DRAFT
          DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR
      EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
 AND NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
         TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY
VENEER/PLYWOOD AND HARDBOARD, WOOD PRESERVING
        VENEER/PLYWOOD AND HARDBOARD
                  PREPARED BY
   ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, INC.
              GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA
                   JUNE, 1973
               WOOD PRESERVING
                  PREPARED BY
     MISSISSIPPI FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATORY
           MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY
                   MAY, 1973
                     FOR:
 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-------
                                 NOTICE
The attached document is a DRAFT CONTRACTOR'S REPORT.  It includes tech-
nical information and recommendations submitted by the Contractor to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") regarding the sub-
ject industry.  It is being distributed for review and comment only.  The
report is not an official EPA publication and it has not been reviewed by
the Agency.

The report, including the recommendations, will be undergoing extensive
review by EPA, Federal and State agencies, public interest organizations
and other interested groups and persons during the coming weeks.  The
report and in particular the contractor's recommended effluent guidelines
and standards of performance is subject to change in any and all respects.

The regulations to be published by EPA under Sections 304(b) and 306 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, will be based to a
large extent on the report and the comments received on it.  However,
pursuant to Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Act, EPA will also consider
additional pertinent technical and economic information which is developed
in the course of review of this report by the public and within EPA.  EPA
is currently performing an economic impact analysis regarding the subject
industry, which will be taken into account as part of the review of the
report.  Upon completion of the review process,  and prior to final pro-
mulgation of regulations, an EPA report will be issued setting forth EPA's
conclusions regarding the subject industry, effluent limitations guide-
lines and standards of performance applicable to such industry.  Judgments
necessary to promulgation of regulations under Sections 304(b) and 306 of
the Act, of course, remain the responsibility of EPA.  Subject to these
limitations, EPA is making this draft contractor's report available in
order to encourage the widest possible participation of interested per-
sons in the decision making process at the earliest possible time.

The report shall have standing in any EPA proceeding or court proceeding
only to the extent that it represents the views of the Contractor who
studied the subject industry and prepared the information and recommenda-
tions.  It cannot be cited, referenced, or represented in any respect in
any such proceedings as a statement of EPA's views regarding the subject
industry.

                  U. S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
                  Office  of Air and Water  Programs
                  Effluent  Guidelines  Division
                  Washington,  D.  C.   20460

-------
                            DRAFT-


                   DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR
                EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES
                 AND STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE
                   TIMBER PRODUCTS INDUSTRY:
               VENEER/PLYWOOD AND HARDBOARD
Prepared by:
Environmental  Science and Engineering, Inc
2324 Southwest 34th Street
Gainesville, Florida   32601
Under Contract No.  68-01-1506
June, 1973
                       WOOD PRESERVING
Prepared by
Dr. Warren S. Thompson
Mississippi Forest Products Laboratory
Mississippi State University
Post Office Drawer FP
Mississippi State, Mississippi  39762
Under EPA Project No. R801308
May, 1973
                             FOR:
        UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-------
DRAFT


                          ABSTRACT


This document presents the findings of an extensive study  of
the timber products industry by Environmental Science and
Engineering, Inc., (Veneer/Plywood and Hardboard) and Missi-
ssippi Forest Products Laboratory  (Wood Preserving), for the
purpose of recommending to the Environmental Protection Agency,
Effluent Limitations Guidelines, Federal Standards of Perfor-
mance, and Pretreatment Standards  for the industry, to imple-
ment Sections 304, 306, and 307 of the "Act."

Effluent limitations guidelines contained herein set forth
the degree of effluent reduction attainable through the ap-
plication of the best practicable  control technology currently
available and the degree of effluent reduction attainable
through the application of the best available technology eco-
nomically achievable which must be achieved by existing point
sources by July 1, 1977 and July 1, 1983, respectively.  The
Standards of Performance for new sources contained herein  set
forth the degree of effluent reduction which is achievable
through the application of the best available demonstrated
control technology, processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives.

The hardboard industry has been divided into two subcategor-
ies; dry process hardboard and wet process hardboard.  The
proposed regulations for the dry process hardboard  industry
for all three levels of technology set forth above establish
the requirement of no discharge of wastewaters to navigable
water.  The proposed regulations for the wet process hard-
board industry for July 1, 1977 are a discharge of BODs and
suspended solids of 1.6 kilograms  per ton (3.2 pounds per  ton)
and 2.8 kilograms per ton (5.6 pounds per ton), respectively.
The recommended discharge limitations for July 1, 1983 for
BODs and suspended solids are 0.2  kilograms per ton (0.4
pounds per ton) and 1.1 kilograms  per ton (2.1 pounds per  ton),
respectively.  The recommended Standards of Performance for
new sources are the same as those  for July 1, 1983.

The veneer and plywood industry is considered as one category
of the timber products industry without further subcategoriza-
tion.   The proposed regulations for all three levels of tech-
nology set forth above establish the requirement of no dis-
charge of wastewaters to navigable waters, with special
considerations for plants with existing steam vats.

The best practicable treatment and control technology currently
available and the best available treatment and control
                             111
   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW-BY 'EPA.

-------
DRAFT
technology  economically achievable are defined for the wood
preserving  industry, along with technology applicable to new
sources.  Effluent limitations commensurate with these levels
of technology are recommended for each of four industry sub-
categories.

An evaluation of the results has shown that the most serious
waste problem in terms both of volume and quality of effluent
is at plants  that steam condition stock prior to treatment
with oily preservatives.  Among plants that condition stock
by other means,  treat with water-soluble chemicals, or use
non-pressure  processes for preservative treatment, a zero
discharge of  process water is currently practical.

Supportive  data  and rationale for development of the proposed
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards of Performance
are contained in this document.
                              iv
   NOTICE.  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECCMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
                          CONTENTS
Section                                                 Page

I            Conclusions                                  1

II           Recommendations                              5

III          Introduction                                 9
               Purpose and Authority                      9
               Summary of Methods                        10
               General Description of the Industry       11
               Inventory of the Industry                 17

IV           Process Description and Industry
              Categorization                             41
               Process Description-Veneer and Plywood    41
               Process Description-Hardboard             52
               Process Description-Wood Preserving       65
               Industry Categorization                   68
               Veneer and Plywood-Subcategorization      68
               Hardboard Industry-Subcategorization      72
               Wood Preserving-Subcategorization         75

V            Water Use and Waste Characterization        79
               Part A:  Veneer and Plywood               79
               Part B:  Hardboard                       107
                        Dry Process Hardboard           107
                        Wet Process Hardboard           115
               Part C:  Wood Preserving                 137
                        Wastewaters Containing
                         Entrained Oils                 137
                        Salt-Type Preservatives and
                         Fire Retardants                144
                        Raw Waste Loading Data          144
                        Sources of Wastewater           153

VI           Selection of Pollutant Parameters          159
               Wastewater Parameters of Pollutional
                Significance                            159
               Discussion of Pollutant Parameters       160
                              v

-------
                     CONTENTS  (Continued)
Section
VII          Control  and  Treatment  Technology           163
               Part A:  Control  and Treatment
                          Technology in  the Veneer
                          and  Plywood Industry           163
               Part B:  Control  and Treatment
                          Technology in  the
                          Hardboard  Industry             170
                           Dry Process Hardboard         170
                           Wet Process Hardboard         170
               Part C:  Control  and Treatment
                          Technology in  the Wood
                          Preserving Industry            191
                           Status  of Technology in
                            Industry                    191
                           Status  of Pollution Control
                            in Industry                  191
                           Treatment and Control
                            Technology                   196

VIII         Cost, Energy,  and Non-Water
              Quality Aspects                          245
               Part A:  Veneer and  Plywood              245
               Part B:  Hardboard                      251
                           Cost and  Reduction Benefits
                            of Alternative Treatment and
                            Control  Technologies  for Dry
                            Process  Hardboard            251
                           Cost and  Reduction Benefits
                            of Alternative Treatment and
                            Control  Technologies  for Wet
                            Process  Hardboard            252
               Part C:  Wood  Preserving                257
                           Alternate Treatment and
                            Control  Technologies         257
                           Engineering Estimates  for
                            a  Hypothetical Subcategory
                            1  Plant                      257
                           Engineering Estimates  for
                            a  Hypothetical Subcategory
                            2  Plant                      258
                           Non-Water Quality Aspects     259
                              VI

-------
                    CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
IX           Effluent Reduction Attainable Through
              the Application of the Best Practicable
              Control Technology Currently Available -
              Effluent Limitations Guidelines           261
               Introduction                             261
               Veneer and Plywood Industry              262
               Dry Process Hardboard Industry           264
               Wet Process Hardboard Industry           266
               Wood Preserving Industry                 268

X            Effluent Reduction Attainable Through
              the Application of the Best Available
              Technology Economically Achievable -
              Effluent Limitations Guidelines           279
               Introduction                             279
               Veneer and Plywood Industry              280
               Dry Process Hardboard Industry           280
               Wet Process Hardboard Industry           280
               Wood Preserving Industry                 282

XI           New Source Performance Standards           291
               Introduction                             291
               Veneer and Plywood Industry              291
               Dry Process Hardboard Industry           292
               Wet Process Hardboard Industry           292
               Wood Preserving Industry                 292

XII          Acknowledgements                           299

XIII         References                                 301

XIV          Glossary                                   315

             Appendix A                                 331

             Appendix B                                 357
                             VII

-------
                           TABLES


Number                     Title                         Page

   1        Consumption of Principle  Preservatives  and
             Fire Retardants of Reporting  Plants  in the
             United States                               16

   2        Summary of Veneer and Plywood  Plants  in the
             United States                               18

   3        Forest Industries 1968 Plywood Statistics     26

   4        Softwood Plywood Production  for 1972          28

   5        Hardwood Plywood Production  in the
             United States                               29

   6        Softwood Plywood Production  in the
             United States                               29

   7        Inventory of Hardboard Manufacturing
             Facilities                                   31

   8        Wood  Preserving  Plants  in  the  United  States
             by State and Type                            36

   9        Materials Treated in  the United States  by
             Product  and Preservatives,  1967-1971         38

  10        Ingredients  of Typical  Protein,  Phenolic
             and  Urea Glue Mixes                          49

  11        Current  and  Projected  Adhesive  Consumption
             in the  Plywood  Industry                      50

  12        Classification of Hardboard by  Surface,
             Finish,  Thickness  and  Physical  Properties    66

  13        Some  Properties  of  United States Woods        81

  14        Winter Characteristics  of Oregon Log Ponds
             Part A:  Chemical Characteristics           83
             Part B:  Physical Characteristics           84

  15         Summer Characteristics  of Oregon Log Ponds
             Part A:  Chemical Characteristics           85
             Part B:  Physical Characteristics           86
                             IX

-------
                     TABLES  (Continued)

Number                     Title                        Page
  16        Winter Wasteload from Oregon Log Ponds       87
  17        Ponderosa Pine Wet Deck Data                 88
  18        Analysis of Sample Taken from a Wet Decking
             Recycle Pond                                88
  19        Characteristics of Debarking Effluents       91
  20        Characteristics of Steam Vat Discharges      92
  21        Characteristics of Hot Water Steam
             Vat Discharges                              94
  22a       Analysis of Drier Washwater                  95
  22°       Waste Loads from Veneer Driers               96
  23-A      Average Chemical Analysis of Plywood Glue    98
  23-B      Average Chemical Analysis of Plywood
             Glue Washwater                             100
  23-C      Characteristics of Glue Washwater           101
  23-D      Amount of Adhesive Washwater Generated in
             Southern Pine Plywood Plants               102
  23-E      Glue Waste Discharge Measurements           103
  24        Wastewater Flow and Source                  108
  25        Average Chemical Analysis of Plywood Resin   110
  26        Analyses of Some Common Species of Wood     124
  27        Wastewater Discharges from Wet Process
             Hardboard                                  132
  28        Raw Wastewater Characteristics from Wet
             Process Hardboard                          133
  29        Progressive Changes in Selected Character-
             istics of Water Recycled in Closed
             Steaming Operations                        140

-------
                     TABLES (Continued)


Number                     Title                        Page

  30        Phenol and COD Values  for Effluents  from
             Thirteen Wood Preserving Plants             143

  31        Ratio Between COD and  BOD for Vapor  Drying
             and Creosote Effluent Wastewaters           146

  32        Range of Pollutant Concentrations  in
             Wastewater from a Plant Treating with CCA-
             and FCAP-Type Preservatives  and  a Fire
             Retardant                                  146

  33        Raw Waste Loadings for Plant  No.  1           147

  34        Raw Waste Loadings for Plant  No.  2           148

  35        Raw Waste Loadings for Plant  No.  3           149

  36        Raw Waste Loadings for Plant  No.  4           150

  37        Raw Waste Loadings for Plant  No.  5           151

  38        Average JRaw Waste Loadings for Five  Wood-
             Preserving Plants                          152

  39        Source and Volume of Water Discharged and
             Recycled per Da)  by a Typical Wood-
             Preserving Plant                           156

  40        The Adhesive Mixes Used (Cascophen 3566C)    169

  41        Representative Process Water  Filter
             Efficiencies                               177

  42        Primary Settling Tank  Efficiency             181

  43        Treatment Efficiency of Biological Systems  184

  44        Example of an ASB System Performance
             Related to Temperature                     189

  45        Method of Disposal of  Wastewater by  Wood
             Preserving Plants in  the United States     192
                             XI

-------
                     TABLES  (Continued)


Number                     Title                        Pag<

  46        Method of Disposal of Wood Preserving
             Wastewater by Region                       192

  47        Compliance with  State and Federal Water
             Standards Among Wood Preserving Plants
             in the United States                       193

  48        Plans of Wood Preserving Plants not in
             Compliance with Water Standards in the
             United States                              193

  49        Type of Secondary Wastewater Treating
             Facilities Installed or Planned by Wood
             Preserving Plants in the United States     194

  50        Type of Secondary Wastewater Treating
             Facilities Installed or Planned by Wood
             Preserving Plants by Region                195

  51        Efficiencies of Oil Separation Process      198

  52        Effect of Lime Flocculation on COD and
             Phenol Content of Treating Plant Effluent  202

  53        Toxic Constituents in the Principal Salt-
             Type Preservatives and Fire Retardant
             Chemicals Used  in the United States        204

  54        Concentrations of Pollutants Before and
             After Laboratory Treatment of Wastewater
             from Two Sources                           206

  55        Concentration of Pollutants in Plant
             Wastewater Containing Salt-Type Preserv-
             atives and Fire Retardants Before and
             After Field Treatment                      207

  56        BOD, COD and Phenol Loading and Removal
             Rates for Pilot Trickling Filter Processing
             a Creosote Wastewater                      211

  57        Relationship Between BOD Loading and Treat-
             ability for Pilot Trickling Filter Process-
             ing a Creosote Wastewater                  212
                             XII

-------
                     TABLES (Continued)


Number                     Title                        Pag(

  58        Sizing of Trickling Filter for a Wood
             Preserving Plant                           213

  59        Substrate Removal at Steady-State Con-
             ditions in Activated Sludge Units Contain-
             ing Creosote Wastewater                    217

  60        Reduction in Pentachlorophenol and COD  in
             Wastewater Treated in Activated Sludge
             Units                                      218

  61        Results of Laboratory Tests  of Soil
             Irrigation Method of Wastewater Treatment  220

  62        Reduction of COD and Phenol  Content in
             Wastewater Treated by Soil  Irrigation       221

  63        Average Monthly Phenol and BOD Concentra-
             tions in Effluent from Oxidation Pond  at
             Weyerhaeuser"s DeQueen, Arkansas Operation:
             1968 and 1970                              225

  64        Effect of Chlorination on the COD and
             Phenolic Content of Pentachlorophenol  and
             Creosote Wastewaters                       226

  65        Effect of Chlorination with  Calcium Hypo-
             chlorite on the Pentachlorophenol Content
             of Wastewater                              228

  66        Effect of Chlorination with  Chlorine Gas
             on the Pentachlorophenol Content of
             Wastewater                                 228

  67        Effect of Chlorination of Pentachlolophenol
             Waste on COD                               229

  68        Chlorine Required to Eliminate Taste in
             Aqueous Solutions of Various Phenolic
             Compounds                                  231

  69        Chlorine Demand of M-Cresol  After Various
             Contact Times                              232
                            Xlll

-------
                     TABLES  (Continued)


Number                     Title                        Pagt

  70        Chlorophenol Concentration in Creosote
             Wastewater Treated with Chlorine           234

  71        Summary of Wastewater Characteristics
             for 17 Exemplary Wood Preserving Plants    241

  72        Summary of Waste Loads from Treatment
             Alternatives                               245

  73        Effluent Limitations Based on Best
             Practicable Control Technology Currently
             Available:  Wood Preserving Industry       272

  74        Effluent Limitations Based on Best
             Practicable Control Technology Currently
             Available:  Wood Preserving Industry       272

  75        Recommended Premissible Discharge of
             Specific Pollutants in Non-Process Waste-
             water from Wood Preserving Plants in
             Subcategories 2, 3, and 4.                 274

  76        Recommended Permissible Discharges of
             Metals from Wood Preserving Plants in
             Subcategory 1 That Employ the Same Retort
             for Both Oil-Type and Salt-Type Preserv-
             atives                                     276

  77        Effluent Limitations Based on Best Avail-
             able Technology Economically Achievable    288

  78        Effluent Limitations Based on Best Avail-
             able Technology Economically Achievable    288

  79        Recommended Premissible Discharge of Metals
             from Plants in Subcategory 1 That Employ
             One Retort to Apply Preservative Treatment
             with Oil-Type and Salt-Type Preservatives  290

  80        Standards of Performance for New Sources    295
                              xiv

-------
                     TABLES (Continued)


Number                     Title

  81        Standards of Performance for New Sources

  82        Recommended Permissible Discharge of Metals:
             Plants Applying Dual Treatment of Salt-
             Type and Oil-Type Preservatives, and Plants
             Using a Single Retort to Apply Both Preserv-
             atives                                     297
                             xv

-------
                          FIGURES


Number                     Title                        Page

  1         Simplified Process Flow Diagram for
             Veneer and Plywood Production               13

  2         Distribution of Softwood Veneer and
             Plywood Mills Throughout the United
             States                                      21

  3         Distribution of Hardwood Veneer and
             Plywood Mills Throughout the United
             States                                      22

  4         Distribution of Veneer and Plywood Mills
             in the State of Oregon                      23

  5         Distribution of Veneer and Plywood Mills
             in the State of North Carolina              24

  6         United States Forest Areas                   25

  7         Growth of the Plywood Industry in the
             United States                               30

  8         Geographical Distribution of Hardboard
             Manufacturing Facilities in the United
             States                                      33

  9         Detailed Process Flow Diagram for Veneer
             and Plywood                                 43

 10         Wet Barking Process Diagram                  45

 11         Raw Material Handling in the Hardboard
             Industry                                    53

 12         Typical Dry Process Hardboard Mill           54

 13         Typical Wet Process Hardboard Mill           55

 14         Process Flow Diagram for a Typical
             Wood Preserving Plant                       69

 15         Water Balance for a Plywood Mill Pro-
             ducing 9.3 Million Square Meters per
             Year on a 9.53 Millimeter Basis            104
                            xvi i

-------
                     FIGURES  (Continued)


Number                     Title                      Page

 16         Water Balance for a Typical Dry Process
             Hardboard Mill                           114

 17         Water Usage in Raw Materials Handling
             in the Hardboard Industry                116

 18         Water Use in the Explosion Process        118

 19      -   Effect of Preheating Time and Tempera-
             ture on Yield                            122

 20         The Chemical Components of Wood           125

 21         Relation Between Dissolved Lignin and
             Wood                                     126

 22         Process Water Recycle in a Typical
             Wet Process Hardboard Mill               128

 23         Process Water Recycle in a Hardboard
             Mill Using the Explosion Process         129

 24         Water Balance for a Typical Wet
             Process Hardboard Mill                   135

 25         Variation in Oil Content of Effluent
             with Time Before and After Initiating
             Closed Steaming                          138

 26         Variation in COD of Effluent with Time
             Before and After Closed Steaming         139

 27         Variation in COD Content and Waste-
             water Flow Rate with Time                142

 28         Relationship Between BOD and COD
             for Wastewater from a Creosote
             Treating Operation                       145

 29         Source and Volume of Daily Waste Use
             and Recycling and Wastewater Source
             at a Typical Wood-Preserving Plant        155

 30         Plywood Plant Wash Water Reuse
             System                                   168
                           XVlll

-------
                    FIGURES (Continued)


Number                     Title                       Page

 31         Inplant Treatment and Control  Techniques
             at Mill No.  7                             175

 32         Typical Wet Process  Hardboard  Mill  with
             Pre-Press                                 176

 33         Inplant Treatment and Control  Techniques
             at Mill No.  3                             178

 34         Typical Wet Process  Hardboard  Mill  with
             Savo  System                               180

 35         Variation of Effluent BOD  and  Suspended
             Solids as a Function of Time  for Mill
             No.  2                                     186

 36         Variation of Effluent BOD  and  Suspended
             Solids as a Function of Time  for Mill
             No.  3                                     187

 37         Variation of Effluent BOD  and  Suspended
             Solids as a  Function of Time  for Mill
             No.  4                                     188

 38         Effect of Detention  Time on  Oil  Re-
             moval by Gravity Separation               199

 39         Determination of  Reaction  Rate Constant
             for a Creosote Wastewater                 215

 40         COD Removal from  a Creosote  Wastewater
             by Aerated Lagoon without Sludge           216
             Return

 41         Phenol Content  in Weyerhaeuser's
             Oxidation Pond Effluent Before  and
             After Installation  in June, 1966 of
             Aerator                                    224

 42         Relationship  Between  Weight  of Activated
             Carbon Added,  and Removal of  COD and
             Phenols  from a Creosote Wastewater         236
                            xix

-------
                      FIGURES  (Continued)


Number                     Title                       Pag<

 43         Wastewater Flow Diagram for Wood
             Preserving Plant  Employing an Ex-
             tended Aeration Waste Treatment
             System in Conjunction with Holding
             Lagoons and Soil  Irrigation               242

 44         Wastewater Flow Diagram for Wood
             Preserving Plant  Employing Chemical
             Flocculation, Sand Filtration, and
             Soil Irrigation                           243

 45         Wastewater Flow Diagram for a Wood
             Preserving Plant  Employing an
             Oxidation Pond in Conjunction with
             an Aerated Raceway                        244
                             xx

-------
DRAFT
                          SECTION  I

                         CONCLUSIONS
VENEER AND PLYWOOD INDUSTRY

For the purpose of establishing Effluent  Limitations  Guidelines
and Standards of Performance, the veneer  and plywood  industry
as a whole serves as a single logical category.   Factors  such
as age, size of plant, process employed,  climate,  and waste  con
trol technologies do not justify the segmentation  of  the  indus-
try into any subcategories.  Similarities in waste loads  and
available treatment and control technologies further  substan-
tiate this.

It is concluded that by July 1, 1977 all  veneer  and plywood
mills except those with existing steam vats can  achieve  zero
discharge of wastewaters to navigable water.  This can be
achieved by the application of existing technology.   Plants
with existing steam vats may be able to do  likewise,  but  the
technology is not yet established.  It is,  therefore, believed
that mills with existing steam vats should  be given special
consideration, keeping in mind that with  biological treatment
BOD loads can be reduced to about 80 kilograms  (180 pounds)
per day for the typical mill producing 9.3  million square
meters (100 million square feet) per year on a  9.53 millimeter
(three-eights inch) basis.

HARDBOARD INDUSTRY

For the purpose of further establishing Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards of Performance,  the hardboard manu-
facturing industry (which is a category of  the  timber products
industry) has been broken down into two subcategories--dry
process hardboard and wet process hardboard--because  of  their
wide variation in process and wastewater  flow.   Factors  such
as age, size of plant, climate and waste  control technologies
do not justify the segmentation of the industry  into  further
subcategories.  Similarities within the two subcategories in
waste loads and available treatment and control  technologies
further substantiate this.

It is concluded that the dry process hardboard mills  can
achieve the requirement of no discharge of  wastewater by
July 1, 1977 as 25 percent of the mills presently  have no
discharge.
   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


It is concluded  that the wet process hardboard mills can
achieve  the  requirements of 1.7 kilograms per ton (3.4 pounds
per ton)  and 2.8 kilograms per ton (5.6 pounds per ton) of
BODs and  suspended solids, respectively, by July 1,  1977, as
22 percent of the mills are presently meeting this limitation.

WOOD PRESERVING  INDUSTRY

For the purpose  of further establishing Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards of Performance, the wood preserving
industry  (which  is a category of the timber products industry)
has been  divided into four subcategories as follows:

Plant
Subcategory          Description

    1                Pressure process employing oily  preser-
                     vatives in which the predominant method
                     of conditioning green stock is by
                     steaming and/or vapor drying

    2                Pressure processes employing oily pre-
                     servatives in which the predominant
                     method of conditioning green stock is
                     by water-borne salts

    3                Pressure processes employing water-
                     borne salts

    4                Non-pressure processes

The basis for the subcategorization was the variation both in
volume and composition of discharges, the method of  condition-
ing wood  preparatory to treatment, and whether a pressure or
non-pressure process is used.

The volume of wastewater originating from non-pressure preser-
vative processes is  small and consists principally of precipi-
tation that  enters the open tanks employed.   Modification of
existing  facilities  to prevent the entry of rain and snow
and/or dehydration of oil to maintain water content  an an
acceptable level can be used to eliminate discharges from this
segment of the industry.

Plants that  employ pressure retorts and treat unseasoned stock
with oily preservatives have a more serious pollution problem.
Their effluents  are  normally characterized by a high phenol
content and  a high oxygen demand, the latter due primarily to


                              2
    NOTICE: THESE  ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COWENTS  RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


entrained oils and various extractives, principally carbo-
hydrates, that are removed from wood during conditioning.
This process may be accomplished by either one of two tech-
niques, depending primarily upon species of wood.  Boultoni-
zing is the predominant conditioning method used at plants
that treat Douglas-fir and other West-Coast species, while
open steaming is the predominant method used with the pines
and other species native to the East.  Wastewater from  the
Boulton process consists of water removed from the wood.  Be-
cause the volume is relatively small, amounting to less than
9,500 liters per day (2,500 gallons per day) at most plants,
it is practicable to reuse it for cooling water and dispose
of the surplus by evaporation.  A zero discharge of process
water has already been achieved by many plants that employ
the Boulton method of conditioning.

The waste stream from plants employing open steaming is com-
posed both of the water removed from the wood and the steam
condensate that forms in the retort during the steaming opera-
tion.  The volume is large relative to that for the Boulton
process, and the waste usually has a much higher oxygen demand
because of emulsified oils and dissolved solids.  Elimination
of discharges from plants in this group is not practicable.
The waste is amenable to conventional wastewater treating
methods, and the volume of discharge can be reduced substan-
tially by in-plant process changes and control techniques.

Wastewaters from pressure processes in which water-soluble
preservatives and fire retardants are employed contain  trace
amounts of the chemicals used.  These are primarily salts of
copper, chromium, arsenic, and zinc, as well as fluorides,
phosphates, and borates.  A zero discharge is practicable
for such plants because of the small volume of wastewater
involved, and the feasibility of reusing it as makeup water
in preparing fresh batches of treating solution.
   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
                         SECTION II

                       RECOMMENDATIONS
VENEER AND PLYWOOD INDUSTRY

For the veneer and plywood industry, the recommended  effluent
limitations for the best practicable control technology  cur-
rently available (July 1, 1977) are no discharge of wastewaters
to navigable water with special consideration for mills  with
existing steam vats.  No discharge of wastewaters to  navigable
water is recommended as the Effluent ^im.itations Guidelines and
Standards of Performance for the' bes't'available technology  eco-
nomically achievable (July 1, 1983) and for new sources.

HARDBOARD INDUSTRY

No discharge of wastewater to navigable water is also recom-
mended as the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards of
Performance for the dry process hardboard  industry.   This re-
presents the degree of effluent reduction  obtainable  by  exist-
ing point sources through the application  of the best practicable
control technology currently available, and the best  available
technology economically achievable.  This  also represents,  for
new sources, a standard of performance providing for  the control
of the discharge of pollutants which reflects the greatest degree
of effluent reduction achievable through application  of  the best
available demonstrated control technology, processes, operating
methods or other alternatives.

For the wet process hardboard industry, the recommended  effluent
limitations for the best practicable control technology currently
available (July 1, 1977) are a BOD and suspended solids  of  1.7
kilograms per metric ton (3.4 pounds per ton) and 2.8 kilograms
per metric ton (5.6 pounds per ton), respectively.  The  recom-
memded effluent limitations for the best available technology
economically achievable (July 1, 1983) are a BOD and  suspended
solids of 0.2 kilograms per metric ton (0.4 pounds per ton) and
1.1 kilograms per metric ton (2.1 pounds per ton), respectively.
The recommended standards of performance for new sources are  a
BOD and suspended solids of 0.2 kilograms  per metric  ton (0.4
pounds per ton) and 1.1 kilograms per metric ton (2.1 pounds
per ton), respectively.
   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COWENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT


 WOOD  PRESERVING INDUSTRY

 A  high degree of pollution abatement is practicable in the wood
 preserving industry through the application of conventional
 wastewater treatment methods and in-plant process changes and
 controls.   Recommendations pertaining to effluent guidelines
 for the four subcategories into which the industry was divided
 are summarized below:

      (1) A zero discharge requirement for all levels of treat-
 ment  and control technologies is recommended for: (a) all non-
 pressure processes; (b) plants employing only water-soluble
 preservatives and fire retardants, and that portion of the
 production facilities  used to apply salt-type chemicals at
 plants that also treat with other types of preservatives; and
 (c) plants that employ the Boulton process as the predominant
 method of  conditioning.

      (2) The following effluent limitations are recommended
 for plants that use steaming and vapor drying as the pre-
 dominant methods of conditioning stock for preservative
 treatment:

                                               Oil
                                               and    Suspended
                     Phenols  COD      BOD    Grease    Solids

 Best  Practicable
 Control Technology
 Currently  Available  0.658  109.236  69.272  11.987    33.304
 (Kg/1000M3)          (0.041)  (6.806)  (4.316  (0.747)   (2.075)

 Best  Available
 Technology Economi-
 cally Achievable
 and New Sources      0.064   41.301   6.662   3.338    13.323
 (Kg/1000M3)          (0.004)  (2.573)  (0.415)  (0.208)   (0.830)

      NOTE:   Values in  parentheses are discharge equivalents in
             pounds per 1,000 cubic feet)

A variance to the effluent guidelines is  recommended for certain
plants  for which circumstances make unrealistic a uniform ap-
plication  of effluent  limitations.   Specifically, it is recom-
mended  that:
   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
         A discharge of trace quantities of pollutants  in
non-process water be permitted at older plants in subcate-
gories for which a zero discharge requirement is proposed.

     (2) The discharge of copper, chromium, arsenic, and
other ions used in salt-type treatments be permitted in
specified amounts for subcategory 1 plants, the oils waste-
water from which becomes contaminated with salt-type pre-
servatives due to: (a) use of a single retort for both  types
of preservatives, or  (b) dual treatment of certain products
with both creosote and inorganic salts.

     (3) In applying the best practicable control technology
currently available guidelines, special consideration be
given to plants that: (a) have already invested in wastewater
treating facilities, the performance of which is adequate  to
protect receiving waters and to remove 95 percent or more  of
the major pollutants from the discharge, but which fails  to
meet the best practicable control technology currently  avail-
able effluent limitation; or (b) have inadequate land area
available to provide lagoon space for long-term detention
time following biological treatment.

     (4) A discharge equivalent to  25 percent of that allowed
for subcategory 1 plants be permitted under best practicable
control technology currently available for subcategory  4
plants that are unable to keep water out of open tanks  during
winter months because of ice formation on stock prior to
treatment.

Wastewater from preservative treatments employing oil -type
preservatives contains no constituent that is incompatible
with a well-designed and operated publicly owned wastewater
treatment plant.  Wastewater from salt- type treatments  con-
taining arsenic, copper, zinc, and  chromium potentially is
incompatible with a biological treatment system, and  it is
recommended that such waste receive an appropriate pretreat-
ment prior to discharge to the sewer.
    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
                       SECTION III

                       INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY

Section 301 (b) of the Act requires the achievement by 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 con-
trol technology currently available as defined by the Ad-
ministrator pursuant to Section 304 (b) of the'Act.  Section
301 (b) also requires the achievement by 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 econom-
ically achievable which will result in reasonable further
progress toward the national goal of eliminating the dis-
charge of all pollutants, as determined in accordance with
regulations issued by the Administrator pursuant to Sec-
tion 304(b) of the Act.  Section 306 of the Act requires
the achievement by new sources of a Federal standard of per-
formance providing for the control of the discharge of pol-
lutants which reflects the greatest degree of effluent
reduction which the Administrator determines to be achievable
through the application of the best available demonstrated
control technology processes, operating methods, or other
alternatives, including, where practicable, a standard per-
mitting no discharge of pollutants.

Section 304(b) of the Act requires the Administrator to pub-
lish within one year of enactment of the Act, regulations
providing guidelines for effluent limitations setting forth
the degree of effluent reduction attainable" through the ap-
plication of the best control measures and practices achiev-
able including treatment techniques, process and procedure
innovations, operation methods and other alternatives.  The
regulations proposed herein set forth effluent limitations
guidelines pursuant to Section 304(b) of the Act for the
plywood/#eneer, hardboard, and wood preserving-categories
of-the titnber products processing industry.

Section 306 of the Act requires the Administrator, within one
year after a category of sources is included in a list published
pursuanrt to Section 306(b) (1) (A) of the Act, to propose regu-
lations establishing Federal standards of performance for new

-------
DRAFT
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 ap-
plicable to new sources within the plywood/veneer, hardboard,
and wood preserving categories of the timber products processing
industry.

SUMMARY OF METHODS USED FOR DEVELOPMENT'OF THE EFFLUENT
LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS'' OF PERFORMANCE

Those effluent limitations guidelines and standards of per-
formance proposed herein were developed in the following
manner.  The point source category was first categorized for
the purpose of determining whether separate limitations and
standards are appropriate for different segments within a
point source category.  Such subcategorization was based upon
raw materials used, product produced, manufacturing process
employed, and other factors.  The raw waste characteristics
for each subcategory were then identified.  This included an
analysis of (1) the source and volume of water used in the
process employed and the source of waste and wastewaters in
the plant; and (2) the constituents  (including thermal) of
all wastewaters including toxic constituents and other con-
stituents which result in taste, odor, and color in water or
aquatic organisms.  The constituents of wastewaters which
should be subject to effluent limitations guidelines and
standards of performance were identified.

The full range of control and treatment technologies existing
within each subcategory was identified.  This included an iden-
tification of each distinct control and treatment technology,
including both inplant and end-of-process technologies, which
are existent or capable of being designed for each subcategory.
It also included an identification in terms of the amount of
constituents  (including thermal) and the chemical, physical,
and biological characteristics of pollutants;- of the effluent
level resulting from  the application of each of the treatment
and control technologies.  The problems, limitations and reli-
ability of each treatment and control technology and the re-
quired implementation  time was also  identified.  In addition,
the non-water quality  environmental  impact, such as the effects
of the application of  such technologies upon other pollution
problems, including air, solid waste, noise and radiation were
                             10

-------
DRAFT


also identified.  The'energy*requirements of- each of the
control and treatment technologies'were identified,  as well
as the cost of the application of such technologies.

The information, as outlined.above, was then evaluated in
order to determine what levels of technology constituted the
"best practicable control technology currently available,"
"best available technology economically achievable" and the
"best available demonstrated control technology, processes,
operation methods or other alternatives."  In identifying
such technologies, various factors were considered.   These
included the total cost of application of technology in rela-
tion to the effluent reduction benefits to be achieved from
such application, the age of equipment and facilities involved,
the process employed, the engineering aspects of the applica-
tion of various types of control techniques'process changes,
non-water quality environmental impact (including energy re-
quirements) and other factors.  Consideration of the technol-
ogies was not limited to those presently employed in the in-
dustry, but included also those processes in pilot plant or
laboratory research stage and those used by-other industries.
The alternative of combined industrial/municipal treatment,
including the compatibility and economic ramifications, was
also examined.

The data for identification and analysis were derived from a
number of sources.  These sources  included  Environmental
Protection Agency research information,  published literature,
internal reports furnished by the  industry  and  equipment
manufacturers,  qualified technical  consultation, on-site
visits and interviews at exemplary  plants throughout  the
United States,  and evaluation of permit  application data
provided under  Permit Programs of  the  Rivers  and Harbors
Act of 1899  (Refuse Act)  All references used in this  study
are  included in Section XIII.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY

The  timber products processing industry  includes a  broad
spectrum of  operations ranging from cutting and removing
the  timber from the  forest to the  productive  utilization
of wood wastes.   The  greatest water pollution potential in
the  industry exists  in the case  of plywood/veneer mills,
hardboard mills,  and  wood preserving plants,  and although a
greater  total  volume  of wastes may be discharged from other
liquid waste generating  factories  of the industry,  the strength
is lower and total  flow  is distributed over a substantially
                            11

-------
DRAFT


larger number of  installations.  At any given location the
environmental impact  of  the  relatively higher strength wastes
from an installation  of  the  three categories mentioned above
will be considerably  greater,  Therefore, Phase I of this study
includes plywood/veneer  mills, hardboard mills, and wood preserv-
ing plants.'

Veneer and  Plywood

Plywood is  an assembly of numbers of  layers of wood joined to-
gether by means of  an adhesive.  It is a multi-use material
characterized by  its  ability to  be designed and engineered for
construction purposes, decorative purposes, flat shapes, curves,
and bent shapes.  Hardwood plywood is distinguished from softwood
plywood in  that the former is  generally used for decorative pur-
po-ses and has a face  ply of  wood from deciduous or broad leaf
trees.  Softwood  plywood, on the other hand, is generally used
for construction  and  structural  purposes, and the veneers typically
are of wood from  evergreen or  needle  bearing trees.  Hardwoods in-
clude such  species  as oak, walnut, lauan, elm, cherry, hickory,
pecan, maple, birch,  gum, cativo, teak, rosewood, .and mahogany.

The principal raw material in  the veneer and plywood industry is
roundwood,  with species  varying  according to-geographical loca-
tion.

The various operations  for converting roundwood into veneer and
finally into plywood  are relatively simple and'chiefly mechanical.
A Simplified process  flow diagram for the production of veneer
and plywood from  roundwood is  shown in Figure 1.

The most important  operation in  this  process is the cutting of
the veneer. The  appearance  of a plywood panel is greatly de-
pendent upon the  manner  in which the  veneer  is cut.  This is the
chief reason for  cutting veneers in different ways.  Prior to
the cutting of veneer,  most  logs are  heated  to make cutting easier
and to help insure  smooth-cut veneer.

Veneer can  be cut in four ways:   (1)  rotary  lathing;-(2) slicing;
(3) stay log cutting; and  (4)  sawing  veneer.

After rotary veneers  are cut,  they may go directly to  a clipper
or may be  stored  temporarily on  a  series of  horizontal  storage
decks or on reels.   The green clipper clips  the veneers to various
widths and  also may remove  defects.   From the clippers  the veneers
are conveyed to  the dryers,  large  chambers which  are  equipped with
heating elements  and fans  and which have automatic conveying systems
on which the veneer moves.   Some mills  now use high speed drivers
                               12

-------
LOG
STORAGE


DEBARKER


LOG
CONDITIONER
                            VENEER
                            CUTTER
VENEER
DRIER
          VENEER  OPERATION
VENEER
PREPARATION


GLUE
LINE


PRESS



FINISHING
         PLYWOOD  OPERATION
FIGURE 1 -  SIMPLIFIED PROCESS  FLOW  DIAGRAM FOR
           VENEER AND PLYWOOD  PRODUCTION
                   13

-------
DRAFT


located behind the rotary  lathe which allow the veneer to be
dried in a continuous sheet after it is cut.  Veneers are gen-
erally dried to moisture contents of below ten percent, which
is a level compatible with gluing and consistent with the mois-
ture content to which hardwood plywood products will be exposed
while in service.

After drying, less than full-size sheets are dry-clipped and
joined together to form full-size sheets in preparation for
gluing.  Taping machines and tapeless splicers are used in this
joining process.  Patching and repairing are then accomplished.

After pressing, the panels are stacked for conditioning, sawed
to dimension, and sanded.  They are then ready for inspection,
grading, strapping, and shipping.  Grading and inspection usually
are done at intermediate steps in the manufacturing process.

Hardboard

The industry refers to panel products reconstituted from wood
fibers and chips as "board."  To a great extent, the board is
manufactured from chips or fibers which are by-products of lum-
ber or plywood production.  Particle board, insulation board,
and hardboard make up this group of products.

There are two major subcategories of hardboard manufacturing
based upon the manner in which the board is formed.  In the
wet process, water is used as the medium for carrying the
fibers and distributing them in the forming machine.  In
the dry process air serves that function.  The present
hardboard industry in the  United States developed from a
defiberization process invented by William H. Mason during
the 1920's.  It was the prototype of wet process hardboard.
Other methods of fiber preparation were later developed.
All are intended basically to provide ultimate bonding in
the hardboard.  The resulting fibers may be washed, screened,
and refined before being carried in a liquid slurry to a
board-forming machine similar to that used  in making paper,
a cylindrical former, or a batch unit.  After forming, the
wet mat may be pressed either wet or dry.   If the mat is
to be pressed dry, then all of the moisture must be removed
by evaporation after wet-forming.  All but  one of the wet-
dry hardboard mills discussed later are associated with an
insulation board mill.
                             14

-------
DRAFT
Fiber preparation in the dry process is similar to that
in the wet process.   After fiber preparation, existing
water is reduced in a dryer.  The fibers are then trans-
ported by an air stream to a dry-felting machine for mat
formation.  After formation of the dry mat, the mat is
pressed in a dry state by all but two of the dry press
hardboard mills to be discussed later.  Two mills add
water to the mat after dry formation; however, in one
mill any water added is evaporated in the pressing opera-
tion.  Virtually all new hardboard installations since
the 1950's have utilized the dry process.

Wood Preserving

The wood preserving industry applies treatment to round
and sawn wood products by injecting into them chemicals
that have fungistatic and insecticidal properties, or
that impart fire resistance.

The most common preservatives used in wood preserving are
creosote, pentachlorophenol, and various formulations of
water-soluble, inorganic chemicals, the most common of
which are salts of copper, chromium, and arsenic.  Fire
retardants are formulations of salts, the principal ones
of which are borates, phosphates, and ammonium compounds.
Eighty percent of the plants in the United States use at
least two of the three types of preservatives.  Many
treat with one or two preservatives plus a fire re-
tardant (1) .

Consumption data for the principle preservatives for the
five-year period between 1967 and 1971 are given in
Table I.  In terms of amount used, creosote in its various
forms is the most important, followed in order by penta-
chlorophenol and salt-type preservatives.  Among the
latter, the CCA (copper-chromium-arsenic) formulations
account for most of that used.

The general trend in presevative use is a decrease in
creosote consumption and an increase in the use of penta-
chlorophenol and salt-type preservatives.  This trend is
expected to continue.  Consumption of fire retardants has
been relatively stable for the past five years, but it is
anticipated that it will increase significantly as exist-
ing building codes are modified to permit the use of
fire retardant treated wood in lieu of other flameproof
construction materials.
                              15

-------
     DRAFT

                               TABLE I

      CONSUMPTION OF PRINCIPLE PRESERVATIVES AND FIRE RETARDANTS

        OF REPORTING PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES. 1967-1971 (2)


                                           Year
Material
Creosote
Creosote-
Coal Tar
Creosote-
Petroleum
Total
Creosote
Total
Petroleum
Penta-
chlorophenol
Chromated
Zinc Chloride
(Units)
Million
Liters
Million
Liters
Million
Liters
Million
Liters
Million
Liters
Million
Kilograms
Million
Kilograms
1967
329
216
135
559
279
11.2
0.8
1968
293
219
121
518
279
12.0
0.7
1969
274
206
115
485
258
11. b
0.6
1970
256
229
125
475
286
12.9
0.7
1971
242
218
118
441
307
14
0





.5
.6
CCA


ACC


Pyresote


Non-Com


FCAP

Osmose Flame
Proof

Other
Solids
Million
Kilograms    1.0    1.4    2.1    2.7
Million
Kilograms    0.6
0.5
0.4    0.4
Million
Kilograms    1.3    1.7    1.1    1.2

Million
Kilograms    2.4    2.7

Million
Kilograms    2.4
                     3.9


                     0.5


                     1.2


       3.4    3.1     2.8


1.8    2.0    1.2     1.0
Million
Kilograms    2.0
1.8    1.8    2.0     2.4
Million
Kilograms    2.7    2.8    2.3    1.7    1.7
Note:  Data are based on  information supplied by approximately
       357 plants  for each year.
                                16

-------
DRAFT


INVENTORY OF INDUSTRY

Veneer and Plywood

Today there are approximately 501 veneer and plywood mills
in the United States, 248 of which use softwood,  253 use
hardwood, and 27 use a combination of softwood and hardwood.
As shown in Table 2, the largest concentrations of mills
are in Oregon,  Washington, and North Carolina.  Figures 2
through 5 show the distribution of mills throughout the
United States.   Hardwood and softwood mills are located ac-
cording to availability of raw materials, and their distri-
bution, therefore, follows the timber distribution as shown
in Figure 6.  A detailed inventory of the mills in the United
States is included in Appendix A of this document.  A sum-
mary is presented in Table 2.

In 1968, a Forest Industry survey resulted in the most com-
plete statistics available for the plywood industry.  At
that time there were 175 softwood and 242 hardwood plywood
mills.  Although hardwood plywood mills were more numerous,
individual installations were smaller.  In 1968,  the pro-
duction of softwood plywood in the United States was about
1.4 billion square meters on a 9.53 millimeter basis (15
billion square feet on a three-eights inch basis) , while
that of hardwood plywood was slightly more than 186 million
square meters on a 6.35 millimeter basis (2 billion square
feet on a one-fourth inch basis).  Included in Table 3 are
statistics from the 1968 survey.  More recent data collected
as a result of correspondence with the industry association
shows that in 1972, softwood plywood production was 1.71
billion square meters on a 9.53 millimeter basis  (18.3 bil-
lion square feet on a three-eights inch basis), while that
of hardwood plywood was estimated as 205 million square
meters on a 6.35 millimeter basis (2.2 billion square feet
on a one-fourth inch basis).

During the decade 1950-1960, the world's production of
plywood rose by 150 percent.  The United States accounted
for about 50 percent of the world's plywood production.
More important, however, is that the United States along
with Canada was the major source of softwood  timber.  As
the demand for construction materials continues to increase
so does the demand for softwood plywood.  Twenty years ago
practically all of the softwood plywood in the United States
was produced in the Pacific Northwest from Douglas fir.   In
the past ten years, however, the industry has expanded into
the southeastern United States where the use  of southern
                             17

-------
DRAFT
                        TABLE 2



SUMMARY OF VENEER AND PLYWOOD PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES
     SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD



   Alabama           6



   Arizona           1



   Arkansas          8



   California       15



   Colorado          1



   Florida           2



   Georgia           5



   Idaho             5



   Louisiana        12



   Maryland          1



   Michigan          2



   Mississippi       6



   Montana           4



   New Hampshire     1



   North Carolina    6



   Oklahoma          1



   Oregon           81



   South Carolina    3



   Texas             9



   Virginia          1



   Washington       29



   TOTAL           199
  SOFTWOOD VENEER



Arkansas         1



California       8



Florida          1



Georgia          1



Maryland         1



Minnesota        1



New Jersey       1



North Carolina   6



Oregon          31



South Carolina   1



Texas            1



Virginia         1



Washington       9



Wisconsin     	2_



TOTAL           65
                            18

-------
DRAFT
    HARDWOOD PLYWOOD
TABLE 2  CONTINUED
               HARDWOOD VENEER
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana
Maine
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New York
9
4
6
3
6
1
6
2
3
4
2
6
2
2
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
New Jersey
4
4
5
1
13
2
4
1
1
3
2
3
2
1
   North  Carolina     26
   Oregon             9
   Pennsylvania        4
   South  Carolina     16
   Tennessee           4
   Texas               3
   Vermont             5
   Virginia           11
   Washington          5
   West Virginia       1
   Wisconsin          16
   TOTAL            157
                            19
               New York         5
               North  Carolina   19
               Ohio             2
               Oregon           5
               Pennsylvania      5
               South  Carolina    6
               Tennessee         2
               Vermont           1
               Virginia         7
               West Virginia     2
               Wisconsin     	4_
               TOTAL           107

-------
DRAFT
                      TABLE 2  CONTINUED
SOFTWOOD 5 HARDWOOD PLYWOOD



   Alabama            2



   Florida            1



   Michigan           1



   New Hampshire      1



   North Carolina     1



   Oregon             3



   South Carolina     1



   Texas              1



   Washington         4



   TOTAL              16
SOFTWOOD § HARDWOOD  VENEER



    Florida           1



    Georgia           1



    Minnesota         1



    North Carolina    3



    Oregon            3



    Virginia          1



    TOTAL            11
                  TOTAL PLYWOOD PLANTS  -  340



                  TOTAL VENEER PLANTS  -  161
                              20

-------
                                                                                                                                       oribou
                              SOFTWOOD - PLYWOOD

                                   6  VENEER
                              SOFTWOOD 8  HARDWOOD

                              PLYWOOD  &  VENEER
NOTE :
    OREGON AND NORTH CAROLINA ARE HIGH
    DENSITY AREAS AND ARE SHOWN ON SEPARATE
    MAPS
                  FIGURE 2 - DISTRIBUTION  OF SOFTWOOD VENEER AND PLYWOOD  RILLS THROUGHOUT THE  UNITED STATES

-------
Francis
      k Angeles
                      oBoise
                         Phoe
J=	E      G       E      N


   A     HARDWOOD -  PLYWOOD
               8   VENEER

   •     SOFTWOOD  a HARDWOOD-
          PLYWOOD  a  VENEER


          ^urango
NOTE :
     OREGON AND NORTH CAROLINA ARE HIGH DENSITY
     AREAS AND ARE SHOWN ON SEPARATE MAPS.
                                                                                     Minneapoli
                                                                                         frl
\
                                                                                                        AA
                                                                                                         Chicago1
                                                                                                                         Detroit / Jamestow
                                                                                                                                           Rochester
                                                                                                                                           A    *»
                                                                                                                                                           lew York

                                                                                                                                                          I Philadelphia
                                                                                                                                       IPIMsbu
                                                                                                                            Dayton
                                                                                                                                Clarksburg ,
                                                                                            Joseph
                                                                                         pKansas City
                                                                                                                                               Richmond
                                                                                                St. Louis
                                                                                                                      0  Nashville
                                                                                   -, Dallas
                                                                                              Little ROCK
                                                                                             <|Shr.v.port
                                                                                               (Baton  Rouge
                                                                                                                           i Atlanta
                                                                                                                   Birmingham  \A
                                                                                                                       Montgomery
                                                                                                                               o    A
                                                                                                                  Mobile
                                                                                                         New Orleans
                                                                                                                                           Orlandoi
                                                                      San  Antonio
                                                                                                                                                       Miami
                              FIGURE 3  -  DISTRIBUTION  OF  HARDWOOD  VENEER AND PLYWOOD  MILLS THROUGHOUT  THE  UNITED STATES

-------
 L   E   G  E  N   D

•    SOFTWOOD
A   HARDWOOD
•    SOFT AND HARDWOOD
                              FIGURE 4 - DISTRIBUTION  OF  VENEER  AND  PLYWOOD HILLS  IN THE STATE OF OREGON

-------
•   SOFTWOOD
A   HARDWOOD
•   SOFT AND HARDWOOD
                                                                               WILMINGTON
        FIGURE 5 - DISTRIBUTION OF VENEER AND PLYWOOD hILLS IN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

-------
                                           UNITED STATES FOREST AREAS
[SJ
en
              Softwood timber is indicated by grey,
              hardwood by black areas.
                                 FIGURE  6 (3)  -  UNITED STATES FOREST AREAS

-------
DRAFT
                           TABLE   3



          FOREST  INDUSTRIES  1968 PLYWOOD  STATISTICS  C4)
Number of
Softwood
Plywood
Region Plants
New
England
Middle
Atlantic
East North
Central
West North
Central
South
Atlantic 10
East South
Central 7
West South
Central 17
Mountain 11
Pacific 130
Total
U.S.A. 175
Softwood Ply-
wood Production
In Square meters
(9 . 53 mm Basis)









54,730,000

49,500,000

142,500,000
101,720,000
1,063,000,000

1,411,500,000 -
Number of
Hardwood
Plywood
Plants

15

7

41

4

72

24

11

31

205
Hardwood Ply-
wood Production
In Square meters
(6.35 mm - Sur-
face Measure)

7,175,000

1,675,000

29,950,000

4,200,000

42,660,000

30,625,000

4,100,000

77,375,000

197,750,000
                             26

-------
DRAFT


pine has catapulted this area into the plywood scene (See
Table 4).  In 1968, the southeast accounted for 20 percent
of the nation's softwood plywood production.

As a result of demand, hardwood plywood production has re-
mained fairly constant over the past 20 years (Tables 5 and
6, and Figure 7) .

Hardboard

In 1973, there were 27 manufacturing facilities which pro-
duced hardboard by some variation of the two basic processes.
As shown in Table 7, 17 of these were variations of the
dry process and 10 were variations of the wet process.  In
addition, some hardboard is produced at six insulation board
plants, but the wastewater aspects of these will be considered
in Phase II of the study.  It has been estimated that in 1972,
the total production of hardboard in the United States, on a
3.2 millimeter  (one-eighth inch) basis, was 0.54 billion square
meters  (518 billion square feet).  The geographical distri-
bution of the hardboard industry is shown more graphically
in Figure 8.

From the viewpoint of total utilization of the forest resource,
those categories of the timber products processing industry
which are relatively indiscriminate in terms of the properties
of the wood raw material used are of increasing importance.
High quality lumber and plywood are prized for certain struc-
tural characteristics which are inherent in the structure of
the harvested tree.  As the timber products industry becomes
more dependent on smaller, second-growth timber and as the
demands for timber products increase, it becomes more important
to develop those categories of the industry which can use wood
and wood wastes in a variety of forms and in large quantities.

In general, the categories of this type include those which
can use wood reduced to small particles or fibers and then
reconstitute them  into useful form.  Essentially, these opera-
tions are represented by the "board" category of the  industry
as described previously.   In its entirety, this is one of the
most rapidly expanding industrial operations in the United
States.  Hardboard production contributes to that growth.  It
has been reported  that 16  times as much hardboard was used in
1953 as compared with 1929.  The Forest Products Research
Society reported that hardboard production on a 3.2 millimeter
(one-eighth inch) basis  increased from 0.09 billion square
meters  (0.96 billion square feet) in 1948 to 0.14 billion
square  meters  (1.5 billion square feet) in 1953  (5).   In  1968,
                             -27

-------
DRAFT
                         TABLE  4

            SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD PRODUCTION FOR 1972


             State       Sq. Meters-9.55 mm Basis

           California             140,543,000

           Oregon                 803,700,000

           Washington             210,443,000

           Idaho                  156,366,000

           Others                 495,066,000
           CMostly  South)	

             Note:  Data obtained from APA.
                             28

-------
DRAFT
                       TABLE 5

    HARDWOOD PLYWOOD PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES
    Year

    1947

    1955

    1960

    1965

    1970

    1972
Square Meters Surface Area

    68,700,000

    87,000,000

    82,500,000

   170,500,000

   146,600,000

   204,765,000
    Note:  Data obtained from Hardwood Manufacturing
           Association - April 1, 1973.
                       TABLE  6

    SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES
Year
1925
1940
1950
1960
1970
1972
Sq. Meters-9.53 mm Basis
14,240,000
111,690,000
237,700,000
727,500,000
1,334,700,000
1,707,400,000
No. of Plants
12
25
68
152
179

    Note:  Data obtained from APA.
                             29

-------
Q

UJ
o
or
ex.
LU
QC
«C


3
CO
     1.500 -
     1,000 -|
      500 -
      250 -
       50 -
                    1930
                                                             1970
                                     YEAR
    FIGURE 7 - GROWTH  OF THE PLYWOOD INDUSTRY  IN  THE  UNITED STATES





    A  - SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD PRODUCTION ON A 9.53mm (3/8")  BASIS



        - HARDWOOD PLYWOOD PRODUCTION ON A 6.35mm (1/4")  BASIS
                                       30

-------
DRAFT
                         TABLE 7

       INVENTORY OF HARDBOARD"MANUFACTURING" FACILITIES
DRY PROCESS

Anacortes Veneer
Anacortes, Washington

Celotex Corporation
Deposit, New York

Celotex Corporation
Marion, South Carolina

Celotex Corporation
Paris, Tennessee

Evans Products
Doswell, Virginia

Evans Products
Moncure, North Carolina

Evans Products
Phillips, Wisconsin

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Coos Bay, Oregon
DRY-WET PROCESS

Weyerhaeuser Company*
Klamath Falls, Oregon
Georgia Pacific Corporation
Conway, North Carolina

Masonite Corporation
Spring Hope, North Carolina

Masonite Corporation
Towanda, Pennsylvania

Pope and Talbot
Oakridge, Oregon

Superwood (Nu-Ply)
Bemidji, Minnesota

U.S. Plywood
Champion International
Catawba, South Carolina

U.S. Plywood
Champion International
Lebanon, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Craig, Oklahoma
WET PROCESS

Abitibi Corporation
Roaring River, North Carolina
Evans Products
Corvallis, Oregon

Forest Fibre
Stimpson Lumber Company
Forest Grove, Oregon
                             31

-------
DRAFT
                   TABLE' 7  CONTINUED

        [INVENTORY OF HARDBOARD MANUFACTURING FACILITIES)
Masonite Corporation
Laurel, Mississippi

Masonite Corporation
Ukiah, California

Superior Fibre
Superior, Wisconsin
Superwood
Duluth,  Minnesota

Superwood
North Little Rock,  Arkansas

U.S. Plywood
Champion International
Dee (Hood River), Oregon
WET-DRY PROCESS

Abitibi Corporation*
Alpena, Michigan
WET-DRY HARDBOARD  PLANTS
OPERATED  IN  CONJUNCTION~
WITH  INSULATION  BOARD PLANTS

Boise Cascade
International  Falls, Minnesota

Temple  Industries
Diboll, Texas

U.S.  Gypsum
Danville, Virginia
U.S. Gypsum
Greenville, Mississippi

U.S. Gypsum
Pilot Rock, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Craig, Oklahoma
         *  To  be  given special  consideration
                              32

-------
       : G i  N D
        WET
     A DRY PROCESS
     • DRY-WET PROCESS
     • WET- DRY PROCESS
        WET-DRY/INSULATION
FIGURE 8 - GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF  HARDBOARD MANUFACTURING
           FACILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

-------
DRAFT


27 hardboard plants  in  the United  States produced approxi-
mately 0.39 billion  square meters  (4.2 billion square feet)
of product.  For  1972,  hardboard production was estimated
to be 0.54 billion square meters  (5.8 billion square feet)(6).
During the first part of 1973, pia«g -for three new dry-process
plants were completed, and const.ructd.en: has "already begun.  .
A United States Forest  Service survey published in 196~4', based
on information collected in  1962,  established that the amount
of timber consumed in the United States has increased to 0.37
billion cubic meters  (13 billion cubic feet) annually.  It
projected a demand of 0.79 billion'Cubic meters (28 billion
cubic feet) by the year 2000  - more than twice the 1962
],evel - based on  a population of 325 million.  The increased
 ?opulation must also be sheltered, and experts predict 1QD mil-
 ion homes must be built in  the next 30 years.  If hardboard
manufacture increases at the  same  rate during the next decade
as in the last two decades,  annual production is projected to
be 0.93 billion square  meters (10  billion square feet) by  1980
(6).  This means  that ten plants with annual capacity-of 39 mil-
lion square meters (420 million square feet) each would have to
b.e completed during the next  seven years.

Somewhat akin to  the saw mill part of the forest products  in-
dustry, the board portion is  spread nationally with some pro-
duction of each kind in each  forest region of the United States.
The hardboard and particle board industries utilize the resi-
dues from other wood working  plants in large measure and accord-
ingly provide opportunities  to reduce the cost of other products
and expand the development of completely integrated wood indus-
tries.

It is anticipated that  there  will  be two'major factors .which
will influence the location  trend  of future hardboard plant
additions.  The trend toward  integrated forest product com-
plexes, which involves  pulp•  and paper, plywood, particle board
and hardboard operations, all contained at one location is ex-
pected to increase.  Installations such as these will be predi-
cated upon the benefits derived from logistics and economics.
Currently, 33 percent of the  hardboard plants are owned by one
of the major.forest industry  companies, and this percentage is
expected to increase moderately in the near future, which will
no doubt have some impact on  the location trend.

The other major factor  influencing' growth trend is that
associated with supply  and demand, with new plants being
located where there is  demand predicted on the dynamic
growth and expansion areas.   Raw material availability
and price may have some impact on  the development of this
particular growth trend.
                              34

-------
DRAFT


By far the most dynamic growth areas are the South Atlantic,
South Central, and Pacific Coast regions.  It is anticipated
that the growth trend will intensify in these two areas during
the next decade and probably on into the 1990's.

Due to the anticipated demand for hardboard production, it
is not expected that any operations will be phased out prior
to 1980.  After this time, however, wet process plants in
the capacity range of 4.6 to 9.3 million square meters (50 to
100 million square feet) will become economically marginal
due to operating performance and environmental capital
expenditures.

Wood Preserving

The wood preserving industry^ in the United States is composed
of approximately 390 treating plants, 315 of which use pres-
sure retorts.   Most of the plants are concentrated in two
distinct regions.   The larger region extends from East Texas
to Maryland and corresponds roughly to the natural range of
the southern pines, the major species utilized.  The second
concentration of plants is located along the Pacific Coast,
where Douglas  fir and western red cedar are the species of
primary interest to the industry.  Only 23 percent of the
United States' plants are located outside these two regions.
The distribution of plants by type and location is given in
Table 8.

The production of treated wood is very responsive to the
general state  of the national economy, particularly the health
of the construction industry.  Production overall decreased
from 1967 to 1971 (Table 9), but is expected to show a sharp
increase for 1972.

The volume of  wood treated with creosote showed the largest
decrease during the 1967 to 1971 period, and accounted for
most of the decrease in total production.  Wood treated with
pentachlorophenol registered a slight increase during the
period, while  that treated with CCA-type preservatives in-
creased almost four-fold.   Production of fire-retardant
treated wood remained essentially constant.  These trends
are expected to continue,  except that an increase in the
production of  fire-retardant treated wood is anticipated.
                             35

-------
  DRAFT
                           TABLE   8
WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS  IN  THE UNITED  STATES BY STATE AND TYPE



                            (1971)
Commercial
Pressure
NORTHEAST
Connecticut
Delaware
0
1
Dist. of Columbia 0
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
West Virginia
TOTAL
NORTH CENTRAL
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
Ohio
Wisconsin
TOTAL
SOUTHEAST
Florida
Georgia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
TOTAL
0
6
1
1
4
5
6
1
0
3
28

6
6
0
0
6
4
3
7
0
0
7
3
42

23
24
18
11
15
91
Non-
Pressure
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
2
5
5
0
0
0
0
12

1
1
0
0
1
3
Pressure
and Non-
Pressure
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
4

1
2
0
0
1
4
Railroad
Pressure
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2

0
0
0
0
0
0
and Other
Non- Total
Pressure Plants
0
0
0
0
0

0


0
0
0
1
2

1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

0

3

0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0


1


1

34


6



11
i *"*
12



£. 7
63
2p
5
1 T
27
19
11
17
99
                                  36

-------
DRAFT
                    TABLE  8   CONTINUED
                     Commercial
Railroad and Other
                                Pressure
                       Non-     and Non-          Non-     Total
              Pressure Pressure Pressure Pressure Pressure Plants
SOUTH CENTRAL
Alabama
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
TOTAL
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
TOTAL
PACIFIC
Alaska
California
Hawaii
Oregon
Washington
TOTAL
UNITED STATES
TOTAL

22
11
21
18
6
6
27
111

1
2
3
2
0
1
0
0
1
10

0
8
3
6
7
24
306


1
0
0
1
0
1
3
6

0
0
3
3
0
0
0
1
0
7

0
0
0
0
5
5
35


0
1
1
3
0
0
2
7

0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
4

0
2
0
4
4
10
30


0
0
0
0
0
1
2
3

0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
9


0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1

0
2
0
0
1
3
10


23
12
22
22
6
8
34
127

1
2
7
8
0
2
1
2
2
A |-
25

0
12
3
10
1 *7
17
A 1
42
390

                               37

-------
(si
oo
          DRAFT


                                              TABLE 9


           MATERIALS TREATED'IN THE UNITED STATES. BY PRODUCT AND PRESERVATIVE.  1967-1971  (2)


                     (Note:  Components may not add to totals due to  rounding.)
Thousand Cubic Meters
Preservative

Creosote and
Cresoste-Coal
Tar


Creosote-
Petroleum



Petroleum-
Pentachloro-
phenol


Chromated
Copper
Arsenate
Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1967
1968
1969
1970
Poles
and Railroad
Piling Ties
1,636
1,456
1,330
1,315
1,172
30
27
18
18
15
950
927
919
1,074
1,157
5
11
35
42
1,683
1,712
1,497
1,650
1,856
808
125
694
806
775
7
6
5
10
4
1
0.2
1
1
Lumber
and
Timbers
504
528
451
357
342
82
97
81
62
45
446
54
450
436
430
146
197
254
366
Fence
Posts
184
184
175
181
193
68
45
42
32
27
290
224
212
194
233
3
4
7
9
Other
100
100
93
78
70
12
11
7
9
9
186
168
142
146
143
0.5
4
8
10
Total
4,146
3,980
3,545
3,587
3,6326
1,000
905
849
926
871
1,879
1,846
1,729
1,864
1,967
217
306
306
4287

-------
            DRAFT
                                              TABLE 9 CONTINUED
                                                   Thousand-Cubic Meters
OJ

-------
DRAFT
                                    TABLE 9 CONTINUED
Thousand Cubic Meters
Preservative

Fire
Retardants



All
Others




All
Preservatives

Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
Poles
and
Piling
...
—
—
	
—
12
15
13
12
4
2,857
2,649
2,522
2,600
2,492
Railroad
Ties
3
2
0.3
2
	
	 	
0.1
	
0.1
	
2,508
2,447
2,199
2,469
2,639
Lumber
and
Timbers
99
94
104

100
47
18
72
3
19
1,716
1,772
1,687
1,576
1,694
Fence
Posts
_ _ _
—
—

—
6
4
3
62
3
595
466
443
428
472
Other
32
42
30

37
7
6
13
6
2
382
360
323
292
305
Total
134
138
134

138
71
43
102
83
28
7,538
7,695
7,175
7,366
7,602

-------
DRAFT


                          SECTION IV

       PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION


PROCESS DESCRIPTION-VENEER AND PLYWOOD

Raw Materials

A large variety of wood is utilized in the manufacture of
veneers.  A high percentage of veneer produced in the
United States is manufactured from Douglas fir, in particu-
lar that manufactured in the Northwest, with lesser quanti-
ties of veneer made from ponderosa pine and hemlock also in
the Northwest, and southern pine in the Southeast.  In general,
veneer is classified as softwood or hardwood due to the marked
differences in the utilization of the respective products.
Softwood veneer is manufactured on the west coast, the Rocky
Mountain region, and the southeastern United States.  The
species that are used in the western United States include
Douglas fir, sitka spruce, western hemlock, balsam fir,
western larch, ponderosa pine, sugar pine, western white
pine, and redwood.  In the southeastern states bald cypress
and southern pine are most commo'n.  The hardwood species com-
monly used in the United States are beech, birch, maple, bass-
wood, red gum, yellow poplar, cottonwood, tupelo, sycamore,
and oak.

Softwood veneer is almost exclusively used in  the manufactur-
ing of softwood plywood; however, small quantities are also
used as center stock and cross-banding for panels made with
hardwood faces.  Hardwood veneer, on the other hand, has
several important uses that can be categorized as  (1) face
veneer, (2) commercial veneers, and  (3) veneers for containers.
Face veneers are of the highest quality and are used to make
plywood panels employed in the manufacturing of furniture  and
interior decorative panels.  There are more than  50 such manu-
facturers throughout the eastern United States.  Commercial
veneers are those used for cross bands, cores, and backs of
plywood panels and concealed parts of  furniture.  Container
veneers consist of a large variety of  inexpensive veneers  used
in  the manufacturing of crates, hampers, fruit and vegetable
baskets and kits, boxes and similar  container  items.

Manufacturing

Plywood is manufactured in practically every state  in  the  Union
The majority  of softwood plywood  is  produced on the Pacific
Coast while  the bulk of the hardwood plywood is manufactured in
                             41

-------
DRAFT


the southeastern states.   The hardwood plywood industry is
made up of a large number  of small  factories distributed
widely over the eastern United  States.

The detailed process description will be restricted to factors
of the process which affect wastewater characteristics.  A
detailed flow diagram  of the veneer and plywood manufacturing
process is shown in Figure 9.   This will also be the outline
followed in the process description.

Log Storage

Veneer mills throughout the country, like many other mills
within the Timber Products Industry, find it necessary to re-
tain large inventories of  logs  to maintain a continuous supply
throughout the year.   There are three'common methods of storing
logs in the industry:  (1) dry-decking, (2) wet-decking, and
(3) log ponding.

