## Jul y 2003



# Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Chapter 10 Plywood and Composite Wood Products

Final Background Report

Prepared for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Factors and Inventory Group Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 RTI Project No. 08550.001.014.003

Prepared by

RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

## Jul y 2003



# Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42

Chapter 10 Plywood and Composite Wood Products Final Background Report

Prepared for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Factors and Inventory Group Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

RTI Project No. 08550.001.014.003

Prepared by

RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

### ii NOTICE

The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-D01079 to RTI International. It has been reviewed by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and has been approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

### iii Table of Contents

Section Page

1.0 Introduction

................................................................. 1-1

2.0 Sources of Emission Data

...................................................... 2-1 2.1 Previous AP-42 Background Reports

...................................... 2-1 2.2 Emission Test Reports from EPA MACT Survey

............................. 2-2 2.3 NCASI Data

.......................................................... 2-2

3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

.................................... 3-1 3.1 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP)

.......................................... 3-1 3.2 Non-HAP Data

........................................................ 3-2 3.2.1 Organic Compounds

............................................. 3-2 3.2.2 Particulate Matter

............................................... 3-4 3.2.3 Other Non-HAP Compounds

...................................... 3-6 3.3 Emission Testing Issues

................................................. 3-7 3.3.1 Organic Emissions From Dryers and Presses

.......................... 3-7 3.3.2 Moisture Content of Dryer Exhaust

................................. 3-7 3.3.3 VOC and PM-10 Measurements

.................................... 3-8 3.3.4 Interrelationship of PM/PM-10 and VOC Emissions

.................... 3-9 3.3.5 Summary of Emission Testing Issues

................................ 3-9

4.0 Review of Emission Data

...................................................... 4-1 4.1 AP-42

............................................................... 4-2 4.2 Emission Test Reports

.................................................. 4-2 4.3 NCASI Data

.......................................................... 4-4

5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

................................................... 5-1 5.1 General Approach

..................................................... 5-1 5.2 Grouping of Emission Data

.............................................. 5-1 5.2.1 Grouping by Air Pollution Control Device

........................... 5-1 5.2.2 Grouping Within Source Types

.................................... 5-2 5.3 Calculating Emission Factors

............................................ 5-3 5.4 Emission Factor Ratings

................................................ 5-4

6.0 References

.................................................................. 6-1 Attachment 1. Acronyms/Codes/Abbreviations

.......................................... A-1 Attachment 2. Example Calculation

.................................................. A-11 Attachment 3. Conversion Factors and Equations

....................................... A-15

### iv This page intentionally left blank.

### 1.0 Introduction

1-1 

# 1.0 Introduction

The purpose of this report is to document the development and revision of emission factors for the EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources (commonly referred to as AP-42), Chapter 10, Wood Products Industry. Four previous AP-42 sections were revised: Section 10.5, Plywood Manufacturing; Section 10.6.1, Waferboard/Oriented Strandboard Manufacturing; Section 10.6.2, Particleboard Manufacturing; and Section 10.6.3, Medium Density Fiberboard Manufacturing. In addition, two new AP-42 sections were developed: Section 10.6.4, Hardboard and Fiberboard Manufacturing; and Section 10.9, Engineered Wood Products Manufacturing. Emission factors were not revised for the remaining sections of Chapter 10 (lumber, chemical wood pulping, pulp bleaching, papermaking, charcoal, and wood preserving). An emission factor is a representative value that attempts to relate the quantity of a pollutant released to the atmosphere with an activity associated with the release of that pollutant. Emission factors usually are expressed as the weight of pollutant divided by the unit weight, volume, distance, or duration of the activity that emits the pollutant. The emission factors presented in AP-42 may be appropriate to use in a number of situations, such as making source-specific emission estimates for areawide inventories for dispersion modeling, developing control strategies, screening sources for compliance purposes, establishing operating permit fees, and making permit applicability determinations. This background report consists of six sections. Section 1 is the introduction to the report. Section 2 discusses the sources of the emission data used to develop the emission factors. Section 3 discusses the pollutants and the emission measurement methods used to collect the data. Section 4 discusses the review of the emission data. Section 5 discusses the calculation of the emission factors. Section 6 lists the references.

### 1.0 Introduction

1-2 This page intentionally left blank.

### 2.0 Sources of Emission Data

2-1 

# 2.0 Sources of Emission Data

The emission factors presented in this report are based on data combined from three types of sources: (1) prior versions of AP-42 sections covering the plywood and composite wood products industry; (2) numerous emission test reports (dated 1995 or later) collected from plants during EPA’s 1998 maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standard survey; and (3) results from an extensive air emission testing program conducted by the National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI). A total of 111 emission data sources were reviewed in the development of emission factors for the plywood and composite wood products sections of AP-42. These 111 emission data sources are divided into three groups as follows:



### # Background reports for the previous plywood and composite wood products industry sections of AP-42 (including reviews of 124 emission test reports) — four reports;



### # Emission test reports submitted with responses to EPA’s 1998 MACT survey — 99 reports; and



### # NCASI technical bulletins (numbers 768 through 774, dated January 1999) and an associated database — seven bulletins and the database. When combined, the data from these three emission data sources yielded a total of approximately 30,000 individual emission test runs. Sections 2.1 through 2.3 below provide brief descriptions of the three data sources.


## 2.1 Previous AP-42 Background Reports
Emission factors for the wood products industry are presented in Chapter 10 of AP-42. 1 

### Chapter 10 is divided into multiple sections according to the type of wood product manufactured. For each section published in AP-42, there is an accompanying background report. The AP-42 background reports provide details from each of the emission data references used to develop the AP-42 emission factors. Emission test data and process information were extracted from the background reports for the following previous AP-42 sections: 2-5



### # Plywood Manufacturing (September 1997),


### # Waferboard/Oriented Strandboard (OSB) Manufacturing (December 1998),


### # Particleboard Manufacturing (September 1998), and


### # Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) Manufacturing (September 1998). The previous plywood background report includes a review of emission data from five emission test reports, NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 405, and the plywood portion of NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 694. 6,7

### The previous waferboard/OSB background report includes a review of 105 emission test reports and the OSB portion of NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 694. The previous particleboard background report includes a review of eight emission test reports and the particleboard portion of NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 693. 8

### The previous MDF background report includes a review of six emission test reports and the MDF portion of NCASI Technical Bulletin No. 693.

### 2.0 Sources of Emission Data

2-2 The four previous AP-42 background reports were the source of approximately 5,600 emissiontest runs. The background reports include a significant quantity of data for criteria and other nonhazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions including various particulate matter (PM) fractions, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO x

### ), carbon dioxide (CO 2

### ), total hydrocarbon (THC), and 33 other non-HAP compounds. The emission test data extracted from the AP-42 background reports also include measurements for 32 speciated HAP compounds. The background reports include data for uncontrolled emissions sources, as well as data for emissions controlled with a number of air pollution control devices (APCDs), including regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs), wet electrostatic precipitators (WESPs), electrified filter beds (EFBs), wet scrubbers, multicyclones (multiclones), and baghouses (fabric filters).


## 2.2 Emission Test Reports from EPA MACT Survey
In addition to the data from the previous AP-42 background reports, 45 plants (representing 14 companies) submitted 99 emission test reports with their responses to a 1998 EPA MACT survey of the plywood and composite wood products industry. 9-107

### These 99 reports represent approximately 3,400 emission test runs and include measurements of 21 speciated HAP compounds. These reports also include measurements of THC, CO, CO 2 

### , NO x 

### , and 25 other non-HAP compounds. The reports include measurements of uncontrolled emissions, as well as controlled emissions from sources equipped with several types of APCDs including RTOs, regenerative catalytic oxidizers (RCOs), thermal oxidizers, exhaust gas recirculation systems, biofilters, wet scrubbers, EFBs, WESPs, baghouses, and multicyclones.


## 2.3 NCASI Data
Data from the NCASI MACT sampling program is published in a series of seven technical bulletins and was also provided to EPA electronically in a consolidated emissions database. 108-115

### The consolidated emissions database includes approximately 21,000 emission test runs and is the largest single source of emission data for the wood products industry. Emission tests were conducted at 29 wood products mills, representing a cross section of product types, source types, and emission control techniques. The data collected from the NCASI program characterize emissions of 20 speciated HAP compounds, 9 additional non-HAP compounds, THC, and CO. In some cases, methane emissions were measured at RTO outlets so that non-methane THC emissions could be calculated. In addition to uncontrolled emissions, emissions were measured at the outlets of a number of different APCDs, including RTOs, RCOs, biofilters, wet scrubbers, WESPs, EFBs, and baghouses.

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-1 

# 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

A number of different emission test methods were used to collect the emission data used in the development of emission factors for the plywood and composite wood products sections of AP-42. Table 1 of Attachment 1 lists each emission test method used, the test method code used in the NCASI databases and the spreadsheets used to develop the new emission factors, and the pollutants measured with each method. Most of the data were collected using EPA reference test methods or the NCASI impinger/canister method (NICM). With a few exceptions, all emissions data for a given pollutant were treated equally regardless of the test methods used to collect those data. Data collected using ambient test methods or National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) test methods were discarded if data collected with stack sampling methods were available for the same combination of source, control device, and pollutant. In addition, data collected using Method 25 (M25) were not used for the reasons provided in Section 3.2.1. Emission test methods for HAP and non-HAP compounds are discussed in the paragraphs below.


## 3.1 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP)
“Hazardous air pollutants,” as used in this report, refers to the list of pollutants as promulgated in §112(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Emissions data were collected for approximately 30 HAP compounds as part of this revision of AP-42. These HAP are italicized in Table 1 of Attachment 1. The available HAP emissions data were collected using a variety of emission test methods. With one exception, formaldehyde, no attempt was made to assess the potential effect of stack sampling methods on measured HAP emissions, primarily because the data sets were too small to show any significant effects. However, a significant amount of formaldehyde data was obtained using two distinct test methods (described below), and therefore, the formaldehyde data collected with these two methods were compared to determine if there were any biases associated with the test methods. The results of the data analysis showed no discernible differences in the results obtained using the two methods (in fact, the two data sets completely overlapped), and therefore, all of the available formaldehyde data were treated as one data set. 116


### The bulk of the speciated organic HAP data (including formaldehyde) was collected as part of the NCASI emissions test program using the NICM. The NCASI test program included the sampling and analysis of 20 different HAP compounds. A list of these compounds and the analysis methods used tomeasure each HAP is provided in Table 2 of Attachment 1. The NICM testing was done using a selfvalidating quality assurance program and is described in detail in NCASI Technical Bulletin 774. 114


### A significant amount of formaldehyde and other aldehyde and ketone emissions data from wood products operations also was obtained using EPA Method 0011 (M0011). The procedure collects an integrated sample isokinetically at points along perpendicular traverses of the stack. The gaseous and particulate pollutants in the sample gas are collected in an impinger train that contains an aqueous acidic solution of dinitrophenyl-hydrazine. Formaldehyde reacts with the dinitrophenyl-hydrazine to form a

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-2 formaldehyde dinitrophenylhydrazone derivative. This derivative is extracted, solvent exchanged, concentrated, and analyzed by high performance liquid chromatography. Although M0011 was developed specifically for formaldehyde emissions, it has not been validated for measuring formaldehyde emissions from wood products industry emission sources. EPA Method 0011 also has been applied to other aldehyde and ketone compounds including acetaldehyde, acrolein, propionaldehyde, and methyl ethyl ketone. However, EPA recommends that M0011 be used only for the determination of formaldehyde, acetophenone, isophorone, acetaldehyde, and propionaldehyde emissions from stationary sources. 117

### The EPA further concludes that M0011 is not appropriate for the measurement of quinone, acrolein, methyl ethyl ketone, and methyl isobutyl ketone, due either to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems. The poor collection efficiency and analytical problems result in emission estimates for these compounds that are biased low. Some formaldehyde data were collected using California Air Resources Board (CARB) Method 430. The EPA’s Emission Measurement Center (EMC) has indicated that this method is similar to M0011. 118



### Other EPA reference methods used to collect HAP emission data include Method 0010 for semivolatile organic HAP, Method 0030 for volatile organic HAP, Method 308 for methanol, and Method 18 for benzene. In addition, three methods from the EPA Compendium of Methods for the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air (TO) were used to collect HAP data: TO-5, TO-8, and TO-14. The limited data available for methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) were collected using one of two methods: the 1-(2-pyridyl) piperazine method (1,2-PP) or NIOSH Physical and Chemical Analytical Method 142 (P&CAM142).


## 3.2 Non-HAP Data
Data also were compiled for a number of non-HAP compounds. The majority of the non-HAP emission data collected are measurements taken using EPA reference methods. Emission measurement methods for organic compounds, PM, and other non-HAP compounds are discussed in the paragraphs which follow.

3.2.1 Organic Compounds Organic compound emissions data for the wood products industry have been obtained primarily via one of two EPA methods: Method 25 (M25) and Method 25A (M25A). It is important to understand that these two methods measure different portions of the total organic compounds in the exhaust stream and that results from the two methods are not directly comparable. Method 25 measures volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions as total gaseous nonmethane organics (TGNMO). Results of M25 measurements are typically reported as carbon concentrations or mass rates. Because organic PM interferes with the analysis of the volatile organics, the sample is drawn through a heated filter for PM removal. The sample is drawn from the filter through a condensate trap into an evacuated sample tank. The material in the trap and sample tank are recovered and analyzed separately, and the results are combined to determine total VOC. The organic material in the condensate trap is oxidized to CO 2

### and collected in an evacuated vessel; then a portion of the CO 2

### is reduced to methane (CH4

### ) and measured by flame ionization detector (FID). A portion of the gas collected in the sample tank is first passed through a gas chromatograph to separate CO, CO 2 

### , and CH4

### from the

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-3 remaining nonmethane organic material (NOM). The NOM is then oxidized to CO 2 

### , reduced to CH4 

### , and measured by FID. This procedure essentially counts the number of carbon atoms present in the nonmethane volatile organic material and eliminates inconsistencies associated with the variable response of the FID to different organic compounds. Method 25A is used to provide a continuous measure of the concentration of organic vapors consisting primarily of alkanes, alkenes, and aromatic hydrocarbons, collectively referred to as THC. The stack gas sample is collected through a heated sample line with either an in-stack or heated filter to remove PM. From the filter, the sample is directed to an FID, and the concentration of organic material in the gas stream is measured as calibration gas equivalents or as carbon equivalents. The results depend strongly on the particular constituents that make up the organic content of the gas stream because the FID has different response factors for different organic bond structures. In particular, the carbon/oxygen bond (as in formaldehyde) provides a negative interference, so the response of the FID to oxygenated compounds (like formaldehyde) is diminished. Consequently, M25A does not include an adequate measure of formaldehyde emissions and does not accurately quantify emissions of other oxygenated compounds in the THC estimate. Also, M25A measures methane, which is not regulated as a VOC. This may result in the overestimation of VOC emissions from gas-fired emission sources which may have significant methane emissions. The limited amount of M25 VOC emission data from the previous AP-42 background reports was discarded. As mentioned above, measurements of VOC obtained using M25 are not directly comparable with measurements of THC obtained using M25A. All of the non-speciated organic compound data from the 99 emission test reports and from the NCASI MACT sampling program were collected using M25A. In addition, most of the non-speciated organic compound data from the previous AP-42 background reports were obtained using M25A. All THC emission factors presented in this report are based on M25A and are reported on a carbon basis. The THC emission factors have not been adjusted to exclude methane. It is important to note that the THC emission factor for a given source is not directly comparable to the sum of organic HAP emission factors (total HAP) for that source. The THC analysis uses the molecular weight (MW) of carbon (12 grams/mole) to convert measured concentrations into mass emission rates. The mass emission rates for the individual HAP are calculated using the molecular weights of the individual compounds. Thus, different mass emission rates would be calculated by the two methods even if the measured concentrations were the same. In addition, as mentioned above, M25A underestimates the concentrations of oxygenated compounds in the exhaust stream. Guidance from EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) indicates that, when possible, VOC emission factors should be reported in terms of the actual weight of the emitted compound. However, when an actual MW of the emitted stream is not feasible (as is the case with the mixed streams emitted from wood products industry sources), the VOC should be reported using an assumed MW of 44, and reported “as propane.” Each VOC-as-propane emission factor is estimated by first converting the THC from a carbon basis to a propane basis. Propane (MW = 44) includes 3 carbon atoms (total MW of 36) and 8 hydrogen atoms (total MW of 8). Every 36 pounds of carbon measured corresponds to 44 pounds of propane. The ratio of the MW of propane to the MW of carbon in propane is 44/36, or 1.22. The conversion from mass on a carbon basis to mass on a propane basis is expressed by the following equation:

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-4 THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane
After the THC emission factor has been converted from a carbon to a propane basis, the formaldehyde emission factor is added (where available), then the available emission factors for non-VOC compounds, including acetone, methane, and methylene chloride, are subtracted. This procedure is expressed simply by the following equation: VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride) In cases where no emission factor is available (or the emission factor is reported only as below the testmethod detection limit, or “BDL”) for one or more of the compounds used to estimate the VOC-aspropane value, adjustments to the converted THC value are made only for those compounds for which emission factors are available. That is, a value of zero is inserted in the above equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as BDL. For example, if no methane emission factor is available, the THC-as-carbon emission factor is converted to THC-as-propane, formaldehyde is added, and only acetone and methylene chloride are subtracted.

3.2.2 Particulate Matter There are three distinct PM fractions for which EPA has developed emission test methods: (1) filterable PM, (2) condensible PM, and (3) particulate matter equal to or less than an equivalent aerodynamic diameter of nominally 10 micrometers (PM-10). The material collected in the probe and filter (front-half catch) of an EPA Method 5 (M5) sampling train is considered by EPA to be filterable PM. The material collected in the impingers (back-half catch) of an EPA M5 or Method 202 (M202) sampling train is considered by EPA to be condensible PM. The material collected on the filter and in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A (M201 or M201A) sampling train is considered by EPA to be PM-10.
Test methods for PM (both filterable and condensible) include the standard reference method (EPA Methods 1 through 5 with M5 being the primary PM procedure) and derivatives of M5. Other methods that have been used in the plywood and composite wood products industry are EPA Method 17 (M17) for total PM, M201 and M201A for PM-10, M202 for condensible PM, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Method 8 (ODEQ-8) for filterable PM, and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Method 7 (ODEQ-7) for both filterable PM and condensible PM. The paragraphs below first describe the essential features of M5 and then describe how the other procedures differ from M5. No emissions data based on M17, ODEQ-7, or ODEQ-8 have been used to develop emission factors were used to develop the revised and new wood products AP-42 sections. The primary components of the M5 sampling train are the nozzle, the probe, a filter (which is maintained at 120 ± 14°C [250 ± 25°F] in a heated filter box), an impinger train that is kept in an ice bath to cool the gas stream to ambient temperature, a meter box, and a pump. The impinger train contains four impingers; the first two contain water, the third is dry, and the fourth contains silica gel to dry the gas stream before it enters the dry gas meter. The M5 train collects an integrated sample over one to several hours at sample points that span a cross-section of the exhaust duct or stack, typically on perpendicular traverses across the diameter of the stack. At each sampling point, a sample of the gas

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-5 stream is collected isokinetically through the nozzle. The captured gas stream moves through the probe to the filter. Some particles are collected on the walls of the probe, and the remaining material that is in particle phase at 120°C (250°F) is collected on the filter. The gases that pass through the filter then go through the impinger train where any organic or inorganic materials that condense between 16° and 120°C (60° and 250°F) are collected. Typically, the material collected in the probe and filter (front half catch) is considered for regulatory purposes to be PM, and the material captured in the impingers (back half catch) is considered to be condensible PM. The procedures for M5 do not require the back half catch of the sampling train to be quantified. However, as explained below, the M5 train may be coupled with a M202 sampling train for measuring the condensible PM emission rate. The other two methods that have been used to collect total PM emissions from plywood and composite wood products industry operations, M17 and ODEQ-7, encompass the same principles as M5 but have specific modifications. The primary difference between M5 and M17 is in the collection temperature for the front half catch. In order to maintain a collection temperature of 120°C (250°F), the M5 train employs a heated probe and filter. In contrast, the M17 train employs an in-stack filter, so the collection temperature is equal to the actual temperature of the stack gas. If the stack gas temperature is less than 120°C (250°F), then any material that condenses at temperatures between the stack gas temperature and 120°C (250°F) will be measured as filterable PM with M17. However, in a M5 train, this material would pass through the front half of the train to the impingers and would not be quantified as filterable PM. The measures are reversed if the stack gas temperature is greater than 120°C (250°F). The ODEQ-7 method modifies M5 by adding a filter between the third and fourth impingers to collect any condensed material that escapes the impingers. This filter is maintained at approximately ambient temperature, and the material collected in the first three impingers and on the second filter are added to the front-half catch to obtain total PM. This procedure is intended to measure those constituents in the emissions responsible for the formation of PM once the emissions have cooled to ambient temperature. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Method 8 is a high volume method of sampling filterable PM emissions, primarily designed for wood products handling cyclone and baghouse exhaust systems, for which the primary emissions are solid PM. The primary components of the ODEQ-8 train are the nozzle, the probe, a filter (unheated, outside stack), a meter box and a pump. One primary difference between M5 and ODEQ-8 is in the collection temperature for the filter catch. In order to maintain a collection temperature of 120°C (250°F), the M5 train employs a heated probe and filter. In contrast, the ODEQ-8 train uses an unheated probe, and an unheated, out-of-stack filter, so the collection temperature is near the actual temperature of the stack gas. If the stack gas temperature is less than 120°C (250°F), then any material that condenses at temperatures between the stack gas temperature and 120°C (250°F) will be measured as filterable PM with ODEQ-8. However, in a M5 train, this material would pass through the front half of the train to the impingers and would not be quantified as filterable PM. The other major difference between M5 and ODEQ-8 is that the Oregon method does not include a series of impingers, or back half, and, therefore does not quantify condensible PM. In 40 CFR Part 51, EPA has published a procedure for determining condensible PM emission rates (M202). Method 202, which applies to determination of condensible PM from stationary sources, measures condensible PM as material that passes through the filter and is collected in the impingers of a PM train. The primary method specifies that condensible PM be based on the back-half catch of a M17 train (which uses an in-stack filter), but M5, M201, or M201A procedures are also acceptable. The method specifies that the impinger solution be extracted with methylene chloride, the inorganic and

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-6 organic fractions be dried separately, the residues weighed, and the condensible PM be determined from the combination of both residues. Note that because the method allows the use of either a heated filter system or an in-stack filter system, some ambiguity in results can occur from test to test. In 40 CFR Part 51, EPA has published two procedures for determining PM-10 emission rates (M201 and M201A). Methods 201 and 201A are derivatives of M5, both of which include an in-stack cyclone to remove particles with an aerodynamic diameter greater than 10 micrometers ( :

### m) from the gas stream followed by an in-stack filter to collect the remaining particles. The back half of the train is identical to the back half of the M5 train. Both methods require a traverse of the stack, but M201 uses isokinetic sampling with a recirculating system to maintain constant flow through the cyclone, while M201A uses a constant sampling rate. The PM-10 is determined gravimetrically from the material captured in the sample line between the cyclone and filter and on the filter. Neither of the two methods specify procedures for determining condensible PM, but both methods indicate that for applications such as inventories of sources contributing to ambient PM-10 levels, PM-10 should be the sum of condensible PM emissions and PM-10 emissions measured by the M201 or M201A procedures. It is routine for filterable PM and condensible PM emissions to be summed in order to generate a total, or “primary PM” value. With regard to PM-10 emissions, the applicability sections of EPA M201 and M201A state that: EPA recognizes that condensible emissions not collected by an in-stack method are also PM-10, and that emissions that contribute to ambient PM-10 levels are the sum of condensible emissions and emissions measured by an in-stack PM-10 method, such as [Method 201] or Method 201A. Therefore, for establishing source contributions to ambient levels of PM-10, such as for emission inventory purposes, EPA suggests that source PM-10 measurement include both in-stack PM-10 and condensible emissions.
In effect, this means that condensible PM emissions are also PM-10 emissions, and in order to determine total “primary PM-10” emissions, PM-10 emissions measured with M201 or M201A should be summed with condensible PM emissions. In this report, PM-10 emissions measured with M201 or M201A are referred to as “filterable PM-10” as an indication of EPA’s view that these measurements represent only the “front-half” or “dry” portion of total primary PM-10 emissions. Separate emission factors are presented for filterable PM and condensible PM; they may be summed to determine an emission factor for total primary PM. Similarly, the separate emission factors presented for filterable PM-10 and condensible PM may be summed to determine an emission factor for total primary PM-10.

3.2.3 Other Non-HAP Compounds
Data are available for CO, CO 2 

### , NO x 

### , SO 2 

### , and a number of volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds. As noted above, most of the non-HAP data have been collected using EPA reference methods. Data for these non-HAP compounds are incorporated from the previous AP-42 data and from the 99 emission test reports submitted with the MACT survey responses. Speciated non-HAP aldehyde and ketone data based on M0011 measurements are available, primarily for the MDF and particleboard industry sectors. As mentioned in Section 3.1 of this report, EPA recommends M0011 be used only for the determination of formaldehyde, acetophenone,

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-7 isophorone, acetaldehyde, and propionaldehyde emissions. 117

### Due to poor collection efficiency and analytical problems, emission estimates for other compounds may be biased low. The M0011 data for these compounds have been used to develop emission factors only in cases where no other emission data are available. For compounds where measurements with other methods are available, the M0011 data for these compounds have not been used in the development of average emission factors. Speciated non-HAP data were also extracted from the NCASI MACT sampling database. The NCASI MACT sampling database includes measurements of nine speciated non-HAP organic compounds. A list of the nine non-HAP compounds and the analytical methods used to measure each compound is provided in Table 3 of Attachment 1. The NCASI MACT sampling database also includes measurements of CO and methane at selected sources.


## 3.3 Emission Testing Issues
Many of the difficulties encountered in developing VOC and PM-10 emission factors for plywood and composite wood products industry dryers and hot presses arise because of the chemical composition of the organic materials found in the emission streams from these processes and the use of different test methods to collect and analyze these organic compounds for the historical data base. Also, the chemical and physical characteristics of these emission streams, particularly the moisture content and temperature variations, complicate sampling and analysis and data reduction. Particular issues of concern are complications associated with high moisture in exhaust streams, differing VOC and PM-10 results from different procedures and associated concerns with the condensible PM-10 as measured by Method 202, and the interrelationship between the estimates of VOC and PM-10 emissions. These issues are a general concern in the wood products industry and should be considered in the planning of emission test programs for the industry. The paragraphs below first discuss the characteristics of the organic material in wood products exhaust streams and then address the general issues outlined above.

3.3.1 Organic Emissions From Dryers and Presses As green wood is subjected to heat in plywood and composite wood products dryers, some of the organic material in the wood is volatilized and carried off with the exhaust stream. These organic materials that emanate from the wood are the primary VOCs and condensible organic PM in the dryer exhaust. Consequently, the organic compounds found in wood products dryer emissions typically include terpenes, terpene-like materials, resins, and fatty acids comparable to those found in wood. The boiling points of many of these materials are in the range of 155° to 370°C (310° to 700°F). These temperatures are greater than typical dryer temperatures for some industry sectors, but the compounds exhibit significant vapor pressures at dryer temperatures. Consequently, some of these organic compounds are at saturation levels in the gas streams and will condense as the gas stream cools.

3.3.2 Moisture Content of Dryer Exhaust The inherent moisture contents of exhaust streams from plywood and composite wood products dryers complicate measurement of PM-10 emissions in these streams. This problem is most prevalent for facilities that have wet control devices such as wet ESPs or wet scrubbers. Because the exhaust from these systems is saturated, moisture condensation downstream from the control device is common. The EPA reference methods for PM-10 prescribe an in-stack filter that operates at stack temperatures. If the gas stream contains water droplets, sample train filter blinding (blockage of gas flow through the filter) is likely to preclude PM-10 sampling. This problem has been encountered during EPA tests conducted on

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-8 wet ESP-controlled dryers as a part of the program to develop emission factors for the wood products industry.
One solution to this problem is to use a heated filter rather than an in-stack filter in the Method 201 or 201A train. As a part of the testing, Method 202 could be used to determine condensible PM emissions from the back half of the Method 201 or 201A train. The total PM-10 emissions could be estimated as the sum of the PM-10 emissions obtained from Method 201 or 201A and the condensible PM emissions obtained from Method 202. This solution will eliminate the moisture problem, but it does have two drawbacks. First, since this procedure is different from the procedure used for dry control systems, the results will not be directly comparable. Second, this procedure exacerbates the problems related to the interrelationship of VOC and PM-10 emissions discussed below. High levels of moisture in exhaust streams can cause negative bias on Method 25A THC measurements. The magnitude of the bias can differ for different Method 25A analyzers. Few analyzers have shown significant biases at moisture contents of less than 10 percent. However, significant negative bias (e.g., around 20 percent) has been shown to occur for some Method 25A analyzers at 20 percent moisture. One method for preventing the negative bias is to dilute high moisture exhaust streams to less than 10 percent moisture using heated air.

3.3.3 VOC and PM-10 Measurements As suggested by the characteristics of the organic emissions from wood products dryers described above, the dryer exhaust gas contains a substantial amount of organic material that is condensible in the range of 50° to 120° C (120° to 250°F). Because all of the test methods described earlier contain a filter to collect PM, the amount of this material that remains on that filter and the amount that will be measured downstream from the filter depend on the operating temperature of the filter. Consequently, the material classified as PM-10, condensible PM, and VOC differs, depending on filter temperature. The situation related to VOC emissions is further complicated by the presence of aldehydes and ketones in the exhaust streams from dryers and presses. The paragraphs below first address the PM-10 issues and then the VOC issues. The applicability sections for M201 and M201A indicate that if PM-10 results are to be used for purposes such as inventories, then the PM-10 results from those methods should be added to condensible PM results from M202 to obtain total PM-10 emissions. Because the primary purpose of AP-42 is to aid in preparing emission inventories, such a combination appears to be appropriate for developing AP-42 emission factors. However, condensible PM emissions can be determined via M202 in conjunction with a variety of trains. The available data base on condensible PM emissions from the wood products industry has been obtained using a M202 train following M5 and M201A trains. Because these trains operate at different filter temperatures, they can generate different measures of condensible PM emissions for the same facility. Furthermore, because M201A operates with an in-stack filter, the distribution of filterable and condensible fractions will vary from site to site depending on stack gas temperatures. In addition, measurements of filterable PM by M5 and PM-10 by M201 or M201A on the same stack gas can result in a PM-10 emission rate that is higher than the filterable PM emission rate because of the differences in sampling train filter temperatures. Such differences complicate averaging results across facilities to develop emission factors.

