.

Agriculture Handbook No. 384

. .

; U.S. Department of Agricdthe 0 Forest Service

.
3-

;L p‘ rw-~-

” Low-Cost Wood Hoines For

-. Rural America-Construction Manual

By L. 0. ANDERSON, Engineer

.Forest Products Laboratory

Agriculture Handbook No. 364, May 1969

U.S. Department of Agriculture l Forest Service

For splp by the Superlntandent of Documents, V.S. 009 enmant Printiog office W~lrhiagton, D.C. 204&z - Prlcd $1
R. F. Blomquist a.nd’ H. F. Zornig

RI UCH IS BEING WRITTEN about the

housing problems in the

United States. This is a multifacet

problem, involving ‘both urban and

rural living, all geographical areas,

all income levels, and al! :i;gle and

multifamily living units. There is a

great deal of emotion involved, and

many different approaches are suggested for meetirig the rapidly growing needs for adequate housing of

our population during the remainder

of the twentieth century. By the year

2000, 100 million: additional Americans will be stacked on top of the

140 million already living in our

‘urban areas.’ There is ‘no doubt that

these areas face tremen’dous housing

problems. Having more people living in our, cities increases critical

problems associated with land use,

transportation, job opportunity,

housing, protective services, and

*pollution.

One solution might be to stop the

migrations from iural to urban’ areas

that have occurred for some years,

and actually reverse such movements.

Obviously this doesn’t mean sending

citjl people back to the farms, ,but

moving them back to smaller rural

communities, where they can live under less congested conditions and be

employed in industries that are being

relocated in such communities, where

space, beauty, outdoor recreation,

moderate land and building costs,

and underemployed people are available now. This is the goal of the

U. S. Department of Agriculture’s

lAnonymous. 1967. Communities of

tomorrow - agriculture/2000. U. S.

Dept. of Agr., Washington, D.C.

The authors are, respectively, Project Leader-Housing Research, and Research Architectural Engineer-Housing

Research, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Forestry Sciences

Laboratory, Athens, Ga. This paper

was received for publication in June

1969.

.

Abstract

Five home designs are described to

meet the need for better housing for

low-income rural families. Homes feature the intelligent use of wood and

wood products as much as possible,

are intended for simple and efficient

construction with typical building

labor available ln rural areas, and

‘are designed to meet .the goal of a

three-bedroom home with at least 1000

square feet for $6000 without land, external utilities, interest, and financing.

Pole-frame and wood pier foundation

systems are widely used in order to

reduce construction costs through

elimination of masonry work. Scale

models are illustrated. Actual building

of prototype homes is now underway

under the Federal Housing Administration’s Experimental Housing Pm

gram.

Editor’s Note: just prior to priding,

we learned that summary sheets are

now available for all of the designs

mentioned. Inquiries should be sent

to the Div. of Information & Education, Forest Service, USDA, So. Agric.

Bldg., Washington, D.C. 20250. Summary sheets indicate procedures for

ordering detailed plans. and specifications.

“Communities of Tomorrow” program as part’ of the “Agriculture/

2000” plan.ln* This program for improving the rural communities is

already underway, but it has a Iong

way to go. The 196s Housing Bill

contains a n!mber of features that

will provide better housing in rural.

areas, as well as in urban areas.

The problem of providing better

housing for low-income rural families has been receiving special attention in the U. S. Depaitment of

Agriculture. The Forest Service is an

important part of the program, not

only because it is interested in wood

and wood utilization in housing, but

*Anonymous. 1967. Agriculture/2000.

U. S. Dept. of Agr., Washington, D. C.

FOREST PRODUCTS JOURNAL vol. 19.No. 12

also because forestry and the production of forest prod& are ess&iaIly

rural industries. .Rural poverty in the

Ynifed States has no geographical

boundaries. It is present in all sections of the country, and is particularly acute in the South, where

the Forest. Service’s Atkens Housing

Research project is located. This rural

poverty is not limited to one race or

ethnic group. Only a small portion

of the rural ‘poor actually stiI1 live

on farms. Mqst live in smaI1 communities in rural areas. Contrary to

popular opinion, ‘whites outnumber

npn-whites among the rural poor by

a large margin. Negroes, American

Indians, Mexican-Americans, and

various migrant worker groups live

in atrocious homes, and one in wery

13 houses in rural America is officially classified as unfit to live in,

according to the President’s A.dvisory

Commission on Rural Poverty?

