Photographs showing Blue River near site 2; October 2000, Indian Creek near site 6, March

2002; and Brush Creek near site 10, February 2000.

USGS science for a changing world

Prepared in cooperation with the City of Kansas City, Missouri, Water

Services Department

Water quality in

the Blue River

Basin, Kansas

City Metropolitan

Area, Missouri

and Kansas,

July 1998 to

October 2004

Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5147

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

Cover photographs:

Top: Blue River near site 2, October 2000.

Bottom left: Indian Creek near site 6, March 2002.

Bottom right: Brush Creek near site 10, February 2000.
Water Quality in the Blue River 

Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan 

Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 

1998 to October 2004

By Donald H. Wilkison, Daniel J. Armstrong, Richard D. Norman, Barry C. Poulton, 

Edward T. Furlong, and Steven D. Zaugg

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Prepared in cooperation with the

City of Kansas City, Missouri,

Water Services Department

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5147

Prepared in cooperation with the City of Kansas City, Missouri, Waster Services Department

Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5147

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners

to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation: 

Wilkison, D.H., Armstrong, D.J., Norman, R.D., Poulton, B.C., Furlong, E.T., and Zaugg, S.D., 2006, Water Quality in the 

Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5147, 170 p.

U.SDepartment of the Interior

Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P.Patrick Leahy, Acting Director.

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 802225

For more information about the USGS and its products

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/
 iii

Contents

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

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

Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

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

Study Area Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Climate and Hydrology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Land Use/Land Cover. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Water Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Previous Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Sampling Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Determination of Impoundment Pool Volumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Quality Control and Assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Water Quality in the Blue River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Base Flow Water Quality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Organic Wastewater Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Pharmaceutical Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Stormflow Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Organic Wastewater Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Pharmaceutical Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Hydrologic Effects on Constituent Concentrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Effects of Wastewater Treatment Effluent on Blue River Streamflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Dissolved Compared to Particulate Phase Constituents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Organic Wastewater Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Nutrient Load and Yield Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Bacteria Densities and Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Brush Creek Impoundments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Mixing Effects on Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Vertical Water-Quality Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Diurnal Changes in Water Chemistry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Impoundment Productivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Bottom Sediments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Macroinvertebrate Community Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Conceptual Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Nutrients. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Organic Wastewater and Pharmaceutical Compounds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Bacteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Macroinvertebrate Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
iv 

Figures

1. Map showing location of study area, sampling sites, wastewater-treatment plants, and area of

combined storm and sanitary sewers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

2. Photograph showing riparian areas adjacent to selected stream sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

3. Photograph showing flow over weir from Plaza pool into Volker pool below following storm event

and storm sewer discharge into Brush Creek. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

4. Map showing land use/land cover in the Blue River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

5. Graph showing mean monthly discharge at selected sites in the Blue River Basin from August

1998 through October 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

6–13. Boxplots showing:

6. Total nitrogen concentration by site and total instantaneous nitrogen load by stream

reach in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . 18

7. Total phosphorus concentration by site and total instantaneous phosphorus load by

stream reach in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004. . . 19

8. Sum of the concentration of organic wastewater compounds by site and total instantaneous organic wastewater compound load by stream reach in base-flow samples

collected between August 1998 and September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

9. Sum of the concentration of pharmaceutical compounds by site and total instantaneous

pharmaceutical loads by stream reach in base-flow samples collected between May 

1999 and September 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

10. Total nitrogen concentration by site and total instantaneous nitrogen load by stream reach

in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

11. Total phosphorus concentration by site and total instantaneous phosphorus load by

stream reach in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . 27

12. Sum of the concentration of organic wastewater compounds by site and total 

instantaneous organic wastewater compound load by stream reach in stormflow 

samples collected between May 1999 and June 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

13. Sum of the concentration of pharmaceutical compounds by site and total instantaneous 

pharmaceutical loads by stream reach in stormflow samples collected between 

October 2000 and June 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

14–18. Graphs showing:

14. Increases in discharge for the Blue River near Kansas City for time periods with no, 

one, and three wastewater-treatment plant inputs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

15. Percentage of total nitrogen as nitrate and percent as organic nitrogen in relation to 

stream discharge for selected stream reaches in the Blue River Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

16. Percentage of total phosphorus as dissolved phosphorus in relation to stream discharge

for selected stream reaches in the Blue River Basin and total phosphorus concentration 

in relation to stream discharge by stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by 

site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

18. Concentrations of selected organic wastewater compounds in relation to stream 

discharge by site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

19–21. Boxplots showing:

19. Estimated mean monthly total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads at sites in the 

Blue River Basin from July 2002 through September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

20. Estimated yields of total nitrogen and total phosphorus at selected sites in the Blue River 

Basin from July 2002 through September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

21. Brush Creek longitudinal fecal coliform density from July 1995 through September 

2004 and relation to sampling points in this study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
 v

22. Graph showing median monthly fecal coliform densities measured in Brush Creek samples 

from July 1995 through January 2003, and percentage of samples with fecal coliform to 

fecal streptococci ratios greater than four . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

23. Graph showing relation between fecal coliform densities and Escherichia coli densities 

measured in stream samples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

24. Boxplot showing presumptive sources of Escherichia coli measured in base-flow samples. . . . . . . 53

25. Graphs showing temporal changes in Escherichia coli sources at selected stream sites. . . . . . . . . . 54

26. Photographs showing views of impounded reaches on Brush Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

27. Graph showing percentage of days during 1999 to 2004 water years that mean daily flow was 

sufficient to replace the pool volume for selected impounded reaches of Brush Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

28. Boxplots showing concurrent measurements of mean daily dissolved oxygen concentrations 

at three Brush Creek impoundments and long-term daily dissolved oxygen concentrations at 

sites on the Blue River and Brush Creek from 1998 to 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

29–32. Graphs showing:

29. Mean daily water temperatures in the Blue River and Brush Creek from August 1998 to 

September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

30. Concentration profiles with depth for dissolved oxygen and redox potential for impounded 

reaches of Brush Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

31. Concentration profiles with depth for dissolved nitrate, ammonia, and orthophosphate 

for impounded reaches of Brush Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

32. Continuous water temperature, pH values, dissolved oxygen concentrations, and 

dissolved oxygen saturation from August 1 to September 5, 2003, at site 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

33. Photograph showing sediment accumulation in Plaza pool, upstream from site 10, being 

prepared for removal, January 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

34. Graph showing sum of 10 proportionally scaled aquatic-life metrics by site for 4 sampling periods, 

March and September 2002 and February 2003, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

35. Graph showing relation between proportional metric score and the percentage of vegetative

cover and urbanized land use at sample sites in the Blue River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

36. Boxplot showing proportional aquatic-life metric score by potential wastewater sources. . . . . . . . . 73

37. Graphs showing relation between proportional metric score and proportional water-quality 

scores for base-flow and stormflow conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

38. Graphs showing metric values from 1980 to 2004 at two Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment long-term monitoring sites in the Blue River Basin and comparison to five adjacent 

sites in the basin from 2002 to 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Tables

1. Locations of sites sampled and type of water-quality and streamflow data collected as part of 

this study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

2. Land-use/land-cover characteristics for sites and streams sampled. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3. Stream reach and wastewater source categories for sites sampled in the Blue River Basin . . . . . . 13

4. General use categories for organic wastewater compounds analyzed in this report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

5. General use categories for pharmaceutical compounds analyzed in this report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in baseflow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between 

August 1998 and September 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

8 Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between 

May 1999 and September 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
vi 

9. Percentage of organic wastewater compounds detected in stream samples by wastewater 

use category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

10. Percentage of pharmaceutical compounds detected in stream samples by pharmaceutical 

use category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in 

stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected 

between May 1999 and June 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between 

May 2000 and June 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

14. Minimum variance unbiased estimation models used to estimate monthly total nitrogen and 

total phosphorus loads at selected sites in the Blue River Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

15. Percentage of Escherichia coli measured in base-flow samples collected between November 

2002 and June 2003 assigned to presumptive host sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

16. Pool volumes of three impounded reaches of Brush Creek. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

17. Algal productivity of Brush Creek impoundments and four urban lakes in Missouri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

18. Mean concentration of nutrients and fecal indicator bacteria densities in Brush Creek bottom 

sediment samples collected from September 2002 to September 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

19. Mean concentration of organic wastewater compounds in Brush Creek bottom sediment 

samples collected from September 2002 to May 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

20. Mean concentration of pharmaceutical compounds in Brush Creek bottom sediment samples 

collected from February 2003 to September 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

21. Stream Condition Index (SCI) scores for Missouri Department of Natural Resources core 

metrics and aquatic life support (ALS) status for sites sampled in 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

22. Kansas Department of Health and Environment core metrics and aquatic life support (ALS) 

status for sites sampled in 2003 and 2004. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

23. Summary of benthic macroinvertebrate metrics used as part of the assessment of biotic

integrity and the expected response to system perturbations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
 vii

Conversion Factors and Datum 

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.)

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch (in.)

meter (m) 3.281 foot (ft)

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi) 

meter (m) 1.094 yard (yd) 

Area

square meter (m2) 0.0002471 acre

hectare (ha) 2.471 acre

square hectometer (hm2) 2.471 acre

square kilometer (km2) 247.1 acre

square centimeter (cm2) 0.001076 square foot (ft2)

square meter (m2) 10.76 square foot (ft2)

square centimeter (cm2) 0.1550 square inch (in2) 

hectare (ha) 0.003861 square mile (mi2)

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2)

Volume

liter (L) 33.82 ounce, fluid (fl. oz)

liter (L) 2.113 pint (pt)

liter (L) 1.057 quart (qt)

liter (L) 0.2642 gallon (gal) 

cubic meter (m3) 264.2 gallon (gal) 

cubic decimeter (dm3) 0.2642 gallon (gal) 

cubic meter (m3) 0.0002642 million gallons (Mgal)

cubic centimeter (cm3) 0.06102 cubic inch (in3) 

cubic decimeter (dm3) 61.02 cubic inch (in3) 

liter (L) 61.02 cubic inch (in3) 

cubic decimeter (dm3) 0.03531 cubic foot (ft3) 

cubic meter (m3) 35.31 cubic foot (ft3) 

cubic meter (m3) 1.308 cubic yard (yd3) 

cubic kilometer (km3) 0.2399 cubic mile (mi3) 

cubic meter (m3) 0.0008107 acre-foot (acre-ft) 

cubic hectometer (hm3) 810.7 acre-foot (acre-ft)

Flow rate

meter per second (m/s) 3.281 foot per second (ft/s) 

meter per minute (m/min) 3.281 foot per minute (ft/min)

meter per hour (m/hr) 3.281 foot per hour (ft/hr)

meter per day (m/d) 3.281 foot per day (ft/d)

meter per year (m/yr) 3.281 foot per year (ft/yr)

cubic meter per second (m3/s) 35.31 cubic foot per second (ft3/s)

cubic meter per second per square kilometer [(m3/s)/km2] 91.49cubic foot per second per square mile 

[(ft3/s)/mi2]
viii 

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F = (1.8 x °C) + 32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C = (°F - 32) / 1.8

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the "North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88)."

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the "North American Datum of 1983 (NAVD 

83)."

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

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 

25 °C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or 

micrograms per liter (μg/L).

cubic meter per day (m3/d) 35.31 cubic foot per day (ft3/d)

liter per second (L/s) 15.85 gallon per minute (gal/min) 

cubic meter per day (m3/d) 264.2 gallon per day (gal/d)

cubic meter per day per square kilometer [(m3/d)/km2

] 684.28

gallon per day per square mile [(gal/d)/

mi2]

cubic meter per second (m3/s) 22.83 million gallons per day (Mgal/d)

cubic meter per day per square kilometer [(m3/d)/km2

] 0.0006844

million gallons per day per square mile 

[(Mgal/d)/mi2

]

cubic meter per hour (m3/h) 39.37 inch per hour (in/hr)

kilometer per hour (km/h) 0.6214 mile per hour (mi/hr)

Mass

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce, avoirdupois (oz)

kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound avoirdupois (lb)

Multiply By To obtain
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City 

Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to 

October 2004

by Donald H. Wilkison, Daniel J. Armstrong, Richard D. Norman, Barry C. Poulton, Edward T. Furlong, and 

Steven D. Zaugg

Abstract

Water-quality data were collected from sites in the Blue 

River Basin from July 1998 to October 2004 in cooperation 

with City of Kansas City, Missouri, Water Services Department. Data included measurements of stream discharge, physical properties, nutrients, organic wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds, fecal-indicator bacteria densities, and benthic 

macroinvertebrates to provide an assessment of the chemical, 

bacteriological, and biological conditions in urban streams that 

have substantial discharges from wastewater-treatment plants 

and/or combined sewer overflows. Fourteen sites were sampled 

during base-flow conditions, 10 sites were sampled during 

storms, and 5 sites were monitored continuously for temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity. Water column waterquality profiles and bottom-sediment samples were collected in 

three impounded reaches of Brush Creek. Benthic macroinvertebrate community indicators were described at 10 sites in the 

basin and 1 outside control site. Total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads and yields were estimated for 28 months at 4 basin 

sites to allow comparison with loads estimated for 3 wastewater-treatment plants in the basin, and to compare basin yields 

with those estimated at a control site and to other urban areas of 

the United States. Sites upstream from wastewater-treatment 

plants and/or the combined sewer system area had lower concentrations of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, organic wastewater compounds, and pharmaceuticals, and more diverse 

aquatic communities. Sites downstream from wastewater-treatment plants had the largest concentrations and loads of nutrients, organic wastewater compounds, and pharmaceuticals. 

Approximately 60 percent of the total nitrogen and total phosphorus in the middle and lower Blue River originated from the 

Indian Creek tributary, smaller amounts from the upper Blue 

River (from 28 to 16 percent), and less than 5 percent from 

Brush Creek. Nutrient yields from the lower Indian Creek and 

the middle Blue River were significantly greater than yields 

from the upper Blue River, lower Brush Creek, the outside control site, and other U.S. urban sites. Total nitrogen and total 

phosphorus yields from the upper Blue River and lower Brush 

Creek were not significantly different from one another. Large 

concentrations of nutrients led to eutrophication of impounded 

Brush Creek reaches, even though biogeochemical activity in 

bottom sediments reduced and removed nitrogen from the system. This occurred because these same reducing conditions 

mobilized phosphorus into the overlying water column. Bottom 

sediment samples collected from impoundments generally had 

concentrations of organic wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds equivalent to, and sometimes greater than, concentrations observed in streambed sediments downstream from wastewater-treatment plants. Bacteria in streams largely was the 

result of nonpoint-source contributions during storms. Presumptive sources of Esherichia coli bacteria in base-flow 

stream samples varied temporally and spatially in the basin. 

Based on genetic source-tracking, average contributions of instream Esherichia coli bacteria in the basin from dogs ranged 

from 26 to 32 percent of the total, geese contributed between 8 

to 19 percent, human sources ranged from 28 to 42 percent, and 

18 to 20 percent were from unknown sources. Macroinvertebrate diversity as measured by total taxa present and the percentage of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricoptera was 

highest at sites with the largest percentage of upstream land use 

devoted to forests and grasslands. Declines in macroinvertebrate community metrics were correlated strongly with 

increases in several, inter-related urbanization factors including 

percent impervious cover, nutrient enrichment, and the prevalence of organic wastewater compounds and pharmaceuticals.

Introduction

The Blue River Basin encompasses 725 square kilometers 

and roughly one-half of the Kansas City metropolitan area south 

of the Missouri River. The inter-jurisdictional basin extends 

through two states (Missouri and Kansas), four counties 

(Johnson and Wyandotte in Kansas; Jackson and Cass in Missouri), and 11 municipalities. Fifty-four percent of the basin is 

located in Kansas and 46 percent in Missouri. The quality of 

stream water in the basin is influenced by a variety of factors, 

including point and nonpoint-source pollution, physical stream 

conditions, and complex water-quality processes. Wastewater, 

both treated and untreated, is an important hydrologic component in the Blue River Basin. Stream segments of Indian Creek, 
2 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Tomahawk Creek, and the Blue River receive discharge from 

wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), and segments in the 

lower reaches of Brush Creek and the Blue River receive discharges from combined sewer overflows (CSOs). In an effort to 

better understand the myriad of factors affecting water quality 

in the basin, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation 

with the City of Kansas City, Missouri, Water Services Department initiated studies to characterize water-quality and identify 

sources of selected constituents in the basin. These studies 

began in 1998 and continue to present (2006). Previous reports 

examined data from July 1998 through 2000 (Wilkison and others, 2002), or presented data collected from October 2000 

through 2004 (Wilkison and others, 2005). 

Background

Kansas City, Missouri, is one of approximately 750 

municipalities in the United States with a combined sewer system (CSS; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004). 

Unlike separate sanitary sewer systems, CSSs are designed to 

carry sanitary wastewater and stormwater runoff and to function differently during dry and wet weather conditions. In dry 

weather, CSSs convey sewage from homes, businesses, and 

industry to a WWTP. After treatment, the water is discharged 

to a receiving stream in accordance with applicable water-quality standards. During wet weather, runoff from streets, rooftops, parking lots, parks, and lawns enters the combined system 

and is delivered to the WWTP for treatment and discharge. 

However, if the volume of runoff and sewage exceeds the pipe 

or treatment plant capacity, then the excess flow (a mixture of 

stormwater and untreated sewage) is diverted to receiving 

streams to reduce hydraulic stress on the system. It is the addition of stormwater to CSSs that eventually overwhelms the system and results in diversion and discharge that is termed a CSO. 

There are approximately 220 diversion structures in the Kansas 

City, Missouri, CSS area (fig. 1) that drain to approximately 

100 stream outfall points (City of Kansas City, Missouri, written commun., 2005). Three-fourths of the diversion structures 

and outfalls are located within the Blue River Basin. 

Communities with CSSs are required under federal and 

state regulations to develop a plan to control overflows and to 

monitor their impacts on receiving waters (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1999). Control plans include analysis of 

current water-quality conditions, characterization of other pollutant sources that might inhibit the attainment of applicable 

water-quality standards, and a watershed-based perspective 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994). To support 

development of a control plan, laboratory and hydrologic analysis of stream samples from the Blue River Basin began in 1998 

to characterize water quality in the basin and to better understand the variety of sources, including wastewater, that affect 

receiving stream water quality. Stream samples are analyzed for 

a number of constituents including nutrients, selected organic 

wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds, fecal indicator 

(Escherichia coli [E. coli] and fecal coliform) bacteria, and suspended sediment. These data indicate that water quality in the 

basin is affected by urban stormwater, nonpoint-source pollution, CSOs, leaks from aging or damaged sewer lines, sediments 

trapped behind impoundments, continuous (or nearly continuous) discharges of treated sewage effluent, storm events that 

produce flows in excess of the sewer system collection and 

treatment capabilities that result in the discharge of untreated 

wastewater into receiving streams, and combinations of these 

sources (Wilkison and others, 2002, 2005).

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present the results of a 

detailed assessment of stream water quality in the Blue River 

Basin from July 1998 to October 2004. This investigation consolidates data from two previous companion water-quality studies conducted in the basin from July 1998 to October 2000, and 

from October 2000 to October 2004 (Wilkison and others, 

2002, 2005). Measurements of nutrients, organic wastewater 

compounds (OWCs), over-the-counter and prescription drugs, 

fecal-indicator bacteria, physical properties, and aquatic macroinvertebrate communities are discussed for stream sites on the 

Blue River, Brush Creek, and Indian Creek. Contaminant loading patterns determined from these measurements are presented 

for base- and stormflow conditions, and conceptual models 

were developed to show how various contaminants move 

through the environment.

Study Area Description

The study area included 14 surface-water sites in the Blue 

River Basin and encompassed reaches of the Blue River, Brush 

Creek, and Indian Creek that received inputs from either CSOs 

or WWTPs (fig. 1; table 1). Data-collection sites included six 

sites on the main stem of the Blue River (sites 1, 2, 7, 8, 13, and 

14), four sites on the tributary Brush Creek (sites 9 to 12), and 

three sites on the tributary Indian Creek (sites 3, 4, and 6). Two 

stream sites, one in the basin (site 5 on Tomahawk Creek) and 

one outside of the basin (site 19 on the South Grand River) were 

sampled as controls for aquatic biota measurements. Control 

sites were chosen because they were either an urban site without 

expected wastewater sources (site 5) or were a non-urban site 

within the same ecoregion (site 19). Data from three WWTP 

discharges (site 15, 16, and 17; fig. 1) were evaluated.

Climate and Hydrology

 Kansas City has a modified continental climate dominated 

by warm, wet summers and cool, dry winters (Ruffner and Bair, 

1979). Mean annual precipitation in the Blue River Basin is 98 

centimeters. Sixty percent of the precipitation occurs between 

May and September of each year and the most intense precipitation events—those with greater than 2.5 centimeters within 24 

hours—generally occur then (National Climatic Data Center, 

2005). Extended drought conditions can develop when dry 
Introduction 3

Figure 1. Location of study area, sampling sites, wastewater-treatment plants, and area of combined storm 

and sanitary sewers.

Figure 1. Location of study area, sampling sites, wastewater-treatment plants, and area of combined storm 

and sanitary sewers.
Table 1. Locations of sites sampled and type of water-quality and streamflow data collected as part of this study. [ID, identification number; BQW, base-flow water quality; SQW, stormflow water quality; CQW, continuous water quality; IQW, benthic macroinvertebrates; LQW-SED, verticment water quality; QI, instantaneous discharge; QC, continuous discharge; KS, Kansas; --, no data or not applicable; KCMO, Kansas City, Missouri; WWTP, wastewater-treatm

Site number (fig. 1) Station name Station ID Latitude / Longitude Water-quality data 

BQW SQW CQW IQW LQ

1 Blue River near Stanley, KS 06893080 384845 / 0944032 X -- -- X 2 Blue River at Blue Ridge Boulevard Extension, KCMO 06893150 385322 / 0943450 X X -- X 

1Continuous data collection began in 2001. 3 Indian Creek at 69 Hwy., Overland Park, KS 06893270 385513 / 0944216 X -- -- X 

4 Indian Creek at Farley, Overland Park, KS 06893280 385600 / 0944139 X -- -- X 5 Tomahawk Creek at Tomahawk Creek Park, Overland Park, KS 385539094372100 385539 / 0943721 X -- -- X 6 Indian Creek at 103rd Street, KCMO 06893400 385631 / 0943616 X X -- X 7 Blue River near KCMO 06893500 385725 / 0943332 X X X X 8 Blue River at Blue Parkway, KCMO 06893552 390206 / 0943136 X X -- X2 2Sampled at 63rd Street 9 Brush Creek at Ward Parkway, KCMO 06893557 390159 / 0943619 X X -- -- 

10 Brush Creek at KCMO 06893560 390223 / 0943507 X X X3 3Continuous data collection discontinued in 2001. -- 

11 Brush Creek at Rockhill Road, KCMO 06893562 390221 / 0943443 X X X -- 12 Brush Creek at Elmwood Avenue, KCMO 06893564 390211 / 0943152 X X X3 X4 4Sampled in free-flowing section below dam. 13 Blue River at Stadium Drive, KCMO 06893578 390330 / 0943042 X X -- X 14 Blue River at 12th Street, KCMO 06893590 390549 / 0942928 X X X3 -- 15 Blue River Main WWTP, Johnson County, KS -- 385114 / 0943658 X5 X5 -- -- 

5Some data are from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Compliance History Online database (http://www.epa.gov/echo). 

16 Indian Creek Middle Basin WWTP, Overland Park, KS -- 385514 / 0944208 X5 X5 -- -- 17 Tomahawk Creek WWTP, Overland Park, KS -- 385548 / 0943726 X5 X5 -- -- 18 Blue River WWTP, KCMO 390736094292700 390736 / 0942927 X -- -- -- 19 South Grand River near Freeman, MO 06921582 383520 / 0942630 X -- -- X 
Introduction 5

winds from the semiarid southwest dominate the air flow pattern. July typically is the warmest month, with a mean daily 

maximum temperature of 89 oF (degrees Fahrenheit) and January is the coldest month, with a mean daily minimum temperature of 18.1 oF (National Climatic Data Center, 2005).

 The major tributaries of the Blue River—Brush, Indian, 

and Tomahawk Creeks—originate in Kansas. The remaining 

basin, approximately 46 percent or 345 square kilometers, 

drains most of Kansas City, Missouri, which lies south of the 

Missouri River. Substantial parts of stream segments in the 

basin have been altered substantially by urbanization, industrial 

development, and flood-control projects. An estimated 25 percent of the land use and land cover in the basin is impervious 

(table 2).

During the last 30 years, the Blue River has been channelized from Brush Creek to the mouth as part of flood-control 

measures (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004). Additional 

Blue River flood mitigation projects either have been completed, or are planned, along the reach from Indian Creek to 

Brush Creek (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, written commun., 

2005). Stream segments have been straightened and the banks 

armored with rip-rap or concrete in an attempt to increase floodwater conveyance and reduce the area inundated by floods. 

