ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
i
REPORT ON
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
«
I
NATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATION CENTERS
DENVER AND CINCINNATI
AND
REGION IV, ATLANTA. GEORGIA
MARCH 1973
2 ** \
*1- PftCfl
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
Report on
WASTE SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
National Field Investigation Centers-Denver and Cincinnati
and
Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia
March 1973
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES iv
LIST OF FIGURES v
LIST OF APPENDICES vi
I
GLOSSARY OF TERIIS vii
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. BACKGROUND 1
B. 1972 WATER-QUALITY INVESTIGATIONS 2
II. CONCLUSIONS 4
A. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA A 4
B. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B 6
III. RECOMMENDATIONS 8
IV. STUDY AREA 11
A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION 11
B. ECONOMICS 11
C. HYDROLOGY 11
V. APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS . . 13
A. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 13
B. FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
AMENDMENTS OF 19 72 15
VI. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA A 17
A. GENERAL 17
B. UTILITIES AND WATER SUPPLY 19
C. PROCESS OPERATIONS AND WASTE SOURCES 20
Acetic Acid Concentration and Refining —
Building 2 22
Acetic Anhydride Manufacturing —
Buildings 7 and 20 23
Producer Gas Plant — Building 10 25
Acetic Anhydride Refining — Building 6 27
Mechanical Refrigeration — Building 5 29
Steam Generation at Steam Plant — Building 8 . . 29
iii
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cont.)
Table No.
Page
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
HAAP, AREA A-KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
51
STATE OF TENNESSEE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR HAAP-AREAS A AND B
54
7 .OUTFALL CHARACTERISTICS FROM RAPP APPLICATION
HOLSTON ARjMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
8 DESCRIPTION OF EPA SAMPLING STATIONS, HAAP,
AREA B, KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
9 SUMMARY OF FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE, 13-15 DECEMBER 1972
10 ORGANIC POLLUTANTS IDENTIFIED
HOLSTON ARMY AICIUNITICN PLANT-AREA B
DECEMBER IS72
65
66
68
72
11 PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SG^DULF.
HAAP, AREA B-KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
74
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No.
Fol]ows
Pap;e
STUDY AREA-KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
DECEMBER 1972
inside
back cover
PLANT LAYOUT-HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-
AREA A, KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
SIMPLIFIED FLOWSHEET-AREA A
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
21
21
SAMPLING STATIONS HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION
PLANT-B, KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
SCHEMATIC OF EXPLOSIVE PRODUCTION LINE-AREA B
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
59
59
v
-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
A GENERAL WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE
DEFINITION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION
IN THE WATERS OF TENNESSEE
B SAMPLING PROCEDURE
C METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLE PRESERVATION
vi
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
BOD
- Biochemical Oxygen Demand, 5-day
COD
- Chemical Oxygen Demand
TOC
- Total Organic Carbon
SS
- Suspended Solids
TKN
- Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
nh3~n
- Ammonia as Nitrogen
NO^ + NO^-N - Nitrate + Nitrite as Nitrogen
Total-P
—
Total Phosphorus
Cr
-
Chromium
Mn
-
Manganese
Fe
-
Iron
Cu
-
Copper
Zn
-
Zinc
Sn
-
Tin
Hg
-
Mercury
Pb
-
Lead
RM
-
River Mileage (e
denoting distance from the mouth of the Hols ton River
to the confluence with a tributary upstream, and
second value indicating distance upstream of the mouth
of the tributary stream.
TL - Median Tolerance Limit, the concentration of toxicant
in water that causes a 50 percent mortality of the
test fish over a specified time period.
WUTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant
vii
-------
cfm - Flew rate Riven in cubic feet per minute
cfs - " " " " * second
gpm - " " " " gallons per minute
gpd - " " " " " " day
gpw - " " " " " " week
mgd - " " " " million gallons per day
mg/1 - Concentration given in milligrams per liter
mg/kg - " " " " " kilograms
Pg/1 - " " " micrograms per liter
pmhos/cm - Unit of specific conductance (mho—the inverse of the
standard unit of electrical resistance, the ohm) mea-
sured over a 1-centimetcr distance, conventionally
at 25°C.
ppm - Concentration given in parts per million
viii
-------
1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND
The South Fork of the Hols ton River as it flows through the City
A
of Kingsport, Tennessee and the Holston River downstream from Kingsport
are polluted from discharges of inadequately treated and/or untreated
industrial and municipal wastes. A study conducted by the Federal
Water Quality Administration, Department of the Interior, Region IV,
during June-July, 1969, reported that:
1. Wastewater discharges from the Tennessee Eastman Company (TEC);
Holston Army Ammunition Plant Areas A and B (HAAP-A&B); Mead
Papers a division of Mead Corporation; Kingsport Wastewater
Treatment Plant; and Holliston Mills contributed approximately
137,500 lb/day of BOD and 22,000 lb/day of total nitrogen to
the Holston River system.
2. Cooling-water discharges from TEC and HAAP-A raised the ambient
water temperature of the South Fork of the Holston River by
about 12°C.
3. Attached aquatic weeds (primarily Potamogeton peotinatus) covered
the bottom of the Holston River throughout the reach of the 23
river miles studied. This resulted in a cyclical variation of
oxygen levels and caused violations of the Tennessee Stream
Standards for dissolved oxygen.
The Tennessee Water Quality Control Board subsequently established
* The Holston River and the South and North Forks of the Holston River
are interstate streams.
-------
2
effluent requirements which specified that those industries discharging
to the Holston River and its tributaries provide a minimum BOD removal
of 85 percent by April 1972. The 1969 survey concluded that the BOD load
discharged in the study reach must be reduced by 92 percent if water
quality conditions were to improve. The study further concluded that the
two largest dischargers, TEC and HAAP-B, must reduce the total Kjeldahl
nitrogen in the effluents by 92 percent.
To date, the 85-percent BOD-removal goal has not been met. However,
with the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Ammendraents
of 1972, previous State goals and implementation plans have been revised
to maintain a minimum dissolved oxygen of 5 ppm in the River. The State
of Tennessee is planning to hold a public hearing regarding the water
pollution problems in the Kingsport area, but no date has been set. Addi-
tionally, the State has not requested interim authority from EPA to issue
permits under the 1972 Amendments.
B. 1972 WATER-QUALITY INVESTIGATIONS
The National Field Investigations Center-Denver (NFIC-D) was re-
quested by EPA Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia, to conduct waste-source
evaluations and a stream survey in the Kingsport, Tennessee, area-Holston
River Basin with the following objectives:
1. Determine the quality and quantity of waste pollutants dis-
charged to the Holston River and its tributaries so that ef-
fluent limitations can be established pursuant to the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
3
2. Ascertain the changes in water quality of the Holston River
and its tributaries due to waste discharges.
3. Evaluate present pollution control measures and determine what
additional abatement measures are necessary for the protection
and enhancement of receiving water quality.
The study was conducted by the National Field Investigation Center-
Denver and Cincinnati during the period 27 November through 15 December
1972. This report summarizes the results of the NFIC investigations of
the Holston Army Ammunition Plant-Areas A and B. Sources of pollution
and the resulting effects of wastewater discharges on the water quality
of the Holston River and its tributaries are discussed. Results of the
NFIC investigations of other waste sources in the Kingsport, Tennessee
area are discussed in the report entitled, Waste Source Investigations -
Kingsport, Tennessee.
The cooperation extended by Holston Army Ammunition Plant personnel
and State and Federal agencies is gratefully acknowledged.
-------
4
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA A
1. The HAAP installation had virtually no treatment of industrial
process wastes and contaminated cooling waters. The total wastewaters,
including spent cooling waters, being discharged from the Holston Army
Ammunition Plant, Area A, into the South Fork of the Holston River was
43.3 mgd. These wastewaters had average measured amounts of 20,300 lb/day
BOD; 19,100 lb/day COD; and 4,060 lb/day suspended solids. Due to the
complex nature of HAAP wastes and their potential effect upon analytical
tests, these results most likely represent minimum values.
2. The Main Outfall discharge (Station 2) was found to contain more
than 90 percent of the total BOD and COD loads being discharged from the
overall HAAP A complex. This discharge also represented about 75 percent
of the total facilities wastewater flow. Effluents from the ASG Indus-
tries were discharged into the upper section of the HAAP Main Outfall,
amounting to approximately 3,600 lb/day of suspended solids in a waste
flow of 0.52 mgd. Many of these solids settled out in the open ditch
either before reaching or within the Main Outfall.
3. Bioassay studies conducted at HAAP, Area A, disclosed that waste-
water discharges at Stations 2 and 8 were highly toxic to aquatic life.
The coal-tar drainage (0.007 mgd) at Station 8 killed 50 percent of the
fathead minnow test species after 96 hr with a waste concentration of
only 0.17 percent. The Main Outfall (33.6 mgd) at Station 2 showed a
50 percent kill of test fish after 96 hr with a waste concentration
of 56.0 percent. These two waste discharges alone would require that
-------
5
about 2,000 cfs be maintained in the South Fork and Holston Rivers to
ensure no long-term impact on aquatic life because of toxicity (based
upon 1/20 of the 96-hr TL ). This calculated dilution flow does not
m
include additional allowance for the many other potentially toxic waste
streams presently entering the Holston River, not only from the remaining
parts of HAAP A, but also HAAP B, Tennessee Eastman, and miscellaneous
sources. The concentrations of toxic materials in the Holston River
downstream from Kingsport, Tennessee, are approaching the levels that
are toxic to fish. These toxic discharges are in violation of the General
Water Quality Criteria for the Definition and Control of Pollution In the
Waters of Tennessee for Fish and Aquatic Life-subsection 3(g). If in-
cluded in the process waste stream for waste treatment purposes these two
waste streams may seriously interfere with the efficacy of the proposed
biological treatment.
4. The Area A wastewater-treatment program relies exclusively upon
completion and adequate performance of the aerated lagoon (i.e., Phase II).
The full-scale lagoon is scheduled for operation by February 1976. In the
interim, process wastes will be discharged without treatment to the South
Fork of the Holston River, and projects completed prior to this data (e.g.,
the tank-farm dike project anti collection of boiler blowdown and steam-
plant wastes for treatment) will not be functional as all the wastes are
designed to ultimately flow to the lagoon.
5. Treatment performance criteria used for the design of the aerated
lagoon system are not expected to meet APSA Guidelines or Water Quality
Standards Requirements. The system, as described, is incompatible with
-------
6
best practicable control technology. Design criteria were based upon
USAEHA derived waste loads which were found considerably lower than the
EPA 1972 survey loads. Consequently, expected treatment performance
may be greatly altered. Questions are also raised on the applicability
of biological treatment to the HAAP wastes. Modification of the criteria,
or even the concept itself, could be necessary.
6. A significant air pollution problem exists in Area A. Measures
are presently underway to alleviate some of these air pollution emissions.
B. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA R
1. At Area B, the total discharge to the River was 84.4 mgd, con-
taining a net BOD of about 10,000 lb/day. The applicability of the BOD
test to some of these waste streams, which may contain nondegradablc or
even toxic materials, is questionable.
2. In the EPA survey, only about 100 lb of ammonia/day are dis-
charged in the wastewater effluent. Other surveys showed up to almost
2,500 lb/day in the effluent streams. Almost 2,500 lb of the nitrate
and nitrite ion/day are discharged into the Hols ton River.
3. Waste treatment facilities designed by CERL and based on stan-
dards of the State of Tennessee were not designed in accordance with the
best practicable control technology currently available.
4. All solids removed in the water treatment facility and from
steam production are sent untreated to the river.
5. A significant air pollution problem exists in Area B. Measures
are presently underway to alleviate some of these air pollution emissions.
-------
7
6. Static bioassay studies on Streams 29 and 30 after mixing but
before entering the river has a 96 hr TL value of 23 percent. The
m
combined flow was 16.72 mgd. A factor of 1/20 was used to obtain a
river flow that would dilute this so that there would be no long-term
impact on aquatic life. A bioassay on stream 31 (at 2.3 mgd) showed
a 96 hr TL^ of 23 percent. Similar calculations were performed on this
flow. The summation of the two bioassay calculations indicated that a
minimum flow of 2,600 cfs would have to be maintained in the river.
This figure does not include dilution water that would be necessary to
protect the aquatic life from discharges at Area A, Tennessee Eastman
Company, or other sources in the area.
-------
8
III. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. To meet water-quality standards in the Holston River and the
requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System the
following effluent limitations are recommended for the Holston Army
Ammunition Plant (Areas A & B) located in the vicinity of Kingsport,
Tennessee:
A. BOD not to exceed 2,400 lb/day
Area A-1,000 lb/day
Area B-1,400 lb/day
B. TKN not to exceed 100 lb/day
Area A-10 lb/day
Area B-90 lb/day
C. Heavy metals not to exceed 150 lb/day
Area A-30 lb/day
Area B-120 lb/day
D. Phenolics not to exceed 5 lb/day
Area A-l lb/day
Area B-4 lb/day
E. No detectable discharge made of potentially toxic organic wastes
F. SS shall not exceed 30 mg/l in process wastes and background in
cooling water. In the process waste, the SS limit shall be
4,600 lb/day.
Area A-1,000 lb/day
Area B-3,600 lb/day
G. Nitrate and nitrite nitrogen shall not exceed 1 mg/l in process
wastes and background in cooling water. In the process wastes
the nitrate-nitrite shall be limited to 150 lb/day.
Area A-30 lb/day
Area B-120 lb/day
2. The Array Munitions Command shall provide to the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region IV, by not later than 15 July 1973, a treatment
NOTE: Effluent limitations A through D refer to net additions to
raw intake water.
-------
9
system and schedule of abatement necessary to meet the effluent limita-
tions established in recommendation number one by 1 July 1977. A sug-
gested treatment system which could meet these limitations is:
A. Separation of process wastes and major uncontaminated cooling
water streams to the maximum extent feasible
B. Pretreatment measures to protect the biological treatment
process
C. Activated sludge
D. Deep-bed filtration
E. Carbon adsorption
F. Denitrification
3. Sludges, solids, and debris resulting from water treatment pro-
cess at both Areas A and B shall be dewatered and removed to approved
landfill with no discharge to receiving waters,
A. Wastes resulting from discharges in the tar-tank storage area
shall be completely contained and not discharged to receiving waters nor
included in any process-waste streams that discharge to the waste treat-
ment system. There shall be no discharge of this coal tar waste to re-
ceiving waters.
5. For the tank-farm- and chemical-storage areas HAAP shall develop
a strong spill prevention, containment, and countermeasure program as
soon as possible. Such a program and associated plan of action shall, as
a bare minimum, incorporate preventive maintenance and inspection; ade-
quate capacity diking or curbs shall be constructed around all tanks or
groups of tanks so as to prevent a) chemicals leaking or spilling from
the tanks and b) any storm water contaminated with chemicals from entering
-------
10
a receiving watercourse. In no event shall spills, be allowed to enter
sanitary, process, or cooling-water sewers. Complete containment and
separate recovery or treatment of spills, leaks, and associated drainage
are recommended.
6. All additional effluent requirements established by the State of
Tennessee shall be met.
-------
11
IV. STUDY AREA
A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The study area [Figure 1, inside back cover] lies within the Holston
River Basin in the rugged hill country of Northeastern Tennessee and
includes portions of Sullivan and Washington Counties. The Holston River
is formed by the confluence of the South and North Forks of the Holston
River, at Kingsport.
Kingsport and Johnson City, Tennessee, and Bristol, Virginia,
form the "Tri-Cities" metropolitan area. Kingsport (population, 30,800),
located in Sullivan County, is the only city located within the study
area. It is the most industrialized of the three cities and provides
jobs for more than 34,000 people. Since 1960, the city has grown at
an annual rate that exceeds 17 percent. The ma-jority of the develop-
ment has been along the South Fork of the Holston River.
B. ECONOMICS
A detailed study of the economic growth in eastern Tennessee and
western Virginia reported that manufacturing is the major industry,
employing 73,200 persons. Chemicals and allied products, apparel, and
textile products are the leading industries. The pulp and paper indus-
try is projected as having the major growth potential. Employment in
the region Is anticipated to increase from Its present rate of 31 per
100 population to 36 per 100 population by the year 2020.
C. HYDROLOGY
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has constructed a series of
-------
12
impoundments upstream of Kingsport on the South Fork of the Holston
River and its tributaries to control flooding and generate hydro-
electric power. The flow in the North Fork is unregulated. The
ft
20 year three-day low flow in the North Fork, recorded at Gate City,
Virginia, is 46 cfs, and the mean daily discharge is 851 cfs. The TVA
is required to release water from Fort Patrick Henry Dam to maintain a
minimum daily flow of 450 cfs in the South Fork of the Holston River.
However, the Tennessee Eastman Company requires a minimum daily stream
flow of 750 cfs for process and cooling water. The company purchases
the additional water from the TVA.
