Development Document for
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards
               for the

     WET STORAGE, SAWMILLS,

        PARTICLEBOARD  AND

         INSULATION BOARD

           Segment of  the
        TIMBER PRODUCTS
            PROCESSING
        Point Source Category

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

              AUGUST 1974

-------

-------


                  EEVELQPMENT DOCUMENT

                           for

             EFFLUENT IJMITATICNS GUIDELINES

                           and

            NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

                         f or the

          WET STORAGE, SAWYELLS, PARTICLEBCftRD
                  AND INSULATION BOARD
                     SEGMENT CF THE
               TIMEER PRODUCTS PROCESSING
                  POINT SOURCE CATEGORY
                    Russell E. Train
                      Administrator

                      James L. Agee
Assistant Administrator for Vfeter and Hazardous Materials
                       Allen Cywin
         Director, Effluent Guidelines Division

                   Richard E. Williams
                     Project Officer
                       August 1974
              Effluent Guidelines Division
         Office of Water Planning and Standards
      United States Environmental Protection Agency
                 Washington, D.C.  20460

-------

-------
                            ABSTRACT


A study was made of the timber products processing  point  source
category  for the purpose of developing information to assist the
Agency  in  establishing  efflueat  limitations  guidelines   and
standards  to  implement  Sections  301, 304, 306, and 307 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.

The portions of the  industry  studied  included  the  insulation
board  manufacturing,  particleboard  manufacturing, sawmills and
planing mills, wet storage, i.e., pond and wet  deck  storage  of
unprocessed  wood,  and the operations of log washing, finishing,
fabrication, by-product utilization  and dry deck storage.

The wet storage, sawmills,  particleboard  and  insulation  board
segment  of  the  timber  products processing industry is divided
into seven subcategories.  The subcategorization was based on the
processing procedures involved and  the  water  requirements,  in
terms of both quantity and quality.

The  subcategories,  as  presented  in  this  document  are:  wet
storage, log washing,  sawmills  and  planing  mills,  finishing,
particleboard  manufacturing,  insulation board manufacturing and
insulation  board  manufacturing  with  steaming   or   hardboard
production.

Best  Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available  (BPCT),
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable  (BAT), and  New
Source  Performance  Standards   (NSPS)  for five subcategories in
this segment of the  industry  is  defined  as  no  discharge  of
process   waste  waters  pollutants  to  navigable  waters.   The
insulation  board  manufacturing  portion  of  the  segment   has
quantitative  limits  on   discharge.   Limits on the wet  storage
subcategory are basically no discharge of waste water  pollutants
with  an allowance for discharge volume related to precipitation-
evaporation considerations.

-------

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS


SECTION                                                         PAGE

  I          CONCLUSIONS                                        1

  II         RECmSEJTOATIONS                                    3

  III        INTRODUCTION                                       9

             Purpose and Authority                              9
             Basis for Guidelines and Standards                 9
               Development
             Definition of the Tiitiber Products Industry         11
             Background of the Tiittoer Products Industry         16
             Inventory of the Timber Products Industry          19
             Description of Processes                           30

  IV         INDUSTRY CATBQORIZATICN                            79

             Surmary of Subcatergorization                      85

  V          V&TER USE AND VffiSTE CHARACTERIZATION               87

             Storage of Logs in Estuaries, Impoundments,        87
               Rivers, and Transportation of Logs
               in Vfeter
             Mill Ponds                                         91
             Log Ponds                                          102
             Storage of Logs on Land {Wet Decking)              132
             Storage of Logs on Land (Dry Decking)              138
             Storage Piles of Fractionlized Wood                140
             Log Washing                                        149
             Sawmills                                           151
             Fabrication                                        156
             insulation Board                                   165
             Particleboard                                      177
             Finishing Operations                               185

  VT         POLLUTANT PARAMETERS                               193

-------
                                                              PAGE
VII       CCNTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY                   209

           Impoundments and Estuarine Storage and             209
             Transportation
           Wet Storage                                       209
           Mill Ponds                                         209
           Treatment Control                                  211
           Log Ponds                                          223
           Wet Decking                                       234
           Dry Decking                                       238
           Storage of  Fractionalized Wood                     239
           Log Hashing                                       240
           Sawmills                                           240
           Fabrication                                       243
           Insulation  Board                                   261
           Particleboard                                      288
           Finishing                                          299

VIII       COST, ENERGY, AND NCN-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS        303

           Impoundments and Estuariiie Storage and             304
             Transportation
           Wet Storage                                       305
           Mill Ponds                                         305
           Log Ponds                                          320
           Wet Decking                                       334
           Log Washing                                       336
           Savmills and Planing Mills                         340
           Finishing                                          341
           Insulation Board Subcategories                     354
           Cost and Reduction of Alternative Treatment        355
             and Control Technologies
           Particleboard Subcategory                          379
           Finishing with Water Reducible Materials           390

IX         BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
             CURRENTLY AVAILABLE                              395

X          BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY BXNCMtCALLY
             ACHIEVABLE                                       407

XI         NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS                   411

XII        ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                   415

XIII       REFERENCES                                         417

XIV        GLOSSARY                                           427
                              VI

-------
NUMBER
                             FIGURES

                                                                 PAGE
  1          Interrelationships of the Timber Products           12
             Industry

  2          Production of Insulation Board 1949-1970            17

  3          Particleboard Production                            18

  4          Sawmills and Planing Mills                          22

  5          Production of Softwoods and Hardwood 1967           23

  6          Millwork Plants                                     27

  7          Wood Container Manufacturers                        28

  8          Finished Panel Producing Plants                     29

  9          Wood Products Not Elsewhere Classified              32

 10          Map of Insulation Board Plant Locations             33

 11          Particleboard Manufacturing Facilities              35

 12          Hydraulic Shotgun                                   46

 13          Process Diagram of Rough Green Sawmills             50

 14          Process Diagram of Band Sawmill                     51

 15          Process Diagram Multiple Headrig Sawmill            52

 16          Standard Glue Joints                                55

 17          Process Diagram for Laminated Timber Manufacture    57

 18          Insulation Board Process                            59

 19          Schematic Diagram of Cylinder Forming Machine       63

 20          Particleboard Process Flow Diagram                  66

 21          Process Flow Diagram for the Manufacture of         75
             Printed Grain—Pre-f inished Paneling

 22          Process Flow Diagram for Vinyl Film Overlaying      78

 23          log Pond 01                                         105

 24          Log Pond 02                                         106

 25          Log Pond 03                                         107
                               vn

-------
                                                                PAGE
26          Bottom Contours for Log Pond 01                     117

27          Bottoti Contours for Log Pond 02                     118

28          Bottom Contours for Log Pond 03                     119

29          Tenperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       120
            for Log Pond 01

30          Temperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       121
            for Log Pond 01

31          Tenperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       122
            for Log Pond 02

32          Tenperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       123
            for Log Pond 02

33          Tenperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       124
            for Log Pond 03

34          Tenperature, pH and Dissolved Oxygen Profiles       125
            for Log Pond 03

35          Particle Size Analysis for Douglas Fir Bark         142
            and Sawdust

36          Runoff Flow Rate Vs. Rainfall Intensity for         147
            Whitewood and Redwood Chip Piles and a Sawdust
            Pile

37         Water Balance for a Sawnill Producing 60,000         155
            Cubic Meters Per Year

38          Typical Glue Tiines                                  159

39          Water Balance for a Typical Insulation Board        166
            Process

40          Variation of BCD with Preheating Pressure           172

41          Variation of the Ratio of BCD/Dissolved Solids      173
            with Yield

42          Waste Water Production in a Prefinished Panel       191
            Plant

43          BCD -3 Variation with Dilution                      205

44          Variation of BOD with Sarrple Concentration          206

45          Alternative Treatment Schemes for Mill Ponds        213

46          Alternative B for Mill Ponds                        217
                              vm

-------
                                                                PAGE
47          Alternative D2 for Mill Ponds                       219

48          Alternative E for Mill Ponds                        222

49          Alternative F for Mill Ponds                        224

50          Alternative Treatment Schemes for Log Ponds         226

51          Alternative B for Log Ponds                         229

52          Alternative C for Log Ponds                         230

53          Alternative D for Log Ponds                         233

54          Alternative Treatment Schemes for Wet Decking       236

55          Log Wash Recycle System                             241

56A         Titration Curve for Hardwood Glue                   245
56B         Titration Curve for Phenolic and Protein Glue       246

57          COD and TOC of Supernatant Vs. pH for Protein       247
            Glue

58          CCO of Supernatant Vs. pH for Phenolic Glue         248

59          Alternative B for Glue Waste Disposal               256

60          Alternatives C and D for Fabrication                259

61          Alternative E for Glue Washwater Reuse System       260

62          Water Recycle System Type I for Insulation          263
            Board

63          Water Recycle System Type II for Insulation         264
            Board

64          Conpatability of Process Waters of Various         267
            Products - Insulation Board

65          Schematic of Suspended Solids Removal for          269
            Process White Water Recycle in Insulation Board
            Plants

66          Water Reuse Possibilities for an Insulation        271
            Board Plant

67          Variation in BOD and Suspended Solids from         275
            Secondary Treatment in Plant No. 7

68          Variation in BCD and Suspended Solids from         276
            Secondary Treatment Effluent in Plant No. 9

-------
                                                               PAGE
69          Variation in BCD and Suspended Solids from         277
            Secondary Treatment in Plant No. 12

70          Variation in BOD and Suspended Solids from         278
            Secondary Treatment in Plant No. 14

71          Variation in BCD and Suspended Solids from         279
            Secondary Treatment in Plant No. 16

72          Schematic of Alternative B for Insulation          282
            Board

73          Schematic of Alternatives Cl and Dl for            284
            Insulation Board

74          Schematic of Alternative C2 for Insulation         285
            Board

75          Schematic of Alternative D2 for Insulation         285
            Board

76          Schematic of Alternative E for Insulation          287
            Board

77          Schematic of Alternative F for Insulation          289
            Board

78          Schematics of Alternatives B, C, and D for         296
            Particleboard

79          Schematics of Alternatives E and F for             298
            Particleboard

80          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        310
            Vs. COD Reduction for Alternative C

81          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        312
            Vs. CCD Reduction for Alternative D

82          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        316
            Vs. CCO Reduction for Alternative E

83          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        324
            Vs. COD Reduction for Alternative B

84          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        327
            Vs. CCD Reduction for Alternative C

85          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        331
            Vs. CCD Reduction for Alternative D

86          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        363
            Vs. BCD Reduction for Alternative C -
            Subcategory  of the Insulation Board Industry

-------
                                                               PAGE
87          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        .-364'
            Vs. BOD Reduction for Alternative C -
            Subcategory II of the Insulation Board Industry

88          Total Investment Cost and Tota Yearly Cost         365
            Vs. BCD Reduction for Alternative C -
            Subcategory III of the Insulation Board Industry

89         . Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        367
            Vs. BCD Reduction for Alternative D -
            Subcategory I of the Insulation Board Industry

90          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        368
            Vs. BOD Reduction for Alternative D -
            Subcategory II of the Insulation Board Industry

91          Total Investment Cost and Total Yearly Cost        369
            Vs. BCD Reduction for Alternative D -
            Subcategory III of the Insulation Board Industry

-------

-------
                            TABLES
 3

 4

 5
 6
 7

 8

 9
10

11
12

13
14
15
16
17

18

19

20
                                                          PAGE
Property Requirements of Mat Formed Particleboard         15
Area and Volume Statistics by Ownership                   20
Classes, 1970
Lumber Production by Regions - 1971 and                   24
by Mill Size
Manufacturers of Prefabricated Structural  Wood            26
Members and Wood Laminates
Types of Factory Finished Panels                          31
Inventory of Insulation Board Plants                      34
Particleboard Producing Plants by Geographic              35
Areas, 1973
U. S. Particleboard  (Mat-Formed)                          33
Producers
Wood Adheslves:  Properties, Handling and Use Guide       54
BOD, COD, PBI and TOC in Inflow and Outflow               89
from Log Storage Reservoir Number 74
Log Pond Data                                             92
Winter Characteristics of Oregon Log Ponds                95
Part A:  Chemical Characteristics
Literature Data for  Ponds                                 98
Characterization of  Mill Ponds                            99
Data Correlations for Mill Ponds                          101
Typical Waste Stream From a Mill Pond                     103
Average Value and 95 Percent Confidence                   IQQ
Interval for Various Parameters for Log Pond 01
Average Value and 95 Percent Confidence                   109
Interval for Various Parameters for Log Pond 02
Average Value and 95 Percent Confidence                   no
Interval for Various Parameters for Log Pond 03
Surface Sample Analyses for Log Pond 01                   ill
                                 xm

-------
                                                                      PAGE
21          Surface Sample Analyses for Log Pond 02                   112
22          Surface Sample Analyses for Log Pond 03                   113
23          Winter Data for Log Ponds 01, 02, and 03                  114
24          Diurnal Study on Log Ponds 01 and 02                      115
25          Data from Log Ponds in the Washington, Oregon             116
            Idaho Area
26          Data Correlations for Log Ponds 01, 02, and 03            127
27          Relationship of the Various Parameters to COD             128
            for Log Ponds 01, 02, and 03
28          Typical Waste Streams from Log Ponds                      131
29A         Characteristics of Effluent from Wet Decking              134
            Operations
29B          Data Correlation for West Coast Wet Decking              135
30          Typical Waste Stream from Wet Decking Operations          137
31          Leachates from Dry Deck Experiment                        139
32          Analysis of Cold Water Solubles in Bark, Wood,            141
            and Moss Peat
33          Chip Pile Runoff Results                                  144
34          Chip Pile Runoff Summary                                  145
35          Bark Pile Effluent Character                              148
36          "Typical" Effluent Stream from a Particle                 148
            Pile
37          Raw Waste Water Characterization Log Wash Water           150
38          Water Usage for an Actual Sawmill with Power              152
            Plant and Log Storage
39          Makeup Requirements for Various Mixes                     157
40          Glue Requirements for Various Mills                       158
41          Volume of Waste Water Reported by Various                 161
            Mills
42          Characteristics of Glue Washwater (mg/1)                  162
43          Average Chemical Analysis of Glue Waste Water             164
                                  xiv

-------
                                                                      PAGE
44
45

46

47

48
49
50
51

52

53

54

55
56

57

58
59
60
61

62
63

64
(Assuming A 40:1 Dilution with Water)
Total Plant Waste Water from Insulation Board
Effect of Hardwood, Steaming and Hardboard
Production on the BOD£ Load from Insulation
Board Plants
Particleboard Plant Process Water and Cooling
Water Flow Rates
Total Particleboard Plant Raw Waste Water
Discharge
Waste Water Analyses by Stream
Waste Water Generation from Finishing Plants
Chemical Analysis of Water Base Materials
Retardation of BOD Test Timber Products Effluents
(Leachates)
Efficiencies and Concentrations for the Various
Treatment Alternatives for Mill Ponds
Efficiencies and Concentrations for the Various
Treatment Alternatives for Log Ponds
Efficiencies and Concentrations for the Various
Treatment Alternatives for Wet Decking
Neutralization of Protein Glue Waste
Alum  VS H2S04 for Neutralization of Phenolic
Glue Waste
Incineration Test for Phenolic, Protein
and Urea Glue
Volatile Solids in Phenol Resorcinol Waste Water
Potential Makeup Water Vs. Waste Water Production
Spray Evaporation Pond Design Alternative B
Existing Treatment Technology in the Insulation
Board Industry
Efficiency of Biological Treatment Processes
Summary of Effluents Produced by Treatment
Alternatives for Model Insulation Board Plants
Existing Particleboard Waste Water Treatment
Systems
170
174

178

183

184
187
189
207

214

227

237

249
250

252

253
255
257
272

273
290

293
                                    xv

-------
                                                                      PAGE
65          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative B for                307
            Mill Ponds

66          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative C2 for               309
            Mill Ponds

67          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative D2 for               311
            Mill Ponds Chemical Coagulation, Flocculation,
            and Sedimentation Only

68          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative E3 for               314
            Mill Ponds F1Iteration and Sludge Disposal Only

69          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative E4 for               315
            Mill Ponds

70          Itemized Cost Summary of Alternative F for                318
            Mill Ponds Evaporation Pond Only

71          Yearly Power Use and Costs of Alternative                 319
            Treatments for Mill Ponds

72          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative Bl for              322
            Log Ponds

73          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative B2 for              323
            Log Ponds

74          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative C2 for              326
            Log Ponds

75          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative D3 for              328
            Log Ponds

76          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative D4 for              330
            Log Ponds

77          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative E for Log           332
            Ponds

78          Yearly Power Use and Costs for Alternative                333
            Treatment for Log Pond

79          Non-Mater Quality Wastes Generated for Land               335
            Decking and Water Storage

80          Costs Summary for Wet Decking                             337

81          Costs of Control and Treatment, Alternative B             339
            for Log Washing Operations

82          Costs of Control and Treatment for Alternative            342
            B for Fabrication Operations
                                 xvi

-------
                                                                      PAGE
83          Costs of Control and Treatment for Alternative            345
            C for Fabrication Operations

84          Costs of Control and Treatment for Alternative            348
            D for Fabrication Operations

85          Costs of Control and Treatment for Alternative            350
            E for Fabrication Operations

86          Summary of Alternative Costs for Fabrication              353
            Operations

87          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative B for               356
            Insulation Board

88          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternatives Cl, and            358
            Dl for  Insulation Board

89          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative C2 for              360
            Insulation Board

90          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative B2 for              361
            Insulation Board

91          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative E for               370
            Insulation Board

92          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative F for               374
             Insulation Board

93          Summary of Cost and Benefits of Treatment                 375
            Alternatives for  the Model  Insulation Board
             Plant

 94           Power Requirements  of Treatment Alternatives              -376
             1n the Insulation Board Industry

 95           Itemized  Cost  Summary  for  Alternative  B  for                380
             Particleboard

 96           Itemized  Cost  Summary  for  Alternative  C  for               382
             Particleboard

 97           Itemized  Cost Summary  for  Alternative D  for              .383
             Particleboard

 98          Itemized  Cost Summary  for  Alternative E  for               334
             Particleboard

 99          Itemized Cost Summary for Alternative F for               386
             Particleboard

 100         Summarized Cost of Treatment Alternatives for             387
             Particleboard Plants
                                 xvii

-------
                                                                     PAGE
101          Power Requirements of Treatment Alternatives             389
            1n the Partlcleboard Industry

102         Summary of Alternative Costs for Finishing               393
            with Water Reducible Materials

103         Anticipated Annual Energy Costs for Alternate            394
            Control Technologies for Finishing with Water
            Reducible Materials

104         Conversion T£ble                                         446
                                 xvm

-------
                            SECTION I

                           CONCLUSIONS

For the purpose of developing Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
New Source Performance Standards,  this  segment  of  the  timber
products   processing   industry  has  been  divided  into  seven
subcategories as follows:

(1) wet storage; (2)  log washing; (3) sawmills and planing mills;
(4)  finishing;    (5)   particleboard;   (6)   insulation   board
manufacturing;   and   (7)  insulation  board  manufacturing  with
steaming or hardboard production.

The main criterion for subcategorization was  process  variation.
Factors  such  as  plant  size, age, nature of raw materials were
considered   and   found   not   to   be   significant   in   the
subcategorization as presented.

Waste  water  pollutants  of significance for this segment of the
timber products processing industry include: BOD,  COD,  phenols,
oil  and  grease,  pH,  temperature,  dissolved solids, suspended
solids, color, phosphorus, and nitrogen.


In addition,  in  those  operations  employing  preservatives  or
finishing, the following pollutants may be present.

    Copper
    Chromium
    Arsenic
    Zinc
    Fluoride
    Ammonia
    Mercury

It  was  determined  that  for the wet storage of logs  (i.e., the
storage of wood raw material in self contained bodies  of  water;
pond  storage,  and  the  storage of wood material on land, where
water  is  sprayed  on  the  wood),  best   practicable   control
technology   (BPCT) and best available technology  (BAT) limits the
allowable volume of discharge to the volume of precipitation that
falls on the drainage area of the wet storage facility  less  the
natural  evaporation that occurs during the months of May through
October.  Discharge volume during  the  months  November  through
April  is  limited  to  a  volume equal to the precipitation that
falls on the facility.  New source performance  standards   (NSPS)
for  wet  decking  is  the  same  as BPCT and BAT.  NSPS for pond
storage is no discharge of waste water  pollutants  to  navigable
waters.   For  the log washing subcategory, sawmills subcategory,
the finishing  subcategory,  and  the  particleboard  subcategory
BPCT,  BAT  and NSPS limitations are no  discharge of water water
pollutants to navigable waters.  BPCT and NSPS for the insulation
board manufacturing subcategories is based on the application  of
biological  treatment  before  discharge,  BAT for the insulation

-------
board subcategories is  based  on  recycling  a  portion  of  the
treated waste water into the process water system.

As  part  of  the development program for effluent guidelines and
standards for the  timber  products  processing  industry,  other
activities  in  the industry were investigated.  These activities
were the transportation and storage of logs on rivers, estuaries,
and impoundments; the storage of fractionalized  wood  in  piles;
dry  decking  of  logs,  and  the  storage  of  processed  timber
products; and  storm  water  runoff  from  storage  yards.   This
investigation    resulted   in  the  conclusion  that  management
techniques are available  to  reduce  the  impact  on  the  water
environment  from  these operations.  However, the amounts, type,
and  quality  of  the  information  currently  available  is  not
considered  adequate  to  serve as a basis for proposing national
standards and limitations.

Because of  the  complexity  of  the  Phase  II  timber  products
processing  industry,  and  the  undefinable number of processing
operations, it is not possible to  estimate  the  total  industry
cost of achieving the BPCTCA and BATEA.  However, it is felt that
the  technology  developed herein is practical and that the total
industry cost will not be excessive.  In most cases, the costs of
achieving these proposed limitations can be incorporated into the
selling price.

-------
                           SECTION II

                         RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommended effluent limitations guidelines and standards are
based on  (1) best practicable control technology currently avail-
able, (2) best available technology economically achievable, and
(3) performance standards for new sources.  The effluent limita-
tions as set forth herein are developed in depth in the following
sections of this document.

   RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS BASED ON BEST PRACTICABLE
             CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
SUBCATEGORY
Wet Storage
               EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

A.  No discharge of process waste water pollu-
    tants between May 1 and October 31, except
    a volume of water equal to the difference
    between the mean precipitation for a given
    month and 10% of the annual lake evapora-
    tion.

B.  No discharge of process waste water pollu-
    tants between November 1 and April 30,
    except a volume of water egual to the mean
    precipitation that falls on the drainage
    area of the wet storage facility.

C.  When a discharge is allowed the following
    limitations shall apply:
                     Daily
                    Maximum
                               30-Day
                              Average
     (metric unj.ts)

     Debris
     pH

     (english units)

     Debris
     pH
        maximum diameter, cm
   2.5U                         2.54
   Within the range 5.5 to 9.0

        maximum diameter, in

   1.0                          1.0
   Within the range 5.5 to 9.0
Log Washing


Sawmills and
planing mills

Finishing
No discharge of process waste water pollutants
to navigable waters

No discharge of process waste water pollutants
to navigable waters

No discharge of process waste water pollutants
to navigable waters

-------
Partic1eboard
Insulation
board
   BODS
   TSS
   pH

Insulation board
manufacturing with
steaming or
hardboard production

    BOD 5
    TSS
    pH
No discharge of process waste water pollutants
to navigable waters
      Daily
     Maximum
      kg/kkg
     (Ib/ton)

       3.75
      (7.50)
       9.40
     (18.80)
 30-Day
Average
 kg/kkg
 (Ib/ton)

  1.25
 (2.50)

  3.13
 (6.25)
           Within the range 6.0 to 9.0
      Daily
     Maximum
      kg/kkg
     (Ib/ton)

      11.3
     (22.60)
 30-Day
Average
 kg/kkg
(Ib/ton)

  3.75
  (7.50)
       9.UO
     (18.80)
  3.13
  (6.25)
          Within the range 6.0 to 9.0
    RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS BASED ON BEST AVAILABLE
               TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
SUBCATEGORY
Wet Storage
               EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

A.  No discharge of process waste water pollu-
    tants between May 1 and October 31, except
    a volume of water equal to the difference
    between the mean precipitation for a given
    month and 10% of the annual lake evapora-
    tion.

B.  No discharge of process waste water pollu-
    tants between November 1 and April 30,
    except a volume of water equal to the mean
    precipitation that falls on the drainage
    area of the wet storage facility.

C,  When a discharge is allowed the following
    limitations shall apply:
                     Daily
                    Maximum
                               30-Day
                              Average
    (metric units)
        maximum diameter, cm

-------
    Debris
    PH

    (english units)

    Debris
    pH
                   NO
                   to

                   NO
                   to

                   NO
                   to

                   NO
                   to
Log Washing


Sawmills and
planing mills

Finishing


Particleboard
Insulation
board
   BODS
   TSS
   PH

Insulation board
manufacturing with
steaming or
hardboard production
          \
    BODS
    TSS
    PH
2.54                         2.54
Within the range 5.5 to 9.0

     maximum diameter, in

1.0                          1.0
Within the range 5.5 to 9.0

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters
                         Daily
                        Maximum
                         kg/kkg
                         (Ib/ton)

                          1.13
                          (2.25)

                          2.85
                          (5.70)
                                30-Day
                               Average
                                kg/kkg
                                (Ib/ton)

                                 0.38
                                 (0.75)

                                 0.85
                                 (1-90)
                              Within the range  6.0 to  9.0
                         Daily
                        Maximum
                         kg/kkg
                         (Ib/ton)

                          3.38
                          (6.75)
                                30-Day
                               Average
                                kg/kkg
                                (Ib/ton)

                                  1.13
                                 (2.35)
                          2.85
                          (5.70)
                                 0.85
                                 (1.90)
                             Within the  range  6.0  to  9.0
SUBCATEGORY
Wet Storage
                     RECOMMENDED NEW SOURCE
                      PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
                   A.
              EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS

 Subject to the provisions of paragraphs
 B and C, which are applicable only  to

-------
                       wet decking operations, there shall be no
                       discharge of process waste water pollu-
                       tants to navigable waters.

                   B.  No discharge of waste water pollutants
                       between May 1, and October 31, except
                       a volume of water equal to the differ-
                       ence between the mean precipitation for
                       a given month and 10% of the annual lake
                       evaporation.

                   C.  No discharge of waste water pollutants
                       between November 1 and April 30, except
                       a volume of water equal to the mean pre-
                       cipitation that falls within the drainage
                       area of the wet storage facility.

                   D.  When a discharge is allowed the following
                       limitations shall apply:
                     Daily
                    Maximum
                               30-Day
                              Average
    (metric units)

    Debris
    pH

    (english units)

    Debris
    pH
        maximum diameter, cm
Log Washing
Sawmills and
planing mills

Finishing
Particleboard
Insulation
board
   BODS
   TSS
NO
to

No
to

NO
to

No
to
2.54                         2.5U
Within the range 5.5 to 9.0

     maximum diameter, in

1.0                          1.0
Within the range 5.5 to 9.0

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters

discharge of process waste water pollutants
navigable waters
      Daily
     Maximum
      kg/kkg
     (Ib/ton)

       3.75
      (7.50)

       9.40
     (18.80)
                                30-Day
                               Average
                                kg/kkg
                                (Ib/ton)

                                  1.25
                                 (2.50)

                                  3.13
                                 (6.25)

-------
   pH                         Within the range 6.0 to 9.0

Insulation board         Daily                        30-Day
manufacturing with      Maximum                      Average
steaming or              kg/kkg                       kg/kkg
hardboard production    (Ib/ton)                      (Ib/ton)

    BODS                 11.3                           3.75
                        (22.60)                        (7.50)

    TSS                   9.40                          3.13
                        (18.80)                        (6.25)

    pH                       Within the range 6.0 to  9.0

-------

-------
                           SECTION III

                          INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
Section 301 (b) of the Federal Water  Pollution  Control  Act,  as
amended, hereinafter cited as "The Act," requires the achievement
be not later than July 1, 1977, of effluent limitations for point
sources,  other  than  publicly  owned treatment works, which are
based  on  the  application  of  the  best  practicable   control
technology  currently  available  as defined by the Administrator
pursuant to Section 304(b)  of  the  Act.   Section  301 (b)   also
requires  the  achievement  be  not  later  than July 1, 1983, of
effluent limitations for point sources, other than publicly owned
treatment works, which are based on the application of  the  best
available technology economically achievable which will result in
reasonable   further   progress  towards  the  national  goal  of
eliminating the discharge of all pollutants,  and  which  reflect
the greatest degree of effluent reduction which the Administrator
determines  to  be achievable through the application of the best
available  demonstrated  control   technology,   and   processes,
operating   methods,   or  other  alternatives,  including  where
practicable, a standard permitting no discharge of pollutants.

Section 304 (b) of the Act requires the Administrator  to  publish
regulations providing guidelines for effluent limitations setting
forth  the  degree  of  effluent reduction attainable through the
application of the best practicable control technology  currently
available  and the degree of effluent reduction practices achiev-
able  including  treatment  techniques,  process  and   procedure
innovations,  operation  methods,  and  other  alternatives.  The
regulations  proposed  herein  set  forth   effluent   limitation
guidelines  pursuant  to  Section  304(b) of the Act for selected
segments of the timber products processing category.

Section 306 of  the  Act  requires  the  Administrator,  after  a
category  of  sources is included in a list published pursuant to
Section  306(b)(1)(A)  of  the  Act,   to   propose   regulations
establishing  Federal  standards  of performances for new sources
within such  categories.   The  Administrator  published  in  the
Federal  Register  of January 16, 1973,  (38 F.R. 1624), a list of
27  source  categories.   Publication  of  the  list  constituted
announcement  of  the  Administrator's intention of establishing,
under Section 306, standards of  performance  applicable  to  new
sources  with  in  the  timber  products  processing  category of
sources.

BASIS FOR GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT ,

The effluent limitations and standards of performance recommended
in this document were developed in the following manner:

-------
    1.   An  exhaustive  review  of  available   literature   was
    conducted.   This  included  researches  at the University of
    Florida,  University  of  California,  Stanford   University,
    Oregon   State  University,  University  of  Washington,  and
    University of North Carolina.  Additional literature searches
    were conducted at the United Nations  Library  in  New  York,
    N.Y.   and   the   Forest  Products  Laboratory  in  Madison,
    Wisconsin.

    2.  Questionnaires were submitted to individual particleboard
    and insulation board plants  by  the  National  Particleboard
    Association  and  The  Acoustical  and  Insulating  Materials
    Association,  respectively.   Seventy  particleboard   plants
    responded,  twenty  five particleboard responses were usable,
    and this information was incorporated  into  the  data  base.
    Samples of the questionnaires are shown in Appendix A.

    3.   On-site inspections and sampling programs were conducted
    at numerous installations throughout the U.  S.   Information
    obtained   included  process  diagrams,  water  usage,  water
    management  practices,  waste  water   characteristics,   and
    control and treatment practices information.

    U.   Other  sources  of  information  included:  personal and
    telephone  interviews;  meetings   with   industry   advisory
    committees, consultants, and EPA personnel; State and Federal
    permit  applications;  and  internal  data  supplied  by  the
    industry.

The reviews,  analyses,  and  evaluations  were  coordinated  and
applied to the following:

    1.   An  identification  of  pertinent  features  that  could
    potentially provide a  basis  for  subcategorization  of  the
    industry.    These   features  included  the  nature  of  raw
    materials  utilized,  plant  size  and  age,  the  nature  of
    processes,  and others as discussed in Section IV of this re-
    port.

    2.  A determination  of  the  water  usage  and  waste  water
    characterization   for  each  subcategory,  as  discussed  in
    Section V, including the volume of water used, the sources of
    pollutants, and the types and quantities of  constituents  in
    the waste waters.

    3.   An  identification  of  the waste water constituents, as
    discussed in Section VI, which are characteristic  and  which
    were   determined   to  be  pollutants  subject  to  effluent
    limitation guidelines and standards.

    4.   An  identification  of   the   control   and   treatment
    technologies  presently employed or capable of being employed
    by the industry, as discussed in Section VII,  including  the
    effluent   level  obtainable  and  treatment  efficiency  and
    reliability associated with each technology.
                                   10

-------
    5.  An evaluation of the cost, energy, and non-water  quality
    aspects  associated  with the application of each control and
    treatment technology as discussed in Section VIII.

DEFINITION OF THE TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY

The timber products industry is defined in  this  study  as  that
listed  in  Standard  Industrial Classification (SIC) Major Group
24.  The major portions included in SIC 24 are:

    1.  Logging camps and logging contractors; 2.    Sawmills  and
    planing  mills;  3.  Millwork, veneer, plywood and structural
    wood members; 4.  Wood containers;  5.   Wood  buildings  and
    mobile homes; and 6.  Miscellaneous wood products.


Segregated  under  the various major topics in Major Group 24 are
hundreds of industrial  operations  with  products  ranging  from
finished  lumber, hardboard, and mobile homes to tobacco hogshead
stock,  chicken  coops,  and  toothpicks.   The   magnitude   and
complexities  of  operations range from backyard wood carving, to
complexes covering 1000 acres or more.

Also, rather than each operation being a discrete function within
the industrial segment, the timber products  processing  industry
is  an  interrelated  one.  As illustrated in Figure 1, the waste
material from one operation is often a raw material for  another.
An  example  of  this is in the production of particleboard where
sawdust, planer shavings, veneer cores, plywood scraps, and other
waste wood materials commonly serve as raw materials.

Earlier, effluent guidelines and standards were developed for the
barking, veneer, plywood, hardboard, and wood preserving  segment
of  the  timber  products  processing industry.  These operations
were considered to be  the  most  significant  sources  of  water
pollution problems.  Guidelines and standards for that segment of
the industry were promulgated on April 18, 1974 (F.R. 39, 13942).
In  order  to achieve an orderly, logical, and practical approach
to the development of effluent guidelines, the remaining portions
of the industry have been considered in three  broad  areas:   (1)
raw   material  and  waste  product  storage  and  handling,   (2)
sawmills, and planing mills, and various unit operations, and  (3)
the production of insulation board and particleboard.  The  first
area  includes  such  operations as timber transport and storage;
storage piles of fractionalized  wood;  and  runoff  from  roofs,
yards,  and  other  sources.   Timber  harvesting  may be further
defined as all operations concerned with the cutting and trimming
of trees in the forest.  Timber transport involves the moving  of
logs from the harvest area by means of water, rail, or truck to  a
processing plant.  Log storage includes both storage in water and
on  land,  whether  at a processing plant site or at other areas.
Storm runoff is defined as all water  produced  by  precipitation
falling  on  the  roof  of a facility or on the adjacent grounds.
Storm runoff is considered to be separate from process waters and
                                   11

-------

FrtUFST TRANSPOR- LOG SORTING
rUHtol ir\**n^rwn AND STORAGE
RESOURCES -TAT10N fl p%v pr^K •)
(HARVESTED TIMER) TRUCK D. WET DECK
(HARVESTED TIMER) RA]|_ QR C.WATER STORAGE





BARK REMOVAL
a. HYDRAULIC

K>D , ,
[

* • PLANING MILLS
PLYWOOD CHIP. AND
SAWDUST 1 '
i 4 PLANEft j
\ ^ SHAVIHfS
44-
HARDBOARD IMSULATIO
O.WETPROCESS ^^
b. DRY PROCESS BOARD
- T ,.
1 F P
PLYWOOD ^


•i b •EXTRUDED
w

Jf
FINISHING AND
MISCELLANEOUS
OPERATIONS

i

N 4—^

t. LUMICK


FIGURE 1 INTERRELATIONSHIPS  OF  THE TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
                                    12

-------
does not include runoff originating in storage piles of  logs  or
fractionalized wood.

In   the  second  study  area  sawmills  and  planing  mills  are
considered to be those installations producing lumber and similar
products from logs.  Other unit processes  include  log  washing,
fabricating,  finishing,  machining  and  by-product utilization.
These operations may occur either singularly  or  in  combination
with  one  another  or with other processes.  Log washing removes
grit from logs by  washing  the  logs  with  water.   Fabricating
includes  those  operations  using adhesives to join various wood
members.  Finishing, such as  sanding,  varnishing  or  painting,
concludes  the final processing activates.  Machining shapes wood
or wood  products  to  a  desired  form  by  splitting,  turning,
carving,  drilling,  sawing,  grooving,  and cutting.  By-product
utilization converts bark, sawdust, and other scrap material into
wood flour, pressed logs, mulch, ornamental bark, or molded wood.
This does not include,  however,  the  production  of  insulation
board or particleboard.

Insulation  board  is  a  form  of fiberboard, which in turn is a
broad generic term applied to sheet  materials  constructed  from
ligno-cellulosic  fibers.   It  can perhaps best be classified on
the basis of  density,  and  most  broadly  as  "compressed"  and
"noncompressed."   Compressed  fiberboards  (hardboards)   have  a
density  over  0.5  g/cu  cm  (31  Ib/cu  ft)   and  noncompressed
fiberboards   (insulation  boards) have a density of less than 0.5
g/cu  cm   (31  Ib/cu  ft).    Insulation   boards   are   usually
manufactured  in  thicknesses between 5 and 25 mm  (3/8 and 1 in).
On a basis of density, insulation board may  be  subdivided  into
semi-rigid  insulation  board  and  rigid  insulation  board with
densities of 0.15 g/cu cm (9.5 Ib/cu ft) and 0.15 to 0.40 g/cu cm
(9.5 to 25 lb/ cu ft), respectively.  Semi-rigid insulation board
is  normally  used  only  for  insulation  purposes  while  rigid
insulation  board  may be used for sheathing, interior panelling,
and as a base for plaster or siding.

There are seven basic types of insulation board products as cited
by the Acoustical  and  Insulating  Materials  Association.   The
principal types include:

    1•   Building board - General purpose  product  for  interior
         construction.

    2-   Insulating roof deck - A  three-in-one  component  which
         provides  roof  deck,  insulation,  and  finished inside
         ceiling.   (Insulation  board   sheets   are   laminated
         together with waterproof adhesives).

    3.   Roof insulation - Insulation  board  designed  for  flat
         roof decks.

    **•   Ceiling tile - Insulation board embossed  and  decorated
         for   interior   use.    It   also  provides  acoustical
         qualities.
                                    13

-------
    5.   Lay-in-panels - A tile used for suspended ceilings.

    6.   Sheathings -  Board  used  extensively  in  construction
         because  of  its insulative, bracing strength, and noise
         control qualities.

    7.   Sound deadening insulation board -  A  product  designed
         specifically  for  use  in  buildings  to  control noise
         level.

The American Society for  Testing  and  Materials  sets  standard
specifications for the above categories and others.

Particleboards  are board products which differ from conventional
fiber boards in that they are composed of distinct  particles  of
wood   or  other  ligno-cellulosic  materials  which  are  bonded
together with an organic binder.  The "particles"  vary  is  size
and  must be distinguished from the fibers used in insulation and
hardboard.   Other  terms  used  for   particle   board   include
chipboard, flakeboard, silverboard, shaving board, and wood waste
board.  Particleboard is a highly engineered product which can be
formed  to  meet varied specifications.  As a result of its being
produced in wide density  ranges,  it  is  usually  divided  into
categories  of low density (0.25 to 0.40 g/cu cm)  (15 to 25 Ib/cu
ft), medium density (0.40 to 0.80 g/cu cm) (25 to 50  Ib/cu  ft),
and high density (0.80 to 1.20 g/cu cm) (50 to 75 Ib/cu ft).

Low  density particleboards are for use either as panel material,
where heat or sound insulation is important,   or  as  a  core  in
veneered  constructions  where weight savings are important.  The
major use for low density particleboard is as the core in wood or
plastic flush doors.  These boards are  usually  manufactured  in
thicknesses of no greater than 2.5 cm  (1 in).

Most of the particleboard currently produced can be classified as
medium  density  board  having  a  density  some 10 to 20 percent
higher than that of the species of wood or  material  used.   The
mat-formed board may be homogeneous throughout its thickness with
respect  to  the  particles used; or it may be composed of two or
more discreet layers; or it may be graduated from  face  to  core
with  respect to particle size.  Extruded particlebaord, however,
must use the same  type  of  particle  throughout  its  thickness
because of the nature of its production.

High  density  particleboard  is  quite  similar  to hardboard in
density, appearance, and application, the basic difference  being
one  of  bond.  It is usually produced in the same thicknesses as
conventional hardboard, and the small sized particles  which  are
used may approach wood fiber in size.

The U. S. Department of Commerce sets forth a Commercial standard
for  manufacture  of  mat-formed wood particleboard, which covers
both  interior  and  exterior  applications  and  includes   such
property  requirements as density, modulus of elasticity, modulus
                                   14

-------
                                                 TABLE  1.


                             PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS OF MAT FORMED PARTICLEBQARD




Density
(Grade)
Type (min. avg.)
1



1



1



2



2
A
(High Density
0.80 gm/cm3
and over)
B
(Medium Density
between 0.40
and 0.80 gm/cm3)
C
(Low Density
0.40 gm/cm3 and
under)
A
(High Density
0.80 gm/cm3
and over
B



Class
1


2
1


2
1


2
1


2
1
Modulus of
Rupture
(min. avg.)
ATM
164


232
110


164
55


96
164


232
124
Modulus of
Elasticity
(min. avg.)
ATM
23,820


23,820
17,010


27,220
10,210


17,010
23,820


34,030
17,010
Internal
Bond
(min. avg.) ,
ATM
15


11
6


5
2


3
10


28
5
Linear
Expansion
(max. avg.)
percent
0.55


0.55
0.35


0.30
0.30


0.30
0.55


0.55
0.35
Screw Holding
Face
(min.
__Kfl_
204


-
102


120
57


80
204

-
227
102
Edge
avg.)
Kg
-


-
73


91
_


-
_


159
73
    (Medium Density
    less than 0.80
    gm/cm3)
171
30,620
0.25
114
91
Type 1 - Mat formed particleboard (generally made with urea-formaldehyde resin  binders)  suitable  interior
         applications.
Type 2 - Mat-formed particleboard made with durable and highly moisture and heat resistant  binders  (generally
         phenolic resins) suitable for interior and certain exterior applications.

-------
of rupture, internal bond, screw holding,  and  linear  expansion
(Table 1) .

BACKGROUND OF THE TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY

Forests  have from the beginning been one of North America's more
important natural resources.  The earliest sawmills and lumbering
operations date back to 17th century New England.  The apparently
inexhaustable  supply  of  virgin  timber  met  the  needs  of  a
developing country as the lumbering frontier spread to the Middle
Atlantic  and Lake States and onward to the South and the Pacific
Northwest.  By the early  20th  century  the  industry  was  well
established  throughout the country and continuing development of
equipment  and  techniques  increased  productivity.   There  are
currently  in  the  United  States over 200 million commercial ha
(500 million ac) of forest and over 40,000 establishments in  the
timber products processing industry.

In  recent  years, the U. S. has become an increasingly important
exporter of wood products.  However, since  the  U.  S.  has  the
world * s  highest  per  capita  consumption  of  forest  products,
imports usually double exports, with  Canada  being  the  largest
supplier.   Pressing  housing  needs  for  domestic  and  foreign
markets have created shortages in lumber supply and  have  raised
questions concerning export control.  Nevertheless, foreign trade
affords increased incentives for production.

The  economics  of  the  timber products industry is increasingly
affected by growth as well as changes in  product  demand.   Over
the past half century an awareness of the losses in timber supply
associated  with  processing  has  developed  and  from  this has
stemmed an extensive waste utilization program, i.e., the use  of
chips,  shavings,  sawdust, and other scraps in the production of
various wood based products.  Insulation board alone is  produced
in  ten  types,  each  meeting  specific  needs of the market and
creating new  demands.   Since  1956,  according  to  the  U.  S.
Department  of  Agriculture,  64  percent  of  the  growth in the
insulation board industry has been in new plants  as  opposed  to
expansion  of  existing  facilities.  Within the last decade, the
industry has more than doubled its capacity, as shown  in  Figure
2.   The increased capacity has been accompanied by a decrease in
use of non-wood fibers  in  production  as  indicated  by  a  4.8
percent  increase per year in raw wood materials consumed for the
period 1956 to 196a.

One of the newest additions to the industry,  particleboard,  has
experienced an eight-fold growth in production since 1956 (Figure
3)  because  of  its versatility.  The industry has also expanded
into the  production  of  prefinished  panels,  wood  containers,
prefabricated  buildings,  and  specialty products.  In 1958, the
production of particleboard was  over  1.16  million  sq  m   (125
million  sq  ft)  on  a 1.91 cm (0.75 in) basis)  (5).  Production
rates has tripled this figure by 1962, and in 1972 the Bureau  of
Census reported a production peak of over 300 million sq m  (three
                                   16

-------
         l,500n
O
O
c
o
H

O
O
o
o
s
rn
H
2)

o

•H
O
1,000-
 500-
              1949  1950 1951  1952 1953 1954  1955  1956  1957  1958 1959 I960 1961   1962  1963  1964 1965 1966 1967  1968  1969  197C

                                              YE     A    R
                                FIGURE 2  PRODUCTION OP INSULATION BOARD, 1949-1970

-------
                                   to
                                   <
                                   to
                                     300,000-1
                                   o
                                   o
                                   O 200,000
00
                                   I-
                                   o
                                   3
                                   a
                                   o
                                   tt 100,000
                                   a.
                                            1959
                                                  -1	1	
                                                   1980   I9«l
-1	1	
 1962   1963
—I	1	
 1964   1965
                                                                                       1966
—I	1	
 I96T  1966
                               1969
—I—
 1970
—1—
 1971
                               I9T2
                                                            FIGURE  3   PARTICLEBOARD PRODUCTION

-------
billion  sq ft) on a 1.9 cm (0.75 in) basis from 71 plants.  This
is illustrated in Figure 2.

A study by the U. S. Department of Agriculture on industry trends
of particleboard during the period 1956 to 1966, reported only 25
particleboard plants in the U.S. in  1956.  The current number  of
approximately  76 particleboard plants indicates a growth rate of
200 percent in the 17 year period.  During the period  from  1956
to  1966  three-fourths  of  increased particleboard capacity was
contributed to new mills which had the  greatest  development  in
the South and West.  Prior to 1961, production output was between
48 and 63 percent of designed plant capacity; but since 1961, the
percentage  has  increased  to 70 percent capacity, except in the
North where output is about 50 percent of capacity.

INVENTORY OF THE TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY

The U. S. possesses 200 million ha (0.5 billion ac) of commercial
forest land with a total inventory  of  6  billion  cu  m  (2,400
billion  bd  ft).  This land is owned by four groups as indicated
in Table 2.

The major single user of forest resources is the pulp  and  paper
industry  which produces about 47 billion metric tons  (52 billion
tons)  of pulp per year  and  requires  approximately   50  million
cords  of wood.  This corresponds to approximately 126 million cu
m  (4.5 billion cu ft) of timber per year.  In 1968,  the  plywood
industry  produced  about  1.4 billion sq m  (15 billion sq ft) of
9.53 mm  (3/8 in) softwood plywood and 0.198 billion  sq  m   (2.13
billion  sq  ft)  of  6.35  mm   (0.25 in) hardwood plywood.  This
corresponds to approximately 30 million cu m  (1 billion cu ft) of
timber in 1968.  In 1973, the total volume of timber utilized  by
the plywood industry was about 56 million cu m  (2 billion cu ft).
The  production  of  hardwood  plywood  requires an additional 28
million cu m (1 billion cu  ft)  of  timber.   The  total  timber
production in 1972 was about 88 thousand cu m (38 million bd ft).
This  corresponds  to about 112 million cu m  (4 billion cu ft) of
timber per year.  The sum of these uses 322 million  cu  m   (11.5
billion cu ft)  compared with the reported total timber removal .of
392 million cu m (14 billion cu ft)  in 1970.

Following harvesting, timber must be transported to and stored in
various   stages   to   processing   plants.    The  storage  and
transporation of logs in water is practiced  extensively  in  the
northwestern  U.  S. and in Alaska.  In 1964, approximately 9,000
ha (23,000 ac)  of water were used to store and transport logs  in
the  Northwest.  This was comprised of about 6,000 ha  (14,000 ac)
in Oregon, 2,000, ha (4,000 ac) in Washington,  2,000  ha  (4,000
ac)  in  California,  and  400  ha   (1,000  ac)   in Idaho.  It is
estimated that as of 1971 Alaska used about 400 ha  (1,000 ac)  of
its  waterways  for  logs  storage   and transportation.  Logs are
transported almost exclusively by water in Alaska.

In contrast, virtually all raw material transport  in  the  South
and  East is by truck or by rail, where logs may be hauled either
                                   19

-------
                                                       TABLE 2


                            AREA AND VOLUME STATISTICS BY OWNERSHIP CLASSES, 1970
to
o
Ownership Classes
National Forests
Other Public
Forest Industry
Other Private
National Total
Commercial
Area Held
(Million
Hectares }
37.2
17.9
27.3
119.9
202.3
In Million Cubic Meters
Total Softwood Sawtimber Volume
Inventory
2,291
520
742
891
4,444
Growth
20
9
23
41
93
Removal s
30
10
38
33
111
Total Hardwood Sawtimber Volume
Inventory
91
93
159
859
1,202
Growth
3
4
6
33
46
Removal s
1
1
4
28
34

-------
in tree length, logs in cord pile lengths, or in a chipped  form.
No  water  storage  of  logs  is  practiced in the southern U. S.
primarily because southern pine tends to sink.   In  a  study  of
land  decking  by  the  Southern  Forest Products Association, W8
plants responded to questionnaires out of a total of 79 that were
sent.  Of the companies responding, 21 companies  used  spray  on
the  land  decks  and  27  did  not.   The  only  case  of  water
transportation of logs observed in the South involved logs  being
harvested  from  an  island  in  the  Mississippi River.  In this
special case, it was easier to barge the logs down the  river  to
the  mill  site  than  to  barge them to the adjacent bank of the
river for transfer to truck or rail.

The most complete available inventory of sawmills is contained in
"the 1973 Directory of Forest Products Industry.   This  reference
should  be  consulted  for  information  on individual mills.  In
order to present a  general  perspective  on  the  magnitude  and
distribution   of   sawmills   in  the  U.S.   Figures  4  and  5
respectively, indicate the number of sawmills in  1967  by  state
and region, and a breakdown of production in millions of bd ft on
a  state,  regional,  and national basis as well as by major type
shown, i.e., hardwood or softwood.  The total number of  sawmills
and  planing  mills  in 1967 was 10,271.  It should be noted that
the figures presented in Table 3 are  for  general  sawmills  and
planing  mills.   These  are  defined  by the Bureau of Census as
those establishments primarily engaged in sawing rough lumber and
timber, from logs and bolts; resawing  cants  and  flitches  into
lumber, including box lumber and softwood cutstock; planing mills
combined  with  sawmills;  and separately operated planing mills.
Thus,  the  segment  of  the  industry  which  produces  hardwood
dimension, flooring, and special product sawmills  (totaling 1,190
establishments  in  1967) is not included.  Also not included are
mills producing prefinished panels,  millwork,  wood  containers,
prefabricated   wood   products,  and  other  miscellaneous  wood
products.  These will  be  covered  in  other  sections  of  this
document.

Table 3, from Forest Industries, Volume 99 indicates the range of
mill sizes.  The information presented is a result of a survey of
mills  responsible  for  approximately  65.2 percent of the total
1971 production in  the  U.  S..   It  should  be  noted  that  a
relatively  small  number  of  mills represent an extremely large
percentage of production.   Thus,  in  the  western  region,  257
mills, less than three percent of the total, accounted for nearly
37  percent  of the total production in the U.S.  The top twenty-
five companies in the  U.  S.   accounted  for  approximately  30
percent of the total production of the country in  1971.

Those unit operations encountered at sawmills which may result in
significant  waste  water  problems include storage, washing, and
debarking  (Barking standards were  promulgated  earlier   (40  CFR
Part  429,  Subpart A)) of logs.  The following discussion of log
washing is presented in order that an indication may be  provided
of  its  present magnitude and frequency of occurrence as well as
possible future trends in the industry.
                                   21

-------
NJ
M
                                                 FIGURE 4  SAWMILLS AND PLANING MILLS

-------
                        ALASKA AND HAWAII
                        SOFT -  460
                        HARD -    0
                        TOTAL- 460
MOUNTAIN PIVISIOM
SOFT - 9627
HARD •   40
TOTAL-9667
NORTH-WEST CENTRAL DIVISION
SOFT - 489
HARD - 980
                                                                                 TOTAL-  1359
                                                       NORTH-EAST CENTRAL_ DIVISION,
                                                       SOFT •   306
                                                       HARD -  2445
                                                       TOTAL -  2731
NEW EN8LAMD DIVISION
SOFT - 1062
HARD -  413
TOTAL- 1475
10
CO
                                                                                                                                                   MIDDLE ATLANTIC DIVISION
                                                                                                                                                   SOFT - 373
                                                                                                                                                   HARD • I68S
                                                                                                                                                   SOFTWOOD - 65040
                                                                                                                                                   HARDWOOD- 17269
                                                                                                                                                   U.S.TOTAL- 82309
                        PACIFIC DIVISION
                        SOFT-37695
                        HARD -  42O
                            (S) - DID NOT MEET
                            CONSISTENCY STANDARDS,
                                                                                           SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION
                                                                                           SOFT - 6986
                                                                                           HARD - S I I 5
                          SOUTH-EAST CENTRAL DIVISION
                          SOFT -3708
                          HARD-3934
SOUTH-_WEST CENTRAL DIVISION
SOFT -4844
HARD -2 268
                            UMTS SHOWN ARE IN
                            THOUSAND CUBIC  METERS.
                                                          TOTAL-7 I I 2
                                                                                                                                                TOTAL-1 2 I 0 I
                                                         FIGURE  5    PRODUCTION  OF SOFTWOODS  AND  HARDWOODS  1967

-------
                                       TABtE 3

            TITMRKR PRODUCTION BY REGIONS - 1971 AND BY MILL SIZE*
 West
 South
 North and  East
Production Range
(Thousand Cubic Meters)
120 - up
60 - 120
23 - 60
12 - 23
7 - 12
Other
Total s
120 - up
60 - 120
23 - 60
12 - 23
7 - 12
Other
Total s
120 - up
60 - 120
23 - 60
12 - 23
7 - 12
Other
Number
Companl es
87
55
96
36
16
83
373
19
16
63
83
58

364
-
4
17
32
50
162
Number
Mills
257
59
106
40
16
84
562
71
25 .
68
88
58

439
-
7
32
39
52
162
Production
(Meters)
33,038,519
4,567,041
3,613,833
576,399
132,514
166,189
42,094,495
5,847,699
1,246,298
2,120,136
1,309,708
491,542

11,354,608
__
306,152
640,873
470,201
415,362
477,557
*The above production represents approximately 65.2 percent of total U.S.
  production for 1971.
                                  24

-------
Log washing is one of several unit operations which  may  or  may
not  be  associated  with  a particular sawmill.  While numerical
inventory of those plant practicing log washing is not available,
it can be stated that the majority of sawmills  do  not  practice
log  washing.   A  survey  of southern pine mills by one industry
association showed that approximately twelve percent of the mills
returning questionnaires utilized log washing.  Plant visits  and
information  developed  during the current guidelines development
program determined that  of  the  several  dozen  mills  observed
throughout  the  southeast.  Northwest, and Northeast, only a few
were found to have log washing operations.

The millwork industry comprises establishments primarily  engaged
in  manufacturing  fabricated  millwork,  either  prefinished  or
unfinished.  The number of mills and their distribution  in  1967
is presented in Figure 6.  It should be noted that the values for
number  of  mills  include  planing  mills only if such mills are
primarily  engaged  in  millwork  production.   For   information
regarding  specific  companies or mills, reference should be made
to Sweats Catalogue  or  any  other  such  manufacturer's  guide.
Inventories are also available through the associations listed in
Appendix B.

In  1967  the  total  number  of  establishments  involved in the
production of prefabricated  structural  wood  members  and  wood
laminates  was  43.   While  no  current  complete  inventory  is
available, it can be assumed that the magnitude of  the  industry
has  not varied significantly since 1967.  The American Institute
of Timber Construction has provided the inventory of  its  member
companies  presented  in  Table  4.   This inventory includes the
ma jority of  the  industry  both  in  number  of  plants  and  in
production.

The  wood  container  segment  of  the  timber  products industry
includes  establishments  manufacturing  nailed   wooden   boxes,
wirebound  boxes  and  crates, veneer and plywood containers, and
cooperage.   Figure  7   gives   the   total   number   of   such
establishments  and  their  distribution  by region and state for
1967.

Because of changes  in  the  Standard  Industrial  Classification
(SIC)  Codes, an accurate inventory of establishments involved in
the manufacturing of wood  buildings  and  mobile  homes  is  not
available.    There   were,  however,  about  500  establishments
operated by over 330 firms engaged in the manufacture  of  mobile
homes.   The  total  production  of mobile homes in the U. S.  in
1972 was approximately 567,000  units  according  to  the  Mobile
Homes Manufacturers1 Association.

Another  important  product  of  the timber products industry are
prefinished  panels.   A  wide  variety  of   factory   finishing
operations  are  performed,  to some degree, on most all types of
flat-stock, wood panels including hardwood and softwood  plywood,
hardboard,  and  particle  board  panels.   Figure  8  shows  the
distribution of panel producing plants  in  the  U.S.  which,  as
                                   25

-------
                                     TABLE 4


MANUFACTURERS OF PREFABRICATED STRUCTURAL WOOD MEMBERS AND WXD LAMINATES
 Able Fabricators, Inc.
 Spokane, Washington

 Anthony Forest Products Co.
 El Dorado, Arkansas

 Architectural Wood Products, Inc.
 Fresno, California

 Bohemia Wood Systems
 Eugene, Oregon

 Boise Cascade Corporation
 Boise, Idaho

 Ronald A. Coco, Inc.
 Baton Rouge, Louisiana

 Duco-Lam, Inc.
 Drain, Oregon

 El Dorado Laminated Beams, Inc.
 El Dorado Springs, Missouri

 The Intermountain Company
 Salmon, Idaho

 Koppers Company, Inc.
 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
      Plant Locations:
      Magnolia, Arkansas
      Morrisville, North Carolina
      Sumner, Washington

 Laminated Timbers, Inc.
 London, Kentucky

 Laminated Wood Products Co.
 Ontario, Oregon
 Mid-West Lumber Company
 Lincoln, Nebraska

 Riddle Laminators
 Riddle, Oregon

 Rosboro Lumber Company
 Springfield, Oregon

 Standard Structures, Inc.
 Santa Rosa, California

 Structural Wood Systems, Inc.
 Greenville, Alabama

 Timberweld Manufacturing
 Billings, Montana

 Timfab, Incorporated
 Clackamas, Oregon

 Unadilla Laminated Products
 Unadilla, New York

 Weyerhaeuser Company
 Tacoma, Washington
      Plant Locations:
      Albert Lea, Minnesota
      Cottage Grove, Oregon

Wood Fabricators, Inc.
North Bill erica, Massachusetts
Woodlam, Incorporated
Tacoma, Washington
                                  26

-------
NJ

                                                   FIGURE 6  MILLWORK  PLANTS

-------
ISJ
CO
                                               FIGURE 7  WOOD CONTAINER MANUFACTURERS

-------
to
O  SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD PANELS
   HARDWOOD PLYWOOD PANELS
   HARDBOARD PANELS
   PARTICLEBDARD PANELS
                                                FIGURE 8   FINISHED PANEL PRODUCING PLANTS

-------
reported  by  the 1973 Directory of the Forest Products Industry,
produce one or more of the types of  finished  panels  listed  in
Table  5.   A  detailed  inventory of those plants represented in
Figure 8 is included in Appendix B.  It should be noted that this
is not intended to represent a complete inventory of this segment
of  the  industry.   In  recent  years  rapid  developments  have
resulted  in  a  multitude  of  finishing  processes  with a wide
variety of materials used and finished products  produced.   Such
developments have further resulted in an ever expanding number of
industrial   operations   being  accomplished  not  only  by  the
manufacturers of the basic wood  products,  but  also  by  custom
finishing   plants  not  primarily  associated  with  the  timber
products industry.

Another portion of  the  industry  included  in  Major  Group  24
comprises establishments primarily engaged in turning and shaping
wood,  and  manufacturing  various wood products such as cork and
sawdust products, various carved wood novelties, and a  multitude
of  machined  and fabricated products.  While an inventory of the
various industries within this category is not feasible. Figure 9
gives the number of such mills and indicates  their  distribution
by state and region.

In  the U. s. there are currently 18 insulation board plants pro-
ducing over 330 million sq m (3,600 million sq ft)  on  a  13  mm
(0.5  in)  basis  yearly  from  wood or bagasse.  Figure 10 cate-
gorizes these plants according to process and production.   Seven
of  these  plants  also produce hardboard to varying degrees, and
they all produce insulation board in either structural,  mineral,
or  finished  form.   A list of the plants and their locations is
given in Table 6.  Of the 17 plants surveyed in this  study,  all
produced  structural  insulation  board,  and  13  also  produced
finished insulation board.  As for  raw  materials  used  by  the
plants,  a majority of 12 used softwood predominantly, three used
mostly hardwood, one mineral fiber, and one bagasse.

Much of the production growth of particleboard attributed to  the
South and West can be explained by the concentration of plants in
the  states of North Carolina and Oregon (Figure 11); there are 8
and 1tt particleboard plants  in  each  state,  respectively,  and
Oregon produces one-third of the present total U.S. particleboard
production (Table 7).

Of  the  76  plants  now producing particleboard in the U* S., 69
produce platenboard  (mat-formed board) and eight produce extruded
board (Table 8).  The platenboard accounts for 98 percent of  the
total particleboard production.

DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSES

The  following  discussions  of  processes in the timber products
industry are intended to  provide  a  general  knowledge  of  the
operations  involved  in the timber industry.  These descriptions
are considered to be representative processes  and  are  oriented
toward their use of water and generation of waste water.
                                    30

-------
                                TABLE 5
                TXPES OF FACTORY FINISHED PANELS
    Softwood Plywood
Prefinished Plywood
Hardboard Faced
Paper Overlaid
Plastic Overlaid
Metal Overlaid
Special Printed Overlaid
Decorative Wall Panels
Preprimed Plywood
Coated Concrete Form
    Hardwood Plywood
Prefinished Parcels
Hardboard Faced
Paper Overlaid
Plastic Overlaid
Vinyl Overlaid
Special Printed Overlaid
Plastic Laminated
Preprimed Plywood
    Hardboard
Prefinished Panels
Factory Primed
Wood Grained
Plastic Overlaid
Vinyl Overlaid
Black-Dyed
    Particleboard
Prefinished Panels
Filled Panels
Sealed Panels
Factory Primed
Veneer Overlaid
Plastic Overlaid
Vinyl Overlaid
Polyester Filled and Printed
                                 31

-------
UJ
ro
                                         FIGURE  9  WOOD PRODUCTS NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED

-------
OJ
                                         O   SUBCATEGORY   I



                                             SUBCATEGORY   H




                                         A   SUBCATEGORY   HI
                                           FIGURE 10  MAP OF INSULATION  BOARD  LOCATIONS

-------
                                   TABLE 6

                 INVENTORY OF INSULATION BOARD PIANTS
Abitibi Corporation
Blounstown, Florida

Armstrong Cork Company
Macon, Georgia

Boise Cascade Corporation
Internation Falls, Minnesota

The Celotex Corporation
Dubuque, Iowa

The Celotex Corporation
Marrero, Louisiana

The Celotex Corporation
L'Anse, Michigan

The Celotex Corporation
Sunbury, Pennsylvania

Flintkote Company
Meridian, Mississippi

Huebert Fiberboard, Inc.
Boonville, Missouri

Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc.
St. Helens, Oregon

National Gypsum Company
Mobile, Alabama

Simpson Timber Company
Shelton, Washington

Southern Johns-Manville Products
Jarratt, Virginia

Temple Industries, Inc.
Diboll, Texas

United States Gypsum Company
Lisbon Falls, Maine

United States Gypsum Company
Greenville, Mississippi
United States Gypsum Company
Pilot Rock, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
(Craig) Broken Bow, Oklahoma
                                  34

-------
U)
Ul
                                                    MAT  FORMED

                                                    MAT  FORMED (under construction)

                                                    EXTRUDED
                                             FIGURE  11   PARTICLEBOARD MANUFACTURING FACILITIES

-------
                             TABLE 7




PARTICLEBQARD PRODUCTION PIANTS BY GEOGRAPHIC AREAS,  1973
Geographic
Area
United States, Total
East
Pennsylvania
Indiana
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
South
Virginia
Florida
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Kentucky
Tennessee
Al abama
Mississippi
Arkansas
Texas
Louisiana
Oklahoma
All Types
76
9
2
2
1
2
2
40
7
1
8
3
2
2
1
1
4
4
3
3
1
Number Producing
Platenboard Extruded Board
69 7
8 1
1 1
2
1
2
2
34 6
5 2
1
6 2
2 1
2
1 1
1
1
4
4
3
3
1
                             36

-------
TABLE 7  PARTICLEBOARD PRODUCING PLANTS
BY GEOGRAPHIC AREAS, 1973
(Continued)
    Geographic
      Area
                   Number Producing
All Types    Platenboard    Extruded Board
West
     Idaho
Montana
New Mexico
Arizona
Washington
Oregon
California
   27            27
    1             1
    1             1
    1             1
    1             1
    1             1
   14            14
    8             8
                                37


-------
                                 TABLE 8


        UNITED STATES PARTICLEBCftRD  (MAT-FORMED) PRODUCERS
TABLE 8  UNITED STATES PARTICLEBOARD
(MAT-FORMED) PRODUCERS

           ALABAMA

Giles & Kendall Company, Inc.
Maysville, Alabama

           ARIZONA

Southwest Forest Industries
Flagstaff, Arizona

           ARKANSAS

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Crossett, Arkansas

International Paper Company
Southern Kraft Division
Malvern, Arkansas

Permaneer Corporation
Hope, Arkansas

The Singer Company
Furniture Division
Trumann, Arkansas

            CALIFORNIA

American Forest Products Corporation
Martell, California

Big Bear Board Products
Division of Golden State Building
  Products
Redlands, California

Champion International
Anderson, California

Collins Pine Company
Chester, California

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Ukiah, California

Hambro Forest Products, Inc.
Crescent City, California
Humbolt Flakeboard
Arcata, California

Sequoia Forest Industries
Division Wickes Forest
  Industries
Chowchilla, California

      FLORIDA

Florida Plywood
Greenville, Florida

      GEORGIA

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Vienna, Georgia

Weyerhaeuser Company
Adel, Georgia

       IDAHO

Pack River Company
Tenex Division
Sandpoint, Idaho

       INDIANA

Swain Industries, Inc.
Seymour, Indiana

Swain Industries, Inc.
Evanston, Indiana

       KENTUCKY

Tenn-Flake Corporation
Mlddlesboro, Kentucty

      LOUISIANA

Louisiana-Pacific Corporation
Urania, Louisiana
                                 38

-------
                                  TABLE 8.
            UNITED STATES PARTICLEBOARD (MAT-FORMED) PRODUCERS
                                  (Continued)
Olinkraft, Inc.
Lillie, Louisiana

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Duraflake South, Inc. Division
Ruston, Louisiana

       MICHIGAN

Champion International
Gaylord, Michigan

       MINNESOTA

Blandin Wood Products Company
Grand Rapids, Minnesota

Cladwood Company
Division Forest Poducts Sales Co.
Virginia, Minnesota

       MISSISSIPPI

Champion International
Oxford, Mississippi

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Louisville, Mississippi

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Taylorsville, Mississippi

Kroehler Manufacturing Company
Meridian, Mississippi

       MONTANA

Evans Products Company
Missoula, Montana
     NORTH CAROLINA

Broyhill  Furniture Company
Broyhill, North Carolina

Carolina Forest Products, Inc.
Wilmington, North Carolina

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Whiteville, North Carolina

International Paper Company
Southern Kraft Division
Farmville, North Carolina

Nu-Woods Incorporated
Lenoir, North Carolina

Permaneer Corporation
Black Mountain, North Carolina

     OKLAHOMA

Ward Industries, Inc.
Miami, Oklahoma

     OREGON

Boise Cascade Corporation
La Grande, Oregon

Cascade Fiber Company
Eugene, Oregon

Cladwood Company
Division Forest Products Sales
Sweet Home, Oregon

Fibreboard Corporation
Clear Fir Products Division
Springfield, Oregon

Permaneer Corporation
Brownsville, Oregon
                                39

-------
                                    TABLE 8
           UNITED STATES PARTICLEBQARD (MAT-FORMED)  PRODUCERS
                                ^Continued)
Mexwood Products, Inc.
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Roseburg Lumber Company
Dillard, Oregon

Timber Products Company
Medford, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Klamath Falls, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Wood Products Division
North Bend, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Wood Products Division
Springfield, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Duraflake Division
Albany, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Brooks-Willamette Corporation
 Division
Bend, Oregon

      PENNSYLVANIA

Westvaco Corporation
Tyrone, Pennsylvania

      SOUTH CAROLINA

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Russellvilie, South Carolina

International Paper Company
Southern Kraft Division
Greenwood, South Carolina

      TENNESSEE
Permaneer Corporation
Dillard, Oregon

Permaneer Corporation
White City, Oregon
Temple Industries ,
Diboll, Texas

Temple Industries
Pine!and, Texas
Bassett Furniture Company
Basset, Virginia

Champion International
South Boston, Virginia

Masonite Corporation
Waveryly, Virginia

Stuart Lumber Company
Stuart, Virginia

Union Camp Corporation
Franklin, Virginia

      WASHINGTON

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Longview, Washington

      WISCONSIN

Rodman Industries, Inc.
Resinwood Division
Marinette, Wisconsin

Weyerhaeuser Company
Marshfield, Wisconsin
                                40

-------
Timber Harvesting

Timber  may  be  harvested by one of four principal methods:  (1)
"selective cutting," in which particular  trees  are  chosen  for
harvest;  (2)    "shelter wood," in which mature trees are removed
in (2) such a manner as to leave an adequate overstory; (3)  "seed
tree harvesting," in which an area is clear  cut  to  the  extent
that  only  sufficient  trees  are  left to bear seed for natural
reforestation; and  (U) "clear-cutting," in which  all  trees  are
removed from the harvested area.

Transportation of Logs and Other Raw Materials

The   transportation   of   logs  after  leaving  the  forest  is
accomplished primarily by truck and rail.  In the Northwest,  and
Alaska,  where  waterways  are accessible, a large number of logs
are transported from the forest by  navigable  waterways.   While
this  method  of  transportation may be in ships or on barges, it
more commonly consists of large log rafts floating in the  water.
In most cases, the logs are transported from as little as several
miles  to as much as 161 km (100 miles) by truck or rail prior to
being transported in water.  Furthermore, the logs may be  sorted
in  a  fresh  water pond before transport by truck or rail to the
large floating log rafts.

Because of the magnitude of these operations, water transport  of
log  rafts is generally limited to ocean or estuarine waters; but
some fresh water rafting is practiced, particularly in the  power
supply  reservoirs of the western U. S.  Typically, a log raft is
composed of millions of bd ft of  logs,  loose  or  bundled,  and
contained  by perimeter logs.  Log "driving", as practiced in the
early years of the industry, is almost non-existent  today.    Log
transportation   in  the  South,  East,  and  Midwest  is  almost
exclusively by truck.

Other raw materials transported in the timber  products  industry
may  be  broadly classified as fractionated wood.  In the case of
total tree harvesting, the resultant chips are trucked  from  the
forest.   While this type of immediate harvesting is a relatively
new practice in the industry, it is expected to increase  in  the
future.    In   general,   wood  chips  resulting  from  in-field
processing are commonly transported  by  truck  or  rail.   While
limited  fluidization  of chips, and hydraulic pipeline transfer,
is practiced in the pulp and paper industry,  this  technique  is
used  only  as  an inplant process in the remainder of the timber
products industry.  Pneumatic transportation of bark  or  sawdust
is  common  for  inplant  transportation;  however, between-plant
transportation is accomplished by rail and occasionally by truck.

Raw Material Storage

The harvesting of timber is seasonal in most parts of the  U.  S.
Consequently,  log storage is often essential for continuous mill
production.  When fractionalized wood is used as a raw  material,
it  is  usually produced on a rather continuous basis, but it may
                                   41

-------
arrive at the production site at irregular  intervals,  depending
on  the  distance  and  method of transportation.  For example, a
train load of chips may arrive as infrequently as  monthly  at  a
plant site and a stockpile of chips must therefore be maintained.
Management  usually  requires  a  "safety  margin"  of  supply to
accommodate  non-shipment  during  supply  interruptions,   e.g.,
railroad workers' strikes.  A stockpile of chips to supply two or
three  months  production  would be common.  Generally, turn over
times for stockpiles of raw materials for insulation board plants
are less than one or two months and may be as low as three to six
days.  Stockpiles for overseas shipment are normally quite  large
and turnover times may be as long as several years.

Raw  material storage is of considerable importance to the timber
products industry and a large  amount  of  planning  and  capital
expenditure  is  involved.   In addition, preservation of the raw
material while in storage is necessary to insure that the quality
and quantity of finished product is not impaired.   Most  of  the
techniques used for raw material storage and preservation involve
the use of water and the ensuing production of water pollutants.

Logs  may  be  stored  either on the land or in the water.  Those
logs stored on land may be stacked in piles ranging from 20 to 33
ft (6 to 10m)  in height and hundreds of feet  in  length.   These
piles,  called  "land  decks",  are  usually  one log's length in
width.  When logs are land decked, there exists  a  tendency  for
the  ends  of  the  logs  to  dry and crack.  This "end-checking"
diminishes the amount of usable, top grade  lumber  that  can  be
obtained  from  the  logs.   To  prevent  end-checking  it is not
uncommon to sprinkle the decks with  water.   Because  of  almost
continuous  rains  in  the  winter,  spraying  of  land  decks is
seasonal on the Northwestern coast.  In other areas, such as  the
Southeast, it is practiced on a continuous basis.  A sprayed land
deck  is  referred  to  in the industry as a "wet deck."  In some
cases, the effluent from the wet deck is collected and  recycled,
but  more commonly it is directly discharged.  Quite often runoff
from the wet deck flows into a log pond.

Logs may be stored in water either singularly or in bundles.   If
logs are stored as bundles, they are usually sorted on land, but,
in  some  cases,  may  be  sorted  in the water prior to storage.
There are usually two or more logs on the top of bundles that are
held above the water because of buoyancy and do not benefit  from
the water storage; however, the number of logs that can be stored
in  the  same body of water is considerably greater when the logs
are bundled.

Logs may be stored in log ponds, river impoundments, or  directly
in  marine  or  estuarine waters.  A log pond may be defined as a
body of water in which the influent and effluent are either small
or controlled.  Most ponds range between 0.5 to 16 ha  (1.2 to  <*0
ac)  in size.  Typically one to three m  (four to ten ft) in depth,
some  may  serve  as  catch  basins for drainage areas many times
their size, though normally the  associated  drainage  areas  are
relatively   small.    Most   log  ponds  serve  as  a  means  of
                                   42

-------
transporting logs to a mill located on their shores.   Because the
equipment at the mill that receives the logs cannot tolerate wide
fluctuations, in pond water  level  most  log  ponds  attempt  to
control pond level fluctuations.  While there are a few log ponds
used  only for storage and sorting, most are associated with some
type   of   mill   operation.   Log  ponds  are  confined  almost
exclusively to the Northwest.

An impoundment of sufficient depth for log storage may be  formed
by  the  construction  of a dam across a river.  Logs are usually
transported to impoundments by trucks and the confinement  serves
as  a  convenient  means  of  sorting  and  storing the logs.  An
impoundment  is  subject  to  the  same  types   of   operational
restrictions  as log ponds with the primary difference being that
the flow of water through such an  impoundment  is  usually  much
greater  than  the  flow  through a log pond.  In addition, these
reservoirs are  usually  public  waters  whereas  log  ponds  are
privately   owned.    Some   logs   are  stored  in  fresh  water
impoundments when the primary  function  of  the  impoundment  is
other  than  log  storage.   Power  reservoirs  and flood control
reservoirs are occasionally used for log storage, but the extreme
water level fluctuations  characteristic  of  these  waters  make
operations  difficult,  limiting  their  usage.   Logs  are often
stored  in  estuarine  and  ocean  waters,  particularly  in  the
Northwest  and Alaska, sometimes as long as 20 years.  These logs
are placed into the water, sorted, and stored in a protected cove
or bay in piles away from the shore.  Provision is made for water
level changes with the tides.

Wood chips, planer shavings, sawdust, and bark may be either  raw
materials  or  waste products in different segments of the forest
products industry.  As  raw  materials,  fractionalized  wood  is
commonly  placed  in  uncovered  piles.   The residence time of a
particle in the storage pile depends on the rates  at  which  the
particles  are  supplied and utilized, as well as the operational
safety margin required by management.  The  production  or  usage
rate combined with the mean residence time establishes pile size.
A  pile  may  be  as  small as a single truck load or as large as
several hectares and up to 30 m  (100 ft) in height.

The particles are usually conveyed pneumatically  onto  the  pile
and,  the  particles may be wetted during the blowing process, if
dust is a problem.  In  some  cases,  both  the  introduction  of
particles  to the pile and their removal occurs on the top of the
pile and results in some of the particles in the  bottom  of  the
pile residing much longer than the mean residence time.  In other
cases,  particles are added and removed from one side of the pile
which causes those particles on the back side of the pile to have
a residence time much longer than  the  mean.   Chip  and  planer
shaving piles used as raw materials in the particleboard industry
are  usually stored inside buildings to keep the moisture content
of the chips  as  low  as  possible.   Sawdust  from  very  small
sawmills  may  be stored on-site in piles for more than one year,
and in many cases are left indefinintely.
                                    43

-------
Sawmills and Planing Mills

The primary function of any sawmill is to reduce a log or cant to
a usable end product.  The process employed  to  accomplish  this
function  consists  of  a  combination  of  basic unit operations
including the following:

    mill feed
    log washing
    debarking
    sawing
    resawing
    edging
    trimming
    lumber handling
    lumber finishing

It should be emphasized that several of the above operations  may
not  be  practiced  at  a  specific plant.  The following process
description is a discussion of operations listed above  including
a  discussion of some of the variations within each unit that are
most common in the industry.

Mill Feed - The majority of mills utilizing land storage of  logs
as opposed to water storage are fed by using a variety of loading
equipment,  most commonly front-end loaders.  The loader picks up
the log and simply places it on a  ramp  or  deck  equipped  with
moving chains which transport the log into the mill.  Some mills,
however,  utilize  ponds  or  flumes  for  mill feeding purposes.
Ponds may be used for sorting and washing prior to  entering  the
mill.   Ponds  and  other  water bodies used for storage are also
used for sorting purposes.  Log  flumes  are  utilized  for  mill
feeding  by  relatively  few  sawmills.  In those mills utilizing
flumes, ponds or other water bodies for  feeding,  the  logs  are
floated  to  the  mill  entrance where a chain belt or bull chain
carries the logs out of the water and into the mill.

Log Washing - Log washing  may  be  practical  prior  to  barking
and/or  sawing.   While  the  desirability  or  necessity of this
practice cannot be clearly established, some of the  reasons  for
its  use  are  as follows:  (1)  Where bark is utilized as a fuel,
log washing prior to barking reduces the amount of  slag  buildup
on  boiler  grates  and,, consequently, reduces frequency of grate
washdown.  Also, if bark is used for other  purposed,  a  minimal
amount  of grit is desirable;  and (2)  for mills not barking prior
to sawing, log washing increases saw life.

Log washing is accomplished by spraying water on logs from  fixed
nozzles  as  the logs are tranported into the mill.  In practice,
pressure and volume of water utilized vary from mill to mill, but
pressures are on the order of 6.8 atmospheres (100 Ib per sq  in)
while  the  volume of water varies from less than 5 to 17 Ips (80
to 265 gpm).
                                    44

-------
The future of log washing will be a function of one  or  more  of
several  considerations.   If  the trend in log storage is toward
deck storage, wet or dry,  rather  than  toward  storage  in  log
ponds, log washing may increase since log ponds serve the purpose
of  cleaning  logs.   If  the  use  of  bark  as an energy source
increases or decreases significantly log  washing  will  possibly
vary  proportionately because log washing reduces slag buildup on
boiler grates.  If the market for "dirty" chips (i.e., chips  and
bark  mixed  together)  increases significantly, the desirability
for bark removal may decrease, while  the  desirability  for  log
washing  would  increase.   Also,  changes in the market value of
bark would likewise influence the degree of log washing and could
possibly result in the adoption of bark washing.   Based  on  the
above considerations, the desirability of log washing will likely
increase in the future.

Headrig  Operation  - The term headrig is used by the industry to
include all the  machinery  which  is  utilized  to  produce  the
initial breakdown of a log to boards, dimensions or cants.  Thus,
a headrig includes the feed works, the setworks, the carriage and
shotgun, the headsaw, chipper or chipper saw and all the controls
associated  with  the above.  The major types of headrigs and the
basic mechanical components will be discussed.

The basic headrig consists of a single diesel or electric powered
circular saw and a log carriage.  The carriage is a  platform  on
wheels  equipped  with  hydraulic or electric setworks which hold
the log as the carriage moves parallel to the saw.  The setworks,
which are controlled by the sawyer, position the log for  sawing.
The carriage is powered by a shotgun which may be air, hydraulic,
or  steam powered.  The shotgun is a long, circular tube in which
a ram is inserted.  One  end  of  the  ram  is  attached  to  the
carriage and the other is fitted with a pistonhead.  A compressor
or  pump pressurizes the working fluid behind the piston and thus
powers the carriage in one direction.  By rotating a valve  spool
the  sawyer  can  reverse  the  direction  of  the piston and the
carriage.  Figure 12 gives an equipment layout  for  a  hydraulic
shotgun.

Another  type  of  single  saw  headrig  utilizes  a band saw.  A
typical band saw is 25cm to 30cm  (10 to 12 in) wide, 11 to  12  m
(35  to  UO ft) long, and is mounted on two saw wheels, one above
the other, each with a diameter of two to three  m   (six  to  ten
ft).   The band saw is tensioned and driven by the saw wheels and
may be one-sided or two-sided.  The log is placed on the carriage
and sawn  as  it  passes  the  saw  which  is  moving  vertically
downward.

Ahead  of  either  the  band  saw  or  the  circular saw may be a
chipper.  The chipper is used to square the side of the log prior
to sawing and thus eliminates  the  slab  which  would  otherwise
result from sawing.
                                    45

-------
                                        RAM
O1
                                                                         PISTON' VALVE SPOOL  SAFETY
                                                                                                 VALVE
                                                                  PUMP
                                                                                          HEAT EXCHANGER
                                              FIGURE 12  HYDRAULIC SHOTGUN

-------
Multiple saw headrigs consist of the following basic types:

    Log gang mill
    Double band or quad band headrig
    Scrag mill
    Chipping headrig

The  log  gang  or  Swedish gang saw cuts by means of a series of
parallel saw blades mounted in a frame that moves up and down  as
the  log is fed through.  The double band headrig utilizes a pair
of band saws while a quadband headrig utilizes two pairs of  band
saws  in  tandem  to  accomplish  the initial log breakdown.  The
scrag mill is generally utilized  for  small  diameter  logs  and
consists  of one or more pairs of circular saws with each pair in
tandem.

The purpose of the multiple saw headrig is to increase production
efficiency by eliminating the need  for  several  passes  by  the
headsaw.   This  task  may  also  be  accomplished  by a chipping
headrig.  In this type of headrig the debarked log is fed through
an infeed section to bottom, side, and top chipping  heads.   The
chipping  heads  are  automatically set according to the diameter
and shape of the log so that only that portion of the  log  which
will  not produce marketable lumber is chipped away.  Thus, after
chipping,  the  log  has  been  completely  profiled  such   that
marketable   lumber   can   be  readily  produced  by  subsequent
operations.  The  subsequent  operations  are  similar  to  those
following  other  headrigs  with  the  exception  that  from  the
chipping headrig the profiled log  must  proceed  immediately  to
further breakdown without turning or changing position.

The  nature  of  subsequent  sawing operations will depend on the
degree of breakdown accomplished in the headrig and  the  desired
end  product  from  the  mill.  In general, the function of these
operations is to reduce the width or thickness of the  lumber  or
to square the edges or ends.  The basic unit operations following
the headrig are gang sawing, resawing, edging, and trimming.  The
gang  saw may be the reciprocating type, as previously described,
or a set of circular saws usually  of  a  movable,  double  arbor
type.   The  gang  saw  reduces  a  cant  to  lumber  of  desired
thickness.  Resaws are usually vertical band saws and are used to
saw thick boards into thinner ones.  These may be single, double,
or quad band resaws.  Following resawing, or  remanufacturing  as
it  may  be  termed,  the  lumber  enters the edger.  Edgers vary
widely in size and capacity but usually consist of one stationary
circular saw and one or more circular  saws  that  can  be  moved
laterally  on the arbor to permit ripping different widths.  Trim
saws are circular saws used to square the ends of the lumber  and
to remove serious defects.