According to 1964 estimates, based

on Social Security Administration

poverty .criteria, approximately 25

percent of the total rural population

was poor, or living in poverty.

Here, a family income below $3,000

is considered in the poverty category.

More than 70 percent of poor families in rural America live on less

than $2,000 per year, and one-fourth

exist on less than $1,000.

Deteriorating and dilapidated

housing .is among the undesirable

situations that accompany low incomes. The 1960 U. S. Census of

Housing indicated about 4 million

rural units, or 27 percent of all

occupied rural housing, were deteriorating or dilapidated. Approximately 1.5 million units do not

provide safe and adequate shelter,

and do endanger health, safety, and

well-being of occupants. Clearly, the

need for better, economical housing

for low-income rural families is a

real problem.

In 1967, the Housing Research

Project at Athens, Georgia, undertook a study of ways to provide better housing for such low-income

rural families, primarily in the South

and Southeast, as part of the broader

research program of the Forest Service, which includes similar work at

the U. S. Forest Products Laboratory

*Anonymous. 1967. The people left

behind. A report by the President’s

National Advisory Commission on

Rural Poverty, U. S. Govt. Printing

Office, Washington. D. C.

. .

.I1
7..r

Figure i. - Floor plon, SE-1 design.

.

in Madison, Wis, The target for the

Athens study was to provide good

-housing for rather large rural fam-

. ilies, with at least 1,000 square feet

of livable area, and three bedrooms,

for a cost of $G,OOO without land,

external utilities, legal fees, permits,

and, of course, interest and financing

charges. Wood and wood products

were to be used as efficiently as

possible, and the houses were to

provide good livability, durability,

and easy maintenance, be attractive,

and be simple enough in construction

for relatively unskilled buiIding Iabor that is available in some rural

areas. This was quite a challenge,

because conventional middle-income

housing in cities was running from

$12 to $16 per square foot, as compared to the $G target figure. Obviously something had to be omitted

in such low-cost housing.

The first step was to review a

number of conventional. house plans

and building techniques, to see what

features might be omitted or modified. Special attention was given to

simplifying construction, reducing

the number of building trades required, and making one component

serve more than one function. Some

obvious deletions at the start were

much of the architectural trim, particularly inside, elimination of some

doors between rooms and on closets

and cupboards, and elimination of

much of the masonry work usually

involved, particularly in foundations.

There are two ways to provide

housing for low-income families:

build what they can actually afford,

or buiId what they want (or what

someone else thinks they must have

as a minimum) and then subsidize

any additional costs from public

funds. We chose to follow the former course.

1 2

A’ combination of wood sheathing

and siding on waIIs was considered

important, and wjdely used, alpng

with inexpensive, easy-to-maintain

nitural finishes. Some obvious potential economics, such as wider

spacing. of joists, rafters, and studs,

were considered. A single-layer wood

floor replaced the conventional three

layers of subfloor, underlayment, and

finish. Trim around eaves was eliminated; as were eave troughs. Carports and porches were eliminated

or reduced to a ml’nimzm.

Such changes and eliminations

were naturally not popular, and

some housing experts immediately

predicted unacceptability of the designs. All suggestions were considered, some modifications were made

during development of the plans

and designs, but always the cost

.target was kept foremost. It should

be noted that each of the several

designs discussed in this paper has

been through a series of evolutionary

changes, and should not yet be considered as the final design. Each design contains some new experimental

features that have not been entirely

tested in the laboratory or in an actual building. Plans are now underway to test these features in. a prototype building.