* The Tennessee Water Quality Criteria are applied on the basis of two
definitions of minimum flow: (1) unregulated streams—3-day minimum,
20-year recurrence interval, and (2) regulated streams—instantaneous
minimum.
-------
13
V. APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS
A. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
The Holston River, an interstate stream, and the South Fork of the
Holston River are used for public water supply, industrial water supply,
recreation, hydroelectric power, agricultural purposes, and receipt of
treated wastes. Within the study area, al] the rivers and streams investi-
gated, with the exception of Hales Branch (not classified) and North
Fork are classified as suitable for "Fish and Aquatic Life." In addi-
tion, the llolston River downstream (KM 131.5) from Kingsnort is classi-
fied as "Domestic Raw Water Supply." [The Tennessee Water Quality
Criteria are contained in Appendix A.]
The criteria and standards require that all wastes will receive
the best practicable treatment (secondary or equivalent) or control
according to the policy and procedure of the Tennessee Water Quality
ConLrol Board. A degree of treatment greater than secondary, when
necessary to protect the water uses, will be required for selected
sewage and waste discharges.
Specific standards applicable to this survey include:
1. Dissolved Oxygen—The dissolved oxygen shall be maintained
at 5.0 mg/1 except in limited sections of the stream receiving
*
treated effluent. In these limited sections, a minimum of
3.0 mg/1 dissolved oxygen shall be allowed. [These limited
sections are mixing zones which refer to that section of the
* The EPA has requested that Tennessee upgrade Water Quality Criteria
for these sections to 5.0 mg/1 DO and to establish a fecal coliform
criteria of 2,000/100 ml for water classified for fish and aquatic life.
-------
14
flowing stream or impounded waters necessary for effluents
to become dispersed. The mixing zone necessary in each parti-
cular case shall be defined by the Tennessee Water Quality Control
Board.] The dissolved oxygen content shall be measured at mid-
depth in waters having a total depth of ten (10) feet or less
and at a depth of five (5) feet in waters having a total depth
of greater than ten (10) feet. Minimum dissolved oxygen content
of 6.0 mg/1 shall be maintained in recognized trout streams.
2. pH—The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.5 to 8.5 and
shall not. fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in Lhis range over a
period of 24 hours.
3. Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits.—There shall be no dis-
tinctly visible solids, scun, toan, oily slick, or the formation
of slimes, bottom deposils or sludpe banks of such si7C or
character that mjy 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 3°C relative to an upstream control point. The temper-
ature of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C and the maximum
rate of change shall not exceed 2°C per hour. The temperature
of recognized trout waters shall not exceed 20°C. There shall
be no abnormal temperature changes that may affect aquatic
life unless caused by natural conditions. The temperature
-------
15
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.
B. FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972
Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments oT 1972
(FWPCAA), existing water quality standards for interstate waters are
preserved. In addition, the Act requires the preparation of water qua-
lity standards applicable to intrastate waters. The existing mechanism
for State establishment, Federal review and promulgation and review of
water quality standards is continued.
Hales Branch, a tributary to the South Fork of the Holston River,
falls within this intrastate category; water quality standards must
therefore be established.
The Act also provides that all point sources of pollution other
than publicly owned treatment works, which discharge directly into the
-------
16
Nation's waters are required to achieve, not later than July 1, 1977,
effluent limitations which shall require the application of the "best
practicable control technology currently available." The same point
sources must achieve effluent limitations which shall require the appli-
cation of the "best available technology economically achievable" by
July 1983. Point sources discharging into publicly owned treatment
works must comply with pretreatment standards as prescribed by the EPA.
EPA will also limit the discharge of pollutants determined to be toxic
and where appropriate may require an absolute prohibition of the dis-
charge of such toxic pollutants.
Publicly owned treatment works must meet effluent limitations by
July 1, 1977 which are based on "secondary treatment." as defined by EPA.
By July 1, 1983, public plants must meet "best practicable waste treat-
ment technology."
The established effluent limitations for each individual point
source will be applied as conditions of permits to be issued under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System as established by the Act.
In cases where the prescribed effluent limitations will not achieve
a level of water quality consistent with vater quality standards and
suitable for swimming and sustaining a balanced population of fish,
shellfish and wildlife, EPA may impose more stringent effluent limita-
tions as may be necessary to achieve that goal.
-------
17
VI. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA A
A. GENERAL
The Hols ton Army Ammunition Plant (HAAP) is located on two separate
sites (Area A and Area B) in the vicinity of Kingsport, Tennessee. Area
A, within the corporate boundaries of Kingsport, occupies about 134 acres
and borders on the South Fork of the Holston River [Figure 1], Area A
abuts industrial properties of the Tennessee Eastman Company (TEC) and
the ASG Industries.
Area A is the organic acid manufacturing facility of HAAP, whereas
Area B is the nitric acid and exnlosives manufacturing facility. Major
processes at HAAP, Area A, include the manufacture and refining of
acetic anhydride and the concentrating and refining of acetic acid,
principally recovered from HAAP, Area B.
HAAP is the only munitions plant under the auspices of the Army
Procurement and Supply Agency (APSA) that is devoted to the manufacture
of RDX-HMX explosives. RDX and HMX are admixed with THT (TNT being
received from the outside) and various chemicals, densensitizing agents,
fillers, etc., for primary use in manufacturing military explosives.
Additionally, explosives are prepared for the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration. HAAP reports the manufacture of about 50 RDX-HMX
product variations of which Composition B is the most prominent; it is
an extremely powerful explosive made up of RDX, TNT, and wax.
At Area A, waste acetic acid from Area B is concentrated, refined
and re-used in process operations. Areas A and B, are interconnected
by a railroad spur that is part of the ClinchOeld Railroad System and
-------
18
by a scries of stainless steel pipelines laid along the railroad tracks
which convey raw materials and intermediate products between the two
manufacturing facilities.
The Holston Army Ammunition Plant, owned by the Department of the
Army, is operated and managed by the Holston Defense Corporation (HDC -
a subsidiary of the Tennessee Eastman Company) on a contractual agreement
with the Department of the Army. Line command proceeds downward from
the Department of the Army through Army Materials Command (AMC) to the
Army Ammunition Procurement and Supply Agency (APSA), then Munitions
Command (MUCOM), and then to HAAP.
The Department of the Army has undertaken a long-term program for
modernizing its munitions and loading facilities. This modernization
program, under APSA, spans from 1969-1980 at a projected cost of
$2.5 billion. The largest aspects of the program are mechanization,
replacement, new construction, and pollution abatement. Modernization
program funding is controlled by Congressional appropriation to the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for military construction, i.e., MCA. The
Army is responsible for funding pollution abatement measures necessary
to conform to State standards and criteria; the requirements under
Federal legislation and Executive Order 11507; and most recently, the
best practicable control technology currently available and best avail-
able treatment measures as described in the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972.
HAAP Areas A and B are operated continuously and are staffed by two
Army officers, AO Civil Service personnel, and approximately 1,950 employees
-------
19
of the Holston Defense Corporation. During late 1972, the 11AAP manufac-
turing facilities were being operated at around 43 percent of full
capacity.
Permit applications under the 1899 Refuse Act have previously been
filed with the U. S. Corps of Engineers for all waste discharges from
HAAP, Areas A and B. There are 13 waste outfalls from Area A and 8
outfalls from Area B.
EPA personnel from NFIC-Denver and Cincinnati, and Region IV,
Atlanta, Georgia together with Tennessee State Health Department repre-
sentatives met with HAAP personnel at Kingsport, Tennessee, on 16 October
1972. They discussed process operations and the pollution potential of
existing wastewater streams. Considerable information was obtained but
Federal and State representatives did not view the process or wastewater
operations. Subsequently, the EPA personnel conducted industrial site
and river water pollution surveys. Area A, was studied from 30 November
to 3 December 1972. Mr. Robert Banner, Jr., Chemical Engineer at HDC;
provided information and assistance during the industrial surveys.
B. UTILITIES AND WATER SUPPLY
HAAP, Area A, purchases electricity, potable water (approximately
200,000 gal./day), and domestic sewer services from the City of Kingsport.
Area A has a central steam generating plant consisting of seven boilers
fired by "non" low sulfur content coal. Furnace fly ash is slurried
into a 4 ft by A ft settling compartment followed by a 10 ft by 20 ft
pit having continuous overflow. Coal is also utilized in the manufac-
ture of producer gas at HAAP A. The producer gas is added to the
-------
20
cracking furnaces in forming the acetic anhydride. Producer gas is
basically a gaseous fuel formed from the incomplete combustion of coal
or coke, and consisting mostly of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, hydrogen
and carbon dioxide. It is also a viable source of phenolics in re-
sulting wastewaters.
Various amounts of water for cooling and process needs are withdrawn
from the South Fork of the Holston River; previously reported figures
on total withdrawals vary considerably. River water is diverted into
a canal located on the south bank of the South Fork and originating a
short distance upstream of the Tennessee Eastman Company waste outfalls.
River water enters Area A via a pump station with attendant trash racks.
A portion of this flow is treated on-site. Average river water intake
varies from about 45 to 65 mgd. The cooling water (once-through) flows
for the total facility range from 42 to 60 mgd; process water flows
range from 0.8 to 4.4 mgd. The wide range in water use figures report-
edly is due to the lack of precise measurement of incoming water flows.
This study assumes that approximately 42 mgd is employed for once-
through cooling and 0.8-0.9 mgd for processing at Area A. Furthermore,
recent data front HAAP indicate that about 1.5 mgd of intake water is
treated (softened and filtered) of which about 0.8 mgd is used for
boiler feed and 0.7 mgd for process waters. Spent cooling waters, water-
works filter sludges, and industrial process wastewaters from Area A
are discharged without treatment to the South Fork of the Holston River.
C. PROCESS OPERATIONS AND WASTE SOURCES
The general layout of manufacturing buiIdings at Area A is shown
-------
21
in Figure 2. A simplified flow sheet of Area A is presented in Figure 3.
The major processes conducted at Area A are as follows:
1. Concentration and refining of waste acetic acid (received from
HAAP B) by means of azeotropic distillation units in Building 2
yields an acetic acid whose concentration is increased from
60 percent to approximately 99 percent pure (glacial acetic
acid). About one-third of the glacial acetic acid is returned
to Area B for explosives manufacturing; two-thirds are employed
in the manufacture (within Area A) of 98 percent acetic anhydride.
Interim storage of the refined acid (99 percent pure) is pro-
vided for in the tank farm areas.
2. Acetic anhydride manufacturing is carried out (in Buildings 7
and 20) by first catalytically cracking glacial acetic acid in
special cracking furnaces (fueled by producer gas) and secondly
absorbing the cracking products in glacial acetic acid to yield
the crude anhydride, which is then refined (Building 6).
3. Generation of producer gas (Building 10) is carried out upon
demand by the cracking furnaces in the acetic anhydride manu-
facturing processes.
4. Refining of the crude anhydride by distillation (Building 6)
produces a high purity acetic anhydride, required for the
various explosives manufacturing operations in HAAP. Area B.
It should be noted that Building 6 has two distinct functions:
a) acetic anhydride refining and b) azeotropic distillation to
purify and concentrate acetic acid.
-------
OPEN D ITCH
AS6 INDUSTRIES
WASTEWATER EFFLUENT
ACETIC
ANHYDRIDE
REFINING
ACETIC
ANHYDRIDE
MANUFACTURING
BLDGS 7 & 20
ACETIC
ACID
CONCEN
TRATION
BLDG 2
TANK
FARM
BLDGS
TANK
FARM
TANK
FARM
ACETIC
ACID
CONCEN
TRATION
BLDG 6
PRODUCT GAS
PLANT BLDG 10
MAIN TANK FARM
A SAMPLING STATION
3 (MANHOLE)
FILTER PLANT
BLDG 9
FLY ASH PIT
(MANHOLE)
STEAM PLANT
BLDG 8
SLUICE PIT
PUMP
HOUSE
BLDG 11
DITCH FROM
TAR TANKS
NOT TO SCALE
SOUTH FORK HOUSTON RIVER
Figure 2. Plant Layout-Holston Army Ammunition Plant-Area A
Kingsport, Tennessee
-------
DILUTE (61%)
ACETIC ACID
(TRO.'I AREA 3)
ACETIC
_v,i ACID
GLACIAL
ACETIC ACID
(TO AREA E)
A
CCI CENTRATION
(ELDG 2)
GLACiAL
ACETIC
i CVO
PRODUCER
CAS
TLA^T
ULDG 1C)
GT.ACI -.1
ACE1IC
j A'TiiDRITE
It A "LI CTURE
i (ri..-»rs> v & 20)
CRUDE
ANHYDRIDE
DILU ^
ACETIC
ANHYDRIDE
(TO AREA B)
A
ACETIC ACID
ACETIC
AKnYDRIDE
?EF liCIKG
(ELDG 6)
ACETIC
ACID
CONCENTRATION
(BLOC 6)
/CC~IC
ArID
Figure 3. SIMPLIFIED FLOWSHEET-ARE A A, HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT
Courtesy of USAEHA, Edpewood Arsenal,
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland
Taken from USAEHA Study No. 24-021-71/72
-------
22
5. Mechanical refrigeration services (Building 5)
6. Generation of steam with coal fired boilers (Building 8) pro-
vides for the needs of the entire HAAP, Area A complex.
Acetic Acid Concentration and Refining—Building 2
In azeotropic distillation, the nearly pure acetic acid is with-
drawn from the bottom of the column, and the rt-propylacetate-and-water
mixture is removed from the top of the column and condensed. Separation
of water from the acetate is accomplished by decantation. The propyl
acetate is then returned to the azeotropic distillation column. The
decanted waters are passed through a flash column for further solvent
recovery before they are discharged to the sewer.
During distillation there is a undesirable buildup of solids in the
distillation column. Sludge bleedoff is necessary, with this material
being sent to a sludge-heating operation. Under elevated temperature
and vacuum, additional acetic acid is distilled arid recovered via the
overhead streams until the acid concentration falls below the level
deemed economically recoverable. At this point the sludges arc dumped
into the sewer. Sludge heating is a batch operation. Exhausted sludges
are dumped sporadically, between two to four times each week. Occas-
sionally spent sludges contain heavy metals (including Cr, Cu, Fe, and
Mn) from the corrosive destruction of materials which form the distil-
lation columns.
Flash column effluent waters and sludge heater wastes are cited in
the 1971 Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (AEHA) Report as totaling
24,000 gpd and 16,000 gpw, respectively. However, the 1971 MUCOM
-------
23
report for HAAP reports a process wastewater flow of 312,000 gpd from
Building 2 (also, presumably for the decant waters). These process
effluents range in pH from 2.8 to 3.8 and contain nitromethane, methyl
nitrate, acetic acid, n-propyl acetate, nitric acid and trace amounts
of explosives.
Cooling and condensing water usage (in Building 2) for the distil-
lation units and peripheral operations are estimated as 24.0 mgd. Acetic
acid (99 percent) production is about 1.3 to 1.6 million lb/day. Cooling
waters, process waters and sludges are mixed in the Building 2 indus-
trial sewer and discharged into the "Main Outfall Ditch" adjacent to
Building 2. This ditch was sampled at Station 2 during the NFIC-D,
1972 survey, immediately before its entry into the South Fork of the
Holston River [Figure 2],
Another pollution source from the acetic acid operations (Building
6), is vent gns from the azeotropic distillation columns. Under current
production rates, these vent gases contain about 530 lb/day of methyl
nitrate liberated in a total, untreated mixture of nitromethane, methyl
acetate, propyl formate, propyl acetate and methyl nitrate. The weight
of solvent vapors vented to the atmosphere approaches some 1,070 lb/day.
Methyl nitrate is toxic and highly explosive.
Acetic Anhydride Manufacturing—Buildings 7 and 20
Glacial acetic acid (from Building 2) is vaporized and fed to the
cracking furnace (in Buildings 7 and 20) together with triethyl phos-
phate, a reaction catalyst. Furnace vapors are passed through a con-
denser which separates the process stream into a) uncondensed vapors and
-------
24
b) unreacted acetic acid obtained from the bottom of the condenser.
The unreacted acid is sent to Building 6 for re-concentration.
Uncondensed vapors are directed through a series of five scrubbing
units; the primary, secondary, anhydride, weak acid and water scrubbers.
The scrubbers employ recycling of feed, bottoms, and intermediate product
streams. The vapor stream is scrubbed with glacial acetic acid, and
ketene originating from catalytic cracking is absorbed to form the anhy-
dride. Crude anhydride is taken off the bottom of the secondary scrub-
ber and subsequently sent to the distillation unit (Building 6) for re-
fining. Wastewaters from acetic anhydride production (Buildings 7 and
20) are principally generated at the fifth (i.e. the water) scrubbing
unit. Vapors entering the fifth unit are scrubbed with water; after a
single pass they enLer a drain sump and the plant sewer. Non-conden-
sables off the top of the fifth unit are captured in a barometric con-
denser that likewise discharges to the drain sump. Both the barometric
system and drain sump arc vented to rid the production area of noxious
fumes. It is likely that drips, leaks, spills, etc., in the production
area are also directed to the drain sump.
