Method1 Us

Holston Army Ammunition Plant HABR No.
TN-10
Kingspoxt V:- _."..-..:'..-.

Hawkins County -^o^^vi-uVM COUM
Tennessee
WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA
REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED DRAWING
Historic American Engineering Record

National Park Service
Department of the Interior
Washington, DC 20013-7127
HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD
Holston Army Ammunition Plant
TN-10
Location: In Sullivan County, Tennessee, along the Holston

River, South and west of Kingspolpt.
Date of Construction: Established in 19A2-1944
Owne r: Department of the Army
Significance: During World War II, the Holston Army Ammunition Plant
made several significant contributions to
explosives-manufacturing technology. It was the first
large-scale facility to implement the nearly developed
Bachmann process in the manufacture of the explosive
RDX. At the same time, it streamlined the Bachmann
method by instituting a slurry-based, continuous
manufacturing process, and it also developed important
new cooling and packaging procedures for composition
#
B. As a result of these innovations, Holston became
the world's largest producer of Composition B, the
most powerful explosive until the development of
nuclear weapons.
Historical Report
Prepared by: Jeffrey A. Hess, 1984.
Prepared for
Transmittal by: Robie S. Lange, HABS/HAER, 1985.
HAER No. TN-10
Page %
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Holston Army Ammunition Plant (HSAAP) is part of the Army's Armament,
Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM). It is the only American
manufacturing facility for RDX- and HMX-based high explosives. Its chief
product is Composition B. The installation consists of two separate areas

Plant A (120 acres) and Plant B (5,900 acres) situated in and near
Kingsport, Tennessee. Except for a four-year standby period immediately
following V-J Day, the facility has been in continuous production since its
initial construction in 1942-1944. Of the 470 buildings maintained by the
installation, approximately three-quarters date from the World-vVar-II
period.
As the world's first large-scale Bachmann-method plant, the Holston Army

Anmunition Plant revolutionized the production of RDX and Composition B by
replacing an expensive, labor-intensive technology with a cost-efficient,
mass-production operation. It also pioneered in the development of the

magnesium-nitrate method of nitric acid concentration- During World War
II, the installation was of critical importance to Allied strategic
planning, and its large output of Composition B hastened Allied victory in
the crucial Battle of the Atlantic.
Because of their great technological and historical importance, the ten RDX
and Ccmposition-B manufacturing lines (Buildings Bl, S3, B5, 87, B9, Cl,
C3, C5, C5, C7, C9, D1-D10, E1-E10, G1-G10, Hl-HlO, 11-110, Jl^JlO, K1-K10,
L1-L10, M1-M10, 01, 03, 05, 07, 09, N1-N10) at Plant B are Category I
historic properties. The installation also contains one of the nation's

HAER No. TN-10
Page^3
few surviving producer-gas plants (Plant A, Building 10), which is a
Category I "historic property by virtue of its rarity and "highly intact
condition. The installation's Old Administration Building (Plant B,
Building 1) is a Category III historic property "because of its role in
overseeing the Wbrld-War-II manufacturing operation. There are no Category
II historic properties at the installation.

HAER No. TN-10
Page ^j.
CONTENTS
Executive Surmary
PREFACE 1
1. INTRODUCTION 3
Scope 3
Methodology 4
2. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 14
Background 14
World War II 17
Korean War . 45
Vietnam War 48
Recent Developments 50
3. PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 59
Background 59
Category I Historic Properties 64
Category II Historic Properties 80
Category III Historic Properties 80
BIBLIOGRAPHY 83
HAER No. TN-10
Page %
PREFACE
This report presents the results of an historic properties survey of the
Holston Army Ammunition Plant. Prepared for the United States Army
Materiel Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM), the report is intended
to assist the Army in bringing this installation into compliance with the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and its amendments, and related
federal laws and regulations. To this end, the report focuses on the
identification, evaluation, documentation, nomination, and preservation of
historic properties at the Holston Army Ammunition Plant. Chapter 1 sets
forth the survey's scope and methodology; Chapter 2 presents an architec-
tural, historical, and technological overview of the installation and its
properties; and Chapter 3 identifies significant properties by Army
category and sets forth preservation recommendations. Illustrations and an
annotated bibliography supplement the text.
This report is part of a program initiated through a memorandum of
agreement between the National Park Service, Department of the Interior,
and the U.S. Department of the Army. The program covers 74 DARCOM
installations and has two components: 1) a survey of historic properties
(districts, buildings, structures, and objects), and 2) the development of
archaeological overviews. Stanley H. Fried, Chief, Real Estate Branch of
Headquarters DARCOM, directed the program for the Army, and Dr. Robert J.
Kapsch, Chief of the Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American
Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) directed the program for the National Park
Service. Sally Kress Tompkins was program manager, and Robie S. Lange was
HAER No. TN-10
Page (,.
project manager for the historic properties survey. Technical assistance
was provided by Donald C. Jackson.
Building Technology Incorporated acted as primary contractor to HABS/HAER
for the historic properties survey. William A. Brenner was BTI's
principal-in-charge and Dr. Larry D. Lankton was the chief technical
consultant. Major subcontractors were the MacDonald and Mack Partnership
and Jeffrey A. Hess. The author of this report was Jeffrey A. Hess. The
author gratefully acknowledges the help of Lt. Col. Willis Seguin, Plant
Commander; William D. Miller and Susan P. Cole of the government staff; and
T.W. Goodwin, Jerry Blair, Henry Hurd, Roy S. Eastern, Robert Brewer, Jr.,
Robert Wicker, and Ken Curtis of the Holston Defense Corporation.
The complete HABS/HAER documentation for this installation will be included
in the HABS/HAER collections at the Library of Congress, Prints and
Photographs Division, under the designation HAER Mo. TN-10.

HAER No. TN-10
Page 7
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
SCOPE
This report is based on an historic properties survey conducted in April
1983 of all Army-owned properties located within the official boundaries of
the Holston Army Ammunition Plant. The survey included the following
tasks:
Completion of documentary research on the history of the
installation and its properties.
Completion of a field inventory of all properties at the
installation.
Preparation of a combined architectural, historical, and
technological overview for the installation.
Evaluation of historic properties and development of recommenda-
tions for preservation of these properties.
Also completed as a part of the historic properties survey of the
installation, but not included in this report, are HABS/HAER Inventory
cards for 27 individual properties. These cards, which constitute
HABS/HAER Documentation Level IV, will be provided to the Department of the
Army. Archival copies of the cards, with their accompanying photographic

HAER No. TN-10
Page g
negatives, will be transmitted to the HABS/HAER collections at the Library
of Congress.
The methodology used to complete these tasks is described in the following
section of this report,
METHODOLOGY
1. Documentary Research
The Holston Army Ammunition Plant (HSAAP) was constructed during
1942-1944 as a government-owned, contractor-operated facility designed
to manufacture the high explosive Composition B and its chief ingre-
dient RDX. In addition to these major products, the HSAAP also
manufactured several raw materials used in RDX production. These
subsidiary operations involved the production of acetic acid, acetic
anhydride, ammonium nitrate, nitric acid, and producer gas. To place
the HSAAP in proper historical and technological perspective, research
was conducted on virtually all manufacturing processes employed at the
installation. Published doumentary sources were identified by con-
sulting standard bibliographies of military history, engineering, and
the applied sciences. Unpublished sources were identified by
researching the historical and technological archives of the U.S. Army
Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command (ALMCCOM) at Rock Island
Arsenal.
HAER No. TN-10
Page \
A concerted effort was also made to locate published and unpublished
sources dealing specifically with the architecture and history of the
HSAAP. This site-specific research was conducted primarily at the
AMCCOM Historical Office at Rock Island Arsenal, the Kingsport Public
Library (Palmer Room), and the HSAAP (contractor's archives, govern-
ment administrative archives, real property records office, facilities
engineer's office). The Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office
(Tennessee Historical Commission, Nashville) was contacted for infor-

2
mation about the HSAAP, but had no relevant data.
Army records used for the field inventory included current Real
Property Inventory (RPI) printouts that listed all officially recorded
buildings and structures by facility classification and date of
construction; the installation's property record cards; base maps and
photographs supplied by installation personnel; and installation mas-
ter planning, archaeological, environmental assessment, and related
reports and documents. A complete listing of this documentary
material may be found in the bibliography.
2. Field Inventory
Architectural and technological field surveys were conducted in April
1983 by Jeffrey A. Hess and Robert C. Mack. Following General
discussions with William Miller, environmental affairs officer of the
government staff, and T. W. Goodwin, manager of the contractor staff,
the surveyors were provided with escorts for tours of the
installation's production and magazine areas. The following
/
HAER No. TN-10
Page \0
contractor personnel served as guides: Ken Curtis {magazine areas),
Henry Hurd (Plant-A production facilities), Robert Brewer, Jr.
(Plant-A utilities), Jerry Blair (Plant-B RDX-and-Composition-B
lines), and Robert Wicker (Plant-B acid area and utilities). The
surveyors were permitted to inspect the installation's administration
and shop areas on an unescorted basis.
Field inventory procedures were based on the HABS/HAER Guidelines for
Inventories of Historic Buildings and Engineering and Industrial

2
Structures. All areas and properties were visually surveyed.
Building locations and approximate dates of construction were noted
from the installation's property records and field-verified. Interior
surveys were made of the major facilities to permit adequate
evaluation of architectural features, building technology, and
production equipment.
Field inventory forms were prepared for, and black and white 35 nsn
photographs taken of all buildings and structures through 1945 except
basic utilitarian structures of no architectural, historical, or
technological interest. When groups of similar ("prototypical")
buildings were found, one field form was normally prepared to
represent all buildings of that type. Field inventory forms were also
completed for representative post-1945 buildings and structures.
Information collected on the field forms was later evaluated,
condensed, and transferred to HABS/HAER Inventory cards.
?
HAER No. TN-10
Page \l
3. Historical Overview
A combined architectural, historical, and technological overview was
prepared from information developed from the documentary research and
the field inventory. It was written in two parts: 1) an introductory
description of the installation, and 2) a history of the installation
by periods of development, beginning with pre-military land uses.
Maps and photographs were selected to supplement the text as
appropriate.
The objectives of the overview were to 1) establish the periods of
major construction at the installation, 2) identify important events
and individuals associated with specific historic properties, 3)
describe patterns and locations of historic property types, and 4)
analyze specific building and industrial technologies employed at the
installation.
4. Property Evaluation and Preservation Measures
Based on information developed in the historical overviews, properties
were first evaluated for historical significance in accordance with
the eligibility criteria for nomination to the National Register of
Historic Places. These criteria require that eligible properties
possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association, and that they meet one or more
4
of the following:
7
HAER No. TN-10
Page Q
A. Are associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of oar history.
B. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in the
nation's past.
C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or
method of construction, represent the work of a master,
possess high artistic values, or represent a significant and
distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
distinction.
D. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information
important in pre-history or history.
Properties thus evaluated were further assessed for placement in one
of five Army historic property categories as described in Army
Regulation 420-40:
Category I Properties of major importance
Category II Properties of importance
Category III Properties of minor importance
Category IV Properties of little or no importance
Category V Properties detrimental to the significance
of adjacent historic properties.