These projects have resulted in the alteration or removal of most 

of the native in-stream and adjacent riparian corridor habitat in 

the lower reaches, although most of the upper stream reaches 

remain largely unaltered (fig. 2). 

Brush Creek is a highly urbanized stream. Large sections 

of the native streambank and channel have been replaced by 

concrete and most of the native riparian habitat replaced by 

landscaping—a process that began in the mid-1920’s and continues through the present (2006; fig. 2). The most substantial 

channel alterations occur along the lower 9-kilometer stretch 

from the Missouri-Kansas state line to the mouth and followed 

a devastating loss of life and property flood in 1977. Brush 

Creek channel modifications were designed to decrease flooding by quickly conveying floodwaters to the Blue River. Additionally, to enhance the aesthetic and recreational potential of 

Figure 2. Riparian areas adjacent to selected stream sites (fig. 1).
Table 2. Land-use/land-cover characteristics for sites and streams sampled. [Drainage area (upper number), in square kilometers above site or within stream; basin percentage (lower number in bold); m3, cubic meters; --, no data; na, site below wastewater

available; unless noted, land cover classifications modified from U.S. Geological Survey National Map (2004)] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 11 1

Drainage area, total 118 241 477 551 671 749 42 60 168 194 34 41 47 78 

Agricultural 30 59 83 83 83 83 6.0 8.0 23 23 0.02 0.02 0.02 0

25.2 24.6 17.3 15.0 12.4 11.1 15.3 12.8 13.7 11.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0

Barren 0.28 0.85 0.92 1.39 1.54 1.68 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0

Commercial and Industrial 0.83 2.97 26.8 37.4 55.7 80.3 4.22 8.37 17.9 20.9 2.59 4.50 5.20 9

0.7 1.2 5.6 6.8 8.3 10.7 10.1 14.0 10.7 10.8 7.6 11.1 11.1 12

Forested 11.7 33.5 56.0 73.2 82.4 86.9 2.16 2.78 10.1 11.6 2.70 2.96 3.13 4

9.9 13.9 11.7 13.3 12.3 11.6 5.2 4.7 6.0 6.0 8.0 7.3 6.7 5

Grassland, including parks 69.8 129 189 203 220 231 10.8 13.7 44.1 47.0 4.51 4.76 5.51 8

59.3 53.5 39.6 36.9 32.8 30.9 25.7 23.0 26.2 24.2 13.3 11.7 11.8 10

Residential, High Intensity 0.46 1.47 45.1 62.2 117 144 8.23 12.0 30.3 38.9 15.9 19.7 23.6 42

0.4 0.6 9.5 11.3 17.4 19.2 19.6 20.1 18.0 20.0 46.8 48.5 50.6 55

Residential, Low Intensity 1.31 6.20 63.2 75.3 94 101 9.31 14.0 39.3 48.6 8.1 8.4 8.9 11

1.1 2.6 13.2 13.7 14.1 13.5 22.2 23.4 23.4 25.1 23.7 20.7 19.2 15

Water 1.51 3.40 5.67 6.39 7.18 8.23 0.22 0.39 1.42 1.57 0.09 0.15 0.18 0

1.3 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.4 0
Wetlands

1.92 4.20 7.41 8.82 10.0 12.1 0.55 0.75 1.98 2.30 0.09 0.10 0.10 01.6 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0

Impervious area, includes roads, roofs, sidewalks, and parking lots1

17.6 38.6 89.1 106 146 184 8.29 12.2 35.2 41.2 16.8 20.2 23.1 3615.0 16.0 18.7 19.2 21.8 24.6 20.0 20.6 20.9 21.2 50.0 50.0 49.2 47

Roads

2.19 5.46 23.2 28.5 40.7 47.4 3.42 4.45 13.5 16.0 3.59 4.49 5.20 81.9 2.3 4.9 5.2 6.1 6.3 8.2 7.5 8.0 8.2 10.6 11.0 11.1 11

Storm, sanitary, and combined sewer lines, total length, in meters (upper value) and capacity, in m3 (lower value)2

 -- na 464,800 1,015,000 2,031,000 78,900 158,000 272,000 741,0 -- na 97,400 212,000 488,000 -- -- na na -- 9,660 27,200 50,100 193,0

Sewer density, in length (meters) per square kilometer (upper value) and capacity (m3) per square kilometer (lower value)

 -- na 975 7,450 6,560 -- -- na na -- 2,330 11,800 29,900 69,30 -- na 204 1,550 1,980 -- -- na na -- 284 2,610 3,770 4,630 

Sewer Lines, unit length in meters

 -- na 5,690 10,700 20,300 -- -- -- -- -- 7,930 18,600 29,900 69,30

Number of combined sewer overflow diversion structures2

0 0 1 34 172 172 0 0 0 0 0 14 19 112 

1Adapted from Mid-America Regional Council, 2005.2City of Kansas City, Missouri, data on file.

Table 2. Land-use/land-cover characteristics for sites and streams sampled.—Continued[Drainage area (upper number), in square kilometers above site or within stream; basin percentage (lower number in bold); m3, cubic meters; --, no data; na, site below wastewater

available; unless noted, land cover classifications modified from U.S. Geological Survey National Map (2004)]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 11 1
8 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

the stream corridor, a series of impoundments were created by 

constructing weirs, or small dams, designed to impound water 

during base-flow periods and then to allow stormwater to freely 

move downstream during higher flows (fig. 3). The channel 

modifications to Brush Creek have resulted in a stream that consists of a series of lotic (flowing) and lentic (standing) reaches 

during low flows.

Wastewater, both treated and untreated, is an important 

hydrologic component in the basin. Kansas residents are served 

by three WWTPs (sites 15 to 17; fig.1) that discharge into the 

basin above site 7. The largest of these plants, site 16, discharges just upstream from site 4 on Indian Creek; the nextlargest plant, site 17, discharges into Tomahawk Creek just 

upstream from its confluence with Indian Creek and upstream 

from site 4; the smallest plant, site 15, discharges into the Blue 

River just upstream from site 2. From July 2001 through August 

2004, these plants treated an average of 10.3 million gallons per 

day (Mgal/d), 4.2 Mgal/d, and 2.9 Mgal/d (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2005). All of these plants have secondarytreatment capacity; sites 15 and 16 utilize activated-sludge 

treatment, and site 17 uses trickling-filter treatment. Wastewater for Missouri residents in the basin is treated at site 18, but 

plant effluent is discharged outside of the basin into the Missouri River.

Discharges from WWTPs supplement the natural flow in 

receiving streams. At sites downstream from either one (site 2), 

two (site 4), or three (site 7) WWTPs, effluent can comprise 

greater than 95 percent of base flow during droughts (Wilkison 

and others, 2005). Other potential sources of wastewater that 

can contribute contaminants to streams in the basin are faulty 

septic-systems, line blockages that result in sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), leaks from aging and disrepaired sewer-lines, 

and WWTP by-passes; therefore, most sites in the basin potentially are affected by some wastewater source. 

Land Use/Land Cover

The Blue River Basin mostly is urbanized (fig. 4; table 2) 

and has been for a number of years. However, more than 60 percent of the area upstream from site 2 still remains in grass or forested land. Residential land use constitutes one-third of the total 

basin area, and more than 70 percent of the area drained by 

Brush Creek. Since 1970, population has doubled in the Kansas part of the basin, but has remained constant on the Missouri 

side (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). Residential development in 

the basin headwaters area is expected to increase by 30 percent 

in the next 10 years, with only minimal additional development 

expected on the Missouri side (Mid-America Regional Council, 

2003). Agricultural lands constitute 11 percent of the total 

basin area, and are confined almost entirely to headwater 

reaches of the Blue River and Indian Creek. Commercial and 

industrial development primarily is concentrated along the 

lower reaches of Brush Creek, Indian Creek, and the Blue 

River.

Park lands along streams stretch over approximately 60 

linear miles of riparian corridors in the basin. Brush Creek 

Greenway, which stretches along the lower 6 kilometers of 

Brush Creek, was acquired in 1917 (City of Kansas City, Missouri Parks Department, written commun., 2005). Numerous 

other parks have been established along and adjacent to basin 

streams, and efforts are underway to make these an integral 

component of an inter-connected, metro-wide, greenways and 

trails system (Mid-America Regional Council, 2004). 

Water Quality

Water-quality issues have long been a concern in the basin. 

Principal water-quality concerns have centered around the 

effects of increasing urbanization in the basin, industrial and 

wastewater discharges, nonpoint-source pollution, and the 

effects of CSOs on receiving waters (Mid-America Regional 

Council, 1983; Blevins, 1986; Wilkison and others, 2002, 

2005). Approximately 15 percent of the basin is underlain by a 

CSS that occasionally allows untreated wastewater to be discharged into Brush Creek and Blue River. The boundaries of the 

combined system are shaded on figure 1 and are roughly, the 

Missouri River on the north, the Blue River on the east, 85th 

Street on the south, and the Kansas state line on the west. Rainfall rates in excess of 0.6 centimeter per hour probably are sufficient to trigger CSOs in some areas of the city (City of Kansas 

City, Water Services Department, written commun., 2004).

Previous Studies

Systematic streamflow measurement began in 1939 on the 

Blue River (site 7, fig. 1) and in 1963 on Indian Creek (approximately 7 kilometers upstream from site 6) and has continued 

through the present (2006). Various other streamflow gages 

were established as part of previous studies (Becker, 1990; 

Blevins, 1986; Wilkison and others, 2002, 2005), some of 

Figure 3. Flow over weir from Plaza pool (above site 10) into 

Volker pool below (above site 11) following storm event and 

storm sewer discharge into Brush Creek (marked with arrow).
Introduction 9

Figure 4. Land use/land cover in the Blue River Basin.
10 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

which are still in use today and were part of this study. Streamflow data are published annually in reports by the USGS and 

made available on the world wide web (URLs: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/mo/nwis/ and URL: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ks/

nwis/). 

During 1998, the USGS began conducting surface-water 

studies in the Blue River Basin in an effort to characterize the 

effects of wastewater pollutant loadings on selected stream 

reaches in the Blue River Basin (Wilkison, 2002). This work 

primarily focused on the Blue River downstream from site 7 and 

on the Missouri part of Brush Creek (downstream from site 9). 

Constituent loadings of compounds associated with wastewater 

were determined for 1998 to 2000 during base-flow and stormflow conditions. DNA fingerprinting of E.Coli bacteria also 

was utilized to estimate relative proportions of bacteria sources 

at selected sites within the study area. In 2000, data collection 

efforts were adjusted slightly to better characterize source loadings from wastewater effluent on the upper Blue River 

(upstream from site 2) and in Indian Creek. Additionally, watercolumn and bottom-sediment data were collected from lentic 

reaches of Brush Creek and biological samples were collected 

at 10 sites throughout the basin. These data were reported in 

Wilkison and others (2005). Lee and others (2005) sampled 

selected sites in the upper basin as part of an effort to examine 

the effects of point and nonpoint sources in Johnson County, 

Kansas, and their relation to land use.

Methods

Streamflow and water-quality data analyzed in this study 

were collected from July 1998 to October 2004 (Wilkison and 

others, 2002, 2005). Data collected included discrete and continuous streamflow; discrete and continuous water-quality 

properties; concentrations of nutrients, organic wastewater and 

pharmaceutical compounds; fecal-indicator bacteria and suspended sediment in base-flow and streamflow samples; and 

assessments of aquatic macroinvertebrates.

Sampling Protocol

Sampling sites were selected to provide a comprehensive 

assessment of the effects of point and nonpoint sources within 

the basin, to provide support for historical trend analysis of 

water quality, and to assess the aquatic integrity of selected 

stream reaches within the Blue River Basin. Locations were 

based on a variety of factors including accessibility, security, 

and proximity to tributaries, CSS areas, or WWTPs. Types of 

water-quality and streamflow data collected at sites are listed in 

table 1. Sites are shown in figure 1 in relation to streams and 

tributaries in the basin, to the areal extent of the CSS area in 

Kansas City, Missouri, and to the proximity of existing WWTPs 

in the study area. Samples were collected during base-flow 

(defined as streamflow unaffected by storm runoff) and stormflow events.

Descriptions of the streamflow and water-quality sampling 

methods employed in this study have been described in detail 

previously (Wilkison and others 2002; 2005). A brief description follows. 

Streamflow was determined by direct discharge measurement at the time of sample collection, or from established stagedischarge relations using USGS procedures outlined by Rantz 

and others (1982a, 1982b). At continuous streamflow sites 

(table 1), stage was measured at 5- to 15-minute intervals, and 

the mean daily discharge published annually (Hauck and Nagel, 

2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) and are available in the 

National Water Information System (NWIS) online at URL 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis. Mean monthly discharge data 

for selected sites in the study area (sites 6, 7, and 11) from 

August 1998 through September 2004 are shown in figure 5.

At continuous water-quality data sites (table 1), multiparameter probes capable of recording temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity were used in accordance with procedures outlined in Wagner and others (2000). Monitors were 

installed to allow adequate contact with the sampled stream and 

to protect the monitor from floods. From 1998 through 2000, 

monitors at sites 10, 11, and 12 were encased in protective polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pods with holes drilled throughout to 

allow adequate water exchange, anchored with steel cables to 

fixed points along the stream bank, and placed in the centroid of 

flow. Beginning in 2001, the monitor at site 11 was installed 

adjacent to the stream bank in a protective case designed to hold 

the instrument six-tenths of the total depth below the static 

water surface during base flow. Monitors at sites 7 and 14 were 

installed in protective cases anchored to the stream bottom with 

steel rods, and designed to hold the monitors at an approximate 

depth of six-tenths of the total depth below the water surface 

during base flow. 

Mean daily water-quality values were published annually 

(Hauck and Nagel, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005) or in a previous report (Wilkison and others, 2002, 2005) and are available 

in NWIS (URL http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis).

All water-quality samples were collected and processed 

using protocols designed to prevent contamination; therefore, 

collection and processing equipment was comprised of inert 

materials—glass, fluorocarbon polymer, or stainless steel (Lane 

and Ray, 2003; Wilde, 2004; Wilde, 2005; Wilde and others, 

1999; Wilde and others, 2002; Wilde and others, 2004). Baseflow samples were depth- and width-integrated across streams 

unless depth or width constrictions warranted the collection of 

grab samples from the centroid of flow. Stormflow samples 

were collected using automatic samplers programmed to collect 

flow-weighted samples after minimal stage thresholds were 

exceeded. Sample programs were based on the shape and duration of a hydrograph from a thunderstorm capable of producing 

1.9 to 3.2 centimeters, which targeted events considered to be of 

sufficient intensity or duration to trigger at least some CSOs in 

the CSS area. Storms may have triggered events in parts of the 

basin, but not in other parts, and the duration and magnitude of 

events likely varied at individual CSO points for any given 

storm. It was beyond the scope of this project to characterize 
Figure 5. Mean monthly discharge at selected sites in the Blue River Basin from August 1998 through October 2004 (no data at site 6 for August 19
12 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

the frequency, duration, or magnitude of CSO events. Every 

attempt was made to sample the complete hydrograph during 

storms; however, this was not always the case, and not all sites 

were sampled during every event.

Stream samples were analyzed for physical properties, 

nutrients, organic wastewater and selected pharmaceutical compounds, fecal indicator bacteria (E. coli and fecal coliform), 

major ions, trace elements, and benthic macroinvertebrates. 

Major ions and trace elements are not discussed in the report. 

Nutrients analyzed in this study included total ammonia plus 

organic nitrogen (N), dissolved ammonia, dissolved nitrate 

(NO3), dissolved nitrite (NO2), total N (sum of total and dissolved N species), orthophosphate, and dissolved and total 

phosphorus (P). Organic wastewater compounds refers to concentrations of common household and industrial chemicals, 

including, but not limited to, detergent surfactants and surfactant metabolites, antimicrobial soaps, personal-care insecticides, plasticizers, musks and fragrance compounds determined 

from unfiltered samples (Brown and others, 1999; Kolpin and 

others, 2002). Information about the potential uses, sources, and 

endocrine-disrupting potential of these compounds has been 

reported in a related method for OWC determination from filtered samples (Zaugg and others, 2002). Pharmaceutical compounds were determined from filtered samples using the 

method of Cahill and others (2004). Pharmaceutical analytes 

included analgesics (acetaminophen and ibuprofen), an anticonvulsant (carbemazepine), antibiotics (sulfamethoxazole and 

trimethoprim), cardiac and anti-clotting medications (dehydronifedipine, diltiazem, and warfarin), a cholesterol-regulator 

(gemfibrozil), a narcotic (codeine), and stimulants (caffeine and 

cotinine, a metabolite of nicotine). 

To better characterize Brush Creek impoundment water 

quality and to more fully understand the controlling processes, 

vertical water-quality profiles were determined for selected 

sampling events. Because the intent was to sample water that 

was in chemical equilibrium with bottom sediment, sampling 

events were scheduled to follow extended periods (2 weeks or 

greater) of little or no precipitation. During these sampling 

events, selected physical properties were measured at 0.25 

meter depth intervals concurrent with the collection of depthintegrated water samples.

Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled in accordance 

with biological assessment protocols established for the evaluation of the biological condition of wadeable streams (Rabeni 

and others, 1997; Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2000). Samples collected in 2002 were obtained from a 

standard habitat or habitats (usually coarse mineral substrate in 

riffles, at a minimum) with a D-frame kicknet, preserved in the 

field, and processed in the laboratory. The sample was split in a 

gridded tray and organisms sorted from sample debris, enumerated, and identified with microscopy. In 2003 and 2004, two 

independently obtained 100-organism samples were collected 

from multiple habitats using a D-frame kicknet, field sorted, 

and composited into one sample to create a composite of 

approximately 200 organisms, which were identified and enumerated in the laboratory using microscopy.

With the exception of E. coli microbial source-tracking 

samples, all samples were analyzed at USGS laboratories using 

established procedures (Faries, 1993; Fishman, 1993; Fishman 

and Friedman, 1989; Moulton and others, 2000; Kolpin and others, 2002; Zaugg and others, 2002; Cahill and others, 2004). 

E. coli microbial source-tracking samples were analyzed at the 

University of Missouri Veterinary Pathobiology Laboratory in 

Columbia, Missouri, using genotypic, geographic-specific, 

library-based methods (Dombek and others, 2000; Carson and 

others, 2003). 

Data Analysis

Water-quality data were analyzed by categorical analysis 

for various factors that may have been expected to affect concentrations and loads observed in stream samples. These factors 

included hydrologic condition at the time of sample collection, 

stream reach, and potential wastewater sources.

Stream sampling sites were determined to provide broad 

areal coverage throughout the basin (fig. 1) with consideration 

given to site locations that would allow characterization of 

major tributaries or contributions from major point sources. 

Due to safety considerations, data collection on the lower Blue 

River was moved upstream from site 14 to site 13 beginning in 

early 2002, and data from these sites were combined for the purposes of this report. Sites above and below major point sources 

were sampled. Because one objective was to determine the relative magnitude of various potential sources of wastewater 

entering streams, sites were categorized by the expected principal upstream wastewater inputs for stream sites and reaches 

(table 3). Potential sources included WWTP effluent, CSOs, 

and mixtures of WWTP effluent and CSOs. Sites categorized as 

“other” were considered less likely to be affected substantially 

by wastewater but still could be potentially impacted by faulty 

septic systems, leaking sanitary sewer lines, and sewer by-pass 

overflows.

Instantaneous loads of selected contaminants at stream 

sites were determined by multiplying the measured concentration by the discharge at the time of sample collection, and then 

by an appropriate conversion factor to normalize units. Estimates of monthly total N and total P loads at selected sites in the 

basin were determined by minimum variance unbiased procedures (Runkel and others, 2004). These procedures were 

designed to account for non-normal data distributions, seasonal 

or annual cycles, censored data, biases associated with logarithmic transformations, and serial correlation of residuals (Cohn 

and others, 1988; Cohn and others, 1989). Hydrologic and/or 

seasonal components were included only when model fit 

improved and warranted their inclusion. Because fewer storm 

samples were collected at sites 2 and 6, stormflow data from 

nearby USGS streamflow gaging stations, 06893100 and 

06893300, which were sampled in 2003 and 2004 (Lee and others, 2005), were used to provide better resolution to the fitted 

model at these sites. The models determined instantaneous 

loads from each observation in the data set. Loads were esti-
Methods 13

Table 3. Stream reach and wastewater source categories for sites sampled in the Blue River Basin.

[KS, Kansas; KCMO, Kansas City, Missouri; MO, Missouri; WWTP, wastewater-treatment plant; --, not assigned; CSO, combined sewer overflows]

Site

number

(fig. 1) Station name

Stream reach 

category

Wastewater source 

category

1 Blue River near Stanley, KS Upper Blue River Other1

1

Site upstream from wastewater-treatment plants and combined sewer overflow areas.

2 Blue River at Blue Ridge Boulevard Extension, KCMO Upper Blue River WWTP

3 Indian Creek at 69 Hwy., Overland Park, KS Upper Indian Creek Other1

4 Indian Creek at Farley, Overland Park, KS Middle Indian Creek WWTP

5 Tomahawk Creek at Tomahawk Creek Park, Overland Park, KS -- Other1

6 Indian Creek at 103rd Street, KCMO Lower Indian Creek WWTP

7 Blue River near KCMO Middle Blue River WWTP

8 Blue River at Blue Parkway, KCMO Middle Blue River WWTP/CSO

9 Brush Creek at Ward Parkway, KCMO Middle Brush Creek Other1

10 Brush Creek at KCMO Middle Brush Creek CSO

11 Brush Creek at Rockhill Road, KCMO Lower Brush Creek CSO

12 Brush Creek at Elmwood Avenue, KCMO Lower Brush Creek CSO

13 Blue River at Stadium Drive, KCMO Lower Blue River WWTP/CSO

14 Blue River at 12th Street, KCMO Lower Blue River WWTP/CSO

mated for each time period, in this case days, which were 

summed to provide monthly estimates using the S-LOADEST 

computer program (David Lorenz, U.S. Geological Survey, 

written commun., 2005). Yield estimates were determined by 

dividing the constituent load determined at the site by the site’s 

drainage area.

Estimates of the natural background total N and total P 

loads at selected sites in the basin were done by applying 

regional regression models developed from minimally affected 

USGS reference basins (Smith and others, 2003) and atmospheric deposition rates for 1998 through 2004 (National Atmospheric Deposition Program, 2005). Estimates of mean monthly 

contaminant loads from WWTPs were determined by multiplying the mean monthly concentration of selected contaminants 

by the mean monthly plant discharge as reported by the plant 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005) and then by an 

appropriate conversion factor to normalize units. Estimates of 

total N and total P loads originating specifically from CSOs 

were beyond the scope of this report, but such measurements 

were provided for stream reaches in the CSS area to allow comparison with other potential sources.

Algal productivity of Brush Creek impoundments was 

determined using the Trophic-State Index (Carlson, 1977) and 

a slightly different system (Trophic State) developed specifically for Missouri lakes (Jones and Knowlton, 1993). The 

Trophic-State Index was calculated based on Secchi depths, 

chlorophyll a concentrations, and total P concentrations (Carlson, 1977). Trophic State was determined from measurements 

of chlorophyll a, total N, and total P concentrations (Jones and 

Knowlton, 1993). Both methods classify the algal productivity 

of lakes as being oligotrophic (low), mesotrophic (moderate), 

eutrophic (productive), or hypereutrophic (very productive) 

based on each parameter measured. 

The genetic similarity of E. coli isolated from water samples were compared to a library of E. coli isolates from three 

hosts—dogs, geese, and humans—all of which were known to 

be present in the basin based on previous data (Wilkison and 

others, 2002), field observations, and knowledge of potential 

contaminant sources. Host-source library samples were collected from sites adjacent to stream sites that reasonably could 

be expected to contribute in-stream bacteria. Genetic fingerprint patterns of samples were determined only after a four-step 

procedure confirmed that isolates were indeed strains of fecal 

E. coli. Fingerprints of isolates were generated by repetitive 

extragenic palindromic-PCR (rep-PCR) using BOX1AIR primers consisting of 18 to 30 bands (Carson and others, 2003). The 

similarity of fingerprint patterns from water-borne E.coli were 

compared to their association with patterns in the host-source 

library using Bionumerics software, version 3.0 (Applied 

Maths, Kortrijk, Belgium). Assignment to a host-group was 

deemed to occur when water sample patterns had a 75 percent 

or greater similarity to those from a known host. Samples outside of those limits were assumed to be from unknown sources.

The species richness and relative abundance of aquatic 

macroinvertebrates present at stream sites was determined by 

applying standard sampling protocols used for biological 
14 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

assessments (Rabeni and others, 1997; Kansas Department of 

Health and Environment, 2000). The resulting data include 

community-level attributes referred to as metrics, which are 

specific indicators of stream impacts that respond to the range 

in conditions (quality of water, sediments, or habitat) present 

among stream sites. Relative scores for the sites were determined from several different combinations of indicator metrics, 

referred to as multi-metric indices. These indices served as the 

basis for comparison of biological condition among the sites 

and for the determination of aquatic life status. 