Following  edging  and trimming, the rough green lumber is sorted
and stacked.  The lumber may first flow into a "green chain"  and
be graded, sorted, and stacked, or it may be graded and sorted by
placing  it  in appropriate sorting troughs.  If the lumber is to
be marketed green, it may be passed through a preservative  bath.
                                    47

-------
usually  pentachlorophenol,  prior  to stacking.  The duration of
the dip is usually less than one minute.

Dying of lumber is accomplished by either  air  seasoning  or  by
kiln  drying.   Air  seasoning  is  accomplished  by segregating,
coating, and piling.  Segregation is done based upon green  board
weight  so that a given pile will dry at the same rate.  Prior to
its being stacked, the lumber may be treated  with  chemicals  by
spraying, brushing, or dipping in order to prevent blue stain and
other fungal attack.  Various coatings may also be applied to the
end  of  the lumber to retard checking.  The most common of these
is paraffin or other wax emulsions.  The lumber is  then  stacked
in  such a manner as to provide adequate air circulation and left
to dry for a period of time that may extend to several months.

Kiln drying is  accomplished  by  placing  green  lumber  into  a
humidity  and temperature controlled kiln.  The kiln is heated by
steam or other means, generally by indirect radiation from coils.
Air circulation is maintained  by  forced  draft  or  by  natural
circulation.  Humidity is controlled by steam sprays.  The lumber
is  stacked mechanically or manually outside the kiln with sticks
of wood used to separate the boards.  The stacks are  then  moved
into  the  kiln where they will remain until the desired moisture
content is reached.  Temperature, humidity, and drying time  will
vary  with kiln type, wood species, initial moisture content, and
various other factors.   In  general,  however,  kiln  drying  is
accomplished in two to five days at dry-bulb temperatures ranging
from 49 to 82 C (120 to 180 F)„  For some cases, high temperature
drying,  i.e.,  above  93  C   (200  F) is also employed to reduce
drying time.

Dried lumber is quite often planed to  desired  smoothness.   The
surfacing  tools  used  are  planer knives attached to a rotating
cutterhead.  The quality of finish is a function of the number of
knives, the rotations per minute of the cutterhead, the feed rate
of lumber through the planer, and other factors.  Lumber  may  be
surfaced  on  one, two, or four sides by the addition of an equal
number of cutting heads.

After planing the lumber may proceed through one or more  of  the
following processes:

    Preservative dipping
    Staining
    End-coating
    Moisture proofing

Preservative application is generally accomplished by the methods
previously   discussed  for  green  lumber  handling.   Staining,
usually with a water base material, is done merely to  produce  a
more  pleasing  color  in the finished lumber.  This is generally
accomplished by a spray nozzle as the lumber passes  through  the
spray  compartment.   Excess  spray is recirculated.  End-coating
prevents the ends of the lumber from  checking  while  it  is  in
storage  or  in  service.  This is generally done by spraying the
                                    48

-------
end of the lumber with any of various materials such as paint  or
wax  emulsions.   Any  material  which  will  seal the end of the
lumber and is easily applied will  suffice.   Moisture  resistant
compounds  are  sometimes  sprayed  on  the  finished  lumber  to
increase durability  and  resistance  to  weathering.   compounds
specifically  formulated  for  this  purpose  are  available from
several manufacturers and are applied in a similar fashion to the
stain application discussed above.  These materials are generally
water soluble.

As previously mentioned, a sawmill is a combination  of  some  or
all  of the above unit operations.  The process diagrams shown in
figures 13 through 15 will serve  to  illustrate  some  of  these
possible combinations and some possible mill layouts.


Figure  13  illustrates  a process layout for a small rough green
sawmill.  Figure 14 illustrates the combination of  wet  and  dry
deck  storage . of  logs, with a small to medium size band sawmill
and a planing mill.  Figure 15 gives  a  possible  layout  for  a
medium to large sawmill.


It  should  be  noted that planing mills may exist in combination
with sawmills or may be independent mills buying from a number of
suppliers.  It should also be noted that  other  unit  operations
may  be present at a sawmill or planing mill.  The most common of
these additional operations is edge or end jointing of lumber  in
sawmills  and  production  of  millwork  in planing mills.  These
types of operations will be discussed below.


Miscellaneous Operations - There are a number  of  wood  products
which are produced by further processing or manufacturing of such
primary  forest  products  as lumber, plywood and board products.
The large number of  such  products  prohibits  a  discussion  of
detailed  process  descriptions  for  each individual product and
since for the most part there is little or no process water  used
and  little  or  no  waste water generation in these processes, a
thorough discussion of each manufacturing method is  unnecessary.
Basically  the  production  of miscellaneous wood products may be
characterized as one or more of the  following  unit  operations:
machining,     fabrication,     and    by-product    utilization.
Representative  examples  of  the  specific  products  which  are
considered under these operations are given below.
shakes                  door trim          wooden frames and sash
shingles                baseboards         window trim
excelsior               moldings           box cleats
barrel  staves           wooden panels      spools
gun  stocks              stair railings     flooring
wooden  bowls            toothpicks         matches
                                    49

-------
MILL  FEED
    MECHANICAL DEBARKER
          CIRCULAR HEADSAW
                  EOGER AND GANGSAW
                               TRIM SAW
                                  GREEN  CHAIN
                                            SHIPPING
  FIGURE 13 PROCESS  DIAGRAM OF ROUGH GREEN SAWMILL
                      50

-------
 DRY STORAGE
i—   WET STORAGE
          MECHANICAL DEBARKER
              BAND HEADSAW
            VERTICAL RESAW
                EDGER
                TRIM SAW
                GREEN END
    ,
KILN DRYING
PUMP
                            WATER
                          RESERVOIR
                  HOG CHIPPER
                                           SHIPPING
       AIR  DRYING
               PLANING  MILL
                SHIPPING
              FIGURE 14 PROCESS DIAGRAM OF BAND SAWMILL
                            51

-------
Ul
N)
                                  PRELIMINARY BARK
                                  PROCESS  AND
                                  COLLECTING
                                       FIGURE  15   PROCESS DIAGRAM  MULTIPLE  HEADRIG SAWMILL

-------
                           Fabricating

barrels                 laminated beams        baskets
doors                   laminated decking      wirebound boxes
windows                 jointed lumber         wooden boxes
prefabricated buildings wooden pipes           crates
mobile dwellings        trusses

                     Bv-Product Utilization

wood flour              ornamental bark        bark mulch
toilet seats            chair seats            pressed logs

Machining - Machining is the process of shaping wood to a desired
form  and  is accomplished by such basic mechanical operations as
splitting, turning,  carving,  drilling,  sawing,  grooving,  and
lathing.  Thus, shingles are manufactured from a block of wood by
sawing at a slight angle to produce a flat piece of wood with one
end  thicker than the other.  Moldings, trim, and other mill work
are produced by lathing and grooving  a  piece  of  lumber  to  a
desired  shape.   Cleats,  used  in  crate manufacturing, are pro
duced by sawing lumber into small shapes  to  be  used  in  crate
manufacture.  A multitude of products are produced from lumber by
such  simple  machining  operations, but none are of significance
with respect to waste water generation.

Fabrication - Fabrication is accomplished by mechanical fasteners
or by use of adhesives.  Where mechanical fasteners are  employed
no  water usage is necessary.  This is the case, for instance, in
the manufacture  of  mobile  homes,  trusses,  barrels,  baskets,
pallets,  crates,  and  other  fabricated  products.   The use of
adhesives normally necessitates a certain amount of  waste  water
because of cleanup operations.

The  adhesives  most  commonly used in the wood products industry
are given in Table 9.  Of these, casein glue, protein,  polyvinyl
acetate,  urea  formaldehyde,  melamine  urea  resin,  and phenol
resorcinol resins are most frequently used in  fabrication.   All
of  these  are water soluble and, with the exception of polyvinyl
and resorcinol resin, require water in preparation.

Fabrication with adhesives consists of jointing, adhering a  flat
sheet  to  a  frame,  or  joining  lumber face to face to produce
structural materials.  The standard  glue  joints  are  given  in
Figure  16.   These joints are used for three basic purposes:  to
join lumber side-to-side-grain, end-to-side-grain or  end-to-end-
grain.   Urea,  modified  urea, melamine urea, polyvinyl, casein,
and phenol resorcinol are the most common adhesives for jointing.
The finger joint is the predominant end to end joint utilized  in
the  industry.   Finger joints are produced by machining the ends
of two pieces to be joined into fingers,  applying  adhesives  to
the  fingers  by brush or special roller applicators, and joining
the pieces together.  Curing time, temperature, and pressure will
depend on the resin used.  The amount  of  resin  which  must  be
applied  varies  with  the  type  and purpose of the joint and is
                                    53

-------
WOOD ADHESIVES:
       TABLE 9
PROPERTIES, HANDLING AND USE GUIDE
CURING PREPAR-ADDI- EXTEN- DURA- ADVAN-' DISAD- "SPEC. &
TYPES METHOD SOLVENT ATION TIVES DERS APPLICATION PRESSURE BILITY TAGES VANTAGES STANDARDS
Animal Glue A.C-l.D J-l E N,0 - V-1,2,3,4 W-1,2 a f,h,q c h
Casein Glue A.D-2 0-1,2 E U,
Protein Blend A,D-2,D-3 1.0-1 E U
Soybean Glue A.D-3 1,0-1 E 0
Polyvinyl Acetate B,C-2 J-l E N
Melamine Resin B.D-2.D-3 • I,K.L E 0
Urea Resin B,D-1,2,3 l,J-i,K,L E 0
Modified Urea B.D-1,2, 1,0-1,
Resin D-3 K.L E 0,
Urea/Melamine B,C-1,D- , i,K,L
Resin 2,3 E 0
Urea Resorcinol B,C-l,D-L E,F N
Epoxy Resin B I,J-1,K H N
A Natural Origin D continued j
B Synthetic Resin 3 Several ingredients
C Liquid needed
1 Solution E Water
2 Emulsion F Water and Alcohol «
D Powder G Hexane and Methyl
1 Dry Base Material ethyl Ketone L
2 All ingredients H 100% solids M
in powder, add to I Hot press
water
a Dry, Interior use only f Fast setting
b High cost 9 Low cost
c Poor water resistance h Fed, Spec, MM
d Thick glue lines craze 1 Fed. Spec, m
e. Generates heat in mix- J Fed. Spec. MM,
ing, requiring small k Fed. Spec. MM
mixes 00181
P P - V-l ,2,3;
V-l
U V-l
V-l ,2, 3,
b V-
b,K,U V- ,3,4
V, ,3,
Q Q S 4
V- ,3,
S 4
V- ,3
S
V-l, 3
0 - 4
V-l, 3
4
-V-l, 3
4
U - K,$,I ,U V-l
S V- ,3
V-l, 3
S
V- ,3,4
Cold Press N
1 Room Temp. 0
7Q°F P
2 50° or above Q
Kiln Cure R
(14Q°F or higher) S
Radio Frequency
Electrical Resistance T
Heating U
1 Fed. Spec.
m CS-35
4-A-100 n CS-45
•l-A-125 o Mil.. Spec.
1-A-188 p Mil, Spec.
4-A-
4 W- ,2,3 a,Z q
H-l.2,3 a,Z q
W-1,2,3 a,/ q
4 W-1,2,3 a f
W- ,2,3 X,Y X
W-1,2,3 Y,Z q
r-'' Y*z .
;-.*. Y,Z _
r-*' Y'z .
W-1,2 z,a
3 f
W-1,2,3, Y.Z
4 f
W- .2.3 X.Y f
W-1,2,3 x X
W- ,2,3 X
X
W- ,2,3 Y X
Ready to use
Mix with water
Synthetic Latex
Furfuryl alcohol
Wheat Flour
Walnut Shells or
Pecan Shells
Co-cob for Furafil
Soluble Blood
MMM-A-193
MIL-A-22397
MIL-A-46051
i,m
m,n
n
c 1
b p
d m.j
k,m
m .
m
m
b m
b
m,n,o,p,k
b m,n,ofp,k
b m,n,o,p,k
e m
V 1 Spreader
2 Dip
3 Brush
4 Spray
W 1 100 psi
2 150 psi
3 175 psi
4 Squeeze rolls
X Waterproof
Y Highly water
resistant
Z Moderately water
resistant

-------
SIDE-TO-SIDE-GRAIN JOINTS:     (A) plain   (B) tongue-ond-groove
    A.
B.
C.
D.
                                                 E.
            F.
       G.
   H.
                                         J.
 END-TO-SIDE-GRAIN JOINTS I (A) plain; (B) miter, (C)dowel,
 (D)mortise and tench, (E)dado tongue and rabbet ,{F)slip or
 lock corner , (G)dovetail, (H) blocked ,(J)tongue and groove.
   A.
                        B.
                      C.
                     D.
      E.
      F.
         G.
 END-TO-END-GRAIN JOINTS : (A)end butt, (B)platn scarf,
(C) finger, (D) serrated scarf ,(E) hooked scarf, (F)flnger,
(G)double-slope scarf.

                           FIGURE  16
                             55

-------
usually  measured  only  indirectly  by  testing  the  joint  for
strength.   Similar  assembly steps are utilized for end-to-side-
grain joints and  for  side-to-side-grain  joints.   End-to-side-
grain  joints  are  employed  in  fabricating  door frames of all
types, window frames, and in lock  corner  boxes.   Side-to-side-
grain  joints  are  utilized  in  flooring, decking, and in solid
flush doors.

The application of a flat sheet to a frame is illustrated in door
manufacturing.  The flat sheet may be  a  door  skin  of  various
types which is pressed against a preglued frame in which case the
adhesive  used  may  be resorcinol, polyvinyl, contact cement, or
some non-synthetic  glue.   This  type  of  fabrication  is  also
utilized to some extent in the building construction industry for
adhering  panels  to  frames  or  for  adhering  plywood to floor
joists.  The adhesive must likely to be used in this  application
is  a mastic construction adhesive which is a thick dispersion of
various elastomers in an organic solvent.

The third major fabrication operation to be considered is that of
joining lumber face to face to produce structural members such as
beams, arches, and timbers.   Whether  the  process  employed  is
automatic  or manual, it basically consists of pregluing, gluing,
fabricating and finishing.   Pregluing  operations  include  such
previously  mentioned  operations  as lumber drying, preservative
dipping or spraying, planing, grading, end or edge jointing,  and
cutting  to  length.   The dressed lumber, usually two in pine or
fir, is end jointed or cut to the desired  length  of  the  final
member.  The lumber used to produce these laminates is graded and
sorted.   The  high strength clear lumber is utilized in the high
stress areas of the final product, which for beams is the top and
bottom layers, while lower grade lumber is  used  for  the  lower
stress areas of the member.

Following  pregluing the laminates are spread with glue, commonly
resorcinol and phenol resorcinol resin, by a double roll spreader
or by an extruder  applicator.   The  resins  are  mixed  with  a
catalyst  in  small  batches  and  are  then  fed  to the roller-
spreaders under pressure.  The  extrusion  spreader  requires  no
mixing tank, except for catalyst preparation, as the catalyst and
resin are mixed in a helical mixing chamber within the spreader.

According  to  the Handbook of Adhesive Bonding, following gluing
the laminates are assembled to form the beam  and  the  resin  is
cured.   Curing may be accomplished by cold setting, heat curing,
or radio frequency curing.  During curing, pressure is applied to
the member.  Special laminating clamps, generally  of  the  screw
type  with  rocker  heads  apply  the  required  pressure.   Both
straight beams and curved arches can be produced in  this  manner
by  different  arrangements  of the clamp systems.  After curing,
which may take up to 2U hours, the member is finished by  sanding
or  planing and prepared for shipment.  A typical process diagram
for a laminated timber manufacturing process is given  in  Figure
17.
                                   56

-------
      DRESSED LUMBER
      FINGER JOINTING
           GLU I NG
            l_ AY UP
           CURING
         Fl NISH I NG
         PACKAG ING
          SHIPMENT
                                      GLUE  STORAGE
                                       AND  MIXING
FIGURE  17 PROCESS DIAGRAM FOR LAMINATED TIMBER MANUFACTURE
                         57

-------
By-product  utilization  covers  those  products  in SIC 24 which
utilize waste materials such as bark and  sawdust  as  their  raw
material  and  are  not  covered  elsewhere.   As  none  of these
products are significant sources of waste  water,  only  a  brief
discussion of some of the major products follows:

Wood flour - Produced by attrition from planer dust or sawdust.
Pressed  logs and briquettes - Produced by injecting sawdust into
a mold under heat and pressure without chemical binders.
Mulch - Produced by hogging bark or sawdust to  a  fine  particle
size  and  possibly adding nitrogen in the form of liquid ammonia
by spraying the ground bark.
Ornamental bark - Produced  by  classification  of  bark  into  a
desired size category.
Molded  Products - A small number of plants produce miscellaneous
molded wood items from wood particles.  The process  consists  of
applying  resin  which  is generally of the thermoplastic type to
the wood particles following molding with heat and pressure.  The
resin content may be in the range of 30 - 40 percent by weight.

The term by-product utilization as defined in this document  does
not   include   the   manufacture   of   insulation   board   and
particleboard.  These processes are discussed below.

Insulation Board

Insulation board can be formed from a variety  of  raw  materials
including  wood  from  a  softwood  and hardwood species, mineral
fiber, waste paper, bagasse, and  other  fibrous  materials.   In
this  study,  only  those processes employing wood as the primary
raw material are considered.  Plants utilizing wood  may  receive
it  as  roundwood or fractionated wood.  Fractionated wood can be
in the form of chips, sawdust, or  planer  shavings.   Figure  18
provides  an  illustration  of  a representative insulation board
process.

When roundwood is used as a raw material, it is  usually  shipped
to  the  plant  by  rail or truck and stored in a dry deck before
use.  The round wood is usually debarked by drum or ring  barkers
before  use,  although in some operations a percentage of bark is
allowable in the board.  The barked wood then may be chipped,  in
which  case the unit processes are the same as those plants using
chips exclusively  as  raw  materials.   Those  plants  utilizing
groundwood  normally  cut  the logs into 1.2 to 1.5 m (4 to 5 ft)
sections either before or after debarking so that they can be fed
into the groundwood machines.  The equipment used in these  oper-
ations  is  similar to that used in the handling of raw materials
in other segments of the timber products industry.

Fiber Preparation Operations


Ground wood is used in a number of insulation board plants in the
U.S.  It is usually produced in  conventional  pulpwood  grinders
equipped  with  coarse  burred artificial stones of 16 to 25 grit
                                    58

-------
Ul
WOOD •

   (50)
STOCK
CHEST
                                                                                   FORMING
                                                                                   MACHINE
                                                                                               TO ATMOSPHERE
                                                                                                    A
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                    I
                                                                                        DRIER
                                                                                                        TO FINISHING
                                 (25)
(I)
(15)
(1.5)
(50)
(98)
                     (X)
                     WATER  IN

                     WATER  OUT

                     APPROXIMATE FIBER CONSISTENCY IN PROCESS
                                                  FIGURE 18   INSULATION BOARD PROCESS

-------
with various patterns.  The operation  of  the  machine  consists
primarily  of  hydraulically  forcing  a  piece of wood against a
rotating stone mounted horizontally.  The wood held  against  the
abrasive  surface  of  the  revolving  stone is reduced to fiber.
Water is sprayed on the stone not only to carry away  the  fibers
into  the  system,  but also to keep the stone cool and clean and
lubricate  its  surface.   The  water  spray  also  reduces   the
possibility  of  fires  occurring  from the friction of the stone
against the wood.

While most fractionated  wood  is  purchased  from  other  timber
products  operations,  in  some  cases  it  is  produced on site.
Currently, little chipping occurs in the forest; however, in  the
future this is expected to become a major source of chips.  Chips
are  usually  transported  to  the plants in large trucks or rail
cars.  They are stored in piles which may be covered but are more
often exposed.  The chips may  pass  through  a  device  used  to
remove  metal  grit,  dirt,  and  other  trash  which  could harm
equipment and possibly cause plate damage in the refiners.   This
may be done wet or dry.  Pulp preparation is usually accomplished
by mechanical or thermo-mechanical refining.

Bagasse consists of the woody fibers and pith fractions remaining
from  the  milling  of  sugar cane.  It is delivered to the board
plant by rail and truck from storage at the sugar mills in either
loose piles or in bales.   Moisture  content  can  vary  from  10
percent  to  80  percent  depending  on  the  method  of storage,
Rigorous washing of the bagasse to remove remains of field  trash
and  mud,  in  addition  to the pith fractions, is a critical and
necessary step in preparation for plant use.

Refining Operations - Mechanical refiners  basically  consist  of
two  discs  between which the chips or residues are passed.  In a
single disc mill, one disc rotates while the other is stationary.
The feed material passes between the plates and is discharged  at
the  bottom  of  the  case.   The  two discs in double disc mills
rotate in opposite directions, but the product flows are  similar
to  a  single  disc mill. Disc mills produce fibers that may pass
through a 30 or 40 mesh screen, although about 60 percent of  the
fibers  will not pass through a 65 mesh screen.  The discs plates
generally rotate at 1,200 or 1,800 rpm or  a  relative  speed  of
2,400 or 3,600 rpm for a double disc mill.  Plate separations are
generally  less  than  0.10  cm  (0.040  in).   A variety of disc
patterns are available and the particular pattern used depends on
the feed's characteristics and type of fiber desired.

A thermo-mechanical refiner is  basically  the  same  as  a  disc
refiner  except  that  the  feed material is subjected to a steam
pressure of 4 to 15 atm  (40 to 220 psi) for a period of time from
one to 45 minutes before it enters the refiner.  In  some  cases,
the pressure continues through the actual refining process.

Pre-steaming  softens  the  feed material and thus makes refining
easier and provides savings on horespower requirements;  however,
yield   may  be  reduced  up  to  10  percent.   The  longer  the
                                    60

-------
pretreatment  and  higher  the  pressure,  -the  softer  the  wood
becomes.    The   heat  plasticizes  primarily  portions  of  the
hemicellulose and lignin components of wood which bind the fibers
together and result in a longer and stronger fiber produced.

Following  the  refining  operation,,  the  fibers  produced  are
diluted  with  water to a consistency amenable to screening.  For
most  screening  operations,  consistency  of  approximately  one
percent fiber is required.  Screening is done primarily to remove
coarse  fiber  bundles,  knots, and slivers.  The coarse material
may be recycled  and  passed  through  secondary  refiners  which
further  reduce  the rejects into usable fibers for return to the
process.  After screening, the fibers produced by any method  may
be sent to a decker or washer.

Decker Operations - Deckers are essentially rotating wire-covered
cylinders,  usually  with  an  internal  vacuum,  into  which the
suspension  of  fibers  in  water  is  passed.   The  fibers  are
separated  and  the  water  is  often  recirculated back into the
system.  There are a number of reasons for deckering or  washing,
one of which is to clean the pulp.  When cleaning the pulp, water
may be sprayed on the decker as it rotates.  The major reason for
deckering,  however,  is  for  consistency  control.  While being
variable on a piant-to-piant basis, the consistency of  the  pulp
upon reaching the forming machine in any insulation board process
is critical.  By dewatering the pulp from the water suspension at
this  point, consistency can be controlled with greater accuracy.
Washing of the pulp is sometimes desirable  in  order  to  remove
dissolved solids and soluble organics which may result in surface
flaws  in  the board.  The high concentration of these substances
tends to stay in the board and during the drying  stages  migrate
to  the surface.  This results in stains when a finish is applied
to the board.

After the washing or decking operation, the pulp is reslurried in
stages from a consistency  of  15  percent  to  the  1.5  percent
required  for  the  formation  process.   The initial dilution of
approximately five percent consistency  is  usually  followed  by
dilutions  to  three  percent  and  finally,  just  prior  to mat
formation,  a  dilution  to  approximately  1.5  percent.    This
procedure  is  followed primarily for two reasons:  (1) it allows
for accurate consistency controls and more  efficient  dispersion
of  additives,  and   (2) it reduces the required pump and storage
capacities for the pulp.  During the various stages of  dilution,
additives  are usually added to the pulp suspension.  These range
from 5 to 30 percent of the weight of the board depending on  the
product  used.   Additives  may include:  wax emulsion, paraffin,
rosin, asphalt, starch, and  polyelectrolytes.   The  purpose  of
additives  is  to  give  the  board  desired  properties  such as
strength, dimensional stability, and water absorption resistance.

After passing through  the  series  of  storage  and  consistency
controls,  the  fibers  in  some  cases  pass  through  a tune-up
refiner.  The  fiberous  slurry,  at  approximately  1.5  percent
                                   61

-------
consistency,  is then pumped into a forming machine which removes
water from the pulp suspension and forms a mat.

Forming Operations - While there are  various  types  of  forming
machines  used  to make insulation board, the two most common are
the  fourdrinier  and  the  cylinder   forming   machines.    The
fourdrinier  machine  used in the manufacture of insulation board
is similar  in  nature  to  those  used  in  the  manufacture  of
hardboard  or  paper.  The stock (pulp slurry) is pumped into the
head box and allowed to flow onto an  endless  traveling  screen.
The  stock  is spread evenly across the screen by special control
devices and an interlaced fibrous blanket, referred to as a  mat,
is  formed  by  allowing  the dewatering of the stock through the
screen by gravity.  The partially formed  mat  traveling  on  the
wire screen then passes through press rollers, some with a vacuum
applied, for further dewatering.

Cylinder  machines  are  basically  large  rotating  drum  vacuum
filters with screens.  Stock is pumped through a head  box  to  a
vat  where  a  mat  is  formed  by  use of a vacuum on the screen
imposed on the interior of the rotating drum.  A portion  of  the
rotating drum is immersed into the stock solution as indicated in
Figure  19.   As  water  is  sucked  through the screen, a mat is
formed when the portion of the cylinder rotates above  the  water
level  in  the tank and the required amount of fiber is deposited
on the screen.  The mat is further dewatered by the vacuum in the
interior of the rotating drum and is  then  transferred  off  the
cylinder  onto  a  screen conveyor where it passes through roller
presses as utilized in fourdrinier operations.

Both the fourdrinier and the cylinder machines produce a mat that
leaves the roller press with a  moisture  content  of  50  to  70
percent  and  the  ability  to  support its own weight over short
spans.  At this point, the mat  leaves  the  forming  screen  and
continues  its  travel  over  a  conveyor.   The  wet mat is then
trimmed to width and cut off to length by a traveling  saw  which
moves  across  the  mat on a bias making a square cut without the
necessity of stopping the continuous wetlap sheet.

After being cut to desired lengths,  the  mats  are  dried  to  a
moisture content of five percent or less.  Most dryers now in use
are gas or oil fired tunnel dryers.  Mats are conveyed on rollers
through  the  tunnel  with  hot  air being circulated throughout.
Most dryers have eight to ten decks and various zones of heat  to
reduce  the  danger  of  fire.  These heat zones allow for higher
temperatures when the board is "wet"  (where the mat first enters)
and lower temperatures when the mat is almost dry.

The dried board than goes through  various  finishing  operations
such   as   painting,  asphalt  coating,  and  embos sing.   Those
operations which manufacture  decorative  products  will  usually
have  finishing operations which use water-base paints containing
such  chemicals  as  inorganic  pigments,  i.e.,   clays,   talc,
carbonates,  and  certain  amounts  of  binders  such  as starch,
protein,  PVA,  PVAC,  acrylics,  urea  formaldehyde  resin,  and
                                   62

-------
                       VACCUM
                         IMPOSED
                           AREA
HEADBOXN
(INFLOW) V
                                                           SCREEN
                                                        CONVEYOR TO
                                                        ROLLER  PRESS
                                FIGURE 19
                                63

-------
malamine  formaldehyde  resins.   These  are applied in stages by
rollers, sprayers, or brushes.  The decorative tile then  may  be
embossed,  beveled,  or  cut  to  size  depending  on the product
desired.

The board sometimes receives addditional  molten  asphalt  appli-
cations  to  one  surface.   It  is  then  sprayed with water and
stacked to allow adjustment to a uniform moisture content.

Hardboard is produced by some insulation board plants.   Allowing
the  mats  to  age,  redrying them, and pressing the mat by large
steam heated hydraulic  presses,  consolidates  the  mat  to  the
desired density.

Finishing  operations  such  as sanding and sawing give the board
the correct dimensions.  Generally, the dust,  trim,  and  reject
materials  created in finishing operations are recycled back into
the process.

Particleboard

In the majority of  cases  the  raw  materials  used  to  produce
particleboard  are wood residues of any species from other timber
product  processes.   However,  roundwood  is  used  in   a   few
instances.   At  this  time,  most  particleboard  in the U.S. is
produced from mill residues such as planer shavings, sawdust, and
plywood trim.  Furniture waste, particleboard trim, veneer cores,
and other chip sources are used occasionally.  In cases  where  a
particleboard  plant  is  a  part  of  an  integrated  complex, a
substantial part, or all of the raw  materials  are  supplied  by
other operations in the complex.

In  other  countries,  logging residues are the primary source of
raw materials.  Logging residues  arise  from  complete  or  near
complete  utilization  of  forested land and include chips, tops,
and standing dead trees.  It is projected that the use of  forest
residues  in  the  U.  S.  will  increase in the future, possibly
causing a modification of the production process because  of  the
necessity  of  washing logging residues to remove grit, sand, and
other trash.

There is research presently being conducted  in  the  U.  S.  and
abroad  on  the  utilization of other raw materials such as bark,
wastepaper, and  even  municipal  garbage   (the  paper  and  wood
components  after  separation).   The  widespread  utilization of
these raw materials to produce specific grades  of  particlebaord
will  depend  largely  on  both  economics  and  scarcity  of raw
materials.  In the case of  bark  utilization,  the  problems  of
disposal  may  be  the  catalyst  needed to develop a utilization
scheme.  Sander dust (presently being used by some European mills
in amounts up to 10 percent in boards) may  be  utilized  in  the
future because of environmental considerations stemming from both
air pollution and solid waste disposal problems.
                                   64

-------
The  raw  materials are shipped to the plant by rail or truck and
stored in silos, covered sheds, or outside  piles  until  needed.
The   fractionated   wood   is  then  conveyed  pneumatically  or
mechanically to the  particle  preparation  area.   Before  being
reduced  into  particles, the raw materials pass through metering
bins in order that a uniform feed rate can be achieved.  (In some
cases, the silos storing the received raw materials have metering
capabilities.)  The  metered  wood  then  goes  to  the  particle
preparation  stage.   Figure  20 shows a process flow diagram for
particleboard production.

There  are  three   basic   steps   is   producing   mat   formed
particleboard:  particle  preparation,  mat  formation,  and  mat
consolidation.  Incorporated within these primary operations  are
particle  drying,  additive  blending,  board  cooling, and board
finishing operations.  It should be  noted  that  differences  in
equipment  among plants are common and the equipment is described
in the general case only.

Classification - Prior or subsequent to particle preparation,  it
is  usually  necessary to classify the wood by size by the use of
vibrating screens or air classifiers.  The classification is done
primarily to remove particles of undesired shape and size  which,
if  allowed  to  remain,  would  increase the resin requirements,
present problems during manufacture, or produce  defects  in  the
product.   Another  reason  for classifying particles is to allow
the use of the finer particles to form the face of the board  and
the coarser particles to form the core.

Screen   classification  is  usually  accomplished  by  vibrating
screens.  The wood is fed onto one end  of  the  screen  and  the
vibrating  action  of  the  screen  transports the wood along the
length of the screen.  The rejects which are too  large  to  pass
through  the  screen  are  recycled  back into a system such as a
hammermill  which  reduces  the  size.   The  fines   which   are
unacceptable  for  the  process  are discarded.  Although in some
cases air classification provides sharper fractionization, it can
also involve greater difficulties in operation and controls.  The
use of air classification allows for the instantaneous adjustment
of the classification process.  However, it also entails a larger
energy consumption than do screens,

Particle Preparation - The four  principal  methods  of  particle
formation  in  use  are  hammermills,  flakers,  mechanical,  and
thermo-mechanical  refining.   Hammermills   and   similar   type
machines  use  free swinging hammers of steel strips or impellers
with stiff arms to reduce material by a  beating  action.   These
are  relatively  simple  machines  with  low cost wear parts.  On
certain raw materials and with the proper choice  of  hammermill,
operating  spped,  feed  rates  and  screen  size  the hammermill
produces acceptable particle  geometry  at  an  acceptable  cost.
Under certain operating conditions, a high percentage of dust may
be  produced.   These machines are used primarily for coarse jobs
such as the reduction of large reject chips to a size  acceptable
for feeding flakers or refiners.  These machines are also used to
                                    65

-------
WOOD
ADDITIVE
BLENDING
•^  PORTION M
                                                                                                        0 FINISHING
                                 FIGURE 20  PARTICLEBOARD PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

-------
produce  some  core  stock  in  particular operations.  After the
initial impact, particles that are still  too  large  are  pushed
through  a screen or grate at the periphery.  The screen controls
the size of the particles produced,

Flakers are used extensively in the  particleboard  industry  for
core  stock and to some extent for face stock.  Different flakers
use either roundwood or residues as the feed; however, the  basic
concept  of  the  machines,  the use of knives to reduce the feed
wood to particles, is the same.  In  the  case  of  wood  residue
flakers, an impeller throws the residue against a ring of knives.
The  flakes thus produced are generally 0.05 to 0.15 cm  (0.020 to
0.060 in) in thickness.  Thirty to 40 percent  of  the  particles
produced  are  in  the screen size range of four to ten with only
two to ten percent being larger under normal conditions.  Flakers
used on roundwood operate on a similar principle in that logs are
fed to a rotating set of knives.  The resulting flakes are larger
than  those  produced  from  residue  but  the  thicknesses   are
comparable.

Mechanical  refiners consist of two discs between which the chips
or residues are passed.  In a single disc attrition mill there is
one rotating disc.  The feed material passes between the rotating
disc and a stationary plate and is discharged at  the  bottom  of
the  case.  Double disc mills have two discs rotating in opposite
directions, but the product flow is similar to  the  single  disc
mill.   The  product  of disc mills is generally an elongated rod
shape.  The disc plates generally rotate at 1,200  rpm  or  1,600
rpm  (a relative speed of 2,400 rpm or 3,600 rpm for a double disc
mill).   Plate separations are generally less than 0.10 cm  (0.040
in).  A variety of disc patterns are available and choice depends
on the feed's characteristics and type of product  desired.   The
products from these mills are generally used as face stock, i.e.,
the  fiber  is  deposited  on  the  surface  of  the board during
formation to provide a smooth surface.  When phenolic resins  are
used, the resin frequently is added during refining.

A  thermo-mechanical  disc  refiner  is  basically a disc refiner
receiving  feed  material  which  has  been  subjected  to  steam
pressure  four to 15 atm (60 to 220 psi) for a period of time (15
seconds to 3 minutes) before entering the refiner.  The  pressure
continues through the actual refining  (in the disc area), in most
cases.

Pre-steaming  softens  the  feed  material  and  thus facilitates
refining and reduces horsepower  requirements.   The  longer  the
pretreatment  and  higher  the  pressure,  the  softer  the  wood
becomes.  The heat plasticizes primarily  the  hemicellulose  and
lignin  components  of  wood  which bind the fibers together.  In
addition, a longer and stronger fiber is produced.

Drying - Following particle preparation, the particles are  dried
by  heat  to  achieve  a  uniform moisture content.  The moisture
content of the particle is critical and is different for  various
operations;  however,  the  preferred  moisture  content  of  the
                                   67

-------
particles at the drier exit is usually between 5 and 15  percent,
Driers  are  heated  by  gas,  oil,  wood  residue unsuitable for
particleboard  (sander dust, etc.)* or a combination of the above,
but gas and  oil  fired  driers  are  most  common.   The  energy
required per ton of particles is not an accurate measure of drier
efficiency  as  the inlet moisture content will vary considerably
depending on species and whether  green  or  dry  wood  is  used,
Drier   efficiency  is  usually  discussed  in  terms  of  energy
requirements per pound of water evaporated in the drier.

The rotary jet drum drier is essentially a  horizontal  pneumatic
drier  in  which  high  velocity heated air is directed in such a
manner that a sprial flow of particles is  achieved  through  the
drier.

Another  type  of  drier in use is situated vertically and uses a
fluidized bed principle.  The particles enter the drier  and  are
suspended  by  hot  air  entering from the bottom.  The particles
become lighter as they dry and are emitted from the  top  of  the
unit.

A  third  type of drier in use consists of a tube bundle rotating
in a trough.  The particles dry in contact with the tube  bundles
while  vanes fitted to the bundles convey the particles.  In some
cases the particles enter a preheater before entering the  drier.
The  preheater  is  usually heated by exhaust gases from the main
drier.

Because of the nature  of  the  drying  operation  (heating  wood
particles), there is always a risk of fire.  Although maintenance
and  operational  procedures  generally  keep fires at a minimum,
dryer fires can still be expected  to  occur  several  times  per
year.

The  most important operation in terms of the quality of the bond
of the board and one of  the  more  critical  operations  in  the
particleboard   plant  is  the  application  of  additives.   The
quantity of resin and the method  of  application  are  important
factors in both cost and quality of the finished product.

The  two  most  common  types  of  resins  used  in manufacturing
particleboard are urea-formaldehyde and phenol-formaldehyde, with
the former accounting for approximately 90 percent of  the  usage
in  the U.  S.  Resin content in the board will range from 6 to 12
percent in the surface layers and U to 8 percent in the core.  It
is sometimes desirable to add 0.25 to  1.0  percent  catalyst  to
urea resin to promote faster curing of the resin.  The catalysts,
consisting  of  acids or acid salts such as ammonium chloride, or
ammonium sulfate promote faster curing by lowering the  pH,   The
major  disadvantage of adding a catalyst is a shortened resin pot
life.  Ammonium hydroxide may be added to retard  the  action  of
the acid until the pressing operation.

In  addition  to  resins,  a petroleum base wax sizing is usually
added to the particles in the blenders.  Sizing increases  liquid
                                   68

-------
water  resistance  considerably  and  vapor  resistance  to  some
extent.
The additives are applied to the particles in blenders of various
types,  A blender is basically a machine in which wood  particles
are agitated while a spray of resin and other additives are added
in  a manner that will allow uniform coverage of the additives on
the wood particles.  Each wood particle has adequate exposure  in
the  blender  to  the  spray.   This  insures  a  coating  of the
necessary  quantity  of  resin  and  other  additives  which   is
necessary  to  achieve the desired properties in the final board.
The additives may either be mixed together prior to  blending  or
sprayed into the blender separately.

Although  most plants currently use continuous blenders there are
some batch blenders in use.   A  batch  blender  is  operated  by
adding  wood  to  a  mix  tank  and agitating with a proportional
amount of additives.  While this  system  is  considered  by  the
industry to be reliable it is not economically feasible for large
plants and is rarely used.

Continuous  blenders  consist  of  a  longitudinal  trough with a
center shaft carrying mixing  arms  and  spray  nozzles  for  the
dispersion   of   additives.   There  are  two  common  types  of
continuous blenders.  In one type  the  mixing  arms  rotate  and
cause  a  dense wood-air suspension.  Spray nozzles located along
the top  eject  atomized  resin  and  other  additives  onto  the
particles  in  a uniform manner.  The atomization is accomplished
by  compressed  airr  pressure  spraying,  or,  in  some   cases,
centrifugal means.

The  most  common  type of continuous blender currently in use is
the curtain spray blender.  Particles are fed into one end of the
blender in a falling  curtain  effect.   Auxiliary  curtains  are
created  by  the  agitating  action  of paddles fixed to rotating
mixer arms.  Resin and other additives are added to  this  system
by spray nozzles located in the end plate on the feed side of the
blender.  The curtain spray blender creates a thorough mixture of
all  the  materials that will go into a board and many new plants
are choosing this type of blender.  One reason the  trend  is  to
the  curtain spray blender is the availability of cooling jackets
for reduction of the inside temperature.  Blender cleaning  is  a
necessary  part  of all blender operations since excess resin, as
well as resin already on  particles,  sometimes  adheres  to  the
paddles  and  walls  of  the  blenders.   It  is  advantageous to
maintain this buildup at  a  minimum  level  in  order  that  the
blenders  can  be used for longer periods of time and maintenance
costs can be reduced.  Since both urea and  phenolic  resins  are
thermosetting,  the cooled blender will have less adhesion on the
walls and will require cleaning less often.  Also,  the  curtain-
spray blenders have fewer nozzles to clean or plug up.

Formation  of  a  uniform  mat  of  particles  is the single most
important objective in a particleboard manufacturing process.   A
                                   69

-------
lack  of  uniformity will result in physical property variations,
curing problems in the pressing cycle, and will tend to make  the
particleboard  more subject to warp.  Poor mat formation may also
result in poor surface and edge  characteristics  which  in  turn
affect the salability of the board.

Forming machines meter the particles from a surge area and spread
them  uniformly  across  the  width of the machine onto a caul or
moving  screen.   In  addition,  there  is  usually  a   particle
orientation  or  leveling  device  to further provide for uniform
formation.   A  surge  area  in  a  forming  machine  insures   a
continuity  of  material  flow into the formation devices.  It is
important to maintain a uniform level in the surge bin.   Without
bulk  density  control  there can be no uniform mat formed as the
wood is generally metered volumetrically.  The  wood  is  metered
onto  the  caul  or  moving  screen by the means of rakes, picker
rolls, or other such devices, although some machines use air as a
metering technique.  After the particles are distributed onto the
caul or moving,screen,  there  are  usually  leveling  screws  or
picker rolls or shaveoffs to level the mat.  To produce a layered
board,  the  particles,  which  have been previously divided into
fine and coarse materials, are laid by different machines to give
fine surfaces and a coarse core to the board.

A variation of the layer board formation is  the  graded  density
board.   This  is  formed  by  air  classification  and a gradual
reduction of particle size occurs from the core to  the  surface.
Graded   density  is  accomplished  by  feeding  particles  at  a
volumetrically controlled rate through a central air distribution
mechanism.  The horizontal air flow acts as an air separator  and
the  heaviest  particles  drop almost vertically, while the finer
particles are thrown to the far edges.

Pressing - After formation the mats are conveyed to the  pressing
area.   A prepress is often used when a caul-less system is being
used or a thick board is being produced.  The prepress, which may
be of the single opening hydraulic type or the continuous  roller
typer  is  used  to  impart some integrity to the board before it
enters the hot press.  Also, before entering the hot  press,  the
mats  are  usually  trimmed  by  trim  saws  with  the trim being
recovered as furnish and fed back to the forming system.

The hot press is used to consolidate the mats under pressure  and
cure the resin with the heat from the steam heated platens.  Some
newer  plants  use  resonance  frequency devices to help cure the
resin by heating the  board  internally  with  the  use  of  high
frequency  radio  waves.   Resonance  frequency  pressing reduces
press time and allows for the production  of  boards  of  greater
thickness.

Pressing   is  accomplished  by  either  multi-opening  hydraulic
presses, single opening hydraulic presses,  or,  occasionally,  a
continuous  press.   Multiopening  presses consist of a number of
shelves with each shelf containing a heated platen.  The mats are
stacked into a loader which in turn allows mats to be  placed  on
                                   70

-------
all  the  shelves  at once.  Each press is usually constructed so
that platens close  simultaneously  in  order  to  prevent  board
defects.   Single  opening  presses do not require loading racks.
They operate in a similar manner as  the  multi-opening  presses.
The  presses  operate  at pressures as great as 69 atm (1000 psi)
and at temperatures of 132°C to 20U°C (270°F to 400°F)   depending
upon  the type of resin the process employed.  Continuous presses
consist of heated rolls and produce a continuous ribbon of board.
After the ribbon leaves the  press  it  is  cut  to  the  lengths
required and sanded.

Extruded Particleboard
The raw materials utilized for extruded particleboard are usually
dry  wood  with  a large proportion of furniture scrap.  Particle
preparation is  primarily  accomplished  by  hammermills.   After
particle  preparation  and classification, the wood particles are
coated with resin and  wax  by  the  previously  described  batch
method.   The coated particles are forced through a heated dye by
hydraulic rams and the board emerges in a continuous strip  which
is  cut  to size.  Since boards produced by the extrusion process
are considerably stronger  in  one  direction  they  are  usually
cross-banded with wood veneers to provide strength and stability.

Finishing Operations

Finishing  is  generally  the  final  step, with the exception of
packaging, in any timber products manufacturing process.  It  may
consist of surface smoothing such as sanding or planing, covering
with liquid coatings or covering with various sheet materials, or
combinations  of  these  operations.   With  the exception of the
finishing  processes  previously  discussed  in  connection  with
sawmilling  and particleboard and insulation board manufacturing,
the  manufacture  of  prefinished  panels   and   the   finishing
associated with mill work and molding are the major product areas
of significance for the purposes of this study.

Factory  finishing  of  wood-based  panel  products  involves the
application of a wide variety of finishing materials  of  various
formulations   and   the   employment   of   various  methods  of
application.  In general, however,  finishing  materials  can  be
classified as either liquid materials or sheet material overlays.
Liquid  finishes  are  supplied to almost all types of wood-based
panels including softwood plywood,  hardwood  plywood,  hardboard
and  particleboard.   For any particular finishing operation, the
finishing  material  used  and  the  method  of  application  are
primarily dependent upon the type of panel being finished as well
as  the desired final properties of the finished product.  Liquid
finishing materials are most  commonly  applied  by  one  of  the
following  methods:   spray coating, curtain coating, direct roll
coating, reverse roll coating, or knife coating.  Each  of  these
methods  usually  involves  the  employment  of a coating machine
through which the panel substrates pass in a horizontal position,
on a continuous basis by way of a conveyor system.
                                   71

-------
Spray coating is a method used on almost all types of  substrates
and  is  used  in  the  application  of  various liquid finishing
materials including clear and pigmented paints and coatings.  The
spray of material is most commonly produced by fixed  gun  spray,
reciprocating  spray,  or  rotary arm spray equipment.  The spray
equipment is commonly enclosed in a spray booth to  provide  fire
and air pollution protection by removal of both the solvent fumes
and  the spray mist generated from spray coating operations.  Two
types of spray booths include a water wash type, which employs  a
thin  water  curtain as the filtering media, and a dry type which
employs a dry filter  element.   Spray  coatings  are  especially
important in the application of certain textured surfaces.

Curtain  coating  is a common method of applying various types of
coatings to flat, smooth panel substrate surfaces.   The  curtain
coater  produces  a  thin,  uniform  curtain-like  film of liquid
material which falls by gravity to  the  panel  substrate  as  it
passes  through  the  coating  zone.   The  curtain-like  film is
produced as the liquid material passes through  over  head  knife
gates  under  either  a  gravity head or a pressure head.  Excess
curtain flow is caught by a return trough and is returned to  the
receiving tank for reapplication.

The  direct roll coater is probably one of the most commonly used
applicators for flat  stock  panel  substrates.   A  roll  coater
generally  consists of an applicator roll, a metering roll, and a
feed or support roll.  The applicator roll and the metering  roll
rotate  in  opposite  directions  on  the upper side of the panel
substrate and the liquid material is  flooded  over  and  between
these two rolls.  The metering roll, of smaller diameter than the
applicator  roll,  serves  to control the thickness of the liquid
material film on the applicator roll which applies  the  material
directly  to  the  panel  substrate  as  it is passed through the
coating device by the feed roll on the under side of  the  panel.
Excess  liquid  material  is  caught  by  a  recovery  pan and is
returned to the receiving tank.

Reverse roll coating is particularly important in the application
of high viscosity filler materials of high solids  content.   The
reverse   roll  coater  basically  consists  of  the  same  three
components  of  the  direct  roll  coater  plus   an   additional
component,  a  reverse  wiping roll which rotates in the opposite
direction of the applicator roll.  The essential purpose  of  the
wiping  roll  is  to more effectively force the material into the
surface voids of the panel substrate  and  to  provide  a  smooth
troweled  surface  coating.   As with the direct roll coater, the
excess material is collected and returned to the material  supply
for reapplication.

Knife  coating  is  also  especially  suited  for  applying  high
viscosity liquid finishing materials of high solids content.  The
knife coater basically consists of an applicator roll,  a  duplex
doctor blade assembly and support and feed rolls.  The applicator
roll  first  applies  an  excess  amount of material to the panel
substrate in much the same manner as described above  for  direct
                                   72

-------
roll  coating.   The  duplex  doctor  blade  consists  of a rigid
bullnosed blade which first  scrapes  off  the  majority  of  the
excess  material  and  a  more  flexible  blade which scrapes the
surface of the panel clean, leaving only the surface voids filled
with coating material.  The excess material is also collected for
reapplication.

Liquid finishing materials vary widely and cannot be  defined  as
completely   as   the  methods  employed  in  their  application.
Finishing operations on all types of wood-based panel  substrates
usually  involve  the application of one or more of the following
materials:  patching materials, sealers, stains and  dyes,  prime
coatings  and  fillers,  base  or ground coatings, grain printing
inks and top coatings.  Patching materials are usually applied to
hardwood plywood panels as the first step in the manufacturing of
prefinished wall panels.  The patching material, a  thick  putty-
like  substance,  is  manually  applied  using a flat blade putty
knife to fill knot holes and other large surface defects  in  the
hardwood face veneer of the panels.

Sealers  of  many  different  formulations are usually applied to
almost all wood-based panels at  sometime  during  the  finishing
operations.   A variety of synthetic resin sealers are applied to
softwood plywood, usually for the purpose of  protection  of  the
surface   until  final  in-use  finishing  such  as  painting  or
varnishing.  Sealers or primers of  pigmented  paint  or  lacquer
types are often applied to hardwood plywood and particle board to
provide  a  firm foundation for subsequent coatings.  Sealers are
usually applied  by  spray  coating,  roll  coating,  or  curtain
coating equipment.

Stains  and  dyes  are  used  to  some extent in the finishing of
various types of wood-based panels.   Conventional  finishing  of
softwood plywood is commonly accomplished by spraying or flooding
light or heavily pigmented penetrating stains which will not curl
or  flake upon checking of the panel face.  Dying of hardboard is
becoming less important but is still practiced to some extent  in
making floor tiles and similar products.

Prime  coatings  and fillers and frequently applied to nearly all
types of wood-based  panels.   Prime  coated  panels  are  either
marketed  as  such  or  receive  further finishing at the factory
level.  The primary purpose of prime coating and  filling  is  to
improve  the control and the quality of finish of materials to be
applied in subsequent finishing operations on  the  prime  coated
panel.   Prime  coating of softwood plywood is often coupled with
the use of a  medium  density  paper  overlay.   The  combination
serves  to  improve  surface  qualities  for paint finishes to be
applied by the ultimate user.  Fillers or high viscosity, heavily
pigmented paint materials are applied  to  the  face  veneers  of
hardwood  plywood and to the surfaces of particleboard to a great
extent in the manufacturing of prefinished panels.   The  purpose
of applying the filler material is to fill the small voids in the
panel surface to provide a smooth flawless surface for subsequent
finishing  operations.   Filler  materials  are  usually  applied
                                    73

-------
either by a knife coater or a reverse  roll  coater.   Presently,
most  filler  materials are of a non-water solvent base, however,
because of air  pollution  controls  on  solvent  emissions  from
finishing  lines,  water  base  fillers  are becoming more widely
used.

Factory finishing of insulation board is a common practice in the
case of both ceiling and interior wall  panels  which  are  being
factory  painted.   Special fire-retardant paint formulations are
often applied, usually by spray coating, to obtain  an  irregular
surface to aid in sound absorption.

A Forest Products Journal investigation shows that prime-coatings
are  especially  important  in  the  manufacturing  of  hardboard
panels.  High viscosity, heavily pigmented paints which often act
as fillers are applied to the hardboard panels  employing  either
knife coaters or reverse coating of hardboard panels.

Base  or  ground  coatings differ from prime coatings in that the
former are usually  associated  with  grain  printing  operations
commonly  used  on  hardboard  panels,  particleboard  panels and
hardwood plywood panels with face  veneers  of  plain,  unfigured
character  or  color.  After a filler coat is applied and cured a
base coat is applied with either a curtain coater, roll coater or
spray coater which provides a ground color for the  grain  to  be
printed.  After curing the ground coat, grain designs are printed
by  one  or  more  commonly  by two or three roller or plate type
printing machines to provide the  panel  with  a  simulated  wood
grain finish.

Presently,  most  inks used for grain printing are non-water base
but water base inks are expected to become more  popular  in  the
near future.

Top  coatings are often applied as a final factory finish coating
and are used to a great extent in the  finishing  of  nearly  all
prefinished   panels.   Top  coatings  for  prefinished  hardwood
plywood panels are usually either a lacquer type or  a  synthetic
conversion varnish type of which the alkyl urea resin type is the
most  important.  Top coatings for hardboard are of various types
including alykl or melamine based varnishes.  Clear and pigmented
polyester and acrylic finishes are transparent  lacquers.   Water
base  top  coats  are also being used on various types of prefin-
ished panels.

Figure 21 shows a process flow diagram for the  manufacturing  of
printed  grain  wall paneling.  Although the process shown is not
necessarily typical of any particular plant or type of panel,  it
should  serve  here to illustrate some of the processes that have
been  discussed  with  respect  to  the  application  of   liquid
finishing  materials  to  wood-based  panels.   As  shown  in the
diagram,  the  panels  are   introduced   into   the   continuous
prefinishing  line  and  are  first  cut  to  size and then rough
sanded, usually by large belt sanders.  The V  or  U-grooves  are
then machine cut and painted.  Currently groove paints are mainly
                                   74

-------
   MANUAL
   PATCHING
I-	*
    FILLING



OVEN



•*
TRIMMING
CUT-OFF

GROOVE




ROUGH
SANDING

GROOVE



rf_
                      DRYING
                           PAINTING
               GRADING
               	}f
PACKING
                   CUTTING



FILLER
DRYING

OVEN
DRYING

" F
4
\
FINE
SANDING

TOP
COATING



*
^
BASE
COATING

OVEN
DRYING .
fe
W

*
^
OVEN
DRYING

GRAIN
PRINTING


4-
SHIPPING
           CONVEYOR TRANSFER


           MANUAL TRANSFER
FIGURE 21 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF PRINTED GRAIN
                      PRE-FINISHED PANELING
                               75

-------
non-water   solvent   base  but  water-base  paints  are  gaining
popularity for this application.  After the groove paint is  oven
dried,  the  panels  are  then machine filled by either a reverse
roll coater or a knife coater and the filler is then oven  dried.
The   filled   panels   are  sometimes  fine  sanded  before  the
application of the base coat  which  also  must  be  dried.   The
imitation grain is then printed on the panels and dried, followed
by  the  application  of the top coat.  After top coat drying the
panels are then graded and packaged for shipment.

Overlaying operations in  the  factory  finishing  of  wood-based
panels  involves various types of sheet materials being bonded to
the base panel by glue or cement materials of various types.  The
primary purposes of  overlaying  are  to  mask  defects,  protect
against weathering, provide a base for paints and other finishes,
increase  the  strength,  hardness  or abrasive resistance of the
surface, provide decorative effects, or a combination of  any  of
these   attributes.   The  most  important  types  of  overlaying
materials are resin-impregnated papers, special plastic film  and
aluminum foils.  Resin-impregnated paper overlays are used on all
types  of  wood-based  panels.   The  resin-impregnated papers of
widely varying resin content are usually bonded to the wood-based
panel under high temperatures and pressures.  Temperature  ranges
of 93 to 1U9°C (200 to 300 F)  and pressure of 8 to 28 atm  (118 to
412 psi) are employed depending on the resin type and content and
on  the  type  of  base  panel  being  overlaid.   Except  in the
production  of  abrasion  resistant  surfaces,  most   overlaying
operations involve low pressure systems.  For surfaces where high
resistance to abrasion is required, high pressure laminating of a
clear  melamine  protective sheet is often added to the overlayed
panel.

The most common types of resins used in  resin-impregnated  paper
overlaying   are   melamine  formaldehyde,  phenol  formaldehyde,
polyesters,  and  acrylic  types.   The  first  three  types  are
thermosetting   resins   which  undergo  permanent  physical  and
chemical changes through the application of  heat  and  pressure.
In  contrast,  the  acrylic  types are thermoplastic resins which
soften and may be reformed under pressure and heat.  The melamine
and phenol-formaldehyde resins are usually added to  kraft  paper
at  the  pulp  mill  to  produce  either  high  or medium density
impregnated paper to be overlaid at the  panel  finishing  plant.
High  density  impregnated  paper requires no additional adhesive
for bonding to the wood substrate while medium  density  overlays
usually require a phenolic glue line in the overlaying operation.
The  polyester  impregnated  papers  are  also self-bonding while
overlaying of the acrylic types usually employs a  phenolic  glue
line.

Special  plastic  films  of  various types may be used to overlay
almost all types of wood—based panels.   Vinyl  resin  films  are
being  used to a large extent.  Polyvinyl chloride films are used
in producing textured and printed decorative panels.  Clear vinyl
films are also  important  in  finishing  hardwood  plywood  wall
panels.   Bonding  of  the  vinyl  film  is  usually accomplished
                                    76

-------
through  the  application  of  either  polyvinyl  acetate  water-
emulsion  adhesives  or  solvent-type elastomeric adhesives.   The
polyvinyl  acetate   is   a   thermoplastic   resin   formed   by
polymerization  of vinyl acetate.  The adhesive is either applied
to the wood-based panel or to the vinyl film and is  often  dried
to remove the solvent, then heat activated before joining the two
materials.   The  overlayed  panel is usually pressed between two
rubber rollers to improve the bond.

Aluminum foil overlayed panels are being produced on a relatively
small scale basis.  Bonding of the foil is often accomplished  by
using  modified  phenolic  resin  film glue and employing a press
operation.  Adhesives used in the overlaying operations discussed
above can be applied in a number of ways,  but  the  most  common
method  is  by roll coating the adhesive onto the panel substrate
prior to the application of the sheet material overlay.

Other types of overlaying operations practiced on   a  relatively
small scale basis involve the overlaying of hardboard and veneers
onto  particleboard  panel  substrates.   Adhesives used in these
operations are most commonly phenolic or urea resin glues used in
conjunction with a hot pressing operation.  However, vinyl  glues
and  various  contact cements can also be used in a cold pressing
operation.

Figure 22  shows  a  simplified  process  flow  diagram  for  the
manufacturing  of  vinyl film overlayed panels.  Although this is
not typical of all overlaying operations, it is presented here to
illustrate some of the basic operations  involved  in  overlaying
wood-based  panels.  The panels are first fed into the continuous
system and are often sanded  prior  to  the  application  of  the
adhesive which is commonly applied by a roller coater.  Often the
solvent  is  dried  immediately after application of the adhesive
and then heat activated before application  of  the  vinyl  film.
After the vinyl sheet material is applied, the composite panel is
then  passed  between  two  rubber  rollers  to improve the bond.
Excess vinyl material on the edges of the panel is trimmed  flush
with  the  panel  edge.   The finished, overlayed panels are then
graded and packaged for shipping.

Molding  is  produced   by   planing,   grooving   or   otherwise
manufacturing  through  a  molding  machine.  Finishing generally
consists of priming and painting, or  filling  followed  by  wood
grain   printing   or  vinyl  film  application.   The  finishing
materials utilized are generally the same as those  utilized  for
prefinished panels.
                                    77

-------
FEED
             SANDING
 ADHESIVE
APPLICATION
ADHESIVE
 DRYING

-*


PRESSING

^
VINYI FM M ^ MrriuATinr
APPLICATION ADHESIVE

VINYL FILM
TRIMMING



TO S
           >•    CONVEYOR  TRANSFER
                 MANUAL  TRANSFER
          FIGURE 22 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM FOR VINYL FILM OVERLAYING
                             78

-------
                           SECTION IV

                     INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION

In   the   development  of  effluent  limitation  guidelines  and
standards of performance for the timber products industry, it was
necessary to determine the differences which may form a basis for
subcategorization   of   the   industry.    The   rationale   for
subcategorization was based on differences and/or similarities in
the  following  factors: (1) quality and quantity of waste waters
produced, (2) the engineering feasibility of  treatment  and  the
resulting  effluent reduction, (3) plant age, (4) plant size, (5)
raw materials used, (6) manufacturing process employed, and,  (7)
the costs of treatment and control.

Effluent  guidelines limitations and standards of performance for
the barking,  veneer,  plywood,  hardboard  and  wood  preserving
portion of the timber products processing industry were published
as  40  CFR  Part  429,  subparts  A  through H.  This regulation
appeared in the Federal Register, Volume  39,  13942   (April  18,
1974).

A  previous  study  by  the  Midwest  Research  Institute for EPA
concerning  pollution  from  silvicultural  activities  discussed
timber  harvesting.   Therefore,  while various aspects of timber
harvesting may be subject to future guidelines, this  portion  of
the  timber  product  industry  is  not  studied nor subjected to
effluent  limitation  guidelines  in  this  document.   Also  not
subject  to  recommended effluent guidelines in this document are
(1) the storage of  logs  in  waters  other  than  self-contained
ponds,   (2)   the transportation of logs in water,  (3) the storage
of lumber and other end products,  (4) dry decking  of  logs,  and
(5) storm water runoff from yards and roofs.  In Section V, waste
water  characteristics  will be discussed for the storage of logs
in  waters  other  than  ponds.   In  Section   VII,   management
techniques  for  the reduction of pollution will be discussed for
transportation and storage of logs in waters  other  than  ponds,
storage  of lumber and other end products, dry decking, and storm
water runoff.
As outlined in the description of the industry  in  Section  III,
the   timber   products   industry  consists  of  many  different
manufacturing  processes.   Several  factors  affecting   quality
and/or quantity of waste produced, the engineering feasibility of
treatment  and  resulting  effluent  reduction,  and  the cost of
treatment were considered significant with regard to  identifying
potential   subcategories   for  these  processes.   The  factors
considered included:   (1) process employed, and  variations,   (2)
nature  of  raw  materials,   (3)  plant  size  and  age,  (4) land
availability,  (5) climatic relationships, and  (6)  process  water
requirements.
                                   79

-------
In  consideration of the above factors, the segment of the timber
products industry included in this study and subject to  proposed
effluent limitations has been subcategorized as follows:

(1)  Wet storage,
(2)  Log washing,
(3)  Sawmills,
(4)  Finishing,
(5)  Particleboard manufacturing,
(6)  Insulation board manufacturing, and
(7)  Insulation board manufacturing with steaming or
     hardboard production.

The rationale for the above categorization is as follows:

Process Variation

The  production  of  products  from wood and wood by-products, as
indicated in Section  III,  involves  considerable  variation  in
process  operations.  These variations, whether caused by the end
product desired, raw materials used, processing method  used,  or
other  factors,  can result in considerably different waste water
characteristics, applicable control and  treatment  alternatives,
and  costs of control and treatment alternatives.  Of all factors
considered,  process  variation  is  the  most   significant   in
determining   possible   subcategorization.   The  possible  sub-
categories resulting from consideration of this factor are:

    (1) Wet storage in water
    (2) Wet storage on land
    (3) Dry storage
    (4) Fabricating operations in which mechanical fasteners
        or non-water soluble adhesives are used
    (5) Fabricating operations in which water soluble adhesives are
         employed
    (6) Finishing operations employing water soluble materials
    (7) Finishing operations employing non-water soluble
        materials
    (8) Log washing
    (9) Sawmills and planing mills
   (10) Insulation board production employing little or no
        steaming of raw furnish
   (11) Insulation board production employing extensive steam-
        ing and having no hardboard production, or employing
        limited steaming with hardboard production
   (12) Insulation board production empoying steaming and
        having hardboard production
   (13) Particleboard production

Ponds as discussed Section III, are distinct  process  variations
in that logs may remain in a log pond for long periods of time or
for periods of time seldom exceeding a week.

Land  storage  of  logs  or  other raw materials is distinct from
water storage in  that  the  waste  water  generation  from  land
                                    80

-------
storage   results  from  spraying  water  on  the  logs  or  from
precipitation runoff while the pollution  associated  with  water
storage results from the leaching of substances directly into the
water.   Furthermore,  except  in  the case of sprayed land decks
without recycle, the flow produced by land storage  is  dependent
on  sufficient  rainfall while the flow from storage ponds may be
continuous, at least on a seasonal basis.

However,  information  regarding  the   treatment   and   control
reliabilities, and the waste water characteristics variabilities,
is  limited.   It is not feasible to subcategorize the storage of
logs to a more specific level than wet storage.

The  processes  involved  in  fabrication  result  in  a   highly
concentrated  glue  waste.   In  some  cases  these wastes may be
similar to the glue  wastes  produced  by  plywood  manufacturing
while  in  other cases they are quite different, depending on the
type resin used.

Those  process  variations  which  emplo'y  mechanical   fasteners
generate no waste water.  Those employing organic soluble resins,
while  requiring  cleanup of equipment generate a volume of water
sufficiently small that it can be contained  and  reused.   Those
operations employing water soluble resins constitute, the majority
of  the fabricating industry and generate a volume of waste water
sufficiently large that treatment and disposal is necessary.

The unit process of  finishing  produces  a  unique  waste  water
requiring  special  handling  and  treatment.   The  waste  water
primarily consists of various concentrations,  depending  on  the
amount   of  wash  water  used,  of  paint  and  other  finishing
materials.  The characteristics of the waste water  vary  widely,
depending on the ingredients used in the finishing substances.  A
substantial variation occurs, however, depending on whether water
soluble or non-water soluble materials are used.

Another process variation that results in a different waste water
stream  is  the  unit operation of log washing.  Log washing does
not result in the same degree of leaching effects that  occur  in
ponds because of the short contact time of the water with the log
and  results  in  an  effluent  with  a  considerably higher grit
content than the effluents from other timber products operations.
Because of the different waste  water  characteristics  resulting
from log washing, the unit process is considered to be a separate
subcategory.

Sawmills  and planing mills are considered a separate subcategory
in that the processes employed may require the use of water,  but
with  proper  control  no  discharge of waste water pollutants is
achievable.

In the production of  boards  the  process  of  insulation  board
manufacturing   and  particleboard  manufacturing  have  definite
differences, as described in Section III,  and  result  in  waste
waters that require different control and treatment technologies.
                                   81

-------
While  the  production  of  insulation  board  products from wood
involves   similar   operational   procedures   in   any   plant,
considerable   process  variation  can  and  does  occur.   These
variations may be caused by the end product  desired  or  by  the
practices  and  procedures  of  plant  management.  There are two
process variations which produce significant differences with re-
gard to waste water generation in the insulation board  industry.
These  variations  involve the effect of steaming or not steaming
raw material before refining and whether or not a plant  produces
hardboard  products.   Although  waste  water  flows  and  solids
concentrations will vary little between subcategories, BOD,  will
vary  considerably.   When steaming is done prior to the refining
there is a release of soluble organics that are not released when
no steaming is done.  This in terms of BOD loading  approximately
doubles  the  waste  load.   The  effect  of  producing hardboard
products is  that  hardboard  products  require  additives  of  a
different nature than plants producing insulation board products.
Also  there  is  more refining of the wood necessary for the pro-
duction of hardboard type products.  These will be  discussed  in
more detail in Section V, Water Use and Waste characterization.

Because  of  significant  differences  in  waste water loads, the
insulation board industry  has  been  further  divided  into  two
subcategories:   plants  that do not steam their raw furnish, and
plants  that  steam  their  raw  furnish  or  produce   hardboard
products,

The  production  of  particleboard  involves  similar operational
procedures in all plants; however, there are  process  variations
that can occur.  These variations do not affect waste water flows
or  concentrations  considerably.   The biggest variation derives
from the production differences  inherent  between  those  plants
producing  extruded  particleboard,  and  those that produce mat-
formed particleboard.

While extruded particleboard accounts for less than  one  percent
of the total production and plants are much smaller, the reported
daily  waste  water flows vary little from the largest mat-formed
particleboard plant because the components  of  the  waste  water
essentially  are the same.  Process variations are not considered
as  a  technical  element  necessitating  subcategorization   and
because  of  no  significant  differences  in  water  usage,  the
particleboard  industry  has  not  been  divided   into   further
subcategories.

Nature of Raw Materials

No subcategorization resulted from consideration of the nature of
raw materials.  It would be expected that species type would have
an  effect  on  the  characteristics  of waste waters from timber
products operations, particularly those in which  an  appreciable
source  of  pollutants  is  the  leachates  from  wood  and  wood
products.  However, as shown in Section V, Water  Use  and  Waste
Characterization   waste   water   characteristics  do  not  show
                                    82

-------
sufficient differences to warrant further subcategorization based
on species type.

A more significant effect is produced by whether the raw material
is in the form of fractionalized wood or whole logs.  As shown in
Section V, whole  log  storage  in  wet  or  dry  decks  produces
significantly different waste water characteristics from piles of
chips, planer shavings, bark, and other similar materials.

While  approximately  30  percent  of all insulation board plants
utilize mineral wool as a portion of their raw material,  it  was
found  that  this practice did not cause sufficient variations in
waste water loads to warrant subcategorization.   One  insulation
board   plant  uses  bagasse  as  its  sole  raw  material.   All
particleboard plants utilize wood as a  raw  material.   Although
the  raw  material may be in the form of roundwood, chips, planer
shavings, or sawdust, a  significant  variation  in  waste  water
loads  with  variation in raw materials was not found.  Because a
major waste stream from a plant comes from  the  washing  of  the
additive  blending  areas,  a difference in additives will affect
the waste water quality.  However, this is not considered  to  be
an    effect    significant    enough    to    warrant    further
subcategorization.

Plant Size and Age

Operations in the timber products industry  range  in  size  from
"backyard"  businesses  to complexes with thousands of employees.
In most cases size  of  operation  and  waste  water  volume  and
pollutant  load  will  be proportional and thus, on a basis, size
has a negligible effect on waste water characteristics.

In addition, cost  of  control  and  treatment  technology  tends
toward  a  constant  factor  on  a unit product basis.  In larger
operations, economy of scale is  applicable  to  various  degrees
but,  while  this  must  be  given  consideration, it does not in
itself justify subcategorization of the industry.  On  the  other
extreme,  small  operations  have  treatment and disposal options
such as retention, land spreading, and trucking to landfill, that
are impractical on larger scales.  These factors are  taken  into
account  in the development of control and treatment alternatives
in  Section  VII,   but   do   not   constitute   a   basis   for
subcategorization of the industry.


Plant  age  cannot be considered as a basis for subcategorization
because  operations  vary  in  age  of  equipment  as   well   as
structures,   i.e.,   plants   generally   undergo  a  continuous
modernization  of  facilities  and  the  actual   "age"   of   an
installation   is   indeterminable.    Furthermore,  the  age  of
equipment does not necessarily  affect  waste  water  generation.
More  important  factors  are  operation  and  maintenance of the
equipment.
                                   83

-------
The only trend related to age observed in this study is  that  of
particleboard  plants  in the western U. S. tending to be of more
recent origin than those in the East.  However, as  indicated  in
Section  V,  no  differences  in  waste water generation could be
discerned for the two groups.

Nature of Water Supply

The quantity and quality of  fresh  water  supplies  utilized  by
timber  products  operations  were  originally  considered  to be
possible  elements  for  industry  subcategorization  because  of
potential  prohibitive  factors  that  could  be  encountered  in
control and  treatment.   However,  despite  the  fact  that  the
industry  tends  to  use  the most available water supplies and a
wide variation in the nature of the  water  supplies  result,  no
detectable  effects  on  control and treatment have resulted from
this study.  Therefore, nature of water supply is not regarded as
a technical element necessitating subcategorization.

Plant Location and Land Availability

The location of a timber products plant  may  be  significant  in
terms of climatic effects on operations and control and treatment
technology,  . the   availability   of   adequate   land  for  the
construction of treatment facilities, and other  factors.   These
factors have received consideration in the development of control
and  treatment  technology   (Section  VII) in which, for example,
various evaporation rates were considered for different  sections
of   the   country  and  different  treatment  alternatives  were
developed for varying amounts of available land.

Despite the fact that plant location and  land  availability  can
affect  the practicality of various control and treatment methods
as well as costs, no rational subcategorization can be  based  on
this consideration because of the wide variability of conditions.
The  considerations  taken  in  the  development  of  control and
treatment technology are considered adequate for the  development
of  effluent  limitations  guidelines and plant location and land
availability are rejected  as  technical  elements  necessitating
subcategorization.

Water Usage

Several  operations  in the timber products industry experience a
unique usage  of  water.   These  are  the  storage  of  logs  in
estuaries,  rivers,  and  impoundments, and the transportation of
logs in water.  The water pollution generated by these operations
is unique in that  no  waste  water  streams  are  produced;  the
pollution  results  from  direct  contact  of the operations with
surface  water  bodies.   Any  attempts   to   characterize   the
pollutional  effects result in water quality considerations, and,
while certain management techniques as discussed in this document
can be effective in reducing pollution, no  treatment  technology
is applicable to these operations.  Therefore, as a result of the
nature   of  water  usage,  the  operations  of  log  storage  in
                                    84

-------
estuaries, rivers, and impoundments, and  the  transportation  of
logs  in  water  are  considered as a separate subcategory of the
timber products  processing  industry.   However,  as  previously
stated,  these operations are not subject to effluent limitations
at this time.
SUMMARY OF SUBCATEGORIZATION

The  segments  of  the  timber   products   processing   industry
considered   in  this  document  have  been  separated  into  the
following subcategories for the  purpose  of  proposing  effluent
limitations  guidelines  and  new  source  performance standards.
These subcategories are defined as:

    1.   Wet Storage.  The wet storage subcategory  includes  the
         holding  of  unprocessed  wood,  before  or  after  bark
         removal, i.e.f logs, in self-contained bodies  of  water
         (ponds)   or land storage of unprocessed wood where water
         is sprayed on the  wood.   This  operation  is  commonly
         referred to as wet decking.

    2.   Log Washing.  The log washing subcategory refers to  the
         process  of  passing  the  wood  raw material through an
         operation where water under pressure is applied to   the
         log  for  the  purpose of removing foreign material from
         the surface of the log before further processing.

    3.   Sawmills and Planing Mills.   The  sawmills  subcategory
         includes   timber   products  processing  operations  of
         sawing,  resawing,  edging,  trimming,  planing   and/or
         machining.

    U.   Finishing.    The   finishing    subcategory    includes
         operations  that  follow  edging,  trimming and planing.
         These operations include drying, dipping, staining,  and
         coating,  moisture  proofing  and by-product utilization
         not otherwise covered by effluent limitations guidelines
         and standards.

    5.   Particleboard.     The    particleboard    manufacturing
         subcategory  includes  the manufacture of particleboard.
         Particle board is, defined as  board  products  that  are
         composed  mainly  of distinct particles of wood or other
         ligno-cellulosic materials not reduced to  fibers  which
         are bonded othether with an organic or inorganic binder.
         (A  component  of  particleboard  furnish may be fibrous
         material.)

    6.   Insulation board.  The  insulation  board  manufacturing
         subcategory   includes   facilities   that   produce   a
         fiberboard from wood in a fibrous state.  The board  has
         a  density  of less than 0.5 g/cu cm (31 Ib/cu ft).  The
         manufacturing  process   involved   does   not   involve
                                   85

-------
subjecting  the  wood  material to a pressure created by
steam.

Insulation  board   Manufacturing   with   Steaming   or
Hardboard  Production.   This  subcategory  includes the
manufacture  of  insulation  board  at  facilities  that
either  steam condition the raw material before refining
or that produce hardboard at the same facility.
                          86

-------
                            SECTION V

              WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION

Water is used in various  ways  throughout  the  timber  products
processing  industry  and a variety of waste waters result.  This
section describes the water usage  and  characterizes  the  waste
waters  associated  with  the subcategories identified in Section
IV.  For each subcategory discussed herein, a model is developed.

It  should  be  noted  that  the.  water  usage  and  waste  water
characteristics  described  for  each operation, unless otherwise
specified, are descriptive of that particular operation.  Various
unit  operations  may  be  employed  in  conjunction  with  other
operations  and  the  resulting  waste  water characteristics are
essentially a weighted average of those of the  unit  operations.
For  example,  prior  to  the  fabrication of wirebound crates, a
veneering operation may be involved.  The veneering operation, in
turn, could have associated with it bark removal  operations  and
log  pond  storage.   The waste stream resulting from the complex
would be a combination of the waste streams from each of the unit
operations.

A model operation is developed below for each of  the  operations
or combinations of operations discussed in Sections III and IV of
this  document.   As discussed earlier, the variety of operations
conducted in this  segment  of  the  timber  products  processing
industry are numerous.  Consideration of the process water volume
requirements,   the   process   waste   water  quality,  and  the
practicability of reuse and disposal techniques  results  in  the
conclusion  that so called model operations can be described, not
specific to each and every variation included  in  this  portion,
but  applicable  to  the  operations  being  considered  in  this
document.   This  approach  is  appropriate  to  the  purpose  of
developing  the  control and treatment technologies  (Section VII)
and the presentation of cost information  (Section VIII).

STORAGE  OF  LOGS  IN  ESTUARIES^   IMPOUNDMENTS,   RIVERS,   AND
TRANSPORTATION OF LOGS IN WATER

The  quantity  of  materials  contributed to the water by logs in
open  water  storage  and  transportation  is  dependent  on  the
leaching  rate  of  substances  from  the  logs  which in turn is
dependent on such factors as the residence time of logs in water,
log species, and quality of water.  For example, in a  laboratory
study,   Graham  and  Schaumburg  showed  that  the  leaching  of
pollutants from logs is rapid initially but decreases with  time.
They also showed that more pollutants were leached from Ponderosa
pine  than  Douglas fir logs and that more pollutants are leached
from logs suspended in fresh water than from those  suspended  in
saline waters.

Log  storage  in open waters occurs primarily in the northwestern
U. S.  The primary concern about such storage  has  involved  the
aesthetics  of  floating  bark.  Several investigations have been
                                    87

-------
addressed to the problem of bark loss and its eventual deposition
site.  The results of the studies all point to the fact that most
of the dislodging of bark from logs occurs at the dump site where
the violent entry into the water is accompanied by  the  abrasive
action  of  the  logs  rubbing against one another.  The logs are
usually allowed  to  free-fall  into  the  water  from  distances
ranging  from a meter or so up to six or more meters, the greater
falls occuring when dumping into tidal  waters  is  done  at  low
tide.

The work at Oregon State University by Graham under the direction
of  Schaumburg on the leaching of pollutants from logs has led to
the formulation of equations characterizing  the  leaching.   The
equation  originating from the work of Graham and Schaumburg with
modification by Williamson and Schaumburg is of the form:
T = (1-x) (D) (Ac)

where :
                         (X) (C) (Ac) + fl  (B-D) Ae
    T = total pollutional contribution from field logs  (grams)
    B = grams leached from test log  (ends unaltered, w/bark)
                     sq m of cylindrical area
    C = grams leached from test log  (ends sealedf w/bark)
                     sq m of cylindrical area
    D = grams leached from test log  (ends sealed, w/o barkl
                     sq m of cylindrical area
    Ae = total submerged end area of field logs  (sq m)
    Ac = total submerged cylindrical area of field logs  (sqm)
     x = fraction of bark missing from field logs
    f 1 = cylindrical area of test log
             end area of test log

Typical calculations using this equation for  a  20  hectare   (50
acre)   raft  of  Ponderosa  pine  that  has  a free flowing water
profile  and  a  log  storage  time  of  30  days,  yield  a  COD
combination  of 320 kg/day  (700 Ib/day) and a BOD contribution of
150 kg/day (320 Ib/day) .

Similar calculations performed for logs stored on a  fresh  water
reservoir with a volume of about 2.4 x 10s cu m  (8.7 x  106 cu ft)
and an average flow of 79.1 cu m/min   (46. 5 cfs)  yield  an average
detention  time  of  52 hours.  Ten measurements of water quality
were made over a three  day  period  of  both  the  influent  and
effluent  from the reservoir.  The average value and the standard
deviation for each of the measured parameters are shown in  Table
10.   The calculated results are also shown.  It can be seen from
this study that  the  expected  and  observed  changes  in  water
quality  through  the  reservoirs are extremely small in terms of
concentration.  It can also be seen that the predicted  change  is
always  less  than the observed change.  This is probably because
of the fact that the equation does  not  take  into  account  the
contribution of the benthic deposits to the water quality.
                                   88

-------
                 TABLE 10  BOD, COD, FBI AND TOC IN INFLOW AND OUTFLOW
                         FROM LOG STORAGE RESERVOIR NUMBER 74
Pollution
Index
BOD
COD
PBI1
TOC
CO
CO
±nt±ow wean
Concentration
mg/1
0.25+0.13
8.7+ 3.7
1.6+ 0.83
3.7+ 0.95

Uuttlow Mean
Concentration
mg/1
1.25+ 0.55
10.0+ 4.1
1.8+ 0.54
3.9+ 1.87

Measured
mg/1
1.0
1.3
0.2
0.2

Increase
?
kg/ day
110
150
20
1120

Predicted
mg/1
0.02
0.07
0.16
0.03

Increase
kg/day
2
8
18
' 4

 PBI -Pearl Benson Index is expressed as ppra SSL - Spent Sulfite Liquor (10% by weight)

2kg/day based on a flow of 79.1 cu m/min (30mgd)

-------
In  addition,  the variability of the measured parameters is such
that the standard deviation is  nearly  half  the  value  of  the
parameters   for   all   measured   parameters.    Limited  field
applicability of the equation is, therefore, indicated.    Similar
results  are  reported  by  Williamson  and  Schaumburg for other
impoundments  studied.   The  evaluation  of  the   equation   by
Williamson  and  Schaumburg  when  applied  to estuarine analyses
showed that the maximum  change  in  any  of  the  water  quality
parameters  studied  would  be less than 1.0 mg/1.  Consequently,
field studies were not conducted in this  study  because  it  was
surmised that the variability of the water quality resulting from
tidal recycles would far exceed these differences.

Samples were collected in this study in both the Little Deschutes
River  and  the  Deschutes  River  in  Oregon above and below log
impoundments.  The results  of  the  analyses  of  these  samples
showed   that  it  was  virtually  impossible  by  water  quality
measurements to determine the degradation in water caused by  the
logs.   Some  of  the  downstream  samples  were  higher than the
upstream samples and some were  lower,  but  in  both  cases  the
measurable effect was too low to be considered significant.  This
observation agreed with the work of Williamson and Shaumburg.

The  waters above and below four large log rafts were measured on
estuaries at Astoria, and at Goose Bay.  Three of the four  rafts
sampled  showed  that  the  concentration of pollutants increased
from the downstream end of the raft to the  upstream  end,  while
the third raft sampled showed an increase in concentration in the
expected  direction,  from  upstream  to downstream.  Two samples
collected on the Columbia River at Longview,  Washington,  showed
the  same  reverse  trend.   No attempt was made to determine the
variability of the measured parameters because of  the  magnitude
of the sampling that would have been required.

The  data  collected  by  Williamson and Schaumburg and also that
collected in this study illustrate that it  is  not  possible  to
readily  determine  the change in water quality of an impoundment
because  of  log  storage  on  the  impoundment.   Without   that
capability, it is not possible to reliably predict or measure the
pollutional  contribution of the logs to the storage waters.  The
effect of  easy  let-down  devices  in  reducing  the  amount  of
floating  bark  released  to  the  water  is  evident from visual
observations,  but  no  further   studies   were   performed   to
quantitatively  evaluate  this.   No  typical  waste water can be
characterized because it is not currently  possible  to  reliably
measure  a  waste  water  characteristic  that  can be attributed
solely to the logs in the water.
                                    90

-------
Wet Storage

The  following  discussion  is  divided  into   three   portions,
identified  as  mill  ponds,  log  ponds  and  wet  decking.  The
division,  particularly  mill  ponds  and  log  ponds,   may   be
considered  somewhat artificial.  However, this division provides
an opportunity to discuss potential differences in water use  and
waste characterization.
MILL PONDS

Mill  ponds  are those man-made water impoundments used primarily
for sorting logs and feeding them into a plant.  Mill  ponds  are
usually  less  than  one  ha   (2.5  ac)  in  size and usually are
typified by low flow rates and short log residence time.

Two of the four ponds reported in a study by Haufbur are  typical
mill  ponds  (Table  11).   Ponds C and D are small ponds and the
average storage time is two weeks  and  one  week,  respectively.
The  relatively  high  flow  of  25  Ips  (UOO gpm) through pond C
causes low concentrations of pollutants, whereas the  lower  flow
of  one  liter  per  second  (16 gpm) through pond D causes higher
concentrations of pollutants.  Pond B in Table 11  would  qualify
as  a  mill  pond because of the short residence time of the logs
and because of the high concentration of pollutants, even  though
the  pond  is  8  ha   (20 ac)  in size.  There would have to be an
intense amount of activity occurring on a 8 ha (20  ac)  pond  in
order  to exchange 80 percent  of the logs in one week.  Pond A is
a typical log pond, in that the area of the pond is large and the
storage time in the pond is long.  Because there is  no  outflow,
the  concentration of pollutants is not as low as Pond C, but not
nearly as high as Pond B and D.

Another typical pond is that identified as Pond  04   (Table  12).
It  is  only about one ha  (2.5 ac) in size and the detention time
of logs in the pond is only about three hours.  The  activity  on
the  pond  is sufficiently high that suspended solids of 579 mg/1
are reported.  Other parameters such  as  COD  and  BOD  are  low
because the high flow rate washes the pollutants from the pond.