HAER No. TN-10
Page \<x
Based on an extensive review of the architectural, historical, and
technological resources identified on DARCOM installations nationwide,
four criteria were developed to help determine the appropriate
categorization level for each Army property. These criteria were used
to assess the importance not only of properties of traditional
historical interest, but also of the vast number of standardized or
prototypical buildings, structures and production processes that were
built and put into service during World War II, as well as of
properties associated with many post-war technological achievements.
The four criteria were often used in combination and are as follows:
1) Degree of importance as a work of architectural, engineering,
or industrial design. This criterion took into account the
qualitative factors by which design is normally judged:
artistic merit, workmanship, appropriate use of materials,
and functionality.
2) Degree of rarity as a remaining example of a once widely used
architectural, engineering, or industrial design or process.
This criterion was applied primarily to the many standardized
or prototypical DARCCM buildings, structures, or industrial
processes. The more widespread or influential the design or
process, the greater the importance of the remaining examples
of the design or process was considered to be. This
criterion was also used for non-military structures such as
farmhouses and other once prevalent building types.
X
HAER No. TN-10
Page |4
3) Degree of integrity or completeness. This criterion compared
the current condition, appearance, and function of a
building, structure, architectural assemblage, or industrial
process to its original or most historically important
condition, appearance, and function. Those properties that
were highly intact were generally considered of greater
importance than those that were not.
4) Degree of association with an important person, program, or
event. This criterion was used to examine the relationship
of a property to a famous personage, wartime project, or
similar factor that lent the property special importance.
The majority of DARCOM properties were built just prior to or during
World War II, and special attention was given to their evaluation.
Those that still remain do not often possess individual importance,
but collectively they represent the remnants of a vast construction
undertaking whose architectural, historical, and technological
importance needed to be assessed before their numbers diminished
further. This assessment centered on an extensive review of the
military construction of the 1940-1945 period, and its contribution to
the history of World War II and the post-war Army landscape.
Because technology has advanced so rapidly since the war, post-World
War II properties were also given attention. These properties were
evaluated in terms of the nation's more recent accomplishments in
weaponry, rocketry, electronics, and related technological and
*f
HAER No. TN-10
Page | 5
scientific endeavors. Thus the traditional definition of "historic"
as a property 50 or more years old was not germane in the assessment
of either World War II or post-war DAKCCM buildings and structures;
rather, the historic importance of all properties was evaluated as
completely as possible regardless of age.
Property designations by category are expected to be useful for
approximately ten years, after which all categorizations should be
reviewed and updated.
Following this categorization procedure, Category I, II, and III
historic properties were analyzed in terms of:
Current structural condition and state of repair. This
information was taken from the field inventory forms and
photographs, and was often supplemented by rechecking with
facilities engineering personnel.
The nature of possible future adverse impacts to the
property. This information was gathered from the
installation's master planning documents and rechecked with
facilities engineering personnel.
Based on the above considerations, the general preservation
recommendations presented in Chapter 3 for Category I, II, and III
historic properties were developed. Special preservation
x
HAER No. TN-10
Page \i^>
recommendations were created for individual properties as
circumstances required.
5- Report Review
Prior to being completed in final form, this report was subjected to
an in-house raview by Building Technology Incorporated. It was then
sent in draft to the subject installation for comment and clearance
and, with its associated historical materials, to HABS/HAER staff for
technical review. When the installation cleared the report,
additional draft copies were sent to DARCOM, the appropriate State
Historic Preservation Officer, and, when requested, to the
archaeological contractor performing parallel work at the
installation. The report was revised based on all comments collected,
then published in final form.
NOTES
1. 'The following bibliographies of published sources were consulted:

Industrial Arts Index, 1938-1957; Applied Science and Technology
Index, 1958-1980; Engineering Index, 1938-1983; Robin Higham, ed., A
Guide to the Sources of United States Military History (Hamden, Conn.:
Archon Books, 1975); John E, Jessup and Robert W. Coakley, A Guide to
the Study and Use of Military History {Washington, D,C: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1979); "Military Installations," Public
Works History in the United States, eds., Suellen M. Hoy and Michael
C. Robinson (Nashville: American Association for State and Local
History, 1982), pp. 380-400. AMCCOM (formerly ARRCOM, or U.S. Army
Armament Materiel Readiness Command) is the military agency
responsible for supervising the operation of government-owned
munititions plants; its headquarters are located at Rock Island
Arsenal, Rock Island, Illinois. Although there is no comprehensive
index to AMCCOM archival holdings, the agency's microfiche collection
of unpublished reports is itemized in ARRCOM, Catalog of Common
Sources, Fiscal Year 1983, 2 vols. (no pi.: Historical Office,
AMCCOM, Rock Island Arsenal, n.d.).
X
HAER No. TN-10
Page x*')
2. Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering

Record, National Park Service, Guidelines for Inventories of Historic
Buildings and Engineering and Industrial Structures (unpublished
draft, 1982).
3. Representative post-World War II buildings and structures were defined

as properties that were: (a) "representative" by virtue of
construction type, architectural type, function, or a combination of
these, (b) of obvious Category I, II, or III historic importance, or
(c) prominent on the installation by virtue of size, location, or
other distinctive feature.
4. National Park Service, How to Complete National Register Forms

{Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 1977).
5. Army Regulation 420-40, Historic Preservation (Headquarters, U.S.

Army: Washington, D.C., 15 April 1984).
A
HolsCon Army Ammunition Plant
HAER No. TN-10
Page ! %
Chapter 2
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
BACKGROUND
The HSAAP is a government-owned, contractor-operated installation

constructed during 1942-1944 for the manufacture of the military, high
explosive Composition B, and its chief ingredient RDX. The installation

consists of two separate areas Plant A and Plant B located about four
air miles apart on the Holston River in northeastern Tennessee (Figure 1).
The two areas are connected by above-ground chemical pipelines and an
inter-plant railroad. Plant A presently occupies about 120 acres in the

heart of the manufacturing district of Kingsport in Sullivan County. It
produces raw materials for and processes by-products from Plant B, which is
situated upstream on about 5,900 acres in rural-suburban Hawkins County.
Plant B contains a nitric-acid production area and ten explosives-
manufacturing lines, as well as extensive facilities for storing and
shipping explosives. . It also houses the HSAAP's main administrative
offices and maintenance shops.
During World War II, the HSAAP made several significant contributions to
explosives-manufacturing technology. It was the first large-scale facility
to implement the newly developed Bachmann process in the manufacture of

RDX. At the sarre time, it streamlined the Bachmann method by instituting a
slurry-based, continuous manufacturing process, and it also developed

important new cooling and packaging procedures for Composition B. As a
result of these innovations, the HSAAP became the world's largest producer
X
HAER No. TN-10
Page |P
&
HAER No. TN-10
Page ?0
of Composition B, the most powerful explosive known until the development
of nuclear weapons. Used extensively in depth charges and torpedos, the

plant's output hastened Allied victory in the crucial Battle of the
Atlantic. On a smaller scale, the HSAAP pioneered in the use of magnesium
nitrate as a dehydrating-concentrating agent in nitric-acid production a
technique that would eventually lead to the commercial development of the
"maggie unit,"
Shortly after V-J Day, the HSAAP suspended manufacturing operations and
assumed the status of a "standby" plant with its production equipment
intact. Apart from the fabrication of ammonium-nitrate fertilizer in

1946-1947 for distribution under the Marshall Plan, the HSAAP1 s
manufacturing lines remained inactive until 1949, when small-scale
production of Canposition B resumed. Since that time, the HSAAP has

continued to turn out RDX-based explosives, with production dramatically
expanding and contracting during and after the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
At present, the HSAAP comprises approximately 470 buildings, three-quarters

of which date from the original construction period. About one-third of
the structures are used for manufacturing; one-third for explosives

storage; and the remaining third for administration, maintenance, and
utilities. Despite the modification and modernization of several plant
facilities, the HSAAP in both architectural and technological terms

retains much of its original, World-War-II character. The installation
also maintains and operates one of the country's few remaining producer-gas
plants (Plant A, Building 10).
X
HAER No. TN-10
Page AI
For a more detailed understanding of the HSAAP's architectural and
technological history, it is necessary to look more closely at the
installation's three major production periods: World War II, the Korean War
and the Vietnam War. Whenever the available data permits, the discussion
will focus on specific buildings and processes.
WORU) WAR II
In June 1940, shortly after the fall of France, President Roosevelt
established the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) to mobilize the
nation's academic community for "research on the mechanisms and devices of
warfare." In time, the NDRC would sponsor hundreds of research projects
that ran the gamut from amphibious vehicles to rocket propellants. But
initially it focused its attention on promising new technologies developed
by the British, and this was particularly true in the area of high
explosives.
During the 1930's, British stategists had learned that German submarine
hulls were being strengthened to withstand anything short of a direct hit
by a conventional TNT-loaded depth charge. To counter the U-boat threat,
the British Admiralty began seeking a more effective explosive, and its
first choice was cyclonite. Discovered as early as 1899, cyclonite was
known to be almost twice as powerful as TNT but also several times more
sensitive to shock, which prohibited its use in conventional ordnance. By
the late 1930's, however, British scientists at the Armament Research
Department at Woolwich Arsenal had determined that cyclonite could be
X
Holston Array Ammunition Plant
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3.3s
sufficiently desensitized by combining it with wax, plasticizing oils, or
TNT. As a security measure, the British rechristened cyclonite as
"Research Department Explosive," or RDX. with a similar flair for
anonymity, they chose the name of "Composition B" for the desensitized
mixture of 60% RDX and 40% TNT that was to be widely used in Allied naval
ordnance during World War II.
Although the British were the first to tame cyclonite, they were less
successful in devising an efficient means for mass producing it. The
method developed at Woolwich Arsenal, and first employed on a large scale
at Bridgewater, England in the summer of 1941, involved a simple batch
process for the nitration of hexamine by concentrated nitric acid. Calling
for eleven pounds of strong nitric acid for every pound of RDX produced,
the Woolwich method required the construction of an enormous, on-site
nitric-acid works, which made the process extremely expensive to implement
and operate. While the Bridgewater plant was still under construction, the
British encouraged the newly created NDRC to investigate a cheaper method
of manufacturing RDX. The NDRC took up the challenge, and in November
1940, it selected Werner E. Bachmann, an organic chemist at the University

4
of Michigan, to work on the project.
Bachmann had no previous experience with munitions, and as he later
declared, his "heart sank" at the prospect of working on an explosives
project. Despite his personal distaste for the work, Bachmann threw
himself into the study with such energy that within three months he had
developed a new RDX-pr eduction process, involving the nitration of hexamine
by a mixture of strong nitric acid and ammonium nitrate, with acetic

HAER No. TN-10
Page S^
anbydride added to serve as a dehydrating agent. Bachmann's discovery
reduced the total nitric-acid requirements of the Woolwich method by fully
85% while doubling the RDX yield from hexamine. The new process, however,
did have one drawback: it released, as a by-product, substantial quantities
of weak acetic acid contaminated with RDX. Before the Bachmann method
could become a practical manufacturing technique, it was necessary to
devise a means of purifying the acetic acid, concentrating it, and
reconverting it to acetic anhydride. The search for the solution to this
problem led the NDRC to the Tennessee Eastman Corporation of Kingsport,
Tennessee.
A wholly-owned subsidiary of the Eastman Kodak Company of Rochester, New
York, the Tennessee Eastman Corporation was a leading producer of both
acetic anhydride and cellulose acetate, which it manufactured into
synthetic yarn. In developing its cellulose-acetate facility, Tennessee
Eastman had engineered an acetic-acid recovery system that seemed
applicable to the Bachmann process. In November 1941, the NDRC requested
Tennessee Eastman to join its RDX task force, and three months later, the
company reported that it had worked out a feasible acid-recovery procedure.
The firm was then asked to design and operate two pilot plants in
Kingsport: one to manufacture RDX according to the Bachmann method, and
the other to combine RDX and TNT into Composition B. Both plants were in
production by the end of April 1942. Highly impressed with the company's
expeditious handling of the pilot projects, the NDRC recommended that
Tennessee Eastman be selected to design and operate the HSAAP, the
country's first and only large-scale, Bachmann-method, RDX installation. A

HAER No. TN-10
Page 2:4
contract to this effect was signed by Tennessee Eastman and the United
States government in June 1942.
Site Selection and Former Land Use
The Kingsport area was selected as the site for the HSAAP primarily because
it was the manufacturing base of the Tennessee Eastman Corporation, which

7
would serve as contractor-operator of the new facility. The site also
satisfied the following basic criteria that governed the selection of other
World-War-II explosives plants:
(1) availability of suitable labor without major housing projects;

(2) proximity to a main railroad line;
(3) availability of adequate electric power;

(4) ample supply of water for processing;
(5) availability of extended, isolated tracts for explosives
manufacturing and storage;

(6) a location at least 200 miles from coastal waters and
international borders as a defense against enemy attack.
When the government began its acquisition of land for the HSAAP in the
summer of 1942, the Plant-A site, immediately adjacent to the Tennessee
Eastman Plant in Kingsport, was an unoccupied, industrially-zoned tract

with no standing structures. The Plant-B site in rural Hawkins County was
predominantly crop and pasture land that had long been used for dairying.
It contained at least thirty-eight standing structures, including
farmhouses, servants' quarters, garages, stables, barns, and a schoolhouse.
2ef
HAER No. TN-10
Page 35
None of these buildings survive within the present boundaries of the
HSAAP.9
Construction
*
Construction work on the HSAAP commenced in the summer of 1942 under the
general supervision of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, which created a
special "Holston District" to administer the project. Since the HSAAP was
the first large-scale facility to implement the Bachmann process, there
were no precedents for its overall design. The preparation of engineering
and construction specifications was further complicated by a phased
completion schedule that called for the progressive activation of
production lines. As one engineer on the project observed, "Holston was
very literally designed, built and operated simultaneously." The Corps
of Engineers launched the project by letting two major contracts. The
first went to Tennessee Eastman Corporation for "general layout of the
plant, design of the manufacturing buildings, design and procurement of
manufacturing equipment, and finally operation of the plant." The second
contract was awarded to the New York architectural and engineering firm of
Fraser-Brace Co., Inc., which had just completed a series of design and
construction contracts for the expansion of the Weldon Springs Ordnance
Works, a sprawling TNT plant in Missouri. Fraser-Brace agreed to serve as
general contractor and project manager, and assumed direct responsibility
for "all construction and equipment installation, all procurement (other
Throughout World War II, the HSAAP was officially designated as the
Holston Ordnance Works. The plant's current name, which dates from
1963, is used throughout this report for the sake of brevity and
clarity.
/
HAER No. TN-10
Page Sfc
than manufacturing equipment), and all design of temporary utilities and
structures," For its principal subcontractor on the HSAAP project,
Fraser-Brace selected the Boston architectural and engineering firm of
Charles T. Main, Inc., which had previously handled the construction of
Camp Edwards in Massachussets. At the HSAAP site, the Boston firm was
responsible for the "design of roads, railroads, bridges, utilities,
magazines and all buildings other than manufacturing, as well as field
layout and field inspection." By dividing design responsibility among
three firms, the Corps of Engineers had hoped to promote flexibility and
speed. In practice, however, the project was plagued by persistent
confusion at the construction site, exacerbated by "an element of friction"

