EPA-44011-74-026 a
Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards for the
BUILDER'S PAPER &
ROOFING FELT
Segment of the Builder's Paper
and Board Mills
Point Source Category
\\\\ 197-1
t>
>.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
o l, Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
Abstract
This document presents the findings of a study of the builders
paper and roofing felt segment of the builders paper and board
industry for the purpose of developing effluent limitations ffor
existing sources and standards of performance for new sources to
implement sections 304(b) and 306 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (The "Act").
Effluent limitations are set forth for the degree of effluent
reduction attainable through the application of the "Best
Practicable Control Technology Currently Available," and the
"Best Available Technology Economically Achievable," which must
be achieved by existing point sources by July 1, 1977 and July 1,
1983, respectively. "Standards of Performance for New Sources"
set forth the degree of effluent reduction which is achievable
through the application of the best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating methods, Or Other
alternatives.
The identified technology for July 1, 1977 is good in-plant waste
water management followed by preliminary screening, primary
sedimentation, and biological treatment. The 1977 limitations
can be met by mills using only biological treatment, but a
combination of in-plant controls and biological treatment may
prove to be more cost effective.
The identified technology for July 1, 1983 and for new source
performance standards is in-plant waste water controls and
biological treatment. In addition, coagulation and filtration is
identified for TSS reduction. The identified in-plant controls
may require some major changes in existing processes and design
modifications to existing equipment. The identified in-plant
controls and external treatment systems are available for
implementation at mills within this subcategory.
Supportive data and rationale for development of the proposed
effluent limitations and standards of performance are contained
in this report^
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Conclusions '
II Recommendations 3
III Introduction 5
Purpose and Authority 5
Summary of Methods Used for Development of the
Effluent Limitations and Standards
of Performance 6
General Description of Industry Segment 11
Production Classification 15
Capacity Projections 15
IV Subcategorization of the Industry 17
Factors of Consideration 17
Rationale for Selection of Subcategory 17
V Water Utilization and Waste Characteristics 19
Process water Utilization 19
General Use 19
Specific Process Use 20
Stock Preparation Area 20
Wet End Area 20
Dry End Area 22
Asphalt Saturating Process 23
Unit Process Waste Loads 22
Total Raw Waste Load 22
VI Selection of Pollutant Parameters 25
Waste Water Parameters of Significance 25
Rationale for Section of Identified Parameters 25
Rationale for Parameters Not Selected 28
VII Control and Treatment Technology 33
Internal controls 35
Recovery and Recycle Concepts 35
Internal Recovery Equipment 36
External Treatment Technology 40
Removal of Suspended Solids 40
Biological Treatment 41
Two Stage Biological Treatment 45
Temperature Effects 46
Tertiary Suspended Solids Reduction Technologies 46
Sludge Dewatering and Disposal 49
Effluent Levels Achieved by Existing Treatment
Systems at Builders Paper and Roofing Felt Mills 51
-------
CONTENTS (CONT'D)
Cost, Energy f Non-Water Quality Aspects, and
Implementation Requirements
Xl New Source Performance Standards
55
Costs 55
Energy Requirements 61
Non-Water Quality Aspects of Control Treatment
Technologies 62
Air Pollution Potential 62
Noise Potential 62
Solid Wastes and Their Disposal 63
Implementation Requirements 64
Availability of Equipment 64
Availability of Construction Manpower 67
Construction Cost Index 67
Land Requirements 68
Time Required to Construct Treatment Facilities 68
IX Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available 73
Introduction 73
Effluent Reduction Attainable Through the Application
of Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available . 74
Identification of Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available 75
Rational for Selection of Best Practicable Control
Technology Currently Available 77
Rationale for Selection of BPCTCA Effluent Limitations 79
X Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 81
Introduction 81
Effluent Reduction Attainable Through the Application
of Best Available Technology Economically Achievable 82
Identification of Best Available Technology
Economically Achievable 82
Rationale for Selection of Best Available Technology
Economically Achievable 84
Rationale for Selection of BATEA Effluent Limitations 86
87
Introduction 57
Recommended New Source Performance Standards 07
Identification of Technology to Achieve New Source
Performance Standards „„
Rationale for Selection of Technology for New Source
Performance Standards gg
XII Acknowledgements
vi
-------
CONTENTS (CONT'D)
Section ••'•• J-"
93
XIII References
95
XIV Glossary
99
Appendices
vii
-------
TABLES
Page
1 Effluent Limitations and
New Source Performance Standards 3
2 Comparative Test Results on Split Samples 10
3 Raw Waste Characteristics 24
4 Summary of Internal Technologies 33
5 Summary of External Technologies 34
6 Estimated Distribution of External Treatment Systems 34
7 Effluent Levels Achieved By Existing Treatment Systems 53
8 Internal and External Controls Used in the
Development of Costs 58
9 Effluent Treatment Cost and Quality 60
10 BPCTCA Effluent Limitations 74
11 BATEA Effluent Limitations 82
IX
-------
FIGURES
Page
1 Distribution of Building Paper and Roofing Felt
Mills in the U. S. (1973) 13
2 Building Paper and Roofing Felt Process Diagram 16
3 Process Flow Diagram of Building Paper and Felt Mill 21
4 Effluent Treatment at Building Paper Mills 44
5 Sludge Dewatering and Disposal 52
6 Total Water Pollution Control Expenditures 65
7 waste water Treatment Equipment Sales 66
8 Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index 69
9 Land Required For Waste Water Treatment 70
10 Time Required to Construct Waste Water Facilities
Conventional and Turnkey Contract 71
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
For the purpose of establishing effluent limitations and stan-
dards of performance, the builders paper and builders board
industry has been subcategorized. The building paper and roofing
felts subcategory is presented in this report. The hard board
segment is covered in a separate report on the forest products
industry.
Within the building paper and roofing felts subcategory, factors
such as age and size of plants, processes employed, climate, and
waste treatability confirm and substantiate this
subcategorization.
An extensive search for information and data was made for mills
within the subcategory. Information and data were gathered from
all possible sources including mill records, waste water sampling
surveys, technical and trade associations, literature, NPDES
permit applications, and interviews with industry authorities.
The effluent limitations and performance standards were based
upon extensive analysis of the accumulated information and data
as described above. Identification of the technology levels of
BPCTCA, BATEA, and NSPS were made and effluent qualities which
could be achieved by each of the technologies were determined.
Evaluation of all available information and data resulted in the
selection of the following significant waste water parameters for
which limitations were developed:
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (five day-20°C) (BOD5)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Settleable Solids
- PH
Limitations have been set forth on BOD5, TSS, settleable solids,
and pH for July 1, 1977. The identified technologies for BPCTCA
includes good in-plant waste water management followed by
external controls of preliminary screening, primary
sedimentation, and biological treatment. The 1977 limitations
can be met by mills using only secondary treatment, but a
combination of in-plant controls and biological treatment may be
more cost effective. It is estimated that increases in
production costs to achieve the 1977 effluent limitations will
average $7.20 per metric ton ($7.83 per short ton) depending upon
specific mill conditions relating to available technologies at
the particular mill.
Limitations have been set forth on BOD5, TSS, settleable solids,
and pH for July 1, 1983. The identified technolgies for BATEA
include in-plant waste water controls and secondary treatment.
The identified in-plant controls may require some major changes
in existing processes and design modifications to existing
-------
equipment. In addition, coagulation ana nitration
identified for TSS reduction. The estimated increases n
production costs of upgrading existing mills from BPCTCA to BATEA
will average $2.40 per metric ton ($2.67 per short ton) depending
upon specific mill conditions.
For new source standards have been set forth on BOD5, TSS,
settleable solids, and pH. The identified technologies for new
sources include in-plant waste water controls, secondary
treatment, and filtration. The in~plant controls reflect
internal improvements which can be achieved through effective
design and layout of mill operations. The identified in-yplant
cpntrols and external treatment systems are available for
implementation at mills within this subcategory.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the information in this report, the effluent
limitations and standards of performance shown in Table 1 are for
the building paper and roofing felt subcategory.
Table 1
Ef^uent_Limitations-and_New
Source Performance Standards
Values in kq/kkq(Ibs/tonl
BODS TSS pH settleable
Daily^Max 30_Day Daily^Max Range
BPCTCA
3.0 (6.0) 5.0 (10.0) 3.0 (6.0) 5.0 (10.0) 6.0-9.0 0.2 ml/1
BATEA
1.0 (2.0) 1.75 (3.5) 1.0 (2.0) 1.75 (3.5) 6.0-9.0 0.2 ml/1
NSPS
1.0 (2.0) 1.75 (3.5) 1.0 (2.0) 1.75 (3.5) 6.0-9.0 0.2 ml/1
The maximum average of daily values for any 30 consecutive day
period should not exceed the 30 day effluent limitations shown
above. The maximum for any one day should not exceed the daily
maximum effluent limitations shown above. The limitations are in
kilograms of pollutant per metric ton of production (pounds of
pollutant per short ton of production) except for the pH range
and settleable solids limitations. Mill effluents should always
be within the settleable solids concentration and the pH range
limitations shown.
The above effluent limitations and new source performance
standards for the TSS parameter are measured by the technique
utilizing glass fiber filter disks as specified in S^andagd
Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Vfatgr (13 Editionf
Production is defined as the annual average level of production
off the machine (air dry tons).
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE MID AUTHORITY
Section 301(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended in 1972, requires the achievement by not later than July
1, 1977, of effluent limitations for point sources, other than
publicly owned treatment works, which are based on the
application of the best practicable control technology currently
available as defined by the Administrator pursuant to Section
304(b) of the Act. Section 301(b) also requires the achievement
by not later than July 1, 1983, of effluent limitations for point
sources, other than publicly owned treatment works, which are
based on the application of the best available technology
economically achievable which will result in reasonable further
progress toward the national goal of eliminating the discharge of
all pollutants, as determined in accordance with regulations
issued by the Administrator pursuant to Section 304(b) of the
Act. Section 306 of the Act requires the achievement by new
sources of a Federal standard of performance providing for the
control of the discharge of pollutants which reflects the
greatest degree of effluent reduction which the Administrator
determines to be achievable through the application of the best
available demonstrated control technology, processes, operating
methods, or other alternatives, including, where practicable, a
standard permitting no discharge of pollutants.
Section 304(b) of the Act requires the Administrator to publish
within one year of enactment of the Act, regulations providing
guidelines for effluent limitations setting forth the degree of
effluent reduction attainable through the application of the best
control measures and practices achievable including treatment
techniques, process and procedure innovations, operating methods,
and other alternatives. The regulations proposed herein set
forth effluent limitations guidelines pursuant to Section 304(b)
of the Act for the builders paper segment of the builders paper
and builders board point source category.
Section 306 of the Act requires the Administrator, within one
year after a category of sources is included in a list published
pursuant to Section 306 (b) (1) (A) of the Act, to propose
regulations establishing Federal standards oF performance for new
sources within such categories. The Administrator published in
the Federal Register of January 16, 1973, (38 F.R. 1624), a list
of 27 source categories. Publication of the list constituted
announcement of the Administrator's intention of establishing,
under Section 306, standards of performance applicable to new
sources within the builders paper and builders board point source
category, which was included within the list published January
16, 1973.
-------
The limitations in this document identify (in terms of chemical,
physical, and biological characteristics of pollutants) the level
of pollutant reduction attainable through the application of the
best practicable control technology currently available and the
best available technology economically achievable. The
limitations also specify factors which must be considered in
identifying the technology levels and in determining the control
measures and practices which are to be applicable within given
industrial categories or classes.
In addition to technical factors, the Act requires that a number
of other factors be considered, such as the costs or cost-benefit
study and the nonwater quality environmental impacts (including
energy requirements) resulting from the application of such
technologies,
SUMMARY OF METHODS USED FOR DEVELOPMENT QF THE EFFLUENT
LIMITATION GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
The basic procedures used in developing the effluent limitations
and standards of performance are discussed below.
With the objective to identify mills which could be considered as
representing the best existing control technology, a list of
every mill in the above subcategory was compiled and is shown in
Appendix I. All available information regarding the internal
processes employed, types of products, waste treatment facilities
in operation, and quantity/quality of the waste water discharge
was then tabulated for each mill. Evaluation of the results of
this search activity made apparent that very few mills provided
biological treatment of their effluent. The majority, on the
order of 50 - 70 percent of mills in this subcategory, discharge
to a public sewer system.
This information was then evaluated to determine which mills
should be investigated further by on-site surveys. The main
criteria used during the evaluation were the quantity of waste
water discharge and quality of the discharge as characterized by
BOD5 and suspended solids. The former indicated the extent of
in-plant control measure practices and the latter showed the
extent and performance capabilities of their waste treatment
facilities.
Previous to sending a full sampling survey team to the above
mills, a reconnaissance team was sent to the mills selected from
the above list of qualified candidates. At this time the mill
personnel were briefed on the objectives of the project, the
information that was necessary for the successful completion of
the project, and the work program to be carried out by the survey
team. A copy of the reconnaissance and mill survey
questionnaires is shown in Appendix III. At this time the
availability of laboratory facilities, and the feasibility of
-------
obtaining verification data by a field survey was determined. A
tour of the plant and the treatment facilities, and a review of
the available mill records on waste streams, both internal and
external, were made. The objective of this effort was to verify
that the mill represented the best practicable control technology
and that the mill records could be validated by a field survey
team. The types of cost records and information required for the
project were described at this time so that the mill would have
the time to compile this information which was then collected by
the mill survey team.
The field survey team consisted of three to seven people. The
goal was to obtain analytical and flow data on various in-plant
controls and external treatment systems. Samples were collected
every hour for 3-7 days, composited on a 24 hour basis, and
analyzed on-site by the survey team or by an independent
laboratory. All analyses were performed following methods
described in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Waste Water (13th Edition) (1) or equivalent EPA-accepted
methods. (See Appendix III) .
During the survey, samples were split between the mill laboratory
personnel and the survey team. The objective of this effort was,
if necessary, to generate an "analytical procedure factor" to be
applied to the 12 month data collected by the mill. This would
place all data on the same analytical base. However, development
of the "analytical factor" did not prove to be feasible because
of the wide variations in testing procedures, and much of the
data did not correlate between procedures. Table 2 shows a
sample comparison between results of the split samples.
The data, subject to any corrections indicated from the above
procedures, was used to generate a broad based data bank. The
tons per day of production for each mill were corrected to air-
dry tons (ADT) as required. Reported flows by mills were
evaluated and corrected if necessary to include all waste water
flows which should be reported as contributing pollutant loads.
The summary bloc of data shown in Table 7, Section VII, is the
basis for the limitations developed in this report. They were
developed from twelve months of daily records from each mill,
when available. The data that have been selected are believed to
be in accordance with accepted standards of the analytical
procedures verified by survey programs described in detail above.
In addition to the above accumulated data and information, the
full range of control and treatment technologies existing
applicable to builders paper and roofing felt segment was
identified. This included an identification of each distinct
control and treatment technology, including both in-plant and
end-of-process technologies, which ar'e existent or capable of
being designed for each subcategory. It also included an
identification in terms of the amount of constituents and the
chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of pollutants,
-------
of the effluent level resulting from the application of each of
the treatment and control technologies. The problems,
limitations, and reliability of each treatment and control
technology and the required implementation time were also
identified. In addition, the nonwater quality environmental
impact, such as the effects of the application of such
technologies upon other pollution problems, including air, solid
waste, noise, and radiation was also identified. The energy
requirements of each of the control and treatment technologies
were identified as well as the cost of the application of such
technologies.
The information, as outlined above, was then evaluated to
determine what levels of technology constitute the "best
practicable control technology currently available," "best
available technology economically achievable," and the "best
available demonstrated control technology, processes, operating
methods, or other alternatives." In identifying such
technologies, various factors were considered. These included
the total cost of application of technology in relation to the
effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from such application,
the age and size of equipment and facilities involved, the
process employed, the engineering aspects of the application of
various types of control techniques or process changes, non-water
quality environmental impact (including energy requirements), and
other factors.
Piscus sion_gf^Data Sources
The data and information base which was used in the development
of the effluent limitations was generated by the methods
discussed above. The sources of data included the following:
1. Mill records of selected mills
2. Short term survey results of selected mills
3. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Applications
U. American Paper Institute (API)
5. Literature
6. Personal interviews with recognized authorities in the
industry
Mill_Records
Data were accumulated from the selected mills. The records
covered 12-13 months operating time. Most of the mill data was a
result of daily sampling and analysis. The mill data was
carefully screened in order to have an accurate set of data for
-------
each mill. In order to evaluate the validity of the mill data,
surveys of sampling and analytical techniques were made as
discussed previously. Mill waste waters were sampled for a
period of 3-7 days with samples being split between the mill
laboratory and the contractor's laboratory.
Short Term Survey
As mentioned above, surveys were conducted of the selected mills
for 3-7 days with a basic objective of evaluation of mill data.
Twenty-four hour composites of hourly samples were taken of the
mills' waste water during the surveys. Sampling and analytical
techniques were conducted using EPA-^accepted procedures.
NPDES Applications
Data from NPDES applications represents an average operating
condition for the mills. The data frequently does not compare to
data from other sources for the same mills. Thus, the NPDES data
were only used as a comparison check to other data.
Literature
Frequently, the mill effluent data in published literature is not
correlated with the particular mill which it represents. Also,
the reliability of the data is sometimes questionable since
sampling and analytical methods are usually not presented and
since the time period which the data represents is frequently
omitted. Thus, the data in literature was carefully screened
before consideration.
2s.e. of Data Sources
All of ,the above sources were used in developing the effluent
limitations. However, it should be pointed out that the data
sources are not equal in reliability and thus, they were weighted
accordingly. The data from the selected mills' records were used
as the major source. In addition, the short term survey data for
the selected mills without adequate mill records were used in
conjunction with the mills' data in developing the limitations.
The short term survey data represents essentially one data point
over a year's time and thus should be within the range of the
year's operating data. These two sources were used as the basis
for the effluent limitations. The data from other sources were
used mainly as backup data from which to check the mill and short
term survey data.
-------
Table 2
BUILDING PAPER AND ROOFING FELT SUBCATEGORY
COMPARATIVE TEST RESULTS ON SPLIT SAMPLES
BY MILL BP-1 AND BY EPA
Data In nig/1
FINAL EFFLUENT
DAY BODS TSS
1
2
3
4
5
*25/51
75/84
55/64
35/53
38/56
78/94
89/72
81/65
68/44
21/31
Averages 46/62 67/61
*mill result/EPA result
10
-------
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF INDUSTRY^SEGMENT
This report pertains to the builders paper segment of the
builders paper and board point source category. The terms
"building papers" and "roofing felts" are more commonly applied
to the products of this segment and are, of course, aptly
descriptive of heavy papers used in the construction industry.
As a group, they are identified more by nomemclature appropriate
to their use rather than by significant variations in the raw
materials or the process used to manufacture them. Both products
are composed of varying combinations of wood, waste paper and/or
rags. The process used for the production of both types of
product is similar in concept, differing basically to accommodate
the particular combinations of raw materials used. Each of the
raw materials described above requires different equipment to
reduce the material to individual fibers. The fibers are then
blended in varying proportions and formed on a paper machine
which is common to both types of product.
building papers are generally characterized as saturating papers,
flooring paper, and deadening papers which are used in the
Construction and automotive industries. They differ from
unsaturated roofing felts only in thickness and possible chemical
additives added to the process in order to achieve a specific
property, i.e., strength, density, wet strength, water repellant
capability, or similar physical qualities.
The function of dry roofing felt is to provide a strong, highly
absorbent material as support and backing for the bituminous
coatings necessary for the water-proofing characteristics
essential to the finished product (2). One or more saturating
coats of melted asphalt are applied to the finished roll of felt
in a process which follows the papermaking process. If the
product is a roofing roll, the sheet is given a thin coat of mica
and talc after the saturating process and is then the finished
product. "Mineral-surfaced" products used as roof-flashing rolls
or shingles, are surfaced with granules of slate, stone, or ce-
ramic following the saturating and talc processes (3). This
coating provides resistance to weathering and to damage caused by
roof maintenance activities. Roll roofing does not require this
granular coating since it is protected by gravel placed in a
heavy coat of bitumen when installed. Roll roofing felts of wood
and asbestos fibers are exceptionally strong and weather and heat
resistant, making it possible to install them without providing a
protective coat of gravel or granular material. The roofing
materials described above account for a high percentage of the
production of the mills which are the subject of this report.
The objective of this project is to,, study mills that generate a
wasteload that is attendant to the manufacture of building paper
and roofing felt, some of these products are made by mills which
also produce other paper and paperboard products, manufacturing
building paper and dry felt only on an intermittent basis. These
products also derive from mills which produce both building paper
11
-------
and buxlding board, insulating board, or other combinations of
products. in keeping with the objective, therefore, this report
deals exclusively with those mills which produce building papers
and felts as their primary product.
Eighty-one mills in this group are listed in Appendix I. Al-
though there is some overlapping, they are divided generally in
accord with their announced production as follows:
Dry Roofing Felt 17 mills
Saturated/Coated Roofing Felt 58 mills
Combination of The Above 6 mills
it was found during the course of this study that these mills
quite frequently change their production, discontinuing one or
more products and introducing new ones. Thus, this list is
illustrative only.
The total daily production capacity of these 81 mills is
approximately 4898 metric tons (5400 short tons) per day. The
daily capacity of the largest mill is 295 metric tons (325 short
tons) and the smallest output is 20 metric tons (22 short tons).
The size distribution of the mills is shown below.
kkg/day (short tons/day) % of mills
Less than 45.3 (50) 30%
55.3-87.7 (50-99) 40%
90.7-135 (100-149) 20%
Greater than 136 (150) 10%
They are geographically distributed over most of the United
States as illustrated in Figure 1. The majority of them are
located in or near metropolitan areas where the quantity of waste
paper required is available. Because they are so located, many
of them, 60 to 75 percent is estimated, dispose of their wastes
in municipal sewerage systems.
Total annual U.S. production of construction paper, the term
utilized by the Bureau of the Census and the American Paper
Institute (API), in 1971 was 1,473,000 metric tons (1,623,000
short tons) (4).