 Ten indicator metrics determined from individual 

response patterns, stepwise data analysis, and lack of cross correlations (Barry Poulton, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2005) were used to develop proportional macroinvertebrate metric scores. Each of the 10 macroinvertebrate metric 

scores at individual sites were scaled proportionally by transforming scores from 1 to 100; the highest score was assigned 

100, the lowest assigned 1, and the remaining values calculated 

as a proportion of the range of scores (Kreis, 1988). Proportional values were then summed with the highest score possible 

being 1,000 and the lowest possible 10. This process normalized individual metric scores, added robustness to the approach, 

and allowed relative comparisons of aquatic community integrity between sites. Proportional water-quality scores were determined using a modification of the same approach (Kreis, 1988). 

The median concentration of nutrients, and OWC and pharmaceutical compounds by use categories (tables 4 and 5) at a site 

were proportionally transformed based on the range of all 

observed values for any given constituent; lowest concentrations were assigned 100, largest concentrations assigned 1, and 

the remaining values calculated as a proportion of the range. 

Therefore, an increase in a water-quality score corresponded to 

a decrease in the median concentration of contaminants measured in stream samples. 

Nonparametric statistical methods were used to analyze 

the data when appropriate because water-quality data generally 

are not normally distributed, and the data often contain values 

less than the method detection level (Childress and others, 

1999). Nonparametric statistical methods are not unduly 

affected by extreme values (outliers) because ranks of the data 

are used instead of the actual concentrations of the water-quality constituents (Helsel and Hirsch,1992). A significance level 

(α) of 0.05 was used for all statistical tests in this study. The 

attained significance level, or probability of error (p-value) 

from the test, often was much lower and is reported to provide 

a quantitative indication of the degree of similarity or difference 

between data sets.

The laboratory method for OWCs in unfiltered samples 

currently (2006) analyzes for 72 compounds. To simplify data 

analysis, OWC compounds were categorized into general use 

categories according to previously established guidelines 

(Wilkison and others, 2002; Kolpin and others, 2002; Lee and 

others, 2004). The general use categories of OWCs include 

detergents, pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 

(PAHs), fragrances and flavorings, sterols, plastics, stimulants, 

and fire retardants. The general use categories of OWCs and the 

chemicals that make up each category are listed in table 4. 

Detailed descriptions of the specific uses of these compounds 

have been reported in several publications (Kolpin and others, 

2002; Wilkison and others, 2002; Zaugg and others, 2002; Lee 

and others, 2004). Some compounds listed have several uses 

and were assigned to categories that were believed to comprise 

the bulk of their use. 

The laboratory method for pharmaceutical compounds in 

filtered samples currently (2006) analyzes for 22 compounds. 

Compounds were sub-divided into 10 categories based on their 

typical medicinal use (table 5).

Determination of Impoundment Pool Volumes

Pool volumes of impounded reaches upstream from sites 

10 and 12 on Brush Creek were determined using real-time 

kinematic surveying linked to a global-positioning system 

(Heimann and Richards, 2003). Universal Transverse Mercator 

coordinates and an elevation were established from a nearby 

known benchmark, and these data points were then used to construct digital surfaces of the impoundment bottoms and determine pool volumes. 

 The impounded reaches occasionally are drained, either to 

inspect sediment accumulation or to maintain pumps, motors, 

and lighting contained within the pools. Inspection of continuous hydrograph records during either the draining or filling of 

the impounded reaches also allowed for the determination of the 

pool volume by integrating the volume entering and/or exiting 

a given reach. 

Quality Control and Assurance

Quality control and assurance samples, designed to ensure 

the integrity of the water-quality data analyzed in this report, 

represented approximately 10 percent of all field samples collected. Laboratory method performance was evaluated continuously through the use of standard reference materials, logic 

checks, and internal and external data reviews. Results from, 

and detailed discussions of, the quality control and assurance 

samples collected as part of this study were reported in Wilkison and others (2002, 2005). A brief discussion of the qualityassurance methods used in this study follows.

Field equipment blank samples were used to determine the 

adequacy of field and sample processing cleaning protocols. 

These samples were collected and processed by passing highly 

purified water through the same equipment used to collect and 

process water-quality samples. These blank samples were collected and processed in sequence with environmental samples, 

and then all samples were stored, shipped, and analyzed by 

identical methods. Most compounds were not detected in any 

field blank samples and, if detected, the reported concentrations 

were less than, or near, the detection limits for the compounds. 

Benzo[a]pyrene, a combustion by-product, and tri(2-chloroethyl)-phosphate, a plasticizer, frequently were detected in field 
Table 4. General use categories for organic wastewater compounds analyzed in this report.[PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; AHTN, acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene; HHCB, Hexa-hydro-hexamethyl-cyclopenta-benzopyran; categories adapted from Wilkison and others, 2002Lee and others, 2005]

Antioxidant Detergent Disinfectant Fire retardant Flavoring or fragrance

2,6-Di-tert-benzoquinone 4-Cumylphenol Phenol Tributylphosphate 3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol2,6-Di-tert-butylphenol 4-Nonylphenol Tribromomethane Tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate Acetophenone 5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole 4-Octylphenol Triclosan Tris (dichlorisopropyl) phosphate AHTN 3-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (BHA) 4-tert-octylphenol Benzaldehyde Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) Nonylphenol monoethoxylate Camphor 

Nonylphenol diethoxylate d-Limonene Octylphenol monoethoxylate HHCB Octylphenol diethoxylate Indole 

Isoborneol Isoquinoline MentholMethylsalicylate

Pesticide Plastics Solvent Sterol or stanol Stimulant

1,4-Dichlorobenzene Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate Isophorone Ethynyl estradiol Caffeine3,4-Dichlorophenyl isocyanate Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Isopropylbenzene (cumene) 17-β−Estradiol CotinineAnthraquinone Bisphenol A Tetrachloroethylene 3-β-CoprostanolAtrazine Diethylphthalate CholesterolBenzophenone Phthalic anhydride EquileninBromacil Triethyl citrate EstroneCarbaryl Triphenyl phosphate SitosterolCarbazole Tris (2-butoxyethyl) phosphate Stigmastanolcis-ChlordaneChlorpyrifosDiazinonDichlorvosDieldrinLindaneMetalaxylMetolachlorN,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET)PentachlorophenolPrometon
16 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Table 5. General use categories for pharmaceutical compounds analyzed in this report.

Analgesic Antacid Antibiotic/Antifungal Anticonvulsant Antidiabetic

Acetaminophen Ranitidine Azithromycin Carbamazapine Metformin

Ibuprofen Cimetidine Erythromycin

Miconazole

Sulfamethoxazole

Thiabendazole

Trimethoprim

Antidepressant Asthma/Antihistamine Cholesterol/Cardiac Narcotic Stimulant

Fluoxetine Albuterol (Salbutamol) Dehydronifedipine Codeine 1,7-dimethylxanthine

Diphenhydramine Diltiazem Caffeine

Gemfibrozil Cotinine

Warfarin

and equipment blanks collected in 1998 and 1999 (Wilkison and 

others, 2002). Because of that, environmental concentrations 

above the highest level observed in any blank [0.39 μg/L 

(micrograms per liter) for benzo[a]pyrene and 0.32 μg/L for 

tri(2-chloroethyl)-phosphate] for samples collected before 

October 2000 were removed from analysis in this report. There 

was one detection each of the pharmaceutical compounds sulfamethoxazole and diphenhydramine at trace levels (0.004 μg/L) 

in a field equipment blank and environmental concentrations at, 

or below that level, were censored for analysis in this report. 

Equipment blanks also were used to assess the sterility of 

equipment used in the processing and enumerating bacteria 

from stream samples, and the potential for sample cross-contamination. Sterile buffered solution was passed through the 

equipment before sample processing to assess equipment sterility and then again, if multiple sites were processed using the 

same equipment, to assess the potential for cross-contamination 

between sites. Equipment blank samples were then processed 

and enumerated following the same procedures used for stream 

samples. Results, as determined by the lack of cultural bacteria 

in these samples, indicated that equipment sterility and crosscontamination were not issues in this study.

 Field replicate samples were collected to determine the 

variability in sample collection and processing procedures, and 

to examine the affect these variations may have on evaluating 

the precision of ambient environmental concentrations. The 

smaller the difference between environmental and replicate 

concentrations, the higher the confidence level that sampling 

and processing variability do not unduly affect the precision of 

results. Quantile-quantile plots of the concentrations of constituents determined in environmental samples, and those determined in replicate samples, were previously reported (Wilkison 

and others, 2005). The relative percent difference between environmental and replicate samples analyzed for nutrients and 

pharmaceutical compounds averaged one percent or less and 

coefficient of determinations of 0.96 and 0.94 respectively 

(Wilkison and others, 2005). Samples analyzed using the 

whole-water organic wastewater method had higher percent differences (average of 5.7 percent) and lower coefficients of 

determination (average r2 of 0.85) than did the nutrient or pharmaceutical samples (Wilkison and others, 2005). Replicate data 

indicated that a higher degree of uncertainty resulted when 

compounds were determined from whole-water samples, likely 

because of slight differences in suspended sediment or organic 

matter between whole-water samples, or because constituents 

were mediated by biological activity. 

Bacteria samples were enumerated using multiple dilutions to ensure that density counts fell in the range of optimal 

values as expressed in Myers and Wilde (2003). When enumerated densities fell outside of prescribed limits, densities were 

estimated based on non-ideal counts using standardized criteria 

(Myers and Wilde, 2003). Based on these criteria, only 3 percent of the bacteria samples were reported as estimated, indicating that enumeration techniques were sufficient to adequately 

quantify in-stream bacteria.

 A number of quality assurance procedures were utilized 

by the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL). 

These include the determination and tracking of long-term 

method detection level, internal and external audits, blind blank 

and blind spike programs using standard reference materials, 

method performance evaluations, and data review. Laboratory 

blanks, reagent-spiked samples, and continuing calibration verification solutions were processed with each sample set (generally 10 to 15 samples) to assess potential sample contamination; 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 17

quantify method performance, bias, and variability; and to verify instrument sensitivity and calibration. Data were reviewed 

by logic algorithms (for example cation/anion balances and historical results); data that fell outside of acceptable limits were 

reviewed by chemists, verified, and re-analyzed if necessary, 

before acceptance. During the course of this study, standard reference material nutrient and trace element data indicate that laboratory bias and variability were within acceptable limits, generally less than one standard deviation from the most probable 

value. Laboratory quality-assurance data and methods are documented on the world wide web (URL http://bqs.usgs.gov), and 

in Childress and others (1999), Zaugg and others, (2002), and 

Cahill and others (2004). Data from OWC and pharmaceutical 

laboratory reagent spike and blank samples analyzed in conjunction with this study previously were reported (Wilkison and 

others, 2005).

For macroinvertebrate samples collected in 2002, the sorting of every 10th sample was checked by another technician to 

assure that at least 95 percent of the organisms were removed 

from the sample debris. For samples collected in 2003 and 

2004, 10 percent of laboratory samples were cross-identified by 

different technicians. Identifications were checked with local 

experts when available and with catalogued USGS reference 

collections.

Water Quality in the Blue River Basin

Water quality in the Blue River Basin was characterized 

from July 1998 through October 2004 using an interdisciplinary 

approach. The approach included measurements of nutrients, 

organic wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds, and fecal 

indicator bacteria in base flow, stormflow, and impounded 

stream reaches. Benthic macroinvertebrates were used to assess 

the biological integrity of basin streams.

Base Flow Water Quality

Stream samples were collected between August 1998 and 

October 2004 at surface-water sites in the basin. Summaries of 

sample analytical results collected during base-flow conditions 

are given in tables 6 to 8, at the back of this report.

Nutrients

During base flow, WWTPs constitute the predominant 

source of nutrient loads to Indian Creek and Blue River. Total 

N and total P concentrations and instantaneous loads measured 

in base-flow samples by site, and total N and total P load by 

stream reach are summarized in figures 6 and 7. The largest 

concentrations of total N and total P were observed in base-flow 

samples from sites 4 and 6 on Indian Creek (figs. 6a and 7a). 

Median total N concentration at site 4 was 15.2 mg/L (milligrams per liter) and 11.4 mg/L at site 6; median total P concentration at site 4 was 3.47 mg/L and 2.58 mg/L at site 6. Both 

sampling sites are located downstream from WWTP discharges. When sites were grouped by potential wastewater 

sources (table 3), the median concentration of total N and total 

P at sites downstream from WWTPs were 9 to 23 times greater 

than the median concentrations at sites above WWTPs and/or 

the CSS area. Median total N and P concentrations from baseflow samples collected in the CSS area (1.7 mg/L and 0.176 

mg/L) were approximately twice that of sites with no apparent 

wastewater sources (0.93 mg/L and 0.07 mg/L). When sites 

were grouped by stream reach (table 6), median total N concentrations were lowest in base-flow samples collected from Brush 

Creek (1.42 mg/L) and greatest in Indian Creek samples (11.4 

mg/L). Samples from the Blue River had median concentrations 

(5.25 mg/L) intermediate between Brush and Indian Creeks. 

Median total P concentration in Brush Creek samples was 0.13 

mg/L compared to 2.58 mg/L in samples from Indian Creek and 

0.88 mg/L in samples from the Blue River. These data indicate 

substantial nutrient enrichment of Indian Creek and Blue River 

below WWTPs during base flows. Only samples collected in 

upper Indian Creek and on Brush Creek ever had concentrations 

below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Level III, 

ecoregion 40, nutrient criteria of 0.86 mg/L for total N and 0.09 

mg/L for total P (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2000). Samples collected at sites downstream from WWTPs 

had median total N and total P concentrations ranging from 6 to 

38 times greater than the criteria. However, more than 90 percent of base-flow samples collected in the basin (including 

some samples from Brush Creek) had total N and total P concentrations greater than the Level III, ecoregion 40, nutrient criteria, indicating that excess nutrient levels were not confined to 

reaches affected by WWTP effluent.

Boxplots of instantaneous total N and total P base-flow 

loads (flow-adjusted concentration) are shown in figures 6b and 

7b for stream reaches in the basin. Instantaneous total N and 

total P loads were significantly greater in lower Indian Creek 

and in the middle and lower reaches of Blue River than other 

basin reaches (p<0.001). Reaches that received WWTP effluent 

had significantly greater total N and total P instantaneous baseflow loads than those that did not (p<0.001). Instantaneous total 

N and total P base-flow loads measured in Brush Creek were 

significantly less than loads measured in lower Indian Creek, 

and in all reaches of the Blue River (p<0.001). Median instantaneous nutrient loads measured in Brush Creek were less than 

2 percent of the loads measured in the Lower Blue River, indicating that Brush Creek contributed only a small part of the 

overall load to the Blue River during base flow. 

As water moves downstream in a basin, some part of the 

dissolved nutrients can be assimilated into aquatic plants and 

algae, especially during summer months and in lentic stream 

reaches. It was beyond the scope of this study to completely 

characterize processes that might have affected in-stream nutrient speciation and downstream N and P losses. However, the 

relative importance of these processes can be inferred by examining how the percentage of total N and total P in the dissolved 

fraction at sites changed as it moved downstream. At site 6 on 
18 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 6. Total nitrogen concentration by site (A) and total instantaneous nitrogen load by stream reach (B) in base-flow 

samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 19

Figure 7. Total phosphorus concentration by site (A) and total instantaneous phosphorus load by stream reach (B) in base-flow 

samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.
20 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Lower Indian Creek, the percentage of total N that occurred as 

dissolved NO3 was 77 percent, which is similar to the values at 

downstream Blue River sites (values ranged from 77 to 82 percent; fig. 6a) indicating that little shift in N speciation, and thus 

loss, occurred from lower Indian Creek to lower Blue River. 

Some N assimilation may have occurred in the reach between 

site 2 and site 7 as evidenced by the decline in the percent of dissolved phase N (from 87 to 82 percent) between these two sites. 

There was a gradual decline in the percentage of total P that 

occurred in the dissolved phase as it moved downstream from 

sites located in the upper Blue River (site 2) or lower Indian 

Creek (site 6) to sites downstream on the Blue River (sites 7, 8, 

and 13). The percentage of total P in the dissolved phase 

declined from 96 percent at site 2, and 97 percent at site 6, to 94 

percent at site 7, 88 percent at site 8, and 85 percent at site 13 

(fig. 7a). This gradual shift indicated that some P removal 

(likely the result of algal and plant uptake) occurred as water 

moved downstream, although this process was insufficient to 

remove substantial parts of the total P. Discussion of the potential affects of Brush Creek impoundments on nutrient speciation 

is provided in a later section of this report.

Organic Wastewater Compounds

Organic wastewater compounds were measured in unfiltered base-flow samples from August 1998 to September 2004 

at stream sites in the basin; not every stream site was measured 

during each base-flow sampling event. The number of OWC 

samples collected ranged from 1 (sites 1 and 5) to 30 (site 7). 

Summaries of OWC concentrations grouped by site and by 

stream are listed in table 7, at the back of this report.

 Base-flow concentrations of the sum of detectable (total) 

OWCs at each site and instantaneous total OWC loads for 

selected stream reaches are shown in figure 8. Base-flow samples from sites 4 and 6, downstream from WWTPs on Indian 

Creek, had the largest median concentrations of OWCs in the 

basin. WWTPs vary in their ability to remove OWCs (Spengler 

and others, 2001; Glassmeyer and others, 2005). The trickling 

filter secondary-treatment used at site 17 (upstream from site 6) 

generally is regarded as being less effective than activatedsludge secondary treatment, which is used at site 15 (upstream 

from site 2) and site 16 (upstream from site 4) (Lee and others, 

2005). Detergents and sterols (primarily cholesterol and 3βcoprostanol) generally comprised at least one-half (values 

ranged from 37 to 74 percent) of the measured OWCs. Detergents constituted 57 percent of the measured OWCs at site 4 and 

decreasing amounts at sites downstream (table 9). This is consistent with previously reported findings (Wilkison and others, 

2002) where it was shown that, once released into the environment, detergent surfactants degrade by biogeochemical transformations. Adsorption to streambed sediments also likely 

plays an important role in the observed declines in downstream 

concentration.

At sites with no apparent wastewater sources the median 

total OWC concentration was 4.46 μg/L, approximately onehalf of the median concentration at sites in the CSS area (8.03 

μg/L), and approximately 40 percent of the median concentration at sites immediately downstream from WWTPs (11.5

μg/L). These data indicate that other sources, likely of nonpoint- source origin, play a role in base-flow OWC concentrations. Atmospheric deposition of PAHs, detergent surfactants 

originating from car washing, pesticides from irrigation returns, 

and plant matter in streams could contribute OWCs to streams 

during base flows. Additionally, SSOs and poorly performing 

septic systems could contribute OWCs to streams during base 

flows.

Median instantaneous loads of total OWCs in base-flow 

samples were largest in the lower Indian Creek [18.4 mg/sec 

(milligram per second)], followed by those in middle and lower 

reaches of the Blue River (10.1 and 10.9 mg/sec; fig. 8b). 

There was some loss of OWCs downstream from site 6, likely 

either through transformation or sorption onto sediments, but 

little decrease was observed in loads from the middle to lower 

Blue River. Instantaneous loads in the upper Blue River and 

Brush Creek were much smaller by comparison to those from 

lower Indian Creek, indicating that the predominant source of 

OWCs to the Blue River resulted from Indian Creek contributions. The median instantaneous base-flow OWC load in 

upper Blue River and in Brush Creek samples was only 5 percent of the loads measured in downstream Blue River reaches, 

an indication of the magnitude of base-flow contributions from 

these reaches when compared to the Indian Creek tributary. 

There was little difference between OWC loads in the middle 

reach of Brush Creek (median load of 0.39 mg/sec) compared 

to those in the lower reach of Brush Creek (median load of 0.53 

mg/sec). Median OWC loads at sites without apparent wastewater sources were 23 percent of the median loads at Brush Creek 

sites in the CSS area. These data indicate that approximately 

one-quarter of the base-flow OWC load in Brush Creek originated from sources outside of the CSS area. 

Pharmaceutical Compounds

Pharmaceutical compounds were measured in filtered 

base-flow samples at stream sites from May 1999 to August 

2004. Summary statistics for pharmaceutical compounds analyzed in base-flow samples as part of this study are given in 

table 8, at the back of this report. Concentrations of the sum of 

pharmaceutical compounds measured in stream samples by site 

and the instantaneous loads of pharmaceuticals by stream reach 

are shown in figure 9. Individual pharmaceutical concentrations 

measured in stream samples were small, generally less than 1 

μg/L, and were attributed mostly to over-the-counter medications. Concentrations of pharmaceutical compounds were highest in samples from site 6 on Indian Creek, followed by samples 

from site 8 on the Blue River, and site 10 on Brush Creek. 

Median pharmaceutical concentrations at sites with no apparent 

wastewater source (0.20 μg/L) were 6 times less than the 

median concentrations at Brush Creek sites in the CSS area 

(1.21 μg/L). These data indicate that approximately 16 percent 
Table 9. Percentage of organic wastewater compounds detected in stream samples by wastewater use category.[--, no data; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; CSO, combined sewer overflow; WWTP, wastewater-treatment plant; Other, includes no sources, sewer leaks and by-passes

Wastewater use category

Stream reach

Sites

included

Hydrologic

condition

Antioxidant Detergent Disinfec- tant Fire retardant Flavor/ fragrance PAH Pesticide Plastic St

Upper Blue River 1,2 base flow 1 13 0.3 7 6 1 20 23 

stormflow 0 2 0.3 6 4 9 26 22 

Upper Indian Creek 3 base flow 2 12 0 3 0.1 0.3 18 36 

stormflow -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Middle Indian Creek 4 base flow 5 57 1 3 4 0.3 6 5 

stormflow -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Lower Indian Creek 6 base flow 1 34 2 2 1 0.3 4 9 

stormflow 1 17 1 2 2 18 12 8 

Middle Blue River 7,8 base flow 1 30 3 3 2 1 4 16 

stormflow 3 16 2 1 0.3 12 4 46 

Middle Brush Creek 9,10 base flow 1 10 1 1 0 2 2 30 

stormflow 1 16 1 1 1 25 5 24 

Lower Brush Creek 11,12 base flow 1 16 1 2 1 4 4 23 

stormflow 2 20 1 1 1 10 6 20 

Lower Blue River 13,14 base flow 2 24 2 3 2 9 5 18 

stormflow 5 20 2 2 1 10 6 30 

Potential wastewater source

CSO 10,11,12 base flow 1 13 1 2 1 3 2 18 

stormflow 2 20 1 1 1 11 5 22 

WWTP 2,4,6,7 base flow 2 35 2 3 2 0 5 11 

stormflow 2 14 1 1 1 13 7 42 

WWTP/CSO 8,13,14 base flow 2 26 3 3 1 7 4 18 

stormflow 5 20 3 2 0.4 11 5 30 

Other 1,3,5,9 base flow 1 10 0.4 2 0.5 2 6 50 

stormflow 1 14 0.4 1 1 33 6 23 
22 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 8. Sum of the concentration of organic wastewater compounds by site (A) and total instantaneous organic wastewater 

compound load by stream reach (B) in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 23

Figure 9. Sum of the concentration of pharmaceutical compounds by site (A) and total instantaneous pharmaceutical loads by 

stream reach (B) in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and September 2005.
24 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

of the pharmaceuticals in Brush Creek originated from sources 

outside of the CSS area; a percentage slightly less than the 23 

percent of OWCs.

Instantaneous base-flow pharmaceutical loads (fig. 8b) 

followed a similar pattern in stream reaches to base-flow OWC 

loads (fig. 7b), an indication that sources for each were largely 

the same during base flows. Median loads measured in lower 

Indian Creek were greater than those measured in the downstream reach of the Blue River. Some loss of pharmaceuticals 

may occur through adsorption and sedimentation, biodegradation, or photolysis once released into receiving waters during 

base flows; although during the winter, cold stream temperatures likely limit biodegradation (Wilkison and others, 2002; 

Loraine and Pettigrove, 2006). These losses also could result 

from the mixing of surface water with predominantly contaminant free ground water, resulting in stream dilution. Median 

loads also declined from the middle to lower reaches of the Blue 

River. Upper Blue River contributions were less than 4 percent, 

and Brush Creek contributions were less than 2 percent of 

downstream Blue River loads. These contributions were much 

less than those from Indian Creek and the Blue River, and indicate that during base-flow conditions, pharmaceuticals in the 

Blue River predominantly originate from lower Indian Creek.