12
between Fraser-Brace and its Boston associate.
In July 1943, as the HSAAP was nearing completion, the government
authorized a doubling of the installation's production capacity, which
necessitated both the modification of existing, on-site equipment and the
erection of several new structures. As a result of this expansion program,
construction crews remained at the site until mid-March 1944, when "the
project was finished, cleaned up and 100% in the hands of the operators."
At this time the Corps of Engineers took inventory of the new installation,
and counted a total of 610 buildings. Of this number, 48 were located at
Plant A (Figures 2, 3). Compactly clustered on a 134-acre site, the
principal Plant-A structures comprised an Administration-Laboratory

*
Building (Building a-1), a Steam Plant (Building a-8), and Acetic-Acid
* Throughout this chapter, Plant-A and Plant-B buildings are distinguished,

respectively, by the use of the lower-case prefixes "a" and "b."
7&
HAER No. TN-10
Page ')
,3
IT) (0
^O i-|
r- O
&8
as
8 !to
I
<ri to
< P is
a.a
8-6
O
_ to 53
an -
^
o
C CN
3 CN
3c:
CN t-H
CN
23^
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3g
." w
UA
&
I ^
CO
H
HAER No. TN-10
Page cffi
Concentration Plant (Building a-2), an Acetic-Acid Production Plant
(Building a-3), an Acetic-Acid Catalyst Building (Building a-4), a

Refrigeration Plant (Building a-5), an Acetic-Anhydride Refining Plant
(Building a-6), two Acetic-Anhydride Production Plants (Buildings a-7,
a-20), and a Producer-Gas Plant (Building a-10).
Occupying a 6,370-acre site, the 562 buildings at Plant B were dispersed
into six major areas according to their general function. The most
centrally located area was devoted to manufacturing; it contained approxi-

mately 100 structures divided into ten production lines for RDX and Compo-
sition B (Figure 4). Bordering the manufacturing area on the north was a
shop area and, further north, an administration area, which contained the
HSAAP's Main Administration Building (Building b-1) (Figure 5), Personnel
Building (Building b-2), Cafeteria (Building b-3). Hospital (Building b-4),
Telephone Building (Building b-5), and Fire Station (Building b-7). Due
west of the manufacturing area was a Steam Plant (Building b-200), and an
"acid area" that produced nitric acid for the explosives-manufacturing
lines. The principal structures in this part of the plant were an

Air-Compressor Building (Building b-300), an Ammonia-Oxidation Building
(Building b-302), a Nitric-Acid Concentration Building (Building b-303),
and a Sulfuric-Acid Concentration Building (Building b-308). Still further
west was a storage area for ammonium nitrate, a main ingredient for the
manufacture of RDX. The ammonium nitrate was stored in eleven, above-
* After World War II, there were gradual reductions in the size of the
HSAAP until, by the early 1930s, Plant A comprised about 120 acres and
Plant B about 5,900 acres.
HAER No. TN-10
Page 30
a -
**%
sag
tig1*
4-1 &<
tfl *X>
H r-
H <T\
H
&
a
CO
8

r-l <T\
X CM
Q t-i
I
o
.3
1ii
e> 8
1
3 8 !
11
&4
HAER No. TN-10
Page ^jM
4J <D
0) f0
&
fl>
a 13
ti
Cn-H Cn CD S
rH *r4 *rH
H 3H id in
m
*d I *d >
P E 3 ifl 5)
in
H
&4
^
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3^-
ground, Richmond magazines (Buildings b-Yl-Yll). The sixth, and last,
major area of Plant B was an extensive storage facility for high
explosives. Separated from the rest of Plant B by the Holston River, and
located about two miles southwest of the manufacturing area, this facility
contained 130 earth-sheltered, Corbetta-type "beehive" magazines (Buildings
b-21-150) (Figure 6).15
In terms of overall architectural design, the aSAAP reflected both its
general industrial function and the no-frills speed of its construction.
Almost all the buildings were utilitarian in style without pretense to
ornamentation. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the installation was
the widespread use of brick, which was generally considered too costly for
wartime, munitions-plant construction:
A reinforced-concrete frame and brick wall design was adopted for

most of the heavy manufacturing buildings and for the steam
plants, primarily to save steel. Several of these buildings
might have been built of all concrete, but lumber was exceedingly
scarce and brick was used to save not only steel but form lumber.
Brick was available in ample quantities for immediate delivery
from a plant near Kingsport. An adequate number of capable
bricklayers also was available, making cost of brick construction
not excessive as compared to frame construction. Consequently,
many buildings that normally would have been of frame
construction were built of brick, including the permanent
administration buildings and the staff residences.
Since the installation's manufacturing buildings were designed by the
Tennessee Eastman Corporation, it is not surprising that they closely
resembled the company's factory buildings in Kingsport, which conformed to
standard, chemical-plant construction of the 1930s (Figures 7, 8, 9).
After the completion of the expansion program in the spring of 1944, the
HSAAP experienced little new construction during World War II. The only
notable additions before V-J Day were a Nitric-Acid-Ammonium-Nitrate Plant

HAER No. TN-10
Page 3 e
w ^t to
HAER No. TN-10
Page 34-
m
ti
&4
in
0 I
II a
9)
El
HAER No. TN-10
Page. 3<
y
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3k
Figure 9: Constructed during the 1930s, Tennessee Eastman

Corporation's cellulose-acetate plant in Kingsport
served as an architectural and engineering model
for many of the production facilities at the
Holston Army Arnmunition Plant. (Source: Kingsport
News, April 9, 1951.)
&
HAER No. TN-10
Page .3 '
(Building b-330) in the summer of 1944, and a Magnesium-Nitrate-Nitric-Acid

Concentrating Plant (Building b-303-B) in the summer of 1945. Both
facilities were located in the acid area of Plant B and conformed to the
18
prevailing utilitarian-industrial architectural style.
Technology
In terms of military technology, the HSAAP is best known for its

contributions to the manufacture of RDX during World War II. But the
installation was also responsible for manufacturing a number of its own raw
materials, which involved it in a number of subsidiary technologies. At
the HSAAP, four principal ingredients went into the production of RDX:
acetic anhydride, nitric acid, ammonium nitrate, and hexamine. Of these
materials, the HSAAP manufactured the first three. We will consider each
in turn.
In one way or another, all of the industrial buildings at Plant A were

associated with the production of acetic anhydride. 19 By the early 1940s,
the most common method for producing this chemical was to dehydrate
20
glacial, or concentrated, acetic acid. This method was well suited for
the HSAAP because the RDX-preduction lines at Plant B released, as a
by-product, substantial quantities of dilute acetic acid that could serve
as the starting point for acetic-anhydride manufacture. The weak acid from
Plant B was shipped to Plant A in tank cars over the inter-plant railroad;
it was then delivered to Building a-2 for concentration into glacial
acetic.
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3&
Although dilute acetic acid could have been concentrated by simple
distillation, the heat requirements were too prohibitive for large-scale

industrial use. A more feasible method used azeotropic distillation, which
was pioneered by British chemists in the 1920s and adopted, with
modifications, by the Tennessee Eastman Corporation for its cellulose-
acetate plant in Kingsport during the 1930s. Briefly, azeotropic

distillation employed an "entraining" liquid that was added to the dilute
acid in order to "bind" the water into a special compound known as an
"azeotrope" that boiled away at a lower temperature than the general
acid-water mixture. Because of the differential boiling points,
distillation procedures could then be used to remove the water and
concentrate the dilute acid. With only minimal loss, the entraining fluid
21
was recovered from the waste water and continuously recycled. The
Acid-Concentration Plant (Building a-2) employed the azeotropic process

patented by the Tennesse Eastman Corporation. Designed with a daily
production capacity of 3.2 million pounds of glacial acetic, the
eight-story structure was divided by a firewall into two identical units,

each containing four azeotropic stills. The height of the structure was
dictated by the height requirements of the distillation equipment.
Since the glacial acetic produced from the Plant-B dilute acid was
insufficient to meet the installation's total acetic-anhydride production
requirements, the HSAAP also had the capability to manufacture new acetic
acid. Until the early 1930s, almost all glacial acetic produced in the
United States was by the destructive distillation of wood. In 1935,

however, the Tennessee Eastman Corporation began experimenting with a new
British procedure for producing acetic acid by catalytic methods from ethyl
a/
HAER No. TN-10
Page 3!
alcohol. This procedure was the one adopted at the HSAAP. A Tennessee
Eastman spokesman described the process as follows:
Ethyl alcohol is shipped in tank cars from the Baton Rouge

alcohol plant of Esso Standard, The 190-proof alcohol is pumped
to storage tanks and then is sent to dehydrogenation units. The
dehydrogenation results from the action of a catalyst. The
reaction in the dehydrogenation units causes 2 atoms of hydrogen
to be liberated, leaving acetaldehyde in vapor form. The vapor
is condensed by refrigeration and the resulting liquid passed to
an oxidizing tank. When air is blown through the acetaldehyde in
the presence of a catalyst, acetic acid is formed and the free
nitrogen is removed. The nitrogen is piped off and the acetic
acid is condensed. This acid is subsequently concentrated into
glacial grade.
At the HSAAP new acetic-acid manufacturing took place in a Catalyst
Building (Building a-4), which housed dehydrogenation units, and an
Acetic-Acid Production Plant (Building a-3), which contained oxidizing
equipment. The new acid was concentrated into glacial grade at the
Acetic-Acid Concentration Plant (Building a-2) by the previously described
azeotropic method. In terms of total output, the new-acid operation was
designed with a daily production capacity of 200,000 pounds of glacial
acetic.
Production of glacial acetic acid was the first step in the manufacture of
acetic anhydride. In converting acid into anhydride, the HSAAP adopted a
system based upon well established industrial processes used by the
Tennessee Eastman Corporation at its Kingsport plant. Briefly, this method
entailed heating glacial acetic acid in the presence of a catalyst so that
it "cracked," or decomposed, into water vapor and a colorless gas called
ketene. Next, the ketene was "scrubbed" with fresh glacial acetic acid to
form a crude mixture of acetic anhydride and dilute acetic acid. This
HAER No. TN-10
Page ^
crude solution was then refined and separated into pure anhydride and
23
glacial acetic by repeated distillation in a rectifying column.
The anhydride operation focused on three principal structures: Buildings
a-7 and a-20 prepared the crude anhydride solution, and Building a-6
refined it. In terms of basic equipment, Building a-7 contained thirty-two

gas-fired cracking furnaces and sixteen scrubbing trains; Building a-20
housed sixteen gas-fired furnaces and eight scrubbing trains; and Building
24
a-6 had nine rectifying columns. Since the Kingsport area had no
natural-gas facilities, the cracking furnaces at Buildings a-7 and a-20
were fueled by a Producer-Gas Plant (Building a-10), which converted

25
bituminous coal and steam into synthetic gas. The industrial system at
Plant A was designed with a daily production capacity of 1.6 million pounds
of anhydride. After production, the chemical was pumped into storage

tanks, and eventually transported in tank cars over the inter-plant
railroad to Plant B.
Acetic anhydride was only the first of three RDX ingredients manufactured
at the HSAAP. The second principal raw material was nitric acid, which was
produced at the "acid area" of Plant B. The production system, designed by
the Hercules Powder Co., embodied a standard technology developed by E. I.

du Pont de Nemours & Co. in the mid-1920s. In the du Pont process, liquid
ammonia was vaporized and mixed with heated compressed air in the presence
of a platinum catalyst to form nitrogen oxides. The nitrogen compounds
were then further oxidized with air and fed into an absorption tower, where
they combined with water to form 60% nitric acid. At the HSAAP, air
compressors in Building b-300 supplied the pressurized air required by the