Production Processes
In terms of quality, raw material requirements for building paper
and felt are not, generally, as demanding as those for finer
grade papers. Thus, more flexibility exists in those that can be
used and in the way they are prepared. These products generally
consist of waste paper and defibrinated wood, wood flour, or pulp
mill rejects although some rags or other materials can be
employed.
12
-------
Figure 1
DISTRIBUTION OF BUILDING PAPER AND ROOFING FELT
MILLS IN THE U.S. (1973)
-------
Some mills receive wood as logs which are chipped on
premises. Others purchase wood chips, sawdust, or wood flour.
Or in the case of many mills, equipment is available to handl^
these materials alternatively. Rags and waste paper arrive a"t
the mill in bales. Old, low grade rags not suitable for
recycling into fine paper may be utilized for building paper and
felt. Similarly lower specifications for reclaimed paper result
in frequent variations in quality of this raw material.
Various specifications require different preparations of raw
materials to impart desired characteristics such as strength,
absorptive capacity, heat and flame resistance, and flexibility.
The furnish for roofing felt must be such that the product can
meet specifications of weight, tensile strength, and flexibility
to enable it to withstand any strain to which it may be later
subjected in the roofing plant (3) . It must be able to absorb
from two to three times its weight in bituminous saturants and
six times its weight in saturants and granule coatings.
Stock Preparation
Fibers are prepared for use by various methods which are
determined by the fiber source. Wood chips are pulped
mechanically in an attrition mill. This is a, refiner containing
fixed and rotating discs between which the chips pass on a stream
of water. In some operations, this is preceded by cooking, or
steaming, the chips with water for a short period in a digester,
a large metal pressure vessel. This softens the chips and
reduces the mechanical energy required. Chemicals are nqt
generally utilized.
The pulp is discharged from the attrition operation as a slurry
which goes to a stock chest for storage. It is then blended with
other raw materials. Wood flour requires no pretreatment an$
enters the system in the blending chest.
After they are cut and shredded, rags are placed, along with
fresh or process water, in a beater tank at about six percent
consistency. Here a rotating cyclindrical bladed element, which
operates in conjunction with stationary blades, both impacts th^
fiber and causes its continuous circulation around the beater and
back through the attrition zone. Thus, progressive fiberizincj
occurs. After a period of several hours, when the charge is
sufficiently defibered, the pulp is diluted and removed to a dump
chest
Waste paper is similarly treated in beaters or pulpers. in the
pulper operation, the paper follows the water circulation in a
large open vat and is repeatedly exposed to rotating impeller
blades. Over a period of time it is ripped, shredded, and
finally defibered (2) . Accessory equipment separates and removes
metal and other contaminants.
-------
After the stock is blended, it is subjected to refining and
screening ahead of the forming process.
Some building papers are highly sized with resins and alum.
Felts may be sized with bituminous materials or contain mold-
proofing or fungicidal materials.
Papermaking
These products are manufactured principally on single-cylinder
paper machines from the raw materials reduced to fiber in the
stock preparation area and transported to the machine in a dilute
slurry. A rotating wire-covered cylinder retains the fibers
which form a sheet on its surface and permits water to drain
through. This sheet is then removed from the wire by a cloth
felt which carries it through a press section where additional
water is removed from the sheet. It is self supporting as it
leaves the press sections and passes through the steam-heated
multi-drum drier section from which it is cut to width and
rolled. At this stage it is considered a dry or unsaturated
felt. The above paper forming and drying process is the type
Used by all manufacturers treated in this study.
A process flow diagram of a building paper and roofing felt mill
is shown in Figure 2.
PRODUCTION CLASSIFICATION
The U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Manufactures (4),
classifies construction paper (dry basis before saturating) as
Product Code No. 26612 under the four-digit category 2661,
building paper and board.
CAPACITY PROJECTIONS
Only a very minor increase in construction paper capacity is
forecast through 1975 (6). The percentage of waste paper used as
a constituent is projected to rise from 27.1 percent in 1969 to
40 percent in 1985 (7) . Research, development, and
implementation of programs in response to environmental problems
associated with the disposal of solid wastes, to which "paper"
makes a large contribution, may support this projection.
15
-------
FIGURE 2
BUILDING PAPER AND ROOFING
FELT PROCESS DIAGRAM
WOOD CHIPS
WASTE
PAPER
DEFIBRINATOR
r
PULPER
STOCK
CHEST
REFINER
CHEST
WHITE
WATER
CHEST
SAVE-ALL
BUILDING PAPER
or
UNSAT. FF1TS
EFFLUENT
STOCK
CHEST
JORDAN
CHEST
SCREEN
FORMING
MACHINE
DRIER
SATURATING &
COATING
REJECTS
PROCESS
WATER
ROOFING FELTS]
SHINGLES
LEGEND
PRODUCT8 RAW MAT'L -
PROCESS WATER -
BACK WATER
STEAM
REJECTS --~-^.
EFFLUENT
16
-------
SECTION IV
SUBCATEGORIZATION OF THE INDUSTRY
FACTORS OF CONSIDERATION
This study is concerned with the building paper and roofing felt
segment of the builders paper and board mills point source
category. In order to identify any relevant discrete
subcategories within this segment, the following factors were
considered:
1. Raw materials
2. Production processes
3. Products produced
t. Size and age of mills
5. Waste water characteristics and treatability
6. Geographical location
After analyzing these factors, it is concluded that this segment
constitutes one discrete subcategory defined as BUILDING PAPER
AND ROOFING FELT, which is the production of heavy papers used in
the construction industry from cellulose and mineral fibers
derived from waste paper, wood flour and sawdust, wood chips,
asbestos, and rags, without bleaching or chemical pulping.
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF SUBCATEGORY
Raw Materials
Cellulose fiber is the principal raw material used. While there
are differences in the sources of these fibers, as noted above
and in Sections III and V, such differences have only a minor
impact on waste water characteristics and treatability. All raw
wastes containing cellulose respond to the same treatment
techniques for removal of suspended solids and BODS. The details
of these techniques are described in Section VII.
Other raw materials, such as asphalt used in some roofing felt
mills, do not contribute significantly to waste water
characteristics, as described in Section V.
17
-------
Production^Processeg
All mills within the subcategory studied utilize the same basic
production processes. Although there are deviations in equipment
and production procedures , these deviations do not significantly
alter either the characteristics or the treatability of the waste
water generated,,
Products_Produ(ged
As delineated in Section III,, there is a wide variety of products
produced,, ranging from roofing felts to gasket materials. As
shown in Section V, waste water characteristics do not vary
significantly as a function of product produced.
While older mills tend to have higher levels of pollutants in the
waste water than newer mills, there are 8»old" mills which have
applied available technology , principally in the area of recycle,,
to reduce such pollutant levels to those obtained by '-'new" mills.
Size of most mills varies only within a relatively narrow range
from nearly 45 kkg (50 tons) to about 227 kkg (250 tons) per day.
Geograghical_Location
Waste water characteristics and treatability do not differ
significantly with geographical location, irrespective of the raw
materials and process employed and the products produced.
However , the local climate can affect biological treatment
processes as climatic effects can fl) slow biological oxidation
processes through lower biological activity due to extremely cold
waste water temperatures,, and (2) decrease biological treatment
efficiencies during the fall and spring when waste water
temperatures are changing and also the biological community.
These effects can be minimized in the design of the biological
treatment systems as described in Section VII. In addition other
factors frequently have a greater effect upon final effluent
qualities than climate, Alsoj, the effects of climate can be
accounted for in the effluent limitations by inclusion of mills
located in all geographical locations in the data base. Thus,
the industry segments were not further subcategorized based upon
geographical location or climate.
18
-------
SECTION V
WATER UTILIZATION AND WASTE CHARACTERISTICS
PROCESS WATER UTILIZATION
General Use
A building paper and/or roofing felt mill utilizes water in its
process, exclusive of steam generation, for the following
purposes:
1. To act as an agent for separating the raw materials into
discrete fibers which is essential for: the formation of the end
product; the removal of contaminants and undesirable fibers from
the stock system; and the control and metering of stock to the
paper machine. This water, which is generally recycled, acts as
a vehicle for transporting the fiber to the process.
2. To clean those areas, particularly on the wet end of the
machine, which tend to develop fiber buildup. These areas are
the paper forming section of the machine and the felts used to
carry the formed sheet through the machine and press sections.
This water enters the system via shower nozzles and represents
the largest contribution to the volume of raw waste water
generated since it is nearly all excess water in terms of process
water needs.
3. To keep production equipment throughout the mill opera-
tional or permit the equipment to perform its design function.
Typical applications are the seal and cooling waters used on
pumps, agitators, drives, bearings, vacuum pumps, and process
controls. Also cooling water is required by those mills that
include the asphalt saturating process for the production of
roofing felts and shingles. This water represents the second
largest contributor to the volume of waste water generated by the
process.
H. To supply emergency make-up water, under automatic
control, to various storage tanks to avoid operational problems
resulting in reduced production or complete mill shut down.
5. To provide power boiler condenser, heat exchange
condensate, and non-contact cooling water that can be segregated
and discharged separately without treatment. However, there are
many mills that still permit all or part of this water to enter
the waste water sewer system which increases the volume of water
requiring treatment.
19
-------
Specific Process Use
The manufacture of building paper involves three relatively
discrete process systems in terms of quantity and quality of
water utilization: stock preparation and the wet end and dry end
of the machine. An illustrative process flow diagram is shown in
Figure 3.
StQck_Preparatign_Area
The stock preparation area uses water for purposes described in
Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 of the General Use section. Water in the
form of steam may also be used directly to maintain stock
temperature which contributes to the volume of waste water
generated since it represents excess water in terms of the
process water balance.
Process water is mixed with baled waste paper in the pulper or
beater and the resulting slurry is then carried through the stock
cleaning system where additional process water is introduced.
The stock is then thickened to increase consistency for refining
or jordaning (fiber control) . The process water removed by the
thickener or decker is recirculated back to the pulper and
cleaning system. A mill utilizing wood flour instead of wood
pulp from an attrition mill adds the flour in the above waste
paper stock system ahead of the jordans or refiners. However,
those that use wood chips and/or rags and/or inorganic materials
such as asbestos require a preparation process for each type of
furnish used. These are generally low volume water users
although each system contributes to the waste load generated.
The various stock components are blended and passed through the
refiners and discharged to a machine stock chest.
Wet^End Area
The stock is pumped to a head box which meters the quantity of
stock of the paper machine. At this point process water is added
to reduce the stock consistency to 0.25-0.5 percent in the vat
which is the forming section of the machine. The stock deposits
on a cylinder wire and the excess machine white water passes
through the wire. A large portion of this white water is
recycled back through the machine stock loop and the excess is
pumped to a white water collection chest for reuse in the stock
preparation area. It is on the wet end that excess water is
created by the use of fresh water showers as described in Item 2
of the General Use Section. The sheet is carried by felts to the
press sections where additional quantities of water are removed.
Felt cleaning showers add more excess water, but are necessary
for the maintenance of the drainability of the felt.
20
-------
WASTE PAPER
AND/OR RAGS
I 80 Tons
—j
BROKE
MG
5 Tons
~~0.025~MG
PULPEF
• DUMP CHEST — •"
2 Tons Rejects 0.625 MG
. , _ «p_ • " "17 «ir-
3 Tons
RIFFLERS • — ™ REFINERS
Rejects 2.9 MG
2.9 MG
1 r
SCREENS 1"
JORDANS
0.74 MG
\
m Bl FNI
CHE
SHOWERS
STOCK
CHEST
ATTRITION 1
MILL I
0.12 MG 1 Ton Rejec
i
ITNfi —
5T
ALTERNATE FOR CHIPS
WOOD FLOUR
0.8 MG ' EVAPORATION I *
6 0.06 MG II
FRESH
WATER
2 Tons Rejects
2.8 MG
WHITE WATER
CHEST
FORMING
SECTION
PRESS
DRYING
SECTION
1
3.5 MG
VACUUM
PUMP
VACUUM
SAVE-ALL
1.2 MG
CLEAR
WELL
TI'
'
LL 1.0 MG
rr"
I »
Ur-Jj
Ho.
05 MG
UNSATURATED
PRODUCT
SATURATING
& COATING
11.2 MG
Figure 3
SEWER
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
OF A
BUILDING PAPER AND FELT MILL
ROOFING FELT
OR SHINGLES
STOCK
MISC.&FLOOR
DRAINS
I!
II
i!
I!
tf
Us
SETTLING
BASIN
RIVER
i
COOLING
TOWER
WATER
===== EXTENSIVE WATER RE-USE
-------
sheet passes through the drier section to the dry end where
water use is generally low in volume consisting principally of
cooling water and sheet moisture control. The product at this
point may be the finished product or it may be subject to
additional processes in the mill. For some products , the
saturating process is the next waste generating step after the
papermaking process . However,, the production of deadening or
flooring felts from the paper produced does not require
processing which generates a waste water load.
The paper is carried through one or two stations for asphalt
saturation and application of a coat of talc on one side of the
sheet. This requires the utilization of cooling water applied by
spray nozzles after each saturation which represents the waste
load sewered from the area. This process has the capability of
making roofing shingles as well as roofing felts; therefore a
section for coating the saturated felt with a granular stone
and/or mica is part of the operation,. These particles fall to
the floor and are washed to the sewer and represent the principal
source of inert suspended solids in the waste water generated in
the area. As explained in Section VII t the volume of water used
for this application varies widely f and the resulting waste water
is very low in BODS.
Definitive data on individual waste loads from each of the above
process sources do not presently exist f and are difficult to
develop; First , many* if not most,, mills in this subcategory
change raw materials and products manufactured in response to
short term pricing* availability, and demand. Figure 3
demonstrates the complexity of process options which may be used
in even a single mill in response to these factors. Second, the
pronounced tendency in these mills toward increased recycle could
erroneously attribute a waste load to one unit process which
actually originated in another. Such recycle r as explained below
and in Section VII, reduces pollutant levels in the raw waste and
in the final discharge.
Definition of "total raw waste load88 from mills in this'
subcategory is subject to interpretation dependent upon the
particular scheme of recycle used. Three principal schemes have
been i dent if iedj, each being effective insofar as reduction of
final discharge pollutants is concerned, and each dependent upon
product quality,? mill layout, and other factors:
-------
1. An internal device such as a save-all or DSM screen is
used to remove suspended solids. Both the solids and the
clarified process water may then be recycled, at least in part,
resulting in a low "raw waste" level of suspended solids.
2. An external device such as a mechanical clarifier is used
to serve the same functions. The influent to the clarifier may
technically be called "raw waste," but any effluent not reused
would be the definition comparable to scheme tl.
3. The third scheme relies principally upon internal
recycle, with internal or external storage facilities to hold
surge flows due to grade changes and other process upsets. Most
of these surge flows are then returned to the process as
production equilibrium is again approached, with only a small and
sometimes intermittent final waste flow occurring.
Thus, raw waste loads from mills in this subcategory vary widely,
depending upon the definition used. Data developed in 1971
illustrate this point. Of 13 mills in this subcategory, raw
waste suspended solids varied typically from 2.5 kilograms per
metric ton (5 pounds per short ton) to 30 kilograms- per metric
ton (60 pounds per short ton).
Raw waste suspended solids for the two selected mills ranged from
4 kg/kkg (8 Ibs/ton) to 42 kg/kkg(84 Ibs/ton). Raw waste BOD5
for the two selected mills ranged from 7 kg/kkg (14 Ibs/ton) to
15 kg/kkg(30 Ibs/ton). The above raw waste characteristics are
show in Table 3.
Although no definition of "total raw waste load" fits all cases,
the "primary effluent not recycled" probably meets most field
conditions as the best definition.
Final effluent flow is a measure of the degree of reuse employed
by a given mill. The first surveyed mill employed extensive
recycle and used only 4^200 liters per metric ton (1,000 gallons
per short ton) during the four days of the survey. The second
mill, which did not employ extensive recycle, used 54,000 liters
per metric ton (13,000 gallons per short ton) during the survey.
Longer term data from the 13 mills mentioned above show a wide
variation in water usage, primarily as a function of recycle.
The typical range among these mills was from 8,400 liters per
metric ton (2,000 gallons per short ton) to 42^000 liters per
metric ton (109000 gallons per short ton).
23
-------
Table 3
Mill BOD5
TSS
BP-1* 12.6 (25.2) 41 (82)
BP-1** 9.5 (19) 42 (84)
BP-2** 7.2 (14.3) d.l (8»3)
* Mill Records
** Short term survey data (3-7 days)
-------
SECTION VI
SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
A thorough analysis of the literature, mill records, sampling
data which has been derived from this study, and the NPDES
applications demonstrates that the following constituents
represent pollutants according to the Water Pollution Control Act
for the subcategories under study;
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5-day, 20°C) (BOD5)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Settleable Solids
pH
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF IDENTIFIED PARAMETERS
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is a measure of the oxygen
consuming capabilities of organic matter. The BOD5 in builders
paper and roofing felt mill effluents is a result of the raw
materials and the manufacturing processes as shown in Sections
III and V.
The BOD5_ does not in itself cause direct harm to a water system,
but it does exert an indirect effect by depressing the oxygen
content of the water. Sewage and other organic effluents during
their processes decomposition exert a BQD5, which can have a
catastrophic effect on the ecosystem by depleting the oxygen
supply. Conditions are reached frequently where all of the
oxygen is used and the continuing decay process causes the
production of noxious gases such as hydrogen sulfide and methane.
Water with a high BOD5_ indicates the presence of decomposing
organic matter and subsequent high bacterial counts that degrade
its quality and potential uses.
Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a water quality constituent that, in
appropriate concentrations, is essential not only to keep
organisms living but also to sustain species reproduction, vigor,
and the development of populations. Organisms undergo stress at
reduced DO concentrations that make them less competitive and
able to sustain their species within the aquatic environment.
For example, reduced DO concentrations have been shown to
interfere with fish population through delayed hatching of eggs,
reduced size and vigor of embryos , production of deformities in
young, interference with food digestion, acceleration of blood
clotting, decreased tolerance to certain toxicants, reduced food
efficiency and growth rate, and reduced maximum sustained
swimming speed. Fish food organisms are likewise affected
adversely in conditions with suppressed DO. Since all aerobic
25
-------
aquatic organisms need a certain amount of oxygen, the
consequences of total lack of dissolved oxygen due to a high BOD5
can kill all inhabitants of the affected area*
If a high BOB5. is present,, the quality of the water is usually
visually degraded by the presence of decomposing materials and
algae blooms due to the uptake of degraded materials that form
the foodstuffs of the algal populations.
I2£li §HILeended Solids JTSSX
Total Suspended Solids (or Suspended Solids) is a measure of non-
dissolved solids in the waste water which are trapped or
"suspended" on a test filter medium. Suspended solids in
builders paper and roofing felt mill effluents are generally
fibrous materials lost in the manufacturing process. Most of
these suspended solids can be removed by primary treatment with
most of the remainder removed by secondary treatment. The
suspended solids discharged from builders paper and roofing felt
mill secondary treatment systems are generally biological
organisms generated in the secondary treatment system in the
removal of BOD5? and thus are not of the same characteristic as
the suspended solids in mill waste waters. These suspended
solids have the following detrimental effects upon receiving
waters: (1) increases in turbidity of the receiving water
resulting in reduced light transmission and accompanying effects,
such as reduced photosynthesis, {2} degradation of aesthetic
values, (3) settling of suspended solids to the bottom of
receiving waters, and (4) exertion of BOD by the biological
suspended solids is only partically measured by the BOD5 test as
the long term BOD (often expressed BOD20) would be more
descriptive of the oxygen consuming effects, A general
description of suspended solids and effects upon receiving waters
is given below-
Suspended solids include both organic and inorganic materials.
The inorganic components include sandf silt, and clay. The
organic fraction includes such materials as grease, oils tar,
animal and vegetable fats, various fibers^ sawdust,, hair, and
various materials from sewers„ These solids may settle out
rapidly and bottom deposits are often a mixture of both organic
and inorganic solids,, They adversely affect fisheries by
covering the bottom of the stream or lake with a blanket of
material that destroys the fish-food bottom fauna or the spawning
ground of fish. Deposits containing organic materials may
deplete bottom oxygen supplies and produce hydrogen sulfide,
carbon dioxide, methane,, and other noxious gases.
In raw water sources for domestic usey state and regional
agencies generally specify that suspended solids in streams shall
not be present in sufficient concentration to be objectionable or
to interfere with normal, treatment processes. Suspended solids
in water may interfere with many industrial processes,, and cause
26
-------
foaming in boilers, or encrustations on equipment exposed to
water, especially as the temperature rises. Suspended soilds are
undersirable in water for textile industries; paper and pulp;
beverages; dairy products; laundries; dyeing; photography;
cooling systems, and power plants. Suspended particles also
serve as a transport mechnism for pesticides and other substances
which are readily sorbed into or onto clay particles.
Solids may be suspended in water for a time, and then settle to
the bed of the stream or lake. These settleable solids
discharged with man's wastes may be inert, slowly biodegradable
materials, or rapidly decomposable substances. While in
suspension, they increase the turbidity of the water, reduce
light penetration and impair the photosynthetic activity of
aquatic plants.
Solids in suspension are aesthetically displeasing. When they
settle to form sludge deposits on the stream or lake bed, they
are often much more damaging to the life in water, and they
retain the capacity to displease the senses. Solids, when
transformed to sludge deposits, may do a variety of damaging
things, including blanketing the stream or lake bed and thereby
destroying the living spaces for those benthic organisms that
would otherwise occupy the habitat. When of an organic and
therefore decomposable nature, solids use a portion oor all of
the dissolved oxygen available in the area.
Settleable Solids
The settleable solids test involves the quiescent settling of a
liter of wastewater in an "Imhoff cone" for one hour, with
appropriate handling (scraping of the sides, etc.). The method
is simply a crude measurement of the amount of material one might
expect to settle out of the wastewater under quiescent
conditions. It is especially applicable to the analysis of
wastewaters being treated by such methods as screens, clarifiers
and flotation units, for it not only defines the efficacy of the
systems, in terms of settleable material, but provides a
reasonable estimate of the amount of deposition that might take
place under quiescent conditions in the receiving water after
discharge of the effluent.
pH, Acidity, and Alkalinity
The effluent from a typical biological treatment process will
normally have a pH in the range of 6.0 to 9.0, which is not
detrimental to most receiving waters. However, the application
of some external technologies can result in major adjustments in
pH. The effluent limitations which are cited insure that these
adjustments are compensated prior to final discharge of treated
wastes in order to avoid harmful effects within the receiving
waters. A general description of pH, acidity, and alkalinity and
their effects upon receiving waters is given below.