McHugh,  Miller,  and  Olson   collected a large quantity of water
quality data while studying mosquitoes in  log  ponds.   Some  of
those data are listed in Table 13 along with the areas of the log
ponds  as  supplied  by  the   Oregon  Department  of Ecology.  In
addition, data supplied from various sources are  list  in  Table
13.
Grab   samples were collected during this study from several ponds
in Oregon and Washington and  analyzed  for  several  parameters.
Based  on  the  distinctions mentioned above, some of these ponds
were classified as mill ponds and  the  values  of  the  measured
parameters are listed in Table  14.
                                    91

-------
                     TABLE 11
                  LOG POND DATA
Physical  Character!sties  of  Log Ponds Studied
Surface
Area
Pond Hectares
A -30.5
CO
CO
B 8.1
C .1

D 1.2
Average
Depth,
Meters
2.4
1.8-2.4
3.7

1.2-1.5
Age of
Pond,
Years
11
14
19

39
Type of
Logs
Stored
Douglas
fir
Douglas
fir
85% Pon-
derosa
pine
15% Doug-
las fir
Over 90%
Pondero-
sa pine
Length
of
Storage
1-3 yrs.
80% of logs
about one
week
Two weeks

One week
Water
Source
Stream
Wells
Stream

Springs:
Irriga-
tion
ditch
Remarks
Non-overflowing except during
high runoff periods. Sanitary
wastes dumped Into pond.
Non-overflowing except during
high runoff periods. Sanitary
and glue wastes from plywood
plant dumped Into pond.
Overflowing at about 25 I/sec.

Overflowing at about .0 I/sec.

-------
                                                         TABLE 11
                                                LOG POND DATA (Cont'd)
CD
              Chemical Characteristics  of  Log  Ponds  Studied
              Pond A
Point
1
2
3
4
4-B
5
TS,
mg/la/
254
253
230
238
39.1
260
Vs
59
53
49
53
46
56
SS,
mg/1
43
38
27
B4
2.1
35
DO,
mg/1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.2

0.2
Temp,
°C
22
22
22
22

22
COD, BOD20,
pH mg/1 mgTT
6.9 IJo 48
116
104
116
100
116
BODS BOD5. k, N,b/ NOl-N.c/
mg/T COD day-r.i mg/1 mg/1
29 0.25 0.08 2.4 0.6





P04, PBI
mq/l mg/1
0.5 175





             a/ mg/1 - milligrams per liter = ppm
             b/ N - total kjeldahl nitrogen (ammonia plus organic nitrogen)
             c/ NOS^-N - nitrate nitrogen
             4-B = bottom sample taken at point 4

-------
                                           TABLE 11
                                  LOG POND DATA (Cont'd)
Pond B



CO
JT

Point
1
2
3-B
4
5
6
TS,
mg/1
747
724
776
720
723
755
VS
%
55
63
60
61
57
56
SS,
mg/1
180
162
266
234
248
256
DO,
mg/1
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.1
Temp,
°C
2X.5
21.5
21
22
22
22
COD, BOD20 BOD5, BOffi k, N, N03-N, P04,
pH mg/1 mgTT mgTI C~J& day-^ mg/1 mg/1 mgTl
7.1 496 167 54 0.11 0.03 110.4 1.5 :.1.2
7 a 484
504
488
488
504
PBI,
ma/1
545




3-B = bottom sample taken at point 3

-------
en
                                                             EAELE 11
                                                    LOG POND BAT& (Cont'd)
             Pond C
Point
1
2
3
4
dfrozen
Pond D
Point
l
2-B
3
4
TS .
mg/1
352
356
360
352
VS
30
33
32
30
ss,
mg/1
d
d
d
4
samples— suspended

TS
mg/1
550
580
530
606

Vs
40
50
44
46

DO,
1.5
1.7
2.0

Temp,
°C
23
23 7
23

sol Ids tests

SS, DO,
mg/1 mg/1
d
d
d
122
0.4
0.2
0.5
0.7

Temp,
°C
21
20.5
21
21.5 7
COD BOD20 BOD 5, BOD5 k, N,
pH mg/1 mg/T mg/1 COD day-1 mg/1
20
.5 24 10 6 0.25 0.08 1
26
22
not run

COD, BOD20, BOD 5, BOD5 k, N,
pH mg/1 mg?T mg/T COD day- 1 mg/1
312
316
3 0
.4 353 116 68 O.i9 0.08 4.9
N03-N, P04, PBI
mg/1 mgTl mg/1

O.i O.i 35




N03-N, P04, PBI
mg/1 mgTl mg/1



0.7 2.0 338
              2-B = bottom sample taken at point 2

-------
                                              TABLE 12
                         WINTER CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG PONDS?
                           PART B:  PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS (Cont'd)




OD
CD


Pond

01
02

03

04
Surface
Area
(Hectares)

23
17

23

1.2
Average
Depth Volume
(Meters) (Cu.M)

l .4
1.2

1.5

1.8

314,912
207,039

345,192

22,937
Type of Log

65%
100%

65%
35%
40%

Doug.
Doug.

Doug.

fir
fir

fir
Log
Deten tlon

60
126

44

Days
Days

Days
Water
Source


Another
Pond
Reservoir
Hemlock
Doug.
fir
3
hours
Creek
Remarks and
Approximate Eff.
Overflow 1n Nov. to Mar. =
about i, 635 Cu. M/Day
Overflow 1n Nov. to Mar. »
about 1,643 Cu. M/Day
Overflow 1n Nov. to Mar. «
about 1,635 Cu. M/Day
Impounded creek overflowing
                                       60% Hemlock
Nov. to Mar. = about 489,000
Cu. M/Day
*Based on Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.  sampling from March 2  to  March  6,  ]973.

-------
                                                     TABLE 12
                                     WINTER CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG POND*
                                           PART A:  CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
CD
Pond
01
02
Q3
04
06
48
BOD5
2
3
5
10
7
3
COD
47
67
57
64
46
78
DS
69
130
81
90
120
271
SS
11
21
31
579
42
26
TS
80
151
112
669
162
297
Turb.
8
6
12
40
28
4
Phenols
0.03
O.Ol
0.03
0.03
0.08
0.06
Color
14
9
18
9
12
13
Kjld-N
1.40
1.33
2.30
0.34
2.82
0,45
T-P04.-P
0,02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.025
0.02
             Note:   Turbidity in  JTU: color 1n Pt.-Cobalt units; all others 1n mg/1.

             *Based on  Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. sampling from March 2 to March 6, 1973.

-------
                               TOBTE  13
                LITERATBKE  DMA  FOR PCNDS
Temp.
                  Color
                                              COO
                                                               f!IOT
                                                                        fcOD/COL'
03
04
0?
01
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
49
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
70
69
40073
40073
40073
40073
40073
40073
70072
70072
70072
70072
62860
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
50873
52173
21373
21373
22073
22073
22773
22773
30673
30673
31373
31373
32073
32073
32773
32773
40373
40373
41073
41073
41773
41773
42473
42473
50173
50173
50873
50873
51573
51573
60573
60573
71073
71073
91973
-
6.9
7.1
7.5
7.4
6.5
5.0
6.5
5.8
6.9
6.3
7.1
7.4
7.1
6.9
7.0
5.8
6.4
6.4
6.4
5.5
7.4
4.9
6.7
6.9
6.3
6.3
6.4
(..t
7.0
6.2
5.3
6.2
4.8
6.3
7.3
9.5
5.9
6.7
7.8
7.0
6.1
7.0
6.7
6.3
7.8
5.8
6.0
6.5
5.5
5.8
6.2
6.6
7.4
6.0
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.3
5.6
6.S
6.4
7.1
7.1
6.4
6.4
6.0
6.2
6.3
6.6
6.3
6.4
6.3
6.6
7.6
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.2
6.3
6.6
6.7
6.2
6.5
7.2
8.2
6.3
6.4
6.4
7.1
6.6
- 6.9
6.1
6.2

-
22.0
21.5
23.0
21.5
.
.
_
_
_
.
.
,
_
_
_
_
_
.
.
.
.
_
.
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
_
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
.
.
_
_
.
.
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
_
37.0
38.0
52.0
56.0
44.0
52.0
44.0
43.0
46.0
45.0
48.0
51.0
51.0
50.0
50.0
53.0
53.0
58.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
60.0
57.0
64.0
58.0
58.0
64.0
76.0
49.0
71.0
73.0
77.0

-
0.1
0.3
1.5
0.7
,
.
_
_
_
.
_
_
.
_
_
.
.
-
,
.
_
_
.
-
.
_
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.7
1.4
2.6
1.8
1.3
0.0
1.5
0.1
2.1
0.5
0.0
1.8
0 0
olo
0.0
0.5
0.0
3.7
0.9
1.0
0.0

3.4

0.0
0.9
0.0
5.8
0-0
0.0

_
-
18.0
9.0
9.0
14.0
23.0
13.0
-
-
-
-
62.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
75.0
75.0
125.0
25.0
25.0
25.0
150.0
125.0
100.0
25.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
150.0
500.0
100.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
25.0
150.0
25.0
100.0
50.0
40.0
20.0
150.0
200.0
40.0
15.0
100.0
50.0
30.0
200.0
100.0
50.0
200.0
25.0
50.0
50.0
200.0
-
175.0
50.0
25.0
20.0
50.0
25.0
50.0
150.0
-
-
120.0
75.0
220.0
140.0
200.0
120.0
200.0
120.0
220.0
140.0
200.0
140.0
130.0
150.0
100.0
150.0
100.0
100.0
140.0
120.0
100.0
125.0
120.0
160.0
100.0
120.0
300.0
300. n
175.0
175.0
450.0
250.0

12.0
dO.O
b.O
8.0
13.0
2C.O
_
.
-
.
7.0
44.0
7.0
11.0
8.0
20.0
10.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
16.0
32.0
34.0
7.0
7.0
50.0
9.0
42.0
12.0
19.0
10.0
10.0
9.0
14. "i
9.0
8.0
23.0
7.0
24.0
12.0
7.0
4.0
23.0
40.0
8.0
8.0
50.0
12.0
8.0
56.0
8.0
8.0
160.0
16.0
14.0
56.0
7.0
-
43.0
6.0
8.0
6.5
25.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
60.0
90.0
112.0
76.0
28.0
26.0
26.0
22.0
38.0
21.0
92.0
34.0
39.0
15.0
74.0
62.0
520.0
570.0
155.0
128.0
84.0
80.0
360.0
230.0
34.0
23.0
68.0
76.0
255.0
190.0
114.0
84.0
150.0
130.0

5.0
10.0
3.0
2.0
33G.O
6.0
29.0
54.0
6.0
68.0
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
.
.
.
,
.
.
_
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
_
_
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
26.0
46.0
34.0
17.0
41.0
29.0
19.0
24.0
31.0
20.0
39.0
36.0-
37.0
22.0
43.0
46.0
20.0
27.0
23.0
20.0
29.0
19.0
24.0
23.0
20.0
27.0
21.0
24.0
24.0
19.0
18.0
41.0
17.0
11.0

57.0
64.0
67.0
47.0
-J57.0
65.0
11G.O
504.0
24.0
353.0
43.0
417.0
93.0
351.0
121.0
105.0
eo.o
48.0
52.0
42.0
68.0
161.0
200.0
11.0
40.0
422.0
31.0
681.0
209.0
300.0
434.0
62.0
9.0
144.0
83.0
67.0
676.0
52.0
713.0
144.0
47.0
11.0
187.0
600.0
82.0
21.0
228.0
4.0
21.0
173.0
117.0
106.0
431.0
112.0
202.0
802.0
84.0
204.0
-
37.0
15.0
38.0
225.0
22.0
37.0
188.0
164.0
118.0
-
_
_
-
-
.
- .
-
-
-
-
-
"
_
.
.
_
_
_
.

_
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
.
.
.
107.0
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.50
1.20
0.10
2.00
0.03
O.lfi
0.12
0.37
0.06
0.18
0.24
0.10
0.02
0.02
0.06
0-29
3.36
0.0
0.06
0.84
0.14
0.60
0.44
0.0
0.01
0.0
0.04
0.10
0.04
0.0
0.49
1.02
0.50
2.66
0.05
0.0
0.15
3.00
3.00
0.37
0.77
0.06
0.10
0.41
0.14
0.10
0.0

_
0.76
0.24
0.15
0.76
0.29
0.0
0.10
0.01
0.03
0.10
0-0
0.04
0.03

_
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
_
_
_


.
.
.
_
.
.
_
.
_
_
_
_
.
,
_
^
_
.
2.20
2.30
0.34
1.33
1.40
0.05
1.82
2.40
10.40
1.00
4.90
0.13
7.67
9.60
5.50
5.40
-
-
5.10
6.04
2.68
3.22
0.21
11.62
-
0.19
4.57
0.22
9.95
-
-
-
0.95
' -
16.10
7.01

10.58

8.86
7.30

_
3.55

_
2.59
0.48
4.51

1.90

5.44
9.19
4.32

8.57

3.05

2.61
0.17
0.22
1.49
0.38
0.64
4.00
0.12
0.08




.
_
.

.

.
_
"

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
_
.
.
.
.
_
,
_
O.f.0
0.09
0.16
0.04
0.04
0.35
0.09
0.25
0.11
0.25
0.19
47.0
391.0
290.0
347.0
261.0
291.0
257.0
234.0
300.0
85.0
138.0
222.0
320.0
33.0
76.0
506.0
117.0
658.0
340.0
502.0
481.0
_ • 116.0
82.0
260.0
345.0
102.0
422.0
123.0
255.0
237.0
247.0
116.0
244.0
669.0
417.0
393.0
455.0
97.0
76.0
473.0
185.0
146.0
1055.0
'130.0
268.0
805.0
150.0

23876.0
74.0
60.0
82.0
2097.0
68.0
66.0
154.0
0.16 222.0
0.39 225.0


"

_
_
_
_
_
.
_
-•

.
.
.
-
_
_
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
TUI^S  Area

       57.00
       .  3.00
       4?.or)
       57.00
                                                                                            95.0
                                                                                            71.0
                                                                                            88.0
                                                                                            23.0
                                                                                            72.0
                                                                                            35.0
                                                                                            60.0
                                                                                             3.0
                                                                                            35.0
                                                                                            35.0
                                                                                            49.0
                                                                                            89.0
                                                                                            64.0
                                                                                            79.0
                                                                                            42.0

                                                                                            21.0
                                                                                            12.0
                                                                                            35.0
                                                                                            94.0
                                                                                             35.0
                                                                                             29.0
                                                                                             26.0
                                                                                             26.0
                                                                                             19.0
                                                                                             25.0
                                                                                             32.0
                                                                                             16.0
                                                                                                   26.00
                                                                                                   20.00
                                                                                                    2.50
                                                                                                    3.00
                                                                                                    6.00
                                                                                                    0.50

                                                                                                    0.70
                                                                                                    1.00
                                                                                                    0.75
                                                                                                    3.00
                                                                                                    3.00
                                                                                                    1.50
                                                                                                    1.50
                                                                                                    0.74
                                                                                                    1.00
                                                                                                    0.60
                                                                                                    2.50
                                                                                                    0.50
                                                                                                    1.00
                                                                                                    2.50
                                                                                                    2.00

                                                                                                    0.70
                                                                                                    5.00
                                                                                                    0.50
                                                                                                    4.00

                                                                                                    0.60
                                                                                                    2.50
                                                                                                    1.50
                                                                                                    0.30
                                                                                                    2.00
                                                                                                    1.00
                                                                                                    0.70

                                                                                                    0.50
                                                                                                  100.00
                                                                                                    0.10
                                                                                                    1.50
                                                                                                    4.00

                                                                                                  .  0.70
                                                                                                    0.25

                                                                                                    1.50
                                                                                                    0.30
                                                                                                    4.00

                                                                                                    6.00
                                                                                                    0.50
                                                                                                    0.25
                                                                                                    0.50
                                                                                                    0.50

-------
           TABLE 14
CHARACTERIZATION OF MILL PONDS
                                           Water



CO
CO



Pond
44
44
72
28
04
23
23
73
Color
86
124
433
171
9
571
476
117
Jurbidity
20
67
36
4
40
15
9
304
BOD5
59
55.9
66
44
10
50
40
-
COD
98
84.5
221.2
53
64
301
262
121.6
P04
2.0
3.45
5.44
1.80
0.02
6.49
7.18
1.84
NT
1.95
1.86
4.91
2.42
0.34
5.54
4.57
2.18
TS
429
448
446
153
669
350
298
138
SS
8
30
199
31
579
68
66
103
TDS
421
418
247
121
40
282
232
35
TVS
112
141
216
70
-
.258
194
75
VSS
0
11
129
25
-
37
142
52
VDS
112
130
87
45
-
221
152
23
Phenols
39.3
—
98.7
9.4
22.0
5.4
11.4
2.6
Flow
(Cu rn/day)
6,170
6,170
0
0
488,265
0
0

Production
(Cu m/day)
0.39 '
0.39
0.65
0.06
0.63
0.42
0.42
0.37
Pond Area
(Hectares)
1.2
1.2
0.2
1.2
0.2
1.2
0.2
1.2

-------
several  observed trends have been previously noted in making the
distinction between log ponds and mill ponds*  These include  the
small pond size and the great amount of activity on the mill pond
as compared to the log pond.  Chemical parameters tend to support
this distinction as shown in Tables 11, 12, and 13, in that total
solids,  COD,  BOD, nitrogen, and phosphate concentrations in the
mill pond tend  to  be  higher  than  those  in  the  log  ponds.
Regression analysis was conducted for selected parameters for the
ponds  of less than one ha  (three ac)  in Table 13 and for the six
ponds in Table 14.  The correlation coefficient  (r),  the  slope
(m), and the intercept (b) of the line of best fit for the linear
regression  analysis  are  shown  in Table 15.  More than 40 data
points were used in all the regressions from Table  13  with  the
exception of the COD-BOD relation where only 11 observations were
available.   The  parameters  for  which  significant correlation
occurred were  COD-TS  
-------
                                     15
                    DATA CORRELATIONS FOR MILL PONDS
PART A (McHugh, et al. Data)
Independent Variable
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
POi
BOD
COD
PART B (Six Ponds, Thi
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
P04
BOD
COD
COD
Dependent Variable
N!
Color
P04
TS
Turbidity
NT
NT
BOD
s Study)
NT
Color
POi
TS
Turbidity
NT
N!
BOD
ss
r*
0.487
0.355
0.224
0.854
0.527
0.641
0.620
0.838

0.903,
0.935
0.943
-0.036
-0.113
0.964
0.687
0.433
-0.231
m
0.0102
04479
0.00105
0.7922
0.0668
2.9715
0.0777
0.1307

0.0179
2.063
0.0259
-0.078
-0.139
0.697
0.0651
0.090
-0.530
b
2.936
594J2
0.3536
£23.556
7.756
3.147
0.6507
4.41,6

0.33,6
-59.94
-0.487
372.38
92.77
0.633
0.0245
31.782
239.97
Dependent Variable =  (m) (Independent Variable)  +  b
                               101

-------
to the physical parameters  of  the  pond.   The  fact  that  the
suspended  fraction  of  the  mill pond waters does not correlate
well with any  of  the  soluble  parameters  indicates  that  the
suspended  fraction is not related to the activity on the pond in
the same fashion as the soluble fraction.  It was not possible to
obtain a good correlation of  the  suspended  fraction  with  any
rational  combination  of  the  physical  parameters.   This  may
indicate that the suspended fraction is highly dependent  on  the
specific  conditions existing in the particular pond with respect
to the amount that the bottom gravel and muds are agitated, while
the soluble fraction is primarily a function  of  the  amount  of
materials leaching directly from the logs.

The  poor  correlation  of  BOD  and  COD  concentrations further
evidences the low reliability that should be placed  on  BOD  for
materials  leached  from  woods  and  barks.  The highly variable
behavior  of  the  BOD/COD  ratio  for  uncooked  leachates   was
evidenced throughout the study.

The  characteristics  of  the  effluent  from a mill pond, in the
event that there is a  discharge,  is  highly  dependent  on  the
number  of  logs  going across the pond per unit time and is less
dependent on the area and hydraulic flow through the pond.  There
is often a discharge from the mill pond because of  the  function
of  the mill pond in the timber products industry.  The mill pond
is used to feed the logs into the mill, and usually to  sort  the
logs before they go to the mills.  Because most mill machinery is
set  up to accomodate only a small water level fluctuation, it is
necessary to maintain the  pond  near  full  or  completely  full
throughout  the  year.   For this reason, even a non-flowing pond
will overflow during a period of natural precipitation.  Some  of
the  ponds  are allowed to overflow continually, but with greater
overflow  occurring  during  periods  of  precipitation.   During
periods  of low precipitation, water is added to the pond to make
up for evaporative losses.  Hence, the mill pond is  always  full
and the discharge may be continuous or intermittent.

It  is  difficult  to  describe  a single waste stream, or even a
waste  stream . that   is   characteristic   of   a   mill   pond.
Consequently,  the  data  in Table 16 are for a hypothetical mill
pond representative of a mill pond with a moderate flow  and  log
loading, and a large area.

LOG PONDS

Several  laboratory  studies  have  been  performed prior to this
study, but have limited value in discussing log ponds.   However,
the  data  developed  in the studies are valuable in establishing
trends that can be expected for pollutants  in  log  ponds.   One
that  is particularly applicable is the study conducted by Graham
on the leaching of pollutants from logs submerged in  tanks  with
suppressed  biological activity.  The study showed that COD, TOC,
FBI, and TVS of the water increased at a rapid rate initially and
then tended to reach a maximum concentration at  detention  times
greater  than  UO days.  In addition, it was observed that if the



                                  102

-------
                          TABLE 16
          TYPCIAL WASTE STREAM FROM A MILL POND
Parameter                                                Value
Hydraulic flow,  cu m/day                                   3,800
Log loading, cu  m/day                                       115
Area, hectares
Calculated Parameters
COD (rag/1)                                                   68
Color (units)                                                 80
NT                                                         1.53
                                                           1;.27
Estimated Parameters
BOD5.   Cmg/1)                                                14
Turbidity (JTU)                                              20
Total Solids (mg/1)                                          250
Suspended Solids  (mg/1)                                       50
                             Ida

-------
log that had been leached to an apparent maximum concentration in
the surrounding water was then removed from that water  and  then
placed  in  fresh water, the concentration of leachates increased
in the fresh water in a fashion similar to that in  the  original
water.   This  indicated that the leaching rate of materials from
the log is  a  function  of  the  concentration  of  the  leached
materials  in the surrounding waters.  It was also found that the
bark inhibits the initial loss of soluble organic matter from the
logs and contributes most of the color producing substances.   It
was  also  found  that  Ponderosa  pine  logs  contribute  higher
concentrations of leachates than Douglas Fir logs.

In a study by Benedict, bark  was  submerged  in  water  and  the
concentration  of  leachates in the water was measured with time.
Just as in the log study,  maximum  concentrations  were  reached
after  40  to  60  days,  but  the concentration of leachates was
considerably higher.  The age of the bark  was  found  to  be  an
important  variable,  i.e., the older bark yielded less leachates
than the younger.  Similar work by Asano and  Towlerton  involved
the  study  of  leachates from submerged wood chips.  Once again,
the plateau value of concentration was obtained, but  after  only
20  to 30 hours of agitation of the sample.  The concentration of
leachates in the surrounding water was found to be  dependent  on
the  concentration  of wood chips in the water.  The color of the
supporting water was found to increase to 3,000 to 4,000 standard
color units, whereas the color of the water surrounding the  bark
in  the  Benedict  study  was found to increase to 7,000 to 8,000
units.  This is in support of the  observations  by  Graham  that
most  of the color from the logs came from the bark.  A different
study  by  Spoul  and  Sharpe  on  bark  tends  to  support   the
observations  in  the three previously mentioned studies, but the
experimental conditions were different and direct  comparison  is
not possible.

Pond  A  listed  in Table 11 is a good example of a log pond and,
even though Pond B  is  large  enough  to  conform  to  the  area
associated  with  the  log  ponds,  the  number of logs that move
across the pond per  day  is  so  high  that  Pond  B  should  be
classified  as  a  mill  pond.  The listing of literature data in
Table 13 shows that only eight of the  ponds  in  the  list  have
areas  large  enough to be classified as log ponds.  Two of these
ponds are the same as Pond A and B listed in  Table  11,  one  of
which  is  not  a  log  pond even though its size is substantial.
Three of the ponds were sampled only once in the winter  and  two
of the ponds were sampled only once in the summer.  Only one pond
was  sampled  more than once and the data were rather incomplete.
For these reasons, it was determined that  a  more  comprehensive
study  should  be  performed  on log ponds in order that adequate
characterization could result.

Three log ponds were selected for study.  The selection was based
on the size and physical characteristics of the  ponds,  and  the
fact  that  previous  data had been collected on these particular
ponds.  Log Pond 01 (Figure 23) was chosen because  there  is  no
mill  or plant on its shores or discharging into it.  Log Pond 02

-------
o
or
                            TO LOG

                            POND-02
                                                 LOG   LOAOIN
                                                                                                                  X  -  PROFILE SAMPLING POINTS


                                                                                                                  [7) -  SURFACE SAMPLING POINTS
                                                                   FIGURE  23   LOG POND 01

-------
o
                     LOG
                     DUMP
                   POND INF-

                  PLANT EFP
                                                                                                                                               INFLUENT

                                                                                                                                              (SUBMERGED)
                                                                                                               X  - PROFILE SAMPLING POINTS


                                                                                                               X) - SURFACE SAMPLING POINTS
                                                                  FIGURE  24   LOG POND  02

-------
                                                                                                                            EFFLUENT
                                                                                                                            WEIR
O
                                                        DUMPING
                                                        AREA,
                                            PARTIALLY
                                          SUBMERGED
                                          LOG DECK
                                           POND
                                         MFLUENT
                                                  X -  PROFILE SAMPLING POINTS

                                                 3) -  SURFACE SAMPLING POINTS
                                                                 FIGURE 25   LOG  POND 03

-------
                                                                                  TABLE  17
                                                         AVERAGE VALUE  AND  95  PERCENT CONFIDENCE
                                                        INTERVAL FOR  VARIOUS XrawftHg ^  iaf
                                                                               POND   Ul
                   COLOR        TURB.        BOD5       COD         P0
     I.rfluent
     (N = 5)
 	      	      	      	        	       *[_         TS. •          TSS         IH!          TVS         TVSS        TVDS       PHENOLS

11.59+5.58   1.58+1.13   5.98+7.43   13.8+7.44   0.59+0.28  3.75+5.58   46.39+31.88     27+28.89    19.4+6.7    20.60+14.09  11.40+11.74  9.20+10.56   12.32+7.40
      Effluent
      Week 1
      (H - H)
     Effluent
     Week 2
     (N-7)
      Effluent
      Week 3
      {N = 3)
      Effluent
      Total
      (N = 24)
121.35+2.14  3.57+0.43  18.68+3.00   58.95+5.76  1.01+0.25  4.03+2.25  113.5+27.9    32.5+13.3    81.0+23.5   60.57+13.74  15.86+7.44  44.71+9.92    16.18+8.09




122.70+7.90  4.43+1.39  19,04+11.57  57.8+2.5    0.92+0,29  1.91+0.39  151.57i?7.33  33.14+25.47   119.28+_67,50  77.86+18.77  14,28+12.01 64.71+16.91   10.91+7.22




103.66+^24.53  4+4.99    22.13+29.35  56.73i5.77  1.04+0.56  1.91+0.69  77+13.1?     10.6+27.3     66.3+10.1   62.3+23.8     2.60+5.16  59.6+21.13    10.89+5.73




120.38+4.37  3.88+0.SO  19.22+3.52   56,89+.3.46  0.99+0.17  3.15+1.32  120.04+25.78  29.96+9.99    90.33+20.79  65.83+9,43   13.79+5.30  52.42+7.76    13.57+4.73
o
GO

-------
                                                                                  TABLE 19
                                                         AVERAGE  VALUE AND 95 PERCENT  CONFIDENCE
                                                      INTERVAL FOR VARIOUS PARAMETERS FOR  LOG
                                                                             POND   02
                                                                                                     TSS        IDS         TVS         TV5S
                                                                                                                                       TVDS      PHENOLS
  Influent
  (N = 4)
  COLQR__       TURBIDITY      BODs         COD        P04       NT            Ts

135.75+23.96     13+3.91  23.17+3.50  108.92+22.02  1.52+0.57  2.73+0.54   271.5+93.84    58+69.88  188.5+41.3   104.75+40.28  23.25+40.09  81.5+15.24  18.80+31.23
  Effluent     144.5*31.77    8.57+1.12  28.58+9.96   96,21+6.11   1.25+0.43  4.69+2.48  223.43+16.44  36,78+18.25  186+22.27     101.78+11.94  19.5+11.9    82.28+12.98  24.70+12.33
  Week 1
  (N " 14)


  Effluent     138.14+9.20   10.43+1.91  21.34+9.32   86.88+4.18   1.09+0.12  2.59+0.49  269.86+39.49  45.71+48.4  223.86+59.49   107.28+33.38  22.86+25.99  84.43+20.11   9.33+5.91
  Week 2
  (N-7)


  Effluent     115+11.4       7.66+1.46  19.30+6.28   88.43+10.37  1.17+0.39  2.38+0.47  215.33+77.63  31.6?i91.22 183.67+17.47   118.33+92.0   25.33+92.47  89.67+11.23  16.90+12.45
  Week 3                                                                                                                              "                             ~
  (N = 3}


  Effluent     138.96+18.03     g+p.85  25,31+6.14   92.10+5.01   1.19+0.25  3.77+1.43  l!35.58+25.06  38.75+15.93  196.75+20.01  105.45+11.40  21.21+10.10  83.83+8,63   ig.QO+7.42
  Total                                                                                                                                                         '   ~
  (N =24)
o
CO

-------
                                           TABLE  19
                        AVERAGE VALUE AND 95  PERCENT CONFIDENCE
                   INTERVAL  FOR VARIOUS PARAMETERS FOR  LOG POND  03
COLOR
TURB.
                        COD
                                 PO,
                                               TS
                                                        TSS
                                                                TDS
                                                                          TVS
                                                                                   TVSS
                                                                                           TVDS
                                                                                          PHENOLS
Inf'usr.t
(N •= 3)
Effluent,
Week 1
(M - K)
Effluent
K;ok 2
(X -7)
Effluent
Week 3
(N - 3}
Effluent
Total
3.33+ 7.19
-3.36- 10.52
357.71+ 72.30
285.41-430.01
344.57+ 9.23
335.34-353.fiO
321.0 + 58.52
2S2. 48-379. 52
357.62+ 35.69
321.93-393.31
0. 29*0.43
-0.143). 72
5.00+0.78
4.22^5.78
5.57+0.73
4.8'',~6.30
4.33+3.79
0.54^8.12
5.09+35.69
4.57~5.61
9.27+18.42
-9.15-27.69
33.01+ 7.95
25.06-40.96
35.53+35.07
0.46-70.60
22.10+ 6.88
15.22-28.98
32.37+ 9.46
22.91-4.83
7.73+ 8.99
-1.26^16.72
134.43+ 3.54
130.89^137.97
127.74+ 24.8C
102.90^152.58
126.20+ 31.11
95.09^157.31
133.40+ 6.46
126.94^139.86
0.54+0.69
-0.15^.23
1.66+0.43
1.23~2.09
1.22+0.39
0.83^1.61
1.82+0.65
1.17^.47
1.55+0.27
1.28^1.82
t
1.49+0.52
0.97-2.01
5.64+2.66
2.98"8.30
3.04+0.20
2.84"3.24
2.81*0.04
2.77~2.85
4.50+1.57
2.93"6.07
33.33+ 31.28
2.05- 64.61
149.14+ 24.13
125.01^173.27
143.86+ 31.96
111.90^175.82
130.33+ 27.97
102.36^158.30
145.29+ 15.50
129.79^160.79
14.33+34.85
-20.52-49.18
38.36+22.77
15.59-61.13
39.00+39.25
- 0.25-78.25
24.00+46.09
-22.09^70.09
36.75+15.81
20.94-52.55
19.00+ 13-17
5.83- 32,17
112.21+ 11.08
101.13^123.29
104.86+ 18.65
86.21-123.51
106.33+ 20.27
86.06^126.6
109.33+ 7.70
101.63^117.03
19.67+ 14.85
4.82- 34.52
105.14+ 14.75
90.39^119.89
109.43+ 12.28
97.15-121.71
106.33+ 41.05
65.28^147.38
106.54+ 8.88
97.66^15.42
7.33+22.98
-15.65-30.31
27.14+14.80
12.34-41.94
24.00+21.00
3.00-45.00
16.33+41.78
-23.45-60.11
25.13+ 9.81
15.32-34.94
12.67+ 15.02
-2.35- 27.69
78.00+ 13.02
64. 98r 91.02
85.43+ 16.71
68.72-102.14
88.00+ 2.50
85.50- 90.50
81.42+ 8.34
73.08" 89. 76
9.89+ 9.78
0.11^19.67
37.48+19.25
•18.23-56.73
8.43+ 5.49
2.94^13.92
27.07+62.82
35.75-89.89
28.55+12.85
15.70~41.40

-------
                 TABLE  20
SURFACE SAMPLE ANALYSES FOR LOG PONDS 01
Sample
Surface No. No.
23
89
±38
Average
2 24
90
139
Average
3 21
91
156
Average
4 22
92
137
Average

pH
6.2
5.9
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.7
5.9
5.8
6.3
5.8
6.4
6.2
6.3
5.7
5.9
6.0
Temp,
°F
17
i 7
I9
1,8
i7
V
23
I9
17
20
30
22
16
i8
22
19

DO
IB
i.4
0.8
1.2
J.6
J.5
i-7
1.6
1.4
2.5
5.9
3.3
1.8
1.9
0.8
1.5

Color
143
119
94
Us
iso
121
198
116
128
124
90
114
131
124
195
117

Turb
5
4
7
5
6
3
6
5
5
5
4
5
8
4
4
5

BODS
14.0
24.5
20.0
19.5
16.0
22.0
17.0
1,8.3
25.5
19.5
18.0
21.0
18.8
3 .5
20.5
23.6

COD
56.6
53.2
59.4
56.4
63.8
57.4
55.4
58.9
52.5
54.6
57.4
54.8
68-7

65.3
65.1

P04
(M9
0.99
1' 1-0"
1.0?
1.26
0.98
1.04
1.09
1.38
0.92
1.3]
1.20
1.30
1.20
1.23
1.24

NT
4.48
1.88
1-92
2.76
4.7i
2.2i
1.76
2.89
3.26
2.03
2.32
2.54
3.96
2.46
2.32
2.91

TS
.85
126
83
98
110
116
73
100
78
23
87
96
83
90
9|
88

TSS
;5
0
28
38
54
35
20
36
6
13
17
12
23,
12
21
19

TDS
70
]6
55
80
56
8]
53
63
72
11.0
70
84
60
78
70
69

TVS
70
70
55
65
72
78
62
71
63
42
67
57
78
64
73
72

TVSS
16
2
1
6
44
34
0
26
3
0
2
5
17
5
3
8

TVDS
54
68
54
59
28
44
62
45
60
32
65
52
61
59
70
63

Phenols
5.0
13.7
19.6
12.8
4.4
14.4
12.9
10.6
12.7

3,2. 3
11. 0
i8.5
I5-6
i8.5
l«-2

-------
                                                            TABLE  21




                                          SURFACE  SAMPLE  ANALYSIS  FOR  LOG  POND  03
ro

Surface No.
1



2



3



4



Sample
No.
31
112
128
Average
35
114
133
Average
33
113
129
Average
36
115
132
Average

JDH_
6.4
6.2
6.2
6.3
6.8
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.8
6.0
6.3
6.4
6.9
6.3
6.1
6.4
Temp
°F
20
24
21
22
19
20
23
21
19
18
18
18
24
22
22
23

DO
2.3
4,0
1.3
2.5
1.8
3.9
1.2
2.3
1.8
1.4
0.9
1.4
3.1
2.0
0.5
1.9

Color
135
119
113
122
124
119
106
116
124
133
107
121
138
131
114
128

Turb
8
7
6
7
7
7
6
7
7
12
12
10
10
11
12
11

BODS
22.0
37.8
18.0
25.9
23.0
44.1
23.7
30.3
23.0
40.1
19.2
27.4
22.4
39.1
21.7
27.7

COD
92.9
79.6
93.1
88.5
95.0
79.5
196.0
123.5
95.0
82.3
95.0
90.8
90.9
82.3
131.5
101.6

P04
0.83
0.88
i.29
1.00
0.91
1.37
1.07
1.12
0.85
1.21
1.29
1.12
1.02
0.91
1.34
1.09

NT
2.72
2.80
2.38
2.63
2.93
2.52
2.06
2.50
2.43
2.32
3.51
2.75
2.20
2.28
2.84
2.44

TS
232
187
203
207
222
188
198
203
222
194
199
205
217
191
212
207

TSS
36
49
13
33
29
65
35
43
29
82
11
41
14
33
19
22

TDS
196
138
190
175
193
123
163
161
193
112
188
164
203
158
193
185

TVS
107
71
140
106
60
64
103
76
60
78
112
83
45
88
99
77

TVSS
22
37
11
23
20
54
5
26
20
51
9
27
8
32
1
14

TVDS
85
34
129
83
40
10
98
49
40
27
103
57
37
56
98
64

Phenols
41.7
11.7
22.9
25.4
28.9
13.3
4.8
15.7
13.9
5.6
30.6
16.7
24.2
9.6
11.9
15.2

-------
                                                               TABLE  22

                                            SURFACE  SAMPLE  ANALYSIS  FOR  LOG  POND  03
CO

Surface No.
l



2



3



4



5



Sample
No.
44
79
.147
Average
48
84
148
Average
45
80
149
Average
46
83
150
Average
47
82
151
Average

pH
5.9
5.9
5.4
5.7
5.9
5.8
5.6
5.8
5.9
5.9
5.5
5.8
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.8
Temp
°F
20
19
23
21
24
19
26
23
26
22
22
23
25
23
25
24
23
20
25
23

DO
1.4
1.3
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.4
2.1
1.9
0.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
0.4
1.1
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.4

Coloi
343
340
342
342
333
365
338
345
348
375
342
355
381
365
324
357
381
375
343
366
                                                                        P04   NT    TS   TSS  TDS  TVS  TVSS  TVDS    Phenols
                                                      5   26.5   135.3   0.99  3.26  150   85
                                                      5   23.5   117.2   1.26  3.14  241  171
                                                      3   23.8   11B.8   1.81  3.40  182   72  110  155
                                                      4   24.6   123.8   1.38  3.27  191  109   82  136
                                                      6    19.5   133.3   0.93  2.43  145   12  133   97
                                                      6    21.5   124.0   0.96  3.41  245 :163   82  135
                                                      2    16.5   118.8   1.86  3.17  162   40  022  142
                                                      5    19.2   125.4   1.25  3.00  184   72  112  125
                                         65   92   30
                                         70  161  121
                                                   60
                                                   70

                                                    7
                                                   62
                                                   21
                                                   30
    28.5
    22.0
    17.0
    22.5

    22.0
    29.0
    17.0
    22.7
7   22.5
6   21.5
2   15.5
5   19.8
135.3
119.2
122.8
225.8

135.2
120.0
122.8
.126.0

127.2
124.0
120.8
124.0
0.92
1.17
1.49
,1,19

0.81
1.44
1.59
1.28

0.92
1.17
1.51
1.20
2.77   96
2.56  16.1
3.07  155
2.80  137

2.72  197
2.86  120
3.37  157
2.98  168

2.58  160
2.46  .151
3.11  155
2.72  155
28   68   56
10  151  126
28  127  133
22  115  105

17  180   77
25  195   99
20  157  108
21  .147  195

10  150  115
53   98   98
58   97  ^21
40  115  111
12
22
 7
14

 2
23
54
26
                                               62
                                               40
                                               95
                                               66

                                               90
                                               73
                                              121
                                               95
                                                                                                          8    48
                                                                                                          7   119
                                                                                                         28   107
                                                                                                         14    91
 65
 77
101
 81

113
 75
 67
 85
                                                31.1
                                                 9.2
                                                17.5
                                                19.3
                                                26
                                                17
11.0
18.4

23.3
 5.2
18.7
15.7

14.4
19.0
19.8
17.7
                                                                                                                       25,
                                                                                                                       18,
                                                                                                                       16,
                                                                                                                       20.0

-------
                                          TABLE  23
                    WINTER DATA FOR LOG PONDS 01,  02, AND  03
Date
Color
01
202 110673
205 110673
208 110773
211 110773
214 110873
218 110973
222 111273
Average Values
02
203 110673
206 110673
209 110773
212 110773
215 110873
219 110973
223 111273
Average Values
03
201 110673
204 110673
207 110773
210 110773
213 110873
217 110973
224 111273
Average Values
Observed Flows:



120
138
138
123
123
109
105
122

136
148
140
143
141
118
121
135

295
319
314
302
296
286
290
300
Pond 01
Pond 02
Pond 03
Turbidity     BODs     COD    PQ4     NT     TS     TSS
                                                                            70S
                                                                         TVS
TVSS
























4.
7.
15.
6
6
5
7
5
4
5
5
12
10
11
14
6
8
10
8
8
16
6
6
5
4
4
7
6 Cu M/Min
1 Cu M/Min
6 Cu M/Min
20.0
13.0
20.0
14.4
20.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
23.0
23.0
23.6
29.4
4.5
8.0
24.0
19.4
17.0
24.0
15.0
26.6
10.0
15.0
20.0
18.2



63.5
61.9
66.6
62.3
61.2
60.0
63.1
62.7
109.0
103.9
113.7
105.8
91.3
102.7
110.5
105.7
110.9
107.8
109.8
109.4
•109.8
107.4
109.1
109.2



1.6
3.5
2.9
3.2
1.1
0.9
2.0
2.2
1.2
3.0
2.5
1.4
1.3
0.7
1.4
1.6
4.8
4.8
3.8
6.0
2.1
1.8
4.0
4.5



i
1.83
1.80
1.68
2.53
2.54
0.79
1.09 •
1.75
2.18
1.96
2.46
3.68
1.88
1.32
1.57
2.15
4.10
2.73
2.58
2.88
2.98
1.69
1.30
2.61



90
97
63
96
135
76
63
89
225
231
202
235
168
215
201
211
120
138
93
140
136
113
95
119



45
35
8
13
35
4
5
21
62
28
18
68
10
32
19
34
47
50
1
26
42
19
5
27



45
62
55
83
100
72
58
68
163
203
184
167
158
183
182
177
73
88
92
114
94
94
90
92



78
76
60
59
75
54
25
61
115
116
86
102
98
79
88
98
83
100
90
90
89
. 88
72
87



TVDS
38
• 24
8
2
31
0
4
15
52
12
0
50
8
6
12
20
33
40
0
7
18
12
1
\;
40
52
52
57
44
54
21
46
63
103
86
52
90
73
76
78
• 50
60
90
83
71
76
71
76
Phenols
                                                                                                             '  0
                                                                                                               0
                                                                                                               0
                                                                                                           139.4
                                                                                                            42.3
                                                                                                            20.5
                                                                                                            22.4
                                                                                                            32.1
                                                                                                             6.9
                                                                                                             2.3
                                                                                                               0
                                                                                                            50
                                                                                                            32.
                                                                                                            31.8
                                                                                                            13.7
                                                                                                            19.6
                                                                                                             1.7
                                                                                                             2;0
                                                                                                               0
                                                                                                            87.3
                                                                                                            56.1
                                                                                                            35.2
                                                                                                            16.0.
                                                                                                            28.0

-------
                                                                                         TABLE 24
                                                               DIURNAL  S1UDY ON LOG  PONDS   01 AND 02
cn
   Pord     Location  Ph   TenilL. DO,
01 Pond-AH   Surface   5.8  16°    .9
          '  Middle    5.8  16°    .7
            Bottom    5.8  15°    .5
01 Pcnd-PM   Surface   6.0  17°   1.7
            Middle    5.9  16°   1.5
            Bottom    5.9  15°   1.3
02 Pond-AM   Surface   6.1  17°   1.0
            Middle    6.0  17°    .7
            Gotten    6.0  17°    .6
02 Pond-PM   Surface   6.2  23°   1.9
            Middle    6.0  17°   1.0
            Bottom    6.0  17°  .  .7
117
119
119
133
126
126
114

126
124
131
131
 5
 7
 6
 6
 6
 9
 5
10
 9-
      COD  poa   NT
27.5  51.5   2.05  1.91
23.4  51.5   1.80  2.17
24.5  53.4   1.17  2.30
25.0  54.9    .91  2.14
16.6  54.9   1.09  1,54
22.0  54-.1   1.02  1.74
23.0  S7.1   1.20  2.46
29.5  92.1   1.06  2.37
27.0  84.3   1.11  2.37
29.0  85.4   1.00  2.21
26.0  98.0   1.13  2.43
31.0  86.2   1.23  1,66
                                                                                                                                       Total      Total
                                                                                                        Total      Total     Total      Volatile   Volatile           Depth
                                                                                              Total   Suspended  Dissolved  Volatile   Suspended  Dissolved  Phenols  Sampling
Solids
75
85
65
90
75
83
186
186
183
198
316
248
Solids
9
13
3
28
3
23
. 16
9
2
15
141
93
Solids
66
72
62
62
67
60
170
177
181
183 •
175
155
Solids
56
77
49
82
67
51
96
79
90
79
121
98
Solids
0
2
0
25
0
12
7
2
2
10
28
36
Solids
56
75
49
57
67
39
89
77
88
69
93
62
mg/1
6.0
2.3
2.3
41.7
13.3
92.5
4.6
2.3
3.7
20.0
15.4
6.2
Point
-
1.7m
-
-
-
-
-
-
2.3m
-
-
_

-------
                                                        TABLE  25


                                       DATA  FROM  LOG  PONDS  IN  THE  WASHINGTON
                                            OREGON,  IDAHO  AREA  LOG  PONDS


                                                                                                              Area
    Pond  PH    Temp.   Color  Turbidity  BODS    COD    P04    NT    TS_  I$S  TDS.  TVS   TVSS   TVDS   Phenols   (Hectares)

     71   -      -       29      0        7.5    29.7    .90   .87   67    0   67   38     1     38     0.0        70

     19   -      -      276     26         -    233.2  11.18  7.12  446   53  393  163     0    163    39.3         6

M   72   -      -       21      5       21.5    13.7   2.00  3.98   95    8   87   20     0     20     0.0        22

CO   69  6.15   75°F    350    140       14.0   107.0   2.20  0.60   -   24   -          -     -     0.01       93

     01   -      -      109      2       13.2    43.1    .40  3.15  112    3   71   45    43     43      -         49.9

     02                 138      9       25.3    92,1   1.19  3.77  236   39  196  105    21     84      -         52.2

     03   -      -      354      5       23.1   125.7   1.01  3.01   74   22   90   87    18     69      -         48.9

-------
AVERAGE DEPTH - 1.51 METERS
VOLUHE • 303.97 MILLION LITERS
(ALL DEPTHS SHOWN IN METERS)
           FIGURE  26   BOTTOM  CONTOURS  FOR  LOG  POND 01

-------
oo
                                                                                           .5   /  1.8        t.6        1.8       I.8
                                                                                           .8   /   2.1        2-3       2-3

                                                                                          2.3       2.3  /   2.4       2.4 \     2.3
                                                                                                    2.S       2.3       2.3       2.1   /   1-8
                           AVERAGE DEPTH - 2.03 METERS
                           VOLUME - 428.12 MILLION LITERS
                           (ALL DEPTHS SHOWN IN METERS)
                                                        FIGURE 27   BOTTOM CONTOURS  FOR LOG  POND 02

-------

-------
                 18     24     3O    35    40     45    47    52    57
    2.0
                      TEMPERATURE
            12     W    24    SO     35    4O    45    47     62     57
                             PH
       «     12    IB     24    3O    35     4O    45     47     52    57
                  DISSOLVED OXYGEN
FIGURE 29  TEMPERATURE, pH, AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES FOR LOG  POND  01
                            120

-------
                  M    20    26    31     36    41
                       TEMPERATURE
            8     14
    STATION  NUMBERS



20 	 26    31     36
                                             41
                                                        4fl _ S3_
   u 1.5
             8     M  __ 20    26     31    36    41
                   DISSOLVED  OXYGEN



FIGURE 30  TEMPERATURE, pH, AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES FOR LOG POND 01
                             121

-------
                 5    9    15    21    27   33   39   45
                     TEMPERATURE
                                                            67
        12     R    9    15   ,21    27    33    M   46
                                              39   49   51     67
                   DISSOLVED  OXYGEN
FIGURE  31  TEMPERATURE, pH,  AND  DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES FOR LOG POND 02
                           122

-------
                     STATION  NUMBERS





     7     ft     17    23    29     55    41     47    83
                   TEMPERATURE
           II     17
                    STATION  NUMBERS




                      23    29    35
                    STATION NUM BERS





           II     17    23    29     36
                                                         59
                                       41     47     53      59
                                       41     47     53     59
                DISSOLVED OXYGEN
FIGURE 32  TEMPERATURE, pH, AND DISSOLVED OXYGEN  PROFILES  FOR LOG POND 02
                              123

-------
                         STATION  NUMBERS
                        13    17	24  	32
40    47
                     TEMPERATURE
                         STATION NUMBERS

                       J3__	 17	24	K-
 4O     47
             53
                         STATION  NUMBERS

             S     9     !3     IT    24    32    4O    47     53
                DISSOLVED OXYGEN
FIGURE 33  TEMPERATURE, pH, AND  DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES FOR LOG POND 03
                              12k

-------
                                 STATION NUMBERS
                   7    II     15     2£     30    36    45	 51
           z.o
                             TEMPERATURE
                                  STATION NUMBERS
                         II  	15     22	_30     38    4S     51
           2.0
                                    PH
                              15     22    30    38    45    SI
           2.0
                         DISSOLVED  OXYGEN
FIGURE 34  TEMPERATURE,  pH, AND  DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES FOR LOG POND 03
                            125

-------
 (Figure 24) was selected because of the low amount of activity on
the pond  (even though the log loading on the pond  is  high)  and
also  because  the  primary  influent to the pond is the effluent
from  Pond  01  which  already   contains   a   moderately   high
concentration  of pollutants.  Log Pond 03 (Figure 25)  was chosen
because there was a high amount of activity on  one  end  of  the
pond  and  the  pond  is a non-overflowing pond during the summer
months.  In addition to these reasons, the ponds were in adequate
geographical proximity that all three could  be  sampled  in  the
same day and direct comparison of the data was possible.

The  three  ponds  were sampled for three weeks during the summer
and for five days at the beginning of winter.  Fourteen  effluent
samples  were  collected  during  the first week of sampling from
each of the ponds, seven during the second week, and three during
the third week.  Three to five influent  samples  were  collected
during  the  same period.  Four or five surface sample sites over
the area of the pond were selected, and one sample from  each  of
these sites was collected each week.  These samples were analyzed
for   12   selected   parameters   in   addition   to  the  field
determinations of pH, Dissolved Oxygen  (D.O.)   and  temperature.
The influent and effluent data summary for the ponds is presented
in  Tables  17  through 19.  The average value and the 95 percent
confidence range for each of the parameters is presented for  the
influent  and  also  for  the effluent for each week and totally.
The number of  samples  comprising  the  data  involved  in  that
sampling  period is also indicated.  The surface sample locations
are indicated in Figures 23 through 25 and the corresponding data
for the locations is shown in Tables 20  through  22.   The  data
from the winter sampling are shown in Table 23.

Sampling  sites  were  established  every  200  ft on each of the
ponds.  At these sites, the  depth  was  recorded,  and  the  pH,
temperatures,  and  D.O. were measured at various depths.  Bottom
contours for the ponds were established and are shown in  Figures
26,  27,  and  28.   Temperature,  pH,  and D.O. profiles for the
various lines through  the  pond  are  presented  in  Figures  29
through  34.   In  addition, a diurnal study was conducted on Log
Pond 01 and also on Log  Pond  02.   The  data  for  the  diurnal
studies are shown in Table 24.

Samples  were  collected  from  several  other  ponds  in Oregon,
Washington, and Idaho.  These samples were analyzed and the  data
are presented in Table 25.

The three log ponds were studied in the detail described above in
order   to   determine  if  the  concentrations  of  the  various
parameters in the effluents were varying with time  and  also  to
determine  if  the  concentrations  varied spatially in the pond.
The data reported in Tables 17 through  19  are  the  95  percent
confidence  range  of  values  for the various parameters for the
influent and effluent by week and  also  the  effluents  for  all
three  weeks  of  study.   These data indicate that the log ponds
studied were at steady state with  respect  to  concentration  of
pollutants  in  the  effluent stream.  The influent data were not
                                  126

-------
                                   TABLE 26
               DATA CORRELATIONS FOR IBG PONDS (01,  02 AND 03)
Independent   Dependent   Correlation
 Variable     Variable    Coefficient    Slope   Intercept

01 Pond
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
BODS
P04t
Turbidity
Color
Nt
BO~D5
P04t
TS~
Nt
Nt
-0.217
-0.055
-0.088
-0.501
0.424
-0.409
-0.304
0.060
-0.0317
-0.070
-0.007
-0.443
0.019
-3.056
-0.019
0.094
5.677
124.358
2.408
45.561
-0.099
293.928
2.407
1.936
56.892
56.892
55.857
54.854
56.892
56.892
19.367
1.049
3,875
120.375
2.035
21.254
0.987
120.042
2.035
2.035
24
24
21
24
24
24
21
21
02 Pond
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
BODS
P04t
Turbidity
Color
Nt
BO~D5
P04t
TS~~
Nt
Nt
-0.098
-0.521
-0.340
0.455
0.385
-0.305
0.009
-0,037
-0.2i
-2.345
-0.021
0.690
0.023
-1.838
0.001
-0,037
10.970
356.295
4.433
-39.366
-0.977
404.885
2.531
2.541
92.521
92.521
91.733
92.521
92.521
92.104
22.786
1.275
139.375
139.375
2.544
24.474
1.192
235.583
2.544
2.544
24
24
21
24
24
24
21
21
03 Pond
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
BOD5
P04T
Turbidity
Color
Nt
BO~D5
P04t
TS~~
Nt
Nt
-0.265
-0.070
0.028
-0.074
-0.018
-0.070
-0.038
0.160
-0.019
-0.252
0.003
-0.107
-0.001
-0.168
-0.003
0.427
7.586
377.318
2.907
46.448
1.649
168.172
3.377
2.579
13L.456
13L.456
131.276
13L.450
13L.450
13L.450
33.457
1.653
5.043
344.174
3.285
32.379
1.552
146.083
3.285
3.285
23
23
21
24
24
24
21
21
                             127

-------
              TABLE 27
RELATIONSHIP OF THE VARIOUS PARAMETERS
  TO COD FOR LOG PONDS 01, 02, and 03
Ratio
Color/COD
Turbidity/COD
BOD/COD
P04/COD
NT/COD
TS/COD
TSS/COD
01
2.116
0.068
0.338
0.017
0.055
2.110
0.527
02
1.509
0.098
0.275
0,013
0.041
2.558
0.421
03
2.681
0.038
0.243
0.012
0.034
1.089
0.275
Average Ratio
2. 02
0.068
0.285
0.014
0.043
1.919
0.408
                       128

-------
quite as reliably steady as illustrated by  the  large  range  of
values.   The areal data on the ponds indicate that not only were
the effluent concentrations steady with time, but also  that  the
effluent   concentrations   of   a   parameters   represents  the
concentration  of  that  parameters  throughout  the  pond.   The
various  points  in  the  ponds  were  chosen  for areal sampling
because it was anticipated that these  would  represent  sluggish
areas  in  the  pond and perhaps contain higher concentrations of
pollutants.  Because that did not occur, it would appear that the
ponds are well mixed with respect to their detention time.

The results of data correlations for the three ponds are shown in
Table 26.  As indicated by the correlation coefficients in  Table
26,  poor  correlation  of  the  data  was  observed  between all
parameters studied, indicating that the data varied in  a  random
fashion.   The  randomness of the data in this case does not mean
that the variations of the parameters are not related, but rather
that the  parameters  are  varying  insufficiently  to  cause  an
observable  trend.  The ratios between the various parameters for
the three ponds are shown in Table 27.  It can be seen  that  the
ratios  of  BOD,  PO<*,  and  Nt to COD seem to be decreasing when
progressing from Log Pond 01 to Log Pond 02 to Log Pond 03.  This
seems reasonable when considering that the age of the  pollutants
increases in the same order.  However, the difference between the
ponds  is  such  that  the  average  ratio will be an approximate
representation of log ponds for all detention times.

It is recognized that a comprehensive description of the effluent
from a log pond must include the following factors:

    1.  Type of logs in the pond;
    2.  Number of logs in the pond;
    3.  Age of the logs;
    4,  Detention time of the logs;
    5.  Size of the pond;
    6.  Hydraulic detention time; and
    7.  Quality of water entering the pond.

All of the above listed parameters, with  the  exception  of  the
type of log and the age of the logs were taken into account in an
attempt  to  model  the effluent from the log pond.  The log pond
was considered to be a "continuous  feed  stirred  tank  reactor"
(CFSTR)  with  the  logs acting as the feed of pollutants and the
influent water acting as both the  feed  of  pollutants  and  the
water  feed.   The  use  of  this  model  was  justified  by  the
uniformity of the log  pond  effluent  with  time  and  also  the
uniformity  of  the log pond water from point to point within the
pond.  The leaching rate of pollutants was assumed to be a  first
order  reaction  up  to a maximum level that was dependent on the
volume of the pond and the number  of  logs  in  the  pond.   The
maximum  concentration  was  determined  from Log Pond 03 and Log
Pond 09 which are norflow ponds  during  the  summer.   The  five
first  order  leaching constants for the various ponds calculated
from the model varied from 0.00121 to  0.00308  with  an  average
                                129

-------
value  of  0.00205.   The  equation  for  predicting the effluent
concentration using t£e model is:
              Co.* kKt  L
     Ceffl. =   1 + k
                        t
     Where:

    Ceffl = effluent COD concentration (mg/1)

    Co    = influent COD concentration (mg/1)

    k     = first order rate constant (davs-1)
    t     = hydraulic detention time of the pond (days)

    L     = quantity of logs on the pond (cu m)

    V     = pond volume (liters)

    K     = constant to account for maximum COD concentration =
            Cu V/L

          Where :

          Cu = ultimate COD concentration in the non-
                flowing pond (mg/1)

           K  = 2957.3 X 10«   mq
                              cu m

When this equation was used to predict the concentration  of  the
five  ponds,  and  then  the  predicted  value  compared with the
observed value of the effluent concentrations,  the  data  agreed
well as indicated by a correlation coefficient of 0.953.

Using  the  data  collected  in this study and the model used for
relating that data to the various  physical  parameters,  it  was
possible  to  approximate  the  character of the effluent streams
from log ponds for  different  physical  characteristics.   These
data  are  listed  in Table 28.  It can be shown that despite the
concentration of the effluent from Pond A being  less  than  that
from  Pond  Br  the total amount of materials removed from Pond A
per day is significantly higher than that removed  from  Pond  B.
In a similar fashion, even though the concentration of pollutants
in  the  water  in Pond E is highest of the five ponds, the total
pounds per day of pollutants from Pond E is zero because the flow
is zero.  In addition, the greater depth of Pond D over  Pond  C,
all else being constant, yields lower effluent concentrations and
total  pounds  of  pollutants.   These  observations  lead to the
conclusion that minimum pollutant release would be obtained by no
flow, or if the flow must be allowed, it should be minimized  and
the pond depth made as great as possible.
                                130

-------
               TABLE 28
TYPICAL WAS1E STREAMS FROM LOG PONDS
Parameter
Hydraulic Flow (Cu M/Day)
Log Loading (Thousand Cubic
Meters)
Area (Hectares)
Depth (Meters)
Initial Concentration, C0_
Calculated Parameters
Pond Volume (Million Liters)
Detention Time (Days)
COD (mg/1)
Color (Color Units)
NT (mg/1)
P04T(mg/1)
BOD5, (mg/1)
Turbidity (JTU)
TS (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
Log Pond A
38,000
19

20
1.5
0

308.33
8.146
3.0
6.3
0.13
0.04
0.8
0.2
5.8
1.2
Log Pond B
3,800
19

20
1.5
0

308.33
81.46
26.1
54.8
1.-12
0.37
7.4
1.7
50.1
10.6
Log Pond C
3,800
37

20
1.5
0

308.33
81.46
52.3
109.8
2.25
0.73
14.9
3.5
100.4
21.3
Log Pond D
3,800
37

20
3.0
0

6 6.73
162.94
45.7
96.0
1.97
0.64
13.0
3.1
87.7
18.6
Loq Pond E
0
37

20
3.0
0

616.73
00
179.5
377.0
7.72
2.51
51.2
12.2
344.5
73.2

-------
The Model Log Pond

The  representative  log  pond  is located in the Northwest.  The
pond is constructed from a field about 20 ha (50 ac) in size that
is fairly flat.  Retaining walls for the log pond are  formed  by
dozing  the  soil  from  the center of the field to the edge.  An
effluent structure, usually of concrete, is installed such that a
water depth of 1.5 to 3.0 m (5 to 10 ft) is maintained throughout
the pond.  The pond may receive  surface  water  runoff  from  an
adjacent  area,  or  it  may  be  completely  isolated  from  all
precipitation except that falling directly on the pond.  In  some
cases,  the  pond  is  fed  from  springs, irrigation ditches, or
rivers.  Most log ponds require the addition of water during  the
dry season.

The  logs  are  dumped  from  a  truck or train into the pond and
floated to a temporary storage area.  The logs  are  then  sorted
with  small  boats  called  mules.   The  logs may be bundled for
storage, stored loose, or moved directly to the mill feed area of
the pond, if one exists.  The logs may be stored in the pond  for
a year or more, but generally they are stored only long enough to
insure  an  adequate  supply  for the mill during the season when
timber harvesting is difficult.

The model log  pond  us ed  for  consideration  in  the  following
sections would have characterises similar to those shown for Log
Pond  C  in  Table 28.  The characteristics of the effluent would
also be the same as that for Log Pond C.

STORAGE OF LOGS ON LAND (WET PECKING)

The sprinkling of logs stored on land occurs in all areas of  the
U.S.   The  purpose  of sprinkling is to prevent deterioration of
the wood during the storage period between harvesting and further
processing at the  facility.   Some  species  of  wood  are  more
susceptible  to  deterioration  during  this  storage period than
others.  Realistically, it is only necessary to keep the logs wet
during dry  periods.   In  general,  however,  industry  practice
appears to be that, if the facility practices sprinkling of logs,
the  system continues to operate during periods of precipitation.
The volume of water applied and/or the number  of  spray  nozzles
may or may not be adjusted depending on the volume of the logs in
storage at any given time.

Most  decks  are  sprinkled with the "rainbird" type of sprinkler
which allows about 0.2 Ips  (3.2 gpm) of water to  flow  from  the
nozzle.   The  number of rainbirds used on a particular land deck
does not appear to be related to the size or shape of  the  deck,
but rather to the opinion of the manager of the operation.  Flows
from  as  low as 5UO 1 per second per million cu m  (20 gpm per mm
b.f.) to as high as 6,750 Ips per  million  cu  m   (250  gpm  per
million b.f.) have been observed.

In  some  cases,  mist type spray nozzles are used for sprinkling
land decks.  The flow from these  nozzles  is  considerably  less
                               132

-------
than   from   rainbird  type  sprinklers.   The  water  used  for
sprinkling the deck is usually relatively clean ground  or  river
water.   In the arid areas of Oregon and Washington, the water is
usually applied in a single use operation,  in  which  the  water
passes  over  the  deck  and  then  flows off the property to the
nearest drainage area.  The pollutants present in this runoff are
primarily leached materials from the logs.

The recycling of wet deck water is practiced  in  the  South  and
Southeast  and, to a limited extent, in the West.  The water lost
by evaporation in the recycled wet deck is  usually  replaced  by
water  from a convenient fresh water source.  The runoff from the
wet deck during the rainy season is usually allowed  to  overflow
the small recycle pond.

The  characterization  of  the  runoff  from  a wet deck has been
attempted and reported  in  the  literature  in  only  one  case.
Schaumburg  reports  the  measurement  of the BOD of the leachate
from a large wet deck to be 19 mg/1.  It can  be  estimated  that
the  deck  contained  about 8.7 x 103 cu m  (3.7 million bd ft) of
logs and the flow rate of water over these logs was  measured  as
1,610  cu  m  per  day  (0.426  mgd).   In  addition  to  this, a
laboratory setup was constructed in which the wet deck runoff was
recycled.  It was found that most  of  the  pollutant  parameters
increased in concentration up to about 100 hours of operation and
then  assumed  a  fairly  constant value after that time.  It was
also found that Douglas fir  logs  yielded  significantly  higher
pollutant levels than Ponderosa pine logs.  This was the opposite
of that observed for logs submerged in water.

The  data  in  the  literature  were  found  to  be inadequate to
properly characterize the waste water generated by  wet  decking.
For  this reason, eight wet decking operations in the Washington-
Oregon area and six in the South and Southeast were studied.  The
data collected from this sampling program are listed in Table 29.
The first eight samples are from the West coast and the last  six
are from the Southeast and South.

Seven  of the eight West coast wet decks sampled did not recycle.
Using COD as a measure of the pollution of the water from the wet
deck, it was possible to find satisfactory relationships  between
the COD, the volume of logs in the deck, and the flow rate of the
water  over  the deck.  A simple curve fitting technique was used
to obtain a relationship of the form:

    COD = 131.3 X 10*  (L/Q) + 42.33

    Where:

    L = volume of logs in the deck  (cu m)
    Q = flow rate of water over the deck  (I/sec)

The relationship between the observed COD in the runoff from  the
seven non recycled wet decks and the calculated L/Q was such that
a  correlation  coefficient between the other parameters measured
                                 133

-------
CO
                                                                        TABLE 29A                              —
                                               CHARACTERISTICS OF  EFFLUEOT FRCM WET DECKING OPERATIONS
                                                                                                        Total     Total
                                                                            Total      Total     Total     Volatile    Volatile
Plant
75
75
75
44
44
29
73
72
76
76
77
78
79
80
PH
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
6.25
6.02
6.9S
7.84
7.S2
7.2
Reeyclg
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Ho
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Color
57
29
53
153
104
99
34
127
400
400
100
300
-
-
Turbidity
6
0.7
6
0.9
1.9
53
10
5
10
2.5
17.0
2.5
3.2
-
BjO..^
52.1
11.0
38.4
14.2
17,6
27
-
17.0
21.0*
3,0*
- *
„ *
. *
191
C.O.D.
67.0
56.6
45.5
133.3
107.8
98
54.9
78.4
212
115
16.8
82.8
40.5
358
0.73
1.15
.45
.62
.43
4,10
1.12
2.89
0.63
0.31
.13
0.31
,16
7.0
*t
1.69
0.80
0,59
2.24
.81
1.36
1.50
.76
2.63
1.90
1.23
0.88
.32
1.0
Total
Sol Ids
105
76
91
440
101
347
170
208
310
201
98
292
232
826
Suspended
Solids
18
4
36
a
28
50
85
63
122
46
19
20
27
23
Dissolved
Solids
87
72
55
432
73
297
85
145
188
155
79
272
205
806
Volatile
Solids
77
57
33
99
95
no
67
100
166
102
41
133
98
246
Suspended
Solids
17
7
8
0
1
91
44
30
-
-
-
-
-
12
Dissolved
Solids
60
50
25
99
94
19
23
70
-
-
-
-
-
234
Phenols
fag/ 11
44.4
82,6
52.8
61.1
37.1
26.7
170.8
97.9
27
6
<5
<5
0.15
20 .
Inventory
6.9
1.15
1.725
3.68
2.07
25.3
1.15
46
.46
.69
.23
1.61
.345
1.219
Flow
(I/sec)
32.9
7.7
12.6
3.7
4.3
20.1
7.3
113.6
1.8
3.2
-
11.2
1.2
.6
. Q./L** L/Q**
174
244
267
32
76
29
232
90 -
145 .00700
167 .00600
-
253 .00395
129
18 .05521
COO
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
212
115
.
82.
358
     Apparent toxicity of samples

     **Q/L • flow/Inventory

      L/Q • Inventory/flow

-------
                          TABLE 29 B
        E&TA CORRELATION FOR WEST COAST WET DECKING
Independent
Variable
COD
COD
COD
COD
COD
P0£
BOD
COD
Dependent
Variable
NT
Color
P04.
TS
Turb.
NT
NT
BOD
r*
0.522
0.878
-0.173
0.74,1
-0.882
-0.239
0.230
-0.5]4
m
0.010
1.317
-0.004
2.974
-0.085
-0.2.15
0.006
-0.402
b
0.414
-22 .707
1 .271
-60.774
11-854
1.41D
1.004
63.855
*r - correlation coefficient
                                   135

-------
and COD could be determined.  As can be seen from Table 29A.  COD
correlated well with color and total solids, but  not  turbidity.
However,  the  correlation  of  COD  with  the  nutrients and the
nutrients  with  themselves  was  very   poor.    The   phosphate
concentrations  from the wet deck appears to be about 1.0 mg/1 or
less, whereas the nitrogen concentration  appears  to  be  rather
erratic.  The BOD/COD ratio for the wet decking varied from a low
of  0.10  to  a  high  of 0.84.  The higher value was higher than
observed for any other data  in  the  raw  material  storage  and
handling.  The high variation in this ratio accounts for the poor
correlation between BOD and COD.

The   above   equation   was   used  to  calculate  the  expected
concentration of COD from the log deck reported by Schaumburg and
a value of 87 mg/1 was obtained.  If the BOD/COD ratio were  0.25
(an  average  value  for  wet decking) , the BOD for this wet deck
would be  about  22  mg/1.   This  compares  favorably  with  the
reported BOD concentration of 19 mg/1.

The southern wet decks with recycle fit the form of the equation,
but the constants are different.  The equation for characterizing
southern wet decks with recycle isi
COD = 168.9 X 10* (L/Q)
                              109.8
The  fit  between  the observed COD and the calculated parameters
L/Q  was  such  that  a  correlation  coefficient  of  0.915  was
obtained.

The  one  observation of southern wet decking without recycle did
not fit either equation.  In addition, the western wet deck  with
recycle did not fit either equation.

The  concentration of pollutants in a wet decking water system is
a function of the number of logs in  the  deck,  the  species  of
logs,  the  flow  rate  of water being sprayed over the deck, and
whether or not the wet deck water is  recycled.   If  the  runoff
from the wet deck is recycled, the concentration of pollutants is
generally  higher,  but  these pollutants are not discharged from
the system unless rain water causes  overflow  from  the  recycle
pond.

The Model Plant

Using  the  equation derived in this study and "typical" wet deck
characteristics, it is possible to generate the effluent  quality
for  a  wet  deck  with  recycle  and one without recycle.  These
"typical" effluents are shown in Table 30 .

The hydraulic flow and  the  number  of  logs  in  the  deck  are
considered  to  be typical values based on field operations.  The
concentrations of pollutants in Table 30 are not inclusive of all
the concentrations to be expected, but may be  considered  to  be
representative of a typical wet decking operation.
                                136

-------
                               TABLE 30
             TYPICAL WASTE STREAM FRCM WET DECKING OPERATIONS
Parameter
Hydraulic flow, I/sec.
Logs in deck, cu.m.
Type of Discharge
Area required, hectares
       Western
Wet Deck, No Recycle
         9.5
        3500
     Continuous
        1.52
Calculated or Estimated Parameters
COD, mg/1                             77.7
BOD, mg/1                               20
Color (color units)                     80
fft, mg/1    -                           1.2
PP04., mg/1                             0:7
Total Solids, mg/1                   Variable
Total Suspended                         50
 Solids, mg/1
      Southern
Wet Deck, With Recycle
         9.5
        3500
 Intermittent* or None
        1.52**
                                   155
                                    38
                                    50
                                   1.3
                                   0.5
                                 Buildup
                                    00
Intermittent flow occurs whenever rain is enough to exceed  the  unused
 volume of the sedimentation basin
**Will require additional area for recycle pond
                              137

-------
STORAGE OF LOGS ON LftND (DRY DECKING)

Since  no water is used in the dry storage of logs, no studies in
regard to the  generation  of  pollutants  have  been  conducted.
Realistically,  however, it must be considered that a significant
polluted stream might be produced by storm runoff from dry decks.

Some  differences  between  wet  decks  and  dry   decks   during
precipitation periods can be expected.  One primary difference is
that  the  runoff  from  an  established  wet  deck  tends  to be
channelized, i.e., has eroded definite patterns of flow,  and  to
be  essentially  free of soil particles.  The storm runoff from a
dry deck, on the other hand, tends  not  to  be  channelized  and
usually  contains considerable concentrations of suspended solids
contributed by the soil.  In this respect, a new wet deck can  be
more  comparable  to a dry deck.  This effect was observed in the
effluent from one wet decking operation which even after 24 hours
from  spray   initiation   still   contained   significant   soil
contamination.

It  was  felt  early  in  the  study  that  despite  the  lack of
information concerning dry  decking,  it  might  be  possible  to
establish  a definitive relationship between the effluents of wet
decking and dry decking and thereby characterize the dry  decking
effluent.   In  an attempt to accomplish this, a field (experiment
was conducted.

Fifty-three slash pine logs were placed on supports such that the
logs were maintained at a distance of 46 cm   (18  in)  above  the
ground.   The  5 meter  (16 foot) wide, one and a half meter  (five
foot) high deck contained logs with an average length of  12.3  m
(40.4  ft),  an average butt diameter of 31.55 cm  (12.42 in), and
an average top diameter of 18.44 cm  (7.26  in).   The  butt  ends
were  all  placed  at  one  end of the deck.  Three plastic lined
basins were constructed under the log pile in such a manner as to
collect all water percolating through the decks at each  end  and
in the middle.

The  first period of precipitation amounted to a total of 1.47 cm
(0.58 in) of rain fall and samples were collected from the basins
after the first 1.22 cm (0.48  in)  and  at  the  termination  of
precipitation.   The results of analyses showed little difference
in the two samples, and the values shown in Table 31 are averages
for the two samples.

Twenty days later a second rainfall deposited 1.24 cm   (0.49  in)
of  rain  and  ten days after that a third storm produced 0.89 cm
(0.35 in).  The results of sample analyses are shown in Table 31.

A comparison of the results in Table 31 with those  in  Table  29
shows that the concentrations of pollutants leaching from the dry
deck are markedly higher than any from the wet deck samples.

For  example,  the  COD concentrations for wet deck runoff ranged
from 15 to 150 mg/1 with one sample  concentration 'of  212  mg/1
                                 138

-------
         31
FROM DRY DECK EXPERIMENTS
Total Leachate



h-»>
CO
to


Date
10/31/73
11/1/73
11/19/73

11/28/73
Rainfall
(Inches)
0.42
0.16
0.49

0.35
Collected
(liters)
594
155
534

299

_PH
4.9
4.5
6.0

5.7

Color
362
357
455

409

Turb.
24
29
36

-

BOD5
265
299
211

112

COD
1097
1037
773

594
,
TOC
200
214
141

173

EPA
1.67
1.74
1.49

0.59

NT
0.83
1.61
2.05

0.81

TS
868
974
.

509

TSS
162
164


132

IDS
706
810
482

377

TVS
782
875
398

77

Phenols
206
211
223

83

-------
whereas  the  COD  concentrations  observed  from  the  dry  deck
leachate were generally in the range of 600 to  1200  mg/1.   The
COD  load  contributed  by  the  dry deck for the three rainfalls
amounted to about 1265 grams (2.75 Ib).   In this particular  case
the load was contributed in about one day of rainfall spread over
about  US  days.   The  equivalent  load  from a wet deck with no
recycle would be contributed in about two days.   This  tends  to
indicate that even though the concentrations of the pollutants in
the  leachate  coming  off  the dry deck are high, the total load
contributed by the deck during the actual rain periods  is  about
the same as a wet deck.

This  data  is only for one log pile of one particular species of
wood under fairly similar precipitation and climatic  conditions.
The  difference  in  concentrations  of  the  pollutants  in this
leachate and the wet deck leachate is so great, even  though  the
total load may be similar, that a correlation between wet decking
and dry decking is not felt to be possible at this time.

STORAGE PILES OF FRACTIONALIZED WOOD

Fractionalized  wood  and  wood  products  consisting  of  chips,
sawdust, planer shavings, bark,  etc.,   are  commonly  stored  in
piles  in  the  timber  products  industry.   These piles and the
associated water pollution  are  similar  in  some  respects  and
dissimilar  in  others.  In terms of waste water streams, a prime
consideration must be given to the quantities of  materials  that
can  be expected to be leached from the piles.  There are several
factors which affect leaching rates.  These include:  1) type  or
species  of  wood in the pile, 2)  sizes of particles in the pile,
3)  amount of water generated by the pile, and 4)  age of particles
in the pile.  The effects of species on  leaching  rates  can  be
illustrated by Table 32 which presents the results of analyses of
cold water solubles from the bark and wood of several species.  A
considerable variation of concentrations can be observed.

Particle  size  has  an  effect  on  leaching rate in that larger
particles generally tend  to  have  slower  leaching  rates  than
smaller  particles  because  of  the  smaller  areas  of  surface
exposure.  The relative size of particles in piles is illustrated
graphically in Figure 35 since they are usually greater  than  10
mm in size.

Perhaps the most important parameter in the determinations of the
amount  of  pollutants generated by a pile of fractionalized wood
is the amount of water that passes from the pile.  The water  may
originate  from  one  or  more  of  several  source s.   When  the
particles are blown on to the pile, water may be added to control
dust.  Water may be generated by ground water  seeping  into  the
pile  or  it  may originate from storm runoff flowing through the
pile.  The water may be released from particles because of micro-
bial decomposition.  Most  of  the  .water  from  particle  piles,
however,  originates  from  rain falling directly on the pile and
passing through it.

-------
                                    TABLE 32
                          ANALYSIS OF COLD WATER SOLUBLES IN
                            BARK, WOOD,  AND MOSS PEAT  •
  Species
Western redcedar;
  Untreated
  Extracted

Redwood:
  Untreated
  Extracted

Red alder:
  Untreated
  Extracted

Western Hemlock:
  Untreated
  Extracted

Ponderosa pine:
  Untreated
  Extracted

Sitka spruce:
  Untreated
  Extracted

Douglas fir:
  Untreated
  Extracted
  Sour sawdust

Moss peat:
  Untreated
  Extracted
PH
Bark
3.
4.
3.
4.
4.
5.
4.
4.
3.
3.
4.
6.
3.
3.
"


2
5
2
8
6
0
1
4
8
9
9
4
6
8

3.8
4.4
Water
soluble
Wood Bark Wood
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
4.
4.
4.
4.
6.
3.
3.
2.


5 2.95 6.99
6 -
4 2.35 1.67
6 -
8 11.64 1.43
0 -
0 3.95 3.47
4 -
4 4.35 2.68
2 -
1 10.89 1.27
4
4 5.49 4.65
3 — —
0 - 12.81
1.04
—
Kjeldahl
nitrogen
Bark
%
0.14
.13
.11
.11
.72
.81
.27
.24
.12
.13
.41
.40
.12
.11
~
.83
—
Wood
0.06
.06
.07
.06
.13
.15
.04
.03
.04
.06
.04
.04
.04
.04
.06


C/N
ratio
Bark
378:
392:
473:
457:
71:
62:
212:
223:
422:
429:
130:
127:
471:
513:
~


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

58
—
Wood
810
835
753
876
377
320
1,234
1,618
1,297
895
1,214
1,194
1,268
1,242
893


  Total solids in 12 successive 1:10 water extractions, 24 hours each

-------
                 100,
ro
                  8Q__J
                  60_j
              2
                  40
                  20.
                                                       SIEVE       OPENING (mm)
                                                       SIEVE   NUMBER
                              FIGURE 35  PARTICLE SIZE  ANALYSIS FOR DOUGLAS  FIR  BARK AND SAWDUST

-------
The age of a fractionalized wood pile is an  important  criterion
in  determining  the  quantity  and quality of leachates from the
pile in that older piles may be saturated and yield  their  water
more  readily.   The  older pile may also be undergoing microbial
decomposition which can increase the concentration  of  leachates
or,  conversely,the  microbial  decay  may have progressed to the
point   that   further   leaching   produces    relatively    low
concentrations.

The  factors  discussed  above and others affect the character of
the waste stream from  a  fractionalized  wood  pile  to  varying
degrees.   In  many  cases, the problem is compounded by the pile
being located on bare earth which may allow the waste  stream  to
percolate  into the ground.  Partly for these reasons few studies
have been conducted on leachates from fractionalized  wood  piles
and,  in fact, few cases of visible leachates have been observed.
Virtually no characterization of  the  waste  waters  originating
from  piles  of fractionalized wood had been established prior to
the current study.

while  there  are  no  data  in  the  literature  concerning  the
character  of  leachate  from  fractionalized  wood  piles in the
field, there have been  three  laboratory  studies  performed  on
leachates  from  piles,  and  numerous works on the alteration of
chip quality in chip piles experiencing biological decomposition.
An   annotated   bibliography   prepared    by    Hajny    covers
comprehensively the effects of chip quality in outside storage.

The  laboratory  study  by  Asano  and  Towlerton illustrates the
pollutant levels that may be  expected  in  leachates  from  chip
piles.  The study reported COD concentrations of greater than 500
mg/1  and  color  values of about 3,000 units.  About 10 hours of
agitation were required to produce these  concentrations.   Using
submerged  agitated bark, Benedict observed COD concentrations of
about 4,000 mg/1, BOD concentrations of greater than 2,000  mg/1,
and  color  values  of  about  7,000 units for a mixture of fresh
softwood and hardwood bark.  The Benedict study is probably  more
representative  of  the leachates to be expected from a bark pile
than the laboratory study  by  Asano  and  Towlerton  is  of  the
leachate  to  be expected from a chip pile.  The ratio of bark to
water in the Benedict study is closer to that expected in a  bark
pile  than the ratio of chips to water in the Asano and Towlerton
study.  .Another  bark  study  by  Sproul  and  Sharpe  shows  COD
concentrations  of about 500 mg/1 and color units of about 2,000.
These  concentrations  remained  relatively  constant  over   the
duration of the 90 day test.

During  the  course  of the current study, leachates from several
bark, chip, and sawdust piles were collected  and  analyzed.   As
indicated  in  Table  33 the data seem to be highly variable.  In
addition, it can be observed from Table 33 that bark piles,  chip
piles,  and  sawdust piles all produce leachates that can be high
in concentration.  It was possible to investigate the  effect  of
rainfall  intensity  on the quantity and quality of leachate from
chip and sawdust piles by critically examining the data shown  in

-------
                                                        TABLE 33

                                               CHIP PILE RUNOFF RESULTS


               Date     Flow                                                                             Phenols
Source         1973   (I/sec)   Color    pH    NT  COD*   PO^   BOD*    TS*  TVS*   TSS*   TVSS*   TDS*    mg/l

Chip Pile+     8/2     —       1560    5.1    —  489    —    117    3927  2544   164    126     3763
Runoff
Plant 80

Chip Pile+     8/3     —       2250    5.6    — 4368    —    630    4119  2652   854    560     3265
Runoff
Plant 80

Chip Pile+     10/16  0.1        --     6.2  9.18 1190    2.00  222**  1050   731    67     —      —    239
Runoff
Plant 80

Bark Pile      1/3    0.6       1600    —    —  8700     --    —    4800
Runoff
Plant 82

Sawdust Piletf  1/3    0.9        250    —    —  1530     —    —    1850  —
Runoff
Plant 82

Sawdust Pile   1/3    0.1  "      —     —    —   4358 '1.8    —    5404 2964
Runoff
Plant 81

Chip Pile
Runoff
Plant 81       10/17  0.2        550    6.95  —    237   0.30  3.8     543  309     91     —      —     19

        *Expressed as mg/l
       **Possible toxlcity
        +Collected and analyzed by Temple Industries, Dlbold, Texas
        ^/Collected and analyzed by CH2M-Hill, Corvallis, Oregon

-------
                                         34
                          CHIP PILE RUNOFF SUMMARY

Date
1/8/73
9:00 a.m.


J/9/73
9:00 a.m.


V12/73
1:00 p.m.


l/tS/73



1/3)8/73
9:00 a.m.


3/19/73
4:00 p.m.


Point of Runoff
Sample
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Redwood
Whitewood
Sawdust
Total
Flow
I/Sec.