HAER No. TN-10
Page "//
du Pont process and the oxidation-and-absorption process took place in
Building b-302.25
Like most industrial uses of nitric acid, the manufacture of RDX required
an almost pure grade of the ingredient. To achieve this level of purity,
the HSAAP used the time-honored technique of concentrating the 60% nitric
acid by dehydrating it with sulphuric acid. This process occurred in
dehydration towers at Building b-303. The spent sulfuric acid, now diluted
with water, was collected in concentrator drums at Building a-308, where
it, in turn, was dehydrated by blasts of hot gases from oil-fired furnaces.
The re-concentrated sulfuric acid was then ready to be recycled in the
nitric-acid operation.
The third, and last, RDX ingredient produced at the HSAAP was ammonium
nitrate. Until the summer of 1944, _the installation purchased its ammonium
nitrate from the Kansas-Ordnance Works and the Wolf Creek Ordnance Works,
where it was synthesized primarily for use in making the TNT-based
explosive Amatol. In the spring of 1944, however, the Ordnance Department
determined that "a savings of approximately $5,000.00 per day can be
effected" if the HSAAP were to manufacture the material on its own
premises. The new Ammonium-Nitrate Production Plant (Building b-330) was
constructed and in operation by August 1944. The operation employed a
standard procedure of mixing ammonia and strong nitric acid in continuous
reactors to produce an ammonium-nitrate solution. The only drawback to the
operation was that the HSAAP could not manufacture enough nitric acid to
meet the production requirements of both RDX and ammonium nitrate. This
deficit was initially made up by nitric-acid shipments from other ordnance
/
HAER No. TN-10
Page *j 0-
works that had excess capacity. In 1945, however, increased demands for
TOT created a general nitric-acid shortage in the munitions industry, and

28
the HSAAP ammonium-nitrate plant was forced to shut down.
Although the HSAAP made no major technological changes in its production of
RDX ingredients during World War II, the installation did host some
important experimental work in the area of nitric-acid concentration.
After considerable developmental work, the Tennessee Eastman Corporation

received government authorization to proceed with a pilot project for a
revolutionary new method of dehydrating nitric acid by means of magnesium
nitrate. The pilot plant (Building b-303-B) was built and in operation by
March 1945. An Ordnance Department memorandum briefly describes the new

process as follows:
Weak Nitric Acid is to be fed continuously into a continuous

column below a rectifying section with hot liquid (95%) Magnesium
Nitrate being added at a somewhat higher point. Strong nitric
acid is distilled from the top of the column through a bleacher
pot to storage. At the base of the column, the Magnesium
Nitrate-water solution would flow to a base heater where the
water would be driven off by high pressure coil steam. Part of
' the water so obtained would be returned to the column for
reboiling heat and the remainder discharged for pre-heating feed
and finally for use as [Ammonium-Oxidation Plant] feed water.
The residue of the concentrated Magnesium Nitrate will be pumped
continuously from the base heater through a steam-jagketed line
to a point in the tower above the weak Nitric feed.
Although this pilot project never moved beyond the experimental phase, it
laid the groundwork for the development, during the 1950s, of the
magnesium-nitrate dehydrating towert or "maggie unit," which would offer

the nitric-acid industry an alternative to the conventional sulfuric-acid
30
technique of concentrating weak nitric.
HAER No. TN-10
Page Af%
In planning raw-material production at the HSAAP, the Tennessee Eastman
Corporation relied on well established industrial processes. But the
preparation of RDX by the Bachmann method was quite another matter. When
Tennessee Eastman first began its work on a pilot plant for RDX in early
1942, the Bachmann method was a laboratory procedure rather than a
mass-production technique. In its basic outline, the method called for
both dry and liquid ingredients that were reacted in a two-stage batch
process with an intermediate drying period. During its experimental work,
Tennessee Eastman streamlined this procedure by means of two important
innovations. First, all ingredients were transformed into concurrent
liquid feeds that were reacted in a one-stage, continuous nitrator.
Second, a production system was devised whereby the RDX was transferred
from one processing building to another in slurry form through the use of
centrifugal pumps. As a result of these innovations, the Bachmann method
became a continuous manufacturing process, with raw materials entering at
one end of a production line, and RDX rolling off at the other.
Tennessee Eastman also improved on the standard British method of combining
RDX and TOT into Composition B. As one observer noted, "The British
procedure for making Composition B was to melt TNT in a heated kettle,
shovel in wet RDX and stir until the water evaporated. The molten mix was
then poured into trays something like biscuit pans where it cooled and
solidified. With only a few pounds per tray, this was a real labor hog.
32
Besides, the workers were constantly exposed to poisonous TOT fumes." To
speed up the final casting-and-cooling process, Tennessee Eastman devised a
continuous pelleting procedure that used "an agitated casting pot with
HAER No. TN-10
Page ^/y
33
multiple holes in the bottom" to extrude the warm Composition B mixture
onto a cooling conveyor belt (Figures 10/ 11). "The process was simple,
ingenious and safe. It eliminated the TNT fume problem and reduced labor
34
by a very large factor."
In its final design, the Plant-B manufacturing area was organized into ten
nearly identical, parallel production lines, each containing ten principal
buildings (Figure 12). The first five structures in a line (Buildings C,
D, E, G, H) manufactured RDX; the last five (Buildings I, J, L, M, N)
Composition B. From start to finish, production went as follows:
"C" Building serve[s] as [a] collection point for explosives'

starting materials . . . [These] raw materials, including nitric
acid-arcnonium nitrate solution, hexamine-acetic acid solution,
and acetic anhydride, are pumped to the "D" Building. They are
fed into a reactor [where] a centifugal pump . . . serves as a
quick mixing device. The vigorous, rapid reaction releases large
quantities of heat. To control temperature, the punp discharges
directly into water-jacketed pipe heat exchanger loops. As the
solution circulates, nitrolysis takes place. Reactants return to
the reactor and overflow into the age (or hold up) tank, in which
the reaction is completed. Temperature is controlled with
filtered water. The product overflows into a series of simmer
tanks where linear nitramines and other undesirable by-products
are destroyed. The crude RDX slurry is cooled, diluted with
water, and pumped in to the "E" Building [where] spent acid is
removed and the product washed with water. Washed explosive
slurry frcm the "E" Building is pumped to the "G" or
Recrystallization Building. The non-uniform, crude crystals of
RDX contain occluded acid. By partially dissolving the RDX in
either acetone or cyclohexanone, the acid is removed [and]
crystals are enlarged .... After simmering,, the slurry is
dropped by gravity through a screen to remove any foreign matter
that would sensitize the RDX. The filtered solution is distilled
to gradually remove the solvent (which is recovered) and to
reprecipitate the RDX under conditions which control particle
size distribution .... RDX is [then] pumped to the "H" or
Dewatering Building. After being pumped in a water slurry into
receiving tanks, RDX is dropped to stainless steel notches [i.e.,
containers]. Perforated stainless steel probes, covered with a
cotton filter cloth, remove the water by vacuun filtration
[Figure 13]. . . . RDX in final form is taken to the
Incorporation Building via wheeling ramps. There are four
X
HAER No, TN-10
Page * '<
Id
T5
'^
8
o
0)
41
HAER No. TN-10
Page V6
to
fr
to
cPuH
-33 s

HAER No. TN-10
Page */7
H
w 6s
1 to
5 ? S1 S1 51
33333
PQ
3
I3
5?
H H H H -P
iH _ ffl -r-J -H
H O CfflH
w ij -H en -p
'^! P -B H P
t-it-H +3 tfl O
fi U Q W O
i
* Cn &1 Cn G^
j 8 S -5 -5 -S -S
a HHH
' pq
tN
<D
id
HAER No. TN-10
Page Cfg
a.s
8
0)
a
CQ
(fi
U}
a
-H
fa
HAER No. TN-10
Page
Incorporation Buildings [,I, J, L, and M,] in each line. Melted

TNT is siphoned into the incorporation kettle. Wet RDX is
shoveled from the nutsche into the agitated kettle using a
nonmetallic shovel. After water is descanted from the surface,
the batch is heated until all moisture is removed. Melted wax is
added as a desensitizer. The molten Composition 3 flows from a
casting pot onto a casting belt. Composition B is [then]
delivered to the "N" or Packaging Building where it is boxed.
After it is boxed and weighed,3fche product may go direcly to rail
docks, or to magazine storage.
The HSAAP's first production line for RDX and Composition B went into
operation in April 1943, and by the end of that year, all ten lines were in
production. At peak performance, the installation manufactured 40 million
pounds of Composition B per month, and its total wartime output reached
nearly one billion pounds. The HSAAP continued to operate at maximum
levels until July 1945, when nine of its ten explosives lines were de-
activated. Complete shutdown occurred immediately after V-J Day. On
November 1, 1945, the HSAAP was designated a "standby" facility, and two
weeks later, the Tennessee Eastman Corporation turned the installation over
to the Ordnance Department for continued maintenance and supervision,
KOREAN WAR
In April 1949, the HSAAP was removed from standby status and reactivated as
a production facility under the contract-supervision of the Holston Defense
Corporation, a newly formed subsidiary of the Eastman Kodak Company of
Rochester, New York. Initially, production activities focused on the
reworking of surplus stocks of Composition B, which involved the use of one
manufacturing line. But as the Korean War got underway, most of the
installation's facilities at Plants A and B were mobilized for new pro-
duction. During 1951-1954, a total of eight manufacturing lines were

Holston Army Ammunition Plant;
HAER No. TN-10
Page ^2
rehabilitated, and in August 1953, production reached a monthly peak of
15.2 million pounds of Composition B. Following the cessation of

hostilities, the HSAAP quickly reverted to a one-line operation with
monthly output stabilizing at about one-half milion pounds of explosives
from 1958 to 1961.37
Construction
During the 1950s, the HSAAP witnessed the construction of approximately one
dozen new buildings that closely conformed to the utilitarian-industrial
architectural style employed during World War II. Plant A received two
small storage facilities (Buildings a-TA613, a-TA636), a Carpenter Shop
(Buildings a-TA505), and a Sewage Pumphouse (Building a-29). New
construction at Plant B included a substantial General Purpose Warehouse

(Building b-117), an Auto Paint Shop (Building b-115), a Paint Storehouse
{Building b-118), and five nitric-acid production facilities (Buildings
b-302-B, b-303-B, b-303-C, b-303-D, b-308-B). Also, above-ground pipelines
were constructed between Plant A and B for the transport of acetic acid and
acetic anhydride, thus eliminating the previous use of tank cars over the
inter-plant railroad. In 1957, the D Building in Production Line 4 at

Plant B was severely damaged by fire, and the structure was subsequently
38
demolished.
Technology
Although most of the HSAAP *s production lines for SDK and Composition B
were modified during rehabilitation for the Korean War, the basic
HAER No. TN-10
Page j</
manufacturing processes developed during World War II continued to govern
the operation. The most significant change occured at Production Line 4,
which was converted to the manufacture of a new high explosive known as
HMX. Nearly identical in chemical structure to RDX, this new nitramine
compound is characterized by a higher melting point, which led to its
designation as "High Melt Explosive," or HMX. HMX is always produced in
minute amounts during the manufacture of RDX by the Bachmann method, and it
was first isolated and identified by Bachmann during his experimental work
on RDX in 1941-1942. Although HMX was found highly suitable for plastic
explosives, it proved too difficult and expensive to manufacture during
World War II, and only a pilot production run of 25,000 pounds was
attempted at the HSAAP before V-J Day. In 1952, however, the HSAAP once
again took up the production of HMX, and gradually developed a successful
batch operation at Production Line 4 that was quite similar to the general
Bachmann method used for RDX manufacture. When the D building for HMX
production was destroyed by fire in 1957, new equipment was installed in
the D Building of Production Line 5. 39
Other technological changes also occurred at the acid area of Plant 3. In
1952 a magnesium nitrate facility for concentrating nitric acid was

perfected at Building b-303-B, using the general method pioneered at the
HSAAP during World War II. Since nitric-acid production had been a
bottleneck at the installation during the 1940s, the HSAAP also was
equipped with two new conventional Nitric-Acid Concentrating Plants
(Buildings b-303-C, b-303-D) in 1951 and 1954, a new Ammonium Oxidation
Plant (Building b-302-B) in 1954, and a conventional Sulfuric-Acid
Concentrating Plant (Building b-308-B) in 1958. Although the new Ammonium

HAER No. TN-10
Page 5 S
Oxidation Plant (Building b-302-B) employed the standard du Pont pressure
process, it differed from the World-War-II vintage plant (Building b-302)

by housing its own air compressors, and by employing a newly developed
power-recovery system that harnessed the energy of emitted stack gases to

40
drive the air-compressor machinery.
VIETNAM WAR
Although the HSAAP remained in operation after the Korean War, production
was generally restricted to one manufacturing line and rarely exceeded
one-half million pounds of Composition B per month. As a result of the

Berlin and Cuban crises of the early 1960s, the installation's monthly
output increased to about two million pounds, but large-scale production
did not resume until the Vietnam buildup of the mid-1960s. During
1965-1966, the government appropriated about $40 million to modernize the
HSAAP's production equipment and support facilities, and to rehabilitate
Production Lines 9 and 10, which had not seen use since World War II. By
December 1968, all ten lines were in service, with a combined monthly
production of about 33 million pounds of Composition B, which nearly
equalled the World-War-II record. With the conclusion of the Vietnam War
in 1973, the installation's output of Composition B rapidly declined to

about two million pounds per month in early 1976. Throughout the Vietnam
era, the Holston Defense Corporation continued to serve as contractor-