Five specific designs will be disiuised. briefly. The first three are’

one-story structures, relatively conventiona1 in general appearance and

in most construction features, although all contain some experimental features that will require further

study before wide adoption. The last

two designs are unconventional and

were developed to see how wood

products might be used in unusual

designs for good low-cost houses.

Plan SE-1

The first design, designated SE-;,

is for a square house on a flat site.

Figure 2. - Model, S&l design.

DECEMBER 1969
i * A square plan requires, the least exi ,

1 teriqr wall length for a given floor

area of any rectangular dwelling.

. The floor plan is shown in Figure 1,

and a finished model is shonn in

Figure 2. Many such low-cost houses

would normally be built on a concrete slab floating on the ground.

Accordingly, a floating wood floor

system was considered, and two were

designed. One uses treated 2 by 4

/

sleepers laid flatwise on the ground,

or on a leveling course of sand, and

in either case over a vapor barrier.

A single layer of tongue-and-grooved

pine flooring is nailed across the

sleepers. The space under the floor

is used as a shallow return air

pIenum to the furnace fan. A simple

concrete block foundation wall encloses the wood floor and supports

the exterior walls. Interior loadbearing walls are supported by a 2

by 12 treated wood footing.

.

In the other floor system, a plywood. underlayment is nailed to a

four-foot grid of 2 by 4 sleepers and

the space under the floor between

the grid is filled with sand or sandy

soil. All the wood in contact with

Figure 4.- Model, SE-2 design.

the ground or directly on the soil

cover is pressure treated with suitable preservatives..Other wood is not

treated.

Walls and roof are conventional

stud ronstruction; softwood plywood

is used. as exterior combination

sheathing and siding; gypsum board

or other paneling is used for interior

finish. Windows and doors are conventiona1 wood units. An experimenI

. -. . 36*-O”

Figure 3. - Floor plan, SE-2 design.

tal feature is the sin& iayer of

particleboard that is used for interior

partition walls. In this case, walls

are designed so that closets and other

builtGns serve as stiffeners for the

particleboard panels, as does some

of the trim. The central section of

the attic is floored and provided

with a pull-down stair for extra storage, a feature badly needed in small

houses for large families. Ceilings

a’nd walls are insulated.

This design provides 1,024 square

feet, and sleeping space for up to

10 persons in three large bedrooms.

Cost estimates in early 1968 indicated

that the house could be built to meet

the target requirements, although

costs on all the houses will now be

higher because of recent significant

increases in both materials and labor.

Cost estimates for all houses are

,based on the 1967 National Construction Estimator for Light and

Heavy Construction.’

. .

Plan SE-2

This is a design for a sloping site,

and emphasizes a foundation. system

of preservative-treated wood piers.

No masonry work is required, thus,

the foundation could even be installed in freezing weather, It is a

rectangtdar design with 1,008 square

feet, and features an open play area

that doubles as a’ hallway and is directly coniiected to a large bunk

room, for children. Construction is

again relatively conventional, but the

particleboard partition system is used

between some rooms, and the foundation and floor system is detailed.

FAL Pacific Estimators. 1967. National Construction Estimator, 15th

Edition. Craftsman Book Company,

Los Angeles, Calif.

F 0 R E S T P R 0 D U C T S J 0 U R N A L, Vol. 19, ~a. 12 1 3
Figure 5. - Model, SE-3 design.

The floor plan is shown in Figure

3; the exterior of the model is shown

in Figure 4. Cost estimates in early

1968 indicated that the target of $6

per square foot could be met.

Plan SE-3 ,

This is another design for a sloping site, and features a pole-frame

system, supporting the roof, with a

secondary line of wood piers down

the centerline as additional support

for the floor. Pole-frame construction, although well established for

; farm structures and shop buildings,

.

is quite new for houses,s particularly

. for small ones. This efficient system

raised some important technical

questions that had to be resolved.

Round treated poIes were chosen for

; their greater availability and more

certain uniformity of treatment compared to sawn timbers. Such poies

: could be placed outside of, inside

of, or in line with exterior walls,

which can be nonbearing because

roof loads are carried on the poles.

