity.
This is a customary procedure in tissue papers and fine decorative
papers.
Cylinder Machine - One of the principal types of papermaking machines,
characterized by the use of wire-covered cylinders or molds on which a
web is formed.
Debarking - See "Barking".
Decker - A piece of equipment commonly used to thicken pulp. It
consists of a wire-covered drum in a pulp vat. A vacuum is applied to
the center of the drum, commonly by a barometric leg, to pull water
out of the stock slurry.
Deflaker - A high-speed mixing and agitating machine through which a
fibrous stock suspension in water is pumped to obtain complete
separation and dispersion of each individual fiber, and break up of
any fiber lumps, knots, or bits of undefibered paper.
Deinking - The operation of reclaiming fiber from waste paper by
removing ink, coloring materials, and fillers.
Density - Weight per unit volume.
Diffusion Washing - Washing pulps with an open ended vessel by
diffusing or passing the wash media through the pulp mass.
Digester - The vessel used to treat pulpwood, straw, rags or other
such cellulosic materials with chemicals to produce pulp.
Disk Refiner - A motor-driven refiner whose working elements consist
of one or more matched pairs of disks having a pattern of ribs
machined into their faces and arranged so that one disk of the pair is
rotated. The other disk is usually stationary, but may be driven in
the opposite direction of rotation.
Dissolved Oxygen - Amount of oxygen, expressed in milligrams per
liter, dissolved in water.
Dissolved Solids - The total amount of dissolved material, organic and
inorganic, contained in water or wastes.
612
-------
Dissolving Pulp - A special grade of chemical pulp made from wood or
cotton 1 inters for use in the manufacture of regenerated cellulose
(viscose rayon and cellophane) or cellulose derivatives such as
acetate and nitrate.
Doctor Blade - A thin plate or scraper of wood, metal, or other hard
substance placed along the entire length of a roll or cylinder to keep
it free from the paper, pulp, or size, thus maintaining a smooth,
clean surface.
Dregs - The inert rejects from the green liquor clarifier of a pulp
mill.
Dregs Washer - A piece of equipment used to wash the green liquor
(Na2C03_) off the dregs prior to their disposal.
Dry End - The mill term for the drying section of the papermachine,
consisting mainly of the driers, calenders, reels, and slitters.
Esparto - A grass whose bast fibers are used to produce high-class
book and printing papers and medium class writing papers.
Evaporators - Process equipment used to concentrate spent pulping
liquors prior to burning.
Extended Aeration - A modification of the activated sludge process
that employs aeration periods of 18 hours or more.
Extraction Water - Water removed during a pulp manufacturing process.
Fatty Acid - A naturally-occuring organic compound of wood.
FeIt - The endless belt of wood or plastic used to convey and dewater
the sheet during the papermaking process.
Fiber - The cellulosic portion of the tree used to make pulp, paper,
and paperboard.
Filler - A material, generally nonfibrous, added to the fiber furnish
of paper. In paperboard manufacturing, the inner ply or plies of a
multiple layer product.
Fine Papers - Papers for printing, reproduction and writing.
Fines - Very short pulp fibers or fiber fragments and ray cells. They
are sometimes referred to as flour or wood flour.
Finishing - The various operations in the manufacture and packaging of
paper performed after it leaves the papermachine. Finishing
operations include supercalendering, plating, slitting, rewinding,
sheeting, trimming, sorting, counting, and packaging. Ruling,
punching, pasting, folding, and embossing are also sometimes
considered as finishing operations.
613
-------
Flour - A term applied to the fine fibers or fiber fragments of a
pulp. They are also known as fines.
Flume - A sloped trough with flowing water used to transfer pulpwood
from one point to another.
Fourdrinier Machine - A papermaking machine employed in the
manufacture of all grades of paper and paperboard. It may be divided
into four sections, the wet end, the press section, the drier section,
and the calender section.
Freeness - A measure of the rate with which water drains from a stock
suspension through a wire mesh screen or a perforated plate. It is
also known as slowness or wetness.
Furnish - The mixture of fibers and chemicals used to manufacture
paper.
Gland - A device utilizing a soft wear-resistant material used to
minimize leakage between a rotating shaft and the stationary portion
of a vessel such as a pump.
Gland Water - Water used to lubricate a gland. Sometimes called
"packing water".
Glassine Paper - Paper used as protective wrapping of foodstuffs and
products including tobacco products, chemicals, metal parts, as well
as for purposes where its transparent features are useful (i.e.,
window envelopes). This paper is grease resistant and has high
resistance to the passage of air and many essential oil vapors.
Gloss - The property of a surface which causes it to reflect light
specularly and is responsible for its shiny or mirror-like appearance.
Grab Sample - A sample collected at a particular time and place.
Grade - The type of pulp or paper product manufactured.
Greaseproof Paper - Paper used when resistance to oil and grease
penetration is necessary.
Green Liquor - Liquor made by dissolving the smelt from the kraft
process water and weak liquor preparatory to causticizing.
Green Liquor Clarifier - A piece of equipment used to separate the
dregs from the green liquor, allowing recovery of the green liquor for
processing into white "cooking" liquor.
Grinder - A machine for producing mechanical wood pulp or groundwood.
It is essentially a rotating pulpstone against which logs are pressed
and reduced to pulp.
614
-------
Grindstone - A natural or artifical stone which is channeled or
grooved and used for the manufacture of mechanical, chemi-mechanical,
and groundwood pulp.
Groundwood Papers - A general term applied to a variety of papers,
other than standard newsprint, made with substantial proportions of
mechanical wood pulp together with chemical wood pulps, and used
mainly for printing and converting purposes.
Hardwood - A term applied to wood obtained from trees of the angio-
sperm class, such as birch, gum, maple, oak, and poplar. Hardwoods
are also known as porous woods.
Headbox - The area of the papermachine that uniformly spreads and
distributes the dilute stock suspension and from which the stock flows
through a sluice onto the wire.
Hemicellulose - The secondary component of cell walls of wood
consisting primarily of short-chained (low molecular weight)
polysaccharides.
Hemp - A tall plant native to Asia having stems that yield a coarse
fiber used in the cordage and textile industry. Enters the paper
industry as old cordage or rough textile waste.
Hot Ponds - Heated ponds of water used to thaw frozen logs.
Impregnation - The process of treating a sheet or web of paper or
paperboard with a liquid such as hot asphalt or wax, a solution of
some material in a volatile solvent, or a liquid such as an oil. It
is also used as a term to describe a treatment in which fibrous raw
materials are infused with a chemical solution prior to a digesting or
fiberizing process. Sometimes called pre-impregnation.
Integrated - A term used to describe a pulp and paper mill operation
in which all or some of the pulp is processed into paper at the mill.
Jordan - A refiner whose working elements consist of a conical plug
rotating in a matching conical shell. The outside of the plug and the
inside of the shell are furnished with knives or bars commonly called
tackle.
Jumpstage Countercurrent Washing - Another type of countercurrent
washing in which fresh water is used on the last two stages and
filtrates from the acid stages are used on the preceding acid stage
with the filtrate from the final alkaline stage being used on the
preceding alkaline stage.
Jute - The glossy fiber of either of two East Indian plants of the
linden family used chiefly for sackling burlap and twine. In
papermaking, cuttings from burlap manufacture, washed sugarbagging and
wool tares used in wrapping cotton bales are used as raw material
sources.
615
-------
Kappa Numbers - The permanganate number of a pulp measured under
controlled conditions and corrected to be the equivalent of 50 percent
consumption of the permanganate solution in contact with the specimen.
It gives the degree of delignification of pulp through a wider range
than does the older permanganate number test.
Kiln - A furnace or oven used in the pulp and paper industry to burn
lime and calcium carbonate to produce CaO, which is used again with
green liquor to form white liquor.
Knots - An imperfection in paper or lumps in paper stock resulting
from: 1) incompletely defibered textile materials; the term applies
especially to rag paper manufacture; 2) small undefibered clusters of
wood pulp; and 3) the basal portion of a branch or limb which has
become incorporated in the body of the tree.
Knotter - A mechanical device, usually a screen, for removing knots
from wood pulp.
Kolmoqorov -
statistical test
frequency distribution
Smirnov Goodness of Fit Test - A nonparametric
of goodness of fit for an observed continuous
to the expected frequency distribution
representing the hypothesis.
Kraft - A descriptive term for the (alkaline) sulfate pulping process,
the resulting pulp, and paper or paperboard made therefrom.