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-9 3.3.4 Interrelationship of PM/PM-10 and VOC Emissions Due to source characteristics, there is an interrelationship between PM/PM-10 and VOC emissions. Because of this interrelationship, the differences in the test methods described above can result in measuring some fraction of the organic constituents in the exhaust stream as both PM-10 and VOC emissions. Available test data for wood products dryer emissions indicate that irrespective of filter temperature, essentially all of the condensible PM that passes through the filter and is collected in the back half of a PM or PM-10 train is organic material. Also, any organic material that passes through an in-stack filter used with M25A will be measured as VOC. At the same time, organic material that condenses between the stack temperature and 120°C (250°F) will be measured as PM-10 by M201 and M201A. Furthermore, material that condenses in the back half of a M5 train will be classified as condensible PM by M202. An overlap in the measured PM-10 and VOC emissions in the historical data base may have occurred. If the recommendations of M201 and M201A related to including condensible PM in estimating total PM-10 emissions are followed, condensible PM will be measured as both VOC and PM-10.

3.3.5 Summary of Emission Testing Issues In summary, plywood and composite wood products industry source characteristics and differences in test methods used for collecting the historical test data make it difficult to combine the available data to obtain average emission factors. Consequently, engineering judgment was used to combine the data and develop average emission factors. Several general conclusions can be made regarding the measurement of PM-10 and VOC emissions for these sources. First, the source characteristics result in an interrelationship betweenPM/PM-10 and VOC. The constituent organic pollutants emitted act as both PM and VOC. When an instack filter is used during sampling, the measured filterable PM, condensible PM, and VOC will be affected by the stack gas temperature. Consequently, these measurements should be made under normal operating conditions; ideally, simultaneous measurements should be taken.
Second, the PM-10 and VOC test methods should be conducted to minimize the amount of overlap in their measurement. Use of M201 or M201A for filterable PM-10 in conjunction with M202 for condensible PM-10 will provide total PM-10 results on the same basis (distribution of emissions between the filterable and condensible fraction will be dependent upon stack gas temperature because the M201 and M201A trains use an in-stack filter). Use of M25A with an in-stack filter will provide VOC data on the same basis as the PM-10 measurements. In this case, the condensible organic PM-10 fraction measured using M202 will also be measured as VOC by M25A. However, the amount of measurement overlap can be estimated. Finally, M25A has a very low response to formaldehyde, and a reduced response to other aldehydes and ketones; consequently, the VOC emissions measured by M25A will be biased low in cases where these compounds are present. A separate measurement method (e.g., NCASI’s impinger method or M0011) should be used to quantify these compounds when they are expected to be present in the emissions; for example, in the exhaust gases from the presses and from drying operations.

### 3.0 Pollutants and Emission Measurement Methods

3-10 This page intentionally left blank.

### 4.0 Review of Emission Data

4-1 

# 4.0 Review of Emission Data

As part of the analysis of the emission data, the quantity and quality of the information contained in the reference documents were evaluated. The following data were excluded from consideration:



### # Test series averages reported in units that cannot be converted to the selected reporting units;



### # Test series representing incompatible test methods (i.e., comparison of EPA Method 5 front half with EPA Method 5 front and back half);



### # Test series of controlled emissions for which the control device is not specified;



### # Test series in which the source process is not clearly identified and described; and



### # Test series in which it is not clear whether the emissions were measured before or after the control device. Test data sets that were not excluded were assigned a quality rating. Data used for AP-42 are assigned A through D letter ratings, where A represents the most reliable data. The rating system used was that specified by EFIG for preparing AP-42 sections. The data were rated as follows:

A Multiple test runs that were performed using sound methodology and reported in enough detail for adequate validation. These tests do not necessarily conform to the methodology specified in EPA reference test methods, although these methods were used as a guide for the methodology actually used.

B Tests that were performed by a generally sound methodology, but lack enough detail for adequate validation.

C Tests that were based on an unproven or new methodology, or that lacked a significant amount of background information.

D Tests that were based on a generally unacceptable method, but may provide an order-of-magnitude value for the source. The following criteria were used to evaluate test reports and other primary sources of emission data for sound methodology and adequate detail:

1. Source operation . The manner in which the source was operated is well documented in the report. The source was operating within typical parameters during the test.

2. Sampling procedures . The sampling procedures conformed to a generally acceptable methodology. If actual procedures deviated from accepted methods, the deviations are well documented. When this occurred, an evaluation was made of the extent to which such alternative procedures could influence the test results.

### 4.0 Review of Emission Data

4-2 3. Sampling and process data . Adequate sampling and process data are documented in the report, and any variations in the sampling and process operation are noted. If a large spread between test results cannot be explained by information contained in the test report, the data are suspect and are given a lower rating.

4. Analysis and calculations . The test reports contain original raw data sheets. The nomenclature and equations used were compared to those (if any) specified by EPA to establish equivalency. The depth of review of the calculations was dictated by the reviewer’s confidence in the ability and conscientiousness of the tester, which in turn was based on factors such as consistency of results and completeness of other areas of the test report.


## 4.1 AP-42
For this study, average emission factors were not taken from the four previous AP-42 sections (plywood, OSB, MDF, and particleboard). Rather, the emission and process data from the individual tests were retrieved from the background reports to allow averaging with the new data (from the 99 new emission test reports and NCASI). The data from the previous AP-42 background reports had already undergone a thorough EPA review and rating process and were ready to be incorporated with the new data. The review and rating process for AP-42 is described in detail in the EPA manual, Procedures for Preparing Emission Factor Documents

. 119


### Due to the large quantity of data in the previous AP-42 background reports, the additional emission test reports, and the NCASI database, and the understanding that the additional data would generally be higher A- and B-rated data, all C- and D-rated data from the previous AP-42 background reports were discarded. The discarded data include emission factors in incompatible units, data based on measurements with unspecified test methods, and data where process operations were not clearly defined.


## 4.2 Emission Test Reports
The review of the 99 new emission test reports consisted primarily of quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) review of the emissions calculations, extraction of process information, and assigning of a quality rating like that done for AP-42. It is important to note that this review did not include an in-depth look at field and laboratory procedures to evaluate the degree to which prescribed methods were followed. For purposes of this review, it was assumed that testing contractors and analytical laboratories followed the procedures of the methods that have been indicated in the test reports. However, attention was given to discussions of any problems or unusual circumstances encountered during the testing. The EMC was asked to review a list of the emissions sources and emissions test methods cited in these reports to ensure that the proper methods were selected. The approach used to review and extract data from the emission test reports is discussed below, and is also presented in a separate memorandum. 120


### The QA/QC review of the additional emission test reports involved retrieving run-specific stack parameters, pollutant concentrations, and production rates from the emission test reports and entering the raw data into a series of spreadsheets to recalculate stack gas standard flow rates, mass emission rates of pollutants in units of pounds per hour (lb/hr), and emission factors in units of pounds of pollutant per process rate unit (for example, pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood). Reports that lacked raw data sheets or other significant supporting data to allow recalculation of mass emission rates (summary reports) were generally not reviewed and, consequently, were not used for emission factor development.

### 4.0 Review of Emission Data

4-3 For test runs with pollutant concentrations below the method detection limit (MDL), a value equal to half of the MDL was entered and clearly noted in the spreadsheets.
Emissions data for all pollutants (HAP and non-HAP) in the test reports were included in the review. Data collected with EPA Method 25A were tabulated as THC on a carbon basis. Where THC concentrations were provided as parts per million by volume (ppmv) as propane, the values were multiplied by a factor of 3 to obtain ppmv as carbon. No adjustments were made to individual data points for non-VOC compounds, such as methane, acetone, and methylene chloride. No adjustments were made to individual data points for compounds with reduced response rates to the flame ionization detector (FID), such as oxygenated compounds, including formaldehyde. The adjusted VOC emission factors were calculated from average emission factors, as described above in Section 3.2.1. There are no EPA Method 25 runs in the test reports submitted.
Particulate matter (PM) emissions data were tabulated as filterable PM, filterable PM-10, or condensible PM, as appropriate. Recalculation of PM mass emission rates began with raw catch weights in grams.
All other pollutants were reported on an “as pollutant” basis. Recalculation of mass emission rates generally began with dry ppmv. Where wet ppmv were provided, these units were first converted to dry ppmv (the equation for this conversion is presented in Attachment 3). In the case of CO 2 

### , the calculation began with percent CO 2

### in the exhaust stream.
After the data were entered into the spreadsheets, a QA/QC check was performed on the spreadsheets. This check included identifying data entry errors, as well as identifying data that appeared to be out of the typical ranges. During the QA/QC check, individual wood products mills were contacted to clarify information contained in the test reports and/or to obtain additional information (e.g., process rates to allow calculation of emission factors). The spreadsheets subsequently were updated to include any clarifications and new information provided by the mills.
In addition to the stack parameters, process rates, and other data required for the QA/QC review, additional process information was extracted to aid in analyzing the emissions data. These process parameters were entered into a second set of columns to the right of the QA/QC columns in the review spreadsheets. A number of process parameters were tabulated for each source type. Because different parameters were desired for different source types, and to make data entry and analysis easier, separate spreadsheets were created for the eight general source types for which emission test reports were submitted: hot presses; board coolers; rotary dryers; tube dryers; veneer dryers; conveyor dryers; hardboard/fiberboard kilns, ovens, and dryers; and miscellaneous sources. In some cases, plant-specific data from responses to the EPA’s 1998 MACT survey of the plywood and composite wood products industry were used to fill gaps in the process data. However, the only survey response data used were for process parameters that are relatively constant, such as press size, dryer type, resin type and dryer firing method. Process data that vary greatly over time (e.g., equipment throughput) were not pulled from the survey responses, nor was confidential business information (CBI) used to fill data gaps. Data ratings were assigned to the individual emission test data based on EFIG guidance. A summary of the rating structure is presented previously in this section. Generally, the data from the test reports were assigned A ratings if they were based on 3 or more emission test runs. If the test included

### 4.0 Review of Emission Data

4-4 only 2 runs, the data were rated B. If the test included only 1 run, the data were further downrated to C. The emission data were also downrated if the test report noted any conditions that may have adversely impacted the validity of the test data.


## 4.3 NCASI Data
The NCASI provided EPA with an electronic data base of the run-by-run emission test data summarized in technical bulletins 768 through 774. The run-by-run data in the data base were in units of concentration (ppm) and mass rate (lb/hr and lb/unit operation throughput). The method detection limit (MDL) was included in the data base for test runs that were non-detect (i.e., below the MDL, or “BDL”). These run-by-run data were extracted from the NCASI data base.
Due to the extensive data review process within NCASI, review of the NCASI data was less stringent than that for the emission test reports submitted with survey responses. Pollutant concentrations and mass emission rates were not recalculated as for the 99 emission test reports. Review of the NCASI data essentially consisted of recalculating average emission factors from the individual run data for each emission source and assigning a data rating. However, attention was also given to discussions in the technical bulletins of any difficulties or unusual circumstances encountered during the test program. Generally, the NCASI data were assigned A ratings if they were based on 3 or more emission test runs. If the test included only 2 runs, the data were rated B. If the test included only 1 run, the data were further downrated to C. The emission data were also downrated if any conditions were noted which may have adversely impacted the validity of the test data. The most significant adjustment made to the NCASI data was the recalculation of emission factors incorporating “non-detect” test runs. In general, when calculating emission factors, NCASI treated non-detects as “zero.” While there are no set rules for handling non-detect data, the methodology used by EPA when developing emission factors for AP-42 is to assign a value of one-half of the MDL for non-detect runs. This same methodology was applied for the data from the emission test reports. Thus, for consistency with the data extracted from the previous AP-42 background reports and the emission test reports, non-detect runs were reassigned a value of one-half the MDL when recalculating the average NCASI emission factors. A detailed discussion of the treatment of non-detect data by NCASI and by EPA is presented in a separate memorandum. 121


### Once the run-by-run data were extracted from the NCASI data base and averaged, the averages (where no non-detect runs were involved) were compared with the values calculated by NCASI, as reported in the technical bulletins. Only those emission factors not including BDL data could be compared in this manner. For sources with multiple vents, emissions from the vents must be summed in order to determine total emissions from the source. The approach to summing emissions for sources with multiple vents was compared with the approach taken by NCASI, using the technical bulletins as a guide. Process data for each unit operation was provided in the technical bulletins.

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-1 

# 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5.1 General Approach
First, emission test data (typically averages of three-run tests) from the previous AP-42 background reports, the MACT survey test reports, and the NCASI database were combined in a spreadsheet. Next, the test data were grouped by product, pollutant, source type, and APCD. Other parameters that could significantly impact emissions also were used to group the data when appropriate. Once grouped, the test data were used to calculate average emission factors.


## 5.2 Grouping of Emission Data
The emission data were sorted into several groups. Grouping by pollutant, wood product, and general source type (e.g., tube dryer, veneer dryer) was straightforward. However, some interpretation of the data was necessary for deciding how to group the data by APCD and how to further group the emission data within source types (e.g., segregate plywood veneer dryer data by firing method).

5.2.1 Grouping by Air Pollution Control Device Primary cyclones installed for product recovery are not considered APCDs. Instead, they are considered to be process equipment because they are a necessary part of the production process; without them, the primary raw material would be lost and the manufacturing process could not continue. Emissions test data collected at the outlet of primary cyclones are considered to be uncontrolled for all pollutants including filterable PM, condensible PM, and PM-10. Based on a review of the control efficiency data, APCDs installed for PM abatement were considered to have no effect on gaseous emissions, such as THC, CO, CO 2 

### , NO x 

### , and gaseous HAP. These APCDs include cyclones, multiclones, baghouses, and EFBs. As a result, emission test data for sources with PM controls were averaged with the uncontrolled emission test data for all pollutants except filterable PM, condensible PM, and PM-10.
Wet electrostatic precipitators and wet scrubbers installed for PM control also were considered to have no effect on gaseous emissions. These wet systems may achieve short-term reductions in THC or gaseous HAP emissions. However, the HAP and THC control efficiency data, which range from slightly positive to negative values, indicate that the ability of these wet systems to absorb water-soluble compounds (such as formaldehyde) diminishes as the recirculating scrubbing liquid becomes saturated with these compounds. Thus, as for the other PM controls, test data for WESPs and wet scrubbers were averaged with uncontrolled test data for all pollutants except filterable PM, condensible PM, and PM-10. One wet scrubbing system, a combination water tray tower/high energy venturi scrubber that uses treated water and is designed to minimize emissions of both PM and odorous compounds from a hardboard press, did achieve notable HAP and THC emissions reductions. This system reduced formaldehyde and methanol emissions by 65 percent and 50 percent, respectively, and reduced THC emissions by 86 percent. 113 

### Separate emission factors were developed for the outlet of this scrubber.

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-2 Data were available for several control technologies that achieve significant THC and HAP removal. Most of these technologies are incineration-based, including thermal oxidizers, RTOs, RCOs, and exhaust gas recirculation systems. Data were also available for biofiltration systems. Separate emission factors were developed for sources with outlet data for each of these control devices.

5.2.2 Grouping Within Source Types There are several operating and design parameters which may affect emissions from dryers, presses, and other wood products emission sources. For example, dryer emissions may be affected by wood furnish characteristics (e.g., wood species, age, season), heat source, fuel, temperature, percent fines, resin addition, etc. Press emissions may be affected by type and amount of resin applied, wood species, moisture content, cycle time, temperature, addition of catalysts and scavengers, etc. Lists of the parameters EPA attempted to collect for each emission source type are included in the memorandum describing the emission test report review process. 120

### It is not practical to consider all of these parameters for emission factor development because the data set becomes smaller each time a distinction is made. Also, in many cases, the source-to-source variability was greater than the variability associated with operating parameters.
Some parameters affect emissions more than others. Furthermore, a parameter that increases emissions of one pollutant may simultaneously decrease emissions of another pollutant. Therefore, care was taken to select the parameters that may have the most significant effect on HAP emissions when deciding how to further group emission data within emission source types. Discussions of grouping according to source parameters in the NCASI technical bulletins were reviewed in making decisions on how to group the emission data. In addition, the grouping schemes used in the previous edition of AP-42 were also considered because these schemes were reviewed by industry representatives when the AP-42 sections were developed. Dryers within each industry sector were generally differentiated by firing type, fuel type, and wood species. For MDF and hardboard tube dryers, further distinctions were made for blowline versus non-blowline blending, resin type, and for secondary (relay) dryers. For hardboard and fiberboard board dryers, distinctions were made for differing binder systems. Hot presses within each industry sector were differentiated by resin type only. For the remaining sources, distinctions were made as warranted by the data. For particleboard and MDF rotary dryers, a distinction was made between predryers or “green” dryers and “dry” dryers, based on furnish moisture content. Wood moisture content can be expressed on an oven-dry (or dry) basis or on a wet basis. In the plywood and composite wood products industry,percent moisture content is commonly expressed as percent moisture content on a dry basis. The drybasis moisture content is determined by weighing a sample of wood before and after oven-drying and then calculating the moisture content based on the weight before and after drying. Moisture content on a dry basis is calculated by the following equation:

% Moisture Content (dry basis) = weight of water in wood × 100 weight of oven-dry wood
Alternately, wood moisture content may be expressed on a wet basis. The procedure for determining wet-basis moisture content involves the same weighing and drying of a wood sample as for the dry-basis

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-3 determination; however, the calculation of the wet-basis value uses the wet weight of the wood, instead of the dry weight of the wood, as the denominator. Moisture content on a wet basis is calculated by the following equation:

% Moisture Content (wet basis) = weight of water in wood × 100 weight of wet wood
In general, dryers that dried furnish with a moisture content of greater than 50 percent (dry basis) were considered green dryers. Dryers that dried furnish with a moisture content less than 50 percent (dry basis) were considered dry dryers. There were a few instances in which dryers that were used to dry furnish with a reported moisture content just below the 50 percent threshold were included with the green dryers because the plant considered them to be green dryers or predryers. In cases where one species (or group of species, e.g., softwoods) accounted for 70 percent or more of the wood mix processed by a given process unit, the process unit was categorized by that species. For example, if a dryer processed 70 percent pines and 30 percent mixed hardwoods, the dryer was grouped with softwood dryers. If the dryer processed 40 percent softwood and 60 percent hardwood, the dryer was grouped with mixed wood species dryers.
Where emission factors for mixed hardwood and softwood species have been calculated, the wood species mix has been specified. Emission factors for other mixes of hardwood and softwood species may be calculated by combining the emission factors for hardwoods and softwoods in the ratiospecific to a given application. For example, an uncontrolled THC emission factor for a direct woodfired OSB rotary dryer processing 70 percent softwood and 30 percent hardwood may be calculated using the uncontrolled THC emission factor for softwood (6.7 lb/ODT) and hardwood (1.7 lb/ODT), and the ratio of 70 percent to 30 percent. The resultant emission factor, rounded to two significant figures, would be 5.2 lb/ODT.


## 5.3 Calculating Emission Factors
Once the emission data were grouped according to pollutant, APCD, and source type, they were then averaged to develop average emission factors. The data available for some of the emission factorsdeveloped included the results of multiple tests on the same piece of equipment. In such cases, the testspecific emission factors for the same piece of equipment were averaged first, and that average emission factor then was averaged with the factors for the other pieces of equipment to yield the overall average emission factor. The averaging of multiple tests on the same piece of equipment was more often an issue for criteria pollutants; it occurred much less frequently for HAP compounds. The number of non-detect test runs for each emission data point were considered before theywere subsequently averaged into emission factors. If all of the test data for a source were based on nondetect test runs, then no emission factor was developed and a “BDL” code was substituted for the numeric emission factor. If some of the data were non-detect and some were above the MDL, then values of one-half of the MDL were averaged into the emission factors for the non-detect test runs. Some tests have higher MDLs than others in the same data set. This can lead to situations where using half of a high MDL will bias the average high. If the half-MDL value for a non-detect test is higher than all detect values for the other tests in the data set, the non-detect test is discarded. If the half-MDL

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-4 values are less than detect values, they are included in the average. Attachment 2 is a table with an example calculation to illustrate how the average emission factors were calculated from the individual data points.


## 5.4 Emission Factor Ratings
The quality of the emission factors developed from analysis of the test data was rated using the following general criteria:

A – Excellent : Developed from A- and B-rated source test data taken from many randomly chosen facilities in the industry population. The source category is specific enough so that variability within the source category population may be minimized. B – Above average : Developed only from A- or B-rated test data from a reasonable number of facilities. Although no specific bias is evident, it is not clear if the facilities tested represent a random sample of the industries. The source category is specific enough so that variability within the source category population may be minimized.
C – Average : Developed only from A-, B- and/or C-rated test data from a reasonable number of facilities. Although no specific bias is evident, it is not clear if the facilities tested represent a random sample of the industry. In addition, the source category is specific enough so that variability within the source category population may be minimized. D – Below average : The emission factor was developed only from A-, B-, and/or C-rated test data from a small number of facilities, and there is reason to suspect that these facilities do not represent a random sample of the industry. There also may be evidence of variability within the source category population. Limitations on the use of the emission factor are noted in the emission factor table.

E – Poor : The emission factor was developed from C- and D-rated test data, and there is reason to suspect that the facilities tested do not represent a random sample of the industry. There also may be evidence of variability within the source category population. Limitations on the use of these factors are footnoted.

U – Unrated : For two of the revised AP-42 sections (plywood and OSB) some of the emission factors are based on one test conducted at one facility with either a source/control device configuration, or process operating parameters that are specific to that facility and may not be representative of any other facilities; those emission factors are unrated and are indicated with an emission factor rating of U. The use of these criteria is somewhat subjective and depends to an extent upon the individual reviewer. The ratings assigned to the average emission factors are largely a function of the data ratings assigned to the individual data sets and the number of data sets upon which the average emission factors are based. Generally, C- and D-rated data were discarded and were not used in the determination of average emission factors. However, C-rated data were used if the data were downrated only because they were 1-run data. Average emission factors based on a single data set were rated E. For factors based on multiple data sets, the ratings were based primarily on the number of data sets. In general, the average emission factors were rated D, if based on less than 10 data sets, emission factors based on 10 to 19 data

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-5 sets were rated C, and factors based on 20 or more data sets were rated B. No emission factors were assigned an A rating. The VOC-as-propane emission factors were assigned ratings one rating below the corresponding THC-as-carbon emission factor rating (unless both were rated E). Emission factors based solely on M0011 data for compounds other than formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and propionaldehyde were downrated (unless they were already rated E) because M0011 has not been validated for these other compounds and the results are likely to be biased low.

### 5.0 Emission Factor Calculations

5-6 This page intentionally left blank.

### 6.0 References

6-1 

# 6.0 References

1. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1995.

2. Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.5, Plywood Manufacturing, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1997.

3. Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.6.1, Waferboard/Oriented Strandboard Manufacturing, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, December 1998.

4. Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.6.2, Particleboard Manufacturing, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, September 1998.

5. Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.6.3, Medium Density Fiberboard Manufacturing, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, September 1998.

6. A Study of Organic Compound Emissions from Veneer Dryers and Means for Their Control, Technical Bulletin No. 405 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, August 1983.

7. Oriented Strandboard and Plywood Air Emission Databases, Technical Bulletin No. 694 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, April 1995.

8. Particleboard and Medium Density Fiberboard Air Emission Databases, Technical Bulletin No. 693 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, April 1995.

9. Results of a Series of Source Emission Tests on the OSB Core Wafer Dryer Exhaust and the Board Press Hood Exhaust at Northwood Panelboard Co., Solway, Minnesota, October 9-10, 1997, prepared for Northwood Panelboard Company, by MMT Environmental Services, Inc., MMT Report No. 10257, November 18, 1997.

10. Results of a Series of Source Emission Compliance Tests (TSP, PM10, VOC, CO, NOx, Formaldehyde and Opacity) on the OSB Wafer Dryer at Northwood Panelboard Co., Solway, Minnesota, February 28 - March 2, 1997, prepared for Northwood Panelboard Company, by MMT Environmental Services, Inc., MMT Report No. 10235, March 21, 1997.

### 6.0 References

6-211. Volatile Organic Compound Destruction Efficiency Testing of the Regenerative Catalytic Oxidizer at the ABTCo. Facility in Alpena, Michigan, Test Dates November 24-25, 1998 , prepared for Durr Environmental, Inc., by Clayton Environmental Consultants, Inc., Clayton Project No. 13-99342.00, December 14, 1998.

12. Emission Studies on Boiler No. 1, 2 and 3 Located at the ABTCo Facility Alpena, Michigan, Test Dates December 9-11, 1998 , prepared for ABTCo, Inc., by NTH Consultants, Ltd., February 1, 1999.

13. Source Emission Test Report, Dryer and Press Exhausts, Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, Mt. Jewett, Pennsylvania, Test Dates October 22-24 and December 17, 1997, prepared for Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, by Galson Measurements, Galson Project No. 975540, December 3, 1997.

14. Emissions Test Report, Boise Cascade Corporation, Island City, Oregon, Green Furnish Dryer, March 10 & 11, 1998 , prepared for Boise Cascade Corporation, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-042D, 1998.

15. Title V Emissions Test Report, PM10, Particulate Matter, Condensible Particulate Matter, Aldehydes/Ketones, Phenols, Methanol, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Cold Total Hydrocarbons from Process Stacks, Georgia Pacific Hardboard Manufacturing Plant, North Little Rock, Arkansas, Test Dates September 26-29, 1995 , prepared for CH2M Hill and Georgia Pacific Corporation, by DEECO, Inc., Report No. 95-1200-A, October 27, 1995.

16. Engineering Emissions Testing Performed on the Core Dryer and Face Dryer Cyclone Exhaust Stacks, Georgia Pacific, Vienna, Georgia, Test Dates: March 1-2, 1995, prepared for Georgia Pacific Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 95T03991, 1995.

17. Title V Emissions Testing on the Furnish Dryer Exhaust, Georgia Pacific Corporation, Panelboard Plant, Monticello, Georgia, February 13, 1996, prepared for CH2M Hill, by Analytical Testing Consultants, Inc., Report No. 5743, March 13, 1996.

18. Emission Test Results for Formaldehyde from the Primary and Secondary Stacks of Dryer 1 and Dryer 2, Georgia Pacific Fiber Board Plant, Holly Hill, South Carolina, Test Dates May 31 to June 1, 1995 , prepared for Georgia Pacific Corporation, by DEECO, Inc., Report No. 062895- 1235, June 28, 1995.

19. Results of the January 17-19, 1995 Source Emission Tests on the Dryer Stack, Dump Stack and Humidification Kiln Stack at the Georgia Pacific Facility Located in Phillips, Wisconsin , prepared for CH2M Hill, by PACE, Inc., Project No. 941228.401, March 2, 1995.

20. Summary of Test Results, May 11, 1995 Testing, Georgia Pacific, Phillips, Wisconsin , prepared for CH2M Hill, by PACE, Inc., Project No. 941228.401, May 18, 1995.

21. Results of the September 27-29, 1995 Emission Tests on the Fluidized Bed Boiler Dump Stack and Flash Tube Dryer Stack at the Georgia Pacific Facility Located in Phillips, Wisconsin ,

### 6.0 References

6-3 prepared for Georgia Pacific Corporation, by PACE, Inc., Project No. 950828.401, November 7, 1995.

22. Summary of Test Results, March 23-24, 1995 Testing, Georgia Pacific, Phillips, Wisconsin , prepared for CH2M Hill and Georgia Pacific Corporation, by PACE, Inc., April 12, 1995.

23. Stationary Source Sampling Report for Georgia Pacific Corporation, Mt. Hope, West Virginia, Wellons Energy Unit, Press Vent, Test Dates August 7-8, 1996, prepared for Georgia Pacific Corporation, by Trigon Engineering Consultants, Inc., Project No. 047-96-004, August 1996.

24. Compliance VOC and Formaldehyde Emissions Testing Performed on the Press Vent RTO System at Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date February 23, 1995 , prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 94T03968, 1995.

25. Engineering VOC and Formaldehyde Emissions Testing Performed on the Press Vent RTO System Inlet at Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date March 31, 1995 , prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 95T04069, 1995.

26. Formaldehdye and VOC Emissions Testing Performed at Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date April 18, 1996, prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 96T04537, 1996.

27. Formaldehdye and VOC Emissions Testing Performed at Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date May 9, 1996, prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 96T04585, 1996.

28. Formaldehdye and VOC Emissions Testing Performed at Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date June 5, 1996, prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 96T04609, 1996.

29. WESP Emission Test Report, Masonite Corporation, Cordele, Georgia, Test Date September 11, 1997, prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 10414-004- 001, October 7, 1997.

30. Report of Particulate/VOC and Formaldehyde Emissions Tests for Masonite Corporation, Lines I and II Press Vents, Laurel, Mississippi, Test Dates March 10-11, 1998 , prepared for Masonite Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, March 27, 1998.

31. Stationary Source Sampling Report, Reference No. 14337, International Paper, Stuart, Virginia, Emissions Testing for Carbon Monoxide, Formaldehyde, Nitrogen Oxides, Particulate, Total Hydrocarbons, Dryer No. 1 Stacks A and B, Boiler, Test Dates June 13-15, 1995 , prepared for International Paper, by Entropy, Inc., June 1995.