 The percentage of pharmaceutical compounds determined 

at each site by pharmaceutical use category are shown in table 

10. When viewed as a whole, 87 percent of the pharmaceutical 

compounds measured in stream samples originated from overthe-counter drugs, primarily from the stimulants caffeine and 

nicotine, of which caffeine comprises the bulk. Smaller 

amounts, slightly more than 20 percent, can be attributed to the 

analgesics acetaminophen and ibuprofen. Many factors could 

affect these results, including drug metabolism and excretion 

rates, WWTP removal efficiencies, environmental fate, and the 

use rate of each drug. The general population use is expected to 

be much higher for caffeine than for over-the-counter and prescription medications, which likely affects their environmental 

occurrence. For example, caffeine, either in the form of coffee, 

tea, or soft drinks, is consumed daily by the majority of the U.S. 

population. Average adult per capita caffeine use rates are 4 

mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram) of body weight per day (Barone and Roberts, 1996). Therefore, a 80 kg (kilogram; 175 

pound) adult would consume on average 320 mg (milligram) of 

caffeine per day, equivalent to approximately four cups of coffee per day (Lelo and others, 1986). This is approximately the 

midpoint of suggested over-the-counter daily doses for acetaminophen and ibuprofen, but a smaller percentage of the population would be taking these medications on any given day. Cotinine, formed as a by-product of nicotine, would be expected to 

be consumed on a much smaller basis by the general population. 

Based on population estimates, smoking rates, and average nicotine content of cigarettes, per capita consumption of nicotine 

in the Kansas City metropolitan area was estimated to be 6 

mg/day (milligrams per day; Federal Trade Commission, 2000; 

Centers for Disease Control, 2005), which is more than 50 times 

less than the per capita caffeine consumption. 

Stormflow Water Quality

Storm samples were collected at 10 sites (table 1) in the 

Missouri part of the basin. The number of samples collected 

ranged from 7 samples at site 2 to 44 samples at site 11. Storm 

samples were collected between May 1999 and June 2004. 

Summaries of the analytical results for selected constituents 

sampled during storms are given in tables 11 to 13, at the back 

of this report.

Nutrients

 Boxplots of total N and total P concentrations measured in 

stormflow samples by site and instantaneous total N and total P 

loads by stream reaches in the basin are shown in figures 10 and 

11. The largest concentrations of total N and total P were 

present in stormflow samples from site 8 on the Blue River, and 

site 6 on Indian Creek (figs. 10a and 11a). Median total N concentration at site 8 was 6.64 mg/L and at site 6 was 5.72 mg/L. 

Median total P concentration at site 8 was 2.03 mg/L and 1.40 

mg/L at site 6. When grouped by stream (table 11), median total 

N and P concentrations in stream samples from Indian Creek 

were 5.72 mg/L and 1.40 mg/L, which were greater than those 

observed in samples from the Blue River (4.91 mg/L and 1.24 

mg/L) and Brush Creek (2.40 mg/L and 0.37 mg/L). Median 

concentrations of total N and total P at sites in the CSS area 

(2.25 and 0.31mg/L) were significantly less (p<0.001) than 

median concentrations at Brush Creek site 9 (3.08 and 0.64

mg/L) with no apparent sources of wastewater. There are three 

golf courses upstream from site 9, so nonpoint-source runoff 

upstream from site 9 may contribute greater nutrient loads than 

in downstream reaches, and some storm nutrients are trapped in 

impounded reaches. These data indicate that nonpoint sources 

likely play at least as large a role in the observed concentrations 

of nutrients in Brush Creek as CSOs.

Boxplots of instantaneous total N and total P stormflow 

loads are shown in figs. 10b and 11b for stream reaches in the 

basin. Because storm sampling did not begin at sites 2 and 6 

until 2002, a smaller number of storm samples were collected at 

sites in the upper Blue River and lower Indian Creek (7 to 14 

samples) than on sites in the middle and lower reaches of the 

Blue River and Brush Creek (21 to 44 samples). Because discharge (flow) is a primary component of load calculation, 

instantaneous load estimations can be skewed by extreme 

events. As a result, samples from two storm events on Indian 

Creek (August 28 to 29, 2003, and August 31, 2003) that had 

discharges in excess of those sampled at downstream Blue 

River sites were removed from the following analysis. Median 

instantaneous total N loads measured in lower Indian Creek 

exceeded those in downstream Blue River reaches, indicating 

that even without including the two largest events, estimates of 

total N load from Indian Creek based on instantaneous measurements were still likely biased high. Median instantaneous total 

N and total P loads in the upper Blue River reaches were 18 and 

12 percent of the loads measured in downstream Blue River 
Table 10. Percentage of pharmaceutical compounds detected in stream samples by pharmaceutical use category[OTC, over-the-counter drugs includes: acetaminophen, caffeine, ibuprofen, and nicotine; --, no data; CSO, combined sewer overflow; WWTP, wastewater-treatment plant; Otherand by-passes]

Stream reach

Sites

included

Hydrologic

condition Analgesic Antacid

Antibiotics

Anticonvulsants Anti- diabetics Anti- depres- sants Asthma Choles- terol Narco- tics S

Upper Blue River 1,2 base flow 3 5 23 20 0 0 0 1 3 

stormflow 88 0 0 0.9 0 4 0 0 0 

Upper Indian Creek 3 base flow 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 

stormflow -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Middle Indian Creek 4 base flow 7 8 42 5 3 0 10 2 18 

stormflow -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Lower Indian Creek 6 base flow 20 0.2 7 1 0.1 0 0.3 0.5 1 

stormflow 22 0.4 2 0.6 0.2 0.3 <0.1 0 0 

Middle Blue River 7,8 base flow 18 0.1 13 1 0 0 0.2 1 0.7 

stormflow 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Middle Brush Creek 9,10 base flow 53 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0 0 0 0 0 

stormflow 58 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 

Lower Brush Creek 11,12 base flow 15 <0.1 0.6 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 0 0.1 

stormflow 41 0 <0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Lower Blue River 13,14 base flow 18 0.1 6 1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.9 

stormflow 31 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.3 0 <0.1 0.1 0 

Potential wastewater source

CSO 10,11,12 base flow 47 0 0.2 0 0 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 

stormflow 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

WWTP 2,4,6,7 base flow 17 0.4 7 2 0.1 0 0.5 1 2 

stormflow 44 0.3 1 0.7 0.2 2 0 0 0 

WWTP/CSO 8,13,14 base flow 20 0.1 14 0.7 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.6 

stormflow 31 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.3 0 0 <0.1 0 

Other 1,3,5,9 base flow 15 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0 0 0 <0.1 0 

stormflow 58 0 <0.1 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 
26 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 10. Total nitrogen concentration by site (A) and total instantaneous nitrogen load by stream reach (B) in stormflow 

samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 27

Figure 11. Total phosphorus concentration by site (A) and total instantaneous phosphorus load by stream reach (B) in 

stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.
28 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

reaches. Instantaneous total N loads measured in Brush Creek 

were 11 percent of the instantaneous total N load measured in 

the lower Blue River and 5 percent of the total P load. These 

data indicate that while the relative contribution of total N and 

P from Brush Creek to the Blue River increased during storms 

when compared to base flows, storm loads from Brush Creek 

comprised a smaller part of the total load when compared to 

sources from the upper Blue River or lower Indian Creek. Total 

N and total P yield estimates, developed to integrate base-flow 

and stormflow loads and which normalize loads based on drainage area for individual reaches, are discussed later in this report.

Organic Wastewater Compounds

Concentrations of the sum of all (total) OWCs detected in 

stormflow samples are shown by site in figure 12. Non-detectable concentrations are not summed or plotted in the figures; all 

samples had at least one detection of an OWC. Summaries of 

the individual OWC constituents are reported in table 12, at the 

back of this report. The largest concentrations of OWCs were 

observed in storm samples from site 9 (median concentration of 

19.5 μg/L) and site 11 (median concentration of 22.3 of μg/L) 

on Brush Creek. Concentrations were less at sites 10 and 12 on 

Brush Creek probably because suspended sediment and associated particulate contaminants settled out in impoundments 

because of declines in stream velocities at these sites. The next 

highest concentration of OWCs were observed in samples from 

site 6 on Indian Creek (median concentration of 16.7 μg/L). 

Median OWC concentration at Brush Creek sites in the CSS 

area (sites 10, 11, and 12; 17.4 μg/L) were similar to the median 

concentration at site 9, upstream from most CSO influences. 

These data indicate that factors other than CSOs likely played 

as great a role in the occurrence of OWCs as did CSOs in Brush 

Creek. Examples of other factors that could contribute to the 

observed OWC concentrations are SSOs that result from line 

blockages, leaks from broken or aging sewer lines that intersect 

recharge flow paths, WWTP by-passes, and urban nonpoint 

sources.

The largest instantaneous total OWC loads were measured 

in samples from lower Indian Creek (median load of 246 

mg/sec), followed by those observed in the lower Blue River 

(196 mg/sec) and the middle Blue River (167 mg/sec). As discussed previously, Indian Creek instantaneous loads may be 

overestimated because of the sampling of two large storm 

events. Total instantaneous OWC loads measured in lower 

Brush Creek (107 mg/sec) were slightly greater than those measured in middle Brush Creek (96 mg/sec). When normalized by 

drainage area (table 2), median OWC yield from Indian Creek 

was slightly higher [1.46 mg/sec/km2

 (milligrams per second 

per square kilometer)] than the median OWC yield from Brush 

Creek (1.29 mg/sec/km2) data, again indicating that sources 

outside of the CSS area are equally, if not more, important to 

overall basin storm loads, than are CSOs. Detergents generally 

comprised a smaller percentage of the total OWCs measured in 

storm samples than in base-flow samples, except for storm samples from Brush Creek where this percentage tended to be 

greater than those in base-flow samples (table 9; figs. 8 and 12). 

Pharmaceutical Compounds

Pharmaceutical data from storm samples were collected at 

six sites. The sum of detectable pharmaceutical concentrations 

are shown in figure 13 by site and pharmaceutical loads measured in selected stream reaches. Because only a few storms 

were sampled during this study for pharmaceuticals comparisons between sites were limited and were not performed as part 

of this study.

Hydrologic Effects on Constituent Concentrations

For point-source contributions to contamination that 

remain nearly constant with time, such as those from WWTPs, 

constituent concentrations in receiving waters can be expected 

to be diluted with increasing streamflow. Conversely, as 

streamflow decreases, concentrations in receiving waters would 

be expected to increase. When nonpoint sources are the dominant source of contaminant loadings, the reverse is expected. 

Nonpoint-source contaminants are mobilized into the environment by the same precipitation events that result in increased 

streamflow. Therefore, as streamflow increases, constituent 

concentrations also would be expected to increase, or at least 

decrease less. It also is likely that streams are subjected to a 

combination of point sources and nonpoint sources, and that the 

relative magnitude of these sources may shift as hydrologic 

changes occur.

Effects of WWTP Effluent on Blue River Streamflow

Wastewater-treatment plant effluent often is an important 

hydrologic component of a number of streams in the Kansas 

City metropolitan area. During base flow, the majority of 

streamflow is often comprised of effluents at sites downstream 

from WWTP discharges (Wilkison and others, 2002; Lee and 

others, 2005). Because populations continue to rapidly grow in 

the upper basin, WWTPs inputs to basin streams also are 

expected to increase. Increases to the capacity of two WWTPs 

in the basin (sites 15 and 17) are planned or under consideration 

(Johnson County Wastewater, written commun., 2005). Therefore, an understanding of the role that WWTPs play in stream 

hydrology is important, especially in light of the water-quality 

data presented in this report.

Three WWTPs (sites 15, 16, and 17) located in the upper 

parts of the Blue River Basin discharge into the Blue River, or 

its tributaries. These plants are permitted under state and federal 

statues to process wastewater from residents of Johnson 

County, Kansas, and discharge effluent into receiving streams. 

Because the original source of the water is from outside the 

Blue River Basin (the Kansas River), the net effect is an interbasin transfer of water. Water originates outside the Blue River 

Basin, is treated and used by businesses and homeowners, trans
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 29

Figure 12. Sum of the concentration of organic wastewater compounds by site (A) and total instantaneous organic 

wastewater compound load by stream reach (B) in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2005.
30 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 13. Sum of the concentration of pharmaceutical compounds by site (A) and total instantaneous pharmaceutical 

loads by stream reach (B) in stormflow samples collected between October 2000 and June 2005.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 31

ferred to a wastewater-treatment facility, and ultimately discharged into another basin. This process has altered the hydrologic regime of much of the Blue River. The percent exceedance 

values of mean daily streamflow for the Blue River at site 7 

from 1939 to 1955, 1956 to 1981, and 1982 to 2003 is shown in 

figure 14. These time periods represent when there was no 

wastewater effluent discharged into the stream above this site, a 

time period in which one plant discharged into the stream, and 

a time period in which three plants discharged into the stream. 

Since 1955, the median daily streamflow at site 7 increased 29 

ft3/s (cubic feet per second) which is nearly equivalent to the 

sum of the discharges from these three plants (28.2 ft3/s; fig. 

14). 

Effluent affects on the discharge to the Blue River (site 7) 

were more pronounced during drought periods (mid-2002 

through mid-2003) because Indian Creek contributed a larger 

percentage of flow to the overall Blue River flow (fig. 5). More 

than 40 percent of the time from August 1998 through October 

2004, WWTP effluent constituted more than 95 percent of the 

discharge at site 7.

Nutrients

When nutrient species are compared by hydrologic event 

(base flow and stormflow) there are a number of differences that 

exist. During base flow, the predominant N species occurred as 

NO3 for sites downstream from WWTPs (sites 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 

13). On average, NO3 accounted for 81 percent of the total N 

measured in base-flow samples at these sites (fig. 6a). When 

WWTPs function properly, most organic N is oxidized into 

NO3, which is discharged into receiving waters and NO3 constituted the bulk of the total N measured during base flows at 

downstream sites. In Brush Creek, NO3 constituted a much 

smaller percentage (17 percent) of the total N observed in base 

flow stream samples; two-thirds of the N in Brush Creek samples was in the organic N form (table 6), another indication that 

the source of nutrients in Brush Creek, or the processes acting 

on them, is different from those observed in Indian Creek and 

the Blue River. Unlike N from WWTPs, N from nonpointsource contributions often contains a greater percentage of suspended organic N when compared to the dissolved NO3 phase. 

Nitrogen species from CSOs also would be expected to occur 

mostly in the reduced organic particulate phase. Some organic 

N is trapped in impoundments during storm events, and may 

remain suspended for extended periods. The algal productivity 

of Brush Creek may play a more important role in the difference 

between the N phases of streams. During base flow, dissolved 

inorganic N can be assimilated into algae, which increases concentrations of organic N when compared to the dissolved phase, 

a process that can occur in all stream reaches but one that would 

be expected to be exacerbated in lentic stream reaches, such as 

those in Brush Creek.

During storms, the percentage of N as NO3 declined, and 

the percentage of N as organic N increased with increasing flow 

at all sites (fig. 15); however, the shift was much more pronounced in Indian Creek and the Blue River as compared to 

Brush Creek, where most N was already in the organic phase. 

As streamflow increased, there was a marked decline in the percentage of total N that occurred as NO3 for Indian Creek and all 

reaches of the Blue River (Spearman’s rho = -0.69 to -0.87; fig. 

15). This decline corresponded with an increase in the percent 

of the total N that originated from organic N for these same 

stream reaches (Spearman’s rho = 0.82 to 0.87; fig. 15). These 

data are consistent with a predominantly WWTP source of N 

during base flows, and an increase in nonpoint and/or WWTP 

by-passes during storms as the ratio of treated WWTP effluent 

to streamflow declined in Indian Creek and Blue River reaches. 

In Brush Creek stream reaches, the trends between flow and the 

percentage of N occurring as NO3, or as organic N, were much 

less pronounced (fig. 15); an indication that factors in addition 

to streamflow were important in determining N speciation.

The concentration of total P and the percentage that 

occurred as dissolved P in relation to streamflow is shown in 

figure 16. During base flows, more than 90 percent of the total 

P in samples from the Blue River and Indian Creek occurred in 

the dissolved phase (median of 91 and 98 percent, respectively) 

compared to 60 percent in samples from Brush Creek. The percentage of total P that occurred in the dissolved phase decreased 

with increasing streamflow for all reaches, although the relation 

was stronger in reaches of the Blue River and Indian Creek 

(Spearman’s rho -0.77 to -0.88; fig. 16) than for reaches of 

Brush Creek (Spearman’s rho -0.70 to -0.49; fig. 16).

There was a difference in the relation between total P concentration and streamflow for samples collected from Brush 

Creek compared to those from Indian Creek and the Blue River. 

For Brush Creek, there was an upward trend in total P concentrations as streamflow increased, but in Indian Creek and the 

Blue River, the trend was for decreased total P concentrations 

as streamflow increased (fig. 16). These data are consistent 

with the pattern expected if sources of P in Brush Creek predominantly were nonpoint and/or from CSOs, and sources in 

Indian Creek and the Blue River predominantly were WWTP 

effluent. As streamflow increased in Brush Creek, total P concentrations increased in stream samples; the result of increased 

nonpoint source and CSO sources. Whereas, on Indian Creek 

and the Blue River, as streamflow increased, the relative contribution of WWTP effluent to streamflow declined, as did the 

concentration of P in the receiving stream.

Instantaneous stormflow total N and total P loads were 

much greater than those observed during base flows. For the 

Blue River and lower Indian Creek reaches, total N and total P 

instantaneous storm loads increased by a factor of approximately 25 over those observed during base flow (figs. 10b and 

11b); however, on Brush Creek, the difference between instantaneous storm and base-flow loads was much more pronounced. 

Total N and P storm loads increased, on average, 200 to 300 

times more than observed during base flows in Brush Creek. 

Part of this difference was likely related to the relatively higher 

base-flow loads in Indian Creek and the Blue River as the result 

of WWTP inputs. Therefore, storm load increases on these 
32 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 14. Increases in discharge for the Blue River near Kansas City for time periods with no, one, and three wastewatertreatment plant inputs.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 33

Figure 15. Percentage of total nitrogen as nitrate and percent as organic nitrogen in relation to stream discharge for selected stream reaches in the Blue River Basin.
34 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 16. Percentage of total phosphorus as dissolved phosphorus in relation to stream discharge for selected stream reaches in 

the Blue River Basin and total phosphorus concentration in relation to stream discharge by stream.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 35

streams, which include a mixture of nonpoint sources and 

WWTP inputs, appear masked when compared to Brush Creek. 

Additionally, Brush Creek has a larger percentage of impervious surface area (47 percent) compared to Indian Creek (21 percent) and the Blue River (25 percent; table 2) which results in 

greater unit runoff volumes for any given storm on Brush Creek. 

Brush Creek sites have the highest density of population, storm, 

sanitary, and combined sewers of sites in the basin, which could 

have contributed increased runoff and contaminant loads. Consequently, stormflow nutrient contributions from nonpoint 

sources and CSOs are considered the predominant source of 

nutrients to Brush Creek.

For stream reaches outside of the CSS area, a variety of 

nonpoint sources are expected to comprise the bulk of the loadings during storms. Comparison of median loads originating 

from WWTPs to those measured in stormflow samples indicated that during storms, WWTPs typically accounted for 7 to 8 

percent of the total N and total P loads measured in storm samples at sites downstream from WWTPs. This does not account 

for any by-pass discharges that can occur during storms; if 

WWTP by-passes do occur, the percentage would be expected 

to rise. Regardless, these data indicate that sources of nutrients 

originating from WWTPs are dominant during base flows and 

become a much smaller component during stormflows. In areas 

underlain by CSSs, primarily along Brush Creek, the combination of nonpoint source and CSO contributions are expected to 

constitute the bulk of the nutrient loadings. Some contributions 

to Brush Creek also could originate from occasional by-pass 

discharges from the pumping stations located on Brush Creek 

upstream from site 9.

Dissolved Compared to Particulate Phase Constituents

Concentration changes as a function of hydrology were 

very similar at Blue River and Indian Creek sites (fig. 17). However, the relation between concentration and streamflow varied 

for compounds that primarily occurred in the dissolved phase 

compared to those primarily occurring in the particulate phase. 

Dissolved constituents, such as ammonia, NO3, P, and chloride 

showed a strong downward trend with increased flow because 

of dilution (sites 2, 6, 7, and 13; fig. 17 [ammonia not plotted]). 

These data indicate that the predominant source of these compounds were the nearly constant source provided by upstream 

WWTPs. Nonpoint sources also contributed to these concentrations, especially during storms. Such is the case with the two 

greatest stormflow concentrations for chloride at site 6; these 

samples were collected during the winter, and it is likely that 

stream concentrations were affected by road salt applications. 

Constituent concentrations that primarily occurred in the particulate phase showed an upward trend with increased streamflow 

at Blue River and Indian Creek sites. Concentrations of organic 

N, fecal-indicator bacteria, biochemical- and chemical-oxygen 

demand, and suspended sediment generally increased with discharge during stormflows as water velocities increased and 

energy became available for sediment transport. These data 

indicate that storm runoff and nonpoint-source pollution played 

a substantial role in the transport of many particulate-phase 

compounds into Indian Creek and the Blue River. Some compounds, which had point-source and nonpoint- source contributions, such as total P (and to a lesser extent organic N) had concentrations that declined as base flows increased, and increased 

as stormflow increased (sites 7 and 13; fig. 17). This was 

because during base flow, much of the total P was in the dissolved phase, and increased flow resulted in more dilution. During storms, however, particulate phases became dominant and 

total concentrations increased with discharge. This phenomenon was most pronounced at sites where a large percentage of 

the contaminant load originated from WWTPs. 

Sites, such as sites 9 and 11 on Brush Creek, which are not 

affected by WWTP effluent, showed a different relation 

between hydrologic condition, streamflow, and concentrations 

of organic N and total P. During base flow, there is no obvious 

trend in concentration with discharge, indicating that concentrations were linked to other variables during low-flow periods 

(fig. 17). During storms, the concentrations of organic N and 

total P increased with increasing streamflow, indicating that the 

source of organic N and total P in Brush Creek was largely the 

result of wet weather events. A combination of nonpoint 

sources, including runoff from streets, storm sewers, lawns, 

parks, golf courses, and point sources such as those from CSOs 

(or WWTP by-passes) would have contributed to the greater 

concentrations observed in storm samples.

Some constituents, notably fecal indicator bacteria and 

biochemical oxygen demand, showed similar trends with discharge at all sites. As streamflow increased, concentrations of 

these compounds increased in large part because of their association with suspended sediment, concentrations of which also 

increased. Fecal indicator bacteria and suspended sediment 

concentrations sometimes were one to two orders of magnitude 

more than those measured in base-flow samples. Consequently, 

these data indicate that wet weather loads of fecal indicator bacteria and suspended sediment were much greater than base-flow 

loads throughout the basin. Nonpoint-source contributions 

would be expected to contribute a substantial part of these 

loads. Point sources, such as from CSOs and WWTP by-passes, 

also could have contributed to the loads.

Organic Wastewater Compounds

Concentrations of total OWCs measured in whole-water 

stream samples, in relation to discharge, are shown in figure 18 

for selected sites that were sampled during base flow and stormflows. These data include one site on Indian Creek (site 6), two 

sites on the Blue River (sites 11 and 13), and two sites on Brush 

Creek (sites 9 and 11). Because of the smaller number of 

stormflow samples collected, only general trends could be 

determined at site 6. Plots are constructed so as to illustrate the 

relation between OWC general use categories and streamflow, 

and help to illustrate the range of concentrations that occur during base flow and stormflow.
36 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 37

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
38 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 39

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
40 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 41

Figure 17. Concentrations of selected water-quality constituents in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
42 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 18. 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 43

Figure 18. Concentrations of selected organic wastewater compounds in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
44 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 18. Concentrations of selected organic wastewater compounds in relation to stream discharge by 

site.—Continued
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 45

Figure 18. Concentrations of selected organic wastewater compounds in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
46 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 18. Concentrations of selected organic wastewater compounds in relation to stream discharge by site.—Continued
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 47

These data indicate that for most classes of total OWCs, 

concentrations decrease with increasing streamflow at most 

sites on Indian Creek and the Blue River, which is consistent 

with a constant source. Two exceptions to this trend were PAHs 

and pesticides, indicating that nonpoint sources play a role in 

the occurrence of these compounds during storm events. PAHs 

commonly originate from vehicle exhaust and are known to partition onto sediments in urban areas (Van Metre and others, 

2000). Impervious surfaces, such as streets, parking lots, and 

roofs are likely sources for these compounds during storm runoff. Pesticides could originate from many nonpoint sources in 

the basin including lawns, riparian parks, and upstream agricultural areas. 

Generally, OWC concentrations increased in Brush Creek 

samples with increasing stormflow (fig. 18). There was little 

difference between the relation between concentrations and discharge at site 9 upstream from most CSOs and site 11 located in 

the CSS area; data that indicate that the source of many OWCs 

in Brush Creek originated from non-CSO sources. Such sources 

would be expected to include storm sewers, SSOs and leaks, 

and WWTP by-passes but also may include contributions from 

impervious surfaces and nonpoint-source contributions from 

lawns, parks, and golf courses. Following storms, rainfallinduced infiltration and inflow rates result in extended increases 

in WWTP throughputs at site 18, an indication that the integrity 

of the CSS may be compromised in parts of the basin (Charles 

Raab, City of Kansas City Water Services Department, oral 

commun., 2005).

