-------
Table 2E-1: (cont.)
Name
Newsprint
a,
Coefficient
133.1
34.74
. 3736
Coated Printing
a 269.9
a^ 27.61
b .6017
Uncoatea Freesheet
a1 114.9
a2 142.3
b .7120
Uncoated Groundwood
ax 195.2
a2 9.650
b 2.982
Thin Papers
-59.09
a2 321.1
b 3.862
Solid Bleached Bristols
ln(a2) 5.212
b 1.532
T-statistics
4.73
1.50
2.93
19.89
4.04
11.89
4.97
17.48
6.40
1.04
3.85
-.180
1.21
2.34
32.13
6.18
-R2
.998
.998
,976
,985
.979
,657
D.F. F Value
21
42
96
19
15
20
5,239
11,340
1,991
631
399
38.2
2-100
-------
Table 2E-1: (cont.
Name
Cotton Fibre
ln(a2>
Coefficient
487.1
9,044
Unbleached Linerboard
a 84.92
37.72
b .09790
Unbleached Foldingboard
In(a_)
4.931
1.407
Bleached Linerboard
5.278
b 3.822
In(a2)
Bleached Foldingboard
a^ 65.07
a2 120.2
b .4653
Solid Bleached Board
a 177.1
a2 16.02
b 1.602
T-statistic
13.23
14.58
5.35
2.77
4.95
18.12
1.44
65.16
2.78
0.66
1.32
2.02
10. 31
1.58
4.42
52
.910
.999
,508
.659
,998
.996
D.F.
21
45
12
16
F Value
212.5
15,671
2.06
7. 73
2,871
1,989
2-101
-------
Table 2E-1: (cont.)
Name
Coefficient
T-statistic
D.F. F Value
Semi-Chemical Corrugating
Medium
aj^ 62.84 2.73
a2 40.24 1.97
b .2706 3.3 5
.998
34
8,671
Recycled Linerboard
a 54.4 3
a2 49.33
b 1.876
1.14
1.24
2.31
,991
21
1,156
Recycled Corrugating Medium
ln(a ) 4.540 71.91
b .7691 7.75
.750
20
60.0
Recycled Foldingboara
ai 171.4
1. 554
1.563
46.67
2.06
9.08
.998
11,633
Construction Paper and Board
a 134.0 53.39
a ^ .01665 2.17
b 3.580 21.15
992
88
5,652
All Other Board
In (a2) 3.901
1.279
Source: 308 Survey
28.97
11.31
.692
57
128.0
2-102
-------
Section 3
Structure of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry
Introduction
This description of the economic and financial structure of the
Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry is organized on the basis of
major product sectors. These sectors constitute aggregations of the
important groups of intermediate and end products which the industry
manufactures, such as: Market Pulp, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard, and
Uncoated Freesheet Paper. Products are used as the basis for dividing
the industry into segments since they are the focus of the economic
activity affecting the industry. It is these economic considerations
which will determine how the industry responds to increased effluent
control costs. The product sector divisions used are based on the
grade descriptions defined by the American Paper Institute. This
section describes the types of firms and mills that form the industry
in terms of characteristics such as size, age, and location. In
addition, the relationship between product sectors and industry sub-
categories (industry categories used for the purpose of defining
effluent limitations and assessing the costs of implementing control
technologies) is explained. The nature of capacity expansion, the
role of research and development (R&D), and technological change are
also discussed.
Product Sectors
The characteristics of mills making up the various product sectors
of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry depend upon the particular
economic details of each sector. Volume II presents detailed profiles
of individual product sectors. This discussion provides a summary and
comparison of these product sector characteristics. For paper producers,
mills are categorized on the basis of size or capacity; for paperboard
producers, mills are categorized on the basis of type of furnish as well
as size; and for pulp producers, mills are categorized on the basis of
product markets. This classification is useful because many other firm
and mill characteristics such as degree of integration, concentration,
planned expansion, regional distribution, and productivity appear re-
lated to these categories.* Using data from the individual product
sector descriptions compiled in Volume II, the product sector categories
are discussed below, in terms of both firm and mill characteristics.
*The "all other paper" and "all other paperboard" sectors are mixed
categories, and therefore are left out of this classification discussion.
3-1
-------
Paper Producers
The most useful categorization for highlighting the characteristics
of paper producing firms and mills is volume of production. This corre-
lates well with the markets and types of products produced.
Small Volume Paper Product Category (Table 3-1). This category in-
cludes firms and mills producing low volume and/or specialty paper pro-
ducts which are individually under three percent of all paper production.
These are special purpose or high quality paper products characterized
by a large value-added in production and relatively low volume of pro-
duction. Products include Thin, Glassine and Greaseproof, Cotton Fibre,
and Special Industrial papers. Together these product sectors account
for six percent of all paper capacity.
The product sectors included in this category are generally
concentrated, that is, a small number of firms control a large percen-
tage of the production capacity. The firms have a lower level of
vertical integration relative to firms producing larger volume paper
products. They tend to be privately owned and, with the exception of
Special Industrial Paper producers, tend to be one-mill firms. Several
product sectors in the group (Glassine and Greaseproof, Cotton Fibre,
Thin Papers) suffer from substitution pressure from plastics or other
papers.
The paper products included in this category are typically manu-
factured in small (50 to 100 tons per day), urban-centered, old mills.
Roughly 85 percent of these mills are located in the Northeast and
North Central regions of the country. Relative to mills producing
larger volume products, more of these mills are indirect discharges.
Generally, productivity growth in these categories is low, machinery is
older and expansion plans are minimal. Due to these factors, small
volume sectors have less economic strength than the larger volume paper
products sectors. However, because many of the products manufactured
in these categories cater to specialized markets, economic health is
correspondingly varied.
Medium Volume Paper Product Category (Table 3-2). Mills and firms
in this category produce medium volume products which individually
account for three to four percent of all paper production. Included are
miscellaneous intermediate volume paper products such as Solid Bleached
Bristols, Uncoated Groundwood, and Bleached Kraft papers. About 11 per-
cent of total paper capacity is included in these sectors.
3-2
-------
TABLE 3-1. CHARACTERISTICS OF SHALL VOLUME PAPER PRODUCERS
Characteristic
Product
Sectors
Glassine and
Greaseproof
Cotton Fiber
Special
Industrial
Thin Papers
Product Sector
Concentration
highly
concentrated
moderately
concentrated
not concentrated
concentrated
Level of Vertical
Integration
moderate
low
low
high
Level of Horizontal
Integration
moderate
low
high
low
Ownership of Largest
Firms
half public;
half private
most private;
few public
most private;
few public
most private;
few public
Economic/Technological
Trends
severe competition
from plastics
competition
from chemical
wood-pulp
papers
specialized
applications,
few substitutes
competition from
carbonless copy-
paper
Number of Firms/Mills
8/10
19/23
40/63
18/21
Median Mill Size
(tons/day)
105
52
58
96
Primary Location
Northeast,
North Central
Northeast,
North Central
Northeast
Northeast,
North Central
Number of Indirect
Dischargers
1
16
26
5
Planned Expansion
small
small
moderate
moderate
Technological
"Age" of Mills
old
old
old
old
Productivity Growth
low
low
low
low
Source: Based on data in Volume II and Appendix 7-A.
-------
TABLE 3-2. CHARACTERISTICS OP MEDIUM VOLUME PAPER PRODUCERS
Characteristics
Solid Bleached
Bristol
Uncoated
Groundwood
Bleached
Kraft Paper
Product Sector
Concentration
concentrated
concentrated
concentrated
Level of Vertical
Integration
high
high
high
Level of Hori-
zontal Integration
moderate
low to
moderate
moderate
Ownership of
Largest Firms
most public;
few private
half public;
half private
almost all
public
Economic/Techno-
logical Trends
declining due
to changes in
computer and
office tech-
nology
recent gains;
quality
innovations
heavy penetration
by plastics
Number of Firms/
Mills
18/22
17/22
30/41
Median Mill Size
(tons/day)
553
468
420
Primary Location
Northeast,
Southeast,
North Central
Northeast,
North Central
Northeast,
Southeast,
North Central
Number of Indirect
Dischargers
7
4
9
Planned Expansion
none
large
small
Technological
"Age" of Mills
intermediate
intermediate
new
Productivity
Growth
low
low
small
Source: Based on data in Volume II and Appendix 7-A.
3-4
-------
These are concentrated product sectors with the top five and eight
firms controlling roughly 60 and 80 percent, respectively, of production
capacity. The level of vertical integration of the firms from raw ma-
terial to converted product is high and the level of horizontal integra-
tion is generally moderate. Most firms in these sectors control only
one mill and more are publicly owned than those in the small volume
paper sectors. Economic trends in these sectors are mixed.
Mills in this category are of substantially larger size (about 500
tons per day), than those producing small volume paper products. They
tend to have somewhat newer capital stock and more widespread regional
distribution than the smaller, specialty mills. However, their produc-
tivity growth has been lower and their expansion plans are generally
more modest than the large volume paper producers.
Large Volume Paper Product Category (Table 3-3). The large volume
paper category includes product sectors which each account for 13 to
25 percent of all paper production and includes the following papers:
Uncoated Freesheet, Coated Printing, Unbleached Kraft, Newsprint and
Tissue Papers. Together, this category includes about 82 percent of
all paper production capacity.
The product sectors making up the large volume category tend to be
somewhat less concentrated than their smaller volume counterparts.
Firms in these sectors have a high level of vertical integration and a
low to moderate level of horizontal integration. The largest firms are
primarily publicly owned and the incidence of multi-mill firms is higher
than in the lower volume subcategories. Economic and technological
trends in these sectors can be characterized as very positive due to in-
creasing demand and resistance to competition.
Products in this category are made by generally large scale, new
mills. In contrast to the smaller volume categories, productivity
growth is high and large expansions are planned for these mills.
Paperboard Producers
Paperboard producers can also be classified according to volume of
production as was done for paper producers. However, a more meaningful
categorization is based upon the raw material used in production, either
recycled material or virgin wood products. Within these two groups,
size distinctions can then be made.
3—5
-------
TABLE 3-3. CHARACTERISTICS OF LARGE VOLUME PAPER PRODUCERS
Characteristics
Uncoated
Freesheet
Coated
Printing
Unbleached
Kraft
Newsprint
Tissue
U>
Product Sector
Concentration
Level of Vertical
Integration
Level of Hori-
zontal Integration
Ownership of
Largest Firms
Economic/Techno-
logical Trends
not
concentrated
high
low to
moderate
almost all
public
diverse markets
and increasing
demand
Number of Firms/Mills 53/103
271
Median Mill Size
(tons/day)
Primary Location
Number of Indirect
Dischargers
Planned Expansion
Technological
"Age" of Mills
Northeast,
North Central
34
large
generally new
not
concentrated
high
low to
moderate
almost all
public
some plastics
penetration;
trends
follow adver-
tising boom
30/45
517
Northeast,
North Central
11
large
intermediate
moderately/
concentrated
high
low to
moderate
almost all
public
resisted
plastics
competition
29/45
886
Southeast
Productivity Growth high
high
moderate
recently low
concentrated
high
moderate
most public;
few private
quality in-
novations ;
competitive
with other
media
16/24
836
Southeast,
Northwest
large
new
high
concentrated
high
moderate
most public;
few private
consumer tissue:
recession-proof,
non-price
marketing in-
centives ; indus-
trial tissue:
follows level
of employment
42/90
137
Northeast,
North Central
27
moderate
high
Source: Based on data in Volume II and Appendix 7-A.
-------
Recycled Material-Based Paperboard Category (Table 3-4). This
category includes products ranging from one percent to ten percent of
total paperboard production. The processes used to produce these pro-
ducts employ large amounts of secondary fiber in their furnish. Included
in this category are Recycled Corrugating Medium, Recycled Linerboard,
and Recycled Foldingboard. Molded Pulp Products and Construction Paper
and Board have also been classified in this category since a high per-
centage of mills in each sector use processes based on wastepaper. The
large volume sectors within this category together account for 20 percent
of total paperboard capacity, the medium volume group accounts for seven
percent and the total category accounts for 28 percent.
The most important distinctions between the recycled material-based
paperboard producers and virgin wood-based paperboard producers occur in
mill characteristics rather than firm characteristics. However, a couple
of comparisons can be made for firms. In contrast to firms in the wood-
based category, recycled-based firms tend to have a higher degree of
private ownership. Also, their economic trends tend to be less promising
since many product markets are mature and there is some encroachment by
plastics. The Construction Paper and Board sector does not fit this
pattern as its products are designed for specialized markets.
Several characteristics of firms in this category vary according to
size. For instance, the small volume sector is highly concentrated, the
medium volume sector is moderately concentrated and the large volume sec-
tors are generally less concentrated. The level of vertical integration
is generally high in this category mainly because most wastepaper users
prepare their own wastepaper pulp. Horizontal integration for these firms
is low except for the Molded Pulp firms. Both the small volume and large
volume firms tend to be multi-mill while the medium volume ones are one-
^ixll firms.
One of the most obvious distinctions between the recycled and virgin
fiber paperboard categories is the size of the mills. The recycled mills
are small in size, less than 200 tons per day, in contrast to the virgin
wood mills which are very large, near 1,000 tons per day or higher.
These mills tend also to be older and are located primarily in the North-
east and North Central parts of the country, near their fiber supplies.
Since they are located near urban areas, many more of them are indirect
discharges. Productivity growth has been slower than for virgin fiber
mills.
Wood-Based Paperboard Category (Table 3-5). Product sectors in this
category each have production levels that range from less than one per-
cent of total paperboard production to 41 percent. The products classi-
fied here use primarily virgin wood pulp for their furnish and include
3-7
-------
TABLE 3-4. CHARACTERISTICS OF RECYCLED MATERIAL-BASED PAPERBOARD PRODUCERS
Characteristics
Small Volume
Medium Volume
Large Volume
Molded Pulp
Products
Recycled Cor-
rugating Medium
Recycled
Linerboard
Recycled
Foldingboard
Construction
Paper and Board
Product Sector
highly
moderately
moderately
not
moderately
Concentration
concentrated
concentrated
concentrated
concentrated
concentrated
Level of Vertical
high
moderate
high
high
high
Integration
Level of Hori-
moderate to
low
low
low
low to moderate
zontal Integration
high
Ownership of
most public;
half public;
half public;
half public;
almost all
Largest Firms
few private
half private
half private
half private
private
Economic/Techno-
plastics com-
mature
mature
plastics en-
remodelling uses
logical Trends
petition but
market
market
croachment ;
mitigate severe
new market
disadvantages
demand fluctuations
development
compared to
few substitutes
virgin
foldingboard
Number of Firms/
5/14
20/27
20/25
48/75
44/100
Mills
Median Mill Size
69
189
140
160
101
(tons/day)
Primary Location
Northeast
North Central
Northeast
Northeast
Northeast
North Central
North Central
Southeast, North
Central, West
and Southwest
Number of Indirect
8
27
13
75
54
Discharges
Planned Expansion
not available
moderate
large
small
small
Technological
not available
intermediate
old
intermediate
varies with
"Ago" of Mills
to old
products
Productivity Growth not available _ moderate
Source: Based on data in Volume II and Appendix 7-A
low
low
moderate
-------
TABLE 3-5. CHARACTERISTICS OF WOOD-BASED PAPERBOARD PRODUCERS
Characteristics
Small Volume
Medium
Volume
Large
Volume
Bleached Kraft
Linerboard
Bleached
Foldingboard
Solid Bleached
Board
Unbleached
Kraft Liner-
board
Semi - Chemi ca 1
Corrugating
Medium
Product Sector
highly
concentrated
concentrated
riot
not
Concentration
concentrated
concentrated
concentrated
Level of Vertical
high
high
high
high
high
Integration
Level of Hori-
low
low to
moderate
low
moderate
zontal Integration
moderate
Ownership of
most public;
almost all
almost all
almost all
almost all
Largest Firms
few private
public
public
public
public
Economic/Techno-
higher quality
some plastics
heavy plastics
resisted
few substitute
logical Trends
product that
penetration;
competition
competition
follows unbleached
strong medical
linerboard trends
packaging
demands
Number of Firms/
6/6
13/17
17/19
29/48
29/37
Mills
Median Mill Size
1,613
1,264
1,400
1,255
658
(tons/day)
Primary Location
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Southeast
Number of Indirect
0
2
1
3
3
Discharges
Planned Expansion
moderate
moderate
small
large
large
Technological
intermediate
intermediate
intermediate
new
new
"Age" of Mills
to new
Productivity
moderate
moderate
moderate
high
high
Growth
Source: Based on data
in Volume II and Appendix 7-A.
-------
Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached Foldingboard, Solid Bleached Board,
Unbleached Kraft Linerboard, and Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium.
These tend to be low value-added products. The large volume sectors
within this category together account for 54 percent of total paperboard
capacity, the medium volume class accounts for 11 percent, and the whole
category accounts for about 66 percent.
As explained above, firm characteristics in the paperboard cate-
gories vary primarily by size rather than by furnish type. The larger
volume firms are much less concentrated than the smaller volume ones.
There are also more multi-mill firms in the large volume sectors. The
smallest volume firms.include more which are privately owned than the
larger volume classes. However, in general, there is a much greater
degree of public ownership of the wood-based firms than of the recycled-
based firms. The level of vertical integration in this category is
high as many firms control their own timber operations. The level of
horizontal integration is low to moderate. While there has been plastics
competition for some products included in this category, such as for
Solid Bleached Boards, most of these sectors have a strong economic out-
look.
As mentioned above, the mills in this category tend to be much
larger than mills making recycled paperboard products and they are
larger than most paper producers as well. They primarily are located
in rural areas of the Southeast and thus very few are indirect dis-
charges. The ages of these mills tend to be younger, their productivity
growth higher and their expansion plans larger than those for recycled
mills. Together, these factors indicate that the economic health of
these sectors is very good.
Pulp Producers (Table 3-6).
Only two pulp product sectors have been considered in this study:
Dissolving Pulp and all other Market Pulp. Dissolving Pulp has been
classified separately, as it is a highly specialized product with uses
that are not connected to the rest of the paper industry. All other
pulps, such as Bleached Kraft Pulp, are used in the production of paper
or paperboard either directly by the firm that produces them or through
purchase by another firm. These last are Market Pulps.
The pulp product sectors have different concentration levels.
Dissolving Pulp is highly concentrated, with only a few producers of
this product. There are many producers of other types of Market Pulp,
none of whom control very large amounts of the production capability.
3-10
-------
TABLE 3-6. CHARACTERISTICS OF PrrLP PRODUCERS
Characteristics
Dissolving Pulp
Other Market Pulp
Product Sector
Concentration
Level of Vertical
Integration
Level of Hori-
zontal Integration
Ownership of
Largest Firms
Economic/Techno-
logical Trends
Number of Firms/
Mills
Median Mill Size
(tons/day)
Primary Location
Number of Indirect
Dischargers
Planned Expansion
Technological
"Age" of Mill
Productivity
Growth
highly
concentrated
high
high
almost all
public
decreasing
demand
6/9
638
Southeast,
Northwest
0
none
intermediate
high
not
concentrated
high
moderate
almost all
public
substitution of sulfate
for sulfite process;
sensitive to world
market conditions
47/76
886
Southeast
not available
depends on process
recently low
Source: Based on data in Volume II and Appendix.
3-11
-------
Both sectors have a high degree of public ownership of firms and have
many firms with a high level of vertical integration. Horizontal in-
tegration is common for Dissolving Pulp firms and less so for other
Market Pulp firms. Economic trends for these sectors differ:
Dissolving Pulp firms are experiencing decreasing demand and other
Market Pulp producing firms' demand fluctuates with the world market.
There is a higher percentage of multi-mill firms in the other Market
Pulp sector than in the Dissolving Pulp sector.
Mills in both pulp sectors are large (600 to 900 tons per day),
located primarily in the Southeast and Northwest, and nearly all are
direct dischargers. Productivity growth in the Dissolving Pulp sec-
tor is high and for other Market Pulp mills was high but has more
recently been low. Dissolving Pulp mills are of an intermediate age
and have no expansion plans. For other Market Pulp mills, the age
depends on the process used and expansion plan data is not available.
General Trends
The characteristics of firms and mills making up the various pro-
duct sectors of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry — regional
distribution, size, age — depend upon the particular economic details
of the sector involved, as discussed above. However, several general-
izations about these characteristics can be made and are presented
below.
Integration from Pulp to Paper Making
The degree to which a mill's production process is integrated from
pulp to papermaking varies from sector to sector. For the purpose of
this economic analysis, mills were classified into three categories:
integrated, nonintegrated, and secondary fiber. Integrated mills are
those which contain both pulp and papermaking facilities. Nonintegrated
mills are those which purchase pulp and then use it to produce paper or
paperboard. Secondary fiber mills are those that primarily use waste-
paper as a furnish and thus are considered integrated as they normally
produce their own wastepaper pulp.
Table 3-7 ranks paper and paperboard product sectors by degree of
integration. In general, the degree of integration is dependent on the
value of the end product. Mills producing low price-per-unit products
are usually integrated (e.g., Newsprint, Uncoated Groundwood, Unbleached
Linerboard), while specialized, high value products (e.g., Special In-
dustrial) frequently are nonintegrated. The level of integration is
also related to the location of the mill. Integrated mills are more
often located in rural areas, while nonintegrated mills operate nearer
urban areas. Secondary fiber mills also operate near urban areas.
3-J.2
-------
TABLE 3-7. PRODUCT SECTORS AND DEGREE OF INTEGRATION
Product Sectors
Percentage of Mills in
Product Sector Classified
as Nonintegrated
Integrated
V
Nonintegrated
Integrated
Paper
Newsprint
Uncoated Groundwood
Unbleached Kraft Paper
Coated Printing
Bleached Kraft Paper
Tissue
Solid Bleached Bristols
Uncoated Freesheets
Thin Papers
Cotton Fiber
Special Industrial
Glassine and Greaseproof
Paperboard
Unbleached Kraft Linerboard
Bleached Kraft Linerboard
Semi-Chemical Corrugating
Recycled Linerboard
Recycled Corrugating
Molded Pulp Products
Solid Bleached Board
Recycled Foldingboard
Construction Paper and Board
Bleached Foldingboard
0.0%
13.6
24.4
33.3
34.1
35.6
36.4
44.7
57.1
65.2
66.7
80.0
0.0%
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
4.0
5.9
Source: 308 Survey
3-13
-------
Low value products are usually standardized, and thus do not need the
same contact with their markets that the manufacturers of specialized
products need. In addition, access to raw materials tends to be very
important in the production of low value items. For secondary fiber
mills, (e.g., Tissue, Recycled Boards, Construction Paper and Board
mills) the best sources of wastepaper are urban areas.
Regional Distribution
The regional distribution of mills and capacity is shown in
Tables 3-8a and 3-8b. While a majority of mills (61 percent) are
located in the Northeastern and North Central Regions of the country,
most production capacity is located in the Southeast. The Northeastern
and North Central mills tend to be in nonintegrated or secondary fiber
sectors which produce very small portions of total paper, paperboard,
and market pulp. The combined effect of the impact of integration and
the regional distribution of mills can be seen in Tables 3-9 and 3-10.
Several product sectors are heavily concentrated in the Northeast and
North Central regions, including Cotton Fibre, Special Industrial,
Glassine and Greaseproof Papers, and Coated Printing. In the Southeast
are found heavy concentrations of Bleached and Unbleached Kraft Liner-
board, Solid Bleached Board, and Bleached Foldingboard.
This regional distribution also holds for capacity. The Introduc-
tion to Volume II presents a ranking of product sectors by total capa-
city. Based on capacity the four paper sectors most highly concentrated
in the Northeast and North Central regions — Glassine and Greaseproof
Paper, Special Industrial Paper, Thin Paper, and Cotton Fibre Paper —
together constitute less than three percent of total paper, paperboard,
and market pulp production. In addition. Recycled Corrugating Medium,
Recycled Foldingboard, All Other Paperboard, Recycled Linerboard, and
Molded Pulp Products, the five paperboard product sectors most highly
concentrated in the Northeast and North Central Regions, constitute
less than twelve percent of total capacity.
In contrast, the Southeast is characterized by integrated mills
producing the larger volume products. Three of the largest product
sectors, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard, Other Market Pulp, and Semi-Chem-
ical Corrugating Medium, which together have almost 35 percent of total
U.S. paper, paperboard, and market pulp capacity, are heavily represented
in the Southeast. There is a strong regional trend toward production by
large, integrated mills producing low value products in the Southeast
and small, secondary fiber and nonintegrated mills producing higher value
added products in the Northeast and North Central regions.
3-14
-------
TABLE 3-8. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF KILLS AND CAPACITY
TABLE 3-8A. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF MILLS
Region*
Number of Mills
Percent
Northeast
215
34.0
Southeast
144
22. 7
North Central
171
27.0
Northwest
41
6.5
West & Southwest
62
9.8
Total 633 100.0
TABLE 3-8B. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF CAPACITY
(Thousands of short tons/day)
Pulp** Paper Paperboard
Region* Capacity Percent Capacity Percent Capacity Percent
Northeast
25.
.83
13.
, 36
23.
,39
26.
,73
11.
, 30
10.
,83
Southeast
94.
. 8C
49.
.05
29.
, 74
33.
98
55.
,77
52.
,17
North Central
27.
.62
14.
.29
19.
,80
22.
,62
16.
,20
15.
,27
Northwest
23.
.96
12.
40
9.
,21
10.
,52
9.
,06
8.
,59
West & Southwest
21.
,06
10.
,90
5.
38
6.
.15
13.
13
13.
,14
Total
193.
. 27
100.
.00
87.
.52
100.
,0C
105.
.44
o
o
,00
Source: 308 Survey
~Northeast includes: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Puerto Rico;
Southeast includes: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia;
North Central includes: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin;
Northwest includes: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington;
West & Southwest includes: Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas,
Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Wyoming.
Hawaii — not in the analysis, but classed in West & Southwest.
**Includes capacity in Deink and Wastepaper (42.08 thousand short tons/
day) .
3-15
-------
TABLE 3-9. PRODUCTION IN NORTHEAST AND NORTH CENTRAL REGIONS
CJ
I
-------
TABLE 3-10. PRODUCTION IN SOUTHEAST REGION
Paper Sectors
Percentage of Mills
Located in
Southeast Paperboard Sectors
Percentage of Mills
Located in
Southeast
Unbleached Kraft Paper
Solid Bleached Bristols
Bleached Kraft
Newsprint
Thin Paper
Coated Printing
Tissue
Uncoated Freesheets
Special Industrial
Glassine and Greaseproof
Uncoated Groundwood
All Other Paper
Cotton Fiber
46.7%
31.8
29.3
29.2
14.3
13.3
13.3
12.6
11.1
10.0
9.1
4.6
4.4
Unbleached Kraft Linerboard
Solid Bleached Board
Bleached Kraft Linerboard
Bleached Foldingboard
Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium
All Other Paperboard*
Construction Paper and Board
Molded Pulp Products
Recycled Foldingboard
Recycled Linerboard
Recycled Corrugating Medium
Pulp Sectors
Market Pulp
Dissolving Pulp
70.8%
68.4
66.7
64.7
48.7
23.5
22.0
21.4
17.3
16.0
7.4
46.1%
44.4
*Includes Unbleached Kraft Foldingboard
Source: 308 Survey
-------
Capacity
Most of the investment in new capacity by the Paper and Paperboard
Industry is in the Southeast region of the United States, and almost
entirely by large integrated firms. The one exception is the invest-
ment in nonintegrated mills in the Northeast. Table 3-11 presents
a regional breakdown of recent capital expenditures. Investment in the
Southeast was over twice as great as investment in any other region.
Due to recent investment patterns, the average and median mill ages in
product sectors characterized by integrated mills are decreasing, while
mean and median ages of product sectors characterized by nonintegrated
or secondary fiber mills are increasing.
Over the past several years one of the most noticeable character-
istics of the industry has been the amount of new capacity generated at
existing mills. Rebuilds and improvements of machines in place and the
introduction of new machines into existing mills will account for
over 80 percent of capacity expansion in the next year or two. At
some point, scale economies can no longer be realized by increasing
mill size due to the costs of transporting wood to the mill sites.
However, the high cost of building new mills and the costs (or time
delays) of meeting environmental and other regulations for new sites
frequently make them unattractive investments. Whatever the case may
be, recent data suggest that most new capacity will come from existing
mills. Table 3-12 shows projected capacity changes by sector for the
industry.
For paper, the product sectors with the largest projected growth
rates in capacity are: Newsprint, Coated Printing, Uncoated Freesheet,
and Uncoated Groundwood. Smaller increases in capacity are found in
Unbleached Kraft, Tissue, Special Industrial, and Thin Paper. The
paperboard product sectors which are expected to grow most rapidly
are: Unbleached Linerboard, Recycled Linerboard, and Semi-Chemical
Corrugating Medium. Smaller increases in capacity are expected in
Recycled Corrugating Medium, Bleached Linerboard, and Bleached
Foldingboard.
International Capacity
The United States is the world's largest producer and consumer of
forest products. Roughly 35 percent of 1978 total world paper, paper-
board, and pulp production came from U.S. mills, while 1979 U.S. con-
sumption (64.3 million metric tons) far outpaces second-ranked Japan
3-18
-------
TABLE 3-11. RECENT CAPITAL EXPENDITURES BY REGION
Capital Expenditures During Five-Year
Period in mid-1970s
Region ($ x 10^)
Northeast 1,749.4
Southeast 3,611.2
North Central 1,611.1
Northwest , 1,698.7
West and Southwest 828. 2
Source: 308 Survey
3-19
-------
Table 3-12: Projected Capacity Changes, by
Product Sector (10^ short tons)*
Sector
PulP
Dissolving Pulp
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine and Greaseproof
Tissue
Special Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bleached Bristols
Cotton Fiber
Unbleached Linerboard
Bleached Linerboard
Bleached Foldingboard
Solid Bleached Board
Semi-Chemical Corrugating
Recycled Foldingboard
Recycled Linerboard
1979 1985 Average Annual
Capacity Capacity Growth Rate
1.536 1,537 0
4,261 4,620 1.3%
1,051 1,112 0.9%
220 233 1.0%
4,885 5,474 1.9%
928 1,029 1.7%
4,109 6,416 7.4%
4,741 6,348 4.9%
8,095 9,901 3.4%
1.537 2,022 4.6%
412 465 2.0%
1,146 1,148 0
129 131 0.3%
14,087 17,587 3.7%
133 152 2.2%
2,080 2,320 1.8%
2,105 2,201 0.7%
4,851 5,899 3.3%
3,009 3,178 0.9%
354 433 3.4%
3-20
-------
Table 3-12 (cont.)
1979 1985 Average Annual
Sector Capacity Capacity Growth Rate
Paperboard (cont.)
Recycled Corrugating 1,700 1,997 2.7%
Construction Paper & Board 7,067 7,501 1.0%
All Other Paperboard,
including Unbleached
Foldingboard 5,055 5,443 1.2%
*For a more detailed presentation, and sources, see Appendix 7-A.
3*21
-------
(17.5 million metric tons), and third-ranked West Germany (9.5
million tons). Stated differently, the 637 pounds of pulp, paper,
and paperboard consumed in 1979 by each American was far higher than
Canada's 474 or Sweden's 470 pounds per capita. No other country
consumed over 400 pounds of forest products per capita last year.
Though the United States clearly dominates world production and
consumption of forest products, its rate of production expansion has
not kept pace with other parts of the world. The U.S. 1977-1978
production increase was 2.7 percent, compared to increases of 3.5
percent in Europe and 7.0 percent in Asia. This is consistent with the
long-term (1960-1978) expansion trend in which Asia/Australia's annual
rate of production expansion was 11.9 percent; Latin America, 8.1
percent; Europe. 4.3 percent; and North America, 3.5 percent. These
percent increases, however, ignore the base of which expansion grows.
Thus the North American paper and paperboard tonnage increase from
1960 to 1978 was 32.5 million metric tons, compared to Europe's
30.5 million, Asia's 24.3 million, and Latin America's 4.7 million.
The faster growth rates in Europe, Asia, and Latin America have
reduced the North American proportion of world pulp, paper, and paper-
board, if not North America's pre-eminence in the industry. In 1960,
North America accounted for 53 percent of world paper and paperboard
output and 54 percent of pulp output, while in 1978 these proportions
had fallen to 43 percent and 49 percent respectively. The 1979 U.S.
contribution to North American pulp production was roughly 70 percent
and roughly 81 percent to North American paper and board production.
Developing countries currently produce less than one-quarter of the
world's paper and board and less than one-fifth of the world's pulp.
Although both rates represent increases for developing countries
since 1960, North American world dominance will continue for a long
time. As an example, two recently announced new U.S. mills (Weyer-
hauser in Plississippi and International Paper in Louisiana) will add
almost as much capacity to these companies as Africa's total 1978
production.
Trends in Technology
Research and development has never been a major activity for
the pulp and paper industry. Compared with research-oriented basic
industries like organic chemicals, it spends little on research and
development. On the average, it allocates about 0.7 percent of its
sales revenues to this area. In most years, organic chemical firms
spend at least five times that much as a percentage of their sales.
3-22
-------
For pulp and paper firms, funds made available for research are
divided betweeen process development and product research. In recent
years, research on process has focused as much on air and water pollu-
tion control as it has on process changes designed to increase produc-
tivity. As the Development Document has shown, however, process
changes designed to reduce pollution may also reduce costs.* Two
areas gaining more attention are fiber recovery and energy savings. In
1978, approximately 53 percent of fibrous raw material was derived
from recovered materials: 22 percent from wastepaper (a slight increase),
30 percent from forest and manufacturing residues, and 1 percent from
other fibers.** At the same time, hog fuel use increased from 5.5
million tons in 1972 to 12 million tons in 1978.+ Clearly, a conflict
between using residual materials as a fiber source or for energy genera-
tion is developing.
One sector where the results of research in product development
are most noticeable is tissue with the development of fluff pulps
and air layering. Another is uncoated groundwood where the develop-
ment of the supercalendering process has improved product characteris-
tics to the extent that penetration into higher quality markets has
been possible.++
A variety of technological innovations are either being introduced
or more widely adopted in the industry. Mechanized harvesting, whole
tree chipping, residue derived fuels, thermo-mechanical pulping, dis-
placement bleaching and washing, and computerized process control
are now firmly entrenched. Oxygen pulping and bleaching, pretreatment
of wood chips with hydrogen sulfide in the sulphate process, and
polysulfide pulping with sulphate are also commercially used. Some
years away are high-consistency forming and dry forming. It would
appear that most innovations which are likely to be commercially
attractive in the near future will be those which reduce fiber re-
quirements (or conversely, increase yield), effluent loads, or energy
needs.
*Preliminary Data Base for Review of BATEA Effluent Limitations
Guideleines, NSPS and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and
Paperboard Point Source Category, prepared for U.S. EPA by E.C. Jordan,
Portland, Maine, June 1979
**Pulp and Paper, May 1979.
¦HPulp and Paper, May 1979.
++Recent estimates of demand show a much faster growth in the demand
for these improved uncoated groundwood papers. Between 1979 and 1983,
growth of newsprint is estimated to increase 8.6%, while demand for
improved grades are estimated to increase 19%. Paper Trade Journal,
October 30, 1980, p. 24.
3-23
-------
The Relationship Between Product Sectors and Industry Subcategories
In addition to the division into product sectors for the purpose
of economic impact analysis, the industry has been divided into units
called subcategories. These are formed by grouping mills which employ
similar production and process techniques. This was necessary so that
EPA could develop uniform national effluent limitations and standards
which would affect similar mills in a similar fashion in terns of
modifications required and costs incurred. The relationship between
the product sectors and the industry subcategories is illustrated in
Tables 3-13 and 3-14. Each table is organized as an array in which the
rows are product sectors and the columns are subcategories. In Table
3-13 the cell entries are the percentages of that subcategory's pro-
duction which go into the production of the various product sectors.
The percentages are obtained by dividing a subcategory's product
sector production by total subcategory production. For example, there
are eighteen mills in the subcategory Tissue from Wastepaper and they
produce approximately 8,283,000 tons of paper per year. Nearly all of
this production (92 percent) goes into the manufacturing of Tissue
Paper and only about 5 percent goes into the manufacturing of Special
Industrial Paper. Table 3-14 contains the percentage of a product
sector's production which is manufactured by each subcategory. To
calculate these cell entries a sector's total production is divided
into individual subcategories' sector productions. While most sub-
categories contribute to several sectors, the majority of a subcategory's
production (over 70 percent) goes to no more than two product sectors,
and a majority of a product sector's production (again, over 60 percent)
is contributed by two or fewer subcaterories.
Several other generalizations can be made from these tables. Almost
all nonintegrated production capacity is in the paper, rather than the
paperboard, sector. The only exceptions are Construction Paper and
Board and All Other Paperboard product sectors. Nonintegrated sub-
categories account for less than 4 percent of each of these product
sector's capacity, even though these two product sectors account for
over 23 percent of Nonintegrated Paperboard's capacity. Each secondary
fiber subcategory has much of its capacity concentrated in a particular
product sector (see Table 3-15). Integrated subcategories production
is primarily in low value per unit output product sectors, as mentioned
earlier. No integrated subcategory has more than 5 percent of its
capacity in any of the following high value-per-unit output product
sectors:
Bleached Kraft Papers
Glassine and Greaseproof Papers
Special Industrial Paper
Thin Papers
Cotton Fibre Paper
Bleached Linerboard
3-24
-------
TABLE 3-13. Percentage of Subcategory Production in Each Product Sector
Dissolving
Kraft
[ Market
| Bleached Kraft
BCT
Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached
Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft
(Linerboard)
1
Unbleached Kraft ¦
| (Bag) |
Semi - Ch emic a 1
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp
1
Papergrade
Sulfite
Groundwood -
| Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood -
Course, .Molded,
Newsprint
Groundwood -
Fine Papers
Miscellaneous
Integrated
Deink
(Fine Papers)
4J
Ł
Wl
a
M irt
c *
H ID
0) Z
o
PRODUCT SECTOR:
Dissolving Pulp
*
79
Market Pulp
*
89
16
9
*
*
*
21
*
12
Unbl. Kraft
34
18
8
Bl. Kraft
•
*
4
Glassine
*
*
Tissue
*
•
*
*
*
44
4
Special Industrial
*
*
1
Newsprint
*
*
16
*
Coated Printing
37
79
6
Uncoated Freesheet
42
*
38
*
*
9
•
Uncoated Groundwood
*
*
*
*
4
*
Thin Papers
*
*
*
Solid Bl. Bristols
*
*
*
*
2
Cotton Fibre
All Other Paper
*
*
*
Unbl. Linerboard
•
51
56
17
Bl. Linerboard
*
* '
Bl. Foldinqboard
*
42
s
Solid Bl. Board
*
21
6
Semi-Chem. Corruqatinq
87
19
*
4
Recycled Linerboard
Recycled Corrugating
«
*
Recycled Foldinqboard
*
•
*
Construction Paper & Bd.
