ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AC
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EPA-330/1-79-O06
A SUMMARY OF
TOXIC SUBSTANCES INFORMATION
FOR THE
CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN AREA
TENNESSEE-GEORGIA
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
DENVER. COLORADO
NOVEMBER 1979
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Enforcement
EPA-330/1-79-006
A SUMMARY
OF
TOXIC SUBSTANCES INFORMATION
FOR THE
CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN AREA
TENNESSEE - GEORGIA
James R. Vincent
November 1979
National Enforcement Investigations Center
Denver, Colorado
-------
CONTENTS
ADDENDUM
I INTRODUCTION l
II SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 5
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 5
SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION -7
SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES 14
III BACKGROUND 19
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 19
PREVIOUS STUDIES 25
IV STUDY METHODS 31
BACKGROUND DATA COLLECTION 31
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE 31
AERIAL RECONNAISSANCE 32
V ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 33
AIR QUALITY 34
WATER QUALITY 36
VI SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION 43
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION 43
MUNICIPAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION 80
DOMESTIC SOURCES OF POLLUTION 82
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 82
VII SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - SOUTH CHICKAMAUGA CREEK
DRAINAGE AREA 89
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES 90
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES HI
MUNICIPAL SOURCES I21
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL I24
NON-POINT SOURCES I25
VIII SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - CITICO CREEK DRAINAGE AREA ... 127
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES I2?
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES 151
OTHER SOURCES 136
IX SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - CHATTANOOGA CREEK
DRAINAGE AREA ' I37
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES 137
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES 159
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 162
NON-POINT SOURCES I65
X SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - LOOKOUT CREEK DRAINAGE AREA . . 167
XI SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - TENNESSEE RIVER MAIN STREAM . . 171
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES I72
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES 189
MUNICIPAL SOURCES 194
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL 20°
NON-POINT SOURCES 20°
REFERENCES 203
-------
FIGURES
1 Location Map 2
2 Study Area Map 20
3 Tennessee-American Water Company 24
4 Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant 91
5 C.F. Industries Fertilizer Plant 93
6 C.F. Industries, Bio-Pond Area 95
7 C.F. Industries, South Pond Area 96
8 Airport Industrial Area 98
9 GAF Corporation 100
10 Lower South Chickamauga Creek 102
11 W.R. Grace and Co. and Mueller Co 104
12 Mueller Company 107
13 Alco Chemical Corp 108
14 DeSoto, Inc. and Foam Fabricating, Inc 112
15 Ringgold, Georgia Area 113
16 South Industrial Area, Ringgold, Georgia 115
17 Sweetwater Carpet Corp 116
18 Southern Centrifugal and Hawthorne St. Dump 120
19 Citico Creek Area 128
20 Southern Railway Wastewater Pretreatment Units 130
21 Chattanooga Gas Co. and U.S. Stove Co 132
22 Industrial Plating Co 135
23 Alton Park - Lower Chattanooga Creek Area 138
24 Velsicol Chemical Corp. and Chattanooga Coke & Chemical Co. . 145
25 Southern Wood Piedmont Co 150
26 Rockwell International Corp 154
27 Wheland Foundry, Middle Street Unit 157
28 Flintstone, Georgia Area 160
29 Rossville, Georgia Area 161
30 38th Street Closed Dump 164
31 Lower Lookout Creek 168
32 Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant Final Pond 174
33 Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant Wastewater Treatment Units . . 175
34 Chickamauga Dam Area 177
35 DuPont Wastewater Treatment Plant 179
36 DuPont Plant and Disposal Area 180
37 Polysar Latex 182
38 Central Soya Company 183
39 Moccasin Bend and Central Chattanooga Area 185
40 Combustion Engineering, Inc 188
41 U.S. Pipe and Foundry Company, Soil Pipe Division 190
42 Signal Mountain Area 195
43 American Cyanamid Company 196
44 Moccasin Bend Wastewater Treatment Plant 197
-------
APPENDICES
A - Georgia Water Quality Criteria
B - Tennessee Water Quality Criteria
TABLES
1 Steam Use Classifications 38
2 Steam Segment Classifications and Waste Load Allocations ... 39
3 Inventory of Industrial Sources of Pollution 44
4 Municipal Sources of Pollution 81
5 Domestic Sources of Wastewater Discharges 83
6 Industrial Residuals Survey 84
-------
ADDENDUM
January 1979
Subsequent to the final printing of this report, the Velsicol
Chemical Corporation submitted new data to NEIC that updated the status
of abatement of releases of toxic substances to the environment from
their Chattanooga facility.* This chemical plant was assigned the
highest rating for potential releases of toxic substances to the environ-
ment from industrial sources in the Chattanooga metropolitan area.
The NEIC report was prepared from data present in EPA files in
early 1979. The Velsicol submission contained data on releases of
toxic substances in early 1979 and older data not previously submitted
to EPA. This information shows that significant changes in pollution
abatement practices at the plant have occurred in the last three years
that are not reflected in the report discussion. This addendum up-
dates the report text to reflect these changes.
A subjective relative ranking (page 15) was assigned to each of
23 major industrial sources of toxic substances based on their known
or potential releases of toxic substances to city sewers, to surface
waterways, to the ambient air, and to onsite hazardous waste disposal.
Velsicol received the maximum 5-point relative rating on three of the
four factors and a 4 rating on releases to the air. Information in
the 1980 submission indicated that there has been past litigation
concerning damage to vegetation in residential areas adjacent to the
plant resulting from release of dicamba (a herbicide) and concerning
* Letter dated January 23, 1980, from Mr. John M. Rademacher, Vice
President, Environmental, Health and Ragulatory Affairs, Velsicol
Chemical Corporation, to Mr. Thomas Gallagher, Director, NEIC, with
Attachments A-E.
-------
odor problems from the residual waste burner. These factors were not
considered in the air rating. If so, they would have produced a 5-point
rating.
Production of dicamba and operation of the waste burner have ceased.
Hydrocarbon emissions have been substantially reduced below 1971 levels
previously evaluated. These changes result in a current air rating of
three points.
Control of surface runoff from the plant site and surface overflow
of process wastes has been substantially improved since 1977 resulting
in reduced discharges of toxic substances to surface waterways. A re-
duced rating of three points is currently assigned to discharges to
waterways.
The total rating assigned to Velsicol at this time is 16. This
would result in a No. 4 ranking on page 15. It should be noted that
changes may have occurred at other industrial facilities that could
also change their relative ratings.
A detailed discussion of the Velsicol plant is presented in Sec-
tion IX of this report, pages 137 to 146. Revisions to these pages
reflecting the new information are discussed below.
Velsicol reports that six products listed on page 139 should be
deleted and four added as follows:
Delete: Benzonitrile
2,4-Diamino-6-phenyl-s-triazine
Benzyl Benzoate
Benzyl Ether
l,4,5,6,7,7-Hexachloro-5-norbornene-2,3-dicarboxylic
diesters
a,a,a, Trichlorotoluene
1,1,
-------
Add: Di-2-Ethyl, Hexyl Chlorendate
Di Methyl Chlorendate
Di Butyl Chlorendate
Glycerol Tri Benzoate
Velsicol has never produced BHC (page 140, paragraph 1). It was
produced by Tennessee Products Company, the previous plant owner. Pro-
duction of BHC was stopped more than ten years ago. The presence of BHC
contamination in process wastes, surface runoff, and adjacent swamp land
10 years later, attest to the persistence of this pesticide and its wide-
spread contamination of this site.
Velsicol has constructed various improvements, including three
impoundment basins, to control the discharge of contaminated wastewaters
and surface runoff from the plant site to surface waterways as occurred
frequently prior to mid-1977 (see page 140, paragraphs 3 and 4). This
construction was scheduled for completion in December 1976 but was not
completed until August 1977 because of a contract work stoppage. The
sampling of surface runoff in April 1977 by EPA was conducted prior to
completion of construction so the reported results are not representative
of present conditions (page 143).
Analytical data submitted by Velsicol on samples of surface runoff
taken in January and March 1979, both on and off the plant site, show that
contamination of the runoff offsite has been substantially reduced below
levels observed prior to mid-1977. Priority pollutants detected offsite
in January 1979 v/ere reported as only methylene chloride, benzene, 2,4-di-
chlorophenol, BHC, aldrin, chlordane, dieldrin and endrin. The latter
four pesticides had not been previously reported in any environmental
sample data reviewed for this report. Only methylene chloride (sample
range 150 to 2,800 |.ig/l) was reported present at levels above 50 ug/1.
Several traditional pollutants including BOD, suspended solids, ammonia,
and phenols exceeded applicable State limits in some samples, indicating
that some runoff contamination or residual contamination in waterways
still exists.
•iii
-------
Contamination of the March 1979 samples by priority pollutants
for which analyses were reported was nil. No data on pesticides or
metals were reported. Several organic compounds related to current
products were detected but not quantified.
Velsicol has scheduled additional improvements during 1980 re-
lated to containment of spills within process and storage areas, to
complete containment of contaminated surface runoff discharges from
the plant site and to control pollution from the residue disposal
area. These improvements are designed to produce further reductions
in the discharge of toxic substances from the plant site to surface
waterways.
Improvements completed to date essentially contain all contami-
nated runoff from the Velsicol and Reilly Tar property and convey it
to the Chattanooga city sewer. Discussions in the first three para-
graphs on page 144 need to be modified to reflect this current status.
The leachate from the refuse area is intercepted by berms and ditches
and conveyed to the city sewer (page 144, paragraph 2).
The discussion of the refuse disposal area is correct. Velsicol
has scheduled a major project for 1980 to control pollution from this
area. Part of the woodland north of the refuse area will be denuded
on top of the hill and the refuse area and denuded area will be capped
with clay to prevent infiltration. Monitoring wells will be installed
around the refuse area to monitor groundwater quality and leachate.
Use of the waste burner was discontinued in 1975 (page 141, paragraph
2). However, the backlog of drummed residues was not completely removed
in 1975. This removal was not completed until 1979. The piles of
drums present in the 1978 aerial photographs were the last of the
drummed residue backlog (page 144, paragraph 4). Velsicol reports
that the drums observed on the "crud barn" floor slab contain column
packing material and not chemical residues.
^v
-------
Both the 1973 and 1977 EPA studies (page 142, paragraph 1 and
page 143, paragraph 3) found contamination in the swamp southeast of
the plant including high levels of BHC (a pesticide and carcinogen),
Banvel and Lindane. This was presumed to be the result of discharges
of contaminated surface runoff and occasional overflows of process
wastes during periods of heavy storm water runoff. Velsicol's 1980
submission would indicate that there was an additional previously
unreported source of this contamination. Prior to 1972, Velsicol
discharged process wastes to the city sewer through a private outfall
shared with Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company. The outfall was
northeast of the manufacturing area. Sometime in the 1970 to 1972
period, an explosion in the city sewer system resulted in the city
terminating sewer service. For "several weeks", process wastewaters
from Velsicol were discharged directly to Chattanooga Creek through
the swampy area east of the plant site while the present outfall sewer
was constructed. Velsicol states that, "Given the persistence of the
three compounds mentioned, it is to be expected that residual levels
of these materials could remain and be present as a result of the
flow of full-strength process wastewater through the area several
years ago." Given these factors and the toxicity of the substances
possibly present, it appears that contamination of the swamp should
be evaluated, including sampling of sediments at several locations
and depths.
Velsicol submitted air emission data updating the 1971 data con-
tained in the report (page 144, last paragraph). A computerized data
summary from the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Air Pollution Control
Bureau was provided for 26 emission points. Total reported annual
emissions were about 77 m. tons (85 tons) of unspecified hydrocarbons
and one ton of particulates. No sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides or
carbon monoxides were reported. The reported sources of emissions
indicate that toluene would be present in the hydrocarbon emissions,
possibly as a major fraction.
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) was requested
by the Enforcement Director, EPA Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia, to compile
and evaluate available information on environmental pollution in the Chat-
tanooga, Tennessee-metropolitan area [Figure 1]. Specific study objectives
were to:
1. Compile available information from EPA files on air emissions,
wastewater discharges and solid and hazardous waste disposal
practices in the Chattanooga area with emphasis on toxic sub-
stances.
2. Develop an aerial photograph inventory of solid and hazardous
waste disposal sites (including on-site industrial disposal)
and wastewater discharges.
3. Identify and assign priority rankings to known and potential
sources of toxic substances which warrant consideration by EPA
for reconnaissance inspections to determine actual releases of
toxic substances to the environment and the related control prac-
tices and environmental impacts.
The geographical boundaries of the study area were established
to include all of the Chattanocjga urban area and adjacent drainage
areas affecting the Chattanooga water supply and water quality in the
urban area. These included the Tennessee River from River Mile 450
to 480 (Signal Mountain to Harrison Bay north of Volunteer Army Ammuni-
tion Plant including portions of Nickajack and Chickamauga Lakes),
South Chickamauga Creek from Ringgold, Georgia to the Tennessee River,
Chattanooga Creek from Flintstone, Georgia to the Tennessee River and
the lower 5 km (3 mi) of Lookout Creek.
-------
Kentucky
Nashville
Tennessee
Alabama
Montgomery
Knoxville
'' North
Georgia
Atlanta
Carolina
N
F1gure 1.
Location Map
-------
The scope of the investigation included a compilation of infor-
mation present in EPA files, a detailed literature search, a brief
ground reconnaissance and aerial reconnaissances for obtaining-photo-
graphs. Aerial photography was obtained on several dates between
June 1978 and January 1979.
The Chattanooga metropolitan area is one of four major population
and industrial centers in Tennessee. Because of the concentration of
industry and population, environmental quality is degraded. Although
implementation of air and water pollution controls during the past
decade have resulted in improved environmental quality, further improve-
ment is needed to meet applicable state and federal environmental
regulations. The quality of the Chattanooga water supply periodically
is affected by spills and discharges of chemicals and industrial waste-
waters necessitating sophisticated water treatment processes. Several
area watercourses are not suitable for designated beneficial uses.
Air pollution alerts occur at least once per year.
Recent legislation dealing with toxic substances and disposal of
hazardous and solid wastes (the toxic Substances Control Act and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) require that inventories of
sources and disposal practices for such materials be compiled. Toxic
substances released to the environment from industrial sources and
from municipal wastewater treatment plants receiving industrial waste-
waters contribute to the Chattanooga environmental problems.
Resources available to EPA are inadequate to fully define and
evaluate all sources of-toxic substances and other pollutants in the
study area. This report provides the basis for prioritizing the use
of these limited resources to investigate the most significant environ-
mental problems and their causes.
-------
Section III summarizes background data on the study area including
previous studies. Methodology used in the current study is discussed in
Section IV. Section V summarizes current environmental conditions (air
and water quality) and trends. Sources of pollution of the air and water
of the study area are discussed in Section VI which includes detailed
inventories of all known sources. Sections VII through XI contain de-
tailed discussions of all major and numerous minor known or potential
sources of toxic substances.
.Section II, Summary and Conclusions, presents the results of the
study in summary form organized in the same order of presentation as
Sections V to XI.
-------
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Water Quality
1. Water quality data on toxic substances in the study area are
very limited and in most cases have been obtained by special
studies of specific stream reaches. The only current monitoring
of instream toxic substances reported in EPA files was sampling
for a few heavy metals conducted by Tennessee-American Water
Company upstream from their intakes.
2. Water quality in the Tennessee River as it passes through the
study area, is degraded by municipal and industrial wastewater
discharges and surface runoff. The relatively good water quality
present in the upstream Chickamauga Lake decreases in quality in
Nickajack Lake downstream from Chickamauga Dam. Nickajack Lake
is designated by Tennessee as a water quality limited stream seg-
ment which does not meet applicable water quality standards.
Levels of cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury and phenols were in
violation of water quality criteria in 1973.
3. The public water supply for most of the study area is provided by
the Tennessee-American Water Company. Raw water is obtained from
Nickajack Lake downstream from numerous sources of pollution.
Degraded water quality has made necessary the installation of addi-
tional treatment facilities at the water plant. Spills of chemicals
and industrial wastes upstream of the water supply intakes have in-
creased in recent years. The intakes are located in a position vul-
nerable to pollution from Citico Creek, bypasses from a sewage pump-
ing station and along-shore flow from South Chickamauga Creek.
-------
4. Chattanooga Creek is the most polluted stream in the study area.
Although water quality has improved since a 1973 study, a 1977
study showed continued degradation in the lower reaches by dis-
charges of toxic substances from industrial sources and from sur-
face runoff and combined sewer overflows. Toxic substances pre-
sent included phenols, benzene, chloroform, tetrachloroethylene,
chlorobenzene, dimethyl phenol, naphthalene, dimethylphthalate,
and di-n-butylphthalate. The stream is designated as water quality
limiting in the Tennessee reaches. Water quality does not meet es-
tablished water quality criteria. Dissolved oxygen depressions
were severe in 1977.
5. Water quality has improved in Citico Creek in recent years but it
is still degraded by surface runoff and small industrial discharges.
This small stream is designated as water quality limiting by Tennessee.
Water quality does not meet applicable water quality criteria.
6. South Chickamauga Creek is designated as water quality limiting and
in violation of water quality criteria. The most serious pollution
problems are bypassing of untreated municipal and industrial waste-
waters, spills of chemicals and industrial wastes, and contaminated
surface runoff.
7. Lookout Creek receives only minor aunicipal and industrial pollu-
tion. No current water quality data were available.
Air Quality
1. The most serious air pollution problem in the study area is the high
total suspended particulate (TSP) levels. During air stagnations,
TSP concentrations occasionally reach alert levels. Although annual
mean TSP levels have decreased from more than 200 ug/m3 in the 1950's
to less than 100 ug/m3 at urban stations in the mid-1970*s, TSP con-
centrations are still in violation of ambient levels at several
-------
stations near Industrialized areas. Major sources of particu-
lates include several foundries, a coke plant, a cement plant,
industrial power plants and quarries.
2. The serious air pollution problem caused by high nitrogen oxide
emissions primarily originating from the Volunteer Army Ammunition
Plant has been abated by the shutdown of the explosives production
facility.
3. Other than criteria pollutants (total suspended particulates,
nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide),
there were essentially no ambient air quality data.
SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Industrial Sources
1. Industrial facilities comprise about 80% of the sources of environ-
mental pollution in the study area. A directory of manufacturers
for a tri-state 10-county area listed about 500 industrial facili-
ties with addresses in the study area. These range in size from
very small plants with less than 10 employees to major industrial
complexes with more than 5,000 employees. Major types of pro-
ducts manufactured include textiles, fabricated metals, chemicals,
primary metals, food products, machinery, apparel, paper products
and leather goods.
2. Most industrial facilities discharge part or all of their waste-
water to municipal sewerage systems with the majority connected to
the Chattanooga Moccasin Bend Wastewater Treatment Plant. Eighty-
two industries have reported they discharge industrial wastewaters
to municipal sewers. In most cases, the status of pretreatment
was not defined. Only domestic wastewaters are discharged by
-------
108 industries. The type of wastewater discharged to city sewers
was not defined for the remainder of the industrial facilities
but probably consists of domestic or minor industrial wastewaters,
in most cases, because these are primarily small plants with low
waste generating processes.
3. There are a total of 95 reported direct discharges of wastewaters
from industrial sources to surface waterways. NPDES permits
have been issued to 51 of these, of which 20 are considered major
dischargers. An additional 16 sources have been issued Tennessee
State Permits but not NPDES permits. The following 44 industrial
facilities reportedly have a known or probable surface discharge
but do not have a NPDES permit. Most of these discharges are
reportedly small cooling water discharges, surface runoff contain-
ing process contaminants, minor process wastewater discharges or
other miscellaneous wastewaters. Sources with Tennessee State
Permits are indicated with an asterisk.
Tennessee Sources
1. ALC Inc.*
2. ACCU-Cast
3. Acheson Foundry & Machine
4. Alloy Fabricators
5. American Oil Co.
(Chattanooga Pipeline Terminal)*
6. Atlas Paper Box Co.
7. BHY Concrete Finishing, Inc.*
8. Chattanooga Boiler & Tank Co.
9. Chattanooga Gas Co.
LNG Storage*
LPG Storage*
10. Chattanooga Products, Inc.*
11. Clowes Ceramics
12. Cobble Muse Hosiery Mills
13. Colonial Pipeline
-------
14. Consolidated Latex*
15. Crane Co.*
16. Dixie Industries
17: E'Con Mills*
18. Fibron, Inc.*
19. General Oils
20. General Shale Products, Inc.*
21. Godsey's Automotive Shop
22. W.R. Grace and Co.*
23. Ernest Holmes Div., Dover Corp
24. Hy's Mi nit Car Wash
25. Industrial Plating Co.
Tech Finishing Division
26. W.L. Jackson Mfg. Co.*
27. Jet Speed Car Wash
28. Kay's Ice Cream, Inc.
29. Koehring Co., Loraine Div.
30. Rock-Tenn Co., Mill Div.
31. Ross-Meehan Foundries
32. Southern Cellulose Products, Inc.
33. Southern Centrifugal, Inc.*
34. Southern Champion Tray Co.
35. Southern Oil Service
36. Stainless Metal Products, Inc.*
37. D.M. Steward Mfg. Co.*
38. Swift Edible Oil Co.
39. United States Stove Co.
Georgia Sources
1. Acuff Processing Plant
2. Borg Textiles - Southern Div.
3. Kenyon Southern Inc.
4. Standard-Coosa-Thatcher
4. Data were not available on the actual discharges of toxic sub-
stances from most industrial facilities to surface waters or
to sewerage systems. Based on a ranking system developed by
NEIC that relates the probability of discharge of toxic sub-
stances to Standard Industrial Classifications, relative poten-
tial rankings were assigned to each facility. A majority of
the industrial sources have a moderate to high potential for
discharge of toxic substances. There were 30 facilities with
-------
10
known discharges of toxic substances, 6% of the total. About
119 facilities (24%) have relatively high potential for dis-
charges of toxic substances. An additional 253 facilities
(51%) were assigned a moderate potential. The remaining 95
sources (19%) were given a low to no potential ranking.
5. Data on emissions of air pollutants were not available for most
industrial facilities and toxic substance data other than sulfur
oxides, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide were almost non-existent.
Most larger sources of the criteria pollutants were listed in
the Compliance Data System (88 sources) and emissions data were
available in the National Emissions Data System for 60 sources.
Based on a subjective evaluation of industry types and products,
201 of the facilities (40%) have some potential for emitting
toxic substances.
6. A majority of the industrial facilities potentially produce hazar-
dous wastes requiring disposal. Only 9 sources were known to
produce hazardous wastes. Based on a subjective evaluation of
the industry type and products, about 52% (260 sources) were
believed to be potential sources of hazardous wastes.
Municipal Sources
1. There are seven municipal wastewater treatment plants in the
study area, of which six are considered major dischargers. These
plants serve a total sewered pollution estimated as 156,000 persons.
Wastewater flow averaged 250,000 mVday (66 mgd) in 1977. A major
portion of the flow originated from industrial sources.
2. The largest source of pollution in the study area is the Moccasin
Bend Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) which is operated by the
City of Chattanooga and serves a major portion of the study area.
-------
11
The plant is hydraulically and organically overloaded. Average
flow treated in 1977 was about 193,000 mVday (51 mgd) of which
70% was from industrial sources. Plant design capacity is
160,000 mVday (42 mgd). Bypassing of untreated sewage occurs
frequently, especially during wet weather. Waste activated sludge
is discharged to Nickajack Lake because of inadequate solids hand-
ling facilities. Additional solids-handling facilities are under
construction.
3. The Brainerd WWTP frequently bypasses untreated sewage (75 days
in 1977) to South Chickamauga Creek upstream of the public water
supply intakes in Nickajack Lake. The plant is operated by the
City of Chattanooga and serves portions of the City east of Mission-
ary Ridge with a sewered population of about 35,000. Average waste-
water flow in 1977 was about 19,000 mVday (5 mgd), substantially in
excess of the design capacity of 13,000 mVday (3.5 mgd). Industrial
wastewater treated has a small flow volume but the organic load from
industrial sources alone exceeds design capacity. Wastewater treated
at the plant is scheduled to be diverted to the Moccasin Bend WWTP
within the next five years.
4. The East Ridge, Fort Oglethorpe and Red Bank WWTP's serve a total
population of about 32,000 and treat an average wastewater flow
of about 30,000 mVday (8 mgd). Industrial contributions are
small. These plants are scheduled to be abandoned and wastewaters
diverted to the Moccasin Bend WWTP within the next five years.
Domestic Sources
1. There are 38 domestic sources of pollution in the study area.
These are small wastewater treatment plants serving facilities
such as mobile home parks, schools, recreational and commercial
developments. Only 18 of the facilities had NPDES permits. Six-
teen of the 27 Tennessee facilities had state permits. Eleven
-------
12
were in Georgia. The 20 facilities without NPDES permits are
possible noiv* filers. The 20 are listed below by State. Facili
ties with Tennessee permits are shown by an asterisk.
Tennessee
1. Cedar Creek Mobil Home Park
2. Chattanooga Power Service Center*
3. Chattanooga State Technical School
4. Gulf Oil Service Station*
(Cummings Highway)
5. Gulf Oil Service Station
(Hixon Pike)
6. Highway 58 Shopping Center*
7. Holiday Inn*
8. K-Mart (Hixon Pike)
9. LaOel Mobile Home Valley*
10. Lakeshore Country Club Apts.*
11. McDowell Wastewater Treatment Plant*
12. North Twinbrook Subdivision*
13. Plaza 76 Service Station (Union Oil)
14. Red Food Stores
15. Shephard Elementary School
16. Union Oil Service Station
(Hixon Pike)
Georgia
1. Chattanooga Valley High School
2. Georgia Welcome Station
3. Lookout Mountain Junior High School
4. Morris Estates Subdivision
'Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal
1. There are no active public landfills in the study area. Most
solid wastes are hauled to the Hamilton County landfill in Harrison
or the City of Chattanooga landfill in Ooltewah just east of the
study area. Solid wastes have been disposed of at various closed
private and municipal landfills and dumps in the study area in
the past. The five closed dumps listed below are considered
significant actual or potential sources of pollution:
-------
13
Alton Park Boulevard
Amnicola Highway
North Hawthorne Street
Red Bank
38th Street
2. Hazardous wastes are generated by various industrial facilities
and by municipal wastewater treatment plants. Data on volumes
and characteristics of the wastes are very limited. Disposal
methods are undefined in many cases. Known disposal methods in-
clude on-site disposal in dumps, landfills and ponds; incineration,
transportation to local landfills and transportation to remote
hazardous waste disposal sites. Some current disposal methods
violate regulations and pose environmental hazards.
Non-Point Sources
1. Much of the older downtown area of Chattanooga is served by com-
bined storm and sanitary sewers. These overflow directly to
surface waters without treatment during precipitation events.
There are about 38 overflow points on the Chattanooga sewerage
system including treatment plant bypasses and pumping station
overflows as well as combined sewers. In addition to domestic
sewage, these overflows discharge untreated industrial wastewaters.
2. Contaminated surface runoff from industrial plant sites is a
significant source of pollution in the study area. In some cases,
this contaminated runoff is discharged to municipal sewers con-
tributing to the overload and bypassing conditions.
-------
14
SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Major Industrial Sources
1. The study identified 23 major industrial sources which have a
known or potential release of toxic substances to the environment.
Of these major sources, 20 discharge toxic substances to municipal
sewers and 12 discharge to surface waterways. Toxic substances
may be discharged in process wastewaters, in contaminated cooling
water or surface runoff, and in spills of products or raw materials.
Toxic substances were emitted to the atmosphere by 12 sources.
These sources also emitted particulate matter that may or may
not have contained toxic substances but contributed to violations
of ambient air standards and air pollution alerts. Fourteen of
the sources have on-site storage or disposal of hazardous wastes
of concern.
2. In most cases, available data were not 'adequate to define actual
current releases of toxic substances from major industrial sources.
Inspections of industrial facilities coupled with detailed sub-
missions of data would be needed to accurately define such releases.
Based on data on past releases and/or current potential releases,
a subjective relative ranking was assigned to each release pathway
for each source and used to prioritize the significance of substance
releases by source. This listing could then be used to prioritize
plant evaluations.
-------
15
Industry Name
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Velsicol Chemical Corp.
Alco Chemical Corp.
Chattanooga Coke &
Chemical Co.
Rockwell International
Wheland Foundry
Lutex Chemical Corp.
U.S. Pipe & Foundry
(Soil Pipe Division)
Chattem Drug & Chemical
W. R. Grace & Co.
GAF Corp.
Mueller Co.
Southern Wood Piedmont
DeSoto Inc.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours
Co.
Industrial Plating Co.
Roper Corp.
Combustion Engineering
Inc.
Gilman Paint & Varnish
Co.
Polysar Latex
American Cyanamld Co.
Rossville Development
Corp.
Southern Railway
C.F. Industries
Toxic
Substance Releases
To
Rating City Sewer To Waterway
19
18
17
17
16
15
15
14
14
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
11
11
11
10
10
10
9
5
5
5
3
3
5
3
5
5
5
4
4
4
0
4
4
4
5
5
0
3
3
0
5
5
4
5
4
5
4
4
2
2
2
4
3
3
3
3
2
1
2
4
2
2
3
To Air We
4
3
5
4
5
3
4
3
2
2
3
2
3
5
2
2
2
3
2
2
4
3
4
Hazardous
istes On-Site
5
5
3
5
4
2
4
2
5
4
4
3
2
4
3
3
3
2
2
4
1
2
2
Minor Industrial Sources
1. There were 49 minor industrial sources of toxic substances identi-
fied in the study. In most cases these were small plants or larger
plants with small releases of toxic substances. Most sources have
little or no potential emissions of toxic substances. Data on
-------
16
wastewater discharges were limited or non-existent but available
source information indicated minor potential discharges of toxic
substances.
2. Most of the minor sources discharge wastewaters to municipal
sewerage systems. Although the individual discharges of toxic
substances are small, their cumulative volume could produce
adverse effects on the operation of wastewater treatment plants.
Municipal Sources
1. The Moccasin Bend WWTP is the largest source of toxic substances
in the study area. A major portion of these toxic substances
originate in industrial wastewaters discharged to the municipal
system without adequate pretreatment. Discharges of industrial
wastewaters (including contaminated surface runoff) contribute
substantially to overloaded conditions at the WWTP, reduced treat-
ment efficiency and bypassing of untreated wastewaters. Pollutant
levels in the Moccasin Bend WWTP effluent are comparable to typical
municipal wastewaters before treatment. The City is in the process
of implementing an industrial, waste pretreatment ordnance passed in
1977.
2. Overloaded conditions at the Brainerd WWTP result in the bypassing
of toxic substances to the South Chickamauga Creek upstream of
the water supply intakes in Nickajack Lake.
Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites
1. There are no approved public hazardous waste disposal sites in
the study area. The status of approval by regulatory agencies
-------
17
of known private disposal sites (limited to disposal on-site by
industry) was not defined.
2. Available information and aerial photographs indicate that the
following industrial plants have known or potential on-site storage
or disposal of hazardous wastes:
1. Alco Chemical Corp.
2. American Cyanamid Co.
3. Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Co.
4. Desoto, Inc.
5. E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co., Inc.
6. GAP Corp.
7. W.R. Grace and Co.
8. Mueller Co.
9. Rockwell International
10. Roper Corp.
11. Southern Wood Piedmont
12. U.S. Pipe and Foundry, Soil Pipe Div.
13. Velsicol Chemical Corp.
14. Wheland Foundry
Non-Point Sources
1. Combined sewer overflows and bypasses at sewage pumping stations
contribute toxic substances to surface waterways, especially
when the bypassed sewage contains industrial wastewater.
2. Contaminated surface runoff from industrial plant sites contributes
significant amounts of toxic substances to surface waterways,
both in direct discharges and in bypasses during sewer system
overloads aggravated by inflow of surface runoff. Substantial
amounts of surface runoff are discharged to the Chattanooga sewer
system by the Southern Railway, Southern Wood Piedmont and Velsicol
Chemical Corp.
-------
III. BACKGROUND
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA
The City of Chattanooga is the center of a six-county Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) on the Tennessee-Georgia border
in southeastern Tennessee. It is one of four major population and
industrial centers in Tennessee. Estimated population of the SMSA in
1975 was 391,000.1
Because most significant point sources of air and water pollution
are concentrated in a smaller area than the SMSA, study area boundaries
were established to encompass only about 20% of the land area but
about 70% of the population and 90% of the industrial facilities.
Roughly, the study area encompasses the southwestern one-third of
Hamilton County, Tennessee, and smaller portions of the northern ends
of Catoosa, Dade and Walker Counties, Georgia [Figure 2]. The City
of Chattanooga with an estimated 1975 population of 170,000 covers
most of the Tennessee portion of the study area. Other Tennessee
cities are East Ridge, Lookout Mountain, Red Bank and Signal Mountain
with a total population of 42,000 in 1975. Georgia cities are Fort
Oglethorpe, Ringgold and Rossville. The 1975 estimated population of
the Georgia portion of the study area was 58,000 bringing the total
study area population to about 270,000.
Topographically, the study area is dominated by mountain ridges
and valleys and by the Tennessee River. Lookout Mountain (elev. 2,391
feet), Raccoon Mountain (elev. 1,750 feet) and Signal Mountain (elev.
2,080 feet) dominate the west side of the study area, rising above
downtown Chattanooga (elev. 665 feet). The northeast-southwest trending
-------
20
Racoon Mt
liickamnuga l,k.
STUDY AIEA
TENNESSEE,
BEIIIIA
Figur* 2. Study Area Map
-------
21
Missionary Ridge (elev. 1,100 feet) divides the older central city
from the eastern suburbs. These mountains exert a major influence on
the micro-meteorology of the study area, tending to trap air pollutants
in the industrialized central city during inversions and air stagnations.
The Tennessee River traverses the north and west portions of the
study area. Chickamauga Dam at River Mile (RM) 471 impounds the river
to create Chickamauga Lake, a major reservoir. The remainder of the
river in the study area is the upstream end of Nickajack Lake, an
impoundment created by Nickajack Dam 74 km (46 mi) downstream. Nickajack
Lake is confined to the river channel in the study area. The Tennessee
River is navigable through both lakes and a lock on Chickamauga Dam.
Hydroelectric power is generated at Chickamauga Dam. As a result,
streamflow below the dam varies widely on a diurnal and weekly basis,
as well as seasonally. Zero flows are possible for short periods of
a few hours. Average streamflow is about 91,000,000 mVday (37,000 cfs)
with the seven-day low flow with a ten-year recurrence interval about
one-third of the average flow.2
Nickajack Lake is the smallest of the mainstream Tennessee River
reservoirs and has limited storage. Hydroelectric power is also gener-
ated at Nickajack Dam. Because of the limited storage, any significant
differences in power releases at Chickamauga and Nickajack Dams can
have substantial effects on flow rates and directions in the upper
reaches of Nickajack Lake. During periods of zero flow at both dams,
a seiche has been observed to form in the lake producing flow reversals.
A similar flow reversal has been noted at the Tennessee-American Water
Company intakes during a period of heavy tributary inflow and no release
from Chickamauga Dam.
-------
22
The Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage Project, a TVA hydroelectric
power facility, is under construction near the midpoint of Nickajack
Lake (RM 444.6). This facility is designed to pump water from Nickajack
Lake to a storage reservoir atop Raccoon Mountain during low power
use periods. During peak power demand periods, the stored water is
released through turbines into Nickajack Lake to generate power.
During power generation, about 49,000,000 mVday (20,000 cfs) will be
released to Nickajack Lake.3 This flow is large enough to cause sub-
stantial flow reversals in upper Nickajack Lake during low or zero
releases from Chickamauga Dam.
South Chickamauga Creek is tne largest tributary of the Tennessee
River in the study area. It originates ji> Georgia and flows northward
through the east side of the study area and then bends westward around
the north end of Missionary Ridge to join the Tennessee River about
5 km (3 mi) downstream from Chickamauga Dam. Average streamflow is
about 1,700,000 mVday (700 cfs); however, the seven day low flow
with a recurrence interval of ten years is only about 20,000 mVday
(80 cfs). Most pollution sources in this drainage area are downstream
from Ringgold, Georgia. Ringgold was selected as the southeastern
corner of the study area.
North Chickamauga Creek, a smaller tributary, enters the river
from the north immediately downstream of Chickamauga Dam. It has few
sources of pollution and was not included in this study.
Citico Creek is a small stream draining urban and industrial
areas northeast of central Chattanooga. Streamflow consists primar-
ily of surface runoff and industrial wastewaters.
Chattanooga Creek originates in Georgia and flows northward through
the southwest part of the study area between Lookout Mountain and
Missionary Ridge to join the Tennessee River at the north end of Lookout
-------
23
Mountain. Average streamflow about 16 km (10 mi) above its mouth is
about 20,000 mVday (80 cfs). Flows are greater in the lower reach
but instantaneous flows are affected by fluctuations in the level of
Nickajack Lake. The south boundary of the study area in this drainage
was set at Flintstone, Georgia.
Lookout Creek orginates in Georgia and flows northward along the
west side of Lookout Mountain to the Tennessee River. The southwest
corner of the study area was set at the L & N Railroad Yards about
5 km (3 mi) upstream of Nickajack Lake. This stream reach is affected
by backwater from the lake.
There are between 500 and 600 manufacturers in the study area
employing a total of more than 50,000 persons. Principal products
include textiles, fabricated metals, chemicals, primary metals, food
products, machinery, apparel, paper products and leather goods. Indus-
trial facilities are primarily located along the Tennessee River between
Chickamauga Dam and Lookout Mountain, in the lower Chattanooga Creek
valley, along lower South Chickamauga Creek, northeast of the municipal
airport and at the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant.
Tourism is a major industry with more than 12 million visitors
attracted annually by the scenic, recreational and historic attributes
of the Chattanooga area.
Tennessee-American Water Company provides a public water supply
for most of the study area [Figure 3]. Raw water is obtained from
Nickajack Lake near the mouth of Citico Creek (RM 465.3). The Company
served more than 61,000 customers in 1976 and had a treatment capacity
of about 270,000 mVday (72 mgd).
Because of recurring problems with spills of chemicals and other
water pollutants to Nickajack Lake, the Company has recently installed
-------
24
Figure 3. Tennessee-American Water Company
-------
25
granulated activated carbon filter media and an activated carbon slurry
feed system in addition to conventional treatment. Finished water
storage is limited, increasing the vulnerability of the water system
to major spills. About 17,000 m3 (4.4 million gal) of storage is to
be added during the next three years. Several industrial plants obtain
water from the Tennessee River.
PREVIOUS STUDIES
Because the concentration of population and industrial development
in the Chattanooga area resulted in substantial degradation of both
water and air quality, numerous investigations and studies have been
made of environmental conditions and sources of pollution. Reports
and data from such studies during the past 11 years were used as a
major basis for the information contained in this report.
Water Quality Investigations
In October 1968, a water quality investigation of portions of
Nickajack Lake, South Chickamauga Creek, Friar Branch and Citico Creek
was conducted by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration's
Southeast Water Laboratory (predecessor to EPA).2 The study was prompted
by excessive levels of ammonia in these waters and resulting high
chlorine demands at the Chattanooga Water Company (now the Tennessee-
American Water Company) treatment plant serving the Chattanooga area.
Bioassay, hydrological and water quality studies were performed. In
addition, waste characterization studies were performed at the Farmers
Chemical Association (now C.F. Industries, Inc.) fertilizer plant on
the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant and at several other industrial
facilities. Recommendations were made for pollution abatement to
provide a safe public water supply and protection of aquatic life.