Earlier designs with poles inside the

exterior walls were developed, particuIarIy to take advantage of the

cantilevering of the floor beyond

the poles. The big problem was obstructions inside the small rooms

with the pole placement. Fitting

walls directly in line with poles of-

,

fered problems, so we placed the

walls” just inside the poles, and used

the poles as accent features.

The house is illustrated by the

. mode1 in Figure 5, which shows it

‘McAlister, R. H. 1967. Pole framing

-inexpensive solution to rural-housing

construction. Proceedings Amer. Sot.

Agr. Eng. November, p. 30, 31, 37.

1 4

from the lower Ievel. Because exterior walls could be nonbearing,

thin -modular sandwich panels were

designed. These’ are nail-glued in a

small shop with simple carpenter

tooIs, can be trucked to the site in

a pickup truck, and are easily erected

by two men. Construction of the

house is shown in further detail in

Figure 6. Similar modular sandwich

panels are also used as interior

partitions.

Because conventional wood window units did not fit in the a-inch

walls, a simple and inexpensive window wail unit was designed by combining a fixed glass area with sliding

panels of hardboard for ventilation

.

f

(Fig. 5). The window unit is the

same size as the modul.ar wall panel.

Details were developed for fastening

and joining the various component

panels to each other and to the other .

structural elements. Because thin

prefabricated panels are difficuh to

‘wire, a combination wood baseboard

and raceway system was developed

to conceal horizontal wiring, provide

wall outlets, and also provide baseboard heating. A stressed-skin floor

ASPHALT SHINGLES

INStiLATtON

FLOOR SYSTEM

hgure 6. - construction detoil, wall ond

pole system, SE-3 design.

Figure 7. - Floor plon, SE-3 design.

DECEMBER 1969
. panel system is offered as an alter-

. nate to the conventional joist system.

,

All stressed-skin panels are of plywood, glue-n&d to wood framing

members, with the necessary batt

insulation.

This design provides 1,008 square

feet (Fig. 7). A feature of the

design is good use of the space under the house (Fig. s), a portion of

. which is enclosed with a plywood8

sheathed wall to provide an addiI tional storage room. At the same

time, the walls serve as part of the

bracing system of the poles. Other

I1bracing is provided by treated poles

laid on the ground and anchored to

the pole foundation, -thus avoiding

the need for cross .bracing. Carport

storage is provided below the house.

This design could also be built for

the $6 target figure in early 196s.

Less Conventional Designs

In order to see how costs could

be decreased in wood houses, without the restrictions of conventional

buiiding practices, we developed and

.

considered a number of other designs. Of these, two were particularly

interesting and promising, and were

developed further. At the present

time, both are considered strictly as

experimental designs, with significant unproved features that will require , further study before wide

adoption. Again, these designs are

based on a good background know&

edge of wood and wood construction, and no real. problems are

anticipated. These designs are presented as - examples of new ap

proaches to better, low-cost housing

made of wood. They represent particularly efficient ways to enclose

housing space. Each design has received .favorable comment, both from

Figure 8. - Tubular house, partial erection

(model), showing laminated ribs and floor

system installed on posts.

Figure 9. - Model of completed tubular house.

. .

an appearance and a design standpoint.

Tubular House

An original design was a perfectly

round, tubular shell which.. evolved

out of thinking about the exceptional strength of curved roof systems and tubular shapes. The round

cross section was later modified to

an aircraft fuselage shape for a more

pleasing appearance. Essentially, the

structure consists of a double Iine

of treated wood. posts or poles, set

in pairs 8 feet apart. To these pairs

of poIes, horizontal beams are bolted.

at the first and second floor levels.

Glulam circular arches or ribs, made

in halves and joined at -the top-and

bottom on the site, are then bolted

to the lower sections of the poles

and to the ends of the horizontal

beams. This construction is shown in

Figure S, which also shows interior

construction.