Lap - See Wet Lap.
Lignin - A non-degradable organic compound of wood which is removed
during pulping.
Lime Mud - A solid residue generated from the white liquor
in the lime recovery/white liquor preparation process.
clarifier
Linerboard - A paperboard made on a Fourdrinier or cylinder machine
and used as the facing material in the production of corrugated and
solid fiber shipping containers.
Market Pulp - A pulp manufactured explicitly for purchase.
Mathieson Process - A process of producing chlorine dioxide, using 502^
as a reducing agent.
Mechanical
- Pulp produced by physical means without the use of
chemicals or heat, often referred to as groundwood.
Metering Rod - A rod used to apply coating to the surface of a sheet,
metering even thickness coating layers on the surface.
Molded Pulp Products - Contoured products, such as egg packaging
items, food trays, plates, and bottle protectors, made by depositing
616
-------
fibers from a pulp slurry onto a forming mold of the contour and shape
desired in the product.
Mud Filter - A piece of equipment used to thicken and wash lime mud
prior to burning it in the lime kiln.
Mud Washer - A piece of equipment used to wash the sodium base
chemicals from the lime mud prior to burning it in the lime kiln.
Newsprint - Paper, made largely from groundwood pulp with a small
percentage of chemical pulp added for strength, used chiefly in the
printing of newspapers.
Nip - The point at which two adjacent rolls come together.
Nonparametic Methods - Statistical methods which do not require the
assumption of a distributional form, such as a normal distribution.
Nonwood Fibers - Fibers not of the wood family used to produce pulp,
paper, and paperboard. Such as vegetable fibers (cotton, flax, jute,
hemp, cereal straw, bagasse, bamboo, esparto, abaca, sisal,
pineapple), animal fiber (wool), mineral fiber (asbestos, glass), and
man-made or artifical fiber (rayon, nylon, orlon, dacron).
Normal Distribution - A statistical distribution identified by a bell
shaped curve which is the most important of all continuous
distributions. This distribution curve is symetrical about the mean.
Nutrients - Elements, or compounds, essential as raw materials for
organism growth and development (as in activated sludge process).
Opacity - A measure of the index of transparency of paper, by
measuring the quantity of light that is transmitted through the paper
sheet.
Dry - A pulp or paper which has been dried to a constant weight
temperature of 100° to 105°C (212° to 221 OF).
Oxidation Pond - A low-rate biological process in which biological
treatment takes place in a man-made pond. Dissolved oxygen is
supplied by natural aeration processes such as wind, algae,
photosynthesis, and partial pressure.
Paperboard - One of the two broad subdivisions of paper products.
Paperboard is heavier in basis weight, thicker, and more rigid than
paper. In general, all sheets 12 points (0.012 in.) or more in
thickness are classified as paperboard. There are a number of
exceptions based upon traditional nomenclature. For example, blotting
paper, felts, and drawing paper in excess of 12 points are classified
as paper while corrugating medium, chipboard, and linerboard less than
12 points are classified as paperboard. Paperboard is made from a
wide variety of furnishes on a number of types of machines,
principally cylinder and fourdrinier. The broad classes are: 1)
617
-------
container board, which is used for corrugated cartons; 2) boxboard
which is further divided into, a) folding boxboard, b) special food
board, and c) setup boxboard; and 3) all other special types such as
automobile board, and building board.
Parametric Methods - Classical statistical methods which are effective
for samples taken from normally distributed populations.
Permanganate Number (K NO.) - This method (T-214-TAPPI Std.) is used
the relative "hardness" or bleach requirements of pulp.
it is the number of milliliters of 0.1 N potassium
absorbed by 1 gram of moisture-free pulp under
to determine
By definition,
permanganate solution
specified control conditions.
Peroxide - A chemical used in bleaching of wood pulps, usually
groundwood pulps.
Porosity - A measure of time required for 100 cm3 of air to flow
through a sample area. Also termed "air resistance" (in seconds per
100 cm3).
Precipitators - Equipment used to remove ash and other fine solids
from gases exiting the boilers and furnaces in a mill.
Precook ~ Prehydrolysis.
Prehydrolysis - Pre-steaming of chips in the digester prior to
cooking; usually associated with improved bleaching of kraft pulps.
Press - In a papermachine, a pair of rolls between which the paper web
is passed for one of the following reasons: 1) water removal at the
wet press; 2) smoothing and leveling of the sheet surface at the
smoothing press; and 3) application of surface treatments to the sheet
at the size press.
Printability - The ability of a paper surface to accept printing ink.
pth Percentile - A real number which divides the area under a
probability density function corresponding to a continuous
distribution into two parts of specified amounts (i.e., 99th
percentile divides the density function into one percent and 99
percent of the population).
Pulp - Cellulosic fibers after conversion from wood chips.
Pulper - A mechanical device used to separate fiber bundles in the
presence of water prior to papermaking.
Pulping - The operation of reducing a cellulosic raw material, such as
pulpwood, rags, straw, and reclaimed paper into a pulp suitable for
papermaking.
618
-------
Pulpwood - Those woods which are suitable for the manufacture of
chemical or mechanical wood pulp. The wood may be in the form of logs
as they come from the forest or cut into shorter lengths suitable for
the chipper or the grinder.
Rag Paper - A paper product manufactured by use of such materials as
cotton or linen threads, flax and hemp, raw cotton, and other textile
fibers and cotton linters, as well as rags.
Recovery Furnace or Recovery Boiler - A boiler which burns the strong
black liquor.
Red Stock - Sulfite pulp after the pulping process, prior to other
treatments, such as bleaching.
Reel - 1) A term applied to the untrimmed roll of paper of full
machine width wound on a large shaft at the dry end of the
papermachine. 2) The shaft on which the paper is first wound when it
leaves the driers. 3) A term for the operation of winding paper into
a reel.
Refiner - A machine used to rub, macerate, bruise, and cut fibrous
material, usually cellulose, in water suspension to convert the raw
fiber into a form suitable for formation into a web of desired
characteristics on a papermachine. See also Def.laker, Disk Refiner,
Jordan.
Refining - A general term applied to several operations, all of which
involve the mechanical treatment of pulp in a water suspension to
develop the necessary papermaking properties of the fibers and to cut
the fibers to the desired length distribution. See Refiner.
Rejects - Material unsuitable for pulp or papermaking which has been
separated in the manufacturing process.
Repulpinq - The operation of rewetting and fiberizing pulp or paper
for subsequent sheet formation. See also Pulper.
Resin - A special additive used to produce wet-strength in paper or
board.
Resin Acid - A naturally occuring organic compound in wood.
Rewinder - The term rewinder is often used for the winder in the
finishing room, distinguishing it from the winder which follows the
slitter at the end of the papermachine.
Rewinding - The operation of winding the paper accumulated on the reel
of papermachine onto a core to give a tightly wound roll suitable for
shipping or for use in the finishing or converting department.
Rosin - A brittle ye-llow or amber-colored natural resin that is
obtained from southern pine, (types: gum rosin, wood rosin, and
619
-------
tall-oil rosin). Used in paper-making for internal (beater) sizing of
paper.
Roundwood - Logs as received in the woodyard. The logs can be any
length and usually have not been debarked.
R-2_ Process - A modification of the Mathieson process.
Saltcake Loss - The loss of cooking chemical from the kraft cycle,
primarily at the brownstock washers or screen room.
Sample Mean - The average of a population calculated from the sample;
it is the most commonly used measure of the center of a distribution.
Its value equals the sum of the values of the observations divided by
the number of observations.
Saveall - A mechanical device used to recover papermaking fibers and
other suspended solids from a wastewater or process stream.
Screening - 1) The operation of passing chips over screens to remove
sawdust, slivers and oversize chips. 2) The operation of passing pulp
or paper stock through a screen to reject coarse fibers, slivers,
shives, and knots.
Screw Press - A device used to recover spent liquor from cooked chips.
Scrubbers - Equipment for removing noxious gases from the exhaust of
certain areas in the mill, such as the bleachery or washers.
Sheet - A term used extensively in the paper industry meaning: 1) A
single piece of pulp, paper, or paperboard; 2) the continuous web of
paper as it is being manufactured; 3) a general term for a paper or
paperboard in any form and in any quantity which, when used with
appropriate modifying words, indicates with varying degrees of
specificity, attributes of the product such as quality, class, use,
grade, or physical properties (Examples: a bright sheet, a kraft
sheet, a folding boxboard sheet); and 4) to cut paper or paperboard
into sheets of desired size from roll or web.