27
-------
Acidity and alkalinity are reciprocal terms. Acidity is produced
by substances that yield hydrogen ions upon hydrolysis and
alkalinity is produced by substances that yield hydroxyl ions.
The terms "total acidity" and "total alkalinity" are often used
to express the buffering capacity of a solution. Acidity in
natural waters is caused by carbon dioxide, mineral acids, weakly
dissociated acids, and the salts of strong acids and weak bases.
Alkalinity is caused by strong bases and the salts of strong
alkalies and weak acids.
The term pH is a logarithmic expression of the concentration of
hydrogen ions. At a pH of 7, the hydrogen and hydroxyl ion
concentrations are essentially equal and the water is neutral.
Lower pH values indicate acidity while higher values indicate
alkalinity. The relationship between pH and acidity or
alkalinity is not necessarily linear or direct.
Waters with a pH below 6 . 0 are corrosive to water works
structures, distribution lines, and household plumbing fixtures
and can thus add such constituents to drinking water as iron,
copper, zinc, cadmium and lead. The hydrogen ion concentration
can affect the "taste" of the water. At a low pH water tastes
"sour." The bactericidal effect of chlorine is weakened as the pH
increases, and it is advantageous to keep the pH close to 7.
This is very significant for providing safe drinking water.
Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress conditions or
kill aquatic life outright. Dead fish, associated algal blooms,
and foul stenches are aesthetic liabilities of any waterway.
Even moderate changes from "acceptable" criteria limits of pH are
deleterious to some species. The relative toxicity to aquatic
life of many materials is increased by changes in the water pH.
Metalocyanide complexes can increase a thousand-fold in toxicity
with a drop of 1=5 pH units. The availability of many nutrient
substances varies with the alkalinity and acidity. Ammonia is
more lethal with a higher pH.
The lacrimal fluid of the human eye has a pH of approximately 7.0
and a deviation of 0.1 pH unit from the norm may result in eye
irritation for the swimmer.
Oil and Hexane_Sglubles
The asphalt saturation process associated with the production of
roofing felts has a potential for developing an oil and grease
(hexane soluble) constituent in the waste water generated by the
process. Useful data regarding the concentrations of oil and
grease in the treated waste water generated by mills engaged in
this activity are almost negligible. However, if the identified
treatment systems are operated efficiently, any oil and grease
should be effectively removed. Thus, oil and grease is not
28
-------
considered as a separate pollutant parameter. A general
description of oil and grease is given below.
Oil and grease exhibit an oxygen demand. Oil emulsions may
adhere to the gills of fish or coat and destroy algae or other
plankton. Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments can serve to
exhibit normal benthic growths, thus interrupting the aquatic
food chain. Soluble and emulsified material ingested by fish ,may
taint the flavor of the fish flesh. Water soluble components may
exert toxic action on fish. Floating oil may reduce the re-
aeration of the water surface and in conjunction with emulsified
oil may interfere with photosynthesis. Water insoluble
components damage the plumage and costs of water animals and
.fowls. Oil and grease in a water can result in the formation of
objectionable surface slicks preventing the full aesthetic
enjoyment of the water.
Oil spills can damage the surface of boats and can destroy the
aesthetic characteristics of beaches and shorelines.
Color_
Color is defined as either "true" or "apparent" color. In
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water
(1)f the true color of water is defined as "the color of water
from which the turbidity has been removed." Apparent color
includes "not only the color due to substances in solution, but
also due to suspended matter." Color has not been a problem in
effluents from builders paper and roofing felt mills. Short term
survey data substantiated this as it showed only two kilograms
per metric ton (four pounds per short ton) of color. Thus, color
was not included as a separate pollutant parameter.
Nutrients
Waste water discharged from builders paper and roofing felt mills
is deficient in nitrogen and phosphorus. Frequently, nutrients
must be added to mill effluents in amounts sufficient to enhance
biological treatment. Thus, nutrients were not included as
separate pollutant parameters. A general description of the
nutrients, ammonia and phosphorous is given below.
Ammonia
Ammonia is a common product of the decomposition of organic
matter. Dead and decaying animals and plants along with human
and animal body wastes account for much of the ammonia entering
the aquatic ecosystem. Ammonia exists in its non-ionized form
only at higher pH levels and is the most toxic in this state.
The lower the pH, the more ionized ammonia is formed and its
toxicity decreases. Ammonia, in the presence of dissolved
oxygen, is converted to nitrate (NO3) by nitrifying bacteria.
Nitrite (NQ2), which is an intermediate product between ammonia
and nitrate, sometimes occurs in quantity when depressed oxygen
29
-------
conditions permit. Ammonia can exist in several other chemical
combinations including ammonium chloride and other salts.
Nitrates are considered to be among the poisonous ingredients of
mineralized waters, with potassium nitrate being more poisonous
than sodium nitrate. Excess nitrates cause irritation of the
mucous linings of the gastrointestinal tract and the bladder; the
symptoms are diarrhea and diuresis, and drinking one liter of
water containing 500 mg/1 of nitrate can cause such symptoms.
Infant methemoglobinemia, a disease characterized by certain
specific blood changes and cyanosis, may be caused by high
nitrate concentrations in the water used for preparing feeding
formulae. While it is still impossible to state precise
concentration limits, it has been widely recommended that water
containing more than 10 mg/1 of nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) should
not be used for infants. Nitrates are also harmful in
fermentation processes and can cause disagreeable tastes in beer.
In most natural water the pH range is such that ammonium ions
(NH4+) predominate. In alkaline waters, however, high
concentrations of un-ionized ammonia in undissociated ammonium
hydroxide increase the toxicity of ammonia solutions. In streams
polluted with sewage, up to one half of the nitrogen in the
sewage may be in the form of free ammonia, and sewage may carry
up to 35 mg/1 of total nitrogen. It has been shown that at a
level of 1.0 mg/1 un-ionized ammonia, the ability of hemoglobin
to combine with oxygen is impaired and fish may suffocate.
Evidence indicates that ammonia exerts a considerable toxic
effect on all aquatic life within a range of less than 1.0 mg/1
to 25 mg/1, depending on the pH and dissolved oxygen level
present.
Ammonia can add to the problem of eutrophication by supplying
nitrogen through its breakdown products. Some lakes in warmer
climates, and others that are aging quickly are sometimes limited
by the nitrogen available. Any increase will speed up the plant
growth and decay process.
Phosphorus
During the past 30 years, a formidable case has developed for the
belief that increasing standing crops of aquatic plant growths,
which often interfere with water uses and are nuisances to man,
frequently are caused by increasing supplies of phosphorus. Such
phenomena are associated with a condition of accelerated
eutrophication or aging of waters. It is generally recognized
that phosphorus is not the sole cause of eutrophication, but
there is evidence to substantiate that it is frequently the key
element in all of the elements required by fresh water plants and
is generally present in the least amount relative to need.
Therefore, an increase in phosphorus allows use of other, already
present, nutrients for plant growths. Phosphorus is usually
described, for this reasons, as a "limiting factor."
30
-------
When a plant population is stimulated in production and attains a
nuisance status, a large number of associated liabilities are
immediately apparent. Dense populations of pond weeds make
swimming dangerous. Boating and water skiing and sometimes
fishing may be eliminated because of the mass of vegetation that
serves as an physical impediment to such activities. Plant
populations have been associated with stunted fish populations
and with poor fishing. Plant nuisances emit vile stenches,
impart tastes and odors to water supplies, reduce the efficiency
of industrial and municipal water treatment, impair aesthetic
beauty, reduce or restrict resort trade, lower waterfront
property values, cause skin rashes to man during water contact,
and serve as a desired substrate and breeding ground for flies.
Phosphorus in the elemental form is particularly toxic, and
subject to bioaccumulation in much the same way as mercury.
Colloidal elemental phosphorus will poison marine fish (causing
skin tissue breakdown and discoloration). Also, phosphorus is
capable of being concentrated and will accumulate in organs and
soft tissues. Experiments have shown that marine fish will
concentrate phosphorus from water containing as little as 1 ug/1.
Turbidity
Turbidity is an expression of the optical property of the fine
suspended matter in a sample of water. The suspended matter may
be clay silt, finely divided organic and inorganic matter,
plankton, and other microscopic organisms. The suspended matter
causes light to be scattered and absorbed rather than transmitted
in straight lines through the sample. The builders paper and and
roofing felt subcategory may have effluents which have high
turbidities. However, turbidity is not considered as a pollutant
parameter because an adequate data base does not exist for
turbidity in builders paper and roofing felt mill effluents and
the treatment systems which are installed to reduce BOD5 should
also reduce turbidity.
Polychgrinated Bjphenyls
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) are chemically and thermally
stable compounds found in waste paper and are known to cause
deleterious effects upon biological organisms. They have been
shown to concentrate in food chains and few restrictions on their
control exist at present. Recycled office papers are the main
source at present, although occasionally paperboard extracts show
evidence of Monsanto1s Aroclor 1254 (PCB) from environmental and
other sources. Quantities of PCB in recycled wastepaper are
generally low. PCB's are not being added to paper products and
are being purged from the system through process waters,
volatilization and paper destruction. This parameter is not
considered as a separate pollutant parameter because an adequate
data base and an adequate means of control technology do not
exist at this time.
31
-------
SECTION VII
CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Waste waters discharged from mills in the building paper and
roofing felt industry to receiving waters can be reduced to
required levels by conscientious application of established in-
plant process loss control and water recycle measures and by well
designed and operated external treatment facilities.
This section describes both the in-plant and external techno-
logies which are either presently available or under intensive
development to achieve various levels of pollutant reduction.
External technology is used to treat the residual waste concen-
tration levels to achieve the final reduction of pollutants dis-
charged to the environment. Tables 4 and 5 summarize internal
and external pollution control technologies, respectively, which
are applicable to builder's paper and roofing felt mills. Table
6 shows the estimated distribution of external treatment systems
employed at builders paper and roofing felt mills.
TABLE i*
SUMMARY OF INTERNAL TECHNOLOGIES
Building Paper and Roofing Felt Mills
1. Reuse of white water
2. Saveall system
3. Shower water reduction/reuse
4. Gland water reduction/reuse
5. Vacuum pump seal water reduction/reuse
6. Internal spill collection
7. Segregation of non-contact process water
8. Low volume cooling spray shower nozzles
33
-------
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF EXTERNAL TECHNOLOGIES
Building Paper and Roofing Felt Mills
Screening Traveling, self-cleaning Bar Screen
Suspended Solids (C) Mechanical Clarifier
Removal (L) Earthen Basin
(MMF) Mixed (multi) -Media Filtration
(Coag) Coagulation
BOD5 Removal (ASB) Aerated Stabilization Basin
(AS) Activated Sludge
(SO) Storage Oxidation Ponds
Temperature Control Cooling Tower
Table 6
Estimated Distribution of Treatment Systems Employed at
Builders Paper and Roofing Felt Mills
Number of Plants 81
Plants Using Municipal Systems 50%
Non-Municipal Plants with Access to
Municipal Systems 25%
Plants with No Treatment 7%
Primary Only or Equivalent 10%
Plants Using Activated Sludge 4%
Plants Using Aerated Stabilization
Basins 4%
Plants Using Storage Oxidation Ponds None
-------
INTERNAL CONTROLS
Recovery and Recycle Concepts
Generally, mills that reduce effluent volume through recycle
reduce raw waste pollutant loads concommitantly. As discussed in
Section V, in some cases a mill may employ extensive suspended
solids removal equipment internally, reusing both the clarified
water for manufacture and the recovered solids in the product,
whereas another mill depends on an extensive primary clarifier
for suspended solids removal. This study indicated that similar
reductions in pollution loads are achieved by both methods of
treatment.
Large quantities of water are necessary to form a sheet of paper.
Typically, the fibrous stock is diluted to about 0.5 percent con-
sistency before entering the paper machine itself. Such
dilutions are necessary in order to provide uniform dispersion of
the fibers in the sheet forming section. Most of this water must
be removed in the wet end of the machine since only a small
amount of moisture, typically five to eight percent by weight, is
retained in the product at the dry end.
After leaving the forming section of the machine, the sheet of
paper or board contains about 80 percent moisture. A press
section employing squeeze rolls, sometimes utilizing vacuum, is
used to further reduce moisture to a level of about 40 percent.
The remaining moisture is evaporated by steam-heated drying
rolls.
Water leaving the forming and press sections is called white
'water, and approximates 104,325 liters per metric ton (25,000
gallons per short ton) of product. Due to recycling, only a
relatively small portion of the total is wasted. Mills which
utilize varying amounts of extensive recycling discharge only
2087 to 20,865 liters of white water per metric ton (500 to 5COO
gallons of white water per short ton) from the system.
Recycling of this white water within the stock preparation and
wet end of the papermaking machine has long been practiced in the
industry. However, in recent years very extensive reuse of
treated white water has been achieved. The replacement of fresh
water with treated white water is the mechanism by which final
waste water volume is reduced. It has been demonstrated that
with a closed water system the concentration of solids increases
significantly to a high level at which plateau it remains,
varying only plus or minus 10 to 15 percent. Thus, a significant
result of total or near total recycle of process water is that
dissolved solids, derived primarily from raw materials, are
removed from the process water system via the product
manufactured rather than in the waste stream.
Problems are experienced, however, as near total recycle of
process water is approached. It appears, though, that the
35
-------
production process and product quality of mills in the building
paper industry, and particularly those manufacturing roofing felt
paper, are such that with good system design these problems can
be overcome. This posture is supported, to some extent, by a
report from one mill in the industry. In this instance both in-
plant and external biological treatment facilities, using the
activated sludge process and final chlorination, were installed.
After a year of operation, the mill is near a decision to
eliminate its discharge to the environment and operate a
completely closed process water system. In addition, an on-going
EPA supported project will demonstrate the elimination of
discharge from a roofing felt mill and will also provide
information on conversion to closed loop operation, its costs and
effect on product quality. The overall costs of closed loop
operation are expected to be much less than the costs of end-of-
the^pipe treatment technologies.
Saturated roofing felt mills have a water use requirement which
is independent of that for the papermaking process. This water
is essentially cooling water that becomes contaminated by the
granular particles used to coat the saturated felts. The cooling
water is applied across the festooned sheet immediately after it
passes through the hot liquor asphalt saturation bath. This
study indicated that there is no measurable contamination of the
water due to its contact with the hot asphalt. The volume
required depends entirely on the types of showers used and
therefore varies over a wide range, perhaps as low as 209 liters
per metric ton (50 gallons per short ton) to as high as U173
liters per metric ton (1000 gallons per short ton) of paper
saturated. There are mills that segregate this water and convey
it to a settling pond for the removal of readily settleable
suspended solids. However, in order to reuse it as cooling water
it is necessary to employ a cooling tower process application.
The success of this recycle system, on a year round basis, is not
well documented since the reduction in pollution load that can be
achieved does not necessarily warrant the capital investment,
increased operating costs, and potential loss of production
inherent in the operation of such a system. Those systems that
have been installed have not been operated on a continuous basis
by virtue of the weather-dependent nature of a cooling tower.
Internal Recovery^Equipment
Most mills employ a save-all to recover fibrous and other sus-
pended solids from the process water of which there are three
principal types. (1) One is the gravity or vacuum drum type
which employs a rotating screen-covered drum immersed in a vat
containing the waste water. The water passes through the drum,
leaving a mat of fiber which is removed continuously for reuse.
(2) The vacuum disc filter is another type of save-all which
utilizes a series of screen-covered discs on a rotating shaft
immersed in the vat. Both types filter the white water through a
filter mat; however, the disc type has the advantage of greater
36
-------
filtering area or capacity per unit volume. This filtering
medium in each case is provided by a side-stream of "sweetener"
stock added to the influent to act as a filtering mat for the
removal of suspended solids. The recovered fiber and sweetener
stock is returned for reuse directly to the stock system. (3) A
third type is a stationary bar screen with very fine slots
between the bars which has in recent years been employed by mills
in this industry for the recovery of fiber from the process water
system. There is a significant economic advantage in this type
of system. However, the quality of the effluent is not as good
in terms of suspended solids as that generated by vacuum filters.
All or part of the effluent from a save-all may be discharged
directly to a sewer, but most mills reuse a significant portion
for such services as:
1. Machine Showers
2. Stock clean elutriation
3. Pump and agitator seals
4. Vacuum pump seals
5. wash-ups
6. Consistency regulation dilution
Machine Showers
Machine and felt showers are used in both the forming and press
sections to clean the wire, felts, and other machine elements
subject to contact with the stock. Formerly, large volumes of
fresh water were used for this purpose, but in recent years,
attention has focused on the use of recycled white water.
However, a suspended solids content of less than 120 milligrams
per liter (one pound per thousand gallons) is generally required
to avoid plugging of shower nozzles. Concurrently, the use of
high pressure (up to 52 atm. or 750 psig), low volume showers
using fresh water has increased. These are employed where
product, operability, cleanliness, or other factors mitigate
against the use of white water showers. These high pressure
showers are operated on a time cycle, so that flow occurs only a
small percentage, 10 to 20 percent, of the time.
Whether recycled water or lower volumes of fresh water are used
for showers, a reduction in fresh water usage and its concomitant
waste water flow results. Significantly, this reduction also
decreases the fiber losses to sewer.
Seal Water
Vacuum pumps are essential to the paper forming process as
presently practiced to provide a vacuum source to accelerate the
37
-------
removal of water from the sheet as formed, and to dry the felts
for each pass through the wet end. Most such pumps are of the
ring seal type, which requires water to provide a seal between
the moving parts of the pump and avoid backflow of air to the
vacuum side. Water used for this purpose must be sufficiently
free of suspended solids to avoid plugging of the orifices or
other control devices used to meter it to the pump. Further, it
must not be corrosive to the mechanical parts of the pump, and it
must be relatively cool (typically less than 32 C (90 F) to
permit development of high vacuums of o. 67-0. 74 atm. (20-22 in.
Eg.) . For lower vacuum requirements 0.17-0.40 atm. (5-12in.
hg.) , somewhat higher temperatures are permissible.
Seal water is also used on packing glands of process pumps, agi-
tators, and other equipment employing rotating shafts. It cools
bearings, lubricates the packing, and minimizes leakage of the
process fluid. Even though the amount of water used per packing
is small — generally in the range of 1.86 to 11.34 liters per
minute (0.5 to 3 gpm) — the total usage is quite extensive
because of the large number of rotating shafts required in the
processes. The total usage may approximate 4173-8346 liters per
metric ton (1000-2000 gallons per short ton) of product. Methods
used to control and reduce the quantities of water required
include proper maintenance of packings and flow control of
individual seal water lines.
As more extensive recycle is employed the significance of the
quantity of seal water used for all purposes in the mill
increases in terms of waste water volume. The use of mechanical
seals has reduced the amount of seal water, but they have so far
not proven satisfactory in terms of maintenance and reliability
for many applications.
The replacement of fresh water with clarified waste water in the
building paper industry is dependent largely on maintaining a
level of suspended solids in the recycled seal water at 120 mg/1
or less. The vacuum required on the paper machines in these
mills indicates that a seal water temperature of 49 degrees
centigrade can be tolerated. The limits to recycle in the water
use area will be more completely documented as more mills develop
reuse systems.
A majority of mills in this industry employ a stock cleaning
system that dates back many years, the riffler. This is a simple
device that removes sand, grit, metals, and other readily settled
contaminants from the stock slurry. This system subjects the
process water system to insignificant, if any, fresh water
requirements and satisfies the cleaning needs of the production
quality. The contribution to the waste water load is also small
since the solids removed from the stock can be removed at
intervals from the bottom of the riffler trough, generally at
38
-------
most, once a week. This material is disposed of by trucking to a
plant-owned or municipal land disposal area.
If cleaning at the machine is practiced, flat bed slotted plate
vibrating screens are generally employed. This method of
cleaning, as with a riffler, has been in use for many years.
Again, rejects are removed in a relatively dry state for truck
disposal and the impact on the waste water generated by the mill
is negligible.
The trend toward replacement of these older cleaning systems with
more modern equipment will increase in this industry as labor and
maintenance costs exceed the increased power costs associated
with the new equipment. With newer cleaning equipment there is
potential for increased quantities of rejects and, more
importantly, fiber discharged to the sewer. This phenomenon has
already been experienced by many mills in the waste paperboard
industry. The effect on the waste water load generated can be
minimized or eliminated by the inclusion of a well designed
rejects handling system along with an improved cleaning system.
The effectiveness of these systems becomes more significant to a
mill as it approaches near total recycle of process water. In
fact, under this condition it becomes of paramount importance
since rejects cannot escape from the mill in the waste water, and
therefore build up in the system unless removed in a relatively
dry state by an adequate rejects handling system.
Cooling Water
Cooling water is used for bearings, particularly in older mills
using sleeve bearings instead of the anti-friction bearings
employed in new or rebuilt mills. Cooling water is not
contaminated and can be collected and reused either directly
(after heat removal), or indirectly by discharge into the fresh
water system, if heat buildup is not a problem. Similarly, water
used to cool brake linings in paper rewind applications may be
reused, but because of high heat loads cooling of this water by
cooling towers or other means would usually be necessary. None
of the mills surveyed in this study cooled this water. However,
one mill surveyed returned dryer condensate directly to the feed
water heater at the boiler plant under 1.20-1.34 atm. (three-five
psig) pressure, thereby reducing the cooling water requirement.
This approach could be used more generally where dryers are
operated at pressures above 1.34 atm. (five psig).