Dry-decking is simply  the  practice  of stacking- logs on land.
When logs are stored in this manner there exists a'tendency for
them to dry out rapidly at the  ends which in turn.causes cracks
to be formed in the wood.  This phenomenon is known'as "end
checking" and it greatly increases  the amount of product wastage

End-checking can be minimized by sprinkling the land.^decked logs
with water and this method of storing logs is'referred to as wet-
decking.  Land-decking, whether wet or dry, requires large
machinery to handle the logs.

The third method of storing logs is by floating them in a body
of water.  End-checking is not  a problem with this form of
storage and logs can be handled more easily.  Logs'may be
floated in lakes, rivers, estuaries, or man-made ponds', with
the last being the most common  receptacle for .this-purpose.
Log ponding, when feasible, has been accepted as'the most con-
venient and economical form of  log  storage.  Some-logs, such
as southern pine, sink in  water and land-decking-"is 'therefore
a necessity.  Many veneer  and plywood mills use a  combination
of log ponds and land-decking for  log storage with1 the land-
decking being used for short periods of detention  and log ponds
for long term log storage.
                              42

-------
LIQUID WASTE
"GREEN END" < ST£AM DRIER WASH'
OVERFLOW FROM CONDENSATE AND DELUGE
LOG POND WATER
LOG STORAGE
( LOG POND. _ LOG . LOG VENEER VEH
COLO DECK UbBAHKING *" SI LAMING * LAIHt " OH




4
I


1
EXHAUST
GASES
IEER
HER
OR BOTH)

GASES
SOLIDS
BARK
LIQUIDS
I



\








GLUE V 	
PREPARATION)*
v /'




VENEER
PREPARATION

^
GLUE






^



GLUE
LI
NE








1

UNUSABLE
VENEER AND
TRIMMINGS
	 i 	 ___ __ _L







GLUE WASH
WATER




RECYCLE


RESSING! FINISHING

TRIM AND
SANDER
DUST
j
SOLID WASTE IS BURNED IN BOILER
CHIPPED  FOR  REUSE OR SOLD
          FIGURE 9 - DETAILED PROCESS  FLOW DIAGRAM FOR VENEER AND PLYWOOD

-------
DRAFT
Barkers

From storage the logs are  first taken to'a barker where
the bark is removed before' the logs are cut into smaller
sections, usually about  two  and four-tenths meters (eight
feet) long.  The bark can  be removed in either a dry or
wet process.

Logs are debarked by several different'types of machines (7),
including:  (1) drum barkers,  (2) ring barkers, (3) bag
barkers, (4) hydraulic barkers, or  (5) cutterhead barkers.

Drum barkers are made in a wide variety of sizes, generally
two and four-tenths to four  and nine-tenths meters (eight
to sixteen feet) in diameter and up to 22.8 meters (75 feet)
in length.  A drum barker  consists  of a cylindrical shell
rotating on its horizontal longitudinal axis.  Logs are fed
into one end and the tumbling  and rolling action removes the
bark.  Water sprays may  be used to  reduce dust., promote the
thawing of wood in cold  climates, or reduce the bond between
the bark and wood.

Ring barkers or rotary barkers consist of a rotating ring on
which several radial arms  are  pivoted.  On the end- of each arm
is a tool which abrades  or scrapes  off the bark.  A ring bar-
ker handles only one log at  a  time, but can handle logs up
to 213.4 centimeters (84 inches) in diameter.

Bag barkers or pocket barkers  are simple stationary .containers
in which the logs are rotated  to remove bark by abrasion.
Water may also be used in  this process for the same purposes
as were described for the  drum barkers.

The hydraulic barker uses  a  high pressure water .jet to blast
bark from a log.  Pressures  from 56.25 to 112.4 kilograms of
force per square centimeter  (800 to 1600 psi) are used with
flow rates varying from  25.2 to 101 liters per. second (400 to
1600 gallons per minute).   Due to the large volumes-of ultra-
clean water required, the  inability to recycle wa-ter and the
resulting wastewater flow, hydraulic barkers are slowly being
phased out.  In the cutterhead barker, logs are fed through
the barker one at a time and a cylindrical cutterhead removes
bark by a milling action as  it rotates parallel to the axis
of the log.  No water is employed.

All of the wet barkers use large amounts of water-and require
a fairly  complex operation  (Figure 10) to separate the bark
from the water and dry it  so that it can be used'as fuel in
the boiler.  In spite of the recovery operations, the effluent
from wet barkers have high solids concentrations.  It is
                             44

-------
cn


LOG
STORAGE


PROCESS
WATER
1 	
PROCESS
BACK WATER
1
t
LOG
WASHER
	 _,

Jr« 	
COARSE
SCREENING
i<^
f
FINE
SCREENING
1
i
DIVERSION
BOX
1
i
EFFLUENT

4-4-J.1.4**
J
' 1
WET DRUM
POCKET OR
HYDRAULIC BAR
	 1
BARK PRESS

fc DEB
LOG
1
OFF
tKER
CYC
*-*^

ARKED
S

GASES
t
LONE +•-+-+-.

+ | 1+ + +^ BARK BOILER ^-4-t-l
4


ASH TO LAND . ._
DISPOSAL

BJ
PR
BA
GA
BA
RE
EF
ODUCT AND
W MATERIAL
OCESS WATER —
CK WATER
SES
RK ASH ^
SIDUE
FLUENT -
4 4
L™i

—
h++-
                        FIGURE 10  (8) - WET BARKING  PROCESS  DIAGRAM

-------
DRAFT


expected that wet barkers will disappear in the near
future since at the present time their main use is for
debarking oversized logs, which are diminishing in supply.

Log Conditioning

Heating of logs prior to veneering serves to improve the
cutting properties of wood, particularly hardwood.  His-
torically, both hardboard and softwood mills have prac-
ticed log heating.  There has been in recent years a trend
away from log heating in the softwood industry, but the
current trend is again toward this practice.

Wken the heating of logs occurs not only prior to veneer-
ing, but also prior to debarking, it also facilitates the
debarking operation, and this has been the common practice
in the past.  With the increasing use of ring and cutterhead
barkers whose operations are not aided by prior heating to
the same degree as other debarking methods, heating commonly
occurs between the debarking and veneering operations.

There are basically two methods of heating logs:  (1) by direc-
ting steam onto the logs in a "steam vat" (steam tunnel), and
(2) by heating the logs in a "hot water vat" full of water
which is heated either directly with live steam or indirectly
with steam coils.

Heating in steam vats is generally more violent than in hot
water vats.  Steam vats are therefore more applicable to species
of wood that do not rupture under rapid and sudden thermal in-
creases.  The times and temperatures of these conditioning
processes vary with species, age, size, and character of veneer
to be cut.  The experience has been that the harder  (more
dense) the species and the more difficult to cut, the longer
the conditioning period and the lower the temperature required.
Some of the softer woods can be cut satisfactorily without
such conditioning.  Among these are poplar, bass wood, cotton-
wood, and certain conifers.

Veneer Cutting

The principal process unit in the manufacturing of veneers is
the cutting of the veneer.  There are four methods used to cut
veneer:   (1) rotary lathing,  (2) slicing, (3) stay log cutting,
and (4) sawn veneering.

Currently more than 90 percent of all veneer is rotary cut (9).
In this method of cutting, a bolt of wood is centered between
two chucks on a lathe.  The bolt is turned against a knife
extending across the length of the lathe, and, as the log
turns, a thin sheet of veneer is peeled from it.  Lathes
                             46

-------
 DRAFT


capable of peeling logs from 3.66 to-4.88 meters (12 to 16
feet) in length are not uncommon.  More  commonly,  however,
veneer is cut in lengths ranging from 0.610 to 2.44 meters
(two to eight feet).   The bolts that are to be veneered are
usually cut from 10 to 15 centimeters (four to six inches)
longer than the width of veneer to be cut from them.

Most slicers consist of a stationary knife.  The flitch to be
cut  is attached to a log bed which moves up and down.  On
each downward stroke a slice of veneer is cut by the knite.
Slicers are used primarily for cutting decorative face veneers
from woods such as walnut, mahogany, cherry, and oak.

Stay log cutting produces veneers which are intermediate be-
tween rotary cut and sliced veneers.  A flitch  is attached to
a stay log or metal beam, mounted off center to a rotary  lathe.
The  stay log method produces half-round veneer which is generally
used for faces.

A very small quantity  of veneer  is  cut by  sawn  veneering.  A
circular type  saw,called a  segment  saw,with a thin,  segmented
blade  turns  on  an  arbor.  The  thin  blade reduces  saw kert.
This method  generally  is used  only  for certain  species  such as
oak,  red cedar, and Spanish cedar  in order to achieve  special
effects.   Veneers  are  cut to thicknesses ranging  from .0.0231  to
9.53 millimeters  (one-one hundred  and tenth to  three-eighths  of an
inch).  Most of the rotary  cut veneers are either-3'.63,  3.18,  -3.b4,
1.69,  or  1.27  millimeters  (one-seventh,  one-eighth,  one-tenth,, one-
fifteenth,  or  one-twentieth of an  inch)  thick.' Sliced-veneer usu-
ally ranges  from  1.27  to  0.635 millimeters (one-twentieth to  one-
 fortieth  of an inch).   Sawed veneers vary  from  6.35 to 0.795  milli-
meters (one-fourth to  one-thirty second  of an inch)-in.thickness.

The veneer coming from the  lathe is cut  to rough  green size,
 and defects are removed at  the green clipper.

Veneer Drying

 Freshly cut veneers  are ordinarily unsuited for gluing because
 of their wetness.  In the undried  (green)  state,  veneers are
 also susceptible to attack by  molds, blue-stain,  and-wood-destroy-
 ing fungi.  It is therefore necessary to remove the-excess moisture
 as rapidly as  possible.  Veneers are usually dried to a moisture
 content of less than ten percent.

 Several methods for drying veneers are in common use.  The
 most common dryers are long chambers equipped with rollers on
 belts which advance the veneer longitudinally through the
                              47

-------
DRAFT
chamber.   Fans  and heating coils  are  located on the sides of
the  chamber  to  control temperature  and humidity.

The  majority of high-temperature  (above 100°C:212°F) veneer
dryers  depend upon steam as a heat  source.  The heat is trans-
ferred  to  the air  by heat exchangers.   However, direct-fired
oil  and gas  dryers are becoming  increasingly common in the
industry.

The  conventional progressive type and  compartment type lum-
ber  kilns  are also used in drying veneers.  Air drying is
practiced  but is quite rare except  in  the production of low
grade veneer such  as that used in crate manufacturing.  Air
drying  is  accomplished by simply  placing the veneer in stacks
open to the  atmosphere,  but in such a  way as to allow good
circulation  of  air.

Veneer  Preparation

Between the  drying and gluing operations are a series of minor
operations that prepare  and/or salvage veneer.  These opera-
tions may  include  grading and matching,  redrying, dry-clipping,
jointing,  taping and splicing, and  inspecting and repairing.
These operations are self-descriptive  and completely mechanical
or manual  except for jointing and splicing which may use some
sort of adhesive;  however,  the bonding does not have to be as
strong  as  that  in  the gluing of plywood, and the amount of
adhesive used is kept to  a  minimum.  Most of these gluing
operations do not  require washing.

Gluing  Operations

A number of  adhesives can be used in the manufacture of ply-
wood.   For the  purpose of this discussion, distinction is
made between (1) protein,  (2)  phenol-formaldehyde, and (3)
urea-formaldeJjyde  glues,  since these are the classes of glue
most often used in the industry.  Protein glue is extracted
from plants  and animals,  while the  other two are synthetic
and thermosetting  glues.  Table 10  lists ingredients of typi-
cal protein,  phenolic,  and  urea glue mixes.

Both protein and urea-formaldehyde  glues are chiefly interior
glues,  while  phenol-formaldehyde  is an exterior glue.   Urea-
formaldehyde  is  used almost  exclusively  in the hardwood plywood
industry when the  panels  are used for  furniture 'and indoor
panelling.   Phenol-formaldehyde is  a thermosetting resin like
                             48

-------
DRAFT
                           TABLE 10

INGREDIENTS OF TYPICAL PROTEIN,  PHENOLIC AND UREA GLUE MIXES (lO)


            Protein Glue For Interior Grade Plywood:

                            Water
                         Dried Blood
                          Soya Flour
                             Lime
                       Sodium Silicate
                        Caustic  Soda
               Formaldehyde Doner for Thickening


           Phenolic Glue For Exterior Grade Plywood

                            Water
                           Furafil
                         Wheat Flour
                 Phenolic Formaldehyde Resin
                        Caustic  Soda
                          Soda Ash


                Urea Glue For Hardwood Plywood

                            Water
                           Defoamer
                   Extender (Wheat Flour)
                   Urea Formaldehyde Resin
                             49

-------
DRAFT


urea- formaldehyde,  but  it  is waterproof and is practically
the only glue used  to make  exterior plywood.  Exterior glue,
however, is being increasingly used to produce interior ply-
wood as well as  exterior,  so that the use of phenol-formalde-
hyde is increasing  rapidly.  Table 11 shows the break-down of
glue usage in 1965  and  the  projected usage for 1975.  At present,
phenolic glues comprise  about 50 percent of all glue consumed
while by 1975 it is projected that about 80 percent of all the
glue used in plywood manufacturing will be phenolic based.

Historically, protein glues had been the only adhesive used
in the plywood industry.  However, as a result of synthetic
resins becoming  less expensive and their versatility becoming
more recognized, the use of protein glues is disappearing.  At
the present time, the main  advantage of some protein glues is
that they can be cold pressed.  But while cold pressing is a
simpler and cheaper operation, it is usually only satisfactory
for interior plywood.


                           TABLE 11

       CURRENT AND  PROJECTED ADHESIVE CONSUMPTION IN
                   THE PLYWOOD INDUSTRY
1965
     (Millions of Kilograms
                                                  s)
                                                  197
Plywood Type  Phenolic  Urea  Protein   Phenolic  Urea  Protein

Western
Exterior         37       --      --        88

Western
Interior        6.4       --      47        62

Southern
Exterior         --       --      --        41

Southern
Interior        4.5       --      --        39

Hardwood         --       25      --        --      54      --

TOTALS           48       25      47       230      54     Nil
                             50

-------
DRAFT


Most plywood manufacturers mix their own glue'in'large dough
type mixers.  The glue is then applied to the veneer by means
of a spreader, the most common of which consists'of two power
driven rollers supplied with the adhesive.  Protein glues are
usually applied with steel rollers, while other glues are
usually applied with rubber-covered rollers.  More recently
the practice of applying glue by means of sprays and curtain-
coaters has emerged.  Since all glues harden with time, the
glue system must be cleaned regularly to avoid build-up of
dried glue.  Some of the most recent spray curtain-coater glue
applicators require less washing than the conventional rollers.

Pressing

The gluing operations in the plywood industry are finished by
subjecting the sheets to pressure for the purpose"of insuring
proper alignment and an intimate contact between the wood and
the glue.  The adhesive is allowed to partially cure under pres-
sure.  Pressing may be accomplished at room temperature  (cold-
pressing) or at high temperature (hot-pressing).  Cold-pressing
is used with casein, some protein, and some urea-formaldehyde
adhesives.  Hot-pressing equipment is used to cure some protein,
some urea-formaldehyde, and all of the phenol-formaldehyde ad-
hesives.

Most presses are hydraulic and apply pressures  from 6.1  to 17
atmospheres (75 to  250 psig).  Presses can be hot or cold de-
pending upon operating temperatures.  Cold presses are operated
at room temperatures, while hot presses are operated at  temp-
eratures of up to around 177°C  (350°F) with heat being trans-
ferred by means of  steam, hot water, or hofoil.  Plywood pres-
sing time ranges from two minutes to 24 hours,  depending upon
the temperature of  the press and the type of glue used.  The
hotter the press, the shorter the pressing time.

In recent years, radio-frequency heat has been*used to cure
synthetic resin adhesives.  This works on'the principle  that
when an alternating electric current oscillating  in the  radio
frequency range is  applied to a dielectric material, the ma-
terial will be heated.   It is still questionable whether this
method of heating is economically worthwhile; however, it is
technically applicable for pressing plywood as  well as edge-
gluing.

Finishing

After the pressing  operation, any number  of a series of
finishing  steps, depending upon the operation and the  pro-
duct desired, can be taken.  These operations include:
(1) redrying,  (2) trimming,  (3) sanding,  (4) sorting,
(5) molding,  and  (6) storing.
                             51

-------
DRAFT


PROCESS DESCRIPTION-HARDBOARD

The raw material  for  hardboard- production like the pulp
and paper  industry  is  essentially  all wood.  This wood
may be in  the  form  of  round wood,  wood chips made from
waste products  from saw  mills  and  plywood mills, or other
sources of wood fiber'.   Raw material handling for both
wet and dry process hardboard  mills is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 12  shows a typical inplant  process diagram of a
dry process hardboard  mill and Figure 13 shows a typical
inplant process diagram  of a wet process hardboard mill.
All phases of  the raw  materials handling for both dry and
wet hardboard mills are  essentially the same.  The prin-
ciple difference between the two processes is the manner
in which the fibers are  carried and formed into a mat.

Raw materials,  such as logs, chips, or other forms of wood,
are transported to  the hardboard mill site for storage and
processing.  Logs may  be stored in a log deck or log pond
upon arrival at the mill.  Chips arriving by rail car,
truck, or  simply by conveyer from  an adjoining mill are
stored in bins  or piles.  Logs may or may not be debarked
before being chipped.  There are no general standards for
bark removal as each mill has  its  own standards for the
quantity of bark allowed in its finished product.  In some
mills logs are  washed  before debarking to remove dirt and
other abrasive  material  that would be'detrimental to ma-
chinery or to  the final  product.

Log Barkers

Logs are debarked by several different types of machines (7) ,
including:  (1) drum barkers;  (2)  ring barkers; (3) bag
barkers; (4) hydraulic barkers; and (5) cutterhead barkers.
Drum barkers are made  in a wide-variety of sizes, generally
2.4 to 4.9 meters (8 to  16 feet) in diameter and up to
22.9 meters (75 feet)  in length.   A drum barker consists
of a cylindrical shell rotating on its horizontal longi-
tudinal axis.   Logs are  fed into-one end and the tumbling
and rolling action  removes the bark.  Water sprays may be
used to reduce  dust, promote the thawing of wood in cold
climates, or reduce the  bond between the bark and wood.

Ring barkers or rotary barkers consist of a rotating ring
on which several radial  arms are pivoted. On the end of
each arm is a tool  which abrades or scrapes off the bark.
                             52

-------
               LOGS

               o
               LOG



             STOR AGE
            LOG WASH
            DEBARKER
             CHIPPER
               CHIP

             'STORAGE^
                             O
                         TO PROCESS
CHIP

WASH
FIGURE 11  -  RAW  MATERIAL HANDLING IN THE HARDBOARD INDUSTRY
                           53

-------
    CHI PS
en
**W" " I ' 	 IF! HER l^rEL
^JPREHEATERJZJ REFINER | 	 .BRYER 1^1
(50) (60)pI3 Hi; ^ (7.5)
CHIPS

FIBER

rERSl V, J \ P R F S <

Vj to)
PREPRESS
MAT
-^ - 	 p-
. «— r^X TO
* r^-vT FINISHING
BOARD

      (XX) APPROXIMATE PERCENT MOISTURE
                       FIGURE 12  - TYPICAL DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD MILL

-------
                        CH I PS
FIBER
                                                     DILUTION
                                                     WATER
in
en
                       PREHEATER	 REFINER
M AT
                                                                                         BOARD
                              TO ATMOSPHERE
                              AT
               CHIPS
                     SCREW
                    -FEED
                                                                 WET FORMING
                                                                  MACHIN E
               (1.5)
              TO
              FINISHING
                            WATER IN

                            WATER OUT
                      (XX)  APPROXIMATE PERCENT  FIBER
                            (CONSISTENCY IN PROCESS)
                                   FIGURE 13 - TYPICAL  WET PROCESS HARDBOARD MILL

-------
DRAFT


A  ring  barker  handles only one log  at  a  time but can handle
logs up to  2.1 meters (7 feet) in diameter.  Bag barkers
or pocket barkers  are simple stationary  containers in which
the logs are rotated to remove bark by abrasion.  Water may
also be used in this process.

The hydraulic  barker uses a high  pressure water jet to blast
bark from a log.   Pressures from  56 to 112 kilograms per
square  centimeter  (800 to 1600 psi)  are  used with flow rates
varying from 1,514 to 6,057 liters  per minute  (400 to 1600
gallons per minute).   Due to the  large volumes of ultra clean
water required,  the inability  to  recycle water because of
nozzle  plugging, and the resulting  wastewater  flow, hydraulic
barkers are slowly being phased out. The last  general type
of barker is a cutterhead barker.   Logs  are fed through this
barker  one at  a time,  and a cylindrical  cutterhead removes
bark by a milling  action as it rotates parallel to the axis
of the  log.

Logs or wood scraps must be either  processed to chips on-site
or  converted to chips  off-site and  hauled to the mill.  There
are several types  of chippers  utilized in the  industry with
disc chippers  being the  most common.   After chipping, chips
are screened to segregate them into  various sizes.  Screens
may be  of the  rotating,  shaking,  vibrating, or gyrating types,
with vibrating and gyrating screens  being the most prevalent.

Chips are stockpiled  in  the open, under  a roof, or totally
enclosed in chip silos.   Some  mills  presently wash chips to
remove  dirt and  other  trash which would  cause high maintenance
in  the  fiber preparation stages.  The  quantity of dirt in
chips depends  upon many  factors.  For  the future, hardboard
manufacturers  project  the utilization  of complete trees, in-
cluding bark,  limbs,  and leaves.  This will cause additional
dirt to be brought to  the mill.   Weather conditions during
logging operations also  have a significant effect on the
quantity of dirt as  logs must  be  stored  on the ground. Chip
washing is also  important for  thawing  frozen chips in more
northern climates.   There is a general industrial trend to-
ward use of lower  quality fiber because  of the increased
demand  for timber  products,  high  cost  of logs, and their
general scarcity.   With  the use of  lower quality fiber,  such
as tree limbs  and  bark,  it  will become more and more desirable
to wash chips.

Fiber Preparation

Fiber preparation  is one of the most important process operations
in the production  of hardboard.   There are two basic methods of
                             56

-------
DRAFT
 fiber preparation, but a wide range of variations exists
 within  each basic method.  These  two basic methods are:

                (1)  Thermal plus  mechanical refining
                (2)  Explosion process.

 In  the  explosion process, wood chips are subjected to high
 temperature steam in a "gun," or  high pressure vessel, and
 ejected through a quick opening valve (7).  Upon ejection,
 the softened chips burst into a mass of fiber or fiber bun-
 dles.   The process is essentially a high temperature acid
 hydrolysis and  lignin softening procedure, and is adaptable
 to  almost any ligno-cellulosic material.  Chips approxi-
 mately  19 millimeters (three-fourths inch) square, prepared
 in  conventional chippers and screened, are fed into a bat-
 tery of 50.8 centimeter [20 inch) calibre guns or high
 pressure vessels.  Each gun is filled and closed.  The chips
 are then ^teamed to 42 kilograms  per square centimeter (600
 psi) for about one minute after which the pressure is quickly
 raised  to about 70 kilograms per  square centimeter (1,000 psi
 equivalent to about 285°C [550°FJ) and held for about five
 seconds.  The time of treatment at this high pressure is very
 critical, and depends on the species and the-desired quality
 of  the  product.  The pressure is  suddenly released into a
 brown,  fluffy mass of fiber.  Entering a cyclone the steam
 is condensed and the exploded fiber falls into a stock chest
 where it is mixed with water and  pumped through washers, re-
 finers, and screens.   The yields  of fiber from pulping by
 the explosion method are lower than those for other coarse
 pulping procedures, due largely to the hydrolysis of hemi-
 cellulosic material under conditions of steaming at high
 pressure.  The explosion process  is used in only two hard-
 board mills in the United States, both owned-by the Masonite
 Corporation.

 By far  the most widely used fiber preparation consists of
 both thermal and mechanical pulping (11).  Thermal plus
 mechanical refining,  as its name  implies, involves a pre-
 liminary treatment of the raw material with heat in addition
 to mechanical action in order to  reduce the raw material to
 pulp.   The mechanical reduction is carried out in disc re-
 finers or attrition mills after the pulp-type chips or
 shredded raw materials have first been softened by steaming.

One of the advantages of this attrition mill method of pulping
 over conventional grinding lies in the fact that a greater
variety of species and forms of raw material may be processed,
 including materials from roundwood, slabs, edgings and veneer
residues, as well as  materials such as pulp screenings,
 shavings, and sawdust.   Furthermore, with the possibilities
                             57

-------
DRAFT
of variation  in pre-steaming, of plate pattern, of plate
clearances, and of number  of refiners, there is considerable
latitude for  the production of pulps possessing a wide range
of properties.  In general, attrition mills such as disc
pulpers produce a good  quality of pulp.  A fast draining
pulp can be readily produced, having few abraded fibers and
coarse fiber  bundles.

In the dry process, similar equipment can be used.  However,
the wood can  also be  subjected to lower steam pressures of-
2.1 to 8.5 kilograms  per square centimeter (30 to 120 psi)
for somewhat  longer periods  (one to two minutes) and then
passed through a disc refiner.  In some cases the resin is
added to the  chips while they are being refined by pumping
it through a  hole drilled  through the refiner shaft.

Prior to passing wood chips or other fibrous raw materials
through disc  pulpers  or refiners, it is often expedient to
give the material some  form of pre-treatment in order to
reduce subsequent power consumption and improve pulp quali-
ties.  However, the extent of the treatment will again depend
upon the nature of the  raw material and the end product desired,
Steaming softens the  wood  to produce a pulp with fewer broken
fibers and coarse fiber bundles.  The fibers of pulp so made
are more flexible and felt together more readily to form a
stronger board than pulp from wood that has not been steamed.
However, with some species, steaming may increase the tough-
ness of the chips and thereby increase the energy required
for defibering.  The  operation is carried out in digesters
under a variety of conditions of time and temperature.

In one process the chips are brought to a temperature of 170°
to 190°C (340° to 375°F) in a period of 20 to 60 seconds by
means of steam pressure between 7 and- 11.5 kilograms per
square centimeter (100  and 165 psi) and at this temperature
are passed through a  disc  refiner.  It is claimed that due
to the short  steaming period little hydrolysis takes place
and there is  little loss of wood substance, the yield ranging
from 90 to 93 percent.

Attrition mills of the  disc type have two discs, one sta-
tionary and one rotating,  or both rotating, for defibering
and refining.  Various  disc patterns are available and
choice depends on species, pre~-treatment, and the type of
pulp desired.  In most  cases, the discs are made of special
alloys.  The  discs are  usually 600 to 1,000 millimeters
(23 to 40 inches) in  diameter and operate at 400 to 1,200
revolutions per minute.
                              58

-------
DRAFT


Double disc attrition mills, with the discs rotated in
opposite directions, do more work on the fiber and conse-
quently produce a higher stock temperature.  Such equip-
ment, when operating on wood chips, produces well fiberized
material  which may have all the strength required for
board manufacture.  However, where further development or
strength is desired,further refining may be useful.

The single rotating disc mill has certain advantages.  The
feed opening is more accessible and can be made very large
to accomodate bulky materials.  It has fewer moving parts
and fewer bearings than the double disc mill.

Factors which determine the pulp quality produced by attri-
tion mills are properties of the raw material, pre-treatment,
the physical shape of material to be refined,  plate design,
plate clearance, rate of feed, consistency, temperature,
speed of rotation, and rate of energy consumption.  Many of
these factors can only be determined by experiment.  Plate
clearances usually vary from 1.30 millimeters (0.05 inches)
for an initial breakdown of chips to a very low clearance
for the final refining.  As the clearance between the plates
is reduced the strength of the pulp is increased, but because
of the production of more fines, the rate of drainage is re-
duced.  An improved quality of stock may be obtained by using
a plate clearance of about 0.25 millimeters (0.01 inch),
screening out the acceptable stock,and recycling the coarse
material.  This procedure reduces the power consumption and
the pulp will have  a higher percentage of  intermediate  length
fibers and fewer  fines.  A certain amount  of fines, however,^
is desirable as they improve board properties, such as  rigidity,
and provide a smoother surface.

The power requirements for refiner stock from woods commonly
used vary from about 200 to 800 kilowatt" hours per ton  (10 to
40 horsepower per ton) depending on species and pre-treatment.

The consistency of  pulp leaving the attrition mill in a wet
process hardboard mill may vary over wide  limits, but in
general is between  30 and 40 percent fiber.  Lower consis-
tencies are used  with certain material to  prevent'feed  chokes.
High consistencies  tend to produce better  pulps by raising the
temperature.

After conversion  of the raw material to  a  fibrous pulp  in  the
attrition mills,  it may be  screened to remove coarse  fiber
bundles, knots, and slivers.  Some of the  coarse material
can be returned to  the system for  further  breakdown.  Modern
equipment can produce a pulp which does  not require  screening.
                             59

-------
DRAFT


There are various attrition mills on the market for the
preparation of pulp.  Some of the better known ones are des-
cribed in some detail in  references  (12) and (13).  However,
brief reference is made here to the Asplund method (12) which
has been used extensively for preparation of stock for hardboard
mills.  This involves the use of a single rotating disc and
has the feature of combining the steaming and defibering in
one unit in a continuous  operation.  The entire operation is
carried out under pressure and has"the advantage that no
cooling of the steamed chips takes place prior-to defibering,
and foaming difficulties  are substantially reduced.  A unit
may be expected to process 9 to 45 metric tons (10 to 50 tons)
of dry wood per day, depending on the type of wood and the
degree of defibering required.  For hardboard stock, slight
refining may be desirable, especially for the removal of
slivers.  When using modern refining equipment subsequent
screening may be unnecessary.  However, when screening is
considered necessary a vibratory or rotary-type screen
may be used.

The American Hardboard Association (14) describes the remain-
ing processes in the following way.

Forming Hardboard

The manufacture of hardboard consists basically of reducing
trees to fibers and putting them1 back together'in the form
of sheets or boards having properties and characteristics
not formerly attainable in the natural wood.  Before board
formation is started, it  is often desirable to introduce
certain chemical additives to pulp which increases the
strength, water resistance, and other desirable properties
of hardboard.  The additives to be used and the amounts
depend on the species of  wood, degree of refining, and the
final properties desired.  After the inclusion of additives
to the refined pulp, which may be in the form of either a
wet slurry or a dry fluff, the pulp  is ready for delivery
to the board former.to begin the process of reassembling
fibers into hardboard.  The formation or felting of fibers
to form a mat may be done by either the wet-felting process
or the dry-felting  (air-felting) process.

Wet-Felting:  In the wet  process the mat is usually formed
on a fourdrinier type machine such as those used in making
paper.  Refined pulp is pumped to the head box of the machine
and diluted with large quantities of water, until the mixture,
called "stock," contains  only about one and one-half percent
pulp.  The stock flows rapidly and smoothly from the bottom
of the head box onto an endless traveling wire screen.  Special
                             60

-------
DRAFT


devices control the flow of stock allowing it'to-spread evenly
on the screen as an interlaced fibrous'blanket which may be
several inches thick depending upon the desired thickness of
the finished hardboard.  The screen, kept level by tension,
and a number of rollers carry stock onward for about 9 meters
(30 feet) while water is withdrawn through the wire screen.
The water is first removed by gravity and as the screen advances
additional water is removed when the screen passes over one
or more suction boxes.  At this point, stock has felted to-
gether into a continuous fibrous1 sheet called "wetlap."
The forming screen extends between a number of pairs of press
rollers which also have an endless screen travelling around
a series of the paired rollers.  Here more water is removed
as the press rollers gradually apply pressure to the wetlap,
a process which is similar to the wringing action of a wash-
ing machine.

When the wet mat emerges from press rollers it is still
quite wet (50 to 75 percent moisture) but yet strong enough
to support its weight over a small span.  At this point, it
leaves the forming screen and- continues its travel over a
conveyor.  The wet mat is then trimmed to width and cut ojrf
to length by a travelling saw which moves across the travelling
mat on a bias making a square cut without the necessity of
stopping the continuous wetlap sheet.  The thickness of wet
mat is normally three or four- times the finished thickness of
the hardboard to be produced.  It still contains a great
deal of water which must be removed before the hardboard
manufacturing process is complete.  The wet mat may be de-
livered directly to a platen press where water is removed
by a combination of pressing and heating or it may be con-
veyed to a heated roll dryer where water is evaporated by
heating alone.  The direct pressing method is used to pro-
duce smooth one-side hardboard (SIS).  The evaporative
drying method is used in the production of smooth two-side
hardboard (S2S).  These operations will be described later.

Dry-Felting:  The main difference'between- the dry, or air-
felting process, and the wet-felting process is that in the
dry process fibers are suspended in air rather than in water
as is the case in the wet-felting process.  The unit developed
for laying down a continuous mat'of dry fibers is called the
felter.  The prepared fibers are fed by volumetric feeders to
the felting unit at a controlled rate.  A nozzle in the unit
distributes fibers to the top of the felter chamber and the
fibers fall to the floor of the felter similar to a heavy
snow storm.  The effects of this snowing action produce an
interwoven mat of fibers.  The floor of the felter is a moving
screen which is synchronized with the volumetric feeders.
                             61

-------
DRAFT


Air is sucked through  the  screen  to aid'in the felting.  As
the mat emerges from the felting  chamber', • it has attained the
height necessary for the thickness of the board desired.

When a finished board  of 3.2 millimeters  (one-eighth inch) is
desired, the height of the mat as it emerges from the felting
chamber may be as much as  10 to 15 centimeters (4 to 6 inches).
Once the mat is formed, the procedure of compressing, trim-
ming, and sawing of the mat is similar to that for the wet
process.  However, air-formed mats prior to pressing are
always thicker and softer  than wet-formed mats and usually
require more care in loading the  hardboard press.

Hardboard Press

The heart of every hardboard process is the press.  Here
the reassembly of wood particles  is completed and fibers
are welded together into a tough, durable grainless board.
Hardboard presses are  massive, consisting of heavy steel
heads and bases, each  of which may weigh 45 metric tons
(50 tons) or more, held together  by steel columns 25 to
30 centimeters (10 or  12 inches)  in diameter and as long
as 9 to 12 meters (30  to 40 feet).  Between the head and
the base of the press  are  suspended a number of steel platens
which are drilled internally to provide circulating passages
for high pressure steam or water  which is used to provide
heat necessary to help weld the fibers together.  Several
hydraulic rams with a  movable head are placed below the
platens and on top of  the  base to apply pressure upwards
toward the head of the press.  When open, the hydraulic
rams are at their lowest position.  Each'platen; except the
top and bottom platens which are  fastened firmly to the press
head and moving base respectively, is individually suspended,
allowing an air space  of 8 to 25  centimeters (3 to 10 inches)
between platens.  The  unpressed mats are placed one on top of
each platen so that there  is an equivalent of a multi-deck
sandwich with the mat  located between the steel platens.
When the press is loaded,  hydraulic pressure is applied to
the rams.  This operation  forces  the platens up against the
head of the press, squeezing the  mats down to a fraction of
their former thickness.  Pressures exerted may vary from 35 to
100 kilograms per square centimeter (500 to 1,500 psi) depend-
ing on the process and density desired in the finished board.
Most hardboard presses have 20 openings and 21 platens, so
that 20 boards may be  pressed at  the same time.  Some presses
have as few as ten openings and some as many as 30.  Press
sizes vary, but include 1.2 meters by 4.9 meters (four feet by
16 feet), 1.2 meters by 2.4 meters (four feet by eight feet),
1.2 meters by 5.5 meters (four feet by 18 feet), and 1.5 meters
                             62

-------
DRAFT
by 4.9 meters (five feet by 16 feet).  The 1.2 meters by 4.9
meters (four feet by 16 feet)-is the most common production
size.  The combination of heat and pressure applied to mats
in the press welds the fibers  back together and produces
properties which are unattainable in natural wood.   The amount
of time required for pressing  and the details of temperature
and pressure vary widely, depending upon the process and
physical properties in the particular hardboard being produced.

To facilitate loading and unloading the board in the press,
most presses are equipped with loading and unloading racks,
which usually take the form of multi-deck elevators, with
one deck for each opening in the hardboard press.  Mats are
loaded on all decks of a loading rack.  When the hardboard
press is open, unpressed mats  are fed into the press at the
same time pressed mats are removed at the other end of the
press and placed into an unloading rack.  Then, while the
new boards are under pressure, unpressed mats are placed
into the loading rack and pressed mats are discharged one at
a time from the loading rack and conveyed to subsequent opera-
tions.

Pressing Operation:  There are two basic-types'of hardboard,
smooth one-side (SIS) and smooth two-sides (S2S).  In making
SIS hardboard, the cut-to-size mat is delivered from the
board former onto a piece of screen wire slightly larger in
overall dimensions than the piece of wet mat.  The wires carry-
ing wet mats are loaded into the decks of the press loading
racks and are loaded into the  press openings.  When the press
is closed and pressure applied, a large portion of water is
removed.  The remaining water  must be evaporated by the heat
of the press platens.  Temperatures used in the production of
SIS board are around 190°C (380°F).  The entire process of
pressing the board is carefully controlled by automatic elec-
trical equipment.

When a wet-formed mat is to be used to produce S2S hardboard,
it is delivered from the forming machine into a hot air dryer
where surplus moisture is evaporated.  This may require from
one to four hours depending upon the weight of board being
produced.  At this stage the mat is in large pieces, usually
two or three times as wide as  the hardboard which will ulti-
mately be pressed.  The mat is trimmed to the desired length
and width (usually slightly larger than 1.2 meters by 4.9
meters [four feet by 16 feet]) and delivered to the S2S hard-
board press.  At this point, the board may have less than one
percent moisture content, and  it is strong and rigid enough
to support its own weight.  Thus, board can be delivered
                             63

-------
DRAFT


directly into the press openings and*pressed'with smooth pla-
tens, or caul plates, directly against both sides.  Since
moisture does not have to be squeezed and evaporated, the
press cycle, which is from one to four minutes for common
thickness, is much shorter than for comparable thicknesses of
SIS board, which requires a 4 to 12 minute pressing time.  The
dried board is much harder to compress than the soft, wet SIS;
consequently, hydraulic pressures three times greater
must be applied.  Press temperatures in excess of 288°C
(550°F) must also be attained.

Dry-formed mat may also be used to produce S2S hardboard.
When this is done, the fibers must be reduced to a desired
low moisture content prior to the board formation.  Most
dry air-formed mats are deposited-directly on traveling
caul plates and delivered into the press.  These traveling
caul plates are necessary because the air-formed mat is
too fragile to support its own weight before pressing.
However, once in the press the combination of heat, pres-
sure, and time consolidates the soft, fluffy material into
a tough, durable piece of hardboard.

Oil Tempering

After being discharged from the press, a certain amount of
hardboard is selected to receive a special treatment called
tempering.  Tempering consists of impregnating the sheets
of hardboard by dipping or roller-coating them in a bath
composed of drying oils and various drying resins derived
from petroleum.

As sheets are removed from the oil bath, they are passed
through a series of pressure rollers which aid in permeating
the oils and removing any excess.  The oil is then stabilized
by baking the sheet from one to four hours at temperatures
ranging from 143° to 171°C (290° to 340°F) .  Tempering hard-
board increases the hardness, strength, and water resistance,
thus making the board more resistant to abrasion and weathering.

Humidification

When sheets of hardboard are removed from the press, or the
tempering oven, they are very hot and dry.  The boards must
be subjected to a seasoning operation called "humidification,"
otherwise they may tend to warp and change dimensions.  Humidi-
fication is carried out by conveying boards through a long
tunnel humidifier, or charging them in racks which enter a
chamber where a high relative humidity is maintained.  The
boards are retained in the humidifier until they reach the
proper moisture content.  Although hardboards are humidified,
they should be allowed to adjust to local atmospheric condi-
tions before being installed.


                             64

-------
DRAFT


Further Processing

The final operation includes trimming the board to length
and width.  Sheets of hardboard may be cut into any size a
customer desires.  Also, hardboard may be fabricated in a
variety of ways.  Some of the finishing processes include
simulating wood grain finishes, applying paint for a variety
of uses, embossing, and scoring.

After all operations have been completed and the sheets of
hardboard pass their final rigid inspection, they are wrapped
or packaged and sent to the warehouse for shipment to cus-
tomers.

Table 12 shows the proposed voluntary classification of hard-
board by surface finish, thickness, and physical properties.

PROCESS DESCRIPTION-WOOD PRESERVING

Treatments are applied by the industry to round and sawn wood
products by injecting into them chemicals previously described
that have fungistatic and insecticidal properties, or that im-
part fire resistance.  Treatment is accomplished by either pres-
sure or non-pressure processes.  Pressure processes for treating
wood with preservatives employ a combination of air and/or hydro-
static pressure and vacuum.  Differences among the various pres-
sure treating processes used are based mainly on the sequence of
application of vacuum and pressure.  The particular process used
does not significantly affect either the quantity or the quality
of wastewater discharged by a plant. Non-pressure processes uti-
lize open tanks and either hot or cold preservatives in which the
stock to be treated is immersed.  Employment of this process on a
commercial scale to treat timbers and poles is largely confined
to the Rocky Mountain and Pacific regions, particularly the latter,
It is used to treat lumber and posts in  the East.

The effect of species of wood on the waste stream is significant
only to the extent that it determines the conditioning method that
must be employed to prepare stock for preservative treatment.
Some species, such as the southern pines, are conditioned by a
process in which the stock is steamed at approximately 118°C
(245°F) for periods of from 1 to 16 hours preparatory  to preserva-
tive treatment.  This process, which is  normally carried out in
the same retort  in which the actual injection of preservative is
subsequently performed, has as  its purpose to reduce the moisture
content of green wood and to render the  wood more penetrable,
thus improving  the quality of the preservative treatment.  Other
species,  i.e.,  Douglas fir, are conditioned for  the  same purposes
                              65

-------
    DRAFT

                                    TABLE 12

CLASSIFICATION OF HARDBOARD BY SURFACE FINISH, THICKNESS, AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES (15)
Water Resistance
(max av per panel)
Class

1
2
3
Surface

SIS
SIS
and
S2S
SIS
and
S2S
SIS
and
S2S
Water
Nominal Absorption based
Thickness on Weight

mm-
2.1
2.5
3.2
4.8
6.4
7.9
9.5
2.1
2.5
3.2
4.8
6.4
7.9
9.5
3.2
4.8
6.4
9.5
SIS
percent-
1
30
20
15
12
10
8
8
40
25
20
18
16
14
12
20
18
15
14
S2S
percent1
	
25
20
18
12
11
10
40
20
25
25
20
15
12
25
20
20
18
Tensile Strength
Modulus of (min av per panel)
Rupture Parallel Perpendic-
Thickness • (min av per to ular to
Swelling panel) Surface Surface
SIS
percent
25
16
11
10
8
8
8
30
22
16
14
12
10
10
15
13
13
11
S2S
percent -Kilo-Newton per square meter-
	
20
16
15 1015 507.5 21.75
11
10
9
30
25
18
18 725 362.5 14.5
14
12
10
22
18
14 625.5 290 14.5
14
         Note:    1:  Tempered
                 2:  Standard
                 3:  Service-Tempered

-------
DRAFT

                                TABLE 12 CONTINUED





Water Resistance
Cmax av per panel)
Class Surface

SIS
and
S2S
4
S2S
SIS
and
S2S
5
S2S
Water
Nominal Absorption based
Thickness on Weight- •

mm
3.2
4.8
6.4
11.1
12.7
IS. 9
17.5
19.1
20.6
22.2
25.4
9.5
11.1
12.7
15.9
17.5
19.1
20.6
22.2
25.4
SIS
percent
30
25
25
25
25
— _
25
25
25

S2S
percent
30
27
27
27
18
15
15
12
12
12
12
25
25
25
22
22
20
20
20
20


Tensile btrengtn
Modulus of (min av per panel)
Rupture Parallel Perpendic-
Thickness (min av per to ular to
Swelling panel) Surface Surface
SIS
percent
25
15
15
15
15
—
20
20
20

S2S

percent --Kilo-Newton per square meter-
25
22
22
22
14
12
12
9
9
9
9
20
20
20
18
18
16
16
16
16
435 217.5 10.875
290 145 5.075

       Note:   4:  Service
              5:  Industrialite

-------
DRAFT


by a process called Boultonizing in tvhich the wood is heated
under vacuum in the preservative at 82° to 104°C (180° to 220°F)
prior to preservative injection.  Boultonizing is not used where
the preservative is of the water-borne type.

Wastewater generated in steam conditioning is composed of both
steam condensate and water removed from the wood.  Wastewater
from the Boultonizing process is composed only of water removed
from the wood.  Both waste streams are contaminated by the pre-
servative used, and, where the same preservative is used, the
difference between them is primarily a quantitative one.

A process flow diagram for a typical plant using steam condition-
ing is shown in Figure 14.

INDUSTRY CATEGORIZATION

The general objective of industry categorization is to subdivide
the industry in order that separate effluent limitations and stan-
dards may be developed for such categories, if it is determined
that separate regulation is necessary.  A further necessary con-
sideration, however, has to be based on whether differences in
segments of the industry require separate technical analyses,
even if the results of the analyses should lead to the same regu-
lations .

The Environmental Protection Agency preliminarily categorized the
timber products industry according to Standard Industrial Classifi-
cation (SIC) codes.  In Phase I of this study, veneer and plywood,
hardboard, and wood preserving are covered.  Due to the extreme
differences among the three industries, the categorization is main-
tained.

VENEER AND PLYWOOD-SUBCATEGORIZATION

The veneer and plywood industry has been assigned two SIC codes:
SIC 2435 includes hardwood veneer and plywood, and SIC 2436 in-
cludes softwood  U6) .  It has been concluded that due to the
applicability of treatment and control technology to the indus-
try and due to other factors, hardwood and softwood veneer and
plywood mills can be treated as one category without further sub-
categorization.  Representatives of the industry have concurred
with this conclusion.

Raw Materials

Numerous species of wood are used to cut veneer and produce ply-
wood.  Wastewater characteristics vary widely with raw material.
For example,  it  is known that softwoods in contact with water,
particularly  hot water, release more wood  sugars than do hardwoods
                             68

-------
o
10



O £?-




            FIGURE  14  -  PROCESS  FLOW  DIAGRAM FOR A TYPICAL  WOOD-PRESERVING PLANT
                        (COURTESY  OF  ALBERT  H.  HALFF  ASSOCIATES,  INC.,  DALLAS,  TEXAS)

-------
DRAFT


Within the broad categories  of  softwood  and hardwood there are
also many species with  varying  leaching  characteristics.  In
addition, it  is known that variations  in process are often dic-
tated by the  raw materials.   For example, hardwoods require log
conditioning  while  some species of  softwood do not.

While it would be expected that different wastewater charac-
teristics result from different raw materials, it is observed
that volumes  of wastewaters  vary only  with process variations.
In addition,  the control  and treatment technology applied to
the industry  consists almost exclusively of recycle and con-
tainment and  is more a  function of  wastewater volume than of
pollutant concentration.  Differences  according to species do
not significantly affect  the degree to which wastewaters can
be treated or controlled  and, therefore, are rejected as pos-
sible elements for  subcategorization.

Type Of Product

The type of product manufactured is not  directly related to
wastewater volumes  or concentrations and is, therefore, con-
sidered ineffective as  a  basis  for  subcategorization.

Size And Age  Of Facility

The veneer and plywood  industry is  an  old industry and contains
a number of old mills.  The  softwood plywood industry, however,
has been experiencing substantial growth for the past 20 years,
and numerous  new facilities  have been  constructed.  The south-
eastern United States,  the main area for new development, con-
tains many of the newer plywood plants.  Even though the ages of
plants vary,  the ages of  various components of a plant are not
necessarily reflected in  total  installation age; equipment is
constantly being replaced.   Plant age  is therefore'rejected as
a possible element  for  subcategorization.

The size of mills can also vary drastically from a backyard
operation producing 200,000  square  meters (two million square
feet) of plywood per year to a  large plywood mill producing
50 million square meters  (600 million  square feet) per year.
Since the volume of wastewater produced  by a mill is largely
proportional  to the size  of  the mill,  control and treatment
are similarly proportional.   While  some  special considerations
based on economics may  be necessary for  extreme cases, plant
size is rejected as a possible element for subcategorization.
                              70

-------
DRAFT


Process Variation

As suggested above, there are many process variations in the
veneer and plywood industry.  These variations can.-be due to
a number of factors, including:  raw materials, climate, type
of product, and personal preference.

Earlier in this section, process variations were described
in detail.  A mill may or may not condition logs; it may have
wet or dry decking; it may remove the bark with or without^
water; it may or may not dry the veneer.  Also, log condition-
ing may be accomplished in steam vats or hot water vats;
dryers may have to be cleaned weekly, bi-weekly, or not at
all.  Most of these differences are dictated by the factors
previously listed, while in some cases it is merely a matter
of personal preference.

Even though there are a number of variations, particular unit
processes are basically similar from plant to plant.  It was
therefore concluded that a feasible approach would be to charac-
terize each- unit operation rather than entire mills, and then
to assemble these unit operations accordingly to determine  the
characteristics of a particular plant.

The variations in process are  quite numerous, as might  be expec-
ted in an  industry composed of about 500  installations; however,
with few  exceptions, all variations can comply with  regulations
based on  a single category  encompassing all veneer,  plywood,
and veneer-plywood  installations.

Land Availability

Since most treatment technology requires  some  amount'of land,
and  since  one of  the more economically  attractive1 treatment
alternatives considered  is  containment  of the wastes,  land
availability must  be considered.  Most  veneer  and. plywood
mills have sufficient  land  availability.   However,  there  are
certain plants located  in urban areas which have  a decisive
lack  of available  land.  While it  is  likely that  most  of  these
will  have the opportunity to  use municipal sewers-,  they will
require specific  consideration.  With this stipulation, land
availability  is  rejected as  a parameter for subcategorization.
                             71

-------
DRAFT


HARDBOARD  INDUSTRY- SUBCATEGORIZATION

In developing  Effluent  Limitations  Guidelines and Standards
of Performance for  new  sources  for  a  given  industry, a judg-
ment must  be made as  to whether effluent  limitations and
standards  are  appropriate  for different segments  (subcategories)
within the industry.  The  factors considered in determining
whether  such subcategories are  justified  are:
                     Raw materials
                 (2)  Manufacturing process
                 (3)  Plant  size
                 (4)  Plant  age
                 (5)  Product
                 (6)  Plant  location
                 (7)  Air pollution control equipment
                 (8)  Waste  generated
                     Treatability of wastewaters
After extensive review  of the  above  factors,  involving plant
inspections, discussions  with  industry  representatives, and
review of literature, it  was concluded  that the hardboard
industry should be broken into  two subcategories which are
(1) dry process hardboard and  (2) wet process hardboard.

Raw Material

Raw materials in  the hardboard  industry consist mainly of
wood fiber and quantities of additives  such as phenolic
formaldehyde, urea formaldehyde, alum,  ferric chloride and
petroleum waxes.  The type of wood fiber utilized will
depend upon many  variables including plant location, avail-
ability of raw material,  and product to be made.  The species
of wood and even  the season of  harvest will have an effect on
wastewater characteristics.

Composition changes in  the binders are being made at different
times by the industry to  reduce raw materials cost, to improve
the final product, and  to reduce wastewater concentrations.
Each mill has its own characteristics; however, in general, the
waste characteristics for dry process hardboard mills and wet
process hardboard mills are similar.  Therefore, raw materials
is not a basis for subcategorization.

Manufacturing Process

There are two different manufacturing processes in the hardboard
industry which affect wastewater flow and composition.  These
are the dry-felting process and the wet-felting process.  In
                              72

-------
DRAFT
the dry-felting process the fibers are suspended in air as
compared with the wet-felting process where the fibers are
suspended in water.  There is little or no process wastewater
discharge from the dry-felting process, while there is a
continuous and substantial wastewater discharge from the
wet-felting process.  One of the dry process mills which
adds water to the mat after dry forming has a discharge
from the press.  This mill should be considered a special
case and be given special consideration.

Wet-felting (wet process) hardboard mills may press board either
dry or wet.  If the board is to be pressed dry it is oven dried
before pressing.  Since there is only one existing hardboard
mill which produces hardboard alone by wet-felting, dry pres-
sing, it is not sufficient cause for a separate category.  The
wastewater from this particular mill is somewhat higher than a
typical wet process mill; therefore, it should be considered a
special case and given individual consideration.

There are several insulation board mills which produce hardboard
by the wet process followed by dry pressing.  Because insulation
board mills will be considered in Phase II and because of the
unknown interrelationship between the manufacture of insulation
board and hardboard, these mills will also be surveyed in
Phase II.

In the wet process hardboard mills, fiber preparation is a
major factor affecting wastewater characteristics.  Two mills
utilize the explosion process for fiber preparation which
causes substantially more BOD to be released.  However, both
of these mills have installed evaporators to handle this high
BOD process wastewater and their overall waste discharge is
as low or lower than other wet process mills.  The degree of
fiber preparation will depend upon many factors including
wood species, inplant processes, and final product.  There
are even separate fiber preparation lines for boards that
are made up in layers with the degree of fiber preparation
for each layer dependent upon the product to be produced.
The effect of fiber preparation on wastewater flow and
composition is not sufficient in itself to be used as
grounds for subcategorizing the industry.

Plant Size

It has been determined from existing data and from on-site
inspections that, other than in volumes of water, plant  size
has no effect upon the wastewater characteristics and, there-
fore, should not be taken into consideration.  Plant size
will only affect costs of treatment as  treatment cost for
                            73

-------
DRAFT


larger plants will generally be less per unit basis than for
small plants.

Plant Age

A review of the data shows that plant age has no significant
effect on wastewater discharge.  The major effects of plant
age are the higher maintenance cost and difficulty involved
in installing recycle systems, not in wastewater flow or con-
centration.  Therefore, plant age is not an appropriate basis
for subcategorization.

Product

The type of hardboard produced in any one mill does not neces-
sarily determine the inplant processes used to make that pro-
duct.  In the hardboard industry the product itself is not
sufficient justification  for subcategorizing the industry, as
similar products can be produced by a combination of different
inplant processes.  It is the inplant processes which affect
the wastewater characteristics rather than the product resulting
from the processes.

Plant Location

Geographical location of  hardboard mills affects wastewater
characteristics mainly due to the type of available raw materials.
Variation in raw materials has already been rejected as grounds
for subcategorizing the industry.  Plant location will affect
the weather conditions experienced and the effect of low temp-
eratures on biological treatment systems should be given special
consideration.  Plant location in itself is not sufficient
grounds for subcategorization.

Air Pollution Control Equipment

Air pollution control is  a major problem in the dry process hard-
board industry and the industry is just beginning to take steps
to control the problem.   Air pollution control equipment is not
a major factor affecting  wastewater discharge  in the hardboard
industry, therefore, the  industry subcategorization should not
be affected by air pollution equipment.

Wastes Generated

Variation in waste generated in the hardboard  industry  is directly
related to the two different manufacturing processes utilized  in
making hardboard,  the wet-felting process and  the dr.y-felting  pro-
cess.  The wastewater flow,  excluding cooling  water, from a typi-
cal dry process hardboard mill will consist of a discharge  of  less
than 1,890 liters  per day (500 gallons per day).  This  compares
                             74

-------
 DRAFT


 with a wastewater flow of 1,430,000 liters per day (378,000 gal-
 lons per day) from a typical wet'process hardboard mill.  There-
 fore, there  is justification for subcategorizing"the industry
 into the wet process and dry process hardboard mills.

 Treatability of Wastewaters

 Treatability of wastewaters is not a justified basis for subcate-
 gorization.  Wastewaters from all wet process hardboard mills
 are difficult to treat; however, there is not sufficient varia-
 tion to subcategorize the hardboard industry base on treatability
 of wastewater alone.

 WOOD PRESERVING INDUSTRY-SUBCATEGORIZATION

 The wood preserving industry is defined as the treatment of round
 and sawn wood products by injecting them with chemicals which pro-
 tect the wood from insect of microorganism attack or provide fire
 resistance.

.Factors Considered

 With respect to identifying any relevant, discrete categories
 for the wood preserving industry, the following factors or
 elements were considered in determining whether the industry
 should be subdivided into subcategories for the purpose of
 the application of effluent limitations guidelines and standards
 of performance:

                 (1)  Raw materials
                 (2)  Products produced
                 (3)  Production processes or methods
                 (4)  Size and age of production facilities
                 (5)  Wastewater constituents
                 (6)  Treatability of wastes.

 After considering all of these factors, it was concluded that
 the wood preserving industry should be subcategorized based on
 the method of conditioning the stock, type of preservative em-
 ployed, and type of process involved.  The wood preserving in-
 dustry may be divided into four subcategories as follows:

        Subcategory          	Description	

             1               Pressure processes employing oily
                             preservatives in which the predomi-
                             nant method of conditioning green
                             stock is by steaming or vapor
                             drying
                             75

-------
DRAFT


           (Subcategory)       	(Description)	

                2             Pressure processes employing oily
                              preservatives in which the predomi-
                              nant method of conditioning green
                              stock is by Boultonizing

                3             Pressure processes employing water-
                              borne salts

                4             Non-pressure sources.

These categories subdivide the  industry by major process, either
pressure or non-pressure, and by type of preservative used,
either oil-type or water-borne.  It further subdivides pressure
processes  that employ oil-type  preservatives into two groups
based on the method of conditioning green wood preparatory to
preservative treatment.

Categorization based on  treatment process, preservative used,
and method of conditioning is necessary because "of the effect
of these variables on wastewater volume and on the opportunity
for recycling waste, thus limiting or, in some instances, cur-
tailing discharges.  The specific considerations that dictated
the selection of the categories shown are summarized below:

           (a)  Because  of the  processing methods used,
                pressure treatments require the use of
                water, some  of  which comes into contact
                with the product.  Non-pressure treat-
                ments generate  no process water.  Con-
                tamination of water which occurs in the
                latter process  is due directly or indi-
                rectly to precipitation, and can generally
                be avoided.

           (b)  Technology is currently available that makes
                practical the recycling of wastewater from
                salt-type treatments.  This is not neces-
                sarily the case for wastewater from treat-
                ments which  employ oily preservatives.

           (c)  The volume of wastewater generated during
                conditioning of green stock preparatory to
                preserva-tive treatment is several times
                greater  by steaming than by Boultonizing.
                             76

-------
DRAFT


Subcategories 1 and 2 will apply principally to plants which
treat southern pine and Douglas fir, respectively, with creosote
and/or pentachlorophenol in the various forms in which they are
used.  As such, they will cover the majority of the plants in
the industry.

Subcategory 3 will apply both to plants which treat only with
water-borne preservatives and fire-retardants and to that por-
tion of the production equipment used to apply salt-type treat-
ments at plants which also treat with oily preservatives.

Subcategory 4 will ajppl_y to all 'non^ressure processes regardless
of type, preservative used, and "the products treated.
                             77

-------
 DRAFT
                           SECTION V

             WATER USE AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION


 PART A:  VENEER AND PLYWOOD

 Water usage varies widely  in the veneer and plywood industry
 depending on types of unit operations employed and the degree
 of recycle and reuse of water practiced.  In general, total
 water usage is less than 3.15 liters per second  (50 gallons
 per minute).  There are some veneer and plywood plants that
 do not discharge wastewater into navigable streams, but all
 use fresh water to some extent.  While there are plants pre-
 sently being designed to recycle all wastewater, none are now
 in operation and the practicability of doing so has not been
 established.  It is observed, however, that considerable ef-
 fort can be made to reduce the amount of wastewater to be
 discharged or contained.  The amount of information available
 on volumes and characteristics of wastewaters from the industry
 is minimal; however, its problems are also dwarfed when com-
 pared to that of most other industries.  Data used in waste-
 water characterization is based mostly on data from the litera-
 ture, information supplied by individual mills, and sampling
 and analyses conducted for the purposes of this study.  Since
 the volumes that are involved are small, attention has been
 directed to finding methods for reducing the volumes and ways
 of handling in such a way as to eliminate discharges.

 When wood comes in contact with water, there can occur various
 chemical effects which cause leaching and dissolution of vari-
 ous compounds into the water.   Wood is exceedingly difficult to
 define chemically because it is a complex heterogeneous product
 of nature composed of interpenetrating components, largely of
 high molecular weight.   The principal components generally are
 classified as cellulose, lignin, hemicellulose, and solvent-
 soluble substances (extractives).  The paper industry (7)
 reports the amounts present to be in the range of 40 to 50
percent,  15 to 35 percent,  20 to 35 percent, and 3 to 10 percent,
 respectively.

The yield,  composition,  purity,  and extent  of degradation of
 these isolated components depend on the exact conditions of
 the empirical procedures employed for their isolation.  By far
 the most important factor relative to the values obtained in
chemical analysis for wood components is the tree species.
                             79

-------
DRAFT


At normal temperatures wood has remarkable resistance to
degradation by chemicals  and solvents.  This may be attri-
buted to the penetrating  network structure of wood comprised
of polymers with widely differing properties.  Also, the high
crystallinity of the  carbohydrate system reduces the acces-
sibility of the wood  components to reagents.

Water at room temperature has  little chemical effect on wood,
but as temperature  rises  and pH decreases because of the
splitting off of acetyl groups, wood becomes subject to rapid
acid hydrolysis with  the  dissolution of carbohydrate material
and some lignin.  At  temperatures above 140°C (220°F) con-
siderable and rapid removal of hemicellulose occurs (7).
Fortunately, cellulose resists hydrolysis better than hemi-
cellulose fractions.  Table 13 relates properties and
composition of many common woods used in tnis country.

In veneer and plywood mills, water is used in the following
operations:

             (1) Log  storage
             (2) Log  debarking
             (3) Log  conditioning
             (4) Cleaning of veneer dryers
             (5) Washing  of the glue line
                 and  glue tanks
             (6) Cooling

Figure 9 (Section IV), presented a detailed process flow
diagram.  The water use and waste characteristics for each
operation are discussed below.

LOG STORAGE

As described in Section IV, Process Description and Industry
Categorization, there are three methods of storing logs,and
two of these, log ponds and wet-decking, depend on the use of
water.

Log Ponds

There are hundreds  of log ponds throughout the country.  Some
of these are in conjunction with veneer and plywood operations,
but many more are part of logging operations, saw mills, hard-
board plants, paper mills, and other operations in the timber
products industry.  Log ponds  can take a number of forms.   As
discussed in Section  IV,  they  can be in an estuary, river, lake,
                              80

-------
                 TABLE 13 (17)



SOME PROPERTIES OF CERTAIN UNITED STATES WOODS


Spiucc
Iji^clmann
li.il
Silka
\\ lute
Kir
Alpine
Dakim
Crand
Nohle
Silver
\\lute
Douglas fir, coast t)pc
Pine"
Jack
Lol.lolly
Lodgepnle
Ixinglcaf'
1'ondcrosa
Red
Shortleaf
Shsh
Sugai
\Vlntc eastern
White western
Hemlock
1'astcrii
Western
Inarch
Tainarjck
Western
Cypress, l-alil

Ash, white
H.isswocxl
Beech
Ilirch
Taper
Yellow
Riittcmut
Chestnut
Cuuimln'r lice
Dm, AniiiK.ni
Cum
Hl.ick
Sttlll
Maple
Hed
Sil»er
Sti»ar
1'opl.ir
Qu.iknr.; asprii
Hakim
('..IslLIII inllllllUIKxl
I..IIL;» ln.illi aspen
SxiMllUllt
Ullm, poplar
grin ilij
SftrinA-
tiff.
Hark.
',
Ilimlnat
Su/r Lml
Ci Iliilmr.
Ll'£lllll.
la
Soluh,
Hot
icalcr
ilily. ' o
T//.CT
Cunift-rs

0.31
03S
0.37
0,37

0.31
0.34
037
035
035
0.35
045'

039
0.47
0.38
0.54
0.3S
0.44
0.46
056
035
0.34
0.36

0.33
0.3S

0.49
0.48
0.42

101
118
115
13.7

90
108
106
125
11.1
94
118

104
12.3
115
122
96
115
123
122
79
8.2
118

9.7
11.9

136
132
105

11.1
—
—
124

—
	
9.1
__
159
_
106

98
105
75
116
—
	
119
156
	
125
	

18.9
9.7

_
88
	

240
3i()
310
320

220
290
360
290
310
330
4SO

370
450
33d
500
310
340
410
630
3)0
310
310

400
430

3SO
450
390

250
4!0
430
350

280
200
4:0
330
3GO
380
510

3SO
420
320
5.50
330
360
410
GHO
320
310
310

500
520

400
470
440

605

605
604



6.50

608

597

587
587
576
586
580

588
598

600
597

544
596


578


27.9

206
20.0



27.0

282

303

285
28,3
259
.108
272

290
27.6

27.5
264

311
302


	


1.7

5.0
2.9



2.3

3.2

5.6

37
1.8
36
3.1
4.8

26
36

46
45

3.7
3.0


126


0.5

08
1.2



0.9

0.9

09

22
1.9
13
21
6.8

2.0
3.3

30
43

06
0.7


081

]l(irdti.M>tls
0.55
032
0.56

048
055
036
0.40
041
0.46

046
0.44

0.40
0.11
0.56

03->
0..10
0.17
0 Ti
0. Hi
or.
133
15.8
163

16.2
1G7
102
116
1J6
14.6

130
150

13.1
' 12 0
MO

115
105
11 1
ll.S
142
12J
__
_
_

132
—
	
	
	
96

124
—

—
._
1.17

18 1
_.
117
—
__
—
9«>
250
650

560
7SO
390
420
520
c:o

CM
520

700
5<.K)
970

3(10
210
310
37(1
610
310
1,010
200
970

470
810
410
5-jn
(.(XT
(.SO

700
(.30

7SO
(.70
1 .07(1

2M>
210
.}SO
•K")
*i(tl
3'K)
510
612


CO 6
613



5S.3

567
306



(•OS

(V55

(£2


61.7
264
_


257
—



24.3

284
205



232

234

2.16


200
69
4.1


2.7
4.0*



3.6

40
28



4.1

30

2.0


20
05
1.9


10
06



04

0 1
O.S



0.1

1 1

0 1


0-2
                       81

-------
DRAFT


or they can be  in  the  form of man-made  impoundment.  The data
available in the literature  along with  that obtained by sam-
pling are based on man-made  impoundments which are the most
common in the veneer and plywood industry.  All of these are
based on the state of  Oregon where log  ponds abound.

In order to characterize the quality of water leaving a log
pond, there are many factors that must  be considered.  These
include:

          (1) Type of  logs in pond
          (2) Number of logs in pond
          (3) Age  of logs
          (4) Detention time of logs
          (5) Size of  pond
          (6) Hydraulic detention time
          (7) Quality  of water entering pond

While the first five factors can usually be approximated with
sufficient accuracy, the last two can be elusive.  Both the
hydraulic detention time and the quality of water entering the
pond are a function of the quantity and frequency of rain as
well as drainage area  and runoff characteristics.  In western
Oregon, for example, the average yearly rainfall is approxi-
mately 137 centimeters (54 inches), but almost all of the
rain occurs in  the winter months of November through April.
In general, in  western Oregon log ponds do not discharge dur-
ing the summer, and the concentrations  accumulate until the
winter rainy season when the ponds begin to overflow.  At the
end of the rainy season the  quality of  water in the log ponds
is usually at its  best.  A variable discharge, as is common in
Oregon, makes the  task of characterization an exceedingly dif-
ficult one.  In fact,  in order to accomplish a reasonable
characterization,  it would be necessary to monitor several log
ponds over at least a  one-year period.

The data used to characterize log ponds in this study are
based on samples collected in the winter of 1973 and on addi-
tional samples  collected under Environmental Protection Agency
Project Number  NP01320, by Doctor Frank D. Schaumburg (18),
in the summer of 1972.  From this data  it is possible to for-
mulate an approximation of the characteristics of man-made log
ponds in Oregon and to obtain some idea of the waste loads
that these might represent.

Tables  14  and  15  characterize the water from various log ponds
in terms of concentration.   From this data it can be seen that
there are significant  differences in concentration from summer
to winter.
                              82

-------
                                                  TABLE  14

                              WINTER  CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG PONDS*
                                    PART A:   CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
oo
            Pond    BOD5    COD   DS    SS   TS   Turb.    Phenols    Color    Kjld-N    T-P04~P
A-l
A- 2
A- 3
A- 4
A- 5
A- 6
5
10
2
3
7
3
57
64
47
67
46
78
81
90
69
130
120
271
31
579
11
21
42
26
112
669
80
151
162
297
12
40
8
6
28
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
.03
.03
.03
.01
.08
.06
18
9
14
9
12
13
2.30
0.34
1.40
1.33
2.82
0.45
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.025
0.02
            Note:   Turbidity  in JTU;  color  in Pt.-Cobalt units;  all others  in mg/1.

-------
                                         TABLE 14  (CONTINUED)

                              WINTER CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG PONDS*
                                  PART B:  PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
                Surface   Average
                  Area     Depth    Volume                  Log      Water       Remarks  and
          Pond  (Hectares) (Meters)  (Cu.M)  Type of Log  Detention   Source    Approximate Eff.
00
          A-l
          A-2
          A-3
          A-4
23
 1.2
23
17
1.5   345,192  651 Doug.fir  44 Days
               351 Hemlock
1.8    22,937  40% Doug.fir  3 Hours
               601 Hemlock
1.4   314,912  90% Doug.fir  60 Days
1.2   207,039 100% Doug.fir 126 Days
Reservoir
 Creek
 Another
  Pond
Overflow in Nov.
to Mar.=about
1,635 Cu.M/Day

Impounded creek
Overflowing Nov.
to Mar.=about
489,400 Cu.M/Day

Overflow in Nov.
to Mar.=about
1,635 Cu.M/Day

Overflow in Nov.
to Mar.=about
1,643 Cu.M/Day
           *Based  on  Environmental  Science  and  Engineering,  Inc.  sampling  from
           March  2 to  March  6,  1973.

