Geohydrologic and Water-Quality 

Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95

By Jeffrey L. Imes, John G. Schumacher, and 

Michael J. Kleeschulte_______________

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4270

Prepared in cooperation with the

DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC WORKS,

ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION,

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION

Rolla, Missouri 

1996
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Gordon P. Eaton, Director

For additional information write to: Copies of this report may be

purchased from: 

District Chief

U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey 

1400 Independence Road Branch of Information Services 

Mail Stop 100 Box25286 

Rolla, MO 65401 Denver, CO 80225-0286
CONTENTS

Abstract................................................................................................................................^ 1

Introduction.......................................................................................................................^^ 2

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

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation History and Facilities................................................................................ 5

Previous Investigations..................................................................^ 5

Environmental Setting .......................................................................................................................................................... 6

Climatology............................................................................................^ 6

Physiography and Topography.................................................................................................................................... 6

Soil Types and Distribution......................................................................................................................................... 7

Geohydrologic Framework........................................... 7

Structural Setting......................................................................................................................................................... 8

Bedrock Geology and Stratigraphy............................................................................................................................. 10

Fracture Patterns and Karst Features........................................................................................................................... 10

Ground-Water Hydrology..............................................................................................................................................^ 12

Ground-Water Levels High-Base Flow.................................................................................................................... 13

Ground-Water Levels Low-Base Flow..................................................................................................................... 18

Vertical Ground-Water Flow........................................................................................................................................ 20

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow............................................................................................ 20

Surface-Water Hydrology...................................................................................................................................................... 33

Methodology................................................................................................................................................................ 35

High-Base Flow Stream and Spring Discharge........................................................................................................... 37

Low-Base Flow Stream and Spring Discharge............................................................................................................ 37

Ground-Water Discharge to Streams........................................................................................................................... 40

Water Quality......................................................................................................................................................................... 40

Methodology................................................................................................................................................................ 42

Quality Assurance........................................................................................................................................................ 44

Regional Ground-Water Quality.................................................................................................................................. 45

Spring-Water Quality................................................................................................................................................... 52

Surface-Water Quality................................................................................................................................................. 59

Streambed Sediment Quality....................................................................................................................................... 62

Summary and Conclusions..............................................................................................._^ 62

Selected References........................................................................................................._^ 64

FIGURES

1-3. Maps showing:

1. Location of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation and 17 solid-waste management units

identified as potential sources of ground- or surface-water contamination.................................................... 3

2. Bedrock geologic formations at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.............................................. 4

3. Distribution of sinkholes and springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.................. 9

Contents
4. Generalized geologic sections trending northwest to southeast across the Fort Leonard Wood Military

Reservation...........................................................................................................-^ 11

5-8. Maps showing:

5. Altitude of shallow ground-water levels at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation

during high-base flow conditions................................................................................................................... 17

6. Altitude of shallow ground-water levels at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation

during low-base flow conditions .................................................................................................................... 19

7. Injection and recovery points for dye-trace tests T103-01 to T103-07 and historical dye-trace tests

at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.............................................................................. 22

8. Distribution of charcoal packets placed in surface water and springs for monitoring of background

dye concentrations at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation............................................... 23

9-15. Graphs showing spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in:

9. Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-01............................................................................................. 25

10. Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-03.................................................................................................. 26

11. Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-04.................................................................................................. 27

12. Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-05............................................................................................. 28

13. Roubidoux Spring during dye-trace test T103-06.......................................................................................... 29

14. The pumping station spring during dye-trace test T103-07 ........................................................................... 30

15. Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-07............................................................................................. 31

16-19. Maps showing:

16. Probable catchment areas of selected major springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military

Reservation..................................................................................................................................................... 32

17. Stream discharge measurements for the high-base flow seepage run made on the Big Piney River, 

Roubidoux Creek, and selected small tributary streams in December 1994 at and near the Fort 

Leonard Wood Military Reservation.............................................................................................................. 34

18. Stream discharge measurements for the high-base flow seepage run made on the Big Piney River in

February 1995 at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation...................................................... 38

19. Stream discharge measurements for low-base flow seepage run made on the Big Piney River, 

Roubidoux Creek, and selected small tributary streams in September 1995 at and near the 

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation ...................................................................................................... 39

20. Graphs showing variations in stream discharge (corrected for tributary and spring inflow and for daily flow

rate variation) along the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek............................................................................ 41

21. Map showing location of domestic and public-supply wells sampled at and near the Fort Leonard Wood

Military Reservation................................................................................................................................................ 46

22. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in ground-water samples........... 50

23. Graph showing sum of calcium, magnesium, and strontium as related to bicarbonate in water samples

from wells and springs at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation................................................................. 51

24. Map showing location of spring, surface-water, or streambed sediment sample sites at the Big Piney River, 

Roubidoux Creek, and tributaries and contributing springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation................................................................_^ 53

25. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in spring samples...................... 54

26. Boxplots of selected physical properties and chemical constituents in water samples from wells, springs,

and major streams and tributaries at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation................................................ 56

27. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in surface-water samples.......... 61

IV Contents
TABLES

1. Water-level measurements made in selected domestic and public-supply wells during high-base and

low-base flow conditions at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation............................................. 14

2. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-01...................................... 71

3. Summary for successful dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-01.................................... 72

4. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-02...................................... 73

5. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-03...................................... 74

6. Summary for successful dye recovery at Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-03......................................... 75

7. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-04...................................... 76

8. Summary for successful dye recovery at Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-04......................................... 77

9. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-05...................................... 78

10. Summary for successful dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-05.................................... 79

11. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-06...................................... 80

12. Summary for successful dye recovery at Roubidoux Spring during dye-trace test T103-06................................. 81

13. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-07...................................... 82

14. Summary for successful dye recovery at the pumping station spring during dye-trace test T103-07.................... 83

15. Summary for uncertain dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-07..................................... 84

16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and

tributaries, December 1994..................................................................................................................................... 85

17. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River and tributaries,

February 1995............................................................_ 92

18. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and

tributaries, September 1995.................................................................................................................................... 94

19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and

Missouri Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL)...................... 97

20. Quality-assurance data for physical properties and inorganic constituents in duplicate and blank water

samples................................................................................................................................................................... 105

21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort

Leonard Wood Military Reservation...................................................................................................................... 108

22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard

Wood Military Reservation..................................................................................................................................... 114

23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort

Leonard Wood Military Reservation...................................................................................................................... 121

24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation............................................................................................................... 128

25. Background concentrations of selected physical properties and major and trace inorganic constituents 

in ground-water, spring, and surface-water samples at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military 

Reservation............................................................................................................................................................. 47

26. Simulation of water quality at Shanghai Spring..................................................................................................... 59

Contents
ACRONYMS AND INITIALISMS

BTEX

CCD

CFR

DOD

DPWED

DRMO

FLW

FLWMR

FSP

GC-FID

HACN

IRP

MCL

MDGLS

NCO

NVW

OB/OD

OSHA

PCB

QA

QAPP

QC

RCRA

SARA

STP

SWMU

USAEHA

USAF

USEPA

USGS

USMC

VOC

XAC

Benzene-Toluene-Ethylbenzene-Xylene

Capitina-Clarksville-Doniphan

Code of Federal Regulations

U.S. Department of Defense

Directorate of Public Works, Environmental Division

Defense Reutilization Maintenance Office

Fort Leonard Wood

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, also Base

Field Sampling Plan

Gas Chromatograph with Flame lonization Detection

Hartville-Ashton-Cedargap-Nolin

Installation Restoration Program

Maximum Contaminant Level

Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Land Survey

Non-Commissioned Officers

Needleye-Viraton-Wilderness

Open-Burn/Open-Detonation

Occupational Safety and Health Act

Polychlorinated biphenyls

Quality Assurance

Quality-Assurance Project Plan

Quality Control

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

Sewage Treatment Plant

Solid-waste management unit

U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency

U.S. Air Force

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Marine Corps

Volatile organic compound

Explosives associated compound

The use of trade, product, industry, or firm names in this report is for identification or location purposes only, and does 

not constitute endorsement of products by the U.S. Geological Survey, nor impute responsibility for any present or potential 

effects on the natural resources.

VI Contents
Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the 

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 

1994-95

By Jeffrey L Imes, John G. Schumacher, and Michael J. Kleeschulte

ABSTRACT

A coordinated regional geohydrologic and 

water-quality assessment of the Fort Leonard 

Wood Military Reservation (FLWMR) in southcentral Missouri, has described geologic controls 

on ground-water flow at the FLWMR and provided a reliable data base of background groundand surface-water quality. Ground-water levels 

and flow directions beneath the FLWMR are similar under conditions of high-base and low-base 

flow and have been modified from pre-karst conditions in the central and northeastern parts of the 

FLWMR by substantial karst development. Fractures commonly do not extend through the full 

thickness of bedrock formations and display little 

evidence of solution activity. Substantial dissolution of interbedded dolomitic material in the Roubidoux Formation has caused collapse of 

overlying sandstone-rich strata and provided large 

permeability pathways for ground-water flow. 

The catchment areas for Shanghai Spring and 

Miller Spring, discharge points for large volumes 

of water infiltrating upland areas at the FLWMR, 

are better delineated by dye-trace investigations 

conducted during the study. Stream-discharge 

measurements indicate that water in the Big Piney 

River and lower Roubidoux Creek near the 

FLWMR is almost entirely derived from tributary 

and spring inflow. The upstream-most reach of 

Roubidoux Creek on the FLWMR receives substantial ground-water recharge through its streambed.

Results of ground-water sampling indicate 

that the shallow ground water is vulnerable to 

contamination from surficial sources. Samples 

from several wells indicated human or animal 

wastes effects or nitrogen-containing fertilizers 

and contained detectable concentrations of pesticides. Volatile organic compounds detected in 

small concentrations in ground water include 

probable by-products of well chlorination (chloromethane, trichloromethane, bromomethane, 

bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, 

and bromoform), total xylenes, methyltertiarybutylether, and non-target volatile organic compounds tentatively identified as dibromomethylbenzene, 1 -bromo-3,5-dimethylbenzene, 

4-bromo-l,2-dimethylbenzene, cyanogen chloride, 2-methylpropanal, pentanal, and 2,4-dimethyl heptane. No semivolatile organic compounds 

or explosives associated compounds were 

detected, but the pesticides diazinon, p,p' -DDE, 

and tebuthiuron were detected.

Two springs, Shanghai Spring and the 

pumping station spring, show probable septic 

contamination. Ballard Hollow Spring shows 

fecal coliform and fecal streptococcus bacteria 

contamination that may originate at a nearby 

horse stable. Shanghai Spring contains detectable 

concentrations of the volatile organic compound 

trichloromethane (possibly a preservative contaminant) and the pesticides prometon and 

simazine. Substantial concentrations of the volatile organic compound tetrachloroethene (PCE) 

also were detected. No surface-water samples

Abstract 1
from streams exiting or bordering the FLWMR 

contained volatile or semivolatile organic compounds or explosives associated compounds. The 

pesticides tebuthiuron, atrazine, deethylatrazine, 

andp,p'-DDE were detected in the Big Piney 

River and a tributary. Small concentrations of 

octachlorodibenzoparadioxin (OCDD), a natural 

combustion product, were detected in streambed 

sediment.

INTRODUCTION

During 1980, the U.S. Department of Defense 

(DOD) devised a comprehensive Installation Restoration Program (IRP) to assess and to control the migration of environmental contamination that may have 

resulted from past operations or disposal practices at 

DOD facilities. The IRP underwent changes after the 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

(SARA) was passed during 1986. This Act requires 

federal facilities to adhere to guidelines and procedures set forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (USEPA) for the investigation and restoration 

of former disposal and spill sites. The long-range 

objectives of the IRP at the FLWMR are to assess the 

extent and magnitude of contamination at selected 

closed solid-waste management units (SWMUs).

During 1994, the Directorate of Public Works, 

Environmental Division (DPWED), FLWMR 

requested support from the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) in a regional basewide geohydrologic and 

water-quality assessment and investigation of the 

quality of water at selected SWMUs at the FLWMR 

(fig. 1). The regional geohydrologic assessment was 

designed to characterize the geohydrologic framework 

of the FLWMR and provide the background hydrochemical data necessary to conduct and interpret more 

detailed investigations of contaminant distribution and 

movement near individual SWMUs. Specific objectives for the regional assessment were:

1) to determine regional ground-water flow 

directions and discharge locations in and 

bordering the FLWMR, and

2) to assess the current and background groundand surface-water quality in and bordering 

the FLWMR.

The study area for the reconnaissance appraisal 

of the 17 selected SWMUs includes the immediate 

vicinity of each site and areas to which ground or surface water can readily migrate from the site. Preliminary site-specific investigations at 11 SWMUs (fig. 1) 

currently (1996) are completed on the FLWMR. Many 

leachate, ground- and surface-water, soil, and sediment samples have been collected from areas in and 

near these selected SWMUs. Investigations at six sites 

(FLW-006, FLW-012, FLW-013, FLW-014, FLW-015, 

and FLW-016) have been temporarily suspended and 

little data have been collected at these sites. The 17 

sites selected for detailed study are:

FLW-002 Closed sanitary landfill 2 

FLW-003 Closed sanitary landfill 3A 

FLW-004 Closed sanitary landfill 3B 

FLW-005 Closed sanitary landfill 3C 

FLW-006 Closed sanitary landfill at ballfield 

FLW-012 Closed sanitary landfill 10A 

FLW-013 Closed sanitary landfill 10B 

FLW-014 Closed sanitary landfill 11A 

FLW-015 Closed sanitary landfill 11B 

FLW-016 Closed sanitary landfill 11C 

FLW-028 Directorate of Public Works old

fire training area

FLW-030 Open-burn/open-detonation 

(OB/OD) area in range 24 

FLW-032 Air National Guard cannon range

open-burning, explosives associated 

compounds (XACs) burial area 

FLW-037 Directorate of Public Works old

pesticide storage building 2206 

FLW-040 Ammunition container storage area 

FLW-059 Closed sanitary landfill 

FLW-060 Closed sanitary landfill

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results of a coordinated 

geological, hydrological, and hydrochemical data-collection and data-analysis effort designed to characterize regional ground- and surface-water flow and 

quality at the FLWMR. The study was conducted from 

October 1994 to October 1995. The study area for 

geohydrologic assessment included the 64,000-acre 

FLWMR and bordering areas. The bordering areas of 

interest were areas east of the FLWMR between the 

military reservation and the Big Piney River, including 

the river (fig. 2); areas west of the FLWMR between 

the reservation and Roubidoux Creek, including the 

creek (fig. 2); and the small area north of the FLWMR 

between the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek, 

and south of Interstate 44 (figs. 1,2).

2 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
92'15' 92'07'30"

37'37'30" 

FLW-013 

FLW-016 {

" ; Roat yard

» , tetnrana storage ana area

""" FLW-037

Dry-cleaning 

shop :

Fomey Amy Airport

FLW-028 / \ FLW-040 

FLW-003

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

EXPLANATION

APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF 

CANTONMENT AREA

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY 

RESERVATION BOUNDARY

SOLID-WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT 

(SWMU) AND IDENTIFIER

- BOUNDARY OF OZARK UPLIFT

5 MILES

J

I I

5 KILOMETERS

Figure 1. Location of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation and 17 solid-waste management units identified 

as potential sources of ground- or surface-water contamination.

Introduction
92-I51

37'45' 501

37-3730-

EXPLANATION

JEFFERSON CITY DOLOMITE 

ROUBIDOUX FORMATION 

GASCONADE DOLOMITE

Modified from Middendorf (1984a, 1984b. and 1986) 

and Sumner and Easson (1986)

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY 

RESERVATION BOUNDARY

FAULT

TRACE OF GEOLOGIC SECTION

Figure 2. Bedrock geologic formations at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

4 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
Regional ground-water flow directions were 

determined by developing potentiometric surface 

maps based on ground-water-level measurements in 

domestic and public-water-supply wells. Groundwater discharge was measured directly at the many 

springs that flow from karstic limestone and dolostone 

bedrock at the FLWMR and indirectly by measuring 

changes in surface-water flow rates for the Big Piney 

River, Roubidoux Creek, and their tributaries that 

drain the FLWMR. Ground-water, surface-water, and 

streambed material samples were collected from various locations at the FLWMR to define the water quality and the relation to the water quality of the 

immediate surrounding area. Sampling locations generally were chosen to represent the regional water 

quality at the FLWMR, rather than chosen to be representative of any specific area. Most of the sample sites 

characterize native or natural water quality. Site specific data for the SWMUs are not included in this 

regional geohydrologic report.

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

History and Facilities

The FLWMR is located in south-central Missouri (fig. 1), approximately 130 mi (miles) southwest 

of the city of St. Louis. The mission of the FLWMR 

primarily is combat troop training. It consists of 

approximately 64,000 acres of land, including a small 

aircraft landing strip, Forney Army Airport. The history of the FLWMR began during 1941 when it was 

opened for the training of combat troops in World War 

II. The FLWMR was closed during 1946 at the end of 

the war, but was re-opened in 1956 as a combat troop 

training center and engineering school.

Many facilities are concentrated in the cantonment area (fig. 1) that occupies the north-central part 

of the FLWMR. This area contains classrooms, barracks, recreation and shopping facilities, and support 

units. The remainder of the FLWMR contains large 

tracts of land set aside for small arms firing ranges, 

training areas for armored vehicles night maneuvers, 

an Air National Guard cannon and strafing range, and 

heavy equipment training areas. Currently (1996), the 

FLWMR is home to the 1st Engineer Brigade (Center), 

the 3rd Basic Training Brigade, the 43rd Adjutant 

General Battalion, and a Military Police Command.

The 1st Engineer Brigade (Center) provides 

support for Engineer Officer Basic and Engineer 

Officer Advanced Training Courses and includes an

engineer combat battalion composed of two fire-fighting detachments, an evacuation hospital, a transportation company, an engineer pipeline company, an 

engineer company, and a quarry company. The 3rd 

Basic Training Brigade annually trains 20,000 initialentry recruits and 4,000 combat engineers and provides support services for several Army Reserve 

Units. The 43rd Adjutant General Battalion supplies 

inprocessing services, training of Non-Commissioned 

Officers (NCO) through the Libby Non-Commissioned Officer Academy, basic NCO courses, 

advanced NCO courses, Drill Sergeant School, and 

Initial Entry Cadre Training.

Several tenant organizations operate on the 

FLWMR, including the Medical Department, which 

operates the General Leonard Wood Army Hospital, 

Dental Activity, Defense Printing Service, Testing and 

Evaluation Coordination Office, Defense Investment 

Service, Ordnance Disposal Detachment, Army Trial 

Defense Service, Resident Agency, U.S. Marine Corps 

(USMC) Administration Detachment, U.S. Air Force 

(USAF) Technical Training Group, U.S. Army 

Defense Reutilization Maintenance Office (DRMO), 

Commissary, Army Reserve Training Center, Army 

Readiness Group, Tactical Fighter Wing Detachment 1 

of the Air National Guard, Engineer Housing Support 

Center, and Army Information Center.

Previous Investigations

Previous hydrologic investigations at the 

FLWMR have focused almost exclusively on chemical 

analyses of ground-water samples collected from 

monitoring wells installed near selected SWMUs. 

None of these studies have attempted to understand 

the regional ground-water and surface-water hydrology of the FLWMR or the geohydrologic settings of 

the SWMUs in relation to the regional hydrology.

During 1987 and 1988, the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (USAEHA, 1988a) conducted an investigation of the effect of SWMUs FLW002, FLW-003, FLW-004, and FLW-005 on ground 

water in nearby unconsolidated deposits. Seventeen 

shallow wells were drilled into the unconsolidated 

deposits to collect ground-water samples. Depth to the 

water table in the upland area commonly exceeds 100 

ft (feet), which accounts for the observation that all 17 

wells were dry in the fall and only 3 contained sufficient water to sample in the spring. The sampled water 

probably was water temporarily perched above less

Previous Investigations 5
permeable sediments. One landfill leachate sample 

was collected. The report concludes that there was no 

adverse effects on ground-water in the unconsolidated 

deposits; however, two of four samples had concentrations of sodium [28 to 102 mg/L (milligrams per liter)] 

and chloride (37 and 97 mg/L) larger than expected 

background concentrations, indicating effects from 

landfill leachate.

A later study conducted by the USAEHA 

(1988b) documented and characterized 40 SWMU 

sites and concluded that sites FLW-002, FLW-003, 

FLW-004, FLW-005, FLW-022, FLW-028, FLW-030, 

FLW-032, and FLW-037 warranted additional environmental investigations. No monitoring-well drilling 

or water sampling was conducted during this study.

Three additional deeper monitoring wells ranging from 83 to 100 ft deep were installed around the 

perimeter of FLW-002 in 1990. Water levels in these 

wells ranged from 33 to 69 ft below land surface. No 

organic compounds were detected in water samples 

from these wells. Four additional deeper monitoring 

wells also were installed during 1990 around landfill 

FLW-003 and adjacent landfills FLW-004 and FLW005 at depths of 57 to 103 ft. Only one well contained 

water and was sampled for trace elements, priority 

pollutant volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds, pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Organic compounds were not 

detected, but barium was detected at a concentration 

of 210 |ig/L (micrograms per liter, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1990).

During 1993, the USAEHA (1993) collected 

soil samples to characterize old fire training areas 

FLW-050, FLW-051, and FLW-052. Total petroleum 

hydrocarbon concentrations in 7 of 35 samples from 

FLW-050,1 of 28 samples from FLW-051, and 1 of 15 

samples from FLW-052 equaled or exceeded minimum detection limits of 4 pg/L. No sample contained 

benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, or xylene (BTEX) in 

concentrations greater than 1 jig/L.

During 1993, the Radian Corporation (1993) 

completed a study of the float yard storage area, furniture repair shop satellite storage area, building 2563 

battery acid storage area, and an open-burn/open-detonation (OB/OD) area in Cannon Range 36. Small concentrations of lead (Pb) were detected in soils, and 

odors from soil sample boreholes indicated the presence of VOCs at the float yard storage area. Surface 

soil samples at the furniture repair shop area contained 

Pb concentrations of 156 mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram), but it was unclear whether this concentration 

was significant as compared to natural background Pb 

concentrations in the residuum (Connor and Shacklette, 1975), which can be as large as 120 mg/kg. Volatile organic compounds also were detected in soils 

near the repair shop. Several XACs were detected in 

soil samples from the OB/OD area at Cannon Range 

36. No evidence existed that the XACs were migrating 

offsite by overland runoff or had entered the groundwater system.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Climatology

The FLWMR area is characterized by a humid, 

temperate climate with warm, humid summers and 

cool, wet winters. The average annual temperature is 

57 °F (degrees Fahrenheit). The recorded temperature 

extremes at the Forney Army Airport from 1963 to 

1994 are a maximum of 109 °F (August 1980) and a 

minimum of -13 °F (December 1985). The average 

annual precipitation recorded at the airport is about 42 

in. (inches; National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 1951-80,1994).

Physiography and Topography

The FLWMR occupies a large part of southern 

Pulaski County and a small part of eastern Laclede 

County in south-central Missouri. It is located within 

the Salem Plateau of the Ozark Plateaus Physiographic 

Province (Fenneman, 1938), an area characterized by 

a rugged terrain of thin soils and narrow steep-walled 

valleys. Most of the FLWMR is located on a broad 

ridge between the northerly flowing Big Piney River 

to the east and the northerly flowing Roubidoux Creek 

to the west (fig. 2). Tributary streams to the Big Piney 

River and Roubidoux Creek drain the upland areas and 

are deeply incised into the sides of the ridge.

Area relief generally is the result of gradual 

uplift of the Ozark Dome in southern Missouri and 

erosion of the uplifted rocks by precipitation runoff 

and streamflow. The regional land surface altitude 

ranges from about 1,150 ft above sea level along parts 

of the central ridge to about 750 ft above sea level at 

the Big Piney River near the northeastern boundary of 

the FLWMR. Roubidoux Creek is not as deeply

6 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
incised, nor does it have as large a flow, as the Big 

Piney River. The altitude of Roubidoux Creek near the 

northwestern boundary of the FLWMR is about 780 ft 

above sea level.

some large areas along the western flank of the central 

ridge, the surface soils and subsoils have been completely stripped or altered by years of heavy equipment training activities.

Soil Types and Distribution

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (1979) has surveyed and mapped 

soils at the FLWMR. Surface soils at the FLWMR 

generally were formed over consolidated sandstone 

and cherty limestone bedrock deposits. Three general 

types of soils cover the FLWMR: the Needleye-Viraton-Wilderness (NVW), the Capitina-ClarksvilleDoniphan (CCD), and the Hartville-Ashton-CedargapNolin (HACN). The fragipan clay subsoils and soils, 

which are common to the area, contain a large clay 

content and can inhibit the downward movement of 

ground water in the unsaturated zone. Fragipan subsoils can locally alter the normal vertical movement of 

recharging ground water, causing the water to perch 

on top of the fragipan and flow laterally to more permeable vertical pathways or emerge at land surface as 

ground-water seeps.

The NVW soils, loamy upland soils with fragipans, commonly are along the nearly level to moderately steep central ridge of the FLWMR. These soils 

form in cherty limestone residuum and are characterized by a cherty silt loam surface soil overlying a moderately permeable cherty silty clay loam subsoil that is 

supported by an underlying massive compact brittle 

fragipan. The CCD soils are loamy upland soils that 

contain fragipan or are chert throughout. They commonly are on nearly level to extremely steep slopes 

between the central ridge of the FLWMR and the Big 

Piney River and Roubidoux Creek valleys. These soils 

form in cherty limestone and dolostone residuum and 

are characterized by a cherty silt loam surface soil 

overlying a massive compact brittle fragipan or moderately permeable clay subsoil. The HACN soils are 

poorly to excessively drained loamy bottom land soils 

commonly in the narrow Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek valleys. These soils form in cherty limestone residuum and are characterized by a silt loam or 

cherty silt loam surface soil overlying a slowly to 

moderately permeable silt, silty clay, or cherty silt 

loam subsoil.

Most natural soils on the FLWMR have been 

altered extensively by construction and development 

on the FLWMR and ongoing training activities. In

GEOHYDROLOGIC FRAMEWORK

The geohydrologic assessment of the FLWMR 

included a comprehensive geologic mapping program 

to identify fractures and faults and a less intensive 

effort to verify and refine existing bedrock geology 

maps. Onsite mapping was conducted by the USGS 

between November 1994 and May 1995. All onsite 

observations, data interpretations, and geologic mapping (compiled at 1:24,000 scale) are published separately from this report in Harrison and others (1996). 

The total mapped area was the approximate equivalent 

of three 7.5-minute quadrangle maps and generally 

extended from Interstate 44 to the southern boundary 

of the FLWMR and from Roubidoux Creek to the Big 

Piney River, including all parts of the FLWMR that 

are located outside of this general boundary. However, 

the geologic mapping program was centered on the 

FLWMR property and extended beyond the FLWMR 

property only to the extent necessary to support the 

mapping effort on the FLWMR property. Geologic 

descriptions in this report generally are condensed 

from the geologic mapping program and selected previous investigations. The reader is referred to Harrison 

and others (1996) for a more complete assessment of 

the geology of the FLWMR and a comprehensive set 

of observations made during the geologic mapping 

program.

Bedrock geologic formation maps (fig. 2) at the 

FLWMR were completed by the Missouri Department 

of Natural Resources, Division of Geology and Land 

Survey (MDGLS) in the mid 1980's. Bedrock geology 

maps of the southern two-thirds of the FLWMR were 

compiled at 1:62,500 scale (Middendorf, 1986; Sumner and Easson, 1986), and maps of the northern onethird were compiled at 1:24,000 scale (Middendorf, 

1984a, 1984b). Because the focus of this study was on 

hydrology, not geology, no earnest attempt was made 

to refine these bedrock geology maps. However, as 

surficial expressions of bedrock contacts were 

observed onsite during fracture and fault mapping, the 

contacts were noted, and a revised bedrock geology 

map (Harrison and others, 1996) at 1:24,000 scale was 

produced that incorporated corrections and additions 

to the existing maps.

Geohydrologic Framework 7
Mapping of fractures included identification 

and characterization of fracture sets and characterization of fractures by persistence, aperture, and solution 

activity (hydrologically active or inactive). At the 

beginning of the study a substantial component of 

ground-water flow at the FLWMR was assumed to be 

controlled by permeable zones associated with solution-enlarged fractures and bedding planes. Thus, a 

large part of the geologic assessment was directed 

toward developing a better understanding of these 

geologic features.

Structural Setting

A preliminary assessment of the geologic structural setting of the FLWMR was conducted before 

onsite observations were initiated to determine the 

general relation between structural features beneath 

the FLWMR and the regional structure of the Ozark 

Uplift of southern Missouri (fig. 1). This assessment 

was accomplished by review of previously published 

maps and articles on the geology of southern Missouri 

and by preparation of structure maps of the base of the 

Roubidoux Formation and base of the Gasconade 

Dolomite near the FLWMR. The data base of the altitudes for geologic formation contacts used to construct 

these maps was compiled from data on file at the 

MDGLS.

The Ozark Uplift of southern Missouri is part of 

a large rhyolite-granite basement complex that probably formed a continental divide in Late Precambrian 

time (Lidiak and others, 1966; Muehlberger and others, 1966,1967). Through a series of depositional and 

erosional cycles extending from Cambrian to Pennsylvanian time, the oldest geologic formations in southern Missouri crop out in southeastern Missouri, and 

younger formations crop out in approximately concentric rings around the older core. Rocks of early Ordovician age are exposed at the FLWMR, which is located 

on the northern flank of a structural high extending 

from southeast Missouri to the southwestern corner of 

the State (McCracken, 1971). The most prominent 

regional structural feature at the FLWMR is an 

unnamed anticline expressed as a north-trending ridge 

in contoured altitudes of the top of the Roubidoux Formation (McCracken, 1971, plate 1).

Maps of regional structure features and contours 

on the base of the Gasconade Dolomite and base of the 

Roubidoux Formation were prepared during the geologic assessment of the FLWMR. The base of the Gasconade Dolomite (Harrison and others, 1996) is 

characterized by a low-altitude area in the central 

FLWMR area and an anticlinal ridge (maximum altitude about 750 ft above sea level) extending northward through the northeastern and eastern part of the 

FLWMR. The low-altitude area is mapped based on 

only a single measurement and may be anomalous. 

The southern FLWMR area contains a prominent 

northwest-southeast trending normal fault, interpreted 

to be a segment of a single regional fault, previously 

mapped as the Countyline Fault to the northwest and 

the Palace Fault to the southeast (fig. 3). The fault has 

a displacement in excess of 100 ft in some places. The 

Gasconade Dolomite is about 300 ft thick at the 

FLWMR.

The structure of the base of the Roubidoux Formation (Harrison and others, 1996) is quite similar to 

that of the underlying Gasconade Dolomite. With the 

addition of more available data for the shallower Roubidoux Formation, the isolated low-altitude area in 

central FLWMR appears as part of a narrow elongated 

basin extending northeast from the Countyline Fault. 

The southwestern boundary of the basin is the 

downthrown side of Countyline Fault. The prominent 

north-trending anticlinal ridge is evident at the base of 

the Roubidoux Formation and attains a maximum altitude of about 1,050 ft above sea level in the northern 

part of FLWMR. The thickness of the Roubidoux Formation is about 150 ft at the FLWMR.

One of several interesting observations noted 

during the onsite mapping was structural evidence for 

substantial dissolution of the more dolomitic parts of 

the Roubidoux Formation (Harrison and others, 1996). 

Bedding plane attitudes in the underlying Gasconade 

Dolomite are nearly horizontal throughout the 

FLWMR. Bedding plane attitudes in sandstone beds of 

the upper part of the Roubidoux Formation consistently reflect a pattern of narrow steep-sided folds. The 

large difference in attitudes as measured in the two 

formations is regarded as a result of the dissolution of 

dolomitic material in the lower part of the Roubidoux 

Formation and subsequent collapse of the overlying 

sandstone-rich beds. The nature of the collapse indicates that solution activity in the Roubidoux Formation is concentrated in interbedded dolostone in the 

lower part of the formation.

8 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-85
I 

92'15' 92'07'30" 92'

37'45'

3r37'30"

Falling 

Spring

EXPLANATION

UNEAR TREND OF SINKHOLE 

DISTRIBUTION

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY 

RESERVATION BOUNDARY

FAULT

SINKHOLE

SPRING

Figure 3. Distribution of sinkholes and springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

Geohydrologlc Framework 9
Bedrock Geology and Stratigraphy

Bedrock geology of the FLWMR area consists 

of a sequence of three lower formations of Ordovician 

age of the Canadian Series. The Gasconade Dolomite, 

predominantly a cherty dolostone, is the oldest bedrock formation that crops out at the FLWMR. Exposures of Gasconade Dolomite (fig. 2) primarily are 

seen as bedrock bluffs along the Big Piney River and 

Roubidoux Creek valleys. The approximately 250-ftthick lower part of the Gasconade Dolomite contains a 

sandstone unit, the Gunter Sandstone Member, that is 

persistent throughout most of southern Missouri, but is 

not exposed in the study area. The approximately 50- 

ft-thick upper dolomitic section of the formation 

grades from a coarsely crystalline dolostone with a 

large chert content to an overlying more finely crystalline dolostone with a small chert content. The upper 

part of the Gasconade Dolomite was observed to contain intraformational breccia horizons as much as 4 ft 

thick that probably are indicative of larger permeability zones and may be capable of rapidly transmitting 

large quantities of ground water. Most caves and larger 

springs in the study area are contained in the upper 

part of the Gasconade Dolomite.

The lithology of the overlying Roubidoux Formation ranges from sandstone to dolomitic sandstone 

and cherty dolostone. The Roubidoux Formation crops 

out (fig. 2) in upland areas and hillsides in the western, 

northern, and eastern parts of the FLWMR. Most of 

the observed sinkholes in the upland areas of FLWMR 

are formed in the Roubidoux Formation.

The youngest bedrock formation, the Jefferson 

City Dolomite, has a maximum thickness in the study 

area of about 200 ft and is exposed in the southern part 

of the FLWMR along the central upland ridge that 

trends north-south through the FLWMR midway 

between the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek 

(fig. 2). This finely crystalline argillaceous dolostone 

commonly contains shale partings and brecciated 

chert. Solution activity was not observed in any Jefferson City Dolomite outcrop. Small ground-water seeps 

are common near the base of the dolostone and probably are caused by the resistant basal Quarry Ledgef1 . 

The beginning of flow in the headwaters of some small 

streams may be associated with the contact between

terminology is that of the Missouri Division of Geology and 

Land Survey.

the Roubidoux Formation and Jefferson City Dolomite.

Two geologic sections that trend northwestsoutheast across the central and northern parts of the 

FLWMR (fig. 4) show substantial stream entrenchment resulting from erosion of the Gasconade Dolomite and younger rocks by the Big Piney River and 

Roubidoux Creek. Beneath the Gasconade Dolomite, 

but not exposed in the FLWMR area, are the Eminence 

and Potosi Dolomites, Derby-Doe Run Dolomite, 

Davis Formation, Bonneterre Formation, and Lamotte 

Sandstone, all overlying Precambrian basement rocks. 

Most recharge at FLWMR probably does not flow into 

these deeper formations. The Potosi Dolomite is a 

massive thick-bedded dolostone that is vuggy and contains quartz druse. This formation is a source of 

ground water for municipalities throughout southern 

Missouri, and several public-supply wells in the 

FLWMR area are completed in the formation. The 

Potosi Dolomite is separated from the Gasconade 

Dolomite by the Eminence Dolomite, which commonly is less karstic and, therefore, less permeable 

than either the Potosi Dolomite or Gasconade Dolomite.

Modern stream valleys at and near the FLWMR, 

primarily the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek, 

contain thin alluvial deposits. This alluvium consists 

of both sorted and unsorted accumulations of sand, 

silt, gravel, and clay.

Fracture Patterns and Karst Features

The permeability of limestone and dolostone 

bedrock geologic formations that underlie the 

FLWMR has been greatly increased by dissolution. 

Evidence of the magnitude of dissolution is shown by 

the numerous, irregular, small folds with steep attitudes and the numerous sinkholes that have been created in the Roubidoux Formation by collapse of 

overburden into solution-enlarged cavities. Preliminary concepts of ground-water flow at the FLWMR 

assumed that solution-enlarged fracture systems were 

responsible for the observed patterns of sinkhole 

development and that conduit systems created from 

solution-enlarged intersecting fractures directed 

ground water to major springs. Therefore, the main 

emphasis of the geologic mapping program was to 

determine the density and properties of fractures in the 

FLWMR area. Specific physical properties measured 

during onsite observations included fracture orienta10 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
Sea

Vertical scale greatly exaggerated level

2 MILES

Sea

Vertical scale greatly exaggerated level

1 2 KILOMETERS

Figure 4. Generalized geologic sections trending northwest to southeast across the Fort Leonard 

Wood Military Reservation (the traces of sections A-A' and B-A' are shown in figure 2).

Fracture Patterns and Karst Features 11
tion and persistence and a characterization of fractures 

as hydraulically active or inactive based on evidence 

of solution activity in the fracture.

Before this study, fracture flow was thought to 

be the method by which recharge in upland areas of 

the FLWMR was transported rapidly through the Jefferson City Dolomite and Roubidoux Formation to the 

larger springs that flow from openings in the upper 

part of the Gasconade Dolomite. Onsite observations 

of hundreds of fractures at the FLWMR (Harrison and 

others, 1996) revealed that less than 10 percent of 

fractures in the Jefferson City Dolomite and less than 

5 percent of fractures in the Roubidoux Formation 

extend through the entire thickness of the formations 

(through-going). About 10 percent of fractures in the 

Gasconade Dolomite are through-going. A larger density of through-going fractures are located near Roubidoux Creek and Smith Branch in the northwestern part 

of FLWMR where stream channels seem to be 

strongly controlled by fractures. Bedrock-formation 

fracture patterns display preferred orientations locally 

(fracture domains), but apparently neither throughgoing nor non-through-going fractures in the FLWMR 

area display a strong preferred regional orientation.