32. Emission Test Report Particleboard Press and No. 2 Rotary Dryer (MEC Dryer with WoodFired Burner) Emissions Testing, International Paper, Decorative Products Division, Stuart, Virginia, Test Dates June 8-10, 1998 , prepared for International Paper Decorative Products Division, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 00157-045-002, June 1998.

### 6.0 References

6-4 33. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Clayton MDF Plant, Test Dates August 22-23, 1995 , prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., September 13, 1995.

34. Report of Particulate/CO/VE/NOx/VOC Emissions Tests for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Clayton MDF Plant Nos. 1 and 2 Wood Waste Boilers, Test Dates June 26-27, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., July 18, 1997.

35. Source Test Report: Preliminary Compliance Test of a Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer at Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Oroville, California, Test Dates November 12-13, 1996, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Project No. 16802.000, 1996.

36. Butte County Air Quality Management District Compliance Source Test Report for LouisianaPacific Corporation Merlo Avenue Facility (Oroville), Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer, Test Dates May 5-7, 1998 , prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Aeros Environmental, Inc., Project No. 217-1190, June 16, 1998.

37. Butte County Air Quality Management District Compliance Source Test Report for LouisianaPacific Corporation Merlo Avenue Facility (Oroville), Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer, Test Dates July 29-31, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Aeros Environmental, Inc., Project No. 217-928, September 10, 1997.

38. Source Test Report: Emissions Compliance Test of a Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer at Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Oroville, California, Test Dates December 18-19, 1996, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Project No. 16802.002, 1996.

39. Source Test Report: Source Testing of Various Process Emissions at Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Oroville, California, Test Dates July 31 - August 4, 1995 , prepared for LouisianaPacific Corporation, by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Project No. 15747.000, September 7, 1995.

40. Source Test Report: Particulate Matter Emissions from Line 1 Filter Box at Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Oroville, California, Test Date August 16, 1996, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Normandeau Associates, Inc., Project No. 16605.000, 1996.

41. Results of the November 14-17, 1995 Air Emission Compliance Tests at the Louisiana-Pacific Waferboard Plant in Missoula, Montana , prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Interpoll Laboratories, Inc., Report No. 5-6833, December 27, 1995.

42. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Silsbee Particleboard Facility Press Vent Baghouse, Test Date September 25, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., October 17, 1997.

### 6.0 References

6-5 43. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Silsbee Particleboard Facility Core and Face Dryer Cyclones, Test Date September 23, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., October 18, 1997.

44. Report of Formaldehyde/CO/NOx Emissions Tests for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Silsbee Particleboard Facility Core and Face Dryer Cyclones, Test Date September 23, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., October 18, 1997.

45. Emission Test Report, MDI Emission Testing, Batch Press Vent, Louisiana-Pacific, Tomahawk, Wisconsin, Test Dates August 25-26, 1997, prepared for ICI Polyurethanes Group, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 11251-004-001, November 10, 1997.

46. Report for PM-10 Emission Measurements from the Press Vents, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates May 17-19, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, December 1995.

47. Report for 1995 VOC Emission Compliance Tests at the Press Vents, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Date August 21, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, August 1995.

48. Report for 1995 VOC Emission Compliance Tests at the Wood Fiber Dryers and Press Vents, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates April 10-13, 1995 and May 17-19, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, May 1995.

49. Final Report for 1998 Emission Compliance Tests SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates August 12-20, 1998 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by The Avogadro Group, October 27, 1998.

50. Report for PM-10 Emission Measurements from the Wood Fiber Dryers, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates April 10-13, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, April 1995.

51. Report for 1996 PM-10 Emission Measurements for Emission Reduction Credits, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates November 19-26, 1996, prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, April 1997.

52. Results of 1996 Emission Testing of the Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer System at SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates November 19 and 25, 1996, prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, December 1996.

53. Engineering Emissions Testing for Particulate Performed on the #1 & 3 Dryer Cyclone Exhausts and Engineering Emissions Testing for Methanol Performed on the Press Vents at Temple Inland Corporation, Monroeville, Alabama, Test Dates February 10-14, 1997, prepared for Temple Inland, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 97TO4908, 1997.

54. In-House Air Emissions Testing of Primary Dryer Outlet, Hope Particleboard Plant, Hope, Arkansas, Test Dates January 29-31, 1997, prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No. 1411700875A, March 14, 1997.

### 6.0 References

6-6 55. In-House Air Emissions Testing of Primary Dryer Outlet and RTO Press Vent Inlet, Hope Particleboard Plant, Hope, Arkansas, Test Dates February 12-14, 1997, prepared for TempleInland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No.1411700875B, March 17, 1997.

56. RTO Outlet Emission Test Report, Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, Thomson, Georgia, Test Dates April 21-22, 1998 , prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 06598-010-002, May 11, 1998.

57. Lumber Kiln Emissions Testing, Diboll and Buna, Texas, Test Dates January 20-23, 1998 (Diboll) and January 26-29, 1998 (Buna) , prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 06598-011-001, April 1, 1998.

58. In-House Air Emissions Testing of the Diboll Particleboard Plant, Diboll, Texas, Test Dates October 8-9 and 15, 1997, prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No. 9711254A, January 12, 1998.

59. Volatile Organic Compound Sampling and Analysis of Adel’s Full Scale Biofilter, Test Dates February 1, 1996 to May 14, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Weyerhaeuser, Project No. 721-9569, June 1996.

60. Volatile Organic Compound and Formaldehyde Sampling of Adel’s Biofilter, Test Dates June 18, 1996 to December 23, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Weyerhaeuser, Project No. 721- 3086.

61. Weyerhaeuser Company–Adel, Georgia Particleboard Press Vent VOC and HAP Testing, Test Dates March 6-18, 1995 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Weyerhaeuser, Project No. 721-9520, September 1995.

62. Source Test Report, Weyerhaeuser Corporation, Adel, Georgia Biofilter Inlet/Outlet Particulate, Test Date September 10, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Technical Services, Inc., September 1996.

63. Source Test Report, Biofilter VOC Emissions Reduction, Weyerhaeuser Corporation, Adel, Georgia, Test Date September 10, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Technical Services, Inc., September 1996.

64. Source Test Report, Weyerhaeuser Corporation, Adel, Georgia, Biofilter Inlet/Outlet Formaldehyde, Test Date September 11, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser, by Technical Services, Inc., September 1996.

65. Test Report Determination of Formaldehyde, Methanol, Particulate and Carbon Monoxide Emissions, Press Biofilter, Weyerhaeuser Structurwood, Grayling, Michigan, Test Dates December 11-12, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Structurwood, by Earth Tech, Inc., January 1997.

### 6.0 References

6-7 66. Stationary Source Sampling Report Reference No. 0301, Weyerhaeuser Company, Moncure, North Carolina, Dry ESP Inlet and Stack, Test Dates March 17-18, 1997, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Environmental Technical Group, Inc., April 16, 1997.

67. Stationary Source Sampling Report Reference No. 0097, Weyerhaeuser Company, Moncure, North Carolina, Wood Boiler Multiclone Inlet and Outlet, Test Dates July 25-27, 1995 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Environmental Technical Group, Inc., September 22, 1995.

68. Formaldehyde Methods Comparison, NCASI Acetylacetone Method vs. EPA Method 0011, Weyerhaeuser Company, Springfield, Oregon, MEC #3 Rotary Particle Dryer, Test Dates February 27-28, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by BWR Associates, Inc., 1996.

69. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Thru Door Core Plant Press Vents, VOC Compliance Testing 1998.3, Test Dates August 6-7, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9850, September 15, 1998.

70. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Formaldehyde Emissions Variability Study, Press Area Common Stack, Test Dates April 1, 1998 to June 30, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9753, 1998.

71. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Thru Door Core Press Vent Testing 1995.3, Test Dates August 25, 1995 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9547, January 8, 1997.

72. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Door Core Dryer, Particulate Compliance 1996.4, Test Date October 19, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9640, December 12, 1996.

73. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam Muffler Vent, Formaldehyde and VOC Test Method Study 1998.3, Test Dates August 6-7, 1998, and July 25, 1997, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9850, September 29, 1998.

74. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Thru Door Core Dryer and Press Testing, Formaldehyde Air Emissions 1996.4, Test Dates October 19 and 21, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9640, December 30, 1996.

75. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Press Testing, Formaldehyde Air Emissions 1997.3, Test Date July 25, 1997, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9741, 1997.

76. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Door Core Press Scavenger Trials, Press Vent Formaldehyde Air Emissions 1997.3, Test Dates July 21-24, 1997, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9741, 1997.

### 6.0 References

6-8 77. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Formaldehyde Emissions Variability Study, Press Area Common Stack, Test Dates December 18, 1997 to March 26, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9753, May 26, 1998.

78. Press Room Vent Emissions Sampling, Willamette Industries, Inc., Emerson, Louisiana, Test Dates February 8-9, 1995 , prepared for Willamette Industries, Inc., by Armstrong Environmental, Inc., Project W-1653-95, February 20, 1995.

79. Engineering Evaluation Test Report, Formaldehyde, Total Hydrocarbons, and Methane Emissions from Four Process Stacks, Willamette Industries, Inc., Emerson, Louisiana, Test Dates April 23-24, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, Inc., by DEECO, Inc., Project No. 1559, June 7, 1998.

80. Report of Particulate, VOC, and Formaldehyde Tests for Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line I and Line II Press Vent Baghouses, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Dates May 7-8, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, May 28, 1998.

81. Report of VOC and Formaldehyde Emissions Test for Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line I Press Vent Baghouse, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Date July 24, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, August 14, 1998.

82. Report of VOC and Formaldehyde Emissions Test for Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line II Press Vent Baghouse, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Date September 10, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, September 29, 1998.

83. Report of Air Emissions and Inlet Loading Tests for Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line II Dryers Thermal Oxidizer, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Dates March 5-6, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, April 3, 1998.

84. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Willamette Industries–Arcadia OSB Facility Press Vent Exhaust, Arcadia, Louisiana, Test Dates October 2-4, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, November 16, 1996.

85. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Willamette Industries–Arcadia OSB Facility Press Vent Exhaust, Arcadia, Louisiana, Test Date July 12, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, July 17, 1996.

86. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Willamette Industries–Arcadia OSB Facility Press Vent Exhaust, Arcadia, Louisiana, Test Date May 20, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, August 3, 1996.

87. Report of Air Emissions Tests for Willamette Industries–Arcadia OSB Facility, Arcadia, Louisiana, Test Dates July 11-12, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, August 3, 1996.

### 6.0 References

6-9 88. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries MDF, Eugene, Oregon, Primary Dryer and Sander Dust Baghouse, Test Dates October 3 and 16-18, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 96-165X, 1996.

89. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries MDF, Eugene, Oregon, Press Vents, Test Dates November 13-14, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 96-165X, 1996.

90. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries, Springfield, Oregon, Veneer Dryer #1 and Veneer Dryer #2, Test Dates June 1-2, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-092D, 1998.

91. Compliance Test, Formaldehyde and VOC, Board Press Area, Dominance Industries, Inc., Pan Pacific Products, Broken Bow, Oklahoma, Test Dates September 25-26, 1997, prepared for Pan Pacific Products, by CETCON, Job No. CJ-1813, October 28, 1997.

92. Compliance Test, Formaldehyde, PM, VOC and CO, Dryer Cyclone 13E, Dominance Industries, Inc., Pan Pacific Products, Broken Bow, Oklahoma, Test Dates September 22-23, 1997, prepared for Pan Pacific Products, by CETCON, Job No. CJ-1812, October 23, 1997.

93. Compliance Test, Formaldehyde, PM, VOC and CO, Wood Fired Boiler, Dominance Industries, Inc., Pan Pacific Products, Broken Bow, Oklahoma, Test Dates September 24-25, 1997, prepared for Pan Pacific Products, by CETCON, Job No. CJ-1814, October 27, 1997.

94. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Albany, Oregon, Dry Dryers 1, 2, 3 and 4, Test Dates May 19-22, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-044D, 1998.

95. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Millersburg (Albany), Oregon, Green Dryer #3, Test Dates March 27-28, 1997, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 97-043D, 1997.

96. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Albany, Oregon, Boiler #1, Green Dryer #1, and Green Dryer #2, Test Dates April 22-23 and 25-26, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 96-048X, 1996.

97. Potential Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Borden Cascophen® SP-C32K During Pressing and Press Cool Down (Southern Pine) , prepared for Borden, June 13, 1996.

98. Potential Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Borden Cascophen® 7CA31H During Pressing and Press Cool Down (Douglas Fir) , prepared for Borden, June 13, 1996.

99. Potential Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Borden Cascophen® SP-C32K During Pressing and Press Cool Down (Yellow Poplar) , prepared for Borden, June 13, 1996.

100. Emissions Testing for Particulate, Formaldehyde, CO, NOx, VOCs on Various Process Exhausts, Trus-Joist Macmillan, a Limited Partnership, Buckhannon, West Virginia, Test Dates

### 6.0 References

6-10 December 12-16, 1995 , prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Analytical Testing Consultants, Inc., Report No. 5712, January 25, 1996.

101. Information Stack Test Report, Wellons Cyclo-Blast Wood-Fired Furnaces, Wood Strand Dryers, Fuel Energy Analysis for Trus-Joist MacMillan, Hazard, Kentucky, Test Date March 1, 1996, prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Commonwealth Technology, Inc., June 18, 1996.

102. Compliance Stack Test Report, Test Results for Wellons Cyclo-Blast Wood-Fired Furnaces, Wood Strand Dryers, Siempelkamp Steam Injection Press for Trus-Joist MacMillan, Hazard, Kentucky, Test Dates February 28-29 and March 27, 1996, prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Commonwealth Technology, Inc., June 18, 1996.

103. Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Emissions from Neste Resins 4001/H1003 Adhesive , prepared for Boise Cascade Corporation, May 9, 1997.

104. Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from the Thermal Oil Heater Exhaust Stack and the Strand Dryer Exhaust Stack when Firing Hardwood Species Other than Aspen, Determination of MDI Emissions from the Press Vent Exhaust Stack, Trus-Joist MacMillan, Deerwood, Minnesota, Test Dates August 15-16, 1995 , prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Braun Intertec Corporation, Report No. CMXX-95-0493, September 11, 1995.

105. Determination of Pollutant Emissions from the Strand Dryer System at the Trus-Joist MacMillan Facility, Deerwood, Minnesota, Test Dates June 8-10, 1998 , prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Braun Intertec Corporation, Report No. CMXX-98-0389, July 8, 1998. 106. Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from the Thermal Oil Heater and the Strand Dryer at Trus-Joist MacMillan, Deerwood, Minnesota, Test Date November 18, 1997, prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Braun Intertec Corporation, Report No. CMXX-97-0710, December 22, 1997.

107. Determination of Pollutant Emissions from Six Emission Points at the Trus-Joist MacMillan Facility, Deerwood, Minnesota, Test Dates November 19-22, 1996 and March 4-5, 1997, prepared for Trus-Joist MacMillan, by Braun Intertec Corporation, Report No. CMXX-96-0984, April 1, 1997.

108. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part I - Plywood, Technical Bulletin No. 768 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

109. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part II - Engineered Wood Products, Technical Bulletin No. 769 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

110. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part III - Medium Density Fiberboard, Technical Bulletin No. 770 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

### 6.0 References

6-11 111. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part IV - Particleboard, Technical Bulletin No. 771 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

112. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part V - Oriented Strandboard, Technical Bulletin No. 772 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

113. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part VI - Hardboard/Fiberboard, Technical Bulletin No. 773 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

114. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part VII - Test Methods, Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures and Data Analysis Protocol, Technical Bulletin No. 774 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

115. Wood Products MACT Study Database, National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

116. Comparison of EPA M0011 and NCASI Impinger Method Emission Factors for Formaldehyde , memorandum to project file, from D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, November 4, 1999.

117. Field Validation of the DNPH Method for Aldehydes and Ketones , EPA No. 68-D4-0022, DCN No. 95-650-049-12-04, prepared for J. Knoll, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Air Measurements Research Division, Methods Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, January 30, 1996.

118. Memorandum from G. McAlister, EMAD/EMC, to D. Safriet, EMAD/EFIG. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Method 430. February 7, 2001.

119. Procedures for Preparing Emission Factor Documents , EPA-454/R-95-015, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1997.

120. Approach to Reviewing Test Reports Submitted With Responses to the 1998 EPA Information Collection Request (MACT Survey)–Plywood and Composite Wood Products , to Mary Tom Kissell, OAQPS/ESD/WCPG, from D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, June 8, 1999.

121. Approach to Using Values Below Test Method Detection Limits in the Development of Emission Factors and Control Efficiencies , to Mary Tom Kissell, OAQPS/ESD/WCPG, from D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, November 3, 1999.

### 6.0 References

6-12 This page intentionally left blank.

### Attachments

A-1 

# Attachment 1
Acronyms/Codes/Abbreviations

### Attachments

A-2 This page intentionally left blank.

### Attachments

A-3 Table 1. Emission Test Method Codes

Code Test Method Pollutant(s) Measured a 1,2-PP 1-(2-pyridyl) piperazine method Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI)
BCA Bacharach combustion analyzer Carbon monoxide
CARB430 California Air Resources Board

Method 430 Formaldehyde

DNPH Unspecified DNPH method Formaldehyde
GC Unspecified gas chromatography Methane
GC/FID Unspecified gas

chromatography/flame ionization detector method Ethane, methane

M0010 SW-846 Method 0010, Semi-VOST

(Semivolatile Organic Sampling Train) 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, acetophenone , a-pinene, a-terpene, biphenyl, bis-(2-ethylhexyl phthalate) , b-pinene, butylbenzyl phthalate, cumene , p-cymene, di-N-butyl phthalate , hydroquinone
M0011 BIF Method 0011, for Aldehydes

and Ketones 2,5-dimethyl benzaldehyde, acetaldehyde , acetone, acrolein , benzaldehyde, butylaldehyde, butyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde, formaldehyde , hexaldehyde, isovaleraldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone , o-,m-,ptolualdehyde, propionaldehyde , valeraldehyde
M0030 SW-846 Method 0030, VOST

(Volatile Organic Sampling Train) 1,1,1-trichloroethane , 4-methyl-2-pentanone , a-pinene, acetone, b-pinene, benzene , bromomethane , carbon disulfide , carbon tetrachloride , chloroform , chloromethane , cumene , dimethyl sulfide, ethyl benzene , n-hexane , methyl ethyl ketone , methylene chloride , p-cymene, styrene , toluene , o-,m-,p-xylene
M10 EPA Method 10 Carbon monoxide
M10B EPA Method 10B Carbon monoxide
M18 EPA Method 18 Benzene , methane
M201A EPA Method 201A PM-10
M202 EPA Method 202 Condensible PM
M25A EPA Method 25A Total hydrocarbons (THC)
M3 EPA Method 3 Carbon dioxide
M3A EPA Method 3A Carbon dioxide
M308 EPA Method 308 Methanol

M5 EPA Method 5 Filterable PM
M6 EPA Method 6 Sulfur dioxide

### Table 1. (continued) Attachments

Code Test Method Pollutant(s) Measured a



### A-4 M6C EPA Method 6C Sulfur dioxide

M7 EPA Method 7 Nitrogen oxides
M7C EPA Method 7C Nitrogen oxides

M7E EPA Method 7E Nitrogen oxides

MM5 Modified EPA Method 5 Phenol
MM0011 Modified BIF Method 0011, for

Aldehydes and Ketones Formaldehyde

NCASI NCASI impinger method Formaldehyde , methanol
NICM NCASI impinger/canister method Acetaldehyde , acetone, acrolein , a-pinene, b-pinene, benzene , bromomethane , camphene, 3-carene, chloroethane , chloroethene , cis-1,2-dichloroethylene,

cumene , 1,2-dichloroethane , formaldehyde , limonene, p-mentha-1,5-diene, methanol, methyl ethyl ketone , methyl isobutyl ketone , methylene chloride , p-cymene, phenol, propionaldehyde , styrene , toluene , 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene , o-,m-,p-xylene
P&CAM142 NIOSH Physical and Chemical

Analytical Method 142 Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI)

TO-5 TO-5 (Compendium of Methods for

the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air) 2,4-dimethylbenzaldehyde, acetone, benzaldehyde, butyraldehyde, crotonaldehyde, formaldehyde , hexaldehyde, isovaleraldehyde, o-,m-,p-tolualdehyde, valeraldehyde
TO-8 TO-8 (Compendium of Methods for

the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air) Benzo-a-pyrene , o-,m-,p-cresol, naphthalene , phenol, pyridine

TO-14 TO-14 (Compendium of Methods for

the Determination of Toxic Organic Compounds in Ambient Air) Acetone, benzene , bromomethane , chloroethane , chloromethane , ethanol, ethylbenzene , isobutanol, methyl ethyl ketone , methyl propyl ketone, methylene chloride , propanol, styrene , toluene , trichlorofluoromethane, xylenes TO-14(mod) Modification of TO-14 Methanol

a HAP compounds in italic.

### Attachments

A-5 Table 2. HAP Analytes and Analysis Techniques for NCASI MACT Sampling Program

HAP Analyte Analysis Method a Impinger Canister Acetaldehyde GC/FID GC/MS Acrolein GC/FID GC/MS Benzene none GC/MS Bromomethane none GC/MS Chloroethane none GC/MS Chloroethene none GC/MS Cumene none GC/FID 1,2-Dichloroethane none GC/MS Formaldehyde Colorimetric none Methanol GC/FID GC/MS Methyl Ethyl Ketone GC/FID GC/MS Methyl Isobutyl Ketone GC/FID GC/MS Methylene Chloride none GC/MS Phenol GC/FID GC/MS Propionaldehyde GC/FID GC/MS Styrene none GC/MS Toluene none GC/MS 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene none GC/MS m,p-Xylene none GC/MS o-Xylene none GC/MS

a GC/FID = gas chromatography/flame ionization detector; GC/MS = gas chromatography/mass spectrometer.



### Table 3. Non-HAP Analytes and Analysis Techniques for

NCASI MACT Sampling Program

Non-HAP Analyte Analysis Method a Impinger Canister Acetone GC/FID GC/MS Camphene none GC/FID 3-Carene none GC/FID p-Cymene none GC/FID cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene none GC/MS Limonene none GC/FID p-mentha-1,5-Diene none GC/FID Alpha-pinene none GC/FID Beta-pinene none GC/FID

a GC/FID = gas chromatography/flame ionization detector; GC/MS = gas chromatography/mass spectrometer.

### Attachments

A-6 Table 4. Product Codes

Code Product
FB Fiberboard
HB Hardboard
HPW Hardwood Plywood I-joist I-joist
LSL Laminated Strand Lumber
Lumber Lumber
LVL Laminated Veneer Lumber
MDF Medium Density Fiberboard
OSB Oriented Strandboard
PB Particleboard
SPW Softwood Plywood



### Table 5. Air Pollution Control Device (APCD) Codes

Code Air Pollution Control Device
BH Baghouse (Fabric Filter)
BIO Biofilter
CU Combustion Unit; Exhaust Gas Recirculation
CYC Cyclone
DESP Dry Electrostatic Precipitator
EFB Electrified Filter Bed
MC Multicyclone (Multiclone)
NONE None; no air pollution control device
RCO Regenerative Catalytic Oxidizer
RTO Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer
SCBR Wet Scrubber
SF Sand Filter
TO Thermal Oxidizer
WESP Wet Electrostatic Precipitator

### Attachments

A-7 Table 6. Wood Species Codes

Code Wood Species ALDER Alder ASPEN Aspen BIRCH Birch CBI Wood species is claimed to be Confidential Business Information CHERRY Cherry
DFIR Douglas Fir DFIR-fresh Douglas Fir - fresh cut DFIR-7day old Douglas Fir - cut 7 days before testing
DFIR HEART Douglas Fir Heartwood DFIR SAP Douglas Fir Sapwood GUM Unspecified Gum HICKORY Hickory HWOOD Unspecified Hardwood LARCH Larch
MAPLE Maple
MIXED Mixed hardwood and softwood species
NPINE Northern Pine NS Not Specified OAK Oak
PINE Unspecified Pine POPLAR Poplar
PPINE Ponderosa Pine ROAK Red Oak SPRUCE Spruce SWOOD Unspecified Softwood SYPINE Southern Yellow Pine
UFIR Unspecified Fir USPINE Unspecified Southern Pine
WFIR White Fir WOAK White Oak WSWOOD Western Softwood YPOPLAR Yellow Poplar

### Attachments

A-8 Table 7. Resin Codes

Code Resin Type
LINSEED Linseed Oil Binder System

MDI Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate

PF Phenol-Formaldehyde PF-dry Dry Phenol-Formaldehyde
UF Urea-Formaldehyde



### Table 8. Dryer Firing Type Codes

Code Dryer Firing Type

DF Direct-Fired

IF Indirect Heated
IF/DF Indirect and Direct Heat

RF Radio-Frequency Heated



### Table 9. Dryer Fuel Type Codes

Code Dryer Fuel Type
DFINE Dry Wood Fines (unspecified)
FINES Wood Fines (unspecified)
NGAS Natural Gas
PROP Propane
SDUST Sanderdust
STEAM Steam Heated (indirect heated)

TRIM Wood Trim
WDUST Wood Dust (unspecified)
WREF Wood Refuse (unspecified)

### Attachments

A-9 Table 10. Dryer Hot Air Source Codes

Code Dryer Hot Air Source
BOILER FLUE GAS Boiler Flue Gas
BOTH Indirect and Direct Heat

DFIRE Direct-Fired (unspecified)
FLUE GAS Flue Gas
FUEL CELL Fuel Cell
GAS BU Gas Burner
IHEAT Indirect heated RFREQ Radio-Frequency Heated
STEAM Steam (indirect heat)
STM COIL Steam Coil (indirect heat)
SUSP BU Suspension Burner
TOH Thermal Oil Heater
WET CELL Wet Cell



### Table 11. Veneer Dryer Type Codes

Code Veneer Dryer Type
LONG Longitudinal
JET Jet
PLATEN Platen

RF Radio-Frequency Heated
TUNNEL Tunnel

### Attachments

A-10 Table 12. Emission Factor Unit Abbreviations

Emission Factor Unit Abbreviation Definition

lb/1000 ft3 pounds per thousand cubic feet
lb/MLF pounds per thousand linear feet
lb/MSF pounds per thousand square feet of surface area
lb/MSF reclaim pounds per thousand square feet of reclaimed material surface area
lb/MSF 1/2 pounds per thousand square feet of 1/2-inch thick board
lb/MSF 1/8 pounds per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick board
lb/MSF 3/4 pounds per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick board
lb/MSF 3/8 pounds per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick board
lb/ODT pounds per oven-dried ton

### Attachments

A-11 

# Attachment 2
Example Calculation

### Attachments

A-12 This page intentionally left blank.

### Attachments

A-13 

## Example Calculation

Unit Operation Test

date No. of

runs No. of

runs BDL Test emission factor value

(average of test runs), lb/ODT Unit emission factor

value, lb/ODT Plant 30, dryer A 1/19/93 3 0 0.000413 0.000413 Plant 10, dryer A 10/22/97 3 3 0.008121 0.008121 a Plant 10, dryer B 10/22/97 3 3 0.003042 0.003042 Plant 156, dryer A 9/22/97 6 0 0.006574
0.007113 Plant 156, dryer A 9/22/97 3 0 0.007652 Plant 183, dryer A 5/2/97 3 2 0.003555
0.004664 Plant 183, dryer A 5/2/97 3 0 0.005773 Plant 30, dryer B 1/20/93 3 0 0.002676 0.002676 Overall emission factor for unit operation (average of unit emission factor values), lb/ODT 0.0036

a This unit average emission factor was disregarded when calculating the overall emission factor for the unit operation. This value is one-half of the MDL for a test where all runs were non-detect, and is higher than all of the other detect runs. Using this value would bias the overall average emission factor high.

### Attachments

A-14 This page intentionally left blank.

### Attachments

A-15 

# Attachment 3
Conversion Factors and Equations

### Attachments

A-16 This page intentionally left blank.

### Attachments

A-17 

## Useful Conversion Factors

To convert from . . . to . . . multiply by . . .
board feet cubic feet 0.0833
lb as carbon lb as propane 1.22
lb as methane lb as carbon 0.75 lb as propane lb as carbon 0.82
MSF “X” basis MSF “Y” basis X/Y (see example below) ppm as carbon ppm as propane 0.33 ppm as methane ppm as carbon 1

ppm as propane ppm as carbon 3.0
Example of conversion from MSF 3/4-inch basis to MSF 3/8-inch basis:
1,000 MSF 3/4-inch basis = 1,000 MSF 3/8-inch basis × (3/4)/(3/8) = 2,000 MSF 3/8-inch basis

### Attachments

A-18 

## Useful Equations

Wood moisture content calculations:

% Moisture Content (dry basis) = weight of water in wood × 100 weight of oven-dry wood

% Moisture Content (dry basis) = %MC WB

### ÷ 100 × 100 1

! 

### (%MC WB

### ÷ 100)

% Moisture Content (wet basis) = weight of water in wood × 100 weight of wet wood

% Moisture Content (wet basis) = %MC DB

### ÷ 100 × 100 1 + (%MC DB

### ÷ 100) where: %MC DB

### = moisture content (dry basis) %MC WB 

### = moisture content (wet basis)

Parts per million by volume, dry:
ppmvd = ppmvw
1

! 

### (%moisture ÷ 100) where: ppmvd = concentration, parts per million by volume, dry ppmvw = concentration, parts per million by volume, wet %moisture = stack gas moisture content, %

Grains/dscf from grams collected:
gr/dscf = grams × 15.43
dscf where: gr/dscf = concentration, grains per dry standard cubic foot grams = grams of pollutant collected dscf = gas volume sampled, dry standard cubic feet

### Attachments

A-19 Stack gas flowrate, dry standard cubic feet per minute:

dscfm = acfm × (1

! 