2


10
16
6
32
6
10
6
22




4
6
0.5
10.5
3
4
4
1
BOD
(mg/n




840
iao
210













294
2JO
320

CO)
(mc^l)
460
478


2270
750
553

2500
913
1220

2460
278
238

1820
797
672

1186
71]-
948

Rainfall
cm/day


2.44



444



3.35



010



3.07



1.42

*Data from  industrial contact 623
                             IkS

-------
Table  34.   A  plot  of  the flow from the various piles and the
total flow versus the rainfall intensity (Figure 36)   shows  that
the flow from each of the piles does not begin until the rainfall
intensity  exceeds  a  certain  value.  The data for the month of
March has been omitted from the plot in Figure 36.  The rationale
for this omission was that during the month of January  the  chip
and  sawdust  piles  were  saturated  to  a  certain  low  level.
Therefore, when it  rained  with  an  intensity  greater  than  a
certain  level (in this case 2.21 cm  (0.87 in)  per day), the chip
or sawdust piles could not absorb the rainfall at that rate,  and
a  portion  of  the rainfall came off the pile as though the pile
was acting as a roof.  In March, after two additional  months  of
rainfall,  the  piles  were  saturated  to  a greater degree and,
therefore, the intensity of rainfall required to  produce  runoff
from  the piles was significantly less.  This is evidenced by the
fact that a rainfall intensity of 1.42 cm (0.56 in)   per  day  in
March  produced a runoff rate that would have required a rainfall
intensity of about 2.92 cm (1.15 in) per day in January.  Looking
at the total yield that could be expected from the two chip piles
with areas of 2.35 and 3.12 ha  (5.83 and 7.70 ac) and the sawdust
piles with an area of 0.39 ha (0.97 ac), the average flow if  the
rain  fell  at  a uniform rate for 24 hours would be about 10 Ips
(153 gpm).  These figures, 10 Ips (153 gpm)  versus  11  Ips  (173
gpm),  agree quite well considering the inexact nature of most of
the measurements involved in the data.  The agreement of the  two
figures  signifies that the chip and sawdust piles were absorbing
relatively little precipitation.

The COD data in  Table  34  shows  that  the  COD  is  relatively
constant for each of the effluents no matter what the flow.  This
indicates  that  the quantity of pollutants leached from the pile
is directly proportional to the flow from the piles.   A  washout
phenomenon  is  expected,  but  it may occur at greater flow-offs
from the piles.  No explanation can be given for the much  higher
concentration  of  COD in the leachate from the redwood chip pile
than from the whitewood chip  pile.   No  information  about  the
species  of  chips  contained  in each pile was supplied with the
data.  Typically chip piles for the particleboard  or  insulation
board  processes  experience rapid turnover and saturation of the
piles may never be obtained.

The data represented by entry number 4 in Table 33 were  not  the
only data received on that bark pile.  BOD and COD concentrations
for  three  flows  were received and BOD and COD loads coming off
the pile were calculated therefrom.  This data appears  in  Table
35.   It  can be seen that the amount of COD and BOD leached from
the pile increases about 60 percent when the flow increases  from
0.8 to 3.4 Ips (12 to 54 gal per minute).  The flow increase from
3.4  to  4.7  Ips (54 to 75 gpm) did not increase the COD and BOD
load.  Apparently the bark pile  reached  the  washout  point  at
about 3.4 Ips (54 gpm) whereas the chip and sawdust piles had not
reached the washout point at 32 Ips  (500 gpm).

The  seepage  of  the absorbed water from the particle pile is an
expected phenomenon, but was observed only for  sample  locations

-------
•p.
-J
                  O

                  z
                  O
                  O
                  UJ
                     37,0 1
                     31.0
                     25.0 -
    18.0 -
£   12.0
D.
                  a:
                  LJ
                      6.0 -I
                                          I       I.S      2       2.5      3

                                             RAINFALL INTENSITY (CM/DAY)
                                                                                               TOTAL
WHITE WOOD







REDWOOD




SAWDUST
                                                              3.6      4.1      4.6     5.1
                              FIGURE 36  RUNOFF  FLOW RATE  VS  RAINFALL  INTENSITY  FOR  WHITEWOOD  AND

                                         REDWOOD CHIP  PILES AND A  SAWDUST  PILE

-------
                            TABLE 35
                BARK PILE EFFLUENT CHARACTER
Discharge
(I/Sec.)
1
3
5
COD
(mg/1 )
6,930
2,530
4,850
COD
(Kg/Day)
453
745
755
BOD5
(mg/T)
3,800
1 ,300
870
BOD5
(Kg/ Day)
\ 
-------
numbers 6 and 7 in Table 33.   For both of these two samples, rain
had  occurred  for  one or two days previous to sample collection
and the rate of leachate production on the sample  day  was  low.
However, the strength of the effluent was relatively high.

Typical Effluent from Fractionalized Wood Piles

Fractionalized  wood  piles,   like  most  other aspects of timber
products raw material  storage,  emit  highly  variable  effluent
waste  streams both with respect to flow and concentrations.  The
leachate stream can emanate from the pile because  of  the  water
held  within  the  pile,  because  of water flowing on the ground
through the pile, or because of water running off the pile during
rainfall periods.  Regardless of the origin,  the  concentrations
of  pollutants  in  the effluent stream are high.  No modeling of
the piles was attempted,  but  the  typical  effluent  stream  is
considered to have the characterization listed in Table 36.

LOG WASHING

As  previously  mentioned,  the  practice  of  log washing is not
common in the industry.  Furthermore, the method of washing,  the
amount   of   water   used,   and   the   resulting  waste  water
characteristics will vary from mill to  mill.   The  waste  water
characteristics can be expected to vary somewhat depending on the
season  of  the  year  and the conditions under which the log was
harvested.  Thus, during rainy, seasons of the year, the  charac-
teristics  of  the  solids removed from the logs will differ from
those removed under dry conditions.  However,  these  solids  are
generally  settleable  and  because  the  log  wash  water can be
recycled, these variations are not of significance.

Typically, log wash water will  be  low  in  COD  and  solids  as
illustrated  in  Table 37  (from information collected during this
study).  The data shown illustrate  waste  water  characteristics
for  recycled  wash water as well as non-recycled wash water.  It
should be noted that the COD values for the recycle  systems  are
approximately  twice  the concentration found in the non-recycled
system.   This  indicates  the  possibility  of  a  concentration
gradient  which  inhibits to a great extent further leaching from
the logs.  It should also be noted that the reported  values  for
solids  do  not include settleable solids since settleable solids
concentrations vary considerably with log harvesting  conditions.
Their removal is the primary reason for log washing.

The  representative log washing operation is located at a sawmill
producing 59,000 cu m  (25 million bd ft) of lumber per year.  The
log wash operates for 16 hours per day, five days per  week,  and
requires  25  I/sec   (UOO  gpm)  of  water  at  a  pressure  of  8
atmospheres  (117  psi).   This  is  a  non-recycle  system  and,
therefore,  the  waste water characteristics are similar to those
of Mill A, Table 37.
                                 1«*9

-------
                                                        TABLE 37
                                   RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION LOG WASH WATER
cn
O
                    COD
                               Total
Total   Suspended  Dissolved  Volatile   Volatile
Sol ids    Sol ids     Sol ids   Suspended  Suspended
Mill
A
B*
C*
mg/1
97
240
258
mg/1
334
442
354
mg/1
73
218
204
mg/1
61
214
150
mg/1
62
214
170
mg/1
-
98
_
m9
5.
3.
1.
T\
6
68
04
mg/T
.10
3.0
.58
JTU
-
530
13.0
Units
70
274
_
NT   P04T  Turb,  Color  Phenol
                          mg/1
                                                                                                          79
              *Recycle systems

-------
SAWMILLS

Water  usage  at  sawmill  operations  varies  significantly.   A
majority of small sawmills do not produce their own power and use
no water at all except for sanitary purposes.  On the other hand,
a sawmill producing power, washing logs, and wet decking logs may
use over 38,000,000 1 of water per day  (10 mgd).

This disparity in volume illustrates the difficulty in attempting
to  discuss  a typical sawmill.  However, a discussion of various
possible sources and volumes of water use follows.

Table 38 provides a list of sources of water usages in an  actual
sawmill  and  approximate maximum water requirements.  The volume
of water used is 737 I/sec  (11,682 gpm) or 63,600 cu in/day   (16.8
mgd),  Of this volume, approximately 93 percent is related to the
production  of  power rather than to the operation of the sawmill
itself.  Actually, only 0.4 I/sec   (six  gpm)  of  the  total  is
directly  related  to  the mill operation and this is absorbed by
the sawdust.  However, the fact that a large volume of  water  is
used  in the vicinity of the sawmill is important in that in many
cases this water becomes contaminated prior to leaving  the  mill
yard.   This  is  the  case, for instance, when the point of dis-
charge of uncontaminated cooling water is a log pond.

In many cases the range of water use prohibits the development of
waste  water  characteristics;  however,  such   information   as
available  is presented.  It should be noted that the information
presented represents the best available  information  on  present
status  of  water  use in the industry.  Future technological and
economic developments may result in increased or decreased  water
usage.   It should also be noted that the following discussion is
directed toward the sawmill processes  and  does  not  include  a
discussion  of  log  storage waste waters or those resulting from
the presence of glue using operations such as end-jointing  which
might  be present at a sawmill.  These are discussed elsewhere in
this report.

One possible water usage in a sawmill is saw cooling water.   The
practice  of  spraying a fine mist on saws, especially band  saws,
is common.  Where water is employed for  cooling  the  volume  is
small, generally less than 0.06 to 0.12 I/sec  (1 to 2 gpm) and no
waste  stream  is  created  as  all  moisture  is absorbed in the
sawdust.  This practice is sometimes employed  in  cooling   other
types  of  saws,  especially  gang saws where the volume of water
used may be on the order of 0.18 to 0.25 I/sec  (3 to 5 gpm).   As
the  volume  of  water used increases,  so does the probability of
creating a discharge.  For most  saws,  however,  the  volume  of
water used can be restricted such that no discharge is necessary.
In  fact,  only  one saw cooling system was observed to produce a
waste water stream.

A notable trend in the industry, is toward the  use  of  thin  or
narrow-kerf   saws.   The  narrow-kerf  saws  are  somewhat  more
susceptible to dynamic instability than most  present  day   saws.
                                  151

-------
                                TABLE 38
               WATER USAGE FOR AN ACTUAL SAWMILL WITH
                  POWER PLANT AND LOG STORAGE
Water Pumped
I/Sec
316
316
3
3
0.4
8
28
19
6
2
38
739.4
Volume Lost
I/Sec
—
—
—
—
0.4
—
28
__
6
2
2
38
74.4
Volume Discharge
I/Sec
316
316
3
3
—
8
—
19
—
—
—
665
Source of Use
Condenser No. I
Condenser No. 2
Grate Cooling
Boiler Scaling
Saw Cooling
Compressor Cooling
Boiler Makeup
Bark Wash
Miscellaneous
Fire Protection
 (normal)
Log Deck (summer)
Totals
*Sanitary use not included.   Also, maximum  fire protection use is 388
 liters per second.
                              152

-------
Saw  guides,  employed  to  compensate  for this instability, use
water, oil and sometimes air  mixtures  to  reduce  friction  and
pitch  buildup on the saws.  Such a system designed for an edger,
for instance, would utilize 0.06 to 0.6 Ips  (1  to  10  gpm)  of
water  and  up  to  2.6  1/hr (0.7 gal/hr.) of water soluble oil.
Thus, oil content of the cooling water may be  on  the  order  of
1000  mg/1.   As saws become thinner, larger volumes of water may
be required; however, at this time characterization of any  waste
water that might result is not possible.  Also, the current state
of development of thin-blade saws is such that the sawguide water
required  is  of  a  volume  that  all  water  is absorbed by the
sawdust.

Many sawmills, especially older ones, utilize steam  for  various
purposes.   In general, where steam is utilized for power such as
in steam driven log carriages, a condensate can  be  expected  to
occur.   Generally,  the  steam  powers the carriage and then the
steam is blown-off or wasted  to  the  atmosphere.   It  is  also
common  practice  to  inject an oil mist into the steam to insure
proper lubrication of the equipment.   In  some  cases,  the  oil
contaminated  condensate  may  be  of sufficient volume to form a
waste water stream; however, the volume and oil content  of  such
streams is highly variable and is usually intermittent.

Cooling  water  is  generally non-contact water such as that used
for  cooling  compressors  and  condensers.   Turbine  pumps  and
various  other  types  of hydraulic equipment may require bearing
cooling  water.   The  volume  of  such  cooling   water   varies
considerably  but  is  generally  contaminated  by  only a slight
amount of oil, if any.

A common practice at sawmills is  the  dipping  of  lumber,  both
green  and dressed, in a preservative solution of, most commonly,
pentachlorophenol.   There  should  be  no  discharge   of   this
material.  However, often times the dip vats are not covered and,
therefore,  receive precipitation and may overflow.  Also, as the
lumber is removed from the dip tank, drippage on the  ground  may
occur.   It is also probable that the dip tank eventually becomes
heavily silted with debris and may require blowdown.

Another source of water usage is in lubrication  of  chain  belts
and  other  conveyor systems.  The water is sprayed on the chains
in small volumes.  No waste water should result, however, as  the
water is absorbed by bark or sawdust.

There  is  no  necessity  for  waste  water  generation from most
cleanup operations in sawmills or planing mills.  A small  volume
of  water,  generally  less  than 35-75 I/day  (10-20 gpd) will be
required for cleaning various types of applicators which  may  be
employed.   Small spray compartments are utilized to apply stains
and moisture resisting compounds  to  lumber.   The  waste  water
generated  in  cleaning  the  compartments  and nozzles should be
recycled and used in makeup for the next batch of material.
                                 153

-------
While no necessity exists for waste water generation from cleanup
operations, it is commonly occurs, especially in cleanup of areas
underneath the mill.  The volume used for this purpose  has  been
reported  by  industry  to  be as high as 23,000 Ipd (6,000 gpd).
This stream contains  a  considerable  amount  of  floating  wood
particles  and  also contains soluble wood and bark constituents,
dust, oils, and greases.  COD and total solids concentrations  of
100 and UOO mg/1, respectively, have been observed.

Consultation  with  industry  representatives as to the necessity
for this practice resulted in the conclusion that the cleanup  of
mill floors can be accomplished by dry cleaning (sweeping)  rather
than by the use of water.

The  utilization  of  bark  and  other wood residues for fuel may
result in a number of waste  water  sources  including  leachates
from  hogged  fuel piles and the presence of bark washing or bark
pressing operations.  Possible leachates  from  bark  piles  were
discussed  previously in this section and that information can be
consulted to obtain an indication of their characteristics.  Bark
washing or pressing operations have not been observed in sawmills
and no further information is presently available.

The presence  of  boilers  may  result  in  boiler  blowdown  and
demineralized  backwash.   Similarly,  furnace grates may require
some water for cleanup.  Non-contact grate cooling water may also
be required.  Air pollution devices required to reduce  emissions
may   be   wet-scrubbers  which  require  bleed-off  of  a  small
percentage of the recycled flow.  Typically, the volume  of  such
bleed-off  is  about  0.6 I/sec (10 gpm)  with a solids content of
0.5 to 1.0 percent.

Figure 37 is a water balance for a sawmill  producing  230  cu  m
(100,000  bd ft) per day of dried lumber.  It is assumed for this
model mill that the moisture content of the incoming logs  is  50
percent  and that the dried lumber moisture content is 12 percent
by weight.  It is further assumed that the lumber overrun  equals
the kerf loss, where overrun is defined as the difference between
the  measured  volume  of  a  log and the actual volume of lumber
produced, and kerf loss is the volume of wood lost to sawdust  in
sawing.

The  volume  of  water  used  for log washing is equivalent to 25
I/sec  (400 gpm), 2U hours  per  day,  and  is  considered  to  be
discharged  without  recycle.  The headrig water usage is typical
of a steam driven log carriage.  The effluent is considered to be
lost to the atmosphere, the ground or absorbed  in  the  sawdust.
The  saw cooling water shown is equivalent to 0.6 I/sec  (10 gpm),
21 hours per day, and represents  the  total  saw  cooling  water
usage for the mill.  No discharge results from this usage because
of  adsorption  in  the sawdust.  The volume of boiler makeup and
blowdown and compressor cooling water is  based  on  actual  mill
usage  and  it  is  assumed that these discharges are not further
contaminated by contact with wood or wood  residues.   The  water
used  in the dip vat is for dilution of concentrated preservative

-------
  83^70-
654.048
     ,048—tJ


   56,775 —»4
    1,703—+\
                 WATER IN LOGS
2,180,160—**]       LOG WASH
   54,504—*4	SAWING
                     I
COMPRESSOR
                  DRY KILN
                  DIP VAT
                DRIED LUMBER
                                      2,180,160



                                        54,504
1
'
1 BOILER
I—*- 654,048



    -   56,775


]—*-   71,536
                                          13,437
               LITERS PER DAY
                                WATER IN * 3,030,460
                                WATER OUT= 3,030,460
 FIGURE 37  WATER BALANCE FOR A SAWMILL PRODUCING
           60,000 CUBIC METERS PER YEAR
                   15S

-------
compounds.  The model system assumes a covered dip vat which does
not receive rainwater.  The dry kiln is assumed to result  in  no
discharge  as  100 percent of the steam condensate is returned to
the boiler.  The discharge of 71,500 Ipd (18,900  gal/day)   shown
from  the  kiln  consists  of  water  vapor driven from the green
lumber.

Thus, the model sawmill is managed in such a manner as to produce
discharges only from log washing, compressor cooling, and  boiler
blowdown, and the various potential discharge points such as mill
cleanup  and  other  sources previously discussed are not present
because of proper water management.

FABRICATION

The discussion of water use and waste water  characteristics  for
the unit process of fabrication contained herein does not include
the subcategory of fabrication which employs mechanical fasteners
and  non-water  soluble  adhesives since it requires no water and
generates  no  waste  water.   Therefore,  this   discussion   is
concerned  only  with  the  use  of  water  soluble  adhesives in
fabricating operations and the resulting waste water.

Water  usage  involved  with  the   use   of   adhesives   varies
considerably  depending  mainly on the form in which the resin is
delivered, i.e., whether the resin is in a dry, powdered form  or
a  liquid  or  emulsified  form.   Table 39 is a list of the most
commonly used resins with the  percentage  by  weight  of  resin,
catalysts, and additives, and potential makeup water.

Melamine,  urea, and urea formaldehyde may be purchased in either
dry or liquid forms.   Those  resins  delivered  in  liquid  form
require  no  water  for  makeup  but  may require dilution to the
proper concentration  (Table 39) to obtain  a  desired  viscosity.
Dry  resin forms require a substantial percentage of makeup water
as shown.  Phenolic, urea formaldehyde, and protein are used much
more extensively in the manufacture of  plywood  than  elsewhere.
Table UO illustrates the amount of glue used at several mills for
specified  products  and the potential makeup water requirements.
It should be noted that makeup water is  actually  required  only
for the melamine urea mix while the other resins may require some
water for viscosity control.

Other  than  the  small  volume  of water used for mixing certain
resins, the only  water  use  in  fabricating  operations  is  in
cleanup  of  glue  spreaders  and  mixing  tanks.   In  a typical
operation, the equipment requiring cleanup may consist of some or
all of the following:

    Glue Applicator  (double roller, extruder, end
      or edge jointer)
    Resin Mixing Tank
    Resin Storage Tank
    Catalyst Mixing Tank
    catalyst Storage Tank
                               156

-------
                                     TABLE 39
                      MAKEUP REQUIREMENTS FOR VARIOUS MIXES
       Resin Type

*Melamine Urea
(Borden MU-607-F)

Melamine Urea
(Melural)

*Urea Formaldehyde
(Borden 5H-FM-GA)

Urea Formaldehyde
(Borden 5H)

Casein Blend
(Borden S-97)

*Viny1 Acetate
(Borden WB-905)

Phenolic
(Borden Cascophen 31)

*Phenol Resorcinol
(Cascophen LT-75-FM-282)

Protein
(Borden Casco S-230)

*Liquid Resins
Resin, Percent
by Weight of
Glue Mix
     80
     65
     80
     75
     28
     90
     75
     83
      75
Catalyst, Additives
Percent by Weight
of Glue Mix
       16
       15
       13
Makeup, Water
Percent
by Weight
                          35
                          25
                          72
                          25
                           25
                                   157

-------
Figure 38 illustrates a typical liquid resin glue line, including
catalyst mixture, and a typical dry  resin  glue  line  requiring
only  water  for  mixing.    The  volume  of water used in cleanup
varies from operation to operation depending  on  the  number  of
applicators  and  mixing  tanks,  the  frequency  of cleanup, and
cleanup techniques.  The number of applicators is related to  the
production  capacity  of  the operation and is also a function of
the efficiency of the whole operation.  Thus,  efficient  lay  up
operations  in a laminating plant can increase production without
increasing the number of applicators required.

The number of storage and mixing tanks present is  determined  by
the production of the plant, the amount of glue required per day,
the  type  of  glue  used,  and  the  type  of  applicator  used.
Generally,  liquid  resins  such  as  phenol  resorcinol  require
controlled  temperature storage in tanks.  This type of glue also
requires the addition of a catalyst which is generally a powdered
substance requiring makeup water and mixing prior  to  its  being
added   to  the  resin.   Mixing  of  the  resin  and  catalysts,
generally, occurs in a separate mixing vessel.  The exception  to
this  is  observed  where extruder applicators are used.  In this
case, mixing may occur during transfer of the resin and  catalyst
from  their  respective  storage  tanks by passing them through a
helical mixing chamber.  Powdered resins usually require only dry
storage and one mixing tank.

The frequency of cleanup of  mixing  vessels  is  usually  daily.
According to industry representatives, resin storage tanks do not
require  cleaning.   Glue  applicators  have  been observed to be
cleaned daily, once per shift, and even twice per shift.  Cleanup
is required whenever use is suspended on any applicator.  Various
cleanup techniques which can be utilized to reduce the volume  of
water  required  will  be  discussed  in  detail  in Section VII,
Control and Treatment Technology.  These techniques  include  the
use  of  steam,  high  pressure  nozzles,  dry  scraping, and the
application of grease  where  possible  to  applicator  surfaces.
Table  U1 indicates waste water volumes observed at various mills
and operations during these studies.

Waste Water Characteristics

Characteristics  will  vary  considerably  from  mill   to   mill
depending  on the type of resin used and the volume of water used
during cleanup.   This  degree  of  variability  complicates  any
attempt  to  develop  waste water characteristics.  However, such
data as are available on characteristics of various  glue  wastes
are  presented  in  Table  42.   These  data  are  the product of
analyses of actual waste water streams during this study.

In order to more thoroughly characterize the various glue  wastes
found  in fabrication, samples of undiluted resins were analyzed.
This  is  considered  adequate  characterization  in   that,   as
demonstrated  in  Section  VII, no discharge of the wastes should
occur  and  adequate  control  is  obtainable   without   further
characterization  of  the  wastes.   In  order  to  relate  these
                                160

-------
            TABLE  41
VOLUME OF WASTE WATER REPORTED BY VARIOUS MILLS
                          Number of    Frequency
              Volume      Applica-     of clean-  Volume of
Mill
A


B
C

D

Type of
Product
Garage Door
Beams
Finger
Jointed
Lumber
Beams
Beams ,
Decking
Finger
Jointer
Decking
Beams
Type of
Glue
Poly vinyl
Phenol
Resorcinol
Poly vinyl
Phenol
Resorcinol
Phenol
Resorcinol
Resorcinol
Mel ami ne
Urea
Phenol
Resorcinol
of Lumber
(cu; m/day)
2
30
.
190
470
-
20
10
tors/Mixing
Tanks
1/0
1A
I/O
2A
5/2
2/0
1/1
1/1
up (times
per day
1
1
1
1
1
6
1 i
)
Wastewater
(liters/day)
380
190
190
380
4,500
2,300

3,800
            161

-------
                                                                   TABLE 42

                                               CHARACTERISTICS OP  GLUE  WASWATER (ng/1)
CO
                       BOD
COD
X
2
3
4 a
4 b
15,900
-
710
4,880
_
OJ5.70I
-
5,671
3,84:
_
TS
DS
                                       5,917
SS
                               OJ5.700   7,910   6,850

                                       8,880   6,310

                               5,670   5,890   3,360   2,530

                                       1,284     545     739
TVS   VDS
                                 886  235
                 687   5,233i   5,146  403   4,713
vss
-
-
-
65i
713
Phenols
4.16
0.14
-
127
327
Nt
21.8
U640
-
3.28
952
P04
2.46
20.2
-
1.19
4.95
PH
9.77
5.25
10.8
-
_
             NOTE:  Mills l and 2 use phenolic glue
                    Mill 3 uses urea glue
                    Mill 4a uses phenol resorcinol
                    Mill 4b uses resorcinol

-------
analyses to expected waste water characteristics, a  dilution  of
40  to  1  of  water to glue is assumed to occur.  The results of
these analyses are presented in Table 43.  The  data  demonstrate
the variability in concentrations one would anticipate because of
the  different  glues.   The analyses presented for the phenolic,
protein, and urea glues were taken from a publication by  Bodien.
The remaining analyses were performed during this study.

Model Operation

For  the  purpose of developing control technology and associated
costs for fabrication operations, a model  fabrication  operation
has  been  developed.   The  model  fabrication  operation may be
producing any of a variety of products such  as  doors,  decking,
end-jointed  lumber,  or laminated beams.  Thus, production rates
are not as meaningful as an indicator of expected volume of waste
water as is the number of pieces of equipment requiring  cleanup.
On this basis, two model fabricating operations are assumed:

Model I consists of one double roller spreader, a finger jointer,
and  a  small  mixing  tank.  The type of glue used may be any of
those  previously  discussed.   Observation  of  various  cleanup
operations indicate that approximately 750 Ipd  (200 gpd) of waste
water results from cleaning the above equipment as follows:

    Double roller spreader - 370 Ipd
    Finger jointer         - 190 Ipd
    Mixing tank            - 190 Ipd
    Total                    750 Ipd

Model  II is applicable to large industrial glue users other than
plywood and  is  most  applicable  to  the  laminated  structural
products  industry.   A large laminated beam plant, for instance,
may use five face glue spreaders, extruder or roller type;  three
finger  jointers;  a  catalyst mixing tank; and either a catalyst
storage vessel or a resin-catalyst mixing  tank.   The  spreaders
will  require  cleanup on a daily basis while the finger jointers
are cleaned once per shift, i.e., three  times  per  day.   Other
possible  water  usages that can be expected are glue mixing room
floor  cleanup  and  delivery   truck   washdown.    Occasionally
imperfect  batches  of  glue  may  require dumping and subsequent
equipment cleanup.  The expected volumes of waste water for  such
an operation are as follows:

     Spreaders (5)         - 1890 Ipd
     Finger jointers  (3)   - 1700 Ipd
     Catalyst Mixer        -  380 Ipd
     Glue mixing tank  (2)   -  760 Ipd
     Miscellaneous cleanup -  950 Ipd
     Total                   5680 Ipd
                                 163

-------
                                          TABLE 43

                               AVERAGE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF GLUE
                       VRSTE VCVTER (ASSUMING A 40; 1 DILUTION WITH' V&TER)
Analysis
(mg/kg)
COD
BOD
TOC
P04J
TKN
Phenols*
S.S.
D.S.
T.S.
TVSS
TVS
Phenolic
Glue
16,325
12,500
4,400
3
30
12,850
2,300
7,625
9,925
42,000
86,000
Protein
Glue
4,425
220
1,300
7
300
45.3
1,475
2,950
4,425
850
3,425
Urea
Glue
10,525
4,875
2,250
18.9
533
-
86,500
5,150
13,750
8,650
13,750
Casein Mel ami ne Phenol
Glue Urea Resorcinol
5,500 11,600 26,000
_
-
- -
- -
3,600 1,200 102,500
-
- -
23,000 6,000 1,400
_
6,600
Polyvinyl
Acetate
15,000
-
5,000
-
-
-
1,000
1,000
12,000
5,600
12,000
*Phenols = Kg/Kg

-------
INSULATION BOARD

Specific Water Uses

An   insulation   board   plant  producing  270  metric  tons/day
discharges 3,400 cu m per  day  (0.9  mgd)   of  waste  water  and
evaporates  an  additional  380  cu m per day (0.1 mgd)  of water.
While the major waste water stream results  from  excess  process
white   water,  quantities  may  also  be  discharged  from  such
operations as chip washing, dryer  washing,  and  finishing,  and
from  air  pollution  contol devices.  The waste waters resulting
from  the  handling  and  storage  of  raw  materials  have  been
previously discussed.

Chip  Washing  -  After  the  appropriate  raw  material handling
operations previously discussed, the first step considered to  be
part  of  the  subcategory of insulation board production is chip
washing.  Chips may be washed in  order  to  remove  grit,  dirt,
sand,  metal,  and other trash which may cause excessive wear and
possible destruction of the refining equipment.   In  additori  to
removing  undesirable  matter,  chip  washing may result in chips
with a more uniform moisture content and, in  northern  climates,
assists  the  thawing of frozen chips.  Chip washing is practiced
by virtually all plants utilizing chips as  a  raw  material  and
plants  utilizing  chips  as  a  major  portion  of their furnish
comprise  approximately  70  percent  of  the  insulation   board
industry.   In the future, with the projected increase in the use
of forest residues and whole tree  utilization,  essentially  all
mills are expected to be using chip washers.

Water  used  for  chip  washing  is  usually  recycled to a large
extent.  A minimum makeup of approximately 400 1 per  metric  ton
(95  gal per ton) is required in a closed system because of water
leaving with the chips and  with  sludge  removed  from  settling
tanks.  However, up to 4,200 1 per metric ton  (1,000 gal per ton)
water   usage   has  been  reported  from  mills  that  discharge
quantities of chip wash water to waste.  Water used for makeup in
the chip washer may be fresh water, cooling  water,  vacuum  seal
water, or recycled process water.

Process  White  Water  -  Water used to process and transport the
wood from the fiber preparation stage through  mat  formation  is
referred  to  as process white water.  The water use in this area
is represented in Figure 39.  The process white water, accounting
for over 95 percent of a  plant1s  total  waste  water  discharge
(excluding  cooling  water),  will  be  discussed in terms of two
streams:  1) fiber preparation white  water  system  and  2)  the
machine white water system.

The  fiber preparation white water system is considered to be the
water used in the refining of  stock  up  to  and  including  the
dewatering  of  stock  by  a  decker  or  washer.   As previously
discussed, there are  three  major  types  of  fiber  preparation
utilized  in  the insulation board industry: 1) stone groundwood,
2) mechanical disc refining  (refiner groundwood), and 3)  thermo-
                                 165

-------
cn
CD
r«>8i
WOOD "™^^| "EFININO "^STOCKCHEST ^"4 DECKER ^4 STOCK CHE
(50)
	 *• WAT
	 +- WAT
(X) APPR
IN PR
(25)
0,615]
;R IN
ER OUT
II) 1 (IS)
[87,137] |[-84,7I6] &-


1
1
DXIMATE FIBER CONSISTENCY — rii""^
OCESS 1^Lllt385J

••J FORMING H
31 ^l MACHINE
TO ATMOSPHERE
|[-WO]
•• DRIER
(t.5) t (SO)
1
>,460] [-56,697]
1

	 ^ TO TREATMENT
*[-ll,55S]
                         [LITERS WATER]

                           *  INCLUDES HOUSEKEEPING WATER
                                                                                                            OB)
                                                                                                                    FINISHIN8
                                 FIGURE 39   WATER BALANCE FOR A TYPICAL INSULATION BOARD  PROCESS

-------
mechanical  disc  refining.  The water volume utilized by each of
the three methods is essentially the same.  In the general  case,
as  shown  in  Figure 39r the wood enters the refining machine at
approximately  50  percent  consistency   (50  percent  solids  by
weight),  and  is fiberized and diluted to a consistency suitable
for screening  (approximately one percent).   The  stock  is  then
dewatered  at  the  decker  to  a consistency of approximately 15
percent before being repulped.  This is a water deficient section
of the process in that more makeup water is necessary than  water
is  discharged  because of the quantity of water leaving with the
stock.  The variations of water use by the refining  process  are
determined  by  the point where the water is added.  In all cases
water is added to  dilute  the  stock  as  it  leaves  the  fiber
preparation  section.   However, in the case of stone groundwood,
the stock is flushed from the refining machine  by  a  shower  of
water  that  is  sprayed onto the revolving stone.  There is some
water used for consistency control in the mechanical and  thermo-
mechanical  disc  refiners.   Also, water is added in the thermo-
mechanical pulping in the  form  of  steam  prior  to  the  chips
entering the refiner.

In  the  machine  white  water  system, after the dewatered stock
leaves the decker at approximately  15  percent  consistency,  it
must  again  be  diluted  to  a  consistency of approximately 1.5
percent to be  suitable  for  mat  formation.   This  requires  a
relatively  large quantity of water of approximately 60,000 1 per
metric ton  (14,400 gal per ton).  The amount of dilution required
can be calculated from the relationship:

         M(y)  = M(x)/C-M(x)

where:

M(y) = mass of dilution water required M(x) = mass of wood  being
diluted, and C = consistency.

The  redilution  of the stock is usually  accomplished in a series
of steps.  The stock usually receives an  initial dilution down to
approximately  5 percent  consistency,  then  to  3  percent,  and
finally,  just  prior  to  mat  formation,  to  approximately 1.5
percent.  This sequence is done primarily for two reasons:  1) to
allow accurate consistency controls and more efficient dispersion
of additives,  and 2)  to  reduce  the  required  stock  pump  and
storage capacities.

During  the  mat formation stage of the insulation board process,
the stock is dewatered to a consistency of approximately 40 to 50
percent.  Subsequently, in the dryer, the mat is  dried  to  less
than 5 percent moisture.

The water produced by the dewatering of stock at any stage of the
process is usually recycled to be used as stock dilution water at
another  stage of the process.  However,  for reasons discussed in
Section VII, Control and Treatment Technology, there is a need to
bleed-off a considerable quantity of excess  process  water.   In
                                167

-------
most  cases  the  bulk  of  the  total waste water produced by an
insulation board plant will consist of this water.

Drying  -  The  boards  leaving  the  forming  machine   with   a
consistency  of  approximately  40  percent  are dried to a level
greater than 97 percent in the dryers.  This water is  evaporated
to  the  atmosphere  and  there  is  no  water discharge from the
operation.  It is, however, necessary to occasionally  clean  the
driers  to  reduce fire danger and maintain proper heat transfer.
This produces a minor waste water stream of about 11,000 1 (3,000
gal) per week in most operations.

Finishing - After the board  leaves  the  dryer,  it  is  usually
sanded  and  trimmed to size.  The dust from the sanding and trim
saws is often controlled by dust collectors  of  a  wet  scrubber
type and the recovered dust is recirculated back into the process
for  use  in  making  board.   The  water  that  is  fed into the
scrubbers is sometimes excess process water; however, fresh water
is occasionally used.  This water usually returns to the  process
with the dust.

Plants  that produce coated products such as ceiling tile usually
paint  the  board  after  it  is  sanded  and   trimmed.    Paint
composition  will  vary with both plant and product; however, all
plants utilize a water based paint.  The resulting washup of this
paint produces approximately 400 1 (100 gal) of water per ton  of
product  which  is  contributed  to  the waste .water stream or is
metered to the process white water system.   In  addition,  there
are  sometimes  imperfect  batches of paint mixed.  These batches
are occasionally discharged to the waste water stream or  metered
to the process white water system.

Broke  System  - Reject boards and trim are reclaimed as fiber by
recycling.  This is done by placing the waste board and trim into
a hydrapulper and producing a fiber slurry that is reused in  the
process.   While  there  is need for a large quantity of water in
the  hydrapulping  operation,  the  water  is  normally  recycled
process  water.   There is normally no water discharged from this
operation.

Miscellaneous Water Usage - Other water usage in insulation board
plants include water used for cooling,  for  seal  water  in  the
vacuum  pumps,  for  screen  washing,  for  fire control, and for
general housekeeping.  It is common practice to use cooling water
and seal water as makeup water in the process water system.   The
water  used  for  washing screens in the forming and decker areas
usually enters the process water system.  Housekeeping water  can
vary  widely from plant to plant depending on plant operation and
many other factors.  A reasonable estimate for housekeeping water
usage is 400 1 per metric  ton   (100  gal  per  ton)  of  machine
production.
                                  168

-------
Waste Water Characterization

Characteristics  of  insulation  board  plant  waste  waters  are
essentially the same as those of the water  discharged  from  the
process white water system.  This is because the major portion of
the  waste water pollutants results from leachable materials from
the wood and additives added during the formation  process.   The
materials  leached  from  the  wood  will  normally dissolve into
solution in the process white water system.  However, if  a  chip
washer  is  utilized,  a portion of the solubles are dissolved in
this process.  A small fraction of the waste water  load  results
from  cleanup operations in the finishing process; however, these
have little influence on  any  characteristics  except  suspended
solids.   The  finishing  waste water, in some plants, is metered
back into the process  water  system  with  no  reported  adverse
effects.   The  characteristics  of  waste  waters  produced by a
number of insulation board plants are summarized in Table 44.

Chip Washing - As previously discussed, a chip washer is utilized
by most plants using chips as furnish.  The chip washer  is  used
to   remove   grit,   sand,  and  other  trash  which  may  cause
difficulties in refining, excessive wear of refiner  plates,  and
impair finished quality of the final product by allowing grit and
sand to be formed into the mat.  As was stated above, the primary
source  of  pollutants  at this point is soluble material leached
from the wood.  This material would normally dissolve during  the
refining  and  other  process  operations and become incorporated
into the process white water stream.  No accurate characteristics
of chip washer discharge are available; however, it must be noted
that this waste  water  represents  merely  a  redistribution  of
pollutants  in  the  process  rather  than  an effluent requiring
treatment and disposal.

Process White Water - The process white water accounts  for  over
95  percent  of  the waste load and flow from an insulation board
plant.  It is characterized  by  high  quantities  of  BOD,  COD,
suspended solids, and dissolved solids as shown in Table 44.

The three major factors affecting process waste water quality are
1)  the  extent  of  steam  pretreatment, 2) the types of product
produced and additives employed, and  3)  raw  material  species.
The  major  source  of dissolved organic material originates from
the raw material.  From one to three percent   (on  a  dry  weight
basis)  of  wood  is  composed  of water-soluble sugars stored as
residual  sap  and,  regardless  of  the  type  of  refining   or
pretreatment  utilized,  these  sugars  enter the water to form a
major source of BOD and COD.  Furthermore, when thermo-mechanical
pulping is employed, not only do the residual  sugars  enter  the
system but there will also occur decomposition products formed by
the  hydrolysis  of  the carbohydrates naturally occurring in the
wood.

Basically, two phenomena occur during  steaming.   The  first  of
these  is  the  physically  reversible  thermo-softening  of  the
hemicellulose and lignin components of the middle lamella.   This
                                 169

-------
       TABLE 44 TOTAL PLANT WASTEWATER  FROM  INSULATION BOARD
Plant
No.
13
7(1)
9
12(1)
6(1)
15 (1)
5(1)
17
4
11(3)
i
10(4)
14
3(J)
Production
KKg/day
109
813
163
322
142
227
291
154
528
457
200
217
353
154
Flow
1/KKg
41,380
14,118
11,564
9,189
50,494
8,346
7,800
14,506
103,910
—
45,487
8,330
9.644
19,956
BOD
Kg/KKg
11.3
11.6
15.1
15.1
27.5
32.3
33.7
33.7
34.7
35.2
39.0
40.9
44.6
COD
Kg/KKg
67.9
49.0
„
20.3
—
62.5
72.4
—
~
1S1.8
94.5
__
88.7
valid data
TS
Kg/KKg
95.9
—
—
—
_.
48.1
—
—
—
278.9
93.9
98.2
—
not
ss
Kg/KKg
52.1
11.8
14.1
4.2
14.5
11.7
3.0
30.0
24.7
235.0
10.5
25.7
52.3
OS
Kg/KKg
45.0
20.4
_
—
—
36.3
8.0
—
—
—
83.4
—
—
available
(l)   Analysis  taken  after  preliminary clarification
(2)   Forming machine production
(3)   Plant utilizes  bagasse
(4)   Values do not represent present conditions due to experimental
     changes in water systems
(5)   Represents 70-90 percent of total load
                                  170

-------
effect  does  not  break down the cellulose or hemicellulose into
water soluble substances.

The second effect consists of time dependent  chemical  reactions
in   which   hemicellulose  undergoes  hydrolys is,  and  produces
oligosaccharides  (short  chained,  water  soluble  wood  sugars,
including  disaccharides).  In addition, hydrolysis of the acetyl
groups form acetic acid.  The  resulting  lowered  pH  causes  an
increase  in  the rate of hydrolysis.  Thus, the reactions can be
said to be autocatalytic.  For this reason,  the  reaction  rates
are  difficult to calculate.  However, estimations have been made
that the reaction rates double with an increase in temperature of
eight to ten degrees Celsius.  As can be expected and as shown in
Figure 40 there is a higher BOD in a plant's waste water when the
plant utilizes steaming.  This results primarily from an increase
in the  dissolved  substances  entering  the  water.   There  is,
however,  not a direct relationship between the amount of BOD and
the amount of dissolved solids entering the system.  In  general,
at lower temperatures  (pressures), where higher yields are found,
there  is  a higher ratio of BOD to dissolved solids because of a
higher percentage of low molecular weight material  entering  the
waste  water.   This  is  illustrated  in  Figure  41.  It can be
concluded that with increased steam pressure there  is  a  higher
proportion  of  long  chain,  high molecular weight carbohydrates
entering   the   water.    These   compounds   are   not   easily
biodegradable.

Plants  1,  9, 12, 13, and 16 in Table 44 all report little or no
steaming of furnish  and  other  than  plant  4,  which  will  be
discussed  later,  the  remainder  of  the  plants  steam a major
portion of furnish.

The exact nature and percentage of  materials  dissolved  in  the
water  vary  with  species,  i.e.,  as  discussed earlier in this
document, hardwoods contain a greater percentage  of  potentially
soluble  material  than do softwoods.  Nevertheless, as indicated
in Table 45, using steam factors from Figure 40,  the  effect  of
species  on  waste  water  load   is  of secondary importance when
compared to the  degree  of  steaming  to  which  the  chips  are
subjected and to the extent of hardboard production.

An  analysis  of  the  data  in  Table  45  shows  a  correlation
coefficient of 0.79 between the steam factor and BOD  load  data.
Neglecting  the  data from plant  10, a correlation coefficient of
0.73 is observed between hardboard production of plants with high
steam factors and BOD load.   The  fact  that  species  type  has
relatively  little  effect  on pollutant generation, or that what
effect it does have is masked by the more significant effects  of
steaming  and  hardboard  production,  is  shown by a correlation
coefficient between the utilization of hardwood and BOD  load  of
less  than  0.1 for the types of plants that utilize little or no
steaming and for plants with high steam factors.

While a large portion of the BOD in the process waste water is  a
result  of organics leaching from the wood, a significant portion
                               171

-------
60-
40-
       TOTAL B007 IN  kg
       02/TON DRY CHIPS
     —\	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1—
   04       6      6       10      12
     PRE-HEATING  PRESSURE  (atm.g.)
    FIGURE 40  VARIATION OF BOD WITH PRE-HEATING PRESSURE
                     172

-------
  0.70-
  0.60-
  0.50-
         BODr
         g O./g  DISSOLVED  MATERIAL
                         PLANT B
                             PLANT A
92
                            94
                         % YIELD
96
FIGURE 41  VARIATION OF THE RATIO OF BOD/DISSOLVED SOLIDS WITH YIELD
                        173

-------
                             l&ELE 45

              EFFECT OF HARDWOOD, STEAMING, AND HARDBOARD
                 PRODUCTION ON THE BOD  LOAD FROM
                   INSULATION BOARD PLANTS
Plant Hardwood
No. Percent Furnish
16
13
7
9
12
6
15
17
5
4
1
10*
14
3
10
0
15
0
22
0
56
100
15
92
100
92
7
0
Steam Hardboard BOD
Factor Percent Production KgfKKg
2.5
2.7
2.5
3.6
3.8
6.0
6.5
6.2
9.0
4.0
6.0
6.2
6.3
—
0
0
0
0
Q
0
0
0
27
44
60
0
26
47
6.5
11.2
11.6
15.1
15.1
27.6
32.2
33.6
33.6
3L7
39.0
40.5
44.6
NG
*Values do not represent present conditions  due  to experimental
 changes in water systems.
                          17«*

-------
results from additives.  Additives vary in both type and quantity
according to the operational preferences of  the  plant  to  some
extent,  but primarily to the type of product being produced.  An
unpublished report prepared  by  the  Acoustical  and  Insulating
Materials  Association  indicates  a variation in waste load with
variation in additives; however, this is difficult to quantify.
                                                 receive  various
                                               up  to  25 percent
The three basic types of product  produced  by  insulation  board
plants,  sheathing,  finished  tile   (ceiling  tile,  etc.),  and
hardboard (including  medium  density  siding)
amounts  of  additives.   Sheathing  contains
additives which include asphalt, alum, starch, and  size  (either
wax or resin).  Finished tile contains up to  10 percent additives
which  are  the  same  as used in sheathing, except no asphalt is
used.  Hardboard contains up to 30  percent  additives  including
organic resins, as well as emulsions and tempering agents such as
tall oil.

Total  retention  of  these  additives would be advantageous from
both a production cost as well as waste water standpoint, but  is
not  currently  achievable.   Therefore,  the process waste water
will contain not only leachates from the wood and fugitive fiber,
but also the  portion  of  the  additives  not  retained  in  the
product.

The  primary effect of product type occurs with the production of
hardboard in an insulation board plant.  Hardboard often requires
higher amounts of additives, but it also requires  a  pulp  of  a
higher  quality  than  does  insulation board and thus more fiber
preparation may be necessary.  For these reasons,  the  hardboard
producing plants will have a greater waste water load than plants
which do not produce hardboard.  This again is shown in Table 45.
Plants  1, 3, 5, and 14 all utilize steaming  in fiber preparation
and  also  produce  hardboard;  therefore,  the se   piants   have
characteristically higher waste water loads.  Plant 4, which also
produces  hardboard,  utilizes  little or no  steaming of furnish.
For this reason, the effluent from plant  4   is  similar  to  the
effluents  from  plants  that  steam  chips   but  do  not produce
hardboard.

Model Plants

As discussed in Section IV, the subcategory of  insulation  board
production  has  been  further  subcategorized into two portions.
Subcategory I consists of plants that do little or no steaming of
furnish.  These plants are 7, 9, 12,  13, and  16.  Subcategory  II
includes  those  plants  that  steam  the  furnish or plants that
produce hardboard at the  same  facility.   These  include  plant
numbers 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 14, 15, and 17 as  shown in Table 44.

There  are  wide  variations  of  production  rates  within  each
category; however, there is  little  or  no   correlation  between
production rates and subcategories.  Since the average production
rate for all plants listed in Table 44 is 288 metric tons per day
 (318  tons per day), a production rate of 270 metric tons per day
                                 175

-------
 (300 tons per day) was selected as the production
model plants.
rate  for  all
An  analysis  of  the data presented in Table 44 shows there is a
wide range of waste  water  flow  independent  of  subcategories.
Waste  water  flow  is  not directly related to the organic waste
water load discharged but to individual plant operation and water
utilization practices.  A flow of 12,500 1 per metric ton   (3,000
gal  per ton)  was judged to be representative of plants with good
inplant control.  Therefore, a flow of 12,500 1  per  metric  ton
(3,000  gal  per  ton)  was  selected  as the flow from the model
plants for each subcategory.

Table 44 also shows a wide range of suspended  solids  discharged
independently    of    subcategories.    The   suspended   solids
concentrations in the waste water discharged from  an  insulation
board  plant  depend  on  equipment  utilized to remove suspended
solids from the waste water stream possibly prior to  its  reuse.
The  model  plant  for  each  subcategory is assumed to utilize a
primary  clarifier  for  suspended   solids   removal.    Primary
clarification  is  an  effective  and  common method of suspended
solids removal in the insulation board industry.  Data  in  Table
U4  show  that  the suspended solids in the effluent from primary
clarifiers in all three subcategories can be expected to  average
10 Kilograms per metric ton (20 pounds per ton).

The  model  plants  are  assumed to have adequate sludge handling
facilities since this is  the  case  for  most  existing  plants.
Based  on limited data, it was assumed that the waste sludge from
primary clarifiers is 10 kilograms per metric ton (20 pounds  per
ton) at 3.0 percent consistency.

The   principal   variation   in   waste  water  quality  between
subcategories occurs in regard to the BOD loads.  The  BOD  loads
for  subcategory  I and II were selected to be 12.5 kilograms per
metric ton (25 pounds per ton), and 37.5 kilograms per metric ton
(75 pounds per ton), respectively.

As shown in Table 44, the BOD loads in subcategory I  range  from
6.5  kilograms  per metric ton to 15 kilograms per metric ton  (13
pounds per ton to 30 pounds per ton).   Plant  16,  which  has  a
discharge  of  6.5  kilograms per metric ton  (13 pounds per ton),
soaks its wood before grinding; however. This operation  will  be
phased  out  by  the  end  of 1974.  The soaking liquor removes a
portion of the BOD load which is not reported as part of the  6.5
kilograms per metric ton  (13 pounds per ton).  This is assumed to
be  approximately  25  percent  of the total plant discharge.  An
average of the adjusted BOD load for the subcategory.  The plants
in this  subcategory  exercise  approximately  equal  degrees  of
inplant control methods.

The  BOD  of 37.5 kilograms per metric ton  (75 pounds per ton) of
subcategory II is considered reasonable based  on  interpretation
of the data presented in Table 44.  Waste loads from these plants
range from 27.5 to 44.6 kilograms per metric ton  (55 to 89 pounds
                                  176

-------
per  ton).   Although  little  data is available, plant 10, which
reports a waste load to 40.5 kilograms per metric ton (81  pounds
per ton), appears to have reduced its waste load significantly at
this  time.   Based on current experimental modifications at this
plant, it is projected that the plant can reduce its  waste  load
to 27.5 kilograms per metric ton (55 pounds per ton) or less.  An
average  of  the  plants  in this subcategory is approximately 37
kilograms per metric ton (74 pounds per ton) ; therefore, the  BOD
load  for  this  subcategory  was  assumed to be 37 kilograms per
metric ton  (74 pounds per ton) .
A summary of the waste water characteristics for model plants
all subcategories is presented below.
                                                of
      II
12,500

12,500
Production
  kkg/day

    270

    270
  BOD
kq/kkg

 12.5

 37.5
  SS
kq/kkq

  10

  10
It should be noted that the presented flows and loads occur after
a  primary  clarifier.   The loads and flows given do not include
cooling water, boiler blowdown,  roof  runoff,  yard  runoff,  or
waters from raw material handling and storage operations.

PARTICLEBOARD

Specific Water Uses

There  is little water used in the manufacturing of particleboard
itself.  Water usage for raw materials handling is typical of the
timber products industries and is  discussed  elsewhere  in  this
document.   The  water  use within a typical plant may consist of
that used for cleaning blenders, rinsing additive storage  tanks,
caul  cooling sprays, mat sprays, fire suppression water, cooling
water, water used in scrubbers for  air  emissions  control,  and
water  used  in  miscellaneous operations.  The total quantity of
waste water flow, excluding cooling water, from  a  particleboard
plant,  according to all collected data, may range from  less than
190 Ipd  (50 gal per day) to as much as 320,000  Ipd   (86,000  gal
per  day),  with little correlation in plant production.  Cooling
water requirements may run from  150 to 2,300 cu m per  day   (0.04
to  0.60  mgd),  but  rarely exceed 1,100 cu m per day  (0.3 mgd).
Table 46 itemizes waste water flows  from  particleboard plants.
Data  were  obtained  by  questionnaires sent out by the National
Particleboard Association  and   samples  collected  from several
plants during this study.

Blender  Wash:  Blender cleaning is necessary because of the fact
that during the operation of the blender there is  a  buildup  of
resin  and  wood  particles  on  the interior of the machine which
causes increased friction and  eventual  binding  of  the  moving
                                177

-------
                        TABLE 46
PARTICLEBOARD  PLANT PROCESS WATER AND  COOLING WATER FLOW  RATES
Plant
Number
J5
i
29
28
25
2
23
3
16
4
3.1
11
P
6
20
9
Wastewater
Product! on Di scharge
(kkg/day) (I/day)
87_ 189
J8
54
136
136 2277.
140
261
272 1,097,6506,
272 15,140
295 12,3017
297 327,213
317 45421
317
336
356 3785
363
Cooling
Water
Discharge
(I/day)



J90.764
151,400
187,887
2,180,1607_
1,362.6004.

55,6584
to
416,350
163,512
to
464,798
654,048
545,0401
11,355
189,250
10,9037
Blender House- Press
Washout keeping Pi t
(I/day) (I/day) (I/day)
1S9

189
5681
151
57 802

1893i

42735 1325
to
9463
54,504 218,016 54,693
189 76
18937.
J325
3785
227
to
341
Storage
Tank Wash
Waters
(Vday)

761


76
303



15 14

189




     363
43,603
7570   18,9252
18,9253.1/change
                             178

-------
                          TABLE  46
PARTICLEBOARD  PLANT PROCESS WATER AND COOLING WATER FLOW  RATES
(Continued)
Plant
Number
30
12
26
27
14
19
10
8
32
Wastewater
Producti on D1 scharge
(kkg/day) (I/day)
381
392
431
449
499 83277,
635
726
1361

Cooling
Water Blender House-
Discharge Washout keeping
0/day) (I/day) (I/day)
253,595
1,627,550
98,0324
2,. 180, 160
2,;iSO,X60 7570
1,771,380

Dry Clean
454,200 IB, 925
Storage
Press Tank Wash
Pi t Waters
(I/day) (I/day)


21,953

757

28393. 1/wk


  NOTE:  No available data for plant numbers not listed,

  l) once per week
  2) once per 3-months
  3) frequency varies
  4) recycled
  5) includes blender wash
  6} scrubber effluent
  7) estimated
                                      179

-------
parts  of  the  blender,  increased  wear  on  the  motors, and a
decrease in blender capacity.  Also the residue  buildup  on  the
inside  of the blender may break loose and become formed into the
finished board.   This  may  result  in  resin  spots  which  are
considered by the industry to be a serious quality problem.  This
residue  must  be removed periodically.  The volume of wash water
used depends on (1)  the frequency of cleaning,  and   (2)  whether
the  cleaning  operation  is  preceded  by manual scraping of the
blender.  The frequency of the blender cleanup  operation  varies
from  plant to plant.  Blenders may be cleaned as infrequently as
once a week or as often as four times a day depending on the type
of blender being used as well as the size of the  wood  particles
and the tack (ability to adhere) of the resin being added.

Certain  types  of  blenders  are  equipped with a cooling jacket
which  reduces  the  frequency  of  washing  because  the  resins
utilized are thermo-setting and a reduction in temperature inside
the  blender  will  significantly  reduce  the amount of buildup.
There is a wide variation in buildup in actual field  conditions.
No  definitive  explanation  for  this  variability in buildup is
available.  It has been noted in  the  field  that  particles  of
smaller  size  cause  an  increase  in the rate of buildup on the
interior of a blender.  While no  definitive  studies  have  been
conducted  in this area, the phenomenon is most likely related to
the surface area,  volume ratio of the particles.

Blenders, although usually  cleaned  with  water,  are  sometimes
cleaned by manual scraping followed by the use.of steam to remove
the  remainder  of the waste.  This method requires approximately
45 1 (12 gal)  of water per washing operation.  When water is used
to wash out blenders, the resulting quantity of water required is
approximately 400 1  (100 gal) per wash.  A discussion of  factors
for  choosing wet or dry blender cleaning can be found in Section
VII of this report,   when phenolic resins are used, they  may  be
added  in  a  refiner  rather  than  in  a  blender; however, the
refiners must also be cleaned and a waste  stream  of  a  similar
volume results.

In  a  particleboard  plant  there  is need occasionally to clean
additive storage tanks to  remove  a  buildup  of  residue.   The
amount  of  water  used  varies  widely, approximately from 75 to
19,000 1  (20 to 5,000 gal) per  washing  operation,  but  usually
does  not  exceed  2,000  1  (500 gal) per wash.  These tanks are
washed infrequently, usually once every three  months  for  resin
storage  tanks  and  once  a year for wax emulsion storage tanks.
Some plants find the need  to  wash  tanks  more  frequently  for
reasons  relating to resin storage life and ambient temperatures.
Also, washing is required more frequently when different types of
resins used for different products must be  stored  in  the  same
tank.

Caul  Cooling Water - Approximately half the particleboard plants
in the U. S. utilize cauls for forming the  mat  or  transporting
the  mat  into the press and the finished board out of the press.
During the pressing cycle, the cauls may become  quite  warm  and
                                 180

-------
must be cooled before being reused.  This is usually accomplished
by  spraying  a  fine  mist  of  water  onto the cauls.  There is
usually no discharge from this  point,  and,  if  discharge  does
occur,  it normally does not exceed 3.8 to 7.6 1 (1 to 2 gal)  per
minute.

Mat Spray -  In  order  to  improve  the  final  product,  it  is
sometimes  advantageous  to slightly moisten the mat before it is
pressed.  This is done by a spray in a  similar  manner  as  caul
cooling, and usually results in no discharge.

Fire Suppression Water - An inherent problem in the production of
particleboard  is  that  as  a result of the wood particles being
transported in  a  dry  state,  they  are  subject  to  fire  and
explosion.   The  interior  of  a  particleboard plant can easily
become coated with  dry  particles  which  are  ignitable  by  an
electrical  spark  or  excessively  hot press or other equipment.
Most frequently fires start in a refiner or  flaker  and  quickly
spread  throughout  the particle conveying system.  Fires are not
scheduled and their frequency varies from mill to mill  depending
on  the  degree  of  particle  preparation  carried out and other
factors.  Historically, major fires  occur  from  two  to  twelve
times  a  year.   Most mills have elaborate fire fighting systems
which use massive  quantities  of  water  to  rapidly  extinguish
fires.   The quantity of water used will vary with the extent and
duration of the fire.  In addition,  there  are  sometimes  minor
fires,  occurring  as  often  as  once  or  twice  a day but more
commonly once or twice a week,  which  require  relatively  small
quantities of water for control.

Cooling   Water   -  The  largest  volume  of  water  used  in  a
particleboard mill is cooling water for various inplant equipment
such as  refiners,  air  compressors,  hydraulic  systems,  press
platens,   resin   tanks,  blenders,  and  other  machinery.   As
presented in Table 40, typical volumes vary from 150 cu m per day
(O.OU million gal per day) to  over  7,000  cu  m  per  day   (2.0
million gal per day).

Scrubbers  -  Air  pollution  from particleboard mills is a major
environmental concern.  One method of air  pollution  control  in
the  particleboard  industry  is the use of wet scrubbers.  Water
usage  for  scrubbing  will  vary  depending  on  the  individual
scrubber  design.   As discussed in Section VII, all of the waste
water from wet scrubbers can be recycled by use of settling ponds
with makeup being  added  to  replace  that  evaporated.   Excess
solids  buildup  in  the  settling  ponds  is  normally hauled to
landfill  areas  as  necessary.   As  most   scrubbers   in   the
particleboard  industry  can  be  operated  without a waste water
discharge, they are not considered  to  be  a  significant  waste
water source.

Miscellaneous	Operations  -  There  are  several  miscellaneous
operations in a particleboard mill that  result  in  waste  water
discharges
per plant.
totaling  approximately 4,000 Ipd (1,000 gal per day)
These discharges consist primarily of water  and  oil
                                 181

-------
formed in the press pit because of leaking of the press hydraulic
system  and  water  used  for  general  plant  cleanup.   Volumes
reported from the press pit vary from essentially zero to  5^,700
Ipd  (ia,45Q  gal per day); however, a flow of 1,000 Ipd (300 gal
per day)  or less is judged to be typical.  The  plants  reporting
higher  volumes usually rinse the press pit with water.  Although
many plants  are  cleaned  with  vacuum  cleaners  or  other  dry
devices, some plants feel the need to wash these areas with water
for  the purpose of fire prevention.  If this is done, there will
be an increased water discharge of approximately 8,000  Ipd(2,000
gal per day) from the plant.

Another water discharge may result from the condensation of steam
coming  into contact with the cold metal of a pressurized refiner
during start up.  This is an intermittent flow  that  will  cease
once  the  refinery reaches operating temperatures.  The quantity
is estimated to be less than 150  1  
-------
                                           TABLE 47
                  TOTAL  PARTICLEBOARD  PLANT RAW WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
Plant Flow Color Temp. BOD COD
No. (I/day) pH (units) (°C) (mg/1) (mg/1)
4 12,491 7.2 380
to
12.0
1
31 327,403
t— fc
OD
CO
12 264,950* 6.6 15
32 6.2 50
to
7.6
US
to
44

28 134 320
to
260

300 H5
22 6
to to
24 35
TS SS DS
(mg/1) (mg/1) Ong/1)
35
to
260

134
to
259

68 2i 47
30


on &
P04 Phenols Grease TN ON
(mgTl) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mq/1) (mg/1)
17
to
18

0.7 18.5 • 135



0 4.1
1
td
50
*Total flow Includes wastewater and some cooling water.

-------
                 TABLE 48
WASTE WATER ANALYSIS BY STREAM




h-l
oo
-c-



Source
Blender
Wash

Urea Resin
Tank Wash

Press
Pit

Plant
No.
24

6
4

11
3

5
Flow
(I/day)
379
V
1325
1514

189
1893

95
Color
pH (units)
6.4_

7.0 433
7.7

262
7.4

7.3
Turb. BODc
(J.T.U.) (mg/T;
60

5 31 ,500


750 39,300
500

150
COD
1 (mg/1)
357

9,523


18,200
13,200

414
TS
.(mg/1)
373

4,385


38,234
5,638

697
SS
(mg/1
98

1,650


3,335
155

225
DS
) (mg/1)
275

2,735


34,899
5,483

472
ST.S P04
(mg/1) (mg?l)
<1 /

1.67
15

6.75
<1


Phenols TN KN
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0.75 18.3

1340


87.4 41,278
35 52.2

<.005 64.5
VS P TOC
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)





34,534
5,079 3.14

1 .85 148

-------
will  contain  quantities  of  floatable  wax.    The  waters from
washing resin  tanks  will  contain  quantities  of  nitrogen  or
phenols,  depending  on  whether  urea  or  phenolic  resins  are
utilized.

Cooling Water - Cooling water is usually  uncontaminated  and  is
characterized  by  having an increased temperature that will vary
with the type of equipment being cooled.  However, in some cases,
mills handling their cooling water in  open  trenches  allow  the
cooling water to become contaminated with wood fibers, additives,
or   oil.   Generally,  it  is  considered  that  proper  process
management   allows   cooling   water   to   be   a   noncontact,
uncontaminated stream.

Miscellaneous  Operations - The waste stream generated by general
plant cleanup or waters pumped from the press pit vary widely  in
degree  of  contamination.   The  water  from  plant cleanup will
normally contain wood particles as well as some  oils  or  resins
which  have been spilled.  The amounts of these substances in the
waste water stream will vary considerably with time.   The  waste
stream  from  the  press  pit  is  composed  of  liquids from the
hydraulic system of the press as well as  from  steam  lines  and
will  contain  a  large amount of fugitive particles.  Character-
istics of this stream vary.  Results of  analyses  conducted  for
one plant are presented in Table 48.

Model Plant

Based   on   the   values   presented  in  Table  46,  a  typical
particleboard plant discharges on an intermittent basis 11,000  1
(3,000  gal)  per  day  of  contaminated  waste  water.  It has a
production of 270 metric tons (300 tons) per day.  The  22,000  1
(3,000 gal) of waste water consist of 7,200 1  (2,000 gal)  per day
of  housekeeping  water,  i.e.,  water  used  for  general  plant
cleanup; 1,900 1 (500 gal) per day of resin blender  wash  water;
and  an  additional  1,900  1   (500  gal)  per  day consisting of
miscellaneous flows including periodic washdown of storage tanks,
pressurized refiner start-up, and water from the press  pit.   It
is  felt that because no discharge is a feasible alternative, the
flow is the primary factor involved in a consideration  of  waste
water   treatment  schemes.   The  model  plant  utilizes  planer
shavings or chips as a basic raw material.  It does not wash  the
raw material before utilizing it in the process.

The  model plant is considered to be typical of the particleboard
industry at this time.  However, the model plant  in  the  future
may  include  both a chip washer and a scrubber for air emissions
control.

FINISHING OPERATIONS

There are two distinct  classifications  of  finishing  materials
used in the factory finishing of wood products.  Liquid finishing
materials  include water and solvent based sealers, stains, dyes,
primers, fillers, base or ground coatings, printing inks, and top
                                  185

-------
coatings.  Overlaying materials include resin-impregnated papers,
special plastic  films,  and  metal  foils.   The  overlaying  of
particleboard  with  veneers and hardboard is also practiced to a
limited extent.

The water used in  finishing  operations  primarily  consists  of
makeup  water  and  wash  water associated with the use of water-
reducible  coatings  and  adhesives  and  in   surface   cleaning
operations  practiced  at  some  plants as an initial step in the
finishing operation.  As reported by Tomsu, the use of water-base
coatings has been  associated  with  the  increasingly  stringent
regulatory  limits  on  solvent  emissions  from finishing lines.
Water-base fillers are  used  on  particleboard,  hardboard,  and
open-grained  plywood.   Water thinned sealers, ground coats, and
clear top coats are also used to  some  extent.   Some  finishing
plants  prepare  the  surface  of  the substrate for finishing by
machine washing with water and a mild detergent.   However,  such
an operation produces no waste water as all Wash water is used in
the makeup of the cleaning solution.

The  only sources of waste water from finishing operations result
from the washing of equipment associated with the use  of  water-
reducible  coatings  and water soluble adhesives.  Such equipment
includes the various types of applicating machines  discussed  in
Section  III  and  the  vats  or  barrels  in  which  the coating
materials or adhesives are mixed and stored prior to application.

Table U9 shows the total volumes  of  waste  water  generated  at
several finishing plants.  Also given in this table are the types
of  finished  products produced, annual production rates, and the
types of water reducible materials applied at each plant.  It can
be  seen  that  the  volumes  of  waste  water   generated   vary
considerably  from  plant to plant.  These variations are chiefly
attributable to the different manners in which the  equipment  is
washed.   For instance, some plants may use 90 to 115 1  (25 to 30
gal) of water or more to  wash  down  one  roll  coater  used  in
applying  a  water base coating material, while another plant may
use less than 20 1  (5 gal) of water to wash down the same type of
machine used to apply a similar type of material.

Because of the wide variety of finished products produced,  types
of  coatings  applied,  and  methods  of  application  and drying
employed, both water  and  solvent  base  coating  materials  are
custom  formulated  for  each  application.   The constituents of
these materials are widely varied throughout the industry and  in
many  cases  even  at  the individual finishing plant level where
custom formulations are freqently made.  Generally,  as  reported
by  Leary, the market requirement influences the type of chemical
coating system applied to the surface of any finished product.

Because  of  such  extreme  variations,  no   list   of   typical
ingredients  of  coating  materials  used  in  wood  finishing is
available, and characterization of the waste waters generated  in
the  use  of  such  materials is not possible on an industry wide
basis.  Characterization of  waste  waters  from  such   finishing
                                   186

-------
                                                    TABLE  49


                                        WASTE WATER GENERATION  FROM FINISHING PLANTS
CO
                    Type of Finished
         Plant     Products Produced

           A       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling and Vinyl
                   Overlaid Hardwood
                   Plywood

           B       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling
           C       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling

           D       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling
           E       Vinyl  Overlaid
                   Hardboard Panels

           F       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling

           G       Prefinlshed Wall
                   Paneling

           H       Preflnished Wall
                   Paneling
                   Aluminum Overlaid
                   Softwood Plywood
                   Exterior Siding
    Annual  Production
   of Finished Products
(Millions of Square Meters)

           12
          11



            6


            2
           11
           10
  Applicators  of
  Water-Reducible
  Finishing  Materials

1  Groove  Striper
1  Adhesive  Spreader
   (Direct Roll)
 2  Filler  Applicators
   (Reverse  Roll)
 2  Groove  Stripers

1  Grain Printer
   (2 Rolls)

1  Tcp Coater  (Direct
    Roll)
l  Sealter Coater  (Direct
   Roll)

l  Adhesive  Spreader
   (Direct Roll)

l  Sealer  Coater (Direct
   Roll)

 3  Sealer  Coaters  (Direct
   Roll)

 i Sealer  Coater (Direct
   Roll)
 l Filler  Coater (Reverse
   Roll) .

 l Arfieslve  Spreader
 2  Spray Booths
   Volumes of
Wastewater Generated*

       260
     1,360



        75


       130




        75


      11 0


       I/O


       760




       450
           *L1ters

-------
operations  would  only be possible on an individual plant basis.
Table 50 shows the results of the chemical  analyses  of  several
water base coatings and the wash waters generated from their use.
However, these materials are not typical of all waterbase coating
materials  used in finishing operations and are presented only as
an indication of possible waste water characteristics.

As reported by Conner, various metals may find their way into any
coating material.  Additives of various types such as those which
are incorporated into a coating material as stabilizers for  such
purposes  as  to prevent biological contamination of the material
during its shelf-life, often contain  mercury,  although  at  the
present  time  efforts  are  being  made by the paint and coating
industry to develop additives of  non-mercuric  types.   Pigments
incorporated  into  a coating material to provide color, commonly
contain lead or cadmium or other materials.

The most extensive study of waste water from paints and  coatings
is  currently  being made for EPA by Southern Research Institute.
The  findings  of  this  study  with  respect  to   waste   water
characteristics   of  waste  water  from  water-base  paints  and
coatings  would  be  most  representative  of  the  waste  waters
generated  from  finishing  operations  in  the  timber  products
processing industry which involve the use of such materials.

Adhesives used in  overlaying  various  sheet  materials  include
plastic  and  vinyl films, medium density impregnated papers, and
metal foils.  The most commonly  used  adhesives  for  overlaying
special   plastic  films  are  polyvinyl  acetate  water-emulsion
adhesives, solvent-type elastomeric adhesives, modified  phenolic
films, special epoxy-resin formulations, and various contact-type
adhesives.   The  resin—impregnated  papers  requiring additional
adhesive bonding are commonly bonded to  the  wood  substrate  by
phenolic  and  modified  phenolic  resin  glues.   Aluminum  foil
overlays are commonly applied with modified phenolic  resin  film
glues,  resorcinol  resins,  and rubber-base contact cements.  As
reported by Brumbaugh, phenol and urea resin glues are  the  most
common  adhesives  used  in overlaying veneers and hardboard onto
particleboard.  Of these various adhesives,  only  the  polyvinyl
acetate-water  emulsions,  the  phenolic and urea resins, and the
resorcinol resins are water soluble and would constitute a source
of waste water in the washing of equipment associated with  their
use.   Water-soluble  adhesive  applicating  machines employed in
overlaying operations are usually washed at the end of  each  run
and require about 75 1  (20 gal) of water for each washing.

Since  most  overlayed  wood  products  are  usually  produced as
specialty items in the  larger  finishing  plants,  and  are  not
usually  produced  on  a full scale, continuous production basis,
volumes of waste  water  generated  from  such  operations  would
seldom  exceed  75 Ipd  (20 gal per day) from any single finishing
plant.  The  characteristics  of  these  waste  waters  would  be
similar  to  those  described previously for adhesive wash waters
generated in fabricating operations.  The chemical analysis of  a
                                  188

-------
                                              TABLE 50

                                    CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF WATER BASE MATERIALS
                                Total      Total      Total
                                         To tal       Total
Material
Water base sealer
Washwater
Water base sealer
Washwater
Water base sealer
Washwater
h-*
g Waterbase filler
Washwater
Total
Solids
(mg/D
267,805
1,765
543,160
46,710
675,530
28,300
1,203,720
65,000
Suspended
Solids
(mg/1)
56,465
335
345,490
43,022
538,530
25,537
1,160,290
60,2iO
Dissolved
Solids
(mg/D
211,340
1,430
197,670
3,688
137,000
2,763
43,430
4,790
Volatile
Solids
(mg/D
196,866
1,405
446,590
40,880
203,970
7,510
223,720
27,000
Sus pended
Sol Ids
(mg/1)
40,755
141
318,590
37,407
146,370
5,420
154,150
22,717
Dissolve
Solids
(mg/D
156,111
1,264
128,000
3,473
57,600
2,090
69,570
4,283
d
COD
(mg/D
306,740
8,428
512,462
51 ,169
305,760
26,264
226,968
51,156
                                                                                            P04t    Nt
                                                                                            (mST\) (mg/D

                                                                                            6351.0 469.56

                                                                                             191.9 123.31

                                                                                            3500.0 435.44

                                                                                             504.1  65.52

                                                                                             137.8  89.82

                                                                                              86.5   6.33

                                                                                             113.5 579.44

                                                                                              52.7  81.62
                                                                                   Phenols
                                                                                    (mg/1)

                                                                                    3699.4

                                                                                     ^04.0

                                                                                     329.4

                                                                                      92.8

                                                                                    4975.4

                                                                                     212.1

                                                                                     361.3

                                                                                     213.8
Water Soluble
adhesives

Washwater
607,771    88,098   519,673   591,167     77,566   513,601  807,128    94.6  77.25  2678.3

253,502   250,492     3,OlO   241,342    238,656     2,686  245,000  1216.2   8.84  3191.1

-------
water  soluble  adhesive used in a vinyl overlaying operation and
the waste water generated from its use is presented in Table 50.

Figure U2 shows a process flow  diagram  for  the  production  of
printed grain, prefinished wall paneling and shows the amounts of
waste  water generated from such an operation.  Although this may
not be typical of any particular plant, it should serve  here  to
illustrate  typical sources and volumes of waste water that might
be generated from such a plant.

Model Plant

Although finishing operations are carried out in  many  different
types  of  plants,  producing a wide variety of types of finished
products, the volumes of waste  water  generated  from  finishing
plants  generally  fall  into the range of 75 to 1,100 Ipd  (20 to
300 gal per day).  The typical finishing plant  to  be  developed
for  the purposes for this study is a plant producing prefinished
wall paneling with a total waste water generation of 750 Ipd (200
gal per day) resulting from the washing of  equipment  associated
with  the  use  of  water-base  finishing materials.  The typical
plant is assumed to consist of the following:

    1.  Two identical finishing lines similar to that shown in
        Figure U2.

    2.  Both lines operate on a 24 hour per day, 5 days per week
        basis.

    3.  Each line consists of three water-base material appli-
        cating machines.

    U.  Annual production of prefinished paneling is equal to 10
        million sq m on a 6.35 mm basis (107.6 million sq ft on a
        0.25 in basis) .

Typically, each water-base material applicating machine would  be
washed  once  each day requiring 75 1  (20 gal) of water per wash.
Wash water from machine wash down would then  consist  of  450  1
(120  gal) per day.  Material storage and mixing vats require 300
1  (80 gal) of wash water per day.   The  total  volume  of  waste
water  generated  at the typical plant would then be 750 Ipd (200
gal per day) .
                                  190

-------
FEED
HARDWOOD
PLYWOOD
PANELS


V- GROOVE
CUTTER
                                                                    MACHINE
                                                                    WASH WATER
                                                                    75 LITERS/DAY
                               MACHINE
                               WASHWATER
                               T5 LITERS/DAY
CO
                                                                                                          MACHINE
                                                                                                          WASHWATER
                                                                                                          79 LITERS/DAY
                                                                                                  PACKAGING AND
                                                                                                  SHIPPING
                                      (EXISTING 2-LINES)


                                    VAT
                                    WASHWATER
                                    SCO LITERS/DAY
TOTAL MACHINE WASHWATER  • 229 I/day
      MACHINE WASHWATER  • 490 I/day
      VAT WASHWATER       • 900 I/doy
                    TOTAL* 799
                                     FIGURE  42   WASTEWATER  PRODUCTION  IN A  PREFINISHED PANEL PLANT

-------

-------
                           SECTION VI

                      POLLUTANT PARAMETERS
Presented below is  a  discussion  of  pollutants  and  pollutant
parameters  that  may be present in process waters in the portion
of the timber products processing industry that is the subject of
this  proposed  effluent  guidelines  and  standards  development
document.

Certain  of  these parameters are common to all the subcategories
covered by this document,  although  the  concentrations  in  the
process  water  and  the  absolute  amounts generated per unit of
production vary considerably among the subcategories.

Review of published information. Refuse Act Permit  applications,
industry  data,  and  information generated during the survey and
analysis phase of this effluent  guidelines  development  program
determined  that the following pollutants or pollutant parameters
may be common to all of the subcategories:

         Biochemical Oxygen Demand  (BOD5)
         Chemical Oxygen Demand
         Phenols
         Oil and Grease
         pH
         Temperature
         Dissolved Solids
         Total Suspended Solids
         Phosphorus
         Ammonia
         Copper
         Chromium
         Arsenic
         Zinc
         Flourides

The above listed  pollutants  or  pollutant  parameters  are,  of
course,  not  present in process water from all the subcategories
for which effluent guidelines and standards are presented in this
document.  Their presence depends on a number of factors, such as
processing method, raw materials used, and chemicals added to the
process.          x

Following is a  discussion  of  the  significant  pollutants  and
pollutant parameters.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)

Biochemical  oxygen  demand   (BOD)  is  a  measure  of the oxygen
consuming capabilities of organic matter.  The BOD  does  not  in
itself  cause direct harm to a water system, but it does exert an
indirect effect by depressing the oxygen content  of  the  water.
Sewage  and  other  organic  effluents  during their processes of
                                  193

-------
decomposition exert a BOD, which can have a  catastrophic  effect
on  the ecosystem by depleting the oxygen supply.  Conditions are
reached frequently where all  of  the  oxygen  is  used  and  the
continuing  decay  process causes the production of noxious gases
such as hydrogen sulfide and methane.   Water  with  a  high  BOD
indicates   the   presence  of  decomposing  organic  matter  and
subsequent high bacterial counts that  degrade  its  quality  and
potential uses.

Dissolved  oxygen  (DO)   is  a water quality constituent that, in
appropriate  concentrations,  is  essential  not  only  to   keep
organisms living but also to sustain species reproduction, vigor,
and  the development of populations.  Organisms undergo stress at
reduced DO concentrations that make  them  less  competitive  and
able  to  sustain  their  species within the aquatic environment.
For  example,  reduced  DO  concentrations  have  been  shown  to
interfere  with fish population through delayed hatching of eggs,
reduced size and vigor of embryos, production of  deformities  in
young,  interference  with  food digestion, acceleration of blood
clotting, decreased tolerance to certain toxicants, reduced  food
efficiency   and  growth  rate,  and  reduced  maximum  sustained
swimming  speed.   Fish  food  organisms  are  likewise  affected
adversely  in  conditions  with suppressed DO.  Since all aerobic
aquatic  organisms  need  a  certain  amount   of   oxygen,   the
consequences  of total lack of dissolved oxygen due to a high BOD
can kill all inhabitants of the affected area.

If a high BOD is present, the quality of  the  water  is  usually
visually  degraded  by  the presence of decomposing materials and
algae blooms due to the uptake of degraded  materials  that  form
the foodstuffs of the algal populations.

Phenols

Phenols and phenolic wastes are derived from petroleum, coke, and
chemical  industries;  wood distillation; and domestic and animal
wastes.  Many phenolic compounds are more toxic than pure phenol;
their toxicity varies with the combinations and general nature of
total wastes.  The effect of combinations of  different  phenolic
compounds is cumulative.

Phenols  and  phenolic compounds are both acutely and chronically
toxic to fish and other  aquatic  animals.   Also,  chlorophenols
produce  an  unpleasant  taste  in fish flesh that destroys their
recreational and commercial value.

It is necessary to limit phenolic compounds in raw water used for
drinking water supplies, as conventional treatment  methods  used
by  water supply facilities do not remove phenols.  The ingestion
of concentrated solutions of phenols will result in severe  pain,
renal irritation, shock and possibly death.

Phenols  also  reduce the utility of water for certain industrial
uses, notably food and  beverage  processing,  where  it  creates
unpleasant tastes and odors in the product.
                                 19J*

-------
Oil and Grease

Oil  and  grease  exhibit  an  oxygen  demand.  Oil emulsions may
adhere to the gills of fish or coat and destroy  algae  or  other
plankton.  Deposition of oil in the bottom sediments can serve to
exhibit  normal  benthic  growths,  thus interrupting the aquatic
food chain,  soluble and emulsified material ingested by fish may
taint the flavor of the fish flesh.  Water soluble components may
exert toxic action on fish.  Floating  oil  may  reduce  the  re-
aeration  of the water surface and in conjunction with emulsified
oil  may  interfere   with   photosynthesis.    Water   insoluble
components  damage  the  plumage  and  coats of water animals and
fowls.  Oil and grease in a water can result in the formation  of
objectionable   surface  slicks  preventing  the  full  aesthetic
enjoyment of the water.

Oil spills can damage the surface of boats and  can  destroy  the
aesthetic characteristics of beaches and shorelines.

ESf Acidity and Alkalinity

Acidity and alkalinity are reciprocal terms.  Acidity is produced
by  substances  that  yield  hydrogen  ions  upon  hydrolysis and
alkalinity is produced by substances that  yield  hydroxyl  ions.
The  terms  "total acidity" and "total alkalinity" are often used
to express the buffering capacity  of  a  solution.   Acidity  in
natural waters is caused by carbon dioxide, mineral acids, weakly
dissociated  acids, and the salts of strong acids and weak bases.
Alkalinity is caused by strong bases  and  the  salts  of  strong
alkalies and weak acids.

The  term  pH is a logarithmic expression of the concentration of
hydrogen ions.  At a pH of  7,  the  hydrogen  and  hydroxyl  ion
concentrations  are  essentially  equal and the water is neutral.
Lower pH values indicate acidity  while  higher  values  indicate
alkalinity.    The   relationship   between  pH  and  acidity  or
alkalinity is not necessarily linear or direct.

Waters  with  a  pH  below  6.0  are  corrosive  to  water  works
structures,  distribution  lines, and household plumbing fixtures
and can thus add such constituents to  drinking  water  as  iron,
copper,  zinc,  cadmium and lead.  The hydrogen ion concentration
can affect the "taste" of the water.  At a low  pH  water  tastes
"sour." The bactericidal effect of chlorine is weakened as the pH
increases,  and  it  is  advantageous  to keep the pH close to 7.
This is very significant for providing safe drinking water.

Extremes of pH or rapid pH changes can exert stress conditions or
kill aquatic life outright.  Dead fish, associated algal  blooms,
and  foul  stenches  are  aesthetic  liabilities of any waterway.
Even moderate changes from "acceptable" criteria limits of pH are
deleterious to some species.  The relative  toxicity  to  aquatic
life  of  many materials is increased by changes in the water pH.
Metalocyanide complexes can increase a thousand-fold in  toxicity
with  a  drop of 1.5 pH units.  The availability of many nutrient
                                  195

-------
substances varies with the alkalinity and  acidity.   Ammonia  is
more lethal with a higher pH.

The lacrimal fluid of the human eye has a pH of approximately 7.0
and  a  deviation  of 0.1 pH unit from the norm may result in eye
irritation for the swimmer.  Appreciable  irritation  will  cause
severe pain.

Temperature

Temperature  is  one  of the most important and influential water
quality characteristics.  Temperature  determines  those  species
that  may  be  present;  it  activates  the  hatching  of  young,
regulates their activity,  and  stimulates  or  suppresses  their
growth  and development; it attracts, and may kill when the water
becomes too hot or becomes chilled too  suddenly.   Colder  water
generally   suppresses   development.    Warmer  water  generally
accelerates activity and may be a primary cause of aquatic  plant
nuisances when other environmental factors are suitable.

Temperature  is a prime regulator of natural processes within the
water  environment.   It  governs  physiological   functions   in
organisms  and, acting directly or indirectly in combination with
other water quality constituents, it affects  aquatic  life  with
each  change.   These  effects  include  chemical reaction rates,
enzymatic functions, molecular movements, and molecular exchanges
between membranes within and between  the  physiological  systems
and the organs of an animal.

Chemical  reaction  rates  vary  with  temperature  and generally
increase as the temperature  is  increased.   The  solubility  of
gases  in  water  varies  with  temperature.  Dissolved oxygen is
decreased by the decay  or  decomposition  of  dissolved  organic
substances and the decay rate increases as the temperature of the
water  increases  reaching  a  maximum at about 30°C  (86°F).  The
temperature of stream water, even during  summer,  is  below  the
optimum  for pollution-associated bacteria.  Increasing the water
temperature increases the bacterial multiplication rate when  the
environment is favorable and the food supply is abundant.

Reproduction  cycles  may  be  changed significantly by increased
temperature because this function takes  place  under  restricted
temperature  ranges.   Spawning  may  not  occur  at  all because
temperatures are too high.  Thus, a fish population may exist  in
a  heated  area  only by continued immigration.  Disregarding the
decreased reproductive potential,  water  temperatures  need  not
reach  lethal  levels  to  decimate a species.  Temperatures that
favor competitors, predators, parasites, and disease can  destroy
a species at levels far below those that are lethal.

Fish  food  organisms  are  altered  severely  when  temperatures
approach or  exceed  90°F.   Predominant  algal  species  change,
primary  production is decreased, and bottom associated organisms
may  be  depleted  or  altered   drastically   in   numbers   and
                                 196

-------
distribution.   Increased  water  temperatures  may cause aquatic
plant nuisances when other environmental factors are favorable.

Synergistic actions of pollutants are more severe at higher water
temperatures.  Given amounts of domestic sewage, refinery wastes,
oils,  tars,  insecticides,  detergents,  and  fertilizers   more
rapidly  deplete  oxygen in water at higher temperatures, and the
respective toxicities are likewise increased.

When water temperatures increase, the predominant  algal  species
may  change  from  diatoms  to  green  algae, and finally at high
temperatures to blue-green algae, because of species  temperature
preferentials.  Blue-green algae can cause serious odor problems.
The  number  and  distribution  of benthic organisms decreases as
water temperatures increase above 90°F, which  is  close  to  the
tolerance  limit for the population.  This could seriously affect
certain fish that depend on benthic organisms as a food source.