*
Molded Pulp
*
*
All Other Paperboard
*
7
*
Ttatal Production
(103 short tons/year)
*
2,124
2,338
5,087
5,378
3,261
2,931
5,208
931
2,072
*
*
1,437
L9,258
361
*
Number of Mills
*
10
8
21
17
11
20
10
6
16
*
*
9
81
5
*
~Publication would disclose information about an aggregate of four or fewer mills.
Note: Row and column sums may not equal 100% due to data suppression.
-------
TABLE 3-13. Percentage of Subcategory Production in Each Product Sector (continued)
Deink
(Tissue)
Tissue
from Wastepaper
Paperboard
from Wastepaper
Hastepape?
Molded
Builders' Paper &
Roofing Felt
I
Miscellaneous
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Fine Papers
Nonintegra-ted
Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated
Lightweight
Nonintegrated
Filter & Nonwoven
Nonintegrated Light-
weight-Elec. Allow.
Nonintegrated
Paperboard
Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated
Total Production
(10 3 short tons/yr)
Number of Mills
PRODUCT SECTOR:
Dissolving Pulp
1,361
9
Market Pulp
*
*
5,057
76
Unbl. Kraft
*
*
ft
*
*
2
3.704
44
Bl. Kraft
*
*
*
•
*
*
*
5
1,093
40
Glassine
*
12
220
10
Tissue
95
92
*
7
*
98
ft
*
4,116
89
Special Industrial
*
*
*
*
*
95
ft
*
23
602
63
Newsprint
3,944
24
Coated Printinq
*
25
*
«
*
4,546
45
Uncoated Freesheet
28
55
ft
*
*
13
6.442
103
Uncoated Groundwood
*
*
1,179
22
Thin Papers
*
*
*
63
ft
«
396
21
Solid Bl. Bristols
*
*
*
860
22
Cotton Fibre
2
*
*
120
23
All Other Paper
*
*
*
*
*
*
213
22
Unbl. Linerboard
13,104
48
Bl. Linerboard
95
6
Bl. Foldingboard
•
*
1,918
17
Solid Bl. Board
*
1,621
19
Semi-Chem. Corrugating
4, 222
37
Recycled Linerboard
9
*
759
25
Recycled Corrugatinq
15
*
1,160
27
Recycled Foldingboard
40
*
*
2,894
75
Construction Paper & Bd.
12
100
*
*
*
2,841
99
Molded Pulp
•
2 79
14
All Other Paperboard
22
*
*
•
*
2,080
68
Total Production
(10 3 short tons^ear)
666
:1,28 3
!>, 507
145
1,585
1 ,158
2 ,0R9
1 ,234
286
62
ft
128
906
Number of Mills
13
18
150
8
61
16
41
26
11
14
i
11
35
*Publication would disclose information about an aggregate of four or fewer mills.
Note: Row and column sums may not equal 100% due to data suppression.
-------
TABLE 3-14. Percentage of Total Product Sector Production Manufactured by Subcategory
Dissolving
Kraft
Market
Bleached Kraft
1
BCT
Bleached Kraft |
Fine Bleached
Kraft s Soda
1
Unbleached Kraft
(Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft
(Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade
Sulfite
Groundwood -
| Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood -
Course, Molded,
Newsprint
Groundwood -
Fine Papers
Miscellaneous
Integrated
Deink
(Fine Papers)
Deink
(Newsprint)
PRODUCT SECTOR:
Dissolving Pulp
*
*
Market Pulp
*
20
8
8
*
*
*
4
*
45
Unbl. Kraft
30
26
42
Bl. Kraft
*
*
59
Glassine
*
*
Tissue
*
*
*
*
•
20
19
Special Industrial
*
*
*
15
Newsprint
*
*
75
*
Coated Printing
38
25
22
Uncoated Freesheet
31
*
11
*
*
26
5
Uncoated Groundwood
*
*
*
•
55
*
Thin Papers
•
•
*
*
Solid Bl. Bristols
*
*
*
*
35
Cotton Fibre
57
All Other Paper
*
*
*
*
Unbl. Linerboard
41
13
22
24
Bl. Linerboard
*
*
*
Bl. Foldingboard
*
53
47
Solid Bl. Board
*
32
65
Semi-Chem. Corrugating
»
«
*
«
Recycled Linerboard
Recycled Corrugating
*
*
Recycled Foldinqboard
*
*
*
Construction Paper & Bd.
*
Molded Pulp
*
*
All Other Paperboard
*
16
*
*
Total Production
(103 short tons/year)
*
2,124
2, 338
5,087
5,378
3,261
2,931
5,208
931
2,072
*
*
1,437
19,258
361
*
Number of Mills
*
10
8
21
17
11
20
10
6
16
*
*
9
81
5
*
*Publication would disclose information about an aggregate of four or fewer mills.
Note: Row and column sums may not equal 100% due to data suppression.
-------
TABLE 3-14. Percentage of Total Product Sector Production Manufactured by Subcategory (continued)
Deink
(Tissue)
Tissue
from Wastepaper
Paperboard
from Wastepaper
Wastepaper
Molded
Builders' Paper &
Roofing Felt
Miscellaneous
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Fine Papers
J
•i
Nonintegrated 1
Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated
Lightweight
Nonintegrated
Filter & Nonwoven
1
Nonintegrated Ligh^
weight-Elec. Allow.
Nonintegrated
Paperboard
Miscellaneous
Nonintegrated
r
Total Production
(10^ short tons/yr)
Number of Mills
PRODUCT SECTOR:
Dissolving Pulp
1,361
9
Market Pulp
•
ft
5,057
76
Unbl. Kraft
#
•
ft
*
ft
3,704
44
Bl. Kraft
*
*
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
4
1,093
40
Glassine
*
50
220
10
Tissue
15
4
*
2
*
29
*
4,116
89
Special Industrial
*
*
*
*
*
10
*
ft
34
602
63
Newsprint
3,944
24
Coated Printinq
*
11
ft
ft
*
4.546
45
Uncoated Freesheet
5
16
ft
ft
ft
2
6.442
103
Uncoated Groundwood
*
*
1.179
22
Thin Papers
•
*
*
45
*
*
396
21
Solid Bl. Bristols
*
*
•
860
22
Cotton Fibre
29
ft
*
120
23
All Other Paper
*
*
*
ft
*
213
22
Unbl. Linerboard
13.104
48
Bl. Linerboard
95
6
Bl. Foldinqboard
*
*
1.918
17
Solid Bl. Board
•
1 .621
19
Semi-Chem. Corrugating
4.222
37
Recycled Linerboard
•
*
759
25
Recycled Corrugatinq
84
*
1.160
27
Recycled Foldingboard
90
*
*
2.894
75
Construction Paper & Bd.
28
56
*
ft
2.841
99
Molded Pulp
51
279
14
All Other Paperboard
70
•
*
ft
*
2.080
68
Total Production
(10 ^ short tons/year)
666
8,203
6,507
145
1,585
L, 158
1,089
1,234
286
62
*
128
906
Number of Mills
13
18
150
8
61
16
41
26
11
14
*
11
35
*Publication would disclose information about an aggregate of four or fewer mills.
Note: Row and column sums may not equal 100% due to data suppression.
-------
TABLE 3-15- IMPORTANT PRODUCT SECTORS FOR
SECONDARY FIBER SUBCATEGORIES
Production
Subcategory
Primary Product
Category
Percent Subcategory
Capacity in Primary
Product Category(s)
Deink (Fine Paper)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Waste-
paper
Paperboard from
Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded
Products
Builders' Paper and
Roofing Felt
Uncoated Freesheet
Tissue
Tissue
Recycled Board
86% (Uncoated Freesheet)
95 (Tissue)
92 (Tissue)
9 (Recycled Linerboard)
15 (Recycled Corrugating)
40 (Recycled Folding-
board)
Molded Pulp Products 99 (Molded Pulp)
Construction Paper
and Board 100 (Construction)
Source: 308 Survey
3-29
-------
Given the extent to which sectors and subcategories are related,
some of the comments made earlier about regional distribution of sector
production and age of mills manufacturing the various products bear
repeating in the context of subcategories (see Table 3-16) . Sixteen of
the twenty-seven subcategories have a majority (50 percent or more) of
their mills in one region. Eight of those sixteen subcategories are
integrated production processes, and four of these eight have a majority
of mills in the Southeast. This is not surprising in light of our
earlier analysis based on the 308 Survey which showed that the majority
of integrated mills and integrated capacity is located in the Southeast.
Seven subcategories have a majority of mills in the Northeast; of these,
five are nonir.tegrated processes and two are secondary fiber.
Ranking subcategories by age shows that large, integrated mills
ter.d to be newer than either secondary fiber or non-integrated mills
(see Table 3-17). In part, this is because most recent investment has
gone into integrated mills, making the average age of many integrated
subcategories younger. However, there are exceptions to this generali-
zation. Tissue from Wastepaper, the sixth youngest category, has only
0.3 percent of industry capacity and ranks twenty-fourth (out of 29
production categories) by capacity. Nonintegrated Fine Papers, the
oldest subcategory, ranks tenth by capacity. Thus the age-size cor-
relations which held for product sectors are net as important for sub-
categories .
Capacity can also be used to measure the degree to which a sub-
category is dominated by a few mills, the degree of concentration for
the subcategory. Table 3-18 presents the mean and total capacity for
each subcategory. In addition, subcategories are ranked by the ratio
of the capacity of the five largest mills to total capacity for the
subcategory. As already stated, integrated mills (particularly Kraft
mills) tend to be significantly larger than nonintegrated or secondary
fiber mills. However high concentration ratios are not limited to the
integrated subcategories. This is due in part to our definition of
concentration. By using the top five mills, any subcategory with a
small number of mills will have a high ratio. There are five sub-
categories with four or fewer mills. Excluding these five subcategories,
the highest ratios are found in Deink (Fine Papers), Dissolving Sulfite,
Nonintegrated Lightweight, Wastepaper Molded Products and Deink (Tissue).
All these subcategories are relatively small. In terms of number of
mills, these subcategories range from five to thirteen; and in terras of
capacity they range from 563 tons per day to 2,674 tons per day. The
three least concentrated subcategories, those with the smallest ratios,
subcategories with very large numbers of mills. However, the next
three have between eleven and twenty-one mills. This is because the
mills within the subcategory are more nearly the same size, and therefore
3-JQ
-------
TABLE 3-16. Concentration of Subcategories by Region
Name >50 Percent of Mills In Region
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Southeast
(76.5%)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Southeast
(72.7%)
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Cheraical
Southeast
(60.0%)
Market Bleached Kraft
Southeast
(50.0%)
Dissolving Sulfite
Northwest
(83.3%)
Deink (Fine Papers)
North Central (80
.0%)
Groundwooa Fine Papers
North Central (66
.7%)
Papergrade Sulfite
North Central (62
.5%)
Semi-Chemical
North Central (50
.0%)
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Northeast
(72.7%)
Nonintegrated Miscellaneous
Northeast
(72.2%)
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
Northeast
(56.1%)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Northeast
(55.6%)
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Northeast
(54.6%)
Deink (Tissue)
Northeast
(53.9%)
Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven
Northeast
(50.0%)
Source: 3C8 Survey
3-31
-------
TABLE 3-17: SUBCATEGORIES RANKED BY AGE OF MILL (Youngest to Oldest)
Subcategory
Number of
Mills
Mean Years From Initial
Construction
Deink (Newsprint)
*
*
BCT Bleached Kraft
7
21
Market Bleached Kraft
8
23
Dissolving Kraft
*
*
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
30
29
Tissue from Wastepaper
17
33
Unbleached Kraft &
Semi-Chemical
10
34
Dissolving Sulfite
6
36
Wastepaper Molded Products
12
37
Builder's Paper and
Roofing Felt
58
40
Groundwood - Coarse, Molded,
News Papers
6
41
Paperboard from Wastepaper
150
43
Semi-Chemical
11
53
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
31
54
Fine Bleached Kraft and
Soda
20
68
Nonintegrated Lightweight
14
70
Papergrade Sulfite
18
71
Deink (Fine & Tissue)
17
71
Nonintegrated Filter and
Woven
15
74
Groundwood - Fine Papers
9
77
Nonintegrated Paperboard
14
80
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
37
87
Source: E.C. Jordan
3-32
-------
TABLE 3-
18. CAPACITY
BY SUBCATEGORY (TONS/DAY)
Number
Mean
Standard
Total
Ratio of Top 5
Subcategory
Responding
Capacity
Deviation
Capacity
Mills to Total
Rank
Dissolving Kraft
~
~
~
*
*
*
Market Bleached Kraft
10
724
422
7,240
.68
15
BCT Bleached Kraft
8
1,121
427
8,971
.77
11
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
21
682
294
14,329
. 38
26
Unbl. Kraft (Linerboard)
17
1,121
445
19,050
.43
24
Unbl. Kraft (Bag)
11
907
650
9,982
.74
13
Semi-Chemical
20
506
221
10,129
. 39
25
Unbl. Kraft & Semi-Chemical
10
1,678
702
16,776
.67
16
Dissolving Sulfite
6
651
220
3,906
.89
7
Papergrade Sulfite
16
391
223
6,258
.52
21
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
~
*
*
*
*
*
Groundwood-Course, Molded, Newsprint
*
*
*
•k
*
*
Groundwood-Fine Papers
9
530
313
4,774
.76
12
Misc. Integrated Mills
81
739
630
59,855
. 17
28
Deink (Fine Papers)
5
222
130
1 ,110
1.00
6
Deink (Newsprint)
*
*
~
*
*
*
Deink (Tissue)
13
206
354
2 ,674
. 79
10
Tissue from Wastepaper
18
40
36
725
. 58
18
Paperboard from Wastepaper
150
170
131
25,439
.12
29
Wastepaper Molded
8
70
35
563
.80
9
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
61
108
75
6,563
. 18
27
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
16
244
175
3,908
.57
19
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
41
168
214
6,907
.46
22
Nonintegrated Tissue
26
141
179
3,676
.53
20
Nonintegrated Lightweight
11
93
84
1,018
.82
8
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
14
21
15
288
.66
17
Nonintegrated Lightweight-
Electrical Allowance
*
*
*
*
*
*
Nonintegrated Paperboard
11
45
28
500
.71
14
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
35
96
105
3, 365
.44
23
Source: 308 Survey
-------
no few mills dominate production. As with concentrated subcategories,
the not concentrated subcategories are found in the integrated as well
as the secondary and nonintegrated segments of the industry.
3-*34
-------
Section 4
Financial Profile
Financial Overview
Following excellent years in 1978 and 1979, the Pulp, Paper and
Paperboard Industry entered 1980 expecting a major downturn as the U.S.
economy was finally driven into a recession by continued oil price in-
creases, double-digit inflation, and the monetary strictness this in-
flation fostered. Companies which also produce lumber products were the
first to feel the effects of the recession as housing starts dried up.
This had the added effect of drastically reducing the supply of wood
chips and residuals available for pulp production.
Economic growth turned negative in February of 1980, and by mid-
summer almost all paper and board grades were affected. As in the past,
converted paperboard products were the first to feel the impact of the
economic downturn. During the second quarter of 1980, demand was
severely impacted, with total paper and board production dropping a
seasonally adjusted annual rate of 24 percent. Production declined in
all grades, except Newsprint, with Builder's Paper and Board and Re-
cycled Paperboard being the hardest hit.
However, in comparison to the 1975 recession, this one has had a
smaller impact on the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry. Data
Resources, Inc. predicts a drop of 3.5 percent in total U.S. paper and
board production (including hardboard) in 1980.* This smaller impact is
due in part to the Canadian newsprint mill strikes this summer, the
strong export markets for pulp, linerboard and newsprint, and the lack
of over-built consumer inventories. As a result, product prices have
remained relatively stable, with minor weaknesses in linerboard and
corrugated box prices.**
The future prospects for the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry
appear very good. Data Resources, Inc. expects paper and board produc-
tion to begin growing again by the end of 1980 or early 1981. While
growth in 1981 is expected to be only moderate, paper and board produc-
tion is expected to grow at a faster rate between 1979 and 1985 than it
did between 1973 and 1979. However, the future industry growth rate will
probably be slightly lower than the general economic growth rate due to
*Data Resources, Inc. "Monthly Comment Note," October 2, 1980,
Paperr.otes #240.
*tlarence Brown, analyst with Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb, as reported
in Paper Trade Journal, October 30, 1980.
4-1
-------
rising real paper prices, competition from substitutes (e.g., plastics
and electronics), and a declining share of consumption expenditures with
respect to total expenditures. These declines will be partially offset
by growth in U.S. paper and board exports and technological advances in
paper production.
Demand for Market Pulp also is expected to increase significantly,
thereby improving the prospects for producers in this segment. Table
4-1 shows wood pulp production changes by grade from 1976 through the
first half of 1980. Overall, total pulp production has been increasing,
with decreases in Sulfite and large increases in Kraft. The world de-
mand for market pulp is likely to increase over the next few years. In
1979, world production of paper and board was about 5.5 percent above
1978 levels, while world production of pulp increased only 4.7 percent.
This was coupled with increased reliance on wastepaper. According to a
recent survey, some 20 million annual tons of paper and board capacity
are due to be added worldwide between 1980 and 1983, but only 13
million tons of pulp capacity.* Construction of market pulp mills has
become very expensive. In addition, many market pulp producers are
integrating downstream so that they can use their pulp to produce higher-
value paper.
The financial performance of paper and allied industries during the
last several years has been uniformly good, and in general much better
than the early 1970s. (See Table 4-2.) Net sales have steadily in-
creased since 1969, with sales in 1980 expected to be approximately 2.8
times those in 1969. Net profits declined between 1969 and 1972. Since
1972 they have steadily increased, with 1974 being an exceptionally pro-
fitable year. Profits in 1980 are expected to be slightly below those
in 1979, but still higher than 1978 profits. Sales margin (the ratio
of after-tax earnings to net sales) also declined between 1969 and
1972. Since then it has remained relatively stable, except for 1974
and 1979 which were particularly good years. Return on net worth has
followed the pattern of sales margins. In spite of the recession in
1980, return on net worth for this year is expected to be only slightly
below the 13.6 percent average for the previous seven years. Therefore,
the industry as a whole can be characterized as strong, and in better
shape than was true ten years ago.
One distinguishing characteristic of the Pulp and Paper Industry
is the high level of capital investment required. Based on Department
*Pulp and Paper International's "Projects Survey 1980-83," as
reported in Pulp S Paper, August 1980.
4^2
-------
TABLE 4-1. WOOD PULP PRODUCTION
Percent Change
Production Total (first half
(103 tons) Percent Change 1979 to first
Grade 1976 1979 (1976-79) half 1980)
Dissolving and
Special Alpha
1,485
1,497
0.8%
12.4%
Bleached Sulfite
1,750
1,379
-21.2
11.3
Unbleached Sulfite
419
396
- 5.5
- 0.7
Bleached and Serai-
Bleached Kraft
15,773
18,061
14.5
7.8
Unbleached Kraft
17,826
19,930
11.8
2.2
Semi-Chemical
3,827
4,068
6.3
3.3
Groundwood and IMP
4,304
4,385
1.9
4.2
Total, excluding
Defibrated and
Screening
45,385
49,715
9.5
5.0
Defibrated, Exploded
and Screenings
3,219*
3,130
- 2.8*
-28.2
Source: American Paper Institute, as reported in the Paper Trade
Journal.
*1977 (1977-79).
4-3
-------
TABLE 4-2. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF PAPER AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES
Net Sales
Net Profits*
Sales Margin**
Return on
Year
($
billion)
(%)
Net Worth
1969
20.607
0.987
4.8%
9.7%
1970
21.069
0.719
3.4
7.0
1971
22.224
0.512
2.3
4.8
1973
26.503
1.441
5.4
12.5
1974t
32.837
2.287
7.0
16.8
1975
32.044
1.801
5.6
12.1
1976
39.270
2.270
5.8
13.2
1977+
45.750
2.367+
5.2
12.0
1978
48.920
2.548
5.2
12.3
1979
55.359
3.724
6.7
16.0
1980E
58.408
3.196
5.5
13.1
Source: Federal Trade Commission. Based on companies primarily
engaged in sales of paper and allied products.
*Net profit after taxes.
**Ratio of after-tax earnings to net sales.
tSince revised, not directly comparable to prior years.
E Estimate based on first two quarters of 1980.
4-4
-------
of Commerce statistics (Table 4-3) capital spending by the Paper In-
dustry has increased rapidly between 1978 and 1980. This increase has
been at a much faster rate than that undertaken by manufacturing in
general. As discussed in Section 6, capital expenditures on pollution
control have leveled off to a current rate of about $0.3 billion.
Therefore, most of the recent capital expenditures have gone for new
machinery and capacity expansion.
In line with typical industry procedure for many years, most of
the additions to capacity have occurred at existing facilities. In
1978, only two new mills came on line and three more greenfield mills
were under construction. According to the American Paper Institute,*
69 percent of new capacity tonnage in the 1980-82 period will come
from new equipment at new and existing facilities, while 31 percent
will come from modernizing existing production lines. The rate of
capacity expansion has been steadily increasing since 1977, (See
Table 4-4.) Included in this total is capacity lost to the shutting
down of old machines and the closing of mills. For example, in the
1978-79 period, 35 paper and board machines and nine complete mills
were closed, whose annual capacity was 1,514,000 short tons. The
American Paper Institute estimates that between 1980 and 1982, 11
machines and one mill will be closed, with an annual capacity of 366,000
short tons.**
Ratio Analysis of Major Firms
The ratios examined are long-run, non-liquid asset ratios. They
were chosen because firms that are in serious financial difficulty
(including those considering bankruptcy) base their most critical
financial decisions on long-run prospects rather than short-run liquid
assets. For example, a firm will declare bankruptcy as soon as nega-
tive long-term prospects are clear to them.
All financial ratios are for complete firms and not for just the
pulp and paper segments of their business activities. For highly di-
versified corporations, this is an important constraint of ratio
analysis. Standard and Poor's Corporation compiles financial statements
(annual and quarterly) on a large number of U.S. corporations, and
various ratios and other mar.upulations of these data are available
through a service called COMPUSTAT. Meta Systems used data from this
3200-firra data base for this analysis.
•American Paper Institute, Paper/Paperboard Woodpulp Capacity,
1978-1981 with additional data for 1982, p. 4, corrected.
**American Paper Institute, Paoer/Paperboard Woodpulp Capacity,
1978-1981 with additional data for 1982, p. 9.
4-5
-------
Table 4-3: Capital Spending:
Paper Industry and All Manufacturing ($ billion)
Paper Industry All Manufacturing
Capital Percent Capital Percent
Year Spending Change Spending Change
1978
3.46
—
67.65
—
1979
4.88
41.0%
78.92
16.7%
1980
6.06
24.2%
89.55
13.5%
Source: Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, various issues
4-6
-------
TABLE 4-4. U.S. PAPER INDUSTRY CAPITAL SPENDING AND
CAPACITY INCREASES FOR 1970-1980
Year
Capital
Spending**
($ billion)
Percent
Change*
Paper/
Paperboard
Capacity**
(million tons/yr)
Percent
Change*
1970
$ 1.65
—
57.2
—
1971
1.25
-24.2%
58.1
1.7%
1972
1.38
10.4
60.0
3.1
1973
1.86
34.8
62. 3
3.9
1974
2.58
38.7
63.8
3.9
1975
2.95
14.3
64.4
0.9
1976
3.27
10.1
65.7
2.0
1977
3.36
2.7
66.5
1.2
1978
3.46
2.9
67.4
1.4
1979
4.88
41.0
68.9
2.2
1980E
6.06
24.2
71.0
3.0
Source: Pulp and Paper, July 1979, p. 104, Pulp and Paper,
August 1900, p. 21, American Paper Institute.
*From prior year.
**Capital spending figure, Commerce Department; capacity
figures, American Paper Institute. E = estimated.
4-7
-------
No single ratio works as well as a combination of ratios. However,
perhaps the most useful ratio in predicting failure (and probably the
most common measure of profits) is "net income to total assets." There-
fore it is the best single "financial profile" of the industry available.
Unfortunately at the time of this analysis data were available only for
1978. Limitations notwithstanding, the combination of ratios listed
below provide insight into the financial health of the top publicly-
held pulp and paper firms.
Firms were grouped according to their net income to total asset
ratio. Financial profile information on the 12 firms with the highest
ratio and the ten firms with the lowest ratio are presented in Table
4-5. The high ratio group is much more profitable than the low ratio
group, with a mean value of the net income to total assets ratio about
3.3 times that of the low group. While the two groups have nearly
equal mean rankings by total sales, the high group has a smaller ratio
of sales to working capital than the low group. The more profitable
group is less dependent on paper sales, with a somewhat smaller mean
ratio of paper sales to total sales than the less profitable group of
firms. However, both groups contain some firms where paper is a
very small percentage of their business, as well as firms which are
exclusively in the paper business.
The last two columns present similar data on seventeen of the
smallest firms. A few of these firms are in financial trouble as in-
dicated by a negative net income to total assets ratio. However, even
with these firms included, the mean value of this ratio for these small
firms is higher than the mean for the lowest group. In addition, the
highest value of this ratio is equal to the highest value in the most
profitable group. Therefore, it can be concluded that the financial
well-being of the smallest firms varies widely, and that small firms
are not necessarily weak firms. The smallest firms do have a lower
mean value of sales to working capital, and a higher current ratio than
the other two groups. As expected, their mean value of paper as a per-
cent of total sales is higher than the other two groups. Again the
range is from paper being a very small part of the firms' business to
paper being their total business.
A few additional general statements can be made. The high profit
(high ratio) firms tend to be producers of paper, not board. A much
higher proportion of the low profit (low ratio) firms are involved in
the production of paperboard. However, this relationship between pro-
fit levels and products is not as strong for small firms. Of the
seven most profitable small firms, two are involved in paperboard; and
of the seven least profitable, three are involved in paperboard.
4-8
-------
TABLE 4-5. FINANCIAL PROFILES - 1978
High Net Income Low Net Income Small Firms -
to Total Assets to Total Assets Based on Sales
(12 Firms) (10 Firms) (17 Firms)
Ratio Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range
Net Income to Total
Assets
.119
.09-.214
.036
.009-.047
.059
-.145-.214
Sales to Working
Capital
6.62
1.60-10.24
7. 30
5.29-11.9
6.55
1.34-23.47
Current Ratio
2.71
1.61-6.85
2.25
1.28-2.85
3.03
1.25-6.85
Rank in Total Sales
32
5-54
31
7-56
N.A.
Paper as Percent of
Sales
67.75
15-100
73.7
9-100
75.35
3-100
Source : Meta Systems and COMPUSTAT.
-------
308 Survey Analysis
Information was requested on assets, revenues and expenses as part
of the 308 Survey. This required mill level information from pro forma
balance sheets, income statements and other financial records. The re-
sults of these requests were organized by subcategory. For this report,
three major items were given attention: working capital in relation to
total assets, five-year investment plans in relation to fixed assets,
and expenses in terms of general, sales and administrative expenditures.
Working capital* is a measure of a mill's liquidity and is an indi-
cation of the mill's ability to meet short-term financial commitments
(see Table 4-6). In addition, net working capital represents an invest-
ment of capital. Therefore, the magnitude of a company's net working
capital has a direct bearing on return on investment. Comparing working
capital to total assets** measures the proportion of the mill's capital
which is liquid. The subcategory with the largest ratio of working
capital to total assets is Nonintegrated Paperboard. These mills tend
to be small, having one of the smaller mean values of total assets.
This subcategory also is one of the smallest overall, having the third
smallest sum of total assets. The subcategory, with the smallest ratio
of working capital to total assets is Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical.
These mills on average are the largest, and have one of the highest mean
total assets. This subcategory also has one of the larger sums of
total assets.
Investment during the past five years as a percent of fixed assets
ranges from a low of 21% for Unbleached Kraft (Bag) to a high of 64%
for Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda and almost 67% for Miscellaneous
Secondary Fiber (see Table 4-7). Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda is the
second largest subcategory in terms of total investment, while Miscel-
laneous Secondary Fiber is one of the smaller in terms of total invest-
ment. So both large subcategories and small subcategories are investing
heavily.
The ratio of mean mill general, sales and administrative expendi-
tures to cost of goods sold ranges from a high of about 2 3 percent for
BCT Bleached Kraft, to a low of 4.5 percent for Unbleached Kraft and
Semi-Chemical (see Table 4-8). BCT Bleached Kraft is used in the
~Working capital is equal to total current assets (including cash,
accounts receivables, inventory, prepaid expenses, etc.) minus total
current liabilities (including accounts payable, estimated tax liability,
accrued income, etc.)
**Total assets equal fixed assets (at original cost)plus working
capital.
4-10
-------
TABLE 4-6. TOTAL ASSETS BY SUBCATEGORY ($000)
Subcategory
Number
Responding
Mean
Assets
Standard
Deviation
Total
Assets
Ratio of
Working Capital
to Total Assets
Rank
Dissolving Kraft
*
*
*
*
*
~
Market Bleached Kraft
10
99,551
64,358
995,513
.140
12
BCT Bleached Kraft
8
157,864
66,336
1,262,913
.078
24
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
21
133,856
75,044
2 ,810,983
.092
23
Unbl. Kraft (Linerboard)
17
73,782
27,286
1,254,294
.077
25
Unbl. Kraft (Bag)
11
81,030
54,317
891,327
.094
22
Semi-Chemical
20
33,021
21,525
660,425
.098
21
Unbl. Kraft & Semi-Chemical
10
158,321
86,977
1,583,214
.054
28
Dissolving Sulfite
6
108,314
30,571
649,885
.110
20
Papcrgrade Sulfite
16
67,983
50,914
1,087,739
.150
10
Groundwood-Thermo-Mechanical
*
~
*
*
*
•k
Groundwood-Coarse, Molded, Newsprint
*
*
*
*
*
*
Groundwood-Fine Papers
9
63,431
57 ,006
570,880
.116
19
Misc. Integrated Mills
81
91,292
89,589
7,394,724
.076
26
Deink (Fine Papers)
5
27,826
18,176
139,129
.137
13-14
Deink (Newsprint)
*
*
*
*
*
•k
Deink (Tissue)
13
28,791
52 ,946
374,277
.275
2
Tissue from Wastepaper
18
6,239
15,645
112,293
.129
17
Paperboard from Wastepaper
150
7,175
8,286
1,076,234
.133
16
Wastepaper Molded
8
9,399
6,337
75,195
.059
27
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
61
3,483
3,879
212,434
.218
5
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
16
18,673
15,846
298,761
.136
15
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
41
19,350
25,963
793,330
. 210
6
Nonintegrated Tissue
26
34,349
50,256
893,078
.169
7
Nonintegrated Lightweight
11
15,116
15,336
166,273
.137
13-14
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
14
4,166
3,788
58,326
.230
4
Nonintegrated Lightweight-
Electrical Allowance
*
*
*
*
*
*
Nonintegrated Paperboard
11
5,350
3,339
58,852
.285
1
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
35
11,240
13,911
393,411
. 238
3
Source: 308 Survey
-------
Table 4-7. Investment
Number Mean
Subcategory Responding Investment
* *
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bl. Kraft 10 85,567
BCT BL. Kraft 8 145,496
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda 21 121,598
Unbl. Kraft (Linerbd.) 17 68,083
Unbl. Kraft (Bag) 11 73,419
Semi-Chemical 20 29,773
Unbl. Kraft & Semi-Chem. io 149,730
Dissolving Sulfite 6 96,402
Papergrad^ Sulfite 16 5 7,771
Groundwood-Thermo-Mech. * *
Groundwood-Coarse ,
Molded, Newsprint * *
Groundwood-Fine Papers 9 56,046
Misc. Integrated Mills 81 84,392
Deink (Fine Papers) 5 24,024
Deink (Newsprint) * *
Deink (Tissue) 13 20,879
Tissue from Wastepaper 18 5,431
Paperboard from Wastepaper 150 6,220
Wastepaper Molded 8 8,842
Builders' Paper & Roof. Felt 61 2,724
Misc. Secondary Fiber 16 16,126
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 41 15,295
Nonintegrated Tissue 26 28,557
Nonintegrated Lightweight 11 13,047
Nonintegrated Filter and
Nonwoven 14 3,208
Nonintegrated Lightweight-
Electrical Allowance * *
Nonintegrated Paperboard 11 3,828
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills 35 8,561
Source: 308 Survey
Previous Five Years ($000)
Standard Total Ratio of Investment
Deviation Investment to Fixed Assets Rank
54,663 855,670 .402 12
62,898 1,163,972 .484 7
70,506 2,553,555 .640 2
25,644 1,157,406 .356 15
45,719 807,614 .213 24
20,163 595,469 .5 30 3
80,795 1,497,299 .514 4
30,439 578,411 .505 5
43,932 924,328 .399 13
* * * *
* * * *
51,706 504,417 .499 6
84,127 6,835,726 .352 17
16,845 120,121 .242 22
* * * *
33,514 271,432 .472 8
13,998 97,753 .246 21
7,591 933,035 .412 10
6,385 70,738 .241 23
2,751 166,170 .373 14
13,927 258,013 .666 1
21,313 627,089 N.A.
41,421 742,488 .355 16
11,724 143,513 .322 18
3,379 44,914 .439 9
* * * *
2,794 42,106 1.323
11,177 299,645 .404 11
-------
Table 4-8. General, Sales, and Administrative Expenditures by Subcategory ($000)
Subcategory
Number Mean Standard
Responding Expenditures Deviation
Ratio of Mean
Total Expenditure to
Expenditures Cost of Goods Sold
Rank
I
u>
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bl. Kraft
BCT Bl. Kraft
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda
Unbl. Kraft (linerbd.)
Unbl. Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbl. Kraft & Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood- 'Hie rmo-Me ch.
Groundwood-Coarse, Molded,
Newsprint
Groundwood-Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded
Builders' Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated Fine Paper
Nonintegrated Tissue
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
Nonintegrated Lightweight-
Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
10
8
21
17
11
19
10
6
16
*
9
79
5
*
13
15
146
6
49
15
41
24
11
14
11
35
*
4,002
18,379
10,499
2,667
2,965
1,536
3,650
5,304
7,505
*
*
3,266
4,380
1,587
*
3,295
2,032
661
1,247
280
1,158
1,776
10,032
1,186
491
779
1,794
4,651
24,563
22,832
2,522
2,773
1,610
2,495
2,898
9,848
"k
2,253
7,547
926
*
6,460
5,924
899
399
574
1,021
1,666
16,740
876
409
*
646
3,100
*
40,018
147,029
220,479
45,337
32,612
29,177
36,500
31,824
120,075
*
29,396
345,988
7,933
*
42,834
30,484
96,545
7,482
13,715
17,373
72,827
240,776
13,049
6,872
8,569
62,805
*
.092
.232
.116
.058
.056
N.A.
.045
.084
.123
*
.054
N.A.
.058
*
.125
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
.069
N.A.
.068
.095
*
.133
.112
*
8
1
5
16-17
18
N.A.
20
9
4
*
*
19
N.A.
16-17
*
3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
13
N.A.
14
7
2
6
Source: 308 Survey
-------
production of many products, the most important being Bleached Folding-
board and Solid Bleached Board. Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical is
used primarily in the production of Unbleached Linerboard. In general,
the mills with the lowest ratio of general, sales and administrative
expenses to cost of goods sold are those producing undifferentiated
products and integrated mills. Of the 29 subcategories, this ratio is
available for only 21. The average ranking of the integrated sub-
category is 12, indicating that in general, they have slightly lower
than average ratios of general, sales and administrative expenditures
to cost of goods sales. The secondary fiber and nonintegrated mills
have an average ranking of about 8.
To summarize, working capital as a percent of total assets tends to
be highest for small and/or secondary fiber and nonintegrated mills.
General, sales and administrative expenditures in relationship to cost
of goods sole also tends to be high for mills producing highly differ-
entiated products, and for secondary fiber and nonintegrated mills;
although this relationship is less strong. Investment during the past
five years as a percent of fixed assets tends to be higher for inte-
grated mills, with both large-mill and small-mill sectors experiencing
heavy investment.
4-14
-------
Section 5
Pricing
This section addresses the question of how cost increases due to
BCPCT and BATEA treatment requirements are likely to affect prices in
the pulp and paper industry. First, the historical relationship between
costs and prices is reviewed, both for the industry as a whole and for
smaller segments- The results emphasize the effect of capacity utili-
zation rates on the ability to cover cost increases. Next, the effects
of demand growth and elasticity on likely price impacts are discussed,
and the prospects for each product sector assessed. Finally, the effect
of the degree of competitiveness of markets, i.e. market structure, on
pricing behavior is discussed, and the evidence for assessing the com-
petitiveness of each product sector in the pulp and paper industry is
examined.