### (%moisture÷ 100) × (68 + 460) × barometric pressure (stack temp + 460) × 29.92 where: dscfm = stack gas flow rate, dry standard cubic feet per minute acfm = stack gas flow rate, actual cubic feet per minute %moisture = stack gas moisture content, % barometric pressure = stack pressure, inches of mercury stack temp = stack gas temperature, degrees Fahrenheit

Lb/hr from grains/dscf:
lb/hr = (dscfm × gr/dscf) × 60
7000 where: lb/hr = emission rate, pounds of pollutant per hour dscfm = stack gas flowrate, dry standard cubic feet per minute gr/dscf = pollutant concentration, grains per dry standard cubic foot

Lb/hr from ppmvd:
lb/hr = MW × (ppmvd × 0.000001) × dscfm × 60
385.3 where: lb/hr = emission rate, pounds of pollutant per hour MW = molecular weight of pollutant ppmvd = concentration, parts per million by volume, dry dscfm = stack gas flowrate, dry standard cubic feet per minute

Lb/hr from %:
lb/hr = MW × (concentration% ÷ 100) × 60 × dscfm
385.3 where: lb/hr = emission rate, pounds of pollutant per hour MW = molecular weight of pollutant concentration% = concentration of pollutant, percent dscfm = stack gas flowrate, dry standard cubic feet per minute

Emission factor: emission factor = emission rate, lb/hr ÷ process rate, units/hr

### Attachments

A-20 Control efficiency:

Control efficiency = inlet mass emissions

! 

### outlet mass emissions × 100 inlet mass emissions

Conversion from THC-as-carbon to THC-as-propane:

THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane

Calculation of VOC-as-propane from THC-as-carbon: VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde

! 

### (acetone + methane + methylene chloride)

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-1

10.5 Plywood Manufacturing

10.5.1 General
Plywood is a building material consisting of veneers (thin wood layers or plies) bonded with an adhesive. There are two types of plywood: softwood plywood and hardwood plywood. Softwoods generally correspond to coniferous species. The most commonly used softwoods for manufacturing plywood are firs and pines. Hardwoods generally correspond to deciduous species. For hardwood plywood, commonly used wood species include oak, poplar, maple, cherry, and larch.
Softwood plywood is manufactured by gluing several layers of dry softwood veneers together with an adhesive. Softwood plywood is used for wall siding, sheathing, roof decking, concrete formboards, floors, and containers. Softwood plywood is classified under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 2436, and North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 321212 for “Softwood Plywood and Veneer”.
Hardwood plywood is made of hardwood veneers bonded with an adhesive. The outer layers (face and back) surround a core which is usually lumber, veneer, particleboard, or medium density fiberboard. Hardwood plywood may be pressed into panels or plywood components (e.g., curved hardwood plywood, seat backs, chair arms, etc.). Hardwood plywood is used for interior applications such as furniture, cabinets, architectural millwork, paneling, flooring, store fixtures, and doors. Hardwood plywood is classified under SIC code 2435 and NAICS code 321211, for “Hardwood Plywood and Veneer”.
Softwood plywood plants typically produce softwood veneers and softwood plywood on the same plant site. However, most hardwood plywood and veneer plants either produce hardwood plywood or hardwood veneer. Hardwood veneer plants cut and dry hardwood veneers. Hardwood plywood plants typically purchase hardwood veneers and press the veneers onto a purchased core material.
10.5.2 Process Description 1-4, 22


### The manufacture of softwood or hardwood plywood consists of nine main processes: log storage, log debarking and bucking, heating the logs, peeling the logs into veneers, drying the veneers, gluing the veneers together, pressing the veneers in a hot press, plywood cutting, and other finishing processes such as sanding. Figure 10.5-1 provides a generic process flow diagram for a plywood mill.
The initial step of debarking is accomplished by feeding logs through one of several types of debarking machines. The purpose of this operation is to remove the outer bark of the tree without substantially damaging the wood. After the bark is removed, the logs are cut to appropriate lengths in a step known as bucking.
The logs (now referred to as blocks) then are heated to improve the cutting action of the veneer lathe or slicer, thereby generating a product from the lathe or slicer with better surface finish. Blocks are heated to around 93°C (200°F) using a variety of methods--hot water baths, steam heat, hot water spray, or a combination of the three.

### 10.5-2 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 V E N E E R D R Y ING LOG STORAGE (SCC 3-07-008-95) LOG HEATING (STEAMING/SOAKING) (SCC 3-07-007-30) (SCC 3-07-007-89) LOG DEBARKING (SCC 3-07-008-01) AND BUCKING (SCC 3-07-008-02)

VENEER LAYUP AND GLUE SPREADING (SCC 3-07-007-27) VENEER CUTTING (SCC 3-07-007-25)

FINISHED PRODUCT PLYWOOD FINISHING (SCC 3-07-007-02) PLYWOOD CUTTING (SCC 3-07-007-10) PLYWOOD PRESSING (SCC 3-07-007-80 TO -85) (SCC 3-07-007-11 TO -20) (SCC 3-07-007-34 TO -71)

Additional Source Classification Codes for Combined Operations : SCC 3-07-007-88: Hardwood plywood combined dust baghouse (includes trim saw, composer, core saw, dry hog, hammermill, and sander) SCC 3-07-007-90: Softwood plywood, dry veneer trim chipper (trimmed veneer from layup line) SCC 3-07-007-91: Softwood plywood, dry plywood trim chippers (trim from panel saws) SCC 3-07-007-92: Softwood plywood sander (includes sanders and specialty saw) SCC 3-07-007-93: Softwood plywood saws (includes 3 saws, hog, and sander)



### Figure 10.5-1. Generic process flow diagram for a plywood mill.

(SCC = Source Classification Code.)

After heating, the logs are processed to generate veneer. For most applications, a veneer lathe is used, but some decorative, high quality veneer is generated with a veneer slicer. The slicer and veneer lathe both work on the same principle; the wood is compressed with a nosebar while the veneer knife cuts the blocks into veneers that are typically 3 mm (1/8 in.) thick. Decorative hardwood veneers are usually sliced much thinner than 3 mm (1/8 in.) thick. The veneer pieces are then clipped to a usable width, typically 1.37 m (54 in.), to allow for shrinkage and trim.
Veneers are taken from the clipper to a veneer dryer where they are dried to moisture contents that range from around 1 to 15 percent, dry basis. Face veneer moisture contents can range up to 25 percent, dry basis. Target moisture content depends on the type of resin used in subsequent gluing steps. The typical drying temperature ranges from 150° to 200°C (300° to 400°F). The veneer dryer may be a longitudinal dryer, which circulates air parallel to the veneer, or a jet dryer. The jet dryers direct hot, high velocity air at the surface of the veneers in order to create a more turbulent flow of air. The increased turbulence provides more effective use of dryer energy, thereby reducing drying time. Veneer dryers may be either direct-fired or indirect-heated. In direct-fired dryers, hot combustion gases from an onsiteboiler are blended with recirculated exhaust from the dryer to lower the gas temperature. In indirectheated veneer dryers, air is warmed over steam coils and circulated over the veneer. Veneer dryers typically have one to three heated zones followed by a cooling zone or section. Each heated zone has a hot air source, fans to move the warm air, and an exhaust vent or stack. The cooling section circulates ambient air over the veneer to reduce the veneer temperature just before it exits the dryer. The veneers must be cooled to prevent glue from curing on the veneers during the layup and glue spreading operations before they reach the plywood press.

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-3 Veneer may also be dried in veneer kilns, which resemble lumber kilns. Kiln drying is a batch operation, where the veneers are stacked with stickers (narrow wood strips) and dried in the kiln.
Veneer moisture is checked against the target moisture level as the veneer exits the veneer dryer. Veneer redryers may be used to redry the veneer that did not reach the target moisture content. Veneer redryers are typically heated by radio frequency (RF) and are designed to handle only a fraction of the throughput from full-scale veneer dryers. Conventional veneer dryers may also be used for redrying veneer. When used for redrying veneer, conventional veneer dryers are operated at faster than normal speeds (i.e., the redry veneer passes through the dryer more quickly than does green veneer).
After drying, veneers sometimes are glued together on the edges to form larger sheets of veneer. This process is called composing. Narrow veneer slices must be composed before they are used in plywood panels or other products requiring wider veneer sheets.
When the veneers have been dried to their specified moisture content, they are conveyed to a layup operation, where a thermosetting resin is spread on the veneers. The two main types of resins are phenol-formaldehyde, which is used for softwood plywood and exterior grades of hardwood plywood, and urea-formaldehyde, which is used to glue interior grades of hardwood plywood. The resins are applied by glue spreaders, curtain coaters, or spray systems. Spreaders have a series of rubber-covered grooved application rolls that apply the resin to the sheet of veneer. Generally, resin is spread on two sides of one ply of veneer, which is then placed between two plies of veneer that are not coated with resin.
Assembly of the plywood panels must be symmetrical on either side of a neutral center in order to avoid excessive warpage. For example, a five-ply panel would be laid up in the following manner. A back, with the grain direction parallel to the long axis of the panel, is placed on the assembly table. The next veneer has a grain direction perpendicular to that of the back, and is spread with resin on both sides. Then, the center is placed, with no resin, and with the grain perpendicular to the previous veneer (parallel with the back). The fourth veneer has a grain perpendicular to the previous veneer (parallel with the short axis of the panel) and is spread with resin on both sides. The final, face, veneer with no resin is placed like the back with the grain parallel to the long axis of the plywood panel.
The laid-up assembly of veneers then is sent to a hot press in which it is consolidated under heat and pressure. Hot pressing has two main objectives: (1) to press the glue into a thin layer over each sheet of veneer; and (2) to activate the thermosetting resins. Typical press temperatures range from 132° to 165°C (270° to 330°F) for softwood plywood, and 107° to 135°C (225° to 275°F) for hardwood plywood. Press times generally range from 2 to 7 minutes. The time and temperature vary depending on the wood species used, the resin used, and the press design.
The plywood then is taken to a finishing process where edges are trimmed; the face and back may or may not be sanded smooth. The type of finishing depends on the end product desired.

10.5.3 Emissions and Controls 2-22


### The primary emissions from the manufacture of plywood include filterable particulate matter (PM) and PM less than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-10) from log debarking and bucking, and plywood cutting and sanding; filterable and condensible PM/PM-10 from drying and pressing; organic compounds from steaming and drying operations; and organic compounds, including formaldehyde and other hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), from gluing and hot pressing. However, trace

### 10.5-4 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002

amounts of combustion by-products, which may include HAPs, may be present in direct-fired veneer dryer exhausts as a result of fossil fuel or wood combustion gases being passed through the dryer. Fuel combustion for material drying also can generate carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO 2

### ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2

### ), and nitrogen oxide (NO x

### ) emissions.
The main source of emissions is the veneer dryer, which emits significant quantities of organic compounds. The quantity and type of organic compounds emitted varies depending on the wood species, the dryer type, and its method of operation. Emissions from dryer heated zones and cooling sections typically are ducted through separate stacks. In addition to emissions from the heated zones and cooling section stacks, veneer dryer fugitive emissions may be emitted from the dryer ends and doors. The two discernible fractions released from the dryer are condensibles and volatiles. As the condensible compounds cool after being emitted from the stack, they often combine with water vapor to form aerosols, which can cause a blue haze.
Measurement of VOC and condensible PM emission rates are highly dependent on stack gas and sampling train filter temperatures. When the sampling train filter temperature is higher than the stack gas temperature, the rate of VOC and condensible PM emissions measured will increase with increasing filter temperature, because, as filter temperature increases, less organic material will condense on the sampling train filter. The available data are inadequate to determine the effect on emissions of recirculating the exhaust from wood-fired veneer dryers to a combustion gas blend box.
The hot pressing operation is also a source of organic emissions. The quantity and composition of emissions from this operation are expected to vary with wood species and resin components. Plywood pressing operations are typically uncontrolled.
Significant quantities of sawdust and other small wood particles are generated by plywood cutting and sanding operations. Sanders and trim saws typically have control devices to recover the material for use as a fuel in the dryer or boiler. However, small amounts of PM may be released from cutting and sanding. Log debarking, log bucking, and sawdust handling are additional sources of PM emissions. Wood storage piles are sources of fugitive PM and VOC emissions. Log debarking, log peeling, and other minor operations are also sources of fugitive VOC emissions.
Methods of controlling PM emissions from veneer dryers include absorption systems (wet scrubbers), electrified filter beds (EFBs), wet electrostatic precipitators (WESPs), and oxidation systems (discussed below). The EFB uses electrostatic forces to attract pollutants to an electrically charged gravel bed. The WESP uses electrostatic forces to attract pollutants to either a charged metal plate or a charged metal tube. The collecting surfaces are continually rinsed with water to wash away the pollutants. Wet PM control systems such as wet scrubbers and WESPs may achieve short-term reductions in emissions of some water-soluble organic compounds (such as formaldehyde). However, the ability of these wet systems to absorb water-soluble compounds diminishes as the recirculating scrubbing liquid becomes saturated with these compounds.
A VOC control technology commonly used in the wood products industry for controlling veneer dryer exhaust gases is regenerative thermal oxidation. Thermal oxidizers destroy VOCs and condensibleorganics by burning them at high temperatures. Thermal oxidizers also reduce CO emissions in directfired dryer exhausts by oxidizing the CO in the exhaust to CO 2

### (a product of complete combustion). Regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) are designed to preheat the inlet emission stream with heat recovered from the incineration exhaust gases. Up to 98 percent heat recovery is possible, although

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-5

95 percent is typically specified. Gases entering an RTO are heated by passing through pre-heated beds packed with a ceramic media. A gas burner brings the preheated emissions up to an incineration temperature between 788° and 871°C (1450° and 1600°F) in a combustion chamber with sufficient gas residence time to complete the combustion. Combustion gases then pass through a cooled ceramic bed where heat is extracted. By reversing the flow through the beds, the heat transferred from the combustion exhaust air preheats the gases to be treated, thereby reducing auxiliary fuel requirements.
Regenerative catalytic oxidizers (RCOs) are also used to control VOCs from veneer dryers. Regenerative catalytic oxidizers function similar to RTOs, except that the heat recovery beds in RCOs contain catalytic media. The catalyst accelerates the rate of VOC oxidation and allows for VOC destruction at lower temperatures than in an RTO, typically 316° to 538°C (600° to 1000°F), which reduces auxiliary fuel usage.
In addition to add-on thermal or catalytic oxidizers, exhaust gases from veneer dryers may be routed to the combustion chamber of an onsite boiler or process heater. The VOC and CO emissions in the process exhaust may be incinerated in the combustion chamber provided that the system is designed to allow for sufficient mixing and residence time.
Fugitive PM emissions from road dust and uncovered bark and dust storage piles may be controlled in a number of different ways. Some of these methods include enclosure, wet suppression systems, and chemical stabilization.
Calculating PM-10 emissions from wood products industry emission sources is problematic due to the relationship between PM-10 (or PM) emissions and VOC emissions from these processes. Because the Method 201A train (PM-10) operates with an in-stack cyclone and filter, organic materials that are volatile at stack gas temperatures but that are condensed at back half impinger temperatures (
- 20°C [ - 68°F]) are collected as condensible PM-10. However, these materials will also be measured as VOC via Methods 25 and 25A, which operate with a heated or an in-stack filter. Hence, if PM-10 is calculated as the sum of filterable and condensible material, some pollutants will be measured as both PM-10 and VOC emissions. However, if only filterable material is considered to be PM-10, the PM-10 emission factors will be highly dependent on stack gas temperature. In this AP-42 section, PM-10 is reported as front half catch only (Method 201A results only; not including Method 202 results). However, condensible PM results are also reported, and these results can be combined with the PM-10 results as appropriate for a specific application. Measured VOC emissions may be affected by the sampling method and by the quantity of formaldehyde and other aldehydes and ketones in the exhaust; formaldehyde is not quantified using Method 25A. Other low molecular weight oxygenated compounds have reduced responses to Method 25A. Therefore, when VOC emissions are measured using Method 25A, the emission rates will be biased low if low molecular weight oxygenated compounds are present in significant concentrations in the exhaust stream. A more extensive discussion of these sampling and analysis issues is provided in the Background Report (Reference 15) for this section.
Guidance from EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) indicates that when it is possible, VOC emission factors should be reported in terms of the actual weight of the emitted compound. However, when an actual molecular weight (MW) of the emitted stream is not feasible (as is the case with the mixed streams emitted from wood products industry sources), the VOC should be reported using an assumed MW of 44, and reported “as propane.” Each VOC-as-propane emission factor is estimated by first converting the THC from a carbon basis to a propane basis. Propane (MW = 44) includes 3 carbon atoms (total MW of 36) and 8 hydrogen atoms (total MW of 8). Every 36 pounds of carbon

### 10.5-6 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002

measured corresponds to 44 pounds of propane. The ratio of the MW of propane to the MW of carbon in propane is 44/36, or 1.22. The conversion is expressed by the following equation:

THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane
After the THC emission factor has been converted from a carbon to a propane basis, the formaldehyde emission factor is added (where available), then the available emission factors for non-VOC compounds, including acetone, methane, and methylene chloride, are subtracted. This procedure is expressed simply by the following equation:
VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride)
In cases where no emission factor is available (or the emission factor is reported only as below the testmethod detection limit, or “BDL”) for one or more of the compounds used to estimate the VOC-aspropane value, adjustments to the converted THC value are made only for those compounds for which emission factors are available. That is, a value of zero is inserted in the above equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as BDL. For example, if no methane emission factor is available, the THC-as-carbon emission factor is converted to THC-as-propane, formaldehyde is added, and only acetone and methylene chloride are subtracted.
Table 10.5-1 presents emission factors for veneer dryer emissions of PM, including filterable PM and condensible PM. Table 10.5-2 presents emission factors for veneer dryer emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.5-3 presents emission factors for veneer dryer emissions of organic compounds, some of which are listed as HAPs under section 112(b) of the Clean Air Act. The emission factors for dryer emissions are presented in units of pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel produced (lb/MSF 3/8). Separate emission factors are presented for hardwood plywood and softwood plywood veneer dryers. In Tables 10.5-2 and -3, separate emission factors also are presented for the heated zones and cooling section of a veneer dryer. When estimating total emissions from the drying process, emissions from heated zones and cooling section should be combined.
Table 10.5-4 presents emission factors for plywood press emissions of PM, including filterable PM and condensible PM. Table 10.5-5 presents emission factors for plywood press emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.5-6 presents emission factors for plywood press emissions of organic compounds, some of which are HAPs. The units for the press emission factors are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel produced (lb/MSF 3/8). Table 10.5-7 presents emission factors for organic compounds from miscellaneous plywood manufacturing sources. Some of these compounds are listed HAPs under section 112(b) of the Clean Air Act.

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-7 Table 10.5-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD VENEER DRYERS-- PARTICULATE MATTER a

Source Emission Control Devicec Filterableb

Condensibled EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION

FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATING
Indirect heated, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-62) Uncontrolled 0.35 D ND 1.0 D

Direct natural gasfired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-52) Uncontrolled 0.079 D ND 0.42 D

Direct wood-fired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-36) WESP 0.24 D ND ND

Radio frequencyheated redryer, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-71) Uncontrolled 0.0050 E ND 0.0060 E

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick veneer (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 16. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### Emission control device: WESP = wet electrostatic precipitator. d 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

### 10.5-8 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Table 10.5-2. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD VENEER DRYERS--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Source Emission Control Deviceb NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING
Indirect heated, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-62) Uncontrolled

RTO ND

ND 0.028 c

0.062 c E

E ND

ND Indirect heated, cooling section, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-63) Uncontrolled ND 0.043 c E ND

Indirect heated, heated zones, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-56) Uncontrolled ND 0.0088 c E ND

Indirect heated, cooling section, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-57) Uncontrolled ND 0.099 c E ND

Direct natural gasfired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-52) Uncontrolled

RCO 0.012 d

ND D 0.64 e

0.0076 c D

E 28 f

ND D

Direct natural gasfired, cooling section, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-53) Uncontrolled ND 0.010 c E ND

Direct wood-fired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-36) Uncontrolled 0.17 g D 3.2 g D 100h D

Direct wood-fired, heated zones, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-34) Uncontrolled ND 0.23 c E ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick veneer

(lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. Factors for heating zones and cooling section should be summed when estimating total dryer emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer; RCO = regenerative catalytic oxidizer.

c 

### Reference 17. d 

### Reference 16.

e 

### References 16 and 17.

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-9 Table 10.5-2 (cont.).

f 

### Reference 18. g 

### References 16 and 19. h 

### Reference 19.

### 10.5-10 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Table 10.5-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD VENEER DRYERS--ORGANICS a

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING
Indirect heated, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-62) Uncontrolled

13466-78-9 75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8 71-43-2 127-91-3

50-00-0 138-86-3 67-56-1

108-10-1

1330-20-7

99-83-2 108-95-2 123-38-6

108-88-3 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 1.5 f 1.8 BDL BDL 0.040 0.017 0.013 0.0013 0.96 0.00059 0.27 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.014 0.080 0.039 BDL 0.0015 BDL 0.00075 BDL BDL 0.017 0.0034 0.0024 BDL 0.0011 B

C

C C C C C C C

C C C

C

C

C C C

C

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-11 Indirect heated, cooling section, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-63) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-10-1

1330-20-7 95-47-6

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.050 0.054 BDL BDL BDL 0.0046 0.0085 BDL 0.049 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0013 BDL 0.010 BDL 0.0054 BDL 0.0019 0.0014 BDL BDL 0.0062 BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D

D

D

D

D D

D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-12 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Indirect heated, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-62) RTO

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8 71-43-2

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.14 0.17 BDL BDL BDL 0.0019 0.0017 BDL 0.026 0.00040 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0023 BDL 0.0023 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0050 BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D E

D

D

D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-13 Indirect heated, heated zones, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-56) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-10-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.23 g 0.28 BDL BDL BDL 0.0043 0.0040 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0011 BDL 0.041 BDL 0.0022 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0030 BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D

D

D

D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-14 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Indirect heated, cooling section, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-57) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-10-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.62 0.72 BDL BDL BDL 0.032 0.047 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0065 BDL 0.021 BDL 0.029 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D

D

D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-15Direct natural gasfired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-52) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8 71-43-2 127-91-3

50-00-0 138-86-3 74-82-8 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

1330-20-7

108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 108-88-3 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methane Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 2.1 h 2.5 BDL BDL BDL 0.062 0.059 0.0090 1.0 0.0057 0.41 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.064 j 0.081 0.067 k 0.036 0.0019 0.0026 BDL 0.0039 BDL BDL BDL 0.0060 0.0016 0.0015 0.0074 D

E

D D D D D D

D D D D D D

D

D D D D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-16 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002Direct natural gasfired, cooling section, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-53) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.038 0.044 BDL BDL BDL 0.0034 0.0041 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0015 BDL 0.0057 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.010 BDL BDL BDL E

E

E E

E

E

E

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-17Direct natural gasfired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-52) RCO

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.30 0.36 BDL BDL BDL 0.061 0.048 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.038 BDL 0.0049 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0055 BDL BDL BDL E

E

E E

E

E

E

Direct wood-fired, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-36) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 THC as carbond VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * 0.83 m 1.1 0.045 n D

E D

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-18 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Direct wood-fired, heated zones, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-34) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.053 0.063 BDL BDL BDL 0.0052 0.0045 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0025 BDL 0.0095 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL E

E

E E

E

E

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-19 Direct wood-fired, cooling section, hardwood (SCC 3-07-007-35) Uncontrolled THC as carbond VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.0037 0.0045 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL E

E

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-20 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002Radio frequencyheated redryer, softwood (SCC 3-07-007-71) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

127-91-3

50-00-0 138-86-3 67-56-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.23 f 0.28 BDL BDL BDL 0.0015 0.00089 BDL 0.17 BDL 0.056 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00035 0.0040 0.0027 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D

D

D D D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick veneer (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. Factors for heating zones and cooling section should be summed when estimating total dryer emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 17 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer; RCO = regenerative catalytic oxidizer.

c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number. d 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.

### Table 10.5-3 (cont.).

1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-21 e 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. f 

### References 16 and 17. g 

### References 17 and 20. h 

### References 16, 17, and 18. j 

### References 17 and 18. k 

### Reference 18.

m 

### References 16 and 19.

n 

### Reference 19.

### 10.5-22 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002

Table 10.5-4. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD PRESSES--PARTICULATE MATTERa

Sourcec Emission Control Device Filterableb

Condensibled EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, PF resin, softwood plywood (SCC 3-07-007-83) Uncontrolled 0.12 D ND 0.083 D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 16. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde. d 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

Table 10.5-5. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD PRESSES--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, PF resin, softwood plywood (SCC 3-07-007-83) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde.

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-23 Table 10.5-6. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD PRESSES--ORGANICS a

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hot press, PF resin, softwood plywood (SCC 3-07-007-83) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

127-91-3

50-00-0 138-86-3 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.21 f 0.25 BDL BDL BDL 0.0042 0.0065 BDL 0.098 BDL 0.038 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0019 g 0.011 0.14 0.00087 0.00071 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0014 BDL BDL BDL D

E

D D

D

D

D D D D D

D

### Table 10.5-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-24 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Hot press, UF resin, hardwood plywood (SCC 3-07-007-85) Uncontrolled

67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-10-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.055 h 0.047 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.025 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0047 BDL 0.032 BDL 0.0057 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.011 BDL BDL BDL D

E

D

D

D

D

D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 17 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde; UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number. d 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.

e 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”.

### Table 10.5-6 (cont.).

1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-25 f 

### References 16, 17, and 21. g 

### References 17 and 21. h 

### References 17 and 20.

### 10.5-26 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Table 10.5-7. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PLYWOOD MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES a

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING
Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Log bucking (cutting) (SCC 3-07-008-02) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Veneer cutting (SCC 3-07-007-25) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Veneer layup and glue spreading (SCC 3-07-007-27) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Plywood cutting (SCC 3-07-007-10) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

Plywood finishing (SCC 3-07-007-02) Uncontrolled ND PM, THC, VOC ND

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-27 Hardwood plywood combined dust baghouse (includes trim saw, composer, core saw, dry hog, hammermill, and sander) e (SCC 3-07-007-88)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

67-64-1

67-56-1 PM

THC as carbonf VOC as propane g 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND 0.019 0.014 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0089 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0029 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL U

U

U

U

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-28 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Softwood plywood, log steaming vat (SCC 3-07-007-89)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

127-91-3

67-56-1 PM

1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND BDL BDL BDL 0.0047 0.0030 BDL 0.056 BDL 0.0064 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0073 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL U

U

U

U

U

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-29 Softwood plywood, dry veneer trim chipper (trimmed veneer from layup line) (SCC 3-07-007-90)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 PM

THC as carbonf VOC as propane g 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND 0.059 0.072 BDL BDL BDL 0.00081 0.00082 BDL 0.032 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00034 BDL 0.0087 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0019 BDL BDL BDL U

U

U U

U

U

U

U

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-30 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Softwood plywood, dry plywood trim chipper (trim from panel saws) (SCC 3-07-007-91)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

80-56-8

67-56-1 PM

THC as carbonf VOC as propane g 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND 0.056 0.068 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.036 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0078 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL U

U

U

U

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-31 Softwood plywood sander (includes sanders and specialty saw) h (SCC 3-07-007-92)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1 PM

THC as carbonf VOC as propane g 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND 0.15 0.18 BDL BDL BDL 0.0028 0.0047 BDL 0.023 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0018 BDL 0.012 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL U

U

U U

U

U

U

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Devicec CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.5-32 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Softwood plywood saws (includes 3 saws, hog, and sander)

j (SCC 3-07-007-93)

Use with caution! Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1

80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1 PM

THC as carbonf VOC as propane g 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * ND 0.072 0.086 BDL BDL BDL 0.00092 0.0019 BDL 0.027 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00034 BDL 0.012 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL U

U

U U

U

U

U

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/8). One lb/MSF 3/8 = 0.5 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. ND = no data available. U = emission factor unrated. These emission factors should be used with caution; the ducting arrangements of these miscellaneous sources varies from mill to mill, therefore, these emission factors may not provide accurate estimates of emissions from other mills. Reference 17. See Table 10.5-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of plywood and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### SPW = softwood plywood; HPW = hardwood plywood.

c 

### Emission control devices (baghouses) are considered no control for organic pollutants. d 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

### Table 10.5-7 (cont.).

1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-33 e 

### A composer is a device used for gluing veneers along the edge to form larger sheets of veneer; a core saw is used to cut core plies of veneer separately from decorative face veneers; a dry hog is used to reduce the size of wood residue by slicing or chopping; a hammermill is used to pulverize wood residue into small particles. f 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. g 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. h 

### A specialty saw is used for cutting and grooving the edges of plywood panels for tongue and groove joints. j 

### A hog is used to reduce the size of wood residue by slicing or chopping.

### 10.5-34 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002 Table 10.5-8. WOOD SPECIES COMMONLY USED IN COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING a



### Wood product AP-42 section Hardwood species Softwood species Plywood 10.5 Oak, cherry, poplar, maple, larch Firs, pines
Oriented strandboard 10.6-1 Aspen Pines, firs, spruce
Particleboard 10.6-2 Aspen, oak Pines, firs Medium density fiberboard 10.6-3 Gum, alder, hickory Pines, firs
Hardboard/fiberboard 10.6-4 Aspen, birch, beech, oak, maple Pines Engineered wood products 10.9 Aspen, birch, poplar Pines, firs, hemlock

a 

### Reference 15.

### 1/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.5-35

References For Section 10.5

1. C. B. Hemming, Plywood, Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia Of Chemical Technology , Second Edition, Volume 15, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1968, pp. 896 - 907.

2. F. L. Monroe, et al. , Investigation Of Emissions From Plywood Veneer Dryers , Washington State University, Pullman, WA, February 1972.

3. T. Baumeister, ed., Plywood, Standard Handbook For Mechanical Engineers , Seventh Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1967, pp. 6-162 - 6-169.