Spent gases from the cracking furnaces are sent to a waste heat
boiler that receives deionized water for low pressure steam generation.
Flue gas from the boiler, in addition to any unburned producer gas, is
directly vented to the atmosphere.
The flow of the process wastewater streams that include the water
scrubber discharges and barometric condensates previously mentioned
ranges from 500,000 to 550,000 gpd. These wastewater streams are
-------
25
reported to contain acetic anhydride, acetic acid, acetaldehyde,
acetonitrile, methyl acetate, methyl nitrate, ethanol, methanol, ethyl
acetate, propanol, propyl acetate, etc. A previous Array report equates
the water scrubber discharge to 3,100 lb BOD/day.
The volume of the cooling waters for anhydride manufacturing amount
to 2.0 to 2.3 mgd which are mixed with process wastewaters in the
building sewer for discharge to the South Fork of the Holston River.
These discharges were collectively measured and analyzed at the Process
Waste Outfall (Station 3) during the EPA survey, 30 November-3 December
1972. The conditions just expressed are representative of acetic
anhydride production rates in the range of about 510,000 to 640,000 lb/day.
Pollutants similar to those found in the wastewater streams can be
expected in the various off-scream gases vented to the atmosphere (from
Buildings 7 and 20). Of the contaminants resulting from anhydride manu-
facturing some 16,500 lb/day of air pollutants are estimated to be cur-
rently discharged (from Buildings 7 and 20); this total is comprised of
5,440 lb/day of hydrocarbons, 6,360 lb/day of carbon monoxide and
4,700 lb/day of carbon dioxide mixed with hydrogen.
Producer Gas Plant—Building 10
Producer gas manufacturing facilities (Building 10) are rated at a
capacity of about 2.0 million cubic feet of gas per day. A heated, satu-
rated steam-air mixture is added to coal, burning in the gas producer
furnaces, where combustion is maintained around 1,100°F. Ashes are
withdrawn from the bottom of the furnaces and disposed of by removal to
a landfill.
-------
26
The products of this combustion pass through water sprays, a tar
trap, and then into two large water scrubbing units in series. Scrub-
bing removes dust, tars, phenolics, etc. from the gases but these pol-
lutants then find their way into the wastewater flows. Spent water from
the header sprays and the scrubbing units is decanted for removal of
tars which are sent to the steam plant as fuel. Decanter effluents
flow through a cascade cooler prior to being recycled to the sprays and
scrubbers or are discharged to the plant sewer. Total water usage and
ensuing wastewater discharges associated uith the manufacture of pro-
ducer gas heavily depend upon the degree of recycling of decanter efflu-
ents back into the system. The Army reports that flows of "excess"
cooling and condenser water from the producer gas building amount to
from 170,000-180,000 gpd. Flow measurements made at Station 4 during
the 1972 EPA survey (November-December) 1972 indicate the wastewater
contribution from Building 10 was many times higher than that reported
by the Army. However, wastewater loads from this plant, as measured at
both Stations 3 and 4 (EPA survey stations), were reflected, within the
results obtained.
Other pollution sources within the producer gas area include sludges
from an on-site evaporator and cleanout of the tar traps. These materials
are disposed of at a sanitary landfill. Air contaminants from the pro-
ducer gas furnace vent gases include particulate matter, and sulfur and
nitrogen oxides.
General operations data indicate that approximately 56 cu ft of
producer gas are obtained for each pound of coal burned and that about
-------
27
14.3 cubic feet of producer gas are consumed per pound of crude acetic
anhydride formed.
Acetic Anhydride Refining—Building 6
Building 6 actually houses two different process operations:
acetic anhydride refining, accomplished by distillation, and acetic
acid concentration accomplished by azeotropic distillation. Anhydride
refining constitutes the major operation. Crude anhydride is received
from the dehydration process (Buildings 7 and 20) or from storage tanks,
whereas the low-grade acetic acid is obtained as a by-product of the
anhydride refining columns.
Crude anhydride, acetic acid and impurities are received into
two-stage refining columns heated in the lower stage. Refined anhydride
is withdrawn from the lower stage, sent to a second (small) column for
removal of color bodies, and is then ready for storage or pipeline
transport to I1AAP, Area B. The vapors from the top of the two-stage
anhydride column contain acetic acid, 15 percent anhydride plus some
impurities. This vapor is condensed, part being returned to the
refining column and the majority sent to a stripping column. In
stripping, separation is made into a) acetic acid and anhydride (off
the bottom of the stripper) which arc returned to the refining column,
and b) 90-percent acetic acid vapors off the top of the stripper. These
vapors serve as the feed for the azeotropic stills (located in Building 6).
Azeotropic distillation of acetic acid for purification and concen-
tration is similar to that performed in Building 2 (production of 99 per-
cent pure acid). In Building 6 the acetic acid feed to the stills contains
-------
28
low-boiling compounds that must be removed before azeotropic distil-
lation. Prior to distillation, the feed is passed through a stripping
column, to reduce the low boilers and release these compounds to the
atmosphere. Vented streams contain acetonitrile, methyl acetate, acetal-
dehyde, methanol, ethanol, methyl nitrate, ethyl acetate, propanol and
propyl acetate, all of which then become air pollutants. Other sources
of air pollution exist in Building 6. The major source is the azeotropic
stills, for which there is no waste load information presently available.
Sludge bottoms from the various stills in Building 6 are recovered.
Sludges from the refining columns are sent to a ball mill, then heated
under vacuum to distill off additional acetic anhydride. When the
anhydride falls below an economically recoverable level, the sludges
are dumped to the sewer, a daily occurrence. Sludges from the azeotropic
stills, because of their anhydride origin, receive preparatory treatment
by sulfuric acid to break down the acetamide in the sludges. The sludges
arc then sent to sludge heaters and handled in a similar fashion to
those in the acetic acid purification process (Building 2). In like
manner exhausted azeotropic still sludges are eventually discharged into
the plant sewer.
Process wastewater sources from anhydride refining (Building 6)
include a) 70,000 gpd ball mill sludges containing carbon polymers,
acetic anhydride, etc.; b) 8,100 gpd of sludge heater sludges that are
dumped four times per week — containing carbon, ammonium phosphate,
acetamide, and various polymers; and c) flash column effluent, in the
acetic acid concentration area, having unknown volume but found to
-------
29
contain acetone, ethyl acetate, acetonitrile, and methyl cyanide.
Total spent cooling and condensing waters from anhydride refining
(Building 6) are estimated by the Army as around 9.5 mgd. All spent
flows leaving Building 6 are untreated and mixed together in the indus-
trial plant sewer. These streams were collectively analyzed with other
wastewaters passing Station 2 during the EPA 1972 survey. Conditions
described are representative of acetic anhydride production in the
range of 600,000 to 700,000 lb/day and acetic acid production of
120,000 to 150,000 lb/day.
Mechanical Refrigeration—Building 5
The anhydride scrubber medium (in Buildings 7 and 20) is cooled
by an ethylene glycol solution. The glycol, after use, is cooled by
mechanical refrigeration equipment (located in Building 5) and, in a
closed loop system, is returned to the anhydride units. Spent cooling
waters from the refrigeration operation (Building ^>) have been esti-
mated to range from 0.164 to 2.3 mgd. These waters are expected to
contain substantial amounts of heat.
Steam Generation at Steam Plant—Building 8
Except for a single boiler that employs pulverized coal, steam-
producing boilers (Building 8) are stoker fired. Tar sludges received
from the producer gas bulling are also put into the boilers. Boiler
feed consists of a mixture of deionized water and return steam con-
densates. In order to minimize corrosion in the boilers, sodium sulfite
is added to the feed waters. Sodium phosphate is added directly to the
-------
30
boiler drums to reduce corrosion and scale formation on the boiler tubes.
The boilers are blovn down more or less continuously so as to prevent too
high a solids concentration in the boiler system. Both high and low-
pressure steam are produced for needs throughout Area A. Compressed
air requirements for Area A are met by equipment within Building 8.
Spent ashes from the bottom of the boilers are slurried into an
ash pit followed by a sluice pit. The overflow from the sluice pit is
estimated from 100,000 to 140,000 gpd; the flow was sampled at EPA
survey Station 10. The Army describes this water as strong in phosphates
and sulfites. Pumo gland drainage from the water pumping house adjacent
to the steam plant also contributed a considerable amount of flow passing
EPA Station 10.
Boiler blowdown is released into the drainway, monitored by
Station 9 during the EPA survey. This discharge reportedly has a high
temperature and contains significant quantities of phosphates, sulfates
and sulfites. The Army has provided a flow fipure for boiler blowdown
(from Building 8) of approximately 30,000 gpd although survey results
for Station 9 indicated some 690,000 gpd; this reflects additive wastes
such as general washdown and cleanup waters, spills, leaks, or unknown
water uses.
Coal tars recovered from the producer-gas building are conveyed to
storage tanks directly adjacent to the steam plant. Tar deposits on the
grounds around the storage tanks are slowly leached into the drainway
on the southeast side of the steam plant and eventually discharged to
the South Fork of the Holston River. This drainage was sampled at EPA
-------
31
Station 8 and shown to be very heavily laden with organics, notably
phenolics.
Relative to air pollution from the coal-fired steam plant, substantial
abatement could be indicated in the forthcoming period of time. MUCOM,
in the 1971 survey of HAAP, Indicated that discharge of air pollutants
from the boilers amounts to 16,000 lb/day of particulates, 8,000 lb/day
of sulfur oxides, plus unknown amounts of other materials.
D. REFUSE ACT PERMIT APPLICATION (RAPP) DATA
Wastewater characteristics submitted by HAAP in May 1971 have been
summarized [Table 1], The summary also includes the total waste loads
determined by the U. S. Army Environmental Agency (USAEA) and corresponding
RAPP and EPA 1972 survey station numbers.
Of the 13 RAPP outfalls, two are inactive (010 and 011) and three
(002, 003, and 004) discharge sludge (from the settling basins within
the waterworks) to the River, only once every three or four months.
However, to say that the waterworks discharge minimum amounts of coagu-
lated sludge is not necessarily true. In fact, it is highly probable
that large amounts of settled sludge are being continuously swept out
of the sedimentation basins and onto the waterworks filters. The large
majority of these chemical sludges are likely being flushed to the river
on a routine daily basis via the unloading and backwashing of the filter
beds through RAPP outfall 005 (EPA 1972 Survey Station 6).
RAPP Outfall 013 (EPA Station 2) reflects the addition of some
0.52 mgd wastewater from ASG Industries introduced upstream of HAAP
into this "Main Outfall Ditch," which in turn discharges into the South
-------
TA3LE 1
OUTFALL CHARACTERISTICS FROM RAFP APPLICATION, HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT - AREA A
KINCSPORT, TENNESSEE
RAPP
Outfall
EPA
Stn.
Flow
BOD
COD
SS
NHi-N
NO-,-N
P-
-Total
N'utdct
Ho..5/
n5d
ms/1
lb/day
n(*/l
lb/dav
t/1
lb/day
Tq/1 lb/day
ni»/l lb/day
mj?/l
lb/day
001
3,4
4.9
4
163
47
1,909
18
731
-
1 40
1
49
002
b/
0.3
56
140
1,233
3,032
8,112
20,274
-
-
-
-
003
b/
0.3
56
140
1,233
3,082
8,112
20,274
-
-
-
-
004
b/
0.3
1
4
-
-
22
55
-
-
-
-
005
6
0.05
5
2
62
26
50
21
-
-
-
-
006
7
0.01
84
7
276
23
96
8
-
-
-
-
007
b/
0.03
5
1
320
80
20
5
-
-
-
-
008
8
0.0005
-
-
3,600
15
-
-
-
-
-
-
009^
9
-
-
-
-
-
8
4
-
-
-
-
012
10
1.1
2
20
69
634
85
781
-
-
-
-
013
2
33.3
34
9,443
60
16,663
93
25,828
10 278
12 333
15
417
TOTALS
40.3
9,920
25,514
67,981
278
373
466
TOTALS
USAEHA
FROM .
rzporx-
37.6
9,359
13,200
6,060
650
259
a/ These station nunbers refer to the 1972 study,
b/ Thi*? out fall was not aanpled.
c/ Outfalls 010 and Oil are inactive discharges.
d/ This refers to the U.S. Anry Environmental Hygiene Agency Report (19 March - 28 June 1971).
-------
33
Fork of the Holston River. [For EPA 1972 Survey Stations, see Figure 2.]
E. DISCUSSION OF 1972 EPA FINDINGS
During the EPA field sampling survey of 30 November to 3 December
1972 ten wastewater sampling stations were established [Figure 2 and
Table 2]. Major wastewater streams include Stations 2, 3, and 4.
Stations 2 through 4 and 7 through 10 were manually sampled at two-hr
intervals for 72 consecutive hours beginning at 8:00 AM, 30 November.
[See Appendix B for description of Sampling Procedure.] These grab samples
were composited on an equal volume basis into three 24-hr composite samples.
At Station 6 the ion exchange regeneration wastes and filter backwash from
the water works were grab sampled at times of discharge. Unnamed Creek
(background location) and the plant raw water intake, respectively Sta-
tions 1 and 11, were sampled twice daily and composited into daily samples.
Data on waste loads from ASG Industries (discharges into open ditch that
flows into the main outfall ditch) was obtained with concurrent sampling
and were extracted from the results of the 1972 NFIC-D & C survey findings
on ASG Industries.
At Stations 2, 3, and 7 through 10 special samples for analyses of
oil and grease and of phenolic materials were taken every two hr and
continuously composited over a 24 hr period. At Station 6 grab samples
for oil and grease analysis were collected twice each day and composited
into a daily sample. Temperature, pH, and conductivity were measured
each time a sample was collected. [See Appendix C for Methods of Anal-
ysis and Sample Preservation.]
EPA flow measurements were made at the following stations:
-------
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
TABLE 2
EPA SAMPLING STATIONS, HAAP, AREA A, KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
EPA SURVEY OF 30 NOVEMBER-3 DECEMBER 1972
Refuse Act Permit
Discharge Number
Type
Sample
Station Location
013
001
001
2 Grab/Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Unnamed Creek, upstream from confluence with
HAAP "A" discharge
Main Outfall stream, at chain like fence near
river bank
Process waste outfall at manhole 8, prior to
mixing with "manhole 7 wastes" and discharge
to South Fork of the Holston River
Process waste outfall at manhole 7, prior to
mixing with "manhole 8 wastes" and discharge
to the river.
005
Grabs
Zeolite regeneration wastes and backwash from
waterworks
006
008
009
012
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Process waste outfall to the river originating
from main tank farm
Leached wastes from area of tar tanks on dis-
charge line close to the river bank
Floor drainage and steam-plant effluent at
manhole on outfall.
Discharge from steam plant, principally an ash
pit overflow, together with pump gland drainage
originating from (water) pump house
2 Grab/Composite
Raw water intake into water works
-------
35
1. Stations 3, 4, 7 - measured every 2 hr with a Marsh-McBirney
electromagnetic water-current meter.
2. Stations 1 and 2 - gaged several times daily and rating curves
were established.
3) Station 8 - flow recorder was installed for continuous
measurement.
Flow data for remaining sampling stations were extracted from HAAP
records and/or generally compiled from special Array studies.
The EPA 1972 survey revealed a total (net) wastewater discharge
from HAAP, Area A, of 43.3 mgd, but the 43.3 mgd does not include ASG
Industrial Wastewater discharges and the natural flow in Unnamed Creek,
that contribute to overall flows in the "Main Outfall Ditch." The RAPP
applications reported a total water intake of 65 mgd pumped from the
South Fork of the Hols ton River. Because the USAEHA 1971 waste survey
showed only 37.6 mgd of wastewaters being discharged from Area A, liDC
decided to measure, during June to July 1972, the total pJant intake
water with pitot tubes during June-July, 1971, and consequently the
survey showed an average intake flow of 48.7 mgd. Of course the EPA
figure of 43.3 mgd reflects spent waters leaving HAAP, Area A, and
does not take into account water lost in product, evaporation and
steam losses, and some 0.35 mgd of pumphouse trash rack wastewater.
The complex nature of pollutants contained in the wastewater from
Areas A and B, presented unusual difficulty to EPA personnel who con-
ducted the analyses. It is likely that the important waste characteri-
zation parameters of BOD, COD, and TOC were affected in varying degree
-------
36
by the kind of wastewaters encountered. Many HAAP wastes arc relatively
non-biodegradable and are potentially toxic to biological life, hence
yielding comparatively low BOD values. The presence of acetic acid,
straight-chain aliphatics and aromatic hydrocarbons all of which are
prevalent in HAAP wastes, are relatively resistant to COD measurement.