-------
26
A followup Investigation of the same area studied in 1968 (the
Tennessee River and its tributaries between River Mile (RM) 465 and
476) was conducted in June 1972 by EPA's Region IV SurveiHence and
Analysis (S & A) Division.4 This was a more comprehensive study and
included significant wastewater discharges to Friar Branch, the lower
South Chickamauga Creek, Citico Creek, North Chicamauga Creek, the
Tennessee River between Chicamauga Dam and the Chattanooga water supply
intake, and Harrison Bay in Chickamauga Lake. Study methods included
bioassays, wastewater characterizations, organic analyses of selected
industrial effluents, and water quality analyses. Fourteen industrial
wastewater sources were investigated. Two closed municipal dumps
were also investigated. Improvements in water quality were noted in
comparison to the 1968 study but grossly polluted conditions still
existed in Citico Creek and Friar Branch had high ammonia concentra-
tions. Deficiencies in wastewater treatment and disposal were noted
at most industrial plants evaluated. This study is the most recent
reported comprehensive water quality investigation in this portion of
the Chattanooga study area.
Details of wastewater characteristics, treatment and disposal at
the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant and adjacent Farmers Chemical
Association plant were provided by a 1972 EPA Federal Facilities invest-
igation.5 Additional details were developed by 1970 and 1972 studies
performed by the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency.6'7
An aerial reconnaissance of portions of the study area was flown
by EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas,
Nevada, in January 1973.8 True color photographs were recorded at
several altitudes of the Tennessee River between Signal Mountain and
Chickamauga Dam, Chattanooga Creek from Flintstone, Georgia to its
mouth, all of Citico Creek and the lower 3 km (2 mi) of South Chicka-
mauga Creek. Adjacent urban and industrial areas were also recorded.
These photographs provided details-, of wastewater treatment and disposal
-------
27
facilities, solid waste disposal practices, industrial plant layouts,
visible' water pollution and visible emissions of air pollutants.
A comprehensive water pollution study comparable to the 1972
investigation was conducted by EPA's Region IV, S & A Division, in
February to March 1973 downstream of the Chattanooga water intake.9
The study area included the Tennessee River from the intake downstream
to Signal Mountain, Lookout Creek, and Chattanooga Creek and tributaries
from Rossville, Georgia, to the mouth. Seventeen industrial sources of
pollution were evaluated as was the Moccasin Bend municipal wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP). Water quality in Chattanooga Creek was found
to be'severely degraded. Various industrial plants in the drainage
area provided inadequate pollution controls. The Moccasin Bend WWTP
was found to be a major source of toxic substances discharged to the
Tennessee River. These primarily originated from industrial wastewaters
discharged to the Chattanooga sewer system that caused operational
problems at the WWTP.
A September, 1974, report summarized a study performed by a con-
sultant of Velsicol Chemical Corporation that provided details of
sources and characteristics of surface runoff from the Corporation's
plant.10 These wastewaters were found to be a major source of pollu-
tion of Chattanooga Creek in the 1973 EPA study.9 A March, 1975,
report prepared by Velsicol provided additional data on this problem.11
A consultant for Wheland Foundry made a study of surface runoff
and wastewater discharges from the Foundry in 1976.12 This foundry
is a source of pollution of Chattanooga Creek.
A followup investigation of water quality in portions of Chattanooga
Creek and wastewater characterizations at five industrial plants including
Velsicol Chemical Corporation and Wheland Foundry was conducted in April
1977 by EPA's Region IV, S & A Division.13 Detailed organic analyses of the
-------
28
industrial wastewaters were performed by EPA's National Enforcement
Investigations Center (NEIC) in Denver. Improvement in water .quality
in Chattanooga Creek since 1973 was found but quality was still not
acceptable. Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company, Lutex Chemical
Corporation and Velsicol Chemical Corporation were found to be discharg-
ing numerous toxic substances.
As part of the requirements of their NPDES permit, the City of
Chattanooga conducted an inventory of 340 "Priority I" industrial
plants believed to be discharging wastewaters to the Chattanooga sewer
system.14 Based on' industry responses, the inventory was divided
into domestic wastewater only dischargers, industrial wastewater dis-
chargers, plants not on municipal sewers, plants out of business,
unknown status, and duplications.
A major amount of data on current environmental conditions in
the study area and on sources of water pollution is contained in various
reports prepared as part of the wastewater treatment facilities and
areawide waste treatment management planning studies conducted pursuant
to Sections 201 and 208 of the Federal Water Pollution-Control .Act.1
Most of this work has been performed by contractors and local agencies
in the past three years. Available data included inventories of munici-
pal, industrial and domestic sources of water pollution;15'3 an industrial
point source area-wide plan;16 details of open1 and closed solid waste
disposal landfills and dumps;17 water quality conditions and problems;3
and area-wide wastewater disposal plans.18'19
The Tennessee-American Water Company for the past several years
has conducted monitoring of selected water quality parameters (pH,
turbidity, specific conductance, Mn, Fe, Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd, Cr and Na)
at 20 stations on Citico Creek, South and North Chickamauga Creeks
and the Tennessee River upstream of their intake:20 Thirteen of the
stations are industrial outfalls. Monitoring is done on an approximate
monthly or bi-monthly schedule.
-------
29
Both the Tennessee Department of Public Health, Division of Water
Quality Control and EPA Region IV have conducted various individual
industrial plant and municipal WWTP visits and sampling studies the
past several years to monitor compliance of wastewater sources with
state and NPDES permits. Inspection reports were available in most
cases in EPA Region IV NPDES permit file.s.21
Air Quality Investigations
Activation of the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant in 1965 (VAAP)
resulted in numerous complaints from area residents about particulate
and gaseous emissions. In October 1967, an air quality survey was
begun in the Chattanooga, Tennessee-Rossville, Georgia, interstate
area by the National Air Pollution Control Administration (NAPCA).22
Various studies were conducted during the period from 1967 through
April 1969. Ambient air quality meteorology, vegetation effects,
material effects and emissions were studied.. The results of these
studies provided data on meteorological conditions, ambient air qual-
ity and emissions of criteria pollutants. This study is the latest
reported comprehensive investigation of air quality and emissions in
the study area.
A 1970 NAPCA report provided data on emissions from federal faci-
lities in the study area.23 Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant was listed
as the only federal facility with air pollution problems. Emissions
from VAAP were given as 10,000 m. tons (11,000 tons) of nitrogen oxides
and 600 m. tons (710 tons) of sulfur oxides. Emissions from VAAP ac-
counted for a major portion of the area nitrogen oxides emissions.
A study of chronic respiratory illness among 3,500 adults living
in areas with high or low nitrogen dioxide levels was made by Research
Triangle Institute in late 1970.24 The study did not detect significant
differences in chronic respiratory illness between adults living in
-------
30
the different exposure areas. However, lung function as measured by
forced expiratory volume tests was significantly lower in the high
nitrogen dioxide exposure areas.
An inventory of area source emissions of criteria pollutants was
completed in 1975 by Pedco-Environmental Specialists, Inc.25 This
inventory provided data on emissions from sources such as home heating
units, fugitive emissions, mobile sources and evaporation losses.
Data on emissions and ambient levels of suspended particulates
in 1974 were provided in a 1976 report prepared by GCA Technology
Division for EPA.26 Monitoring in 1974 at several stations provided
data at several locations for comparison with one long-term monitoring
station. Levels of total suspended particulates had substantially
decreased during the past two decades but still violated ambient stan-
dards at several stations.
A study by Research Triangle Institute for EPA provided data on
nitrogen oxide levels in the study area from June 1974 to June 1976.27
The VAAP had been modernized and was operating at lower production
levels during this period. Emissions of nitrogen dioxide were substan-
tially reduced from levels five years earlier.
A 1977 EPA report contained data on a 1971-1972 study of lung
function in children living in Chattanooga areas of high and low expo-
sure to nitrogen oxides.28 No differences in lung function were con-
firmed in contrast to an earlier study which showed that lung function
was decreased in children living in high exposure areas. One possible
explanation of the differences in study results was that nitrogen
dioxide levels had decreased since the earlier (1968-1969) study.
-------
IV. STUDY METHODS
BACKGROUND DATA COLLECTION
Background data were collected using both manual file search and
computerized information retrieval techniques. Region IV program
files (NPDES permits, area-wide wastewater planning, air, drinking
water and solid waste disposal) were manually searched and available
data on sources and types of toxic substances in the study area were
extracted. File contents included plant and outfall locations, de-
scriptions of wastewater characteristics and treatment facilities,
discharge monitoring reports (DMR's), inspection reports (both state
and EPA), planning reports and reports of previous studies. Aerial
photographs of about half of the study area were available from a
1973 EPA aerial reconnaissance.
A wide variety of computerized literature data bases were searched
and appropriate articles and reports identified. These documents were
then obtained from conventional literature sources.
Computerized EPA data bases including the Permit Compliance
System (PCS), Compliance Data System (CDS), National Emissions Data
System (NEDS) and STORET were searched and pertinent data extracted.
These data included lists of NPDES permits (PCS) and air sources (CDS),
emission data on criteria pollutants (NEDS) and water quality data for
both streams and wastewater effluents (STORET).
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE
A brief reconnaissance of known major sources of pollution in the
study area was made on June 15 and 16, 1978. This reconnaissance
-------
.32
Involved driving around or along the perimeters of plant sites to ver-
ify locations on topographical maps and observations of area streams,
wastewater discharges and air emissions. Most major plant sites were
also viewed from a light aircraft to verify the presence and location
of facilities such as wastewater treatment ponds and solid waste dis-
posal sites.
AERIAL RECONNAISSANCE
Data collected during the background study and field reconnaissance
were used to design an aerial reconnaissance of major sources of pollu-
tion. The initial reconnaissance was conducted on August 15 and 18,
1978. Reconnaissance aircraft equipped with thermal infrared sensors
and three cameras for multiband photography were used. Because of
multiple, simultaneous camera failures, only thermal infrared imagery
and false-color infrared photographs were obtained. Thermal infrared
imagery was also obtained at night.
The data obtained were not adequate for a full evaluation of
pollution sources. The reconnaissance was rescheduled several times
in subsequent months but adverse weather conditions or camera failures
prevented collection of additional data until December 15, 1978, when
more thermal infrared and false-color infrared imagery was obtained.
No true-color photographs were obtained due to a camera failure.
A third aerial reconnaissance was conducted on January 30, 1979.
Both true color and false-color infrared imagery were obtained of
most sources of pollution in the study area.
The photographs and thermal imagery were subjected to a detailed
review, evaluation and interpretation including comparison with the
1973 photographs. Black and white prints of selected photographs were
prepared to assist in presentation of the results of the investigation
in later sections of this report.
-------
V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Both air and water quality are degraded in the Chattanooga metro-
politan area as the result of the release of pollutants from numerous
industrial and municipal sources. Air quality degraded by large releases
of nitrogen oxides from the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant in the
past has improved since this plant was shut down. However, high levels
of suspended particulates from foundries and other stationary sources
occur during air stagnations resulting in occasional air pollution
alerts.
Water quality in the Tennessee River as it enters the study area
in Chickamauga Reservoir is generally good although the reservoir is
classified as eutrophic. Water quality in Nickajack Reservoir leaving
the study area is in violation of water quality standards because of
degradation by discharges of municipal and industrial wastewaters
directly to the reservoir and to tributary streams. Severely degraded
water quality has been observed in South Chickamauga, Citico, and
Chattanooga Creeks. A 1976 Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) study
labeled Chattanooga Creek the most severly polluted stream in the
Tennessee Valley.3
The public water supply for essentially the entire metropolitan
area is obtained from Nickajack Reservoir. Water quality degradation
in the reservoir thus has a detrimental impact on the water system.
The frequency of spills of deleterious substances into the water supply
has increased in recent years due primarily to increased industrial
activity.
Additional details on these environmental quality problems are
presented below.
-------
34
AIR QUALITY
Available ambient air quality data show that suspended particu-
lates, nitrogen oxides (NO ) and sulfur dioxide (S02) are the air
pollutants of most concern in the study area.26'27 Only limited data
were available on hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Although a few
higher concentrations were observed, ambient levels for these two
pollutants appear to be below applicable standards and not a signifi-
cant problem. Very little information was available on the presence
of toxic substances in ambient air. A special survey for nitrosamines
in the atmosphere near the Velsicol Chemical Corporation plant con-
ducted by NEIC in 1977 detected none.29
The particular combination of industrial sources, topography,
and meteorology present in the study area result in ambient levels of
suspended particulates that exceed ambient air standards. Major in-
dustrial sources of particulate emissions include several foundries,
a coke plant, a cement plant, various coal-fired boilers, and several
quarries. Most of the study area consists of valleys between north-
east-southwest trending mountain ridges. Lookout Mountain southwest
of the central urban and industrial area is about 390 m (1,200 ft)
above the valley floor. Wind speeds are low, averaging about 10 km/hr
(6 mph) with 25% calms. Inversions below 160 m (500 ft) above the
valley floor occur 30 to 50% of the time. The study area is near the
center of the region having a very high potential for large scale air
stagnations. These conditions result in the frequent trapping of
particulates and other air pollutants near the ground between the
mountain ridges. This is most pronounced in the central urban and
industrial area bounded by Lookout Mountain, Missionary Ridge, and
the Tennessee River.
-------
35
Levels of total suspended participates (TSP) have decreased sub-
stantially since 1958 as a result of improved pollution controls and
fuel switching.26 The annual geometric mean TSP exceeded 200 ug/m3 in
1958 at the Chattanooga NASN station. The comparable 1970 value de-
creased to less than 120 ug/m3. A continued reduction to about 80 ug/m3
was observed for three stations in the same urbanized area in
1974. Less industrialized areas had lower particulate levels as expec-
ted. In 1974, of 12 sampling stations in the study area, 5 still
exceeded the national primary standard for TSP of 75 ug/m3.
Higher levels of particulates occur during inversions and air
stagnations. These have reached air pollution alert levels on several
occasions including February 4, 1977, and January 24, 1978.30
In addition to the central urban and industrial area, particulate
levels were high in the past in the vicinity of the Volunteer Army
Ammunition Plant (VAAP). This was apparently primarily due to opera-
tions of the plant which has since shut down.
Nitrogen oxides in the Chattanooga area were very high for about
10 years beginning in 1965.27 The Volunteer plant was reactivated in
1965 to make TNT explosives for the Vietnam war. This resulted in
large emissions of NO , primarily nitrogen dioxide (N02). Ambient
^
levels of N02 in excess of 1000 ug/m3 were observed with substantially
higher levels on the plant site. Increased pollution control at VAAP
and decreased production resulted in decreased N02 levels by 1972.
An additional 50% reduction occurred between 1972 and 1976. By 1976,
all stations reported average N02 levels below the ambient standard
of 100 ug/m3. Shutdown of the plant in 1977 should have produced
further reductions.
Levels of S02 in the vicinity of VAAP were of concern during the
plant's operation, but have dropped following plant shut down.
-------
36
WATER QUALITY
The public water supply for essentially the entire metropolitan
area is obtained from Nickajack Reservoir on the Tennessee River.
Degradation of water quality in the reservoir, especially by spills
of chemicals and industrial wastewaters, has adversely affected the
water supply. This has made necessary the installation of high levels
of treatment at the Tennessee American Water Company treatment plant
that processes most of the public water supply. Several spills of
pollutants into Nickajack Reservoir have caused taste and odor problems
in treated drinking water. The frequency of such spills is increasing.
Several stream segments in the study area are in violation of
applicable water quality standards. The degraded water quality causing
such violations interferes with beneficial water uses such as recrea-
tion and fish propagation.
Applicable Water Quality Regulations
Both Georgia and Tennessee have promulgated water quality stan-
dards which define water uses to be protected in each stream segment
under their jurisdictions and which prescribe water quality limits
(criteria) to be met for each water use. Georgia classifies streams
according to the water use requiring the highest level of water quality.
Tennessee classifies streams according to all intended uses. The
assigned stream classifications for stream segments in the study area
are listed in Table I.3
Both states have established water quality criteria that specify
what water quality must be maintained in the stream for each assigned
use. The Georgia and Tennessee criteria are presented in Appendices
A and B, respectively.
-------
37
With respect to toxic substances, both sets of criteria contain
narrative provisions that limit instream levels of toxic substances
to below levels that would interfere with assigned water uses. No
numeric instream criteria were established. Tennessee has established
numerical effluent limits for various toxic substances.
Both states administer the NPDES permit program.' Tennessee re-
ceived permit program delegation from EPA in 1978. Prior to that
time, the State had their own permit program. NPDES permits issued
by EPA prior to delegation of the program to Tennessee are being en-
forced by EPA.
The states are also required to categorize stream segments with
water quality degraded by point source discharges of pollutants into
two categories: water quality or effluent limited segments. Water
quality limited segments are those that currently do not meet applicable
water quality criteria and are not expected to meet the criteria when
best practicable control technology currently available has been im-
plemented by industrial sources and secondary treatment by municipal
sources. Effluent limited segments, however, are currently in com-
pliance with water quality criteria or are expected to achieve com-
pliance upon implementation of the pollution controls described.
As indicated in Table 2, there are six segments in the study
area classified as water quality limiting, including all of the
Tennessee River reach (Nickajack Reservoir) downstream of Chickamauga
Dam. The Tennessee River upstream of the dam (Chickamauga Reservoir)
is considered effluent limited but in violation of applicable criteria.
Waste load allocations used to determine permit limits for sources
discharging to each segment are also shown in Table 2. Allocations
have been established for BOD, ammonia, DO and temperature.
-------
38
Table 1
STREAM USE CLASSIFICATIONS
Stream
TENNESSEE RIVER
Lookout Creek
Lookout Creek
Black Creek
Black Creek
Chattanooga Creek
Chattanooga Creek
Dry Creek
TENNESSEE RIVER
Cltlco Creek
South Chfckamauga Creek
South Chlckanauga Creek
Friar Branch
West Chlckanauga Creek
West Chlckanauga Creek
Spring Creek
Spring Creek
All other tributaries not
Description
Pot Light (Hlle 448.0) to mouth of
Chattanooga Creek (Mile 460.6)
Mouth to Georgia-Tennessee state line
Georgia-Tennessee state line to origin
Mouth to Mile 1.6
Mile 1.6 to origin
Mouth to Georgia-Tennessee state line
Georga- Tennessee state line to origin
Mouth to origin
Mouth of Chattanooga Creek (Mile 460.6) to
mouth of the Hiwassee River (Mile 499.4)
Mouth to origin
Mouth to Georgia-Tennessee state line
Georgia-Tennessee state line to origin
Mouth to origin
Mouth to Georgia-Tennessee state line
Georgia-Tennessee state line to origin
Mouth to Georgia-Tennessee state line
Georgia-Tennessee state line to origin
classified shall be classified
Tennessee*
Stream Use Georgia Stream Use**
1234567 123456789
XX XX
XX XX
X
X XX
X X X X
XX XX
X
X
X X X X X X X
X
XX XX
X
X XX
XX XX
X
XX XX
X
X X X X
* Tennessee Stream Use Classifications
1. Domestic raw water supply
2. Industrial water sgpply
3. Fish and aquatic life
4. Recreation
5. Irrigation
6. Livestock watering and wildlife
7. Navigation
** Georgia Stream Use Classification
1. Drinking water supplies
2. Recreation
3. Fishing, propagation of fish, shellfish, game, and other aquatic life
4. Agricultural
5. Industlral
6. Navigation
7. Wild River
8. Scenic River
9. Urban Stream
-------
Table 2
STREAM SEGMENT CLASSIFICATIONS AND WASTE LOAD ALLOCATIONS
Maximum Allowable Waste
Stream Segment
Tennessee River
Lookout Creek 2.4/
Black Creek
Chattanooga Creek
0.0-9.3 (including
all tributaries)
Chattanooga Creek
12.8, Rock Creek 1.1
Citico Creek
O.Ororigln
South Chickamauga
Creek 0.0-17.3
(Including all
tributaries)
South Chickamauga
Creek 17.5
South Chickamauga
Creek 17.9/Peavine
Creek 2.2
South Chickamauga
Creek 17.9/Peavine
Creek 3.6
South Chickamauga
Creek 29.4
South Chickamauga
Creek 31.6
Little Chickamauga
Creek 0.6
Little Chickamauga
Creek 1.8
East Chickamauga
Creek 1.5
West Chickamauga
Creek 4.4
Tennessee River
471.0-499.4
Waconda Bay 0.5-3.0
Classification*
A
A
A
F
A
A
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
C
A
BODS
(mg/D
10
10
10
44
10
BODS
(Ib/day)
257
10
(Nitrates 10
30
30
30
30
30
20
74
30
30***
30
10
20.3
4.3
3.3
37.5
17.5
2.5
8
7.5
501
(Nitrates 10
NH3-N
(mg/1)
1.6
1.6
1.6
0.0
1.6
1.6
mg/1)
20
20
20
20
20
0.0
0.0
20
20
5.0
0.5
mg/1)
Loads**
DO
(mg/1)
5.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
2.0
30.5
Temp
(°C)
30.5
30.5
30.5
30.5
Tennessee Stream Segment Classification:
A - Water-quality-limited in violation of stream standards
B - Water-quality-limited not presently violating stream standards
C - Effluent-limited in violation of stream standards
D - Effluent-limited not presently violating stream standards
Georgia Stream Segment Classifcation:
E - Effluent-limited
F - Effluent-limited - dissolved oxygen exception
G - Water-quality-limited
BOD = 5-day 20 C biochemical oxygen demand in effluent
NH3-N = Ammonia nitrogen in effluent
*** If significant nitrification takes place in West Chickamauga Creek,
**
effluent limits may be changed to 10 mg/1
and 5.0 mg/1 00.
BOD,., 2.0 mg/1 ammonia nitrogen,
-------
40
Present Water Quality
Water quality data for the study area available in EPA files
were limited. In most cases, the data were developed by the previous
studies discussed in Section III. Little routine monitoring data
were reported. Toxic substance data were even more limited.
The Tennessee River exhibits substantially different water qual-
ity in the two segments within the study area. Chickamauga Lake up-
stream of Chickamauga Dam (RM 471) has relatively good water quality
and is heavily used for recreation. However, the reservoir is classi-
fied as eutrophic, primarily because of upstream pollution carried by
the river inflow. There are few pollution sources in the study area.
The reservoir is designated as effluent limiting and in violation of
water quality standards. Bacterial contamination contributes to the
violations. Waconda Bay was heavily polluted by industrial wastewaters
from the VAAP in the past but is recovering following shutdown of
this facility.
Water quality is much poorer in Nickajack Lake downstream from
Chickamauga Dam. Occasional violations of dissolved oxygen and fecal
coliform criteria occur. A 1973 TVA study found levels of cadmium,
chromium, lead and mercury in violation of water quality criteria and
phenol levels as high as 75 ug/1.3 The only recent toxic substances
data reported for this reach were the monitoring by Tennessee-American
Water Company for selected heavy metals. These did not show any signi-
ficant levels upstream of the public water supply intakes. The Nickajack
Lake stream segment has been designated as water quality limiting and in
violation of water quality criteria. Applicable waste load allocations
are shown in Table 2.
Chattanooga Creek is the most polluted stream in the study area
and has the most available toxic substances data. The 1973 EPA study
-------
41
found depressed dissolved oxygen levels (5.9 mg/1 in February), high
ammonia (4.4 mg/1), and high phenols (260 ug/1) even though streamflow
was above average.9 Lead (118 ug/1) and zinc (111 pg/1) were also
elevated near the mouth of the Creek. Levels of As, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb
and Zn increased substantially in sediments near the Creek mouth relative
to upstream unpolluted reaches. Zinc (363 mg/kg) and lead (230 mg/kg)
were the highest. Dissolved oxygen was severely depressed (0.5 mg/1)
in the lower reaches of the Creek during the 1977 study.13 Toxic
substances present in 1977 included benzene, chloroform, chlorobenzene,
dimethylphenol, dimethylphthalate, di-n-butylphthalate, naphthalene,
phenols, and tetrachloroethylene. Chattanooga Creek in Tennessee is
water quality limiting and in violation of water quality criteria.
Citico Creek was grossly polluted in 1969 and 1972 with excessive
levels of ammonia, phenols, coliform bacteria and oil and grease present.2'4
Dissolved oxygen was only 3 mg/1 with some observations of zero dissolved
oxygen. Zinc at 970 jjg/1 was the highest heavy metal concentration observed.
Recent Tennessee-American Water Company monitoring did not detect any signi-
ficant heavy metals levels for the few analyzed.20 However, the limited flow
in the Creek is still polluted by surface runoff.
No recent water quality data were available on South Chickamauga
Creek. Water quality was not seriously degraded in 1972, the most
recent survey reported.4 However, the stream is designated as water
quality limiting and in violation of water quality criteria.
Friar Branch, a small tributary of South Chickamauga Creek, was
degraded by toxic levels of ammonia in 1969 (100 mg/1) and 1972 (20 mg/1).2'4
Water quality has been improved by decreases in waste loads from the
C.F. Industries fertilizer plant and GAF Corporation. However, recent
sampling by Tennessee-American Water Company still detected excessive
ammonia levels (10 mg/1).20
-------
42
Lookout Creek is relatively unpolluted. No current water quality
data were available.
Public Water Supply
Spills of chemicals and industrial wastes in Nickajack Lake and
tributaries upstream of the Tennessee-American Water Company have
occurred with increasing frequency in recent years with detrimental
effects on the water supply. There were only eight such occurrences
during the five-year period 1971 to 1975.3 There were four reported
events in 1976 and seven in 1977.
The Tennessee-American Water Company intakes are located near
shore only 50 m upstream from the mouth of Citico Creek and about
200 m upstream from a sewage pumping station. Because flow reversals
occur in Nickajack Lake, pollution from these two sources can and has
entered the raw water supply with adverse impacts on water quality.
The Company has been requested in the past by local and state health
agencies to move the intakes to a less contaminated location. This
has not been done.
-------
VI. SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Review of available data indicated that a complete inventory of
sources of environmental pollution in the study area was not available.
An inventory was developed by combining an air pollution source listing,32
an NPOES permit listing,33 an areawide waste treatment planning inven-
tory,3'15 a manufacturers directory34 and other file materials. Jhis
inventory was prepared in four sections corresponding to the four major
types of pollution sources: industrial, municipal, domestic and solid
waste disposal. The following sections summarize the inventory data for
each type of source and present detailed source listings. Because of
different dates of the referenced materials, it is probable that some
of the sources no longer exist and that some new sources have not been
listed. However, this is the most current information available in
EPA files.
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Industrial facilities and plants comprise more than 80% of pollu-
tion sources in the study area. These plants range in size from less
than 10 employees to more than 5,000. Major industry types present
in the study area include textiles, textile chemicals, iron and steel
foundries, heavy machinery manufacturing, steel fabrication, ceramics
and organic chemicals. As shown in Table 3, there are 453 industrial
facilities with Chattanooga addresses and an additional 44 facilities
in adjacent communities of the study area. Companies are arranged
alphabetically by county and city.
As shown in Table 3, information available on most industrial
facilities included the company name, address, the number of employees,
-------
Table 3
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
•
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
AAA Aluminum Awning Co.
5807 Lee Hwy. 37421
ABC Blind and Awning Co.
3400 Dodds Ave. 37407
A & E Machinery Co.
2410 Dodson Ave. 37406
A.L.C. Incorporated
3406 Alton Park Blvd.
37410
Abilities, Inc. of Tenn.
2317 Lindbergh St. 37408
Accent House
5731 Hwy. 153 37343
ACCU-Cast
110 W. 42nd. St. 37410
Acheson Foundry & Machine
Works - P.O. Box 2195.
511 W. 38th St. 37410
Acme Engraving Co.
802 Hamilton Ave. 37405
Acme Printing & Litho-
graphing Co.
440 Cherokee Blvd. 37405
The Action Co.
917 East 16th 37408
Adams Lithographic Co.
Inc. - 817 N. Market St.
37405
AESCO .
4000 7th Ave. 37407
Alco Aluminum Corp.
Employees
9
3
33
31
20
6
16
13
2
3
12
22
16
6
SIC Codes
3444,3448
2591,3499
3442
3552
2851,2891
2499,2441
2448
3299
3324,3325
3321
2793.3555
2752
2399
2752
3433
3444,3442
Products
HAMILTON COUNTY
Chattanooga
Awnings,; Carports
Venetian Blinds
Aluminum. Awnings
Aluminum Window Screens
Tufting Ind. Parts
Latex Carpet Backing
Ind. Adhesive
Corran. Adhesive
Industrial Wood Products
Boxes, Pallets
Plaster Crafts
Commercial Molds
Investment Castings
Steel Castings
Gray Iron Castings
Photoengraving
Offset Plates
Job Printing
Comm. Printing
Horse Blankets
Saddle Pads
Lithographic Material
Printing
Asphalt Ind. Heaters
Alum. Canopies
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic d
Status" Substances0 List1" Substances
NO
NO
MD
MU-T
so-s
MD
NO
MU
SD-CP
HD
fl\ B
SD-P
MU
MD.
ND
MU
ND
MD
PO
PO
PI
P4
PO
PO
P4
K
P4
P5
PI
P5
P2
PO
No
No
00020
M.1
no
00035
MJ
00030
No
No
00040
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
P
P
P
No
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
P
P
P
No
P
No
No
2207 Vine. St. 37404
Alum. Replacement
Windows
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS
Status" Substances0 L1stc
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
^
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Alco Chemical Corp.
909 Mueller Ave. 37406
Alloway Stamping and
Machine Company
2507 E 29th St. 37407
Alloy Fabricators Inc.
2311 E 28th St. 37407
Aluminum Builders and
Awning Company
6117 Dayton Blvd. 37415
American Can Co.., Inc.
2880 Amnicola Hwy. 37406
American Color Pkg. Product .
Hwy. 153 & Jersey Pike /
37421 /
American Cynamld Co. /
Pineville Rd. 37405 '
American Electrical Ind.
Manufacturers Rd. 37405
24
14
40
4
33
5
6
277
American Mfg. Co.— =— — 225
124 Chestnut St. 37402
American 'Oil Company
(Chattanooga Barge Terminal)
American Oil Company
(Chattanooga Pipeline Terminal)
American Saddlery Inc.
1810 Rossville Ave. 37408
Anderson Machine Works, Inc.
4511 Dodds Ave. 37407
Angel Printing Co.
1409 Chestnut St. 37402
A Quick' Print Service
2629 Dayton Blvd. 37415
Arcade Inc.
1815 E. Main St. 37404
17
20
10
2
50
2899,2895
2869
3599,3469
3544
3443
3442,3444
3411
2392,3079
2754
2819
3355
2542,3631
3429
5171
5171
3199
3544,3599
2751
2751
2752
Water Treatment Chemicals
Carbon Black
Rubber Accelerant
Custom Job Shop
Metal Stamping
Dies
Stainless Steel Process
Equipment
Storm Windows
Patio Covers
Metal Containers
Pkg. Containers
Plastic Bags
Film
Film Printing
Aluminum Sulfate
Aluminum Wire Cable
_ . __
Wire Display Racks
Stove Hdwe. Wire
Saddle. Horn. Hdwe.
Asphalt Bulk Terminal
Bulk Petroleum Products
Saddles, Bridle Straps
Breast Collars
Welding Fixtures
Custom Machinery
Comm. Printing
Comm. Printing
Printing
0002798
MI-CT
MI
ND
SD-0
ND
MI
ND
0026760
MD-S-T
0002542
MD-C-T
MI
0002577
SO-T
SD-SO-T
ND
MD
MD
ND
MI
P3
P2
P2
PO
P2
P5
P3
P2
P3
K
K
P4
P2
PS
PS
PS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Toxic d
Substances
P
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
No
P
, Hazardous
1 Wastes6
K
No
No
No
P
P
P
No
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
•P*
cn
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
.42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Architectural HJ 11 work
and Lumber
2718 8th Ave. 37407
Armour and Company
1400 Cowart St.
Box USA 37401
Art Printing & Litho-
graphing Inc.
2919 W. Cunnings Hwy 37419
Asphalt Contractors Equip.
Co. - 3110 Riverside Dr.
37406
Astec Industries, Inc.
4101 Jerome Ave. 37407
Atlantic Ice Co.
37 W 13th St. 37410
Atlas Paper Box Co.
Automation Machine Co. ,
Inc.
2705 Wood Ave. 37406
BHY Concrete Finishing Inc.
1912 Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
Bacon Products Co. , Inc.
1605 Shephard Rd. 37431
Ball-Lookout Stamp Co.
338 Market St. 37402
Bale Industries, Inc.
1514 Chestnut St. 37402
Barry of Chattanooga
1512 Sholar Ave. 37406
Bee Line Graphics
5823 Lee Hwy. 37421
Bennett, Wilbur, Show Cards
1335 Central Ave. 37408
Biononrical Chemicals and
Service Inc.
1003 Plnevllle Rd. 37405
15
26
3
17
170
12
2
60
25
2
6
60
3
1
10
2421,2431
2011
2752
3531
3531,3564
3532
2097
2650
3599
3273
2879.2834
3953
3361
3142
2751
2741,2782
2842
Products'
Lumber. Mill work
Meat Packing
Capm. Printing
Asphalt Pit. Coop.
Asphalt Hot Mix Plant
Dust Collect. Equip.
Coal Mining Equip.
Ice
Packaging
Spec. Machlnery-Ind.
Ready Mix Concrete
Insecticides
Potent Drugs
Marking Devices
Aluminum Hstn. Allays
Aluminum Castings •
Ladles Slippers
Printing Note Cards
Show Cards, Banners
Charts
Liquid Cleaning
Compounds
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h COS Toxic H
Status" Substances0 L1stc Substances0
HO
HI
NO
ND
MD
HD
SD-C
MO
MD-T
SD-SO
MD
MD
ND
MD
ND
NO
MI
PO
PO
P5
P2
P3
PO
P5
P2
PO
P4
PI
P4
PI
PS
P2
P3
00120
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
No
P
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
No
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
Black Horse Mfg. Co.
601 Cumberland 37404
Blanton Mfg. Co. , Inc.
805 N Market St. 37405
Blow Pipe Inc.
1213 E 23rd St. 37408
Boaz Spinning Co., Inc.
1800 Watkins St. 37404
Bogo, Jerry Company
P.O. Box 9006 37412
Bohr, Edwin, Electronics
5880 Dayton Blvd.
Boutz Family Glassblowers
Choo-Choo, Market St. 37402
Broad St. Machine Co., Inc.
2614 Broad St. 37408
Brock Candy Co.
4120 Jersey Pike 37421
Brown, Dave L. , Co., Inc.
1701 Fagan 38408
Brown Fence Co.
4104 S Creek Rd. E 37406
Bundschu Enterprises
5412 Ringgold Rd. 37412
Burroughs Plastics Corp.
Pineville Rd. 37405
CF Industries (Nitrogen
Complex)
P.O. Box 87, Hwy 58 37341
Captain's Craft. Inc.
4135 Cromwell Rd. 37421
Card & Co. , Inc.
1532 Riverside Dr. 37406
16
22
12
360
9
1
8
30
325
10
20
36
8
188
17
100
SIC Codes
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS loxic d
Status Substances List Substances
3199,2399
2211
3498,3564
3444
2283,2281
3911,3915
3811,3674
3229
3552
2066
3273
3429
2752
2392,3079
2871
3732
3552
Horse Riding Equip.
Horse Blankets
Saddle Bags
Cruiser Drapery
Cruiser Aces.
Blow pipe system
Blow pipe fans
Gen. sheet metal fab.
Carpet Yarns
Upholstery Yarns
Jewelry, Diamond Rings
Diamond Earrings
Calibrate Test Equip.
Electronic Instr.
Art & Craft Glass
Tufting Machines
Candy
Ready Mix Concrete
Fence Parts Hdwe.
Comm. Printing
PolyBags, Packaging
Chemical Fertilizer
Houseboats
Tufting Equip.
ND
ND
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
MD
MI
MI
ND
MD
ND
002267
MJ-CPO-T
ND
MD
P2
P2
P2
P2
PO
P2
PO
P2
PO
PO
P4
P5
PI
K
P2
P2
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
00300
MJ
No
No
No
No
01150
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
P
K
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
P
No
P
P
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
09
Company, and Address Enrol wees
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
76.
Carglll Inc.
501 Manufacturers Rd. 37405
Ca-Ro Manufacturing Co. ,
Inc.
1505 Oak St. 37404
Carsbe Company
1810 E. Main St. 37404
Cavalier Corporation
1100 E. llth St. 37403
Central Soya Co. , Inc.
Judd Rd. . Box 5067 37406
Central Soya of Chattanooga
Inc. , 414 W. 16th St. 37408
Chattanooga Bag Co. . Inc.
1211 Chestnut St. 37402
Chattanooga Bakery Inc.
1126 King St. 37402
Chattanooga Boiler & Tank
Co. , 1011 E Main St. 37408
Chattanooga Button & Badge Co.
438 Frazler Ave. 37405
Chattanooga Coca-Cola
Bottling Co.
4000 Amnlcola Hwy. 37406
Chattanooga Coke & Chen.
Co. , Inc. (Head Corp.)
4800 Central Ave. 37410
Chattanooga Gas Co.
(LNG Storage)
Chattanooga Gas. Co.
(LPG Storage)
Chattanooga Glass Co.
400 W 45th St. 37410
Chattanooga Hosiery
Finisher Inc.
3319 Alton Park Blvd. 37410
14
25
24
550
300
500
10
85
200
5
250
140
650
150
SIC Codes
2043,2048
2041
2512
3429
3581
2075.2048
2041
2016.2017
2643
2051
3443
2396.2399
2086
3312
3221
2261
Products'
Corn, Oats, Wheat
LI v ingrown Furniture
Sofa, Ottoman, Chairs
Saddlery Hardware
Vending Machines
Soybean Oil -Meal
Animal Feed. Grain
Broiler Chickens
Eggs
Poly Sheeting
Bags
Mars hmal low
Sandwiches
Fabr. Storage Tank
Pressure Vessels
Ribbons. Badges
Coca-Cola Prod.
Or. Pepper Prod.
Coal to'1 Coke
Coal By-Products
Storage of Liquified
Natural Gas
Storage^ of Liquified
Propane Gas
Glass Bev. Bottles
Coma. Finishers
Wastewater. Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic d Hazardous
Status" Substances" L1stc Substances" Wastes'1
NMS
MD
NO
HI
0003557
MJ-CPO^T
HI
MD
MI
MD
SD-0
ND
MI
0001635
MI-MJ-PS
T
SD-C-T
SD-C-T
MI
ND
PO
PI
P2
P4
PO
PO
PO
PO
P2
P2
PO
K
K
K
P2
P4
00390
ill
nJ
No
No
No
00460
NJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
00495
MJ
No
No
00500
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No.
Ko
No
No
K
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
K
No
No
No
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
Chattanooga Mattress & Furn.
Co. , 1265 E. 13th St. 37408
Chattanooga News-Free Press
400 E. 11 St. 37402
Chattanooga Pattern and
Foundry
1808 Dayton Blvd. 37405
Chattanooga Pharmacal Co.
101 Memorial Dr. 37415
Chattanooga Photoengraving
Co. , 1405 Chestnut St. 37042
Chattanooga Plastics Inc.
4120 Suck Creek Rd. 37405
Chattanooga Plating Works
Inc. , 100 Market St. 37402
Chattanooga Printing and
Engraving
300 Market St. 37402
Chattanooga Products, Inc.
Chattanooga Rendering Co. ,
Inc. , 3301 St. Elmo Ave.
37408
Chattanooga Rope & Leather
Inc.. Burnt Mill Rd. 37409
Chattanooga Rubber Stamp &
55
300
10
92
3
35
15
20
10
30
6
SIC Codes
2515,2512
2711
3361
3842
2793
3079
3471
2751
2830
2077
3429
3953
Products'
Matt. & Box Springs
Uph. Llvingroom Furn.