Of all observed fractures, only about 4.5 percent 

in the Jefferson City Dolomite, about 1.5 percent in 

the Roubidoux Formation, and about 20 percent in the 

Gasconade Dolomite show evidence of solution activity (Harrison and others, 1996). Fracture sets exhibiting solution activity have a pronounced northeast 

orientation. Conduit flow may have developed in some 

of these fractures. However, about 98 percent of all 

observed fractures have narrow (less than 0.5 in.) 

apertures and show no evidence of secondary mineralization. These observations, combined with evidence 

of extensive dissolution of interbedded dolostone in 

the lower part of the Roubidoux Formation and the 

fact that nearly 45 percent of all observed Gasconade 

Dolomite outcrops showed evidence of beddingplane-controlled caves, solution cavities, or vugs, lead 

to the conclusion that much of the water discharged at 

large springs is transported along high-permeability 

pathways within solution-enlarged bedding planes 

rather than fractures.

An inventory of typical karst features such as 

springs, seeps, losing streams, sinkholes, and caves 

was conducted during the regional geohydrologic 

assessment to help develop a more complete concept 

of ground-water flow. One observation, resulting from 

the compilation of sinkhole location data from USGS

7.5-minute topographic maps, high-resolution digital 

contour data for the FLWMR, and onsite observations, 

is that many of the sinkholes located in the north-central part of the FLWMR are distributed along a 1-miwide linear trend oriented northeast to southwest (fig. 

3). The major axis of this band of sinkholes is parallel 

to and in line with a 1.5-mi-long linear segment of 

Roubidoux Creek within a reach of the creek characterized by a sequence of near right-angle shifts in flow 

direction and complete flow loss. The axis also intersects Kurd Hollow Stream at the point of flow loss. 

The occurrence of abrupt changes in stream channel 

directions, a linear stream segment, flow loss in two 

streams, and a linear band of sinkholes oriented along 

a common line strongly indicates an area of substantial 

hydrologic control by fractures.

The mapping of fractures resulted in the identification of previously unmapped faults that presumably 

are the cause of the lost surface-water flow in Roubidoux Creek and Kurd Hollow Stream. The faults are the 

previously mentioned extension of Countyline Fault 

into the southern FLWMR and Kurd Hollow Fault, 

which intersects the Countyline Fault at a steep angle 

in the vicinity of flow loss at low-base flow in Roubidoux Creek. The Kurd Hollow Fault extends northeast 

from the Countyline Fault into the interior of the 

FLWMR and crosses Kurd Hollow near the point of 

flow loss in Hurd Hollow Stream (Harrison and others, 

1996; fig. 3). The mapping also identified the intersection of two smaller faults, a probable extension of Nelson Creek Fault and Hurd Hollow Fault, with the 

larger Countyline Fault.

Two narrower bands of sinkholes with major 

axes oriented northwest to southeast also are evident 

in figure 3. Extensions of the major axes of these 

bands also intersect near-linear segments of Roubidoux Creek northwest of the FLWMR. One of the bands 

also extends along a near-linear 1-mi-long reach of 

Smith Branch. These features also are indicative of 

fracture or fault control, but no direct evidence has 

been found that links these features to a common 

structure.

GROUND-WATER HYDROLOGY

Ground-water resources of the region primarily 

are associated with the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system, 

consisting of consolidated sediments of Cambrian 

through Ordovician age (Imes and Emmett, 1994). 

Ground-water supplies near the FLWMR are from

12 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
wells that are completed in the Ozark aquifer, the middle aquifer of the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system. 

Although the lower few tens of feet of the Jefferson 

City Dolomite can be saturated locally at the FLWMR, 

the formation normally is unsaturated. The underlying 

Roubidoux Formation, Gasconade Dolomite, and 

Potosi Dolomite commonly are productive water-bearing formations. The upper part of the Eminence Dolomite commonly is a massive dolostone containing few 

vugs or solution features and probably forms a weak 

hydraulic barrier to vertical ground-water flow 

between the Gasconade Dolomite and Potosi Dolomite.

Recharge to the aquifer primarily is by percolation of precipitation through permeable residuum and 

bedrock. Ground-water flow in the aquifer mainly is 

controlled by regional topography, but local anomalies 

on the regional flow system are produced by flow 

through solution-enlarged openings in the karst bedrock. Karst features commonly are well developed in 

the Gasconade Dolomite and Potosi Dolomite. The 

presence of karst features can substantially alter the 

movement of ground water from flow patterns commonly associated with rocks of more uniform permeability. Because of the areal extent and the permeability of the aquifer, water-supply wells are numerous 

and productive. Wells completed in the Roubidoux 

Formation-Gasconade Dolomite rock sequence commonly yield from several tens of gallons per minute to 

several hundreds of gallons per minute (Melton, 

1976). Wells completed in the Potosi Dolomite are 

capable of yielding from several hundred gallons per 

minute to as much as 1,000 gal/min (gallons per 

minute; Fuller and others, 1967).

General directions of ground-water movement 

beneath the FLWMR were determined by mapping the 

water table or potentiometric surface associated with 

underlying geohydrologic units using measured water 

levels in wells. Domestic and public-supply wells 

were inventoried before and during the time groundwater-level measurements were made, and well construction data were collected where possible. Water 

levels were measured in existing production wells, 

previously drilled SWMU monitoring wells, and 

domestic wells. Many water levels were measured in 

areas bordering the FLWMR to supplement the few 

water-level measurements available from wells 

located within the FLWMR. The measurements were 

made twice, once during seasonal high-base flow conditions and once during seasonal low-base flow conditions. Most measured water levels were from wells 

completed in the Roubidoux Formation-Gasconade 

Dolomite rock sequence. Only a few wells are completed in the Potosi Dolomite; consequently, there are 

insufficient data to map the potentiometric surface of 

ground water in the Potosi Dolomite.

Ground-Water Levels High-Base Flow

Water-level measurements were made in domestic and public-water-supply wells located in the general FLWMR area from November 2 to December 2, 

1994, to provide a set of measurements representing 

ground-water levels during high-base flow conditions. 

Water levels in six additional wells were measured in 

the winter and spring of 1995 to complete the data 

base. Approximately 120 homes and businesses were 

visited during the survey; however, water levels were 

measured in only 60 wells because of the inability to 

gain access to some wells. These measured values of 

depth to water and the computed water-level altitudes 

are listed in table 1.

The high-base flow regional ground-water levels between the Big Piney River and Gasconade River 

(fig. 5) primarily represent hydraulic conditions in the 

Roubidoux Formation-Gasconade Dolomite rock 

sequence. A few measurements that represent water 

levels in the underlying Eminence Dolomite and 

Potosi Dolomite or a weighted average of water levels 

in the Roubidoux Formation, Gasconade Dolomite, 

and underlying Eminence and Potosi Dolomites also 

are incorporated into the map (for example, measurements from dw 015 and dw 065, table 1).

Water levels exhibit a distinct transition in character between the southern and the northern part of the 

mapped area. In the southern one-half of the mapped 

area, water levels generally are higher along the major 

recharge areas on topographic ridges and are lower 

toward discharge areas in the major river valleys. The 

higher levels in the upland areas are supported by the 

percolation of rainwater through the soil and unsaturated zone of the upland areas. The rate of groundwater flow away from the upland recharge areas is 

determined by the bedrock permeability. Groundwater flow is perpendicular to the contour lines of 

equal hydraulic head, or water-level altitude, and is 

directed to regional streams where the ground water 

discharges. The slight offset of the regional groundwater divide between the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek west of the regional topographic divide

Ground-Water Levels High-Base Flow 13
o

Table 1. Water-level measurements made in selected domestic and public-supply wells during high-base and low-bas

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation

[ddmmss, degrees, minutes, seconds; x-coord, x coordinate; y-coord, y coordinate; , no data; all depths in feet below land surface]

o

I

5

<§ 

o 

at

a.

1

o

SL

<S

>

!

3

3

a

so>

o1

3

|

at

5.

fo

O.

2

of 

3

3D

2

2.

o

1

i

c

i

State plane 

zone 4426

Well

number

dwOOl

dw002

dw003

dw004

dwOOS

dw006

dw007

dwOOS

dw009

dwOlO

dwOll

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw016

dw017

dw018

dw019

dw020

Latitude

(ddmmss)

375203

375114

375105

375056

375040

375018

374943

374935

374910

374904

374835

374809

374805

374706

374638

374612

374458

374456

374445

374442

Longitude

(ddmmss)

0920402

0920729

0920549

0920848

0921102

0921909

0921331

0920758

0921638

0920634

0921911

0920918

0921149

0921251

0920823

0921810

0921258

0921302

0921506

0922120

x-coord

624929

608351

616375

602022

591280

552221

579345

606064

564350

612817

552081

599678

587561

582603

604128

557006

582080

581760

571803

541765

y-coord

740842

735814

734937

733969

732312

729983

726509

725792

723131

722683

719565

717069

716622

710639

707881

705111

697691

697488

696347

695980

Landsurface 

altitude

(feet above

sea level)

830

795

1,010

1,065

992

1,031

1,010

1,075

1,031

1,035

1,105

1,075

795

1,025

1,122

1,050

873

880

905

1,095

Well

depth

(feet)

230

240

395

--

350

360

320

341

_

__

496

390

110

400

__

260

175

--

High-base flow

Date

(monthday-year)

11-02-94

11-02-94

11-02-94

11-03-94

11-03-94

11-04-94

11-04-94

11-03-94

11-04-94

11-22-94

11-04-94

11-10-94

11-10-94

11-10-94

12-02-94

11-09-94

01-27-95

01-27-95

11-09-94

11-22-94

Depth to

water

(feet)

129.5

68.5

277.0

306.3

190.4

254.5

211.9

226.5

243.3

309.6

323.0

271.3

7.8

187.1

291.5

255.1

71.1

55.1

111.7

151.2

Waterlevel 

altitude

(feet above

sea level)

700.5

726.5

733.0

758.7

801.6

776.5

798.1

848.5

787.7

725.4

782.0

803.7

787.2

837.9

830.5

794.9

801.9

824.9

793.3

943.8
Table 1. Water-level measurements made in selected domestic and public-supply wells during high-base and low-bas

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation Continued

State plane 

zone 4426

O

3

3

1

!ii<L

I

&

7

ff

g

Tl

_t

Well

number

dw021

dw022

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw026

dw027

dw028

dw029

dw030

dw031

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw035

dw036

dw037

dw038

dw039

dw040

dw041

Latitude

(ddmmss)

374440

374436

374422

374358

374313

374308

374253

374138

374113

374107

374106

373939

373919

373857

373750

373734

373630

373616

373616

373551

373540

Longitude

(ddmmss)

0922120

0922021

0921316

0920412

0920651

0921739

0921117

0921423

0921646

0920910

0921713

0921601

0920558

0921255

0921805

0921803

0920822

0921547

0921810

0921441

0920954

x-coord

541765

546505

580645

624353

611502

559536

590234

575310

563822

600478

561654

567463

615959

582432

557516

557680

604444

568641

557133

573958

597060

y-coord

695778

695381

694045

691783

687193

686506

685074

677443

674885

674389

674172

665386

663527

661179

654339

652721

646387

644857

644831

642343

641303

Landsurface 

altitude

(feet above

sea level)

1,100

1,235

1,052

870

1,100

1,200

1,090

910

1,230

1,120

1,100

1,195

1,078

1,125

1,112

1,035

1,190

1,273

1,075

1,173

1,326

Well

depth

(feet)

-

-

490

-

-

500

-

55

-

290

220

-

100

154

-

--

High-base flow

Date

(monthday-year)

11-22-94

11-22-94

02-09-95

12-01-94

12-01-94

11-09-94

03-31-95

11-22-94

11-28-94

12-01-94

11-28-94

11-28-94

11-22-94

12-01-94

11-28-94

11-28-94

11-22-94

11-28-94

11-29-94

H-29-94

11-22-94

Depth to

water

(feet)

155.0

75.6

215.7

61.4

290.7

334.8

145.0

22.2

233.5

170.7

100.5

196.2

160.4

162.5

51.1

69.2

99.3

250.9

100.0

62.6

153.2

Waterlevel 

altitude

(feet above

sea level)

945.0

1,159.4

836.3

808.6

809.3

865.2

945.0

887.8

996.5

949.3

999.5

998.8

917.6

962.5

1,060.9

965.8

1,090.8

1,022.1

975.0

1,110.4

1,172.8
0) Table 1. Water-level measurements made in selected domestic and public-supply wells during high-base and low-bas

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation Continued

>hydrologlc and\

<

SL

*

1

o

^

le Fort Le

0

0)

rd Wood

?

i 

C2

2

i<D

1O

1

c

3.

5

£01

State plane 

zone 4426

Well

number

dw042

dw043

dw044

dw045 

dw046

dw047

dw048 

dw049

dwOSO

dwOSl 

dw052

dw054

dw055

dw056

dw057 

dw058

dw059

dw060

dw064

dw065

dw066

Latitude

(ddmmss)

373522

373442

373439

373416 

373414

373409

373349 

373338

373238

373233 

373156

373048

373030

373012

372947 

372938

372737

374303

374312

374104

374648

Longitude

(ddmmss)

0920500

0921039

0921624

0920131 

0922000

0920429

0920647 

0921815

0921133

0921541 

0922023

0921249

0920753

0920546

0920545 

0920316

0920606

0921402

0920648

0920926

0921239

x-coord

620729

593458

565687

637585 

548303

623258

612156 

556764

589152

569181 

546476

583065

606921

617161

617253 

629265

615616

576973

611862

599193

583572

y-coord

639577

635424

635039

632981 

632474

632205

630134 

628850

622868

622304 

618514

611723

609986

608207

605679 

604823

592524

686044

687100

674081

708821

Landsurface 

altitude

(feetabove

sea level)

1,182

1,185

1,312

939 

1,000

1,195

1,222 

1,085

1,172

1,191 

1,115

1,142

1,370

1,145

1,225 

1,250

1,410

898

1,092

1,144

900

High-base flow

Well Date

depth (month-

(feet) day-year)

11-09-94

11-22-94

11-28-94

H_09_94 

11-29-94

H_08-94

11-10-94 

11-28-94

11-22-94

11-29-94 

11-29-94

11-09-94

11-08-94

11-08-94

11-10-94 

300 11-08-94

11-10-94

126

630

692 01-24-95

340 01-31-95

Depth to

water

(feet)

131.2

66.1

167.3

64.3 

8.2

215.0

199.0 

39.6

106.8

97.6

77.2

61.6

141.6

49.6

137.7 

151.2

181.2

__

--

200.8

55.8

Waterlevel 

altitude

(feetabove

sea level)

1,050.8

1,118.9

1,144.7

874.7 

991.8

980.0

1,023.0 

1,045.4

1,065.2

1,093.4 

1,037.8

1,080.4

1,228.4

1,095.4

1,087.3 

1,098.8

1,228.8

__

--

943.2

844.2
92'22130" 92-07-30"

37-37-30"

1037.8

EXPLANATION ° 

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

WATER-LEVEL CONTOUR--Shows altitude of water table, 

Fall 1994 and winter and spring 1995. Dashed where 

approximately located. Contour interval is variable. Datum 

is sea level

STREAM-Shaded reach is dry except during substantial runoff events

GROUND-WATER DIVIDE

TOPOGRAPHIC DIVIDE

MEASURED GROUND-WATER LEVEL-Number Is altitude In feet

5.0 KILOMETERS

Hgure 5. Altitude of shallow ground-water levels at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

during high-base flow conditions.

Ground-Water Levels High-Base Flow 17
indicates that bedrock permeability generally may be 

larger in the Big Piney River Basin. Ground-water levels south of the FLWMR are greater than 1,100 ft 

above sea level between the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek valleys and between the Gasconade 

River and Roubidoux Creek valleys. Apparently, all 

three streams receive ground-water discharge in this 

part of the mapped area.

In the central part of the FLWMR, the regional 

ground-water divide is as much as 2 mi west of the 

regional topographic divide. The large lateral separation between the ground-water and topographic 

divides indicates a substantially larger bedrock permeability in the east-central part of the FLWMR than in 

the west-central part. Evidence for this increased permeability is the unusually low water level (809.3 ft 

above sea level) measured in the old ammunition 

dump well (dw 025) and the large concentration of 

sinkholes (fig. 3) that indicate the presence of a welldeveloped karst terrane throughout the central and 

northeastern parts of the FLWMR. The major effects 

of the secondary permeability zone are to redirect 

ground water that normally would have flowed westward to Roubidoux Creek eastward to the Big Piney 

River and to redirect ground water that would have 

flowed eastward to the Big Piney River more northward toward Shanghai Spring. More evidence of this 

flow pattern will be presented during the discussion of 

dye-trace investigations and streamflow measurements. Water-level contours in the extreme north-central part of the FLWMR are more typical of an area 

where flow is not dominated by karst; that is, flow is 

east and west from a ground-water divide that is 

beneath the regional topographic divide. However, 

karst features are not absent from this area.

The small oval-shaped mound of ground water 

about 5 mi west of the FLWMR probably is caused by 

the presence of low permeability material in the topographically high area centered on the mound. The single measured water level (1,159.4 ft above sea level) 

on which the contoured mound primarily is based is 

more than 200 ft above water levels measured in 

nearby wells. Although the depth of this well is not 

known, it is likely that the well is shallow (perhaps 

less than 100 ft deep) and the water-level measurement is not representative of hydraulic heads in the 

lower part of the Roubidoux Formation and Gasconade Dolomite. Water levels north of the mound are low 

(less than 800 ft above sea level) and quite uniform 

throughout an area that includes a major topographic

ridge and the Gasconade River valley. The water levels exhibit a small northward gradient toward the Gasconade River. The presence of such a uniform waterlevel surface within an area of large relief (about 400 

ft) indicates a substantial increase in bedrock permeability consistent with greatly enhanced bedding-plane 

permeability by widespread dissolution of one or more 

carbonate beds. The enhanced permeability alters surface-water flow in the Gasconade River and is observable using dye-trace investigations. Evidence of the 

effect of the increased permeability on flow patterns 

will be presented during the discussion of dye-trace 

investigations and streamflow measurements.

Ground-Water Levels Low-Base Flow

Water-level measurements were made during 

low-base flow conditions in selected domestic and 

public-water-supply wells from August 28 to August 

31,1995. Water levels in six additional wells were 

measured October 11 and 12, 1995, to complete the 

data base. Depth-to-water measurements and the computed water-level altitudes during low-base flow conditions are listed in table 1.

The mapped low-base flow regional groundwater levels (fig. 6) primarily represent hydraulic conditions in the Roubidoux Formation-Gasconade Dolomite rock sequence and differs little from the mapped 

ground-water-level measurements during high-base 

flow conditions (fig. 5). The most notable difference 

between these two sets of measurements is that the 

water levels during low-base flow conditions within 

and near the northern FLWMR boundary are about 35 

ft lower than water levels during high-base flow conditions. The character of the water-level surface in this 

area is almost solely based on measurements in the 

main supply well for the FLWMR (Indiana Avenue 

well, dw 015). Water-level measurements typically are 

taken only after the pump has been turned off for 

about one-half hour or more. The much lower water 

level measured in well dw 015 during low-base flow 

conditions possibly represents the regional effect of 

the operating well during a period of increased water 

use, not the direct effect of dryer climatic conditions.

Lower water levels (about 10 ft) also were measured during low-base flow conditions in two wells in 

the Roubidoux Creek valley. The lower level may be 

caused by decreased ground-water flow into the 

extremely permeable rock beneath the dry stream 

channel in this part of the valley and continued north18 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
92'22-30' 92'07'30"

srsawr

37*3730" 

EXPLANATION 

" FORT LEONARD WOOD MIUTARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

5.0 KILOMETERS

 WATER-LEVEL CONTOUR-Shows altitude of water table, 

August and October 1995. Dashed where aproximately 

located. Contour interval is variable. Datum is sea level

............. ...****«** STREAM-Shaded reach is dry except during substantial runoff events

 GROUND-WATER DIVIDE

 TOPOGRAPHIC DIVIDE

1094J. MEASURED GROUND-WATER LEVEL-Number is altitude in feet

Figure 6. Altitude of shallow ground-water levels at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

during low-base flow conditions.

Ground-Water Levels Low-Base Flow 19
ward drainage of the water through large fractures and 

conduits. However, in general, most measured groundwater-level changes from high- to low-base flow conditions were small, especially in upland areas. A possible explanation is that ground-water storage in the 

karst terrane is large and the system has the capacity to 

supply substantial quantities of water to discharge 

points, such as springs, for sustained periods of 

decreased rainfall.

Vertical Ground-Water Flow

Three well pairs included in the regional 

ground-water-level survey provide an opportunity to 

estimate vertical hydraulic-head differences at these 

locations. The wells comprising each well pair are 

located within a few hundred feet of one another and 

are completed in different geologic formations. Wells 

dw 017 and dw 018 (table 1) are located at the westcentral border of the FLWMR and were drilled about 

200 ft apart; well dw 018 is completed in the middle 

part of the Gasconade Dolomite and well dw 017 in 

the lower part of the Gasconade Dolomite. During 

high-base flow conditions, the water level in the shallower well was about 20 ft higher than levels in the 

deeper well (824.9 and 801.9 ft above sea level). During low-base flow conditions, the water level in the 

shallower well was about 30 ft higher than the level in 

the deeper well (818.8 and 789.7 ft). The vertical 

hydraulic gradient in this area was downward to the 

base of the Gasconade Dolomite.

Another well pair is located at an ammunition 

dump in the east central part of the FLWMR (table 1, 

wells dw 025 and dw 064). These wells are about 100 

ft apart. The exact depth of the shallower well is not 

known; however, the well is reported to have been 

drilled a short distance into the Eminence Dolomite 

(about 400 ft deep). The deeper well was completed at 

630 ft in the Potosi Dolomite and was cased to 488 ft 

(middle part of the Eminence Dolomite). Because the 

deeper well was drilled after the water-level measurements were completed during high-base flow conditions, only water levels during low-base flow 

conditions were obtained at the well. Under low-base 

flow conditions, water levels in the shallower well 

were about 8 ft lower than levels in the deeper well 

(820.0 and 828.2 ft). The vertical hydraulic gradient in 

this area was upward from the Potosi Dolomite to the 

Gasconade Dolomite. However, in this part of the 

FLWMR, water levels in the Roubidoux Formation

and Gasconade Dolomite are relatively low because 

the large permeability caused by dissolution of the carbonate rock in this area effectively drains ground 

water rapidly to nearby springs. In the absence of such 

a well-developed karst terrane, the vertical gradient 

possibly would be downward.

The third well pair is located in the south-central 

FLWMR (table 1, wells dw 030 and dw 065). These 

wells are located about 1,300 ft apart. The depth of the 

shallower well is 290 ft and is cased to 82 ft deep. This 

well is completed in the middle part of the Gasconade 

Dolomite. The deeper well was completed to a depth 

of 692 ft in the Potosi Dolomite and was cased to 295 

ft (also in the middle part of the Gasconade Dolomite). 

Unfortunately for this analysis, the deeper well is open 

to both the Gasconade Dolomite and Potosi Dolomite, 

and a clear distinction between water levels in the two 

formations cannot be made. During high-base flow 

conditions, water levels in the shallower well were 

about 6 ft higher than levels in the deeper well (949.3 

and 943.2 ft). During low-base flow conditions, water 

levels in the shallower well were about 16 ft higher 

than levels in the deeper well (951.8 and 935.7 ft). The 

vertical hydraulic gradient in this broad upland apparently was downward from the Gasconade Dolomite to 

the Potosi Dolomite.

Based on the scant data available and by comparison with regional ground-water flow patterns and 

flow patterns in nearby areas of similar geologic conditions, vertical hydraulic gradients generally are 

thought to be downward from the Gasconade Dolomite to the Potosi Dolomite in the FLWMR area. 

These gradients probably are small. Where the highly 

permeable karst terrane in the Roubidoux Formation 

and Gasconade Dolomite rapidly transports ground 

water through conduits to local points of discharge 

(springs), hydraulic heads in these formations are lowered and can locally be lower than heads in the Potosi 

Dolomite. In these local areas, vertical hydraulic gradients can be upward into the Gasconade Dolomite.

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and 

Conduit Flow

Ground-water flow at the FLWMR is a complex 

combination of flow through porous residual material 

and bedrock and flow through hydraulically active 

fractures and along solution-enlarged openings 

between bedding planes. Ground-water flow in a 

hydrologic system of this complexity often is difficult

20 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-85
to fully understand based solely on potentiometric 

data. The small number of water wells on the FLWMR 

and low density of accessible water wells around the 

FLWMR relative to the large size of the study area 

make the construction of detailed and accurate potentiometric maps difficult. Dye-tracing techniques were, 

therefore, used to supplement water-level measurements and provide direct evidence of hydraulic connectivity between specific ground-water recharge 

areas, such as sinkholes, and major ground-water discharge points, such as springs. Dye-trace investigations are a valuable method of determining groundwater flow directions and rates in a karst terrane and 

for delineating spring catchment areas.

At least five dye-trace tests are known to have 

been conducted in or near the FLWMR before this 

study began. These tests are labeled HT-01 to HT-05 

on figure 7. The injection point for dye-trace test HT01 (Harvey, 1980, p. 34-35) was the point at which 

Roubidoux Creek loses flow under low-base flow conditions. The injected dye was recovered at Roubidoux 

Spring, about 10.5 mi north of the injection site, about 

5 days after injection. Dye for dye-trace test HT-02 

(Harvey, 1980, p. 34-35) was injected into a tributary 

of Dry Creek near St. Robert (fig. 1) and was recovered at Shanghai Spring 2.8 mi to the northeast. Dyetrace test HT-03 (Harvey, 1980, p. 34-35 and p. 36- 

37) was made to determine if wastewater from the 

FLWMR sewage treatment plant (STP) was being 

transported to Shanghai Spring. Dye injected into the 

sewage outflow, which is discharged into Dry Creek, 

was recovered at Shanghai Spring 2.5 mi to the northnortheast. Dye-trace test HT-04 (Rory McCarthy, 

FLWMR, written commun., 1995) was conducted by 

MDGLS after a sinkhole in the northeast part of a 

small lake collapsed and drained part of the lake. Dye 

injected into the sinkhole was recovered at Shanghai 

Spring 9.0 mi northwest of the lake, indicating an 

interbasin transfer of water across the central surfacewater divide of the FLWMR. Dye for tracer test HT-05 

(unpublished data on file at the MDGLS) was injected 

into a sinkhole near the upper edge of Range 19 Lake 

and was recovered at Miller Spring 3.0 mi east of the 

injection site.

Seven tests using fluorescent dyes were conducted during this study between February and September 1995. Dye injection locations at the FLWMR 

generally were chosen based on the availability of a 

substantial opening through the unsaturated zone to 

the water table. Visual evidence of such openings

include the presence of water-formed conduits in the 

bottom of sinkholes and substantial loss of streamflow 

over short distances. Although many sinkholes are 

present throughout the northern one-half of the 

FLWMR, most of these sinkholes are not suitable as 

injection sites because the sinkhole bottom is sealed 

by residuum and clay soils. Sinkholes north of Forney 

Army Airport, beyond the northern extent of Jefferson 

City Dolomite bedrock (fig. 2), are more likely to be 

open or to be filled by more-permeable friable soils 

and plant root mats. Dye recovery detection was 

attempted at downgradient perennial streams, springs, 

and seeps associated with ground-water discharge to 

the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, Gasconade 

River, and their tributaries.

Background fluorescent spectra checks and 

attempted dye recoveries were made by placing 

approximately 10 g (grams) of activated coconut charcoal encased in a fiberglass mesh into flowing surface 

water. The charcoal packets were kept immersed from 

a few days to about 2 weeks. After retrieval from the 

water, each charcoal packet was washed with clean 

water, dried, and split into two samples of approximately equal weight. One-half of the sample was 

archived in case the analysis needed to be repeated. 

The other one-half was eluted in a solution of 95 percent isopropyl alcohol and 5 percent ammonium 

hydroxide by volume. The elutant solution was analyzed for the presence of fluorescent materials using a 

scanning spectrofluorophotometer adjusted to illuminate the solution using a range of excitation wavelengths from 300 to 650 nm (nanometers) and monitor 

the fluorescence (emission) spectra from 320 to 670 

nm using a 3-nm window at a +20-nm shift from the 

excitation wavelength. All analyses were qualitative. 

The reader is referred to Mull and others (1988) for a 

review of standard dye-tracing techniques.

Before dye was injected into the ground-water 

flow system, a series of preliminary background 

checks for fluorescent materials were made at several 

potential dye-recovery sites north and east of the 

FLWMR. The background check sites (fig. 8) included 

11 sites in the Big Piney River Basin (Shanghai 

Spring, Dry Creek at the STP outflow, the "Boy Scout 

Camp" tributary, the pumping station spring, the 

"Asphalt Plant" stream, Miller Spring, and 5 locations 

on the Big Piney River) and 8 sites in the Roubidoux 

Creek Basin (Roubidoux Spring, Ballard Hollow 

stream, and six locations on Roubidoux Creek). Background checks were conducted on a few additional

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 21
92'15' 92'07'30"

37'45' 

37-37-30" 

T103-01

* INJECTION POINT

 RECOVERY POINT

EXPLANATION

- FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION 

BOUNDARY

- DYE-TRACE TEST AND NUMBER Conducted during 

this study. Questioned where uncertain

- DYE-TRACE TEST AND NUMBER Historical data

Figure 7. Injection and recovery points for dye-trace tests T103-01 to T103-07 and historical 

dye-trace tests at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

HT-04

22 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
92'15'

37'45' 

37'37130" 

Dry Creek * i 

Ballard at sewage7 \

^eefc^wt"0"0* treatment \ < Cr«5n-x ^ stream plant - 

outflow J

"Boy 

Camp" tributary

*s=U,__JJ

EXPLANATION

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY 

r» CHARCOAL DYE-DETECTOR PACKET AND LOCATION

Rgure 8. Distribution of charcoal packets placed in surface water and springs for monitoring of 

background dye concentrations at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 23
sites (Creasy Spring, Stone Mill Spring, Bartlett Mill 

Spring, Ousley Spring, and Road FLW 32 unnamed 

spring, fig. 3) during the investigation because it 

became necessary to incorporate new potential dyerecovery sites into the network. Background checks 

also were repeated at each potential recovery site 

incorporated into a dye-trace test to determine whether 

residual dye concentrations from a previous dye-trace 

test had sufficiently decreased before the injection of 

more dye into the flow system. The typical background fluorescence spectra for preliminary background check samples were a broad low-intensity peak 

centering on an emission wavelength of about 440 nm. 

However, three of the sites (Shanghai Spring, Dry 

Creek at the STP outflow, and the pumping station 

spring) had well-defined fluorescence peaks at about 

520 nm. This wavelength is consistent with the presence of fluorescein dye and may be derived from 

household cleaning products or automotive antifreeze. 

The background fluorescence spectra at Shanghai 

Spring were nearly identical to that at the STP outflow, 

indicating that outflow from the STP enters the 

ground-water flow system through the Dry Creek streambed and resurges at Shanghai Spring (fig. 7, trace 

HT-03).

Dye injection for the first dye-trace test (T103- 

01, fig. 7) was on February 14,1995. Preparation for 

the dye-trace test included an additional background 

check at nine potential recovery sites a few days 

before the dye injection. The test was performed by 

injecting 3 L (liters) of Rhodamine WT dye in a large 

sinkhole located about 0.75 mi north of Forney Army 

Airport control tower. Rhodamine WT dye was used 

because its fluorescence peak wavelength (567 nm) is 

higher than the wavelength of detected background 

fluorescent materials at Shanghai Spring, a site at 

which dye recovery was anticipated. A pre-injection 

flush of 100 gal (gallons) of water and post-injection 

flush of 400 gal of water were used to quickly move 

the dye through the unsaturated zone. The maximum 

concentration of Rhodamine WT dye was detected at 

Shanghai Spring from February 24 to 27,1995. Travel 

time from the injection site and Shanghai Spring, a lateral distance of 6.55 mi and altitude difference of 

about 360 ft, was 10 to 13 days. Dye was not detected 

at eight other recovery sites. The relatively short time 

for the dye pulse to pass through Shanghai Spring (3 

days) indicates that water primarily is transported 

from the injection site to the spring through a single 

well-defined fracture or bedding-plane opening. Dye

concentrations before and after these 3 days were 

small relative to the maximum dye concentration. The 

estimated ground-water flow rate is about 0.5 mi per 

day. A summary of the dye-trace injection and recovery data for T103-01 is presented in tables 2 and 3, at 

the back of this report. The relative fluorescence intensity of dye eluted from charcoal packets placed in 

Shanghai Spring during the dye-trace test is shown in 

figure 9.

A second dye-trace test (T103-02, fig. 7) was 

conducted by injecting Rhodamine WT dye into a 

small (about 6-ft diameter) sinkhole in a wooded area 

at the south edge of SWMU FLW-003 on March 16, 

1995. This site was chosen in an attempt to conduct a 

dye-trace test from the immediate vicinity of FLW003, FLW-004, and FLW-005, landfills under investigation during the same time as the regional geohydrologic assessment was being conducted. It was 

understood that this was not an ideal site for dye injection. Although the large rocks and gravel that filled the 

bottom of the sinkhole did not completely restrict flow 

into the subsurface, the infiltration rate was small, and 

there was no certainty that flow to the water table was 

unimpeded. Background dye concentrations at potential recovery sites were checked before the dye-trace 

test was conducted. Dye concentrations at Shanghai 

Spring had receded to background concentrations. 

Approximately 4 L of Rhodamine WT dye were used 

in the injection, which included a 600-gal post-injection flush. Potential recovery sites (table 4, at the back 

of this report) were monitored for Rhodamine WT dye 

for about 4 months after the injection date. No dye was 

recovered from this injection. The only indication that 

dye recovery might be successful was during analysis 

of charcoal packets collected from Shanghai Spring on 

May 12,1995. Fluorescence spectra from this analysis 

showed a previously undetected peak at 572 nm; however, the peak intensity was extremely small and may 

have been caused by residual dye from dye-trace test 

T103-01. Packets collected from Shanghai Spring on 

May 15 and 19,1995, also indicated the peak at the 

same small intensity. The peak was not present in analyses of packets recovered after May 19, 1995. The 

movement of the dye to the water table was assumed 

to have been impeded by clayey residuum and bound 

into the clay matrix.

A third dye-trace test (T103-03, fig. 7) was initiated on April 17, 1995, with the injection of 2 Ibs 

(pounds) of fluorescein dye into an opening at the 

northeastern side of a large sinkhole located about 300

24 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
250

200

z 

>-

150

CO

z

LU

SLU

L1J 

IT

o

§

100

50

DYE INJECTED 02-14-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

400

DATE PLACED

02-14-95 

02-16-95 

02-21-95 

02-24-95

02-27-95

03-03-95

DATE RECOVERED 

02-16-95 

02-21-95 

02-24-95

02-27-95

03-03-95 

03-10-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Figure 9. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-01.

ft south of Bradford Cemetery. The injection process 

included a 100-gal pre-injection flush and 500-gal 

post-injection flush. Fluorescein dye was used in this 

test to maintain distinction from the ongoing dye-trace 

test T103-02, which used Rhodamine WT dye. The 

injected dye was recovered at Miller Spring, located 

3.93 mi east of the sinkhole at an altitude of about 240 

ft lower than the sinkhole, about 4 days after injection. 

The estimated ground-water flow rate is about 1 mi per 

day. Dye-trace injection and recovery data for T103- 

03 are presented in tables 5 and 6, at the back of this 

report. Relative fluorescence intensity of dye eluted

from charcoal packets collected at Miller Spring during a 3-week period after injection is shown in figure 

10.

A fourth dye-trace test (T103-04, fig. 7) was 

conducted on May 9,1995, with the injection of 2.5 

Ibs of fluorescein dye into a small sinkhole that is the 

easternmost of a series of four sinkholes extending 

nearly parallel to a dirt and gravel road along the 

northern boundary of a small arms firing range. Fluorescein dye again was used in this test to maintain distinction from on-going dye-trace test T103-02. A 

small opening in the bottom of the sinkhole provided

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 25
150

100

50

DYE INJECTED 04-17-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

DATE PLACED

04-14-95 

04-17-95 

04-21-95 

04-24-95 

04-27-95

DATE RECOVERED 

04-17-95 

04-21-95 

04-24-95

04-27-95

05-02-95

400 500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Figure 10. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-03.

access to a 10- to 15-ft deep cavity beneath the sinkhole. Dye injection was followed by a flush of 500 gal 

of water to rapidly move the dye into the saturated 

zone. The injected dye was recovered at Miller Spring. 

Maximum dye concentrations at Miller Spring as indicated by the intensity of fluorescence spectra occurred 

about 13 days after injection; however, substantial 

concentrations of dye were detected at the spring from 

about 3 days after injection until about 25 days after 

injection. Miller Spring is located 4.08 mi northeast of 

the sinkhole. The ground-water flow rate along the 

path carrying the greatest dye load is about 0.3 mi per

day. Dye-trace injection and recovery data for T103- 

04 are presented in tables 7 and 8, at the back of this 

report. The relative fluorescence intensity of dye 

eluted from charcoal packets collected at Miller 

Spring during the dye-trace test is shown in figure 11. 

