U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2018–5009

Prepared in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 

Division of Water Resources

Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial 

Water Use in Tennessee, 2010
Cover photographs, left column, top to bottom: Skyline of Nashville, Tennessee; view north of Nashville. Urban residence, north 

Nashville, Tennessee. Water reservoir along Richland Creek, a tributary to the Cumberland River, Nashville, Tennessee.

Cover photographs, right column, top to bottom: Skyline of Nashville, Tennessee; view north of Nashville. Historic Eighth Avenue 

South Reservoir in Nashville, Tennessee. The elliptical reservoir was built in the late 1880s as a settling basin. This reservoir was 

designated as an American Water Landmark by the American Water Works Association in 1971 and a Metro Nashville Landmark in 2004.

Cover photograph, center: View of downtown Nashville, Tennessee, from the east bank of the Cumberland River.

All photographs by John A. Robinson, U.S. Geological Survey.
Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied 

Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

By John A. Robinson

Prepared in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation, Division of Water Resources

Scientific Investigations Report 2018–5009

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

William H. Werkheiser, Deputy Director 

 exercising the authority of the Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2018

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit https://store.usgs.gov.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Robinson, J.A., 2018, Public-supply water use and self-supplied industrial water use in Tennessee, 2010: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Report 2018–5009, 30 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................................................2

Description of the Study Area ............................................................................................................2

Hydrology ......................................................................................................................................5

Physiographic Regions ...............................................................................................................9

Previous Investigations........................................................................................................................9

Approach and Methods..............................................................................................................................10

Public-Supply Water Use During 2010 .....................................................................................................10

Surface Water.....................................................................................................................................12

Groundwater........................................................................................................................................12

Gross Per Capita Water Use .............................................................................................................19

Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 ....................................................................................19

Surface Water.....................................................................................................................................20

Groundwater........................................................................................................................................20

Summary........................................................................................................................................................25

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................26

Glossary.........................................................................................................................................................28

Appendix 1. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the Tennessee 

Hydrologic Region, 2010................................................................................................................29

Appendix 2. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the Ohio Hydrologic 

Region, 2010.....................................................................................................................................29

Appendix 3. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the LowerMississippi Hydrologic Region, 2010...........................................................................................29

Appendix 4. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Tennessee Hydrologic Region, 2010.........29

Appendix 5. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Ohio Hydrologic Region, 2010....................29

Appendix 6. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Lower Mississippi Hydrologic 

Region, 2010.....................................................................................................................................29

Appendix 7. Public-Supply Water Systems in Tennessee, 2010. .........................................................29

Figures

1. Maps showing regions and basins in Tennessee. Modified from Webbers ......................3

2. Map showing counties and primary population centers in West, Middle, and 

East Tennessee .............................................................................................................................4

3. Map showing primary tributaries of the Mississippi, Tennessee, and Cumberland 

Rivers in Tennessee......................................................................................................................7

4. Maps showing principal aquifers and generalized geologic section in Tennessee.........7

5. Graph showing surface-water and groundwater withdrawals by public-supply 

water systems in Tennessee, 1950 to 2010...............................................................................9

6. Diagram showing source of water use for public-supply water systems in 

Tennessee in 2010.......................................................................................................................10

7. Map showing distribution of public-supply water systems using surface water or 

groundwater in Tennessee in 2010 ..........................................................................................11
iv

8. Map showing public-supply surface-water withdrawal rates for Tennessee 

counties in 2010...........................................................................................................................13

9. Map showing public-supply groundwater withdrawal rates for Tennessee 

counties in 2010...........................................................................................................................14

10. Graph showing public-supply groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day, 

from principal aquifers in Tennessee in 2010.........................................................................15

11. Map showing principal aquifers in Tennessee and rate of public-supply 

groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day, 2010.................................................16

12. Diagram showing source of water for self-supplied industry in Tennessee in 2010.......19

13. Map showing self-supplied industrial surface-water withdrawal rates for 

Tennessee counties in 2010 ......................................................................................................21

14. Map showing self-supplied industrial groundwater withdrawal rates for 

Tennessee counties in 2010 ......................................................................................................22

15. Graph showing self-supplied industrial groundwater withdrawals, in million 

gallons per day, from principal aquifers in Tennessee in 2010 ...........................................23

16. Map showing principal aquifers in Tennessee and rate of self-supplied industrial 

groundwater withdrawals in million gallons per day, 2010..................................................24

Tables

1. Surface-water characteristics of the hydrologic subregions and major river 

basins in Tennessee.....................................................................................................................5

2. Aquifer and well characteristics in Tennessee.......................................................................8

3. Surface-water withdrawals by public-supply water systems from Tennessee 

river basins in 2010 .....................................................................................................................12

4. Groundwater withdrawals by public-supply water systems in Tennessee using 

1 million gallons per day or more .............................................................................................17

5. Self-supplied industrial withdrawals by category and source in Tennessee in 2010 .....19

6. Self-supplied industrial surface-water withdrawals from Tennessee river basins 

in 2010 ...........................................................................................................................................20
v

Conversion Factors

U.S. customary units to International System of Units

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

Area

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometers (km2)

Volume

gallons (gal) 3.785 liter (L)

gallons (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3

)

acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter (m3

)

Flow rate

gallons per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liters per second (L/s)

gallons per day (gal/d) 0.003785 cubic meters per day (m3

/d)

million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meters per second (m3

/s)

Selected Water Equivalents in U.S. Customary Units

1 gallon (gal)=8.34 pounds (lb)

1 million gallons (Mgal)=3.07 acre-feet (acre-ft)

1 cubic foot (ft3)=62.4 pounds (lb) or 7.48 gallons (gal)

1 acre-foot (acre-ft)=325,851 gallons (gal) or 43,560 cubic feet (ft3)

1 inch of rain (in.)=17.4 million gallons per square mile (Mgal/m2), 27,200 gallons per acre 

(gal/acre), or 100 tons per acre (ton/acre)

Datum

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 

(NGVD 29).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North America Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Altitude

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to the distance above the vertical datum.

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation 

with the Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation, Division of Water Resources, prepared this 

report and displayed and analyzed water use by self-supplied 

industrial and public-supply water systems in Tennessee for 

2010. Public-supply water systems in Tennessee provide 

water for domestic, industrial, and commercial uses and for 

municipal services. In 2010, 474 public-supply water systems 

distributed 917 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of surface 

water (67 percent, 617 Mgal/d) and groundwater (33 percent, 

300 Mgal/d) to a population of 5.7 million in Tennessee. Gross 

per capita water use in Tennessee during 2010 was 162 gallons 

per day.

Since 1950, water withdrawals by public-supply water 

systems in Tennessee have increased from 160 Mgal/d to 

917 Mgal/d in 2010. Each of the 95 counties in Tennessee 

was served by at least 1 public-supply water system in 

2010. Tennessee public-supply water systems withdraw less 

groundwater than surface water, and surface-water use has 

increased at a faster rate than groundwater use. Since 2005, 

surface-water withdrawals have increased by 26 Mgal/d, 

and groundwater withdrawals have decreased by 29 Mgal/d, 

which is the first decrease in groundwater withdrawals since 

1950; however, 29 systems reported increased groundwater 

withdrawals during 2010, and 12 of these 29 systems reported 

increases of 1 Mgal/d or more. Davidson County had the 

largest surface-water withdrawal rate (136 Mgal/d) in 2010. 

The largest groundwater withdrawal rate (151 Mgal/d) by a 

single public-supply water system was reported by Memphis 

Light, Gas and Water, which served more than 669,000 people 

in Shelby County in 2010.

Self-supplied industrial water use includes water for such 

purposes as fabrication, processing, washing, diluting, cooling, 

or transporting a product; incorporating water into a product; 

or for sanitation needs in facilities that manufacture various 

products. Water withdrawals for self-supplied industrial 

water use during 2010 were about 776 Mgal/d. This quantity 

represented a decrease of 7 Mgal/d since 2005. In Tennessee, 

self-supplied industrial water withdrawals were primarily for 

chemical and allied products (555 Mgal/d), paper and allied 

products (107 Mgal/d), aeronautical products (71.5 Mgal/d), 

concrete and glass products (9.74 Mgal/d), and primary metal 

products (4.49 Mgal/d); and these products accounted for 

96 percent (747 Mgal/d) of the self-supplied industrial water 

withdrawals in 2010. Surface water supplied 94 percent of 

the water (728 Mgal/d) for self-supplied industrial purposes, 

and groundwater supplied 6 percent (47.6 Mgal/d). Selfsupplied industrial water withdrawals in Sullivan County were 

488 Mgal/d and accounted for 61 percent of the self-supplied 

industrial water withdrawals. The largest groundwater 

withdrawal, 14.9 Mgal/d, by a single self-supplied industry 

was in Memphis, Tennessee, for the production of chemicals 

and allied products.

Introduction

The water resources in Tennessee are likely to be stressed 

in the future by factors such as population increase, urban and 

suburban development, climate change, and other competing 

demands. As these stressors increase, water-resource managers 

and policymakers will need timely and accurate information 

regarding water use as part of effective regional water-supply 

planning for infrastructure investment, conservation, and 

cost-recovery strategies. Quantifying public-supply water 

use and self-supplied industrial water-use information, and 

understanding the effects of water use on water resources and 

natural hydrologic systems, is important for the public and 

policymakers.

The population of Tennessee in 2010 was estimated as 

6,346,105 by the U.S. Census Bureau (2012). As Tennessee’s 

population has increased with time, so too has the number of 

people and industries relying on additional water resources. 

Public supply refers to water withdrawn by public or private 

suppliers that furnish water year round to at least 25 people or 

have at least 15 service connections (U.S. Geological Survey, 

1978). Estimates of self-supplied industrial withdrawals 

by facilities with usage of 10,000 gallons per day (gal/d) 

or more were obtained from the Tennessee Department of 

Environment and Conservation (TDEC) or from a water-use 

Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial 

Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

By John A. Robinson
2 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

inventory conducted by TDEC in conjunction with this 

investigation (Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation, 2015). Studies documenting water withdrawals 

by self-supplied industrial and public-supply water systems 

provide local and regional government agencies with a better 

understanding of past and current water use and a basis for 

accurate estimation of future water needs.

Purpose and Scope 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation 

with the TDEC Division of Water Resources (DWR), 

prepared this report to display a detailed analysis on water 

use by self-supplied industrial and public-supply water 

systems in Tennessee; additionally, this report presents the 

sources of these water uses (withdrawals) and quantities of 

water withdrawn.

The 2010 water-use data were obtained from the TDEC–

DWR, which regulates self-supplied industrial and publicsupply water system withdrawals and usage within Tennessee. 

Public-supply water-use data before 2010 were obtained from 

published USGS reports. The data analyses for this report 

include graphic summaries and descriptions of water use in 

Tennessee from 1950 to 2010.

