Copper Naphthenate Treated WoodA Review and Regulatory Update

1

Ken LaughlinNisus Corporation - Rockford, TN

Prepared for the 2015 AWPA Annual Meeting

Presentation Outline• Overview of Copper Naphthenate (CuN)• EPA Regulatory Status– Basis for General Use classification– RED status– Treated Wood Disposal

• AWPA Standards• Commodities & Uses• Recent Efficacy/Performance Studies

2

3

Copper Naphthenate Basics• Naphthenic acid is a natural

component of petroleum

– Carboxylic acid like acetic acid (vinegar)– Mixture of C6-C25 acids– Recovered for commercial uses– Previously disposed of as waste

• Copper used in CuN recovered from electronics waste4

CH3

CH3

OH

O

CH3

OH

O

Copper Naphthenate Basics• Produced by the reaction of naphthenic acid

and copper compounds– Pure CuN is a glassy solid or paste, ~11-13% Cu– Insoluble in water– Concentrate formulations

• Solvent-based: Diluted in #2 D or mineral spirits to 8% Cu• Waterborne: Diluted to 5% Cu

• Copper is the main active component in CuN– Organic naphthenate portion provides oil solubility

5

Why Copper Naphthenate?

6

• Consumer pressure for a cleaner end product

• Cleaner handling characteristics & lower odor

• Not a restricted use pesticide & no listed carcinogens

• Diverse studies show it works as well as alternatives

• Good lubricating and waterproofing qualities, and non-conductive

• Works great with borates as a dual treatment– borates prevent incipient decay in wood

while seasoning

Copper-Based Pesticides• Used extensively in agriculture– Tens of millions of lbs applied

annually in crop and algaecide applications

– Major crop applications include citrus, tree nuts, tomato, pepper, grape, berries and peach

• Direct water applications as an algaecide, aquatic herbicide, bactericide and molluscicide

• Copper is a micronutrient with minimal toxicity to higher life forms 7

CuN Regulatory Status• EPA non-restricted use pesticide

– General Use Classification– Sold over the counter for consumer use– Non-hazardous waste– Non-hazardous air pollutant– No reportable quantity required if

spilled

• EU/ECHA BPR: Not currently registered as an active in PT 8– Working to get added as new active

8

EPA Registration Update• 2007: Re-registration Eligibility Decision

– All studies identified in data call-in are complete– Data submitted to EPA in 2013 & 2014.

• 2010: Registration Review– EPA does not anticipate needing additional data– Final decision due in 2015

• 2015: 10 active registrations for oil-borne CuN– 8.0% Cu concentrate containing 68% CuN– 1% Cu (8.5 to 10% CuN) ready to use– 2% Cu (17 to 21.6% CuN) ready to use

9

Copper Naphthenate Health Effects

• Low acute mammalian toxicity by oral, dermal, inhalation routes of exposure

• Skin irritant, but not a skin sensitizer• Not a carcinogen or mutagen• No reproductive toxicity • Minimal avian toxicity• Moderate to high aquatic toxicity

10

Wood Preservative ComparisonCu/CuN Pentachlorophenol Creosote Arsenic

Use Classification General Restricted Restricted Restricted

Toxicity Category III I I I

RCRA Listed Waste Not Listed F021, F027, F028,F032,K001

F034, K001, K035, U051

F035, P011

CERCLA RQ, lbs None 10 1 1

OSHA carcinogen No Yes Yes Yes

Drinking Water MCL, mg/l

1.3 (Cu) 0.0001 0.002 (B[a]P)

0.010

EPA 2011 tap water RSL, μg/l

620 (Cu) 0.17 0.0029 (B[a]P)

0.045

EPA 2011 res. soil RSL, mg/kg

3100 (Cu) 0.89 0.015(B[a]P)

0.39

11

Best Management Practices• Recommended practices for treating wood using

CuNap and other preservatives• Ensures a clean surface & minimal drippage• Minimizes environmental exposure for wood

intended for use in aquatic, wetland and other sensitive environments

• Available at www.wwpinstitute.org• Refer to AWPA Standard M20-14 12

13

CuN Re-Registration Impact• Risk assessment completed 2007• CuN eligible for Re-registration 2007– Conditions identified in RED must be satisfied

• Data gaps: aquatic toxicity, inhalation toxicity, exposure

• Data Call-In issued June 2010

• All 3 producers voluntarily canceled all labels• EPA had not anticipated CuN might disappear

14

Nisus enters the CuN businessIn 5 Months: • Met with EPA in 2011 • Completed test batches • Committed to meet EPA data call-in • Obtained Federal and State registrations • Manufactured, tested and shipped 20,000 gallons 8%

Cu, trade named as QNAP®

• New Rockford, TN plant operational 2Q2012 15

16

Copper Naphthenate Markets

Major market currently in utility poles.