A fifth dye-trace test (T103-05, fig. 7) was conducted on May 26,1995, with the injection of 1.25 to 

1.50 Ibs of fluorescein dye into a sinkhole located 

about 100 ft north of the west end of Pulaski Avenue 

in the northwestern corner of the cantonment area. The 

dye was placed in an opening beneath a large tree 

growing from the southern bank of the sinkhole. Fluo26 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
900

800

700

600

500

LU

O 400

LU

>

LiJ 

CC 

O

I

300

CC 200

100

DYE INJECTED 05-09-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

400

DATE PLACED

1 05-05-95

2 05-08-95

3 05-12-95

4 05-15-95

5 05-19-95

6 05-22-95

7 05-26-95

8 05-30-95

DATE RECOVERED 

05-08-95 

05-12-95 

05-15-95 

05-19-95 

05-22-95 

05-26-95

05-30-95

06-02-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Rgure 11. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-04.

rescein dye was used in this test to maintain distinction 

from dye-trace test T103-02. The injection site was 

flushed with 50 gal of water before injection and 450 

gal after injection. The injected dye was recovered at 

Shanghai Spring from about 4 to 29 days after injection, with peak concentrations occurring about 10 to 

14 days after injection. The altitude of Shanghai 

Spring is 295 ft lower than the injection sinkhole. The 

slower rise and fall of peak dye concentrations at the 

spring as compared to dye-trace test T103-01 indicates 

a more complex multi-channel flow path from the 

Pulaski Avenue sinkhole to Shanghai Spring than from

the Forney Army Airport sinkhole to Shanghai Spring. 

The ground-water flow rate along the path carrying the 

greatest dye load is about 0.4 mi per day. Shangai 

Spring is located 4.49 mi northeast of the sinkhole. 

Dye-trace injection and recovery data for T103-05 are 

presented in tables 9 and 10, at the back of this report. 

Relative fluorescence intensity of dye eluted from 

charcoal packets collected at Shanghai Spring for 6 

weeks after injection is shown in figure 12.

Dye-trace test T103-06 (fig. 7) was begun July 

6,1995, and completed in August 1995. The dye, 1 gal 

of Rhodamine WT, was injected into a losing stream in

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 27
700

600

500

400

300

200

100

DYE INJECTED 05-26-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

0 L400

DATE PLACED

1 05-26-95

2 05-30-95

3 06-02-95

4 06-05-95

5 06-09-95

6 06-16-95

7 06-23-95

8 06-30-95

DATE RECOVERED

05-30-95

06-02-95 

06-05-95 

06-09-95 

06-16-95 

06-23-95

06-30-95

07-06-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Figure 12. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-05.

Kurd Hollow near the location of complete flow loss. 

Dye was recovered at Roubidoux Spring at an altitude 

132 ft lower that the Kurd Hollow injection site about 

8 to 15 days after injection. Dye concentrations before 

and after the 8- to 15-day travel time were small as 

compared to the peak concentrations. The groundwater flow rate along the path carrying the greatest dye 

load is estimated at 0.5 to 1 mi per day. No dye was 

recovered from Roubidoux Creek between Roubidoux 

Spring and the point at which flow returns near Ballard 

Hollow, which indicates that the source of water in

Roubidoux Creek downstream from the long dry reach 

(fig. 6) is discharge of shallow ground water from 

nearby upland areas. Surface water that flows into the 

karst terrane beneath Roubidoux Creek near the point 

of total streamflow loss apparently flows beneath the 

lower gaining reach of Roubidoux Creek and discharges at Roubidoux Spring. Dye-trace injection and 

recovery data for Tl03-06 are presented in tables 11 

and 12, at the back of this report. Relative fluorescence 

intensity of dye eluted from charcoal packets collected 

at Roubidoux Spring for 6 weeks after injection is 

shown in figure 13.

28 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
200

DYE INJECTED 07-06-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

DATE RECOVERED

Z 150

COSE

Z

(0

HI

o

LU

HI

cc 

O

HI

oc

100

50

400

DATE PLACED

1 06-30-95

2 07-06-95

3 07-14-95

4 07-21-95

5 07-28-95

6 08-04-95

07-06-95 

07-14-95 

07-21-95

07-28-95

08-04-95 

08-11-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Rgure 13. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Roubidoux Spring during dye-trace test T103-06.

Dye-trace test T103-07 (fig. 7) began July 13, 

1995, and was completed in September 1995. Fluorescein dye was used in this dye-trace test to maintain 

distinction from dye-trace test T103-06, which was in 

progress simultaneously. The dye was injected into a 

large sinkhole at the junction of roads FLW 24 and 

FLW 22 near the eastern edge of the cantonment area. 

A substantial pulse of dye was detected at the pumping 

station spring, located about 0.5 mi north of the Big 

Piney River pumping station, between 1 and 8 days 

after injection. Background concentrations of fluorescein dye were consistently detected at this recovery 

site during the course of the dye-trace test. The background fluorescein could be derived from residential 

areas 1 mi west of the spring. However, the magnitude 

of the dye pulse detected after dye injection far 

exceeded the measured background concentrations. 

Substantial dye concentrations also were detected after 

the peak concentration, indicating that some water is 

flowing through alternate paths or temporarily is 

retained in storage. The ground-water flow rate along 

the path carrying the greatest dye load is less than 1 mi

Dye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 29
per day. Also, about 1 to 8 days after injection, analyses of charcoal packets collected from Shanghai 

Spring indicated the presence of fluorescein dye. The 

dye concentration at Shanghai Spring (fig. 7) was substantial, but was not considered large enough to be 

clearly distinguished from fluctuating concentrations 

of background fluorescent material at the spring. This 

dye-trace test could be repeated with more dye 

injected or a different dye to confirm or deny a direct

hydraulic connection between the injection point and 

Shanghai Spring. Dye-trace injection and recovery 

data for T103-07 are presented in tables 13,14, and 

15, at the back of this report. Relative fluorescence 

intensity of dye eluted from charcoal packets collected 

at the pumping station spring is shown in figure 14; 

relative fluorescence intensity of dye eluted from charcoal packets collected at Shanghai Spring is shown in 

figure 15.

1,000

900

800

i 70°

& S

Z 600

(fl

LU

500

LJJ

co 400

LU 

DC 

O

LU 300

F

200

100

DYE INJECTED 07-13-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

400

DATE PLACED

1 06-30-95

2 07-06-95

3 07-14-95

4 07-21-95

5 07-28-95

6 08-04-95

7 08-11-95

8 08-18-95

9 08-25-95

DATE RECOVERED 

07-06-95 

07-14-95 

07-21-95

07-28-95

08-04-95 

08-11-95 

08-18-95

08-25-95

09-07-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Figure 14. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extrated from activated charcoal packets 

placed in the pumping station spring during dye-trace test T103-07.

30 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
200

150

I

z

LU

o

LU

L1J 

CC 

O

100

50

cc

DYE INJECTED 07-13-95 

RESIDENCE TIME OF CHARCOAL PACKET

400

DATE PLACED

1 06-30-95

2 07-06-95

3 07-14-95

4 07-21-95

5 07-28-95

6 08-04-95

7 08-11-95

8 08-18-95

9 08-25-95

DATE RECOVERED 

07-06-95

07-14-95 

07-21-95

07-28-95

08-04-95 

08-11-95 

08-18-95

08-25-95

09-07-95

500 

EMISSION WAVELENGTH, IN NANOMETERS

600

Figure 15. Spectral analysis of fluorescent material extracted from activated charcoal packets 

placed in Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-07.

Based on historical dye-trace investigations near 

the FLWMR, dye-trace tests conducted as part of this 

study, and ground-water-level measurements made 

during high- and low-base flow conditions, a map (fig. 

16) was constructed showing the probable catchment 

areas of selected springs. The catchment area of the 

combined Falling Spring, Creasy Spring, and Bartlett 

Mill Spring drainage system is based entirely on historical dye traces, primarily conducted by the MDGLS 

near the Gasconade River (fig. 7). The eastern and 

southern boundaries of that area were drawn mostly

based on ground-water divides as determined from 

mapped ground-water levels in figure 6, except that 

part of the southern boundary is drawn south of the 

divide to incorporate results of a dye-trace test in that 

area. The northwestern boundary is drawn coincident 

with a losing reach of the Gasconade River.

The probable catchment area of Shanghai 

Spring lies southwest of the spring. The western 

boundary of that catchment area was drawn to coincide with the regional ground-water divide that 

extends through the FLWMR (fig. 6). Other boundDye-Trace Investigations of Fracture and Conduit Flow 31
92-22>30" 92'07'30"

37'52'30"

37'37'30"

\___IZl

2.5

I

5.0 MILES

Hazelgreen^

i r

0 2.5 5.0 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

PROBABLE CATCHMENT AREA

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

GROUND-WATER DIVIDE

SPRING

SOLID-WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT (SWMU)

STREAM DISCHARGE MEASUREMENT SITE OR GAGING STATION AND IDENTIFIER 

(FROM BOLON, 1953)

Figure 16. Probable catchment areas of selected major springs at and near the Fort Leonard 

Wood Military Reservation.

32 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
aries were drawn to enclose dye-injection points 

known to transmit water to Shanghai Spring. The 

probable catchment area of the pumping station spring 

is based solely on the single dye-trace test to that 

spring and is assumed to share a common boundary 

with the catchment area of Shanghai Spring. The probable catchment area of Miller Spring extends west of 

the spring to the regional ground-water divide and is 

assumed to have a common boundary with the catchment area of Shanghai Spring. The remainder of that 

area is drawn to encompass dye-injection points 

known to transmit water to Miller Spring.

SURFACE-WATER HYDROLOGY

Surface-water drainage within the FLWMR is 

by small tributary streams and dry washes that direct 

water from a central topographic ridge that divides the 

eastern and western parts of the FLWMR. Drainage 

systems in the eastern one-half of the FLWMR discharge water into the Big Piney River, which flows 

northward near the eastern boundary of the FLWMR 

and discharges into the Gasconade River. Drainage 

systems in the western one-half of the FLWMR discharge water into Roubidoux Creek, which flows 

northward near the western boundary of the FLWMR 

and discharges water into the Gasconade River. Several large manmade ponds and lakes that have been 

built on the FLWMR are located in a 3-mi wide band 

that extends east-west across the FLWMR immediately south of Forney Army Airport. Most of these 

impoundments were constructed near the central 

dividing ridge in the headwater areas of small ephemeral streams. At least one lake was built over an active 

sinkhole that subsequently collapsed.

The Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek are 

the two primary discharge areas for precipitation that 

percolates through the unsaturated zone and recharges 

the water table in the FLWMR. Previous seepage-run 

measurements, a series of stream discharge measurements made along a stream reach during a short time 

to identify where gains and losses in flow occur, were 

conducted on these streams and the Gasconade River 

northwest of the FLWMR. The measurements provided data on changes in the volumetric rate of streamflow along each stream channel. These flow-rate 

changes were used to estimate the magnitude and distribution of ground-water discharge to each stream 

and, thus, identify gaining and losing stream reaches

to quantify the degree of ground- and surface-water 

interaction.

The USGS conducted a low-flow seepage run 

on the Big Piney River, September 17 and 18,1953, 

and determined the recurrence interval of the measured streamflow. The recurrence interval is the average interval (in years) between occurrences of 

discharge less than that measured. The discharge was 

determined at six sites on the mainstem of the Big 

Piney River from where flow began in Texas County 

(about 10 mi south of the FLWMR) to its mouth in 

Pulaski County. The discharge of two tributary 

streams also was measured. The following streamflow 

discharge and recurrence intervals were determined 

upstream from Houston (25 mi southeast of the 

FLWMR), 12 ft3/s (cubic feet per second) discharge, 

25-year recurrence interval; middle reaches (from 

Houston to Ross Bridge; fig. 17), 106 ft3/s, 5 years; 

and lower reaches (from Ross Bridge to mouth), 161 

ft3/s, 2 years (Skelton, 1976). The results of this seepage run indicate that the discharge generally increased 

downstream.

A seepage run also was conducted on the Roubidoux Creek by the USGS on July 13,1971 (Skelton, 

1976, fig. 7). The discharge was determined at 10 sites 

along the mainstem of Roubidoux Creek from its 

headwaters in Texas County to its mouth in Pulaski 

County. The three measurements made on Roubidoux 

Creek mainstem in Texas County show the discharge 

increases downstream, the entire flow of the creek is 

lost in Pulaski County, and flow begins again in the 

lower reach of the creek in the northern part of the 

FLWMR (fig. 6). The recurrence interval for the 10 

ft3/s discharge measured near the mouth of Roubidoux 

Creek was determined to be 2 years.

During September 17 and 18,1953, a low-flow 

seepage run was conducted by the USGS on the Gasconade River between the USGS gaging stations at 

Hazelgreen and Waynesville (fig. 16; Bolon, 1953). 

The most downstream part of this reach receives water 

from springs that collect water from a catchment area 

northwest of the FLWMR (fig. 16). The seepage-run 

data indicated that flow diminished from 32.2 to 3.9 o

ft /s between Tie Ford and Lundstrum Ford, with most 

of the flow being lost between Mokane Bridge and 

Ozark Spring (Bolon, 1953). Substantial flow was 

observed entering a sinkhole at the west side of the 

Gasconade River immediately north of the bridge 

approach at Ozark Spring. Additional measurements 

made at a later date indicate the river consistently

Surface-Water Hydrology 33
92'15' 92'07130"

37'45'

3T3T30-

EXPLANATION 

...................... FORT LEONARD WOOD MIUTARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

.36.6 STREAM DISCHARGE MEASUREMENT-Number is flow rate, in cubic feet per second. 

Selected tributary discharge measurements larger than 0.05 cubic foot per second 

are shown

Figure 17. Stream discharge measurements for the high-base flow seepage run made on the Big 

Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and selected small tributary streams in December 1994 at and near 

the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

34 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
loses flow (from 18 to 30 ft3/s) in this reach, regardless 

of river stage. Other measurements made during the 

1953 seepage run indicated that within the reach of the 

Gasconade River between the mouth of Collie Hollow 

to and including Bartlett Mill Spring (0.75 river mi 

reach) the flow increased in the Gasconade River from 

4.3 to 69.8 ft3/s. Most of this increase in flow was 

observed boiling up through the gravel in the streambed and adjacent to the channel. Flow also was 

contributed by Creasy, Falling, and Bartlett Mill 

Springs and from other unnamed springs. The temperature of the water from the gravel boils was about 5 °F 

warmer than the water from the other springs, indicating that the water from the gravel boils had not traveled sufficiently underground to assume low groundwater temperatures (Bolon, 1953).

Three sets of seepage-run measurements were 

conducted on the Big Piney River, and two sets of 

seepage-run measurements were conducted on Roubidoux Creek during this investigation. The first two 

seepage runs on the Big Piney River were made during 

high-base flow conditions and the third during lowbase flow conditions. The first Roubidoux Creek seepage run was made during high-base flow conditions; 

the second was during low-base flow conditions. Measurements made during high-base and low-base flow 

conditions are necessary to assess seasonal variations 

in the magnitude of ground-water discharge to 

streams. Continual stream-stage data were also collected at a gaging station on the Big Piney River at 

Ross Bridge (fig. 17).

Springs are present along the Big Piney River 

near the eastern border of the FLWMR (fig. 3) and, to 

a much lesser extent, along Roubidoux Creek near the 

western border of the FLWMR. Some of the larger 

springs are Shanghai Spring, Ousley Spring, Stone 

Mill Spring, and Miller Spring in the Big Piney River 

Basin and Roubidoux Spring in the Roubidoux Creek 

Basin. Several smaller perennial and wet-weather 

springs discharge from solution-enlarged bedrock contacts and fractures throughout the FLWMR. Discharge 

rates of many of these springs were measured as part 

of the seepage-run measurements.

Methodology

Generally, seepage runs are designed to be made 

during periods of minimum streamflow and minimal 

daily streamflow fluctuations (base flow periods). During these periods, streams are sustained by ground

water and spring discharge, not by surface runoff. 

These base flow periods typically occur in late summer or fall. However, a seepage run made in the winter 

or spring when base flows are larger (high-base flow) 

can supply valuable information in stream reaches of 

extreme water loss, such as Roubidoux Creek. The 

series of discharge measurements in the seepage run 

normally is designed to be made in consecutive downstream order. During both seepage runs on Roubidoux 

Creek, this procedure could not be used because of 

accessibility restrictions. Where a firing range overlapped a part of Roubidoux Creek, access to that part 

of Roubidoux Creek was denied when that range was 

being used on a particular day. This interruption in the 

normal procedure caused data gaps along selected 

stream reaches that were filled as the stream reach 

could be accessed.

During the seepage-run measurements, access 

to measuring sections on the Big Piney River was primarily gained by boat; access to sections on Roubidoux Creek was by wading. Wading measurements 

were made at selected locations along both streams 

and at the mouths of inflowing tributaries. Seepagerun measurements were made at locations where 

stream channel morphology and velocity were conducive to accurate discharge measurements. Discharge 

was measured using either a standard AA or pygmy 

current meter, depending on stream velocity and 

depth. The methods used to make discharge measurements and the criteria used to determine the type of 

current meter applicable to the measuring section are 

described by Rantz and others (1982). The accuracy of 

the measurements were rated according to stream 

channel conditions and uniformity of flow. The rated 

measurement accuracy is subjective and defined as 

follows: "good" means that the actual discharge is 

thought to be within 5 percent of the measured discharge, "fair" is 5 to 8 percent; and "poor" is more 

than 8 percent. Where channel conditions were not 

adequate for making discharge measurements, either 

because of insufficient depths or small flow velocities, 

discharge was estimated. However, all measurements 

were not given a rating. The error at the sites where 

flow is estimated may exceed 8 percent.

Generally, check measurements were made each 

day at one or more of the measuring sections. This 

check measurement consisted of a streamflow measurement made by two different people at the same 

measuring section and was used as a quality-control 

procedure. The two measurements were expected to be

Surface-Water Hydrology 35
within the degree of accuracy defined by the rated 

measuring conditions.

Specific conductance and temperature of the 

water were typically measured at the discharge measurement site. Specific conductance values were measured using a portable conductivity meter with 

temperature compensation designed to read in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 °C (degrees Celsius). 

Water temperature was measured with a thermistor to 

the nearest 0.1 °C.

During the winter and spring when high-base 

flow conditions occur, sustained periods of no precipitation rarely occur. For this reason, the seepage runs 

were started after precipitation had occurred and sufficient time had elapsed for small tributary streams to 

stop flowing. However, the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek still had substantial variations in daily 

streamflow during the December 1994 and February 

1995 high-base flow seepage runs. These conditions 

probably showed more variability than a normal base 

flow period; however, the series of discharge measurements were made, and collectively they will be 

referred to as high-base flow seepage runs.

To establish the daily flow rate variation, a policy was established that the last section measured each 

day would be the first section measured at the beginning of the following day. This procedure was not followed during the December 1994 seepage run on the 

Big Piney River. Because of this fact and quality-control concerns, a second high-base flow seepage run 

was conducted on the river in February 1995.

During the data analysis of these seepage runs, 

adjustments were made to the measured discharge 

along the mainstem of both the Big Piney River and 

Roubidoux Creek. The first adjustment removed the 

quantity of flow contributed to the mainstem of the 

stream by tributaries and springs. This "inflow adjustment" was made to each discharge measurement on 

the mainstem by first calculating the cumulative discharge of all tributaries and springs that entered the 

mainstem upstream of the site where the discharge 

measurement was made. The cumulative total from 

tributary and spring inflow was then subtracted from 

the discharge measurement. This adjustment was 

made to remove the increase in flow along the mainstem from sources that were visibly contributing 

water. Therefore, any net increase in discharge along 

the stream reach after this adjustment was applied 

would be a result of the diffuse ground-water inflow

along the streambed and not surface water or spring 

inflow.

A second adjustment, hereafter referred to as the 

"common-base adjustment," was made to the measured discharges along the mainstem of both the Big 

Piney River and Roubidoux Creek during the three 

high-base flow seepage runs. The common-base 

adjustment was applied primarily to remove some of 

the substantial daily flow rate variation that was occurring in these streams during the high-base flow conditions. This adjustment involved applying a shift to 

each set of daily discharge measurements, so that discharge measurements made on consecutive days could 

be brought to a common base. Each set of discharge 

measurements consists of all the mainstem discharge 

measurements made on a specific day. The applied 

shift was determined by the difference in the consecutive discharge measurements that were made at the 

same measuring section at the end of the day and at the 

start of the following day. For example, rainfall on 

February 14 and 15 caused the discharge measured at 

river mile 23.68 to change from 408 ft3/s on February 

14 to 501 ft3/s when the interrupted seepage run was 

restarted on February 17. Because flow in the stream

(^

increased 93 ft /s from propagation of water from 

areas upstream of the FLWMR, this amount was subtracted from all the measurements made on February 

17 to bring those measurements to the same base as 

measurements made previously.

The procedure of measuring the discharge at the 

same section at the end of the day and again at the start 

of the following day was not followed during the 

December 1994 seepage run on the Big Piney River. 

Therefore, the applied common-base adjustment was 

determined using the difference in daily mean discharge as recorded at the gaging station at Ross 

Bridge. The decrease in daily mean flow in the Big 

Piney River was determined to be 88 ft3/s at the gaging station for the period during the seepage run. This 

variation was prorated and then subtracted from the 

discharge measurements made on each corresponding 

day. This correction considerably reduced the fluctuation of the measurements; however, the data scatter 

was still large compared to the small variations 

expected from ground-water inflow.

36 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-05
High-Base Flow Stream and Spring 

Discharge

The first high-base flow seepage run (table 16, 

at the back of this report; fig. 17) on the mainstem of 

the Big Piney River was made during December 12 to 

14,1994. Between November 21 and December 8, 

1994,0.23 in. of rainfall was recorded at Waynesville 

(fig. 18); on December 9,1994,0.21 in. of rainfall was 

recorded (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1994). Runoff and increased ground-water 

inflow to streams and springs caused river conditions 

to change 2 days before the scheduled start of the 

seepage run; however, measurements were continued 

as scheduled. Discharge was measured at 16 locations 

in the mainstem of the Big Piney River along a 38- 

river mi reach from an access locally known as Six 

Mile Crossing to the mouth of the river. A substantial 

part of this river reach borders or is interior to the 

FLWMR. Discharge also was measured or estimated 

at the mouths of 81 stream and spring tributaries of 

Big Piney River (58 of which had no flow). Four 

springs (Shanghai Spring, Ousley Spring, Stone Mill 

Spring, and Miller Spring) with substantial flow were 

identified, and their discharge was measured. Four 

tributary streams that drain the FLWMR were investigated in more detail. Discharge measurements were 

made in these four streams from the stream mouths at 

Big Piney River to the point where flow began in the 

headwater areas.

Because of substantial daily streamflow fluctuations and procedural and quality-control concerns during the first seepage run, a second high-base flow 

seepage run was conducted on the Big Piney River 

between February 13 to 22,1995 (table 17, at the back 

of this report; fig. 18). During the interval from the 

planning stage to the start of this second seepage run, 

streamflow and climatological conditions were favorable. However, between February 14 and 15,1995, a 

total of 0.30 in. of rainfall was recorded at the 

FLWMR. The remainder of the seepage run was postponed on February 15,1995, and began again on February 17,1995. Because daily streamflow fluctuations 

were still considered to be extreme, further work was 

postponed until February 20. During this seepage run 

the same 38-river mi reach of Big Piney River was 

measured as in the first seepage run. During this seepage run, 31 discharge measurements were made at 22 

locations on the mainstem of Big Piney River. Discharge also was determined at the mouths of 41 stream 

and spring tributaries (15 of which had no flow).

A high-base flow seepage run (table 16; fig. 17) 

also was made on Roubidoux Creek from December 

12 to 14,1994. Discharge was determined at 58 locations (16 of which had no flow) along a 34 river mi 

reach of Roubidoux Creek from the Missouri Highway 

17 bridge to the mouth. Flow also was determined at 

the mouth of 40 stream and spring tributaries of Roubidoux Creek (27 of which had no flow). A reach of 

Roubidoux Creek from the Missouri Highway 17 

bridge to 2 river mi downstream was remeasured on 

December 15,1994, because the percentage of difference between check measurements made along this 

reach during the seepage run were outside acceptable 

limits. These seepage-run data also were analyzed to 

determine the diffuse ground-water inflow component 

by applying the inflow adjustment, and the commonbase adjustment was applied to adjust the measurements of each succeeding day. The common-base 

adjustment primarily corrected the data for small flow 

changes caused by propagation of water from areas 

upstream of the FLWMR and the small differences 

caused by different individuals measuring separate 

reaches of the same stream.

Low-Base Flow Stream and Spring 

Discharge

Stream discharge measurements (table 18, at the 

back of this report; fig. 19) also were made on the 

same 38-river mi reach of the Big Piney River during 

low-base flow conditions from September 18 to 25, 

1995. Although rainfall occurred before the start of 

and during the seepage run, antecedent conditions 

were excessively dry and there was little runoff. 

Streamflow fluctuations were minimal during this 

seepage run even though 0.66 in. of rainfall was 

recorded at the FLWMR on September 19,1995. The 

river reach measured on September 19 was reexamined the next day to verify that effects of the rainfall 

on streamflow were minimal. Twenty-five low-flow 

discharge measurements were made on the Big Piney 

River mainstem at 19 locations. Discharge also was 

determined at the mouth of 57 stream and spring tributaries (35 of which had no flow). Because of the sustained dry weather before the measurements and the 

minimal effect of the September 19th rainfall, the only 

adjustments made to this streamflow data were the 

subtraction of tributary inflows from mainstem measurements (inflow adjustment).

Low-Base Flow Stream and Spring Discharge 37
92*15' 92*07*30"

3T3T3Qm 

.382

EXPLANATION 

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

STREAM DISCHARGE MEASUREMENT-Number is flow rate, in cubic feet per second. 

Selected tributary discharge measurements larger than 0.05 cubic foot per second 

are shown

Figure 18. Stream discharge measurements for the high-base flow seepage run made on the Big 

Rney River in February 1995 at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

38 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
92*15' WOT-SO" 92'

37'45'

37'37'30"

v -,

EXPLANATION 

----------- FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY

STREAM DISCHARGE MEASUREMENT-Number is flow rate, in cubic feet per second. 

Selected tributary discharge measurements larger than 0.05 cubic foot per second 

are shown

Figure 19. Stream discharge measurements for the low-base flow seepage run made on the Big 

Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and selected small tributary streams in September 1995 at and near 

the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

Low-Base Flow Stream and Spring Discharge 39
A low-flow seepage run was conducted on Roubidoux Creek from September 5 to 13,1995, along the 

same 34 river mi reach that was investigated during 

the high-base flow seepage run (table 18; fig. 19). 

Twenty-nine discharge measurements were made (3 

with no flow) at 25 different locations. Discharge also 

was determined at the mouth of 24 stream and spring 

tributaries (15 of which had no flow). Only the inflow 

adjustment was required to analyze this seepage-run 

data, considering the lack of rainfall before and during 

the measurements.

Ground-Water Discharge to Streams

The result of the seepage runs indicates a substantial increase in stream discharge in the mainstem 

of the Big Piney River from Six Mile Crossing to the 

mouth of the river. Much of this increased flow was 

caused by the inflow of tributaries and springs. To differentiate between the amount of flow contributed by 

inflow from tributaries and springs and that contributed by diffuse ground-water inflow, the inflow adjustment was applied. The result represents the effects of 

surface- and ground-water interaction. The adjusted 

discharge data were plotted as a function of the location of the measurement from the mouth of the stream 

(fig. 20).

Analyses of the general trend of stream discharge data collected on the Big Piney River during 

February 1995 at high-base flow and September 1995 

at low-base flow (fig. 20) indicate that the river, with 

respect to the ground-water system, loses water from 

about 30 to 38 river mi upstream from the mouth, 

gains water from about 18 to 30 river mi upstream 

from the mouth, and loses water from about 18 river 

mi upstream from the mouth to near the mouth. All 

data was adjusted for tributary and spring inflow and 

the high-base flow data collected in December 1994 

and February 1995 was adjusted for daily flow rate 

variation. However, the large uncertainty in the 

streamflow measurements (estimated at 5 to about 10 

percent) and the relatively small magnitude of flow 

changes caused by surface- and ground-water interaction makes it difficult to state any conclusion with certainty. The December 1994 adjusted data contain too 

much scatter to provide even a qualitative estimate of 

the location of losing or gaining stream reaches.

An analysis of stream discharge data collected 

on Roubidoux Creek during high- and low-base flow 

conditions as adjusted for tributary and spring inflow

and adjusted to a common base during high-base flow 

conditions (fig. 20) indicates Roubidoux Creek to be a 

markedly different type of stream from the Big Piney 

River. Stream discharge measurements indicate that 

Roubidoux Creek gains water through its streambed 

from 28 to about 34 river mi upstream from the mouth. 

During high-base flow conditions, the entire flow of 

Roubidoux Creek is lost from about 22 to about 28 

river mi upstream from the mouth, with most of the 

loss occurring within about a 1-mi reach. During lowbase flow conditions, the entire flow is lost 24 river mi 

upstream from the mouth, or about 2 river mi 

upstream from the point of flow loss during high-base 

flow conditions. This flow loss occurs at and is associated with the intersection of Roubidoux Creek, the 

Countyline Fault, and Kurd Hollow Fault (Harrison 

and others, 1996; fig. 3). Kurd Hollow Fault also 

crosses Kurd Hollow near where Kurd Hollow Stream 

loses its entire flow. Measurements made on the lower 

reach of Roubidoux Creek (from 1 to 8 river mi 

upstream from the mouth) indicate that essentially all 

flow in this reach of the creek is derived from tributary 

or spring inflow.

During all but the highest flow conditions 

caused by large amounts of runoff, Roubidoux Creek 

is dry throughout the nearly 7 to 8 river mi reach identified by shading on figures 5 and 6. Ground-water levels along this reach of Roubidoux Creek typically are 

20 to 30 ft below the streambed, and the creek is a subterranean trough-shaped feature in the water-table surface. Part of the explanation for this situation is that, in 

this reach, the Roubidoux Creek stream channel contains thick gravel deposits and may be controlled by 

large hydraulically connected fractures. Although 

some ground water does flow toward Roubidoux 

Creek from the central part of the FLWMR along this 

reach (fig. 5), the diversion of large quantities of 

ground water from the Roubidoux Creek Basin to the 

Big Piney River by karst features substantially 

decreases available ground-water discharge and, therefore, streamflow in Roubidoux Creek. Row in Roubidoux Creek resumes about 2 river mi before the stream 

channel crosses the northern boundary of the 

FLWMR.

WATER QUALITY

Water-quality samples were collected from 

selected domestic and public-supply wells, springs, 

the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and selected

40 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-85
500

400

§ 300 

O

CO

ccffi

111 ffi

O

5 200

O

z

UJ

I

Q

5 100

DECEMBER 1994 

FEBRUARY 1995 

SEPTEMBER 1995

VERTICAL ERROR BAR 

Represents a plus or minus 

5 percent range of 

uncertainty in the discharge 

measurement

CO

100

ROUBIDOUX CREEK DECEMBER 1994 

O SEPTEMBER 1995

10 20 30

DISTANCE, IN MILES FROM MOUTH OF STREAM

40 50

Figure 20. Variations in stream discharge (corrected for tributary and spring inflow and for daily flow 

rate variation) along the Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek.

Water Quality 41
tributaries draining the FLWMR to determine baseline 

water-quality conditions. Sample locations generally 

were chosen to represent regional water sources and 

not effects from any specific source area or site. 

Depending on the location, water samples were analyzed for a comprehensive suite of inorganic and 

organic constituents, including dissolved and total 

major cations, anions, and trace elements, total cyanide (CNt), nutrients, total organic carbon (TOC), a 

suite of 73 VOCs, semivolatile organic compounds or 

semivolatile organic compound scan by gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (GC-FID), 

selected pesticides, chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides, 

and XACs. Streambed sediment samples were analyzed for grain size, concentrations of major and trace 

inorganic constituents, chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides, chlorinated organic compounds, XACs, and 

dioxins and furans. Concentrations of major and trace 

inorganic constituents generally refer to the dissolved 

phase unless noted otherwise.

Methodology

Water-quality samples were collected using 

modifications of standard USGS methods (Guy and 

Norman, 1970; Wood, 1976; Shelton, 1994). Water 

samples from domestic and public-supply wells were 

collected from the tap nearest the wellhead. Interviews 

with domestic well owners were conducted to determine the location of water softeners or pressure tanks 

and recent water use. All wells were purged to remove 

stagnant water in the well bore, pump, and pipes 

before sampling. Domestic wells were purged by 

allowing water to flow freely for a minimum of 30 

minutes. Public-supply wells were sampled by allowing the pump to run for a minimum of 20 minutes. 

During purging, specific conductance, pH, and water 

temperature were monitored in a closed beaker; waterquality samples were not collected until these measurements had stabilized. Stabilization criteria generally were as follows: specific conductance (successive 

measurements within 2 percent), pH (successive measurements within 0.02 pH unit), and temperature (successive measurements within 0.5 °C). Samples for 

analyses of total inorganic and organic constituents 

were collected in plastic or baked-glass bottles directly 

from the tap. Samples for the determination of VOCs 

were collected in 40 rnL (milliliter) amber glass vials 

fitted with a Teflon-lined septum cap.

All sample preservation and filtering was done 

at the site immediately after sample collection. Samples for dissolved inorganic constituent analyses were 

filtered through a 0.45 pm (micrometer) nominal poresize disposable capsule filter using a peristaltic pump 

as the pressure source. Samples for the determination 

of dissolved organic constituents were filtered using a 

142-mm (millimeter) diameter 1.0 pm pore-size baked 

glass fiber filter placed in an aluminum filter holder. A 

fluid metering pump was used as the pressure source. 

Corrugated Teflon tubing was used to attach the pump 

to the filter assembly.

Depth-integrated water samples were collected 

from the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, Miller 

Spring, Shanghai Spring, and Roubidoux Spring using 

a hand-held USGS DH-81 isokinetic Teflon sampler 

according to the methods described in Edwards and 

Glysson (1988) and Ward and Hair (1990). A minimum of 10 individual subsamples were collected at 

equal widths across the stream. Subsamples were 

composited in 3-L Teflon containers. Samples for 

analyses of VOCs were collected directly from the 

spring or stream by filling and capping the bottles 

beneath the water surface near the center of flow.

Determinations of specific conductance, pH, 

temperature, dissolved oxygen concentration, and total 

alkalinity were made at the sampling site. Specific 

conductance, temperature, and concentrations of dissolved oxygen were determined using portable meters 

and placing probes near the center of flow. The pH was 

measured by immersing the pH probe in a closed beaker containing water collected from the subsample 

nearest the center of flow. Samples from smaller 

springs and tributaries were collected by filling sample 

bottles or compositing containers directly from the 

center of flow.

All water-quality, sediment-sampling, and support equipment (for example, compositing containers, 

churn splitter, cone splitter, peristaltic pump hose, and 

pump hoses) were thoroughly cleaned before initial 

use and between each onsite use. The general cleaning 

protocol included an initial rinse with a non-phosphate 

detergent, followed by successive rinses in tap water, 

dilute acid, deionized water, methanol (organic-compound sampling only), and organic-free deionized 

water (organic-compound sampling only). In addition, 

samplers, pumps, and hoses were pre-rinsed with 

ambient water before sample collection and processing. The effectiveness of the cleaning procedures was 

monitored by the use of routine equipment blanks. In

42 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
addition to equipment blanks, a number of VOC trip 

blanks (containing organic-free deionized water) were 

carried to the sampling sites, preserved, and shipped in 

sample coolers to verify contaminants were not introduced into VOC samples during sample handling or 

storage.

The specific conductance of water samples was 

measured using a portable conductance meter with 

temperature compensation designed to express values 

in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 °C. The meter 

was calibrated before each measurement using standards prepared by the USGS water-quality laboratory 

in Ocala, Florida. Temperature was measured to the 

nearest 0.1 °C using a thermistor attached to the conductance meter. The pH was measured using a portable pH meter calibrated with standard buffers 

bracketing the expected sample pH before each measurement. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were 

determined using a portable dissolved oxygen meter. 

Alkalinity was determined by using incremental titration of 0.16 normal (N) standardized sulfuric acid to 

25 mL of sample past the carbonate-bicarbonate 

inflection point (approximately pH 8.3) and the bicarbonate-carbonic acid inflection point (approximately 

pH 4.5). Concentrations of carbonate (CO3), bicarbonate (HCO3), and CO3 alkalinity were later computed 

using a computer program to integrate the rate of pH 

change to the equivalence of acid added.

To reduce or prevent the loss of ions or organic 

compounds from water samples, a variety of sample 

preservation treatments were used. When possible, filtering and adding chemical treatments to environmental samples was done inside a water-quality van to 

reduce the potential for contamination by airborne particulates. Samples to be analyzed for dissolved or total 

major cations and trace elements were acidified to a 

pH less than 2 using concentrated trace-metal-grade 

nitric acid (HNO3). Samples for the determination of 

CNt were preserved using 10 M (molar) sodium 

hydroxide to a pH greater than 10 and chilled to 4 °C. 

A HNO3-potassium dichromate solution was used to 

preserve samples for the analyses of total mercury 

(Hgt). Samples for nutrient analysis were acidified to a 

pH less than 2 using concentrated sulfuric acid 

(H2SO4) and chilled to 4 °C. A total of four vials were 

filled for each VOC sample; two vials were preserved 

with organic-free hydrochloric acid (HC1) and two 

vials were unacidified. All VOC vials were placed in a 

dedicated cooler and chilled to 4 °C. Samples for laboratory analysis or scan by GC-FID of semivolatile

organic compounds were chilled to 4 °C. Pesticide 

samples were filtered onsite and chilled to 4 °C for 

transport to the USGS laboratory in Rolla, Missouri, 

where they were extracted using a C-18 extraction cartridge. The cartridges were chilled and shipped to the 

USGS water-quality laboratory in Arvada, Colorado, 

where they were reextracted and analyzed. Samples 

for the determination of XACs were placed in bakedglass bottles and chilled to 4 °C for transport to the 

laboratory. Between 30 and 50 subsamples were collected from the top 2 cm (centimeters) of the streambed sediment in a stainless steel container for 

compositing. Subsamples for grain size and analysis 

of inorganic constituents were placed in sealed ziplock bags. Subsamples for the determination of 

organic compounds were placed in baked wide-mouth 

glass jars and chilled to 4 °C. All samples were 

shipped overnight and analyzed within guidelines 

established in the Sampling and Analysis Plan on file 

at the USGS in Rolla, Missouri.