Survey results for TOC were noted as exceptionally low relative to the
BOD and COD values, leading one to suspect some interference in these
determinations. Procedural difficulties were also experienced in
undertaking the complex organic analyses. Refined analytical methods
and possibly some research on modified analytical techniques, directed
specifically to HAAP-type wastewaters, would seem advisable. Results
for BOD, COD, and TOC, obtained from the EPA 1972 sampling survey, are
considered to represent the near minimum values.
Specific water and wastewater sampling results obtained from the
30 November to 3 December 1972 EPA survey of the HAAP A installation are
discussed as follows: [The summary of analytical data from the EPA
survey is presented in Table 3.]
Unnamed Creek At Station 1
This creek had a natural average flow of 0.69 mgd, and the water
quality was similar to that found in the South Fork of the Holston River
(as compared to plant water intake at Station 11) except for slight
increases in values of BOD and conductivity.
Main Outfall From HAAP, Area A, Station 2
The main outfall from Station 2 collects the majority of spent
-------
TAELE 3
SUMMARY OF FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLSTON" ARMY AMMUNITION' PIJVNT AREA A
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
1-3 DLCEIUER 19 72
Station Nunber 1 2 3 4
/
Station Description—
Process
Waste and
Unnamed Creek Upstream
Main Outfall Ditch
Process Waste Outfall
Cooling Water Outfall
(RM 142,
.15/4.04)
(RM 142.
.15/4.04)
(RM 142,
.15/4.30)
(RM 142
.15/4.30)
b /
ParaTetcir-
Range
Avctape
Range
Average
Ranr.e
Average
Ranse
Average
Flow (mgd)
0.52-0.96
0.69
33.5-33.7
33.6
3.97-5.40
4.65
3.88-4.96
4.40
pH (standard units) , range
6.9-7.0
6.2-7.6
6.2-7.4
6.1-7.5
Temperature ("C), range
5.5-6.0
18.0-20.0
14.0-16.0
14.0-17.0
Conductivity (iimhos/cm) , range
320-480
160-300
200-350
180-360
BOD
2.4-5.8
3.80
56-71
65
20-75
41
4.6-12
8.5
BOD (lb/day)
24
18,800
1,500
320
COD
64-66
65
TOC
6-8
6.7
6-11
8.7
4-29
14
Total Solids
193-326
276
133-164
147
123-138
132
125-211
160
Suspended Solid3
10-45
29
3-21
9.6
4-14
9
8-22
15
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
N.D.-'
190
2,700
350
520
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen-N
<0.5-0.5
<0.5
<0.5-0.5
<0.5
<0.5-0.6
<0.5
.Mi ,-N"
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D,.
1.0^
KO'1 + JiO,-N
0.5-1.8
0.9
0.8-1.9
1.3
0.8-1.0
0.9
1.0
NO, + NO^-N (lb/day)
6.30
354
35.0
36.7
ToEal Phosphorus-P
0.28-0.67
0.45
0.19-0.22
0.21
0.18-0.20
0.19
0.12-0.14
0.15
Total Phcsphorus-P (lb/day)
2.80
57.9
7.24
5.52
Oil and Grease
2-3
2
<1-2
<1
Phenols
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
-------
TABLE 3 (Cent.)
SUMMARY OF FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLSTON ARMY ATCTNTTION PLANT AREA A
KIVCSPORT, TENNESSEE
1-3 DECEMBER 1972
Station N'unber
6
7
8
9
Station Description—
Filter Plant
Backvash
Tank Farm Was tes
Tar Tank
Area
Stean Plant
Effluent
(PjM 142 .15/4.25)
(KM 142
.15/4.24)
(RM 142.15/4.20)
(RM 142.15/4.19)
*>/
Paranetcr—
RanRG
Average
Ranp.e
Average
Ranf>e
Average
Ranee
Average
Flow (ngd)
0.04^
0.18
0.005-0 .008
0.007
0.695-'
pH (standard units), range
6.4-7.1
4.5-7.6
5.8-8.1
6.7-11.2
Temperature (°C), range
9.5-10.3
14.0-24.0
13.0-65.0
15.0-21.5
Conductivity (uraos/cm), range
280-360
200-460
500-26,000
220-640
BOD
22-36
29
20-32
26
>800->2,700
>2,030
6.9-7.2
7.1
BOD (lb/day)
9.7
37
>122
40
COD
4,800-10,600
7,957
TOC
7-18
12.5
3-7
5
1,300-2,800
2,130
3-8
5
Total Solids
229-475
352
72-268
173
2,400-5,300
4,020
196-202
199
Suspended Solids
118-236
177
7-57
25
64-98
84
15-47
27
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
59
29
4.5
160
Oil and Grease
<1-2
1
31-89
63
<1-3
2
Phenols
<0.01-0.04
0.023
1,100-5,800
3,600
1.3-5.0
2.1
Phenolics (lb/day)
202
12.1
OJ
CO
-------
TABLE 3 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF FIELD ?JCASURLMP,NTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLS TON AR'-'Y AMMUNITION PLANT AREA A
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
1-3 DCCE'fBER 19 72
Station Number 10 11
^ /
Station Description-
Sluice Pit Outfall
Raw Water Intake
(RM 142
.15/4.10)
(RM 142.
15/4.08)
Parameter^
R?nge
Average
Range
Average
Flow (mgd)
1.0^
48. 7-'
pH (standard units), range
6 .5-8.2
6.1-6.9
Temperature (°C), range
27.5-33,0
9.0-10.0
Conductivity (ymhos/cm), range
150-320
240-280
BOD
2.9-3.9
3.4
1.0-1.4
1.1
BOD (lb/day)
51—
28
460
COD
57
TOC
8-17
11
2-4
3.3
Total Solids
161-173
167
125-143 '
134
Suspended Solids
16-36
29
6-35
22
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
240
8,800
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen-N
<0.5-0.5
<0.5
NH -N
NO^ + NO -N
N.D,.
l.oi'
1.0
NO + NO^-N (lb/day)
406
Total Phosphorus-P
0.06-0.22
0.12
Total Phosphorus-P (lb/day)
47.4
Oil and Grease
<1-2
<1
aj See Table 2 for station description.
b/ All values reported as mg/1, except where otherwise sr>ecified.
c/ N.D. - None Detected,
d/ All values are the same.
ef The flow was determined from RAPP application,
f/ This is based on one value.
-------
40
cooling- and process-water flows from the Area A manufacturing facilities.
An average flow of 33.6 mgd was observed within the large drainway that
includes some 0.52 mgd wastewater flow contributed by the ASG Industries
and the respective flow of Unnamed Creek [Figure 2], The creek carries
a negligible waste load into the drainway, but the ASG pollution loads
are equivalent to 3,600 lb/day suspended solids added to the upper section
of the Main Outfall. However, some solids rapidly settle out, both with-
in the open drainage ditch and within parts of the Main Outfall. Near
its terminus point at Station 2 it was found to be conveying average
loads of 18,800 lb/day BOD; 18,200 lb/day COD; and 2,700 lb/day suspended
solids directly into the South Fork of the Holston River. Using any
criterion of measurement, these are very large waste loads. More than
90 percent of the total BOD and COD loads discharged from Area A were
found in this single outfall. Surprisingly so, at least during the
three-day survey, no phenolic materials were detected at this location,
and nutrient levels were fairly similar to background waters. No
detectable amounts of heavy metals were found at Station 2. However,
a number of metals sources exist within the IIAAP A complex, esnecially
from the sludge-heater system and corrosion of the aezotropic distil-
lation columns (Buildings 2 and 6). These could contribute to a metals
problem. Using fathead minnows as the test fish species, bioassay
studies were conducted on a 24-hr composite sample of the Main Outfall,
the 96-hr TLm (50 percent fish kill) obtained from static bioassays
was 56.0 percent of the wastewater concentration. When one considers
the magnitude of flow at Station 2, these toxicity results are highly
significant as will be explained later in this report.
-------
41
Two Process Waste Outfalls, Stations 3 and 4
Outfalls at Stations 3 and 4 are located in a vertical plane one
above the other and eventually join together prior to their combined
discharge into the South Fork of the Holston River. These outfalls
contain various spent process and cooling waters from the producer gas
plant (Building 10), and the acetic anhydride manufacturing areas
(Buildings 7 and 20). These two drains comprise the second largest BOD
load from Area A into the South Fork of the Holston River. The combined
discharge was about 9 mgd containing 1,820 lb/day BOD, 680 lb/day TOC,
and 870 lb/day of suspended solids.
0utfa31 At StatJ on 6
This outfall originates from the HAAP A waterworks and carries ion
exchange regeneration wastes and sludges from filter bed backwashing.
This outfall discharges on an irregular schedule. Previous data (from
the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency) indicate 40,000 gpd being
discharged via this outfall. A wide discrepancy exists between this
flow figure and the 1-million-gpu figure of waterworks sludge mentioned
in the November 1971 MUCOM report for HAAP A. Waste loads from this
outfall, at least as measured by the EPA Survey, were relatively minimal.
Still remaining are questions as to the frequency and magnitude of sludge
loads released from the other three waterworks outfalls. The dumping
of water treatment sludges into receiving streams is unsatisfactory.
Tank Farm Area Drainage, Station 7
Drainage from the main tank farm area (principally acetic acid
storage) averaged 188,000 gpd containing mean BOD and suspended solids
-------
42
loads of 37 lb/day and 38 lb/day, respectively. However the pH values
were somewhat erratic, ranging from 4.5 to 7.6. Spills and inadvertant
waste releases associated with HAAP chemical storage areas are treated
later in this report.
Tar Tank Storage Area, Station 8
The leachate and drainage accruing from the grounds around the tar
tank storage area, measured at Station 8, amounted to about 7,000 gpd
and was categorized as a noxious and heavy organic-laden waste stream.
Average BOD, COD, and TOC values were, respectively, greater than
2,030 mg/1, 7,960 nig/1, and 2,130 mg/1. Concentration of phenolics was
found to be 3,600 rag/1. This discharge, upon entering the South Fork
of the Holston River, caused an intense reddish coloration, detectable
about 100 yd into the main river. Waste loads in this outfall approxi-
mated 460 lb/day COD and 200 lb/day of phenolics. Flow-through bioassay
studies were conducted on this waste stream. Results, with fathead
minnows as the test species, disclosed that a 0.17 percent waste con-
centration would kill one-half of the test fish within 96 hr. This
toxicity is within the same range as some of the more potent pesticides.
Steam Power Plant, Station 9
Boiler blowdown and floor and miscellaneous drainage from the steam
power plant, as measured at Station 9, yielded an average discharge of
0,69 mgd, containing BOD, suspended solids, and phenolics loads amounting
to 40 lb/day, 160 lb/day and 12 lb/day, respectively. The phenolics
are probably attributable to coal tar and/or coal used as fuel for the
boilers.
-------
43
Ash Pit Overflow and Pump Seepage, Station 10
Ash pit overflow (originating from the steam plant), together
with packing gland seepage from pumps in the water intake house, were
measured at Station 10. HAAP recorded an average flow of 1.0 mgd for
Station 10 during the EPA survey. Sluice pits used for settling the
ash slurry (from the steam plant) represent the only external waste
treatment presently found in Area A. Waste loads being discharged to
the South Fork of the Hols ton River approximated 240 lb/day suspended
solids and 470 lb/day COD. Oil and grease values were negligible. The
EPA survey results suggest that unreported waste sources may be contri-
buting to this outfall.
Raw Water Supply, Station 11
The raw water supply for Area A pumped from the South Fork of the
Ilolston River, Station 11, was approximately 46.7 mgd, according to
special HDC pitot tube studies that have been partially substantiated
by EPA and USAE11A calculations. The incoming river water was reported
to be of good quality with a BOD of 1.1 mg/1 and with 22 mg/1 of sus-
pended solids. Nutrient levels were low with the exception of 1.0 mg/1
of nitrite-nitrate, indicating some enrichment from upstream sources.
A summation of wastewater loads from Area A, for the period of
the EPA survey, discloses that 20,300 lb/day BOD, and 4,060 lb/day of
suspended solids were collectively being discharged to the South Fork
of the Holston River. Included in the suspended solids load was
3,600 lb/day being contributed by ASG Industries to the upper section
of the Main HAAP Outfall, although much of this load actually settled
-------
44
out in the open (ASG) ditch before reaching the main outfall. As
mentioned previously in this report, the mean total volume of wastewater
discharge from the overall HAAP Area A was 43.3 mgd. This figure excludes
the flow contribution from Unnamed Creek and the ASG wastewaters.
Comparison of the 1972 EPA summary data to the 1971 USAEHA studies
and the RAPP application data is as follows:
WASTEWATER VALUES - SUM OF ALL OUTFALLS*
USAEHA RAPP 1972 EPA
Flow (mgd) 37.6 40.3 43.3
BOD (lb/day) 9,360 9,920 20,300
COD (lb/day) 13,200 25,500 19,100
(approximately)
SS (lb/day) 6,060 68,000 4,060
By comparing the RAPP data to the EPA 1972 results, it Is seen that
only the flow values are in reasonable agreements. Differences between
the 1972 results and the previous USAEllA data serins are especially
critical because the latter figures were supposed to provide specific
engineering design criteria for upcoming IIAAP A waste treatment pro-
cesses. USAT.HA loadings for BOD and COD arc about one-half the 1972
EPA loads. Although many other questions concerning MUCOM's approach
and the waste-abatement plans for HAAP remain unanswered, the differences
expressed herein could alone greatly alter the expected performance of
the planned aeration basins at HAAP A. Design specifications that ap-
parently are being employed at the present time will fall far short of
attaining effluent limitations predicated upon "best practicable control
technology currently available."
Production levels have remained constant.
-------
45
F. FUTURE WASTE-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
The HAAP pollution-abatement plans comprise part of the AMC Moderni-
zation Program, subject to Congressional appropriation. These projects
under the Military Construction appropriations are expected to abate
serious air and water pollution problems at military installations as
addressed by Executive Order 11507. Furthermore, under the "Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972," Section 313, all
Federal facilities having discharge or runoff of pollutants, are now
instructed to comply with Federal, State, interstate and local require-
ments regarding control and abatement of pollution to the same extent
that any "person" (as rigorously defined in the Act) is subject to the
requirements of the Act.
Pertinent sections of the Act that would seem to have application
Lo Federal facilities and Army munitions manufacturing plants are
Sections 301 and 302 dealing with Best Practicable Control Technology
required by 1 July 1977, and Best Available Technolopv required by
1 July 1983, both of which arc directed to the national goal of elim-
inating the discharge of all pollutants. Additionally, Section 306 and
307 deal with standards of performance to be established through best
available demonstrated control technology for new pollution sources and
the establishment of toxic and pretreatment effluent standards, respectively.
However, under Section 313 of the Act, the President can exempt
any Federal facility effluent source if it is in the paramount interest
of the United States to do so; no such exemptions shall be granted in
waiving requirements under Sections 306 and 307 of the Act. It is also
-------
46
stated that no such exemptions shall be granted because of a lack of
appropriations, unless the President has specifically requested such
appropriation as part of the budgetary process, and Congress has failed
to make available such requested appropriation.
The November 1971 MUCOM report for HAAP specifically states that
HAAP has a planned program for abatement of each of its major pollutants;
the program is being implemented as rapidly as Federal funding permits.
As of the end of 1971, the report cites that progress in planning has
not been manifested in construction. It appeared doubtful that any
significant construction would be accomplished prior to December 1972.
We note the pilot aeration lagoon which is the first major item of
construction at Area A, and which was scheduled for completion in
December 1972, has not, at this date, been actually completed.
To gain the necessary background in understanding the envisioned
pollution abatement plans at HAAP one must be aware of the proceeding
and current criteria and standards under which these plans are being
formulated. Earlier standards/criteria include the State of Tennessee
air and water quality requirements and the CEPJ, engineering design
criteria. An Army report, "Effluent and Arrbient Air and Water Quality
St&idards and Regulatiorts Applicable to Army Ammunition Plants" has
been recently completed, but copies have not yet been received. The
most extensive and perhaps the most important set of criteria covering
Army munitions manufacturing plants is that incorporated under the APSA
Guidelines that give proposed air and water quality standards for both
effluents and boundary conditions. These Guidelines are more complete
-------
47
and as limiting as any specific set of State or Federal standards, and
according to the Army, can be applied universally across the entire
MUCOM munitions manufacturing complex. MUCOM, in a recent Senior
Scientist Steering Group Briefing of February 1973, compared future
waste abatement performance expected at its various Government Owned-
Company Operated (GOCO) facilities, specifically with the APSA load limits.
Based upon this understanding, the APSA Guidelines should be judged
to be the controlling criteria for waste-abatement plans and activities
at most Army munitions facilities. EPA Effluent Limitations for muni-
tions manufacturing, if developed for purposes of Sections 301 and 304
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, will
rely heavily upon the APSA Guidelines. The APSA Regulations are
enumerated in this report [Table 4] as are the MUC01I proposed schedules
for identified pollution-abatement projects at HAAP, Area A [Tabic 5].
No funds have been appropriated beyond Fiscal Year 197 3. During the
EPA survev, construction was in progress on a ^.5 million gal. pilot
aerated lagoon (Phase I Pond) for HAAP A.