Shive - A bundle of incompletely separated fibers which may appear in
the finished sheet as an imperfection.
Side-Hill Screens - Steeply sloped screens usually used to remove some
water from suspensions of stock or other solids while retaining the
solid on the screen surface.
Size - Any material used in the internal sizing or surface sizing of
paper and paperboard. Typical agents are rosin, glue and gelatin,
starch, modified celluloses, synthetic resins, latices, and waxes.
Size Press - A unit of a paper machine, usually located between two
drier sections, used to apply, meter and distribute evenly size onto
paper.
620
-------
Sizing - 1) Relates to a property of paper resulting from an
alteration of fiber surface characteristics. In terms of internal
sizing, it is a measure of the resistance to the penetration of water
and various liquids. In terms of surface sizing, it relates to the
increase of such properties as water resistance, abrasion resistance,
abrasiveness, creasibility, finish, smoothness, surface bonding
strength, printability, and the decrease of porosity and surface fuzz.
2) The addition of materials to a papermaking furnish or the
application of materials to the surface of paper and paperboard to
provide resistance to liquid penetration and, in the case of surface
sizing, to affect one or more of the properties listed in 1).
Slaker - A device used to regenerate white liquor in the green liquor
recovery process.
Slasher - A saw or set of saws used to cut long logs to desired
length.
Slitter - A set of knives used to slit a reel of paper into the
desired widths as the reel is rewound.
Sludge - Semi-fluid mixture of fine solid particles with a liquid.
May contain fibrous and filler materials, and/or biological solids.
Slurry - A suspension of solid particles in a liquid.
Smelt - The molten inorganic cooking chemicals from the recovery
boiler.
Soda Process - The first process for the manufacture of chemical wood
pulp. Involves boiling wood in caustic alkali at a high temperature.
Softwood - Coniferous woods, such as pines, spruces, and hemlocks.
Solvay Process - A modification of the Mathieson process.
Spent Cooking Liquor - Cooking liquor after digestion containing
lignaceous, as well as chemical, materials.
Stock - 1) Pulp which has been beaten and refined, treated with
sizing, color, filler, etc. and which, after dilution, is ready to be
formed into a sheet of paper. 2) Wet pulp of any type at any stage in
the manufacturing process. 3) Paper in inventory or in storage. 4)
Paper or other material to be printed, especially the paper for a
particular piece of work. 5) A term used to describe a paper suitable
for an indicated use, such as coating raw stock, milk carton stock,
tag stock, and towel stock.
Stock Preparation - A term for the several operations which occur
between pulping (or bleaching) and formation of the web on a
papermachine. It may include, for example, repulping, beating,
refining, and cleaning.
621
-------
Stone - See Grindstone.
Sulfidity - Sulfidity is a measure of the amount of sulfur in kraft
cooking liquor. It is the percentage ratio of NaS, expressed as NaO,
to active alkali.
Thickener - A device using vacuum or gravity type suction mesh screen
to remove excess water from pulp.
Tolerance Level - Provides an interval within which at least a
proportion of the population lies with probability 1-a or more (i.e,
99 percent of the observations lie below a given value with 70 percent
confidence).
Unbleached - A term applied to paper or pulp which has not been
treated with bleaching agents.
Vegetable Parchment - A wet strength paper product used as wrapping
for moist materials.
Virgin Wood Pulp - Pulp made from wood, as contrasted to wastepaper
sources of fiber.
Viscosity - The resistance to flow in a liquid; a measurement used in
stock preparation as an indicator of pulp condition.
Washer - A piece of equipment, usually either a decker or side hill
screen type, equipped with showers to wash chemicals from pulp stock
or reject solids.
Wastepaper - A general term used to specify various recognized grades
such as No. 1 news, new kraft corrugated cuttings, old corrugated
containers, manila tabulating cards, coated soft white shavings, etc.,
which are used as a principal ingredient in the manufacture of certain
types of paperboard, particularly boxboard made on cylinder machines
where the lower grades may go into filler stock, and the higher grades
into one or both liners.
Web - The sheet of paper coming from the papermachine in its full
width or from a roll of paper in any converting operation.
Wet End - That portion of the papermachine between the headbox and the
drier section. See Fourdrinier Machine.
Wet Lap Machine - A machine used to form pulp into thick rough sheets
sufficiently dry to permit handling and folding into bundles (laps)
convenient for storage or transportation.
Wet Laps - Rolls or sheets of pulp of 30 to 45 percent consistency to
facilitate transportation of market pulp, and prepared in a process
similar to papermaking.
622
-------
Wet Press - The dewatering unit used on a papermachine between the
sheet-forming equipment and the drier section.
Wet Strength - The strength of paper after complete saturation with
water.
Wet Strength Additives - Chemicals such as urea and melanine
formaldehydes used in papermaking to impart strength to papers used in
wet applications.
White Liquor - The name applied to liquor made by causticizing green
liquor.
White Water - A general term for all papermill waters which have been
separated from the stock or pulp suspension, either on the
papermachine or accessory equipment, such as thickeners, washers, and
savealls, and also from pulp grinders.
Winder - The machine which winds into rolls, the paper coming from the
papermachine reel.
Wire - An endless moving belt made of metal or plastic, resembling a
window screen, upon which a sheet of paper is formed on a Fourdrinier
machine.
Wire Pj.t - A pit under the wire of a Fourdrinier machine, which
receives some of the water drained or pulled out of the paper sheet.
Wood Flour - Finely ground wood or fine sawdust used chiefly as a
filler.
Wood Preparation - A series of operations utilized to prepare wood to
a suitable state for further development into pulp, paper, and
paperboard. These operations include barking, washing, and chipping.
Woodroom - The area of a pulp mill that handles the barking, washing,
chipping or grinding of logs, and processing of purchased chips.
Woodyard - The area of a mill where roundwood is received and stored
prior to transport to the woodroom.
Yankee Machine - A papermachine using one large steam-heated drying
cylinder for drying the sheet, instead of many smaller ones. Commonly
used for manufacturing tissue.
Yield - In pulp and papermaking, the ratio of product to raw material.