Concentrations of most dissolved major cations 

and trace elements, except sodium (Na), total sodium 

(Nat), potassium (K), total antimony (Sbt), total 

arsenic (Ast), Hgt, total selenium (Set), and total thallium (Tlt), in water samples were determined by using 

inductively coupled liquid plasma (ICP). Concentrations of Na, N^, an(^ K were measured using atomic 

adsorption (AA). Concentrations of Sbt, Ast, and Set 

were determined using AA with graphite furnace or 

hydride generation. Total mercury was determined by 

cold vapor. Concentrations of the common ions chloride (Cl), sulfate (804), and nutrients, such as total 

nitrite plus nitrate (NO2+NO3), total nitrite (NO2), and 

total ammonia (NH3), were determined by colorimetry, and concentrations of fluoride (F) were determined 

by ion-specific electrode. A modification of Method 

524.2 (Eichelberger and others, 1992) was used to 

determine concentrations of VOCs in water. Semivolatile organic compounds were analyzed by Method 

625 (Code of Federal Regulations, 1994). Concentrations of 47 selected pesticides in water were determined using a USGS method described in Zaugg and 

others (1995). The minimum reporting levels for this 

method ranged from 0.001 to 0.018 jig/L. Concentrations of XACs in water were determined by gas chromatography using a electron capture detector 

described in Schumacher and others (1996).

Concentrations of semivolatile organic compounds in sediment were determined using modifications to methods described in SW 846 (U. S. EnvironMethodology 43
mental Protection Agency, 1986d). Concentrations of 

XACs in sediment were determined using Method 

8330 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990). 

A list of constituents and method reporting levels for 

inorganic and organic constituents in water and sediment samples and USERA drinking water maximum 

contaminant levels (MCL) are given in table 19, at the 

back of this report.

Quality Assurance

An extensive quality assurance (QA) program 

has been implemented by the USGS to ensure the production of scientifically accurate data of known and 

documented quality. The effectiveness of a QA program is measured by the quality of data generated. 

Data quality is judged in terms of its accuracy, precision, completeness, representativeness, and comparability. A field sampling plan (FSP) and qualityassurance project plan (QAPP) were developed to 

describe, in detail, the methods and procedures used 

by the USGS for the collection, preservation, shipping, and analysis of project environmental samples to 

ensure that appropriate levels of QA and quality control (QC) were achieved (Sampling and Analysis Plan 

on file at the USGS in Rolla, Missouri). The QA program was developed to ensure and validate that inconsistencies in field protocols, the field protocols 

themselves, or analytical protocols do not introduce 

error into the data-collection process. Onsite QC 

checks were introduced into the sample collection procedures to minimize (and identify if it occurred) the 

potential for interference or introduction of contaminants during sample collection, storage, transport, and 

equipment decontamination. Laboratory QC checks 

were implemented to ensure the accuracy of the analytical data and minimize, or document the occurrence 

of, laboratory contamination and variability in analytical results.

Onsite quality checks included the proper calibration of all instruments using standard solutions, the 

collection of blank and duplicate samples, and adherence to standard sample collection protocols or documentation of variations. The most common error 

attributable to onsite procedures is contamination of 

the sample matrix. Two general forms of contamination occur: systematic and erratic. The goal of the field 

QA program is to decrease the systematic component 

and provide evidence of the erratic component by:

 Calibrating instruments daily

 Performing duplicate onsite measurements

 Collecting and analyzing equipment blanks

 Collecting and analyzing duplicate samples

 Collecting trip blanks for VOC

Of the 80 water-quality samples collected during the regional assessment of the FLWMR, 8 (10 percent) were duplicate samples. Eight (10 percent) 

equipment blanks and seven additional VOC trip 

blanks were collected. Duplicate samples were analyzed for all constituents determined in the original 

sample. Equipment blanks were analyzed for physical 

properties and dissolved and total inorganic constituents, VOCs, semivolatile organic compounds, selected 

pesticides, and XACs. The additional VOC trip blanks 

were analyzed only for VOCs. A summary of the relative percent difference (RPD) for the various physical 

properties and inorganic constituents between duplicate and the original samples is given in table 20, at 

the back of this report. The median and maximum values detected in the equipment blank samples also are 

listed in table 20.

Values of physical properties and concentrations 

of constituents in duplicate samples were similar to 

those in the original samples. To assess the general 

comparability of duplicate samples to original samples, a median RPD was calculated for each physical 

property or inorganic chemical constituent. The 

median RPD was derived by calculating the percent 

difference between each pair of sample and duplicate 

values and computing a median of those eight values. 

Generally, the RPD between the duplicate and original 

sample values was less than 5 percent (table 20). The 

largest median RPD between duplicate and original 

samples was for total phosphorus (Pt), boron (B), and 

iron (Fe) with median RPD values of 28, 33, and 13 

percent (table 20). The concentrations of these constituents in the samples and duplicates were at or near the 

reporting levels, where large variations can be 

expected to occur.

Values of physical properties and concentrations 

of inorganic constituents in the equipment blank samples generally were small as compared to concentrations detected in water samples. Maximum concentrations of major constituents were less than 1 mg/L, and 

maximum concentrations of trace elements were near 

the reporting levels except for B (20 |ig/L), Fe (7 

jig/L), total iron (Fet, 10 pg/L), Pb (50 |ig/L), zinc 

(Zn, 8 |ig/L), and total zinc (Znt, 4 |ig/L). Although 

the maximum concentrations of these constituents

44 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
approached concentrations detected in some of the 

environmental samples, the median concentrations in 

the blanks were near or less than the reporting levels.

A review of the analytical data for inorganic 

constituents in ground-water (table 21, at the back of 

this report), spring (table 22, at the back of this report), 

and surface-water (table 23, at the back of this report) 

samples indicated that concentrations of calcium (Ca), 

barium (Ba), and Pb were commonly larger than concentrations of total calcium (Cat), total barium (Ba^, 

and total lead (Pbt). Dissolved inorganic constituents 

were analyzed at the USGS laboratory in Arvada, Colorado, using a simultaneous scanning vertical torch 

ICP, whereas total inorganic constituents were analyzed at the USGS laboratory in Ocala, Florida, using 

a total digestion (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Method 200.7) and a sequential scanning 

inclined torch ICP. Except for Pb, the differences are 

small as compared to the actual concentrations of Ca, 

Ba, C^, and B^ in the water samples and are not significant. The most probable explanation is a slight 

(about 5 percent) analytical bias between the methods 

used at the two laboratories.

Because the solubility of Pb in water at nearneutral pH values is less than 1 jug/L, reported values 

of Pb in the tens of micrograms per liter are suspect. 

The maximum Pb concentration (50 jug/L) detected in 

the blank samples (table 20) indicates the determination of Pb in water samples in this study may be unreliable. A possible source of the anomalous Pb 

concentrations is contamination during sample collection and preservation. Samples for Pb and Pbt are 

treated identically except samples for Pb determination are pumped through a disposable capsule filter. 

Filter contamination is possible; however, all filter lots 

are quality checked for metal contamination by the 

USGS laboratory in Ocala, Florida, prior to use. Several water samples from the FLWMR also had 

reported Pb concentrations substantially larger than 

the reporting level of 10 jug/L and significantly larger 

than reported concentrations for Pbt. Contamination 

during sampling is possible; however, contamination 

also would be expected to affect Pbt concentration. 

The small Pbt concentration indicates contamination is 

unlikely. The QA data and comparison of Pb and Pbt 

in water samples indicates that concentrations of Pb 

determined by vertical torch ICP probably are less 

reliable than those determined by inclined torch ICP.

None of the blank samples contained detectable 

concentrations of semivolatile organic compounds,

selected pesticides, or XACs; however, one VOC 

blank contained a chloromethane concentration of 1.8 

jiig/L (table 24, at the back of this report). In addition, 

a comparison of acidified and unacidified VOC water 

samples indicated the trihalomethane (THM) compounds, chloromethane, and trichloromethane were 

present only in the acidified samples. A thorough 

review of the QA samples and blanks indicates that 

chloromethane and trichloromethane were present as 

contaminants in the HC1 used to preserve VOC samples collected between January and July 1995. Water 

samples that contained only chloromethane or trichloromethane without other VOCs are suspect and probably indicate contamination from the preservative. 

Interferences from the contaminated acid resulted in 

the reporting levels for several THM in several samples being raised from 0.02 to 0.4 |Lig/L. These samples 

are identified in table 24. After the contamination was 

discovered, fresh HC1 was used to preserve samples 

collected after August 1,1995.

Regional Ground-Water Quality

The USGS collected 34 (includes 2 duplicates) 

samples from 23 wells at the FLWMR during 1995 

(fig. 21). Analytical data for these samples are given in 

table 21. All wells except wells dw 027, dw 061, and 

dw 064 were sampled during high-base flow conditions between February and May 1995. Samples were 

collected for the determination of dissolved and total 

inorganic constituents, total nutrients, VOCs, semivolatile organic compounds, selected pesticides, and 

XACs. To determine if ground-water quality varied 

with season, nine of the wells were sampled again during low-base flow conditions in August 1995. Wells 

were not sampled for pesticides or XACs during the 

low-base flow sampling. No obvious difference in 

water quality was detected between the high- and lowbase flow samples; however, samples from a number 

of wells indicate the effects of human or animal wastes 

or nitrogen-containing fertilizers. Several well samples also contained detectable pesticide concentrations.

Concentrations of major cations and anions and 

trace elements in well samples were used to establish 

background concentrations for ground water at the 

FLWMR. The range and 95th percentile of physical 

properties, major cations and anions, and trace elements in ground-water samples are included in table 

25. The 95th percentile represents the value for which

Regional Ground-Water Quality 45
92'22'30" 92'0730"

37'52'30"

37'37'30"

/ V_. / 7

/ Sdw013 J ",dw012 f

; / r--^^ ---x...;----f-^

2.5 5.0 KILOMETERS

dw038.

EXPLANATION

FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION BOUNDARY 

GROUND-WATER SAMPLING SITE AND WELL IDENTIFIER

Figure 21. Location of domestic and public-supply wells sampled at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation.

46 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
Table 25. Background concentrations of selected physical properties and major and trace inorganic constituents in groundwater, spring, and surface-water samples at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation

[jiS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; mg/L, milligrams per liter, <, less than; col/100 mL; colonies per 100 

milliliters; --, no data available; \ig/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than or equal to]

Ground water (wells)

Physical property or 

chemical constituent

Specific conductance (nS/cm)

Temperature (°C)

pH (standard units)

Calcium (mg/L)

Calcium, total (mg/L)

Magnesium (mg/L)

Magnesium, total (mg/L)

Sodium (mg/L)

Sodium, total (mg/L)

Potassium (mg/L)

Bicarbonate (mg/L)

Chloride (mg/L)

Sulfate (mg/L)

Fluoride (mg/L)

Nitrate plus nitrite, total (mg/L)

Nitrite, total (mg/L)

Ammonia, total (mg/L)

Phosphorus, total (mg/L)

Alkalinity, it, total (mg/L)

Total organic carbon (mg/L)

Dissolved solids, sum of constituents (mg/L)

Hardness, total (mg/L)

Fecal Coliform (col/ 100 mL)

Fecal Strep (col/ 100 mL)

Antimony, total (ng/L)

Arsenic, total (M-g/L)

Barium (|ig/L)

Barium, total (M-g/L)

Beryllium (|ig/L)

Beryllium, total (M-g/L)

Boron (M-g/L)

Boron, total (M-g/L)

Cadmium (M-g/L)

Cadmium, total (|ig/L)

Chromium (M-g/L)

Chromium, total (p,g/L)

Cobalt (\LgfL)

Range

315-680

11.5-21

7.3-7.9

.2-75

.1-72

.1-42

.1-43

1.3-150

1.4-150

.2-2.2

192-438

1.0-37

1.8-26

<. 1-0.6

<.02-7.2

<.001-.02

<.01-.03

<.02-.03

157-359

<.l-88

170-382

1-360

~

~

<l-2

<1

25-210

20-200

<.5

<.5-2.5

<10-20

220

<l-2

21

<5

25

<3

95th 

percentlle

510

18.0

7.9

68

65

38

38

4.4

5.0

1.7

344

6.2

15

.1

1

<.01

.03

<.03

282

2.8

290

286

-

-

<1

<1

144

140

<.5

<.5

<20

<20

<1

<1

<5

<5

<3

Spring

Range

203-434

2.5-23.5

6.8-8.2

21-45

19-44

11-25

12-27

.9-7

1-7.2

.9-2.3

108-264

1.1-9.6

4.3-17

<.l-.2

<.02-2.0

<.001-.01

<.01-.05

<.02-.38

89-216

.7-36

108-252

98-220

0-810

0-360

<1

<1

35-58

40-50

<.5

<.5-1.3

<10-110

<20-120

<l-3

21

<5

25

<3

95th 

percentlle

390

18.8

7.8

44

42

24

26

2.9

3

2

257

4.7

9.4

<.l

0.7

<.01

.04

<.04

212

15.4

226

207

180

280

1

1

54

50

<.5

.5

21

20

<3

1

<5

5

<3

Surface water

Range

211-548

4.5-31

7.3-8.2

24-55

23-53

13-32

14-31

.9-39

.9-38

.8-7.4

113-294

.7-38

2.9-44

<.l-.7

<.02-2.7

<.001-.26

<.01-8.4

<.02-1.5

92-241

.8-7.7

130-286

110-270

<2- 1,000

<2-540

<1

<1

23-88

30-80

<.5-19

<.5-1.4

<10-140

<20-150

<l-3

<1

<5

<5

<3

95th 

percentlle

359

29

8.2

38

36

22

24

3.5

3.7

2.7

220

4.7

6.8

<.3

.5

<.01

.04

<.03

206

3.8

222

198

428

430

1

1

64

66

<1

1.3

30

20

<2

1

<5

5

<3

Regional Ground-Water Quality 47
Table 25. Background concentrations of selected physical properties and major and trace inorganic constituents in groundwater, spring, and surface-water samples at and near the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation Continued

Ground water (wells)

Physical property or 

chemical constituent

Cobalt, total (ng/L)

Copper (Mg/L)

Copper, total (jig/L)

Iron (Mg/L)

Iron, total (Mg/L)

Lead (Mg/L)

Lead, total (Mg/L)

Lithium (Mg/L)

Manganese (Mg/L)

Manganese, total (Mg/L)

Mercury, total (fig/L)

Molybdenum (Mg/L)

Nickel (Mg/L)

Nickel, total (|ig/L)

Selenium, total (|ig/L)

Silver (Mg/L)

Silver, total (Mg/L)

Strontium (Mg/L)

Thallium, total (Mg/L)

Vanadium (Mg/L)

Vanadium, total (Mg/L)

Zinc (Mg/L)

Zinc, total (Mg/L)

Range

<3-4

<10-40

<10-40

<3-75

4-750

<10-40

<10

<4-9

<l-5

<l-33

<.l

<10-20

<10

<10

<1

<l-3

<1

<l-62

<1

<6

<1

<3-750

<4-760

95th 

percentlle

<3

17

<20

<64

225

<10

10

<7

2

1

<.l

<10

<10

<10

<1

1

<1

59

<1

<6

<1

<445

<410

Spring

Range

23

<10

210

<3-110

10-230

<10-60

<10

<4

<1-290

1-330

<.l-.3

<10-30

<10

<10

<1

<1

<1

28-51

<1

<6

<1

<3-6

<4-20

95th 

percentlle

3

<10

10

43

200

<10

10

<4

<75

136

<.2

<10

<10

10

1

<1

1

49

1

<6

1

<6

<10

Surface water

Range

<3

<10

<10

<3-80

7-470

<1-40

<10-18

<4-5

<1-160

1-240

<.l-.2

<10

<10

<10

<1

<l-2

<1

24-58

<1

<6

<l-2

<3-10

<4-20

95th 

percentlle

3

<10

10

51

<285

<10

10

5

<58

<58

<.2

<10

<10

10

<1

<2

1

<48

1

<6

1

<8

<9

95 percent of the samples are equal to or less than. The 

95th percentile was assumed to represent a conservative approximation of the upper limit of background 

values. A subjective iterative procedure was followed. 

If a constituent value for a particular sample exceeded 

the 95th percentile, the sample was examined closely 

to determine if other physical properties or constituents exceeded their respective 95th percentiles. For 

example, physical properties and constituents commonly related to similar sources, such as increased 

specific conductance values and Na, Cl, and nutrient 

concentrations associated with effects from septic 

tanks or feed lots, were considered to represent nonbackground conditions. The values for these constituents were listed in table 21 and, although listed in the 

range, were not used to calculate the 95th percentiles 

for the particular constituents (table 25). A sample 

from well dw 023 (table 21) was not used to calculate 

the 95th percentiles. This sample contained concentrations of Ca, C^, Mg, and Mgt less than 1 mg/L and 

concentrations of Na, and N^ of 150 mg/L. This sample was inadvertently collected from a tap down line of 

a water softener, and concentrations of major cations 

and anions and trace elements are not representative of 

background conditions.

Ground-water quality at the FLWMR is similar 

to the regional water quality of the Ozark aquifer 

described by Imes and Davis (1991). Imes and Davis

48 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
(1991) indicated that ground water in the Ozark aquifer in south-central Missouri generally is a Ca-MgHCO3 type with Cl and 864 concentrations less than 

10 mg/L and dissolved solids less than 300 mg/L. 

Ground water at the FLWMR has specific conductance 

values ranging from 315 to 680 ^iS/cm (background 

95th percentile of 510 ^tS/cm), pH values about 7.5, 

and Ca, Mg, and HCO3 as the predominant ions. Concentrations of dissolved solids generally were less than 

300 mg/L (table 21). Samples from most wells plot 

within a narrow field on a trilinear diagram near the Ca 

plus Mg-CO3 plus HCO3 vertex (fig. 22), reflecting 

the predominately carbonate lithology of the Roubidoux Formation, Gasconade Dolomite, Eminence Dolomite, and Potosi Dolomite. Samples from wells dw 

038 and dw 056 have large concentrations of Cl (37 

and 22 mg/L) and plot outside the background range 

for ground water. Molar ratios of Ca to Mg in groundwater samples range from 0.97 to 1.18 with a median 

of 1.1. Ground water in equilibrium with limestone 

(predominately comprised of the mineral calcite) 

would be expected to have ratios much larger than one 

(Hem, 1992). Molar ratios of Ca to Mg of one generally indicate that dissolution of the mineral dolomite is 

the primary source of Ca and Mg in solution. Equilibrium speciation calculations using the geochemical 

code WATEQ4F (Ball and others, 1987) indicate that 

all ground-water samples (except the sample from 

well dw 023) were at equilibrium with the minerals 

calcite (CaCO3) and dolomite [(Ca, Mg)(CO3 )2], indicating that equilibrium with these minerals controls 

the pH and concentrations of Ca, Mg, and HCO3 . 

Ground-water samples plot along the line for weathering of carbonate material by carbonic acid (fig. 23), 

according to the equation:

CO2 + H2O + (Ca, Mg, Sr)CO3 = 

(Ca, Mg, Sr)2+ + 2HCO31 ', (1)

rather than mineral acid dissolution or hydrolysis. The 

slopes of the regression lines for well (0.57) and 

spring (0.58) samples are similar to the theoretical 

slope of 0.5 from equation 1.

Samples from wells dw 017, dw 019, dw 024, 

dw 030, dw 033, dw 037, dw 038, dw 054, and dw 056 

indicate effects of human or animal wastes or fertilizers on ground-water quality. Larger than background 

concentrations of Na, Na^ Cl, and NO2+NO3t were 

detected in samples from wells dw 024, dw 030, dw 

037, dw 038, and dw 056. Well dw 024 is located at

the FLWMR golf course and also may be affected by 

fertilizers applied on the golf course. The larger than 

background concentration of Cl (6.3 mg/L) in the sample from well dw 033 also may indicate the effects of 

septic or animal waste, considering that the 

NO2+NO3t concentration was at the background concentration of 1 mg/L. The larger than background concentrations of NO2+NO3t in samples from wells dw 

017 (6.9 mg/L), dw 019 (7.2 mg/L), and dw 054 (3.8 

mg/L) were somewhat anomalous because they were 

not associated with larger than background concentrations of Na, N^, or Cl (table 21). Samples from wells 

dw 019, dw 033, dw 037, dw 054, and dw 056 also 

have larger than background concentrations of TOC, 

possibly related to human or animal wastes.

Concentrations of most trace elements in 

ground-water samples generally were less than detection or less than a few tens of micrograms per liter 

except for Ba, Ba^ Fet, strontium (Sr), Zn, and Znt. 

Carbonate rock forming minerals such as calcite and 

dolomite contain trace quantities of Ba and Sr, and 

concentrations of these constituents in ground water 

are largely derived from dissolution of these minerals 

by percolating water. Concentrations of Ba, however, 

commonly are limited by the solubility of the mineral 

barite (BaSO^. Indeed, samples from wells dw 017, 

dw 030, dw 032, dw 034, and dw 062 are at equilibrium with barite. Barite is present in the weathered 

residuum overlying bedrock throughout much of the 

Ozarks and dissolution of this mineral also could contribute to the large Ba and B^ concentrations detected 

in samples from well dw 034 (210 and 200 ug/L). Oxidation and dissolution of the mineral pyrite (FeS2) 

within the bedrock is a potential source of Fe in the 

ground water. The solubility of Fe (Fe3+) oxy-hydroxides is small, however, and Fe commonly is present as 

colloidal or small particles in ground water. Generally, 

concentrations of Fet were substantially larger than Fe, 

indicating most Fe is present in the particulate phase. 

In addition, corrosion of common well construction 

materials such as steel casings, pumps, pump riser 

pipes, and steel and galvanized water pipes can contribute to Fe detected in ground-water samples. Thirteen ground-water samples contained large (68 to 760 

jLig/L) concentrations of dissolved Zn or Znt. Generally, increased Zn concentrations are associated with 

Zn-bearing minerals such as sphalerite (ZnS) or cerussite [Zn(CO3)]; however, Zn mineralization is not 

known to occur in the vicinity of the FLWMR, and the 

most likely source for the increased Zn and Znt conRegional Ground-Water Quality 49
CALCIUM CHLORIDE PLUS NITRATE

PERCENT 

NORMALIZED MILLJEQUIVALENTS OF MAJOR IONS

EXPLANATION

 WELL SAMPLE 

o WELL dw 038 

n WELL dw 056

Figure 22. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in ground-water samples.

50 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
2

|

1

si

PLJJCO zuj

<oll

QZ

0

u.

O

5

(0

4.D

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

0

_ i i i i | i i i i | i i i i | i i i i | i i i i | i i i i | i i i i y i i i i_

- / '-

- */ "

 / 

 f'm

r V -.

'-- w ^

^Qjf/

: iff* :

 Jg 

I /> ° j

: <r ° :

- -

_ ........f........ .......... . IA/CI yv^ujg 1 O V Y»0.57X A CTTV + . 0.38 A OO (H /D^ »0.oo) A OC\

 

\ 0 SPRINGS Y-0.58X + 0.19 (R2»0.83) :

~ i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i r

1 2345 676

BICARBONATE, IN MILLJMOLES PER UTER

Rgure 23. Sum of calcium, magnesium, and 

strontium as related to bicarbonate in water 

samples from wells and springs at the 

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

centrations is the corrosion of galvanized pipes used in 

many domestic and public-supply wells.

Samples from wells dw 015, dw 024, dw 025, 

dw 030, dw 061, and dw 064 contained small (less 

than 1 .6 pg/L) concentrations of THM, such as chloromethane, trichloromethane, bromomethane, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and 

bromoform, that probably are the result of chlorination 

of the wells or a contaminant from the HC1 used to 

preserve some samples (as previously discussed in the 

"Quality Assurance Section," table 24). Chlorine in 

the form of household bleach commonly is used to disinfect domestic and public-supply wells after installation or servicing or is poured down wells with known 

bacterial contamination. Bromine is present in trace 

quantities in bleach and is the probable source of the 

bromine-containing THM. Well dw 064 is a new supply well for an ammunition storage area. This well 

was sampled shortly after it was completed, and the 

concentrations of trichloromethane (0.9 |ig/L), bromodichloromethane (0.7 pg/L), and dibromochloromethane (0.5 Hg/L) detected probably are related to 

bleach used to disinfect this well after it was completed. Only three ground-water samples contained 

detectable concentrations of VOCs other than THM. A 

sample from well dw 015 (August 29, 1995) contained 

total xylene concentrations of 0.3 pg/L, and a sample 

from well dw 024 (August 29, 1995) and a duplicate

sample from well dw 030 (August 30,1995) contained 

methyltert-butylether (MTBE) concentrations of 0.3 

and 0.6 pg/L. Xylene and MTBE commonly are 

present in fuels such as gasoline. A sample collected 

from well dw 033 (February 23,1995) contained acetone (1.4 Hg/L) and 2-butanone (0.2 pg/L), which are 

contaminants traced to a permanent marker used to 

label VOC vials from this well.

Several non-target VOCs were tentatively identified in samples from wells dw 015, dw 024, and dw 

060. Samples from well dw 015 contained dibromomethylbenzene (estimated at 0.1 pg/L), l-bromo-3,5- 

dimethylbenzene (estimated at 0.3 pg/L), and 4- 

bromo-l,2-dimethylbenzene (estimated at 0.2 H£/L). 

Brominated benzene derivatives are somewhat 

unusual and probably are formed during the chlorination of wells. The parent compound of the brominated 

benzene derivatives, however, is most likely a substituted benzene such as xylene, indicating small xylene 

concentrations may be present in ground water near 

this well. A sample collected from well dw 024 (April 

6,1995) contained the non-target VOCs cyanogen 

chloride, 2-methylpropanal, and pentanal (0.1 pg/L). 

Cyanogen chloride is a highly toxic compound (Budavari and others, 1989). This compound probably is 

formed during chlorination similar to many of the 

THM. The sample from well dw 060 contained the 

tentatively identified non-target VOC 2,4-dimethyl 

heptane (estimated at 0.1 pg/L).

No semivolatile organic compounds or XACs 

were detected in any ground-water samples; however, 

dissolved pesticides were detected in samples from 

wells dw 014, dw 032, dw 033, and dw 060. Diazinon 

was the most commonly detected pesticide, detected at 

5 ng/L (nanograms per liter) in samples from wells dw 

014 and dw 032 and at 7 ng/L in the sample from well 

dw 060. The sample from well dw 033 contained a 

trace quantity (2 ng/L) of p,p'-DDE, a degradation 

product of DDT. Tebuthiuron was detected at 14 ng/L 

in the sample from well dw 060. Tebuthiuron is a nonselective herbicide used in rangelands, rights-of-way, 

and industrial areas (Meister Publishing Company, 

1994). The effects of pesticides, human or animal 

wastes, and fertilizer on the water quality in several 

sampled wells indicates much of the shallow ground 

water at the FLWMR and vicinity is susceptible to 

contamination from surficial sources.

Regional Ground-Water Quality 51
Spring-Water Quality

The USGS collected 19 water samples (including 3 duplicates) from 9 springs at and near the 

FLWMR between March 1 and September 1,1995 

(fig. 24). Springs were to be sampled during high-base 

flow (spring) and low-base flow (July-August) conditions; however, Ballard Hollow Spring, Musgrave 

Hollow spring 1, and Tunnel Hollow Spring were dry 

during the low-base flow sampling and Cannon Range 

Spring was not sampled during high-base flow conditions. Springs were sampled for dissolved and total 

inorganic constituents, total nutrients, VOCs, semivolatile organics scan by GC-FID, selected pesticides, 

and XACs at high-base flow, and for all the above 

except for pesticides at low-base flow. Analytical data 

for these samples and 11 additional water samples collected from Roubidoux Spring as part of the USGS 

ambient water-quality program are listed in table 22. 

Background concentrations of physical properties and 

chemical constituents were calculated in a similar 

manner as those for ground-water samples and are 

listed in table 25. Except for Shanghai Spring, spring 

discharges were substantially smaller during the lowbase flow sampling in August 1995 than during highbase flow conditions. A review of 17 discharge measurements made by the USGS at Shanghai Spring 

between 1992 and 1996 indicates that discharge is 

similar during high- and low-base flow conditions 

(data on file at the USGS, Rolla, Missouri).

Water samples from springs had specific conductance values ranging from 203 to 434 jtiS/cm and 

plot near the Ca, Mg-HCO3 vertex on a trilinear diagram (fig. 25). Similar to ground-water samples from 

wells, water samples from springs had pH values of 

about 7.5 and Ca, Mg, and HCO3 as the principal ions 

(table 22).

Spring samples also plot along the weathering 

line of carbonate material by carbonic acid (fig. 23) 

and have molar ratios of Ca to Mg of about 1.1, indicating dissolution of dolomite is the principle source 

of major ions in spring samples. The annual loads of 

Ca and Mg discharged from springs such as Miller 

Spring represent dissolution of a substantial mass of 

bedrock, indicating a dynamic karst system that is 

continually developing. For example, assuming (1) all 

Ca in water samples from Shanghai Spring is derived 

from dissolution of dolomite, (2) a daily mean discharge of 18 ft3/s, and (3) an average Ca concentration 

of 38 mg/L, the yearly mass of Ca discharged by 

Shanghai Spring represents the dissolution of about

35,000 ft3 (cubic feet) of bedrock equivalent to a cubic 

cavern with dimensions of 33 ft per side. This constant 

dissolution of material over many thousands of years 

has manifested itself in the extensive dissolution and 

collapse features observed within the lower part of the 

Roubidoux Formation.

Boxplots showing the distribution of selected 

physical properties, chemical constituents, and ion 

ratios in samples from ground water, springs, and 

major streams and tributaries at the FLWMR are 

shown in figure 26. Background concentrations of 

major and trace inorganic constituents in spring samples generally were smaller than concentrations 

detected in ground-water samples from wells (table 

25; fig. 26). Specific conductance values and concentrations of inorganic constituents in spring water samples generally were larger in low-base flow samples 

than in high-base flow samples (table 22), reflecting 

dilution by increased local recharge during high-base 

flow conditions.

Water samples from Shanghai Spring and the 

pumping station spring had probable effects of septic 

contamination. The high- and low-base flow samples 

from Shanghai Spring contained larger than background concentrations of Na (7.0 mg/L), N^ (7.1 and 

7.2 mg/L), Cl (9.6 and 8.5 mg/L), NO2+NO3t (1.4 and 

2.0 mg/L), Pt (0.07 and 0.38 mg/L), B (32 and 30 

Hg/L), and Bt (30 and 40 ng/L). The high-base flow 

sample also contained larger than background concentrations of SO4 (10 mg/L) and NH3 (0.05 mg/L). The 

low-base flow sample also contained larger than background specific conductance values (434 pS/cm) and 

concentrations of K (2.3 mg/L). The low-base flow 

sample from the pumping station spring contained 

larger than background Na (3.1 mg/L), N^ (3.2 mg/L), 

Cl (6.4 mg/L), and NO2+NO3t (0.88 mg/L) concentrations. The high-base flow sample from the pumping 

station spring contained only TOC (36 mg/L) concentrations larger than background. A historical dye-trace 

test (fig. 7, trace HT-03; Harvey, 1980) verified a subsurface connection between Shanghai Spring and Dry 

Creek, which contains the sewage treatment plant. 

Effluent from the plant is a likely source of the larger 

than background constituent concentrations in Shanghai Spring. The pumping station spring is downgradient of a residential area, and runoff through storm 

sewers or leakage from sanitary or combined storm 

and sanitary sewers is a likely source of the larger than 

background constituent concentrations.

52 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
92'15' 92-0730" 92*

 "x-x'

37'45'

37-3730'

EXPLANATION 

......................... FORT LEONARD WOOD MILITARY RESERVATION

ASW 014 SPRING, SURFACE-WATER, OR STREAMBED SEDIMENT 

SAMPLE SITE AND IDENTIFIER

 H.W002 SOLID-WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT AND IDENTIFIER

Figure 24. Location of spring, surface-water, or streambed sediment sample sites at the Big Piney 

River, Roubidoux Creek, and tributaries and contributing springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation.

Spring-Water Quality 53
CHLORIDE PLUS NITRATE

PERCENT 

NORMALIZED MILUEQUIVALENTS OF MAJOR IONS

EXPLANATION 

 SPRING SAMPLING SITES INCLUDE:

Ballard Hollow Spring 

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1 

Musgrave Hollow spring 2 

Pumping station spring 

Roubidoux Spring 

Shanghai Spring 

Tunnel Hollow Spring 

Cannon Range Spring

Figure 25. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in spring samples.

54 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
Geochemical modeling indicates the water quality of Shanghai Spring can be simulated by mixing 

uncontaminated spring water with the flow lost from 

Dry Creek. A simple mixing model was developed 

using the geochemical code PHREEQE (Parkhurst and 

others, 1980). Because Miller Spring and Shanghai 

Spring are located in similar geologic settings and had 

identical low-base flow discharges (26 ft3/s), waterquality data from Miller Spring were used to represent 

the uncontaminated component of flow in the model. 

Measured discharges and constituent concentrations in 

the high-base flow sample from Dry Creek (table 23, 

site SW 009) and the low-base flow sample from 

Miller Spring (table 22) were used in the model. A 

constant volume mixing scenario was used, and equilibrium with calcite and a partial pressure of carbon 

dioxide (CO2) of 1 x 10" atmospheres were 

assumed. Results of the modeling indicate that all of 

the flow lost in Dry Creek probably emerges at Shanghai Spring (table 26).

Spring samples contained various densities of 

fecal coliform [0 to 810 col/100 mL (colonies per 100 

mL)] and fecal streptococcus bacteria (0 to 360 

col/100 mL; table 22). Most of the results involved 

non-ideal colony counts. The sample from Ballard 

Hollow Spring contained among the largest densities 

of fecal coliform (150 col/100 mL) and fecal streptococcus (360 col/100 mL) bacteria within the ideal 

count range (table 22). The ratio of fecal coliform to 

fecal streptococcus bacteria in this sample is 2.4. A 

fecal coliform to fecal streptococcus bacteria ratio 

greater than 4.1 generally is indicative of human waste 

and ratios less than 0.7 are indicative of animal waste 

(American Public Health Association and others, 

1985). Ratios between 0.7 and 4.4 generally are interpreted as mixed human-animal wastes; however, ratios 

from sampling points more than 24 hours downstream 

from the source may be unreliable because fecal streptococcus bacteria have a relatively short life span outside their animal host. A possible source of the 

bacterial contamination to Ballard Hollow Spring is 

the FLWMR horse stable located about 1 mi east of 

Ballard Hollow Spring. The mixed human-animal 

waste signature (ratio of 2.4) could indicate that the 

travel time from the source to Ballard Hollow Spring 

is greater than 24 hours.

Water samples from Shanghai Spring contained 

detectable concentrations of VOCs (table 24). Tetrachloroethene (PCE; 1.5 and 0.8 jig/L) and trichloromethane (less than or equal to 0.2 jog/L) were detected

in the high- and low-base flow samples from Shanghai 

Spring. The trace concentration (0.2 jig/L) of trichloromethane detected in the high-base flow sample, 

however, may be related to contamination from the 

HC1 preservative because chloromethane, a known 

preservative contaminant, also was detected in this 

sample. The concentrations of PCE may be biased 

low. Water discharged from Shanghai Spring flows 

through a cave system at least several hundred feet 

before reaching the spring orifice (Vineyard and Feder, 

1974). Because of its large Henry's law constant of 

1.46 x 10"2 atmospheres-cubic meter per mole (Montgomery, 1991), PCE would quickly volatilize once 

water enters the cave system. Concentrations in water 

samples collected downgradient from the spring orifice probably are smaller than those in water entering 

the cave system. Assuming an average PCE concentration of 1.2 |ig/L and a daily mean discharge of 18 

ft3/s (Vineyard and Feder, 1974), about 19 kg (kilograms), or 3 gal, of PCE is discharged per year from 

Shanghai Spring.