Description of the Study Area

Tennessee is in the central southeastern United States, 

bounded by the Mississippi River on the west and extending 

to the Blue Ridge physiographic region on the east (fig. 1). 

Tennessee encompasses 42,126 square miles (mi2), which 

includes 926 mi2 of inland water (Webbers, 2003). Landsurface altitudes range from 180 feet (ft) above the National 

Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) along the 

Mississippi River to more than 6,600 ft above the NGVD 29 

in the Great Smoky Mountains of East Tennessee. The 

three grand divisions of Tennessee shown in figure 2—West 

Tennessee, Middle Tennessee, and East Tennessee—are 

characterized by distinct differences in geology, physiography, 

and hydrology. In West Tennessee, thick unconsolidated 

sedimentary aquifers provide water for public supply and 

self-supplied industry. In Middle and East Tennessee, publicsupply and self-supplied industrial water originates primarily 

from surface-water sources and, in places, from groundwater 

sources such as wells and springs.

The climate in Tennessee generally is temperate, warm, 

and humid. Precipitation in the form of short-duration 

thunderstorms happens from late spring through early fall. 

Storms from December through May can last for several 

days and produce large amounts of precipitation. During 

2007 to 2012, parts of Tennessee have had record floods 

and droughts. Moderate to extreme drought happened in 

the spring, summer, and fall of 2007 and 2008; and in the 

summer of 2012 (U.S. Drought Monitor, 2007, 2008, 2012). 

Moderate to extreme flooding happened in the spring of 2010 

(National Weather Service, 2010) and 2011 (National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, 2011). The record floods 

and droughts have affected the demands for reservoir storage 

and flood control (Griffin, 2006) and natural aquifer recharge 

in Tennessee.

The climate in Tennessee is temperate with warm 

summers and mild winters. In general, the temperature 

and precipitation in Tennessee is a function of the varying 

topography from West to Middle to East Tennessee. The 

average annual precipitation for the State of Tennessee was 

53.6 inches (in.) from 1981 to 2010. The months with the most 

precipitation were March, April, and May with an average 

of 14.8 in. of precipitation per month. The months with the 

least precipitation were September, October, and November 

with an average of 11.9 in. of precipitation per month. The 

annual average temperature for Tennessee was 57.8 degrees 

Fahrenheit (°F); temperatures were lowest in January, 

February, and December with an average temperature of 

38.7 °F and highest in June, July, and August with an average 

temperature of 75.9 °F (National Centers for Environmental 

Information, 2013).

The population of Tennessee increased 11.5 percent from 

2000 to 2010, and Tennessee was the 17th most populated 

State in the United States during 2010. According to the 

U.S. Census Bureau as of 2010, the primary population centers 

shown in figure 2 include Memphis (646,889), Shelby County; 

Nashville (601,221), Davidson County; Knoxville (178,874), 

Knox County; Chattanooga (167,674), Hamilton County; 

Clarksville (132,929), Montgomery County; and Murfreesboro 

(108,755), Rutherford County (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). 

During 2000 to 2010, the fastest growing counties in 

Tennessee were Williamson, Rutherford, Fayette, Wilson, 

Montgomery, Sevier, Louden, Sequatchie, and Sumner 

Counties (Center for Business and Economic Research, 2012).
Introduction 3

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

Hatchie-Obion

River Basin

Lower Tennessee

River Basin

Upper Cumberland

River Basin

Upper Tennessee

River Basin

Lower Cumberland

River Basin

LOWER

TENNESSEE

SUBREGION

OHIO REGION

SOUTH ATLANTICGULF REGION

CUMBERLAND SUBREGION

(including the Green River Basin)

Middle

TennesseeHiwassee River

Basin

French BroadHolston

River Basin

UPPER TENNESSEE

SUBREGION

TENNESSEE REGION

MIDDLE TENNESSEEELK SUBREGION

MIDDLE TENNESSEEHIWASSEE SUBREGION

(including Alabama Region

Middle TennesseeElk Basin

LOWER MISSISSIPPIHATCHIE SUBREGION

LOWER MISSISSIPPI

REGION

35°

36°

89°

88° 87° 86° 85° 84° 83° 82°

Mississippi

River

COASTAL PLAIN

WESTERN VALLEY 

HIGHLAND

RIM

HIGHLAND RIM

CENTRAL

BASIN

VALLEY AND RIDGE

BLUE RIDGE

A

B

Base from U.S. Geological Survey

digital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

Standard parallels 29°30’N 45°30’N

Standard meridian 96°00‘W’

CUMBERLAND

 PLATEAU

SEQUATCHIE

VALLEY

TENNESSEE

Geology modified from Fenneman, 1946; and Miller, 1974

Hydrologic region boundary

Hydrologic subregion boundary

Primary river basin boundary

Figure 1. Regions and basins in Tennessee. Modified from Webbers (2003). A, physiographic regions; and, B, primary hydrologic 

regions and subregions and primary river basins.
4 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010 MOORE Clarksville Nashville Memphis Memphis Knoxville Murfreesboro Chattanooga

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

TENNESSEE

35 ̊

36 ̊

89 ̊

88 ̊ 87 ̊ 86 ̊ 85 ̊ 84 ̊ 83 ̊ 82 ̊

Grand division of TennesseePrimary population center

Base from U.S. Geological Surveydigital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000Albers Equal-Area Conic projectionStandard parallels 29°30’N 45°30’NStandard meridian 96°00‘W’

TIPTON

DYER

WEAKLEY

HENRY

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

HICKMAN

LEWIS

DICKSON DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

LAWRENCE

HUMPHREYS

MONTGOMERY

HAYWOOD

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

CROCKETT

SHELBY

GIBSON

FAYETTE

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY HARDIN

SUMNER

TROUSDALE

PICKETT

MACON

RUTHERFORD

WILSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

BEDFORD

LINCOLN FRANKLIN

COFFEE

WARREN

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY

MARION

SMITH

JACKSON

CLAY

OVERTON

FENTRESS

MORGAN

ROANE

LOUDEN BLOUNT

UNICOI

SEVIER

COCKE

SCOTT CAMPBELL

CANNON

GILES

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

HAMILTON

SEQUATCHIE

ANDERSON

RHEA

MEIGS

POLK BRADLEY

MCMINN

MONROE

JEFFERSON

HAMBLEN UNION GRAINGER

KNOX

CLAIBORNE

GREENE

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

WASHINGTONCARTER

HANCOCK

JOHNSON

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

DECATUR

CHEATHAM

MARSHALL

Figure 2. Counties and primary population centers in West, Middle, and East Tennessee.
Introduction 5

Hydrology

Information on hydrologic regions presented in this 

section is from Webbers (2003) unless cited otherwise. Three 

primary hydrologic regions divide the State’s surface-water 

hydrography from West Tennessee to East Tennessee—the 

Lower Mississippi, the Ohio, and the Tennessee hydrologic 

regions (fig. 1). A small part of southeastern Tennessee is in 

the South Atlantic-Gulf hydrologic region. Within the primary 

hydrologic regions are six, smaller hydrologic subregions 

containing river basins that determine water drainage within 

the State (table 1).

In Middle and East Tennessee, the Ohio hydrologic 

region includes the Cumberland River and its tributaries. 

The primary tributaries of the Cumberland River shown in 

figure 3 are the Obey, Caney Fork, Harpeth, Stones, and Red 

Rivers of the Cumberland subregion. In West, Middle, and 

East Tennessee, the Tennessee hydrologic region includes 

the Tennessee River and its primary tributaries shown in 

figure 3, including the Buffalo, Beech, Big Sandy, and Duck 

Rivers of the Lower Tennessee subregion; the Elk, Shoal, 

and Flint Rivers of the Middle Tennessee-Elk subregion; and 

the Clinch, French Broad, Holston, Nolichucky, Powell, and 

Tellico Rivers of the Upper Tennessee subregion. The Lower 

and Upper Cumberland and Lower and Upper Tennessee River 

Basins include an extensive network of reservoirs that store 

about 8.12 million acre-feet (2,647 billion gallons) of water 

(Hutson, 1990). In West Tennessee, the Lower MississippiHatchie hydrologic subregion drains about 8,907 mi2

. Surfacewater characteristics of the hydrologic subregions and primary 

river basins in Tennessee are described in table 1.

Groundwater for public supply in Tennessee is provided 

by eight of the nine principal aquifers in the State (table 2). 

The principal aquifers in Tennessee that are used for public 

supply are the alluvial (Quaternary), Tertiary sand, Cretaceous 

sand, Pennsylvanian sandstone, Mississippian carbonate rock, 

Ordovician carbonate rock, Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate 

rock, and crystalline rock (Precambrian and Cambrian) 

aquifers (Hollyday and Bradley, 1985; fig. 4). During 2010, 

62 percent of the groundwater used for public supplies and 

self-supplied industry in Tennessee was produced from the 

Tertiary sand aquifers in West Tennessee. In Middle and 

East Tennessee, groundwater may be produced from wells or 

discharge at large springs, which are used for water supplies. 

Detailed descriptions and water-quality information for the 

aquifers in Tennessee are provided in the following reports: 

Brahana and Bradley (1985), Brahana and others (1986a, 

1986b), Parks and Carmichael (1989), and Kingsbury and 

Parks (1993).

Table 1. Surface-water characteristics of the hydrologic subregions and major river basins in Tennessee.—Continued

[From Webbers (2003)]

Hydrologic subregion1 Major river basin and 

associated streams

Physiographic divisions 

(Miller, 1974) Response to drought Remarks

Lower MississippiHatchieHatchie-Obion

 Obion

 Hatchie

 Loosahatchie

 Wolf

 Nonconnah

 Forked Deer

Coastal Plain Sustained flow from 

groundwater in main 

stem during dry 

months. Small streams 

will be dry.

 

 

Few available storage 

sites. High sediment 

load and poor water 

quality limits use; 

pumps must use filters.

 

Cumberland (including 

the Green River basin 

in Tennessee)

Upper Cumberland

 Obey

 Caney

Lower Cumberland

 Harpeth

 Stones

 Red

Central Basin

Highland Rim

Cumberland

 Plateau

Many small unregulated 

streams. Area

 characterized by no 

flow or low flow

 during dry periods. 

The Cumberland 

 River is regulated.

In the Central Basin, 

streamflow is highly 

responsive to rainfall 

and flows are poorly 

sustained. Stramflows 

are fairly well sustained 

in the Highland Rim. 

The streamflows in 

the Cumberland River 

Plateau are poorly 

sustained.

Lower Tennessee Lower Tennessee

 Duck

 Buffalo

 Beach

 Big Sandy

Highland Rim

Central Basin

Western Valley

In late summer and 

early fall, unregulated 

streams go dry or 

sustain low flows.