4. Written communication from John Pinkerton, National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., to Dallas Safriet, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 13, 1993.

5. A. Mick, and D. McCargar, Air Pollution Problems In Plywood, Particleboard, And Hardboard Mills In The Mid-Willamette Valley , Mid-Willamette Valley Air Pollution Authority, Salem, OR, March 24, 1969.

6. Controlled And Uncontrolled Emission Rates And Applicable Limitations For Eighty Processes , Second Printing, EPA-340/1-78-004, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 1978, pp. X-1 - X-6.

7. J. A. Danielson, ed., Air Pollution Engineering Manual, AP-40, Second Edition, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1973, pp. 372 - 374.

8. Assessment Of Fugitive Particulate Emission Factors For Industrial Processes , EPA-450/3-78-107, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1978.

9. C. T. Van Decar, Plywood Veneer Dryer Control Device, Journal Of The Air Pollution Control Association , 22:968, December 1972.

10. Alternative Control Technology Document--PM-10 Emissions From The Wood Products Industry: Plywood Manufacturing, Draft , U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1992.

11. Written communication from John Pinkerton, National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., to Dallas Safriet, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, June 8, 1993.

12. Written communication and attachments from T. A. Crabtree, Smith Engineering Company, Broomall, PA, to P. E. Lassiter, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 26, 1996.

13. Technical Memorandum, Minutes of the October 12-13, 1993 BACT Technologies Workshop, Raleigh, NC, sponsored by the American Forest and Paper Association, K. D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, October 1993.

### 10.5-36 EMISSION FACTORS 1/2002

14. A. E. Cavadeas, RTO Experience In The Wood Products Industry , Presented at Environmental Challenges: What’s New in the Wood Products Industry?, Workshop sponsored by the American Forest and Paper Association, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 4-5, 1997.

15. Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Chapter 10, Wood Products Industry, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, July 2003.

16. Oriented Strandboard And Plywood Air Emission Databases, Technical Bulletin No. 694 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, April 1995.

17. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part I - Plywood, Technical Bulletin No. 768 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

18. Engineering Evaluation Test Report, Formaldehyde, Total Hydrocarbons, And Methane Emissions From Four Process Stacks, Willamette Industries, Inc., Emerson, Louisiana, Test Dates April 23-24, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, Inc., by DEECO, Inc., Project No. 1559, June 7, 1998.

19. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries, Springfield, Oregon, Veneer Dryer #1 And Veneer Dryer #2, Test Dates June 1-2, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-092D, 1998.

20. Source Test Report–Woodtech, Inc., Bluefield, Virginia , prepared for Woodtech, Inc., by Environmental Quality Management, Inc., and Pacific Environmental Services, January 1992.

21. Press Room Vent Emissions Sampling, Willamette Industries, Inc., Emerson, Louisiana, Test Dates February 8-9, 1995 , prepared for Willamette Industries, Inc., by Armstrong Environmental, Inc., Project W-1653-95, February 20, 1995.

22. Written communication from Charles Simon, Precision Analytical Laboratories, Incorporated, to Dallas Safriet, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 5, 2001.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-1

10.6.2 Particleboard Manufacturing

10.6.2.1 General 1,2


### - Particleboard is defined as a panel product manufactured from lignocellulosic materials, primarily in the form of discrete particles, combined with a synthetic resin or other suitable binder and bonded together under heat and pressure. The primary difference between particleboard and other reconstituted wood products, such as waferboard, oriented strandboard, medium density fiberboard, and hardboard, is the material or particles used in its production. The major types of particles used to manufacture particleboard include wood shavings, flakes, wafers, chips, sawdust, strands, slivers, and wood wool. The term particleboard sometimes is used generically to include waferboard and oriented strandboard, which are manufactured primarily with wood flakes and wafers. However, for the purposes of this report, particleboard pertains only to panels manufactured from a mixture of wood particles or otherwise from wood particles other than wafers and flakes. Particleboard manufacturing falls under Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 2493, reconstituted wood products, which includes hardboard, insulation board, medium density fiberboard, waferboard and oriented strandboard in addition to particleboard. The six-digit Source Classification Code (SCC) for particleboard manufacturing is 3- 07-006. 10.6.2.2 Process Description 1,2


### - Particleboard is produced in densities ranging from around 590 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3 

### ) (37 pounds per cubic foot [lb/ft3 

### ]) to greater than 800 kg/m3 

### (50 lb/ft3 

### ). Most particleboard is formed into panels. However, molded particleboard products such as furniture parts, door skins, or molded pallets are also produced. Although some single-layer particleboard is produced, particleboard generally is manufactured in three or five layers. The outer layers are referred to as the surface or face layers, and the inner layers are termed the core layers. Face material generally is finer than core material. By altering the relative properties of the face and core layers, the bending strength and stiffness of the board can be increased. The general steps used to produce particleboard include raw material procurement or generation, classifying by size, drying, blending with resin and sometimes wax, forming the resinated material into a mat, hot pressing, and finishing. Figure 10.6.2-1 presents a process flow diagram for a typical particleboard plant. The furnish or raw material for particleboard normally consists of wood particles, primarily wood chips, sawdust, and planer shavings. This material may be shipped to the facility or generated onsite and stored until needed. In mills where chips are generated onsite, logs are debarked, sawn to proper length, and chipped. After shipping to the site or generation onsite, the furnish may be further reduced in size by means of hammermills, flakers, or refiners. After milling, the material is either screened using vibrating or gyratory screens, or the particles are air-classified. The purpose of this step is to remove the fines and to separate the core material from the surface material. The screened or classified material then is transported to storage bins. From the storage bins, the core and surface material are conveyed to dryers. Rotary dryers are the most commonly used dryer type in the particleboard industry. Both single and triple-pass dryers are used. In addition, some facilities use tube dryers to dry the furnish. Wood-fired dryers are used at most facilities. However, gas- and oil-fired dryers also are used. The moisture content of the particles entering the dryers may be as high as 50 percent on a wet basis. Drying reduces the moisture content to 2 to 8 percent. Dryer inlet temperatures may be as high as 871°C (1600°F) if the furnish is wet; for dry furnish, inlet temperatures generally are no higher than 260°C (500°F). Dryers with an inlet furnish

### 10.6.2-2 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

moisture content of greater than 50 percent on a dry basis are labeled “green” dryers. A predryer may be used for initial drying of relatively wet furnish. Following predrying, the drying process is completed in a final dryer (which may be either a rotary dryer or a tube dryer). The dryer inlet temperature is adjusted based on the desired furnish moisture content at the dryer outlet. Core dryers generally operate at higher temperatures than surface dryers due to differences in core and surface particle characteristics and because a lower moisture content is more desirable for core material. After drying, the particles pass through a primary cyclone for product recovery and then are transferred to holding bins. Face material sometimes is screened to remove the fines, which tend to absorb too much of the resin, prior to storage in the holding bins. From the holding bins, the core and surface materials are transferred to blenders, in which the particles are mixed with resin, wax, and other additives by means of spray nozzles, tubes, or atomizers. Urea-formaldehyde is the resin most commonly used for particleboard manufacture. However, phenol-formaldehyde resin may be used for particleboard produced for exterior applications. Waxes are added to impart water resistance, increase the stability of the finished product under wet conditions, and to reduce the tendency for equipment plugging. For furnishes that are low in acidity, catalysts also may be blended with the particles to accelerate the resin cure and to reduce the press time. Formaldehyde scavengers also may be added in the blending step to reduce formaldehyde emissions from the process. Blenders generally are designed to discharge the resinated particles into a plenum over a belt conveyor that feeds the blended material to the forming machine, which deposits the resinated material in the form of a continuous mat. Formers use air to convey the material, which is dropped or thrown into an air chamber above a moving caul, belt, or screen and floats down into position. To produce multilayer particleboard, several forming heads can be used in series, or air currents can produce a gradation of particle sizes from face to core. As it leaves the former, the mat may be prepressed prior to trimming and pressing. The mats then are cut into desired lengths and conveyed to the press. The press applies heat and pressure to activate the resin and bond the fibers into a solid panel. Although some single-opening presses are used, most domestic particleboard plants are equipped with multi-opening batch presses.Total press time is generally 2.5 minutes (min) for single-opening presses and up to 6 min for multiopening presses. Continuous presses may also be used to produce particleboard. Presses generally are heated using steam generated by an onsite boiler that burns wood residue. However, hot oil and hot water also are used to heat the press. The operating temperature for particleboard presses generally ranges from 149° to 182°C (300° to 360°F).
The presses used to manufacture molded particleboard products are not platen presses, but are press molds equipped with a heated die that shapes the resinated wood particles into the finished product. Press temperatures can range from 132° to 288°C (270° to 550°F). Press temperature and time vary according to the molded product being produced. After pressing, the boards generally are cooled prior to stacking. The particleboard panels then are sanded and trimmed to final dimensions, any other finishing operations (including laminate or veneer application) are done, and the finished product is packaged for shipment.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-3 Milling (SCC 3-07-006- 64)

Core

Material Storage

Cooling (SCC 3-07-006- 61) Sanding

(SCC 3-07-006- 65) Trimming Other Finishing Operations Drying (SCC 3-07-006- 02 to -40) Drying (SCC 3-07-006- 02 to -40) Cyclone

Screening Surface

Material Storage Cyclone

Core Material Storage

Blending Forming Blending Resin, wax other additives

Prepressing Trimming

Heat, pressure

Pressing (SCC 3-07-006- 51, -55) Steam/hot oil/hot water Resin, wax, other additives Direct/Indirect Heat Screening/ Classifying

Surface Material Storage

PROCESS FLOW

OPTIONAL PROCESS ON-SITE PARTICLE GENERATION: Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC 3-07-008-02) OFFSITE PARTICLE GENERATION



### Figure 10.6.2-1. Process flow diagram for particleboard manufacturing.

### 10.6.2-4 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

10.6.2.3 Emissions And Controls 1-35


### - The primary emission sources at particleboard mills are particle dryers and hot press vents. Other emission sources may include boilers, particle generation, blending, forming, board cooling, and finishing operations such as sanding, trimming, and laminate or veneer application. Other potential emissions sources ancillary to the manufacturing process may include wood chip storage piles and bins (including wood fuel), chip handling systems, and resin storage and handling systems. Although most particleboard mills have chips delivered from offsite locations, in mills where chips are generated onsite, operations such as log debarking and sawing, in addition to particle mills, screens, and classifiers generate particulate matter (PM) and PM less than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-10) emissions in the form of sawdust and wood particles. In addition, these processes may be sources of PM less than 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-2.5) emissions. Emissions from dryers that are exhausted from the primary recovery cyclone include wood dust and other solid PM, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), condensible PM, and products of combustion such as carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO 2

### ), and nitrogen oxides (NO x

### ), if direct-fired units are used. The condensible PM and a portion of the VOCs leave the dryer stack as vapor but condense at normal atmospheric temperatures to form liquid particles or mist that creates a visible blue haze. Both the VOCs and condensible PM are primarily compounds evaporated from the wood, with a minor constituent being combustion products. Quantities emitted are dependent on wood species, dryer temperature, fuel used, and other factors including season of the year, time between logging and processing, and chip storage time. Emissions from board hot presses are dependent on the type and amount of resin used to bind the wood fibers together, as well as wood species, wood moisture content, wax and catalyst application rates, and press conditions. When the press opens, vapors that may include resin ingredients such as formaldehyde and other VOCs are released. The rate at which formaldehyde is emitted during pressing and board cooling operations is a function of the amount of excess formaldehyde in the resin, board thickness, press temperature, press cycle time, and catalyst application rates. Emissions from finishing operations for particleboard are dependent on the type of products being finished. For most particleboard products, finishing involves trimming to size and sanding. Some products may require application of laminate surfaces or veneers with adhesives. Trimming and sanding operations are sources of PM and PM-10 emissions. In addition, these processes may be sources of PM less than 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-2.5) emissions. No data specific to particleboard trimming and sawing are available. However, emissions factors for plywood or medium density fiberboard (MDF) sawing operations may provide an order of magnitude estimate for similar particleboard sawing and trimming operations. In particleboard mills where particles are generated onsite, PM, PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions from log debarking, sawing, and grinding operations can be controlled through capture in an exhaust system connected to a sized cyclone and/or fabric filter collection system. Emissions of PM, PM-10, and PM-2.5 from sanding and final trimming operations can be controlled using similar methods. These wood dust capture and collection systems are used not only to control atmospheric emissions, but also to recover the dust as a by-product fuel for a boiler or dryer. Methods of controlling PM emissions from the particleboard sources include multiclones, absorption systems (wet scrubbers), fabric filters, sand filter scrubbers, electrified filter beds (EFBs), wet electrostatic precipitators (WESPs), and oxidation systems (discussed below). The sand filter scrubber incorporates a wet scrubbing section followed by a wet-sand filter and mist eliminator. The EFB uses

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-5

electrostatic forces to attract pollutants to an electrically charged gravel bed. The WESP uses electrostatic forces to attract pollutants to either a charged metal plate or a charged metal tube. The collecting surfaces are continually rinsed with water to wash away the pollutants. Wet PM control systems such as wet scrubbers and WESP’s may achieve short-term reductions in emissions of some water-soluble organic compounds (such as formaldehyde). However, the ability of these wet systems to absorb water-soluble compounds diminishes as the recirculating scrubbing liquid becomes saturated with these compounds. A VOC control technology commonly used in the wood products industry for controlling both dryer and press exhaust gases is regenerative thermal oxidation. Thermal oxidizers destroy VOCs and condensible organics by burning them at high temperatures. Thermal oxidizers also reduce CO emissions in direct-fired dryer exhausts by oxidizing the CO in the exhaust to CO 2

### (a product of complete combustion). Regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) are designed to preheat the inlet emission stream with heat recovered from the incineration exhaust gases. Up to 98 percent heat recovery is possible,although 95 percent is typically specified. Gases entering an RTO are heated by passing through preheated beds packed with a ceramic media. A gas burner brings the preheated emissions up to an incineration temperature between 788° and 871°C (1450° and 1600°F) in a combustion chamber with sufficient gas residence time to complete the combustion. Combustion gases then pass through a cooled ceramic bed where heat is extracted. By reversing the flow through the beds, the heat transferred from the combustion exhaust air preheats the gases to be treated, thereby reducing auxiliary fuel requirements. Biofiltration systems are also used effectively for control of a variety of pollutants including organic compounds, NO x 

### , CO, and PM from press exhaust streams. Biofiltration uses microorganisms immobilized in a biofilm layer on a porous packing such as bark, wood chips, or synthetic media. Typical biofilter design consists of a three- to six-foot deep bed of media suspended over an air distribution plenum. Exhaust gases entering the plenum are evenly distributed through the moist biofilter media. As the contaminated vapor stream passes through the biofilter media, pollutants are transferred from the vapor to the biofilm and, through microbiological degradation, are converted to CO 2 

### , water, and salts. The microorganisms cannot easily attack pollutants in the gas phase; therefore, less water soluble compounds (such as pinenes) are generally more difficult to control using a biofilter than are the more water-soluble compounds (such as formaldehyde). Fugitive PM emissions from road dust and uncovered bark and dust storage piles may be controlled in a number of different ways. Some of these methods include enclosure, wet suppression systems, and chemical stabilization. Calculating PM-10 emissions from wood products industry emission sources is problematic due to the relationship between PM-10 (or PM) emissions and VOC emissions from these processes. Because the Method 201A train (PM-10) operates with an in-stack cyclone and filter, organic materials that are volatile at stack gas temperatures but that are condensed at back half impinger temperatures (
- 

### 20°C [
- 

### 68°F]) are collected as condensible PM-10. However, these materials will also be measured as VOC via Methods 25 and 25A, which operate with a heated or an in-stack filter. Hence, if PM-10 is calculated as the sum of filterable and condensible material, some pollutants will be measured as both PM-10 and VOC emissions. However, if only filterable material is considered to be PM-10, the PM-10 emission factors will be highly dependent on stack gas temperature. In this AP-42 section, PM-10 is reported as front half catch only (Method 201A results only; not including Method 202 results). However, condensible PM results are also reported, and these results can be combined with the PM-10 results as appropriate for a specific application. Measured VOC emissions may be affected by the sampling method and by the quantity of formaldehyde and other aldehydes and ketones in the exhaust; formaldehyde is not quantified using Method 25A. Other low molecular weight oxygenated compounds

### 10.6.2-6 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

have reduced responses to Method 25A. Therefore, when VOC emissions are measured using Method 25A, the emission rates will be biased low if low molecular weight oxygenated compounds are present in significant concentrations in the exhaust stream. A more extensive discussion of these sampling and analysis issues is provided in the Background Report for this section. Guidance from EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) indicates that when it is possible, VOC emission factors should be reported in terms of the actual weight of the emitted compound. However, when an actual molecular weight (MW) of the emitted stream is not feasible (as is the case with the mixed streams emitted from wood products industry sources), the VOC should be reported using an assumed MW of 44, and reported “as propane.” Each VOC-as-propane emission factor is estimated by first converting the THC from a carbon basis to a propane basis. Propane (MW = 44) includes 3 carbon atoms (total MW of 36) and 8 hydrogen atoms (total MW of 8). Every 36 pounds of carbon measured corresponds to 44 pounds of propane. The ratio of the MW of propane to the MW of carbon in propane is 44/36, or 1.22. The conversion is expressed by the following equation:

THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane
After the THC emission factor has been converted from a carbon to a propane basis, the formaldehyde emission factor is added (where available), then the available emission factors for non-VOC compounds, including acetone, methane, and methylene chloride, are subtracted. This procedure is expressed simply by the following equation: VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride) In cases where no emission factor is available (or the emission factor is reported only as below the testmethod detection limit, or “BDL”) for one or more of the compounds used to estimate the VOC-aspropane value, adjustments to the converted THC value are made only for those compounds for which emission factors are available. That is, a value of zero is inserted in the above equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as BDL. For example, if no methane emission factor is available, the THC-as-carbon emission factor is converted to THC-as-propane, formaldehyde is added, and only acetone and methylene chloride are subtracted. Table 10.6.2-1 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.2-2 presents emissions factors for dryer emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.6.2-3 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of organic compounds, some of which are listed as HAPs under section 112(b) of the Clean Air Act. The emission factors for dryer emissions are presented in units of pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of the dryer (lb/ODT). Table 10.6.2-4 presents emission factors for press and board cooler emissions of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.2-5 presents emission factors for press and board cooler emissions of NO x

### and CO. Table 10.6.2-6 presents emission factors for press and board cooler emissions of organic compounds, some of which are listed HAPs. The units for the press and board cooler emission factors are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4- inch thick panel produced (lb/MSF 3/4). Table 10.6.2-7 presents emission factors for miscellaneous sources of organic compounds. Some of the compounds also are listed HAPs. To the extent possible, separate emission factors for particleboard dryers are presented in Tables 10.6.2-1 to -3 for hardwoods and softwoods. Hardwoods generally correspond to deciduous species. For particleboard, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used hardwoods

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-7

include aspen, oak, poplar, maple, cherry, alder, hickory, gum, beech, birch, and basswood. The emission factors for hardwood particleboard dryers presented in this section are based largely on the drying of aspen furnish. Oak also is used often for making particleboard. Softwoods generally correspond to coniferous species. For particleboard, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used softwoods include pines, firs, and spruce. Pines and firs are the most commonly used softwood species for particleboard manufacturing. Emission factors for every possible mix of hardwood and softwood species cannot be reported in this section. Emission factors for specific mixes of wood species may be calculated by combining emission factors for individual wood species in the ratio specific to a given application, as emission datafor those species become available. For example, a THC as carbon emission factor for a direct woodfired rotary dryer processing 60 percent softwood and 40 percent hardwood may be calculated using the THC as carbon emission factors for softwood (1.0 lb/ODT) and hardwood (0.20 lb/ODT), and the ratio of 60 percent to 40 percent. The resultant emission factor, rounded to two significant figures, would be 0.68 lb/ODT.

### 10.6.2-8 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Table 10.6.2-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD DRYERS--

PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source Emission Control Device c Filterableb

Condensible d EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-10) Uncontrolled/

MCLO SCBR EFB 03 3.3 e

0 0 0.93 e 0 0.19 e D

D D ND

ND ND 0.21 e

0.024 e NA D

D

Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-07) Uncontrolled

MCLO 0 3.4 e

0 0.93 f D

D 0.69 e

ND D 0.20 e ND D

Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, mixed species (35-60% softwood, 40-65% hardwood) (SCC 3-07-006-08) Uncontrolled

EFB 0 2.2 g

0 0.28 h D

D ND

ND 0.48 g NA D

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis), softwood (SCC 3-07-006-25) Uncontrolled/

MCLO BH EFB EFB/BH 0 2.2 h

0 1.4h 0 1.5 e 0 0.20h D

E E E ND

ND 0.64 e ND E 1.1 h

NA NA NA D

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis), mixed species (40-60% softwood, 40-60% hardwood) (SCC 3-07-006-26) Uncontrolled

MCLO BH EFB EFB/BH ND

2.0 e 0 1.3 h 0 0.27 e 0 0.15j E

E E E ND

ND ND 0.11 e ND D 0.62 k NA NA NA NA D

Rotary dryer, direct natural gas-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-32) Uncontrolled

MCLO EFB ND

2.2 e 0 0.31 n E

E ND

ND 0.15 m NA ND D

Rotary dryer, direct natural gas-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-30) Uncontrolled/

MCLO 0 0.42p D ND 0.12 q D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. NA = Not applicable. See Table 10.6.2-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of particleboard and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications,

### Table 10.6.2-1 (cont.).

6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-9 are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### Emission control device: MCLO = multiclone; SCBR = wet scrubber; EFB = electrified filter bed; BH = baghouse (fabric filter). d 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202); multiclones, EFB’s, and baghouses are not expected to control condensible PM; condensible PM emissions measured at the outlets of those control devices are considered to be uncontrolled.

e 

### Reference 7. f 

### References 8, 9, and 10. g 

### References 7, 11, 12, and 13. h 

### References 7 and 14. j 

### Reference 14. k 

### Reference 7, 11, and 14.

m 

### Reference 7, 15, and 16.

n 

### Reference 16. p 

### Reference 8, 17, and 18. q 

### Reference 17 and 18.

### 10.6.2-10 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

Table 10.6.2-2. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD DRYERS--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-10) Uncontrolled 0.92 c D 5.7 c D ND

Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-07) Uncontrolled 0.58 d D 0.68 e C ND

Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, mixed species (35-60% softwood, 40-65% hardwood) (SCC 3-07-006-08) Uncontrolled 1.8 f D 0.59 c D 538 g D

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis), softwood (SCC 3-07-006-25) Uncontrolled 2.7 h D 3.5 h D 573j D

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis), mixed species (40-60% softwood, 40-60% hardwood) (SCC 3-07-006-26) Uncontrolled 1.4 c E 0.77 k D ND

Rotary dryer, direct natural gas-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-32) Uncontrolled 0.024m E 1.2 m E 311 n E

Rotary dryer, green,direct natural gasfired (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis), softwood (SCC 3-07-006-31) Uncontrolled ND ND 237 p D

Rotary dryer, indirect heated with auxiliary natural gas, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-35) Uncontrolled 0.31 c D 0.12 c D 38.2 q D

### Table 10.6.2-2 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-11 Tube dryer, direct wood-fired, blowline blend, UF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-40) Uncontrolled ND ND 447 r E

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. See Table 10.6.2-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of particleboard and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### Reference 7. d 

### References 7, 9, and 10.

e 

### References 7, 9, 10, and 19. f 

### References 7, 12, and 13. g 

### References 11, 12, 13, and 14. h 

### References 7, 20, and 21. j 

### References 14, 20, and 21. k 

### References 7 and 19.

m 

### Reference 15.

n 

### Reference 22. p 

### References 21 and 23. q 

### Reference 24.

r 

### Reference 25.

### 10.6.2-12 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

Table 10.6.2-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD DRYERS--ORGANICS a

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-10) Uncontrolled THC as carbond VOC as propane e 0.20 f
0.24 D

E

Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-07) Uncontrolled

71-55-6

95-63-6 5779-94-2 13466-78-9 75-07-0 67-64-1 98-86-2 107-02-8 80-56-8 100-52-7 71-43-2 127-91-3 92-52-4 117-81-7 74-83-9 123-72-8 85-68-7

75-15-0 56-23-5

74-87-3

98-82-8 84-74-2 75-18-3 74-84-0 100-41-4 50-00-0 66-25-1 123-31-9 590-86-3 138-86-3 1330-20-7 620-23-5 64-82-8 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1 75-09-2 110-54-3 95-47-6 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,1,1-Trichloroethane * 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acetophenone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Beta-pinene Biphenyl * Bis-(2-ethylhexyl phthalate) Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Butylbenzyl phthalate Camphene Carbon disulfide * Carbon tetrachloride * Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Chloromethane * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Di-N-butyl phthalate Dimethyl sulfide Ethane Ethyl benzene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Hydroquinone Isovaleraldehyde Limonene m-, p-Xylene * m-Tolualdehyde Methane Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * n-Hexane* o-Xylene * 1.0 g 0.90 0.000012 f
BDL BDL 0.000090 f
0.000033 f,y
0.076 0.013 0.084h
0.000064 f
0.0045 0.39 0.0026 f,y
0.00099 h
0.12 0.000039 f
0.00032 f
0.000028 f
0.0031 f,y
0.000014 f
BDL 0.000018 f
0.000012 f
BDL BDL 0.00011 f
BDL 0.000069 f
0.000023 f
0.000014 f
0.015j
0.0000038 f
0.025 k
0.016 f,y
0.000060 f
0.00052 f,y
0.034 0.00055 h
0.00045 f,y
0.26 j
0.014m 0.0049 h
0.0024h
0.00063 h
0.000026 f
0.000014 f C

D D

D E D D D D D D E D D D D D E E

D D

D

D D E D E C E E E D D E D D D D D E D

### Table 10.6.2-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-13 Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-07) (cont.) 108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 108-88-3 110-62-3 p-Cymene

p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde BDL BDL 0.0066 0.0032 0.00012 f
0.0021 h
0.0016 f,y D

D E D E Rotary dryer, direct wood-fired, mixed species (35-60% softwood, 40-65% hardwood) (SCC 3-07-006-08) Uncontrolled THC as carbond VOC as propane e 0.048 f
0.059 E

E

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired, softwood (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis) (SCC 3-07-006-25) Uncontrolled

5779-94-2 13466-78-9 80-56-8 8006-64-2 75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 127-91-3 100-52-7 71-43-2

123-72-8 79-92-5

67-66-3

4170-30-3 98-82-8 50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3 138-86-3 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1 75-09-2 1330-20-7 123-72-8 529-20-4 95-47-6 99-87-6 99-83-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Alpha-pinene a-Terpene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Beta-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Chloroform Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * n-Butyraldehyde o-Tolualdehyde o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene 3.9 n 4.7 BDL BDL 0.0053 f,y
0.043 1.4h
0.17 f
0.075 h
0.19 h
0.023 f,y
0.52 h
0.12 f,y
0.0076 BDL 0.029 f,y
0.043 BDL BDL 0.00010 f
BDL 0.010 f,y
0.0020 f
0.14p 0.022 f,y
0.018 f,y
0.043 0.11 q BDL 0.0069 0.0018 h
0.0048 h
0.030 f,y
0.011 f,y
0.00045 f
0.027 h
0.043 D

E

E E D E D D E D E D

E E

E

E E D E E E D

D D D E E E D E

### Table 10.6.2-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.2-14 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired, softwood (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis) (SCC 3-07-006-25) (cont.) 104-87-0 108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 108-88-3 110-62-3 p-Tolualdehyde

Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 0.026 f,y
0.028 0.013 h
0.00036 f
0.013 h
0.014 f,y E

D D E D E

Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired, mixed species (40-60% softwood, 40-60% hardwood) (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis) (SCC 3-07-006-26) Uncontrolled

5779-94-2 13466-78-9 80-56-8 8006-64-2 75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 127-91-3 100-52-7 71-43-2

123-72-8

156-59-2 4170-30-3

50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3

67-56-1 78-93-3

75-09-2 1330-20-7 529-20-4 95-47-6 99-87-6

104-87-0 108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 108-88-3 110-62-3 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Alpha-pinene a-Terpene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Beta-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Tolualdehyde o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene p-Tolualdehyde Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 1.3 h
1.6 BDL BDL 0.0015 f,y
0.040 0.51 h
0.053 f
0.059 h
0.047 h
0.015 0.11 h
0.0082 f,y
0.0047 BDL 0.0019 f,y
BDL BDL BDL 0.0012 0.00082 f,y
BDL 0.096 h
0.0062 f,y
0.0011 f,y
BDL 0.059 0.0034 BDL 0.0014h
0.0058 0.00066 f,y
0.00058 0.0016 f
BDL 0.0046 f,y
0.0079 0.0042 h
0.00057 0.0059 h
0.0040 f,y D

E

E D D E D D D D E D

E

D E

D E E

D D

D D E D D

E D D D D E

### Table 10.6.2-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-15 Rotary dryer, green, direct wood-fired, mixed species (40-60% softwood, 40-60% hardwood) (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis) (SCC 3-07-006-26) RTO

67-64-1

71-43-2

50-00-0

67-56-1

75-09-2 1330-20-7 95-47-6

100-42-5 108-88-3 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.013 0.013 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0033 BDL BDL 0.00055 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00055 BDL 0.0019 BDL BDL 0.00060 0.00075 0.00075 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00074 0.00065 E

E

E

E

E

E

E E E

E E Rotary dryer, direct natural gas-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-006-32) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 THC as carbond VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * 0.21 r 0.28 0.028 s E

E E

Rotary dryer, direct natural gas-fired, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-30) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 67-56-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * Methanol * 1.6 t 2.0 0.0086u 0.073 u D

E E E Rotary dryer, green,direct natural gasfired, softwood (inlet moisture content >50%, dry basis) (SCC 3-07-006-31) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 67-56-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * Methanol * 0.77 v 0.94 0.0042 v BDL E