-------
                                               TABLE  15
oo
tn
          Pond
TS
                           SUMMER CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG  PONDS  (18)
                                  PART A:  CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
SS
                                    BOD5
DO    Temp.  pH   COD  BOD2Q  BOD5  CT5U   Kjld-N  N03-N  P04
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
254
747
356
606
43
180
4
122
0.1
0.3
1.5
0.7
22
21.5
23
21.5
6.9
7.1
7.5
7.4
116
504
23
353
48
167
10
116
29
54
6
68
0.25
0.11
0.25
0.19
2
10
1
4
.4
.4
.0
.9
0.6
1.5
0.1
0.7
0.5
1.2
0.1
2.0
          Note:  All concentrations in mg/1 except temperature in degrees Centigrade  and  pH

-------
                                        TABLE 15 (CONTINUED)
00
en
                        SUMMER CHARACTERISTICS OF OREGON LOG PONDS (18)
                               PART B:  PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
                 Area     Depth    Pond Age
         Pond (Hectares) (Meters)   (Years)
                              Type
                              Logs   Length of
                             Stored-   Storage
                                       Water
                                       Source  Remarks
         B-l
         B-2
         B-3
         B-4
10.5
 8.09
 1.01
 1.21
2,44
1.85
 to
2.44
3.66
1.22
 to
1.52
11    Doug.fir  1-3 years   stream
14
19
Doug.fir  80% of
          logs about
          1 week
85% Pond- 2 weeks
erosa pine
15% Doug.fir

Over 90%  1 week
Ponderosa
pine
 wells
stream
Non-everflowing
except during high
runoff periods;
Sanitary wastes
dumped into pond.

Non-overflowing
except during high
runoff periods;
Sanitary wastes
from plywood dump-
ed into pond.

Overflowing at
about 25.2 liters
per second
                            spring; Overflowing at
                            irriga- about 1.01 liters
                            tion    per second.

-------
DRAFT
In the winter, BOD values range from two to ten milligrams per
liter and in the summer from six to 68 milligrams per liter.
COD values are from six to 26 times larger than BOD values in
the winter and from four to ten times larger in the summer.
Log ponds with higher hydraulic loads also have higher solids
concentration.  Total solid concentrations vary from about 80
to 700 mg/1.

All of the log ponds have a distinct brown coloration which
has been credited by Schaumburg (18) to leached tannins from
the bark of the logs.  The Pearl Benson Index has often been
used as a measure of color producing substances, but COD has
also been found by Schaumburg to correlate satisfactorily.

Table 16, below, presents approximate waste loads from ponds
sampled during this study.  Three of the four ponds presented
in this table show good correlation; however, the other carries
much greater loads.  The greater loads may be partly due to the
greater hydraulic loads and partly to the shorter detention
time of the logs - factors favoring greater leaching.

Wet-Decking

Since wet-decking is the most acceptable alternative to tra-
ditional log-ponding, it is necessary to determine the waste
characteristics from such operations.  Schaumburgfs study  (18)
on log handling includes the results of field work conducted
to obtain leaching data from wet-decking.  This data is shown
in Table 17.  It appears that the amount of waste transferred
from the logs to the water is about the same regardless of
whether the logs are stored in ponds or wet-decked.

                          TABLE 16

             WINTER WASTELOAD FROM OREGON LOG PONDS

Pond   BODs   COD   PS     SS     TS   Phenols  Kjld'N  T-POa

A-l      23   262   367    144     516  0.138    10.6  <0.092

A-2    2027 13600  -912 121000  120000  6.587    74.3   <4.36

A-3      20   477   701    112     814  0.306    14.2  <0.202

A-4      12   258   502     81     583 -0.039  -0.277
Note: Units are  in kilograms per million cubic meters
                             87

-------
DRAFT
                         TABLE 17
            PONDEROSA PINE WET DECK DATA (18)

   Parameter	Sampled Value
   Mean log diameter                 49 cm
   Mean log length                   9.9 m
   Estimated number of logs          24,400
   Estimated surface area            371,600 sq.m
   Mean BOD of runoff                19 mg/1
   Flow                              1,612 cu.m/day
   BOD per day                       30.6 kg/day
                         TABLE  18
 ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE TAKEN FROM A WET DECKING RECYCLE POND

   BOD                               16 mg/1
   COD                               323 mg/1
   Total Solids                      544 mg/1
   Suspended Solids                  104 mg/1
   Dissolved Solids                  440 mg/1
   Total Phosphorus                  2.0 mg/1
   Kjeldahl Nitrogen                 2.7 mg/1
   Turbidity                         80 JTU
   pH                                8.16
                             88

-------
DRAFT


However, collection and recycling of sprinkling water makes
zero discharge from wet-decking more feasible than from log
ponds.  The main advantage of wet-decking is that the volume
of wastewater produced is more easily controlled due both to
the operation and to the fact that sprinkling enhances evapo-
ration.  The increased evaporation partially offsets the effect
of rainfall runoff on wastewater volume.

A small hardwood and veneer plywood plant with a wet-decking
operation recycles the sprinkled water by collecting it into
two small ponds of less than two hectares (one acre) where
solids are allowed to settle.  The effluent from these ponds
is pumped back to the sprinklers through a coarse screen.  One
of these ponds was sampled and the results of analyses are pre-
sented in Table 18.  No significant accumulation of BOD and
COD is observed when this data is compared with the data in
Table 17.  The major concern of such a recycling system is the
accumulation of solids and particularly of colloidal solids.
While there are problems associated with recycling, these are
operational problems that vary from plant to plant and also
vary with location, soil conditions, and other such factors.
These problems can be solved in most cases.  There are now
several plants within the industry that recycle sprinkling
water successfully.

LOG BARKING

Logs can be barked with or without water.  A typical mill
barks logs without water and it appears that the trend will
be for all barking to be accomplished without water (mech-
anically).  A very small amount of water may be used to
control dust and small wood particles; however, no discharge
is necessary.  Nevertheless, there are still some applications,
such as with very large logs, which make wet barking necessary.

Since wet barkers are being phased out in the veneer and ply-
wood industry, no effort is being made to verify the charac-
terization of the wastewaters associated with it.  The
following is based on results of Environmental Protection
Agency Contract Number 68-01-0022 and 68-01-0012 (8).

As discussed in Section IV, Process Description and Industry
Categorization, there are three types of wet barkers:TH
drum barkers;(2) pocket barkers; and (3) hydraulic barkers.
Drum and hydraulic barkers are the most common.  In any
case, a wet barking operation requires a number of steps
to separate the bark from the water.  The bark is usually
pressed to remove water and then sent to a boiler where it
                             89

-------
DRAFT


is used as a source of fuel.  Figure 10 in Section IV presented
a typical process flow diagram for wet barking.

Results of an analysis of the effluent from a hydraulic barking
process are shown in Table 19.  The water employed in hydraulic
barking must be free of suspended solids to avoid clogging noz-
zles.  It can be concluded that the total suspended solids
content in the discharge from hydraulic barking ranges from 521
to 2,362 mg/1, while BOD values range between 56 and 250 mg/1.

Results of an analysis of the effluent from a drum barker is
also given in Table 19.  Total suspended solids concentrations
are only slightly higher in a drum barker than in a hydraulic
barker, but BOD values are significantly higher. Drum barking
often involves recycling, which accounts for'part of the in-
crease.  The high BOD values are also due to a longer contact
between the bark and the water and to the grinding action which
is absent in hydraulic barking.

BOD values are also affected by the species of wood barked and
by the time of the year in which the log in cut.

LOG CONDITIONING [STEAMING)

The industry uses two distinct types of log steaming systems.
These are discussed in Section IV; Process Description and
Industry Categorization, and are referred to as steam vats
and hot water vats.  In the South about 50 percent of the
plants use steam vats and 50 percent use hot water vats.  In
the West, however, only about 30 percent of the plants use
any kind of conditioning and these use steam vats almost
exclusively.

The only wastewater from a steam vat is condensed steam.
This water carries leachates from the logs as well as wood
particles.  Table 20 presents the results of analyses of
wastewaters from steam vats.  The magnitudes of these flows
vary according to the size and number of vats.  A plant pro-
ducing 9.31 million square meters (100 million square feet)
of plywood on a 9.53 millimeter (three-eights inch) basis
has an effluent of about 1.58 to 3.15 liters per second (25
to 50 gallons per minute).  A southern plywood mill produces
a BOD load of 2,500 kilograms per million square meters
(51.5 pounds per million square feet) of board on a 9.53 mil-
limeter (three-eights inch) basis, and a total solids load
of 29,200 kilograms per million square meters on a 9.53
millimeter basis (6,000 pounds per million square feet on
a three-eights inch basis) of board.
                              90

-------
DRAFT
                          TABLE 19

         CHARACTERISTICS OF DEBARKING EFFLUENTS (8)
                   Total
                 Suspended  Non-Set.
Mill
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
/
8
9
10
11
Type of
Debarking
Hydraulic
Hydraulic
Hydraulic
Hydraulic
Hydraulic
Hydraulic
LI » r f\ ^» rt 1 1 1 \ f
ny QI au -L i c
Hydraulic
Drum
Drum
Drum
Solids
(mg/1)
2,362
889
1,391
550
521
2,017
2nnn
, uuu
600
2,017
3,171
2,875
Solids
(mg/1)
141
101
180
66
53
69
^ 9 no
<£U(J
41
69
57
80
BOD5
(mg/1)
85
101
64
99
121
56
97
1
250
480
605
987
Color
Less
Less
Less
Less
Less
Less
35
20
Less
Less
Units
than 50
than 50
than 50
than 50
than 50
than 50


than 50
than 50
                              91

-------
10
fo
                                              TABLE  20


                              CHARACTERISTICS OF STEAM VAT DISCHARGES



                                               Concentrations
Plant
A
B
C
D
E
F
BOD
470
3,117
2,940
1,499
1,298
476
COD
8,
4,
8,
3,
3,
1,
310
005
670
435
312
668
DS
2,430

5,080
2,202
2,429
917
SS
2,940
86
370
389
107
74
TS
5,370

5,450
2,591
2,536
991
Turb, Phenols
450 0.69

245 0.57
249
30 0.30
28 0.20
Kjld-N
56.
16.
39.

1.
4.
8
5
3

87
73
T-P04-P pH
5,70 4.12
14 4.1-6.1
5.38
5.3
.173
1.93
          Note:  All units  are  in mg/1  except  Turbidity,  which  is  in JTU's  and pH,

-------
DRAFT
A hot water vat conditions the log with hot water heated
either directly with steam or by means of heating coils with
steam, oil or other heat sources. When the vat is heated in-
directly, there is no reason for a constant discharge.   Steam
vats regardless of heating method are usually emptied periodi-
cally, and the water is discharged and replaced with clean
water.  Some plants settle spent wastewater and pump it back
into the vats.  Chemical characteristics for hot water vats
for a series of veneer and plywood plants are given in Table
21.

DRYER WASHWATER

Veneer dryers accumulate wood particles.  Volatile hydrocar-
bons will also condense on the surface of dryers to form an
organic deposit which is called "pitch."  In order to avoid
excessive buildup of these substances, dryers must be cleaned
periodically.  Wood particles can be removed either by flush-
ing with water or by blowing with air.  While some of the
pitch can be scraped off, generally a high pH detergent must
be applied to dissolve most of the pitch and then it must be
rinsed off with water.

The nature of the dryer wash water varies according to the
amount of water used, the amount of scraping prior to appli-
cation of water, condition of the dryer, operation of dryer,
and, to some extent, the species of wood that is being dried.

The amount of water used varies from plant to plant and from
operator to operator.  One drying operation was observed to
use about 23,000 liters (6,000 gallons) of water per dryer
over a period of 80 hours.  At this plant there were six
dryers and they were washed every three weeks.  The washing
operation consisted of removing the bulk of the wood residue
by blowing it out with air and hauling it away, and then
washing the dryer with water for about three-quarters of an
hour to remove more wood particles.  After this water clean-
ing, the caustic detergent was applied.  Finally, the deter-
gent was rinsed off with water for another three-quarters of
an hour.  Samples of spent water were taken during both
applications of water, and the analyses of these samples are
shown in Table 22-A. The effluent from this washing operation
was averaged over a seven-day period and expressed in terms
of a unit of production basis as shown in Table 22-B.

One thing that is emphasized by various experts in the veneer
and plywood industry is that pitch build-up can be minimized
by proper maintenance of the dryers.  In addition, the volume
                             93

-------
                                              TABLE  21

                         CHARACTERISTICS OF HOT WATER STEAM VAT DISCHARGES
                                                Concentrations
vo
Plant
A
B
C
D*
E*
BOD
4,740
3,100
326
1,000
1,900

14
9
1

4
COD
,600
,080
,492

,000
DS
3,950
1,570
1,948

319
SS
2,520
460
72
160
1,462

6
2
2
1
1
TS Turb. Phenols
,470 -- 0.40
,030
,020 800 <1.0
,000
,781
Kjld-N T-P04-P pH
26.4 -- 5
23.4 -- 3
16.2 <1.0 6
4
4
.4
.8
.9
.5
.4
           Note:  All  units  are  in  mg/1  except Turbidity, which  is  in  JTU,  and pH

           *Analyses  for  plants  'D1  and  'E1 were  provided by  the respective plants,  and
           figures  for plant  'E' represent an average  for  several  mills  owned by  one  company

-------
vo
in
                                   TABLE 22a


                          ANALYSIS OF DRIER WASHWATER



Plant   BOD    COD    DS    SS    TS    Turb.   Phenols  Color  Kjld-N  T-P04-P



  A


Part I  210  1,131    643   113   756     19     1.31     32     17.7     1.93


Part II 840  6,703  1,095 5,372 6,467     50     0.20     43    211      11.0



  B      60  1,568  1,346    80 1,426      6     4.68     51      2.91    0.495



Note:  All units are concentrations in mg/1 except for Turbidity in JTU's and
       Color in Pt-Cobalt units.

-------
                                              TABLE 22b



                                   WASTE LOADS FROM VENEER DRIERS





          Plant     BOD     COD     DS     SS     TS     Phenols     Kjld-N     T-P04-P








«o           A      60.94   412     99.7  319    418      0.018       13.2        0.18





            B       2.33    60.6   52.3    3.09  55.2    0.014        0.112      0.019







          Note:  all units are in kilograms per million square meters.

-------
DRAFT


of water necessary to wash the dryers can be greatly reduced.
For example, one Oregon plant of about one-half the size of
the one described previously was observed to use one-twelfth
as much water per week to clean its dryers.  Wastewater charac-
teristics from this plant are also given in Tables 22-Aand22-B.
It must be noted, however, that this plant provides settling
and screening for the spent wash water before discharge, and
samples were taken at the discharge.

Most dryers are equipped with deluge systems to extinguish
fires that might be generated inside the dryer.  Fires in
dryers are actually quite common, especially in those that
are poorly maintained.  This water is usually handled in a
similar manner to dryer wash water, and many plants actually
take advantage of fires to clean the dryers.  Fire deluge
water can add significantly to the wastewater problems in
some cases.

In addition to the two wastewater sources from veneer dryers
that have been mentioned, water is occasionally used for flood-
ing the bottom of the dryers.  Many operators question the
logic behind this practice, while some claim that it prevents
fires and reduces air pollution problems.  In any event, this
water does not have to add to the wastewater problems of a
mill.  Several plants recycle all flood, wash, and fire water,
and because the flooding results in substantial evaporation of
water, these plants have found that fresh water can be used to
clean the dryers and still keep the system closed.

GLUE SYSTEM

Presently there are three types of glues in use in the veneer
and plywood industry: (1) phenolic formaldehyde resin; (2)
urea formaldehyde; and (3) protein glue.  Protein glues are
slowly being phased out of the industry, while phenolic glues
are becoming more widely used.  The main source of wastewater
from a glue system results from the washing of the glue
spreaders and mixing tanks.

The most extensive study of wastewater from glue systems in
the veneer and plywood industry was made by the Environmental
Protection Agency and carried out by Bodien (10).  Table 10,
found in Section IV, shows a list of the typical ingredients
of the three categories of glues already established.  The
specific quantities of these ingredients may vary slightly.
Table 23-A lists the results of chemical analyses of typical
mixtures of the different glues.  The wastewaters from the
washing operations are diluted at a ratio of about twenty
                             97

-------
10
00
                                             TABLE 23-A


                          AVERAGE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF PLYWOOD GLUE (10)



           Analysis and Units                    Phenolic Gluea  Protein Glueb  Urea Gluec
COD, mg/kg
BOD, mg/kg
TOC, mg/kg
Total Phosphate, mg/kg as P
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/kg as N
Phenols, pg/kg
Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Dissolved Solids, mg/kg
Total Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Solids, mg/kg
653,000
—
176,000
120
1,200
514,000
92,000
305,000
397,000
84,000
172,000
177,000
88,000
52,000
260
12,000
1,810
59,000
118,000
177,000
34,000
137,000
421,000
195,000
90,000
756
21,300

346,000
240,000
550,000
346,000
550,000
           aBorden's Cascophen 31 which is similar to Borden's Cascophen  382
           bfiorden's Casco S-230
           cBorden's Casco Resin 5H

-------
DRAFT
to one with water to yield concentrations shown in Table 23-B.
Samples of two phenolic and one urea formaldehyde wastewater
were collected and are shown in Table 23-C.  These are in the
same range as those in Table 23-B, so it is reasonable to as-
sume a twenty to one dilution with water.  This ratio varies
considerably, however, according to frequency of cleaning and
amount of water used.

Wastewaters from glue systems are presently being handled by:
(1) direct discharge; (2) lagooning and discharge; (3) eva-
porators; (4) partial incineration; and (5) reusing the wash
water.

Several studies have been made of wastewater flow and reuse in
gluing operations to determine the possibility of complete
wastewater recycling.  Most plywood mills add about 20 percent
water by weight, and the use of some wash water in the glue
mix is, therefore, possible.  Table 23-D shows a list of south-
ern plywood mills along with the wastewater generated and the
water needed in glue makeup.  Table 23-E shows measurement of
wastewaters generated by four Oregon plywood plants.  It is
obvious from this data that in order to use all of the wash
water as glue makeup,significant reductions must be made in the
wastewater generated.  These reductions, however, are feasible
and many plants currently operate with complete recycle.

Cooling Requirements

A veneer and plywood mill requires a certain amount of cooling
water to dissipate heat from the air compressor as well as
from machines such as the press and the lathe.  A mill pro-
ducing 9.3 million square meters (100 million square feet) of
plywood per year on a 9.53 millimeter (three-eights inch) basis
needs to dissipate about 55,000 kilo-calories (217,000 BTU)
(20) per hour from the compressor and 101,000 kilo-calories
(400,000 BTU) (20) per hour from the rest of the plant, for a
total of 156,000 kilo-calories (617,000 BTU) per hour.

Mass Water Balance in a Veneer and Plywood Mill

An account of water gains and losses that occur in a typical
mill is given in this section.  A schematic diagram of water
balance is given in Figure 15.

A veneer and plywood mill with an annual production of 9.3
million square meters (100 million square feet) of plywood on
a 9.53 millimeter (three-eights inch) basis is used as a basis
for the development of the water balance.  Such a mill would
                             99

-------
o
o
                                            TABLE 23-B

                       AVERAGE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF PLYWOOD GLUE WASHWATER  (10)
                               (assuming a 20:1 dilution with water)


           Analysis and Units                    Phenolic Gluea  Protein Glueb  Urea Gluec
COD, mg/kg
BOD, mg/kg
TOG, mg/kg
Total Phosphate, mg/kg as P
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/kg as N
Phenols, ug/kg
Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Dissolved Solids, mg/kg
Total Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Solids, mg/kg
32,650
-25,000
8,800
6.00
60
25,700
4,600
15,250
19,850
84,000
172,000
8,850
440
2,600
13
600
90.5
2,950
5,900
8,850
1,700
6,850
21,050
9,750
4,500
37.8
1,065

173,000
10,300
27,500
17,300
27,500
            aBorden's Cascophen  31 which  is  similar  to  Borden's  Cascophen  382
            bBorden's Casco  S-230
            cBorden's Casco  Resin 5H

-------
                                 TABLE 23-C



                     CHARACTERISTICS OF GLUE WASHWATER
Plant
A
B
C
BOD COD TS
15,900 16,700 7,910
8,880
710 5,670 5,890
DS SS Kjld-N
6,850 21.8
6,310 1,640
3,360 2,530
T-P04-P Phenols pH
2.46 4.16 9.77
20.2 0.14 5.25
10.8
Note:  Plants A and C utilize phenolic glue and Plant C uses urea glue.

-------
o
Is)
                                              TABLE  2 3-D


             AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE WASHWATER GENERATED IN SOUTHERN PINE  PLYWOOD  PLANTS  (19)



           Plywood Plant
             Production
(million sq.
meters/year)
9 .53mm basis
2.7
3.6
4.5
5.4
6.3
7.2
8.1
9.0
Weekly
Adhesive
Use
38,590
51,454
64,316
77,180
90,044
102,906
115,770
128,634
Amount
Glue
Mixers
9,286
9,286
9,286
11,939
23,877
23,877
23,877
23,877
of Washwater
Glue
Hold Tanks
948
1,895
1,895
1,895
1,895
2,843
2,843
2,843
Produced (
Glue
Spreaders
6,633
13,265
13,265
13,265
19,898
19,898
26,530
26,530
liters)
Total
16,866
24,446
24,446
27,099
45,670
45,670
53,250
53,250
Amount of
Adhesive
per week
7,364
9,820
2,276
14,732
17,188
19,640
22,096
24,552

-------
                                             TABLE  23-E


                                GLUE WASTE DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS
o
OJ
                               Average Discharge
Plant
1
2
3
4
Days
Measured
212
49
42
42
for Days
Measured (I/sec)
0.814
1.54
1.13
3.36
1966 Production
(sq.M - 9.53mm basis)
9,000,000
12,150,000
9,000,000
6,300,000
Number of
Spreaders
4
3
4
2

-------
 47,034(1)
    WATER
     IN
    LOGS
                    (50)
163,440(s)
163,440(1)
     LOG

CONDITIONING
                     (50)
 44,220(s)
   VAPORS
    OFF
   DRYERS
                     (3)
  1,634(1)
  1,634(1)
    DRYER

   WASHING
                            (3)
 WATER
  IN
PLYWOOD
6,583(1)
                               (7)
 VAPORS
  OFF
 PRESS
                                                    454(s)
                                (7.5)
  GLUE

 WASHUP
                                                  4,222(1)
                                                  4,222(1)
                                (7.5)
                                       GLUE
                                                  4,222(1)
  (1)  -  liquid  water
  (2)  -  steam
  (XX)  -  I  of moisture by weight
        based on dry wood
                              Water  in  =  485,800
                              Water  out=  485,800
             All  units in  Kg of water per Day
                iS_
                Lb.
                          (Ib.  of water per Day)
  FIGURE 15 -  WATER BALANCE FOR A PLYWOOD MILL PRODUCING
              9.3 MILLION SQUARE METERS PER YEAR
              ON A 9.53mm BASIS
                            104

-------
DRAFT
be producing plywood equivalent to 93,980 kilograms (207,000
pounds) per day or 95 metric tons (104 tons) per day on a dry
wood basis.

Water Gains

Water gains from a typical mill include water from the logs
and glue from various freshwater intakes that are used
throughout the process without the water becoming incorpo-
rated into the wood.

The moisture content of incoming logs varies according to
species.  For the purpose of these calculations, 50 percent
moisture is assumed.  Water from incoming logs is thus 47,000
kilograms per day or 500 kilograms per metric ton (1,000 pounds
per ton).  The amount of water that is applied to plywood glue
is estimated to be 4,200 kilograms per day or 43 kilograms per
metric ton (85 pounds per ton) of dry plywood.

The freshwater sources of water vary with operation.  Based
on data previously given, the following quantities can be
estimated: about 163,000 kilograms (360,000 pounds) per day
or 1,750 kilograms per metric ton (3,500 pounds per ton) of
steam is used in log conditioning; about 1,620 kilograms
(3,570 pounds) per day or 17.5 kilograms per metric ton (35
pounds per ton) of water is used to wash veneer dryers; and
about 4,200 kilograms (9,300 pounds) per day or 45 kilograms
per metric ton (90 pounds per ton) of water is used to wash
the glue system.

Water Losses

Water losses from a typical mill include the water in the
finished plywood, vapor losses from the pressing, and spent
water from log conditioning and washing operations.

The amount of water that is in the finished plywood can be
calculated to be 6,600 kilograms per day (14,500 pounds per
day or 140 pounds per ton)  based on a seven percent moisture
content.

Vapor losses occur in the dryers and in the press.   Based on
three percent moisture content in dried veneer, approximately
44,000 kilograms per day (97,400 pounds per day or 940 pounds
per ton) of steam must be released.   Similar calculations
indicate a steam discharge  of 450 kilograms per day (1,000
pounds per day or 10 pounds per ton)  from the press.
                             105

-------
DRAFT


Wastewater discharged from log conditioning equals the amount
of steam applied, if coils are not used.  This would be equi-
valent to a discharge of 163,000 kilograms per day (360,000
pounds per day or 3,500 pounds per ton).

Wastewater discharges from the washing operations are equal to
the respective water usage.  Dryer wash water is approximately
163,000 kilograms per day  (3,600 pounds per day or 35 pounds
per ton), and glue wash water is approximately 4,200 kilograms
per day (9,300 pounds per day or 90 pounds per ton).
                             106

-------
DRAFT


PART B:  HARDBOARD


DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD

Specific Water Uses

There are several processes in the dry process hardboard
industry where water might be used.  However, due to a wide
variety of raw material handling techniques and inplant
processes and housekeeping practices, no single dry process
hardboard mill uses water in all of the following processes:

          Log Washing
          Chip Washing
          Resin System
          Caul Washing
          Housekeeping
          Humidification
          Fire Fighting
          Cooling

The quantity of water utilized in any dry process hardboard
mill depends upon water uses in raw material handling and
inplant processes, recycle system utilized, housekeeping prac-
tices, and many other factors.  Table 24 shows wastewater flows
from 11 of the 16 existing dry process hardboard mills.  The
quantity of process water utilized in a typical mill would be
approximately 18,925 liters (5,000 gallons) per day.  Most of
this water is either evaporated in the press or becomes a part
of the final product.  A typical wastewater flow from a dry
process mill should be less than 1,900 liters (500 gallons)
per day.  Cooling water usage varies widely from mill to mill
but rarely exceeds 280,000 liters (75,000 gallons) per day.
Therefore, it can be seen that the water usage in a dry pro-
cess hardboard mill is exceedingly low and wastewater dischar-
ges minimal.

Log Washing

Log washing is practiced by a minority of mills and not neces-
sarily on a continuous basis.  Log washing is used to remove
dirt and sand from the log surface, the quantity of which
varies according to harvesting and storage techniques.  Weather
conditions are a factor in the need for log washing as wet con-
ditions may cause excessive quantities of mud to adhere to the
logs when harvested.  Since mills store both whole logs and
                             107

-------
o
00
                                                TABLE 24

                                       WASTEWATER FLOW AND SOURCE
MILL
A
B
C
D**
E
F
G
H
I
J**
K
LOG
WASH
0
0
0
YES
81,650
0
0
0
0
0
0
CHIP
WASH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
RESIN*
WASH
0
0
38
0
0
0
5,670
3
0
570
0
CAUL*
WASH
0
570
110
300
0
380
0
750
0
0
0
HOUSEKEEPING*
20,000
380
0
YES
—
0
0
0
0
0
—
COOLING
WATER
320,000
81,650
227,000
YES
YES
—
189,000
125,000
160,650
283,500
Ot
HUMIDIFICATION
0
11,340
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
           Note  - All  flows  given  in  liters per  day
                 * Actual  Intermittant  Flow Averaged Daily
               ** Total Waste  Contained  on Site
                 t Cooling Water Used  for Boiler  Makeup

-------
DRAFT


chips on site and the ratios of logs purchased as compared
with chips vary, the quantity of water utilized will vary ac-
cordingly.  Fresh water can be utilized for log washing.
•Cooling water from the inplant processes may also be used.
Quantities of water utilized for log washing can be expected
to vary from 400 liters per metric ton (100 gallons per ton)
to 1,250 liters per metric ton (less than 300 gallons per
ton) (8).   Typical chemical analyses would include a BOD of
200 mg/1 and a suspended solids of 500 mg/1.

Chip Washing

The purpose of chip washing is similar to that of washing logs.
Chips that are brought in from outside sources can contain dirt
and sand which cause excessive equipment wear.  Chip washing
serves not only to remove this unwanted matter, but also gives
the chips a uniform moisture content and, in northern climates,
helps thaw frozen chips.  There were no dry process hardboard
mills reporting the use of chip washing, but the trend is toward
mills having to wash chips.  As prime sources of fiber become
increasingly scarce such as from whole logs, the future trend
is toward whole tree utilization.  This means that whole trees,
or just limbs and branches, would be chipped in the forest and
shipped to the mill.  Due to the increased extraneous material,
chip washing will become a necessity.

Fresh water may be used for chip washing or cooling water from
inplant equipment might also be used.  As there are presently
no chip washing systems reportedly in use, there are no water
usage figures or waste characteristics available in the dry
process hardboard industry.

Resin System

Water is used to make up the resins which are added as binders
for hardboard.  The water used for making resin is not a waste-
water but becomes part of the hardboard as it is evaporated in
the press.  Some mills claim it is necessary to clean the resin
system,and available data,as shown in Table 24, indicates that
there is no standard procedure for cleanup as water usage varies
widely.

There are two types of resins used in the hardboard industry,
phenolic formaldehyde and urea formaldehyde.  These resins are
essentially the same as those utilized in the plywood industry
where most mills have already gone to a completely closed resin
system.   Table 25 shows typical chemical analysis of plywood
glue.
                             109

-------
                                TABLE 25  (10)



                  AVERAGE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF PLYWOOD RESIN



Analysis and Units                        Phenolic Resin  (a)      Urea  Resin  (b)
COD, mg/kg
BOD, mg/kg
TOG, mg/kg
Total Phosphate, mg/kg as P
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/kg as N
Phenols, Wg/kg
Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Dissolved Solids, mg/kg
Total Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Suspended Solids, mg/kg
Total Volatile Solids, mg/kg
(a) Borden's Cascophen 31 which is similar
(b) Borden's Casco Resin 5H
653,000
--
176,000
120
1,200
514,000
92,000
305,000
397,000
84,000
172,000
to Borden's

421,000
195,000
90,000
756
21,300

346,000
204,000
550,000
346,000
550,000
Cascophen 382


-------
DRAFT
The chemical analysis of resin washwater will be those
concentrations shown in Table 25 diluted by a factor depending
upon the quantity of water used for wash up.   Several hardboard
mills are presently recycling this wash water as resin makeup
water or simply do not wash at all, therefore, they have no dis-
charge.  Due to the small quantity of water and ease of reuse,
there should be no discharge from the resin system in any hard-
board mill.

Caul and Press Plate Wash Water

Another minor water usage and wastewater source for some mills
is for caul and press plate wash water.  After a period of use.
cauls and press plates acquire a buildup of resin and organics
on their surfaces. This results in sticking in the presses and
blemishes on the hardboard surface.  The cauls or press plates
must then be cleaned to remove this buildup.   The cleaning op-
eration consists of submerging the cauls in a caustic cleaning
solution for a period of time to loosen the organic matter.
Press plates are also cleaned with a caustic solution inplace.
After soaking,cauls are removed, rinsed with fresh water, then
put back in use.  The tanks used for soaking the cauls are
emptied as needed, normally only a few times each year.  The soak-
ing water and rinse water used in a typical dry process hard-
board mill ranges from 380 to 950 liters (100 to 250 gallons)
per day or approximately 4 liters per metric ton (1.0 gallons
per ton) of hardboard production.

Miscellaneous Housekeeping Water

Water may be used in small quantities for various cleaning pro-
cedures.  The frequency and quantity of water used for clean-
ing purposes is highly variable as there are generally no
scheduled cleanup procedures.  Information gathered from sev-
eral dry process hardboard mills indicates that this water usage
can be expected to range from zero to less than 1,500 liters
(400 gallons) per day in a typical mill.  This source of waste-
water is of such a minor volume that it can easily be disposed
of onsite.   Several mills utilize no water for cleaning as all
house cleaning is done by sweeping and vacuum cleaning.

Humidification

All dry process hardboard mills humidify their board after
pressing.  This consists simply of passing the boards through
a room with a high humidity and temperature to bring the mois-
ture content to a more stable level.  Approximately 45 liters
                             111

-------
DRAFT


(12 gallons) of water per ton of product are used for this
purpose.  Most mills report no wastewater discharge from this
process.

Fire Water

A major problem with the dry process for manufacturing hard-
board is the problem of fires.  The inside of a dry process
hardboard mill can easily become coated with dry fibers and
an electrical spark or excessively hot press or other piece
of equipment can easily start a fire.  More frequently, a
fire starts in a refiner and quickly spreads through the fiber
conveying system.  Mills have elaborate fire fighting systems
which use large quantities of water to put fires out quickly.
Fires are certainly not scheduled and their frequency varies
from mill to mill.  Depending upon the duration and extent of
the fire, the water used to control a fire will vary accor-
dingly.  Fire water should not be considered as a continuous
wastewater flow because a typical mill will have a fire only
a few times each year.

Cooling Water

The largest water usage in a dry process hardboard mill is for
cooling water.  This water is used for cooling various inplant
equipment such as refiners and air compressors, and is normally
not changed in quality except for the addition of heat.  Al-
though this usage is the largest volume used in a dry process
hardboard mill, it is relatively small when compared with other
industries.  The volume of cooling water varies widely from
mill to mill depending upon temperature of freshwater source
and the equipment within a mill.  Cooling water can be expected
to range from 18,900 to 280,000 liters (5,000 to 75,000 gallons)
per day with a typical mill utilizing 190,000 liters (50,000
gallons) per day.  There is a potential for cooling water to
become contaminated with lubricating oil and in this event the
oil must be removed before the cooling water is discharged.

Scrubber Water

Air pollution from dry process hardboard mills is a major con-
cern.  One method of air pollution control is the use of wet
scrubbers.  Although only two hardboard mills report using a
wet scrubber, the future trend is toward the use of wet scrub-
bers in many dry process hardboard mills.  The water usage for
wet scrubbing in a dry process hardboard mill will vary depen-
ding on the individual scrubber design.  Since there are only
                             112

-------
DRAFT
two wet scrubbers in operation, representative data for the
industry is unavailable.  One of the mills using a wet scrubber
reportedly achieves zero discharge by settling and filtering
the scrubber water before recycle.  In fact, there is need for
water makeup.

Mass Water Balance in a Dry Process Hardboard Mill

An account of water gains and losses in a typical dry process
hardboard mill is given in this section.  A schematic diagram
of the water balance (net gains and losses) for a typical dry
process hardboard mill is shown in Figure 16.  Water gains or
losses are shown as liters of water per metric ton of dry pro-
duct produced in a typical 225 metric ton per day mill.

Water Gains.  Water gains in a typical dry process hardboard
mill result from incoming raw materials and fresh water intake.
Incoming wood normally has approximately 50 percent moisture
which represents 100 percent of the final product weight.
Water from incoming wood
(50 percent moisture)
=  1,000 liters per metric ton
   (240 gallons per ton)
The water usage within a dry process hardboard mill is highly
variable depending upon water usage within an individual pro-
cess and plant operation.  A typical dry process mill uses
water only for glue preparation, caul wash, humidification
and cooling.
Water in glue
(3.5 percent of product)
   35 liters per metric ton of
   product (8.4 gallons per ton)
Caul wash (950 liters per day)  =  4.2 liters per metric ton of
          (250 gallons)            product (1 gallon per ton)
Humidification              =
(5.0 percent of product)

Cooling water (284,000 liters
               per day)
              (75,000 gallons)
   50 liters per metric ton of
   product (12 gallons per ton)

    =  1,250 liters per ton of
       product (300 gallons per
       ton)
Water Losses .   Water losses in a dry process hardboard mill
result from:

Fiber drying to 7.5   =  960 liters per metric ton of product
percent moisture         (230.4 gallons per ton)
                             113

-------
GAIN = IOOO
RAW
MATERIALS
HANDLING
COOLING WATER
  GAIN = I250   RES|N  LOSS =
             SYSTEM      4
      I	GAIN=35	L
  FIBER
  PREPARATION

                 COOLING  WATER
                   LOSS=I250
FIBER
DRYER
FELTER
                                             CAUL  WASH
                                               GAIN=4.2-»
                                             LOSS = 4.2
                                                    PRESS
                                       FRESH WATER
                                                   LOSS=75
                                                    HUMIDIFICATION
                                                  FINISHING
                                                    PRODUCT
                                                      TOTAL  GAIN =23392
                                                      TOTAL  LOS 8=2339.2
      •••GAINS AND LOSSES  SHOWN IN LITERS/TON DRY PRODUCT
      FIGURE 16 -  WATER BALANCE FOR TYPICAL DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD MILL*

-------
DRAFT


Press evaporation      =  75 liters per metric ton of product
(0.0 percent moisture)    (18 gallons per ton)

Water in product
(5.0 percent moisture) =  50 liters per metric ton of product
                          (12 gallons per ton)

Caul wash (950 liters per day) =4.2 liters per metric ton
          (250 gallons)          (1.0 gallons)

Cooling water            = 1,250 liters per metric ton of pro-
(284,000 liters per day)   duct (300 gallons per day)

WET PROCESS HARDBOARD

Specific Water Uses

There are several processes  in the wet process hardboard in-
dustry where water is used.  Wet process mills have  similar
overall water uses and wastewater sources, however,  due to
variations  from mill  to mill there will be variations in water
use in the  following  processes:

          Raw Materials Handling
          Fiber Preparation
          Mat Formation and  Pressing
          Finishing
          Miscellaneous

Raw Materials Handling

There are two potential sources of water usage and waste
discharge in  the  raw  materials handling process;  1)  log wash-
ing, 2) chip  washing  (see Figure 17  for  schematic diagram of
the raw materials handling  processes).

Log Washing.  Log washing  is practiced by  a  minority of mills
ana not necessarily  on  a  continuous  basis.   Log washing is
used to remove  dirt  and sand from  the  log  surface, the quan-
tity of which varies  according to  harvesting and  storage
techniques.   Weather  conditions are  a  factor in the  need  for
log washing as  wet conditions may  cause  excessive quantities
of mud  to adhere  to  the logs when  harvested.   Since  mills
store both  whole  logs and chips on site  and  the ratios of logs
purchased as  compared with  chips vary, the quantity  of water
utilized will vary accordingly.  Fresh water can  be  utilized
for  log washing;or cooling  water from  the  inplant processes
                              115

-------
           LOGS
           o
           LOG
         STORAGE
                 CHIPS
        LOG WASH
         DEBARKER
          CHIPPER
     WATER  IN

     WATER  OUT
    o
TO PROCESS
FIGURE 17 - WATER USAGE IN RAW MATERIALS HANDLING
            IN THE HARDBOARD INDUSTRY
                     116

-------
DRAFT


may also be used.  Quantities of water utilized for log washing
can be expected to vary from 417 liters per ton (100 gallons per
ton) to less than 1,250 liters per ton (300 gallons per ton) (8).
Typical chemical analyses would include a BOD of 200 mg/1 and
a suspended solids of 500 mg/1.

Chip Washing.  The purpose of chip washing is similar to that of
washing logs.  Chips that are brought in from outside sources
can contain dirt and sand which cause excessive equipment wear.
Chip washing serves not only to remove this unwanted matter, but
also gives the chips a uniform moisture content and, in northern
climates, helps thaw frozen chips.  There  is  only one wet pro-
cess hardboard mill reportedly using chip washing, but the trend
is toward mills having to wash chips.  As prime sources of fiber
become increasingly scarce such as from whole logs, the future
trend is toward whole tree utilization.  This means that whole
trees, or just limbs and branches, would be chipped in the for-
est and shipped to the mills.  Due to the increased extraneous
material, chip washing will become a necessity.

Fresh water may be used for chip washing; and cooling
water from inplant equipment might also be used.  There is
presently only one chip washing system reportedly in use
with a water usage of approximately 330 liters per ton (96
gallons per ton).

Fiber Preparation

As previously discussed, there are two principal fiber prepara-
tion processes: 1) thermal plus mechanical refining, and 2)
the explosion process.  Figure 13 (Section IV) shows a sche-
matic diagram of a typical wet process hardboard mill where
thermal plus mechanical refining is used for fiber prepara-
tion.  All but two wet process mills utilize some variation
of this process.  Two mills owned by the Masonite Corporation
utilize the explosion process as shown in Figure 18.

The actual water used in fiber preparation in the wet process
is relatively small as compared to overall water use in a wet
process mill.  In general, the only water used in fiber pre-
paration is the addition of steam into the cooker.  This quan-
tity of steam can be expected to equal one half the weight of
dry chips processed or approximately 0.5 cubic meters per 1.0
ton (120 gallons per short ton).

The principal reason for significant wastewater flows and
concentrations from the wet process as compared with the dry
                             117

-------
          CHI
oo
                                                                  MAKE-UP
                                                                  WATER
                 WATER  IN


                 WATER  OUT
                                                                                    TO ATMOSPHERE
                                                                  STOCK
                                                                                               TO
                                                                                              FINISHING
                                                                                        V
                             FIGURE  18 - WATER USE IN THE EXPLOSION PROCESS

-------
DRAFT


process is the fact that the fiber is diluted from approximately
40 percent consistency to 1.5 percent consistency with sig-
nificant quantities of water prior to forming on a wet felting
machine.  There are limitations on the concentrations of or-
ganics in the process water which means that most of the soluble
organics released into solution during fiber preparation must
be disposed of in some manner (usually discharged as wastewater)
as only a portion of the solubles may be retained in the hard-
board.  In the dry process all solubles released during fiber
preparation are retained in the board.

The interrelation between fiber preparation processes, varia-
tions of cooking time, and temperature and wood chemistry on
wastewater discharge is extremely important.  The following
information was derived from a number of sources, the most
important of which are reference numbers (7) and (17) .  Wood
is exceedingly difficult to define chemically because it is a
complex heterogeneous product of nature made up of interpene-
trating components, largely of high molecular weight.  The
principal components generally are classified as cellulose,
lignin, hemicellulose, and solvent-soluble substances (ex-
tractives).   The amounts present are in the range of 40 to 50
percent, 15 to 35 percent, 20 to 35 percent, and 3 to 10 per-
cent, respectively.

The yield, composition, purity, and extent of degradation of
these isolated components depend on the exact conditions of
the emperical procedures employed for their isolation.  By far
the most important factor relative to the values obtained in
chemical analysis for wood components is the tree species.  The
variation in chemical composition of wood greatly influences
the quantities and kinds of chemicals released during fiber pre-
paration.

At normal temperatures wood has remarkable resistance to degra-
dation by chemicals and solvents.  This may be attributed to
the interpenetrating network structure of wood comprised of
polymers with widely differing properties.   Also, the high
crystallinity of the carbohydrate system reduces the accessi-
bility of the wood components to reagents.

Water at room temperature has little chemical effect on wood,
but as temperature rises and  pH decreases because of the
splitting off of acetyl groups, wood becomes subject to rapid
acid hydrolysis with the dissolution of carbohydrate material
and some lignin.   At temperatures above 140°C considerable and
rapid removal of hemicelluloses occurs.   Fortunately, cellulose
resists hydrolysis better than the hemicellulose fractions.
                            119

-------
DRAFT


The thermal and  explosion pupling processes such as the Asplund
and Masonite processes  make  use of the effect of water on wood
at high temperatures  to prepare fiber for mechanical refining
prior to being pressed  into  hardboard.  The high temperatures
soften the lignin-hemicellulose matrix to permit the separation
of fibers with reduced  power cost and fiber damage.  Also, car-
bohydrate and lignin  degradation products and the lignin softened
by high temperatures  facilitate bonding of the fibrous structure
upon drying of the board.

Cooking wood with steam at temperatures of about 180°C causes
a rapid loss in  weight.  Part of the loss is due to thermal de-
composition and  simple  solution, but the acids released by the
wood hydrolyze appreciable amounts of carbohydrates as well.  In
commercial operations,  yields of pulp fall to between 75 and 90
percent, therefore, potential wastewater problems increase sig-
nificantly.  Wood species high in water-solubles will obviously
give lower yields of  pulp.

In the well-known explosion  process wood chips are exposed to
high-pressure steam in  a "gun" or small digester fitted with a
quick-opening valve that allows the chips to disintegrate when
the pressure is  abruptly released.  In the gun the chips are
steamed at 41.8  ATM (600 psi) for 1 minute, and the pressure
is then increased to  69  ATM  (1,000 psi) for an additional 5
seconds before the valve is  opened.  Differences in wood species,
condition, and size of  chips modify the cycle.  The high tempera-
ture, high pressure treatment does not remove the lignin but
makes it sufficiently plastic for the chips to burst apart on
release.  Hemicellulose  is hydrolyzed, becoming pentose sugars,
some of which are dehydrated and polymerized to form furfural
resins as a result of the steaming and the subsequent high-
temperature pressing  and tempering involved in manufacturing
boards.  This process causes the release of significant quan-
tities of organics which must be disposed of as a waste stream.

Another representative  and more commonly used process uses a
screw press to force  compressed chips into one end of a hori-
zontal stainless-steel  tube, typically 3 meters (10 feet) long
and 1 meter (3 feet)  in  diameter, which the chips traverse in
about 30 seconds while  exposed to steam at 182°C and 12.9 ATM
(175 psi) .  At the far  end they are fiberized in a single-rotating-
disk mill while  still hot and under pressure. From the disk mill
the pulp is discharged  to a  cyclone, from which it goes to a surge
bin followed by  a second refiner for further processing.  Other
types of continuous or  quick-cycle digesters may be substituted
and give similar results.  Due to the lower temperatures and
                             120

-------
DRAFT


pressures the quantity of released organics is considerably less
than in the explosion process, resulting in less potential waste.

The yield, chemical composition, and physical properties of the
pulps prepared by any method are dependent upon two sets of
variables, i.e.:

Variables associated with the wood,

      1.  Species
      2.  Density
      3.  Growth factors
      4.  Moisture content
      5.  Length of storage
      6.  Particle size

Variables associated with the fiber preparation system,

      7.  Concentration of pH or liquor (water solution)
      8.  Temperature of digestion
      9.  Time of digestion

The dissolution of the wood substances takes place mainly during
pre-heating and defibration process and is closely related to the
kind of raw material used.  It is also a function of the pre-
heating temperature and the pre-heating time used.

It is rather difficult to make determinations of the yield of
pulp from wood as a function of the pre-heating conditions as,
in general, the pre-heating periods used in practice are fairly
short in comparison to the time it takes for the chips to reach
the final temperature in the pre-heater.  Some attempts have
been made, however, and in Figure 19 a graph for beechwood is
shown,  where the pre-heating period was extended to 16 minutes.
These determinations were made with water as "cooking liquor,"
and it  is clearly shown that the dissolution proceeds much
faster  as the pre-heating temperature is increased (21).

During  the pre-heating mainly two reactions take place.  One of
them is the hydrolysis of hemicellulose molecules, whereby oli-
gosaccharides are formed.   These short-chain molecules are small
enough  to dissolve in water.  The other reaction is the hydroly-
sis of  acetyl groups, whereby acetic acid is formed, causing an
increase in the hydrogen ion concentration in the raw material.
The higher acidity causes the hydrolytic reactions to proceed
still faster.  Thus the reactions can be said to be autocatalytic,
For that reason it is very difficult to calculate rates of
                             121

-------
       YIELD %
100
 90
 80
                                    I58°C
                                    I72°C
                                     I83°C
70
              5         10        15
              PREHEATING   TIME   MINUTES
                      20
      FIGURE 19  (21)  -
EFFECT OF  PREHEATING TIME AND
TEMPERATURE  ON YIELD
                          122

-------
DRAFT


reaction for the dissolution of wood substances during the
pre-heating stage.  As a rough estimation, however, the rate
of reaction seems to double with an increase in temperature
of about 8°C (50°F), which is normal for most chemical
reactions  (21).

So far no exhaustive investigations seem to have been made on
the composition  of the substances dissolved during the pre-
heating and defibration steps.  An examination of the com-
position of the  substances dissolved in the Masonite process
was made by Edhborg some fifteen years ago.  The temperature
in the Asplund-Defibrator process is normally about 180°C and
the pre-heating  time is usually from one up to a few minutes.  The
temperature in the explosion process, on the other hand, is in-
creased to between 250 and 300°C, even if it is only for a few
seconds.  This  leads to larger amounts of substances being dis-
solved in the latter process and also to more acidic conditions--
a pH value of about 3 was obtained in an extract from an explo-
sion pulp whereas the pH values in extracts from defibrator
pulps are usually close to 4.  The acidity depends partly on
volatile acids  like acetic and formic acid and partly on non-
volatile ones,  among which uronic acid is the most frequent (21)

The investigation on dissolved substances in the explosion
process was based on coniferous wood as raw material.  The
dissolved substances in this case consisted of about 70 percent
carbohydrates,  10 percent lignin - partly modified - and 20
percent "organic resins."  The carbohydrates consisted of 35
percent pentosans - mostly xylans - and 65 percent hexosans (21)

Corresponding investigations on dissolved substances in the
Asplund-Defibrator process were made with beech as raw material.
In this case 75  percent of the dissolved substances were carbo-
hydrates and a  few percent were lignin type substances.  In
addition about  10 percent acetic acid - partly free and partly
bound as acetyl  groups - were found.  In this case about 80
percent of the  carbohydrates were pentosans -- mainly xylans --
and 20 percent  hexosans.

Tables 13 and 26 relate properties and composition of many
common woods used in this country, and Figure 20 indicates the
effects various  treatments have on these components.  Figure
21 depicts a general relationship of lignin dissolution ver-
sus percent of  wood dissolved.
                             123

-------
to
                                                TABLE 26 (7)

                                 ANALYSES  OF SOME COMMON SPECIES OF WOOD
                               (Extractive-free basis,  percent of dry wood)
Constituent
Ash
Acetyl
Lignin

a-Cellulose
Hemicellulose
Total3

-------
ts)
l/l

1
TOTAL
WOOD
SUBSTANCE




Neutral
Solvents
and/or
Steam
i
2
EXTRACTIVE
FREE WOOD
95%
|
Soluble
or
Volatile
*
3
EXTRACTIVES
5%


I
INORGANIC
<.05%
Mild
Oxidation
and ~~
Extraction
Degraded
Soluble
t
4
SOLOCELLULOSE
(TOTAL
POLYSACCHARIDE
FRACTION)
70%

5
LIGNIN
25%


6
Dilute WOOD
Aqueous CELLULOSE
Alkali 60%

Ac
Soluble Hydrc

1
GLUCOSI
TRACES
OTHER
CARBOH'
AND IMF
id
>lysis
E +
OF
fDRATES
HJRITIES
               MANNOSE
               XYLOSE
               GALACTOSE
               ARABINOSE
               URONIC ACIDS
  Acid
Hydrolysis
HEMICELLULOSE
     20%
                         FIGURE  20  (7)  - THE CHEMICAL  COMPONENTS OF WOOD

-------
    100
o
LJ
o
V)
CO

o
80
    60
<

I   40

E
o
o

£   20
a.
                 20
                             w
                      40
60
80
100
                      PERCENT  WOOD DISSOLVED
 FIGURE 21 (7) - RELATION BETWEEN DISSOLVED LIGNINS AND WOOD
                          126

-------
DRAFT


Mat Formation and Pressing

Figure 13 shows that from the refiner,fiber is discharged into
a cyclone where the fiber is diluted with process water.  Figure
22 shows a typical schematic diagram of the process water flow
in the wet process.  From the refiner,fiber is diluted to ap-
proximately 5.0 percent through the cyclone then diluted still
further to approximately 1.5 percent fiber in the stock chest.

A mat is then formed on the wet forming machine where the fiber
concentration is increased to approximately 35 percent prior
to wet pressing.  Water removed from the mat formation flows to
a process water chest where it is recycled as process water.
Water released upon pressing either evaporates to the atmosphere
or flows back to the process water chest or is discharged directly
as a wastewater.  Process water may be recycled until the tem-
perature, soluble organics or suspended solids become too high.
Normally, fresh makeup water is added at a constant rate to con-
trol these parameters and the overflow is discharged to waste.

In the explosion process considerably more soluble organics are
released.  All of these plants (two) use recycle process water
for fiber washing.  Fiber wash water from the explosion process
is a major source of wastewater.  A waste load from this process
alone of 40 kilograms per metric ton  (80 pounds per ton) into a
flow of 2.5 cubic meters per ton (600 gallons per ton) is re-
ported.  Typical wastewater characteristics of this fiber wash
are shown below:

          BOD = 22,620 mg/1
          COD = 51,100 mg/1
          TS  = 32,000 mg/1
       Volume = 2.5 cubic meters per metric ton (600 gallons
                per ton)

Because of these high waste concentrations it has been found
that it is practical to evaporate this waste stream. The re-
sulting liquor is sold as cattle feed or incinerated (Figure
231.  This is  the  normal procedure in both of the plants
that use an explosion process.

Two other wet process mills which use the more conventional
cooking processes wash fiber prior to mat formation.  These
mills do not evaporate this wash water separately as is done
by the Masonite mills, but simply discharge it directly to
waste.
                             127

-------
Isj
oo
               STEAM
     CHIPS
             PREHEATER ^_ REFINER
           SCREW
           FEED
       WATER IN


       WATER OUT


r^T*> ALTERNATE ROUTE
                                                                                     TO
                                                                                     ATMOSPHERE
STOCK  L-1 WET FORMING
CHESTS J™|  MACHINE
                                                    A  05)
                                                                          WET  I—r-\

                                                                         PRESS f^V
J
I

DILUTION
WATER










*
PROCES
WATER

CHEST
t

5


f
X
/
/
/






<**-"




',


/
t
r



r ,
                                      TO
                                      FINISHING
                                                  MAKE-UP
                                                  WATER
                                                                                        >
                                  TO
                                  TREATMENT
       (XX)   APPROXIMATE  PERCENT FIBER
              (CONSISTENCY IN  PROCESS)
            FIGURE 22 -  PROCESS WATER RECYCLE IN A TYPICAL WET PROCESS HARDBOARD MILL

-------
                                                                                   TO ATMOSPHERE
10
     CHIPS
            GUN
            w
                     CYCLONE
             WATER IN
WATER  OUT

CONCENTRATED
BY-PRODUCT
                                                  STOCK ==WETFORMING
/!=> i=r
f

MASHER
^



1—, j—J CHEST | JMACH
it

1




PROCESS
WATER
CHEST
TO
FINISHING
                                                                               ' i f
                                                                            '(//tii/fr/if/iiiiffil
                                                                           <£=-MAKE-UP WATER
                                                                                         TO TREATMENT
                                       CONCENTRATE TO
                                       CATTLE  FEED
                        FIGURE 23  -  PROCESS WATER RECYCLE IN  A HARDBOARD MILL
                                      USING  THE EXPLOSION PROCESS

-------
 DRAFT


 The  moisture in the chips entering  the wet  process is
 approximately 50 percent.  Assuming that  the mat  is formed from
 a  1.5 percent fiber concentration and that  the board coming from
 the  press  has a 0.0 percent moisture, and that there is no re-
 cycle,  approximately 66.8 cubic  meters per  ton (16,000 gallons
 per  ton) of process water must be disposed  of in  some form.
 While a portion of this water will  be disposed of as steam, the
 majority will be discharged as a waste stream.  The actual vol-
 ume  discharged is a function of  the amount  of recycle practiced.
 There are  three principal factors which limit recycling of pro-
 cess water:  temperature,  suspended  solids,  and soluble solids.

 Usually a  process water temperature of a  certain  minimum is
 required to avoid excessive use  of  resin.   At lower temperatures
 the  naturally occurring resins in the fiber will  set, thereby
 becoming ineffective for  bonding.   Furthermore, when the board
 is formed  at low temperature, longer pressing times are required
 which can  significantly reduce production rates.  Most hardboard
 mills operate with a process water  temperature between 30°C
 (100°F)  and 63°C (145°F).   The more the process system is closed,
 the  higher its temperature becomes.   It has been  found that as
 temperatures increase outside of this range, certain corrosion
 problems are experienced.   Furthermore, conditions near forming
 machines become very humid,  making  working  conditions unpleasant.
 A certain  critical temperature seems to exist after which spots
 will  appear on the board,  thereby lowering  the aesthetic quality
 of the  board.   This critical temperature  varies with raw material,
 process  and product produced.

 Increased  recycling of process water increases the concentration
 of soluble organics.   This increased concentration raises the
 risk  of spot formation on the board and the chance of sticking
 in the  hot press.   This is partly due to  build-up of volatilized
 organics on press plates.   The critical concentration of soluble
 organics,  above which process problems are  encountered, is pri-
 marily  a function of wood species.

 The  effect of suspended solids concentrations relates to the
 dewatering characteristics  of the  board.   It has been reported
 that  as  suspended solids  concentrations increase with recycling,
 a certain  concentration is reached  after  which the board will
 not  exhibit  proper water  drainage during  mat formation (22).
 This  can be  attributed to  a  buildup  of fines which cause the
mat  to  dewater  slowly.  As suspended solids become too numerous
 in the process  water  they  must be removed either by blowing
down  this  highly concentrated water  and diluting  it with fresh
water, or  by removing the  solids  from the process water by some
other means.
                             130

-------
DRAFT


Miscellaneous Wastewater Sources

By far the major wastewater discharge from a wet process
hardboard mill is process water from mat formation, pressing,
and fiber washing where used.  Other wastewater sources which
may be classified as miscellaneous streams include resin system
wash water, caul wash water, housekeeping water, and cooling
water.

Resin Wash Water.  Water is used to make up the resins which are
added as binders for hardboard.  The water used for making re-
sin is not a wastewater, but is evaporated in the press.  Some
mills claim it is necessary to clean the glue system; and indications
are that there is no standard procedure for cleanup.  Several
hardboard mills are presently recycling this wash water as re-
sin makeup water or simply are not washing at all, therefore,
they have no discharge.

Caul, Press Plate or Screen Wash Water.  Another minor water
usage and wastewater source is for caul and press plate (screen)
wash water.  After a period of use cauls and press plates acquire
a buildup of resin and organics on their surface.  This results
in sticking in the presses and blemishes on the hardboard sur-
face.  The cauls or press plates must then be cleaned to remove
this buildup.  The cleaning operation consists of submerging the
cauls in a caustic cleaning solution for a period of time to
loosen the organic matter.   Press plates are also cleaned with
a caustic solution inplace.  The cauls are removed, rinsed with
fresh water, then put back in use.  The tanks used for soaking
the cauls are emptied as needed, normally only a few times each
year.  The soaking water used may amount to about 4 liters per
metric ton (1.0 gallons per ton) of hardboard production.  Rinse
water volume varies with frequency of washing of cauls or plates
(approximately 1.0 gallons per ton).

Water can be used in small quantities for various cleaning pro-
cedures.  The frequency and quantities of water used for clean-
ing purposes is highly variable as there are generally no
scheduled cleanup procedures.  Information gathered indicates
that the volume of wastewater from this amounts to less than
8 liters per ton (2.0 gallons per ton) of board.

Total Wastewater Flow

Table 27 is a summary of the total wastewater flow from eight
wet process hardboard mills.  Table 28 gives a summary of the
average wastewater concentrations from these same mills.
                             131

-------
DRAFT
                          TABLE 27

      WASTEWATER DISCHARGES FROM WET PROCESS HARDBOARD
Plant
Production
metric tons
(t) Chip Wash Included

 *  Projected Figures
Wastewater
  m3/day
 Wastewater
mVmetric ton
1
2
3
4(t)
5
6
7
8*
91
77
1,356
136
82
127
356
327
4,164
2,952
16,578
1,590
757
908
1,628
833
45.9
38.2
12.2
11.7
9.3
7.1
4.6
2.6
                             132

-------
OJ
                                              TABLE 28



                     RAW WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS FROM WET PROCESS HARDBOARD
                     Discharge Flow
BODt;
S.S.
Plant
1
2
3°*
4
5
6*
7*
8
m-i/D iiH/metric ton mg/1 kg/metric ton
4,164
2,945
16,578
1,589
757
897
1,635
840
45.9
38.2
12.2
11.7
9.3
7.1
4.6
2.6
720
1,130
1,800
3,000
3,500
3,900
--
3,350
33
50
23
28
32
28

8.5
mg/1 kg/metric ton
220

540
1,650
430
450

48
10

6.5
19
4
3.21

0.125
pH


5.0
4.5
4.4
4.0


          *  After Primary Treatment



          °  Masonite Explosion Process

-------
DRAFT


Wastewater flows vary  from  about  4.2 to 45.8 cubic meters per
metric ton (1,000  to 11,000 gallons per ton), depending largely
upon the amount of process  water  recycled.  BOD concentrations
vary from 720 mg/1 to  4,000 mg/1  and suspended solids from 48
to 1,650 mg/1.  A  comparison of data reported as raw wastewater
concentrations from mill  to mill  should be done with caution.
Several mills report raw  wastewater concentrations after primary
sedimentation while others  do not.  These mills utilize primary
clarifiers as part of  their recycle systems while other mills
consider primary clarifiers as part of their waste treatment
system.  The average discharge of BODs in kilograms per metric
ton (pounds per ton) ranges from  8.5 to 50  (17 to 100), while
average discharge  of suspended solids ranges from 0.13 to 19
kilograms per metric ton  (0.25 to 38 pounds per ton).

Other representative analyses of  raw wastewater discharged from
a typical wet process  hardboard mill are shown below:

                                            Concentrations
        Parameter                               mg/1	

        BOD                                 1,300 -  4,000
        COD                                 2,600 - 12,000
        SS                                    400 -  1,100
        TDS                                   500 -  4,000
        Kjld'N                                017 -  4.0
        P04~P                                 0.3 -  3.0
        Turbidity                              80 -    700
        pH                                    4.0-5.0
        Phenols                               0.7 -  1.0

Water Balance for  a Typical Wet Process Hardboard Mill

A schematic diagram of the  water  balance (net gains and losses)
for a typical mill is  shown in Figure 24.  Water gains or los-
ses are shown as liters of  water  per metric ton of product
produced in a typical  127 metric  tons (1401 tons) per day mill.

Water Gains.  Water gains in a typical wet process hardboard
mill result from incoming raw materials and freshwater makeup.
Incoming wood has  approximately 50 percent moisture content
which represents 100 percent of the final product weight.

The volume of miscellaneous housekeeping water, used for such
things as floor and caul  washing, is highly variable.  There
is little data as  this stream is  normally discharged to the
treatment system with  the process water without monitoring.
                             134

-------
Ul
LOSS: 83.5
STEAM GAIN=835 LOSS: 188 GAIN= 50
GAIN = 29,840 A WATER FROM TO STEAM OR
COOLING a 4> ADDITIONS ATMOSPHERE WATER
GAIN =500 SEAL WATER A 11
STEAM II JL ll &
2-TONS Jl V V 1 — — 1 | 	 — 	 1
CMII'S , , V 	 T^h 	 . 1C L_" STOCK UWET FORMING WET 1 	 LiMiniFiFB ^
— ^> ^PREHEATER1-1 REFINER ' 	 Yr r~lCHESTSn MACHINE PRFSS "UW'""-'t« /
—if* 1 ^ iiri r oE n& M i c«ir-^ n t r i in t n M*^^^ ^ 11 iimMvnii^b rft 11 do 1 }/
(soi \ (401 p-^ t — i 1 o /is) /
NSCREW FEED ^ \_V
GAINS = I,000 Jl Afc 17,590
LOSS: 29,6 17
COOLING AND 1 1

SEAL WATER D|LUT1Q
WATER
MAKE-U
WATER
GAIN = 9,1
\ (15) W (35)»—
46,655 V 63,911
PROCESS
WATER 
-------
DRAFT
Water from incoming chips
(50 percent moisture)

Steam to preheater
Cooling and seal water
Additive dilution water
Process water makeup
Humidifier
Miscellaneous housekeeping  =
   1,000 liters per ton (240  gallons
   per ton)

   500 liters per ton (120 gallons
   per ton)

   29,840 liters per ton (7,150  gal-
   lons per  ton)

   83.5 liters per ton (20 gallons
   per ton)

   9,890 liters per ton (2,370 gal-
   lons per  ton)

   50 liters per ton (12 gallons per
   ton)

   42 liters per ton (10 gallons per
   tonj	
Total water gain
=  41,405 liters per ton (9,922  gal-
   lons per ton)
Water Losses. Water  losses  in  a wet process mill result from:
Steam off of press
Cooling and seal water
discharge

Steam from cyclone
=  188 liters per ton (45 gallons
   per ton)

=  29,817 liters per ton (7,145
   gallons per ton)

=  83.5 liters per ton (20 gallons
   per ton)
Discharge of excess pro-
cess water  (includes
miscellaneous housekeeping  =   11,267  liters per ton  (2,700
water discharge)               gallons per ton)
Water in product
=  50 liters per ton (12 gallons
   per ton)	
Total water losses
=  41,405 liters per ton (9,922
   gallons per ton)
                             136

-------
"DRAFT"                        "DRAFT--


PART C:  WOOD PRESERVING

WASTEWATERS CONTAINING ENTRAINED OILS

Wastewater characteristics vary with the particular preservative  used,
the volume of stock that is conditioned prior to treatment,  the con-
ditioning method used, and the extent to which effluents  from the re-
torts are diluted with water from other sources.  Typically,  wastewaters
from creosote and pentachlorophenol  treatments have high  phenolic,  COD,
and oil contents and may have a turbid  appearance that  results from emul-
sified oils.  They are always acid in reaction, the pH  values usually
falling within the range of 4.1 to 6.0.  The COD for such wastes  fre-
quently exceeds 30,000 mg/liter, most of which is attributable to en-
trained oils and to wood extractives, principally simple  sugars,  that
are removed from wood during steam conditioning.

Effect of Closed Steaming

The characteristics of wood preserving  wastewater are different for plants
that practice modified-closed or closed steaming.  In the former  process
steam condensate is allowed to accumulate in the retort during the steam-
ing operation until it covers the heating coils.  At that point,  direct
steaming is stopped and the remaining steam required for  the cycle is
generated within the retort by utilizing the heating coils.   Upon com-
pletion of the steaming cycle, the water in the cylinder  is  discarded
after recovery of oils.  In closed steaming, the water  in the retort at
the end of a steaming cycle is returned to a reservoir, after recovery of
free oils, and is reused instead of being discarded.

The principal advantage of modified-closed steaming,  aside  from reducing
the volume of waste released by a plant, is that effluents  from the re-
torts are less likely to contain emulsified oils than when  open steaming
is used.  Free oils are readily separated from the wastewater; and as a
result of the reduction of the oily content, the oxygen demand and the
solids content of the waste are reduced significantly relative to efflu-
ents from plants using conventional  open steaming.  Typical  oil and COD
values for wastewater from a single plant before and after  the plant com-
menced modified-closed steaming are shown in Figures  25 and  26  (23)   *
respectively.  The COD of the wastewater was reduced by about two-thirds
when this steaming method was initiated.  Oil content was reduced by a
factor of ten.

Water used in closed steaming operations increases in oxygen demand,
solids content, and phenol concentration with each reuse.  The high oxy-
gen demand of this waste is attributable primarily to wood  extracts, prin-
cipally simple sugars, the concentration of which increases with the use of
the water.  Because practically all  of  the solids content of this waste
are dissolved solids, only insignificant reductions in  oxygen demand and
                                137

-------
                             Avg. oil content
                              before closed
                              steaming-1360mg/1
(si
CO
                                           Avg.oil content
                                            after closed
                                            steaming—136 nig/ I
                                8         12
                                   TIME ( weeks)
16
20
            FIGURE 25  - VARIATION  IN OIL CONTENT OF EFFLUENT WITH TIME
                        BEFORE AND AFTER INITIATING CLOSED STEAMING  (23)

-------
             65-
IO
                                30    40    50
                                    TIME (days)
               FIGURE 26 -  VARIATION IN COD OF  EFFLUENT  WITH  TIME  BEFORE  AND
                           AFTER CLOSED STEAMING:   DAYS  0-35  OPEN  STEAMING;
                           DAYS 35-130  CLOSED STEAMING  (23)

-------
                               "DRAFT"
Improvement in color result from primary treatments involving floccula-
tion.  The progressive changes in the parameters for water used in  a
closed steaming operation are shown in Table29 (24).  Although suchwastes
are perhaps more difficult to treat, this disadvantage is counterbalanced
in part by the fact that substantial reductions in the volume of waste-
water and total kilograms of pollutants released can be achieved by using
closed steaming.

      Table 29 Progressive Changes In Selected Characteristics Of
               Water Recycled In Closed Steaming Operations (24)
Charge
No.
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
12
13
14
20

Effect of
Phenol
46
169
200
215
231
254
315
208
230
223
323
NOTE:
Time
COD
15,516
22,208
22,412
49,552
54,824
75,856
99,992
129,914
121,367
110,541
123,429
Values expressed

Total
Solids
10,156
17,956
22,204
37,668
66,284
66,968
67,604
99,276
104,960
92,092
114,924
as mg/liter.