18

19

20

Copper Naphthenate Markets

Major market currently in bridge timbers

22

Copper Naphthenate-Treated Ties and Bridge Timbers

Copper Naphthenate Markets• Large market is in

remedial treatment of poles in service

Copper Naphthenate Markets

Fence posts, highway bridge/guardrails, glulam

25

26

Copper Naphthenate Markets• Increasing interest in railroad ties– Major Class I railroads switching to CuN– Bridge ties & timbers in addition to crossties

• Fence posts, highway bridge/guardrails, glulam

Copper Naphthenate Markets

Major market in railroad ties–Major Class I railroads switching

to CuN–Bridge ties & timbers in addition

to crossties

29

30

31

AWPA U1-14 Commodity Specification A & D for Copper Naphthenate-treated Crossarms & Poles

Minimum Retention Standards, lbs/ft3 (pcf), as Cu

Service Southern Pine Douglas-fir Western Red Cedar

UC3B (crossarms)

0.040 0.040 0.040

UC4A 0.060 0.075 0.120 (0.150)*

UC4B 0.080 0.095 0.120 (0.150)*

UC4C 0.130 0.150 0.120 (0.150)*

32* By thermal (non-pressure) process

AWPA U1-14 Commodity Specification B & C for Copper Naphthenate-treated posts & ties

Minimum Retention Standards, lbs/ft3 (pcf), as Cu

Service Southern Pine

Douglas-fir

Oak & Hickory

Mixed Hardwoods

Posts, UC4A 0.055 0.055 -- --

Posts, UC4B 0.069 0.069 -- --

Ties, UC4A-C 0.060 0.060 0.055* 0.060

33* Or refusal

AWPA Standard M4Remedial Treatments

• Ground-line & end cut treatment to extend service life

• 1-2% minimum copper in CuN solutions

• Appropriate for wood originally treated with other preservatives, including waterbornes

• Std. M4 revised in 2014 to require field treatment if lumber/timbers are cut or drilled 34

Recent Efficacy & Wood Properties Data

• Field stake tests in MS

• Treated wood properties– Electrical conductivity– Gaff penetration

35

USDA Forest Products Lab Stake StudyFPL-RN-02

• B. Woodward, C. Hatfield, S. Lebow. “Comparison of Wood Preservatives in Stake Tests - 2011 Progress Report”

• 2" x 4" x 18" Southern Pine stakes

• Pressure treated, installed 1948-1953 in MS

• AWPA Hazard Zone 5 (most severe exposure)

36

USDA Forest Products Lab Data FPL-RN-02 Table 17 - 2x4 Stake Tests

In Catalytic Gas Oil @ 50 Years Exposure in Saucier, MSActives, % in solution

Retention, pcf, AI / Solution

AI Retention, % of AWPA UC4B

Average Life, years

Untreated Control -- -- 2.2Cat. Gas Oil Control -- / 4.0 -- 7.6CuN, 0.5% 0.021 / 4.2 28 14.3CuN, 0.75% 0.033 / 4.4 44 17.4PCP, 5.0% 0.21 / 4.2 42 14.2C.T. Creosote 4.1 41 16.3

37

USDA Forest Products Lab Data FPL-RN-02 Table 29 - 2x4 Stake Tests

In Light Aromatic Solvent @ 29 Years Exposure in Saucier, MSActive, % in solution

Retention, pcf, by Weight / Assay

AI Retention, % of UC4B

Post treatment

Avg. Life, years

Untreated Control -- -- -- 2.4

CuN, 0.5% Cu 0.023 / 0.020 31 / 27 None 11.0

CuN, 0.5% Cu 0.022 / 0.020 29 / 27 Steam 12.0

CuN, 0.5% Cu 0.023 / 0.018 31 / 24 Vapor 11.8

CuN, 0.59% Cu 0.026 / 0.023 35 / 31 Steam 14.3

PCP, 5.0% 0.230 / 0.186 46 / 37 None 14.1

PCP, 5.0% 0.240 / 0.222 48 / 44 Steam 12.9

PCP, 5.0% 0.300 / 0.173 60 / 35 Vapor 12.3 38

Treated Wood ConductivityRagon et al. 2011, Proc. AWPA

• Samples: 1-foot sections of southern pine poles• Moisture content ~16 +/- 1%

CuN contains copper but is non-conductive 39

Chemical Treatment Conductivity, Siemens/mCuN 1.01 x 10-8

Untreated 1.68 x 10-8

Pentachlorophenol 2.13 x 10-6

CCA 2.96 x 10-6

Gaff Penetration (Shupe et al. 2011)

Force required for 9206 gaff to penetrate 0.475 in. (lbs)

40Southern Pine Douglas-fir0

50100150200250300350400450500

UntreatedCuNapPCPCreosote

Summary & Conclusions• CuN – a proven and effective preservative• CuN-treated wood – properties advantageous to utilities, railroads

and other users– a renewable natural material– from a sustainable, managed source– treated with a non-restricted use preservative, manufactured

domestically using reclaimed substances– options for uses after normal service life

41