The cost of fish being attracted to heated water in winter months
may be considerable, due to fish mortalities that may result when
the fish return to the cooler water.

Rising  temperatures  stimulate  the  decomposition  of   sludge,
formation  of. sludge gas, multiplication of saprophytic bacteria
and fungi  (particularly in the presence of organic  wastes),  and
the   consumption  of  oxygen  by  putrefactive  processes,  thus
affecting the esthetic value of a water course.

In general, marine water temperatures do not change as rapidly or
range as widely as those of freshwaters.   Marine  and  estuarine
fishes,  therefore,  are  less tolerant of temperature variation.
Although this limited tolerance is greater in estuarine  than  in
open water marine species, temperature changes are more important
to  those  fishes  in  estuaries  and  bays than to those in open
marine areas, because of the nursery and replenishment  functions
of  the  estuary  that  can  be  adversely  affected  by  extreme
temperature changes.

Dissolved Solids

In  natural  waters  the  dissolved  solids  consist  mainly   of
carbonates,   chlorides,   sulfates,   phosphates,  and  possibly
nitrates of  calcium,  magnesium,  sodium,  and  potassium,  with
traces of iron, manganese and other substances.

Many  communities in the United States and in other countries use
water supplies containing 2000 to UOOO mg/1 of  dissolved  salts,
when   no  better  water  is  available.   Such  waters  are  not
palatable, may not quench thirst, and may have a laxative  action
on  new  users.   Waters  containing more than UOOO mg/1 of total
salts are generally considered unfit for human use,  although  in
hot  climates  such  higher  salt concentrations can be tolerated
whereas  they  could  not  be  in  temperate  climates.    Waters
containing 5000 mg/1 or more are reported to be bitter and act as
bladder  and  intestinal  irritants.  It is generally agreed that
                                  197

-------
the salt concentration of good, palatable water should not exceed
500 rag/1.

Limiting concentrations of dissolved solids for fresh-water  fish
may  range  from  5,000  to 10,000 mg/1, according to species and
prior acclimatization.  Some fish are adapted to living  in  more
saline  waters,  and a few species of fresh-water forms have been
found in natural waters with a salt concentration  of  15,000  to
20,000  mg/1.   Fish  can  slowly  become  acclimatized to higher
salinities, but fish in waters of  low  salinity  cannot  survive
sudden  exposure to high salinities, such as those resulting from
discharges of oil-well brines.  Dissolved  solids  may  influence
the  toxicity  of  heavy metals and organic compounds to fish and
other aquatic life, primarily because of the antagonistic  effect
of hardness on metals.

Waters  with total dissolved solids over 500 mg/1 have decreasing
utility as irrigation water.  At 5,000 mg/1 water has  little  or
no value for irrigation.

Dissolved  solids  in  industrial  waters  can  cause  foaming in
boilers and cause interference with cleaness, color, or taste  of
many  finished  products.  High contents of dissolved solids also
tend to accelerate corrosion.

Specific conductance is a measure of the  capacity  of  water  to
convey  an  electric  current.   This  property is related to the
total concentration of ionized  substances  in  water  and  water
temperature.   This  property  is frequently used as a substitute
method of quickly estimating the dissolved solids concentration.

Total Suspended Solids

Suspended solids include both organic  and  inorganic  materials.
The  inorganic  components  include  sand,  silt,  and clay.  The
organic fraction includes such materials  as  grease,  oil,  tar,
animal  and  vegetable  fats,  various fibers, sawdust, hair, and
various materials from  sewers.   These  solids  may  settle  out
rapidly  and  bottom deposits are often a mixture of both organic
and  inorganic  solids.   They  adversely  affect  fisheries   by
covering  the  bottom  of  the  stream  or lake with a blanket of
material that destroys the fish-food bottom fauna or the spawning
ground  of  fish.   Deposits  containing  organic  materials  may
deplete  bottom  oxygen  supplies  and  produce hydrogen sulfide,
carbon dioxide, methane; and other noxious gases.

In raw  water  sources  for  domestic  use,  state  and  regional
agencies generally specify that suspended solids in streams shall
not be present in sufficient concentration to be objectionable or
to  interfere  with normal treatment processes.  Suspended solids
in water may interfere with many industrial processes, and  cause
foaming  in  boilers,  or  encrustations  on equipment exposed to
water, especially as the temperature rises.  Suspended solids are
undesirable in water for  textile  industries;  paper  and  pulp;
beverages;   dairy   products;  laundries;  dyeing;  photography;
                                  198

-------
cooling systems, and  power  plants.    Suspended  particles  also
serve   as   a  transport  mechanism  for  pesticides  and  other
substances which are readily sorbed into or onto clay particles.

Solids may be suspended in water for a time, and then  settle  to
the   bed  of  the  stream  or  lake.   These  settleable  solids
discharged with man's wastes may be inert,  slowly  biodegradable
materials,   or   rapidly   decomposable  substances.   While  in
suspension, they increase the  turbidity  of  the  water,  reduce
light  penetration  and  impair  the  photosynthetic  activity of
aquatic plants.

Solids in suspension are aesthetically  displeasing.   When  they
settle  to  form  sludge deposits on the stream or lake bed, they
are often much more damaging to  the  life  in  water,  and  they
retain  the  capacity  to  displease  the  senses.   Solids, when
transformed to sludge deposits, may  do  a  variety  of  damaging
things,  including  blanketing the stream or lake bed and thereby
destroying the living spaces for  those  benthic  organisms  that
would  otherwise  occupy  the  habitat.   When  of an organic and
therefore decomposable nature, solids use a portion or all of the
dissolved oxygen available in the area.  Organic  materials  also
serve  as  a  seemingly inexhaustible food source for sludgeworms
and associated organisms.

Turbidity  is  principally  a  measure  of  the  light  absorbing
properties  of  suspended  solids.   It  is  frequently used as a
substitute method  of  quickly  estimating  the  total  suspended
solids when the concentration is relatively low.


Phosphorus

During the past 30 years, a formidable case has developed for the
belief  that  increasing standing crops of aquatic plant growths,
which often interfere with water uses and are nuisances  to  man,
frequently are caused 'by increasing supplies of phosphorus.  Such
phenomena   are   associated  with  a  condition  of  accelerated
eutrophication or aging of waters.  It  is  generally  recognized
that  phosphorus  is  not  the  sole cause of eutrophication, but
there is evidence to substantiate that it is frequently  the  key
element in all of the elements required by fresh water plants and
is  .generally  present  in  the  least  amount  relative to need.
Therefore, an increase in phosphorus allows use of other, already
present, nutrients for  plant  growths.   Phosphorus  is  usually
described, for this reasons, as a "limiting factor."

when a plant population is stimulated in production and attains a
nuisance  status,  a  large  number of associated liabilities are
immediately apparent.   Dense  populations  of  pond  weeds  make
swimming  dangerous.   Boating  and  water  skiing  and sometimes
fishing may be eliminated because of the mass of vegetation  that
serves  as  an  physical  impediment  to  such activities.  Plant
populations have been associated with  stunted  fish  populations
and  with  poor  fishing.   Plant  nuisances  emit vile stenches,
impart tastes and odors to water supplies, reduce the  efficiency
                                   199

-------
of  industrial  and  municipal  water treatment, impair aesthetic
beauty,  reduce  or  restrict  resort  trade,  lower   waterfront
property  values,  cause skin rashes to man during water contact,
and serve as a desired substrate and breeding ground for flies.

Phosphorus in the  elemental  form  is  particularly  toxic,  and
subject  to  bioaccumulation  in  much  the  same way as mercury.
Colloidal elemental phosphorus will poison marine  fish  (causing
skin  tissue  breakdown  and discoloration).  Also, phosphorus is
capable of being concentrated and will accumulate in  organs  and
soft  tissues.   Experiments  have  shown  that  marine fish will
concentrate phosphorus from water containing as little as 1 ug/1.

Ammonia

Ammonia is a common  product  of  the  decomposition  of  organic
matter.   Dead  and  decaying animals and plants along with human
and animal body wastes account for much of the  ammonia  entering
the  aquatic  ecosystem.   Ammonia exists in its non-ionized form
only at higher pH levels and is the most  toxic  in  this  state.
The  lower  the  pH,  the  more ionized ammonia is formed and its
toxicity  decreases.   Ammonia,  in  the  presence  of  dissolved
oxygen,  is  converted  to  nitrate (NO3)  by nitrifying bacteria.
Nitrite (NO2), which is an intermediate product  between  ammonia
and  nitrate,   sometimes occurs in quantity when depressed oxygen
conditions permit.  Ammonia can exist in several  other  chemical
combinations including ammonium chloride and other salts.

Nitrates  are considered to be among the poisonous ingredients of
mineralized waters, with potassium nitrate being  more  poisonous
than  sodium  nitrate.   Excess  nitrates cause irritation of the
mucous linings of the gastrointestinal tract and the bladder; the
symptoms are diarrhea and diuresis, and  drinking  one  liter  of
water containing 500 mg/1 of nitrate can cause such symptoms.

Infant  methemoglobinemia,  a  disease  characterized  by certain
specific blood changes  and  cyanosis,  may  be  caused  by  high
nitrate  concentrations  in  the water used for preparing feeding
formulae.    While  it  is  still  impossible  to  state   precise
concentration  limits,  it has been widely recommended that water
containing more than 10 mg/1 of nitrate nitrogen   (NO3-N)  should
not   be   used  for  infants.   Nitrates  are  also  harmful  in
fermentation processes and can cause disagreeable tastes in beer.
In most natural water the pH range is  such  that  ammonium  ions
(NHJH-)   predominate.    In   alkaline   waters,   however,  high
concentrations of un-ionized ammonia  in  undissociated  ammonium
hydroxide increase the toxicity of ammonia solutions.  In streams
polluted  with  sewage,  up  to  one  half of the nitrogen in the
sewage may be in the form of free ammonia, and sewage  may  carry
up  to  35  mg/1  of total nitrogen.  It has been shown that at  a
level of 1.0 mg/1 un-ionized ammonia, the ability  of  hemoglobin
to  combine  with  oxygen  is  impaired  and  fish may suffocate.
Evidence indicates  that  ammonia  exerts  a  considerable  toxic
effect  on  all aquatic life within a range of less than 1.0 mg/1
                                    200

-------
to 25 mg/1, depending  on  the  pH  and  dissolved  oxygen  level
present.

Ammonia  can  add  to  the problem of eutrophication by supplying
nitrogen through its breakdown products.  Some  lakes  in  warmer
climates, and others that are aging quickly are sometimes limited
by  the nitrogen available.  Any increase will speed up the plant
growth and decay process.

Copper

Copper salts occur  in  natural  surface  waters  only  in  trace
amounts,  up to about 0.05 mg/1, so that their presence generally
is  the  result  of  pollution.   This  is  attributable  to  the
corrosive  action  of  the  water  on copper and brass tubing, to
industrial  effluents,  and  frequently  to  the  use  of  copper
compounds for the control of undesirable plankton organisms.

Copper  is  not considered to be a cumulative systemic poison for
humans, but it can cause symptoms of gastroenteritis, with nausea
and intestinal  irritations,  at  relatively  low  dosages.   The
limiting  factor  in domestic water supplies is taste.  Threshold
concentrations for taste have  been  generally  reported  in  the
range  of  1.0-2.0  mg/1  of  copper, while as much as 5-7.5 mg/1
makes the water completely unpalatable.

The toxicity of copper to aquatic organisms varies significantly,
not only with  the  species,  but  also  with  the  physical  and
chemical  characteristics  of  the  water, including temperature,
hardness, turbidity, and carbon dioxide content.  In hard  water,
the  toxicity  of copper salts is reduced by the precipitation of
copper carbonate or other insoluble compounds.  The  sulfates  of
copper  and  zinc,  and  of copper and cadmium are synergistic in
their toxic effect on fish.

Copper concentrations less than 1 mg/1 have been reported  to  be
toxic,  particularly  in  soft  water,  to  many  kinds  of fish,
crustaceans, mollusks, insects,  phytoplankton  and  zooplankton.
Concentrations  of  copper,  for example, are detrimental to some
oysters above .1 ppm.  Oysters cultured in sea  water  containing
0.13-0.5  ppm  of  copper deposited the metal in their bodies and
became unfit as a food substance.

Chromium

Chromium, in its various valence states, is hazardous to man.  It
can  produce  lung  tumors  when   inhaled   and   induces   skin
sensitizations.   Large doses of chromates have corrosive effects
on the  intestinal  tract  and  can  cause  inflammation  of  the
kidneys.   Levels  of  chromate  ions  that have no effect on man
appear to be so low as to prohibit determination to date.

The toxicity of chromium salts toward aquatic life varies  widely
with  the  species, temperature, pH, valence of the chromium, and
synergistic or antagonistic effects, especially that of hardness.
                                  201

-------
Fish are relatively tolerant of chromium  salts,  but  fish  food
organisms  and  other  lower  forms of aquatic life are extremely
sensitive.  Chromium also inhibits the growth of algae.

In some agricultural crops, chromium can cause reduced growth  or
death  of  the  crop.   Adverse  effects of low concentrations of
chromium on corn, tobacco and sugar beets have been documented.

Arsenic

Arsenic is found to a small extent in  nature  in  the  elemental
form.   It occurs mostly in the form of arsenites of metals or as
pyrites.

Arsenic is normally present in sea water at concentrations  of  2
to  3  ug/1  and  tends  to  be  accumulated by oysters and other
shellfish.  Concentrations of 100 mg/kg  have  been  reported  in
certain shellfish.  Arsenic is a cumulative poison with long-term
chronic  effects  on  both  aquatic  organisms  and  on mammalian
species and a succession of small doses may add  up  to  a  final
lethal  dose.   It is moderately toxic to plants and highly toxic
to animals especially as AsH3.

Arsenic trioxide, which also is exceedingly toxic, was studied in
concentrations of 1.96 to ^0 mg/1 and found to be harmful in that
range to fish and other aquatic life.   Work  by  the  Washington
Department  of Fisheries on pink salmon has shown that at a level
of 5.3 mg/1 of As2O3 for 8 days was  extremely  harmful  to  this
species;  on  mussels,  a  level of 16 mg/1 was lethal in 3 to 16
days.

Severe human poisoning can result from 100 mg concentrations, and
130 mg has proved fatal.  Arsenic  can  accumulate  in  the  body
faster  than  it  is excreted and can build to toxic levels, from
small amounts taken  periodically  through  lung  and  intestinal
walls from the air, water and food.

Arsenic   is   a   normal   constituent   of   most  soils,  with
concentrations ranging  up  to  500  mg/kg.   Although  very  low
concentrations  of arsenates may actually stimulate plant growth,
the presence of excessive soluble arsenic  in  irrigation  waters
will  reduce  the yield of crops, the main effect appearing to be
the destruction of chlorophyll in the foliage.  Plants  grown  in
water   containing   one  mg/1  of  arsenic  trioxides  showed  a
blackening of the vascular bundles  in  the  leaves.   Beans  and
cucumbers are very sensitive, while turnips, cereals, and grasses
are  relatively  resistant.  Old orchard soils in Washington that
contained H to 12 mg/kg of arsenic trioxide in the top soil  were
found to have become unproductive.

Zinc

Occurring  abundantly  in rocks and ores, zinc is readily refined
into a stable pure metal and is used extensively for galvanizing,
in alloys, for electrical purposes, in printing plates, for  dye-
                                   202

-------
manufacture   and  for  dyeing  processes,  and  for  many  other
industrial purposes.  Zinc salts  are  used  in  paint  pigments,
cosmetics,   Pharmaceuticals,   dyes,   insecticides,   and  other
products too numerous to list herein.  Many of these salts (e.g.,
zinc chloride and zinc sulfate)   are  highly  soluble  in  water;
hence  it  is  to  be  expected  that  zinc  might  occur in many
industrial wastes.  On the other  hand,  some  zinc  salts  (zinc
carbonate,  zinc  oxide, zinc sulfide)  are insoluble in water and
consequently it is to be expected that some zinc will precipitate
and be removed readily in most natural waters.

In  zinc-mining  areas,  zinc  has  been  found  in   waters   in
concentrations  as  high  as 50 mg/1 and in effluents from metal-
plating works and small-arms ammunition plants it  may  occur  in
significant  concentrations.   In most surface and ground waters,
it is present only in trace amounts.  There is some evidence that
zinc  ions  are  adsorbed  strongly  and  permanently  on   silt,
resulting in inactivation of the zinc.

Concentrations  of zinc in excess of 5 mg/1 in raw water used for
drinking water supplies cause an undesirable taste which persists
through conventional treatment.  Zinc can have an adverse  effect
on man and animals at high concentrations.

In  soft  water,  concentrations  of zinc ranging from 0.1 to 1.0
mg/1 have been reported to be lethal to fish.  Zinc is thought to
exert its toxic action by forming insoluble  compounds  with  the
mucous  that  covers the gills, by damage to the gill epithelium,
or possibly by acting as an internal poison.  The sensitivity  of
fish  to  zinc varies with species, age and condition, as well as
with the physical and  chemical  characteristics  of  the  water.
Some acclimatization to the presence of zinc is possible.  It has
also  been  observed  that  the effects of zinc poisoning may not
become apparent immediately, so  that  fish  removed  from  zinc-
contaminated  to  zinc-free water  (after 4-6 hours of exposure to
zinc) may die 48 hours later.  The presence of  copper  in  water
may  increase  the toxicity of zinc to aquatic organisms, but the
presence  of
toxicity.
calcium  or  hardness  may  decrease  the  relative
Observed values for the distribution of zinc in ocean waters vary
widely.   The  major concern with zinc compounds in marine waters
is not one of acute toxicity, but rather of  the  long-term  sub-
lethal  effects of the metallic compounds and complexes.  From an
acute toxicity point of view, invertebrate marine animals seem to
be the most sensitive organisms tested.  The growth  of  the  sea
urchin, for example, has been retarded by as little as 30 ug/1 of
zinc.

Zinc sulfate has also been found to be lethal to many plants, and
it could impair agricultural uses.
                                   203

-------
Fluorides

As  the  most reactive non-metal, fluorine is never found free in
nature but as a constituent of  fluorite  or  fluorspar,  calcium
fluoride,  in  sedimentary  rocks  and  also  of cryolite, sodium
aluminum fluoride, in igneous rocks.  Owing to their origin  only
in certain types of rocks and only in a few regions, fluorides in
high  concentrations  are  not  a  common  constituent of natural
surface waters, but they may occur in detrimental  concentrations
in ground waters.

Fluorides  are  used  as  insecticides,  for disinfecting brewery
apparatus, as a flux in the manufacture of steel, for  preserving
wood  and mucilages, for the manufacture of glass and enamels, in
chemical industries, for water treatment, and for other uses.
Fluorides in sufficient quantity are toxic to humans, with
of 250 to 450 mg giving severe symptoms or causing death.
doses
There  are  numerous articles describing the effects of fluoride-
bearing waters on dental enamel of children; these  studies  lead
to  the generalization that water containing less than 0.9 to 1.0
mg/1 of fluoride will seldom cause mottled  enamel  in  children,
and  for  adults,  concentrations  less  than 3 or 4 mg/1 are not
likely  to  cause  endemic  cumulative  fluorosis  and   skeletal
effects.   Abundant  literature  is also available describing the
advantages of maintaining 0.8 to 1.5  mg/1  of  fluoride  ion  in
drinking   water  to  aid  in  the  reduction  of  dental  decay,
especially among children.

Chronic fluoride poisoning of  livestock  has  been  observed  in
areas   where   water   contained   10   to   15  mg/1  fluoride.
Concentrations of 30 - 50 mg/1 of fluoride in the total ration of
dairy co-vs is considered the upper  safe  limit.   Fluoride  from
waters  apparently  does  not  accumulate  in  soft  tissue  to a
significant degree and it is transferred to a very  small  extent
into  the  milk and to a somewhat greater degree into eggs.  Data
for fresh water indicate that fluorides  are  toxic  to  fish  at
concentrations higher than 1.5 mg/1.
                                   20k

-------
   6OO-
  500 H
-s.
O
E
 .400-1
O
o
DO
  300 H
  200
      IOO         99.75
99.50
99.25        9900
                SAMPLE  DILUTION  (% )
                 FIGURE 43.  BOD -3 VARIATION WITH DILUTION
                              205

-------
                20-1
1*0
               O
               z
               UJ
               cc
               I-
               W


               UJ
               H
               O)
|
-------
                                      TABLE 51




               RETARDATION OF BOD TEST TIMBER PRODUCTS EFFLUENTS  (LEACHATES)
                                                                             Concentration For TLm96
Study
Identification No
1135
2176
2347
Materials
logs/w/bark
logs/wo/bark
bark-hardwood
bark-softwood
wood chips @40°C
wood chips @32°C
F1sh at Test -
chlnook,
chlnook,
chlnook,
chlnook,
guppies
guppies
salmon
salmon
salmon, flngerllngs
salmon, flngerllngs

BOD
16.8
28.8
69.3
63.00
92.4
108.8
COD
54.4
75.2
537.6
483.0
336.0
400.0
NOTE:  No dissolved oxygen data presented for the studies.

-------

-------
                           SECTION VII

                CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY
This  section  identifies, documents, and verifies the full range
of control and treatment technology which exists or is applicable
to each operation identified in  Section  IV.    In  addition,  it
presents the control and treatment alternatives applicable to the
model plants developed in Section V.

IMPOUNDMENTS AND ESTUARINE STORAGE AND TRANSPORTATION

The   control   of   pollutants  generated  by  log  storage  and
transportation,  other  than  log  storage  in  ponds,   can   be
accomplished   primarily  by  operational  modifications.   Water
pollution by log storage and transportation  could  be  virtually
eliminated by a transition of the industry to total land handling
of  logs;  however,  as  indicated in Section VIII, the non water
related environmental impact of such action would be severe.

The most important of the operational  controls  that  have  been
investigated  is  the  employment  of  easy  let-down devices for
placing logs into the water.  The easy let-down devices  and  the
practice  of  bundling  logs  either  in  the  water  or prior to
placement in the water has been effective in reducing the eyesore
of floating bark and the pollution problems associated with  bark
deposits  on  the  bottom  of  waterways.  In some instances, the
number of logs in the water at any  one  time  has  been  reduced
considerably.   This  is  practical for those locations where the
impoundment is used only to feed the mill.

WET STORAGE

Presented  below  is  a  discussion  of  treatment  and   control
technology  applicable  to  the  wet  storage  subcategory.   The
discussion is further broken down into mill ponds, log ponds, and
wet decking operations.  This breakdown of ponds into mill  ponds
and  log  ponds  is  useful  in  demonstrating the differences in
quality and quantity of waste waters generated and the applicable
treatment and control technology that are dependent on  the  type
of  activity occurring at the ponds, the location of the activity
with regard to the location of the discharge and  the  throughput
rates of the wood material and water.

MILL PONDS

The mill pond as it currently exists has evolved from the logging
practices  in  the  past.   Waterways  were  used  originally  to
transport logs from  the  forests  to  processing  areas.   As  a
result, most mill machinery is still water oriented, but the size
of the water associated operations have diminished to the present
mill pond.  Most plants still dump logs into the mill pond in the
same  fashion  as  when loading logs from trucks and trains first
became the practice.  Most managers of mill pond operations allow
                                  209

-------
a considerable amount of activity near the effluent structure and
almost all still place the logs in the pond  without  prior  bark
removal.  Some mills remove the ends of the logs while the log is
still  in  the  water,  thus  allowing  sawdust to be contributed
directly to the pond,

Existing Operational Control Measures

Several  operational  load  measures  may  be  taken  to   reduce
pollution  load of mill pond effluents.  Logs can be barked prior
to  being  placed  in  the  pond.   This  practice  substantially
diminishes  the  amount  of  floating  bark in the pond.  Another
control measure common to most mill pond operations is the use of
baffles near the discharge effluent of the pond.  The baffles are
placed so  as  to  protrude  through  the  water  surface.   This
prevents  floating material from passing over the weir and out of
the pond.  In some cases, the baffles are placed far enough  from
the effluent weir that the bottom muds stirred up by the activity
on  the pond can settle and not be passed over the effluent weir.
Another practice is the use of a submerged  discharge,  that  is,
the water to be discharged is drawn from below the surface of the
pond.  This prevents the carryover of floating material.  Another
operational control measure observed was the use of surface spray
nozzles  to  contain  the floating debris in a mill pond near the
sawing operation.  Surface sprays are particularly effective  for
control  of  sawdust  generated  by  pond sawing operations.  The
screening of the water  that  entered  the  area  near  the  mill
operation  to  remove  sawdust  and  bark from the water was also
observed to be used as a control measure.

Potential Operational Control Measures

As previously mentioned, the sawing of logs while  still  in  the
water was observed in several locations.  The elimination of this
practice by sawing all logs on land would prevent the sawdust and
bark  generated from entering the pond water system.  The removal
of bark before placement in the water would reduce  floating  and
settled  bark  as  well as the leachates from the bark.  When the
logs are placed in the water without prior bark removal,  smaller
quantities  of  bark would be loosened from the logs if easy let-
down devices were utilized.  The quantity of water emanating from
a mill pond can be  markedly  reduced  if  all  storm  runoff  is
diverted  around the pond.  This can be accomplished with an open
diversion ditch in most cases, but in some cases, a larger closed
conduit may be required.  The amount of bottom materials  stirred
up during the log moving operations may be diminished markedly by
using  boats  that  have  smaller engines than those currently in
use.  In this case, the decreased productivity  of  the  operator
would have to be a factor of consideration.
                                  210

-------
Potential Operational Control Measures

There  are  several  potential  control measures for reducing the
effluent from ponds  or  increasing  its  quality.    The  primary
source  of  influents  to  ponds may be drainage.  However, since
most log ponds also serve as mill ponds, they are  normally  kept
full  and  overflow  as a result of precipitation.   One method of
minimizing the amount of material washed from the log pond  would
be  to  enlarge the pond and allow the water levels to fluctuate.
In that fashion the amount of water leaving the pond  because  of
precipitation  would  only  be  that  in  excess  of  the  amount
evaporated.  The pond would be at minimum depth at the end of the
dry season and would overflow late  in  the  rainy  season.   The
water  level in the model pond would fluctuate from 1 to 2 m (two
to six ft) or more depending on the water balance for  the  area.
This method would require the diversion of all drainage away from
the pond, an action that in itself is a control measure.

Another  operational control measure that would reduce the amount
and possibly the concentration of pollutants in the pond effluent
would be to prohibit all discharge or water streams to the  pond.
This  would  be the most effective of reducing discharge from the
log pond, but it may not be the most practical approach when  the
entire  mill complex is considered.  The log pond can serve as an
oxidation pond and it may have some assimilative capacity  beyond
that  required  for  pollutants  leached  from the logs.  Cooling
water flows may need special consideration, yet the log pond  can
also  serve  as  a  cooling  pond  for  heated  water.  Also, the
addition of warm water during winter conditions can be beneficial
in preventing freezing of wood and water.

The effluent from a mill or log pond may be  screened  for  large
solids removal.  This will accomplish the removal of a portion of
the  suspended  and  floating  solids, and primarily that, portion
that is aesthetically objectionable.  Settling ponds may also  be
used  for clarification of the pond effluent.  An example of this
technology for removal of settleable  solids  from  both  surface
runoff  and  process  water  is  reported  in  Forest, Industries,
November 1972.  The ponds discussed in this reference had asphalt
bottoms and sloped driveways leading into them.   The  ponds  are
periodically drained and the accumulated sediment trucked away.

TREATMENT AND CONTROL
The treatment and control technology currently available and that
potentially  available are essentially the same for log ponds and
mill ponds.  Unlike the mill pond, the amount of suspended solids
in a typical log pond effluent is sufficiently low that  the  use
of primary sedimentation is not necessary.  If the water level in
the  log  pond  can  be  allowed  to fluctuate, then the log pond
itself can act as the basin.  In application of  the  evaporation
pond  designed  for  the  mill  pond  effluent  to  the  log pond
effluent, only spray evaporation  must  be  added.   This  design
concept  was added to the treatment plant schemes for mill ponds.
                                  211

-------
For application of all of the  designs  for  mill  ponds  to  log
ponds, the flow rate from the equalization basin to the treatment
works  was  considered  to  be  3800  cu  m per day (1.0 mgd) .   A
laboratory study of  the  treatability  of  log  pond  waters  by
physical-chemical  means  by  Blauton showed that sand filtration
was relatively ineffective.  The study showed that  BOD  removals
of  7  to  49  percent  and COD removals of 52 to 67 percent were
possible using alum at an optimum coagulation  pH  of  5.0.   The
study  further  indicated  that activated carbon could be used to
reduce COD concentrations to less than 50  milligrams  per  liter
even  in  the pond effluent by removing 272 to 485 milligrams COD
per gram of carbon.  The treatability of log pond waters using an
activated sludge system with a detention time of from one to five
days was studied by Hoffbahr.  It was found that  BOD,  COD,  and
suspended solids removals of greater than 80 percent, 50 percent,
and  60  percent  respectively, could be obtained.  The BOD, COD,
and suspended solids of the influent waters were 52, 440, and 160
milligrams per liter, respectively.

The removal of lignins is important  in  the  treatment  of  wood
derived  pollutants  as  shown by Wilson and Wong who studied the
removal of lignins from solution using foam separation processes.
It was found that foam fractionation is ineffective  in  removing
lignins  but ion flotation under the proper conditions yielded up
to 91 percent  removal.   However,  the  total  dissolved  solids
required  for  the  separation  to be possible was at such a high
level as to render the process impractical.

The treatment of the wastes from mill ponds can  be  accomplished
using   both   chemical-physical  and  biological  processes.    A
thorough discussion of the various  processes  available  can  be
found  in waste water treatment texts.  More specifically. Bailey
investigated the applicability of aerated  lagoons  for  treating
pulp  and  paper mill wastes and found BOD reductions of up to 70
percent.  In a study by Timpany, et al.  60  to  80  percent  BOD
removal  efficiencies  were  illustrated for aerated lagoons with
detention times  of  five  days  treating  pulp  and  paper  mill
effluents.  Other studies have substantiated the applicability of
the  technology  for  treating waste waters resulting from timber
products processing waste stream.

Treatment Alternatives for Model Mill Pond
Six alternative treatment schemes were chosen  for  treatment  of
the  effluent  from  the  model  mill  pond.   These  systems are
illustrated in Figure 45.  A summary of the removal  efficiencies
of  the  alternatives  is  presented  in Table 52.  The treatment
alternatives selected for the model mill pond are:

Alternative A:

    No treatment
                                    212

-------
     ALTERNATIVE - A :    •«> TMATMENT
     ALTERNATIVE - B :
                     EQUALIZATION BASIN
                     PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION
     ALTERNATIVE-C :
1 »
*
EQALIZATION BASIN
OXIDATION POND No. 1


OXIDATION
POND Ne.2
     ALTERNATIVE - 0 :
| .
1 "

PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION


CHEMICAL
FLOCCULATION


SECONDARY
SEDIMENTATION
     ALTERNATIVE - E !
MILL A fc
POND J '
<^-*
-------
                    TABLE 52


EFFICIENCIES AND  CONCENTRATION FOR THE VARIOUS  TREATMENT
     ALTERNATIVES FOR  MILL PONDS

                                 _COD_ ______        Suspended So1ids_
Percent COD
Reduction in
Alternatives the Unit
A
Bl, Cl, Dl, El
C2
D2, E2
E3
E4
Fl
0
20
60
60
20
75
100
Percent Suspended Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Solids Reduction Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration
in the Unit (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
0
50
20
90
90
0
100
68
68
54
54
22
17.6
68
68
54
22
22
17.6
4.4
0
50
50
25
25
2.5
0.25
50
50
25
20
2.5
0.25
0.25
0

-------
Alternative B:

    Equalization basin and primary sedimentation

Alternative C:

    C1  Equalization basin - oxidation pond No. 1
    C2  Oxidation pond No. 2

Alternative D:

    D1  Equalization basin - primary sedimentation
    D2  Chemical coagulation - flocculation, secondary sedimen-
        tation

Alternative E:

    E1  Equalization basin - primary sedimentation
    E2  chemical coagulation - flocculation, secondary sedimen-
        tation
    E3  Filtration
    E4  Activated carbon

Alternative F:

    Evaporation pond

Alternative A - In alternative A,  there  is  no  treatment  and,
therefore, no reduction in the quantity of pollutants discharging
from  the  mill  pond.  For those mill ponds that have high water
volume throughput rate, diversion of that water around  the  mill
pond will reduce the amount of pollutants discharged by the pond.

Alternative	B  -  In  alternative  Br  an  equilization basin is
coupled with a primary sedimentation unit.  The  mill  pond  that
has had all extraneous water diverted from it will discharge only
when  precipitation  occurs.   The designs of mill ponds, and the
predicted effluents are, therefore, a function of the size of the
pond, the quantity of precipitation on the pond, and the rate  of
evaporation  from  the pond.  The amount of precipitation and the
evaporation rate were  chosen  based  on  geographical  location.
Because most mill ponds are located in the Northwest, and because
the  Seattle,  WAf area has one of the highest rainfall rates and
one of  the  lowest  evaporation  rates  in  the  Northwest,  the
precipitation-evaporation  data  in  the  Seattle,  WA, area were
used.  A one hectare  (2.5 acre) pond was assumed.  In this  area,
about  75 percent of the total annual precipitation occurs in the
winter months.  It was, therefore, assumed that treatment of  the
effluent  would  be  necessary only during the winter months, and
that the evaporation rate would exceed the precipitation rate and
no discharge flow would  occur  during  the  summer  months.   An
equilization  basin must be provided to accomodate the high flows
during  rainy  weather  with   flows   during   periods   of   no
precipitation.   A treatment plant could, therefore, operate with
a nearly constant flow rate throughout the winter  months.   From

                                  215

-------
the  rainfall  data,  it  was  possible  to  calculate  that  the
treatment plant would have to operate at a rate of 3 Ips (50 gpm)
and the equalization basin would have to have a volume  of  about
1*000 cu m (1 million gal) .

The  effluent  characteristics  of the typical mill pond indicate
that a sedimentation  system  might  be  a  beneficial  treatment
process.   In  addition,  it  would  be  less costly to allow the
equalization basin to also  serve  as  a  sedimentation  chamber.
This  was  considered  and  the  design of the equalization basin
modified accordingly.

The design for Alternative B then would be as shown in Figure 46.
Design assumptions include the following:

    1.   The basin will be cleaned annually (in the dry season) .

    2.   Cleaning to be performed with a drag line or a front end
         loader.

    3.   Water level will fluctuate between 0.9 m (3 ft) and  2.5
         (8 ft) depth.
4.    Sludge production is estimated at 200  cu  m
     Disposal would be by land spreading.

5.    Basin walls = packed earth
                                                       per  year
6.

7.
     Basin size at inside top of berm = 59.
                                                 m
         Effluent weir variable (by hand) from 0.9 m  (3 ft) depth
         to 2.5 m  (8 ft) depth.
    8.   Provide wet well for pump.

The predicted treatment  efficiency  for  Alternative  B1  is  20
percent  COD  removal  and  50  percent suspended solids removal.
These  predictions  are  based  on  the  characteristics  of  the
effluent  water,  the laboratory studies reported previously, and
the expected performance of this type of installation.

Alternative C - This alternative involves two steps.  Alternative
C1 consists of an equalization basin functioning as an anaerobic-
aerobic oxidation pond with a variable influent  and  a  constant
effluent.  The design of C1 is the same as the design of Alterna-
tive B.

Alternative  C2  consists of an oxidation pond which receives the
effluent from the equalization basin.  The  construction  of  the
second oxidation pond is the same as the first with the exception
that  the berm is two m  (seven ft) high and the basin size at the
raised top of the berm is 53 m (175 ft) instead of the 59 m   (195
ft)  of  the  first  basin*   The effluent weir is arranged at an
elevation that allows a maximum of one meter  (five ft)  of  water
to be maintained in the pond at all times.
                                  216

-------
  EFFLUENT
  FROM MILL
  POND
                     PUMP
EQUALIZATION
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN
                        59.4m
FIGURE 46  ALTERNATIVE B  FOR MILL PONDS
                  217

-------
The  predicted  treatment  efficiency  of  Alternative  C2  is 60
percent COD removal and 20 percent suspended solids removal.  The
higher COD removal results from a more uniform flow and a uniform
detention time.  The lower suspended solids reduction is based on
the fact that most of the settleable solids will  be  removed  in
the first basin.

Alternative  D  -  Alternative  D  consists  of  the  addition of
chemical  treatment  to  the  sedimentation  equalization   basin
described  for  Alternative B and C1.  Alternative D1 consists of
the equalization basin.   Alternative  D2  consists  of  chemical
coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation.

Consideration  was given in this alternative to chemical addition
and mixing.  A baffled flocculator was  provided  as  well  as  a
sedimentation  tank.   Sludge  disposal  was  provided by using a
settling pond  with  supernatant  returned  to  the  equalization
basin.   The sludge is assumed to be landfilled.  The sludge pond
is  designed  to  accomodate  both  the  sludge   from   chemical
coagulation-flocculation-secondary   sedimentation   and   filter
backwash water.

The predicted COD and suspended solids removals  for  Alternative
D2  are  60  percent and 90 percent, respectively.  These removal
efficiencies are normally expected for these units.

Alternative  D2  is  schematically  shown  in  Figure  47.    The
following design criteria were employed:

    1.   Mixing and Chemical Addition

         a.   Design flow = 30 Ips.

         b.   Mixing chamber =0.5mx0.5mx  0.5  m,  made  of
              steel or reinforced concrete.

         c.   Mixer  =  1.0  horsepower  motor  with  appropriate
              blade.

         d.   Flocculant feed pump = 10 to 40 1 per hour.

         e.   Coagulant feeding equipment = dry feeder for up  to
              90 kilograms per day of A12  (SO4J3.

         f.   Flocculant mixing equipment - 1 -  570  liter  tank
              and a one and one-half horsepower mixer.

    2.   Flocculator

         a.   The flocculator is a baffled channel.

         b.   Construction = reinforced concrete.

         c.   Around the end baffles in a folded channel.
                                  218

-------
EQUALIZATION
BASIN

 EFFLUENT
                MIXING
            CHEMICALS
9m   I  0.9m     O.9m  j  0.9m
                                 4.5m
               SLUDGE
                               TREATED
                               EFFLUENT
                            SLUDGE  FROM
                           FILTER BACKWASH
                                               0.9m
                                SUPERNATANT
                                TO  EQUALIZATION
                                BASIN         '
        FIGURE 47  ALTERNATIVE D2 FOR MILL PONDS
                       219

-------
         d.   Channel depth = 1,2 m.

    3.   Sedimentation Chamber

         a.   Mechanically cleaned.

         b.   Continuous sludge withdrawal.

         c.   Surface skimming not necessary.

         d.   Provide influent and effluent baffles.

         e.   Longitudinal flow, rectangular tank.

         f.   Depth = 3.7 m width = 2.U m, and length = 4.3 m.

         g.   Reinforced concrete construction.

    5.   Sludge Disposal

         a.   Sludge from chemical coagulation-sedimentation  and
              filter backwash water.

         b.   Estimated settled volume = 490 cu m per year.

         c.   Settling pond size 30.5 m x 30.5 m.

         d.   Overflow weir 32m depth.

         e.   Annual cleaning.

         f.   Sludge disposal to sanitary landfill.

         g.   Pump to return supernatant to equalization basin.

Alternative  E  -  In  Alternative  E,  the  unit  operations  of
filtration  and physical adsorption by activated carbon are added
to Alternative D.
Alternative  E  is  considered  to  consist   of   three   steps:
Alternative   El,   an   equalization   basin   as  designed  for
Alternatives B, C1, and D1;
Alternative E2, chemical treatment as  designed  for  Alternative
C2;
Alternative E3, single media pressure sand filtration; and
Alternative E4, activated carbon treatment.

Following  the removal of a large portion of the suspended solids
in the waste water by chemical treatment, the treated waste water
still contains some solids from floe carryover.  This  floe  will
tend   to  plug  the  activated  carbon  system  and  reduce  its
efficiency for absorption of organics.  Most of the floe  can  be
removed by pressure filtration.

The  activated  carbon  system  is  intended  to  remove  soluble
organics by physical adsorption.  The system is  designed  as  an
                                  220

-------
upflow  suspended  bed  of  granular activated carbon.  The spent
activated  carbon  should  be  wasted  or   recharged   off-site.
Recharging  on-site,  for  such  a  small quantity, would be cost
prohibitive.

The predicted COD and suspended solids removals in  the  pressure
filtration  unit are 20 percent and 90 percent, respectively.  In
the activated carbon unit, the predicted COD  removal  efficiency
is 75 percent, leaving a COD in the final effluent of less than 5
gm/1.

A  schematic  of  Alternative  E  is  shown  in  Figure  48.  The
following design criteria are involved:

    1.   Pressure Filtration

         a.   Pressure sand filter  (single media).

         b.   Tank = 1.8 m diameter, 1.8 m height, with legs  and
              manhole.

         c.   Underdrain = graded gravel.
         d.   Media = 80 cm of silica sand, effective diam =  0.5
              mm, uniformity coefficient =1.5.

         e.   Two parallel units.

         f.   Provide feed pump for 3 Ips S TDK =  15.2 m.

         g.   Provide backwash pump for 25 Ips 9 TDH = 7.6 m.

         h.   Backwash with dirty water from equalization  basin,
              provide  for  initial  filtration  to  equalization
              basin until effluent is clear.

         i.   Backwash water treatment provided elsewhere.
     2.   Activated Carbon

         a.   Upflow contactors.
         b.


         c.

         d.

         e.
Three units, two operated in parallel  while  third
is recharged.

Must recharge one unit every two days.

Provide underdrain system.
Pumping  for  filtration  will   also   serve
activated carbon.
for
                                   221

-------
OXIDATION
POND

^

CHEMICAL
TREATMENT



BACKWASH
  PUMP
                           BACKWASH
                                    ACTIVATED CARBON
            PRESSURE FILTRATION
       FIGURE 48  ALTERNATIVE E FOR MILL PONDS
                       222

-------
         f.


         g.

         h.

         i.
              Columns = 0.9
              removal tops.
m
diameter  x  U.0  m  height  with
              Columns = steel tanks.

              Provide for 102 kg of activated carbon per day.

              Provide for recharge off site, or discard the spent
              carbon.  If discard is used, the spent carbon  will
              be  incorporated in the sludge treatment system for
              coagulation and for filter backwash.

         j.   Provide for equipment to empty and fill columns.

         k.   Equipment will be housed in filter building.

Alternative F - Alternative F consists of an evaporation pond for
the containment of the total discharge from the mill  pond.   The
design   of   the   evaporation   pond  takes  into  account  the
geographical variation of evaporation  and  precipitation  rates.
It  provides  for  spray  evaporators to operate continuously for
five months of the year.  The pond is  designed  to  contain  all
precipitation  falling  on  itself as well as that falling on the
mill pond.  The efficiency of the unit for removal of  pollutants
is 100 percent.
A  schematic  of  Alternative  F  is presented in Figure 49.
following design criteria are employed:
                                                              The
    1.

    2.

    3.
         Spray evaporation necessary (Seattle, Washington) .

         Pond size = 3 ha.
         Pond shape = canal 38 m wide and 850 m long.

    U.   Sixteen floating pumps d 75 hp each.

    5.   Pond depth = 3 m of water.

    6.   Place pond perpendicular to prevailing wind.

LOG PONDS

Log ponds differ from mill ponds in several  ways  including  the
fact that they are constructed at a key location for the specific
purpose of storing logs.  Most log ponds have processing mills on
their banks and in many cases the mill discharges its waste water
to  the  log  pond.   The discussion in this section will only be
concerned with log handling operations on the pond and  not  with
treatment  and  control  measures  relevant to extraneous streams
entering the log pond.
                                   223

-------
                45.7  m
    X X  X  X  X
XX*X,XXXXX
                  650 m
                                                   36m
FIGURE 49  ALTERNATIVE  F  FOR HILL PONDS
                221*

-------
Existing Operational Control Measures

The only existing operational control measure  observed  in  this
study is the bundling of logs prior to placement in the log pond.
This  practice  decreased  the  bark  loss during the log dumping
operation and allowed more logs to be stored on the same pond.


Treatment and Control Technology

The treatment alternatives selected for the model  log  pond  are
illustrated  in  Figure  50.   Table 53 presents a summary of the
efficiencies of the alternatives.  The selected alternatives are:

Alternative A:

    No treatment

Alternative B:

    B1  Equalization basin, oxidation pond No. 1
    B2  Oxidation pond No. 2

Alternative C:

    C1  Equalization basin
    C2  Chemical coagulation - flocculation, sedimentation

Alternative D:
                             - flocculation, sedimentation
    D1  Equalization basin
    D2  Chemical coagulation
    D3  Filtration
    DU  Activated carbon

Alternative E:

    •Use. of the log pond as an evaporation pond.

Alternative A - In Alternative A, there is no  treatment  and  no
reduction  of  the  pollutant load.  Some of the inplant measures
recommended previously should reduce the load from the log  pond.
All  extraneous flows should be diverted around the log pond and,
if possible, maximum water level fluctuation should be allowed.

Alternative B - In Alternative B an  equalization-oxidation  pond
is  coupled  with  a second oxidation pond (Alternative B2).  The
design of Alternative B1 for the pond  was  accomplished  in  the
same  fashion  as  Alternative  C  for  mill ponds.  The required
storage in the equalization basin was found to be 53,000 cu m  (Itt
million gal) and the treatment plant flow rate was in  excess  of
30  Ips (500 gpm):; therefore, a design flow of 3,800 cu m per day
{one million gal per day) was used.
                                    225

-------
   ALTERNATIVE-A:
                    NO TRCATMCMT
   ALTERNATIVE -


EQUALIZATION BASIN



OXIDATION
POND N«.2
   ALTERNATIVE-


EQUALIZATION
8ASIN


CHEMICAL COACULATK*



SEDIMENTATION
   ALTERNATIVE-



EQUALIZATION
6ASIN




•4-
CHEMICAL
FLOCCULATION

ACTIVATED
CARBON





SEDIMENTATION

FILTRATION
   ALTERNATIVE-
                  ATMOSPHERE

                  A 444
   C
LOG
POND
EVAPORATION
POND
FIGURE  50  ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT SCHEMES FOR LOG PONDS
                               226

-------
                                                 TABLE  53
                            EFFICIENCIES AND CONCENTRATIONS  FOR THE VARIOUS

                                TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR LOG  PONDS
                                                             COD
Suspended Solids
ro
ro
Alternatives
A
B1,C1,D1,E1
B2
C2, 02
D3
D4
El
Percent COD
Reduction in
the Unit
0
20
60
60
20
75
100
Percent Suspended Influent
Solids Reduction Concentration
in the Unit (mq/1)
0
20
50
60
90
0
100,
52
52
42
42
17
14
52
Effluent Influent
Concentration Concentration
(mq/1) (mg/1)
52
42
17
17
14
3.5
0
21
21
17
17
1.7
0.2
21
Effluent
Concentration
(mg/1 )
21
17
8.5
1.7
0.2
0.2
0

-------
The waste water from a log pond is sufficiently low in  suspended
and settleable solids that a primary sedimentation chamber is not
considered  necessary.   For  this  reason,  Alternative  B  is a
combination equalization basin and oxidation pond.

Just as in Alternative C for mill ponds, this design provides for
a second oxidation pond, in series.  In this case,  the  size  of
the second pond is the same as the first.  The only difference is
that  the  flow  through the second pond is controlled by gravity
rather than by a pump.

Alternative B1 provides a removal efficiency of  20  percent  for
both  COD  and suspended solids.  Alternative B2 provides removal
efficiencies of 60 percent and 50 percent for COD  and  suspended
solids, respectively.
Alternative  B  is illustrated in Figure 51.
for each pond are as follows:
      The design criteria
    1.   Effluent from the basin to be
         3,800 cu m per day.
pumped  at  the  rate  of
    2,   Water level will fluctuate between 0 and 1,5 m depth.

    3.   Provide wet well for pump.

    ft.   Basin size at inside top of berm = 213.** m

Alternative C - Alternative c consists of  an  equalization  pond
(Alternative C1)  followed by chemical treatment  (Alternative C2).
The design and efficiencies of Alternative C1 are the same as for
Alternative  B1.    The design of Alternative C2 is similar to the
design of Alternative D2 for mill ponds.  However, instead of the
"around the end" baffle system in the flocculator used  for  mill
ponds.  Alternative  C2  employs an "over and under" system.  The
reason for this difference is that more reliability  is  provided
by the parallel sedimentation tanks of this design.

Alternative  C1  provides  a removal efficiency of 20 percent for
both COD and suspended solids.  Alternative C2  provides  removal
efficiencies  of  60 percent and 90 percent for COD and suspended
solids, respectively.

Alternative C is illustrated in Figure 52.  The following  design
criteria are employed:

    1.   Mixing and chemical addition

         a.   Design flow = 4U Ips (694 gpm or 3,800 cu m per day
              (1 mgd) .

         b.   Mixing chamber  =  1.8  m  x  1.8  x  2.4  m  deep,
              reinforced concrete.

         c.   Mixer = 5.0 horsepower motor with appropriate blade
                                    228

-------
EFFLUENT
FROM LOG
POND
            EQUALIZATION
            OXIDATION POND
                                  OXIDATION
                                    POND
          I.Zrrv
                     213.4m
<\
 3
                'CS
                 3
          FIGURE 51  ALTERNATIVE B FOR LOG PONDS
                           229

-------
LOG POND
EFFLUENT
          • EOALIZATION
        -M OXIDATION
          I POND
H
OXIDATION
  POND
MIXING
                               .CHEMICALS
        1.8m  TYPICAL
      M	»•
                                                            •0,3m
                   1.2m
                           O.9m I    I FLOCCULATOR
                            9.1m
                      TREATMENT
                      EFFLUENT
                                                               3.4m
                                                   SEDIMENTATION
                                SLUDGE
           1.2m
         67.1m
                     3   I  •
                              SLUDGE POND
                             2.7m
          FIGURE 52  ALTERNATIVE C FOR LOG  PONDS
                              230

-------
    2.
    3.
    5.
d.   Flocculator feed pump = 2 to 63 Ips (30 to 100  gal
     per hour).

e.   Coagulant feed equipment = dry  feeder  for  up  to
     1,300  kilograms  per day (2,800 pounds per day) of
     alum.

f.   Flocculant mixing equipment = 1,900 1  (500 gal) mix
     tank and two hp motor with mixer.

Flocculator

a.   Over and under baffled channel.

b.   Construction = reinforced concrete.

Sedimentation Chamber - Same as for mill ponds except:

a.   Two parallel units with one common wall.

b.   Size, depth = 3.7 m  (12 ft), width = 3.7 m (12 ft),
     length = 15.2 m  (50 ft).

House for feed equipment and chemical storage.

a.   A metal building.

b.   Size = 12.2 m (UO ft) x 12.2 m  (UO ft).

c.   One double door,  one  single  door,  two  windows,
     lighting,  exhaust  fan,  concrete  pad, cold water
     taps, drain, no sanitary facilities.

Sludge disposal.

a.   Same as mill ponds only larger.
         b.


         c.

         d.

         e.
     Pond size 2.1 m   (7  ft)
     square.
deep,  67.1
m
(220   ft)
     Overflow weir a 2 m  (7 ft) depth

     Annual cleaning.

     Hauled to sanitary landfill.
Alternative D - Alternative D consists of applying filtration and
activated carbon treatment to the effluent  from  Alternative  C.
Therefore,  Alternative  D1  consists  of  the equalization basin
designed for Alternative B1 and C1, and Alternative  D2  consists
of  the  chemical  treatment  system designed for Alternative C2.
Alternative D3 is  a  filtration  unit  utilizing  gravity  flow.
Pressure  filtration  was  not  used  in this case because of the
large size of the units required.  Alternative DU is an activated
carbon system similar to that designed for mill  pond  effluents.
                                     231

-------
except  that  in  this  case  the  rate  of carbon consumption is
sufficient to justify  on-site  regeneration.   Therefore,  three
units  are  provided, two to operate in series while the third is
recharged.

The removal efficiencies for Alternatives D1 and D2 are the  same
as  for  Alternatives  C1  and  C2,  respectively.   The  removal
efficiencies for Alternative D3 are 20 percent and 90 percent for
COD and suspended solids, respectively.  The  removal  efficiency
of Alternative DU is 75 percent for COD.

Alternative  D is illustrated in Figure 53,  The following design
criteria are employed:

    1.   Filtration unit

         a.   Gravity sand.

         b.   Two boxes of reinforced concrete each 3.0 m (10 ft)
              wide, 10.7 m (35 ft) long, and U-6 m (15 ft) deep.

         c.   76 cu m of silica sand - effective diameter  =  0.5
              mm and uniformity coefficient = 1.5.

         d.   Underdrain = graded gravel.

         e.   Feed pumps are assumed to be unnecessary.

         f.   Backwash pump 331 Ips (5,250 gpm »  TDH=7.6  m  (25
              ft).

         g.   Backwash water treated in sludge settling pond with
              other sludge.

         h.   Housing = increase coagulation and chemical storage
              building to 18.3 m  (60 ft) x 18.3 m  (60 ft).

    2.   Activated Carbon
         a.   Same as mill ponds except for  size   and  necessity
              for pumping.

         b.   Three tanks 3.0 m  (10 ft) diameter,  4.0 m   (13   ft)
              tall.

         c.   Provide for 1,400 kg  (3,000 Ib) of activated  carbon
              per day.

         d.   This dose rate is within  the  regeneration  range.
              Therefore, provide a  carbon regeneration system.

         e.   House  regeneration   equipment -    make    existing
              building 18.3 m  (60 ft) x 2U.U m  (80 ft) .
                                   232

-------
LOG  POND
EFFLUENT
       EQUALIZATION
       OXIDATION
       POND
       OXIDATION
       POND No. 2
MIXING
                                   CHEMICALS
       FLOCCULATION
                                    SLUDGE
   SEDIMENTATION
 SLUDGE
  POND
          FILTRATION
                      SAND
                  UNDERDRAIN
                                           BACKWASH WATER
                  BACKWASH
                  PUMP
 RECHARGE
 ACTIVATED
 CARBON
t
     TREATED
     EFFLUENT
           FIGURE 53 ALTERNATIVE D FOR LOG PONDS
                         233

-------
Alternative  E  -  Alternative  E consists of the installation of
spray evaporation units directly on the log pond.  Alternative  E
requires  U2 spray units for the model pond.  The units should be
engineered to allow operation of  individual  units.   The  spray
falling on the logs would aid in preserving the logs and the logs
may  increase  the  evaporation  rate.  The pond would have to be
sufficiently deep to provide a two meter  (seven ft)   water  level
fluctuation  for  winter storage.  The spray evaporation would be
operated 24 hours per day during the five  months  of  operation.
With  proper design and operation the pond will have no discharge
and the treatment efficiency is 100 percent.


WET DECKING

An alternative to the storage of unprocessed  wood  in  ponds  is
storage  on  land.   To  preserve  land decked logs, the logs are
often sprinkled with water.  The water must be relatively free of
solids in order to pass through small diameter spray nozzles.

Existing Inplant Control Measures

The most common type of water spray nozzle in  use  in  wet  deck
spray  systems is the "rainbird".  This nozzle delivers the water
to the atmosphere from  a  0.3  cm  (1/8  in)   diameter  rotating
nozzle.   The  water from this spray wets a 15 to 30 m (50 to 100
ft) diameter circle.  An alternative spray system that delivers a
mist.  This mist wets a 3 to 6 m (10 to 20  ft)  diameter  circle
and  must  be very close to the log surface because wind may blow
the mist away from the logs.  One such installation, observed  on
a warm dry day, resulted in no water discharge from the log deck.
It  was  all  evaporating  or infiltrating into the ground at the
site.  While these nozzles have the advantage of producing little
or no runoff, they have several  disadvantages.   There  must  be
more  nozzles  used  on  the  same size log deck and there can be
virtually no suspended solids in the water or  the  nozzles  will
plug.

Another  inplant  control  measure  is  the recycling of wet deck
water.  The water discharge from the wet deck is collected  in  a
settling  basin,  sometimes  as  small as 9 m by 9 m (30 ft by 30
ft), which removes  grit  and  readily  settleable  solids.   The
clarified  water  is  pumped  back to the wet deck spray nozzles.
The fine mist producing spray nozzles usually cannot be used on a
recycled wet deck because of inadequate  solids  removal  in  the
settling  pond.   Water  must  be  added to the system during dry
periods  because  the  evaporation  rate  for  a  wet   deck   is
considerably  higher  than  for  quiescent  waters.    An overflow
structure is usually provided on the pond.

Potential Inplant Control Measures

The most effective control measure available to the operator of a
wet decking facility is  the  control  of  the  volume  of  water
sprayed  on the wet deck area.  This requires strategic placement
                                23k

-------
of the spray nozzles and control of the periods
system is operated.
when  the  spray
The  number of spray nozzles and, consequently, the flow of water
to the wet deck could be reduced by making the  deck  higher  and
shorter.   This  may  add  significantly  to the cost of decking,
because it would have to be performed with a  crane  rather  than
the  front-end  loader  that is commonly used.  It would also add
significantly to the danger associated with placing and  removing
logs from the deck.

The  land  deck  could be covered and a high humidity environment
maintained under the cover.  Plastic drape covers have been  used
to  protect roundwood stored for the pulp and paper industry, but
wind readily tears the covering from the pile.  For this  reason,
a firm frame for the cover material would probably be necessary.

Treatment and control Technology

The  treatability  of the effluent from a wet deck was assumed to
be the same as  that  of  log  pond  waters  since  the  chemical
analyses  obtained  in this study showed that the effluent waters
for wet decking operations are similar to those from mill and log
ponds.  Therefore, the treatment technology can be considered  to
be similar.

Six   treatment  alternatives  were  considered  in  wet  decking
effluents but two different flows for each scheme are  presented.
These flows correspond to those expected from a one ha (3 ac) and
a  20  ha   (50  ac)  wet  deck.   These  alternatives  are  shown
diagramatically in Figure 54.  Table 5U  presents  a  summary  of
treatment  efficiencies  for  the  treatment  alternatives.   The
treatment alternatives  selected  for  the  typical  wet  decking
operations are:

Alternative A:

    No treatment, cost of small recycle pond.

Alternative B:

    Recycle-equalization-sedimentation pond

Alternative C:

    C1 Recycle-equalization-oxidation pond #1.
    C2 Oxidation pond #2.

Alternative D:

    D1 Recycle-equalization-sediment&tion pond.
    D2 Chemical coagulation-flocculation.
    D3 Secondary sedimentation.

Alternative E:
                                    235

-------
   ALTERNATIVE- A:
                                    MO TREATMENT
  ALTERNATIVE -
  ALTERNATIVE -
                 RECYCLE EQUALIZATION
                 OXIDATION PONONoi
  ALTERNATIVE - 0!

DECK J

RECYCLE EQUALIZATION
SEDIMENTATION PONO


CHEMICAL COAGULATION
FLOCCULATION


SEDIMENTATION
ACTIVATED
CARBON


FILTRATION
LTERNATIVE-F: ATMOSPHERE
S~~~\. T : ; :

Wt 1 V
OECK J

RECYCLE EVAPORATION
POND

FIGURE  54  ALTERNATIVE   TREATMENT SCHEMES FOR WET DECKING
                             238

-------
                        TABLE 54

EFFICIENCIES AND CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS
    TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES  FOR WET DECKING
                                  COD
Suspended Solids
Percent COD
Reduction in
Alternative the Unit
A
ho
Co B1,C1,D1,E1
— J
C2
D2, E2
E3
E4
Fl
0
20
60
60
20
75
100
Percent Suspended Influent
Solids Reduction Concentration
in the Unit (mg/1)
0
50
20
, 90
90
0
100
155
155
124
124
50
40
155
Effluent
Concentration
(mg/1)
155
124
50
50
40
10
0
Influent
Concentration
(mg/1 )
100
100
50
50
5
0.5
100
Effluent
Concentration
(mg/1 )
100
50
40
5
0.5
0.5
0

-------
    E1 Recycle-egualization-sedimentation pond.
    E2 Chemical coagulation-flocculation.
    E3 Secondary sedimentation.
    EU Filtration.
    E5 Activated carbon.

Alternative F:

    Recycle-evaporation pond.

Alternative  A  -  There  is  no  treatment  and  no  removal  of
pollutants for Alternative A.

Alternative B - Alternative B is the same design as Alternative B
for mill ponds and Alternative B for log ponds.  The  removal  of
sludge  from  the  log  pond alternative must be considered.  The
removal efficiencies are the same.
Alternative C - Alternative C is the same  as
mill ponds and Alternative B for log ponds.
Alternative  C  in
Alternative  D  -  Alternative D is the same as Alternative D for
mill ponds and Alternative C for log ponds.
Alternative E - Alternative E is the same as  Alternative  E
mill ponds and Alternative D for log ponds.
               for
Alternative, F  -  Alternative  F  is a recycle-evaporation pond.
Evaporation ponds for wet decks of a size larger than one hectare
(3 ac) are  unrealistic  as  a  treatment  technique.   For  this
reason,  this  alternative  is the same as Alternative F for mill
ponds.  There is  no  method  considered  to  be  reasonable  for
achieving  zero  discharge  or 100% treatment in wet decks larger
than one hectare (3 ac).

DRY DECKING

Some of  the  operational  control  measures  applicable  to  wet
decking,  such  as  the  minimization  of  log  inventories,  and
alteration of deck configuration,  are  also  applicable  to  dry
decks.   However,  since  dry  decked  logs  are  only subject to
natural precipitation,, and runoff results only after  sufficient
rain  has fallen, the operational control measures are fewer and*
to some extent, different.

No operational control measures are currently practiced  for  dry
decking  operations.   In general, the decks are located on high,
dry ground  in  order  to  facilitate  log  handling  during  wet
weather.   This  has the added advantage of minimizing the amount
of surface water passing through  the  deck.   Other  efforts  to
divert  the flow of surface storm runoff front the log decks, such
as channelization of the runoff,  can  substantially  reduce  the
waste water stream generated by dry decks.
                                 238

-------
Another   potential  control  measure  is
inventory to a minimum operating level.
reduction  of  storage
A potential method for pollutant reduction is the utilization  of
greater depths in the decks.  Greater rainfalls would be required
to wet the taller decks and, consequently, to produce runoff.

Covering  of  decks  with  plastic sheets or other materials is a
method of  preventing  polluted  runoff;  however,  the  problems
associated with this measure include: 1) the covering tends to be
blown  away  during  winds, 2)  log accessibility can be seriously
impaired, and 3) the cost would tend to be excessive for decks of
substantial size.

The end of line technology discussed for wet decks  would  appear
to  be  somewhat applicable to dry decks; however, the absence of
adequate flow information and comprehensive studies of effects of
species diversities, as discussed in  Section  V,  precludes  the
development  of  detailed  designs for treatment alternatives for
dry deck effluents.

STORAGE OF FRACTIONALIZED WOOD

Practionalized wood, including such  materials  as  bark,  chips,
planer  shavings,  and  sawdust,  are  stored  in  piles as waste
materials at sawmills, veneer mills, and other operations such as
insulation board  and  particleboard  production  and  by-product
recovery.

As  discussed in Section V, Water Use and Waste Characterization,
the retention time of the wood based material in  a  pile  is  an
important  factor  affecting  waste  water  characterization and,
therefore, applicable pollution control techniques.  In  general,
rapid  utilization  of  the  piles,  as  practiced as a matter of
course  at  particleboard  plants,  is  a  method  of   pollution
reduction.

The  use  of fractionalized wood as boiler fuel can significantly
reduce both a water pollution problem and a solid waste  disposal
problem.   However, an increase in particulate emissions from the
boiler can result.  An air pollution problem is  also  associated
with the use of Teepee burners and a widespread ban on the use of
such  burners  for  fractionalized  wood  destruction  has led to
extensive stockpiling of chip and particle piles.

Following a reduction of inventory to minimum levels practicable,
additional steps can be taken  to  reduce  water  pollution  from
fractionalized  wood  piles.  The practice of allowing yard storm
runoff to flow into piles can be avoided by diverting storm water
around or away from the piles.  With such a diversion,  the  only
water  generated from the piles is that originating from rainfall
directly on the piles or from  their  initial  moisture  content.
Yard  runoff  can  also  be  prevented  from entering piles by an
initially selection of storage sites on high, dry grounds.
                                    239

-------
Waste water generation by  fractional!zed  wood  piles  could  be
virtually  eliminated  by either storing the materials inside the
plant building, as  is  the  case  in  some  particleboard  plant
operations,  covering  them  with a roof, or placing a waterproof
material over  them.   Unfortunately,  few  plants  that  do  not
currently store these materials inside have the ability to do so,
and/  as  in  the case of dry decks, covering of outside piles is
restricted by material accessibility and high cost.  In the  case
of  long  term storage, however, as indicated by McKee and Daniel
covering of piles with polyethylene may be practical  and  offers
the  advantages of reduction of decay and opportunities of longer
storage.

It  would  appear  that  treatment  technology  similar  to  that
discussed for wet decking operations would be applicable to waste
waters   generated  by  storage  piles  of  fractional!zed  wood.
However, although the chemical make up  of  the  waste  water  is
presented  in  Section  V, available flow data is insufficient to
allow design of treatment facilities.

LOG WASHING

Treatment and control technology as practiced  in  sawmills  with
respect  to  log  washing  effluents  consist  of  no  treatment;
sedimentation and discharge; or sedimentation and  recycle.   Two
mills  report  total  recycle  of settled effluent.  One of these
utilizes three rectangular steel basins in series,  accomplishing
grit  removal primarily, with recycle being from the third basin.
The other mill uses a dirt basin approximately 15 m  (50  ft)   in
diameter  by  two m (six ft) deep to settle 25 I/sec (400 gpm) of
log wash  effluent.   The  effluent  of  the  basin  is  recycled
following   fine   screening.    The  system  has  been  operated
successfully for over one year.  Both mills report that  periodic
removal of sludge is necessary.  The inclusion of adequate sludge
handling  capabilities  should allow maintenance of total recycle
indefinitely.

The recommended system to provide 100 percent recycle consists of
coarse screens with screen openings of about 0.64  cm   (0.25  in)
for  removal  of  large bark and wood solids from the waste water
followed by a rectangular settling basin which provides a surface
overflow of 41,000 Ipd/sq m  (1000 gpd/sq ft) and a detention time
of two hours.  The effluent from this tank  should  pass  through
fine  screens  prior  to recycle.  Sludge from the settling basin
should be pumped to a sludge pond  for  thickening.   The  sludge
pond  should be sized so as to require only periodic dredging and
disposal  of  sludge.    Figure  55  illustrates  the  recommended
recycle system.

SAWMILLS

As discussed in Section V, exemplary sawmill operations currently
do not discharge waste water other than from log storage ponds or
storage  piles  of  fractionalized  wood (discussed separately in
                                    2
-------
FRESH  MAKEUP
—.—.INDICATES EXISTING FACILITY
       •WSUMP
         I- —*—— *
         J^PUMP J
      .TRUCK
    4       LOG W<
LOG WASH     j
     SLUDGE HOLDING
          POND
                                  COARSE SCREEN
                       SUPERNATANT
      SLUDGE PUMP
                                                   SOLIDS TO
                                                   INCINERATION
           SETTLING
             TANK
                                   FINE SCREEN
           FIGURE 55  LOG WASH RECYCLE SYSTEM

-------
this report),  bark  removal  operations,
noncontact cooling water sources.
boiler  blowdown,  and
Frequently,  the  practice in a sawmill is to allow cooling water
to flow from the mill site in  open  ditches.   This  results  in
contamination  of  the cooling water by sawdust, wood scraps, oil
and  grease,  and  other  substances.   It  can  be  avoided   by
discharging the cooling water through closed conduits.  This will
be  feasible  except  where  receiving  stream flow is too low to
avoid a deterioration of water  quality  because  of  temperature
rise.   It is also a frequent practice to discharge cooling water
to log ponds, especially during  winter  months  to  prevent  the
ponds  from freezing.  This practice results in the production of
large volumes of polluted log pond water and  should  be  avoided
unless adequate treatment of the log pond effluent is provided.

Other  control  techniques  which  lead  to  the  elimination  of
pollutant  discharges  from  a   sawmill   consist   of   various
housekeeping measures and management practices, many of which are
current  practice.  Saw cooling water and chain lubricating water
usage can be minimized to avoid the production of waste  streams.
This  can  be  accomplished  by  the installation of special flow
control systems or by reducing the flow to the  minimum  required
volume.  This will result in all saw cooling water being absorbed
in the sawdust.

Mill  cleanup should be practiced on a frequent basis both inside
and outside the mill to avoid the buildup of bark  and  dust  and
subsequent leaching and precipitation runoff.  All cleanup can be
done  without the use of water.  Hog fuel piles should be covered
where  possible  or  ditches  to  divert  stormwater  should   be
constructed.

Where  stains  or  anti-staining  compounds  are used, all excess
materials should be recycled and all cleanup water should be used
for makeup in subsequent batches.  Dip vats should be covered  to
keep  out  precipitation  and should be equipped with an apron to
catch all drippage from dipped lumber.  Any glue using operations
in the mill should adopt treatment  alternatives  recommended  in
the fabricating operations section of this report.

In  summary,  the  following  practices  are  recommended and are
considered to be current utilized practice at the model sawmill:

    1.   Cooling water should be discharged after use in  cooling
         pumps,  turbines or condensers by way of closed conduits
         rather than open ditches.

    2.   Waste materials such  as  bark  and  sawdust  should  be
         utilized  wherever  possible  for  fuel or otherwise and
         should not be allowed to accumulate.

    3.   All stains, preservatives and coating compounds  applied
         to  lumber  should be totally contained.  Where water is
                                  21+2

-------
         required for cleanup of  these  systems,
         reused as makeup for the next batch.
it  should  be
    U.   Cleanup  in  and  around  the  sawmill  should  be  done
         frequently  to  avoid  buildup of bark and sawdust.   All
         cleanup should be done without water.

    5.   Saw cooling water usage and chain belt lubricating water
         usage should be minimized.

FABRICATION

Fabrication with water soluble adhesives and  associated  cleanup
operations   results   in  the  production  of  an  intermittent,
concentrated waste water.  The volume of  this  waste  water  has
been  shown  in  previous sections to be related to the number of
applicators and mixing vessels present at a particular plant.  In
general, the volumes observed  have  been  of  approximately  two
orders of magnitude.  For most fabricating operations, the volume
of  glue  wash  water will be in a range from 95 Ipd to 1,100 Ipd
(25 gal per day to 300 gal per day).  However,   for  some  larger
glue  users,  most notably the laminated structural wood products
industry, the volume of waste water produced may fall in a  range
from  4,000  Ipd to 8,000 Ipd (1,000 gal per day to 2,000 gal per
day).  For this reason, control and treatment recommendations and
designs are based on two distinct volume ranges.

In-Piant Control Measures

In-plant control measures to reduce the volume  of  waste  waters
consist  of  various cleanup techniques.  One of these techniques
consists of scraping the  mixing  tanks  and  other  surfaces  to
remove  as  much of the glue residue as possible.  This technique
in combination with high pressure  hoses  can  reduce  the  total
volume  of  wash  waters  appreciably.   Steam or steam and water
mixtures can also reduce water usage.  Steam cannot  be  used  on
rubber  rollers, but it is applicable to extruder and mixing tank
cleanup.  Also, at least  one  fabricating  operation  applies  a
heavy  duty  grease  to the extruder surfaces to prevent the glue
from contacting the metal surfaces.  It is  estimated  that  with
the  application of these techniques the volume of water required
for cleaning applicators can be reduced from 800 1 (200 gal)   per
cleanup to less than UOO 1 (100 gal) per cleanup.

End of Line Control Technology

Present  control  and treatment technology for glue wash water in
the fabrication industry consists of containment in lagoons  with
periodic   dredging   of   solids   with  disposal  to  landfill,
landspread,  or  municipal  sewers.   Several  treatment  methods
result  in  no  discharge  of  glue  wash  water.   This  can  be
accomplished by screening of the larger  glue  solids  and  other
residue followed by a variety of alternatives including:

-------
    1.   Discharge  to  a  shallow   lagoon   sized   such   that
         evaporation    and   infiltration   will   allow   total
         containment.  Spray evaporators may be required in  some
         regions   of   high   precipitation   and  limited  land
         availability.

    2.   Discharge to a holding tank from which glue  wash  water
         can  be  trucked  to landfill, landspread, or sprayed on
         hogged fuel to be burned.

    3.   Discharge to a holding tank from which  the  wash  water
         can  be  reused  as  wash  water  in cleanup operations.
         Depending on the type of  resin  used  at  a  particular
         plant,  it  may be possible to use a portion of the wash
         water as makeup water in glue mixing.  A portion of wash
         water  will  possibly  require  bleedoff  which  can  be
         handled by evaporation or incineration.

Evaporation  ponds  without  spray  evaporators  are  presently a
common  control  technique  for  disposal  of  glue  wash  water.
However,  because  of  the high percentage of dissolved solids in
the resin mix, it is quite likely that zero discharge  conditions
cannot be maintained in those regions where precipitation exceeds
evaporation.  According to Baker, the adsorption of the dissolved
solids  by  soil  particles causes the containment pond bottom to
become  sealed  and  practically  impermeable  to  water.    This
disadvantage  can  be partially overcome by neutralization of the
waste water to reduce dissolved solids prior to lagooning.

Neutralization as a pretreatment technique has been  investigated
previously  for  phenolic,  protein  and  urea plywood glue waste
waters using  alum,  sulfuric  acid,  and  hydrochloric  acid  as
neutralizing   agents.    The   resulting  titration  curves  are
presented in Figures 56A and 56B.  These give both the volume  of
titrant  required  to produce a given pH and the optimum pH value
for maximum COD reduction for the various glues.  Figures 57  and
58  indicate  that  the  maximum  COD  reduction  occurs for both
protein and phenolic  resins  at  approximately  pH  7.5.   While
comparable  data  is not available on dissolved solids, it can be
assumed that a large percentage of the total  COD  of  the  waste
water  is  because  of  dissolved solids and, therefore, that the
maximum dissolved solids reduction would occur  at  near  neutral
pH.   Tables  55  and  56  present  optimum dosage levels, sludge
production rates, and  cost  information  for  neutralization  of
protein and phenolic glue wastes.  It should be noted that, for a
phenol glue waste, approximately 13.8 ml of 1 N H2SO4 is required
per  gram  of glue.  Thus, assuming a U0:1 dilution of wash water
to glue, approximately 1961 Ipd  (518 gal per  day)  of  IN  H2SO4
would  be  required for a glue waste flow of 5,678 Ipd  (1,500 gal
per day).  The total volume of unthickened sludge  produced  from
the  above neutralization would be approximately 5,681 Ipd  (1,501
gal per day) .

While the above information specifically  concerns  phenolic  and
protein  glue wastes, similar, though less extensive studies have
                                  2kk

-------
                             1.2
tn
                          X
                          Q.
                                      (A) BORDEN'S CASCO RESIN S-H
                                 .7    .6    .8    .4    .3    .2    .1


                                      ML  I.ON N, OH/6M. GLUE
0    .1     .2    .3     .4    .5     .6    .7


    ML  I.ON H, SQ4/GM. GLUE
                                      FIGURE  56A  TITRATION  CURVE FOR HARDWOOD GLUE

-------
                                                            I 	I    I	I     I
ro
*-
en
x
 a.
12 -I




II




10




9



e




7



6




5




4 H



9



2
                               (A) BORDEN'S CASCOPHEN  3i

                               (B) BORDEN'S CASCO s-230
                          i
                            o    i
                                                            I    I    I    I
               234    56789    10


                           ML I.ON  H2 S04/6NT  GLUE
                                                         12   13   14   15    16  17
                              FIGURE 56B  TITRATION CURVE FOR PHENOLIC AND PROTEIN GLUE

-------
    10 -
     9 J
     8 -
     7 -
     6 -
 X
  Q_
     5 -
     4 -
     3 -
                              i    t    i   i
                                                 i   t   t
        0  10  ZO 30  40  50  6O 70  SO  90 100 110  I2O 130  I4O
                    COD  OR TOC, MG/GM GLUE
FIGURE 57-  COD AND  TOC OF SUPERNATANT VS pH FOR PROTEIN GLUE

-------
    II
    IO-
    9 -
    8 -
    7 -
X
Q.
    5 -
    4 J
               IOO      200      30O      4OO

                   CODv MG/GM  GLUE
5OO
     FISURE 58  COD OF SUPERNATANT VS  pH FOR PHENOLIC  GLUE

-------
                                         TABLE 55

                      NEUTRALIZATION OF PROTEIN GLUE WASTE
                        Acid             Alum                Acid
                     (1NH2S04)    {IN. A1£(S04)3-18H20)    (IN HC1)
Optimum Treatment
Dosage, rnl/g glue 6.3
COD supn't, mg/g glue^
TOC, supn't, mg/g 3.2
gluei/
pH 7.9
Cost of chemicals/
100 Kg glue $0.35
6.7
19.5
9.0
6,9
$0.79
6.2
26.0
—
7.6
$0.74
5/Initial COD, 176,000 mg/gm glue

^/Initial TOC, 52,000 mg/gm glue

-------
                              TABLE  56
   ALUM VS H2S04 FOR NEUTRALIZATION OF  PHENOLIC GLUE  WASTE
                                 Acid           Alum
                              (IN H2_S04.)    (IN A12.(Sp4)3.'18H20)
Optimum Treatment  Dosage,
  ml/g  glue                     13.8
COD supn't mg/g  glue^/           67.0
pH                                6.8
Total gms solids produced/
  g glue                          0.24
Total Volume sludge, ml/g
  glue                           40.0
Cost of chemicals/100 Kg glue     $0.77
14.0
50.0
 7.4

 0.46

60.0
$1.65
-'initial  COD,  653 mg/g  glue
                                 250

-------
been performed for casein and phenol resorcinol glue wastes.   The
results of these studies indicate that approximately 162 Ipd  (UU
gal  per  day)   of  1  N AL2 (SOU)3 • 18H2O would be required for
neutralization of 5,678 Ipd (1,500 gal per day) of these types of
glue  waste  waters.   These  studies  also  indicate  that   the
precipitate  formed  as a result of neutralization will have poor
settling characteristics.  Because of the obvious sludge handling
problems discussed above, neutralization will  likely  not  be  a
practicable  control  technology.   Therefore,  containment  pond
design should be based on zero infiltration where  neutralization
is  not  practiced.   The assumption of zero infiltration assures
the need for induced evaporation  in  areas  where  precipitation
exceeds evaporation.

Another alternative for glue waste disposal consists of screening
and sedimentation to remove settleable solids and floating debris
followed  by  landspreading,  landfill  disposal or incineration.
Where adequate area is available, landspreading is a satisfactory
disposal method except during winter months when  the  ground  is
frozen.   Previous  studies  as  well  as observations during the
current study indicate that the glue solids are biodegradable  by
soil  bacteria.  While the intermittent nature of the waste water
flow and  the  high  phenolic  content  of  many  of  the  resins
prohibits  typical  biological treatment of the waste water, soil
bacteria appear to degrade the glue solids over a period of time.

Disposal  by  incineration  was  investigated  by  Bodien.    His
results,  presented  in Table 57 indicate the small percentage of
non-volatile solids  present  in  several  typical  plywood  glue
wastes.   This  condition  is probably typical of the glue wastes
encountered in fabricating operations.  Data collected during the
current study, as  presented  in  Table  58,  indicate  that  the
precentage  of  non-volatile  solids  for phenol resorcinol waste
waters  will  be  small.   The  conclusion  can  be  drawn   that
incineration of glue wastes at temperatures exceeding 600 C would
be  a  highly  efficient method of reducing the volume of wastes.
Thus, where incineration facilities presently exist  such  as  at
sawmills with hogged fuel furnaces, spraying the glue waste water
on   the   hogged  fuel  prior  to  burning  would  constitute  a
practicable control technology and would result in  a  negligible
increase in ash presently produced.

A  third  alternative  consists of screening and sedimentation of
the waste water followed  by  reuse  of  wash  water  for  future
equipment  cleaning.  While this control method is being utilized
in the plywood industry, it is not known whether its  application
would be practicable for all industrial glue wastes.  This method
would  probably  require closer operational control than previous
control technologies so as to avoid clogging the recycle pump  or
piping.  Apparent advantages in the application of such a recycle
system  include  the  fact  that  no  reliance  need  be  made on
hydrological conditions to insure proper control of  disposal  as
is  the  case  with containment and land spreading.  Reuse of the
waste water for washing may also serve to emphasize  conservation
                                    251

-------
                     TABLE 5-7

INCINERATION TEST  FOR PHENOLIC,  PROTEIN AND UREA GLUE
  Based on Met Weight of Glue
 % Ash @ 600°C  % Ash @ 1000°C
Based on Dry Weight Glue Solids
% Ash A 600°C '% Ash £ 1000°C

Phenolic
Protein
Urea

4.58
13.37
Nil

4.12
6.12
Nil

26.08
34.48
Nil

23.40
15.76
Nil
                          252

-------
                              TABLE 58
             VOLATILE SOLIDS IN PHENOL RESORCINOL WASTEWATER
Sample A
Sample B
Sample C
Total  SoHds
   (mg/1)
    1284
    5&17
    1013
Total Volatile Solids
       (mg/1)
       886
       5116
       796
Non-Volatile

   30
   14
   21
                                     253

-------
practices  because  of  the limited amount of storage provided in
the system and the increased costs of excessive water usage.

For some resins, a portion of the waste  water  may  be  used  as
makeup  for  the  next  batch of glue.  This may be the case with
various resins delivered in a  dry  powder  form.   However,  the
practicality  of  waste  water  recycle  for  glue  mixing is not
established for resins other than those utilized in  the  plywood
industry.   Table  59  presents  a comparison of anticipated wash
water flows and potential reuse  of  the  waste  water  for  glue
mixing of viscosity control.

A  fourth  alternative  for  disposal  and  a  common practice is
discharge to municipal sewers.  The majority  of  resins  may  be
considered  compatible  with  municipal  sewage  treatment plants
either  because  the  constituents  of  the  waste   waters   are
biodegradable,  because  the  volume  is  small,  or  both.  Some
constituents may not be compatible,  however,  if  discharged  in
large  slugs.   This is the case, for instance, with the phenolic
resins which may contain  over  500  milligrams  of  phenols  per
kilogram  of glue while phenol resorcinol resins may contain 4 to
18 percent  free  phenol.   Many  protein  glues  contain  sodium
pentachlorophenate  as  an inhibitor at levels up to 0.5 percent.
Other types of resin  may  contain  catalysts  such  as  chromium
nitrate  at  levels  up  to  5 percent by weight.  Metals such as
these may pass through a conventional secondary treatment system.

Selected Treatment Alternatives for Model Plants

On the basis of the above discussion, five alternative  treatment
systems  have  been  developed for glue wastes resulting from the
two fabrication operations modeled in section V.

Alternative A consists of no treatment and control and results in
no reduction benefits or costs.

Alternative B consists of screening  and  discharge  to  a  spray
evaporation  pond.   Screening  is  accomplished  in this and all
remaining alternatives by a 38 cm (15 in)  rotating  screen  with
2.00  mm (0.1 in) screen openings.  The screened effluent is then
discharged to a pond sized such that spray evaporators  operating
five  months  per  year  contain  the  waste  flow  and rainwater
completely.  The evaporators consist of  a  pump,  piping,  spray
nozzles,  and  a  flotation system.  A schematic of the system is
presented in Figure 59.  Table  60  presents  design  information
concerning the proposed treatment system.

Alternative  C,  incineration, consists of screening, storage and
the necessary pump and piping to spray  the  wastes  onto  hogged
fuel prior to burning.  This alternative assumes the existence of
a hogged fuel furnace.

Alternative  D,  landspreading  of  the  glue wastes, consists of
screening,  storage and trucking to landspreading or  landfilling.
A schematic of Alternatives C and D is given in Figure 60.
                                  25lt

-------
               TABLE  59
POTENTIAL MAKEUP WATER VS.  WASTEWATER PRODUCTION
Mill
A


B
C

D
Type of
Product
Garage Door
Beams
End- Jointed
Lumber
Beams
Beams
Decking
End-Oointed
Lumber
Decking
Type of
Glue
Poly vinyl
Phenol
Resorcinol
Polyvinyl .
Phenol
Resorcinol
Phenol
Resorcinol
Phenol
Resorcinol
Phenol
. Resorcinal
Mel ami c
Urea
Wastewater
Production
(I/day)
380
190
190
380
4500
2300
3800
Potential Makeup
Water
(I/day)
4
19
4
68
125

110
                     255

-------
          ____ INDICATES EXISTING FACILITY
                      GLUE SPREADER
                      FINGER JOINTER
                      MIXING TANKS
                            1
                       200mm SCREEN
                      STORAGE LAGOON
PLANT - I

       FLOW   =  757 (pd

       SPRAY  EVAPORATION   WHERE  NECESSARY

PLANT-2

       FLOW   =  5678 Ipd

       SPRAV  EVAPORATION  WHERE  NECESSARY
      FIGURE 59  ALTERNATIVE B FOR GLUE WASTE DISPOSAL
                          256

-------
                              TABLE  60

     SPRAY EVAPORATION POND DESIGN ALTERNATIVE B



Northwest Region
     Precipitation  - 259  cm/year
     Evaporation    -  61  cm/year
     Plant 1
         "Flow -  760  liters/day
          Lagoon  Size -  11 x  11 x 3 meters deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty horsepower unit, operating
                             six hours per days five months per year,
    :PI ant 2
          Flow - 5680 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 30 x 30 x 3 meters deep
          Spray Evaporators -  One seventy horsepower unit operating
                              eleven  hours per day, five months per
                              year.
North Central Region
     Precipitation - 84 cm/year
     Evaporation   - 76 cm/year

     Plant 1
          Flow - 760 liters/day
          Lagoon Size -9x9x3 meters  deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty  horsepower unit, operating
                              three hours per day, five months per year.

