Southern Pulpwood Production, 1986

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Southern Pulpwood Production, 1986 ie* United States @ ;;Of hern P Forest Service Southern Forest Produc Experiment Station New Orleans, Louisiana Resource Bulletin SO-138 Dennis M. May Southern Pu pwood Production, 1986 Dennis M. May Southern Forest Experiment Station New Orleans, Louisiana and Southeastern Forest Experiment Station Asheville, North Carolina of the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the American Pulpwood Association June 1988 Southern Pulpwood Production, 1986 Dennis M. May Table I.-- In this publication are presented the findings of a 100-percent canvass of all wood-using pulpmills drawing round- State Pulpwood Change wood or wood residues from 12 Southern States (fig. 1). Canvass data are Thousand cords Percent compiled annually and analyzed on an alternating basis by personnel of the Alabama Forest Inventory and Analysis Units of Arkansas Florida the Southern and Southeas tern Forest Georgia Experiment Stations. All production Louisiana figures are reported in standard cords. Mississippi When necessary, pulpwood production data North Carolina for mills reporting in nonstandard units Oklahoma South Carolina are converted to standard cords using Tennessee regional conversion factors, Texas Virginia PULPWOOD All States Fueled by increased competitiive- ness, the result of a devalued American 1 dollar, lower interest rates, and recent Colurnn data may not add due to rounding. mill improvements, domestic pulp and paper products experienced a resurgence in demand in 1986. As expected, this resurgence had consequential effects on the demand for pulping fiber. In the South, pulpwood production climbed 6 Table 2.--Pulpwood production in the Southeast and Midsouth. 1986 percent above the 1985 level to top 60 Region million cords for the first time (table and All 1). Both regions in the South, Midsouth source of wood species Softwo& HardvOOd and Southeast, experienced a recovery in ---------------Stand4 cords----------------- pulpwood production with respective gains of 9 and 4 percent in 1986. Southeast However, the Midsouth contributed 7 Romdwd 19,467,269 14,064,687 5,402,582 percent more to the 1986 production than Residues 8,664,839 7,141,875 1.522.964 did the Southeast (table 21, The State Total 28,132,108 21,205,562 6,925,546 of Georgia was the leading producer of pulpwood in 1986. Alabama ranked a Eaidsouth Roundwood close second, and Mississippi, with a Residues major increase in production, ranked third. Collectively, these three States Total supplied over 40 percent of the total Entire South Roudwd 40,439.843 27,115,068 13,324,775 production. Residues 20,149,920 15,567,714 4,582,206 Softwoods continued to be the major source of pulpwood, comprising '70 I percent of the total production in States of Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, 1986. The production of softwood was and Virginia. 2 split equally between the Midsouth and States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoaa, Southeast regions. In contrast, the Tennessee, and Texas. 1 Table 3.--Roundwood production in the South, by State and species' group, 1986 and 1985 1986 1985 Change from A1 1 A1 l State? 1985 species Softwood Hardwood species Softwood Hardwood Percent Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia I All States 9 40,439.9 27,115.1 13,324.8 37.217.9 25,230.8 11,987.0 Row and column data may not add due to rounding. Midsouth was the major supplier of almost half the total roundwood harvest hardwood pulpwood, furnishing over 60 in 1986. The top three roundwood pro- percent of the total hardwood produc- ducing States also contained over half tion. Both roundwood and wood residues the 114 counties in the South that contributed to the 1986 pulpwood pro- harvested in excess of 100,000 cords of duction record. Roundwood, however, was roundwood each (Appendix tables A1-A12, the leading form of pulping fiber, Appendix figures ~1-~6).Once again, outproducing wood residues by 2 to 1. Florida' s Taylor county was the leading Table 4.--Roundwood production in the South, by State Roundwood and species' mup, 1986 In line with the increase in All pulpwood production, Southern roundwood State species softwood Hardwood production increased 9 percent in 1986 (table 3). This gain in roundwood accounted for 89 percent of the increase Alabwa in pulpwood production in 1986. Round- Arkansas wood harvests in the Midsouth and Florida Southeast increased by 10 and 7 percent, Georgia Louisiana respectively, in response to the Mississippi heightened demand for pulpwood. How- North Carolina Oklahoma ever, the Midsouth still supplied the South Carolina majority of the roundwood harvest (table Tennessee Texas 2) Virginia The top three roundwood producing 1 States were Alabama, Georgia, and All States Mississippi, in this order (table 4). I Together, these three States supplied Column data may not add due to rounding. producer of roundwood, with a harvest