Price History
Overall Industry Performance
The producers (wholesale) price index for the pulp, paper and allied
products industry from 1960 to 1978 is shown in Figure 5-1. As the
figure shows, the average price of pulp, paper and paperboard remained
quite stable during the 1960's and up to 1972 where it began to rise but
not as rapidly as that of other industrial commodities. In 1971 wage
and price controls were put into effect and until March 1973 paper
industry prices were held constant while prices of many of the materials
used in its manufacture increased. Following the removal of price con-
trols in 1973 and 1974, the paper price index increased at an average
annual rate of 16 percent, reflecting increased demand. It has
steadily risen since at a rate of about 5 percent per year, remaining
slightly below the index for all industrial commodities.
The relatively constant prices prior to 1972 reflected stable op-
erating costs, higher than average productivity increases, and stable
capacity utilization rates.* Three major factors contribute to the cost
of making paper: (1) raw materials - approximately 40 percent of cost;
(2) labor - almost 25 percent; and (3) purchased energy - between 10
and 15 percent. Recent price increases have resulted from increases in
these costs as well as the cost of building or expanding productive
facilities and pollution control costs.
Figure 5-2 shows the profit margin (ratio of net income after tax
to sales) history of the paper and allied products industry. During the
•Council on Wage and Price Stability, Price Increases and Capacity
Expansion in the Paper Industry, Staff Report, December 1976, p. 3.
5-1
-------
FIGURE 5-1
PRODUCER PRICE INDEXES
PULP, PAPER & ALLIED PRODUCTS VS. ALL INDUSTRIAL COMMODITIES
2.2 f-
2.0
1.8
1.6
i
1.4
1.2
1.0
-L
All Industrial Commodities
Pulp, Paper &
Allied Products
_L
_L
I
1960 61 62 63 64 65 66
67 68
69
70 71
72
73
74 75
76
77 78
SOURCES: Council on Wage and Price Stability, Price Increases and Capacity Expansion
In the Paper Industry, Staff Report, December 1976, p. 17
Pulp and Paper, North' American Profile Issue, 1979, p. 22
-------
FIGURE 5-2
PROFIT MARGINS - PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
VS. ALL MANUFACTURING
Paper & Allied
Products,
All Manufacturing
J I I I 1 I I I i I I I ! ! I 1 L
1960 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78
SOURCES: Council on Wage and Price Stability, Price Increases and Capacity Expansion
In the Paper Industry, Staff Report, December 1976, p. 19
Pulp and Paper, North American Profile Issue 1979, p. 18
-------
1960's the profit margin remained stable, slightly below the all manu-
facturing average. It fell considerably in the 1970-71 recession but
climbed above its former average in 1974 when prices rose sharply after
the lifting of controls. In 1974 the profit margin peaked at 7 percent
and since then has returned to a level slightly above 5 percent. The
Council on Wage and Price Stability concludes from this profit margin
data that, as a whole, industry prices have risen sufficiently to cover
cost increases.* Data submitted to the Council on Wage and Price
Stability by members of industry showed that during the period from
1967 to 1976, operating costs generally rose less than prices, con-
sistent with the profit margin data presented above.**
This conclusion is not accepted by everyone. Business Week reports
in 1977 that paper prices have risen rapidly since 1967 but not fast
enough to cover soaring costs.*** An industry journal, Pulp and Paper,
states that the principal reason for lower earnings in 1977 compared to
1976 was the inability of companies to raise prices fast enough to com-
pensate for higher manufacturing costs.t Prices improved enough in
1978, however, to reverse the decline in profit margins caused by costs
rising faster than prices.tt
The producer price index for pulp, paper and paperboard rose 3.9
percent in 1977 compared to 7 percent for key industrial commodities,
13.7 percent for fuel and electricity and 10.8 percent for labor.t+t
In 1978 the price index for paper rose more than 4.8 percent, labor
rates were up 10.4 percent, fuel 7 percent and industrial chemicals
1.6 percent.A
A key factor in industry pricing is the capacity utilization rate
(production divided by capacity) for the industry. If it is about 92
percent or greater, the industry is usually able to raise prices faster
than costs. Capacity utilization rate history for industry is shown in
Figure 5-3.
~Council on Wage and Price Stability, p. 2.
**Council on Wage and Price Stability, p. 18.
***Business Week, May 2, 1977, p. 54.
tPulp and Paper, June 30, 1978, p. 22.
ftPulp and Paper, January 1979, p. 21.
~ttPulo and Paper, January 1979, p. 23.
APulp and Paper, June 30, 1979, p. 17.
5-4
-------
FIGURE 5-3. CAPACITY UTILIZATION RATE FOR THE PAPER AND ALLIED PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
PERCENT
100
100
95
95
90
90
85
i/i
80
80
75
75
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
^ Source: Pulp and Paper, June 30, 1979, p. 21
-------
Experience of Individual Product Sectors
The prices of most product sectors follow the general trends des-
cribed above for the industry as a whole, with price remaining fairly
stable during the 1960's and through 1972, Then most of them rise con-
siderably due to the lifting of price controls, the pressure from
accelerating cost increases, and the high capacity utilization rates
which reflect tight demand conditions and provide an opportunity for
price increases to be maintained. Product sectors which follow this
general pattern include Coated Printing Papers, Solid Bleached Bristols,
Special Industrial Papers and Foldingboard. In many sectors the price
rises which occurred during 1973 and 1974 were maintained despite the
1975 recession and consequent severe drop in capacity utilization.
Examples of product sectors which exhibit this trend are Uncoated Ground-
wood, Thin Papers, Unbleached Kraft Paper, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard,
and Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium. After 1975, prices of most grades
continued to increase or at least hold constant.
Costs of production began increasing in some product sectors in the
early 7C's while prices continued to remain fairly stable. Such product
sectors include Uncoated Groundwood, Coated Printing, Uncoated Freesheet,
Solid Bleached Bristols and Thin Papers. Costs tended to increase
faster in the period from 1973 to 1975 and prices rose during this tine
also for reasons mentioned above. Product sectors in which prices rose
faster than costs through the end of 1978 were Coated Printing Paper
and Newsprint; those in which costs rose faster than prices were Un-
bleached Kraft Linerboard, Unbleached Kraft Paper, Market Pulp and
Uncoated Freesheet (especially uncoated book paper). Cost history data
are not available for all product sectors.
Demand Conditions
Demand conditions have an important effect on the ability of the
industry to pass cost increases through to consumers. Producers have
the most ability to pass costs through when demand is inelastic (i.e.
not price-sensitive) and growing. Otherwise, a substantial part of the
impact may be absorbed as reduced output and profit in the short run
and closure in the longer run. This part describes demand conditions
for the entire industry and the individual product sectors. Because
demand elasticities were discussed in Section 2, they are only briefly
reviewed here.
In general, the industry is considered mature. Consumption (pro-
duction plus net imports) maintains a fixed relationship to GNP, being
strongly related to the overall level of business activity of the
economy. Nonetheless, demand for many of its products grew more
rapidly than the economy during the 50's and 60's due to substitution of
5-6
-------
paper for glass, cloth and wood products and increased advertising and
use of paper materials for product promotion. Other important factors
affecting growth of demand include technological changes in end use
sectors such as computers and dry copying machines. Recently, however,
many of these markets have become saturated and plastics (e.g., wrapping
and bags) have made substantial inroads in others. However, because of
their unique attributes which provide a high level of performance in a
wide variety of uses at low cost, demand for many industry products re-
mains inelastic.
The rate of growth in much of the industry has leveled off and in
some cases has declined. In the 1960's the relation between the demand
for paper and paperboard products and economic activity was 53,000 tons
of paper industry products consumed per billion dollars of real GNP.*
In the years after the 1973-74 price rise, this figure has fallen to less
than 50,000 tons per billion dollars. There is speculation that this
lower level may continue to be maintained as customers have become
accustomed to lower basis weights or the use of substitute products.
The first column of Table 5-1 presents a rough qualitative assess-
ment of end-use demand growth in each product sector. This judgement is
based on DRI's forecasts of demand indicators (size of end-use sector)
and end-use factors (which reflect technological and other changes).
Summaries of these data are presented in Appendix 7-B. Discussions of
economic and technological trends in each product sector appear in
Volume 2. Demand is fairly strong in most product sectors except Glas-
sine and Greaseproof, Bleached Kraft Papers, Cotton Fibre, recycled
board grades, and Dissolving Pulp.
Some product sectors have been severely affected by the penetration
of their traditional markets by substitute materials. Examples of this
trend are the substitution of polyethylene bags for Bleached Kraft Bags,
of plastic film for Glassine and Greaseproof paper, of plastic con-
tainers for Molded Pulp products, and of plastic bottles for Solid
Bleached Board. Other product sectors have not succumbed to penetration.
For example, most Unbleached Kraft Papers have superior packaging pro-
perties and consequently have maintained market shares.
Technological change in end use markets has affected some products.
Demand for Solid Bleached Bristols is down since there is increased
use of computer magnetic tape rather than cards. Uncoated Freesheet
use, on the other hand, has improved due to the burgeoning need for
business forms and paper for computers and copying machines. Technolo-
gical changes in product production have improved demand in some
sectors such as Newsprint, Uncoated Groundwood and, very recently,
Tissue, by improving product characteristics and therefore consumer
acceptance.
*Business Week, May 2, 1977, p. 56.
5-?7
-------
TABLE 5-1. DEMAND/SUPPLY ASSESSMENTS OF EACH PRODUCT SECTOR
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
Demand
Outlook
Increasing
Static
Declining
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Static
Declining
Increasing
Demand Supply
Elasticity* Elasticity
n-c
Predicted
ratio of
price increase
to cost increase
1. 43l
3.86
2.14
.73
.63
.64
.38
2.65
1.07
.41
2.06
.06
.71
1.22
2.34
.51
.83
.51
1.02
.33
.057
.59
1.34
.58
.32
.24
.52
.41
.57
.44
.73
.11
.05
. 59
.39
.91
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chem. Corr.
Recycled Liner
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & Bd.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
Increasing
Static
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Static
Static
.61
.73
.73
.61
.61
.61
.73
.68
n.a.
1.15
.63
.95
2.04
1.13
.91
1. 31
.87
.42
.097
n.a.
.50
.32
.61
.75
.61
.60
.68
.59
.37
.13
n.a.
.30
.33
Dissolving
Market
Declining
Increasing
.59
1.91
.76
Source: DRI, Meta Systems estimates.
^Absolute value (e is negative).
5-8
-------
The second column of Table 5-1 presents the ovm price elasticities
of demand for each product sector. The derivation of these was dis-
cussed in Section 2. In most cases confidence intervals for these
estimates are small. The table shows that the elasticity estimates of
most of the product sectors are relatively inelastic. Exceptions are
Bleached and Unbleached Kraft Papers, Glassine and Greaseproof Papers,
Cotton Fibre Papers, Uncoated Groundwood Papers, Thin Papers, and
Solid Bleached Board all with elasticities greater than one. Demand in
some product sectors is extremely inelastic. These include Tissues,
Uncoated Freesheet, and Solid Bleached Bristols. Recall also that
several product sectors, Glassine and Greaseproof, Cotton Fibre, Un-
coated Groundwood and Unbleached Kraft Papers have high cross-price
elasticities.
In the standard theory of competitive markets, the impact of an
increase in costs on price depends on the elasticities of supply and
demand. Suppose the imposition of the treatment requirements causes
the supply curve simply to be shifted up by a fixed amount. (This may
not be accurate for the supply curve as a whole, but is a close approxi-
mation in the neighborhood of the intersection of the demand and supply
curves.) If e is the elasticity of demand and n is the elasticity of
supply, then it can be shown that the percent price (P) increase re-
sulting from a one percent increase in costs at the margin (MC) is equal
to
dP/P = T)
dMC/MC n-e. 5
(The elasticity on the left is equal to the derivative dP/dMC because
P=MC. See Appendix 5-A.)
The third and fourth columns of Table 5-1 show the elasticity of
supply, and the price impact, n/(n-Ł) , for each sector for which
these data are available. The elasticities of supply were calculated
from the supply curve equations in Appendix 2-E. It must be kept in
mind that the supply elasticities are only approximate, because they
are derived from the constructed supply curves. The limitations of
this procedure are discussed in Sections 2 and 8. The price impact
figures show that on the basis of elasticity estimates, more of the
cost increase will be passed on in the board sectors than in the paper
sectors. On the other hand, this is counterbalanced somewhat because
demand growth is generally stronger in the paper sectors. Paper
sectors face static demand.
5-9
-------
Effect of Market Structure on Pricing
Overview
The basic theory of the price behavior of competitive markets is
straightforward: the price rise resulting from an increase in costs
depends on the elasticities of supply and demand. The theory is simple
because it assumes that firms are small enough relative to the size of
the market so that their actions do not measurably affect the overall
market. The assumption that firms maximize profit provides a deter-
minate market outcome. However, if firms are large enough to have some
market power then strategic concerns affect their behavior, and there
is no determinate market outcome.
A number of empirical observations have been made about oligopo-
listic markets, i.e. markets with a number of firms having some market
power. Prices tend to change less often than in competitive markets
because of price leadership and an unwillingness to cause changes which
may upset market shares. The theory of the monopolistic firm suggests
that price changes may be smaller than cost changes, but this result
may not apply to oligopolistic markets. Markets with capital-intensive
industries may be subject to price wars in times of slack demand because
of low variable costs.
Although oligopolistic markets tend to change prices infrequently,
this is probably less true in periods of inflation. Moreover, a
specific action such as the imposition of pollution controls may pro-
via a signal which allows all producers in a market to raise prices
without fear that other firms will hold back in order to increase their
market shares. Therefore it is not possible to make general statements
about the relative behavior of competitive and oligopolistic markets in
response to treatment costs. It is necessary to examine the experience
of individual product sectors to gain further insight.
Market Structure and Behavior of the Pulp and Paper Industry
The structure of the pulp and paper industry combines both com-
petitive and oligopolistic characteristics. In general terms, it can
be described as a commodity industry with minimal product differen-
tiation. These characteristics combined with the large number of firms
in the industry lead to the expectation that price competition is the
dominant form of competition. During the 1960's, when demand weakened
or when excess capacity existed, companies generally continued pro-
duction at high rates and cut prices or gave discounts to customers.
Recent industry conduct, however, has not always followed this pattern.
During the recession of 1975, which was the worst demand decline since
World War II, companies cut production rather than prices and as a
5-10
-------
result prices held relatively steady.* With the 1976 improvement in
the economy, price competition increased. Commenting on demand tapering
off during the second half of 1976, Pulp and Paper journal concluded
that this problem was compounded by a "breakdown in pricing statesman-
ship" in which widespread price discounting occurred. This behavior
eventually forced posted prices down on many grades.** An explanation
suggested for this apparent inconsistency is that with the improvement
in economic conditions, companies made aggressive attempts to expand
market share by reducing prices which they were reluctant to do during
the recession.***
With rapidly increasing manufacturing costs there is pressure on
firms to raise prices. However, price increases have become a sensitive
issue due to the large number of antitrust cases filed by the Justice
Department, states and private companies alleging price fixing in such
grades as corrugated boxes, folding cartons, bags, labels, and fine
paper.+ The large settlement costs and the reclassification of price
fixing from a misdemeanor to a felony are bound to have some effect on
the pricing behavior of the industry if only to increase companies' re-
luctance to take a price leadership position.
The market structures of the various product sectors within the
pulp and paper industry differ considerably. A discussion of these
mechanisms for several sectors is presented below based primarily on
Guthrie's study of the industry.ft
Market Pulp: Market pulp is an international commodity and has a
worldwide market. Thus, import prices have a significant effect on
domestic prices. For instance, Canadian producers' price changes in-
fluence U.S. producers and Scandinavian prices also affect U.S. prices,
particularly when there is overcapacity in the industry. This can be
clearly seen in the tremendous buildup of inventories in Europe during
1976-77 which precipitated a substantial decline in prices.
The market is not purely competitive. Sellers are relatively large
and so are customers. In addition, prices are contract prices which
~Business Week, May 2, 1977, p. 55.
**Pulp and Paper, June 1977, p. 21.
***Pulp and Paper, January 1978, p. 53.
^Business Week, p. 57; The Wall Street Journal, May 4, 1978, p. 1
and 31; Paper Trade Journal, June 1-15, 1978, p. 22; February 15, 1979,
p. 10; April 30, 1979, p. 17; October 15, 1980, p. 1; Pulp and Paper,
September 1980, p. 25; and New York Times, October 21, 1980.
+~John A. Guthrie, An Economic Analysis of the Pulp and Paper In-
_ ¦ 11 » M a ^ -i - | i i
dustry, Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA, 1972.
5-11
-------
generally remain unchanged over three-month periods. Occasionally, a
large market pulp producer will initiate a price change followed by
other firms.
Paper: Mewsprint, unlike other paper grades, has a major inter-
national market. A high percentage of the supply consumed in the U.S.
is produced by Canadian firms. As a result, the price is influenced
and often set by these firms. All but a very small percentage of sales
are on a contract basis. There is extensive evidence that price
leadership is a prevalent practice although no one firm consistently
takes the lead and not all firms follow the price changes. The accep-
tance of this competition-limiting practice is due to the inelasticity
of demand, the high fixed costs involved in production, and the
existence of customers (large newspaper publishers) who could exert
pressure on suppliers through the media to reduce prices. Newsprint is
clearly an oligopolistic market with a small amount of product
differentiation.
Price history data for book and writing papers do not demonstrate
the price leadership pattern as often as that for Newsprint, although
it is probably practiced occasionally. The following observations lead
to this conclusion: (1) there is a greater frequency of price changes
in these sectors; (2) there are more buyers and sellers of these grades
than of Newsprint; and (3) prices have risen relatively higher for
these grades than for Newsprint.
Price behavior for Kraft Packaging Paper is similar to those for
the Book and Writing Papers. Although sufficient data do not exist to
allow a definitive conclusion, the market structures of packaging, book
and writing grades appear to resemble differentiated oligopolies since
product differentiation is important to each and the sellers are large
relative to their markets.
Paperboard: In Kraft Linerboard most manufacturers are large and
price changes are relatively infrequent. Price leadership may exist in
this segment since sellers are sufficiently large that they are pro-
bably aware of their effects on competitors' activities.
Recycled Foldingboard price changes over the last 20 years have
been more frequent than those of linerboard and have risen faster.
These mills use wastepaper, tend to be smaller in size and more numerous.
This segment nay more closely approximate the competitive model and
probably does not practice price leadership.
5 *-12
-------
Individual Sector Assessments: Table 5-2 summarizes important
aspects of the market structure of each product sector, including the
number of firms, degree of concentration and recent behavior of prices
and costs. These should indicate the extent to which different sectors
are likely to show oligopolistic behavior. If such behavior is likely,
the predictions of the competitive model about price behavior should be
modified in light of other information about the sector.
The first and second columns of Table 5-2 list the number of firms
and the share of capacity of the largest five firms, respectively, for
each of the sectors. This information comes from the product profiles
in Volume 2. A five-firm share greater than 50 percent implies a
moderate degree of concentration and a share greater than 80 percent
implies a high degree of concentration. The more competitive sectors
would tend to have more firms and have a lower degree of concentration.
Uncoated Freesheet and Special Industrial Papers, for instance, appear
to be on the competitive side while Tissue and Molded Pulp products
seem to be more oligopolistic. Comparisons between the "number of
firms" figures are less clear, however, due to their dependence on the
definitions of product sectors. Certain product sectors contain a much
more heterogeneous collection of grades than others. Special Industrial
Papers, Tissue, Thin Papers, All Other Paper, and All Other Board have
significant product differentiation and hence market segmentation. A
proper measure of concentration would include the market segment and
any close substitutes. However, this information was not available, so
the overall numbers must be taken with the appropriate reservations
about the characteristics of each product sector.
The next three columns of Table 5-2 show for the period 1972 to
1978 the percentage increase in product price and in production costs
in the sector as well as the frequency of price changes during that
period. Observations are available for only certain product sectors.
A comparison between the cost and price gains of the sectors shows
some, such as Unbleached Kraft Papers and Thin Papers, whose costs in-
creased significantly more than their prices, and others such as Un-
coated Groundwood and Tissue whose prices rose more than their costs.
Still others like Coated Printing Papers experienced equivalent price
and cost increases. Relatively high price rises are an indication that
the sector may be more competitive; the frequency of price changes is
another measure of competitiveness. Oligopolistic sectors' prices tend
to remain constant or rigid for long periods. The product sector data
displayed in Table 5-2 are inconclusive concerning the two indicators
just discussed. Some sectors with a relatively new number of price
changes such as Uncoated Groundwood or Tissue have quite a high rate of
price gain during the period considered. Unbleached Kraft Linerboard
has a relatively high number of price changes but somewhat lower level
5-13
-------
TABLE 5-2. MARKET STRUCTURE AND PRICE BEHAVIOR BY PRODUCT SECTOR
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec- Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid B1. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
All Other Paper
No. of
Firms
33
14
8
47
16
32
51
43
12
48
14
42
63
Percent
share of
capacity of
top 5 firms
Percent
price
gain
1972-78 —
Number
quarterly
price
changes
Percent
product
cost
chanae
48
52
n.a.
46
51
46
38
69
n.a.
52
n.a.
66
n.a.
45
80
95
75
91
100
87
126
66
64
74
119
76
23
18
19
21
23
19
118
100
100
90
8C
100
90
100
85
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 50
Bl. Kraft Liner. 2
Bl. Kraft Folding 40
Semi-Chem. Corr. 46
Recycled Liner 87
Recycled Corr. 87
Recycled Folding 87
Constr. Paper & Bd. 34
Molded Pulp 14
Solid Bl. Board 17
All Other Board 87
33
60
30
29
29
29
59
70+
29
75
45
71
70
73
60
25
28
pulP
Dissolving
Market
11
33
82
32
84
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
5-14
-------
of price increase. The magnitude of price changes must be evaluated
in relation to relative productivity increases, and information about
this is difficult to obtain.
5^-15
-------
Appendix 5-A
Derivation of Price Impact Formula
Given equations for demand and supply in a competitive market, the
problem is to derive the price increase that results from a simple
vertical shift of the supply curve due to treatment costs. As long as
the cost increase is not too large, this assumption about the change in
costs is an adequate approximation of any change in the supply curve due
to adding treatment costs. This is because price is affected only by
the shape of the supply curve in the neighborhood of the intersection
of the demand and supply curves.
Let the supply curve take the form
MC = f(Q) + c (5A-1)
where MC is marginal cost, Q is output, and c the shift term. This
form is not restrictive because c could be zero. If we substitute in
the competitive relationship
P = MC, (5A-2)
where P is price, and solve for output Q in equation (5A-1), we get
Q = S(P-c) (5A-3)
where S is the inverse of f, i.e. S = f-^-.
Suppose the demand curve takes the general form
Q = D(P). (5A-4)
Assuming demand equals supply, we have
D(P) = S(P -c) (5A-5)
Totally differentiating (5A-5) yields
D' dP = S' dp - S' dc (5A-6)
where an apostrophe denotes the first derivative, e.g. D' = dD/dP.
5-16
-------
Recombining terms yields
dP_ S1
dc ~ S'-D' (5A-7)
dP/dc measures the equilibrium effect of the vertical shift c on price.
It also equals the percent change in price due to a one percent change
in marginal cost, (dP/P)/(dMC/MC) because dMC = dc (the change in the
shift factor equals the change in marginal cost) and price equals
marginal cost by assumption. Multiplying the right side of (5A-7) by
(P/Q)/(P/Q) yields the relation in the text
dp _ n
dc ri-e (5A-8)
where
n = S' P and
Q
e 2 D* P
Q-
Equation (5A-8) implies that costs are passed through completely only
if supply is totally elastic (n=0°) or demand is completely inelastic
(Ł=0)~.
5-17
-------
Section 6
Effluent Control Guidelines, Costs and
Other Regulatory Costs
Introduction
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(PL 92-500), later amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217),
requires that EPA revise and promulgate effluent limitations and stan-
dards for all industrial point sources of water pollution. As of
January 1977, pursuant to Section 304(b) of the Clean Water Act, EPA had
promulgated final regulations providing for effluent limitations re-
presenting the degree of effluent reduction attainable by the appli-
cation of Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT),
for all subcategories, except Wastepaper Molded Products, Nonintegrated
Lightweight Paper, Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven Paper, and Non-
integrated Paperboard. These limitations were to be achieved by mills
in the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry not later than July 1, 1977,
according to Section 301(b) of the Clean Water Act. Subsequently, in
September 1978, the BPT regulations for the Dissolving Sulfite Pulp sub-
category for acetate grade pulp were remanded by the court. In response
to this remand, the Agency proposed BPT regulations for acetate grade
pulp production in the Dissolving Sulfite Pulp subcategory on March 12,
1980.
The BPT-based regulations establish daily maximum and maximum 30
day average limitations for five-day biochemical oxygen demand (B0D5),*
total suspended solids (TSS), pH, and zinc (for groundwood subcategories
only) per ton of product. These effluent limitations were to be met by
mills using end-of-pipe treatment techniques, process and procedural
innovations, and operating methods. In-plant control technologies for
BPT as defined by EPA include strict management control over water use
practices, minimization of water intake through reuse and recirculation
of wastewater. End-of-pipe treatment technologies to meet BPT limi-
tations include preliminary screening, primary sedimentation with a
mechanical clarifier, biological treatment involving aerated stabili-
zation basins or activated sludge treatment systems for all subcategories
except Nonintegrated Tissue Paper, where the technologies include pre-
liminary screening and primary sedimentation. For Groundwood sub-
categories, lime addition also is included.
*B0D5 is defined as the quantity of dissolved oxygen used in the
biochemical oxidation by microorganisms of organic matter in a five
day period.
6-1
-------
The pollution control options analyzed are described below. In
developing the effluent limitations options and in assessing their costs
to the industry, it was assumed that BPT technology had been installed
by all mills and that BPT discharge limitations have been attained.*
Option Descriptions**
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
Effluent Limitations
The recommended technology for BPT for Wastepaper Molded Products
has been identified as biological treatment, which is the technology
upon which BPT limitations are based for all other subcategories of the
Secondary Fiber segment of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry.
It has been determined that wastewater discharges from the Nonin-
tegrated Lightweight Paper, Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven Paper,
and the Nonintegrated Paperboard subcategories are similar in nature to
discharges from the Nonintegrated Tissue Paper subcategory. For these
three subcategories, the recommended technology for BPT has been identi-
fied as primary clarification, which is the technology or. which BPT
limitations are based for the Nonintegrated Tissue Paper subcategory.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) Effluent
Limitations
The factors considered in establishing the BAT level of control
include environmental considerations such as air pollution, energy con-
sumption, and solid waste generation; the costs of applying the control
technology; the age of process equipment and facilities; the process
employed; process changes; and the engineering aspects of applying
various types of control techniques.
*In the case of Wastepaper Molded Products, none of the mills are
meeting the BPT limitations, and investments will be necessary. Due to
the nature of the Molded Pulp Products market and our inability to ob-
tain price information for this product sector, it was not feasible to
develop a demand function. Therefore, the impact on production costs
of implementing each option was estimated and are presented in Section 7.
The impact of the options on closure of mills in this product sector
also was analyzed. (See Section 8.)
**For a more detailed description of these options, see the Develop-
ment Document for Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines, New Source
Performance Standards, and Pretreatment Standards for the Pulp, Paper,
and Paperboard and the Builders' Paper and Board Mill Point Source
Categories, prepared for EPA by E. C. Jordan Co., Inc.
6-2
*
-------
The primary determinant of BAT is effluent reduction capability
using economically achievable technology. As a result of the Clean
Water Act of 1977, the achievement of BAT has become the national means
of controlling the discharge of toxic pollutants. Four regulated toxic
pollutants are discharged from mills in the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Industry. These pollutants are chloroform, trichlorophenol, penta-
chlorophenol, and zinc. The proper application and operation of the
technologies that formed the basis of BPT effluent limitations were
found to control chloroform and zinc. Chemical substitution for slimi-
cides and biocides containing trichlorophenol and pentachlorophenol
was selected for control of these pollutants to trace levels without
expensive end-of-pipe treatment.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT) Effluent
Limitations
The 1977 amendments to the Clean Water Act established BCT for dis-
charges of conventional pollutants from existing industrial point
sources. Conventional pollutants are defined by the Act as B0D5, TSS,
fecal coliform, and pH, plus any additional pollutants defined by the
Administrator as "conventional" (oil and grease).
BCT is not an additional limitation, but replaces BAT for the con-
trol of conventional pollutants. BCT requires that limitations for con-
ventional pollutants be assessed in light of a "cost-reasonableness"
test, which involves a comparison of the cost and level of reduction of
conventional pollutants from the discharge of publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs) to the cost and level of reduction of such pollutants from
a class or category of industrial sources.
Four different BCT options were analyzed, in addition to the option
EPA is proposing. Three of these effluent control options were based on
the development of model mills for each subcategory. The technical con-
tractor developed the model mills using data requested from the industry
on mill processes, products, production process controls, raw waste load,
etc. A model mill represents the typical operation of mills within the
subcategory and is used to estimate the cost of implementing selected
production process controls and effluent treatment technologies. Up to
three mill sizes were selected for each subcategory depending on actual
mill size variations. The fourth effluent control option was based on
the effluent quality characteristics of the best performing mills in
each subcategory, those with exemplary treatment systems.
Alternative Option 1. The effluent limitations are based on the
technology upon which BPT is based for each subcategory plus additional
in-plant production process controls. No additional end-of-pipe
6^3
-------
technology beyond BPT is contemplated in this option. Effluent limi-
tations are proposed for each subcategory of the industry and are based
on specific controls that include segregation of non-contact cooling
water, use of dry barking operations, collection of spills and leaks for
reprocessing, increased efficiency of pulp washing, collection and reuse
of paper machine spills, improvement in save all operation, and
effluent recycle/reuse. These controls primarily achieve reductions in
water use, wastewater discharge, and B0D5 raw waste loadings. Imple-
mentation of process controls will improve performance of existing
primary and secondary biological treatment systems due to the reductions
of raw waste loadings. Evaluation of Alternative Option 1 by the BCT
cost-reasonableness test shows that the Nonintegrated Paperboard sub-
category fails the test. For this subcategory, BCT is equal to BPT.
Alternative Option 2. The effluent limitations are based on the
addition of chemically assisted clarification of BPT final effluents
for all integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and for the Non-
integrated Fine Papers subcategory (for these subcategories BPT is based
on biological treatment). It is assumed that additional solids-contact
clarifiers will be added using alum as a coagulant and polymer as a
flocculant aid. For the remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for
which primary treatment was the basis of BPT, effluent limitations are
based on the addition of biological treatment. Evaluation of Alterna-
tive Option 2 by the BCT cost-reasonableness test shows that the Paper-
board from Wastepaper, Tissue from Wastepaper, Wastepaper Molded
Products, Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt, Nonintegrated Tissue Papers,
Nonintegrated Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven
Papers, and Nonintegrated Paperboard subcategories fail this test. For
these subcategories the less stringent Alternative Option 1 forms the
basis for BCT if it passes the test.
Alternative Option 3. The effluent limitations are based on Alter-
native Option 1 plus the addition of chemically assisted clarification
for all integrated and secondary fiber subcategories and for the Non-
integrated Fine Papers subcategory (for these subcategories BPT is based
on biological treatment). It is assumed that additional solids-contact
clarifiers will be added using alum as a coagulant and polymer as a
flocculant aid. For the remaining nonintegrated subcategories, for
which primary treatment was the basis of BPT, effluent limitations are
based on the application of Alternative Option 1 plus the addition of
biological treatment. Evaluation of Alternative Option 3 by the BCT
cost-reasonableness test shows that the Tissue from Wastepaper,
Wastepaper Molded Products, Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt, Nonin-
tegrated Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated
Filter and Nonwoven Papers, and Nonintegrated Paperboard subcategories
fail this test. For these subcategories the less-stringent Alternative
Options 1 or 2 form the basis for BCT if they pass the BCT cost-
reasonableness test.
6-4
-------
Alternative Option 4. The effluent limitations are based on the
levels attained by best performing mills in the respective subcategories
Best mill performance for a subcategory is generally the average at all
mills where BPT effluent limitations are attained. The technologies
for achieving Alternative Option 4 effluent limitations vary depending
on the type of treatment systems that are employed at mills in each sub-
category. Evaluation of Alternative Option 4 by the BCT cost-reason-
ableness test shows that the Nonintegrated Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated
Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven Papers, and Non-
Integrated Paperboard subcategories fail this test. For these sub-
categories, the less stringent Option 1 forms the basis for BCT if it
passes the test.
Proposed Regulation. The effluent limitations EPA has proposed are
based on the Alternative Option 4 effluent limitations for all sub-
categories for which the BCT cost-reasonableness test passes. In those
subcategories where the cost-reasonableness test fails, Nonintegrated
Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated Lightweight Papers, Nonintegrated Filter
and Nonwoven Papers, and Nonintegrated Paperboard, the less stringent
Alternative Option 1 forms the basis of BCT if it passes the cost-
reasonableness test. The only exceptions are the Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp and the Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt subcategories for which
BCT is established at the BPT level because of the projected severe
economic impact. (See Section 7.)
Treatment systems commonly employed at mills in the integrated
segment, Nonintegrated Fine Papers, and Deink subcategories in which
BPT was based on biological treatment include aerated stabilization
basins, activated sludge systems, and oxidation ponds. It is assumed
that aerated stabilization basin treatment systems will be upgraded
through the addition of spill prevention and control systems, by in-
creasing aeration capacity, and by providing additional settling
capacity. For the Nonintegrated Fine Papers subcategory, it is assumed
that equalization will also be provided. Conversion to the extended
aeration activated sludge process was considered to be the probable
method of upgrading the performance of aerated stabilization basins
located in colder climates. It is assumed that activated sludge
systems will be upgraded through the addition of spill prevention and
control systems, by providing equalization, by increasing the capacity
of aeration basins and by providing for operation in the contact stabili
zation mode, and by increasing the size of clarification and sludge
handling equipment. It is assumed that oxidation ponds will be upgraded
through the addition of rapid sand filtration to remove algae that can
contribute to the discharge of large levels of suspended solids.
6^5
-------
At mills in the nonintegrated subcategories in which BPT is based
on primary treatment, it is assumed that existing primary treatment
systems will be supplemented by additional in-plant production process
controls. No additional end-of-pipe technology beyond BPT is con-
templated.
At best performing mills in the remaining subcategories CPaperboard
from Wastepaper, Tissue from Wastepaper, Wastepaper Molded Products,
and Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt), extensive use also is made of
production process controls to reduce wastewater discharge. Therefore,
Alternative Option 4 for these subcategories is based on the application
of the same technology as discussed in Alternative Option 1: the tech-
nology on which BPT is based plus the application of additional produc-
tion process controls.
Table 6-1 presents a summary of the total capital cost and the total
annual cost to the industry. Appendix 6-A presents the cost effective-
ness of each option in terms of the BCT Cost Test.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The basis for new source performance standards (NSPS) is the best
available demonstrated technology, including in-plant controls and end-
Df-pipe treatment technologies, that reduce pollution to the maximum
feasible. The NSPS effluent limitations for control of toxic and con-
ventional pollutants are based on the application of production process
controls to reduce wastewater discharge and raw waste loadings and
end-of-pipe treatment in the form of biological treatment for all sub-
categories except Nonintegrated Tissue Papers, Nonintegrated Lightweight
Papers, Nonintegrated Filter and Nonwoven Papers, and Nonintegrated
Paperboard, where end-of-pipe treatment is in the form of primary clari-
fication. This option includes both production process controls that
form the basis of BPT and BCT Alternative Option 1 in combination with
end-of-pipe treatment with a design basis identifcal to BCT Alternative
Option 4. This option ensures substantial reductions in the discharge
of the toxic pollutant chloroform from subcategories where pulp is
bleached with chlorine or chlorine-containing compounds. In addition,
effluent limitations are based on chemical substitutions to signifi-
cantly reduce the amounts of zinc, trichlorop'nenol and pentachlorophenol
discharged.
This option was not analyzed separately. Instead, the economic
analysis of each of the five BCT options described above assumed that a
specific portion of the capacity expansion would be considered as new
sources, and would meet the NSPS. The costs assigned to these capacity
expansions were those developed by the technical contractor to meet NSPS.
6-6
-------
Table 6-1. Summary of Option Costs
Cost to Industryt
(million $)
BPT
Regulations
Molded Pulp
Products**
Capital
Annual
BCT - Total Industry
Alternative Option 1
Alternative Option 2
Alternative Option 3
Alternative Option 4
Proposed Regulation
906.2
1730.6
2290.4
1450.1
1359.1
281.0
770.0
918.8
460.5
430.2
Source: Meta System estimates. See Section 7 for details.
+For capacity forecast to exist at end of 1983.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
**For three subcategories (Nonintegrated Lightweight, Nonintegrated
Filter and Nonwoven, and Nonintegrated Paperboard) BPT has no additional
cost since technologies are already in place.
6-7
-------
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
Pretreatment standards for existing sources are designed to prevent
the discharge of pollutants that pass through, interfere with, or are
otherwise incompatible with the operation of publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs). The Clean Water Act of 1977 adds a new dimension by
requiring pretreatment for pollutants, such as heavy metals, that pass
through POTWs in amounts that would violate direct discharger effluent
limitations or limit POTWs' sludge management alternatives, including
the beneficial use of sludges on agricultural lands. To accomplish this,
the toxic pollutants trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol, and zinc are
controlled through chemical substitution, as described in the option
above. Chloroform is effectively controlled through the application of
biological treatment, the type of treatment most commonly used at POTWs.
Therefore, this option does not include any specific control technology
for the removal of chloroform. Since the cost of the PSES is minimal,
it was not included in the economic analysis.
Pretreatment Standards for Mew Sources (PSNS)
New indirect dischargers, like new direct dischargers, have the
opportunity to incorporate the best available demonstrated technologies
including process changes, in-plant control measures, and end-of-pipe
treatment, and to use plant site selection to ensure adequate treatment
system installation. The pretreatment option considered for new dis-
chargers to POTWs is the same as for PSES.