     Plant 2
          Flow - 5680 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 23 x 23 x 3 meters deep
          Spray Evaporators - One seventy-five horsepower unit.
                              operating six hours per day, five months
                              per year.

New England Region
     Precipitation - 94 cm/year
     Evaporation   - 64 cm/year
     Plant 1
          Flow - 760 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 8 x 8 x 3 meters deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty horsepower  unit, operating
                              three hours per day, five months per
                              year.
     Plant 2
          Flow - 5680 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 22 x 22 x 3 meters deep
          Spray Evaporators - One seventy-five  horsepower unit,
                              operating six hours  per  day,  five
                              months per year.
                             257

-------
Southwest Region
     Precipitation - 38 cm/year
     Evaporation   - 147 cm/year

     Plant 1
          FTow - 760 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 11 x 11 x 0.6 meters  deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty  horsepower  unit, operating
                              1.5 hours per day, five  months  per year.

     Plant 2
          Flow - 5680 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 30 x 30 x 0.6 meters  deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty  horsepower  unit, operating
                              eleven hours  per day,  five months per year,

Southeast Region
     Precipitation - 127 cm/year
     Evaporation   - 112 era/year

     Plant 1
          FTow - 760 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 8 x 8 x. 3 meters  deep
          Spray Evaporators - One twenty  horsepower  unit, operating
                              twenty hours  per day,  five months per year.

     Plant2
          Flow - 5680 liters/day
          Lagoon Size - 21 x 21 x 3 meters  deep
          Spray Evaporators - One seventy-five horsepower unit,
                              operating six hours  per  day,  five months
                              per year.
                              258

-------
INDICATES  EXISTING  FACILITY  — — — — — —
                GLUE   SPREADER   |
                Fl N6ER  JOINTER   |
                MIXING  TANKS      I
                                     I
                      I
2
00mm SCREEN
                HOLDING   TANK
1
r
TRUCK TO
LANDFILL

^
r
TRUCK TO
LAND SPREAD


r
SPRAY ON
HOGGED FUEL
PLANT - t
        FLOW = 757!pd
        HOLDING  TANK  VOLUME  = 7570 liters

PLANT- 2
        FLOW =  5678 Ipd
        HOLDING TANK VOLUME = 3?850 liters
FIGURE 60  ALTERNATIVES C AND D  FOR FABRICATION
                    259

-------
                  _-_-__ INDICATES EXISTING FACILITY
PUMP
                       MIXING TANK


                      GLUE SPREADER
                      FINGER JOINTER
                             I
                      2.00mmSCREEN
                       HOLDING  TANK
BLEEDOFF  TO
INCINERATION OR
LAGOON
                           SUMP
 MAKE-UP  WATER
  PLANT- I
        PUMP  FLOW = 757 lpd@J3.7otm    (INTERMITTENT)
        HOLDING TANK VOLUME  a  3785 lltirs


  PLANT - 2
        PUMP FLOW -  5,678 Ipd fl 3.7atm     (INTERMITTENT)
        HOLDING  TANK  VOLUME  =  18.925 liter*
   FIGURE 61  ALTERNATIVE E FOR GLUE WASHWATER REUSE SYSTEM
                           260

-------
Alternative  E,  wash  water recycle, again consists of screening
and storage.  The settled and screened effluent is then  utilized
for  subsequent  washing  operations.   A  sump and sump pump are
provided as is a capacity for makeup  water  to  the  system  and
bleedoff  from the system.  Provision is also made for use of the
waste water in  glue  mixing  where  feasible.   This  system  is
presented in Figure 61.

Alternative  F is applicable for urban fabricating operations and
consists of discharge to a municipal sewer.

INSULATION BOARD

The treatment and control method currently in use in  all  plants
consists  of  primary  clarification  only.  Other systems in use
include activated  sludge,  aerated  lagoons,  spray  irrigation,
sedimentation,  coagulation,  and  water recycle.  There are also
two  plants  currently  discharging  into   municipal   treatment
systems, with three others scheduled to do so in the near future.

Inplant Control Measures and Technology

There  are  various  means  by which waste water flow and loading
from an insulation board plant may be reduced.  However, some  of
these methods are either not practical or not applicable to every
plant  because  of  variations  in  inplant processes or products
produced.  As  discussed  previously  in  section  V,  and  shown
graphically  in  Figure  40,  steaming pressure, and time have an
influence on the BOD loading from a  given  process.   While  the
reduction  of  the  severity  of  steaming may reduce waste water
loads, there is a counter-effect of increased cost of defibrating
as well as a decrease in the  quality  of  the  resulting  fiber.
Full  scale plant tests in Sweden have shown a BOD load reduction
of up to 50 percent with reductions of steaming pressures from 15
atmospheres to approximately 7 atmospheres.

Studies  in  Sweden  on  the  economics  of  decreasing  steaming
severity  show  that  there  is  an approximate increase of up to
$1.50 per metric ton when the steaming  pressure  is  reduced  by
this  amount.   Although these costs may differ from one plant to
another depending on  the  extent  of  modification  of  existing
equipment,  they are considered sufficiently valid to reflect the
increase in energy consumption, the purchase  of  extra  refining
equipment, and the reduction of steam consumption.

It  was  also  found  in  the  study  that there is a decrease in
internal bonding  strength  in  the  finished  board  when  steam
reduction  is  done  outside of certain ranges.  It was concluded
that the quality of pulps produced  within  a  range  of  six  to
twelve  atmospheres  of  steam pressure  (70 to 160 psi) are about
the same; however, reduction  in  steaming  pressure  below  this
range produces fiber of lower quality.  In addition to a decrease
in  the  internal bonding properties of the board, there has also
been noted a decrease in the resistance to water  absorption  and
an  increase  in  swelling  properties  of the final board.  Most
                                     261

-------
plants in  the  U.  S.  already  operate  below  11  atmospheres,
therefore,  they  are discharging less BOD load than if they were
operating at a higher steaming pressure.

The elimination of steaming completely  (or the reduction of steam
pressures to under two atmospheres  (29 psi) cannot be  considered
a  viable  alternative  to reduced waste water loads as this will
change the characteristics of the fiber produced  which  in  turn
will affect the following operations and have considerable effect
on  the final product.  In addition, there are certain species of
wood such as oak which could no longer be  utilized  if  steaming
were  to  be  eliminated.  Therefore reductions or elimination of
steaming  on  an  industry-wide  basis  is  not   considered   an
alternative  for  BOD  reduction, although each plant may want to
consider it on an individual basis.

As discussed in Section V, all insulation board  plants  practice
some  degree  of process water recirculation.  It is also typical
of the industry to practice some degree of reuse of other waters.

The major effect  of  closing  a  process  water  system  is  the
reduction  of  the  total  amount of suspended solids (fibers and
other fine suspended substances) in the discharge stream.  It has
been shown that the concentration  of  suspended  solids  in  the
waste  water  is  approximately  the same regardless of the total
volume of waste water  discharged.   Thus  the  total  pounds  of
fibers  and other suspended substances discharged will be roughly
proportional to the volume of the waste water discharged.

Although it has been shown that plants with closed water  systems
have  lower  pollution  loads than plants with open systems, only
when a process water system is closed to a discharge of less than
2000 1 per metric ion  (500  gal  per  ton)  will  a  significant
decrease  in  BOD  load occur.  A decrease in the volume of waste
water discharged from 50,000 1 per metric ton  to  10,500  1  per
metric  ton (12,000 gal per ton to 2,500 gal per ton) reduces the
amount of solubles (the major contributor to BOD)  by  only  eight
percent in the waste stream.  Plants in the U. S.  usually recycle
water by such systems as are shown in Figures 62 and 63.

There are limitations to the amount of recirculation which can be
done  by any given plant.  When a process water system is closed,
there is usually a buildup of dissolved solids and,  to  a  small
extent,  suspended  solids,  as  well  as a decrease in pH and an
increase in temperature  of  the  process  water  system.   These
factors  affect both the economics of the process and the quality
of the final product.  Also, as these  effects  occur,  there  is
further  hydrolysis  of  some  of  the  dissolved solids to lower
molecular weight material, thus increasing the BOD per unit  mass
of  dissolved  solids  by  hydrolyzing the colloidal fiber into a
dissolved state.  The dissolving of  the  colloidal  fiber  would
eliminate  any  possibility  of a substantial portion of it being
removed by chemical coagulation.
                                    262

-------
                                                                                                     TO ATMOSPHERE
                                                                                                          I03f
N>
WOOD
   (50)
                     LJ
                                          (25)
    __________________
LjJ  DECKER  LJ
            REFINING      STOCK CHEST       DECKER      STOCK CHEST
 (I)     {(15)
         !
         i
                                                                                     LJ  ^^^ LJ
(1.5)     |     (50)
        I
                   DRIE R   Unite* TO FINISHING
                                                                 PROCESS WATER CHEST
     	»-  WATER IN
     	*•  WATER OUT
     (X)    APPROXIMATE FIBER CONSISTENCY
            IN PROCESS
                                                                                      *	1
                                                                     FRESH WATER   '	-^ TO TREATMENT
                                    FIGURE 62   WATER RECYCLE SYSTEM TYPE I FOR INSULATION BOARD

-------
                                                                                              TO ATMOSPHERE
en
                  WOOD

J REFINING ^JsTO
(30) (25)
-. ^ WATER IM
*
1
1
CK CHEST ^J DECKER U STOCK CHEST ^J K!SJ!« ^^ DRIER 1
^^^^ ^^^^1 ^^^^1 Pn«^niP|C ^^^^^ |
(I) j 05) ' (1.3) j
* *
FIBER MACHIN

WHITEWATER WAT£fl
. C?,FSJ._ * — - — 	 CHesT
1 ' 	
1
L — *-TO TREATMENT
(50)
E

                                                                                                          (98)
                                                                                                                 TO FINISHING
                         -- ». WATER OUT
                         (X)    APPROXIMATE  FIBER CONSISTENCY IN PROCESS
                                   FIGURE  63  WATER  RECYCLE SYSTEM TYPE II  FOR INSULATION BOARD

-------
As the process water system is closed, there is  an  increase  in
the  concentration  of  soluble  substances (dissolved solids)  of
both organic and inorganic nature.   Because  there  is  over  50
percent  moisture  in  the  mat  entering  the  dryer,  a  higher
concentration of dissolved solids in the process water would mean
a proportional increase in the amount of dissolved matter leaving
with the board.  During the drying operation,  there is a tendency
for the wood sugar and other dissolved organics to migrate to the
surface of the board.  The presence of these soluble organics  on
the  surface  of  the  board  causes problems when a dry board is
coated.  When a dissolved solids concentration reaches a  certain
point,  the  amount of organics on the surface of the board is so
great that when a coating is applied, a discoloration may occur.

The presence of these dissolved organic materials on the  surface
will  cause  problems  during  the  rehumidification stage of the
process.  In some plants, the board is coated  with  a  spray  of
water  and then sheets are stacked on top of one another to allow
the moisture to become uniformly distributed  within  the  board.
When  the amount of organic material on the surface is too large,
a lamination between boards causes  entire  stacks  of  board  to
stick  together.   A  buildup  of inorganic dissolved solids in a
system may cause a case hardening effect in the board  as  it  is
dried.   That  is,  there will be a less efficient utilization of
heat in the dryer and more energy will be required to reduce  the
moisture content in the board to the required level.  It has been
noted  in  one  plant,  which  is  currently  in  the  process of
attempting to close its process water system, that an increase in
weight of the board occurs and also the water resistance  is  de-
creased,  thus  creating  a need for more size to be added to the
final product.  The critical amount of dissolved solids that  can
be  tolerated  by any given plant will vary considerably.  It has
been reported by industry  that  the  maximum  concentrations  of
organic  dissolved  solids  that  can be tolerated range from 0.5
percent to as  high  as  1.8  percent,  depending  on  the  plant
involved.  In general, a higher concentration of dissolved solids
can  be  tolerated  in  sound  deadening  board  as compared with
sheathing board and a higher concentration can  be  tolerated  in
sheathing   as  compared  to  finished  products.   Those  plants
producing hardboard, in addition to the above problems, encounter
sticking in the press when the dissolved organic concentration is
excessive.  The concentrations that can  be  tolerated  by  these
systems  will  also range from approximately 0.5 percent to about
1.8 percent.

As mentioned above, there is an increase in temperature when  the
process  water system is closed.  The increase in temperature may
cause hot and humid conditions near the forming machines and lead
to unpleasant working conditions.  The high temperature may  also
affect  the  additives  that  are  added  to  some  boards.   For
instance, when molten asphalt is added in  sheathing  production,
it usually becomes crystalline when it contacts the process water
stream.   It  is  necessary  that  this occur in order to produce
sheathing of high quality.  However, if the  temperature  of  the
process  water  becomes too high, the asphalt remains in a molten
                                      265

-------
state causing  a  degradation  of  product  quality.   Increasing
recycle  not  only increases the temperature but causes a drop in
pH.  Aside from the increase of chemical hydrolysis as  discussed
above,  a  drop in pH to approximately U.O increases corrosion of
pipes and other machinery.

A  closed  process  water  system  is  a  media  that  encourages
biological growth.  It has been noted that slime growth occurring
on  screens  throughout  the system affects the forming operation
and other screening necessary in the process.  Slime buildups  on
machinery  other  than  screens may be broken off and formed into
the mat.  When the mat is dried the slime causes an  imperfection
in the board and sometimes causes a cavity to appear.  This again
makes the board unsalable.

Although  the  actual concentration of suspended material may not
increase significantly  in  a  closed  white  water  system,  the
percentage  of  fine  material  will.   The buildup of these fine
suspended solids causes a decrease in the draining  rate  of  the
stock.  This will cause a slowing down of the production process,
or  an  increase  in  the  weight  of  the  board.   This  is  an
undesirable effect since the board is sold on a square foot basis
and shipped on a weight basis.

In a plant producing multiple products on multiple lines  with  a
common  pulping  system,  there  are  further restrictions on the
reuse of process waters.  This is because of  an  incompatibility
of  certain  additives used in producing one product with another
product.  In general, as shown in Figure 6U, the  process  waters
from  the  finished  board (ceiling tile, etc.)  and mineral fiber
white water systems are interchangeable and can  be  utilized  in
all  other  product  water  mixes.   The  process  water  from  a
hardboard machine can be utilized  in  the  process  water  of  a
sheathing  machine  and sound deadening board.  The process water
from sheathing production can be utilized only  in  making  sound
deadening board.

Despite  the  limitations  mentioned  above, there are methods to
increase the amount of water that can be recycled which  in  turn
reduces  the  waste  water flow and, in some cases, the pollutant
load as well.

One method of achieving a decrease in waste water flow is to  use
a split recycle system as shown in Figure 63.  This system breaks
the  water  usage  at the decker with the fiber preparation white
water being held separate from the machine  white  water  system.
This  system  enables  the  reduction  of pollutant flows but not
necessarily the waste water loads from a process.  The  principle
of  this system is to keep the dissolved solids that are released
during the steaming process from entering the machine white water
system.   This  enables  a  plant  to  reduce  the  waste   water
discharge,  which  might be advantageous for spray irrigation, to
concentrate the  waste  water  stream  if  evaporation  is  being
considered,  or  to  reduce  the flow and save money on clarifier
costs, if a biological system is to be used, while  at  the  same
                                  266

-------
or
MINERAL
FIBER
BOARD
j

1
i
U
i
i
j




-*V^^^








Fl N IS H E D
(DECORATIVE)
TILE
f




HARDBOARD
M.
L. ._
i
i
SH
D. SIDING

i

•
EATHING

N
'
'
*
i
•
'


'
i
'

L*. (BLACK)


BOARD



'

'
^E^-y*-1












1 • -^^








'

SOUND
DEADENING
BOARD
t j




.




                                   FIGURE 64  COMPATIBILITY OF PROCESS WATERS OF VARIOUS PRODUCTS -
                                              INSULATION BOARD

-------
time control the dissolved solids concentration being built up in
the  machine white water system.  This would eliminate or greatly
reduce the problems associated with dissolved solids  buildup  in
the  machine  white  water  system  discussed  above.   There are
limitations to this system.  It is not applicable  for  a  multi-
product,  multi-line  plant which uses a combined pulping system,
as recycled water from the sheathing line  may  come  in  contact
with   the   fiber  destined  for  the  ceiling  boardline,  thus
contaminatng the board.  If separate  pulping  systems  are  used
this  is not a problem.  There is the possibility for an increase
in temperature and lowering of pH in the fiber preparation  white
water  system.   This  can be eliminated by using stainless steel
piping and installing a heat exchanger.

Another method of reducing water discharge is to  use  a  primary
clarifier  and  recirculate a portion of the clarified water back
to the system.  This is currently  being  done  in  a  number  of
hardboard and insulation board plants with promising results.

There is also some pilot scale work being conducted on the use of
coagulants  and  flotation  clarifiers  to  enable  a more closed
system to be achieved.  The use of calcium hydroxide, followed by
aluminum sulfate with a high  ferric  sulfate  content  has  been
shown  to  reduce  the  chemical  oxygen  demand of process water
systems by about 30 percent  over  a  rather  wide  range  of  pH
conditions.   This  reduction  is  principally  the result of the
removal  of  some  of  the  higher  molecular  weight   dissolved
organics.   Various coagulation processes have been tried both in
the O. S. and Europe in an attempt to increase recycle and reduce
BOD loads.  The results have  not  been  particularly  successful
with  only  a  small  percentage  of the plants installing a full
scale process.

Other methods for increasing the amount  of  water  that  can  be
recycled  by  attempting  to  remove the suspended solids.  These
include 1) the use of  a  Saveall  or  2)  a  diatomaceous  earth
filter.   The  diatomaceous  earth filter utilizes coagulation to
increase solids removal by the  filter.   Solids  reduction  from
2000  or 3000 mg/1 down to 200 or less are reported to be common.
The practical application of this system has not been  adequately
tested,  but  it can be assumed that it can be used to reduce the
waste water discharge,  A schematic of a  summary  of  the  above
treatment systems is shown in Figure 65.

There  is currently one plant recycling secondary effluent to the
process and another plant planning to do pilot work in  the  near
future.   In  these  systems,  the  effluent  from the plant goes
through a biological treatment system  (activated sludge) and  the
effluent from the secondary clarifier is recycled to the process.
The  use  of a biological treatment system enables a considerable
reduction in the organic material in the waste stream.  A  system
of   this   type   would   reduce  limitations  imposed  by  high
concentrations of dissolved solids of organic  nature.   However,
the plant currently recycling from the secondary clarifier has no
long  term  data  and thus the effect of the buildup of inorganic
                                   268

-------
                                                                                      TO ATMOSPHERE
               WOOD
CO
REFININ6 I"MM| STOCK CHEST
i
WATE
WAT
.

MMH

DECKER


:R IN
•R OUT
i
MM

STOCK CMCSTpMM
i
I 	
*
PROCESS
WHITE


FORMING"———
MACHINE J~™
1
_J
I — -
J
WATER CHEST

£



DRIER UMMJ

SOLIDS REMOVAL
(1)
(2)
(31

TRFATUFMT
FILTRATION
FLOTATION
SEDIMENTATION
1


TO FINISHING
                                   FIGURE  65  SCHEMATIC OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL FOR
                                  PROCESS WHITE WATER RECYCLE  IN  INSULATION BOARD PLANTS

-------
dissolved solids has not been adequately studied.  Members of the
industry indicated that recycle of a  portion  of  the  secondary
effluent is a practical idea.  However, the problems of suspended
solids  overflowing  the  clarifier  must  be solved, possibly by
mixed media filtration.  The effect of the buildup  of  inorganic
solids  on a long term basis must be studied before a large scale
utilization of this scheme is employed.

There are other possible places where water may be  reused  in  a
system  to reduce water usage.  These include but are not limited
to the use of cooling water and  seal  water  as  process  makeup
water  and  the reuse experimentally of clarified effluent from a
primary or secondary clarifier as seal water.  A summary of water
reuse possibilities is presented  in  Figure  66  for  a  typical
plant.

End-of-Line Treatment Technologv

Existing  end-of-line  waste  water  treatment  technology in the
insulation  board  industry  varies   considerably   within   the
industry.   There  are  plants  with no treatment and plants with
zero  discharge.   The  existing  systems   can   be   considered
conventional   and   usually  consist  of  primary  clarification
followed by a type of biological treatment.  Each of the existing
processes presently being used is discussed below  and  presented
in Table 61.

Primary  S edimentati on  -  The  removal  of  suspended  solids by
primary sedimentation is the basic  process  utilized  for  waste
water  treatment  in  most  plants.   At  least 13 plants utilize
primary settling tanks  or  ponds  as  part  of  their  treatment
system.   Overflow  from  primary  settling  may be discharged to
receiving streams, to municipal treatment systems, or to  further
treatment  on  site.   A  portion of the overflow may also be re-
cycled for inplant use.  Suspended solids removal efficiency data
are available from only two insulation board plants which  report
approximately   50   and  85  percent  efficiency,  respectively.
Because most of the BOD in the waste  water  from  an  insulation
board   plant   is  dissolved  solids,  BOD  removal  by  primary
sedimentation is only approximately 10 percent.

Handling of sludge from the primary settling  units  is  a  major
problem.   Some plants reuse a small portion of the sludge in the
production of board; however, the quantity of  sludge  reused  is
dependent  on  many  factors  and  is not a dependable method for
sludge handling.  Therefore, adequate means  of  sludge  handling
must  be  available  at  all  plants.  The only mechanical sludge
dewatering process reported to be used in  the  insulation  board
industry  is  vacuum  filtration.   Final sludge disposal with or
without prior dewatering usually consists of  lagooning  or  land
disposal.

Activated  Sludge  -  Three plants are utilizing activated sludge
systems for a portion of their waste water treatment.   Table  62
shows the average efficiency of these treatment systems.  Average
                                     270

-------
    COOLING
    , WATER
\
1
\ *
\ WA
/

1 	 *
r— *

r
AL /

CHIPWASH

" •<*-


t;.
r^n
FIBER
PREPARATION
WHITEWATER
t—
r
MACHINE
WHITEWATER
( INCLUDING
BROKE)
.. *
i
FINISHING
0, 0
"i
1



(EXPERIMENTAL)
4 .. rt 	 n_ 	 _.._r^_ 	 n-
' 1
J
1
I
_ J
k SCRUBBER
>
i
i
1
1
?„
; '
\

i
i

i '
"
<-D—
1
1
D ' '-
,
1
D ^

1
:
1 1
:
r, ^

^ ^ / ' \
J ! 1

1 1
i i /**>^"S\
-™"° D™"fpR 1 M A R Y I
(

SECONDARY
(EXPERIMENTAL
'
FIGURE 66  WATER REUSE POSSIBILITIES  FOR AN  INSULATION BOARD PLANT
                                 271

-------
                        TABLE  61
EXISTING TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY  IN THE INSULATION BOARD  INDUSTRY
  PLANT NO.
      1
      3
      4
      5

      6
      7
      9
     10
     11
     12
    . 13
     14

     15
     16
     17
     18
     19

     20
   EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT
To Municipal System
Spray Irrigation
Primary Settling
Primary Settling,  Spray Irrigation,
or Lagoon
Primary Settling
Primary Settling,  Activated Sludge
Primary Settling
Diatomaceous Filter*
None
Primary Settling,  Activated Sludge
None
Primary Settling,  Aerated  Lagoon,
Lagoon
Spray Irrigation
Aerated Lagoon, Secondary  Clarifier*
To Municipal System
Primary Settling,  Lagoon*
Primary Settling,  Lagoon,  To Municipal
System
To Municipal System
  *These systems involve experimentation with complete reuse of  the
   treatment system's effluent.
                                  272

-------
                           TABLE  62



        EFFICIENCY OF BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
EFFLUENT
INFLUENT
lant
7
9
12

BOD
Kg/KKg
11.6
15.1
15.1

SS
Kg/KK
11.
14.
4.


BOD
BOD Removal
q Kg/KKG Eff.
Activated Sludge
8 2.6
1 2.8
2 1.4
Aerated Lagoon
78%
83%
91%

SS
Kg/KKg
24.5
4.2
3.9

SS
mg/1
1027
359
424

SS
Removal
Eff.
0%
70%
8%

16*
 6.5
                           0.2
                       68
                       77%
14
44.6
52.3
2.8
94%
1.0
98
* 50+ Day  D.T.
                                    273

-------
BOD  reductions  vary  from 78 to 91 percent and suspended solids
reductions vary  from  zero  to  70  percent.   There  is  little
question  that  a properly designed and operated activated sludge
system can provide an average BOD reduction of  90  percent.   At
least   two  hardboard  mills  which  have  similar  waste  water
characteristics are achieving greater than 95 percent BOD removal
with activated sludge processes.

The efficiency  of  biological  systems  for  removing  suspended
solids  appears  quite  low because of the high concentrations of
biological suspended solids in the effluent  and  the  fact  that
these  solids  are  difficult  to  settle  and dewater.  There is
presently no economical method that is satisfactory for  handling
waste  activated sludge generated by insulation board waste water
treatment systems.   The  difficulty  of  handling  waste  solids
causes  a  build  up  within  the  treatment  system, a resulting
discharge of solids in the effluent, and  the  characteristically
low  efficiency  of  the  system  for  suspended  solids removal.
Furthermore, ambient temperature are reported to have  an  effect
on the settling rate of biological solids in biological treatment
systems.

Figures  67, 68, 69, 70, and 71 show the variation in the monthly
average effluent BOD and suspended solids for plants  7,  9,  12,
1U,  and  16,  respectively.   The  major  significance  of these
figures is the illustrated variation in effluent composition  and
high suspended solids in the effluent.

Aerated  Lagoons  -  Two  plants  report  utilization  of aerated
lagoons as part of a waste water treatment system.  Plant 16  has
an  aerated  lagoon  followed  by a clarifier and plant 1U has an
aerated system followed'by lagoons.  As shown in  Table  62,  the
treatment  efficiency  across the total process for both of these
plants average 9U percent BOD removal and greater than 75 percent
suspended solids removal.  Both of these plants  are  located  in
areas  where  winter  temperatures  are quite cold.  It should be
noted that although these two  systems  are  technically  aerated
lagoon  systems,  the design parameters utilized for constructing
the systems are completely different.

Lagoons - Lagoons are utilized by six plants  as  part  of  their
waste treatment system.  Lagoons serve as holding ponds to dampen
variations  in  waste water flow and concentration, to hold waste
water during winter  months  when  spray  irrigation  fields  are
frozen,  to  serve as settling ponds for removal of excess solids
from activated sludge or aerated lagoon processes, or  simply  to
provide   for  additional  BOD  removal.   Because  of  the  long
detention times  required,  lagoons  are  not  used  as  a  waste
treatment  system  alone,  but  are  quite effective as a part of
other systems.  Because of the wide variations of waste flow  and
concentrations  because of inplant spills, clean-up, or equipment
malfunction, lagoons will continue to serve as an effective waste
water treatment process in the insulation board industry.
                                    21k

-------
at
                4-
             o» 3-
                * '
S
                0
                                                                                        4/73-W6
                                                                                                     o»
                                                                                                    o>
.10
                  II   12  I    2  3   4    5   6   7   8   9   10  II   12   I
                    1971                        1972
                                                        DATE
                                                                  23456
                                                                           1973
                             FIGURE 67  VARIATION IN BOD AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS FROM SECONDARY
                                        TREATMENT IN PLANT NO. 7

-------
                             3LZ
M

§
Q3
M
a
I
O
O
          1
          wl
          Of
        ro
       m
          INH
          oM
(O
-4
OJ
  on


  o>
                              80D5  Kg/KKg
                               ro        w
          CD
                       SUSPENDED SOLIDS  Kg/KKg

-------
   25
   2.0
s
*
 10
o
   LO-
  05-
                                                    	BOD,
                                                    	S.S/
                              678
                                      MONTH (1973)
  8.0
  7.0
  6.0
 -5.0
 -4.0
*
to
o
€0
                                                                                       "
\
                                                                                   LO
                                                                                   0
            FIGURE  69  VARIATION IN BOD AND  SUSPENDED SOLIDS FROM SECONDARY
                        TREATMENT IN PLANT NO.  12

-------
00
               4.0
               3.0-
              o»
               2-0

 in
I'-5
                I.OH

                0.5-

                0
                                          "T—	" '     I            I
                                           345
                                                   MONTH (073)
                                                                           BOD.
                                                                                              -2.0
                                                                                               1.0
                        FIGURE 70  VARIATION IN BOD AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS  FROM SECONDARY
                                   TREATMENT IN PLANT NO. 14

-------
                      BLZ
                      BOD5 Kg/KKg

                       o
                       ro
                       en
                        i
                                       p
                                       s
   OI-
H





-------
Spray Irrigation - Three plants presently dispose of all or  part
of  their  wastes by spray irrigation.  Plants 3 and 15 presently
dispose of all waste water by spray irrigation.  Both plants have
holding lagoons that hold the waste for approximately five months
during the winter when the spray  fields  are  frozen.    Plant  5
presently  disposes  of  a  major  portion  of its waste by spray
irrigation and is moving toward total disposal  by  this  method.
Two  of  the three plants are located in areas of relatively high
rainfall and found it necessary to install underdrain systems  to
maintain a low water table and drain off excess water.   The third
plant is located in a relatively low rainfall area; therefore, an
underground drainage system was found to be unnecessary.  Because
of  the  lack  of  rainfall, this plant achieves essentially zero
discharge.

If land is available, if proper soil conditions are present,  and
if the system is designed and operated properly, spray irrigation
can  be  expected  to provide BOD reductions of up to 99 percent.
Inadequate land space, unsuitable soil conditions, and high costs
will  prevent  spray  irrigation  from  being  feasible  at  many
insulation board mills.

Evaporation - Evaporation of waste water can be considered either
as  an  end  of line treatment technology or an inplant method of
water recycle.  As an insulation  board  white  water  system  is
closed  through  this  recycle,  the concentration of soluble and
suspended organics increase.  Suspended solids can be  controlled
by  sedimentation  or  filtration;  however, dissolved solids are
considerably more difficult to control.

A potential method for control of dissolved solids from the white
water  systems  of  an  insulation  board  mill  is  evaporation.
Evaporation  would  possibly  be economical only for those plants
that steam a major portion of their  furnish,  i.e.,  subcategory
II.   At  the  present time two hardboard plants in the U. S. and
one in Sweden  utilize  evaporation  for  treatment  of  a  major
portion  of  their waste water load.  The two plants in the U. S.
utilize the  explosion  process  which  results  in  considerable
quantities  of  dissolved  organics.  Counter-current washers are
used to remove a major portion of the  organics  from  the  fiber
prior  to dilution and mat formation.  The waste is discharged to
a clarifier and the overflow goes to a  multi-effect  evaporator.
The  concentrated  organic  stream  from the evaporator is either
sold as cattle feed or incinerated.   The  condensate  is  either
reused as process water or discharged as a waste water stream.

The  Skinnskattenbergs  Bruk plant in Sweden presently evaporates
all of its waste water discharge from the white water system.   A
five-effect  evaporator  is  utilized to evaporate 30 cu m  (7,900
gal) per hour.  Slowdown from the white water system has a  total
solids  concentration  of 2.7 to 3.2 percent and is evaporated to
approximately 30 percent solids.  The  concentrated  material  is
then burned along with sander dust in a boiler.
                                      280

-------
At  the  present  time,  no  insulation  board  plant is known to
utilize evaporation for waste water treatment although  at  least
one  plant in the U. S.  is considering this type of system.  The
major  question  concerning  the  use  of  evaporation   in   the
insulation  board industry is economics.  The cost of evaporation
is directly related to the quantity of  water  to  be  evaporated
which  is  in  turn  related  to  the  concentration of dissolved
organics in the  white  water  system  as  discussed  previously.
Evaporation   cannot   be   recommended  as  a  viable  treatment
alternative for  every  insulation  board  plant  as  a  detailed
feasibility  study and cost estimate should be conducted for each
plant to determine its applicability.

Selection of Control and Treatment Technology for Model Plants

In Section V,  model  plants  were  developed  for  each  of  the
insultion  board subcategories.  The subcategories and definition
of waste water flow and composition are summarized as follows:
Subcategory     Liters/kkq

     I           12,500
    II
        12,500
              Flow
            cu m/day

              3400

              3UOO
 BOD
kq/kkg

 12.5

 37.5
SS kq/kkcr

   10

   10
Each of the model plants is assumed already  to  have  a  primary
clarifier  in use because all insulation board plants either have
primary clarification or the equivalent.
Except where  noted  the  following  treatment  alternatives
applicable to both insulation board subcategories:
                                                     are
Alternative A - Alternative A assumes no additional treatment and
control technology

Alternative   B   -  Figure  72  shows  a  schematic  diagram  of
Alternative B.  This alternative consists of  adding  an  aerated
lagoon  followed  by  a  small  settling  lagoon to Alternative A
above.  The detention time of the  aerated  lagoon  was  19  days
based on the following formula:
Where:
Xo
~X

XO

X

T

K
1 + KT


influent BOD concentration, (mg/1)

effluent BOD concentration, (mg/1)

detention time in days,

constant which is dependent on the
characteristics of a particular waste
and temperature.
                                 281

-------
   FROM
   EXISTING
   FACILITIES
                AERATED LAGOON
                19DAY DETENTION
                TIME
      TO DISCHARGE
SETTLING
POND
24 HOUR
DETENTION
TIME
FIGURE 72  SCHEMATIC OF ALTESNATIVE B FOR INSULATION BOARD
                              282

-------
A  treatment  efficiency  of 85 percent is assumed using a highly
conservative K = 0.3 at 20 C.  The settling pond  is  assumed  to
have  a  detention  time of 2U hours.  The only variation between
the design of the systems for the model plants is the quantity of
aeration which is assumed to equal 1.5 times  the  BOD  load  per
day.   Sludge  that settles in the settling pond is assumed to be
removed  yearly  and  disposed  of  by  landfill.   A  total  BOD
reduction  and  suspended  solids reduction of 85 and 70 percent,
respectively, are assumed across  both  the  aerated  lagoon  and
settling  pond.   Reduction  of  suspended  solids is based on an
assumed effluent suspended solids concentration of 250 mg/1.

Alternative  C-1  -  Figure  73  shows  a  schematic  diagram  of
Alternative  C-1.   This  treatment  alternative  consists of the
addition of an activated sludge system to the waste water stream.
The following design assumptions were made:

          Treatment process - complete mixed activated sludge

          Mixed liquor suspended solids - 2,500 mg/1

          BOD loading rate - 0.2 kg BOD/kg MLSS

          Secondary clarifier loading rate - 20,000 1/sq m/day

          Aeration requirements - 1.5 kg 02/kg BQD/day

Because of the nutrient deficiency of the waste, nutrients in the
form of anhydrous ammonia and phosphoric acid are  added  to  the
ratio  of  BOD:  nitrogen: phosphorus of 100:2:2.  Provisions are
also made for pH adjustment as required.

Excess biological sludge is wasted to the sludge thickener.   The
activated  sludge  is  wasted  at  a concentration of 0.8 percent
solids and the sludge from the primary clarifier is wasted  at  a
solids  concentration  of  3.0  percent.   Sludge  is pumped to a
gravity thickener where the solids are concentrated to  a  solids
concentration  of 5.0 percent.  The hydraulic loading rate on the
sludge thickener is assumed to be UOOO  1/sq  m/day   (100  gal/sq
ft/day).   Underflow  from the sludge thickener is dewatered on a
pair of vacuum  filters.   The  dewatered  sludge  is  hauled  to
landfill   for  final  disposal.   Supernatant  from  the  sludge
thickener and filtrate from the vacuum filters is returned to the
primary clarifier.

The overall BOD removal efficiency is assumed to  be  90  percent
and  the suspended solids removal to be approximately 70 percent.
Reduction of suspended solids is based  on  ah  assumed  effluent
suspended solids of 250 mg/1.

Alternative  C-2  -  Figure  7U  shows  a  schematic  diagram  of
Alternative C-2.  Alternative C-2 consists of the addition of  an
aerated  lagoon  which  contains  a  quiescent area.  The aerated
lagoon is assumed to have a detention time of eight days and will
provide an additional 70 percent BOD reduction to the effluent of
                                  283

-------
    NUTRIENT AND
    pH CONTROL
1
AERATION  POND
  O   O  O
                                                                  DISCHARGE
SUPERNATANT TO EXISTING
PRIMARY CLARI FIER
                                                                TRUCK TO
                                                                LANDFILL
FIGURE  73   SCHEMATIC OF ALTERNATIVES Cl AND Dl FOR INSULATION BOARD

-------
IACTIVATED!
t- w
*
j( EXISTING) |
1 	 1
AERATED !
LAGOON j
5-DAY J
DETENTION !
TIME ,
TO STREAM ^
*-->
OUIECENT AREA
  FIGURE 74  SCHEMATIC OF ALTERNATIVE C2 FOR INSULATION BOARD
         J ACTIVATEDi
        J  SLUDGE
          .(EXISTING)!
RETURN TO
PROCESS
               MIXED MEDIA
                  FILTER
DISCHARGE
 FIGURE 75  SCHEMATIC OF ALTERNATIVE D2 FOR INSULATION BOARD
                                   285

-------
the activated sludge system.  No  increase  in  suspended  solids
removal is assumed.  The overall BOD reduction for Alternative C-
2  is  97  percent  and  suspended  solids  reduction  remains at
approximately 70 percent.

Alternative P-1 - Alternative D-1'consists of the addition of the
activated sludge system of Alternative c-1 to Alternative A.

Alternative  D-2  -  Figure  75  shows  a  schematic  diagram  of
Alternative  D-2.   Alternative  D-2  consists of the addition of
mixed  media  filtration  to  the  activated  sludge  process  of
Alternative  D-1.   A surface loading rate of 160 1/sq m/min (tt.O
gal/sq ft/min) was assumed for the  loading  rate  of  the  mixed
media  filter.   The  filter is designed to handle 100 percent of
the plant effluent of 3400 cu m/day (0.9 mgd) .   The  reason  for
the  addition  of  a filter to the activated sludge process is to
obtain a water quality sufficient  for  reuse  inplant.   Recycle
after  biological treatment is an unproven method of water reuse;
however, industry representatives feel that it may  be  possible.
At  least  one  plant  (No. 16)  has experimented with water reuse
after biological treatment with  good  results.   The  long  term
effects  and  the percent of recycle has not yet been determined.
Alternative D-2 assumes 70 percent recycle which  results  in  an
overall  BOD and suspended solids reduction of 97 and 91 percent,
respectively.

Alternative  E  -  Figure  7 6  shows  a  schematic   diagram   of
Alternative   E.   This  alternative  can  only  be  utilized  by
insulation board mills in subcategory II because they steam their
furnish.  Plant 4 ,also cannot use  this  alternative  because  it
uses  groundwood  for its raw material.  Further limitations with
this alternative include that the plant either produce  only  one
product  or,  if  the  plant  has multiple lines making different
products, each line must have a separate water system.

Alternative E requires that the process water systems be split at
the decker resulting in  a  white  water  system  for  the  fiber
preparation  system  and  a  white  water  system for the machine
forming system.  It also requires the installation of a  multiple
effect  evaporation  system  to  handle  blowdown  from the fiber
preparation  white  water  system.    The  condensate   from   the
evaporator  will  be used as partial makeup for the machine white
water system after pH adjustment.

The evaporator will concentrate the  waste  to  approximately  30
percent  consistency.  The concentrated material is then utilized
as auxiliary  fuel  for  producing  steam.   Additional  fuel  is
required because of the high moisture content of the concentrate.
Blowdown from the machine white water system goes to an activated
sludge  process  using design parameters as previously described.
Other assumptions are listed below.
         1.   Machine white water is used to wash
              the decker.
the  stock  on
                                      286

-------
                                                                                                    TO ATMOSPHERE
                                                                                                        4
                          WOOD
Co
-4
| REFINING [••J STOCK CHEST |HBB| DECKER
i ,

At
'
A
-
FIBER
PREPARATION
WHITEWATER
CHEST



(^STOCKCHEST^S.^M DRIER |__*


'
f
MACHINE '
WHITE
*~" — ' ' WAItH
CHEST

_t

OH AOJUSTMrNT
'"4

ACTIVATED
SLUDGE
1 EVAPORATOR 1
:R PLOW 	 ».

^

TO OISCHAMC
                                                                       'CONCENTRATE
                                          FIGURE  76  SCHEMATIC OF ALTERNATIVE E  FOR INSULATION BOARD

-------
         2.   Blowdown from the  fiber  preparation  white  water
              system  has a dissolved solids concentration of 1.0
              percent and a flow of between 950  cu  in/day  (0.25
              ragd) 1200 cu m/day (0.31 mgd) for subcategory II.

         3.   Blowdown from the machine white  water  system  has
              dissolved solids concentration of 0.5 percent and a
              flow  of  between 830 cu m/day (0.22 mgd) and 1,000
              cu m/day (0.27 mgd)  for subcategory II.

         4.   Stock leaving the decker  into  the  machine  white
              water  system  has  water  containing  a  dissolved
              solids concentration of 0.75 percent.

         5.   BOD/DS  ==0.6

         6.   Overall  efficiency  of  the  treatment  system  is
              assumed to be 97 percent for BOD removal.  Effluent
              suspended solids are assumed to be 250 mg/1.
Alternative   F   -  Figure  77  shows  a  schematic  diagram  of
Alternative F.  This alternative involves spray irrigation of all
waste water from the  plant.   Design  of  the  spray  irrigation
system  is  limited  by  hydraulic  capacity  not  organic  load;
therefore, the system is applicable to both subcategories.

Two separate spray irrigation systems are designed because of the
temperature differences between northern  climates  and  southern
climates.   For  northern  climates,  a  holding lagoon with five
months waste  water  flow  capacity  is  required  because  spray
irrigation   cannot  be  practiced  during  freezing  conditions.
Following the holding lagoon, waste water is pumped to  a  dosing
pond with a 3 day irrigation capacity.  Nutrients as required are
added  at this point.  The spray irrigation system is designed on
a hydraulic loading rate of 47,000  1/ha/day  (5000  gal/ac/day).
The system is also provided with an underdrain system.

The   spray   irrigation  system  for  the  southern  climate  is
essentially the same as the one for the northern  climate  except
that  the  five  month  holding  lagoon  is  replaced by a 30-day
holding lagoon lagoon.  A 30-day holding for southern climates is
required because at times heavy rains will exceed  the  hydraulic
capacity of the irrigation field.


Spray  irrigation  can be used by only a limited number of plants
because of lack of suitable land.  If  spray  irrigation  can  be
utilized  at  a  plant,  its  treatment  efficiency  for  BOD and
suspended solids removal is predicted to be 99 percent.
A summary of the effluents produced  by
alternatives is presented in Table 63.

PARTICLEBOARD
each  of  the  treatment
                                    288

-------
FROM
EXISTING
FACILITIES
HOLDING
 BASIN
   A
                              HOLDING
                              POND
                              3-DAY
                              CAPACITY
                 TO IRRIGATION FIELD
                 WITH UNDERDRAINS
 FIGUEE 77  SCHEMATIC OF ALTERNATIVE F FOR INSULATION BOARD
                               289

-------
                           TABLE 63

SUMMARY OF EFFLUENTS PRODUCED BY  TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
   FOR MODEL  INSULATION  BOARD PLANTS
                                   BOD
                                  Kq/KKc
SUBCATEGQRY I

     Alternative

         A
         B
         C-l, D-l
         C-2
         D-2
         F

SUBCATEGORY II

     Alternative

         A
         B
         C-l, D-l
         C-2
         D-2
         F
         E

SUBCATEGORY III

     Alternative

         A
         B
         C-l, D-l
         C-2
         D-2
         F
         E
                                   12.5
                                    1.3
                                    1.3
                                    0.4
                                    0.4
                                    0.2
                                   30.0
                                   3.0
                                   3.0
                                   0.9
                                   0.9
                                   0.3
                                   0.9
                                   37.5
                                   3.8
                                   3.8
                                   1.1
                                   1.1
                                   0.4
                                   1.1
10.0
 3.1
 3.1
 3.1
 0.9
 0.1
10.0
 3.1
 3.1
 3.1
 0.9
 0.1
 0.8
10.0
 3.1
 3.1
 3.1
 0.9
 0.1
 2.0
                                  290

-------
The  small  volumes of water discharged, 11,000 1 (3,000 gal)  per
day or less, from particleboard plants and the variation of waste
water sources from plant to plant  have  limited  development  of
waste  treatment technology in the industry.  In general, because
of  the  small  volumes  of  waste  water  generated,  the  major
treatment   processes  are  limited  to  waste  retention  ponds,
settling ponds, or a combination of retention and settling ponds.
The major  waste  water  source  in  one  mill  may  generate  no
discharge in another mill.  Inplant modifications for the purpose
of reducing, eliminating, or reusing waste water flow can greatly
affect  total  waste  water discharge in any mill; however, these
are generally not applicable to all mills.  Nevertheless, by  the
implementation of inplant modifications and end of line treatment
technologies  currently in use, the elimination of discharge from
particleboard plants can be achieved.

Inplant Control Measures and Technology

Blender Cleaning - As previously mentioned, blender cleaning  can
be  accomplished  by  either  a  wet or a dry method with the wet
method requiring approximately  10  times  more  water  than  the
typical  dry  method.   There can be virtual elimination of waste
water from the  dry  cleaning  of  blenders;  however,  it  takes
approximately  four  times  longer  to clean a blender by the dry
method because of the manual labor  required.   Also,  there  are
various  types  of  blenders  which  cannot be cleaned by the dry
method.  Therefore, in some mills, it is economically as well  as
technically  infeasible  to  clean  a  blender by the dry method.
Because  the  volume  of  water  utilized  in  a  blender  varies
primarily  with  the  rate  of  buildup  on  the  interior of the
blender, it is advantageous to reduce this rate of buildup by the
use of a cooling jacket on the blender.  The resins  utilized  by
the  particleboard  industry are thermosetting and a reduction in
temperature inside the  blender  will  significantly  reduce  the
amount  of  buildup  and  subsequently  the  frequency of washing
required.  However,  as  discussed  in  the  description  of  the
particleboard  manufacturing  process, there are certain types of
blenders in use that are not adaptable  to  the  use  of  cooling
jackets, because of the nature of the blender's construction.

Cooling  Water  -  Cooling water in some plants is transported in
open ditches and can become contaminated  with  resin  leaks  and
fugitive  particles  from  the plant operation.  When the cooling
water becomes contaminated in this manner, the contaminants  must
be  removed  before  discharge.   One  method  of eliminating the
pollution of cooling water is to transport it by closed conduits.

Wet Scrubbers - As mentioned previously, it is common practice in
the industry to recycle a majority of the scrubber water  through
settling  ponds  to  remove  the dust and wood particles from the
waste stream.  This enables a high  percentage  of  water  to  be
recycled.   Because  there is extensive evaporation in a scrubber
system, there is a need for continuous makeup water to be  added.
Various  plants have reported the use of cooling water as well as
waste waters for this makeup water purpose.  The  evaporation  of
                                     291

-------
waste  waters  in  the scrubbers is one method of eliminating all
discharges other than the blowdown from the scrubber.

End Of Line Technology

End  of  line  treatment  technology  currently  in  use  in  the
particleboard   industry,  as  shown  in  Table  64,  is  limited
essentially to:

         1.   Settling tanks
         2.   Containment lagoons
         3.   Septic tanks
         4.   Spray irrigation
         5.   Lagoons

In addition, at least one plant currently sprays its waste  water
on the incoming raw materials and another on the hog fuel for its
boiler.

It  is  common  practice  for  the several plants located in mill
complexes to combine their waste waters into a  common  treatment
system.

There  are  currently  at  least  three particleboard plants that
treat waste waters in lagoons prior to discharge.   Lagoons  rely
on  natural  aeration  or algae to provide oxygen to biologically
decompose organic material in the waste water.  Settleable solids
undergo an anaerobic decomposition  on  the  lagoon  bottom.   If
properly  designed,  a  treatment  efficiency  of  from  80 to 85
percent BOD removal can be realized.

Settling tanks, which constitute the most  common  technology  in
use  in the particleboard industry at this time, normally consist
of baffled settling tanks approximately 2 by 3 m  (6  by  10  ft)
with  a  depth  of  1  m  (about  3 ft) or less.  There is little
available data on the efficiency of these settling  tanks.   They
may  discharge  to  municipal  or  other  treatment  systems,  or
directly to receiving waters.  The sludge  from  these  tanks  is
normally removed manually on an infrequent basis.

There  is  presently  at  least one plant (Plant 15) which uses a
septic tank for waste  water  treatment.   A  septic  tank  is  a
settling   tank   in  which  the  settled  sludge  is  decomposed
anaerobically.  Septic tanks are  followed  by  drain  fields  to
allow  the  effluent  to  undergo  aerobic  stabilization  and to
percolate  into  the  ground.   Septic  tanks  are  suitable  for
relatively low waste water flows which contain a sufficiently low
solids  content that soil percolation rates will not be adversely
affected.

Spray irrigation was reported in response  to  questionnaires  by
only  one  plant   (Plant  16) in the particleboard industry.  The
plant spray irrigates waste water in a neighboring forested area.
This  method  of  waste  water  treatment   utilizes   the   soil
microorganisms ability to decompose organic matter as well as the
                                    292

-------
                        TABLE 64
EXISTING PARTICLEBOARD WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS
  Plant No.
 10,  22, 23
 1, 24
 11,  25
 26
 4, 6
 2

 30

 7
 14,  18
 15
 5
 16
 20
 8
 3
 9,  17,  31,  32


 8,  10
 3
          Type of Treatment
     Settling Tank
     Settling Tank - Municipal  Treatment
     Municipal Treatment
     Settling Tank - Containment Lagoon
     Containment Lagoon
     1)  Settling Tank - spray on dirt  roads
     2)  Containment
     Settling Tank - Make-up for log pond
     evaporation
     To  discharging log pond
     Lagoon
     Septic Tank
     Spray or raw materials
     Spray irrigate in woods
     Lagoon - spray on sawdust landfill
     Truck to landfill
     Burn with hog fuel
     To  mill complex's system
Scrubbers
     Recycle
     Screen and settling pond
                                 233

-------
soil's natural filtering ability to achieve waste water treatment
and  disposal.   In  most cases, with proper design and operation
there is no threat of groundwater contamination.  Related to this
technology is the practice of one plant  (Plant 2) of  controlling
the  dust on its logging roads by wetting them with particleboard
waste water.

Containment lagoons are is use in numerous industrial  facilities
in  the timber products industry.  These systems, reported in use
by a  small  number  of  particleboard  plants,  utilize  natural
evaporation  as well as seepage into the soil to dispose of waste
water.   The  seepage  into  the  ground  water  of   undesirable
substances  is  a possibility, and this effect must be considered
before construction.

A type of treatment, similar to  containment  lagoons,  is  spray
evaporation.  The primary difference is that a spray mechanism of
some  type must be installed.  The waste water is concentrated by
evaporating most of the water  by  increasing  the  surface  area
exposed  to  the ambient air by use of spray nozzles.  The sludge
which accumulates on the bottom  is  usually  disposed  of  in  a
landfill.

At  least  one  plant  (Plant  5)  sprays  its entire waste water
discharge on the incoming  raw  material.   The  system  consists
first  of  settling  ponds  which remove settleable and floatable
materials.   The  spray  nozzles  are  activated   by   automatic
switching  devices  and,  in order to maintain a uniform moisture
content on the incoming raw materials, it is sometimes  necessary
to  supplement  the waste water flow with cooling water.  Initial
work with this system has shown that the moisture content of  the
incoming  raw  material  is  increased  by  six  to  ten percent.
Although  this  could  theoretically  create  problems   in   the
subsequent  inplant  processes,  none have been reported to date.
For example, refining has not been  impaired;  on  the  contrary,
refining  has  been  found  to  improve  with the higher moisture
content  in  the  raw  materials.   Also,  there  has   been   no
significant  increase  during the first eight months of operation
of the fuel drying costs despite the  increase  in  the  moisture
content.   Finally,  no  degradation  of  the  final  product  or
incompatibility of the system has been observed  because  of  the
waste material present in the raw material.

There  are  two  other  systems currently in use by particleboard
plants.  These consist of 1)  spraying of waste water on  the  hog
fuel,  and  2)  trucking waste to landfills.  Spraying waste water
on hog fuel appears to be a viable alternative if the volumes  of
waste  are  low  and a hog fuel boiler is available.  This system
may raise the moisture content of the raw fuel and result in more
energy being required to run the boilers.  The  small  number  of
plants  that  truck  waste  to  land  fills do so because inplant
equipment and process variables such as type of resin, tack,  and
particle  size allow a reduction of waste water flow to less than
400 1 (100 gal)  per day.
                                   23k

-------
Treatment Technology For the Particleboard Plant

The treatment technologies considered to  be  applicable  to  the
particleboard  plant  discharging 11,000 1 (3,000 gal)  per day of
waste water as described in Section V are:

         1.   Discharge to municipal system
         2.   Discharge to a septic tank
         3.   Spray irrigation
         4.   Spray evaporation
         5.   Spraying of all waste water on incoming
              raw material
         6.   Spraying of waste water on hog fuel

Containment lagoons, rely heavily on percolation  to  dispose  of
waste  water.   Since  the  percolation  characteristics  of  the
terrain are a major factor, the use  of  containment  lagoons  is
considered  to  be applicable only in certain cases and not on an
industry-wide  basis.   Oxidation  ponds   are   not   considered
applicable  treatment  technology  because  1)  they require large
land areas, 2) they are subject to odor problems, and 3) they  do
not  provide  for  no  discharge  of  pollutants from the process
waters as do other more feasible methods.  Trucking  to  landfill
may   be  a  viable  alternative  for  plants  discharging  small
quantities of water.

Description of Model Systems

Models of the treatment and control technology considered  to  be
applicable have been developed as follows:

Alternative  A  - Alternative A consists of no treatment of waste
waters and, therefore, no reduction of pollutants.

Alternative B - Alternative B consists of a septic tank utilizing
prior screening as shown in Figure 78.  The screening consists of
a coarse screen and a fine screen in series.  The  coarse  screen
has  3  mesh  (0.25 in) openings, and the fine screen is a 20 mesh
screen (0.7 mm).  These are flat screens and are cleaned manually
on a daily basis.

Alternative C - Spray irrigation systems, as shown in Figure  78,
are  designed for two climatic areas, northern and southern.  The
former area has winter conditions which produce snow  and  icing.
The  second is for all other areas.  The first system consists of
a holding pond of five months capacity, a  storage  tank  with  a
three  day  capacity,  and  a  properly designed spray irrigation
field.  The five month capacity of the holding pond provides  for
containment of the plant's effluent during the winter months when
spray  irrigation is not feasible.  The three day storage tank is
used as a sump.  The second type of system also has a  three  day
storage  tank and a spray irrigation field.  However, the holding
pond is of a 30 day capacity  to  provide  for  adequate  storage
during  periods  of  heavy  rainfall when spray irrigation is not
feasible.  The hydraulic loading rate for the  irrigation  fields
                                  295

-------
          SCREENS
              SEPTIC TANK
                                           J
                                       DRAIN FIELDS

HOLDING
TANK






STORAGE
TANK
3- DAY
CAPACITY

TO IRRIGATION
FIELD w
W

FROM
PROCESS
 POND
                                       PUM P
V       X        X   \
                                                    SPRAY
                                                      HEADS
FIGURE 78  SCHEMATICS OF ALTEENATIVES B, C, AND D FOR PARTICLE BOARD
                                23S

-------
is  47,000  1/ha/day  (5000 gal/ac/day).   Though spray irrigation
systems depend somewhat on climatical and soil  percolation  fac-
tors  this  type of system can be used in a wide variety of areas
because the treatment of the waste water (removal of  pollutants)
occurs  primarily  because  of biological actions in the soil and
the filtration by the soil of the waste water.

Alternative p - Alternative D consists of  spray  evaporation  of
all  waste  water from the particleboard plant as shown in Figure
78.  Systems were designed for the four  climatical  areas  where
particleboard  plants  are  located.   These  are  the  northwest
(Seattle area), the New England area, the southeast (Mississippi)
area, and north  central   (Minnesota)  area.   These  areas  were
chosen  on  the  basis  of  rainfall  and  climate  to  represent.
evaporation  rates  to  be  found  in   the   majority   of   the
particleboard  industry.   All  systems  consist of lined lagoons
with spray units installed.

Spray units consist of a number of spray nozzles connected  to  a
central  75  hp  (56 kw)  pump.  All systems are designed such that
the spray units need to be  operated  only  5  months  per  year;
however, during the 5 month period, in some areas it is necessary
to  operate the spray unit on a continuous basis and in others it
is necessary only to operate the spray unit intermittently.   The
design  criteria  including the size of the lagoons and period of
daily operation is as follows:
Climatic
  Area

Northwest
Length
  m

  85
Width
  _m

  21
Operating Time
	Days	

       24
New England

Southeast

North Central
  62

  59

  65
  16

  15

  16
       12

       11

       13
It should be noted, as indicated above, that all spray ponds  are
rectangular  in shape with a length to width ration of 4:1.  This
design was necessary for two reasons:  1) the size and  shape  of
the  spray units, and 2) the long axis should be perpendicular to
the prevailing wind of the area so that the  maximum  evaporation
can  occur  by  preventing waste water spray from one nozzle from
being flown into the area of influence of another  spray  nozzle,
as  this  would reduce the evaporation rate and efficiency of the
unit,

Alternative E - Alternative E requires two ponds in series,  each
of five day detention time, from which water is pumped to a sump.
The  water from the sump is applied to the raw materials by spray
nozzles located over an existing conveying device which takes the
material from the unloading area to the storage area as shown  in
Figure 79.  As the raw material passes under the spray nozzles, a
trip-arm switch activates the pump from the sump and the water is
                                  297

-------
    FROM PLANT
    11,000 LITERS/DAY
    INTERMITTENT
                  5 DAY
                  DETENTION
                   TIME
 5-DAY
DETENTION
 TIME
                                                     FLOAT ACTIVATED
                                                     PUMP
                                                               VALVE TO ALLOW
                                                               COOLING  WATER TO
                                                               60 TO SUMP IF LEVEL
                                                               OF(T)TOO LOW.
                             FLOAT ACTIVATED
                             PUMP TO FILL
                             SUMP.
             SPRAY NOZZLE
    TRIP ARM SWITCH AT fA ACTIVATES PUM
    CONVEYOR.
                       FLOW= 19,000 LITERS/DAY
                                                        RAW MATERIAL UNLOADED
                                                        ONTO CONVEYOR
              EXISTING CONVEYOR
       T)WHEN  RAW MATERIAL PASSES  BY ON
FROM
PROCESS

z
UJ
o:
u
CO
•••


SUM P

SPRAY ON HOG
FUEL MANUALLY

FIGURE 79   SCHEMATICS OF ALTERNATIVES E AND F FOR PARTICLE BOARD
                                   298

-------
applied to the raw materials.  Between the settling ponds and the
sump,  a  valve  i-s required too allow cooling water to enter the
sump and be applied to the  raw  materials.   This  provides  for
adequate  water  supply to be placed on the incoming raw material
so that the raw material can have  a  uniform  moisture  content,
which  is  critical  for  production  purposes.  There is a float
activated valve in the second  settling  pond  which  allows  for
waste  water  to be pumped from the pond to the sump if the level
of the pond is above a minimum depth.  There is also a  float  in
the  sump  to  provide  for  pumping  from  the settling ponds or
cooling water to fill the sump when the level gets too low.   The
amount   of  water  sprayed  on  the  incoming  raw  material  is
approximately 19,000 1 (5,000 gal) per day.  This is a rate of  a
little over 67 1 per metric ton  {16 gal per ton) of raw material.
The plant currently utilizing this system has an application rate
over three times greater.   (200 liters per metric ton)

Alternative  F  -  Alternative F is a system for spraying all the
waste water on hog fuel as shown in Figure 79.   It  consists  of
screens,  sump,  a  pump, and a spray nozzle.  The screens are of
the same design as described for Alternative B.  The waste water,
after screening, passes to a 19,000 1  (5,000  gal)  sump  and  is
then  sprayed  onto  the hog fuel either while the hog fuel is in
storage or is being conveyed to the boiler.

FINISHING

Finishing operations, involving the use  of  water  base,  liquid
finishing  materials,  and  overlaying operations involving water
soluble adhesives, require equipment  washdown  operations  which
result  in the production of an intermittent, concentrated, waste
water flow.  Volumes of waste water generated  from  this  source
vary  considerably  from plant to plant, but will usually fall in
the range of 75 Ipd to 1,100 Ipd  (20 gpd to 300 gpd) .

Inplant Control Measures

As discussed in Section V, the cleanup  techniques  practiced  at
any  particular  plant  will  significantly  affect the volume of
waste water generated.  For instance,  the  volume  of  washwater
required  for  a  direct roll coater used in applying a waterbase
material, in most cases, could be reduced from as much as  132  1
 (35 gal) per wash to as little as 19 1  (five gal) per wash.  This
reduction  can  be accomplished by the use of only a small volume
of water initially and  recycling  the  same  water  through  the
applicator several times before rinsing with fresh water.  It may
be   possible   to  reuse  this  washwater  for  several  cleanup
operations if the type of finishing material is not varied.   The
use  of  high pressure nozzles to wash paint drums can reduce the
total waste water production also.   However,  the  best  inplant
control   measures   simply  consist  of  the  implementation  of
conservative water use practices.
                                    299

-------
End Of Line Treatment Technology

Current  control  and  treatment  technology  for   waste   water
generated  from  the use of water base liquid finishing materials
and  water  soluble  adhesives  used  in  overlaying   operations
consists of the following:
         1.

         2.
         3.
         5.
Containment in drums or holding tanks followed
by landfill disposal.
Land spread disposal.
Containment in shallow lagoons with evaporation
and infiltration.
Containment in drums or holding tanks with
settling of solids followed by reuse of the
supernate and landfill disposal of the solids.
Containment in holding tanks followed by dis
charge into municipal sewers.
These alternatives have been discussed previously for control and
treatment of glue washwater from fabricating operations.

Because  of  the potential soil clogging effect, as discussed for
glue wash waters  in  fabricating  operations,  containment  pond
design  should  be  based on zero infiltration with provision for
induced  evaporation  in  areas   where   precipitation   exceeds
evaporation.   The  size  requirements  for  such  ponds for five
selected regions are presented in Table 60.

Another  presently  practiced  method  of  disposal  for   plants
generating  these  smaller volumes of washwater is landspreading.
Since no studies have been conducted on the  biodegradability  of
these  materials, no conclusions can be drawn as to the extent of
degradation  that  is  accomplished  by  so il  bacteria  in  this
disposal method.

Discharge  of  these  washwaters  into municipal sewers is also a
commonly practiced method of disposal.  However, because  of  the
great  diversity  in  constituents  of  the materials, and in the
resulting waste waters, the effects of such a practice  can  only
be  considered  on  an  individual  plant  basis.   Some of these
materials  may  contain  various   additives   which   serve   as
stabilizing agents to prevent biological contamination during the
shelf  life of the material.  Such additives could be detrimental
to the biological processes of a  municipal  treatment  facility.
In  most  cases,  however,  either  the constituents of the waste
waters may be biodegradable or the volumes small enough, or both,
such that the waste water  stream  would  be  compatible  with  a
municipal  treatment facility.  Pigments in these materials often
contain heavy metals such as lead and cadmium  which  might  pass
through  a  municipal treatment system unremoved from the treated
effluent.

Recommended Treatment Alternatives
                                 300

-------
On the basis of the above  discussion,
alternatives are recognized:
               the  following  treatment
         Alternative A
         Alternative B
         Alternative C
         Alternative D
         Alternative F
No control or treatment.
Spray evaporation.
Incineration.
Landspreading.
Discharge to municipal sewer.
The  above  alternatives correspond to those selected for Model 1
for fabricating with the exception that screening  of  the  waste
water  is  not  required.   Also,  Alternative  E for fabricating
operations, recycle of washwater, is not a practicable technology
for  finishing  materials  because  of  variations  in  finishing
materials.   Thus,  each  applicator  may be applying a different
material and these materials  should  not  be  mixed.   Reference
should   be   made  to  the  recommended  control  and  treatment
technologies for fabrication for design  details  for  the  above
alternatives.
                             301

-------

-------
                          SECTION VIII

           COST, ENERGY, AND NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS
This   section  presents  an  evaluation  of  the  costs,  energy
requirements, and non-water quality aspects associated  with  the
treatment and control alternatives developed in Section VII.

In absence of complete cost information for individual processes,
the  cost  figures  developed herein are based on reliable actual
cost figures reported  for  various  installations  coupled  with
engineering  estimates.   Adequate  engineering  estimates  for a
single installation must necessarily involve consideration  of  a
multitude  of  factors.  An estimate completely applicable to all
members  of  an  entire   industry   subcategory   is   obviously
impossible.   For  instance,  it must be realized that land costs
vary widely.  While some  lands  associated  with  remote  timber
processing  operations  may  sell for under a hundred dollars per
hectare, land at an urban  complex  may  be
price.   Construction  cost,  in  terms  of
materials cost, is  another  element  that
Therefore,  the costs presented herein are intended to serve as a
guide only.
 unavailable  at  any
 both  labor cost and
is  highly  variable.
The engineering estimates for all cost analyses in  this  section
employed the following assumptions:

    1.   Excavation cost = $1.96/cu m  ($1.50/cu yd).

    2.   Road cost = $3.00/sq m  ($2.50 sq yd).

    3.   Contract labor = $10.00/hr.

    U.   Power costs = 2.30/kw hr.

    5.   All costs reported in August  1971 dollars.

    6.   Trucking haul cost = $20.00/trip.

    7.   Landfill fee = $37.85/cu m ($0.1U3/gal) for sludge.

    8.   Landfill fee = $2.50/ton).

    9.   Tank truck assumed to be of 5.68 cu m  (1500 gal) capacity.

    10.  Annual interest rate for capital cost = 8 percent.

    11.  Salvage value of zero over 20 years for physical
         facilities and equipment.

    12.  Depreciation is straight line.
                                      303

-------
    13.  Total yearly cost = (investment cost/2)  (0.08)  +
         (investment cost) (0.05)  + yearly operating cost.
IMPOUNDMENTS AND ESTUARINE STORAGE AND TRANSPORTATION

Cost  and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies
No  control  and  treatment  technology
therefore, no costs are calculated.
was   formulated   and.
Related  Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies

The transportation of logs via water is practiced extensively  in
the Northwest.  The logs are lowered or dumped into the water and
made  up  into  rafts.   These  rafts  may  contain  four or five
thousand cu m of logs.  The log rafts are towed to the processing
mill by a tugboat.  There are several  of  these  raft  formation
sites  on the estuaries of Washington State alone, each accepting
one or two train loads of logs each day.  The energy required  to
transport  the  logs  to  the  mill,  a distance of a 160 km (100
miles)  or more, via rail or truck would be significantly  greater
than  the energy required to transport the logs on the water.  In
addition, the energy required to construct the new  railways  and
highways  necessary  to  accommodate  the  higher traffic volumes
would be substantial.

The energy requirements for land decking of logs in  relation  to
water  storage  of  logs  were  investigated  by Schaumberg.  The
results of this study are  discussed  in  detail  later  in  this
section  but,  in brief, the study showed that the energy cost to
land deck the logs only 0.8 km (0.5 mi) from  the  mill  was  far
greater  than  water  storage  at  the  mill site.  Based on this
study, it could be concluded that the land transportation of logs
over 160 km  (100 miles)  with  dry  decking  at  the  mill  would
require  considerably  more  energy than water transportation and
storage.
Non-water Quality Aspects of Alternative
Tec hno1oqi es
Treatment  and  Control
The  non-water  quality  aspects  of  impoundment  and  estuarine
storage and transportation  are  primarily  associated  with  the
alternative  of  removing the logs from the water.  The increased
production of both  solid  wastes  and  air  pollutants  if  land
decking  were  used  will  be  discussed,  but  if  rail or truck
transportation all the way to the mill were used, there are other
factors to be considered.

Most mills that process the water transported logs are located on
the water.  In many cases, a town or city  has  developed  around
the  mill  to  the  extent  that  the  mill does not have room to
                                     30i»

-------
expand.  If a rail or truck terminal were to be  located  at  the
mill  site, the cost of purchasing the adjacent property might be
prohibitive.  In addition, the traffic generated by  this  change
would have an adverse social impact.

Several  studies  have  been  performed  on the loss of bark from
river and estuarine storage and transportation.   These  studies,
as  discussed  in Section V of this document, relate primarily to
water  quality  aspects  in  bark   loss.    Floating   bark   is
aesthetically  displeasing  and  so attempts to prevent bark from
entering the water for water quality reasons will also  make  the
log  rafting  area  more  aesthetically  pleasing.  Easy let-down
devices have been observed to markedly reduce the amount of  bark
lost  from  the  logs  during placement of the logs in the water.
For this reason, easy  let-down  devices  are  appearing  in  the
industry in more places.

WET STORAGE

The  following  discussion  of  the  cost,  energy, and non-water
quality aspects of treatment and control technologies  applicable
to  the  holding  of raw materials in a wet environment is broken
down into mill ponds, log ponds, and wet decking.  The purpose of
this breakdown is to demonstrate the range  of  technologies  and
the  range  of  costs  applicable  to  the  various treatment and
control schemes.

Mill. PONDS

The effluents from mill ponds are considered to be  derived  from
natural precipitation.  All extraneous flows to the mill pond are
considered  to  be  routed  around  the  mill.  Various treatment
schemes are available for treatment of this  effluent  discharge.
Six  alternative  schemes  were  selected in Section VII as being
applicable engineering alternatives.  These alternatives  provide
for  various  levels of treatment of the waste stream from a mill
pond.

                                                          Control
     and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and  	
Technologies

Alternative A - It is estimated that 31.5 million 1 (8.31 million
gal)  of  waste  water  emanate from the one hectare (three acre)
mill pond each year, or on the average 86,173 Ipd (22,767 gal per
day).  The suspended solids load for the same waste, based  on  a
concentration  of  50  mg/1, is 4.3 kilograms per day (9.5 pounds
per day).

This  alternative  requires  reasonable  process  water  use  and
control  in  order  to  achieve  volume  limitations  related  to
precipitation  and  evaporation  rates.   The  control   of   the
discharge  of  debris  also  any  require  production  management
procedures, as discussed in Section VII to control the generation
of these materials.  The physical layout and arrangement  of  the
                                   305

-------
wet  storage  facility  and  the timber processing equipment also
influence the possible discharge of debris.

Because of the variety of wet storage operations as they exist in
the  field,  it  is  not  possible  to  present   absolute   cost
information.   The  costs  of  achieving the proposed limitations
range between $0 and a maximum of $9,000.

control of the discharge of floating materials can be achieved by
such technologies as floating log booms, submerged weir discharge
structures, or inverted discharge pipes, or screens.

Control of debris,  diameter  exceeding  2.54  cm   (1.0  in),  is
usually achieved by installations minimizing activity near points
of  discharge  or  by  settling  action  that  takes place in the
collection area of a wet deck recycle system.

Alternative  B  -  The  use  of  an  equalization  basin  may  be
appropriate for treatment of an intermittent flow.  In this case,
the  equalization  basin  is  also used as a sedimentation basin.
The costs of control  and  treatment  in  Alternative  B  are  as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs   $29,200

    Total Investment Cost          $29,200

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                $ 2,400

    Total Yearly Cost              $ 5,000

An  itemized  cost  breakdown  for  Alternative B is presented in
Table 65.

The reduction benefits for Alternative B involves a COD reduction
of 20 percent and a suspended solids reduction of 50 percent.

Alternative Cl - This alternative is the same as  Alternative  B,
The costs and unit efficiency are the same.

Alternative C2 - This second oxidation pond is fed by a pump from
the  first  pond  and,  consequently,  is  expected  to  be  more
effective because of the more constant feed rate.

The costs of control and treatment  for  Alternative  C2  are  as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs    $18,300

    Total Investment Cost           $47,500

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                 $ 3,100
                                        306

-------
               TABLE  65   ITEMIZED  COST SUMMARY OF
                  ALTERNATIVE  B  FOR MILL  PONDS
Investment Costs
Items:   1.  Basin
        2.  Pump
        3.  Effluent Weir
        4.  Engineering
        5.  Contingencies
        6.  Land  (1.1 ha@ $2470/ha)
            Total costs
Operating Costs
        1.  Operation and maintenance
        2.  Power Costs
            Total costs
Total Yearly Cost for equalization-
 sedimentation basin
$21,000
    840
    168
  2,200
  2,420
  2,600
$29,228

$ 2,263
    101
$ 2,364

$ 5,000
                              307

-------
    Total Yearly Cost
                        $ 7,400
An  itemized  cost  breakdown  for  the  second oxidation pond is
presented in Table 66.

The reduction benefits for Alternative C2 include a COD reduction
of 60 percent and a suspended solids reduction of 20 percent  and
the incremental suspended solids reduction is 10 percent.  A cost
efficiency curve for Alternative C is presented in Figure 80.

Alternative  Dl  - This alternative is the same as Alternative B.
The costs and efficiency are the same.

Alternative D2 - The addition of chemicals, the flocculation, and
sedimentation of the resultant floe  are  all  considered  to  be
integral portions of Alternative D2.
The  costs
follows:
of  control  and  treatment for Alternative D2 are as
    Incremental Investment Cost     $47,200

    Total Investment Cost           $76,500

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                 $43,400

    Total Yearly Cost               $50,200
An itemized cost breakdown of chemical coagulation, flocculation,
and sedimentation is presented in Table 67.

The reduction benefits for Alternative D2 include a COD reduction
of 60 percent and a suspended solids  reduction  of  90  percent.
The incremental reduction of Alternative D2 over D1 is 48 percent
for  COD  and 45 percent for suspended solids.  A cost efficiency
curve for Alternative D is presented in Figure 81.

Alternative El - This alternative is the same as Alternative  Bl.
The costs and efficiency are the same.

Alternative  E2 - This alternative is the same as Alternative D2.
and efficiency are the same.

Alternative E3 - The filtration of the effluent from  Alternative
E2  pressure  sand  filters  will provide some additional COD and
suspended solids removal.
The cost of control and  treatment  for  Alternative  E3
follows:

    Incremental Investment Cost   $ 36,900

    Total Investment Cost         $113,400
                                              are  as
                                      308

-------
               TABLE 66  ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY OF
                 ALTERNATIVE  C2  FOR MILL  PONDS
Investment Cost for Second  Oxidation  Pond  Items:
            1.   Weir                                   $    168
            2.   Pond                                   13,020
                                                       $13,188
            3.   Engineering 10%                          1,318
            4.   Contingencies  10%                        1,450
            5.   Land 0.94ha @  $2,470/ha                  2,340
                Incremental Costs                      $18,296
                Cost of Alternative C-l                29,228
                Total Costs                            $47,524
Operating Cost for Second Oxidation Pond
            1.   Equipment Maintenance                  $     42
            2.   Pond Maintenance                           729
                Incremental Cost                       $    771
                Cost of Alternative C-l                  2,364
                Total Cost                          .   $  3,135
Total Yearly Cost for Second Oxidation Pond            $  2,418
                                      309

-------
                                                TOTAL  INVESTMENT COST (dollars)
CJ

H*

O
                 00
                 o
                 I

               H M
               o
H





O
                 o
                 o
                 O
                 o
                 I
                 O
                 1-9
                 H

                 §
o
o
o

3)  *
m  o
o

o
                                      o
                                      "o
                                      o
                                      o
                                      i
                          O

                          O
                          o
                                          w

                                          f
                                          o
                                          o
                                          I
           o
           o
           o
           I
Ul
o

b
o
o
               Ul
               "o
               o
               o
                                o
                                o
                                s
o
o
o
u>
o

8
3
b
8
                          TOTAL YEARLY COST (dollars/year)

-------
                    TABLE 67  ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY OF
                       ALTERNATIVE D2 FOR MILL PONDS
         CHEMICAL COAGULATION, FLOCCULATION, AND SEDIMENTATION  ONLY
INVESTMENT COST
     Mixing and chemical  addition
     Flocculation
     Sedimentation
     Sludge disposal

     Engineering 10%
     Contingencies 10%
     Land .006 + .001 + .0014 + .1933 X $2470/ha
     Incremental Costs
     Cost of Alternative 01
     Total Costs
OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE
     Flocculation
     Sedimentation
     Chemicals and Mixing
     Building
     Sludge Disposal
     Power
     Incremental Cost
     Cost of Alternative Dl
     Total Costs
Total Yearly cost for chemical coagulation-
 f1occulati on-sedimentati on
$13,236
  3,716
 17,402
  4,261
$38,615
$ 3,862
  4,248
    498
$47,223
 29,228
$76,451

$    84
    523
 38,847
     88
  1,166
    262
$40,970
  2,364
$43,334

$45,220
                                              311

-------
   160,O'00
                               l

                   20         40         60


                          COD  REDUCTION (%)
            r 80,o oo
                                                               -70,OOO
                                                               -eopoo
                                                               - 50,000
                                                                       §
                                                                       f
                                                               -40,000 ~O
                                                               - 30,000
                                                               - 20,000
                                                                       UJ
                                                               - 10,000
80
roo
FIGURE 81  TOTAL INVESTMENT COST  AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs COD REDUCTION

           FOR ALTERNATIVE D
                                 312

-------
    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Cost
                                  $ U7,i*QO

                                  $ 57,500
An  itemized  cost  breakdown  of  the  filtration  operation  is
presented in Table 68.

The reduction benefits for Alternative E3 include a COD reduction
of 20 percent and a suspended solids  reduction  of  90  percent.
The  incremental  reduction of Alternative E3 over Alternative E2
is six percent for COD and 4.5 percent for suspended solids.

Alternative EU - The use of  activated  carbon  will  reduce  the
organic fraction of this effluent, but the suspended solids level
is not reduced.

The  cost  of  control  and  treatment  for Alternative EU are as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Cost   $ 23,600

    Total Investment Cost         $137,000

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance               $ 59,400

    Total Yearly Cost             $ 71,700

An itemized cost breakdown of the  activated  carbon  process  is
presented in Table 69.

The reduction benefits for Alternative EU include a COD reduction
of  75 percent.  The incremental reduction of Alternative EU over
Alternative E3 is 19.5 percent for COD  and  zero  for  suspended
solids.

A  cost efficiency curve for Alternative E is presented in Figure
82.
Alternative
                - The spray evaporation  process  should  achieve
zero discharge in the most economical fashion.
The  costs  of  control  and  treatment  for Alternative F are as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Cost      $647,700

    Total Investment Cost            $647,700

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                  $ 69,800

    Total Yearly Cost                $128,100
                                       313

-------
     160,000-1
     140,000-
     120,000 -
2 100,000-
o
   o
   o
   111



   CO
   UJ
      GOflOO-
      40,OOO-
      2O,OOO-
                       20         40

                            COD REDUCTION (%)
                                          i

                                          60
                                                                    -80,ODO
                                                                    -70,000
                                                                 - 60,000 -£
                                                                        5
                                                                    - 50.0OO
                                                                           1
                                                                           3.
                                                                        8
                                                                        O

                                                                 -40,OOO>j

                                                                        tc

                                                                        111
                                                                 -3 0,0001

                                                                        H
                                                                 -20,000
                                                                 -10,000
80
IOO
FIGURE 82   TOTAL INVESTMENT  COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs COD REDUCTION

            FOR ALTERNATIVE E
                                      316

-------
An itemized cost breakdown for the evaporation pond is  presented
in Table 70.

The   reduction  benefits  for  Alternative  F  include  COD  and
suspended solids reductions of 100 percent.

Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and  Control
Technoloqies

As shown if Table 71, the amount of power required to operate the
various   treatment   alternatives   for   mill   ponds   is  not
considerable, except for Alternative F.  The cost  of  power  for
the  evaporation  pond is more than 100 times the cost to operate
any of the other treatment alternatives.

The total direct energy costs for Alternative A through E are not
great enough to warrant  their  elimination  from  consideration.
The costs (energy) requirements for Alternative F with respect to
the benefit to the environment must be considered carefully.

Non-Water  Quality  Aspects  of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies

The most significant non-water quality aspect associated with the
alternatives for treating mill pond effluents concerns the amount
and nature of the solid waste produced.  Secondly, but of  almost
equal significance is the aspect concerning the amount and nature
of  air  pollutants  produced.   Other  important  considerations
include effects on  the  operational  efficiency  of  the  timber
products  industry  and the aesthetics of the various alternative
treatment systems.

Alternative A, no treatment and control, may  be  considered  the
base against which the other alternatives can be compared.

The  types  of  sludge  produced  by Alternative B or C should be
readily disposable on land because of their highly organic nature
whereas the sludges produced by Alternative D and  E  are  highly
inorganic  and  may be more detrimental to vegetation at disposal
sites.  The activated carbon used and  wasted  in  Alternative  E
requires  considerable  amounts  of  energy  for  production and,
consequently, the use of Alternative E  has  an  indirect  energy
cost  that does not appear in Table 71.  The same is true for the
coagulants and flocculants used in  Alternatives  D  and  E.   No
solid  wastes are shown to be produced in Alternative F.  Yet the
solids entering the unit must  eventually  be  handled.   It  was
assumed  for  the purpose of cost estimates that the sludge would
be allowed to accumulate on the pond bottom with the  pond  being
cleaned at infrequent intervals.  No costs were assigned to this.
Cleaning frequency was assumed to be greater than 20 years.

The air pollutants contributed from the various alternatives will
generally vary in proportion to the amount of processing required
for  the  chemicals  and  the  energy requirements.  In addition,
                                     317

-------
                                TABLE 70
                          ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY
                     OF ALTERNATIVE F  FOR MILL PONDS
                           EVAPORATION POND ONLY
INVESTMENT COSTS
    ITEMS

          1.  Pond & Road                             236,516

          2.  16 Flotation pumps                      268,800
                                                      505,316

          3.  Engineering @ 10%                        50,532

          4.  Contingencies @ 10%                      55,585

          5.  Land 14.66 ha @ $2470/ha                 36,222

                               Total  Investment Cost $647,655


MAINTENANCE & OPERATION

          1.  Power                •                   $62,263

          2.  Pond Maintenance @ $1040 ha               7,574

                               Total  Yearly Cost     $128,126
                                   318

-------
                           TABLE 71


                  YEARLY  POWER USE AND COSTS
            OF ALTERNATIVE  TREATMENTS FOR MILL PONDS
Alternative               Power Use  (Kw-hrs)           Yearly Cost

     A                         0                          0

     B                         4,391                      $85

     C                         4,391                      $85

     D                        15,782                      $305

     E                        21,260                      $411

     F         -             2,707,087                      $52,301
                                    319

-------
Alternative F may cause measurable amounts of ammonia nitrogen to
be released to the air via air stripping,

LOG PONDS

The effluents from log ponds are considered to  be  derived  from
natural  precipitation,  just as in the case for mill ponds.  The
only differences between mill ponds and log  ponds  is  that  the
size  of the model log pond is 20 ha (50 ac) while the model mill
pond was one hectare (three ac), and the quality of the  effluent
is  different.   All  extraneous streams are assumed to be routed
around the log pond.   Five  alternative  treatment  schemes  for
treatment  of  the  waste waters emanating from the log pond were
selected.

Cost and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and  Control
Technology

Alternative  A  - It is estimated that 526 million 1 (139 million
gal) of wastes will emanate from the 20  hectare  (50  acre)  log
pond  each  year, or on the average of 1,441,400 Ipd (380,820 gal
per day) .  The  COD  concentration  of  the  waste  is  52  mg/1,
yielding  a  daily  COD  waste load of 75 kilograms (165 pounds).
The suspended  solids  load  for  the  same  waste,  based  on  a
concentration  of 21 mg/1, is 30 kilograms per day (67 pounds per
day) .

This  alternative  requires  reasonable  process  water  use  and
control  in  order  to  achieve  volume  limitations  related  to
precipitation  and  evaporation  rates.   The  control   of   the
discharge  of  debris  also  may  require  production  management
procedures, as discussed in Section VII to control the generation
of these materials.  The physical layout and arrangement  of  the
wet  storage  facility  and  the timber processing equipment also
influence the possible discharge of debris.

Because of the variety of wet storage operations as they exist in
the  field,  it  is  not  possible  to  present   absolute   cost
information.   The  costs  of  achieving the proposed limitations
range between $0 and a maximum of $9,000.

Control of the discharge of floating materials can be achieved by
such technologies as floating log booms, submerged weir discharge
structures, inverted discharge pipes, or screens.