Asphalt^Cgoling
The volume of waste water generated in the felt saturating
cooling process is entirely dependent on the type of shower
nozzles used to spray the sheet. A very high reduction in water
requirements with increased cooling efficiency — i.e.,
temperature drop per unit time •— has been achieved with special
nozzles. The need to settle the waste water generated by this
process is established, and the ability to recycle, after cooling
39
-------
has been demonstrated. However, because of its low pollutant
load, the need to recycle this waste after settling versus
discharge to the environment appears to be an issue to be
determined on an individual mill basis. Surveyed mill "br" for
example? used 209 liters of cooling water per metric ton of
production (50 gal/ton). It utilized a cooling tower to cool
this water on a seasonal basis for reuse. When the cooling tower
was operating, net discharge flow was reduced to an estimated 19
liters (five gallons) per metric ton.
EXTERNAL_TgEATjgENT_TECm?OLOGY
Waste treatment requirements do not vary appreciably among mills
in the building paper industry. Although there are variations in
concentrations and specific waste constituents, the general
classes of compounds which can be expected to occur in their
wastes derive from the pulping of wood fiber or repulping of
waste fiber and are, thus, characteristic of them all. These
substances are dissolved organic components of wood and cellulose
degradation products. They make up the bulk of the oxygen
demanding wastes of this subcategory. The pulping of rags adds
to the waste load generated. In addition, other compounds such
as adhesives, sizing material, and resinates are used by the
industry depending on product. The residual of all of these
substances in the waste load or combinations of them, appears to
jDe amenable to the various biological treatment processes used by
the industry.
Removal of Suspended Solids
The physical process of removing suspended organic and inorganic
materials, commonly termed "primary treatment," is generally
accomplished by sedimentation. Screening ahead of treatment
units is necessary to remove trash materials which could
seriously damage or clog succeeding equipment. Automatically
cleaned screens, operating in response to level control, are
commonly employed and represent preferred practice.
Primary treatment can be accomplished in mechanical clarifiers or
sedimentation lagoons. Although the latter enjoyed widespread
use in the past, the large land requirements, coupled with
inefficient performance and high cost for cleaning, have made
them less popular in recent years (8).
The most widely used method for sedimentation in this industry is
the mechanically-cleaned quiescent sedimentation basin (8).
Large circular tanks of concrete construction are normally
utilized with rotating sludge scraper mechanisms mounted in the
center. Flow usually enters the tank through a well which is
located at the center of the tank. Settled sludge is raked to a
center sump or concentric hopper and is conveyed back to the
process system. Floating material is collected by a surface
skimmer attached to the rotating mechanism and discharged to a
-------
hopper. This material may be brought back to the process or
carried to land disposal.
A properly designed and installed mechanical clarifier is capable
of removing over 95 percent of the settleable suspended solids
from the waste water. The removal efficiency of this fraction of
the total suspended solids is the true measure of performance for
this device since it cannot be expected to separate those solids
which will not settle under the most favorable conditions.
Because of the biodegradable nature of a portion of the
settleable solids present in the effluents of these mills,
clarification results in some BOD5 reduction.
Biological __Treatment
BOD reduction is generally accomplished by biological means,
again because of the relative biodegradability of most of the
organic substances in the waste. Advances in reduction of
internal losses and recycling of process water have increased BOD
concentrations in the waste to be treated. However, this, in
general, seems to improve the removal efficiency of the process.
Current biological treatment practice includes the use of very
large storage oxidation basins, aerated stabilization basins, or
the activated sludge process and modifications thereof. The
storage oxidation basin and the aerated stabilization basin
because of their large land requirements have not found wide
application in this industry. Most of the mills are located in
relatively populated areas with minimum land availability.
Therefore, the activated sludge process has had wider acceptance.
The land requirements of the oxidation basin are due to the fact
that it is a relatively low-rate process. Because of the
availability of land, and the warmer climate which helps to
maintain consistent biological activity, most natural oxidation
basins are found in the Southern states (8). Design loading
rates of 56 kilograms BOD5 per hectare per day (50 pounds BOD5
per acre per day) for natural oxidation basins to achieve 95-90
percent removal in warm climates have been reported (9).
By installing aeration equipment in a natural basin, its ability
to assimilate BOD per unit of surface area is greatly increased.
The aerated stabilization basin originally evolved out of the
necessity of increasing performance of existing natural basins
due to increasing effluent flows and/or more stringent water
quality standards. Due to its inherent acceleration of the
biological process, the aerated stabilization basin requires much
less land than the natural stabilization basin and because of the
long reaction period less nutrient addition than that required
for activated sludge. Typically, 0.21 hectares per million
liters (two acres per MGD) of the aerated stabilization basin
compares with 4.8 hectares per million liters (40 acres per MGD)
for natural basins for equivalent treatment levels (9).
-------
Detention times In the aerated stabilization basin normally range
from five to fifteen days^, averaging less than 10 days,
Due to the relatively long aeration times, the buildup of sludge
solids is considerably less than for higher rate processes,
particularly where primary clarification is employed,, Typical
rates are 45.4 to 90.8 grams (0.1 to 0.2 pounds) of sludge
generated for each 454 grams (1 pound) of BOD removed (8). The
sludge is removed as formed by endogenous respiration, sludge
loss in the effluent, and sedimentation within the aeration
basin. However, discharge of untreated waste to an aerated
stabilization basin without prior clarification can result in a
buildup of sludge which after a period of time will impede its
efficiency.
Most mill wastes are deficient in nitrogen and phosphorus.
Therefore, the addition of nutrients to the aeration basin is
generally practiced,, Reported optimum ratios of BOD to nitrogen
are 50:1 with four days aeration,, and 100:1 with 10-15 days
aeration (9). Aeration is normally accomplished using either
gear-driven turbine-type aerators, direct-drive axial flow-pump
aerators, and. In a few casesf diffused aerators. Oxygenation
efficiencies under actual operating conditions range from 0.61 to
1.52 kilograms of oxygen per kilowatt per hour (one to 2,5 pounds
of oxygen per horsepower per hour)„ depending on the type of
equipment used? the amount of aeration power per unit lagoon
volume, basin configuration^ and the biological characteristics
of the system. A dissolved oxygen level of 0*5 mg/1 remaining in
the lagoon liquid is required to sustain aerobic conditions (10),
Approximately 1.1 to 1.3 kilograms of oxygen per kilogram BOD5
(1.1 to 1.3 pounds oxygen per pound BODS) have been reported to
maintain adequate DO for waste oxidation and endogenous
respiration of the 'biological mass produced. Although the
activated sludge process has been employed for many years to
treat domestic sewage, It was first applied to the building paper
industry only very recently* The process is similar to the
aerated stabilization basin except that It is much faster,
usually designed for four to eight hours of total detention time.
The biological mass grown In the aeration tank is settled in a
secondary clarlfier and returned to the aeration tankr building
up a large concentration of active biological material. Since
there is approximately 2000-4000 mg/1 of active sludge mass in
the aeration section of this process, as opposed to 50-200 mg/1
In the aerated stabilization basin,, dissolved and suspended
organic matter are degraded much more rapidlyf greatly reducing
necessary tank volume as well as required detention time. Since
biological organisms are in continuous circulation throughout the
process,, complete mixing and suspension of solids in the aeration
basin Is required. The active microblal mass consists mainly of
bacteria, protozoa, rotifers,, fungi, and cynthonemotodes.
Because the process involves intimate contact of organic waste
with biological organisms, followed by sedimentation, a high
degree of BOD and solids removals is obtained.
42
-------
The contact stabilization process is a variation of activated
sludge wherein two aeration steps are utilized rather than one.
First, the incoming waste is contacted for a short period with
active organisms prior to sedimentation. Settled solids are then
aerated for a longer period to complete waste assimilation.
Contact stabilization has not been applied successfully;
however, conventional activated sludge has found accepted use in
this industry.
The secondary clarifier in the activated sludge process performs
the function of sedimentation of the active microbial mass for
return to the aeration tank. Loading rates of about 211 liters
per day per square meter (600 gallons per day per square foot)
have been reported (11).
Due to the fact that the volume of bio-mass in the activated
sludge process is greatly reduced because of the hydraulic
detention time, endogenous respiration of the concentrated sludge
is considerably lessened. Thus, there are additional quantities
of excess sludge, three fourths kilogram of excess sludge per
kilogram of BODS (three fourths pound of excess sludge per pound
of BOD5J , which must be disposed of.
As in the case of the aerated stabilization basin, aeration can
be accomplished by mechanical or diffused aeration. The more
efficient and more easily maintained mechanical method is
generally preferred by the industry. Oxygen requirements where
activated sludge processes are utilized are in the range of one
kilogram of oxygen per kilogram of BODS (one pound of oxygen per
pound of BODS) removed.
Short detention times and low volumes make the activated sludge
process more susceptible to upset due to shock loads. When the
process is disrupted, several days are usually required to return
the biological activity and high BOD removal rates back to
normal. Thus, particular attention is required to avoid such
shock loads in mills utilizing this process.
A flow diagram of alternative waste treatment systems at building
paper mills is shown in Figure 4.
-------
MILL
EFFLUENT
i
SCREENS
1
CLARIFIER 1 m
1 WASTE
1
1
1
SLUDGE
H AERATION i J SECONDARY
TANK Li CLARIFIER
RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE i
m +. „.., . ... ^ .„„ _ „!
w 1
BEDS
1
1 ALTERNATE
AERATED | J SETTLING
BASIN | ~ BASINS
LAND
DISPOSAL
OUTFALL
h
FIGURE 4
EFFLUENT TREATMENT AT
BUILDING PAPER MILLS
-------
TworStaqe Biological Treatment
Two-stage biological -treatment is employed to enhance the BOD
removal obtained with a single stage. This concept consists of
two biological treatments systems, usually arranged in series.
In the literature (12) a two stage system is described which
employs the activated sludge process in both stages in the
treatment of municipal wastes. The authors note that the sludge
may be returned or wasted within each stage, or that excess
sludge from one stage may be recycled to the other. A principal
advantage of this particular arrangement is that the sludge flows
may be utilized to maximize BODJ5 removal. Other combinations of
biological treatment may be employed in a two-stage arrangement.
For example, a trickling filter may precede an aerated stabi-
lization basin or an activated sludge system. This arrangment
may be employed where the second stage is required because of
insufficient performance of the trickling filter alone. It may
also be used in cases where cooling of the waste is required
before further biological treatment may proceed. In the latter
case, the trickling filter serves as a partial cooling tower, and
also accomplishes some BOD5 reduction.
Two-stage aerated stabilization basins, operated in series, may
have particular appeal for this industry. This arrangement
usually requires less land than a single unit, and can be
expected to provide better treatment on an equal-volume basis.
For the first stage, a detention time up to two days or more is
usually recommended, and up to 10 days or more for the second
stage. If sufficient land is available at reasonable cost, this
system is usually a less expensive approach than a two-stage
system involving activated sludge. It has the further advantage
of providing more detention time which is helpful in treating
surges of flow or pollutant load. Under conditions of proper
design and operation, including nutrient addition and surge
basins located prior to biological treatment, BOD5_ removals of
90-95 percent can ultimately be expected to be achieved with this
system.
A two-stage biological system currently employed by some Southern
unbleached kraft mills utilizes aerated stabilization basins
followed by storage oxidation. Typically, detention time of the
former is eight to 14 days and for the latter is eight to 40
days. In these installations, overall BOD5 removal (compared to
raw waste) of 85 percent is being achieved, with 70 percent
removal after first stage. These data do not, however, reflect
usage of nutrients. It is probable that the addition of surge
basins, coupled with nutrient addition, proper aeration and
mixing capacity, will ultimately permit BOD5 reductions of 90-95
percent in this system. For mills with adequate land and other
favorable factors, this system may be the most economical
approach.
Other combinations of two-stage biological treatment are, of
course, possible. These would include use of activated sludge
-------
followed by an aerated stabilization basin, storage oxidation, or
trickling filters. Such combinations, with rare exceptions,
would not usually be the more economical or practicable solution,
however.
Temperature^ Ef f ect s
All biological treatment systems are sensitive to temperature.
Optimum temperature for these systems is generally in the 16° to
38°C (60° to 100°F) range. Impaired BOD removal efficiency is
usually encountered as temperature of the waste water drops
significantly below or rises significantly above this range.
Temperatures over 38°C may be encountered in warm climates where
heat is also added to the waste stream during processing.
Cooling towers or trickling filters have been employed to reduce
these higher temperatures prior to biological treatment. In
colder climates, waste water temperature is likely to drop below
16°C in the winter, particularly where detention time of the
biological unit exceeds 12 to 24 hours. With greater detention
times, heat loss to atmosphere from the treatment unit generally
becomes significant. Thus activated sludge units, which are
usually designed for two to 10 hours detention, are less
susceptible to reduction of BOD removal efficiency in cold
climates than are aerated stabilization basins or storage
oxidation basins. To some degree, this drop-off of BOD removal
efficiency can be mitigated in colder climates by improved design
of aeration and mixing factors. Two-stage aerated stabilization
basins are likely to perform better in cold temperatures than a
single stage of greater total detention time. More study also is
needed in this area, since other design variables, as well as
operating variables, affect BOD removal. For example, mixing
efficiency varies as temperature changes in the basin. Other
design parameters, such as lagoon geometry, depth, detention
time, nutrient addition, BOD loading rate, and aerator spacing,
and horsepower, are significant. Other factors which affect heat
loss in basin are wind velocity, ambient air temperature and
humidity, solar radiation, aeration turbulence, and foam cover.
Tertiary_ Suspende d So1ids_Reduction Technologi e s
Mixed-Media Filtration
Mixed-medium filters are similar to conventional single medium
deep-bed sand filters, but employ more than one filter media.
Typical arrangements employ garnet, sand, or anthracite.
Conventional sand filters have the finer mesh material on top of
the bed, with coarser grades below. Flow is downward. Thus most
of the suspended solids are trapped in the top inch or two of the
bed. Certain types of suspended solids, such as those from
-------
biological treatment, rapidly plug the top of the bed, requiring
very frequent backwashes.
Multi-media filters have been designed with the objective of
overcoming this disadvantage of single-medium filters. Large size
medium is employed on the top layer, over a second layer of finer
media. Usually anthracite coal is used in the top layer, and
sand in the lower layer. Thus larger particles of suspended
solids are trapped in the top layer, and finer particles in the
lower layer. The result is to extend the filter "run" before
backwashing is required. An extension of this principle is to
add a third, finer, layer of garnet below the sand continuously
decreasing particle size of media as depth increases. The
different media are selected so that the top bed has the lowest
specific gravity, and successively lower beds have successively
higher specific gravities. With this arrangement, the bed layers
tend to maintain their respective physical locations during and
after the turbulence created by backwashing. Typical
arrangements for dual media filters are anthracite (specific
gravity 1.6) over sand (specific gravity 2.65). A layer of
garnet (specific gravity 4.2) is imposed below the sand for a
three-media filter.
Studies on municipal wastes have indicated that multi-media
filters outperform single-^medium sand filters. Better removal of
suspended solids was obtained with longer runs and at higher flow
rates per unit area of filter bed.
Flocculation, Cgagulatign^ and Sedimentation for Suspended Solids
Removal
To avoid rapid plugging of mixed media filters, an additional
step to remove suspended solids contained in biological treatment
effluents may be required.
Traditional treatment systems have utilized rapid mix and
flocculation basins ahead of sedimentation tanks for chemical
clarification. The rapid mix is designed to provide a thorough
and complete dispersal of chemical throughout the waste water
being treated to insure uniform exposure to pollutants which are
to be removed. In-line blenders can be used as well as the
traditional high-powered mixers which may require as much as 0.35
kilowatts/MLD (1 horsepower/MGD). In essence, the rapid mix
performs two functions, the one previously noted (mixing) and a
rapid coagulation. These functions are enhanced by increased
turbulence.
Flocculation promotes the contact, coalescence and size increase
of coagulated particles. Flocculation devices vary in form, but
are generally divided into two categories. These are
mechanically-mixed and baffled flocculators. Baffled basins have
the advantage of low operating and maintenance costs, but they
are not normally used because of their space requirement,
inability to be easily modified for changing conditions and high
-------
head losses. Most installations utilize horizontal or vertical
shaft mechanical flocculators which are easily adjusted to
changing requirements.
Solids-contact clarifiers have become popular for advanced waste
water treatment in recent years because of their inherent size
reduction when compared to separate mixing, flocculation and
sedimentation basins in series. Their use in water clarification
and softening was carried over to waste treatment when chemical
treatment of waste water was initiated. Theoretically, the
advantage of reduced size accrues to their ability to maintain a
high concentration of previously formed chemical solids for
enhanced orthokinetic flocculation or precipitation and their
physical design, whereby three unit processes are combined in one
unit. In practice this amounts to savings in equipment size and
capital cost.
Problems have occurred with the sludge-blanket clarifiers for
reasons which include possible anaerobic conditions in the
slurry; lack of individual process control for the mixing,
flocculation and sedimentation steps; and uncontrolled blanket
upsets under varying hydraulic and organic loading conditions.
The major allegation is the instability of the blanket, which has
presented operational problems in the chemical treatment of waste
waters. Possibly the most effective method of control to date,
other than close manual control, has been to mimimize the blanket
height to allow for upsets. The advantages of higher flow rates
and solids-contacting are maintainedt but the advantage of the
blanket is minimized. Another possiblility which has not been
fully evaluated is the use of siudge^folanket sensors for
automatic control of solids wasting.
Solids-contact clarifiers have been used for the treatment of
secondary and primary effluents, as well as for the treatment of
raw, degritted wastewater* Lime as the treatment chemical has
been used with overflow rates from 48,900 to 69,300 liters per
day per square meter (1200 to 1700 gpd/sq ft) in solidscontact
units, while iron compounds and alum have been used at lower
values, usually between 20,400 to 40,700 liters per day per
square meter (500 and 1000 gpd/sq ft) . All of these rates from
48,900 to 69,300 liters per day per square meter (1200 to 1700
gpd/sq ft) in solids-contact units. All of these rates come from
pilot studies of less than 3.78 MLD (1 MGD$ capacity, and may be
subject to change at a larger scale due to differences in
hydraulics. Polymer treatment can also influence the choice of
overflow rates used for design if their cost can be economically
justified when compared to the cost of lower overflow rates.
Detention times in these solids-contact basins have ranged from
just over one to almost five hours. Sludge removal rate is
dependent on the solids concentration of the underflow, which is
a function of the unit design as well as the chemical employed.
These pilot plants have reported lime sludge drawoffs from 0.5 to
1,5 percent of the waste water flow at concentrations of from 3
to 17 percent solids. Alum and iron sludges have not been
-------
monitored extensively, but. drawoffs have been reported to be 1 to
6 percent of the flow with 0.2 to 1.5 percent solids.
Much of the design information necessary for solids-contact
clarifiers has been obtained from water treatment experience.
This is not surprising in that the principles of treatment are
identical. The characteristics of the solids that are formed and
separated are the source of differences. The organic matter
contained in the chemically-created sludges causes the sludge to
become lighter and also more susceptible to septicity due to the
action of microorganisms. The former condition suggests lower
hydraulic loadings, while the latter suggests highe^ ones, given
a set physical design. Since sludge septicity is neither
universal nor uncontrollable, a lower design overflow rate may
comprise much of the necessary adjustment to waste treatment con-
ditions from those of water treatment. As indicated previously,
design overflow rates from 48,900 to 69,300 liters per day per
square meter (1200 to 1700 gpd/sq ft) for lime treatment and from
29,400 to 40,700 liters per day per square meter (500 to 1000
gpd/sq ft) for alum or iron treatment have been successful at
less than 3.78 MLD (1 MGD) capacity. Cold weather peak flow
conditions will probably constitute the limiting condition, as
water treatment practice has shown that overflow rates are
reduced by as much as 50 percent at near-freezing temperature.
Waste water will probably not reach such low temperatures in most
areas, but the effects are significant*
Sludge^Dewatering^and^Disposal
Due to their high organic content, the dewatering and disposal of
sludges resulting from the waste treatment of mill effluents can
pose a major problem and cost more than the treatment itself. In
early practice, these sludges were placed in holding basins from
which free water from natural compaction and rainfall was
decanted. When a basin was full? it was abandoned, or, if
sufficient drying took place, the cake was excavated and dumped
on waste land. In this case, the basin was returned to service.
Odor problems from drying, as well as land limitations, have
demanded the adoption of more advanced practices. These are
covered in detail in NCASI Technical Bulletin No^ JM30 J13JI and
are described briefly below.
Depending on the performance of dewatering equipment, in some
cases it is either necessary or desirable to prethicken sludges.
This is accomplished by gravity thickeners of the "picket-fence"
type or by providing a high level of sludge storage capacity in
mechanical clarifiers. Small mills sometimes employ high conical
tanks which serve as both storage tanks and thickeners. These
have side wall slopes in excess of 60 degrees but contain no rake
mechanism.
-------
Sludges from building paper mills can generally be thickened to a
consistency in excess of four percent dry solids by
prethiekening. If activated sludge from secondary treatment is
included, this figure can be somewhat lower.
Vacuum filters are in use for dewatering sludges and produce
filter cakes ranging from 20 to 30 percent solids. Observed
capacities for this poorly filterable sludges can generally be
about doubled by chemical conditioning with ferric chloride,
alum, or polyelectrolytes at a cost of from $2,12 to $4.54 per
metric ton ($3.00 to $5.00 per short ton) of dry solids. Such
treatment is generally necessary when activated sludge is
included in the sludge to be dewatered since the addition of 20
percent of this material on a dry solids basis can reduce
filtration rates as much as 50 percent.
Complete vacuum filter installations, including all accessories,
range from $4,306 to $5,382 per square meter of filter area ($400
to $500 per square foot of filter area). Although a number of
different types of filters are in service, ceil or belt types are
the most popular among recent installations. At one mill using
coil filters, average cake content of 23 percent was reported,
with an influent sludge concentration of 3.3 percent. Loading
rates averaged 27.37 kilograms solids per square meter of filter
area per day (5.6 pounds solids per square foot of filter area
per day) „
Centrifuges are also used for sludge dewatering. In practice,
the higher the consistency of the feed, the more effective they
are in terms of solids capture in relation to through-put as well
as reduced cake moisture. Moisture is generally lower than in
cakes produced by vacuum filters. Cakes range from 25 to 35
percent dry solids content and are in a pelletized easily
manageable form. To operate effectively, centrifuges must
capture in excess of 85 percent of the solids in the feed stream.