During base flow, typically more than one-half of OWCs 

measured in stream samples were detergents and sterols (table 

12). The percentage of OWCs from detergents and sterols was 

highest (69 percent) at sites downstream from WWTPs, and 

lowest (33 percent) for sites without evident wastewater 

sources. These same two classes also composed the largest 

component of OWCs measured in most stream storm samples, 

although in some instances, such as sites downstream from 

large WWTPs, plastics composed a larger percentage of the 

OWCs. Although WWTPs were the largest source of many 

OWCs, the ubiquitous nature of some of these compounds in 

the urban environment is evident and underscores that even in 

areas with predominantly WWTP or CSO sources, nonpointsource contributions of some classes of OWCs originated from 

other sources.

Nutrient Load and Yield Estimates

Monthly total N and total P loads (fig. 19) and yields (fig. 

20) at selected sites in the basin were estimated to allow comparison between nutrient sources in the basin. Estimates integrated base- and stormflow loads from July 2002 through September 2004, and related loads to stream discharge, hydrologic 

condition, and seasonal differences using minimum variance 

unbiased estimation models (table 14). Natural background 

estimates of total N and total P loads also were determined at 

these same sites (fig 19). Yields at basin sites were compared

Table 14. Minimum variance unbiased estimation models used to estimate monthly total nitrogen and total 

phosphorus loads at selected sites in the Blue River Basin. 

[Load, in grams per second; Q, discharge minus center of discharge, in cubic feet per second; Qbq, discharge divided by the center of discharge, in cubic feet per 

second; T, time minus center of time, in decimal years; R2, coefficient of determination; SEP, average standard error of prediction in grams per second]

Site number Total nitrogen R2 SEP

2 lnLoad = 2.38 + 0.983lnQ + 0.037lnQ2+ 0.282cos2πT - 0.279sin2πT 0.97 3.64

6 lnLoad = 3.54 + 0.772lnQ + 0.059lnQ2+ 0.159cos2πT + 0.113sin2πT 0.99 3.36

71

1Discharge less than or equal to 76 cubic feet per second.

lnLoad = 2.61 + 0.431lnQbq

72

2

Discharge greater than 76 cubic feet per second.

lnLoad = 3.21 + 1.036lnQbq 0.94 4.24

11 lnLoad = -3.23 + 1.13 lnQ - 0.02lnQ2 +0.01cos2πT - 0.166sin2πT 0.96 0.45

Site number Total phosphorus R2 SEP

2 lnLoad = 0.463 + 1.09lnQ + 0.057lnQ2+ 0.367 cos2πT - 0.403sin2πT 0.95 1.32

6 lnLoad = 2.11 + 0.828lnQ + 0.063lnQ2+ 0.362cos2πT + 0.148sin2πT 0.95 2.10

73

3

Discharge less than or equal to 68 cubic feet per second.

lnLoad = 0.376 + 0.119lnQbq

74

4Discharge greater than 68 cubic feet per second.

lnLoad = 0.376 + 1.183lnQbq 0.86 2.96

11 lnLoad = -2.28 + 1.23lnQ 0.95 0.11
48 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 19. Estimated mean monthly total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads at sites in the Blue River Basin from July 2002 through September 2004.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 49

Figure 20. Estimated yields of total nitrogen and total phosphorus at selected sites in the Blue River Basin from July 2002 through 

September 2004.
50 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

to those at 13 urban sites across the coterminous U.S., and one 

site (site 19) outside of the basin (fig. 20).

There was no significant difference between the median 

total N and total P loads at the lower Indian Creek site (site 6) 

compared to downstream loads at site 7 on the middle Blue 

River (p=0.73 for total N; p=0.75 for total P). These data indicate that most of the nutrients observed at Blue River site 7 originated from the lower Indian Creek (fig. 19). Median nutrient 

loads at WWTP sites 16 and 17, upstream from site 6 on Indian 

Creek, were approximately 60 percent of the values measured 

at site 6 (fig. 19), indicating that most nutrients in lower Indian 

Creek resulted from the combination of upstream WWTP discharges. Other sources, primarily from urban nonpoint-source 

runoff, also contribute substantial amounts of nutrients (approximately 40 percent) to lower Indian Creek. Although sedimentation and biological uptake could have resulted in some loss as 

these nutrients moved downstream, the bulk of the nutrients 

originating from Indian Creek were carried downstream into the 

Blue River.

Median total N and total P loads measured in the upper 

Blue River (site 2) were significantly less than those measured 

downstream at site 7 (p<0.001), and also significantly less than 

those measured on Indian Creek (p<0.001). These data indicate 

that nutrient contributions from the upper Blue River to downstream reaches were substantially less than contributions from 

the Indian Creek tributary. Total N and total P loads measured 

at site 15, the smallest WWTP in the basin, were 28 and 16 percent of the loads measured at site 2. These data indicate that 

other sources, the bulk of which would be expected to be contributions from nonpoint-source runoff, constitute the greatest 

part of the nutrient load in the upper Blue River. 

Median total N and total P loads measured at site 11 on 

Brush Creek were significantly less (p<0.001) than those measured at other sites in the basin (sites 2, 6, and 7). Nutrient loads 

measured on Brush Creek were less than 5 percent of the loads 

measured at site 7 on the Blue River (fig. 19). These data indicate that loadings from Brush Creek provide a much smaller 

contribution to the loads in Blue River than do loads from either 

Indian Creek or the upper reaches of Blue River.

Natural background total N and total P loads were estimated at selected sites in the basin (fig. 19) to determine the role 

that natural processes, such as atmospheric deposition and 

native soil inputs, may be contributing to basin nutrient loads. 

Estimated natural background levels were much (typically one 

to three orders of magnitude) lower than current total N and P 

loads observed in the basin (fig. 19). These data indicate that 

only a small percentage of the nutrients in the basin would be 

expected to occur from natural processes; urbanization effects 

and nonpoint-source runoff contributions were significantly 

(p<0.001) greater contributors of nutrients. The greatest disparity between current and natural background levels was observed 

at site 6, which receives the largest percentage of WWTPs 

inputs.

Load comparisons can be biased in favor of streams, or 

sites, with the largest drainage area because larger drainage 

areas often have higher discharges, which frequently translates 

into higher loads. Estimates of load per unit area, or yield, can 

remove this inherent bias and provide an equivalent measure for 

comparisons. Estimates of total N and total P yields at sites in 

the basin were compared to each other and to sites outside of the 

basin (fig. 20). 

Median total N and total P yields estimated at site 6 on 

Indian Creek were significantly greater (p<0.001) than other 

sites in the Blue River Basin. Median total N yields at site 6 

were five times greater than the median yield at site 2 (upper 

Blue River), two and one-half times greater than at site 7 (middle Blue River), and nine times greater than at site 11 on Brush 

Creek (fig. 20). Median total P yields on Indian Creek were 8 

times greater than those from the upper Blue River, 2.5 greater 

than from the middle Blue River, and 15 times greater than from 

Brush Creek. Mean flows from the two WWTPs upstream 

from site 6 on Indian Creek were five times greater than the 

amount of treated effluent discharged from the WWTP (site 15) 

on the upper Blue River above site 2, consistent with the yield 

differences at these sites.

Nutrient yields from sites outside the basin (fig. 20) provide a relative measure of how sites in the Blue River Basin 

compare to other urban sites across the country, and to a control 

site in Missouri (site 19). The urban sites were sampled between 

1980 and1990 as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program (U.S. Geological Survey, 2005). At 

least 6 of the 13 NAWQA sites were located in cities with a 

CSS; however, it was not determined how many, if any, of these 

sites were located in CSS areas. The control site was sampled 

monthly from July 1998 through September 2004 (Hauck and 

Nagel; 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005). Land use 

upstream from site 19 predominantly is agricultural. Samples 

collected at the urban and control sites included both base- and 

stormflow samples.

Total N and total P yields at sites 6 and 7 were significantly 

greater than those from NAWQA urban sites (p<0.001). Total 

N and total P yields at site 2 were not significantly different than 

the NAWQA urban sites (p=0.07 for total N; p=0.60 for total P). 

There also was no statistical difference between yields at the 

NAWQA urban sites versus those at site 11 (p=0.75 for total N; 

and p=0.08 for total P). Nutrient yields at sites that received 

either no WWTP effluent discharge but CSO discharges (site 11 

on Brush Creek) or one WWTP discharge (site 2 on upper Blue 

River) had yields that were not statistically different from each 

other (p=0.18 for total N and p=0.08 for total P). Sites that 

received discharge from more than one WWTP (sites 6 and 7) 

had median nutrient yields that were three to nine times greater 

than those at other U.S. urban sites.

Nutrient yields at site 6 on Indian Creek were significantly 

greater (p<0.001) than the nutrient yields at site 19 outside the 

basin. Total N yields at site 7 were not significantly different 

than those measured at site 19 (p=0.06), but total P yields were 

(p<0.001). Nutrient yields at site 2 (upper Blue River) and site 

11 (lower Brush Creek) were not significantly different than 

those at the control site (p-values ranged from 0.08 to 0.89). 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 51

Bacteria Densities and Sources

The city of Kansas City measured fecal coliform and fecal 

streptococci bacteria densities at selected sites in Brush Creek 

from July 1995 to January 2003. Samples generally were collected once each week (Wednesday morning) from March 

through November of each year, and once or twice each month 

from December through February under a wide variety of flow 

conditions. Samples collected at eight sampling points were distributed approximately every one-half mile from near site 9 to 

near site 12. Median fecal coliform densities ranged from 200 

col/100 mL (colonies per 100 milliliters) between sites 10 and 

11 (fig. 21) to 600 col/100 mL just downstream from site 9. 

Lower median densities in stream samples collected in the reach 

from site 10 to site 11 may be related to aeration and recirculation processes in place within these reaches, photodegradation 

as the result of longer travel times through the shallower, 

impounded reaches, or from particle settling. The source of the 

higher median fecal coliform densities in the reach between 

sites 9 and 10 is unknown. The highest density of CSO diversion structures occurs in Lower Brush Creek, between sites 11 

and 12. Median fecal coliform densities in lower reaches were 

less than, or equivalent to, upstream areas (where CSO densities 

are much less) indicating that other sources contribute substantially to the bacteria loads. Median fecal coliform densities were 

less than the secondary contact recreation limit of 1,800 col/100 

mL (Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 2005). In 

Brush Creek reaches from site 9 to the mouth, however, 27 percent of samples had fecal coliform densities that were greater 

than the recommended secondary contact standard. Brush 

Creek is not currently (2006) a listed stream in the State of Missouri, so these standards do not presently apply. 

Bacteria densities in Brush Creek are affected by the time 

of year (fig. 22). The largest densities occurred during the wettest months (May and June of each year). During these months, 

median fecal coliform densities were greater than 1,000 col/100 

mL. Median monthly fecal coliform densities were below 100 

col/100 mL from December through March. Median monthly 

fecal coliform densities also were strongly correlated with the 

number of days per month with precipitation events greater than 

2.5 centimeters (Spearman’s rho = 0.90) and to a lesser extent, 

the median monthly streamflow at site 11 (Spearman’s rho = 

0.66). These data indicate that bacteria densities in Brush Creek 

were linked strongly to wet weather events that occur primarily 

from spring through late summer, with rainfall events greater 

than 2.5 centimeters within 24 hours being the most problematic. Fecal coliform data are useful because fecal coliform and 

E. coli densities are strongly correlated (fig. 23; R2

 = 0.95); a 

measure of one can provide a reasonable estimate of the other. 

Median E. coli base-flow load at Brush Creek site 9 (upstream 

from the principal CSS area) was 66 percent of the median load 

measured at site 11 (in the CSS area). Additionally, E. coli

storm loads at site 9 were 59 percent of the E. coli loads for the 

same storms measured at site 11. These data indicate that substantial amounts of the bacteria observed in Brush Creek originated from sources other than CSOs.

Figure 21. Brush Creek longitudinal fecal coliform density from July 1995 through September 2004 and relation to sampling points in 

this study.
52 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 22. Median monthly fecal coliform densities measured in Brush Creek samples from July 1995 through January 2003, and 

percentage of samples with fecal coliform to fecal streptococci ratios greater than four.

Figure 23. Relation between fecal coliform densities and Escherichia coli densities measured in stream samples.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 53

Fecal indicator bacteria densities at sites 2 and 7 on Blue 

River and at site 6 on Indian Creek increased by several orders 

of magnitude during storms (fig. 17). This is because bacteria 

densities are strongly linked to suspended sediment concentrations, which also were dependent on discharge (fig. 17) and 

indicates that much of the observed bacteria in the basin originates from nonpoint sources.

Bacteria were evaluated to determine potential sources of 

E. coli to streams. Microbial source-tracking methods have 

been developed that use genetic markers to identify host sources 

(Carson and others, 2000; Dombek and others, 2000; Simpson 

and others, 2002; Myoda and others, 2003; Ahmed and others, 

2005). These methods assign a presumptive source of waterborne bacteria through a statistical comparison of genetic markers isolated from environmental E. coli samples to genetic 

markers in a host-source library. Because temporal and spatial 

variations are known to exist in E. coli genetic markers, it is 

important to develop a representative host-source library for a 

given study area (Scott and others, 2003; Johnson and others, 

2004; McLellan, 2004; Stoeckel and others, 2004). A local, representative host-source library containing 150 to 200 patterns 

for each potential host was developed from 2001 through 2004. 

This library of patterns was used for comparison to E. coli isolates from water samples in the basin. 

Samples from six sites in the basin were analyzed for host 

sources of E. coli during three base-flow sampling events in 

2002 and 2003. E. coli host-class densities were calculated by 

multiplying the percentage of each host class by the total number of E. coli determined from the same sample. When all samples were pooled together, 32 percent of the E. coli were from 

presumptive dog sources, 8 percent were from geese, 42 percent 

were from humans, and the remaining 18 percent were from 

unknown sources (fig. 24). Previous work (Wilkison and others, 

2002), estimated presumptive sources to be almost equally 

divided among humans (23 percent), dogs (28 percent), geese 

(22 percent), and unknown sources (26). Attempts to characterize the composition of all bacteria in the basin based on these 

results should be strongly cautioned for several reasons. The 

relative percent contribution from various sources should not be 

expected to be constant with time (fig. 25), and the relative survival rates of different sources in the environment is not known. 

Additionally, even though E. coli has been shown to persist for 

extended periods in the environment (Byappanahalli and others, 

2003; Muirhead and others, 2005), stormflow concentrations of 

bacteria are much greater than during base flow, and the relative 

percentages of storm-derived bacteria have not been characterized in the basin. 

Median E. coli densities were highest for samples identified as dog (170 col/100 mL) and lowest (25 col/100 mL) for 

samples identified as originating from geese. Median E. coli 

densities from human sources were 110 col/100 mL, and from 

unknown sources were 55 col/100 mL. The median concentration of E.coli in all samples examined for host sources was 200 

col/100 mL, which is near the concentrations of fecal coliform 

observed in the historical (1995 to 2003) Brush Creek data.

Figure 24. Presumptive sources of Escherichia coli measured in base-flow samples.
Figure 25. Temporal changes in Escherichia coli sources at selected stream sites.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 55

When viewed by sampling event and site (fig. 25), the 

upstream Blue River site (site 2) typically had smaller amounts 

of all E. coli sources. Human and dog sources generally 

increased because of increased urbanization downstream in the 

basin. Goose sources were greatest at sites 6 and 11, where large 

flocks of geese tend to congregate in adjacent parks, impoundments, or fields for much of the year. February samples had substantially lower densities from all hosts, consistent with previous findings about lower densities during this time of the year 

(fig. 22).

Although the percentages changed somewhat from stream 

to stream, all streams in the basin showed the same general 

trend in host sources (table 15). For samples collected between 

November 2002 through May 2003, the largest percentage was 

assigned to human sources (average of 42 percent), followed by 

dogs (average of 32 percent), and then geese (average of 8 percent). Unknown, or unclassified sources were 18 percent of the 

total. Source attribution percentages for the period November 

2002 through May 2003 at individual sites were generally 

within the range of those previously reported (table 15; Wilkison and others, 2002) where it was reported that human percentages of E. coli in stream samples were 28 percent, dog sources 

26 percent, geese sources 19 percent, and unknown (or unclassified sources) were 28 percent. These data indicate that in a 

highly urbanized area, such as the Blue River Basin, E. coli of 

presumptive human origin were found in streams during base 

flow. However, the median densities of presumptive human E. 

coli bacteria (108 col/100 mL; fig. 24) were well below the E. 

coli secondary contact limit of 1,134 col/100mL for Missouri 

streams. 

Table 15. Percentage of Escherichia coli measured in base-flow samples collected between November 2002 and 

June 2003 assigned to presumptive host sources.

[Numbers in bold are basin averages]

Stream

name

Site(s) included

(fig. 1) 

Number

of

samples

Number 

of

isolates

Presumptive host source

Dog Goose Human

Unknown

or unclassified

Sampled collected between November 2002 and June 2003

Brush Creek 9, 11, 12 9 127 35 10 38 17

Blue River 2, 7, 13 9 88 31 3 44 22

Indian Creek 6 3 42 26 16 48 10

All streams 2, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 21 257 32 8 42 18

Previous work (Wilkison and others, 2002)

Brush Creek 10,12 6 97 21 23 26 31

Blue River 7 3 48 35 10 33 21

All streams 7, 10, 12 9 145 26 19 28 28
56 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Before the development of genetic source tracking methods, the ratio of fecal coliform colonies to fecal streptococci 

colonies (FC/FS) frequently was used in attempts to estimate 

human and/or animal source contributions. This methodology 

was based on inherent differences in population densities of 

fecal coliform when compared to fecal streptococci for each 

class, human or animal. Based on these differences, values of 

FC/FS greater than four were more likely to have a human origin, whereas those less than 0.7 were more likely to have originated from non-humans. Environmental survivability rates for 

fecal streptococci are lower than for fecal coliform; therefore, 

ratios can be biased high. This especially is problematic in agricultural settings where ratios can be incorrectly suggestive of 

human origins (Coyne and Howell, 1996; Edwards and others, 

1997). However, FC/FS ratios can provide useful information, 

especially when samples are frequently collected and close to 

the source, sample sets are large, and only the percentages of 

indicative values are used rather than specific values or the 

mean of values (Feachem, 1975; Davenport and others, 1976; 

Coyne and Howell, 1995). The percentage of samples with 

FC/FS greater than 4 is shown by month in figure 22. These data 

indicate that from April through September of each year, 

between 21 and 45 percent of samples met the criteria for 

human-derived bacteria as determined by FC/FS. This time 

frame also coincided with the period of greatest bacteria densities, and with the most frequent and heaviest precipitation 

events. Remember, using this method has the potential to bias 

results in favor of human-derived bacteria, so some percentage 

of these samples may have been affected by uneven die-off 

rates. However, the utilitarian purpose of the FC/FS measurements is to determine whether the human bacteria percentages 

determined by genetic source-tracking methods are representative of longer periods, which they appear to be. Percentages of 

presumptive human bacteria determined from genetic-based 

methods for samples collected from Brush Creek were 26 percent for stream samples collected in 2001(table 15; Wilkison 

and others, 2002) and 38 percent for stream samples collected 

in 2002 and 2003 (table 15; this study).

Brush Creek Impoundments

 Impounded reaches of Brush Creek are known locally as 

the Plaza pool (reach upstream from site 10), the Volker pool 

(reach near site 11), and Lake of the Enshriners (reach near site 

12; fig. 26). Water exchanges are important to the water quality 

of these reaches; without freshwater moving into them, water 

tends to stagnate in the pools. Runoff that enters the impoundments is affected by urban nonpoint-source and CSO contaminants; if stormwater is enriched in nutrients and organic matter, 

macrophytes and algal masses can form quickly, especially in 

the late summer. Sediments, and associated contaminants, can 

accumulate in impoundments as stream velocities decline and 

affect water quality long after storms have receded (Wilkison 

and others, 2002). Measurements of pool volumes, pool 

exchange rates, and vertical water-quality profiles were used to 

determine the role that the impounded reaches have on Brush 

Creek water quality.

Mixing Effects on Water Quality

The volume of water needed to replace the pool volume 

above each site varies considerably. The Volker pool contains 

only about one-half the volume of the Plaza pool and less than 

10 percent of the Lake of the Enshriners (table 16). During 

base flow it takes from several days to several months for the 

pool volume to be replaced at any given reach. For example, at 

a base flow of 1ft3/s it takes approximately 11 days to replace 

the Plaza pool volume, 5 and one-half days to replace the 

Volker pool volume, and about 3 months to replace the pool 

volume in Lake of the Enshriners. These time estimates assume 

piston-flow through the impoundments, meaning any new 

water coming into the impoundments replaces an equivalent 

volume of older water. This is not always the case when the 

impoundments are strongly thermally stratified; thus, complete 

replacement could take substantially longer than the above minimal times. Storm runoff volumes often were sufficient to 

replace pool volumes many times over; however, small events 

with rainfall of less than 0.6 centimeter may result in slugs of 

water moving from upstream pools into downstream pools 

without completely leaving the basin.

From 1999 to 2004, there was, on average, sufficient daily 

flow to replace the volume in Volker pool 23 percent of the time 

(fig. 27). Water in the Plaza pool and Lake of the Enshriners 

was not replenished as frequently because of their larger volumes. Daily flow was sufficient to replace the Plaza pool volume 13 percent of the time and only 4 percent of the time at 

Lake of the Enshriners for the same period. Because less frequent mixing occurred in Lake of Enshriners, the reach would 

have been more prone to stratification and potential eutrophication than the Plaza or Volker pools.

Concurrent measurements of mean daily dissolved oxygen 

in three impounded reaches of Brush Creek indicate that dissolved oxygen concentrations were significantly higher in the 

Plaza pool than in the Volker pool or the Lake of the Enshriners 

(fig. 28; p<0.001). Median concentrations of dissolved oxygen 

declined in the downstream pools, although the difference 

between the Volker pool and Lake of the Enshriners was not 

statistically significant (p = 0.18). Differences between dissolved oxygen at Brush Creek sites were not related to temperature differences as concurrent measurements of temperature 

Table 16. Pool volumes of three impounded reaches of Brush 

Creek.

Impounded

reach above

Volume, 

in cubic feet Impoundment name

Site 10 978,000 Plaza pool

Site 11 474,000 Volker pool

Site 12 7,475,000 Lake of the Enshriners
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 57

Figure 26. Views of impounded reaches on Brush Creek.
58 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 27. Percentage of days during 1999 to 2004 water years that mean daily flow was sufficient to replace the pool volume for selected impounded reaches of Brush Creek.

indicated that temperatures were nearly identical. Improved 

mixing, aided by artificial recirculation and air entrainment 

from fountains, likely resulted in higher dissolved oxygen concentrations in the Plaza pool. The less frequent mixing of Lake 

of the Enshriners likely contributed to the lower dissolved 

oxygen concentrations measured in this reach. Comparing longterm (1998 to 2004) mean daily dissolved oxygen concentrations measured in Brush Creek to those measured in the Blue 

River indicate significantly lower (p<0.001) dissolved oxygen 

concentrations (5.4 mg/L) in Brush Creek when compared to 

the Blue River at site 7 (7.4 mg/L; fig. 28). As discussed later, 

temperature differences, especially during the summer months, 

could account for a small part of this variation. Increased dissolved oxygen concentrations in the Blue River were more 

likely facilitated by higher stream velocities and improved 

mixing over that of Brush Creek. 

Mixing processes also can play a role in streamwater temperatures. The Plaza and Volker pools are channelized entirely 

in concrete and lack any tree canopy; therefore, solar radiation 

affects are more pronounced than where stream canopies are 

more intact and riparian corridors less disturbed, such as at site 

7 on the Blue River. Mean daily water temperature fluctuations 

were less pronounced in Brush Creek during April to mid-July 

than in the Blue River (fig. 29). Brush Creek impoundments 

likely moderated temperature fluctuations as stormwater mixed 

with older, more temperate water contained in the pools. However, during mid-July through September, mean daily water 

temperatures in Brush Creek consistently were greater than 

those in the Blue River by about 0.5 o

C (degrees Celsius). 

These differences likely result from the cumulative effects of 

solar radiation and lack of tree canopy on Brush Creek, coupled 

with the less frequent precipitation during this period. 

Vertical Water-Quality Profiles

Vertical water-quality profiles were performed when 

Brush Creek impoundments had the potential to thermally stratify, usually early spring to late summer after little, or no, precipitation. Profiles for dissolved oxygen saturation, redox potential, and dissolved orthophosphate, nitrate, and ammonia 

concentrations measured in impounded reaches of Brush Creek 

are shown in figures 30 and 31. These data indicate that only the 

Lake of the Enshriners is deep enough, or lacks sufficient mixing, to have persistent stratification. Dissolved oxygen concentrations decreased rapidly with depth during all measurements 

in this impoundment. Super-saturated dissolved oxygen conditions frequently occurred in the upper 1.5 m because of algal 

photosynthesis; however, below about 3 m deep dissolved oxygen concentrations diminished to near zero. In the shallower 

Plaza and Volker pools, sunlight sometimes penetrated through 

the entire water column. This allowed algal growth from the 

surface to near the bottom as indicated by super-saturated dissolved oxygen conditions for all depths at these sites during the 

September 10, 2003, profile.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 59

Figure 28. Concurrent measurements of mean daily dissolved oxygen concentrations at three Brush Creek impoundments (A) 

and long-term daily dissolved oxygen concentrations at sites on the Blue River and Brush Creek (B) 1998 to 2004.