in 5). This relatively small increase can excess of 335,008 cords, be attributed to a 3-percent decline in Softwoods were also the major Southeast wood residue production. Wood source of roundwood, comprising two- residue production increased 6 percent thirds of the total roundwood harvest in in the Midsouth in 1986. The Midsouth 1986, However, as a result of the was also responsible for the majority of increased acceptance of hardwoods as a the wood residue production in 1986 source of pulping fiber, hardwood har- (table 2). The three leading States, vests increased more than softwood ranked in the order of production, were harvests in 1986. The hardwood harvest Georgia, Arkansas, and Alabama. These increased by 11 percent, while that of three States collectively accounted for softwoods only increased by 7 percent, 41 percent of all residue production. This allowed hardwoods to account for As with roundwood production, over 40 percent of the total increase in softwoods comprised the predominant roundwood in 1986. The Southeast was proportion of the wood residue produc- the leading supplier of softwood round- tion, accounting for three-quarters of wood, while the Midsouth supplied most the 1986 production. However, as with of the hardwood roundwood. At the State roundwood, the hardwoods have been level, Georgia harvested the most soft- seeing increased acceptance. In 1986, wood roundwood and Alabama harvested the hardwood residue production increased 5 most hardwood roundwood. percent, in comparison to the 1-percent increase for softwood residues. As a Wood Residues result, hardwood residues accounted for 60 percent of the increase in wood In contrast to the 9 percent rise residues in 1986. The Midsouth contin- in roundwood, wood residue production ued to be the leading producer of hard- only increased 2 percent in 1986 (table wood, furnishing twice the amount of Table 5.--Southern output of wood residues for pulp manufacture, by State and species' group, 1986 and 1985 1986 1985 Change from A1 1 A1 1 State 1985 species Softwood Hardwood species Softwood Hardwood Percent ............................ Thousand cords---------------------------- Alabama 7 Arkansas 9 Florida -8 Georgia - 7 Louisiana 18 Mississippi 20 North Carolina 3 0k.l ahoma 20 South Carolina 5 Tennessee. - 3 0 Texas - 15 Virginia -5 1 All States 2 1 Row and column data may not add due to rounding. Table 6.--Southern output of wood residues for pulp manufacture, by State and type of residue, 1986 1 Chips Other residues All All All State types species of twaod Hardwood species Softwood Hardwood Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia 2 All States 1 Veneer cores, pole and piling trim, cull material, sawdust, and secondary residues. 2 Row and column data may not add due to rounding. hardwood residues as the Southeast. The to 119,825 tons per day (table 7). Midsouth also produced the majority of Alabama and Georgia led the South in the the softwood residues. Arkansas was the number of mills operating, with 15 mills leading producer of hardwood residues, each. However, Georgia led in pulping while Georgia led in softwood residue capacity by an 11 percent margin over production. Alabama. In addition, five pulpmills Chips continued to be the predom- from outside the Southern region were inant form of wood residues produced, also drawing wood from the South (table accotrnting for 99 percent of the total 81 * wood residue production in 1986 (table mmDS 6). The dominance of chips was enhanced by a 3-percent increase in chip produc- In the 10-year period from 1977 to tion and a 36-percent decline in the 1986, pulping capacity in the South production of other residues in 1986. increased from 100,894 to 119,825 tons Softwood chips accounted for three- per day, In the same time period, the quarters of the 1986 chip production. number of pulpmills decreased from 113 to 105. This simultaneous rise in capacity and drop in mills is a testi- MILLS mony to the increasing efficiency of existing mills as a result of recent In 1986, 105 Southern pulpmills mill improvements and modernization. To were operating and drawing wood from the meet the new demmd created by the 12 Southern States (fig. 21, Although 19-percent increase in pulping capacity, the number of mills has remained the Southern pulpwood production climbed 24 same as in 1985, pulping capacity fell percent in the 10-year period (fig. 3). Ml LL CAPACITY (TONS PER DAY) LESS THAN 250 * 250 TO 499 500 TO 999 m !,ow TO 1,499 A 1,500 OR MORE Figure 2.0-1986 capacity of Southern pulpmills operating and drawing wood from the 12 Southern States. Numerals are coded to table 7. Table 7.-- Pulping capacity, 24 hours Map Groundwood Soda Location code Company A1 1 Sulfate and other Semi- and processes mechanical chemical sulfita ALABAMA Clai borne Alabama River Pulp Company Jackson Boise Cascade Paper Group Courtland Champion International Corporation Brewton Container Corporation of America Mobile OAF Corporation Mahrt Georgia Kraft Company.