Centrifuges cost from $106 to $159 per liter per minute ($400 to
$600 per gpm) of feed capacity. At a two percent solids feed
consistency, this is equivalent to 97.6 kilograms of dry solids
(215 pounds of dry solids) daily at 90 percent capture. Although
drying beds are employed for dewatering sludges, they are not
constructed as elaborately as are those employed for sanitary
sewage. They generally consist only of multiple earthen basins
without a complex underdrain system.
Detailed experiments on this method of dewatering sludge set
forth parameters of good practice and area requirements (14).
The latter vary naturally with the climate, although adjustments
as to the depth of sludge deposited and its initial moisture
content are also involved. The most effective depth is less than
one foot.
Sludge generated by mills in this industry can be removed for
disposal on the land as soon as it becomes "spadeable" or
handleable with earth moving equipment,, which is about 25 percent
50
-------
solids content. Land disposal, via dumping or lagooning, has
been a common means of disposing of waste sludges and other solid
wastes from many builder's paper and roofing felt mills. Odors
formed upon decomposition of these materials, the potential for
pollution of nearby surface waters, and the elimination of
affected lands from potential future usages, have made such
practices generally undersirable: If disposed of using proper
sanitary landfill techniques however most solid*? from this
industry should create no environmental problems. In the rare
cases in which sludges may contain leachable quantities of taste
or odor imparting, toxic, or otherwise undesirable substances,
simple sanitary landfilling may not be sufficient to protect
groundwater quality. A sludge dewatering and disposal operation
is shown in Figure 5.
Effluent Levels Achieved by_ Existing Treatment Syjjtems at
Builders Pa^er and Roofing Felt Mills
Final effluent levels presently being achieved by existing
treatment systems at builder's paper and roofing felt mills are
shown in Table 7. BOD5 ranges from 0.055 kg/kkg (0.11 Ibs/ton)
to 4.3 kg/kkg (8.6 Ibs/ton) . Total suspended solids ranges from
0.045 kg/kkg (0.09 Ibs/ton) to 2.75 kg/kkg (5.5 Ibs/ton). It
should be noted that the data for mill BP-1 is the most
representative data in the table as it represents a year's
operating data.
51
-------
SLUDGE FROM
TREATMENT PLANT
STACK
(OFF-GASES)
F
WASTE SLUDGE
METER
GRAVITY
THICKENER
I
en
H
FILTERS
ALTERNATE
CENTRIFUGES
ALTERNATE
DRYING BEDS
_J
1
I
4\_
__!
_ I
I
1
.™^_
— 1
I
i
1
— ~p$
-------
Table 7
Effluent Levels Achieved by Existing Treatment Systems
Mill
Selected Mills
Treatment
Production
kg/day
(tons/day)
en
oo
Flow
kiloliters/kkg
(lOOOgal/ton)
BP-1 •*•
BP-1 **
**
BP-2
Mills from NPBES
1
2
3
4
DAF-AS
DAF-AS
C-ASB-L
Data
C-TF
C-ASB
C-AS
C-ASB
309(341)
—
304(335)
150(165)
59(65)
227(250)
73(80)
75.1(18)
—
4.2(1.0)
7.9(1.9)
0.37(0.09)
—
1.8(0.44)
kg/kkg(lbs/ton)
BOD5
TSS
Inf.
Eff.
Inf.
Eff.
12.6(25.2) 4.3(8.6) 41(82) 2.7(5.5)
9.5(19) 3.9(7.9) 42(84) 4.8(9.6)
7.2(14.3) 0.37(0.75) 4.1(8.3) 0.045(0.09)
0.3(0.6)
—
1.4(2.8)
0.05(0.11)
0.95(1.9)
0.4(0.8)
1.0(2.0)
0.13(0.26)
* Mill Records
** Short term survey data (3-7 days)
Note: MillBF'O. is Mill # 3 and Mill BP-2 is Mill # 2.
-------
Section VIII
COST, ENERGY, NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS,
AND IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS
COSTS
This section of the report summarizes the costs of internal and
external effluent treatment associated with the technologies of
BPCTCA, BATEA, and NSPS. The cost functions used are for
conventional treatment methods based on industry experience with
full scale installations and equipment suppliers' estimates. For
more advanced processes, where full scale installations are few
or nonexistent, the cost estimates are largely based on
experience with pilot installations and on estimates from and
discussions with equipment suppliers. Cost estimates for closed-
loop operation are based on information obtained from mills
presently operating at closed or nearly closed-loop.
It should be recognized that actual treatment costs vary largely
from mill to mill depending upon the design and operation of the
production facilities and local conditions. Furthermore,
effluent treatment costs reported by the industry vary greatly
from one installation to another, depending upon bookkeeping
procedures. The estimates of effluent volumes and treatment
methods described in this section are intended to be descriptive
of the segments of the industry that they cover. However, the
industry is extremely heterogeneous in that almost every
installation has some uniqueness which could be of critical
importance in assessing effluent treatment problems and their
associated costs.
Costs of effluent treatment which are presented have considered
the following (See Appendix IV):
Investment Cost
Design
Land
Mechanical and electrical equipment
Instrumentation
Site preparation
Plant sewers
Construction work
Installation
Testing
55
-------
Annual Cost
Interest
Depreciation
Operation and maintenance
Costs of effluent treatment are presented as investment and
annual costs. The annual costs are further broken down into
capital costs and depreciation, and operating and maintenance
costs. Investment costs are defined as the capital expenditures
required to bring the treatment or control technology into
operation. These include the traditional expenditures such as
design, purchase of land and all mechanical and electrical
equipment, instrumentation, site preparation, plant sewers, all
construction work, installation, and testing.
The capital costs are the financial charges on the capital
expenditures for pollution control.
The depreciation is the accounting charges which reflect the
deterioration of a capital asset over its useful life.... Straight
line depreciation has been used in all case study cost
calculations.
Operation and maintenance costs are those costs required to
operate and maintain the pollution abatement equipment. They
include such items as labor, parts, chemicals, energy, insurance,
taxes, solid waste disposal, quality control, monitoring, and
administration. Productivity increases or by-product revenues as
a result of improved effluent control are subtracted with the
result that the operation and maintenance costs reported are the
net costs.
All costs in this report are expressed in terms of August 1971
prices. This is comparable to the following costs indexes:
Indexes Index 5) August 1971
EPA Treatment Plant Construction Cost 164.5
Index (1957^59 = 100)
EPA Sewer Line Construction Cost 166.8
Index (1957-59 = 100)
Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost
Index (1913 = 100) 1614
ENR Labor Cost
Index (1949 = 100) 420
Effluent treatment or control technology is grouped into internal
and external measures. Available methods for reduction of
pollutant discharges by internal measures include effective pulp
56
-------
washing, chemicals and fiber recovery, treatment and reuse of
selected waste streams and collection of spills and prevention of
"accidental" discharges. Internal measures are essentially
reduction of pollutant discharges at the origin and results in
recovery of chemicals, byproducts, and in conservation of heat
and water.
The treatment unit operations which are discussed are grouped
into pre-rprimary, secondary and tertiary treatment and sludge
dewatering and disposal.
Pretreatment are those processes which are used as required to
prepare the effluent for the subsequent treatment steps.
Primary treatment is designed to remove suspended solids, and is
usually the first major external treatment step.
The primary purpose of secondary treatment is to remove BOD.
The tertiary treatment steps are designed to remove suspended
solids and BOD to degrees which are not obtainable through
primary and secondary treatment processes, or designed to remove
substances which are refractory to the primary and secondary
steps. A detailed discussion of external treatment unit
operations and processes considered in this study, considered
with their costs is summarized in Appendix IV to this report.
The specific internal and external control technologies upon
which costs of treatment were based are shown in Table 8.
Table 9 illustrates the costs and resultant pollutant levels for
the identified treatment and control technologies for the subject
subcategory for a 90.7 metric ton/day (100 short ton/day) mill.
Each cost shown reflects the total amount necessary to upgrade a
mill which has only minimal internal control of spills, minimal
recycling and recovery, and no treatment of waste waters to the
specified technology level. It should be recognized that most
mills have some existing capability beyond this base line, thus
resulting in reduced costs over those shown.
57
-------
TABLE 8
INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL CONTROL TECHNOLOGIF.g_nHF.n
IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF COSTS
Preliminary Upgrading
Internal measures
The internal measures selected can be summarized as follows:
control of asphalt spills
installations of low volume, high pressure self-
cleaning showers on paper machine
filtering and reuse of press water
External Treatment
For mills the external treatment consists of raw waste screening
by bar screens, primary treatment by mechanical clarifiers, foam
control, effluent monitoring and automatic sampling and outfall
diffuser.
The screenings are sanitary landfilled.
BggTCA^Technoloqy
Internal Measures
The internal measures selected to bring the mills up to BPCTCA,
consist of the preliminary additions already made plus the
following:
segregation and reuse of white waters
collection and reuse of vacuum pump seal waters
installation of savealls
gland water reduction
press water filtering
water showers
- save-alls and associated equipment
External Measures
Screening, primary, and secondary treatment are provided to total
mill effluents for mills, where the screening is by bar screens
and primary sedimentation in mechanical clarifiers as was used
when the upgrading was done in the previous upgrading step.
Secondary treatment is provided by biological treatment with
nutrient addition. An emergency spill basin is installed prior
to the secondary treatment step.
58
-------
Foam control, flow monitoring and sampling and outfall system are
as used under previous upgrading step.
BATEA Technology
Internal measures
The internal measures selected to bring the mills up to BATEA
consist of BPCTCA installations plus the following additions:
a. control of spills whereby major pollutional loads bypass
the waste water treatment system to a retention basin and
are ultimately either reused, gradually discharged into the
treatment system, or treated separately;
b. intensive internal reuse of process waters;
c. separation of cooling waters from other waste water streams,
and subsequent heat removal and reuse;
d. intensive reduction of gland water spillage.
External measures
All mill effluents are screened by bar screens, and are subjected
to primary solids separation in mechanical clarifiers and
secondary treatment by biological treatment with nutrient
addition. Suspended solids are further reduced by mixed media
filtration with, if necessary, chemical addition and coagulation.
Emergency spill basins are provided prior to the secondary
treatment step.
Effluents receive foam control treatment, monitoring and
automatic sampling prior to entering the receiving waters through
diffusers.
Screenings are disposed of by sanitary landfilling. Primary
sludges and waste activated sludge are thickened in gravity-
sludge thickeners, and dewatered mechanically by vacuum filters
and presses prior to ultimate disposal.
Ultimate sludge disposal is by sanitary landfilling.
NSPS Technology
The same as BATEA.
59
-------
Effluent Treatment Cost and Quality for 90.7 mtpd (100 tpd) Building Paper Mill
None
E T I
Pre
BPCTCA
BATEA
I **)
NSPS
a. 0. 0. 0. 122 344
b. 0. 0. 0. 34 84
c. 0. 0. 0. 17 47
d. 0. 0. 0. 17 37
kg/kkg^ (Ibs/ton)
TSS 35 (70)
BOD5 35 (70)
01 Approximate gallons
456
118
64
54
per
428 487
98 137
64 62
34 75
5 (10)
17.5 (35)
ton x 1000
915
235
126
109
428
98
64
34
1035
217
138
79
1463
315
202
113
NA
NA
NA
NA
725
162
100
62
4.17 (10>
8.3 (2)
.5 (5)
.5 (5)
1.0
1.0
4.2 (1)
.Of
.0)
1.0
1.0
725
162
100
62
(2.0)
(2.0}
4.2 (1)
Note: In going front *) to **) practical considerations dictate that the internal
investment be made at BPCTCA. Therefore, although a decrease in internal
water use is expected between BPCTCA and BATEA, the total required invest-
ment is given in BPCTCA.
Key for Table
Data are in $1000's unless otherwise indicated.
I - Costs for Internal Controls
E = Costs for External Controls
T = Sum of costs I and E
a = Investment cost
b = Total annual cost (sum of c and d)
e = Interest cost plus Depreciation cost @ 15% per yr.
d = Operating and Maintenance cost (including energy
and power) per year.
-------
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
Specific energy and power prices were based on the following and
are reported as annual expenditures.
External treatment
ppwer cost = 1.10/KWH
fuel price = $0.2U/mill Kg Cal ($0.95/mill BTU)
Internal treatment
steam = $1,86/metric ton ($2.05/short ton)
power = Q.60/KWH
The lower power unit price used fop internal treatment takes into
consideration the lower cost of power generated by the mill,
while power from external sources is assumed for external
treatment.
For a 91 metric ton (100 short ton) per day mill, energy costs
for BPCTCA, BATEA, and NSPS will be $5,400, $5,700 and $3,200,
respectively based upon energy requirements of 16 kwh/kkg (18
kwh/ton), 17 kwh/kkg (19 kwh/ton), and 10 kwh/ton (11 kwh/ton),
respectively.
61
-------
NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS OF CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Air Pollution Potential
There is virtually no potential for an air pollution problem
arising from the external treatment of effluents from building
paper mills, although such problems are encountered in sludge
disposal.
The physical processes employed in suspended solids removal do
not involve any activity which would create air pollution, since
detention times rarely exceed six hours which is not conducive to
development of anaerobic or other odors. The subsequent
biological processes are aerobic in nature when properly designed
and operated, and the products of decomposition consist almost
entirely of carbon dioxide, water, sulfates, and a trace of
nitrates, all of which are odorless. The absence of
objectionable odor has been confirmed by innumerable field
observations by contractor personnel and regulatory officials.
The only odors detectable were the characteristic odor associated
with wood extractants.
Odors can arise from land disposal of liquid sludges as a result
of their anaerobic decomposition. These derive primarily from
organic acids and hydrogen sulfide produced on reduction of
sulfates dissolved in the water content of the sludges.
Dewatering prior to disposal on the land arrests such
decomposition and represents an adequate odor control measure, as
do land fill practices.
Incineration of sludges produced in the effluent treatment
processes can, without appropriate control equipment, result in
the discharge of particulates to the atmosphere. However,
emission control devices are available to meet state regulatory
requirements in most instances. Incinerators are either sold
with integral emission control appliances or are equipped with
them on installation. Gaseous pollutant emissions from such
incinerators are negligible.
In-mill controls which effect a reduction in fiber and additive
losses such as save-alls and recycling of process waters do not
generate an air pollution problem.
Noi se ^ Potenti al
There are no official records of public noise problems arising
from the operation of effluent treatment by building paper mills.
However, based on many years of contractor association with
industry operations, it can be stated that public complaints
engendered by such noise are very infrequent. This is due in
part to their confinement, in some instances, to manufacturing or
utility areas and to the fact that the noise level of most of the
devices employed for treatment is generally lower than that of
some manufacturing machinery.
62
-------
The sources of noise are for the most part air compressors or
mechanical surface aerators supplying air to treatment processes,
vacuum pumps and centrifuges involved in sludge dewatering, and
fans serving sludge incinerators. With the exception of surface
aerators, these devices are most frequently operated in buildings
which serve to muffle their noise. Since many building paper
mills are located in populated areas, noise from surface aerators
could be a problem. However, these mills are small and employ
small aerators which, if not driven through gear boxes, produce
little noise. The problem of noise emanating from gear boxes
used in these aerators and elsewhere is the subject of an
extensive investigation by the Philadelphia Gear Company which
manufactures many of these units. It is anticipated that this
study will lead to a reduction in noise from these sources.
It can be concluded that noise produced by equipment used for
treating building paper mill effluent is not a major public
problem at present. Efforts being made to reduce the noise level
of mechanical equipment in general, motivated by industrial
health protection programs, will lend assistance in preventing it
from becoming one.
Solid Wastes and Their Disposal
Solid wastes generated by building paper mills, in addition to
sludges produced by effluent treatment, are trash, waste paper,
ash, and garbage.
Trash such as metals, glass, and plastics is removed from waste
paper and used rags in the beaters and pulpers and in stock
cleaning operations. The material and grit from the rifflers are
disposed of by land fill on the mill premises or hauled to a
suitable location for disposal in this manner.
Wood rejects occur only in small quantities since less than 50
tons of wood a day is generally processed. In most instances,
the rejects can be recycled in the process.
Ash from coal-fired boilers can be discharged hydraulically to
ash ponds. There the solids settle and compact and the clear
supernatant water is discharged to the mill effluent system. If
ash is hauled to a disposal area, these materials should be
transported wet in order to avoid being blown into the
atmosphere.
Waste paper and garbage are either incinerated on the site or
hauled away for disposal by contractors engaged in this business.
Particulates from incineration must be controlled by effective
devices such as bag filters or wet scrubbers.
Research recently has been conducted on solid wastes generated in
the pulp and paper industry and their disposal for EPA's Office
of Solid Waste Management Programs (EPA Contract No. 68-03-0207).
63
-------
IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENT^
Availability of Equipment
Since 1966, when major Federal water pollution control
expenditures began, various Federal and private organizations
have analyzed the projected levels of water pollution control
activity and their economic impact on the construction and
equipment industries. As a result, a plethora of studies has
been developed which is related to the levels of municipal and
industrial water pollution control construction and the
respective markets for waste water treatment equipment. Less
information is available concerning the actual and anticipated
levels of expenditure by any specific industry.
In recent years, the trend in the waste water equipment industry
has seen the larger firms acquiring smaller companies in order to
broaden their market coverage.
Figure 6 shows graphically past expenditures and projected future
outlays for the construction of industrial waste water treatment
facilities, as well as total water pollution control
expenditures. Obviously, the level of expenditures by industry
is related to the Federal compliance schedule. This will
increase until industry is in compliance with Federal standards.
Once that occurs, the level of spending will return to a level
commensurate with the construction of new facilities, replacement
of existing facilities, and the construction of advance waste
treatment facilities.
Figure 7 shows past expenditures for and projected future trends
in total sales of waste water treatment equipment and the dollar
amounts attributable to industrial and municipal sales.
The data in Figures 6 and 7 related to industrial water pollution
expenditures include only those costs external to the industrial
activity. Internal process changes made to accomplish water
pollution control are not included.
Recent market studies have projected the total available
production capacity for water and waste water treatment
equipment. Most of them have indicated that the level of sales
is currently only 30-40 percent contracted to verify these
figures and indications are that they are still accurate. A
partial reason for this overcapacity is that the demand for
equipment has been lower than anticipated. Production capacity
was increased assuming Federal expenditures in accord with funds
authorized by Congress and conformance to compliance schedules.
64
-------
en
FIGURE 6
TOTAU WATER POUUUT10M
exPEworruces
-------
9OO
YEAR
FIGURE 7
WA5T£WAT&fZ. .
EQUIPMENT
-------
For the immediate future, increased demands for waste water
treatment equipment can be absorbed by the existing overcapacity.
Long term requirements will probably necessitate expansion of
production capacity in various product lines where the demand is
expected to increase dramatically — specifically, advanced
treatment systems and waste solids handling equipment.
It should also be noted that the capacity to produce waste water
treatment equipment could be expanded significantly through the
use of independent metal fabricators as subcontractors. Even at
the present time work loads are heavy and excessive shipping
costs make it desirable to use a fabricator close to the delivery
site.
There appear to be no substantial geographical limitations to the
distribution of waste water treatment equipment to industry. In
various areas, certain suppliers may be more successful than
others; however, this seems to be more related to the
effectiveness of the sales activities than to any geographical
limitations. The use of independent metal fabricators as
subcontractors to manufacture certain pieces of equipment further
reduces geographical limitations.
Equipment delivery schedules may vary substantially depending
upon the manufacturer, the current demand, and the specific
equipment in question. Obviously, the greater the demand or the
more specialized the equipment, the greater the delivery time.
Availability of Construction Manpower
After consultation with the Associated General Contractors of
America and other industry groups, it is concluded that
sufficient manpower exists to construct any required treatment
facilities.
This conclusion has reportedly been substantiated by EPA in an
independent study (15) although there is still some concern about
localized problems. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has been
requested to conduct another study.
Construction Cost Index
The most detailed study and careful analysis of cost trends in
prior years still leaves much to be desired in predicting
construction cost through the next ten years.
During the years 1955 through 1965 there was a very consistent
price rise. The Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost
Index in January 1955 was 644. With slight deviations from a
straight line, costs rose at a steady rate to an index of 988 in
December 1965. This represented an increase in cost of 53.4
percent over an eleven-year period or approximately 5 percent per
year.
67
-------
The first six months of 1966 saw an increase of 6.6 percent which
then leveled off abruptly only to ra?se sharply again in 1967 at a
rate of 6.2 percent, then increasing to 9.4 percent in 1968.
The increase in costs continued at about 10.5 percent per year
through 1970. During 1971, construction costs rose at the
unprecedented rate of 15.7 percent primarily due to larger
increases in labor rates.
With the application oF Federal wage and price controls in 1972,
the rate of increase dropped to $.7 percent. The first three
months of 1973 saw some escalation of cost due to allowable
materials price gains. EPA determined the increase in Treatment
Plant Construction Cost during this period to be 3.1 percent.
This compares with a rise of only 0.9 percent during the previous*
three months.
The opinion of some officials of the Associated Genera].
Contractors is that rate of cost increase for general
construction work, including waste water treatment and industrial
construction, should average no more than five to six percent
over the next several years. This is, therefore, the basis used
for extention of the ENR index curve at an annual six percent
increase for construction costs through the year 1983. This is
shown in Figure 8.
LandRequirements
Land requirements for a number of external treatment systems have
been evaluated and are shown in Figure 9 for a range of plant
sizes. Incineration or off-site disposal of dewatered sludge has
been assumed. Should sludge lagoons be used on site, additional
land would be required.
Time Required to Construct Treatment Facilities
The time required to construct treatment facilities has been
determined for a range of plant sizes and for two different
project contract possibilities„ The treatment sizes evaluated
were under 18,925 kiloliters per day (five MGD) , 18,925-189,250
kiloliters per day (five to 10 MGD), and over 189,250 kiloliters
per day (10 MGD). The contract bases evaluated were 1) separate
engineering and construction and 2) turnkey performance. The
components considered for both approaches included preliminary
engineering, final design engineering, bid and construction
award, and construction.