In the Central Basin, 

streamflow is highly 

responsive to rainfall 

and flows are poorly 

sustained. Straamflows 

are fairly well sustained 

in the Highland 

Rim. Streamflow is 

adequately sustained 

for supply in the 

Western Valley.
6 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Table 1. Surface-water characteristics of the hydrologic subregions and major river basins in Tennessee.—Continued

[From Webbers (2003)]

Hydrologic subregion1 Major river basin and 

associated streams

Physiographic divisions 

(Miller, 1974) Response to drought Remarks

Middle Tennessee-Elk Middle Tennessee-Elk

 Elk

 Shoal

 Flint

Highland Rim

Cumberland Plateau

Central Basin

Commonly in late 

summer, unregulated

 streams go dry, 

particularly along the

 basin rim.

In the Central Basin, 

streamflow is highly 

responsive to rainfall 

and flows are poorly 

sustained. Streamflows 

are fairly well sustained 

in the Highland Rim. 

In the Cumberland 

Plateau, streamflows 

are poorly sustained.

Upper Tennessee French Broad-Holston

 French Broad

 Holston

 Nolichucky

Upper Tennessee

 Clinch

 Powell

 Little Tennessee

 Little 

 Tellico

Blue Ridge

Valley and Ridge

Cumberland Plateau

Commonly in late 

summer, unregulated

 streams go dry. Many 

small unregulated 

streams may sustain 

low flow with 

groundwater inflow.

In the Blue Ridge, 

steep terrain and low 

permeability result 

in high runoff rates. 

Many springs are in 

the area. Surface-water 

impoundments enhance 

water supplies in the 

Valley and Ridge. In 

the Cumberland

 Plateau, streamflows 

are poorly sustained.

Middle TennesseeHiwassee (including 

the Alabama region)

Middle TennesseeHiwassee

 Hiwassee

 Sequatchie

Blue Ridge

Valley and Ridge

Cumberland Plateau

Sequatchie Valley

Commonly in late 

summer, unregulated

 streams go dry, 

particularly along the

 basin rim. Even 

streams having water-

 sheds exceeding 

100 square miles

 may cease to flow.

In the Blue Ridge, 

steep terrain and low 

permeability result in 

high runoff

 rates. Many springs are 

in the area. Surfacewater impoundments

 enhance water supplies 

in the Valley and Ridge. 

In the Cumberland

 Plateau, streamflows 

are poorly sustained.

South Atlantic-Gulf2 Conasauga Blue Ridge

Valley and Ridge

Commonly in late 

summer, unregulated

 streams go dry, 

particularly along the

 basin rim. 

In the Blue Ridge, 

steep terrain and low 

permeability result 

in high runoff rates. 

Many springs are in 

the area. Surface-water 

impoundments enhance 

water supplies.

1

Refer to figure 1 for location on map.

2

South Atlantic-Gulf Region extending from Alabama..
Introduction 7

Mississippi

River

Big

River

Beech R.

Loosahatchie

Hatchie

River

River

Forked

Wolf

Cumberland

River

Sequatchie

River

River

HolstonRiver

Clinch River

Tellico River

Shoal Cr

Elk River

Duck

Stones R.

Caney

Obey River

Fork

River

River

River

Hiwassee

Little

French

River

Broad

Obion 

Deer River Sandy

River

River

River

River

FlintR

Red River

River

River

Powell

TENNESSEE

35 ̊

36 ̊

89 ̊

88 ̊ 87 ̊ 86 ̊ 85 ̊ 84 ̊ 83 ̊ 82 ̊

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

Base from U.S. Geological Survey

digital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

Standard parallels 29°30’N 45°30’N

Standard meridian 96°00‘W’

EXPLANATION

Grand division of Tennessee

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

Nonconna

Creek h

Tennessee

Harpeth

Tennessee Little Tennessee

Nolichucky

Figure 3. Primary tributaries of the Mississippi, Tennessee, and Cumberland Rivers in Tennessee.

1

3

3

5

6 5

4

8

8 9

A A'

1

2

A

B

5 5

8

A A'

1

1

2

3

4

5

2

3

6 6

7

4

9

Alluvial (Quaternary)

Tertiary sand

Cretaceous sand

Pennsylvanian sandstone

Mississippian carbonate

rock

6

7

8

9

A A'

Ordovician carbonate rock

Knox (Cambrian-Ordovician)

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate

rock

Crystalline rock (Precambrian

 and Cambrian)

Trace of geologic section

EXPLANATION

Principal aquifers

Grand division of Tennessee

TENNESSEE

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST

TENNESSEE

Note: Schematic not to scale.

Map and cross section modified from Hollyday and Bradley, 1985.

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

35°

36°

89°

88° 87° 86° 85° 84° 83° 82°

Figure 4. Principal aquifers and generalized geologic section in Tennessee. Modified from Webbers (2003). 

A, State of Tennessee; and, B, cross section A–A’.
8 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Table 2. Aquifer and well characteristics in Tennessee.—Continued

[Modified from Hollyday and Bradley (1985)]

Aquifer name1 and description

Well characteristics

Remarks

Depth,

in feet

Yield, in

gallons per minute

Common 

range

May 

exceed

Common 

range

May 

exceed

Alluvial: Sand, gravel, and clay. 

Unconfined.

10–75 100 20–50 1,500 High iron concentrations in some areas.

Tertiary sand: Multiaquifer unit of sand, 

clay, silt, and some gravel lignite. 

Confined; unconfined in the outcrop 

area.

100–1,300 1,500 200–1,000 2,000 Includes Memphis Sand of Claiborne Group 

and Fort Pillow Sand of Wilcox Group. 

Problems with high iron concentration in 

some places.

Cretaceous sand: Multiaquifer unit of 

interbedded sand, clay, marl, and 

gravel. Confined; unconfined in the 

outcrop area.

100–1,500 2,500 50–1,000 1,000 Includes McNairy and Coffee Sands and 

Tuscaloosa Formation. Water withdrawn 

primarily in the outcrop area.

Pennsylvanian sandstone: Multiaquifer 

unit, primarily sandstone and 

conglomerate, interbedded shale and 

some coal. Unconfined near land 

surface; confined at depth.

100–200 250 5–50 200 Permeability is from fractures, faults, and 

bedding-plane openings. Principal waterbearing units are Rockcastle and Sewanee 

Conglomerates. High iron concentrations 

are a problem.

Mississippian carbonate rock: 

Multiaquifer unit of limestone, 

dolomite, and some shale.

 Unconfined or partly confined near land 

surface; may be confined at depth.

50–200 250 5–50 400 Water occurs in solution and bedding-plane 

openings. Principal water-bearing units 

are Ste. Genevieve (Monteagle), St. Louis 

and Warsaw Limestone and Fort Payne 

Formation. Water generally hard; high 

iron, sulfide, or sulfate concentration are a 

problem in some areas.

Ordovician carbonate rock: Multiaquifer 

unit of limestone, dolomite, and shale. 

Partly confined to unconfined near land 

surface; confined at depth.

50–150 200 5–20 300 Principal water-bearing units are Bigby, 

Carters, Ridley, and Murfreesboro 

Limestones. Water generally hard; some 

high sulfide or sulfate concentrations 

in places.

Knox: Primarily dolomite, some 

limestone; confined. Does not have the 

structural complexity of the CambrianOrdovician carbonate aquifer.

700–1,200 1,400 1–10 20 Deep aquifer; present beneath most of 

central and western Tennessee. Away from 

Central Basin,water generally has high 

concentrations of dissolved solids.

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate rock: 

Highly faulted multiaquifer unit 

of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, 

and shale; structurally complex. 

Unconfined; confined at depth.

100–300 400 5–200 2,000 Principal water-bearing units are carbonate 

rocks in Chickamauga Limestone, Knox 

Group, and Honaker Dolomite. Water is 

generally hard. Brine below 3,000 feet.

Crystalline rock: Multiaquifer unit of 

dolomite, granite gneiss, phyllite, and 

metasedimentary rocks overlain by 

thick regolith; alluvium and colluvium 

in some valleys. Generally unconfined.

50–150 200 5–20 1,000 High yields occur primarily in dolomite 

or deep colluvium and alluvium. Shady 

Dolomite is a principal water bearing unit. 

Low pH and high iron concentrations may 

be problems in some areas.

1

Refer to figure 4 for location on map.
Introduction 9

Physiographic Regions

Information on physiographic regions presented in 

this section is from Webbers (2003) unless cited otherwise. 

The diverse topography of Tennessee includes eight 

physiographic regions (fig. 1) that range from broad flood 

plains in the Coastal Plain physiographic region of West 

Tennessee, to rolling hills and karst plains in the Highland 

Rim and Central Basin regions of Middle Tennessee, and 

to steep mountains and deep narrow valleys in the Valley 

and Ridge and Blue Ridge regions of East Tennessee. The 

geology of Tennessee includes unconsolidated Quaternary, 

Tertiary, and Cretaceous sediments of the Coastal Plain in 

West Tennessee; Mississippian and Ordovician limestone 

and dolomite of the Highland Rim and Central Basin in 

Middle Tennessee; and Pennsylvanian limestone, sandstone, 

and shale of the Cumberland Plateau, Cambrian-Ordovician 

limestone, dolomite, and shale in the Valley and Ridge region, 

and Precambrian and Cambrian metamorphic and igneous 

crystalline rocks of the Blue Ridge region in East Tennessee 

(Miller, 1974).

Previous Investigations

Information on previous investigations presented in 

this section is from Webbers (2003) unless cited otherwise. 

Previous investigations have been published with water-use 

data for Tennessee as part of a national compilation since the 

1950s (MacKichan, 1951, 1957; MacKichan and Kammerer, 

1961; Murray, 1968; Murray and Reeves, 1972, 1977; Solley 

and others, 1993) and specific to Tennessee since the 1980s 

(Alexander and others, 1984; Hutson, 1989, 1991, 1999; 

Hutson and Morris, 1992, 1994; Webbers, 2003; Robinson and 

Brooks, 2010). The most recent investigation for self-supplied 

industrial water use in Tennessee was by Alexander and others 

(1984).

Since 1950, the USGS has published reports documenting 

public-supply water systems and associated water-use data 

for Tennessee. During 1950 to 1985, total public-supply 

water demand trends in Tennessee seemed to be attributed 

to a natural shift in demand that is a function of population 

growth, income growth, and economic development (Griffin, 

2006) when tracked at 5-year intervals. During 1985 to 2010, 

it is more challenging to determine the effect of growth, 

development factors, a climate factor, a policy factor, or a 

combination of n-factors on total public-supply water demand 

trends in Tennessee or for public-supply water use. The 

combined public-supply system withdrawals of groundwater 

and surface water were estimated at 160 Mgal/d in 1950; 

groundwater withdrawals were estimated to be 85 Mgal/d, and 

surface-water withdrawals were estimated to be 75 Mgal/d 

(MacKichan, 1951) (fig. 5). In 1955, total public-supply 

system water withdrawals for Tennessee were estimated at 

250 Mgal/d (MacKichan, 1957). By 1975, total public-supply 

system water withdrawals had reached about 440 Mgal/d 

(Murray and Reeves, 1977). From 1988 (Hutson and Morris, 

1992) to 1990 (Hutson and Morris, 1994), surface-water 

withdrawals decreased slightly from 446 to 426 Mgal/d. 