623
-------
APPENDIX C
LEGEND OF ABBREVIATIONS
A: Acid or Dechlorination
AA: Atomic Adsorption
ADT: Air Dry Tons
APHA: American Public Health Association
API: American Paper Institute
ASB: Aerated Stabilization Basin
ATM: Atmospheres
Avg: Average
Ba: Barometric
BAT: Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
BCT: Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology
BCT Bleached Kraft: Paperboard, Coarse, and Tissue Bleached Kraft
B1K: Bleached Kraft
BMP: Best Management Practices
BODJ5: Biochemical Oxygen Demand (five day)
BP: Blow Pit Wash
BPT: Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
Brd: Board or Paperboard
BS: Bisulfite
Btu: British thermal units
C: Chlorination Stage (bleach)
°C: Degrees Centigrade
Ca: Calcium
CAC: Chemically Assisted Clarification
625
-------
CaO: Calcium Oxide
CFR: Code of Federal Regulations
Chg: Change
CMN: Coarse, Molded, Newsprint
CMP: Chemi-Mechanical Pulp
COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand
Cont: Contained
Conv: Converting
Corrug: Corrugating
Ctd: Coated
cu ft: cubic feet
cu m: cubic meter
cu m/day: cubic meter per day
d: day
D: Chlorine Dioxide Stage (bleach)
DAF: Dissolved Air Flotation
Dens: Density
DI: Deinked
Diss: Dissolving
DMR: Discharge Monitoring Report
DO: Dissolved Oxygen
DR: Drum Wash
E: Extraction Stage (caustic bleach)
E. Coli.: Escherichia Coliform
EC/GC: Electron Capture Detection/Gas Chromatography
EFF: Effluent
ENR: Engineering News Record
626
-------
EPA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Est: Estimate
Excl: Excluding
F: Fine
fps: feet per second
°F: degrees Fahrenheit
ft: feet
ft3: cubic feet
FW: Fresh Water
Fwp: From wastepaper
GAC: Granular Activated Carbon
gal: gallons
GC/MS: Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
gpd/sq ft: gallons per day per square foot
gpm: gallons per minute
GWD: Groundwood
GW. Spec.: Groundwood Specialties
H: Hypochlorite stage (bleach)
ha: hectare
hp: horsepower
hr: hour
HS: Hydrosulfite (bleach)
HW: Hardwood
H202: Hydrogen peroxide
HWK: Hardwood Kraft
Ind: Industrial
627
-------
Inf: Influent
Insul: Insulation
JTU: Jackson Turbidity Unit
K: Kraft
K.99: 99th Percentile of a Population
kg: kilogram, 1000 grams
kg/ha: kilograms per hectare
kg/kkg: kilograms per 1000 kilograms
kg/sq cm: kilograms per square centimeter
kgal: 1000 gallons
kgal/ton or kgal/t: 1000 gallons per ton
kkg: 1000 kilograms (metric ton)
kkg/day: 1000 kilograms/day
kl/kkg: kiloliters per thousand kilograms
kw: kilowatt
kwh: kilowatt hour
1: . liter
lb: pound
Ib/ac/day: pound per acre per day
Ib/gal: pound per gallon
Ib/t: pounds per ton
log: logarithm
mach: machine
MD: Maximum Day Limit
mg: million gallons
mgd: million gallons per day
mg/1: milligrams per liter
628
-------
MgO: Magnesium Oxide
min: minute
misc: miscellaneous
mkt: market
ml: milliliter
MLSS: Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids
MLVSS: Mixed Liquor Volatile Suspended Solids
MST: Median Survival Time
M30DA: Maximum 30 Day Average Limit
n: Number of daily observations
N.A.: Not Available or Not Applicable
Na: Sodium
Na2C03: Sodium Carbonate (Soda Ash)
NaOH: Caustic Soda (Sodium Hydroxide)
Na2S: Sodium Sulfide
Na2S04: Salt Cake (Sodium Sulfate)
Na2S03: Sodium Sulfite
NCASI: National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement
NH3: Ammonia
No.: Number
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSPS: New Source Performance Standards
NSSC: Neutral Sulfite Semi-Chemical
0: Oxygen (bleach)
03: Ozone
O&M: Operation & Maintenance
629
-------
P: Peroxide (bleach)
PA: Peracetic Acid (bleach)
PCB: Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PCP: Pentachlorophenol
PFTBA: Perfluorotributylamine
pH: alkalinity
PIMA: Paper Industry Management Association
pkg: packaging
POTW or POTWs: Publicly Owned Treatment Works
ppb: parts per billion
PPRIC: Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada
Pt-Co units: Platinum Cobalt Units
ppm: parts per million
%: percent
Prf: Proof
Print: Printing
prod.: production
PS: Post Storage
PSES: Performance Standards for Existing Sources
psi: pounds per square inch
psig: pounds per square inch gauge
PSNS: Performance Standards for New Sources
purch: purchased
PVA: Polyvinylacetate
QC/QA: Quality Control/Quality Assurance
RBC: Rotating Biological Contactor
RCRA: Resource Conservation Recovery Act
630
-------
RWL: Raw Waste Load
S: Surface Condenser
S&A: Sampling and Analysis
San: Sanitary
sat: saturated
SB: Settling Basin
SCOT: Support-Coated Open Tubular Capillary Column
Semi-chem: Semi-chemical
SOgi Sulfur Dioxide
spec: speciality
sq ft: square feet
sq m: square meter
sq m/g: square meter per gram
SRP: Salt Recovery Process
SS: Stainless Steel
SSL: Spent Sulfite Liquor
Std Meth: Standard Methods
Str: Structural
SW: Softwood
SWK: Softwood Kraft
t: ton
TAPPI: Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry
TCP: Trichlorophenol
TDK: Total Dynamic Head
Tech: Technical
Temp: Temperature
TMP: Thermo-Mechanical Pulp
631
-------
TOC: Total Organic Carbon
TOD: Total Oxygen Demand
ton: 2000 pounds
t/d or tpd: tons per day
TS: Total Solids
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
TVS: Total Volatile Solids
U: Unknown
UBK: Unbleached Kraft
Unctd: Uncoated
USSR: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Vibra: Vibrating
VOA: Volatile Organic Acid
Vr: Vapor recompression
vs: versus
V/Q: Volume to flow
v/v: percent by volume
W: Water Soak
WATDOC: Canada's Inland Waters Directorate
WF: Wood Flour
w/: w i th
w/o: without
WP: Wastepaper
WW: White Water
w/w: water to water
n: micro
632
-------
ug/1: micrograms per liter
yr: year
Z/A: Zurn/Attisholz
less than
less than or equal to
greater than
greater than or equal to
plus
minus
633
-------
LEGEND OF SYMBOLS ON FIGURES
Y
PROCESS DESIGNATIONS
FLOW DIRECTION
VALVE (NORMALLY OPEN)
VALVE (NORMALLY CLOSED)
CONTROL VALVE (SHOWN OPEN)
FLOOR DRAIN
PUMP
BLOWER
SHOWERS
A DISTRIBUTION NOZZLE
-------
APPENDIX D
REFERENCES
1. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , e_t aj. v. Train, United
States District Court for the District of Columbia, (8 ERC 2120),
June 7, 1976.
2. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , e_t al. v. Costle, United
States District Court for the District of Columbia, (12 ERC 1833),
March 9, 1979.
3. Federal Register, 39 FR 16578, 40 CFR 431, May 9, 1974.
4. Federal Register, 39 FR 18742, 40 CFR 430, May 29, 1974.
5. Federal Register, 42 FR 1398, 40 CFR 430, January 6, 1977.
6. Weyerhaeuser Co., e_t al. v. Douglas Costle, United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, September 5, 1978.
7. Federal Register, 45 FR 15952, 40 CFR 430, March 12, 1980.
8. Federal Register, 46 FR 1430, 40 CFR Parts 430 and 431, January
6, 1981.
9. Federal Register, 42 FR 6476, 40 CFR 128, February 2, 1977.
10. Rationale for the Development of_ BAT Priority Pollutant
Parameters, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Effluent Guidelines
Division, Washington, D.C., May 24, 1977.
11. Choi, P.S.K., W.J. Mueller, J.A. Jacomet, D.L. Hessel, J.A.
Gerling, and T.J. Collier, Multi-Media Pollution Assessment ir\ Pulp,
Paper, and other Wood Products Industry, December 1976.
12. Priority Pollutant Information and Data Assessment, Edward C.
Jordan Co., Inc., Portland, Maine, June 1977.
13. Survey Form—Pulp, Paper,and Paperboard Industry, Part I_ and Part
II, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 1977.
14. Survey Form—Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry, Errata Sheets,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 1977.
15. Sampling and Analysis Procedures for Screening of_ Industrial
Effluents for Priority Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, April 1977.
16. Procedures for Screening o_f Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Effluents
for Fourteen Nonconventional Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., December 1980.
635
-------
17. Screening Program Work Booklet, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.,
September 1977.
18. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association
and Water Pollution Control Federation, 14th Edition, 1975.
19. Process Data - Verification Program Mill Survey for Priority
Pollutants, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, B.C.,
July 1978.
20. Verification Program Work Booklet, Edward C. Jordan, Co., Inc.,
July 1978 (and all subsequent revisions).
21. Private Communication with National Council of the Paper Industry
for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., December 15, 1978.
22. An Investigation o_f Improved Procedures for Measurement o_f_ Mill
Effluent and Receiving Water Color, National Council of the Paper
Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), Technical
Bulletin No. 253, December 1971.
23. Federal Register, 44 FR 69464, 40 CFR 136, December 3, 1979.
24. Procedures for Analysis of Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Effluents
for Toxic and Nonconventional Pollutants, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., December 1980.
25. Long-Term Sampling Work Booklet, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.;
April, 1981.
26. Long-Term Sampling Work Booklet for Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Mills Manufacturing Deink Products, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.,
September, 1981.
27. Economic Impact Analysis of Effluent Limitations and Standards
for the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, October 1982.
28. Pulp and Paper Manufacture; The Pulping of Wood, Vol. !_, 2nd
Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1969.
29. Rydholm, S.A., Pulping Processes, Interscience Publishers, New
York, 1965.
30. Scott, R.H. and H.K. Willard, "The U.S. Sulfite Industry Faces
Present and Future Waste Control Needs," TAPPI, Vol. 56, No. 9,
September 1973.
31. Gehm, H.W., State-of-the-Art Review o_f Pulp and Paper Waste
Treatment, EPA Contract No. 68-01-0012, April 1973.
