The Maine Board of Environmental Protection has not determined whether to consider Verso Paper’s past discharges as it deliberates the impact wastewater discharge by the paper mill has on polluting the Androscoggin River.

Though environmental groups say Jay’s Verso mill is the primary polluter of the Androscoggin, company officials say many other factors contribute to the river’s ill health.

The board heard testimony from both paper industry officials and environmentalists during a series of public hearings in May. This month its members have deliberated the case in public meetings. Deliberations are expected to conclude during the Sept. 6 meeting. The board’s staff will compile a written document of the findings, which will be voted upon before the end of the year.

“What they have to do is decide what the license terms are going to be for the mill and the certification for the dam,” said Cindy Bertocci, executive analyst for the board. “That’s the ultimate decision they have to make.”

The board is considering an appeal of Verso’s discharge limits, something pushed by the Natural Resources Council of Maine.

“The pollutants limits are based upon a model of what happens to the contaminants when they’re put in the river,” Bertocci said. “It has a lot to do with flow and the amount of oxygen and all kinds of things that the dynamics of the river that tell you how much the river can hold or accept.”

NRCM officials suggested the board take into account the previous amount of wastewater discharged into the river by the mill, and not the new model that promises less discharge. That does not appear to be the direction the board is heading in, according to Bertocci and Bill Cohen, a spokesman for the mill.

Instead, they hope for a scientific approach.

“I think that what NRCM was proposing was that … the board not consider the modeling and all that was done and base its decision on past performing of the mills,” Bertocci said. “The board essentially indicated that they didn’t want to take that route.”

Cohen said the board has alternatives.

Nick Bennett, staff scientist and watersheds project director for NRCM said, from his perspective, the board is still very much divided on the issue.

“We think past performance is relevant and we think the performance of what similar mills are doing is relevant,” Bennett said. “That certainly should be taken into account when considering this issue. I don’t know whether the board is really saying they’re not going to do that; I think the situation is … I don’t really have any comment on that.”