Figure 29. Mean daily water temperatures in the Blue River and Brush Creek from August 1998 to September 2004.
Figure 30. Concentration profiles with depth for dissolved oxygen and redox potential for impounded reaches of Brush Creek.
Figure 31. Concentration profiles with depth for dissolved nitrate, ammonia, and orthophosphate for impounded reaches of Brush Creek.
62 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

The greatest concentration changes of some constituents 

with depth were observed in Lake of the Enshriners. Ammonia 

concentrations and orthophosphate concentrations typically 

increased with depth, whereas dissolved nitrate concentrations 

generally were at, or near, the detection limit. The exception 

was the September 5, 2003, sampling event when nitrate concentrations exceeded 2 mg/L throughout the water column. This 

sampling occurred 4 days after a large rainfall event in the 

basin. Redox and dissolved oxygen measurements indicated 

that strong reducing conditions existed in bottom sediments 

before this runoff event (August 27, 2003). Stratification likely 

had been in place for some time as less than 2.54 centimeters of 

rain fell in the basin in the 30 days prior. Without the addition 

of freshwater, the zone of low dissolved oxygen concentrations 

had expanded upward; dissolved oxygen concentrations were 

below100 percent saturation at the surface. Consequently, 

reducing conditions were favorable for orthophosphate release 

from bottom sediments into the overlying water column, and 

downward trends in orthophosphate concentrations from the 

bottom sediments to the surface indicated this was likely occurring. Similar trends in orthophosphate and dissolved oxygen 

concentrations and low dissolved NO3 concentrations throughout the water column were observed during the September 6, 

2002, and May 28, 2003, sampling events. Additionally, ammonia concentrations in bottom sediments during these two sampling events averaged 410 mg/kg compared to 0.95 mg/kg for 

NO3 and more than 60 percent of the organic matter measured 

in bottom sediments occurred as elemental carbon (Wilkison 

and others, 2005). The ratio of carbon-to-nitrogen in Lake of the 

Enshriners bottom sediments averaged 16, much less than the 

average of 22 measured in Plaza pool bottom sediments (Wilkison and others, 2005). The shift in carbon-to-nitrogen ratios at 

Lake of the Enshriners suggest that redox conditions in bottom 

sediments were sometimes favorable for methanogenesis to 

occur. Under methanogenesis, anaerobic bacteria in bottom 

sediments convert organic carbon compounds into methane and 

carbon dioxide, which are then released into the atmosphere 

(Chapelle, 2000). Before methanogenesis, other electron acceptors, such as NO3, are reduced and converted to N gas which 

also escapes to the atmosphere and this process effectively 

removes N from the system. Nitrate concentrations were at, or 

below, analytical detection limits during all sampling events 

except for September 5, 2003, indicating that some N loss 

occurs in the lower Brush Creek impoundment during extended 

warm and dry periods.

More than 23 centimeters of rain fell in the basin between 

August 27 and September 1, 2003. The event was sufficiently 

large to replace the pool volumes many times over, and the runoff would have been expected to contain measurable amounts of 

nutrients; NO3 concentrations did increase in the following 

sampling of Lake of the Enshriners. Low dissolved oxygen concentrations throughout the water column during this event may 

be the result of a high biochemical oxygen demand from 

organic material brought in during the storm and subsequently 

trapped in the impoundment. Such storm events would be 

expected to push out existing algal populations. Chlorophyll a

concentrations were less than 1 mg/L on September 5, 2003, 

compared to 37 mg/L on August 27, 2003, (Wilkison and others, 2005).

Dry, warm, and sunny conditions prevailed until the next 

sampling event (September 10, 2003). By this time, biochemical oxygen demand processes apparently had run their course 

and algal populations had again begun to colonize stream 

reaches. This was evidenced by dissolved oxygen concentrations ranging from near zero at the bottom to values greatly in 

excess of saturation near the surface in Lake of the Enshriners. 

In the shallower impoundments, the Plaza and Volker pools, 

dissolved oxygen concentrations were above saturation levels 

from the top to the bottom. There is some evidence to suggest 

that redox conditions in sediments in the lower reach may have 

begun to denitrify NO3, but as yet had not released orthophosphate into the water column.

Diurnal Changes in Water Chemistry

 Substantial diurnal changes in water chemistry occurred 

in response to daily cycles of photosynthesis and respiration, 

especially during extended periods of dry, sunny weather such 

as occurred during most of August 2003 (fig. 32). As solar 

radiation increased during the day, the water temperature 

steadily rose. Because sufficient nutrients were present to sustain growth, algal populations rapidly expanded. As photosynthesis in the algal biomass proceeded, the pH and dissolved 

oxygen concentrations increased, often to amounts well in 

excess of saturation. As solar energy decreased later in the day, 

the water temperature declined. The cessation of photosynthesis 

and algal respiration caused the pH and dissolved oxygen concentration to decline. Dissolved oxygen concentrations often 

fell well below100 percent saturation during the nighttime as a 

result of algal respiration (fig. 32). The cycle began each day 

(when new solar energy entered the system) because 

impounded reaches of Brush Creek were not nutrient limited. 

Even in the absence of NO3, there was enough ammonia and 

orthophosphorus available in the pools to sustain algal blooms 

throughout most of August 2003.

Substantial rainfall events, such as those that occurred 

between August 27 and 31, 2003, disrupted the diurual cycle. 

These events replaced existing pool water and pushed out established algal populations. Water temperature and pH declined as 

freshwater entered the system; however, sediment and organic 

matter brought in by storms increased biochemical oxygen 

demand and caused sharp declines in dissolved oxygen concentrations (fig. 32).

Impoundment Productivity 

The productivity of Brush Creek impounded reaches were 

determined using measures designed to classify algal productivity (table 17; Carlson, 1977; Jones and Knowlton, 1993). Based 

on Secchi depth values, total N, and total P concentrations, 

impounded reaches of Brush Creek generally were classified as 

eutrophic to hypereutrophic. Total N and total P values for all
Figure 32. Continuous (every 15 minutes) water temperature, pH values, dissolved oxygen concentrations, and dissolved oxygen saturation from A

at site 11.
Table 17. Algal productivity of Brush Creek impoundments and four urban lakes in Missouri. [Avg., average; μg/L, micrograms per liter; TSI, Trophic State Index value (Carlson, 1977); TS, Trophic State (Jones and Knowlton, 1993); mg/L, milligrams per liter; E, eutrophic; M, mesotrophic; --, nO, oligotrophic] Site Surface area (acres) Date Chlorophyll a Secchi depth Total nitrogen 

Avg. value (μg/L) TSI Produc- tivity TS Avg. value (m) TSI Produc- tivity TS Avg. value (mg/L) TSI Produc- tivity TS Avg. value (mg/L) 

Lake of the Enshriners 26 08/10/2000 4.2 45 M M 0.39 74 H -- 1.92 64 E H 0.25 Lake of the Enshriners 09/06/2002 70.6 72 H H .48 70 E -- 2.09 65 E H .24 Lake of the Enshriners 05/28/2003 46.7 68 E E .50 70 E -- 1.96 64 E H .23 Lake of the Enshriners 08/27/2003 36.7 66 H H .60 67 E -- 1.78 63 E H .25 Lake of the Enshriners 09/05/2003 .46 23 O O 1.05 59 E -- 4.34 76 H H .18 Plaza pool 7 08/10/2000 7.9 51 E M .52 69 E -- 2.75 69 E H .24 Plaza pool 09/25/2002 7.1 50 M M 1.05 59 E -- 1.13 56 E E .12 Volker pool -- 08/10/2000 11.5 55 E E .47 71 H -- 2.37 67 E H .25 Creve Coeur Lake1 1Data from Thorpe and others, 2003. 320 2003 71.0 72 H H .38 74 H -- .67 49 M H .19 Blue Springs Lake1 727 2003 12.1 55 E E 1.19 57 E -- .56 46 M E .03 Lake Jacomo1 1068 2003 10.4 54 E E 1.35 56 E -- .44 42 M M .03 Longview Lake1 798 2003 6.9 50 E M 1.14 58 E -- .42 42 M M .02 Osage Plains1,2 2Average of 22 lakes in Osage Plains Physiographic Region (Thorpe and others, 2003). -- 2003 20.2 60 E E .71 65 E -- .78 51 E E .07 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 65

reaches of Brush Creek were generally higher than values 

observed for 4 urban lakes in Missouri and 20 lakes in the same 

physiographic region (Thorpe and others, 2004). It is important 

to note, however, that Brush Creek lakes are in much more 

densely populated urban areas and are much smaller than the 

comparison lakes (table 17). Available concentrations of dissolved N and P indicate that algae in impounded reaches of 

Brush Creek are not nutrient limited, but may be limited by 

other factors such as zooplankton grazing (Carlson and Simpson, 1996).

Because trophic states are an estimate of the amount of 

algal biomass in a waterbody, chlorophyll values are viewed as 

the best predictor indices for this determination (Carlson and 

Simpson, 1996). When classified by chlorophyll a concentrations, Brush Creek productivity values ranged from oligotrophic to hypereutrophic. Hypereutrophic periods in Lake of 

the Enshriners coincided with periods of little, or no, rainfall 

during the previous 2 weeks. Trophic states measured within 

5 days of heavy rainfall events (September 5, 2003, sampling) 

indicated marked declines in chlorophyll a concentrations, and 

changed trophic states from hypereutrophic to oligotrophic. 

Chlorophyll a concentrations in the Plaza and Volker pools (7.1 

to 11.5 μg/L) generally were in the range of other lakes measured in the Kansas City area (6.9 to 12.1 μg/L), but Secchi 

depths were slightly less, indicating that non-algal sources of 

turbidity existed in these reaches. The majority of lakes in the 

Ozark Plains Physiographic Region region were classified as 

eutrophic in 2003 (table 17).

Water-quality differences between impounded reaches 

were attributable largely to the size and depth differences of the 

pools. During base flow, water frequently was trapped for 

extended periods in Brush Creek impoundments. The larger the 

impoundment, the less frequent the total exchange of freshwater 

into them, which affected the water quality. Some vertical 

water-quality variations occasionally were observed in the 

Plaza and Volker pools; however, because of their smaller size 

and depth, less energy was required to keep them mixed and 

they did not thermally stratify. Vertical water-quality changes 

were greatest in Lake of the Enshriners, the largest and deepest 

impoundment, and unlike the upper pools, was prone to lasting 

thermal stratification. During extended dry periods, bottom sediments in Lake of the Enshriners became anoxic, and reducing 

conditions consumed NO3 and released orthophosphate and 

ammonia into the overlying water column. Lack of thermal 

stratification and more oxic conditions in the upper pools likely 

limited processes that would have led to N removal in bottom 

sediments of the upper reaches. Bottom sediments are periodically (every 1 to 3 years) removed from the Plaza and Volker 

pools (fig. 33), but not in the Lake of the Enshriners. 

 Algal blooms occurred during extended warm, sunny periods in all impounded reaches because Brush Creek was not 

nutrient limited. During wet periods, precipitation events frequently caused replacement of impoundment water, which had 

the benefit of pushing out algae matter and stagnant, anoxic 

water; however, stormwater brought sediment, organic matter, 

and nutrients into impoundments where it collected. Biochemical oxygen demand often reduced impoundment oxygen levels 

for several days following storms. Trophic states, as measured 

from chlorophyll a concentrations, ranged from oligotrophic 

after rainfall events to hypereutrophic during extended dry periods. Chlorophyll a values measured in Brush Creek were similar to values measured in other urban lakes in Missouri. 

Bottom Sediments

Sediments accumulate in Brush Creek impoundments 

because these reaches have lower stream gradients and velocities than free reaches. Most sediments are transported during 

storm runoff. Therefore, bottom sediments include contributions from urban nonpoint-source runoff and CSOs. Bottomsediment samples from impounded reaches of Brush Creek 

were analyzed for nutrients, OWCs, pharmaceuticals, and fecal 

indicator bacteria to determine constituent concentrations, and 

evaluate contaminant storage in sediments (Wilkison and others, 2005). Summaries of analytical results from bottom sediment samples are shown in tables 18 to 20.

Ammonia, total N, and total P concentrations typically 

were three to four orders of magnitude greater in bottom sediment samples (table 18) than in water samples from Brush 

Creek, whereas NO3 concentrations in bottom sediments were 

of similar magnitude to those measured in water samples (tables 

6 and 11). As previously discussed, NO3 can be removed from 

bottom sediments under certain anoxic conditions through biogeochemical processes. Ammonia can be removed from bottom 

sediments by several pathways, including upward diffusion 

through the water column, plant uptake, or denitrification 

(Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). However, during anoxic conditions, anaerobic bacteria convert ammonia back to organic matter, which can then build up in sediments (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1993). Both oxic and anoxic conditions would have been 

expected to occur within the impounded reaches; however, 

Figure 33. Sediment accumulation in Plaza pool, upstream from 

site 10, being prepared for removal, January 2000.
Table 18. Mean concentration of nutrients (milligrams per kilogram) and fecal indicator bacteria densities (colonies per 100 milligrams) in Brush Creek 

collected from September 2002 to September 2003. [--, not analyzed] Impoundment Sampling date Number of samples Ammonia, as N Nitrate, as N Total nitrogen Total phosphorus Escherichia coli Fecal coliform Plaza pool 9/25/2002 3 80 0.47 2,790 800 -- -- Plaza pool 3/12/2003 2 170 0.30 2,290 840 -- -- Lake of the Enshiners 9/06/2002 3 470 1.6 3,630 1,100 -- -- Lake of the Enshiners 5/28/2003 2 350 0.55 3,380 1,100 33 -- Lake of the Enshiners 8/27/2003 2 375 0.40 3,150 1,060 30 33 Lake of the Enshiners 9/05/2003 2 335 0.60 2,560 1,010 -- -- Table 19. Mean concentration (micrograms per kilogram) of organic wastewater compounds (OWC) in Brush Creek bottom sediment samples collecte

May 2003. [PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; OWC, organic wastewater compounds; nd, not detected] Organic wastewater-use category Impoundment Sampling date Number of samples Detergent Disin- fectant Fire Flavor/ Frag PAH Pesti- cides Plastic Sterol Solvent Sum of OWC Plaza pool 1/26/1999 2 1,370 770 nd 250 11,300 770 260 710 130 15,560 Plaza pool 9/25/2002 3 9,010 320 80 2,700 68,000 3,070 11,300 96,800 nd 191,280 Plaza pool 3/12/2003 2 940 70 nd 730 27,600 1,230 2,090 34,900 220 67,780 Volker pool 1/26/1999 3 570 690 nd 460 12,100 690 230 1,800 300 16,840 Volker pool 2/25/2003 2 2,150 430 nd 700 21,600 530 2,930 29,600 130 58,070 Lake of the Enshiners 9/6/2002 3 39,200 1,540 90 5,500 57,400 3,190 7,990 136,000 80 250,990 Lake of the Enshiners 5/28/2003 2 8,940 210 nd 710 12,600 480 5,040 64,500 270 92,750 Table 20. Mean concentration (micrograms per kilogram) of pharmaceutical compounds in Brush Creek bottom sediment samples collected from Feb

2003. [OTC, over-the-counter medications; nd, not detected] Pharmaceutical-use category Impoundment Sampling date Number of samples Anal- gesic Antacid Antibiotics/ Antifungal Anticon- vulsants Anti- diabetics Anti- depress- ants Asthma Choles- terol Narcotic Stimu- lants 

Volker pool 2/25/2003 2 nd 5.4 2.7 38 nd nd 13 6.7 nd 34 Lake of the Enshiners 5/28/2003 2 nd 1.9 0.7 8.0 nd nd 2.5 nd nd 2.8 Lake of the Enshiners 8/27/2003 2 nd nd 0.9 12 nd nd 12 nd nd 38 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 67

there was a gradual decline of ammonia and total N concentrations in Lake of the Enshriners bottom sediments from September 2002 through September 2003. Rainfall during this period 

was 60 percent of normal, so nutrient losses from bottom sediments during this time may have exceeded inputs. The higher 

ammonia, total N concentrations, and total P concentrations in 

Lake of the Enshriners bottom sediments, when compared to the 

Plaza pool sediments, may have resulted from more favorable 

biogeochemical conditions in Lake of the Enshriners bottom 

sediments, but also could be reflective of higher deposition 

rates, or different sedimentation sources in the lower reach.

Many OWCs strongly sorb to sediments (Cordy and others, 2004; Talmedge, 1994; Mansell and others, 2004; Xia and 

others, 2004). Concentrations of many OWCs, therefore, would 

be expected to be greater in bottom sediments than in water 

samples, and previous work indicated that PAH concentrations 

in bottom sediments were three to four orders of magnitude 

greater than concentrations in the overlying water column 

(Wilkison and others, 2002). 

Although samples are small, bottom sediment OWC concentrations followed several distinct patterns. The largest concentrations of OWCs in bottom sediments occurred in the sterols, PAHs, plastics, and detergents use categories (table 19). 

Coprostanol comprised from 10 to 48 percent of the sterols 

observed in bottom sediments (Wilkison and others, 2005), 

with the largest percentage in samples from Lake of the Enshriners. Coprostanol has been shown to be an efficient wastewater 

tracer, but some sterols, cholesterol, stigmastanol, and sistosterol, have natural plant matter sources in addition to wastewater sources (Elhmmali and others, 2000). PAHs are ubiquitous in urban lake sediments, in part because of urbanization 

and our increased reliance on automobiles and the myriad of 

potential pathways including nonpoint-source runoff, atmospheric deposition, and wastewater (Paxeus, 1996; Van Metre 

and others, 2000). Diethylhexl phthalate, used as a plasticizer 

in many products and commonly present in freshwater sediments (Kao and others, 2005), was responsible for almost all of 

the plastics OWC component in bottom sediment samples. 

Detergents comprised from 1 to 10 percent of the total OWCs 

observed in bottom sediments, less than the percentage 

observed in Brush Creek base-flow or stormflow samples (table 

9). The largest percentage of detergents were observed in samples collected from Lake of the Enshriners. 

Concentrations of OWCs in bottom sediments also tended 

to increase with impoundment size and to decrease with time. 

Concentrations, as evidenced by the sum of all detections of 

(total) OWCs were lowest in the smallest impoundment, Volker 

pool, and greatest in the largest impoundment, Lake of the 

Enshriners (table 19). Total OWC concentrations in bottom sediments from the intermediately sized Plaza pool were between 

these values. Although the environmental fate of many OWCs 

has not been well characterized, several factors and processes 

could have influenced these differences. Increased photolysis 

and oxidative processes in the upper impoundments potentially 

could decrease some OWC concentrations. Sediment sources 

and sediment trapping efficiencies likely vary among impoundments. Lake of the Enshriners is located in the area of Brush 

Creek with a greater density of CSO diversion structures than 

are the other impoundments, which could have affected concentrations. 

Bottom sediment samples collected in the Plaza pool and 

Lake of the Enshriners during September 2002 had much higher 

total OWC concentrations than did samples collected 6 to 8 

months later (table 19). Total OWC concentrations in the later 

sampling were approximately one-third (33 to 37 percent) of the 

previous value at the Plaza pool and Lake of the Enshriners. 

These data indicate that OWCs likely were degraded in bottom 

sediments, as rainfall was approximately 60 percent of normal 

between the samplings, with few events (6) in excess of 1.25 

centimeters.

Concentrations of OWCs in Brush Creek bottom sediments were compared to those measured in streambed sediments collected between March 31 and April 3, 2003, at sites in 

the basin and previously reported (Lee and others, 2005).

Streambed sediments at three sites in the upper Blue River, two 

sites on Indian Creek, and one site on Indian Creek were analyzed for the same suite of OWCs that were analyzed in 

impoundment bottom sediments. The largest total OWC concentrations [approximately 78,000 μg/kg (microgram per kilogram)] in streambed sediments were observed in samples collected just downstream from site 17 in this study (Lee and 

others, 2005). Total OWC concentrations measured in Brush 

Creek bottom sediments in September 2002 were two and onehalf to three times greater than these concentrations, and five to 

six times greater than in streambed sediments measured in samples collected just upstream from site 6 (total OWC concentrations of 40,000 μg/kg; Lee and others, 2005). Total OWC concentrations measured in Brush Creek bottom sediment samples 

collected between February 25, 2003, and May 28, 2003, 

ranged from approximately 56,000 μg/kg to 91,000 μg/kg, 

which is more within the ranges observed in streambed sediments immediately downstream from WWTP discharges, but 

still much greater than streambed concentrations in the upper 

Blue River. A number of factors could affect these comparisons. Deposition environments in streams can be quite different 

from those in lakes, and decomposition rates that are not well 

characterized could differ substantially between the impounded 

and stream reaches. However, these data indicate that OWC 

concentrations in Brush Creek bottom sediments were enriched 

substantially in many wastewater compounds, often to concentrations equivalent to, or greater than, those observed in stream 

sediments near WWTP discharges.

 Summary results of pharmaceutical compounds analyzed 

in bottom sediments are listed in table 20. Over-the-counter 

medications accounted for a smaller percentage (18 to 60) of the 

total pharmaceuticals in bottom sediments than in water samples (table 10), with caffeine the bulk of the over-the-counter 

medications. The anti-convulsant, carbamazepine, generally 

accounted for a substantial part (23 to 50 percent) of the total 

pharmaceuticals detected in bottom sediments. Carbemazepine 

has been shown to sorb strongly to sediments and to be rela-
68 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

tively stable once released into the environment (Jones and others, 2002; Lam and others, 2004). 

Although the small number of samples makes extensive 

comparisons impractical, concentrations of the sum of pharmaceutical compounds in Brush Creek bottom sediments (values 

ranged from 16 to 100 μg/kg) generally were similar to those 

measured in streambed sediments that were sampled downstream from WWTPs (Lee and others, 2005). Total pharmaceutical concentrations measured in streambed sediments downstream from site 4 was 180 μg/kg, and total concentrations in 

streambed sediments just upstream from site 6 were 85 μg/kg 

(Lee and others, 2005). As with OWC compounds, there are 

many processes and factors that could have affected pharmaceutical concentrations in streambed and lake bottom sediments 

that could hinder these comparisons. Many of these processes 

are not well understood; however, these data are another indication that impoundments along Brush Creek accumulate sediments that were derived, in part, from wastewater sources.

Fecal-indicator bacteria densities were measured in bottom sediments in Lake of the Enshriners during the May 2003 

and August 2003 sampling (table 18). The intent was to examine the possibility of long-term viability of bacteria in bottom 

sediments, and the potential for subsequent contributions if sediments were to be resuspended during later storms. There were 

no runoff events for the 9 days before the May 2003 event and 

for the 16 days before the August 2003 event; therefore, recent 

storm inputs were not an issue. E. coli densities in bottom sediments were approximately 10 percent of the median values 

measured in base-flow samples from Brush Creek (340 col/100 

mL; table 6) and three orders of magnitude less than the median 

value in Brush Creek storm samples (38,700 col/100 mL; table 

11). Whereas these data indicate that some E. coli survive in 

bottom sediments for extended periods, the densities measured 

indicate that resuspension of these sediments during high flows 

would account for but a small part of the storm loads. 

Macroinvertebrate Community Assessments

 The diversity and abundance of macroinvertebrate stream 

fauna at stream sites within the basin were measured in 2002, 

2003, and 2004 using standardized measures known as metrics. 

Selected metrics (Sarver, 2001; Kansas Department of Health 

and Environment, 2000) were used to make assessments of 

aquatic life status (ALS) listed in tables 21 and 22.

When metric scores were adjusted for proportionality, the 

upper Blue River sites (sites 1 and 2), consistently scored at, or 

above, the control site (site 19) score, indicating that streamwater quality was sufficient to support a diverse biological component in the upper Blue River. There was a general overall 

decrease in community integrity downstream in the basin (fig. 

34). Aquatic community integrity was correlated strongly with 

the percent of vegetation and urbanization at sampled sites (fig. 

35). Proportional metric scores increased as the percent of vegetation—defined as the sum of the land use/land cover devoted 

to forests and grassland—increased (Spearman’s rho, 0.81) and 

decreased as the amount of urbanization—defined as the sum of 

the land use/land cover devoted to commercial and/or residential development, and roadways—increased in the basin (Spearman’s rho, -0.83). Although stream habitat assessments were 

not part of this study, riparian disturbances likely contribute 

substantially to the urbanization gradient as many stream 

reaches, especially in the lower basin, have been altered or 

channelized. 