Groundwater withdrawals in the State, however, increased 

slightly during the same time period from 262 Mgal/d 

(Hutson and Morris, 1992) to 269 Mgal/d (Solley and others, 

1993). In 1995, total withdrawals by public-supply water 

systems reached 779 Mgal/d (Hutson, 1999), and there was 

an additional increase of 13 percent in 2000 (890 Mgal/d) 

(Webbers, 2003). The withdrawal rates of water systems 

distributing public supply in Tennessee increased from 

890 Mgal/d in 2000 (Webbers, 2003) to 917 Mgal/d in 2010.

EXPLANATION

Groundwater

Surface water

Total

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Withdrawals, in million gallons per day

1950 1955 1950 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Figure 5. Surface-water and groundwater withdrawals by public-supply water 

systems in Tennessee, 1950 to 2010 (MacKichan, 1951, 1957; MacKichan and 

Kammerer, 1961; Murray, 1968; Murray and Reeves, 1972, 1977; Solley and others, 

1993; Alexander and others, 1984; Hutson, 1989, 1999; Hutson and Morris, 1992, 

1994; Webbers, 2003; Robinson and Brooks, 2010).
10 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Approach and Methods

To assess public-supply water use in Tennessee, 

data were collected and analyzed for public-supply water 

systems active between January 1 and December 31, 2010. 

The public-supply water systems included investor-owned 

water companies, private water companies, municipal 

water departments, regional water authorities, residential 

developments, mobile home parks, homeowner associations, 

and institutions such as schools and prisons. Each water 

system supplied the TDEC–DWR with monthly operating 

reports that included information on the source of water, 

mean daily or monthly water withdrawal rates, and the 

population served. In some instances, public-supply water 

systems were contacted to supplement missing data or verify 

reported data. In previous and current public-supply studies, 

the USGS labeled the monthly operating report data as water 

withdrawals—a surrogate for potable water produced (Hutson, 

1999; Webbers, 2003; and Robinson and Brooks, 2010).

Monthly and annual average water withdrawals by 

each public-supply water system were separated into 

categories of surface water, groundwater, and purchased 

water. The withdrawal rates of systems using surface-water 

and groundwater supplies were calculated and compared to 

historic withdrawal rates and with changes in the population 

served. The amounts of water purchased or sold by publicsupply water systems are not included in the calculations 

for the amount of water withdrawn from the river basins 

or aquifers.

To assess self-supplied industrial water use in Tennessee, 

data were collected and analyzed for industrial water 

users active between January 1 and December 31, 2010. 

The industrial water users used water for purposes such 

as fabrication, processing, washing, diluting, cooling, or 

transporting a product; incorporating water into a product; or 

for sanitation needs within a manufacturing facility (Maupin 

and others, 2014). Industries that use large amounts of water 

produce commodities such as chemicals, food, metals, paper, 

or refined petroleum. Each industrial water user supplied the 

TDEC–DWR with monthly reports that included information 

on the source of water and mean monthly water withdrawal 

rates. The TDEC–DWR receives golf course water-use 

information, but these values are not included in this report 

because the USGS accounts for golf course water use within 

the irrigation water-use category.

Monthly and annual average water withdrawals of 

each self-supplied industry were separated into categories 

of surface water and groundwater. The withdrawal rates of 

industries using surface-water and groundwater supplies were 

calculated and compared with historic withdrawal rates.

A USGS data release (Robinson, 2017) documents the 

data used to support the findings in this report with a specific 

focus on the net supply and gross per capita water use and 

the amount of self-supplied industrial water used by county 

in each hydrologic region. In addition to providing the data 

in a digital format (Robinson, 2017), the data are presented in 

tables (appendixes 1–7) available for download at https://doi.

org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Public-Supply Water Use During 2010

During 2010, public-supply water systems of Tennessee 

withdrew 917 Mgal/d of water, which is a combined 

withdrawal of 67 percent surface water (617 Mgal/d) and 

33 percent groundwater (300 Mgal/d) (fig. 6). Public-supply 

water systems may use a stream or reservoir as a surfacewater source, water withdrawn from a well or spring as a 

groundwater source, or purchased water from another water 

system. In 2010, about 89 percent (5.7 million people) of 

Tennessee’s population was served by 474 public-supply water 

systems. Several of these public-supply water systems (131) 

relied entirely on water purchased from other water systems 

providing 74.7 Mgal/d of purchased water to Tennessee 

residents. A review of previous investigations describing water 

use by public-supply water systems in Tennessee from 1950 

to 2010 indicates that surface-water sources provided most 

of Tennessee’s public supply in 2010 and that surface-water 

withdrawals have increased steadily, whereas groundwater 

withdrawals have leveled off (2000–2005) or declined 

(2005–2010) (fig. 5).

Of the 343 public-supply water systems withdrawing 

water (not relying entirely on purchased water), 126 systems 

withdrew surface water, 201 systems withdrew groundwater, 

and 16 systems withdrew both (fig. 7). Information about 

the water source(s) for each public-supply water system, 

including the amount of water withdrawn, purchased, or 

sold; the population served by each system; and the gross per 

capita water use for each system for which such information 

is known, is provided in appendixes 1, 2, and 3. A list of the 

public-supply water systems in Tennessee in 2010 is provided 

in appendix 7.

33 percent total

groundwater

use (300 million

67 percent total gallons per day)

surface-water

use (617 million

gallons per day)

Figure 6. Source of water use for publicsupply water systems in Tennessee in 2010.
Public-Supply Water Use During 2010 11

TENNESSEE

0 50 100 MILES0 50 100 KILOMETERS

35 ̊

36 ̊

89 ̊

88 ̊ 87 ̊ 86 ̊ 85 ̊ 84 ̊ 83 ̊ 82 ̊

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

EXPLANATION

Public-supply water system using

surface-water source

Public-supply water system using

groundwater source

Public-supply water system using

surface-water and groundwatersources

Grand division of Tennessee

Base from U.S. Geological Surveydigital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000Albers Equal-Area Conic projectionStandard parallels 29°30’N 45°30’NStandard meridian 96°00‘W’

Figure 7. Distribution of public-supply water systems using surface water or groundwater in Tennessee in 2010.
12 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Table 3. Surface-water withdrawals by public-supply 

water systems from Tennessee river basins in 2010.

River basin name

Surface-water 

withdrawal rate,

in million gallons

per day

Lower Cumberland 244

Upper Tennessee 125

French Broad-Holston 78.9

Middle Tennessee-Hiwassee 75.7

Lower Tennessee 43.3

Upper Cumberland 39.1

Middle Tennessee-Elk 10.2

Hatchie-Obion 0.770

Each of the 95 counties in Tennessee was served by 

at least one public-supply water system in 2010 (fig. 7). 

The largest groundwater withdrawal rate (151 Mgal/d) by a 

single public-supply water system was reported by Memphis 

Light, Gas and Water (MLGW), which served more than 

669,000 people in Shelby County in 2010 (appendix 3). 

The county with the largest surface-water withdrawal rate 

(136 Mgal/d) was Davidson County (appendix 2).

Surface Water

In 2010, surface water provided about two-thirds of the 

total public supply distributed by water systems in Tennessee 

(fig. 6). This quantity represents an increase of 26 Mgal/d 

(4 percent) more than the 591 Mgal/d (fig. 5) reported for 2005 

(Robinson and Brooks, 2010). In 2010, 93 public-supply water 

systems withdrew surface-water supplies of 1 Mgal/d or more. 

The largest public-supply withdrawals from surface water by 

hydrologic region (fig. 1) in the State were in counties in the 

Tennessee and Ohio hydrologic regions; and came primarily 

from the Lower Cumberland (244 Mgal/d), Upper Tennessee 

(125 Mgal/d), French Broad-Holston (78.9 Mgal/d), and 

Middle Tennessee-Hiwassee (75.7 Mgal/d) River Basins. 

Other river basins in Tennessee provided 93.4 Mgal/d of the 

public supply in 2010 (table 3).

Surface-water withdrawals for public supply in 2010 

were concentrated in Middle and East Tennessee (fig. 8). 

Water-supply systems serving the metropolitan Nashville/

Davidson County area served more than 616,000 customers 

in 2010 and withdrew 136 Mgal/d from the Cumberland 

River (appendix 2). This was the largest surface-water 

withdrawal in the State during 2010. Large amounts of surface 

water were also withdrawn from the Tennessee River in the 

Chattanooga (Hamilton County) and Knoxville (Knox County) 

metropolitan areas (appendix 1). Because of the abundance 

and availability of groundwater supplies (Hutson and Morris, 

1992; Hutson, 1999), surface water was not a primary source 

for public-supply water systems in West Tennessee. Additional 

information about surface-water sources and withdrawal rates 

are presented in appendixes 1, 2, and 3.

Groundwater

In 2010, groundwater provided about one-third of the 

total public supply distributed by water systems in Tennessee. 

Groundwater supplied 300 Mgal/d in 2010 (fig. 5), which was 

a decrease of 29 Mgal/d since 2005. This decrease was the 

first decrease in groundwater withdrawals since 1950. From 

2005 to 2010 more than 55 percent (16.1 Mgal/d) of this 

decrease in groundwater withdrawals happened in Memphis 

by MLGW in Shelby County, Tennessee. Almost 78 percent 

of the groundwater withdrawn for public supply during 

2010 was in West Tennessee. In Shelby County, Tennessee, 

groundwater withdrawals yielded 173 Mgal/d (fig. 9) and 

provided water for more than 809,000 people. The largest 

total withdrawal (151 Mgal/d) by a single water system in 

Tennessee happened in Memphis by MLGW, which served a 

population of over 669,000. About 235 Mgal/d of groundwater 

were withdrawn from the Tertiary sand, Cretaceous sand, 

and alluvial aquifers (figs. 10 and 11). In contrast to the large 

amount of groundwater used in West Tennessee, the combined 

withdrawals from aquifers in Middle and East Tennessee were 

65 Mgal/d.

A review of historical groundwater use reported by 

large public-supply water systems (Robinson and Brooks, 

2010) withdrawing 1 Mgal/d or more in Tennessee from 

1988 through 2010 indicates that, within the 23-year period, 

withdrawal rates increased substantially for several of 

these systems (table 4). During this same time, 29 systems 

reported increased withdrawals, and 12 of these systems 

increased withdrawals by more than 1 Mgal/d. The greatest 

total increase in withdrawal rates was reported by systems 

located in the Lower Mississippi hydrologic region of West 

Tennessee (22.87 Mgal/d). A total of 50 percent (151 Mgal/d) 

of the groundwater withdrawals in 2010 were by MLGW, 

which reported an increase of 9.77 Mgal/d in withdrawals 

since 1988.
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 13 Figure 8. Public-supply surface-water withdrawal rates for Tennessee counties in 2010. 