Dissolved
Solids
8,176
15,176
20,676
31 ,832
37,048
40,424
41 ,608
91 ,848
101,676
91 ,028
88,796


Because many plants use the same preservatives and follow essentially  the
same treating practices, the wastewaters they release are qualitatively
similar with respect to a number of chemical and biochemical  properties.
Quantitatively, however, they differ widely from plant to plant —  and
even from hour to hour at the same plant, depending upon the  time during
a treating cycle that samples for analysis are collected.
                                140

-------
                               "DRAFT"
Data on the effect of time of sampling during a treating cycle on the
flow rate and COD content of effluent from a plant operating a single
retort are shown in Figure 27.  Flow rate was measured and samples for
analysis collected at 30-minute intervals, beginning during a steaming
cycle and continuing through the treating cycle and part of the succeed-
ing steaming cycle.  The COD of the effluent varied inversely with flow
rate and ranged from 400 mg/liter to 43,000 mg/liter during the 24-hour
sampling period, a 100-fold variation.  Flow rate varied from 7570 Ipd
to 151,400 Ipd (2000 gpd to 40,000 gpd).  The pattern of variation for
phenol and solids content was similar to that for COD.

Variation in effluent characteristics among plants is illustrated by
the data in Table 30, which show the phenol and COD values of raw waste
for 13 plants.  Also shown in the table are the COD values following a
treatment consisting of flocculation and sedimentation.   The phenol  and
COD values for the raw waste vary over a wide range, as  does the effic-
iency of the treatment, as judged by the percent reduction in COD occa-
sioned by flocculation (23).

Biological Characteristics

Wastewater from the wood preserving industry is usually  relatively treat-
able.  Limited experience with bench-scale and pilot plant activated
sludge, trickling filter, and soil irrigation systems indicate that bio-
logical treating methods are generally effective in reducing the oxygen
demand and phenolic compounds to acceptable levels.  Because these waste
waters have a very low nutrient content, the addition of nitrogen and
phosphorus prior to biological treatment is necessary to maintain a vi-
able bacterial population.

Because of its prolonged exposure to temperatures in the range of 110°
to 121°C (230° to 250°F) and its relatively high content of phenolic
compounds, process water is sterile upon its discharge from retorts.
Its successful biological treatment requires the employment of strains
of bacteria that have been acclimated to concentrations  of phenolic com-
pounds of 300 mg/liter or higher.  On a laboratory scale, this require-
ment renders BOD determinations difficult to make and almost impossible
to interpret, especially as regards comparisons of results obtained by
different analysts.  It is not possible to ascertain whether the differ-
ences obtained are due to the characteristics of the waste samples or to
differences in the bacterial  cultures employed and their degree of accli-
mation to the waste.   Dust and Thompson (25;obtained differences in BOD
values for creosote wastewater of 200 percent among several  acclimated
cultures of bacteria.

Fortunately, the correlation  between BOD and COD for wood preserving
wastewater is high.  Using creosote wastewater with BOD  values larger
than 150 mg/liter, the above  authors found that the equation BOD = 0.497
COD x 60, for which r = 0.985, accounted for practically all of the
                                 141

-------
rsj
                                  8        12        16
                                      TIME  ( hours)
20
24
        FIGURE 27 - VARIATION IN COD CONTENT AND WASTEWATER FLOW RATE WITH TIME (23)

-------
DRAFT
           TABLE  30  PHENOL AND COD VALUES  FOR EFFLUENTS
              FROM THIRTEEN WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS  (23)
Plant
Location
Mississippi
Mississippi
Mississippi
Mississippi
Mississippi
Mississippi
Virginia
VI rgi ni a
Georgia
Georgia
Georgia
Tennessee
Louisiana
Phenol
(mg/1 )
162
109
—
168
83
50
192
508
119
331
123
953
104

Raw
6,290
11,490
48,000
42,000
12,300
1.000
9,330
32,300
7,440
3,370
17,100
1,990
10,500
COD (mg/1)
After
Flocculation
3,700
5,025
2,040
31 ,500
4,500
--
3,180
8,575
2,360
1,880
3,830
1,990
6,070

Percent
Reduction
41
56
96
25
63
—
66
73
68
44
78
0
42
                               143

-------
                               "DRAFT"


variation between the two parameters (Figure28),  The general  applica-
bility of this equation was indicated by spot checks of the COD:BOD
ratio for similar wastes from several plants.

The COD:BOD ratio increases rapidly for BOD values smaller than 150
mg/liter (Table31), and averages 6.2 for values in the range of 20 to
40 mg/liter.  This ratio is in line with the value of 6.1  reported for
the petroleum industry for effluents similar in composition to those of
the wood preserving industry.

SALT-TYPE PRESERVATIVES AND FIRE RETARDANTS

Wastewaters resulting from treatments with inorganic salt  formulations
are low in organic content, but contain traces of heavy metals used in
the preservatives and fire retardants employed.  Average analytical data
based on weekly sampling for a year of the effluent from a plant  treat-
ing with both preservatives and a fire retardant are given in  Table 32.
The presence and concentration of a specific ion in wastewater from such
treatments depend upon the particular formulation employed and the ex-
tent to which the waste is diluted by washwater and storm  water.

RAW HASTE LOADING DATA

Average analytical data for five typical wood preserving plants treating
with pentachlorophenol-petroleum solutions and/or creosote are given in
Tab!es 33-37..  Data for plants 1 through 4 (Tables 33-36) were obtained
from 24 samples collected at hourly intervals at the outfall from each
plant and analyzed separately to obtain information on short-term varia-
tion in effluent quality.  These data were later supplemented by  analysis
of several grab samples collected over a period of several months.  Data
for Plant 5 are based on a series of grab samples collected during 1972.
Information on volume of discharge of process water was obtained  either
from 24-hour measurements (Plants 1-4) or estimated based  on number of
retorts, processing operations used, and other considerations  (Plant 5).
Waste volume flow data do not include cooling water, which was recycled
at all plants, coil condensate, or boiler blow-down water.  Production
figures for 1971 were estimated from the void volume of the retorts oper-
ated by the plants.

Raw waste loadings for each pollutant are expressed in terms of concentra-
tions (mg/liter) and kilograms per 1000 m3 of product treated for each of
the five plants.  Maximum, minimum, and average raw waste  loadings per day
based on analytical data and volume of discharge are also  given.  A com-
posite of these data, representing the average raw waste loadings given
in Tables33-37 is shown in Table 38..  The effluent characteristics repre-
sented by these data are assumed to be representative of the raw  waste
streams of plants treating with creosote and pentachlorophenol-petroleum
solutions.  Since each of the five plants involved are typical of the  in-
dustry, data for the hypothetical plant given in Table 38  will be the basis
for an analysis of effluent treatment cost presented later in  this report.
                                144

-------
en
            10-
 O)

CO
 O

 X
 Q

 O
 GQ


 I4
                  ""	1	1	1   II	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	T
             0
                                                    Y=0.497X+60
                "-
                                     ! — '«'''   A   i    i    i — L
  6       8       10      12
Influent  C 0 D  x  io3 mg/|
                                                                     14
                                                                   16
                   FIGURE  28  -  RELATIONSHIP  BETWEEN  BOD AND  COD  FOR  WASTEWATER
                               FROM A  CREOSOTE  TREATING OPERATION  (23)

-------
DRAFT
        TABLE 31  RATIO BETWEEN COD AND BOD FOR VAPOR DRYING
                 AND CREOSOTE EFFLUENT WASTEWATERS*
(NOTE:  Data provided by the Research Department, Koppers Company,  Inc.)

                             (mg/liter)

Range of BOD
40 - 75





20 - 35



10 - 15



Average
*Ana lysis revealed these
not included in average,

COD
150
160
300
300
320
450
160
210
180
120
100
210
180
70
--
values to
»

BOD
45
40
45
75
45
60
25
35
30
20
10
15
10
10
—
be statistical

Ratio
COD/BOD
3.3
4.0
6.7
4.0
7.1
7.5
6.4
6.0
6.0
6.0
10.0
14.0*
18.0*
7.0
6.2
aber rants. They were

   TABLE 32  RANGE OF POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS IN WASTEWATER FROM
              A PLANT TREATING WITH CCA- AND FCAP-TYPE
                 PRESERVATIVES AND A FIRE RETARDANT
                             (mg/liter)
Parameter
COD
As
Phenols
Cu
Cr+6
Cr+3
F
P04
NH3-N
Range of
Concentrations
10
13
0.05
0.05
0.23
0
4
15
80
- 50
- 50
- 0.16
- 1.1
- 1.5
- 0.8
- 20
- 150
- 200
                    PH
5.0 - 6.8
                                 146

-------
DRAFT
            TABLE 33  RAW WASTE LOADINGS FOR PLANT NO. 1
Parameter
COD
Phenols
Oil and
Grease
Total
Solids
Dissolved
Solids
Suspended
Solids
pH 4.6
Raw Waste
(mg/1 )
28,600
134
530
11,963
11,963
1,844

Loadings*
(Kg/ 1000
m3 Prod)
13,723.0
(854.8)
48.2
(3.0)
188.3
(11.7)
4,251.6
(264.9)
3,596.8
(224.1)
654.8
(40.8)

Raw Waste
Max.
2,705.5
(5,952.0)
6.7
(14.8)
84.5
(186.0)
836.6
(1,840.5)
673.0
(1,480.6)
163.6
(359.9)

Loadings/day
Min.
317.0
(697.5)
0.1
(0.2)
4.2
(9.3)
5.0
(11.1)
2.3
(5.1)
3.3
(7.2)

(Kg)**
Avg.
1,631.8
(3,590.0)
5.6
(12.4)
22.4
(49.3)
505.7
(1,112.6)
427.8
(941.1)
78.0
(171.5)

Average flow - 42,494 Ipd (11.227 gpd)
Void vol.of cylinders - 293 m3 (10,337 ft3)
1971 production (est.) - 26,760 m3 (945,000 ft3)
Average work days/year - 225
Average daily production - 119 m3 (4,200 ft3)
Preservatives - Creosote
*Parenthetical  values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical  values in pounds.
                                147

-------
DRAFT
           TABLE 34  RAW WASTE LOADINGS FOR PLANT NO. 2
Raw Waste Loadings*
Parameter (Kg/ 1000
(mg/1 ) nr Prod)
COD 22

Phenols

Oil and
Grease
Total 3
Solids
Dissolved 3
Solids
Suspended
Solids
pH 4.9
,685 7

258

55

,504 1

,044 1

460


Average flow - 68,471 Ipd
Void vol. of cylinders -
1971 production (est.) -
Average work
Average daily
Preservatives
days/year -
production
- Creosote,
,712.
(480.
88.
(5.
19.
(1.
,190.
(74.
,035.
(64.
155.
(9.

0
5)
3
5)
3
2)
9
2)
2
5)
7
7)

(18,090
427 m3 (1
60,163 m3
300
- 201

,„
Raw
Waste Loadinqs/day (Kg)**
Max.
5
(13





(1

(1



,988.
,175.
54.
(120.
4.
(10.
728.
,603.
645.
,419.
95.
(210.

9
6) 0
7
3)
6
2)
8
4)
3
6)
7
6)

Min.
794
,746
9
(19
2
(4
118
(206
106
(234
16
(35

.0
.8)
.0
.9)
.0
.4)
.2
.0)
.5
.4)
.1
.4)

Avg.
1,546
(3,402
17
(38
3
(8
238
(525
207
(456
31
(69


.7
.8)
.6
.7)
.7
• 2)
.9
.6)
.5
.6)
.4
.0)

gpd)
5,068 ft3)
(2,124,588 ft3)

n





(7,082 ft0)
Pentachlorophenol
*Parenthetical values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical values in pounds
                                148

-------
DRAFT


           TABLE 35  RAW WASTE LOADINGS FOR PLANT NO.  3
Raw Waste Loadings* Raw Waste Loadings/day (Kg)**
Parameter (Kg/1000
(mg/1) m3 Prod) Max.
COD 12,467 3
Phenols 82
Oil 150
Total 1,724
Solids
Dissolved 1,528
Solids
Suspended 196
pH 4.5
,295.1 943.2
(205.3) (2,075.0) (1
25.7 5.9
(1.6) (12.9)
40.1 25.0
(2.5) (55.0)
455.8 130.3
(28.4) (286.6)
404.5 115.5
(25.2) (254.0)
51.4 14.8
(3.2) (32.6)

Min.
500.0
,100.0)
3.5
(7.8)

69.5
(153.0)
61.6
(135.6)
7.9
(17.4)

Avg.
708.4
(1,558.4)
5.6
(12.3)
8.5
(18.8)
98.0
(215.5)
86.8
(191.0)
11.1
(24.5)


Average flow (est.) - 56,
Void vol. of cylinders -
1971 production (est.) -
Average work days/year -
Average daily production
Preservatives - Creosote,
775 Ipd (15,000 gpd)
457m3 (16,152-ft3)
64,491 m3 (2,277,432 ft3)
300
- 215 m3 (7,591 ft3)
Pentachlorophenol


*Parenthetical values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical values in pounds
                                149

-------
DRAFT
           TABLE 36   RAW  WASTE LOADINGS FOR PLANT NO. 4
Raw Waste Loadings*
Parameter
Raw
Waste Loadings/day (Kg)**
(Kg/ 1000
(mg/1) m3 Prod)
COD

Phenols

Oil

Total
Solids








Dissolved
Solids

Suspended
Solids
pH 5.

8
9,318

312

580

3,432

2,748

684


2,291.
(142.
77.
(4.
142.
(8.
844.
(52.
675.
(42.
168.
(10.

9
8)
0
8)
8
9)
2
6)
7
1)
5
5)

1
(2





(1





Max.
,131.
,489.
21.
(46.
45.
(100.
530.
,166.
383.
(842.
147.
(324.

Min.
7
8)
2
6)
8
8)
3
7)
1
4)
4
2)

373
(822
14
(32
24
(53
99
(219
93
(206
6
(13

.1
• 6)
.6
.2)
.5
.9)
.9
.7)
.8
.4)
.0
.3)

Avg.
563
(1,239
18
(41
35
(77
207
(456
166
(365
41
(90


.3
.3)
.9
.5)
.0
.1)
.5
.5)
.1
.5)
.3
.9)


Average
Void vol
flow
. of
(est.) - 60
cylinders -
1971 production (est.) -
Average
Average
work
daily
Preservatives
days/year -
production
- Creosote
,560 1
523 m
pd (16,000 gp
3
(18,470 ft3
d)

73,746 m3 (2,604,270
300
- 246

m


3 (8,681 ft
«5
3)


ft3)

















, Pentachlorophenol
*Parenthetical values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical values in pounds
                                 150

-------
DRAFT
           TABLE 37  RAW WASTE LOADINGS FOR PLANT NO.  5
Raw Waste Loadings*
Parameter (Kg/1000
(mg/1) m3 Prod)
COD
Phenol
Oil and
Grease
Total
Solids
13,273 3



Dissolved
Solids
Suspended
Solids
pH 4.
5
126
172
5,780 1
5,416 1
364

Average flow (est.) - 34,
Void vol. of cylinders -
1971 production (est.) -
Average work days/year -
Average daily production
Preservatives - Creosote,
,072.
(191.
28.
(1.
40.
(2.
,338.
(83.
,253.
(78.
83.
(5.

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

Raw
Max.
593
(1,305
5
(11
9
(21
259
(570
241
(532
--

Waste Loadings/day (Kg)**
Win.
.2
.0)
.1
.2)
.9
.8)
.5
.9)
.8
.0)


317
(699
3
(7
1
(2
168
(370
137
(303
—

.8
.1)
.4
.4)
.0
.3)
.3
.2)
.9
.4)


Avg
452
(995
4
(9
5
(12
197
(433
184
(406
12
(27

•
.5
.5)
.3
.4)
.9
.9)
.0
.5)
.6
.2)
.4
.s)

444 Ipd (9,100 gpd)
356 m3 (12,557 ft3)
44,175 m3 (1,560,000 ft3)
300
- 147 m3 (5,200 ft3)
Pentachlorophenol
*Parenthetical values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical values in pounds
                               151

-------
DRAFT
             TABLE 38  AVERAGE RAW WASTE LOADINGS FOR
                   FIVE WOOD-PRESERVING PLANTS
Raw Waste Loadings*
Parameter (kg/1000
(mg/1) m3 Prod)
COD 19,269 5,378.4
(335.1)
Phenols
Oil and
Grease
Total
Solids
Dissolved
Solids
Suspended
Solids
pH 4.9
182
297
5,280 1
4,571 1
710

Average flow - 52,990 Ipd
Void vol. of cylinders -
1971 production (est.) -
Average work days/year -
Average daily production
Preservatives - Creosote,
51.4
(3.2)
83.5
(5.2)
,463.8
(91.2)
,276.0
(79.5)
199.0
(12.4)

Raw
Max.
1,651.
(3,634.
12.
(28.
37.
(82.
470.
(1,035.
387.
(852.
87.
(191.

Waste Loadings/day (Kg)**

9
2)
8
2)
5
5)
7
5)
4
2)
2
9)

(14.000 gpd)
411 m3 (14,517 ft3)
53,867 m3 (1,902, 258
285
- 189 m3 (6,674 ft3)
Pentachlorophenol
Min
502.
(1,106.
6.
(13.
7.
(16.
109.
(240.
93.
(205.
12.
(26.

ft3)
•
9
3)
3
8)
5
4)
5
9)
5
8)
2
8)


Avg.
1,016
(2,235
9
(21
15
(34
278
(612
241
(530
37
(82



.0
.2)
.6
.1)
.6
.4)
.4
.5)
.0
.2)
.5
.4)


*Parenthetical values in pounds/1000 ft3
**Parenthetical values in pounds
                                152

-------
                               "DRAFT"


SOURCES OF WASTEWATER

Wastewaters from wood preserving operations  are  of the  following  types
and contain the contaminants indicated:

     a.  Condensate from conditioning by steaming and  Boulton-
         izing - This is the most heavily contaminated waste-
         water, since it comes  into direct  contact with  the
         preservative being used.  Condensates  from penta-
         chlorophenol and creosote treatments contain  entrained
         oils, phenolic compounds, and  carbohydrates leached
         from the wood.  Those  from salt-type treatments  contain
         traces of the chemicals present in the preservative
         formulation used.   The oxygen  demand of this  waste is
         high because of dissolved wood extractives and,  in the
         case of creosote and pentachlorophenol treatments, en-
         trained oils.

     b.  Cooling water - Cooling water  is used  to cool condensers,
         air compressors, and vacuum pumps  and, in the case of
         plants that use it on  a once-through basis, accounts for
         approximately 80 percent of the total  discharge.  Water
         used with surface condensers,  air  compressors,  and dry-
         type vacuum pumps is unchanged in  quality. That used
         with barometric condensers and wet-type vacuum  pumps is
         contaminated with the  preservative used, unless  the pre-
         servative is of the water-borne type.   In the latter
         case, the cooling water is unchanged in quality.

     c.  Steam condensate from  heating  coils -  Water from this
         source is uncontaminated, unless a coil develops  a leak
         through which preservative can enter.

     d.  Boiler blow-down water - is contaminated with chemicals,
         principally chromates  and phosphates,  used as boiler
         compounds.

     e.  Vacuum water - Water extracted from the wood  during the
         vacuum cycle following steam conditioning is  contami-
         nated with the preservative employed.   In the Boulton
         process, the cylinder  condensate is largely composed
         of water from this source.

     f.  Wash water - Water used to clean equipment is contami-
         nated with the preservative used,  with oil and  grease,
         and may also contain detergents.

     g.  Water softener brine - Water used  for  this purpose is
         contaminated with various dissolved inorganic materials
         including salts of calcium and magnesium.
                                 153

-------
                                "DRAFT"


The  source  and  volume of water  used,  including recycled water, and the
amount  of wastewater discharged by a  hypothetical wood preserving plant
(Table   38  )  that  employs  steam conditioning are shown in the flow dia-
gram that is  Figure  29 .   A  more complete breakdown of these data is
given in Table  39 .

This  plant  has  a daily  intake of approximately 121,120 liters (32,000
gal.),  gross  water usage of  567,750 liters (150,000 gal.), and a dis-
charge  of 104,100  liters per day (27,500 gpd).  An estimated 13,250
liters  (3,500 gal.)  of  cooling  waterarelost by evaporation.  Roughly
446,650 liters  (118,000 gal.) are recycled as cooling water, including
6,400 liters  (1,700  gal.)  of water extracted during the conditioning
process (vacuum water).  The amount of vacuum water recovered averages
about 1.9 kilograms  per cubic meter (4.3 pounds per cubic foot)  of green
wood  that is  steam conditioned.  Approximately two times this amount is
removed from  Boultorn*zed stock.

The actual  volume  of water used at a  plant of this size and type is not
static,  but rather varies  depending upon the condition of the stock
(either green or seasoned) being treated and the size of the individual
items.   For illustrative purposes only, the data in Table 39  were com-
puted based on  the assumption that the plant treated stock one-half of
which was green and  one-half of which was seasoned.  It all  green mater-
ial were  treated,  the volume of boiler water and cooling water used would
approximately double.

Both  the  gross water used  in a  plant  and the volume discharged depends
primarily upon whether  a plant  uses cooling water on a once-through basis
or recycles it.  To  a lesser extent,  the disposition of coil  condensate —
either  reused for  boiler make-up water or discharged — is also  important
in determining the volume  of wastewater.  Nationwide, approximately 75 per-
cent  of the plants recycle their cooling water; only 33 percent  reuse their
coil  condensate.

Gross water usage  is also  influenced by cool ing water requirements.  Among
plants  of the same size and  type of operation, the volume used varies by
as much as  fourfold.  Such variation is attributable to the  operating pro-
cedures  used.  Important variables in this regard are the length of the
vacuum  period, during which  cooling water is required for both the con-
denser  and  the vacuum pump,  and whether or not the rate of flow  to the
condenser is  reduced after the  initial period of operation when  a high
flow  rate is needed.

Volume of cooling water used also varies with the conditioning process
used—either steaming or Boul torn'zing.  In the former process, the con-
denser is operated only about three hours following a conditioning cycle.
In the Boultonizing process, the condenser is operated for the entire
period, which often exceeds  30 hours.  Gross cooling water usageata larger
plant employing the Boulton  process may amount to 3.8 million liters (1 mil-
lion gallons) per day.
                                154

-------
Intake
                                             122,256,
                                             (32,300)
gal.
       11,166
       (2,950)^-	

(Evaporation) 102,
113
(30
550
000)
STEAM
(To retorts Icoils)
10?
(27
384
050)


o6:
440,952
016,500)


454,
[120
813
800)
6,434
(1,700)
200
000)
O
z
o
o
o


Vacuum Water

i,
(5
892
00)
CO
CO
111
0
O
CC
Q.

13^248 l,
(3,| 500) (Evaporation) (s


892
00)
104,277
Waste (27,550)
     FIGURE 29 - SOURCE AND VOLUME  OF DAILY WATER USE AND RECYCLING AND
                 WASTEWATER SOURCE  AT A TYPICAL WOOD-PRESERVING PLANT
                                 155

-------
DRAFT
       TABLE 39  SOURCE AND VOLUME OF WATER DISCHARGED AND
       RECYCLED PER DAY BY A TYPICAL WOOD-PRESERVING PLANT

               (Note:  Based on hypothetical plant,
               data for which are given in TABLE 38)
Source
Cylinder condensate
Coil condensate
Boiler blowdown
Vacuum Water
Cooling water
Other
TOTAL
Volume
Used
51 ,096
(13,500)
55,640
(14,700)
6,813
(1,800)
-
454,200
(120,000)
1,892
(500)
567,500
(150,500)
Volume
Discharged
51 ,098
(13,500)
44,474b
(11,750)
6,813
(1,800)
-
13,248C
(3,500)b
1,892
(500)
104,277
(27,550)
Volume
Recycled
-
-
-
6,434a
(1,700)
440,952
(116,500)
-
447,387
(118,200)
Open values are in liters.
Parenthetical values values are in gallons.
sWater extracted from wood and recycled as cooling water.
bApproximately 15 percent loss due to flash evaporation.
cLoss of cooling water by drift and evaporation.
                                 156

-------
                               "DRAFT"


Assuming recycling of cooling and coil  condensate water, the most  impor-
tant source of wastewater in terms of volume and level of  contamination
is cylinder condensate.   The amount of wastewater from this source varies
with the volume of stock that is green  and must be  conditioned  prior  to
preservative treatment.   For plants operating on similar steaming  or
Boultonizing schedules  the volume of waste does not  vary  widely among
plants of comparable size and generally is less than  75,700 liters (20,000
gallons) per day.
                                 157

-------
DRAFT


                        SECTION VI

             SELECTION OF POLLUTANT PARAMETERS


WASTEWATER PARAMETERS OF POLLUTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE

Veneer and Plywood Industry and Hardboard Industry

Major wastewater parameters of significance for the veneer and
plywood industry and the hardboard industry include:

             BOD
             COD
             Phenols
             Oils and grease
             pH
             Temperature
             Dissolved Solids
             Suspended solids

In addition, parameters of lesser importance include:

             Phosphorus
             Nitrogen

The above parameters have been selected as representing those
chemical constituents which might be present in wastewater from
a veneer or plywood mill or a hardboard mill and which might
have a detrimental effect on a receiving water.

Wood Preserving Industry

Chemical and biological constituents of wood preserving waste-
waters that should be subject to  effluent limitations because
of potential deleterious effects  on receiving waters are  listed
below.  The selection of these parameters was based on data
obtained from various sources, including industry  sources, and
on observations made at the exemplary plants inspected during the
field phase of this study.

             Phenols               Copper
             BODS                  Chromium
             COD                   Arsenic
             Dissolved solids      Zinc
             Suspended solids      Fluorides
             Oil and grease        Ammonia
             pH                    Phosphorus
                            159

-------
DRAFT


All parameters are not present in the raw waste streams of all
wood preserving plants,  the inorganics listed in the second
column occurring only in wastewater from plants treating with
salt-type preservatives.  The particular ions present in the
discharges from these plants depend upon the preservative and/or
fire retardant formulation used.

DISCUSSION OF POLLUTANT  PARAMETERS

BODS: Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5 day at 20°C

This parameter is the widely used measure for determining degrad-
able organic matter  in a wastewater.  It is a standard criterion
utilized in pollution control regulations.  BOD concentrations
are an indication of soluble and suspended organics.  These organics
are composed of simple wood sugars as well as long chain and cyclic
hydrocarbons, and, if discharged to a receiving body of water or
into groundwater, pollution problems can result.

COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand

The COD of a wastewater  is another measure for organic matter con-
centration.  It is a chemical analys-is used to augment the BOD
analysis, and, in certain cases where a definite ratio between
BOD and COD has been established, it can substitute for the BOD
analysis.  Furthermore,  COD can often serve as an indicator of
organics that are not readily biodegradable.

Phenols

Phenols area natural constituent found in wood; therefore, water
contacting wood can  be expected to obtain some concentration of
phenols.  Resin,  another potential source of phenols, might also
be  found in wastewater discharges.   It is a cyclic hydrocarbon
which can be degraded biochemically  by the BOD test but not chemi-
cally by standard COD analysis.

Phenol concentrations  in receiving waters offer the potential of
taste and odor problems  in drinking  water supplies as well as the
potential of toxicity  to biota.

Oil  and Grease

Oil  and grease  (hexane  extractables)  are  standard lubricating
chemicals  in a variety  of inplant machinery.  These  lubricating
chemicals can  find  their way  into cooling water, washwater, and
other miscellaneous  waste  streams.   Creosote  is an oil,  and
various petroleum products  are  used  as  carriers for  pentachloro-
phenol.  These  oils  invariably  are  present  in wastewater  from
                              160

-------
DRAFT
treatments employing oily preservatives and they create a
serious pollution problem.  Values for raw wastewater range
from less than 50 to over 1000 milligrams per liter.
The pH of a liquid is by definition the negative log of the
hydrogen ion concentration.  It is an important parameter in
that most reactions in water are a function of hydrogen ion
concentrations from an equilibrium as well as from a kinetic
standpoint.

Wastewaters from creosote and pentachlorophenol treatments are
invariably acid in reaction, the pH ranging between 3.8 and 6.0.
Those from salt- type treatments may be either acid or basic, de-
pending upon the particular formulation used.

Temperature

Temperature is also an important parameter in reaction kinetics
and equilibria.  Large heat loads on a receiving stream can
cause significant temperature increases which in turn can re-
sult in serious imbalance in micro-ecesystems .

Dissolved Solids

Total dissolved solids is a chemical analysis which, when added
to the total suspended solids concentrations, gives the total
solids in a waste stream.  It is also a measure of the soluble
organics that are leached from wood.  In the case of salt-type
treatments in wood preserving plants, inorganic preservatives
contribute to the dissolved solids content of wastewaters.  In
any recycle system dissolved solids accumulate even though sus-
pended solids are removed.  Sufficient blowdown must be maintained
to prevent deposition on heating and cooling surfaces.

Suspended Solids

Wastewaters can carry substantial suspended  solids concentrations
due to wood fibers,  fiber fragments, and other residue.   Sus-
pended solids is an  important factor in determining the quality
of wastewater since  it affects light penetration and 'the  aesthetic
properties of the receiving waters.

Phosphorus

The only  source of phosphorus from the veneer and plywood industry
is the wood itself.  Phosphorus  is an important nutrient  and  can
have  significant effect  on  the eutrophication of receiving waters.
However,  the wastewaters from this industry  are nutrient  deficient,
and phosphorus  is not considered  a problem.
                             161

-------
DRAFT
Nitrogen

The main forms of nitrogen  in water  are organic nitrogen, ammonia,
nitrites, and nitrates.  Nitrate  is  the lowest oxidation level
of these.  Biochemical reactions  will oxidize ammonia to nitrite
and finally to nitrate.  This oxidation necessitates oxygen,
thereby exerting an  oxygen  demaad_ in water.  Furthermore, nitrates
have been found to be toxic .at  high  levels to infants  and to
interfere with disinfection by  halogens.  Nitrogen is an important
nutrient and can affect  eutrophication in receiving waters.  Urea
formaldehyde glue and protein glues  introduce organic nitrogen.
Assuming no discharge from  glue waste, the wastewaters from a
veneer and plywood mill  are nitrogen deficient and nitrogen
concentrations are not a problem.

Inorganics

All of the inorganics listed for  the wood preserving industry
occur in one or more salt-type-preservatives and  fire retardants.
As indicated previously, the particular  ions present depend upon
the salt formulation used.   Concentrations in raw wastewater range
from five to 100 milligrams per liter.
                             162

-------
DRAFT
                         SECTION VII

              CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY


PART A:   CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY IN THE VENEER
         AND PLYWOOD INDUSTRY

Introduction

Treatment and control technology in the veneer and plywood
industry is not extensive.  This is due in large part to
the fact that the water pollution problems in the industry
are relatively minor when compared to other industries. _The
major effort made by the industry to reduce wastewater dis-
charge has been to reduce the amount of wastewater produced
by reuse and conservation of water and to contain wastewaters
that cannot be reused.  Each source of potential wastewater
and methods of treatment is discussed below.

Log Storage

As discussed in Section IV, Process Description and Industry
Categorization, log storage may consist of log ponds, wet
decking, or dry decking.  Water quality and discharge
volumes of log ponds cannot be characterized with available
data; therefore, development of documentation for effluent
limitations guidelines for this waste source will be accom-
plished in Phase II of the Timber Products study.  Wet deck-
ing, on the other hand, allows for greater control of water
usage to such an extent that zero discharge to navigable
waters is feasible.  There is no wastewater discharge from
dry decking.  Therefore,  in this document, control and treat-
ment technology for waste streams from log storage will be
concerned with the wet decking method.

Several plywood mills presently recycle the water that has
been used to sprinkle logs in wet decking.  Such a recycle
system generally consists of a settling pond or sump to
catch the drainage from the log sprinkling area and of
screening facilities prior to reuse.  Sprinkling enhances
evaporation of water, thereby balancing out runoff from
rain in most areas of the country.  Solids which tend  to
slowly fill the settling  pond can be  removed and disposed
of as landfill.  While  there are operational problems
associated with such a  recycle system, in most  instances
the problems can be solved.  It is  felt that with few
exceptions this technology is applicable  to the industry
in general.
                           163

-------
DRAFT
Dry decking of logs is also practiced in a number of mills,
although it is mostly applicable to mills producing low
quality veneer and to mills that have a fairly constant
supply of logs and do not require large log storage.  If
deterioration of logs becomes a-problem, then wet-decking
must be practiced.

Log Conditioning

Wastewater  from log conditioning has become the largest and
most difficult source to handle in  a plywood mill since it
has been demonstrated that  glue washwater can be eliminated
as a pollution source.

Although seldom used, biological treatment of the effluent
from hot water vats and  steam vats  is practicable and effec-
tive.   It has been reported that 85 to  90 percent reduction
of BOD  and  COD is attainable by using lagoons or aerated
lagoons  (20).  Other  types  of biological  treatment  have not
been reported, but  it  is  obvious that conventional  biological
processes  such as the  activated  sludge  process  are  also tech-
nically feasible.

Hot water  vats when heated indirectly  through coils will not
have a  continuous discharge caused by  steam  condensate.  Any
discharge  results  from spillage when logs are either placed
into or taken out of the vat.   Plants operating  in  this manner
need only  to settle the water in small  settling tanks  or ponds
and  reuse  the water for any makeup that might be  required.
There  are  several  plants designed  to operate in this manner;
however,  the tendency has generally been to  operate this  sys-
tem  by injecting live steam into the vats to heat  the  water
to the desired level  and then to use the steam  to  maintain
the  temperature.   The reason for the use of  steam injection
rather than heating coils is to raise the temperature  as
quickly as possible.   Quicker heating-may also  be accomplished
by adding more heating surface to  the vats.   Plants that  use
 steam coils in their hot water vats and then settle and reuse
 the water have experienced a decreased pH in the vats  with
 time.   Addition of lime or sodium  hydroxide  may be necessary
 to reduce resulting corrosion problems.  The resulting sludge
 may be trucked to landfill.

 Wastewater discharge from  steam vats is more difficult to
 eliminate.  By design, condensate  from the vats must be
 discharged because of the  difficulty of reusing the con-
 taminated  condensate as boiler makeup water.  Various modi-
 fications  have been made  to steam  vats which allow them to
 be converted to totally closed systems.  Several plants have
                              164

-------
DRAFT


converted steam vats to hot water spray tunnels  which would
have conditioning effects similar to hot water vats (20).
Hot water does not heat the logs as rapidly or as violently
as direct steam; however, it is a practical alternative for
most plants.  While many mills cannot use hot water vats  due
to the fact that some species of logs do not sink, hot water
sprays can be used as an alternative.  Hot water spray systems
can be placed in existing steam vats with only minor modifi-
cations.  These systems work on the principle of heating
water through heat exchange coils and then spraying the hot
water over the logs.  The hot water can then be collected and
reheated after settling and screening.

The other possible modification is a technology from the  wood
preserving industry called "modified steaming" (20).  Modi-
fied steaming works on principles similar"to hot water sprays
with the exception that no sprays are used.  Coils in the
bottom of the vat are used to produce steam from the water.
The steam conditions the log in much the  same manner as in
conventional steam vats.  As the steam condenses, it falls
to the bottom of the vat where it is revaporized.

Either the use of hot water sprays or the employment of modi-
fied steaming would allow mills that now  use steam vats to
operate similarly to mills that now use hot water vats without
direct steam impingement.  All of these methods are closed
systems and, therefore,  require some type of solids removal
and "flush-outs" a few times each year.   They may also require
pH adjustment.  The relatively small volumes of wastewater
produced during the "flush-outs" could  then be contained or
used for irrigation.

Veneer Dryers

The practice of cleaning veneer dryers  with water  is one that
will necessarily continue; however,  the  frequency of cleaning
and the volume  of washwater  can be  significantly  reduced.

Plywood mills producing  9.3 million  square meters  (100 mil-
lion square  feet) on a  9.53 mm  (three-eights  inch)  basis per
year presently  use  approximately  57,000  liters  (15,000 gal-
lons)  of water  per week  to clean  dryers.   There  are many modi-
fications  to  cleaning procedures  which  can  reduce  this vol-
ume.   A plywood mill in  Oregon  has  already  reduced  its veneer
dryer  washwater  to  8,000 liters  (2,000  gallons)  per week by
manually scraping  the  dryer  and  blowing it  out with  air prior
to  the application  of water.   Close  supervision  of  operators
and  the  installation of  water  meters on water hoses  also
encourages  water  conservation.   Most mills  can  reduce  the
                             165

-------
 DRAFT
 volume of water to about 12,000 liters (3,000  gallons)
 per  week, and this small volume can be handled without
 discharge by containment, land irrigation-,  or  evapora-
 tion.

 Glue Lines

 Current  technology in the handling of glue  washwater
 allows zero  discharge to navigable waters to be achiev-
 able throughout the industry.   Recycle systems which
 eliminate discharge from the  glue  lines are now in op-
 eration  in about 60 percent of all mills visited and
 are  practicable with all three major types  of  glue.  In
 1968,  only one  plywood mill had a  glue washwater recycle
 system CIO),  Currently the system is accepted technol-
 ogy  in the industry.   Nevertheless,  there are  still a
 number of plywood mills that  discharge wastewater from
 their  glue operations.

A plywood mill  using phenolic  glue can reduce  the waste-
water  flow from its glue operation to about 7,570 liters
 (about 2,000  gallons)  per day,  without altering the pro-
 cess,  by  conserving water (10),  Urea formaldehyde glues
 do not require  any more frequent washing than  do phenolic
 glues  and, therefore,  can be  similarly controlled.  Pro-
 tein glues, however,  normally  necessitate more frequent
cleaning  because of shorter glue pot life.  In order to
 reduce the flows from a mill  phat  uses protein glue, in-
plant  modifications in addition to water conservation
are  necessary.

Phenolic  glues  usually require  about 227 kilograms (500
pounds) of water per  batch (4.5  cubic meters [1,200 gal-
lons]  per  day),   Further reduction of wastewater is
 then necessary  for  all  of the wastewater to be used in
the makeup of glue.   Table 26,  found in Section V, indi-
cates  that most  southern plywood mills produce about
twice  as much wastewater from  glue washing  than can be
used for  glue mixing.

Various inplant  operational and  equipment modifications
can be used to  reduce  glue washwater;  for example:

        (1)  Some  plants wash glue spreaders several
             times  a  day,  and  some wash only once a
             week.  The  less frequent  washings can
             reduce the  amount  of  water to between
             10  and 30  percent  of  the  original volume.
                            166

-------
DRAFT


        (2)  The use of steam to clean the spreaders also
             reduces the water usage considerably.  While
             steam cannot be used for some types of rub-
             ber coated roller spreaders commonly used with
             phenolic and urea glues, steam would be a
             practical modification for protein glue opera-
             tions which use steel rollers.  This is quite
             significant since the frequency of washing for
             protein glue lines cannot be reduced to the
             same extent as when synthetic resins are used.
        (3)  The use of high pressure water lines and noz-
             zles can reduce the amount of water used to
             30 percent of .the original volume.
        (4)  The use of glue applicators which spray the glue
             rather than roll it onto the wood can reduce
             the volume of washwater, since these do not
             require washing as frequently as do the glue
             spreaders.
        (5)  The use of washwater for glue preparation and
             the reuse of remaining washwater for washing
             the glue system is a simpl-e method of reducing
             wastewater flows.  Since a fraction of the
             washwater is used to prepare glue, a volume
             of fresh water can be added as final rinse in
             the washing of the glue spreaders.

Any number of these modifications in combination wi.th each other
can be used to completely recycle the washwater and eliminate
discharge from the glue system.  A typical recycle system is
shown in Figure 30.

There has been no difference in the quality of glue made with
fresh water and that made with washwater (19).  An economic
benefit has been established by using glue wastewater, due to
the fact that it contains glue and other chemicals such as
sodium hydroxide, as shown in Table 40.  Substantial savings
in raw materials can be realized.

Complete recycle systems are now in operation for phenolic, urea,
and protein glues.  Mills that use several types of glues must
have separate recycle systems to segregate the different wash'--
waters.  Attempts at mixing washwater from different types of
glues have been unsuccessful.

In addition to washwater recycle, there are plants that contain
and evaporate glue washwater, spray the glue water on the bark
that goes into the boiler, or use a combination of these techniques
                             167

-------
                                                               PLYWOOD PLANT BUILDING
00
             7-1/2 H.R MOTOR
             PROVIDING CONTINUOUS
             AGITATION
     TRASH
     REMOVAL
     CONVEYOR
     BELT
CONCRETE
SETTLING
  TANK
               GROUND
               LEVEL
                                                        2000 GAL|
                                                        COLLECTION
                                                          TANK
                                                     |WATER
                                                      METERING
                                                      TANK
                                   GLUE
                                   MIXER
 MIX
HOLD
TANK
                                                     PUMP
                                                                PUMP
                                                                                    GLUING  AREA
                                                                                     GLUE
                                                                                   SPREADERS
                                                                      CONCRETE DRAINAGE TROUGH IN  FLOOR
                        FIGURE 30  (19)  -  PLYWOOD PLANT  WASH  WATER REUSE SYSTEM

-------
<£>
                                           TABLE  40  (19)

                            THE  ADHESIVE  MIXES  USED  (CASCOPHEN 3566C)


               Ingredients                 Mix la           Mix 2b           Mix 3C
Water
Phenofil
Wheat Flour
Mix 5 minutes
W-156V Resin
Mix 2 minutes
501 Caustic Soda
Mix 15 minutes
W-156V Resin
Mix 5 minutes
TOTAL
Resin Solids in Mix
700
350
140

220

131

2,178

3,719
25.7%
701
350
140

220

75

2,156.5

3,642.5
25.7%
700
350
140

220

100

2,163.

3,673.
25.








5

5
7%
              ^Control mix  -  clean water  used for mix.
              "D20:l  dilution  of  Mix  1  used  for mix water -  pH 11.5
              C30:l  dilution  of  Mix  1  used  for mix water -  pH 11.4

-------
 DRAFT
 PART B:   CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY IN THE HARDBOARD
          INDUSTRY

 DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD

 Introduction

 The small volumes of water discharged from dry process  hard-
 board mills and the variation of waste sources from mill  to
 mill have resulted in little new waste treatment technology
 being developed.   In general, due to the small volumes  of
 wastewater generated, the major treatment processes have  been
 limited  to oil-water separation, waste retention ponds, or
 perhaps  spray irrigation.

 The major wastewater source in one particular mill  may  be a
 zero discharge source in another mill.   Inplant modifications
 to  reduce,  eliminate, or reuse wastewater flow can.greatly
 affect total wastewater discharge from any mill.  By inplant
 modifications and containment on site,  zero discharge can be
 achieved in the dry process hardboard industry.

 Inplant  Control Measures and Technology

 Log Wash:   Only two mills out of 16 existing mills  reported
 washing  logs.   One mill which washes logs has' zero-discharge
 of  all its  waste  through impounding and land irrigation.   The
 second mill uses  approximately 82 cubic meters  (21,600-gallons)
 per day  for log washing which is discharged directly to a
 stream without treatment.   Log washwater can be  successfully
 reused by  settling with only a small percentage  of-blowdown
 to  remove  accumulated solids.   The blowdown from  log'wash-
 water  recycle systems can be disposed of by impounding or
 land  spreading.

 Chip Wash:   At the present time,  there  are  no  dry .process
 hardboard mills which report washing chips,  however, several
 indicate  plans  to install chip washing in  the  future.  Until
 such time as  chip  washers  are  installed and  experience gained,
 no  technology is  available in  the  dry process hardboard indus-
 try  for  treatment  of  this  waste stream.   Predicted-wastewater
 discharges  from a  chip  wash system are  18.9  to  37.8 cubic
meters (5,000  to  10,000  gallons)  per day which could be dis-
posed  of by  impounding  or  land  spreading.
                            170

-------
DRAFT


   Six mills out of the total of 16 dry process hard-
board mills report zero discharge from their resin systems.
Several other mills report a waste discharge of less than
750 liters (200 gallons) per day.  All hardboard mills use
essentially the same types of resin (phenolic or urea for-
maldehyde) .  Taking into consideration that several mills
already have zero discharge and that many plywood mills using
the same resin have zero discharge, there is no reason all
dry process hardboard mills cannot have zero discharge from
their resin systems.

Caul Wash:  Five mills report no caul washwater discharge for
one of several reasons; the two most commonly given are:
they do not use cauls or the water usage is so small that
it is insignificant.  Those mills reporting discharges of
caul washwater average only some 750 liters (200 gallons/day).
This low quantity of water can be neutralized as needed,
then disposed of by impounding or land spreading.

Housekeeping:  Housekeeping washwater is a miscellaneous waste-
water flow which varies from mill to mill.  Several mills re-
port no housekeeping washwater as all cleaning inplant is done
by sweeping and vacuum cleaning.  At least two mills have waste
flow from their press pit which usually contains oil.  This
wastewater can be eliminated by preventing condensate water
from entering the press pit and by reducing hydraulic fluid leaks
Housekeeping wastewater can be either totally eliminated or,
if water  is used, held on site by impounding and spray irriga-
tion.

Cooling Water:  Cooling water is by far the major wastewater
flow from dry process hardboard mills.  Cooling water is used
in such unit processes as refiner seal water cooling systems,
air compressor cooling systems, and resonance frequency gen-
erator cooling systems.  Use of cooling water varies widely
but is consistently less than 380 cubic meters  (100,000 gal-
lons) per day.  Cooling water can be recycled through cooling
towers or cooling ponds.  Blowdown from these areas  could  be
used for  log washing or chip washing.

Humidifier:  Hardboard must be brought to  a standard moisture
content after dry pressing.  This  is done  in a humidifier  unit
in which  a high moisture and temperature  is maintained.  Nine
mills report no water  discharge  from humidification  units,
while one mill reports  a volume  of less than 11  cubic meters
(3,000 gallons) per day.   It has been proven that humidifiers
can be operated with  zero  discharge, therefore,  all  dry pro-
cess hardboard mills  should  achieve  zero  discharge  from  this
source.
                            171

-------
 DRAFT


 Finishing:  All dry process hardboard- mills report zero
 discharge from finishing operations.-  Concern-was indicated
 by industry with the potential of new technology causing
 wastewater flow from the finishing operation.   For example,
 air pollution control regulations may make it  necessary to
 switch from oil based paints to water based paints, in which
 case a potential wastewater source could exist.   At the pre-
 sent time there is zero discharge from finishing operations.
 Until such time as technology changes create wastewater dis-
 charges from this source,there should be zero  discharge.

 Identification of Water Pollution Related Operation and
 Maintenance Problems At Dry Process Hardboard  Mills	

 The water pollution resulting from dry process hardboard
 mills is  directly related to wastewater flow and concentra-
 tion, which,  in turn,  is influenced by operation and main-
 tenance problems in each mill.   The decision to  wash logs or
 chips by  a mill is a result of the effect of dirt and sand
 on  inplant machinery.   High maintenance cost resulting from
 abrasion  of refiner plates, etc.,  make  it desirable to wash
 logs  and  chips.   Quantities of extraneous material on logs
 depend upon harvesting  and storage operations, and therefore
 directly  affect wastewater flow composition.

 The operation and maintenance of the resin system affects
 wastewater flow.   Most  hardboard mills  and numerous plywood
 mills using similar resins are  able to  operate with zero
 discharge from their resin systems.   Simple modification of
 inplant equipment or maintenance procedures should eliminate
 the resin system as a source of wastewater flow.

 Caul  washing,  a minor wastewater source,  is an inplant  process
 that  is affected by operation.   Cauls  are soaked  in tanks con-
 taining sodium hydroxide and other cleaning agents.   After
 soaking they  are rinsed and put back into use.  The method
 of  operation  of this  cleaning system can  greatly  reduce the
water usage  and therefore  the quantities  of water to  be dis-
charged.    The resulting low volumes  of water  (less  than 750
 liters  [200  gallons] per day) can  be  easily discharged onsite.

Housekeeping  practices  vary widely from mill to mill  with
resulting  effects  on wastewater discharge.   Several mills
are able  to perform clean  up operations without having waste-
water being discharged.  Other  mills use  water for  clean up
operations because  of the  ease  and efficiency  of  water clean-
ing.  Modification  of inplant housekeeping  procedures can
                            172

-------
DRAFT


minimize water usage with resulting zero discharge from
this source.

The press pit (a sump under the press) can collect oil, fiber,
and condensate water.  The method-of-clean up of the'-.press pit
can significantly reduce waste from this process.  Modifica-
tions can be made to reduce or eliminate condensate water so
that an oil/water emulsion will not be formed.

WET PROCESS HARDBOARD

Introduction

There is no single scheme currently being used to treat waste-
water discharges from wet process hardboard mills.  The major
treatment and control methods presently being used include
water recycle, filtration, sedimentation, coagulation, evapor-
ation and biological oxidation processes such as lagoons,
aerated lagoons, and activated sludge processes.

The treatment and control methods presently utilized  in.any
one mill have been influenced by pressure from regulatory
agencies, land availability, access to city sewer, and indi-
vidual company approach  to wastewater control.

Inplant Control Measures  and Technology

Raw Materials Handling:   There were no mills  reporting washing
logs; however, it logs were washed, a simple  recirculation  sys-
tem  could be  installed to eliminate discharge from-.this _ source.
This  recirculation  system would  consist  of  a  sedimentation
basin or pond to catch the washwater  and allow  the-removal  of
suspended solids.   Pumps preceeded by screens would"recirculate
the  water for log washing.  Accumulated  deposits in  the sedi-
mentation basin  or  pond  would  be removed as needed and-disposed
of as landfill.  Chip washing,  if  practiced,  could be eliminated
as a wastewater  source  in a  similar manner.

Process  Water:   The  major source of wastewater  flow-,and  concen-
tration  comes  from  discharging the process  water.  This  includes
fiber preparation,  mat  formation,  and pressing.   As  has  been
previously  discussed,  the source of  organric material in  the
process  water is from  the solution of wood  chemicals.  The  quan-
 tity of  organics released is  directly dependent upon wood
 species,  cooking time,  and temperature.

 It has  been suggested  that a decrease in BOD load can-.be  made
 by reducing the  cooking or preheating temperature at the  expense
 of higher energy consumption in the  refiners.  Little research
                             173

-------
 DRAFT


 has  been done in this area, but it should be-stated'that  only a
 portion of the BOD can be eliminated in this  manner.

 Assuming that chips contain 50 percent fiber  andMnus±rbe  diluted
 to 1.5  percent fiber prior to mat formation,  for  every  ton of dry
 fiber processed, 60.5 cubic meters (16,000- gallons)•of  water is
 needed  for dilution.  The obvious procedure to  obtain'this quantity
 of water and prevent discharge of organic material  is to  recycle
 all  of  the process water.

 There are several  limiting factors preventing total  recycle of pro-
 cess  water,  including temperature, soluble organics, and  build up
 of fines.   Temperature of-process water can be  controlled by the
 installation of a  heat exchanger.  At  least two mills report the
 use  of  shell and tube heat exchangers  to control  process  water
 temperature.

 Soluble  organics are the  most difficult to control  in the wet pro-
 cess.   The explosion process utilized  by two Masonite mills pro-
 duce  greater quantities of soluble organics than  other,  processes
 because  of the higher temperature and  pressure.   Due to the large
 quantities of organic material released from the  wood, Masonite
 has  installed evaporation systems to reduce the quantities of
 organics  discharged in their wastewater.   Figure  31  shows a
 schematic  diagram  of one  of these systems.  In  this  system counter-
 current  washers  are used  to remove a major portion of the organics
 from  the  fiber prior to dilution  and mat formation.  This waste
 stream  passes through a clarifier and is  evaporated.  The concen-
 trated  organic stream from the evaporator is sold as cattle feed
 or it can  be  incinerated,  and the condensate is either  reused as
 process makeup water or discharged as  a wastewater stream.  Process
 water from the felter and the press passes through  a clarifier to
 remove  settleable  solids.   All solids  are reused  to make  board,
while the  overflow is used for fiber wash or dilution water.   The
 total discharge  from this  mill without  biological treatment is
 only  3.25  kilograms per metric ton (6.5  pounds  per ton).

The more  conventional cooking .processes  release less organics and
 it is questionable whether or not process water soluble concentra-
 tions can  be  increased to  a high  enough  level to make evaporation
 economical without inplant modifications.   However, at  least one
mill  in Sweden is  presently evaporating  excess  process water (26).
One possibility  to decrease the volume  of wastewater without in-
creasing  the  concentration of soluble  substances  in the process
water system  at  the same  time is  to  arrange some kind of pre-
pressing  of  the  pulp to remove the concentrated organics  before
they enter the main process water stream.   An arrangement of this
type  is shown in Figure 32,  where a  pre-press has been inserted
                           174

-------
                                                                                      TO ATMOSPHERE
         CHI
REFINER ~ FIBER
     ,-J    WASHER
                                                   STOCK Jz^ WET FORMING
                                                   CHEST j  | MACHINE
                                                                                                  TO
                                                                                                  FINISHING
-j
in
                                      CLARIFIER
WATER  IN


WATER OUT


CONCENTRATED
BY-PRODUCTS

If
1


.BERL





I





1




1
\
rn\i\i
\
',
rrrr*i

r
1





                                                     EVAPORATOR
                                                                                         CLARIFIER
                                             ^.	1
                                               SLUDGE (FIBER)
                                               TO PROCESS
                                                         CONDENSATE
                   FIGURE 31  -  INPLANT  TREATMENT AND  CONTROL  TECHNIQUES AT MILL NO.  7

-------
                   STEAM
cr>
                                                                       WET FORMING

                                                                       MACHINE
                                                                       PROCESS

                                                                        WATER

                                                                        CHEST
                  WATER  IN


                  WATER  OUT
            (XX)  ?r«P£?XIMATE  pE«CENT FIBER
                  (CONSISTENCY  IN PROCESS)
                                                                                   (35)
       WET

       PRESS
TO TREATMENT
                   FIGURE 32  - TYPICAL WET-PROCESS HARDBOARD MILL WITH PRE-PRESS

-------
                                                                          TO ATMOSPHERE
CHIPS
       WATER IN
       WATER OUT


       CONCENTRATED
       BY-PRODUCTS
                                                                         IPROCE5
J>
J

- L

|

                                                                              SLUDGE TO
                                                                              LANDFILL
          FIGURE  33 - INPLANT TREATMENT AND CONTROL TECHNIQUES AT MILL NO. 3

-------
 DRAFT
 after the cyclone.   If the process water system is completely
 closed  all soluble  substances with the exception of those de-
 posited in the hardboard would be contained in the wastewater
 leaving the pre-press.  The concentration of soluble substances
 in this wastewater depends on the amount of substances dissolved
 during the pre-heating, on the volume of wastewater leaving the
 pre-press, and finally on the efficiency of the pre-press,
 i.e., the consistency of the pulp leaving the press.  The effi-
 ciency of such a system can be increased by installing two or
 three presses in series.   A system of this type can signifi-
 cantly reduce the concentration of soluble organics in the
 process water, allowing increased recirculation rates.

 Suspended Solids:  Suspended solids within the process  stream
 should be controlled to limit the build up of fines which re-
 duce  water drainage during .mat formation and to limit  the sus-
 pended solids discharged  in the raw wastewater.   If inplant
 treatment methods such as evaporation are  used,  the suspended
 solids concentrations entering these processes must be  con-
 trolled.   Suspended solids removal systems  consist  primarily
 of  gravity settling,  screening,  filtration,  and flotation.

 Only  two  mills utilize sedimentation tanks  for removal  of sus-
 pended solids  in  process  water prior to  recycle.  Both  of these
 mills  utilize  the explosion  process.   These  systems  are shown
 in  Figures  31  and 33.  Process water from  both mat  formation
 and final  pressing is passed through a clarifier and reused in
 the process.   Other mills  utilize  gravity  separators in their
 final  wastewater  treatment scheme,  but do not  recycle back  to
 process.   In  one  of the two  mills  utilizing  sedimentation to
 remove solids  from the process water,  the settled solids  are
 returned  to the process and  become  part  of the board.  The
 other mill has not  been able  to do  this  due  to a different
 species of raw material.

 Filters can accomplish the same liquid solid separation as
 gravity separation.   The efficiency  of such  filters  varies
widely depending  upon flow rates,  suspended  solids concentra-
 tions, and types  and  sizes of  solids.  Representative data for
 filter efficiency may be found in Table  41, below.

                           TABLE 41

     REPRESENTATIVE PROCESS WATER FILTER EFFICIENCIES

                           Suspended Solids  (mg/1)
     Mill	   Before Filter               	
0
p
Q
R
1000
170
1000
230
- 3500
- 1000
- 1300
- 620
80 -
30 -
280 -
90 -
250
150
330
145
                            178

-------
DRAFT
One of the most interesting systems utilized for controlling
suspended solids is a patented process developed in Finland
at the Savo Oy.Mill.   This system is a chemical treatment
system followed by sedimentation and/or flotation.   The chemi
cal treatment includes adjustment of the pH value,  addition
of chemicals for coagulation, followed by removal of sus-
pended solids and some dissolved and colloidal solids.

There are two mills in the United States presently using this
system to some degree.  Typical data from the Savo system
from one of these mills is shown below:
               Influent     Effluent     Percent Reduction
                      (mg/1)	
COD
SS
TDS
Soluble
Organics
Volatile Sus-
pended solids
7775
750
5525

4285
740
4745
48
4788

3362
46
39
94
13

22
94
An advantage reported from the use of the Savo system is that
all sludge from the system can be reused in the board.  One
mill has been able to reduce its wastewater flow to 2.3 cubic
meters (611 gallons) per ton and BOD discharge to 8.5 kilo-
grams per metric ton (17 pounds per ton).  This low discharge
rate and concentration is the result of inplant modifications
and does not include any end of line treatment.  Figure 34
shows a schematic diagram of this process.

End Of Line Wastewater Treatment

The existing end of line waste treatment facilities consist
primarily of screening followed by primary and biological
treatment.  All of the existing nine wet process hardboard
mills utilize primary settling basins either within the pro-
cess or as part of their final waste treatment facilities.
In order to protect the primary settling units from sludge
loading and to remove as much fiber as possible, screens are
generally placed ahead of the primary units.  Fiber removed
be screening is disposed of by landfill or returned to pro-
cess.

Three of the nine wet process mills were either sampled by
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc., or the mill
reported treatment efficiencies across their primary clari-
fiers.  This data is shown in Table 42.  Although this data
                            179

-------
00
o
                    STEAM
           CHIPS
                 WATER  IN
                 WATER OUT
                                                               WET FORMING
                                                                 MACHINE
FIBER
TO
PROCESS
                                                                PROCESS
                                                                WATER
                                                                CHEST
                                   TO
                                   ATMOSPHERE
                                                                                      TO
                                                                                      FINISHING
i
i
SAVO



	 1
1
                                                                                    DISCHARGE
                   FIGURE 34 - TYPICAL  WET-PROCESS HARDBOARD  MILL WITH SAVO SYSTEM

-------
      DRAFT
                                          TABLE 42



                              PRIMARY SETTLING TANK-EFFICIENCY

Mill
4
5
6
BOD
mg/1
2400
3500
6000
In

k/kTg
28.
32
42.
5

2
BOD
mg/1
2400
3300
3900
Out
"\f / "\f tf fT
/ n
28.5
30'.5
28
Percent
Removal
0
5
35
SS In
mg/1 k/kkg
1650 19
430 4
1440 10
SS
Out

mI7l k/fcTg
178
154
450
2
1.
3.

4
25
Percent
Removal
89
69
68
oo

-------
 DRAFT
 may be typical of the treatment efficiency that existing
 facilities are achieving, it is not representative  of the
 efficiency, that can be obtained through, proper design and
 operation.  The three mills listed in Table 42 utilized
 settling.ponds as primary clarifiers.  These ponds  are
 allowed to fill with solids before being dredged for  solids
 removal.   Accumulated solids undergo anaerobic decomposi-
 tion causing an increase in BOD and suspended solids  (SSI
 in the effluent.

 A  properly designed clarifier with a mechanical sludge
 collector and continuous sludge removal can be expected
 to obtain approximately 75 to 90 percent SS removal and
 10 to 30  percent  BOD removal.

 The pH of wet process wastewater varies from 4.0 to 5.0.
 The pH must  be adjusted to near 7.0 to  obtain satisfactory
 biological degradation.   The pH may be  adjusted by either
 the addition of lime or sodium hydroxide.

 Wet process  hardboard mill wastewater is deficient in  nitro-
 gen and phosphorus.   These chemicals  must  be added in  some
 form to obtain rapid biological degradation of the waste.
 The most  commonly used source  of nitrogen  is  anhydrous
 ammonia,  and the  most commonly used source of phosphorus is
 phosphoric acid.

 Existing  biological  treatment  systems consist  of  lagoons,
 aerated lagoons,  activated sludge,  or a combination of
 these.  T-he  type  of  system presently  used  at  each mill is
 shown  below:
Mill No.
            End  Of  Line Treatment System
  1

  2

  3

  4

  5

  6
  7
  8
  9
Primary settling pond  - aerated lagoon -
secondary settling pond.
Primary settling pond  - aerated lagoon -
secondary settling pond.
Primary clarifier - activated sludge -
aerated lagoon.
Primary settling pond  - activated sludge
aerated lagoon.
Primary settling pond  - activated sludge
lagoon or spray irrigation.
Primary settling pond.
No treatment.
No treatment.
Aerated lagoon.
                            182

-------
DRAFT


Table 43 shows the treatment efficiency of the five-mills which
presently have biological treatment systems in operation._  The
values shown are average values and do not define the variations
in effluent that can be expected from biological systems.  It
should be noted that the values shown for mills No.  1, 2, and 5
include the efficiency of the primary settling units while for
mills No. 3 and 4 the efficiency is across the biological unit
alone.

Mills No. 1 and 2 utilize aerated lagoons.  Their treatment
efficiencies for BOD removal have averaged 70 and 79 percent,
respectively.  Mills 3, 4, and 5 utilize some variation of the
acitvated sludge process and their average efficiencies for BOD
removal are 97,77, and 95 percent, respectively.  Mill No. 4,
whose activated sludge system averages only 77 percent efficiency
for BOD removal,is actually not operated as an activated sludge
system as there is no sludge waste'from the system.   Therefore,
the system is more representative of an aerated lagoon system.

The efficiency of solids removal across the biological system
for all mills is essentially zero.  There are several reasons
for this.  Biological solids produced in waste treatment systems
treating hardboard wastewater are difficult to settle and dewater.
There is presently no economical method that is satisfactory for
handling waste activated sludge from these biological systems.
One mill attempts to utilize a centrifuge for sludge  thickening
prior to incineration, however, the system is highly  variable
in its efficiency and frequently excess sludge has to be hauled
by tank  trucks to a land spreading area.

Several mills in the United States and Europe have put excess
sludge back  into the process water to become part of  the board
(21).  The quantity of sludge which can be reclaimed  in  this
manner is variable from mill to mill depending upon a variety  of
factors.  It  is known that  the addition of sludge to  the board
increases the water absorption, reduces the drainage  rates,  and
make  it  necessary to add additional chemicals to compensate  for
the  sludge addition  (27).

At least one  mill  (mill No.  5) is disposing of  its waste sludge
by spray irrigation.  Waste  sludge is pumped  to  an aerobic di-
gester,  then  the digested sludge  is pumped to a  nearby spray
irrigation field.  Land  irrigation or  sludge  lagooning has the
advantage of  making  it unnecessary to  dewater the sludge prior
to disposal.

The  difficulty  in handling  waste  activated sludge from the acti-
vated sludge  treatment  of wet  process  hardboard  wastewater leads
to a build up of  solids within the system with  a resulting dis-
charge  of  solids  in  the  effluent.  Weather conditions (temperature)
                             183

-------
        DRAFT
00
                                            TABLE  43


                           TREATMENT  EFFICIENCY OF BIOLOGICAL  SYSTEMS
BOD. ke/kkp
Mill No.
* + l
* + 2
*3
*4
*+5
** + !
** + 2
*3
*4
*5
Influent
33
50
23
28.5
32
BOD
720
1310
1800
2400
3500
Effluent
7
15
0.6
6.45
1.55
, me/1
151
393
54
552
175
Percent
Removal
79
70
97
77
95
79
70
97
77
95
Influent
10

1.4
0.7
1.4
220
—
114
60
151
SS, kg/kkg
Effluent
9
_ _
3.6
4.2
3.6
ss, mg/1
198
_ m
295
360
38!!

Percent
Removal
10

0
0
0
10

0
0
0
                              +  Includes  efficiency  of primary settling
                             **  Aerated  lagoons
                              *  Activated sludge

-------
DRAFT


are also reported to have an effect on the settling rate of
biological solids in both aerated lagoon systems and the acti-
vated sludge system (28).

Figures 35, 36, and 37 show the variations in effluent BOD and
suspended solids for mills No. 2, 3,.. and 4, respectively.  Values
shown are monthly averages and do not necessarily indicate a di-
rect relationship between suspended solids and season (tempera-
ture) .   The main information presented by these graphs is that
for either the aerated lagoon or activated sludge average, sus-
pended solids in the effluent can be expected to be 250 milli-
grams per liter.

Table 44 shows an example of an aerated stabilization basin (ASB)
or aerated lagoon performance related to temperature.  This table
is for a biological system treating paperboard waste; however,
similar effects are experienced in the wet process hardboard in-
dustry.  The main difference, however, is that the quantity of
solids can be expected to be several times greater.

Summary of Waste Treatment Control Technology

Water Reuse:  The existing nine wet process hardboard mills
presently practice considerable recycle of wastewater.  These
systems include:

            (1)  Process water recycle with blowdown to con-
                trol suspended and dissolved organics.  This
                blowdown may occur in a pre-press, from  the
                wet or hot press, or from  the process water
                chest.
            (2)  Process water recycle through a primary  clari-
                fier with blowdown of some clarifier  effluent
                and recycle of some or all sludge  to  the  stock,
                chest.
            (3)  Process water recycle through a primary  clari-
                fier with blowdown being  evaporated and  some
                evaporator condensate being utilized  for  make-
                up.   In  the explosion process all  fiber  wash-
                water is discharged through a primary clari-
                fier prior to evaporation.
            (4)  Process  water recycle with blowdown passing
                through  a chemical coagulation, system.   Plant
                of  coagulated waste recycled back  to  process
                and all  sludge returned  to stock chest.
                            185

-------
00
           1/72    2/72   3/72    4/72   5/72   6/72   7/72   8/72   9/72
        1	T
10/72   11/72   12/72
1/73
                     FIGURE  35  -  VARIATION OF  EFFLUENT BOD AND SUSPENDED  SOLIDS
                                  AS A FUNCTION OF TIME FOR MILL NO. 2

-------
   z
   o
OO
                                                                                    BOD
            1/72   2/72   3/72   4/72    5/72   6/72   7/72   8/72   9/72   10/72   11/72
12/72
                      FIGURE 36  -  VARIATION OF EFFLUENT  BOD AND SUSPENDED  SOLIDS

                                   AS  A FUNCTION OF TIME  FOR MILL NO. 3

-------
     30-
     25  •£,  -
00
CO
    CD
     10-
      5-
            1/72
2/72
3/72
4/72
5/72
6/72
7/72
8/72
9/72
10/72
11/72
                       FIGURE 37 -
                VARIATION OF EFFLUENT  BOD AND  SUSPENDED SOLIDS
                AS  A FUNCTION OF TIME  FOR MILL NO.  4

-------
DRAFT
                          TABLE 44 (28)

EXAMPLE OF AN ASB SYSTEM PERFORMANCE RELATED TO TEMPERATURE
PAPE REGARD*
Average
Monthly
Temperature
(°C)
21
21
19
17
17
11
7

5
5
3

Effluent
BODS
Cmg/1)
11
17
22
17
11
20
40
i
29
38
42

Cone.
SS
Cmg/1)
22
21
23
17
16
29
56

61
31
42
                 * Includes long-term
                   settling
                            189

-------
DRAFT
Wastewater Treatment:   End of pipeline  treatment  technol-
ogy presently  consists  of:

                (1)   Screening
                (2)   Primary clarification
                     a.   settling  ponds
                     b.   mechanical  clarifiers
                (3)   pH  control
                (4)   Nutrient addition
                (5)   Aerated lagoons
                (6)   Activated sludge process
                (7)   Oxidation lagoons

Sludge Handling:  Systems  utilized  for  disposal of waste
sludge include:

                (1)   Reuse  in manufacture of hardboard
                (2)   Landfill
                (3)   Spray  irrigation
                (4)   Incineration
                                190

-------
DRAFT

PART C:  CONTROL AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY IN  THE WOOD PRESERVING  INDUSTRY

STATUS OF TECHNOLOGY IN INDUSTRY

The technological base of the wood preserving industry  is  generally quite
weak by comparison with most other industrial  categories.   Relatively  few
companies have employees with the engineering and  other technical  skills
needed to utilize effectively current or potential  developments in waste
treatment and management, or to adopt processing methods that would min-
imize waste loads.  Engineering services required  by individual plants
are most commonly performed by consulting firms.   This  situation  is ameli-
orated somewhat by the American Wood-Preservers' Association through the
activities of its technical committees and publication  of  its Proceedings,
both of which serve to keep its members advised of current developments.
Membership in the Association represents plants that account for  an esti-
mated 90 percent of the total production of the industry.

STATUS OF POLLUTION CONTROL IN INDUSTRY

The comments and data which follow summarize  the status of pollution con-
trol activities in the wood preserving industry, as revealed by a recent
survey of 377 plants (1).  The data are based on results obtained from
207 plants.