‘Two-inch tongue - and - grooved

lumber sheathing is nailed to the

outside of the ribs. Over this,

a foamed-in-place polyurethane insulation is applied. Typical construction involves a Z-pound per cubic

foot density foam, 1 inch thick. A

coat of aluminum paint, neoprene,

or asphaltic emulsion is applied over

the foam to serve as a protective

coating. The ends of the house are

simple frame and sheathing construction, with the special window

unit of SE-3; the’ outside of these

end walls is also coated with the

foam and finish, which serves as

sealant, insulation, and final finish.

Interior walls and floors are essentially light, conventional construction. Spiral ‘stairs can be used, or

conventiona wpod stairs. The finished mode1 is shown in Figure 9.

The original design provides a total

of. 90~1 square feet, half on each

floor, and early 196~ cost estimates

indicated a finished cost of about $5

per square foot. A “stretched” version, 8 feet longer, provides l,lSS

square feet, and the estimated cost

per square foot was $5.20 in early

1%~. Both designs’ provide very

good space utilization, an unusual

and attractive exterior, and are adaptable to either flat or sfoping sites.

Various modifications have been considered wherein the exterior pIastic

foam and finsh can be eliminated

and the lumber roof sheathing covered with rigid insulation and conventional roll or sheet roofing. The

laminated ribs are obviously an important design feature and must be

properly fabricated, preferably by an

experienced laminator. Ribs are 2-

ll/ 16 inches wide and 4-l/ 2 inches

deep, built up of nominal one-inch

. softwood lumber. Minimum bending

radius is 8 feet. The rib construction

is rather simple’ and could probably

be laminated by the builder in a

small shop with nailgluing. However, good quality control may be

difficult to achieve by this method

except under speciaI, controlled shop

conditions.

The field appIication of the -

foamed poiyurethane insulation is
becoming a widely used technique,

primarily for large commercial freezers and cold-storage rooms. Applicators are located in many parts of the

country and can come to a building

site with all the necessary metering

and spray application equipment

readily available in small trucks. After the ,insulation is in place, the

same equipment can be used to apply

the plastic finish; similar finishes can

be put on by roller or brush. Although still not common in rural

areas, there is no reason why such

insulation application cannot be done

efficiently and economically. Actual

commercial application costs were

used in the estimates for the tubular

house. Data. on the long-term outdoor durability of the plastic

insulation-finish system are still incomplete. Limited available information indicates good durability against

the elements.- Recently, some large

roof structures on commercial buildings have been covered with this

system.

Round House

‘Another unusual design is the

round house, built on a circular concrete slab on a flat site. Concrete is

used for the floor because of the ease.

of fabricating the round slab, compared to a wood system. The wails

of this house are of rough-sawn,

properly dried 2 by 8 softwood

planks, set on end around the perimeter of the brick foundation enclosing the slab. Planks are joined

at the edges with a hardboard spline

that is inserted in grooves cut in

each edge of the planks. There is no

other wall framing. Planks are nailed

to the treated-wood sill around the

s slab, and toenailed to each other at

the top. A wood fascia board.around

the outside at the top also serves to

hold the planks together.

Another circular wall of planks is

placed about the center of the ‘slab.

It forms an atrium hall, 8 feet in

diameter, in the original 3%foot

diameter house. This size provides a

total area of 804 square feet. A larger

version, with a 38-foot diameter and

a IO-foot diameter hall, provides an

area of 1,134 square feet.

Across the top of the plank walls,

4 by G rough-sawn softwood beams

are placed radially out from the center. The beams are supported in

notches cut into the tops of some

planks. Beams are placed 4 feet

apart at the perimeter walls, held in

place by suitable na;ling, and then

covered with lumber or plywood

roof sheathing.. The original design,

illustrated in the model in Figure

i0, has a fiat roof. However, a

conical-shaped roof would be possible, although it would require

longer planks for the inside, circular

wall and would complicate interior

wall construction. Two. round

houses, one each .of the two sizes

previously mentioned, have been

built and sold in *Hope Mills, North

Carolina.