00 to 0.991 to 4.995 to 14.99

15 to 24.9925 to 68136

EXPLANATION

Surface-water withdrawal rates by 

county, in million gallons per day

Counties from the U.S. Census Bureau1:2,000,000 digital line graphAlbers Equal-Area Conic projectionCentral meridian: –96.0Standard parallels_1:29.5Standard meridian _2:45.5

Grand division of Tennessee

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

TIPTON

DYER

WEAKLEY

HENRY

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

LEWIS

HICKMAN

DICKSON

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

LAWRENCE

HUMPHREYS

MONTGOMERY

HAYWOOD

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

CROCKETT

SHELBY

GIBSON

FAYETTE

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY HARDIN

TROUSDALE

SUMNER

PICKETT

MACON

RUTHERFORD

WILSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

BEDFORD

LINCOLN FRANKLIN

COFFEE

WARREN

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY

MARION

SMITH

JACKSON

CLAY

OVERTON

FENTRESS

MORGAN

ROANE

LOUDEN BLOUNT

UNICOI

SEVIER

COCKE

SCOTT CAMPBELL

CANNON

GILES

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

HAMILTON

SEQUATCHIE

ANDERSON

RHEA

MEIGS

POLK BRADLEY

MCMINN

MONROE

JEFFERSON

HAMBLEN UNION GRAINGER

KNOX

CLAIBORNE

GREENE

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

WASHINGTONCARTER

HANCOCK

JOHNSON

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

CHEATHAM

MARSHALL

MOORE

DECATUR 35 ̊30’

36 ̊

89 ̊

83 ̊
14 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

Counties from the U.S. Census Bureau1:2,000,000 digital line graphAlbers Equal-Area Conic projectionCentral meridian: –96.0Standard parallels_1:29.5Standard meridian _2:45.5 0

0.01 to 0.490.050 to 0.99

1.0 to 9.9910 to 17173

EXPLANATION

Groundwater withdrawal rates by 

county, in million gallons per day

Grand division of Tennessee

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

TIPTON

DYER

WEAKLEY

HENRY

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

LEWIS

HICKMAN

DICKSON

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

LAWRENCE

HUMPHREYS

MONTGOMERY

HAYWOOD

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

CROCKETT

SHELBY

GIBSON

FAYETTE

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY HARDIN

TROUSDALE

SUMNER

PICKETT

MACON

RUTHERFORD

WILSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

BEDFORD

LINCOLN FRANKLIN

COFFEE

WARREN

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY

MARION

SMITH

JACKSON

CLAY

OVERTON

FENTRESS

MORGAN

ROANE

LOUDEN BLOUNT

UNICOI

SEVIER

COCKE

SCOTT CAMPBELL

CANNON

GILES

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

HAMILTON

SEQUATCHIE

ANDERSON

RHEA

MEIGS

POLK BRADLEY

MCMINN

MONROE

JEFFERSON

HAMBLEN UNION GRAINGER

KNOX

CLAIBORNE

GREENE

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

WASHINGTONCARTER

HANCOCK

JOHNSON

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

CHEATHAM

MARSHALL

MOORE

DECATUR 35 ̊30’

36 ̊

89 ̊

83 ̊

Figure 9. Public-supply groundwater withdrawal rates for Tennessee counties in 2010.
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 15

1,000 100

10

1

0.1

100

10

1

0.1

Total groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day

Total groundwater withdrawals, in percent

Principle aquifer name

TR

TR

CMBR

MSSP

ODVC

ALVM

PSLV

CRCS

CRYST

CMBR MSSP CRCS CRYST ODVC ALVM PSLV

EXPLANATION

EXPLANATION

Principal aquifer name

Total groundwater withdrawals,

in million gallons per day

Total groundwater withdrawals,

in percent

Tertiary sand

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate rock

Mississippian carbonate rock

Cretaceous sand

Crystalline rock (Precambrian and Cambrian

Ordovician carbonate rock

Alluvial (Quaternary)

Pennsylvanian sandstone

Figure 10. Public-supply groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day, 

from principal aquifers in Tennessee in 2010.
16 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Mgal/d

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

Base from U.S. Geological Surveydigital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000State Plane Coordinate System,Zone 5301

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

ALVM

TR

CRCS

PSLV

Alluvial (Quaternary)Tertiary sandCretaceous sandPennsylvanian sandstone

MSSP

ODVC

CMBR

CRYST

Mississippian carbonate rockOrdovician carbonate rockCambrian-Ordovician carbonate rockCrystalline rock (Precambrian and Cambrian)

Grand division of TennesseeMillion gallons per day

36 ̊

89 ̊

88 ̊ 87 ̊ 86 ̊ 85 ̊ 84 ̊ 83 ̊ 82 ̊

35 ̊

CMBR

(40.9 Mgal/d)

CRYST

(3.72 Mgal/d)

PSLV

(0.41 Mgal/d)

ODVC

(2.30 Mgal/d)

MSSP

(17.7 Mgal/d) CRCS

(9.48 Mgal/d)

TR

(223 Mgal/d)

ALVM

(2.29 Mgal/d)

ALVM CMBR

Modified from Hollyday and Bradley (1985)

EXPLANATION

Principle aquifer name

TIPTON

DYER

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

SHELBY

WEAKLEY

HAYWOOD

CROCKETT

GIBSON

FAYETTE

HENRY

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

DECATUR

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

HUMPHREYS

HARDIN

HICKMAN

LEWIS

DICKSON

LAWRENCE

MONTGOMERY

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

LINCOLN

CHEATHAM

GILES

MARSHALL

SUMNER

TROUSDALE

MACON CLAY

FENTRESS

SCOTT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE

MORGAN

UNION

HANCOCK

KNOX

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

GRAINGER OVERTON

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

JACKSON

PICKETT

WILSON

BEDFORD

FRANKLIN

COFFEE

SMITH

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

WARREN

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY MCMINN

MONROE

ROANE

ANDERSON

CARTER

JOHNSON

LOUDON

UNICOI

BLOUNT

SEVIER

COCKE

GREENE

HAMBLEN

JEFFERSON

RHEA

MARION

BRADLEY

HAMILTON

MEIGS

WASHINGTON

SEQUATCHIE

CANNON

RUTHERFORD

MOORE

Figure 11. Principal aquifers in Tennessee and rate of public-supply groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day, 2010. Modified from Webbers (2003).
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 17

Table 4. Groundwater withdrawals by public-supply water systems in Tennessee using 1 million gallons per day or more.—Continued

[TRMS, Tertiary sand-Memphis aquifer; CRCS, Cretaceous sand; TRCF, Tertiary sand-Cockfield aquifer; TRFP, Tertiary sand-Fort Pillow aquifer; CMBR, 

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate rock; CRYST, Crystalline rock; ALVM, Alluvial; MSSP, Mississippian carbonate; ODVC, Ordovician carbonate rock;–, no 

groundwater withdrawal reported by system; N/A, not applicable]

Public water-supply system

Withdrawal rate, in million gallons per day Change in withdrawals (2010 

minus 1988), in 

million gallons 

per day

Aquifer 1988 1995 2000 2005 2010

Lower Mississippi hydrologic region

Memphis Light, Gas and Water 141 148 166.73 167.39 150.77 9.77 TRMS

Jackson Water System 10.2 12.1 15.03 13.72 13.21 3.01 TRMS

Germantown Water Department 4.91 3.96 7.28 6.19 8.07 3.16 TRMS

Bartlett Water System/Bartlett-Ellendale 1.36/1.77 4.44 5.99 6.47 6.15 3.02 TRMS

Collierville Water Department 2.37 3.41 5.82 6.06 6.23 3.86 TRMS

Dyersburg Water Department 4.35 4.12 4.00 3.22 3.23 –1.12 TRMS

Union City Water Department 2.85 3.45 3.96 3.96 3.66 0.81 TRMS

Gibson County Municipal Water District 0.73 0.81 1.34 0.82 0.32 –0.41 TRMS

Humboldt Utilities Water Department 1.84 2.28 2.37 1.70 1.06 –0.78 TRMS

Selmer Water System 2.10 2.13 2.24 2.19 2.10 0.00 CRCS

Covington Water Department 1.40 1.43 2.23 2.06 2.05 0.65 TRMS

Ripley Water System 1.83 1.52 2.03 1.90 1.31 –0.52 TRMS

Brownsville Water Department 1.71 2.05 1.77 1.75 1.69 –0.02 TRMS

Poplar Grove Utility District 0.21 1.00 1.76 1.92 2.20 1.99 TRMS

Martin Water Department 1.51 1.40 1.50 1.42 1.44 –0.07 TRMS

Milan Water Department 1.34 1.31 1.33 1.24 1.21 –0.13 TRMS

County Wide Utility District 0.96 1.13 1.01 1.01 0.83 –0.13 TRMS/TRCF

Bolivar Water System 1.37 1.17 1.28 1.17 1.10 –0.27 CRCS

McKenzie Water Department 0.72 1.19 1.22 1.11 0.94 0.22 TRFP

Henderson Water Department 0.86 1.02 1.15 1.01 0.92 0.06 CRCS

Millington Water Department 1.10 1.17 1.10 0.59 1.01 –0.09 TRFP

Munford Water Department 0.38 0.72 1.05 1.17 1.01 0.63 TRMS

Naval Support Activity Memphis 1.91 1.56 0.93 0.80 0.30 –1.61 TRFP

Newbern Water Department – – – 1.21 1.02 –0.19 TRCF

Oakland Water Department – – – – 1.05 1.05 TRMS

Subtotal 188.78 201.37 233.12 230.08 212.86 22.87 N/A

Tennessee hydrologic region

Hixson Utility District 5.61 6.19 6.7 6.54 7.92 2.31 CMBR

Elizabethton Water Department 5.26 5.35 5.39 5.70 5.00 –0.26 CMBR

Johnson City Water Department 3.18 3.93 3.72 3.91 3.41 0.23 CRYST

Jefferson City Water and Sewer Comm. 1.51 2.34 2.7 3.88 4.28 2.77 CMBR

Athens Utilities Board 1.76 1.12 2.6 3.17 1.81 0.05 CMBR
18 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Table 4. Groundwater withdrawals by public-supply water systems in Tennessee using 1 million gallons per day or more.—Continued