Disposition Of Wastewater

The approach to the pollution problem taken by many treating plants is
to store their wastewater on company property (Table 45).   This is by
far the most popular method of handling wastewater, accounting for 42
percent of the plants reporting.  Seventeen percent are still releasing
their wastewater with no treatment, while 14  percent of the plants are
discharging to sanitary sewer systems.  Of the latter group, 63 percent
are discharging raw waste to sewers, while 37 percent are  giving  the
waste a partial treatment before releasing it. Only 9  percent of the
207 plants responding to the survey presently are  giving their waste the
equivalent of a secondary treatment before releasing it.  Eighteen per-
cent either have no wastewater or are disposing of it by special  methods
such as evaporation or incineration.

There were no unusual trends when the data on methods of disposal  of
wastewater were broken down by region (Table  46).   However, it is of in-
terest to note that a high proportion of the  plants in  the West dispose
of their waste by special methods, or have no waste stream.

Compliance With Standards

Sixty percent of the plants surveyed indicated that they currently meet
state and federal water pollution standards (Table 47). Twenty-five per-
cent stated that they do not meet these standards  and 15 percent  do not
know whether they do or not.  A higher portion of  plants in the West
                                191

-------
 DRAFT
           TABLE 45  METHOD OF  DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER BY WOOD
                PRESERVING PLANTS  IN THE UNITED STATES
Disposal Method
Release - No Treatment
Store In Ponds
To Sewer - Untreated
To Sewer - Partial Treatment
Secondary Treatment
Other*
*No wastewater, Incineration,
Number
of
Plants
35
86
19
11
18
38
etc.
Percent
of
Plants
17
42
9
5
9
18

            TABLE 46  METHOD OF DISPOSAL OF WOOD PRESERVING
                         WASTEWATER BY REGION
Region
Southeast
Southwest
Atlantic Coast
Lake and Northeast
Release
Untreated
13
5
9
2
Store
29
20
10
17
Sewer
12
6
4
6
Treat
5
4
4
5
Other
17
5
4
2
and Southwest currently meet  standards than In other regions of the
country,,  However,  the differences among regions are not great, ranging
from 57 percent of  the plants  In the Atlantic Coast region to 73 percent
in the West.

There was considerable evidence of confusion on the part of some respond-
ents regarding the  question of compliance or non-compliance.  A number of
plants that are currently releasing their wastewater with no treatment
stated that they meet federal  and state standards.  Conversely, a number
                                 192

-------
DRAFT

of plants that retain their waste on company  property or  release  it  into
sanitary sewer systems stated that they do not meet standards, or do not
know whether they do or not,

     TABLE 47  COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL  WATER STANDARDS
          AMONG WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES
Compliance
Yes
Don't Know
No
Number
of
Plants
126
29*
52
Percent
of
Plants
60
15
25
                      *Includes Non-Responses
Table 48 gives a breakdown of what the plants  that do  not  now meet  the
standards plan to do with their wastewater.  Nationally, roughly  one-
third of the plants have made no plans.  Most  of the remainder plan
either to construct on-site treating facilities  for their  wastewater
(31 percent) or discharge it to sewer systems  (19 percent).   Twelve of
the 81 plants involved indicated that they would dispose of  their waste
by other means.  Incineration and evaporation  were two of  the "other"
methods mentioned.

     TABLE 48  PLANS OF WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS NOT IN  COMPLIANCE
                WITH WATER STANDARDS -- UNITED STATES

                                                          Number
                  Plan                                       of
	Plants

None                                                         29

Discharge To Sewer - Raw                                      5

Discharge to Sewer - Oil Removal                              6

Discharge To Sewer - Oil + Phenol Removal                      4

Construct On-Site Treating System                            25

Other                                                        12

     TOTAL                                                   81
                                193

-------
DRAFT
Over a third of the plants not meeting standards are located in the South-
east.  Most of these plants are planning to treat their waste on site or
discharge it to a sewer system.  Half of the plants  in the West and Lake
and Northeast states indicated that they have made no plans to meet ap-
plicable standards.

Of the plants that have installed or plan to install  secondary treating
facilities, 70 percent will use either oxidation ponds or soil percolation
(Table 49).  Only 14 plants (about 16 percent) have  elected to use trick-
ling filters or activated sludge.  The choices of the various methods of
treatment were generally uniform among regions, with no single region
showing a strong preference of one method over another (Table 50).

     TABLE 49  TYPE OF SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATING FACILITIES
       INSTALLED OR PLANNED BY WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS IN U.S.
                                                            of
                                                          Plants
     Oxidation Pond                                         31

     Trickling Filter                                        8

     Activated Sludge                                        6

     Soil Percolation                                       31

     Chemical Oxidation                                      3

     Other (incineration)                                 	1_0_

          TOTAL                                             89



PLANT SANITATION

By plant sanitation is meant those aspects of plant housekeeping which re-
duce or eliminate the incidence of water contamination  resulting from equip-
ment and plumbing leaks, spillage of preservative, and  other similar sources.
Lack of attention to these sources of pollution is a serious problem at many
plants that will require remedial action.  Its origin lies in the lack of
appreciation of the fact that even small losses of preservative can largely
negate waste management practices directed toward collecting and treating
process water.
                                 194

-------
DRAFT
 TABLE 50  TYPE OF SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATING  FACILITIES  INSTALLED
           OR PLANNED BY WOOD PRESERVING  PLANTS BY REGION
Treatment
Oxidation Pond
Trickling Filter
Activated Sludge
Soil Percolation
Chemical Oxidation
Other

SE
12
3
1
12
1
0

sw
9
3
2
2
0
4
Region
AC
3
0
1
9
1
0

w
2
1
1
2
1
6

L&NE
5
1
1
6
0
0
Preservative  Loss From Retorts

Areas under and in the immediate vicinity of retorts  are  the  most  import-
ant from the standpoint of plant sanitation.   The  camber  in some retorts
prevents the complete drainage of preservative from the retort  upon  com-
pletion of a charge.   Consequently, when  the retort door  is opened to  re-
move the charge, a quantity of preservative  drains into pipe  trenches  or
sumps under the retort where it becomes contaminated  with dirt, storm
water, and other types of preservatives.   Most plants process the  preserva-
tive through oil separators and thereby recover most of  it.  The  better
managed and equipped plants collect it in troughs  as  it drains  from  the
retorts and transfer it to underground storage tanks.

Losses of preservative in the vicinity of the retort  are  of particular
importance in salt-type treatments because they represent the major  source
of pollution.  Many such plants are equipped to collect preservative spill-
age and wash water and reuse it as make-up water for  fresh treating  solu-
tions.

Storm Water

Storm water becomes contaminated as it flows over  areas saturated  with pre-
servative from spills and leaks.  Areas of particular concern are  those
around and in the vicinity of treating cylinders,  storage tanks, and sepa-
rators.  Because these areas are usually  not large, it is practical  to re-
duce the volume of storm water that must  be  treated by constructing  dikes
and drainage ditches  around the areas to  prevent uncontaminated water  from
flowing across them.
                                195

-------
 DRAFT
 Preservative  accumulation  in the  soil where treated stock is stored.
 although  unavoidable,  is another  potential source of contaminated storm
 water.  Storage yards  frequently  encompass large areas.  Depending upon
 their topography,  the  problem of  collecting all storm water from these
 yards for treatment  may be a formidable one indeed, especially in regions
 of heavy  rainfall.   It is  probable  that no significant contamination  of
 water occurs  from  this source.  Thompson  (29) analyzed storm water samples
 collected at  various locations  in storage yards of two commercial treat-
 ing plants  and found insignificant  phenol and COD contents.

 Equipment Leaks

 Preservative  losses  from pipes  and  pumps contribute to the pollution  prob-
 lem at many plants.  The early  detection of leaks from these sources  can
 best be accomplished by periodic  and systematic checks of all pumps and
 plumbing  employed  in the transfer of preservatives.

 TREATMENT AND CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY

 Wastewater treating  facilities  have been installed and are in operation
 at only about 9 percent of the  estimated 390 plants in the United States
 (Table 45).   Most  of these facilities have been in operation for only a
 relatively  short period of time.  It follows that both experience in  the
 treatment of  wastewater from the  wood preserving industry and the backlog
 of data on  such operations  is  limited.  This problem is lessened some-
 what by studies and  field  experience in the treatment of petroleum wastes.
 Data from this industry are frequently directly applicable to the wood
 preserving  industry  because of  the  similarity of the effluents involved,
 particularly  as regards phenol  content, oil content and other parameters.
 Likewise, within the past  three years laboratory and pilot-plant studies
 have supplied useful information  on the treatment of effluents from wood
 preserving  operations.  Perusal of  these sources, as well as information
 obtained  from visits to and analyses of effluent samples from wood pre-
 serving plants that  have effective waste treatment and management programs,
 provided  the  data  on which this section is based.

 Primary Treatments

 Primary treatments for creosote and pentachlorophenol-petroleum waste-
waters usually include  flocculation and sedimentation.   This process, as
 currently practiced  at a number of plants, is normally carried out for
one  of two  purposes:   (1)  to remove emulsified oils and other oxygen-
 demanding substances preparatory  to secondary treatment, and (2) to render
wastewaters acceptable  to  municipal authorities prior to releasing it into
 sanitary  sewers.  A  few plants  discharging their waste into city sewers
 apply primary treatments to reduce sewer charges levied by municipal
authorities,  rather  than to meet  specific influent limitations.
                                 196

-------
DRAFT
One of the principal  benefits of primary treatments  of oily wastewater
is the reduction of the oil  content of the  wastewater  to  a level  compat-
ible with the secondary treating process that is  employed.  This  is  par-
ticularly important with those wastewaters  containing  emulsified  oils,
which normally cannot be removed by mechanical  means.   Flocculation  treat-
ments employing a suitable polyelectrolyte  are quite effective  in breaking
emulsions and precipitating the oil.   Reductions  in  oil content on the
order of 95 percent are not unusual.   Where the oil  content of  wastewater
is not a serious problem, however,  flocculation treatments preparatory
to secondary treatment may not be necessary.   The decision in this regard
must be based on the relative cost of such  treatments  and that  of provid-
ing sufficient secondary treating capacity  to accomodate  the additional
COD loading that would normally be removed  during primary treatment  of
the wastewater.

Primary treatments of wastewaters containing salt-type preservatives and
fire retardants serve to precipitate heavy  metals and  thus make the  waste
amenable to biological treatment.  The contractor is not  aware  of any
plant that is currently applying a secondary treatment to this  type  of
wastewater.

Wastewaters Containing Entrained Oils - It  is the intermingling of the
oils and water from the treating cycle and  the condensate from  condition-
ing operations that is responsible for most of the pollution problem in
the industry.  Oils account for most of the oxygen demand of the  waste-
water, serve as carriers for concentrations of pentachlorophenol  far in
excess of those attainable in oil-free water, and create  emulsion problems.
In a very real sense, control of oils is the key  to  pollution control in
the wood preserving industry.

Recovery Of Free Oils - Most wood preserving plants  have  oil-recovery sys-
tems for reclaiming a high percentage of the oil  that  becomes entrained
in water during treating operations.   Apart from  environmental  consider-
ations, this practice is and always has been done for  economic  reasons:
it is less expensive to recover and reuse this oil than to buy  new oil.
With the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of  1965  and
subsequent amendments, the contribution of  non-recovered  oils to  the cost
of treating wastewater has become an important consideration.   Within the
past five years many plants have added new  oil-recovery systems or re-
vamped existing ones.

Free oils are recovered from wastewater by  gravity-type separators.   Vari-
ous designs are used.  The most common ones are patterned after the  API
separator developed by the American Petroleum Institute (30).   These are
equipped to recover oils both lighter and heavier than water.   Basically
they consist of a horizontal tank divided into three or more compartments
by strategically placed baffles which decrease turbulence.  Heavy oils
sink to the bottom where they are removed by a pump  to a  dehydrator, and
                                197

-------
DRAFT
thence transferred to storage.   Floating oils are removed by a skimmer.
For pentachlorophenol-petroleum  solutions, a simple tank or series  of
tanks with provisions for  drawing off the oil that collects at the  top
and the water from the bottom is all that is required (31).  Good prac-
tice dictates that separate effluent handling systems be installed  for
each preservative.  However, many plants are not so equipped.

A few plants have installed air-flotation equipment to effect oil-water
separation.  In these units, all oil is brought to the surface of the
water by bubbles created by saturating a portion of the wastewater  with
air under pressure and releasing it at the bottom of the flotation  cham-
ber.  The oil is removed at the  surface by a skimming device.  Mechani-
cal oil scavengers are also sometimes used to remove surface oils.

The percentage of entrained oils removed by oil-water separation equip-
ment varies widely, depending in part upon whether or not the oil is  in
a free or emulsified form.  Data on the percent efficiencies of several
oil-separation processes,  including the API separator, are given in
Table 51.  These data are  based  upon the treatment of petroleum refinery
wastewater, but are probably applicable to other oily wastes.  Separator
efficiency is of course a  function of detention time.  The effect of
this variable on oil removal is shown in Figure 38.

       TABLE 51  EFFICIENCIES OF OIL SEPARATION PROCESSES (32)

                               Source OfPercent Removal
	Influent    Free Oils    Emulsified Oils

API Separator                  Raw Waste     60 - 99     Not applicable
Air Flotation without
Chemicals
Air Flotation with
Chemicals
Chemical Coagulation and
Sedimentation
API
Effluent
API
Effluent
API
Effluent
70 -
75 -
60 -
95
95
95
10 -
50 -
50 -
40
90
90
Only free oils are removed in conventional oil-water separators.   However,
emulsions are broken by rotary vacuum filters and by centrifugation,  both
of which have been tested on wood preserving wastewater at a few  plants  in
the South.  Wastewaters containing emulsified oils frequently have oil con-
tents in excess of 1000 mg/liter after passing through gravity-type separa-
tors (24).  Oils in this form normally must be removed by primary treat-
ments involving flocculation.
                                 198

-------
            AVERAGE TEMPERATURE- 38°C
        INITIAL OIL CONCENTRATION -45P.P.M. ±4 P. P.M.
   0     40     80     120    160    200
    SEPARATION  TIME  IN  MINUTES
FIGURE  38  C33) -
EFFECT OF  DETENTION TIME ON OIL
REMOVAL BY GRAVITY SEPARATION
                 199

-------
 DRAFT


 The  formation  of oil-water emulsions  is  a particular problem where con-
 ventional  steam conditioning is  used  and apparently results from agita-
 tion of retort condensate  as it  is  expelled from the retort through a
 steam  trap.  Thompson  (34) analyzed condensate samples collected alter-
 nately from  a  hole  drilled near  the bottom of a retort and from a pipe
 leading from the trap  and  found  that  only those samples that had passed
 through the  trap contained emulsified oils.  Some plants treating with
 pentachlorophenol-petroleum solutions have greatly reduced the problems
 of emulsion  by replacing high-speed pumps involved in preservative trans-
 fer  with low-speed,  high-volume  models.

 Breaking Of  Oil-Water  Emulsions  - Emulsions may be broken chemically,
 physically,  or electrically.  Chemical methods involving flocculation
 and  sedimentation are  the  most widely used, generally are the least ex-
 pensive, and are effective with  effluents from wood preserving plants.
 For  these  reasons,  the remarks which  follow are confined to processes
 which  are  based on  the use of chemicals.

 Chemicals  that have  been used to break oil-water emulsions, either in
 the  laboratory or field, include metallic hydroxides, principally lime,
 ferric chloride and  other  salts  of  iron, alum, bentonite clay, and vari-
 ous  types  of polyelectrolytes.   The same material or combination of ma-
 terials  does not work  equally well  with with wastewaters from all plants
 (Table 30, Section  V).   Jones and Frank  (35) achieved COD and BOD reduc-
 tions  of 83  and 73  percent, respectively, in creosote wastewater by using
 a single cationic polymer  at a rate of 40 mg/liter.  Similar results were
 observed by  Thompson at a  Chicago-based plant treating with both creosote
 and  pentachlorophenol  that flocculated its waste prior to routing it to a
 sanitary sewer.

 Oil  reductions  in refinery wastewater of more than 95 percent were ob-
 tained by  Simonsen  (36)  who used both anionic and cationic polyelectro-
 lytes  in combination with  bentonite clay.  There was no difference be-
 tween  the  two  types of polymers  in  the results obtained.  However, only
 cationic polyelectrolytes  broke  oil-water emulsions from wood preserving
 plants  in  work  reported by Jones and  Frank (35).  Aluminum chloride, alum,
 activated-silica, clay and lime  were  employed by Weston and Merman (37)
with refinery wastes.   Reductions in  BOD, COD, and oil  content on the
order  of 50  percent were reported.

 Ferric chloride  was  found  by Thompson and Dust (23) to  be an effective
 flocculating agent for both creosote  and pentachlorophenol  wastewaters.
 However, floe  formation  occurred only within very narrow pH limits.   This
 feature  would  pose serious problems in field applications of this chemical.

Much of  the  research work  on flocculating wood preserving wastewaters has
involved the use  of lime either  singly or in combination with a polyelectro-
 lyte.  Thompson  and Dust (23)  reported that the optimum dosage of lime, as
judged  from  COD  reductions,  varied  from 0.75 to 2.0 g/liter, depending upon
                                 200

-------
 DRAFT
 wastewater characteristics.  Percent reduction in this parameter increased
 with  increasing  dosage up to a maximum, and then was unaffected by further
 lime  additions (Table 52).  Phenol content, exclusive of pentachlorophenol,
 was not  decreased by flocculation of the wastewater.  However, pentachloro-
 phenol was regularly reduced to a concentration of about 15 mg/liter in
 wastewaters  containing this chemical.  It was surmised from this result
 that  pentachlorophenol, unlike other phenolic compounds, is primarily as-
 sociated with the oil phase in oil-water emulsions and is precipitated
 with  the oils when the emulsion is broken.  The residual concentration of
 pentachlorophenol remaining in the filtrate was reported by Thompson and
 Dust  (23)  to correspond approximately to the solubility of this chemical
 in water.  Typical data showing the reduction of pentachlorophenol result-
 ing from lime additions to a wastewater are shown below:

             Lime Dosage                 Residual PCP
             (gm/liter)             Concentration (mg/liter)

                 0                            150

                 1.0                           45

                 1.5                           25

                 2.0                           17

 Middlebrook (38) also used lime, in dosages of 2 g/liter, to obtain re-
 ductions in COD of up to 70 percent in a creosote wastewater.   Similar
 results were achieved with alum.  Both chemicals were used successfully
 by Gaskin  (39) to treat creosote and vapor-drying wastewater previously
 de-emulsified with sulfuric acid.   Lime and caustic soda were reported
 by van Frank and Eck (40)  to be effective in flocculating oily wastewater
 after polyelectrolytes  alone failed to produce a floe.

 Among numerous polyelectrolytes tested by Thompson and  Dust (23)  rela-
 tively few were found that were effective with wood preserving wastewater
 in the absence of lime.   The primary contributions that many of the test
materials made to the flocculation process were the agglomeration of
minute floe particles,  which promoted rapid settling, and reduction in
sludge volume.   Only a  few of them were effective in initiating floe forma-
tion in samples of wastewater from 20 plants,  and none  increased  COD re-
moval  beyond that obtained with lime alone.   The few that were effective
in initiating floe formation in the absence of lime are relatively new
products  currently marketed by a large  chemical  company.   Reductions in
COD for individual  polyelectrolytes in  this  group ranged from 50  to 74
percent and averaged 62  percent (24).   Several  wood preserving plants
currently use them in primary treatments  of their wastewater.   Lime in
combination with  polyelectrolytes  is used by other plants.
                                201

-------
DRAFT
          TABLE 52  EFFECT OF LIME FLOCCULATION ON COD AND PHENOL
                    CONTENT OF TREATING-PLANT EFFLUENT
                                           COD
Lime
(gm/1)
0.0
0.25
0.50
0,75
1.00
1.25
1.50
PH
5.3
6.8
7.9
9.7
10.5
11.4
11.8
Cone.
(mg/1 )
1 1 ,800
9,700
7,060
5,230
5,270
5,210
5,210
Percent
Removal
—
23
39
56
55
56
56
Phenol
(mg/1)
83
81
72
78
80
84
83
Vacuum and pressure filtration has also been used to break oil-water emul-
sions, permitting the recovery of the oil  (41).  Halff (42), in commenting
on work with vacuum filtration through diatomaceous earth, reported that
a precoated rotary vacuum filter efficiently broke oil-water emulsions
from wood preserving operations.  The same author tested sand filtration
of composited wastewater from several wood preserving plants and concluded
that the method was not practical, although a 99 percent reduction in tur-
bidity was achieved by the process.

Methods of breaking oil-water emulsions in the petro-chemical industry
have been reviewed by Halladay and Crosby  (43).  The theory of floccula-
tion has been covered by Powell (121).

Sludge Dewatering - The availability of effective polyelectrolytes for
flocculation treatments lessens considerably the problem of sludge handling
and disposal.  Using lime alone, a volume  of sludge equal to 30 percent of
the wastewater is produced by flocculation.  This value is reduced to about
7 percent when lime is used  in combination with a suitable polyelectrolyte,
and is reduced still further when one of the newer polyelectrolytes is used
alone.
                                   202

-------
DRAFT


Sludge drying beds similar to those employed with domestic sewage  have
been used successfully to dewater sludge resulting from primary treat-
ments of wood preserving wastewater (39).   Recent tests conducted  by
Oust (44) have shown that the dewataring characteristics of beds of this
type are unaffected by adding a total  of 41 centimeters (16 inches) of
sludge from creosote wastewater to them in two applications during a
24-hour period.  Upon drying, the sludge can be easily  removed from the
beds using a garden rake.  Drying beds are currently in use at a number
of plants in the southern states.

Sludge dewatering can also be accomplished mechanically with equipment
currently available (45).  Results of tests of the effectiveness of one
machine in processing sludge from creosote wastewater were promising (44).
The sludge was dewatered to a solids content of 25 percent.

Wastewaters Containing Heavy Metals - Because heavy metals contained in
wastewater from plants that treat with salt-type preservatives and fire
retardants are toxic to microorganisms in  low concentrations (46), they
must be removed before subjecting the wastewater to secondary treatments
involving biological oxidation.  Unlike primary treatments of oily waste-
waters in which recovery of oil is primarily a physical problem, the re-
moval of preservative salts from solution  is a chemical problem and is
related to the properties of the specific  ions present.  A listing of
the principal water-soluble preservatives  and fire retardants currently
marketed in the United States, and the toxic constituents in each, is given
in Table 53.

The procedure used to precipitate heavy metals from wood preserving ef-
fluents was adopted from the electroplating industry.   Dodge and Reams (47)
compiled a bibliography of over 700 references dealing  with the processing
and disposal of waste from this industry,  and it has been estimated that
50 additional articles on the subject have been published annually since
this bibliography first appeared (48).  A  detailed treatment of the sub-
ject has been prepared by Bliss (49).   The basic procedure followed, while
modified somewhat, depending upon the specific preservative salts  involved,
is described below.

With the exception of boron, hexavalent chromium is the only ion shown  in
Table 53 which will not precipitate from solution when  the pH of the waste-
water is raised to 7 or 8 with lime.  Since trivalent chromium will pre-
cipitate from neutral or slightly alkaline solutions, the first step in
treating wastewaters containing this metal is to reduce it from the
hexavalent to the trivalent form.  The use of sulfur dioxide for this
purpose has been reported on in detail by  Chamber!in and Day (28).  Chrom-
ium reduction proceeds most rapidly in acid solution.   Therefore,  the
wastewater is acidified with sulfuric acid to a pH of 4 or less before
introducing the sulfur dioxide.  The latter chemical will itself lower  the
pH to the desired level, but it is less expensive to use the acid.
                                203

-------
 DRAFT
 TABLE 53  TOXIC CONSTITUENTS IN  THE  PRINCIPAL SALT-TYPE PRESERVATIVES
        AND FIRE RETARDANT CHEMICALS  USED  IN  THE UNITED STATES
                                                              Dinitro
                                  Cu    Zn   Cr   B   As   F    phenol


 Fluor-Chrome  Arsenate Phenol               X        XX       X

 Chromated Zinc Chloride                X    X

 Copper!zed Chromated Zinc
    Chloride                      XXX

 Chromated Copper Arsenate        XXX

 Chromated Zinc Arsenate                XX        X

 Acid Copper Chromate             X         X

 Ammoniacal  Copper Arsenite        X                  X

 Fire Retardant

     Type A                           XX

     Type B                           XXX

     Type D                           XXX
When the chromium has been reduced, the pH of the wastewater is  increased
to 8.5 or 9.0 to precipitate not only the trivalent chromium, but also  the
copper and zinc.  If lime is used for the pH adjustment,  fluorides and
most of the arsenic will also be precipitated.  Care must be taken not  to
raise the pH beyond 9.5, since trivalent chromium is slightly soluble at
higher values.  Additional arsenic and most of any residual  copper and
chromium in solution can be precipitated by treating the  waste with hydro-
gen sulfide gas, or by adding sodium sulfide.  Ammonium and  phosphate com-
pounds are also reduced by this process.

This procedure is based on the well-known fact that most  heavy metals are
precipitated as relatively insoluble metal hydroxides at  alkaline pH.   The
theoretical solubilities of some of the hydroxides are quite low, ranging
down to less than 0.01 mg/liter.  However, theoretical levels are seldom
achieved because of unfavorable settling properties of the precipitates,
                                 204

-------
DRAFT
slow reaction rates, interference of other ions in solution, and other
factors.  Among the ions shown in Table 53, copper and zinc (51  and 52),
and chromium (53 and 54) can be reduced to levels substantially  lower
than loO mg/liter by the above procedure,,  Fluorides have a theoretical
solubility at pH's of 8,5 to 9.0 of 8.5 mg/liter, but residual concen-
trations on the order of 10 to 20 mg/liter are more usual because of slow
settling of calcium fluoride.  The use of additional lime, alum  coagula-
tion (56) and filtration through bone char (57) are reported to  reduce
fluoride concentrations to 1.0 mg/liter or less.

The most difficult ion to reduce to acceptable concentration levels is
arsenic.  Treatment of water containing arsenic with lime generally re-
moves only about 85 percent of the metal (58).  Removal  rates in the
range of 94 to 98 percent have been reported for filtration through fer-
ric sulfide beds (59), coagulation with ferric chloride (60), and pre-
cipitation with ferric hydroxide (61).  However, none of these methods
are entirely satisfactory, particularly for arsenic concentrations above
20 mg/liter.

Literature on treatment processes for removing boron from wastewaters
is not available.

The sludge resulting from the precipitation process contains the heavy
metals formerly in solution, along with the excess lime.  It may also
contain various organic materials of wood origin that are flocculated
and precipitated with the lime.  The sludge can be filtered to reduce
its volume and disposed of in a suitable manner.  The supernatant may
be routed to a holding basin, as is currently being done by several
plants, given a secondary treatment, or released, depending upon its
oxygen demand and content of residual metals.  Work is in progress to
determine if the sludge can be acidified and reused in the treating
solution (62).

Representative data on the laboratory treatment of wastewater containing
CCA-type salt preservatives and a proprietary fire-retardant formulation
composed mainly of ammonium and phosphate compounds are given in Table 54.
Data for both concentrated solutions and diluted wastewater from a hold-
ing pond are given.  Average results of treatments conducted daily over
a period of a year on effluent from a plant are given in Table 55.  The
latter data were obtained by analyzing effluent from equipment designed
by Russell  (63) to process wastewater automatically.

Wastewaters from salt-type treatments frequently are heavily diluted
and, consequently, may contain very low metal concentrations.  The im-
portance of subjecting the waste to a primary treatment to remove the
metals, even when present in only trace quantities, was  alluded  to
earlier.  Numerous studies have shown that copper, chromium, zinc, and
arsenic have a toxic effect on biological waste treatment systems (64,
65, 66).  Results of these studies were recently reviewed by Jones (46).
                                 205

-------
DRAFT
  TABLE 54  CONCENTRATIONS OF POLLUTANTS BEFORE AND AFTER LABORATORY
            TREATMENT OF WASTEWATER FROM TWO SOURCES (62)

COD
As
Phenols
Cu
Cr+6
Cr+3
F
P04
NH3-N
Cone.
Influent
1700
300
Nil
170
375
0
590
640
1260
Solution
Effluent
400.
15
Nil
25
0
0
80
90
95
Dilute
Influent
112
20.8
0.03
0.35
0.52
0
19
80
80
Pond Waste
Effluent
20
1.0
Nil
0.25
0
0
9.5
25
Nil
NOTE:  Values expressed as mg/1.
                                206

-------
DRAFT
TABLE 55  CONCENTRATION OF POLLUTANTS IN PLANT WASTEWATER CONTAINING
             SALT-TYPE PRESERVATIVES AND FIRE RETARDANTS
                BEFORE AND AFTER FIELD TREATMENT (62)

COD
As
Phenols
Cu
Cr+6
Cr+3
F
P04
NH3-N

Influent
10 -
13 -
0.050 -
0.05 -
0.23 -
0.0 -
4 -
15 -
80 -
Values expressed
Ranges
50
50
0.160
1.1
1.5
0.8
20
150
200
as mg/ liter
Effluent Averages
25
8.9
0.048
0.35
0.1
0.02
5.8
15
75

                                 207

-------
DRAFT
Ion exchange resins of the sulfonated-polystyrene and quaternaryamine
types have been employed on a commercial scale for purification  and  re-
covery of metals used in the electroplating industry (67,68,69).  The
technology involved in ion exchange has application to the wood  preserv-
ing industry, but the economics of the process in the purification of
preservative wastewaters containing metal contaminants are unknown.  It
has been suggested that inert sulfate and sodium ions and organic ma-
terials in these wastewaters would lower the metal-removing capacity of
the exchangers sufficiently to make the process impractical  under most
circumstances (70).

Plant experience in treating wastewater from salt-type treatments is
limited.  This situation arises from the fact that steam conditioning
of stock prior to preservative injection is not widely practiced among
plants that use preservative and fire-retardant salts.  Consequently,
only a small volume of wastewater is generated.  The better managed
plants use the wastewater that is available as make-up water in  prepar-
ing fresh batches of treating solution.

Secondary Treatments

Biological treatments, chemical oxidation, activated-carbon adsorption
and various combinations of these basic methods of wastewater treatment
have been used commercially, proposed for such use, or tested in labora-
tory and pilot-plant investigations of wood preserving effluents.  Each
of these methods is discussed below in terms'of:  (a) characteristics
relating to sensitivity to shock loadings, availability of equipment,
and maintenance requirements; (b) efficiency with phenolic-type  wastes,
as revealed by the literature; and (c) effluent characteristics  of wood
preserving waste resulting from treatment.  Because of the limited num-
ber of wood preserving plants that are currently providing secondary
treatment for their waste, data for item (c) is, in some instances,  based
on grab samples collected in connection with this study, or on results
of pilot-plant investigations.

Biological Treatments - Where a substantial volume of waste with a high
organic load is involved, cost considerations usually dictate that bio-
logical oxidation be used as the major component in the waste treatment
program.  Polishing treatments involving chlorination, and possibly
activated-carbon filtration, may or may not be required, depending upon
the design of the biological system and the waste loads involved.  Each
of the several biological waste-treating systems that have present or
potential application in the wood preserving industry is covered in  this
section.

Characteristics - According to Besselieure (84), trickling filters are
not unduly susceptible to disruption by shock loads and recover  quickly
if disruption occurs.  Their operation does not require constant atten-
tion, and, when equipped with plastic media, they are capable of handling
                                 208

-------
DRAFT
high loading rates.  The latter feature minimizes  the  land  area  required.
For package units sized for the relatively small  volume of  discharge  at
the average wood preserving plant,  an area of 186  m2  (2,000 ft2)  should
be adequate for the tower (approximately 6 meters  (20  feet) in diameter)
and associated equipment, including settling tank.

Processing Efficiency For Phenolic  Wastes - The  literature  contains many
references concerning wastewater treatment using trickling  filters in
the petroleum and by-product coal  industries.  Most of the  references
report on efforts to reduce phenol  concentrations  to acceptable  levels.
Sweets, Hamdy and Weiser (71) studied the bacteria responsible for phenol
reductions in industrial waste and  reported good phenol removal  from  syn-
thesized waste containing concentrations of 400  mg/liter.   Reductions of
23 to 28 percent were achieved in  a single pass  of the wastewater through
a pilot trickling filter having a  filter bed only  30 centimeters  (12  in.)
deep.

Waters containing phenol concentrations of up to 7500  mg/liter were suc-
cessfully treated in laboratory tests conducted  by Reid and Libby (72).
Phenol removals of 80 to 90 percent were obtained  for  concentrations  on
the order of 400 mg/liter.  Their work confirmed that  of  Ross and Shep-
pard (73) who found that strains of bacteria isolated  from  a trickling
filter could survive phenol concentrations of 1600 mg/liter and were
able to oxidize phenols in concentrations of 450 mg/liter at better than
99 percent efficiency.  Reid, Wortman, and Walker (74) found that many
pure cultures of bacteria were able to live in phenol  concentrations  of
up to 200 mg/liter, but few survived concentrations above 900 mg/liter,
although some were grown in concentrations as high as  3700  mg/liter.

Harlow, Shannon, and Sercu (75) described the operation of  a commercial-
size trickling filter containing "Dowpac" filter medium that was  used to
process wastewater containing 25 mg/liter phenol  and 450  to 1,900 mg/liter
BOD.  Reductions of 96 percent for phenols and 97  percent for BOD were ob-
tained in this unit.  Their results compare favorably  with  those  reported
by Montes, Allen, and Schowell (76), and Dickerson and Laffey (77).   The
former authors obtained BOD reductions of 90 percent in a trickling fil-
ter using a 1:2 recycle ratio.  Dickerson and Laffey obtained phenol  and
BOD reductions of 99.9 and 96.5 percent, respectively, in a trickling
filter used to process refinery wastewater.

A combination biological waste-treatment system  employing a trickling
filter and an oxidation pond was reported on by  Davies, Biehl, and Smith
(78).  The filter, which was packed with a plastic medium,  was used for
a roughing treatment of 10.6 million liters (2.8 million  gallons) of
wastewater per day, with final treatment occurring in  the oxidation pond.
Removal rates of 95 percent for phenols and 60 percent for  BOD were ob-
tained in the filter, notwithstanding the fact that the pH  of the influ-
ent averaged 9.5.
                                 209

-------
DRAFT


Biological  treatment of refinery wastewaters was studied by Austin,
Meehan, and Stockham (79)  using a series of four trickling filters.
Each filter was operated at  a  different recycle ratio,,  The waste con-
tained 22 to  125 mg/llter  of oil.  BOD removal was adversely affected
by the oil, the lowest  removal rates  corresponding to the periods when
the oil content of  the  influent was highest.  Phenol removal was unaf-
fected by oil concentrations within the range studied.

Prather and Gaudy (80)  found that significant reductions in COD, BOD,
and phenol  content  of refinery wastewater were achieved by simple aera-
tion treatments„  They  concluded that this phenomenon accounted for the
high allowable loading  rates for biological treatments such as trickling
filtration*

Treatment of  Wood Preserving Effluents - The practicality of using the
trickling filters for secondary treatment of wastewaters from the wood
preserving  industry was  explored by Dust and Thompson (25).  A pilot
unit containing a 6,4 meter  (21 feet) filter bed of plastic media was
used in their study.  Creosote wastewater was applied at BOD loading
rates of from 400 to 3050  kilograms/1000 m3 per day (25 to 190 pounds/
1000 ft3 per  day).  The  corresponding phenol loadings were 1.6 to 54.6
kilograms/1000 m3 per day  (0.1 to 3.4 pounds/1000 ft3 per day).  Raw
feed-to-recycle ratios  varied  from 1:7 to 1:28.  The pilot unit was
operated and  daily  samples collected  and analyzed over a period of seven
months that included both winter and  summer operating conditions.

Because of  wastewater characteristics at the particular plant coopera-
ting in the study,  the  following pretreatment steps were necessary:
(a) equalization of wastes;  (b) primary treatment by coagulation for
partial solids removal;  (c)  dilution  of the wastewater to obtain BOD
loading rates commensurate with the ra'.ige of raw flow levels provided
by the equipment; and (d)  addition to the raw feed of supplementary
nitrogen and  phosphorus.   Dilution ratios of 0 to 14 were used.

The efficiency of the system was essentially stable for BOD loadings of
less than 1200 kilograms/1000  m3 per  day (75 pounds/1000 ft3 per day).
The best removal rate was  achieved when the hydraulic application rate
was 2.85 lpm/m2 (0.07 gpm/ft2) of raw waste and 40.7 Ipm/m2 (1.0 gpm/ft2)
of recycled waste.  The  COD, BOD, and phenol removals obtained under these
conditions  are given in  Table  56.  Table 57 shows the relationship between
BOD loading rate and removal efficiency,  BOD removal efficiency at load-
ing rates of  1060 kilograms/1000 m3 per day (66 pounds/1000 ft3 per day)
was on the  order of 92 percent, and was not improved at reduced loadings.
Comparable  values for phenols  at loading rates of 19.3 kilograms/1000 m3
per day (1.2  pounds/1000 ft3 per day) were about 97 percent.

Phenol  content was  more  readily reduced to levels compatible with exist-
ing standards than  was BOD content.   Consequently, the sizing of commer-
cial units  from data collected from the pilot unit was based on BOD removal
                                 210

-------
DRAFT
    TABLE 56  BOD, COD, AND PHENOL LOADING AND REMOVAL RATES FOR
    PILOT TRICKLING FILTER PROCESSING A CREOSOTE WASTEWATER (81)
                                             Characteristic

Raw Flow Rate (gpm/ft2)
Recycle Flow Rate (gpm/ft2)
Influent Concentration (mg/1)
Loading Rate (Ib/M ft3/day)
Effluent Concentration (mg/1)
Removal (%)
BOD
0,07
1.0
1698
66.3
137
91.9
COD
0.07
1.0
3105
121.3
709
77.0
Phenol
0.07
1.0
31
1.2
<1.0
99+
rates.  Various combinations of filter-bed depths, tower diameters,  and
volumes of filter media that were calculated to provide a BOD removal
rate of 90 percent for influent having a BOD of 1500 mg/liter are shown
in Table 58 for a plant with a flow rate of 75,700 Ipd (20,000 gpd).

Activated Sludge and Aerated Lagoon - Characteristics -  Activated Sludge
treatments which employ the complete-mix alternative to the  conventional
process are very resistant to disruptions caused by shock loads,  offer
low operation and maintenance costs, low initial cost, and have small
land requirements.  Package units designed to treat the wastewater from
an average wood preserving plant could be located on an area of approxi-
mately 93 m2 (1000 ft2).  Additional space would be required for  a pre-
treatment equalization reservoir and, where required, flocculation tanks.
A system designed by Environmental  Engineering, Inc. of Gainesville,
Florida for installation at Koppers Company's Carbondale, Illinois plant
will occupy an area of approximately 140 m* (1500 ft2), including equip-
ment for pre- and post-treatment chlorination.

An aerated lagoon is a special type of complete-mix, activated sludge
system, without sludge recycle.  It normally is operated in  conjunction
with a polishing pond into which waste from the lagoon is discharged.
Both the lagoon and polishing pond  are usually  constructed with earthen
embankments, a feature which reduced the cost of the system  compared with
the activated sludge process.  This method of treatment has  essentially
the same advantages as the conventional complete-mix, activated sludge
system, but does require more land  area.
                                 211

-------
DRAFT
    TABLE 57  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BOD LOADING AND  TREATABILITY
    FOR PILOT TRICKLING FILTER PROCESSING A CREOSOTE WASTEWATER (81)
BOD
Loading
(Ib/ft3/day)
23
26
37
53
66
76
85
115
156
Removal
(*)
91
95
92
93
92
82
80
75
62
Treatability*
Factor
0.0301
0.0383
0.0458
0.0347
0.0312
0.0339
0.0286
0.0182
0.0130
     *Based on the equation:

                      L£=  eKD/0.0-5   (Germain, 1966)
                      Lo

      in which Le  = BOD concentration  of settled effluent, Lo =
      BOD  of feed, Q = hydraulic application  rate of raw waste
      in gpm/ft2,  D = depth of media in  feet,  and K = treatability
      factor (rate coefficient).
                                212

-------
DRAFT
TABLE 58  SIZING OF TRICKLING FILTER FOR A WOOD PRESERVING PLANT  (81)

    (NOTE:  Data are based on a flow rate of 20,000 gallons per
            day, with filter influent BOD of 1500 and effluent
            BOD of 150.)
Depth of
filter
bed
(ft)
10.7
12.5
14.3
16.1
17.9
19.6
21.4
Raw flow
(gpm/ft2
filter
surface)
0.019
0.026
0.034
0.044
0.054
0.065
0.078
Recycle flow
(gpm/ft2
filter
surface)
0.73
0,72
0.71
0.70
0.69
0.68
0.67
Filter
Surface
area
(ft2)
708
520
398
315
255
210
177
Tower
dia.
(ft)
30.0
25.7
22.5
20.0
18.0
16.3
15.0
Vol ume
of
media
(ft3)
7617
6529
5724
5079
4572
4156
3810
Processing Efficiency for Phenol'c Wastes  -  Treatment of municipal and
mixes of municipal  and industrial  wastes  by  the  activated sludge process
is common practice  (82, 83,  84).   In  recent  years  the process has also
been adapted to industrial wastes  similar in composition to that of ef-
fluents from wood preserving plants.   Pruessner  and Mancini (85) obtained
a 99 percent oxidation efficiency  for BOD in petrochemical wastes.  Simi-
larly, Coe (86) reported reductions of both  BOD  and phenols of 95 percent
from petroleum wastes in bench-scale  tests of the  activated sludge process.
Optimum BOD loads of 2247 kilograms/1000  m3  per  day (140 pounds/1000  ft3
per day) were obtained in his work.  Coke  plant  effluents were success-
fully treated by Ludberg and Nicks (87),  although  they experienced some
difficulty in start-up of the activated sludge system because of the  high
phenol content of the water.

The complete mixed, activated sludge  process was employed to process  a
high-phenolic wastewater from a coal-tar  distilling plant in Ontario.
Initial phenol and  COD concentrations of  500 and 6,000 mg/liter, respec-
tively, were reduced in excess of  99  percent for phenols and 90 percent
for COD (88).
                                213

-------
 DRAFT


 Cooke and Graham (89) employed the complete-mixed, activated  sludge sys-
 tem to treat waste containing phenols, organic acids,  thiocyanates, and
 ammonia using detention times of 8 to 50 hours.  At feed rates of 144 to
 1605 kilograms/1000m3 per day (9 to 100 lb/1000 ft3 per day), phenol con-
 tent was reduced from 281  mg/liter to 62 mg/liter, for a removal rate of
 78 percent.

 The employment of aerated reaction units on a continuous flow basis was
 used by Badger and Jackman (90) to treat coke gasification plant waste.
 They found that a two-day detention period was sufficient to  remove 90
 percent of the phenol from a waste stream containing up to 5,000 mg/liter
 of the chemical.

 Nakashio (91) successfully treated coal gas washing liquor containing
 1,200 mg/liter of phenols  in a study that lasted more  than a year.  Phenol
 concentration was reduced by more than 99 percent.  Similar phenol removal
 rates were obtained by Reid and Janson (92) in treating wastewater con-
 taining cresols by the activated sludge process.

 In a report of pilot and full-scale studies performed  by Bethlehem Steel
 Corporation (93), phenol removal  efficiencies greater  than 99.8 percent
 were obtained using the complete-mixed, activated sludge process.  Load-
 ing rates  of 0.86 kilograms phenol/kilogram (0.86 Ib phenol/lb) MLSS/day
 were used  successfully.   Phenol  influent concentrations  of 3,500 mg/liter
 were reduced to 0.2 mg/liter in the effluent.

 Treatment  of Wood Preserving Effluents - Dust and Thompson (25) conducted
 bench-scale tests of complete-mixed,  activated sludge  treatments of creo-
 sote and pentachlorophenol  wastewaters using 5-liter units and detention
 times of 5,  10,  15, and 20  days.   The operational  data  collected at steady-
 state conditions of substrate removal  for the creosote waste are shown in
 Table 59.   A plot of these  data showed that the treatability factor, K =
 0.30 days-1  (Figure 39). The resulting design equation, with t expressed
 in days, is:

                                   Lo
                      Le  =	
                              1 + 0.30t

A plot of percent  COD  removal  versus detention  time in the aerator, based
on the above equation,  is  shown in  Figure  40.  This figure shows that an
oxidation efficiency of about 90 percent can be expected with a detention
time of 20 days  in units of this type.

Work done with pentachlorophenol waste was conducted to determine the de-
gree of biodegradability of this chemical.  Cultures of bacteria prepared
from soil removed  from  a drainage ditch containing pentachlorophenol waste
were used to inoculate   the treatment units.  Feed to the units contained
10 mg/liter of pentachlorophenol and 2,400 mg/liter COD.  For the two 5-
liter units (A and B) the  feed was  500 and 1000 ml/day and detention  times
were, in order,  10 and  5 days.
                                 214

-------
K>
h-1
un
       CO
       co
       Q
       O
       O
-   4
c
0)

uj   3
OO
O
O   2
                                          Slope =K=0.30 day
                                                     -1
                                         Le =
                                                 Lo
                                                     l+0.30t
                             5              10

                                 Aeration  Time  (Days)
                                                     15
                                                                   20
                FIGURE 39 (25) - DETERMINATION OF REACTION RATE  CONSTANT
                                 FOR A CREOSOTE WASTEWATER

-------
N)
      o
      o

      x 90
        80
      n

      | 70
      U
      S 50
      i_
      o>
      Q.
        40
                                                Le =
                                                        Lo
1+0.301
                                         10


                              Aeration Time  (Days)
 15
20
                 FIGURE  40  (25)  - COD REMOVAL FROM A CREOSOTE WASTEWATER BY

                                 AERATED LAGOON WITHOUT SLUDGE RETURN

-------
 DRAFT
  TABLE  59  SUBSTRATE REMOVAL AT STEADY-STATE CONDITIONS IN ACTIVATED
             SLUDGE UNITS CONTAINING CREOSOTE WASTEWATER
 Aeration Time, Days                 5.0      10.0      14.7      20.1
COD Raw, mg/1
COD Effluent, mg/1
% COD Removal
COD Raw/COD Effluent
447
178
60.1
2.5
447
103
76.9
4.3
442
79
82.2
5.6
444
67
84.8
6.6
Removal rates for pentachlorophenol and COD are given in Table 60.  For
the first 20 days Unit A removed only 35 percent of the pentachlorophenol
added to the unit.  However, removal increased dramatically after this
period and averaged 94 percent during the remaining ten days of the study.
Unit B consistently removed over 90 percent of the pentachlorophenol added.
Beginning on the 46th day and continuing through the 51st day, pentachloro-
phenol loading was increased at two-day intervals to a maximum of about
40 mg/liter.  Removal rates for the three two-day periods of increased
loadings were 94, 97, and 99 percent.

COD removal for the two units averaged about 90 percent over the duration
of the study.

Also working with the activated sludge process, Kirsh and Etzel (94) ob-
tained removal  rates for pentachlorophenol in excess of 97 percent using
an 8-hour detention time and a feed concentration of 150 mg/liter.  The
pentachlorophenol was supplied to the system in a mixture that included
100 mg/liter phenol.  Essentially complete decomposition of the phenol
was obtained, along with a 92 percent reduction in COD.

Soil Irrigation -  Characteristics - The principal feature of the soil
irrigation method of wastewater treatment is its simplicity.  Water that
has been freed of surface oils and, depending upon the presence of emulsi-
fied oils, treated with flocculated chemicals and filtered through a sand
bed is simply sprayed onto a prepared field.  Soil microorganisms decom-
pose the organic matter in the water in much the same fashion as occurs
in more conventional waste treatment systems.

In addition to its simplicity, soil irrigation has the advantage of low
capital  investment, exclusive of land costs, low operating and maintenance
costs, requires a minimum of mechanical  equipment, and produces a high-
quality effluent in terms of color, as well  as oxygen demand and other
                                217

-------
DRAFT
        TABLE 60   REDUCTION  IN PENTACHLOROPHENOL AND COD IN
            WASTEWATER TREATED IN ACTIVATED SLUDGE UNITS
                              RAW              EFFLUENT FROM UNIT
                             WASTE                 (% Removal)
       DAYS                  (mg/1)               "A"         "B"
                                COD
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
2350
2181
2735
2361
2288
2490
2407
78
79
76
82
90
—
83
78
79
75
68
86
84
80
                          PENTACHLOROPHENOL

       1-5                    7.9                20          77
       6-10                  10.2                55          95
      11-15                   7.4                33          94
      16-20                   6.6                30          79
      21-25                   7.0                -          87
      26-30                  12.5                94          94
      31-35                   5.8                94          91
      36-40                  10.3                            91
      41-45                  10.0                            96
      46-47                  20.0                            95
      48-49                  30.0                            97
      50-51                  40.0                            99
pertinent parameters.  Its chief disadvantage is that its use  requires a
minimum area of approximately one hectare per 33,000 liters/day (3500 gal/
acre/day) of discharge.  This requirement makes the method impractical in
locations where space is at a premium.  However, it is not a major problem
for the many plants in rural areas where land is relatively inexpensive-

Processing Efficiency For Phenolic Wastes - Effluents'from a number of
different types of industries have been successfully disposed  of by soil
irrigation.  Besselieure (84) listed 20 types of industrial wastes that
                                 218

-------
DRAFT
have been treated by this method.   Among  these were  several wastes  high
in phenol content.  Removal  efficiencies  as  high  as  99.5 percent  for
both BOD and phenols were reported.

Fisher (95) reported on the  use of soil irrigation to  treat wastewaters
from a chemical  plant that had the following characteristics:

     pH         '% to 10
     Color        5,000 to 42,000  units
     COD          1,600 to 5,000 mg/liter
     BOD          800 to 2,000 mg/liter

Operating data from a 0.81 hectare (2 acre)  field, when irrigated at  a
rate of 7570 liters (2,000 gal) per acre/day for  a year, showed color
removal of 88 to 99 percent and COD removal  of 85 to 99 percent.

The same author reported on  the use of this  method to  treat effluent
from two tar plants that contained 7,000  to  15,000 mg/liter phenol  and
20,000 to 54,000 mg/liter COD.  The waste was applied  to the  field  at
a rate of about 9460 liters  (2500  gal) per acre/day.  Water leaving the
area had COD and phenol concentrations of 60 and  1  mg/liter,  respective-
ly.  Based on the lower influent concentration for each parameter,  these
values represent oxidation efficiencies of well over 99 percent for both
phenol and COD.

Bench-scale treatment of coke plant effluent by soil irrigation was also
studied by Fisher (95).  Wastes containing BOD and phenol  concentrations
of 5,000 and 1,550 mg/liter, respectively, were reduced by 95+ and  99+
percent when percolated through 0.9 meters (36 inches) of  soil.   Fisher
pointed out that less efficient removal was  achieved with  coke-plant  ef-
fluents using the activated sludge process,  even  when  the  waste was di-
luted with high-quality water prior to treatment. The effluent from  the
units had a color rating of 1,000  to 3,000 units, compared to 150 units
for water that had been treated by soil irrigation.

Treatment of Wood Preserving Effluents -  Both laboratory and  pilot  scale
field tests of soil-irrigation treatments of wood preserving  wastewater
were conducted by Dust and Thompson (25). In the laboratory  tests, 210-
liter (55 gallon) drums containing a heavy clay soil 60-centimeters (24
inches) deep were loaded at rates  of 32,800, 49,260, and 82,000 liters/
hectare/day (3,500, 5,250, and 8,750 gallons/acre/day).  Influent COD
and phenol concentrations were 11,500 and 150 mg/liter, respectively.
Sufficient nitrogen and phosphorus were added to  the waste to provide a
COD:N:P ratio of 100:5:1.  Weekly  effluent samples collected  at the bot-
tom of the drums were analyzed for COD and phenol,

Reductions of 99+ percent in COD content  of  the wastewater were attained
from the first week in the case of the two highest loadings and from  the
fourth week for the lowest loading.  A breakthrough  occurred  during the
22nd week for the lowest loading rate and during  the fourth week  for  the
                                219

-------
DRAFT
highest loading rate.  The  COD  removal steadily decreased thereafter for
the duration of the test.   Phenol removal showed no such reduction,  but
instead remained high  throughout the test.  The average test results for
the three loading  rates  are given in Table 61.  Average phenol  removal
was 99+ percent.   Removal of COD exceeded 99 percent prior to breakthrough
and averaged over  85 percent during the last week of the test.

      TABLE 61  RESULTS  OF  LABORATORY TESTS OF SOIL IRRIGATION
                   METHOD OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT*
  Loading Rate

 (Liters/ha/day)
Length Of   Avg. % COD
  Test      Removal to
 (Week)    Breakthrough
COD REMOVAL    Phenol
 Last Week     Avg. %
 of Test,      Removal
     %       (AH  Weeks)
32,800
(3,500)
49,260
(5,250)
82,000
(8,750)
Loading
31 99.1 (22 wks) 85.8
13 99.6 99.2
14 99.0 (4 wks) 84.3
rates in parentheses in gallons/acre/day
98.5
99.7
99.7

*Creosote wastewater containing 11,500 mg/liter of COD and
of phenol was used.
                                      150 mg/liter
The field portion of Dust and Thompson's (25) study was carried out on
an 0.28-hectare (0.8 acre) plot prepared by grading to an approximately
uniform slope and seeded to native grasses.  Wood preserving wastewater
from an equalization pond was applied to the field at the rate of 32,800
liters/hectare/day  (3,500 gallons/acre/day) for a period of nine months.
Average monthly influent COD and phenol concentrations ranged from 2,000
to 3,800 mg/liter and 235 to 900 mg/liter, respectively.  Supplementary
nitrogen and phosphorus were not added.  Samples for analyses were col-
lected weekly at soil depths of 0 (surface), 30, 60, and 120 centimeters
(1, 2, and 4 feet).

The major biological reduction in COD and phenol content occurred at the
surface and in the  upper 30 centimeters (1 foot) of soil.  A COD reduc-
tion of 55.0 percent was attributed to overland flow.  The comparable
reduction for phenol content was 55.4 percent (Table 62).  Average COD
reductions at the three soil depths, based on raw waste to the field,
were 94.9, 95.3, and 97.4 percent, respectively, for the 30-, 60-, and
120 centimeter (1-, 2-, and 4-foot) depths.  For phenols, the reductions
were, in order, 98.9, 99.2, and 99.6 percent.
                                220

-------
DRAFT
     TABLE 62  REDUCTION OF COD AND PHENOL  CONTENT  IN WASTEWATER
                   TREATED BY SOIL  IRRIGATION  (25)
       Month
Raw Waste
                                          Soil  Depth  (centimeters)
             30
          60
          120
     July
     August
     September
     October
     November
     December
     January
     February
     March
     Apri 1
  2235
  2030
  2355
  1780
  2060
  3810
  2230
  2420
  2460
  2980
     Average % Removal
        (weighted)
COD (mg/1)

   1400
   1150
   1410
    960
   1150
    670
    940
    580
    810
   2410
              55.0
150
170
 72
121
144
101
126
            94.9
170
 91
127
 92
102
         95.3
66
64
90
61
46
58
64
64
68
76
          97.4
Phenol (mg/1)
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
235
512
923
310
234
327
236
246
277
236
186
268
433
150
86
6
70
111
77
172
..
—
--
4.6
7,7
1.8
1.9
4.9
2.3
1.9
..
--
--
--
3.8
9.0
3.8
2.3
1.9
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.0
2.8
OoO
3.8
0.0
1.8
1.3
0.8
     Average  % Removal
        (weighted)
              55.4
            98.9
         99.2
          99.6
                               221

-------
DRAFT
Color of the wastewater  before  and after treatment was not measured.
However, the influent  to the field was dark brown and the effluent was
clear.  Samples taken  from the  60- and 120-centimeter (2- and 4-foot)
depths showed no discoloration.

The application of the wastewater to the study area did not interfere
with the growth of vegetation.  On the contrary, the area was mowed
several times during the summer months to control the height of native
grasses that became established.

The soil percolation method for treating the creosote wastewater from
the wood preserving plant consistently showed a greater percentage re-
moval of COD and phenol  than either the activated sludge or the trickling
filter methods.

Oxidation Ponds - Characteristics - Oxidation ponds are relatively simple
to operate and, because  of their large volume, difficult to disrupt.  Op-
eration and maintenance  costs are usually lower than for other waste
treating methods.  Their disadvantages are numerous.  Included among these
are:  (a) low permissible loading rate, which necessitates large land
areas; (b) abrupt changes in efficiency due to weather conditions; (c)
difficulty of restoring  a pond  to operating condition after it has .been
disrupted; (d) tendency  to  become anaerobic, thus creating odor problems,
and (e) effluents contain algal cells, which are themselves a pollutant.

Processing Efficiency  for Phenolic Wastes - Only a few cases of the use
of oxidation ponds to  treat phenolic wastes are recorded in recent lit-
erature.  The American Petroleum Institute's "Manual on Disposal of Re-
finery Wastes" (96) refers  to several industries that have successfully
used this method.

Montes (97) reported on  results of field studies involving the treatment
of petrochemical wastes  using oxidation ponds.  He obtained BOD reductions
of 90 to 95 percent in ponds loaded at the rate of 84 kilograms or BOD
per hectare per day (75  pounds/acre/day).

Phenol concentrations  of 990 mg/liter in coke oven effluents were reduced
to about 7 mg/liter in field studies of oxidation ponds conducted by
Biczysko and Suschka (98).  Similar results have been reported by Skogen
(99) for a refinery waste.

Treatment of Wood Preserving Effluents - Oxidation ponds rank high among
the various methods that  wood preserving companies plan to use to treat
their wastewater (Table  49).  However, the literature contains operating
data on only one pond  used  for this purpose (100, 101, 102).  This is
the oxidation pond used  as  part of a waste treatment system by Weyer-
haeuser Company at its DeQueen, Arkansas wood preserving plant.
                                222

-------
DRAFT
As originally designed and operated in the early 1960's,  the DeQueen
waste treatment system consisted of holding tanks into which water from
the oil-recovery system flowed.  From the holding tanks the water was
sprayed into a terraced hillside from which it flowed into a mixing
chamber adjacent to the pond.  Here it was diluted 1:1  with creek water,
fortified with ammonia and phosphates, and discharged into the pond
proper.  Retention time in the pond was 45 days.  The quality of the
effluent was quite variable, with phenol content ranging up to 40 mg/
liter.

In 1966 the system was modified by installing a raceway containing a
surface aerator and a settling basin in a portion of the  pond.  The
discharge from the mixing chamber now enters a raceway where it is
treated with a flocculating agent.  The floe formed collects in the
settling basin.  Detention time is 48 hours in the raceway and 18 hours
in the settling basin.  From the settling basin, the wastewater enters
the pond proper.

These modifications in effect changed the treating system from an oxi-
dation pond to a combination aerated lagoon and polishing pond.  The
effect on the quality of the effluent was dramatic.  Figure 41 shows
the phenol content at the outfall of the pond before and  after instal-
lation of the aerator.  As shown by these data, phenol  content decreased
abruptly from an average of about 40 mg/liter to 5 mg/liter.

Even with the modifications described, the efficiency of the system  re-
mains seasonally dependent.  Table 63 gives phenol and BOD values for
the pond effluent by month for 1968 and 1970.  The smaller fluctuations
in these parameters in 1970 as compared with 1968 indicate a gradual
improvement in the system.

Chemical Oxidation -  Phenolic compounds, in addition to  contributing
to the oxygen demand of wood preserving wastewaters, largely account
for the toxic properties of effluents from creosote and pentachloro-
phenol treatments.  These compounds can be destroyed by chemical  oxida-
tion.  Oxidizing agents that have been successfully used  for this pur-
pose are chlorine and ozone.

Chlorine - Many references to the chlorination of phenol-bearing waters
exist in the literature (103, 104, 105).  Chlorine gas  and calcium and
sodium hypochlorite have been used most extensively for this purpose.
Direct treatment with gaseous chlorine using a continuous-flow system
is simpler and less expensive than hypochlorite where large volumes  of
wastewater must be treated.  However, for batch-type treatments involv-
ing small wastewater volumes, hypochlorite is probably  the more practical.

Chlorine dioxide may also be used to oxidize phenols.  It has the advan-
tage over other sources of chlorine of short reaction time, does  not re-
quire close control of pH and temperature, does not produce chlorophenols,
                                223

-------
    45





    40




    35




    30
  -25


ho  0>
£  E
*» ••-'
   *-20
   O

  U  15

   O
   c
   0)

  £  10
            JAN   FEB  MAR  APR   MAY JUNE  JULY  AUG  SEPT  OCT   NOV

                                           Month


         FIGURE 41  - PHENOL CONTENT  IN WEYERHAEUSER1S OXIDATION  POND EFFLUENT
                    BEFORE AND AFTER INSTALLATION IN JUNE,  1966 OF AERATOR
DEC

-------
DRAFT
 TABLE 63  AVERAGE MONTHLY  PHENOL AND  BOD  CONCENTRATIONS IN EFFLUENT
           FROM OXIDATION POND AT WEYERHAEUSER1S DEQUEEN,
              ARKANSAS  OPERATIONS:   1968 and  1970  (100)
(mg/liter)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
1968
Phenol
26
27
25
11
-6
5
7
7
7
16
7
11

BOD
290
235
190'
150
100
70
90
70
no
150
155
205
1970
Phenol
7
9
6
3
1
1
1
1
1
—
--
__

BOD
95
140
155
95
80
60
35
45
25
—
—
__
                                225

-------
DRAFT
and is effective  at  ratios  of  chlorine to phenol of 1:1 or 2:1.   Its
primary disadvantages  are its  lack of stability, which requires  that
it be produced  as used,  and its  relatively high cost (30).

The theoretical ratio  of chlorine to phenol required for complete oxi-
dation is  about 6:1.   For m-cresol the ratio is 3.84:1  (106).   However,
because of the  presence  in  wastewater of other chlorine-consuming com-
pounds, much higher  ratios  are required.  Thompson and Dust (107) found
that the minimum  concentration of calcium hypochlorite needed  to destroy
all phenols in  creosote  wastewater was equivalent to a chlorine:phenol
ratio of 14:1 to  65:1.   The exact ratio varied with the pH, COD content,
and source  of the wastewater.  Comparable ratios for pentachlorophenol
ranged as  high  as 300:1  when calcium hypochlorite was used to  700:1  for
chlorine gas.   Generally, approximately two times as much gaseous chlor-
ine was required  to oxidize a given weight of pentachlorophenol  as
chlorine from calcium  hypochlorite.

In other work,  Dust and  Thompson     analyzed wastewater samples for COD,
phenol, and pentachlorophenol content following chlorination with quanti-
ties of calcium hypochlorite equivalent to 0 to 3.0 g/liter of chlorine.
Typical results are shown in Table 64.  Treatment of creosote  wastewater
achieved a  reduction in  phenol content of 95 to 100 percent, as  deter-
mined by procedures recommended by APHA (108)(NOTE:  This qualification
is necessary, since the  4-amino antipyrine test for phenols does not
detect all chlorinated phenols and cresols.).  However, as illustrated
in Table 64, a  residual  phenol content of 5 to 10 mg/liter that  was  re-
sistant to oxidation remained in some samples.  Substantial reductions
in COD were also  obtained by the treatments.  However,  practically all
of the reduction  in COD  occurred at chlorine doses of 2 g/liter  or less.

  TABLE 64  EFFECT OF CHLORINATION ON THE COD AND PHENOLIC CONTENT
            OF  PENTACHLOROPHENOL AND CREOSOTE WASTEWATERS
Ca(OCl)2 as
Chlorine
(g/liter)
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
PCP Wastewater
(mg/liter)
COD
—
8150
7970
8150
7730
7430
PCP
40.7
17.3
13.1
12.0
10.4
0
Creosote Wastewater
(mg/liter)
COD
5200
4800
4420
4380
4240
3760
Phenol
223.1
134.6
65.3
15.4
10.0
5.4
                                226

-------
DRAFT


In the same study, both chlorine gas  and  calcium  hypochlorite were used
to treat pentachlorophenol  wastewater adjusted  to pH levels of 4.5, 7.0,
and 9.5.  The results,  which are summarized  In  Tables 65 and 66, showed
that the efficiency of the  treatments, in terms of the  ratio of weight
of chlorine used to weight  of pentachlorophenol removed, varied with  the
pH of the wastewater, the source of chlorine, and whether or not the
waste was flocculated prior to chlorination.

A large proportion of the chlorine added  to  the wastewater in the above
studies was consumed in oxidizing organic materials other than phenolic
compounds.  This is indicated by the  major reductions in COD that occurred
coincident to the chlorination treatments.   For unflocculated waste,  the
COD averaged 24,000 mg/liter before and 10,300  mg/liter after treatment
with calcium hypochlorite,  a reduction of 58 percent (Table 67).  The
comparable reduction for samples treated  with chlorine  gas was 55 percent.
These reductions were obtained at the maximum dose of chlorine employed;
that is, 5 g/liter for calcium hypochlorite  and 10 g/liter for chlorine
gas.  However, practically  all of the reduction in COD  occurred at chlor-
ine doses of 1 g/liter or less, in the case  of  samples  treated with the
hypochlorite, and 2 g/liter or less for those treated with chlorine gas.
For example, a typical  sample of raw  waste treated with chlorine gas  had
an initial COD of 20,400 mg/liter.  This  value  was reduced to 10,250
mg/liter by a chlorine dose of 2 g/liter. The  addition of 10 g/liter of
chlorine further reduced the COD only to  10,200 mg/liter.  These data in-
dicate that a portion of the organic  content of the wastewater was re-
sistant to chemical oxidation.

The reduction in COD caused by chlorination  of  raw wastewater was prac-
tically the same as that achieved by  flocculation with  lime and a poly-
electrolyte.

Chlorination of phenol-bearing waters has long  been associated with odor
and taste problems in municipal water supplies.  Phenol itself apparently
does not impart taste to water in concentrations  below  about 60 mg/liter.
Its significance as a taste and odor problem arises from its reaction
with chlorine to produce chlorophenols.  Some of  the latter group of
chemicals are reported to impart taste in concentrations as low as 0.00001
mg/liter (109).

Ingols and Ridenour (110) postulated that a  quinone-like substance was
responsible for the taste and odor problem of chlorinated water, and  that
this substance was an intermediate product in a succession of chlorinated
products produced by chlorine treatments  of  phenol. A  ratio of 5 to  6
grams of chlorine per gram  of phenol  was  found  to eliminate the taste
problem.  They hypothesized from this result that high  levels of chlori-
nation rupture the benzene  ring to form maleic  acid.
                                227

-------
DRAFT
     TABLE 65  EFFECT OF CHLORINATION WITH CALCIUM HYPOCHLORITE
           ON THE PENTACHLOROPHENOL CONTENT OF WASTEWATER
Ca(OC1)2 as
Chlorine
(g/liter)
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
TABLE 66
THE
Unflocculated
pH
4.5 7.0 9.5
21.5 19.0 20.5
10.0 14.0 10.0
8.0 10.0 8.0
6.0 8.0 8.0
6.0 7.5 8.0
3.5 6.0 5.0
2.0 6.0 4.0
2.0 5.8 4.0
EFFECT OF CHLORINATION WITH
PENTACHLOROPHENOL CONTENT OF

4.5
12.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0
0
0
0
Flocculated
pH
7.0
12.0
9.0
8.0
5.0
3.6
0
0
0

9.5
14.0
11.0
9.0
6.0
7.0
4.0
0
0
CHLORINE GAS ON
WASTEWATER
Pentachlorophenol (mq/liter)
Chlorine
(g/liter)
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
10.0
UnflocculatGd
pH
4.5 7.0 9.5
22.0 20.0 18.0
13.0 14.0 16.0
10.0 12.5 15.0
9.0 9.0 11.5
8.0 8.0 11.5
8.0 8.0 8.0
10.0 8.0 11.0
14.0 11.5 12.0
14.0 11.5 14.0

4.5
18.0
16.0
14.0
10.0
8.0
7.5
2.0
0
0
Flocculated
pH
7.0
17.0
14.0
13.0
14.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
2.0
2.0

9,5
19.5
16.5
11.0
11.0
8.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
                                228

-------
DRAFT





TABLE 67  EFFECT OF CHLORINATION OF PENTACHLOROPHENOL WASTE ON COD
Test Conditions
Calcium Hypochlorite
pH = 4.5






Calcium Hypochlorite
pH = 7.0







Chlorine Gas
pH = 4.5







Chlorine Gas
pH = 7.0







Available Chlorine
(g/liter)
0.0
Oo5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0

0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
10.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
10.0
COD
(mg/ liter)
24,200

10,650

10,600

10,300


23,800

10,300

10,200


10,050
20,400



10,250

10,600

10,200
23,600



9,760

10,700

11.250
                                 229

-------
DRAFT


Later studies by Ettinger  and Ruchoft  (111) largely substantiated earlier
work which showed that  taste intensity increases with chlorine dosage and
then decreases with  further chlorination, until no taste remains.  Re-
sults of work by these  authors on the chlorination of various phenolic
compounds and the quantities of chlorine required to eliminate taste are
given in Table 68.   These  data indicate that a chlorine-to-phenol ratio
of 5:1 would be adequate to form chlorination end products.   Work re-
ported by others (106)  show that for m-cresol this ratio is  3.84:1.   A
ratio of 5:1 resulted in a free chlorine residual after a reaction time
of 2 hours.