The roof is covered with the same

plastic foam insulation and plastic

top finish described for the tubular

house. Fixed windows are provided

in the exterior walls simply by Ieaving out sections of two planks, side

by side, and installing fixed glass in

a simple wood frame. Ventilation

can be provided by a sliding hardboard panel system in some. plank

openings, in the same way as in the

window-wall panel system in SE-3.

Interior partition walls are all nonc

.._,

1 _-

. ,‘Figure 10. - Model, round house (32 foot diameter).

- . _

,16

.., DECEMBER 1969

bearing, and can be placed at any

radius between the interior hal! wall

and the exterior wall. A frame-type

plumbing wall is provided between

the bath and kitchen areas; other*

partitions are of the particleboard

system described in SE-l.

Although some critics are pessimistic, experience indicates good

utilization of space, and good furniture placement, even in the threebedroom version of the %-foot

diameter house (Fig. 11). The

rough-surfaced planks would be

given a transparent stain finish in

different shades, as desired. A

smooth finish could be used on the

‘interior surfaces of the planks. Obviously, some problems can be expected with dimensional changes in

the planks in coming to equilibrium

with normal room conditions. To

reduce. such problems to a minimum,

it is very important to use properlydried lumber. Experiments are underway in the laboratory on full-size

plank wall assemblies to study and

observe such .dimensional changes,

particularly in width across the

grain, as well as tendencies to cup or

warp. Calculated amounts of movement on southern pine planks would

indicate that the dimensional movements can be readily tolerated if the

lumber is properly dried before

installation.

Recent Developments

It is fully recognized that miny

good house designs have been developed over the years, including

some experimental designs of wood,

an.d- yet never used in actual construction. One possible obstacle to

wide acceptance of such designs is

the general lack of complete design

work, including provisions for joining and fastening all components,

provisions for wiring, plumbing,

and heating or air conditioning, particularly for stressed-skin panel designs, and various other minor but

important and frustrating construction features. In our designs, every

effort was made to solve these problems. Although it is impossible to

indicate all of them here, complete

detailed drawings and specifications

are available for each design. Simple, one-page summary sheets have

been prepared and have been widely

distributed. Persons ‘wishing to review the construction features more

fully, with an eye to actual construction, are provided with the detailed

drawings and specifications without
.
-_ -_-. - - ._... - .

Figure 11. - Floor plan, round house.

charge upon request. At present,

such documents have only been

prepared for the conventional designs SE-l, SE-Z; ahd SE-3. Prelitiinary drawings for the. tubular and

round houses were prepared and circulated on a limited basis for review

and comments, and have n.aw been

revised and are ready for

disjribution.

Nothing is really gained from

. suih design efforts until actual

houses are constructed to try out the

designs, This involves money and

time, and is probably not an efficient

use of limited research funds. We

have recently built a small experimental structure in Athens that includes most of the unproved features

of all five house designs, lo study

experimentally the possible problems with the floating wood floor

system of SE-l, the pole and pier

systems of SE-2 and SE-3, the particleboard partition system, the

plank wall of the round house, the

window-wall unit, the panel wall

system of SE-3, and other features.

Therefore, efforts have been made

to interest actual builders in. construtting prototype houses with

private funds, for sale to families.

When they are occupied, data on

both construction and livability may

be obtained. More reliable cost data

can also be obtained from such efforts, and many ideas for improved

design and construction features can

be accumulated.

At the present time, one cbmmercial builder in Hope Mills, North

Carolina, has built one of the 32-foot

round houses as a private venture

and sold it to a family who is now

living in it. Although the, builder

didn’t follow all of our details. and,

recommendations, the results were

satisfactory, and no serious problems or complaints have been noted.

This same builder has also received a commitment from the Federal Housing Administration for

building one of each of the five

houses described under the FHA Experimental Housing Program. He

started construction. in March 1969.