Newspaper Printing/Publishing
Aluminum Castings
Phy'l. Therapy Equip.
Wire Products
Col-Pac Hydrocell
Negative Plates, Velox
Prints, Engraving
Plastic Vials
Metal Refinisher
Job Printing
Specialty Chemicals
Animal By- Products
Saddlery Hardware
Rubber Stamps, Corporate
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic d
Status" Substances0 List6 Substances
MD
MU
NO
NMS
HI
NO
MI
MD
SD-P-T
MD
NO
NO
PI
P5
P3
P3
P5
P3
P4
P5
P3
PO
P2
P2
00520
MJ
No
00530
nncen
UU9OU
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
P
No
P
P
Mo
P
P
No
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
P
No
P
No
P
P
P
No
P
No
Stencil, 23-21 Patten Parkway
37402
91. Chattanooga Sewing & Sales 10 2211
Co., Inc.
2002 E. Main St. 37404
92. Chattanooga Tent and 7 2394
Awning Co.
1110 Oak St. 37403
93. Chattanooga Tufters Supply 30 3552
Co.. 426 Cumberland St.
37404
Seals, Name Plates
Cloth Filter Media
Large Tents
Tufting Textile Machines
ND
ND
P2
P2
P3
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
Chattanooga Venetian Blind
Co., 1400 McCallle Ave.
37404
Chattanooga Wllbert Vault
Co. . Inc.
1016 W 33rd St. 37410
Chattanooga Wire Products
Co. , 2413 Lyndon Ave.
37415
The Chattanoogan
25 Patten Parkway 37402
Chattem Drug & Chemical
1715 W 38th St. 37409
Checks, Inc.
110 Riverfront Pkwy 37402
Chemetron Corp.
Ind'l Gases Olv.
200 Hooker Rd. 37410
Chemical Leamon Tank Lines,
211 Shlpp Ave.
City Iron & Wire Works
1100 Ashmore Ave. 37406
Cities Service Oil Co.
Clowes Ceramic
3711 Calhoun Ave. 37407
Clowes Protective Coating
Inc. , 2205 Vine St. 37404
Cobble Dlv. , Spencer Wright
Employees
5
9
20
5
220
12
60
Inc.
34
100
3
350
SIC Codes
2591
3272
3312
2721
2834,2844
2782
2813
3496
5171
3264
2851
3552
Products
Venetian Blinds
Concrete Vaults
S-S Wire Products
Magazine Publishing
Tab-Relief Menst.
Hair Llghtner
Chemical Antacid
Checks
Nitrogen, Oxygen
Argon
Bulk Chemical Transport
Screen Wire Cloth
Bulk Petroleum Products
Ceramic Insulators, 'Tech.
Ceramics. Ceramic Parts
Acrylic Mastic, Coat and
Latex Paint, Spec. Sealants
Tufting Equip., Textile
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge toxic h CDS Toxic d Hazardous
Status8 Substances0 L1stc Substances0 Wastes6
MD
ND
ND
ND
0002780
MI-MJ-C
T
ND
MI-T
MU
ND
0022438
SO
MD
SD-C
MU
MI
P2
PI
P4
PS
K
P4
P2
P4
P2
K
PI
PS
P2
No
No
No
No
00600
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
00610
00660
No
No
No
No
No
No
K
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
No
No
K
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
Ind., 1501 Riverside Dr.
37406
107. Cobble Machinery and
Supply Co.
1518 Wllholt St. 37408
3552
Finishing Equip.
Tufting Machine Parts
MD
P2
No
No
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
Cobble Muse Hosiery Hills
Inc., 1101 E. Main St.
37408
Coca-Cola Food Division
246 E llth St. 37402
Collins Concrete Pipe Co.
101 Cromwell Rd. 37421
Collins Concrete Pipe Co.
1111 Oak St., P.O. Box 3057
37404
Colonial Baking Co.
2220 E 4th 37404
Colonial Pipeline
Colorstrand Div.
Wadsworth Greenwood Corp.
1100 E 16th St. 37408
Combustion Engineering
Inc. , 911 West Main St.
37402
Comolll Memorials, Inc.
2409 S. Broad St. 37408
Concrete Forms Corp.
314 Hooker Rd. 37410
Concrete Service Co.
Quintus Loop 37421
Consolidated Latex Co.
2003 Amnicola Hwy. 37406
Container Corp. of Amer.
2101 Rossvile Ave. 37408
Container Corp. of Amer.
2100 Rossville Blvd. 37408
Corley Mfg. Co.
2900 Crescent Circle 37407
Craftique Mfg. Co.
1096 Dayton Blvd. 37045
Employees
225
15
15
25
250
110
5000
10
175
5
45
139
114
120
8
SIC Codes
2252
2095,2099
2087
3272
3272,2821
2051
2269
3443,3317
3623
3281
3446,3444
3273
3069
2653
2631
3553,2421
3961,2499
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
01 scharge Toxic h COS Toxic d
Status Substances Listc Substances
Hosiery
Coffee, Tea, Citrus
Concrete Pipe
Sewer-Culvert Pipe
Polyvinyl Chloride
Manhole-Misc. Con.
Breads, Rolls
Oil and Gas Transmission
Space Dye/Carpets
Industrial Boilers, Stain. Stl.
Tubing, Welding Electrodes
Memorials
Scaffolding, Forms
Ready-Mix Concrete
Compound Latex
Corrugated Ship. Cont.
Corrugated Items
Combin. Boxboard
Sawmill Machinery
Sawmill Products
Wood Jewelry
Wood Plaques
MI
SD-0
ND
MD
MD
MI
SD-SO
MI
0003514
MI-C-T
MD
MD
ND
MI-T
SD-CS
MI
ND
MD
ND
P2
PO
PO
P2
PO
K
P4
P4
PO
P2
PO
P2
P2
P2
P2
PI
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
00690
MJ
00640
No
No
No
00700
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
P
No
No
No
P
P
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes8
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
No
P
P
P
No
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
in
ro
Company and Address Employees
124. Craftsman Printers
6861 Lee Hwy. 37421
125. Crane Co.
33rd & Alton Park Blvd.
37408
126. Cresent Printing Co.
2210 Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
127. Cumberland Corp.
1 Uiehl St. 37403
128. Custom Pattern Works
and Foundry
1334 Stuart St. 37406
129. Cutter Laboratories
1800 Crutschfield St.
37406
130. Danner Steel Inc.
1322 Stuart St. 37406
131. Dawn Produce Co.
183S Kerr St. 37408
132. Dayton Materials Inc.
Office 5721 Hwy. 153 37343
133. Desoto Inc.
Judd Rd. 37406
134. Devon Corp.
1215 Chestnut St. 37402
135. Dixie Industries
1210 S Greenwood Ave. 37404
136. Dixie Portland Flour Mills
Inc., 1120 King St. 37403
137. Dixie Printing & Engraving
2719 Hickory Valley Rd.
37421
138. Dixie Sand & Gravel Co.
515 River St.
1
250
7
400
11
625
15
75
6
200
10
75
125
3
SIC Codes
2752
3494
2752
3569,3551
3523
3361,3362
3365
2834.3841
2833
3441
2017
2951
3429,3645
2262
3463,3423
3462
2041
2753
1442
Products'
Conn. Printing
Large Steel Valves
Conn. Printing
Material Handling Equip.
Dairy Delivery Cases
Farm & Poultry Equip.
Aluminum Castings
Brass Castings
Wood-Metal Foundry Patterns
Hospital Solutions
Dlsp. Needle Sets
Structural Steel Fab.
Poultry
Hot Mix Asphalt
Fireplace Furnishings
Electric Light Fixtures
Custom Flocking
Forg'. Fittings-Chain
Hand Tools - Timber, Comm.
Forgings
Bulk Bakery Flour
Mill Fe'ed
Comm. Printing
Sand and Gravel
Wastewater Discharges
Afr Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic d
Status Substances List Substances
NO
SD-CO-T
KD
HI
MD
0001481
MI-MJ-CO
T
ND
HI
ND
0005711
HI-C-T
ND
HI
SD-P
HI
ND
0004707
MD-HJ-P
P5
K
PS
P4
P3
P3
PI
PO
PI
K
P4
P2
PO
P5
PO
No
No
No
00730
MO
00760
No
No
No
No
00830
MJ
No
00845
MJ
00850
MJ
No
No
No
P
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
P
P
No
P
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
K
P
P
No
P
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
139. Dixie Stamping Inc.
Rear 1111 Highland Park
37404
140. Dixie Yarns Inc.
1100 Watkins St. 37404
141. Dooley Chemical Co.
2400 E 24th St. 37407
142. Doors of Distinction
626 Shall owford Rd. 37411
143. Double Cola Co.
3350 S Broad St. 37408
144. Dream World
5813 Lee Hwy. 37421
145. Drummer Printing Co.
336 E. Main
146. Duggan Furn. Mfg. Co. , Inc.
7633 Dayton Pike 37343
147. Dunn Sound Productions Inc.
301 N. Market 37405
148. Dupont, E.I., de Nemours
Co., Access Rd. , P.O. Box 71
37401
149. Dura-Containers, Tag Cont. 01 v.
3800 Tag Rd. 37416
150. Eaves Badge & Emblem Co.
3214 Brainerd Rd. 37411
151. Eclipse Lookout Co.
Manufacturers Rd. 37405
152. E'con Mills Inc.
(Comoro Carpeting)
3114 Freeman Ave. 37406
153. Edmonds Screen & Glass Co.
930 Signal Mountain Rd. 37405
154. Electric Furnace Prod. Inc.
3
625
9
5
25
3
1
30
6
3963
60
4
140
157
2
4
SIC Codes
3643,3545
3469
2281
2843
2431,3442
3632
2087
2542
2752
2512
2782,2752
3652
2281,2821
2653
2399,2389
3443
2272,2391
3442
3479
Products'
Caps and Plugs
Steel Hardware Furn.
Spec. Steel Stamp
Proc. Cotton Yarn
Proc. Synthetic Yarn
Textile Chemicals
Door, Window Guards
Walk- In Coolers
Double Cola Concentrate
Tru-Ade Concentrate
Ski Concentrate
Display Material
Comra. Printing
Uph. Livingroom Furn.
Record Albums, Record Jackets
Printing, Recording Studio
Synthetic Fiber Yarns
Corr. Ship. Containers
Flags, Badges, Costumes
Thermal Fid. Heaters
Steam Boilers, Ht. Recry. Prods
Tufted Carpet, Draperies
Screens
Teflon Coating
Wastewater Discharges Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS TOXIC d
Status" Substances" L1stc Substances
ND
0002453
MI-O-T
MU
ND
MU
ND
.MD
ND
ND
0002844
NMS-MJ-CPO
•f
NMS
ND
MD
MI-T
SD-C
ND
ND
P2
P2
P3
P2
PO
P2
P5
P2
P5
P4
P2
P2
P2
P4
D1
rl
P2
No
00880
No
No
No
No
No
00890
No
02730
00920 MJ
01895
MJ
No
No
01060
MJ
Mn
nu
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
No
No
UM
NO
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
Hazardoi
Wastes
No
No
No
P
No
No
Mn
NO
P
P
No
No
P
No
No
3315 Curtis St.. P.O. Box 5130
37406
en
to
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
155. Electric System Inc.
1207 E 23rd St. 37408
156. Electro-lite Battery Co.
1225 E 40th St. 37407
157. Eureka Foundry Co.
1814 Grove St. 37402
158. Exxon Co. USA
Bonny Oaks Dr.
159. Fabricators, Inc.
2108 S Highland Park Ave.
37404
160. Faerber Blow Pipe and
Sheet Metal
2708 Hickory Rd. 37421
161. Fassnacht, A & Sons, Inc.
Ill W 13th St. 37402
162. Fibron Inc.
Industry Dr. 37416
163. Fillauer Orthopedic
2710 Amnicola Hwy. 37406
164. Flexible Foam Prod. Dlv.
1101 Wisdom St. 37406
165. Floor Coverings Inc.
616 Broad St. 37402
166. Floor Master, Inc.
4801 Hooker Rd. 37407
167. Floyds Cabinet Shop
11030 Old Dayton Pike 37415
168. Foam Fabricating Inc.
Judd Rd. , P.O. Box 452
37401
169. Foundry Pattern Service
Inc. , 1221 E. 40th St.
37407
170. GAF Corporation
2120 Polymer Dr. 37421
Employees
25
15
70
7
13
22
125
42
125
15
7
6
50
21
280
SIC Codes
3622
3691
3321,3325
3565
5171
3599
3564
3713,3714
2281
3842
3079
2434
2842
2434
3079
3565.3325
3069.2822
Products'
Electronic Controls
Batteries
Ferrous Castings. Non-
Ferrous Cast, Wood Patterns
Pipeline Terminal
Job Shop
Blow^PIpe System
Collectors.
Truck Bodies
Truck Equipment
Flbrl Hated Yarn
Tex-Ind-Agrl. Use
Orthopedia Appllcances
Artificial Limbs
Flexible Urethane
Foam Bedding & Cushions
Cabinets
Sweeping Compounds
Cabinets
Fabricate Polyurethane Foam
.Foundry Patterns
Foundry Castings
Pplyper Latex
Latex Compounds
Wastewater
Discharge
Status8
MU
MD
MI
0028533
cn
so
MD
ND
MD
NMS-T
SO-C
MD
0002836
MI-T
ND
NMS
ND
NMS
MD
003492
MI-MJ-T
D1 scharges
Toxic h
Substances
P4
P2
P3
K.
P2
P2
P2
P4
P2
P2
P2
P3
P2
R2
P3
K
Air Emissions
CDS
L1stc
No
No
01130
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
01155
01160
oiiBO
01232
Toxic d
Substances
P
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
K
Hazardous
Wastes6
P
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
K
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
171. Galther Machine Works Inc.
401 E 23rd St. 37408
172. Gamble Asphalt Materials
1633 Shephard Rd.
P.O. Box 8128 37411
173. Gateway Hosiery Mills, Inc.
1220 E Main St. 37408
174. General Industries of Tenn. Inc.
1301 Stuart St. 37406
175. General Oils
176. General Portland Cement
Inc. , 1300 Am. Natl . Bank
Bldg. 37402
177. General Shale Products Corp.
P.O. Box 7086 37401
178. General Specialties Co.
1925 Chestnut St. 37408
179. Center, C.D. Co.
2109 Broad St. 37408
180. Gentry Steel Inc.
2307 E 28th St. 37407
181. Oilman Paint & Varnish Co.
216 W 8th St. 37402
182. Gladish Machine Co. Inc.
2121 Chestnut St. 37408
183. Godsey's Automotive Shop
184. Good Bros. Produce Co. , Inc.
Farmer's Market llth St.
37403
185. Goree Ice Mfg. Co. , Inc.
2318 McCallie Ave. 37404
186. Grace, W.R. & Co.
4000 N Hawthorne St. 37406
187. Graco Incorporated
4140 Jersey Pike 37421
15
8
85
120
250
70
1
170
20
350
12
5
2
79
18
SIC Codes
3599
3531
2252,3949
3599.3293
3552
5171
3241
3271
3172
2328,3151
3292
3441
2851
3713,3599
2099
2097
2875
3535,3531
Products Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic h
Status Substances
Job Machine Shop
Plant, Mixed Asphalt
Socks, Bootees
Athletic
Van Conversions, Textile Pack
Scr. , Textile Machinery
Bulk Petroleum Distribution
Portland Cement
Masonry Cement
Face Brick
Small Leather Items
Industrial Clothing, Leather
Gloves, Asbestos Products
Structural Steel
Ind. Prod. Finishes, Paint &
Coatings, Lacquer & Related Prod.
Truck Bodies, Machine Shop
Automotive Cleanup
Slaw and Salad
Ice
Rare Earth Chemicals
Convey-Buck Elev.
Crushing Equip.
MD
ND
MI
MD
SD-SO
NMS
MD-T
en-DC
Ml rL
ND
MD
MD
MI
MD
SD-P
ND
MD
MI-T
SD-CPO
ND
P2
PI
P2
P4
P2
PI
PO
P2
P4
P2
P5
P4
P2
PO
PO
K
P2
Air Emissions
CDS Toxic d
1 Listc Substances0
No
00037
No
No
No
00004
01260
MJ
No
No
No
01310
No
No
No
No
01325
No
No
P
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
P
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
P
No
No
No
No
K
P
in
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF. INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
197.
198.
199.
200.
201.
202.
203.
Grada Products Co. , Inc.
2401 Bragg St. 37406
Groner Printing Co.
1421 E Main St. 37404
H & H Welding Shop
1811 E 23rd St. 37404
Hall's Lifetime Toys, Inc.
2305 E 28th St. 37407
Hamilton Concrete Prod. Inc.
1400 E 39th St. 37407
Hamilton County Herald
6131 Airways Blvd. 37421
Hartford Carpet Mills Inc.
2913 8th Ave. 37403
Harvey, E.B. & Co. Inc.
147 N. Market St. 37405
Hayward Bolt & Specialty Co.
Inc. . 2805 S Orchard Knob Ave.
37407
Hickory Valley Welding
7512 Lee Hwy. 37421
Hixson Iron Works
6713 Sand switch Rd. 37433
Hixson Steel Erectors Inc.
6713 Sandswitch Rd. 37434
Hoi ley's Cabinet Shop
1516 Dodds Ave. 37404
Holmes, Ernest, Dlv. ,
Dover Corp.
2505 E 43rd St. 37407
Hoi sum Bakers of Chattanooga
2305 Dodson Ave. 37406
Hudson Printing and Litho-
graphing
20
4
3
34
90
N/A
21
6
7
1
25
10
N/A
525
170
30
2499
2752
3443
3944
3271,3272
2711
2271
3911
3452,3312
3541
3317
•3441
3312
2434
3714
2051
2752
Products'
Palnt-StJrrers, Yard Sticks
Rulers
•Conn. Printing
Weldjng, Fabrication
Dollhouses, Doll house Furn.
Concrete Blks, Wall Panel-
Precast, Floor Slabs
Weekly Newspaper
Carpet Nylon
Custom Design Jewelry
Steel Bolts, Sag Rod for Bldg.
Special Threading
Wrought Iron
Steel Fabrication
Steel Erection
Steel Erections
Cabinets
Auto Wreckers, Wrecker
Parts, Accessories
Breads and Rolls
Color Printing
Conn. Printing
Wastewater'
Discharge
Status"
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
MI
SD-0
ND
ND
Discharges
~ Tojclc 1
Substances
P2
,P5
P2
P2
PO
P5
P4
P2
P2
PI
.P2
P2
P2
K
PO
PS
Air Emissions
CDS , * Toxic H
, L1stc Substances0
01330
HJ
No
No
No
01335
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
No
P
P
.
No
P
Hazardous
Wastes*
No
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
No
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
204. Hulsey Concrete Prod. Inc.
625 Hulsey St. 37405
205. Huskey Sheet Metal Co.
1300 Bennett Ave. 37404
206. Hy's Hi nit Car Wash
207. Igou-Mfg. Co. , Inc.
4053 S Access Rd. 37406
208. Industrial Incinerator Co.
Inc. , 1309 Chestnut St.
37402
209. Industrial Plating Co.
3007 N Hickory St. 37406
210. Industrial Water Chemicals,
Inc. , 314 Spear Ave. 37405
211. Industrial Wire Rope and
Supply Co.
1982 S Greenwood Ave. 37412
212. Intertype Composing Co.
212 Walnut St. 37403
213. Jackson, W.L. Mfg. Co.,
Inc. ,1200 E 40th St.
37407
214. Jet Speed Car Wash
215. Jiffy Car Wash
216. Johnson Brothers
921 Schmltt Rd. 37412
217. Jones, Lloyd E., Co.
Manufacturers Rd. 37405
218. Jones Printing Co., Inc.
336 Chestnut St. 37402
219. Junior Billboards. Inc.
100 Barton Ave. 37405
220. Kay's Ice Cream, Inc.
3744 Brainerd Rd. 37411
221. Kelley Mfg. Co.
1200 Wisdom St. 37406
40
6
4
12
29
35
9
5
270
1
55
23
2
114
71
SIC Codes
3271,3272
3589
7542
3914
3567
3471,3479
2899
3496.2298
2791
3639.3443
3433
7542
7542
3442
3441,3443
2752
2499
2024
3799,3631
3469
Products'
Concrete Blks, Septic Tanks
Food Service Items
Car Wash
Trophies, Plaques
Fab. Reclnng. Furnace
Chrome Plating, Flame Plating,
Urethane Coating
Water Chemicals
Fabric Wire Rope, Assemblies,
Slings
Typesetting
Water Heaters, Hydropneumatic
Tanks, Solar Water Heaters
Car Wash
Car Wash
Storm Windows
Structural Steel
Fabricated Plate
Comm. Printing
Billboards
Ice Cream
Wheelbarrows, Barbecue Grills
Garbage Cans
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic d
Status* Substances List** Substances"
NHS
ND
SD-P
ND
MD
MI
SO-P
MD
.ND
MD
MI-T
SD-P
SD-P
0004766
P
ND
MD
ND
ND
MU
SD-C
MI
PO
P2
P4
P2
P2
K
P3
P2
P5
P3
P4
P4
P2
P2
P5
P2
PO
P4
01390
U 1
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
01460
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
No
P
P
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
U1
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
222. Kell urn-James, Inc.
3910 E Tennessee Ave. 37409
223. Kelley Textile Designers
2105 McCallle Ave. 37404
224. Kickoff Publishing Co.. Inc.
1401 Carter St. 37402
225. Kick Shaw, Inc.
3511 Hixson Pike 37415
226. Klmball Engraving and
Printing Co.
34 Frailer Ave. 37405
227. Kingston Corp. , The
5485 Hixson Pike 37343
228. Kirk Machine Shop
3209 13th Ave. 37402
229. Koehrlng Co. , Loral n Dlv.
409 Signal Htn. Rd. 37405
230. Koehrlng Co., Southern Dlv.
25 Manufacturers Rd. 37405
231. Kopl King, Inc.
719 Cherry St. 37402
232. Krispy Kreme Doughnut Co.
5609 Bralnerd Rd. 37411
233. Louisville & Nashville RR
Wauhatchie Yard
234. Laco Sportswear
1601 Gulf St. 37408
235. Lamar Wood Products
2801 Roanoke St. 37406
236. Lancer Printing Co.
1200 Carter St. 37402
237. Lane Steel Fabricators
4311 7th Ave. 37407
5
2
25
10
4
125
1
307
243
8
52
14
20
3
7
SIC Codes
2499
3469
2741
3079
2753.2751
3951.3952
3079
3469
3531
3531
2752.2741
2051
4013
2331
2426
2751
3441,3443
3553
Products' Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic h
Status* Substances
Picture Frames
Pattern Drums
Football Publication
Baptismal Tanks
Church Steeples
Engraving. Printing
Adv. Ball Point Pens
Adv. Pencils
Plastic Injection Molds
Machine Parts
Cranes-Excavator
Heavy Duty Mach. & Equip.
Printing, Copying. T.V. Programs
Doughnuts
Diesel Engine Service
Ladles Blouses
Furniture Frames
Wood Parts for Furniture
Printing
Structural Steel Cans
Boiler Equip.
m * « « ftJukiMK^a
ND
MD
MD
ND
MD
ND
ND
SD-0
ND-T
ND
MI
0004588
NMS-MJ-T
ND
ND
MD
MD
P2
P2
PS
P3
P5
P3
P2
P4
P4
!>5
PO
P4
PI
P3
P5
P2
Air Emissions
CDS , Toxic H
L1stc Substances0
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
01786
MJ
01470
MJ
No
No
No
No
01700
No
No
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
P
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
Sawmill Machinery
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic . CDS Toxic H
Status" Substances" Listc Substances0
238.
239.
240.
241.
242.
243.
244.
245.
246.
247.
248.
249.
250.
251.
252.
253.
Laub Letter & Copy Service
6838 McCuthcheon 37421
Lee's Tackjess Strips. Inc.
2220 Polymer Dr. 37421
Life Craft Marble Co.
6123 Airways Blvd 37421
Ling Faidley.Co., Inc.
811 E. 16th St. 37408
Liquid Air, Inc.
1104 Riverfront Pkwy. 37402
Lookout Mountain Tarpaulin,
1405 Oodds Ave. , Box 3012
37404
Lookout Pattern Works
903 16th St. 37408
Lookout Platenafcing Co.
418 S Willow 37404
Lookout Saddle Co. , Inc.
1600 Rossville Ave. 37408
Loret Mills. Inc.
35 W Main St.
Louisell Davis Vault Co.,
Inc. , 4123 Cromwell Rd.
37421
Lovell Call i nets, Inc. ,
6822 Conner Lane 37421
Lucey Boiler Co.
901 S Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
Lutex Chemical Corp.
6153 Airways Blvd. 37421
Machine Design. Inc.
2716 Dodson Ave. 37406
Made-Rite Sandwich Co.
1401 Dodds Ave. 37404
1
8
2
22
3
12
2
4
45
75
7
10
125
50
3
22
2751
2641
3079
Z751
2813
2394,2399
3564
3555
3199
2048,2017
3272
2434
3443.3599
2843
-_
3599"J!L
2099
Comn. Printing
Carpet Wood Strips
Cultured Marble
Comra. Printing
Roll Labels
Industrial Gases, Welding
Gases, Cutting Gases
Tarpaulins, Awnings, Window
Shades, Ind. Applications
Wood and Metal Patterns
Offset Plates
Saddles, Bridles, Breast
Collars
Poultry Feed, Processed Eggs
Concrete Vaults
Cabinets
Plate Steel Fab, Pressure
Vessels, Machine Shop
Chemical Specialties
Custom Machinery
Prepared Sandwiches
ND
ND
ND
MU
ND
MD
MD
ND
MD
MD
ND
ND
MD
0030325
MI-SC
ND
ND
P5
P2
PZ
K
P2
P2
P2
P4
P3
PO
PO
P2
P2
K
P2
PO
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
01790
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
Ho
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes8
No
No
No
P
P
No
No
P
P
No
No
P
No
P
No
No
to
-------
(ft
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
254.
255.
256.
257.
258.
259.
260.
261.
262.
263.
264.
265.
266.
267.
Mann Welding Co.
2347 Rear Rossville Blvd.
37408
Marathon Hills Inc.
3402 N Hawthorne St. 37406
March Company, Inc.
3003 N. Hickory St. 37406
Marlowe & Miller Mechanical
2002 Wilder St. 37406
Har Node Hosiery Mill, Inc.
3319 Alton Pk. Blvd.
Box 1149 37401
Marsh Ceramics, Inc.
601 Cumberland 37404
Marsh-Tennessee Co., Inc.
1080A Duncan Ave. 37404
Mayo Chem Co. of Tennessee
607 Hudson Rd. 37405
McDowell Development Corp.
Control ngs Road
Mechanical Industries
2501 N. Orchard Knob Ave.
37406
Metro Chemical
317 Old Wauhatchie Pk. Rd.
37409
Metropolitan Mfg. Co.
2809' Dodson Ave. 37406
Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co.
Tech Ceramics Division
Cherokee Blvd. & Mfg. Rd.
37405
Mississippi Valley Struct.
Steel , 2408 Vance Ave.
37401
5
25
5
2
125
12
9
7
5
15
2
880
225
SIC Codes
3443
2221
3441.3449
3599,3441
2251
3264
2653
2842
2841
3479,2752
2819
3541
3264
3441
Products'
SteeT Pressure Tanks an
Greige Goods
Fab Structural Metal
Misc. Metal Work
Machine Shop
Steel Fabrication
Ladles Hosiery
Ceramic Insulators
Corrugated Boxes
Bleach
Soap and Detergents
NanepTates, Printing
Industrial Chemicals
Contract Kach. Parts
Machine Tools, Valve Repairs
Porcelain Parts, Steatite
Technical Ceramics
Fabricated Structural Steel
tfastewatcr Discharges,
Air Emissions
Discharge ToxTc h CDS Toxic d
Status" Substances" List Substances
NO
NO
ND
NO
MI
MD
ND
MI
0029513
ND
NMS
ND
MI
MD
P2
P4
P2
P2
P2
PI
P2
P2
P3
PS
P3
P3
P3
P2
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
30001
00090
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
P
P
P
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
P
P
No
No
Kb
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
268. Missouri Portland Cement
611 Hudson Rd.
269. Mitchell Industrial Tire
Co. , Inc.
1400 E 40th St. 37407
270. Modern Display Craft
6707 Ocoee 37421
271. Modern Maid Inc.
E 14th St & Holtzclaw Ave.
37404
272. Modern Pattern Engineers
317 E Main St. 37408
273. Modern Sofa Co. , Inc.
1909 Bachman St. 37406
274. Morefield Secretarial Serv.
5310 Ringgold Rd. 37412
275. Mornlngslde Chemical Co.,
Inc. , 2205 Holtzclaw Ave.
37404
276. Moss, Ray, Farms Inc.
3411 Vlnewood Ave. 37406
277. Mountain View Salads
1911 S. Greenwood Ave. 37404
278. Mueller Co.
1401 Mueller Ave. 37406
279. Hunt in Corp.
606 Barton Ave. 37405
280. Murray Printing & Office
Supplies, 3399 Hawthorne St.
37406
281. McKlnney Fibers Inc.
1511 Williams St. 37402
282. McCarthur Wire Inc.
62
5
400
6
15
N/A
14
N/A
10
900
1
10
3
12
SIC Codes
3241
3011,3714
3559
2542
3631,3444
3565
2512
2751
3843
2026
2099
3321,3494
2511,2431
2752
2284
3355
Products
Portland Cement Distribution
Tire, Wheels and Rims
Hydraulic Press
Store Shelving
Gas Stoves, Elect. Stoves
Cook Tops, Hoods
Wood Patterns
Aluminum Patterns
Uph. Livingroom Furn.
,Comm. Printing
Textile Chemicals
Milk Products
Salads
Fire Hydrants, Gate Valves
Miscellaneous Products
Wood Furniture, Doors
Coram. Printing
Ind. Sewing Thread
Alum. Welding Wire
Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic
Status Substances
0030902
c
MD
ND
MI
MD
MD
.ND
MD
MI
un
ND
MI
T
ND
NHS
ND
ND
PI
P3
P3
K
P2
P2
P5
P3
PO
nn
rU
P3
P3
P5
P2
P2
Air Emissions
CDS Toxic
List Substances
No
02075
02040
MJ
No
02100
No
No
No
Un
NO
No
No
02150
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Un
NO
No
No
P
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes"
No
P
P
p
No
u_
NO
No
UA
NO
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
01
ro
Company and Address
283. Mac Cabinets Co.
2232 Dayton Blvd. 37415
284. Nabors Manufacturing Co. ,
Inc. , 1900 Stuart St. 37406
285. Nation Hosiery Mills, Inc.
1200 E Main 37408
286. National Metal Products,
Inc. , 711 E llth St.
37403
287. Neal's Custom Cabinet Co.
2027 Jenkins Rd. 37421
288. Nolan Garvln, Awning Co.
1405 Dodds Ave. 37405
289. North American Royalties,
(Wheland Foundry)
200 E Eighth St. 37402
290. Old Hickory Medicine Co., Inc
5813 Lee Hwy. 37421
291. O'Neal Publishing Co.
3613 Ringgold Rd. 37412
292. Organic Chemical Corp. ,
Southeastern
738 E 12th St. 37403
293. Ortmeler Machinery Co. ,
Inc. , 1308 E 23rd St.
37404
294. Ortweln & Barnes Signs Co.
4700 Dodds Ave. 37407
295. Ortweln, Bill, Neon Sign
Inc. , 2108 S. Buckley St.
37404
296. P.B. & S. Chemical Co.
317 Old WauhatcMe Pike Rd.
37409
297. Paramont Displays, Inc.
2915 8th Ave. 37407
Employees
1
65
210
3
N/A
10
1310
3
6
20
6
5
15
14
SIC Codes
2434
3069
2252
3444.3645
2434
2211
3321
2833,2879
2751
2865
3599
3993
3993
2819,2812
3993
Products'
Kitchen Cabinets
Urethane Foam
Children's Hosiery
Sheet Metal Products
Copper Lamps
Grate Fronts
Kitchen Cabinets
Ind'l Canvas
Gray Iron Castings
Over-the-Counter Prep.
Pesticides
Printed Matter
.
Dyes & Chemicals
Job Shop Repair
Electrical Signs
Connn. Signs
Signs
Ind. Chemicals
Chlorine
Advertising Displays
Wastewater
Discharge
Status"
ND
MD
MI
MD
ND
ND
0002437
MI-MJ-SC
NO
ND
MD
MD
ND
ND
ND
ND
01 scharges
Toxic b
Substances
P3
P3
P2
P3
P3
P2
K
P2
PS
P3
P2
PI
PI
P3
PI
Air
CDS
L1stc
No
No
No
No
No
No
03710
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Emissions
Toxic d
Substances
P
P
No
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
No
No
No
P
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
P
P
P
P
P
No
K
P
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
298. Payne & Haddock Cabinet Shop
2401 Falrleigh St. 37406
299. Payne, T.H. , Comm. Printing
Oiv. , 1212 Carter St. 37402
300. Perma-Seat Metal Co.
Rt. 8 Gordon Rd. 37419
301. Photo-Craft Inc.
2628 S Broad St. 37408
302. Pickering, Edgar, Inc.
153 Warehouse Mart 37406
303. Pierce Welding & Machine Co.
2500 Ross vi lie Blvd. 37408
304. Pioneer Press Inc.
801 N. Market St. 37405
305. Pioneer Products, Inc.
6419 E Bralnerd Rd. 37421
306. Planters Snacks
3002 Jersey Pike 37421
307. Polysar Latex
3805 Aminocola Hyw. 37406
308. Posta Graflx Inc.
2405 Belle Arbor Ave 37406
309. Potts, Thomas Enterprises
913 Barton Ave. 37405
310. Powell, Charles, J. ,
Wholesale Meats
3405 St. Elmo Ave. 37409
311. Precision Machine & Tool Co.
21 W 20th St 37408
312. Precision Packaging, Inc.
310 E 28th St. 37410
313. Precision Wire Engineering
Co. , 607 A North Market St.
37405
9
7
3
15
2
4
8
6
150
86
8
1
18
3
29
10
SIC Codes
2541
2751
3993
3079,3861
3552
3599
2752
3999
2099
3069
3861
2434
2013
3599
2651
3999
Products'
Wood Cabinets
Comm. Printing
Name Plates
Plastic Molding
Photo Processing
Textile Dyeing Equip.
Machine Shop
Comm. Lithograph
Personal Door Mats
Snack Foods
Latex
Photographic Art
Wooden Kitchen Cabinets
Wieners, Bologna, Beef Patties
Job Shop
Folding Cartons
Carr. Containers
Custom Wire Forms
Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic b
Status Substances
MO
NO
NO
ND
NMS
ND
ND
'ND
MI
0002861
MI-C-T
MI
ND
MI
ND
MD
ND
P3
P5
PI
P4
P2
P2
P5
P2
PO
P3
P4
P2
PO
P2
P2
P2
Air Emissions
CDS Toxic H Hazardous
List Substances Wastes*
No P P
No P P
No No No
No P P
No No No
No No P
No P P
No No No
No No No
No P P
No No P
No P P
No No No
No No No
No P P
No No No
en
W
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
314.
315.
316.
317.
318.
319.
320.
321.
322.
323.
324.
325.
326.
327.
328.
329.
Printer, The
5823 Lee Hwy. 37421
Pro Ad Co. , Inc.
1413 Market St. 37402
Progroup, Inc.
99 Tremont St. 37405
Quaker Oats Co. .
Chattanooga Food Dlv.
1677 Riverside Or. 37401
Quince Kitchens, Inc.
3709 Oodds Ave. 37409
Rainbow Processing Co.
601 Cumberland St. 37404
Rapro, Inc.
1903 Polymer Dr. 37421
Ray-Ser Dyeing Company
1807 Elmendorf St. 37406
Ready Fries
243 E llth St. 37403
Red Ranger Saddlery Co.
1222 E 38th St. 37407
Redd-I, Inc.
2600 E. 40th St. 37407
Reid House Salads, Inc.
1232 Green's Lake Rd. 37412
Repro Corporation
1402 Manufacturers Rd. 37405
Richardson Electric, Inc.
Amnlcola Hwy. 37406
Richardson Machine Shop
1996 Dayton Blvd. 37415
Richelson Iron 4 Metal Co.
400 E 20th St. 37404
2
9
250
150
26
85
60
30
1
45
23
32
13
14
3
60
SIC Codes
2751
2262,2752
3949
2041.2045
2434
2269
3629
2629
2038
3199,3111
3634
2035,2038
3842
3613
3599
3341,3448
Products
Coon. Printing
Screen Print Tee Shirts
Commercial Printing
Golf Clubs, Bags, Sports
Jackets. Golf Balls
Corn-Goods-Grits, Meal
Pancake
Kitchen Cabinets, Bathroom
Cabinets, Countertops
Dyed Carpet Yarn
Elec Applicance Parts
Tyle Prac. Dyeing
Twisting
Proc. Potatoes
Saddles., Bridles, Jbg. Goods
Elec. Duct Heaters
Salads, Sandwich Spreads
Pizzas
Bio Medical
Ind. Control Panels
Machine Shop
Scrap Metal, Metal Bldg. Prod.
Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic
Status Substances
NO
NO
MI
MD
NO
HI
MD
0028339
MI-P-T
NO
MD
NO
ND
NO
KD
ND
ND
PS
PS
P3
PO
P2
P4
P3
P4
PO
P2
P4
PO
P3
P2
P2
P2
Air Emissions
COS Toxic
LI st Substances
No
No
02285
02490
H_l
NJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
02765
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
No
No
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
P
P
P
No
P
P
f
P
No
P
P
No
P
P
No
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
330. Richmond Carpet Mills, Inc.
2509 N. Orchard Knob Ave.
37406
331. Riverside Machine Co. , Inc.
3306 N. Hawthorne St. 37406
332. Riverside Tool & Die Engr.
2019 Riverside Dr. 37406
333. Rivoll Mills, Inc.
2301 E 22th St. 37407
334. Rock-Tenn Co., Folding Dlv.
1809 Chestnut St. 37408
335. Rock-Tenn Co., Mill Dlv.
Manufacturers Rd. 37405
336. Rockwell Int'l. -Metal
Casting Division
3217 Alton Park 81 vd 37410
337. Roper AppHcance Corp.
100 Manufacturing Rd. 37405
338. Ross-Meehan Foundries
1601 Carter St. 37402
339. Rothberger Directory Co.
511 Oodds Ave. 37404
340. Royal Crown Bottlers of
Chattanooga, Inc.
201 Broad St. 37402
341. Russell, F.M. . Co.
2206 S. Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
342. Russell's Chili
2201 Hamil Rd. 37407
343. Rutledge Lumber & Mfg. Co. ,
Inc. , 2300 E 28th St. 37407
344. SAL Business Forms, Inc.
1412 McCallie Ave. 37404
345. S & H Erectors Co.
Hixson Pike 37343
20
10
5
135
48
200
580
100
550
40
65
N/A
N/A
30
4
40
SIC Codes
2272
3599
3544
2253.2321
2651
2631
3321,3431
3469,3631
3325.3321
2741
2086
3441
2032
2449
2761,2752
3443,3599
Products
Tufted Carpets
Machine Job Shop
Tool and Die
Ladles' Sportswear
Hens' Knit Shirts
Knit Body Suits
Folding Parti cleboard Boxes
Recycled Particleboard
Auto Metal Castings
Stove Parts, Oven Parts
Steel Casting, Iron
Castings
Pub. City Directory
Royal Crown Cola, Nehi Flavors
Soft Drinks
Const. Steel
Chili
Furn. Framing Lumber
Knock Down Wardrobe Boxes
Bus. Forms, Comm. Printing
Steel Fab. , Machine Shop
Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic
Status Substances
MD
ND
MD
MD
MI
SD-0
0001902
MU-MJ-CPS
0003603
MI-PC-T
MI
SD-0
ND
MU
ND
ND
MD
ND
ND
P2
P2
P2
P2
P3
P4
K
K
P4
PS
PO
P2
PO
PI
PS
P2
Air Emissions
CDS Toxic Hazardous
List Substances Wastes
No
No
No
No
No
No
00720
MJ
02780
02830
MJ
No
No
No
No
02870
MJ
No
No
No P
No P
No P
No No
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
P P
No No
No No
No No
No No
P P
No No
en
w
-------
Table 3 (Confd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
346. Sander's Cabinet Shop
3306 Dodds Ave. 37407
347. Sceni eland Machine and
Fabricating
4031 S Access Rd. 37416
348. Scenic Land Printing and
Sales, 3005 Dodson Ave.