4. 41
operator.
HAER No. TN-10
Page %~K
Construction
During the 1960s and early 1970s, the HSAAP witnessed the construction of
approximately 70 buildings, of which the vast majority served maintenance,

storage, and utility purposes. All of the new buildings conformed to the
installation's prevailing utilitarian-industrial architectural style.
Quonset construction was frequently employed. With the exception of two
maintenance shops (Buildings a-31, a-34) erected at Plant A in 1968 and
1973, new construction was restricted to Plant B, with its greatest

concentration in the Shop Area. The major facilities completed during this
period were a Sewage Treatment Plant (Building b-216) in 1960, two

Magnesium-Nitrate Facilities (Buildings b-304, b-334) in 1965 and 1966, a
Water Filtration Plant (Building b-221) in 1966, two large General Purpose
Warehouses (Buildings b-140, b-141) in 1968, and a Steam Plant Addition

42
{Building b-222) in 1969, which contained three gas-fired boilers.
Technology
Although the HSAAP did not incorporate any radical new procedures for
manufacturing RDX or Composition B during the Vietnam War, it did adopt

several equipment modifications that resulted in a continuous supply of
ammonium-nitrate solution and hexamine-acetic-acid solution from the C
Buildings, continuous aging and simmering in the D Buildings (which

improved D-Building production by 50%), and improved filtration in the H
Buildings. At the same time, the HSAAP completely converted its
nitric-acid concentrating procedures to the magnesium-nitrate method,
erecting four "maggie units" in Building a-304 in 1965, and an additional
0
HAER No. TN-10
Page 5*-Y
four in Building a-334 in 1966. The installation of the maggie units was
accompanied by the demolition of the World-War-II-vintage Nitric-Acid

Concentrating Plant (Building b-303) and the Sulfuric-Acid Concentrating
Plant (Building b-308). During the Vietnam War the HSAAP began purchasing
glacial acetic acid instead of manufacturing it at Plant A. This led to

the closing down of the Acetic-Acid Production Plant (Building a-3) and the
Catalyst Building (Building a-4). The Acetic Acid Production Plant

43
(Building a-3) was demolished in 1982.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, 1973-1983
Under the continued contract-supervision of the Holston Defense

Corporation, the HSAAP remained in operation throughout the 1970s and early
1980s. Although monthly production of Composition B gradually tapered off
to less than a million pounds per month, this decline in production was
partially offset by increased demand for "special-order" propellants and
explosives using RDX and HMX. Between 1974 and 1983, the HSAAP also
produced about one-quarter of a million pounds of HMX per month for the
44
Navy's Trident Program.
Construction
With the conclusion of the Vietnam War, the Department of Defense initiated
a ten-year modernization program for its munitions facilities, including
the HSAAP. This program entailed the replacement of outmoded structures
with permanent modern facilities, and the implementation of pollution-
abatement measures. Between 1973 and 1983, approximately thirty new

HAER No. TN-10
Page S3
buildings were constructed at the HSAAP for administrative, manufacturing,
maintenance, storage, and utility purposes. Almost all of the new

construction occurred at Plant B, and it generally conformed to the
installation's prevailing utilitarian-industrial architectural style. The
most prominent of the additions was a new General Administration Building,

completed in 1980 at Plant B. Constructed of pre-cast-panel exposed
aggregate, the building was designed in a modern corporate style. Despite
the modernization program of the 1970s, the HSAAP still strongly reflects
its World-War-II origin. As of 1983, the installation contains
approximately 465 buildings, and more than three-quarters of these
45
structures date from the original construction period.
Technology
During the 1970s, most of the technological developments at the HSAAP were
geared to bringing the installation into compliance with federal clean air
and water regulations. Completed measures included the construction of a
holding pond at Plant A for acetic-anhydride production wastes, the

installation of electrostatic precipitators for the coal-fired furnaces at
the steam plants (Buildings a-8, b-200), and the erection of a new Ammonium
Oxidation Plant (Building b-337) with "an extra large absorption tower to
46
reduce nitrogen oxide fumes to acceptable standards."
NOTES
1. James Phinney Baxter, III, Scientists Against Time (Boston: Little,

Brown and Company, 1946), pp. 42-46; "Construction Speeded Output of
'RDX'" Engineering News-Record, 95 (July 25, 1946), 64.
/
HAER No. TN-10.
Page 5 V
2. On the formation of the NDRC, see 3axter,pp. 14-25, 119-123, 451.
3. The British work with RDX during the 1930s is described in W. H.

Simmons, "The Manufacture of R.D.X. in Great Britain," Industrial
Chemist, 24 (July, 1948), 429-430; R. C. Burton, "The Origin of
Holston Army Ammunition Plant," Speech before Rotary Club of
Kingsport, Term., Sept. 10, 1975 (Kingsport: n. pub., 1975), n.p., in
Palmer Room, Kingsport Public Library. On the use of RDX in naval
ordnance, see Buford Rowland and William B. Boyd, U.S. Navy Bureau of
Ordnance in World War II (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing
Office, n.d.), pp. 204-207; Constance McLaughlin Green and others, The
Ordnance Department: Planning Munitions For War (Washington, D.C:
Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army,
1955), p. 463.
4. The use of the Woolwich method at the Bridgewater plant is discussed

in Simmons, "The Manufacture of R.D.X. in Great Britain," Industrial
Chemist, 24 (July 1948), (August 1948), {September 1948), 429-432,
530-544, 593-601. On the method's nitric-acid requirements, Simmons
writes: "One of the most striking features of the Woolwich process
for the manufacture of R.D.X. is the size of the acid plant necessary.
... It had been learnt by experience that the production of 1 ton of
R.D.X. required the addition of 0.86 tons hexamine to 11 tons of
concentrated nitric acid. Of this 11 tons about 5 tons could be
recovered as weak acid . . . and rather more than 4 tons by absorption
of the nitrous fume produced in the process. Allowing reasonable
process losses, it was clear that for each ton of R.D.X. there would
be about 9 tons of weak nitric to reconcentrate, and rather more than
2 tons of new strong nitric acid to reduce" (p. 430). The initial
involvement of the NRDC with RDX research is discussed in Baxter, op.
255-256.
5. Bachmann's initial response to the RDX project is noted in Baxter, p.

256. The first published description of the Bachmann method is found
in W.E. Bachmann and John C. Seehan, "A New Method of Preparing the
High Explosive RDX," Journal of American Chemical Society, 71 (May
1949), 1842-1845. The method's pros and cons are analyzed in Burton,
n.p.
6. On Tennessee Eastman's production of cellulose acetate, see "Eastman
Corp. Defies Slump," Knoxville Journal, June 4, 1933; "Chemical
Wonderland," Oilways, 14 (June 1948), 1-5. The acetic-acid recovery
problems involved in the manufacture of cellulose acetate are
discussed in Alfred George Lipscomb, Cellulose Acetate (London: Ernest
Benn Limited, 1933), pp. 77-101. For Tennessee Eastman's
pilot-project work, see Burton, n.p. It should be noted that the
HSAAP was not the first RDX plant built in the United States. The
first plant was the Wabash River Ordnance Works, a Woolwich-type
facility constructed at Newport, Indiana during 1941-1943. Boasting
the world's largest nitric-acid works, the Wabash River plant
accounted for about one-tenth of American RDX production during World
War II; its RDX lines were completely dismantled in the 1970s. See
Baxter, p. 257.; William Voight, Jr., "The Ordnance Organization in
World War 11/" pp. 312-315, unpublished report, 1945, on microfiche.
HAER No. TN-10
Page 5>'")
in AMCCOM Historical Office, Rock Island Arsenal; C.H. Carter, Jr. and
others, "History of the Powder and Explosives Section, March 1943 to
September 1945," unpublished report prepared for Ammunition Division,
Office of the Chief of Ordnance, 1945, pp. 9-11, Appendix IV-33, on
microfiche, AMCCOM Historical Office; "Holston Army Ammunition Plant,
Historical Monograph Covering the Period 1 July 1942 Through 30 June
1963," unpublished report prepared by Holston Defense Corporation,
1963, p. 22, in Holston Defense Corporation Archives, HSAAP.
7. Voight, pp. 132-133; Burton, n.p.
8. Lenore Fine and Jesse A. Remington, The Corps of Engineers:

Construction in the United States (Washington, D.C.: Office of the
Chief of Military History, United States Army, 1972) pp. 134-137.
9. "It's a Long Way from a Pasture to Ammo Plant," Kingsport News,

November 14, 1968, The thirty-eight buildings within the boundaries
of the HSAAP as of October 1944 are inventoried in "Industrial
Facilities Inventory, Holston Ordnance Works," Plant B, Part I,
Section 9, n.p.; Part II, Section 4, n.p., unpublished report prepared
by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of the District Engineer,
Knoxville, Term., 1944, in AMCCOM Historical Office.
10. Harry Englander, Building Holston Ordnance Works (New York:

Fraser-Brace Engineering Co., Inc. 1946), p. 15, in Holston Defense
Corporation Archives, HSAAP. See also Fine and Remington, p. 517.
11. The description of the various contracts is from "Construction Speeded

Output of 'RDX,'" 65. Fraser-Brace1 s work on the Weldon Springs plant
is noted in Englander, p. 19. On Charles T. Main, Inc. and Camp
Edwards, see Fine and Remington, p. 211.
12. Fine and Remington, p. 595.
13. Englander, p. 47.
14. "Industrial Facilities Inventory," Plant A, Part I, Section 11; Part

II, Section 4, n.p.; Plant B, Part I, Section 11, n.p. Also see the
"Plot Plan for Plant A, in Plant A, Part I, Section 5, n.p. It should
be noted that Building a-20 is incorrectly identified as an
"acid-making" plant in the principal inventory (Plant A, Part II,
Section 4, Sheet 1). It is correctly identified as an
Acetic-Anhydride Production Plant in the "equipment layout" flow
charts (Part III, Section 1, n.p.).
15. "Industrial Facilities Inventory," Plant B, Part II, Section 4, n.pl.;

also see the "Plot Plant" for the various areas of Plant B in Plant 3,
Part 1, Section 5, n.p.
16. "Construction Speeded Output of 'RDX1" 67. Immediately after Pearl

Harbor the Army Ordnance Department laid down strict rules for future
munitions plant construction: "There is no excuse for masonry
structures . . . where a light frame structure will serve the purpose.
&
Holston Array Ammunition Plant
HAER No. TN-10
Page 5
There is no excuse for the use of expensive materials where less

costly ones will serve the purpose for the period of time for which
the construction is being provided." By the spring of 1942, however,
the nation was experiencing a critical lumber shortage which prompted
Ordnance construction supervisors to permit the substitution of brick
for wood "where the difference in cost and completion time was not
excessive." On this matter of building materials, see Fine and
Remington, pp. 517, 547. The shortage of structural steel for wartime
construction created some special problems at the HSAAP, which
required several railroad bridges across the Holston River. Since new
steel was unavailable for these structures, Praser-Brace resorted to
salvage operations, dismantling and moving two abandoned bridges
originally constructed for the Southern Railway Co. at Lynchburg,
Virginia in 1895 and 1903. The two bridges were similar Warren-truss
structures. After dismantling and moving, the old bridge-work was
reassembled at the HSAAP into three railroad crossings over the
Holston River: "the three-span Holston Bridge No. 1, the two-span
Slough Bridge, and the four-span Clouds Bend Bridge." See Englander,
p. 40; "Ordnance Plant Bridge Built of Old Trusses," Engineering
News-Record, 93 (June 17, 1943), 89-91.
17. The original design of the Tennessee Eastman Corporation plant in

Kingsport is shown in a photograph of the recently completed facility
in "Eastman Corp. Defies Slump," Knoxville Journal, June 4, 1933.
13. On the construction of the Nitric-Acid-Ammonium-Nitrate Plant, see

"Industrial Facilities Inventory," Plant B, Addendum, Part II, Section
4, Sheet 3, n.p.; Carter, pp. 47-48, Appendix IV-49, 50, 51. On the
construction of the magnesium-nitrate facility, see "Industrial
Facilities Inventory," Plant B, Addendum Part II, Section 4, Sheet 2,
n.p.; Carter, p. 49, Appendix IV-60, 61.
19. The discussion of Plant-A industrial facilities relies heavily on

information provuded by Henry Hurd, Holston Defense Corporation
Superintendent of Organic Acids, and Robert Brewer, Jr., Holston
Defense corporation superintendent of Organic Acids, and Robert
Brewer, Jr., Holson Defense Corporation Supervisor of Area A
Utilities, during on-site interviews on April 13, 1983. Also helpful
were "equipment layout" plans for the various buildings in "Industrial
Facilities Inventory," Plant A, Part III, Section 1, n.p. Daily
production capacities for the various processes are in Plant A, Part
II, Section 1, n.p.
20. G. Benson, "New Acetic Anhydride Process," Chemical and Metallurgical
Engineering, 47 {March 1940), 150.
21. On the development of the azeotropic distillation of acetic acid, see
Lipscomb, pp. 77-88; R. Norris Shreve, Chemical Process Industries
(New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967, 3rd. ed.), pp. 620-621.
22. "Making Acetic Anhydride from Petroleum Ethyl Alcohol," Oil ways, 14
(June 1948), 3. Although this article describes the Tennessee Eastman
plant in Kingsport, the same technology was used at the HSAAP. The
HAER No. TN-10
Page 5Q\
historical background on acetic-acid manufacture is derived from F. J.