Past Expenditures on Environmental Pollution Control
Expenditures for pollution control plant and equipment by the Pulp,
Paper and Paperboard Industry over the last decade are shown in Figure
6-1. Total environmental- control capital investment.peaked in 1975 at
over 600 million dollars, declined rapidly in the next five years and is
expected to remain at this level in 1980 according to the U.S. Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA). Also depicted in Figure 6-1 is a breakdown
of expenditures by type of pollution. Investment in solid waste dis-
posal facilities has remained only a small part of the total, rising to
near fifteen percent in the last couple of years. Air pollution control
capital expenditures peaked in 1975 at about 2 35 million dollars, de-
clined through 1977 and have remained fairly constant since. Investment
in water pollution abatement rose rapidly through 1972, declined
slightly and then continued to increase until 1975 when it reached about
275 million dollars, remained near that level through 1977 and declined
thereafter.
6-8
-------
FIGURE 6-1. Pollution Abatement Capital Expenditures
Paper and Allied Products Inventory
MILLIONS
600
500
400
TOTAL
300
200
AIR
WATER
SOLID
RESIDUALS
100
YEAR
1972
1976
1974
1978
1980
PLANNED
-------
Sources for Figure 6-1: 1970-72: National Council of the Paper Industry
for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. as reported in Pulp and Paper North
America/Profile, June 30, 1979, p. 23. 1973-78: U.S. Bureau of the
Census, Current Industrial Reports, Pollution Abatement Cost and Expen-
diture , 1977 and Advance Report 1978. 1979-80: U.S. Bureau of Economic
Analysis, Survey of Current Business, June 1980.
6*-10
-------
The level of pollution control capital expenditures by industry
are affected by two factors. The first is the level of investment in
productive capital, as new plant and equipment must meet pollution
control requirements. The second factor is deadlines for compliance with
regulations promulgated under environmental legislation such as the Clear
Air Act or the Clean Water Act. The impact of such deadlines is illus-
trated in Figure 6-1 by the reduction of air pollution control expendi-
tures after 1975 when compliance was required with national primary
ambient air quality standards and by the similar reduction in water
pollution abatement investment after 1977 when best practicable control
technology (BPT) was to be in place. Industry has not yet encountered
such deadlines concerning solid waste disposal.
The effects of these deadlines are more sharply outlined in Figure
6-2 which shows pollution control investment as a percent of total
capital investment. Use of this ratio eliminates the first factor
mentioned above affecting pollution control investment, that which
generally accompanies new productive investment. Significant drops in
expenditures are shown for air pollution control after 1975 and for
water pollution control after 1977. The proportion of investment allo-
cated to pollution control of all types reached a high point near 25
percent in 1972 and remained quite high through 1975 after which it de-
creased rapidly to near five percent, where it is at present. The high
proportions of investment allocated to water pollution control and cor-
respondingly to total environmental control in 1971 and 1972 is partly
due to the fact that total investment decreased by 24 percent in 1971
and increased only ten percent in 1972, probably due to the price
controls in effect at that time.
The proportion of total capital invested in pollution control by
the paper industry is compared to other industries with high pollution
control investments and with all manufacturing industries in Figure 6-3.
Paper industry pollution control investment was a higher proportion of
total investment than that of other industries except petroleum from
197 3 through 1975. Thereafter this ratio decreased more rapidly than
that of other industries so that by 1978 it was close to the average for
all manufacturing industries and remained near that level through
planned 1980 investments. Other industries, such as the chemical in-
dustry, were closer to the average throughout the period shown, and
spent proportionately less of their capital investment on pollution
control. The level of capital expenditures assigned to pollution control
has been decreasing over time for all manufacturing industries.
Figure 6-4 depicts the percentage of new capital expenditures in-
vested in pollution abatement over time along with other time series
6-11
-------
FIGURE 6-2. Pollution Abatement Capital Expenditures as a Percentage
of Total New Capital Expenditures, Paper and Allied
Products Inventory
PERCEN
25
20
TOTAL
AIR
r WATER
1 RESIDUALS
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980 YEAR
PLANNED
Source: 1970-72 : National Council of the Paper Industry for Air arid
Stream Improvement, Inc. as reported in Pulp and Paper, North America/
Profile, June 30, 1979, p. 23. 1973-77: U.S. Bureau of the Census,
Current Industrial Reports, Pollution Abatement Cost and Expenditures,
1977 and 1977 Census of Manufacturers Preliminary Statistics. 1978-80:
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Survey of Current Business, June 1980.
6-12
-------
FIGURE 6-3. Pollution Abatement Capital Expenditures as a Percentage
of Total New Capital Expenditures for Selected Industries
PERCENT
3ol—
PETROLEUM
20
^PRIMARY
\METALS
15 —
10
.. CHEMICALS
ALL manufacturing
YEAR
1974
1976
1978
1980
PLANNED
Source: 1973-77: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Industrial Reports,
Pollution Abatement Cost and Expenditures, 1977 and 1977 Census of Manu-
factures, Preliminary Statistics; 1978-80: U.S. Bureau of Economic
Analysis, Survey of Current Business, June 1980.
6-^13
-------
FIGURE 6-4. Comparison of Investment allocated to Pollution Control
With Other Time Series Data for the Paper And Allied Products Industry
PERCENT
OPERATING
RATES
90
80
75
POLLUTION ABATEMENT CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (PACE)
TO TOTAL NEW CAPITAL EXPENDITURES iTNCE)
20
NET PROFIT AFTER TAX
TO NET WORTH
V
NET SALES TO TNCE
CAPACITY CHANGE FROM PRIOR
YEAR
LjttCE TO NET SALES
1970
1972
1974
1976
1980 YEAR
1978
6-14
-------
Sources for Figure 6-4: (1)
Operating Rates: Pulp and Paper, North
American/Profile, June 30, 1979, p. 21;
(2) PACE to TCNE: 1970-1971: National
Council of the Paper Industry for Air and
Stream Improvement, Inc. as reported in
Pulp and Paper, June 30, 1979, p. 23;
1972: 6th Annual McGraw-Hill Survey,
Pollution Control Expenditures, McGraw-
Hill Publications, May 18, 1973; 1973-
1977: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current
Industrial Reports, Pollution Abatement
Cost and Expenditures, 1977 and 1977
Census of Manufacturers Preliminary Sta-
tistics; 1978-1979: U.S. Breau of Eco-
nomic Analysis, Survey of Current
Business, June 1980;
(3) Net sales to TNCE and Net Profit After
Tax to Net Worth; American Paper Insti-
tute (API), Statistics of Paper and Paper-
board , October, 1979, pp. 29 and 39, and
personal communication with API Statistics
Department, August, 1980;
(4) Capacity Change From Prior Year: API,
Capacity Survey, 1979;
(5) PACE to Net Sales: see second reference
above for PACE and third reference for
Net Sales.
6-15
-------
data for the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industry. Profitability of the
industry was highest in 1974 (17 percent), after price controls were
lifted, decreased in 1975 during the recession, remained near twelve
percent until 1979 when it again increased to 16 percent. It is in-
teresting to note that the first increase took place during a time of
proportionately high pollution control investment and that the ratio re-
mained constant during a period of decreasing pollution control expendi-
tures. Profitability is affected by operating rates which reflect the
level of demand and the ability of producers to pass along cost in-
creases in terms of higher prices. Nineteen seventy five was a year of
very low operating rates, 79 percent, as shown in Figure 6-4. Capacity
changes from year to year are related to new plant and equipment in-
vestment and follow the same general pattern as the profitability ratio.
Return on productive investment is shown in Figure 6-4 as the ratio
of net sales to total capital expenditures. This indicator is highest
at about 17 percent in 1971 and 1972, decreases to a low near 10 per-
cent in 1975, increases again gradually through 1978 and decreases in
1979. As might be expected, the ratio of pollution abatement expendi-
tures to net sales tends to move in the opposite direction although
much smaller in magnitude as the return on productive investment, with
the exception of the years 1971, 1973, and 1979.
In addition to pollution abatement controls, another federal source
of required investment is the Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA). Figure 6-5 presents paper industry capital expenditures for
compliance with OSHA regulations. These expenditures have remained
around fifty or sixty million dollars annually since 1972, and are ex-
pected to continue at this level. Paper industry expenditures were
significantly below those of the chemical and petroleum industries in
1979 and 1S80. Data for other years for these industries were not
available.
OSHA compliance capital investment has equaled only about one to
two percent of total new capital expenditures in each year since the
early 1970s. (See Table 6-2}. Adding these OSHA capital expenditures
to the total environmental capital expenditures presented above would
increase them by one to two percent, and the general conclusions remain
the same. Appendix 6-B summarizes the pollution abatement and OSHA
compliance costs for 1970 through 1980.
The 308 Survey also reported capital and operating expenditures on
pollution control by pulp, paper and paperboard mills between 1971 and
1978. Table 6-3 compares the expenditure levels as reported in the
308 Survey with those discussed above. Total capital expenditures as
6-*16
-------
FIGURE 6-5. Investment in Employee Safety and Health.
Paper and Other Industries
$
MILLION
2500
2400
2300
2200
2100
2000
1900
1800
1700
*
400
300
200
100
1972
N
/
\
\
\
\
ALL
MANUFACTURING
CHEMICALS
/ V PETROLEUM
PAPER
1976
1978
1980
1982 1984
YEAR
Source: McGraw-Hill Publications Co., Annual Survey of Investment in Employee
Safety ar.d Health, 1973 through 1980.
6-17
-------
TABLE 6-2. OSHA EXPENDITURES AS A PERCENTAGE
OF TOTAL NEW CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (TNCE)
Year
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
PI. 1980
PI. 1983
TNCE
($ million)
1380
1860
2580
2950
3270
3360
3460
4880
7060
6185
OSHA Capital
Expenditures
($ million)
50
58
44
65
69
40
77
60
66
60
OSHA as
Percentage
of TNCE
3.6
3.1
1.7
2.2
2.1
1.2
2.2
1.2
0.9
1.0
Source: McGraw-Hill Publications Co., Annual Survey of Investment in
Employee Safety and Health, 1973-1980.
6-18
-------
TABLE 6-3. COMPARISON OF REPORTED ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL COSTS FOR PULP,
3
PAPER AND PAPERBOARD MILLS ($x!0 )
Total Capital
1971-78*
Air
Pollution
Water
Pollution
1,529,000 1,537,000
Solid
Residuals
137,000
OSHA
Compliance
396,000
All
Other
Total
3,599,000
-------
reported in the 308 Survey are only 57 percent of those publicly re-
ported. However, water pollution control capital expenditures are in
closer agreement, with the 308 Survey reporting about 89 percent of
that publicly reported. Air pollution control expenditures are the
least in agreement.
Past pollution control expenditures as reported in the 308 Survey
were aggregated by subcategory. The more meaningful cost data are
those normalized by the size of the mill, i.e., costs per ton of
capacity. Among those subcategories which have had the highest per
unit costs are Papergrade Sulfite, Nonintegrated Lightweight, Fine
Bleached Kraft and Soda, and Dissolving Kraft.
Future Expenditures on Environmental Pollution Controls
For the future, it is difficult to predict the level of capital ex-
penditures that will be allocated by the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Industry to environmental control other than for water pollution for
which we have available detailed cost estimates. From past history it
appears that total expenditures have been decreasing and are leveling
off at about five percent of total new capital investment. However,
new requirements are likely to increase expenditures on pollution
control, at least in the short-run. As discussed above, industry
allocates a higher proportion of its capital investment to pollution
control as opposed to productive facilities when it is required to meet
certain standards or to employ certain technology. After these dead-
lines are passed (and presumably the requirements are met) pollution
abatement expenditures decrease to a level consistent with the level of
investment in new plant and equipment. Although the setting of dead-
lines which will require increased capital investment by the pulp and
paper industry are anticipated in the near future, good data concerning
the costs involved are not available. Therefore, the economic analysis
assumes that pollution control costs, other than water pollution, will
remain at their 1978 levels. Since this underestimates the total cost
of pollution control to the pul? and paper industry, the anticipated
federal regulations are discussed below.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was passed in
1976 to improve the management of solid wastes in order to protect
human health and the environment and to promote resource recovery and
conservation. These objectives are to be achieved through state pro-
grams authorized by EPA which regulate the management of hazardous
waste from generation through approved disposal. Land disposal of
other solid wastes are also to be regulated under state programs which
meet minimum federal requirements. Hazardous waste regulations were
promulgated on May 19, 1980, which define types of wastes covered and
6-20
-------
provide guidelines for management and disposal. Implementation will
begin in 1981 and it may be five or more years before all sites have
approved permits. Compliance costs to the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard
Industry are not known at this time.
The purpose of the 1970 Clear Air Act is to protect the public
health and welfare from harmful effects of air pollution. To carry on
this purpose EPA has developed national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) and the states are adopting State Implementation Plans (SIP) to
meet these standards. For areas of states which already meet the
national standards, states must develop prevention of significant de-
terioration (PSD) plans. EPA also must produce new source performance
standards (NSPS) and national emission standards for hazardous air
pollution from stationary sources (NESHAPS).
The 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act served to delay its imple-
mentation. In addition, there have been delays in approval of state
SIPs and the attainment of ambient air standards. The states are re-
vising their SIPs and most have not met the recent target dates for
approval. Among the states, there is wide variation in the degree to
which air quality controls have been implemented so far. The level of
capital investment which has been expended by pulp and paper mills and
that which is required to be spent in the future depends on the states
in which the mills are located. A firm with mills in the states with-
out controls may have a long way to go with its air emissions control
investment compared to other companies which have substantially com-
pleted control programs because of their location in states with
stricter regulations.
During 1980 and 1981 EPA will review its NAAQS for carbon monoxide,
nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and particulates. Current attainment
targets are 1982 for particulates, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide
and 1987 for ozone and carbon monoxide. New legislation may cause de-
lays of one or more years in the deadlines and in state plan approval.
EPA also periodically updates its NSPS which apply to new sources and
to existing sources which are modified after approval of the regu-
lations. Updates will take place in 1980, 1981 and 1982. EPA will
develop guidelines for including visibility protection in SIPs in 1980
and for PSD plans in 1982. Also in 1980 EPA will finalize a regu-
lation which establishes policy and procedures for dealing with air-
borne carcinogens under its NESHAPS program. In the future EPA will
develop generic standards for volatile organic chemical carcinogens as
they are listed as hazardous air pollutants. Dates for these regu-
lations are not available. Many of the new regulations, updates and
reviews of existing standards mentioned above have impacts on the Pulp,
Paper and Paperboard Industry and its future capital expenditures on
air pollution controls. Future costs, however, are not available.
6-21
-------
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 was passed to protect
workers in their working environment. The Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) within the U.S. Department of Labor imple-
ments this legislation by promulgating and enforcing workplace safety
and health regulations. In March 1977, a new direction was taken in
the administration of the act toward prevention of occupational disease
by concentrating effort on high-risk industries. Standards have been
set by OSHA for worker exposure to several substances such as benzene,
lead, cotton dust and chlorine, a few of which affect the Pulp, Paper
and Paperboard Industry. Several cases have been brought to court by
industry groups, such as the American Petroleum Institute, challenging
the rulings. OSHA has developed a generic carcinogen policy which
classifies chemicals into four categories depending on evidence of
carcinogenicity. Classification into the first two categories would
trigger regulatory action.*
As to future regulation affecting the pulp and paper industry, OSHA
may promulgate a noise standard in 1980 which has been pending since
1975.** This could require the institution of engineering controls by
the industry. In addition, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) is preparing a criteria document to assess
the degree of hazard caused by wood dust in the working environment.
NIOSH conducts many of these assessments and it is unlikely that this
study will lead to the promulgation of a standard.t OSHA's first
candidate list of chemicals being considered for regulation under its
carcinogen policy recommends ten or twenty substances for priority
regulation. It does not include any chemicals used by the Pulp, Paper
and Paperboard Industry. It thus appears that probably one but not
many new OSHA regulations will be promulgated over the next several
years which will require additional capital investment of an unknown
amount by this industry.
*Category I includes confirmed carcinogens based on human data, or
based on tests in two mammalian species or in one species if the tests
have been replicated. Category II includes substances whose carcino-
genicity has been reported but for which the evidence is only sugges-
tive or is positive in only one species and not yet replicated.
~~Personal communication with Mr. Richard Klinzing, of the American
Paper Institute, August 1980.
¦(¦personal conversation with Dr. John Festa, of the American Paper
Institute, August 1980.
6-22
-------
User Charges
The 308 Survey included user charge and flow data for indirect dis-
chargers. The data for each subcategory was disaggregated by mill size
and by region- Since many subcategories had no mills or only one mill
in certain size or regional breakdowns, very little could be concluded.
However, two general observations can be made. Integrated subcategories
have the fewest indirect dischargers. Of the five regions, the North-
west has the fewest indirect dischargers.
6-23
-------
Appendix 6-A. Summary of the BCT Test Ratios
One criteria used to compare options is the BCT Test, or cost
effectiveness ratio. The BCT Test compares the cost for industry to
remove a pound of conventional pollutants to the cost incurred by a
publicly owned treatment works (POTW). For industry, a ratio is calcu-
lated representing the annual incremental cost to remove a pound of
conventional pollutants beyond BPT in terms of dollars per pound. For
an option to be meet the BCT Test, this industry ratio must be less
than the POTO cost effectiveness ratio. The following tables present,
for each option, the ratio in dollars per pound of pollutant removed
for each subcategory in terms of 1978 capacity and pollutant levels.
6-24
-------
TABLE 6A-1. BCT ANALYSIS - PROPOSED REGULATION
Subcategory
Subcategory
Average $/lb
Range
Option
Selected
Dissolving Kraft
0.31
0.29
-
0.35
4
Market Bleached Kraft
0.48
C. 37
-
0.81
4
BCT Bleached Kraft
0.44
0. 31
-
0.84
4
Alkaline Fine
0.46
0. 32
-
0.73
4
Unbleached Kraft
0.67
0.44
-
2.09
4
Semi-Chemical
1.02
0.56
-
1.84
4
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical
0.98
0.68
-
2.10
4
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
_*
-
BPT
Papergraae Sulfite
0.42
0.24
-
CO
4
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical
0.62
0.60
-
0.62
4
Groundwood-CMN Paper
0.65
0.54
-
1.57
4
Groundwood-Fir.e Paper
0. 75
0.62
-
1.59
4
Deink
0.68
0.43
-
1.75
4
Tissue from Wastewater
0.47
0.23
-
1.52
4
Paperboarc from Wastepaper
0.10
0.05
-
0.31
4
Wastepaper Molded Products
0.64
0.53
-
1.04
4
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
_*
-
BPT
Nor.integrated Fine
0.23
0.15
-
0. 79
4
Nor.integrated Tissue
0.44
0.35
-
0.86
1
Nonintegrated Lightweight
0.75
0.47
-
3.24
1
Nor.integrated Filter and Non-Woven
0. 78
0. 71
-
3.65
1
Nonintegrated Paperboard
_**
-
BPT
*BCT equals BPT ude to severe economic impact.
**BCT equals BPT as no regulatory option passes the BCT cost test.
6-25
-------
TABLE 6 A-2. BCT ANALYSIS - ALTERNATIVE OPTION 1
Subcategory
Subcategory Average $/lb Range
Dissolving Kraft 1.04 1.00 - 1.07
Market Bleached Kraft 0.29 0.25-0.40
BCT Bleached Kraft 0.31 0.28 - 0.45
Alkaline Fine 0.95 0.89 - 1.63
Unbleached Kraft 0.40 0.27 - 1.28
Semi-Chemical 0.65 0.43-0.80
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical 0.42 0.31-0.69
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 0.77 0.58 - 1.10
Papergrade Sulfite 0.20
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical 0.08 0.16-0.44
Groundwood-CMN Paper 0.44 0.07-0.11
Groundwood-Fine Paper 0.73 0.31-1.83
Deink 0.14 0.09 — 0.70
Tissue from Wastewater 0.51 0.17-1.94
Paperboard from Wastepaper 0.10 0.05 - 0.31
Wastepaper Molded Products 0.64 0.53-1.04
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 0.44 0.31 - 0.58
Nonintegrated Fine 0.37 0.20 - 2.10
Nonintegrated Tissue 0.44 0.35 - 0.86
Nonintegrated Lightweight 0.75 0.47-3.24
Nonintegrated Filter and Non-Woven 0.78 0.71-3.65
Nonintegrated Paperboard 3.95 2.89 -17.86
6-26
-------
TABLE 6A-3. BCT ANALYSIS - ALTERNATIVE OPTION 2
Subcategory
Subcategory Average $/lb Range
Dissolving Kraft 0.48 0.46 - 0.49
Market Bleached Kraft 0.61 0.50-0.75
BCT Bleached Kraft 0.46 0.42-0.63
Alkaline Fine 0.74 0.64-1.16
Unbleached Kraft 0.64 0.50 - 1.03
Semi-Chemical 0.54 0.48-0.83
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical 0,48 0.42-0.62
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 0.30 0.29-0.31
Papergrade Sulfite 0.42 0.37 - 0.66
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical 0.64 0.57 - 0.86
Groundwood-CMN Paper 1.06 0.84-2.44
Groundwood-Fine Paper 1.13 0.93 - 2.39
Deink 0.60 0.34 - 1.76
Tissue from Wastewater 2.00 1.01 - 5.05
Paperboard from Wastepaper 1.84 0.93-6.47
Wastepapsr Molded Products 2.85 2.30-4.97
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 3.16 2.57-3.72
Nonintegrated Fine 0.78 0.50 - 3.17
Nonintegrated Tissue 5.62 4.03 -12.69
Nonintegrated Lightweight 5.2 3 3.48 -16.66
Nonintegrated Filter and Non-Woven 6.09 4.91-9.81
Nonintegrated Paperboard 14.63 13.42 -40.15
6-27
-------
TABLE 6A-4. BCT ANALYSIS - ALTERNATIVE OPTION 3
Subcategory
Subcategory Average $/Lb Range
Dissolving Kraft 0.53 0.52 - 0.55
Market Bleached Kraft 0.63 0.51 - 0,79
BCT Bleached Kraft 0.52 0,47-0.73
Alkaline Fine 0.82 0.74-1.34
Unbleached Kraft 0.62 0.49-1,12
Semi-Chemical 0.65 0.69-0.86
Unbleached Kraft & Semi-Chemical 0.49 0.41 - 0.66
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 0.53 0.49 - 0.58
Papergrade Sulfite 0.38 0.31-0.67
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical 0.55 0.48-0.78
Groundwood-CMN Paper 0.92 0,67-2.22
Groundwooa-Fine Paper 0.97 0,80-2.22
Deink 0.52 0.29-1.73
Tissue froir. Wastewater 1.80 0.87 - 4.66
Paperboard from Wastepaper 1,05 0.52-4.16
Wastepaper Molded Products 1.66 1.33-2.93
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt 1.30 0.96-1.64
Nonintegrated Fine 0.68 0.42-3.17
Nonintegrated Tissue 2.67 1.93 - 6.17
Nonintegrated Lightweight 2.54 1.52 - 7.82
Nonintegrated Filter and Non-Woven 3.33 2,65 - 5.40
Nonintegrated Paperboard 9.56 8.31-31.04
6-28
-------
TABLE 6A-5. BCT ANALYSIS -
Alternative Option 4
Subcategory
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Alkaline Fine
Unbleached Kraft
Serai-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft Ł Semi-Chemical
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Subcategory
Ave rage $/lb
0. 31
0.48
0.44
0.46
0.67
1.02
0.98
0.43
Range
0.29 ¦
0. 36 -
0. 30 -
0. 31 -
0.44 -
0.55 -
0.68 -
0.26 -
0. 35
0.81
0.83
0. 72
2.07
1.82
2.10
0.70
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood-CMN Paper
Groundwood-Fir.e Paper
0.42
0.62
0.65
0.75
0.24
0.60
0.54
0.62
0.62
1.57
1.59
Deink
Tissue from Wastewater
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt
0.68
0.47
0.10
0.64
0.43
0.43
0.23
0.05
0.53
0. 31
1.75
1.52
0. 31
1.04
0.54
Nonintegrated Fine
Nonintegrated Tissue
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter and Non-Woven
Nonintegrated Paperboard
0.23
1.56
1.44
1.44
3.45
0.15 - 0.79
0.81 - 4.31
0.52 - 3.87
0.58 - 3.74
0.79 -15.05
6-29
-------
Appendix 6-3 . Pollution Abatenent Capital Expenditures
Paper and Allied Products Industry (million $)
Year Total Air
1970 187 120
1971 202.5 134
1972 389 205
1973 398 166
1974 521 271
1975 670 323
1976 556 181
1977 467 134
1978 395 115
1979 357 133
1980 Planned 366 135
Total 4,509 1,917
Total
1971-1978 3,599 1,529
Solid QSHA
Water Residues Compliance
65 2
66 2.5
129 5 50
161 12 58
193 13 44
266 16 65
279 27 69
262 32 40
181 29 70
124 40 60
125 40 66
1,851 219 522
1,537 137 396
Sources: 1970-72: National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and
Stream Improvement, Inc. as reported in Pulp S Paper, North
America/Profile, June 30, 1979, p. 23;
1973-78: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Industrial
Reports, Pollution Abatement Cost and Expenditures, 1977 and
Advance Report 1978;
1979-80: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; Survey of Current
Business, June 1980.
6-30
-------
Section 7
Economic Impact Analysis
Introduction
This section presents the results of the economic analysis for the
Proposed Regulation and the four Alternative Options which were des-
cribed in Section 6. Results for the following parts of the analysis
are included:
• Base Case Forecast: Variable costs of producers; forecast
of price, output and contribution to capital by product
sector in 1983-85;
• Costs of Compliance: Average total annual cost per ton
and total capital and total annual costs by subcategory
and product sector for existing and new sources;
• Demand/Supply: Effects of cost increases on price, output
and contribution to capital in each sector;
• Capital Availability: Effect of control costs on present
value of new capacity and ability of industry to finance
investments in new capacity and pollution control out of
current income;
• Mill Closure: Projected mill closures and associated
employment impacts;
• Community Impacts: Indirect effects on employment and
earnings; and
• Balance of Trade Impacts: Effects of price increases on
international competitiveness of products with significant
amounts of exports and imports.
Summary cf Results for Proposed Regulation
Under the Proposed Regulation, total costs of compliance for
capacity in place by 1983 are:
7-1
-------
Millions of Dollars (1978)
Capital Costs Total Annual Costs
Existing Sources 1184.3 367.7
New Sources 174.8 62.5
Total 1359.1 430.2
This implies an average cost increase of $4.80 per ton for all pulp,
paper and paperboard products. Those cost increases result in an over-
all average price increase of $4.10 per ton or 1.02 percent, a decrease
in output of 480,000 tons per year or .63 percent, and a decrease in
contribution to capital of $49.8 million per year or .42 percent.
Capital availability may be a problem for five sectors in the base
case forecast: Bleached Kraft Papers, Bleached Kraft Linerboard,
Bleached Kraft Foldinqboard. Newsprint, and Semi-Chemical Corrugating
Medium. Under the proposed Regulation, the Unbleached Kraft Linerboard,
Uncoated Groundwood, and Bleached Kraft Foldingboard sectors may also
have capital availability problems.
Seven mills are predicted to close but another four mills that
would have closed under the base case may stay open because revenues
rise more than do their treatment costs under the regulations. This
leads to an actual net gain of about 600 jobs and a corresponding net
increase of $36 million in earnings.
3ase Case Forecast
This section presents a summary of the base case forecast to pro-
vide a reference point for the results of the impact analysis given in
the following sections. The forecasts presented here are for base
variable production costs by subcategory and 1983-85 averages of price,
production and contribution to capital from the demand/supply analyses.
A description of the base case forecast, including end-use demand growth
and capacity expansion, is given in Appendix 7-A and 7-3. See Section 2
for a discussion of the methodology underlying the forecasts.
Information on variable production costs is taken from the 308
Survey. Table 7-1 shows dollar per ton costs for direct dischargers
broken down by subcategory and Table 7-2 shows the costs by product
sector. Where there is a sufficient number of observations to ensure
confidentiality, variable costs are shown separately in each sector or
subcategory for mills with low, medium and high variable production
costs. For example, mills in a given subcategory are ranked in order
of average variable production cost per ton, and then divided into
7-2
-------
lower, middle and upper thirds. The treatment costs given in the next
section are presented for the same groups of mills to show the relative
impacts of.treatment requirements on the cost structure of the industry.
If there are not enough observations to allow averages for each
third to be computed, only an overall average variable cost is shown for
a given mill grouping. If there are fewer than five observations in a
cell, only an asterisk, is shown to ensure confidentiality.
It is evident that some sectors and subcategories show a much
greater range of costs than others. Subcategories with a wide range of
costs are Market Bleached Kraft, Papergrade Sulfite, Miscellaneous In-
tegrated, Tissue from Wastepaper, Paperboard from Wastepaper, Nonin-
tegrated Tissue, Nonintegrated Lightweight, and Miscellaneous Nonin-
tegrated. Product Sectors with a wide range of costs are Special
Industrial, Thin Papers, Solid Bleached Bristols, Tissues, Recycled
Foldingboard, Construction Paper and Board, All Other Board, and Market
Pulp.
Table 7-3 shows average values over the forecast period 1983-85
for price, output and contribution to capital (revenue less variable
costs) in each product sector. These results were obtained from the
demand/supply analyses. The three-year averages are given to be com-
patible with the results of demand/supply impact analyses given below.
Three year averages are given for the impacts because lagged price
responses on the demand side mean that it takes up to three years for
the full effect of price changes on demand to be felt.
Direct Impacts - Existing Sources
Tables 7-4 to 7-13 show, by subcategory and product sector, the
average annual treatment costs per tor. and total capital and annual
costs needed for compliance with BCT and BAT regulations under the
various treatment options considered. Annual costs include a capital
charge based on a capital recovery factor of 22 percent, operation and
maintenance costs and energy costs. The average unit costs are for
direct dischargers only. The averages in each subcategory and product
sector are derived for the same groups of mills whose variable pro-
duction costs were shown in Tables 7-1 and 7-2. When a mill produces
more than one product, costs are allocated across products on an equal
per ton basis.
The tables also show total costs of compliance for existing
sources through 1983 for both capital costs and total annual costs.
Data from the 308 Survey were used to estimate costs of compliance for
capacity in place by 1978. The derivation of the forecasts of capacity
expansion in each product sector was given in Section 2. It was also
7-3
-------
Cable 7-1. Average Variable Production Costs'
of Direct Dischargers by Subcategory:
(Averages for Low, Medium, and High Cost Mills)
(1978 $/ton)
Integrated
Low
Medium
High
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda 304.7
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard) 141.0
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical 124.1
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood — Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded,Newsp.
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills 163.1
198.7
260.0
402.1
157.6
193.6
141.2
145. 9
292.6
504.0
332. 3
241.2
575. 7
276.2
211.7
630.1
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)t
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
124.4
413.2
474.7
175.2
*
111.6
430.1
312.3
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 416.4 546.9
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers 319.1 72 3.5
Nonintegrated Lightweight 918.3
Nonintegrated Filter Ł Nonwoven 1330.2
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance *
Nonintegrated Paperboard 359.2
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills 510.3 664.2
682.9
~
1110.7
Source: 308 Survey
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
+No direct dischargers.
7-4
-------
Table 7-2: Average Variable Production Costs of
Direct Dischargers by Product Sector
(Averages for Low, Medium, and High
Cost Mills) (1978
$/ton)
Low
Medium
High
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
163.8
218.4
392.3
Bleached Kraft
256.7
366.6
644.3
Glassine
719.1
Spec. Industrial
378.2
730.9
1444.9
Newsprint
175.4
209.8
268.8
Coated Printing
314.1
431.9
578.9
Uncoated Freesheet
329.8
434.9
589.6
Uncoated Groundwood
228.2
299.6
433.4
Thin Papers
821.2
Solid Bl. Bristols
263.2
381.3
874.9
Cotton Fibre
804.5
Tissue
305.9
469.8
839.7
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
136.0
163.8
201.0
Bl. Kraft Liner.
240.4
Bl. Kraft Folding
211.2
267.6
*
Semi-Chem Corr.
113.3
135.6
170.7
Recycled Liner.
151.8
Recycled Corr.
160.0
Recycled Folding
131.9
190.6
352.7
Constr. Papers & Board
117.4
170.3
448.5
Molded Pulp
379.7
Solid Bl. Board
195.1
243.6
327.2
All Other Board
107.3
185.0
386.1
Pulp
Dissolving
296.4
Market
113.6
166.6
306.3
Source: 308 Survey
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-5
-------
necessary to forecast capacity increases by subcategory. Information
on this is less reliable. The approach taken was to assume that ex-
pansion would come primarily from integrated mill subcategories, and
that it would follow the current mix of integrated subcategories in
each product sector. As a conservative estimate, all capacity additions
after 1978 are assumed to be direct dischargers and hence subject to
BCT/BAT costs.
Starting in 1982, capacity increases due to "greenfield" mills or
major alterations of existing plants are assumed subject to NSPS re-
quirements. Thus it was necessary to forecast what fraction of new
capacity would be classified as a "new source." This was done using
information on installation of new machines in API's capacity forecasts
and planned capacity increases in existing plants from the 308 Survey.
See the following subsection for NSPS costs. The costs for existing
sources described in the previous paragraph were applied to the re-
maining fraction of capacity increases after 1982.
The estimates presented here have a great deal of uncertainty.
Therefore, sensitivity analyses are given in Section 8.
To gauge the impact of treatment costs, they should be compared
with the base production costs given in Tables 7-1 and 7-2. This
gives a picture of the relative impacts of treatment costs within a
given mill grouping. It should be used in interpreting the relationship
between price impacts and impacts on contribution to capital discussed
below. For example, if mills with high unit variable production costs
have low treatment costs relative to mills with lower base production
costs, the price impacts (which usually are related to the cost changes
of high cost mills) will likely be much smaller than the overall impact
on contribution to capital.
Proposed Regulation
Tables 7-4 and 7-5 give average dollar per ton treatment costs by
subcategory and product sector for the Proposed Regulation. The over-
all average cost increase is $4.80 per ton. The largest absolute cost
increases occur in the Market Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine
Bleached Kraft and Soda, Papergrade Sulfite, Deink (Tissue) and Tissue
from Wastepaper subcategories and in the Bleached Kraft Paper, Un-
coated Freesheet, Solid Bleached Bristols, Cotton Fibre, Tissue,
Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached Kraft Foldingboard, and Market
Pulp product sectors. Estimated total capital costs for existing
sources are $1184.3 million and total annual costs are $367.7 million.
7-6
-------
Table 7-3: Summary of Base Case Forecast,
1983-85 Average Values
Price
Paper (1978 $/ton)
Unbleached Kraft 294
Bleached Kraft 350
Glassine 873
Spec. Industrial 945
Newsprint 299
Coated Printing 600
Uncoated Freesheet 580
Uncoated Groundwood 485
Thin Papers 672
Solid Bl. Bristols 488
Cotton Fibre 1480
Tissue 956
^Output
(10 tons/yr)
4394
624
201
572
5814
5941
9054
1720
420
1106
122
4933
Contribution
to Capital
(1978 $xlQ )
570
68
32
561
557
430
2775
1402
155
255
54
442
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 230
Bl. Kraft Liner. 267
Bl. Kraft Folding 438
Semi-Chem. Corr. 220
Recycled Liner 202
Recycled Corr. 211
Recycled Folding 358
Constr. Paper & Bd. 269
Molded Pulpt
Solid Bl. Board 464
All Other Board 297
17042
128
2225
5699
555
1489
2951
5745
2028
4710
1255
6
297
438
29
121
296
739
409
905
Pulp
Dissolving
Markett
355
1413
110
Source: 308 Survey, Demand/Supply Forecast
tDemand/supply analysis not available.
7-7
-------
Integrated
Table 7-4. Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers
By Subcategory: Proposed Regulation
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
Low Medium High
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bl. Kraft
BCT Bl. Kraft
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda 10.6
L'nbl. Kraft (Linerboard) 2.8
Unbl. Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical 2.1
Unbl. Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood Thermo-
Mechanical
Groundwood Coarse,
Molded, Newsprint
Groundwood -- Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills 8.1
*
9.2
8.2
6.6
2.3
5.8
3.7
4.0
0
15.0
*
5.9
4.8
9.0
4.6
5.3
67.9
85.7
159.9
67
43
34
73
92,
13.1
28.2
405.9
*
21.6
25.4
49. 3
20.5
13.1
11.5
21.5
0
29.1
*
9.7
124.3
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)t
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper Ł Roofing
Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
2.1
0
14.6
13.5
4.6
*
0
3.8
2.0
0
21.5
3.6
7.3
~
0
8.0
0
7.9
1.4
8.3
*
0
Nor. integrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 6.6
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers 0.9
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-
woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills 4.3
1.2
0.9
4.3
0
,8
8.6
*
6.8
12.9
1.7
4.7
0
0
10.1
4.0
0.4
1.1
0
0
2.3
Total
1184.3
367.7
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
+No direct dischargers in this subcategory.
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-8
-------
TABLE 7-4A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY SUBCATEGORY:
Proposed Regulation
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Integrated
Low
Medium
High
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
3.47
1.99
1.69
4.63
3.15
1.64
1.46
3.00
2.62
2.74
0
1.56
1.67
2.50
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood — Theme-Mechanical
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded, Newsp.
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
4.97
2.98
*
*
1.78
1.99
2.08
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Be ink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
1.69
#
0
3.53
2.84
2.63
*
0
.88
.64
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 1.59
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers .28
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
—Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills .84
.22
.12
.47
0
0
0
.72
1.26
*
.61
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-9
-------
Table 7-5. Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers
By Product Sector: Proposed Regulation
Paper
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills!
