206 

 EUGENE P. HAYDU 

 of Weyerhaeuser Company's Pulp Research Department at 

 Longview, Washington. 



Ladies and gentlemen, I have a stutter, 

 roost of you know this but some of you may not, aid I ask 

 for your kind patience while I read this statement. 



I have a few comments to make about several 

 aspects of the FWPCA report. I assume that by now most 

 of you are familiar with these abbreviations, PBI, SWL, 

 FWPCA. My initial comments will deal with the Pearl- 

 Benson test, its adequacies and inadequacies as a realistic 



measure of sulfite waste liquor in receiving waters. I 

 am not here concerned with the specificity of the PBI 

 test, that is, whether or not it measures only sulfite 

 waste liquor. The limitations of the test in this respect 

 are well recognized. 



The terms PBI and sulfite waste liquor are 

 too frequently used interchangeably. This practice is mis- 

 leading and erroneous. The organic fraction of sulfite 

 waste liquor, like kraft wastes, consists of a great variety 

 of organic compounds ranging from those which rapidly de- 

 compose to those which degrade very slowly. The lignins 

 are the major organic components of kraft and sulfite 

 waste liquors. They are also quite stable, that is slow 



to decompose. Due to their stability and to the fact that 