More recent work by  the Manufacturing Chemists Association (105)  shows
that the reaction between  chlorine and phenolic compounds proceeds at a
rapid rate for the first 15 minutes and is essentially complete after 2
hours contact time.  For concentrations of m-cresol of 10 and 20  mg/liter,
the application of 50 and  100 mg/liter of chlorine produced  a free chlo-
rine residual after  2 hours.  A residual chlorine content after 2 hours
contact time was obtained  for phenol only when chlorine was  applied at
ten times the level  of phenol.  The relationship among m-cresol concen-
tration, chlorine dosage,  contact time, and chlorine residual is  shown
in Table 69.

In related studies,  phenol in concentrations of 25 mg/liter  was treated
with levels of chlorine calculated to provide an excess of phenol.  Gas
chromatographic analyses of samples withdrawn after a contact time of
0.5 hour revealed the presence of 0-chlorophenol, p-chlorophenol, 2,6,
dichlorophenol, 2,4  dichlorophenol, and 2,4,6 trichlorophenol. Similar
tests with m-cresol  showed the formation of a number of reaction  products,
which were assumed to be a mixture of chloro-m-cresols.  Positive identi-
fication was not made because chlorine-substituted cresols for use as
standards are not available commercially.

The authors proposed that  the reaction proceeds in part sequentially by
the stepwise substitution  of the 2,4, and 6 ring positions,  and in part
simultaneously, resulting  in the formation of a complex mixture of chloro-
phenols and their oxidations products.  Ring oxidation was assumed to
follow the formation of 2,4,6 trichlorophenol.  Other authors have postu-
lated that the reaction proceeds only by a stepwise substitution  (111,
112).

Burttschell's work (112) indicated that the progression of chlorinated
products occurs as follows:

     Phenol
     2-Chlorophenol
     4-Chlorophenol
     2,4-Dichlorophenol
     2,6-Oichlorophenol
     2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
     4,4-Dichloroquinone
     Organic Acids
                                 230

-------
 DRAFT
      TABLE 68  CHLORINE REQUIRED TO ELIMINATE TASTE IN AQUEOUS
            SOLUTIONS OF VARIOUS PHENOLIC COMPOUNDS (111)

Phenol
0-Cresol
M-Cresol
P-Cresol
1-Napthol
2-Chlorophenol
4-Chlorophenol
2-, 4-Dichlorophenol
2-, 4-, 6-Trichloro-
Chlon'ne Required To
Eliminate Taste
(mg/1 )
4
5
5
3
4
3
3
2
Could not be tasted
Chlorine Added
To Produce Free
Residual (mg/1)
7
5
5
4
5
5
6
6
3









   phenol
2-, 4-, 5-Tr1chloro-
   phenol
2-, 3-, 4-, 6-Tetra-
   chlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Could not be tasted

Could not be tasted
Could not be tasted
1.5
1.0
                                231

-------
DRAFT






TABLE 69  CHLORINE DEMAND OF M-CRESOL AFTER VARIOUS CONTACT TIMES  (106)
Net Chlorine
m-Cresol
Concentration
(ma/1 )

10



10



10



20



20

Contact
Chlorine Time
(mg/1 ) (hr)
0.25
20 °'5
1.0
2.0
0.25
50 °°5
1.0
2.0
0.25
100 °'5
1.0
2.0
0.25
50 °°5
1.0
2.0
0.25
100 ?:§
2.0
Chlorine
Residual
(mg/1 )
3.3
1.5
0.5
0.2
30.8
30.8
28.3
17.0
81.4
77.0
61.6
61.6
16.3
11.1
8.0
8.0
61.6
58.2
56.6
46.0

mg/1
16.7
18.5
19.5
19.8
19.2
19.2
21.7
33.0
18.6
23.0
38.4
38.4
33.7
38.9
42.0
42.0
38.4
41.8
43.4
54.0
Demand
m mol cl2
m mol m-Cresol
2.5
2.8
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.9
3.3
5.0
2.8
3.5
5.9
5.9
2.6
3.0
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.2
3.3
4.1
                                232

-------
 DRAFT
 Destruction of the benzene ring was found to occur at a chlorine-to-phenol
 ratio of 10:1.  Burttschell attributed the taste problem associated with
 chlorophenols to 2,6-dichlorophenol.  The development of taste was re-
 ported not to occur at pH values of less than 7.0.

 Results of a study by Eisenhauer (113) supported earlier work of other
 investigators that non-aromatic products are formed when phenols are
 treated with high levels of chlorine.

 Oxidation products resulting from the chlorination of pentachlorophenol
 have not been studied intensively.  However, Thompson and Dust (107) re-
 ported the presence of chloranil in samples of chlorinated wastewater
 analyzed using a gas chromatograph.

 With the exception of the last reference cited, the studies described in
 the foregoing paragraphs have dealt with phenolic compounds in solutions
 not contaminated with other substances.  Because of other chlorine-con-
 suming materials in wood preserving wastewater, a question arises con-
 cerning the levels of chlorine required to fully oxidize phenols in such
wastes.  Unpublished results of a recent study (1970) at the Mississippi
 Forest Products Laboratory provides a partial answer.

 Creosote wastewater with phenol and COD contents of 508 and 13,500 mg/
 liter, respectively, were flocculated and samples of the filtrate ad-
justed to pH values of 4.5, 7.0, and 9.5.  The samples were treated with
quantities of calcium hypochlorite calculated to yield a gradient series
of chlorine concentrations.  The pH readings of the samples were adjusted
 to the original values after a contact period of 30 minutes.  After 8
 hours, the samples were filtered, analyzed for phenols by the 4-amino-
 antipyrine method, and then analyzed for di- and tri-chlorophenols using
an electron capture detector.  Chloro-cresols and other chlorophenols
were not included because reagent-grade materials for use as standards
could not be found.  The results are given in Table 70.

Trichlorophenol was present in all samples, but the concentration de-
creased rapidly with increasing levels of chlorine.  However, traces
remained in samples treated with the highest levels of chlorine.  The
rate of oxidation was highest at pH 4.5 and decreased with increasing
alkalinity, although the difference between pH 7.0 and 9.5 was not great.
The relationship between results of the APHA test for phenols and levels
of chlorophenols determined using an electron capture detector was gen-
erally poor at low chlorine levels.  However, low values for the APHA
test always corresponded with low concentrations of chlorophenols.

Ozone Treatments -  Ozone is a powerful oxidizing agent, but its employ-
ment in waste treatment is a relatively recent development.   Its princi-
pal  disadvantages are its lack of stability, which requires  that it be
produced as used, and its high cost both in terms of capital  investment
                                233

-------
DRAFT
     TABLE 70  CHLOROPHENOL CONCENTRATION IN CREOSOTE WASTEWATER
                        TREATED WITH CHLORINE

PH

4.5





7.0





9.5





Ca(OCl)2
As Chlorine
(g/1)
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
5.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
5.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
3.0
5.0
Residual
Phenols (mg/1)
by
APHA Method
438.5
256.1
30.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
300.0
101.5
7.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
315.4
101.5
11.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
ECD Analysis
2-, 4-dichloro-
phenol
—
161.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
122.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
198.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
(mg/1 )
2-, 4-, 6-tri-
chlorophenol
—
910.0
6.7
1.5
1.0
0.3
0.3
316.0
35.0
6.4
2.8
1.5
1.3
264.0
27.0
25.0
3.7
3.8
1.9
                                234

-------
DRAFT
in equipment and operating costs,  The major cost of producing  ozone is
electricity.  It requires 19.8 kwh of electricity to produce one kilogram
of ozone with air feed to the generating equipment and 9.9 kwh  with oxy-
gen feed (96),  The high initial cost of ozonation is offset in part by
the fact that the equipment has a useful life expectancy of 25  years (114).

Treatment of wastewater with ozone may be either by batch or continuous
flow methods.  Ozone reacts rapidly with phenols at all pH levels, but
the optimum pH observed by Niegowski (114, 115) was 12,0.  Ozone demand
at pH 12 was less than one-half that at pH 7 in treating petroleum waste-
waters.  However, the difference in demand was manifested only  in oxi-
dizing the last 30 percent of the phenol in the waste.  During  two-thirds
of the oxidation, the reaction was so rapid that pH had very little effect.

A ratio of ozone:phenol of about 2:1 normally is required to destroy the
phenols in a solution.  However, ratios as low as 1:1 and as high as 10:1
were reported by Niegowski (114) for wastewaters from different sources.
According to Gloyna and Malina (116), only about one-tenth as much ozone
is required as chlorine to oxidize the same amount of phenol.

Because of its high energy requirements and the resulting high  operating
costs, ozonation does not lend itself to the treatment of wood  preserving
wastewaters, and hence will not be considered further in this report.

Activated Carbon Filtration - Activated carbon is used commercially to
treat petroleum (117) and other types (118) of industrial wastewaters.
It can also be used effectively to remove phenolic compounds from wood
preserving waste streams.  Although carbon has a strong affinity for non-
polar compounds such as phenols, adsorption is not limited to these ma-
terials.  Other organic materials in wastewater are also adsorbed, result-
ing in a decrease in the total oxygen demand of the waste.  Because the
concentration of the latter substances exceeds that of phenols  in efflu-
ents from wood preserving plants, the useful life of activated  carbon is
determined by the concentration of these materials and the rate at which
they are adsorbed.

Results of carbon-adsorption studies conducted by Dust and Thompson (25)
on a creosote wastewater are shown in Figure 42.  Granular carbon was
used and the contact time was 24 hours.  The wastewater was flocculated
with ferric chloride and its pH adjusted to 4.0 prior to exposure to the
carbon.  As shown in the figure, 96 percent of the phenols and  80 percent
of the COD were removed from the wastewater at a carbon dosage  of 8 g/liter.
The loading rate dropped off sharply at that point, and no further in-
creases in phenol removal and only small increases in COD removal occur-
red by increasing carbon dosage to 50 g/liter.  Similar results were ob-
tained in tests using pentachlorophenol wastewater.

Results of adsorption isotherms that were run on pentachlorophenol  waste-
water, and other samples of creosote wastewater followed a pattern similar
                                235

-------
    100
    80
ra

5

0)
oc
0>
.c
Q.

TJ
C
CO

Q

O
u
                10        2O        30        40


                  Activated Carbon (gm / liter)
                                      50
  FIGURE  42 (25)  -
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WEIGHT  OF ACTIVATED

CARBON ADDED AND REMOVAL  OF  COD AND PHENOLS
FROM A CREOSOTE WASTEWATER           ™hNOL5
                          236

-------
 DRAFT
 to  that shown in Figure 42,  In some instances a residual  content of
 phenolic compounds remained in wastewater after a contact period of
 24  hours with the highest dosage of activated carbon employed, while
 in  other instances all of the phenols were removed.  Loading rates of
 0.16  kilograms of phenol and 1.2 kilograms of COD per kilogram of car-
 bon were typical, but much lower rates were obtained with some waste-
 waters .

 Other Waste Handling Methods

 Containment and Spray_Ev^apoj^ajtigji - Forty-two percent of the plants re-
 sponding to the survey referrecTto in Section V indicated that they cur-
 rently are storing their wastewater on company property, and therefore
 have  no discharge (Table 45).  The popularity of this method of waste
 handling undoubtedly is attributable to its low cost, in the case of
 plants with ample land area, and its simplicity.  The practicality of
 the method is questionable in areas of high rainfall and low evapora-
 tion  rate, unless the rate of evaporation is increased by the applica-
 tion  of heat or by spraying.  The latter alternative is being employed
 by  a  number of plants in the Gulf South.

 The use of spray ponds to dispose of wastewater by evaporation requires
 that  a diked pond of sufficient capacity to balance annual  rainfall and
 evaporation be constructed.  The pond is normally equipped with a pump
 and the number of spray nozzles necessary to deliver to the air the
 volume of water calculated to provide the desired amount of evaporation,
 assuming a given evaporation efficiency.

 The feasibility of spray evaporation depends upon the availability of a
 land  area of such size that a pond large enough to permit a balance be-
 tween inflow and evaporation can be constructed.  Pond size and number
 of  spray heads are determined by waste volume and the ratio of rainfall
 to  surface evaporation.  Where rainfall  and evaporation in a region are
 approximately equal, the effect of both  can be neglected,  if sufficient
 storage capacity is provided.  For areas with higher annual rainfall or
 lower evaporation rate, the design of a  spray evaporation  system must
 account for a net annual  increase in water volume in the pond due to
 rainfall.

 Pan Evaporation^ - A few plants with small  volumes of wastewater are evap-
orating it directly by application of heat.  Basically, the procedure in-
 volved is  to channel  the effluent from the oil-separation  system into an
open  vat equipped with steam coils.  The water is then vaporized by boil-
 ing,  or, as in one instance, heated to approximately 71°C  (160°F) and the
 rate of evaporation increased by circulation of air across  the surface
of  the water.   The method is expensive,  fuel cost alone amounting to an
estimated  $8 00 per 3,785 liters (1000 gallons).  This estimate is based
on using natural  gas as fuel  and assumes an overall  efficiency of 65 per-
cent  for the process.
                                 237

-------
 DRAFT
 Evaporation In Cooling Towers - In this  process, effluent from the oil-
 separation system is discharged to the basin  of a cooling tower and re-
 used as cooling water.  Normal  evaporation  associated with the operation
 of the tower accounts for an average loss of  approximately 7,570 Ipd
 (2000 gpd) for a typical  tower.  Evaporation  of excess water is expedited
 by the intermittent operation of a heat  exchanger or other heating system
 in conjunction with a fan.  The efficiency  of the condensers, both tube-
 type and barometric, are reported to be  unaffected by water temperatures
 of up to 38°C (100°F) and by light oils  that  accumulate in the water.
 The owner of one plant stated that oil concentrations as high as 10 per-
 cent could be tolerated in the  cooling water.   However, problems with
 condenser efficiency were reported at another plant in which the oil con-
 tent of the process water used  for cooling  was  less than 100 mg/liter.

 Incineration - Two plants in the U.S.  are known to operate incinerators
 for wastewater disposal.   The one plant  for which data are available
 currently operates a unit capable of "burning"  5,676 liters (1500 gal)
 of wastewater per hour.   Fuel cost alone for  this unit, which is fired
 with Bunker C oil, is $15.00 per 3,785 liters  (1000 gal) of waste.

 Data reported by the American Wood Preservers' Association (48) indicate
 that incineration of wastewater is economical only when the oil content
 of the waste is  10 percent or higher.  Such high oil contents are not
 common for wastewater from the  wood preserving  industry.

 General  Information

 Required Implementation Time -  Because of the relatively small  volume of
wastewater at most wood preserving plants,  "off-the-shelf" equipment
 should ordinarily meet the requirements  of  the individual  plants with re-
 gard to the application of treatment technology required to be achieved
 by  July 1,  1977  and July  1,  1983,  respectively.  It is not anticipated,
 therefore,  that  either equipment availability, or (because of the sim-
 plicity of the equipment)  availability of construction manpower will ser-
 iously affect implementation time.   For  the same reason, it is not antic-
 ipated that the  time  required to construct  new treating facilities or
modify existing  ones  will  affect implementation time for any of the treat-
ment and  control  technologies that are likely to be employed in the indus-
 try.

Land availability will influence  the choice of treatment and control tech-
nology at many wood preserving  plants located in urban areas.   For example,
the  employment of oxidation  ponds,  soil  irrigation, and possible aerated
lagoons will  not  be  feasible in  areas where all company land is in use
and  additional acreage cannot be  purchased  at a reasonable price.   Plants
thus  located will  have to  select  extended aeration  or other treating
methods, the  land requirements  of which  conform to  the space that is
available.
                                238

-------
 DRAFT


 Effect Of Treatment Technology  On  Other Pollution Problems - None of the
 treatment and control  technologies that are currently feasible for use
 in the wood preserving industry will  have  an effect on other pollution
 problems.
                                                              i
 Solid Waste - Solid wastes resulting from treatment and control tech-
 nologies that have potential  use in the wood preserving industry are of
 two types:  sludge from coagulation of wastewater and bacterial sludges
 originating from biological treatments.  The former material contains
 oil and dissolved phenolic compounds  originally in the preservative,
 along with the flocculating compound  used.  In the case of water-soluble
 preservatives, the sludge will  contain  traces of the metals used in the
 particular preservative or fire retardant  formulation involved.  Bacter-
 ial sludges contain the biomass from  biological treatments, but are of
 importance from the standpoint  of  disposal only in the case of treatments
 that employ activated  sludge  and trickling filter units.

 The volume of sludge involved with  both  types is small.  Plants currently
 are disposing of these  materials in sanitary landfills.  Incineration of
 organic waste and burial of inorganic salts are possible disposal methods
 that could be used.

 Plant Visits

 A  number of wood preserving plants judged to be exemplary in terms of
 their waste management  programs were visited in conjunction with this
 study.   Selection  of plants for visits was based on the type of waste-
 water treating and/or disposal system employed and, insofar as possible,
 geographic location.  Plants  that dispose of their raw waste by discharg-
 ing it to a sewer,  as well as those that simply store their waste on  site,
 were  not represented among the plants visited.   Exclusion of these plants
 limited the number considered for a visit to the approximately 30 plants
 in  the  U.S. that either give  their waste the equivalent of a secondary
 treatment before discharging it, or which have no discharge.   Only four
 of  this  number were found both to treat their waste on site and discharge
 it  directly to a stream.  The remainder either channel  their treated water
 to  an  irrigation field or to a sewer, or have no discharge due to reuse
 of wastewater, evaporation, or both.

 Plant  visits were  used to obtain samples, the analyses of which  permitted
 an evaluation of the efficiency of the wastewater treating system employ-
 ed.  Performance data provided by the plants  themselves were  used in  this
 evaluation when available.   Information was also obtained on  flow rate,
 annual production, and other parameters needed  for the development of ef-
 fluent guidelines.  Cost data  on wastewater treating  systems were requested
of all plants and provided by  some.
                                239

-------
DRAFT
A summary of the data obtained for each plant visited is  presented  in
Table 71.  Flow diagrams illustrating waste treatment systems  employ-
ing extended aeration, soil percolation, and combination  aerated lagoon
and oxidation pond are shown in Figures 43, 44, and 45,  respectively.

Detailed data on each plant are given in Supplement B.
                                 240

-------
   OR.
ro
                   TABLE 71  SUMMARY OF WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS FOR 17 EXEMPLARY WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS
Plant
No.
1
2*
3
4*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Average
Phenol
(mg/1)
6.00
0
0.50
35.96
—
—
3.30
0.40
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
2.50
2.50
COD
(mg/1)
845
10
10
1695
—
—
523
435
--
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
240
240
Oil And
Grease
(mg/1)
7
7
0
83
—
—
55
158
—
—
~
--
—
—
—
—
12
46
Suspended
Solids
(mg/1 )
100
253
60
724
—
—
103
270
—
—
--
—
--
—
—
—
82
123
Volume
of
Ef fl uent
(Ipd)
73,800
49,200
49,200
34,100
3,800
34,100
567,800
98,400
15,100
22,700
49,200
18,900
4,700
9,500
7,600
19,700
63,200
34,600
Volume
of
Discharge
(Ipd)
0
0
0
0
0
0
492,100
87,100
0
0
49,200
0
0
0
0
0
63.200
—
Daily
Produc-
tion
(m3)
283
283
266
436
210
403
708
425
178
204
93
210
62
125
34
190
223
255
Cost
($)
42,000
90,000
30,000
17,000
40,000
25,000
85,000
46,000
38,000
85,000
—
120,000
5,500
6,000
50,000
39,000
__
47,900
Fi nal
Disposition
of
Waste
Sewer
Field
Field
Field
Field
Field
Stream
Stream
Pond
Evaporated
Ditch
Evaporated
Evaporated
Evaporated
Evaporated
Sewer
Stream

            *Data not included in average.

-------
           Cool. Pond
           Overflow
               Boiler
               Blow
               Down
Back
Wash!
                    .11
Condenser
Drain
Tanks (3)
Solvent
Tank
Pit
                                                Pumps (3)
Cylinder Pit
Treating Room
OH Drips


Cylinder Vent
    And
 Slowdown
                    To Ditch
            _T
            Separator ft
             Decanter
IN)
L
                                   Flow Splitter
             Equalizing  Tank
                                                 Chlorinator
                                             Duplex Ext. Aer. Tank Clar.
                                             Weir A Sludge Return
                               Control Valv
                               @10GPM

                               Nutrient Feed r
                                      Irrigation
                                      Field
1/4 Acre
1/4 Acre
Lagoon
i
I
Lagoon

1/3 Acre
Lagoon

                                                                     O
          FIGURE  43  -
               AM           FLOW  DIAGRAM FOR WOOD-PRESERVING PLANT EMPLOYING
               AN EXTENDED AERATION  WASTE  TREATMENT  SYSTEM IN CONJUNCTION
               WITH  HOLDING LAGOONS  AND SOIL IRRIGATION

-------
ro
4^
to
       Penta

       Storage
       Tanlc
                            IE
                           -*"*•
Transfer
Pump
                                   2,000 Gals.
          5,500 Gals.
                                    1,000 Gals.
                                                  ffl
                                               -»—X-
        Gravlmetric Penta
        Separation Tank
                                                                                 Pit    S~\
                                                                                 Pump  v^x
                                  -IX-
                                          (B
                                                                i( Suet ion
                                                                 (Pressure!
                                                                  '
Steaming  Water
Transfer Pump
n ' _ JT 	
n n
Barometric Float Control Valve ,-—
ftTttrcVoling &!'°pen) SP™PP©
Pond f 11 SI Skimmer

Chemical I'ciar" J ff
Mixing TankLjS^^gi -
OH ft Sludge*\^y
Separation Tank
(Normal Open)
lllfm?1 " Wormain 	 fl
^"•"P ^blosed) II l|
.VL 	 fine park Filter
|-f-|| ». T— — ffl»«<3« Tff
ytu n ' ' nLand"n"
j n — . — n

Sludge Oewaterlng Bed (| 	
I*
Holding
-n B3


Tank Transfer
Pump
(Normal ,
Closed)
Sprays
A A A A A '
Soil Percolation
Field
        FIGURE  44  -  WASTEWATER FLOW  DIAGRAM FOR WOOD-PRESERVING  PLANT  EMPLOYING
                      CHEMICAL FLOCCULATION,  SAND FILTRATION,  AND  SOIL IRRIGATION
                                                                                 To Stream

-------
                                     To PCP
                                     Recovery
                PCP
ro
                                                                                                        Secondary PCP
                                                                                                        A Creo. Separation
                                                       PCP  Separation
                                                            Tank
                                        Catch   Pond
                                    Overflow and Run-olf Water
                                                                              Creo./    /
                                                                                Effluent
                                                Light Oil
                                                Recover
                                                                     Creo.
                                                                      Dehydration
                                                                      Tank
                                                 Creo. 5eparationa
To Creo.
Recovery
                                To PCP
                                Recovery
                                                    Holding Ponds

                                                   Final  Separation
            Emergency Catch

                Pond
D                                                                                         Effluent
                                                                                         Pump
                                                                   Mixing
                                                                   Chamber
                               Recycle fump—..yj f


                                Race  Track -**"
                                                                     FIGURE  45
                                            WASTEWATER FLOW DIAGRAM FOR
                                            A  WOOD-PRESERVING  PLANT EM-
                                            PLOYING AN OXIDATION POND  IN
                                            CONJUNCTION WITH AN AERATED
                                            RACEWAY

-------
DRAFT
                         SECTION VIII

         COST, ENERGY, AND NON'-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS


PART A:  VENEER AND PLYWOOD

Cost And Reduction Benefits of Alternative Treatment And
Control Technologies For Selected Typical Plant

A detailed analysis of the costs and pollution reduction
benefits of alternative treatment and control technologies
applicable to the veneer and plywood industry is given in
Supplement A of this document.  The typical veneer and ply-
wood mill chosen as a basis for cost estimates is a mill
producing 9.3 million square meters on a 9.53 millimeter
basis (100 million square feet on a three-eighths inch
basis) per year.  It is assumed to have the following:

         (1)  Wet decking of logs without recycle;
         (2)  Log conditioning by means of hot water
              vats with discharge due to direct steam
              impingement;
         (3)  No containment of dryer washwater;
         (4)  A phenolic glue line without recycle
              or reuse of washwater.

Table 72 summarizes waste loads from each treatment and con-
trol alternative.
                          TABLE 72

    SUMMARY OF WASTE LOADS FROM TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Effluent              Raw
Constituent          Waste
Parameters   Units   Loads
                          Resulting Effluent
                                Levels
                          BCD
 BOD
 COD
 SS
 TS
 Phenols
 Kjld-N
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
 558
1174
 363
1109
0.25
4.14
558
1174
363
1109
0.25
4.14
481
1000
378
1000
0.09
3.8
411
1000
378
1000
0.09
3.8
2.7
19
11
19
0.004
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
                             245

-------
DRAFT


Alternative A:  No Waste Treatment"Or Control

Effluent waste load  is  estimated at 560 kilograms (1230
pounds) per day for  the selected typical plant.

          Costs:  None
          Reduction  Benefits:  None

Alternative B:  Complete Retention of Glue Washwater

This alternative includes complete retention of glue wastes
by recycle and reuse  in glue preparation.  This practice has
now become standard  in  the  industry although four years ago
only one mill practiced complete recycle.  Effluent waste
load is estimated at  481 kilograms (1060 pounds) per day for
the selected typical  plant  at this control level.  In addi-
tion, 73 percent of  the phenol load is removed.

          Costs:  Incremental costs are approximately
                  $17,500 over Alternative A, thus
                  total costs are $17,500.
          Reduction  Benefits:  An incremental reduction
                  in  plant  BOD is approximately 77 kilo-
                  grams (170 pounds) per day.  Total
                  plant reduction in BOD would be 13.8
                  percent.

Alternative C:  Complete Retention of Wet Decking Wastewater

This alternative includes complete retention of wet decking
wastewater by collection and recycle, but no control for
other wastes.  This  practice is a relatively new technology,
but it is currently  used in several mills.  Effluent waste
load is estimated at  409 kilograms (900 pounds) of BOD per
day for the selected typical plant at this control level.

          Costs:  Incremental costs are approximately
                  $39,000 over Alternative B, thus
                  total costs are $56,500.
          Reduction  Benefits:  An incremental reduction
                  in plant  BOD of-73 kilograms  (160 pounds)
                  is  evidenced when compared to Alter-
                  native B.  The total plant reduction in
                  BOD is 26.5 percent.

Alternative D:  Complete Retention'of Wastewater From Log
Conditioning

Alternative D would  result  in complete recycle of water from
hot water vats with  containment of excess wastewaters.  Modi-
fication of hot water vats  to provide heat by means of coils
                            246

-------
DRAFT
rather than direct steam impingement is assumed.  Effluent
waste load is estimated as three kilograms (six pounds) of
BOD per day for the selected typical plant at this control
level.

          Costs:  Incremental costs of approximately
                  $12,000 over Alternative C would be
                  incurred, thus producing total costs
                  of $68,500.
          Reduction Benefits:  An incremental reduction
                  in plant BOD of 406 kilograms (894
                  pounds) per day is evidenced when com-
                  pared to Alternative C.  Total plant
                  reduction in BOD is 99.5 percent.

Alternative E:  Complete Retention of Dryer Washwater

Alternative E would result in the complete retention of
dryer washwater.  Modification of washing operations to
reduce the volume of water used is assumed.  Effluent waste
load is estimated at zero kilograms (zero pounds)  of BOD
per day for the selected typical plant at this control level.
Complete control of wastes without discharge to receiving
waters is effected.

          Costs:  Investment costs of $5,000 to $10,000
                  over Alternative D would be incurred,
                  thus producing total costs of about
                  $76,000 ($74,000 to $79,000).
          Reduction Benefits:  An incremental reduction
                  in plant BOD of three kilograms  (six
                  pounds) per day is evidenced when com-
                  pared to Alternative D.  Total plant
                  reduction in BOD of 100 percent.

Mills With Existing Steam Vats

In Sections I, II, and IX of this report; it is mentioned
that special consideration is recommended for mills with
existing steam vats. Since there are a number of mills with
steam vats, it is felt that these should not be treated as
rare cases to be dealt with as the occasion arises.  In
Section VII, Treatment And Control Technology, it  is noted
that existing technology for treatment and control of waste-
waters from steam vats consists of biological treatment
which is capable of 85 to 90 percent removal of BOD.  Two
modifications of steam vats (modified steaming and hot water
sprays)  which make zero discharge feasible are also discussed
in Section VII.  It is evidenced, however, that these modi-
fications do not represent currently available technology
as defined by the "Act."
                            247

-------
DRAFT
As discussed  in Section VII, Control and Treatment
Technology, biological treatment  is applicable to waste-
watersFrom steam vats.  A  summary of costs and effluent
levels for biological treatment of wastewaters from mills
with existing steam vats is presented below.

     A system consisting of a vacuum separator
     followed by an aerated lagoon would cost
     approximately $81,000  for the selected
     typical mill utilizing a steam vat and
     would reduce the load  to around 41 kilo-
     grams (90 pounds) of BOD per day.

     An activated sludge plant may result in
     slightly higher BOD removals for a cost of
     about $138,000 and a resulting BOD load of
     about 20 kilograms (45 pounds) of BOD per
     day for the selected typical mill.

Related Energy Requirements of Alternative Treatment and
Control Technology

It is estimated that 180 kilowatt-hours of electricity are
required to produce 93 square meters (1000 square feet)
of plywood (119) .  This electrical energy demand is affected
by the following factors:   (1) type of wood, (2) whether or
not logs are conditioned, (3) type of dryer, (4) amount of
lighting, and (5) pollution control devices.

For a typical mill producing 9.3 million square meters (100 mil-
lion square feet) of plywood per year on a 9.53 millimeter
(three-eighths inch) basis, total energy demand is estimated at
4500 kilowatts (119) .  At a cost of-one cent per kilowatt-
hour, the plant would have a yearly energy cost of $180,000.
Associated with the control alternatives are annual energy
costs.  These are estimated to be:

     For Alternative A:  $0
     For Alternative B:  $800
     For Alternative C:  $2,100
     For Alternative D:  $2,200
     For Alternative E:  $2,300

Non-Water Quality Aspects'Of Alternative Treatment And
Control Technology

Air Pollution:  While there are no appreciable air pollution
problems associated with any of the treatment and control alter-
natives, in the veneer and plywood industry there are air pol-
lution problems presently in existence that may cause water
                            248

-------
DRAFT


pollution problems.  The two main sources of air pollution
are from veneer dryers and from the hog boiler (bark boiler).

Associated with each are different pollutional problems of
significance.  Stack gases from the dryers contain volatile
organics and those from the boiler contain suspended particu-
late matter.

Veneer Dryers:   Since there are currently no emission control
systems installed on any plywood veneer dryers, it is not pos-
sible to cite typical applications or technology.  There are,
of course, method's operating on similar processes which would
be suitable and applicable for controlling emissions from
veneer dryers.

If particulate emissions were excessive, they could be ade-
quately controlled utilizing inertial collectors of the
cyclone or mechanical type.  Volatile and condensable hydro-
carbon emissions could be effectively controlled by one of
the several following methods:

          (1)  Condensation, utilizing tube con-
               densers with air or water for cooling.
          (2)  Absorption (scrubbing) , utilizing
               water or a selective solvent.
          (3)  Incineration or thermal oxidation.
          (4)  Adsorption
          (5)  A combination of the above.

The water pollution potential of these-control'methods is
not great.  Only condensation-and scrubbing use water.  Water
used in condensation is only cooling water and is, therefore,
not contaminated, while the most efficient scrubber appears
to be that using a selective solvent rather than water for
absorption.

Boiler:  The emissions from hogged fuel boilers consist of
flyash particulates.  Both the sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide
gaseous concentrations are negligible.  While most hogged
fuel boilers are equipped with the multiple cyclone type of
centrifugal collectors, in most areas this solution is no
longer adequate because of increasingly stringent emissions
limitations.  The solution to the flyash emission problem
appears to depend on the use of wet scrubbers.

Such a control method creates a water pollution problem.  A
boiler generating 68,000 kilograms (150,000 pounds) per hour
of steam generates a flyash slurry wastewater of 190 liters
(50 gallons) per minute with a solids concentration of about
6,000 milligrams per liter (120).
                             249

-------
DRAFT
Odors:  Odors presently  associated with veneer'and plywood
are not considered a problem.   Since'the-control and treat-
ment technology of this  industry  is  greatly dependent on
containment ponds, there is  always the danger of ponds be-
coming anaerobic.  Frequently anaerobic ponds'will promote
growth of organisms which biochemically reduce compounds to
sulfur dioxide and other odor causing gases'T

Solid Waste;  The bulk of the solid  waste from veneer and
plywood mills is comprised of wood residues and bark.  These
wastes are commonly used as  fuel  in  the boiler.

In addition to wood wastes are  the settleable solids that
accumulate in ponds and  those that" are separated in screening
devices.  Disposal of this material  may be at the plant site
or the waste material may be collected by the local munici-
pality with disposal by  landfill.  While the amount of solids
generated is not expected to be great, consideration must be
given to a suitable site for landfill and, in turn, to pro-
tection of groundwater supplies from contamination by leach-
ates.
                            . 250

-------
DRAFT

                        SECTION VIII


PART B:  HARDBOARD

COST AND REDUCTION BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT
AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES FOR DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD

A detailed analysis of the costs and pollution reduction
benefits of alternative treatment and control technologies
applicable to the dry process hardboard industry is given
in Supplement A of this document.  The typical mill selec-
ted to represent the dry process hardboard industry has a
..production of 227 metric tons (250 tons) per day...  The waste-
water discharges result only from caul washing and cooling
water.  The basic results are summarized below:

Alternative A:  No Waste Treatment Or Control

Effluent consists of only 950 liters  (250 gallons) per day of
caul washwater and 28,500 liters (75,000 gallons) of cooling
water.  There is no log or chip wash, no resin washwater,
humidifier water or housekeeping water discharges.

          Costs:  None
          Reduction Benefits:  None

Alternative B:  Retention of Caul Washwater and Discharge
of Cooling Water"

This alternative includes the collecting of caul washwater in
a holding tank and trucking to land disposal after pH neutrali
zation.  Cooling water would be discharged into a receiving
stream.

          Costs:  Incremental costs are approximately
                  $21,500 over Alternative A, thus total
                  costs are $21,500.
          Reduction Benefits:  Elimination of caul wash-
                  water as a discharge stream.

Factors Involved In The Installation  Of Treatment Systems

The only treatment system involved  in the representative dry
process mill  is the disposal of caul  washwater by hauling  to
land disposal.  There are no problems concerning the reli-
ability of the system as caul washwater will be put  into a
storage tank, neutralized, then hauled by truck to a disposal
area.  This system is not sensitive to shock loads,  and  start-
up and shutdown procedures do not cause a problem.   This
                             251

-------
DRAFT


system  can  be  designed and installed within one year and
requires  little  or no  time to  upgrade  operational and main-
tenance practices.   There are  no  air pollution, noise, or
radiation effects  from the installation  of this treatment
system.   The quantities of solid  waste generated from this
system  are  insignificant as are the additional energy re-
quirements .

COST AND  REDUCTION BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT AND
OONtROL TECHNOLOGIES FOR WET PROCESS HARDbOARD	

A detailed  analysis of the costs  and pollution reduction
benefits  of alternative treatment and  control technologies
applicable  to  the  wet  process  hardboard  industry is given
in Supplement  A  of this document.  The typical mill selected
to represent the wet process industry  has a production of
127 metric  tons  (140 tons)  per day, a  wastewater flow of
1,432 cubic meters  (0.378 million gallons) per day, a BOD
of 33.75  kilograms  per metric  ton (67.5  pounds per ton),
and a suspended  solids concentration of  nine kilograms per
metric  ton  (18 pounds  per ton).   The basic results of the
cost estimates are  shown below.   All cost estimates are
based on  August, 1971,  prices.

Alternative A:   Screening and"Primary  Clarification

Raw wastewater characteristics for the typical mill having
a BOD of  33.75 kilograms per metric ton  (67.5 pounds per
ton) represents  a mill with recirculation but no inplant
treatment facilities.

          Costs:   $109,000
          Reduction Benefits:  A  BOD reduction of ten
                  percent and  a suspended solids re-
                   duction of 75 percent would be incurred.

Alternative B:   Addition of Activated  Sludge Process

This alternative includes the  addition of an activated sludge
process including pH adjustment and nutrient addition to Al-
ternative A.  The  effluent  from this system would average
3.4 kilograms per metric ton (6.8 pounds per ton)  BOD and
2.25 kilograms per  metric ton  (4.5 pounds per ton)  suspended
solids, respectively.

          Costs:   Incremental  costs are approximately
                  $435,000  over Alternative A, thus the
                  total  costs  are $544,000.
                             252

-------
DRAFT


          Reduction Benefits:  An incremental reduc-
                  tion in BOD5 of from 2700 milligrams
                  per liter to 300 milligrams per
                  liter for a reduction of 88.9 per-
                  cent would be achieved.  Suspended
                  solids would increase from 200 milli-
                  grams per liter to 250 milligrams per
                  liter for a 0.0 percent reduction.
                  Total plant reduction in BOD5 would
                  be 90 percent', and suspended solids
                  reduction would be 69 percent.

Alternative C:  Addition of An Aerated Lagoon Treatment
System to Alternative's"

This alternative includes the addition of a five day deten-
tion time aerated lagoon to the preceding treatment system
in Alternative B.  The effluent from this system would average
1.6 kilograms per metric ton  (3.2 pounds per ton) BOD and
2.8 kilograms per metric ton  C$.6 pounds per ton) of sus-
pended solids, respectively.

          Costs:  Incremental costs of $299,000 over
                  Alternative B would be incurred,  thus
                  producing a total cost of $843,000.
          Reduction Benefits:  The BOD5  in the effluent
                  of this system would average 150  milli-
                  grams per  liter for an incremental re-
                  duction of  50 percent  and an overall
                  reduction  of 69 percent.

Alternative D:  Evaporation Of•Process Water - Activated
Sludge Treatment of Condensate

This alternative is a  new process separate from those  dis-
cussed previously.  Alternative D consists of  the" addition  of
a pre-press  inplant which results in wastewater discharges
totaling 442  liters per minute  (117 gallons per minute) being
discharged  from the pre-press and the hot press.   The  total
waste  flow  would be passed  through  a  screen, primary  clari-
fier,  and evaporator.  Condensate from  the evaporator  would
then be  treated in an  activated  sludge  system  prior to dis-
charge.

          Costs:  Total  cost of  this  system would
                  be  $722,000.
          Reduction Benefits:   The  BODc  of this  system
                  would  average  0.2 kilograms  per  metric
                   ton  (0.4  pounds per  ton) and the sus-
                  pended  solids  1.25  kilograms per metric
                   ton  (2.5  pounds per  ton) for an  overall
                   reduction of  99.4 percent  and 86 percent,
                   respectively.


                             253

-------
DRAFT


Factors Involved  In The  Installation of Alternative A

All existing wet  process hardboard mills presently have
screening and settling or the equivalent of primary settl-
ing as part of their treatment systems.  Several mills
utilize a single  lagoon  or pond for both settling and
sludge storage.   The use of a settling and storage pond
in one unit is not desirable because of anaerobic decompo-
sition which resuspends  solids and releases dissolved or-
ganics into the effluent.  The primary clarifier recommended
in Alternative A  consists of a mechanical clarifier with
continuous sludge wasting to a sludge lagoon.

Mechanical clarifiers are one of the simplest and most de-
pendable waste treatment systems available.  They are not
sensitive to shock loads and shut-down and start-up of manu-
facturing processes have little or no effect.  Primary clari-
fiers and screening devices are readily available on the
market and an estimated  time of one year would be required
for the design and construction of such a facility.  It is
estimated that an area less than one and one-half acres
would be required for this system.  The additional energy
required to operate this system is estimated to be 22 kilo-
watt-hours .

There are no noise or radiation effects related'to this pro-
cess; however, the disposal of 285 kilograms (630 pounds) per
day of solids into a sludge lagoon may be a source of poten-
tial odor problems.

Factors Involved  In the  Installation" of Alternative B

Alternative B consists of an acitvated sludge system fol-
lowing the facilities previously discussed in Alternative
A.  Activated sludge treatment of wet process hardboard
mill waste can be quite  effective.  However, the system
has all of the problems  associated with activated sludge
treatment of domestic plus several more.  These include
the necessity for pH- control- and nutrient addition.  An-
other major problem is that the activated sludge pro-
duced does not readily settle.  This can frequently cause
high suspended solids in the effluent.  Temperature appar-
ently has a major effect not only by reducing the biologi-
cal reaction rates during cold weather, but also affecting
the settling rates of the mixed liquor suspended solids
(MLSS).
                            254

-------
DRAFT


Activated sludge systems require constant supervision and
maintenance.  They are quite sensitive to shock loads and
to shut-down and start-up operations'of the manufacturing
process.  The equipment needed for activated sludge systems
is available on the market; however, up to two years may be
required from initiation of design until beginning of plant
operation.  The energy requirements as high as approximately
320 kilowatt-hours are needed to operate the process.  There
is essentially no noise or radiation effects associated with
the process; however, the disposal of approximately 3.3 met-
ric tons (three tons) of waste solids each day can cause poten-
tial odor problems.

Factors Involved In The Installation Of Alternative C

Alternative C consists of an aerated lagoon following the pro-
cess described in Alternative B.  Similar problems associated
with the operation of an activated sludge process hold true
with this system.  Since the system will be preceded by an
activated sludge process, slug loads are not a problem.  Temp-
erature does affect the system as it does'any biological
system.  The only additional equipment necessary for this
system is aeration equipment of which an additional 225 kilo-
watt-hours of energy is required.  The estimated time of con-
struction of this facility is one year from initiation of de-
sign.  No noise or radiation problems are associated with this
process, nor are there any odor problems.

Factors Involved In The Installation Of Alternative D

Alternative D is a completely different system from those
described in Alternatives A through C.  This system consists
of the installation of a pre-press inside the wet process mill
to dewater the stock between the cyclone and the stock chest.
This allows a projected decrease in wastewater flow from
1,432 cubic meters (0.378 million gallons) per day to 629 cu-
bic meters (0.166 million gallons) per day.  Wastewater from
the pre-press and the wet press will first be treated through
a screening and clarification system as described in Alterna-
tive A.  Next, instead of using a biological system to remove
organics, an evaporation system is used.  This system produces
a saleable by-product similar to that presently being produced
by the Masonite Corporation at two mills.  A portion of the
condensate is recycled back inplant and the remaining 545 cu-
bic meters (0.144 million gallons) per day is treated in an
activated sludge system similar to the system described in
Alternative B.
                             255

-------
DRAFT
Evaporation systems must be  fed-at a relatively constant
rate as they are  sensitive to shock loads.- Maintenance
requirements are  high due to 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-unreasonable.
Noise and radiation effects  are nil,but energy require-
ments for steam and electricity are significant.  For
example, approximately 150 kilowatt-hours are required
to operate the system in addition to steam requirements.
Air pollution factors are related to the energy require-
ment as fuel must be burned  to produce both steam and
electricity.
                             256

-------
DRAFT


PART C:  WOOD PRESERVING

ALTERNATE TREATMENT AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES

Detailed information on the costs and benefits of various alterna-
tive treatment and control technologies applicable to the wood-
preserving industry is given in Supplement A of this hocument.  As
previously indicated, Subcategory 1 and 2 plants are the only ones
for which substantial costs may be involved in achieving the re-
commended effluent limitations.  Thus only these alternatives are
summarized in this section.  Further data and the basis for cost
calculations are presented in Supplement A.

ENGINEERING ESTIMATES FOR A HYPOTHETICAL SUBCATEGORY 1  PLANT

Cost figures which have been obtained for wood-preserving plants
in Subcategory 1 as shown in Supplement A vary widely for a number
of reasons.  In order to attempt to provide a reasonable common
basis for comparison, a hypothetical waste treatment facility was
devised to meet the suggested standards and costs estimated based
on May 1973 construction data.

The'treatments to be provided are those which already have been
recommended:  A-- Oil separation; B - Coagulation and filtration;
C-| - Biological treatment in aerated lagoons; C2 - Biological
treatment by activated sludge; D - Chlorination as a polishing
treatment; and E - Effluent measurement.  The two biological
treatments are alternates, either one or the other is intended to
be used.  For estimating purposes, a daily wastewater flow of
53,000 liters (14,000 gallons) was used.  The waste loading and
quality of effluent which is expected from each-stage of treat-
ment suggested is as follows:
                                  mg/ liter

Parameter
COD
BOD
Phenols
Oil & Grease
Suspended Sol
Raw
Waste
40,000
20,000
190
1,500
ids 700
A
7,260
3,670
190
225
700
Treatments
B
3,630
1,865
190
80
350
C
410
260
2. "5
45
125
D
300
50
0.5
25
100
                              257

-------
  DRAFT

  A-Oil  Separation  -  Standard  oil  separation equipment, equipped
  for both  surface  and  bottom  removal, can be  used for this purpose.

               Capital  cost estimate                  $ 29,760
               Annualized  cost  including operation
                   and maintenance             $ 0.31/ 1000 liters

  B-Coagulation and Filtration  - This would consist essentially of a
  multi-compartmented tank equipped for rapid mix of coagulant, slow
  mix, and  sedimentation.   Filtration would be by slow sand filters.

              Capital  cost estimate                  $ 43,320
              Annualized  cost  including o and m $ 0.58/ 1000 liters

 C1-Biological Treatment.  Aerated Lagoons - A lined lagoon of about
  3 meters  in depth and having  a surface of about 353 square meters
 was selected.  Two aerators of 7.5 hp each were selected to provide
 the necessary aeration.

              Capital cost estimate                  $ 21,120
              Annualized cost  including o and m $ 0.70/ 1000 liters

 Co-Biological Treatment. Activated Sludge - An activated sludge
 package plant having a capacity of 378,000 liters per day was
 selected.

              Capital cost estimate                  $120,000
              Annualized cost including o and m $ 1.75/  1000 liters

 D-Polishing Treatment. Chlorination -  Provision  is  made  for dosages
 of chlorine up to  500 mg/liter and a detention time of  3 to 6 hours.
 Chlorine will  be handled in 200-pound  cylinders..

              Capital  cost estimate                  $  8,400
              Annualized  cost  including  o  and  m $ 0.65/ 1000  liters

 E-Effluent Measurement -  A recording flow measurement device was
 selected.

              Capital  cost estimate                   $  3,600
             Annualized  cost  including  o  and  m $ 0.16/ 1000  liters

 Total capital  costs  for  complete  treatment with  lagoons   $106,200
 Annualized costs for same system                 $2.40/  1000 liters

 Total capital  cost for complete treatment with activated sludge
 .    _.  _,                                               $205,080
Annual!zed costs for same system                 $3.45/  1000 liters


 ENGINEERING ESTIMATES  FOR A HYPOTHETICAL SUBCATEGORY 2 PLANT

Among Subcategory 2 plants, the most common method of achieving the


                                258

-------
DRAFT

recommended effluent limitations is oil  separation followed by
evaporation of the residual  water.   The  cost estimate summary for
oil separation (Treatment A) has already been presented.   Energy,
of course, is the most expensive item in disposing of• wastewater by
evaporation.  Based on evaporation  of 7,600 liters/day (2,000 GPD)
the fuel  costs using natural gas are estimated at more than $4,000
per year.  The total annual  cost for this scheme (Treatment A plus
evaporation) would be about $ 5.98/ 1000 liters ($22.67 per 1000
gal.) of excess water evaporated.

NON-WATER QUALITY ASPECTS

None of the wastewater treatment and control technologies  dis-
cussed above has a significant effect on non-water-environmental
quality.   The limited volume of sludge generated by coagulation
and biological treatments of wastewater  is currently being disposed
of in approved landfills by most plants.  Because the organic com-
ponents of these sludges are biodegradable, this practice  should
present no tfcpeat to the environment.
                             259

-------
DRAFT
                            SECTION IX

   EFFLUENT  REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
 THE BEST PRACTICABLE  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
                 EFFLUENT  LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES


 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 Tech-
 nology Currently Available.  Best Practicable Control Technology
 Currently Available is generally based upon the average of the
 best existing performance by plants  of various sizes, ages, and
 unit processes  within  the industrial category and/or subcate-
 gory.  This  average is not based upon a broad range of plants
 within the timber products industry, but based upon performance
 levels achieved by  exemplary plants.

 Consideration must  also be given to:

          (a)   The  total  cost  of application of tech-
                nology  in  relation to the effluent re-
                duction benefits  to be achieved from
                such application;
          (b)   The  size and age  of equipment and
                facilities involved;
          (c)   The  processes employed;
          (d)   The  engineering aspects  of the
                application cf  various types of con-
                trol  techniques;
          (e)   Process changes;
          (f)   Non-water  quality environmental impact
                (including energy requirements).

Also, Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available
 emphasizes treatment facilities  at the  end of a manufacturing
process but  includes the  control  technologies within the pro-
cess itself when the latter are  considered to be normal prac-
 tice within  an  industry.

A further consideration is the degree of economic and engineering
reliability which must be  established for the technology to be
"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  commencement of construction or
installation of  the  control facilities.
                             261

   NOTICE!  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE  SUB.TECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


EFFLUENT  REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST POLLUTION  CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE~FO'R
THE VENEER AND  PLYWOOD INDUSTRY
Based upon  the  information contained in Sections III through
VIII of  this  report,  a determination has been made that the
degree of effluent  reduction attainable through the applica-
tion of  the Best  Pollution Control Technology Currently Avail-
able is  no  discharge  of wastewater (not including cooling
water) into navigable waters, with special consideration for
mills that  now  use  steam vats and for mills that have hydrau-
lic barkers.
Identification  ot best Pollution Control Technologies Cur-
rently Available"

Best Pollution  Control Technology Currently Available for the
veneer and  plywood  industry is recycle and reuse of certain
process  waters  within the operation with land disposal of
excess water.   To implement this requires:

          (a)   Recycle of sprinkling water from wet
                decking.   This includes screening and
                suspended solids removal.
          (b)   Recycle of water from hot water vats.
                This includes:  (1) use of steam coils
                rather than direct steam, (2) suspended
                solids removal, and (3) pH control for
                minimization of corrosive effects.
          (c)   Containment of dryer washwater.  This
                includes;  (1) reduction of water
                usage  and (2) retention of entire flow.
          (d)   Recycle of glue washwater.  This in-
                cludes:  (1) reduction in the amount
                of fresh water used, (2) use of wash-
                water  to prepare glue, and (3) moni-
                toring of glue and glue washwater to
                maintain proper solids concentration.
          (e)   Retention of all general wastes:
                e.g.,  floor and equipment washes.

Mills with  existing steam vats are to be treated as special cases
for the  following reasons: ,

          (1)   The  development of technology for complete
                retention of wastewater from steam vats is
                not  sufficiently advanced to be definitely
                achievable by July 1, 1977.
                             262

   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT


           (2)   Biological treatment of steam vat
                wastewaters is technically feasible
                and it has been reported that 85 to
                90 percent removal can be obtained;
                however,  only one mill is known to
                do this,  and no verification of the
                degree of treatment exists.  The
                cost of biological treatment is much
                greater than the apparent cost to
                modify steam vats to allow zero dis-
                charge.

 Approximate  costs and effluent loads that can be achieved
 with  the  application of  biological treatment are described
 in  Section VIII,  Cost, Energy and Non-Water Quality Aspects.

 In  addition  to  mills with steam vats, it has also been recom-
 mended  that  mills that have hydraulic barkers also be given
 special consideration concerning the July 1, 1977 deadline.
 There are only  a  few mills with hydraulic barkers and it is
 felt  that by 1983,  there will be none.   The application of
 hydraulic barkers is in  the debarking of very large logs, and
 the harvesting  of large  logs is decreasing rapidly.

 Control and  treatment technology for the effluent of hydraulic
 barkers in non-existent.   Waste characteristics are given in
 Section V.   From  these it can be seen that suspended solids
 concentrations  are  quite high.   It is suggested that settling
 be considered in  dealing with effluents  from hydraulic barkers.

 Engineering  Aspects of Control  Technique Applications

 The technology  defined for this level is practicable since it
 is practiced throughout  the industry.   In addition, there are
 mills which  are now achieving the effluent reductions set
 forth herein.   The  concepts are proven,  available for implemen-
 tation, and  may be  readily adopted through adaptation or modi-
 fication of  existing  production units.

 Costs of Application

 The cost of  achieving  zero discharge  for a mill  with the maxi-
mum water pollution problems  is  summarized in Section VIII,
Cost,  Energy and  Non'-Water Quality Aspects.   The investment
costs associated  with  this  level  of  technology  represent about
one percent  of the  total  capital  investment  needed  to build a
veneer and plywood  mill  and  the  operating  costs  may be a simi-
 lar contribution.   It  appears that the application  of this level
of technology can be  achieved without placing a  heavy burden on
the industry.


                              263

   NOTICE:  THESE  ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN  THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


EFFLUENT REDUCTION  ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST POLLUTION  CONTROL  TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR
THE DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD INDUSTRY

Based upon the  information contained in Sections  III  through
VIII of this  report,  a  determination has been made that  the
degree of effluent  reduction attainable through the applica-
tion of the best pollution control technology currently  avail-
able is no discharge  of wastewater to navigable waters.

The best pollution  control technology currently available for
discharge of  non-contact cooling waters is described in  the
Steam-electric  Generation Effluent Guideline document.

Identification  of Best  Pollution Control
Technology Currently  Available

Best pollution  control  technology currently available for the
dry process hardboard industry is recycle  and reuse of  cer-
tain process  waters within the dry process hardboard mill with
land disposal of excess water.  To implement this requires:

           (a)   The  recycle of log wash or chip wash water
                when used;
           (b)   The  recycle of resin wash water;
           (c)   Neutralization of caul wash water followed
                by land  disposal;
           (d)   Elimination of housekeeping water by dry
                cleaning;
           (e)   Elimination of discharge from humidifica-
                tion by  inplant control.

Rationale  for the Selection of Best Pollution Control
Technology Currently  Available

Age and Size  of Equipment and Facilities.  The dry process
industryTsrelatively  new,therefore,the age'of the mills
is not a major  factor.   This coupled with the narrow size
differential  between  plants is insufficient to substantiate
the specifications  for  improvements in waste control indi-
cated.

Total Cost of Application in Relation to Effluent Reduction
Benefit's^The  dry  process industry as a whole is a relative-
ly minor wastewater source.  The investment of a $5,000  maximum
per mill is an  insignificant factor in the cost of producing
hardboard.
                              264

    NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
Engineering  Aspects of Control Techniques Utilized.  This
level of  technology is practicable  because mills are pre-
sently utilizing this technology.

Process Changes.  This technology requires no process
changes,  rather modifications in housekeeping techniques
and existing process operation.

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact.   None.
                              265

   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE  SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


EFFLUENT  REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE '
FOR THE WET  PROCESS HARDBOARD INDUSTRY.

Based upon the  information contained in Sections III
through VIII  of this report,  a determination has been made
that the  degree of effluent reduction attainable through
the application of the best pollution control technology
currently available would allow a final BODc and suspended
solids discharge of 1.7 kilograms per ton (3.4 pounds per
ton) and  2.8  kilograms per ton (5.6 pounds per ton), res-
pectively.

Identification  of Best Pollution Control Technology
Currently Available

Best pollution  control technology currently available for
the wet process hardboard industry consists of the fol-
lowing recycle  and reuse processes inplant, followed by
end-of-line waste treatment facilities.

          (a) Recycle of process water as dilution
              water utilizing temperature control
              and suspended solids control to reduce
              the total plant discharge to 10.2 cubic
              meters per ton (2,700 gallons per ton),
              the BOD to 33.8 kilograms per ton (67.5
              pounds per ton) and the suspended solids
              to 9 kilograms  per ton (18 pounds per
              ton) .
          (b) The total wastewater flow to be treated
              by screening, primary settling, activa-
              ted sludge followed by an aerated
              lagoon.
          (c) Sludge to be either recycled inplant or
              aerobically digested and disposed of in
              sludge lagoons.

Rationale for the Selection of Best Pollution
Control Technology Currently Available

Age and Size  of Equipment and Facilities.  As set forth
in this report,industry competition and general improvement
in production concepts and wastewater management have led to
the modernization of plant facilities throughout the industry.
                             266

   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
With the exception  of  one  large  mill,  the  size  differential
between mills  is  insufficient  to substantiate   the specifica-
tions for  improvements  in  waste  control  as indicated.   The one
large mill should not  be given special consideration.
                                 i
Engineering Aspects of  Control Technique Applications.   This
level of technology is  practicable  because 22 percent  of the
mills in the industry  are  presently achieving the  effluent
reductions set forth herein.   The concepts are  proven,  avail-
able for implementation, and may be readily adopted through
adaptation or modification of  existing production  units.

Process Changes.  This  technology does not require any  sig-
nificant inplant modifications as the  majority  of  mills are
presently discharging  raw  wastewater flows and  concentrations
less than those utilized in the  selection  of end of pdpe
treatment systems.

Non-Water Quality Environmental  Impact.  There  is  one  essen-
tial impact upon major  non-water elements  of the environment:
A potential effect on  soil systems  due to  the need to utilize
land for the ultimate  disposal of waste  sludge.  With respect
to this, it is addressed in a  precautionary context only since
no evidence has been discovered  which  even intimates a  direct
impact--all evidence points to the  contrary.  Technology and
knowledge are available to assure land disposal of sludge can
be done with no harmful effects  to  the environment.

Factors Which Might Affect Effluent Limitations

The major factor and the only  factor which should  be taken
into consideration is temperature.   Low  temperatures can have
a detrimental effect on biological  systems..reducing their
treatment efficiency, causing  increased  concentrations  of BOD
and suspended solids in the effluent.  Effluent limitations
are based on an average effluent  BOD and suspended solids of
150 mg/1 and 250 mg/1,  respectively.   It is  felt that a well-
designed system as described previously  can  maintain this
treatment efficiency at temperatures such  that  the waste  does
not freeze.  Special considerations  should be given during
periods of extreme low  temperature  when  wastewater within the
treatment systems actually begins to freeze.
                             267

   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE  SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
GUIDELINES AND LIMITATIONS FOR THE WOOD PRESERVING INDUSTRY

Recommendations contained in this section for the wood preserving  indus-
try are based on data presented elsewhere in the report.   Numerical  limi-
tations on specific constituents of discharges are based  on the  average
of the best existing performance by plants in each subcategory.  These
limitations are to be achieved by existing plants no later than  July 1.
1977.

A rigid application of the effluent limitation parameters is not practi-
cal in all instances because of differences among plants  in age, avail-
ability of land, production.process used, and other factors.  Factors
that are pertinent in this regard are listed and described in terms  of
their effect on the achievability of the recommended effluent limitations.
Consideration of these factors may require some modification of  the  efflu-
ent limitations in the case of particular plants.

Treatment and Control Technology Models

Treatment models representing "best practicable control technology cur-
rently available" are presented below.  These models are  not intended to
dictate procedures or processes, but instead are meant to illustrate the
methodology by  which effluent limitation parameters can  be achieved by
July 1, 1977.  Alternatives to biological treatments include activated
carbon filtration and chemical oxidation.  While these methods may give
the same end results, they are not judged to be economically practical at
present, except where the volume of waste is very small.   Likewise,  they
have never been applied on a commercial scale to wood preserving waste-
waters, and hence are not "currently available" in the sense of  having a
high degree of engineering reliability.

            TREATMENT MODELS;  ACHIEVABLE BY JULY 1. 1977

                             Biological
                                                    linn
     1.  Oil Separation                 1.  Oil Separation
     2.  Equalization                   2.  Equalization
     3.  Chemical Coagulation           3.  Chemical  Coagulation
     4.  Sand Filtration                4.  Sand Filtration
     5.  pH Control                     5.  pH Control
     6.  Biological Oxidation           6.  Soil Irrigation
     7.  Secondary Clarification

                              Physical
                 "S"                                "T"
     1.  Oil Separation                 1.  Oil Separation
     2.  Coagulation                    2.  Coagulation
     3.  Sand Filtration                3.  Sand Filtration
     4.  Evaporation                    4.  pH Control
                                        5.  Discharge to Sewer

                                 268

    NOTICE;  THESE ARE  TENTATIVE  RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN THIS REPORT AND  ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED  AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
General

Biological oxidation is the only wastewater treating method  that  is  both
currently available and economically feasible,  by which the  objectives
of the Act can be achieved by July 1, 1977.  The method adopted by  indi-
vidual plants will be determined in part by wastewater characteristics
and in part by such factors as volume of waste, capital investment  re-
quired, land area available, and the specific stream standards that  must
be met.  For example, coagulation and filtration, both of which are  shown
in the two models for biological treatments, will not be  required for
wastewater from all plants.  Secondary clarification is impractical  where
treatment is by soil irrigation.  The treatment methodology  used, whether
extended aeration, aerated lagoon, or soil  irrigation, will  be determined
to a large extent by the availability of land,   Finally,  it  is probable
that some plants will find it necessary to  use  a level of treatment  beyond
that indicated in Models Q and R in order to meet specific stream standards.

The cost of biological treatments is generally  recognized to be the  lowest
among the possible methods of treatment that are compatible  with  current
water quality standards.  A major factor that must be considered  where this
method is used is cost of land.   The best results achieved by exemplary
plants were obtained where there was sufficient land available to provide
lagoons with detention periods of from 120  to 180 days for the treated
wastewater.  Plants with insufficient land  for  this purpose  were  unable
consistently to reduce phenol and COD content of their waste below  about
2.0 and 450 mg/liter, respectively.

Models S and T, representing physical methods of waste disposal,  are in-
cluded as part of the control and treatment technology achievable by Julyl,
1977 because the control methods indicated  are  both practical and currently
available for certain plants.  With regard  to Model T, approximately 15 per-
cent of the U.S. plants were discharging to publicly-owned sewers in 1972.
It is estimated that this percentage will increase to at  least 25 percent
by 1977.  However, the option to dispose of waste by discharging  it  to a
sewer is not available to all plants, depending as it does upon the  prox-
imity of a plant to a sewer line and, in some instances,  the treatment
charge levied by the municipality involved.

Evporation of wastewater is practical where the volume is small and, de-
pending upon the method used, the waste is  of a quality that will permit
its reuse as cooling water.  Two methods are currently used.  In  one, the
wastewater is simply boiled in an open vat  equipped with  steam coils until
it has all been evaporated.  In  the second, the process water is  discharged
to a cooling tower equipped with both a fan and either steam coils or a
heat exchanger.  The quantity of water in excess of that  required for cool-
ing purposes is disposed of by intermittent operation of  the heating sys-
tem.  Costs of these methods of wastewater  disposal are discussed in Sec-
tion VIII.  These costs are expected to increase significantly in the fore-
seeable future because of anticipated increases in fuel cost.  The economic
viability of the two methods is  clearly questionable because of their high
energy requirements, except where the volume of wastewater is very small.

                                269

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE  BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


Because the treatment  and  control methods Indicated as best practicable
control technology  currently available are "end-of-the-line" processes,
plant age is not  considered to be a significant factor, except as  indi-
cated elsewhere in  this  section.  This is likewise true of process changes
that would need to  be  made to accommodate these methods.  None would be
required, except  as regards disposal of wastewater via a cooling tower,
as described above  and indicated in Model S.  This procedure is not  amen-
able to plants in Subcategory 1 because of the relatively large volume
of water involved and  the  high energy input that would be required to
dispose of the excess  water.

All of the methods  proposed are standard in the sense that they are  used
by a number of plants.   None of them present  any unique problems  from
an engineering point of  view.

In-Plant Control

In determining treatment and control technology achievable by July 1, 1977
the following assumptions  were made:

(a)  Volume of wastewater  will be minimized by making the necessary  in-
     plant process  changes to conserve water use.

(b)  Oil content  of influent to biological treating systems will  be
     limited to 100 mg/liter or less by installation of efficient  oil
     recovery equipment.

(c)  Equipment and  plumbing leaks will be eliminated and spills mini-
     mized by good  housekeeping practices.

(d)  All discharges of contaminated water generated in processes employ-
     ing salt-type  preservatives and fire-retardant formulations will
     be recovered and  reused as make-up water in preparing fresh batches
     of treating  solution.

(e)  Existing non-pressure processing equipment will be modified to
     eliminate the  introduction of water from precipitation in the
     treating tank  and new equipment will be designed to achieve
     this result.

In-plant process  changes which are currently in use in the industry, and
which will minimize the  volume of wastewater that must be treated, include
the recirculation of direct-contact cooling water and segregation  of con-
taminated and uncontaminated waste streams.  Use of once-through,  direct-
contact cooling water  and  mixing of contaminated and uncontaminated  waste
streams are particularly incompatible with efforts to reduce wastewater
flow rate and will  be  reduced in order to maintain treating costs  at a
reasonable level.
                                 270

    NOTICE;   THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
Uncontaminated process water Includes condensate from  heating  coils  and
heat exchangers, and non-contact cooling water.   Although  such water
could be discharged without treatment, its  reuse is  recommended.   Reuse
of condensate from heating coils for boiler make-up  water  is economically
sound, since it is hot and essentially mineral  free.   The  latter  charac-
teristic precludes the necessity of adding  scale-inhibiting chemicals
or otherwise treating it to reduce hardness.

Entrained oils are responsible for most of  the  pollution in the wood
preserving industry.  Because of their importance, it  is essential that
the efficient removal of oils be given primary  consideration by plants
in the development of wastewater treating systems.   The use of modified
closed steaming during conditioning and employment of  low-speed,  high
volume pumps in the transfer of preservatives are recommended  methods
of reducing the incidence of emulsion formation. Removal  of free oils
can be accomplished efficiently by well-designed, API-type separators.
Most of the residual oil in wastewater can  be removed  either by filtra-
tion through oil-absorbent materials or by  chemical  coagulation.

Control of storm water in the immediate vicinity of  retorts and preserva-
tive storage tanks may be required because  of the accumulation of oil
from spillage in such locations.  Normally, the  total  area involved  for
which collection of storm water is necessary should  be quite small.

Collection and treatment of storm water from yards where treated  products
are stored are unnecessary, based on available  data, and are not  econom-
ically practicable.  Storage yards encompassing  areas  of 8 hectares  (20
acres) or more are common in regions having rainfall of 100 to 150 centi-
meters (40 to 60 inches) per year.  Even if the  water  could be channeled
into a lagoon—and this in itself would be  a formidable task for  plants
located on hilly terrain—the cost of treating  the 95  million  liters
(25 million gallons) of annual runoff from  an 8-hectare (20 acre)  yard,
most of which would occur during a four-month period,  would far exceed
any environmental benefit that could be achieved.

Construction of a lagoon or other suitable  structure at a  location such
that it will intercept major spills is recommended at  all  plants.

Discharge Limitations

Numerical  limitations on discharges for each subcategory of the wood pre-
serving industry are given in Tables 73 and 74.   These values  are ex-
pressed in the two tables as kilograms of pollutants per 1000  m3  of  pro-
duct treated and in effluent concentration, respectively,  for  information
purposes only.  The discharge from a plant  must  be limited on  the basis
of total weight of pollutant per day.   Total allowable discharge  should
be computed from daily production data shown on  the  permit application.
                                271

    NOTICE:   THESE  ARE TENTATIVE  RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN  THIS  REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT
   TABLE 73  EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS BASED ON BEST  PRACTICABLE CONTROL
       TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY AVAILABLE:   WOOD PRESERVING INDUSTRY
             (kilograms of pollutants/1000 m3 of product)*
Sub-
category
1
1
2
3
4
Wastewater
Volume
Iiters/m3
267
(2.0 gal/ft3)
—
—
—
Phenols COD
0.
(0.
No
No
No
658 109.236
041) (6.806)
discharge of
discharge of
discharge of
BOD
69.272
(4.316)
process
process
process
oil
and Suspended
Grease Solids
11.989 33.
(0.747) (2.
water permitted
water permitted
water permitted
304
075)



"Values  in  parentheses  are  discharge equivalents in pounds/1000
  TABLE  74   EFFLUENT  LIMITATIONS BASED ON BEST PRACTICABLE CONTROL
      TECHNOLOGY  CURRENTLY  AVAILABLE:  WOOD PRESERVING INDUSTRY
               (milligrams of pollutants/liter of water)


             WastewaterCRT
  Sub-         Volume                                and    Suspended
category     Iiters/m3   Phenols    COD    BOD    Grease    Solids

   1            267         2.50     410    260      45        125
          (2.0 gal/ft3)

   2              —         No discharge of process water permitted

   3              —         No discharge of process water permitted

   4              --         No discharge of process water permitted
Limitations are not placed on total water usage, color, and dissolved
solids.  However, when discharges containing color or dissolved solids
may cause harm to the receiving waters, or cause a violation of existing
water quality standards, limits must be established.

The pH of the final effluents from wood preserving plants  should be with-
in the range of 6.0 to 8.5.
                                 272

    NOTICE:   THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS  BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


If effluent limits based on best practicable  treatment currently avail-
able fail  to meet existing water quality  standards, such limits will be
upgraded as required.

Specific effluent parameters are given  only for  Subcategory  1 plants.
The effluent limitations for BOD and phenols  were based on concentrations
of 2.50 mg/liter and 260 mg/liter,  respectively,,  For oil and grease the
value used was 45 mg/liter.  The concentrations  were applied to a  flow
volume equivalent to 267 liters  per cubic meter  (2.0 gallons/ft3)  of wood
treated.  These flow rates were  obtained  from actual measurements  made
over a period of 24 hours at a number of  plants  and from data supplied
by cooperating plants.   Adjustments in  measured  flow were made to  account
for reductions in discharge that can be achieved by procedures considered
normal for the industry and increases in  discharge from storm water col-
lected around treating  cylinders and preservative storage areas.