E E

### Table 10.6.2-3 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.2-16 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Rotary dryer, indirect heated with auxiliary natural gas, softwood (SCC 3-07-006-35) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 64-82-8 67-56-1 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * Methane Methanol * 0.43 w 0.30 0.047 x 0.27 f
0.027 x D

E D D D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 19 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.6.2-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of particleboard and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer.

c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number. d 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.

e 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. f 

### Reference 7. g 

### References 7, 9, 10, and 19. h 

### References 7 and 19. j 

### References 9 and 10. k 

### References 7, 9, 19, and 26.

m 

### References 9, 19, and 26.

n 

### References 7, 19, 20, and 21. p 

### References 7, 19, 20, 21, and 27. q 

### References 19 and 21.

r 

### Reference 15.

s 

### Reference 22. t 

### References 17 and 18.

u 

### Reference 17.

v 

### Reference 23.

w 

### References 7 and 24.

x 

### Reference 24. y 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-17

Table 10.6.2-4. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD PRESSES AND BOARD COOLERS--PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source c Emission

Control Device Filterableb

Condensible d EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-51) Uncontrolled 0.20 e D 0.016 f E 0.23 g D

Board cooler, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-61) Uncontrolled 0.15 g D ND 0.077 g D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### UF = urea formaldehyde. d 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

e 

### References 7, 26, 28, and 29. f 

### Reference 7. g 

### References 28 and 29.

Table 10.6.2-5. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD PRESSES AND BOARD COOLERS--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device c NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-51) Uncontrolled

RTO 0.017 d

0.092 d E

E 0.22 e

0.090 f D

D ND

ND Board cooler, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-61) Uncontrolled ND 0.15 g D ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

### 10.6.2-18 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

c 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer. d 

### Reference 26.

e 

### References 7, 15, 19, 26, 28, and 29. f 

### References 19 and 26. g 

### References 28 and 29.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-19

Table 10.6.2-6. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD PRESSES AND BOARD COOLERS--ORGANICS a

Sourceb Emission

Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-51) Uncontrolled

5779-94-2 13466-78-9 75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8 100-52-7 71-43-2 127-91-3

123-72-8 79-92-5

4170-30-3

50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3 138-86-3 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

99-87-6 99-83-2 108-95-2

110-62-3 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 0.79 g 1.1 BDL BDL 0.00032 h,j
0.036 0.011 k
0.029 m 0.0054m 0.40 0.0018 j,n
0.0030 0.11 BDL 0.0019 j,n
0.044 BDL BDL BDL 0.00050h,j
BDL 0.23 p 0.010 j,n
0.0011 h,j
0.036 0.59 q 0.0052 m 0.0099 BDL BDL BDL 0.035 0.036 0.011 BDL BDL BDL 0.0039 h,j C

D

E D D D D D E D D

E D

E

C E E D D D D

D D D

E

### Table 10.6.2-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission

Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.2-20 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-51) RTO

50-00-0

108-95-2 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.018 0.027 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0054 q
BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0082 BDL BDL BDL E

E

D

E

### Table 10.6.2-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission

Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-21 Board cooler, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-61) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8 100-52-7

123-72-8

4170-30-3

50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3

67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2

110-62-3 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 0.069 r 0.091 BDL BDL BDL 0.0036 s 0.0083 m 0.00036 h,j
0.050 0.00042 h,j
BDL BDL BDL 0.00060h,j
BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00029 h,j
BDL 0.015 t
0.0011 h,j
0.00040h,j
BDL 0.081 0.00011 h,j
0.0032 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0066 BDL BDL BDL 0.0015 h,j D

E

D D E D E

E

E

D E E

D E E

D

E

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 19 unless otherwise noted. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are

### Table 10.6.2-6 (cont.).

10.6.2-22 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer. d 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

e 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. f 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. g 

### References 7, 15, 19, 26, 28, 29, and 30. h 

### Reference 7. j 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems. k 

### References 7, 15, and 19.

m 

### Reference 19.

n 

### References 7 and 15. p 

### References 7, 15, 19, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, and 34. q 

### References 19 and 26.

r 

### References 7, 28, 29, and 30.

s 

### References 7 and 19. t 

### References 19, 28, and 29.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-23

Table 10.6.2-7. EMISSION FACTORS FOR PARTICLEBOARD MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES a

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units d EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

Log debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

Log cutting (SCC 3-07-008-02) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

Flaker/ refiner/ hammermill, softwoods and mixtures containing softwoods (SCC 3-07-006-64) Uncontrolled

67-64-1

80-56-8

127-91-3

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.94 1.1BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0064 BDL 0.49 BDL 0.15 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0073 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0045 BDL BDL BDL lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT D

E

D

D

D

D

E

### Table 10.6.2-7 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units d EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.2-24 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Sander (SCC 3-07-006-65) Uncontrolled

67-64-1

80-56-8

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.069 0.079 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0051 BDL 0.048 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.013 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.015 BDL BDL BDL lb/MSF

lb/MSF

lb/MSF

lb/MSF

lb/MSF

lb/MSF E

E

E

E

E

E

Veneer press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-006-55)
(gluing veneer to particle-board substrate) Uncontrolled 71-55-6 80-56-8 75-07-0 127-91-3 50-00-0 66-25-1 78-93-3 123-72-8 108-88-3 1,1,1-Trichloroethane *

Alpha-pinene Acetaldehyde * Beta-pinene Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Methyl ethyl ketone * n-Butylaldehyde Toluene * 0.00022 g 0.00054 g 0.000099 g 0.00011 g 0.0062 g 0.00017 g,h
0.00020 g 0.00014 g,h
0.00047 g lb/MSF 3/4

lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 lb/MSF 3/4 E

E E E E E E E E

a 

### Emission factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. ND = no data available. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 19 unless otherwise noted. b 

### Emission control devices (baghouses) are considered no control for organic pollutants.

c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

### Table 10.6.2-7 (cont.).

6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-25 d 

### Emission factor units: Pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of panel (lb/MSF). One lb/MSF = 0.0049 kg/m 2 

### . Pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3



### . e 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. f 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. g 

### Reference 15. h 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems.

### 10.6.2-26 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002 Table 10.6.2-8. WOOD SPECIES COMMONLY USED IN COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING a



### Wood product AP-42 section Hardwood species Softwood species Plywood 10.5 Oak, cherry, poplar, maple, larch Firs, pines
Oriented strandboard 10.6-1 Aspen Pines, firs, spruce
Particleboard 10.6-2 Aspen, oak Pines, firs Medium density fiberboard 10.6-3 Gum, alder, hickory Pines, firs
Hardboard/fiberboard 10.6-4 Aspen, birch, beech, oak, maple Pines Engineered wood products 10.9 Aspen, birch, poplar Pines, firs, hemlock

a 

### Reference 6.

References For Section 10.6.2

1. T. M. Maloney, Modern Particleboard And Dry-Process Fiberboard Manufacturing, Miller Freeman Publications, Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1977.

2. J. G. Haygreen and J. L. Bowyer, Forest Products And Wood Science: An Introduction , Second Edition, Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, 1989.

3. Written communication and attachments from T. A. Crabtree, Smith Engineering Company, Broomall, PA, to P. E. Lassiter, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 26, 1996.

4. Technical Memorandum, Minutes of the October 12-13, 1993 BACT Technologies Workshop, Raleigh, NC, sponsored by the American Forest and Paper Association, K. D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, October 1993.

5. A. E. Cavadeas, RTO Experience In The Wood Products Industry , presented at Environmental Challenges: What’s New in the Wood Products Industry?, workshop sponsored by the American Forest and Paper Association, Research Triangle Park, NC, February 4-5, 1997.

6. Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Chapter 10, Wood Products Industry, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, July 2003.

7. Particleboard And Medium Density Fiberboard Air Emission Databases, Technical Bulletin No. 693 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, April 1995.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-27

8. Engineering Emissions Testing For Particulate Performed On The #1 & 3 Dryer Cyclone Exhausts And Engineering Emissions Testing For Methanol Performed On The Press Vents At Temple Inland Corporation, Monroeville, Alabama, Test Dates February 10-14, 1997, prepared for Temple Inland, by Air Techniques, Inc., ATI Job No. 97TO4908, 1997.

9. In-House Air Emissions Testing Of Primary Dryer Outlet, Hope Particleboard Plant, Hope, Arkansas, Test Dates January 29-31, 1997, prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No. 1411700875A, March 14, 1997.

10. In-House Air Emissions Testing of Primary Dryer Outlet And RTO Press Vent Inlet, Hope Particleboard Plant, Hope, Arkansas, Test Dates February 12-14, 1997, prepared for TempleInland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No. 1411700875B, March 17, 1997.

11. Stationary Source Sampling Report, Reference No. 6041A, Weyerhaeuser Company, Moncure, North Carolina, Particulate Emissions And Plume Opacity Testing, Surface Line Electrified Filter Bed Inlet And Stack, October 20, 1988 , Entropy Environmentalists, Inc., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, November 8, 1988.

12. Weyerhaeuser Company, Marshfield, Wisconsin, Stack Testing Report For Total Gaseous NonMethane Organic Compound Emissions (TGNOC), Test Date: March 19-23, 1990 , Cross/Tessitore & Associates, P.A., Orlando, Florida, 1990.

13. Report To Weyerhaeuser Company, Marshfield, Wisconsin, For Particulate & NOx Emissions Testing, Door Core Dryer EFB Stack, December 20, 1991 , Environmental Technology & Engineering Corporation, Elm Grove, Wisconsin, 1992.

14. Stationary Source Sampling Report, Reference No. 6393A, Weyerhaeuser Company, Moncure, North Carolina, Formaldehyde Emissions, Particulate Emissions, And Plume Opacity Testing, Core Line EFB Inlet, Core Line Stack, And Surface Line Stack, August 9 And 11, 1989 , Entropy Environmentalists, Inc., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, September 21, 1989.

15. Emission Test Report: HAP Emission Testing On Selected Sources At A Wood Furniture Production Facility–Facility A , prepared for U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., April 1993.

16. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Door Core Dryer, Particulate Compliance 1996.4, Test Date October 19, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9640, December 12, 1996.

17. Title V Emissions Testing On The Furnish Dryer Exhaust, Georgia Pacific Corporation, Panelboard Plant, Monticello, Georgia, February 13, 1996, prepared for CH2M Hill, by Analytical Testing Consultants, Inc., Report No. 5743, March 13, 1996.

18. Report Of Air Emissions Tests For Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Silsbee Particleboard Facility Core And Face Dryer Cyclones, Test Date September 23, 1997, prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Inc., October 18, 1997.

### 10.6.2-28 EMISSION FACTORS 2/2002

19. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part IV - Particleboard, Technical Bulletin No. 771 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

20. Emissions Test Report, Boise Cascade Corporation, Island City, Oregon, Green Furnish Dryer, March 10 & 11, 1998 , prepared for Boise Cascade Corporation, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-042D, 1998.

21. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Albany, Oregon, Boiler #1, Green Dryer #1, And Green Dryer #2, Test Dates April 22-23 And 25-26, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 96-048X, 1996.

22. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Thru Door Core Dryer And Press Testing, Formaldehyde Air Emissions 1996.4, Test Dates October 19 And 21, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9640, December 30, 1996.

23. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Millersburg (Albany), Oregon, Green Dryer #3, Test Dates March 27-28, 1997, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 97-043D, 1997.

24. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries Duraflake Division, Albany, Oregon, Dry Dryers 1, 2, 3 And 4, Test Dates May 19-22, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 98-044D, 1998.

25. Source Emission Test Report, Dryer And Press Exhausts Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, Mt. Jewett, Pennsylvania, Test Dates October 22-24 And December 17, 1997, prepared for Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, by Galson Measurements, Galson Project No. 975540, December 3, 1997.

26. In-House Air Emissions Testing Of The Diboll Particleboard Plant, Diboll, Texas, Test Dates October 8-9 And 15, 1997, prepared for Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation, by Maxim Technologies, Inc., Project No. 9711254A, January 12, 1998.

27. Formaldehyde Methods Comparison, NCASI Acetylacetone Method Vs. EPA Method 0011, Weyerhaeuser Company, Springfield, Oregon, MEC #3 Rotary Particle Dryer, Test Dates February 27-28, 1996, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by BWR Associates, Inc., 1996.

28. Results Of The November 14-17, 1995 Air Emission Compliance Tests At The Louisiana-Pacific Waferboard Plant In Missoula, Montana , prepared for Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, by Interpoll Laboratories, Inc., Report No. 5-6833, December 27, 1995.

29. Results Of The May 9-12, 1994 Air Emission Compliance Tests At The Louisiana-Pacific [Particleboard] Plant In Missoula, Montana , Report No. 4-2837, Interpoll Laboratories, Inc., Circle Pines, Minnesota, June 8, 1994.

30. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Steam-Thru Door Core Plant Press Vents, VOC Compliance Testing 1998.3, Test Dates August 6-7, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9850, September 15, 1998.

### 6/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.2-29

31. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Door Core Press Scavenger Trials, Press Vent Formaldehyde Air Emissions 1997.3, Test Dates July 21-24, 1997, prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9741, 1997.

32. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Formaldehyde Emissions Variability Study, Press Area Common Stack, Test Dates December 18, 1997 To March 26, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9753, May 26, 1998.

33. Weyerhaeuser Company–Marshfield, Wisconsin, Formaldehyde Emissions Variability Study, Press Area Common Stack, Test Dates April 1, 1998 To June 30, 1998 , prepared for Weyerhaeuser Company, by Weyerhaeuser Company, Project No. 721-9753, 1998.

34. Emission Test Report Particleboard Press And No. 2 Rotary Dryer (MEC Dryer With WoodFired Burner) Emissions Testing, International Paper, Decorative Products Division, Stuart, Virginia, Test Dates June 8-10, 1998 , prepared for International Paper Decorative Products Division, by Roy F. Weston, Inc., Work Order No. 00157-045-002, June 1998.

35. Written communication from David Word, National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., to Dallas Safriet, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 14, 2001.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-1

10.6.3 Medium Density Fiberboard Manufacturing

10.6.3.1 General 1-2,7


### - The Composite Panel Association defines medium density fiberboard (MDF) as a dry-formed panel product manufactured from lignocellulosic fibers combined with a synthetic resin or other suitable binder. The panels are compressed to a density of from 496 to 801 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3 

### ) (31 to 50 pounds per cubic foot [lb/ft3 

### ]) in a hot press. The entire interfiber bond is formed by a synthetic resin or other suitable organic binder. In contrast to particleboard, MDF has more uniform density throughout the board and has smooth, tight edges that can be machined. It can be finished to a smooth surface and grain printed, eliminating the need for veneers and laminates. Most of the thicker MDF panels (1.27 to 1.91 centimeters [cm]) (1/2 to 3/4 inch [in.]) are used as core material in furniture panels. Medium density fiberboard panels thinner than 1.27 cm (1/2 in.) typically are used for siding.
10.6.3.2 Process Description2-7 

### The general steps used to produce MDF include mechanical pulping of wood chips to fibers (refining), drying, blending fibers with resin and sometimes wax, forming the resinated material into a mat, and hot pressing. Figure 10.6.3-1 presents a process flow diagram for a typical MDF plant. The furnish for MDF normally consists of wood chips. Wood chips typically are delivered by truck or rail from offsite locations such as sawmills, plywood plants, furniture manufacturing facilities, satellite chip mills, and whole tree chipping operations. If wood chips are prepared onsite, logs are debarked, cut to more manageable lengths, and then sent to chippers. If necessary, the chips are washed to remove dirt and other debris. Clean chips are softened in a steam-pressurized digester, then transported into a pressurized refiner chamber. In the refiner chamber, single or double revolving disks are used to mechanically pulp the softened chips into fibers suitable for making the board. From the refiners, the fibers move to the drying and blending area. A rotary predryer may be used for initial drying of relatively wet furnish. Regardless of whether or not a predryer is used, tube dryers typically are used to reduce the moisture content of the fibers to desired levels. Single-stage or multiple-stage tube drying systems are commonly used in MDF manufacture. Most of the multiple-stage tube drying systems incorporate two stages. In multiple-stage tube dryers, there is a primary tube dryer and a second stage tube dryer in series separated by an emission point such as a cyclonic collector. Heat is usually provided to tube dryers by the direct firing of propane, natural gas, or distillate oil or by indirect heating. The sequence of the drying and blending operations depends on the method by which resins and other additives are blended with the fibers. Urea-formaldehyde (UF) resins are the most common resins used in the manufacture of MDF. Phenolic resins, melamine resins, and isocyanates are also used. Some plants inject resins into a short-retention blender, while most facilities inject resin formulations into a blowline system. If resin is added in a separate blender, the fibers are first dried and separated from the gas stream by a fiber recovery cyclone, then conveyed to the blender. The fibers then are blended with resin, wax, and any other additives and conveyed to a dry fiber storage bin. If a blowline system is used, the fibers are first blended with resin, wax, and other additives in a blowline, which is a duct that discharges the resinated fibers to the dryer. After drying, the fibers are separated from the gas stream by a fiber recovery cyclone and then conveyed to a dry fiber storage bin.

### 10.6.3-2 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 PRESSURIZED DIGESTER CHIP WASHING (OPTIONAL)

DRY FIBER STORAGE PRIMARY TUBE DRYER (SCC 3-07-009- 21 to -40) RESIN, WAX, ADDITIVES

BLOW LINE

OR FIBER RECOVERY CYCLONE

RESIN, WAX, ADDITIVES

FORMING (SCC 3-07-009-81, -82) PREPRESSING MAT TRIMMING

WOOD RECYCLE HOT PRESSING ( S CC 3-07-009-50, -60)

PACKAGING/ SHIPPING PAINTING/ LAMINATING (OPTIONAL) TRIMMING, SANDING, SAWING (SCC 3-07-009-83, -84) BOARD COOLING

WOOD RECYCLE PRESSURIZED REFINER

BLENDER (SCC 3-07-009- 80) OFF-SITE CHIP PREPARATION ON-SITE CHIP PREPARATION Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC 3-07-008-02) Chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21)

SECOND STAGE TUBE DRYER (OPTIONAL) (SCC-3-07-009-37) SECOND STAGE TUBE DRYER (OPTIONAL) (SCC-3-07-009-37)

CYCLONIC SEPARATOR

FIBER RECOVERY CYCLONE

CYCLONIC

SEPARATOR PRIMARY TUBE DRYER (SCC 3-07-009- 21 to -40) ROTARY PREDRYER (OPTIONAL) (SCC 3-07-009-40)



### Figure 10.6.3-3. Typical process flow diagram for a medium density fiberboard (MDF) plant.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-3

Air conveys the resinated fibers from the dry storage bin to the forming machine, where they are deposited on a continuously moving screen system. The continuously formed mat must be prepressed before being loaded into the hot press. After prepressing, some pretrimming is done. The trimmed material is collected and recycled to the forming machine.
The prepressed and trimmed mats then are transferred to the hot press. The press applies heat and pressure to activate the resin and bond the fibers into a solid panel. The mat may be pressed in a continuous hot press, or the precompressed mat may be cut by a flying cutoff saw into individual mats that are then loaded into a multi-opening, batch-type hot press. Steam or hot oil heating of the press platens is common in domestic MDF plants. After pressing, the boards are cooled, sanded, trimmed, and sawed to final dimensions. The boards may also be painted or laminated. Finally, the finished product is packaged for shipment.

10.6.3.3 Emissions And Controls 2-18


### - The primary emission sources at MDF mills are fiber dryers and press vents. Other emission sources may include boilers, chip production operations, and finishing operations such as sanding, trimming, and laminate application. Wood storage piles are sources of fugitive PM and VOC emissions.
Most MDF mills have chips delivered from offsite locations. However, in mills where chips are generated onsite, operations such as log debarking, sawing, chipping, and grinding, in addition to panel trimming, sanding, and sawing generate particulate matter (PM) and PM less than 10 micrometers (PM-10) emissions in the form of sawdust and wood particles. In addition, these processes may be sources of PM less than 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-2.5) emissions. The exhaust from dryers first is ducted to a fiber recovery cyclone before being emitted. Emissions can include wood dust and other solid PM, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and condensible PM. If direct-fired units are used, products of combustion such as carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO 2

### ), and nitrogen oxides (NO x

### ), are also emitted. The condensible PM and a portion of the VOCs leave the dryer stack as vapor but condense at normal atmospheric temperatures to form liquid particles or mist that creates a visible blue haze. Both the VOCs and condensible PM are primarily compounds evaporated from the wood, with a minor constituent being combustion products. Quantities emitted are dependent on wood species, dryer temperature, fuel used, and other factors including. season of the year, time between logging and processing, and chip storage time. Emissions from board hot presses are dependent on the type and amount of resin used to bind the wood fibers together, as well as wood species, wood moisture content, wax and catalyst application rates, and press conditions. When the press opens, vapors that may include resin ingredients, such as formaldehyde and other VOCs, are released. The rate at which formaldehyde is emitted during pressing and board cooling operations is a function of the amount of excess formaldehyde in the resin, board thickness, press temperature, press cycle time, and catalyst application rates. Emissions from finishing operations for MDF are dependent on the type of products being finished. For most MDF products, finishing involves trimming to size, sanding, and in some cases application of laminates. Other products may require sanding or the application of laminate surfaces with spray adhesives. Trimming and sanding operations are sources of PM and PM-10 emissions. In addition, these processes may be sources of PM-2.5 emissions. Limited data are available for MDF sanding and sawing operations. Emission factors for plywood sanding and sawing operations may provide an order of magnitude estimate for similar MDF sanding and sawing operations. Emissions from adhesives used in the application of laminate surfaces are likely to include VOCs.

### 10.6.3-4 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002

In MDF mills where wood chips are generated onsite, PM, PM-10, and PM-2.5 emissions from log debarking, sawing, and grinding operations can be controlled through capture in an exhaust system connected to a sized cyclone and/or fabric filter collection system. Emissions of PM, PM-10, and PM-2.5 from sanding and final trimming operations can be controlled using similar methods. These wood dust capture and collection systems are used not only to control atmospheric emissions, but also to recover the dust as a by-product fuel for a boiler or dryer. Methods of controlling PM emissions from MDF sources include absorption systems (wet scrubbers), fabric filters, wet electrostatic precipitators (WESPs), and oxidation systems (discussed below). The WESP uses electrostatic forces to attract pollutants to either a charged metal plate or a charged metal tube. The collecting surfaces are continually rinsed with water to wash away thepollutants. Wet PM control systems may achieve short-term reductions in emissions of some watersoluble organic compounds (such as formaldehyde). However, the ability of these wet systems to absorb water-soluble compounds diminishes as the recirculating scrubbing liquid becomes saturated with these compounds. A VOC control technology commonly used in the wood products industry for controlling both dryer and press exhaust gases is regenerative thermal oxidation. Thermal oxidizers destroy VOCs and condensible organics by burning them at high temperatures. Thermal oxidizers also reduce CO emissions in direct-fired dryer exhausts by oxidizing the CO in the exhaust to CO 2

### (a product of complete combustion). Regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) are designed to preheat the inlet emission stream with heat recovered from the incineration exhaust gases. Up to 98 percent heat recovery is possible,although 95 percent is typically specified. Gases entering an RTO are heated by passing through preheated beds packed with a ceramic media. A gas burner brings the preheated emissions up to an incineration temperature between 788° and 871°C (1450° and 1600°F) in a combustion chamber with sufficient gas residence time to complete the combustion. Combustion gases then pass through a cooled ceramic bed where heat is extracted. By reversing the flow through the beds, the heat transferred from the combustion exhaust air preheats the gases to be treated, thereby reducing auxiliary fuel requirements. Regenerative catalytic oxidizers (RCOs) are also used to control VOCs from wood products dryers and presses. Regenerative catalytic oxidizers function similar to RTOs, except that the heat recovery beds in RCOs contain catalytic media. The catalyst accelerates the rate of VOC oxidation and allows for VOC destruction at lower temperatures than in an RTO, typically 316° to 538°C (600° to 1000°F), which reduces auxiliary fuel usage. Thermal catalytic oxidizers (TCOs), which are a combination of an RTO and RCO, are also used in the wood products industry. The TCO operates at a temperature of around 480°C (900°F) and contains catalytic media. However, the heat recovery canisters and fans on the TCO are sized large enough so that the TCO can be operated like an RTO (with non-catalytic ceramic media) if catalyst replacement costs become overly expensive. In addition to add-on thermal or catalytic oxidizers, exhaust gases from dryers and presses may be routed to the combustion chamber of an onsite boiler or process heater. The VOC and CO emissions in the process exhaust may be incinerated in the combustion chamber provided that the system is designed to allow for sufficient mixing and residence time. Fugitive PM emissions from road dust and uncovered bark and dust storage piles may be controlled in a number of different ways. Some of these methods include enclosure, wet suppression systems, and chemical stabilization.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-5

Calculating PM-10 emissions from wood products industry emission sources is problematic due to the relationship between PM-10 (or PM) emissions and VOC emissions from these processes. Because the Method 201A train (PM-10) operates with an in-stack cyclone and filter, organic materials that are volatile at stack gas temperatures but that are condensed at back half impinger temperatures (
- 

### 20°C [
- 

### 68°F]) are collected as condensible PM-10. However, these materials will also be measured as VOC via Methods 25 and 25A, which operate with a heated or an in-stack filter. Hence, if PM-10 is calculated as the sum of filterable and condensible material, some pollutants will be measured as both PM-10 and VOC emissions. However, if only filterable material is considered to be PM-10, the PM-10 emission factors will be highly dependent on stack gas temperature. In this AP-42 section, PM-10 is reported as front half catch only (Method 201A results only; not including Method 202 results). However, condensible PM results are also reported, and these results can be combined with the PM-10 results as appropriate for a specific application. Measured VOC emissions may be affected by the sampling method and by the quantity of formaldehyde and other aldehydes and ketones in the exhaust; formaldehyde is not quantified using Method 25A. Other low molecular weight oxygenated compounds have reduced responses to Method 25A. Therefore, when VOC emissions are measured using Method 25A, the emission rates will be biased low if low molecular weight oxygenated compounds are present in significant concentrations in the exhaust stream. A more extensive discussion of these sampling and analysis issues is provided in the Background Report for this section. Guidance from EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) indicates that when it is possible, VOC emission factors should be reported in terms of the actual weight of the emitted compound. However, when an actual molecular weight (MW) of the emitted stream is not feasible (as is the case with the mixed streams emitted from wood products industry sources), the VOC should be reported using an assumed MW of 44, and reported “as propane.” Each VOC-as-propane emission factor is estimated by first converting the THC from a carbon basis to a propane basis. Propane (MW = 44) includes 3 carbon atoms (total MW of 36) and 8 hydrogen atoms (total MW of 8). Every 36 pounds of carbon measured corresponds to 44 pounds of propane. The ratio of the MW of propane to the MW of carbon in propane is 44/36, or 1.22. The conversion is expressed by the following equation:

THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane
After the THC emission factor has been converted from a carbon to a propane basis, the formaldehyde emission factor is added (where available), then the available emission factors for non-VOC compounds, including acetone, methane, and methylene chloride, are subtracted. This procedure is expressed simply by the following equation: VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride) In cases where no emission factor is available (or the emission factor is reported only as below the test method detection limit, or “BDL”) for one or more of the compounds used to estimate the VOC-as-propane value, adjustments to the converted THC value are made only for those compounds for which emission factors are available. That is, a value of zero is inserted in the above equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as BDL. For example, if no methane emission factor is available, the THC-as-carbon emission factor is converted to THC-as-propane, formaldehyde is added, and only acetone and methylene chloride are subtracted.