It is concluded from reviewing the data shown in Figure 1Q that
it should be possible in all cas
-------
tTt
vo
3000
ZfeOO
O
8
8
ZiOO
8
0
1
0
*
O
6>00-
I9SS
W60
• JUL.Y 1977
±
W70
JUUY
|«»00 ±.
I9T3 W15 WT7
JUUV \983
~ 3040 ±
f»60 1983
YEAR
FIGURE 8'
E.NGINE.ERIMG NS&WS RECORD
CONSTRUCTION COST
-------
if)
UJ
&
U
4
UJ
IOOO
5OO
STABILIZATION
ACTIVATED SLU DCiE.
70
FIGURE 9
LAND REQUIRED FOR
TREATMENT
-------
SITE
MGD
UMD&R 5
COMV.
UNDER S
TURNKEY
5-10
CONV
^ 5-10
TURNKEY
OVER 1O
COMV
OVER tO
TURNKEY
/
197£i
JFMAHJJASOND
~"
• _
"•••
•••
i
•••
•mi
"•
• II
•
• • •
tmm
...
,.
1975
J F M AMJ JASOND
••
• !•
.1.
• mm
.-,
• i i
• i •
mimmtmm
tin
• 11
• i •
i »m
I
197b
j FM AMJJ AS ON-D
1977
J F H AMJJ A
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
FINAL DESIGN ENGINEERIKG FIGURE 1Q
BID AND CONSTRUCTION AMARU
TIME R6QU\RtD TO
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCT WASTEWWER FA.C \HT\ES
COWVEK1TIOWA\- ^ TURNKEY COUTR'S^VS
(
-------
SECTION IX
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July lr 1977
are to specify the degree of effluent reduction attainable
through the application of the best practicable control
technology currently available. Best practicable control
technology currently available is generally based upon the
average of the best existing performance by plants of various
sizes, ages, and unit processes within the industrial subcate-
gory.
Consideration was also given to:
a. the total cost of application of technology in relation to
the effluent reduction benefits to be the achieved from such
application;
b. the size and age of equipment and facilities involved;
c. the processes employed;
d. the engineering aspects of the application of various types of
control techniques;
e. process changes;
f. non-water quality environmental impact (including energy
requirements) ;
g. waste water characteristics and treatability.
Also, best practicable control technology currently available
emphasizes treatment facilities at the end of a manufacturing
process but includes the control technologies within the process
itself when the latter are considered to be normal practice
within an industry.
A further consideration is the degree of economic feasibility and
engineering reliability which must be established for the
technology to be "currently available." As a result of
demonstration projects, pilot plants, and general use, there must
exist a high degree of confidence in the engineering feasibility
and economic practicability of the technology at the time of
commencement of construction of installation of the control
facilities.
73
-------
EFFLUENT REDUCTIQN_ATTAINABLE THROUGH_THE_APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE^^ CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY_AVAILABLE
Based upon the information contained in Sections III through VIII
and the appendices of this report, a determination has been made
that the point source discharge limitations for each identified
pollutant shown in Table 10 can be obtained through the
application of the best practicable pollution control technology
currently available.
Table 10
BPCTCA Effluent Limitations
Values in kg/kkg (Ibs/ton)
BOD5 ____ . __ ,__ __ . _______ TSS ______ , pH Settleab]
______ _ ____ . __ ,__ __
30 Day Djli.iY._iIax 30^Day Daily^Max _B^D2e Solids
3.0 (6.0) 5.0 (10.0) 3.0 (6.0) 5.0 (10.0) 6.0-9.0 0.2 ml/
The maximum average of daily values for any 30 consecutive day
period should not exceed the 30 day effluent limitations shown
above. The maximum for any one day should not exceed the daily
maximum effluent limitations shown above. The limitations are in
kilograms of pollutant per metric ton of production except for
the pH and settleable solids limitations. Mill effluents should
always be within the settleable solids concentration and the pH
range shown.
The TSS parameter is measured by the technique utilizing glass
fiber filter disks as specified in Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Waste water (13 Edition) (1) .
Production is defined as the annual average level of production
off the machine (air dry tons) .
74
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF BEST PRACTICABLE CQNTRQL_TECHNQLQGY CURRENTLY
BAILABLE
Best practicable control technology currently available is
identified below. The identified in-plant controls are in common
use in plants within the subcategory. It should be emphasized
that it is not expected that all of the internal controls listed
are needed for mills to meet the limitations. Also, the internal
controls, as well as the external controls, are identifications
(not requirements) of pollution control technologies which can be
utilized to meet the 1977 limitations. In addition, mills have
the option for pollutant reduction by well designed and operated
external treatment systems or by a combination of both internal
and external controls.
Internal Control
a. Water Showers
Fresh water showers used to clean wire, felt, and other
machine elements (of both fourdrinier and cylinder ma-
chines) should be low-volume and high-pressure; white
water showers should be low-pressure, high volume, and
self-cleaning.
b. Segregation of White Water Systems
The segregation of white water systems should be
designed to permit maximum reuse within the stock
preparation/ machine systems and to permit only low
fiber content white water to enter the sewer.
c. Press Water Filtering
A vibrating or centrifugal screen should be employed to
remove felt hairs prior to press water reuse.
d. Collection Systems for Vacuum Pump Seal Water
Seal water should be collected for partial reuse and/or
cascade to or from other water users.
e. Save-all with Associated Equipment
An effective save-all should be employed to recover
fibrous and other suspended material which escapes from
the paper machine.
f. Gland Water Reduction
75
-------
Flow control of individual seal water lines to equipment
packing glands, or equivalent measures, should be
exercised.
Control of Asphalt Spills
Floor drains are connected to a spill basin which is
equipped with asphalt removal facilities „
a. Suspended Solids Reduction
This step involves removal of suspended solids from the
raw waste stream. It can incorporate either 1) an
earthen stilling basin; or 2) mechanical clarification
and sludge removal . Solids dewatering screens can also
be incorporated prior to solids settling as a means of
removing coarse solids,
b. BOD Reduction
The treatment system for reduction of BOD5> is biological
oxidation with nutrient addition. The treatment system
may consist of activated sludge process (AS) , aerated
basins (ASB) , and/or storage oxidation ponds (SO) =
c. Secondary Solids Reduction
The system should provide for the removal of biological
solids by either mechanical clarifiers, stilling ponds
(or a SO following an ASB) , or a quiescent zone in an
aerated basin which is beyond the influence of the
aeration equipment.
d. Sludge Disposal
When compatible with other unit processes, sludge
disposal can often be carried out in a stilling pond.
However, this necessitates periodic dredging, removal,
and disposal of solids . Where activated sludge and
mechanical clarification are utilized, ultimate sludge
disposal can be accomplished through sludge thickening
by vacuum filtration or centrifugation, followed by
sludge dewatering and ultimate solids disposal.
Disposal can be accomplished by either land disposal or
incineration. Combustion of sludges can be carried out
either in a sludge incinerator or a power
76
-------
RATIONALE FOR_THE_SK]VF.CTION_OF BEST PRACTICABLE __ CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY^CURRENTLY^AVAILABLE^
Age and gi2g_gf_Eguigment_and_Facilities
There is a wide range f in both size and age among mills in the
subcategory studied. However, internal operations of most older
mills have been upgraded, and some of these mills currently
operate very efficiently. The technology for upgrading of older
mills is well established, and does not vary significantly from
mill to mill within the subcategory. Studies have also shown
that waste treatment plant performance does not relate to mill
size. Most mills are constructed on a "modular" concept, where
key process elements are duplicated as mill size expands.
Consequently, there is no significant variation in either the
waste water characteristics or in the waste water loading rates
between mills of varying sizes,,
Application of best technology currently available does not
require major changes in existing industrial processes. The
identified in-plant systems representing BPCTCA have previously
been installed at most mills and are thus in common use.
Incorporation of additional systems ^ treatment processes, and
control measures can be accomplished in most cases through
changes in piping, and through design modifications to existing
equipment. Such alterations can be carried out in all mills
within the subcategory™
The in-plant technology to achieve these effluent limitations is
practiced and generally in common use within the subcategory
under study. The concepts are proven, available for
implementation, and applicable to the wastes in question. The
waste treatment techniques are also broadly applied within many
other industries. The technology identified will necessitate
improved monitoring of waste discharges and of waste treatment
components on the part of many mills, as well as more extensive
training of personnel in operation and maintenance of waste
treatment facilities. However, these procedures are commonly
practiced in many builders paper and roofing felt mills and are
common practice in many other industries.
The technology to achieve these effluent limitations is practiced
within the subcategory under study. The concepts are proven,
available for implementation, and applicable to the wastes in
question. The waste treatment techniques are also broadly
applied within many other industries. The technology required
will necessitate improved monitoring of waste discharges and of
77
-------
waste treatment components on the part of many mills, as well as
more extensive training of personnel in operation, and maintenance
of waste treatment facilities. However, these procedures are
currently practiced in some mills and are common practice in many
other industries»
Application of the activated sludge waste treatment process
offers a potential for adverse Impact upon air quality if
dewatered sludges are incinerated. However* proper selection and
operation of participate emission control equipment can minimize
this Impact^ Dredged or dewatered sludges disposed of on land
can present an odor problem If a solid waste disposal program is
not properly implemented.
technology cited will not create any significant increase in
noise levels beyond those observed in well designed municipal
waste water treatment systems which currently are being approved
by the Federal government for construction In populated areas.
Furtherr no hazardous chemicals axe required as part of this
The greatest proportion of energy consumed will be for pumping
and for biological treatment « The total energy requirements for
implementation of best available technology are not substantial
(less than one percent) and should not be enough to warrant
concern on either a national or regional basis,
of 2 o Effluent Re due ti. on Benefit
For a 90. 7 metric ton (100 short ton) per day mill, the total
annual cost of this level of technology is estimated at $235ffQQOf
including energy requirements, This results in an increase in
production costs of approximately $7 =,20 per metric ton ($7=93 per
short ton) „
This Increase reflects both all internal mill and external waste
treatment improvements* It Is based on 300 days of
production/year. It should be emphasized, however , that most
mills have already carried out many of these improvements.
Subsequently^, their Increased costs would be less than those
shown above,
All mills within the subcategory studied utilise the same basic
production processes., although there are deviations In equipment
and production procedures, these deviations do not significantly
alter either t'ae e'bcracteri sties or the treatafol lity of the waste
wa t er qenerat e d =-
-------
RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF BPCTCA EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The effluent limitations were based upon the two selected mills,
Mill BP-1 and Mill BP-2. Mill BP-2 was determined to be
achieving effluent qualities representative of BATEA. Thusff the
effluent limitations were primarily based on Mill BP-1.
As shown in Table 7 in Section VII, Mill BP--1 was achieving less
than 70% BOD5 reduction with the activated sludge process. Since
Mill BP-2 demonstrated that nearly 95% BOD5 reduction is
achievable by secondary treatment, it was determined that Mill
BP-1 was not achieving effluent gualities equivalent to the
application of BPCTCA. Using the raw waste BOD5 load from Mill
BP-1 and minimally acceptable levels of BODj> reduction of 85-90%
on an annual average basis, the effluent limitations were
determined. Conservative factors of 1.9 and 3.2 for ratios of
effluent quality of maximum month to annual average and maximum
day to annual average, respectively, were applied to determine
the 30-day and daily maximum limitations.
The TSS effluent limitations were based upon Mill BP-1 effluent
gualities and effluent flows. Since BPCTCA was not being
demonstrated at mill BP~1 as discussed above, the annual average
TSS levels in the final effluent of 50 mg/1 were used as the
maximum month in determining the limitations. The above factors
of 1.9 and 3.2 were used to determine the 30-day and daily
maximum effluent limitations, respectively, based on an annual
average of 26 mg/1.
Since many mills, such as Mill BP-*2, may choose to close up their
water systems instead of installing external waste water
treatment in order to meet the effluent limitations, it was
determined that a settleable solids limitations equivalent to
primary treatment was needed. These mills may be able to meet
the limitations without external treatment and still cause a
sludge bed problem in receiving waters by discharging their
unsettled bleed-off waste waters containing heavy loads of
settleable solids.
Limitations
The pH range of 6.0-9.0 in receiving waters is satisfactory for
aquatic life as specified in the draft document by the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) on Water Quality Criteria. Thus, the
effluent limitations of pH range 6.0-9.0 were chosen for all
subcategories .
79
-------
SECTION X
BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
INTROJDUCTION
Best available technology economically achievable is to be
achieved not later than July 1, 1983. It is not based upon an
average of the best performance within the subcategory under
study, but has been determined by identifying the very best
control and treatment technology employed by a specific point
source within the subcategory, or by applying technology from
other industry areas where it is transferable.
Consideration was also given to:
a. the age of equipment and facilities involved;
b. the process employed;
c. the engineering aspects of the application of various
types of control techniques;
d. process changes;
e. cost of achieving the effluent reduction resulting from
application of the technology;
f. non-water quality environmental impact, including energy
requirements;
g. waste water characteristics and treatability.
This level of technology emphasizes both internal process
improvements and external treatment of waste waters. It will,
therefore, require existing mills to implement significant
internal process changes in water reuse and recycle as well as to
apply more advanced waste treatment processes and other improved
internal and external controls in order to meet the effluent
limitations* In some cases, the industry may be required to
conduct applied research and demonstration studies in order to
firmly establish the most economical approach toward meeting the
limitations. In some cases, closed loop operation may be an
economically and environmentally favorable alterative.
81
-------
1SELUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF BEST
AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
Based upon the information contained in Sections III through VIII
and in the appendices of this report, a determination has been
made that the point source discharge limitations for each
identified pollutant shown in Table 11 can be obtained through
the application of best available technology.
Table 11
BATEA_Effluent_Limitations
Values in kg/kkg (Ibs/ton)
JH>S_________ pH settleable
1.0 (2.0) 1 = 75 (3.5) i.o (2.0) 1.75 (3,5) 6.0-9.0 0.2 ml/1
The maximum average of daily values for any 30 consecutive day
period should not exceed the 30 day effluent limitations shown
above. The maximum for any one day should not exceed the daily
maximum effluent limitations shown above. The limitations are in
kilograms of pollutant per metric ton of production except for
the pH and settleable solids limitations. Mill effluents should
always be within the settleable solids concentrations and the pH
range shown.
The TSS parameter is measured by the techniques utilizing glass
fiber filter disks as specified in Standard Methods For The
!liS!DiS3J_ion 2£ MS^JlS §B£l EUlJiJl HSiSE (13th Edition)
Production is defined as the level of production off the machine
(air dry tons).
IDENTIFICATION OF THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY
ACHIEVABLE
The best available technology economically achievable consists of
the best practicable control technology currently available as
defined in Section IX of this report. It also includes the
following additional internal mill improvements and external
advanced waste water treatment practices.
82
-------
Internal
Building paper operations will be able to implement modifications
and operating procedures for:
a. control of spills whereby major pollutional loads bypass
the waste water treatment system to a retention basin
and are ultimately either reused, gradually discharged
into the treatment system, or treated separately;
b. intensive internal reuse of process waters;
c. separation of cooling waters from other waste water
streams, and subsequent heat removal and reuse;
d. intensive reduction of gland water spillage.
External Treatment
Section IX of the report describes best practicable external
control technology currently available. Application of that
technology in conjunction with several additional recognized and
potential technologies described in section VII constitutes best
available technology economically achievable. The additional
external processes applicable to this more advanced technology
are as follows:
a. BOD5 Reduction
The treatment system is biological oxidation
with nutrient addition.
b. Suspended Solids Reduction
The treatment to further reduce suspended solids is
mixed media filtration with , if necessary,
chemical addition and coagulation.
83
-------
There is a wide range„ in both size and age,, among mills in the
subcategory studied,, Howeverff internal operations of most older
mills have been upgraded,, and some of these mills currently
operate very efficiently., The technology for upgrading of older
mills is well established^ and does not vary significantly from
mill to mill. Studies have also shown that waste treatment plant
performance does not relate to mill size» Most mills are
constructed on a "modular" concept? where key process elements
are duplicated as mill size expands. Consequently,, there is no
significant variation in either the waste water characteristics
or in the waste water loading rates between mills of varying
sizes-
Process
Application of best available technology economically achievable
may require some major changes in existing industrial processes-
Incorporation of additional systemsf treatment processes, and
control measures can be accomplished in most cases through
changes in piping, through design modifications to existing
equipment, and through installation of additional equipment.
Such alterations can be carried out on all mills within the
subcategory,
Several mills within the builders paper and roofing felt
subcategory have closed or nearly closed loop recycling systems*
An EPA project investigating recycling possibilities in builders
paper and roofing felt mills is scheduled for completion late in
1973. The project is determining the cost-effectiveness of
various recycling concepts. Results of the project in
conjunction with information on the several mills already
practicing closed loop technologies indicate that closed loop
operations which are at or nearly at zero discharge may be
economically and environmentally advantageous over external
treatment systems as identified in BATEA. Thuse the technologies
of biological and physical-chemical treatment systems may be
changed at a later time after further demonstration of closed
loop systems to a BATEA technology of closed loop systems which
would result in no discharge of pollutants„
The technology to achieve most of these effluent limitations is
either practiced by an outstanding mill in the subcategory, or is
demonstrated in other industries and Is transferable. The
technology required for all best available treatment and control
systems will necessitate sophisticated monitoring, sampling, and
control programsg as well as properly trained personnel <,
84
-------
Application of the activated sludge waste treatment process
offers a potential for adverse impact upon air quality if
dewatered sludges are incinerated. However, proper selection and
operation of particulate emission control equipment can minimize
this impact. Dredged or dewatered sludges disposed of on land
can present an odor problem if a solid waste disposal program is
not properly implemented.
The technology cited will not create any significant increase in
noise levels beyond those observed in well designed municipal
waste water treatment systems which currently are being approved
by the Federal government for construction in populated areas.
Further, no hazardous chemicals are required as part of this
technology.
The greatest proportion of energy consumed will be for pumping
and for biological treatment. The total energy requirements for
implementation of best available technology for the categories
under study are not substantial (less than one percent) and
should not be enough to warrant concern on either a national or
regional basis.
Based upon the information contained in Section VIII and the
appendices of this report, total projected cost of upgrading a
90.7 metric ton (100 short ton) per day mill incorporating best
practicable control technology currently available to the level
of best available technology economically achievable reflects an
increase in production expenses of $2?40 per metric ton ($2.67
per short ton) . This is based upon total annual cost of $80,000,
including energy requirements.
This increase reflects both all internal mill and external waste
treatment improvements and is based on 300 days of production per
year.
Processes Employed
All mills within the subcategory studied utilize the same basic
production processes. Although there are deviations in equipment
and production procedures, these deviations do not significantly
alter either the characteristics or the treatability of the waste
water generated,
85
-------
ALE FOR SELECTION OF BATEA EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
The rationale used in developing the BATEA effluent limitations
for BODS, TSS, and pH is discussed below.
The BOD5 effluent limtiations were based upon the effluent
qualities being achieved by Mill BP-2 as shown in Table 7 in
Section VII. Mill BP-2 discharges only 4,170 liters/kkg (1,000
gal/ton) whereas Mill BP-1 discharges 57,100 liters/kkg (13,700
gal/ton). In addition to having low water use, the external
treatment was achieving 95% BOD5 reduction. However, because of
the short duration of the sampling survey which was made at Mill
BP-2, the effluent limitations were determined using the Mill BP-
1 raw waste BOD5 load and applying 95% reduction. The identified
in-plant controls and external treatment system should achieve at
least 95% reduction in BODjj. Since variabilities in effluent
qualities should be less utilizing BATEA than BPCTCA, factors of
1.5 and 2.75 were applied to determine the 30-day and daily
maximum limitations, respectively.
The TSS effluent limitations were determined using the 1977
limitations as a base and applying 65% reduction which can be
achieved by application of in-plant controls and external
treatment. It appears that the identified external controls of
coagulation and filtration may not be needed by all mills to meet
the limitations as Mill BP-2 is already well within the
limitations without coagulation and filtration.
The settleable solids limitations was discussed in Section IX.
Limitations Guideline
The pH range of 6.0-9.0 in receiving waters is satisfactory for
aquatic life as specified in the draft document by the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) on Water Quality Criteria. Thus, the
effluent limitations guideline of 6.0-9.0 were chosen.
86
-------
SECTION XI
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
INTRODUCTION
This level of technology is to be achieved by new sources. The
term "new source" is defined in the Act to mean "any source, the
construction of which is commenced after the publication of
proposed regulations prescribing a standard of performance."
Such commencement of construction can occur within the near
future, certainly before either the 1977 or 1983 compliance dates
for either best practicable or best achievable technologies.
Therefore, new source performance standards utilize best
practicable control technology currently available as a base, but
also encompass additional treatment and control technologies
through the application of improved production processes which
are designed to reduce pollutant loads.
Consideration has also been given to:
a. The type of process employed and process changes;
b. Operating methods;
c. Batch as opposed to continuous operations;
d. Use of alternative raw materials and mixes of raw materials;
e. Use of dry rather than wet processes (including substitution
of recoverable solvents for water);
f. Recovery of pollutants as byproducts;
g. Waste water characteristics and treatability.
RECOMMENDED NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The NSPS are the same as limitations to be achieved by July 1,
1983, as presented in Section X.
87
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF TECHNOLOGY TO ACHIEVE NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
The technology for NSPS consists of the best available pollution
control technology economically achievable as identified in
Section X of this report.
STANDARDS
No radical new in- plant processes are proposed as a means of
achieving new source performance standards for this subcategory.
The internal control technologies which are identified have all
been demonstrated by mills within the subcategory under study.
Significant revisions in operating methods, both in-plant and at
the waste water treatment facility, will be necessary. However,
these improvements are not beyond the scope of well-trained
personnel, and are currently being practiced in other industries.
The primary areas of operational change will pertain to required
activities for recycle, reuse,, and spill control , as well as for
optimal performance of waste water treatment facilities.
For the subcategory studied , it was determined that batch as
opposed to continuous operations is not a significant factor in
waste load characteristics and no additional control of
pollutants could be achieved through the use of one type process
over the other,
The raw materials requirements for a given mill do vary,
depending upon supply and demand„ desired end product, and other
conditions. However, alteration of raw materials as a means of
reducing pollutants is not considered feasible over the long term
even though such a change could possibly realize benefits of
short duration in a given instance.