In the case of the Holston Army Ammunition Plant, the effluent
limitations should be controlled by Water Quality Standards which call
for a minimum DO content of 5 mg/1 in both the South Fork and the
Holston River. These limitations are shown in Table 6.
Relative to the overall MUCOM pollution-abatement schedule for
HAAP — based upon a preliminary analysis of the schedule, a number of
potential deficiencies in the schedule are apparent [See the "remarks"
column in Table 5]. Additional information is necessary to ascertain,
-------
TABLE 4
DEPARTMENT OF TI1E ARMY
AMMUNITION PROCUREMENT & SUPPLY AGENCY
PROPOSED GUIDELINES
APSA Regulation
Number 11-13
Proposed Air Quality Standards
Design and Operating Standards (Proposed)
Pollutant
Acid ity
Ammonia
Carbon Monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Hydrogen Sulfide
Lead
Nitiogen Oxides (a)
Oxi dants
Ozono
Par ticuldtcs
Particulates, Incinerator
Sulfur Dioxide, Power Plant
Sulfur Dioxide, Acid Plant
Boundary
Standard
12ug/M (1)
0. 15
0.15
0.20
0.02(5)
O.tug/M (4)
0.10(2)
0.04
0.03
S0u«/M3(4)
fiCusr/i,J(4)
0.04(3)
0.04(3)
Stack
Emission
Standard
. Xp.pt}
50mg/M3
100.
200
100
• « t
200
200mg/M3*
450t?.g/M3-Wi"
500
200
(1) Maximum value not to be exceeded more than 1% of the hours per year.
(2) Average value for measurable limits over a 1 hour period is not to
ho exceeded more than 1.0 perce.it of t.he time over a three month period.
(3) Maximum value not over IVo of the time m a 24-hour sample period.
(4) Maxlmum value foi any 24-hcuir sample period.
(5) Average value for \ hour not to be exceeded more than twice a year.
'v This value is calculated from figure 1-1 of AR 11-21.
** This value is calculated from value given in paragraph 1-7C.(2) of
AR 11-21.
(a) Nitrogen oxides include NO + LJ02«
-------
TABLE 4 (Cont.)
APSA Regulation Proposed Water Quality Standards
Number 11-11
Design and Operating Standards - Ionic Materials (Proposed)
Pollutant Effluent Boundary
Standard Standard
ppm ppm
Aluminum 1.0 0.1
Ammonia 0.1 .01
Antimony* 0.05 0.01
Arsenic* 0.05 0.01
Barium* 1.0 0.1
Beryllium 0 05 0.01
Bicarbonate 35 35
Bismuth* 1.0 0.5
Boron 1.0 0.1
Bromide 1.0 0.5
Calcium 100 50
Cadmium* 0.01 0.01
Chloride 150 25
Cesium 1.0 0.1
Chromate 0.05 0.05
Chromium 1.0 0.1
Cobalt* 1.0 0.1
Copper* 0.2 0.02
Cyanide .025 0.01
Florlde 1.0 0.7
Germanium* .5 0.05
Iron 0.3 0.05
Lanthanum 1.0 0.1
Lead* 0.05 .01
Lithium 0.5 0.1
Magnesium 30 15
Manganese* 0.05 0.01
Mercury 0.01 0.01
Molybdenum* 1.0 0.1
Nickel* 1.0 0.1
Nitrate 5.0 0.5
Phosphate 0.5 0.05
Platinum* .5 .05
Potassium 10 10
Radioactivity, ToLal ** **
Selenium 0.01 0.01
Silicon Oxide 6 6
Silver* 0.05 0.01
Sodium 100 10-60
Strontium* 10 .1
Sulfate 200 50
Sulfite 2.0 0.1
Tantalum* 1.0 0 1
Tellurium 0.1 0.1
Thorium* 1.0 0.1
Tin* 1.0 0.1
Titanium* 1,0 0.1
Tungsten* 1.0 0.1
Uranium* 1.0 0.1
Vanadium* 0.5 0.1
Zinc 0.5 .05
Zlronium* 1.0 0.1
Total Heavy Metal 5.0 5.0
* Heavy Metal
** Radioactive - gross beta activity in the known absence of Strontium
90 and alpha emitters not to exceed 1000 micromicrocuries
per liter at any time. "Absence of" is defined as not
more than 10 pico curies of Strontium 90 and 3 plco
curies of alpha radiation
-------
TABLE 4 (Cont.)
Design and Operating Standards - Non Ionic Materials (Proposed)
50
Pollutant
Color (Color Units)*
Maximum Temperature (°F)
Oil (ppm)
Oxygen Dissolved
Minimum Value (ppm)
Biological Oxygen Demand (ppm)
Chemical Oxygen Demand (ppm)
Total Organic Carbon (ppm)
Phenols (ppb)
pll (pli Units)
Solids, Dissolved (ppm)
Solids, Suspended (ppm)
J.nsecti cides Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons (ppb)
Insecticides Organic
Phosphorous (ppi->)
Insecticides Carbamate (ppb)
Herbicides (ppb)
Bacteria-Monthly Average
(No./100 ml)-7o of samples
(Coliform count)
TNT and Nitrobodies (ppm)
Effluent
Standard
JREB
3-30
15
5
15.0
20.0
30.0
10
6.0-8.5
500
25
0
0.5
0.5
0.1
Boundary
Standard
PPm
3-30
90
No Visible Oil
on Water Surface
5
2.0
2.0
3.0
10
6.0-8.5
200
25
0
0.1
0.1
0.1
(5000)-20
(2 000)-5
0.5
0.3
ppb - parts per billion
ppm - parts per million
a state water ambient temperature shall not be increased for more
than 5°F, with the hourly temperature change of the state water not
to exceed 1°F.
color units are based on platinum-cobalt standard
-------
TABLE 5
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
HAAP, AREA A - KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE-
Item
Funding
FY
Estiirated
Completion FY
Remarks
Aerated Lagoon, Pilot Plant only 70
(Phase I)
Aerated Lagoon, Full Scale (Phase II) 73
Separation of uncontaminated cooling
water from process waters
Tank-Farm Dike System
Water- and Air-Pollution Monitoring
Systems
Waterworks sludge settling and land
disposal
Boiler Blowdown to Aeration Lagoon
Pumphouse Trash Disposal
72
73
72
72
72
WATER
72
76
74
75
74
74
74
See comments on expected performance, this
report but are presently not expected to
meet water quality standards requirements
Design and performance criteria not known
by EPA
Specified in 1971 MUCOM report but no real
follovup evident in pollution abatement
schedule
Spill Containment dikes with routing of spilled
materials back to industrial wastewater
treatment system (See other comments in
this report.)
Sludge to be disposed of onto Area B grounds.
Because supernatants are designed to enter
lagoon, full objectives will not be met
until FY 76
Lagoon will not be completed until FY 76,
effectively causing delay in project
objective until 76, rather than 74
Further details sought
-------
TABLE 5 (Cont.)
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
HAAP, AREA A - KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE—
Item
Funding
FY
Es timated
Completion FY
Remarks
Replacement of distillation columns
serving sludge-heater sludges in
order to combat metals problem in
effluents, Bldg. 2
Ash pit waters, Bldg. 8
Flash column improvements, Bldgs. 2
and 6, to improve propyl acetate
recovery
Control and/or elimination of
drainage from the tar tank area
Possible substitution of surface
condenser in lieu of barometric
condenser(s), Bldgs. 7 and 20
Alternative means of handling and
disposing of ball mill and sludge-
heater sludges
Removal of methyl nitrate, and
recovery of volatile gases from
azeotropic stills, Bldgs. 2
and/or 6
Precipitators for the Pulverized
Coal Boiler (Area A?)
73
73
73
70
75
74
AIR
76( ?)
73
Plans not known
Plans not known
Further details sought
Indicated as essential by EPA survey
Means of reducing water pollution
Likely a major waste source that should be
handled and disposed of in slurry or
semi-solids form
In feasibility stage only. Control for
Bldg. 6 apparently unplanned
Further details sought
<»n
NJ
-------
TABLE 5 (Cont.)
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
HAAP, AREA A - KING-SPORT, TENNESSEE—
Item
t uriamg
FY
Estimated
Completion FY
Remarks
Precipitators on Boilers (Not known
if Area A and/or B)
73
75
Further details sought
Control and treatment of noxious
vent gases from anydride manufac-
turing (Bldgs. 7 and 20)
Vents from producer gas building
Vents from Bldg. 6, anhydride
refining operations
Determined by Army as a major air-pollution
source
Cited in USAEHA report
Cited in USAEHA report
NO control and treatment
x
SO control and treatment
x
Both NO and SO abatement technology being
studied by MU&M on an overall facilities
basis. Prototype units now in development
stage including molecular sieve for NO
which is fairly advanced. NO and SO X
X X
problems considered reasonably critical.
SOLID S—^
Trash Disposal Incinerators (to
serve bouth Areas A and B?)
72
74
Further details sought
aj Other items have been cited in MUCOM, USAEHA, and HAAP reports, but these items are either ambiguous or do not
have a demonstrated impact on wasta-abatement progress,
b/ Open burning procedures for trash, debris, packaging materials spent process and explosives materials, etc.
continue to represent current practices. Even though this renort has not emphasized the problems of open
burning and solid waste disposal, air pollution from open burning has been severe in many instances.
Advanced technology is urgently needed.
VI
u>
-------
54
TABLE 6
STATE OF TENNESSEE EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
FOR 11AAP-AREAS A AND B
Parameter Effluent Limitations, lb/day
HAAP A
BOD 1,050
HAAP B
BOD 1,4 30
TKN 76
TN 620
NH 76
NO^ 556
* These are effluent limitations required to maintain a DO of 5 mg/1
in the South Fork and Holston Rivers.
-------
55
step by step, planned activity to be undertaken by HAAP. Certain
essential abatement items have not been either adequately described
or incorporated into the plans or appropriated to date under the MUCOM
schedule. Most importantly, no method seems available whereby the MUCOM
technology implementation schedule could be translated into a concise
statement as whether and when the effluent limitations can be met for
the HAAP installation. Further coordination and detailed review of
the HAAP waste abatement plans are needed between MUCOM, HAAP and the
Region IV, EPA Enforcement and Federal Activities Program Offices.
There are two aspects of the HAAP biological treatment systems that
pose serious concern about the success of this approach and that warrant
much more attention. Past design criteria for the aeration lagoons have
been liberal, and the effluent limits as specified will not meet the
effluent limitations. The biological systems as now described to the
EPA are not consistent with "best practicable control technology cur-
rently available." The other aspect deals with the kinds and amounts
of wastes being treated and their inherent impact upon the efficiency of
a biological system. If it is assumed that future HAAP A activities will
almost necessarily Include the strict segregation of cooling waters from
process flows (the latter to receive treatment), then the (remaining)
0.6 to 4.0 mgd process wastewaters may be more adaptable to chemical/
physical treatment than to biological treatment, as now being planned
by HAAP.
Increased recycling, re-use, and recovery of process flows together
with strict segregation of cooling waters could hold the total process
-------
56
wastewaters at Area A down to 1 mgd, or less. Available data strongly
suggest that these process effluents per se, are extremely strong In
COD, complex organics, toxicity, and, possibly, metals content. Unfor-
tunately, proper data do not exist relative to the characteristics of
individual process flows; this is partly because the cooling and process
flows are now combined within the existing sewer system inside each
manufacturing building. Based upon similar experiences and with the
pieces of data now on hand, the implied risk in using biological treat-
ment with the HAAP wastes is abnormally hLgh. Mixing, with additional
cooling water, and enlarging the size of the biological units are not
likely to substantially improve the creditability and performance of the
biological approach. Characterization of the separate process flows
could serve to clarify this most important issue.
-------
57
VII. HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
A. GENERAL
Area B, the nitric acid and explosives manufacturing facility, is
situated on 6,370 acres immediately downstream of the confluence of the
North and South Forks of the Ilolston River [Figure 1] and approximately
6 miles west of the City of Kingsport and Area A.
Major processes at Area B, include nitric acid and ammonium nitrate
production; the preparation, manufacturing, and packaging of various
explosives; and the recovery of waste acetic acid for shipment to Area A.
Area B was studied from 12 through 15 December 1972. Mr. Robert
Banner, Jr., chemical engineer at HDC, provided information and assistance
during the inc'ustrial surveys.
B• UTILITIES AND WATER SUPPLY
Area B purchases its electricity and potable water (0.2 mgrl) from
the City of Kingsport. 11AAP records show that about 84.4 m<;d of waLer
is pumped through an intake screen from the Ilolston River at two pumping
stations. About 14.5 mgd of this is treated by flocculation, sedimenta-
tion, and filtration to produce process water; about 0.75 mgd of this is
deionized for use as boiler-feed water.
Wastewaters discharged to the river totaled 84.6 mgd. A natural
stream entering the plant grounds (Amotts Branch) contributed 11.4 mgd,
thus producing a net waste flow of 73.2 mgd.
Only one of the two water filtration plants was on stream at the
time of the EPA survey. The wastewater from cleaning the intake screens,
-------
58
backwashing the filters, and desludging the sedimentation basins enters
the river at Station 25. Pollution-abatement plans at the water treat-
ment facility call for land disposal of material removed from the intake
screens and for continuous sedimentation of filter backwash water with
solids going to thickeners, followed by sand bed drying and ultimate
disposal at a landfill. The sedimentation basins treating the main flow
will be converted to continuous sludge removal. Sludge from these basins
will also be thickened, dried on sand beds and disposal of at a landfill.
Wastewaters from the steam-production buildings consist of boiler
blowdovn; ion exchanger backwash, regeneration wastes, and rinse water;
cinder decant water; condensate and cooling; water. These wastes are
discharged through Lhe main outfall, at Station 33. Present abatement
plans call for these wastes to be diverted to the industrial waste treat-
ment facility.
Sanitarv wastes from Area 3 and from a feu hoiies in Che immediate
area are treated at a secondary treatment plant on the grounds, consisting
of primary sedimentation, trickling filters, secondary sedimentation and
chlorination. The adequately treated waste is discharged to the Holston
River at Station 26.
C. PROCESS OPERATIONS AND WASTE SOURCES
The main activities at Area B include production and concentration
of nitric acid; production of ammonium nitrate; production, purification,
and packaging of explosives; and the recovery of dilute acetic acid,
which is then returned to Area A.
Nitric acid is produced by the oxidation of anhydrous ammonia to
-------
59
nitrogen oxide that, when dissolved in water, produces dilute nitric acid.
It is concentrated to 99 percent by extractive distillation with magnesium
nitrate. The process wastewaters from these operations include ammonia,
nitric acid, the nitrite ion, and a small amount of oil from the compres-
sors used in the ammonia oxidation process. These process wastes and
the cooling water from the processes are discharged at Station 33
[Figure 4].
The concentrated nitric acid is, together with anhydrous ammonia,
employed in the production of a nitric acid-ammonium nitrate solution,
an intermediate step in this manufacturing process. Essentially all of
the waste flov from the operation is cooling water, low in contamination.
It was included in Station No. 33.
Manufacture of the explosive compounds takes place in a series of
facilities which receive glacial acetic acid (conveyed in tank cars) and
acetic anhydride from Area A, nitric acid and the ammonium nitrate-nitric
acid solution (conveyed in tank cars) from Area B, and other materials
purchased for use. These materials include hcxamine (hexamethylene
tetramine), wax, TNT (trinitrotoluene), lacquer and several desensitizing
agents,
In the "Preparation" complex [Figure 5] a number of operations are
carried out. Hexamine is dissolved in glacial acetic acid. The ammonium
nitrate-nitric acid solution is stored for use elsewhere. Lacquer mix-
tures for use later in the process are also prepared. Waste flows from
the Preparation complex include spilled hexamine and negligible amounts
-------
kingsport university center
HAAP-8
'boundary
MT CARMEL
AQMIHISTRATIOH AHA
RAIN WATER RESERVOIR.
BARRIER PENINSULA
35
HAAP-B BOUNDARY
MAGAZINE AREA
25
I L E S TO HOLLISTON
'jlMMONlA RECOVIRY
EXPLOSIVES MANUFACTURING AREA
SODIUM NITRATE
LAGOONS
/3 3d
STEAM PLANT-
•WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
SODIUM NITRATE
LAGOONS
26
30
27
BURNING
AREA
29
CLOSED CONDUIT
1000
1000
SCALE IN FEET
32
SURFACE WATER AND / OR OPEN DITCH
SAMPLE LOCATION
Figure 4 Sampling Stations Holstoo Army Ammunition Plant - B
Kingsport, Tennessee
-------
USE
Vf
RECSYSTAlLIZATIOa-
FRGM ACID
> AREA
PREPARATION-(C)
FROET
AREA-A
OUTSIDE
VENDORS
Figure 5. SCHEMATIC OF EXPLOSIVE PRODUCTION LINE-AREA B, HOLSTON ARI5Y AMMUNITION PLANT
Courtesy of KLD, Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, N.J.