At present he has completed the

larger version, of the round house,

the tubular house (shown on the

cover of this issue), and the SE-3

pole-frame house. We are following

this work carefully and are assisting

him in some of the technical problems that may occur. We hope to

get good cost estimates and opinions

6n livability from the actual occupants. Some instrumentation of wood

components, pith thermocouples and

moisture probes, is also underway.

Efforts will be continued to get

other prototypes built and occupied

in different areas, and then to follow up on the results. The design

work on additional houses will also

continue with high priority not an!y

for rural houses, but also -for lowincome urban and suburban

dwellings. .

FOREST PRODUCT’S JOURNAL Vol. 1% No. 12

. . EASTERL CANADIAN

R. Mocnaz, technical director, Chemco, ltd.,

.Montreal, Cjuebe’c, Canada

M. H. Schneider, professor, The University of

New Brunswick, Fredericton, N. B., Canada

GREAT LAKES

P. J. Lins, application engineer, Bauer Bros.

Co., Springfield, Ohio

INLAND EMPIRE

D. M. Bldhm, ars’t supervisor, Boise Cascade

Corp., Latrande, Oreg.

MID-SOUTH

T. C. Ma, graduate student, Mississippi State

Univ., State College, Miss.

F. H. Ragor, Jr., Dierks Forests, Inc., Broken

Bow, Okla. .

Temple White Co., Inc., new supporting member with voting rights held by H. C. White,

president, ‘Diboll, Tex.

MIDWEST

1. W. Carr, graduate student, Southern l!linois

Univ., Carbondale, III.

F. Foitik, general manager, Banner lumber

CO., inc., Milwaukee, Wis.

M. P. Luza, ldwa State Univ., joliet, ill.

P. R. Sutula, Southern Illinois Univ., Carbondale, III.

NORTHEAST

G. A Delgado, student, State Univ.- College

of Foresiry at Syracuse, Syracuse, N.Y.

M. P. Klein, vice president, Jaxton Mfg. Corp.,

Glenns Falls, N.Y.

B. Martin, student (military), Fallentimber, Pa.

R. Meltzer, president, Triangle Pacific Cabinets,’ Inc., Great Neck, N.Y.

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

S. P. Bradley, forest products representqtive,

Di. Giorgio Corp., Son Francisco, Colif.

J.’ 1. Jocz, sales engineer, Stetson-Ross Machine Co., Ranch0 Cordova, Calif.

C. R. Short, northwest regional manoger,

F.M.C. Corp.-Engineering Systems Div.,

Cupertino, Colif.

OHIO VALLEY

L. G. Henderson, Tenn-Flake Corp., Middlesboro, Ky.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST

George Bramholl, Burnoby, B.C., Conodo

Block Clawson, inc., new supporting member

with Barry A. C. Pittman holding the voting

rights, Everett, Wosh.

M. M. Greer, librarian, Forest Research Laboratory, Victoria, 8. C., Canada

W. H. Hunt, exec. vice-pres., Georgia-Pa&c

Corp., Portland, Oreg.

8. P. Kornbsrg, Soderhomn Machine Mfg.

Co., Portland

R. 0. Lee, vice-pres., Georgia-Pacific Corp.,

Portland

R. G. Murdock, western manager,. Mereen

Johnson Machine Co., Portland

J. V. Richardson, student, Oregon State Univ.,

Corvollis, Oreg.

T. L. Scroggins, student, Oregon State Univ.,

Albony, Oreg.

PACIFIC SOUTHWEST

A. G. Imbrecht, division president, Air Wall,’

Inc., Paramount, Calif.

.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN

J. F. MacDonald,’ president. Great Scot Timber

111 Lagging Co., EnglewFd, Colo.

SOUTHEAST

W. S. Dorr, district manoger, Hercules, Inc.,

Mobile, Alo.

G. M. Lehmon, branch monoger, U.S. Ply

wood, Miomi, Flo.

G. R. Sampson, research forester, U.S. Forest

Service, Hull, Go.

C. W. Vallette, senior technical sales representative, Hercules, Inc., Atlanta, Ga.