Use of Dry, Rather Than Wet Processes llncludincj §lfeg£itution of
Recoverable Solvents: for Water
For this subcategory, it was determined that technology for dry
pulping beyond that already practiced or papermaking processes
does not exist nor is it in a sufficiently viable experimental
stage to be considered here.
-------
SgcoggrY_ofpQllutants_ag Byproducts,
It is anticipated that these performance standards will motivate
increased research on recovering materials for byproduct sale the
recovery of which is not presently economically feasible.
Pretreatment Requiremgnts fog Discharges^to.,Municipal Systems
None of the pollutant parameters identified in Section VI of this
report, with the possible exception of pH, can be expected to
disrupt or interfere with the normal operation of a municipal
waste water treatment system which is designed to accommodate the
industrial pollutant load discharged to it from any mill within
the subcategory studied. In the case of pH, some pre-treatment
may be required if it can be shown that the normal pH range in
the waste discharged from a given mill exceeds 6.0-9.0.
Cost of. Application in Relation to Effluent Reduction Benefits
Based upon the information contained in Section VIII and the
Appendices of this report, the total projected cost of the
external technologies identified for NSPS for a 90.7 metric ton
(100 short ton) per day mill reflects an increase in production
expenses of $4.90 per metric ton ($5.40 per short ton). This is
based upon a total annual cost of $162,000, including energy
requirements and 300 days of production per year. Costs for
internal technologies are not available.
89
-------
SECTION XII
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Environmental Protection Agency wishes to acknowledge the
contributions of WAPORA, Inc., and its subcontractors, E. C.
Jordan Co. and EKONO, who prepared the original draft of this
document. The efforts of Mr. E. N. Ross, Dr. Harry Gehm, Mr.
William Groff, Dr. Howard Eddy, and Mr. James Vamvakias are
appreciated.
Craig D. Vogt, Project Officer, Effluent Guidelines Division,
through his assistance, leadership, advice, and reviews has made
an invaluable contribution in the preparation of this report.
Mr. Vogt provided a careful review of the draft report and the
original Development Document and suggested organizational,
technical and editorial changes.
Special thanks are due George Webster, previously with the
Effluent Guidelines Division, for his efforts on the draft report
and the original Development Document.
Appreciation is expressed for the contributions of several
individuals within the Environmental Protection Agency: Kirk
Willard and Ralph Scott, National Environmental Research Center
at Corvallis, Oregon; David Lyons of the Permit Assistance and
Evaluation Division; Irving Susel of the Economic Analysis
Division; and Richard Williams, John Riley, Ernst Hall, and Allen
Cywin of the Effluent Guidelines Division.
Appreciation is extended to Gary Fisher of the Effluent
Guidelines Division for his efforts in data handling and
analysis. The efforts of Karla Jean Dolum for her continuous
assistance throughout the project are appreciated. Thanks are
also due to the many secretaries who typed and retyped this
document: Pearl Smith, Karen Thompson, Jane Mitchell, Barbara
Wortman and Laura Noble.
The cooperation of the National Council for Air and Stream
Improvement in providing liaison with the industry and technical
assistance were invaluable assets, and this service is greatly
appreciated. Thanks are also extended to the American Paper
Institute for its continued assistance.
Appreciation is also extended to companies who granted access to
their mills and treatment works from field surveys and for the
assistance lent by mill personnel to field crews. The operation
records furnished by these manufacturers and information supplied
by other individuals in the industry contributed significantly to
the project.
91
-------
SECTION XIII
REFERENCES
1. American Public Health Association (APHA) , AWWAr WPCF,
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste
r New York, (13th Edition) 1971.
2. Greenfield, S. H., "A Study of the Variables Involved in the
Saturating of Roofing Felts," National Bureau of Standards^
Building Science Series ...19, (June 1969) .
3. Roofing and Sidincj Products, 9th Ed., Asphalt Roofing Industry
Bureau, New York (1966).
U. Britt, K. W. , Handbook^of^PulB^and^jPager^TechnologY* 2nd Ed.,
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York~~(1970) 7
5- 1962 Census of Manufacture s^. Major Group. 26_x Paper and Allied
Products^ U. S. Bureau of the Census, MC 67(2)-26A, (Oct.
1970) .
6« Paj2££.t Pap.erboardA Wood Pulg Capacity 197J.-J.974, American
Paper Institute, (Oct. 1972).
7. Slatin, B. , "Fiber Requirements of the Paper Industry in the
Seventies and Eighties," TAPPI Secondary Fiber Conf. (1971).
8. Gehm, H. W. , State-of-the-Art Review of Pulp. and Paper Waste
Treatment EPA Contract No. 68-01-1-0012, "(April 1973).
9. Edde, H., "A Manual of Practice for Biological Waste
Treatment in the Pulp and Paper Industry," NCASI Technical
No.. 2J4 (1968) .
10. Gellman, I., "Aerated Stabilization Basin Treatment of Mill
Effluents," NCASI Technical Bulletin No.. 185 (1965).
11. Timpe, W. G., Lange, E., and Miller, R. L. , Kraft Pulping
Effluent Treatment and Reuse - State- of -the- Art .
Environmental Protection Technolosy. Series EPA-2-73-164
(1973). ~
12. Fair, Geyer, Okum. Water and Waste Water Engineering, John
Wiley & Sons, 1968.
13. Follett, R. , and Gehm, H. W. , "Manual of Practice for Sludge
Handling in the Pulp and Paper Industry," NCASI Technical
Bulletin No. 190 (1966).
93
-------
14. Voegler, J. r "Drainability and Dewatering of White Watejr
Sludges*" NCASI Technical Bulletin No... 35 (1950).
15. "'Availability of Construction Manpower,'9 Engineering News
Record, June 7f 1973.
94
-------
SECTION XIV
GLOSSARY
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended in 1972.
Mr, Dry Ton
Measurement of production including moisture content, which
usually varies between four and ten percent.
Broke
Partly or completely manufactured paper that does not leave the
machine room as salable paper or board; also paper damaged in
finishing operations such as rewinding rolls, cutting, and
trimming.
Cellulose
The fibrous constituent of trees.
Chest
A tank used for storage of wet fiber or furnish.
Chigs
Small pieces of wood used to make pulp.
Costings
Materials such as clay, starch, alum, synthetic adhesives, etc.,
applied to the surface of paper to impart special
characteristics.
Consistency
The weight percent of solids in a solids-water mixture used in
the manufacture of pulp or paper.
Cylinder Machine
A papermaking machine in which the sheet is formed on a wire-
covered cylinder rotating in a vat of furnish.
geCker or Thickener
A mechanical device used to remove water from pulp.
95
-------
External^Treatment
applied to raw waste streams to reduce pollutant
levels.
Fiber
The cellulosic portion of the tree used to make paper.,
Furnish
The mixture of fibers 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.
GJLandJWater
Water used to lubricate a gland,. Sometimes called "packing
water. "
Grade
The type of building paper or felt manufactured,
Technology applied within the manufacturing process to reduce or
eliminate pollutant in the raw waste water,. Sometimes called
"internal measures."
An endless belt of wool or plastic used to convey and dewater the
sheet during the papermaking process,
Presis
A device using two rolls for pressing water from the sheet and/ or
the felts carrying the sheet? prior to drying,,
Cellulosic fibers from wood chipsj, waste paper,, or other fiber
sources.
device used to separate fiber bundles in the
presence of water prior to papermaking.
96
-------
Rejects
Material unsuitable for papermaking which has been separated in
the manufacturing process.
Sanitary__Landfill
A sanitary landfill is a land disposal site employing an
engineered method of disposing of solid waste on land in a manner
that minimizes environmental hazards by spreading the wastes in
thin layers, compacting the solid wastes to the smallest
practical volume, and applying cover material at the end of each
operating day.
Save-all
A mechanical device used to recover papermaking fibers and other
suspended solids from a waste water or process stream.
Sheet
The web of paper as manufactured on a paper machine.
Stock
Wet pulp with or without chemical additions.
Syction__Bojc
A rectangular box with holes or slots on its top surface, used to
suck water out of a felt or paper sheet by the application of
vacuum.
Virgin Wood Pulp (or fiber)
Pulp made from wood, as contrasted to waste paper sources of
fiber.
Whitewater
Water which drains through the wires of a paper machine which
contains fiber, filler, and chemicals.
97
-------
APPENDICES
Page
j Building Paper and Roofing Felt Mills in the U. S 101
III Table l NPDES Data 106
jIII Exhibit 1 Preliminary Mill Survey Format 107
2 Mill Survey Format 110
i
JIV Development of Costs - Supporting Data 115
Figure 1 Capital and Operating Cost for Raw Waste
Settling 116
2 Construction Cost of Earthern Settling Ponds. 11^
3 Capial and Operating Cost for Mechanical
Clarifiers 120
4 Aerated Lagoon Treatment Plant . 121
5 Completely Mixed Activated Sludge ...... 122
6 Spill Control Installations 131
7 Spill Basin and Controls 132
V Metric Conversions. .... 135
99
-------
APPENDIX I
BUILDING PAPER AND ROOFING FELT MILLS IN THE U.S.
Saturated/Coated Roofing Felt
GAF Corp
Mobile, Alabama
Bear Brand Roofing, Inc.
Bearden, Arkansas
Celotex Corp.
Camden, Arkansas
A-R Felt Mills, Inc.
Little Rock, Arkansas
Elk Roofing Co.
Stephens, Arkansas
Fry Roofing Co.
Compton, California
Celotex Corp.
Los Angeles, California
Johns-Manvilie Product Corp.
Pittsburg, California
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
Richmond, California
Anchor Paper Mills, Inc.
South Gate, California
U. S. Gypsum Co.
South Gate, California
Flintkote Company
Vernon, California
Tilo Company, Inc.
Stratford, Connecticut
101
-------
Fry Roofing Co.
Jacksonville, Florida
GAF Corp*
Savannah, Georgia
Lloyd AO Fry Roofing Corp.
Chicago, Illinois
Logan-Long Co,
Chicago, Illinois
Flintkote Co.
Mt. Carmel, Illinois
Johns-Manville Corp.
Waukegan, Illinois
Carey Co.
Wilmington^, Illinois
Celotex Corp.
Wilmington, Illinois
Fry Roofing Co.
Brookville, Indiana
Delta Roofing Mills, Inc.
Slidell, Louisiana
Bird & Son, Inc.
Shreveport, Louisiana
Celotex Corp,
Marrero, Louisiana
Congolium-Nairn, Inc.
Finksburg, Maryland
Bird S Son, Inc.
East Walpole, Massachusetts
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
Shankopee, Minnesota
Atlas Roofing Mfg. Co., Inc.
Meridian, Mississippi
Tannko Asphalt Products Inc®
Joplin, Missouri
102
-------
GAP Corp.
Kansas city, Missouri
Fry Roofing Co.
N. Kansas City, Missouri
U.S. Gypsum Co.
Jersey City, New Jersey
Johns-Manville Corp.
Manville, New Jersey
Allied Materials Corp.
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Armstrong Cork Co.
Fulton, New York
Penn Yan Paper Products
Penn Yan, New York
Fry Roofing Co.
Morehead City, North Carolina
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
Avery, Ohio
Celotex Corp.
Cincinatti, Ohio
Nicolett Industries
Hamilton, Ohio
Big Chief Roofing Co.
Ardmore, Oklahoma
Allied Materials Corp.
Stroud, Oklahoma
Bird & Son Inc. of Mass.
Portland, Oregon
Fry Roofing Co.
Portland, Oregon
Celotex Corp.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
GAF Corp.
Whitehall, Pennsylvania
Certain Teed Products Corp.
York, Pennsylvania
103
-------
Phillip Carey Mfg. Co.
Memphis, Tennessee
Fry Roofing Co.
Memphis, Tennessee
Celotex Corp.
Memphis, Tennessee
GAF Corp.
Dallas, Texas
Southern Johns-Manville Corp.
Ft. Worth, Texas
Celotex Corp.
Houston, Texas
Fry Roofing Co,
Houston, Texas
Fry Roofing Co.
Irving, Texas
Celotex Corp.
San Antonio, Texas
Dry_Roofing Felt
Fontana Paper Mills Inc.
Fontana, California
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co.
Miami, Florida
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
Savannah, Georgia
Bird & Son, Inc.
Chicago, Illinois
Certain-Teed Products Corp.
East St. Louis, Illinois
Celotex Corp.
Peoria, Illinois
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co.
Mishawaks, Indiana
Royal Brand Roofing, Inc. (Tamko)
Phillipsburg, Kansas
Southern Johns-Manville Corp.
104
-------
New Orleans, Louisiana
GAP Corp.
Gloucester City, New Jersey
Celotex Corp.
Perth Amboy, New Jersey
Conwed Corp.
Riverside, New York
Celotex Corp.
Goldsboro, North Carolina
Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co.
Emmaus, Pennsylvania
GAF Corp.
Erie, Pennsylvania
Bird & Son Inc.
Phillipsdale, Rhode Island
The Flintkote Company
Cornell, Wisconson
Combination of the Above
GAF Corp.
Joliet, Illinois
Grace & Co.
Owensburg, Kansas
Celotex Corp.
Linden, New Jersey
Logan-Long Co.
Franklin, Ohio
Malarkey Paper Co.
Portland, Oregon
Nicolet Industries
Ambler, Pennsylvania
105
-------
Appendix II
Table I
RAPP DATA - BUILDING PAPER MILLS
Mill
1
2
3
4
5
6
Tons/ Treatment
Day C ASB AS
165 X trickling filter
65 X X
240
250 X
250 X X
80 X X
Flow
G/Ton
xlOOO
1.9
0.09
2.5
Discharge
TSS
#/Ton
1.9
0.8
11.0
BOD
#/Ton
0.58
0.001
30.5
Poor operation reported by
state
NA
0.44
2.0
0.26
2.8
0.11
Comments
Felt
Roofing felt
Construction felt
Roofing felts
Flooring felt
Roofing felt
Key to treatment codes:
C = Clarifier
ASB = Stabilization Basin
AS = Activated Sludge
-------
IP
APPENDIX III
Exhibit 1
PRELIMINARY MILL SURVEY FORMAT
Information to be determined prior to mill survey.
1. PRE-VISIT INFORMATION - Obtain information describing the
plant prior to the reconnaissance survey. This could include
magazine, articles describing the facilities, data or drawings
furnished by the mill, RAPP data, 'or any other pertinent
information available. This will enable us to get familiar with
the mill before we meet with the mill personnel.
2. EVALUATION OF EXISTING DATA - Check the availability of
existing data that the mill will make available for our
inspection.
Included in this should be any drawings of the inplant or
external treatment facilities such as:
a. Layouts and sewer locations
b. Flow diagrams of treatment facilities
c. Flow diagrams of mill process areas
d. Water balance
e. Material balances
3. INITIAL MEETING - Establish what procedures will be required
of us during the sampling survey. For example, are there any
areas of the mill off limits or will the mill want someone with
us at all times?
What safety requirements must we follow? Do we need safety
shoes, life preservers, hard hats, respirators, etc.? Can the
mill supply these?
4. INSPECTION OF MILL - In inspecting the various process areas
of the mill, we should identify the following:
a. Location of individual discharges to the process sewers.
b. Relative quality and type of individual discharges, i.e.,
clean, cooling water, contaminated, etc.
c. Types of sewers, i.e., open, closed; and direction of
flow.
d. Location of existing flow measurement and sampling points
and type of equipment in use.
e. Tentative locations of additional sampling and gauging
points. Where possible, an estimation of the average flow
107
-------
and possible peak conditions will be indicated. Upstream
conditions and sewer characteristics will be inspected to
ascertain that no flooding or other problems will be
encountered during measurement.
f. Methods and procedures in use to prevent or intercept
strong spills.
g. Relative amount of process water reuse and adequacy of
existing information such as flow diagrams to explain and
document the extent, methods, and equipment required for
reuse.
5. INSPECTION OF EFFLUENT TREATMENT FACILITIES - In addition to
location of existing flow measurement and sampling points we
should evaluate the need for additional points and any special
equipment needed. Sampling points should be available at the
following locations:
a. Primary influent
b. Primary effluent
c. Primary sludge
d. Secondary effluent
e. Secondary sludge (if any)
f. Chemical feed systems
g. Sludge disposal
h. Additional treatment facilities
6. LABORATORY FACILITIES - A complete check of the procedures
used by the mill in running its chemical and biological tests
should be made by the plant chemist or other responsible party.
Determine whether the mill will allow us to use its lab and/or
personnel during the survey. If the mill will allow us to use
its facilities, a complete list of equipment available should be
made and a list of supplies needed to perform the various tests.
If we cannot use the mill's lab, we must determine where we
intend to have the samples tested and make the appropriate
arrangements.
7. REVIEW INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON FRESH WATER USED AND WHERE
USED -
a. Process
b. Sanitary
c. Cooling water
d. Other
Review records showing quantity and quality of fresh water and
flow measurement device used.
10*
-------
8. REVIEW INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE WASTE WATER DISCHARGE
FROM THE POWER PLANT -
a. Determine water treatment facilities employed
b. Facilities used on water discharge
c. Frequency of waste discharges
d. Quality of discharge
9. COST INFORMATION - Determine or have the mill get for us (if
they will) any information on the cost of the internal and
external treatment facilities. This should include both capital
and operating cost for the facilities, preferably for a number of
years. The method used by the mill to finance the facilities and
the number of years used to write the expense off would be
useful.
If possible the cost data should be gotten by area, such as
internal treatment, primary, secondary, etc. Operating costs
should include labor, maintenance, chemicals, utilities, hauling,
supplies, and any other costs available from the mill.
10. TIME CONSIDERATIONS - Obtain any available information on
the following:
a. Time required to design the facility including the
preliminary study and final design.
b. Time to construct the facility.
c. Was construction bid after completion of engineering or
done turn~key?
d. What were delivery times for major pieces of equipment,
both internal and external?
e. What delays were encountered in getting approval by the
various regulatory agencies?
Determine the availability of any schedules, CPM or Pert charts
for the engineering or construction.
109
-------
Exhibit 2
MILL SURVEY FORMAT
Building Paper and Roofing Felt Mills
GENERAL_INFORMATION
I. Geographic and Physical
1. Describe mill by SIC # and name
2. Location: state, city
3. Age of mill - startup date
4. Water Source - river, well, lake, other
Name Flow Characteristics - cfs
Maximum Average Minimum
5. Production, 1965 1968 1971 1973* 1977* 1983*
annual tonnage (*-projected)
6. Current design capacity of mill, tons/yr.
II. Obtain the following information from daily mill records over
13-month period, where available.
1. Production, tons/day
2. Principal grades run (use raw materials changes as criterion)
3. Raw materials used; % of total tons/day
4. Waste water characteristics
a. Total raw waste water
b. Primary treatment effluent
c. Primary sludge
d. Secondary treatment effluent
e. Secondary settling effluent
f. Secondary sludge
g. Characteristics of influent and effluent of
any additional waste treatment facilities
5. In-plant water/waste water characteristics
a. Stock preparation area
b. Paper machine area - wet end
c. Paper machine area - dry end
110
-------
d. Power plant - demineralizer
e. Other waste water discharges
f. Asphalt saturation process
III. Determine type of equipment, design parameters, capital and
operating costs of all out-of-plant waste treatment
facilities and of those in-plant processes contributing
to a significant reduction in waste loads generated.
1. Primary treatment
a. sump pumps controls and screen
b. surge tank and controls
c. removal of suspended solids
d. chemical treatment (cost/day or yr)
e. system for removal of floating contaminants
2. Primary sludge handling facilities
a. pump and control station
b. storage tank and controls
c. chemical treatment (cost/day or yr)
d. dewatering facilities
e. disposal facilities (cost/day or yr)
3. Secondary treatment - biological process
a. land area required
b. power required - hp, $/hp
c. nutrients required - $/d, gpd,
d. other system components
H. Secondary solids handling facilities
a. sludge pumping station and controls
b. sludge storage tank and controls
c. other system components
5. Other out-of-plant treatment facilities
6. In-plant facilities
IV. Obtain the following information on Process Equipment.
1. Paper mill in-plant treatment, water re-use and clear water
segregation systems
a. overall volume used (provide best estimate)
b. where occurring (indicate yes, no or unknown)
1. stock preparation area
a) top, under, back and filler pulpers
b) white water chest make-up
111
-------
c) cleaning system, dilution-elutriation water
d) pump and/or agitator seal water
e) decker or thickener shower water
f) wash-up hoses
2. machine room
a) wire showers
b) headbox showers and dilution water
c) felt showers
d) couch roll, breast roll, suction drum, .couch
pit showers
e) vacuum pump seal water
f) pumps and agitator seal and gland water
g) wash-up hoses
c. Cooling water segregation of pulper drives, refiner drives, M
vacuum pump separators, saturating process, other areas.
V, Obtain sufficient information to complete the following:
1. Schematic diagram of plant, including all significant in~plant
and waste water treatment processes.
2. block flow diagram showing-
a. water source(s)
b. in^plant effluent discharge(s)
1) location
2) gpm
d. existing sampling stations
1) location
2) types samples
3) frequency
e, water recycling
1) location
2} gpm
f. Contractor sampling stations
3. description of shut-down operations, frequency and effect
on water quality.
^. comprehensive report on:
a. mill laboratory procedures and effectiveness
b. housekeeping procedures
c. in~plant and/or waste treatment process improvements
112
-------
contemplated or under laboratory/pilot study
d. evaluation of operation and maintenance procedures,
both in-plant and waste treatment
e. reliability of existing waste treatment facilities
at average and maximum efficiency levels
f. availability of back-up systems in waste treatment
process (i.e., dual power, by-pass storage and re-cycle,
standby equipment and parts, etc.)
g. sensitivity of waste treatment process to shock loads;
shock load frequency
h. extent of impact of existing waste treatment system
on air quality, noise, etc.
i. treatment and disposal of solid wastes
j. source, use and ultimate disposal of cooling water
k. recovery/reuse of waste water constituents
1. potential for significant upgrading of waste treatment
process performance through
1) modifications in operation and maintenance procedures
2) minor additions of equipment (i.e. additional aerators,
monitoring equipment, etc.)
