L1brar ’
e veiiiarice & A 1y I fi 1ôn
IN JSTRI AL WASTE SU V
HAVE tHILL P.APEP3OARD CORPORATION
HAVE RHILL, iASSAC t-iU S TTS
Septhmber 23, 1971

-------
J 3HILL P P EOiRD CORPOR.ATIO J
HAV LtHILL) $SACHUS1 TT3
S PT 3 R 23, 1971
On Seotember 23, 1971, ersoL-1ne]. from the Enviroiinent.al Prot ct .orL
ency, Region .i., Needhain, L !ass chusstts, under th2 supervlSlcL1 of
E na1d Porteous, sarrnled the Nerrirnack River arid HaverFill Paperboard
Cor2oration (foz ’ner1y Continerit 1 Can Company) for possible enforee-
merit action. (see Figure 1 arid Table 1). Kerry Anderson aim onalcI
Berger collected ierriinack River sanpies. Donald Porteous arid Robert
Atrood collected the industrial waste s&v)les
errirack River
The errii iack River was sampled upstream of Haverh fl Pa?erooari,
off thz Interstate Route i-i. 95 hight-7ay bridge at river mile 21.25
( R -O1). The downstream saniple was taken off the Rocks Village Bridge
at river mile 11.80 (I R-O2). All river miles referred to are taken
from a report entitled, ‘P eport of Pollution of the Iierriniack River
arid Certain Tributaries, ’ t Part II, U. S. Dapartinent of the Interior,
F PCA.
aver !1i _ Paper oard Corooratiori
£ t aoo oximatsly 1iL 5 hours, Septeither 23, 1971, essrs. Porteous
and ! t- -ood received per:nission from John Stubbs, plant engineer, to
sc.r o1e the main waste line at the company’s Parshall flunie (HPB 1)
located on prei iiscs at South Ki:..5a11 Avenue, Haverbill (Figure #2).
The comoany has two other out±’alis to the ‘1errimack River -- one

-------
ca.rz -in blct-:cown and cooling at r; th other sani ary :ast . ?ce sious
dy st :dics cond ict- by r. Portzous on September 2, 1971, sho;:ed
t st p :g through the Parshall flume dischar e o the
I•arriimack iver iugh a concrete pipe sure #3). The fiow through
t.’.e 1i 3 the c : rio ’ to sc lirig as r .’d2d by the ?arshall f1u s
ut r atic flow recorder was 1 .83 million gallons. During sampii g,
the f1ot s measured by the sampling creL comoared favorably with the
ilo’:s ir easured by the autor .atic recorder (Appendix 1).
Sin lir’ Prccedures
Saioles for general analysis, chenical oxygen demand (COD), dis-
solved organic carbon (DX), dissolved oxygen (DO) and bacteria were
collected at all stations. The general aialysis serr 1as were anal-jzed
for residue, pH, turbidity and biochei ical oxygen demand. (EOD). The
COD and D C samtles were stored and shiooed together in the sani
contc.iners.
The river stations bacteria and DO samples were collected with
a iCer erer -type sampler and transferred to their shipoing and storage
contninars • The river samples’.for general analysis and COD, DOC were
collected with a !ceir erer-type sam ier, con osited in 5-gallon plastic
car o:-s,and transferred to shipping and storage containers.
The bacteria samples at the Parshall flume of Haverhill Paoerboard
Coroora ion, were collected directly in shipping and storage containers.
The scitples for general analysis, COD-DOG, and. DO were collected in a
galvanized bucket and divided into the shipping and sthra e containers.
—2—

-------
. EO seed scrole was collected at River Street off the G.’cerd’ af
E id e in a galvanized bucket and transferred to a gallon cubitdner.
S3 o e Preservation
The 300 ml I X) sa.- l. rere preserved with 2 ml of inanganous sulate
and 2 n.1 of alkali-azic2 reagent, and the quart COD-rXDC senpl s were
preserved dth 2 ml of concentrated sulphuric acid reagents. These s&’ oles
as well as the gallon general analysis arid bacterial saIrDles were iced.
P.11 sai iolas were returned to the Needhan laboratory by the respective
san 1ing crews the day of saripling. Temperatures using metal theriomet..ers
and pH using electrode pH meters were conducted in the field on ‘ost o
the saznDies.
SanDle Iderti2ication
& ch sample was tagged with one chain of custody tag indicating the
collecting agency, laboratory number, date, source of sample, signature
and title of collector, signature and title of witness plus infor tation
on the transfer of the sample.
In addition, a ore-numbered field data card was filled out for
ec.ch collection time to record H, temperatures, weather conditions,
sar oling locations, and analyses to be performed.
Rs suits
The results of the saiii ling are su mmarized in Tables 2, 3, and L .
The results show that the COD and total filterable residue are higher
than that of normal domestic sewage.
—3—