Taken from W. iieidel'ierRer Report, Nov. 1971.
-------
60
of acids and other organics. The wastes from these operations were
monitored at Stations 28 and 33.
The hexamine-acetic acid solution is pumped to the "Nitration"
operation where the hexamine solution is batch nitrated, with the nitric
acid-ammonium nitrate solution, to produce crude RDX (CJ1-0-N-) or HMX
J b o o
(C^HgOgNg). Acetic acid and acetic anhydride are also added to the
reaction vessel. After initial reaction, the mixture is "aged" and then
diluted with wastewater from a vent scrubber on the reaction vessel plus
other water from a later washing operation. Contaminants in the explosive
mixture at this point include acetic acid, ammonia, nitric acid, and
numerous abphatic and cyclic nitro compounds. Contaminated waste streams
from the nitration operation are routed through a catch basin in route
to the industrial sewer. The waste flows from this operation include
coolinp water, condensate, agitator seal water, and floor and equipment
washdown water. The contaminants include RDX, HMX, acetic acid, and
other materials, mostly from leaks and spills in the nitration operatLon.
The flows from the various nitration facilities were monitored at Sta-
tions 28, 29, 31 and 33.
The crude RDX or HMX slurry is pumped from "Nitration" to "Washing."
Another source of crude explosive is the "B-line" (to be discussed later).
In the washing operation, the explosive is filtered, washed, and reslur-
ried for transfer to another series of processing areas. The filtrate
and most of the water used to wash the explosive, at a 60 percent acid
concentration, are sent to the "B-line" area for recovery of acetic acid
and ammonia. The final dilute filtrate is sent to "Nitration" to be used
-------
61
as dilution water. The washed explosive is reslurried and pumped to
another complex for further processing. The contaminated wastes, con-
taining explosives, acetic acid, nitric acid, and other components of the
mixture, pass through baffled catch basins before entering the industrial
sewer. They were sampled at Stations 28, 29, 31 and 33.
The washed explosive slurry is then pumped to the "Recrystallization"
facilities, which, in addition to recrystallization, accomplish dewatering
and compounding of special-purpose explosives. The slurry is pumped into
dissolvers containing solvents. Depending upon the type of crystal de-
sired in the explosive, the solvents used can be cyclohexanone, neetone,
or toluene. After dissolution, the solvent is distilled off, condensed,
and re-used. The batch is then cooled and either dewatered in the crystal-
lization process or cent on as a slurry to the "Dewatering" operation.
The wastewaters — mostly cooling water, seal water, and condensate, were
sanplcd at Stations 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32. The contaminated flows pass
tlirough baffled catch basins before being introduced to the sewers. The
contaminants include solvents, explosives, l.tcquets, and other compound-
ing agents.
The explosive slurry or dewatered explosive is then sent to "De-
watering" for grinding or dewatering and grinding. All grinding is done
in a water slurry. In order to remove explosives, which are later sent
to receiving tanks, the filtrate is settled, and the overflow water drains
to a catch basin and then to the sewer. The ground, dewatered explosives
(as a wet cake) are then sent to another series of facilities for com-
pounding. The wastewaters, containing explosives, solvents, condensate,
-------
62
acetic acid, settling tank overflow, and wash water are sampled at Sta-
tions 28, 29 and 31.
Compounding of the final product is accomplished in the "Incorpo-
ration" process whore RDX or HMX are mixed with melted TNT (the resultant
water layer being sewered) to form Composition B. This material is
heated, wax is added, and then the mixture is solidified by passing it
onto a cooled conveyor belt. In other operations in this series, the
explosive in wet cake form is dried in kettles, perforated trays, or in
drying ovens. In all cases the air used in drying is scrubbed with
water before being discharged to the atrrosphere. The wastewaters, con-
taining explosives (including TNT), wore sampled at Stations 28, 29 and 31.
In the TNT-receiving area, TNT in brought in by truck, unpackagcd,
and dumped into melt kettles for tran9poiM:ation to the "Incorporation"
operation. Packaging of some compounded explosives is also carried out
at these buildings. Explosive dusts are drawn to a wet scrubber for
removal. The scrubber water and floor wash water f]ow to an industrial
sewer through catch basins and were sarrpled at Stations 28 and 31.
The final step in explosives manufacturing occurs in the "Pack-
aging" area. The explosives, received in barrels or carts, are packaged
and loaded on trucks for shipment to local storage or to railroad loading
docks. Dust is exhausted from the buildings and scrubbed with water.
The scrubber water and floor and equipment washdown water were sampled
at Stations 28, 29 and 31.
The 60-percent acetic acid solution from the "Washing" operation is
sent to the "3-line" facilities for recovery of the acetic acid. The
-------
63
solution contains acetic acid, nitric acid, and a small amount of RDX
and HMX. First the solution is neutralized with sodium hydroxide and
sent to a primary evaporator. About 80 percent of the feed is volatil-
ized, condensed, and recovered as 60 percent acetic acid. The remaining
20 percent is withdrawn from the bottom of the evaporator as a sludge.
The sludge is diluted and heated to about 100°C. During cooling, an
RDX slurry is added as seed to aid crystallization of the RDX-HMX. The
crystallized explosives are returned to the "Washing" operation.
The remaining liquid is sent to a secondary evaporator that recovers
more acetic acid. The sludge from the secondary evaporators is steam
stripped to recover the remaining acetic acid. (All recovered acetic
acid is sent to Area A for purification and concentration.) Sodium
hydroxide is added to the stripped sludge. This converts the ammonium
nitrate in the sludge to sodium nitrate and ammonia, the residual acetic
acid to sodium acetate, and the residual RDX and HMX to ammonia and
sodium nitrate. The ammonia released in the reactor is absorbed in
water and sent to an ammonia recovery are^. The sludge from the reactor
is pumped to storage lagoons for storage until a fertilizer facility is
constructed. The waste flows, containing acetic acid and a small amount
of ammonia, were sampled at Station 33.
Aqueous ammonia from the "B-line" is distilled to recover anhydrous
ammonia, which is used as fertilizer, for impurities in the recovered
anhydrous ammonia prevent its further use in manufacturing of explosives.
The major impurities in the column bottoms are methyl amine and dimethyl
amine; these are sampled at Station 33.
-------
64
D. REFUSE ACT PERMIT APPLICATION (RAPP) DATA
In September 1971, the llolston Army Ammunition Plant submitted an
application for a permit to discharge under the Refuse Act Permit Pro-
gram [Table 7]. This table also shows the total pollutant loads from
the Army Environmental Hygiene Agency survey of March to June 1971, the
EPA survey station numbers consistent with the RAPP codes, and totals
from the EPA survey.
The RAPP data and EPA survey results for BOD and SS agree closely.
However, ammonia loads do not agree. A critical consideration is that
the total content of ammonia in the waste stream will determine whether
or not a special ammona-removal process is necessary. It is recommended
that the ammonia content of the waste streams be closely surveyed before
designing the final treatment processes.
E. DISCUSSION OF 19 72 EPA FINDINGS
There were 12 sampling points at Area B [Figure 4 and Table 8].
Stations 25, 28, 29, 30, and 33 were manually sampled at two-hr inter-
vals and composited on an equal-volume basis. Stations 26, 31, 32, 34,
and 36 were sampled using a SERCO automatic sampler and composited on
an equal-volume basis at the end of 24 hr. Grab samples were collected
manually from stations 27 and 35 twice daily and combined to make one
composite sample for each station. Temperature, pH, and conductivity
were measured each time a manual sample was collected and at least three
times per day at stations where automatic samplers were used. Samples
for oil-and-grease analysis were 24-hr composites consisting of well-
mixed grab samples collected every two hr (except for Station 31 which
-------
TABLE 7
OUTFALL CHARACTERISTICS FROM RAP? APPLICATION", HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE
RAPP EPA
Outfall Sen. Flow BOP COD SS NH,-N TKN N'Oi-S P-Total Hn
N'uber No.j/ myd ng/1 lb/day ng/1 lb/day rig/1 lb/day ~i;/1 lb/day m^./l lo/day Tg/l lb/day ng/l lb/day mg/l lb/day
001
25
1.0
36
304
455
3,790
1,653
13,774
1
9
3
26
1
11
1
4
2
17
002
26
0.1
5
4
23
19
4
3
7
6
6
5
003
27
SURFACE DRAINAGE ONLY - NO
INFORMATION GIVEN
004
28
1.2
70
726
180
1,796
18
183
4
36
4
40
10
104
1
8
005
29,30
38.0
21
6,500
61
19,175
51
16,142
3
854
3
1,076
1
325
0.5
127
0.5
149
006
b/
0.0001
007
31,32
2.4
166
3,323
386
7,712
25
507
3
63
3
73
1
21
1
13
5
.008
33
54.7
13
5,903
30
13,623
25
11,407
3
1,506
3
1,689
2
885
1
456
TOTALS
97.4
16,760
46,115
42.016
2,463
2,904
1,352
613
171
TOTALS FROM .
USAEriA REPORT-
TOTALS FROM
EPA SURVEY
77.1
84.6
<6,500
14,750
22,250
9,760
31,493
802
102
1,120
<600
1,670
2,482
<250
86
a/ These station numbers refer to the 1972 study,
b/ This outfall was not sanpled.
c/ This refers to the U.S. Amy Environmental Hygiene Agency Report, 19 March - 28 June 1971.
Ul
-------
TABLE 8
DESCRIPTION OF EPA. SAMPLING STATIONS, HAAP, AREA B
KIMGSPOFH , TENNESSEE
EPA SURVEY OF 12 THROUGH 15 DECE!BER 1972
Survey
Station
Number
25
26
27
28
29—/
30^/
31—/
32—/
33
34
35
36
Refuse Act Permit
Discharge Number
001
002
003
004
005
005
007
007
008
Tyne of
Sample
Composite
Composite
Grnb
Composite
Composite
Coirpositc
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
a/ Flows at
Stations
Stations 29 and 30 nixed together
31 and 32.
Station Location
Filter plant backwash, at manhole adjacent to perimeter
road
Sewage treatment plant effluent, prior to chlorination
Surface water drainage from production lines 9 and 10,
at open ditch adjacent to perimeter road
Process wastes at sewer outfall, adjacent to perimeter
road
Process wastes and cooling water at outfall, adjacent
to perimeter road
Cooling and surface waters from production lines 6 and 7,
at sewer outfall adjacent to perimeter road
Process wastes from production lines 3, 4, and 5, at
sewer outfall adjacent to perimeter road
Cooling water from production lines 3, 4, and 5, at
sewer outfall adjacent to perimeter road
Main outfall ditch, at HAAP effluent water quality monitor
station
Raw-water intake at Building 201 pumphouse
Arnotts Branch, upstream of nitric-acid production area
Raw-water intake at Building 209 pumphouse
before entering the river. The same is true of flows at
o
-------
67
was a composite of three equal volume grab samples taken over a 4 to 6
hr period).
Flow measurements were made at the following stations:
1. Measurements carried out at Stations 25 and 31 were made on
instantaneous flows at two-hr intervals with a Marsh-McBirney
electromagnetic water current meter. With the flow at Station
31 only being measured for 24 hr because the high river stage
surcharged the outfall pipe;
2. Flows measured at Stations 26 and 27 were obtained using
V-notch weirs and flow recorders;
3. The waste streams at Stations 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, and 35 were
gaged several tiiues daily during the study period, and a rating
curve was established.
The flows at the remaining stations were extracted from HAAP records.
The flows and analytical data obtained have been tabulated f'fable 9].
The BOD of the raw water entering the plant wan , from Amotts
Branch, 100 lb/day and, from the water in the Holston River, 4,130 ]b/dav.
For suspended solids the load from Arnotts Branch was 4,400 lb/day and in
the intake from the Holston River, 32,570 lb/day. The total BOD leaving
the plant was 14,750 lb/day and the total suspended-solids content was
31,493 lb/day.
Therefore, the net contribution of the plant was about 10,000 lb
BOD/day. The streams leaving the plant had about 5,000 lb of suspended
solids/day less than the entering streams. This net loss of suspended
solids cannot be explained on the basis of the information available.
-------
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF FIELD MEASUREMENTS AXD CHEMICAL DATA
FOLSTOM ARMY AMMUH IT ION PLANT-AREA B
KIKCSPORT, TENNESSEE
13-15 DECEMBER 1972
Station Nu-aer '
25
26
27
28
Station Description^
Filter Plant
Backwash
Sevagc Treatment
Plant Effluent
Surface Water Drainage
Process Wastewaters
(RM 141.
.6)
(r:; 140
' 7)
(RM 140.
3)
(RM 139.7)
Paraneterii/
Range
Averape
Range
Aver a Re
Range
Average
Range
Average
Flo-v (123d)
0.66-1.62
1.1
0.66-0.71
0.69
1.21-1.42
1.3
0.59-0.80
0. 70
pri (standard units), range
6.5-7.9
7.5-8.5
6.6-7.1
3.2-7.9
Tecaerature (°C), range
11.0-14.5
13.0-15.0
10.5-10.5
17.0-25.0
Conductivity (lichos/cm), range
300-850
420-500
220-230
260-800
BOD
1.2-2.7
1.9
4 4-8 2
6.9
2.7-3.5
3.2
48-~> 160
> 94
EOD (lb/day)
16
39
35
550
COD
41-407
224
TOC
5-6
5.6
7-8
* 7.3
5-9
6.6
12-115
47
Total Solids
313-441
369
314-335
324
161-176
167
249-350
269
Suspended Solids
7-36
21
2-15
8
12-42
22
11-80
34
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
_ f
160
43
240
220
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen-N
N D.—^
0.9-1.1
1.0
0.6-1.0
0.77
8.8-35
17.6
Total Kjeldahl J.'itrogen-N (lb/day)
5.70
106
NH3-N
N.D.
< 0 5-0.6
< 0.5
N.D.
6.5-26
13.1
SH--S (lb/day)
< 2
78.8
NO, + NO,-N
0.6-3.1
1.6
3.6-4.0
3.8
1.5-1-6
1.5
1.5-5.4
3.1
KOj + SO^-N (lb/day)
13.3
21.5
16.6
180
Total Phosphorus-P
0.04-0.07
0.05
0.45-0.49
0.47
0.06-0.07
0.07
0.02-5. ST.
2.0
Total Phosphorus-P (lb/day)
13.2
Oil and Crease
1-23
10
Manganese
0.3-0.5
0.4
G\
CO
-------
TABLE 9 (Cont.)
SUMMARY OF FIELD MEASURE! ENTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLSTOS ARilY AK-.milTION PLAN'T-AREA B
kLNGSPORT, TE^ESSEE
13-15 deceiver 1972
Station Nucber 29 30 21 22,
Station Description^
Process W
asccvaters
Cooling und
Surface Waters
Process Wastewaters
Cooling and Surface Waters
(RM
139.6)
(R-I
139.6)
(RM 139.
.2)
(RM 119.2}
Parameter13/
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Ranee
Average •
Flow (ngd)
3.02-3.97
3-54
11.5-14.4
13.2
2.1-2.5
2.3
8.22-9.11
8.8
pH (stancard units), range
4.1-6.8
6 8-8.4
6.5-7.3
6.5-7.7
Temperature (°C) , range
20.0-22.5
13.0-19 0
15.0-18.0
12 5-15.5
Conductivity (ijnhos/cm), range
260-380
200-340
230-340
210-260
EOD
150-240
193
7 6-13
10.2
110-350
213
9.5-14.0
12
BOD (lb/day)
5680
1101
4090
840
COD
42-235
175
69-151
97
TOC
24-56
44 2
4-8
6.3
24-38
28.
,7
8-10
8.7
Total Solids
197-231
217
156-199
180
180-228
203
218-246
232
Suspended Solids
10-20
15
32-41
36
6-11
8
67-96
79
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
440
3940
150
5800
Total Kjelaahl Nitrogen-N
1.0-7 1
3.95
0.6-0.7
0.6
0.9-1.6
1.
,2
0.6-0.8
0.73
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen-N (lb/day)
120
N.D.c/
70.1
24
53.5
< 0.5-2.0
0.8
N.D.
N.D.
NH^-N (lb/day)
24.3
no2 + no3
3.9-8.8
5.9
1.2-3.6
2.0
2.1-2.7
2.
.4
0.9-1.0
1.0
^°2 + NOj -N (lb/day)
170
212
47
70.4
Total Phospborus-p
0.02-0.04
0.03
0-10-0.14
0.11
0.03-0.06
0.
.04
0.16-0.1?
0.17
Total ?nosphorus-P (lb/day)
12.7
12.4
Oil and Grease
4-10
7
0.3^
5-23
11
Manganese
0.1-0.2
0.15
0.3
ON
vD
-------
TABLE 9 (Cone.)