37406
349. Scholze Tannery
3100 St. Elmo Ave. 37408
350. Seaboard Allied Mill Corp.
1 Riverside Lane 37406
351. Seal Tlte Screw Co.
123 W 2nd St. 37402
352. Selox Inc. (Air Separation)
821 E llth St. 37403
353. Service Mattress Co. , Inc.
2904 Colhoun Ave. 37407
354. Service Printing Co.
2100 Oodds Ave. 37404
355. Sharrock Machine and Welding
Hooker Rd. 37410
356. Shell 011 Co.
4325 Jersey Pike
357. Sherman & Rellly Inc.
400 W 33rd St. 37410
358. Shoppers Guide Pub. Co.
of Chattanooga
105 W Newberry St. 37415
359. Signal Alloys Corp.
1207 Fort St. 37402
360. Signal Chemical Corp.
1416 Fort St. 37402'
361. Signal Knitting Mills, Inc.
Manufacturers Rd. 37405
4
7
6
200
35
3
85
7
4
6
110
10
19
6
375
SIC Codes
2434
3599,3441
2262
3111.2499,
2293
2041
3452
2813
2515
2751
3599
5171
3664.3644
2752
3341
3843
2322.2341
2321
Products' Wastewater Discharges
Discharge Toxic b
Status" Substances
Kitchen Cabinets
Custom Machinery
Fabricating
Printing for Hosiery
Industries
Leather, Tan Bark Mulch
Cattle Hair
Wheat Flour, Wheat Offals
Bolts, Nuts. Screws
Industrial Gases
Mattresses, Box Springs
Job Printing
Machine and Welding
Job Shop
Pipeline Terminal
Polellne Hdwr. . Polellne Tools.
Polellne Equip.
Advertizing
Zinc Alloys
Textile Chemicals
Mens1 Underwear. Chlldrens1 PJ's
Boys' Polo Shirts
NO
NO
MU
HI
NMS
MD
0004031
NMS-C-T
NO
ND
MO
0001562
MD-S-T
MI
NO
MD
MD
MI
P2
P2
P3
P4
PO
P2
K
PI
PS
P2
K
P2
PS
P4
P3
P2
Air Emissions
COS . Toxic d
L1stc Substances
No P
No P
No P
No P
No No
No No
No No
No No
No P
No No
No No
No No
No P
03080 P
No P
03050 No
at
O»
Hazardous
Wastes*
P
P
P
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
P
P
P
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
362. Signal Mountain Cement Div.
Suck Creek Rd.
363. Signal Plating Inc.
1608 Camdent St. 37406
364. Signal Thread Co.
1210 Chestnut St. 37402
365. Silk Screen Sign Inc.
2915 8th Ave. 37407
366. Simco Leather Co. , Inc.
1800 Daisy St. 37406
367. Sky land International Corp.
2001 Wheeler Ave. 37406
368. Smartt Cablnetts
801 Signal Mtn. Blvd. 37405
369. Smith Elevator & Mfg. Co. ,
1612 Cowart St. 37408
370. Smith, Perry, Co., Inc.
1910 Polymer Dr. 37421
371. Southeastern Directories
Inc. , Battlefield Trail
37409
372. Southern Railway
Diesel Shop
373. Southeastern Sofa Co.
2449 Glass St. 37406
374. Southern Ad. Co.
319 Cherokee Blvd. 37405
375. Southern Cellulose Prod.
Inc. , 101 W 45th St.
37410
376. Southern Centrifugal, Inc.
(Moccasin Bronze)
4106 S Creek Rd. E 37406
377. Southern Champion Tray Co.
f% ....__ r* a n OMU >incc
Employees
40
50
15
350
630
5
24
25
5
5
12
99
50
55
SIC Codes
3241
3471
2284
2741,3993
3199
2253,2252
2434
3599
3443,3433
2741
4011
2512
3993
2611
3362
2631
Products
Portland Cement
Metal Plating
Ind. Sewing Thread
Bumper Strips, Banners
Signs
Saddlery Riding Equipment
Knit Fabrics, Chlldrens1
Hoisery
Kitchen Cabinets
Machine Shop
Boiler Fab., Process Piping
Publish Church Directory
Locomotive & Car Service
Upholstered Sofas
Elect. Signs
Cotton Llnters Pulp
Bronze Bearings, Bronze
Machine Parts
Paperboard Prod. , Food Trays
farrv-nnt Foldina Box
Wastewater
Discharge
Status
0001830
MJ-CPO-T
ND
MD
MU
MU
MI
ND
MD
MD
ND
0002071
UT.T
HI 1
ND
ND
SD-0
SD-CSO
T
MI-T
Discharges
Toxic
Substances
PI
P4
P2
PS
P3
P2
P2
P3
P2
PS
P3
P2
P2
P5
P4
P3
Air Emissions
CDS
List
03070
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
03220
No
No
03110
MJ
02085
MJ
03120
MJ
Toxic
Substances
No
P
No
P
No
No
P
P
No
P
No
No
No
P
P
P
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
No
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
P
37405
Ot
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
00
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
378.
379.
380.
381.
382.
383.
384.
385.
386.
387.
388.
389.
390'.
391.
392.
Southern Comfort Insulation
Inc. . Ill € 39th St. 37407
Southern Filter Media, Inc.
2401 Bachman St. 37406
Southern Foundry Sup. Inc.
W 19th St., P.O. Box 6216
37401
Southern Machine Co. , Inc.
2318 Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
Southern Oil Service
Southern Saddlery Co. , Inc.
3001 S Broad St. 37408
Southern Specialty Paper
Co. , Inc. , 105 W 45th St.
37410
Southern Wood Piedmont
400 W 33rd St. 37410
Southland Iron & Steel
Corp., 2801 Rossvllle Blvd.
37407
Specialty Machine Co.
3201 Riverside Dr. 37406
Spectra Inc.
2400 Bachman St. 37406
Sports International, Inc.
5009 Shoals Lane 37416
Stainless Metal Prod. Inc.,
4215 Cromwell Road 37411
Standard-Coosa-Thatcher Co.
1800 Watkins St. 37404
Standard Iron & Wire Works
8
15
40
70
50
68
132
2
5
15
1
83
950
80
2649
2393
3341
3552
5171
3199,2231
2621
2491
3446
3544
2262
3949
2542
2281
3446
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS Toxic A Hazardous
Status8 Substances0 Listc Substances0 Wastes6
Cellulose Insulation
Filter Media Bags, Oust Bags,
Filter Bags
Iron Steel Scrap
Remelt Aluminum-Zinc
Tufting Machinery
Bulk Petroleum Products
Saddles-Halters, Bridles-
Harness, Blanket pads
Filter Paper
Pressure Treated Wood
Wrought Iron Work
Metal Discs. Tools
Textile Printing
Silk Screen Printing
Head Covers, Toboggans
Display Equip.
Yarn and Thread
Metal Work for Bldg.
ND
ND
MD
HD
SO-SO
MD
MI
0028380
MI-MJ-SO
T
ND
MD
MI
ND
(MS
SD-P-T
MI
ND
P2
P2
P4
P2
K
P2
P2
K
P2
P2
P3
PI
K
P4
P2
No
No
03190
MJ
03235
No
No
No
03240
MJ
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
No
P
P
No
P
No
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
No
f
No
K
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
393.
Inc., Spring Rd & Dayton Blvd.
37415
Stardust Cruiser Mfg. Co.
806 N. Holtzclaw Ave. 37406
75
3732
Metal Stair Rails
Steel Hull Houseboats
MD
P3
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
394.
395.
396.
397.
398.
399.
400.
401.
402.
403.
404.
405.
406.
407.
408.
409.
Starkey Printing Co.
2710 E 30th St. 37407
Steel Fabricators, Inc.
2108 S Highland Park Ave. 37404
Steel Products Inc.
Hudson Rd. , P.O. Box 15315
37415
Steward, D.M. Mfg. Co.
E 36 St., P.O. Box 510
37407
Stone Man, Subsidiary of Kopper,
Inc. , 3908 Tennessee Ave.
Strickland Pattern Works
106 Spring Rd. 37405
Suburban Cabinet Shop
7325 Hoses Rd. 37433
Suburban Machine Co.
2003 Stuart St. 37406
Swift Edible Oil Co.
4608 Kirkland Ave. 37410
Swift Fresh Meat Co.
2150 Amnicola Hwy. 37406
Synco Products Co.
4801 Hooker Rd. 37410
Systems Associated, Inc.
1412 McCallie Ave. 37404
TDT Paper Products Co.
1404 Carter St. 37402
TLW Industries
918 Stateline Rd. 37412
Target Printing Co.
4122 S. Creek Rd. 37406
Temple-Eastex. Chatta. 01 v.
Wiehl St., P.O. Box 350
37401
45
5
4
175
12
N/A
9
180
45
1
10
3
45
40
170
SIC Codes
2751
3444
3441
3662.3499
3264
1422
3565
2434
3599
2079
2011
2842
2761,2752
2645
3993
2752
2441
Products'
Comm. Printing
Steel Metal Fabricators
Fab. Strl. Steel
Deflect Yolk Cre. , Magnets
Steatite Insulation
Crushed Limestone
Wood Patterns, Industrial
Pattern Equip.
Cabinets
Job Shop
Shortening and Lard
Hardbutters, Cooking Oils
Meat Packers
Liquid Detergent
Business Forms
Printing
Proc. Chip Bd.
Die Cutting
Signs
Comm. Printing
Wooden Beverage Case
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge ToxiS b CDS TOXIC d Hazardous
Status" Substances" L1stc Substances" Wastes
MI
NO
NO
MI-T
SD-P
0022764
NO
.NO
MD
MI
SD-P
ND
NO
ND
ND
NO
ND
MO
PS
P2
P2
P3
PI
P2
P2
P2
PO
PO
P3
PS
P3
P2
P5
P2
No
No
No
00780
MJ
03510
MJ
03300
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
30003
n^dsn
Ui9^9U
MJ
rw
p P
No No
No P
P P
No No
No No
P P
No P
No No
No No
No No
P P
No P
P P
P P
No No
en
10
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
410. Ten-E-C Stone & Brick Prod.
1816 Allen St. 37406
411. Tenn- American Water Co.
126 E 10th St.
412. Tenn. Awning & Tent Co. ,
Inc.. 1601 McCallie Ave.
37404
413. Tenn. Machine Works, Inc.
1103 Latta St. 37406
414. Tenn. Paper Mills, Inc.
415. Tenn. Steel Tank Co.
2011 Polymer Dr. 37421
416. Tenn. Valley Ice Co.
4116 S Creek Rd. 37406
417. Texaco Inc.
Manufacturer's Rd.
418. Textile Printing Co.
6107 Ringold Rd. 37412
419. Textile Systems, Inc.
Summitt Rd. , P.O. Box 21160
37421
420. Times Printing Co.
117 E 10th St.
P.O. Box 951 37402
421. Tool craft Mold & Tool Co.
3955 Dayton. P.O. Box 15345
37415
422. Top Flight Paper Prod, Inc.
1300 Central Ave. 37403
423. Track 29 Shirt Co.
P.O. Box 5342 37406
424. Tradeco Inc.
406 Scruggs Rd. 37412
425. Tuftco Corp.
Employees
15
20
35
34
3
65
16
275
2
150
3
40
300
SIC Codes
3292
4941
2394
3599
3444
2097
5171
2752
3552
2711
3544
2648.2642
2652
2262
2392
3552
Products'
Veneer Brick
Mountain Stone
Domestic Water Treatment
Tents, Awning. Tarpaulins
Machine Shop
Box Board
Custom Fab.
Steel Tanks
Ice
Bulk Petroleum Products
Pkg. for Textile
Text. Machine Dryers
Reclamation Systems
Newspaper Publishing
Casting Tooling
Molds Vacuum Bus.
Paper Prod. Envelopes
Set-up Paper Box
Screen Print Tee Shirt
Bedspreads and Draperies
Tufting Machinery
Wastewater
Discharge
Status"
ND
0002518
MU-MJ
MO
MD
SO-CO
ND
ND
0022241
T
NMS
ND
ND
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
Discharges
ToxTc h
Substances
PO
PI
P2
P2
P4
P2
PO
P2
PS
P2
P5
P2
P3
P3
P2
P2
Air
cos
L1stc
No
No
09004
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Emissions
Toxic d
Substances
No
No
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
P
No
P
P
P
No
No
P
No
P
No
P
P
No
P
2320 Holtzclaw Ave. 37408
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
c
426.
427.
428.
429.
430.
431.
432.
433.
434.
435.
436.
437.
438.
439.
440.
441.
442.
lompany and Address E
Tulake Corporation
3609 Amnicola Hwy. 37406
Turnbull Cone Baking Co.
1404 Carter St. 37402
Turner Advertising Co.
99 Market St. 37402
US Pipe & Foundry-Soil Pipe
Division
1000 W 19th St. 37408
US Pipe & Foundry-Valve
Division
2501 Chestnut St. 37408
USA Volunteer Ammo Plant
Hwy 2-AE & Hickory Valley Rd.
USA Army Reserve Center
Ullenberg Corp.
4113 N Spring St. 37405
United States Stove Co.
3500 N Hawthorne St. 37406
VPC Typesetting Co.
3710 Calhoun, P.O. Box 6009
37407
Valley Machine & Welding Co.
4500 Fagan St. 37410
Vandsco Posters, Inc.
960 Dodson Ave. 37406
Velsicol Chemical Corp.
4902 Central Ave. 37410
Vulcan Iron Works. Inc.
2909 Riverside 37406
Vulcan Materials Co.
Shall owford Rd. 37421
Vulcan Materials Co.
2001 Rossville Rd. 37408
Wagner Industries
mployees
80
75
25
575
952
150
200
6
50
80
200
75
115
30
35
SIC Codes
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h COS loxic d
Status Substances Listc Substances"
2086
2099,3551
3993
3321
3321
9711
3961
3443
2721
3599
2751
2869,2865
3531,3295
2951
3273
2037
Soft Drink Pepsi, Seven-up
Orange Crush
Ice Cream Cones, Ice Cream
Cone Machines
Outdoor Advertising
Soil Pipe fittings, Valves-
Hydrants, Comm. Gray Iron
Cast Iron Pres. Fittings,
Valves-Hydrants, Cast Iron
Castings
TNT Explosives
Truck Wash & Training Center
Jewelry. Finger Rings
Ironwood Heaters
Gas Room Heaters
Typography Arts
Subsidy Publishing
Custom Fabricate Machine Parts
Outdoor Advertising
Industrial Chemicals
Pile Hammers, Pile Extractors
Airline Oilers
Paving Mixtures
Mixed Concrete
Fruit Drink
ND
MU
ND
0003808
MI-MJ-CP
T
0002429
MJ-CP
T
0002313
MJ-CP-T
0030589
0
MI
MI
SD-C
ND
MD
MI
0025895
MI-MJ-S
T
MD
ND
0003077
HJ-P-T
ND
PO
PO
P2
P2
P2
PI
P3
PI
K
P5
P2
P5
K
P2
PI
PI
PO
No
No
No
00029
3005
MJ
03321
MJ
03630
30006
No
No
No
No
No
No
03500
No
00010
03640
No
No
No
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
No
P
P
No
No
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
No
No
P
P
P
P
P
No
P
P
P
P
K
P
P
No
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
443.
444.
445.
446.
447.
448.
449.
450.
451.
452.
Walker Transfers of Tenn.
1700 Holtzclaw Ave. 37404
Wallace Printing & Litho-
graphing, 1221 Bailey Ave.
37404
Warmouth Engraving and
Printing, 2207 Dayton Blvd.
37415
Wei chance Mfg. to.
724 N. Market St. 37405
Wells Ornamental Iron
4054 S. Access Rd. 37406
Wells Ornamental Iron
5400 Ringgold Rd. 37412
Wi Chilian Monuments, Inc.
5225 Bra i nerd Rd. 37411
Willwear Hosiery Mill, Inc.
2000 Stuart St. 37406
Wilson Printing Co.
804 Central Ave. 37403
Wood-Bridge Furniture Ind. ,
6
4
4
17
2
5
25
125
3
110
SIC Codes
2396
2752
2753,2752
2512
3446,3444
3446
3281
2251.2252
2761
2512
Products'
Wastewater 'Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h COS Toxic ,
Status Substances L1stc Substances
Iron-on Transfers
Coom. Printing
Engraving. Conn. Printing
Livingroao Furniture
Fab. Ornamental Iron
Guttering
Fab. Ornamental Iron
Monuments
Burial Markers
Knee High Hosiery
Athletic Socks. Anklets
Job Printing
Upholstered Livingrooo Furn.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
HI
ND
MD
P2
P5
PS
P2
P2
P2
PI
P2
PS
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
02520
P
P
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
. Hazardous
1 tastes6
P
P
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
Inc., 2000 Elmendorf St.
37406
453. Wrenn Brothers Inc. N/A 3537
2022 Polymer Dr. 37421
Forklifts
Harrison
1. Carbonfc Industries Corp. 12
Hwy. 58 37341
2813
Carbon Dioxide
HU
NMS
P2
P2
No
No
CATOOSA COUNTY
Fort Oglethorpe
No
No
No
1. Buck Creek Industries,
Buckaneer Dtv.
217 Patterson Ave. 30742
178
2281
Carpet Yarn
ND
P4
No
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees SIC Codes
Products' Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS
Status" Substances" L1stc
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Colorstrand, Inc.
P.O. Box 2364 30742
Danube Carpet Mills,
212 First 30742
Gray Yarn Hills, Inc.
216 First St. 30742
Jemco, Inc.
2nd St. 30741
Monarch Furniture Mfg. Co.
Inc., Div. of Mclaughlin
Corp.. 306 1st St. 30741
North Georgia Furniture Mfg.
Co.. Inc., P.O. Box 2006
30742
North Georgia Printing Co.
406 LaFayette Rd. 30742
Acuff Processing Plant
Rt. 3 30736
Babb Lumber Co. , Inc.
Hwy. 41 N, P.O. Box 250
30736
Call away Bros.
303 High St. 30736
Candlewick Yarns-Hurst Plant
#9. P.O. Box 280 30736
Catoosa County News
P.O. Box 40, Rt. 4 30736
Colox Corporation
30736
Dixie Yarns Inc. ,
Candlewick Div.
P.O. Box 280 30736
2283
55 2272
45 2281
9 3544.3599
50 2512
2512
3 2752
6 2011
22 2421,2436
2431,3442
2 2048,2875
457 2281
4 2711,2752
9 2865
147 2281
Carpet Yarn
Carpet
Textile Yarn
Tools, Dies
Machine Shop Job Work
Livingroom Chairs, Dual Sleeping
Equipment, Sofas
Upholstered Wood Furniture
Offset Job Printing
Rinqgold
Custom Beef Processing
Custom Pork Processing
Softwood, Plywood, Wood Doors
Metal Windows
Dairy Cattle Feed, Beef Cattle
Feed, Hog Feed, Fertilizer
Carpet Yarn
Newspaper Publishing
Offset Job Printing
Chem. -Textile Inds. , Chem.
Surfactants Foam Stabilizer
Textile Yarns for Tufting
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
SD-P
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0000027
CPO
P4
P2
P4
P2
P2
P2
PS
PO
P2
P2
P4
P5
P3
P4
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Toxic j
Substances
P
P
P
No
No
No
P
No
P
No
P
P
P
P
, Hazardous
1 Wastes6
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
No
P
P
P
P
P
P
OJ
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address Employees
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Dixie Yarns, Inc. 348
Chemical Fibers Plant
P.O. Box 280 30736
P.M. Russell CO 14
P.O. Box 188, Chattanooga,
TN 37401
Machlneco, Inc. 19
Hwy. 41 S, 30736
Salem Carpet Mills Inc. 750
P.O. Box 10 30736
Salem Equip. Inc. , Dixie 14
Div. , Rt. 1, P.O. Box 407 30736
Selox
South Eastern Steel Casting 8
Co. , 112 Clalbourne St.
30736
Sweetwater Carpet Corp. 500
724 E Nashville St. 30736
Union Oil
Alco Fabricators, Inc. 12
1104 Old Lakevlew Or. 30741
Alton Box Board Co. 65
Papertube Div., Rossvllle
Plant, P.O. Box 190 30741
Bevis, H.C. Rope Mfg. Co., 30
Inc. , 321 Hogan Rd. 30741
Borg Textiles-Southern Div. 400
P.O. Box 697 30741
SIC Codes
Products'
Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h CDS
Status" Substances0 List
2281
3441
3552,3599
2272
3553
2813
3325
2272
5541,5171
3441
2655
2298
2211
Manmade Fiber Yarns
Structural Steel
Lift Poles/Carpet Ind.
Machine Shop
Carpet
Sawmill Machinery
Carriage, Carriage Drives
Industrial Gases
Steel Castings
Tufted Rugs & Carpets
Oil and Gasoline Storage
Truck Stop
WALKER COUNTY
Rossvllle
Fabricated Steel
Yarn Cones
Reflnlshed Yarn Cones
Braided Cordage & Rope
Deep Pile Fabric
ND
NO
ND
0030988
PO
ND
0031135
ND
0030937
0021954
0000078
0030678
ND
0030741
P
ND
MI
SD-0
P4
P2
P2
P4
P2
P2
P3
P4
K
P2
P4
P2
*
P2
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Toxic d
Substances
P
No
No
P
No
No
No
P
No
No
P
No
No
Hazardous
Wastes6
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
No
P
P
No
P
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.)
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Company and Address
Employees SIC Codes
Products' Wastewater Discharges
Air Emissions
Discharge Toxic h COS
Status" Substances L1stc
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
1.
Brock & Blevins Co. , Inc.
200 W. Gordon Ave.
P.O. Box 160 30741
Burner Systems Int'l. Inc.
1200 Car line Rd.
P.O. Box 816 30741
Fav-0-Rich, Inc.
Rossville Division
P.O. Box 608 30741
Jorges Carpet Mills, Inc.
420 W Lake Ave.
P.O. Box 698 30741
Kenyon Southern Inc.
Maple St.. P.O. Box 639
30741
Murphy Machine
1003 Carllne Rd. ,
P.O. Box 656 30741
National Printing Co.
1121 Mary Lane 30741
Norwood Sheet Metal Co.
1830 McFarland 30741
Rossville Mills Inc.
P.O. Box 40 30741
Rossville Spinning Corp.
P.O. Box 40 30741
Standard-Coosa-Thatcher
Co. , P.O. Box 280 30741
Stone Man
Union Oil Co.
5700 Tennessee Ave.
Wilson Electric Furnaces
429 W. Gordon Ave. 30741
Yates Bleachery Co.
30725
369 3443,3317
65 3433
130 2026
200 2272
200 2261
20 3552
1 2751
2 3444
2221
2281.2824
500 2281
1422
5171
4 3567.3585
134 2262
Tanks, Pressure Vessels
Gas Burners, Tube
Fabrication
Milk and Milk Products
Broadloom Carpets
Textile Dryers, Finishers,
Printers
Textile Machinery
Comra. Printing
Sheet Metal Work
Upholstery Fabric, Nylon
Yarn Spinning
Synthetic Yarn
Ind. Sewing Thread
Textured Yarn
Crushed Limestone
Bulk Petroleum Products
Electric Heating Apparatus
Heating & Air Cond. Control Sys.
Flints tone
Textile Dyeing and Finishing
MD
ND
ND
MD
MI
SD-S
'NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
SD-0
0023761
002681
ND
0000019
P
P2
P2
PO
P4
P4
P2
P5
P2
P4
P2
P2
PI
P2
P2
P4
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Toxic d
Substances
No
No
No
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
i Hazardous
1 Wastes6
P
P
No
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
No
No
P
P
en
-------
Table 3 (Cont'd.) °*
INVENTORY OF INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
FOOTNOTES
Discharge Status Codes
ND - No data.
MD - Discharges domestic wastewaters to municipal sewers.
NI - Discharges Industrial wastewaters to municipal sewers.
MU - Discharges unknown wastewaters to municipal sewers.
HJ - Major NPDES permit.
NMS - Not on a municipal sewer.
7-D1git Number - NPDES permit number
SO - Surface discharge listed In Hay 1978 Inventory
of wastewater discharges.
C - Cooling water discharge.
P - Process wastewater discharge.
0 - Other wastewater discharge.
S '- Surface runoff discharge.
T - Tennessee state permit (full or temporary) or state
specified effluent limits.
Toxic Substances (Water)
K - Known discharge of toxic substances.
P - Potential for discharge of toxic substances - Rated 0 to 5
(5 is highest) based on SIC code and products.
CDS Limit
No - Source not tracked by CDS.
HJ - Major emissions source (Potential emissions > 100 tons/year).
5-D1git Number - Source number in CDS.
Toxic Substances (Air)
No - No significant potential for emission of toxic substances.
P - Significant potential for emissions of toxic substances.
K - Known emissions of toxic substances.
Hazardous Wastes
No - No significant potential for production of hazardous wastes.
P - Significant potential for production of hazardous wastes.
K - Known producer of hazardous wastes.
-------
77
the Standard Industrial Category (SIC) code and major types of products.
These data were primarily obtained from a 1977 directory of manufac-
turers in the Chattanooga area and surrounding counties.34
The list of manufacturers was augmented by four additional inven-
tories. A few company names were added from a list of all industrial
sources of wastewater discharges covered by permits issued under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).33 Additional
industrial sources were listed in an inventory of all wastewater dis-
charges in a six-county wastewater treatment planning study area.3 A
list of industries discharging wastewater to the Chattanooga muni-
cipal sewerage system identified 88 facilities not on the other lists
as well as 238 companies that were included.14 Because no data were
available on SIC codes or products for these 88, they were not added
to the Table 3 inventory. Their potential significance as sources of
pollution could not be determined. A few companies were added from a
list of all air pollution sources in the area included in State Imple-
mentation Plans.32
Wastewater Discharges
Data from these various lists were used to define the status of
wastewater discharges from each source if known. The municipal con-
tributors list indicated that 108 sources reportedly discharge only
domestic wastewaters to the city sewerage system (coded MD in Table
3). An additional 82 discharge industrial wastewaters to the city
(MI) and the status (MI or MD) was unknown (MU) for 18 industries
discharging some type of wastewater to the city. No data (ND) were
available on 217 sources. Most of these latter sources were plants
with few employees and (with the exception of printing plants) a low
to moderate potential for discharge of toxic substances. The municipal
contributors list reportedly contained only "Priority I" sources.
Thus, many of the small plants probably discharge to the city but
have not been inventoried yet.
-------
78
Fifty-one of the companies listed in Table 3 have, or have applied
for, NPDES permits with 20 listed as major dischargers (MJ). The
seven-digit number is the permit number which is always preceded by
the two-letter abbreviation for the state (TN or GA) in NPDES files.
The areawide wastewater treatment planning inventory listed 44
sources that had discharges of wastewater to surface waters but did
not have NPDES permits. EPA file data did not contain a current
Tennessee state permit inventory. A January 1977 inventory15 listed
temporary or full permits or effluent limits (T) for 16 of these sources.
The remaining 28 sources did not have Tennessee or NPDES permits.
Several of their surface discharges were very small cooling water
discharges or surface runoff only.
Of the 95 permitted and unpermitted surface water discharges,
36 contained process wastewaters, 35 contained cooling water, 18
contained surface runoff and 32 contained miscellaneous wastewaters
such as boiler blowdown, filter backwash or sanitary wastewaters.
The municipal contributors list identified 17 sources that were
not connected to municipal sewers (NMS) by choice or because no sewer
was available. Only three of these sources have an NPDES permit. It
is not known if the other 14 have an unpermitted surface discharge or
if they use subsurface disposal methods.
Thirty sources listed in Table 3 have known discharges of toxic
substances in their wastewaters (shown by a K in the toxic substances
column). For the remainder of the sources, data either showed no
discharge of toxic substances or (in most cases) were inadequate to
define such a discharge.
To provide an estimate of the possible discharge of toxic sub-
stances from a source, NEIC has developed relative rankings of SIC
-------
79
codes based on the potential of an industrial plant of that type to
discharge toxic substances.35 This ranking is based on the probability
of occurrence of each of 129 toxic substances36 in the wastewaters
for each industry type weighted for the relative aquatic toxicity and
human health effects of each toxic substance. This ranking ranges
from 0 to 5, with 0 no probability of toxic substances and 5 a high
probability of the presence of highly toxic substances. The relative
ranking for each source is shown in the toxic substance column (water)
of Table 3 as PO to P5.
About half of the sources (253) have a moderate potential (P2 to
P3) to discharge toxic substances. This means they probably discharge
only a few toxic substances with low to moderate toxicity and probably
no highly toxic substances. There were about a fourth of the sources
(119) with relatively high potential (P4 and P5). These sources probably
discharge numerous toxic substances or several with high toxicity.
The remaining fourth (95) potentially discharge little or no toxics.
Air Emissions
Data on air emissions of toxic substances were very limited.
Only 88 of the sources in Table 3 are listed in the Compliance Data
System (CDS) that tracks the compliance status of air emission sources
listed in State Implementation Plans. The CDS source numbers (5-digits)
are shown in the table. About half (46) of the sources are listed as
major emitters. All but three were listed as in compliance in October
1978.37
No relative ranking system was devised for the emission of toxic
substances. Those facilities believed to have a potential for emission
of toxic substances based on a subjective evaluation of industry type
and products were designated with a P in the toxic substances (air)
column. About 40% (201) of the sources potentially emit toxic sub-
stances.
-------
80
Hazardous Wastes
Data were also limited on disposal practices for hazardous wastes.
Only nine sources were known to produce hazardous wastes. Based on a
subjective evaluation of industry types and products, about 52% (260)
of the sources potentially produce hazardous wastes requiring disposal.
This was indicated in Table 3 by a P in the hazardous wastes column.
MUNICIPAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
There are seven municipal wastewater treatment facilities in the
study area. All have NPDES permits and six are considered major dis-
chargers. All provide secondary treatment. Actual and design flows,
sewered populations and industrial wastewater data are presented in
Table 4.3'21
The large Moccasin Bend plant operated by the City of Chattanooga
serves most of the area. Current plans are for its service area to
be expanded in the next 5 years to include areas tributary to the
Brainerd, East Ridge, Fort Oglethorpe, and Red Bank treatment plants
which would then be abandoned. The Moccasin Bend plant is currently
hydraulically and organically overloaded and is being expanded. Be-
cause of the large industrial wasteload, the plant is the largest
source of toxic substances in the study area.
The Brainerd, Fort Oglethorpe and Red Bank facilities also receive
substantial industrial wastewater inflows relative to their sizes and
are significant sources of toxic substances. The remaining three
plants receive primarily municipal wastewaters but also discharge
some toxic substances because of minor industrial flows and the nature
of domestic sewage. Sludges from all of these plants could contain
substantial amounts of toxic substances, especially heavy metals and
organic compounds.
-------
81
Table 4
MUNICIPAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Source
Brainerd
(Chattanooga)
East Ridge
Fort Oglethorpe
Moccasin Bend
(Chattanooga)
Red Bank
Ringgold
Signal Mountain
Totals
Est. Sewered
Population
35,000
24,000
4,500
85,000
5,500
500
1,400
155,900
Est. Industrial
Waste Pop. Equiv.
37,000
0
8,000
479,000
3,600
2,100
200
529,900
Avg. Effluent
Flow (mgd)
4.9
5.0
2.0
51
2,0
0.2
0.4
65.5
Design
Capacity (mgd)
3.5
3.0
2.0
42.0
1.5
0.16
0.4
52.96
-------
82
DOMESTIC SOURCES OF POLLUTION
In addition to the municipal wastewater treatment plants, there
are 38 domestic sources of pollution in the study area [Table 5].3
These are small plants treating domestic wastewaters from facilities
such as schools, service stations, trailer courts, motels, shopping
centers and recreational facilities. Because these discharges are
small (less than 0.1 mgd) and domestic sewage only, their total dis-
charge of toxic substances should be very small.
A comparison with the January 1977 inventory of Tennessee state
permits15 showed that 16 of the 27 Tennessee sources had state permits.
Eleven of the sources are in Georgia. Only 18 of the sources had NPDES
permits.
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL
The various industrial facilities in the study area produce waste
residuals that require disposal. Some of this material such as trash
and garbage can be disposed of safely in conventional sanitary landfills.
Other material can contain toxic substances, be corrosive or infTamable
and thus hazardous. Special disposal methods are thus required for
both safety and environmental protection.
A summary of the types of industrial waste residuals generated
in the study area is presented in Table 6.17 Management and disposal
practices are also listed. Note that two types of disposal (on-site
storage in lagoons or landfills and hauling to landfills) are often
used for wastes that are potentially hazardous. There are no landfills
in or near the study area that are licensed to dispose of the most
hazardous wastes. Current disposal practices thus could pose a serious
threat to the environment and may be illegal as well.
-------
83
Table 5
DOMESTIC SOURCES OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
Name
Estimated
Sewered Population
Design
Capacity (mgd)
Tennessee
Permits
NPDES
Permit
TENNESSEE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
Cedar Creek Mobil Home Park
Chattanooga Area Voc Techn. School
Chattanooga Power Service Center
Chattanooga State Technical School
Gulf Oil Service Station
(Cummings Highway)
Gulf Oil Service Station
(Hixon Pike)
Hamilton Co. Nursing Home
Highway 58 Shopping Center
Hixon High School
Hixon Junior High School
Holiday Inn
K-Mart (Hixon Pike)
LaDel Mobile Hone Valley
Lakeshore Country Club Apts.
Loret Resort Villa (Harrison)
Loret Resort Village (Chattanooga)
McDowell Wastewater Treatment Plant
Northgate Mall (Hixon Sewage, Inc.)
North Twinbrook Subdivision
Plaza 76 Service Station (Union Oil)
Red Bank Water Treatment Plant
Red Food Stores
Shephard Elementary School
Tennessee Dept. of Transportation
(1-24 Welcome Station)
TVA Chickamauga Dam Hydro Plant
Union Oil Service Station
(Hixon Pike)
Valley View Elementary School
130
250
80
512
--
--
800
—
945
1,275
160
—
246
340
240
—
--
1,216
25
—
—
—
—
600
45
-- •
360
0.012
0.013
0.006
0.040
--
—
0.080
0.006
0.001
0.003
0.016
0.010
0.010
0.145
0.040
--
0.025
0.250
.0.014
—
--
0.005
0.005
0.020
0.006
0.001
0.002
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0023116
0026751
0026735
0026743
0022829
0004618
0002208
0020516
0030295
0027413
0026727
GEORGIA
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Chattanooga Valley High School
Covenant College
Days Inn Motel
Georgia Welcome Station
Granny's Restaurant (More Petroleum)
1-75 Tourist Welcome Center
Lookout Mountain Junior High School
Morris Estates Subdivision
Powell Mobile Home Park
Rock City Gardens
Wildwood Sanitarium
__
500
—
--
—
--
—
455
—
—
~~
0.018
0.050
0.017
0.015
0.004
0.045
0.004
0.022
0.030
--
0.010
0023558
0022411
0023906
0022951
0029734
0029726
0022764
-------
84
Table 6
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUALS SURVEY
Industrial
Classification
No. of
Industries
Included
Type of Residual
Food and Kindred Products (SIC 20)
i
Meat Products 8
Dairy Products
Grain and Feed
Mill Products
Bakery Products
8
Waste hair, slimes, man-
ure, waste blood, tank
sludge, feathers, etc.
Cleanup wastes
Milk, whey, and other
liquid wastes
Screenings, sludges
from pretreatment
Grain dust and debris,
sweepings, off-quality
products
Oils, fats, and grease
Waste treatment sludges
and screenings
Bakery process waste,
scraps, etc.
Beverages 5 Reactor sludge
Textile Mill Products (SIC 22)
28
Cloth scraps and collect-
ed lint
Inorganic salts and sol-
vent sludges*
Latex wastes*
Pretreatment screenings
and waste treatment
sludges*
Residuals Management/
Disposal Practices
Discharged to sewers;
land disposal.
Discharged to sewers.
Discharged to sewers;
used for animal fodder
off-site.
Discharged to sewers;
hauled off-site.
Disposed pf on-site;
hauled off-site.
Hauled off-site.
Hauled off-site; lagoon.
Discharged to sewers;
hauled to landfill.
Discharged to sewers.
Hauled to landfill.
Hauled off-site; la-
goons or landfill on
plant property.
Latex processing plant
hauled to landfill.
Hauled off-site; la-
goons or landfill on
plant property.
-------
Table 6
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUALS SURVEY (Continued)
85
Industrial
Classification
No. of
Industries
Included
Type of Residual
Lumber and Wood Products (SIC 24)
14
Sawdust, wood chips, and
scrap lumber
Sludges containing chlor-
inated phenols*
Paper and Allied Products (SIC 26)
6 Sawdust
Residuals from air pollu-
tion control equipment
(fly ash), process sludges,
and wastewater treatment
sludges*
Glue wastes
Printing. Publishing, and Allied Industries (SIC 27)
5 Nitric acid etch solution
contaminated with magne-
sium*
Solvents, cutting oils,
and ink
Chemicals and Allied Products (SIC 28)
30 Solvents and spent acids*
Oils and grease
Organic and inorganic
chemical sludges*
Sludge from wastewater
treatment processes*
Latex wastes*
Residuals Management/
Disposal Practices
Hauled to landfill;
stored on-site.
Storage lagoons.
Stored on-site.
Stored on-site.
Discharged to sewers.
Neutralized and discharged
to sewers.
Discharged to sewers.
Discharged to sewers;
stored on-site.
Discharged to sewers;
hauled off-site;
stored on-site.
Stored on-site; land-
filled; storage lagoons.
Storage lagoons or ponds.
Public landfill; laytex
recovery plant.
-------
86
Table 6
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUALS SURVEY (Continued)
Industrial
Classification
No. of
Industries
Included
Type of Residual
Herbicides*
Leather and Leather Products (SIC 31)
3 Hide fleshings, lime,
sodium sulfide, and
chromic hydroxide sludge
alum*
Stone. Clay. Glass, and Concrete Products (SIC 32)
16
Calcium phosphate sludge
Sodium hydroxide sludge
Thorium hydroxide sludge
and rare earths waste,
concrete, glass, clay,
ceramics, etc., air pol-
lution control equipment*
Chromic acid, tolulene
acetone, chlorinated hy-
droxide, and beryllium
oxide*
Primary Metal Industries (SIC 33)
16
Foundry dry waste includ-
ing sand, cupola dirt;
particles from air pollu-
tion control equipment may
contain phenols, bonding
agents, fluorides, cyan-
ides, and heavy metals*
Scrap metal, griridings,
and cutting oil
Residuals Management/
Disposal Practices
Stored on-slte; out-of-
state disposal.
Hauled from site; dis-
charged to sewers.
Settling ponds.
Settling ponds.
Settling ponds used; fill
plant property; radio-
active residuals removed
to special landfill site.