[TRMS, Tertiary sand-Memphis aquifer; CRCS, Cretaceous sand; TRCF, Tertiary sand-Cockfield aquifer; TRFP, Tertiary sand-Fort Pillow aquifer; CMBR, 

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate rock; CRYST, Crystalline rock; ALVM, Alluvial; MSSP, Mississippian carbonate; ODVC, Ordovician carbonate rock;–, no 

groundwater withdrawal reported by system; N/A, not applicable]

Public water-supply system

Withdrawal rate, in million gallons per day Change in withdrawals (2010 

minus 1988), in 

million gallons 

per day

Aquifer 1988 1995 2000 2005 2010

Tennessee hydrologic region—Continued

Paris Board of Public Utilities 2.17 2.41 2.57 2.28 1.97 –0.20 CRCS

Savannah Public Utilities Department 1.73 1.60 2.27 2.26 2.29 0.56 ALVM

Erwin Utilities 1.28 2.08 2.21 1.95 1.79 0.51 CMBR

Lincoln County Board of Public Utilities #1 0.74 1.42 1.68 1.91 2.03 1.29 MSSP

Savannah Valley Utility District 0.80 0.90 1.66 2.06 2.08 1.28 CMBR

Hohenwald Water System 0.90 1.18 1.48 1.52 1.47 0.57 MSSP

Ocoee Utility District 0.56 1.47 1.33 1.41 1.54 0.98 CMBR

Lawrenceburg Water System 1.07 1.32 1.27 0.63 1.16 0.09 MSSP

Cleveland Utilities 1.25 1.47 1.23 1.14 1.09 –0.16 CMBR

First Utility District of Carter County 0.76 1.06 1.12 1.90 1.02 0.26 CMBR

Eastside Utility District 3.77 – – – – –3.77 CMBR

Jasper Water Department – – – 1.42 0.88 –0.54 CMBR

Waverly Water Department – – – 1.07 0.98 –0.09 MSSP

Mount Pleasant Water System #1 0.93 1.06 1.03 1.07 1.02 0.09 MSSP

Hampton Utility District 0.60 0.80 0.89 0.88 1.06 0.46 CMBR

Sweetwater Utility Board 1.10 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 –1.10 CMBR

Mountain City Water Department 1.10 0.45 0.83 0.64 1.25 0.15 CMBR

Subtotal 36.08 36.62 40.68 45.34 44.03 7.95 N/A

Ohio (Cumberland River) hydrologic region

Fort Campbell Water System 4.98 4.69 4.42 4.90 3.58 –1.40 MSSP

Lafayette Water System 0.64 0.81 1.48 0.76 1.88 1.24 MSSP

Gladeville Utility District #1 – 0.97 1.06 1.44 1.71 0.74 ODVC

Subtotal 5.62 6.47 6.96 7.09 7.17 1.55 N/A

Totals statewide 230.48 244.46 280.76 282.51 264.06 32.36 N/A
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 19

Gross Per Capita Water Use

Gross per capita water use is the calculated amount 

of water used in gallons per day (gal/d) and is a means of 

normalizing or estimating the distribution of water use for 

county populations within a state or populations across state 

lines. For this report, the gross per capita for a public-supply 

water system was calculated from the net supply divided by 

the number of customers (population) served by the system. 

The net supply is calculated from the amount of water 

withdrawn and purchased from specific sources minus the 

amount of water sold to other public-supply water systems. An 

average of all gross per capita water-use values was calculated 

for 2010 and compared to the values of previous years.

Gross per capita water use in Tennessee during 2010 

was 162 gal/d. This value is less than reported in 2005 

(171 gal/d) by Robinson and Brooks (2010). Per capita 

values for all public-supply water systems (using surface 

water, groundwater, and purchased water) that were active in 

Tennessee during 2010 are listed in appendixes 1, 2, and 3.

Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use 

During 2010

Self-supplied industrial water use includes water for such 

purposes as processing, washing, and cooling in facilities 

that manufacture various products. Estimates of industrial 

withdrawals were obtained from the TDEC–DWR. In 

Tennessee, the primary water-using industries are associated 

with chemical and allied products (555 Mgal/d), paper 

and allied products (107 Mgal/d), aeronautical products 

(71.5 Mgal/d), concrete and glass products (9.74 Mgal/d), 

and primary metal products (4.49 Mgal/d) (table 5). Together, 

these industries accounted for 96 percent (747 Mgal/d) 

of the self-supplied industrial water withdrawals in 2010 

(table 5) and other industries accounted for the remaining 

4 percent (28.8 Mgal/d) in 2010. Self-supplied industrial 

water withdrawals in Sullivan County were 488 Mgal/d and 

accounted for about 61 percent of the self-supplied industrial 

water withdrawals (appendix 4).

Water withdrawals for self-supplied industrial water use 

during 2010 were estimated to be 776 Mgal/d (fig. 12); this is 

a decrease of 7 Mgal/d (1 percent) since 2005 (783 Mgal/d) 

(Kenny and others, 2009). Surface water supplied 94 percent 

of the water (728 Mgal/d) for self-supplied industrial 

purposes, and groundwater supplied 6 percent (47.6 Mgal/d) 

(fig. 12; appendixes 4, 5, and 6).

Table 5. Self-supplied industrial withdrawals by category and 

source in Tennessee in 2010.

Withdrawal, in million gallons per day

Industrial 

category Groundwater Surface water Total

Chemicals and 

allied products

21.9 533 555

Paper and allied 

products

5.09 102 107

Aeronautical 

products

0.778 70.7 71.5

Highway 

and heavy 

construction

28.1 0 28.1

Manufacture of 

concrete and 

glass

0 9.74 9.74

Primary metal 

products

1.78 2.72 4.49

Other 18.1 10.7 28.8

6 percent total

groundwater

use (47.6 million

gallons per day)

94 percent total

surface-water

use (728 million

gallons per day)

Figure 12. Source of water for self-supplied 

industry in Tennessee in 2010.
20 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Surface Water

All the surface-water withdrawals (table 6) by selfsupplied industry in Tennessee happened in counties in the 

Tennessee and Ohio hydrologic regions; and came from the 

French Broad-Holston (493 Mgal/d), Middle TennesseeHiwassee (74.0 Mgal/d), Lower Tennessee (70.5 Mgal/d), 

Middle Tennessee-Elk (59.9 Mgal/d), Upper Cumberland 

(23.4 Mgal/d), Upper Tennessee (6.19 Mgal/d), and Lower 

Cumberland (1.50 Mgal/d) River Basins.

Most surface-water withdrawals for self-supplied 

industry happened in the Tennessee River region. A total of 

67 percent of the surface-water withdrawals for self-supplied 

industry happened in Sullivan County, Tennessee (488 Mgal/d; 

fig. 13). The largest total withdrawal (459 Mgal/d) by a single 

self-supplied industry happened in Sullivan County from the 

South Fork Holston River. This was the largest surface-water 

withdrawal in the State during 2010. Large amounts of surface 

water also were withdrawn from the Upper Cumberland 

River/Old Hickory Lake in Davidson County (the Nashville 

metropolitan area), Woods Reservoir in Franklin County, 

the Hiwassee River in McMinn County, the Tennessee 

River in Humphreys County, and the Tennessee River in 

Hardin County. Because of the abundance and availability 

of groundwater supplies (Hutson and Morris, 1992; Hutson, 

1999), surface water was not a primary source for selfsupplied industry in the Lower Mississippi hydrologic region 

of West Tennessee.

Groundwater

Groundwater supplied 47.6 Mgal/d in 2010 of the total 

self-supplied industrial water withdrawals in Tennessee 

(fig. 14), which is an increase of 2.00 Mgal/d since 2005 

(Kenny and others, 2009). A total of 86 percent of the 

groundwater withdrawn for self-supplied industry during 

2010 was reported from West Tennessee. In Shelby County, 

Tennessee, groundwater withdrawals were 34.3 Mgal/d 

(fig. 14) and provided water for chemical and allied 

products; paper and allied products; and food, fuel, resin, 

and fiber products. The largest groundwater withdrawal, 

14.9 Mgal/d, by a single self-supplied industry was for the 

production of chemicals and allied products and happened 

in Memphis, Tennessee. About 40.7 Mgal/d of groundwater 

were withdrawn from the Tertiary sand, Cretaceous sand, 

and alluvial aquifers (figs. 15 and 16). In contrast to the large 

amount of groundwater used in West Tennessee, the combined 

withdrawals from aquifers in Middle and East Tennessee were 

only 6.85 Mgal/d. Short-term, limited use of groundwater 

withdrawals from wells for highway and heavy construction 

occurred in Gibson County (7.67 Mgal/d) and Obion County 

(20.4 Mgal/d) and are not included in the totals but are 

included in the companion data release (Robinson, 2017).

Table 6. Self-supplied industrial surface-water withdrawals from Tennessee 

river basins in 2010.

River basin name Surface-water withdrawal rate, 

in million gallons per day

French Broad-Holston 493

Middle Tennessee-Hiwassee 74.0

Lower Tennessee 70.5

Middle Tennessee-Elk 59.9

Upper Cumberland 23.4

Upper Tennessee 6.19

Lower Cumberland 1.50
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 21

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

Counties from the U.S. Census Bureau1:2,000,000 digital line graphAlbers Equal-Area Conic projectionCentral meridian: –96.0Standard parallels_1:29.5Standard meridian _2:45.5

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

TIPTON

DYER

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

SHELBY

WEAKLEY

HAYWOOD

CROCKETT

GIBSON

FAYETTE

HENRY

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

DECATUR

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

HUMPHREYS

HARDIN

LEWIS

HICKMAN

DICKSON

LAWRENCE

MONTGOMERY

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

LINCOLN

CHEATHAM

GILES

MARSHALL

SUMNER

TROUSDALE

MACON CLAY

FENTRESS

SCOTT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE

MORGAN

UNION

HANCOCK

KNOX

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

GRAINGER OVERTON

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

JACKSON

PICKETT

WILSON

BEDFORD

FRANKLIN

COFFEE

SMITH

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

WARREN

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY MCMINN MONROE

ROANE

ANDERSON

CARTER

JOHNSON

LOUDON

UNICOI

BLOUNT

SEVIER

COCKE

GREENE

HAMBLEN

JEFFERSON

RHEA

MARION

BRADLEY

HAMILTON

MEIGS

WASHINGTON

SEQUATCHIE

CANNON

RUTHERFORD

MOORE

POLK

00.01 to 0.991 to 2.993 to 6.99

7 to 34.9935 to 70.99488

EXPLANATION

Surface-water withdrawal rates by 

county, in million gallons per day

Grand division of Tennessee

35 ̊30’

36 ̊

89 ̊

83 ̊

Figure 13. Self-supplied industrial surface-water withdrawal rates for Tennessee counties in 2010. 
22 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010 Counties from the U.S. Census Bureau 1:2,000,000 digital line graph Albers Equal-Area Conic projection Central meridian: –96.0 Standard parallels_1:29.5 Standard meridian _2:45.5