At least one known and two potential sources of 

PCE contamination are known at the FLWMR: 

SWMU FLW-002 located about 2.5 mi southwest of 

Forney Army Airport and a dry-cleaning shop and 

float yard storage area (fig. 1). Samples collected by 

the USGS from monitoring wells at SWMU FLW-002 

contained PCE concentrations (less than 0.2 to 4.7 

jig/L) close to the MDNR MCL of 5 jig/L. The 

SWMU FLW-002 is about 1.5 mi south of a dye-injection point where dye concentrations were detected at 

Shanghai Spring and about 1.2 mi southeast of a dyeinjection point where dye concentrations were 

detected at Miller Spring. Because no dye-trace tests 

have been conducted in the immediate vicinity of 

SWMU FLW-002, conduit ground-water flow from 

that site to Shanghai Spring cannot be eliminated from 

consideration. Wastes containing PCE from the drycleaning shop temporarily were stored in the float yard 

located within the cantonment area about 3.5 mi 

southwest of Shanghai Spring (fig. 24). This area is 

within the probable catchment area of Shanghai 

Spring as defined by dye-trace tests (fig. 16). Two 

shallow (less than 2 ft deep) soil samples collected in 

1992 during an investigation of the float yard (Radian 

Corporation, 1993) contained PCE; however, concentrations were less than the method reporting level of 2 

jig/kg (micrograms per kilogram). No subsurface samples were collected, and only four surficial samples 

were analyzed for PCE. An outside storage pad and

Spring-Water Quality 55
MICROSIEMENS CENTIMETER DEGREES MILLIGRAMS AT 25PER LITER CELSIUS

8oo88$SS2g8 8§2

*

(31) SPECIFIC 

CONDUCTANCE

(9)

(24) -1-

(5)

1 (13) O

* R

f ' Y

i i i

_ (3* CALCIUM

(9)

(16)

j (6)

T U] (? r1-! T $ T H 9 -

*

1 1 1

1 1 1 

(9) SODIUM

8

(31)

o

O

(lo)

T

rS c^i ^L ^H, J^L

| 8

i,

6 

50

40 

30 

20 

10

0

(6) N

* c

T 9

-*-7

 N

-j-2 

 1 1 

* C

O If

i

(24) (13) 

(31) P~|

LJ

T1 0

1 1

i i i 

PH 

(9) (7)

r~~l

I I L

1

(31) 

*

(16)

- T i

n ^ T"

i

i i

MAGNESIUM

(9)

(7) T

f^ U -

9 TT

I I

GW SP SW1 SW1A SW2 SW2A

EXPLANATION

IUMBER OF SAMPLES WATER SAMPLES

ATA GREATER THAN GW Selected domestic and publlc90th PERCENTILE supply wells

Oth PERCENTILE gp selected springs

5th PERCENTILE SW1 B«g Plney River 

SW1A Tributaries of the Big Plney River 

SW2 Roubldoux Creek

SW2A Tributaries of Roubldoux Creek 

IEDIAN

5th PERCENTILE

Oth PERCENTILE

ATA LESS THAN 10th 

PERCENTILE

^SUFFICIENT DATA TO

GW SP SW1 SW1A SW2 SW2A

Figure 26. Boxplots of selected physical properties and chemical constituents in water samples from wells, 

springs, and major streams and tributaries at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

56 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
8

7 

6 

5

4

2

1

0

MILLIGRAMS PERLITER

-& N)W-J. 0000

0

8

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2

1

n

I I I I I I 

§

POTASSIUM

(9)

<3 » (L6) _L

o f rn (9) <7>

" * T JL rn LJ ~ $L^ o

- ^ ^ ^ V 1-3 -

f I I I I I

<§ ' ' 6 ' '

CHLORIDE

0

(16) 

f *

r (9)

1 (9) 1 1

rh ,_!_, JL (6)

 = E? rX M T , U T EP

i i i i i i 

(31)

R TOTAL NITRATE PLUS - 

u NITRITE

* 

*

*

(9)

r © [ (24) h JL : ^

(13)

r-^ f

~ M ^ (=3 _2_ J2_

auu 

400 

300

200

100

50 

40 

30 

20

10

0

MICROGRAMS PER LITER

5 8g

ou

0

I I I I

(31) BICARBONATE

(9)

I I ° 

(24) *

I ^

M -*- (») j^ fl I * i i r±i n - -1 ___ td 4= T 9 ^

* i

*

i i i i i

i i i i i i 

*

* SULFATE

(31) 

$

(16) (9) 

*

rh (9) (^, (6) -r- ^ -TT- H? a L_J M -y ^ =^=

i i i i i

i i i i

(31) 

O BARIUM

(7) 

* * 

(13) (9)

I * T (6) - rn =i= w F=h L=H S -

__ E^3 ^ t=I t^d ^

1 *

1 1 1 1

Figure 26. Boxplots of selected physical properties and chemical constituents in water samples from weiis, 

springs, and major streams and tributaries at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation Continued.

Spring-Water Quality 57
zoo

150

oc

85

i 100

8

oc 

o

2 

50

0

800 

700

a: 600

§DC 500

8!

1 40°

o

§ »°

i

200

100 

0

0.5 

0.4 

g 0.3 i

i 0.2

0.1

0.0

TOTAL BORON

(9)

0 

0

(13)

o

_

(31) * (7) (7) (6)

_ cb _ a JL _

iii ii

i i i i i i 

o

* TOTAL ZINC

-

L (3i>

(16) (9) (9) (7) (6) 

=5= 8 8 O * 1

III II

° SODIUM:CALCIUM

(16) (9)

0

(31)

8

(9)

r^ bd O (7) fc^d E^=3 (6)

* F=l

^ * M ^ 

iii ii

GW SP SW1 SW1A SW2 SW2A

IV

60

ou

40

30 

20

10 

0

1.3 

1.2

|

£

a 1.1

2 

1.0

0.9

4 

3

2

1

0

1 I I I I I

(3i) STRONTIUM 

(9)

(13) J-

" rh f (7)

r-h f <6>

' T - rh fl ' . T LJ ^ LJ _ o _

V

II II

1 . . 1 1 

CALCIUM:MAGNESIUM

(16) 

(31) 

* (9) I--1

* *

T (7) ?

'^T?;ifi" I ~ T M

1 v <9>

« * p 

iii ii

i i i i i 

SODIUM:CHLORIDE

(31) 

* 

*

(9)

[ 11-

l- -i <16>

T (7) 

n-U 0

n w v^

r P i J - T^ ^ =s=

i i i i i

GW SP SW1 SW1A SW2 SW2A

Figure 26. Boxplots of selected physical properties and chemical constituents in water samples from welis, 

springs, and major streams and tributaries at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation Continued.

58 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
Table 26. Simulation of water quality at Shanghai Spring

[na, not applicable; mg/L, milligrams per liter; u,g/L, micrograms per liter]

Descriptor

Flow component (percent)

PH

Temperature (degrees Celsius)

Calcium, dissolved (mg/L)

Magnesium, dissolved (mg/L)

Sodium, dissolved (mg/L)

Potassium (mg/L)

Bicarbonate (mg/L)

Sulfate (mg/L)

Chloride (mg/L)

Nitrate plus nitrate as nitrogen, total (mg/L)

Strontium ([ig/L)

Miller Spring 

08-14-95

83

7.6

13.5

38

21

2.0

1.2

195

5.1

2.3

.36

38

Dry Creek 

06-13-95

17

7.8

21.5

32

15

39

7.4

182

46

38

2.7

52

Shanghai Spring 

08-15-95

na

7.7

15.5

45

25

7.0

2.4

257

9.1

8.5

2.0

47

Simulated Shanghai 

Spring8

na

7.6

14.9

46

20

8.3

2.3

235

12.1

8.5

2.2

40

Dissolution of 2.4 x 10"4 moles of calcite per liter and partial pressure of carbon dioxide of 1 x 10"2-3 atmospheres.

drain lines leading from the building containing the 

dry-cleaning shop and the float yard are possible PCE 

sources. Other potential sources include several other 

closed SWMUs (FLW-006, FLW-012, FLW-013, 

FLW-014, FLW-015, and FLW-016) within the Shanghai Spring probable catchment area that have not yet 

been investigated.

High-base flow samples from the pumping station spring and Shanghai Spring contained detectable 

concentrations of the pesticides prometon (7 and 8 

ng/L) and simazine (8 and 6 j-ig/L). Prometon is a nonselective herbicide used for the control of many weeds 

and grasses (Meister Publishing Company, 1994). 

Simazine is a selective herbicide commonly used on 

crops such as corn and alfalfa, and on turf grasses. The 

absence of these pesticides from other springs at and 

near the FLWMR indicates they probably are, or were, 

used hi the residential and industrial areas within the 

catchment areas of these springs. None of the spring 

samples contained detectable quantities of semivolatile organic compounds or XACs.

Surface-Water Quality

During this investigation, the USGS collected 

32 water-quality samples (including 4 duplicate samples) from 17 surface-water sites at and near the 

FLWMR between April 1 and October 10,1995 (fig. 

24). Water samples were collected from the Big Piney 

River and Roubidoux Creek upstream (sites SW 001 

and SW 010) and downstream (sites SW 004 and SW 

013) from the FLWMR (fig. 24). In addition, water 

samples were collected from sites on the Big Piney 

River (sites SW 002 and SW 003) and Roubidoux 

Creek (sites SW Oil and SW 012) and near the mouth 

of tributaries draining the FLWMR. Data from seven 

water-quality samples (including one duplicate sample) collected from the Big Piney River near Devils 

Elbow (site SW A04, fig. 24) downstream from the 

FLWMR as part of the USGS ambient water-quality 

monitoring program also were included. Surface-water 

samples also were collected during high- and low-base 

flow conditions. High-base flow samples were collected during April and June 1995 and low-base flow 

samples were collected during August and October 

1995 (table 23). Samples from the Big Piney River 

and Roubidoux Creek were analyzed for dissolved and 

total major and trace inorganic constituents, VOCs, 

semivolatile organic compounds, pesticides (high-base 

flow only), and XACs (high-base flow only). Samples 

from tributary sites were analyzed for dissolved and 

total major and trace inorganic constituents, VOCs,

Surface-Water Quality 59
semivolatile organic compound scan by GC-FID, pesticides (high-base flow only), and XACs (high-base 

flow only).

Despite large differences in discharge and drainage basin size, samples from surface-water sites 

(excluding samples from site SW 009) generally had 

similar values of physical properties and inorganic 

constituents. Because of the similar water quality at 

most of the surface-water sites, generally data from all 

sites except site SW 009 were used to calculate background values for surface water. Background values of 

physical properties and concentrations of inorganic 

chemical constituents were calculated using an interpretative process similar to that used for ground-water 

and spring samples and are listed in table 25.

Surface-water samples generally had specific 

conductance values less than about 350 jiS/cm and Ca, 

Mg, and HCO3 as the major ions. Samples from surface-water sites, except those from sites SW 007, SW 

008, and SW 009, plot in a group near the Ca, MgHCO3 vertex on a trilinear diagram (fig. 27). Samples 

from site SW 007 contained larger than background 

concentrations of Na (4.2 and 6.3 mg/L), N^ (4.3 and 

6.1 mg/L), and SO4 (13 and 19 mg/L). This site is on a 

tributary stream that flows into the Big Piney River 

about 0.25 river mi downstream from the FLWMR 

water-treatment plant. The plant uses aluminum sulfate [A12(SO4)3] and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) during the treatment process, and overflow from the plant 

is a possible source of the increased Na and SO4 concentrations in these samples. Samples from site SW 

008 contained larger than background values of specific conductance (399 and 452 fiS/cm) and concentrations of Ca (45 and 55 mg/L), C^ (42 and 53 mg/L), 

Mg (23 and 32 mg/L), Mgt (31 mg/L in one sample), 

Na (4.7 and 4.9 mg/L), N^ (4.7 mg/L), HCO3 (275 

mg/L in one sample), SO4 (17 and 9.8 mg/L), Cl (7.0 

and 5.8 mg/L), B (37 ^g/L in one sample), Bt (30 

Hg/L), and Sr (54 and 58 jUg/L). The source of the 

larger than background concentrations is uncertain; 

however, the lack of increased concentrations of nutrients indicates the source is not sewage or septic effluent. This tributary drains a large part of the 

cantonment area and may be affected by runoff from a 

number of industrial facilities, a closed landfill 0.5-mi 

upstream, or runoff from residential areas within the 

basin. The discharge at site SW 009 during the highbase flow sampling was composed almost entirely of 

effluent from the sewage treatment plant (about 1,500 

ft upstream) and, consequently, the water quality is

substantially degraded. The high-base flow sample 

had larger than background values of specific conductance (548 fiS/cm) and concentrations of Na (39

mg/L), N^ (38 mg/L). K O7-4 m§/L)> SO4 (44 m&V> 

Cl (38 mg/L), F (0.7 mg/L), dissolved solids (286 

mg/L), TOC (7.7 mg/L), NO2+NO3t (2.7 mg/L), NO2t 

(0.26 mg/L), NH3 (8.4 mg/L), Pt (1.5 mg/L), B (140 

Hg/L), Bt (150 pg/L), and Sr (52 pg/L). During the 

low-base flow sampling, effluent from the sewage 

treatment plant was lost to the subsurface before it 

reached site SW 009.

Generally, concentrations of major inorganic 

constituents and nutrients had an inverse relation with 

discharge; the smallest discharges and the largest constituent concentrations generally occurred during the 

low-base flow sampling. This inverse relation is 

caused by the decreased proportion of low ionicstrength precipitation/runoff during low-base flow 

conditions. Samples from the Big Piney River at site 

SW 001, however, did not follow this trend, and concentrations of most major inorganic constituents and 

nutrients, except for K, silica (SiO2), and NO2+NO3t, 

were smaller in the low-base flow sampling. Although 

the low-base flow discharge (292 ft3/s) was smaller 

than the high-base flow discharge (441 ft3/s), the lowbase flow sample was collected on the receding limb 

of a small rise caused by rainfall several days before 

sample collection. Specific conductance values and 

most constituent concentrations were, therefore, 

diluted by rainfall runoff. The larger K, SiO2, and 

NO2+NO3t concentrations in the low-base flow sample from site SW 001 may be caused by leaching of K 

and NO2+NO3t from soils or plant matter. Hem (1992) 

noted that during periods of relatively high discharge, 

K concentrations in streams from the central United 

States were nearly as large or larger during times of 

high discharge as during low discharge and attributed 

this to leaching of K from soil and organic material by 

runoff.

None of the surface-water samples contained 

detectable concentrations of VOCs, semivolatile 

organic compounds, or XACs; however, high-base 

flow samples from the Big Piney River (sites SW 001, 

SW 002, SW 003, and SW 004) and tributary site SW 

008 contained several pesticides (table 24). Tebuthiuron was detected in samples from site SW 001 (9 

ng/L), site SW 002 (8 n^L), and site SW 003 (9 ng/L). 

The detection of this herbicide in the upstream sample 

(site SW 001) and similar concentrations in the samples from sites SW 002 and SW 003 indicate sources

60 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
CHLORIDE PLUS NITRATE

PERCENT 

NORMALIZED MILUEQUIVALENTS OF MAJOR IONS

EXPLANATION

o SURFACE-WATER SITE 

A SW 007 

 SW 008 

+ SW 009

Rgure 27. Trilinear diagram depicting relative concentrations of major cations and anions in surface-water samples.

Surface-Water Quality 61
other than the FLWMR. Atrazine was detected in the 

sample from site SW 002 (2 ng/L) and an atrazine 

metabolite, deethylatrazine, was detected in samples 

from sites SW 002 and SW 004 (4 ng/L). Atrazine is a 

widely used selective herbicide commonly applied in 

the spring on row crops such as corn, and widespread 

occurrence of atrazine in streams in the central United 

States has been attributed to runoff from agricultural 

areas (Goolsby and others, 1991). Several corn fields 

along the Big Piney River in the vicinity of site SW 

002 are a possible source of the atrazine detected. The 

sample from tributary site SW 008 contained p,p'- 

DDE at the reporting level of 1 ng/L. The SWMU 

FLW-037, the old pesticide building where pesticides 

were mixed and stored at the FLWMR, is located 

about 0.5 mi upstream from site SW 008. Large concentrations of DDT and other organochlorine pesticides have been detected in soils adjacent to the 

SWMU FLW-037 (U.S. Army Environmental 

Hygiene Agency, 1992). In 1995, the USGS detected 

p,p'-DDE, DDT, chlordane, and dieldrin in streambed 

sediment samples between the SWMU FLW-037 and 

site SW 008 (data on file at the USGS, Rolla, Missouri).

Streambed Sediment Quality

Streambed sediment samples were collected 

from Big Piney River and Roubidoux Creek upstream 

(sites SW 001 and SW 010) and downstream (SW 004 

and SW 013) from the FLWMR (fig. 24). Initially, 

these samples were analyzed for grain size, concentrations of major and trace inorganic constituents, chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides, chlorinated organic 

compounds, XACs, dioxin, and furans. Analytical 

results of subsamples submitted for grain size, trace 

element, and chlorinated organic compounds had not 

been received at the time of this report. None of the 

samples contained detectable concentrations of chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides or XACs. Small concentrations of octachlorodibenzoparadioxin (OCDD) were 

detected in streambed sediment samples from sites 

SW 001 (0.21 jig/kg) and SW 004 (0.01 |ig/kg). Small 

concentrations of OCDD are common because this 

compound can be produced as a natural combustion 

product.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

A geohydrologic and water-quality assessment 

of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation has 

increased the knowledge of geologic controls on 

regional ground-water flow in the karst terrane at the 

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, has provided background water-quality data for ground- and 

surface-water resources at the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation, and has identified the presence 

of organic compound contamination in Shanghai 

Spring, a major discharge point for ground water flowing from the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

and adjacent areas to the north. Geologic mapping of 

the southern Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

area resulted in identification of an extension of the 

Countyline Fault through the southern Fort Leonard 

Wood Military Reservation and the presence of two 

intersecting smaller faults, a probable extension of 

Nelson Creek Fault and a new fault named Kurd Hollow Fault. One geologic observation of hydrologic 

interest was structural evidence for substantial dissolution of interbedded dolostone in the lower part of the 

Roubidoux Formation and collapse of overlying sandstone-rich strata. The zones of dissolution along bedding planes offer large permeability pathways for 

ground-water flow. A conclusion derived from observations of hundreds of fractures at the Fort Leonard 

Wood Military Reservation is that fractures commonly 

do not extend through the full thickness of formations, 

and most fractures do not show evidence of solution 

activity.

Ground-water levels and general directions of 

ground-water flow beneath the Fort Leonard Wood 

Military Reservation are similar under conditions of 

high-base and low-base flow. Ground-water levels in 

the central part of the Fort Leonard Wood Military 

Reservation show characteristics associated with substantial karst development. Ground water that normally would have flowed westward to Roubidoux 

Creek is redirected eastward to the Big Piney River by 

zones of large secondary permeability, and ground 

water that would have flowed eastward to the Big 

Piney River is redirected more northward toward 

Shanghai Spring. The regional ground-water divide in 

this area is as much as 2 miles west of the regional 

topographic divide. Water levels in the southern Fort 

Leonard Wood Military Reservation area generally are 

higher along the major recharge areas on topographic 

ridges and lower at discharge areas in the major river 

valleys. Ground-water flow is nearly perpendicular to

62 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-95
the regional streams. Vertical ground-water flow generally is downward from the Gasconade Dolomite to 

the Potosi Dolomite, but may be upward in areas of 

highly permeable karst terrane where ground-water 

levels in the Roubidoux Formation and Gasconade 

Dolomite are lowered because of rapid flow of ground 

water through conduits to nearby springs.

Dye-trace tests, used to investigate groundwater flow from distinct recharge points (such as sinkholes) to discharge points (such as springs), were used 

to determine ground-water flow directions and rates in 

the karst terrane at the Fort Leonard Wood Military 

Reservation and to determine catchment areas for several springs. The catchment area of Shanghai Spring 

includes a substantial part of the north-central and 

northeastern Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation. 

Miller Spring receives water from much of the eastcentral part of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation. The boundary location between Shanghai 

Spring and Miller Spring catchment areas has been 

narrowed, but further investigations would be necessary to delineate this boundary.

A series of stream-discharge measurements, or 

seepage-run measurements, made on the Big Piney 

River and Roubidoux Creek during high-base and 

low-base flow conditions were analyzed to determine 

ground-water discharge through their streambeds. 

Stream-discharge data for the Big Piney River indicate 

that the river loses water from about 30 to 38 river 

miles above its mouth, gains water from about 18 to 

30 river miles above its mouth, and loses water from 

about 18 river miles above its mouth to near its mouth. 

However, the uncertainty in these measurements and 

the small magnitude of apparent ground-water inflow 

make a definitive conclusion impossible. Data from 

streamflow measurements indicate that Roubidoux 

Creek gains water from 28 to about 34 river miles 

above its mouth. During high-base flow conditions, 

the entire flow of Roubidoux Creek is lost 22 miles 

above its mouth. During low-base flow conditions, the 

entire flow is lost 24 miles above the mouth. This flow 

loss is associated with the intersection of Roubidoux 

Creek, the Countyline Fault, and Kurd Hollow Fault. 

Measurements made on about the lower 8 river miles 

of Roubidoux Creek indicate that essentially all flow 

in this reach of the creek is derived from tributary 

stream or spring inflow. During all but the highest flow 

conditions, Roubidoux Creek is dry throughout a 7- to 

8-river mile reach along the western boundary of the 

Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation.

Water-quality samples collected from regional 

ground-water and surface-water sources during highbase and low-base flow conditions were used to establish baseline water-quality conditions at the Fort 

Leonard Wood Military Reservation. No obvious difference was detected in water quality between samples 

collected during high- and low-base flow conditions. 

Ground-water quality at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation is similar to the regional water quality of the Ozark aquifer, a calcium magnesium 

bicarbonate type water with concentrations of chloride 

and sulfate less than 10 milligrams per liter; dissolved 

solids concentrations generally were less than 300 milligrams per liter. Ground-water specific conductance 

values ranged from 315 to 680 microsiemens per centimeter, pH was about 7.5, and calcium, magnesium, 

and bicarbonate were the predominant ions. Major and 

trace elements concentrations in well samples were 

used to establish background concentrations for 

ground water at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation. Concentrations of most trace elements in 

ground-water samples generally were less than detection limits or less than a few tens of micrograms per 

liter except for barium, total barium, total iron, strontium, zinc, and total zinc. Thirteen ground-water samples contained large (68 to 760 micrograms per liter) 

concentrations of dissolved zinc or total zinc. The 

most likely source for the increased zinc and total zinc 

concentrations is the corrosion of galvanized pipes 

used in many domestic and public-water-supply wells.

Samples from six wells contained small (less 

than 1.6 micrograms per liter) concentrations of trihalomethane compounds, such as chloromethane, trichloromethane, bromomethane, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform, that probably are the result of chlorination of the 

wells or contaminated hydrochloric acid used to preserve some samples. Only three ground-water samples 

contained detectable concentrations of volatile organic 

compounds other than trihalomethane compounds; 

one sample contained total xylenes concentrations of 

0.3 microgram per liter, and two samples contained 

methyltertiarybutylether concentrations of 0.3 and 0.6 

microgram per liter. One or more of the non-target volatile organic compounds dibromomethylbenzene, 1- 

bromo-3,5-dimethylbenzene, 4-bromo-l,2-dimethylbenzene, cyanogen chloride, 2-methylpropanal, pentanal, and 2,4-dimethyl heptane were tentatively 

identified in samples from three wells. No semivolatile 

organic compounds or explosives associated cornSummary and Conclusions 63
pounds were detected in any ground-water samples. 

The pesticides diazinon,p,p'-DDE (a degradation 

product of DDT), or tebuthiuron was detected in samples from four wells. The results of ground-water sampling indicate that much of the shallow ground water 

in the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation is susceptible to contamination from surficial sources.

Water-quality samples were collected from eight 

springs during high-base flow and six springs during 

low-base flow at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation. Spring water had specific conductance values 

ranging from 203 to 434 microsiemens per centimeter, 

pH values of about 7.5, and calcium, magnesium, and 

bicarbonate as the principal ions. Dissolution of dolomite is the principal source of major ions in spring 

samples; annual calcium and magnesium loads at 

major springs represent dissolution of a substantial 

rock mass. Background concentrations of major and 

trace inorganic constituents in spring samples generally were smaller than concentrations detected in 

ground-water samples from wells. Specific conductance values and concentrations of inorganic constituents generally were larger in spring-water samples 

collected during low-base flow, reflecting dilution by 

increased local recharge during high-base flow conditions. Samples from two springs, Shanghai Spring and 

the pumping station spring, exhibit probable effects of 

septic contamination. Results of geochemical modeling indicate that all of the flow lost in Dry Creek probably emerges at Shanghai Spring. Fecal coliform and 

fecal streptococcus bacteria densities varied in spring 

water; among the largest densities were detected in the 

sample from Ballard Hollow Spring, the source of 

which may possibly be the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation horse stable located about 1 mile east 

of Ballard Hollow Spring. Water samples from Shanghai Spring contained detectable concentrations of trichloromethane (possibly a preservative contaminant) 

and concentrations of tetrachloroethene equivalent to a 

discharge of 3 gallons of tetrachloroethene per year. 

High-base flow samples from the pumping station 

spring and Shanghai Spring contained detectable concentrations of the pesticides prometon and simazine.

Water samples collected from 17 surface-water 

sites at the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation 

during high- and low-base flow conditions generally 

(excluding samples from site SW 009) had similar values of physical properties and concentrations of inorganic constituents. Surface-water samples generally 

had specific conductance values less than about 350

microsiemens per centimeter and calcium, magnesium, and bicarbonate as the major ions. Concentrations of major inorganic constituents and nutrients 

typically had an inverse relation with discharge, 

except for one sample collected from the Big Piney 

River, where the concentrations probably were diluted 

by runoff. No surface-water samples contained detectable concentrations of volatile, semivolatile organic 

compounds, or explosives associated compounds; 

however, samples from the Big Piney River and a tributary contained the pesticides tebuthiuron, atrazine, 

deethylatrazine, andp,p'-DDE.

Analytical results of streambed sediment samples collected from Big Piney River and Roubidoux 

Creek for grain size, trace element and chlorinated 

organics analysis are not yet available. No samples 

contained detectable concentrations of chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides or explosives associated compounds. Small concentrations of octachlorodibenzoparadioxin, a natural combustion product, 

were detected in bed sediment samples from two sites.

SELECTED REFERENCES

American Public Health Association and others, 1985, Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (16th ed.): Washington, D.C., American Public 

Health Association, 1,268 p.

American Society for Testing Materials, 1984,1984 annual 

book of ASTM standards Volume 4.08, Soil and 

Rock, Building Stones: Philadelphia, Pa., American 

Society for Testing Materials, p. 345, 371.

Ball, J.W., Nordstrom, K.D., and Zachmann, D.W., 1987, 

WATEQ4F A personal computer Fortran translation 

of the geochemical code WATEQ2 with revised data 

base: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-50, 

108 p.

Bates, R.L., and Jackson, J.A., 1980, Glossary of geology 

(2d ed.): Falls Church, VA., American Geological 

Institute, 788 p.

Bolon, H.C., 1953, Low-water study of the Gasconade 

River Basin: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

53-24,10 p.

Budavari, Susan, O'Neil, M.J., Smith, Ann, and Heckelman, P.E., eds., 1989, The Merck index: Rahway, N.J., 

Merck and Co., Inc., 1,606 p.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1994, Title 40, part 136 

Appendix A, Method 635, p. 574-601.

Connor, J.J., and Shacklette, H.T., 1975, Background

geochemistry of some rocks, soils, plants, and vegetables in the conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Society Professional Paper 574-F, 168 p.

64 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-85
Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, G.D., 1988, Field methods for 

measurement of fluvial sediment: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-531,118 p.

Eichelberger, J.W., Munch, J.W., and Beller, T.A., 1992, 

Measurement of purgeable organic compounds in 

water by capillary column gas chromatography/mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Environmental Systems Monitoring Laboratory, rev. 

4.0, p. 5-51.

Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of the Eastern United 

States: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., p. 419- 

518.

Fuller, D1,., Knight, R.D., and Harvey, E J., 1967, Ground 

water, in Mineral and Water Resources of Missouri: 

Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and Land Survey, 

v. 43,2d ser., 399 p.

Goolsby, D.A., Coupe, R.C., and Markovchick, DJ., 1991, 

Distribution of selected herbicides and nitrate in the 

Mississippi River and its major tributaries: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

91-4163,36 p.

Guy, H.P., and Norman, V.W., 1970, Field methods for measurement of fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 3, 

chap. C-2,59 p.

Harrison, R.W., Oradorff, R.C., and Weems, Robert, 

1996, Geology of the Fort Leonard Wood Military 

Reservation and adjacent areas of south-eastern Missouri, with contributions on Quaternary terraces by 

Paul E. Anderson, Dennis Mienert, and Grant Butler: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-60, 

255 p., 10 plates.

Harvey, E.J., 1980, Ground water in the Springfield-Salem 

Plateaus of southern Missouri and northern Arkansas: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 80-101,66 p.

Hem, J.D., 1992, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water (3d ed.): U.S Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254,263 p.

Horowitz, A.J., 1985, A primer on trace metal-sediment 

chemistry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2277,67 p.

lines, J.L., and Emmett, L J7., 1994, Geohydrology of the 

Ozark Plateaus aquifer system in parts of Missouri, 

Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Kansas: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 1414-D, 127 p.

Imes, J.L., and Davis, J.V., 1991, Water type and concentration of dissolved solids, chloride, and sulfate in ground 

water from the Ozark aquifer in Missouri, Arkansas, 

Kansas, and Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-711-K, 4 sheets.

Koenig, John W., ed., 1961, The stratigraphic succession in 

Missouri: Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and 

Land Survey, v. 40,2d series, 185 p.

Lidiak, E.G., Marvin, R.F., Thomas, H.H., Bass, M.N., 

1966, Eastern area, part 4, in Geochronology of the 

Midcontinent Region, United States: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 71, p. 5,427-5,438.

Meister Publishing Company, 1994, Farm chemicals handbook: Willoughby, Ohio, Section C, p. C1-C410.

Melton, R.W., 1976, The regional geohydrology of the Roubidoux and Gasconade Formations, Arkansas and Missouri: Fayetteville, University of Arkansas, 

unpublished M.S. thesis, 160 p.

McCracken, M.H., 1971, Structural features of Missouri: 

Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and Land Survey 

Report of Investigations 49,99 p.

Middendorf, M.A., 1984a, Geology of the Devils Elbow 

quadrangle, Missouri: Rolla, Missouri Division of 

Geology and Land Survey Open-File Map OFM-84- 

192d-GI, 1:24,000 scale, 1 sheet.

 1984b, Geology of the Waynesville quadrangle, 

Missouri: Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and 

Land Survey Open-File Map OFM-84-192c-GI, 

1:24,000 scale, 1 sheet. 

-1986, Geology of the Dryknob, Brownfield, Drew,

and Winnipeg quadrangles, Missouri: Rolla, Missouri 

Division of Geology and Land Survey Open-File Map 

OFM-84-190-GI, 1:52,500 scale, 1 sheet

Montgomery, J.H., 1991, Ground water chemicals field 

guide: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishing Inc., 271 p.

Muehlberger, W.R., Denison, RE., and Lidiak, E.G., 1967, 

Basement rocks in continental interior of the United 

States: Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, v. 51, p. 2,351-2,380.

Muehlberger, W.R., Hedge, C.E., Denison, R.E., and Marvin, R.F., 1966, Southern area, part 3, in Geochronology of the Midcontinent Region, United States: Journal 

of Geophysical Research, v. 71, p. 5,409-5,426.

Mull, D.S., Liebermann, T.D., Smoot, J.L., Woosley, L.H., 

and Mikulak, RJ., 1988, Application of dye-tracing 

techniques for determining solute-transport characteristics of ground water in karst terranes: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 904/6-88-001,103 p.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1985, 

NIOSH/OSHA Pocket guide to chemical hazards: U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, DHHS 

No. 85-114,249 p.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1951- 

80, Climatological data-National Summary: 

Asheville, N.C., National Climatic Data Center.

 1994, Climatological data monthly summary, Missouri: Asheville, N.C., National Climatic Data Center, 

v. 98, no. 11 and 12.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 1989, Hazardous waste operations and emergency response: CFR 

1910.120, p. 330-330.34.

Selected References 65
Oesch, R.D., and Oesch, D.W., 1986, Cave resources of Ft. 

Leonard Wood An inventory and evaluation: Missouri Department of Conservation, 157 p.

Office of the Federal Register, 1962 (July 16), Part 300, 

National oil and hazardous substances pollution contingency plan, Subpart H: Washington, D.C., Federal 

Register, National Archives and Records Service.

Parkhurst, D.L., Thorstenson, D.C., and Plummer, L.N., 

1980, PHREEQE A computer program for geochemical calculations: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations 80-96,193 p.

Radian Corporation, 1993, Final report, multi-site RCRA 

Investigation, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri: Kansas 

City, Mo., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982, Measurements and computation of streamflow Volume 1. Measurement of stage 

and discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2175, 284 p.

Sawyer, C.N., and McCarty, PL., 1978, Chemistry for environmental engineering (3rd ed.): New York, McGrawHill Inc., p. 120,514-519.

Sax, N.I., 1984, Dangerous properties of industrial materials 

(6th ed.): New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co.

Schumacher, J.G., Merten, L.M., Hockanson, E.A., and 

DeRusseau, S.N., 1996, Hydrologic and water-quality 

data for the Weldon Spring ordnance works, St. 

Charles County, Missouri, 1992-95: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96-218,101 p.

Shelton, L.R., 1994, Field guide for the collection and processing of stream-water samples for the National 

Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 94-455, 42 p.

Skelton, John, 1976, Missouri stream and springflow characteristics, low-flow frequency and flow duration: 

Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and Land Survey 

Water Resources Report 32,71 p.

Smith, J.A., Witkowski, P.J., and Fusillo, T.V., 1987, Manmade organic compounds in the surface waters of the 

United States A review of current understanding: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-209, 

182 p.

Sumner, H.S., and Easson, Greg, 1986, Geology of the 

Bloodland, Big Piney, Roby, and Slabtown Springs 

quadrangles, Missouri: Rolla, Missouri Division of 

Geology and Land Survey Open-File Map OFM-84- 

189-GI, 1:24,000 scale, 1 sheet.

U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1988a, Interim 

final report, Hazardous waste consultation No. 37-26- 

1646-88, evaluation of solid waste management units, 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, 1-4 June 1987 and 27 

June-1 July 1988: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.

 1988b, Geohydrologic study no. 38-26-0919-88, 

investigation of closed landfills, Fort Leonard Wood, 

Missouri, 29 October-6 November and 14-18 March 

1988: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.

U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1990, Geohydrologic study no. 38-26-k865-91, Sampling Visit, 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, 13-24 August 15-18 

September 1990: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.

 1992, RCRA facility assessment report: Fort 

Leonard Wood, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. 

-1993, Ground-water quality consultation no. 38-26-

KV44-93, RCRA facility assessment-Sampling Visit, 

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, 29 March-2 April 1993: 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.

U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency, 1983, 

Explosives in soil by HPLC, Method No. 8H: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 

1979, Missouri general soil map and soil association 

descriptions: 74 p.

 1989, Soil survey of Pulaski County, Missouri:

120 p., 12 sheets. 

U.S. Department of Defense, 1981, Defense environmental

quality program policy memorandum (DEQPPM81-

5). 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, Methods for

chemical analysis of water and wastes: USEPA/600/4-

79-020.

 1985, Remedial action at waste disposal sites: Washington, D.C., Office of Emergency and Remedial 

Response, USEPA/625/6-85/006.

 1986a, Superfund exposure assessment manual: 

Washington, D.C., Office of Emergency and Remedial 

Response.

 1986b, Quality criteria for water: Office of Water 

Regulations and Standards, USEPA/440/5-86-001.

 1986c, Methods for organic chemical analysis of 

municipal and industrial wastewater: Federal Register, 

40 CFR 136, App. A, July 1,1986.

 1986d, Test methods for evaluating solid waste: 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 

Washington, D.C., SW 846, v. 1 A, 3rd ed. 

-1990, Method 8330 (Nitroaromatics and nitroamines

by high performance liquid chromatography), in Test 

methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical 

methods, SW 846: Washington, D.C., Office of Solid 

Waste and Emergency Response, rev. 0.

Vineyard, J.D., and Feder, G.L., 1974, Springs of Missouri: 

Rolla, Missouri Division of Geology and Land Survey, 

Water Resources Report 29, 266 p.

Ward, J.R., and Hair, C.A., 1990, Methods for the collection 

and processing of surface-water and bed-material samples for physical and chemical analyses: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-140,71 p.

Wood, W.W., 1976, Guidelines for the collection and field 

analysis of ground-water samples for selected unstable 

constituents: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 1, chap. D-l, 

25 p.

66 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994-85
Zaugg, S.D., Sandstrom, M.W., Smith, S.G., and Fehlberg, extraction and capillary-column gas chromatograK.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geologi- phy/mass spectrometry with selection-ion monitoring:

cal Survey national water quality laboratory Deter- U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95-181,

ruination of pesticides in water by C-18 solid-phase 49 p.

Selected References 67
TABLES

4.9
Table 2. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-01

Tracer injection date:

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

02-14-95

Forney Army Airport 

Pulaski 

Bloodland 

1,075 ±10 feet

Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

Injection Site

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

T1 03-01 

MO-10300

374433 

0920802 

sec. 22, T. 35 N, R. 11 W 

SE1/4NW1/4SW1/4; CBD

Large sinkhole, about 100 feet in diameter, domed interior; probable cave collapse. 

Overcast sky; intermittent sleet, temperature about 30 degrees Fahrenheit. 

_ low flow; _ high flow; _x_ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Rhodamine WT 

3 liters 

1:05 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 

Post-injection flush: 

Investigator(s):

100 gallons 

400 gallons 

Imes/Brenden/Hockanson

Remarks: Water for pre- and post-injection flushes was provided by the Fort Leonard Wood fire department. Rory McCarthy (Fort 

Leonard Wood, Directorate of Public Works, Environmental Officer) and Diana Travis (Missouri Division of Geology and Land 

Survey) observed the dye injection. Onsite survey of the area south of the injection site yielded six sinkholes of varying sizes. One 

sinkhole contained a distinct conduit to the subsurface. Dye was detected at Shanghai Spring 10 to 13 days after injection.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Latitude-longitude Sample 

Site name (degrees minutes seconds) method

Miller Spring

Pumping station spring

Shanghai Spring

Ballard Hollow Stream near Laughlin Cemetery

Small spring in Tunnel Hollow

Roubidoux Spring

Creasy Spring

Stone Mill Spring

Bartlett Mill Spring

374204 -

374416 -

374951 -

374636 -

374745 -

374931 -

375037 -

374424 -

375043 -

0920414

0920451

0920515

0920948

0920926

0921205

0921538

0920229

0921503

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

4.49

2.92

6.55

2.85

3.89

6.80

9.83

5.07

9.55

Test 

results8

n

n

P

n

n

n

n

n

n

ap, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected.

Summary for Injection Site and Attempted Recovery Sites During Dye-Trace Test T103-01 71
Table 3. Summary for successful dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-01

Tracer injection date: 02-14-95 Tracer Test No: T103-01 

Project No: MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Forney Army Airport 

Pulaski 

Bloodland 

1,075 ±10 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374433

0920802

sec. 22, T. 35N.R. 11 W

SE1/4NW1/4SW1/4; CBD

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

Large sinkhole, about 100 feet in diameter, domed interior; probable cave collapse.

Overcast sky; intermittent sleet, temperature about 30 degrees Fahrenheit.