Hauled off-site; settl-
ing pond; stored on-site.
Stored on plant site;
landfilled.
Sold as intermediate
product.
-------
Table 6
INDUSTRIAL RESIDUALS SURVEY (Continued)
87
Industrial
Classification
No. of
Industries
Included
Type of Residual
Residuals Management/
Disposal Practices
Fabricated Metal Products. Machinery, and Electrical and Electronic Machinery
(SIC 34. 35. 36)
45
Air pollution residuals*
Sand, shot blast metal
grindings, and scrap
metal
Aluminum wastes*
Cutting oils, solvents,
and paint wastes*
Slag, pickling solutions,
lime sludge, chromium,
cyanide, cadmium, zinc,
and arsenic*
Sawdust
Caustic plating waste*
Cyanide and chromium
wastes*
Electroplating wastes,
i.e., etching solutions
bath filter solids, and
treatment sludge con-
taining heavy metals*
Discharged to sewers;
disposed of on plant
property.
Sold as scrap metal;
stored on property.
Hauled off-site.
Discharged to sewers;
stored on property;
hauled to landfill.
Lime sludge put in
barrels and hauled
to landfill.
Hauled off-site;
stored on property.
Put in drums and hauled
off-site.
Settling ponds.
Discharged to sewer;
stored on-site;
hauled off-site.
*Potentia11y hazardous residuals
SOURCE: Hensley-Schmidt, Inc.
Estimated quantities were derived from information obtained from the Chattanooga Air
Pollution Control Bureau and Waste Landfill Demonstration Project. Tennessee-Georgia
Regional Health Commission, City of Chattanooga, Tennessee, and the Tennessee Depart-
ment of Public Health (January, 1975).
-------
In addition to the industrial waste residuals, sludges from muni-
cipal wastewater treatment plants that may contain toxic substances
such as heavy metals also require disposal.
Background data and the aerial reconnaissance reveal that large
volumes of residual wastes, some known to be hazardous, are stored on
plant sites. Details of such disposal are discussed by plant in later
sections of this report on sources of toxic substances.
A May 1978 inventory of open and closed landfill and dump sites
indicated that there are no open landfills within the study area but
there are five closed sites that are actual or potential sources of
pollution.17 Most solid waste from the study area, including some
undefined hazardous wastes, are hauled to the Hamilton County landfill
in Harrison or the City of Chattanooga landfill in Ooltewah. Both of
these are just east of the study area.
The closed landfills are listed below with their associated re-
ceiving streams. Details of the pollution problem at each site are
presented in later sections on sources of toxic substances for
each stream.
Name Receiving Stream
North Hawthorne Street South Chickamauga Creek
Alton Park Boulevard Chattanooga Creek
Red Bank Tennessee River
Amnicola Highway Tennessee River
38th Street Chattanooga Creek
-------
VII. SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - SOUTH CHICKAMAUGA CREEK
DRAINAGE AREA
South Chickamauga Creek is the largest tributary of the Tennessee
River in the study area. The Creek originates in northern Georgia
and flows northward into Tennessee through eastern portions of Chattanooga.
It then flows westward around the north end of Missionary Ridge to
join the Tennessee River at River Mile (RM) 468.2, about 4.5 km (2.8 mi)
downstream from Chickamauga Dam [Figure 2].
Streamflow averages 5,500,000 mVday (682 cfs) about 19.3 km (12 mi)
upstream of the mouth. There is little inflow downstream from this
point. Major tributaries include West Chickamauga Creek entering at
RM 13.2 and Little Chickamauga Creek entering at RM 31.6 at Ringgold.
Friar Branch, a small tributary, enters South Chickamauga Creek at
RM 8.7.
There are few sources of pollution in the South Chickamauga Creek
drainage area south of Ringgold and Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia. The
study area boundaries were thus set at RM 32.6 for South Chickamauga
Creek and RM 1.5 of Little Chickamauga Creek in Ringgold and at RM
5.0 of West Chickamauga Creek in Fort Oglethorpe.
Industrial facilities that discharge toxic substances to South
Chickamauga Creek are primarily located at Ringgold, at the Volunteer
Army Ammunition Plant, in an industrial area along a 3 km (2 mi) reach
of Highway 153 northeast of the Chattanooga Municipal Airport, and
along the lower 3 km (2 mi) of the Creek. Major municipal wastewater
treatment plants are located at Ringgold, Fort Oglethorpe, East Ridge
and Brainerd.
-------
90
Major industrial facilities include the CF Industries fertilizer
plant, the GAP Corporation textile chemicals and latex plant, the W. R.
Grace rare earth chemicals plant, the Mueller Co. valve and hydrant
plant, the Alco Chemical Co. organic chemicals plant and the Desoto
plant manufacturing electric light fixtures and fireplace equipment.
The closed Hawthorne Street dump and various industrial landfills
are other potential sources of toxic substances.
In the following sections, details of major and minor industrial
sources, municipal sources, domestic sources and hazardous waste dis-
posal sites are presented in downstream order.
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
CF Industries. Inc.
This large fertilizer plant on the northwest portion of the Vol-
unteer Army Ammunition Plant (VAAP) [Figure 4] is owned by Farmers
Chemical Association, Inc., (FCAI) and is operated by CF Industries,'
Inc. Portions of the plant including a water supply system, a steam
power plant, a nitric acid plant and other utilities are leased from
VAAP. The fertilizer plant was built in 1961-1966 by FCAI who added
facilities for manufacture of nitric acid, ammonia, urea, ammonium
nitrate and nitrogen solutions.38 Annual design capacities in 1970
(in 1,000 tons) were: anhydrous ammonia, 175; urea, 42; ammonium
nitrate, 120; nitrogen solutions, 200; and nitric acid, 170.38
Basic raw materials are air, natural gas and water. In 1970 the
plant consumed more than half of the natural gas used in the Chattanooga
area.
-------
„: MILITARY
^/RESERVATION
.'. "f "Chemical
;. in A.Wate
5 \». ": :
* * •
- /7Vafne|l Cerr
AMMU
RESERATIO
C.F. INDUSTRIES
Figure 4. Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant
-------
92
Emissions data retrieved from NEDS39 indicated that in 1973 the
plant was estimated to emit 260 m. tons (287 tons) of participates
and 419 m. tons (462 tons) of nitrogen oxides per year. Major emission
sources included the nitric acid plant, the ammonium nitrate prilling
tower and granulator, and the chemical separator evaporator. Air
pollution controls included a catalytic afterburner at the nitric
acid plant and several wet scrubbers and centrifugal collectors at
particulate emission points. Air program file data did not define
current emission levels or pollution controls. The plant is listed
as in compliance with SIP regulations. Excessive visible emissions
were noted from one unit, possibly the prill tower scrubber stack, in
the 1978 aerial photographs [Figure 5].
In 1968 the fertilizer plant was identified as a major source of
high ammonia concentrations in Friar Branch, South Chickamauga Creek
and the Tennesse River in upper Nickajack Reservoir.2 The high ammonia
contributed to a very high chlorine demand in the Chattanooga Water
Company (now the Tennessee-American Water Company) raw water supply.2
Streamflow in Friar Branch was toxic to aquatic life and to livestock
watering from the stream.2
A 1968 FWPCA study of the plant and wastewater discharges found
that the plant discharged about 2,460 mVday (0.65 mgd) of cooling
tower blowdown, air pollution control scrubber wastewaters and mis-
cellaneous spills, leaks and process losses.2 These wastewaters were
treated in two ponds in series and discharged to Poe Branch, a small
tributary of Friar Branch, about 1.8 km (1.1 mi) above RM 2.3 of Friar
Branch. Ammonia concentrations as high as 100 mg/1 were measured in
Friar Branch. The wastewaters also contained chromium from the cooling
tower blowdown. Prior to installation of chromium reduction facili-
ties on the blowdown stream, chromium discharges as high as 36 kg
(80 Ib) per day were detected.5 Chromate settled in a ditch following
the reduction unit could be washed into Poe Branch by surface runoff.5
-------
93
Figure 5. C.F. industries Fertilizer Plant
-------
94
In 1972 an ion exchange unit was placed in operation to treat
all process wastewaters and contaminated surface runoff. These waste-
waters were directed to the upper treatment pond for retention and
pumping to the ion exchange unit.
A compliance sampling inspection was made at the plant in April
1977 by the EPA Region IV, S & A Division.21 The ion exchange unit was
discharging about 3,400 mVday (0.9 mgd) of wastewater with an ammonia
concentration of less than 1 mg/1. Chromium was at trace levels. An
unpermitted discharge to Poe Branch consisting of uncontaminated surface
runoff and "non-process cooling water" was detected. These data would
appear to indicate that this major source of toxic conditions in Friar
Branch has been abated. However, sampling of Friar Branch downstream
of the CFI discharge in early 1978 by Tennessee-American Water Company
detected ammonia nitrogen levels of about 10 mg/1.20 This would appear
to indicate that some contamination other than the ion exchange discharge
still exists or that the treatment unit was malfunctioning.
Aerial photographs of the plant [Figures 6 and 7] taken in August
and December 1978 indicated that wastewater treatment was probably
the same as in 1977. The unpermitted discharge was not visible.
In summary, the CF Industries fertilizer plant no longer discharges
major ammonia loads to Friar Branch. However, observed ammonia levels
in Friar Branch are still excessive. Emissions o'f particulates and
NO are large.
/\
GAF Corporation
This facility consists of a latex plant and a textile chemicals
plant on opposite sides of RM 0.5 of Friar Branch northeast of the
-------
95
Figure 6. C.F. Industries, Bio-Pond Area
-------
96
Figure 7. C.F. Industries, South Pond Area
-------
97
airport [Figure 8]. In 1977 products of the two plants were listed
as:40
Elastomers
Polybutadiene-styrene latex
Plastics and Resins
Styrene-butadiene copolymer resins
Surface-Active Agents
Castor oil, sulfated, sodium salt
Coconut oil acids, potassium salt
Fatty Acid-Diethanolamine Condensates
Coconut oil acid-diethanolamine condensate
Palmitic acid-diethanolamine condensate
Stearic acid-diethanolamine condensate
Oleic acid, potassium salt
Polyethylene glycol monolaurate
n-Propyl oleate, sulfated, sodium salt
Tall oil acids, potassium salt
General and Compounded Products
Acrylic resin compounds
Neoprene latex compounds
PVC latex compounds
Styrene-butadiene latex compounds
Primary raw materials are styrene, butadiene and other monomers.
Ammonia is also used in the process.
In 1974 emission sources included three boilers burning natural
gas or distillate oil, two process vents, evaporation from wastewater
treatment ponds and storage vents.39 Particulate emissions were nil.
Nitrogen oxide emissions from the boilers were about 44 m. tons
(48 tons) per year. Hydrocarbon emissions, primarily styrene, were
about 25 m. tons (28 tons) per year. Styrene, a toxic substance, is
released from process vents and the wastewater treatment ponds. No
air pollution controls were listed.
Until 1978, both plants discharged wastewaters including process
wastes to Friar Branch. In 1968 and 1972, this discharge was identi-
fied as a major source of ammonia.2'4 Ammonia concentrations averaged
-------
BENTON OIL
l.7/'-^'.> '"' /! •.^
""
r, « T^gg-ATOX:!£_=
.-' •'$::*%"rBM=GWM=2/
SOUTHERN OIL
AMERICAN Oil
' STAINLESS METAL
PRODUCTS
CITIES SERVICE/
^COLONIAL PIPELINE
Hickory
JGreenhill Cem'
'Citizens Cem
•-'.•'/ ^fe , Boyd/Buthanan Vs \ \
X
!.._ '^J^. Sewage disposal \
Figure 8. Airport Industrial Area
-------
99
106 mg/1 during a June 1972 survey.4 This was a load of about 158 kg
(350 lb)/day. The estimated load in 1968 was about 894 kg (1,970 lb)/day.2
Low levels of Cr, Cu, Pb and Zn were observed in 1972. Analyses for
organic chemicals detected benzothiazole, pentachlorophenol, and 16
other compounds.
Treatment in 1972 included calcium carbide coagulation, clarifi-
cation, and aeration. Rejected batches of latex were discharged to a
storage pond with supernatant discharged to the aeration pond.
Aerial photographs in August 1978 showed that each plant had
four treatment or storage ponds [Figure 9]. The polymer plant had
a large latex storage pond, two interconnected ponds which appeared
to contain latex wastes and a triangular pond with one surface aerator.
The textile chemicals plant had two small ponds, one large aerated pond
and a smaller apparent settling pond. No discharge to Friar Branch
was observed.
The photographs indicate that large volumes of latex wastes are
stored on-site in a pond. These wastes contain styrene and other
toxic substances. No data on off-site disposal of hazardous wastes
were noted in the file. Various drums were stacked about both plant
sites in a relatively neat manner.
The GAF discharge was scheduled to be connected to Chattanooga
municipal sewers in 1978.21 Connection of this discharge to the sewer
should eliminate pollution of Friar Branch and South Chickamauga Creek
by ammonia discharges from this source. However, even with the pre-
treatment apparently being provided, toxic substances would be discharged
to the sewer system and eventually to the Moccasin Bend treatment plant.
-------
100
» Pf "v
'
Figure 9. GAP Corporation
-------
101
W. R. Grace and Co.
The Davidson Chemical Division operates a rare earth chemicals
plant on North Hawthorne Street at the east end of the industrial
complex along lower South Chickamauga Creek [Figure 10]. The plant
was formerly operated by Vitro Chemical Company.
The plant extracts rare earth chemicals from monazite sand, a
thorium-rare earth orthophosphate.4 Cerium is a major product although
a total of 14 rare earths may be present. The ore is extracted with
sodium hydroxide which converts the rare earth phosphates to hydroxides.
By-product trisodium phosphate is decanted and pumped to a holding
pond. Hydrochloric acid is used to convert the hydroxides to hydrous
thorium oxide and rare earth chlorides. Hydrofluoric acid has also
been used in the past.4
In 1977 final products were: cerium oxide and hydroxide, rare
earth chlorides, fluorides and oxides, thorium nitrate, specialty
rare earth products and contact lens and glass polishing powders40.
These products would indicate hydrofluoric acid may still be used.
Wastewater treatment in 1969 consisted of a lagoon.2 About 380
mVday (0.1 mgd) of wastewaters containing caustic soda, trisodium
phosphates, chlorides and fluorides were discharged to the lagoon that
then overflowed to South Chickamauga Creek at about RM 1.3. In 1972
wastewater disposal facilities consisted of three ponds: the phosphate
holding pond, a thorium holding pond and a "combination pond".4 Both
phosphate and thorium were being held for later recovery. The "combi-
2
nation pond" discharged about 980 m /day (0.26 mgd) of wastewater in-
cluding sanitary sewage treated in a septic tank to South Chickamauga
Creek. This "combination pond" could have been the 1969 lagoon.
-------
L ,-"V^?K
• v -Av-v-rt
Wilkes T Thrasher Brie
CHICKAMAUGA DAM
. • • ^l^..^**'" Svvin}
V i 1* >b
KA '. j.-Vv'<
1 ' •'• ^ /' Rivermonf
'*>Golf anU Country C
BM c
66
FOAM
<, FABRICATING
CENTRIFUGAL
ST. DUMP
; • W.R. GRACE"4^^%4^f ^^ 7.ch»^
x-p •. "-/MJ ^f^-
W . •••//•.•.. .,6-^r -.
o
no
:"^c«v/ /,.' . v/4
Figure 10. Lower South Chickamauga Creek
-------
103
Two other wastewater discharges were noted in 1972. A small
holding pond was used for neutralizing hydrofluoric acid wastes.
When this pond overflowed, it discharged to a small stream carrying
leachate from a landfill. The landfill contained a variety of mater-
ial including radioactive residues that had received acid treatment.
This leachate, which discharged to the Creek, contained radium in
excess of drinking water standards.4
The location of the landfill was not defined in the 1972 report.4
The report indicated that landfill practices were not adequate but did
not define the deficiencies. The 1973 aerial photographs show two pos-
sible landfill areas. A small area that is the most probable location
is between the thorium and phosphate ponds. In the 1978 photographs
[Figure 11], this area was still disturbed and appeared to contain
dumped piles of dirt and other debris.
The second possible landfill area in the 1973 photographs was
larger and paralleled the Creek below the ponds. No access road to
this disturbed area was visible, however. In 1978 a sewage pumping
station occupied part of this area.
The current status of wastewater discharges from this plant is
not clear as file materials conflict. The plant does not have a cur-
rent NPDES permit. However, the May 1978 area-wide planning inventory
indicates that process, cooling and sanitary wastewaters were still
being discharged.3 The industrial contributors list for the Chattanooga
sewerage system indicated the plant contributed industrial wastewaters.
This would indicate that the May inventory is in error and that the
plant probably discharges both to holding ponds and the municipal
system. It is probable the plant contributes toxic substances to the
sewerage system, possibly including radioactive materials.
No NEDS emissions data were available although the plant has
been assigned a source number.
-------
104
Figure II. W.I?. Grace and Co. and Mueller Co.
-------
105
Mueller Co.
A large (900 employee) fire hydrant and gate valve manufacturing
plant is operated by the Mueller Co. immediately west of the W. R.
Grace and Co. facility [Figures 10 and 11]. The plant includes a
foundry using electric induction furnaces.4 Mold making and sand
handling practices were not defined.
The plant is a major source of particulate and hydrocarbon emissions.
Sources of emissions in 1975 included an incinerator; 15 emission
points venting various foundry operations such as sand handling, mold
making, pouring, chipping, grinding, and blast cleaning; and two electro-
static paint booths39. The four electric induction furnaces did not
have outside vents. Air pollution control measures included various
wet scrubbers, fabric filters and centrifugal collectors. Annual
emissions were estimated at 26 m. tons (29 tons) of particulates,
122 m. tons (135 tons) of hydrocarbons and 9 m. tons (10 tons) of
NO . Excessive visible emissions were noted from a point near the
n
center of the building in both the 1973 and 1978 photographs.
Wastewater disposal practices have changed substantially in the
past 10 years. The 1969 topographical map [Figure 10] shows a trian-
gular settling pond and two rectangular settling basins between the
plant and the Creek. The settling pond was not in use in 1972. Sani-
tary wastewaters were treated in a small activated sludge plant and
discharged to the Creek. Process wastewaters were treated in the
rectangular settling basins and discharged to the Creek. The basins
were operated alternately with one filled while the other was decanted
and solids removed. The basins were in poor operating condition.
Discharged wastewaters contained visible oil and fine solids from the
foundry operations. Phenols were high, averaging about 2.4 mg/1.4
The plant reportedly now has a closed system with no discharge
to the Creek.4 Industrial wastewaters are reportedly discharged to
the Chattanooga sewerage system.14
-------
106
Comparison of the 1973 and 1978 aerial photographs showed that
disposal of solid wastes (primarily foundry sands) in the area between
the plant and the Creek had substantially increased [Figure 12]. The
settling pond and two settling basins had been filled over with black
solid wastes. Two smaller settling basins had been constructed near
the plant. A small rectangular spray cooling pond was present in
both photographs. The proximity of the disposal area to the bank of
the Creek would suggest the possibility that fine sand could be washed
into the Creek by surface runoff. Foundry sand disposal areas are
often a source of heavy metals and oil in runoff.
Alco Chemical Corporation
Alco Chemical Corporation, a division of Alco Standard Corporation,
operates a plant west of the Mueller Company primarily producing rubber
processing chemicals [Figure 10]. Products in 1977 included:40
Polyacrylic acid
Rubber Processing Chemicals
Di n-butyldithiocarbamic acid, sodium salt
Oi n-butyldithiocarbamic acid, zinc salt
Diethyldithiocarbamic acid, sodium salt
Oiethyldithiocarbamic acid, zinc salt
Dimethyldithiocarbamic acid, potassium salt
Dimethyldithiocarbamic acid, sodium salt
Dimethyldithiocarbamic acid, zinc salt
Sodium polyacrylate
General and Compounded Products
Carbon black dispersions
The manufacturing directory also listed water treatment chemicals as
a product.34
The manufacturing process involves batch mixing of chemicals
such as amines, carbon disulfide, caustic soda, methyl acrylate, zinc
sulfate and various surfactants.2'4
-------
107
Figure 12. Mueller Company
-------
108
Figure 13. Afco Chemical Corp.
-------
109
In 1975, emissions of hydrocarbons from the plant were listed as
1,100 m. tons (1,200 tons)/year, primarily methyl aerylate. It is possible
that carbon disulfide, a toxic substance, is released during the manu-
facturing process.
In 1969 process wastewaters containing zinc and carbon disulfide
were treated in a series of three sedimentation basins and then discharged
to South Chickamauga Creek at RM l.O.2 The discharge of process waste-
waters was stopped in Spring 1972 with only cooling water discharged
to the Creek.4 Process wastewaters were stored in two new holding
ponds awaiting development and construction of suitable treatment
facilities. The ponds were very full posing a possible spill threat
in 1972.4 Organic analyses of the stored wastewaters detected dibutyl-
amine and 15 to 20 other organic compounds.
The 1973 aerial photographs showed two crescent-shaped holding
ponds (apparently unlined) filled with white wastewaters. A small
unlined empty pond adjacent to a small building north of the main
building appeared to be a treatment facility nearing completion. It
was not clear from file information whether or not treated process
wastewaters were discharged directly to the Creek after 1972. However,
the May 1978 area-wide inventory indicated that about 1,890 m /day
(0.5 mgd) of process and cooling waters were discharged to the Creek
following coagulation, flocculation, neutralization and sedimentation.3
The NPDES permit file indicated that the plant now discharges only
190 m /day (0.05 mgd) of non-contact cooling water to the Creek.21
Pretreated process wastes containing zinc as high as 130 to 140 mg/1
are discharged to the Chattanooga sewerage system.
The 1978 aerial photographs indicated that both holding ponds
were filled with wastewater darker than in 1973 [Figure 13]. The
small treatment pond had been divided into two cells. Scattered drums
-------
no
and containers were piled on the northeast portion of the plant site.
There were fewer drums than in 1973. No solid waste disposal areas
were visible.
It would appear that continuous direct discharges of toxic sub-
stances to South Chickamauga Creek from this plant have been abated.
Instead, these toxic substances are discharged to the Chattanooga
Moccasin Bend wastewater treatment plant.
Frequent spills of toxic process wastewaters and chemicals to
the Creek have occurred in the past.3 Diisobutylamine was spilled in
1974, 1975 and 1976. Acrylic acid was spilled in 1975. Two spills
of raw process wastewater from the holding ponds occurred in 1977. A
March 1977 spill of process wastewaters contained zinc, acrylic acid,
carbon disulfide and numerous organic compounds. These spills caused
taste and odor problems in the Chattanooga water supply.
In summary, the Alco Chemical Corporation plant continues to be
a major source of toxic substances. These are primarily released to
the environment in spills and treated municipal wastewaters.
DeSoto. Inc.
DeSoto, Inc. manufactures electric lighting fixtures and fire-
place furnishings at its plant near the mouth of South Chickamauga
Creek [Figure 10]. Processes include metal plating and bonderizing.2
In 1969, process wastewaters containing heavy metals and cyanides
were discharged to a settling pond and then to the Creek at RM O.2.2
By 1971, the discharge to the Creek was only welding cooling water.21
However, frequent discharges of high heavy metals concentrations have
been detected in the cooling water. A pipe break in July 1977 allowed
a spill to the Creek containing 4.7 mg/1 of zinc, 3.3 mg/1 of copper
-------
Ill
and low levels of chromium and nickel. The plant is listed as contri-
buting industrial wastewaters to the Chattanooga sewerage system.14
Both the 1973 and 1978 aerial photographs [Figure 14] showed a
clean plant site with no solid waste disposal sites visible. Little
difference in site configuration between the photographs was noted.
The plant is designated a major air pollution source.32 Emission
sources include two spray booth exhausts, two buffing operation exhausts
and a metal plating vent. Hydrocarbon emissions from lacquer coatings
were estimated at 116 m. tons (128 tons) per year. Particulate emissions
were 5.4 m. tons (6 tons) per year. All emissions except plating
emissions were controlled with wet scrubbers. The hydrocarbon emissions
could contain toxic substances.
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
-*
Ringgold. Georgia. Area
Table 3 in Section VI lists 17 industrial facilities in the Ringgold
vicinity [Figure 15]. Five of these have NPDES permits. Because the
Georgia permits are issued by the State, the permit data were not
present in EPA files and were not reviewed.
Dixie Yarns, Inc. operates three plants including the Candlewick
Yarns Hurst Plant and the Chemical Fibers Plant south of Ringgold.
Products include carpet yarn, textile yarns for tufting and manmade
fiber yarns. Total employment is-over 900. Wastewaters, including
sanitary (extended aeration treatment), cooling, boiler feed and pro-
cess water (no treatment) and averaging 190 m3/day (0.05 mgd) are
discharged to Little Chickamauga Creek at RM 1.5. Chromium is reported
at 8 mg/1.4 No other data on toxic substances were available. Aerial
photographs taken in 1978 show relatively clean plant sites with no
-------
112
Figure 14. DeSofo, Inc. and Foam Fabricating, Inc.
-------
S^:::--J/ :•
-'•,- V> l?V . -'' - ':/ *
- -. /
. ,
:ri o •-. /a' nroTO
Sr^C:2
•i.^^
Ig
;' ft
o-
DIXIE YARNS % v/
,—1
., ,V^;/>
, ^'jif/r^
;' ' V. \ , f I II
J { .—, < > « ' '
^
^
I
Figure ~\5. Ringgold, Georgia Area
-------
114
significant solid waste disposal [Figure 16]. These facilities are
probably minor sources of toxic substances.
Salem Carpet Mills, Inc. operates a carpet mill employing 750
persons next to Dixie Yarns.34 Process and sanitary wastewaters averag-
ing 57 m3/day (0.015 mgd) receive extended aeration treatment before
discharge to RM 1.4 of Little Chickamauga Creek [Figures 15 and 16].3
This plant is a minor source of toxic substances.
The Colox Corporation's former textile chemicals plant was aban-
doned when observed in June 1978.
Sweetwater Carpet Corporation operates a tufted rug and carpet
plant employing 500 persons in Ringgold [Figure 15].34 Cooling water
averaging 190 mVday (0.05 mgd) is discharged to South Chickamauga
Creek at RM 32.6.3 Latex wastes and sanitary wastewaters are discharged
to the Ringgold sewerage system. These wastes contain zinc (5 mg/1)
and styrene.15 Their effects on the Ringgold treatment plant were
not defined. Aerial photographs taken in 1978 showed a small lined
rectangular pond and a small clarifier at the southwest corner of the
plant [Figure 17]. Mechanical surface aerators were in operation in
the pond in January 1979 but not in the 1978 photographs.
Airport Industrial Area
Numberous industrial facilities are along a 5 km (3 mi) reach of
Highway 153 northeast of the municipal airport [Figure 8]. The only
major source of toxic substances in this area is the GAF Corporation
plant previously discussed. Known or potential minor sources of toxic
substances include Amoco Oil Company, Cities Service Oil Company,
Colonial Pipeline, Exxon, Fibron, Inc., Lutex Chemical Corporation
and Stainless Metal Products, Inc.
-------
115
Figure 16. South Industrial Area, ft/nggofd
-------
116
Figure 17. Sweetwater Carpef Corp.
-------
117
Wastewaters from this area are discharged to tributaries of Friar
Branch or South Chickamauga Creek or to the Chattanooga municipal
sewerage system. At least part of the area is served by the overloaded
Brainerd wastewater treatment plant that frequently bypasses untreated
wastewaters to South Chickamauga Creek. Part of the area currently
may be without municipal sewers. This entire area will eventually be
served by the Moccasin Bend wastewater treatment plant.
Lutex Chemical Corporation, a subsidiary of National Starch and
Chemical Corporation, operates a speciality textile chemicals plant
employing 50 persons east of the airport [Figure 8].34 Products include
fat and petroleum based lubricants, fugitive identification tints,
solvent emulsions and surface-active agents.40 Process wastewaters
were discharged to a small tributary of South Chickamauga Creek entering
the Creek at RM 10.5 in 1969.2 This discharge was later connected to
Chattanooga sewers tributary to the Brainerd WWTP. This could have
occurred prior to 1972 since this source was not included in the 1972
study.4 In 1976, Lutex discharged napthalene and biphenyl to the
sewer causing treatment problems at the Brainerd WWTP and bypassing
of raw sewage containing napthalene to the Creek.30 Napthalene was
again spilled in 1977 through a storm sewer to the Creek.3 Wastewaters
discharged from this plant to municipal sewers contain toxic substances.
The Company has an NPDES permit for a cooling water discharge.
Because past spills and poor housekeeping practices have resulted in
pollutants entering the cooling water discharge, the cooling water
discharge and surface runoff were sampled in April 1977 by EPA.13
Cooling water flow ranged from 4 to 53 mVday (0.001 to 0.014 mgd)
with a comparable flow range for the surface runoff. Organic analyses
of both cooling water and surface runoff detected a total of 34 organic
compounds including 8 on the Toxic Substance List:36 chloroform, methy-
lene chloride, naphthalene, toluene, 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, m-, o-
and p-xylene. Four aromatic hydrocarbons were at higher concentrations
-------
118
Including benzole acid (11 mg/1), biphenyl (2.2 mg/1), methylbenzoic
acid (1.4 mg/1) and naphthalene (0.56 mg/1). These discharges were
obviously contaminated with toxic process wastes and/or spills.
The plant could also produce hazardous wastes requiring disposal.
The use of benzene and other aromatic hydrocarbons suggests that toxic
substances may also be released to the environment.
Seven bulk petroleum product storage facilities are grouped around
the Colonial Pipeline terminal at the north end of the industrial
area [Figure 8]. Small surface discharges of surface runoff, spills
and decant water reportedly originate from American Oil Company, Cities
Service, Inc., Colonial Pipeline, and Exxon facilities.3 Other facili-
ties include Benton Oil Company, Chevron Oil Company, Shell Oil Company
and Southern Oil Company. Phenols and other petroleum products are
contained in these wastewaters which discharge to a tributary of Friar
Branch. Cities Service, Inc. and Exxon have NPDES permits for these
discharges. American Oil Company and Colonial Pipeline do not.
Fibron, Inc. operates a fibrillated yarn plant employing 125
persons west of the oil storage complex [Figure 8].34 The plant
reportedly discharges about 190 m3/day (0.05 mgd) of cooling water to
a tributary entering South Chickamauga Creek at RM 5.I.3 No information
on toxic substances was available. This discharge does not have an
NPDES permit. The Chattanooga industrial contributors list indicates
that the plant is not connected to a municipal sewer.14
Stainless Metal Products, Inc. operates a manufacturing plant
employing 83 persons in the production of display racks.34 The plant
is south of Fibron on Cromwell Road [Figure 8]. Reportedly, plating
waste and rinse waters averaging about 45 mVday (0.012 mgd) are dis-
charged to South Chickamauga Creek after settling.3 High concentrations
-------
119
of hexavalent chromium (66 mg/1) and nickel (101 mg/1) were present.3
This plant does not have a NPDES permit and is not connected to a mu-
nicipal sewer.14
Lower Industrial Area
Major sources of toxic substances along the lower 3 km (2 mi) of
South Chicikamauga Creek were previously discussed [Figure 10]. Minor
sources of toxic substances in this area include Southern Centrifugal,
Inc. and Foam Fabricating, Inc.
Southern Centrifugal, Inc. employs 50 persons in the manufacture
of bronze bearings and machine parts.34 The plant, located on the
north side of the Creek adjacent to the Southern Railroad, was formerly
the Moccasin Bronze Division of Phelps Dodge Brass Co. While operated
by Moccasin Bronze, the plant discharged about 64 m3/day (0.017 mgd)
of cooling water and surface runoff (after settling) and 23 m3/day
(0.006 mgd) of sanitary wastewater (extended aeration treatment) to
South Chickamauga Creek at RM 1.7.3 No information was available on
toxic substances in the discharge but the nature of the process would
suggest the possible presence of heavy metals. Both the 1973 and
1978 aerial photographs show a small rectangular treatment unit (possibly
a package extended aeration plant) at the southwest corner of the
plant site [Figure 18]. Some solid waste material (possibly dirt and
construction debris) was visible in an area southeast of the plant
with more present in 1978. Various containers had been dumped near
the northeast corner of the plant.
Emissions from an electric induction bronze melting furnace and
associated foundry operations were about 8 m. tons (9 tons) per year
in 1974.39 Control devices were fabric filters. It is probable that
some of the particulate emissions were toxic heavy metals.
-------
120
Figure 18. Southern Centrifugal and Hawthorne St. Dump
-------
121
Foam Fabricating, Inc. fabricates polyurethane foam in a plant
employing 50 persons on Judd Road south of the DeSoto plant.34 No
wastewater discharge has been reported. The plant is not connected
to municipal sewers. In the 1973 aerial photograph, a recently con-
structed, unlined, rectangular earthen basin was visible north of the
plant building. It was not present in 1978 [Figure 11]. Wastewater
disposal practices are thus undefined.
Foam Fabricating, Inc. is listed as a major air pollution source
in PCS but -no data were available in NEDS to define emissions.33'39
Production of polyurethane foam can release large quantities of hydro-
carbons to the atmosphere, possibly including toxic substances.
There are an additional ten minor industrial dischargers scattered
throughout the South Chickamauga Creek drainage area. These include
car washes, a coin laundry and a small meat packer. These are not
considered significant sources of toxic substances.
Vulcan Materials Company operates a large quarry and sand plant
north of the airport [Figure 8]. The facility is a major source of
particulate emissions and also discharges about 22,700 m3/day (6 mgd)
of wash water and quarry drainage. However, it is not considered a
significant source of toxic substances.
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
There are four municipal wastewater treatment plants tributary
to South Chickamuga Creek in the study area. With the exception of
Ringgold, all are major dischargers.
The Ringgold WWTP discharges about 600 mVday (0.16 mgd) of waste-
water to South Chickamauga Creek at RM 31.4 [Figure 15].3 Treatment
consists of screening, aeration (extended aeration process), final
-------
122
clarification and post chlorination. August 1978 aerial photographs
showed that the plant had two mechanically aerated basins and two
final clarifiers. Only one of each was in operation. The plant serves
a population of about 500 but receives wastes with a population equivalent
about four times that amount.3 Sweetwater Carpet Corporation reportedly
discharges latex wastes containing zinc (5.3 mg/1) and styrene to
Ringgold sewers. The effect of these substances on treatment efficiency
was not defined.
Treated wastewaters from the Fort Oglethorpe WWTP are discharged
to West Chickamauga Creek at RM 4.8. The plant serves a sewered popu-
lation of about 4,500 and discharges about 7,570 mVday (2.0 mgd)
following secondary treatment (activated sludge).3 The population
equivalent of industrial wastes is about double the domestic contri-
bution.3 Industrial flow volumes were not defined. Industrial faci-
lities with Fort Oglethorpe addresses are primarily textile mills.34
The contribution of toxic substances from this source is not defined
but could be significant. This plant is scheduled to be abandoned
and wastewater diverted to the Moccasin Bend WWTP within the next 5
years.
The East Ridge WWTP discharges wastewaters to South Chickamauga
Creek at RM 14.5. The plant serves a population of about 24,000 and
receives little industrial flow.3 In 1977, wastewater flow ranged
from 15,000 to 26,000 m3/day (4 to 7 mgd) and averaged 19,000 m3/day
(5 mgd).21 The plant employs the activated sludge process preceeded
by roughing trickling filters. Ultimate sludge disposal was not speci-
fied but sludge was piled on the plant site posing the potential for
leaching of heavy metals and other toxic substances to surface runoff.
The Brainerd WWTP operated by the City of Chattanooga serves
portions of the City east of Missionary Ridge in the South Chickamuga
Creek drainage area. Treated wastewaters are discharged to the Creek
at RM 10.8 [Figure 8].
-------
123
An EPA inspection in September 1977 found that the plant was
hydraulically and organically overloaded. The plant is designed for
an average flow of 13,000 m3/day (3.5 mgd). For the 12-month period
proceeding the inspection, flow averaged 19,000 mVday (4.9 mgd).
Dry and wet weather peak flow rates were 23,000 and 39,000 mVday
(6.2 and 10.4 mgd), respectively. It was believed that whenever plant
influent exceeded 26,000 mVday (7 mgd), bypassing of untreated waste-
water to South Chickamauga Creek at RM 11.2 occurred. Influent flows
in excess of this limit occurred 35 days in 1976 and 75 days in 1977.
A severe infiltration problem exists.
The plant is designed for a wasteload with a population equivalent
of 35,000. Estimates of the sewered population ranged from 25,000 to
35.000.3'21 Because the industrial contributors list did not define
which Chattanooga WWTP served each source, industries served by the
Brainerd WWTP were not defined in the file. The 1977 inspection report
indicated that principal types of industrial wastes were from textile
dyestuffs, aromatic chemicals and candy manufacturing. Industrial
wastewater flow was estimated at only 380 mVday (0.1 mgd). However,
the BOD and TSS loads from industrial sources were indicated as 36,900
and 67,700 population equivalents, respectively. Thus the industrial
wasteloads alone exceed plant design capacity.
The plant employs the activated sludge treatment process. Excess
sludge is anaerobically digested, vacuum filtered and reportedly disposed
of in a sanitary landfill. However, the 1977 inspection team observed
sludge stored on the plant site.
Available data do not define the discharge of toxic substances
from this WWTP. The overloaded condition, the bypassing of untreated
wastewater and the sludge disposal practices would indicate a high
probability of substantial discharges of toxic substances to South
Chickamauga Creek.
-------
124
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL
Hazardous wastes containing toxic substances are stored at several
industrial plant sites in the South Chickamauga Creek drainage area
as previously discussed. These sites include Alco Chemical Corporation,
DeSoto, Inc., GAP Corporation, W. R. Grace and Company, and Mueller
Company.
There are no approved public hazardous waste disposal sites in
the drainage area. However, at least one closed municipal dump (North
Hawthorne Street) in the area could contain hazardous wastes [Figure 10].
Apparently abandoned by the City of Chattanooga about 1970 when its
lease expired, the dump is officially closed. However, unauthorized
dumping continues and refuse is exposed throughout the area. Both
the 1973 and 1978 photographs show a low area in the center of the
landfill that was not properly closed [Figure 18]. The entire landfill
has not been properly graded and seeded. Ponded water was observed
during the 1972 study.4 These conditions are conducive to excessive
leaching and the possible discharge of toxic substances. Average
flow of a leachate stream sampled in 1972 was about 87 mVday (0.023 mgd).4
Ammonia was present in toxic concentrations as high as 385 mg/1.
Organic analysis of the leachate detected primarily constituent! of
oil and grease. Chromium, copper, lead and zinc were present at low
levels. Recent sampling of the leachate stream by Tennessee-American
Water Company also found low levels of these metals.20 Available
data are not adequate to define the full extent of discharges of toxic
substances from this dump.
A large closed landfill east of GAF Corporation is indicated on
the 1976 topographical map [Figure 8] and was visible in the 1978
aerial photographs. This site was not discussed in the areawide water
pollution control plan so no data were available.17 The landfill
appears to be properly closed and graded. Access is restricted and
-------
125
no unauthorized dumping was visible. Its potential as a source of
toxic substances is not defined.
Several small sites where solid wastes had been dumped were noted
in the aerial photographs. Most of the material appeared to be dirt
and construction debris.
NON-POINT SOURCES
Surface runoff from urbanized areas contributes some toxic sub-
stances. There are no combined sewers reported in the drainage area.
Eight sewer system overflows have been reported.19 These are probably
pumping stations and the Brainerd WWTP.