636
-------
32. Brown, R.W., et al., "Semi-Chemical Recovery Processes and
Pollution Abatement," Pulp and Paper Magazine of Canada, T-202, March
1960.
33. Hanson, James P., "No Sulfur Pulping Pushing Out NSSC Process at
Corrugating Medium Mills," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 52, No. 3, March 1978.
34. TAPPI Standard Method T217m-48.
35« The Bleaching of Pulp, TAPPI, Monograph Series, No. 27, 1963.
36. LockwQodls Directory of the Paper and Al1ied Trades, Vance
Publishing, 1978 Edition.
37. Paper and Pulp Mill Catalog and Engineering Handbook, Paper
Industry Management Association (PIMA), 1978 Edition.
38- Post's Pulp and Paper Directory, Miller Freeman Publications, San
Francisco, California, 1979 Edition.
39• Aejrated Lagoon Treatment of Sulfite Pulping Effluents, Report to
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control
Research Series Program No. 12040 ELW, December 1970.
40. Strier, Murray, Treat ability of_ Organic Priority Pollutants -
Part C - Their Estimated (30 Day Average) Treated Effluent
Concentrat ions - h Molecular Engineering Approach, 1978.
41. Development Document for Existing Source Pretreatment Standards
for the Electroplating Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-79-003, August 1979.
42. Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards for the Metal Finishing Point Source Category, EPA
440/l-82/091b, August 1982.
43. Fate of Priority Pollutants Jji Publicly Owned Treatment Works,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 440/1-82/303, September
1982.
44. Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards for Control of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in the Deink
Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., October 1982.
45. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Builders' Paper and Roofing Fe1t
Segment of the Builders' Paper and Board Mills Point Source Category,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-74-
026a, May 1974.
46. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New
Source Performance Standards for the Unbleached Kraft and
637
-------
Semi-chemical Pulp Segment of the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills
Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., EPA 440/I-74-025-a, May 1974.
47. Development Document for Interim Final and Proposed Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Proposed New Source Performance Standards
for the Bleached Kraft, Groundwood, Sulfite, Soda, Deink, and
Non-Integrated Paper Mills Segment of_ the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Point Source Category - Vol. 1 & 2, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-76/047-A, January 1976.
48. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines for the
Bleached Kraft, Groundwood, Sulfite, Soda, Deink, and Non-Integrated
Paper Mills Segment of_ the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source
Category, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA
440/1-76/047-b, December 1976.
49. Ekono, Inc., "Process Design Manual for Pollution Control in the
Pulp and Paper Industry, Part II, Water and Solids," Unpublished
Project for EPA Contract No. 68-01-1821, 1973.
50. Thompson, R., P.J. Savage, and C.Y. Chai, "In-Plant Reduction of
Suspended Solids at Espanola," 1974 Air and Stream Improvement
Conference, Toronto, Ontario.
51. SSVL, "The Environmental Care Project Half Year Report - January
1973," Printed for Swedish Pulp and Paper Mission to North America,
January 1973.
52. SSVL Environmental Care Project- Technical Summary, Stockholm,
Sweden, 1974.
53. Kramer, J. D., C.F. Cornell, D.C. Pryke, and G. Rowlandson,
"Spill and Effluent Control in the Closed-Cycle Bleached Kraft Pulp
Mill," TAPPI Environmental Conference, 1979.
54. Czappa, D. J., "In-Mill Close-up," TAPPI, Vol. 61, No. 11,
November 1978.
55. Becker, K.E., "Crown Simpson Finds Process Revisions Less Costly
than Primary Treatment," TAPPI, Vol. 62, No. 6, June 1979.
56. A Study of_ the Relation Between Residual Soda and
Water-Ex tractable Components of_ Vacuum Drum Washed Kraft Pulp and of
Repulped Corrugated Container Effluent Characteristics, NCASI, Stream
Improvement Technical Bulletin No. 277, October 1974.
57. Edde, H. and E. Sebbas - Bergstrom, "Internal Pollution Controls
in the Pulping Industry," Journal WPCF, Vol. 46 No. 11, 1974.
638
-------
58. Rapson, William H. "Using Caustic Extraction Effluent in
Production of Bleached Pulp," Canadian Patent 802,084, December 24,
1968.
59. Twitchell, J. and L. Edwards, "Kraft Mill Material Balance
Calculations for Brown Stock Washing, Screening and Oxygen Bleaching,"
TAPPI, Vol. 57, No. 9, September 1974.
60. "Summary Report on the Evaluation of Internal Process Control
Technology Used in the Pulp and Paper Industry for Effluent
Reduction," Unpublished Contractor's Report to EPA, October, 1977.
61. CIP Research, Ltd., Water Re-use and Recycle ijn Bleacheries,
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa,
Ont., CPAR Report No. 47-1, 1972.
62. Kalish, John, "Swedish Mill Modernizes and Looks to New Future
for Sulfite Process," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 51, No. 9, September 1977.
63. Internal Memorandum from H.J. Wilk (ITT Rayonier Inc., Olympia
Research Division) Concerning Sulfite Effluent BOD, July 25, 1975.
64. Rath, P., "Process Wastewater: Reclamation or Disposal," TAPPI
Environmental Conference, April 26-28, 1976.
65. "Pollution Reduction by Internal Measures at Bleached Kraft
Mills," Paper Trade Journal, Vol. 156, No. 44, October 1972.
66. "Proceedings of the 1976 NCASI Central-Lakes States Regional
Meeting," NCASI Special Report 77-02, March 1977.
67. Relation Between Process Water Quality Characteristics and Its
Reuse Potential in Combination Board Mills, NCASI Technical Bulletin
No. 282, September 1975.
68. The Relationship Between Process Water Quality Characteristics
and its Reuse Potential jji the Nonintegrated Manufacture of_ Tissue and
Toweling, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 289, November 1976.
69. Casey, J.P., Pulp and Paper Chemistry and Chemical Technology,
2nd Edition, Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, 1960.
70. Broughton, Robert W., "Needled Felts Get Another Lease on Life
With New Shower Method," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 43, No. 11, November
1969.
71. Mulford, J.E. and R. Cooke, "Reuse of Nash Vacuum Pump Seal
Water," TAPPI. Vol. 52, No. 12, December 1969.
72. Brown, G.W., "Computer Simulation of Papermaking to Evaluate
Water Reuse Strategies," Mead Corporation, (Unpublished Paper).
639
-------
73. David, E., et. al., "Oxygen Bleaching - Two Years of Operating
Experience in France," Pulp and Paper International, June 1976.
74. Myburgh, C.J., "Operation of the Enstra Oxygen Bleaching Plant,"
TAPPI, Vol. 57, No. 5, May 1974.
75. Andersson, K.A., "The Non-Polluting Bleach Plant," TAPPI, Vol.
60, No, 3, March 1977.
76. Rapson, W.H., D.W. Reeve, e_t al. , "The Closed Cycle Bleached
Kraft Pulp Mill - 1978," TAPPI, 1978.
77. Rapson, W.H., D.W. Reeve, and J.A. Isbister, "The Closed Cycle
Concept Kraft Mill at the Great Lakes Paper Co., Ltd. - A Status
Report," Proceedings of the PIMA Conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota,
June 22, 1978.
78. Anderson, L.G. and S. Lindberg, "Uddeholm Cleans Bleach Effluents
and Solves Chlorine Removal Question," Pulp and Paper International,
Vol. 16, No. 6, June 1974.
79. Lowe, K.E., "Chesapeake Launches Oxygen Bleaching," Pulp and
Paper, October 1973.
80. MacLeod, M., "Evolution and Revolution in Pulp Bleaching - A
Current Perspective," Pulp and Paper, May 1976.
81. Carpenter, W.L., I. Gelman, e_t al., "A Comparison of Effluent
Characteristics from Conventional and Oxygen Bleaching Sequences -
Results of a Laboratory Study," CPPA-TAPPI International Pulp
Bleaching Conference, Vancouver, B.C., September 1973.
82. Mattson, D., Unpublished Trip Report on ERCO Envirotech - Closed
Cycle Kraft Mill, E.G. Jordan Co., Washington, D.C., October 19,
1978.
83. Cox, C., Unpublished Trip Report to Great Lakes Paper Co.,
Thunder Bay, Ontario, October 1, 1980.
84. Gall, R.J. and F.H. Thompson, "The Anti-Pollution Sequence - A
New Route to Reduced Pollutants in Bleach Plant Effluent," TAPPI, Vol.