Low
Medium Hioh
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
Unbleached Kraft
4.1
4.5
6.5
59.7
17.9
Bleached Kraft
8.9
8.9
4.2
25.0
7.6
Glassine
7.2
6.7
2.0
Spec. Industrial
8.3
5.6
2.4
10.0
2.9
Newsprint
8.4
5.2
6.6
84.4
26.1
Coaled Printing
6.3
5.8
4.8
92.0
28.4
Uncoated Freesheet
8.7
6.5
7.7
173.9
54.3
Uncoated Groundwood
4.8
6.6
7.0
27.8
8.4
Thin Papers
5.3
2.6
8.5
12.1
4.3
Solid Bl. Bristols
7.8
7.1
6.4
17.8
5.2
Cotton Fibre
12.7
3.8
1.1
Tissue
9.8
12.7
4.2
84.5
27.0
Board
Unbl. Xraft Liner.
3.3
3.7
4.6
163.9
49. 3
Bl. Kraft Liner.
7.0
3.5
1.0
Bl. Kraft Folding
6.9
7.6
*
52.3
15.6
Semi-Chem. Corr.
3.6
3.8
6.2
57.1
18.2
Recycled Liner
3.8
2.0
0.8
Recycled Corr.
2.7
3.2
1.4
Recycled Folding
3.8
3.7
2.6
3.1
3.2
Constr. Paper & Bd.
0.2
C. 6
5.5
5. 3
1.9
Molded Pulp
2.2
1.0
C. 3
Solid Bl. Board
7.3
4.4
6.3
36.2
10.8
All Other Board
0.4
3.2
5.1
7.0
4 . 3
Pulp
Di ssolving
1.8
16.3
5.1
Market
7.9
6.7
13.8
221. 3
68.8
Total
1184.3
367.7
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-10
-------
TABLE 7-5A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY PRODUCT SECTOR
Proposed Regulation
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
Low
2.50
3.47
2.19
4.79
2.01
2.64
2.10
2.96
3.20
Medium
2.06
2.43
1.00
.77
2.48
1.34
1.49
2. 20
.32
1.86
1.58
2.70
His*
1.66
.65
.17
2.46
.83
1. 31
1.62
.73
.50
Board
Unbl. Kraft Lir.er.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Seni-Chera. Corr.
Recycled Liner
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & Bd.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other 3oard
2.43
3.27
3.18
2.88
.17
3.74
. 37
2.26
2.91
2. 84
2.80
2.50
1.69
1.94
. 35
.58
1.81
1.73
2.29
*
3.63
.74
1.23
1.93
1. 32
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
6.95
.61
4.02
4.51
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-11
-------
Tables 7-4a and 7-5a show the percent increases over base production
costs in Table 7-1 and 7-2 represented by the unit treatment cost es-
timates in Tables 7-4 and 7-5. Subcategories with the highest percent
cost increases are Market Bleached Kraft. BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine
Bleached Kraft and Soda, Papergrade Sulfite, Miscellaneous Integrated
Mills, and Deink (Tissue). Product sectors with the highest percent
cost increases are Bleached Kraft Papers, Newsprint, Tissue, Bleached
Kraft Foldingboard, Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, Solid Bleached
Board, and Market Pulp.
Tables 7-4 and 7-5 show that in general the variability of unit
treatment costs is greater over product sectors than subcategories.
This is because most product sectors include integrated, secondary
fiber and nonintegrated mills, and the latter two tend to have lower
treatment costs than the former. In sectors such as Bleached Kraft
Paper, Special Industrial Paper and Tissue, low-cost producers face the
highest treatment costs. Sectors where high cost producers bear the
highest treatment costs are Thin Papers, Semi-Chemical Corrugating
Medium, Construction Paper and Board, and All Other Board. As will be
seen in the demand/supply analysis, the distribution of costs across
producers in the same product sector has an important effect on the
resulting changes in price and contribution to capital.
Alternative Option 1
Tables 7-6 and 7-7 show treatment cost estimates by subcategory
and product sector for Alternative Option 1. The average cost increase
is $2.80 per ton. The total capital costs are $731.4 million and total
annual costs are $218.5 million. The subcategories with the highest
absolute cost increases are Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda, Dissolving
Sulfite Pulp, Papergrade Sulfite, Tissue from Wastepaper, and Nonin-
tegrated Lightweight. Product sectors with the highest absolute in-
creases are Glassine and Greaseproof, Special Industrial, Coated
Printing, Uncoated Freesheet, Thin Papers, Tissue, Molded Pulp, and
Dissolving Pulp.
Tables 7-6a and 7-7a show the corresponding percentage increases
in average unit costs over base production costs given in Tables 7-1
and 7-2. Subcategories with the highest percent cost increases are
Market Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda, Semi-Chemical,
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, and Tissue from Wastepaper. Product sectors
with the highest percent cost increases are Newsprint, Tissue, Semi-
Chemical Corrugating Medium, Construction Paper and Board, Solid
Bleached Board, Dissolving Pulp, and Market Pulp.
7-12
-------
Table 7-6. Average Total Annual Treatment Costs
of Direct Dischargers by Subcategory:
Alternative Option 1
Integrated
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 5/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
LOW
Medium
High
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Lir.erboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi - Chemi c a 1
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood -- Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded,Newsp.
Groundwood -- Fine Papers
Misc. Intecrated Mills
6.3
1.2
3.3
.9
.9
.9
.3
,4
.2
. 5
2.6
6.
1.
1.
3.
1.
23.2
7.6
it
*
3.6
3.1
7.7
1.5
3.3
2.6
23.1
35.1
131.8
30.4
13.3
34.1
32.6
101.9
61.4
*
*
31.7
177. 5
9.4
12.9
34.8
9.9
3.7
9.7
8.9
31.0
15.6
*
*
5.6
56.6
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)t
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper Ł Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
0.6
2.8
8.2
0.6
*
4.8
1.6
0.7
it
o
5.0
3.0
5.4
*
3.4
4.1
it
o
1.2
1.0
1.7
*
1.0
0.9
Konintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
3.5
2.3
3.1
3.8
2.0
6.9
3.5
0
3.8
5.2
*
5.2
14.7
3.8
4.2
1.0
*
0
16.2
4.1
0.9
1.2
0.3
*
0
1.8
Total
731.4
218.5
Source: Meta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
"No direct dischargers.
7-13
-------
TABLE 7-6A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY SUBCATEGORY:
Alternative Option 1
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
^13 Low Medium
Dissolving Kraft *
Market 31eached Kraft 1.96
BCT Bleached Kraft 1.50
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda 2.07 1.72
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard) . 95 g2
Unbleached Kraft (3ag) .72
Semi-Chemical 2.66 2.27
Unbleached Kraft, and Semi-Chem. 1.03
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 7.93
Papergrade Sulfite 1.51
Groundwood -- Thermo-Mechanical *
Groundwood — Ccarse, Molded, Newsp. *
Groundwood — Fine Papers 1.08
Misc. Integrated Mills 1.59 1.29
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers .34 ^ 59
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers .72 .28
Nonintegrated Lightweight .75
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-woven .26
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance *
Nonintegrated Paperboard 0
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills .57
Source: Keta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
.48
.68
1.73
. 34
*
4. 30
7-14
-------
Table 7-7. Total Annual Treatment Costs of Direct
Dischargers by Product Sector and
Total Cost of Compliance Through 1983:
Alternative Option 1
Paper
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1S78 $/tor.)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Low
Medium High Capita] Total Annual
Unbleached Kraft
1.6
2.6
2.7
20.2
6.4
Bleached Kraft
3.4
3.4
2.4
9.8
3.0
Glassine
4.4
4.7
1.2
Spec. Industrial
4.4
4.3
4.2
8.1
2.1
Newsprint
3.4
2.7
2.4
45.3
13.3
Coated Printing
3.5
4.9
4.1
67.0
17.4
Uncoated Freesheet
4.9
4.5
4.6
119.6
33.0
Uncoated Groundwood
2.9
3.0
3.1
15.6
3.9
Thin Papers
7.2
6.0
1.6
Solid Bl. Bristols
3.9
5.2
3.2
¦7.0
3.2
Cotton Fibre
4.0
0.6
0.2
Tissue
4.9
4.1
2.9
45.6
13.3
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chem Corr.
Recycled Liner.
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & Bd.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
1.5
3.1
2.2
1.2
2.5
3.3
1.4
1.6
2.8
3.1
3.2
0.5
1.2
0.5
0.6
5.4
3.4
1.4
1.7
*
3.5
1.3
2.6
3.6
2.1
72.1
1.1
21.1
46.7
1.0
2.5
2.4
7.3
2.8
18.6
5.7
21.5
0.4
7.7
13.3
0.3
0.7
0.7
2.2
0.7
6.4
1.6
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
3.0
17.1
4.2
3.7
88.5 27.6
111.2 36.8
Total
731.4 218.5
Source: Meta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-15
-------
TABLE 7-7A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY PRODUCT SECTOR
Alternative Option 1
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassir.e
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freeshest
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fiber
Tissue
Low
.98
1.32
1.16
1.94
1.11
1.49
1.27
1.48
1.60
Medium
1.19
.93
.61
.59
1.29
1.13
1.03
1.00
.88
1. 36
.50
.87
High
.69
. 37
.29
.89
.71
. 78
.72
.37
. 35
Board
Uribl. Kraft Liner. 1.10 .98 .85
Bl. Kraft Liner. 1.16 *
Bl. Kraft Folding 1.47 1.16 2.05
Ser.i-Chem. Corr. 1.94 2. 36
Recycled Liner .33
Recycled Corr. .75
Recycled Folding .91 .26 .37
Constr. Paper & Bd. 2.13 .35 .58
Molded Pulp 1.42
Solid Bl. Board l.69 1.40 1.10
All Other Board 1.30 .76 .54
Pulp
Dissolving 5.77
Market 2.64 2.52 1.21
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-16
-------
Alternative Ootion 2
Tables 7-8 and 7-9 show treatment cost estimates by subcategory and
product sector for Alternative Option 2. The average cost increase is
$9.30 per ton. The total capital costs are $1555.8 million and the
total annual costs are $707.5 million. The subcategories with the
highest absolute cost increases are Market Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached
Kraft and Soda, Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, Papergrade Sulfite, and Deink
(Tissue). The product sectors with the highest absolute increases are
Coated Printing, Uncoated Freeshect, Solid Bleached Bristols, Tissue,
Bleached Kraft Foldingboard, Dissolving Pulp and Market Pulp.
Tables 7-8a and 7-9a show the corresponding percentage increases
in average unit cost over base production costs given in Tables 7-1
and 7-2. Subcategories with the highest percent cost increases are
Market Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine 3leached Kraft and Soda,
Semi-Chemical, Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chemical, Dissolving Sulfite
Pulp, Papergrade Sulfite, and Deink (Tissue). Product sectors with the
highest percent cost increases are Newsprint, Uncoated Groundwood,
Unbleached Kraft Linerboard, Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, Solid
Bleached Board, Dissolving Pulp and Market Pulp.
Alternative Option 3
Tables 7-10 and 7-11 show treatment cost estimates by subcategory
and product sector for Alternative Option 3. The average cost increase
is $11.20 per ton. Total capital costs are $2115.6 million and total
annual costs are $856.3 million. The subcategories with the highest
absolute cost increases are primarily those of integrated mills, i.e.
Market Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda,
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, Papergrade Sulfite, and Deink (Tissue). Pro-
duct sectors showing the greatest increases are Coated Printing, tin-
coated Freesheet, Solid Bleached Bristols, Tissue, Bleached Kraft
Linerboard, Bleached Kraft Foldingboard, Solid Bleached Board, Dis-
solving Pulp and Market Pulp. The impacts are substantially higher
than in the Proposed Regulation.
Tables 7-10a and 7-lla show the corresponding percentage in-
creases in unit average costs over base production costs given in
Tables 7-1 and 7-2. Subcategories with the highest percent cost in-
creases are Market Bleached Kraft, BCT 3leached Kraft, Fine Bleached
Kraft and Soda, Semi-Chemical, Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, and Papergrade
Sulfite. Product sectors with the highest percent cost increases are
Newsprint, Solid Bleached Bristols, Tissue, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard,
Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, Solid
Bleached Board, Dissolving Pulp and Market Pulp.
7-17
-------
Table 7-8. Average Total Annual Treatment Costs
of Direct Dischargers by Subcategory:
Alternative Option 2
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kxaft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood -- Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded, Newsp.
Groundwood -- Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost'Mills)
Low Medium High
15.1
6.4
8.8
11.4
19.7
16.4
16.2
7.6
7.7
8.1
7.2
30.6
29.4
8.5
10.8
19.4
9.3
9.1
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
9.1
*
86.2
99.3
165.5
114.
56.
55.
81.
65.7
115.8
*
*
41.8
486.9
,0
. 3
.7
3
*
44.6
53 .7
82.7
51.8
23. 7
24. 5
43.4
36.9
60.2
*
*
15.0
207. 7
Secondary Fiber
Deink- (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)f
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
0.6
22.3
8.2
1.3
*
4.8
12.8
0.7
*
0
7.5
3.0
13.5
~
3.4
24.0
0
12. 3
1.0
4.0
*
1.0
8.1
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
9.8
2.3
5.4
9.0
2.0
6.9
0
6.4
7.0
*
1.6
33.1
3. B
4.3
1.0
*
0
17.7
14.4
0.9
1.2
0.3
0
2.
Total
1555.8
707.5
Source: Meta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
+No direct dischargers.
7-18
-------
TABLE 7-8A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood -- Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded, Newsp.
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills -
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
High
9.91
6. 31
4-96 4.03 3.37
4-54 4.82 3.37
3.98
7.09 5.74 4.30
4.93
10.46
3.83
*
*
2.56
2.58 2.49 .97
5.40
1.73
.48 .74 .22
¦k
4.30
2.98
2-35 1.65 1.03
.72 .28 *
.75
.26
0
1.06 .96 .23
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY SUBCATEGORY:
Alternative Option 2
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Low Medium
7-19
-------
Table 7-9: Total Annual Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers
by Product Sector and Total Cost of Compliance
Through 1983: Alternative Option 2
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low,
Medium
Total Costs
and High
Cost Mills)
Millions of 1978 $
Low
Medium
High
Capital
Total Annual
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
5.4
4.5
7.4
67.5
29.6
Bleached Kraft
4.9
5.8
6.9
26.1
11.1
Glassine
9.2
9.8
4.2
Spec. Industrial
10.9
5.2
4.4
14.7
5.3
Newsprint
7.6
7.8
5.3
131.0
57.3
Coated Printing
9.5
11.6
12.7
111.4
49.0
Uncoated Freesheet
10.2
15.0
11.6
211.4
85.6
Uncoated Groundwood
9.3
6.6
10.7
38.1
15.6
Thin Papers
9.1
15.8
5.4
Solid Bl. Bristols
10.5
14.9
6.1
21.2
10.0
Cotton Fibre
4.0
0.8
0.3
Tissue
12.0
12.8
6.7
111.4
48.7
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chem Corr.
Recycled Liner.
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Cor.str. Paper & 3d.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
6.7
7.6
7.3
2.2
2.5
9.0
1.9
6.0
8.3
12.3
6.8
1.9
4.1
1.3
0.6
1.6
6.5
2.7
5.4
9.1
5.2
4.7
9.5
6.6
224.3
2.8
67.1
87. 3
3.8
6.0
5.2
19.5
2.8
48.2
15.3
100.4
1.5
32.4
39.5
1.3
2.4
2.0
6.9
0.7
23.4
6.3
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
8.7
26.4
12.4
19.0
75.6
235.6
42.4
114.6
Total
1555.8
7Q7.5
Source: Meta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-20
-------
TABLE 7-9A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY PRODUCT SECTOR
Alternative Option 2
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mils
Paper LoW Medium
Unbleached Kraft 3-30 2.06
Bleached Kraft 1>91 1>58
Glassine 1.28
Spec. Industrial 2.88 .71
Newsprint 4.33 3.72
Coated Printing 3.02 2.69
Uncoated Freesheet 3 Qg 3 45
Uncoated Groundwocd 4.08 2.20
Thin Papers 1.11
Solid Bl. Bristols 3.99 3.91
Cotton Fibre _ 50
Tissue 3.92 2.72
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 4.93 3.66
Bl. Kraft Liner. 3.45
Bl. Kraft Folding 3>60 4.60
Semi-Chem. Corr. 6.44 5.01
Recycled Liner 1.25
Recycled Corr. 2.56
Recycled Folding 1.67 .68
Constr. Paper & Bd. 2.13 .35
Molded Pulp 42
Solid Bl. Board 4.61 2.67
All Other Board _62 1.46
Pulp
Dissolving 8.91
Market 7-56 7,44
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
•Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-21
-------
Table 7-10. Average Total Annual Treatment Costs
of Direct Dischargers by Subcategory:
Alternative Option 3
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market 31eached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Sexi-Chen.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood -- Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood -- Coarse, Molded,Newsp.
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Kisc. Integrated Mills
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $./ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
Low Medium High
20.0
6.5
10. 3
12.9
21.9
49.5
21.7
7.7
3.6
9.5
7.6
54.6
31.8
•k
*
11.c
12.6
24.1
9.4
10.6
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
10. 3
105.0
125.0
290.5
126.1
47.1
80.5
96.0
167. 9
158. 5
¦k
•k
54.2
612. 3
49.5
67.9
109.2
52.7
19.4
28.9
42.2
65.7
64.3
*
*
17.4
239.9
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)+
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Foofina Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
4.5
21.8
8.2
4.0
*
4.8
12."2
1.6
0
28.9
3.0
38.4
¦k
3.4
25.1
it
o
11. 7
1.0
14.9
*
1.0
17.8
Konintegrated
Nor.integrated Fine Papers
10 .1
15.0
7 .0
41.4
16.0
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
2.3
2.0
*
3.8
0.9
Nonintegrated Lightweight
9.5
8.9
4.4
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
3.5
1.0
0.3
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
*
*
*
Nonintegrated Paperboard
0.0
0
0
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
8.4
fc . 5
5.2
17. 7
5.3
Total
2115.6
856.3
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
tNo direct dischargers.
7-22
-------
TABLE 7-10A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT Bleached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood — Thermo-Mechanical
Groundwood -- Coarse, Molded, Newsp.
Groundwood -- Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated I'ills
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper s Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
High
11.02
19.04
6.56 5.40
4.61 4.89
4.44
8.30 6.73
5.21
18.66
6.31
*
*
3.31
3.86 3.52
5.28
1.73
3.62 2.28 .51
*
4.30
2.84
2.43 2.74 1.03
.72 .28 *
1.03
.26
0
1-65 .98 .47
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY SUBCATEGORY:
Alternative Option 3
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Low Medium
4.19
3.40
5.01
7-23
-------
Table 7-11. Total Annual Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers
by Product Sector and Total Cost of Compliance
Through 1983: Alternative Option 3
Paper
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
Low
Medium
High
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
Unbleached Kraft
6.4
6.2
8.5
81.9
33.4
Bleached Kraft
7.4
7.9
7.4
33.4
13. 3
Glassine
10.4
12.7
4.7
Spec. Industrial
13.1
6.0
5.7
18.2
6.2
Newsprint
9.9
9.5
7.1
139.0
61.0
Coated Printing
11.8
15.2
16.3
159.1
59.4
Uncoated Freesheet
13.1
18.0
15.6
302.5
122.6
Uncoated Groundwood
10.8
7.8
11.2
44.9
16.2
Thin Papers
11.6
26.2
8.3
Solid Bl. Bristols
26.3
22.1
7.7
29.4
11.6
Cotton Fibre
7.0
0.8
0.3
Tissue
19.8
13.3
7.2
131- 3
50.6
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
7.2
6.9
6.3
289.6
114.3
Bl. Kraft Liner.
19.2
3.6
1.6
Bl. Kraft Folding
21.8
30.0
*
84.8
35.2
Semi-Chem Corr.
8.2
8.7
11.2
120.5
45.5
Recycled Liner.
4.7
8.1
3.0
Recycled Corr.
6.7
12.2
4.9
Recycled Folding
3.8
3.7
6.2
15.4
5.8
Constr. Paper S. Bd.
4.2
2.9
9.4
25.4
8.9
Molded Pulp
10.0
4.4
1.3
Solid Bl. Board
21.1
17.6
25.5
61. 3
25.4
All Other Board
4.5
3.4
8.1
24.2
9.5
Pulp
Dissolving
43.7
163.7
67.4
Market
16.9
17.9
29.2
318.8
143. 4
Total
2115.6
856. 3
Source: Meta Systems estimates
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-24
-------
TABLE 7-11A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY PRODUCT SECTOR:
Alternative Option 3
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid 31. Bristols
Cotton Fiber
Tissue
Low
3.91
2.88
3.46
5.64
3.76
3.97
4.42
9.99
6.47
Medium
2.84
2.15
1.45
.82
4.53
3.52
4.14
2.60
1.41
5.80
:87
2.83
High
2.17
1.15
. 39
2.64
2.82
2.65
2.58
.88
.86
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chen. Corr.
Recycled Liner
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & 3d.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
5.29
10. 32
7.24
2.88
3.58
10.81
4.19
4.21
7.99
11.21
6.42
3.10
4.19
1.94
1.70
2.63
7.22
1.84
3.13
*
6.56
1.76
2.10
7.79
2.10
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
14.88
]4.74
10.74
9.53
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-25
-------
Alternative Option 4
Tables 7-12 and 7-13 show treatment cost estimates by subcategory
and product sector for Alternative Option 4. The average annual cost
increase is $5.20 per ton. The total capital costs are $1275.3
million and total annual costs are 398.1 million. The subcategories
with the highest absolute cost increases are Market Bleached Kraft,
Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda, Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, Papergrade Sul-
fite, Deink (Tissue), Tissue from Wastepaper, and Building Papers and
Roofing Felt. The product sectors with the highest increases are
Bleached Kraft Paper, Special Industrial Paper, Newsprint, Uncoated
Freesheet, Cotton Fibre, Tissues, Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached
Kraft Foldingboaxd, Construction Paper and Board, Dissolving Pulp, and
Market Pulp.
Tables 7-12a and 7-13a show the corresponding percentage increases
in unit average costs over base production costs given in Tables 7-1
and 7-2. Subcategories with the highest percent cost increases are
Market Bleached Kraft, BCT Bleached Kraft, Fine Bleached Kraft and Soda,
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp, Miscellaneous Integrated Mills, Deink (Tissue)
and Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt. Product sectors with the highest
percent cost increases are Bleached Kraft Papers, Newsprint, Tissue,
Bleached Kraft Foldingboard, Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, Con-
struction Paper and Board, Solid Bleached Board, Dissolving Pulp and
Market Pulp.
Costs for Mew Sources — Proposed Regulation
New sources are defined to be greenfield mills or major modifi-
cations of existing mills built 9C days after promulgation of the
federal regulations for BCT and BAT controls. Costs were developed by
the technical contractor for model mills in each subcategory. Only one
technology option is considered for new sources in each subcategory.
It is defined by the processes needed for new sources to attain the
level of discharge of "exemplary" existing mills. These processes are
described in Section 6.
Table 7-14 shows model mill daily capacity, total capital costs,
capital costs per ton, and total annual costs per ton for treatment
systems for model mills in each subcategory. These costs are signifi-
cantly higher than comparable costs for existing sources, particularly
in the secondary fiber and nonintegrated subcategories. This is
partly because NSPS costs include costs of attaining BPT levels as well
as the incremental cost of moving from BPT to BCT levels. Therefore
these costs may overestimate the impact of the Proposed Regulation if
the capacity expansion costs taken from the 308 Survey already include
at least some treatment costs.
7-26
-------
Integrated
Table 7-12. Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers
By Subcategory: Alternative Caption 4
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium,
and High Cost Mills)
Low Medium High
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Caoital Total Annual
Dissolving Kraft *
Market Bl. Kraft 9.2
BCT Bl. Kraft 8.2
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda 10.6 6.6 9.0
Unbl. Kraft (Linerboard) 2.8 2.3 4.6
Unbl. Kraft (Bag) 5.8
Semi-Chemical 2.1 3.7 5.3
Unbl. Kraft and Semi-Chem. 4.0
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp 24.3
Papergrade Sulfite 15.C
Groundwood Thermo- *
Mechanical
Groundwood Coarse, *
Molded, Newsprint
Groundwood — Fine Papers 5.9
Misc. Integrated Mills 8.1 4.8 13.1
67.9
85.7
159.9
67.4
43.7
34.4
73.5
81. 2
92.5
*
28.2
4C5 .9
21.6
25.4
49. 3
20.5
13.1
21.5
27.5
29.1
*
9.7
124.3
Secondary Fiber
Deir.k (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)+
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Produces
Builders Paper & Roofing
Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
2.1
C
14.6
13.5
4.6
*
14.3
3.8
2.0
*
0
21.5
3.6
7.3
*
9.8
8.0
2.8
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 6.6
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers 0.9
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter & Non-
woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills 4.3
1.2
0.9
4.3
0
8.6
~
6.8
12.9
1.7
4.7
0
0
0
1C.1
4.0
0.4
1.1
0
0
2.3
Total
1275.3
398.1
Source: Meta Systems estimates
+No direct dischargers in this subcategory.
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-27
-------
TABLE 7-12A. PERCENT INCREASE IK PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY SUBCATEGORY:
Alternative Option 4
Integrated
Low
Medium
High
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bleached Kraft
BCT 31eached Kraft
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbleached Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
3.47
1.99
1.69
4.63
3.15
1.64
1.46
3.00
2.62
2. 74
8. 30
1.56
1.67
2.50
Papergrade Sulfite
Grour.dwocd -- Thermo-Mechanical
Grour.dwood — Coarse, Molded, Newsp.
Groundwood -- Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
Secondary Fiber
4.97
2.98
~
*
1.78
1.99
2.08
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue frcir. Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
1.69
0
3.53
2.84
2.63
~
12. 81
.88
.64
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 1.59
Nonintecrated Tissue Papers .28
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nor.integrated Filter & Non-woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills .94
.22
.12
.47
0
0
.72
1.26
*
.61
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-28
-------
Table 7-13. Treatment Costs of Direct Dischargers By
Product Sector: Alternative Option 4
Paper
Unit Total Annual Costs
(1978 $/ton)
(Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills)
Low Medium High
Total Costs
Millions of 1978 $
Capital Total Annual
Unbleached Kraft
4.1
4.5
6.5
59.7
17.9
Bleached Kraft
8.9
8.9
4.2
25.0
7.6
Glassine
7.2
6.7
2.0
Spec. Industrial
8.3
5.6
2.4
10.0
2.9
Newsprint
8.4
5.2
6.6
84.4
26.1
Coated Printing
6.3
5.8
4.8
92.0
28.4
Uncoated Freesheet
8.7
6.5
7.7
173.9
54.3
Uncoated Groundwood
4.8
6.6
7.0
27.8
8.4
Thin Papers
5.3
2.6
8.5
12.1
4.3
Solid Bl. Bristols
7.8
7.1
6.4
17.8
5.2
Cotton Fibre
12.7
3.8
1.1
Tissue
9.8
12.7
4.2
84.5
27.0
Board
Uhbl. Kraft Liner.
3.3
3.7
4.6
163.9
49.3
Bl. Kraft Liner.
7.0
3.5
1.0
Bl. Kraft Folding
6.9
7.6
*
52. 3
15.6
Semi-Chem. Corr.
3.6
3.8
6.2
57.1
18.2
Recycled Liner
3.8
2.0
0.8
Recycled Corr.
2.7
3.2
1.4
Recycled Folding
3.8
3.7
2.6
8.1
3.2
Constr. Paper S, Bd.
10.4
0.6
5.5
15.2
6.0
Molded Pulp
2.2
1.0
0.3
Solid Bl. Board
7.3
4.4
6.3
36.2
10.8
All Other Board
0.4
3.2
5.1
7.0
4.3
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
7.9
18.0
11.6
14,
81.6
237.0
27.2
74.2
Total
1,275.3
398.1
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-29
-------
TABLE 7-13A. PERCENT INCREASE IN PRODUCTION COSTS DUE TO
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BY PRODUCT SECTOR:
Alternative Option 4
Averages for Low, Medium
and High Cost Mills
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Grounawood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fiber
Tissue
Low
2.50
3.47
3.46
4. 79
3.76
2.64
4.73
2.96
3.20
Medium
2.84
2.15
1.45
.82
4.53
3.52
4.14
2.60
1.41
5.80
.87
2.83
High
2.17
1.15
. 39
2.64
2.82
2.65
2.58
.88
.86
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chem. Corr.
Recycled Liner
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & Bd.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
5.29
3.27
3.18
2.88
8.86
3.74
4.19
4.21
7.99
11.21
6.42
3.10
4.19
1.94
1. 70
2.63
7.72
1.84
3.13
*
6.56
1.76
2.10
7.79
2.10
ŁH±Ł
Dissolving
Market
6.95
6.07
10.74
9.53
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
*Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-30
-------
As a comparison. Table 7-14 also shows average unit capital costs of
treatment systems in place in existing mills taken from the 3C8 Survey.
In most cases these reflect; BPT treatment levels for large relatively
recent mills. The following subcategories have BPT costs as a large
fraction of NSPS costs (over 50 percent): Fine Bleached Kraft, Paper-
grade Sulfite, and Deink (Tissue).
As noted in the section on costs for existing sources, it is very
difficult to project total costs of compliance for new sources. First,
the fraction of predicted capacity expansion in a given year which will
be classified as a new source must be determined. Secondly, that
amount of capacity must be allocated among various subcategories.
Through 1983, the fraction of new source capacity in each product
sector is projected based on API forecasts of new machines and the
capacity expansion plans of existing mills reported in the 308 Survey.
Thereafter, new sources should occupy an increasing fraction of capacity
expansion. The mix of subcategories is assumed to be the same one as
that used for expansions of existing capacity. (See previous sub-
section.) Estimates of total costs of compliance for 1982-83 are given
in Table 7-15. (1982 is assumed to be the first year for which new
source standards apply.)
Indirect Impacts - Demand/Supply Analysis
Tables 7-16 through 7-20 show the results of the demand/supply
analyses for the Proposed Regulation and the four Alternative Options.
Each table shows the percent changes in price, output and contribution
to capital as well as the average dollar per ton price increase re-
sulting from the inclusion of treatment costs in mills' costs of pro-
duction. Industry-wide price and output changes are also given for
each option.
Because increases in cost affect the equilibrium values of both
price and output, the relative impacts of a treatment option across
different product sectors cannot be measured simply by the relative
impacts on price. The distribution of the impact between price and
output depends on the elasticities of supply and demand. This can be
seen in Figure 7-1, where DD is the demand curve and SS and S'S' the
before and after-control supply curves. Trie relative price impact is
(P'-P)/P and the quantity impact (Q'-Q)/Q. The flatter (more elastic)
both the supply and demand curves are, the greater will be the effect
on quantity compared to the effect on price.
The effect on the contribution to capital is an important indi-
cator of the magnitude and distribution of treatment costs among low-
and high-cost producers, but must be interpreted with some care. In
Figure 7-1, pre-control contribution to capital is measured by the
7-31
-------
Table 7-14. Costs of Compliance for New Sources,
Model Mills: Proposed Regulation
BPT Capital
Total Total Costs for
Mill
Capital
Capital
Annual
Existinc
Capacity
Costs
Costs
Costst
Mills
Integrated
(ton/d)
(1978 $x 106;
(S/ton)
(S/ton)
(S/ton)
Dissolving Kraft
100C
33.1
100. 3
38. 0
29.0
Market Bleached Kraft
750
20.7
83.5
28.4
20.3
BCT Bleached Kraft
500
17.1
103.4
35.4
24.8
Fine Bleached Kraft & Soda
750
19.0
76.9
27.4
41.5
Unbleached Kraft (Linerboard)
500
8.2
49.6
16.2
5.3
Unbleached Kraft (Bag)
1000
13.6
41. 2
13.4
12.7
Semi-Chemical
500
8.9
54.2
18.C
12.2
Unbleached Kraft and Serai-Chem.
1500
21.2
42.9
14.5
11.4
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
500
40.4
244.9
82.9
26.5
Papergrade Sulfite
750
39.8
160.8
54.1
84.4
Groundwood — Themjo-Mechanical
500
9.1
55.4
19.7
*
Groundwood — Coarse, Molded,News500
10.2
61.7
21.8
*
Groundwood — Pine Papers
500
10.9
66.3
22.1
25.7
Misc. Integrated Mills
-
-
-
_
21.7
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
500
11.2
67.8
30.0
*
Deink (Newsprint)
500
J 2.0
72,9
30.4
-
Deink (Tissue)
500
13.2
80.3
33 .7
66.7
Tissue from Wastepaper
10
1.3
389.7
152.4
31.8
Paperboard from Wastepaper
500
4.4
26.5
9.6
6.7
Wastepaper Molded Products
50
1.5
89.5
33.2
*
Builders Paper & Roofing Felt
150
2.5
49.9
19.8
*
Misc. Secondary Fiber Kills
—
"*
—
—
15.5
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers
250
4.4
53.9
18.6
22.5
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
250
4.1
49.4
21.7
8,4
Nonintegrated Lightweight
50
2.7
164. 3
67.5
34.0
Nonintegrated Filter & Nonwoven
25
1.7
205. 8
85.0
54.1
Nonintegrated Lightweight
— Electrical Allowance
50
2.9
178. 7
73.5
A'
Nonintegrated Paperboard
50
1.6
97.9
43.4
18.4
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
18.7
Source: E.C. Jordan, 308 Survey.
"Includes 0 & M energy and capital recovery (22%).
~Suppressed due to confidentiality.
7-32
-------
Table 7-15. Total Costs of Compliance, 1982-83,
for New Sources: Proposed Regulation
(Millions of 1978 $)
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Liner.
Bl. Kraft Folding
Semi-Chem, Corr.
Recycled Liner
Recycled Corr.
Recycled Folding
Constr. Paper & Bd.
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board
All Other Board
Pulp
Dissolving
Market
Total
Total Annual
Capital Costs Costs
9.7 3.2
0 0
0 0
0.2 0.1
34.3 13.9
21.9 7.6
15.1 5.3
8.2 3.2
0 0
0 0
0 0
19.3 7.2
38.8
0
1.3
21.5
0
.02
0
1.9
0
1.6
0.8
12.8
0
0.4
7.1
0
.01
0
0.8
0
0.5
0.3
0
0
0
0
174.8
62.5
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-33
-------
r'IGURE 7-1: The Effect of Elasticity on the
Relative Changes in Price,
Quantity, and Contribution to
Capital
PRICE,
COST
Q Q
OUTPUT
7-34
-------
area ABP and post-control contribution to capital by the area DCP1.
The net change is given by the area PECP' ( l\\\\\\\\\l ) less the area
ABED ( 1///////771 ) and the relative change is (PECP'-ABED)/ABP. It
can be seen that the amount PECP is very close to (P'-P)Q' and hence
depends mainly on the change in costs at the margin which affect price
and output. On the other hand, area ABED roughly measures the total
amount of treatment costs, and hence will be affected by whether treat-
ment costs of infranarginal producers are low or high relative to the
marginal producer. Lastly, for a given base quantity 0Q, original
contribution ABP depends on the shape of the supply curve.
Because of these points, for a given percent increase, the relative
change in contribution could be large either if cost increases for in-
framarginal producers are high relative to marginal producers or if the
base level of contribution is low (SS relatively flat) or both. There-
fore it is useful to compare the percent change in contribution to the
ratio of contribution to total revenues (ABP/OQBP in Figure 7-1) to
determine the extent to which, for example, a small base level of con-
tribution might be the cause of a large percent change in contribution
due to treatment costs.
Proposed Regulation
Table 7-16 shows the impacts on price, output and contribution to
capital projected to result from treatment costs due to the Proposed
Regulation. The relative price increases range from 0 percent to 3.57
percent, and the absolute price changes range from $0 to $23.30 per
ton. The overall average price increase is $4.10 per ton. Changes
in output range from -5.94 percent to plus 1.90 percent. The overall
loss in output is 480,000 tons per year. In general, relative price
changes are greater than relative output changes, reflecting the in-
elastic demand for most paper and board products. Exceptions to this
are 31eached Kraft Papers, Glassine and Greaseproof Papers, and Re-
cycled Lincrfcoard. Impacts in the board sectors show a greater range
than in the paper sectors mainly due to the large cost increases in
bleached board product sectors.
Paper grades with relatively high price impacts are Newsprint
(3.20 percent}, and Glassine and Greaseproof (1.83 percent). Glassine
and Greaseproof has the highest overall impact with a 5.94 percent loss
in output as well. Uncoated Groundwood, Thin Papers, Cotton Fibre, and
Tissue show very small impacts.
Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached Kraft Foldingboard, and Semi-
Chemical Corrugating Medium show the greatest price increases of the
board grades. Bleached Kraft Foldingboard has the highest overall im-
pacts, with a 2.52 percent drop in output as well. The lowest impacts
are in the recycled grades.
7-35
-------
Table 7-16.
Summary of Demand/Supply Analysis
Proposed Regulation
Average Percent Changes
from Base Case, 1983-85
Average Price
Contribution Increase, 1983-85
Paper Price Output to Capital (1978 $/ton)
Unbleached Kraft
.69
- .75
-1.30
2.00
Bleached Kraft
.83
-2.26
-5.86
2.90
Glassine
1.83
-5.94
7.68
16.00
Spec. Industrial
.61
- .48
.92
5.80
Newsprint
3.20
- .87
3.75
9.60
Coated Printing
.49
- .20
-1.01
2.90
Uncoated Freesheet
.80
- .19
- .51
4.60
'Jncoated Groundwood
0
0
-2.58
0
Thin Papers
.20
- .08
-1.66
1.30
Solid Bl. Bristols
.67
- .24
- .77
3.30
Cotton Fibre
.08
- .15
- .16
1.20
Tissue
.23
- .01
- .31
2.20
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 1.86 - .94
Bl. Kraft Liner. 2.63 - .99
Bl. Kraft Folding 3.57 -2.52
Semi-Chem. Corr. 2.48 -1.76
Recycled Liner .18 .01
Recycled Corr. 1.41 1.90
Recycled Folding .07 - .08
Constr. Paper & Bd. 0 0
Molded Pulp+
Solid Bl. Board .72 - .64
All Other Board .18 - .11
.85
1.47
-3.72
1.63
.57
1.94
- .51
- .27
- .36
-1.43
4. 30
7.00
15.60
5. 50
0.40
3.00
.30
0
3.30
0.50
Pulp
Dissolving
Market"
2.85
-2.09
4.04
10.40
Overall Average
1.02
.63
- .42
4.10
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
•••No demand/supply model.