### 10.6.3-6 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002

Table 10.6.3-1 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.3-2 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.6.3-3 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of organic pollutants. The emission factors for dryer emissions are presented in units of pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of the dryer (lb/ODT). Table 10.6.3-4 presents emission factors for press and board cooler emissions of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.3-5 presents emission factors for press emissions of NO x

### and CO. Table 10.6.3-6 presents emission factors for press and board cooler emissions of organic pollutants. The units for the press and board cooler emission factors are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel produced (lb/MSF 3/4). Table 10.6.3-7 presents emission factors for miscellaneous source emissions of organic pollutants. To the extent possible, separate emission factors for MDF dryers are presented in Tables 10.6.3-1 to -3 for hardwoods and softwoods. Hardwoods generally correspond to deciduous species. For MDF, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used hardwoods include aspen, oak, poplar, maple, cherry, alder, hickory, gum, beech, birch, larch, and basswood. The emission factors for hardwood MDF dryers presented in this section are based largely on the drying of gum, alder, and hickory furnish. Softwoods generally correspond to coniferous species. For MDF, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used softwoods include pines, firs, and spruce. Pines and firs are the most commonly used softwood species for MDF manufacturing. Emission factors for specific mixes of wood species may be calculated by combining emission factors for individual wood species in the ratio specific to a given application, as emission data for thosespecies become available. For example, an uncontrolled THC as carbon emission factor for an indirectheated tube dryer, blowline blending UF resin and processing 60 percent softwood and 40 percent hardwood may be calculated using the THC as carbon emission factors for softwood (4.4 lb/ODT) and hardwood (3.7 lb/ODT), and the ratio of 60 percent to 40 percent. The resultant emission factor, rounded to two significant figures, would be 4.1 lb/ODT.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-7

Table 10.6.3-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF DRYERS--PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source c Emission Control Device d Filterableb

Condensible e EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATINGTube dryer, indirectheated, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-32) Uncontrolled

BH

BH/WESP ND

ND

ND 0.60 f

0.011 h

0.013 f D

D

D 0.53 g

0.14h

0.13 f D

D

D Tube dryer, direct wood-fired, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-23) Uncontrolled 10.4 j D 1.6 j D 0.59 j D

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. See Table 10.6.3-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of MDF and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### UF = urea formaldehyde. d 

### Emission control device: BH = baghouse (fabric filter); WESP = wet electrostatic precipitator.

e 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202). f 

### Reference 8. g 

### References 8 and 9. h 

### Reference 9. j 

### Reference 10.

### 10.6.3-8 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Table 10.6.3-2. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF DRYERS--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Tube dryer, indirect-heated, non-blowline blend, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-33) Uncontrolled ND 0.11 c D ND

Tube dryer, indirect-heated, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-32) Uncontrolled

Thermal oxidizer ND

0.38 d E 0.068 c

1.6 d D

E ND

ND

Tube dryer, direct natural gas-fired, non-blowline blend, hardwood (SCC 3-07-009-27) Uncontrolled ND 0.20 c D ND

Tube dryer, direct wood-fired, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-23) Uncontrolled ND 4.0 e D ND

Rotary predryer,direct natural gasfired, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-40) Uncontrolled ND 0.24 c D ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. See Table 10.6.3-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of MDF and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde

c 

### Reference 11. d 

### Reference 12.

e 

### Reference 10.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-9 Table 10.6.3-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF DRYERS--ORGANICS a

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATINGTube dryer, indirectheated, non-blowline blend, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-33) Uncontrolled THC as carbond 1.7 D VOC as propane e 2.1 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.055 D

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.085 D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.74 D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.3-3 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.3-10 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002Tube dryer, indirectheated, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-32) Uncontrolled THC as carbond 4.4 D VOC as propane e 5.6 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL 75-07-0 Acetaldehyde * 0.020 f D 67-64-1 Acetone 0.025 D

Acrolein * BDL 80-56-8 Alpha-pinene 2.1 D

Benzene * BDL 127-91-3 Beta-pinene 0.43 D

Bromomethane * BDL 79-92-5 Camphene 0.12 D

Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.22 g C

Limonene 0.11 D 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.87 D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL 108-10-1 Methyl isobutyl ketone * 0.0049 D

Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL 108-95-2 Phenol * 0.023 D

Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDLTube dryer, indirectheated, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-32) Thermal

oxidizer 75-07-0

50-00-0 Acetaldehyde *

Formaldehyde * 0.0051 h 0.15 h E

E

Tube dryer, indirectheated, blowline blend, UF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-009-36) Uncontrolled

75-07-0 50-00-0 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e Acetaldehyde * Formaldehyde * 3.7 j 4.8 0.013j 0.26 j D

E D D

### Table 10.6.3-3 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-11 Tube dryer, direct natural gas-fired, non-blowline blend, hardwood (SCC 3-07-009-27) Uncontrolled THC as carbond 1.0 D VOC as propane e 1.2 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.016 D

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.0085 D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.96 D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL Tube dryer, direct wood-fired, blowline blend, UF resin, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-23) Uncontrolled

50-00-0 THC as carbond VOC as propane e Formaldehyde * 4.8 j 6.7 0.86 j D

E D

### Table 10.6.3-3 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.3-12 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Tube dryer, second stage, blowlineblend, indirectheated, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-37) Uncontrolled THC as carbond 0.13 D VOC as propane e 0.18 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL 75-07-0 Acetaldehyde * 0.0035 D 67-64-1 Acetone 0.0034 D

Acrolein * BDL 80-56-8 Alpha-pinene 0.055 D 71-43-2 Benzene * 0.00073 D

Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.021 D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.015 D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL 108-88-3 Toluene * 0.00083 D

### Table 10.6.3-3 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device CASRNc Pollutant Emission factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-13 Rotary predryer,direct natural gasfired, softwood (SCC 3-07-009-40) Uncontrolled THC as carbond 0.79 D VOC as propane e 0.95 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.019 D

Acrolein * BDL 80-56-8 Alpha-pinene 0.28 D

Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.0076 D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.025 D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material out of dryer (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 11 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.6.3-8 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of MDF and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.
c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number. d 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.
e 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”.

### Table 10.6.3-3 (cont.).

10.6.3-14 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 f 

### References 11 and 12. g 

### References 11, 12, and 13. h 

### Reference 12. j 

### Reference 10.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-15

Table 10.6.3-4. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF HOT PRESSES AND BOARD COOLERS-- PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source c Emission Control Device d Filterableb

Condensible e EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-60) Uncontrolled

RTO 0.18 f

0.040h D

E 0.15 g

ND D 0.20 f

0.016 h D

E Board cooler, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-71) Uncontrolled 0.054 g D 0.0038 g E ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.

c 

### UF = urea formaldehyde. d 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer.

e 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202). f 

### References 10 and 14. g 

### Reference 10. h 

### Reference 14.

Table 10.6.3-5. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF HOT PRESSES--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device c NO x EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-60) Uncontrolled

RTO 0.030 d

0.51 e E

E 0.034 d

0.085 e E

E ND

ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer. d 

### Reference 10.

e 

### Reference 14.

### 10.6.3-16 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002

Table 10.6.3-6. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF HOT PRESSES AND BOARD COOLERS-- ORGANICS a

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-60) Uncontrolled

5779-94-2

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8

100-52-7

123-72-8

4170-30-3

50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3

67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

529-20-4

104-87-0 108-95-2 123-38-6

110-62-3 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Tolualdehyde o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene p-Tolualdehyde Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 0.29 g 0.80 BDL BDL 0.0025 h
BDL 0.014 j
0.029 k
0.0012 h
BDL 0.00055 h
BDL BDL BDL 0.0024h
BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0011 h
BDL 0.48 m 0.0029 h
0.0014h
BDL 0.56 n 0.00059 h
0.016 k
BDL BDL 0.00070h
BDL BDL BDL 0.0010h
0.027 k
0.00054h
BDL BDL 0.0024h D

E

E

D D E

E

E

E

C E E

D E D

E

E D E

E Hot press, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-60) RTO

50-00-0 THC as carbone VOC as propane f Formaldehyde * 0.019p 0.032 0.0091 p E

E E

### Table 10.6.3-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-17 Board cooler, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-71) Uncontrolled

5779-94-2

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8

100-52-7

123-72-8

4170-30-3

50-00-0 66-25-1 590-86-3

67-56-1 78-93-3

529-20-4

104-87-0

110-62-3 THC as carbone

VOC as propane f 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 2,5-Dimethyl benzaldehyde 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzaldehyde Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Butylaldehyde Camphene Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Crotonaldehyde Cumene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isovaleraldehyde Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Tolualdehyde o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene p-Tolualdehyde Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Stryene * Toluene * Valeraldehyde 0.077 j
0.13 BDL BDL 0.00019 h
BDL 0.0010h
0.0092 k
0.00022 h
BDL 0.000099 h
BDL BDL BDL 0.0014h
BDL BDL BDL 0.00026 h
BDL 0.042 q 0.00065 h
0.00025 h
BDL 0.025 k
0.00011 h
BDL BDL BDL 0.000065 h
BDL BDL BDL 0.00017 h
BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00048 h D

E

E

E E E

E

E

E

D E E

E E

E

E

E

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 3/4-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 3/4). One lb/MSF 3/4 = 0.26 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 10 unless otherwise noted. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are

### Table 10.6.3-6 (cont.).

10.6.3-18 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 available on EPA’s Technology Transfer Network (TTN) website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer. d 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

e 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. f 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. g 

### References 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 17. h 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems. j 

### References 10 and 11. k 

### Reference 11.

m 

### References 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18.

n 

### References 11 and 17. p 

### Reference 14. q 

### References 10, 11, and 18.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-19 Table 10.6.3-7. EMISSION FACTORS FOR MDF MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES a

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

Log debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

Log chipper, hardwoode (SCC 3-07-014-82) Uncontrolled PM ND THC as carbonf 0.0041 lb/ODT E VOC as propaneg 0.0050 lb/ODT E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL Acetone BDL Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL Formaldehyde * BDL Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.0010 lb/ODT E

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21) Uncontrolled PM, THC, VOC ND

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.3-20 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Blender, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-80) Uncontrolled 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL Acetone BDL Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.010 lb/ODT E

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.48 lb/ODT E

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-21 Former without blowline blending, UF resin (includes blender emissions) (SCC 3-07-009-81) Uncontrolled 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.053 lb/ODT E

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.060 lb/ODT E

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.41 lb/ODT E

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.3-22 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Former with blowline blend, UF resin (SCC 3-07-009-82) Uncontrolled THC as carbonf 0.056 lb/ODT E VOC as propaneg 0.067 lb/ODT E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.0064 lb/ODT D

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.0051 lb/ODT D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.017 lb/ODT D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-23 Sanderh (SCC 3-07-009-83) Uncontrolled THC as carbonf 0.0074 lb/MSF E VOC as propaneg 0.0066 lb/MSF E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene* BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL 67-64-1 Acetone 0.0051 lb/MSF D

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.0027 lb/MSF D

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.0043 lb/MSF D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL 108-95-2 Phenol * 0.0069 lb/MSF D

Propionaldehyde * BDL 100-42-5 Styrene * 0.0014 lb/MSF D

Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.3-24 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Saw and hogger

j (SCC 3-07-009-84) Uncontrolled THC as carbonf 0.11 lb/MSFk E VOC as propaneg 0.13 lb/MSFk E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene BDL 3-Carene BDL Acetaldehyde * BDL Acetone BDL Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL Formaldehyde * BDL Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.38 lb/MSFk E

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

a 

### Emission factor units: Pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT). One lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of panel (lb/MSF). One lb/MSF = 0.0049 kg/m 2 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. ND = No data available. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 11. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### UF = urea formaldehyde.

c 

### Emission control devices (baghouses) are considered no control for organic pollutants. d 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

e 

### Reference 20; based on data for hardboard log chipping operation (See Section 10.6.4). f 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.

### Table 10.6.3-7 (cont.).

8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-25 g 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. h 

### Emission factors for MDF sanders in units of pounds per thousand square feet of panel produced (surface area of one side, even though both sides sanded). j 

### Board trim saw and hogger for processing wood residue for recycle. Hoggers reduce the size of wood residue by slicing or chopping. k 

### References 11 and 19; emission factors for MDF saw in units of pounds per thousand square feet of reclaimed (trimmed) material; approximate MSF reclaimed (trimmed) = MSF from press × 3%.

### 10.6.3-26 EMISSION FACTORS 8/2002 Table 10.6.3-8. WOOD SPECIES COMMONLY USED IN COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING a



### Wood product AP-42 section Hardwood species Softwood species Plywood 10.5 Oak, cherry, poplar, maple, larch Firs, pines
Oriented strandboard 10.6-1 Aspen Pines, firs, spruce
Particleboard 10.6-2 Aspen, oak Pines, firs Medium density fiberboard 10.6-3 Gum, alder, hickory Pines, firs
Hardboard/fiberboard 10.6-4 Aspen, birch, beech, oak, maple Pines Engineered wood products 10.9 Aspen, birch, poplar Pines, firs, hemlock

a 

### Reference 7.

References For Section 10.6.3

1. T. M. Maloney, Modern Particleboard And Dry-Process Fiberboard Manufacturing, Miller Freeman Publications, Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1977.

2. J. G. Haygreen and J. L. Bowyer, Forest Products And Wood Science: An Introduction , Second Edition, Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, 1989.

3. O. Suchsland and G. E. Woodson, Fiberboard Manufacturing Practices In The United States , Agriculture Handbook No. 640, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1986.

4. C. C. Vaught, Evaluation Of Emission Control Devices At Waferboard Plants , EPA-450/3-90-002, Control Technology Center, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1990.

5. Written communication and attachments from T. A. Crabtree, Smith Engineering Company, Broomall, PA, to P. E. Lassiter, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 26, 1996.

6. Technical Memorandum, Minutes of the October 12-13, 1993 BACT Technologies Workshop, Raleigh, NC, sponsored by the American Forest and Paper Association, K. D. Bullock, Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, October 1993.

7. Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Chapter 10, Wood Products Industry, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, July 2003.

8. Report For PM-10 Emission Measurements From The Wood Fiber Dryers, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates April 10-13, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, April 1995.

### 8/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.3-27

9. Report For 1996 PM-10 Emission Measurements For Emission Reduction Credits, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates November 19-26, 1996, prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, April 1997.

10. Particleboard And Medium Density Fiberboard Air Emission Databases, Technical Bulletin No. 693 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., New York, NY, April 1995.

11. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part III - Medium Density Fiberboard, Technical Bulletin No. 770 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

12. Report Of Air Emissions And Inlet Loading Tests For Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line II Dryers Thermal Oxidizer, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Dates March 5-6, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, April 3, 1998.

13. Report For 1995 VOC Emission Compliance Tests At The Wood Fiber Dryers And Press Vents, SierraPine, Ltd., Rocklin, California, Test Dates April 10-13, 1995 And May 17-19, 1995 , prepared for SierraPine, Ltd., by Carnot, May 1995.

14. Report Of Air Emissions And Inlet Loading Tests For Louisiana-Pacific Corporation Urania MDF Plant, Urania, Louisiana, January 18 through 21, 1994, prepared by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, Ridgeland, Mississippi, February 1994.

15. Report Of VOC And Formaldehyde Emissions Test For Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line I Press Vent Baghouse, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Date July 24, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, August 14, 1998.

16. Report Of VOC And Formaldehyde Emissions Test For Willamette Industries–Malverne MDF Facility Line II Press Vent Baghouse, Malverne, Arkansas, Test Date September 10, 1998 , prepared for Willamette Industries, by Environmental Monitoring Laboratories, September 29, 1998.

17. Emissions Test Report, Willamette Industries MDF, Eugene, Oregon, Press Vents, Test Dates November 13-14, 1996, prepared for Willamette Industries, by BWR Associates, Inc., Project No. 96-165X, 1996.

18. Source Emission Test Report, Dryer And Press Exhausts Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, Mt. Jewett, Pennsylvania, Test Dates October 22-24 and December 17, 1997, prepared for Allegheny MDF Limited Partnership, by Galson Measurements, Galson Project No. 975540, December 3, 1997.

19. Written communication from David Word, National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., to Dallas Safriet, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 14, 2001.

20. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part VI - Hardboard/Fiberboard, Technical Bulletin No. 773 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-1

10.6.4 Hardboard and Fiberboard Manufacturing

10.6.4.1 General 1 

### - Fiberboard is a low-density insulation board used for housing, roofing, and office furnishings. Hardboard is similar to fiberboard, except that hardboard is more dense than fiberboard. Hardboard is used for applications in housing (e.g., exterior siding, garage doors, and interior door facings), furniture, store fixtures, automotive interiors, and toys. The most frequently used raw material for production of fiberboard products is wood chips which are first softened in a pressurized steam vessel (digester) and then refined or pulped into wood fibers. The fibers may then be mixed with resin, formed into mats, and pressed and/or dried to form panel products. Other materials may be added during manufacture to improve certain properties such as stiffness, hardness, finishing properties, resistance to abrasion and moisture, as well as to increase strength, durability and utility. Hardboard/fiberboard manufacturing falls under the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 2493, for “Reconstituted Wood Products”, which also includes oriented strandboard, medium density fiberboard, and particleboard. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code for hardboard/fiberboard is 321219, for “Reconstituted Wood Product Manufacturing”.
10.6.4.2 Process Description 1 

### - Hardboard products are manufactured through dry processing, wet processing, or wet/dry processing. Fiberboard products are manufactured by wet processing. Dry processing involves dry mat forming and pressing, while wet processing involves wet forming and wet pressing. Wet/dry processing involves wet forming followed by dry pressing. Resin is used in wet hardboard and dry hardboard processing. Resin is not used in wet/dry hardboard or wet fiberboard processing. The following sections summarize dry process hardboard manufacturing, fiberboard and wet process hardboard manufacturing, and the wet/dry hardboard manufacturing process. Dry Process Hardboard

- The general steps used to manufacture dry process hardboard include mechanical pulping of wood chips to fibers (digesting and refining), blending of fibers with resin and wax, drying, forming the resinated material into a mat, hot pressing, heat treatment of the pressed boards, and humidification. Figure 10.6.4-1 presents a flow diagram for dry process hardboard manufacturing. The primary raw material used in hardboard is hardwood or softwood chips. In addition to wood chips, shavings or sawdust may be used as a raw material. If wood chips are prepared onsite, logs are debarked, cut to manageable lengths, and then sent to chippers. If necessary, the chips are washed to remove dirt and other debris. Clean chips are either processed in pressurized refiners or are softened by steam in a digester and sent to atmospheric refiners. Pressurized refiners consist of a steaming vessel (digester) and of single or double revolving disks to mechanically pulp (refine) the chips into fibers suitable for making the board. The wood chips are discharged under pressure from the digester section of the pressurized refiner into the refiner section. The steam pressure is maintained throughout the entire refining process. Atmospheric refiners also use revolving disks to pulp the chips into fibers, but steam pressure is not maintained in atmospheric refiners. Wax may be added to the wood chips in the digester. Phenol-formaldehyde (PF) resin and other additives (if used) are added to the wood fiber during or immediately following refining. Most dry process hardboard plants inject PF resin into a blowline that discharges the resinated fibers to a tube

### 10.6.4-2 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 ON-SITE CHIP PREPARATION Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC-3-07-008-02) Chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21)

DRY FIBER STORAGE BIN

DRY FORMER* PRIMARY TUBE DRYER (SCC 3-07-014-10, -15) CHIP WASHER* (Optional)

HOT PRESS (SCC 3-07-014-40) (SCC 3-07-007-07) COOLER* (Optional)

BAKING/TEMPERING OVEN (SCC 3-07-014-20) (SCC 3-07-007-08, -09) HUMIDIFICATION KILN (SCC 3-07-014-30) FINISHING Sanding (SCC 3-07-014-80) Other finishing steps DIGESTER/REFINER (SCC 3-07-014-84)

OFF-SITE CHIP PREPARATION

SECONDARY TUBE DRYER (Optional) (SCC 3-07-014-25) Wax

Linseed oil (optional)BLOWLINE Resin, additives

* This process is a potential emission source; however, no emissions data specific to this process are available.



### Figure 10.6.4-1. Dry hardboard manufacturing processes.

dryer. The turbulent conditions in the tube dryer facilitate mixing between the wood fibers and resin droplets. After drying, the resinated fibers are conveyed to a dry fiber storage bin where they await forming. Single-stage or multiple-stage tube drying systems are most commonly used in dry process hardboard manufacture. Most of the multiple-staged tube drying systems incorporate two stages. In multiple-stage tube dryers, there is a primary tube dryer and a secondary tube dryer in series separated by an emission point such as a cyclonic collector. Single-stage and double-stage tube dryers are shown in Figures 10.6.4-2a and 10.6.4-2b. Hardboard primary tube dryers dry wood fibers from about 51 percent moisture (dry basis) to around 20 percent moisture (dry basis) with dryer inlet temperatures ranging up to 246°C (475°F). Secondary tube dryers further dry the wood furnish to around 6 percent moisture (dry basis). Heat is provided to the hardboard tube dryers by either direct-firing with wood residuals, gas, or oil or by indirect-heating. Although less common than tube dryers, rotary dryers may also be used to dry wood material for hardboard manufacture.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-3 Fiber to storage Second-stage exhaust

Cyclonic collector Fan

Rotary air lock Secondary dryer Burner or heat exchanger 

### Figure 10.6.4-2a. Single-stage tube dryer. Dryer exhaust

Cyclonic collector

Fiber to storage Pressurized refiner
Tube dryer Burner or heat exchanger Blowpipe Resin Fan



### Figure 10.6.4-2b. Double-stage tube dryer. Rotary air lock

First-stage exhaust

Cyclonic collector Pressurized refiner
Primary dryer Burner or heat exchanger Blowpipe Resin Fan

Rotary air lock



### Resinated fibers exiting the drying system enter a forming machine where they are deposited on a continuously moving conveyor. The mat is prepressed and trimmed before being loaded into the hot press. The press applies heat and pressure to activate the PF resin and bond the fibers into a solid board. Dry process hardboard plants use a multi-opening batch press. The typical press cycle is about 4 minutes. The hardboard presses are heated by steam to a temperature of around 210°C (410°F). Following pressing, boards are routed through a board cooler at some plants. However, most plants do not operate board coolers.

### 10.6.4-4 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 ON-SITE CHIP PREPARATION Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC-3-07-008-02) Chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21)

FIBERBOARD BOARD DRYER (SCC 3-07-015-10, -12) WET FORMER (SCC 3-07-015-50) STEAM DIGESTER* (Optional)

MIXING CHEST*

FINISHING* WASHER (Optional) (SCC 3-07-015-40) OFF-SITE CHIP PREPARATION REFINER (SCC 3-07-015-30)

Water, additives

* This process is a potential emission source; however, no emissions data specific to this process are available.



### Figure 10.6.4-3. Process flow diagram for wet process fiberboard manufacturing. Hardboard plants typically heat treat the pressed hardboard in a bake or tempering oven. The purpose of heat treatment is to lower the moisture content of pressed hardboard to bone dry levels to improve dimensional stability and enhance board mechanical properties. Linseed oil is sometimesapplied to the hardboard prior to heat treatment. Hardboard ovens are either indirect-heated or directfired and operate at temperatures up to 170°C (340°F). Humidification of boards is done immediately following heat treatment to bring the board moisture content back into equilibrium with ambient air conditions. Humidification kilns are often integrated with hardboard ovens (i.e., the boards coming out of the hardboard oven go straight into the humidification kiln). Following humidification, the hardboard is finished and packaged for shipment. Dry process hardboard densities range from 625 to 1,100 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3 

### ) (39 to 69 pounds per cubic foot [lb/ft3 

### ]).

Wet Process Fiberboard

- The general steps in production of fiberboard manufacture include pulping of hardwood or softwood wood chips, wet forming, drying, and finishing. Fiberboard may be manufactured with bagasse or other agricultural fiber instead of wood fiber. The bagasse fiberboard manufacturing process is generally the same as the wood fiberboard manufacturing process. Figure 10.6.4-3 presents a flow diagram for wet process fiberboard manufacturing. The discussion below focuses on the wood fiberboard manufacturing process.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-5

Wood chips for fiberboard may either be steamed in digesters or soaked in hot process water before being ground into fiber in atmospheric refiners. From the refiners, fibers are sometimes washed to remove wood sugars that might reduce the quality of the finished product. The refined and/or washed fibers are sent to stock chests to await further processing. The fibers from the stock chests are mixed with water and additives such as alum, starch, asphalt, and wax. Resins are not used in fiberboard production. The wood fibers are bonded together by additives and substances naturally contained in the wood. Alum aids in the precipitation of wax, asphalt, and rosin onto wood fibers. Bonds between these substances and the wood fibers assist in holding the fiber mat together. Once mixed with additives, the fiber slurry is sent to the forming machine. In the wet forming process, the water-fiber mixture is metered onto a wire screen. Water is drained away by gravity and with the aid of suction applied to the underside of the wire. The fiber mat along with the supporting wire is moved to a room-temperature pre-press where excess water is squeezed out. Once pre-pressed, the fiber mat may be cut to length and trimmed on the edges with high-pressure water jets.The fiber mats, which are around 60 percent moisture (dry basis), are passed through a conveyortype board dryer where their moisture content is reduced to about 4 percent. Fiberboard board dryers operate with inlet temperatures of around 230°C (450°F) and outlet temperatures of around 160°C (320°F). Finished fiberboard density ranges from 190 to 380 kg/m3 

### (12 to 24 lb/ft3 

### ). Once dried, the fiberboard is finished, trimmed, and may be painted or roll-coated with asphalt. Finally, the fiberboard is packaged for shipment.

Wet Process Hardboard - Production of wet process hardboard includes pulping of wood chips, wet forming, pressing, heat treatment, humidification, and finishing. Phenol-formaldehyde resin, wax, and alum are used in wet process hardboard manufacturing. Figure 10.6.4-4 presents a flow diagram for wet process hardboard manufacturing. Hardwood or softwood chips may either be purchased from outside or generated onsite from logs. The chips are washed to remove dirt and debris. The chips are then steam cooked under pressure in digesters to soften the chips and liberate the wood sugars. After cooking, the softened chips are refined in a single or double disc atmospheric refiner (referred to as the primary refiner), which grinds the chips into fiber form. The fibers from the primary refiner are subsequently fed into stock washers, which use water and pressure to wash out the wood sugars. After washing, the wood material is further refined in a secondary refiner. Some plants may omit secondary refining.
Once refined, the wood fiber is mixed with water, alum, PF resin, and wax in stock or mix chests. The alum is added to the fiber slurry to control pH and help precipitate the resin and wax onto the fibers. The dilute slurry of fiber, additives, and water is routed to a wet forming machine. At some plants, the forming machine may have separate header boxes where separate slurries may be used to make layers in the hardboard mat. The top layer of the fiber mat is called an “overlay” and the bottom layer is called a “substrate”. The wood fiber used to make the overlay undergoes additional refining prior to chemical addition and dilution so that the top layer of the hardboard will have a smoother finish. The fiber slurry from the substrate head box and the overlay head box are fed onto a moving wire screen (forming machine) where they immediately begin to form a continuous fiber mat. Water drains through the wire screen first by gravity and then by suction. The fiber mat is compressed with press rolls and further dewatered. The edges of the fiber mat may be trimmed with water jets prior to hot pressing.

### 10.6.4-6 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 ON-SITE CHIP PREPARATION Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC-3-07-008-02) Chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21)

WET FORMER (SCC 3-07-014-86) SECONDARY REFINER* (Optional) CHIP WASHER* (Optional)

WASHER*

HOT PRESS (SCC 3-07-014-40) (SCC 3-07-007-07)

BAKING/TEMPERING OVEN (SCC 3-07-014-20) (SCC 3-07-007-08, -09) HUMIDIFICATION KILN (SCC 3-07-014-30) FINISHING Sanding (SCC 3-07-014-80) Other finishing steps DIGESTER*

OFF-SITE CHIP PREPARATION

MIXING CHEST* REFINER*

Water, alum, resin, wax

* This process is a potential emission source; however, no emissions data specific to this process are available.



### Figure 10.6.4-4. Process flow diagram for wet process hardboard manufacturing.

The carrying wire takes the fiber mats to a preloader to await pressing. The fiber mats are loaded into the press. Water released from the mats during pressing cascades down the sides of the press and is recycled. The fiber mats enter the press at a moisture content of about 120 percent (dry basis). Wet process hardboard presses are typically multi-opening, steam-heated, batch presses. The hardboard mats are pressed for roughly 8 minutes at around 200°C (390°F). As with dry process hardboard, the wet process hardboard mats may be transported to baking or tempering ovens where the mats are dried to “bone-dry” levels following pressing. Further drying of the mats increases bonding and makes the hardboard more resistant to water. Once dried, the boards may be cooled and are then rehumidified to prevent buckling and to improve the overall dimensional stability of the boards. Final wet process hardboard densities range from 800 to 1,120 kg/m3 

### (50 to 70 lb/ft3 

### ). Wet/Dry Process Hardboard - Production of wet/dry process hardboard includes pulping of softwood or hardwood chips, wet forming, drying, pressing, heat treatment, humidification, and finishing. Wet/dry process hardboard production is similar to fiberboard production until the pressing step of the process is reached. The pressing, heat treatment, and humidification steps in wet/dry hardboard production are similar to the

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-7 ON-SITE CHIP PREPARATION Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Cutting (SCC-3-07-008-02) Chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21)

MIXING CHEST* CHIP WASHER* (Optional)

HARDBOARD BOARD DRYING*

PREHEATER* HOT PRESS (SCC 3-07-014-42) (SCC 3-07-007-07) BAKING/TEMPERING OVEN (SCC 3-07-014-20) (SCC 3-07-007-08, -09)

FINISHING Sanding (SCC 3-07-014-80) Other finishing steps DIGESTER/REFINER (SCC 3-07-014-84)

OFF-SITE CHIP PREPARATION

WET FORMER* Water, additives

HUMIDIFICATION KILN (SCC 3-07-014-30)

* This process is a potential emission source; however, no emissions data specific to this process are available.


### Figure 10.6.4-5. Process flow diagram for wet/dry process hardboard manufacturing. same steps in wet hardboard production. Raw materials used in the production of wet/dry hardboard include wood chips and additives such as linseed oil, asphalt, and wax. No resin is used in the production of wet/dry hardboard. Figure 10.6.4-5 presents a flow diagram for wet/dry process hardboard manufacturing.

Wood chips may either be purchased from offsite or generated onsite from logs. The chips are washed to remove dirt and debris. The chips are then steam cooked under pressure in digesters. After cooking, the chips are refined in primary and/or secondary refiners. Some plants may omit secondary refining. Some plants may use pressurized refiners in lieu of stand-alone digesters and atmospheric refiners.

Once refined the wood fiber is mixed with water and wax in stock or mix chests. The dilute slurry of fiber, additives, and water is routed to a wet forming machine. As with the manufacture of wet process hardboard, some plants may use separate substrate (bottom layer) and overlay (top layer) forming header boxes to make a layered hardboard mat. The fiber slurry from the substrate head box and the overlay head box are fed onto a moving wire screen (forming machine) where they immediately begin to form a continuous fiber mat. Water drains through the wire screen first by gravity and then by suction.