__ low flow; __ high flow; _x_ high-base flow; __ low-base flow; __ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

RhodamineWT 

3 liters 

1:05 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 

Post-injection flush: 

Investigator(s):

100 gallons 

400 gallons 

Imes/Brenden/Hockanson

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Shanghai Spring 

Pulaski 

Devils Elbow 

715 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374951

0920515

sec. 24, T. 36N,R. 11 W

NE1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4; CAA

Sampling method: 

Analytical method:

Activated coconut charcoal Trace length: 6.55 miles 

Scanning spectrofluorophotometer Travel time: 10 to 13 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950213.06 19950216.09 19950221.09

19950224.09 19950227.09 19950303.09

Remarks: The relatively short period (10 to 13 days) that dye passed through Shanghai Spring indicates that water primarily is 

transported from the injection site to the spring through a single well-defined fracture or bedding-plane opening. Dye concentrations before and after this 3-day period were small relative to the maximum dye concentration. Row rate along path carrying 

greatest dye load is about 0.5 mile per day.

72 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 4. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-02

Tracer injection date: 03-16-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-02 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

SWMU FLW-003 

Pulaski 

Bloodland 

1,098 ±5 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374318

0920816

sec. 33, T. 35 N, R. 11 W

SE1/4NE1/4NE1/4; AAC

Site description: About 200 feet into wooded area at south edge of solid-waste management unit FLW-003.

Field conditions: Partly cloudy; about 75 degrees Fahrenheit; previous rainfall about 1 week before injection.

Hydrologic conditions: _ low flow; _ high flow; _x_ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Rhodamine WT 

4 liters 

2:40 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 60 gallons

Post-injection flush: 600 gallons

Investigator(s): Imes/Brenden

Remarks: Injection in small sinkhole at south edge of solid-waste management unit FLW-003. Sinkhole is about 6 feet in diameter 

and 5 feet deep and located between two old manmade trenches. Preliminary to the injection, an 8- to 10-inch thick mass of rootlets 

and organic material was dug from the hole, exposing rock rubble. Rocks were removed to a depth of about 1.5 feet during the preinjection flush. The sinkhole contained no clay fill and accepted flush water at a rate of about 2.5 gallons per minute. Two other small 

sinkholes in the area contained substantial clay fill and were unsuitable as injection sites. The post-injection flush was conducted in 

two stages; a 200-gallon flush at the time of dye injection and a 400-gallon flush 4 days after injection. The dye apparently remained 

trapped in clay deposits beneath the "sinkhole."

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Latitude-longitude Sample 

Site name (degrees minutes seconds) method

Miller Spring

Pumping station spring

Shanghai Spring

Ballard Hollow Stream near Laughlin Cemetery

Small spring in Tunnel Hollow

Roubidoux Spring

Stone Mill Spring

Unnamed stream 0.3 mile south of pumping station

"Asphalt Plant" stream

Ousley Spring

374204

374416

374951

374636

374745

374931

374424

374347

374303

374747

- 0920414

-0920451

-0920515

- 0920948

- 0920926

- 0921205

- 0920229

- 0920517

- 0920456

- 0920156

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

3.93

3.30

8.02

4.03

5.23

7.94

5.44

2.78

3.11

7.73

Test 

results3

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

an, no dye detected.

Summary for Injection Site and Attempted Recovery Sites During Dye-Trace Test T103-02 73
Table 5. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-03

Tracer injection date: 04-17-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-03 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Bradford Cemetery Sinkhole 

Pulaski 

Big Piney 

1,040 ±5 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374210 

0920702

sec.2,T.34N,R. 11 W 

SE1/4 NW1/4 NW1/4; BED

Site description: About 300 feet from Bradford Cemetery Road in large (300 by 150 feet) sinkhole.

Field conditions: Cloudy; about 70 degrees Fahrenheit; intermittent light rainfall, storm approaching.

Hydrologic conditions: __ low flow; _x_ high flow; __ high-base flow; __ low-base flow; __ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

21bs 

1:30 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 

Post-injection flush: 

Investigator(s):

100 gallons 

500 gallons 

Imes/Kleeschulte

Remarks: Injection in hole in northeast side of base of large sinkhole located about 300 feet southwest of bend in Bradford Cemetery 

Road. Sinkhole is elliptical, about 300 by 150 feet, and about 60 feet deep. The injection was in a pit having a surface opening about 

12 by 18 inches and expanding into a cavity about 6 feet long by 4 feet wide by 5 feet deep. The injected dye and water entered the 

ground through a small hole beneath a large boulder in the bottom of the cavity.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Latitude-longitude Sample 

Site name (degrees minutes seconds) method

Miller Spring

Pumping station spring

Shanghai Spring

Ballard Hollow Stream near Laughlin Cemetery

Small spring in Tunnel Hollow

Roubidoux Spring

Stone Mill Spring

Unnamed stream 0.3 mile south of pumping station

"Asphalt Plant" stream

Ousley Spring

374204

374416

374951

374636

374745

374931

374424

374347

374303

374747

- 0920414

-0920451

-0920515

- 0920948

- 0920926

- 0921205

- 0920229

- 0920517

- 0920456

- 0920156

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

3.93

3.30

8.02

4.03

5.23

7.94

5.44

2.78

3.11

7.73

Test 

results8

P

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected.

74 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 6. Summary for successful dye recovery at Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-03

Tracer injection date: 04-17-95 Tracer Test No: T103-03 

Project No: MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Bradford Cemetery Sinkhole 

Pulaski 

Big Piney 

1,040 ±5 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374210

0920702

sec.2,T. 34N,R. 11 W

SE1/4 NW1/4 NW1/4; BBC

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

About 300 feet from Bradford Cemetery Road in large (300 by 150 feet) sinkhole. 

Cloudy; about 70 degrees Fahrenheit; intermittent light rainfall, storm approaching. 

__ low flow; _x_ high flow; __ high-base flow; __ low-base flow; __ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

21bs 

1:30p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 

Post-injection flush: 

Investigator(s):

100 gallons 

500 gallons 

Imes/Kleeschulte

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Miller Spring 

Pulaski 

Big Piney 

798 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374204

0920414

sec.6,T. 34N,R. 10W

SE1/4 NW1/4 NE1/4; ABD

Sampling method: 

Analytical method:

Activated coconut charcoal Trace length: 3.93 miles 

Scanning spectrofluorophotometer Travel time: about 4 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950414.04 19950417.04 19950421.04

19950424.04 19950427.04

Remarks: The first dye detection at Miller Spring occurred within 4 days of injection. Concentrations of dye at the spring 

remained at maximum levels 4 to 7 days after injection, then began decreasing from peak values. Flow rate along path carrying 

greatest dye load is about 1 mile per day.

Summary for Successful Dye Recovery at Miller Spring During Dye-Trace Test T103-03 75
Table 7. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-04

Tracer injection date: 05-09-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-04 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Range 18 sinkhole series

Pulaski

Bloodland

1,100 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374026

0920815

sec. 10,7.34 N,R. 11 W

NW 1/4 SW 1/4 NW 1/4; BCB

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

0.97 mile from solid-waste management unit FLW-001 and dirt road at north edge of Range 18.

Cloudy; about 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

__ low flow; _ high flow; _x_ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

2.5 Ibs 

ll:30a.m.

Pre-injection flush: None

Post-injection flush: 500 gallons

Investigator(s): Imes/Brenden

Remarks: Injection in eastern-most sinkhole of a series of four sinkholes approximately parallel to the dirt road along the northern 

edge of Range 18. The sinkhole is about 20 by 12 feet with a small pit beneath a large rock in the north side of the sinkhole. During 

the flushing operation, the base of the pit collapsed, revealing a 10 to 15 feet deep cavity beneath the pit and overhanging rock.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Latitude-longitude Sample 

Site name (degrees minutes seconds) method

Miller Spring

Pumping station spring

Shanghai Spring

Ballard Hollow spring

Small spring in Tunnel Hollow

Roubidoux Spring

Stone Mill Spring

Unnamed stream 0.3 mile south of pumping station

"Asphalt Plant" stream

Ousley Spring

374204

374416

374951

374830

374745

374931

374424

374347

374303

374747

- 0920414

-0920451

-0920515

- 0921056

- 0920926

- 0921205

- 0920229

-0920517

- 0920456

- 0920156

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

4.08

5.38

11.12

6.72

8.49

11.00

6.97

4.72

4.28

10.23

Test 

results3

P

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

ap, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected.

76 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 8. Summary for successful dye recovery at Miller Spring during dye-trace test T103-04

Tracer injection date: 05-09-95 Tracer Test No: T103-04 

Project No: MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Range 18 sinkhole series

Pulaski

Bloodland

1,100 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374026

0920815

sec. 10, T. 34N,R. 11 W

NW1/4 SW1/4NW1/4; BCB

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

0.97 mile from solid-waste management unit FLW-001 and dirt road at north edge of Range 18.

Cloudy; about 60 degrees Fahrenheit.

_ low flow; _ high flow; _x_ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

2.5 Ibs 

ll:30a.m.

Pre-injection flush: None

Post-injection flush: 500 gallons

Investigator(s): Imes/Brenden

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Miller Spring 

Pulaski 

Big Piney 

798 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374204

0920414

sec. 6,T.34N,R. 10 W

SE1/4NW1/4NE1/4; ABD

Sampling method: Activated coconut charcoal Trace length: 4.08 miles 

Analytical method: Scanning spectrofluorophotometer Travel time: about 13 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950505.04 19950508.04 19950512.04

19950515.04 19950519.04 19950522.04

19950526.04 19950530.04

Remarks: Dye concentrations from elutriated charcoal packets placed in Miller Spring were largest about 13 days after injection. 

The slow rate of increase and decrease of dye concentrations as dye passed through the spring suggests a complex multi-path 

flow system. Flow rate along path carrying greatest dye load is about 0.3 mile per day.

Summary for Successful Dye Recovery at Miller Spring During Dye-Trace Test T103-04 77
Table 9. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-05

Tracer injection date: 05-26-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-05 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Pulaski Avenue 

Pulaski 

Waynesville 

1,045 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374647

0920817

sec.9,T. 35.N,R. 11 W

SE1/4NE1/4NE1/4; AAD

Site description: 700 feet east of intersection of Pulaski and Indiana Avenues; north side of road.

Field conditions: Overcast with showers; considerable rainfall in past week.

Hydrologic conditions: _ low flow; _x_ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

1.25tol.501bs 

2:15p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 

Post-injection flush: 

Investigator(s):

50 gallons 

450 gallons 

Brenden

Remarks: Injection in hole beneath large ehn tree at southern edge of eastern-most sinkhole of two sinkholes located along Pulaski 

Avenue. Road passes through western-most sinkhole, which has a flat vegetated bottom and no drainage hole. Intense rainfall 

occurred within 2 hours of the dye injection.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Latitude-longitude Sample 

Site name (degrees minutes seconds) method

Miller Spring

Pumping station spring

Shanghai Spring

Ballard Hollow spring

Small spring in Tunnel Hollow

Roubidoux Spring

Stone Mill Spring

Unnamed stream 0.3 mile south of pumping station

"Asphalt Plant" stream

Ousley Spring

Roubidoux Creek near Burchard Hollow

374204 -

374416 -

374951 -

374830 -

374745 -

374931 -

374424 -

374347 -

374303 -

374747 -

374611 -

0920414

0920451

0920515

0921056

0920926

0921205

0920229

0920517

0920456

0920156

0920929

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miies)

6.55

4.26

4.49

1.30

1.52

4.69

5.97

4.25

4.40

5.91

3.15

Test 

results8

n

n

P

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

ap, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected.

78 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 10. Summary for successful dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-05

Tracer injection date: 05-26-95 Tracer Test No: T103-05 

Project No: MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Pulaski Avenue 

Pulaski 

Waynesville 

1,045 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374647

0920817

sec.9,T. 35N,R. 11 W

SE1/4NE1/4NE1/4; AAD

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

700 feet east of intersection of Pulaski and Indiana Avenues; north side of road.

Overcast with showers; considerable rainfall in past week.

_ low flow; _x_ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescien 

1.25tol.501bs 

2:15 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 50 gallons

Post-injection flush: 450 gallons

Investigator(s): Brenden

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Shanghai Spring 

Pulaski 

Devils Elbow 

715 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374951

0920515

sec. 24, T. 36 N, R. 11 W

NE1/4NE1/4SW1/4;CAA

Sampling method: Activated coconut charcoal Trace length: 4.49 miles 

Analytical method: Scanning spectrofluorophotometer Travel time: 10 to 14 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery 

19950526.11 19950530.11 19950602.11 

19950605.11 19950609.11 19950616.11 

19950623.11 19950630.11

Remarks: Peak dye concentrations at the spring occurred 10 to 14 days after dye injection. The slower rate of increase and 

decrease of dye concentrations about the peak value as compared to dye-trace test T103-01 indicates a more complex multichannel flow path from the Pulaski Avenue sinkhole to Shanghai Spring than from the Forney Army Airport sinkhole to Shanghai Spring. Flow rate along path carrying greatest dye load is about 0.4 mile per day.

Summary for Successful Dye Recovery at Shanghai Spring During Dye-Trace Test T103-05 79
Table 11. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-tract test T103-06

Tracer injection date: 07-06-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-06 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Hurd Hollow Stream 

Pulaski 

Bloodland 

902 ± 5 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374205

0921319

sec.2,T. 34N,R. 12 W

NE1/4SE1/4NW1/4; BDA

Site description: In streambed of Hurd Hollow near point of flow loss in pool of water with small inflow.

Field conditions: Partly sunny scattered rainfall during the week.

Hydrologic conditions: _x_ low flow; _ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Rhodamine WT 

1 gallon 

3:30 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: None

Post-injection flush: None

Investigator(s): Brenden/Collier

Remarks: Injection in pool of water near the point where Hurd Hollow Stream loses flow. Some rainfall occurred the night before the 

injection.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Site name

Creasy Spring

Roubidoux Spring

Roubidoux Creek near Burchard Hollow

Tunnel Hollow spring

Ballard Hollow spring

Miller Spring

Road FLW 32 tributary

Pumping station spring

Stone Mill Spring

Shanghai Spring

Latitude-longitude Sample 

(degrees minutes seconds) method

375037

374931

374611

374745

374830

374204

374347

374416

374424

374951

- 0921538

- 0921205

- 0920929

- 0920926

- 0921056

-0920414

- 0920517

-0920451

- 0920229

-0920515

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

10.02

8.63

7.70

7.42

5.87

8.29

7.63

8.16

10.27

11.57

Test 

results3

n

P

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

"p, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected.

80 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 12. Summary for successful dye recovery at Roubidoux Spring during dye-trace test T103-06

Tracer injection date: 07-06-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-06 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Kurd Hollow Stream 

Pulaski 

Bloodland 

902 ± 5 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374205

0921319

sec.2,T. 34N,R. 12 W

NE1/4SE1/4NW1/4;BDA

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

In streambed of Kurd Hollow near point of flow loss in pool of water with small inflow.

Partly sunny scattered rainfall during the week.

_x_ low flow; _ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Rhodamine WT 

1 gallon 

3:30p.m.

Pre-injection flush: None

Post-injection flush: None

Investigator(s): Brenden/Collier

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Roubidoux Spring 

Pulaski 

Waynesville 

770 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374931

0921205

sec. 25, T. 36 N, R. 12 W

SE1/4 NE1/4 NW1/4; BAD

Sampling method: Activated coconut charcoal Trace length: 8.63 miles 

Analytical method: Scanning spectrofluorophotometer Travel time: 8 to 15 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950630.10 19950706.02 19950714.02

19950721.02 19950728.02 19950804.02

Remarks: Dye recovery at Roubidoux Spring was confined to a relatively small time range compared to the total period during 

which recovery was attempted. Dye concentrations before and after the 8- to 15-day travel time were small as compared with 

peak concentrations. Flow rate along path carrying greatest dye load is about 0.5 to 1 mile per day.

Dye was not recovered in a charcoal packet placed in Roubidoux Creek between the point at which flow returns to Roubidoux 

Creek near Ballard Hollow and Roubidoux Spring. This indicates that the source of water in Roubidoux Creek downstream from 

the long dry reach is discharge of shallow ground water from nearby upland areas. Surface water lost to karst terrane beneath 

Roubidoux Creek near the Cannon Range apparently flows beneath the lower reach of Roubidoux Creek and discharges at Roubidoux Spring.

Summary for Successful Dye Recovery at Roubidoux Spring During Dye-Trace Test T103-06 81
Table 13. Summary for injection site and attempted recovery sites during dye-trace test T103-07

Tracer injection date: 07-13-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-07 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Sinkhole at junction of FLW 24 and FLW 22 Latitude:

Pulaski Longitude:

Big Piney Land net:

1,010 feet Quarter section:

374442

0920544

sec. 24, T. 35 N, R. 11 W

SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4; BCD

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

Large sinkhole at south side of junction of roads FLW 24 (pumping station) and FLW 22.

Hot, humid, and sunny. No rainfall in the past week.

_x_ low flow; _ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

0.50 Ib 

10:20 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 300 gallons

Post-injection flush: 700 gallons

Investigator(s): Brenden

Remarks: Sinkhole had two visible openings in the southeast corner. A large amount of organic matter was removed from around 

both openings in the event one would not take flush water. Largest opening was used and was opened to 1.5 feet diameter by 1.5 feet 

deep before flushing. Opening took flush water quickly with minimum amount of pooling. Water never overflowed the opening at 

any time, which indicates a good connection to underground fractures.

Attempted Recovery Sites

No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Site name

Creasy Spring

Roubidoux Spring

Roubidoux Creek near Burchard Hollow

Tunnel Hollow spring

Ballard Hollow spring

Miller Spring

Road FLW 32 tributary

Pumping station spring

Stone Mill Spring

Shanghai Spring

"Asphalt Plant" stream

Latitude-longitude Sample 

(degrees minutes seconds) method

375037 -

374931 -

374611 -

374745 -

374830 -

374204-

374347 -

374416 -

374424 -

374951 -

374303 -

0921538

0921205

0920929

0920926

0921056

0920414

0920517

0920451

0920229

0920515

0920456

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Charcoal

Distance 

(miles)

11.32

7.99

6.46

4.86

3.78

3.33

1.14

.95

2.99

5.93

2.15

Test 

results3

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

P

n

u

n

ap, positive dye detection; n, no dye detected; u, uncertain (inconclusive results).

82 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 14. Summary for successful dye recovery at the pumping station spring during dye-trace test 

T103-07

Tracer injection date: 07-13-95 Tracer Test No: 

Project No:

T103-07 

MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Sinkhole at junction of FLW 24 and FLW 22 Latitude:

Pulaski Longitude:

Big Piney Land net:

1,010 feet Quarter section:

374442

0920544

sec. 24, T. 35 N, R. 11 W

SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4; BCD

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

Large sinkhole at south side of junction of roads FLW 24 (pumping station) and FLW 22.

Hot, humid, and sunny. No rainfall in the past week.

_x_ low flow; _ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

0.50 Ib 

10:20 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 300 gallons

Post-injection flush: 700 gallons

Investigator(s): Brenden

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Pumping station spring 

Pulaski 

Big Piney 

825 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374416

0920451

sec. 24, T. 35 N, R. 11 W

SE1/4 SE1/4 SE1/4; CCC

Sampling method: 

Analytical method:

Activated coconut charcoal 

Scanning spectrofluorophotometer

Trace length: 

Travel time:

0.95 mile 

1 to 8 days

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950630.07 19950706.08 19950714.08

19950721.08 19950728.08 19950804.08

19950811.08 19950818.08 19950825.08

Remarks: Fluorescein has always been present in the background at this recovery site. The background fluorescein may be 

derived from residential areas 1 mile west of the spring. Dye recovery was within 1 to 8 days after injection. Initial recovery concentrations were large, indicating a well-defined flow path. Substantial dye concentrations were also detected after the peak concentration, indicating some water is flowing through alternate paths or is temporarily retained in storage. Flow rate along path 

carrying greatest dye load is less than 1 mile per day.

Summary for Successful Dye Recovery at the Pumping Station Spring During Dye-Trace Test T103-07 83
Table 15. Summary for uncertain dye recovery at Shanghai Spring during dye-trace test T103-07

Tracer injection date: 07-13-95 Tracer Test No: T103-07 

Project No: MO-10300

Injection Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Sinkhole at junction of FLW 24 and FLW 22 Latitude:

Pulaski Longitude:

Big Piney Land net:

1,010 feet Quarter section:

374442

0920544

sec. 24, T. 35N,R. 11 W

SE1/4 SW1/4 NW1/4; BCD

Site description: 

Field conditions: 

Hydrologic conditions:

Large sinkhole at south side of junction of roads FLW 24 (pumping station) and FLW 22.

Hot, humid, and sunny. No rainfall in the past week.

_x_ low flow; _ high flow; _ high-base flow; _ low-base flow; _ flood flow

Tracing agent: 

Agent quantity: 

Time:

Fluorescein 

0.50 Ib 

10:20 p.m.

Pre-injection flush: 300 gallons

Post-injection flush: 700 gallons

Investigator(s): Brenden

Recovery Site

Site name: 

County: 

Quadrangle: 

Altitude:

Shanghai Spring 

Pulaski 

Devils Elbow 

715 feet

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Land net: 

Quarter section:

374951

0920515

sec. 24,T.36N,R. 11 W

NE1/4 NE1/4 SW1/4; CAA

Sampling method: 

Analytical method:

Activated coconut charcoal 

Scanning spectrofluorophotometer

Trace length: 

Travel time:

5.93 miles

File names of the sequence of traces indicating a positive dye recovery

19950630 19950706 19950714

19950721 19950728 19950804

19950811 19950818 19950825

Remarks: A small fluorescein peak was observed at Shanghai Spring several days after the successful recovery at the pumping 

station spring. Because dye concentrations at Shanghai Spring were substantial immediately before injection, it is not certain that 

the peak dye concentration detected 1 to 8 days after injection of dye into the sinkhole at roads FLW 24 and 22 was caused by the 

injected dye. This dye-trace test could be repeated using a different injected dye or larger quantity of fluorescein dye to confirm 

recovery at Shanghai Spring.

84 Geohydrologic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994

[mi, mile; fP/s, cubic feet per second; uS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; temp., temperature; °C, degrees Celsius; N/A, not 

applicable; Ib, left bank; --, no data; rb, right bank; see la, see measurement no. la; e, estimated; <, less than]

Measurement 

number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

Stream name

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Tributary name

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Shanghai Spring

Dry Creek

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Ousley Spring

unnamed spring

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

Bank

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

0.081

.381

.895

1.414

1.495

1.578

1.619

1.757

2.646

2.994

3.007

3.083

3.272

3.513

3.961

4.055

4.469

4.853

4.970

5.081

5.594

5.925

6.464

6.483

6.698

7.022

7.627

8.060

8.161

8.485

9.058

10.132

10.766

11.116

11.592

11.872

12.603

12.676

13.015

13.557

13.896

14.062

14.139

15.112

15.165

15.481

Date 

(monthdayyear)

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-13-94

Flow 

rate 

(tf/s)

506

0

0

.27

544

0

0

0

.09

0

0

0

0

0

0

.15

0

535

.02

0

0

22.2

0

0

0

0

0

520

0

.04

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

532

0

0

0

.75

1.11

0

504

0

Specific 

conductance 

(nS/cm)

333

--

--

448

334

--

--

--

539

--

--

--

--

--

--

343

--

324

364

--

--

424

--

-

-

--

--

334

--

491

--

--

-

-

-

--

--

324

--

--

465

441

--

334

--

Temp. 

(°C)

6.0

--

--

9.7

5.8

--

--

--

4.9

--

--

--

--

--

-

7.9

--

5.8

6.0

--

--

14.0

--

-

--

--

--

5.3

--

6.8

--

--

--

--

-

--

--

6.3

--

-

12.9

11.2

--

5.1

~

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-

--

--

--

-

--

-

~

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and Tributaries 85
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number Stream name

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Tributary name

Smokey Hollow

unnamed

spring branch

Spring Creek

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

Stone Mill spring

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

pump station culvert

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Miller Spring

McCourtney Hollow

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

Distance Date 

from (monthmouth dayBank (ml) year)

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

Ib

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

16.217

16.381

16.702

16.829

17.276

17.588

17.763

19.740

19.850

20.886

21.393

21.852

22.179

22.428

22.849

23.213

23.679

23.985

24.120

24.402

24.545

25.319

25.424

25.709

26.992

28.203

28.605

28.930

29.403

29.495

29.495

29.557

29.587

29.971

30.831

31.259

31.588

31.895

32.367

32.730

33.462

33.615

33.907

35.872

35.900

35.900

35.934

36.435

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-14-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-12-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance 

(ft^s) (uS/cm)

0

0

.04

38.4

0

0

518

see la

0

407

46.8

0

0

0

0

0

453

.12

see6a

see9a

.06

0

441

0

0

0

9.06

0

0

470

467

0

0

0

0

0

0

.02

523

0

.03

0

see 13a

.02

445

464

.10

0

--

--

501

308

--

--

228

-

-

321

270

--

--

--

--

-

318

385

--

--

419

--

336

--

--

--

308

--

--

--

335

~

-

~

--

~

-

478

341

--

331

--

413

342

342

431

--

Temp. 

(°C)

-

--

5.2

10.0

--

-

6.1

-

--

10.0

13.7

--

--

--

--

--

5.4

12.0

-

--

2.5

--

5.0

--

--

--

13.0

--

--

--

4.5

-

--

--

--

--

--

4.5

6.0

-

2.4

~

3.5

5.2

5.2

2.5

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-

-

--

--

--

-

-

-

--

-

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

-

--

--

-

~

~

~

~

86 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number

95

96

97

la

2a

3a

4a

5a

6a

7a

8a

9a

lOa

lla

12a

13a

14a

15a

16a

17a

18a

19a

20a

21a

22a

23a

24a

Ib

2b

3b

4b

5b

6b

7b

Stream name

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

tributary

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

"Pumping station"

stream

"Pumping station"

stream

"Pumping station"

stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

tributary

unnamed stream

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

tributary

Bald Ridge Creek

tributary

Bald Ridge Creek

tributary

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

Bald Ridge Creek

tributary

Bald Ridge Creek

tributary

Bald Ridge Creek

unnamed south

fork

unnamed tributary

Little Bald Ridge

Creek tributary

Little Bald Ridge

Creek

Little Bald Ridge

Creek tributary

Little Bald Ridge

Creek tributary

Little Bald Ridge

Creek tributary

Tributary name

Crossing Hollow

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed south fork

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed tributary

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Little Bald Ridge

Creek

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

Falls Hollow

N/A

unnamed spring

N/A

Wildcat Hollow

spring

Distance 

from 

mouth 

Bank (ml)

rb 37.311

rb 37.588

37.942

.066

.332

rb .862

1.045

1.320

.021

.364

.526

.035

.282

Ib .662

.787

.043

.141

.502

1.821

Ib 1.832

Ib 2.945

Ib 3.173

3.786

4.712

rb 5.221

Ib 5.662

6.405

rb .153

.145

Ib .277

.606

rb 1.332

Ib 1.916

rb 2.197

Date 

(monthdayyear)

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-13-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-13-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-12-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-21-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-22-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance Temp. 

(fAs) (uS/cm) (°C)

0.24 426 4.5

0

482 324 5.1

.29 400 8.6

.46

see Ib

.29 500 9.1

0

.12 444 5.7

.26 440 11.2

0

.11 356 6.4

.30

see 2b

0

2.61 335 7.5

3.07

3.11

2.84

see 3b

0

0

.53

0

0

0

0

0

0

see Ic

.78

0

0

0

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

-

--

--

--

--

~

--

-

--

--

~

-

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

flow begins

~

--

--

--

--

~

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and Tributaries 87
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number Stream name

Ic

2c

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Falls Hollow 

tributary

Falls Hollow

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

(Highway H)

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Tributary name Bank

unnamed Ib

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

sewage plant outflow rb

N/A

Roubidoux Spring rb

N/A

unnamed rb

N/A

Burchard Hollow rb

N/A

unnamed Ib

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Ballard Hollow rb

unnamed rb

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed Ib

N/A

unnamed rb

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed Ib

Town Hollow Ib

N/A

Distance Date 

from (monthmouth day- 

(ml) year)

0.023

.138

.136

1.417

1.861

1.889

2.493

2.928

3.565

3.768

4.277

4.586

4.767

5.447

6.116

6.546

7.086

7.514

7.514

7.929

8.250

8.350

8.654

8.769

8.893

9.338

9.565

9.830

10.882

11.244

11.862

11.943

12.184

12.921

13.447

13.832

14.088

12-22-94

12-22-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance 

(ft3/s) (uS/cm)

0

0

63.4

64.3

65.1

.61

58.3

61.2

1.89

0

1.02

0

1.43

0

.28

.36

.29

.67

.66

.83

.31

see la

0

0

0

.03e

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

~

241

365

400

825

365

351

385

375

333

350

332

356

357

295

372

357

~

~

~

Temp. 

(°C)

--

10.9

11.7

11.3

8.3

12.0

12.8

5.7

4.8

--

6.2

6.2

4.4

4.7

6.0

5.5

5.5

7.4

~

~

--

~

«

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

good

--

poor

good

--

fair

fair

pumping

at creek

good

--

fair/poor

good

fair

poor

poor

fair/poor

~

~

~

88 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

Stream name

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Tributary name

N/A

N/A

York Hollow

unnamed

Elliot Branch

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

Hurd Hollow

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

Bank

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

14.287

14.498

14.574

14.928

15.322

15.551

16.973

17.433

17.641

19.251

21.729

21.733

21.776

22.013

22.039

22.158

22.196

22.639

22.924

23.765

23.908

24.267

24.541

24.582

24.606

25.257

25.459

25.886

25.893

26.230

26.418

26.418

26.887

Date 

(monthdayyear)

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance Temp, 

(tf/s) (nS/cm) (°C)

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

.46 361 1.8

0

0

3.10 361 2.3

3.55 363 4.3

0

0

28.2 363 4.1

33.6 361 4.7

.Ole

0

0

40.0 364 4.3

0

0

43.2 366 4.2

46.0 355 4.3

.Ole

0

41.7 308 3.9

44.0 360 5.5

0

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

~

~

~

-

~

~

--

good/fair

good

good

good

good

good/fair

good

good

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and Tributaries 89
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number Stream name

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

la

2a

3a

4a

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Highway 17 bridge

Ballard Hollow

Ballard Hollow

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

Tributary name

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

Musgrave Hollow

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

Little Piney Creek

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Distance Date 

from (monthmouth dayBank (ml) year)

Ib 26.920

27.148

Ib 27.195

Ib 27.377

rb 27.546

27.657

27.980

rb 28.000

28.458

28.963

rb 29.355

29.478

29.724

29.724

30.320

30.775

31.284

rb 31.296

32.043

32.043

32.043

Ib 32.056

rb 32.432

rb 32.823

Ib 32.969

33.175

33.175

Ib 33.315

Ib 33.548

33.849

33.849

33.939

.117

.907

.069

.180

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-15-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-15-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-15-94

12-12-94

12-13-94

12-13-94

12-12-94

12-15-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance 

(n^/s) (nS/cm)

0

44.5

seeSa

0

.03e

49.1

47.7

.15e

43.4

48.9

see 12a

41.0

57.4

67.1

53.0

56.9

46.4

.54

39.5

48.6

40.8

0

0

.02e

<.01e

35.7

35.2

see25a

0

36.6

44.8

--

.05e

.02e

.37

.74

~

358

-

365

360

265

140

--

318

338

338

330

248

358

316

--

358

361

475

--

369

--

363

--

444

333

Temp. (°C)

5.0

-

4.4

6.0

6.0

5.0

--

4.8

5.0

5.0

5.1

5.7

5.9

6.0

--

7.4

6.2

6.1

-

4.3

--

4.1

--

4.1

4.6

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

~

good/fair

-

good

poor

--

-

fair

poor

good

good

-

fair

good

--

good

poor

._

good

good

~

good/fair

._

90 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 16. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and 

tributaries, December 1994 Continued

Measurement 

number Stream name

5a 

6a

7a

8a

9a

lOa

lla

12a

13a

14a

15a

16a

17a

18a

19a

20a

21a

22a

23a

24a

25a

26a

27a

Ib

2b

3b

4b

5b

6b

unnamed stream 

tributary 

unnamed stream

tributary

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

tributary

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

tributary

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

tributary

Musgrave Hollow

tributary

Musgrave Hollow

tributary

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

spring

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

spring

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

unnamed stream

Tributary name Bank

unnamed Ib 

unnamed Ib

N/A

Mush Paddle Hollow Ib

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed rb

N/A

N/A

unnamed Ib

unnamed rb

unnamed rb

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Distance Date 

from (monthmouth day- 

(ml) year)

0.210 

.911

1.121

1.634

1.663

2.286

2.472

.066

.605

1.098

1.396

1.642

1.642

1.796

2.218

2.320

2.398

2.878

3.416

4.058

.003

.085

.152

.036

.482

.581

1.080

1.378

1.920

12-15-94 

12-15-94

12-15-94

12-15-94

12-15-94

12-15-94

12-15-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-12-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

12-14-94

Specific 

Flow conductrate ance 

(tf/s) (uS/cm)

0 

0

.19

0

.24

.12e

0

.63

1.16

.88

0

.83

.97

see Ib

0

0

1.36

.71

.50

.01

0

<.01e

0

.57

.25

.12e

.35

0

0

258

~

244

--

--

336

215

363

-

198

233

--

--

--

234

269

252

--

--

530

--

134

96

-

343

--

Temp. 

(°C)

9.6

--

10.4

--

--

5.3

4.6

5.5

--

4.1

4.0

--

--

--

4.1

5.1

6.1

--

--

10.2

--

4.2

5.6

--

5.7

--

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

--

--

--

flow begins

-

fair/poor

poor

poor

--

--

fair

--

--

--

fair

fair

fair

flow begins

--

--

-

fair

poor

--

fair

~

--

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and Tributaries 91
Table 17. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River and tributaries, February 1995

[mi, mile; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; uS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; temp., temperature; °C, degrees Celsius; N/A, not 

applicable; rb, right bank; --, no data; Ib, left bank]

Measurement 

number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

Stream name

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Tributary name

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

Shanghai Spring

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

N/A

Ousley Spring

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

Spring Creek

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

Stone Mill Spring

unnamed

Bank

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

0.462

1.074

1.424

1.475

2.652

3.261

3.261

4.049

4.590

5.085

5.589

5.948

6.083

6.083

6.235

6.453

6.470

6.690

7.021

8.155

8.478

8.523

8.523

9.472

10.127

10.764

10.924

10.979

11.104

13.319

14.052

14.124

14.847

14.847

16.208

16.368

16.491

16.491

16.703

16.817

17.194

17.844

18.798

19.541

21.378

21.528

Date 

(monthdayyear)

02-22-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-22-95

02-21-95

02-22-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-21-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-20-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-17-95

Flow 

rate 

(fAs)

603

.05

.4

601

.2

591

587

.6

622

.03

0

25.6

566

584

.2

583

0

0

0

0

.2

598

602

.1

.02

0

0

611

0

611

1.2

1.6

601

610

0

0

615

644

.02

46.0

611

.1

.1

628

54.7

.05

Specific 

conductance 

(uS/cm)

303

--

--

308

--

306

307

-

308

--

--

389

306

306

--

307

--

--

--

--

--

308

299

--

--

-

--

299

--

302

440

385

303

303

--

306

285

--

275

288

-

285

250

--

Temp. 

(°C)

9.5

--

--

8.9

-

8.4

8.7

--

8.6

--

--

13.3

7.8

7.8

--

7.4

--

--

--

-

-

7.1

9.6

--

--

--

--

9.6

--

9.0

13.1

3.8

8.3

8.3

-

6.9

7.1

~

10.4

6.5

-

6.5

12.2

--

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

good

--

--

fair/poor

--

good

good

--

good

--

--

good/fair

fair

fair

--

fair/poor

--

--

--

-

-

good

good/fair

--

--

-

--

good/fair

-

good

fair/poor

good/fair

good

good

--

-

good/fair

good

--

good/fair

good

-

good/fair

good

92 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 17. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River and tributaries, February 

1995 Continued

Measurement 

number Stream name

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney tributary

Big Piney Tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Tributary name

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

Miller Spring

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

Bald Ridge Creek

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

Bank

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(mi)

21.999

23.680

23.680

24.412

27.219

27.219

28.598

29.389

29.874

30.013

30.064

30.156

31.138

31.228

32.166

32.166

33.524

33.876

34.373

34.658

34.658

34.812

35.822

35.870

36.403

37.897

Date 

(monthdayyear)

02-17-95

02-17-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-14-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

02-13-95

Flow 

rate 

(ft3/s)

520

501

408

.05

405

416

28.7

.1

0

2.0

0

379

0

0

388

386

397

3.7

0

374

397

.2

.2

.2

396

382

Specific 

conductance 

(uS/cm)

296

295

296

--

295

295

240

--

--

--

--

294

--

--

298

289

290

275

-

292

292

--

--

--

292

292

Remark or 

Temp, measurement 

(°C) rating

4.5

4.7

4.4

--

4.7

4.7

12.3

--

--

--

--

4.6

--

--

4.2

5.4

5.4

4.4

--

5.2

5.2

--

--

--

4.8

4.0

good

fair

fair

--

good

good

fair

--

--

--

--

good

--

--

good

good

good

fair

--

good

good

--

--

--

good

good

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River and Tributaries, February 1995 93
Table 18. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and tributaries, 

September 1995

[mi, mile; f^/s, cubic feet per second; spec, cond., specific conductance; uS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; temp., temperature; °C, 

degrees Celsius; N/A, not applicable; rb, right bank; --, no data; Ib, left bank; e, estimated; see la, see measurement no. la]

Measurement 

number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Stream name

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Tributary name

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

Shanghai Spring

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Ousley Spring

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Spring Creek

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

Stone Mill Spring

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed spring

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

Bank

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

3.013

3.533

3.954

4.043

4.436

5.388

5.565

5.963

6.037

6.469

6.680

7.002

7.610

8.141

8.472

8.711

8.711

9.067

9.368

9.400

9.946

10.154

10.217

10.593

10.650

11.702

12.574

13.214

14.203

14.547

15.426

15.629

16.408

16.694

16.744

16.787

17.230

19.244

21.367

22.006

22.010

22.254

22.660

24.381

24.511

25.207

25.289

Date 

(monthdayyear)

09-25-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-25-95

09-22-95

09-25-95

09-25-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-25-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-22-95

09-21-95

09-21-95

09-21-95

09-21-95

09-21-95

09-20-95

09-20-95

09-20-95

09-20-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

Flow 

rate 

(ft3/s)

267

0

0

0

0

285

0

22.7

252

0

0

.10e

0

0

.05e

246

255

.I0e

0

0

.30e

262

0

0

0

0

1.19

1.42

.20e

270

0

0

0

31.8

.50e

229

237

233

35.0

193

198

188

,50e

.30e

.05e

200

.07e

Spec. 