-------
Tot .l residuo is divid2d into t.•io general categories nonfii rable
r siu e a d fil er ble resia. e. The non. j.l- erale resic ue is a ‘ acure
of SUs D3nd ?d solids arid the filterable residue is a measure of dis-
olvcd solids. These general categories can be subdivided into fixed or
i:..organic residue and volatile or organic residue.
Susoended solids discharged in the raw waste from e paDerboard
mill of this kind include dilute suspensions of cellulose fibers, clay
or other pacer fillers plus other miscellaneous particulate matter
om clean-up operations. The cellulose .L’ibers in paper wastes are
detrimental when discharged into receiving waters since they form sludge
deposits and create foul anaerobic conditions. These sludge deposits ir ay
kill benthic organisms thus eliminating an important food supply i’or
fish. In the river itself, the suspended solids interfere with the
nor ial stream eco1o r by preventing light oenetration thereby
reducing photosynthetic activity. Filterable residue or dissolved
solids can become suspended solicLs through biological and chemical
activity within the stream. Thus the casso1 red solids rnay,at some
time, exert the sa. a sraot2ierir g effect on benthic organisms as do
the s sperded $Oi1C S. Also, an oxygen denand on the receiving -rater
is exerted by all organic residues whether dissolved or suspended in
nature. This oxygen deviand could result in a damaging erLviron ient
for fish and other clean water organisms.
-! -

-------
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) is the oxygen required to oxidize
all the organic compounds present to carbon dioxide d.nd water. The
normal ratio of COD to 5-day BOD in domestic waste v..ries between
1.5:1 and 1.3:1. The COD to 5—day BOD ratio of the waste from the
Haverhil ?aperboard Corporation is 4:1, indicative of industrial
waste. The COD of the effluent from Haverhill Paperboard CorporatIon
averaged 700 mg/ ]. and was being discharged at a rate of 29,000 pounds
of COD per day during sampling. These l4 j tons per day of oxygen
demand in the waste discharged into the Merrimack River could cause
an oxygen depletion in the river leading to an aquatic envfroiment
not conducive to fish or other clean water organisms.
The Merrimack River is a severely polluted river by the time
it reaches Haverhil, and discharges in Haverhil, such as from
Haverhill Paperboard, compound the problem.
—5--

-------
TLBLE I
SktLi LOCAfl02 S
S :;..TIo:! LATHtJDE w::C-I WDE DE-S3RI PT ION
12 —Cl 71° 07’21 ” i.t2° it 6T lO t ’ Marritac: River
off I-L95 Bridge
at river nile 21.25
NR-02 710 0013311 ii.2° )43137fl ?lerrinack River
off Rocks Viflaze
BrIdge at river
mile 11.60
I-TB-1 710 03’52” La° bS’59’ 1 Havarhili Pa erboard
Coi’o, Industrial
:caste efflucnt at
Parshall fDrc
—6-

-------
Lr ej.vses R3 Dorted
Tt erature
i i oidi ty
DO
3D -da;r
COD
Total Coliforms
Fecal Coliforrns
Total noauilterabie residue
Total Reaidue
ixed i onfilterab1e resid.ie
ToeeJ.. filterable residue
F±xed filterable residue
L t a’s preceding a reported value
— estinated as, value not
— less than
L - greater than
e s ed In
De ees contigrade
(°C)
Standard uüts (3 5)
Jackson c d1e
turbidit, r units (j’ ;)
Palii is per
lite’ (r.g/l)
L
r ig/i
mg/i
Per 100 ndflititors
Per 100 :-ii.iliters
ng/i
rg/l
--
rg/i
SAI WLE ANALYSES
ABBI EVIATIONS A1 D UNITS OF MEASURE.
Dsscriotion
Sa p e terperature
Turbidity
Dissolved Oxygen
4_bioche i ical—
oxygen c .ev and in-
cubated at 20 C
Chemical oxygen
deTaand
Dissolved organic
carbon
Total Coliforrn
bacteria
Fecal Coliform
bacteria
Total Suspended
solids
Total Solids
Irorganic suspended
solids
Total thssoi :ed
so]. ids
Inorganic suspended
solids
denote the fo11o ing:
accurate
—I—

-------
TAUT 2
au:.’. Tr .C 0i ’ G .A1; A.:i ’l .1 J
? Ci( t( i.’/ER
Tr 1 nTir’f c (,. TT(’ ’ ’I!1 flC
E J P1 .J3i 1 23, 1971.
Depth To.np. DO p 1 1 CoJ. I Coi’i ;/iC0 ml
S !ion L b i o. Time (ri...) (°c) To1 i Fecal.
29”02 0710 2.0 .19.0 7.].
29 1L03 0820 2.0 19.0 3 .hi 7.5 i,300;COO jJ.,C00
291105 09 i0 2.0 19.5 2.9 7.2 1.,C;C0,000 .iG,coo
29 !0 1030 2.0 1.8.5 3.7 7.6 .L.)400,000 i6,ooo
29’ 108 1150 2.0 20.5 3.3 7.1 i, 5C0,0C0 5,000
29 O9 12 i0 2.0 20.0 .i 8. 1,300,000 6,coo
i. ••02 . iL O7 i .5 2.0 19.5 2.3 7 .1 . 520,000 7,200
29 il.2 03 5 2.0 19.5 3.3 6.8 67o,coo ll.,500
29 i1J l 3.005 2.0 20.0 1 L 1 F 7.3 6 o,oco
29 .J.5 i.L 1.5 2.0 2] .2 5.2 6.8 530,000 5 ,6co
29 l17 12.1.5 2.0 20.0 3.3 6.8 65o,ooo 6,800
29 ].8 131.0 2.0 20.0 3.0 7.3 ‘ .50,C00 6,200