Chemical oxygen demand  may be used  to monitor BOD where an appropriate
correlation factor can  be agreed upon.  The equation, BOD =  0.497  COD + 60
expresses the relationship between  the  two parameters for BOD values of
150 and larger.  However, the ratio of  COD/BOD increases rapidly with de-
creasing BOD.  For BOD  values in the range of 20 to 50 mg/liter, the re-
lationship is BOD = 0.161 COD.

In general, the individual plants in the  wood preserving industry  do not
have the expertise required to make BOD determinations.  There is, in
addition, some question regarding the reliability of BOD data from plant
to plant for this type  of waste  because of its characteristics.  The
waste is sterile, and thus must  be  inoculated with bacterial cultures
previously acclimated to the waste.  Differences of 200 percent  in the
efficiency with which several acclimated  cultures of bacteria could uti-
lize the same waste have been reported.  Such differences would  make
plant-to-plant comparisons of BOD values  meaningless.

Factors to be Considered in Applying Effluent Limitations

The above assessment of what constitutes  the  best practicable control tech-
nology currently available is predicated  on the  assumption of a  degree of
uniformity among plants within subcategories  that, strictly  speaking, does
not,exist.  There are extenuating circumstances  which make unrealistic
a rigid application of the same  effluent  limitations to all  plants within
each subcategory.  Some such factors are  summarized here in  the  context
of their effect on the  achievability of the recommended effluent limita-
tions.

Plant Age

The age of the production facilities is of primary significance  in the
case of plants within subcategories for which a  zero discharge  restriction
is recommended.  A zero discharge of pollutants  from an operating  wood pre-
serving plant is improbable at best, and, in  the case of old plants, is


                                273

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE  TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND  ARE  SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL  REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT
 virtually  impossible because  of spills and  leaks of preservatives on
 plant property, adjacent roadways, and railroad right-of-way over
 the years,  it  is  inevitable that small amounts of these materials
 wfll be picked up by storm water.

 Recommended permissible  discharge of pollutants in non-process water are
 given in Table 75 for plants  in Subcategories 2, 3, and 4.  The discharge
 is expressed in concentration only, since it is not related to quantity
 of product  treated.   No  discharge limit  is  given for boron because best
 practical control  technology  currently available has not yet been deter-
 mined for  this element.


 TABLE 75   RECOMMENDED PERMISSIBLE DISCHARGE OF SPECIFIC POLLUTANTS
            IN  NON-PROCESS WASTEWATER FROM WOOD PRESERVING PLANTS
                     IN SUBCATEGORIES 2,  3,  AND 4
                            Plants  in                Plants in
                          Subcategory 3        Subcategories 2 and 4
Phenols
BOD
COD
Oil and Grease
Suspended Solids
Arseni c
Boron*
Chromium
Copper
Fl uori de
Zinc
0.1
25.0
155.0
5.0
15.0
.25
__
0.1
0.5
1.0
1.0
0.3
25.0
155.0
5.0
15.0
__
MM
_ _
__
__
— —
 "Best control technology  for boron has not been determined.


Use of Salt- and Oil-Type Preservatives in One Retort

A no discharge requirement is practical for wastewaters from salt-type
treatments (Subcategory 3)  in plants where contaminated water from such
treatments can be kept segregated from other plant discharges.   This  is
not possible at plants where the same retort is used to treat with both
salt-type and oil-type preservatives and at those plants which apply  dual
treatments.  In spite of  careful cleaning of all equipment preparatory to
changing from a salt-type preservative or fire-retardant to an oil-type
preservative, traces of the constituents in the former material remain in
the equipment and are picked up by and discharged with wastewater from sub-
sequent treatments using  the oil-type preservative.  Similarly, contamina-
tion of oily waste occurs  when products treated with creosote are subse-
quently treated with salts.


                                 274

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT

It Is recommended that discharges of heavy-metal  Ions  from  plants  in
Subcategory 1 thus affected be permitted in  the  amounts  indicated  in
Table 76.  The proposed limitations on discharge  per unit of produc-
tion are based on the concentrations shown and on a flow rate of 267
liters per cubic meter (2,0 gallons/ft3)0

The limits set for copper, chromium, fluorides,  arsenic, and zinc  are
based on literature reports of the maximum percent removal  that  can
practicably be obtained by standard chemical  procedures  involving  re-
duction, lime flocculation, and sedimentation (122).   Arsenic and
fluorides are the most difficult materials to remove from solution,
the latter because of the poor settling properties of  calcium fluoride
and the solubility (8 mg/liter) of this chemical  in alkaline water.
The maximum removal of arsenic by lime addition  is 85  percent.   Further
removals—up to a maximum of about 95 percent—have been achieved  by
dual treatments involving lime addition and  ferric chloride coagulant
in laboratory studies.

History of Pollution Control Effort

Some plants, prompted by state imposed deadlines, have already invested
heavily in pollution abatement and control programs (including the in-
stallation of equipment) designed to meet applicable stream standards.
In some instances, the proposed effluent limitations are more stringent
than those the plants are now required by state  authorities to meet in
order to protect the receiving streams.  It  would impose a  financial
hardship on these plants to require them to  make  additional outlays of
capital to meet limitations imposed by the best  practicable control tech-
nology currently available while still paying off the  original debt.  In
addition, the plants would be placed in an unfair competitive position
with other plants, which, for one reason or  another, found  it unnecessary
to make the earlier investment.  It is recommended, therefore, that prior
investments in pollution control programs and facilities be considered in
determining requirements for these plants, provided their effluents are
compatible with existing stream standards.

Non-Conforming Plants with High Removal Rates

Because of the particular characteristics of their wastewater, it  is pos-
sible that a few plants will be unable to conform to July 1, 1977  efflu-
ent limitations even after achieving reductions  of 90  percent or more in
the major pollutants identified in Section VI.   It is  recommended  that a
variance to these limitations be allowed for plants that achieve a mini-
mum reduction of 95 percent in the major pollutants, provided that the
discharge is compatible with existing stream standards.
                                275

   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION  IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT

                              TABLE 76
  RECOMMENDED PERMISSIBLE DISCHARGES OF METALS FROM WOOD PRESERVING
         PLANTS IN SUBCATEGORY 1 THAT EMPLOY THE SAME RETORT
            FOR BOTH OIL-TYPE AND SALT-TYPE PRESERVATIVES

 (Parenthetical values are discharge equivalents in pounds/1000 ft3)

                          Concentration            Weight
Parameter                    (mg/1)             (kg/1000 m3)
Arsenic
Boron*
Chromium
Copper
Fluorides
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
Phosphorus
1.0
—
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
0.273
--
0.273
0.273
2.664
0.532
1.332
1.332
(0.017)

(0.017)
(0.017)
(0.166)
(0.033)
(0.083)
(0.083)
*Best practicable treatment for boron has not been determined.
                                 276

   NOTICE:  THESE  ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS  BASED UPON
   INFORMATION  IN  THIS REPORT AND ARE  SUBJECT  TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY  EPA.

-------
DRAFT
Avail ability of Land

As mentioned elsewhere, the best performance among plants currently oper-
ating waste treating facilities is at those with sufficient land area to
permit long-term containment of treated wastewaters.   It is improbable
that a conventional  biological treatment, such as trickling filtration
or extended aeration, will consistently reduce oxygen demand and phenol
content values compatible with requirements of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently available.  All of the plants visited that are
applying a biological treatment to their waste prior to discharging it
to a stream have multizone lagoons that provide a total detention time
of up to 180 days after initial treatment by extended aeration  or in
aerated lagoons.  Plants unable to acquire the land needed for  lagoon
construction should be given special consideration with regard  to efflu-
ent limitation requirements.

Non-Pressure Processes

A zero discharge requirement is recommended for non-pressure plants.  The
control measure necessary to attain this level of pollution abatement re-
quires only that water be kept out of the open tanks  that are used in
this process.   This  is not feasible in the case of a  few plants in cold
climates because of ice formation on stock prior to treatment.   It is
recommended that these plants be permitted a discharge during winter
months equivalent to 25 percent of that allowed for plants in subcate-
gory 1.
                                277

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN THIS  REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND-FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
                           SECTION  X

   EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH  THE  APPLICATION OF
    THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY  ECONOMICALLY  ACHIEVABLE
                EFFLUENT  LIMITATIONS  GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION

The effluent limitations which must  be  achieved  by July 1,
1973, are to specify  the degree of effluent  reduction attain-
able through the application of the  best  available technology
economically achievable.  The best available technology eco-
nomically achievable  is not based upon  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  where it  is readily
transferable from one industry process  to another.  A speci-
fic finding must be made as to the availability  of control
measures and practices to eliminate  the discharge  of pollu-
tants, 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
              resulting from application  of  the  best eco-
              nomically achievable technology;
          (f) non-water quality environmental impact
              (including energy requirements).

In contrast to the best practicable  control  technology cur-
rently available, the best economically achievably technology
assesses the availability in all cases  of in-process controls
as well as control or 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 level,  have demonstrated
both technological performances and  economic viability at a
level sufficient to reasonably justify  investing in such faci-
lities may be considered in assessing the best available eco-
nomically achievable  technology.  The best available economically
                             279

   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT
 achievable technology is the highest degree of control
 technology that has been achieved or has been demonstrated
 to be capable of being designed for plant scale operation
 up to and including "no discharge" 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.  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.  There-
 fore, the best available technology economically achievable
-may necessitate some industrially sponsored development work
 prior to its application.

 EFFLUENT REDUCTION ATTAINABLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF
 THE BEST AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE--
 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES FOR THE VENEER AND PLYWOOD
 INDUSTRY

 The effluent limitations reflecting this technology is no
 discharge to 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 DRY PROCESS HARD-
 BOARD INDUSTRY
 The effluent limitations reflecting this technology is no
 discharge to 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 WET PROCESS HARD-
 BOARD INDUSTRY

 Based upon the information contained in Sections III through
 VIII of this report, a determination has been made that the
 degree of effluent reduction attainable through the applica-
 tion of the best available technology economically achievable
 would result in the discharge of 0.2 kilograms per ton (0.4
 pounds per ton) of BOD and 1.1 kilograms per ton (2.1 pounds
 per ton) suspended solids.

 Identification of Best Available Technology
 Economically Achievable

 Best available technology economically achievable for the
 wet process hardboard industry is achieved by inplant
                              280


    NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
modifications, recycle and reuse of certain processes  within
the mill and with activated sludge treatment  of  the  discharge
water.  To implement this requires:

          (a) Installation of a pre-press  between  the  cyclone
              and stock chest to reduce  wastewater to  4.5
              cubic meters per ton (1,186  gallons  per  ton),
              the BOD to 33.8 kilograms  per ton  (67.5  pounds
              per ton), and the suspended  solids to  9  kilo-
              grams per ton (18 pounds per ton).
          (b) Recycle of process water to  cyclone  and  stock
              chest.
          (c) Discharge of process water only from the pre-
              press and the wet press.
          (d) Treatment of the process water  discharge by
              screening, primary clarification and evapora-
              tion.
          (e) Recycle of a portion of the  condensate water
              back to the process.
          (f) Activated sludge treatment of the  excess con-
              densate from the evaporator.

Rationale for the Selection of Best Pollution Control
Technology Currently Available
Age and Size of Equipment and Facilities.   As  set  forth in
this report,industry competition and  general  improvement as
set in production concepts and wastewater  management  have led
to the modernization of plant facilities throughout the in-
dustry.  With the exception of one  large mill, the  size  dif-
ferential between mills is insufficient to substantiate the
specifications for improvements in  waste control as indicated.
The one large mill should not be given special  consideration.

Engineering Aspects of Control Technique Applications.   The
process employed is presently being utilized  by 22 percent of
the industry and,therefore, can be  stated  to  be considered as
available technology.

Process Changes.  This technology requires the  installation of
a pre-press and rearrangement of process water  flow.  At least
one of the existing nine wet process  hardboard  mills  is pre-
sently using the inplant process.

Non-Water Quality Environmental Impact.  There  is  one essen-
tial impact upon major non-water elements  of  the environment:
A potential effect on soil systems  due to  the need to utilize
land as the ultimate disposition of waste  sludge.  With respect
                             281

   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


to  this,  it  is  addressed in a precautionary context  only since
no  evidence  has been discovered which even intimates a direct
impact--all  evidence points to the contrary.   Technology and
knowledge  are available to assure land disposal of sludge can
be  done with no harmful effects to the environment.

Factors Which Might  Affect Effluent Limitations.   The major
factor  and the  only  factor which should be taken into considera-
tion is temperature.   Low temperatures can have a detrimental
effect  on  biological systems,reducing their treatment effi-
ciency, causing increased concentrations of BOD and  suspended
solids  in  the effluent.  Effluent limitations  are based on an
average effluent BOD and suspended solids of 45 mg/1 and 250
mg/1, respectively.   It is felt that a well designed system,
as  described previously,can maintain this treatment  efficiency
at  temperatures such that the waste does not freeze.  Special
considerations  should be given during periods  of extreme low
temperature  when wastewater within the treatment systems ac-
tually  begins to freeze.

BEST AVAILABLEi  TECHNOLOGY'ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE,  GUIDELINES
AND LIMITATIONS FOR  THE WOOD PRESERVING INDUSTRY

Recommendations contained in this section for  the wood pre-
serving industry are based on data presented in other sections
of  this report.   Numerical  limitations on constituents of
discharges are  based in part on the existing performance of
the best control and treatment technology employed by a specific
plant within each category, and in part on the performance
achieved by  control  and treatment technology demonstrated in
plant studies.   These limitations are to be achieved by exist-
ing plants no later  than July 1,  1983.

Treatment  and Control Technology Models

Treatment  models representing best available technology eco-
nomically  achievable are presented below.  There are many
methods by which these effluent limitation requirements can be
achieved.  The  models shown are presented for  illustrative pur-
poses only,  and are  not intended to limit the  technology that
may be  applied.

As  in the  case  of best practical control technology  currently
available, biological treatment is the primary "end-of-the-line"
method  by  which plants can achieve the best available technology
economically achievable requirements of best available tech-
nology  economically  achievable.  Unlike best practical control
                             282

   NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
technology currently available, best  available  technology
economically achievable includes additional  treatment tech-
niques, the purpose of which is to  achieve  a reduction in
discharge beyond those capable of being  achieved  by July 1,
1983.  These treatments include, but  are not limited to,
two-stage biological treatments and polishing treatments
based on activated-carbon filtration  and chlorination.

Treatment Models Achievable by July 1,  1983

                         Biological

         U                                V
1.  Oil Separation
2.  Equalization
3.  Chemical Coagulation
4.  Sand Filtration
5.  pH Control
6.  Biological Oxidation
7.  Secondary Clarification
8.  Chlorination
         W
1.  Oil Separation
2.  Equalization
3.  Chemical Coagulation
4.  Sand Filtration
5.  pH Control
6.  Biological Oxidation - 1
7.  Biological Oxidation - 2
8.  Secondary Clarification
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Oil Separation
Equalization
Chemical Coagulation
Sand Filtration
pH Control
Soil Irrigation
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
Oil Separation
Equalization
Chemical Coagulation
Sand Filtration
pH Control
Biological Oxidation
Secondary Clarification
Carbon Filtration
1.  Oil Separation
2.  Equalization
3.  Chemical Coagulation
4.  Evaporation
                          Physical
1.
2.
3.
4.
Oil Separation
Equalization
Chemical Coagulation
Discharge to Sewer
It is unlikely that a conventional  single-stage  biological
treatment alone will consistently achieve  the  effluent
limitations required by July 1,  1983.   Polishing treatments
employing chemical oxidation, carbon  filtration, or further
biological treatment will probably  be needed.  The  capital
                             283
   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
investments  needed  to  install post-treatment  carbon  filtration
and chlorination  facilities  are estimated  to  be  $8,000  and
$5,000, respectively.   These costs are based  on  1971 costs,
a flow rate  of  19,000  liters per day (5,000 gallons  per day),
and wastewater  characteristics conforming  with the July 1,
1977 requirements.   The investment required to add a bio-
logical polishing treatment  could vary widely depending upon
the type  of  facility added.   The type chosen  would be influ-
enced by theamount of land area available.

Soil irrigation is  included  as the best available technology
economically achievable,  since it provides a  means by which
zero discharge  can  be  achieved by plants with land available
for this  use.   Wastewater disposal by evaporation and by dis-
charge to  a  sewer are  included for the same reason.   The extent
to which  evaporation by heating will be an economically viable
method by  1983  will depend upon energy costs  and volume of
wastewater involved.   It  is  anticipated that  inplant process
changes and  recycling  of  water will  reduce substantially the
total volume of water  that must be disposed of.  Spray  evapora-
tion, if proven to  be  feasible at the several plants at which
the method is under test, should provide a less  costly  alter-
native to  evaporation  by  other means.

Among the  factors that are pertinent in determining  the tech-
nology economically achievable by July 1,  1983,  the  process
employed  in  conditioning  stock for treatment  is  of primary
importance.   Because of low  flow rate and  favorable  wastewater
characteristics,  particularly the general  absence of emulsions
in process water, a zero  discharge is a feasible requirement
for plants that employ the Boulton process as the predominant
method of  conditioning.   A similar requirement is not practical
for plants using  steam conditioning.   Inplant process changes
and reuse  of some process water will reduce the  volume  of dis-
charge from  plants  in  the latter group, but to achieve  zero
discharge would require the  disposal of a  relatively large
volume of  excess  water.   Spray evaporation may prove to be a
feasible method of  disposal, but this method  will be available
only to those plants that have sufficient  land area  devotable
to this use.

Plant age, peculiarities of plant layout, and  the process
changes needed  to reduce  or  eliminate discharge  are  important
from the  standpoint of their effect  on cost of complying with
the 1983 requirements.   However, these factors are not  of
overriding importance  and do not require special considerations,
except in  cases mentioned elsewhere.   Likewise,  the  engineering
aspects of the  application of the control  techniques needed to
                              284

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE  SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


achieve 1983 effluent limitations are not unique and  should
present little problem to plants with access to competent
engineering service.

The importance of the application of 1983 technology  on  non-
water quality environment will be minimal.  Total energy
requirements will depend upon the exact methodology employed;
but for many plants, they will be reduced in total because of
inplant process changes that must be made to reduce total
water usage.  These changes and their effect on energy require-
ments are covered elsewhere.

Inplant Control

The low wastewater flow rate and stringent  limitations on
discharges that must be achieved to conform with 1983 require-
ments will necessitate a high level of water reuse, changes  in
steaming technique among plants using open  steaming,  efficient
oil recovery systems, and the initiation of an efficient pre-
ventive maintenance and housekeeping program.  The following
assumptions related to these factors were made in determining
the best available technology economically  achievable.

(1) The volume of discharge will be minimized by:

    (a) Recycling all direct-contact cooling water
    (b) Reuse of a portion of the process water for cooling
        purposes
    (c) Insulation of retorts and steam pipes to reduce  the
        volume of cylinder condensate
    (d) Use of closed steaming or modified-closed steaming
        to reduce the volume of cylinder condensate and  to
        lessen the incidence of oil-water emulsion formation
    (e) Reuse of all water contaminated with heavy metals  in
        preparing treating solutions of salt-type preserva-
        tives and fire retardants
    (f) Segregation of contaminated and uncontaminated waste
        streams

(2) Oil-recovery systems will be modified or replaced, as
    required, to ensure efficient removal of oils.

(3) Preventive maintenance and good housekeeping programs
    will be inaugurated to reduce spills and leaks and
    provide a standard procedure for cleaning up those
    that do occur.

Some of the methods of reducing waste flow  are standard  indus-
try practice, and they would normally be adopted as early  as
                             285


     NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
     INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
     UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
1977.  These  include  waste stream segregation,  recycling  of
contaminated  cooling  water,  and reuse of wastewater  from  salt-
type treatments,   Use of process water to meet  cooling  water
requirements  is  a  common practice among plants  in  Subcategory
2.  These practices are mentioned here because  of  their con-
tinued importance.

Closed steaming  is applicable to virtually all  plants using
steam conditioning.   It is the single most important inplant
process change that a plant  can make from the. standpoint  of
both reducing the  volume of  wastewater that must be  disposed
of and also reducing  emulsion formation.   Modified-closed
steaming, while  reducing the volume of wastewater  to a  lesser
extent than closed steaming, also lessens emulsion formation.
In addition,  this method substantially reduces  steam require-
ments by retaining the hot steam condensate in  the retort
rather than discharging it as it forms.

Like closed steaming,  insulation of cylinders and  pipes used
in steam transfer potentially can reduce both the  volume  of
condensate formed  and the energy requirements for  steam
generation.   The heat loss from an uninsulated  metal vessel
amounts to 7.3 kilogram-calories per hour per square meter
of surface area  (2.7  BTU per hour per square foot) for  each
degree of temperature difference between the inside  and out-
side of the vessel.   For an  uninsulated retort  2.13  meters
(7 feet) in diameter  and 36.57 meters C120 feet) long,  the
daily heat loss would be 7.56 million kilogram-calories (30
million BTU's) if  the inside and ambient temperatures were
121°C and 27°C (250°F and 80°F), respectively.  This loss
can be cut by 70 percent by  proper insulation.  In addition,
the volume of condensate produced would also be reduced
significantly.

A well executed preventive maintenance and housekeeping pro-
gram is an integral part of  the treatment and control tech-
nology required  to achieve 1983 limitations. Spills and  leaks
can largely negate the efforts directed toward  other, more
obvious aspects  of wastewater management if they are ignored.
The areas around and  in the  immediate vicinity  of  retorts and
storage tanks are  of  particular importance because of the
opportunity for  storm water  contamination from  preservative
drips and spills associated  with freshly pulled charges and
loss of preservative  from plumbing and pump leaks.   Considera-
tion should be given  to paving the area in front of  retorts
to permit channeling  of drips and spills to a sump from which
the oil can be recovered.
                              286

     NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
     INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
     UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
Discharge  Limitations

Numerical  effluent  limitations  to  meet  the  best  available
technology economically  achievable are  given  in  Tables  77 and
78  for  each subcategory  of  the  industry.  These  values  are
expressed  in the  two tables  as  kilograms  of pollutants  per
1,000 cubic meters  of product treated and in  effluent concen-
trations for information purposes  only.   The  discharge  from
a plant will be limited  on  the  basis of total weight of
pollutant  per day.  Total allowable discharge should be com-
puted from daily  production  data shown  on the permit applica-
tion.

Limitations are not placed  on total water usage,  color, and
dissolved  solids.   However,  when discharges containing  color
and dissolved solids may cause  harm to  the  receiving waters,
or  cause a violation of  existing water-quality standards,
limits will be established.

The pH of  the final effluents from wood-preserving  plants
shall be within the range of 6.0 to 8.5.

Effluent limitations for BOD, phenols,  suspended solids,  and
oil and grease are  based on  concentrations  of 50, 0.5,  100
and 25 mg/1,  respectively.   A waste flow  of 133  liters  per
cubic meter (1.0  gallons per square feet) was assumed in
calculating permissible  discharge  per unit  of production.
A lower ratio of  discharge  to volume of production  is achieved
by  several  exemplary plants  as  a result of  treating a much
higher proportion of dry stock  than is  typical for  the  indus-
try as a whole.   A  discharge of 133 liters  per cubic meter (one
gallon per  square foot)  of product is judged  to  be  the  lowest
value that  can be reasonably achieved by  plants  treating a
normal proportion of unseasoned stock.

Chemical oxygen demand may be used to monitor BOD where an
appropriate  correlation  factor  can be determined.   The
equation BOD  = 0.497 COD +  60 expresses the relationship
between the  two parameters  for  BOD values of  150  and larger.
However, the  ratio  of BOD/COD increases rapidly  with decreas-
ing BOD.   For BOD values of  50  and smaller, the  relationship
BOD = 0.161  COD has been found  to  be applicable.

Factors to  be Considered in  Applying Effluent Limitations

The identification of treatment and control technology  to
attain the  best available technology economically achievable
for the various subcategories can  be applied  uniformly  to
most plants  in the  industry.  The  exceptions  are  those
                              287

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
     TABLE  77  EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS BASED ON  BEST AVAILABLE
                TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
                (kilograms of pollutants/1000  M3 of product)3
           Wastewater                          Oil
  Sub-       Volume                            and     Suspended
Category   (liters/m5)  Phenols  COD	BOD    Grease    Solids

   1           133      0.064  41.301   6.662   3.338     13.323
          (1.0 gal/ft3) (0.004) (2.573) (0.415)  (0.208)    (0.830)

   2                    No discharge of  process water  permitted

   3                    No discharge of  process water  permitted

   4                    No discharge of  process water  permitted


aValues in parentheses are discharge equivalents in pounds/1000
     TABLE  78  EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS BASED ON BEST AVAILABLE
                TECHNOLOGY ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE
                (milligrams of pollutants/liter of water)
          Wastewater                          Oil
  Sub-       Volume                            and     Suspended
Category  (liters/m3)  Phenols  COD	BOD   Grease     Solids

   1          133         0.50   310     50       25        100
          (1.0 gal/ft3)

   2           -          No discharge of process water permitted

   3           -          No discharge of process water permitted

   4           -          No discharge of process water permitted
                              288


   NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
plants which, because of age  of  equipment  and facilities,
availability of land, or other factors,  are  unable to con-
form to these requirements.   Some  of  the factors which will
have an effect on the ability of individual  plants to meet
the recommended effluent limitations  are summarized in this
section.

Age of Plant.  The effect of  plant age  on  the achievability
of zero discharge was previously discussed.   The previous
justification for a variance  of  requirements to permit trace
amounts of pollutants in non-process  wastewater to be dis-
charged is equally applicable in this section.

Use of Salt- and Oil-Type Preservatives  in one  Retort.  The
inability of plants in Subcategory 1  which use  a single re-
tort for both salt-type and oil-type  preservatives, or which
apply dual treatments, to prevent  contamination of oily
wastewater with metals from preservatives  of the former type
was previously discussed.  Most  of the  plants in this group
are small, the operation consisting of  a single retort.  It
is recommended that a variance to  the no-discharge require-
ment for plants treating with inorganic  preservatives and
fire retardants that are in this group  be  permitted under
1983 requirements.  The proposed limitations on discharge
per unit or production given  in  Table 79 are based on the
concentrations shown and a flow  rate  of  133  liters per cubic
meter (1.0 gallon per cubic foot)  of  product treated.
                             289

    NOTICE: THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
     TABLE 79  RECOMMENDED PERMISSIBLE  DISCHARGES OF METALS
                FROM  PLANTS IN SUBCATEGORY  1  THAT EMPLOY ONE
                RETORT  TO APPLY PRESERVATIVE  TREATMENT WITH
                OIL-TYPE AND SALT-TYPE PRESERVATIVES
Parameter
Boronb
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Fluorides
Zinc
Ammonia (as N)
Phosphorus
Concentration
(mg/1)
-
1.
1.
1.
10.
2.
5.
5.

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Weight3
(Kg/1000

0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.

128
128
128
330
273
666
666

(0.
(0.
(0.
(0.
(0.
(0.
(0.
m3)

008)
008)
008)
083)
017)
041)
041)
   aValues  in parentheses  are pounds/1000  ft3.

   "Best  control technology for boron has  not been determined.
                               290

  NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
  INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
  UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT


                             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 construc-
 tion of which is commenced after the publication of proposed regula-
 tions prescribing a standard of performance."  New source technology
 shall be evaluated by adding to the consideration underlying the ident-
 ification of best available technology economically achievable a deter-
 mination of what higher levels of pollution control are available through
 the use of improved production processes and/or treatment techniques.
 Thus, 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 upon 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.  However, 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 detennination which must
 be made for new source technology is whether a standard permitting no
 discharge of pollutants is practicable.

 Specific Factors To Be Taken Into Consideration

 At least the following factors should be considered with respect to pro-
 duction processes which are to be analyzed in assessing new source tech-
 nology:

     a.  The type of process employed and 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 FOR THE VENEER AND PLYWOOD INDUSTRY

The effluent limitations for new sources is  no discharge to navigable
waters as developed in Section IX.


                                 291

    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE DRY PROCESS HARDBOARD INDUSTRY

The effluent limitations  for new sources is no discharge to navigable
waters as developed  in Section  IX.

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE WET PROCESS HARDBOARD INDUSTRY

The effluent limitations  for new sources is the same as those shown in
Section X for application  of the Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable — 0.2 kilograms per metric ton (0.4 pounds per ton)  BOD, and
1.0 kilograms per metric  ton (2.1 pounds per ton) suspended solids.

Before discharge to  a publicly-owned activated sludge or trickling fil-
ter waste water treatment  plant, a wet process hardboard mill should sub-
ject its discharge to primary treatment to remove a majority of fiber
in the wastewater.   In addition, the pH may have to be adjusted to 6.0
to 6.5.  This would  have  to be  decided on a plant-to-plant basis with
consideration given  to the relative volume of hardboard mill discharge
compared to the domestic waste  being treated.

There are no known contaminants which will pass through such a system.

NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WOOD
PRESERVING INDUSTRY

General
The technology by which zero discharge of process water from new plants
in Subcategories 2, 3, and 4 can be achieved is both practical  and cur-
rently available.  Performance standards for new plants in these groups
will remain unchanged from those outlined in the two preceding  sections.
The remarks which follow pertain to plants in Subcategory 1.

The process by which wood is treated by plants in Subcategory 1 is direct
and simple.  Basically, it consists of placing the stock in a pressure
retort, conditioning it using steam or vapors of an organic solvent,  and
impregnating it with a preservative or fire retardant.  The opportunity
for change in the production process of an operation of this type is
limited.  Alternative raw materials are not available.  Replacement of
existing preservatives with new or different chemicals is not feasible
in the foreseeable future.  Modification of preservatives to reduce pollu-
tion is practical in the case of pentachlorophenol.  Two processes which
use recoverable solvents for this chemical are being used by a  limited
number of plants.  However, both processes are proprietary and  may be used
only by licensees.

A consideration of the over-all operation reveals only two processing
steps in which the opportunity exists for changes that can lead to re-
duced discharge.  Both are related to preparation of stock for  preserva-
tive treatment, and both are expensive in terms of the capital  investment


                                 292

    NOTICE:   THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS  BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
required.  One of the methods Is to treat dry stock,  and  thereby abrogate
the need to steam condition It.   The other method Is  to steam condition
or vapor dry stock In a separate retort from the  one  In which the pre-
servative treatment is applied.   Both methods, which  are  used to some ex-
tent by existing plants, serve to separate conditioning operations  from
treating operations and thereby  prevent contamination of  water with pre-
servatives.

Approximately 30 percent of the  plants in the United  States  currently
kiln dry a portion of their stock prior to treatment. Only  about 10
percent use kiln drying for all  their stock.   There are two  main reasons
why kilns are not used more widely than they are. First, the capital
investment is high, amounting to $60,000 per kiln.  A minimum of five
kilns would be required if all the material treated by a  typical three-
retort plant were dried prior to preservative treatment.   Secondly, kiln
drying darkens the surface of poles so that some  poles do not meet  the
color standards under which an increasing percentage  of the  ones treated
with pentachlorophenol are sold.

The investment required to install  a sufficient number of retorts so that
steam conditioning and treating  are not conducted in  the  same vessel
would be similar to that required above.  For a plant with a design capac-
ity of 850 m3 (30,000 ft3) of production per week, a  minimum of three con-
ditioning cylinders 2.13 m x 36.58 m (71 x 120')  would be required  to sup-
ply the 15 charges of conditioned poles needed each week. The investment
required for that portion of the plant devoted to steaming,  including steam
generating and vacuum equipment, would amount to  an estimated $260,000.
The plant would still have wastewater to treat, albeit water that would be
much less contaminated than that from a plant steaming and treating in the
same retort.

A detailed discussion of the costs  associated with kiln drying and  steam-
ing is presented in Section VIII.

A reduction in the volume of discharge can also be obtained  by air  season-
ing stock before treating it. Some air seasoning takes place in the nor-
mal processing of material on the yard, and most  plants ordinarily  main-
tain an inventory of untreated stock in open stacks to expedite the fill-
ing of orders.  Any seasoning that occurs here lessens the conditioning
time required when the material  is  treated.  To air season thoroughly,
certain items, such as poles and piling, take up  to six months.  The
large inventory required for this imposes a financial burden on the owners
and is not practical  during a prolonged period of high demand such  as cur-
rently exists.  Furthermore, deterioration is a problem in the South when
stock is stored for the time required for it to air season.

It is apparent from the foregoing discussion  that there is no simple, eco-
nomically viable method to reduce the volume  of discharge from plants in
                                 293


    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE  RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN THIS  REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON  COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


Subcategory  1 below  that based  on  the best available technology economi-
cally achievable.  It  is recommended that new sources performance stan-
dards for plants in  Subcategory 1  remain the same as those developed in
Section X.

Treatment And Control  Technology Models

Treatment models applicable  to  new source performance standards are pre-
sented below.  The models are the  same as those suggested in Section X,
except that  polishing  treatments involving chlori nation and activated
carbon filtration are  not included.  The use of the latter methods will
be added to  the recommended  methods of wastewater treatment for new sources
when additional data on  their applicability to wood preserving effluents
become available.

         TREATMENT MODELS;   NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

                             Biological
     1.  Oil Separation                1.  Oil Separation
     2.  Equalization                  2.  Equalization
     3.  Chemical Coagulation          3.  Chemical Coagulation
     4.  Sand Filtration               4.  Sand Filtration
     5.  pH Control                    5.  pH Control
     6.  Soil Irrigation               6.  Biological Oxidation - 1
                                       7.  Biological Oxidation - 2
                                       8.  Secondary Clarification

                              Physical
     1.  Oil Separation                1.  Oil Separation
     2.  Equalization                  2.  Equalization
     3.  Chemical Coagulation          3.  Chemical Coagulation
     4.  Evaporation                   4.  Discharge to Sewer
Discharge Limitations

Numerical limitations for new source performance standards are given in
Tables 80 and 81 for each Subcategory of the wood preserving industry.
These values are expressed in the two tables as kilograms of pollutants
per 1000 m3 of product treated and in effluent concentrations for informa-
tion purposes only.  The discharge from a plant will be limited on the
basis of total weight of pollutant per day.  Total allowable discharge
should be computed from daily production data shown on the permit appli-
cation.

                                 294

    NOTICE:   THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE  BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
Limitations are not placed on total water usage, color,  and  dissolved
solids.  However, when discharges containing color and dissolved  solids
may cause harm to the receiving waters, or cause a violation of existing
water quality standards, limits will be established.
The pH of the final effluents from wood preserving plants  shall be  with-
in the range of 6.0 to 8.5.
         TABLE 80  STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW SOURCES
            (kilograms of pollutants/1000 m3 of product)*
                         ____^	Subcategory
  Parameter	             1               2        *
Phenols                   0.064 (0.004)** No discharge  of process water
COD                      41.301 (2.573)   permitted  for plants  in Sub-
BOD                       6.662 (0.415)   categories  2,  3,  and  4.
Oil and Grease            3.338 (0.208)
Suspended Solids         13.323 (0.830)
*Based on a flow rate of 133 liters/m^ (1.0 gal/ft^).
**Parenthetical values are pounds/1000 ft3.	
         TABLE 81  STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW SOURCES
              (milligrams of pollutants/liter of water)
                             ___^	    Subcategory
  Parameter	          1          2         3~
Phenols                         0.50      No  discharge of process water
COD                           310         permitted  for plants in Sub-
BOD                            50         categories, 2, 3, and 4
Oil and Grease                 25
Suspended Solids              100
                               295
    NOTICE:  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


Effluent limitations for BOD, phenols, suspended solids,  and  oil  and
grease are based on concentrations of 50, 0.5, 100,  and 25  mg/liter,
respectively.  A waste flow of 133 liters per cubic  meter (1.0  gallons/
ft3) was assumed in calculating permissible discharge per unit  of pro-
duction.  A lower ratio of discharge to volume of production  is achieved
by several exemplary plants as a result of treating  a much  high propor-
tion of dry stock than is typical for the industry as a whole.   A dis-
charge of 133 liters per cubic foot (1.0 gallons/1000 ft3)  of product
is judged to the lowest value than can be reasonably achieved by plants
treating a normal proportion of unseasoned stock.

Chemical oxygen demand may be used to monitor BOD where an  appropriate
correlation factor can be determined.  The equation  BOD = 0.497 COD + 60
expresses the relationship between the two parameters for BOD values of
150 and larger.  However, the ratio of BOD/COD increases  rapidly with
decreasing BOD.  For BOD values of 50 or smaller, the relationship BOD =
0.161 COD has been found to be applicable.

Factors To Be Considered In Applying Effluent Limitations

The identification of standards of performance for new sources  for the
various subcategories can be applied uniformly to most plants in the
industry.  The exceptions are those plants which, because of  age of equip-
ment and facilities, availability of land, or other  factors,  are unable
to attain these performance levels.  Some of the factors  which  will have
an effect on the ability of individual plants to meet the recommended
performance standards are summarized in this section.

Use of Salt- and Oil-Type Preservatives in One Retort - The inability of
plants in Subcategory 1 that use a single retort for both salt-type and
oil-type preservatives, or that apply  dual  treatments, to  prevent con-
tamination of oily wastewaters with metals from preservatives of the
former type was discussed in Section IX.  Most of the plants  in this
group are small, the operation consisting of a single retort.  It is
recommended that a variance to the no discharge requirement for plants
treating with inorganic preservatives and fire retardants that  are in
this group be permitted under new source performance standards.  The
proposed limitations on discharge per unit of production  given  in Table
82 are based on the concentrations shown and a flow  rate  of 133 liters
per cubic meter (1.0 gallons/ft3) of product treated.

P re treatment Requirements

Effluents from preservative treatments with oily preservatives  contain
no constituent that is incompatible with a well designed  and  operated
municipal wastewater treating plant.  This statement presupposes that
the concentrations of phenolic compounds and oils are within  the range
                                296
    NOTICE:   THESE  ARE  TENTATIVE  RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
    INFORMATION  IN  THIS REPORT  AND ARE  SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
    UPON  COMMENTS RECEIVED  AND  FURTHER  INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT
  TABLE 82   RECOMMENDED PERMISSIBLE  DISCHARGE OF METALS:
     PLANTS  APPLYING DUAL TREATMENTS OF SALT-TYPE AND
     OIL-TYPE  PRESERVATIVES, AND  PLANTS USING A SINGLE
               RETORT TO APPLY BOTH PRESERVATIVES
Parameter
Boron**
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Fluorides
Zinc
Phosphates
Nitrogen (NH3)
Concentration
Cmg/1)
-
1
1
1
10
2
5
5

.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
Weight*
(Kg/1000 m3)

0
0
0
1
0
0
0

.128
.128
.128
.330
.273
.666
.666
-
(0
(0
CO
(o
Co
CO
CO

.008)
.008)
.008)
.083)
.017)
.041)
.041)
*Parenthetical  values in pounds/1000 ft3 of product  treated

**Best control  technology for boron has not been  determined
                               297
     NOTICE;  THESE ARE TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
     INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
     UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
DRAFT


considered normal for such wastes.  Approximately 15 percent of the plants
in the U.S. currently are disposing of their waste in this  manner.  The
contractor is not aware of any instance where this practice has had a
deleterious effect on the operation of a municipal sewage facility.

Disposal of raw wastewater from treatments employing inorganic  salt pre-
servatives is not recommended.  Copper, chromium, and arsenic are toxic
to microorganisms in.low concentrations and, based on the work  of Jones
(46) are capable of disrupting a biological wastewater treating system.
Treatment of such waste to precipitate most of the heavy metals prior  to
discharge to the sewer is suggested.
                                298


   NOTICE;  THESE  ARE  TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED UPON
   INFORMATION  IN  THIS REPORT AND  ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED
   UPON COMMENTS RECEIVED  AND FURTHER INTERNAL REVIEW BY EPA.

-------
 DRAFT
                        SECTION XII

                      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The preparation and writing of this document for the veneer/
plywood  industry and the hardboard industry was accomplished
through  the efforts of Dr. Richard H. Jones, Mr. John D. Crane,
Mr. Robert A. Morrell, and Mr. Leonard P. Levine all of Environ-
mental Science and Engineering, Inc.  (ESE).  Dr. John Meiler
was a consultant to ESE and provided  guidance during the pre-
paration of the report.  The Mississippi Forest Products Lab-
oratory was responsible for the preparation and writing of
the sections on the wood preserving industry.

Industrial Advisory Groups for both the plywood/veneer and the
hardboard industry were established and these groups assisted
this project by supplying information and making recommend-
ations.  The plywood/veneer advisory  group consisted of:

          Mr. Bruce Greforth - National Forest Products
                               Association
          Mr. J. Tait Hardaway - Memphis Plywood Corporation
          Mr. Wallace N. Corry - Boise Cascade
          Mr. W. D. Page - American Plywood Association
          Mr. Carl Erb - American Plywood Association
          Mr. Mac Donald - Hardwood Plywood Association
          Mr. John Stover - The Mortenson Company
          Mr. Matt Gould - Georgia-Pacific Corporation
          Mr. Roger Sherwood - Georgia-Pacific Corporation
          Mr. Don Deardorf - Agnew Plywood
          Mr. Harry Bartels - Champion International
          Mr. 0. B. Burns, Jr. - Westavco
          Mr. Ron Presley - U. S.  Plywood

The hardboard advisory group consisted of:

          Mr. Ken R.  Peterson - American Hardboard Association
          Mr. James E.  Leker - Masonite Corporation
          Mr. Fred E.  Blattner - Celotex Corporation
          Mr. Greg M.  Schaefer - Boise Cascade Institute
          Mr. John M.  Sims - Abitibi Corporation
          Mr. Steven  Myers - Abitibi Corporation

Several industrial trade associations and individual corp-
orations  provided assistance and cooperation to the wood pre-
serving study.   Among these were:

          American Wood-Preservers'  Association
          American Wood-Preservers'  Institute


                             299

-------
DRAFT
          J. H.  Baxter  and  Company
          Cascade  Pole  Company
          Fernwood Industries
          Koppers  Company,  Inc.
          L. D.  McFarland Company
          Moss-American,  Inc.
          Sheridan Pressure Treated Lumber,  Inc.
          W. J.  Smith Wood-Preserving Company
          Society  of American Wood Preservers
          Weyerhaeuser  Company
          Wyckoff  Company

Akcnowledgement  is also expressed for the assistance of the
Industry Coordinating Committee and the many individuals who
contributed the  data for use in the study of wood preserving.
Specific appreciation is extended to:

          Mr. C. W. Best  -  J. H. Baxter and Company
          Mr. C. A. Burdell - Southern Wood Piedmont Company
          Mr. L. E. Crane -  Weyerhaeuser Company
          Mr. P. C. Gaskin  - Moss-American,  Inc.
          Mr. C. D. Hudson  - Wyckoff Company
          Mr. M. D. Miller  - Koppers Company, Inc.
          Dr. J. N. Roche -  Koppers Company, Inc.

Mr. Richard Williams of the EPA Effluent Guidelines Division
was the Project  Officer for the Timber Products Industry and
was responsible  for the supervision and the preparation of
this document.

Special consideration should go to Mr. George Webster, Chief,
Technical Assistance and Information Branch, Effluent Guide-
lines Division of  EPA who gave helpful advice and suggestions
throughout this  project.

Acknowledgement  and appreciation is given to the secretarial
staffs of Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. and the
Mississippi Forest Products  Laboratory who typed and retyped
this report numerous times.
                             300

-------
 DRAFT
                          SECTION XIII

                           REFERENCES

 1.  Thompson, W. S., "Status of Pollution Control  in the  Wood
     Preserving Industry,"  Proceedings,  American Wood Preserver's
     Association. 1973 (in press].

 2.  American Wood Preservers' Association,  Proceedings, Vol.  68,
     pg. 275, 286, 287, 1972.

 3.  Forest Products Industry Directory,  Miller Freeman Publica-
     tions, San Francisco, 1972.

 4.  Market Profile - Softwood and Hardwood  Plywood.  U.S.A.  and
     Canada, Forest Industries, Portland, Oregon, 1969.

 5.  Panshin, Alexis John et al, Forest Products:  Their Sources.
     Production, and Utilization, McGraw-Hill.  New  York, First
     Edition, 1950.

 6.  Market Profile - Hardboard.  Forest  Industries,  Portland,
     Oregon

 7.  MacDonald, Ronald G., Editor,  and  Franklin,  John N.,  Techni-
     cal Editor, The Pulping of Wood, Second Edition, Volume I,
     McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969.

 8.  Gehm,  Harry, Industrial Waste  Study  of  the Paper and  Allied
     Products Industries, Environmental Protection  Agency, July,
     1971.

 9.  "Plywood and Other Wood-Based Panels",  Food and  Agricultural
     Organization of the United Nations,  Rome,  1966.

10.  Bodien, Danforth G., Plywood Plant Glue Wastes Disposal.
     Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,  Northwest
     Region, Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory,  U.S. Department
     of the Interior, 1969.

11.  "Fibreboard and Particle Board", Food and  Agricultural  Organ-
     ization of the United Nations, Rome, 1958.

12.  Asplund, A., The Origin and Development of the Defibrator
     Process, FAO/ECE/Board Cons.,  Paper  5.2.

13.  Watts, E. W., Industrial Experience  in  the Manufacture  of
     Smooth-2-Sides Hardboard, FAO/ECE/Board Cons.. Paper  5.11.
                              301

-------
DRAFT
14.  Gettle, Karl, A Guide  for the Study of the Manufacturing
     of Hardboard, American Hardboard Association and American
     Industrial Arts Association

15.  Basic Hardboard - Proposed Voluntary Product Standard TS
     Tl)8a, American Hardboard Association. Revision of CS Z51-
     oTlTardboard, February 13, 1973.

16.  Standard Industrial Classification Manual, prepared by the
     Statistical Policy Division of the Office of Management
     and Budget, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
     D.C., 1972.

17.  Stephenson, J. Newell, Editor, Preparation and Treatment
     of Wood Pulp. Vol. 1, McGraw-Hill, New York 1950.
18.  Schaumburg, Frank D., The Influence of Log Handling on
     '            -¥
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.  1973.
Water Quality, Office of Research and Monitoring
ing on
,  U.S.
19.  Haskell, Henry H., "Handling Phenolic Resin Adhesive Wash
     Water in Southern Pine Plywood Plants," Forest Products
     Journal. Vol. 21, No. 9, September 1971.

20.  Mortenson, A. W. , Private Communications (Inferno Steam
     Systems, Portland, Oregon) April - June, 1973.

21.  Gran, Gunnar, Waste Water From Fiberboard Mills.  Stockholm,
     Sweden

22.  Leker, James E., Masonite Corporation, Private Communica-
     tions, January - June, 1973.

23.  Thompson, W.S. and Dust, J.V.,"Pollution Control  in the Wood
     Preserving Industry.  Part 1.  Nature and Scope of the Prob-
     lem," Forest Products Journal. 21(9), pp 70-75, 1971.

24.  Mississippi Forest Products Laboratory, Unpublished Data,
     Mississippi State University, State College, Mississippi,
     1970.

25.  Dust, J. V., and Thompson, W. S., "Pollution Control in the
     Wood Preserving Industry, Part 4.  Biological Methods  of
     Treating Wastewater." Forest Products Journal, in press,  1973.

26.  Sohlman, L., "Measures Taken by the Wallboard Mill of Skinn-
     skatteberg to Control Water Pollution," International  Congress
     on Industrial Wastewater, Stockholm,Sweden.
                              302

-------
 DRAFT


 27.  Nepper, M., "Biological Treatment of Strong Industrial Waste
     from a Fiberboard Factory," Purdue Waste Water Conference,
     1967.

 28.  Buckley, D. B. and McKeown, J. J., An Analysis of the Per-
     formance of Activated Sludge and Aerated Stabilization
     BTsin 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 Improve-
     ment, Inc., 1973.

 29.  Thompson, W. S., "Contribution of the Wood Preserving Indus-
     try to Water Pollution," Proceedings, Conference on Pollution
     Abatement and Control in the Wood Preserving Industry, Missis-
     sippi Forest Products Laboratory, Mississippi State University
     State College, Mississippi 1971, pp 50-75.

 30.  American Petroleum Institute, Manual on Disposal of Refinery
     Wastes.  Vol. I.  Waste Water Containing Oil [6th Edition! .
     92 pp, 1959";      	~~~~^	

 31.  Thompson, W. S., Pollution Control, Chapter 11, D.D. Nicholas
     and W. E. Loos, Editors, Syracuse University Press, In Press,
     1973.

 32.  Anonymous, The Cost of Clean Waste;   Vol. Ill, Industrial
     Waste Profiles, NO.  5 - Petroleum Refining, U.S. Department
     of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 1967.

 33.  Wallace,  A. T., Rohlich, G.  A.,  and Villemonte, J.  R., "The
     Effect of Inlet Conditions on Oil-Water Separators  at  SOHIO's
     Toledo Refinery," Proceedings.  20th Purdue Industrial  Waste
     Conference, pp. 618-6Z5, 1965.    "~~~~	

 34.  Thompson, W.  S., "Pollution  Abatement by In-Plant Process
     Changes and Sanitation," Proceedings. Conference on Pollution
     Abatement and Control in the Wood Preserving Industry, MissTs"-
     sippi Forest Products Laboratory, Mississippi  State University,
     State College,  Mississippi,  pp.  116-129, 1971.

35.  Jones,  R.  H.,  and Frank, W.  R.,  "Wastewater Treatment  Methods
     in the^Wood Preserving Industry," Proceedings.  Conference on
     n0lj:ut^?n Abatement  and Control  in the Wood Preserving Industry,
     w. s.  Thompson,  Editor,  Mississippi  Forest Products Laboratory,
     Mississippi State  University,  State  College, Mississippi, 1971,
     pp.   206-216.

36.  Simonsen,  R.  N.,"0il  Removal  by  Air  Flotation  at SOHIO Refin-
     eries»" Proceedings.  American Petroleum  Institute,  42CIII).
     pp.  399-4U6,  1962.    ~~~~	
                             303

-------
DRAFT


37.  Western, R. F. and Merman, R. G., "The Chemical Flocculation
     of a Refinery Waste," Proceedings, American Petroleum Insti-
     tute, 34(111), pp 207-224, 1954?

38.  Middlebrook, E. J., "Wastes From The Preservation of Wood,"
     Journal, Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE, 94, pp 41-56,
     1968.

39.  Gaskin, P. C., "A Wastewater Treating Plant for the Wood
     Preserving Industry," Proceedings, Conference on Pollution
     Abatement and Control in the Wood Preserving Industry,
     (W.S.Thompson, Editor) Mississippi Forest Products Labora-
     tory, Mississippi State University, State College, Mississippi,
     pp 271-281, 1971.

40.  van Frank, A. J. and Eck, J. C., "Water Pollution Control in
     the Wood Preservation Industry," Proceedings, American Wood
     Preservers* Association, 65, pp 157-161, 1969.

41.  American Wood Preservers' Association, Report on Information
     and Technical Development Committees, Proceedings, American
     Wood Preservers' Association, Washington, D.C., 52, pp 187-194,
     1956.

42.  Halff, A. H., "Slow Sand Filtration of Wood Treating Plant
     Waste," Proceedings, American Wood Preservers' Association,
     55, pp 184-188, 1959.

43.  Halladay, W. B. and Crosby, R.H., "Current Techniques Of Treat-
     ing Recovered Oils and Emulsions," Proceedings, American Petro-
     leum Institute, 44(111), pp 68-73, 1964.

44.  Dust, J. V., "Sludge Production and Dewatering," Proceedings
     Conference on Pollution Abatement and Control in the Wood Pre-
     gerving Industry [W. S. Thompson. Editor)t Mississippi Forest
     Products Laboratory, Mississippi State University, State College,
     Mississippi, pp 85-95, 1971.

45.  Schwoyer, W., "The Permutit DCG Unit," Proceedings, Conference
     on Pollution Abatement and Control in the Wood Preserving In-
     dustry,(W.S. Thompson, Editor), Mississippi Forest Products
     Laboratory, Mississippi State University, State College,
     Mississippi, pp 96-115, 1971.

46.  Jones, R. H., "Toxicity in Biological Waste Treatment Proces-
     ses," Proceedings. Conference on Pollution Abatement and Con-
     trol in the Wood^PrFseVving Industry,(W.S. Thompson, Editor)
     Mississippi Forest Products Laboratory, Mississippi State
     University, State College, Mississippi, pp 217-231, 1971.
                              304

-------
DRAFT


47.  Dodge, B. F.,  and Reams,  D.  C.,  Jr.,  "Disposing  of Plating
     Room Waste," Research Report No. 9,  American Electroplaters
     Society, New York, New York  1949.

48.  American Wood Preservers'  Association,  Report on Informa-
     tion and Technical Development Committees,  Proceedings,
     Washington, D.C., 54, pp  188-190,  1958.

49.  Bliss, H., "Developing a  Waste Disposal Process," Chem.
     Eng. Progr.. 44, pp 887-894, 1948.

50.  Chamberlin, N.S., and Day, R.V., "Technology of  Chrome  Re-
     duction with Sulfur Dioxide," Proceedings,  llth  Industrial
     Waste Conference. Purdue  University,  pp 129-156, 1956.

51.  Nyquist, O.W.  and Carroll, H.R., "Design and Treatment  of
     Metal Processing Wastewaters," Sew.  Indus.  Wastes,  31,
     pp 941-948, 1959.

52.  Stone, E.H.F., "Treatment  of Non-Ferrous Metal Process
     Waste of Kynoch Works, Birmingham, England," Proceedings,
     25th Industrial Waste Conference,  Purdue University,  pp  848-
     855, 1967.

53.  Hansen, N.H.,  and Zabban,  W., "Design and Operation Problems
     of a Continuous Automatic  Plating  Waste Treatment Plant  at
     the Data Processing Division, IBM, Rochester, Minnesota,"
     Proceedings. 14th Purdue  Industrial  Waste Conference, pp 227-
     249, 19597

54.  Anderson, J.S. and lobst,  E.H.,  Jr.,  "Case  History  of Waste-
     water Treatment at a General Electric Appliance  Plant," Jour.
     Water Pollution Control Federation,  10, pp  1786-1795, 19~oTT

55.  Zabban, W. and Jewett, H.W., "The  Treatment of Fluoride Waste"
     Proceedings, 22nd Purdue  Industrial  Waste Conference, pp 706-
     716, 19677  ~'

56.  Gulp, R.L. and Stoltenburg,  H.A.,  "Fluoride Reduction at La
     Crosse, Kansas," Jour. AWWA, 50, pp  423-437,  1958.

57.  Wamsley, R. and Jones, W.F., "Fluoride  Removal," Water and
     Sewage Works.  94, pp 372-376, 1947.

58.  Magnusen, L.M., Waugh, T.C., Galle,  O.K., and Bredfeldt, J.,
    "Arsenic in Detergents, Possible  Danger  and  Pollution  Hazard"
     Science, 168,  pp 389-390,  1970.
                             305

-------
DRAFT


59.  Shen,  Y.S.  and Chen,  C.S.,  "Relation Between Black-Foot
     Disease  and the Pollution of Drinking Water by Arsenic in
     Taiwan," Proceedings.  2nd International Conference Water
     Pollution Research! Tokoyo.  Pergamon Press. New York.
     pp  173-190, 1964.

60.  Irukayama,  K.,  Discussion of Paper  "Relation Between Black-
     Foot Disease  and the  Pollution  of Drinking Water by Arsenic
     in  Taiwan," 1964.  (See  Shen  and Chen, Reference 59)

61.  Cherkinski,  S.N.  and  Genzburg,  F.I., "Purification of Arsen-
     ious Waste  Waters," Water Pollution Abstracts. 14, pp 315-
     316, 1941.          	

62.  Russell,  L.V.,  "Heavy Metals Removal From Wood Preserving
     Wastewater,"  Proceedings. 27th  Purdue Industrial Waste Con-
     ference,  1972,  in  press.

63.  Russell,  L.V.,  "Treatment of CCA-,  FCAP-, and FR-type Waste-
     waters,"  Proceedings. Conference on Pollution Abatement and
     Control  in  the  Wood Preserving  Industry, [W.S. Thompson. Ed.)
     Mississippi  Forest Products  Laboratory, Mississippi State
     University,  State  College, Mississippi, pp 249-260, 1971.

64.  Barth, E.F.,  Salotto, B.V.,  English, J.N., and Ettinger, M.B.,
     "Effects  of a Mixture of Heavy  Metals on Sewage Treatment
     Processes,"  Proceedings. 18th Industrial Waste Conference.
     Purdue University, Lafayette, pp 616-635, 1964.

65.  Kugelman, I.J.,  and McCarty,  P.L.,  "Cation Toxicity and
     Stimulation  in  Anaerobic Waste  Treatment," Journal, WPCF,
     37(1):97-116,  1965.                        	  	

66.  McDermott,  G.N., Barth, E.F., Salotto, B.V., and Ettinger,
     M.B., "Zinc  in  Relation to Activated Sludge and Anaerobic
     Digestion Process," Proceedings. 17th Industrial Waste Con-
     ference,  Purdue  University,  pp  461-475, 1964.

67.  Young, "Anionic  and Cationic Exchange for Recovery and Puri-
     fication  of Chrome from Plating Process Wastewaters," Pro-
     ceedings. 18th  Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University,
     pp  454-464,  1964.

68.  Gilbert,  L.,  Morrison, W.S.,  and Kahler, F.H., "Use of Ion
     Exchange  Resins  in Purification of Chromic Acid Solutions,"
     Proceedings.  Amer. Electroplating Soc., 39, pp 31-54, 1952.

69.  Costa, R.L.,  "Regeneration of Chromic Acid Solutions  by Ion
     Exchange,"  Ind. Eng. Chem..  42, pp 308-311, 1950.
                              306

-------
 DRAFT


 70.  American Wood Preservers' Association, Report on Informa-
     tion and Technical Development Committees, Proceedings,
     American Wood Preservers' Association, Washington, D7c.,
     53, pp 215-220, 1957.

 71.  Sweets, W.H., Hamdy, M.K., and Weiser, H.H.,  "Microbiolog-
     ical Studies on the Treatment of Petroleum Refinery Phenolic
     Wastes," Sewage Ind. Wastes, 26, pp 862-868,  1954.

 72.  Reid, G.W. and Libby, R.W.,  "Phenolic Waste Treatment Studies,"
     Proceedings. 12th Industrial Waste Conference.  Purdue Uni-
     versity, pp 250-258, 1957.~~

 73.  Ross, W.K., and Sheppard, A.A.,  "Biological Oxidation of
     Petroleum Phenolic Wastewater,"  Proceedings.  10th Industrial
     Waste Conference. Purdue University, pp 106-119, 1955.

 74.  Reid, G.W., Wortman, R. and  Walker, R., "Removal of Phenol
     with Biological Slimes," Proceedings, llth Industrial Waste
     Conference. Purdue University, pp 354-357, 1956.

 75.  Harlow, H.W., Shannon,  E.S., and Sercu, C.L.,  "A Petro-
     chemical Waste Treatment System," Proceedings.  16th Indus-
     trial Waste Conference, Purdue University, pp  156-166,  1961.

 76.  Montes, G.E., Allen, D.L., and Showell, E.B.,  "Petrochemical
     Waste Treatment Problems," Sewage Ind.  Wastes,  28, pp 507-
     512, 1956.                	*	

 77.  Dickerson, B.W.  and Laffey,  W.T., "Pilot Plant  Studies  of
     Phenolic Wastes from Petrochemical Operations," Proceedings,
     13th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University,  pp 780-
     799, 1958."

 78.  Davies, R.W., Biehl, J.A., and Smith, R.M.,  "Pollution  Con-
     trol and Waste Treatment at  an Inland Refinery," Proceedings,
     21st Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University,  pp 126-
     138,1967.

 79.  Austin, R.H., Meehan, W.F.,  and  Stockham,  J.D.,  "Biological
     Oxidation of Oil-Containing  Wastewaters,"  Ind.  Eng.  Chem.,
     46,  pp  316-318,  1954.                     	fi	

80.  Prather,  B.V.,  and Gaudy, A.F.,  Jr.,  "Combined  Chemical,
     Physical,  and Biological Processes in Refinery  Wastewater
     Purification," Proceedings.  American Petroleum  Institute,
     44(111),  pp 105-112,  1964.	
                             307

-------
DRAFT


81o  Davies, J.J. , "Economic Considerations of Oxidation Towers','
     Proceedings, Conference on Pollution Abatement and Control
     in the Wood  Preserving Industry,(W.S. Thompson, Editor}
     Mississippi  Forest Products Laboratory, Mississippi State
     University,  State College, Mississippi, pp 195-205, 1971.

82.  Ullrich, A.H., and Smith, M.W., "The Biosorption Process
     of Sewage and Waste Treatment," Sewage and Ind. Wastes,
     23, pp 1248-1253, 1951.

83.  Ullrich, A,Ho, and Smith, M.W. , "Operation Experience With
     Activated Sludge Biosorption  at Austin, Texas," Sewage and
     Industrial Wastes, 29 pp 400-413, 1957.

84.  Besselieure, E.Be, The Treatment  of Industrial Wastes,
     McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969.

85.  Preussner, R.D., and Mancini, J., "Extended Aeration Acti-
     vated Sludge Treatment of Petrochemical Waste at the Houston
     Plant of Petro-Tex Chemical Corporation," Proceedings, 21st
     Industrial Waste Conference,  Purdue University, pp, 591-599,
     1967.

86.  Coe, R.H., "Bench-Scale Method for Treating Waste by Acti-
     vated Sludge," Petroleum Processing, 7, pp 1128-1132, 1952.

87.  Ludberg, J0E0, and Nicks, G.D., "Phenols and Thiocyanate
     Removed From Coke Plant Effluent," Ind. Wastes (November)
     pp 10-13, 1969.

88.  American Wood Preservers' Association, Report of Wastewater
     Disposal Committee, Proceedings, American Wood Preservers'
     Association, Washington, D.C.7 56, pp 201-204, 1960.

89.  Cooke, R., and Graham, P.W.,  "The Biological Purification
     of the Effluent from a Lurgi  Plant Gasifying Bituminous
     Coal," Int. Jour. Air Water Pollution. 9(3), pg. 97, 1965.

90.  Badger, E.H.M. and Jackman, M.I., "Loading Efficiencies  in
     the Biological Oxidation of Spent Gas Liquor," Journal and
     Proceedings, Inst. Sewage Purification, 2:159, 1961.

91.  Nakashio, M. , "Phenolic Waste Treatment by an Activated-
     Sludge Process,"  Hakko Kogaku Zasshi 47:389, Chem. Abs.
     71(8):236, 1969.                              	  	

92.  Reid, G.W., and Janson, R.J., "Pilot Plant Studies on Phenolic
     Wastes at Tinker Air Force Base," Proceedings. 10th Purdue
     Industrial Waste Conference,  p 28, 1955.
                              308

-------
 DRAFT


 93.  Kostenbader, P.O. and Flacksteiner, J.W.  (Bethlehem Steel
      Corporation), "Biological Oxidation of Coke Plant Weak
      Ammonia Liquor," J.WPCF, 41(2) :199, 1969.

 94.  Kirsh, E.J. and Etzel, J.E., "Microbial Decomposition of
      Pentachlorophenol," (Submitted for Publication,  J.WPCF)
      Personal Correspondence from E.J. Kirsh to Warren S.  Thomp-
      son, 1972.

 95.  Fisher, C.W., "Koppers ' Experience Regarding Irrigation  of
      Industrial Effluent Waters and Especially  Wood Treating
      Plant Effluents," Proceedings, Conference  on Pollution Abate
      ment and Control in the Wood Preserving Industry (W.S. Thomp
      son, Editor), Mississippi Forest Products  Laboratory, Missis
      sippi State University, State College, Mississippi, pp 232-
      248, 1971.

 96.  American Petroleum Institute, Manual on Disposal of Refinery
      Wastes. Vol. I. Waste Water Containing Oil (6th  Edition),
      92 pp,
 97.  Montes, G.E., Allen, D.L.,  and Showell,  E .B. /'Petrochemical
      Waste Treatment Problems,"  Sewage Ind. Wastes.  28:507-512,
      1956.                      - -

 98.  Biczysko, J. and Suschka, J., "Investigations on Phenolic
      Wastes Treatment in an Oxidation Ditch," in Advances  in
      Water Pollution Research, Munich Conference,  Vol.  z,  pp 285-
      289, Pergamon Press, New York, 1967.

 99.  Skogen, D.B., "Treat HPT Wastes With  Bugs," Hydrocarbon Pro-
      cessing. 46(7):105, 1967.                    -

100.  Crane, L.E., "An Operational Pollution Control  System for
      Pressure Treating Plant Waste," Proceedings.  Conference on
      Pollution Abatement and Control in the Wood Preserving In-
      dustry. (W.S. Thompson, Editor) Mississippi Forest Products
      Laboratory, Mississippi State University,  State College,
      Mississippi, pp 261-270, 1971.

101.  Gaudy, A.F., Jr., Scudder,  R. , Neeley, M.M.,  and Perot, J.J.,
      "Studies on the Treatment of Wood Preserving  Wastes," Paper
      presented at 55th National  Meeting, Amer.  Inst.  Chem. Eng. ,
      Houston, Texas, 1965.

102.  Gaudy, A.F., Jr., "The Role of Oxidation Ponds  in  A Wood
      Treating Plant Waste Abatement Program," Proceedings, Con-
      ference on Pollution Abatement and Control  in the  WoodnP7e-
      serving Industry. [W.S. Thompson. Editor]  Mississippi Forest
      Products Laboratory, Mississippi State Univ.,  State College,
      Mississippi, pp 150-164, 1971.
                              309

-------
DRAFT
 103.  Vaughan,  J.C.,  "Problems  in Water Treatment," Jour.,
      American  Water  Works Association, 56(5):521, 19"oT7

 104.  Woodward,  E.R.,  "Chlorine Dioxide for Water Purification,"
      Jour.  Pennsylvania  Water  Works Operators' Assoc., 28:33,
      1956,         ~~"

 105.  Glabisz,  0.,  "Chlorine Dioxide Action on Phenol Wastes,"
      Chem.  Abs..  65:10310, 1966.

 106.  Manufacturing Chemists Association, "The Effect of Chlori-
      nation on Selected  Organic Chemicals," Environmental Pro-
      tection Agency,  Water Pollution Control Research Series,
      Project 12020 EXE,  104 pages, 1972.

 107.  Thompson,  W.S.  and  Dust,  J.V., "Pollution Control in the
      Wood Preserving  Industry. Part 2. In-Plant Process Changes
      and Sanitation,"  Forest Prod. J.. 22(7):42-47, 1972.

 108o  American  Public  Health Association, Standard Methods for
      the Examination  of  Water  and Wastewater, New York. 1965.

 109.  Corbitt,  R.A.,  "The Wood  Preserving Industry's Water Pol-
      lution Control  Responsibility in Georgia and Neighboring
      States,"  Proceedings. Conference on Pollution Abatement
      and Control  in  the  Wood Preserving Industry,[W.S. Thomp-
      son, Editor) Mississippi  Forest Products Laboratory,
      Mississippi  State University, State College, Mississippi,
      pp 19-35,  1971.

110.  Ingols, R.S. and  Ridenour, G.M., "The Elimination of
      Phenolic  Tastes by  Chloro-Oxidation," Water and Sewage
      Works, 95:187,  1949.                  	

111.  Ettinger,  M.B.,  and Ruchoft, C.C., "Effect of Stepwise
      Chlorination on Taste-and-Color-Producing Intensity of
      Some Phenolic Compounds," Jour. American Water Works As-
      sociation. 43:651,  1951.  	

112.  Burttschell, R.H.,  "Chlorine Derivatives of Phenol Caus-
      ing Taste  and Odor," Jour. American Water Works Assoc.,
      51:205-214,  1959.    	

113.  Eisenhaeur, H.R., "Oxidation of Phenolic Wastes," Jour.
      Water  Pollution Control Federation.  36(9):1116-112TTrT964.

114.  Niegowski, S.J.,  "Destruction of Phenols by Oxidation with
      Ozone," Ind. Eng. Chem..  45(3):632-634,  1953.
                              310

-------
DRAFT


115.  Niegowski, S.J., "Ozone Method for Destruction of Phenols
      in Petroleum Wastewater," Sewage and Ind.  Wastes, 28(10):
      1266-1272, 1956.               	

116.  Gloyna, E.F. and Malina, J8F., Jr.,"Petrochemical Wastes
      Effects on Water, Part 3.  Pollution Control," Ind.  Water
      and Wastes (January - February, pp 29-35,  1962.

117.  Gloyna, E.F., and Malina, J.F., Jr., "Petrochemical  Waste
      Effects on Water, Part 2.  Physiological  Characteristics,"
      Ind. Water and Wastes, (November-December)  pp 157-161,  1962.

118.  Gould, M. and Taylor, J., "Temporary Water Clarification
      System," Chem. Eng. Progress. 65 (12):47-49, 1969.

119.  Thomas E. Gates § Sons, Inc., Personal Correspondence to
      Environmental Engineering, Inc., Gainesville, Florida,
      June 1973.

120.  Effenberger, Herman K., Cradle, Don D. and Tomany, James
      P., Hogged Fuel Boiler Emissions Control,  A Case History,
      Environmental Division Conference of TAPPI, Houston, Texas
      May 1972.

121.  Powell, S.T., Water Conditioning For Industry, McGraw-Hill,
      New York, New York 1954.

122.  Patterson, J.W., and Minear, R.A., "Wastewater Treatment
      Technology,"  Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality,
      Report No. PB-204521, 280 pages, 1971.


                     ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Back, Ernst,L. and Larsson, Stig A., "Increased Pulp Yield as
    Means of Reducing the BOD of Hardboard Mill  Effluent,"
    Swedish Paper Journal, October 15, 1972.