7-36
-------
Recycled Linerboard and Recycled Corrugating Medium actually
show increases in both price and output. This results fron their roles
as substitutes for their corresponding solid grades, Bleached and Un-
bleached Linerboard and Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, respectively.
Table 7-5 shows that unit treatment costs are slightly less for the
recycled grades than the corresponding solid grades. Since the output
of the solid grades is much larger than the recycled grades, the cross-
price effect outweighs the own-price effect, and demand for recycled
board grades actually increases. See Appendix 2-B for a discussion of
the modeling of demand for the linerboard and corrugating medium pro-
duct sectors.
Dissolving Pulp shows small price and output impacts because only
mills in the Dissolving Kraft subcategory (three out of nine total) are
subject to BCT regulations.
Percent changes in contribution show a pronounced disparity.
Although most sectors show net losses, a few such as Glassine and Grease-
proof, Newsprint, and Semi-Chemical and Recycled Corrugating Medium
show gains. This implies that at least some firms will benefit from
pollution controls. This result can occur when individual firms ex-
perience cost increases less than the price increases of the goods they
produce. For example, indirect dischargers face no treatment costs
under the Proposed Regulation. This result is confirmed in the closure
analysis, where some base case closures reopen under the option. The
largest declines in contribution are shown by Bleached Kraft Papers
(-5.86 percent) and Bleached Kraft Foldingboard (-3.72 percent).
Alternative Option 1
Results for Alternative Option 1 are shown in Table 7-17. Impacts
in Alternative Option 1 are the smallest of all the three options not
based on exemplary mill costs. All price and quantity impacts except
for Dissolving Pulp are less than one percent. The overall price in-
crease is $1.20 per ton and the overall output change is 99,000 tons
per year. Impacts on contribution show a somewhat greater range, fron
an increase of 1.28 percent for Special Industrial Papers to decreases
of 1.67 percent for Bleached Kraft Papers, 3.41 percent for Semi-
Chemical Corrugating Medium, and 4.13 percent for Dissolving Pulp.
In the paper grades, price impacts range from C to 0.6 percent,
output impacts fron 0 to -0.73 percent, and contribution impacts from
1.28 percent for Special Industrial Paper to -1.21 percent for News-
print and -1.67 percent for Bleached Kraft Paper.
In the board grades, price impacts range from -0.22 percent for
Recycled Corrugating to 0.26 percent for Unbleached Kraft Linerboard,
output impacts range from plus 0.02 percent for Recycled Foldingboard
to -0.51 percent for Bleached Kraft Foldingboard.
7-37
-------
Table 7-17. Summary of Demand/Supply Analysis:
Alternative Option 1
Average Percent Changes
from Base Case, 1983-85
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
Price Output
. 16
.24
.29
.61
.61
.24
.41
0
.30
.29
0
0
-.18
-.67
-.73
-.48
-.17
-.10
-.10
0
-.12
-.10
0
0
Contribution
to Capital
- .58
-1.67
- .72
1.28
-1.21
- .57
- .68
- . 66
.87
- .25
- .44
- .60
Average Price
Increase, 1983-85
(1978 $/ton)
. 50
.80
2.60
5.80
1.80
1.40
2.40
- . 60
2.20
1.40
0
- .40
Board
TJnbl. Kraft Liner. _ gg -.15 .64 2.00
Bl. Kraft Liner. _ g4 -.15 -1.38 2.20
Bl. Kraft Folding. 75 -.53 _ 44 3.30
Semi-Chem. Corr. -.17 -.17 -3.41 ~ •
Recycled Liner. _Q2 -.07 - .38 0
Recycled Corr. -.22 -.18 -1.98 •^
Recycled Folding. _q]_ , C2 .49 0
Constr. Paper & Bd. _q3 .CO - .07 -10
Molded Pulp _
Solid Bl. Board _26 -.23 96 1.20
All Other Board .14 -.04 - .67 -40
Pulp
Dissolving 3.74 -1.32 -4.13 13.30
Market
Overall Average _30 -.12 - .51 1.20
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-38
-------
Both Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium and Recycled Corrugating
Medium show decreases in both price and output. This results from the
complementary relationship between linerboard and corrugating medium.
Since both are used to make fibre boxes, the demand for each depends on
the sum of the costs of linerboard and corrugating medium, weighted
by their respective shares in the composition of fibre boxes. A rise
in the cost of one component reduces demand for the other. If the
fall in demand is large enough, it will outweight the upward shift in
the supply curve, causing both price and output to fall.
Dissolving Pulp has the largest overall impacts, including a 3.74
percent price increase and a 4.13 percent loss in contribution to
capital.
Alternative Option 2
Table 7-18 shows the results for Alternative Option 2. Compared to
Alternative Option 1, price and output impacts are substantially greater
in most product sectors. The overall average price increase is $3.90
per ton or .98 percent and the decrease in output is 401,000 tons/year
or -.51 percent. Movements in contribution to capital show no overall
pattern, some increasing and some decreasing. Increases in contribution
to capital relative to Alternative Option 1 would occur in product
sectors where the bulk of cost increases takes place in high cost mills.
This raises price without similarly raising the costs of inframarginal
mills, thereby increasing contribution to capital overall. Sectors in
which this occurs are Glassine and Greaseproof, Newsprint, Unbleached
Linerboard, Bleached Linerboard, and Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium.
On the other hand, in sectors where the bulk of cost increases occur
in low cost mills, contribution to capital decreases although price
does not change much. This occurs in Special Industrial Papers and
Thin Papers. Product sectors with no significant changes from Option 1
are Cotton Fibre and All Other Board.
In the paper grades, price impacts range from 0 for Cotton Fibre
to 1.93 percent for Glassine and Greaseproof, 2.39 percent for News-
print and 1.20 percent for "Jncoated Freesheet. Changes in output bear
about the same relation to price changes as in Option 1. Changes in
contribution to capital range from an increase of 1.19 percent for
Coated Printing and 1.11 percent for Glassine and Greaseproof to de-
creases of 1.93 percent for Solid Bleached Bristols and 2.63 percent
for Unbleached Kraft Papers. Overall, Glassine and Greaseproof is the
hardest hit sector.
In the board grades, price changes range from -0.52 percent for
Recycled Linerboard to 3.46 percent for Bleached Linerboard and 1.76
percent for Bleached Foldingboard. The biggest decreases occur in Semi-
Chemical Corrugating (-2.51 percent) and Recycled Linerboard (-2.56
percent). Bleached Foldingboard again has the largest overall impact.
7-39
-------
Table 7-18. Summary of Demand/Supply Analysis:
Alternative Option 2
Average Percent Changes
from Base Case, 1983-85
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Spec. Industrial
Newsprint
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bl. Bristols
Cotton Fibre
Tissue
Price Output
.72
.34
1.93
.54
2.39
.82
1.20
. 29
.30
.84
0
.44
- .81
- .92
-6.46
- .42
- .66
- .33
- .29
- .61
- .12
- .30
0
- .02
Contribution
to Capital
-2.63
-1.70
1.11
.60
.98
1.19
-1.26
- .81
- .87
-1.93
- .44
- .57
Average Price
Increase, 1983-85
(1978 $/to,n)
2.10
1.20
16. 90
5.10
7.20
4.90
7.00
1.40
2.20
4.10
0
4. 20
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
.86
- .65
4.30
2.00
Bl. Kraft Liner.
3.46
- .93
4.24
9. 20
Bl. Kraft Folding.
1.76
-1.24
-2.43
7.80
Semi-Chem. Corr.
2.21
- .87
-2.51
4.90
Recycled Liner.
- .52
-1.44
-2.56
-1.10
Recycled Corr.
1.86
- .22
2.14
3.90
Recycled Folding.
.09
- .11
. 70
.30
Constr. Paper & Bd.
.03
0
- .48
. 10
Molded Pulp
-
-
-
-
Solid Bl. Board
1.24
-1.08
- . 18
5.80
All Other Board
.20
- .12
- .86
. 50
Pulp
Dissolving
5.28
-1.83
-9. 57
18.80
Market
Overall Average
.98
- .51
-1.27
3.90
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-40
-------
Dissolving Fulp has a larger impact than in Alternative Option 1,
and at 5.28 percent it still has the highest price impact overall.
Alternative Option 3
Table 7-19 shows the results for Alternative Option 3. Relative
price increases range from -.80 percent to 9.61 percent and absolute
price increases range from $-1.60 to $31.80 per ton. The overall
average price increase is $5.90 per ton or 1.47 percent. Changes in
output range from -6.57 percent to 0.66 percent. The overall average
decrease in output is 030,000 tons/year or -1.80 percent. Paper
grades with relatively high price impacts are Glassine and Greaseproof
(1.97 percent), Newsprint (2.60 percent), and Thin Papers (1.72 percent).
These are not large in any absolute sense, however. Special Industrial
Papers, Uncoated Groundwood, Cotton Fibre, and Tissues show very small
impacts. Overall, the most affected grade is Glassine and Greaseproof,
with a relatively significant price increase and a large drop in out-
put .
The bleached grades of linerboard, foldingboard, and solid board
together with Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium show the largest price
increases of the board grades. Bleached Kraft Foldingboard has the
greatest overall impact, since it also shows a large decrease in output
(3.63 percent). The lowest impacts are in the recycled grades,
although Recycled Corrugating Medium shows a large price increase and
increase in output due to substitution away from Semi-Chemical Cor-
rugating Medium.
Relative changes in contribution to capital range from -12.59 per-
cent for Dissolving Fulp and -6.75 percent for Recycled Linerboard to
an increase of 38.4 percent for Bleached Linerboard. The significant
reduction in Recycled Linerboard occurs because both price and output
decline. (See the discussion of this in the section on Alternative
Option 1.) The large increase for Bleached Linerboard results from
the large price increase, low demand elasticity, and low base level of
contribution to capital (only 18 percent of total revenues, see Table
7-3) .
Alternative Option 4
The results for Alternative Option 4 are given in Table 7-20. Re-
sults for all sectors except Construction Paper and Board and Dissolving
Pulp are identical to those of the Proposed Regulation. Differences
between this option and the Proposed Regulation occur only in the
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp and Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt subcate-
gories. These subcategories are exempt under the Proposed Regulation
7-41
-------
Table 7-19. Summary of Demand/Supply Analysis:
Alternative Option 3
Average Percent
Changes
from
Base Case,
1983-85
Average Price
Contribution
Increase, 1983-
Paper
Price
Output
to Capital
(1978 $/ton)
Unbleached Kraft
.79
- .88
-2.27
2. 30
Bleached Kraft
. 44
-1.22
-2.30
1. 50
Glassine
1.97
-6.57
.72
17. 20
Spec. Industrial
. 56
- .44
.59
5.30
Newsprint
2.60
- .72
- .34
7.30
Coated Printing
1.18
- .48
-1.24
7.10
'Jncoated Freesheet
1.52
- .37
-1.89
8.80
U.ncoated Groundwood
.29
- .62
-2.86
1.40
Thin Papers
1.72
- .70
3.52
12.70
Solid Bl. Bristols
1.49
- .53
-3.23
7. 30
Cotton Fibre
0
0
- .58
0
Tissue
.44
- .02
-1.62
4.20
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
1.40
-1.03
-3.64
3.20
Bl. Kraft Liner.
7.28
-1.63
38.4
19.40
Bl. Kraft Folding.
5.14
-3.63
-2.43
22.80
Semi-Chem. Corr.
3.52
-1.64
- .88
7.70
Recycled Liner.
-.80
-2.27
-6.75
- 1.60
Recycled Corr.
2.68
. 66
2.91
5.70
Recycled Folding.
. 12
.15
- .14
.40
Constr. Paper & Bd.
.27
- .08
.05
. 70
Molded Pulp
-
-
-
-
Solid Bl. Board
2.66
-2.30
-2.23
12.30
All Other Board
.36
- .19
-1.49
1.10
Pulp
Dissolving
8.96
-3.11
-12.59
31.80
Market
"""
Overall Average
1.47
-1.80
-1.71 ¦'
5. 90
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-42
-------
Table 7-20. Summary of Demand/Supply Analysis
Alternative Option 4
Average Percent Changes
PaDer
Price
Output
Contribution
to Capital
Average P:
Increase, 1
(1978 $/'
Unbleached Kraft
.69
- .75
-1.30
2.00
Bleached Kraft
.83
-2.26
-5.86
2.90
Glassine
1.83
-5.94
7.68
16.00
Spec. Industrial
.61
- .48
.92
5.80
Newsprint
3.20
- .87
3.75
9.60
Coated Printing
.49
- .20
-1.01
2.90
Uncoated Freesheet
.80
- .19
- .51
4.60
Uncoated Groundwood
0
0
-2.58
0
Thin Papers
.20
- .08
-1.66
1.30
Solid Bl. Bristols
.67
- .24
- .77
3.30
Cotton Fibre
.08
- .15
- .16
1.20
Tissue
.23
- .01
- .31
2.20
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
1.86
- .94
.85
4.30
Bl. Kraft Liner.
2 .63
- .99
1.47
7.00
Bl. Kraft Folding
3.57
-2.52
-3.72
15.60
Semi-Chem. Corr.
2.48
-1.76
1.63
5.50
Recycled Liner
. 18
.01
. 57
0. 40
Recycled Corr.
1.41
1.90
1.94
3.00
Recycled Folding
.07
- .08
- .51
¦ .30
Constr. Paper & Bd.
0
0
- .98
0
Molded Pulpt
Solid Bl. Board
.72
- .64
- .36
3.30
All Other Board
.18
- .11
-1.43
0.5C
Dissolving
5.35
-3.99
-4.59
19.50
Markett
Overall Average
1.06
- .66
- .54
4. 30
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
-No demand/supply analysis.
7-43
-------
but are required to attain BCT levels under this option. The overall
price increase is $4.30 per ton or 1.06 percent, and the decrease in
output is 507,000 tons per year or -.66 percent.
When mills in the Builders' Paper and Roofing Felt subcategory
are assigned treatment costs, price and output in the Construction Paper
and Board product sector are unaffected, but contribution to capital is
lower, .98 percent lower than in the base case. As can be seen from
comparing Tables 7-5 and 7-13, only relatively low-cost mills in the
product sector are affected by the change.
Not exempting the Dissolving Sulfite Pulp subcategory affects both
the Dissolving Pulp and Market Pulp subcategories. However, no demand/
supply analysis is available for the latter. The impacts on Dissolving
Pulp are the largest of any product sector under the option. Price
increases 5.35 percent or $19.50 per ton, output decreases 3.9S percent,
and contribution to capital decreases 4.59 percent.
Capital Availability Analysis
This section describes the results of the capital availability
analysis. These results can be used to evaluate both the plausibility
of the capital expansion forecasts in the study even in the absence of
BCT and BAT pollution costs, and the ability of the industry to finance
required investments in pollution control. Two measures of this ability
are used: the net'present value of a unit of new capacity; and the
relationship of income after taxes, interest and depreciation in a
given year to the amounts required for (a) bringing existing capacity
into compliance with the Proposed Regulation, and (b) normal capacity
expansion, including required pollution control costs.
The first measure assumes that capital markets will provide the
necessary capital if investments in new capacity are profitable, and
hence focuses on the net present value of a unit of new capacity in
each sector. The second measure asks instead whether or not the re-
quired investments can be financed internally in the various sectors.
Both measures have a certain amount of built-in sensitivity analysis,
because one can test how much the cost and revenue components of each
measure can vary while still meeting the profitability or availability
criterion.
These measures were calculated for the Base Case, the Froposed
Regulation, and the Alternative Options. Most product sectors
analyzed meet both the profitability and internal financing criteria
under all options. The exceptions are Bleached Kraft Papers, Bleached
Kraft Linerboard, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached Kraft Folding-
board, Semi-Chemical Corrugating, Newsprint, Coated Printing Paper,
Uncoated Groundwood and Dissolving Pulp. All except Bleached Kraft
7-44
-------
Linerboard and Bleached Kraft Foldingboard meet the profitability
criterion. The factors contributing to these results are discussed
below.
In addition, the ability of individual mills to meet capital costs
out of current cash flow is analyzed. Under the Proposed Regulation,
56 mills have capital costs of pollution control greater than annual
cash flow.
A present value was calculated for an investment in new capacity
in each product sector in each year from 1979 to 1985 in order to
establish a trend of profitability. For example, Table 7-21 shows 1982
values for unit capital costs, K, the net present value of the invest-
ment, PV, based on the forecast of prices from the demand/supply
analysis for the Base Case, and the ratio of present value to capital
costs, PV/K. The results for other years are similar. The ratio
PV/K shows the profitability of the investment and the sensitivity of
the result to different assumptions about costs. If the ratio is close
to zero, the new capacity just breaks even under our assumptions,
whereas if the ratio is 1.0 or greater, there is a very comfortable
margin for error. In fact, one can use the results of Table 7-21 to
calculate how high variable or capital costs could be before the
capacity investment become unprofitable. PV and PV/K are also given
for the Proposed Regulation and Alternative Options 1-4 in Tables 7-22
to 7-26.
Tables 7-21 to 7-26 also give the comparison of income net of
taxes, interest and depreciation (referred to here as "cash flow")
with total capital costs of bringing existing capacity (as of 1932)
into compliance and the capital costs of capacity expansion (including
treatment costs) for the year 1982. This is consistent with the
assumption in the demand/supply analysis that mills start operating
their treatment systems in 1983. This comparison implicitly makes the
very conservative assumption that all capital costs for pollution con-
trol and capacity expansion must be provided from that year's cash
flow. This is conservative because if capital costs exceed available
cash flow for a given sector, firms will likely be able to either
shift funds from other sectors which have surpluses or borrow the re-
mainder. On the other hand, the comparison neglects other demands on
capital such as compliance with other unrelated federal regulations.
Capital costs of pollution control and capacity expansion are
determined in the same manner as was used for total costs of compliance
in an earlier part of this Section. For capacity in place by 1978,
capital costs were computed using production data from the 308 Survey.
For additions to capacity after 1978, pollution control costs were
estimated by forecasting the amount of capacity expansion in each
sector, the mix of technical subcategories making up that expansion,
7-45
-------
and the nix of new sources and expansions of existing mills. The re-
sults here are grouped somewhat differently than in the subsection on
costs of compliance. Capital costs of pollution control for additions
to capacity in 1983 are combined with the base capital costs of that
expansion and hence appear in the third column labeled "Expansion Cost,
1982." Base capital costs of expansion are the product of the capacity
expansion forecast and the unit capital cost described in the present
value analysis.
Base Case
Table 7-21 shows the results of the capital availability analysis
for the Base Case. Investments in all product sectors except Bleached
Kraft Papers and Bleached Kraft Linerboard are profitable, but several
other sectors, Newsprint, Solid Bleached Bristols, Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard, Bleached Foldingboard, Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium,
and Dissolving Pulp, have relatively low profitability. A comparison
of Table 7-21 and Table 7-3 shows that the percent differences ir.
capital costs per ton between bleached grades and the corresponding
unbleached grades is much greater than the percentage price differences.
For example, Bleached Kraft Paper prices arc only $57/ton higher than
for Unbleached Paper, but capital costs are almost double ($1202/ton
vs. $614/ton). The poor performance of Newsprint stems from its having
capital costs higher than those for Uncoated Groundwood although its
price is lower. The marginal profitability of Unbleached Kraft Liner-
board and Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium may just reflect their com-
petitiveness and relative homogeneity. Dissolving Pulp has static
demand.
The most striking result is that investment in most of the product
sectors is so profitable. Trie highest PV ratios are found in Cotton
Fibre, Tissue, Recycled Foldingboard, Construction Paper and Board, and
All Other Board. The high net present values for Glassinc and Grease-
proof and Cotton Fibre are unexpected because no capacity growth is
forecast for these sectors. This suggests that the capital costs de-
rived from the 308 Survey are low. On the other hand, the results show
that investments in raost sectors would be profitable even if capital
costs were substantially higher.
Of the sectors pinpointed as weak by this analysis, there is
corroborating evidence for the three bleached paper and board grades.
Capacity utilization in Bleached Krafr Papers if projected to remain
very low, about 55 percent. In fact, JRI forecasts that production of
Bleached Kraft Papers will actually decline slightly over the period
7-46
-------
Table 7-21. Capital Availability Analysis:
Base Case
Present
Value of
Internal
Funds
Unit of New Capaci
ty—
Millions of
1978 $-
Total
Expansic
Capital Cost
Net PV
Net PV
Net Income
Cost
Paper
($/'ton)
($/ton)
Cap. Cost
1982
1982
Unbleached Kraft
614
537
0.96
195.4
1C2.5
Bleached Kraft
1,202
- 627
-0.52
27.7
13.0
Glassine
831
2, 348
2.83
10. 1
1.9
Spec. Industrial
1,895
3,630
1.92
85.4
36.8
Newsprint
628
493
0.79
185.2
248.7
Coated Prir.tinq
1,013
1,741
1.72
448.4
309.0
Uncoated Freesheet
930
1,440
] .55
1,152.6
138 .6
Uncoated Groundwood
616
1,724
2.8C
139.5
104.1
Thin Papers
1,343
1,567
1.17
51.0
9.1
Solid Bl. Bristols
1, 161
884
. 76
90. 3
8. 1
Cotton Fibre
908
9,903
10.51
22.4
1.8
Tissue
1,402
5,373
3.83
1,024.0
72.9
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 643 152 0.24 435.5 270.0
Bl. Kraft Liner. 1,093 - 848 -0.78 - 20.0 3.7
Bl. Kraft Folding 1,093 975 ,9C 83.0 49.1
Seni-Chcn. Corr. 545 445 .82 134.4 138.4
Recycled Liner 288 35C 1.22 3.6 0.4
Recycled Corr. 320 54C 1.69 46.0 15.4
Recycled Folding 339 1,993 5.88 130.9 19.0
Constr. Paper & Bd. 267 1,391 5.21 248.1 19.5
Molded Pulp
Solid Bl. Board 1,161 1,317 1.14 153.7 23.2
All Other Board 464 1,485 3.20 395.4 46.9
Pulo
Dissolving
Market
700
399
207
0.4]
33.2
Total
5,025.3 1,632.2
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-47
-------
1979-8C.* Similarly, Bleached Foldingboard and Bleached Linerboard
capacity utilization will remain in the low eighties with low rates of
capacity growth.
Although current forecasts for Newsprint are for somewhat slower
growth than in the 70's, prospects are still bright, since U.S. pro-
duction is only a fraction of domestic demand. Capacity utilization
should remain in the mid-90's. This suggests that the unit capital
costs for Newsprint derived from the 308 Survey may be overestimated.
Table 7-21 also shows that the following sectors show cash flow
less than base expansion costs: Bleached Kraft Papers, Newsprint,
31eached Kraft Linerboard, and Semi-Chemical Corrugating. These results
are consistent with the present value analysis and stem from the same
causes. Bleached Kraft Papers and Bleached Kraft Linerboard show
negative cash flow. For the industry as a whole cash flow is $5,023.5
million and base capital costs for expansion over $1,632.2 million.
Proposed Regulation
Table 7-22 gives the results of the capital availability analysis
for the pollution control capital costs resulting from the Proposed
Regulation. Overall, the results are similar to the base case. Capital
costs of compliance through 1982 are $1,258.5 million and the cost of
r.ew capacity is $1,732.8 nil lion. (Recall that expansion costs include
pollution control for new capacity).
The present value of new investment is actually higher than in
the base case in most sectors. This result arises when the pollution
cost increases are higher for high variable production cost mills than
for low variable cost mills. Since price increases are determined by
the cost changes of the high cost mills, the price changes in some
cases exceed the cost increases for low capacity mills, thereby making
them more profitable.
In addition to the product sectors identified in the base case,
the following sectors have cash flow less than capital costs of
pollution control and expansion: Uncoated Groundwood, Bleached Kraft
Foldingboard and Unbleached Kraft Linerboard. The excess of capital
costs over cash flow for Unbleached Kraft Linerboard is about 15 per-
cent, and less than one percent for Uncoated Groundwood.
*DRI Pulp and Paper Review, June 1980, p. 48.
7-48
-------
Table 7-22: Capital Availability Analysis:
Proposed Regulation
Present Value of Internal Funds
-Unit of New Capacity- Millions of 1978 $
1982
Net ?V BAT Capital Expansion
Capital Total Cash Costs Through Cost
Net PV Cost Flow, 1982 1982 1982
Unbleached Kraft
607
.98
195.4
62.4
109.5
Bleached Kraft
- 605
- . 50
- 27.7
24 .7
13.3
Glassine
6,704
8.07
10.1
6.7
1.9
Spec. Industrial
3,684
1.94
85.4
9.9
36.9
Newsprint
596
.95
185.2
98.6
268.8
Coated Printing
2,294
2.27
448.4
98.1
324.8
Uncoated Freesheet
1,486
1.60
1,152.6
177.8
149.S
Uncoated Groundwood
1,733
2 .81
139.5
28.6
111.5
Thin Papers
- 651
- .49
51.0
12.0
9.2
Solid Bl. Bristols
922
.79
90.3
17.6
8.3
Cotton Fibre
10,206
11.24
22.4
3.8
1.8
Tissue
5,402
3.85
1,024.0
99.6
77.1
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
205
. 32
Bl. Kraft Liner.
- 767
- .70
Bl. Kraft Folding
1,133
1.04
Semi-Chem. Corr.
496
.91
Recycled Liner
348
1.21
Recycled Corr.
574
1.79
Recycled Folding
1,995
5.89
Constr. Paper & Bd.
1,402
5.25
Molded Pulpt
Solid Bl. Board
- 644
- .55
All Other Board
559
1.53
435.5 185.5 287.2
- 20.0 3.4 3.8
83. D 51.7 51.0
134.0 68.1 148.9
8.6 2.0 0.4
46.0 3.0 15.6
130.9 7.8 19.3
248.1 6.1 20.6
1.0 C
153.7 36.6 24.4
395.4 11.9 48.2
Pulo
*
Dissolving 2,096 3.00
Markett
33.2 16.3 0
221.3 +-
Total 5025.3 1083.7 1732.8
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
xNo demand/supply model,
ttlncluded in paper and board expansion costs.
7-49
-------
Alternative Option 1
Table 7-23 shows the results of the capital availability analysis
for Alternative Option 1. Total capital costs for pollution control are
$811.4 million and capital costs for capacity expansion are $1,727
million.
Of the present values of net investment, those for Bleached Kraft
Papers and Bleached Kraft Linerboard are negative. Those with rela-
tively low values are the same ones as for the Proposed Regulation.
Overall, the present values are slightly lower for almost all sectors
relative to those for the Proposed Regulation.
In the cash flow analysis, one sector which had cash flow less than
capital costs under the Proposed Regulation, Bleached Kraft Foldingboard,
has net income greater than capital costs under Alternative Option 1.
In general, capital costs for existing sources are substantially less
than those for the Proposed Regulation.
Alternative Option 2 ¦
Table 7-24 shows the results of the capital availability analysis
for Alternative Option 2. Capital costs of pollution control are
$1,628.8 million and capital costs of new capacity are 51,733.9 million,
somewhat higher than the figures for the Proposed Regulation.
The present values of new capacity axe roughly the same as those
for the Proposed Regulation, with present values for most sectors
slightly lower under Alternative Option 2.
The sectors with cash flow less than total capital costs are the
same as those under the Proposed Regulation, and the actual amounts are
similar in magnitude.
Alternative Option 3
Table 7-25 shows the results of the capital availability analysis
for Alternative Option 3. Pollution control capital costs are $2,183.2
million (73 percent greater than for the Proposed Regulation) and ex-
pansion costs are $1,739.2 million (only slightly higher than for the
Proposed Regulation). Both Bleached Kraft Linerboard and Bleached
Kraft Foldingboard have negative net present values of new capacity.
Present values for other product sectors are slightly less than under
the Proposed Regulation.
In addition to those sectors identified in the base case and the
Proposed Regulation, Coated Printing Paper ar.d Glassine and Greaseproof
also have capital costs greater than cash flow. Capital costs of pollu-
tion control for Dissolving Pulp are four time cash flow in that sector.
7-50
-------
Table 7-23. Capital Availability Analysis:
Alternative Option 1
Present Value of Internal Funds
Unit
of New Capacity
—Millions
of 1978
1982
Net PV
Total
BAT Capital
Expansic
Net PV
Capital
Cash Flow
Costs Through
Cost
Paoer
< 5/ton)
Cost
1982
1982
1982
Unbleached Kraft
570
0.93
195.4
23.0
109.5
Bleached Kraft
- 66 3
- 0.55
- 27.7
9.6
13.2
Glassine
2,293
2.76
10.1
4.7
1.9
Spec. Industrial
3,583
1.89
85.4
8.0
37.0
Newsprint
461
0. 74
185.2
60.1
268.1
Coated Printing
1,703
1.68
448.4
74.4
323.6
Uncoated Freesheet
1,388
1.49
1,152.6
124.4
148.9
Uncoated Groundwood
1,693
2.75
139.5
17.5
110.4
Thin Papers
1,516
1.13
51.0
5.8
9.3
Solid Bl. Bristols
842
0.73
90.3
6.9
8.2
Cotton Fibre
9,853
10.85
22.4
0.6
1.8
Tissue
5,320
3.80
1,024.0
60.7
77.1
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
135
0.21
435.5
94.2
286.6
Bl. Kraft Liner.
- 885
- 0.81
2C .0
1.0
3.8
Bl. Kraft Folding
984
0.90
83.0
21.2
50.3
Semi-Chem. Corr.
407
0.75
134.4
57.7
148.9
Recycled Liner
603
2.09
8.6
1.0
0.4
Recycled Corr.
517
1.62
46.0
2.4
15.5
Recycled Folding
1, 980
5.84
130.9
2.3
19.1
Constr. Paper & Ba.
1,357
5.08
248. 1
7.9
20.9
Molded Pulp ; *"
—
—
—
2.8
0
Solid Bl. Board
1,284
1.11
153.7
19.2
24.2
All Other Board
1,470
3.17
395.4
5.4
47.9
Pulp
Dissolving 405 .58 33.2 88.5 0
Market1'1' — — — 112.1 +
Total 5,025.3 811.4 1,727.0
Source : t-'.eta Systems estimates
Included in paper and board expansion costs.
tAMo demand/supply model.
-------
Table 7-24. Capital Availability Analysis:
Alternative Option 2
Present Value
of
Internal
Funds
Unit
of New Capacity
•-Millions of
1978 §—
1982
Net PV
Total Cash
BAT Capital
Expansic
Net PV
Capital
Flow
Costs Through
Cost
Paper
($/ton)
Cost
1982
1982
1982
Unbleached Kraft
529
0.86
195.4
70.2
109.5
Bleached Kraft .
- 679
- 0.57
27.7
25.8
13.3
Glassir.e
2,260
2.72
10.1
9.7
2.0
Spec. Industrial
3,513
1.85
85.4
14. 3
37.4
Newsprint
416
0.66
185.2
144.9
269.1
Coated Printing
1,638
1.62
448.4
118.1
324. 2
Uncoated Freesheet
1,331
1.43
1,152.6
215.9
149.2
Uncoated Groundwood
1,624
2 .64
139.5
38.5
111.9
Thin Papers
1,448
1.08
51.0
15.6
9.3
Solid Bl. Bristols
771
0.66
90. 3
21.0
8.3
Cotton Fibre
9,853
10.85
22.4
0.8
1.8
Tissue
5 ,244
3. 74
1,024.0
126.4
77.2
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 80 0.12 435.5 245.5 287.6
Bl. Kraft Liner. - 929 - 0.85 - 20.0 12.7 3.8
Bl. Kraft Folding 979 0.90 S3.0 66.5 15.0
Semi-Chem. Corr. 418 0.77 134.4 98.C 149.2
Recycled Liner 583 2.02 8.6 3.8 0.4
Recycled Corr. 5 36 1.68 46.0 5.9 15.5
Recycled Folding 1,971 5.82 130.9 4.8 19.4
Constr. Paper & Bd. 1,376 5.15 248.1 19.8 21.1
Molded Pulp -- — -- 2.8 0
Solid Bl. Board 1,252 1.08 153.7 48.6 24.4
All Other Board 1,464 3.16 395.4 14.7 48.3
Pulp
Dissolving 444 C.63 33.2 75.6 0
Market7"'' — — — 235.6 t
Total 5,025.3 1628.8 1733.9
Source: Meta Systems estimates
+Included in paper and board expansion costs.
++No denand/supply model.
7-52
-------
Table 7-25. Capital Availability Analysis:
Alternative Option 3
Present Value of
-Unit of New Capacity-
1982
Internal Funds
-Millions of 1978 $-
Net PV
Total Cash
BAT Capital
Expansic
Net PV
Capital
Flow
Costs Through
Cost
Paper
(5/ton)
Cost
1982
1982
1982
Unbleached Kraft
538
0.88
195.4
84.6
109.5
Bleached Kraft
686
0.57
27.7
33.0
13.4
Glassine
2, 397
2.88
10.1
12.6
2.0
Spec. Industrial
3 ,544
1.87
85.4
17.7
37.5
Newsprint
476
.76
185.2
152.6
269.4
Coated printing
1,688
1.67
448.4
174.5
325.5
Uncoated Freesheet
1, 391
1. 50
1,152.6
306. 2
150.0
Uncoated Groundwood
1,637
2.66
139.5
44.8
112.4
Thin Papers
1,510
1.13
51.0
25.9
9.4
Solid Bl. Bristols
674
0.58
90.3
29.1
8.4
Cotton Fibre
9,756
10.74
22 .4
0.7
1.9
Tissue
5,205
3.71
1,024.0
146.3
77.2
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner.
106
0.17
435.5
310.6
287.8
Bl. Kraft Liner.
- 872
- 0.80
20.0
3.5
3.8
Bl. Kraft Folding
975
0.90
83.0
84.0
51.2
Semi-Chem. Corr.
439
0.81
134.4
130.9
149.5
Recycled Liner
276
0.96
8.6
8.1
0.4
Recycled Corr.
510
1.59
46.0
11. 7
15.9
Recycled Folding
1,954
5.76
130.9
14.8
19.6
Constr. Paper & Bd.
1,359
5.09
248.1
25.6
21.2
Molded pulp'"
—
—
--
4.4
0
Solid Bl. 3oard
1,172
1.01
153.7
61.7
24.4
All Other Board
1,439
3.1C
395.4
14. 5
48.7
Pulp
Dissolving
Market"""
402
0.57
33.2
163.7
318.8
0
t
Total
5,025.3
2183.2
1739.3
Source: Keta Systems estimates
tlncluded in paper and expansion costs.
~">fo demand/supply model.
7-53
-------
Alternative Option 4
Table 7-26 shows the results of the capital availability analysis
for Alternative Option 4. Total capital costs of pollution control
are $1,332.7 million and capital costs of expansion are $1,733.8 million.
The results are identical to those for the Proposed Regulation except
for Dissolving Pulp and Construction Paper and Board. For Construction
Paper and Board, the present value is slightly lower than under the
Proposed Regulation, and capital costs are 2.5 times as high. For
Dissolving Pulp, the present value is slightly lower, and capital costs
are over 2.5 times as high as annual cash flow.
Mill-Specific Capital Availability
The cash flow analysis described above focuses on the overall
amount of funds in each product sector available to finance investments
in pollution control. Examining such broad aggregates may overlook
potential capital problems that individual mills within a product
sector may face. Table 7-27 presents the results of the mill-specific
capital availability analysis described in Section 2 for each sub-
category. The table shows the number of mills in each subcategory
whose BCT/BAT pollution control investment costs exceed their annual
cash flow based on 1983-85 prices. These results are further broken
down into three ranges for the ratio of investment cost to cash flow
1.0 to 1.5; 1.5 to 2.0, and greater than 2.0. The measure of cash flow
is the more conservative one from which normal reinvestment costs are
deducted. (See Section 2.)
Under the Proposed Regulation, 56 mills have investment costs
greater than one-year cash flows, and 26 mills have investment costs
twice as great as cash flow. Thirty-six out of the 56 mills are in in-
tegrated mill subcategories, reflecting the higher costs of compliance
in those subcategories. Mills which are classified as likely base
closures (see next part of this section) had a slightly greater
tendency than all mills to have a ratio greater than one, but the dif-
ference is not significant. On the other hand, all mills classified
as treatment-related closures had ratios greater than one.
The results for Alternative Options 1-4 present the same general
pattern as those for the Proposed Regulation. The number of mills with
ratios greater than one varies with the stringency of the option in an
expected way. The lowest number of affected mills occurs under
Alternative Option 1 and the highest number occurs under Alternative
Option 3. The results for Alternative Options 2 and 4 are fairly close
to those for the Proposed Regulation.