Curtis, "Complex Situation Impending in Acetic Acid Manufacture,"
Chemical and Metallurgical Engineering, 38 (January 1931), 38-39.
23. Lipscomb, pp. 93-98; "Making Acetic Anhydride for Petroleum Ethyl
Alcohol," 3.
24. Building a-6 also contained an azeotropic still. The thermal cracking
of glacial acetic acid in Buildings a-7 and a-20 was never 100%
efficient, and residual amounts of acetic acid were carried over into
the ketene-and-water-vapor mixture. The dilute acid was separated
from the ketene by condensing trains in Buildings a-7 and a-20, and
piped into the azeotropic still in Building a-6, where it was
processed into glacial acetic acid. This concentrated acid was then
piped back to Buildings a-7 and a-20, where it was used to scrub the
ketene.
25. "Producer gas ... is made by blowing air or a mixture of air and
steam through an incandescent fuel bed. The oxygen of the air
combines with the carbon in the fuel bed to produce carbon monoxide
and some carbon dioxide, while the steam in the entering blast
combines with the carbon. . . to produce carbon monoxide and hydrogen.
The nitrogen of the air passes through the fuel bed unchanged and
appears in the final product .... Producer gas from bituminous coal
contains several percent of methane and some additional hydrogen, as
well as tar vapors, all derived from the volatile matter of the coal";
from Basis W. Waring and John F. Foster, eds., Economics of Fuel Gas
from Coal (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950), pp. 13, 4.
Easy and cheap to manufacture, producer gas saw widespread industrial
use in the United States during the period between the two world wars,
especially in areas that were not supplied with natural gas. The
system at the HSAAP was designed by the Semet-Solvey Engineering
Corporation of New York, a prominent firm in the synthetic-gas
equipment field. The HSAAP gas plant was an atmospheric system
consisting of twelve fixed-bed producer units equipped with overhead
coal feeds. Steam and air were mixed in a saturation column and then
fed, in an up-draft arrangment, through the coal bed of each producer.
The resulting gas was taken off under vacuum at the top of the
producers and sprayed with water to remove pitch and other impurities.
26. The discussion of Plant-B acid-area facilities relies heavily on

information provided by Robert Wicker, Holston Defense Corporation
Chemical Engineer, during an on-site interview, April 14, 1983. Also
helpful were "equipment layout" plans for the various buildings in
"Industrial Facilities Inventory," Plant B, Part III, Section 1, n.p.
On the duPont Process, see Guy B. Taylor and others, "Manufacture of
Nitric Acid by the Oxidation of Ammonia," Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry, 23 (August 1, 1931), 860-865; D.J. Newman and L.A. Klein,
"Recent Developments in Nitric Acid," Chemical Engineering Progress,
68 (April 1972), 62.
^
HAER No. TN-10
. Page d>6
27. The sulfuric-acid reconcentration system in Building b-308 was

engineered by the New-York-based Chemical Construction Corporation
("Chemico"), using a design that it had standardized for the industry.
The flowchart for the Chemico process found in Shreve (p. 340) applies
to the HSAAP system.
28. Details of the HSAAP ammonium-nitrate operation are provided in

Carter, p. 48, Appendix IV-49, 50, 51.
29. Carter, Appendix IV-60; see also p. 49 and Appendix IV-61.
30. See "'Maggie' Concentrates Nitric," Chemical and Engineering News, 36

(June 9, 1958), 40-41; "New Process Chops Cost of Concentrating
Nitric," Chemical Engineering, 65 (July 28, 1958), 68.
31. On the modificaton of the Bachmann method by the Tennessee Eastman

Corporation, see J. T. Bearden, "A Short History of HDC," unpublished,
1970, pp. 4-7, Holston Defense Corporation Archives, HSAAP; Burton,
n.p.
32. Burton, n.p.
33. Bearden, p. 9.
34. Burton, n.p.
35. This passage is from Holston Army Ammunition Plant (n. pi.: Holston
Defense Corporation, n.d), pp. 11-18. Although the description
primarily applies to RDX and Composition B production as of 1983, it
also covers the essential features of the World-War-II operation.
This judgement is based upon information provided by Jerry Blair,
Holston Defense Corporation Superintendent of HMX Products, during an
on-site interview, April 12, 1983, and upon "equipment layout" plans
for the various production buildings in "Industrial Facilities
Inventory," Plant B, Part III, Section 1, n.p. The spent-acid
solution removed from the RDX slurry in the E Buildings consisted of
nitric acid, acetic acid, and residual amounts of RDX. This solution
was pumped to a row of structures (Buildings b-B-1, B-3, B-5, B-7,
B-9) bordering the west end of the manufacturing area. There the
nitric acid was neutralized with caustic, the RDX residue recovered
and pumped back to the E Buildings, and the acetic acid distilled to
60% strength and shipped to Plant A for processing into glacial
acetic.
36. "Holston Army Ammunition Plant Historical Monograph," pp. 11-13.
37. Susan S. Pridemore, "Holston Army Anmunition Plant, Unit History,

1943-1967," unpublished report prepared by HSAAP, 1968, p. 5, in HSAAP
Administrative Archives; "Holston Army Ammunition Plant Historical
Montogaph," p. 17.
38. This assessment of construction activities is derived largely from

Holston Army Ammunition Plant Real Property Inventory, computer
printout, March 1982, HSAAP Archives. The chemical pipelines had been
?<
HAER No. TN-10
Page ( '
planned for the initial construction period, using "a copper pipe line
for return of Acetic Acid to Area A from Area B and a steel pipe line
for pumping Acetic Anhydride from Area A to Area B. [ But] at that
time it was impossible to get the necessary copper so arrangments were
made to do this work utilizing Acid tank cars, and a railroad was
built between the plants"; see Carter, Appendix IV-62.
39. The initial discovery of HMX is noted in Bachmann and Sheehan, 1844.
The pilot production of the material at the HSAAP during World War II
is discussed in Carter, p. 47, Appendix IV-42, 43. On HMX production
during the 1950's, see "Holston Army Ammunition Plant Historical
Monograph," pp. 2. 19; Pridemore, p. 6.
40. The new acid facilities are noted in Pridemore, p. 2. According to

Jim Levie, a Holston Defense Corporation Chemical Engineer who helped
build the pilot maggie unit in 1952, the World-War-II experimental
unit in Building b-303-B was dismantled to make way for the new
equipment (telephone interview, May 18, 1983). On the development of
power-recovery systems for ammonium oxidation facilities, see "Nitric
Acid Plans Today," Chemical Engineering, 60 (November 1953), 150, 152;
Newman and Klein, 63-64.
41. R.J. Hammond, "Profile on Munitions, 1950-1977," unpublished, n.d.,

pp. 82-82, microfiche in AMCCOM Historical Office; "$30 Million
Holston Ammo Plant," undated newspaper clipping in Kingsport
Industries File, Palmer Room, Kingsport Public Library; Pridemore, pp.
12-13, "Annual Unit History Holston Army Ammunition Plant, 1975-1976,"
unpublished report prepared by HSAAP, p. 9, in HSAAP Administrative
Archives.
42. Holston Army Ammunition Plant Real Property Inventory; the Steam Plant
Addition is described in Pridemore, "Holston Army Ammunition Plant,
Unit History, Annual Supplement-CY 1968," unpublished report prepared
by HSAAP, p. 4, in HSAAP Administrative Archives.
43. On equipment modifications, see Pridemore, "Unit History, 1942-1967,"

p. 24. Pridemore also notes that the four magnesium-nitrate
concentration units installed in Building a-304 in 1965 originally
were located at the Alabama Ordnance Works (p. 9). The information
concerning the Plant-A acetic-acid operations comes from an interview
with Hurd, April 13, 1983.
44. See the following unpublished reports in the HSAAP Administrative

Archives: "Annual Unit History, 1975-1976," p. 8; "Annual Historical
Review, 1977-1978," p. 14; "Annual Historical Review, 1978-1979," p.
13; "Annual Historical Review, 1979-1980," p. 14; "Annual Historical
Review, 1980-1981," p. 13.
45. The ten-year modernization program is discussed in Holston Army

Ammunition Plant, p. 4. The summary of recent construction activities
is primarily derived from Holston Army Ammunition Real Property
Inventory.
yf
Holston Army Ammunition Plane
HAER No. TN-10
Page IpQ^
46. An excellent overview of the HSAAP's pollution concerns is found in

"Unit History, Annual Supplement-CY 1968," pp. 3-8, On the holding
pond and the AmmoniunHDxidation Plant, see "Holston Army Ammunition
Plant, Unit History, 1972-1973," unpublished report prepared by H3AAP,
pp. 7,11. On the electrostatic precipitators, see "Forward" of
"Annual Unit History, 1975-1976," n.p.
8'
HAER No. TN-10
Page l&'h
Chapter 3
PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
BACKGROUND
Army Regulation 420-40 requires that an historic preservation plan be
developed as an integral part of each installation's planning and
long-range maintenance and development scheduling. The purpose of such a
program is to:
Preserve historic properties to reflect the Army's role in

history and its continuing concern for the protection of the
nation's heritage.
Implement historic preservation projects as an integral part

of the installation's maintenance and construction programs.
Find adaptive uses for historic properties in order to

maintain them as actively used facilities on the
installation.
Eliminate damage or destruction due to improper maintenance,

repair, or use that may alter or destroy the significant
elements of any property.
Enhance the most historically significant areas of the

installation through appropriate landscaping and
conservation.
To meet these overall preservation objectives, the general preservation
recommendations set forth below have been developed:
Category I Historic Properties
All Category I historic properties not currently listed on or nominated to
the National Register of Historic Places are assumed to be eligible for
*
HAER No. TK-10
Page <W
nomination regardless of age. The following general preservation
recommendations apply to these properties:
a) Each Category I historic property should be treated as if it
were on the National Register, whether listed or not.
Properties not currently listed should be nominated.
Category I historic properties should not be altered or
demolished. All work on such properties shall be performed
in accordance with Sections 105 and 110(f) of the National
Historic Preservation Act as amended in 1980, and the
regulations of the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation
(ACHP) as outlined in the "Protection of Historic and
Cultural Properties" (36 CFR 800).
b) An individual preservation plan should be developed and put
into effect for each Category I historic property. This plan
should delineate the appropriate restoration or preservation
program to be carried out for the property. It should
include a maintenance and repair schedule and estimated
initial and annual costs. The preservation plan should be
approved by the State Historic Preservation Officer and the
Advisory Council in accordance with the above-referenced ACHP
regulation. Until the historic preservation plan is put into
effect, Category I historic properties should be maintained
in accordance with the recommended approaches of the
Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and
0
HAER No. TN-10
Page b5
2
Revised Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and
in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer.
c) Each Category I historic property should be documented in
accordance with Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic
American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) Documentation Level
II, and the documentation submitted for inclusion in the

3
HABS/HAER collections in the Library of Congress. When no
adequate architectural drawings exist for a Category I
historic property, it should be documented in accordance with
Documentation Level I of these standards. In cases where
standard measured drawings are unable to record significant
features of a property or technological process, interpretive
drawings also should be prepared.
Category II Historic Properties
All Category II historic properties not currently listed on or nominated to
the National Register of Historic Places are assumed to be eligible for
nomination regardless of age. The following general preservation
recommendations apply to these properties:
a) Each Category II historic property should be treated as if it
were on the National Register, whether listed or not.
Properties not currently listed should be nominated.
Category II historic properties should not be altered or
demolished. All work on such properties shall be performed

HAER No. TN-10
Page 4?^
in accordance with Sections 106 and 110(f) of the National
Historic Preservation Act as amended in 1980, and the
regulations of the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation
(ACHP) as outlined in the "Protection of Historic and
Cultural Properties" (36 CPR 800).
b) An individual preservation plan should be developed and put
into effect for each Category II historic property. This
plan should delineate the appropriate preservation or
rehabilitation program to be carried out for the property or
for those parts of the property which contribute to its
historical, architectural, or technological importance. It
should include a maintenance and repair schedule and
estimated initial and annual costs. The preservation plan
should be approved by the State Historic Preservation Officer
and the Advisory Council in accordance with the
above-referenced ACHP regulations. Until the historic
preservation plan is put into effect, Category II historic
properties should be maintained in accordance with the
recommended approaches in the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation and Revised Guidelines for