### 10.6.4-8 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002

The fiber mat is compressed with press rolls which assist in further dewatering the mat. The edges of the fiber mat may be trimmed with water jets prior to drying.The fiber mats, which are around 60 percent moisture (dry basis), are passed through a conveyortype board dryer where their moisture content is reduced to around 4 percent. The board dryers operate with inlet temperatures of around 230°C (450°F) and outlet temperatures of around 160°C (320°F). From the dryer, the fiber mats pass through a press predryer or preheat oven. The purpose of the predryer is to reduce the mat moisture content in order to minimize the hot press cycle. Steam-heated batch presses are used in wet/dry hardboard manufacturing. Press temperatures average around 140°C (470°F) for press cycle times of nearly 4 minutes. As for dry and wet process hardboard, the wet/dry process hardboard mats are heat treated in hardboard ovens and humidification kilns following pressing. Wet/dry process hardboard densities range from 720 to 1,150 kg/m3 

### (45 to 72 lb/ft3 

### ).

10.6.4.3 Emissions and Controls - The primary emission sources at hardboard/fiberboard mills are tube dryers, rotary dryers, hardboard ovens, board conveyor dryers, press preheat ovens, and hot presses. Other emission sources may include boilers, chip and fiber production operations, mat formers, board coolers, humidification kilns, and finishing operations such as sanding and trimming. Other potential emissions sources ancillary to the manufacturing process may include wood chip storage piles and bins (including wood fuel), chip handling systems, and resin storage and handling systems. Emissions from tube dryers or rotary dryers that are exhausted from the product recovery cyclone include wood dust and other solid PM, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), condensible PM, and products of combustion such as carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO 2

### ), and nitrogen oxides (NO x

### ), if direct-fired units are used. The condensible PM and a portion of the VOCs leave the dryer stack as vapor but condense at normal atmospheric temperatures to form liquid particles or mist that creates a visible blue haze. Both the VOCs and condensible PM are primarily compounds evaporated from the wood or from the resin if resinated fibers are dried, with a minor constituent being combustion products. Quantities emitted are dependent on wood species, dryer temperature, fuel used, and other factors including season of the year, time between logging and processing, and chip storage time. Unlike tube dryers and rotary dryers, hardboard ovens, board conveyor dryers, and press preheaters process fiber mats or pressed boards and do not rely on pneumatic conveyance of fibers through the dryers. Thus, there is less potential for emissions of PM from hardboard ovens, conveyor dryers, and press preheaters. However, these dryers are sources of VOCs, CO, CO 2 

### , NO x 

### , and other organic compounds. The emissions from hardboard ovens, conveyor dryers, and press preheaters depend on whether the dryer is indirect-heated or direct-fired, the fuel used if the dryer if direct-fired, wood species, and type of resin, binder, or drying oil employed. Emissions from board hot presses are dependent on the type and amount of resin (if any) used to bind the wood fibers together, as well as wood species, wood moisture content, additives used, and press conditions. When the press opens, vapors that may include resin ingredients (if resins are used) such as formaldehyde, phenol, and other organic compounds are released. The rate at which organic compounds are emitted during pressing operations is a function of the resin formulation, board thickness, press temperature, and press cycle time. A VOC control technology commonly used in the wood products industry for controlling both dryer and press exhaust gases is regenerative thermal oxidation. Thermal oxidizers destroy VOCs and condensible organics by burning them at high temperatures. Thermal oxidizers also reduce CO emissions in direct-fired dryer exhausts by oxidizing the CO in the exhaust to CO 2

### (a product of complete

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-9

combustion). Regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) are designed to preheat the inlet emission stream with heat recovered from the incineration exhaust gases. Up to 98 percent heat recovery is possible,although 95 percent is typically specified. Gases entering an RTO are heated by passing through preheated beds packed with a ceramic media. A gas burner brings the preheated emissions up to an incineration temperature between 788° and 871°C (1450° and 1600°F) in a combustion chamber with sufficient gas residence time to complete the combustion. Combustion gases then pass through a cooled ceramic bed where heat is extracted. By reversing the flow through the beds, the heat transferred from the combustion exhaust air preheats the gases to be treated, thereby reducing auxiliary fuel requirements. Regenerative catalytic oxidizers (RCOs) are also used to control VOCs from hardboard dryers and presses. Regenerative catalytic oxidizers function similar to RTOs, except that the heat recovery beds in RCOs contain catalytic media. The catalyst accelerates the rate of VOC oxidation and allows for VOC destruction at lower temperatures than in an RTO, typically 316° to 538°C (600° to 1,000°F), which reduces auxiliary fuel usage. Biofiltration systems are also used effectively for control of a variety of pollutants including organic compounds, NO x 

### , CO, and PM from press exhaust streams. Biofiltration uses microrganisms immobilized in a biofilm layer on a porous packing such as bark, wood chips, or synthetic media. Typical biofilter design consists of a three- to six-foot deep bed of media suspended over an air distribution plenum. Exhaust gases entering the plenum are evenly distributed through the moist biofilter media. As the contaminated vapor stream passes through the biofilter media, pollutants are transferred from the vapor to the biofilm and, through microbiological degradation, are converted to CO 2 

### , water, and salts. The microorganisms cannot easily attack pollutants in the gas phase; therefore, less water soluble compounds (such as pinenes) are generally more difficult to control using a biofilter than are the more water-soluble compounds (such as formaldehyde). In addition to the control devices mentioned above, absorption systems such as scrubbers are often used to control PM from hardboard/fiberboard dryers and presses. Operations such as log chipping, in addition to chip piles and bins, and chip handling systems generate particulate matter (PM) and PM less than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM-10) emissions in the form of sawdust and wood particles. In hardboard/fiberboard mills where log chipping is performed onsite, PM and PM-10 emissions from log debarking, sawing, and grinding operations can be controlled through capture in an exhaust system connected to a fabric filter collection system. Emissions of PM and PM-10 from final sanding and sawing operations can be controlled using similar methods. These wood dust capture and collection systems are used not only to control atmospheric emissions, but also to recover the dust as a by-product fuel for a boiler or direct-fired dryer burners. Fiber production operations such as digesters, pressurized refiners, atmospheric refiners, and fiber washers may be sources of organic emissions. Emissions from these sources are typically uncontrolled, except for pressurized refiners that vent directly into tube dryers at dry process hardboard plants. When exhausted through a tube dryer, the pressurized refiner exhaust exits through the tube dryer control device. Hardboard/fiberboard mat forming systems may also emit small amounts of organic emissions, and PM emissions in the case of dry forming systems. Emission factors for wet forming vacuum systems are provided in this section. No emission factors are available for dry hardboard formers; however, the magnitude of the emissions from dry formers may be comparable to the emissions from dry formers used to form other reconstituted wood products (e.g., medium density fiberboard).

### 10.6.4-10 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002

Hardboard board coolers and humidification kilns may also be sources of organic emissions. Exhaust from board coolers is typically uncontrolled or is routed to the press control device. No emission factors are available specifically for hardboard board coolers, but emission factors are available for particleboard and MDF board coolers. Humidification kilns are usually uncontrolled. Emission factors for humidification kilns are provided in this section. Emissions from hardboard/fiberboard finishing operations are dependent on the type of products being finished. For most hardboard/fiberboard products, finishing involves cutting to size and, in some cases, application of edge seals, anti-skid coatings, primers, company logos, or trademark or grade stamps. Some products may require sanding. Sawing and sanding operations are sources of PM and PM-10 emissions. No data specific to hardboard/fiberboard sawing are available. However, emission factors for MDF sawing operations may provide an order of magnitude estimate for similar hardboard/fiberboard sawing operations. Available emission factors for sanding of hardboard are presented in this section. Fugitive PM emissions from road dust and uncovered bark and dust storage piles may be controlled in a number of different ways. Some of these methods include enclosure, wet suppression systems, and chemical stabilization. Calculating PM-10 emissions from wood products industry emission sources is problematic due to the relationship between PM-10 (or PM) emissions and VOC emissions from these processes. Because the Method 201A train (PM-10) operates with an in-stack cyclone and filter, organic materials that are volatile at stack gas temperatures but that are condensed at back half impinger temperatures (
- 

### 20°C [
- 

### 68°F]) are collected as condensible PM-10. However, these materials will also be measured as VOC via Methods 25 and 25A, which operate with a heated or an in-stack filter. Hence, if PM-10 is calculated as the sum of filterable and condensible material, some pollutants will be measured as both PM-10 and VOC emissions. However, if only filterable material is considered to be PM-10, the PM-10 emission factors will be highly dependent on stack gas temperature. In this AP-42 section, PM-10 is reported as front half catch only (Method 201A results only; not including Method 202 results). However, condensible PM results are also reported, and these results can be combined with the PM-10 results as appropriate for a specific application. Measured VOC emissions may be affected by the sampling method and by the quantity of formaldehyde and other aldehydes and ketones in the exhaust; formaldehyde is not quantified using Method 25A. Other low molecular weight oxygenated compounds have reduced responses to Method 25A. Therefore, when VOC emissions are measured using Method 25A, the emission rates will be biased low if low molecular weight oxygenated compounds are present in significant concentrations in the exhaust stream. A more extensive discussion of these sampling and analysis issues is provided in the Background Report for this section. Guidance from EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) indicates that when it is possible, VOC emission factors should be reported in terms of the actual weight of the emitted compound. However, when an actual molecular weight (MW) of the emitted stream is not feasible (as is the case with the mixed streams emitted from wood products industry sources), the VOC should be reported using an assumed MW of 44, and reported “as propane.” Each VOC-as-propane emission factor is estimated by first converting the THC from a carbon basis to a propane basis. Propane (MW = 44) includes 3 carbon atoms (total MW of 36) and 8 hydrogen atoms (total MW of 8). Every 36 pounds of carbon measured corresponds to 44 pounds of propane. The ratio of the MW of propane to the MW of carbon in propane is 44/36, or 1.22. The conversion is expressed by the following equation:

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-11 THC as pounds carbon × 44 pounds propane 36 pounds carbon = THC as pounds propane

or THC as pounds carbon × 1.22 = THC as pounds propane
After the THC emission factor has been converted from a carbon to a propane basis, the formaldehyde emission factor is added (where available), then the available emission factors for non-VOC compounds, including acetone, methane, and methylene chloride, are subtracted. This procedure is expressed simply by the following equation: VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC as carbon) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride) In cases where no emission factor is available (or the emission factor is reported only as below the testmethod detection limit, or “BDL”) for one or more of the compounds used to estimate the VOC-aspropane value, adjustments to the converted THC value are made only for those compounds for which emission factors are available. That is, a value of zero is inserted in the above equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as BDL. For example, if no methane emission factor is available, the THC-as-carbon emission factor is converted to THC-as-propane, formaldehyde is added, and only acetone and methylene chloride are subtracted. Table 10.6.4-1 presents emission factors for dryer emissions of PM, including filterable PM and condensible PM. Table 10.6.4-2 presents emission factors for dryer and oven emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.6.4-3 presents emission factors for dryer and oven emissions of VOC and speciated organic compounds. Table 10.6.4-4 presents emission factors for hardboard press emissions of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.4-5 presents emission factors for hardboard press emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.6.4-6 presents emission factors for hardboard press emissions of VOC and speciated organic compounds. Table 10.6.4-7 presents emission factors for miscellaneous sources of PM, including filterable PM, filterable PM-10, and condensible PM. Table 10.6.4-8 presents emission factors for miscellaneous source emissions of NO x 

### , CO, and CO 2 

### . Table 10.6.4-9 presents emission factors for miscellaneous source emissions of VOC and speciated organic compounds. To the extent possible, separate emission factors for hardboard and fiberboard dryers are presented in Tables 10.6.4-1 to -3 for hardwoods and softwoods. Hardwoods generally correspond to deciduous species. For hardboard, fiberboard, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used hardwoods include aspen, oak, poplar, maple, cherry, alder, hickory, gum, beech, birch, and basswood. The emission factors for hardwood hardboard and fiberboard dryers presented in this section are based largely on the drying of aspen, birch, beech, oak, and maple furnish. Softwoods generally correspond to coniferous species. For hardboard, fiberboard, plywood, and other composite wood products, commonly used softwoods include pines, firs, and spruce. Pines are the most commonly used softwood species for hardboard and fiberboard manufacturing.

### 10.6.4-12 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002

Table 10.6.4-1. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD DRYERS AND OVENS—PARTICULATE MATTERa



### Source Emission

Control Device Filterableb



### Condensible c 

### EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Tube dryer, direct natural gas-fired, blowline blend, PF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-15) None 1.9 E ND 0.57 E

a 

### Emission factor units: pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT); one lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried). Factors represent uncontrolled emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 2. See Table 10.6.4-10 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of hardboard, fiberboard, and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.
c 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-13

Table 10.6.4-2. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD DRYERS, OVENS—

NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Source Emission Control Deviceb Emission

Factor Units c NO x EMISSION

FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION

FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hardboard tube dryer,direct natural gasfired, blowline blend, PF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-15) Uncontrolled lb/ODT 0.44 d E 0.067 d E 384 d E

Hardboard tube dryer, direct wood-fired, blowline blend, PF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-10) Uncontrolled lb/ODT ND 0.085 E ND

Hardboard tube dryer,second stage, indirectheated, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-25) Uncontrolled lb/ODT ND 0.076 E ND

Hardboard boarddryer, direct naturalgas fired, linseed oil binder, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-014-16) Uncontrolled lb/MSF 1/2 ND 0.49 e E ND

Hardboard tempering oven, direct natural gas-fired, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-20) Uncontrolled

RTO lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 ND

ND 0.11

0.0021 E

E ND

ND

Fiberboard board dryer, indirect heated, starch binder, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-015-10) Uncontrolled lb/MSF 1/2 ND 0.092 E ND

Fiberboard board dryer, indirect heated, 6-12% asphalt binder, heated zones, softwood (SCC 3-07-015-12) Uncontrolled lb/MSF 1/2 ND 0.029 e E ND

a 

### Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 3 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.6.4-10 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of hardboard, fiberboard, and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Emission control device: RTO = regenerative thermal oxidizer.

c 

### Emission factor units: pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT); one lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried); pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/2-inch thick panel

### 10.6.4-14 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002

(lb/MSF 1/2); one lb/MSF 1/2 = 0.38 kg/m3 

### ; pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8); one lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3



### . d 

### Reference 2.

e 

### Emission factors apply only to the heated zones of the dryer; the cooling sections also have emissions but data were not available for cooling section emissions.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-15

Table 10.6.4-3. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD DRYERS, OVENS—ORGANICS a

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING
Hardboard tube dryer, direct natural gas-fired, blowline blend, PF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-15) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 71-43-2

74-87-3

100-41-4 50-00-0 66-25-1

67-56-1 78-93-3

108-95-2

123-38-6

100-42-5 108-88-3 75-69-4 1330-20-7 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Benzene * Benzo(a)pyrene Bromomethane * Chloromethane * Ethanol Ethylbenzene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isobutanol m,p-Cresol * Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl propyl ketone Methylene chloride * Naphthalene * o-Cresol * Phenol * Propanol Propionaldehyde * Pyridine Styrene * Toluene * Trichlorofluoromethane Xylenes * 3.2 f 5.0 0.0096 f 0.0095 f 0.0041 f,g 0.000088 f BDL BDL 0.000019 f BDL 0.00013 f 1.1 f,g 0.052 f,g BDL BDL 1.4 f 0.00083 f BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.056 f BDL 0.041 f BDL 0.0027 f 0.00023 f 0.000020 f 0.000056 f lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT E

E E E E E

E

E E E

E E

E

E

E E E E

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-16 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard tubedryer, direct woodfired, blowline blend, PF resin, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-10) None

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.74 1.1 BDL BDL BDL 0.11 0.018 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.26 BDL 1.0 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.083 BDL BDL BDL lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT D

E

D D

D

D

D

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-17 Hardboard tube dryer, secondstage, indirectheated, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-25) None

67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p,-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.23 0.27 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.031 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.017 BDL 0.042 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.039 BDL BDL BDL lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT D

E

D

D

D

D

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-18 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard board dryer, direct natural-gas fired, linseed oil binder (heated zones), softwood (SCC 3-07-014-16) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8

71-43-2

50-00-0

67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 108-88-3 1,2-Dichloroethane *

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * BDL BDL BDL 0.053 h 0.021 h 0.037 h BDL 0.0021 h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.059 h BDL 0.047 h 0.0013 h 0.0034h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0019 h 0.025 h 0.00016h 0.0010h lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 E

E E

E

E

E E E

E E E E

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-19 Hardboard tempering oven,direct natural gasfired (SCC 3-07-014-20) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8

50-00-0

67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2 123-38-6 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.50 0.61 BDL BDL BDL 0.076 0.0034 0.024 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0043 BDL 0.015 0.00075 0.0046 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0019 0.10 BDL BDL lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8 E

E

E E E

E

E E E

E E

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-20 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard tempering oven,direct natural gasfired (SCC 3-07-014-20) RTO

67-64-1

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00091 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00087 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0020 BDL BDL BDL lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 E

E

E

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-21 Fiberboard board dryer, indirect heated, starch binder (heated zones), softwood (SCC 3-07-015-10) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 123-38-6 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.063 h 0.082h BDL BDL BDL 0.00097 h 0.0038 h 0.00057 h 0.013 h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0093 h BDL 0.017 h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0012h 0.00069 h BDL BDL lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 E

E

E E E E

E

E

E E

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

Source Emission

Control Device CASRNb Pollutant Emission Factor Emission

Factor Units c EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-22 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Fiberboard board dryer, indirect heated, 6-12% asphalt binder (heated zones), softwood (SCC 3-07-015-12) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-95-2 THC as carbond

VOC as propane e 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.11 h 0.14h BDL BDL BDL 0.0029 h 0.0048 h 0.0012h 0.014h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.013 h BDL 0.026h BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0014h BDL BDL BDL lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 D

E

E E E E

E

E

E

a 

### Factors represent uncontrolled emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 3 unless otherwise noted. See Table 10.6.4-10 for the hardwood and softwood species commonly used in the production of hardboard, fiberboard, and other composite wood products. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.
c 

### Emission factor units: pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT); one lb/ODT = 0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried); pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/2-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/2); one lb/MSF 1/2 = 0.38 kg/m3 

### ; pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8); one lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3



### . d 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A.

### Table 10.6.4-3 (cont.).

9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-23 e 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. f 

### Reference 2. g 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical problems. h 

### Emission factors apply only to the heated zones of the dryer; the cooling sections also have emissions but data were not available for cooling section emissions.

### 10.6.4-24 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002

Table 10.6.4-4. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD PRESSES--PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source c Emission Control Device Filterableb

Condensible d EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING
Hardboard hot press, PF resin (SCC 3-07-014-40) Uncontrolled 0.14 E 0.086 E 0.12 E

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8). One lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. Reference 4. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.
c 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde. d 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

Table 10.6.4-5. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD PRESSES--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Sourceb Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION

FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION

FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hardboard hot press, PF resin (SCC 3-07-014-40) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8). One lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions. SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-25 Table 10.6.4-6. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD PRESSES--ORGANICS a

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING Hardboard hot press, PF resin (SCC 3-07-014-40) Uncontrolled THC as carbone 0.42 D VOC as propane f 0.52 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 2,4-Dimethylbenzaldehyde BDL 3-Carene BDL 75-07-0 Acetaldehyde * 0.016 D 67-64-1 Acetone 0.0055 g D

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzaldehyde BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Butyraldehyde BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Crotonaldehyde BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.014 D

Hexaldehyde BDL Isovaleraldehyde BDL Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.24 g D

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL 1330-20-7 m,p-Xylene * 0.0053 D

o-,m-,p-Tolualdehyde BDL 95-47-6 o-Xylene * 0.0036 D

p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL 108-95-2 Phenol * 0.010 D

Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL 108-88-3 Toluene * 0.0011 D

Valeraldehyde BDL

### Table 10.6.4-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-26 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard hot press, PF resin (SCC 3-07-014-40) Scrubber THC as carbone 0.043 E VOC as propane f 0.052 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL 75-07-0 Acetaldehyde * 0.0033 E 67-64-1 Acetone 0.0039 E

Acrolein * BDL Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-00 Formaldehyde * 0.0034 E

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.15 E

Methyl ethyl ketone * BDL Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL Phenol * BDL Propionaldehyde * BDL Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

### Table 10.6.4-6 (cont.).

Sourceb Emission Control Device c CASRNd Pollutant Emission Factor EMISSION

FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-27 Hardboard hot press, linseed oil binder (SCC 3-07-014-42) Uncontrolled THC as carbone 0.58 E VOC as propane f 0.71 E 1,2-Dichloroethane * BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * BDL 3-Carene BDL 75-070 Acetaldehyde * 0.036 E 67-64-1 Acetone 0.015 E 107-02-8 Acrolein * 0.0057 E

Alpha-pinene BDL Benzene * BDL Beta-pinene BDL Bromomethane * BDL Camphene BDL Chloroethane * BDL Chloroethene * BDL Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene BDL Cumene * BDL 50-00-0 Formaldehyde * 0.018 E

Limonene BDL 67-56-1 Methanol * 0.093 E 78-93-3 Methyl ethyl ketone * 0.0045 E

Methyl isobutyl ketone * BDL Methylene chloride * BDL m,p-Xylene * BDL o-Xylene * BDL p-Cymene BDL p-Mentha-1,5-diene BDL 108-95-2 Phenol * 0.0039 E 123-38-6 Propionaldehyde * 0.031 E

Styrene * BDL Toluene * BDL

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8). One lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3 

### . Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * = hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 3 unless otherwise noted. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### PF = phenol formaldehyde.
c 

### Emission control device: scrubber consists of a water quench, followed by a water tray tower, followed by a high-energy venturi scrubber with a 49-inch pressure drop, followed by a chevron demister.

### Table 10.6.4-6 (cont.).

10.6.4-28 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 d 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.
e 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. f 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - (acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. g 

### References 3 and 4.

### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-29

Table 10.6.4-7. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES–PARTICULATE MATTERa

Source Emission Control Device Filterableb

Condensible c EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM EMISSION FACTOR RATING PM-10 EMISSION

FACTOR RATING
Hardboard sander (SCC 3-07-014-80) Fabric filter 0.030 E ND ND

Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

Log cutting (SCC 3-07-008-02) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

Log chipping (SCC 3-07-014-82) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21) Uncontrolled ND ND ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8). One lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3 

### . SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 4. b 

### Filterable PM is that PM collected on or prior to the filter of an EPA Method 5 (or equivalent) sampling train. Filterable PM-10 is that PM collected on the filter, or in the sample line between the cyclone and filter of an EPA Method 201 or 201A sampling train.
c 

### Condensible PM is that PM collected in the impinger portion of a PM sampling train (EPA Method 202).

Table 10.6.4-8. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES--NO x 

### , CO, AND CO 2 a

Source Emission Control Device NO x EMISSION

FACTOR RATING CO EMISSION FACTOR RATING CO 2 EMISSION FACTOR RATING
Hardboard humidification kiln, indirect heated (SCC 3-07-014-30) Uncontrolled 0.0028 E 0.16 E ND

a 

### Emission factor units are pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8). One lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3 

### . SCC = Source Classification Code. ND = no data available. Reference 2.

### 10.6.4-30 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Table 10.6.4-9. EMISSION FACTORS FOR HARDBOARD AND FIBERBOARD MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES--ORGANICS a

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING Log storage (SCC 3-07-008-95) Uncontrolled THC, VOC ND

Debarking (SCC 3-07-008-01) Uncontrolled THC, VOC ND

Log cutting (SCC 3-07-008-02) Uncontrolled THC, VOC ND

Chip storage (SCC 3-07-008-21) Uncontrolled THC, VOC ND

Hardboard log chipper, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-82) None

67-56-1 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.0041 0.0050 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0010 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT E E

E

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-31

Hardboard pressurized digester/ refiner, hardwood (SCC 3-07-014-84) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8

127-91-3

50-00-0 138-86-3 67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2 123-38-6 100-42-5 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.40 0.49 BDL BDL BDL 0.030 0.0042 0.0024 0.0039 BDL 0.0063 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0045 0.0026 0.35 0.00025 0.00024 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0012 0.00091 0.00016 BDL lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT E E

E E E E

E

E E E E E

E E E

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-32 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard former vacuum system, wet, PF resin (SCC 3-07-014-86) None

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1 78-93-3 108-10-1

108-95-2 123-38-6 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * BDL BDL BDL 0.0058 0.0032 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00026 BDL 0.054 0.00030 0.00023 BDL BDL BDL 0.00071 0.00021 BDL lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT D D

D

D D D

D D

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-33

Fiberboard atmospheric refiner and dump chest, softwood (SCC 3-07-015-30) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8 80-56-8

127-91-3

98-82-8 50-00-0 138-86-3 67-56-1 78-93-3

123-38-6

108-88-3 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.79 0.96 BDL BDL BDL 0.0027 0.0039 0.00030 0.72 BDL 0.099 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0034 0.00061 0.017 0.0084 0.00021 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00026 BDL 0.00029 lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT E E

E E E E

E

E E E E E

E

E

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-34 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Fiberboard washer, softwood (SCC 3-07-015-40) None

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.19 0.23 BDL BDL BDL 0.015 0.0047 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0026 BDL 0.13 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT lb/ODT

lb/ODT

lb/ODT E E

E E

E

E

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-35

Fiberboard former vacuum system, wet, 6-12% asphalt (SCC 3-07-015-50) None

75-07-0 67-64-1

50-00-0

67-56-1

108-88-3 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 1,2-Dichloroethane * 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene * 3-Carene Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Alpha-pinene Benzene * Beta-pinene Bromomethane * Camphene Chloroethane * Chloroethene * Cis-1,2-dichloroethylene Cumene * Formaldehyde * Limonene Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl isobutyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Xylene * o-Xylene * p-Cymene p-Mentha-1,5-diene Phenol * Propionaldehyde * Styrene * Toluene * 0.15 0.17 BDL BDL BDL 0.0075 0.014 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0036 BDL 0.014 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.0023 lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2

lb/MSF 1/2 E E

E E

E

E

E

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

Source Emission Control Deviceb CASRNc Pollutant Emission Factor Emission Factor Units d EMISSION FACTOR RATING



### 10.6.4-36 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Hardboard humidification kiln, indirect heated (SCC 3-07-014-30) None

75-07-0 67-64-1 107-02-8

71-43-2

75-00-3 74-87-3

100-41-4 50-00-0 66-25-1

78-93-3

1319-77-3

95-48-7

108-95-2

123-38-6

108-88-3

1330-20-7 THC as carbone VOC as propanef 2,4-Dimethylbenzaldehyde Acetaldehyde * Acetone Acrolein * Benzaldehyde Benzene * Benzo(a)pyrene Bromomethane * Butyraldehyde Chloroethane * Chloromethane * Crotonaldehyde Ethanol Ethylbenzene * Formaldehyde * Hexaldehyde Isobutanol Isovaleraldehyde Methanol * Methyl ethyl ketone * Methyl propyl ketone * Methylene chloride * m,p-Cresol * Naphthalene * o-Cresol * o-,m-,p-Tolualdehyde Phenol * Propanol Propionaldehyde * Pyridine Styrene * Toluene * Trichlorofluoromethane Valeraldehyde Xylenes * 0.62 g 0.76 BDL 0.0018 g 0.0038 g 0.0087 g,h BDL 6.2E-06 g BDL BDL BDL 0.000014 g 0.00012 g BDL BDL 0.000032g 0.0010g,h 0.011 g,h BDL BDL BDL 0.0014 g BDL BDL 0.00033 g BDL 0.00021 g BDL 0.00057 g BDL 0.0077 g BDL BDL 0.000034 g BDL BDL 0.000042g lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8 lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8

lb/MSF 1/8 E E

E D E

E

E E

E E E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

a 

### Factors represent uncontrolled emissions unless otherwise noted. SCC = Source Classification Code. * =

hazardous air pollutant. BDL = below test method detection limit; indicates that this pollutant has not been detected in any test runs on this source. Reference 3 unless otherwise noted. Note: emission factors in table represent averages of data sets. The data spreadsheets, which may be more useful for specific applications, are available on EPA’ s TTN website at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/. b 

### Fabric filters (baghouses) are considered no control for organic pollutants.
c 

### CASRN = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number.

### Table 10.6.4-9 (cont.).

9/2002 Wood Products Industry 10.6.4-37 d 

### Emission factor units: pounds of pollutant per oven-dried ton of wood material (lb/ODT); one lb/ODT =

0.5 kg/Mg (oven-dried); pounds of pollutant per thousand square f eet of 1/2-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/2); one lb/MSF 1/2 = 0.38 kg/m3 

### ; pounds of pollutant per thousand square feet of 1/8-inch thick panel (lb/MSF 1/8); one lb/MSF 1/8 = 1.54 kg/m3



### . e 

### THC as carbon = total hydrocarbon measurements using EPA Method 25A. f 

### VOC as propane = (1.22 × THC) + formaldehyde - ( acetone + methane + methylene chloride); a value of

zero is inserted in the equation for the specified compounds where no emission factor is available, or where the emission factor is reported only as “BDL”. g 

### Reference 2. h 

### Based on M0011 data only; suspected to be biased low due to poor collection efficiency or analytical

problems.

### 10.6.4-38 EMISSION FACTORS 9/2002 Table 10.6.4-10. WOOD SPECIES COMMONLY USED IN COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING a



### Wood product AP-42 section Hardwood species Softwood species Plywood 10.5 Oak, cherry, poplar, maple, larch Firs, pines

Oriented strandboard 10.6-1 Aspen Pines, firs, spruce
Particleboard 10.6-2 Aspen, oak Pines, firs Medium density fiberboard 10.6-3 Gum, alder, hickory Pines, firs

Hardboard/fiberboard 10.6-4 Aspen, birch, beech, oak, maple Pines Engineered wood products 10.9 Aspen, birch, poplar Pines, firs, hemlock

a 

### Reference 5.

References For Section 10.6.4

1. Background Information Document For Proposed Plywood And Composite Wood Products NESHAP, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, September 2000.

2. Results Of The January 17-19, 1995 Source Emission Tests On The Dryer Stack, Dump Stack And Humidification Kiln Stack At The Georgia Pacific Facility Located In Phillips, Wisconsin , prepared for CH2M Hill, by PACE, Inc., Project No. 941228.401, March 2, 1995.

3. Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Products Manufacturing Facilities, Part VI - Hardboard/Fiberboard, Technical Bulletin No. 773 , National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999.

4. Title V Emissions Test Report, PM10, Particulate Matter, Condensible Particulate Matter, Aldehydes/Ketones, Phenols, Methanol, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, And Cold Total Hydrocarbons From Process Stacks, Georgia Pacific Hardboard Manufacturing Plant, North Little Rock, Arkansas, Test Dates September 26-29, 1995 , prepared for CH2M Hill and Georgia Pacific Corporation, by DEECO, Inc., Report No. 95-1200-A, October 27, 1995.

5. Emission Factor Documentation For AP-42 Chapter 10, Wood Products Industry, prepared for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS/EFIG, by Midwest Research Institute, Cary, NC, July 2003.