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

00.01 to 0.2490.25 to 0.499

0.50 to 0.991 to 7.6934.3

EXPLANATION

Groundwater withdrawal rates by 

county, in million gallons per day

Grand division of Tennessee

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

POLK

TIPTON

DYER

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

SHELBY

WEAKLEY

HAYWOOD

CROCKETT

GIBSON

FAYETTE

HENRY

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

DECATUR

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

HUMPHREYS

HARDIN

LEWIS

HICKMAN

DICKSON

LAWRENCE

MONTGOMERY

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

LINCOLN

CHEATHAM

GILES

MARSHALL

SUMNER

TROUSDALE

MACON CLAY

FENTRESS

SCOTT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE

MORGAN

UNION

HANCOCK

KNOX

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

GRAINGER OVERTON

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

JACKSON

PICKETT

WILSON

BEDFORD

FRANKLIN

COFFEE

SMITH

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

WARREN

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY MCMINN MONROE

ROANE

ANDERSON

CARTER

JOHNSON

LOUDON

UNICOI

BLOUNT

SEVIER

COCKE

GREENE

HAMBLEN

JEFFERSON

RHEA

MARION

BRADLEY

HAMILTON

MEIGS

WASHINGTON

SEQUATCHIE

CANNON

RUTHERFORD

MOORE

POLK

35 ̊30’

36 ̊

89 ̊

83 ̊

Figure 14. Self-supplied industrial groundwater withdrawal rates for Tennessee counties in 2010.
Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use During 2010 23

 

Principle aquifer name

TR

TR

ALVM 

CMBR

MSSP

ODVC

CRYST

CRCS

ALVM CMBR CRCS MSSP ODVC CRYST

EXPLANATION

Principal aquifer name

Tertiary sand

Alluvial (Quaternary)

Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate rock

Cretaceous sand

Mississippian carbonate rock

Ordovician carbonate rock

Crystalline rock (Precambrian and Cambrian)

1,000 100

10

1

0.1

100

10

1

0.1

Total groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day

Total groundwater withdrawals, in percent

EXPLANATION

Total groundwater withdrawals,

in million gallons per day

Total groundwater withdrawals,

in percent

Figure 15. Self-supplied industrial groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons 

per day and percent, from principal aquifers in Tennessee in 2010.
24 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

0 50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

TIPTON

DYER

OBION

LAKE

LAUDERDALE

SHELBY

WEAKLEY

HAYWOOD

CROCKETT

GIBSON

FAYETTE

HENRY

CARROLL

MADISON

CHESTER

MCNAIRY

HARDEMAN

HENDERSON

BENTON

DECATUR

STEWART

HOUSTON

PERRY

WAYNE

HUMPHREYS

HARDIN

HICKMAN

LEWIS

DICKSON

LAWRENCE

MONTGOMERY

DAVIDSON

ROBERTSON

WILLIAMSON

MAURY

LINCOLN

CHEATHAM

GILES

MARSHALL

SUMNER

TROUSDALE

MACON CLAY

FENTRESS

SCOTT CAMPBELL CLAIBORNE

MORGAN

UNION

HANCOCK

KNOX

CUMBERLAND

BLEDSOE

GRAINGER OVERTON

HAWKINS

SULLIVAN

JACKSON

PICKETT

WILSON

BEDFORD

FRANKLIN

COFFEE

SMITH

DEKALB

PUTNAM

WHITE

WARREN

VAN

BUREN

GRUNDY MCMINN

MONROE

ROANE

ANDERSON

CARTER

JOHNSON

LOUDON

UNICOI

BLOUNT

SEVIER

COCKE

GREENE

HAMBLEN

JEFFERSON

RHEA

MARION

BRADLEY

HAMILTON

MEIGS

WASHINGTON

SEQUATCHIE

CANNON

RUTHERFORD

MOORE

Base from U.S. Geological Surveydigital data, 1972, 1:2,000,000State Plane Coordinate System,Zone 5301

WEST TENNESSEE MIDDLE TENNESSEE EAST TENNESSEE

Mgal/d

ALVM

TR

CRCS

PSLV

Alluvial (Quaternary)Tertiary sandCretaceous sandPennsylvanian sandstone

MSSP

ODVC

CMBR

CRYST

Mississippian carbonate rockOrdovician carbonate rockCambrian-Ordovician carbonate rockCrystalline rock (Precambrian and Cambrian)

Grand division of TennesseeMillion gallons per day

EXPLANATION

Principle aquifer name

36 ̊

89 ̊

88 ̊ 87 ̊ 86 ̊ 85 ̊ 84 ̊ 83 ̊ 82 ̊

35 ̊

CMBR

(40.9 Mgal/d)

CRYST

(3.72 Mgal/d)

PSLV

(0.41 Mgal/d)

ODVC

(2.30 Mgal/d)

MSSP

(17.7 Mgal/d) CRCS

(9.48 Mgal/d)

TR

(223 Mgal/d)

ALVM

(2.29 Mgal/d)

ALVM CMBR

Figure 16. Principal aquifers in Tennessee and rate of self-supplied industrial groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per day, 2010. Modified from Webbers (2003).
Summary 25

Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 

Division of Water Resources, performed a detailed analysis of 

water use by self-supplied industrial and public-supply water 

systems in Tennessee. Historical data available for publicsupply water use in Tennessee indicate that since 1950 water 

withdrawals by public-supply water systems in Tennessee have 

increased from 160 Mgal/d to 917 Mgal/d in 2010. During 

2010, public-supply water systems of Tennessee withdrew 

917 Mgal/d, which is a combined withdrawal of 67 percent 

surface water (617 Mgal/d) and 33 percent groundwater 

(300 Mgal/d). Tennessee was served by 474 public-supply 

water systems that provided surface water and groundwater 

to a population of 5.7 million. A total of 131 of these systems 

relied entirely on water purchased from other water systems 

to provide 74.7 Mgal/d of purchased water supplies to 

Tennessee residents. Of the 343 public-supply water systems 

withdrawing water, 126 systems withdrew surface water and 

201 systems withdrew groundwater. Of these 343 systems, 

16 used both surface water and groundwater.

The largest groundwater withdrawal rate of 151 Mgal/d 

by a single public-supply water system was reported by 

Memphis Light, Gas and Water in Shelby County in 2010. 

The county with the largest surface-water withdrawal rate 

of 136 Mgal/d was Davidson County. The largest publicsupply withdrawals from surface water by hydrologic region 

in the State happened in counties in the Tennessee and Ohio 

hydrologic regions and came primarily from the Lower 

Cumberland, 244 Mgal/d; Upper Tennessee, 125 Mgal/d; 

French Broad-Holston, 78.9 Mgal/d; and the Middle 

Tennessee-Hiwassee, 75.7 Mgal/d River Basins. Surface 

water supplied 617 Mgal/d in 2010, which is an increase of 

26 Mgal/d since 2005. About 235 Mgal/d of groundwater 

were withdrawn from the Tertiary sand, Cretaceous sand, 

and alluvial aquifers. In contrast to the large amount 

of groundwater used in West Tennessee, the combined 

withdrawals from aquifers in Middle and East Tennessee were 

65 Mgal/d. Groundwater supplied 300 Mgal/d in 2010, which 

is a decrease of 29 Mgal/d since 2005. This decrease is the 

first decrease in groundwater withdrawals since 1950. Gross 

per capita water use in Tennessee during 2010 was 162 gallons 

per day.

Self-supplied industrial water use includes water for 

such purposes as fabrication, processing, washing, diluting, 

cooling, or production; incorporating water into a product; 

or for sanitation needs in facilities that manufacture various 

products. In Tennessee, the primary water-using industries 

are associated with chemical and allied products, 555 Mgal/d; 

paper and allied products, 107 Mgal/d; aeronautical products, 

71.5 Mgal/d; concrete and glass products, 9.74 Mgal/d; 

and primary metal products, 4.49 Mgal/d. These industries 

account for 747 Mgal/d of the self-supplied industrial water 

withdrawals in 2010, whereas other industries accounted 

for 28.8 Mgal/d in 2010. Self-supplied industrial water 

withdrawals in Sullivan County were 488 Mgal/d and 

accounted for 61 percent of the self-supplied industrial 

water withdrawals.

Water withdrawals for self-supplied industrial water 

use during 2010 were estimated to be 776 Mgal/d; this is 

a decrease of 7 Mgal/d since 2005. Surface water supplied 

94 percent of the water, 728 Mgal/d, for self-supplied 

industrial purposes; and groundwater supplied 6 percent, 

47.6 Mgal/d.

All the surface-water withdrawals by self-supplied 

industry in the State happened in counties in the Tennessee 

and Ohio hydrologic regions and came from the French 

Broad-Holston, 493 Mgal/d; Middle Tennessee-Hiwassee, 

74.0 Mgal/d; Lower Tennessee, 70.5 Mgal/d; Middle 

Tennessee-Elk, 59.9 Mgal/d; Upper Cumberland, 23.4 Mgal/d; 

Upper Tennessee, 6.19 Mgal/d; and Lower Cumberland, 

1.50 Mgal/d, River Basins.

Most surface-water withdrawals for self-supplied industry 

happened in the Tennessee River region. A total of 67 percent 

or 488 Mgal/d of the surface-water withdrawals for selfsupplied industry happened in Sullivan County, Tennessee. 

The largest total surface-water withdrawal of 459 Mgal/d by 

a single self-supplied industry happened in Sullivan County 

from the South Fork Holston River. Surface water was not 

a primary source for self-supplied industry in the Lower 

Mississippi hydrologic region of West Tennessee because of 

the abundance and availability of groundwater supplies. 

Groundwater supplied 47.6 Mgal/d in 2010 of the total 

self-supplied industrial water withdrawals in Tennessee, 

which is an increase of 2.00 Mgal/d since 2005. A total of 

86 percent of the groundwater withdrawn for self-supplied 

industry during 2010 was reported from West Tennessee. The 

largest groundwater withdrawal, 14.9 Mgal/d, by a single 

self-supplied industry was for the production of chemicals and 

allied products and happened in Memphis, Tennessee. About 

40.7 Mgal/d of groundwater were withdrawn from the Tertiary 

sand, Cretaceous sand, and alluvial aquifers. In contrast to 

the large amount of groundwater used in West Tennessee, the 

combined self-supplied industrial withdrawals from aquifers 

in Middle and East Tennessee were only 6.85 Mgal/d. 
26 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

References Cited

Alexander, F.M., Keck, L.A., Conn, L.G., and Wentz, S.J., 

1984, Drought-related impacts on municipal and major selfsupplied industrial water withdrawals in Tennessee—Part 

B: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 84–4074, 398 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.

gov/wri/wri844074B/pdf/wrir_84-4074.pdf.]