Control of debris,  diameter  exceeding  2.54  cm  (1.0  in),  is
usually achieved by installations minimizing activity near points
of  discharge  or  by  settling  action  that  takes place in the
collection area of a wet deck recycle system.

Alternative Bl - In Alternative Bl the flow from the log ponds is
evened out by providing an equalization basin that also functions
as an oxidation pond.
                                    320

-------
The costs of control and treatment  for  Alternative  B1  are  as
follows:
    Total Investment Costs                 $96,700

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                        $ 8,700

    Total Yearly Costs                     $17,400

An  itemized  cost  breakdown  for Alternative B1 is presented in
Table 72.  The reduction benefit for Alternative  B1  involves  a
COD  reduction  of 20 percent and a suspended solids reduction of
20 percent.

Alternative g2 ~ Alternative B2 provides a second oxidation  pond
in  series  with  Alternative  B1.   The  costs  of  control  and
treatment for Alternative B2 are as follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs          $ 89,400

    Total Investment Costs                $186,100

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                       $ 14,900

    Total Yearly Costs                    $ 32,000

An itemized cost breakdown for  this  second  oxidation  pond  is
presented in Table 73.  The reduction benefits for Alternative B2
include  a  COD . reduction  of  60 percent and a suspended solids
reduction of 50 percent.  The incremental  COD  reduction  is  47
percent  and  the  incremental  suspended  solids reduction is 40
percent.

A cost-efficiency curve for Alternative B is presented in  Figure
83.

Alternative  Cl - This alternative is the same as Alternative Bl.
The costs and unit efficiencies are the same.

Alternative  C2  -  Chemical   coagulation,   flocculation,   and
sedimentation comprise Alternative C2.
                                     321

-------
                           TABLE   72
           ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY  FOR ALTERNATIVE  B-l
                         FOR LOG  PONDS
INVESTMENT COSTS
     ITEMS

          1.   Pond                                         57,456

          2.   Wet well                                       2,520

          3.   15m of 38cm RCP                                 588

          4.   Pump & motor installed                         3,780

          5.   Plug valve & check valve                      1,428
                                                           65,772

          6.   Engineering  10%                              6,577

          7.   Conti ngenci es  10%                            7,235

          8.   Land 6.9ha at $2470/ha                        17,100

                            Total  Investment Cost         $96,684


OPERATING & MAINTENANCE

          1.   Power                                           941

          2.   Pond $1040/ha/yr                              6,174

          3.   Pumping Station Maintenance                   1,579

                           Total Cost                       8,694


Total yearly cost for Equalization -  Oxidation Pond       $17,396
                                  322

-------
                          TABLE  73
            ITEMIZED  COST   SUMMARY   FOR  ALTERNATIVE  B-2
                       FOR   LOG   PONDS
INVESTMENT COSTS
     ITEMS
          1.   Pond                                    57,456
          2.   15m of 38cm  RCP                            588
          3.   25cm plug & 25cm  check  valve               1,428
          4.   9m of 25cm C.I. pipe                       252

          5.   Engineering  10%
          6.   Contingencies  10%
          7.   Land 6.9ha at $2470/ha
                          Incremental  cost
                   Cost of alternative Bl	  96,684
                                Total  Cost        .     186,050

OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE
          1.   Pond Maintenance  (6.0ha $1040/ha)          6,174
                         incremental  cost                6,174
                    Cost of alternative B-l	8,694
                                Total  Cost             14,868

Total yearly cost for second oxidation pond            $14,582.84
                                     323

-------
  200,000 -
  175,000  -
  150,000 -
  135,000 -
 o
  100,000
o
o
I- 75,000  -
CO
Id
   50,000 -
 - 30,0,00
 -25,000-'
 -20,000
 -15,000
 -10,000
                                                               -  5,000
                    2O        40        60         80

                           COD  REDUCTION (%)
100
FIGUBE 83  TOTAL INVESTMENT  COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs COD SEDUCTION FOR

           ALTERNATIVE  B
                                    321,

-------
The  costs  of  control  and  treatment for Alternative C2 are as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs          $122,300

    Total Investment Costs                $218,900

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                       $ 86,058

    Total Yearly Costs                    $105,800

An itemized cost breakdown for Alternative  C2  is  presented  in
Table  74.   The  reduction benefits for Alternative C2 include a
COD reduction of 60 percent and a suspended solids  reduction  of
90  percent.  The incremental COD reduction is 47 percent and the
incremental suspended solids reduction is 72  percent.   A  cost-
efficiency curve for Alternative C is presented in Figure 84.

costs and unit efficiencies are the same.

Alternative  D2 - This alternative is the same as Alternative C2.
The costs and unit efficiencies are the same.

Alternative D3 - This alternative  consists  of  a  gravity  sand
filter  for  suspended solids removal which will also affect some
COD removal.

The costs of control and treatment  for  Alternative  D3  are  as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs          $152,500

    Total Investment Costs                $371,400

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                       $104,900

    Total Yearly Costs                    $138,400

An itemized cost breakdown for the filtration system is presented
in Table 75.  The reduction benefits for Alternative D3 include a
COD  reduction  of 20 percent and a suspended solids reduction of
90 percent.  The incremental COD reduction is six percent and the
incremental suspended solids reduction is seven percent.

Alternative D4 - The final process considered in Alternative D is
the use of activated carbon for soluble COD removal.

The costs of control and treatment  for  Alternative  D4  are  as
follows:

    Incremental Investment Costs          $408f100

    Total Investment Costs                $779,600
                                       325

-------
                                TABLE   74
             ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY  FOR  ALTERNATIVE C-2
                          FOR  LOG  PONDS
INVESTMENT COSTS
     ITEMS

          1.   Mixing & chemical  addition                   $13,566

          2.   Flocculator                                  20,076

          3.   Sedimentation  Equipment                       44,940

          4.   Building                                     12,818

          5.   Sludge Disposal                                8,503
                                                           99,903

          6.   Engineering  10%                              9,990

          7.   Contingencies   10%                           10,989

          8.   Land 0.55ha at $2470/ha                        1,370

                                Incremental  Cost          $122,252
                          Cost of  alternative  C-l	96,684

                          Total  investment cost           $218,936


OPERATION & MAINTENANCE

          1.   Power                                           618

          2.   Maintenance                                   5,028

          3.   Chemicals                                    29,005

          4.   Labor                                        36,288

          5.   Sludge Disposal                                6,425

                                Incremental  Cost            77,364
                          Cost of  alternative  C-l	8,694

                                Total  costs                 86,058
Total yearly costs of chemical  coagulation  -  flocculation  -
sedimentati on                                             $88,367
                                      326

-------
  200,000-


z



co-



rn  150,000-
o
o
^ lOOpOO
    sopoc
                                                             -125,000
                                                                     g

                                                             -100,000 J
                                                                     o
                                                             -7SPOO  CO


                                                                     O
                                                             -60POO  >

                                                                     _J
                                                             -26POO.
                   20
                             40        60         80


                                COO REDUCTION (%)
                                                            KX)
      FIGURE 84  TOTAL INVESTMENT COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs COD

                 REDUCTION FOR ALTERNATIVE C
                                   327

-------
                           TABLE  75
        ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY  FOR  ALTERNATIVE  D-3
                          FOR  LOG  PONDS
INVESTMENT COSTS
     ITEMS
          1.  Filter chambers (2)                          56,330
          2.  Sand (78cm)                                  8,089
          3.  Gravel  (46cm)                                4,855
          4.  Piping & fittings &  valves                    9,265
          5.  Backwash Pump                               12,600
          6.  Building                                    31,190
          7.  Sludge disposal equipment                    1,699

          8.  Engineering  10%
          9.  Contingencies  10%
         10.  Land 0.98ha at $2470/ha
                          Incremental  cost              $152,504
                     Costs of alternative Dl & D2	218,936
                          Total  cost                     371,440
OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COSTS
          1.  Power                                           70
          2.  Maintenance                                  5,957
          3.  Sludge disposal costs                        12,840
                          Incremental  cost                18,867
                     Costs of alternative Dl & D2	86,058
                           Total  cost                    104,925

Total yearly costs of gravity sand filtration            $32,592
                                        328

-------
    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                       $173,800

    Total Yearly Costs                    $2UU,100

An  itemized  cost  breakdown  for the activated carbon system is
presented in Table 76.  The reduction benefits for Alternative D4
include a COD reduction of 75 percent  and  no  suspended  solids
reduction.   The  incremental COD reduction is 20 percent and the
incremental suspended solids reduction is zero.

A cost-efficiency curve for Alternative D is presented in  Figure
85.

Alternative  E - Alternative E consists of the placement of spray
evaporators on the existing log pond and the enlargement  of  the
berm.

The  costs  of  control  and  treatment  for Alternative E are as
follows:
    Total Investment Costs                $1,074,300

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                       $  166,000

    Total Yearly Costs                    $  262,700

An itemized cost breakdown for  Alternative  E  is  presented  in
Table  77.   The  reduction benefits for this alternative include
100 percent  COD  reduction  and  100  percent  suspended  solids
reduction.  The incremental reductions are the same.

Related  Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies
As shown in Table 78, the amount of power required to operate the
various alternatives for log ponds is not considerable except for
Alternative E.  As in the consideration of mill ponds, the  power
costs  to  spray evaporate the excess water from the log pond are
greater than any of the  other  treatment  techniques.   However,
because  of the modified evaporation-log pond, the cost is not in
proportion to the flow rate.  The cost of heat to regenerate  the
activated  carbon in Alternative D has been converted to kilowatt
hours and is shown in Table 78.

There is considerable discussion in the industry  concerning  the
possibility of removing logs from the water, including log ponds,
and utilizing land decking entirely.  One study showed that three
dollars  per two cu m (about 1,000 bd ft)  could be saved when dry
decking of logs was used in place of a log  pond.   This  savings
was  determined on the basis of saved manpower.  In another study
at a different mill site,  more  factors  were  considered.   The
                                      329

-------
                               TABLE  76
             ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY  FOR  ALTERNATIVE  D-4
                           FOR  LOG  PONDS
INVESTMENT  COSTS
     ITEMS
                   cum
          1.  3800 day pump w/15 hp motor                     2,100

          2.  Contact columns & piping                       63,000
              & carbon handling equip.
   i
          3.  Initial carbon charge                          22,260

          4.  Regeneration equipment                        213,360

          5.  Building                                       36.490
                                                            337,210

          6.  Engineering  10%                               33,721

          7.  Contingencies  10%                             37,093

          8.  Land 0.04ha @ $2470/ha                            100

                          Incremental  cost                 $408,124
                   Cost of alternative Dl,D2a  & D3	371.440

                          Total costs                        779,564


OPERATING & MAINTENANCE (6 months operation)

          1.  Power                                             932

          2.  Carbon handling equipment                      13,440

          3.  Carbon regeneration                            49,981
                 Fuel                                         1,050
                 Power                                          630

          4.  Building                                        2,890

                          Incremental  cost                   68,923
                   Cost of alternative D1,D2,  & D3	104,925

                          Total Cost                        173,848

Total  yearly cost for activated carbon                      105,654
                                  330

-------
    800,000-1
    700,000 -
^  600,000
o
XI
I-
eo
o

°  500,000

K
Z
UJ
z

CO
UJ  400,000
    300,000-
    200,000 -
    IOO,OOO -
                                            I-
                                   250,000   g
                                            O

                                            5
                                            CCL

                                            UJ
                                   200,000   >•



                                            I
                                 -150,000
                                 - 100,000
                                 -  50,000
                      20
 40        60         80

COD  REDUCTION (%)
100
         FIGURE 85  TOTAL INVESTMENT COST  AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs COD

                    REDUCTION FOR ALTERNATIVE D
                                      331

-------
                               TABLE  77
                ITEMIZED  SUMMARY  FOR  ALTERNATIVE   E
                           FOR  LOG  PONDS
INVESTMENT  COSTS
     ITEMS

           1.  Spray evaporators  42 @ $16,800  each        705,600

           2.  Alterations of log pond                    177,116


           3.  Engineer!ng  10%                            88,272

           4.  Contingencies  10%                          97,099

           5.  Land 2.5ha @ $2470/ha                       6,170

                           Total Costs                  1,074,257


OPERATING & MAINTENANCE

           1.  Additional Maintenance cost                 2,591

           2.  Power                                      163,440

                           Total Costs                    166,031



Total Yearly costs for spray evaporators on the log  pond $262,714
                                    332

-------
                          TABLE  78
             YEARLY  POWER  USE  AND  COSTS  FOR
            ALTERNATIVE  TREATMENT  FOR  LOG  POND
Alternative               Power Use  (Kw-hrs)          Yearly Costs (dollars)

     A                         0                         0

     B                         72,511                    1,400

     C                         80,086                    1,600

     D *                       211,100                   4,100

     E                         8,459,652                 163,440
 * Fuel for activated carbon recharge  =  54,326 Kw-hrs = $1100
                                          333

-------
energy required to operate a dry decking operation 0.5 miles from
the  processing  plant  was  compared  to  the energy required to
generate water storage  of  the  same  logs  at  the  mill  site.
Electrical  costs  were about the same, but it was estimated that
the amount of fuel required to operate  the  dry  deck  would  be
300,000 1 (80,000 gal per year)  for the dry deck and U0,000 1 per
year (11,000 gal per year) in the water storage.

The comparison of energy requirements for land decking as opposed
to water storage will depend on the specific requirements at each
mill  location.   However,  it  was observed in the current study
that sorting and storing of logs in water generally requires less
energy and effort than the same operation  on  land.   The  above
cited figures tend to support this observation, yet the long haul
distance  to  the land deck in the above example makes the amount
of energy required for land decking larger than would normally be
expected.

Non-Water Quality Aspects of Alternative  Treatment  and  Control
Technologies

The  significant  non-water  quality  aspects associated with log
ponds are the same as those for mill ponds, i.e.,  solid  wastes,
air  pollutants,  operational  efficiency,  and  aesthetics.   In
general, these aspects are similar to those for mill  ponds,  but
the  quantities  are  significantly greater because of the larger
pond   size,   higher   flow   rates,   and    different    waste
characteristics.

Alternative  D  for  log  ponds  includes on-site regeneration of
activated carbon, so the amount of activated carbon  disposed  of
as  a  solid  waste is less, but the amount of power required for
regeneration of the carbon is  higher.   The  aesthetics  of  the
large  treatment  units  may  be  negative  and  the  cost to the
industry is more than for treatment of the mill pond effluent.

The decision of  whether  to  remove  the  logs  from  the  water
entirely  can also depend on non-water quality parameters.  These
were studied by Schaumberg and the estimates of the quantities of
these solid and air  pollutants  are  shown  in  Table  79.   The
difference in the amounts of these materials produced for the two
log storage techniques is considerable.

WET DECKING

The   effluents  from  wet  decking  operations  are  similar  in
character to those of mill and log ponds.  Because the water used
on the wet decks was assumed to be recycled, the only  time  that
an  effluent  occurs is when the runoff volume from precipitation
exceeds the storage capacity of the  recycle  pond.   With  these
restrictions,  the  wet deck effluent has the same flow character
and volumes as the mill and log ponds.  The precipitation on  the
wet  deck is highly variable with the area of the country and the
amount of flow from the wet deck is directly proportional to  the
area  of  the wet deck and recycle pond.  Because the typical wet


                                      331*

-------
                           TABLE   79
           NON-WATER.  QUALITY  WASTES  GENERATED  FOR
               LAND   DECKING  AND   WATER    STORAGE
Pol1utant
Solid Wastes*
Land Deck Emission
(kilograms/year)
      400
Water Storage
Emissions
(kilograms/year)

    68,000
Air Pollutants
     Particulates               450

     Oxides of sulfur          1000

   '  Carbon Monoxide           9000

     Hydrocarbons              1400

     Oxides of Nitrogen       13500
                                     50

                                    140

                                  1,300

                                    180

                                  1,800
*Bark  @ 240  kg/cu m
                                    335

-------
deck may have an area from one half hectare to 50 ha (one acre to
120 ac) and it may be located in almost  every  location  in  the
country  with  the  exception  of  the  arid Southwest, it is not
possible to decide on typical flows from the wet deck.   For  this
reason, two flows were chosen to represent one small wet deck and
one  large  wet deck.  These flows are three and U4 I/sec (50 and
69** gpm) for six months of the year.  These are the same flows as
chosen for mill and log ponds, respectively.

Because the treatment schemes for the treatment of  waste  waters
from  wet  decks are virtually identical to those chosen for mill
and log  ponds,  the  designs  and  costs  for  those  units  are
applicable  to wet decks.  All costs for wet deck treatment units
are  the  same  as  those  for  mill  and  log  ponds  previously
discussed.   A summary of costs for the two flows is presented in
Table 80.

Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and  Control
Technologies

The  amount  of power required to operate the various alternative
treatment units are the same as those discussed  for  mill  ponds
and  log ponds.  Since wet decking is a type of land decking, the
energy requirements discussed in land decking and  water  storage
are also applicable to wet decking.  The power or energy required
to sort and move the logs on land is considerably higher than the
energy  required  to sort and move the logs in water.  The energy
required to sprinkle the log deck is small compared to the energy
required to move and sort the logs.


The non-water quality aspect of wet decking are the same as those
for mill ponds and log ponds.  The wet decks themselves may  have
different aesthetic value than water storage, but pollutant loads
to  the air and land from the treatment alternatives are the same
as for mill ponds or log ponds.

LOG HASHING

The log washing operation developed in Section  V  possessed  the
following characteristics:

    1.   The log wash operates 16 hours per  day,  250  days  per
         year.

    2.   Existing facilities are the log washer itself  including
         the pump and appropriate piping.

    3.   No treatment is presently given the log washer effluent.

    H.   Volumetric rate of flow is 25 I/sec (400 gpm).

    5.   Volume of logs washed per day equals 280 cu m  (9,887  cu
         ft) .
                                     336

-------
                                                      TABLE  80
                                          COSTS  SUMMARY  FOR  WET  DECKING
CO
GJ
            Alternatives
A  (no treatment
B,C1,D1,E1 (recycle-equalization
   sedimentation)
C2 (oxidation pond #2)
D2Ji2 (chemical coagulation
        flocculation)
E3 (filtration)
E4 (activated carbon)
F (evaporation pond)
Incremental Investment


3
Cost

I/sec 44 I/sec
Total
Investment
Cost

Total
Yearly
Op.
Total Yrly
Costs
Cost

3 I/sec. 44
0
ion
29,
18,
47,
36,
23,
647,
0
200 96,700
300 89,400
200 122,300
900 152,500
600 408,100
700
0
29,
47,
76,
113,
137,
647,

200 96
500 186
500 218
400 371
000 779
700

I/sec
0
,700
,000
,900
,500
,600


3 I/sec
0
2,400
3,200
43,400
47,400
59,400
69,800

44

8
14
86
104
173

I/sec
0
,700
,900
,058
,900
,800

3

5
7
50
57
71
128

I/sec
0
,000
,400
,200
,500
,700
,100


44/sec

17
32
105
138
144

0
,400
,000
,800
,400
,100
- .

-------
The assumptions made for the development of costs for control and
treatment  technologies  for  the  treatment alternatives for log
washing include the following:

    1.   Adequate  land  is  available  on  site  for   treatment
         facilities.

    2.   No extensive changes are required in the  mill  feed  to
         allow  treatment  of  the  effluent from the log washing
         operation.

Alternative A -  This  alternative  consists  of  no  control  or
treatment.   It  requires  no  costs  and results in no reduction
benefits.  The total kilograms of COD per day resulting from  the
application  of  Alternative  A  are  "110  (310  Ibs)   while  the
suspended solids load discharged would be 106 kilograms  per  day
(234 pounds per day).

Alternative B - This alternative consists of total recycle of the
log   wash   effluent.    Total   recycle   can  be  achieved  by
sedimentation of settleable solids and screening of the suspended
solids.  Sludge  ponds  to  thicken  settled  material  are  also
required.   A  summary  of  the  costs  of  treatment and control
follow.  Itemized costs are given in Table 81.

    Costs of Treatment and Control
    Total Investment Costs           $27,600

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                  $14,700

    Total Yearly Costs               $17,200

Reduction benefits:  Reduction benefits of  100  percent  of  all
pollutants are achieved.

Related  Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and control
Technologies

No information is available regarding energy requirements for log
washing.  However, the total energy requirements  for  a  sawmill
producing   280  cu  m  per  day   (10,000  cu  ft  per  day)  are
approximately 28,000 kw hrs/ day of energy.

At a cost of 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour, energy cost for  a  280
cu  meter  (10,000  cu  ft)  per  day  mill  equals approximately
$161,000 dollars per year.  The associated  yearly  energy  costs
for  the  recommended  control  and  treatment  alternatives  are
estimated to be:
                                     338

-------
                           TABLE   81
        COSTS  OF  CONTROL  AND  TREATMENT,  ALTERNATIVE  B
                FOR  LOG  WASHING OPERATIONS
INVESTMENT  COSTS  ESTIMATE
Item
1.  Screen, horizontal  conveyor type,  complete
2.  Settling tank 200 cu m (7000 ft3)  complete
3.  Screen, vibrating,  complete
4.  Sludge pump
5.  Sludge Pond
6.  Engineering
7.  Contingencies
                                    Total

OPERATING  COSTS  ESTIMATE
Item
1.  Operation and Maintenance
2.  Electricity
                                    Total
 Costs
 $3,108
 10,920
  3,108
    840
  4,872
  2,285
  2.513
$27,646
 Costs
$13,780
    899
$14,679
                                   333

-------
                      Alternatives             Cost

                           A                       0

                           B                     $899

Non-"Water Quality Aspects

Non-water quality aspects can be expected  to  be  minimal.   The
disposal of settled materials should be accomplished by landfill.

SAWMILLS AND PLANING MILLS

For  the  purposes  of  this  report the sawmill and planing mill
segment of the  timber  products  processing  industry  has  been
defined to exclude the following items or operations:

    1.   Piles of fractionalized wood.

    2.   Log storage and handling.

    3.   Debarking.

    U.   Log washing.

    5.   Steam and power generating facilities.

    6.   Finishing operations.

The above operations including control and  treatment  technology
and associated costs are discussed elsewhere in this document.

Cost  and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and control
Technologies

The specific assumptions utilized in the development of costs  of
control  and  treatment  for  sawmills  and planing mills are the
following:

    1.   Water used for cooling saws  and  lubricating  belts  is
         minimized.

    2.   No water is used in cleanup of floors.

    3.   Equipment leakage is controlled.

    4.   Cooling water for  condensers,  turbines  and  pumps  is
         removed  from  the  point  of  use by closed pipes as is
         boiler blowdown and ion exchange media backwash.

    5.   Lumber finishing compounds such as coatings,  stains  or
         water  proofing  compounds  are recycled as is washwater
         developed during cleaning of the applicators.
                                      31*0

-------
    6.   Preservative dip tanks are covered to prevent rain  from
         entering  them;  lumber  is allowed to drip-dry prior to
         stacking, or drippage is collected and returned  to  the
         dip tank.

    7.   Steam condensate is returned from drying  kilns  to  the
         boiler.

The  above  assumptions  are  considered to be valid in that in a
well  managed  mill  these  are  generally  considered   standard
practice.   On the basis of these assumptions, no further control
and treatment is required to acheive a zero discharge  limitation
and no costs of control and treatment are thereby incurred.

FINISHING

Two  models were selected in section V as being representative of
fabricating operations.   Model  1  utilizes  one  spreader,  one
finger  jointer and one mixing vessel, all of which require daily
cleanup using a total of 750 1   (200  gal)  of  water.   Model  2
consists  of five double roller spreaders, three finger jointers,
one catalyst mixer, and two resin mixing  tanks.   The  resulting
daily  waste  water production from Model 2 is 5700 1  (1500 gal).
Both models are assumed to operate seven days per week, 52  weeks
per year.

Cost  and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies                                ~     ~"

In addition to the assumptions listed at the  beginning  of  this
section,  the  following  assumptions are made regarding costs of
the various alternatives:

    1.   No control or treatment presently exists.

    2.   For alternatives requiring land, it is assumed  that  it
         is available at $2500 per hectare.

    3.   Discharge to a municipal sewer system entails no  hookup
         charges and a maximum monthly charge of $25.

Alternative  A  -  This  alternative  consists  of no waste water
control of treatment.  Therefore, there are no costs of treatment
and no reduction benefits.

Alternative B - This alternative consists of  screening  followed
by discharge to an evaporation pond.  Evaporation is accomplished
by spray evaporators where precipitation exceeds evaporation plus
waterflow.   A  summary  of  the  costs  and  reduction  benefits
associated with this alternative is presented below.  These costs
represent average costs for all  five  regions,  rounded  to  the
nearest  hundred dollars.  A detailed breakdown of investment and
operating costs is given in Table 82.

    Model 1

-------
    costs of Treatment, and Control


    Total Investment Costs                  $27,000

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         $ 1,900

    Total Yearly Costs                      $ ft,200

Reduction Benefits:  One hundred percent reduction is achieved.

    Model 2

    Costs of Treatment and Control


    Total Investment Costs                  $47,800

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         $ 4,600

    Total Yearly Cost                       $ 8,900

Reduction benefits:  One hundred percent reduction  of  pollutant
discharge is achieved.

Alternative  C  - This alternative consists of screening followed
by  discharge  to  a  holding   tank.    Incineration   is   then
accomplished by spraying the glue wastes on the hog fuel prior to
burning.   It  is assumed that a hogged fuel furnace is presently
on site.  A  summary  of  costs  of  control  and  treatment  and
reduction   benefits   are   presented   below.    Detailed  cost
information is presented in Table 83.

    Model 1

    Costs of Treatment and Control


    Total Investment Costs                  $9,000

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         $3,400

    Total Yearly Costs                      $4,200

    Model 2

    Costs of Treatment and Control

    Total Investment Costs                  $17,200

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         $ 4,300

-------
                           TABLE  83
              -COSTS  OF  CONTROL  AND  TREATMENT
        FOR  ALTERNATIVE  C  FOR  FABRICATION  OPERATIONS
Model 1
Investment Cost Estimate

Item                                                          Cost
1.  Screens                                                   $2,300
2.  Screen Building, Foundation                                4,682
3.  Pump                                                         210
4.  Sump                                                         213
5.  Engineering                                                  741
6.  Contingencies                                                815
                                                TOTAL         $8,961
Operating Cost Estimate
Item                                                          Cost
1.  Electricity
2.  Operation & Maintenance                                   	
                                                TOTAi         $3,394
Model 2
Investment Cost Estimate
Item                                                          Cost
1.  Screen                                                    $2,300
2.  Screen Building, Foundation                                4,682
3.  Pump                                                         210
4.  Sump                                                       6,982
5.  Engineering                                                19417

-------
                            TABLE  83  (Cont.)
Model 2 Cont.
Investment Cost Estimate
Item
6.  Contingencies


Operating Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Electricity
2.  Maintenance & Operation
TOTAL
                                               TOTAL
 Cost
 $1.559
$17,150
               Cost
               $   30
                4,266
               $4,296

-------
    Total Yearly Cost                       $ 5,800

Reduction Benefits:  One hundred percent reduction  of  pollutant
discharge is accomplished.

Alternative  D - This alternative consists of screening to remove
large glue solids followed by landspreading.  A  summary  of  the
costs  of  control  and  treatment  and the reduction benefits is
presented  below.   A  detailed  description  of  investment  and
operating costs is presented in Table 84.

    Model 1

    Costs of Treatment and control

    Total Investment Costs                   $9,900

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                          $1,800

    Total Yearly Cost                        $2,700

Reduction  Benefits:  Reduction benefits may be assumed to be 100
percent.

    Model 2

    Costs of Treatment and control

    Total Investment Cost                    $12,200

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                          $11,100

    Total Yearly Cost                        $12,200

Reduction Benefits:  One hundred percent reduction  of  pollutant
discharge is achieved.

Alternative  E  - This alternative consists of screening followed
by discharge to a holding tank and recycle of  the  settled  glue
waste water for reuse in cleaning.  Piping is provided to provide
makeup  water,  bleedoff  to incineration and use of a portion of
the waste water for glue mixing.  It is assumed that makeup water
is available from existing water distribution system and  that  a
hogged  fuel burner is presently on site.  A summary of costs and
reduction benefits is presented below.  A detailed  breakdown  of
investment and operating costs is presented in Table 85.


    Model 1

    Costs of Treatment and control

    Total Investment Costs                   $10,900



                                   31*7

-------
                              TABLE  84
                   COSTS  OF  CONTROL  AND  TREATMENT
           FOR  ALTERNATIVE  D  FOR  FABRICATION  OPERATIONS
Model 1
Investment Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Screen
2.  Screen Building, Foundation
3.  Holding Tank & Foundation
4.  Pump
5.  Engineering
6.  Contingencies

Operating Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Electricity
2.  Operation & Maintenance

Model 2
Investment Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Screen
2.  Screen Building, Foundation
3.  Holding Tank & Foundation
4.  Pump
5.  Engineering
6.  Contingencies
TOTAL
TOTAL
Cost
$2,300
 4,682
   945
   250
   818
   900
$9,895

Cost
$   20
 1,787
$1,807
           Cost
           $2,300
            4,682
            2,835
              250
            1,007
            1,107
TOTAL     $12,181

-------
                     TABLE  84  (Cent.)
Model 2 Cont.

Operating Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Electricity
2.  Operation and Maintenance
                                                   TOTAL
Cost
$    30
 11,073
$11,103

-------
                              TABLE  85
                   COSTS  OF  CONTROL  AND  TREATMENT
           FOR  ALTERNATIVE  E  FOR  FABRICATION  OPERATIONS
Model 1
Investment Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Screens
2.  Screen Building, Foundation
3.  Holding Tank, Foundation
4.  Sump
5.  Sump Pump
6.  Pump, Piping & Controls for Incineration
7.  Piping & Valves
8.  Engineering
9.  Contingencies

Operating Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Electricity
2.  Operation & Maintenance

Model 2
Investment Cost Estimate
Item
1.  Screen
2.  Screen Building, Foundation
TOTAL
TOTAL
 Cost
 $2,300
  4,682
    735
    153
    420
    420
    336
    905
    995
$10,946
       i
 Cost
 $   12
    313
 $  325
                Cost
                $2,300
                 4,682
                                   350

-------
                          TABLE   85   (Cont.)
Model 2 Cont.
Item                                                      Cost
3.  Holding Tank, Foundation                              $1,995
4.  Sump                                                      370
5.  Sump Pump   .                                              420
6.  Pump, Piping Controls for Incineration                    420
7.  Piping & Valves                                           336
8.  Engineering                                             1,052
9.  Contingencies                                           1,158
                                             TOTAL        $12,733

Operating Cost Estimate
Item                                                      Cost
1.  Electricity                                           $  12
2.  Operating & Maintenance                                   411
                                             TOTAL        $  423
                                   351

-------
    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                          $   300

    Total Yearly Cost                        $ 1,300

Reduction benefits:  100 percent reduction is achieved,

    Model 2

    Costs of Treatment and Control

    Total Investment Costs                   $12,700

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                          $   i»00

    Total Yearly Costs                       $ 1,600

Reduction benefits:  100 percent reduction is achieved.

Alternative  F  -  This  alternative  consists  of discharge to a
municipal  sewer.   For  the  purpose  of  determining  costs  of
municipal  treatment,  it  is  assumed  that  there are no hookup
charges and that a minimum monthly rate of twenty-five dollars is
charged for both model systems.

    Costs of Treatment and Control


    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                          $300

    Total Yearly Costs                       $300

Reduction benefits:  One hundred percent reduction is achieved.

Cost Summary for Alteruatives  -  A  summary  of  costs  for  the
treatment alternatives is presented in Table 86.

Related  Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies

The industries represented  by  this  subcategory  are  extremely
diverse  in  terms  of  product  produced  and  energy  consumed.
Therefore, no information available which  is  representative  of
energy requirements for fabricating operations.

The  following  costs are the anticipated annual energy costs the
the alternative treatment and control technologies:
                                      352

-------
                  TABLE 86  SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE COSTS
                         FOR FABRICATION OPERATIONS
                    *Summary of Alternative Costs,  Model  1
Alternative
A
B
C
D
E
F



Alternative
A
B
C
D
E
F
Percent
Reduction
0
100
. 100
100
100
100

*Summary

Reduction
0
100
100
100
100
100
Investment
Costs
0
$27,000
$ 9,000
$ 9,900
$10,900
0

of Alternative

Costs
0
$47,800
$17,200
$12,200
$12,700
0
Total Yearly
Operating
Costs
0
$1,820
$3,400
$1 ,800
$ .300
$ 300

Costs., -Model 2
Total Yearly
Costs
0
$ 4,600
$ 4,300
$11,100
$ 400
$ , 300
Total Yearly
Operating
Costs
0
$4,200
$4,200
$2,700
$1,300
$ 300


Total Yearly
Costs
0
$ 8,900
$ 5,800
$12,200
$ 1,600
$ 300
*Average costs  for  all  five regions
                                 353

-------
      Alternative

           A

           B

           C

           D

           E

           F


Non-Water Quality Aspects

The non-water quality aspects of  the  various  alternatives  are
anticipated  to  be negligible.  However, disposal of glue wastes
by  landspreading  must  be   controlled   carefully   to   avoid
contamination  of  ground  water and surface water.  Incineration
should be monitored to  determine  any  impact  on  air  quality.
Alternative  E,  wash  water reuse, will provide the least impact
potential for both water and non-water  quality  aspects  and  is
also the least energy consuming treatment technology.

INSULATION BOARD SUBCATEGORIES

The  costs  estimates  contained  in  this  document are based on
actual preliminary cost estimates  for  waste  treatment  systems
defined  in  Section  VII  for a model £lant defined in Section V
(Water Use and Waste Characterization) of  the  insulation  board
industry.   Land  costs were assumed to be $2000 an acre based on
the assumption that insulation board plants are  located  on  the
outskirts  of  medium  size  towns.   The design criteria for the
various treatment technologies presented  below  are  essentially
the  same  for  all  subcategories.   Therefore, unless otherwise
noted the  description  of  the  treatment  alternatives  can  be
considered applicable to all subcategories.

The   insulation  board  industry  was  subcategorized  into  two
subcategories as  previously  discussed.   The  raw  waste  water
discharge for a plant of each subcategory appear below:

                       Flow     Production      BOD      TSS
       Subcategorv     1/kkcr       kkg/Day      kg/kkcr   kg/kkg

            I        5U,250         270         12.5      10
           II        54,250         270         37.5      10

It should be noted that these flows and loads occur after primary
clarification  since  the  plants are all assumed to have primary
clarifiers.  Also, there is assumed  to  be  2700  kg/day   (6,000
Ibs/day)   (dry  weight)  at  3  percent consistency 10 kg/kkg (20
Ibs/ton) of sludge from the existing clarifier, which is disposed
                                     35k

-------
of by an existing system.  The  loads  and  flows  given  do  not
include cooling water, boiler blowdown, roof runoff, yard runoff,
fire  fighting,  or waters from raw material handling and storage
operations.
COST  AND  SEDUCTION  OF  ALTERNATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES
                                    TREVTMENT   AND   CONTROL
Alternative  A - This alternative consists of no treatment of the
waste water discharged from the model plant's primary clarifier.

There is no cost involved and no reduction benefits.

Alternative B - This alternative consists of aerated  lagoons  of
19  day  detention  time followed by a settling pond with 24 hour
detention time added to Alternative A.  This alternative provides
for an 85 percent BOD reduction  in  the  waste  water  based  on
accepted  design criteria and a conservative estimate of reaction
rates.  The sludge from the settling pond will be removed once  a
year  by  dredging and trucking to landfill or by land spreading.
A detailed cost summary is presented in Table 87.

The costs involved for the alternative are as follows:
                        Subcategorv I

    Initial Investment     $380,000

                             3U,500
Yearly Operation
and Maintenance

Total Yearly Cost
                           $ 87,300
Subcategory II

   $380,000

     91,300


   $155,100
This system provides for an 85 percent reduction of  BOD
percent reduction of suspended solids.
                                                      and  70
Alternative cl - This alternative consists of an activated sludge
system  with  sludge handling facilities.  Waste sludge is pumped
to a thickener with a loading rate of U100  Ipd  per  sq  m  (100
gpd/sq  ft).   The  underflow  at  a  consistency of 5 percent is
dewatered by a coil drum vacuum filter prior to which filter aids
are added.  The dewatered sludge then disposed of in a landfill.

The activated sludge system  was  designed  using  the  following
criteria:  mixed  liquor suspended solids is equal to 2,500 mg/1,
loading rate for the aeration tank is equal to 0.2 kg of BOD  per
kg  of MLSS, loading rate for the secondary clarifier is equal to
1900  Ipd.   The  aeration  requirements  were  calculated  using
standard   design   parameters   and  nutrient  addition  and  pH
adjustment were provided.  A detailed cost summary  is  presented
in Table 88.
    Total Investment
                    Subcategorv I   Subcategorv II

                       $954,100       $1,160,800
                                   355

-------
                                                        TABLE  87
                                           ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY
                                    FOR  ALTERNATIVE  B FOR INSULATION BOARD
                                                  INITIAL INVESTMENT  COSTS
CO
01
en
                     ITEM
                          Subcategory I
                            $380,032
                              35,879
                               2,100
                              50,400
Land 4.0  hectares(9.8 acres)   19,600
Engineering and Contingencies  98,366
                            $586,377
Aerated Lagoon
Settling Pond
Pump
Aerators
                                                   COST
                     Operation and Maintenance
                     Power
                              Subcategory II
                              $380,032
                                35,879
                                 2,100
                               117,600-151,200
                                19,600
                               119,534
                              $667,689-708,345
       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
$ 4,221                         $4,221
 30,300                         68,176-87,114
$34,521                        $72,397

-------
    Yearly Operating        216,700          287,800
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Cost      $302,600         $392,300

A  90%  reduction in BOD and 70* reduction of suspended solids is
achieved by this system.


Alternative C2 - This alternative consists of an addition  of  an
aerated  lagoon with a quiescent settling area to Alternative C1.
The addition of an aerated lagoon,  based  on  design  parameters
presented  in  Alternative  B,  will  have an eight day detention
time.  The quiescent area will be dredged once a year and  solids
trucked  to  landfill.   A  detailed cost summary is presented in
Table 89.  The costs for this alternative are as follows:
                        Subcategory I   Subcatecrorv II

    Incremental Investment   $  236,500     $  236,500

    Total Investment          1,190,600      1,397,300

    Yearly Operation            235,900        306,900
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Cost        $  343,100     $  432,700

An incremental  reduction  of  BOD  of  70X  and  no  incremental
suspended solid reduction is achieved by this system.  An overall
reduction  of  BOD  of  97%  and  SS  of  70%  is realized.  Cost
efficiency curves for Alternative C are shown in Figures 86,  87,
88.

Alternative Dl - This alternative consists of an activated sludge
system and sludge handling facilities as described in Alternative
C1.  A detailed cost summary is presented in Table 88.

Alternative  D2  -  This  alternative provides a suspended solids
removal system for secondary effluent of Alternative D1 so that a
portion of this water  can  be  recycled  back  to  the  process.
Suspended  solids are removed by use of a multi-media filter with
backwashing facilities.  The filter is designed for  100  percent
of  the  flow with a surface loading rate of 163 I/ sq m/min  (4.0
gal/sq ft/min).  Backwashing is accomplished with filtered water.
Although this system is designed for recirculation of 100 percent
of  the  effluent,  complete  recycle  may   not   be   feasible.
Therefore,  for  this  system  only  70  percent of the secondary
clarifier discharge will  be  recycled  back  to  the  plant.   A
detailed  cost  summary  is  presented  in  Table  90.  The costs
involved for this alternative are as follows:
                                          357

-------
                                                 TABLE 88  ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY
                                         FOR ALTERNATIVES C-l, AND D-l FOR INSULATION BOARD
                                                         INITIAL   INVESTMENT   COSTS
CO
01
co
ITEM
Activated Sludge             Subcategory I
Nutrient & pH Control Equip. $21,420
Lagoon (w/Liner)              53,088
Secondary Clarifier
 (w/skimmer)                 111,300
Aerators                      50,400
Pipes, Valves & Fittings      63,000
Electrical (Miscellaneous)    63,000
Instrumentation               42,000
  Sub-Total  - Activated
     Sludge                 $404,208
Sludge Disposal Facilities
Thickener (w/skimmer)        $70,980
Polymer Feed Equip.           10,920
Coil Filters                 223,440
Belt Conveyor                 36,960
                                                                                   Subcategory II
                                                                                   $21,420
                                                                                   101,004-120,597
                                                                                   $519,324-572,517

                                                                                   $70,980
                                                                                     10,920
                                                                                   223,440
                                                                                     36,960

-------
                                              TABLE  88  (Cont.)
                  Item

                  Building
Subcategoty I

  37,800
                  Sub-Total  - Sludge Disposal  $380,100
Subcategory II

  37.800

$380,100
CO
en
00
                  Engineering & Contingencies  164,705

                  Land                           5,100 (1.0 ha)

                         TOTAL INVESTMENT     $954,113
                                  188,879 - 200,050

                                    7,280 - 8,160  (1.7 ha)

                               $1,095,583 - 1,160,827

-------
                                                TABLE  89
CO
en
o
                                        ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY
                             FOR  ALTERNATIVE C-2  FOR  INSULATION  BOARD
                                        Total Investment Costs
ITEM




Aerated Lagoon


Aerators


Land {2.0 ha.)


Engineering and Contingent


Incremental Investment


Cost  C-l


 TOTAL INVESTMENT






Operation and Maintenance


Power


Incremental Investment


Cost C-l


TOTAL OPERATION AND
 MAIMEENSNCE
COST
Stfbcafeaoow -i
$147,000
40,320
9,800
ies 39,337
$236,457
954,113
$1,190,570
Operation and Maintenance

Subcategory II
$147,000
40,320
9,800
39,337
236,457
1,095,583-1,160
$1,332,040-1,397








,827
,284

                                              $4,013

                                              15,150
  $4,013


   15,150
                                               19,163


                                              216.690
   19,163


  264,068-287,752
                                            $235,853
$283,231-306,915

-------
                                                 TABLE 90

                                    ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY FOR
                                 ALTERNATIVE B-2 FOR INSULATION BOARD
CO
CO
ITEM


Mixed Media Pressure Filter
  (w/media)

Filtered Water Storage
    Tank

Back Wash Pump

Pipes Valves Fittings

Electrical (misc.)

Instrumentation

Control Building
  Addition

Land (.012 Hec.)

Incremental Investment
COST D-l
TOTAL INVESTMENT
                  Operation and Maintenance

                  Media Replacement
                                                                   COST
Subcategory I
k
58,800
6,720
10,800
8,400
1,680
8,400
10,800
60
105,660
954,113
1,059,773
Operation and Maintenance
3,108
1,680
Subcategory II
58,800
6,720
10,800
8,400
1,680
8,400
10,800
60
105,660
1,095,583
1,201,243
3,108
1,680

-------
                                                       TABLE  90   (Cont.)
CO
CD
                  Item




                  Power

                  Incremental  Investment

                  Cost D-l

                  TOTAL OPERATIONS  &
                  MAINTENANCE
                         Cost
Subcategocy I
222,822
Subcategory
1,344
6,132
216,690
1,344
6,132
264,068
  270,200

-------
                                               INVESTMENT  COST_ (dollars)
Co
CD
GO
Kj
            O rt
                       o-


O
1
fs>
Ul
p
"b
o
o
.
W
8
o
o
o

51
o
"o
o
o

o
8
"o
o
o

M
Ul
p
O
o
o

                                                    TOTAL YEARLY COST   (dollars/year)

-------
1,500,000 -
                            4O        6O
                         BOD REDUCTION (%)
80
100
     FIGURE 87  TOTAL INVESTMENT COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs  BOD
                REDUCTION FOR. ALTERNATIVE C-SUBCATEGORY II OF THE
                INSULATION BOARD INDUSTRY
                                    36!*

-------

                                                             INVESTMENT COST (dollars)
CD
tn
Ul
o

8
o
                                                   en
                                                   o
                                                   P
                                                   o
                                                   o
                                                   o
                                    p
                                    O
                                    o
                                    o
                     N
                     U

                     €

                     8
                     at
                     O
                     O
                     "o

                     8
                           fs>
                           O
                         s
                         o

                         3)
                         m
o
Z m
                           o
                           o
                                        o
                                        p
                                        "o
                                        o
                                        o
                          ro
                          o
                          p

                          "o
                          o
                          o
o
p
o
o
o
o
o
"o
o
o
                                          en
                                          o
                                          o
                                          "o
                                          o
                                          o
                                                              TOTAL YEARLY COST (doltars/years)

-------
                        Subcategorv I   Subcateaorv II

    Incremental Investment      $  105,660     $  105,660

    Total Investment             1,059,800      1,266,500

    Yearly Operation               222,800        293,900
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Cost           $  318,200     $  407,900

An incremental reduction is achieved by this system resulting  in
a  97%  overall reduction of BOD and a 91% reduction of suspended
solids overall.


Cost efficiency curves for Alternative D are shown in Figures 89,
90, 91.

Alternative E - This alternative is appropriate only  for  plants
that steam their furnish, except plant 4 and multiline mills that
have  either  one pulping system for each production line or pro-
duce only one product.  It  consists  of  splitting  the  process
systems at the decker.  Excess machine white water is utilized to
wash  the  fiber  on  the  decker.   The discharge from the fiber
preparation system at approximately one percent dissolved  solids
goes  to  an  evaporator.   The  concentrate  from the evaporator
following neutralization is pumped  back  into  the  white  water
system.   The  condensate from this system at a consistency of 30
percent is utilized for fuel for  the  evaporators.   The  excess
machine  white  water  not  used  in  the  washing  operation  is
discharged to an activated sludge system with  design  parameters
similar  to  Alternative  C1  and  D1 and is discharged following
treatment,  A detailed summary of cost is presented in Table  91.
The costs of this alternative are as follows:
    Initial Investment

    Yearly Operation
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Cost
Subcategorv II

  $1,540,800

     496,700


  $  635,000
A  reduction  of  97%  in BOD and 92% in suspended solids will be
achieved.

Alternative F - This alternative is applicable  only  for  plants
with large land areas available.  This alternative provides spray
irrigation  of  all plant waste waters.  The system consists of a
holding pond followed by a dosing pond and  an  irrigation  field
with  underdrains.  The cost for these units will be the same for
both treatment categories, however, two systems  are  considered.
The  first  is  for  northern  climates where freezing conditions
                                      366

-------
2 1,250,000


•5
o
°   1,000,000
Ul


i

tj  750,000 -
     50O,OOO-
     25O.OOO -
                                                                 - 35O.OOO
                                                                 - 300,000
                                                                  2 50.OOO  ^

                                                                            5
                                                                            9
                                                                 - 200,000
                                                                            o>
                                                                            o
                                                                            o
                                                                 -  150,000
                                                                 •  100,000
                                                                   5O.OOO
                                                                            UJ
                      2O
                                40         6O        80



                                 BOD  REDUCTION (%)
too
      FIGURE 89  TOTAL INVESTMENT  COST  AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs BOD

                 REDUCTION FOR ALTERNATIVE D - SUBCATEGORY,I OF THE

                 INSULATION BOARD  INDUSTRY
                                    367

-------
o
o



Id
s
£

Id
1,500,000 -
1,250,000 -
1,000,000 -
 750,000 -
 500,000 -i
 250,000
                   20         40         60


                          BOD REDUCTION (%)
                                                     80
                                                                - 500,000
                                                                       e
                                                                      s
                                                                      "o
  400,000  g

           O
 - 300,000
                                                                - 200,000
                                                                - 100,000
                                                                      <
IOC
       FIGURE  90  TOTAL INVESTMENT COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST vs BOD

                 REDUCTION FOR ALTERNATIVE D - SUBCATEGORY II Of THE

                 INSULATION BOARD INDUSTRY
                                   368

-------
   J,500,000 -
   1.250,000 -
o
I
fe 1,000,000
o
o

u
UJ
    750 ,000 -
    500,000
    250,000 -
                      20
 i
40
60
60
                             BOD  REDUCTION {%)
                                                                 500.000
                                                                         C
                                                                         _o
                                                                         "o
                                400,000  g
                                         O
                                 300,000  >!
                                                                         o
                                - 200,000
                               - 100,000
100
  FIGURE 91   TOTAL INVESTMENT  COST AND TOTAL YEARLY COST VS BOD REDUCTION
   FOR ALTERNATIVE D  -  SUBCATEGORY III OF THE INSULATION BOARD INDUSTRY
                                      369

-------
                                               TABLE 91
                                    ITEMIZED COST SUMMARY FOR
                                 ALTERNATIVE E FOR INSULATION BOARD
CO
-^1
O
ITEM




Evaporation:
  Evaporator


  Instrumentation


  Erection


  Holding Tanks (2)


  Pumps


  Product Storage Tank


  Caustic Storage


        SUB-TOTAL


Activated Sludge:
  Nutrient & pH Control


  Lagoon v/liner


  Secondary Clarlfier


  Aerators


  Pipes, Valves and Fittings


  Electrical (Misc)
INVESTMENT COSTS


  Subcategory II



  462,000-525,000


   46,200


  186,000-210,000


   20,160-23,520


    8,400


   10,080-11,760


   10,080-10,800


  720,720-830,760



    7,980


   39,312-45,360


   59,220


   40,320-50,400


   16,800


   21,000

-------
                                        TABLE 91  (cent.)
CO
ITEM



Instrumentation

Sludge Disposal

  Thickner

  Polymer Feed Equipt.

  Coil Filter

  Belt Conveyor

  Building

SUB-TOTAL

Engineering & Contingencies

Land

TOTAL INVESTMENT

                   Operation and
            COST

        Sjabcategory II

            8,400



           31,920

           10,920

          111,720

           36,960

           37,800

          422,352-438,480

          240,045-266,540

            5,000 (1.0 ha)

         1,387.917-1,540,840

Maintenance
                  Evaporation
                    Operation and Maintenance

                    Electricity

                    Steam

                  SUB-TOTAL
                                            109,620-137,050

                                             59,976-78,910

                                            101.546-125,830

                                            271,142-341,790

-------
                                           TABLE 91  (cont.)
                    Item









                   Activated Sludge




                     Operation and Maintenance




                     Power




                    SUB-TOTAL




                             TOTAL ALTERNATIVE E
    Cost




Subcategory II








125,376-127,091




 25,895- 27,788




151,271-154,879




422,413-496,669
CO

-------
occur.  This system has a holding lagoon with a capacity of  five
months  which  allows  for  containment  for waste water produced
during the winter months when spray irrigation is  not  possible.
The  second system, designed for plants in southern climates, has
a 30 day holding pond.  This is necessary in the event that heavy
rains eliminate the possibility of spray  irrigation.   Prior  to
the  dosing  pond,  pH  adjustments and nutrient additions may be
provided.  The irrigation field has underdrains  to  collect  the
treated  water.  A loading rate of 204,000 1/day/sq m was assumed
for the spray irrigation field.  A detailed summary of costs  are
presented in Table 92.
The costs for this alternative are as follows:
    Initial Investment

    Yearly Operation
    and Maintenance
       Northern

      $2,009,200

          79,500
      Southern

      $961,400

        76,200
    Total Yearly Cost       $  260,300       $162,700

A 99% reduction of both BOD and suspended solids is achieved.

A summary of costs and reduction benefits for all alternatives is
presented in Table 93.

Related  Energy  Requirement of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies

Based on information  contained  in  questionnaires  provided  by
A.I.M.A.  it  is  estimated  that the plants for each subcategory
utilize the following quantities  of  energy  for  producing  272
kkg/day of insulation board:
     Subcategorv

         I

        II
Electricity
  kw hr/day

 201,000

 105,000-
 243,000
                                         Fuel
9.8 X 10«

6.8 X 108-
8.3 X 108
  Total
  Energy
 Kg cal/dav

11.6 X 108

 9.1 X 108-
 9.3 X 108
Fuel  may  be  in  the  form of oil, coal, gas, or wood,  A major
portion of the energy required for producing insulation board  is
for drying the mats in the driers.

The  total  increase  in  energy  requirements  for  each  of the
treatment alternatives is presented in Table 94.   It  should  be
noted  for  all alternatives, except E, the increase in energy is
for  electricity  only.   However,  alternative  E  also  has  an
increased  fuel  requirement  for  producing  the  steam  for the
                                     373

-------
                             TABLE  92
                      ITEMIZED  COST  SUWIARY
             FOR  ALTERNATIVE  F  FOR  INSULATION  BOARD
Item

Holding Pond
Holding Basin
Pumps
Irrigation System
Control Building
Land
Engineering & Con-
   tingencies
                     Initial   Investment  Costs
Northern
                  Costs
Operating and Maint.
Power
Southern
26,964
577,584
24,360
518,280
4,200
616,000
241,790
2,009,178
Operation and Maintenance
;. 68,124
11,424
79,548
26,964
139,104
24,360
302,400
4,200
360,000
104,376
961,404

64,764
11,424
76,188
                                      37!*

-------
                                TABLE 93  SUMMARY  OF  COST  AND  BENEFITS OF TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
                                              FOR  THE MODEL  INSULATION BOARD  PLANT
GO
-^
cn
AT ternati ve Subcategory
A All
B I
II
C-l I
II
C-2 I
II
D-l I
II
D-2 I
II
E II
F Northern
Southern
Incremental Total Total Yearly Total
Investment Investment Operating and Yearly
Cost Cost Maintenance Cost Cost
0 0
380,000
. - 380,000
954,100
1,095,600-
1,160,800
236,500 1,190,000
236,500 1,332,000-
236,500 1,397,300
954,100
1,095,600-
1,160,800
105,660 1,059,800
105,660 1,201,200-
105,660 1,266,500
1,387,900-
1,540,800
2,009,200
961,400
0
34,400
72,400-
91,300
216,000
264,100-
287,800
235,900
283,200-
306 ,900
216,700
264,100-
287,800
222,800
270,200-
293,900
422,400-
496,700
79,500
76,200
0
87,300
132,500-
155,100
302,600
362,700-
392,300
343,100
403,100-
432,700
302 ,600
362,700-
392,300
318,200
378,300-
407,900
547,300-
635,400
260,300
162,700
BOD
Reduction
Percent
0
85
85
90
90
97
97
90
90
97
97
97
99
99
SS
Reduction
Percent
0
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
91
91
92
99
99

-------
                                       TABLE 94  POWER REQUIREMENTS OF TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
                                                    IN THE INSULATION BOARD INDUSTRY
           Treatment
           Alternative
cn
C-2



D-l



D-2



E


F
                                 Treatment Electrical
Sub-Category                     Requirement (Kw-Hr/Day)

ALL                               -0-

I                                  4,300
II                                 9,670-
                                  12,350

I                                  5,760
II                                11,130-
                                  13,810

I                                  7,910
II                                13,280-
                                  15,960

I                                  5,760
II                                11,130-
                                  13,810

I                                  5,950
II                                11,320-
                                  14,000

I                                 12,170*-
                                  15,130*

ALL                                1,620
Percent increase
in requirement
over model plant

 -0-

  2.1
  9.2-
  5.1

  2.9
 10.fr-
  5.7

  3.9
 12.6-
  6.6

  2.9
 10.6-
  5.7

  3.0
 10.8-
  5.8

  6.1*-
  6.2*

-cl.5
              *Additional non-electrical  energy  to heat  the  evaporators  of  l.AxlO8  -  1.7sl08 kg-cal
               is  required  for  subcategory  II.   This  amounts to  17-25 percent  of present  fuel usage.

-------
evaporators.  This amounts to between 17X and 25% of the
fuel requirement for Subcategory II.

Non-Mater Quality Aspects
present
Alternative   A  assumes  no  additional  treatment  and  control
technologies are added to the model plant.  Therefore, there  are
no non-water quality aspects to be considered.

Alternative  B  consists  of  adding  an  aerated  lagoon  system
followed by a small  settling  lagoon  to  Alternative  A.   This
system has all of the problems usually associated with biological
treatment  plus  several  more,  including  the  necessity for pH
control and nutrient  addition.   Another  problem  is  that  the
biological  sludge  from  this  process  does not readily settle.
This can frequently cause high suspended solids in the  effluent.
Temperature  not  only  has  an effect on the biological reaction
rates but, apparently to some extent, on the  settling  rates  of
the biological solids.

The system is sensitive to shock loads and to shut down and start
up operations of the manufacturing process.  The equipment needed
for  the  aerated  lagoon  system  is  available  on  the market;
however, up to a year or longer may be required  from  initiation
of  design until beginning of operation.  The energy requirements
are high.  There are no noise  or  radiation  effects  associated
with the process.

Alternative   C1   consists   of  an  activated  sludge  process.
Activated sludge treatment of insulation board waste water can be
quite effective.  However, the system has  all  of  the  problems
associated with activated sludge treatment of domestic waste plus
several more.  For instance, pH control and nutrient addition are
required.   A  major  problem associated with the process is that
the biological solids do not readily settle.  This can cause high
suspended solids in the effluent.  Temperature not  only  effects
the  biological  reaction rates, but apparently the settling rate
of the biological solids.

Activated  sludge  systems  require  constant   supervision   and
maintenance.   They  are  quite  sensitive  to shock loads and to
start up and shut down operations of the  manufacturing  process.
The  equipment needed for the process is available in the market;
however, up to two years  may  be  required  from  initiation  of
design   until   beginning   of   plant  operation.   The  energy
requirements  are  high.   There  is  essentially  no  noise   or
radiation  effects  associated  with  the  process.   Sludge is a
problem and can result in odor problems.

Alternative C2 consists of the addition of an aerated  lagoon  to
the  activated  sludge  system.  This alternative provides for an
increase in treatment efficiency above that achieved by activated
sludge alone.  All of the  problems  associated  with  biological
treatment  as  discussed  in  Alternative  B and C1 apply to this
Alternative C2.  There  is  essentially  no  noise  or  radiation
                                         377

-------
effects  with  the  process.  The energy requirements are high as
discussed previously.

Alternative D1 is the same system as described in Alternative C1.
Alternative D2 consists of the addition of mixed media filtration
facilities to Alternative C1 and recycle of  70  percent  of  the
effluent.  This is done to remove the high suspended solids often
found in the effluent of the activated sludge process so that the
water  can be recycled.  This alternative has all of the problems
discussed in  Alternative  C1  plus  those  associated  with  the
operation  of  filtration  facilities.  Mixed media filtration is
quite effective for removing suspended solids from  the  effluent
of  activated sludge systems; however, excessively high suspended
solids concentrations can quickly blind the filter and cause high
frequency of backwash.  Recycle of filtered  effluent  is  not  a
proven technology as the long term effects are unknown.  Possible
buildup  of  dissolved  solids  and  increased  problems of slime
growths and corrosion may result.

The equipment for  this  process  is  readily  available  on  the
market.   The  estimated  time  of construction is within the two
year time period allocated for the construction of the  activated
sludge  process.   The  energy requirements are high as discussed
previously.  There is essentially no noise or  radiation  effects
associated with the process.

Alternative  E  consists  of  the  addition of two separate waste
water handling systems to Alternative A.  This requires that  the
white  water system be split at the decker into fiber preparation
and  machine  white  water  systems.   Slowdown  from  the  fiber
preparation  white  water  system is evaporated in a multi-effect
evaporator.  Condensate is  reused  as  partial  makeup  for  the
machine  white  water system and concentrated waste is mixed with
sander dust and burned in a boiler.

This system is applicable only in plants that steam their furnish
as it is most applicable when high  concentrations  of  dissolved
solids  are  present  from  the  steaming operation.  This system
requires either separate pulping systems for each forming machine
or that the white water from multi-machine plants are compatible.
The requirements of separating the white water systems may not be
practical in many plants  because  of  the  high  cost  of  plant
modifications.   Evaporation  systems must be fed at a relatively
constant rate.  Maintenance requirements are high because of  the
nature  of the material being evaporated.  The evaporator must be
cleaned out weekly if not more frequently.  Evaporation equipment
can be obtained on the market; however, a two  year  period  from
initiation of design until start up is not reasonable.  Noise and
radiation  effects  are  minor,  but  energy  requirements can be
significant.

The blowdown from the machine white water system is treated in an
activated sludge process.  This process  has  the  same  problems
associated  with  it as the activated sludge process discussed in
                                           378

-------
Alternative C1.  Noise and radiation effects of this  system  are
minor.

Alternative  F  consists  of  spray irrigation of all waste water
from a  plant.   Spray  irrigation  of  waste  water  depends  on
biological  degradation of waste by soil bacteria, adsorption and
ion exchange reactions within the soil,  and  filtration  on  the
soil surface.  These factors are greatly influenced by soil type,
effluent qualities, water table, and weather conditions.  Weather
conditions,  especially  freezing  temperature and high rainfall,
require that provisions be made for  waste  water  storage  until
such time as conditions improve.  Spray irrigation fields require
constant supervision and maintenance.  They are sensitive to both
hydraulic  and  organic shock loads.  The pH should be controlled
and nutrients added.  The equipment needed for  spray  irrigation
is  available  on  the  market; however, up to two years might be
required for design and construction  prior  to  operation.   The
availability  of  suitable  sites  for  spray irrigation may be a
limitation.  There is essentially no noise or  radiation  effects
associated with the process.
The cost estimates contained in this document are based on actual
preliminary cost estimates for waste treatment systems defined in
Section  VII   (Control  and  Treatment  Technology)  for a typical
model  plant  defined  in  section  V   (Water   Use   and   Waste
Characterization)  of the particleboard industry.  The land costs
are assumed to be $1500 an acre based on the assumption that  the
plant is located near a small town.

The  particleboard  plant  discharges  on  an  intermittent basis
11,000 1 (3,000 gal)  per day of waste water.  It has a production
of 270 metric tons (300 tons) per day.  The 1.1,000 1 (3,000  gal)
of  waste  water  consist  of  7,700  1  (2,000  gal)  per day of
housekeeping water, i.e. water used for general cleanup;  1900  1
(500  gal)  per day of resin blender wash water; and an additional
1900 1  (500  gal)  per  day  consisting  of  miscellaneous  flows
including periodic washdown of storage tanks, pressurized refiner
start-up and water from the press pit.

The  plant  presented  here  for  discussion  is considered to be
typical of the particleboard industry at this time.  However, the
model plant in the future may include both a chip  washer  and  a
scrubber for air emissions control.

Cost  and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technologies

Alternative A - This alternative assumes no  treatment  of  waste
water.  There is no cost involved and no reduction benefits.

Alternative  B  - This alternative consists of screening of waste
water prior to discharge to a septic tank  and  drain  field.   A
detailed summary of cost is presented in Table 95.
                                     379

-------
                             TABLE  95
                      ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY
            FOR  ALTERNATIVE  B  FOR  PARTICLE  BOARD
                         Initial Investment


Item

Screens and Building

Septic Tanks Drain Field

Land (0.032 ha)

Engineering and Contingencies



                     Operation and Maintenance

Operation and Maintenance

Power
  Cost

 $6,950

  4,032

    117

  2,306
$13,405
 $3,528

     63

 $3,591
                                    380

-------
The cost of this alternative is as follows:

    Initial Investment        $13,400

    Yearly Operation
    and Maintenance             3,600

    Total Yearly Cost         $ 4,800

This alternative provides for no discharge of pollutants.

Alternative  C - This alternative consists of spray irrigation of
all waste water.  Two systems were costed  because  of  different
climatic  conditions.   The one for northern climates is designed
with a holding pond capable of holding a five  month  waste  flow
during freezing weather.  The southern climate plant was designed
with  the  capability to hold all waste water flow during periods
of  heavy  rainfall  only.   A  detailed  summary  of  costs  are
presented in Table 96.

The costs for this alternative are as follows:

                                   Northern  Southern

    Initial Investment            $23,800           $16,000

    Yearly Operation
    and Maintenance                 7,000             7,400

    Total Yearly Cost             $ 9,100           $ 8,800

This alternative provides for no discharge of pollutants.

Alternative p - This alternative consists of spray evaporation of
all waste water.  Systems were designed for four climatic regions
where particleboard plants normally occur.  A detailed summary of
costs are presented in Table 97.

The costs for this alternative are presented below:
Initial Investment

Yearly Operation
and Maintenance

Total Yearly cost

Alternative  E  - This alternative consists of spraying all waste
water on incoming raw materials.  A detailed summary of costs are
presented in Table 98.

The costs for this alternative are as follows:
SE
$22,678
5,893
$ 7,934
NE
$19,299
6,157
$ 7,894
NW
$35,023
10,815
$13,967
NC
$19.997
6,596
$ 8,396
                                         381

-------
                                TABLE   96
                         ITEMIZED  COST   SUMMARY
                FOR ALTERNATIVE  C  FOR   PARTICLEBOARD
                        Initial  Investment Costs
Item
                                    Northern
Transfer Pump                        $ 504
Spray Pump                           1S512
Storage Tank                         3,948
Pond                                 9,045
Irrigation Spray System              1,680
Land                                 3,600
Engineering and Contingencies        3,505

                                   $23,794
                        Operation and Maintenance
Operation and Maintenance            6,939
Power                               	48
                                    $6,987
Cost
            Southern
              504
            1,260
            2,772
            5,774
            1,260
            1,950
            2,430
          $15,950

            7,312
           	55
           $7,367
                                         382

-------
                          TABLE  97
                   ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY
          FOR  ALTERNATIVE  D  FOR  PARTICLEBOARD
                   Initial  Investment Costs
Item
                  Southeastern
      Cost

New England   Northeastern    North  Central
Ponds, Control
Structures, Lining 16,126
Land 3,165
Engineering &
Contingencies 3,387
13,718 24,977 14,220
2,700 4,800 2,790
2,881 5,246 2,987
                   $22,678
 $19,299
$35,023
$19,997
                        Operation  and Maintenance
Operation &
Maintenance
Power

4,093
1,800

4,185
1,972

6,870
3,945

4,459
2,137
                    $5,893
    ,157
$10,815
 $6,596
                                         383

-------
                             TABLE   98
                     ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY
          FOR  ALTERNATIVE  E  FOR PARTICLEBOARD
                   Initial  Investment Costs

Item                                               Cost
Float Activated Pump                               $210
Float and Switch                                    168
Make-up Water Control  Valve                         336
Twin 5-day Detention Pits with Sump Pump and
Concrete                                         24,066
Spray Nozzles and Piping                            252
Land (.011 hec.)                                     41
Engineering and Contingencies                     5,257
                                                $30,330
                       Operation and Maintenance
Operation and Maintenance
Power
$3,892
	32
$3,924
                                         38^

-------
    Initial Investment                      $30,330

    Yearly Operation and Maintenance          3,924

    Total Yearly cost                       $ 6,654

This alternative provides for no discharge of pollutants.

Alternative F - This alternative consists of spraying  all  waste
water  on  hog  fuel for boiler.  A detailed summary of costs are
presented in Table 99.

The costs for this alternative are as follows:

    Initial Investment                      $20,648

    Yearly Operation and Maintenance          3,940

    Total Yearly Cost                       $ 5,790

This alternative provides for no discharge of pollutants.

Summarized costs for all alternatives are presented in Table 100.
It should be noted that all alternatives provide for no discharge
of all pollutants from the manufacturing process.

Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and  control
Technologies

Based  on  information  contained  in survey data provided by the
National Partxcleboard Association,  it  is  estimated  that  the
model particleboard plant uses 50,000 kw hr/day of electricity to
produce  300  tons/day  of  board.   In  addition,  approximately
163,296 kg/day  (360,000 Ib/day) of steam at 15 atms. is required.
The steam is usually produced with oil, gas, coal, or wood  fired
boilers.   The  model  plant was estimated to use 1,416,000 I/day
(50,000 cu ft/day) of gas and 51.7  kkg/day  (57 tons/day) of wood
and oil or coal.  This, however, may vary among plants.

The   total   increased   energy   requirements   for   treatment
alternatives  are  presented  in Table 101.  The increased energy
requirements consist of only electricity and  in  all  cases  the
increased electrical requirements amount to less than 1.1% of the
plant's present electrical usage.

Non-Water  Quality  Aspects  of Alternative Treatment and control
Technologies

Alternative A consists  of  no  treatment  of  waste  water  and,
therefore, there are no non-water quality aspects involved.

Alternative  B  consists of the use of screens, septic tanks, and
drain fields.  Provisions are made to pump out the  septic  tanks
monthly  and  dispose  of  the  ^material by land spreading.  This
system is one of the simplest^for treating  small  quantities  of
                                      385

-------
                           TABLE  99
                    ITEMIZED  COST  SUMMARY
           FOR ALTERNATIVE  F  FOR  PARTICLEBOARD
                  Ini ti al   Construct!on   Cos ts

Item
Screens, Pump and Building
Sump, Concrete
Land (.0073 ha)
Engineering and Contingencies

                   Operation and Maintenance
Operation and Maintenance
Power
 Cost
 $7,160
  9,882
     27
  3,579
$20,684
 $3,877
 _,	63
 $3,940
                                         386

-------
               TABLE  100
      SUMMARIZED  COST  OF  TREATMENT
ALTERNATIVES FOR  PARTICLEBOARD PLANTS
Alternative
A
B
C
D
CO £
00 t
F
Region
ALL
ALL
Northern
Southern
Southeastern
New England
Northwestern
; North Cent.
ALL
ALL
Initial Inves.
$ -0-
13,405
23,749
15,950
22,678
19.299
35,023
19,997
30,330
20,648
                         Operation & Maint.

                         $  -0-

                         3,591

                         6,987
                         7,367

                         5,893
                         6,157
                        10,815
                         6,596

                         3,924

                         3,940
 Total  Yrly.  Cost

 $    -0-

 4,797

 9,128
 8,803

 7,934
 7,894
13,967
 8,396

 6,654

 5,798

-------
waste.   The  major  problem  which might be experienced would be
slug loads of solids that would carry through  the  septic  tanks
and plug the drain field.

The   equipment   necessary   for  this  alternative  is  readily
available.  The time required from initial design  to  completion
of  construction  should  not  exceed  three  months.   There  is
essentially no noise or radiation effects  associated  with  this
process.

Alternative  C  consists  of  spray irrigation of all waste water
from a particleboard plant.  Spray  irrigation  is  an  effective
means  of  waste  disposal  if suitable land can be found for the
spray field.  The volume of waste from a particleboard  plant  is
relatively  small  and  low  loading  rates  should  result in no
discharge to navigable  waters.   Spray  irrigation  systems  are
influenced  by  weather  conditions.  Provisions must be made for
storing  waste  water  in  northern  climates   during   freezing
conditions.   Provisions  must be made for waste storage in areas
of heavy rainfall to prevent  excess  hydraulic  loading  of  the
spray field.

The  equipment  needed  for  the installation of spray irrigation
fields is available on the market, however, up  to  one  year  of
time  may  be  required  from start of design until completion of
construction.  There is essentially no noise or radiation effects
associated with this process.

Alternative D consists of spray evaporation of all  waste  waters
from the particleboard plant.  Spray evaporation can be effective
for  disposal  of  small volumes of waste as experienced from the
particleboard industry.  Problems associated  with  this  process
are  mainly  associated  with weather conditions.  Evaporation is
directly  related  to  quantity  of  waste,  rainfall,   relative
humidity,   and   temperature.    In  areas  of  heavy  rainfall,
considerably more water  must  be  evaporated  in  areas  of  low
rainfall.   Freezing  conditions  in  northern  climates  require
excess  holding  capacity  to  be  designed  for  winter  months.
Increase in suspended and dissolved solids because of evaporation
will  in time require solids to be removed or another evaporation
pond to be installed.

The equipment needed for this process is available on the market;
however, up to one year may be required from initiation of design
until beginning of plant  operation.   There  is  essentially  no
noise or radiation effects associated with the process.

Alternative  E  consists  of  spraying  all  waste  water  on the
incoming raw materials after settling  of  the  waste.   Problems
associated  with  this  process  are  mainly  associated with the
effect of the additional moisture  on  the  raw  materials.   All
plants  may  not find it feasible to spray the waste water on the
raw material because of the effects of  the  additional  moisture
content  on  the  process  although  several plants are presently
using this system.  The quantity of water to be  sprayed  on  the
                                        388

-------
                  TABLE  101
POWER  REQUIREMENTS  OF  TREATMENT  ALTERNATIVES  IN
          THE  PARTICLEBOARD  INDUSTRY
Treatment
Alternative

A
B
C
D
OO
CO
E
F
Region
ALL
ALL
Northern
Southern
Southeastern
New England
Northwestern
North Central
ALL
ALL
Treatment
Electrical
Requirement
(kw-Hr/Day)
-0-
7.5
6.4
7.5
256
280
559
278
4.5
7.5
                                                        Percent Increase
                                                        In Requirement
                                                        Over Model  Plant
                                                               -0-

                                                                0.02

                                                                0.01
                                                                0.02

                                                                0.5
                                                                0.6
                                                                1.1
                                                                0.6

                                                                0.01

                                                                0.02

-------
raw  material  is  relatively small compared to the weight of the
raw material; however, if the raw material  is  already  high  in
moisture  content  the  additional moisture may cause problems in
the manufacturing operation.

The equipment  needed  for  this  system  is  readily  available;
however,  up  to  six  months  may be required from initiation of
design until start up of the process.  There are  essentially  no
noise or radiation effects associated with the process.

Alternative  F  consists  of  spraying  all of the waste water on
waste material utilized as fuel in a boiler.  This is a  feasible
and effective method of disposal of small volumes of waste water.
However, many plants do not burn waste material as fuel for their
boiler  because  of  air  pollution  problems.   Therefore,  this
alternative depends on the existence of  a  hog  boiler  and  its
continued ability to meet air pollution regulations.

The  equipment  required for this process is readily available on
the market; however, up  to  six  months  may  be  required  from
initiation  of  design  until start up of the process.  There are
essentially no noise or radiation  effects  associated  with  the
process.

FINISHING WITH WATER REDUCIBLE MATERIALS

The cost estimates developed herein are applicable to a finishing
plant  generating a volume of waste water of 750 I/day from clean
up operations involved in the use of water base liquid  finishing
materials,  as  discussed  in  Section  V.  The plant produces 10
million sq m on a 6.35 mm basis (107.6 million sq ft on a 0.25 in
basis)  per year of prefinished paneling.  It is assumed  to  have
the following:
    1.
    2.
    3.
    4.
    5.
Two identical finishing lines, both operating  on  a  2H
hour per day, seven day per week basis.

Each line consists of 3 water base material  applicating
machines.
Each  applicating  machine  is  washed
requiring 75 1  (20 gal) of water/wash.
once  each   day
Material storage and mixing vats require a total of  300
1  (80 gal) of washwater/day.

Total waste water generated is 750 Ipd  (200 gal/day) and
will occur 365 days/year.
The typical plant was selected on the  basis  of  the  volume  of
waste  water  generated.   Volumes  of waste water generated from
finishing operations range from 75  Ipd   (20  gal/day)  to  1,100
I/day (300 gal/day) as pointed out in a previous section.  There-
fore, a total volume of 750 I/day  (200 gal/day) can be assumed to
be a typical value.
                                        390

-------
Cost  and Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment and Control
Technology

The  recommended   alternative   treatment   methods   for   this
subcategory  are similar to Alternatives B, C, D, and F for Model
1 for fabricating with the exception that screening of the  waste
water  is  not  required.   The  revised  summaries  of  costs of
treatment for the applicable alternatives  are  presented  below.
Detailed  cost  estimates  for  each  alternative are the same as
those  presented  for   the   fabrication   subcategory   without
screening.

Alternative  A  -  This  alternative  consists  of no control and
treatment.  No costs are associated with this alternative nor are
any reduction benefits achieved.

Alternative B - This alternative consists of a spray  evaporation
pond as described for fabrication.

The Costs of Control and Treatment are as follows;

    Total investment costs                $24,100

    Total yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         1,700

    Total Yearly Costs                    $ 3,800

100 percent reduction of pollutants is achieved.

Alternative  C  -  This  alternative  consists  of discharge to a
holding tank  followed  by  spraying  on  hogged  fuel  prior  to
burning.

The costs of control and treatment are as follows:

    Total Investment Costs                 $6,200

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         3,200

    Total Yearly Costs                     $3,700

100 percent reduction is achieved,

Alternative  p  -  This  alternative  consists  of discharge to a
holding tank followed by trucking to land spreading.

The costs of control and treatment are as follows:

    Total Investment Costs                 $7,100

    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance                         1,600
                                       391

-------
    Total Yearly Costs

100 percent reduction is achieved.
$2,200
Alternative F - This  alternative  consists  of  discharge  to  a
municipal sewer.

The costs of control and treatment are as follows:
    Total Yearly Operating
    and Maintenance

    Total Yearly Costs

100 percent reduction is achieved.
 $ 300

 $ 300
A summary of alternative costs for treatment of waste waters from
this subcategory is presented in Table 102.


Related  Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and control
Technology

The industries represented  by  this  subcategory  are  extremely
diverse  in  terms  of  product  produced  and  energy  consumed.
Therefore, no information is available which is representative of
energy requirements for finishing operations.

The costs presented in  Table  103  are  the  anticipated  annual
energy   costs   for   the   alternative  treatment  and  control
technologies.

Non-Water Quality Aspects of Alternative  Treatment  and  control
Technologies

The  non-water  quality  aspects  of the various alternatives are
anticipated to be negligible.  However,  disposal  of  wastes  by
landspreading must be carefully controlled to prevent groundwater
and  surface  water  contamination.   There are no air pollution,
noise, or radiation effects from the installation of any  of  the
above systems.
                                      392

-------
                   TABLE  102
          SUMMARY  OF  ALTERNATIVE  COSTS
FOR  FINISHING  WITH  WATER  REDUCIBLE  MATERIALS




CO
CD
CO
Alternative
A
B
C
D
E
F
Percent Reduction
-0-
100
100
100
100
Investment Costs
-0-
$24,100
$ 6,200
$ 7,100
Not Applicable
-0-
Total Yrly. Operating
Costs
-0-
$1,700
$3,200
$1,600
$ 300
Total Yrly.
Costs
-0-
-$3,800
$3,700
$2,200
$ 300

-------
                 TABLE 103
    ANTICIPATED ANNUAL ENERGY COSTS FOR
ALTERNATE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES FOR FINISHING
        WITH WATER REDUCIBLE MATERIALS
Alternative

    A

    B

    C

    D

    E

    F
Model-1 Costs

    -0-

   $144

   $ 20

   $ 20

   Not Applicable

    -0-
                         33k

-------
                           SECTION IX

     BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July  1,  1977
are  to  specify  the  degree  of  effluent  reduction attainable
through  the  application  of  the   Best   Practicable   Control
Technology   Currently   Available.    Best  Practicable  Control
Technology  Currently  Available  is  generally  based  upon  the
average  of best existing performance by plants of various sizes,
ages, and  unit  processes  within  the  industrial  category  or
subcategory.   This  average  is  not  based  on a broad range of
performance with the timber products processing  subcategory  but
rather  based  on  levels  of  performance  achieved by exemplary
plants.

Consideration must also be given to:

    a.   The total cost of application of technology
         in relation to the effluent reduction benefits
         to be achieved from such application;

    b.   The size and age of equipment and facilities involved;

    c.   The process employed;

    d.   The engineering aspects of the application of various
         types of control techniques;

    e.   Process changes;
    f.
         Non-water quality environmental impact (including
         energy requirements); and

    g.   Availability of land for use in waste water treatment
         disposal.

Best   Practicable   Control   Technology   Currently   Available
emphasizes  treatment  facilities  at  the end of a manufacturing
process but also includes the  control  technologies  within  the
process  itself  when  these are considered to be normal practice
within the industry.

A further consideration in  the  determination  of  BPCT  is  the
degree  of  economic  and  engineering  reliability which must be
established  for  the  technology  to  be  considered  "currently
available."  As a result of demonstration projects, pilot plants,
and  general use, there must exist a high degree of confidence in
the engineering and economic practicability of the technology  at
the   time   of  construction  or  installation  of  the  control
facilities.
                                     395

-------
In addition to the above factors, consideration should  be  given
to  plants  or  unit  processes  that  form  parts  of industrial
complexes.   Such  complexes   may   be   composed   of   various
combinations  of  some  or  all  of  the  subcategories discussed
herein, as well as operations such as pulp and paper  production,
furniture  manufacturing,  or other processes not covered in this
study.  While a numerical addition of pollutant  loads  from  all
unit  operations  will  yield  the  total  effluent  load  from a
complex, several factors may affect the application of  available
control  and  treatment  technology.   In  treatment of its total
waste water discharge the complex  may  have  the  advantages  of
economies  of  scale,  improved  potential for water recycle, and
joint use of a unit process.  It may also have the  disadvantages
of  lack  of  available land, substantial previous investments in
control and treatment technology that may not  be  applicable  to
the  proposed  guidelines, alteration of waste water treatability
as a result of the combining of waste streams, or, if waste  must
be  treated  separately, the additional expense of segregation of
the  combined  waste  streams.   The  effluent   guidelines   and
standards presented below reflect consideration of these factors.

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR WET STORAGE

Based  on  the information contained in Sections III through VIII
of this document, it has been determined that the application  of
the   best   practicable   control  technology  for  wet  storage
operations results from the control of the  discharge  from  pond
storage situations during periods when precipitation is less than
evaporation.   Control   of  the  volume  discharged  from  a wet
decking operation is achieved  by  process  management.   When  a
discharge  is allowed from a wet storage facility a particle size
limit, maximum size 2.54 cm (1.0 in.)  diameter, is  proposed,  in
addition to a pH range limitation.
Identificat ion
Available
of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
The  technology  identified  as  the  best  practicable   control
technology currently available involves the reasonable control of
the  discharge  of extraneous process waters into the wet storage
pond or recycle pond serving a  wet  deck.   Appropriate  control
technology  may  possibly involve the relocation of the discharge
point of  the  pond  away  from  activity  points  on  the  pond.
Activity  points  include  points where logs are deposited in the
pond, the location where logs are taken to the processing  plant,
areas  where  pond  boats have activity stirs up the pond bottom.
In ponds where saws are used to trim log ends, sawdust  and  bark
materials  can  be  relatively  easily  kept  out  of the pond by
utilizing water jets to force the waste material into a  specific
location  where  it either settles and sinks for removal from the
pond waters or forced out  the  water  to  be  shoveled  out  and
disposed.
                                   396

-------
The  utilization  of various types of discharge systems will help
to  achieve  limitations  on  debris.   Common  practice  in  the
industry  is  the  use  of  a  floating  boom  to retain floating
materials within the body of water.   Also  submerged  weirs  are
utilized  to  retain  floating materials.  Another mechanism that
may be effective is the inverted outlet.  This  involves  placing
an  inverted  drum  over  a  discharge  pipe.  Floating materials
cannot reach the discharge pipe unless it passes  underneath  the
edge of the drum.


Engineering Aspects of Control Technology Applications

Treatment  and  control technology as it currently exists for the
wet storage subcategory involves, in most cases, the  application
of  relatively uncomplicated technology.  The proposed guidelines
and standards can be achieved  by  the  use  of  floating  booms,
submerged  weirs,  inverted  or  submerged  discharges,  and/or a
quiescent area before discharge.

Cost of Application

The total investment costs for the treatment and  control  scheme
for  the  wet  storage  subcategory are estimated to be less than
$3,000 for a pond storage facility and slightly more  for  a  wet
decking  operation.   It  should be kept in mind that these costs
are maximum costs  and  that  a  significant  percentage  of  the
facilities  that  will be covered by these regulations are either
already achieving these limitations  or  can  achieve  them  with
either a modification of operating procedures or a minimal amount
of expense.

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact

The  non-water  quality  environmental  impact will be relatively
minor for the application of Best  Practical  Control  Technology
Currently  Available.   No  air pollutants will be produced.  The
solid wastes will be landfilled.  The varying water levels in the
ponds may, at the end of the  dry  season,  expose  aesthetically
displeasing mud or sludge deposits.  However, the pond can have a
pleasing appearance if maintained properly.

Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

The  proposed guidelines and standards for wet storage operations
are based in part on the consideration that reasonable water  use
is practiced in the manufacturing operation that makes use of the
wet  storage facility.  The volume limitation on discharge from a
wet storage facility, particularly a pond, cannot be achieved  if
control  is  not  maintained  over  the  volume  of process water
discharged to the wet storage water  system.   Although  there  is
not a specific or absolute limitation on the amount or sources of
water  going  into the system, it is recognized that some process
waters, such as glue system water, binder washing water,  process
waters  containing  oil  and grease, and other process waters may
                                    397

-------
contain pollutants which if they come in contact  with  navigable
waters, will have an adverse effect on water quality.

The  diversion  of  extraneous influents from surface runoff is a
consideration also.  While it is  not  possible  to  develop  the
costs associated with diversion because it is so geographical and
climatic  dependent,  diversion  should  be  considered as a tool
available  to  achieve  the  minimization  of  the  discharge  of
pollutants.
EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE  THROUGH  THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE  FOR  THE  LOG
WASHING SUBCATEGORY

Based  on  the information contained in Sections III through VIII
of this document, it has been determined that the application  of
the  Best  Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available is
that resulting from  recycle  of  the  log  wash  effluent.   The
effluent  levels  obtainable  for  this  degree  of  waste  water
reduction is no discharge of process waste  water  pollutants  to
navigable waters.
Identification
Available
of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
The best practicable technology currently available  consists  of
screening  the  log  wash  effluent  followed by sedimentation to
remove grit and suspended solids and screening preceding  recycle
of the effluent to the log washing operation.