3) major additions of equipment (i.e. clarifier, holding
basin, etc.)
m. desirability of additional waste stream segregation or
integration for improvement of final effluent quality
n. description of in-plant operating procedures and design
features for processes demonstrating above-average per-
formance re water and materials usage.
VI. Conduct on^site sampling program, if required, according to
the Analytical Verification Program outline dated March 16,
1973. Sampling will be conducted whenever, in the opinion of
the on-site contractor teams, there is sufficient reason to
question the validity of existing mill data. If sampling is
not conducted, justification and documentation of the
rationale used in arriving at this decision should be
provided.
113
-------
Appendix IV
SUPPORTING DATA
External Treatment
Pretreatment
Pretreatment consists of screening only for all alternatives
considered in this report.
Total effluents from all mills considered in this study usually
lose coarse material in the form of chips, bark, wet strength
paper, etc. , in quantities that require screening to avoid
plugging of sludge lines and escape of floating objects over
overflow weirs.
Although vibrating screens have proven satisfactory when the
flows are small (2-4 MGD) , travelling screens with 1" openings
have been recommended (2) and are used for all mills included in
this study.
Design Criteria: Type: Travelling bar screens
Design Flow: Average daily
Bar Spacing: 1 inch
Capital Cost in $1,000 =
11 + .27 x Q + 7.64 x Q**.625
(see note below)
where: Q = average daily flow in MGD
(cost information from numerous individual
installations was also considered in all cases) .
Annual operation and maintenance costs are 8.0 and 5. OX of cost,
respectively.
Capital cost and annual operation and maintenance costs for raw wast<
screening are shown graphically in Figure 1, Appendix IV.
Note: The symbol ** indicates quantity squared; i.e., Q** =Q2.
115
-------
o
o 100
u
50
15
T
0
£
3
o
s.
S O
O
1 -
o <^.
D>
Opera
10 20
FLOW, MOD
30
Figure 1 Capital And Operation Cost For
Raw Waste Screening
116
-------
Primary treatment is most economically done when all fiber
containing wastes are mixed before treatment. Besides the fact
that large units give lesser treatment costs than a series of
smaller units, mixed effluents generally also have improved
settling characteristics, thus decreasing the total treatment
units requirements. Internal fiber recovery is assumed done to
the maximum economic justifiable degree, with the result that no
external fiber recovery for reuse is considered in the treatment
process design.
Three unit operations for suspended solids separation have been
considered. These are:
a) settling ponds
b) mechanical clarifiers
c) dissolved air flotation
Settling Ponds - Design Criteria:
Construction: earthen construction, concrete inlet
and outlet structures
Detention time: 24 hours
Water depth: 12 feet
Sludge removal: manual
Cost Functions:
Capital cost in $1000 = 27.3 x V **0.75
V = pond volume in million gallons
This construction cost function is based on work in Reference
(3) . The construction cost, which includes plan sewers, and all
diversion - inflow -, and outflow- structures, but excludes land
costs, is shown graphically in Figure 2, Appendix IV. The
function is "verified" by plotting data from the field survey
phase of the same figure.
Operations Costs:
The operation cost of sedimentation ponds consists mainly of
sludge dredging and disposal which was estimated to cost $6.50
per ton of dry solids removed.
Annual maintenance was estimated to be 1% of capital cost.
117
-------
300
200
i
o
•5.
o
o
100
Figure 2
/
/
/
*
/
X
0 10 20 30
FLOW, MGD
Construction Cost of Earthen Settling Ponds
Project Cost Files
118
-------
Secondary Treatment
Primary Clarifiers
Design Criteria:
Construction: Circular heavy duty plow type rotary sludge
scraper, scum collection and removal
facilities.
Overflow rate: 700 gpd/ft**2 (4)
Sidewater depth: 15 feet
Capital cost in $1000 (3) =
62 x ((1.5 - 0.001Q)QxlOOO./OR)**0.60
where: Q = flow in MGD
OR = overflow rate in gpd/ft**2
The construction cost includes all mechanical and electrical
equipment, all construction costs, instrumentation, installation,
and sludge pumps and plant sewers. Land costs are not included.
This cost function is shown graphically in Figure 3, Appendix IV
and includes data from the field survey phase of the project.
BOD removal, i.e. secondary treatment, in the builders paper and
board industry is usually done by a biological process:
Biological filters, natural oxidation ponds, aerated lagoons (or
aerated stabilization basins) or activated sludge. Activated
sludge treatment was considered in this report since a majority
of the mills are close to population centers, where alternate
biological treatment systems would not apply because of the high
cost of land. A two stage aerated lagoon treatment system is
shown in Figure H as an alternative to activated sludge.
Activated Sludge
All costs for activated sludge treatment considered in this study
are for completely mixed systems, and with biological reaction
and oxygen utilization rates representative of the particular
effluents undergoing treatment. The completely mixed system was
selected because of its ability to handle surges of organic loads
and slugs of biological growth inhibitors. The activated sludge
plant used for the costing basis is shown in Figure 5, Appendix
IV.
119
-------
1000
O
O
2 750
•co-
u
"3
I
500
250
,--r
10 20
FLOW, MGD
60
O
O
g
40-^
«a
O
O
S
20 S.
o
30
Figure 3 Capital and Operating Costs For Mechical Clarifiers
Capital Cost Case Studies:
_ Project Cost Files
120
-------
RAW
WASTE WATER"
PRE-
TREATMENT
1
NUTRIENT
ADDITION
PRIMARY
TREATMENT
*
rK
*-
FIRST
AERATION
CELL
DET. TIME
0.5-2.0 DYS
SECOND
AERATION
CELL
DET. TIME
1.5- 10 DYS
->
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
(OPTIONAL)
TREATED
•^
EFFLUENT
T
SCREENINGS,
ETC.
SLUDGE
SLUDGE
Figure Ij. Aerated Lagoon Treatment Plant
121
-------
NUTRIENT
ADDITION
Raw Waste Water
or >
Primary Treatment
i
AERATION
' TANK
DETEN. TIME
1-5 HRS.
^/SECONDARY) Secondary ,.
nCLARIFIER/ Effluent r
^ Recycled ^~~|
Sludge
Figure 5
Completely Mixed Activated Sludge System
-------
Design Criteria:
Aeration Tank:
Construction: reinforced concrete with pier mounted surface
aerators.
Liquid Depth: 15 feet
Nutrient addition: 4 pounds of nitrogen and 0.6 pounds of
phosphorus per every 100 pounds of BOD
removed. Influent nutrients are
subtracted from these values.
Process design criteria:
Aerators: Type: mechanical surface aerators
Secondary Clarifiers:
Construction: circular concrete tanks with rotary suction
type sludge collector
Sidewater depth: 15 feet
Cost Functions: Capital costs in $1000
Aeration tank (3) = 225 x V**0.71
where V = tank volume in million gallons
Aerators (3) = 1.75 x HP**0.81
where HP = total horse power installed
Secondary Clarifiers (3) = 62.*((1.5-0.002Q)Q*1000./OR)**0.6
where Q = flow in MGD, including recycle
OR = overflow rate in gpd/ft**2
Sludge recycle pumps (3) = 5.36+1.66xQ
where Q = average daily flow in MG
123
-------
Operation and Maintenance costs
Cost of operation and maintenance of activated sludge system has been
calculated using a cost function developed in Reference (5). This cost
function includes operation and maintenance of aeration basin, aerators,
final sedimentation tanks and sludge return pumps:
Operation cost (0/1000 gal) = R x (3.40 + 4.95/v**0.5
where v= basin volume in million gallons
R= retention time in days
The breakdown between operation and maintenance is 60% and 4056,
respectively (10) .
Power cost is calculated from the net horsepower requirements at
1.1 0/kwh.
Nutrient costs are calculated on the basis of $250 per ton of
nitrogen and $380 per ton of phosphorus.
Sludge Dewatering
The sludges drawn from the primary and secondary clarifiers
require dewatering prior to final disposal. A large number of
unit operations are available for this purpose, from which the
specific selection depends upon local conditions like sludge
characteristics, proportion of primary and secondary sludges,
distance to ultimate disposal site, and ultimate disposal
considerations. The units operations considered in this study
are sludge settlings ponds, gravity thickeners, vacuum filters,
centrifuges and sludge presses. The selected sludge dewatering
process might consist of one or more sludge dewatering unit
operations.
The dewatered sludge solids are usually disposed of either by
landfilling or incineration, according to local conditions and
the level of technology required. Sludge disposal by landfilling
might give very satisfactory solutions provided a suitable site
can be found within a reasonable distance from the mill.
Possible harmful effects from landfilling are groundwater
pollution by leaching of chemical constituents or decomposition
products and erosion by precipitation. Thus, both soil
conditions and climate must be suitable to make sludge disposal
by landfilling successful, or the required site work might result
in a very expensive solution.
Provided air pollution requirements are met, sludge incineration
is, from an environmental point of view, a very satisfactory
solution since only inert ashes need to be disposed of.
Although the solution is usually quite expensive, especially for
small installations lack of other solutions might make it the
only alternative.
124
-------
Cost of sludge dewatering and disposal commonly accounts for 30-50%
of the total treatment cost.
Cost Functions:
Sludge dewatering ponds: Capital cost in $1000 (3) = 125 x V**0.70
where V = volume in MG
The operation cost of sludge ponds consists mainly of sludge dredging
and disposal which was estimated to cost $6.50 per ton of dry solids
removed.
Annual maintenance cost was estimated to be 1% of capital cost.
Gravity Thickeners: capital cost in $1000 (3)
= (SA) (34. + 16.5/exp (SA/13.3)
where SA = surface area in thousands of square feet
Annual operation and maintenance costs of gravity sludge thickeners was
estimated to 8% of the capital cost.
Vacuum Filters: capital costs in $1000 (12) = 4.70 x A**.58
where A = filter area in square feet
Operating and maintenance cost for vacuum filtration was based on the
following (3) :
Labor: 0.5 man-hours per filter hour 5) $5.25 per hour
Power cost: 0.15 HP per square foot of filter 31.10 0/kwh
Chemicals: $10.00 per dry ton for waste activated sludge, and
$4.00 per dry ton for primary sludges
Maintenance: 5% of capital cost, annually
Centrifuges: capital costs $1000 (12) = 15.65 * (HP)**0.4
where HP = total installed horsepower of the centrifuge.
Operation and maintenance costs have been calculated as follows:
Labor: 0.25 man-hours per hour of centrifuge operation 95.25 per
hour (3) .
Power cost: 1.10 0/kwh
Chemicals: None required for primary sludges increasing linearly
with the fraction of secondary sludges to 8 pounds of
polymer per dry ton of solids 3$1.25 per pound of polymer.
Maintenance: 10% of capital cost, annually.
Sludge Presses: capital cost in $1000 = 5.75 x (S/F)**0.95
where S = dry weight of sludge, ton/day
F = press load, as a fraction of nominal load
Operation Cost:
Labor: 0.25 hours per hour of press operation o)$5.25 per hour
of press operation.
Power: 1.1 0/kwh
125
-------
Maintenance: 10% of operation cost, annually.
Landfilling: Transport cost: 200/ton mile
Transport distance: 10 miles
Incineration: capital cost $1000 (3) = (S/9.6)
(170 + 735 x S**0.61)
S = total solids in tons/day
Incineration: capital cost $1000 (3) = (S/9.6)
(170 + 735 x S**0.61)
where S = total solids in tons/day
Operation cost in $1000/yr (3)
(0.001 + 0.001 SE/P)S •«• S**0.85 x 0.001
where SE = secondary sludge in Ibs/day
P = primary sludge in Ib/day
S = total pounds of sludge/day
Mixed Media^Fjltration
Builders_PajDer_10^T/D
capital: $75,000 + 35% = $101^000
operating: $ 6,200
add: 15% of 101,000
_ 15^.000
total annual cost = $ 21,200
less: 35% of 6,200 energy = __ 2^200
annual cost less energy = $ 19,000
19^QO_0 = $0.63/ton less energy
100x300
2,200 = -O^OI/ton energy
100x300 $ .707 ton total
Internal Treatment
The following unit prices have been used for the internal
measures:
Power 0.60 0/kwh
Heat 3.50 $/10**9 cal
Maintenance: 2.5% of capital cost, annually
Costs of heat exchangers, storage tanks, pumps and pipes are
estimated according to Chemical Engineering, March 24, 1969 issue
and updated to August 1971 price levels.
It should be recognized that costs of internal process
modifications may vary greatly from mill to mill, and that cost
of internal improvements should be evaluated upon consideration
of local conditions.
126
-------
Land Disposal of Junk Materials
The cost has been calculated on the basis of an external trans-
portation contract, and no capital cost has been assumed. The
cost of transportation has been estimated to 20 cents/ton-mile,
and cost of disposal to $1.5/ton. Transportation distance has
been taken to 10 miles. The amount of junk materials for a
building paper mill is the following:
2 ton/day (3504/ton) = 2800 */d
Control of Asjohalt wastes and Spills
Floor drains are collected to a sedimentation basin equipped with
asphalt removal system. The cost of sedimentation basin
according to formulas given in the part discussing the external
treatment is $43r000. Maintenance at 2.5% equals $0.34/tp. Cost
of operation will be $l«64/tp.
Paper Machine Controls
High pressure self cleaning, low volume showers for paper
machine, and press water filter for removing felt hairs will be
provided.
The following paper machine widths have been assumed:
building paper machine 14 feet
Capital cost has been calculated to 14 feet width.
Cost for each unit:
-4 shower pipes 14 feet 2,000
-2 pumps (10 kw) 2,000
-1 smith screen 1,000
-4 water saveall pans 3,000
-2 hair screens, smith 1,000
-tank, piping, hoses 4,000
-spares 1,000
-design, instrumentation,
electricity, installation, etc. lixP.00
TOTAL $35,000
For building paper machine:
Wire part $ 35,000
Press part 35,000
$ 70,000
Spill control
127
-------
By spills are meant releases of wood fibers and/or process
additions to those which are "normal" for the process. The
release of the "normal" pollutant load for a process depends upon
the process design and equipment used, and is therefore
reasonably well defined or deterministic in nature. The spills
are caused by "accidents" or mechanical failures in the
production facilities and are as such probabilistic in nature.
The accidental spills are in general of short duration and
usually have a fiber and/or concentration of chemical substances
which are several times those of the normal mill effluents (1).
Another undesirable property associated with accidental spills is
that they might not be intercepted by the waste water collection
system, and they find their way into the storm sewers and
therefore bypass all treatment systems.
The main sources of accidental losses are:
a) leaks and overflows from storage tanks, b) leaks and spills
resulting from repairs, system changes and mistakes in
departments handling strong liquor, and c) overflows from screens
and filters in departments handling fiber.
Controls of spills can be done by connecting overflow lines to
holding tanks equipped with pumps which return chemicals to
storage or to the recovery system, and fibers to the stock chest.
Cost of spill control is based on systems shown schematically in
Figure 6, Appendix IV.
Costs of spill controls are lump sums as shown in the cost
summary. These costs include construction costs and mechanical
and electrical equipment as shown in Figure 6, Appendix IV.
Large Spills
Large accidental losses caused by mechanical failures can be
prevented by an effective control system, e.g. conductivity
measurements in the waste water lines. As these losses might
render the effluent unsuitable for treatment, an emergency spill
basin is constructed to intercept these wastes. The spill basin
content is pumped back to the treatment process at a rate which
does not "upset" the treatment process.
Construction cost of the spill basin is based on a system which
is shown schematically in Figure 7, Appendix IV.
Design Criteria for Spill Basin:
Volume: 12 hours of average flow
Pump Capacity: Basin volume returned to treatment process in
12 hours at 30 feet head.
Basin: Earthen construction with 12 foot depth
128
-------
Sewers
Plant Sewers
Plant sewers are defined as the gravity flow type conveyance
facilities within the boundaries of the treatment plant. These
may be both closed conduits and open channels. The capital costs
of these items are included under the respective treatment plant
components.
Annual operation and maintenance costs of in-plant sewers have
been taken at a flat 0.50% of the estimated construction cost
with no differentiation between materials of construction, except
as reflected in the construction cost.
Interceptor Sewers
Interceptor sewers are defined as the conveyance facilities which
connect the mill to the treatment plant and the treatment plant
to the outfall system. Thus, they may vary from being
insignificant in a situation where land is available adjacent to
the mill, whereas they may amount to a large percentage of the
treatment plant cost where long interceptor sewers are required.
For this reason no interceptor sewers are included in this study.
Land Requirements and Costs
Land Requirements: A site suitable for an effluent treatment
facility should have the following properties:
- should be within a reasonable distance from the production
facilities so that long and expensive interceptor sewers
are eliminated.
•* should be far enough from the production facilities so that
their expansion possibilities are not hampered.
• should be at a suitable elevation relative to the production
facilities so that pumping costs are minimized, and ideally
allow for gravity flow through all treatment units.
- should allow for orderly future treatment plant expansion
on land which can be purchased at a reasonable price and
with adequate soil properties.
The two major factors affecting the area requirements for
external waste water treatment are the type of secondary
treatment and type of sludge disposal. The approximate land
requirements for activated sludge systems are O.OU acres/mgd.
129
-------
Land required for ultimate solids disposal depends on the sludge
quantities generated, moisture content, ash content, and method
of placement.
Land requirement for different ultimate sludge disposal
methods (Disposed effluent at 12 feet depth)
Disposal Condition Land Requirements
sq ft / ton dry solids
Thickened clarifier underflow, 5% solids 53.0
Centrifuge cake, 20% solids 16.5
Pressed cake, 35% solids 11.6
Incineration, 3% ash 0.15
Incineration, 12% ash 0.60
Land Costs
The value of land is often difficult to establish. Depending
upon land availability and alternate land use, the land cost
might vary from $1.00 per square foot or more down to only a few
cents per square foot.
For the purpose of this study a land cost selected was $1,000 per
acre.
130
-------
,
^
f
Storage
Tank
J
*-
4 ~*
Jn
To Recovery
1
Holding Tank
a) Control Of Chemical Spills And Losses
Filter/ Screen
Stock
Storage
Holding Tank
b) Control Of Fiber Containing Spills
To Process
Emergency Overflow To
Treatment Rant
To Process
Emergency overflow to
treatment plant
Figure 6
Spill Control Installations
131
-------
Process Effluent
To Treatment
Process
spill Basin
Spill Basin and Controls
132
-------
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX IV
1- Engineering-News Record. Published Weekly by McGraw Hill,
Inc. , Highstown, New Jersey.
2. NCASI Technical Bulletin Nor 178, "Settleable Solids Removal
in the Pulp and Paper Industry" (November 1964) .
3. Barnard, J. L. , Treatment Cost Relationships for Industrial
Waste Treatmentx Phj.P_«.x Dissertation . Vanderbilt University,
Tennessee (1971) .
H. NCASI Technical Bulletin No_.. rgO. "Manual of Practice for
Sludge Handling in the Pulp and Paper industry." (June 1959).
5. Swanson, C.I., "Unit Process Operating and Maintenance Costs
for Conventional Waste Treatment Plants" FWQA, Cincinnati, Ohio
(June 1968)
6. "A Manual of Practice for Biological Waste Treatment in the
Pulp and Paper Industry," NCASI__Technical Bulletin No., 21*1
(1968) .
7. "Cost of Clean Water, Industrial Waste Profile No. 3," FWQA,
US Department of the Interior (November 1967) .
8. Helmers, E. N. , J. D. Frame, A. F. Greenberg, and C. N.
Sawyer, "Nutritional Requirements in the Biological Stabilization
of Industrial Wastes, "Sewage and Industrial Wastes^ ND 23^ Vol... 7
-Q9JL1I 2^ 88^
9. Eckenfelder, W. E. , and D. L. Ford, Water Pollution Control -
E jsger imen t a 1 Procedures for Process Design, Pemberton Press,
Austin, Texas.
10. "Study of Pulp and Paper Industry's Effluent Treatment," A
Report Prepared for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome, Italy, 1972 by EKONO.
11. Development of Operator Training Materials, Prepared by
Enviromental Science Services Corp., Stanford, Conn., under the
direction of W. W. Eckenfelder, Jr. (August 1968) .
12. Quirk, T. P., "Application of Computerized Analysis to
Comparative Costs of Sludge Dewatering by Vacuum Filtration and
Centrifuge." Proc..^ 23rd Ind._ Waste Conf ._ . Purdue University
1968, pp. 691-709. b
13. Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology, in the PuljD and Paper
» prepared by OECD, Paris, France, General Distribution,
February 28, 1973.
133
-------
APPENDIX V
METRIC UNITS
CONVERSION TABLE
MULTIPLY (ENGLISH UNITS)
ENGLISH UNIT ABBREVIATION
acre ac
acre - feet ac ft
British Thermal
Unit BTU
British Thermal
Unit/pound BTU/lb
cubic feet/minute cfm
cubic feet/second cfs
cubic feet cu ft
cubic feet cu ft
cubic inches cu in
degree Fahrenheit F°
feet ft
gallon gal
gallon/minute gpm
horsepower hp
inches in
inches of mercury in Hg
pounds Ib
million gallons/day mgd
mile mi
pound/square
inch (gauge) psig
square feet sq ft
square inches sq in
tons (short) t
yard y
by TO OBTAIN (METRIC UNITS)
CONVERSION ABBREVIATION METRIC UNIT
0.405
1233.5
0.252
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555(°F-32)*
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
0.7457
2.54
0.03342
0.454
3,785
1.609
(0.06805 psig +1)*
0.0929
6.452
0.907
0.9144
ha hectares
cu m cubic meters
kg cal kilogram - calories
kg cal/kg kilogram calories/kilogram
cu m/min cubic meters/minute
cu m/min cubic meters/minute
cu m cubic meters
1 liters
cu cm cubic centimeters
°C degree Centigrade
m meters
1 liters
I/sec liters/second
kw killowatts
cm centimeters
atm atmospheres
kg kilograms
cu m/day cubic meters/day
km kilometer
atm atmospheres (absolute)
sq m square meters
sq cm square centimeters
kkg metric tons (1000 kilograms)
m meters
* Actual conversion, not a multiplier
135
------- |