It must be repated that the results given here are only a rough
indicator of problems of capital availability. Most mills will be able
7-54
-------
Table 7-26. Capital Availability Analysis
Alternative Option 4
Present Value of Internal Funds
-Unit of New Capacity- -Millions of 1973 $-
1982
Net PV
BAT Capital
Expansic
Capital
Total Cash
Costs Through
Cost
Paper
Net PV
Cost
Flow, 1982
1982
1982
Unbleached Kraft
607
.98
195.4
62.4
109.5
Bleached Kraft
- 605
- .50
- 27.7
24.7
13.3
Glassine
6,704
8.07
10.1
6.7
1.9
Spec. Industrial
3,684
1.94
85.4
9.9
36.9
Newsprint
596
.95
185.2
98.6
268.8
Coated Printing
2,294
2.27
448.4
98.1
324.8
Uncoated Freesheet
1,486
1.60
1,152.6
177.8
149.8
Uncoated Groundwood
1,733
2.81
139.5
28.6
111.5
Thin Papers
- 651
- .49
51.0
12.0
9.2
Solid Bl. Bristols
922
.79
90.3
17 .6
8.3
Cotton Fibre
10,206
11.24
22.4
3.8
1.8
Tissue
5,402
3.85
1,024.0
99.6
77.1
Board
Unbl. Kraft Liner. 205 .32 435.5 185.5 287.2
Bl. Kraft Liner. - 767 - .70 - 20.0 3.4 3.8
Bl. Kraft Folding 1,133 1.04 83.0 51.7 51.0
Semi-Chem. Corr. 496 .91 134.0 68.1 148.9
Recycled Liner 348 1.21 8.6 2.0 0.4
Recycled Corr. 574 1.79 46.0 3.0 15.6
Recycled Folding 1,995 5.89. 130.9 7.8 19.3
Constr. Paper & Bd. 1,295 4.85 248.1 15.0 21.6
Molded Pulpt 1.0 0
Solid Bl. Board - 644 - .55 153.7 36.6 24.4
All Other Board 559 1.53 395.4 11.9 4B.2
Pulp
Dissolving 1,993 2.85 33.2 81.6
Markett — — — 221.3
Total 5025.3 1,332.7 1,733.9
Source: Meta Systems estimates,
+No demand/supply model,
ttlncluded in paper and board expansion costs.
7-55
-------
TABLE 7-27. Comparison of BCT/BAT Investment Costs
and Annual Cash Flows of Individual Mills
by Major Subcategory Type
Total Number of
Direct Dischargers = 347
Number of Mills with Batio of
Investment Costs tc Cash Flow
Within Each Percentage Range
100-150% 150-200%
Proposed Regulation
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
13
3
0
16
8
4
2
14
>200%
15
7
4
26
Total
36
14
6
56
Alternative Option 1
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
5
4
2
11
4
2
1
7
12
4
3
19
21
10
6
37
Alternative Option 2
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
13
3
4
26
10
2
1
13
16
7
5
23
45
12
10
67
Alternative Option
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
22
3
6
31
16
2
2
20
26
11
5
42
64
16
13
93
Alternative Option 4
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
14
3
0
17
5
2
15
18
9
4
31
40
17
6
63
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
7-56
-------
to spread investment costs over a number of years by selling industrial
revenue bonds. Multi-mill firms may be able to shift funds from other
mills to those mills with the highest investment costs.
Mill Closure Analysis
This subsection gives the results of the mill closure analysis. As
was discussed in the methodology in Section 2, the analysis represents
only an approximation of the actual closure decision rule and informa-
tion used to make that decision. Nevertheless, use of the 308 Survey
probably gives as accurate and detailed a financial picture of the in-
dustry as can be obtained. Table 7-28 shows estimated numbers of mill
closures and total losses of capacity by major subcategory group for
the Base Case as well as the changes in closures resulting from the
cost and price impacts of the Proposed Regulation. Fifty-seven out of
a total of 587 mills close in the base case. Seven more mills are pre-
dicted to close under the Proposed Regulation, and another four mills
that were projected Base Case closures stay open, making net closures
due to the Proposed Regulation equal to plus three. This occurs be-
cause indirect 'discharger mills or mills with low treatment costs bene-
fit from the price increases brought about by mills with higher cost
increases. The overall amount of capacity lost is 3.15 million tons
per year in the 3ase Case, with a net gain of 210,000 tons per
year under the Proposed Regulation.
Nonintegrated mills show the greatest relative number of base
closures with 26 out of 135 mills closing. Twenty-five out of 247
secondary fiber mills close, while integrated mills have the fewest
closures, both in absolute and percentage terms: six out of 205.
The distribution of closures and closed capacity across the major
product sector groupings (Pulp, Paper, Paperboard) is shown in Table
7-29. By far the largest number of closures occur in mills producing
paper grades. It should be noted that the number of closures is in
some cases greater here than in Table 7-28 because of double-counting,
since some mills produce both paper and board. For comparison, the
total average amount of slack capacity over the period 1983-85 implied
by the demand/supply analysis is also shown in Table 7-29. To be con-
sistent, the amount of slack capacity should exceed the amount of closed
capacity by a fair amount since not all remaining mills will run at
full capacity. Overall the amount of slack capacity is 480,000 tons
per year while the amount of net closed capacity is negative, so this
simple consistency test is met.
The relationship between closed capacity and slack capacity for
the increments to each due to treatment costs is less obvious. For
example, a mill which had low capacity utilization in the base case
but just managed to stay open might close because of treatment costs.
7-57
-------
Table 7-28. Results of Mill Closure Analysis
By Subcategory Group: Base Case
and Proposed Regulation
Base Case
No. Closures
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
No. Mills In Sample
Integrated
Mills
6
1031
205
Secondary
Fiber Mills
25
851
247
Nonintegrated
Mills Total
26 57
1269 3151
135 587
Proposed Regulation (Additional Impacts)
No. Closures 1 5
No. Reopenings 1 2
Capacity Closed -102 66
(000 tons/year)
1
1
-174
7
4
-210
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-58
-------
Table 7-29. Results of Mill Closure Analysis
by Product Group, Base Case and
Proposed Regulation
Pulp Paper 3oard Total
Base Case
No. Closures 5 46 12 63
Capacity Closed 186 2433 532 3151
(000 tons/year)
Slack Capacity 145 2156 6138 7719
(000 tons/year)
Proposed Regulation (Additional Impacts)
No. Closures 0 4 3 7
No. Reopenings 112 4
Capacity Closed -184 -66 40 -210
(000 tons/year}
Slack Capacity 3C 144 307 481
(000 tons/year}
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-59
-------
Therefore, when treatment costs are imposed, not only is overall produc-
tion reduced, but it is reallocated among mills if some close. There-
fore, the consistency test should compare total slack, capacity with
total closed capacity. Again, Table 7-29 shows that this test is met
for the industry as a whole with an ample margin.
Tables 7-30 and 7-31 show the results of the closure analysis for
the four alternative options by major subcategory and product sector
group, respectively. The highest number of closures occurs under Al-
ternative Option 4, with nine added closures. The greatest loss of
capacity occurs under the most costly option, Alternative Option 3,
with an added 333,000 tons per year closed. The lowest impacts occur
under Alternative Option 1, the least costly option, with two closures
and three reopenincs for a net gain in capacity of 184,000 tons per
year.
Table 7-32 shows the breakdown of potential closures by region
for the Base Case, the Proposed Regulation and the Alternative Options.
Base Case closures are heavily concentrated in the Northeast and North
Central regions (45 out of 57 mills). This result is consistent with
the concentration of smaller older nonintegrated mills in these regions.
The closures and reopenings under the treatment options occur mostly
in the Northeast, Southeast and North Central areas.
It is important to verify the forecast of base closures, because
it is possible that overestimating the number of base closures could
lead to an underestimation of closures due to treatment costs. The
number of base closures seems high but is not out of line when compared
with previous years or with projected market conditions in various
sectors. According to API,* 56 mills closed in the period 1970-75, 14
mills in 1976-77, and 9 mills in 1978-79. In comparison, our analysis
covers the period 1978-85.
Market conditions in a number of product sectors make a number of
closures likely. Typically, smaller, older nonintegrated mills will be
vulnerable to a combination of significant increased in new integrated
capacity and recession-weakened demand in the early 1980's. This
situation should occur in Tissues,** Coated Printing and Llncoated Free-
sheet,*** and Unbleached Linerboard. In addition, closures can be
*API Capacity Estimate, 1979.
**Pulp and Paper, March 1980, p. 17.
***Ibid., August 1980, p. 125.
7-60
-------
Table 7-30. Results of Mill Closure Analysis, by Subcategory Group
Alternative Options 1-4
Integrated Secondary Nonintegrated
Mills Fiber Mills Mills Total
Alternative Option 1
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 2
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 3
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 4
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
0
0
0
2
0
144
4
0
482
1
0
83
1
2
-19
3
0
56
2
0
26
7
2
93
1
1
-165
0
1
-30
0
2
-175
1
1
-174
2
3
-184
5
1
170
6
2
333
5
3
2
Source: Meta Systems estimates
7-61
-------
Table 7-31. Results of Mill Closure Analysis, by Product: Group
Alternative Options 1-4
Alternative Option 1
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Slack Capacity
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 2
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(COO tons/year)
Slack Capacity
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 3
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Slack Capacity
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 4
No. Closures
No. Reopenings
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Slack Capacity
(000 tons/year)
Source: Meta Systems estimates
Pulp- Paper Paperboard Total
0 2 0 2
0 12 3
0 -161 -23 -184
15 186 412 613
0 4 15
0 13 1
0 140 30 170
3 159 226 388
2 4 15
0 2 14
280 54 -1 333
1 43 53 97
0 4 5 9
0 12 3
C -65 -67 2
56 144 307 507
7-62
-------
Table 7-32. Projected Net Mill Closures by Region
Base Case
No. Mills
Capacity Closed
(OCC tons/year)
Additional Impacts:
Proposed Regulation
No. Mills
Capacity Closed
(CCO tons/year)
Alternative Option 1
No. Milis
Capacity Closed
(COO tons/year!
Alternative Option 2
No. Mills
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 3
No. Mills
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Alternative Option 4
No. Mills
Capacity Closed
(000 tons/year)
Northeast
27
1543
1
-149
-2
-196
3
95
3
2C6
1
-149
North
Southeast Central Northv/cst
3 18 2
103 931 212
3
18
3
0
0
0
1
103
3
18
104
12
1
75
-1
-153
2
105
-1
-183
0
0
0
0
West &
Southwest
7
363
0
0
0
0
27
Source: Metci Systems estimates
V
-------
expected to be concentrated in the secondary fiber and nonintegrated
mills because they will be caught in a squeeze due to market pulp
prices rising faster than the wood prices faced by the integrated mills.*
Employment Impacts of Mill Closures
Table 7-33 shows the direct effects of the projected nrill closures
on employment. Under the Proposed Regulation, there is a net gain of
600 jobs. The highest employment losses occur under Alternative Option
3 with 3200 jobs lost overall and the next highest impacts are under
Alternative Option 2 with 2500 jobs lost. The lowest employment impacts
occur under the least costly option, Alternative Option 1, with a net
cain of 750 jobs.
As was noted in Section 2, the above methodology for determining
employment impacts examines only impacts due to mill closures rather
than any reductions in output. The impact of reductions ir. output on
the number of jobs is more difficult to predict. It is likely that mills
would reduce overtime and the number of shifts rather than simply reduce
the number of full-time jobs in proportion to the reduction in output.
This suggests that applying an average productivity figure to the re-
duction in output caused by treatment costs will overestimate the number
of jobs lost. However, more accurate information is not available. As
a supplement to the impacts of closure on employment, employment losses
under each treatment option were also estimated by multiplying output
losses in each product sector by average worker per ton figures derived
from the 308 Survey. The results are as follows:
In some cases these numbers are less than from the closure impacts
alone. This is because some mills will increase output to absorb some
of the output lost by the closed mills. Note also that this analysis
does not capture increases in output in other industries due to sub-
stitution resulting from higher prices of pulp and paper products.
*Paper Trade Journal, March 15, 1980, p. 29.
Number of Jobs Lost
Proposed Regulation
Alternative Option 1
Alternative Option 2
Alternative Option 3
Alternative Option 4
1418
335
1287
1951
1517
7-64
-------
PABLE 7-33.
Direct Losses in employment Due to Mill Closures
Number of Jobs
Mill Closures Mill Reoosninas Total
Proposed Regulation
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonxntegrated
Total
A'. tsrr.ative Option 1
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegratcc
Total
Alternative Option 2
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
Alternative Option 3
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
Alternative Option 4
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
650
400
50
1100
0
0
130
150
2350
150
0
2500
3050
150
0
3200
650
500
50
1200
• 650
- 150
- 900
¦1700
C
0
- 90C
- 900
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
- 150
- 900
-1050
0
250
-850
-600
-750
-750
2350
150
0
2500
3050
150
n
3200
65C
350
-850
150
Source: Meta Systems estimates, E.C. Jordan 308 Survey Data
7-65'
-------
Community Impacts
Because of the confidentiality of the 308 Survey data, it was not
possible to identify specific communities which would be affected by
the predicted mill closures under the Proposed Regulation and the
Alternative Options. However, a methodology for determining indirect
iapacts on earnings and employment which taJces regional variations in
wage rates into account was described in Section 2. This section
presents the results of that methodology along with the direct impacts
on earnings. As discussed in Section 2, it was not possible to
estimate losses in state and federal tax revenues due to mill closures.
Local revenues from user charges should not be affected because
"indirect dischargers" which discharge to publicly-owned treatment
works (POTW's) are not affected by the Proposed Regulation.
Table 7-34 shows direct, indirect and total changes in earnings
due to the Proposed Regulation and the four Alternative Options. The
effects on earnings of mill closures and reopenings are given
separately. In some cases the positive effects of the reopenings out-
weigh the negative effects of the closures. Under the Proposed Regulation,
net direct additions to earnings are 46.3 million per year; indirect
impacts are $62.9 million per year; and total net impacts are $99.2
million per year. The greatest losses occur under Alternative Option 3,
with an overall loss in earnings of $137.6 million per year. It should
be noted that these earnings loss estimates assume that discharged
workers do not find alternative employment. Therefore these estimates
can be expected to decline over time as the workers relocate and/or
retrain for other jobs.
Table 7-35 shows indirect impacts on employment. As discussed in
Section 2, indirect impacts are calculated by applying regional wage
data to the indirect earnings impacts shown in Table 7-34. Net indirect
employment gains under the Proposed Regulation are 3400 jobs. The
largest negative indirect impacts occur under Alternative Option 2,
with 4929 net jobs lost.
7-66
4
-------
TABLE 7-34.
Impacts
Direct
Due to Mill
and Indirect
Closures
Earnings
Losses
Millions of 1978 $
Direct
Closures Reopenings
Indirect
Closures Reopenings
Net"
Total
Proposed Regulation
Integrated
5.0
-17.0
34.1
- 39.5
- 17.4
Secondary Fiber
6.7
- 2.3
14.9
- 3.5
15.8
Nonir.tegrated
1.2
-29.9
4.1
- 73.0
-98.8
Total
12.9
-49.2
53.1
-116.0
- 99.2
Alternative Option 1
Integrated
0
0
0
0
0
Secondary Fiber
.5
- 2.3
l.C
- 3.5
- 4.3
Nonintegrated
2.9
-29.9
6.2
- 73.0
- 93.8
Total
3.4
-32 .2
7.2
- 76.5
-98.1
Alternative Option 2
Integrated
12.5
0
54.5
0
67 .0
Secondary Fiber
4.9
C
11.6
C
lb. 5
Nonintegrated
0
- 4.2
0
- 20.6
- 24.8
Total
17.4
- 4.2
66.1
- 20.6
58.7
Alternative Option 3
Integrated
87.6
0
156.6
0
244 .2
Secondary Fiber
3.8
0
8.5
0
12.3
Nonintegrated
0
-4 3.9
0
- 75.1
-119.C
Total
91.4
-43.9
165.1
- 75.1
137.5
Alternative Option 4
Integrated
.2
0
34.1
0
34.3
Secondary Fiber
7.5
- 2.3
17.4
- 3.5
19.1
Nonir.tegrated
1.1
-29.9
3.6
- 73.0
- 98.2
Total
8.8
-32.2
55.1
- 76.5
- 44.8
Source: Meta Systems estimates
"Sum of all four columns.
7-67
i
-------
TABLE 7-35. Impacts Due to Mill Closures;
Indirect Employment Losses
Number of Jobs Lost
Closures Reopenings
Total
Proposed Regulation
Integrated 1800
Secondary Fiber 800
Nonintegrated 200
Total 2800
Alternative Option 1
Integrated 0
Secondary Fiber 50
Nonintegrated 300
Total 350
Alternative Option 2
Integrated 2850
Secondary Fiber 600
Nonintegrated 0
Total 3450
Alternative Option 3
Integrated 8450
Secondary Fiber 450
Nonintegrated 0
Total 8900
Alternative Option 4
Integrated 1800
Secondary Fiber 950
Nonintegrated 200
Total 2950
Source: Meta Systems estimates
-2200
- 200
-3800
-6200
0
- 200
-3800
-4000
0
0
-1100
-1100
0
0
-4000
-4000
0
- 200
-3800
-4000
- 400
600
-3600
-3400
0
- 150
-3500
-3650
2850
600
-1100
2350
8450
450
-4000
4900
1800
750
-3600
-1050
7-68
4
-------
Impact on U.S. Balance of Trade
As the world's largest producer of forest products, the United
States supplied roughly 35 percent of total world pulp, paper and
paperboard in 1979. However, the United States is also the largest
consumer of these products, and in 1979 exports were only 45 percent
of imports by weight.* U.S. consumption in 1979 was 64.3 million
metric tons, which far out-paced second-ranked Japan (17.5 million
metric tons), third-ranked West Germany (9.5 million tons), and
fourth-ranked USSR (8.4 million tons). This is due in part to our
very high per capita consumption of 637 pounds of pulp, paper and
paperboard, as compared to Canada's 474, Sweden's 470, and West Germany's
452 pounds per capita. No other country consumed over 400 pounds of
forest, products per capita last year.
Though the United States clearly dominates world production and
consumption of forest products, its rate of production expansion has
not kept pace with other parts of the world. Long-term (1960-1978)
expansion trends show Asia/Australia leading with an annual rate of
production expansion of 11.9 percent, followed by Latin America with
8.1 percent, Europe with 4.3 percent, and North America with 3.5 per-
cent (which tied with Africa for last place world wide). These per-
cent increases, however, ignore the base size on which expansion
grows. Thus the North American paper and paperboard tonnage increase
from 1960 to 1978 was 32.5 million metric tons, compared to Europe's
30.5 million, Asia's 24.3 million, and Latin America's 4.7 million.
According to a recent study by the Food and Agriculture Organization's
Pulp and Paper Advisory Board, between 1979 and 1984 world paper and
paperboard capacity will grow at an annual rate of 2.9 percent and
world papergrade pulp capacity will grow at an annual rate of 2.6
percent.** In spite of an expected 12 percent growth in U.S. world
pulp capacity between 1979 and 1984, the study predicts that U.S.
pulp capacity will drop from 33.5 percent to 33 percent of world
capacity over this same five year period.
The most pronounced world-wide long-term production trend has
been the entrenchment of rich countries as dominant forest product
producers. Less developed countries currently produce less than
one-quarter of the world's paperboard and less than one-fifth of the
world's pulp. Though both rates represent developing countries'
increases since 1960, North American world dominance will continue
for a long time. As an example, two new U.S. mills (Weyerhauser in
Mississippi and International Paper in Louisiana) will add almost as
much capacity to these companies as Africa's total 1978 production.
Currently imports exceed exports, both in terms of tonnage and
value. According to the U.S. Census, in 1978 we exported approximately
*Pulp and Paper, August 1980, p. 74.
**Paper Trade Journal, August 15, 1980, p. 5 7.
7-69
t
-------
2.6 million tons of wood pulp valued at $.82 billion, while importing
4.0 million tons valued at $1.1 billion. In the same year, we exported
2.9 million tons of paper and paperboard valued at $1.1 billion, while
importing 9.3 million tons valued at $2.7 billion.
• Table 7-36 below lists the amounts of various pulp, paper and
paperboard products imported and exported by the United States in 1978.
In some cases, the categories are slightly different for exports and
imports. Among the pulp categories, wc both import and export large
quantities of Bleached Sulfate Pulp. We also export large amounts of
Dissolving Pulp.
United States imports of paper are over three times as large as
our exports of paper. Over one-'nalf of all pulp, paper and paperboard
imports is Newsprint, chiefly from Canada. We also import significant
amounts of Uncoated Printing Paper. In contrast, we export very large
quantities of paperboard and import very little. The major export in
this category is Kraft Linerboard. To summarize, our major export
sectors are Dissolving and Bleached Sulphate Pulp, Kraft Linerboard
and Bleached Packaging Paperboard. Our major import sectors are
Bleached Sulphate Pulp, Newsprint, L'ncoated Printing and Construction
Paper and 3oard.
Future production and consumption levels are projected by the Data
Resources, Inc. (DRI) international pulp and paper models in conjunc-
tion with their models of the economies of various countries. They
expect paper and board demand to increase in response to quickened
economic growth in the 1980's. However, paper and board markets will
not keep pace with general economic growth in the late 1980's due to
rising real prices of paper and increased competition from electronics
and alternative packaging methods and materials. Printing and writing
papers will lead overall paper and board demand. Imports will become
increasingly competitive as tariffs are reduced under the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Scandinavian exports to
Western Europe will retain their most favored status under the European
Free Trade Association (EFTA) agreements, with import tariffs on
Scandinavian goods being phased out by 1983.
In the early 1980's, demand for pulp will exceed capacity and real
prices will increase, leading to new investment in the U.S. South and
in non-traditional producing areas of the world. By the late 1980's,
the supply will have increased sufficiently to stabilize prices. DRI
does not foresee any wood shortage in the U.S. through 1990, ever, with
the large increases ir. pulp demand they are forecasting.
DRI forecasts that a large portion of the worldwide growth in pulp
and paper demand over the next decade will occur in regions which lack
the resources necessary to meet this increase. Therefore, rapid in-
creases in pulp and paper products trade on the world market will
continue. Two areas of the world which will be the major importers
are Europe (specifically the EEC) and Japan. Recognizing that it will
continue to be highly dependent on other parts of the world for wood
7-7C
\
-------
TABLE 7-36. IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF PULP, PAPER, AND PAPERBOARD*
Product
1978 (10 tons) Percent of Total
Imports Exports Imports Exports
Wood Pulp, Total
4,024
2,599
30.2%
47.1%
Dissolving
189
757
1.4
13.7
Sulphite, Total
484
210
3.6
3.8
Bleached
417
190
3.1
3.4
Unbleached
67
20
0.5
0.4
Sulphate, Total
3,143
1,569
23.6
28.4
Bleached
2,813
1,400
21.1
25.4
Semi-Bleached
130
93
1.0
1.7
Unbleached
200
76
1.5
1.4
Soda, Screening, Other
* *
62
**
1.1
Other
207
1.6
Paper and Paperboard
9,319
2,921
69.8
52.9
Paper, Total
8,592
543
64.4
9.8
Newsprint
7,484
82
56.1
1.5
Uncoated Groundwood
522
58
3.9
1.1
Coated Printing
214
74
1.6
1.3
Uncoated Free Sheet
85
1.5
Uncoated Printing
725
5.4
Thin, Excl. Cigarette
7
27
0.1
0.5
Writing, Excl. Thin
12
0.1
Cotton Fiber
N.A.
12
0.2
Bristols
1
11
0.0
0.2
Unbleached Kraft, Total
65
45
0.5
0.8
Glassine
5
8
0.0
0.1
Other Packaging
67
36
0.5
0.7
Special Industrial
1
84
0.0
1.5
Tissue/ Total
12
21
0.1
0.4
Paperboard, Total
100
2,282
0.7
41.3
Kraft Linerboard
1,605
29.1
Corrugating Medium
32
0.6
Bleached Packaging
441
8.0
Recycled Paperboard
204
3.7
Containerboard
32
0.2
Other Paperboard
68
0.5
Wet Machine Board
3
8
0.0
0.1
Construction Paper & Board
625
89
4.7
1.6
Total Pulp, Paper and Board
13,343
5,520
*U.S. Bureau of Census, as reported in American Paper Institute, Sta-
tistics of Paper and Paperboard, 3.979.
**Included with Sulphate Pulp Imports.
7-71
-------
resources, Japan has entered joint-venture agreements with North
American paper companies to build mills in the U.S. and Canada for
Newsprint-and other relatively low-priced grades. An example is the
recent agreement between Oji Paper Company, Mitsui and Company, and
International Paper Company to expand Newsprint capacity in New
Brunswick.* In the past, Japan has obtained raw materials, principally
wood chips, abroad but manufactured paper products at home.
This growing international trade will be concentrated in a few
grades, particularly Bleached Kraft Pulp, Newsprint and Unbleached
Kraft Linerboard. Two of these are already important export grades
for the U.S. Pulp will continue to be important since it is an excellent
way of transferring wood resources. Wood prices do not support the
high transportation costs associated with trading raw fiber. On the
other hand, paper production provides substantial employment and value
added, so countries prefer not to import paper.
The most important factor determining a country's ability to
compete will be relative production costs. This differential in costs
between regions will show up mainly in wood costs. The U.S. continues
to benefit from relatively low-cost wood supplies. A second factor in
determining export market share is domestic demand relative to
capacity. Much of the U.S. expansion of capacity is expected to be used
to meet domestic demand.
The major exporting countries are: Scandinavia, Canada, the United
States, ana Brazil. Scandinavia has relatively high cost wood, but
low cost energy and low delivery costs to the EEC. Based on this,
plus Scandinavia's production expertise, DRI expects pulp nills to be
upgraded for use in paper production. This would result in good
growth in Scandinavian paper and board production and exports. For
Canada, DRI forecasts continuing growth in pulp exports, with the
primary destinations changing to East Asia, Japan and Western Europe.
In the case of the United States, much of the new investment will be
aimed at satisfying growing domestic needs. Export growth will be
concentrated in the Bleached Kraft grades. Brazil has the potential
to become a major exporter of pulp, due ro its low cost wood and labor.
However, DRI .does not- foresee extensive-investment in Brazilian market
pulp capacity until the mid-1930's.
Predictions of future import and export levels arc available for
selected products from DRI. These predictions do not explicitly take
account of future cost increases due to pollution control requirements
but they do indicate the type of changes which can be expected in these
sectors. Table 7-37 summarizes the changes in levels of imports and
exports for these product sectors. For each case, the average annual
rate of change is given. In some cases, this summary statistic masks
large variations from this trend over the period.
*Paper Trade Journal, September 15, 1980, p. 89.
7-72
-------
TABLE 7-37. FUTURE EXPORT AND IMPORT LEVELS FOR SELECTED
PULP, PAPER AND PAPERBOARD SECTORS*
1978 1985
3 3
Product Sector (10 tons) (10 tons)
Coated Printing
Imports 215 53
Exports 74 124
Uncoated Groundwood
Imports 608 1,081
Exports 57 86
Thin Papers
Imports 3.4 5.2
Exports 21.9 20.0
Newsprint
Imports*** 7,274 6,300
Exports 161 235
Uncoated Preesheet
Imports 108 124
Exports 85 86
Kraft Papers
Imports 100 74
Exports 57 98
Unbleached Kraft
Linerboard
Exports 1,466 2,085
Semi-Chenical
Corrugating Medium
Exports 119 131
Total Pulp, including
Dissolving Pulp
Imports 3,609 4,246
Exports 2,187 2,949
Dissolving Pulp
Imports 171 167
Exports 753 720
1978 as a
Percent
of 1978
Consumption
5.2%
1.8%
32.7%
3.1%
1.8%
11.7%
61.1%
1.0%
3.5%
2.8%
2.3%
1.3%
12.5%
2.8%
7.7%
4.6%
24.6%
108.2%
Average
Annual Rate
of Change**
20.0%
7.4%
8.2%
5.9%
6.1%
-1.3%
-2.1%
5.4%
2.0%
0.2%
-4.3%
7.7%
5.0%
1.4%
2.3%
4.3%
-0.3%
-0.6%
kBased on Pulp and Paper Review, June 1980, Data Resources, Inc.
**This does not accurately reflect the volatile nature of some product sectors.
***Imports = Consumption - U.S. Domestic Shipments - Inventory Change
7-73
-------
Among the paper sectors, imports are extremely important in Un-
coated Groundwood and Newsprint, and to a lesser degree in Coated
Printing Paper and Uncoated Freesheets. For three sectors, DRI ex-
pects exports to increase at a faster rate than imports: Coated Print-
ing, Newsprint, and Kraft Papers. For Thin Papers, exports will
continue to far exceed imports even though imports -are expected to
increase at a faster rate.
Overall, the United States imports considerably more pulp than
we export. DRI expects exports to increase at nearly twice the rate
of imports. However, this will only reduce our trade imbalance in
pulp.
For two paperboard products, Unbleached Kraft Linerboard and
Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium, DRI predicts or.ly exports. In both
cases, exports are expected to increase.
Our demand/supply analysis for the paper, paperboard, and Dis-
solving Pulp product sectors includes projections of future prices if
no further controls were imposed and under various levels of pollution
control. Table 7-38 below summarizes this information comparing 1983-
85 prices with no controls. In most cases the differences in the prices
are relatively small. The largest relative price increases are ex-
perienced by Newsprint, Bleached Kraft Linerboard, Bleached Kraft
Foldingboard, and Dissolving Pulp. Newsprint is already a large import
sector with DRI predicting a decrease in imports. This price will
probably have little impact on the size of this reduction. Bleached
Linerboard is a very small export and import sector. Trade in Bleached
Kraft Foldingboard is not significant. Dissolving Pulp does have a
large traded share, wirh exports as large as domestic consumption.
Demand is price-sensitive, because Dissolving Pulp competes with
products in other industries such as natural and synthetic fibers.
Nothing conclusive can be said about shifts in imports and exports
without information on changes in prices in competing countries. Much
of our competition comes from Canada and Scandinavia, which are also
implementing pollution controls. In 1978 it was predicted that
capital expenditures for pollution control by Canadian pulp and paper
producers will average about $107 million a year for 1978-1983.*
This is well above expenditures for pollution abatement in the past.
Part of this cost has been financed by the Canadian national and
provincial governments as part of cheir modernization program. Fi-
nancing for a Canadian government modernization program started in
February 1979 was recently increased from $239 million to $276 million.**
*Paper Trade Journal, July 15, 1978, p. 50.
**Paper Trade Journal, September 15, 1980, p. 27.
-------
TABLE 7-38 IMPACT OF POLLUTION CONTROLS ON PRICES OF FOREST PRODUCTS*
Product Sector
Paper
Unbleached Kraft
Bleached Kraft
Glassine
Tissue
Special Industrial Papers
NewSprirrti
Coated Printing
Uncoated Freesheet
Uncoated Groundwood
Thin Papers
Solid Bleached Bristols
Cotton Fibre
1983-1985
Average Price
per Ton,
without
Controls
294
350
873
956
945
299
600
580
485
672
488
1,480
Paperboard
Unbleached Linerboard 230
Bleached Linerboard 267
Bleached Foldingboard 438
Solid Bleached Board 464
Semi-Chemical Corrugating Medium 220
Recycled Linerboard 202
Recycled Corrugating Medium 211
Recycled Foldingboard 358
Construction Paper & Board 269
Pulp
Dissolving 364
1983-1985
Average Price
per Ton,
with Proposed
Regulation
297
353
889
958
951
309
603
585
485
673
491
1481
234
274
454
46 7
226
202
214
358
269
374
Ratio of Price
with Controls
to
Price
Without
1.01
1.01
1.02
1.00
1.01
1.03
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.00
1.02
1.03
i. 04
1.01
1.02
1.30
1.01
1.00
1.00
1.03
~Based on Table 7-3 and Table 7-16.
7-75
-------
According to the Swedish Pulp and Paper Association,* Swedish pulp
and paper companies have invested about $380 million in pollution con-
trols over the last decade. This has resulted in cutting mill pollu-
tion in half, despite increases in production. They estimate that
$313 million will be invested by the mid-1980' s in pollution control.
Some 55-60 percent is earmarked for water conservation, 25-30 percent
for water purification, 12-14 percent for air conservation, and 6-7
percent for research and development.
Another factor affecting the United States' conpetitive position is
changes in exchange rates among major currencies. The strengthening of
the Japanese yen against the U.S. dollar has helped U.S. exports to
Japan, just as the weakness of the Canadian dollar against the U.S.
dollar has helped Canada's exports. Again, it is difficult to predict
changes in relative exchange rates.
To summarize, for most product sectors, and all the important U.S.
export sectors, the price increases resulting from the Proposed Regu-
lation pollution controls are relatively small. In addition, we can
expect to continue to benefit from relatively low cost wood. Canadian
mills are benefiting from a government grant program to help finance
their modernization and pollution control programs, and Scandinavia is
benefiting from the elimination of tariffs with the EEC. These, plus
changes in exchange rates, are likely to have a greater impact on the
U.S. competitive position than price increases due to the proposed
pollution controls.
*Paper Trade Journalr May 15f 1979; p_ 62>
7-76
-------
Sector
Pulp
Dissolving
Pulp
Paper
Unbleached
Kraft
Bleached
Kraft
Glassine
Tissue
Special
Industrial
Newsprint
Coated
Printing
Uncoated
Freesheet
Uncoated
Groundwood
Thin Papers
Appendix 7-A
3
Projected Annual Capacity Levels, by Sector (10 short tons)
Average Percent
1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Growth Rate
1.536 1,537
4,261 4,286
1,051 1,052
220 222
4,885 5,085
928 945
4,109 4,545
4,741 5,017
8,095 8,532
1.537 1,532
412 422
1,537 1,537
4,238 4,303
1,071 1,079
224 227
5,195 5,395
959 970
5,119 5,433
5,366 5,511
8,742 8,851
1,532 1,555
404 434
1,537 1,537
4,470 4,550
1,090 1,101
229 231
5,447 5,458
989 1,009
5,829 6,165
5,649 6,022
9,000 9,337
1,793 1,904
441 453
1,537 0
4,620 1.3%
1,112 0.9%
233 1.0%
5,474 1.9%
1,029 1.7%
6,416 7.4%
6,348 4.9%
9,901 3.4%
2,022 4.6%
465 2.0%
-------
Sector
Appendix 7-A (continued)
Projejcted Annual Capacity Levels, by Sector (10"^ short tons)
1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984
Average Percent
1985 Growth Rate
Solid
Bleached
Bristols
1,146 1,133 1,115 1,118 1,125 1,136
1,148
Cotton
Fiber
129
129
129
129
131
131
131
0.3%
-j
oo
Paperboard
Unbleached
Linerboard
Bleached
Linerboard
14,087 14,480 15,066 15,638 16,058 16,774 17,587 3.7%
133
135
138
139
142
147
152
2.2%
Bleached
Foldingboard 2,080
Solid Bleached
Milk & Other
Semi-Chemical
Corrugating
Recycled
Foldingboard
Recycled
Linerboard 354
2,150 2,199 2,219 2,235
2,105 2,110 2,120 2,136 2,157
4,851 4,879 4,965 5,263 5,517
2,268
2,179
5,707
3,009 3,053 3,117 3,127 3,136 3,150
2,320 1.8%
2,201 0.7%
357
380
413
414
421
5,899
3,178
433
3.3%
0.9%
3.4%
Recycled
Corrugating
1,700 1,802 1,829 1,849 1,897 1,946
1,997 2.7%
-------
Appendix 7-A (continued)
3
Projected Annual Capacity Levels, by Sector (10 short tons)
Average Percent
Sector 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Growth Rate
Construction
Paper & Board 7,067 7,138 7,209 7,281 7,354 7,427 7,501 1.0%
All Other Paper-
board including
Unbleached
Foldingboard 5,055 5,147 5,192 5,207 5,303 5,377 5,443 1.2%
-------
1979
i
oo
o
Product Sector
PAPER
Unbleached Kraft
UPPTOTENDUSE 1.43
Bleached Kraft
BPPTOTENDUSE 1.49
Glassine and Greaseproof,
Special Industrial, Un-
coated Freesheet, Thin
Papers, Solid Bl. Bristols,
Cotton Fibre
GNP72 1432
Newsprint
JCIRNPA@US 106
Coated Printing
JQINDCPRT14 1.52
ADVPAG@MAG 29.9
JQINDOSI 1.51
Uncoated Groundwood
JQIND27ENW* 1.45
Tissues
HH
78.4
APPENDIX 7-B
FORECASTS OF DEMAND INDICATORS
Avg. Percent
I960 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Increase
1.44 1.46 1.54 1.60 1.64 1.69 2.8
1.51 1.53 1.61 1.68 1.73 1.81 3.3
1434 1455 1518 1569 1611 1673 2.6
106 106 107 107 108 109 0.5
1.52 1.54 1.61 1.66 1.71 1.77 2.6
30.0 30.9 32.9 34.8 36.1 37.6 3.9
1.53 1.56 1.64 1.70 1.75 1.82 3.2
1.46 1.53 1.59 1.66 1.73 1.81 3.8
79.8 81.8 83.5 85.1 86.6 88.2 2.0
-------
APPENDIX 7-B
Product Sector
PAPERBOARD
Unbleached Linerboard,
Bl. Linerboard, Rec.
Linerboard, Semi-Chem.
Corrugating, Recycled
Corrugating (Fibre Box
end-uses)
FORECASTS OF DEMAND INDICATORS (continued)
1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985J
Avg. Percent
Increase
JQINDGR1
1.33
1.36
1.38
1.42
1.47
1.49
1.5;3
2.4
JQINDGR2
1.80
1.85
1.91
2.01
2.11
2.19
2.27
3.9
JQINDGR3CDUR
1.62
1.59
1.73
1.93
1.99
2.03
2.12
4.6
JQINDGR3NDUR
1.27
1.24
1.25
1.32
1.36
1.39
1.43
2.0
JQINDGR3PDUR
1.53
1.46
1.47
1.58
1.65
1.68
1.77
2.5
JQINDGR4CDUR
1.54
1.52
1.57
1.68
1.78
1.83
l.?3
3.8
JQIND22
1.44
1.39
1.44
1.59
1.68
1.71
1.60
3.8
JQINDGR4PDUR
2.76
2.71
2.81
3.19
3.48
3.64
3.68
6.3
JQINDGR5NDUR
1.63
1.63
1.67
1.79
1.87
1.92
2.03
3.7
JQINDGR5PDUR
1.64
1.49
1.63
1.85
1.89
1.92
2.09
4.1
FIBSHPGR6
14.7
14.8
14.8
14.9
15.0
15.1
15|. 1
0.5
Bl. Foldingboard, Rec.