-------
T.1I3f 3
S{E ‘ P t Y 0 ’ C0 fl.’O i t i •‘
u. cx J SVER
iii, ,, 1: 3 \C1 U ,; L”i 3
23, L9’( i.
J _’ UlJ
1)01) IlcJ1t’ rbL’
Tiin Co icrcd Dcplh 5•.cThy COD DOC Tjlr’b. Tct .i i r1 To ;.i.I 1”.,::ccl
s t t on i i io. Fv oi ‘ro ( cL.) w /1. in /1 /i. rr /1 r / 1 ir /J. m3/1
I.’ -OL 29 Oi 0700 0900 2.0 .0 22.0 1.0.5 31.9 12.5 3.0 r ‘
29 01 i. 0900 IICO 2.0 3. 22.0 7.0 1 1. 37
29 F07 .1100 1300 2.0 3.8 23.2 6.5 5.5 11.0 I:.0 . .u.5 :
291 1.10 0700 0900 2.0 3.0 26.8 8.5 3.9 io.6 5.6 07.5
29 11.1.3 1000 1200 2.0 3.3 21..2 8.0 1 I.O 12.3 2.8 103.3 61.3
2911.16 3200 iMoo 2.0 3.2 2 .0 9.0 3.9 12.0 0.2 81.3 1 8.3

-------
TE J3LE 4
SUMMARY OF SA’.4PLES
HAVE RHILL PAPEEBOARD C ORPORATI 0
HAVERHILL, HASSACIUSETTS
SEPTEMBER 23, 1971
I RESIDUC ____________-
BOD Total Fecal [ NONF1LT FILT
Temp Turb. pH DO 5.’day COD DOC Coliforms Coliforms Total Fined Total Fixed
Si-nrion Lab. No. Time O JTU S!J mg/i mg/i mg/i mg/i per 100 ml per 100 ml mg/I mg/i mg/i mg/i.
ziPBl 29427 1200 9.0 110 4.5 7.0 290 653 104 10 .5 93 9 478. i 231. :
29428 1230 9.O 90 4.6 6.5 128 762 97.3 300 . 469.0 257.1
29429 1300 0.0 90 hr7 7.0 160 690 110 10 48.4 466.7 158.2

-------
/
/
.—.--
.—.-.., /,, S
/
Sc’,,,, .
S ri.
‘S
H A \/ ER t IILL
X 495
I .‘FJ L..L I 1 ’\r T ORr .) CO . •:.
rs ,5 r ‘ i -‘-.t’ r S fl • ‘* •‘
L ’..c.,s !L; ’ ,
N
N
N
N
6 R 0 \‘ F LAND

-------
I AVE U NIL. L PAI- LT U DOT U [ ) CO fl
PARKING LOT
HAvEnHII.1. pf\ LI flO/\F D cor P
H/\V [ flH1LL MASSACHUSETTS
11CR /?/Li’ A CI( 1 ?/VEI?
--
P/ USI1A1LI
FL_U E L_•___ I LI
/
/OUTFALL LINE

FENCE
V__
—.—_r.———,:—_-_. -—— .— .- ——— :-——x- — x
MAIN iILI_ CONC1 TE s : !En DUCT
————- —--. — —.—---—-- - — — — -- - .—.. --
/
MAIN OFFICE
/
OUTFALL FROM El U E

-------
CL 3
Dy toured into
Parshall Flume
j
I
Dye n ring M rr c z
liver t} r3 gh the Ln
ILill co :r te s ;c: .ict

-------
APPENDIX I
Time of I Utilizing Field Measurements Using flow
gauging and formulas (1) & (2) Recorder
(hourc) at ‘1ume -
W Ha
(inches) (inches) (MGD) (MCD)
1200 18 1 14.5 5.20 5,0
1230 18 15 5 1 5.74 5.7
[ 1300 18 13.25 ( 4.52 4.4
Sa p1c Calculations:
1.522 W 0.026
(1) Q(cfs) = 4.0 x W Ha
hcre: Q flow thru flume in cfs
W throat width of flume n feet
Ha= Depth of water at the gauging
point in the upstream portion of
the converging section of the
flume in feet.
(2) q(MGD) Q(cfs) x 0.646 MGD/CFS

-------