Recommended publications
  • Scott Paper Co
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FORM 10-K Annual report pursuant to section 13 and 15(d) Filing Date: 1994-03-23 | Period of Report: 1993-12-25 SEC Accession No. 0000950109-94-000524 (HTML Version on secdatabase.com) FILER SCOTT PAPER CO Business Address SCOTT PLZ CIK:87949| IRS No.: 231065080 | State of Incorp.:PA | Fiscal Year End: 1231 PHILADELPHIA PA 19113 Type: 10-K | Act: 34 | File No.: 001-02300 | Film No.: 94517373 2155225000 SIC: 2621 Paper mills Copyright © 2012 www.secdatabase.com. All Rights Reserved. Please Consider the Environment Before Printing This Document - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the Fiscal Year Ended December 25, Commission File Number 1-2300 1993 SCOTT PAPER COMPANY A Pennsylvania Corporation IRS Employer Identification No. 23- 1065080 Scott Plaza Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19113-1585 Telephone (610) 522-5000 SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(B) OF THE ACT: <TABLE> <CAPTION> NAME OF EACH EXCHANGE TITLE OF EACH CLASS ON WHICH REGISTERED - -------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- <S> <C> Cumulative Senior Preferred Shares (without par value) Series designated $3.40 Cumula- tive Senior Preferred Shares.. Philadelphia Stock Exchange Series designated $4.00 Cumula- tive Senior
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Cummings Structural Concrete Company Records
    Guide to the Cummings Structural Concrete Company Records NMAH.AC.0218 Erin Molloy 2011 Archives Center, National Museum of American History P.O. Box 37012 Suite 1100, MRC 601 Washington, D.C. 20013-7012 [email protected] http://americanhistory.si.edu/archives Table of Contents Collection Overview ........................................................................................................ 1 Administrative Information .............................................................................................. 1 Scope and Contents........................................................................................................ 2 Arrangement..................................................................................................................... 3 Biographical / Historical.................................................................................................... 1 Names and Subjects ...................................................................................................... 4 Container Listing ............................................................................................................. 5 Series 1: Biographical, 1904-1936 and undated...................................................... 5 Series 2: Operational Records, 1884-1952 and undated....................................... 11 Series 3: Subject Files, 1891-1970 and undated................................................... 28 Series 4: Publications, 1887-1953 and undated...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Pulps for Papermaking Characterization of Four Stockpile Pulps
    -i. 1 tL~~-c4 -- ?L A. ~ ~ ~ Z IE'I I I - c- _- II I _J L CHARACTERIZATION OF PULPS FOR PAPERMAKING CHARACTERIZATION OF FOUR STOCKPILE PULPS Project 2406 Report Seven A Progress Report to MEMBERS OF GROUP PROJECT 2406 March 8, 1967 r- 1 9 EPiiBXj 4 Cp I h--IILL I THE INSTITUTE OF PAPER CHEMISTRY Appleton, Wisconsin CHARACTERIZATION OF PULPS FOR PAPERMAKING CHARACTERIZATION OF FOUR STOCKPILE PULPS Project 2406 Report Seven A Progress Report to MEMBERS OF GROUP PROJECT 2406 March 8, 1967 MEMBERS OF GROUP PROJECT 2406 Albemarle Paper Company American Can Company Blandin Paper Company Brown Company The Chesapeake Corporation Consolidated Papers, Inc. Container Corporation of America Continental Can Company, Inc. Crossett Division, Georgia-Pacific Corporation Crown Zellerbach Corporation Eastman Kodak Company Fox River Paper Corporation Great Northern Paper Company Hammermill Paper Company Hoerner Waldorf Corporation International Paper Company Kimberly-Clark Corporation Knowlton Brothers The Mead Corporation Michigan Carton Company Mohawk Paper Mills, Inc. NVF Co. Nekoosa-Edwards Paper Company Oxford Paper Company Potlatch Forests, Inc. The Procter & Gamble Company Riegel Paper Corporation Riverside Paper Corporation Scott Paper Company Sonoco Products Company Tennessee River Pulp & Paper Company Thilmany Pulp & Paper Company Tileston & Hollingsworth Co. Union Camp Corporation Union Mills Paper Manufacturing Co. U.S. Plywood--Champion Papers Inc. S. D. Warren Company Wausau Paper Mills Company West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company Weyerhaeuser Company TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 4 PULPS 8 PULP PREPARATION AND TESTING 10 THE GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION OF DATA 12 DRAINAGE PROPERTIES 27 FIBER DIMENSIONS 31 FIBER STRENGTH 38 BONDING 39 RELATIONSHIP OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF HANDSHEETS TO PULP CHARACTERISTICS 46 The Effect of Fiber Length 46 The Effect of Fiber Strength 51 The Effect of Bonding 51 Drainage Characteristics 56 Relationships Among Tests 61 FUTURE USE OF DATA 64 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 66 APPENDIX I.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Northern District of Florida Gainesville Division