Boydston, James R., "Plywood and Sawmill Liquid Waste Disposal,"
    Forest Products Journal. Vol. 21, No. 9, September 1971.

Fisher,  C. W., "Soil Percolation and/or Irrigation of Industrial
    Effluent Waters—Especially Wood Treating Plant Effluents,"
    Forest Products Journal, Vol. 21, No. 9, September 1971.

Freeman, H.G. and Grendon, W.C., "Formaldehyde  Detection and  Con-
    trol in the Wood Industry," Forest Products  Journal. Vol. 21,
    No.  9, September 1971.
                             311

-------
DRAFT


Gehm, Harry, State-of-the-Art Review of Pulp and Paper Waste
    Treatment, Office of Research and Monitoring, U.S. Environ-
    mental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., April  1973.

Gehm, Harry W. and Lardieri, Nicholas J., "Waste Treatment in
    the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industries," Sewage and
    Industrial Wastes. Vol. 28, No. 3, March 1956.

GLOSSARY - Water and Wastewater Control Engineering,  Prepared
    by Editorial Board representing American Public Health
    Association, American Society of Civil Engineers,  American
    Water Works Association, Water Pollution Control  Federation,
    1969.

Gould, M. and Taylor, J., "Temporary Water Clarification System,"
    Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 65, No. 12, December 1969.

Groth, Bertil, Waste Water From Fiberboard Mills, Annual Finnish
    Paper Engineers' Association Meeting, Helsinki, April 12, 1962.

Hansen, George, (Task Force Chairman) Log Storage and Rafting  in
    Public Waters, Pacific Northwest Pollution Control Council,
    August 1971.

Hoffbuhr, Jack, Blanton, Guy, and Schaumburg, Frank,  "The Charac-
    ter and Treatability of Log Pond Waters," Industrial Waste,
    July/August 1971.

Kleppe, Peder J., and Rogers, Charles N., Survey of Water Utili-
    zation and Waste Control Practices in the Southern Pulp and
    Paper Industry, Water Resources Research Institute, Univer-
    sity of North Carolina, June 1970.

Leker, James E., and Parsons, Ward C., "Recycling Water - A Simple
    Solution?,11 Southern Pulp and Paper Manufacturer,  January 1973.

Luxford, R.F., and Trayer, George W., (Forest Products Laboratory,
    University of Wisconsin) Wood Handbook, U.S. Department of
    Agriculture, Washington, B.C.1935.

Malo, Bernard A., "Semichemical Hardwood Pulping and Effluent
    Treatment," Journal Water Pollution Control Federation,
    Vol. 39, No. 11, November 1967.

McHugh, Robert A., Miller, LaVerne S., and Olsen, Thomas E., The
    Ecology and Naturalistic Control of Log Pond Mosouitos in
    the Pacific Northwest, Division of Sanitation and Engineering,
    Oregon State Board of Health, Portland, 1964.
                              312

-------
DRAFT


Parsons, Ward C., "Spray Irrigation of Wastes from the Manufac-
    ture of Hardboard," Purdue Waste Water Conference. 1967.

Parsons, Ward C., and Woodruff, Paul H., "Pollution Control:
    Water Conservation, Recovery, and Treatment," TAPPI,  53:3,
    March 1970.                                   	

Quirk, T.P., Olson, R.C. and Richardson, G., "Bio-Oxidation of
    Concentrated Board Machine Effluents," Journal. Water Pollu-
    tion Control Federation. Vol. 38, No. 1, January 1966.

Reinhall, Rolf, and Vardheim, Steinar, Experience With the DKP
    Press. Appita Conference, Australia, March 1965.

Robinson, J.G., "Dry Process Hardboard," Forest Products  Jour-
    nal, July 1959.                      	

Sawyer, Clair N., Chemistry For Sanitary Engineers.  Second Edi-
    tion, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967.

Shreve, Norris, Chemical Process Industries. McGraw-Hill, New
    York, 1967. ~~~~	

Timpe, W.G., Lang, E., and Miller,  R.L., Kraft Pulping Effluent
    Treatment and Refuse - State of the Art." Office of Research
    and Monitoring, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wash-
    ington, D.C., 1973.

Tretter, Vincent J., Jr., "Pollution Control Activities at
    Georgia-Pacific," Forest Products Journal. Vol.  21, No. 9,
    September 1971.

Wood Products Sub-Council, "Principal Pollution Problems  Facing
    the Solid Wood Products Industry," Forest Products Journal.
    Vol. 21, No. 9, September 1971.     	
                             313

-------
DRAFT
                         SECTION XIV

                          GLOSSARY
"Act" - The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
oFT972.

Activated Sludge - Sludge floe produced in raw or settled
wastewater by the growth of zoogleal bacteria and other
organisms in the presence of dissolved oxygen and accumula-
ted in sufficient concentration by returning floe previously
formed.

Activated Sludge Process - A biological wastewater treatment
process in which a mixture of wastewater and activated
sludge is agitated and aerated.  The activated sludge is
subsequently separated from the treated wastewater (mixed
liquor) by sedimentation and wasted or returned to the pro-
cess as needed.

Aerated Lagoon - A natural or artificial wastewater treat-
ment pond in which mechanical or diffused-air aeration is
used to supplement the oxygen supply.

Aerobic - Condition in which free, elemental, oxygen is pre-
sent .

Additive - Any material introduced prior to the final con-
solidation 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.

Air Drying - Drying veneer by placing the veneer in stacks
open to the atmosphere, in such a way as to allow good
circulation of air.  It is used only in the production of
low quality veneer.

Air-felting - Term applied to the forming of a fiberboard
from an air suspension of wood or other cellulose fiber and
to the arrangement of such fibers into a mat for board.

Anaerobic - Condition in which free elemental oxygen is
absent.

Asplund Method - An attrition mill which combines the steam-
ing and defibering in one unit in a continuous operation.
                             315

-------
DRAFT
Attrition Mill  - Machine which produces particles by forcing
coarse material, shavings,  or pieces of wood between a sta-
tionary and a rotating  disk, fitted with slotted or grooved
segments.

Back  - The side reverse to  the face of a panel, or the poorer
side  of a panel in any  grade of plywood that has a face and
back.

Bag Barker - See debarker

Blue  Stain - A biological reaction caused by a stain pro-
ducing fungi which causes a blue discoloration of sapwood,
if not dried within a short time after cutting.

Biological Wastewater Treatment - Forms of wastewater treat-
ment  in which bacterial or biochemical action is intensified
to stabilize, oxidize,  and nitrify the unstable organic mat-
ter present.  Intermittent  sand filters, contact beds,
trickling filters, and  activated sludge processes are examples

Slowdown - The removal  of a portion of any process flow to
maintain the constituents of the flow at desired levels.

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 micro-
organisms to oxidize the organic contaminants of a water
sample under standard laboratory conditions.  The standard
conditions include incubation for five days at 20°C.

Bolt  - A short log cut  to length suitable for peeling in a
lathe.

Boultonizing

A conditioning process  in which unseasoned wood is heated
in an oily preservative under a partial vacuum to reduce its
moisture content prior  to injection of the preservative.

Casein - A derivative of skimmed milk used in making glue.

Caul  - A steel plate or screen on which the formed mat is
placed for transfer to  the press, and on which the mat
rests during the pressing process.

CCA-Type Preservative - Any one of several inorganic salt
formulations based on salts of copper, chromium, and arsenic.
                            316

-------
DRAFT
Chipper - A machine which reduces logs or wood scraps  to
chips.

Clarifier - A unit of which the primary purpose is to  reduce
the amount of suspended matter in a liquid.

Clipper - A machine which cuts veneers to various widths and
also may remove defects.

Closed Steaming - A method of steaming in which the steam
required is generated in the retort by passing boiler  steam
through heating coils that are covered with  water.  The
water used for this purpose is recycled.

COD - Chemical Oxygen Demand.  Its determination provides 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.

Coil Condensate - The condensate formed in steam lines and
heating coils.

Cold Pressing - See pressing

Commercial Veneer - See veneer; hardwood

Composite Board - Any combination of different types of
board,either with another type board or with another  sheet
material.  The composite board may be laminated in a sepa-
rate operation or at the same time as the board is pressed.
Examples of composite boards include veneer-faced particle
board, hardboard-faced insulation board and  particle board,
and metal-faced hardboard.

Conditioning - The practice of heating logs  prior to cutting
in order to improve the cutting properties of the wood and
in some cases to facilitate debarking.

Construction - Arrangement of veneers, lumber or wood
composition board in plywood.

Container Veneer - See veneer; hardwood

Cooling Pond - A water reservoir equipped with spray aera-
tion equipment from which cooling water is drawn and to
which it is returned.

Core - Also referred to as the center.  The  innermost  por-
tion of plywood.  It may be of sawn lumber joined and
glued, or it may be of veneer, or of wood composition  board.
                           317

-------
 DRAFT
 Creosote -  A complex mixture of organic materials obtained
 as  a  by-product from coking and petroleum  refining opera-
 tions that  is used as a wood preservative.

 Crossband,  v. - To place the grain of the  layers of veneer
 at  right angles in order to minimize  swelling and shrinking.

 Crossband.  n. - The layers  of veneer  whose grain direction
 is  at right angles to that  of the  face piles, applied par-
 ticularly to five-ply plywood and  lumber core panels, and
 more  generally to all layers between  the core and the faces.

 Curing - The physical-chemical change that takes place
 either to thermosetting synthetic  resins (polymerization)
 in  the hot  presses or to drying oils  (oxidation) used for
 oil-treating board.   The treatment to produce that change.

 Cutterhead  Barker -  See debarker.

 Cylinder Condensate  - Steam condensate that forms on the
 walls of the retort  during  steaming operations.

 Debarker -  Machines  which remove bark from logs.  Debarkers
 may be wet  or dry,  depending on whether or not water is
 used  in the operation.   There are  several types of de-
 barkers including drum barkers,  ring  barkers, bag barkers,
 hydraulic barkers,  and cutterhead  barkers.  With the excep-
 tion  of the hydraulic barker,  all  use abrasion or scraping
 actions to  remove bark.   Hydraulic barkers utilize high
 pressure streams  of  water.

 All types may utilize water,  and all  wet debarking opera-
 tions  may use large  amounts of water  and produce effluents
 with  high solids  concentrations.

 Decay -  The decomposition of wood  caused by fungi.

 Defiberization -  The reduction of  wood materials to fibers.

 Delamination -  Separation of the plies through failure of
 the adhesive.

Digester  -  1)  Device for  conditioning  chips using high
pressure  steam, 2) A tank in which biological decomposi-
 tion  (digestion)  of  the  organic matter in sludge takes
place.

Disc  Pulpers  -  Machines  which  produce  pulp or fiber through
 the shredding  action of  rotating and  stationary discs.
                            318

-------
DRAFT


DO  - Dissolved Oxygen is a measure of the amount of free
oxygen  in a water sample.  It is dependent on the physical,
chemical, and biochemical activities of the water sample.

Drum Barker - See debarker.

Dry-clipping - Clipping of veneer which takes place after
drying.

Dry Decking - See log storing.

Dryers  - Most commonly long chambers equipped with rollers
on belts which advance the veneer longitudinally through
the chamber.  Fans and heating coils are located on the
sides to control temperature and humidity.  Lumber kilns
are also sometimes used.  See also veneer drying.

Dry-felting - See air-felting.

Dry Process - See air-felting.

Durability  - As applied to wood, its lasting qualities or
permanence in service with particular reference to decay.
May be  related directly to an exposure condition.

End-checking - Cracks which form in logs due to rapid
drying  out of the ends when stacked on land for storage.

Exterior - A term frequently applied to plywood, bonded
with highly resistant glues, that is capable of with-
standing prolonged exposure to severe service conditions
without failure in the glue bonds.

Face -  The better side of a panel in any grade of plywood
calling for a face and back; also either side of a panel
where the grading rules draw no distinction between faces.

Face Veneer - See veneer; hardwood.

Fiber (Fibre) - The slender thread-like elements of wood or
similar cellulosic material, which, when separated by chemi
cal and/or mechanical means, as in pulping, can be formed
into fiberboard.

Fiberboard - A sheet material manufactured from fibers of
wood or other ligno-cellulosic materials with the primary
bond deriving from the arrangement of the fibers and their
inherent adhesive properties.  Bonding agents or other
materials may be  added during manufacture to increase
                            319

-------
DRAFT


strength,  resistance  to moisture,  fire, insects or decay,
or to  improve  some  other property  of  the product.  Alter-
native  spelling:  fibreboard,  Synonym:  fibre building board.

Fiber  Preparation - The reduction  of  wood to fiber or pulp,
utilizing  mechanical,  thermal, or  explosive methods.

Figure  - Decorative natural designs in wood which are prized
in the  furniture  and  cabinet  making industries.

Finishing  - The final  preparation  of  the product.  Finishing
may include redrying,  trimming,  sanding, sorting, molding,
and storing, depending on  the operation and product desired.

Fire Retardant -  A  formulation of  inorganic salts that im-
parts fire resistance  when  injected into wood in high concen-
trations.

Flitch  - A part of  a  log which has been so sectioned as to
best display a particular  grain  configuration or figure in
the resulting veneer.

Flotation  - The raising of suspended matter to the surface
of the  liquid  in  a  tank as scum--by aeration, the evolution
of gas, chemicals,  electrolysis, heat, or bacterial decom-
position- -and the subsequent  removal of the scum by skimming.

Formation  (Forming) -  The  felting of wood or other cellulose
fibers  into a mat for  fiberboard.  Methods employed: air-
felting and wet-felting.

Glue - Adhesive which  is used to join alternate ply veneers
together in plywood.   There are  three types most often used
in the manufacture of  plywood, depending on raw material
and intended product usage.   They are 1) protein, 2) phenol
formaldehyde, and 3)  urea  formaldehyde.  The first is ex-
tracted from plants and animals  while the other two are
synthetic  and thermosetting.

Glue Spreaders -  Means of  applying glue to veneer, either
by the use of power driven rollers or spray curtain-coater
applicators.

Glue Line  - The part  of the plywood production process
where the  glue is applied  to  the veneer and the plywood
layers assembled.

GPP - Gallons per day.

GPM - Gallons per minute.
                            320

-------
DRAFT
Grading - The selection and categorization of different
woods as to its suitability for various uses.  Criteria
for selection include such features of the wood as color,
defects, and grain direction.

Grain - The direction, size, arrangement, and appearance
of the fibers in wood or veneer.

Green Clipper - A clipper which clips veneer prior to being
dried.

Green Stock - Unseasoned wood.

Hardboard - A compressed fiberboard of 0.80 to 1.20 g/cm3
C50 to 75 pounds per cubic foot) density.  Alternative
term: fibrous-felted hardboard.

Hardboard Press - Machine which completes the reassembly
of wood particles and welds them into a tough, durable,
grainless board.

Hardwood - Wood from deciduous or broad-leaf trees.  Hard-
woods include oak, walnut, lavan, elm, cherry, hickory, pecan,
maple, birch, gum, cativo, teak, rosewood, and mahogany.

Heartwood - The inner core of a woody stem composed of
non-living cells and usually differentia ed from the outer
enveloping layer (sapwood).

Heat-treated Hardboard - Hardboard that has been subjected
to special heat treatment after hot-pressing to increase
strength and water resistance.

Holding Ponds - See impoundment.

Hot Pressing - See pressing.

Humidification - The seasoning operation to which newly
pressed hardboard are subjected to prevent warpage due to
excessive dryness.

Hydraulic Barker - See debarker.

Impoundment - A pond, lake, tank, basin, or other space,
either natural or created in whole or in part by the build-
ing of engineering structures, which is used for storage,
regulation, and control of water, including wastewater.

Industry Categorization - Subdivision of the industry into
categories in order that separate effluent limitations and
                            321

-------
DRAFT
standards  may  be  developed  for  each  category, if it is
determined that separate  regulation  is  necessary.

Kiln Drying -  A method of preparing  wood  for treatment in
which  the  green stock is  dried  in  a  kiln  under controlled
conditions of  temperature and humidity.

Kjld"N  - Kjeldahl Nitrogen  - Total organic nitrogen plus
ammonia of a sample.

Lagoon  - A pond containing  raw  or  partially treated waste-
water  in which aerobic or anaerobic  stabilization occurs.

Land Decking - Another term for dry-decking.  See log
storing.

Leaching -  Mass transfer  of chemicals to  water from wood
which  is in contact with  it.

Log Bed -  Device  which holds a  log and  moves it up and
down past  a stationary blade which slices sheets of veneer.

Log Ponding -  See log storing.

Log Storing -  Retaining large inventories of logs to main-
tain a continuous supply  throughout  the year.  The three
common methods are:

               1)  Dry-decking -  stacking logs on land
               2)  Wet-decking -  sprinkling land-decked logs
                   with water to minimize  end-checking.
               3)  Log  Ponding -  storing  logs by floating
                   them in a body of  water.  This method
                   is  used for long term storage.

MGD - Million  gallons per day.

mg/1 - Milligrams per liter (equals  parts per million, ppm,
when the specific gravity is one).

ml/1 - Milliters  per  liter.

Modified Steaming - A technique for  conditioning logs which
is a variety of the steam vat process in  that steam is pro-
duced by heating  water with coils  set in  the bottom of the
vat.

Moisture -  Water  content  of wood or  a timber product ex-
pressed as  a percentage of  total weight or as percentage of
the weight  of  dry wood.
                            322

-------
DRAFT
Non-Pressure Process - A method of treating wood at
atmospheric pressure in which the wood is simply soaked
in hot or cold preservative.

Nutrients - The nutrients in contaminated water are
routinely analyzed to characterize the food available
for micro-organisms to promote organic decomposition.
They are:

         Ammonia Nitrogen (NH-Q ,  mg/1 as N

         Kjeldahl Nitrogen CON),  mg/1 as N

         Nitrate Nitrogen (N03),  mg/1 as N

         Total Phosphate (TP), mg/1 as P

         Ortho Phosphate (OP), mg/1 as P

Oil-Recovery System - Equipment used to reclaim oil from
wastewater.

Oily Preservative - Pentachlorophenol-petroleum solutions
and creosote in the various forms in which it is used.

Open Steaming - A method of steam conditioning in which
the steam required is generated in a boiler.

Particle - Distinct fraction of wood or other lignocellulo-
sic material produced mechanically for use as the aggregate
for a particle board.  Types of particles include:

         Flake - Specially generated thin flat particles,
         with the grain of the wood essentially parallel
         to the surface of the flake, prepared with the
         cutting action of the knife in a plane parallel
         to the grain but at an angle to the axis of the
         fiber.

         Flax Shives - Fine rectangular-shaped particles
         of lignocellulosic material obtained by longi-
         tudinal division of the  stalk of the flax plant
         during scutching of the  retted flax.

         Granule - A particle in  which length, width and
         thickness are approximately equal, such as a
         sawdust particle.

         Shaving - A thin slice or strip of wood pared
         off with a knife,  plane  or other cutting
                            323

-------
 DRAFT
          instrument, with the knife action approximately
          along the axis of the fiber, such as the shav-
          ings produced in planing  the surface of wood.

          Sliver - Particle of nearly square or rectangular
          cross-section with a length parallel to the  grain
          of the wood of at least four times the thickness.

          Splinter - An alternate term for sliver.

          Strand - A relatively long (with respect  to
          thickness and width) shaving.

          Wood-wood (Excelsior) - Curly slender strands
          of wood used as an  aggregate component for
          particle board, also used  in mineral-bonded
          boards and as packing for  fragile articles.

 Particle  Board - A sheet material manufactured from small
 pieces  of wood or other ligno-cellulosic  materials  (e.g.
 chips,  flakes, splinters,  strands,  shives, etc.)  agglomera-
 ted  by  use of an organic binder together  with one  or  more
 of the  following agents:  heat, pressure,  moisture, a  catalyst,
 etc.   (Wood-wool and other particle boards with inorganic
 binders are excluded.)

 Pearl Benson Index - A measure of color producing  substances.

 Pentachlorophenol -  A chlorinated phenol  with the  formula
 C15C6OH and formula  weight of 266.35  that is  used  as  a wood
 preservative.   Commercial  grades of this  chemical  are usually
 adulterated with tetrachlorophenol  to improve its  solubility.

 p_H - pH is  a measure of the  acidity or alkalinity  of  a
 water sample.   It is equal to the negative log  of  the hydro-
 gen  ion concentration.

 Phenol  -  The simplest aromatic alcohol.

 Pitch - An  organic deposit composed of condensed hydrocar-
 bons which  forms  on  the surface  of  dryers.

 Plant Sanitation  - Those aspects  of plant  housekeeping which
 reduce  the  incidence  of water contamination resulting from
 equipment  leaks,  spillage  of  preservative, etc.

 Plywood - An assembly of an odd  number of  layers of wood,
 or veneers,  joined together by means  of an adhesive.  Ply-
wood consists  of  two  main  types:
                            324

-------
DRAFT


         1) hardwood plywood - has a face ply of
            hardwood and is generally used for
            decorative purposes.

         2) softwood plywood - the veneers typically
            are of softwood and the usage is gene-
            rally for construction and structural
            purposes.

Plywood Pressing Time - The amount of time that plywood
is in a press.  The time ranges from two minutes to 24
hours, depending on the temperature of the press and the
type of glue used.

Point Source - A discrete source  of pollution.

Pressing - The step in the production operation in which
sheets are subjected to pressure  for the purpose of consoli
dation.  Pressing may be accomplished at room temperature
(cold pressing) or at high temperature (hot pressing).

Press Pit - A sump under the press.

Pressure Process - A process in which wood preservatives
and fire retardants are forced into wood using air or
hydrostatic pressure.

Radio Frequency Heat - Heat generated by the application
of an alternating electric current, oscillating in the
radio frequency range, to a dielectirc material.  In re-
cent years this method has been used to cure synthetic
resin glues.

Resin - Secretions of saps of certain plants or trees.
It is an oxidation or polymerization product of the
terpenes, and generally contains  "resin" acids and
ethers.

Retort - A steel vessel in which wood products are pres-
sure impregnated with chemicals that protect the wood from
biological deterioration or that  impart fire resistance.
Also called treating cylinder.

Ring barker - See debarker.

Rotary lathing - See veneer cutting.

Roundwood - Wood that is still in the form of a log, i.e.
round.
                            325

-------
 DRAFT
 Saw Kerf -  Wastage of wood immediately adjacent  to a saw
 blade  due to  the cut-cleaning design  of the blade, which
 enlarges the  cut slightly on either side.

 Sawn Veneer -  See veneer cutting.

 Sedimentation  Tank -  A basin or  tank  in which water or
 wastewater  containing settleable solids is retained to
 remove by gravity a part of the  suspended matter.

 Segment Saw -  A  modern veneer saw  which consists of a heavy
 metal  tapering flange to which are bolted several thin,
 steel  saw segments along its periphery.  The segment saw
 produces considerably less kerf  than  conventional circular
 saws.

 Semi-Closed Steaming  - A method  of steam conditioning in
 which  the condensate  formed during open steaming is re-
 tained in the  retort  until sufficient  condensate accumula-
 tes  to cover the coils.   The remaining  steam required is
 generated as in  closed steaming.

 Settling Ponds - An impoundment  for the  settling out of
 settleable  solids.

 Slicing  - See  veneer  cutting.

 Sludge  - The accumulated solids  separated from liquids,
 such as  water  or wastewater,  during processing.

 Smooth-two-sides (S-2-S)  -  Hardboard, or other fiberboard
 or particle board  produced when  a  board  is pressed from a
 dry mat  to  give  a  smooth surface on both sides.

 Softwood  -  Wood  from  evergreen or  needle bearing trees.

 Soil Irrigation  -  A method  of land disposal in which
wastewater  is  sprayed  on a  prepared field.  Also referred
 to as  soil percolation.

 Solids  - Various  types  of  solids are commonly determined
on water samples.   These types of  solids are:

         Total Solids  (TS)  -  The material left after eva-
         poration  and  drying  a sample at 103-105°C.

         Suspended  Solids  (SS) - The material  removed from
         a sample  filtered  through a standard  glass  fiber
         filter.    Then  it  is  dried at 103-105°C.
                            326

-------
DRAFT
         Dissolved Solids (PS) - The difference between
         the total and suspended solids.

         Volatile Solids (VS) - The material which is lost
         when the sample is heated to 550°C.

         Settleable Solids (STS) - The material which set-
         tles in an ImmhoFf cone in one hour.

Spray Evaporation - A method of wastewater 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
wastewaters by spraying them on land, usually from pipes
equipped with spray nozzles.

Steam Conditioning - A conditioning method in which un-
seasoned wood is subjected to an atmosphere of steam at
120°C (249°F) to reduce its moisture content and improve
its permeability preparatory to preservative treatment.

Steaming - Treating wood material with steam to soften
it.

Sump -  (1) A tank or pit that receives drainage and stores
it temporarily, and from which the drainage is pumped or
ejected, (2) A tank or pit that receives liquids.

Synthetic Resin (Thermosetting) - Artificial resin (as op-
posed to natural) used in board manufacture as a binder.
A combination of chemicals which can be polymerized, e.g.
by the application of heat, into a compound which is used
to produce the bond or improve the bond in a fiberboard or
particle board. Types usually used in board manufacture
are phenol formaldehyde, urea formaldehyde, or melamine
formaldehyde.

Tapeless Splicer - A machine which permits the joining
of individual sheets of veneer without the use of tape.
Individual sheets are glued edge to edge, and cured, thus
saving on tape costs and sanding time during finishing.

Taping Machine - A machine which joins individual sheets
of veneer by taping them together.  The tape is later
sanded off during the finishing operations.

Tempered Hardboard - Hardboard that has been specially
treated in manufacture to improve its physical properties
                            327

-------
 DRAFT


 considerably.   Includes, for example,  oil-tempered
 hardboard.   Synonymous:  superhardboard.

 Thermal  Conductivity- The quantity of  heat  which  flows
 per  unit time  across unit area of the  subsurface  of unit
 thickness when the temperature of the  faces differs by
 one  degree.

 Thermosetting  - Adhesives which,  when  cured under heat
 or pressure, "set" or harden to form films  of great
 tenacity and strength.   Subsequent heating  in no  way
 softens  the bending matrix.

 TOC  -  Total Organic Carbon is a measure of  the organic
 contamination  of a water sample.   It has an empirical
 relationship with the biochemical and  chemical oxygen
 demands.

 T-POy|-P  - Total phosphate as phosphorus.

 Turbidity -  (1)  A condition  in water or wastewater 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 diffraction.

 Underflow - (wet decking)  -  water which runs off  the logs.

 Vacuum Water - Water extracted from wood during the vacuum
 period following steam conditioning.

 Vapor  Drying - A process in  which unseasoned wood is heated
 in the hot vapors of an  organic solvent, usually xylene, to
 season it prior  to preservative treatment.

 Vat  -  Large metal containers in which  logs  are "conditioned,"
 or heated prior  to cutting.   The  two basic  methods for heat-
 ing  are  by direct steam  contact in "steam vats," or by
 steam  heated water in "hot water  vats."

Veneer -  A thin  sheet of wood of  uniform thickness produced
 by peeling, slicing,  or  sawing logs, bolts,  or flitches.
Veneers may be categorized as either hardwood or softwood,
 depending on the type of woods used and the intended purpose.

          Softwood Veneer is  used  in the manufacture of
          softwood plywood  and in  some  cases the inner
          plies  of hardwood faced  plywood.
                            328

-------
DRAFT
         Hardwood Veneer can be categorized according
         to use, the three most important being:

         (1) face veneer - the highest quality used to
             make panels employed in furniture and
             interior decoration.
         (2) commercial veneer - used for crossbands,
             cores, backs of plywood panels and con-
             cealed parts of furniture.
         (3) container veneer - inexpensive veneers used
             in the making of crates, hampers, baskets,
             kits, etc.

Veneer Cutting - There are four basic methods:

         (1) rotary lathing - cutting continuous strips
             by the 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,
therefore, as soon as possible, to a moisture content of
about 10 percent.

Veneer Preparation - A series of minor operations including
grading and matching, redrying, dry-slipping, joining, tap-
ing and splicing, inspecting! and repairing.  These opera-
tions take place between drying and gluing.

Water-Borne Preservative - Any one of several formulations
of inorganic salts, the most common which are based on cop-
per, chromium, and arsenic.

Water Balance - The water gain (incoming water) of a mill
versus water loss (water discharged or lost).

Wet Barkers - See debarker.
                            329

-------
DRAFT
Wet-Felting  - Term  applied to the forming of a fiberboard
from a suspension of pulp in water usually on a cylinder,
deckle box or Fourdrinier machine; the interfelting of
wood fibers  from a  water suspension  into a irat for board.

Wet Process  - See Wet-Felting.

Wet Scrubber- An air pollution control device which involves
the wetting  of particles in an air stream and the impinge-
ment of wet  or dry  particles on collecting surfaces, fol-
lowed by flushing.

Wood Extractives -  A mixture of chemical compounds, pri-
marily carbohydrates, removed from wood during steam con-
ditioning.

Wood Preservatives  - A chemical or mixture of chemicals with
funsistatic  and insecticidal properties that is injected
into wood to protect it from biological deterioration.
                            330

-------
                       APPENDIX A



INVENTORY OF VENEER  AND PLYWOOD MILLS  IN THE UNITED  STATES
                            331

-------
  DRAFT
                           APPENDIX A

     LIST OF VENEER AND PLYWOOD MILLS "IN THE UNITED STATES


              SOFTWOOD PLYWOOD PLANTS
       ALABAMA

Birmingham Forest Products, Inc.
Div. of U. S. Steel $
Champion  International

Dixon Plywood
Div. of Dixon Lumber Company
Andalusia, Alabama

MacMillan Bloedel Inc.
Div. of MacMillan Bloedel Ltd.
Pine Hill, Alabama

Scotch Plywood Company
Fulton, Alabama

Sumter Veneer Works
Eutaw, Alabama

Union Camp Corporation
Building Products Division
Chapman, Alabama
       ARIZONA

Arizona Building Components
Prescott, Arizona
       ARKANSAS

Arkla Chamical Corporation
Div. of Arkansas Louisiana"Gas Co,
Gurdon, Arkansas

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division, Plant #1
Crossett, Arkansas
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division,  Plant  #2
Crossett, Arkansas

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division,  Fordyce Plant
Fordyce, Arkansas

Olinkraft, Inc.
Sub. of Olin Corporation
Huttig, Arkansas

The Singer Company-
Wood Products Division
Trumann, Arkansas

Weyerhaeuser Company
Dierks, Arkansas

Weyerheauser Company
Mt. Pine, Arkansas
       CALIFORNIA

American Forest Products  Corp.
Sub. of The Bendix Corp.
Amador-Calaceras Division
Martell, California

Arcata Plywood Corporation
Arcata, California

Boise Cascade Corporation
Union' Lumber Company Div.
Fort1 Bragg, California

Cloverdale Plywood Company
Div. of Fibreboard Corporation
Cloverdale, California
                               332

-------
  DRAFT

Diamond International Corporation
California Lumber Division
Red Bluff, California

Fortuna Veneer Company
Div. of Arcata Plywood Corp.
Fortuna, California

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Samoa, California

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Weed Operations
Weed, California

The Pacific Lumber Company
Scotia, California

Pickering Lumber Company
Div. of Fibreboard Corporation
Standard, California

Plywood Fabricators, Inc.
Redwood Valley, California

Simpson Timber Company
Mad River Plywood Plant Div.
Arcata, California

Simpson Timber Company
Fairhaven Plywood Plant Div.
Eureka, California

Standard Veneer § Timber Company
Crescent City, California
       COLORADO

Montezuma Plywood Company
Sub. of Southwest Forest Ind.,  Inc.
Cortex, Colorado
        FLORIDA

Boise Cascade Corporation
Pensacola Plywood
Cantonment, Florida

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Chiefland, Florida
        GEORGIA

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Monticello, Georgia

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Savannah, Georgia

Great Northern Plywood Co.
Sub. of Great Northern
Nekoosa Corporation
Cedar Springs, Georgia

Tolleson Lumber Company
Perry, Georgia

U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Waycross, Georgia
        IDAHO

Idaho Veneer Company
Post Falls, Idaho

Potlatch Forests, Inc.
Clearwater Plywood
Lewiston, Idaho

Potlatch Forests, Inc.
Jaype Plywood Plant
Pierce, Idaho

Potlatch Forests, Inc.
St. Maries Plywood Co. Sub,
St. Maries, Idaho
                              333

-------
   DRAFT
        LOUISIANA

Anthony Forest Products Company
Plywood Division
Plain Dealing, Louisiana

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Urania, Louisiana

Louisiana Plywood Corporation
Aff. of Willamette  Industries, Inc.
Dodson, Louisiana

Olinkraft,  Inc.
Plywood Operation
Sub. of Olin  Corp.
Winnfield,  Louisiana

Santiam Southern Company
Aff. of Willamette  Industries, Inc.
Ruston, Louisiana

Tremont Lumber Company
Joyce, Louisiana

U.  S.  Plywood
Div. of Champion  International
Holden, Louisiana

Vanply Incorporated
Florien,  Louisiana

Vanply Incorporated
Oakdale,  Louisiana

Wilmar Plywood,  Inc.
Aff. of Willamette  Ind.,  Inc.
Natchitoches, Louisiana

Woodard-Walker-Willamette, Inc.
Aff. of Willamette  Ind.,  Inc.
Minden,  Lousisiana
       MARYLAND

Chesapeake Bay Plywood  Corp,
Div.  Champion International
Pocomoke City, Maryland
        MICHIGAN

Iron Wood Products  Corp.
Bessemer, Michigan
        MISSISSIPPI

Delta Pine Plywood Company
Beaumont, Mississippi

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Gloster, Mississippi

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Louisville, Mississippi

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
Taylorsville, Mississippi

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Wiggins Operations
Wiggins, Mississippi

Weyerhaeuser Company
Philadelphia Operations
Philadelphia, Mississippi
        MONTANA

 C  § C Plywood Corporation
 Kalispell, Montana
                                334

-------
  DRAFT
Evans Products Company
Van-Evans Operations
Missoula, Montana

Pack River PLywood Company
Poison, Montana

Plum Creek Lumber Company
Columbia Falls, Montana

St. Regis Paper Company
Forest Products Division
Libby, Montana
        NEW HAMPSHIRE

Frye $ Son, Inc.
Wilton, New Hampshire
        NORTH CAROLINA

Evans Products Company
Building Materials Group
Kings Mountain, North Carolina

Prescott Products Corporation
Elizabeth City, North Carolina

Thomason Plywood Corporation
Fayetteville, North Carolina

Triangle Plywood Corporation
Sub. of Boise Cascade Corp.
Moncure, North Carolina

Weyerhaeuser Company
Jacksonville, North Carolina

Weyerhaeuser Company
Plymouth, North Carolina
        OKLAHOMA

Weyerhaeuser Company
Wright City, Oklahoma
        OREGON

Agnew Plywood
Div. of Fourply, Inc.
Grants Pass, Oregon

Alpine Veneers, Inc.
Portland, Oregon

Astoria Plywood Corporation
Astoria, Oregon

Bate Plywood Company, Inc.
Div. of Fibreboard Corp.
Merlin, Oregon

Bohemia Lumber Company, Inc
Gulp Creek, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
N. W. Oregon Region
Albany Division
Albany, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
Mt. Emily Division
Elgin, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
N. W. Oregon Region
Independence Division
Independence, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
Southern Oregon Region
Medford, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
N. W. Oregon Region
Sweet Home  Division
Sweet Home, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
N. W. Oregon Region
Valsetz Division
Valsetz, Oregon
                              335

-------
   DRAFT
Brand S Corporation
Alsea, Oregon

Brand S Corporation
Corvallis, Oregon

Brookings Plywood Corporation
Brookings, Oregon

Brooks-Willamette Corporation
Aff. of Willamette Industries,  Inc.
Redmond, Oregon

Cabax Mills
Plywood Division
Eugene, Oregon

Carolina Pacific Plywood,  Inc.
Sub. of Southwest Forest  Industries
Grants Pass, Oregon

Carolina Pacific Plywood  Inc.
Sub. of Southwest Forest  Industries
White City, Oregon

Coos Head Timber Company
Coos Bay, Oregon

Drain Plywood Company
Drain, Oregon

Ellingson Timber Company
Plywood Division
Baker, Oregon

Eugene Stud $ Veneer Inc.
Eugene, Oregon

Fir Ply Incorporated
White City, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Coos Bay, Oregon
Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Coquille,  Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Springfield Division
Camp Adair Plant
Corvallis, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Eugene Division
Eugene, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Springfield Division
Springfield, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Toledo, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Yarnell Plywood Division
Yarnell, Oregon

Giustina Bros. Lumber §
Plywood Company
Eugene, Oregon

Glendale Plywood Company
Sub. of The Robert Dollar Co.
Glendale,  Oregon

Mines Lumber Company
Mines, Oregon

Mines Lumber Company
Westfir, Oregon

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Gardiner Operations
Gardiner,  Oregon
                                336

-------
   DRAFT
International Paper Company
Long Bell Division
Vaughn Operations
Veneta, Oregon

Lane Plywood Incorporated
Eugene, Oregon

Leadings Plywood Corporation
Eugene, Oregon

Linnton Plywood Association
Portland, Oregon

Medford Corporation
Medford, Oregon

Medford Veneer § Plywood Corp.
White City, Oregon

Mid Plywood Incorporated
Sweet Home, Oregon

Millwaukie Plywood Corporation
Millwaukie, Oregon

Multnomah Plywood Corporation
St. Helens, Oregon

Nordic  Plywood,  Inc.
Aff. with Nordic Veneers,  Inc.
Sutherlin, Oregon

North  Santiam  Plywood  Co.
Mill City, Oregon

Oregon-Washington  Plywood  Co.
Garibaldi, Oregon

Publishers Paper Company
Dwyer  Division
Portland,  Oregon

Rogue  Valley Plywood,  Inc.
White  City,  Oregon
Rosboro Lumber Company
Springfield, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Dillard, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Roseburg, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Riddle, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Coquille, Oregon

SWF Plywood Company
Div.  of Southwest  Forest  Industries
Grants Pass, Oregon

SWF Plywood Company
Div.  of Southwest  Forest  Industries
Springfield, Oregon

Simpson Timber  Company
Albany Plywood  Plant
Albany, Oregon

Southern  Oregon Plywood Inc.
Grants Pass,  Oregon

Structural  Laminates, Inc.
Beaverton,  Oregon

Tillamook Veneer Company
Tillamook,  Oregon

Tim-Ply Company
Division of Timber Products Co.
 Grants Pass,  Oregon

 U. S. Plywood
 Div.  of Champion International
 Gold Beach, Oregon

 U. S. Plywood
 Div.  of Champion International
 Mapleton, Oregon
                               337

-------
     DRAFT
U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Roseburg, Oregon

U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Willamina, Oregon

Warm Springs Forest Products
Mardas, Oregon

Western States Plywood Cooperative
Port Orford, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Cottage Grove, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Klamath Falls, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Coos Bay Branch
North Bend, Oregon

Weyerhaeuser Company
Springfield, Oregon

White City Plywood Company
McMinnville, Oregon

White City Plywood Company
White City, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Dallas Division
Dallas, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Foster Division
Sweet Home, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Griggs Division
Lebanon, Oregon

Willamette Industries, Inc.
Lebanon Division
Lebanon, Oregon
Willamette Industries,  Inc,
Springfield Division
Springfield, Oregon

Willamette Industries,  Inc
Sweet Home Division
Sweet Home, Oregon
       SOUTH CAROLINA

Cheraw Plywood Company,  Inc.
Cheraw, South Carolina

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Russellville, South Carolina

Holly Hill Lumber Co.,  Inc.
Holly Hill, South Carolina
       TEXAS

Blodkstein Company
Houston, Texas

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Corrigan, Texas

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Crossett Division
New Waverly, Texas

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Nacogdoches Operations
Nacogdoches, Texas

Kirby Lumber Corporation
Silsbee, Texas

Owens-Illinois, Inc.
Jasper, Texas

Owens-Illinois, Inc.
Lufkin, Texas
                                   338

-------
     DRAFT
Temple Industries, Inc.
Plywood Division
Diboll, Texas

Walker Plywood
Kirby Lumber Corporation
Cleveland, Texas
        VIRGINIA

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Emporia, Virginia
        WASHINGTON

Biles-Coleman Lumber Company
Omak, Washington

Bingen Plywood Company
Bingen, Washington

Boise Cascade Corporation
Kettle Falls, Washington

Boise Cascade Corporation
Yakima, Washington

Centralia Plywood Inc.
Centralia, Washington

Elma Plywood Corporation
Elma, Washington

Evans Products Company
Building Materials Group
Softwood Lumber § Plywood Div.
Harbor Mill
Aberdeen, Washington

Everett Plywood Corporation
Everett, Washington
Farwest Plywood Company
Tacoma, Washington

Fort Vancouver Plywood Company
Vancouver, Washington

Hardel Mutual Plywood Corp.
Olympia, Washington

Hoquaim Plywood Company, Inc.
Hoquaim, Washington

International Paper Company
Long-Bell Division
Chelatchie Operations
Amboy, Washington

Lacey Plywood Company, Inc.
Lacey, Washington

Lyle Wood Products Inc.
Tacoma, Washington

Mt. Baker Plywood Inc.
Bellingham, Washington

North Pacific Plywood, Inc.
Tacoma, Washington

Peninsula Plywood Corporation
Sub. of ITT
Port Angeles, Washington

Pope § Talbot, Inc.
Kalama, Washington

Publishers Forest Products Co.
Div. of Publishers Paper Co.
Anacortes, Washington

Puget Sound Plywood, Inc.
Tacoma, Washington
                                 339

-------
    DRAFT
Simpson  Timber  Company
McCleary, Washington

Simpson  Timber  Company
Olympic  Plant
Shelton, Washington

Stevenson Co-Ply,  Inc.
Stevenson, Washington
U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Grays Harbor Division
Hoquaim, Washington

Weyerhaeuser Company
Longview, Washington

Weyerhaeuser Company
Snoqualmine Falls,  Washington
                      SOFTWOOD VENEER PLANTS
       ARKANSAS

Beisel Veneer Hoop Company
West Helena, Arkansas
       FLORIDA

Franklin Crates,  Inc.
Micanopy, Florida
       CALIFORNIA

Carolina Pacific Plywood,  Inc.
Sub. of Southwest  Forest  Ind.
Slayer, California

Carolina Pacific Plywood,  Inc.
Sub. of Southwest  Forest  Ind.
Happy Camp, California

Hoopa Veneer Company
Hoopa, California

Medford Veneer § Plywood  Corp.
Crescent City, California

Miller Redwood Company
Sub. of Stimson Lumber Company
Crescent City, California

Orleans Veneer § Lumber Company
Div. of Arcata Plywood Corp.
Orleans, California

Rochlin Veneer § Plywood  Co.
Willow Creek, California

West Coast Veneer Company
Crescent City, California
       GEORGIA

Pearson Basket Mills
Fort Valley, Georgia


       MARYLAND

Stenersen Mahogany Corp.
Cockeysville, Maryland


       MINNESTOA

Wahkon Veneer Mill
Wahkon, Minnesota


       NEW JERSEY

Rapp Package Company
Carpentersville, New  Jersey


       NORTH CAROLINA

Armentrout Veneer Company
High Point, North Carolina
                                 340

-------
   DRAFT
Collins-Davis Chair Company
Hudson, North Carolina

Lenderink Incorporated
Wilson, North Carolina

Mayo Veneers, Inc.
Whitakers, North Carolina

Thomasville Veneer Company
Thomasville, North Carolina

Weyerheauser Company
Jacksonville, North Carolina
       OREGON

Baflam Veneer Corporation
Corvallis, Oregon

Boise Cascade Corporation
Chemult, Oregon

Coburg Veneer Corporation
Coburg, Oregon

Conrad Veneers, Inc.
Tualatin, Oregon

Dillard Veneer Company
Riddle, Oregon

The Robert Dollar Company
Glendale, Oregon

Douglas Lumber Company
Roseburg, Oregon

Firwood Lumber Company,  Inc.
Sandy, Oregon

Freres Lumber Company,  Inc.
Lyons, Oregon
G L Pine Incorporated
John Day, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Norply Veneer Division
Norway, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Powers Veneer Division
Powers, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Rogue River Veneer Division
Rogue River, Oregon

Georgia=Pacific Corporation
Sutherlin Division
Sutherlin, Oregon

Goshen Veneer Inc.
Goshen, Oregon

Edward Hines Lumber Company
Mount Vernon, Oregon

Kogap Manufacturing Company
Medford, Oregon

Lawyer Veneer Company
White City, Oregon

Menasha Corporaiton
Doyle Veneer Division
Myrtle Point, Oregon

The Murphy Company
Florence, Oregon

Nordic Veneers, Inc.
Roseburg, Oregon

Olympic Manufacturing Co.
Gresham, Oregon

Pope  § Talbot,  Inc.
Oakridge, Oregon
                               341

-------
    DRAFT
Rex Veneer Company
Philomath, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Dixonville, Oregon

Stimson Lumber Company
Forest Grove, Oregon

Sun Studs, Inc.
Sun Veneer Division
Roseburg, Oregon

Sweet Home Veneer, Inc.
Sweet Home, Oregon

Timber Products Company
Medford, Oregon

Triangle Veneer Inc.
Eugene, Oregon

Zip-0-Log Veneer, Inc.
Eugene, Oregon
       SOUTH CAROLINA

Highland Crate Co-op.
St. Stephen, South Carolina
       TEXAS

Solver Crate
Rusk, Texas
               Lumber Mill Co.
                                           WASHINGTON

                                    Allen Logging §  Veneer  Co.
                                    Forks, Washington

                                    Bay Veneer Incorporated
                                    Townsend,  Washington

                                    Cowlitz Stud Company
                                    Randle, Washington

                                    Hegewald Timber, Inc.
                                    Stevenson, Washington

                                    Ly-Col Veneer, Inc.
                                    Roslyn, Washington

                                    Mt. Adams  Veneer Company
                                    Randle, Washington

                                    Oregon Washington Plywood  Co,
                                    Tandle, Washington

                                    Solid Wood, Inc.
                                    Olympia, Washington

                                    Winlock Veneer
                                    Winlock, Washington
       WISCONSIN

Dufeck Manufacturing Co.
Denmark, Wisconsin

Menasha Corporation
Neenah, Wisconsin
       VIRGINIA

Ferrum Veneer Corporation
Ferrum, Virginia
                                342

-------
  DRAFT
                      HARDWOOD PLYWOOD
       ALABAMA

Alabama Veneer § Panel Company
Mexia, Alabama

Belcher Lumber Company, Inc.
Centerville, Alabama

Decatur Box § Basket Company,  Inc
Decatur, Alabama

Dixie Veneer Company
Abbeville, Alabama

Fox Lumber Company
Centerville, Alabama

Howell Plywood Corporation
Dothan, Alabama

Taylor Veneer Company, Inc.
Demopolis, Alabama

Thompson $ Swaim Plywood, Inc.
Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Union Camp Corporation
Building Products Division
Chapman, Alabama
       ARKANSAS

Chicago Mill § Lumber Company
West Helena, Arkansas

Delta Plywood Corporation
Cotton Plant, Arkansas

Evans Products Company
West Memphis, Arkansas
McKnight Veneer § Plywoods, Inc,
West Helena, Arkansas
       CALIFORNIA

Birchwood of Los Angeles, Inc.
Los Angeles, California

General Veneer Manufacturing Co
South Gate, California

Karpen Plywood Company
Div. of U. S. Plywood-
Champion Papers, Inc.
Compton, California

Lorenz Lumber Company
Div. of Fibreboard Corp.
Burney, California

Plywood Manufacturing of Calif.
Torrance, California

Sunset Plywood, Inc.
Los Angeles, California
       FLORIDA

Boise Cascade Corporation
Pensacola Division
Cantonment, Florida

Costal Variety Works, Inc,
Blountstown, Florida

Florida Plywoods, Inc.
Greenville, Florida
                              343

-------
   DRAFT
       GEORGIA

Bradley Plywood Corporation
Savannah, Georgia

The Day Company
Cuthbert, Georgia

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Savannah, Georgia

Georgia Plywood Corporation
Dublin, Georgia

Patat Plywood Corporation
Rockmart, Georgia

Pearson Basket Mills
Fort Valley, Georgia
       ILLINOIS

Jasper Wood Products Co., Inc.
Newton, Illinois
       INDIANA

General Plywood Corp., Inc.
Indiana Division
New Albany, Indiana

Hoosier Panel Company, Inc.
New Albany, Indiana

Jasper Stylemasters, Inc.
Div. of Jasper Corporation
Jasper, Indiana

Jasper Veneer Mills, Inc.
Jasper, Indiana
Jasper Wood Products  Co.,  Inc.
Jasper, Indiana

Paramount Plywood Products,  Inc,
New Albany, Indiana
       KENTUCKY

Gamble Brothers,  Inc.
Louisville,  Kentucky
       LOUISIANA

Chicago Mill $  Lumber  Co.
Tullulah,  Louisiana

U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Hammond, Louisiana
       MAINE

J. M. Huber Corporation
Patten, Maine

Kennebec,  Inc.
Bingham, Maine

Allen Quimby Veneer  Company
Div. of Scoville Mfg.  Co.
Bingham, Maine
       MICHIGAN

Contour Products,  Inc.
Bay City,  Michigan

Ironwood Products  Corp.
Bessemer,  Michigan
                               344

-------
   DRAFT
Ply Curves Incorporated
Grand Rapids, Michigan

Plycoma Veneer Corporation
Nashville, Michigan
       MINNESOTA

Buffalo Veneer § Plywood Co,
Buffalo, Minnesota

Mill City Plywood Company
Minneapolis, Minnesota
       MISSISSIPPI

Chicago Mill § Lumber Co.
Greenville, Mississippi

The Day Company
Waynesboro, Mississippi

Iron Wood Products
Bessemer, Mississippi

Pavco Industries, Inc.
Pascagoula, Mississippi

Perry County Plywood Corp.
Beaumont, Missippi

Tuscaloosa Veneer Company
Meridian, Mississippi
       NEW HAMPSHIRE

Frye § Son Incorporated
Wilton, New Hampshire

Keller Products, Inc.
Manchester, New Hampshire
       NEW YORK

Jamestown Plywood Division
AVM Corporation
Jamestown, New York

U. S. Veneer Company, Inc.
Div. of John Lagenbacher
Bronx, New York
       NORTH CAROLINA

Beck Brothers Veneer Co., Inc.
Zubulon, North Carolina

Benson Veneer Company, Inc.
Benson, North Carolina

Boise Cascade Corporation
Face Veneers Division
Pelham, North Carolina

Boliva Lumber Company
Wilmington, North Carolina

Calypso Plywood Company, Inc.
Calypso, North Carolina

Carolina Panel Company, Inc.
Lexington, North Carolina

Carolina Plywood Company, Inc.
Apex, North Carolina

Columbia Panel Manufacturing Co
Thomasville, North Carolina

Davis Wood Products, Inc.
Lexington, North Carolina

Denny Plywood Company, Inc.
Roseboro, North Carolina
                               345

-------
  DRAFT
Doxey Plywood Corporation
Fayetteville, North Carolina

Hasty Plywood Company
Maxton, North Carolina

Hayworth Roll § Panel Co.
High Point, North Carolina

Horner Veneer Company
New Bern, North Carolina

Ingram Plywoods, Inc.
Thomasville, North Carolina

Lea Lumber § Plywood Co.
Div. of Lea Industries, Inc.
Windsor, North Carolina

Lenoir Veneer Company
Lenoir, North Carolina

McLeod Plywood Box Co., Inc.
Wadesboro, North Carolina

Rankin Brothers Company
Fayetteville, North Carolina

Rowland Wood Products Co., Inc.
Rowland, North Carolina

Rural Hall Veneer Company
Rural Hall, North Carolina

Southern Box § Plywood, Inc.
Wilmington, North Carolina

Statesville Plywood § Veneer Co,
Statesville, North Carolina

Thomason Industries, Inc.
Fayetteville, North Carolina

Weldon Veneer Company,  Inc.
Weldon, North Carolina
Whiteville Plywood Company
Whiteville, North Carolina
       OREGON

Columbia Plywood Corporation
Klamath Plywood Division
Klamath Falls,  Oregon

Dougals Fir Plywood Company
Coquille, Oregon

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Eugene/Springfield Division
Junction City,  Oregon

Publishers Paper Company
Dwyer Division
Portland, Oregon

Roseburg Lumber Company
Dillard, Oregon

Southern Oregon Plywood,  Inc.
Grants Pass, Oregon

States Veneer,  Inc.
Div. of Wood Slicing Corp.
Eugene, Oregon

Timber Products Company
Medford, Oregon
       PENNSYLVANIA

Jasper Wood Products  Co.,  Inc.
Watsontown, Pennsylvania

Thompson Mahogany Company
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
                               346

-------
   DRAFT
Timber Products Company
Medford, Pennsylvania

Westavco Corporation
Tyrone, Pennsylvania
       SOUTH CAROLINA

Carolina Veneer § Plywood Co.
Florence, South Carolina

Cheraw Plywood Company, Inc.
Cheraw, South Carolina

Darlington Veneer Company
Darlington, South Carolina

Davis Wood Products, Inc.
S. C. Division
Blenheim, South Carolina

Dillon Veneer § Plywood Company
Dillon, South Carolina

Furniture Veneers, Inc.
Conway, South Carolina

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Williams Furniture Division
Sumpter, South Carolina

King Veneer Company, Inc.
Florence, South Carolina

Marsh Plywood Corporation
Paplico, South Carolina

The Plywood Company
Sumpter, South Carolina

Powe Veneer Company
Camden, South Carolina

Standard Plywoods, Inc.
Clinton, South Carolina
Stilley Plywood Company, Inc.
Conway, South Carolina

Tinsley Plywood Corporation
Florence, South Carolina

U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Orangeburg, South Carolina

Winnsboro Plywood Company
Winnsboro, South Carolina
       TENNESSEE

Panoply Corporation
Lexington, Tennessee

Southern Laminating Company
Memphis, Tennessee

Tennessee Veneer Company
Memphis, Tennessee

Tri-State Veneer § Plywood Co
Memphis, Tennessee
       TEXAS

Bruce Company of Texas
Div. of Cook Industries, Inc.
Center, Texas

Center Plywood Company, Inc.
Center, Texas

Liberty Veneer § Panel Co.
Liberty, Texas
       VERMONT

Bradford Veneer § Panel Co.
Bradford, Vermont
                               347

-------
   DRAFT
Consolidated Electronics Ind-
ustries Corporation
Atlas Plywood Division
Morrisville, Vermont

Rutland Plywood Corporation
Rutland, Vermont

Vermont-Pacific Corporation
Bethel, Vermont

Weyerhaeuser Company
Wood Products Division
Hancock, Vermont
       VIRGINIA

Atkins Plywood Company,  Inc.
Atkins, Virginia

Boise Cascade Corporation
Decorative Paneling Division
Danville, Virginia

Burkeville Veneer Company
Burkeville, Virginia

Day Companies, Inc.
Suffolk, Virginia

Eastern Door § Panel Corp.
Danville, Virginia

Henry County Plywood Corp.
Ridgeway, Virginia

Multi-Ply Corporation
Danville, Virginia

Old Dominion Plywood Corp.
Bristol, Virginia

Virginia-Carolina Veneer Corp,
Danville, Virginia

Virginia Plywood Corporation
Danville, Virginia
Whittle Plywood Corporation
Chatham, Virginia
       WASHINGTON

Buffelen Woodworking  Company
Tacoma, Washington

Everett Plywood Corporation
Everett, Washington

Mt. Baker Plywood, Inc.
Bellingham,  Washington

North Pacific Plywood,  Inc.
Tacoma, Washington

Pasquier Panel Products,  Inc,
Sumner, Washington
       WEST VIRGINIA

Allegheny Lumber Company
Elkins, West Virginia
       WISCONSIN

All-Wood Incorporated
Bayfield, Wisconsin

Birchwood Manufacturing  Co.
Rice Lake, Wisconsin

Blum Brothers
Marshfield, Wisconsin

Eggers Plywood Company
Two Rivers, Wisconsin

Gillett Veneer § Plywood Co.
Gillett, Wisconsin

Larson Plywood Company,  Inc.
Sheboygan, Wisconsin

Linwood Incorporated
Gillett, Wisconsin
                                348

-------
DRAFT
                 Lullabye Furniture Company
                 Div. of Questor Corporation
                 Stevens Point,  Wisconsin

                 Marion Plywood Corporation
                 Marion, Wisconsin

                 Nelson Plywood Corporation
                 Gillett, Wisconsin

                 Pluswood Industries
                 Oshkosh, Wisconsin

                 U. S. Plywood
                 Div. of Champion International
                 Algoma Operations
                 Algoma, Wisconsin

                 Warvel Products, Inc.
                 Gillett, Wisconsin

                 Weber Veneer § Plywood Co.
                 Shawano, Wisconsin

                 Weyerhaeuser Company
                 Marshfield, Wisconsin

                 Wisconsin Laminates, Inc.
                 Pewaukee, Wisconsin
                             349

-------
    DRAFT
                       HARDWOOD VENEER
       ALABAMA

Bacon-McMillan Veneer
Manufacturing Co.,  Inc.
Stockton, Alabama

Browder Veneer Works
Montgomery, Alabama

Sumpter Veneer Works
Eutaw, Alabama

Winborn Veneer Company
Allen, Alabama
       FLORIDA

Franklin Crates, Inc.
Micanopy, Florida

Grower's Container Co-op., Inc.
Leesburg, Florida

Highland Crate Co-op.
Jacksonville, Florida

Telley's Box Company, Inc.
Palatka, Florida
       GEORGIA

Alexander Wood Products,  Inc.
Athens, Georgia

C § H Veneer Company
Hawkinsville, Georgia

Cornelia Veneer Company
Cornelia, Georgia

Perry Veneer Company
Perry, Georgia
Truax Veneer Company,  Inc.
Sub. of Lenderink,  Inc.
Lyons, Georgia
       ILLINOIS

Swords Veneer § Lumber Co,
Sub. of General Woods  and
Veneers, Ltd.
Rock Island,  Illinois
       INDIANA

Amos-Thompson Corporation
Sub. of National  Lead Company
Edinburg, Indiana

Central Veneer Incorporated
Indianapolis, Indiana

Cummings Veneers, Inc.
New Albany,  Indiana

Curry § Sons, Inc.
New Albany,  Indiana

Farrell Box  Company,  Inc.
Decker, Indiana

Hill Brothers Veneer  Co.
Div. of Hammerhill  Paper Co.
Edinburg, Indiana

Hoosier Veneer Company,  Inc.
New Albany,  Indiana

Indiana Veneers,  Inc.
Indianapolis, Indiana

National Veneer $ Lumber Co.
Seymour, Indiana

Pierson-Hollowell Co.,  Inc.
Lawrenceburg, Indiana
                                 350

-------
    DRAFT
Roberts § Strack Veneer Co., Inc.
Clarksville, Indiana

Chester B. Stem, Inc.
New Albany, Indiana

David R. Webb Company
Div. of The Walter Reade Org., Inc
Edinburg, Indiana
       IOWA

Bacon Veneer Company
Hubbard Walnut Division
Dubuque, Iowa

Spencer Veneers, Inc.
Spencer, Iowa
       KENTUCKY

The Freeman Corporation
Winchester, Kentucky

Laminating Services
Sub. of American Standard Corp.
Louisville, Kentucky

Robins Veneer Company
Louisville, Kentucky

Wood Mosaic Corporation
Sub. of Olin Mathierson Chemical Co,
Louisville, Kentucky
       LOUISIANA

Louisiana Veneer Co., Inc.
Chathan, Louisiana

Winnfield Veneer Company
Winnfield, Louisiana

Wood Mosaic Corporation
New Orleans, Louisiana
       MAINE

Indian Head Plywood Corp.
Presque Isle, Maine
       MARYLAND

Stenersen Mahogany Corporation
Div. of Universal Oil Prod. Co.
Escanaba, Michigan

Manthei Incorporated
Petoskey, Michigan

Soo Veneer Mill
Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan
       MINNESOTA

Elk River Box Factory
Elk River, Minnesota

Wahkon Veneer Mill
Wahkon, Minnesota
       MISSISSIPPI

Central Box Company
Crystal Springs, Mississippi

Natchez Veneer § Lumber Co., Inc,
Natchez, Mississippi

Rhymes Veneer Incorporated
Collins, Mississippi
       MISSOURI

Enterprise Veneer Corporation
Pleasant Hill, Missouri
                                351

-------
    DRAFT
Missouri Valley Veneers
Div. of C § D Sales, Inc.
St. Joseph, Missouri
       NEW JERSEY

Ichabod T. Williams § Sons, Inc.
Carteret, New Jersey
       NEW YORK

Gross Veneer Company
Potsdam, New York

Knight Veneer § Panel Corp.
Sub. of Maddox Table Co.
Falconer, New York

Riverside Veneer Company,  Inc.
Heuvelton, New York

Robbins Veneer, Inc.
Falconer, New York

Webster Basket Company
Webster, New York
       NORTH CAROLINA

Armentrout Veneer Co.,  Inc.
High Point, North Carolina

Atlantic Veneer Corporation
Beaufort, North Carolina

Beaufort Face Veneer Co., Inc.
Beaufort, North Carolina

Carolina Veneer Company
Thomasville, North  Carolina

Chadbourn Veneer Company
Chadbourn, North Carolina
Chowan Veneer Company,  Inc.
Edenton, North Carolina

Coastal Veneer Company, Inc.
Wilhan, North Carolina

Davidson Veneer Company,  Inc.
Lexington, North Carolina

Duplin Face Veneer Co., Inc.
Mount Olive, North Carolina

Lenderink Incorporated
Wilson, North Carolina

Linwood Manufacturing Co.
Linwood, North Carolina

Quality Veneer Company, Inc.
Liberty, North Carolina

Southern" Veneer Company,  Inc.
Thomasville, North Carolina

Stubbs Veneer Company
Windsor, North Carolina

Thomasville Veneer Company
Thomasville, North Carolina

Timber Products Company
Div. of Fitco, Inc.
Murphy, North Carolina

U. S. Plywood
Div. of Champion International
Guilford Veneer Operations
High Point, North Carolina

Wilson Veneer Company,  Inc.
Wilson, North Carolina

Womble Veneer Company
Southern Pines, North Carolina
                                352

-------
   DRAFT
        OHIO

Edon Manufacturing Company
Edon, Ohio

Hartzell Hardwoods, Inc.
Piqua, Ohio
       OREGON

Conrad Veneers, Inc.
Tulatin, Oregon

The Dean Company
Olympic Manufacturing Co.  Div,
Gresham, Oregon

Northwest Veneer, Inc.
Grande Ronde, Oregon

Olympic Manufacturing Co.
Sub. of the Dean Company
Gresham, Oregon
       PENNSYLVANIA

Cornelia Veneer Company
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

J. A. Habig Veneer Company
Montgomery, Pennsylvania

Weyerhaeuser Company
Ridgeway, Pennsylvania

Williamson Veneer Company
Sub. of Evans Products Co.
New Freedom, Pennsylvania

Woody Veneer § Lumber Co., Inc,
Glen Rock, Pennsylvania
       SOUTH CAROLINA

BeauforfWood'Products Co., Inc
Yemassee,  South Carolina

Bennettsville Veneer Company
Bennettsville,  South Carolina

Carolina Wirebounds, Inc.
Springfield, South Carolina

Denmark-Veneer Company
Denmark, South Carolina

Elloree Veneer Company
Elloree, South Carolina

Kearse Manufacturing Co.,  Inc.
Olar, South Carolina
       TENNESSEE

Ashby Veneer § Lumber Company
Jackson, Tennessee

Dyer Fruit Box Company
Dyer, Tennessee
       VERMONT

Indian Head Plywood Corp.
Div. of Columbia Plywood Corp,
Newport, Vermont
       VIRGINIA

Blue Ridge Veneer $ Plywood Corp,
Waynesboro, Virginia

Perrum Company
Sub. of Mead Corporation
Ferrum, Virginia
                               353

-------
DRAFT
                   Helms Veneer Corporation
                   Rocky Mount, Virginia

                   Penrod, Jurden § Clark Co.
                   Norfolk, Virginia

                   Stubbs Veneer Company, Inc.
                   Div. of Henry County Plywood Corp,
                   Ridgeway, Virginia

                   U. S. Plywood
                   Div. of Champion International
                   Champion Veneer Works
                   Pulaski, Virginia

                   Virginia Log Company, Inc.
                   West Point, Virginia
                          WEST VIRGINIA

                   Breece Veneer Company
                   Kenova, West Virginia

                   Martinsburg Veneer Corp.
                   Martinsburg, West Virginia
                          WISCONSIN

                   Bennett-Box § Veneer Company
                   Rice Lake, Wisconsin

                   Ebner Box Incorporated
                   Cameron,  Wisconsin

                   Hatley Veneer Company, Inc.
                   Hatley, Wisconsin

                   Houghton  Wood Products,  Inc.
                   Wausau, Wisconsin
                             354

-------
    DRAFT
               SOFTWOOD AND HARDWOOD PLYWOOD
       ALABAMA

Sumpter Veneer Works
Eutaw, Alabama

Union Camp Corporation
Building Products Div.
Chapman, Alabama
       FLORIDA

Boise Cascade Corporation
Pensacola Plywood
Cantonment, Florida
       GEORGIA

Georgia-Pacific Corporation
Savannah, Georgia
       MICHIGAN

Iron Wood Products Corp.
Bessemer, Michigan
       NEW HAMPSHIRE

Frey § Son, Inc.
Wilton, New Hampshire
       NORTH CAROLINA

Thomason Plywood Corporation
Fayetteville, North Carolina-
       OREGON

Georgia-Pacific' Corporation
Eugene Division
Eugene, Oregon

Publishers Paper Company
Dwyer Division
Portland, Oregon

Southern Oregon Plywood Inc.
Grants Pass, Oregon
       SOUTH CAROLINA

Cheraw Plywood Company, Inc.
Cheraw, South Carolina
       TEXAS

Walker Plywood
Kirby Lumber Corporation
Cleveland, Texas
       WASHINGTON

Everett Plywood Corporation
Everett, Washington

Mf. Baker Plywood, Inc.
Bellingham, Washington

North  Pacific Plywood,  Inc.
Tacoma, Washington

Pugef Sound-Plywood,  Inc.
Tacoma', 'Washington
                                 355

-------
   DRAFT
               SOFTWOOD AND HARDWOOD VENEER
       FLORIDA

Franklin Crates Incorporated
Micanopy, Florida
      GEORGIA

Pearson Basket Mills
Fort Valley, Georgia
       OREGON

Conrad Veneers,  Inc.
Tualatin, Oregon

Olympic Manufacturing Co,
Gresham, Oregon

Timber Products  Company
Medford, Oregon
       MARYLAND

Stenersen Mahogany Corp.
Cockeysville, Maryland
       VIRGINIA

Ferrum Veneer Corporation
Ferrum, Virginia
       MINNESOTA

Wahkon Veneer Mill
Wahkon, Minnesota
       NORTH CAROLINA

Armentrout Veneer Co., Inc.
High Point, North Carolina

Lenderink Incorporated
Wilson, North Carolina

Thomasville Veneer Company
Thomasville, North Carolina
                                356

-------
          APPENDIX B



ENGLISH-METRIC CONVERSION TABLE
              357

-------
l/l
OO
                                          CONVERSION TABLE

           Multiply (English Units)              by                 To Obtain  (Metric Units)

           English Unit     Abbreviation     Conversion     Abbreviation     Metric Unit
acre
acre-feet
British Thermal
Unit
British Thermal
Unit/pound
cubic feet
per minute
cubic feet
per second
cubic feet
cubic feet
cubic inches
degree Fahrenheit
feet
gallon
ac
ac ft
BTU
BTU/lb
cfm
cfs
cu ft
cu ft
cu in
oF
ft
gal
0.405
1233.5
0.252
0.555
0.028
1.7
0.028
28.32
16.39
0.555(°F-32)1
0.3048
3.785
ha
cu m
kg cal
kg cal/kg
cu m/min
cu m/min
cu m
1
cu cm
°C
m
1
hectares
cubic meters
kilogram- calories
kilogram calories
per kilogram
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
per minute
cubic meters
liters
cubic centimeters
degree Centigrade
meters
liters
           Actual  conversion,  not a multiplier

-------
                         CONVERSION TABLE (CONTINUED)



Multiply (English Units)              by                To Obtain  (Metric Units)



English Unit     Abbreviation     Conversion     Abbreviation     Metric Unit
gallon per
minute
gallon per
ton
horsepower
inches
inches of
Mercury
pounds
pound per ton
million gallons
per day
mile
pounds per square
gpm
gal/ton
hp
in
in Hg
Ib
Ib/ton
mgd
mi
psig
.0.0631
4.173
0.7457
2.54
0.03342
0.454
0.5005
3,785
1.609
(0.06805 psig+1)1
I/sec
1/kkg
kw
cm
atm
kg
kg/kkg
cu m/day
km
atm
liters per
second
liters per
metric ton
kilowatts
centimeters
atmospheres
(absolute)
kilograms
kilograms per
metric ton
cubic meters
per day
kilometer
atmospheres
   inch (gauge)
 Actual conversion, not a multiplier
(absolute)

-------
                         CONVERSION TABLE (CONTINUED)



Multiply (English Units)               by               To Obtain (Metric Units)



English Unit     Abbreviation     Conversion     Abbreviation     Metric Unit
square feet
square inches
tons (short)
yard
sq ft
sq in
t
y
0.0929
6.452
0.907
0.9144
sq m
sq cm
kkg
m
square meters
square centimeters
metric tons
(1000 kilograms)
meters
OJ
o

-------