Recycle  of  log  wash effluent is considered currently available
practicable technology since total recycle is being  accomplished
by  at  least  two sawmills.  The technology for total recycle is
uncomplicated in nature and should be achievable by July 1, 1977.

Costs of Application

The costs of attaining the recommended  effluent  reductions  set
forth  herein  are  presented  in Section VIII, Cost, Energy, and
Non-Water Quality Aspects and are summarized below.

Costs of Treatment and Control:

    Incremental Investment Costs:    $27,600
    Total Investment Costs:          $27,600
    Total Yearly Operating Costs:    $14,700
    Total Yearly Costs:              $17,200

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact

The non-water quality environmental impact of the application  of
a  closed system for a log washing operation may be considered to
                                  398

-------
be negligible.   There  is  no  appreciable  increase  in  energy
consumption   for   log  washing  with  the  application  of  the
recommended technology.  The  material  removed  from  the  logs,
primarily  inorganic in nature, will vary in amount, depending on
the conditions of harvesting and transportation.   The disposal of
this material by landfill should not have an  adverse  impact  on
the environment.

Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

No   discharge   of  pollutants  should  be  attainable  for  all
operations specifically designed to wash logs.   This  limitation
is  not  intended for application to operations such as hydraulic
debarking  and  wet  storage  wherein  log  washing   may   occur
incidentally.

It should be noted that the no discharge limitation and the costs
associated   with   the   application  of  this  limitation  were
predicated on the assumption that extensive changes in  the  mill
feed will not be required.

EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE  THROUGH  THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY  CURRENTLYAVAILABLE  FOR   THE
SAWMILL AND PLANING MILL SUECATEGORY

Based  on  the information contained in Sections III through VIII
of this document, it has been determined that the application  of
the  Best  Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available is
that resulting from proper inplant management and  control.   The
effluent level obtainable by the application of this no discharge
of waste water pollutants to navigable waters.

Identification  of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available

The  Best  Practicable  Control  Technology  Currently  Available
consists  of  the  application of inplant management practices as
discussed in  Section  VII,  control  and  Treatment  Technology.
These  included  management  of  water  use,  prevention  of  the
contamination of non-contact cooling water.

Engineering Aspects of Control Technology Applications

The inplant control measures recommended for sawmills and planing
mills are currently practicable in that all have been observed at
various mills.

Costs of Application

As stated in Section VIII, the cost of achieving no discharge  in
sawmills  and  planing  mills  as  defined  in  this  document is
considered to be negligible.
                                    399

-------
Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact

There are no known non-water  quality  aspects  involved  in  the
application of a no discharge limitation.

Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

The  pertinent  factors  to  be  considered  in applying effluent
limitation to sawmills and planing mills is the definition  of  a
sawmill.   In  other  words,  by  definition the sawmill does not
include raw material storage or handling, log washing, debarking,
power  or  steam  generation   or   fabricating   and   finishing
operations.   Thus, the effluent limitation of zero discharge for
sawmills and planing mills is only applicable to the  manufacture
of lumber from debarked logs.

EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE  THROUGH  THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY  CURRENTLY  AVAILABLE  FOR   THE
FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

Based  on  the information contained in Sections III through VIII
of this document, it has been determined that the application  of
the  Best  Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available is
evaporation, incineration, land spreading or recycle  of  process
washwaters  for reuse as washwater or makeup water.  The effluent
level obtainable by the application  of  this  technology  is  no
discharge of process waste water pollutants.

Identification  of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available

The  best  practicable  control  technology  currently  available
consists of one or more of the following alternatives:

    1.  Evaporation by the use of spray evaporators.
    2.  Trucking to landspreading.
    3.  Incineration by spraying of hogged fuel prior to burning.
    U.  Recycle of glue system water


Engineering Aspects of Control Technique Applications

Recycle  of  glue washwater for reuse as washwater is a currently
practicable technology in the  plywood  industry.   It  has  been
observed  in  at  least  four  U.  S. plywood plants and has been
reported by Haskell to be utilized in a  European  plywood  mill.
The  feasibility  for  transfer  of  this technology to the water
soluble glue using segment of the finishing subcategory has  been
recognized  by  representatives from government and industry.  It
should be noted, however, that the finishing subcategory contains
a wide variety of plants using a wide variety of glue applicators
and various types of glues.  Therefore, the recycle of  washwater
may  not be practicable in all cases.  Limitations on recycle may
exist for certain types of resins although there is presently  no
information available to substantiate any such limitation.  These
                                    koo

-------
and other aspects will influence the determination of a treatment
alternative  but  should  not  affect  the  attainment  of a zero
discharge limitation.  All of the  recommended  alternatives  are
practicable  since  all  have  been observed at various finishing
plants utilizing water reducible finishing materials.


Costs of Application

The investment costs of achieving  the  proposed  guidelines  and
standards  range between $0 and $27,000 with a range of operating
costs between $300 and $3200.

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact

Because of the relatively small volumes of waste water associated
with this subcategory the  non-water  quality  aspects  including
energy consumption of the various alternatives were assumed to be
negligible  in  Section  VIII.   However,  as all the recommended
alternatives result in  no  discharge  to  pollutants,  the  best
practicable    technology   is   that   technology   which   most
significantly reduces the  potential  for  environmental  impact.
Recycle  of  washwater  for  reuse  as  washwater accomplishes no
discharge of pollutants while not increasing  the  potential  for
air  pollution  as  may  be  the  case with incineration, without
increasing the potential for groundwater pollution as may be  -the
case with evaporation ponds, without increasing the potential for
surface  water  contamination  as  may  be  the  case  with  land
spreading, and with the  least  energy  consumption  of  all  the
recommended   alternatives  other  than  discharge  to  municipal
sewers.

Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

The  no  discharge  limitation  for  the  finishing   subcategory
utilizing  water soluble adhesives is considered to be attainable
in all cases.  However, since there are a wide variety  of  types
of  mills  utilizing  a  variety  of  water soluble adhesives and
various types of applicators, there may exist limitations on  the
adoption of recycle as a control technique.  In those cases where
recycle  of  washwater for reuse as washwater may be demonstrated
to  not  be  a  practicable  technology  one  of  the   following
alternatives will be applicable:

    1.   Incineration via spraying the glue wastes on
         hogged fuel prior to burning.
    2.   Disposal by controlled land spreading.
    3.   Discharge to municipal sewer.
    U.   Evaporation

The factors which may contribute to the necessity for adopting
one of the above alternatives may be:

    1.   Impracticality of collecting several small
         waste streams for where these streams are

-------
         currently discharged separately to a municipal
         sewer.

    2.   A particular type of adhesive may not lend itself
         to extended ^recycling because of deterioration of
         resin solids or buildup of dissolved solids.

EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE  THROUGH  THE APPLICATION OF BEST
PRACTICABLE  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY  CURRENTLY  AVAILABLE  FOR   THE
INSULATION BOARD SUBCATEGORIES

Based  on  the information contained in Sections III through VIII
of this document, a determination has been made that  the  degree
of  effluent reduction attainable and maximum allowable discharge
in the insulation board industry, based on the application of the
best practicable control technology currently  available  is  set
forth in the following table.
                           30-Day Average
Subcateaorv



     I

    II




Subcategorv



     I

    II
                                           Total
BODS Suspended solids
kg/kkg
1.25
3.75

Ib/ton kq/kkg
2.50 3.13
7.50 3.13
Dailv Maximum
Ib/ton
6.25
6.25

     BODS
kg/kkq

 3.75

11.3
Ib/ton

 7.50

22.6
                   Total
             Suspended Solids
kg/kkg

 9.UO

 9.UO
                                           6-9

                                           6-9
6-9

6-9
Identification  of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available

Insulation board is manufactured in a manner discussed in  detail
in  Section  III.   The  wastes  are derived and characterized in
Section V and treatment and control technologies in Section  VII.
The  Best  Practicable  Control Technology Currently Available is
treatment of  the  total  waste  water  discharge  by  biological
treatment possibly with pH adjustment and nutrient addition prior
to the biological treatment process.  Disposal of waste sludge is
by drum filtration followed by disposal of the dewatered sludge.
                                    «t02

-------
Engineering Aspects of Control Techniques Applicable

The  levels  of  technology  summarized  above  and  the effluent
reductions suggested are currently obtained  by  plants  in  both
subcategories.   Information  obtained  from  16 insulation board
plants indicated a typical waste water discharge of 54,250  1/kkg
(3,000  gal  per  ton)  for  all  subcategories.  Raw waste water
characteristics of the model plant are 10 kg/kkg (20  pounds  per
ton)  of  suspended  solids  for  all categories and BOD loads as
follows:  Category I,  12.5  kg/kkg   (25  pounds  per  ton);  and
Category  II, 37.5 kg/kkg  (75 pounds per ton).  The treatment and
control technology summarized above is in use  in  at  least  one
manufacturing  plant  of each subcategory of the insulation board
industry, and each has demonstrated a high degree of  engineering
reliability.

The  equipment needed for the process is available on the market;
however, up to two years  may  be  required  from  initiation  of
design  until beginning of plant operation.  Once plant operation
is initiated there will be at least a  six-week  start-up  period
required for process stabilization.

There  are no significant process changes required.  The addition
of certain capabilities and implementation of water  recycle  and
conservation practices will be needed to meet these limitations.
Cost of Application

The  cost  of  obtaining the recommended effluent limitations set
forth herein for the model plants are presented in Section  VTII,
Cost, Energy and Non*Water Quality Aspects and summarized below:
Subcategory

    I-

   II
 Investment

$  954,100

 1,095,600-
 1,160,800
  Yearly

$302,600

 362,700-
 392,300
  % Increase
in Capital Cost
  of New Plant
 (12.6 Million)

       7.6

       8.7-
       9.2
Non^Water Quality Environmental Impact

The   implementation  of  the  above  treatment  technologies  as
discussed in Section VIII relys on the ultimate disposal  of  the
waste  activated  sludge  on the land.  The energy requirement as
presented in Section VIII will account for less than   11  percent
of  the present electrical requirement of the model plants of all
subcategories.

-------
Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

As discussed  in  Section  VIII,  activated  sludge  systems  are
sensitive  to  shock  loads  resulting  from  start-up or process
malfunctions-  Systems of this  type  require  trained  operating
personnel  to achieve optimum treatment efficiency.  It should be
noted that there are certain limitations  on  the  efficiency  of
biological   waste  water  systems  in  northern  climates  where
freezing conditions occur.  Upset conditions resulting  from  any
of  the  above reasons may result in an increase in the amount of
suspended solids being discharged.

During the start-up period the  waste  water  effluent  from  the
treatment  system  may  exhibit  large variations in both BOD and
suspended solid discharges,

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH  THE  APPLICATION  OF  BEST
PRACTICABLE   CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY  CURRENTLY  AVAILABLE  FOR  THE
PARTICLEBOARP SUBCATEGORY

Based on the information contained in Sections III  through  VIII
of  this Document, it has been determined that the effluent level
obtainable for particleboard manufacture by  the  application  of
the Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available is no
discharge of process waste water pollutants.  This does not apply
to uncontaminated cooling water, roof and yard runoff, and waters
resulting from the handling and storage of raw materials.

Identification  of  Best Practicable Control Technology Currently
Available

Particleboard is manufactured in a manner discussed in detail  in
Section  III.   The  waste derived and characterized in Section V
and treatment and control technologies in Section VII.  The  best
practical  control  technology  currently  available  which  will
result in elimination of the discharge of pollutants requires the
implementation of one of one of the following:

    1.   Screening the total waste water flow prior to discharge
         to a septic tank and drain field.
    2.   Spray irrigation of the waste water.
    3.   The evaporation of all waste water in a spray evapora-
         tion pond.
    U.   Spraying all waste water on incoming raw material.
    5.   Spraying all waste water on hog fuel.

Engineering Aspects of Control Technologies Applicable

The application of the  technologies  summarized  above  and  the
effluent  reductions  suggested are reported to be obtained by 13
plants.  Each of the  treatment  technologies  listed  above  are
currently  in  use in at least one particleboard plant (or in the
case of spray evaporation,  a  plant  with  similar  waste  water
generation)   and   each   has  demonstrated  a  high  degree  of
engineering reliability.  There are no process changes  necessary

-------
for  the  implementation of the above technologies, although some
plants may have to segregate non-contact cooling waters from  the
waste water streams and modify their boilers to accept hog fuel.

Cost of Application

The  costs  of  obtaining the recommended effluent reductions set
forth herein for the model plant, are presented in Section  VIII,
Cost,  Energy, and Kon-Water Quality Aspects.  The cost will vary
by choice of treatment system and  in  some  cases  the  climatic
conditions  occurring  at the plant's location.  The total yearly
costs range from $U,800 to $1U,000 with 9096  less  than  $10,000.
The  capital investment costs range from $13,400 to $35,000 which
represents 0.16 to O.U2 percent  of  the  $8.4  million  cost  of
constructing a new 270 metric ton/day (300 ton/day) plant.

Non-Water Quality Env i ronment al Impact

The  non-water  quality impact will result from the land disposal
of small  amounts  of  sludge  from  certain  alternatives.   The
impact,  however, will be insignificant because of the relatively
small quantities of solid material to be treated.


As presented  in  Section  VIII  the  required  energy  for  each
alternative  treatment system will cause an increase of less than
1.1% in the electrical requirements of the model plant.


Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations


As presented in Section V, Water Use and  Waste  Characteristics,
the  model  plant  does  not have a wet scrubber for air emission
control nor does it have a chip washer.  Presently a minority  of
existing  plants  have  wet  scrubbers  in  use  and one plant is
reported to use a chip  washer.   The  use  of  either  of  these
devices  may  result in an additional waste water source and thus
affect the costs of treatment.

-------

-------
                            SECTION X

        BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
INTRODUCTION
The effluent limitations which must be achieved by July 1,  1983,
are  to  specify  the  degree  of  effluent  reduction attainable
through  the  application  of  the  best   available   technology
economically   achievable.    The   best   available   technology
economically achievable is not based on an average  of  the  best
performance   within   an  industrial  category,  but  is  to  be
determined by identifying the very  best  control  and  treatment
technology  employed  by  a  specific  point  source  within  the
industrial  category,  or  subcategory,  or  the  application  of
different  technology  it  is  transferable  from one industry to
another with a  reasonable  degree  of  confidence.   A  specific
finding  must  be made as to the availability of control measures
and practices to eliminate the discharge  of  pollutants,  taking
into account the cost of such elimination.

Consideration must also be given to:

    (a)  the age of equipment and facilities involved;
    (b)  the process employed;
    (c)  the engineering aspects of the application of various
         types of control techniques;
    (d)  process changes;
    (e)  cost of achieving the effluent reduction;
    (f)  non-water quality environmental impact  (including
         energy requirements).

In contrast to the best practicable control  technology currently
available,  the  best economically achievable technology assesses
the availability in all cases of in-process controls as  well  as
additional   treatment  techniques  employed  at  the  end  of  a
production process.

Those plant processes and control technologies which at the pilot
plant,  semi-works,  or  other  levels,  have  demonstrated  both
technological  performances  and  economic  viability  at a level
sufficient to reasonably justify investing in such facilities may
be  considered  in  determining  the  best  available  technology
economically   achievable.    The   best   available   technology
economically achievable is the highest degree of technology  that
has been achieved or has been demonstrated to be capable of being
applied  to  plant  scale  operation up to and including "no dis-
charge" of pollutants.  Although economic factors are  considered
in  this  development,  the  costs  for this level of control are
intended to be the top-of-the-line of current technology  subject
to  limitations  imposed  by economic and engineering feasibility

-------
considerations.    However,   the   best   available   technology
economically  achievable  may  be characterized by some technical
risk with respect to performance and with respect to certainty of
costs.  Therefore, the  best  available  technology  economically
achievable    may   necessitate   some   industrially   sponsored
development work prior to its application.

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH  THE  APPLICATION  OF  BEST
AVAILABLE  TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE FOR THE WET STORAGE
SUBCATEGORY

Based on the information contained in Sections III  through  VIII
of   this   document,   best  available  technology  economically
achievable is the same as that  identified  as  best  practicable
control  technology  currently  available  in  Section IX of this
report.

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST
AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES FOR THE LOG WASHING SUECATEGORY

The  effluent  limitation  reflecting  this  technology   is   no
discharge of waste water pollutants navigable waters as developed
in Section IX.
EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST
AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
GUIDELINES FOR THE SAWMILL AND PLANING MILL SUBCATEGORY

The   effluent   limitation  reflecting  this  technology  is  no
discharge of waste water pollutants navigable waters as developed
in Section IX.

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST
AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE GUIDELINES  FOR  THE
FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

The   effluent   limitation  reflecting  this  technology  is  no
discharge of process waste water pollutants to  navigable  waters
as developed in Section IX.

EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE  THROUGH  THE APPLICATION OF BEST
AVAILABLE   TECHNOLOGY   ECONOMICALLY    ACHIEVABLE    FOR    THE
PARTICLEBOARD SUBCATEGORY

The  effluent  limitation  achievable  by the application of best
available  control  technology  economically  achievable  is   no
discharge of pollutants as discussed in Section IX.

EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF THE BEST
AVAILABLE  TECHNOLOGY  ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE FOR THE INSULATION
BOARD SUBCATEGORIES

-------
Based on the information contained in Sections III  through  VIII
of this document, a determination has been made that the effluent
limitation   representing   the   degree  of  effluent  reduction
attainable in the  insulation  board  subcategories  through  the
application   of   the  best  available  technology  economically
achievable is a maximum discharge as follows:

                              30-Day Average
Subcategorv



     I

    II




Subcategorv



     I

    II
     BODS
kg/kkq  Ib/ton

 0.38    0.75

 1.13    2.35




     BQD5 ___

        Ib/ton
         2.25

         6.75
             Total
       Suspended Solids

       kg/kkg    Ib/ton

        0.85      1.9

        0.85      2.9

Daily Maximum

             Total
       Suspended Solids
kg/kkg
2.85
2.85
Ib/ton
5.70
5.70
 6-9

 6-9





-En-



 s'9

 6-9
Identification of  the  Best  Available  Technology  Economically
Achievable

The  best  available  technology  economically  achievable in the
insulation board industry is based on the treatment of all  waste
water  in  a biological treatment system and recycling 70 percent
of the flow after mixed media filtration as described in  section
VII.   The remaining 30 percent of the flow is discharged with no
further treatment after the activated sludge system.

Engineering Aspects of Control Techniques Applicable

The technology summarized above is currently being utilized on an
experimental basis by two plants in subcategory I and  one  plant
in  subcategory  II.   There  is  no information available on the
possible long term  effects  of  reusing  secondary  effluent  as
process  makeup water; however, representatives of the insulation
board industry indicate that  the  reuse  of  a  portion  of  the
secondary  effluent  from an activated sludge process is probably
feasible.  The initiation of this  technology  will  have  to  be
accomplished  gradually to determine the effect on the production
process.

-------
Cost of Application

The cost of obtaining the  recommended  effluent  reductions  set
forth  herein,  for  the  model  plants, are presented in Section
VIII,  Cost,  Energy,  and  Non-Water  Quality  Aspects  and  are
summarized below:
Subcategory

     I

    II
Total Invest-
 ment Cost

 $1,059,800

  1,201,200-
  1,266,500
   Total
Yearly Cost

 $318,200

  378,300-
  U07,900
  % Capital
 of New Plant
(12-6  million)
     9.5-
    10.0
 Non-Water  Quality  Environmenta1 Impact  The increase in energy
required for the implementation of this technology  is  presented
in detail in Section VIII.  The energy required is electrical and
represents  less  than  an 11 percent increase in the electricity
requirements of the model plants.  As discussed in  Section  VIII
the  non-water  quality  impact of this technology relates to the
land disposal of the solids  removed  from  the  waste  water  by
filtration.   This  is  in addition to the waste solids resulting
from the activated sludge system as summarized in Section IX.

Factors to be considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

Operational limitations of the activated sludge process should be
considered in the application of the above effluent  limitations.
These  operational  constraints  are discussed under Section VIII
and summarized  in  Section  IX.   In  addition,  the  technology
required  to  achieve  the best available technology economically
achievable effluent limitations  relies  on  the  recycle  of  70
percent  of  the effluent from an activated sludge system.  It is
conceivable that all plants may not be able to recycle as much as
70 percent of the secondary effluent or, on the other hand,  that
some  plants  may  be able to recycle more than 70 percent.  This
will be dependent on the individual plant's production process.

There are currently three plants in subcategory II achieving this
level of effluent reduction  by  the  use  of  spray  irrigation.
However, this technology cannot be utilized be every plant within
the industry as large areas of suitable land are required.

-------
                           SECTION XI

                NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

INTRODUCTION
This  level  of technology is to be achieved by new sources.  The
term "new source" is defined in the Act to mean "any source,  the
construction  of  which  is  commenced  after  the publication of
proposed regulations prescribing a standard of performance."  New
source  technology  shall  be  evaluated   by   adding   to   the
consideration  underlying  the  identification  of best available
technology economically achievable a determination of  what  high
er  levels  of pollution control are available through the use of
improved production processes and/or  treatment  techniques.   In
addition  to  considering  the  best  in-plant and end-of-process
control  technology,  identified  in  best  available  technology
economically  achievable, new source technology is to be based on
an analysis of how the  level  of  effluent  may  be  reduced  by
changing  the  production process itself.  Alternative processes,
operating methods or other alternatives must be considered.  How-
ever, the end result of the analysis will be to identify effluent
standards which reflect levels of control achievable through  the
use   of  improved  production  processes   (as  well  as  control
technology), rather than prescribing a particular type of process
or technology which must be employed.   A  further  determination
which  must  be  made  for  new  source  technology  is whether a
standard permitting no discharge of pollutants is practicable.

Specific  factors  to  be  considered  in  the  determination  of
standards of performance for new sources:

         (a)   the process employed and possible process changes;
         (b)   operating methods;
         (c)   batch as opposed to continuous operations;
         (d)   use of, alternative raw materials and mixes of raw
              materials;
         (e)   use of dry rather than wet processes  (including
              substitution of recoverable solvents for water);
              and
         (f)   recovery of pollutants as by-products.


NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - WET STORAGE SUBCATEGORY

Based  on the information presented in Sections III through VIII,
new source performance standards for  wet  decking  raw  material
storage  operations  are  this same as those identified in Section
IX, that is,  best  practicable  control   technology.   The  new
source  performance  standards  for  pond  raw  material  storage
operations is no discharge of process waste water  pollutants  to
navigable waters.
                                    'til

-------
RATIONALE

The  storage  of  raw  material in the timber products processing
industry usually occurs in out-of-doors situations.   The  volume
of  waste  water,  i.e., water that comes in contact with the raw
material is, of course, dependent on the rate and duration of the
precipitation event (s)  as well as the area of drainage  into  the
wet  storage  facility.   While it is not possible to control the
precipitation volume, it is possible  to   control  the  area  of
drainage  to  a wet storage facility, and to some degree the area
of the wet storage facility itself.

The proposed limitation of no discharge of  process  waste  water
pollutants  for pond storage operations is based on the following
considerations.  Volumes of process waste water  discharged  from
ponds  may  be  greater  because  they will usually be located in
depressions thus, drainage into the  facility  will  be  greater.
Materials  present  in  the   discharge  from  a pond may be more
concentrated with regard to dissolved materials  because  of  the
leaching  resulting  from  soaking.  It is also acknowledged that
the current trend in the industry is away from  pond  storage  of
raw  material for among other reasons, the economic benefits that
timber products processors can realize from  the  more  efficient
utilization   of  materials  achievable  in  land  based  storage
operations.

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - LOG WASHING SUBCATEGORY

Based on  the information presented in Sections III through VIII,
the  new  source  performance  standards  for  the  log   washing
subcategory  is no discharge of process waste water pollutants to
navigable waters.

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS -  SAWMILLS  AND  PLANING  MILLS
SUBCATEGORY

Based  on  the information presented in Sections III through VIII
the new source performance standards for the sawmills and planing
mills  subcategory  is  no  discharge  of  process  waste   water
pollutants to navigable waters.

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - FINISHING SUBCATEGORY

Based on  the information presented in sections III through VIII,
the   new   source   performance   standards  for  the  finishing
subcategory is no discharge of process waste water pollutants  to
navigable waters,

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - PARTICLEBOARD SUBCATEGORY

Based  on the information presented in Sections III through VIII,
the  new  source  performance  standards  for  the  particleboard
subcategory  is no discharge of process waste water pollutants to
navigable waters.

-------
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS - INSULATION BOARD MANUFACTURING
SUBCATEGORIES                  ~

Based on the information presented in Sections III through  VIII,
new   source   performance   standards   for   insulation   board
manufacturing operations are the  same  as  those  identified  in
Section IX:
Subcategorv



     I

    II




Subcategorv



     I

    II

RATIONALE
                            30-Dav Average
                    BODS
kg/kkg  Ib/ton

 1.25    2.50

 3.75    7.50




     BODS	

kg/kkg  Ib/ton

 3.75    7.50

11.3    22.5
      Total
Suspended Solids
                             Dailv Maximum
                                              Total
                                        Suspended Solids
                                        kg/kkg

                                         9.40

                                         9.40
kg/kkg
3.13
3.13
Ib/ton
6.25
6.25
—
6-9
6-9
                    6-9

                    6-9
The  best  available technology economically achievable discussed
in Section X are based in part on the recycling of  an  estimated
70  percent  of  the  process water after mixed media filtration.
This treatment and recycle technology is being  evaluated  on  an
experimental  basis.   However, the degree of reliability has not
been proven sufficiently to merit inclusion in the  consideration
of new source performance standards.

-------

-------
                           SECTION XII

                        ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This support document is based to a significant degree on a study
of  the  water  pollution  control aspects of the timber products
processing  industry  conducted  by  Environmental  Science   and
Engineering,  Inc.,  Gainesville,  Florida.  Dr. Richard H. Jones
served as project director, John D. Crane  was  project  manager.
Key  staff  members  were  Dr. Larry L. Olson, Leonard P. Levine,
John T. White and Jeffrey D. Einhouse.

Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Jacksonville, Florida,  Dr.  Frank  D.
Schaumburg,  Oregon State University, and Dr. Warren S. Thompson,
Mississippi  State  University   provided   assistance   to   the
contractor.

Appreciation  is extended to the many groups and individuals from
the industry who worked with the Agency  and  the  contractor  to
provide  and obtain information useful in  the development of the
guidelines and standards presented here.

Appreciation  is  extended  to  the  National   Forest   Products
Association,   the   National   Particleboard   Association,  the
Acoustical and Insulating  Materials  Association,  the  Hardwood
Plywood  Manufacturers  Association, the Southern Hardwood Lumber
Manufacturers Association and  the  various  industrial  advisory
committees for their cooperation and assistance.  Appreciation is
extended to numerous individuals within the industry who supplied
information   and   arranged  on-site  visits.   Individuals  who
particularly deserve  recognition  include  C.  Curtis  Peterson,
Charles  Morchauser,  Bruce  C.  Grefrath, A. F. Trom, Tom Frost,
James Leker, William Ames,  George  Romeiser,  Ted  Merideth  and
Robert Lunt.

Intra-agency review, analysis, and assistance was provided by the
Timber  Products  Processing  Working  Group/Steering  Committee.
This group included the following EPA personnel:

Harold B. Goughlin, Effluent Guidelines
  Division, Chairman
Irving Susel, Office of Planning
  and Evaluation
G. William Frick, Office of Enforcement and
  General Counsel
Arthur M. Mallon, Office of Research
  and Development
Al Ewing, Office of Research and
  Development

Technical guidance and direction was  provided  by  Allen  Cywin,
Director,  Effluent  Guidelines  Division  and Ernst Hall, Deputy
Director, Effluent Guidelines Division.  D. Robert Quartel served

-------
as project officer during the contract  phase  of  this  effluent
guidelines development program.

Specific  thanks  are  expressed to Nancy Fischer, Darlene Miller
and Linda Rose for their assistance in  preparing  this  document
for publication.

-------
                          SECTION XIII

                           REFERENCES

 1.  Standard Industrial Classification Manual,  U.  S.
    Government Printing Office (Stock No,  4101-0066)  (1972).

 2.  The Story of Insulation Board, Acoustical and  Insulating
    Materials Association, Chicago, Illinois.

 3.  "Mat-Formed Wood Particleboard", U, S.  Department
    of Commerce, commercial Standard, CS236-66.

 4.  Wright,  M.G., and Phelps,  P.B., "Particleboard,  Insulation
    Board,  and Hardboard:   Industry Trends 1956-66",  U.S.
    Department of Agriculture  (1967).

 5.  "The Story of Particleboard", National Particleboard
    Association, Silver Spring,  Md.

 6-  Current Industrial Reports:   Particleboard 1959-1972,  U.S.
    Department of Commerce.

 7.  Fiberboard Industry and Trade, Defibrator AB Stockholm,
    Sweden (November 1971).

 8.  "Report of the Presidents  Advisory Panel on Timber and the
    Environment" (April 1973).

 9.  Information provided by Environmental Protection Agency from
    a study of Builders Paper  and Board Industry.

10.  Information provided by Environmental Protection Agency from
    a study of The Pulp and Paper Industry.

11.  Information collected during the Phase I Timber Products
    Studies.

12.  Meredith, T.H,, Southern Forest Products Association,
    Personal Communication (November 1973).


13.  The Outlook for Timber in  the U. S. States, U.S.  Department
    of Agriculture, Forest Resource Report No. 20.

14.  McHugh, R.A., Miller, L.S.,  and Olsen, T.E., The Ecology
    and Naturalistic Control of  Log Pond Mosquitoes in the
    Pacific Northwest, Oregon  State Board of Health,  Division
    of Sanitation and Engineering, Portland, Oregon.

15.  Log Storage and Rafting in Public Waters, A task force study
    by Pacific Northwest Pollution Control Council (August 1971),

16-  1973 Directory of the Forest Products Industries, 54th Edition.

-------
17. Standard Specifications for Insulating, American Society for
    Testing and Materials, C208-72.

18. 1967 Census of Manufacturers,  Bureau of the census, U. S.
    Department of Commerce (July 1967).

19. Lambert, H-, "1971 Lumber Production", Forest Industries
    99, (May 29, 1972).

20. Sweat's Catalogue, F.  W.  Dodge corporation.

21.  Mobile Home Manufacturers Association, Personal
    Communications (October 1973).

22. Grefrath, B.C., National Forest Products Association, Personal
    Communications (November 1973).

23.  Varossicau, W.W., Forest Products Research and Industries
    in the U. S. States, J.M. Mevlenhoff, Amsterdam (1954),

24. Wood and Wood Products, Reference Data, Buying Guide  (October
    1967).

25. Eagle, S.V., Handbook of Adhesive Bonding, McGraw-Hill,
    New York, N.Y. (1973).

26. Knapp, H.J., "Development, Principles, Problems and Techniques
    of Finishing Particleboard," Proceedings, Washington State
    University Symposium on Partic1eboard, No. 2 (1968).

27. Batey, T.E., Prefinishing and Surfacing of Softwood Plywood,
    FAO/PPP Cons./Paper 3,8.

28. "Plywood and Other Wood-Based Panels", Food and Agricultural
    Organization of the U. S. Nations, Rome (1966).

29. Tomsu, M.L., "Wood Finishes",  Canadian Paint and Finishing;
    Modern Finishing Methods, ££,  6A (June 1973) .

30. Gluk,  D.G., "Selection and Field Testing of Coatings for
    Exterior Hardboard Products",  Forest Products Journal, 21,
    9 (November 1971).

31. McDonald, C.E., Hardwood Plywood Manufacturing in the U.S.A.,
    FAO/PPP cons,/Paper 3.22.

32. Bryant, B.S., Film Finishes for Plywood, FAO/PPP Cons./Paper 3.4.

33. Brumbaugh, J.I., "Overlaying of Particleboard", Proceedings,
    Washington State University Symposium on Particleboard, No. 1
    (1967),

34. MacDonald, R.G., Editor;  "Pulp and Paper Manufacture", The
    Pulping of Wood, _1, Second Edition  (1969) .

-------
35. Runckel, W.J., "C-E Bauer Pressurized Double-Dies Refining
    Systems-Application and Development in the Board Field",
    Proceedings of Seventh Symposium on Particleboard (March 1973).

36. surdyk, L.V,, "The Pallman Flaker", Proceedings of First
    Symposium on Particleboard, Washington State University
    (March 1967).

37. Binder, K.A*, "Resin Application and Quality in Particle
    board Manufacture," proceedings of First Particleboard
    Symposium. Washington State University  (March 1967) .

38. Heebink, E.G., "Wax in Particleboards", Proceedings of
    First Particleboard Symposium. Washington State University
    (March 1967).

39. Newman, W.M,, "Principles of Mat Formation," Proceedings of
    First Particleboard Symposium, Washington State University
    (March 1967).

40. Mitlin, L., Particleboard Manufacture and Its Application,
    Seven Oaks  (Kent), Press Media, LTD  (1969).

i*1. Graham, J.L., Graduate Student; Schaumburg, F.D., Assistant
    Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Oregon State
    University, Pollutants Leached from Selected Species of
    Wood in Log Storage waters, presented at 24th, Purdue
    Industrial Waste Conference, Lafayette, Indiana  (May 6, 1969).

42. Graham, J.L., Pollutants Leached From Selected Species of
    Wood in Log Storage Waters.  An abstract of the thesis for
    Master of science Degree, Department of Civil Engineering,
    Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

43. Williamson, K.J., "A Study of the Quantity and Distribution
    of Bark Debris Resulting from Log Rafting", M.A. Thesis (1969).

44. Schaumburg, F.D., "The Influence of Log Handling on Water
    Quality", 1969-70 Annual Report for Research Project WP
    01320-01, Department of Civil Engineering, Oregon State
    University  (March 1970).

45. Hoffbuhr, J. W., The Character and Biological Treatabilitv
    of Log Pond Waters, a thesis for the Master of Science Degree
    in Civil Engineering, submitted to Oregon State University
    (June 1970) .

46. Benedict, A.H., "An Investigation of the Effects of Bark
    Leaching and Benthal Decomposition on Receiving Water Quality",
    National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
    Improvement, Inc., Technical Bulletin No. 247
    (August 1971) .

47. Asano, T., Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering
    Mechanics, Montana State University; Towlerton, A.L., Sanitary

-------
    Engineering, Cornell, Rowland, Hayes and Merryfield - Clair A.
    Hill and Associates, Portland, Oregon:  "Leaching of Pollutants
    from Wood chips in the simulated Hydraulic Pipelines" (June 25,
    1973).

48.  Sproul, O.J., Sharpe, C.A., "Water Quality Degradation by wood
    Bark Pollutants", Water Resources Center Publications, No. 5
    (June 1968) .

49.  Schaumburg,  F.D., The Influence of Log Handling on Water
    Quality, Office of Research and Monitoring, U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (1973).

50.  Bollen, W.B., "Properties of Tree Barks in Relation to Their
    Agricultural Utilization".

51.  Hajny, B.J., Research Chemist, Outside Storage and Pulpwood
    Chips (October 1973).

52.  Asano, T., Towlerton, Laboratory study from "Leaching of Pollutants
    From Wood Chips in the Simulated Hydraulic Pipelines" (June 1973).

53.  Industry Advisory Committee Meeting, October 1-3, 1973, held at
    the Delta Towers Hotel, New Orleans, Louisiana.

54.  Gran, G., Waste water From Fiberboard Mills. Stockholm, Sweden.

55.  "Effluent Limitations Guidelines", Acoustical and Insulating
    Materials Association, Park Ridge, 111. (November 15, 1973).

56.  Leary, P.E., "Finishing Wood", Canadian Paint and Finishing;
    Modern Finishing Methods, £7, No. 6A  (June 1973).

57.  Conor, R., National Paint and Coating Association, Personal
    Communication (November 19, 1973) .

58.  Barret, W.J., Morneau, G.A., Roden, J.T., III, Waterborne Wastes
    of the Paint and Inorganic Pigments Industries, Southern Research
    Institute, Birmingham, Alabama (July  1973).

59.  "Policy on subsurface Emplacement of Fluids by Well Injection",
    A bolicy statement issued by the U.S.E.P.A. with
    "Recommended Data Requirements for Environmental Evaluation
    of Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids be Well Injection,"
    Washington,  D.C.  (February 1973).

60.  "Particles Strained From Log Pond Before Water Enters Stream
    flow". Forest Industries, 96  (November 1972).

61.  "Settling Ponds Clean Waste Water at Mill Complex", Forest
    Industries,  99  (November 1972).

62.  Blanton, B.I., Jr., The Characterization and Physical Chemical
    Treatabilitv of Log Pond Waters, a thesis for the Master of
    Science Degree in Civil Engineering, Oregon State
                                    1+20

-------
    University (August 1969).

63. Wilson, T.E., and Wang, M. H., "Removal of Liquid by Foam
    Separation Processes", 25th Purdue industrial Wastes Conference
    (May 1970).

6U, Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., Waste Water Engineering:  Collection,
    Treatment. Disposal, McGraw-Hill Book Company (1972).

65. Bailey, G.S., "Weyerhaueser Treatment of Pulp and Paper Wastes
    at the Plymouth, North Carolina Complex," 24th Purdue Industrial
    Wastes Conference (May 1971).

66. Timpany, P.L., et._ al. "Cold Weather Operations in Aerated Lagoons
    Treating Pulp and Paper Mill Wastes", 2.6th Purdue Industrial
    Wastes Conference (May 1971).         ~

67. Bodien, D.G., Plywood Plant Glue Wastes Disposal, F.W.P.C.A.
    (March 1969).

68. Bishop, D.F., et al., "Studies on Activated Carbon Treatment",
    Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 39, 2 (1967).

69. Beebe, R.L.,  and Stevens, J.I., "Activated Carbon System
    for Waste Water Renovation", Water and wastes Engineering
    (January 1967).

70. Smith, S.E.,  and Christman, T.F., "Coagulation of Pulping
    Wastes for the Removal of Color" Journal, Water Pollution Control
    Federation, 41, 2, Part I  (1969).

71, Moggio, W.A., "Experimental Chemical Treatments For Kraft
    Mill Wastes", National Council of tfie Paper Industry for Air
    and Stream Improvement. Inc-, Technical Bulletin No. 50  (1952).

72. McGlasson, W.G., et.al., "Treatment of pulp Mill Effluents
    With Activated Carbon", National Council of the Paper Industry
    for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Technical Bulletin No.  199
    (1967).

73. Gellman, E.,  "Aerated Stabilization Basin Treatment of Mill
    Effluents", National Council of the Paper Industry for Air
    and Stream Improvement, Inc., Technical Bulletin No. 185 (1965).

74. Voights, D-,  "Lagooning and Spray Disposal of NSSC Pulp
    Mill Liquors", Purdue University Industrial Waste Conference
    X (1955).

75. Timpe, W.G.,  Lang, E., and Miller, R.L., Kraft Pulping Effluent
    Treatment and Reuse - State of the Art, Environmental Protection
    Technology~series EPA-R2-73-164  (1973).

76. Follett, R.,  and Gehm, H.W., "Manual of Practice for Sludge
    Handling in the Pulp and Paper Industry", National Council
    of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc.,

-------
    Technical Bulletin No. 190  (1966).

77. Gehm, H.W., State-of-the-Art Review of Pulp and Paper Waste
    Treatment. EPA Contract No. 68-01-0012 (April 1973).

78. Oilman, E.S., Handbook of Applied Hydrology, Chapters 9, 10,
    and 11, McGraw-Hill  (1964).

79. McKee, J.C,, and Daniel, J.W., "Long Term Storage of Pulpwood
    in Sealed Enclosures", Tappi, 49, 5 (May 1966).

80. Baker, N., "Disposal of Timber Laminating Glue Wastes"  (February
    24, 1966).

81. Haskell, H.H., "Handling Phenolic Resin Adhesive Washwater
    in Southern Pine Plywood Plants", Forest Products Journal
    21, No. 9  (September 1971),

82. Baker, N., Borden Chemical Company, Personal Communications is
    (September-December 1973).

83. Buckley, D.B., and McKeown, J.J., An Analysis of the Performance
    of Activated Sludge and Aerated Stabilization Basin Systems
    in Controlling the Release of Suspended Solids in Treated
    Mill Effluents to Receiving Waters, National Council of the
    Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc.  (1973).

84. Eckenfelder, W.W., Industrial Water Pollution Control, McGraw-
    Hill, N.y.  (1966).

85. "Mill Estimates Saving of 3/m in its Switch to Dry Decking",
    Forest Industries, 97 (April 1970).

86. Schaumburg, F.E., An Analysis gf the Log Storage Situation
    At Columbia Plywood Corporation. unpublished work cited by
    permission of author (1973).


87. Back, E.L., and Larsson, S.A., "Increased Pulp Yield As a Means
    of Reducing the BOD of Hardwood Mill Effluent", Swedish
    Forest Products Research Laboratory.

88. Reduction of Pollution From Wet Process Fiber Board Production,
    Defibrator Stockholm, Sweden, "Lesdrevmash-73", September
    5-19, 1973, Moscow, USSR.

    Refining and Water Pollution Consequences, Swedish Forest Products
    Research Laboratory.

90. Peterson, C., Acoustical and Insulating Materials Association,
    Personal communication (December 19, 1973).

91. Morchauser, C., National Particleboard Association, Personal
    Communication (December 18, 1973) .
                                     422

-------
                        ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Asplund, A.e Trends and Developments In the Manufacture Of Fiberboards,
presented at the Seventh World Forestry Congress (October 1972).

Berrong, H.B., "New Wax Sizing Agents For Particleboard", Forest
Industries (September 1973).

Blase, F.G., Characteristics Of Pulp and Paper Mill Sludges, Thesis,
School of Forestry, University of Washington  (1970).

Burns, O.B., Jr., and Mancini, H.L., A Sludge Disposal System For
Mixed Primary and Secondary Sludges At the Covington Virginia Bleached
Kraft Mill (April 1966).

Degroot, R.C-, and Scheld, H,W, f "Biodegradability of Sapwood From
Southern Pine Logs Stored Under A Continuous Water Spray", Forest
Products Journal, 21, 1,  (October 1971).

"Combined Treatment of Municipal Kraft Linerboard and Fiberboard
Manufacturing Wastes", U.S.E.P.A., Industrial Pollution control
Program no. 11060DPD  (February 1971),

Ellwood, E.L. and Ecklund, B.A., "Bacterial Attack Of Pine Logs In
Pond Stoarge", Forest Products Journal, IX, (9)  (September 1959).

"Effect of Bark Content On BOD and Solids Content of Pulping
Effluent", Project *2433, Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton,
Wisconsin  (January 17, 1964).

"Effect of Steam Pressure on BOD and solids Content of Pulping
Effluent", Project #2433, Institute of Paper Chemistry, Appleton,
Wisconsin  (November 5, 1963) .

Emand, R., "Mill Uses Electricity Heated Water TO Thaw Frozen Logs
In Its Pond", Forest Industries. 99  (June 1972).

Giordano, E.E., "Dozer Boat Tugs, A Hillside Railway, and Log Stackers
Solved The BCFP Dilemma:  How To Get Lake Williston Logs To The Mackenzie
Mines", British Columbia Lumberman  (March 1972),

Grah, E., "Log Losses Average 24 Million Cu.Ft."-"...But The Rest
Piles Up As Debris", British Columbia Lumberman  (March 1972).

Grah, E., "Log Losses Average 24 Million Cu.Ft."-"Salvors Recover
Some Six Million...", British Columbia Lumberman (March 1972).

Gran, G., "waste water From Fiberboard Mills", internation Union Of
Pure And Applied Chemistry, 29 (1972).

"Hardwood Fractions Molded In Four-Press-Line System", Forest Industries
(June 1963).

Hedborg, L., "Water Supply and the Treatment Of Waste Effluent
From Wallboard Manufacturing Operations", FAO/ECE/BOARD CONS/ PAPER 4,F.

-------
Hutto, F.B., Jr., "Diatomite Filtration in a Board Mill", based on paper
presented at the 1968 Purdue Industrial Wastes Conference.

Industrial Waste Guide On Logging Practices, U.S. Department of the
Interior (February 1970). ~

"An Investigation Of Certain Water Quality And Biological Conditions
In Boise Creek - Enumclaw, Washington", Washington Pollution Control
Commission, Research Bulletin 63  (March 1973).

Keeley, M., "The Spring River Round-Up", British Columbia Lumberman
(March 1972).

Knox, L.C.  and Schmitz-LeHanne, A., "Development, Manufacture Described
Of Thin Dry Fiberboard Product", Forest Industries (July 1973).

Knuth, D.T., and McCoy, E., "Bacterial Deterioration Of Pine Logs In
Pond Storage", Forest Products Journal, 12 (September 1962).

Kurth, E.F. and Hubbard, J.K., "Extractives From Pondersa Pine Bark",
Ind., and Eng- Chem, £3  (1951) .

Lambert, H., "Board Industry Registered Major Gains in 1972", Forest
Industries (July 1973) .

"Log Bundles Winched From Lake", Forest Industries. 99 (November 1972).

MacPeak, M.D., Bacterial Deterioration As Related To Locf Storage
Practices (January 25,  1963).

Malo, B.A., "Semichemical Hardwood Pulping and Effluent Treatment:,
Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 39, no.11 (1967).

Maloney, T.M., Proceedings-One Through Seven - Symposium On Particleboard
Wood Tech,  Section - Engineering Research Division and Tech. Extension
Service, Pullman, Washington.

Marston, R.B. and Poston, R.F., "By-Product Utilization:  A Positive
Approach To Pollution Control", Journal of Forestry, 68, no. 5
(May 1970).

"Materials Handling Concept Behind Eurocan's Lumber Transportation
Over Coastal Range", British Columbia Lumberman  (March 1973) .

Miller, D.J., "Molding Characteristics of Some Mixtures of Douglas
Fir Bark and Phenolic Resin", Forest Product Journal, 22, no. 9
(September 1972).

Nepper, A.C., "Biological Treatment Of Strong Industrial Waste From A
Fiberboard Factory", Proceedings of the 22nd Industrial Waste Conference
(May 2-4, 1967).

Parmelee, D.M., Trends  In The Disposal of Biodegradable Waste Water
An Upcoming Problem-A Possible Solution, presented before the American

-------
Hardboard Association Meeting (May 23, 1967),

Parsons, N.C., "Spray Irrigation of Wastes From the Manufacture of
Hardboard", Proceedings 22nd Purdue Industrial Waste conference.

Parsons, W.c. and Woodruff, P.H., "Pollution Control:  Water Conservation,
Recovery, and Treatment", TAPPI, 53, no. 3 (March 1970).

Pease, D.A., "Plywood Scrap Converted Into Useful Product", Forest
Industries (March 1972).

Philipp, A.H,, "Disposal of Insulation Board Mill Effluent By Land
Irrigation", Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 43, (no. 8)
(August 1971).

"Principal Pollution Problems Facing The Solid Wood Products Industry",
Forest Products Journal, 21, no. 9  (September 1971).

Pulikowski, Zdislaw, "Development Tendencies In The Fiberboard Industry",
Holstechnologie, 5, no.2  (1964).

Quirk, T.P., "Aerated Stabilization Basin Treatment of White Water",
Industrial Water and Wastes Engineering  (1969).

"7,000 Foot Ice Bridge Spans Lake Williston In Winter Log Transportation",
British Columbia Lumberman  (March 1973).

Sohlman, L., Measures Taken By The Wallboard Mill of Skinnskatteburg
To Control Water Pollution.

Stiehler, M.M., A Comparison Of Two Pulp and Paper Mill Sludges Used
In Rigid Insulation Board, University of Washington  (1971).


Stiehler, A.M., The Technical Feasibility of Utilizing Papermi11 Sludges
in Insulation Board. Water Quality and The Forest Products Industry
(May  1971) .

Stout, A.W., Log Storage Practices  (September 1, 1957).

Stout, A.W., The Protection Of Stored Logs (September 1, 1952).

Stout, A.W., Storage Caused Defects In Idaho White Pine Logs
(February  1, 1955).

Stout, A.W., The Storage Of Ponderosa Pine and Sugar Pine Logs
(June 3, 1955).

Stout, A.W., Water Sprinkling Protects Decked Logs  (August 5, 1955,
revised August 5, 1957).

"Too Mulch, Too Soon", Wood and Wood Products, 77 no. 2
(February  1972).

-------

-------
                           SECTION XIV

                            GLOSSARY
Acrylic  Resin  -  A  synthetic,  thermoplastic  resin  formed by
polymerizing esters of acrylic acid and methacrylic acid.
"Act" - The Federal Water Pollution  Control
1972.
Act  Amendment s  of
Activated  Sludge  Process  -  A biological waste water treatment
process in which a mixture of waste water and activated sludge is
agitated and  aerated.   The  activated  sludge  is  subsequently
separated   from  the  treated  waste  water  (mixed  liquor)   by
sedimentation and wasted or returned to the process as needed.

Additive - 1)  In board production, any material introduced  prior
to the final consolidation of a board to improve some property of
the  final  board  or  to achieve a desired effect in combination
with another  additive.   Additives  include  binders  and  other
materials.   Sometimes  a specific additive may perform more than
one function.  Fillers and preservatives are included under  this
term.   2)  In  liquid  coatings used in:finishing operations, an
additive may be any material added to the coating material in its
formulation, usually to prevent undesirable  effects  during  its
shelf  life.   Mercuric  additives  commonly  found  in paint and
coating materials prevent  biological  contamination  during  the
shelf life of the material.

Aerated Lagoon - A waste water treatment pond in which mechanical
or diffused-air aeration is used to supplement the oxygen supply.

Aerobic - A condition in which free, elemental oxygen is present.

Air  Classifier  - A cylindrical chamber in which small and large
wood particles are  separated  by  the  introduction  of  an  air
stream.

Air Seasoning - See Lumber Drying.

Air  Separation  -  The  unit  operation  associated with the air
classification of wood particles by particle size.

Alkyl Resin - A synthetic, thermoplastic resin  used  in  paints,
varnishes  and  lacquers  produced by the reaction of a polybasic
acid,  such  as  phthalic,  maleic  or  succinic  acid,  with   a
polyhydric alcohol such as glycerine.

Anaerobic - A condition in which free elemental oxygen is absent.

Attrition  Mill  -  Machine which produces wood fibers by forcing
coarse material, shavings, or pieces of wood between a stationary
and a rotating disc fitted with slotted or grooved segments.
                                     427

-------
Autocatalvsis - The  catalysis  of  a  reaction  by  one  of  its
products.

Bagasse  - The solid matter remaining after extraction of liquids
from sugar cane.

Band Saw - A saw in the form of  an  endless  belt  running  over
wheels.

Barker  -  Machines  which remove bark from logs.  Barkers may be
wet or dry, depending on whether or not  water  is  used  in  the
operation.   There  are several types of debarkers including drum
barkers,  ring  barkers,  bag  barkers,  hydraulic  barkers,  and
cutterhead  barkers.  With the exception of the hydraulic barker,
all use abrasion or scraping actions to remove  bark.   Hydraulic
barkers utilize high pressure streams of water.

Bark  Mulch - A material used for soil conditioning purposes pro-
duced by hogging bark into fine particle size and possibly adding
nitrogen in the form of liquid ammonia by spraying.

Barrel Staves - Narrow strips of wood placed edge to edge to form
the sides, covering, or lining of a barrel.

Base Coating - See Ground coating.

Blender - A machine used to blend wood particles and additives in
the production of particleboard.  Blenders are of two types:   1)
A  continuous  type  consists  of a horizontal trough with mixing
arms and sprayers.  Wood particles are fed into the trough  while
additives  are  blended in by means of spray nozzles.  2) A batch
type consists of a  mixing  tank  with  agitation  in  which  the
particles and additives are blended.

Blue  Stain  -  A stain imparting a blue color to the wood.  This
stain is caused by  a  fungus.   The  growth  of  this  fungi  is
retarded by water storage or water spray of the logs.

BOD  (biochemical  oxygen  demand)  -  is a measure of biological
decomposition of  organic  matter  in  a  water  sample.   It  is
determined  by measuring the oxygen required by microorganisms to
oxidize the organic contaminants of a water sample under standard
laboratory   conditions.    The   standard   conditions   include
incubation for five days at 20 C.

BOD7  -  A  modification  of  the BOD test in which incubation is
maintained for seven days instead of five.  This is the  standard
test in Sweden.

Box  Cleat  - In the production of wood containers, a small strip
of wood fastened perpendicular  to  the  sides  to  lend  lateral
support.

Broke  System  -  A  system  for repulping and reuse of wasted or
rejected product to form new croduct.

-------
Cambium Layer - A thin formative  layer  between  the  xylem  and
phloem of most vascular plants that give rise to new cells and is
responsible for secondary growth.

Cant  -  The  remaining  portion  of  a  log,  either  square  or
rectangular in cross section; after the outside  edges  or  slabs
have been sawn or chipped off.

Carriage - see Log Carriage.

Casehardening  -  A  condition of stress and set in wood in which
the outer fibers are  under  compression  stress  and  the  inner
fibers  are  under tensile stress, the stress persisting when the
wood is uniformly dry throughout.

Casein Resin Glue - A glue commonly  used  in  wood  fabricating,
made from a derivative of skimmed milk.

Catalyst  -  An acid or acid salt used to promote quick curing of
resins.   common  catalysts  are  ammonium  hydroxide,   ammonium
chloride, and ammonium sulfate.

Caul - A metal plate or screen on which a formed mat of particles
or  fiber  is  placed for transfer to the press, and on which the
mat rests during the pressing process.

Cellulose - A complex polymeric  carbohydrate, C6H10O5_,  yielding
only  glucose on complete hydrolysis, which constitutes the chief
part of the cell walls of plants.

Chipping Headrig - Equipment consisting of  chipping  saws  which
chip  away  non-marketable  lumber,  so  that  subsequent  sawing
operations will result in marketable lumber.

Chipper Saw - A saw used to face the side of logs prior to  being
sawn.

Clarifier  - A unit of which the primary purpose is to reduce the
amount of suspended matter in a  liquid.

Coagulation - The process of becoming viscous or thickened into  a
coherent mass.

CQp  (Chemical Oxygen Demand) - A test procedure to give a measure
of the oxygen demand equivalent  to that portion of  matter  in   a
sample  which  is  susceptible   to oxidation by a strong chemical
oxidant.

Cold Setting - In resin  curing,  the  setting  of  resins  which
requires no heat as compared to  heat curing.

containment Pond - See Lagoon.

Cord - A unit of wood equal to a stack 1,22 m by 1.22 m by 2.U4  m
or 3.625 cu m  (four ft by four ft by eight ft or 128 cu ft).

-------
Core  Stock  - Supply of coarse particles used in the fabrication
of the inner core of particleboard.

Correlation Coefficient - A numerical value expressing the degree
of association between two variables.

Cross Banding - The transverse reinforcement of panels by  wooden
strips which are weaker in one direction than in the other, i.e.,
extruded particleboard.

Curtain  Coating  -  A  method  used in applying liquid finishing
materials  usually  to  flat  substrate  surfaces.   The  curtain
coating  equipment produces a thin, uniform, curtain-like film of
liquid material which falls by gravity to the panel substrate  as
it passes through the coating zone.

Debarker - See Barker.

Debarking - The removal of bark from logs.

Deck - A stack of logs.

Decker - A machine consisting of a wire-covered cylinder, usually
with  an  internal vacuum, over which the suspension of fibers in
water is passed in order to clean the pulp and  to  increase  the
consistency.

Defibrator - A type of disc-refiner.

Diatomaceous   Earth   Filter   -  A  type  of  filter  in  which
diatomaceous earth, a  light,  friable,  siliceous  material,  is
applied to an existing surface prior to filtration.

Dimension Lumber - Lumber sawn to specified dimensions.

Direct  Roll Coating - A method used in applying liquid finishing
materials to flat substrate surfaces.  The equipment consists  of
an  applicator  roll  which  applies  the  liquid material to the
substrate surface, a metering roll which controls  the  thickness
of  the  liquid  material  on  the  applicator roll, and feed and
support rolls which feed the panel substrate through the  coating
device  and  provide support for the panel against the applicator
roll.

Door Skin - The outer wood sheet of a frame-type door.

Double Band Headrig - A pair of  band  saws  used  to  accomplish
initial log breakdown.

Dressed  Lumber  -  Lumber  which,  not to be marketed as "green"
lumber, is  further  processed  by  drying  and  planing.   Other
treatments  such  as  chemical  preservative  treatment  and  end
coating are generally applied.

Dry Decking - See Log Storage.

-------
Dust Log - A product produced by injecting sawdust  into  a  mold
under heat and pressure without chemical binders.

Dyes  -  Synthetic  or natural organic chemicals that are usually
soluble in solvents characterized by good  transparency  and  low
specific gravity.

Edge Jointing - See Jointing.

Edger  - A stationary circular saw that can be laterally adjusted
to rip desired widths of lumber.

Edging - The process of producing  specified  widths  of  boards,
after a log is reduced into desired thickness.

Embossing  -  The  raising  in  relief  of a surface to produce a
design.

End Checking - Cracks which form in logs  or  lumber  because  of
rapid drying out of the ends.

End  Coating  - The application of paraffin or other wax emulsion
to lumber ends in order to retard end checking.

End Jointing - See Jointing.

Epoxv Resin - By-product of the petroleum industry,  commercially
produced  by a reaction between Bisphenol A, made from phenol and
acetone, and Epichlorohydrin, a by-product in the manufacture  of
synthetic glycerine.

Estuarine  Waters -,An inland arm of an ocean or the lower end of
a river which empties into an ocean; mixtures of fresh and saline
waters.

Excelsior - Fine curled wood shavings used especially for packing
fragile items.

Extruded Particleboard - A particleboard manufactured by  forcing
a  mass  of  particles  and  binder through a heated die with the
applied pressure parallel to the faces and in  the  direction  of
extruding.

Extruder  Applicator  - An applicator which applies glue by means
of a ribbon to one surface of a board.

Fabricating - The jointing of pieces of wood by mechanical  means
or adhesives.

Face  Stock  -  Fine  particles  used in fabrication of the outer
layer or the face of particleboard.

Feedworks - Machinery associated with the feeding of logs to  the
head saw.
                                    «*31

-------
Fiber  Preparation  -  The  reduction  of  wood to fiber or pulp,
utilizing mechanical, thermal or chemical methods.

Filler  -  A  liquid  finishing  material,   usually   containing
considerable  quantities  of  pigment,  used  to build up or fill
depressions  and  imperfections  in  the  surface  of  the   wood
substrate.

Finger  Joint - A joint produced by machining lumber ends to form
interlocking finger-like protrusions.

Finishing - Consists of surface  smoothing  such  as  sanding  or
planing,  covering  with liquid coatings or covering with various
sheet materials or combinations of these operations.

Flaker - A particle formation machine which produces mainly  core
stock  and  some  face stock for particleboard fabrication.  This
machine utilizes a series  of  knives  to  reduce  roundwood  and
residues to desirable particle sizes.

Flotation  Clarifier - A device facilitating solids separation by
causing the solids to float to the surface by the aeration of the
waste water.
Fluidization of chips - The process of suspending chips in
for hydraulic transfer.
water
Fluidized   Bed  Principle  -  A  principle  which  produces  the
equalization  of  gravity  on  a  particle  bed  by  an  influent
pressurized  gas  or  liquid.   Intraparticle  friction  causes a
pressure drop resulting in the suspension of the particles.
Flush Door - A door manufactured by covering a wooden frame
a skin.
 with
Forming  Machine  -  A  device  used  to  form  a mat or fiber or
particles.

Fourdrinier Machine - A type of forming  machine  which  utilizes
the gravity dewatering of stock through a wire screen.

Fractionated  Wood  - Wood chips, sawdust, planer shavings, etc.,
derived from roundwood or residual wood.  Fractionated  wood  may
be  a  raw  material  of  some  process  as  in the production of
particleboard or a waste product  of  other  operations  such  as
sawmilling.

Furnish - The material used for mill production.

Furniture Stock - Lumber to be used in furniture manufacture.
      Saw  -  A saw which consists of an array of parallel blades
mounted in a frame which moves up and down as a log is entered.
                                      «i32

-------
Gluing - In fabricating operations, the application  of  glue
lumber by a double roll spreader or extruder applicator.
to
Grain  Printing  -  The  process of printing a natural wood grain
pattern onto the surface of a wood-based product by roll or flat-
plate printing using  a  colored  ink  or  paint  to  produce  an
imitation  wood  grain  effect  of the surface of the prefinished
product.

Green Chain - A handling system for handling green lumber.

Green lumber - Unseasoned wood.

Ground Coating - The cost of colored  material,  usually  opaque,
applied  before  the  grain  printing ink, in producing imitation
wood grain effects for various prefinished  wood-based  products.
Often referred to as base coating.

Groundwood - A fibrous material produced by the stone-grinding of
round wood under a shower of water.

Hammermill - A type of particle preparation device which utilizes
a  mechanical  array of steel arms or hammers to flagellate large
wood chips into smaller pieces.

Hardboard - A compressed fiberboard of 0.50 to 1.20 g/cu m (31 to
70  Ib/cu  ft)  density.    Alternative   term:    fibrous-felted
hardboard.

Hardwood  -  wood  from deciduous or broad leaf trees.  Hardwoods
include oak, walnut, lavant elm, cherry, hickory,  pecan,  maple,
birch, gum, cativo, teak, rosewood and mahogany.

Headrig - All machinery utilized to produce the initial breakdown
of a log into boards, dimensions or cants.

Headsaw  -  A  single diesel or electric powered saw which breaks
down logs into boards.

Heat Curing - The curing of resins by direct heat.

Heat Exchanger - A device which allows the transfer of heat  from
one media to another.

Hemicellulose  -  One  of  a number of substances resembling, but
having simpler structures than that of cellulose,  and  sometimes
resulting  from  the  partial  hydrolysis of cellulose.  The term
hemicellulose is also applied to certain constituents of  starch,
and of the cells of animals.

High-density  Overlay  -  A phenolic resin-impregnated paper most
commonly used to overlay softwood plywood panels.  Resin  content
is  usually  about  45  to  55  percent  and the overlay is self-
bonding.
                                      1*33

-------
Hog Chipper - A device used for reducing the size of particles.

Hog Fuel - Fractionalized wood used to fire a boiler.

Hogged Bark - Bark reduced to a uniform size by  passing  through
an attrition device,

Hot Press - Particleboard mat presses are of three types:

1)   Multi-opening  hydraulic - consists of 20 to 30 shelves with
individual  platens  which  close  simultaneously.   2)    Single
opening  hydraulic  -  mechanically  similar to multi-opening; in
place of numerous shelves, one  long  shelf.   3)   Continuous
roller type press receives mats in continuous ribbon.  Boards are
cut to required lengths.

Hydraulic Debarker - See barker.

Hydraulic Press - See Hot Press.

Hydrocarbon  -  An  organic  compound  containing only carbon and
hydrogen and often occurring in petroleum, natural gas, coal  and
bitumens.

Hydrolysis  -  A  chemical  process  of  decomposition  involving
splitting of a bond and addition of the elements of water.

Insulation Board - A dried mat of interfelted fibrous material.

Jointing - An operation employed to join two or  more  pieces  of
wood   in   fabricated   wood  products.   Depending  on  product
requirements, joints are of three basic types:  edge jointing  or
side-to-side-grain  joints,  end  to-side-grain  joints,  and end
jointing  or  end-to-end-grain  joints.   In   all   joints   the
application  of  adhesives  and the subsequent curing process are
performed.

Kerf Loss - In a saw mill, the volume of wood lost to sawdust.

Kiln Drying - See Lumber Drying.
Kjld-N - Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Total organic nitrogen plus
of a sample.
ammonia
Knife  Coating  -  A  method  used  in  applying liquid finishing
materials, usually of high viscosity, to flat substrate surfaces.
The equipment consists basically of a direct  roll  coater  which
applies  a  heavy  deposit  of liquid material onto the substrate
surface.  Doctor  blades  then  wipe  off  the  excess  material,
filling the low spots and pores.

Kraft Paper - A paper of high strength made of sulfate pulp.  The
paper  is commonly impregnated with various resins to be overlaid
onto softwood plywood.
                                      «*3
-------
Lacquer  -  A   thin-bodied,   quick-drying   coating   material,
consisting  of  a  mixture of solutions of nitrocellulose,  ethyl-
cellulose and natural and synthetic resins which form a hard film
upon drying by evaporation alone.

Lagoon - A pond containing raw or partially treated  waste   water
in which aerobic or anaerobic stabilization occurs.

Laminated  Beam - A structural member in which two or more  pieces
of lumber are joined together face to face usually  employing  an
adhesive.
Laminated   Decking
A  fabricated  wood  product  which  is
manufactured by the use of side-to-side-grain joints.

Land Decking - See Log Storage.

Land Spreading - The disposal of process waste water by spreading
it on land to achieve degradation by soil bacteria.

Leaching  -  Mass  transfer  of  chemicals  to  water  from  wood
materials which are in contact with it.

Lignin  -  An  amorphous polymeric substance related to cellulose
that together with cellulose forms the woody cell walls of plants
and the bonding material between them.

Linear Regression Analysis - A statistical technique for defining
the equation of best fit for two variables.

Log Carriage - A platform on wheels which holds a  log  in  place
and, in running parallel to the saw, feeds the log to be cut.

Log  Driving  - The manned operation of driving or "herding" logs
from one point to another on moving waters.

J&3. Flume - An open channel of water used to feed logs to mills.

£23 Gang Mill - See Gang Saw.

Log Pond - See Log Storing.

Log Raft - An aggregation of floating  logs,  loose  or  bundles,
contained by perimeter logs.

Log  storing  - Retaining large inventories of logs to maintain a
supply.  The four common types of log storing facilities are:

-------
         1)    Dry-decks - logs stacked on land or land-decked
         2)    Wet-decks - land-decked logs sprinkled with water to
              minimize end-checking
         3)    Log Pond - usually long-term storage of logs by
              floating them on a body of water
         4)    Mill Pond - usually short-term storage of logs by
              floating them on a body of water located at the
              mill site,

Log Washing - A prebarking process which is carried out by  means
of sprayers as logs are transported to mill or through storage in
log ponds.

Lumber  Drying  -  The process in which lumber is dried by one of
two methods:

         1)    Air seasoning - boards are segregated according  to
              board  weight,  coated  with chemical preservatives
              and  stacked  in  a  manner   that   will   provide
              sufficient air circulation.
         2)    Kiln drying - a process whereby  green  or  pre-air
              seasoned  boards  are  dried  in  a kiln which is a
              humidity and temperature controlled building.


Lumber Surfacing (Planing) - A finishing process which is carried
out by means of surfacing tools, i.e.,  planer  knives  that  are
attached to a rotating cutterhead.

Machining  -  One  of the several unit operations employed in the
timber products industry to produce a desired shape or form for a
particular wood product.

Mastic Construction Adhesives - Adhesives consisting of  a  thick
dispersion  of various elastomers in an organic solvent, used for
example, in adhering panels to frames or plywood to floor joists.

Mat Formation - Part of the manufacturing process  of  insulation
board, particleboard and hardboard, in which fractionated wood or
fibers are arranged in a rectangular solid configuration prior to
pressing or drying operations.

Mechanical Refining - See Refiner.

Medium-density Overlay - A phenolic resin-impregnated paper, most
commonly  used to overlay softwood plywood panels.  Resin content
is usually about 20 to 25 percent and the overlay  is  not  self-
bonding.

Melamine  Resin  -  A  synthetic,  thermosetting  resin made from
melamine and formaldehyde, which cures quickly at relatively  low
temperatures,  and  is  characterized by high heat resistance and
stability of color.

Melamine-formaldehyde Resin - See Melamine Resin.



                                      we

-------
Melamine-Urea - A mixture of melamine and urea resins.

Metering Bin - A pre-particle formation apparatus  which  ensures
the  homogeneity of wood pieces in order to provide uniformity of
feed flow.

Middle Lamella - A protoplasmic layer  in  wood  which  separates
individual cells.

Mill Feeding - The transportation of logs from log ponds or decks
to a mill for processing.

Mill Pond - See Log Storing.

Millwork  -  Any  of a variety of interior woodwork items usually
decorative in nature.

Mineral Fiber - Fibers of inorganic nature used in the production
of insulation board.

Mixed Media Filtration - A  combination  of  different  materials
through  which  waste  water  or  other  liquid is passed for the
purpose of purification, treatment or conditioning.

Moisture  Proofing  -  The  application  of  moisture   resistant
compounds  to  lumber  to  increase  durability and resistance to
weathering.

Molded Products - Items produced by the molding of wood particles
with resins.

Multiple Saw Headrig - A  headrig  which  has  several  saws  for
varied  cuts,  eliminating  multiple  passes by the headsaw, thus
increasing efficiency.

Narrow-Kerf Saw - A saw with a thinner blade than normally used.


Oligosaccharide - A sugar which contains units of from two up  to
eight simple sugars.

Overrun  -  In  a  saw  mill, the difference between the measured
volume of a log and the actual volume of the lumber produced.

Particleboard   -   A   sheet    material    manufactured    from
lignocellulosic   pieces  or  particles,  as  distinguished  from
fibers, combined with a synthetic resin or other suitable  binder
and  bonded  together  under heat and pressure in a hot-press, or
extruded, by a process in which the entire inter-particle bond is
created by the added binder.

Patching  Material  -  A  high  viscosity,  putty-like  substance
commonly  used to fill knot holes and other large surface defects
in the face veneers of plywood panels as one of the initial steps
in the manufacture of prefinished panels.

-------
Pentachlorophenol - A crystalline compound, C£C15OH,  used  as  a
wood preservative, fungicide and disinfectant.

pjj - A measure of acidity or alkalinity of a water sample.  It is
equal to the negative log of the hydrogen ion concentration.

Phenols  -  A class of aromatic organic compounds in which one or
more hydroxy groups are attached directly to the benzene ring.

Phenol-formaldehyde  Resin  -  A  synthetic,  oil  soluble  resin
produced as a condensation product of phenol and formaldehyde,

Phenolic  Resins  - Synthetic, thermosetting resins, usually made
by the reaction of phenol with an aldehyde.
Picker Roll - Device used to ensure uniform mat thickness in
dry felting operation.
the
Pigment  -  The  fine,  solid  particles  used for color or other
properties in the manufacture of paints and coatings.

Pitch - An organic deposit  composed  of  condensed  hydrocarbons
removed from the wood and which may deposit on the surface of saw
blades.

Planer Shavings - See Fractionated Wood.

Planing  Mill - Consists of planers which produce smooth surfaces
on lumber.

Platens - The flat plates in the  hot-press  which  compress  the
mats into particleboards.

Polyester  Resin  -  A synthetic, thermosetting resin formed by a
chain of molecules, composed alternately of molecules of acid and
alcohol.  The chain formation linking the molecules  together  is
polymerization.

Polymerization  -  A  chemical  reaction  involving  a successive
linkage of molecules.

Polyvinyl  Acetate  Resins  -  Synthetic,  thermoplastic  resins,
commonly used in the manufacture of emulsion coatings.

Polyvinyl  Chloride  Film  -  A  special plastic film produced by
calendering techniques and used in overlaying various  wood-based
substrates to produce textured and printed decorative products.

Prefinished  Panels  -  Any  type  of  wood-based  panel which is
factory finished and requires no further finishing by the  user.

Pregluing  -  Operations  concerned  with  drying,   preservative
dipping  or  spraying, planing, grading, end or edge jointing and
cutting to length.  These are necessary steps to  prepare  lumber
for gluing.

-------
Prepress - A press which prepares particle mats for the hot press
by partial consolidation of fibers.

Preservative  Dipping  -  The  chemical treatment of green lumber
prior to stacking.  Lumber is dipped in a bath  solution  usually
containing pentachlorophenol.

Pressed  Bark  -  Bark  transformed into logs or briquettes under
pressure and heat.

Press Pit - A sump under the press.

Press Platen - See Platen.

Primary Clarifier - The first settling tank through  which  waste
water is passed in a treatment system.

Prime  Coating  or Primer — A special coating designed to provide
adequate adhesion of a coating system to an uncoated wood surface
and thus to allow for the exceptional absorption of the medium.

Product Mix - The  fractional  breakdown  of  the  sum  total  of
different types of products produced in a plant.

Protein Resin - A protein based resin; usually soya based.

Pulping System - A fiber preparation system.

Quad  Band  Headrig  -  Two pairs of band saws used to accomplish
initial log breakdown.

Radio Freguencv Curing - A method of curing synthetic resin glues
by radio frequency  heat  generated  by  the  application  of  an
alternating  electric current, oscillating in the radio frequency
range, to a dielectric material.

Refiners - Particle forming machines.  Refiners are of two types:

         1)   Mechanical Refiner -  a  particle  forming  machine
              consisting  of  either  two  rotating  disks  or  a
              rotating  disk  and  a   stationary   plate.    The
              particles  produced in passing through the rotating
              apparatus are fine in nature and thus are used  for
              face stock.
         2)   Thermo-mechanical Refiner - A  disk  type  particle
              forming  machine  which employs the aid of heat and
              pressure to soften the feed wood, producing  fibers
              that  are  longer  and  stronger  than  those  of a
              standard mechanical refiner.

Rehumidification - The addition of moisture to a  finished  board
to prevent warping.

-------
Resin  - A semi-solid or solid mixture of organic or carbon-based
compounds which may be drawn from animal, vegetable or  synthetic
sources and may be thermosetting or thermoplastic.

Resin-Impregnated  Paper  - A type of paper, most commonly either
heavy kraft paper or refined alpha paper impregnated  to  varying
degrees  of  saturation  with  various  types  of  resins for the
purpose of overlaying  plywood  and  other  types  of  wood-based
panels.   The  most common types of resins used are: melamine and
phenolic formaldehyde, polyester resins and acrylic types.

Resonance  Frequency  Device  -  A  heating  device  using   high
frequency radio waves to internally cure resins in particleboard.

Resorcinol  -  A  crystalline  phenol  with the formula C<>Hi*(OH)2
obtained from various resins or artifically and  used  in  making
resins.

Reverse Roll Coating - A method used in applying liquid finishing
materials  to  flat  substrate  surfaces.  The equipment consists
basically of  two  parts;  first,  a  direct  roll  coater  which
deposits  a  heavy  coat  of  liquid  material onto the substrate
surface; second, a highly polished, chrome plated roll,  rotating
in  the  opposite  direction of the applicator roll.  The reverse
acting roll wipes and polishes the substrate surface, filling the
low spots and pores and removing the excess liquid material.

Ring Debarker - See Barker.

River Impoundment - A natural or man-made area of a  river  which
is suited for the grouping and storage of logs.

Rotary  Jet  Drum  Dryer  -  A  particle dryer which uses a high-
velocity air jet to produce a  spiral  flow  of  particles  in  a
horizontal drum.

Roundwood - Wood that is still in the form of a log.

Rubber-Base  Contact  Cement - Typically a dispersion of neoprene
elastomer in organic solvents.  Used  quite  extensively  in  the
bonding   of   decorative   plastic   laminates   to  plywood  or
particleboard normally applied to both surfaces  and  allowed  to
dry to a tack-free state before assembly.

Sawdust - See Fractionated Wood.

Saw  Mill - A plant which consists of varied operations necessary
to reduce the raw material, i.e., log or cant to a  useable  wood
product.

Scrag  Mill  - Generally used for small diameter logs, consisting
of one or more pairs of circular saws with each pair in tandem.

Sealer - A liquid finishing material which is  applied  with  the
primary purpose of stopping the absorption of succeeding coats.

-------
Seal Water - Water used as a seal in vacuum pumps.

Sedimentation - The gravity separation of suspended solids.

Septic  Tank  - A single-story settling tank in which the settled
sludge is in immediate  contact  with  the  waste  water  flowing
through  the  tank,  while  the  organic solids are decomposed by
anaerobic bacterial action.

Settling  Ponds  -  An  impoundment  for  the  settling  out   of
settleable solids.

Settling Tank - A tank or basin, in which water, domestic sewage,
or  other liquid containing, settleable solids, is retained for a
sufficient  time,  and  in  which  the  velocity   of   flow   is
sufficiently  low  to  remove  by gravity a part of the suspended
matter.

Setworks - The devices used to secure and position the logs on  a
carriage for cutting.

Shake  -  A  shingle  split from a piece of log, usually three or
four ft long.

Sheathing - Asphalt impregnated insulation board.

Shotgun - A piston-cylinder arrangement, steam, air, or hydraulic
driven, which powers the log carriage.


Size - An additive which increases water resistance.

Slash - To cut logs to size.

Softwood - Wood from evergreen or needle bearing trees.


Solvent Base Coatings - All non-water base or  non-water  soluble
coating materials.

Solvents  -  Products which dissolve or disperse the film forming
constituents  of  surface   coating   materials   which   usually
volatilize  during  drying  and therefore do not become a part of
the  film  itself.   Solvents  are  required   to   control   the
consistency  of  the liquid finishing material to obtain suitable
applicating properties.

Sound Deadening Board - A type of insulation board  that  has  to
meet only minimal industrial standards.

Special  Plastic  Films  -  A wide variety of thermoplastic films
widely  used  for  overlaying   various   types   of   wood-based
substances.

-------
Specialty Mill - A saw mill which produces a particular specialty
item rather than a general range of products.

Spray  Booth  -  An  enclosure,  used  in  conjunction with spray
coating equipment, designed to provide  fire  and  air  pollution
protection  by  removal  of  both the solvent fumes and the spray
mist associated with spray coating operations.  Spray booths  are
of  two  types:   1)   a  water-wash  type which uses water as the
filtering media and 2)  a dry-type which uses dry filter elements.

Spray Coating -  A  method  used  in  applying  liquid  finishing
materials   to   almost   all  types  of  wood-based  substrates,
accomplished by various types of spray equipment including  fixed
gun, reciprocating arm and rotary arm spray equipment,


Spray Evaporation - A method of waste water disposal in which the
water  in a holding lagoon equipped with spray nozzles is sprayed
into the air to expedite evaporation.

Spray Irrigation - A method of disposing of  some  organic  waste
waters by spraying them on land, usually from pipes equipped with
spray nozzles.

Stabilizers  -  Materials  such  as  compounds  of  lead, tin and
cadmium-barium commonly added  to  resin  compounds  to  minimize
chemical  degradation  when  the  material is exposed to elevated
temperatures or ultraviolet rays of the sun.

Stain - A transparent or semi-transparent  liquid  material  made
from  dyes,  finely  divided  pigments  or  chemicals  which when
applied to wood surfaces changes the color without disturbing the
texture or markings.

Staining - A spraying process which gives lumber a more  pleasing
color.

Steaming - Treating wood material with steam to soften it.

Substrate  -  A  material  such  as a wood-based panel coating or
adhesive containing substance  is  applied  for  the  purpose  of
finishing or bonding of an overlay.

Surge Area or Bin - An area in the forming machine which consists
of  a  bin that is kept at a constant level so that continuity of
particle flow is maintained.

Synthetic Resins - Complex, organic semisolid or solid  materials
built  up by chemical reaction of comparatively simple compounds.
Synthetic resins often approximate the natural resins in  various
physical   properties;    namely,  luster,  fracture,  comparative
brittleness, insolubility in  water,  fusibility,  or  plasticity
when  exposed to heat and pressure and, at a certain more or less
narrow temperature range before fusion, a degree of  rubber  like

-------
extensibility.   They commonly deviate widely from natural resins
in chemical constitution and behavior with reagents.

Tack - The ability of a resin to adhere.

Thermomechanical Pulping - Fiber preparation by disk refining and
pretreatment of the wood by pressurized steam.
Thermomechanical
- See Refining.
Thermoplastic Resins - Resins which soften and  may
under heat and pressure.
                           be  reformed
Thermosetting  Resins  -  Resins which undergo permanent physical
and chemical change through the application of heat and pressure.
Ties - Conventional rail and track ties.

TLM 96 - The concentration of a toxic substance that causes
of a group of test organisms to die by the end of 96 hours.
                                   half
TOP  Coat  -  A liquid finishing material, usually applied as the
final finish coating for any prefinished wood product.

Total Tree Harvesting -  The  in  situ  chipping  and  subsequent
utilization of a whole tree.

T-PO4-P - Total phosphate as phosphorus.

Trimming - The final sawing of boards, prior to drying, to square
ends of lumber and remove defects.

TSS   (Total  Suspended  Solids)  -  Total  material retained by a
filler of a specified porosity, expressed in mg/1.

Tunnel Dryer - An enclosure through which wet mats are passed and
dried by means of forced hot air.

Turbidity - 1) A condition in water or waste water caused by  the
presence  of  suspended  matter,  resulting in the scattering and
absorption of light rays.  2) A measure  of  the  fine  suspended
matter in liquids.  3) An analytical quantity usually reported in
arbitrary  turbidity  units  determined  by measurements of light
detraction.
Urea-formaldehyde  Resin  -  A  synthetic
condensing urea with formaldehyde.
                  resin   produced   by
Urea-Resin  Glue - A synthetic-resin adhesive system based on the
thermosetting,  urea-formaldehyde  resin,  used   in   overlaying
veneers and hardboard onto particleboard substrates as well as in
other wood gluing operations.

Y  or  U-Grooves - Machine cut grooves, cut into wood-based panel
substrates  in  the  production  of  prefinished  wall  paneling.
                                    it i* 3

-------
Grooves  are  usually  either  V or U-shaped and are regularly or
random-spaced throughout the length of the panel,

Varnish  -  A  homogeneous  transparent  or  translucent   liquid
material  which,  when  applied  as  a  thin  film,  hardens upon
exposure   to   air   or   heat,   by   evaporation,   oxidation,
polymerization  or  a  combination  of these to form a continuous
film that imparts protective or  decorative  properties  to  wood
finishes.
Veneer Cutting - There are four basic methods:
                                                              the
         1)   Rotary lathing - cutting continuous strips  by
              use of a stationary knife and a lathe.
         2)   Slicing - consists of a  stationary  knife  and  an
              upward  and  downward moving log bed.  On each down
              stroke a slice of veneer is cut.
         3)   Stay log - A flitch is attached to a "stay log," or
              a long flanged, steel casting mounted in  eccentric
              chucks on a conventional lathe.
         4)   Sawn veneer - veneer cut by  a  circular  type  saw
              called  a segment saw.  This method produces only a
              very small quantity of veneer.  (see  also  Segment
              Saw)

Veneer  Drying  - Freshly cut veneers are ordinarily unsuited for
gluing because of their  wetness  and  are  also  susceptible  to
molds, fungi, and blue stain.  Veneer is usually dried as soon as
possible, to a moisture content of about 10 percent.

Vinyl  Acetate  - A colorless liquid with the formula CH2CHCO2CH3
used in the manufacture of synthetic vinyl resins.

Vinyl Resins - Synthetic,  thermoplastic  resins  formed  by  the
polymerization  of  a  vinyl compound, with or without some other
substance.

Water Base or Water  Reducible  Coatings  -  Emulsions  (of  high
molecular  weight), dispersions (of fine particle size) and other
water soluble coating systems which, at  application  of  solids,
comprise  a  minimum  of  80 per cent of their volatile as water,
with the balance as exempt solvent.


Water  Soluble  Adhesive  -  An  adhesive  requiring  water   for
preparation;   used   in   product   fabrication   and  finishing
operations.

Wax Emulsion - A sizing compound.

Wet Decking - See Log Storing.

Wet Scrubber - An air pollution control device which involves the
wetting of particles in an air stream and the impingement of  wet
or dry particles on collecting surfaces followed by flushing.

-------
Wood Chips - See Fractionated wood.

Wood  Flour  - Produced from the attrition of wood materials into
very small particles.

-------
                                                TABLE  104

                                            CONVERSION TABLE
cr>
               MULTIPLY
acre
acre - feet
board foot
British Thermal
  Unit
British Thermal
  Unit/pound
cubic feet/minute
cubic feet/second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Fahrenheit
feet
gallon
gallon/Canute
horsepower
inches
inches of mercury
pounds
pounds/cubic ft
million gallons/day
mile
pound/square inch
   (guage)
square feet
square inches
1000 board ft
tons  (short)

yard
                              ABBREVIATION

                                ac
                                ac ft
                                bd ft
                                BTU

                                BTU/lb
      by

 CONVERSION

   0.405
1233.5
  12.0
   0.252

   0.555
                                                                      TO OBTAIN
ABBREVIATION

   ha
   cu m
   cu ft
   kg cal

   kg cal/kg
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
oF
ft
gal
gpm
hp
in
in Hg
Ib
Ib/cu ft
mgd
mi
psig
sq ft
sq in
1000 bd ft
ton
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555 (°F-32)*
0.3048
3.785
0.0631
0.7457
2.54
0.03342
0.454
16.05
3,785
1.609
(0.06805 psig +1)*
0.0929
6.452
2.36
0.907
cu nyftun
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
°C
m
1
I/sec
kw
cm
atm
kg
kg/cu m
cu m/day
km
atm
sq m
sq cm
cu m
kkg
                                yd
   0.9144
   m
hectares
cubic meters
cubic feet
kilogram-calories

kilogram calories/
 kilogram
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters/minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
liters/second
kilowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
kilograms
kilograms/cubic meters
cubic meters/day
kilometer
atmospheres
 (absolute)
square centimeters
square centimeters
cubic meters
metric tons
 (1000 kilograms)
meters
         *Actual conversion, not a multiplier

-------

-------

-------