Scores at sites located immediately downstream from 

WWTPs (sites 2, 4, and 6, fig. 34) showed a marked decline in 

scores from sites immediately upstream although, as previously 

noted, scores at site 2 were similar to those at the control site. 

This site is downstream from the smallest of the WWTPs (site 

15) that discharges into the basin, and the plant uses extended 

aeration and activated sludge as part of its secondary waste 

treatment (Lee and others, 2005). Activated sludge treatment 

processes, although not completely effective in removing many 

endocrine-disrupting chemicals from effluent (Johnson and 

Sumpter, 2001), typically are more effective than the trickling 

filter method utilized at site 17 (Glassmeyer and others, 2005). 

There was some evidence of recovery in the middle reach of the 

Blue River (between sites 7 and 8). Much of the riparian corridor remains intact along this section of the Blue River, which 

likely helps foster a more diverse aquatic fauna in this reach.

Brush Creek at Elmwood Avenue (site 12) consistently 

had the lowest rank of all sites in the basin. These samples were 

collected in the free-flowing part of the stream downstream 

from the impoundment. A number of factors likely influenced 

the low score for the Brush Creek site. Little of the natural 

hydrologic regime and native habitat of Brush Creek remains 

intact, which likely unduly affects aquatic communities. Dissolved oxygen levels measured on Brush Creek at site 11 frequently (36 percent of the time) were less than the warm-water 

aquatic life standard of 5 mg/L (Wilkison and others, 2005).

When sites were grouped by four potential wastewater 

sources, there was a significant difference between all categories except WWTP and WWTP/CSO (fig. 36; p<0.001). Sites 

with other sources (defined as no sources and contributions 

from septic systems, sewer lines, and WWTP by-passes) had 

the highest scores; the CSO category had the lowest proportional scores. The deleterious effects of upstream impoundments on water quality, especially on habitat availability and 

reduced dissolved oxygen levels, likely plays an important role 

in the low CSO category scores.

Aquatic community integrity, as measured by multi-metric 

scores, was correlated with water-quality scores at the sites (fig. 

37); these factors cannot necessarily be viewed as separate from 

the previously described urbanization effects. Proportional metric scores increased as the proportional water-quality score 

increased for all categories of water quality (Spearman’s rho, 

0.66 to 0.88) except for the nutrients measured in stormwater, 

which declined (Spearman’s rho, -0.49). The reason for the difference probably is because base-flow nutrients originate predominately from point sources that supply a fairly steady stream 

of nutrients to streams, whereas a substantial part of storm nutrients originate from nonpoint sources, which tend to move 
Table 21. Stream Condition Index (SCI) scores for Missouri Department of Natural Resources core metrics and aquatic life support (ALS) status for sit[EPT, Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera; MO, Missouri; SCI, Stream Condition Index; ALS, aquatic life support; F-M, February - March; F, fully supporting; P, partially suSeptember]

Site

number

(table 1)

Sample

period

Total Taxa Richness EPT Taxa Richness MO-Biotic Index

Shannon-Wiener 

Diversity Index 

Metric value Score Metric value Score Metric value Score Metric value Metric sc

1 F-M 37 5 8 3 6.2 3 2.74 5 

2 F-M 23 3 6 3 6.6 3 1.99 5 3 F-M 14 3 2 1 6.5 3 1.59 3 4 F-M 15 3 1 1 7.1 3 2.06 5 5 F-M 22 3 3 1 6.6 3 1.48 3 6 F-M 12 1 1 1 7.2 3 1.49 3 7 F-M 21 3 2 1 7.1 3 1.57 3 8 F-M 15 3 2 1 6.6 3 1.35 3 

12 F-M 12 1 0 1 7.9 1 1.47 3 13 F-M 16 3 1 1 6.8 3 0.98 3 19 F-M 26 5 7 3 6.2 3 1.51 3 

1 S 34 5 7 3 6.2 5 2.78 5 

1 S1

1Sampled November 8, 2002.

33 5 9 3 6.7 3 2.41 5 

2 S 24 5 7 3 6.2 5 2.09 5 3 S 25 5 7 3 6.7 5 2.28 5 4 S 20 3 5 3 7.0 3 2.12 5 5 S 21 3 5 3 6.1 5 1.83 3 6 S 20 3 5 3 6.7 3 2.03 5 7 S 13 3 5 3 6.2 5 1.42 3 8 S 22 3 7 3 6.4 5 1.86 3 

12 S 12 1 1 1 8.6 1 0.66 1 13 S 17 3 5 3 6.4 5 1.72 3 19 S 35 5 9 3 6.4 5 2.47 5 
Table 22. Kansas Department of Health and Environment core metric values and aquatic life support (ALS) status for sites sampled in 2003 and 2004. [EPT, Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera; ALS, aquatic life use support; N, not supporting; P, partially supporting; F, fully supporting; F-M, February - March] Site number (table 1) Sample period EPT Taxa Richness Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index Kansas Biotic Index Percent EPT 

(4

1Percent mussel loss not included in average. 

Metric value Score Metric value Score Metric value Score Metric value Metric score 

1 F-M 6 1 5.47 1 2.71 2 24.8 1 

2 F-M 6 1 5.36 2 3.17 1 45.5 2 3 F-M 5 1 6.18 1 2.70 2 17.6 1 4 F-M 2 1 7.17 1 2.79 2 1.6 1 

5 F-M 5 1 5.72 1 3.29 1 19.9 1 

6 F-M 1 1 7.68 1 3.76 1 12.0 1 7 F-M 4 1 5.68 1 2.91 2 37.1 2 8 F-M 2 1 5.08 2 2.95 2 53.1 3 

12 F-M 0 1 7.88 1 4.55 1 0 1 

13 F-M 2 1 5.70 1 3.23 1 47.5 2 

19 F-M 5 1 5.51 1 3.04 1 30.2 2 

1 F-M 9 2 5.22 2 2.68 2 32.8 2 

2 F-M 4 1 6.12 1 3.19 1 20.6 1 3 F-M 4 1 6.68 1 3.25 1 8.0 1 

4 F-M 1 1 7.14 1 2.80 2 1.0 1 5 F-M 2 1 6.10 1 3.38 1 12.1 1 

6 F-M 2 1 8.12 1 3.50 1 7.0 1 

7 F-M 3 1 6.71 1 2.92 2 19.9 1 

8 F-M 3 1 5.26 2 3.40 1 46.4 2 

12 F-M 0 1 9.16 1 4.50 1 0 1 

13 F-M 4 1 7.11 1 3.74 1 26.9 1 

19 F-M 7 1 5.57 1 3.14 1 31.6 2 
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 71

Figure 34. Sum of 10 proportionally scaled aquatic-life metrics by site for 4 sampling periods, March and September 2002 

and February 2003, 2004.
72 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 35. Relation between proportional metric score and the percentage of vegetative cover and urbanized land use at 

sample sites in Blue River Basin.
Water Quality in the Blue River Basin 73

Figure 36. Proportional aquatic-life metric score by potential wastewater sources.

quickly through the system. These data indicate that at the concentrations measured, the continuous stream of nutrients that 

originate during base-flow conditions may affect the ecological 

condition of streams more adversely than do ephemeral nonpoint-source nutrients that originate during storms. Aquatic 

environments have been demonstrated to be effected by changes 

in ecosystem nutrient dynamics and effluent-dominated streams 

(McCormick and others, 2004; Brooks and others, 2006) and 

indirect deleterious affects are suspected for some detergent byproducts and pesticides (Fleeger and others, 2003; Sumpter and 

Johnson, 2005). From the data collected in this study, the effect, 

if any, that OWCs and pharmaceuticals might have on aquatic 

integrity at sites cannot be separated from those associated with 

urbanization and nutrient enrichment. 

Because of the inter-jurisdictional nature of the basin, ALS 

values were determined using State of Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources protocols during two sampling events in 

2002 (table 21), and using Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment (KDHE) protocols in 2003 and 2004 (table 22). 

Although these protocols use slightly different metrics, the 

goals are similar; to allow comparisons with reference sites 

through the use of unbiased estimators (metrics) of aquatic 

integrity. Some metrics decrease in response to system perturbations, and others are expected to increase (table 23). There 

currently (2006) is no mechanism in place to transfer an ALS 

determination using the protocols of one state to that of another, 

regardless of whether or not the basin is inter-jurisdictional. 

There is no change in ecoregion as one passes from one political 

boundary to the next; therefore, when a standard protocol is 

used across all the sites, the political boundary would not be 

expected to affect the results, and the methods would be 

expected to provide a relative performance measure of stream 

aquatic integrity for any given sampling event.

For sites sampled in March 2002, only one site on the 

upper Blue River (site 1) was evaluated as fully biologically 

supporting, two sites, one on Indian Creek and one on Brush 

Creek (sites 6 and 12), were considered nonsupporting, and the 

remainder, including the outside control site (site 19), were 

determined to be partially supporting. In September 2002, ALS 

improved from partially to fully supportive at three sites on 
74 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Figure 37. Relation between proportional metric score and proportional water-quality scores for base-flow and stormflow conditions.

Blue River and Indian Creek (sites 2, 3, and 4) and at the 

control site (site19) and from nonsupportive to partially supportive at site 6 on Indian Creek. Aquatic life status at site 12 on 

Brush Creek remained nonsupportive during both events. 

Aquatic life status determinations for sites in 2003 and 

2004 (table 22) indicated that no sites were considered fully biologically supporting, and, in fact, the majority of sites were 

evaluated as being nonsupportive of aquatic life. This may be an 

artifact of using the Kansas protocol to make ALS determinations, or may partly be the result of the sampling dates during 

the year. Samples were collected in February 2003 and 2004; 

samples collected in the winter months seemed to indicate a 

higher degree of impairment. Winter impairment may result 

from the deleterious affects of winter road salting on aquatic 

communities, or from the increased percentage of wastewater 

effluent that constitutes streamflow during drier winter months.

Because metric values can be sensitive to hydrologic 

extremes, data collected during this study are shown in comparison to values measured at two KDHE biological monitoring 

stations maintained in the Blue River Basin (fig. 38). The 

KDHE Blue River station (station 205) is located approximately midway between sites 1 and 2 and has been monitored 

since 1982. The Indian Creek station (station 204) is approximately midway between sites 4 and 6 on Indian Creek and was 

monitored from 1980 to 1990 (S. Cringan, Kansas Department 

of Health and Environment, oral commun., 2005).
Conceptual Models 75

Table 23. Summary of benthic macroinvertebrate metrics used as part of the assessment of biotic integrity and the expected response 

to system perturbations.

[EPT, Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera; MO, Missouri; KS, Kansas; KDHE, Kansas Department of Health and Environment; modified from Poulton, 

2005]

Metric Method summary Expected response to perturbation Reference

Total Taxa Richness Measures total taxa present. Decreases with a corresponding increase 

in tolerant groups.

Barbour and others, 

1999

EPT Taxa Richness Measures total taxa within the orders 

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera.

Decrease. However, tolerant EPT species 

may increase in abundance in 

response to mild organic enrichment.

Klemm and others, 

1990

Macrobiotic Index

MO-Biotic Index

KS-Biotic Index

Relates tolerance and number of individual species to total number of organisms.

Increases as organic enrichment 

increases.

Hilsenhoff, 1982

Rabeni and others, 1997

KDHE, 2000

Shannon-Weiner 

Index

Estimates the richness and evenness of 

community diversity.

Decreases with corresponding reduction 

in species richness and evenness.

Washington, 1984

Percent EPT Measures percent of total taxa from the 

orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, 

and Trichoptera.

Decrease. However, tolerant EPT species 

may increase in abundance in 

response to mild organic enrichment.

Barbour and others, 

1999

For two of the four metrics shown in figure 37 (Total Taxa 

Richness and Kansas Biotic Index), the median metric value at 

station 205 fell midway between the median value at site 1 (just 

upstream) and site 2 (just downstream). Median values for Macrobiotic Index (MBI) and percent Ephemoptera-Plecoptera-Tricoptera (EPT), were lower at station 205 compared to sites 1 

and 2. The median MBI value was lower at station 205 (4.78) 

compared to site 1 (5.34) and site 2 (5.74). The median percent 

EPT at station 205 was 19 percent compared to 25 percent at site 

1 and 42 percent at site 2; however, EPT taxa richness at station 

205 was 7, midway between the EPT taxa richness observed at 

sites 1 and 2 which had EPT taxa richnesses of 8 and 6. EPT at 

sites 1 and 2 was dominated by large numbers of a few taxa 

which could account for the differences in percent EPT 

observed at station 205 compared to sites 1 and 2. Although 

determination of trends in aquatic community diversity was 

beyond the scope of this project, these data generally indicate 

that samples collected during 2002-2004 were within the range 

of the long-term values seen in the Upper Blue River.

Metric values at the KDHE Indian Creek station 204 from 

1980 through 1990 were within the range of values at Indian 

Creek sites (sites 3, 4, and 6) during 2002 to 2004. Median values at station 204 were similar to those measured at the nearest 

site, site 6. Median total taxa richness at station 204 was 25, 

compared to 22 at site 6. Median percent EPT at station 204 was 

12 percent, compared to 10.5 percent at site 6. The Kansas 

Biotic Index (KBI) values also were similar between the sites; 

median value of 3.50 at station 204, compared to 3.63 at site 6 

(fig. 38). Median MBI values were 6.37 at station 204, compared to 7.90 at site 6. At the Indian Creek KDHE station, 

aquatic community integrity, as measured by metrics, had 

greater fluctuations and less diversity than the Blue River 

KDHE station.

Conceptual Models

Data from this and previous studies (Wilkison and others, 

2002, 2005) were used to develop conceptual models for various water-quality concerns in the basin. These conceptual models serve as a historical record of current (2006) understandings 

about water-quality issues in the basin, and the foundation for 

further inquiry into factors affecting basin dynamics and water 

quality.

Nutrients

Urbanization factors play a substantial role in the occurrence of nutrients in the Blue River basin. Some stream reaches, 

notably the upper Blue River and Brush Creek, have nutrient 

yields similar to those in other U.S. urban areas, while other 

reaches, the lower Indian Creek and the middle and lower Blue 

River, have nutrient yields that are greater. In all reaches of the 

basin, however, nutrient concentrations were generally many 

times greater over natural background estimates, and typically 

5 to 25 times greater than U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency water-quality recommendations (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000). 
Figure 38. Metric values from 1980 to 2004 at two Kansas Department of Health and Environment long-term monitoring sites in the Blue River Baadjacent sites in the basin from 2002 to 2004.
Conceptual Models 77

Loadings from WWTP effluent are the dominant source of 

nutrients in the Blue River and Indian Creek during base flow; 

nonpoint sources are dominant during wet weather. Only a 

small part of effluent nutrients are assimilated or removed by instream processes, an indication that such contributions frequently exceed the ecological assimilation capacity of many 

reaches. Nonpoint-source loadings during storms can be many 

times greater than during base flow, although the water-quality 

effect of nonpoint-source nutrients on aquatic life is less pronounced. The relative magnitude of wet weather nonpoint nutrient sources compared to that of WWTP effluent at basin sites is 

determined by the number and size of the plant(s) that discharge 

upstream from the site and the site drainage area. Greater than 

70 percent of nutrients in the upper Blue River originate from 

nonpoint sources, primarily nonpoint-source runoff. The smallest WWTP that discharges into the basin is located on the upper 

Blue River and it accounts for a substantial part of the remaining nutrient contributions to the upper Blue River. Nonpointsource runoff contributions are approximately 40 percent of the 

total in-stream nutrient load in lower Indian Creek, downstream 

from two WWTPs, that together discharge five times the 

amount of effluent into a smaller drainage area as the one upper 

Blue River plant. Nutrient loads and yields are greater in lower 

Indian Creek than at other sites in the basin. Because of that, 

nutrient loads in the middle and lower Blue River primarily 

originate from the Indian Creek tributary, and to a much lesser 

extent from the upper Blue River. Nonpoint sources contribute 

approximately 60 percent of the total P to the middle and lower 

Blue River, and approximately one-half of the total N; most of 

the remaining nutrient contributions in the middle and lower 

Blue River result from the combination of the three upstream 

WWTPs. 

Brush Creek differs from the Blue River and Indian Creek 

in that a combination of nonpoint source and CSO contributions 

account for almost all of the nutrients that enter the stream. 

Nonpoint-source nutrient loads in Brush Creek originate from a 

myriad of urban sources, including runoff from parks, golf 

courses, lawns, impervious surfaces, storm sewers, compromised sewer lines, and ground- and surface-water interactions 

with these sources. In the CSS areas, at least some contributions 

from CSOs occur during many rain events, especially those that 

produce precipitation in excess of 1.25 centimeters within 24 

hours. Wastewater-treatment plant by-passes occasionally 

occur upstream from the Missouri-Kansas state line during 

heavy precipitation events, but likely contribute much smaller 

loads than do those from nonpoint-source runoff and CSOs. 

Total N and total P loads and yields in Brush Creek were much 

smaller than those from lower Indian Creek. Nutrient contributions from the Brush Creek tributary are small in comparison to 

those from the Indian Creek tributary. Although total N and 

total P loads from Brush Creek are smaller than those from the 

upper Blue River, yields are not, indicating that the per unit contribution from these areas are similar. 

The effects of nutrient loadings in Brush Creek are 

extended and complicated by the series of impoundments that 

occur along the middle and lower reaches. Although the majority of N flushed into Brush Creek occur as particulate organic N 

during storms, there is no shortage of dissolved phase nutrients 

to limit algal growth in the Brush Creek lakes. Consequently, 

algal blooms are a common occurrence within the impoundments. These blooms typically begin with the advent of warm 

weather in the late spring, and persist throughout the summer 

and early fall and become most pronounced during extended hot 

and dry periods when pool-water retention times are extended. 

The upper impoundments are too small or shallow for strong 

thermal stratification, and blooms can result in super-saturated 

dissolved oxygen concentrations through the entire water column in these reaches. These conditions can occur quickly or 

change over the course of just a few hours, which can cause dissolved oxygen concentrations in some impoundments to drop 

near, or below, the aquatic life threshold of 5 mg/L for short 

periods.

The lowest impounded reach, Lake of the Enshriners, 

stratifies during warm, dry periods, and this can result in dissolved oxygen concentrations that range from super-saturation 

near the surface to near zero at depth. Particulate nutrients, 

trapped in anoxic lake bottom sediments undergo biogeochemical transformations that affect water quality. Reducing conditions release P back into the water column where it becomes 

available to algae and increases productivity. Nitrogen removal, 

through denitrification which occurs during extended dry periods, is likely to be minor compared to total inputs; therefore, 

sediments rich in organic matter and nutrients, such as those 

originating from some nonpoint sources and CSO’s, are a major 

contributor to eutrophication problems in Brush Creek lakes.

Organic Wastewater and Pharmaceutical Compounds

The dominant source of organic wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds in the Blue River and Indian Creek are 

WWTP effluent. Nonpoint-source contributions occur as well, 

primarily during stormflows, but nonpoint-source loadings of 

OWCs and pharmaceutical compounds are much less than nonpoint-source nutrient loadings. Like nutrients, nonpoint-source 

contributions of OWCs and pharmaceuticals to the Blue River 

and Indian Creek are superimposed on a larger WWTP effluent 

signature that continues, and may be elevated, if storm-generated by-passes occur during events.

On Brush Creek, nonpoint sources and CSOs contribute 

OWCs and pharmaceuticals to stream reaches. Nonpoint 

sources can be especially important during base flows where 

ground-water flow paths intersect sewer lines, or if a direct 

hydraulic connection exists between the sewers and receiving 

waters. Storm runoff contributes OWCs nonpoint sources and, 

if storm intensity is great enough, CSO contributions. Sediment-bound OWCs are trapped in catch basins and storm sewers after precipitation ends; however, these sediments and 

bound constituents can move into receiving waters during the 

next precipitation event, where they are again trapped by a 

series of impounded reaches. Remobilization of sediments during storms, especially in reaches designed with higher gradi-
78 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

ents, resuspends contaminated sediments back into the water 

column. Even in large flood events, there is insufficient energy 

to thoroughly transport most sediment out of the impoundment; 

therefore, sediment accumulates behind the low-water dams 

where complex geochemical processes act to degrade some 

OWCs and pharmaceuticals, while preserving others. This phenomenon is most pronounced in the lower impoundment reach 

of Brush Creek because of its larger size and longer hydraulic 

residence time. 

Bacteria

Nonpoint sources that originate during wet weather constitute the majority of fecal coliform and E. coli loads to the Blue 

River, Brush Creek and Indian Creek. Nonpoint-source contributions primarily from urban storm runoff frequently elevate 

in-stream bacteria densities to several orders of magnitude 

greater than base-flow densities. Following storm inputs, bacteria can be harbored in bottom sediments and later resuspended 

during high flows; a process more important in Brush Creek 

because of the series of impounded reaches that act to slow 

stream velocities and trap sediments. However, sediment resuspension would account for but a small part of the total storm 

loads.

Point sources, such as from CSOs, WWTP discharges, or 

by-passes, contribute lesser amounts of bacteria to receiving 

streams than do nonpoint sources. Because CSOs are expected 

to contribute at least some part of the in-stream bacteria during 

many storm events, the relative importance of point sources is 

likely much greater in CSS areas than in areas served by 

WWTPs. Wastewater-treatment plants, although not 100 percent effective in the elimination of bacteria to receiving waters, 

disinfect effluent, which greatly reduces bacteria densities in 

their discharge. Intense precipitation events can sometimes trigger WWTP by-passes, resulting in the discharge of partially 

treated, or untreated effluent, to receiving waters that can contribute to in-stream bacteria, but these sources are expected to 

be small when compared to wet-weather nonpoint sources. Longitudinal profiles of fecal coliform densities along Brush Creek 

indicate that the highest densities are not necessarily linked to 

the highest density of CSOs, indicating that nonpoint-source 

contributions likely plays a substantial, and perhaps an equivalent role, to that of CSOs. 

Sources of fecal indicator bacteria vary temporally and 

spatially in the basin. Human and dog contributions typically 

constitute the largest percentage of the total in-stream bacteria. 

Average human contributions ranged from 26 to 42 percent and 

average dog contributions ranged from 26 to 32 percent of the 

total measured in-stream bacteria. Average contributions from 

geese ranged from 8 to 19 percent, and contributions from 

unknown (or unclassified) sources ranged from 18 to 28 percent. 

Macroinvertebrate Communities

Macroinvertebrate communities in the upper reaches of the 

basin are similar to those measured in outside control locations. 

Biological diversity in these reaches, as measured by aquatic 

life indicators and biological assessment frameworks outlined 

by Kansas and Missouri for wadeable streams, remains largely 

intact. Macroinvertebrate communities in the lower reaches of 

the Blue River, Indian Creek and Brush Creek are impaired—in 

some cases substantially—when measured by the same indicators and assessment tools. Aquatic life impairment is associated 

with urbanization effects that result from a variety of urbanrelated factors, many of which overlap, cannot be easily separated, and likely act together synergistically. Channelization 

and stream-bank armoring reduce bank erosion and the interaction of the stream with adjacent riparian areas that deplete 

streams of the necessary sediment, organic matter, and woody 

debris needed to sustain healthy benthic invertebrate populations. Wastewater-treatment plant effluents enrich streams 

with nutrients and contain other endocrine-disrupting contaminants known to be deleterious to aquatic life. A number of 

benthic organisms also are sensitive to many nonpoint-source 

contaminants, notably PAHs, that are present in these streams. 

Because benthic invertebrate populations serve as an ecological 

base for higher organisms, reductions in their diversity likely 

translates into reduced fish populations on some stream reaches.

A series of low-water dams on Brush Creek has resulted in 

the creation of lentic reaches, and in large part the stream ecosystem has been replaced with a lake ecosystem in much of the 

middle and lower reaches. The lake ecosystems are degraded 

by inputs of organic material, nutrients, and sediments (often 

enriched with toxic pollutants) and frequent periods of eutrophication that periodically stress aquatic organisms by reducing 

available oxygen. 

Summary and Conclusions

Stream water-quality and biologic data were collected in 

the Blue River Basin from July 1998 to October 2004 to provide 

an assessment of water-quality conditions throughout the basin, 

characterize contaminant sources, and provide data to support 

the development of strategies designed to minimize the effects 

of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) on receiving streams 

water quality. Water-quality data were derived from base-flow 

samples at 18 sites in the basin, storm samples from 10 sites, 

vertical water-quality profiles and bottom-sediment samples 

from 3 sites, and continuous water-quality data from 5 sites. 

Benthic macroinvertebrate data were collected at 10 sites in the 

basin and 1 outside control site. Stream samples were analyzed 

for selected physical properties, nutrients, selected organic 

wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds, and fecal- indicator bacteria. Total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads and 

yields were calculated for selected stream reaches and sources 

in the basin to determine the relative contribution of reaches and 
Summary and Conclusions 79

sources. Aquatic community assessments in the basin were 

determined through the collection of benthic macroinvertebrates and the use of standardized metrics and related to land 

use and water quality.