56, No. 11, November 1973.
85. Moy, W.A., K. Sharpe, and G. Betz, "New Bleaching Sequence for
SBK, Cuts Effluent Color and Toxicity," Pulp and Paper, Canada, Vol.
76, No. 5, May 1975.
86. Jenkin, T.E., "Eastex Displacement Bleaching Update," TAPPI,
Alkaline Pulping Conference Preprint, 1976.
87. Displacement Bleaching, Unpublished Report on Mill Visit to
Weyerhaeuser Corp., Plymouth, N.C., E.G. Jordan Co., March 14, 1979.
640
-------
88. Gould, M. and J. Walzer, "Mill Waste Treatment by Floatation at
Delair," Chem 26, November 1972.
89. Fuller, R.S., "Screening of Effluents," TAPPI, Vol. 56, No. 6,
June 1973.
90. Easty, Dwight B., L.G. Borchardt, and B. A. Wabers, Institute of
Paper Chemistry, Removal of_ Wood Derived Toxics from Pulping and
Bleaching Wastes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,
OH, EPA 600/2-78-031, 1978.
91 . Investigation of_ Chlorinated and Nonchlorinated Compounds in the
Lower Fox River Watershed, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
905/3-78-004, Chicago, Illinois, September 1978.
92. Walden, C.C. and J.C. Mueller, B.C. Research, Investigation of_
the Effect of_ BOD Reduction Systems on Toxicity, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 150-1, 1973.
93. Leach, J.M., J.C. Mueller, and C.C. Walden, "Biodegradability of
Toxic Compounds in Pulp Mill Effluents," Presented at 63rd Annual
Meeting of the Technical Section, CPPA, February 1977.
94. Tracy, J.C., "Secondary Waste Treatment Nutrient and Aeration
Studies," Southern Pulp and Paper Manufacturer, February 1970.
95. Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr., Industrial Waste Water Control,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1966.
96. Edde, J., "Field Research Studies of Hydraulic Mixing Patterns in
Mechanically Aerated Stabilization Basin," Proceedings International
Congress on Industrial Waste Waters, Stockholm, Sweden, 1970.
97. McKeown, J.J. and D.B. Buckley, "Mixing Characteristics of
Aerated Stabilization Basins," TAPPI, 8th Water and Air Conference,
1971 .
98. Chandrasekaran K., R.J. Reis, G.'C. Tanner, and H.I. Rogers,
"Removing Toxicity in an Aerated Stabilization Basin," Pulp and Paper,
Canada, Vol. 79, No. 10, October 1978.
99. McKeown, J.J., The Effect of_ Temperature on Treatment Plant
Performance and Related Temperature Studies, NCASI Technical Bulletin
No. 312, 1978.
100. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., Wastewater Engineering, McGraw-Hill Book
Co., 1972.
101. Technical data supplied by Union Carbide Corp., Nov. 29, 1977.
641
-------
102. Harvey, E. and H. Vaandering, "NSFI Pilots UNOX System for
Secondary Treatment," Pulp and Paper, Canada, Vol. 76, No. 2, February
1975.
103. Brock, T.D., Biology of_ Microorganisms, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1970.
104. Van Soest, R. and D. Guatam," Tertiary Treatment Quality for a
Secondary System Utilizing the Zurn-Attisholz Process," Proceedings of
the 28th Industrial Waste Conference, Lafayette, Indiana, 1973.
105. Rice, B. and R. Van Soest, "Practical Experience of a New
Effluent Plant One Year After Start-Up," TAPPI, Vol. 58, No. 10,
October 1975.
106. "Two Stage Activated Sludge Better Than Single for Toxicity
Reduction," Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry, November 5, 1977.
An Assessment of Kraft Bleachery Effluent Toxicity Reduction
Activated Sludge, Wastewater Technology Centre, Fisheries and
Environmental Protection Service, Environment Canada, EPS 4-WP-77-3,
1977.
108. Gillespie, W.J., D.W. Marshall, and A.M. Springer, "A Pilot
Scale Evaluation of Rotating Biological Surface Treatment of Pulp and
Paper Wastes", TAPPI Environmental Conference, April 17-19, 1974.
109. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd. and NCASI, Development of. Biosurf
Process Parameters for the Pulp and Paper Industry, Distributed by
CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 102-1 and 102-2, 1973-74.
110. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd., Anaerobic Contact Filter Process
for the Treatment of Waste Sulfite Liquor, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Serivce, Dept. of the Environment,
Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 103, 1973.
111. McKinney, R.E., Microbiology for Sanitary Engineers, McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1962.
112. Clark, J.W. and W. Viesman Jr., Water Supply and Pollution
Control, International Textbook Company, 1970.
113. Streeter, H.W. and E.B. Phelps, A Study o_f Pollution and Natural
Purification of. the Ohio, Public Health Bulletin No. 146, United
States Public Health Service, February 1925.
114. Vamvakias, J.G. and J.P. Miller, "Temperature Response of
Aerated Stabilization Basins With and Without Nutrients," Fifth
Paper-Industry and Stream Improvement Conference, Canadian Pulp and
Paper Association, Technical Paper T87.
642
-------
115. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd., Biological Treatment and Toxicity
Studies, Environment Canada, Environmental Protection Service,
Economic and Technical Review Report EPS3-WP-73-6, Ottawa, Canada,
1973.
116. McKeown, J.J., D.B. Buckley, and I. Gellman, "A Statistical
Documentation of the Performance of Activated Sludge and Aerated
Stabilization Basin Systems Operating in the Paper Industry," Purdue
Industrial Waste Conference XXIX, 1974.
117. Manual of_ Practice ~ Biological Waste Treatment in the Pulp and
Paper Industry, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 214, April 1968.
118. Burns, O.B., Jr., and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., "A Statistical Study
of Five Years Operation of the West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company's
Waste Treatment Plant," Purdue Industrial Waste Conference XVIII,
1963.
119. Adams, C.E. and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., "Nitrification Design
Approach for High Strength Ammonia Wastewaters," Journal WPCF, March
1977.
120. Adams, C.E., "Removing Nitrogen From Wastewater," Environmental
Science & Technology, August 1973, pp. 696-701.
121. Process Design Manual for Nitrogen Control, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Technology Transfer, October 1975.
122. Gulp, R.L. and G.L. Gulp, Advanced Wastewater Treatment, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1971.
123. Environmental Science Services Corporation, Water Resource
Management Series, Volume ]_ - Manual of_ Treatment Processes, 1970.
124. Liptak, B.C., Environmental Engineer's Handbook, Vol. ]_ - Water
Pollution, Chilton Book Co., Radnor, Pa., 1974.
125. Operation of_ Wastewater Treatment Plants, Manual of Practice No.
11, Water Pollution Control Federation, Lancaster Press, Lancaster,
Pa., 1976.
126. Stumm, W. and J.J. Morgan, Aquatic Chemistry, Wiley
Interscience, 1970.
127. Rebhun, M., C.H. Saliternik, and H. Sperber, "Purification of
Paper Mill Effluents by Flocculation," TAPPI, Vol. 50, No. 12,
December 1967.
128. Ives, K.J., "Theory of Operation of Sludge Blanket Clarifiers,"
Proceedings - The Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 39, Session
1967-1968, January 1968.
643
-------
129. Filtration and Chemically Assisted Clarification of Biologically
Treated Pulp and Paper Mill Industry Wastewaters, Draft Report to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc.,
1979.
130. Rice, N., A.A. Kalinske, and W.I. Arnold, A Pilot Study of
Advanced Wastewater Treatment for the Ticonderoga Mill, August 1977.
131. Personal Communication with Dana Dolloff, International Paper
Co., June 26, 1980.
132. Amberg, H.R., I. Gellman, and R.H. Scott, "The Status of Water
Pollution Control in the Soviet Union," TAPPI, Vol. 58, No. 11,
November 1975.
133. Scott, R.H., "Sophisticated Treatment of Baikal Pulp Mill in
USSR," Pulp and Paper, Vol. 44, No. 4, April 1978.
134. Treatment of_ Calcium-Organic Sludges Obtained from Lime
Treatment of_ Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents - Part I_, NCASI Technical
Bulletin No. 62, 1955.
135. Treatment o_f_ Calcium-Organic Sludges Obtained From Lime
Treatment of_ Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents - Part I_I_, NCASI Technical
Bulletin No. 75, 1955.