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION Case No. STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH, ATTORNEY GENERAL, Plaintiff, v. KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION, SCOTT PAPER COMPANY, INC., GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, FT. HOWARD CORPORATION, BAY WEST PAPER CORPORATION, CASCADES INDUSTRIES, INC., ENCORE PAPER COMPANY, INC., JAMES RIVER CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA, MARCAL PAPER MILLS, INC., AND WISCONSIN TISSUE MILLS, INC. (A DIVISION OF CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION), Defendants. _________________________________/ COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, the State of Florida, by and through its Attorney General Robert A. Butterworth, sues defendants Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Scott Paper Company, Georgia-Pacific Corporation, Fort Howard Corporation, Bay West Paper Corporation, Cascades Industries, Inc., Encore Paper Company, Inc., James River Corporation of Virginia, Marcal Paper Mills, Inc., and Wisconsin Tissue Mills, Inc. (A Division of Chesapeake Corporation) and avers: Jurisdiction and Venue 1. Count I of this Complaint is a civil antitrust action arising under § 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, for treble damages in accordance with § 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15, and for permanent injunctive relief in accordance with § 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26. This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1337. 2. Count II of this Complaint is an action for treble damages arising under § 542.18, Florida Statutes, in accordance with § 542.22, Florida Statutes, and for injunctive relief in accordance with § 542.23 Florida Statutes. This Court has jurisdiction of claims arising under Florida law pursuant to the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction and 28 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of a Paper Co~Wany: the Carlisle-Ferguson Years at St. Regis
    EVOLUTION OF A PAPER CO~WANY: THE CARLISLE-FERGUSON YEARS AT ST. REGIS Interviews with 'c, "• Homer A. Vilas and James E. Kussman;' conducted by " , /' ,., Elwood R. Maunder and John R. Ross and"appen~ded -inte-rview with '.~ ,Carl B. ,Martin James E. Kussmann and Samuel Shane Forest History Society - Santa Cruz, California 1977 -, ,'. - .. ·.--.P '. .... ~ This volume is second in a series of or~l histor£~s on St. Reg4s Paper Company. The·~irit volu,me,. THREE MEMOIRS ON ST. REGIS PAPER COMPANY RI~.T6RY (Eunice Remington 'Nardwell, Louise E .. ·. Richter, and' Harold S. Sutton), was published i.n 1976. '-. ,. "," Forest History Society, Inc. P. O. Box 1581 Santa Cruz, California 95061 Copyright ©1977 by Forest History Society, Inc. All rights reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . vii INTERVIEW I: H01ffiR A. VILAS, DECEMBER 8, 1975 NEW YORK, NEW YORK . 1 First encounter with Roy K. Ferguson in 1921;. F. L. Carlisle and Company; Ferguson, Carlisle, and the pre-Depression business world; St. Regis during the Depression; Sandy Calder and Union Bag and Paper Company; Remarks on the brokerage business; Charles E. Norris, H. Edmund Machold, and Al Smith; Ferguson's relationship with Carlisle; contemplated merger of St. Regis with Union Bag and Paper Company; F_e]guson' s leader-' ,.--'--~ --"-~ .:::~. ----.~-_.- -,,- - - ',- ,.. _,,- ',- . .-'/ - ';,- .. ,,-"'--- - .. - .. sh-ip a'tSt.· Regis';-· tile pe;rsonal)Vorld of, Roy K. Ferguson'---religioiis-'faith, familY-; -and p-astimes; reflections on Ferguson as a friend. INTERVIEW II: JAMES E. KUSSMANN, OCTOBER 17, 1975 ,fJEWYOBK; NEW YORK . 31 Session 1: Roy K. Ferguson takes charge of St. Regis in 1934; separation of papermaking and public utilities interests; the company during the wartime period--1939~1945; postwar expansion in printing papers and the move to the South; impacts of World War II; St.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Summary of Comments on Proposed Paper Products