4
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and in consultation with
the State Historic Preservation Officer.
c) Each Category II historic property should be documented in
accordance with Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic
American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) Documentation Level
6.2T
noiscon Army Ammumcion riant
HAER No- TN-10
Page iol
II, and the documentation submitted for inclusion in the
HABS/HAER collections in the Library of Congress.
Category III Historic Properties
The following preservation recommendations apply to Category III historic
properties:
a) Category III historic properties listed on or eligible for
nomination to the National Register as part of a district or
thematic group should be treated in accordance with Sections
106 and 110(f) of the National Historic Preservation Act as
amended in 1980, and the regulations of the Advisory Council
for Historic Preservation as outlined in the "Protection of
Historic and Cultural Properties" (36 CFR 800). Such proper-
ties should not be demolished and their facades, or those
parts of the property that contribute to the historical
landscape, should be protected from major modifications.
Preservation plans should be developed for groupings of
Category III historic properties within a district or
thematic group. The scope of these plans should be limited
to those parts of each property that contribute to the
district or group's importance. Until such plans are put
into effect, these properties should be maintained in
accordance with the recommended approaches in the Secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Revised
/
HAER No. TN-10
Page (^
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and in
consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer.
b) Category III historic properties not listed on or eligible
for nomination to the National Register as part of a district
or thematic group should receive routine maintenance. Such
properties should not be demolished, and their facades, or
those parts of the property that contribute to the historical
landscape, should be protected from modification. If the
properties are unoccupied, they should, as a minimum, be
maintained in stable condition and prevented from
deteriorating.
HABS/HAER Documentation Level IV has been completed for all Category III
historic properties, and no additional documentation is required as long as
they are not endangered. Category III historic properties that are
endangered for operational or other reasons should be documented in
accordance with HABS/HAER Documentation Level III, and submitted for
inclusion in the HABS/HAER collections in the Library of Congress.
Similar structures need only be documented once.
CATEGORY I HISTORIC PROPERTIES
Producer-gas Plant (Plant A, Building 10)
Background and significance. The Producer-Gas Plant (see Figure 14
and page 55, note 25) was built in 1943 as an integral part of the
si
HAER No. TN-10
Page io^-}
CO
3
S
I O ^r
I -H Ol
to in
M
-P (1)
s 5
tn
! CM
O
o
t-H
S CO
-H
4J u
l-l
a
CM
M -
sI
.. CO

ft
0)
fa
X
HAER No. TN-10
Page T>
acetic-anhydride manufacturing operation at Plant A. In its construc-
tion, the building mirrors the HSAAP's general utilitarian-industrial
architectural style. It is primarily a four-story structure with an

exposed reinforced-concrete structural frame on the first three
stories and a gabled, wood-frame, coal-feed house on the top story.

The coal-feed house is connected by an overhead conveyor to a coal
ramp situated a few yards to the southeast. The Producer-Gas Plant
contains twelve, updraft, fixed-bed producer units that convert
bituminous coal and steam into a synthetic gas. The gas is piped to
fuel cracking furnaces in Buildings 7 and 20 for use in acetic-
anhydride production.
At the time of its construction, the plant's updraft-producer design
represented "the simplest and commonest type" of producer-gas

g
technology. This technology had enjoyed its greatest American vogue
during the 1920s, when approximately 12,000 producer-gas plants were
in active industrial use. After this peak period, producer gas waned
in popularity, largely because of "severe competition [from] natural

gas and fuel oil." By 1948, there were less than 2,000 bituminous gas
producers in operation, and the number continued to decline during the

q
next three decades. When the energy crisis of the mid-1970's revived
industrial interest in producer-gas technology, it was discovered that
the HSAAP had "one of the few gas producer facilities in operation in
the United States."
Architecturally, the Producer-Gas Plant is virtually unchanged since
it was first placed in operation in 1943. And apart from minor

Holscon finny **'"
HAER No. TN-10
Page 1\
modernization projects, such as the updating of its scrubbing trains
for pollution-abatement purposes, the facility still retains its
original equipnent. As an exceedingly rare and "highly intact example
of a once conmon industrial process, the Producer-Gas Plant is a
Category I historic property. For these reasons, it fulfills the
"exceptional significance" criteria required by the National Register
for properties less than fifty years old. The Producer-Gas Plant
should be nominated to the National Register as part of a thematic
group that includes the other significant historic properties at the
HSAAP.
Condition and potential adverse impacts. Architecturally and
technologically, the Producer-Gas Plant is in good condition. There
are no current plans to alter or demolish this structure, but
continued maintenance and repair of the facility is needed to ensure
its preservation.
Preservation options. See the general preservation reommendations at
the beginning of this chapter for Category I historic properties.
RDX-and-Composition-B Manufacturing Lines (Plant B)
Primary Distillation Buildings (Buildings Bl, B3, B5, B7, B9)
Collection Buildings (Buildings Cl, C3, C5, C6, C7, C9)
Nitration Buildings (Buildings D1-D10)
Ashing Buildings (Buildings E1-E10)
Recrystallization Buildings (Buildings G1-G10)
&
Holston Army Munition Plant
HAER No. TN-10
Page 0 <i-
- Dewatering Buildings {Buildings H1-H10)
- Incorporation Buildings (Buildings 11-110, J1-J10, L1-L10,
M1-M10)
TNT-Opening Buildings (Buildings K1-K10)
- Packaging Buildings (Buildings N1-N10)
Laboratories (Buildings 01, 03, 05, 07, 09)
Background and significance. Constructed during 1942-1944, these 116
buildings are the heart of the HSAAP manufacturing operation.
Situated on an isolated tract of bottomland bordering the north bank
of the Holston River in Plant B, they are organized into ten nearly
identical production lines for RDX and Composition B (see Figures
15-23). With the exceptions of Building D4, which was partially
demolished after a fire in 1957, and Building G10, which was doubled
in size in 1968, the structures survive virtually intact.
Taken as an ensemble, these production buildings constitute a unique
technological system of major historical importance. The HSAAP's ten
RDXand-Camposition-B manufacturing lines represent the world's first
large-scale industrial application of the Bachmann method, which
revolutionized the production of RDX and Composition B by replacing an
expensive, labor-intensive batch technology with a cost-efficient,
mass-production operation. During World War II, the HSAAP was (and it
still is) the only American Bachmann-method plant, and it accounted
for approximately ninety percent of the country's output of
Composition B, which was extensively used in Allied ordnance.

HAER No. TN-10
Page n ^>
Figure 15: Building B3 is representative of the Primary

Distillation Buildings in the RDX-and-Composition-
B manufacturing lines. (Source: Field inventory
photograph, 1983, Jeffrey A. Hess, MacDonald and
Mack Partnership.)
Jti
HAER No. TN-10
Page 04
<U
<
CQ
8
.. W3 Li
&
03
E!
HAER No. TN-10
Page 15
Figure 17: Building D10 is representative of the Nitration

Buildings in the RDX-and-Conposition-B manufacturing
lines at the Holston Army Ammunition Plant. (Source:
Field inventory photograph, 1983, Jeffrey A. Hess,
MacDonald and Mack Partnership.)
y?
HAER No. TN-10
Page 1 fe
<w
&
&
"8*
IS>
i?
N,R
3
sag
JU
io
^
53
QJ^ TJ
CO

HAER No. TN-10
Page /1
r-^-
-'-.'- ;.-> Jiil' ;C' v.-** &
<fl
<T
g-S
<
OHH1H
tT*
.iji*i.-*ii*"*ifiii=i ,*
HAER No. TN-10
Page
:<
5#
P (tf Q,
M CO g
oT.SS
few;*
s
HAER No. TN-10
Page H $
7^
HAER No. TN-10
Page $6
CM
HAER No. TN-10
Page \ |
+J Q 0 ^
en ftj 4J -H i<
co_ fa m ^ <u
Hrl-H (U 4-1
*D W <L)
rH & flj Q) 4
3 -rH 01 CO
0 <3 n8 S
to B u fO xj
0>&
m
g s
5
a
rn
tJ>
iia

CO
7f
HAER No. TN-10
Pa e
S I *3,
Combined with aluminum powder at loading plants to form the explosive
"Torpex," Composition B was particularly effective in underwater
munitions, having almost twice the power of conventional TNT-loaded
torpedos and depth charges, Torpex torpedos were of such supreme
strategic importance that they were carefully rationed during the
early years of the war:
Originally issued to submarines with the best record of

kills, the new product was distributed throughout the
submarine fleet as fast as production permitted. Ship
sinkings increased, and the Bureau [of Naval Ordnance]
received reports that Torpex torpedos were able to break
vessels in two. Comparative tests with captured enemy
munitions showed that neither the Germans noc the Japanese
possessed explosives as powerful as Torpex.
As one historian of the HSAAP has noted, "Holston's greatest
accomplishment . . . was its role in winning the Battle of the
Atlantic, [which was] acknowledged by both the United Nations and the
Axis alike as the most important single phase of the war." The large
volume of Composition B produced at the HSAAP also "in great measure
paved the way for the invasion of the European continent and for the
13
final destruction of the Japanese war effort."
Because of their pivotal role in the Allied war effort, the 116
buildings in the HSAAP1 s ten RDX-and-Composition-B manufacturing lines
are Category I historic properties. They fulfill the "exceptional
significance" criteria required by the National Register for

14
properties less than fifty years of age. They should be nominated
HAER No. TN-10
Page g a
to the National Register as part of a thematic group that includes the
other significant historic properties at the HSAAP.
Condition and potential adverse impacts. Apart from Building D4,
which was partially demolished and vacated after a fire in 1957, all
buildings in the district survive in good condition. The buildings
have experienced varying degrees of equipment modification, with the
greatest alterations to the original Bachmann-method apparatus
occuring in Lines 1 and 2. There are no current plans to alter or
demolish any of these structures, but continued maintenance and repair
of the district is needed to ensure its preservation.
Preservation options. There is no need to preserve all ten of the
RDX-and-Composition-B manufacturing lines, but at least one complete
and fully equipped line should be selected, in consultation with
appropriate Army personnel, on the basis of its condition and location
for permanent retention as an historic district. The line should
include a representative B Building, and a linear arrangement of
Buildings C, D, E, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N and 0, along with such
auxiliary structures as barricades and wheeling ramps- The buildings
in the designated line should be subject to the general preservation
recommendations for Category I historic properties, as discussed at
the beginning of this chapter. Since the HSAAP is a functioning plant
with modernization requirements, the Category I preservation
recommendations should be waived for the other nine manufacturing
lines when deemed necessary by military planners.

HAER No. TN-10
Page SH
CATEGORY II HISTORIC PROPERTIES
There are no Category II historic properties at the Holston Army Ammunition

Plant.
CATEGORY III HISTORIC PROPERTIES
Old Administration Building (Plant B, Building 1)
Background and significance. Constructed in 1943 to serve as post
headquarters for the HSAAP, Building 1 (Figure 5) is located in the
administration area of Plant B. Comprising three parallel wings

connected by a central circulation spine, the building is a two-story,
brick structure with a wood-frame hip roof. In keeping with the

installation's industrial-utilitarian character, the Old
Administration Building has only minimal architectural detailing:
pilasters separating window groups, contrasting spandrels, and a

wood-fame, cross-gabled, entrance portico centered on the main facade.
The structure functioned as post headquarters until 1980, when a new
administration building was completed. It is currently used as an
office building by the Naval Reserve. Because of the building's
direct association with the HSAAP's nationally significant,
World-War-II manufacturing program, it is a Category III historic
property. It should be nominated to the National Register as part of
a thematic group that includes the other significant historic
properties at the HSAAP.

HAER No, TN-10
Page 8 ^
Condition and potential adverse impacts. The Old Administration
Building is in good condition and receives routine maintenance and
repair. It closely resembles its original condition. There are no
current plans to alter or demolish the structure.
Preservation options. See the beginning of this chapter for general
preservation recommendations for Category III historic properties that
are eligible for the National Register as part of a thematic group.
NOTES
1. Army Regulation 420-40, Historic Preservation (Headquarters, U.S.