136. Oswalt, J. L., and J.G. Land Jr., Color Removal from Kraft Pulp
Mill Effluents by Massive Lime Treatment, EPA Project 12040 DYD, 1973.
137. Gould, Matthew, "Color Removal from Kraft Mill Effluent by an
Improved Lime Process," TAPPI, Vol. 56, No. 3, March 1973.
138. Gould, Matthew, "Physical-Chemical Treatment of Pulp Mill
Wastes—Woodland, Maine," Proceedings of the Purdue International
Waste Conference, 1970.
139. Smith, O.D., R.M. Stein, and C.E. Adams Jr., "How Mills Cope
With Effluent Suspended Solids," Paper Trade Journal, Vol. 159, No.
17, July 1975.
140. Peterson, R.R. and J.L. Graham, CH2M Hill, Inc., Post Biological
Solids Characterization and Removal from Pulp Mill Effluents, EPA
600/2-79-037, January 1979.
141. Preliminary Data Base for Review of_ BATEA Effluent Limitations
Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Point Source Category, Edward C. Jordan Co., Inc., June
1979.
142. Amberg, H.R., Crown Zellerbach Corp., Comments on E.C. Jordan
Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September 1979.
644
-------
143. Cashen, R.F., St. Regis Paper Co., Comments on E.C. Jordan's
Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September 18, 1979.
144. Button, E.F., ITT Rayonier Inc., Comments on E.C. Jordan's Draft
Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp,
Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September, 1979.
145. Barton, Curtis A., The Proctor & Gamble Co., Comments on E.C.
Jordan's Draft Report, "Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA
Effluent Limitations Guidelines, NSPS, and Pretreatment Standards for
the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category," September
1979.
146. National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), "Summary of Data-Chemically Assisted
Clarification of Biologically Treated Wastewaters," Presented in
Meeting with U.S. EPA/Edward C. Jordan Co., Portland, Maine,
February 7, 1980.
147. Olthof, M.G., "Color Removal from Textile and Pulp and Paper
Wastewaters by Coagulation," Vanderbilt University, Ph.D. Thesis,
1974.
148. Olthof, M.G. and W.W. Eckenfelder Jr., " A Laboratory Study of
Color Removal from Pulp and Paper Waste Waters by Coagulation," TAPPI,
Vol. 57, No. 8, August 1974.
149. Berov, M.B., et a1., "Optimum Conditions for Chemical Treatment
of Effluents," Bum. Prom., No. 2: 17, 1975 (Russia); Abstract Bulletin
Institute of_ Pjapj?r Chemistry, Vol. 46, No. 2, 1975.
150. Dugal, M.S., J.O. Church, R.M. Leekley, and J.W. Swanson, "Color
Removal in a Ferric Chloride - Lime System," TAPPI, Vol. 59, No. 9,
September 1976.
151. Rush, R.J. and E.E. Shannon, "Review of Colour Removal Technology
in the Pulp and Paper Industry," Environment Canada, 1975.
152. Vincent, D.L., Colour Removal From Biologically Treated Pulp and
Paper Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Dept. of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 210-1, March 31, 1974.
153. Environmental Quality Systems, Inc., Technical and Economic
Review of_ Advanced Waste Treatment Processes, Office of the Chief of
Engineers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1973.
154. Process Design Manual for Carbon Adsorption, U.S.
Protection Agency, Technology Transfer, October, 1973.
Environmental
645
-------
155. Timpe, W.G., et al. , "Selection of Pilot Treatment Systems in
the Use of Activated Carbon for Water Renovation in Kraft Pulp and
Paper Mills," FWQA Report, Serial No. 028-70, Pensacola, Florida,
December 1970.
156. Bishop, D.F., e_t al., "Studies on Activated Carbon Treatment,"
Journal WPCF, Vol. 39, No. 2, 1967.
157. Hansen, S.P. and F.J. Burgess, "Carbon Treatment of Kraft
Condensate Wastes," TAPPI, Vol. 51, No. 6, June 1968.
158. Timpe, W.G. and E.W. Lang, "Activated Carbon Treatment of
Unbleached Kraft Effluent for Reuse - Pilot Plant Results," TAPPI
Environmental Conference, San Francisco, California, May 1973.
159. Davis, John C., "Activated Carbon — Prime Choice to Boost
Secondary Treatment," Chemical Engineering, April 11, 1977.
160. Callahan, W.F. and A.B. Pincince, "An Activated Carbon
Wastewater Treatment System at Fitchburg, Mass.," TAPPI, Vol. 60, No.
11, November 1977.
161. Taylor, James L., "Full Scale Experience with Activated Carbon
Treatment of Paper Industry Wastewater," Preceedings of 1979 NCASI
Northwest Regional Meeting, NCASI Special Report No. 80-03, February
1980.
162. T.W. Beak Consultants, Ltd., Optimization of Physical-Chemical
Treatment Processes, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 176-1, 1974.
163. Kimura R. and K. Izumisawa, "Approach to Entirely Closed
Boardmill by Activated Carbon," Japan TAPPI, KAMI PAGIKYOSHI, Vol. 30,
No. 1, January 1976.
164. Smith, D.R. and H.F. Berger, "Waste Water Renovation," TAPPI,
Vol. 51, No. 10, October 1968.
165. Weber, W.J., Jr. and J.C. Morris, "Kinetics of Adsorption in
Columns of Fluidized Media," Journal Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol. 37, No. 4, April 1965.
166. DeWalle, F.B., E.S.K. Chian, and E.M. Small, "Organic Matter
Removal By Powdered Activated Carbon Added to Activated Sludge,"
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, April, 1977.
167. Button, David G., "Removal of Priority Pollutants with a Combined
Powdered Activated Carbon - Activated Sludge Process," Proceedings of
the 179th National American Chemical Society Meeting in Houston,
Texas, March 23-28, 1980.
168. Hutton, D.G. and F.L. Robertaccio, U.S. Patent 3,904,518,
September 9, 1975.
646
-------
169. Crame, L.W., "Activated Sludge Enhancement: A Viable Alternative
to Tertiary Carbon Adsorption," Proceedings of the Open Forum on
Management of Petroleum Refining Wastewater, June 1977.
170. Grieves, C.G., e_t al., "Powdered Carbon Improves Activated Sludge
Treatment," Hydrocarbon Processing, October 1977.
171. Dehnert, J.F., "Case History - The Use of Powdered Activated
Carbon with a Biodisc-Filtration Process for Treatment of Refinery
Wastes," Proceedings of the Open Forum on Management of Petroleum
Rpfin^rv Wa<=;1-pwa1-pr . JUMP 1977.
r i kA »»» W X» t^f f A, *- %-* \_, >—• \^ \-t A. * « ^ ku» *\S 4. W J 1 S»- *-^ £^
Refinery Wastewater, June 1977
172. Heath, W.H., Jr., "Combined Powdered Activated Carbon -
Biological ("PACT") Treatment of 40 MGD Industrial Waste," Presented
to Symposium on Industrial Waste Pollution Control at the 173rd
American Chemical Society National Meeting, March 1977.
173. Robertaccio, F.L., "Combined Powdered Activated Carbon-Biological
Treatment: Theory and Results," Proceedings of the Open Forum on
Management of Petroleum Refinery Wastewaters, June 1977.
174. Ng, K.S., Pilot Plant Evaluation of Mechanical Foam Breaking and
Jet Foam Generation Systems, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 508-1, 1976.
175. Brunner, C.A. and D.G. Stephan, "Foam Fractionation," Industrial
and Engineering Chemistry, Vol. 57, No. 5, May 1965.
176. Miller, J.K.P. and L.K. Legatski, "Investigation of a High
Pressure Foam Wastewater Treatment Process," Federal Water Quality
Adm., Water Pollution Control Research Series 17030 ESX 04/70, 1970.
177. Ng, K.S., Study of. Foam Separation as_ a Means o.f Detoxifying
Bleached Kraft Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat,
Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 233-1
and 2, 1974-75.
178. Walden, C.C. and J.C. Mueller, B.C. Research, Investigation of.
the Effect of BOD Reduction Systems on Toxicity, Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment,
Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 150-2, 1974.
179. Bliss, F.R., Polishing of_ Paper Mill Effluents by_ Micro-
straining, Strathmore Paper Co., (Unpublished Paper), 1973.
180. Bliss, F.R., Papermill Wastewater Treatment by_ Microstraining,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, EPA 600/2-76-
252, 1976.