-------
VIII. SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - CITICO CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
Citico Creek is a small stream entering the Tennessee River at
RM 465.3, about 50 m downstream of the Tennessee-American Water Company
intake [Figure 19]. Streamflow is primarily composed of surface runoff
from industrial areas, railroad yards and some urban areas. Several
small industrial wastewater discharges also contribute to the streamflow.
Because of its proximity to the water intake, pollution of the Creek
has been a source of problems with the water supply in the past.
In 1969 and 1972, Citico Creek was found to be grossly polluted,
primarily by wastewaters from the Southern Railway Yards.2'4 Process
wastewaters from several textile plants were also present. Most if
not all of these wastewaters are now reportedly discharged to the
Chattanooga sewerage system. Recent data on water quality in Citico
Creek collected by the Tennessee-American Water Company do not indi-
cate any gross pollution but the parameters evaluated are limited and
do not include oil and grease or phenols. Conflicting file data indi-
cate the possible presence of several unpermitted industrial wastewater
discharges in this area.
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Southern Railway System
Southern Railway operates a major switching yard and servicing
facility northeast of central Chattanooga [Figure 19]. Cleaning and
servicing of locomotives and rail cars produces wastewaters containing
lubricating and fuel oils, solvents and detergents. In 1972, this
wastewater was treated in an oil separation system before discharge
-------
128
CHATTANOOGA
INDUSTRIAL
PLATING
TENNESSEE-AMERICAN
WATER COMPANY
i®ii6=jB^LJirrf
.ft-feytfeffl. i
3J
Figure 19. Citico Creek Area
-------
129
to Citico Creek.4 Treatment included grit removal, gravity oil separa-
tion, air flotation with a polyelectrolyte flocculant, chlorination
for oxidation of phenols and final clarification. However, storm
runoff during heavy rains overloaded the treatment units and bypassed
much oil to the Creek. Storm drains also carried contaminated yard
runoff to the Creek.
In 1973, aerial photographs showed four small unlined earthen
ponds and several small treatment units clustered on the south bank
of a tributary of Citico Creek at the north end of the service area
[Figure 19]. Three additional earthen ponds were on the north side
of the tributary. All ponds appeared to contain substantial accumu-
lations of oil on their surfaces. The 1978 photographs showed that
all but one of the ponds on the south bank had been removed [Figure 20].
Four sludge drying beds had been built in about the same loca-
tions. The remaining rectangular pond contained much less oil than
in 1973. A large triangular pond had replaced the old ones on the
north bank. It contained a large amount of oil on the surface.
Southern Railway reportedly now pretreats all wastewater flows
and discharges them to the Chattanooga sewerage system.3 The NPDES
permit has been inactivated. It is not clear if all surface runoff
from the entire yards is pretreated and discharged to Chattanooga
sewers. In 1972, contaminated runoff from one storm nearly filled
two 56-inch diameter storm sewers.4 Also, the process wastewater
treatment system was bypassed. The present configuration would not
appear to have capacity for all yard drainage but could probably
handle runoff from service yards if the large pond serves as a hold-
ing pond. Discharge of storm runoff to the Chattanooga sewer system
would contribute to bypassing at the Moccasin Bend WWTP unless all
runoff is held and released during later low-flow periods.
-------
130
Figure 20. Southern Railway Wastewater Pref re afmen t Units
-------
131
Tennessee-American Water Company does not report any monitoring
data on Southern Railway.20 Because of the close proximity of the
water intake to this source, this would suggest that the former dis-
charges of oil, grease and phenols from Southern Railway have been
abated by present treatment and disposal practices.
Sludge was present on at least two drying beds in the 1978 photo-
graphs [Figure 20]. No data on ultimate disposal were available.
In 1975, process steam was provided by two boilers fueled with
residual oil. Annual emissions were estimated as 11 m. tons (12 tons)
of particulates, 124 m. tons (136 tons) of S0x and 33 m. tons (36 tons)
of NO . There was no control equipment.
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Chattanooga Gas Company operates a liquified natural gas storage
facility and a nearby liquified propane gas storage facility on North
Hawthorne Street at the north end of the Citico Creek drainage area
[Figures 19 and 21]. Cooling water from both facilities averaging
212 mVday (0.056 mgd) is discharged to an unnamed tributary to RM
1.9 of Citico Creek. This discharge reportedly contained oil and
phenols.3 Neither discharge has an NPDES permit.
United States Stove Company employs 200 persons in a plant manu-
facturing heaters and fireplace accessories on North Hawthorne Street
between the two Chattanooga Gas Company facilities [Figure 21].34
Industrial wastewaters which would probably include plating wastes
are discharged to the Chattanoooga sewerage system.14 Cooling water
containing some zinc and averaging 102 mVday (0.027 mgd) is discharged
to an unnamed tributary to RM 1.3 of Citico Creek. This discharge
does not have an NPDES permit. Tennessee-American Water Company peri-
odically samples this discharge. Zinc at 1.3 mg/1 was detected in one
sample.20
-------
132
Figure 21. Chattanooga Gas Co. and U.S. Stove Co.
-------
133
Flexible Foam Products Division of Grand Sheet Metal Company
employs 125 persons to manufacture flexible urethane foam bedding and
cushions [Figurel9].34 The plant was formerly operated by Diamond
Shamrock Chemical Company who obtained an NPDES permit for a small
cooling water discharge to Citico Creek. This cooling water is now
reportedly recirculated eliminating a surface discharge.21 Process
wastewaters formerly collected and hauled away or discharged to the
land surface on the plant site are now discharged to the Chattanooga
sewerage system.14 However, Tennessee-American Water Company has re-
ported recent data on periodic sampling of a discharge at this loca-
tion. One sample contained zinc at 2.6 mg/1.20 Some processes for
production of polyurethane foam can release toxic substances to the
atmosphere. Such emissions were not defined.
E'con Mills (now Comero Carpets) operates a 157 employee plant
producing tufted carpets and draperies [Figure 19].34 The plant repor-
tedly discharges cooling water to a tributary of Citico Creek.3 No
NPDES permit has been issued to either company name. The plant is
listed as contributing industrial wastewaters to the Chattanooga sewer-
age system.14 No data on toxic substances discharged were available.
A single Tennessee-American Water Company sample detected no significant
pollution for the 11 parameters measured. The plant is listed as a
major air pollution source. In 1975, particulate emissions were listed
as 1.8 m. tons (2 tons)/ year from a storage silo and the tufting
process, each controlled by fabric filters.
Industrial Plating Company operates two plants in the Citico
Creek drainage area [Figure 19]. The main plant on North Hickory
Street employs 29 persons providing chrome plating, flame plating and
urethane coating services.34 The small Tech Finishing Division plant
on Latta Street has 6 employees and does both types of plating.4 No
report data were available on the main plant as it was not investigated
in 1972 because the state was taking an unspecified enforcement action
-------
134
against it.4 The May 1978 inventory listed the Company as a source
of a plating waste discharge but the location description given could
have been either plant.3 The main plant is listed as a contributor
of industrial wastes to the Chattanooga sewerage system.14 The plant
does not have an NPDES permit.
The Tech Finishing Division Plant was investigated in 1972.4
No direct discharge was observed but indications of recent discharges
of plating wastes to a tributary of Citico Creek were noted. A small
increase in chromium levels in the tributary at the plant was detected.
In 1972, plating wastes were reportedly pumped to a storage tank and
then trucked to another location for treatment. Recent sampling by
Tennessee-American Water Company did not detect any significant levels
of heavy metals being discharged.
No discharge at Tech Finishing could be detected in the 1978
aerial photographs. Vegetation was not present between part of the
plant building and the adjacent tributary although banks were covered
with vegetation upstream of and downstream from the plant. This could
be an indication of the presence of toxic substances in the soil from
plating waste spills.
The aerial photographs did not detect any discharges or spills
at the the main plant [Figure 22].
It is evident that the Industrial Plating Company plants are
sources of toxic substances. Whether these substances are discharged
to municipal sewers, to surface water, or stored on site, is not clear.
South of the Industrial Plating Company main plant was a small
facility reported to be the National Waste Oil Control Corporation
[Figures 19 and 22]. Numerous drums were stacked at several locations
around the site. A small diked area contained a dark liquid and three
-------
135
Figure 22. Industrial Plating Co. and National Waste Oil
-------
136
upright cylindrical tanks. A small rectangular concrete tank was
adjacent to the diked area. The whole site had an unkempt appearance.
Cutter Laboratories produces hospital solutions and disposable
needle sets at a plant employing 625 persons east of the Southern
Railway Yards [Figure 19].34 Cooling water, rinse water and water
softener regenerate averaging 76 mVday (0.02 mgd) are discharged to
RM 0.4 of Tannery Branch tributary to Citico Creek at RM 1.4.3'21
These wastewaters contain low levels of copper and zinc.21 Process
wastewaters are discharged to the Chattanooga sewerage system.14 No
data were available on toxic substances in the process discharge or
in air emissions. The plant has a major NPDES permit.
OTHER SOURCES
There are no municipal wastewater treatment plants in the Citico
Creek drainage area. No bypassing of the sewer system in the area
has been reported.19 There are no combined sewers in the area. Sur-
face runoff from industrial and urban areas contributes pollutants.
Runoff from railroad yards has been a special problem in the past.
The aerial photographs did not show any particular concentrations of
solid waste disposal or unauthorized'dumping.
-------
IX. SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - CHATTANOOGA CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
Chattanooga Creek originates in Georgia and flows northward between
Lookout Mountain and Missionary Ridge to join the Tennessee River at
RM 460.9. The drainage area is relatively unpopulated in Georgia but
is heavily industrialized between Rossville, Georgia, and the Tennessee
River [Figure 2]. Numerous industries discharge wastewaters and
surface runoff to the Creek. Several combined sewers frequently over-
flow to the Creek. Two closed landfills and numerous private waste
disposal areas are located adjacent to the Creek. As a result,
Chattanooga Creek is the most polluted waterway in the study area.
Emissions of air pollutants in the lower drainage area are sub-
stantial. This factor coupled with the meterological effects of Look-
out Mountain and Missionary Ridge produce particulate levels in viola-
tion of ambient standards and elevated levels of other pollutants.
In the following sections, major and minor industrial sources of
toxic substances, solid waste disposal and other sources of pollution
are discussed in detail. Sources are discussed in downstream order.
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Velsicol Chemical Corporation
Velsicol Chemical Corporation (Velsicol), a subsidiary of North-
west Industries, Inc., operates an industrial chemicals plant in the
Alton Park area of southern Chattanooga [Figure 23]. Employment is
about 200 persons.34 There are two manufacturing facilities, the
large main plant and a small semi-works plant.
-------
138
£Sj£ CHATTEM
--. J?7/ l&j/^
R p iA, "• -4'Y rrMXJJ^
M^>^//j/ffmM
CHATTANOOGA ~
COKE
REILLY TAR
•^^•^
nw\\h :sai i
Figure 23. Alton Park - Lower Chattanooga Creek Area
-------
139
The main plant is on an approximately 32 hectare (80-acre) site
abutting the Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company, Inc. coke plant
on the north. Manufacturing facilities occupy the west half of the
site. Most of the southeast quarter has been used for refuse disposal
while the northeast quarter is undeveloped woodland. Residential
areas abut the plant on the east, south and southwest. Schools are
located adjacent to the northeast and west plant boundaries. The
small semi-works plant is located west across Central Avenue from
Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company.
In 1978, the following products were listed for both facilities:41
Benzoic acid, technical
Benzonitrile
Benzoyl chloride
Butyl benzoate
Chlorobenzoic acid esters
2,4-Di ami no-6-phenyl-s-tri azi ne
Dicyclopentenyl alcohol
Flavor and Fragrance chemicals
Benzyl alcohol
Benzyl benzoate
Benzyl ether
l,4,5,6,7,7-Hexachloro-5-norbornene-2,3-dicarboxylic diesters
Hydrochloric acid
Pentaerythritol tetrabenzoate
Plasticizers
Oiethylene glycol dibenzoate
Dipropanediol dibenzoate
Neopentyl glycol dibenzoate
Polyethylene glycol dibenzoate
Triethylene glycol dibenzoate
Trimethylolethane tribenzoate
Sucrose benzoate
a,a,a-Trichlorotoluene
-------
140
Benzole acid is produced from toluene as the basic chemical for
manufacture of most products. Prior to 1976, Banvel (also known as
dicamba), a chlorinated aryl acid herbicide, was produced at the main
plant.9 Apparently BHC (1,2,3,4,5,6 hexachlorocyclohexane) was pro-
duced at some time in the past. A 1974 plant layout shows an inactive
BHC unit.10 Several isomers of BHC are used as pesticides and are
carcinogens.
In 1975, process wastewaters from the semi-works plant and surface
runoff from the immediate area were discharged to Chattanooga municipal
sewers at that location.11
In 1973 and 1977, process wastewaters from the main plant after
pretreatment in a settling pond were discharged to the Chattanooga
municipal sewer in Wilson Road through a long outfall sewer traversing
the southeastern part of the plant site.9'13 Contaminated surface
runoff from about 12 hectares (30 acres) of the plant site also dis-
charged to the outfall. Leachate from the refuse area was also inter-
cepted and discharged to the outfall.10'11 During heavy precipitation,
the outfall was overloaded and overflowed near the southeast corner
of the plant. This overflow passed under Wilson Road and into a small
swamp adjacent to a Chattanooga Housing Authority public housing project.
The swamp drains to Chattanooga Creek.
During heavy precipitation, contaminated surface runoff and process
wastewaters also overflowed onto the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corp.
property (inactive and owned by Velsicol since 1976), and then along
the railroad along the north central side of the plant site. From
there it flowed through a small swamp drained by a small tributary of
Chattanooga Creek. This tributary also received wastewater from Chatta-
nooga Coke and Chemical and formerly from Reilly Tar and Chemical.
-------
141
The refuse area has apparently been used for a variety of dis-
posal purposes. The initial use was probably for refuse from the
ferrosilicon alloy plant which previously occupied this plant site.11
This refuse contained heavy metals. The area has also been used for
disposal of still bottoms and chemical residues and for acid neutral-
ization pits.9 This practice was discontinued in 1974. The area was
actively leaching in 1977.13
Some chemical residues have been disposed of on-site in a waste
burner. Residues were stored in metal drums before disposal. About
12,000 drums were stored on-site in mid-1974.11 Leaking drums contami-
nated the ground surface in the storage area. The residues were re-
moved to a disposal contractor in Louisiana by 1975. It is not clear
if the waste burner is still used.
A study of the Velsicol plant was conducted in February and March
1973, by the EPA Region IV S&A Division.9 Four wastewater streams
were sampled, the process wastewater discharge to the municipal sewer
system and three discharges to small tributaries of Chattanooga Creek.
The surface discharges contained surface runoff and some process waste-
water. The discharge to the sewer system averaged 4,900 mVday (1.3
mgd) with average BOD and COD loads of 24,400 and 33,600 kg (26,900 and
37,100 lb)/day, respectively. Organic analysis of this discharge
detected seven substances on the EPA toxic substance list.36 The
pesticide dicamba was discharged at a concentration of 73 mg/1. The
Velsicol discharge accounted for about 3% of the total flow to the
Moccasin Bend wastewater treatment plant, more than any other industry
at that time. Concentrations of dicamba in the treatment plant effluent
were 1.7 and 2.4 mg/1 in the two samples analyzed. This represents a
35:1 average reduction ratio. Based on a 3% flow contribution, a
33:1 reduction would occur, based on dilution with other wastewaters
at the treatment plant. Thus, very little removal of dicamba was
occurring in the treatment plant.
-------
142
The three surface discharges contained average BOD and COO loads
of 1,270 and 2,360 kg (1,400 and 2,600 lb)/day, respectively. A total
of 20 organic compounds were detected in these discharges of which 14
had known toxicities. The observation was made that mud in the swampy
area at the sampling location at the southeast corner of the plant
was saturated with chemicals from past discharges from Velsicol.
Water and mud had a distinctive chemical odor and oily appearance.
The 1973 report stated that a hill above the plant site (manu-
facturing area) was being used for acid neutralization pits and ponds
for still dredges. Aerial photographs taken in 1973 documented the
presence of five small diked areas with an assortment of liquid and
solid waste contents.
The 1973 report also stated that a heavy backlog of chemicals to
be burned were stored in barrels on the plant site. A large pile of
drums was present in the 1973 photographs in an area shown on a 1974
plot plan as a drum storage pad. Numerous other drums were in scat-
tered small piles in the area. The ground surface around the drums
appeared to be contaminated with chemicals.
In 1974, Betts Engineering Co., Inc. made a study of the plant
site for Velsicol to define sources of wastewater discharges and to
evaluate the capacity of the plant sewer system.10 The study found
that surface runoff and process wastewater overflows were discharged
from the plant site during heavy rainfall at the two primary loca-
tions previously discussed. Maps included in the study report showed
that some regrading had been performed in the refuse area since the
1973 photographs. Also, changes had been made in the benzole acid
recovery area.
Velsicol prepared a report in March 1975 which contained addi-
tional data on the sources and characteristics of the surface runoff.11
-------
143
The report proposed a control program to abate the contaminated sur-
face discharges. Control would be achieved by the following measures:
1) separation of contaminated and uncontaminated surface runoff with
discharge of the latter to surface waterways, 2) pretreatment of
contaminated runoff before discharge to the municipal sewer, 3) re-
moval of contaminated earth from the drum storage area and possibly
other sites, and 4) regrading and surface soil treatment to reduce
leachate from the refuse area. Completion of these abatement mea-
sures by December 1976 was proposed.
In April 1977, a study of surface runoff from the plant site was
again conducted by Region IV S & A Division.13 Organic analyses of
the samples were performed by NEIC in Denver. The results of the
study showed that although contamination levels in the runoff were
less than in 1973, the runoff was still heavily contaminated with
organic compounds. At the north discharge, benzoic acid was present
at 37 mg/1 and 2,4 dichlorobenzoic acid at 1.5 mg/1. Several chlori-
nated phenol and benzoic acid isomers were present.
The other sampling location for the 1977 study was located in
the swamp east of the southeast overflow point. Three pesticides
(Banvel, BHC and Lindane) were present in the runoff. These pesti-
cides are no longer manufactured by Velsicol at this plant indicating
that the contamination was probably coming from leachate from the
refuse area. Disposal in this area was stopped in 1974.
The isomer of BHC detected is a carcinogen and was present at a
concentration of 1.8 mg/1 in the swamp. This swamp is adjacent to a
public housing area. It was observed to be contaminated with waste-
water in 1973.
A total of 10 toxic substances36 were detected in the two sur-
face discharges from Velsicol in 1977.
-------
144
The 1977 study results would indicate that if Velsicol had imple-
mented the control measures proposed in 1975 for completion in 1976,
they had not eliminated the discharges of toxic substances in surface
runoff to Chattanooga Creek tributaries by April 1977.
The 1978 aerial photographs [Figure 24] showed that numerous
changes in the plant topography and disposal units had been made since
the 1973 photographs. In the refuse disposal area, all of the ponds
and pits present in 1973 had been covered or regraded. Two drainage
ditches led to a small pond which appeared to serve for temporary
detention of surface runoff. This pond is located in the vicinity of
where outfall overflows have occurred in the past. Another ditch
appearing to drain the refuse area leaching in 1977 led to the outfall.
A new long, narrow pond had been built in the northeast corner
of the manufacturing area, presumably for stormwater retention. This
was the location of the north surface runoff discharge in 1977.
Most of the area covered with piles of drums in 1973 was occupied
by two ponds, possibly used for benzoic recovery. Several piles of
drums were present in the area. The rectangular wastewater pond present
in 1973 had been paralleled by a smaller pond. The "crud barn" present
in 1973 and so labeled in 1974 drawings had been removed. Numerous
drums were stacked on the remaining building floor slab. A small
pond not present in 1973 was located south of the drum pile.
It is evident that recent changes in wastewater and waste dispo-
sal practices have been made but their effects on discharges of toxic
substances are not defined.
Current emissions from the plant are not defined in the file.
The NEDS data were last updated in 1971.39 Substantial process changes
have occurred since then. The 1971 data indicated that unspecified
-------
145
Figure 24. Velsicol Chemical Corp. and Chattanooga Coke & Chemical Co.
-------
146
hydrocarbon emissions totalled 980 m. tons (1,080 tons) annually.
Participate, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxides were
38, 10, 8, and 80 m. tons (42, 11, 9, and 88 tons) annually, respec-
tively. There were 12 emission points with air pollution controls
ranging from none to vapor recovery systems, wet scrubbers and fabric
filters. A 1977 NEIC sampling survey for nitrosamines in ambient air
around the Velsicol plant detected none.29
Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company. Inc.
Chattanooga Coke and Chemical Company (Chattanooga Coke), a di-
vision of Mead Corporation, operates a coke and byproduct chemicals
plant employing 140 persons adjacent to Velsicol [Figure 23].34 Pro-
ducts include both foundry and blast furnace coke, ammonium sulfate
and other coal byproducts.34'40 The plant has two coke oven batteries
with a total of 44 ovens.39 Gases are collected and condensed into
tar and light oil.13 The light oil contains benzene, toluene, and
xylene compounds and is shipped offsite for further refining.
The plant was a major source of pollution of Chattanooga Creek
in the past and continues to be a major source of air pollution.
Three reports provide data on past wastewater disposal practices. In
1973, six separate wastewater discharges were identified during the
EPA study.9 Part of the process wastewater from the ash-rinse system
was discharged to the municipal sewer system after pretreatment for
solids removal. Part of the wastewater from the byproducts plant in-
cluding the ammonia still discharge was used for quenching coke and the
remainder discharged untreated to Chattanooga Creek. The discharge
route was not specified. Drainage from the parking lot and roof
drains was pumped to an unnamed tributary of the Creek. Water flow-
ing through an old plant dump area that had been used to store acid
sludges was treated in an API oil separator. The API unit was essen-
tially inoperative. During the study the API effluent, a discharge
-------
147
that contained storm drainage from the coal storage area and possible
quench tower drift and/or leakage, and a spring-like discharge of un-
known origin were sampled. All were found to be highly contaminated
including ammonia, cyanides and phenols.
A 1974 wastewater management study by a Company consultant identi-
fied four wastewater discharges.42 The quenching tower effluent averaged
only 23 mVday (0.006 mgd) and flowed northward under or across the
coal storage area to an unnamed tributary of Chattanooga Creek. The
larger ash pit effluent averaged 190 m3/day (0.05 mgd) and followed a
similar discharge path. Both of these effluents had relatively small
contaminant loads although no organic analyses were performed to detect
toxic substances. The largest effluent was the various wastewaters
discharged to the sanitary sewer. It averaged 490 mVday (0.13 mgd)
and contained oil and grease, phenols, cyanides and about 136 kg (300
lb)/day of COD. The most concentrated effluent was discharged through
a process sewer to the API separator and then to an unnamed tributary
of Chattanooga Creek. This effluent contained substantial daily amounts
of COD, 230 kg (500 Ib); ammonia nitrogen, 40 kg (90 Ib); phenols,
42 kg (92 Ib) and cyanides, 33 mg/1 or 3 kg (7 Ib). The process wastes
route to the API unit (a process sewer) differed from the 1973 descrip-
tion (surface flow through an old acid sludge area). The ammonia
still and cooling tower overflow were found to be major sources of
pollutants.
The effluent from the API unit was sampled by EPA in 1977.13 It
was found to be highly contaminated with hydrocarbon compounds including
o-cresol (2.8 mg/1), p-cresol (2.5 mg/1) and naphthalene (1.5 mg/1).
The COD ranged between 700 and 1,190 mg/1. Oil and grease and phenols
were also high.
Construction was described as nearing completion on a closed
system that would include the existing API unit, neutralization, an
aeration basin and a clarifier. The treated effluent was to be used
for quenching coke and excess sludge was also to be sprayed on the coke.
-------
148
The 1978 photographs [Figure 24] showed that the API unit was
still in place. A small rectangular unit had been built east of the
API unit. A small pond not present in 1973 was in the middle of the
coke storage area. The status of the two discharges north of the coal
area could not be determined.
Because of the small sizes of the discharges involved, the aerial
photographs did not indicate if all discharges from the plant site
other than to the municipal sewer have ceased. Current surface runoff
disposal is not defined.
The coke plant is a major source of air pollution. In 1975,
particulate emissions from two coal fired boilers, the two coke oven
batteries, and from quenching operations totalled 113 m. tons (124
tons)/year.39 The boiler emissions were controlled by centrifugal
collectors. A gravity collector served the quench tower. Emissions
of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides from the boilers and coke batteries
were given as 445 and 54 m. tons (490 and 60 tons)/year, respectively.
Emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide were 77 and 44 m. tons
(85 and 48 tons)/year, respectively.
The coke ovens are underfired by carbon monoxide gas. Combus-
tion of CO yields no particulates. Both the 1973 and 1978 photographs
showed excessive visible emissions from both tall battery stacks indi-
cative of leaks from the ovens into combustion flues. Excessive visible
emissions from other points around the oven batteries were also shown
in the photographs.
Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation
Until 1976, Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation operated a small
plant distilling coal tar into roofing and conduit tar and creosote
oil [Figure 23]. Coal tar was obtained from the adjacent Chattanooga
-------
149
Coke plant. Velsicol Chemical Corporation purchased the plant in
1976 and it ceased operation. While in operation, the plant had two
wastewater discharges. Surface and process waters were treated in a
settling pond and discharged to an unnamed tributary of Chattanooga
Creek. Ammonia and phenol concentrations were high but the volume
was very small. Concentrated phenolic wastewaters were treated in a
bio-oxidation pond and batch discharged to the unnamed tributary when
the phenol concentration dropped below 1 mg/1. The 1978 photographs
indicated that much of the plant had been dismantled but the phenol
pond was still present and contained a liquid. Discharges of toxic
substances from the plant should have been eliminated with the pos-
sible exception of surface runoff.
Southern Wood Piedmont Company
Southern Wood Piedmont Company operates a plant employing 132
persons in the production of pressure treated wood adjacent to Chatta-
nooga Creek [Figure 23].34 The plant occupies an area of about 18
hectares (44 acres) most of which is devoted to wood storage.21 As
shown in a 1978 aerial photograph [Figure 25], untreated wood storage
occupies most of the north half of the site. Creosote treated wood
is stored on the east and south portions of the plant site.
The plant has an NPDES permit to discharge treated surface run-
off from about 8 hectares (21 acres) to Chattanooga Creek. Runoff
from most contaminated areas is diverted to four aeration ponds for
batch treatment before batch discharge to the Creek. This discharge
averages about 1,900 mVday (0.5 mgd) and is reportedly low in phenols.21
No organic characterization data was available in the file. This
discharge was not sampled during the 1973 and 1977 EPA studies.
Highly contaminated runoff from about 1.2 hectares (3 acres) and
process wastewaters are pretreated in two aeration basins and discharged
-------
150
Figure 25. Southern Wood Piedmont Co.
-------
151
to the Chattanooga sewerage system.21 No data were available on this
discharge. Surface runoff from about half the plant site (primarily
untreated wood storage) is discharged to the Creek without treatment.
Prior to construction of the present wastewater treatment and
disposal system, some or all process wastewaters were discharged to
an "evaporation" pond. Surface runoff was untreated. The 1973 aerial
photographs show the evaporation pond next to the creosote plant and
a creosote recovery basin in the plant. The pond was still present in
the 1978 photographs. No data on past or present pond contents were
in the file.
Design drawings and the 1978 photographs indicate the diversion
ditches and structures conveying surface runoff to the treatment ponds
could be designed to divert the most contaminated initial runoff to
the ponds but discharge later flows to the Creek untreated. This
could not be verified.
Creosote contains numerous organic compounds and toxic substances.
It is probable some toxic substances are discharged in untreated surface
runoff, in the treated runoff, and in the pretreated wastewaters dis-
charged to Chattanooga sewers. Available data were inadequate to
assess the magnitude of such discharges.
The plant is listed in CDS as a major air pollution source.32
However, no data were available in NEDS.39 It is probable that sub-
stantial amounts of hydrocarbons (possible including toxic substances)
are emitted from process activities, treated wood storage and the
aeration ponds.
No data were available on disposal of sludges from the aeration
basins. Some solid wastes have been dumped in the north edge of the
evaporation pond and west of the pond. The nature of the wastes could
not be determined but they may have been earth or construction debris.
-------
152
Rockwell International Corporation
The Metal Casting Division of Rockwell International Corporation
operates a foundry producing brake drums and axle castings for heavy
trucks.21 The.plant employs 580 persons.34 The plant was formerly a
part of the adjacent Crane Company facility that now produces steel
valves34 [Figure 23]. In 1973, the Crane Company facility (including
the present Rockwell plant) was an enamelware plant with a foundry
producing enameled bathtubs, sinks and lavatories from scrap steel.9
Realignment of the Chattanooga Creek channel between RM 1.0 and
RM 2.0 about 1968 cut off about a 1.0 km (0.6 mi) V-shaped bend of the
old channel. The Rockwell plant abuts the point of this V.
In 1973, wastewaters from the Crane plant generated in cooling
the cupola in the foundry, from casting sand, air pollution scrubbing
equipment and washing operations in the mixing of enamel cover coat
materials were discharged into the cutoff channel.9 The channel dis-
charged to Chattanooga Creek at RM 1.3. Extremely high lead concentra-
tions were present, ranging from 28 to 58 mg/1 for an average load of
338 kg (744 lb)/day. The 1973 photographs show that solid waste materi-
als with the appearance of foundry sand had been dumped along the old
channel bank and into the channel at the V-point to above water level.
An oily discharge was flowing from the middle of this waste pile into
the west channel segment.
The Rockwell discharge was not sampled by EPA during the 1977
Chattanooga Creek study.13 The plant was inspected by the Tennessee
Division of Water Quality Control and wastewater sampled in September
1977.21 About 470 m3/day (0.125 mgd) of wastewater was reportedly
generated from cooling water for air compressors, hydraulic pumps and
the cupola and scrubbing waters from sand mullers, dust collectors
and cupola air pollution control equipment. These wastewaters were
-------
153
reported by the Company to be recycled through two settling basins
and a clarifier. The only reported discharges were an intermittent
overflow from the cupola hot well during power failures and contami-
nated storm water runoff from the foundry area and dump.
Rockwell's NPDES permit covers only the intermittent hot well
discharge. State sampling of the storm sewer receiving this discharge
(also a cooling water discharge from Crane Co.) and three surface
runoff streams during wet weather detected compliance with the NPDES
permit but numerous violations of two temporary state permits and
excessive heavy metals concentrations. Zinc was as high as 22.5 mg/1
in surface runoff. Lead in excess of 5 mg/1 was present as were ele-
vated levels of chromium, copper and phenols.
The 1978 photographs showed that the dump had been substantially
extended into the old creek channel filling much of the channel adjacent
to the plant [Figure 26]. Two unlined ponds were present. The long,
narrow pond is an expansion of the two ponds present during the state
sampling. The second pond was new and was built in the filled channel.
A storm sewer extending from the east parking lot to the old channel
appeared to be under construction. This was the general path of the
most contaminated surface runoff sampled in 1977. A discharge channel
was present in the fill corresponding to the storm sewer location
sampled in 1977. At the northeast corner of the long narrow pond
there was evidence of recent overflow to the creek channel. A surface
channel was present at the northwest corner of the plant. Runoff at
this location was contaminated during the 1977 sampling.
It is evident that toxic pollutants in excess of those allowed
by the NPDES cooling water permit are being discharged by the Rockwell
plant, primarily through contaminated surface runoff. In addition,
solid waste disposal in the old channel with unlined settling ponds
on top of the fill would leach additional toxic substances into the old
-------
154
Figure 26. Rockwell International Corp.
-------
155
channel and Chattanooga Creek. Lead would be expected to be present
in substantial amounts because of both previous Crane Co. discharges
and continuing Rockwell contamination.
The Rockwell plant is listed as a major air pollution source but
no data were available in NEDS.30'39 Both the 1973 and 1978 photographs
showed excessive visible emissions originating from near the southeast
corner of the plant building. In Figure 26, residual emissions are
visible beyond the steam plume. Presumably these emissions are from the
cupola furnace.
Wheland Foundry
Wheland Foundry, a division of North American Royalties, is a
large foundry employing 1,350 persons in the production of gray iron
castings, primarily automotive parts (brake drums).34 Pig iron and
scrap steel are melted in coke fired cupola furnaces. In 1975, the
foundry had four cupolas and a holding furnace.39
The foundry consists of several buildings adjacent to Chattanooga
Creek west of Rockwell International [Figure 23]. Wastewaters consist
of cooling water and surface runoff contaminated with suspended solids,
primarily waste sand and coal used in casting and air pollution control
equipment dust.9 There are four discrete discharges and other non-point
surface runoff.
The 1973 study detected excessive suspended solids in the small
discharges.9 Only one had slightly elevated lead, nickel and zinc
concentrations.
A 1976 wastewater characterization study by a Wheland consultant
evaluated the four discharges from the two large foundry buildings on
Broad Street, a small discharge from the smaller foundry on Middle
Street south across Chattanooga Creek, and several wet-weather discharges
-------
156
from parking lots and sand disposal areas.12 In addition to surface
runoff, wastewaters discharged from the foundries were described as
including once-through cooling water for furnaces and compressors,
cupola cooling tower overflow, slag quencher water and basement drain-
age. In addition to the expected high suspended solids levels, the
sampling detected high concentrations of zinc (3-22 mg/1), chromium
(4.8 mg/1) and phenols (5.6 mg/1) in several small discharges. Because
of the low flows, loads discharged were minor.
The four discharges at the Broad Street foundries were sampled
by EPA in 1977.13 Excessive suspended solids were detected again.
Except for zinc as high as 1.2 mg/1 in one discharge of about 380 mVday
(0.1 mgd), heavy metals were.at low levels.
Wheland Foundry is listed as contributing industrial wastes to
the Chattanooga sewerage system.14
Solid waste (used sand, slag and dust collected by air pollution
controls) disposal is a major problem. Two disposal areas encroaching
on the Chattanooga Creek channel were visible in the 1973 photographs.
The 1978 photographs [Figure 27] show a larger new area south of the
foundry adjacent to Chattanooga Creek and a tributary. Surface runoff
can carry these solids into the Creek.
Wheland Foundry is a major air pollution source. In 1975, 21
emission points were listed.39 The four cupola furnaces emitted about
21,600 m. tons (23,800 tons)/year of carbon monoxide and only 18 m. tons
(20 tons)/year of particulates. Air pollution controls were fabric
filters. The other 18 emission sources consisting of various sand
handling, mold preparation, casting, metal working and other foundry
activities emitted a total of 583 m. tons (643 tons)/year of particu-
lates. Air pollution control devices included wet scrubbers and fabric
filters.
-------
157
Figure 27. Wheland Foundry, Middle Street Unit
-------
158
Chattem Drug and Chemical Company
Chattem Drug and Chemical Company manufactures chemicals and
pharmaceutical products in a plant employing 220 persons [Figure 23].34
Manufacturing activities include production of chemicals and drugs,
and formulation, tableting, packaging, shipping and processing of natural
herbs into proprietary drugs. Products include:41
Aluminum sec-butoxide
Aluminum sec-butoxide diisopropoxide
Aluminum chloride, hydrous
Aluminum diisopropoxide acetoacetic ester chelate
Aluminum heptylate
Aluminum hexadecyloxide isopropoxide stearate
Aluminum isopropoxide
Aluminum isopropoxide bis-(acetoacetic ester chelate)
Aluminum isoporpoxide stearate acetoacetic ester chelate
Aluminum stearate
Aluminum tri-(sec-butoxide)
Glycine, nonmedicinal
Medicinal (Pharmaceutical) Chemicals
Aminoacetic acid
Dihydroxy aluminum aminoacetate
Theophylline sodium glycinate
General and Compounded Products
Aluminum hydroxide gels - U.S.P.
Water use is about 3,880 mVday (1.0 mgd) of which about 70% is
obtained from company wells and the rest purchased.21 Non-contact
cooling water averaging 3,000 mVday (0.8 mgd) is discharged to a
storm sewer to Gillespie Spring Branch to Chattanooga Creek at RM
0.4. Other wastewaters including boiler blowdown, still bottoms,
wash water, air pollution scrubber water and sanitary sewage are dis-
charged to the Chattanooga sewer system. Surface runoff from about
1.2 hectares (3 acres) of plant property enters the storm sewer system.
Spills, leaks and contaminated surface runoff have resulted in
contamination of the permitted cooling water in the past.21 Ammonia
-------
159
and zinc were the contaminants mentioned although no organic analyses
were performed. High BOD, COD and TKN concentrations suggested the
presence of organic contamination during the 1973 survey.9
This plant is a major air pollution source. Emissions of particu-
lates from 10 emission points in 1973 were about 37 m. tons (41 tons).39
Emissions of unspecified hydrocarbons totalled 333 m. tons (366 tons)/year.
Air pollution controls included wet scrubbers, a fabric filter, a
centrifugal collector and a vapor recovery system.
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Minor industrial sources of toxic substances are primarily concen-
trated in Rossville, Georgia, and the lower Chattanooga Creek valley
in Tennessee. Two other sources are located in Georgia.
Yates Bleachery in Flintstone, Georgia, employs 134 persons to
scour, desize, bleach and dry greige cloth [Figure 28].13'34 Waste-
waters are discharged to RM 0.8 of Rock Creek tributary to Chattanooga
Creek at RM 11.5. Treatment, consists of an aerated lagoon and final
clarifier. Compliance assurrance sampling by EPA in 1977 found the
plant in compliance with its NPDES permit. Low levels of heavy metals
were discharged with zinc at 0.2 mg/1 the highest. No organic analyses
were performed.
Union Oil Company operates a small bulk petroleum products terminal
on the Georgia state line [Figure 28]. Surface runoff contains phenols.3
Controls were not specified.
Rossville. Georgia Complex
A complex of textile mills is in Rossville [Figure 29]. Most are in the
Rossville Development Corporation (RDC) complex including Borg Textiles,
-------
CHATTANOOGA 'C
fi /'
rnine^
L674
Wale
okout
I
untain
If Club*
^*r
^
"
'f1 ' -f- i-:"7\,^-^ '
/UNION OIL I' ;^L^^Sa
' ' 4 V v^*vmine '^^i-ct • ^•^'-"^--•-Tir•
*Jl' &?•*• -• !;>=, \\ Stnp • >-^;-^ i'
ISVj^^' ;
LfSa^m R«ad~Ch'
/ • 1-
-iCemj
^r
X
~*»• I
-v/ K ' .'
.^/ «•""» .
I ;
>^
a=4
\ \> - - w;
-,^C' A -i/-^-x--
YATES
BLEACHERY
I )'' '•
a?y
Sewage
disposal
plant
V^J
•^^
t>V. v
'^/
-'tf
ft
:rk_ j * '
- t
\ v^^- ^ -\.
HAPPY VALLEY
FARMS DAIRY
^ Walor.
.Water „
Flintstone
_^^f • \ * / XVf ^^y -sw^ g/ \^ />
:^inr • ; ///^l*^ l^v ?°¥ *^& //*
'"••'•/^ ' & /• M''"^' 0' (^ l( f^-^ r^^ffi/*-)
' '-F •/ ; /^) ' ^ li^^^- ' ^'r^2> /•'•••Pf ?u'2^!' V" »*•
•I ft // •//•'/ /»\Sr i^»-: -r -" - - —T>- V -i. \ B "A Ss / .
:'^fe^OL F:
**;>-,\ * t r ^ v / • • /^vl ••)
ScH • -
Figure 28. Flintstone, Georgia Area
-------
fi7*f«i/
TENNESSEE CITY
ROSSVILLE
DEVELOPMENT
_Humphreys, Cem/
SpenieFHnis
.' - - Tabernacle ' Q$V . .7, .