    FINAL SUMMARY OF COMMENTS ON PROPOSED PAPER PRODUCTS RECOVERED MATERIALS ADVISORY NOTICE Prepared for: Dana F. Arnold Office of Solid Waste (name changed to Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery on January 18, 2009) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460 Date: July 27, 1995 Work Assignment No: 15 CONTENTS Page LIST OF COMMENTERS . 1 INTRODUCTION . 4 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS BY TOPIC Section 1 General Comments. 5 2 Comments on EPA's Objectives. .12 3 Comments on EPA's Approach. .15 4 Comments on EPA's Methodology . .19 5 Comments on EPA's Content Recommendations for Designated Paper Products . .20 Printing and Writing Paper. .20 Coated Printing and Writing Paper. .25 Bristols . .27 Newsprint. .28 Tissue Products . .29 Paperboard and Packaging Products . .32 Miscellaneous Paper Products. .36 6 Comments on Measurement, Specifications, and Recyclability . .37 7 Comments on Definitions . .43 Postconsumer . .43 Waste Paper, Recovered Fiber, and Clarification on Repulping Requirements. .47 Mill Broke . .50 8 Miscellaneous Comments. .55 Further Delineating or Deleting Designated Items. .55 Recovered Material Certification and Verification . .56 Sawdust as Recovered Fiber . .57 Energy Issues and Cost/Benefit Implications of Paper Recycling. .58 Recovered Fiber Supply Shortage. .59 Information on Tray Liners . .62 Information on Greeting Card Stock . .62 Information on Specialty Tissue Products . .62 Information on Paperboard and Packaging. .63 COMMENTERS ************************************************************ Docket Organization
    [Show full text]
  • Surviving Job Loss: Paper Makers in Maine and Minnesota
    Upjohn Press Upjohn Research home page 1-1-2016 Surviving Job Loss: Paper Makers in Maine and Minnesota Kenneth A. Root Luther College Rosemarie J. Park University of Minnesota Follow this and additional works at: https://research.upjohn.org/up_press Part of the Labor Economics Commons Citation Root, Kenneth A. and Rosemarie J. Park. 2016. Surviving Job Loss: Paper Makers in Maine and Minnesota. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. https://doi.org/10.17848/ 9780880995085 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. This title is brought to you by the Upjohn Institute. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Surviving Job Loss Surviving Job Loss Papermakers in Maine and Minnesota Kenneth A. Root Rosemarie J. Park 2016 WEseries focus W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research Kalamazoo, Michigan Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Root, Kenneth A., author. | Park, Rosemarie J., author. Title: Surviving job loss : papermakers in Maine and Minnesota / Kenneth A. Root, Rosemarie J. Park. Description: Kalamazoo, Mich. : W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, [2016] | Series: WE focus series | Description based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed. Identifiers: LCCN 2016002251 (print) | LCCN 2015048918 (e-book) | ISBN 9780880995085 (e-book) | ISBN 0880995048 (e-book) | ISBN 9780880995078 (pbk. : alk. paper) | ISBN 0880995076 (pbk. : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Paper industry workers—United States—Case studies. | Plant shutdowns—United States—Case studies. | Unemployed—United States—Case studies. | Displaced workers—United States—Case studies. | Older people— Employment—United States—Case studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Kimberly-Clark Worldwide Site Upland Area, Everett,Snohomish County,Washington 
    ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE SITE UPLAND AREA, EVERETT,SNOHOMISH COUNTY,WASHINGTON REDACTED FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION March 25, 2013 Report Number 24976 SWCA/NORTHWEST ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES SEATTLE,WASHINGTON ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE SITE UPLAND AREA, EVERETT,SNOHOMISH COUNTY,WASHINGTON Report Prepared for Steve Germiat Aspect Consulting LLC 401 Second Avenue S., Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98104 By Brandy Rinck, Sharon Boswell, and Johonna Shea March 25, 2013 Report Number 24976 REDACTED FOR GENERAL DISTRIBUTION SWCA/Northwest Archaeological Associates 5418 - 20th Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98107 ABSTRACT TheKimberlyͲClarkWorldwide(KͲCWW)uplandareawasdevelopedforhistoricalpulpandpaper manufacturingandtheareaiscontaminatedasaresultoftheindustrialoperations.Theexistingpulp andpapermillwillbedemolishedtopreparetheuplandareaforcleanupandeventuallandusechange. TheDepartmentofEcologyandKͲCWW,Inc.haveexecutedanAgreedOrdertocompletestudies relatedtofuturecleanupaswellasopportunisticinterimactioncleanupactivitiesduringdemolitionof themill.AsrequiredbytheInterimActionPlan,whichisExhibitCtotheAgreedOrder,SWCA EnvironmentalConsultantshasassessedtheprobabilityforencounteringarchaeologicaldepositsor objectsduringcleanupofthecontaminatedKͲCWWuplandarea,concentratingon11areascalledout inopportunisticcleanupplans.Thisassessmentincludesbackgroundinformationonthesettingofthe projectarea,expectationsforburiedculturalresourcesbasedonpreviousinvestigationsinthevicinity,
    [Show full text]
  • Materials Needs and Opportunities in the Pulp and Paper Industry" Was Distributed for Comments and Review at the Meeting
    f' Materials Needs and Opportunities in the Pulp and Paper Industry Advanced Industrial Materials (AIM) Program August 1995 Office of Industrial Technologies U.S. Department of Energy This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Techni- cal Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (615) 576-8401,FTS 626-8401. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. I I This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, corn- pleteness. or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process dis- closed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily consti- tute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ORNLm-12865 MATERIALS NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITES IN THE PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY Date Published: August 1995 NOTICE This document contains information of a preliminary nature. It is subject to revision or correction and therefore does not represent a final report.