Brahana, J.V., and Bradley, M.W., 1985, Delineation and 

description of regional aquifers of Tennessee—The Knox 

Aquifer in central and west Tennessee: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83–4012, 

32 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/

wri834012/pdf/wrir_83-4012_a.pdf.]

Brahana, J.V., Macy, J.A., Mulderink, Dolores, and Zemo, 

Dawn, 1986a, Preliminary delineation and description 

of the regional aquifers of Tennessee—Cumberland 

Plateau Aquifer system: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 82–338, 24 p. [Also 

available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wrir82-338/pdf/

wrir_82-338_a.pdf.]

Brahana, J.V., Mulderink, Dolores, and Bradley, M.W., 

1986b, Preliminary delineation and description of the 

regional aquifers of Tennessee—The Cretaceous Aquifer 

system of west Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 83–4039, 20 p. [Also 

available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri834039/pdf/

wrir_83-4039_a.pdf.]

Center for Business and Economic Research, 2012, Tennessee 

County population projections: The University of Tennessee 

Knoxville, Excel file, accessed January 2013 at http://cber.

bus.utk.edu/data/cntypjoct12.xls.

Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United 

States: U.S. Geological Survey map, scale 1:7,000,000.

Griffin, R.C., 2006, Water resources economics—The analysis 

of scarcity, policies, and projects: Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology, 402 p.

Hollyday, E.F., and Bradley, M.W., 1985, Tennessee groundwater resources, in National water summary 1984—

Hydrologic events, selected water-quality trends, and 

ground-water resources: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 2275, p. 391–396. [Also available at https://

pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/wsp2275.]

Hutson, S.S., 1989, Ground-water use by public-supply 

systems in Tennessee in 1985: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 89–4092, 1 sheet. 

[Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/

wri894092.]

Hutson, S.S., 1990, Tennessee water supply and use, in 

National water summary 1987—Hydrologic events and 

water supply and use: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2350, p. 467–474. [Also available at https://pubs.

er.usgs.gov/publication/wsp2350.]

Hutson, S.S., 1991, Ground-water use by public-supply 

systems in Tennessee in 1988: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 91–176, 1 sheet. [Also available at https://

pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr91176.]

Hutson, S.S., 1994, Estimated use of water in Tennessee, 

1990: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 94–4055, 1 sheet.

Hutson, S.S., 1999, Public water-supply systems and 

associated water use in Tennessee, 1995: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4052, 

91 p.

Hutson, S.S., and Morris, A.J., 1992, Public water-supply 

systems and water use in Tennessee, 1988: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91–4195, 

74 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/

wri914195/pdf/wrir_91-4195_a.pdf.]

Kenny, J.F., Barber, N.L., Hutson, S.S., Linsey, K.S., 

Lovelace, J.K., and Maupin, M.A., 2009, Estimated use of 

water in the United States in 2005: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1344, 52 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.

gov/circ/1344/.]

Kingsbury, J.A., and Parks, W.S., 1993, Hydrogeology of 

the principal aquifers and relation of faults to interaquifer 

leakage in the Memphis area, Tennessee: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93–4075, 

18 p. [Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/

wri934075.]

MacKichan, K.A., 1951, Estimated use of water in the United 

States—1950: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 115, 13 p. 

[Also available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1951/circ115/

htdocs/text.html.]

MacKichan, K.A., 1957, Estimated use of water in the United 

States, 1955: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 398, 18 p. 

[Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/

cir398.]

MacKichan, K.A., and Kammerer, J.C., 1961, Estimated use 

of water in the United States, 1960: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 456, 44 p. [Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/

publication/cir456.]

Maupin, M.A., Kenny, J.F., Hutson, S.S., Lovelace, J.K., 

Barber, N.L., and Linsey, K.S., 2014, Estimated use of 

water in the United States in 2010: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1405, 56 p. [Also available at https://doi.org/10.3133/

cir1405.]
References Cited 27

Miller, R.A., 1974, The geology history of Tennessee: State of 

Tennessee, Division of Geology, Bulletin 74, 63 p.

Murray, C.R., 1968, Estimated use of water in the United 

States, 1965: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 556, 53 p. 

[Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/

cir556.]

Murray, C.R., and Reeves, E.B., 1972, Estimated use of 

water in the United States in 1970: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 676, 37 p. [Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.

gov/publication/cir676.]

Murray, C.R., and Reeves, E.B., 1977, Estimated use of 

water in the United States in 1975: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 765, 39 p. [Also available at https://pubs.er.usgs.

gov/publication/cir765.]

National Centers for Environmental Information, 2013, 1981–

2010 U.S. climate normal: U.S. Department of Commerce, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National 

Centers for Environmental Information, accessed December 

2013 at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/land-based-station-data/

climate-normals/1981-2010-normals-data.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2011, 

Extreme weather 2011—Mississippi River flooding—

Spring–summer, 2011: U.S. Department of Commerce, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National 

Climatic Data Center, accessed March 2013 at https://www.

noaa.gov/extreme2011/mississippi_flood.html.

National Weather Service, 2010, May 1 & 2 2010 epic 

flood event for western and middle Tennessee: Nashville, 

Tenn., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office, 

accessed July 2014 at https://www.srh.noaa.gov/

ohx/?n=may2010epicfloodevent.

Parks, W.S., and Carmichael, J.K., 1989, Geology and 

ground-water resources of the Fort Pillow Sand in western 

Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 89–4120, 20 p. [Also available at 

https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/wri894120.]

Robinson, J.A., 2017, Water use in Tennessee, 2010: 

U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.

org/10.5066/F7V9868K.

Robinson, J.A., and Brooks, J.M., 2010, Public watersupply systems and associated water use in Tennessee, 

2005: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2010–

1226, 100 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/2010/1226/.]

Solley, W.B., Pierce, R.R., and Perlman, H.W., 1993, 

Estimated use of water in the United States in 1990: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1081, 76 p. [Also available 

at https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/cir1081.]

Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 

2015, Water Withdrawal Registration Program: Nashville, 

Tenn., Tennessee Department of Environment and 

Conservation, accessed July 2015 at https://www.tn.gov/

environment/article/wr-wq-water-withdrawal-registrationprogram.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2012, Tennessee—2010—Population 

and housing unit counts—2010 Census of population and 

housing: Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing 

Office, CPH–2–44, [variously paged]. [Also available at 

https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/cph-2-44.pdf.]

U.S. Drought Monitor, 2007, U.S. Drought Monitor archive: 

Lincoln, Nebr., The National Drought Mitigation Center, 

U.S. Drought Monitor, accessed July 2014 at https://

droughtmonitor.unl.edu/MapsAndData/MapArchive.aspx.

U.S. Drought Monitor, 2008, U.S. Drought Monitor archive: 

Lincoln, Nebr., The National Drought Mitigation Center, 

U.S. Drought Monitor, accessed July 2014 at https://

droughtmonitor.unl.edu/MapsAndData/MapArchive.aspx.

U.S. Drought Monitor, 2012, U.S. Drought Monitor archive: 

Lincoln, Nebr., The National Drought Mitigation Center, 

U.S. Drought Monitor, accessed July 2014 at https://

droughtmonitor.unl.edu/MapsAndData/MapArchive.aspx.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1978, Public water supply, chap. 11.C 

of National handbook of recommended methods for water 

data acquisition—Chapter 11—Water use: U.S. Geological 

Survey, accessed December 17, 2013, at https://pubs.usgs.

gov/chapter11/chapter11C.html.

Webbers, A., 2003, Public water-supply systems and 

associated water use in Tennessee, 2000: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4264, 

90 p. [Also available at https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/

wri034264/PDF/PublicSupply.pdf.]
28 Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010

Glossary

Hydrologic region Hydrologic regions are used in the United 

States to divide and subdivide areas of drainage based on the 

direction of water flow. Each division is identified by a unique 

hydrologic unit code (HUC) consisting of two to eight digits. 

A region (primary geographic area, two digit HUC) contains 

either the drainage area of a primary river or the combined 

drainage areas of a series of rivers. A subregion (four digit 

HUC) includes the area drained by a river system, a reach of 

a river and its tributaries in that reach, a closed basin(s), or a 

group of streams forming a coastal drainage area. Hydrologic 

Accounting unit (six digit HUC) boundaries are used by 

the U.S. Geological Survey for designing and managing the 

National Water Data Network.

Industrial water use Water used for industrial purposes such 

as fabrication, processing, washing, and cooling and includes 

such industries as steel, chemical, and allied products; paper 

and allied products; mining products; and petroleum refining 

products. The water may be obtained from a public supply or 

may be self-supplied. See also public-supply water use and 

self-supplied water.

Public-supply water use Public-supply water use refers 

to water use by public and private utilities for delivery to 

domestic, commercial, and industrial users; and for municipal 

services such as firefighting. Water lost by leaky pipes in 

the distribution system (conveyance losses) and system 

maintenance is included in this category.

Self-supplied water Water withdrawn from a surface water 

or groundwater source by a user rather than being obtained 

from public supply.

Water use In this report, the quantity of water use for 

a specific category is the combination of water-supply 

withdrawals and public-supply deliveries. In a restrictive 

sense, the term refers to water that is actually used for a 

specific purpose such as for domestic use, irrigation, or 

industrial processing. More broadly, water use pertains to 

human interaction with the hydrologic cycle and includes 

dimensions such as water withdrawal, delivery, consumptive 

use, wastewater release, reclaimed wastewater, return flow, 

and instream use.
Appendixes 29

Appendix 1. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the 

Tennessee Hydrologic Region, 2010.

The data in appendix 1 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 2. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the 

Ohio Hydrologic Region, 2010.

The data in appendix 2 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 3. Public-Supply Water Systems and Associated Water Use in the 

Lower-Mississippi Hydrologic Region, 2010.

The data in appendix 3 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 4. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Tennessee Hydrologic 

Region, 2010.

The data in appendix 4 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 5. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Ohio Hydrologic Region, 

2010.

The data in appendix 5 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 6. Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in the Lower Mississippi 

Hydrologic Region, 2010.

The data in appendix 6 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.

Appendix 7. Public-Supply Water Systems in Tennessee, 2010.

The data in appendix 7 are available in a U.S. Geological Survey data release (Robinson, 2017) and for download at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009.
Publishing support by Lafayette and Rolla Publishing 

Service Centers

For additional information regarding this publication, contact:

 Director, USGS Lower Mississippi Gulf Water Science Center,

 Tennessee Office

 640 Grassmere Park, Suite 100

 Nashville, TN 37211

 (615) 837-4700

Or visit the USGS Lower Mississippi Gulf Water Science 

Center website at:

 https://www.usgs.gov/centers/lmg-water/

Robinson—Public-Supply Water Use and Self-Supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010—Scientific Investigations Report 2018–5009

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009