SUMMARY OF FTFLD MEASUREMENTS AND CHEMICAL DATA
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
KINGSPORT, TEI.'KESSEE
13-15 DECEMBER 1972
Station Number
33
34
35
36
/
Station Description^/
Main Out fa
.11 Ditch
Intake Ejilding 201
Arnott
Branch
Intake Building 209
(RM 137.9)
(R'l 141
1)
(RM 137
.9/0.8)
(RM 139.
.0)
Parace ter^
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average
Range
Average .
Flow (ngd)
46.7-58.8
53.0
29—1
9.87-12.9
11.4
55. t&J
pH (standard units), range
6.5-7.8
6.8-7.8
1.2-1.1*
7.2-7.9
Terperature (°C), range
14.0-17.0
10.0-12 5
11.5-12.0
10.5-11.0
Conductivity (inshos/cm) , range
270-520
200-360
320-360
210-290
EOD
3.5-7.4
5.5
1.4-2.8
2.7
0.4-2.0
1.1
6.9-8.7
7.8
BOD (lb/day)
2400
41/
100
TOC
5-6
5.7
4
4-10
6
7 ±f
7
Total Solids
215-287
255
162-199
178
229-402
295
205-229
218
Suspended Solids
22-65
47
22-25
24
32-54
43
52-62
58
Suspended Solids (lb/day)
20,500
4400
Total Kjoldahl Nitrogen-N
< 0.5-0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5-0.6
0.5
N.D..S/
< 0.5-0.5
< 0.5
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen-N (lb/day)
<221
Nri3- ?!
N.D.
N D.
N.D.
N.D.
KO2 + NO^—N
3-2-5.8
4.3
0.9-1.7
1.2
1.2-1.6
1.4
1.1-1.9
1.5
NO + NO -I.
1920
137
Total Phosphoru9-P
0.09-0.10
0.10
0.09-0.10
0.10
0.03-0.20
0.09
0.08-0.12
0.10
Total Phosohorus-P (lb/day)
42 7
8.24
Oil and Grease
< 1-2
< 1.0
< 1-5
2
Manganese
0.08-0.1
0.09
0.2-0.3
0.2
0. i-/'
9.1
a/ Sec Table 7 for Station Description.
bj All values reported as og/1, except where otherwise specified,
c/ N.D. - :.one Detected.
dj All values are the sane.
e/ This value was obtained from HAAP records.
-------
71
It seems likely that the BOD reading (14,750 lb/day) is not
representative of total organic content because of the presence of
complex organic materials that may not exert an oxygen demand. The TOC
leaving the plant totaled only about 6,100 lb/day. (Very few, if any,
organic materials are resistant to the TOC analysis.) The presence of
suspended solids may have made the TOC readings ]ow in that, possibly,
a representative sample was not introduced into the TOC analyzer.
Only about 100 lb/day of ammonia were in the effluent streams,
but almost 2,500 lb/day of oxidized nitrogen (NO2 and NO^) are released
to the river, and this should be reduced before being discharged.
Complex organic analyses were performed on samples collected from
Stations 23 and 29 with a combined flow of 4.24 mpd. These waste dis-
charges result from the explosives manufacturing phase of the HAAP Area B
process [Table 8]. Samples were also collected from Stations 31 and 33
and analyzed for complex or^anics. These waste discharges had a com-
bined flow of 55.3 med and resulted from process effluents from produc-
tion lines 3, 4 ?nd 5, as well as the Main Outfall [Table 8]. The
analyses were conducted on an equal aliquot from the listed outfalls.
Compounds isolated are listed in Table 10. The quantities of tri-
nitrotoluene (TNT) and cyclohexanone discharged by the Holston Army
Ammunition Plant, Area B, represent a serious hazard to aquatic life in
the receiving waters of the Holston River. The amount of cyclohexanone
discharged from Stations 28 and 29 ranged between 15.3 lb/day and
76.9 lb/day. The quantity of TNT in this discharge was between 9.1 lb/day
and 46 lb/day. The amount of cyclohexanone discharged in the effluents
-------
72
TABLE 10
ORGANIC POLLUTANTS IDENTIFIED
HOLSTON ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT-AREA B
DECEMBER 1972
Sample
S tatlons Compound
28 and 29 cyclohexanone
2,4,6-trini trotoluene
2-cyclohexylcyclohexanone
31 and 33 cyclohexanone
2-nonanone
di-ji-buty Ike tone
2,2-dimeLhyloctanol
1,11-dodecadicne
2 or 4-sec-butylcycloliexanol
phthalic acid esters (unidentified)
3,6-dimethyl~6-isopropy]-2-
cyclohexanonc
2-cyclohexylcyclohexanone
Concentration
(mg/1)
1.30
0.78
0.02
1.40
*
0.02
0.005"
0.005*
0.005*
0.030*
0.50*
0.015*
0.010*
* Estimated - Standard not available for confirmation.
-------
73
from Stations 31 and 33 ranged between 54 lb/day and 1,240 lb/day. These
quantities are likely to result in adverse effects of a chronic nature
through continuous exposure of aquatic life.
Static bioassay studies on streams 29 and 30 after mixing, but
prior to entering the river, had a 96-hr TL^ value of 23 percent. The
combined flow was 16.72 mgd. A factor 1/20 was employed to obtain a
river flow that would dilute this so that there would be no long-term
impact on aquatic life. A bioassay on stream 31 (at 2.3 mgd) also
indicated a 96-hour TL of 23 percent. Similar calculations were per-
in
formed on this flow. The summation of the two bioassay calculations
disclosed that a minimum flow of 2,600 cfs would have to be maintained
in the river to ensure no long-term impact on aquatic life from toxic
effects. This figure does not include dilution water that would be
necessary to protect the aquatic life from wastewater discharges at
Area A or from other sources in the area.
F. FUTURE WASTE ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and
Executive Order 11507 apply to Area B as well as to Area A. [See dis-
cussion of the Act in the report on Area A.]
MUCOM has proposed schedules for identified pollution abatement
projects at HAAP, Area B [Table 11]. No funds have been appropriated
beyond Fiscal Year 1973. During the EPA survey, no construction had
been started for Area B pollution control facilities.
Relative to the overall MUCOM pollution-abatement schedule — based
-------
TABLE 11
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
HAAP, AREA 3 - KINCSPORT, TENNESSEE-
Item
Funding
FY
Estimated
Completion FY
Remarks
Boiler blowdown Bldgs. 200, 222
treatment to aerated lagoon
Filter-plant sludge
Process-area dike system
Pumphousc trash removal
Industrial waste treatment -
aerated lagoon
72
72
72
72
72
WATER
74
74
74
76
Design criteria complete. Architect-Engineer
evaluating design criteria.
Design complete. Design and performance
criteria not known by EPA. Includes
7-acre drying bed.
Contract let and contractor working 10/72.
Includes 2 spill containment ponds. Effluent
from these ponds to be returned to Area B
treatment system.
Solids removed and sent to incinerator.
Design completed. Contract being negotiated
with Clark-Dietz. Design criteria as
specified by CERL not satisfactory. APSA
guidelines should be used as design criteria.
Total segregation of uncontaminated
cooling water from process water
Remove sodium nitrate from holding
ponds and replace sodium nitrate
process units
Water and Air Pollution Monitoring
System
73
75
Specified in 1971 MUCOM Report but no real
follow up in pollution abatement schedules,
Plans unknown
Ammonia-rich waste streams should be
subjected to ammonia stripping
Plans unknown
-------
TABLE 11 (Cont.)
PROPOSED POLLUTION-ABATEMENT SCHEDULE
IiAAP, AREA B - KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE-
Item
Fun ding
FY
Estimated
Completion FY
Remarks
Electrostatic precipitators on
pulverized coal boilers
Ammonia oxidation Dupont AOP units
Magnesium concentration units
(MAGGIE units)
NO Control and Treatment
x
SO Control and Treatment
x
Refuse disposal incinerator
nonexplosive
Explosives incinerators
72
72
72
73
AIR
73
75
SOLIDS
74
76
b/
No details
Pilot test using molecular sieve on AOP unit
No details on
to remove NO from air.
x
Deferred to October 1975.
design.
Both NO and SO abatement technology being
studied by MuSoM on an overall facilities
basis. Prototype units now in development
stage including molecular sieve for NO
which is fairlv advanced. NO and SO
XX
problems considered reasonably critical
Completion date October 1973. Twenty ton/day
Two incinerators: a 2 ton/day and an 11 ton/day
These three incinerators should eliminate
all open-pit burning.
a/ Other items have been cited in MUCOfl, USAT'HA and 51AAP reports, but these items are either ambiguous or do not
have a demonstrated impact on water-abatement progress,
b/ Open burning procedures for trash, debris, packaging materi.-.ls spent process, and explosives materials, etc.
continue to represent current practices. Even though this report has not emphasized the problems of open
burning and solid-waste disposal, air pollution from ocen burning has been severe in many instances. Advanced
technology is urgently needed.
--j
Ln
-------
76
upon a preliminary analysis of the schedule, a number of potential de-
ficiencies are apparent [mentioned in the "remarks" column in Table 11].
Water Pollution
On the basis of a survey by the Army Environmental Hygiene Agency,
the Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) provided
recommendations and design criteria for pollution-control facilities
at Area B. These recommendations included:
1. The water treatment plant settlers should be revised to permit
continuous sludge removal, with the sludge being thickened
and spread on sancl beds for dewatering to approximately 20-
percent solids and then disposed of in a sanitary landfill.
2. All non-conLaminated coolin^-vaLer streams should be separated
from process waste streams and discharged directly to the river.
3. Ammonia-rich waste streams should be treated aL the source by
ammonia stripping to reduce Lhe ammonia content prior to intro-
duction to the industrial waste treatment system.
4. The combined industrial wastes, with phosphate added as a
nutrient, should be treated in aerated lagoons with a minimum
of 15 hr aeration, and the mixed liquor should be settled and
the settler effluent discharged to the river with waste sludges
being stabilized by aerobic digestion and ultimately disposed
of by land spreading.
Standards established by the State of Tennessee were used by CERL
as the basis for the design of the waste-treatment facilities. These
standards require maximum effluent limitations of 450 mg/1 BOD and
-------
77
180 mg/1 suspended solids. The Army Ammunition Procurement and Supply
Agency has proposed standards (APSAR 11-11) requiring a maximum BOD of
15 mg/1 and a suspended solids content not to exceed 25 mg/1. The
maximum ammonia content was set at 0.1 mg/1 and nitrate at 5 mg/1.
The maximum TNT and nitrobodies content was set at 0.5 mg/1. The total
heavy-metals content was set at 5.0 mg/1 (max).
CERL has conducted treatability studies on selected effluents from
the liolston Army Ammunition Plant explosives-manufacturing area. Using
acclimated organisms, the Laboratory found that the wastes were not
toxic to organisms and were, therefore, treatable by a biological process.
Because of the complex and toxic organic materials present it is ques-
tionable whether a biotnass can be kept viable under these conditions.
If the biomass does survive, it is most unlikely that it wil] degrade
complex organic materials such .13 RDX, llflX, TNT, and cyclohexanone.
It is recommended that HAAP proceed iiimedialely with separation o£
non-contaminated cooling water from the process-waste stream*?. If the
resultant, process-waste stream is compatible with biological treatment,
this should be the first stage in the treatment system. If biological
treatment is not applicable, the first stage could consist of chemical
coagulation followed by flocculation and sedimentation. Either process
should be designed to give a product with a suspended-solids content
of 30 mg/1 or less.
Regardless of whether the first stage treatment is biological or
chemical in nature, a second stage, possibly consisting of adsorption
on activated carbon or oxidation with ozone, will be necessary. Because
-------
78
of the explosive nature of some of the contaminants, thermal regeneration
of the carbon may not be feasible, and ozonation would be the process of
choice. This second-stage treatment is necessary, even after biological
oxidation, to remove the complex organic materials that, in many cases,
are extremely toxic substances.
If the concentrated waste stream is not amenable to biological
oxidation, and if the first two stages consist of chemical treatment and
carbon adsorption, it is likely that acetic acid and any other low mole-
cular weight organic materials will not be adsorbed on the carbon or,
at best, will be adsorbed to only a slight degree. If the ratio of
low-molecular-wei^ht organic materials to the nitrate ion is not too
high, these materials vi]l be removed in the denitrification process
(discussed in tne next paragraph). If the ]ow-molecular-weight organic
materials arc in excess of that needed for dentrificatlon, an aerobic
biological-treatment process should be carried out after carbon adsorption.
because of Lhe high concentration of nitrate ions in the wastewater,
even after the first and second sLages, a uitrogen-removal step will be
necessary to reduce the higli algae growth potential of the receiving
stream. Because all of the nitrogen will be in the oxidized state, a
biological denitrification process is the logical step for this stage.
It is conventional to use methanol as a substrate for this process but,
in this case, it could be less expensive and more convenient to use
acetic acid as the substrate. It could also be necessary to add phos-
phate ion to the denitrification reactor.
The final effluent from this series of operations will be Jow in
-------
79
oxygen demand, suspended solids, and nitrogen forms and will not pose a
pollution threat to the llolston River.
Air Pollution
There are four main sources of air pollution in Area B, These are:
1. Nitric-acid producers;
2. Nitric-acid concentration;
3. Open burning of trash; and
4. Steam production.
The nitric-acid producers, at full capacity, release about 17,000 lb
of NO /day to the atmosphere. The level of NO _ in the general area is
X X
greater than 5 ppm, the maximum level recommended for personnel.
The nitric-acid concentrators, at full production, contribute about
5,200 lb of NO /day.
x 3
About 13 tons of refuse and explosive wastes are burned each day by
open burning techniques, it is esLimatcd that this operation adds
1,/ilO lb of contaminants to the atmosphere each clay.
The six coal-fired and the three natural-gas or oil-fired boilers
release about 28,000 lb of particulates and 11,000 lb of sulfur oxides
to the atmosphere each day.
Refuse disposal is to be handled by sanitary landfill or by incin-
eration with wet scrubbing of the stack gas. Design criteria are avail-
able for an explosives incinerator.
Consideration is being given to the use of electrostatic precipi-
tators or V7et scrubbers to remove particulate matter from the boiler-
building stack gas.
-------
80
The control of SO and NO from the incinerators and steam genera-
X X
tors has not been given much consideration. Use of low-sulfur coal may
solve the SOr problem, and NO can be reduced by control of combustion
X X
temperatures, by catalytic reducers, or by molecular sieves.
Little consideration lias been given to the volatile organic wastes
released to the atmosphere from the various manufacturing operations in
Area B. These materials include cyclohexanone, toluene, acetone, acetic
acid, and methyl nitrate, a by-product of the nitration operation.
Studies should be undertaken to determine the extent of pollution from
these sources and, as required, control measures should be developed
and installed.
In all pollution-control operations, care should be taken to assure
that the pollution is not transferred from water to the atmosphere or
vice versa.
-------
81
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT MID REFERENCES
Several documents by personnel from the Department of the Army
were used extensively in the preparation of this report. These docu-
ments provided information, as well as some tables and figures used
in the report.
The Documents used were:
1. Comprehensive Technical Evaluation Study-Holston Army Ammunition
Plant, Kingsport, Tennessee. Department of Defense, Department
of the Army, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory.
Champaign, Illinois. July 1972.
2. Military Explosives Department of the Army Technical Manual
TM9-1300-214 and Department of the Air Force Technical Order
TO 11A-1-34. Department of Defense. November 1967.
3. W. lieidelber^er. Hoist cm Army Ammunition Plant Pollution and
Abatement Plans Technical Report 4286. Process Automation and
Pollution Abatement Division, Manufacturing Technology Directorate,
Picatinny Arsenal, Department of Defense. Dover, Hew Jersey,
November 1971.
4. Water Quality Engineering Special Study Ho, 24-021-71/72,
Industrial Wastewater-ho'lston A~m / Aimuiition rlcwt-Xingsport,
Tennessee. 19 iiarch-28 Jwie, 1971. Department of the Army,
U, S. Amy Environmental llypiene Agency, Ldpewood Arsenal,
Department of Defense. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.
-------
APPENDIX A
GENERAL WATER DUALITY CRITERIA
FOR THE DEFINITION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION
IN THE WATERS OF TENNESSEE
-------
A-l
general WATER QUhLITY criteria for the definition and control of
POLLUiICK Jit THE UlEkS OF TENNESSEE
Adopted on flay 26, 1967
Amended on November 17, 1967, I lay 22, 1970, October 26, 1971 , and
December 14, 1971
*
Tennessee Water Quality Control Board
The Water Quality Control Act of 1971, Chapter 164 Public Acts of 1971 as
/vnended by Chapter 385, 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, aDatement, and control and to
establish such standards of quality for any waters of the State in relation
to their reasonable and necessary use as the Doard shall deem to be in the
public interest and establish general policies relating to existing or pro-
posed future pollution as the Board shall deem necessary to accomplish 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 ueasures required to control pollution in various
waters or in different sections of the same waters.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
1. Waters have many uses winch m 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 othei
desirable aquatic life; recreational boating and fishing; the final
disposal of municipal sewage and industrial waste following adequate
treatment; stock watering and irrigation; navigation, generation of
power; and the enjoyment of scenic and esthetic qualities of the water
2. The rigid application of urnfoiiu water quality is not desirable or
reasonable because of the varying uses of such waters. The assiimlati
capacity of a stream for sewage and waste varies depending uoon vnriOj
factors including tne following: volume of flow, depth of channel, th
presence of falls or rapids, rate of flow, temperature, natural
characteristics, end 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.