Foldingboard, Setup
Boxboard
CNBOX72
317
323
325
334
343
351
360
2.1
CN72
344
345
356
365
374
385
398
2.5
Construction Paper and
Board
ICR72
55.2
45.0
49.3
58.8
60.1
61.1
66.4
3.1
Solid Bleached Bd.
CNFOOD72
169
173
173
177
181
183
185
1.5
-------
Product Sector
PAPERBOARD
All Other Board
JQIND
ICR72
JQINDUKB
APPENDIX 7-B
FORECASTS OF DEMAND INDICATORS (continued)
1979 1980 1981
1.51
53.2
1.79
1.48
45.0
1.84
1.56
49.3
1.88
1982
1.62
58.8
1.99
1983 1984 1985
1.69
60.1
2.08
1.82
61.1
2.16
1.93
66.4
2.24
Avg. Percent
Increase
4.2
3.1
3.8
PULP
Dissolving
JQINDDIS
1.50
1.37
1.42
1.54
1.61
1.67
1.72
2.3
i
oo
to
Source: DRI macroeconomic forecast, March, 1980.
Notes: Variable names are defined in Appendix 2-B
-------
Section 8
Limits of the Analysis
This section discusses the major limitations of the assumptions,
methodology and results of the analysis. It also presents the results
of a number of sensitivity analyses which test the robustness of the
results of Section 7. It is organized into parts which parallel those
of the methodology and results sections (2 and 7 respectively), i.e.,
costs of compliance and construction of supply curves, demand/supply
analysis, capital availability, mill closures, community impacts,and
balance of trade effects.
The part on costs and supply curves discusses the effect of real cost
increases between 1978 and 1983-85 and the problems of aggregating pro-
duction cost data for different grades within a product sector. The sen-
sitivity of pollution costs to the value of the capital recovery factor
and the mix of new and existing sources is examined. In general, cost and
price increases are underestimated somewhat if real cost increases are not
included. The effect of this on the results of the capital availability
and closure analyses is not clear, however.
The discussion of the demand/supply analysis includes the implications
of assuming competitive markets, the consistency of the results with lonc-
run equilibrium, and problems of aggregation. The sensitivity of the
results to alternative prices of substitute goods and alternative macro-
economic forecasts is examined.
Issues in the capital availability analysis include the reliability
of capacity expansion costs and revenue estimates.
The part on the closure analysis focuses on the limitations of 308
Survey data, the reliance on a straight present value calculation, and the
assumptions about real cost increases. The sensitivity of the results to
the definition of salvage value, the treatment of transfer mills (i.e. those
mills integrated forward to converting operations), and the price forecasts
is examined. In general, the estimates of base closures show substantial
variation, but those of added closures due to treatment costs are quite stable.
8-1
-------
Costs of Compliance, Supply Curve Construction
Estimation of Production Costs
The supply curves are constructed from estimates of mills' variable
production costs and total annual costs of pollution control. Variable
costs arc taken from the 308 Survey and pollution control costs from
the technical contractor's estimates. This section describes some of
the limitations of these cost estimates and the methodology for con-
structing the product sector supply curves- It also describes the re-
sults of varying the cost of capital and the mix of new and existing
sources on estimates of costs of compliance.
The most significant limitation in using variable production costs
from the 308 Survey is that they are not adjusted to take into account
increases in the real costs of inputs such as energy, chemicals, labor
and wood and/or pulp. For example, DRI forecasts the following percent
increases in real costs between 1978 and 1935:*
Unit labor 3.5%
Chemicals 18.0%
Fuel and light 148.4%
Pulp 22.7% (1979-1985)
Softwood Pulpwood 8.4%
Hemlock Wood Chips 29.0%
However, inflating reported costs by these amounts would overesti-
mate actual increases since mills will alter their production processes
somewhat in response to higher costs. For example, chips and other
scraps, which had previously been discarded, are being used increasingly
as an energy source.
Nevertheless, real costs probably will increase about 5-15% over
the period depending on the particular product sector.** This implies
that because the demand/supply analysis assumes constant costs, 1983-
85 base -case ^prices will be underestimated and output overestimated.
This is likely to have little effect on the analysis of price increases
due to BCT pollution regulations because such increases depend on the
elasticities of supply and demand. Although the level of variable costs
*Source:DRI estimates, June 1980 forecast.
**See DRI Pulp and Paper Review, June 80.
8-2
-------
will be underestimated, the curvature of the supply curve, and hence the
elasticity of output with respect to price changes, should not be much
affected.
The effect of underestimating production costs on the capital avail-
ability and closure analyses is not definite either. For each product
sector, prices and unit variable costs would be lower and output higher
than otherwise. Therefore the bias on total revenues and total variable
costs will be smaller, so the estimates of cash flow available for in-
vestment should be fairly stable. Similarly, since output for individual
mills in the closure analysis is assumed fixed, both revenues and costs
will be underestimated, so the net effect of this on the closure results
is unclear.
There are certain inherent difficulties in using survey data. These
are also discussed in Appendix 2-A. Some problems arise due to ambi-
guities in the definitions of various cost items. For example, it was
not clear whether the item "other variable costs" included current
pollution control costs and freight costs, so not all respondents may
have answered the question consistently. Nevertheless, these estimates
are probably as good as can be obtained.
Estimation of Treatment Costs
Pollution control costs were obtained from the technical contractor.
As described in Section 6, treatment requirements of the Proposed Regu-
lation are defined for some mills on an individual or "exemplary mill"
basis and for other mills as the installation of a specific level of
treatment technology. In either case, costs were ultimately developed
from "model" mills and hence will only approximate actual costs borne
by individual mills. However, they should provide reasonable estimates
of overall compliance costs in a given subcategory or product sector.
In calculating total annual costs, a single cost of capital was
used for all mills. Although this estimate was based on industry-wide
data, use of a single value may bias the shape of the supply curve when
total annual pollution control costs are added to variable production
costs. (See Section 2.) For example, if mills with lower variable costs
tend to be larger and owned by larger companies with lower costs of
capital, using a single cost of capital will make the post-regulation
supply curve flatter than it should be. However, total annual costs are
not overly sensitive to variations in the cost of capital. Table 8-1
shows average total annual costs per ton for direct dischargers in each
subcategory under the Proposed Regulation. Total annual costs are
shown for three values of the capital recovery factor: 0.17, 0.22 (the
base assumption), and 0.27. In most cases the alternative values fall
within a bracket of ±15 percent of the base value.
8-3
-------
TABLE 8-1. Effect of Capital Recovery Factor on
Total Annual Costs: Proposed Regulation
Integrated
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bl. Kraft
3CT Bl. Kraft
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda
Unbl. Kraft (Linerboard)
"Jnbl. Kraft (3ag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbl. Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
PapergraJe Sulfite
Ground wood Therir.o-
Mechanical
Groundwood Coarse,
Molded, Newspaper
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing
Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
Nonintegrated
Nonincegrated Fine Papers
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers
Nonintegrated Lightweight
Nonintegrated Filter fi Non-
woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight
-- Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills
Source: Meta Systems estimates
•Suppressed due to confidentiality.
Average Total Annual Costs ($/ton)
Value of CRF
17% 22% 27%
* * *
7.8 9.2 10.6
6.8 8.2 9.6
7.3 8.7 10.1
2.6 3.1 3.6
5.0 5.8 6.6
3.2 3.7 4.2
3.3 4.0 ' 4.7
0 0 0
12.7 15.0 17.3
* * *
* * *
4.8 5.9 7.0
4.8 5.8 6.8
* * *
0 0 0
12.6 14.6 16.6
12.7 14.5 16.3
2.6 2.9 3.2
* * *
0 0 0
3.3 3.8 4.3
4.5 5.3 6.1
0.7 0.9 1.1
3.4 4.3 5.2
0 0 0
0 0 0
coo
4.2 5.3 6.4
8-4
-------
Like variable production costs, variable pollution control costs
are not escalated from real 1978 levels. Therefore total annual
pollution costs are underestimated. Price impacts would be underesti-
mated by a similar¦magnitude. Again, the bias of the underestimations
in the capital availability and closure analyses is less clear because
both price and cost rises are underestimated.
Finally, pollution control costs of new mills may be overestimated
if they are able to reduce costs by making changes in design or pro-
duction process prior to construction. These possibilities could not be
included in the analysis. However it is quite reasonable to make the
conservative assumption of excluding them.
Total Costs of Compliance
The data from the 308 Survey give a detailed picture of the in-
dustry in 1978. In order to predict costs of compliance in 1983, it is
necessary to forecast the increase in capacity in each subcategory and
the fraction of that capacity which will be classified as new capacity
and hence subject to NSPS requirements. Given the forecast of capacity
expansion in each product sector, a forecast for expansion by sub-
category was developed based on the present mix of subcategories in each
sector and the belief that most expansion would take place in integrated
mills. This makes the estimates of the costs of compliance high relative
to most mother mixes of integrated and nonintegrated mills that might
be considered.
The mix of new and existing sources is a more diffcult problem.
As was discussed in Section 7, costs for meeting NSPS standards are
substantially higher than the average costs for existing sources be-
cause they include BPT costs as well. Using them will overestimate
costs if the capacity expansion costs taken from the 308 Survey already
include some treatment costs. The mix of new sources used in Section
7 was based on announced plans of existing mills. Table 8-2 shows what
total costs of compliance for the Proposed Regulation would be if all
capacity coming onstream after 1982 was classified as new sources.
Total capital costs are $1445.7 million and total annual costs are
$464.6 million (6.3 and 8.0 percent greater, respectively, than the
base forecasts).
Supply Curve Construction
The construction of the product sector supply curves from the in-
dividual mill data also has a number of limitations. Perhaps the most
fundamental one is the implicit assumption that all production within a
product sector is homogeneous and hence that mills can be ranked on the
basis of unit variable costs. This is quite plausible for relatively
standardized grades such as linerboard or Newsprint, but less so for
8-5
-------
TABLE 8-2. Total Costs of Compliance When All New Capacity
In Place After 1981 is Subject to NSPS Costs:
Proposed Regulation
Integrated
Millions of Dollars (1978)
Capital Costs
Existing New
Total Annual Costs
Existing
New
Dissolving Kraft
Market Bl. Kraft
BCT Bl. Kraft
Fine Bl. Kraft & Soda
Unbl. Kraft (Linerboard)
Unbl. Kraft (Bag)
Semi-Chemical
Unbl. Kraft and Semi-Chem.
Dissolving Sulfite Pulp
Papergrade Sulfite
Groundwood Thermo-
Mecha.nical
Groundwood Coarse,
Molded, Newspaper
Groundwood — Fine Papers
Misc. Integrated Mills
66.2
82.0
149.2
66.3
43.7
33.4
72.0
0
90.2
24.4
395.5
0
8.9
18.2
46.1
34.9
5.6
18.8
26.2
0
23.8
*
21.9
58.3
21.0
24.3
46.0
20.2
13.1
11.3
21.1
0
23.3
*
8.4
121.1
0
3.0
6.2
16.4
11.4
1.8
6.3
3.9
0
8.0
*
7.3
24. 3
Secondary Fiber
Deink (Fine Papers)
Deink (Newsprint)
Deink (Tissue)
Tissue from Wastepaper
Paperboard from Wastepaper
Wastepaper Molded Products
Builders Paper & Roofing
Felt
Misc. Secondary Fiber Mills
*
0
21.2
3.6
15.9
*
0
7.8
0
5.2
3.0
0
8.2
0
4.7
5. 7
0
7.8
1.4
7.7
*
0
2.7
0
2.2
1.3
0
3.0
0
1.9
3.4
Nonintegrated
Nonintegrated Fine Papers 12.7
Nonintegrated Tissue Papers 1.7
Nonintegrated Lightweight 4.7
Nonintegrated Filter & Non- 0
woven
Nonintegrated Lightweight 0
— Electrical Allowance
Nonintegrated Paperboard 0
Misc. Nonintegrated Mills 10.1
Total 1145.8
0.9
0
3.3
0
0
0
0
299.9
3.9
0.4
1.1
0
0
0
2.3
355.5
0.3
0
1.4
0
0
0
0
109.1
Source: Meta Systems estimates
~Suppressed duo to confidentiality.
8-6
-------
Tissues or Special Industrial Papers. If this assumption does not hold
reasonably well, it raises two major problems. First, the elasticity
of supply implied by the curvature of the constructed supply curve may
be incorrect since mills in the same market (i.e. producing the same
quality grade) may not be grouped together in the supply curve.
Secondly, if there is no single grade price, it is not clear which
region of the supply curve contains the marginal mills whose costs
determine price. If unit cost increases due to treatment costs vary
significantly in different regions of the supply curve, there is no
basis for choosing which cost increases determine the resulting price
increase.
In other words, both the supply elasticity and the amount of the
cost increase on which the price increase is based may be either over-
or underestimated.* This situation may occur in several product
sectors which have a significant range of grade qualities, unit variable
production costs, and unit total annual treatment costs. These include
Special Industrial Papers, Thin Papers, Cotton Fibre, Tissues, and All
Other Board.
The construction of the supply curve using average variable costs
is an approximation, because marginal variable costs should vary with
output. Nevertheless, variable costs are probably fairly constant over
a wide range of output. In any case, the survey data only allow a
point estimate of unit variable costs. The step function structure of
the supply curve resulting from the use of average costs implies that
all mills with average variable costs less than price operate at full
capacity while those with higher costs do not operate at all. This is
of course not realistic. However, the supply curve so constructed is
useful if it approximates the overall elasticity of supply in the
product sectors and reflects the effect of changes in demand on capacity
utilization. High-cost mills in a homogeneous product sector have
greater fluctuations in output than do low-cost mills. Therefore
ranking them on the basis of unit cost should give some idea of the price-
responsiveness of output.
A couple of other simplifications of the supply curve construction
should be mentioned. If a mill has production in more than one product
sector, treatment costs are allocated to each sector on an equal per
ton basis. If mills actually allocate cost on the basis of, say, an
*T'ne question of whether or not price is determined by the mar-
ginal mill, i.e. if the market is competitive, is taken up in the
following section on the demand/supply analysis.
8-7
-------
equal percent price rise, this will introduce some small distortion.
Also, possibilities for switching a machine from producing one grade
to producing another are not taken into account. However, it is unlikely
that mills would alter their product mix because of treatment require-
ments.
Demand/Supply Analysis
The demand/supply methodology is the core of the analysis. It pro-
vides base forecasts of price, output and contribution to capital and
forecasts of the impacts of pollution control costs on these variables.
These are used as inputs to the capital availability, closure, com-
munity impact and balance of trade analyses.
The demand/supply model can be characterized as a competitive short-
run model where the market for each product grade is cleared in each
period by setting price equal to marginal variable costs (including
total annual treatment costs). The methodology raises several important
questions. Is it reasonable to assume that markets are competitive, and
if not, what are the probable biases of doing so? Are the short-run
equilibria consistent with longer-run equilibrium expectations about the
profitability of new investments in the industry? What are the problems
of aggregating over different grades within a specific product sector?
Each of these questions is discussed in this part. The limitations of
the lack of a demand/supply model for Market Pulp, Molded Pulp and All
Other Paper are also explored.
The market structure of the pulp and paper industry was discussed
in Section 5. To briefly review, the pulp and paper industry has a
number of characteristics which suggest that markets are not completely
competitive. Several product such as Dissolving Pulp, Glassine and
Greaseproof, Unbleached Kraft and Foldingboard have only a few mills.
Others such as Special Industrial Papers and Coated Printing have a
larger number of mills overall but contain a number of distinct grades.
Other product sectors are dominated by a few large mills. All these
factors must confer some market power on some of the larger producers.
Of course, some further competitive discipline is imposed by possi-
bilities of substitution among product sectors on both the demand and
supply sides. Also, increases in profitability tend to beresponded to—
with significant increases in capacity, suggesting that it is difficult
to maintain price above a competitive level.
The problem of how to describe imperfectly competitive markets has
vexed economic theory for a long time. As will be discussed below, it
is not possible to predict the outcome of price and output in an
oligopolistic market. Therefore no single "noncompetitive" model
could be used to forecast impacts of treatment requirements on price
and output. Instead, the approach taken here is to use the competitive
model, but also to examine the limitations and possible biases of doing
so.
8-8
-------
The basic difficulty of analyzing noncompetitive markets is that
except for a few special cases, such as monopoly or price leadership,
there is no determinate price and output, and hence no determinate
change in those variables from a change in costs due to pollution
control requirements. This is because firms in an oligopolistic market
must take into account the effects of their actions on other firms.
However, no one pattern of behavior will maximize profits independent
of the actions of other firms.
In the case of pure monopoly one would expect price to rise by less
than in a competitive market in response to a given cost increase. This
is because the monopolist equates marginal revenue and marginal cost and
the marginal revenue curve has a steeper slope than the demand curve.
However, there are no examples of pure monopoly in the pulp and paper
industry. In an oligopolistic market where firms strive to maintain
market share, the imposition of pollution control costs might serve as
a signal which allows all of them to raise prices without disrupting
the market. However, this result is not certain.
One way to approach the problem of the effect of treatment costs on
price in imperfectly competitive markets is to ask: which mill's cost
increase determines the price increase? In a competitive market it is
the mill with highest post-treatment variable costs (including annu-
alized capital costs of treatment) which finds it more profitable to
invest in pollution control and stay open rather than shut down. In an
oligopolistic market, the determining mill could be a large modern mill
with lower variable costs which can exert market power to raise prices.
If both kinds of mills have similar unit pollution control costs per
ton, a competitive and noncompetitive model should yield similar re-
sults. If the high cost mill has lower unit compliance costs than the
low cost mill, the price increase implied by the competitive model will
be less than that of a noncompetitive model, and vice versa .if it has
higher costs.
If mills with low variable costs tend to be large and have some
market power, the range of variable costs in each product sector (see
Table 7-5) should give some indication of the extent to which the
competitive model mis-estimates price impacts. In Newsprint, one
sector which shows evidence of price leadership, unit treatment costs
are fairly constant across producers. This suggests that the predicted
price increase is fairly robust. In the bleached paper and board
sectors, low variable cost mills tend to have higher unit treatment
costs. In Tissues, low cost producers have significantly higher treat-
ment costs, but it is hard to judge the effect of this because of the
many different grades included in this sector.
8-9
-------
In summary, in the absence of a specific model of noncompetitive
behavior, the bias of assuming perfect competition is uncertain. It
may be more relevant to examine the range of cost increases within a
product sector to capture the range of possible price outcomes.
A second question is whether the short-run market equilibria deter-
mined by the demand/supply analysis are consistent with the requirement
of long-run equilibrium that new capacity in each sector earn a competi-
tive return on capital. The present value of investments in each pro-
duct sector is examined in the capital availability analysis. The
limitations of that analysis are discussed in a subsequent part of this
section. In any case, the forecasts of demand growth and capacity ex-
pansion used in the demand/supply model should be consistent because
both are derived from a consistent forecast by DRI. Demand growth is
based on the DRI macro-economic forecast. Capacity forecasts are based
on API reports of announced expansions and extended to later years by
DRI with a model which predicts investment based on the strength of
forecasted demand in each sector.
The capacity expansion forecasts are exogeneous to the demand/
supply analysis and do not take into account the loss in profits due to
BCT costs. Therefore the analysis of the post-controls case somewhat
overestimates capacity and output and underestimates price. However,
although overestimating capacity underestimates the price increase,
this is partially compensated for because the elasticity of supply is
usually greater at a lower level of capacity utilization. In any case,
this effect on price impacts will be small.
Overestimating capacity will overestimate the difficulties for the
industry of financing new investments for two reasons. First, prices,
and hence profits are underestimated. Second, because capacity is over-
estimated, so is the amount of investment required for pollution control.
In general, however, BCT control costs should not have a significant
effect on planned investment in capacity.
The problem of aggregation was touched on in the discussion of the
supply curves. The use of a single price series to estimate an elas-
ticity of demand does not create major problems. Within each product
sector there should be a fairly stable structure which relates the
prices of different grades. Therefore the movement of the sample price
series should reflect the movements in all similar grades. As was
mentioned before, the main problem is with the supply curve. Both the
elasticity of the supply curve and the location of the marginal mill
on the supply curve may be significantly mis-estimated. This is parti-
cularly the case for product sectors with a diversity of grades, such
as Special Industrial Papers, Coated Printing, Thin Papers, Tissue, and
All Other Board. Although this problem must be considered, the direc-
tion or magnitude of any bias in the methodology used is not clear.
8-10
-------
Another significant limitation is the lack of a demand/supply
analysis for Market Pulp (except Dissolving Pulp). A complete analysis
of the Market Pulp sector would be quite difficult. Each of the major
pulp types has many different end uses with different demand prospects.
Because many pulp types are close substitutes, an equilibrium solution
would require information about the substitution possibilities for each
pulp type, and the joint determination of demand in a number of product
sectors in addition to Market Pulp.
Due to the lack of a demand/supply analysis, no price rises for
Market Pulp are forecast. This introduces a significant bias into the
analysis by overestimating the impacts on integrated mills. Revenues
for integrated mills are underestimated in two ways. First, revenues
from sales of Market Pulp do not increase. Second, price increases for
pnper and board grades will reflect the cost increases of nonintegrated
mills, because they tend teo have, higher variable production costs.
Since these cost increases do not include post-control cost increases
for Market Pulp, the resulting price increases, and hence the revenue
increases from sales of paper and board products, will be underesti-
mated. The net impact of this omission on nonintegrated mills is less
clear, since both revenues and costs are underestimated. However, if
price increases are higher than predicted, decreases in overall output
will be greater than predicted as well. Therefore this omission will
have the effect of underestimating shutdowns in the closure analysis.
This is because output in the analysis is taken as equal to the value
reported in the 308 Survey.
As was mentioned in the part on supply curves, the possibility of
a mill switching its output from one product sector to another is not
considered. Such switching would significantly affect the results
of the demand/supply analysis only if it were likely to occur in a
large fraction of total capacity of a given sector. Since the capacity
forecasts used for the base case already reflect projected demand
growth in each sector, all base case switching has implicitly been
accounted for. Switching because of the Proposed Regulation is pro-
bably not a major problem, since the regulations are made on the basis
of processes rather than product sectors.
The demand/supply analysis was not done for an alternative, more
pessimistic macro-economic forecast of the economy. Such an alternative
forecast would have no major effect on the analysis of the incremental
effects of the regulations, either on prices, capital availability, or
mill closures. However, a weaker financial picture of the industry in
the base case might make the forecast of, for example, total capital
requirements less acceptable.
8-11
-------
A number of paper and board sectors have demand equations which
include price terms for substitute goods. The substitute good is
either another paper product or plastic. (See Table 2-2). In the
analysis in Section 7, forecasts of price and other impacts in specific
sectors were Trade using DRI's base case forecast of the price series of
the substitute good. However, in most cases the price of the substitute
good will also rise because of BCT costs. If the prices of both the
own and substitute good rise, the effect of the own good's price on de-
mand will be less than otherwise. Therefore the analysis of Section 7
may underestimate price impacts and overestimate output impacts.
To test the importance of this effect, alternative forecasts of
price and ether impacts were made using the post-3CT price series for
the substitute good under the Proposed Regulation. The results are pre-
sented in Table 8-3 for those sectors which have significanr cross-
price elasticities and whose substitute goods have significant BCT price
impacts. The table compares the percent increase in price due to BCT
costs in that sector when the substitute good also faces BCT costs with
the forecast given in Section 7, Table 7-16. When the substitute was
plastics, estimates of BAT/BCT price increases had to be obtained from
outside sources. Because more refined data were not available, a price
increase of five percent was used.*
Table 8-3 shows that for product sectors where the substitute good
is another paper product, only the impact for Uncoated Groundwood is
appreciably affected. For those sectors whore plastic is the substitute,
Glassine and Greaseproof, Bleached Kraft Paper, and Unbleached and Re-
cycled Linerboard and Foldingboard, the impacts on price and output re-
sulting from using the BCT-adjusted substitute prices are different from
those obtained using unadjusted substitute prices. However, in no case
does the change in assumption qualitatively affect the magnitude of the
impact. Moreover, it should be noted that the BAT/BCT regulations for
plastics may be promulgated later than those for pulp and paper.
Ir. summary, a number of limitations of the demand/supply analysis
have been considered. Price impacts are probably underestimated be-
cause (a).real costs were not increased between 1973 and 1983-85; Cb)
capacity expansion estimates were not adjusted because of added pol-
lution control costs; (c) substitute prices may have been underesti-
mated; and (d) cost impacts on nonintegrated mills did r.ot take in-
creases in pulp costs into account. Only the first and last points
are likely to be significant. The effects on the price estimates of
(a) assuming competitive markets and (b) aggregation bias are unclear.
~Source: EPA estimate.
8-12
-------
TABLE 8—3.
Effect on Demand/Supply Analysis of Using Prices
of Substitute Goods Adjusted for BAT/BCT Costs:
Proposed Regulation
Alternative
Estimate of
Percent
Change
Base
Forecast
from Base Case
in Section 7*
Product Sector
Price
Output
Price
Output
Bl. Kraft Papers
1.22
-1.76
.83
-2.26
Glassine & Greaseproof
3.56
-2.65
1.83
-5.94
Uncoated Groundwood
1.76
.65
0
0
rJnbl. Kr. Linerboard
2.06
- .76
1.86
- .94
Bl. Kr. Linerboard
2.73
- .78
2.63
- .99
Semi-Chem. Corrugating
2.71
.27
2.48
-1.76
Rec. Linerboard
1.26
1.79
.18
.01
Rec. Foldingboard
2.40
1.30
.07
- .08
Rec. Corrugating
1.70
2.15
1.41
1.90
Solid Bl. Board
.94
- .53
.72
- .64
Source: Meta Systems estimates
Note: In some cases (e.g., Uncoated Groundwood) both price and output
increase. This is because the substitution effect of the price in-
crease of the substitute outweighs the effect of the good's own price
increase.
*See Table 7-16.
8-13
-------
Capital Availability Analysis
Hie capital availability analysis examines both the effects of
BCT costs on the present value of a ton of new capacity and on the
total capital requirements in each product sector. Both analyses re-
quire a number of assumptions to be made, and changes in these assump-
tions could have significant effects on the results.
The present value analysis requires three main inputs: base costs
of new capacity; treatment costs for new capacity; and a price forecast.
Costs of new capacity were taken from reports of planned expenditures
in the 308 Survey. In nest cases these reports showed a wide variation
of dollar per ton costs, and the averages were based on a small number
of observations. It was not possible to distinguish between additions
of new machines and modifications of existing equipment, or to detect
changes in grade within a sector. Because of confidentiality restric-
tions, it was not possible to match unambiguously capacity costs of
pulp and paper or board to get an overall figure for integrated capacity
in a particular sector. As was mentioned in Section 7, several of the
capital cost estimates, e.g. Glassine and Greaseproof and Cotton Fibre,
seem low.
Total annual treatment costs for new capacity are taken as equal
to the average treatment costs for the third of mills in each product
sector with lowest production costs. This method only uses costs of
existing sources rather than new sources, and the latter are signifi-
cantly higher. However, there are problems in using the new source
costs because base capacity expansion costs may include BPT costs as
well. (See the discussion of new source costs in Section 7.)
Finally, only the price scries used in the demand curve for each
sector was used in the present value calculation. If prices of dif-
ferent grades vary significantly, that price series may not be con-
sistent with the specific observations on capital costs from the 308
Survey. However, the estimates of the change in present value due to
BCT costs should be stable.
The comparison of cash flow and capital requirements depends on
the sector-specific estimates of cash flow, the forecast of capacity
expansion in each subcategory, including the mix of existing and new
sources, costs of compliance, and the capital costs of new capacity.
The cash flow estimates are based on revenues and costs taken from the
deroand/supply analysis. Revenues are the product of total output and
and price. However, in sectors with a variety of different grades,
the price used may not have been the sector-wide average price, so
revenues may be under- or over-estimated. Unfortunately, other infor-
mation on cash flow broken down by product sector is not available.
Revenue estimates would also be affected by using a different nacro-
econoraic forecast for the base case. However, it is unlikely that
8-14
-------
these chances would significantly affect the overall financial evalu-
ation of the industry, although the evaluations for individual sectors
might change.
The forecast of capacity expansion in each subcategory was based
on the present mix of subcategories in each product sector and the be-
lief that most expansion would be in integrated mills. Total costs of
compliance also depend on the fraction of new capacity subject to MSPS
requirements. As was noted in Table 3-2, assuming that all new capacity
after 1982 is subject to NSFS, total capital costs are raised about
6.3 percent. This does not significantly affect the cash flow analysis
presented in Section 7.
As mentioned earlier, there is considerable uncertainty about the
base costs of new capacity. Since costs of capacity expansion in a
single year are larger than total costs of compliance in any of the
treatment options, these estinates have an important effect on the
overall financial picture of the industry, although they do not affect
the estimate of the incremental effect of 3CT regulations.
The rr.ill-specific capital availability analysis presented in Table
7-27 assumed that normal reinvestment costs were deducted from cash
flow. Table 8-4 presents alternate estimates of the number of mills
which have investnent costs greater than cash flow under the Proposed
Regulation and the Alternative Options when reinvestment is not de-
ducted. For example, this occurs for 44 mills rather than 57 mills
under the Proposed Regulation.
Closure Analysis
A major strength cf the mill closure analysis is that it performs
a present value analysis of every mill in the 308 Survey. This is a
much more reliable way of locating mills with possible hardships than
trying to extrapolate the results for the entire industry on the basis
of a few model mills. Nevertheless, use of survey data which may be
several years old does present problems. Another important limitation
is that the closure decision nay depend partly on variables not in-
cluded in the survey. However, as will be shown below, the forecast
of closures due to BCT costs is quite stable, although the estimate of
base closures does vary with the assumptions ana decision rules used.
As was discussed in the section on supply curves, costs reported
in the Survey are not adjusted for real increases between 1978 and
1983-85. This suggests that costs are underestimated by 5 to 15 per-
cent. On the revenue side, recall that individual mill revenues are
adjusted by a factor (the ratio of revenues in the 308 Survey to revenues
calculated using 1978 product sector prices) to account for variations
8-15
-------
TABL3 8-4. Comparison of BCT/BAT Investment Costs and
Annual Cash Flows of Individual Mills by
Major Subcategory Type: Reinvestment Costs
not Deducted from Cash Flow
Total Number of
Direct Dischargers = 347
Number of Mills
Range of Ratio Investment Cost
Cash Flow
Proposed Regulation
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
1-1.5
11
6
3
20
2
2
q
8
6
1
15
Total
24
14
6
44
Alternative Option 1
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
7
3
2
12
1
0
1
o
3
0
8
13
6
3
22
Alternative Option 2
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
15
5
2
22
4
0
2
6
9
6
1
16
28
11
5
44
Alternative Option 3
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
22
4
5
31
6
3
1
10
17
7
2
26
45
14
8
67
Alternative Option 4
Integrated
Secondary Fiber
Nonintegrated
Total
11
7
3
21
3
2
2
9
11
8
1
20
27
17
6
50
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
8-16
-------
in the prices received by each mill which presumably reflect differences
in grade. The analysis assumes that this adjustment factor remains con-
stant between 1979 and 1383-85, but there is no way to verify this. A
further limitation is that a mill's output in 1983-85 is assumed equal
to the level in the Survey. Even if one could extrapolate to other
levels of output by assuming constant unit variable costs, it is not
evident what level of output should be chosen.
Certain gaps in the coverage of the Survey were detected. Although
salvage value, cost of capital, and useful life of the mill are impor-
tant variables, they had ro be inputed from other variables. Incon-
sistencies in the handling of pulp purchases and production meant that
in some cases an overall material balance of pulp purchased, consumed
or sold should not be calculated.
For any mill selected as a closure candidate, the direct employment
impact estimated should be quite accurate. Mill employment data is ob-
tained from the 308 Survey of the technical contractor in almost all
cases. When not available, employment is imputed using average produc-
tivity for each subcategory. These averages are based on 308 Survey
data.
The reliability of the data is a fundamental problem, and is par-
ticularly acute in the closure analysis because so many different
variables are used. The problem is increased by confidentiality re-
strictions which lessen the chance that inconsistencies or implausible
responses will be uncovered in individual surveys. In the course of
the analysis, a number of anomalous mills were detected, including
some which reported very low unit revenues but were not transfer mills
(i.e. integrated with converting operations) and reported no intention
to close. Also, because of confidentiality, total impacts on indi-
vidual firms could not be estimated.
The comparison of salvage value ar.d the present value of remaining
open car. only approximate the closure decision. Other factors such
as costs of laying off workers or benefits of integrated operation can-
not be taken into account. The analysis can only indicate which mills
appear financially weak. However, the large number of mills in the
industry which transfer some of their output adds a complicating
factor to the analysis. Most transfer mills calculated revenues on
some basis other than market revenues and tended to underestimate the
market value of their output. Because of this underestimation and be-
cause of the advantages of integrated operation, it could be argued
that transfer mills should be excluded from the closure analysis.
However, they were retained (although treated slightly differently,
see below) because of their large numbers and because on average, the
fraction of predicted closures for transfer and non-transfer mills did
8-17
-------
not differ significantly. However, several predicted closures turned
out to be transfer mills with very low revenues (unit revenues less
than $100/tor.) , so they were excluded.
Although the effects of many of these variables on the closure
analysis could not be determined, the sensitivity of the closure analy-
sis to variations in some key parameters and decision rules was tested.
In general, the nunber of predicted closures due to treatment costs
was much more stable than the number of base case closures. This is
because a variation in a parameter or decision rule tends to affect the
probability of closure in both the base case and treatment option in a
similar way. For example, increasing salvage value increases the
number of closures due to treatment costs, but it also causes certain
mills which were closures due to treatment costs but not base closures
to become base closures as well.
Table 8-5 shows the effect on the results of the closure analysis
of different values of g, the fraction of book value of the mill which
is considered salvageable (see Section 2). The base case value was
.125, and the alternative values are 0 and C.3. The results are given
for the Proposed Regulation, and are similar for other treatment op-
tions. Raising fj from 0 to 0.3 increases the opportunity cost of
staying open, and increases the number of base closures by three. How-
ever, the number of option closures increases only by one.
In the base analysis, the rule that a mill would not close if it
was better off financially in 1983-85 than it reported in the 308 Survey
was applied only to transfer mills. Table 8-5 shows the effect of
applying this rule either to no mills or to all mills. Applying the
rule to all mills rather than no mills reduces base -closures by 54 mills
but option closures by only one mill.
Particularly dramatic results occur when the revenue estimates for
both the 1933-85 base case and the Proposed Regulation are varied by
plus or minus ten percent. The results are also given in Table 8-5.
The estimate of base closures is 178 mills higher using the low rather
than the high revenue estimate, but the nua±>er of added closures due to
treatment costs increases by only six.
Mills with greater than 20 percent of their production in the All
Other Paper or Molded Pulp sectors were excluded from the closure
analysis because no data were available to do a demand/supply analysis.
However, a separate analysis was done for them using base prices of
$565 per ton for All Other Paper and $609 per ton for Molded Pulp. Of
the twenty-eight mills analyzed separately, three were predicted base
case closures even in the absence of BPT costs for Molded Pulp.
8-18
-------
TABLE 8-5. Sensitivity Analysis of Closure Results:
Proposed Regulation
Changes in Number of Mills from Base Forecast
Added Impacts
of Proposed Regulation
Variant
1. 6 = 0
2. 3 = 0.3
3. "Better than 1978"
rule applied to no
mi lis
4. "Better than 197P"
rule applied to all
mills
5. 1983-85 revenues
ten percent higher
6. 1983-85 revenues
ten percent lower
Totals for Base Forecast*
Base Case
Closures
- 2
+ 1
+ 38
- 16
- 44
+135
56
Closures
0
+1
-1
-2
-6
Reopenings
+1
0
+1
-2
+4
*From Table 7-28.
Source: Meta Systems estimates.
8-19
-------
Adding BPT costs for the Wastepaper Molded Products subcategory and BCT
costs for all direct dischargers did not produce any added closure
candidates,•even when no price increase was forecast.
The number of base closures, 57, is somewhat large. It was
theorized that the base closures had unusually large BPT costs. How-
ever, a comparison of $/ton BPT costs of base closures with average
$/ton BPT for all mills in the 308 Survey did not confirm this. There-
fore these closures probably result from the reasons given in Section 7,
i.e. a number of smaller, nonintegrated mills are vulnerable because of
significant new capacity in several sectors, and high variable costs
including energy and pulp.
Indirect Earnings and Employment Effects
The estimates of indirect earnings and employment impacts rest on
a very simple input/output framework. On one hand, the approach tends
to overestimate impacts because it does not take into account that many
workers who lose their jobs because of closures will find new jobs else-
where. On the other hand, impacts are underestimated because they do
not include mills which reduce output somewhat but do not shut down.
However, an alternative method calculating employment losses based on
output losses and average productivity gave roughly similar results.
In fact, in some cases the employment effects obtained this way were
less than those from the closure analysis.
Balance of Trade Effects
The analysis of the effect of BCT regulations on the international
trade position of the pulp and paper industry is only qualitative be-
cause of data and model limitations. A rigorous analysis would require
information about demand and supply elasticities in the relevant
foreign markets and the net effects of projected pollution requirements
and subsidies on the production costs of foreign competitors.
In lieu of such an effort, the main task is to identify product
sectors which have a large current or potential share of exports or
imports in total production and which face significant cost increases
under BCT regulations. The only sectors which meet those criteria are
Newsprint, Dissolving Pulp (Alkaline mills) and possibly Bleached
Linerboard. The price impacts and/or trade involvement of other
sectors are sufficiently small that a more detailed analysis of them is
not necessary.
8-20
T.S. 30VERNK2.— PRINTING dfflCi : IS63-C-J1 1-70J/11 i
-------