Figure 29. Rossville, Georgia Area
-------
162
Rossville Carpet Dyeing Corp., Rossville Spinning Corp, Rossville
Yarn Processing Corp., and Rossville Mills.9 Kenyon Southern and
Standard-Coosa-Thatcher operate adjacent mills. The RDC operates a
coal-fired power plant. Complex employment is about 1,500 persons.34
Plant operations include dyeing, heat setting, finish coating, knitting
and weaving. Process wastewaters are reportedly discharged to the
Chattanooga sewerage system. However, various storm and cooling water
drains were observed to intermittently discharge spills and other
colored wastewaters to Dye and McFarland Branches in 1973.9 Above
ambient BOD and TOC levels were observed in McFarland Branch in 1977
indicating some spills could have been still occurring.13 During the
June 1978 reconnaissance, acid drainage from the power plant coal
pile was observed in a drain ditch but no colored wastes were visible.
The RDC power plant has three boilers. In 1975, two were coal
or natural gas fired and the other was fired with residual oil or
natural gas. One boiler was equipped with a centrifugal collector
for control of particulate emissions. Total annual emissions were
68 m. tons (75 tons) of particulates, 327 m. tons (359 tons) of sulfur
oxides, and 417 m. tons (458 tons) of nitrogen oxides.39 Hydrocarbon
emissions were 4 m. tons (5 tons) and carbon monoxide emissions, 20 m. tons
(22 tons).'
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL
Hazardous wastes containing toxic substances are stored at several
industrial plant sites in the Chattanooga Creek drainage area as pre-
viously discussed. These sites include Chattanooga Coke and Chemical
Company, Rockwell International Corporation, Southern Wood Piedmont
Company and Velsicol Chemical Corporation.
There are no approved public hazardous waste disposal sites in
the drainage area. Two closed dumps are located adjacent to Chattanooga
-------
163
Creek in the floodplain. Hazardous wastes could have been disposed
of in these areas. The 38th Street dump is on private property north
of the street and east of Chattanooga Creek [Figure 23].17 The dump
is about 8 hectares (20 acres) in size with an approximate fill depth
of 9 m (30 ft). In the 1973 photographs, the dump was not active.
The surface appeared flat but the edges had not been sloped or graded.
There was no vegetation. In the 1978 photographs, vegetation covered
much of the dump surface [Figure 30]. A large warehouse-type building
had been constructed on the eastern end of the fill. A sewage pumping
station was at the west end. Two rectangular lined ponds had been
constructed on the fill. These pond's appeared to be holding ponds
for bypasses from the pumping station. Apparently this dump does not
have a known leachate problem.17
The Alton Park closed dump is on private property17 on the north
side of Chattanooga Creek east of Alton Park Blvd [Figure 23]. The
area is only about 2 hectares (5 acres) but the fill depth is about
15 m (50 ft).17 As shown in the 1969 topographical map [Figure 23],
the 1968 realignment of the Chattanooga Creek channel cut off two
bends of the old channel. In the 1973 photographs, the old channel
segments were completely filled. Active solid waste disposal and
filling was progressing in a narrow strip east from the Boulevard
along the railroad. Some of the fill was being placed directly into
water in the old creek channel. Standing water was present in shallow
ponds on the surface of the fill in the northern part of the old channels.
The area of channels filled was much larger than the reported dump
area. Also, the active fill area occupied only the southern end of
the filled area. This suggests that at least part of the fill was
materials excavated from the new channel. In any case, it was apparent
that some disposal of solid waste in the old channel below water level
must have occurred. This would be conducive to production of leachate.
The dump has a reported leachate problem.17 The 1978 photographs
showed that the dump had been graded and some vegetation was present.
-------
164
Figure 30. 38/h Sfreef Closed Dump
-------
165
The two sets of aerial photographs showed numerous small sites
scattered throughout the drainage area where dirt, construction debris
or other waste material had been dumped. The possible presence of
toxic substances at these sites could not be determined. Because the
lower valley is heavily industrialized, numerous cases were observed
where a few drums or containers and discolored piles of material were
present on plant sites. It could not be determined if these were raw
materials, products or wastes in most cases. It is probable that
some were hazardous wastes requiring proper disposal.
NON-POINT SOURCES
The extreme northern portion of the drainage area is served by
combined sanitary and storm sewers. Overflows of these sewers to
Chattanooga Creek during wet weather contribute substantial pollution.
There are six reported overflow points along the lower 3 km (2 mi) of
the Creek. The most severe pollution of the Creek in the 1977 study
was contributed by a combined sewer discharging to Dobbs Branch which
enters the Creek at RM 2.I.13 The source of the wastewaters in the
sewer was not determined.
Surface runoff from industrial sites is a significant pollution
source in the lower valley. Runoff problems at Chattanooga Coke and
Chemical Company, Rockwell International Corporation, Southern Wood
Piedmont Company, Velsicol Chemical Corporation and Wheland Foundry
were discussed in the previous section on Major Industrial Sources.
-------
X. SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - LOOKOUT CREEK DRAINAGE AREA
Lookout Creek originates in Georgia and flows northward along
the west side of Lookout Mountain to join the Tennessee River at RM
459.8. Most of the drainage area is relatively undeveloped and there
are few sources of pollution. There are only two sources of toxic
substances of interest. They are located along the lower 6 km (4 mi)
of the stream [Figure 31].
The Louisville and National (L & N) Railroad Wauhatchie Yards
has a locomotive servicing and light repair facility. Servicing includes
washing, fueling and related activities. In March 1977, surface runoff
from locomotive servicing areas was treated by a free oil separator.21
Wastewater from engine washing areas was treated in an emulsified oil
batch treatment system. These two wastewater streams were routed to
a holding pond that discharged to Black Creek at RM 0.6. Black Creek
is a tributary to Lookout Creek at RM 2.5. Domestic wastewaters were
treated in a 38 m3/day (0.01 mgd) extended aeration plant that also
discharged to Black Creek. Average combined flow was about 27 mVday
(0.007 mgd).
A state inspection of the facility in March 1977 found that the
extended aeration plant was in poor condition.21 Residual chlorine in
the discharge was excessive. During a storm runoff event, the holding
pond discharge contained excessive oil and grease (61 mg/1). Low
levels of phenols, chromium and copper were detected.
McDowell Development Corporation has an industrial development
tract north of the L & N Yards. A wastewater treatment plant serves
tenant firms. The plant reportedly treats about 11 mVday (0.003
-------
MCDOWELL
DEVELOPMENT
Figure 31. Lower Lookout Creek
-------
169
mgd) of process wastewater from production of organic and inorganic
chemicals. P.B. and S. Chemical Co. which produces industrial chemi-
cals and chlorine products in a 15 employee plant is one tenant. No
data were available on toxic substances present in this discharge.
In 1977, the biological system was not operated. There were operational
problems with the primary treatment unit.21
-------
XI. SOURCES OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES - TENNESSEE RIVER MAIN STEM
The Tennessee River is impounded for its entire length in the
study area. Chickamuga Dam at RM 471 forms Chickamauga Lake which
extends northeast and north out of the study area. Because only one
significant source of toxic substances (Volunteer Army Ammunition
Plant) was tributary to the lower Lake, the study area boundry was
set at RM 480 in Harrison Bay. Waconda Bay, an arm of Harrison Bay,
receives wastewaters from VAAP. As discussed in Section VI, water
quality in Chickamauga Lake is relatively good and the lake receives
heavy recreational use.
Below Chickamauga Dam, the Tennessee River is impounded by Nicka-
jack Dam at RM 425 west of the study area. The resulting Nickajack
Lake is the smallest mainstem reservoir on the River and is confined
to the river channel in the study area. The upper reaches of Nickajack
Lake are subject to flow reversals during periods of low or zero re-
leases from the Chickamauga Dam power plant. Public water supply for
most of the Chattanooga metropolitan area is withdrawn from Nickajack
Lake at RM 465.3. Wastewater discharges to Nickajack Lake between
Chickamauga Dam and the water intakes as well as discharges to South
Chickamauga Creek (RM 468.2) and Citico Creek (RM 465.3) directly
affect the quality of the water supply. Because of the occassional
flow reversals in the Lake, it is possible for wastewater discharges
downstream from the water intakes to also affect the water supply.
With the completion of the Raccoon Mountain pumped storage hydroelec-
tric plant, the frequency and magnitude of flow reversals will prob-
ably increase.
-------
172
Major industrial facilities are concentrated along much of the
Lake in the study area. Water quality in Nickajack Lake is degraded
by direct discharges of municipal and industrial wastewaters, combined
sewer overflows, urban runoff, and the poor quality of tributary inflows.
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant
This plant occupies a large (7,300 acre) military reservation
northeast of Chattanooga near the small community of Tyner [Figure 4].
The C.F. Industries fertilizer plant discussed in Section VII is on
the west edge of the reservation. Originally constructed in 1942 to
produce trinitrotoluene (TNT) explosives by the batch nitration of
toluene^ the plant was operated from July 1942 to August 1945, June
1953 to March 1957 and October 1965 to 1976.21 Employment reached a
peak of 2,600 in 1966 but decreased to 1,000 in mid-1972 as produc-
tion decreased. The plant is now shutdown except for components
used by C.F: Industries.
Major plant components included two water treatment plants, a
power plartt, three nitric acid plants and 10 TNT production lines.
Farmers Chemical Association, Inc. (FCAI) (owners of the fertilizer
plant now operated by C.F. Industries) operated the water treatment
and power plants, part of the nitric acid production and a sewage
treatment plant under contract. ICI America, Inc. operated the TNT
production facilities under contract.
The VAAP facility was a major pollution source while in opera-
tion. Large amounts of nitrogen oxides were released to the atmosphere.
Highly contaminated wastewaters were discharged to Waconda Bay, an
-------
173
arm of Chickamauga Lake. A modernization plan undertaken in the 1970's
reduced the pollution from this plant but it still remained a.major
source until it shut down.
Water supply for both TNT production and the fertilizer plant
was obtained from Chickamauga Lake. Except for sanitary wastewaters
discharged to Friar Branch in the South Chattanooga Creek drainage
area, all wastewaters from TNT production were discharged to Waconda
Bay. This included about 90,800 mVday (24 mgd) of industrial waste-
waters from TNT and nitric acid units and about 7,600 mVday (2 mgd)
of wastewaters from FCAI operated components. These latter wastewaters
included ammonia storage tank cooling water, filter backwash and sludge
from the water treatment plants, blowdown from the power plant boilers
and surface runoff.
The TNT production wastewaters were eliminated by the plant shutdown.
The status of the FCAI discharge (now C.F. Industries) was not clear.
The C.F. Industries NPDES permit applies only to wastewaters discharged
to Friar Branch. The 1978 photographs [Figures 32 and 33] indicated
the probable presence of a discharge in the ditch formerly carrying
the FCAI discharge to Waconda Bay. The north water treatment plant
was in operation. It could not be determined if the discharge came
from the water treatment plant, the C.F. Industries plant or both.
Air pollution from TNT production was abated upon plant shutdown.
However, air pollution continues from the C.F. Industries plant as
discussed in Section VII.
The VAAP operated a sanitary landfill for disposal of domestic
solid wastes and industrial solid wastes not contaminated with explo-
sives. Contaminated wastes were taken to a burning ground for disposal.
The potential for this burning area to contribute toxic substances to
the environment was not defined.
-------
174
Figure 32. Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant Final Pond
-------
175
Figure 33. Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant Wasfewafer Treatment Units
-------
176
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company. Inc.
The Textile Fibers department of DuPont operates a large (4,000
employee)34 plant producing polyamide and polyester fibers40 on the
north bank of the Tennessee River just downstream from Chickamauga
Dam [Figure 34]. With the shutdown of the Volunteer Army Ammunition
Plant, DuPont became the largest industrial source of air pollutants
and wastewater discharges in the study area.
The plant powerhouse is a major source of particulates, sulfur
oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Annual
emissions in 1974 were estimated as 313, 4,192, 800, 26 and 62 m. tons
(345, 4,621, 870, 29 and 68 tons), respectively.39 These emissions
were a major reduction in particulate emissions from previous years
but an increase in sulfur oxides. Most of the emissions were from
three large coal-fired boilers equipped with wet scrubbers while the
remainder were from two smaller distillate oil-fired boilers. Twenty-
two process sources emitted an estimated 210 m. tons (231 tons) of
particulates and 44 m. tons (48 tons) of hydrocarbons annually.
Water supply for the plant is obtained from an intake on Nickajack
Lake [Figure 34]. There are three wastewater streams from the plant
which are combined before discharge to Nickajack Lake at RM 469.9.
Domestic wastewaters averaging about 380 m3/day (0.1 mgd) are treated
in a trick-ling filter type secondary treatment plant.21 In 1975, about
14,200 m3/day (3.75 mgd) of process wastewaters were treated in a ro-
tating disc system which included 24 rotating discs, two clarifiers,
two digesters and sludge drying beds. Instrumentation at four loca-
tions in the manufacturing plant was designed to detect major spills so
that they could be diverted to a retention basin up sewer from the
treatment plant. The domestic wastewaters received additional treatment
in the process wastewater treatment plant. The treated process and
domestic wastewaters were then combined with uncontaminated cooling
water before discharge to the River. In 1975, cooling water ranged
-------
I % ^vRJA ;;
l^a^fSV:
Wilkes T Thrasher Brie
$ POLYSAR LATEX
io^^J^^
\\ >' j,.-— •—? ,
1,J '^^T'" ^
/ ^
''* ^ / r,;r : — . ^iPfe-IZI ^\1( «««
Chickamauga Dam Area
-------
178
from 7,600 to 87,100 mVday (2 to 23 mgd). The combined DuPont effluent
in 1977 averaged about 30,300 m3/day (8 mgd). It contained an average
of about 2,870 kg (1,300 lb)/day of COD. Phenols at 0.4 kg (0.2 lb)/day
were the only toxic substances reported. No organics analyses were
reported. Recent sampling of the DuPont effluent for heavy metals by
Tennessee-American Water Company detected only low levels.20
Prior to completion of the process wastewater treatment plant in
1974, DuPont was a much larger discharger of water pollutants including
nitrogenous compounds. In 1977, a spill of high strength ammonia
wastewater and carbon black slurry from this plant was reported.3
Comparison of the 1973 and 1978 photographs showed few differences
in the plant site other than construction of the process wastewater
treatment plant [Figure 35]. Excessive visible emissions present in
1973 were not detected in 1978.
Immediately east of the powerhouse are a series of long narrow
ponds that appear to be used for ash disposal [Figure 36]. Further
east across the railroad tracks are two roughly rectangular ponds
with unknown liquid and solid contents. The area to the east of these
ponds appears to be a regularly used disposal area for undefined solid
wastes. The ponds and disposal area were present in the 1973 photo-
graphs but not in a 1969 topographical map. No data on the possible
disposal of toxic or hazardous wastes in this area were available.
Polysar Latex
The Polysar Latex Division of Solar Chemical Corporation manu-
factures polybutadiene-styrene latex40 in an 86 employee plant34 on
the south bank of Nickajack Lake just upstream from the mouth of South
Chickamauga Creek [Figure 34]. In 1971, the plant discharged wastewaters
primarily consisting of non-contact cooling water and surface runoff
-------
179
Figure 35. DuPont Wastewater Treatment Plant
-------
180
Figure 36. DuPonf Plant and Disposal Area
-------
181
to the Lake through four outfalls.21 Process wastewaters averaging
570 m3/day (0.15 mgd) were discharged to the Chattanooga sewerage
system.
The NPDES permit was issued to cover only the non-contact cooling
water. It was not clear if the surface runoff was re-routed to munici-
pal sewers or was not issued a permit. The non-contact cooling water
discharge was discontinued in 1977 by using it for cooling tower makeup.
No data were available on the characteristics of the wastewater
discharge to the municipal sewer. However, the latex wastes would be
expected to contain toxic substances including styrene. Cooling tower
blowdown could contain copper and zinc.
No air emissions data were available. The plant is not listed in
CDS.32 A plant layout shows boilers and a flare. The boilers may be
natural gas fired.
The 1973 and 1978 photographs [Figure 37] show a relatively clean
plant site. There were no visible emissions or solid waste disposal
sites.
Central Soya Company, Inc.
Central Soya Company produces soybean oil and meal, animal feed
and surface active agents (lecithin and derivatives) in a 300 employee
facility at the mouth of South Chickamauga Creek [Figure 34].34'40
Process wastewaters averaging 610 mVday (0.16 mgd) are treated
in an aerated lagoon before discharge to Nickajack Lake at RM 467.9.21
The treatment facility included four small ponds as shown in the 1978
photograph [Figure 38], one more than present in 1973. The aerators
were in operation during the two 1978 aerial reconnaissances but not
on January 30, 1979. Low levels of phenols were the only toxic substances
-------
182
Figure 37. Po/ysor Latex
-------
183
I
Figure 38. Central Soya Company
-------
184
reportedly present. No organic analyses of the effluent were available.
Recent sampling of the effluent for heavy metals by Tennessee-American
Water Company detected only low levels.20
The facility is listed in CDS as a major source of particulate
emissions.32 No data were available in NEDS.39 Emissions would not
be expected to contain significant toxic substances.
The 1978 photographs indicated the plant site was relatively
clean. Small amounts of undefined solid wastes had been dumped on
the north side of the plant site.
This industrial plant is not considered a major source of toxic
substances.
Roper Corporation
This company manufactures gas and electric kitchen ranges and
parts in a 100 employee plant at the east end of an industrial area
in North Chattanooga [Figure 39].34 In 1973, parts were stamped in
sheet metal and then cleaned in a pickling operation (alkaline cleaning,
hot and cold water rinses, pickling and rinse, nickel flushing and
rinse and neutralizing).9 The parts were then enameled. Wastewaters
from the plant in 1973 were discharged through four outfalls to a
small unnamed tributary entering Nickajack Lake at RM 464.0. These
discharges consisted of cooling water and paint shop, pickling line
and enamel wastewaters. Two discharges flowed through three settling
ponds that were completely filled with sediments. The sediments in
the ponds and the four discharges were visible in the 1973 photographs
as were enameling wastes in the tributary.
Heavy metals were present in excessive levels in the discharges
sampled in 1973. Individual samples contained concentrations as high
-------
ROPER
Radio towers
(WGOW) '4
;•
SOUTHERNS-
CHAMPION'
AMERICAN
'ELECTRICAL
ILMAN
AINT
DIXIE S&G
MOCCASIN
§ . BEND WWTP
COMBUSTION
ENGINEERING
SOUTHERN _ .
FOUNDARY W \-'\
-jLM'/i
^ PsVcKiatric Hosp
>-
BM c 7
650
•**»v \X VfVj&tL'i ~^l
• y x>, \\ *f£-r'*&
Figure 39. Moccasin Bend and Central Chattanooga Area
-------
186
as 41 mg/1 zinc, 27 mg/1 lead, 4 mg/1 nickel and low levels of chromium
and copper.
Roper reportedly currently discharges only cooling water through
two outfalls.21 These have low chromium and zinc concentrations.
The plant is listed as a contributor of industrial wastewaters to the
Chattanooga sewerage system.14 It is probable that toxic substances
(especially heavy metals) are discharged to municipal sewers.
The settling ponds have been reworked and covered.21 It is pro-
bable the buried sediments contain heavy metals.
Gil man Paint and Varnish Company
Industrial finishes, paints and coatings, lacquers and related
products are manufactured by this company at a 350 employee plant
northwest of downtown Chattanooga [Figure 39].34
Process wastewaters are discharged to municipal sewers.14 No
data were available on their characteristics or volume but they would
be expected to contain numerous toxic substances. The plant used to
have a cooling water discharge for which it received a NPDES permit
but this has been eliminated by installation of a cooling tower.21
The plant has two boilers fired with distillate oil or natural
gas and one fired with natural gas only. Emissions are low, about
4 m. tons (5 tons) of nitrogen oxides and 1.8 m. tons (2 tons) of
sulfur oxides annually.39 Hydrocarbon emissions from varnish kettles
are estimated at 31 m. tons (34 tons) annually.
Aerial photographs indicate the plant is on a small crowded site
with no solid waste disposal visible. No information was available
on disposal of hazardous wastes normally generated by this type of
facility.
-------
187
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
This very large (5,000 employee) plant produces industrial boilers,
stainless steel tubing and welding electrodes.34 The plant extends
along about 1 km (0.6 mi) of the east bank of Nickajack Lake near
central Chattanooga [Figure 39].
The only discharge of wastewaters to the Lake is non-contact
cooling water averaging about 190 m3/day (0.05 mgd).21 The remaining
cooling water and all process wastewaters are discharged to the
Chattanooga sewerage system. Flow is about 3,800 mVday (1 mgd). No
data were available on the characteristics of the discharge to the
municipal sewer.
The plant is listed as a major air pollution source.32 Emissions
from 10 sources were estimated as 11 m. tons (12 tons) of particulates
annually. Emissions sources were 7 shot blast baghouses, two welding
exhausts and a woodworking area. Pollution controls were fabric filters
and centrifugal collectors.
Aerial photographs showed the plant to be relatively clean except
for an area adjacent to the Lake [Figure 40]. Piles of material that
could have been raw materials or wastes were present.
U.S. Pipe and Foundry Company - Soil Pipe Division
U.S. Pipe and Foundry operates two major plants in Chattanooga.
The 575 employee Soil Pipe Division produces soil pipe and fittings,
valves, hydrants and commercial'gray iron in the plant just south of
Combustion Engineering [Figure 39].34 Processes include melting of
iron and scrap, casting of soil pipe in centrifugal molds, and various
foundry type operations.
-------
188
Figure 40. Combustion Engineering, /nc.
-------
189
Process water used in mold flushing and washdown and in cupola
slagging is pretreated in a clarifier and discharged to the Chattanooga
sewerage system.21 Flow averaged 610 mVday (0.16 mgd) in 1976.
Slowdown from a recycle cooling system is combined with small process
leaks and surface runoff and discharged to Nickajack Lake at RM 462.4.
Flow averages about 910 nrVday (0.24 mgd). In 1976, this discharge
was found to contain excessive zinc (6.7 mg/1) and small amounts of
phenols and copper during a State inspection. Oil and grease were
also high.
The plant is a major air pollution source.32 Emissions of parti-
culates from 10 sources in 1975 were estimated as 126 m. tons (138 tons)
annually.39 Cupola emissions of carbon monoxide were 1,620 m. tons
(1,790 tons) annually. The cupola was equipped with a direct flame
afterburner. Other controls included fabric filters, wet scrubbers
and centrifugal collectors.
Comparison of the 1969 topographical map [Figure 39], the 1973
photographs and the 1978 photographs [Figure 41] show that a pond at
the south end of the plant site has been progressively filled with
solid waste. The waste appears to be waste foundry sand and possibly
cupola slag. Deposit of this material in a low area previously below
lake water level would increase the potential for leaching of toxic
substances into the Lake. Much of the plant site is occupied by raw
material piles and finished products increasing the potential for
contamination of surface runoff.
MINOR INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
Potential minor industrial sources of toxic substances are scattered
along the river between Chickamauga Dam and Signal Mountain with the
most located in central Chattanooga. In most cases, toxic substances
data are sketchy or non-existent.
-------
190
Figure 41. U.S. Pipe and Foundry Company, Soil Pipe Division
-------
191
Selox, Inc. operates an 85 employee air separation plant produ-
cing argon, nitrogen, oxygen and hydrogen adjacent to the duPont plant
[Figure 34].34 Cooling tower blowdown possibly containing zinc is
discharged to the Tennessee River (RM 470.3) under an NPDES permit.
Dixie Yarns, Inc., operates a 625 employee textile mill processing
cotton and synthetic yarns in Lupton City [Figure 34]. Cooling tower
blowdown is reportedly discharged to the River and industrial wastewaters
to the Chattanooga sewerage system.3'14 No toxic substance data were
available but the industrial wastewaters could contain some toxics.
The Rock-Tennessee Company, Mill Division, produces recycled
particleboard in a 200 employee plant in North Chattanooga [Figure 39].34
Cooling water, blowdown and water softener backwash averaging about
520 mVday (0.137 mgd) are reportedly discharged to the river without
treatment at RM 463.5.3 This discharge does not have an NPDES permit.
No toxics data were available.
Heavy duty machinery are produced in a 243 employee plant in
North Chattanooga [Figure 39] operated by the Southern Division of
Koehring Company.34 No data were available on wastewater discharges.
The plant is listed as a major air pollution source in CDS but no
data were available in NEDS. Emissions could be hydrocarbons from
painting operations.
Southern Champion Tray Company operates a 55 employee paperboard
products plant in North Chattanooga [Figure 39].34 The facility was
formerly operated by Tennessee Paper Mills, Inc. No air or water
data were available for the new ownership. Under Tennessee Paper
Mills, the plant reportedly discharged about 11,400 m3/day (3 mgd) of
filter backwash, softener regenerates, boiler blowdown and cooling
water to the River without treatment at RM 462.O.3 The plant now
reportedly discharges industrial wastewaters to Chattanooga sewers.14
-------
192
The aerial photographs (1973 and 1978) showed a large clarifier containing
a white wastewater adjacent to the mill building. No discoloration
was visible in Nickajack Lake indicating this process wastewater may
go to the City. No NPDES permit is active for either Company name.
In 1975, the mill had two boilers fired with residual oil or natural
gas.39 Estimated annual emissions were about 31 m. tons (34 tons) of
particulates, 250 m. tons (270 tons) of sulfur oxides, and 577 m. tons
(636 tons) of nitrogen oxides.
American Electrical Industries manufactures insulated aluminum
and copper wire and cable at a 277 employee plant in North Chattanooga
[Figure 39].34 This plant was formerly operated by 01 in Conductors
and then by Consolidated Aluminum Corporation. About 760 m3/day (0.2 mgd)
of cooling water is discharged to the Tennessee River at RM 462.9
under a NPDES permit. No toxic substances data were available. The
plant reportedly discharges only domestic wastewaters to Chattanooga
sewers.14
American Oil Company operates an asphalt terminal in North Chattanooga.
Boiler blowdown, water softener regenerate and surface runoff averaging
34 m3/day (0.009 mgd) are discharged to the Tennessee River at RM 463.4
under a NPDES permit.3'21 The adjacent Texaco, Inc. bulk petroleum
terminal discharges small amounts of spills and surface runoff, also
under a NPDES permit.3'21 Both facilities are probably minor sources
of phenols.
Dixie Sand and Gravel Company washes sand and gravel dredged
from Nickajack Lake in a plant adjacent to Gilman Paint-and Varnish
Company [Figure 39]. Process wastewaters containing high levels of
suspended solids and averaging about 2,900 mVday (0.77 mgd) are dis-
charged to the Lake at RM 463.O.21 The only toxic substances expected
from this source would result from the processing of sand and gravel
contaminated by wastewater discharges to the Lake.
-------
193
Eureka Foundry Company produces ferrous and non-ferrous castings
in a 70 employee foundry adjacent to Combustion Engineering [Figure 39].34
The cupola emits an estimated 257 m. tons (283 tons) of carbon monoxide
annually.39 The cupola and foundry sand preparation emissions are con-
trolled by fabric filters. Industrial wastewaters are discharged to City
sewers.14
Southern Foundry Supply, Inc. handles iron and steel scrap and
remelts aluminum and zinc at a 40 employee plant adjacent to U.S.
Pipe and Foundry Soil Pipe Division [Figure 39].34 In 1975, the plant
emitted small amounts of particulates, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide
from an incinerator, a mechanical shredder and a magnetic separator.39
No industrial wastewaters are reportedly discharged to the City sewers.14
The large (550 employee) Ross-Meehari Foundries producing iron
and steel castings is adjacent to U.S. Pipe and Foundry [Figure 39].34
In 1975, the foundry had three electric furnaces, only one of which
had an outside vent.39 Particulate emissions were about 29 m. tons
(32 tons) annually. Industrial wastewaters are reportedly discharged
to Chattanooga sewers.14 A small surface discharge of "baghouse water"
has been reported.3 There was no NPDES permit for this plant.
U.S. Pipe and Foundry, Valve Division operates a 952 employee
foundry producing gray and ductile iron castings, cast iron pressure
pipe fittings, valves and hydrants [Figure 39].34 The plant discharges
about 980 m3/day (0.26 mgd) of process wastewaters to the Tennessee
River at RM 461.3 through two oufalls. These wastewaters contain
chromium, nickel, zinc and phenols totalling about 1 kg/day.21 Indus-
trial wastewaters are also reportedly discharged to Chattanooga sewers.14
Emissions from the foundry in 1975 were about 126 m. tons (138 tons)
of particulates and 1,620 m. tons (1,790 tons) of carbon monoxide.39
-------
194
American Cyanamid Company produces aluminum sulfate from bauxite
at a plant north of the Moccasin Bend WWTP [Figure 42].34 The plant
reportedly recycles process wastewaters in closed settling ponds. An
NPDES permit has been issued for surface runoff. There have been
dike failures in the past with spills of acid wastes to the Lake.21
The 1978 photographs [Figure 43] show that the settling ponds have
been enlarged since 1973. In 1975, bauxite crushing and handling
emitted an estimated 114 m. tons (125 tons) of particulates.
The Lorain Division of the Koehring Company produces large cranes
and excavators at a 307 employee plant near Signal Mountain [Figure 42].34
A small amount of steam cleaning and paint booth water is reportedly
discharged to Mountain Creek without a permit.3 No toxic substances
data were available. The plant emits an estimated 73 m. tons (80 tons)
of hydrocarbons annually from painting operations.39
A wet process cement plant employing about 250 persons is operated
by the Signal Mountain Division of General Portland Cement, Inc. near
Signal Mountain [Figure 42].34 Process wastewaters, cooling water
and surface runoff averaging about 7,600 m3/day (2 mgd) are discharged
to Nickajack Lake at RM 454.6.21 Treatment consists of various settling
ponds. No toxic substances data were available. Emissions of particulates
from the two active kilns and associated finishing operations were
about 288 m. tons (317 tons) in 1974.39
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
There are three major municipal wastewater treatment plants dis-
charging directly to the Tennessee River in the study area. All are
located on Nickajack Lake downstream from the public water supply
intakes.
-------
- I
. r KOEHRING
nMr^ahTSi
m-3&k
••K i ST..a* -, . r ..•"^ ^rr. \s
lli'^fi
£*ifi*^:fci&*dl
\ / RED BANK WWTP
/
, r^jofisgE
" AMERICAN CYANAMID
-
/substation :_._>^:
Figure 42. Signal Mountain Area
-------
196
Figure 43 American Cyanamid Company
-------
197
Figure 44. Moccasin Bend Wasfewafer Treafmenf Plant
-------
198
The City of Chattanooga Moccasin Bend WWTP is the largest waste-
water source in the entire study area [Figure 44]. Wastewaters from
a majority of the industrial facilities in the study area contribute
more than 70% of the plant influent. With the scheduled abandonment
of the Brainerd, East Ridge, Fort Oglethorpe and Red Bank WWTP's within
the next five years, the Moccasin Bend plant will serve almost the
entire study area.
The plant is currently hydraulically and organically overloaded.
Plant influent averaged 193,000 m3/day (51 mgd) for a three-month
period in early 1978 in comparison to a design capacity of 159,000 nrVday
(42 mgd). Average monthly flows as high as 227,000 mVday (60 mgd)
have occurred. This hydraulic overload results in bypassing of un-
treated wastewater to the river. This bypassing usually occurs in
wet weather as the result of infiltration/inflow problems and the
discharge of surface runoff from some industrial plant sites to the
sewer system.
The organic overload is a continuous problem and results from a
combination of inadequately pretreated industrial wastewaters and
service area growth. The plant has inadequate solids handling facili-
ties. Waste activated sludge is discharged to the River in the final
effluent. New solids-handling facilities are under construction. An
expansion of other treatment capacity is planned.
In addition to the overloaded condition, the industrial wastewaters
have an adverse effect on biological treatment efficiency. The City
is in the initial phases of implementation of an industrial waste
ordinance passed in 1977.
Final effluent is discharged to Nickajack Lake at RM 457.8, down-
stream from most other sources of pollution in the study area [Figure 39].
Under adverse hydraulic conditions in the Lake caused by operations
-------
199
of hydroelectric power plants at Chickamauga and Nickjack Dams and
the Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage Project, flow reversals occur in
the Lake causing wastewaters to move upstream. Under the most adverse
conditions, it might be possible for this pollution to reach the public
water supply intakes.
The Moccasin Bend WWTP discharge is the largest reported source
of toxic substances in the study area. Sampling by the State in March
1976, detected large daily loads of heavy metals discharged including
0.8 kg (1.7- Ib) of cadmium, 44 kg (97 Ib) of chromium, 17 kg (38 Ib)
of lead, 27 kg (63 Ib) of copper, 19 kg (42 Ib) of nickel, and 139 kg
(306 Ib) of zinc. No organic analyses were reported. These loads
are substantially higher than detected by an EPA study in early 1973.
Organic analysis of the effluent in 1973 detected more than 20 organic
compounds. These included the toxic substances biphenyl, 2,4-dichloro-
phenol, diethylphthalate, trichlorophenol, 1,2,4-tnchlorobenzene; and the
pesticide dicamba. Oicamba, present in the effluent in a concentration of
2.4 mg/1, was discharged to the sewer system of Velsicol Chemical Corpora-
tion. Production of dicamba has since ceased. However, the minimal
removal occurring in the Moccasin Bend WWTP reflects the lack of adequate
treatment provided some toxic substances.
It would appear that the Moccasin Bend WWTP will continue to be
a major source of toxic substances for years until, and only when,
plant expansion and provision of adequate industrial waste pretreatment
are affected.
The Red Bank WWTP serving the City of Red Bank discharges waste-
waters to Nickajack Lake at RM 455.6 downstream from the Moccasin
Bend WWTP [Figure 43]. Average wastewater flow is about 7,600 mVday
(2 mgd). The plant receives only minimal industrial wastewater. No
toxic substances data were available. The plant is scheduled to be
abandoned and wastewater diverted to the Moccasin Bend WWTP within
five years.
-------
200
The Signal Mountain VIWTP serving about 1,400 persons in that
residential city discharges about 1,500 mVday (0.4 mgd) to Nickajack
Lake at RM 453.8. The plant receives only minimal industrial wastewaters
and is not a significant source of toxic substances.
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL
Available data indicate that hazardous wastes containing toxic
substances are probably stored at several industrial sites along the
Tennessee River. These sites include E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company,
Roper Corporation, U.S. Pipe and Foundry Company (Soil Pipe Division)
and American Cyanamid Company.
There are no approved public solid or hazardous waste disposal
sites along the Tennessee River in the study area. However, at least
one closed municipal dump could contain hazardous wastes. The closed
Amnicola dump is on the east bank of Nickajack Lake upstream of the
public water supply intakes [Figure 19]. This dump on private property
in the flood plain was operated at least part of the time by the City
of Chattanooga. Only tree limbs and construction debris were reportedly
landfilled at that time. The 1972 EPA study detected a foul leachate
with organic compounds similar to a pulp mill effluent.4 Latex wastes
could have been disposed of in the dump at some time in the past.
The 1978 photographs indicate the dump is vegetated with no continuing
illegal dumping.
NON-POINT SOURCES
Much of the urban area adjacent to the Tennessee River in central
Chattanooga is served by combined sewers. These sewers overflow to
the River during storm runoff periods. These discharges contain toxic
substances from both industrial and municipal sources. There are a
-------
201
reported 25 combined sewer overflows and pumping stations or treatment
plant bypasses along the river.
Storm runoff from urban areas and industrial plant sites also
contribute toxic substances to the River.
-------
REFERENCES
1. Greater Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, Thursday, June 23,
1977, "Facts About the Greater Chattanooga Area," Forward Chattanooga,
Chattanooga, Tennessee.
2. Bennett, T.B., Schneider, R., Wagner, P., and Whatley, R., Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, February 1969, "Pollution
Affecting South Chickamauga Creek and Nickajack Lake, Chattanooga,
Tennessee," Athens, Georga: U.S. Dept. of the Interior.
3. Tenech Environmental Consultants, Inc., May 1978, "Chattanooga
Area Regional Council of Governments/Southeast Tennessee Develop-
ment District 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan."
4. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1972, "Chattanooga
Waste Discharges, Part I, Upstream From the City Water Company
Intakes," Athens, Georgia, Technical Study Report TS-04-73-02.
5. Environmental Protection Agency, May 10, 1972, "Report on Waste
Disposal Practices at Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, Tyner,
Tennessee," Atlanta, Georgia.
6. U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, August 10-14, 1970,
"Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee," Edge-
wood Arsenal, Maryland, Sanitary Engineering Survey No. 24-003-71.
7. U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, May 9-19, 1972, "Macro-
invertebrate Diversity as an Indicator of the Impact of Waste
Water Discharge on the Water Quality of Waconda Bay Volunteer
Army Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee," Edgewood Arsenal,
Maryland, Water Quality Engineering Special Study No. 24-031-72/73.
8. EPA Environmental Monitoring and Surveillance Laboratory, January
16-18, 1973, Aerial Photographs of Chattanooga Metropolitan Area,
Las Vegas, Nevada.
9. Environmental Protection Agency, July 1973, "Chattanooga Waste
Discharges Part II, Downstream From the City Water Company,"
Athens, Georgia.
10. Betts Engineering Co. Inc., "Report: Surface Runoff and Storm
Drainage Studies for Velsicol Chemical Corporation, Chattanooga,
Tennessee," Chattanooga, Tennessee.
11. G.G. Watson, Environmental Services, March 31, 1975, "Characteristics
and Control Strategy for Surface Runoff from Velsicol Chemical
Corporation Facilities at Chattanooga, Tennessee," Velsicol Chemical
Corporation, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
-------
204
12. Resource Consultants, August 1976, "Wastewater Characterization
and Treatability Study for the Wheland Foundry," Nashville, Tennessee.
13. Environmental Protection Agency, April 1977, "Chattanooga Creek
Study, Chattanooga, Tennessee," Athens, Georgia.
14. December 30, 1977, Letter: from Paul F. Clark, Commissioner,
City of Chattanooga to Elmo Lunn, Tennessee Department of Public
Health, Nashville.
15. Hensley-Schmidt, Inc. Consultants, January 1977, "Inventory of
Existing Point Sources, Activity 104, Chattanooga Area Waste
Management Study," Jackson-Atlanta.
16. Tenech Environmental Consultants, Inc., May 1978, "Chattanooga
Area Regional Council of Governments/Southeast Tennessee Development
District 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan," Chapter
V - Industrial Point Source Areawide Plan.
17. Tenech Environmental Consultants, Inc., May 1978, "Chattanooga
Area Regional Council of Governments/Southeast Tennessee Development
District 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan," Chapter
VIII - Residual Wastes Areawide Plan.
18. Tenech-Environmental Consultants, Inc., May 1978, "Chattanooga
Are.a Regional Council of Governments/Southeast Tennessee Development
District 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan," Chapter
IX.,- Areawide Management Plan.
19. The'Chattanooga Area Regional Council of Governments/Southeast
Tennessee Development District, September 1977, "The Chattanooga
Area Waste Management Draft Plan."
20. Water Quality Data submitted to EPA, Region IV monthly by Tennessee-
American Water Company.
21. NPDES Permit Program Files, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia.
22. Helms, Grady T., DHEW, National Air Pollution Control Administation,
October 1970, "Chattanooga, Tennessee Rossville, Georgia Interstate
Air Quality Study, 1967-1968," Durham, North Carolina, APTD-0583.
23. Russo, Robert S., DHEW, National Air .Pollution Control Administration,
June 1970, "Air Pollution Report - Federal Facilities, Chattanooga,
Interstate Air Quality Control Region," Durham North Carolina,
APTD-0112.
-------
205
24. Jackson, Donald W., Carpenter, B., Poole, W.K., Research Triangle
Institute, June 25, 1971, "Prevalence of Chronic Respiratory
Disease in Chattanooga: Effects of Community Exposure to Nitrogen
Oxides," Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, APTD-0720.