181. Oher, Klaus, "Electrochemical Decolorization of Kraft Mill
Effluents," Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, February
1978.
647
-------
182. Das Gupta, Sankar and S. Mohanta, "Electrochemical Process for
Treatment of Kraft Mill Effluent," Distributed by CPAR Secretariat,
Canadian Forestry Service, Department of the Environment, Ottawa,
Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 523-1, 1976.
183.
Ltd.
Personal Communication with Dr. Sankar Das Gupta, HSA Reactors,
184. Selivanov, V.G., V.P. Svitel'skii, V.G. Ryumin, and N.B.
Samborskii, "Purification of Effluents from the Manufacture of Paper
and Board by Electrochemical Method," Bumazh. Prom. No. 8:24-25,
August 1976.
185. Merer, D.O. and F.E. Woodard, "Electrolytic Coagulation of
Lignin From Kraft Mill Bleach Plant Wastewaters," TAPPI, Vol. 59, No.
1, January 1976.
186. Chan, A., D.W. Herschmiller, and D.R. Manolescu, Environcon,
Ltd., Ion Floatation for Color Removal From Kraft Mill Effluents,
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Department
of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 93-1, 1973.
187. Barclay, H.G., C. Heitner, and S. Prahacs, Review of_ Catalytic
Oxidation of Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR
Ottawa,
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service,
Report No. 147-1, 1973.
188. Hough, G.W. and R.W. Sallee, "Treatment of
Condensates," TAPPI, Vol. 60, No. 2, February 1977.
Ontario, as CPAR
Contaminated
189. East,
1974-75.
R.C. PhD., Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, CRC Press,
190. Wilson, M.A., R. LeBlanc, and I.
Toxicity of Condensates from Sulfate
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian
Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 324-1, 1975.
Middelraad, "Reduction of
Waste Liquor Evaporators,"
Forestry Service, Ottawa,
191. Liem, A.J., V.A. Naish, and R.S. Rowbottom, "An Evaluation of the
Effect of Inplant Treatment Systems on the Abatement of Air and Water
Pollution from a Hardwood Kraft Pulp Mill," Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 484-1, October 1977.
192. Lewell, P.A. and M. Williams,
Distributed by CPAR Secretariat,
Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 8-1F, 1971
Ultrafiltration of Sulfite Liquor,
Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa,
193. Wiley, A.J., L.E. Dambruch, P.E. Parker, and H.S. Dugal, Inst. of
Paper Chem., "Treatment of Bleach Plant Effluents by Combined Reverse
Osmosis and Freeze Concentration Process," Paper presented at TAPPI
Environmental Conference, April 1978.
648
-------
194. Prahacs, S., A. Wong, and H.G. Jones, "Amine Treatment Process
for Decolorization of. Pulp Mill Effluents-Laboratory Studies,"
A.I.Ch.E. Symp. Ser. 70., No. 139, 1974.
195. Prahacs, S. and A. Wottg, "The Use of High Molecular Weight Amines
for the Purification of Pulp Mill Effluents," Distributed by CPAR
Secretariat, Canadian Forestry Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR
Report No. 1-2, 1971.
196. Sanks, Robert L. "Ion Exchange Color and Mineral Removal from
Kraft Bleach Wastes," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, B.C., EPA-R2-73-255, May 1973.
197. Lindberg, S. and L.B. Lund, "A Nonpolluting Bleach Plant,"
TAPPI, Vol. 63, No. 3, 1980.
198. Chriswell, C.D., et al., "Comparison of Macroreticular Resin and
Activated Carbon as Sorbents," Journal of the American Water Works
Association, December 1977.
199. Kim, Byung R., V.L. Snoeyink, and F.M. Saunders, "Adsorption of
Organic Compounds by Synthetic Resins," Journal Water Pollution
Control Federation, January 1976.
200. Rogers, I.H., J.A. Servizi, and R.W. Gordan, "An Effective Method
for the Isolation of Fish-Toxic Organic Solutes from Pulp Mill
Effluents," Environment Canada Bi-Monthly Research Notes, Vol. 28, No.
4, 1972.
201. Leach, J.M. and A.N. Thakore, "Identification of the
Constituents of Kraft Pulping Effluent that Are Toxic to Juvenile Coho
Salmon," Journal of_ the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vol. 30,
No. 4, April 1973.
202. Wilson, M.A. and C.I. Chappel, Reduction of_ Toxicity of_ Sulf ite
Mill Effluents, Distributed by CPAR Secretariat, Canadian Forestry
Service, Ottawa, Ontario, as CPAR Report No. 49-3, 1974.
203. Proposed Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guide!ines
and Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard and the Builders'
Paper and Board Mills Point Source Categories, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-80/025-b, December
1980.
204. McKinney, R.E., "Mathematics of Complete-Mixing Activated Sludge,
Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, Proceedings of the ASCE,
May 1962.
205. Gibbons, J.D., Nonparametric Statistical Inference, McGraw-Hill,
1971 .
649
-------
206. Final Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and Standards for the Timber Products Point Source Category, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA 440/1-81/023,
January 1981.
207. Miller and Freund, Probability and Statistics for Engineers,
Prentice Hall, 1965.
208. Lilliefors, H., "On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests for Normality
with Mean and Variance Unknown," Journal of_ the American Statistical
Association, Vol. 62, 1967.
209. Fisher, R.A., Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 14th
Edition, New York, Hafner Publishing Company, 1975.
210. Robert S. Means Co., Building Construction Cost Data 1977, 35th
Edition, 1976.
211. Employment and Earnings, U.S. Bureau of the Census, April 1978.
212. Employee Benefits 1977, Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A., April
1978.
213. Energy User News, A Fairchild Business Newspaper, Vol. 3, No. 32,
August 7, 1978.
214. Engineering News Record, March 23, 1978.
215. Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Department of Energy, March 1979.
216. Process Design Manual - Municipal Sludge Landfills,
EPA-625/1-78-010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 1978.
217. Chemical Marketing Reporter, November 6, 1978.
218. Robert S. Means Co., Building Construction Cost Data 1979, 37th
Edition, 1978.
219. A Survey of Pulp and Paper Industry Environmental Protection
Expenditures and Operating Costs-1976, National Council of the Paper
Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), NCASI Special
Report 77-06, August 1977.
220. Edde, H., "Influence of Pulping Yield on the Cost of Modernizing
Sulfite Pulp Mill Liquor Recovery," Proceedings of the 1978 TAPPI
Environmental Conference.
650
-------
221. The Energy Resources Company, Disposal Practices for Selected
Industrial Sol id Wastes, Final Report for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Contract No. 68-01-5814, May
1980.
222. McKeown, J.J., "Sludge Dewatering and Disposal-A Review of
Practices in the U.S. Paper Industry," TAPPI, Vol. 62, No. 8, August
1979.
223. Communication between Joseph Aloisio and Mr. Howard Fullerton of
the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
651
-------
CONVERSION TABLE
Multiply (English Units) By
English Unit Abbreviation Conversi on
To Obtain (Metric Units)
Abbreviation Metric Unit
acre
acre-feet
British Thermal
Unit
British Thermal
Unit/pound
cubic feet
per minute
cubic feet
per second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Farenheit
feet
gallon
gallon per
minute
gallon per ton
horsepower
inches
pounds per
ac
ac ft
BTU
BTU/lb
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
OF
ft
gal
gpm
gal/ton
hp
in
psi
0,405
1233.5
0.252
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555(°F-32)*
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
4.173
0.7457
2.54
0.06803
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg cal /kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
°C
m
1
I/sec
1/kkg
kw
cm
atm
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram-
calories
kilogram
calories
per kilo-
gram.
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centi-
meters
degree
Centigrade
meters
liter
liters per
second
liters per
metric ton
kilowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
square inch
(absolute)
652
-------
(continued)
Multiply (English Units) By To Obtain (Hetric Units
English Unit Abbreviation Conversion Abbreviation Metric Unit
million gallons
per day
pounds per square
inch (gauge)
pounds
board feet
ton
mile
square feet
MGD
psi
Ib
b.f.
ton
mi
ft2
3.7 x 10-3
(0.06805 psi + 1)*
0.454
0.0023
0.907
1.609
.0929
cu m/day
atm
Jcg
cu m, m3
kkg
km
m2
cubic meters
per day
atmospheres
kilograms
cubic meters
metric ton
kilometer
square meters
* Actual conversion, not a multiplier.
653
------- |