Cond. 

(jiS/cm)

342

-

--

-

--

345

--

469

335

-

--

520

--

-

--

336

328

--

--

-

521

329

-

--

--

--

470

447

-

328

--

--

--

324

413

332

330

330

340

329

329

325

404

-

325

Temp. 

(°C)

15.9

--

--

--

--

15.3

-

15.2

14.8

--

-

12.0

-

--

--

14.5

16.5

--

--

--

11.1

15.9

--

--

-

--

13.7

14.0

--

15.4

--

--

--

13.0

10.5

14.1

16.6

16.6

14.8

17.2

17.2

18.2

13.9

-

19.3

~

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

fair

-

--

--

--

good-fair

-

fair-poor

fair-poor

-

-

-

-

-

-

good-fair

good-fair

-

~

~

~

good

--

~

-

-

poor

poor

--

good-fair

-

~

~

good

-

good

good-fair

good-fair

poor

good

fair

fair

-

runoff?

runoff?

fair

94 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 18. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and tributaries, 

September 1995 Continued

Measurement 

number

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Stream name

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River tributary

Big Piney River

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Tributary name

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

Miller Spring

Miller Spring

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed spring

unnamed slough

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed spring

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

Bald Ridge Creek

N/A

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

Crossing Hollow

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

STP outflow

unnamed spring

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Bank

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

rb

Ib

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

Ib

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

25.855

26.940

27.051

27.583

28.135

28.581

28.581

28.715

29.344

29.508

29.876

29.947

29.986

30.024

30.024

30.729

30.967

31.113

31.154

31.527

31.835

32.120

32.120

32.384

32.714

33.393

33.784

33.826

34.024

34.024

34.321

34.759

35.342

35.965

36.129

36.408

36.453

37.841

.403

1.490

1.621

1.725

2.312

2.568

2.626

2.787

2.787

3.072

3.567

Date 

(monthdayyear)

09-20-95

09-19-95

09-20-95

09-19-95

09-20-95

09-20-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-20-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-18-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-19-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-18-95

09-06-95

09-06-95

09-05-95

09-06-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09_05_95

09-06-95

09_05_95

09-05-95

09_05_95

Flow 

rate 

(ftS/s)

195

0

189

194

0

7.31

14.2

0

0

0

0

.15e

.05e

180

168

0

.20e

0

0

0

0

111

174

0

0

0

.15e

.50e

173

174

0

0

0

190

.05

.10

.07

182

23.7

23.6

0

.43

1.05

0

0

22.7

22.5

.73

.92

Spec. 

Cond. 

(nS/cm)

325

--

329

328

--

370

369

--

--

--

--

478

--

328

327

--

380

--

--

--

--

329

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

328

413

419

462

324

400

405

--

392

393

--

--

352

388

380

Temp. (°C)

18.1

--

17.6

19.1

--

13.8

13.8

--

--

--

--

14.4

--

17.9

19.3

-

13.9

--

--

--

--

19.1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

19.0

14.6

14.7

14.4

18.4

21.1

19.3

--

17.6

17.5

--

--

17.7

17.9

29.2

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

good-fair

--

good-fair

fair

--

fair

poor

--

--

--

-

--

--

good

good

--

..

-

--

--

-

good

good-fair

--

--

--

--

--

good-fair

good

--

--

--

good-fair

-

--

--

good-fair

good

fair-poor

--

poor

good-fair

--

«

good

fair

fair-poor

fair

Discharge Measurements and Selected Physical Properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and Tributaries 95
Table 18. Discharge measurements and selected physical properties for the Big Piney River, Roubidoux Creek, and tributaries, 

September 1995 Continued

Measurement 

number

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

la

2a

3a

Ib

Stream name

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek tributary

Roubidoux Creek

Musgrave Hollow

Musgrave Hollow tributary

Musgrave Hollow

unnamed tributary

Tributary name

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed spring

1\mnel Hollow

stream

N/A

N/A

Ballard Hollow

stream

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

N/A

unnamed

Musgrave Hollow

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

Little Piney Creeek

unnamed

N/A

unnamed

unnamed

N/A

N/A

unnamed

N/A

N/A

Bank

rb

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

rb

Ib

rb

rb

rb

rb

Ib

Ib

rb

Distance 

from 

mouth 

(ml)

4.585

4.716

4.848

5.555

6.059

6.991

7.148

7.287

7.473

8.234

8.295

8.340

24.034

24.062

24.343

25.039

25.801

25.801

26.192

26.823

26.902

27.155

27.347

27.504

28.005

28.054

28.064

28.963

29.155

29.303

29.638

29.763

30.753

31.062

31.247

31.909

31.909

32.767

32.818

32.853

33.229

33.433

33.796

.000

1.376

1.541

.457

Date 

(monthdayyear)

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-05-95

09-12-95

09-13-95

09-13-95

09-13-95

09-13-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-12-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-11-95

09-11-95

09-05-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

09-12-95

Flow 

rate 

(tf/s)

0

.52

0

.20

.03

0

.08

0

.Ole

.10

.18

0

0

0

2.01

7.03

8.38

8.52

0

8.17

0

0

0

.03e

.05e

9.32

9.62

9.73

0

see la

6.67

7.33

0

8.06

.15e

8.12

7.63

.Ole

.Ole

6.73

0

0

6.28

0

see Ib

.45e

.05e

Spec. 

Cond. 

(uS/cm)

-

-

~

~

-

-

--

~

401

463

--

~

-

349

354

351

328

~

353

-

~

-

-

~

358

354 

355

-

-

356

356

~

350

343

353

354

396

302

358

--

~

358

-

--

-

Temp. (°C)

-

--

--

--

~

--

-

-

26.9

22.2

-

~

~

22.5

22.2

22.8

22.7

-

22.4

-

~

-

~

-

21.3

20.4

21.5

--

~

21.8

21.7

~

22.2

19.7

22.2

20.6

18.8

21.2

21.5

~

~

22.2

~

~

«

--

Remark or 

measurement 

rating

~

~

-

-

~

-

--

--

good

fanflow begins

--

end of flow

good-fair

good-fair

good

good

-

fair

~

-

--

~

-

good-fair

good-fair

good

-

-

poor

good-fair

--

fair

--

poor

good

--

--

fair

--

--

--

-

--

--

96 Geohydroiogic and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL)

[MRL, method reporting level; uS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; --, no data available; mg/L, milligrams per liter; 

Hg/L, micrograms per liter; L, listed; ug/kg, micrograms per kilogram; ng/g, nanograms per gram; PCN, Polychlorinated nepthalene; EPTC, 

s-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate; BHC, 1,2,3,4,5,6,-Hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, N-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)propionamide; ***, not determined]

Group or family Constituent

Physical properties and inorganic compounds, in water

Specific conductance

pH

Oxygen, dissolved

Calcium, dissolved

Calcium, total

Magnesium, dissolved

Magnesium, total

Sodium, dissolved

Sodium, total

Potassium, dissolved

Alkalinity, total, by incremental titration

Bicarbonate, by incremental titration

Carbonate, by incremental titration

Alkalinity, total, pH 4.5 end point

Sulfate, dissolved

Chloride, dissolved

Fluoride, dissolved

Silica, dissolved

Cyanide, total

Dissolved solids, residue at 180 degrees Celsius

Dissolved solids, sum of constituents

Hardness, total

Organic carbon, total

Nitrite plus nitrate, total as nitrogen

Nitrite, total as nitrogen

Ammonia, total as nitrogen

Phosphorus, total

Fecal coliform, in colonies per 100 milliliters

Fecal streptococci, in colonies per 100 milliliters

Antimony, total

Arsenic, total

Barium, dissolved

Barium, total

Beryllium, dissolved

Beryllium, total

Boron, dissolved

Boron, total

Cadmium, dissolved

Cadmium, total

Chromium, dissolved

Chromium, total

Cobalt, dissolved

Cobalt, total

Copper, dissolved

Copper, total

Iron, dissolved

Iron, total

Lead, dissolved

MRL

l.OuS/cm

.01 units

.1 mg/L

.02 mg/L

.02 mg/L

.02 mg/L

.002 mg/L

.2 mg/L

.5 mg/L

.1 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

.2 mg/L

.1 mg/L

.01 mg/L

.1 mg/L

.01 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

1.0 mg/L

.1 mg/L

.01 mg/L

.001 mg/L

.01 mg/L

.010 mg/L

1

1

1.0 M-g/L

l.Ofig/L

1.0 \LgfL

5.0 \LgfL

,5M-g/L

1.0 M-g/L

10.0 M-g/L

20.0 M-g/L

l.Ofig/L

5.0 M-g/L

5.0 Mg/L

10.0 iig/L

3.0M£/L

10.0 Mg/L

10.0 M-g/L

10.0 M-g/L

3.0 (ig/L

5.0 M-g/L

10.0 Mg/L

MCL

-

6.5-9.0

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

250 mg/L

250 mg/L

4 mg/L

--

.2 mg/L

--

-

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

6 Mg/L

50 M-g/L

--

2,000 Mg/L

--

4 M-g/L

--

L

--

5 M-g/L

--

100 M-g/L

--

--

--

1,000 Mg/L

--

300 M-g/L

--

Constituents and Detection Limits of Inorganic and Organic Analyses 97
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family Constituent MRL MCL

Substituted ethane

Substituted ethene

Substituted methane

Physical properties and inorganic compounds, in water Continued

Lead, total 1.0 ug/L

Lithium, dissolved 4.0 ug/L

Manganese, dissolved 1.0 ug/L

Manganese, total 5.0 ug/L

Mercury, total .10 ug/L

Molybdenum, dissolved 10.0 ug/L

Nickel, dissolved 10.0 ug/L

Nickel, total 10.0 ug/L

Selenium, total 1.0 ug/L

Silver, dissolved 1.0 ug/L

Silver, total 5.0 ug/L

Strontium, dissolved 10.0 ug/L

Thallium, total 1.0 ug/L

Vanadium, dissolved 6.0 ug/L

Vanadium, total 10.0 ug/L

Zinc, dissolved 3.0 ug/L

Zinc total 5.0 ug/L

Volatile organic compounds (total), in water

Chloroethane 0.2 ug/L

l,2-Dibromoethane(EDB) .2 ug/L

1.1-Dichloroethane .2 ug/L

1.2-Dichloroethane .2 ug/L

1.1.1-Trichloroethane .2 ug/L

1.1.2-Trichloroethane .2 ug/L

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane .2 ug/L

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane .2 ug/L

Trichlorotrifluoroethane .2 ug/L

Vinyl chloride .2 ug/L

1,1-Dichloroethene .2 ug/L

cis-l,2-Dichloroethene .2 ug/L

trans-l,2-Dichloroethene .2 ug/L

1,1,2-Trichloroethene .2 ug/L

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) .2 ug/L

Bromomethane .2 ug/L

Dibromomethane .2 ug/L

Bromoform .2 ug/L

Bromochloromethane .2 ug/L

Dibromochloromethane .2 ug/L

Chloromethane .2 ug/L

Dichloromethane .2 ug/L

Chloroform .2 ug/L

Chlorofluoromethane .2 ug/L

Carbon tetrachloride .2 ug/L

Dichlorobromomethane .2 ug/L

Dichlorofluoromethane .2 ug/L

Dichlorodifluoromethane .2 ug/L

Trichlorofluoromethane .2 ug/L

Methyl iodide .5 ug/L

Carbon disulfide .2 ug/L

15 ug/L

50 ug/L 

2 ug/L

100 ug/L 

50 ug/L

100 ug/L 

2 ug/L 

L 

5,000 ug/L

0.05ug/L

5 ug/L

200 ug/L

5 ug/L

2 ug/L

7 ug/L

70 ug/L

100 ug/L

5 ug/L

5 ug/L

100 ug/L 

100 ug/L

5 ug/L 

100 ug/L

5 ug/L 

100 ug/L

98 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family

Substituted propane

Substituted propene

Substituted butene

Benzene derivatives

Ether

Aldehyde

Ketone

Ester

Nitrile

Constituent

Volatile organic compounds (total), in water Continued

1 ,2-Dichloropropane

1 ,3-Dichloropropane

2,2-Dichloropropane

1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane

l,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP)

1 , 1 -Dichloropropene

cis- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene

trans- 1 ,3-Dichloropropene

Hexachlorobutadiene

Benzene

Chlorobenzene

1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene

1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene

1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene

1 ,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

Bromobenzene

Ethylbenzene

Isopropylbenzene

n-Propylbenzene

Sec-butylbenzene

Tert-butylbenzene

n-Butylbenzene

1 ,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

1 ,3,5-Trimethylbenzene

Xylenes, total

Styrene

Toluene

1 ,2-Chlorotoluene

1 ,4-Chlorotoluene

p-Isopropyltoluene

Naphthalene

2-Chloroethylvinyl ether

Ethyl ether

Methyltertiarybutyl ether (MTBE)

Acrolein

Acetone

2-Butanone (Methyl ethyl ketone)

2-Hexanone (Methyl butyl ketone)

4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)

Vinyl acetate

Acrylonitrile

MRL

0.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

.2 ug/L

20 ug/L

5 Rg/L

<20

<20

<20

 2ug^

20 ug/L

MCL

5 ug/L

5 ug^

-

--

.2 ug/L

~

~

~

-

5 ug/L

100 \ig/L

600 ug/L

600 M-g/L

75 ug/L

--

70 \ig/L

-

70 ug/L

-

-

~

-

-

--

--

10 ug/L

100 ug/L

1 M-g/L

--

-

--

-

-

-

--

-

~

~

~

-

~

--

Acidic

Semivolatile organic compounds (total), in water

2-Chlorophenol

2,4-Dichlorophenol

2,4-Dimethylphenol

4,6-Dinitro-ortho-cresol

2,4-Dinitrophenol

2-Nitrophenol

4-Nitrophenol

5ug/L

5 ug/L

Constituents and Detection Limits of Inorganic and Organic Analyses 99
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family Constituent MRL MCL

Acidic Continued

Basic and neutral

Semivolatile organic compounds (total), in water Continued

Para-chloro-meta cresol

Pentachlorophenol

Phenol

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

Acenaphthene

Acenaphthylene

Anthracene

Benzidine

Benzo[a]anthracene

Benzo[a]pyrene

Benzo[fc]fluoranthene

Benzo[g,/t,i]perylene

Benzo[fc]fluoranthene

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane

bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether

bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether

bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether

n-Butylbenzyl phthalate

2-Chloronaphthalene

4-Chlorophenly phenyl ether

Chrysene

1,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene

1.2-Dichlorobenzene

1.3-Dichlorobenzene

1.4-Dichlorobenzene

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine

Diethylphthalate

Dimethylphthalate

Di-n-butyl phthalate

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

Di-n-octyl phthalate

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine

Fluoranthene

Fluorene

Hexachlorobenzene

Hexachlorobutadiene

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

Indeno[7,2,3-o/]pyrene

Isophorone

Naphthalene

Nitrobenzene

n-Nitrosodimethylamine

n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine

n-Nitrosodiphenylamine

Phenanthrene

Pyrene

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

30 Mg/L 

30 Mg/L

5Mg/L 

20 Mg/L

5Mg/L

5Mg/L

40 Mg/L

10 Mg/L

10 Mg/L

10 Mg/L

10 Mg/L

10 Mg/L

5Mg/L

5 Mg/L

5 Mg/L 

5 Mg/L

10 Mg/L 

10 Mg/L

20 Mg/L 

5 Mg/L

5jig/L

5Mg/L

5 Mg/L

5Mg/L 

5Mg/L 

5Mg/L

.2 Mg/L 

.2 Mg/L

.2 Mg/L

100 Mg/L

.2 Mg/L 

.3 Mg/L 

600 Mg/L 

600 Mg/L 

75 Mg/L

1 Mg/L 

50

.4 Mg/L

70 Mg/L

100 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family

Acetanilide

Amide

Benzamide

Benzenamine

Carbamate

Carbothioate

Chloractetanilide

Cyclohexane

Dichloroethylene

Dinitroaniline

Methyluracil

Napthalene

Organophosphate

Organophosphorus

Phosphonodithioate

Phosphorothioate

Pyrethroid

Substituted urea

Sulfite ester

Terepthalate/dimethyl

Thiocaramate

Toluidine

Triazine

Triazinone

Constituent

Pesticides (dissolved), in water

Alachlor

Napropamide

Propanil

Pronamide

Ethalfluralin

Butylate

Carbaryl

Carbofuran

EPTC (Eptam)

Pebulate

Thiobencarb

Molinate

Metolachlor

Propachlor

Alpha BHC

Lindane

2,6-Diethylaniline

p,p'-DDE

Pendimethalin

Trifluralin

Terbacil

Dieldrin

Ethoprop

Malathion

Methyl Parathion

Parathion

Phorate

Terbufos

Disulfoton

Methyl azinphos

Fonofos

Dimethoate

Chlorpyrifos

Diazinon

Permethrin

Linuron

Tebuthiuron

Propargite

DCPA (Dacthal)

Triallate

Benfluralin

Atrazine

Cyanazine

Deethylatrazine

Prometon

Simazine

Metribuzin

MRL

0.009 ug/L

.01 ug/L

.016 ug/L

.009 ug/L

.013 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.046 ug/L

.013 ug/L

.005 ug/L

.009 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.007 ug/L

.009 ug/L

.015 ug/L

.007 ug/L

.011 Ug/L

.006 ug/L

.01 ug/L

.018 ug/L

.012 ug/L

.03 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.012 ug/L

.01 ug/L

.035 ug/L

.022 ug/L

.011 Ug/L

.012 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.038 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.024 ug/L

.005 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.016 ug/L

.039 ug/L

.015 ug/L

.006 ug/L

.004 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.013 ug/L

.017 ug/L

.013 ug/L

.007 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.008 ug/L

.012 ug/L

MCL

2 ug/L

--

--

--

--

--

--

40 ug/L

--

--

--

--

L

--

--

.2 ug/L

--

--

--

L

--

--

--

--

-

--

--

--

-

-

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

L

--

--

3 ug/L

--

--

L

4 ug/L

L

Constituents and Detection Limits of Inorganic and Organic Analyses 101
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family Constituent MRL MCL

Acidic

Basic and neutral

Explosives (total), in water

Nitrobenzine 0.1 \ig/L

2-Nitrotoluene

3-Nitrotoluene

4-Nitrotoluene .3

1,3-Dinitrobenzene .05 \ig/L

2,6-Dinitrotoluene .005 jig/L

2.3-Dinitrotoluene .01 ng/L

2.4-Dinitrotoluene .006 |ig/L

3,4-Dinitrotoluene .003 jig/L

1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene .1 pg/L

2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene .009 ng/L

Tertyl .1 ng/L

RDX .3 ng/L

4-Amino 2,6-DNT .2 ng/L

3,5-Dinitroanaline .2 pg/L

2-Amino 4,6-DNT .2 ng/L

HMX .05 \ig/L

Semivolatile organic compounds (total), in sediment

2-Chlorophenol 200 ng/kg

2,4-Dichlorophenol 200 ng/kg

2,4-Dimethylphenol 200 ng/kg

4,6-Dinitro-ortho-cresol 600 ng/kg

2,4-Dinitrophenol 600 ng/kg

2-Nitrophenol 200 ng/kg

4-Nitrophenol 600 ng/kg

Para-chloro-meta cresol 600 ng/kg

Pentachlorophenol 600 jig/kg

Phenol 200 ng/kg

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 600 jig/kg

Acenaphthene 200 Mg/kg

Acenaphthylene 200 jig/kg

Anthracene 200 jig/kg

Benzidine *** jig/kg

Benzo[a]anthracene 400 jig/kg

Benzo[a]pyrene 400 MS/kg

Benzo[fe]fluoranthene 400 jig/kg

Benzo[^,A,i]perylene 400 jig/kg

Benzo[fc]fluoranthene 400 jig/kg

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane 200 jig/kg

bis(2-Chloroethyl) ether 200 jig/kg

bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) ether 200 jig/kg

bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate 200 ng/kg

4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 200 jig/kg

n-Butylbenzyl phthalate 200 jig/kg

2-Chloronaphthalene 200 jig/kg

4-Chlorophenly phenyl ether 200 jig/kg

Chrysene 400 jig/kg

1,2,5,6-Dibenzanthracene 400Mg/kg

1.2-Dichlorobenzene 200jig/kg

1.3-Dichlorobenzene 200jig/kg

102 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family Constituent MRL MCL

Basic and neutral Continued

Semivolatile organic compounds (total), 

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 

3,3 '-Dichlorobenzidine 

Diethylphthalate 

Dimethylphthalate 

Di-n-butyl phthalate 

2,4-Dinitrotoluene 

2,6-Dinitrotoluene 

Di-n-octyl phthalate 

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine 

Fluoranthene 

Fluorene

Hexachlorobenzene 

Hexachlorobutadiene 

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 

Indeno[/ ,2,3-cd]pyrene 

Isophorone 

Naphthalene 

Nitrobenzene 

n-Nitrosodimethylamine 

n-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine 

n-Nitrosodiphenylamine 

Phenanthrene 

Pyrene 

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

in sediment Continued

200ng/kg

*** ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200 ng/kg 

400ng/kg

*** ^g/kg 

200 ng/kg 

200 ng/kg 

200 ng/kg 

200 ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

400ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg 

200ng/kg

Chlorophenoxy-acid herbicides, in sediment

2,4,5-T

2,4-D

2,4-DP

Dicamba 

Picloram 

Silvex

Explosives, in sediment

1,3-Dinitrobenzene

2,6-Dinitrotoluene

2,4-Dinitrotoluene

1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene

2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene

Tertyl

RDX

4-Amino 2,6-DNT

2-Amino 4,6-DNT

HMX

Dioxin, in sediment

TCDD, total 

2,3,7,8-TCDD 

PeCDD, total 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 

HxCDD, total

200ng/kg

0.1 

.1 

.1 

.1 

.1 

.1

0.25 mg/kg 

.26 mg/kg 

.25 mg/kg 

.25 mg/kg 

.25 mg/kg 

.65 mg/kg

1.00 mg/kg 

.26 mg/kg 

.26 mg/kg

2.20 mg/kg

0.013 ng/g 

.013 ng/g 

.036 ng/g 

.036 ng/g 

.026 ng/g

0.00003 ng/g

Constituents and Detection Limits of Inorganic and Organic Analyses 103
Table 19. Constituents and detection limits of inorganic and organic analyses for water and sediment samples and Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources drinking-water maximum contaminant levels (MCL) Continued

Group or family Constituent MRL MCL

Dioxin, in sediment Continued

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 

HpCDD, total 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD

OCDD

Furan, in sediment

TCDF, total

2,3,7,8-TCDF

PeCDF, total

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF

HxCDF, total

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

H-CDF, total

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF

OCDF

0.026 ng/g 

.026 ng/g 

.026 ng/g 

.015 ng/g 

.0073 ng/g 

.25 ng/g

0.067 ng/g 

.067 ng/g 

.019 ng/g 

.019 ng/g 

.019 ng/g 

.014 ng/g 

.014 ng/g 

.014 ng/g 

.014 ng/g 

.014 ng/g 

.011 ng/g 

.011 ng/g 

 Oil ng/g 

.032 ng/g

104 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
Table 20. Quality-assurance data for physical properties and inorganic constituents in duplicate and blank water 

samples

[RPD, relative percent difference; <, less than; --, no data available]

Median RPD Median Maximum 

Physical property or constituent of duplicates blank value blank value

Specific conductance, in microsiemens per centimeter <1 2 6

pH, in standard units 1.4 7.8 8.0

Calcium, in milligrams per liter <1 <.04 .05

Calcium, total, in milligrams per liter 3 .04 .1

Magnesium, in milligrams per liter <1 <.02 .02

Magnesium, total, in milligrams per liter <1 <.03 .04

Sodium, in milligrams per liter <1 <.2 <.2

Sodium, total, in milligrams per liter <1 .2 .2

Potassium, in milligrams per liter 1.4 <.l .1

Alkalinity, incremental titration, total as CaCO3 , in milligrams per liter <1 

Bicarbonate, in milligrams per liter

Alkalinity, pH 4.5 endpoint, in milligrams per liter <1

Chloride, in milligrams per liter <1 .2 .7

Sulfate, in milligrams per liter <1

Fluoride, in milligrams per liter <1 <.l <.l

Silica, in milligrams per liter 1 .3 .4

Cyanide, in milligrams per liter <1 <.02 <.02

Residue, loss upon ignition at 105 degrees Celsius, in milligrams per liter 2.1 9 16

Total dissolved solids, in milligrams per liter <1

Hardness, as CaCC>3, in milligrams per liter <1 <1 <1

Total organic carbon, in milligrams per liter 3.9 1.4 6.2

Nitrite plus nitrate, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter <1 <.02 .02

Nitrite, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter <1 <.006 .01

Ammonia, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter <1 .01 .04

Phosphorus, total, in milligrams per liter 28 <.02 .02

Fecal coliform, in colonies per 100 milliliters <1 <10 <10

Fecal streptococcus, in colonies per 100 milliliters <1 <5 <5

Antimony, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <1 1

Arsenic, in micrograms per liter <1 <1 1

Barium, in micrograms per liter <1 <2 <2

Barium, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <2 2

Beryllium, in micrograms per liter <1 <.5 <.5

Beryllium, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <.5 .5

Boron, in micrograms per liter 33 <15 20

Boron, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <20 20

Cadmium, in micrograms per liter <1 <1 <1

Cadmium, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <1 1

Chromium, in micrograms per liter <1 <5 <5

Chromium, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <5 5

Cobalt, in micrograms per liter <1 <3 <3

Cobalt, total, in micrograms per liter <1 <3 3

Quality-Assurance Data for Physical Properties and inorganic Constituents 105
Table 20. Quality-assurance data for physical properties and inorganic constituents in duplicate and blank water 

samples Continued

Physical property or constituent

Median RPD 

of duplicates

Median 

blank value

Maximum 

blank value

Copper, in micrograms per liter 

Copper, total, in micrograms per liter 

Iron, in micrograms per liter 

Iron, total, in micrograms per liter 

Lithium, in micrograms per liter 

Lead, in micrograms per liter 

Lead, total, in micrograms per liter 

Mercury, in micrograms per liter 

Manganese, in micrograms per liter 

Manganese, total, in micrograms per liter 

Molybdenum, in micrograms per liter 

Nickel, in micrograms per liter 

Nickel, total, in micrograms per liter 

Selenium, total, in micrograms per liter 

Silver, in micrograms per liter 

Silver, total, in micrograms per liter 

Strontium, in micrograms per liter 

Thallium, total, in micrograms per liter 

Vanadium, in micrograms per liter 

Vanadium, total, in micrograms per liter 

Zinc, in micrograms per liter 

Zinc, total, in micrograms per liter

13 <3 

<3 

<4

<6

<8

<4

10 

7 

10 

<4 

50 

10

10

3

1

<6

1

8

4

106 Geohydrologlc and Water-Quality Assessment of the Fort Leonard Wood Military Reservation, Missouri, 1994 95
ABBREVIATIONS AND REPORTING UNITS FOR CHEMICAL CONSTITU

AND NOTATIONS USED IN TABLES 21, 22, and 23

or 

or

CO 

CD

a

30

3.

3 

CO

o 

o

<D

O

o

CO

3

a

!o

CO

0)

IT

0)

a

SC Specific conductance, in microsiemens per centimeter 

	at 25 degrees Celsius

pH In standard units

lab Laboratory

Temp Water temperature, in degrees Celsius

DO Dissolved oxygen, in milligrams per liter

Ca Calcium, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

Cat Calcium, total, in milligrams per liter

Mg Magnesium, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

Mgt Magnesium, total, in milligrams per liter

Na Sodium, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

Naj Sodium, total, in milligrams per liter

K Potassium, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

AU^n-) Alkalinity, total, in milligrams per liter as CaCO3, by incremental titration

HCO3(IT) Bicarbonate, in milligrams per liter, by incremental titration 

	Carbonate, in milligrams per liter, by incremental titration 

	Alkalinity, total, in milligrams per liter as CaCO3, pH 4.5 end point

SC>4 Sulfate, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

Cl Chloride, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

F Fluoride, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

SiC>2 Silica, dissolved, in milligrams per liter

CNt Cyanide, total, in milligrams per liter

ROE Dissolved solids, residue at 180 degrees Celsius, in milligrams per liter

TDS Dissolved solids, sum of constituents, in milligrams per liter

Hard Hardness, total, in milligrams per liter as CaCO3

TOC Organic carbon, total, in milligrams per liter

NO2+NO3t Nitrite plus nitrate, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter

NO2t Nitrite, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter

NO3t Nitrate, total, in milligrams per liter

NH3t Ammonia, total as nitrogen, in milligrams per liter

Pt Phosphorus, total, in milligrams per liter

Sbt Antimony, total, in micrograms per liter

Ast Arsenic, total, in micrograms per liter

Ba Barium, dissolved, in micrograms per liter

Bat Barium, total, in micrograms per liter

Be Beryllium, dissolved, in micrograms per liter

B^ Beryllium, total, in micrograms per liter

B Boron, dissolved, in micrograms per liter

Bt Boron, total, in micr

Cd Cadmium, dissolved

Cdt Cadmium, total, in m

Cr Chromium, dissolve

Crt Chromium, total, in 

Co Cobalt, dissolved, in 

Cot Cobalt, total, in micr

Cu Copper, dissolved, in 

Cut Copper, total, in mic

Fe Iron, dissolved, in m

Fet Iron, total, in microg

Pb Lead, dissolved, in m

Pbt Lead, total, in micro

Li Lithium, dissolved, i

Mn Manganese, dissolve

Mnt Manganese, total, in 

Hgt Mercury, total, in mi

Mo Molybdenum, dissol

Ni Nickel, dissolved, in 

Nit Nickel, total, in micr

Set Selenium, total, in m

Ag Silver, dissolved, in 

Agt Silver, total, in micr

Sr Strontium, dissolved

Tlt Thallium, total, in m

V Vanadium, dissolved

Vt Vanadium, total, in m

Zn Zinc, dissolved, in m

Znt Zinc, total, in microg

	No data

< Less than

> Greater than

Q Discharge, in cubic 

e Estimated

Colif Fecal coliform, in co

Strep Fecal streptococci, i
Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard W

8

f 

3o"

(Q 

0

0)

3

a

u

<?

O

0)

f

>

i13

»*

a

0

o1

a.

8

0)

a

Ia

S

I 

 2

3)

§

i

o"

5

w

c

'.J.

i

4

Ol

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

"03/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time

1305

1430

1325

1050

1220

1100

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1350

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

sc

508

370

317

397

350

428

405

469

509

634

405

367

391

341

341

315

540

482

482

458

385

475

473

678

680

511

441

515

383

364

445

394

465

372

SC, lab

515

347

340

370

371

430

432

470

486

621

401

391

380

338

340

341

524

513

513

524

392

510

507

693

663

509

432

505

385

384

421

422

446

400

pH

7.6

7.8

7.9

7.8

7.9

7.6

7.8

7.6

7.5

7.3

7.7

7.5

7.8

7.7

7.7

7.7

7.5

7.5

7.5

7.4

7.9

7.7

7.5

7.3

7.3

7.5

7.5

7.4

7.6

7.6

7.6

7.7

7.5

7.6

pH, lab

7.6

7.6

7.7

7.4

7.7

7.6

7.5

7.5

7.4

7.3

7.5

7.5

7.7

7.7

7.6

7.6

7.5

7.6

7.6

7.2

7.7

7.4

7.4

7.2

7.3

7.5

7.4

7.6

7.6

7.6

7.4

7.6

7.1

7.6

Temp DO

16.0

13.5

16.5

14.0

16.0

16.0

21.0

13.5

14.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

11.5

15.0 >1

15.0 >1

15.0

13.5

18.0

18.0

14.5

13.0

14.0

15.5

14.0

15.0

13.5

13.0

13.5

15.5

16.5

15.5

16.0

13.0

18.0

Ca

60

38

36

41

39

48

45

51

52

.18

43

41

41

36

37

36

53

50

51

68

42

58

56

75

68

56

41

57

42

41

47

45

49

42

Ca,

52

36

38

38

42

43

48

46

50

.1

39

43

39

32

31

37

50

54

54

65

40

54

60

72

64

53

39

51

38

43

44

49

46

38
Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard W

 o

*w

2

 o 

3

3

8

CD

a

5" 

o

<5

CD

o"

Oo

I

§

sr

3

0

5

c

3

1

|

§ 2.

3

3

1

CO

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

 03/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time

1305

1430

1325

1050

1220

1100

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1350

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

K

0.7

.7

.8

1.1

1.0

.8

.7

1.7

1.6

.2

1.0

.9

1.0

1.2

1.2

1.2

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.5

.9

1.1

1.1

1.1

1.0

2.2

1.7

4.2

.8

.8

.8

.8

.9

1.1

Alk (m

269

172

171

182

167

227

209

214

230

310

185

174

185

188

188

157

234

214

214

295

186

246

262

359

253

249

171

230

179

161

211

183

210

186

HCO3(IT)

328

210

209

223

204

111

255

261

280

378

226

212

226

230

230

192

285

261

261

360

226

301

319

438

309

304

206

280

219

196

258

224

256

227

C03(m

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1.6

0

0

0

0

0

0

A.MP,

266

172

171

182

167

226

212

211

229

311

186

173

186

188

188

157

230

215

215

294

192

246

259

359

252

249

169

229

179

161

211

189

212

185

SO4

2.6

2.1

1.8

6.7

7.0

7.2

6.7

8.7

6.7

4.3

4.1

4.2

7.7

4.5

5.0

7.2

26

25

25

16

4.1

11

11

7.7

11

5

5.4

8.9

12

12

5.9

6.2

16

11

Cl

3.4

1.0

1.2

1.9

2.8

2.3

2.3

5.1

5.7

4.7

5.7

7.2

1.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

7.5

7.8

7.6

1.4

6.3

1.1

1.7

11

37

6.1

22

1.6

1.8

1.7

1.9

2.6

1.3

2.2

F 

<0.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

.1 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.02 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

<.10 

.6 

<.10 

o 

to
:J Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard W

15"

3

o

(Q

0

D)

Q.

i

$

o

9J.

5

i

w

o

a

o 

 n

o

a.

go

D)

3.

o

o

Q.

?

ET

2?

i

o"

p

w

o

~

i

£

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

"03/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time

1305

1430

1325

1050

1220

1100

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1350

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

TDS

273

177

172

194

181

232

215

236

244

355

205

196

198

187

189

171

111

259

~

314

200

263

268

369

329

262

216

255

198

185

219

200

232

202

Hard

290

190

170

200

180

230

220

240

250

1

200

190

200

170

170

170

270

250

260

330

200

280

260

360

330

260

190

__

200

200

220

220

230

200

Tf\f* t*lf\ m t*lf\ t*lf\ t*lf\ KILJ

1 UV* n\J2 + NUgf '' '21 'vJjj *'*3t

<0.1

1.7

.6

1.6

1.0

1.3

.9

1.8

3.1

2.4

<.l

.9

2.3

.6

.7

.7

2.6

.9

.8

2.2

44

2.1

1

88

2.8

58

38

<.l

1.3

.8

1.6

.7

1.9

.8

0.83

.40

.36

.20

.19

.13

.11

6.9

7.2

.34

2.6

2.4

.06

.74

.74

.72

1.5

1.6

1.5

<.02

1.0

<.02

<.02

1.4

5.7

3.8

5.3

.43

.02

<.02

.40

.38

.04

.02

<0.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.010

<.001

<.001

<.010

<.001

<.010

<.010

<.001

.02

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

<.001

0.83

.40

.36

.20

.19

.13

.11

6.9

7.2

.34

2.6

2.4

.06

.74

.74

.72

1.5

1.6

1.5

_

1.0

~

1.4

5.7

3.8

5.3

.43

-

.40

.38

.04

.02

0.01

.01

<.01

.01

.01

.03

<.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

.02

.02

.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

<.01

.01

.01

<.01

.01

<.01

<.01

.01

.03

.01

.01

.01

.01

<.01

Pt 

<0.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

.02 

<.02 

<.02 

.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

.02 

.03 

<.02 

.03 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 

<.02 
Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard 

 o

~

8_

TJ

5

a

8

a>

Q.

5"

o

J! 

1«"

3

(D

3

S

3

O

3

9-

s.

(0

§

"

8

3

3

I

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

^3/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time

1305

1430

1325

1050

1220

1100

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1350

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

Ba, Be

40 <0.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

70 <.5

50 <.5

<2 <.5

40 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

40 <.5

40 <.5

40 <.5

50 <.5

50 <.5

50 <.5

80 <.5

40 <.5

200 <.5

200 <.5

40 <.5

50 <.5

50 <.5

40 <.5

70 <.5

20 <.5

20 <.5

30 <.5

30 <.5

80 <.5

30 <.5

Bet B

<0.5 10

<.5 10

<.5 <10

<.5 10

<.5 <10

.5 20

<.5 20

<.5 10

<5 <io

<.5 20

<.5 10

<.5 20

<.5 20

.5 <10

.5 20

<.5 10

<.5 10

<5 10

<.5 20

<.5 10

<.5 10

<.5 20

<.5 20

<.5 10

<.5 20

<.5 10

<.5 20

<.5 10

°2.5 20

<.5 20

<.5 <10

<.5 20

<.5 20

<.5 10

Bt

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

20

<20

20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

20

20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

20

20

<20

<20

<20

<20

<20

Cd Cd, Cr

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

2 <1 <5

<1.0 1 <5

<1.0 1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 1 <5

1 <1 <5

1 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5

<1.0 <1 <5
i Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard W

o 

8

3

I

o

02

O

0)

Q.

i

1O

SL

>

o

a

o

31

3.