25. Pedco-Environmental Specialists, Inc., October 1975, "Area Source
Emission Inventory Hamilton County, Tennessee, and Walker and
Catoosa Counties, Georgia, Volume I," Cincinnati, Ohio, EPA
904/9-76-027-A.
26. Galkiewicz, R.C, and Record, F., GCA Technology Division, June
1976, "National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem;
Volume VIII - Chattanooga," Bedford, Massachusetts, EPA
450/3-76-026f.
27. Decker, C.E., and Royal, T.M., Research Triangle Institute, October
1976, "Nitrogen Dioxide Trends in Selected Chattanooga Communities,"
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, EPA-600/1-76-034.
28. Hasselblad, Victor, Environmental Protection Agency, January
1977, "Lung Function in School Children: 1971-1972, Chattanooga
Study," Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, EPA-600/1-77-002.
29. National Enforcement Investigations Center, August 1977, "Reconnais-
sance of Environmental Levels of Nitrosamines in the Southeastern
United States," Denver, Colorado, Environmental Protection Agency.
30. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV, Air Program Files,
Atlanta, Georgia.
31. Bellar, T., Carswell, J., DeMarco, J., Kropp, K., Robeck, G.,
Seeger, D., Slocum, C., Smith, B., Stevens, A., and Symons, J.,
November 1975, "National Organics Reconnaissance Survey for Halo-
genated Organics," Journal AWWA.
32. Environmental Protection Agency, Compliance Data System (CDS),
computerized national data bank of air pollution sources listed
in state implementation plans.
33. Environmental Protection Agency, Permit Compliance System (PCS),
computerized national data bank of NPDES permits.
34. Industrial Committee of One Hundred, 1977, "Manufacturers Directory
Chattanooga and Tri-State Area," Chattanooga, Tennessee.
35. Environmental Protection Agency, National Enforcement Investigations
Center file data on discharges of toxic substances by specific
industry types.
36. Environmental Protection Agency Toxic Substances List.
-------
206
37. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Enforcement, November
1978, "Compliance Status of Major Air Pollution Facilities," EPA
340/1-78-012.
38. Farmers Chemical Association, Inc. 1970, Brochure describing
Tyner, Tennessee, fertilizer plant.
39. Environmental Protection Agency National Emissions Data System
(NEDS), computerized national data bank containing emissions
data on selected air pollution sources.
40. SRI International, 1977, "Directory of Chemical Producers, United
States of America," Menlo Park, California.
41. SRI International, 1978, "Directory of Chemical Producers, United
States of America," Menlo Park, California.
42. Associated Water and Air Resources Engineers, Inc., December
1974, "Wastewater Management Alternatives and Treatability Investi-
gations on a Coke Plant Wastewater," (for Chattanooga Coke and
Chemicals, Inc.), Chattanooga, Tennessee.
-------
APPENDIX A
GEORGIA WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
-------
(4) Water Use Classifications. Water use
classifications for which the criteria of this Paragraph are
applicable are as follows:
(a) Drinking Water Supplies
(b) Recreation
(c) Fishing, Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game and
Other Aquatic Life
(d) Agricultural
(e) Industrial
(0 Navigation
(g) Wild River
(h) Scenic River
(i) Urban Stream
(5) General Criteria for All Waters. The following
criteria are deemed to be necessary and applicable to all
waters of the State:
(a) All waters shall be free from materials associated
with municipal or domestic sewage, industrial waste or
any other waste which will settle to form sludge deposits
that become putrescent, unsightly or otherwise objec-
tionable.
(b) All waters shall be free from oil, scum and floating
debris associated with municipal or domestic sewage, in-
dustrial waste or other discharges in amounts sufficient
to be unsightly or to interfere with legitimate water uses.
(c) All waters shall be free from material related to
municipal, industrial or other discharges which produce
turbidity, color, odor or other objectionable conditions
which interfere with legitimate water uses.
(d) All waters shall be free from toxic, corrosive, acidic
and caustic substances discharged from municipalities,
industries or other sources in amounts, concentrations or
combinations which are harmful to humans, animals or
aquatic life.
(e) Applicable State and Federal requirements and
regulations for the discharge of radioactive substances
shall be met at all times.
(0 No man-made physical or other alteration of
stream beds that may violate established water quality
standards, or reduce the waste assimilative capacity of
the streams, will be permitted without the expressed ap-
proval of the Environmental Protection Division.
(6) Specific Criteria for Classified Water Usage. The
following criteria are deemed necessary and shall be re-
quired for the specific water usage as shown:
(a) Drinking Water Supplies:
1. Those waters approved by the Environmental
Protection Division and requiring only approved dis-
infection and meeting the requirements of the Federal
Drinking Water Standards: or waters approved by the
Environmental Protection Division for human consump-
tion and food-processing or for arty Qther use requiring
water of a lower quality:
(i) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of SO per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period and not to exceed 200 per 100
ml in more than five percent of the samples in any 90-day
period.
(ii) Floating solids, settleable solids, sludge deposits or
A-l
any taste, odor or color producing substances: None
associated with any waste discharge.
(iii) Sewage, industrial or other wastes: None.
2. Those raw water supplies requiring approved treat-
ment to meet the requirements of the Environmental
Protection Division and the Federal Drinking Water
Standards or which are approved by the Environmental
Protection Division for human consumption and food-
processing; or for any other use requiring water of a
lower quality:
(i) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of 1,000 per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period and not to exceed a maximum
of 4,000 per 100 ml.
(ii) Dissolved Oxygen. A daily average of 6.0 mg/1 and
no less than 5.0 mg/1 at all times for waters designated
as trout streams by the State Game and Fish Division. A
daily average of 5.0 mg/1 and no less than 4.0 mg/1 at all
times for water supporting warm water species of fish.
(iii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-8.5.
(iv) No material or substance in such concentration
that, after treatment, would exceed the requirements of
the Environmental Protection Division and the latest edi-
tion of Federal Drinking Water Standards.
(v) Temperature: Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than S degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuanne waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the State Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no elevation or depression of
natural stream temperature.
(b) Recreation:
1. General recreational activities such as water skiing,
boating, and swimming, or for any other use requiring
water of a lower quality. These criteria are not to be in-
terpreted as condoning water contact sports in proximity
to sewage or industrial waste discharges regardless of
treatment requirements:
(i) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of:
(I) Coastal Waters — 100 per 100 ml
(II) All other recreational waters — 200 per 100 ml
(III) Should water quality and sanitary studies show
natural fecal coliform levels exceed 200/100 ml
(geometric mean) occasionally in high quality
recreational waters, then the allowable geometric mean
fecal colilbrm level shall not exceed 300 per 100 ml in
lakes and reservoirs and 500 per 100 ml in free flowing
fresh water streams.
I. The geometric mean will be used as the method of
criteria expression. This technique will be applied to no
less than four samples collected from a given sampling
site over a 30-day period at intervals not less than 24
hours.
(ii) Dissolved Oxygen: A daily average of 6.0 mg/1 and
no less than 5.0 mg/1 at all times for waters designated
as trout streams by the Slate Game und Fish Division. A
daily average of 5.0 mg/1 and no less than 4.0 mg/1 at all
times for waters supporting warm water species of fish.
(iii) pH Within the range of 6.0-8.5.
-------
A-2
(iv) Toxic Wastes, Other Deleterious Materials: None
in concentrations that would harm man. Fish and game or
other beneficial aquatic life.
(v) Temperature: Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than 5 degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuarine waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the State Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no elevation or depression of
natural stream temperatures.
(c) Fishing, Propagation of Fish, Shellfish, Game and
Other Aquatic Life; or for any other use requiring water
of a lower quality:
I. Dissolved Oxygen. A daily average of 6.0 mg/1 and
no less than 5.0 mg/1 at all times for waters designated
as trout streams by the State Game and Fish Division. A
daily average of 5.0 mg/1 and no less than 4.0 mg/1 at all
times for waters supporting warm water species of fish.
2. pH: Within the range of 6.0-8.S.
3. Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a' geometric
mean of 1,000 per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period and not exceed a maximum of
4,000 per 100 ml.
4. Bacteria: (Applicable only to waters designated as
approved shellfish harvesting waters by the appropriate
State agencies). The requirements will be consistent with
those established by the State and Federal agencies
responsible for the National Shellfish Sanitation
Program.
5. Temperature: Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than 5 degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuarine waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the State Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no elevation or depression of
natural stream temperatures.
6. Toxic Wastes, Other Deleterious Materials: None in
concentrations that would harm man, fish and game or
other beneficial aquatic life.
(d) Agricultural:
1. For general agricultural uses such as stock watering
and irrigating; or for any other use requiring water of a
lower quality:
(i) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of 5,000 per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period.
(ii) Dissolved Oxygen: No less than 3.0 mg/1 at any
time.
(iii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-8.5.
(iv) Temperature: Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than 5 degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuarine waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the Slate Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no elevation or depression of
natural stream temperatures.
(v) Toxic Substances, Other Deleterious Materials:
None in concentrations that would interfere with or
adversely affect uses for general agricultural purposes or
would prevent fish survival.
(e) Industrial:
1. For processing and cooling water with or without
special treatment; or for any other use requiring water of
a lower quality:
(!) Dissolved Oxygen: No less than 3.0 mg/1 at any
time.
(ii) pH: Within the range of 6.0-8.5.
(iii) Toxic Substances, Other Deleterious Materials:
None in concentrations that would prevent fish survival
or interfere with legitimate and beneficial industrial uses.
(iv) Temperature- Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than 5 degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuarine waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the State Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no-elevation or depression of
natural stream temperatures.
(0 Navigation:
1. To provide for commercial ship traffic and protec-
tion of seamen or crews:
(i) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of 5,000 per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period.
(ii) Dissolved Oxygen: No less than 3.0 mg/1 at any
time.
(iii) pH: Within the range of 6.0 - 8.5.
(iv) Toxic Substances, Other Deleterious Materials:
None in concentrations that would damage vessels, pre-
vent fish survival or otherwise interfere with commercial
navigation.
(v) Temperature: Not to exceed 90 degrees F. At no
time is the temperature of the receiving waters to be in-
creased more than 5 degrees F above intake temperature
except that in estuarine waters the increase will not be
more than 1.5 degrees F. In streams designated as trout
or smallmouth bass waters by the State Game and Fish
Division, there shall be no elevation or depression of
natural stream temperatures.
(g) Wild River:
I. This classification will be applicable to any waters of
the State when so designated by an authorized State or
Federal Agency and will be effective simultaneously with
that Agency's proper designation.
2. For all waters designated as "Wild River," there
shall be no alteration of natural water quality from any
source.
(h) Scenic River:
I. This classification will be applicable to any waters of
the State when so designated by an authorized State or
Federal Agency and will be effective simultaneously with
that Agency's proper designation.
2. For all waters designated as "Scenic River," there
shall be no alteration of natural water quality from any
source.
(i) Urban Stream:
1. This classification is applicable to streams in highly
developed urban areas:
-------
A-3
(i) All conditions specified under "General Criteria for
All Waters" [39l-J-6-.03(5)J will apply, and in addition,
Ihe waters so classified are to be aesthetically compatible
to adjacent areas.
(ii) Bacteria: Fecal coliform not to exceed a geometric
mean of 2,000 per 100 ml based on at least four samples
taken over a 30-day period and not to exceed a maximum
of 5,000 per 100 ml.
(iii) pH: Within the range of 6.0 - 8.5.
(iv) Dissolved Oxygen: No less than 3.0 mg/l at any
time.
(7) Natural Water Quality. It is recognized that certain
natural waters of the State may have a quality that will
not be within the geperal or specific requirements con-
tained herein.
(8) Treatment Requirements. Not withstanding the
above criteria, the requirements of the Slate relating to
secondary or equivalent treatment of all waste shall
prevail. The adoption of these criteria shall in no way
preempt the treatment requirements.
(9) Stre'amflows. Specific criteria or standards set for
the various parameters apply to all flows on regulated
streams. On unregulated streams, they shall apply to all
streamflows equal to or exceeding to 7-day, 10-year
minimum flow.
(10) Mixing Zone. Effluents released to streams or im-
pounded waters shall be fully and homogeneously dis-
persed and mixed insofar as practical with the main flow
or water body by appropriate methods at the discharge
point. Use of a reasonable and limited mixing zone may
be permitted on receipt of satisfactory evidence that such
a zone is necessary and that it will not create an objec-
tionable or damaging pollution condition.
(II) Effective Date. This Paragraph shall become
effective on June 30, 1974.
-------
APPENDIX B
TENNESSEE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
-------
B-l
TENNESSEE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
(Tennessee Water Quality Control Board Chapter 1200-4-3, General Water Quality
Criteria for the Definition and Control of Pollution in the Waters of Tennessee; Adopted
May 26, 1967; Amended November 17,1967, May 22,1970, October 26 and December
14, 1971; October 30, 1973; December 30, 1975; Amended October 20, 1977, effec-
fective December 26, 1977)
1200-4-3-.01
(I) TENNESSEE WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD
The Water Quality Control Act of 1971, Section
70-324 through Section 70-342, Tennessee Code An-
notated, makes it the duty of the Water Quality Control
Board to study and investigate all problems concerned
with the pollution of the waters of the State and with its
prevention, abatement, and control and to establish such
standards of quality for any waters of the State in rela-
tion to their reasonable and necessary use as the Board
shall deem to be in the public interest and establish
general policies relating to existing or proposed future
pollution as the Board shall deem necessary to ac-
complish the purpose of the Control Act. The following
general considerations and criteria are officially adopted
by the Board as a guide in determining the permissible
conditions of waters with respect to pollution and the
preventive or corrective measures required to control
pollution in various waters or in different sections of the
same waters.
(2) GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
(a) Waters have many uses which in the public interest
are reasonable and necessary. Such uses include: sources
of water supply for domestic and industrial purposes;
propagation and maintenance of fish and other desirable
aquatic life; recreational boating and fishing; the final
disposal of municipal sewage and industrial waste follow-
ing adequate treatment; stock watering and irrigation;
navigation; generation of power; and the enjoyment of
scenic and esthetic qualities of the waters.
(b) The rigid application of uniform water quality is
not desirable or reasonable because of the varying uses of
such waters. The assimilative capacity of a stream for
sewage and waste varies depending upon various factors
including the following: volume of flow, depth of channel,
the presence of falls or rapids, rate of flow, temperature,
natural characteristics, and the nature of the stream.
Also the relative importance assigned to each use will
differ for different waters and sections of waters
throughout the stream.
(c) To permit reasonable and necessary uses of the
waters of the State, existing pollution should be corrected
as rapidly as practical and future pollution controlled by
treatment plants or other measures. There is an
economical balance between the cost of sewage and waste
treatment and the benefits received. Within permissible
limits, the dilution factor and the assimilative capacity of
surface water should be utilized. Waste recovery, control
of rates and dispersion of waste into the streams,
and control ot rates and characteristics of flow of waters
in the stream where adequate, will be considered to be a
means of correction.
(d) Sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes, as defin-
ed in The Water Quality Control Act of 1971, Section
70-324 through 70-342, Tennessee Code Annotated, shall
not be discharged into or adjacent to streams or other
surface waters in such quantity and of such character or
under such conditions of discharge in relation to the
receiving waters as will result in visual or olfactory
nuisances, undue interference to other reasonable and
necessary uses of the water, or appreciable damage to the
natural processes of self-purification. In relation to the
various qualities and the specific uses of the receiving
waters, no sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes dis-
charged shall be responsible for conditions that fail to
meet the criteria of water quality outlined below. Bypass-
ing or accidental spills will not be tolerated.
(e) The criteria of water quality outlined below are
considered as guides in applying the water quality objec-
tives in order to insure reasonable and necessary uses of
the waters of the State. In order to protect the public
health and maintain the water suitable for other
reasonable and necessary uses; to provide for future
development; to allow proper sharing of available water
resources; and to meet the needs of particular situations,
additional criteria will be set.
(3) CRITERIA OF WATER CONDITIONS
(a) Domestic Raw Water Supply
1. Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0
to 9.0 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Hardness or Mineral Compounds — There shall be
no substances added to the waters that will increase the
hardness or mineral content of the waters to such an ex-
-------
B-2
tent to appreciably impair the usefulness of the water as a
source of domestic water supply.
4. Total Dissolved Solids — The total dissolved solids
shall at no time exceed 500 mg/l.
5. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character as may impair the
usefulness of the water as a source of domestic water
supply.
6. Turbidity or Color — There shall be no turbidity or
color added in amounts or characteristics that cannot be
reduced to acceptable concentrations by conventional
water treatment processes.
7. Temperature — The maximum water temperature
change shall not exceed 3C degrees relative to an up-
stream control point. The temperature of the water shall
not exceed 30.5 decrees C and the maximum rate of
change shall not exceed 2C degrees per hour. The
temperature of impoundments where stratification oc-
curs will be measured at a depth of 5 feet, or mid-depth
whichever is less, and the temperature in flowing streams
shall be measured at mid-depth.
8. Cohform — The concentration of the fecal coliform
group shall not exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. as the
logarithmic mean based on a minimum of 10 samples
collected from a given sampling site over a period of not
more than 30 consecutive days with individual samples
being collected at intervals of not less than 12 hours. For
the purpose of determining the geometric mean, in-
dividual samples having a fecal coliform group concen-
tration of less than 1 per 100 ml. shall be considered as
having a concentration of 1 per 100 ml. In addition, the
concentration of the fecal coliform group in any in-
dividual sample shall not exceed 5,000 per 100 ml.
9. Taste or Odor — There shall be no substances added
which will result in taste or odor that prevent the produc-
tion of potable water by conventional water treatment
processes.
10. Toxic Substances — There shall be no toxic sub-
stances added to the waters that will produce toxic con-
ditions that materially affect man or animals or impair
the safety of a conventionally treated water supply.
11. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the water in quantities that may be detrimental
to public health or impair the usefulness of the water as a
source of domestic water supply.
(b) Industrial Water Supply
1. Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0
to 9.0 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Hardness or Mineral Compounds — There shall be
no substances added to the waters that will increase the
hardness or mineral content of the waters to such an ex-
tent as to appreciably impair the usefulness of the water
as a source of industrial water supply.
4. Total Dissolved Solids — The total dissolved solids
shall at no time exceed SOO mg/l.
5. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character as may impair the
usefulness of the water as a source of industrial water
supply.
6. Turbidity or Color — There shall be no turbidity or
color added in amounts or characteristics that cannot be
reduced to acceptable concentrations by conventional
water treatment processes.
7. Temperature — The maximum water temperature
change shall not exceed 3C degrees relative to an up-
stream control point. The temperature of the water shall
not exceed 30.S degrees C and the maximum rate of
change shall not exceed 2C degrees per hour. The
temperature of impoundments where stratification oc-
curs will be measured at a depth of 5 feet, or mid-depth
whichever is less, and the temperature in flowing streams
shall be measured at mid-depth.
8. Taste or Odor — There shall be no substances added
that will result in taste or odor that would prevent the use
of the water for industrial processing.
9. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to the waters that may produce toxic conditions
that will adversely affect the water for industrial process-
ing.
10. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the waters in quantities that may adversely
affect the water for industrial processing.
(c) Fish and Aquatic Life
I. Dissolved Oxygen — The dissolved oxygen shall be
a minimum of 5.0 mg/l except in limited sections of
streams where (i) present technology cannot restore the
water quality to the desired minimum of 5.0 mg/l dis-
solved oxygen, (ii) the cost of meeting the standards is
economically prohibitive when compared with the ex-
pected benefits to be obtained, or (iii) the natural
qualities of the water are less than the desired minimum
of 5.0 mg/l. Such exceptions shall be determined on an
individual basis but in no instance shall the dissolved ox-
ygen concentration be less than 3.0 mg/l. The dissolved
oxygen concentration shall be measured at mid-depth in
waters having a total depth often (10) feet or less and at a
depth of five (5) feet in waters having a total depth of
greater than ten (10) feet. The dissolved oxygen concen-
tration of recognized trout streams shall not be less than
6.0 mg/l.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.5
and 8.5 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character that may be
detrimental to fish and aquatic life.
4. Turbidity or Color — There shall be no turbidity or
color added in such amounts or of such character that
will materially affect fish and aquatic life.
5. Temperature — The maximum water temperature
change shall not exceed 3C degrees relative to an up-
stream control point. The temperature of the water shall
not exceed 30.5 degrees C and the maximum rate of
change shall not exceed 2C degrees per hour. The
temperature of recognized trout waters shall not exceed
20 decrees C. There shall be no abnormal temperature
-------
changes that may affect aquatic life unless caused by
natural conditions. The temperature of impoundments
where stratification occurs will be measured at a depth of
5 feet, or mid-depth whichever is less, and the
temperature in flowing streams shall be measured at
mid-depth.
6. Taste or Odor — There shall be no substances added
that will impart unpalatable flavor to fish or result in
noticeable offensive odors in the vicinity of the water or
otherwise interfere with fish or aquatic life.
7. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to the waters that will produce toxic conditions
that affect fish or aquatic life.
8. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the waters that will be detrimental to fish or
aquatic life.
9. Coliform — The concentration of the fecal coliform
group shall not exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. as a geometric
mean based on a minimum of 10 samples collected from
a given sampling site over a period of not more than 30
consecutive days with individual samples being collected
at intervals of not less than 12 hours. For the purpose of
determining the geometric mean, individual samples hav-
ing a fecal coliform group concentration of less than 1
per 100 ml. shall be considered as having a concentration
of 1 per 100 ml. In addition, the concentration of the
fecal coliform group in any individual sample shall not
exceed 5,000 per 100 ml.
(d) Recreation
1. Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0
to 9.0 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character that may be
detrimental to recreation.
4. Turbidity or Color — There shall be no turbidity or
color added in such amounts or character that will result
in an objectionable appearance to the water.
5. Temperature — The maximum water temperature
change shall not exceed 3C degrees relative to an up-
stream control point. The temperature of the water shall
not exceed 30.5 degrees C and the maximum rate of
change shall not exceed 2C degrees per hour. The
termperature of impoundments where stratification oc-
curs will be measured at a depth of 5 feet, or mid-depth
whichever is less, and the temperature in flowing streams
shall be measured at mid-depth.
6. Coliform —The concentration of the fecal coliform
group shall not exceed 200 per 100 ml. as the logarithmic
mean based on a minimum of 10 samples collected from
a given sampling sit; over a period of not more than 30
consecutive days with individual samples being collected
at intervals of not less than' 12 hours. For the purpose of
determining the geometric mean, individual samples hav-
ing a fecal coliform group concentration of less than I
per 100 ml. shall be considered as having a concentration
of 1 per 100 ml. In addition, the concentration of the
fecal coliform group in any individual sample shall not
B-3
exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. Water areas in the vicinity of
domestic wastewater treatment plant outfalls are not
considered suitable for body contact recreational pur-
poses.
7. Taste or Odor—There shall be no substances added
that will result in objectionable taste or odor.
8. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to the water that will produce toxic conditions that
affect man or animal.
9. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the water in quantities which may have a
detrimental effect on recreation.
(e) Irrigation.
1. Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0
to 9.0 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Hardness or Mineral Compounds — There shall be
no substances added to the water that will increase the
mineral content to such an extent as to impair its use for
irrigation.
4. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character as may impair the
usefulness of the water for irrigation purposes.
5. Temperature — The temperature of the water shall
not be raised or lowered to such an extent as to interfere
with its use for irrigation purposes.
6. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to water that will produce toxic conditions that
will affect the water for irrigation.
7. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the water in quantities which may be detrimen-
tal to the waters used for irrigation.
(0 Livestock Watering and Wildlife.
(1). Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. pH — The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0
to 9.0 and shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this
range over a period of 24 hours.
3. Hardness of Mineral Compounds — There shall be
no substances added to water that will increase the
mineral content to such an extent as to impair its use for
livestock watering and wildlife.
4. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character as to interfere with
livestock watering and wildlife.
5. Temperature — The temperature of the water shall
not be raised or lowered to such an extent as to interfere
with its use for livestock watering and wildlife.
6. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to water that will produce toxic conditions that
will affect the water for livestock watering and wildlife.
7. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the water in quantities which may be detrimen-
tal to the water of livestock watering and wildlife.
(g) Navigation.
-------
B-4
1. Dissolved Oxygen — There shall always be suf-
ficient dissolved oxygen present to prevent odors of
decomposition and other offensive conditions.
2. Hardness or Mineral Compounds — There shall be
no substances added to the water that will increase the
mineral content to such an extent as to impair its use for
navigation.
3. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits — There
shall be no distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily
sleek, or the formation of slimes, bottom deposits or
sludge banks of such size or character as to interfere with
navigation.
. 4. Temperature — The temperature of the water shall
not be raised or lowered to such an extent as to interfere
with the use for navigation purposes.
5. Toxic Substances — There shall be no substances
added to water that will produce toxic conditions that
will affect the water for navigation.
6. Other Pollutants — Other pollutants shall not be
added to the water in quantities which may be detrimen-
tal to the waters used for navigation.
(h) These criteria should not be construed as permit-
ting the degradation of higher quality water when such
can be prevented by reasonable pollution control
measures. The above conditions are recognized as apply-
ing to waters affected by the discharge of sewage and/or
industrial waste or other waste and not resulting from
natural causes.
(4) DEFINITIONS
(a) Conventional Water Treatment — Conventional
water treatment as referred to in the criteria denotes
coagulation, sedimentation, filtration and chlorination.
(b) Mixing Zone — Mixing zone refers to that section
of a flowing stream or impounded waters necessary for
an effluent to become dispersed and mixed insofar as
practical with the main" flow or Water body by appro-
priate methods at the discharge point. Such zones shall
be restricted to as small an area and length as possible
and shall not (i) prevent the free passage of fish or
cause aquatic life mortaJity in the receiving waters; (ii)
contain materials, that adequately represent the defined
zone, in concentrations that exceed the 96-hour LCSO for
biota significant to the aquatic community in the receiv-
ing waters; (iii) result in offensive conditions; (iv)
produce undesirable aquatic life or result in dominance
of a nuisance species; (v) endanger the public health or
welfare; or (vi) adversely affect the reasonable and
necessary uses of the area. The mixing zone necessary
in each particular case may be designated in the Dis-
charge Permit as required by the Tennessee Water
Quality Control Act, (T.C.A., Section 70-324 through
Section 70-342).
The mixing zone necessary in each particular case shall
be defined by the Tennessee Water Quality Control
Board.
(5) INTERPRETATION OF CRITERIA
(a) Interpretations of the above criteria shall conform
to any rules and regulations or policies adopted by the
Water Quality Control Board.
(b) Insofar as practicable, the effect of treated sewage
or waste discharges on the receiving water shall be con-
sidered after they are mixed with the waters and beyond a
reasonable zone of immediate effect upon the qualities of
the waters. The extent to which this is practicable
depends upon local conditions and the proximity and
flature of other uses of the waters.
(c) The technical and economical feasibility of waste
treatment, recovery, or adjustment of the method of dis-
charge to provide correction shall be considered in deter-
mining the time to be allowed for the development of
practicable methods and for the specified correction.
(d) The criteria set forth shall be applied on the basis of
the following stream flows: unregulated streams —
stream flows equal to or exceeding the 3-day minimum,
20-year recurrence interval; regulated stream — instan-
taneous minimum flow.
(e) In general, deviations from normal water con-
ditions may be undesirable, but the rate and extent of the
deviations should be considered in interpreting the above
criteria.
(f) The criteria and standards provide that all dis-
charges of sewage, industrial waste, and other wastes will
receive the best practicable treatment (secondary or the
equivalent) or control according to the policy and
procedure of the Tennessee Water Quality Control
Board. A degree of treatment greater than secondary
when necessary to protect the water uses will be required
for selected sewage and waste discharges.
(6) TENNESSEE ANTIDEGRADATION STATE-
MENT
(a) The Standards and Plan adopted are designed to
provide for the protection of existing water quality
and/or the upgrading or "enhancement" of water quality
in all waters within Tennessee. It is recognized that some
waters may have existing quality better than established
standards. ' ' „ . , ...
The latest edition of Quality Criteria for Water
published by the Environmental Protection Agency pur-
suant to Section 304(a) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control A'ct (PL 92-500). and other documents as speci-
fied by the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department
of Public Health and the Water Quality Board shall be
used as guides in determining standards of minimum
water quality outside of those specifically listed in
Section 1200-4-3.10(2) through 1200-4-3.91(5) of
this document.
(b) The Criteria and Standards shall not be construed
as permitting the degradation of these higher quality
waters when such can be prevented by reasonable pollu-
tion control measures. In this regard, existing high quali-
ty water will be maintained unless and until it is affir-
matively demonstrated to the Tennessee Water Quality
Control Board that a change is justifiable as a result of
necessary social and economic development.
(c) All discharges of sewage, industrial waste, or other
waste shall receive the best practicable treatment (secon-
dary or the equivalent) or control according to the policy
and procedure of the Tennessee Water Quality Control
Board. A degree of treatment greater than secondary
when necessary to protect the water uses will be required
for selected sewage and waste discharges.
(d) In implementing the provisions of the above as they
relate to interstate streams, the Tennessee Water Quality
Control Board will cooperate with the appropriate
Federal Agency in order to assist in carrying out respon-
sibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
as amended.
-------
B-5
TENNESSEE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND STANDARDS
(Tennessee Water Quality Control Board Chapter 1200-4-5, Effluent Limitations and
Standards; Adopted October 20, 1977, Effective December 26, 1977)
I200-VJ-.01 DEFINITIONS
Ml terminology not specifically defined herein shall be defined in accordance with
.the Water Quality Control Act, Tennei.ee Code Annotated Section. 70-J2* - 70-
SW.
(I) The •Iratanianeoui minimum concentration* u a limitation on the cencen.
nation. In milligram, ya liter, of any sollutant contained in the waitewater
discharge determined from a grab sample taken of the ducharge at any point
In lime.
O) The term -I-hour average maximum" is a limitation en tie concentration in
milligram per liter, of a cai-iosite coroutine, o( any three equal volume
grab samples collected consecutively at thirty minute interval..
O)
The "dally maximum corcen'ration* 1s a limitation en the average
Concentration, in milligram, per liter, of the discharge during any calendar
day. When a praportixial-to-llc-' composite sampling device is used. ins
dally concentration :s the concemration oi that 2» hour compose;*: when
other sampling meais are used, re daily concentration is the antrmeiic
mean of the concenrations of equal volume samples collected during any
calendar day or sar.ipling period.
(0 The -dally maximum amount- If a limitation on the total amount of any
pollutant In the ducharge by weight during any calendar day.
(J) For municipal and domestic wastewater discharges, the -weekly average
concentration-, other than for fecal conform bacteria, is the arithmetic
mean of all the composite samples collected n a one-week period. The
weekly average for fecal conform bacteria u tne geometric -Man of
umples collected In a one-week period.
CO The -dally average concentration-, a limitation on the discharge concentra-
tion In milligrams per liter, is the arithmetic mean o( all daily concentra-
tions determined in a one-month period. The term u used interchangeably
with the term -monthly average."
(7) Per municipal and domestic wastewater discharges, the -monthly average
concentration*, other than lor fecal conform bacteria, is the arithmetic
mean of all the composite umples collected in a one-month period. The
monthly average for fecal col.torm bacteria a the geometric mean oi
umples collected in a one-month period.
(1) The "daily average amount-, a dheharge limitation, mean, the total
discharge by weight during a calendar month divided by the number of day.
tathe month that the production or commercial facility was operating.
Where less than daily tamplmg is required by a Permit, the """W •"•"«•
dbcharge amount shall be determined by the summation of all the measurea
dally discharges hy weight divided by the numeer of day. during the calendar
month when the measurement, were made.
O) The term "3PTCA* means the best practicable control technology currently
available, a. defined by EPA regulations.
(10) The term -BATEA* mean, the best available technology economically
achievable as defined by EPA regulations. Eflluent limitations established
by this designation shall be effective in accordance with the requirements of
Section 30IIBX2XA), Federal Water Pollution Control Act, PL92-300.
(11) The term "New Source Performance Standards- (NSPS) means rinse
Itandards of performance applied to industrial discharge, defined a. -new
taurce* by Section 106 of the Federal water Pollution Control Act as
•mended, PL92-300. (Th,s term, as it is used in this chapter, is not iiw> SUM
u the term "Standard of Performance." defined by Section 70-)2Xaa>,
Tennessee Code Annotated).
(12) The term "practical conventional unit treatment process" means that degree
el treatment which .ill reduce ,-lluiani concentrations to the level.
provided as daily maximum concentrations in Rule 1200-4-J-.03.
(13) The term -water quality limited segment- means a segment of waters, or
segments of waters which, due to background cuality, flow characteristics or
waste discharges, require a level ol effluent control more restrictive than
the control produced by utilization ol practical conventional unit treatment
processes. BPTCA. BATE*., or NSPS. These segments are not necessarily
ore-designated, but may become water quality limited for certain para-
meters when a wastewaier discha-ge is oe.ng considered which would
prevent the segment from achieving assigned classifications.
(I*) The term "effluent limited segmrnr" means a segment of waters, or
segments of waters, wherein water quality, in accordance with assigned
classifications, can be maintained by the application of effluent limitations
h accordance with BPTCA or practical conventional unit treatment
processes.
1200-*->-02- GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
U) The UK of -receiving water. Increase- limitations, also known as "delta-
standards, as effluent requirements, though not prohibited, u discouraged
and will be used only when appropriate limitation cannot be expresieo in
other term.) in such case, the increase means an increase of a definite
•mount over Intake or upstream water..
(2) The use of differential seasonal limitations as effluent requirrments, though
not prohibited, u discoursed. When limitation in this fashion u ined, the
discharger must demonstrate that tne treatment unit "ill operate at
optimum efficiency at all limes of the year and that even with differential
effluent restrictions, water quality in the receiving waters can be
maintained in accordance with established classifications.
O) Where it u practical and economically feasible to establish a -closed cycle-
water re-use system with no discharge, such requirement may be made a
part of the Permit.
(0 All municipal and domestic waitewater discharge, shall be limited, if
appropriate, by application of monthly average concentra lions, weekly
•verage concentrations, daily maximum amounts, and daily maximum
concentrations of the five-day. 20JC biochemical oxygen demand (BOO.)
and suspended .olid.. Limitations on chlorine residual may be requred both
to assure adequate disinfection .. . to prevent harmful amounts of ehlorre
dbcharge to the receiving »aters. In addition, where harmful material, are
acquired in a collection system, effluent limitations applicable to the
treatment system will be required for such parameter..
(D Regular monitoring and reporting necessary to assure that compliance is
being achieved will normally be required of the discharger in any Permit.
(O Any other requirement or terminology necessary n describe adequate
operation of the treatment unit or appropriate limitation may be required of
the discharger in the Permit.
(7) Any wastewater discharge to a watercourse which at the point of discharge
has no flow for significant periods of time, while not prohibited, is
discouraged.
(I)
All pollutant, shall receive treatment or corrective action to Insure
compliance with effluent limitations established by the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency pursuant to Sections 101 and 102 and Standards of
Performance for new sources pursuant to Section 306, effluent limitations
and prohibition, and pretreatment standards pursuant to Section 307 ol the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended. PL 92-300: also to Insure
compliance with any approved water quality standard, or avoid conflict with
an approved areawide waste treatment management plan prepared according
"to Section 20S of the Federal Act.
Instantaneous maximum concentration or similar limitations may be imoosed
In Permits wheni (I) toxic or harmful parameter, are present in such
significant amount, or concentration, as to represent a threat to the
possibility of maintaining receiving water, in accordance »ith established
Classifications; and (2) the ducharge u characterized as irregular, such as
high peak, short duration flow.
(9)
(10) Any Permit may prohibit the discharge of unusually ,,1i
parameters during short periods of time; such as batch dumping, slug
dbcharge. or other effluent., which might be detrimental to the receiving
stream.
l200-»-J-.03 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITED SEGMENTS
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency h>s adopted eflluent limitations
and guidelines lor existing sources and standards ol performance for new
sources pursuant to Section 101. 30». and 106 of the Federal »ater Pollution
Control Art as amended, PL92-300. Permits for discharges to efl'uent
limned segments will contain limitations and standards in accordance
-------
B-6
achieve as a minimum the following as maximum effluent limitations when
cud) parameters are present as a result of processes causing the
contamination or discharges:
(I) Municipal and domestic wastewater treatment plants
Parameter
BOO.
Monthly
Avg. (mg/l)
Vceklr
Avg. (mg/l)
Daily
Mu.
30 «0 *3
30 »0 «J
The concentration of settleable solids shall not exceed 1.0 ml/1 as measured
by the-standard one-hour Imhof f cone test.
(2) Industrial wastewarer treatment plants
Parameter Daily Maximum Concentrations (mg/l)
Aluminum 230
Antimony 1.0
Arsenic 1.0
Barium J.J
Boron JOO
Cadmium 0.01
Chlorine (total) 2.0
Chromium (total) J.o
Cobalt 10
Copper 1.0
Cyanide 0.03
Fluoride (soluble) 20.0
Iran (total) 10.0
lead 0.1
Manganese 10.0
Mercury 0.03
Nickel 3.0
Oil and Grease (a) 30
(b) No visible or floating oil or grease
pH «.0 to 9.0)
Selenium
Silver
•Suspended Solids
Senlcable solid*
Zinc
1.0
0.01
0.01
M
0.9 ml/1
2.0
•to the case ol biological treatment units, the daily maximum.
TSS may be 120 mg/l.
(!) Domestic waste stabilltation lagoons (existing)
Parameter
BOD.
TSSJ
Monthly
Avg. (n
mn/l)
Veekly
Av«
JO
100
«0
110
Daily
Mai, (mg/l)
O
120
Where II can be demensirated that higher concentration values have resulted (ram
utilization of water conservation practices, allowances may be made in deter-
mination of eflluent limitations. Parameters other than those lilted may be
limited In accordance with current treatment technology.
Vhere It can be demonstrated that j**iment bv practical conventional jnit
treatment processes cannot provide compliance with the concentration limitations
lilted in paragraph I, 2, and 3 ol this section, other reasonable effluent limitations
may be established.
It is not the Intent or purpose of these regulations that all Permit! require
limitation of or monitoring of all parameters listed m paragraph (1) of this Section.
Rather, it is the intent of this Section that each permit induce limitations of those
parameters listed thai are directly attributable to the processes causing the
discharge (or whicn the permit is granted.
1200-t-J-J* EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR EXISTING AND PROPOSED
WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENTS
Permit! for all existing or proposed discharges to water quality limned or proposed
water quality limited segments of the State's waters may Include, when necessary
to maintain assigned classifications. Individually calculated effluent limitations on
any parameter more stringent than BPTCA. BATEA, or results of treatment by
practical conventional unit treatment processes.
(I) Eflluent limitations on toiic substances will be required in accordance with
the General Water Quality Criteria, Rule IMO-«->. using the 96-hour LC..
criterion and appropriate application factor lor each tone parameter.
Q) Appropriate limitations on organic related and other oiygen demanding
parameters will be required in anv Permit to Insure adequate dissolved
oxygen In the State's warns in accordance with the General Water Quality
Criteria, Rule I20CM-J.
O) When a treatment process greater than BPTCA. BATEA. or conventional
unit treatment processes is required by application of these Rules, a set of
effluent limitations will be required in any Permit which will completely
describe expected remits of such treatment process.
ISOO-t-S-J)
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS NECESSARY TO PREVENT
DEGRADATION
Regardless of whether or not • segment of the State's waters Is designated as a
water quality limited segment, eflluent limitations may be required in any Permits
to insure compliance with the Anudegradatien Statement. Rule l200-«-)-.OI«l.
------- |