3. 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 se./age and waste
treatment and the benefits received. Ilithin 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 of rates and characteristics
of flow of waters in the stream where adequate, will be considered to
be a means of correction.
T fuIlyTpproved~oh June 2, 1972, by the Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
A-2
4. fr-T'C, wastes, or other wastes, as defined in The Water
Quality Control Act of 1971, Chapter 164 Public Acts of 1971, as
emended by Chapter 3S6, 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 inter-
ference to other reasonable and necessary uses of the water, or
pppreciable damage to the natural processes of self-purification.
In relation to the various qualities and the specific uses of trie
receiving waters, no sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes dis-
charged shall be resoonsible for conditions that fail to meet the
criteria of water quality outlined below. Bypassing or accidental
spills will not be tolerated.
The criteria of water quality outlined below are considered as guides
in applying the water quality objectives 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 allcw proper
sharing of available water resources; and to meet the needs of parti-
cular situations, additional criteria will be set.
CRITERIA OF WATER CONDITIONS
1. Domestic Raw Water Supply
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - There shall always be sufficient dissolved
oxygen present to prevent odors of decomposition and other
offensive conditions.
(b) pH - The pH value shall lie v/uhin the range of 6.0 to 9.0 and
shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this range over a pericc
of 24 houis.
(c) Hardness or I'.ineral Compounds - There shall'be no substances adder
to the waters that will increase the hardness or mineral content
of the waters to such an extent to appreciaoly impair the useful-
ness of the water as a source of domestic water supply.
(d) Total Dissolved Solids - The total dissolved solids shall at no
time exceed 500 mg/1.
(c) Solids, Tloating Materials and Deposits - There shall be no
distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily sleek, or the fomi?tic
of slimes, bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size or charact
as may impair the usefulness of the water as a source of domestic
water supply.
(O Turbidity or Color - There shall be no turbidity or color added ir
amounts or characteristics that can not be reduced to acceptable
concentrations by conventional water treatment processes.
-------
A-3
- "TV* r- r-% - ( t ^ ¦**£"* ^^v*^4-,' t rh.D^^r r h p "| "[
not exceed 3C° relative to an upstream control point. Tne
temperature of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C and the maximum
rate of change shall not exceed 2C° per hour. The temperature of
impoundments where stratification occurs will be measured at a
depth of 5 fpet, or mid-depth whichever is less, and the tempera-
ture in flowing streams snail be measured at mid-depth.
(h) Microbiological Coliform - Coliform group shall not exceed 10,000
per 100 ml. as a monthly average value (either ilPN or UF count);
nor exceed this number in more than 20 per cent of the samples
examined during any month; nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml. in more
than five per cent of such samples. These values may be exceeded
provided the organisms arc known to be of nonfecal origin, fto
disease producing bacteria or other objectionable organisms shall
be added to surface waters which will result in the contamination
of said waters to such an extent as to render the water unsuitable
as sources of domestic water supply after conventional water treat-
ment.
(i) Taste or Odor - There shall be no substances added which will result
in taste or odor that prevent the production of potable water by
conventional water treatment processes.
(j) Toxic Substances - There shall be no toxic substances added to the
waters that will produce toxic conditions that materially affect
man or animals or impair the safety of a conventionally treated
water supply.
(k) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the water
in quantities that may be detrimental tc public health or impair
the usefulness of the water as a source of domestic water supply.
2. Industrial Water Supply.
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - There shall always be sufficient dissolved oxygen
present to prevent odors of decomposition and other offensive condi-
tions.
(b) pH - The pH value shall lie within the range of G.O to 9.0 and shall
not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this range over a period of 24
hours.
—(c) - Hardness cr 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 extent as to appreciably impair the useful-
ness of the water as a source of industrial water supply.
(d) Total Dissolved Solids - The total dissolved solids shall at no
time exceed 500 mg/1.
-------
A-4
(c) Solids, Floating Materials'and Deposits - There shall be r,o
distinctly "^cb 1 c solid:, :cun, fc:r.5 oily sleek, cr tne for-
mation of slices, 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.
(f) Turbidity or Color - There shall be no turbidity or color added in
amounts or characteristics that can not be reduced to acceptable
concentrations by conventional water treatment processes.
(g) Temperature - The maximum water temperature change shall not exceed
3C° relative to an uostream control point. The temperature of the
water shall not exceed 30.5°C and the maximum rate of change shall
not exceed 2C° per hour. The temperature of impoundments where
stratification occurs vnll be measured at a depth of 5 feet, or
mid-depth whichever is less, and the temperature in flowing screams
shall be measured at mid-depth.
(h) Taste or Odor - There shall be no substances added that will result
in taste or odor tnat would prevent the use of the water for indus-
trial processing.
fi) Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to the waters
that may produce toxic conditions that will adversely affect the wMer
for industrial processing.
(j) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the waters
in quantities that may adversely affect the water for industrial
processing.
3, Fish and Aquatic Life.
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - The dissolved oxygen shall be maintained at 5.0
mg/1 except in limited sections of the stream receiving treated ef-
fluents. In these limited sections, a minimum of 3.0 mg/1 dissolved
oxygen shall be allowed. The dissolved oxygen content shall be
measured at mid-deDth m waters having a total depth of ten (10)
feet or less and at a depth of five (b) feet in waters having a
total depth of greater than ten (10) feet. A minimum dissolved
oxygen content of 6.0 mg/1 shall be maintained in recognized
trout streams.
(b) pH - The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.5 to 8.5 and
shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this range over a
period of 24 hours.
(.c) Solids, Floating Materials and Deoosits - There shall be no
distinctly visible solids, scum, foam, oily sleek, or the for-
mation of slimes, bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size
or character that may be detrimental to fish and aquatic life.
(d) 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.
-------
A-5
(e) Temperature - The maximum water temperature change shall rot
exceed 3C° relative 10 an upstream control point. The tempera-
ture of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C and the maximum ra~e of
change shall not exceed 2C° per hour. The temperature of recognized
trout waters shall not exceed 20°C. There shall be no abnormal
temperature changes that may affect aquatic life unless caused by
natural conditions. The temperature of n.ipoundments where strati-
fication occurs will be measured at a depth of 5 feet, or mid-depth
whichever is less, and the temperature m flowing streams shall be
measured at mid-depth.
(0 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 fisn or
aquatic life.
(g) Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to the waters
that will produce toxic conditions that affect fish or aquatic life.
(h) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the waters
that will be detrimental to fish or aquatic life.
4. Recreation.
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - lhere shall ah/ays be sufficient dissolved
oxygen present to prevent odors of decomposition and other offen-
sive conditions.
(b) pit - The pH value shall lie within the range of 6.0 to 9.0 find
shall not fluctuate more than 1.0 unit in this range over a period
of V\ hours.
(c) Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits - There shall be no
distinctly visible solids, scu'i', foam, oily sleek, or the forma-
tion of slin-es, bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size or
character that may be detrimental to recreation.
(d) Turbidity or Color - There shall be no turbidity or color added in
such amounts or character that will result in an objectionable ap-
pearance to the water.
(e) Temperature - The maximum water temperature change shall not
exceed 3C° relative to an upstream control point. The tempera-
ture of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C and the maximum rate of
change shall not exceed 2C° per hour. The temperature of impound-
ments 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.
(f) Microbiological Coliform - The fecal colifom group shall not
exceed 5,000 per 100 ml. as a monthly average value nor oceed
this number in more than 20 per cent of the samples examined djring
any month nor exceed 20,000 per 100 ml. in more than five per cent
of such samples. In those waters that are physically suitable and
available to the public for water-contact recreation the fecal
-------
A-6
coHform concentration shall not exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. i"
any iv/o consecutive sa.-iples collected during the rrontns of "ay
through September. S.'ater areas near outfalls of domestic sewage
treatment plants are not considered suitable for water-contact
recreation.
(g) Taste or Odor - There shall be no substances added that will
result in objectionable taste or odor.
(h) Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to the water
that will produce toxic conditions that affect man or animal.
(i) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the water
in quantities winch may have a detrimental effect on recreation.
Irrigation
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - There shall always be sufficient dissolved
oxygen present to prevent odors of decomposition and other
offensive conditions.
(b) pH - The pll 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.
(c) 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.
(d) Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits - There shall be no distinct-
ly visible solids, scum, foam, oily sleek, or the formation of slur.es,
bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size or character as may
uiipair the usefulness of the water for irrigation purposes.
(e) Temperature • The temperature of the water'shall not be raised or
lowered to such an extent as to interfere with its use for irriga-
tion puiposes.
(f) loxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to wate1* that
will produce toxic conditions that will affect the water for irriga
tion.
(g) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the water
in quantities which may be detrimental to the waters used for irri-
gation.
Livestock Watering and Wildlife
(a) Dissolved Oxygen - There shall always be sufficient dissolved
oxygen present to prevent odors of decomposition and other
offensive conditions.
-------
A-7
(b) j)H Thd pH value shall lie within the ranee of 6.0 to 9 0 end
she1'1 r1,jctj=tc f's' 1 ? ^r, '"¦••'c rc.i^c c-.c-r a period
of 24 hours.
(c) Hardness or Mineral Compounds - There shall be no substances added
to water that will increase the mineral convent to such an extent
as to impair its use for livestock watering and wildlife.
(d) Solids, Floating Materials and Deoosits - There shall be no distinct-
ly visible solids, scum, foam, oily sleek, or the formation of slimes
bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size or character as to inter-
fere with livestock watering and wildlife.
(e) Temperature - The temperature of the water shall not be raised or
lowered to such an extent es to interfere with its use for live-
stock watering and wildlife.
(f) Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to water that
will produce toxic conditions that will affect the water for live-
stock watering and wildlife.
(g) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the water
in quantities which nay be detrimental tc the water for livestock
watering and wildlife.
7. Navigation
(a) Dissolved Oxygen ~ There shall ah,'ays be sufficient dissolved oxygen
present to prevent odors of decomposition and other offensive condi-
tions.
(b) Hardness or liinor?l 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.
(c) Solids, Floating Materials and Deposits - There shall be no distinct-
ly visible solids, scu:i, foam, oily sleek, or the formation of slires,
bottom deposits or sludge banks of such size or character as to inter-
fere with navigation.
(d) Temperature - The temperature of the water shall not be raised or
lowered to such an extent as to interfere with its use for naviga-
tion purposes.
(e) Toxic Substances - There shall be no substances added to water that
will produce toxic conditions that will affect the water for naviga-
tion.
(f) Other Pollutants - Other pollutants shall not be added to the water
in quantities which may be detrimental to the waters used fo^ navi-
gation.
-------
A-8
criteria should not be construed as permitting the degradation of hiorcr
''Ti-+v» water when such enn be Drevenied by reasonable pollution control n..c.-sures.
•fl cbovc conditions arc recognized as applying to waters affected by the discnarge
^ sewage and/or industrial waste or other waste and not resulting fron natural
causes.
Off IK'ITI O/'S
]. Conventional Water Treatment - Conventional water treatment as referred
to in the criteria denotes coagulation, sedimentation, filtration and
chlormation.
2. Mixing Zone - Mixing zone refers to that section of flowing stream or
impounded waters necessary for effluents to become dispersed.
The mixing zone necessary in each particular case shall be defined by
the Tennessee Water Quality Control Board.
INTERPRETATION OF CRITERIA
1. Interpretations of the above criteria shall conform to any rules and re-
gulations or policies adopted by the Water Quality Control Board.
2. Insofar as practicable, the effect of treated sewage or waste dischaiqes
cm the receiving waters shall be considered after they are Mixed with tne
waters and beyond a reasonable zone of immediate effect upon the quali-
ties of the waters. The extent to winch tins is practicable depends uoon
local conditions and the proximity and nature of other uses of the waters.
3. The technical and economical feasibility of waste treatment, recovery, or
adjustment of th^ ir.sthod of discharge to provide correction shall be con-
sidered in determining the tir.e to be allowed for the development of
practicable methods and for the specified correction.
4. The criteria set forth shall be applied on the basis of the following
stream flows: unregulated sueaips - stream flows equal to or exceeding
the 3-day mimi.'U.n, 20-year recurrence interval; regulated streams -
instantaneous mm mum flow.
5. In general, deviations fron normal water conditions may be undesirable,
but the rate and extent of the deviations should be considered in inter-
preting the above criteria.
6. The criteria and standards provide that all discharges of sewage, indus-
trial waste, and other wastes will receive the best practicable treatment
(secondary or the equivalent) or control according to the policy and pro-
cedure of the Tennessee Water Quality Control Board. A degree of treat-
ment greater than secondary when necessary to protect the water uses will
be required for selected sewage and waste discharges.
-------
jruTSSEE AliTI DEGRADATION STATEMENT
A-9
1. The Standards and Plan adopted are designed to provide for the pro-
tection of existing water quality and/or the upgrading or "ennancc-
ment" of water quality in all waters within Tennessee. It is recog-
nised that some waters may have existing quality better than
established standards.
2. The Criteria and Standards shall not be construed as permitting the
degradation of these higher quality waters wnen such can be prevented
by reasonable pollution control treasures. In this regard, existing
high quality water will be maintained unless and until it is affirma-
tively demonstrated to the Tennessee Water Quality Control Board tnat
a change is justifiable as a result of necessary social and economic
development.
3. All discharges of sewage, industrial waste, or other waste shall
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.
4. In implementing the provisions of the above as they relate to inter-
state streams, the Tennessee Water Quality Control Board will cooperate
with the appropriate federal Agency in order to assist in carrying out
responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended.
December 17, 1971
-------
APPENDIX B
sailing PROCEDURE
-------
B-l
SAMPLING PROCEDURE
Fifty-six sampling locations were established for the waste
source and stream survey. These locations included direct dis-
charges from seven industries to the Holston River and its tribu-
taries, in-plant waste streans at Holston Mills, ASG Industries and
Tennessee Eastman Company, and four stations in the Ilolston River.
The majority of the industrial waste samples were collected
hourly by using automatic samplers and composited on an equal vol-
ume basis at the end of each 24-hour period. Uhero automatic samplers
could not be used, samples were collected manually every tvo hours and
composited on an equal volume basis.
Temperature, pH and conductivity were determined periodically.
Samples were analysed for solids, COD, TOC, nutriento, sulfates, or-
ganic.s, fluorides, metals and alkalinity. Grab samples for phenolic
and oil and sjrease analyses were composited over a 4-6 hour period.
Samples for BOD, solids, phenolics, sulfide, color, alkalinity
and oil and grease extractions were analyzed in the EPA mobile lab-
oratory. COD, TOC, nutrients, sulfates, and fluoride analyses were
performed at the NFIC laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. Organic samples
were analyzed at the NFIC laboratories in Denver and Cincinnati.
Sediment samples were collected at stream stations 10-53, 54, and
-56, using a Phelegcr core sampler. These samples were immediately
-------
B-2
packed with dry ice and shipped to the NFIC laboratory in Cincinnati
for analyses.
Flow measurements were obtained from company records and flow
meters, if available. Uhere necessary, EPA personnel installed
flow measuring devices and recording equipment, or, if this was
not possible, instantaneous flow measurements were taken using a
Marsh-McBirney flow meter.
-------
APPENDIX C
METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLE PRESERVATION
-------
C-l
METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND SAMPLE PRESERVATION
Analyses for COD, sulfate, sulfide, phcnolics, and BOD and DO
were conducted according to standard methods (using the azide modifi-
*
cation of the Winkler technique).
All other laboratory analyses and field measurements were carried
•kit
out in accordance with accepted standard techniques.
Samples collected in the field were preserved as follows:
Sample for Analysis of- Preservative
Sulfate None
Fluoride
BOD Ice
Solids
Sulfj :le
Or^anics
Alkalinity
Sediment Dry ice
nutrients 1 mi cone. II >S 0 ./I
COD - '
TOC
¦•ctals 2 mJ cone UN0 /1
Oil & Crease 2 ml cone >]0SO./1
/. H
Phenolics 1 cm CuSO. + 1 ml cone H.P0./1
4 3 4
* M. J. Tarus, A. E. Greenberg, R. D. Hoalc, and M. C. Rand, Standard
Methods for the Examination of Mater and Wastewater s 3 3th Edition,
American Public Health Association. New York, New York. 1971.
** iiethods for Che>rical Analysis of Water cold. Wastest Environmental
Protection Agency, National Environmental Research Center, Analytical
Quality Control Laboratory. Cincinnati, Ohio. July 1971.
*** Ice was packed around sample containers to lower temperature and
retard bacteriological degradation.
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
------- |