""

8

0)

&

1

a

1

J?

3D

8

I

o

p 

2

c

3.

i

£

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dwOSO

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

"03/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time Cu

1305 <10

1430 10

1325 <10

1050 <10

1220 <10

1100 <10

1120 20

1320 <10

1355 <10

0900 <10

0935 <10

1315 <10

1350 20

1100 <10

1101 <10

0955 <10

1335 40

1045 30

1050 30

1030 <10

1000 <10

1010 <10

1240 <10

1300 20

1215 <10

0940 <10

1140 <10

1010 <10

1400 <10

1420 <10

1115 <10

1420 <10

1515 <10

1315 <10

Cut

<10

10

<10

10

10

<10

20

<10

<10

<10

<10

20

10

10

<10

40

40

40

<10

<10

<10

<10

30

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

20

<10

<10

Fe

<3

5

75

5

<3

<3

<3

4

4

4

<3

<3

3

4

9

<3

<3

<3

<3

4

<3

63

64

<3

3

<3

3

<3

7

<3

<3

<3

7

12

Fe,

40

20

50

40

80

9

7

4

30

20

190

110

20

50

100

6

10

9

9

20

20

110

100

10

60

30

30

40

180

260

8

6

10

750

Pb Pbt Li

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 6

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 4

<10 <10 <4

<10 10 <4

10 <10 <4

<10 <10 5

<10 <10 7

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 4

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 4

<10 10 <4

<10 10 <4

<10 <10 <4

10 <10 7

<10 <10 <4

20 <10 <4

<10 <10 7

C20 <10 <4

<10 <10 9

C30 <10 <4

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 6

C30 <10 <4

C20 <10 <4

<10 <10 6

C40 10 <4

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 <4

<10 <10 6

C20 <10 <4

Mn 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

2 

1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

2 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

1 

<1 

1 

<1 

2 

2 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

1 

1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

<1 

5 
Table 21. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in ground-water samples from wells at and near the Fort Leonard W

TJ

~

S_

3

a~~

8

a.

5"

o

3

o

S

55

1w

3

0

3

1

gS?

3

T3

8CO

3

3

i

CO

Well 

(fig. 21)

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

"03/29/95

04/06/95

08/29/95

03/30/95

07/18/95

b07/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

b08/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

Time Ni Nit 8%

1305 <10 <10 <1

1430 <10 <10 <1

1325 <10 <10 <1

1050 <10 <10 <1

1220 <10 <10 <1

1100 <10 <10 <1

1120 <10 <10 <1

1320 <10 <10 <1

1355 <10 <10 <1

0900 <10 <10 <1

0935 <10 <10 <1

1315 <10 <10 <1

1350 <10 <10 <1

1100 <10 10 <1

1101 <10 10 <1

0955 <10 <10 <1

1335 <10 <10 <1

1045 <10 <10 <1

1050 <10 <10 <1

1030 <10 <10 <1

1000 <10 <10 <1

1010 <10 <10 <1

1240 <10 <10 <1

1300 <10 <10 <1

1215 <10 <10 <1

0940 <10 <10 <1

1140 <10 <10 <1

1010 <10 <10 <1

1400 <10 <10 <1

1420 <10 <10 <1

1115 <10 <10 <1

1420 <10 <10 <1

1515 <10 <10 <1

1315 <10 <10 <1

Ag Agt Sr

<1.0 <1 45

<1.0 <1 42

<1.0 <1 38

1 <1 34

<1.0 <1 32

2 <1 44

<1.0 <1 42

<1.0 <1 58

<1.0 <1 47

2 <1 <1

<1.0 <1 36

<1.0 <1 33

3 <1 48

<1.0 1 39

<1.0 1 41

<1.0 <1 40

3 1 62

<1.0 <1 60

<1.0 <1 59

<1.0 <1 55

<1.0 <1 37

<1.0 <1 53

<1.0 <1 50

<1.0 <1 49

1 <1 50

<1.0 <1 54

<1.0 <1 35

<1 <1 52

<1.0 <1 41

2 <1 41

2 <1 47

<1.0 <1 44

3 <1 48

2 <1 46

Tit V

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

1 <6

1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

<1 <6

aWater sample collected after altered by water softener. Data not used in boxplots (fig.

''Duplicate.

cValue is suspect.

26).
Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

1 

I

3 

o

(Q

O

0>

3 

Q.

1

7

S.

3

8

i

1

£

l-f

0>

 n 

o

a.

i0>

3.

|

|

i

«2

3J

i<D

£± 

O

""

§

<off\

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

"06/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

a06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

 08/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

Q

1.7

<.01

50

50

26

.13

.1

.05e

.97

.42

69

68

205

29

104

29

101

500

670

750

113

113

23

26

26

26

.23

SC

353

393

203

203

328

242

296

371

368

389

364

247

292

302

306

346

318

262

319

238

310

310

390

382

434

434

317

SC, lab

355

392

207

206

355

264

309

390

364

410

~

352

-

312

-

267

-

313

313

--

378

455

455

322

PH

7.3

6.9

7.7

7.7

7.6

7.1

7.4

8.2

6.8

7.6

7.2

7.3

7.2

7.0

7.7

7.8

7.7

7.3

7.6

7.3

7.8

7.8

7.1

7.1

7.7

7.7

7.3

pH, lab

7.2

7.3

7.3

7.4

7.6

7.0

7.2

7.4

7.7

7.6

--

7.7

7.6

7.7

--

7.2

7.4

-

7.5

7.4

7.5

7.2

Temp

13.0

13.5

13.0

13.0

13.5

14.0

19.0

23.5

13.0

13.5

14.0

2.5

9.5

10.5

15.0

16.0

13.0

8.5

12.0

13.0

16.0

16.0

17.5

13.5

15.5

15.5

13.0
Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

TJ

f

2

TJ

5"S

a

s»

a

5"

o

«

|

o

3

=±

I

ff

3

1

!£

3

TJ

S

1

OT

TJ

(Q 

CO

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tbnnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

^6/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

"06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

Mgt

20

24

12

11

21

16

18

22

20

26

--

__

~

-

__

--

-

-

~

19

18

17

27

27

19

Na

2.0

1.9

1.4

1.4

2.0

2.2

2.2

2.7

2.8

3.1

~

2.2

-

2.0

_

-

2.0

-

2.0

2.0

-

7.0

7.0

7.1

.9

Nat

2.0

1.9

1.6

1.4

2.0

2.2

2.3

2.7

2.8

3.2

-

__

-

--

_

--

--

-

2.1

2.1

~

7.1

7.2

6.7

1.0

K

1.6

1.2

1.1

1.2

1.2

.9

1.3

1.9

1.1

1.3

-

1.1

--

1.4

__

--

1.3

--

~

1.5

1.5

1.7

2.3

2.4

1.1

Alk m

163

216

89

89

160

124

154

181

182

199

~

_

~

142

206

148

120

156

120

155

155

196

174

211

211

160

HC03P,

199

264

108

108

195

151

187

221

222

243

227

220

182

178

173

252

180

147

190

146

189

189

239

212

257

257

195

C
i Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

o

8

I

3

<§

0

0)

Q.

f

7

o

SL

>

1

<D

3

a

<D31

j*

8

Q)

3.

f

8.

2

f

1

1

o

2

c 

^

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

"06/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

a06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

F SiO2

<0.10 8.9

<.01 9.7

<.10 9.4

<.10 9.3

.1 8.5

<.10 8.9

<.10 9.0

<.10 11

<.10 8.9

.1 9.0

--

<.10

_

<.10

_-

--

<.10

--

_

<.10 7.9

<.10 8.0

..

.1 8.4

.2 9.1

.2 9.1

<.10 9.3

CNt

<0.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

--

_

-

_

~

-

-

_

-

_

<.02

<.02

~

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

ROE

196

202

108

122

212

146

164

216

202

218

-

194

_

168

-

-

150

-

_

166

166

--

208

252

260

172

TDS

189

217

103

103

174

136

198

--

213

-

182

_

151

~

-

130

-

._

165

--

-

233

--

170

Hard

180

200

98

98

180

130

160

200

-

200

--

180

~

__

160

-

--

130

-

__

160

160

--

-

220

220

170

T

3
Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

3"

1

2

|

a

8

0.

o

3

O

O

o

1

9

5"

i5T

1 o.

3

3

*A

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

"06/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

"06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

"08/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

NHa,

0.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

.01

<010

.02

.01

.01

.02

.03

.02

.04

.02

<.010

.01

.01

.02

.01

.01

.01

.05

.01

.01

<.010

Pt

<0.020

<.020

<.020

<.020

.02

<.020

<.020

<.020

<.020

.02

.03

<.020

.04

<.020

<.020

.04

<.020

<.020

.02

<.020

.02

<.020

.02

.07

.38

.17

<.020

Colif

150

--

53

53

9

46

b4

0

1

b!3

b3

bo

b8

b!2

b6

b4

bl

40

53

180

b6

b810

28

26

-

80

Strep

360

--

120

120

21

29

b2

0

6

47

b8

"2

bl

b8

b6

b4

93

58

190

280

36

b5

76

35

--

53

Sbt

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

<1

1

__

_.

_

__

..

1

1

..

<1

1

1

1

As,

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

<1

1

__

-

_

_

..

._

1

1

<1

1

1

1

C

CO 

CO
i Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

oo

1

f

3

o

(Q

O

0>

Q.

»

^

Oc 

fiL

<e

1

i

0>

a

0>

gi

3.

i

o>

Q.

I

Q.

i

«2

2?8o>

B6"

k

§c

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

a06/ 16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

a06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

B

110

20

<10

10

10

<10

20

20

22

20

-

--

_

_

--

--

--

C30

20

--

32

30

30

20

Bt

120

20

20

20

20

20

20

<20

20

20

-

-

_

__

-

-

--

20

20

~

30

40

40

<20

Cd Cdt

2 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

2 1

<1 1

1 <1

3 <1

<1 1

..

<1 <1

_

<1 <1

_

__

<1 <1

-

--

2 1

3 1

-

2 <1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

Cr

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

--

-

_

_.

--

--

-

<5

<5

-

<5

<5

<5

<5

Crt

5

5

5

5

5

5

5

<5

<5

5

-

-

_

-

__

-

-

-

5

5

-

<5

5

5

5

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<

<
Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

TJ

f

_

TJ

5 o

i

8

0)

a

5" 

o

0)

o"

0

o

ft

i

5"

1

5

I o

3

3

CO o

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

'Rinnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

"06/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

"06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

"08/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

Fe

10

4

110

96

4

13

12

<3

<3

3

--

<3

..

--

<3

--

_

16

--

6

22

_

8

5

<3

20

Fet Pb

100 <10

70 <10

230 10

200 <10

20 C20

70 <10

30 C60

20 <10

50 <10

10 <10

~

<1

..

-

<1

..

_

<1

__

40 C50

40 C50

_

110 <10

20 10

20 <10

180 <10

Pbt

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

<10

<10

10

-

3

__

-

1

-

_

1

--

10

10

_

<10

10

10

10

Li

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

-

-

__

-

--

--

_

-

<4

<4

_

<4

<4

<4

<4

Mn

<1

2

2

1

<1

<1

2

290

<1

1

--

<1

_

-

3

-

_

2

-

<1

2

_

1

<1

<1

1

3

(Q 

CD

<0
Table 22. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in water samples from springs at and near the Fort Leonard Wood 

o

1I

5

0 

CO

o

0>

Q.

?

Oc

 ?

I

o

0

Io

3

5.

*

a

E?

3

31

g 

O

I

0

2

CO

8c

_L

Spring 

(fig. 24)

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

Date

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

a06/ 16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

04/06/95

08/15/95

11/10/93

01/19/94

03/17/94

04/05/94

06/02/94

08/25/94

11/16/94

01/23/95

03/28/95

04/24/95

06/23/95

a06/23/95

08/29/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

Time

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

1500

1245

1230

0730

0900

1530

1250

1650

1600

1530

1500

1100

1040

1045

0800

1245

1445

1450

1145

Nit Set Ag

10 <1 <1

10 <1 <1

10 <1 <1

10 <1 1

10 1 <1

10 <1 <1

10 <1 <1

<10 <1 <1

<10 <1 <1

10 1 1

..

--

--

-

--

_

~

_

._

--

10 <1 <1

10 <1 <1

-

<10 <1 <1

10 1 1

10 1 <1

10 <1 <1

Agt

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

<i

<i

i

-

--

-

-

--

__

-

_

__

i

i

-

<i

i

i

i

Sr

51

44

28

28

38

32

34

44

43

43

-

-

--

--

--

__

-

_.

__

34

34

--

45

47

47

34

Tit 

<1 

1 

<1 

<1 

1 

<1 

1 

<1 

<1 

1 

-

--

--

--

--

-_

_.

_

__

1 

1 

--

<1 

1 

1 

<1 

aDuplicate.

^on-ideal colony count.

cValue is suspect.
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

 o

i

g g

3. 8"~

Q>

Q.

0

(S o>

o"

O 

O

1

o

ii?

3

CO

c

3

?

f

CO

i

XI

10

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007 

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SWOB

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95 

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

"08/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

"01/23/95 

03/29/95

04/21/95 

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95 

08/15/95 

04/04/95

10/10/95 

06/13/95

"06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95 

"08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95 

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95 

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230 

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046 

0930

1500 

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000 

1020 

1130

1115 

1345

1350

1245

1215 

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345 

1010

1130

0945 

1415

1020

1330

1030

Q

441 

^92

443

516

282

282

581

313

790

1,180

1,180 

960

3,730 

622

360

.9

.10

.36

.01

.85 

.40 

.44

.01 

4.5

4.5

19

14 

14

140

1

42

41 

e.10

.33 

.90

e.05

.27

SC

293

253

279

279

274

274

283

272

297

259

259 

263

211 

273

333

246

285

293

438

318 

335 

399

452 

548

548

296

341 

341

298

329

239

234 

347

373 

300

212

264

232

SC, lab

290 

266

286

284

287

287

286

285

260

260

283

248

332

339

446

322 

348 

408

510 

499

499

301

350 

351

305

342

241

246 

364

326

393 

302

369

270

240

pH

8.0 

8.1

7.9

7.8

8.1

8.1

8.2

8.2

8.1

7.9

7.9 

7.9

7.3 

7.5

8.1

8.2

8.0

8.0

8.0

8.1 

8.2 

7.8

8.0 

7.8

7.8

8.2

8.1 

8.1

8.2

8.1

8.2

8.2 

7.9

8.0 

7.9

7.7

7.6

7.8

pH, lab

7.9

7.7

8.0

7.8

7.8

7.7

7.9

8.0

8.1

8.1

7.3

7.5

7.8

7.7

8.0

7.8 

8.0 

7.8

8.0 

6.7

6.8

7.4

7.7 

7.9

7.1

8.0

7.2

7.1 

7.4

7.8

7.8 

7.9

7.6

7.5

7.4

Temp

12.5 

27.5

13.5

11.5

26

26

11.5

27

9.5

4.5

4.5 

12.5

16.0 

22.0

25.0

22.0

23.0

22.5

31.0

14.0 

21.5 

10.5

14.5 

21.5

21.5

22.5

29.5 

29.5

22.5

28.5

26.0

26.5 

25.0

27.0 

27.5

24.0

19.0

17.5

DO

11.3 

8.4

12.5

10.2

8.3

8.3

11.8

8.6

10.6

13.6

13.6 

10.4

9.9 

9.1

9

8.6

8.1

9.5

8.4

10.0 

8.2 

11.5

8.4 

5.5

5.5

8.2

7.8 

7.8

8.2

8

8.5

8.1

7.2

9.1

4.9

8.9
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

o

<D

O 31

Q.

5

<§

o

D)

3 

Q.

^

0

6

fiL

.£

8

i

|

3_

o

g

(D

 n

0

ii

D)

a.

1o

a.

=

sr

30

i

I

0

p

35"

§c

_L

<D

£

£

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

^8/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

 01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

a06/ 13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

 08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

Mg,

17

16

17

17

17

17

15

18

-

15

20

21

31

18

20

22

31

15

15

18

22

23

18

21

14

14

23

20

26

19

24

16

14

Na

2

1.9

2.1

2.3

1.9

2.0

2.0

1.9

2.5

2.4

2.4

-

1.2

1.3

1.1

1.3

4.2

6.3

4.7

4.9

39

40

2.1

2.3

2.3

1.9

2.2

1.5

1.5

1.6

2.0

2.0

1.5

1.5

1.2

.9

Nat

2.2

2

2.1

2.1

2

2

2

2

~

--

1.3

1.4

1.0

1.4

4.3

6.1

4.7

4.7

38

38

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.1

2.2

1.6

1.6

1.7

2.0

2.0

1.4

1.6

1.2

.9

K

1.2

2.8

1.3

3.2

2.3

2.5

1.2

2.3

1.4

1.4

1.9

--

.9

1.3

1.0

1.4

1.3

2.1

1.2

1.3

7.4

7.5

1.7

2.1

2.1

1.5

2.1

1.8

1.7

1.7

1.3

1.2

1.0

1.2

.8

1.1

A* 

140

114

106

138

131

131

149

122

149

136

136

130

92

134

162

119

162

170

241

149

152

156

226

149

149

137

164

164

152

175

108

126

175

185

168

192

129

112

HCO^

170

139

129

168

160

160

182

149

182

166

166

158

113

164

198

145

197

207

294

182

185

190

275

182

182

167

200

200

185

213

132

154

213

--

226

205

235

158

137

C°3(IT

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

3-

3

8

 D

|

<Da.

g

Q)

Q.

5"

o

CD 

Q)

3

O

O 

O

1

(D

?

3

CO

1

£

1

f

10

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SWOB

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

 08/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

 01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

 06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

 08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

F

<0.10

.1

<.10

<.10

.1

.1

<.10

.1

<.10

<.10

<.10

_

<.10

.1

<.10

.1

.3

.5

.1

.7

.7

<.10

.1

.1

<.10

<.10

<.10

<.10

<.10

<.10

.1

<.10

<.10

<.10

<.10

SiO2

3.2

8.8

3.4

3.2

8.7

8.8

3.4

8.5

_

-

_

9.1

9.8

8.3

9.9

7.7

7.1

7.4

10

9.5

9.6

8.3

10

10

7.7

11

7.2

7.1

9.8

9.3

11

10

11

9.3

7.5

CNt

<0.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

~

-

_

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

ROE

156

164

154

148

160

162

156

170

158

156

150

_

134

176

184

240

176

188

230

284

286

286

154

194

190

148

180

130

132

192

162

212

152

192

150

132

TDS

130

144

144

138

138

138

~

141

_

129

168

111

240

171

184

254

275

279

152

177

111

159

183

121

134

186

_

201

170

195

141

Hard

130

~

140

140

140

130

130

140

_

130

170

180

230

160

160

270

140

140

150

170

170

150

170

110

120

180

160

200

150

190

140

120

TOG

<0.1

3.0

<.l

<.l

2.3

2.4

<.l

2.1

~

-

_

1.6

1.2

.8

1.7

1.3

1.5

<.l

7.7

8.0

3.1

1.9

1.8

2.1

1.6

4.8

4.3

1.6

1.2

1.4

1.2

1.2

1.2

.8
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

o

Q.

3

o

ID

O

0)

3 

Q.

i

£

SL

^

»

o

3

o

Q

5

0

 n 

o

a.

§

0)

a

1

o

Q.

i

31

$

is: 

o

?

S 

v>V)

o

c 

p.

<o

?

Ul

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SWOB

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

"08/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

"01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

"06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

"08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

NHM

0.01

.01

.01

<.010

.02

.01

.01

.02

<.070

.01

.01

.02

.09

.01

.02

.02

.01

<.010

.01

.01

.01

.01

<.01

8.4

8.6

.03

.01

.01

.03

.01

.02

.02

.03

.02

.01

.01

<.010

.01

.01

Pt

<0.02

.03

<.02

<.02

.02

.02

<.02

.02

.02

<.02

.04

<.02

.02

<.02

.03

<,02

.02

<.02

.02

<.02

.02

<.02

.02

1.5

1.4

<.02

.02

.02

<.02

<.02

<.02

.02

<.02

<.02

.02

<.02

<.02

.02

<.02

Colif

18

d io

41

57

d6

42

d l

d !4

d !4

350

1,000

28

58

57

d!3

37

d8

46

250

3

22

<2

<2

480

60

C 13

110

56

d!3

--

--

-

29

25

Strep

8

d83

7

12

d!3

7

d26

*^25

*^25

69

540

20

32

130

360

19

39

150

460

6

160

<2

<2

130

42

32

49

~

~

--

33

150

Sbt

<1

1

<1

<1

1

1

<1

1

_

_.

~

--

--

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

<1

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

1

1

<1

1

1

1

<1

1

1

As,

<1

1

<1

<1

1

1

<1

1

__

~

--

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

<1

1

1

1

1

1

1

<1

1

1

<1

1

1

1

<1

1

1

Ba

37

42

36

38

44

44

39

44

_

__

-

--

41

52

51

68

43

47

47

55

23

23

39

51

51

41

49

35

38

88

54

60

48

57

38

46
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

TJ

CO

8

TJ

3

5.

8

et

Q.

5"

o

1

o

o

ft

c

CD

17

3 

0)

i0)

8

i

s

w

i o

CD

CO

ro

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

"08/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

"01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

"06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

"08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

B

12

10

19

20

10

<10

13

20

--

20

<10

10

10

20

20

37

140

130

20

10

30

--

30

20

<10

20

10

20

10

Bt

<20

20

<20

<20

20

20

<20

20

--

~

20

20

<20

20

20

20

30

30

150

160

20

20

20

20

<20

20

20

30

20

20

20

<20

20

20

Cd Cdt

<1 <1

<1 1

<1 <1

3 <1

<1 1

<1 1

1 <1

<1 1

._

<1 <1

<1 <1

._

1.1 1

__

1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 <1

2 <1

2 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 <1

<1 1

<1 1

<1 <1

<1 1

<1 1

2 1

<1 <1

1 1

<1 1

Cr

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

~

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

<5

Crt

<5

5

<5

<5

5

5

<5

5

--

5

5

5

5

5

5

<5

<5

5

5

5

5

5

5

<5

5

5

<5

5

5

5

<5

5

5

Co

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

--

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3

<3
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

0

S«<"

I

o

(Q

O

m

Q.

10

£

m.

^

>

P

w

o

3 

O

5

o

S1

a. 

iS3

m

1

Q.

2

i

30

S

imE±

3

2

0

c

"*

g

<t>

en

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSW A04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

^8/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

"01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

a06/ 13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

"08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

Fe

4

37

17

30

22

22

25

26

-

35

40

~

~

17

14

<3

80

10

7

4

<3

<3

45

50

30

9

9

16

3

57

46

6

6

4

<3

<3

11

25

Fe,

60

180

70

100

120

120

100

120

-

-

_

__

20

20

130

70

50

40

10

7

110

100

100

50

50

80

80

90

120

370

20

7

10

7

40

470

Pb

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

e !4

<10

--

<1

<1

1

e40

<10

e30

<10

e20

<10

<10

e20

10

e30

<10

<10

<10

<10

<10

e20

<10

<10

<10

<10

e20

e20

e30

<10

Pbt

<10

10

<10

<10

10

10

<10

10

--

18

13

6

10

10

10

10

10

10

<10

<10

10

10

10

10

10

10

<10

10

10

<10

10

10

10

<10

10

10

Li

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

--

-

-

_

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

5

5

5

<4

<4

5

<4

5

5

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

<4

4

Mn

7

9

10

12

8

8

11

9

--

7

7

-

11

1

3

73

11

3

<1

2

1

45

45

10

14

14

7

4

3

4

160

5

9

4

1

2

10

Mnt

12

32

14

19

26

26

21

28

-

-

_

__

2

5

71

16

3

5

3

1

43

42

19

24

25

13

22

9

21

240

5

9

4

<1

4

22
Table 23. Physical properties and inorganic constituents in surface-water samples collected at and near the Fort Leonard 

TJ 3" 

CO

s

TJ

5"8

a.

!3

a

0

(S

3 

O

O

o

3

s

i

5T

3

CO

c

i0)

i

5

c?

3 o

8

Identifier 

(fig. 24)

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

bSWA04

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Date

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

"08/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

11/17/94

01/23/95

"01/23/95

03/29/95

04/21/95

06/30/95

08/28/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

"06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

"08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

Time

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

0800

1045

1046

0930

1500

1230

1315

1445

0900

1115

1145

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

Nit

<10

10

<10

<10

10

10

<10

10

--

--

10

10

10

10

10

10

<10

<10

10

10

10

10

10

10

<10

10

10

<10

10

10

10

<10

10

10

Set Ag Agt

<1 <1 <1

1 <1.0 1

<1 <1 <1

<1 <1 <1

1 1 1

1 <1.0 1

<1 <1 <1

1 <1.0 1

__

__

-_

__

--

--

<1 <1 1

1 <1 1

1 <1 1

<1 2 1

1 1 1

<1 <1 <1

<1 <1 <1

<1 <1 1

<1 <1 1

<1 <1 1

1 <1 1

1 <1 1

<1 1 1

<1 <1 <1

<1 <1 1

<1 <1 1

<1 2 <1

<1 1 1

1 1 1

<1 <1 1

<1 2 <1

<1 1 1

<1 <1 1

Sr

30

28

29

29

31

31

31

32

__

--

~

30

39

39

49

33

34

54

58

52

53

28

37

37

29

36

24

25

47

37

41

36

43

31

32

Tit

<1

1

<1

<1

1

1

<1

1

-

--

1

1

1

<1

1

<1

<1

<1

<j

1

1

1

1

<j

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

V

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

--

~

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

<6

"Duplicate. bCollected as part of the U.S. Geological Survey ambient water-quality monitoring program. cDaily mean discharge. dNo
N)

oo

Table 24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the Fort Le

[VOC, volatile organic compound; jig/L, microgram per liter; ng/L, nanogram per liter, PCE, tetrachloroethene; MTBE, methyl-tertiary-butyl ether, --, 

Geohydrol

o

(Q

o

o>

3

a

isr

10>

=

^

CO

i

=5

§

o K

<D

 n

o

ii

0>

2.

1

O

a

2

Sf

31

8a>

i

o"

**

?

i

c

"^

<o

 *

w

lapuy/iuass spevuuiiicuyj

Site name

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

a06/01/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

03/29/95

c04/06/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

07/18/95

'to/I 8/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

^8/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

e04/05/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

^06/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

Time

1305

1430

1220

1050

1325

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1335

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1115

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1015

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

Total VOC Total pesticides Carbon 

(ug/L) (ng/L) disulfide

<0.2

0.1 - .1

<.2

<.2

<.2

2.2 - <.2

1.0 - <.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

1.5 -- <.2

1.1 - <.2

2.1 - <.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

2.0 ~ <.2

.2 ~ <.2

1.3 -- <.2

<.2

<.2

< .2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

.2 - <.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

2.1 - <.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

Chloromethane

<0.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

b l.l

< 2

b!2

<.2

< 2

b!3

<2

b!4

< 2

bL6

<.2

<.2

<.2

<2

b!2

< 2

b!2

b.2

<.2

<.2

b.l

<.2

<.2

< 2

b!2

k.l

< 2

b!2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

hi

b 1.6

<2

bL7

bL6

<.2

Trichloromethane

<0.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

!9

.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

.3

.5

.3

<.2

<.2

<.2

.4

.2

.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

bi

.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

.9

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2

<.2
1c +=

o

I

o

1

0) tr 

^

CO

CO0) Sp

ffl

<NJ<vJ<vJ<vJ<''}<NJCNi<NJ<NJ<vJ<Nj<vJ<vJCNJ OJOJOJCSCSCSOJCSCSCS CSOJCSCSOJOJOJCSCSOJCSCSCSCSOJOJOJOJOJ

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V**' V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv1*- vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

cs oj oj cs oj oj oj cs cs oj cs rn oj oj cs cs oj oj vq oj cs cs cs cs cs cs r-j cs cs cs cs cs cs cst cs cs cs cs cs. cs cs cS( cs cs

v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v ' v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v

CS^CS^CS^CS.CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CS^CSC^

V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

 c 

o 

u_

CD

|

 a 

ci 

15

I

a.

CD

1c

*

 a!

_-g "o

 « 

&

CS CS CSt CS CS CS CO Oj CS CS <S Oj Oj CS «S «S Oj CS Oj Oj «S Oj CS «S <S Oj Oj «S <S <S <S CS «S <S Oj Oj CS CS CS CS Oj CS Oj Oj

V V V V V ' V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

V V V V V V V V V V V ~ V V V ~ v V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

CSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCSCS.CSCSCSCSCSCSM

V V V V V V V V V V V ' V V V ' V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

V V V V V V V

S

O O O >O O O >r>

en cs m cs i cs cs »n cn^csom ' T-I co co

cscscscscscncscscscscscsc^csc^

V V V V V ' V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V

>oooo>oooo>o '

5"o

CO

o ""CO

 E

o 

O

*

CM 

V

.O

&

o o o o o o o o o o o o_o ooooooo ooooo

o o o o 

73 -a -a -a Illl II

o

8

4

CS (<)

88

44

-t

O 0000'

4

r- oo ^ vo o 1-1 »n 10 'B \o

o

linn § i 

4 4

w

#&

£ <L>

Q W) (SO S^'&

 0 « M

1 S S3

^ cs

(so bfi

^ ^

O O

ii

CA C/2

=) =1

SS

Concentrations of Volatile Organic Compounds and Pesticides Detected in Water Samples 129
Table 24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the Fort Leo

Dissolved pesticides (ng/L) 

O 

§

I

5

I(Oo"

0)

a

£

1

10)

*

(0

p

1

2.

<D

 n

o

i8

1a.

|

2

.2 

31

§

0)

6"

_3

2

§

c

j~

<o

f

01

Site name

dw012

dw013

dw014

dw015

dw017

dw019

dw023

dw024

dw025

dw027

dw030

dw032

dw033

dw034

dw037

dw038

dw054

dw056

dw060

dw061

dw062

dw063

dw064

Ballard Hollow Spring

Cannon Range Spring

Miller Spring

Musgrave Hollow spring 1

Musgrave Hollow spring 2

Date

04/06/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

03/28/95

08/31/95

*06/Ql/95

08/29/95

03/28/95

03/27/95

03/29/95

c04/06/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

07/18/95

^7/18/95

08/31/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

^8/30/95

03/27/95

02/23/95

03/31/95

03/31/95

08/30/95

02/23/95

03/27/95

02/24/95

02/24/95

e04/05/95

04/05/95

06/01/95

08/29/95

03/29/95

08/30/95

03/27/95

08/23/95

06/16/95

07/12/95

06/16/95

^6/16/95

08/14/95

06/16/95

06/22/95

08/21/95

Time

1305

1430

1220

1050

1325

_.

1120

1320

1355

0900

0935

1315

1335

1100

1101

0955

1335

1045

1050

1030

1000

1115

1010

1240

1300

1215

0940

1140

1010

1015

1400

1420

1115

1420

1515

1315

0915

1200

1315

1320

1420

1100

1020

1430

Deethyl- p,pfAtrazine atrazine DDE Diazinon Prometon Simazine Tebuthiu

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 5 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 7 <1 <1 14 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 
Table 24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the Fort Leo

o

o

2

10)

6"

CO

-« 

o

m

3"

O

c2

Q)

3

O

O

O

 o

o

Q.

CO 

01

3 

Q.

CD 

CO

o"

Q.

CD

CO

O 

CD

C?

a0

Q.

5"

m

^

at

3 o

o>_L

Site name

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Trip blank

Date

04/06/95

08/15/95

06/23/95 

d06/23/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

^8/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

^13/95

^13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

05/09/95

06/01/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

06/19/95

08/23/95

08/29/95

Time

1500

1245

1040 

1045

1245

1445

1450

1145

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

1445

0900

1115

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

1600

1400

1400

1440

1415

1100

1020

Total VOC Total pesticides Carbon Chloro- 

(ug/L) (ng/L) disulfide methane

<0.2 b0.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 b 1.0 

<.2 b 1.8

1.5 - <.2 b.2

1.0 - <.2 <.2

1.0 - <.2 <.2

<.2 b 1.2

<.2 b.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<~2 <2

<.2 b'.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 b1.8

<.2 bl.l

<^2 b!3

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.8 b 1.0

<.4 b 1.0

f R ''in ^.O 1 .U

<.2 b1.5

<.2 <.2

<2 bL9

<.2 <.2

<.2 b 1.7

<.2 b 1.6

<.2 <.2

<.2 b l.l

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

.4 - <.2 b1.4

<.2 b1.7

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

<.2 b 1.8

<.2 <.2

<.2 <.2

Trichloro- 

methane 

<0.2 

<.2 

<i 

b.20 

.18 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

 c2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

b.10 

b.30 

<.2 

<.2 

b1.0 

b 1.0 

1 0 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

< 2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 

<.2 
Table 24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the Fort Le

Site name

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring 

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Trip blank

Date

04/06/95 

08/15/95

06/23/95 

dO#23/95

04/05/95 

08/15/95 

^8/15/95

06/14/95 

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95 

^8/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95 

 to/I 3/95 

^06/13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

05/09/95 

06/01/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

06/19/95

08/23/95

08/29/95

Time Bromoform PCE

1500 <0.2 <0.2 

1245 <.2 <.2

1040 <.2 <.2 

1045 <.2 <.2

1245 <.2 1.5 

1445 <.2 .8 

1450 <.2 .8

1 145 <.2 <.2 

1230 <.2 <.2

1 100 <.2 <.2

1400 <.2 <.2

0930 <.2 <.2

0950 <.2 <.2 

0955 <.2 <.2

1015 <.2 <.2

1250 <.2 <.2

1445 <.2 <.2

0900 <.2 <.2

1115 <.2 <.2

1000 <.2 <.2

1020 <.2 <.2

1130 <.2 <.2

1115 <.2 <.2

1345 <.8 <.8 

1350 <.4 <.4 

1350 <.8 <.8

1245 <.2 <.2

1215 <.2 <.2

1220 <.2 <.2

1000 <.2 <.2

1210 <.2 <.2

1 100 <.2 <.2

1345 <.2 <.2

1010 <.2 <.2

1130 <.2 <.2

0945 <.2 <.2

1415 <.2 <.2

1020 <.2 <.2

1330 <.2 <.2

1030 <.2 <.2

1600 <.2 <.2 

1400 <.2 <2

1400 <.2 <.2

1440 <.2 <.2

1415 <.2 <.2

1 100 <.2 <.2

1020 <.2 <.2

Chloro- Bromo- Xylenes 

benzene benzene (total) T

<0.2 <0.2 <0.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<| | | 

<2 <2 <2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<2 <2 <2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

^ O ^«O ^«o 

^4 ^4 ^4 

^,o ^«O ^«o 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 .13 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<l <i <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 

<.2 <.2 <.2 
Table 24. Concentrations of volatile organic compounds and pesticides detected in water samples at and near the Fort Le

o

o

I

o

CO

a

cf

i

CD 

O

o

O

o

Q. 

CO 

0)

Q. 

TJ

O.

Q.

£

o

CD 

I

I

I

TJ

Dissolved pesticides (ng/L) 

Site name

Pumping station spring

Roubidoux Spring

Shanghai Spring

Tunnel Hollow Spring

SW001

SW002

SW003

SW004

SW005

SW006

SW007

SW008

SW009

SW010

SW011

SW012

SW013

SW014

SW015

SW016

SW017

Trip blank

Date

04/06/95

08/15/95

06/23/95

d06/23/95

04/05/95

08/15/95

^8/15/95

06/14/95

04/03/95

08/14/95

04/04/95

04/04/95

08/16/95

^8/16/95

04/05/95

08/16/95

06/19/95

08/15/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

08/15/95

04/04/95

10/10/95

06/13/95

^13/95

d06/ 13/95

06/27/95

08/17/95

08/17/95

06/29/95

08/22/95

06/28/95

06/28/95

08/23/95

07/12/95

08/18/95

07/12/95

08/22/95

06/22/95

07/03/95

05/09/95

06/01/95

06/13/95

06/13/95

06/19/95

08/23/95

08/29/95

Time

1500

1245

1040

1045

1245

1445

1450

1145

1230

1100

1400

0930

0950

0955

1015

1250

1445

0900

1115

1000

1020

1130

1115

1345

1350

1350

1245

1215

1220

1000

1210

1100

1345

1010

1130

0945

1415

1020

1330

1030

1600

1400

1400

1440

1415

1100

1020

Deethyl- p,pAtrazine atrazine DDE Diazinon Prometon Simazine Tebuth

<1 <1 <1 <1 7 8 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 8 6 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 9 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

2 4 <1 <1 <1 <1 8 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 9

_

<1 4 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 

<1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 
o Sample contained (tentatively identified by GC/MS) dibromomethylbenzene (0.1 ug/L); l-bromo-3,5-dimethylbenzene (0.3 ug/L); and 4-brom

tions estimated.

Compound present in the hydrochloric acid preservative.

{£ 'This sample also contained (tentatively identified by GC/MS) Cyanogen chloride (0.1 ug/L), 2-methylpropanal (0.1 ug/L), and pentanal (0.1 ug

§ Duplicate. 

"Q. ^This sample also contained (tentatively identified by GC/MS) 2,4-dimethyl heptane (0.1 ug/L). Concentration estimated.

o. Compound probably is the result of contamination from permanent felt-tip marking pen used to label this sample.

o

 9.

o

o>

o

0)

a.

sr

I

o