Army: Washington, D.C., 15 April 1984).
2. National Park Service, Secretary of Interior's Standards for

Rehabilitation and Revised Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings, 1983 {Washington, D.C: Preservation Assistance
Division, National Park Service, 1983).
3. National Park Service, "Archeology and Historic Preservation;

Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines," Federal
Register, Part IV, 28 September 1983, pp. 44730-44734.
4. National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
5. National Park Service, "Archeology and Historic Preservation."
6. National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
7. National Park Service, "Archeology and Historic Preservation."
8. B. J. C. Van Der Hoeven, "Producers and Producer of Gas,"

Chemistry of Coal Utilization, vol. 2 (New York: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 1945), p. 1659.
9. Basil W. Waring and John F. Foster, "Producer Gas," Economics of

Fuel Gas from Coal, eds. John F. Foster and Richard J. Lund (New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950), pp. 15-16.
10. Holston Army Ammunition Plan, Annual Historical Review, 1 October

1978 - 30 September 1979," unpublished report prepared by HSAAP,
in Administrative Archives, HSAAP.
HAER No. TN-10
Page <JCs
11. Marcella Sherfy and W. Ray Luce, "How to Evaluate and Nominate
Potential National Register Properties that Have Achieved
Significance within the Last 50 Years" (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation
Service, 1979).
12. Buford Rowland and William B. Boyd, U.S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance
in World War II (Bureau of Ordnance, Department of the Navy,
n.d.), p. 206.
13. Ellen Crawford, "Full Story of HCW Product/' Kingsport

Times-News, December 9, 1945.
14. Sherfy and Luce.
82^
HAER No. TN-10
Page 6 I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Published Sources
Bachman, W. E. and John C. Sheehan. "A New Method of Preparing the High
Explosive RDX." Journal of the American Chemical
Society, 71 (May 1949), 1842-1845. The first published description of
the Bachmann method.
Baxter, James Phinney, III. Scientists Against Time. Boston: Little,

Brown and Company, 1946. Detailed account of the research projects
sponsored by the National Defense Research Committee, including the
developmental work on the Bachmann method for RDX.
Benson, G. "New Acetic Anhydride Process." Chemical and Metallurgical

Engineering, 47 (March 1940), 150-151. Provides brief historical
information on acetic-anhydride manufacturing.
Burton, R.C. "The Origin of Holston Army Ammunition Plant." Speech before
the Rotary Club of Kingsport Term., Sept. 10, 1975. Kingsport: n.
pub,, 1975. Palmer Room, Kingsport Public Library. Excellent
discussion of the development of the Woolwich and Bachmann methods for
RDX production by General Superintendent of Production of the HSAAP
during World War II.
"Chemical Wonderland." Oilways, 14 (June 1948), 1-2. Describes Tennessee

Eastman's manufacturing facilities in Kingsport, Term.
"Construction Speeded Output of 'RDX.'" Engineering News-Record, 64 (July

25, 1946), 64-69. Good summary of construction activities at the
HSAAP during World War II.
Crawford, Ellen. "Full Story of HOW Product." Kingsport Times-News.

December 9, 1945.
Curtis, F, J. "Complex Situation Impending in Acetic Acid Manufacture."

Chemical and Metallurical Engineering, 38 (January 1931), 38-39.
Describes traditional processes and new developments,
"Eastman Corp. Defies Slump." Knoxville Journal* June 4, 1933. Provides

brief history of Tennessee Eastman Corporation's Kingsport plant.
Englander, Harry. Building Holston Ordnance Works. New York: Fraser-Brace

Engineering Co., Inc. 1946. Holston Defense Corporation Archives.
The most detailed account of the 1942-1944 construction program at the
HSAAP.
Fine, Lenore and Jesse A. Remington. The Corps of Engineers:

Construction in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Office of the
Chief of Military History, United States Army, 1972. The standard
study of government-owned munition-plant construction during World War
II.
far
HAER No. TN-10
Page %l
Green, Constance McLaughlin and others. The Ordnance Department:

Planning Munitions for War. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Chief of
Military History, Department of the Army, 1955. The standard history
of the research-and-development programs of the U.S. Army Ordnance
Department during World War II.
Higham, Robin, ed. A Guide to the Study and Use of Military History.
Hatnden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1975.
Hoy, Suellen M- and Michael C. Robinson, eds. Public Works History in the
United States. Nashville: American Association for State and Local
History, 1982.
Holston Army Ammunition Plant. N. pi.: Holston Defense Corporation, n.d.

Summarizes history and technology of HSAAP as of late 1970s.
"It's a Long Way fran a Pasture to Ammo Plant." Kingsport News. November
14, 1969. Provides information on prior land use of HSAAP site.
Jessup, John E. and Robert W. Coakley. A Guide to the Study and Use of
Military History. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing
Office, 1979.
Lipscomb, Alfred George. Cellulose Acetate. London: Ernest Benn Limited,

1933. Standard text of the period on the manufacture of cellulose
acetate, with excellent coverage of acetic-acid recovery and
acetic-anhydride production.
"'Maggie1 Concentrates Nitric." Chemical and Engineering News, 36 (June 9,

1958), 40-41. Describes use of magnesium nitrate in concentrating
nitric acid.
"Making Acetic Anhydride from Petroleum Ethyl Alcohol." Oilways, 14 (June

1948). First published description of method developed by Tennessee
Eastman Corporation and used at HSAAP during World War II.
National Park Service- "Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of

the Interior's Standards and Guidelines." Federal Register, Part IV
(September 28, 1983), 33730-44734.
How to Complete National Register Forms. Washington,

D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1977.
. Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation

and Revised Guidelines for^Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,
Washington D.C.: Preservation Assistance Division, National Park
Service, 1983.
"New Process Chops Costs of Concentrating Nitric." Chemical Engineering,

65 (July 28, 1958), 68. Notes commercial development of the maggie
unit.
M
Holston Army Ammumcion jriam.
HAER No. TN-10
Page $&
Newman, D. J. and L. A. Klein. "Recent Developments in Nitric Acid."

Chemical Engineering Progress, 68 (April 1972), 62-66. Surveys post
World-War-II developments in the nitric-acid industry.
"Nitric Acid Plants Today," Chemical Engineering., 60 (November 1953),

150-155. Discusses latest developments in power-recovery systems for
ammonium-oxidation plants.
"Ordnance Plant Bridge Built of Old Trussess." Engineering News-Record, 93

(June 17, 1943), 89-91. Summarizes bridge-salvage operations at the
HSAAP during World War II.
Rowland, Buford and William B. Boyd. U. S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance in

World War II. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office,
n.d. The standard history of the subject; discusses naval use of RDX
and Composition B.
Sherfy, Marcella and W. Ray Luce. "How to Evaluate and Nominate Potential
National Register Properties that Have Achieved Significance within
the Last 50 Years." Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of the
Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Services, 1979.
Shreve, N. Norris. Chemical Process Industries. New York: McGraw-Hill

Book Company, 1967, 3rd. ed. A standard text on chemical-industry
technology.
Simmons, W. H. "The Manufacture of R.D.X. in Great Britain." Industrial

Chemist, 24 (July 1948), (August 1948), (September 1948), 429-432,
530-544, 593-601. Detailed description of the development of the
Woolwich method and its use at English RDX plants during World War II.
Taylor, Guy B. and others. "Manufacture of Nitric Acid by the Oxidation of

Ammonia." Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 23 (August 1, 1931),
860-865. First published description of the du Pont pressure process.
"$30 Million Holston Ammo Plant." Undated newspaper clipping, Kingsport

Industries Pile, Palmer Room, Kingsport Public Library. Discusses
mid-1960s rehabilitation program at HSAAP.
United States Army Armament Materiel Readiness Command. Catalog of Common

Sources, Fiscal Year 1983. No pi.: Historical Office, AMCCOM, Rock
Island Arsenal, Rock Island, 111.
Van Der Hoeven, B. J. C. "Producers and Producer Gas." Chemistry of Coal

Utilization, vol 2. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1945.
Waring, Basil W. and John F. Foster. "Producer Gas." Economics of Fuel

Gas from Coal, eds., Foster and Richard J. Lund. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950. Contains concise overview of
producer-gas technology.
Holston Army AmmuniCion riant.
HAER No. TN-10
Page C^
Unpublished Sources
"Annual Unit History, Holston Army Ammunition Plant, 1975-1976." Report

prepared by HSAAP. HSAAP Administrative Archives.
Bearden, J. T. "A Short History of HDC." 1970. Holston Defence

Corporation Archives, HSAAP.
Hammond, R. J. "Profile on Munitions, 1950-1977." N.D. On Microfiche,

AMCCCM Historical Office, Rock Island Arsenal.
Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record,

National Park Service. Guidelines for Inventories of Historic
Buildings and Engineering and Industrial Structures. Draft, 1982.
"Holston Army Ammunition Plant, Annual Historical Review 1977-1978." Report

"Holston Army Ammunition Plant, Annual Historical Review 1978-1979."

Report prepared by HSAAP. HSAAP Administrative Archives.
"Holston Army Ammunition Plant, Annual Historical Review 1979-1980," Report

"Holston Army Ammunition Plant, Annual Historical Review 1980-1981." Report

"Holston Army Ammunition Plant, Historical Monograph Covering the Period 1

July 1942 Through 30 June 1963." Report prepared by Holston Defense
Corporation, 1963. Holston Defense Corporation Archives, HSAAP.
Holston Army Ammunition Plant Real Property Inventory. Computer Printout,

March 1982. HSAAP Real Property Office Archives.
Holston Army Ammunition Plant Site Map. Drawing No. 7651-212/1226.03,

prepared by Holston Defense Corporation, 1970, rev. 1976. Holston
Defense Corporation Archives, HSAAP.
"Industrial Facilities Inventory, Holston Ordnance Works." Report prepared

by U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of the District Engineer,
Knoxville, Tenn., 1944. 3 vols. AMCCOM Historical Office, Rock
Island Arsenal.
Pridemore, Susan S. "Holston Army Ammunition Plant Unit History,

1942-1967." Report prepared by HSAAP. HSAAP Administrative Archives.
. "Holston Army Ammunition Plant Unit History, Annual

Supplement-CY 1968." Report prepared by HSAAP. HSAAP Administrative
Archives.
"Holston Army Ammunition Plant Unit History,

1972-1973." Report prepared by HSAA. HSAAP Administrative Archives.
HAER No. TN-10
Page q |
Voight, William Jr. "The Ordnance Organization in World War II" Report
prepared for the Ordnance Department, 1945- On microfiche, AMCCOM
Historical Office, Rock Island Arsenal. Provides brief historical
sketches of all government-owned, contractor-operated munitions plants
during World War II.

Method1 Us

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document informationorganic way

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Method1 Us

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Method1 Us

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Holston Army Ammunition Plant HABR No.

Kingspoxt V:- _."..-..:'..-.

WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA

REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED DRAWING

Historic American Engineering Record

Holston Army Ammunition Plant

Location: In Sullivan County, Tennessee, along the Holston

Date of Construction: Established in 19A2-1944

Owne r: Department of the Army

product is Composition B. The installation consists of two separate areas

Kingsport, Tennessee. Except for a four-year standby period immediately

installation, approximately three-quarters date from the World-vVar-II

As the world's first large-scale Bachmann-method plant, the Holston Army

replacing an expensive, labor-intensive technology with a cost-efficient,

mass-production operation. It also pioneered in the development of the

planning, and its large output of Composition B hastened Allied victory in

the crucial Battle of the Atlantic.

historic properties. The installation also contains one of the nation's

few surviving producer-gas plants (Plant A, Building 10), which is a

Category I "historic property by virtue of its rarity and "highly intact

condition. The installation's Old Administration Building (Plant B,

Building 1) is a Category III historic property "because of its role in

overseeing the Wbrld-War-II manufacturing operation. There are no Category

II historic properties at the installation.

Category I Historic Properties 64

Category II Historic Properties 80

Category III Historic Properties 80

This report presents the results of an historic properties survey of the

Materiel Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM), the report is intended

identification, evaluation, documentation, nomination, and preservation of

historic properties at the Holston Army Ammunition Plant. Chapter 1 sets

forth the survey's scope and methodology; Chapter 2 presents an architec-

tural, historical, and technological overview of the installation and its

properties; and Chapter 3 identifies significant properties by Army

category and sets forth preservation recommendations. Illustrations and an

annotated bibliography supplement the text.

This report is part of a program initiated through a memorandum of

agreement between the National Park Service, Department of the Interior,

installations and has two components: 1) a survey of historic properties

(districts, buildings, structures, and objects), and 2) the development of

archaeological overviews. Stanley H. Fried, Chief, Real Estate Branch of

Kapsch, Chief of the Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American

project manager for the historic properties survey. Technical assistance

was provided by Donald C. Jackson.

Building Technology Incorporated acted as primary contractor to HABS/HAER

for the historic properties survey. William A. Brenner was BTI's

principal-in-charge and Dr. Larry D. Lankton was the chief technical

consultant. Major subcontractors were the MacDonald and Mack Partnership

Robert Wicker, and Ken Curtis of the Holston Defense Corporation.

The complete HABS/HAER documentation for this installation will be included

in the HABS/HAER collections at the Library of Congress, Prints and

Photographs Division, under the designation HAER Mo. TN-10.

This report is based on an historic properties survey conducted in April

1983 of all Army-owned properties located within the official boundaries of

Completion of documentary research on the history of the

installation and its properties.

Completion of a field inventory of all properties at the

Preparation of a combined architectural, historical, and