    [Show full text]
  • Product Evolution
    Product Evolution Behind-the-scenes look at the No more washing diapers evolution of everyday products NoStory more ofwashing disposable diapers diapers Protection you can throw away Story of disposable diapers Story of facial tissues Did you ever wonder how the essential Learn Learn more more Learn more products you use on a daily basis came to be? What was happening in the world One teacher’s fight against germs that spurred Kimberly-Clark on to invent One teacher's fight against germs Helping babies become big kids StoryStory of paper of paper towels towels Story of training pants new-to-the-world products such as facial Learn Learn more more Learn more tissue, paper towels, toilet paper on a roll, feminine pads and disposable Cotton substitute improves women’s lives training pants? Why were disposable Cotton substitute improves women's lives The roll that changed history StoryStory of feminine of feminine sanitary pads sanitary pads Story of toilet tissue diapers invented and what role did Learn Learn more more Learn more Kimberly-Clark have in improving their use? How did all these amazing products become such an integral Protection you can throw away No more washing diapers Protection you can throw away part of the fabricStory of disposable our lives? diapers StoryStory of facialof facial tissues tissues Learn more Learn Learn more more The answers are quite extraordinary and surprising. For instance, did you know that the material used to develop Helping babies become big kids One teacher's fight against germs Helping babies become
    [Show full text]
  • Commission of the European Communities
    COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES C(96) 44 final Brussels, 16 January 1996 COMMISSION DECISION of 16 January 1996 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case No IV/M.623 - KIMBERLY-CLARK/SCOTT) --------------- (Only the English text is authentic) COMMISSION DECISION of 16 January 1996 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case No IV/M.623 - KIMBERLY-CLARK/SCOTT) --------------- (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings(1), and in particular Article 8(2) thereof, Having regard to the EEA Agreement and in particular Article 57(1) thereof, Having regard to the Commission Decision of 12 September 1995 to initiate proceedings in this case, Having given the undertakings concerned the opportunity to make known their views on the objections raised by the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations(2), 1. On 8 August 1995 the Kimberly-Clark Corporation of Dallas, United States of America (KC) notified to the Commission its intention to merge its worldwide activities with the Scott Paper Company of Philadelphia, United States of America (Scott). "Newco", a newly formed wholly-owned subsidiary of KC, will be merged into Scott, subsequent to which the surviving corporation will be controlled by KC.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Salaried and Hourly Pension Plan (Kimberly-Clark Corporation)
    Your Salaried and Hourly Pension Plan (Kimberly-Clark Corporation) Summary Plan Description Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................1 The Kimberly-Clark Corporation Pension Plan.................................................1 Plan History...................................................................................................1 Plan Features...................................................................................................1 Eligibility............................................................................................................3 Employee Eligibility ..........................................................................................3 Service...............................................................................................................4 What Service Means........................................................................................4 Vesting Service................................................................................................4 Military Service..............................................................................................4 Benefit Service.................................................................................................5 Break-in-Service ..............................................................................................6 Break-in-Service and Pension Choice...........................................................6 Impact of Pension
    [Show full text]