The combination of many urban-related factors have produced deleterious effects on water-quality in many stream 

reaches throughout the Blue River Basin. Such factors include 

disruption of riparian areas, hydrologic alterations to streamflow, urban nonpoint-source runoff, wastewater-treatment plant 

(WWTP) effluent, and CSO discharges. Many of these factors 

are conjunctive. Urbanization and flood-control projects have 

resulted in substantial losses of riparian vegetation, many miles 

of stream channelization, stream-bank armoring, extensive loss 

of native pool and riffle sequences, and altered flow regimes. 

Wastewater-treatment plant effluent discharged into the upper 

basin has increased base flow in downstream reaches. Urban 

nonpoint-source runoff contributes a substantial part of the contaminant load to the basin. In areas served by WWTPs and combined sewer systems (CSSs), discharges of treated and 

untreated wastewater additionally contribute nutrients and other 

contaminants to streams. Deleterious water-quality affects are 

most pronounced in lower Indian Creek, the lower and middle 

reaches of the Blue River, and lower Brush Creek. More than 90 

percent of base-flow samples had nutrient concentrations in 

excess of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency level III, 

ecoregion 40 nutrient criteria and nutrient loads at basin sites 

typically ranged from one to three orders of magnitude greater 

than expected background loads.

There were distinct differences between the primary 

sources of nutrients during base flows and stormflows within 

the basin and within selected reaches. Land use in the upper 

reaches of the Blue River, Indian Creek, Tomahawk Creek, and 

Brush Creek ranged from agricultural to suburban to urban. 

Base-flow nutrient concentrations in the furthest upper reaches 

were not derived from WWTPs or CSOs, but likely from other 

sources such as ground water, land-use practices, leaks from 

septic and/or sanitary sewer systems, natural soil processes, and 

atmospheric deposition. Wastewater-treatment plants provided 

the dominant source of nutrients to the middle and lower Indian 

Creek (downstream from site 4) and the Blue River (downstream from site 2) during base flow. Although there is some 

daily and seasonal variance in WWTPs loads, these facilities 

provided relatively stable nutrient contributions to streams; instream nutrient assimilation and transformation processes 

removed only a small part of these nutrients. During storms, the 

predominant source of nutrients shifted from point sources to 

nonpoint sources. As runoff increased during storms, the relative contribution from WWTPs declined, whereas contributions 

from nonpoint sources increased. Median nutrient loads during 

storms increased by a factor of approximately 25 over those 

observed in base flows for the lower Indian Creek and the Blue 

River.

 In Brush Creek, wet weather events provided the dominant source of nutrients. Storm-event nutrient loads, a combination of nonpoint and CSO sources, increased by 200 to 300 percent over base flow in Brush Creek. Because of hydrologic 

alterations to Brush Creek, nutrients were trapped in impounded 

sections, which promoted algal blooms during warm, dry, and 

sunny periods. In the lowest impounded reach, chemical processes altered or removed nutrient species during extended dry 

periods. Brush Creek contributed a small percentage, less than 

5 percent, of the total nutrient loads to the Blue River. Nutrient 

yields measured in Brush Creek were similar to those observed 

in the upper reaches of the Blue River. Lentic, or slow moving 

reaches, of Brush Creek alter the stream hydrology and effect 

water quality in many ways. Because nutrients were not limited 

in these reaches, algal blooms sometimes altered dissolved oxygen concentrations to values that ranged from greatly in excess 

of saturation to those less than the amount needed for full support of aquatic life. The upper pools, being smaller and shallower, were subject only to brief periods of stratification. 

Streamflow in Brush Creek was sufficient to replace the water 

in these impoundments at rates about three to six times that of 

the lowest impounded reach from 1999 to 2004. During dry, 

warm periods thermal stratification occurred mainly in the lowest impounded reach, and reducing conditions in bottom sediments sometimes induced denitrification, phosphorus release, 

and methanogenesis. These processes may have resulted in the 

loss of nitrogen and carbon from bottom sediments into the 

atmosphere and the release of readily bioavailable phosphorus 

into the overlying water column. Chlorophyll a concentrations 

from impounded reaches of Brush Creek indicated that when 

water was stagnate in the pools, these waters were classified as 

mesoeutrophic to hypereurtrophic. Precipitation events large 

enough to replace pool volumes brought in freshwaters, which 

temporarily reduced productivity and provided nutrients for 

later productivity.

Total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads and yields estimated for four sites in the basin indicated that most of the 

observed nutrients at site 7 on the Blue River originated from 

lower Indian Creek (site 6). Nutrient loads and yields at sites 6 

and 7 were significantly greater than at other basin sites, an outside control site, and other urban sites primarily because of substantial contributions from upstream WWTP effluent. Nutrient 

yields in the upper Blue River (site 2) and from Brush Creek 

(site 11) were not significantly different from each other, the 

control site, or other urban sites. 

At sites on Indian Creek and the Blue River, organic 

wastewater and pharmaceutical compounds were largely attributable to WWTP discharges during base flow. Detergents and 

sterols constituted the majority of organic wastewater compounds (OWCs), and over-the-counter medications constituted 

the bulk of the measured pharmaceuticals measured in stream 

samples. Concentrations of most OWCs and pharmaceuticals 

declined in stormflow samples, which is consistent with a predominantly point-source origin for these compounds in most 

reaches of Indian Creek and the Blue River. However, concentrations for two classes of OWCs (pesticides and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) increased during storms, indicating significant nonpoint-source contributions of these compounds during 

runoff events.
80 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

On Brush Creek, sources of OWCs and pharmaceuticals 

were largely attributable to a combination of wet weather urban 

nonpoint and CSO sources, as evidenced by general increases in 

concentrations of these contaminants with flow. The occurrence of many of these compounds at site 9 (upstream from 

most CSOs) during both base flow and stormflows indicates 

that other factors may be as important in the occurrence of these 

compounds in Brush Creek as are CSOs. Elevated fecal 

coliform counts in areas with few CSOs also underscore the 

importance that nonpoint sources likely has on Brush Creek 

stream-water quality. 

Wet weather urban nonpoint sources were the greatest 

contributor of bacteria to streams in the basin. Fecal coliform 

densities in Brush Creek were greatest from May through September of each year and correlated strongly with periods of precipitation greater than 1.25 centimeters within 24 hours. Small 

longitudinal differences existed in median bacteria concentrations along Brush Creek; areas with the highest density of CSOs 

had median concentrations similar to those in upstream areas 

with few CSOs indicating that other factors likely played an 

equivalent role in the observed densities. Estimates of bacteria 

sources indicated that human and dog sources likely constitute 

the largest percent of the total bacteria. Human sources in the 

basin averaged from 26 to 42 percent, dog sources averaged 

from 26 to 32 percent, geese contributed from 8 to 19 percent, 

and unknown sources contributed approximately 18 to 28 percent of in-stream bacteria during base-flow conditions. Bacteria 

sources and relative percentages change temporally and likely 

change in response to flow conditions; the representativeness of 

source-characterization percentages to storm loads is unknown.

Aquatic assessments at 10 sites in the basin indicated that 

biological integrity was greatest in headwater streams and 

declined in downstream reaches. Declines in aquatic integrity 

were correlated to a number of inter-related, overlapping urbanization factors including declines in upstream vegetative cover 

and increases in upstream impervious cover and roadways, 

nutrient enrichment, and increased wastewater inputs. The relative importance of each of these factors could not be determined.

References

Ahmed, W., 2005, Host-species-specific metabolic fingerprint 

database for enterococci and Escherichia coli and its application to identify sources of fecal contamination in surface 

waters: Applied Environmental Microbiology, v. 71, no. 8, 

p. 4,461–4,468.

Barone, J.J., and Roberts, H.R., 1996, Caffeine consumption: 

Food Chemistry and Toxicology, v. 34, no. 1, p. 119–129.

Becker, L.D., 1990, Simulation of flood hydrographs for small 

basins in Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 90–4045, 40 p.

Blevins, D.W., 1986, Quality of stormwater runoff in the Blue 

River Basin, Missouri and Kansas, July–October 1981 and 

April–July 1982: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 84–4226, 131 p.

Brooks, B.W., Riley, T.M., and Taylor, R.D., 2006, Water quality of effluent-dominated ecosystems: ecotoxicological, 

hydrological, and management considerations: Hydrobiologia, v. 556, no. 1, p. 365–379.

Brown, G.K., Zaugg, S.D., and Barber, L.B., 1999, Wastewater 

analysis by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, in Morganwalp, D.W., and Buxton, H.T., eds., U.S. Geological 

Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program-Proceedings 

of the Technical Meeting, Charleston, South Carolina, March 

8–12, 1999: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4018B, v. 2, p. 431–436.

Byappanahalli, M., Fowler, M., Shively, D., and Whitman, R.,

2003, Ubiquity and persistence of Escherichia coli in a midwestern coastal stream: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 69, no. 8, p. 4,549–4,555.

Cahill, J.D., Furlong, E.T., Burkhardt, M.R., Kolpin, D.W., and 

Anderson, L.G., 2004, Determination of pharmaceutical 

compounds in surface- and ground-water samples by solidphase extraction and high-performance liquid-chromatography-electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: Journal of 

Chromatography A, v. 1,041, p. 171–180.

Carlson, R.E., 1977, A trophic state index for lakes: Limnology 

and Oceanography, v. 22, p. 363–369.

Carlson, R.A., and Simpson, J., 1996, A coordinator’s guide to 

volunteer lake monitoring methods: Madison, Wisconsin, 

North American Lake Management Society. 96 p.

Carson, A.C., Shear, B.L., Ellersieck, M.R., and Asfaw, A, 

2000, Identification of fecal Escherichia coli from humans 

and animals by ribotyping: Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology, v. 67, no. 4, p. 1,503–1,507.

Carson, A.C., Shear, B.L., Ellersieck, M.R., and Schnell, J.D., 

2003, Comparison of ribotyping and repetitive extragenic 

palindromic-PCR for identification of fecal Escherichia coli

from humans and animals: Applied and Environmental 

Microbiology, v. 69, n. 3, p. 1,836–1,839.

Centers for Disease Control, 2005, State-specific prevalence of 

cigarette smoking and quitting among adults - United States, 

2004: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, v. 54, no. 44, 

p. 1,124–1,127.

Chapelle, F.H., 2000, Ground-water microbiology and 

geochemistry: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 468 p. 

Childress, C.J.O., Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., and Maloney, 

T.J., 1999, New reporting procedures based on long-term 

method detection levels and some considerations for interpretations of water-quality data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–193, 19 p.

Cohn, T.A., 1988, Adjusted maximum likelihood estimation of 

the moments of lognormal populations from type I censored 

samples: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00–4126, 

34 p.

Cohn, T.A., DeLong, L.L., Gilroy, E.J., Hirsch, R.M., and 

Wells, D.K., 1989, Estimating contaminant loads: Water 

Resources Research, v. 25, no. 5, p. 937–942.
References 81

Coyne, M.S., and Howell, J.M., 1994, The fecal coliform/fecal 

steptococci ratio (FC/FS) and water quality in the Bluegrass 

Region of Kentucky: Journal of Environmental Quality, 

v. 24, no. 3, p. 411–419.

Coyne, M.S., and Howell, J.M., 1996, Effect of sediment particle size and temperature on fecal bacteria mortality rates and 

the fecal coliform/fecal streptococci ratio: Journal of Environmental Quality, v. 25, no. 6, p. 1,216–1,220.

Cordy, G., Duran, N., Bower, H., Rice, R., Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Zaugg, S.D., Meyer, M.T., and Barber, L.B., 

2004, Do pharmaceuticals, pathogens, and other organic 

waste water compounds persist when waste water is used for 

recharge?: Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, v. 

24, no. 2, p. 58–69.

Davenport, C.V., Sparrow, E.B., and Gordon, R.C., 1976, Fecal 

indicator bacteria persistence under natural conditions in an 

ice-covered river: Applied and Environmental Microbiology,

p. 527–536.

Dombek, P.E., Johnson, L.K., Zimmerley, S.T., and Sadowsky, 

M.J., 2000, Use of repetitive DNA sequences and the PCR to 

differentiate Eshcerichia coli isolates from human and 

animal sources: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 

v. 66, no. 6, p. 2,572–2,577. 

Edwards, D.R., Coyne, M.S., Vendrell, P.F., Daniel, T.C., 

Moore, P.A. Jr., and Murdoch, J.F., 1997, Fecal coliform and 

streptococcus concentrations in runoff from grazed pastures 

in northwest Arkansas: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 33, 

no. 2, p. 413–422. 

Elhmmali, M.M., Roberts, D.J., and Evershed, R.P., 2000, 

Combined analysis of bile acids and sterols/stanols from riverine particulates to assess sewage discharges and other fecal 

sources: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 34, 

no. 1, p. 39–46.

Faries, L.M., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S.Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory-Determination of 

metals in water by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92–634, 

28 p.

Federal Trade Commission, 2000, Tar, nicotine, and carbon 

monoxide of the smoke of 1294 varieties of domestic cigarettes for the year 1998, accessed December 2004 at URL 

http://www.ftc.gov/reports/tobacco/1998tar&nicotinereport.pdf.

Feachem, R.G., 1975, An improved role for fecal coliform to 

fecal streptococci ratios in the differentiation of human and 

non-human pollution sources, Water Research, v. 9, p. 689–

690.

Fishman, M.J., ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water and 

fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

93–125, 217 p.

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., 1989, Methods for determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. A-1, 545 p.

Fleeger, J.W., Carman, K.R., and Nisbet, R.M., 2003, Indirect 

effects of contaminants in aquatic ecosytems: The Science of 

the Total Environment, v. 317, p. 207–233.

Glassmeyer, S.T., Furlong, E.T., Kolpin, D.W., Cahill, J.D., 

Zaugg, S.D., Werner, S.L., Meyer, M.T., and Kryak, D.D., 

2005, Transport of chemical and microbial compounds from 

known wastewater discharges: potential for use as indicators 

of human fecal contamination: Environmental Science and 

Technology, v. 39, no. 14, p. 5,157–5,169.

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2000, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 1999: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–99–1, 390 p. (published annually).

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2001, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 2000: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–00–1, 430 p. (published annually).

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2002, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 2001: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–01–1, 504 p. (published annually).

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2003, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 2002: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–02–1, cd rom, 567 p. (published 

annually).

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2004, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 2003: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–03–1, cd rom, 776 p. (published 

annually).

Hauck, H.S., and Nagel, C.D., 2005, Water resources 

data—Missouri, water year 2004: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Data Report MO–04–1, cd rom, 798 p. (published 

annually).

Heimann, D.C., and Richards, J.M., 2003, Topography and sedimentation characteristics of the Squaw Creek National 

Wildlife Refuge, Holt, County, Missouri, 1937–2002: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

03–4211, 52 p.

Helsel, D. R., and Hirsch, R.M., 1992, Statistical Methods in 

Water Resources: Studies in Environmental Science 49: New 

York, Elsevier Science Publishing Co., 522 p.

Helsel, D. R., 2005, Nondetects and data analysis: statistics for 

censored environmental data: Hoboken, New Jersey, John 

Wiley and Sons, Inc., 250 p.

Johnson County Wastewater, 2005, 2004 Statistical Report, 24 

p., accessed January 2006 at URL http://www.jcw.org/pdf/

auannualpdf/stat2004.pdf.

Johnson, L.K., Brown, M.B., Carruthers, E.A., Ferguson, J.A., 

Dombek, P.E., and Sadowsky, M.J., 2004, Sample size, 

library composition, and genotypic diversity among natural 

populations of Escherichia coli from different animals influence accuracy of determining sources of fecal pollution: 

Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 70, no. 8, 

p. 4,478–4,485. 

Johnson, A.C., and Sumpter, J.P., 2001, Removal of endocrinedisrupting chemicals in activated sludge treatment works: 

Environmental Science and Technology, v. 35, no. 24, 

p. 4,697–4,703.
82 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Jones, J.R., and Knowlton, M.F., 1993, Limnology of Missouri 

Reservoirs: an analysis of regional patterns: Lake and Reservoir Management, v. 8, p. 17–30.

Jones, O.A.H., Voulvoulis, N., and Lester, J.N., 2002, Aquatic 

environmental assessment of the top 25 English prescription 

pharmaceuticals: Water Research, v. 36, no. 20, p. 5,013–

5,022.

Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2000, Division 

of Environment, Quality Management Plan, Part III: Stream 

biological monitoring program, quality assurance management plan: Topeka, Bureau of Environmental Field Services, 

Technical Services Section, variously paged.

Kao, P.H., Lee, F.Y., Hseu, Z.Y., 2005, Sorption and biodegradation of phthalic esters in freshwater sediments: Journal of 

Environmental Science and Health, Part A: Toxic/Hazardous 

Substances and Engineering, v. 40, n.1, p. 103–115.

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., 

Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T., 2002, Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999–2000: A national reconnaissance: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, no. 6, 

p. 1,202–1,211.

Kreis, R.G., 1988, Integrated study of exposure and biological 

effects of in-place sediment pollutants in the Detroit River, 

Michigan: Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channel Final 

Report: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Research and Development, ERL-Duluth, Minnesota, and 

LLRS-Gross Ile, Michigan, 153 p.

Lam, M.W., Young, C.J., Brain, R.A., Johnson, D.J., Hanson, 

M.A., Wilson, C.J., Richards, S.M., Solomon, K.R., and 

Marbury, S.A., 2004, Aquatic persistence of eight pharmaceuticals in a microcosm study: Environmental Toxicology 

and Chemistry, v. 23, no. 6, p. 1,431–1,440.

Lane, S.L., and Ray, R.G., eds., 2003, National field manual for 

the collection of water-quality data: Selection of equipment 

for water-sampling (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A2, 

accessed December 2004 at URL http://pubs.water.gov/

twri9A9/.

Lee, C.J., Mau, D. P., Rasmussen, T. J., 2005, Effects of nonpoint and selected point contaminant sources on streamwater quality and relation to land use in Johnson County, 

northeastern Kansas, October 2002 through June 2004: U.S. 

Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 05–5144, 

104 p.

Lee, K.E., Barber, L.B., Furlong, E.T., Cahill, J.D., Kolpin, 

D.W., Meyer, M.T., and Zaugg, S.D., 2004, Presence and 

distribution of organic wastewater compounds in wastewater, 

surface, ground, and drinking waters, Minnesota, 2000–02: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 04–

5138, 47 p.

Lelo, A., Miners, J.O., Robson, R., and Birkett, D.J., 1986, 

Assessment of caffeine exposure: caffeine content of beverages, caffeine intake, and plasma concentrations of methylxanthines: Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, v. 39, p. 

54–59.

Loraine, G.A., and Pettigrove, M.E., 2006, Seasonal variations 

in concentrations of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in drinking water and reclaimed wastewater in Southern 

California: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 40, 

no. 3, p. 687–695.

Mansell, J., Drewes, J.D., and Rauch, T., 2004, Removal mechanisms of endocrine disrupting compounds (steroids) during 

soil aquifer treatment: Water Science and Technology, v. 50, 

no. 2, p. 229–237.

McCormick, P.V., Shuford, R.B.E.,III, and Rawlik, P.S., 2004, 

Changes in macroinvertebrate community structure and 

function along a phosphorus gradient in the Florida Everglades: Hydrobiologia, v. 529, n. 1, p. 113–132.

McLellan, S.L., 2004, Genetic diversity of Escherichia coli isolated from urban rivers and beach water: Applied Environmental Microbiology, v. 70, no. 8, p. 4,658–4,665.

Mid-America Regional Council, 1983, Nationwide Urban 

Runoff Program, Kansas City Area Project, Technical 

Report, variously paged.

Mid-America Regional Council, 2003, Metro dataline, long 

range forecast for the Kansas City Metropolitan Area, 2002, 

accessed December 2003 at URL http://www.metrodatline.org/index.html.

Mid-America Regional Council, 2004, Kansas City Metrogreen 

Plan, accessed May 2005 at URL http://www.marc.org/

metrogreen/.

Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 2005, Rules of 

Department of Natural Resources, Division 20-Clean Water 

Commission, Chapter 7-Water Quality, Title 10 CSR 

20.7.031, accessed January 2006 at URL http://http://

www.sos.mo.gov/adrules/csr/current/10csr/10c20-7a.pdf.

Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G., 1979, Wetlands: New York, 

Van Nostrand Reinhold, 722 p.

Moulton, S.R., II, Carter, J.L., Grotheer, S.A., Cuffney, T.F., 

and Short, T.M., 2000, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Processing, taxonomy, and quality control of benthic macroinvertebrates samples: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

00–212, 49 p.

Myers, D.N., and Wilde, F.D., eds., November 2003, Biological 

indicators (3d ed.): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A7, accessed 

September 2005 at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A7/.

Muirhead, R.W., Collins, R.P., and Bremer, P.J., 2005, Erosion 

and subsequent transport state of Escherichia coli from cowpats: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 71, no. 6, 

p. 2,875–2,879,

Myoda, S.P., Carson, A.C., Fuhrmann, J.J., Hahm, B.K., Hartel, 

P.G., Yampara-Iquise, H., Johnson, L., Kuntz, R.L., Nakatsu, 

C.H., Sadwosky, M.J., and Samadpour, M., 2003, Comparison of genotypic-based microbial source tracking methods 

requiring a host origin database: Journal of Water Health, 

v. 1, n. 4, p. 167–180.

National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National Trends 

Network, 2005, Online database accessed September 2005 at 

URL http://napd.sws.uiuc.edu/. 
References 83

National Climatic Data Center, 2005, Online database at URL 

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html.

Paxeus, N., 1996, Organic pollutants in the effluents of large 

wastewater treatment plants in Sweden: Water Resources, v. 

30, no. 5, p. 1,115–1,122.

Rabeni, C.F., Sarver, R.J., Wang, N., Wallace, G.S., Weiland, 

M., and Peterson, J.T., 1997, Biological criteria for streams 

of Missouri: Columbia, Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Missouri, 270 p.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982a, Measurement and computation 

of streamflow—Volume 1. Measurement of stage and discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, p. 

1–284. 

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982b, Measurement and computation 

of streamflow—Volume 2. Computation of discharge: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, p. 285–631.

Ruffner, J.A., and Bair, F.E., 1979, The Weather Almanac: New 

York, Avon Publishing Co., 728 p. 

Runkel, R.L, Crawford, C.G., and Cohn, T.A., 2004, Load Estimator (LOADEST): A FORTRAN program for estimating 

constituent loads in streams and rivers: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques and Methods, book 4, chap. A5, 69 p.

Sarver, R.J., 2001, Semi-quantitative macroinvertebrate stream 

bioassessment project procedure: Jefferson City, Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Quality, 24 p.

Scott, T.M., Parveen, S., Portier, K.M., Rose, J.B., Tamplin, 

M.L., Farrah, S.R., Koo, A., and Lukasik, J., 2003, Geographical variation in ribotye profiles of Eshcherichia coli

from humans, swine, poultry, beef, and dairy cattle in Florida: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v. 69, 

p. 1,089–1,092.

Simpson, G.M., Jr., Santo Domingo, J.W., and Reasoner, D.J., 

2002, Microbial source tracking: state of the science: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, no. 24, p. 5,279–

5,288.

Smith, R.A., Alexander, R.B., and Schwartz, G.E., 2003, Natural background concentrations of nutrients in streams and 

rivers of the coterminous United States: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 37, no. 14, p. 3,039–3,047,

Spengler, P., Korner, W., and Metzger, J.W., 2001, Substances 

with estrogenic activity in effluents of sewage treatment 

plants in southwestern Germany.1.Chemical analysis: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 20, no. 10, p. 2,133-

2,141.

Stoeckel, D. M., Mathes, M.V., Hyer, K.E., Hagedorn, C., 

Kator, H., Lukasik, J., O’Brien, T.L., Fenger, T.W., Samadpour, M., Strickler, K.M., and Wiggins, B.A., 2004, Comparison of seven protocols to identify fecal contamination 

sources using Eschericia coli: Environmental Science and 

Technology, v.3 no. 8, p. 6,109–6,117.

Sumpter, J.P., and Johnson, A.C., 2005, Lessons from endocrine disruption and their application to other issues concerning trace organics in the aquatic environment: Environmental 

Science and Technology, v. 39, n. 12, p. 4,321–4,332.

Talmedge, S., 1994, Environmental and human safety of major 

surfactants: Alcohol ethoxylates and alkylphenol ethoxylates: Boca Raton, Florida, Lewis Publishers, 374 p.

Thorpe, A.P., Obrecht, D.V., and Jones, J.R., 2004, Lakes of 

Missouri Volunteer Program 2003 Data Report: University 

of Missouri, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, 

114 p., accessed July 2005 at URL http://www.lmvp.org.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004, Blue River Channel Modification, accessed December 2004 at URL http://

www.nwk.usace.army.mil/projects/blueriver/.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2002, Population estimates, accessed 

December 2003 at URL http://www.census.gov/.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994, Combined sewer 

overflow (CSO) control policy, final policy: U.S. Federal 

Register, v. 59, no. 75, p. 18,688–18,698.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Combined sewer 

overflows—Guidance for monitoring and modeling: Washington, D.C., Office of Water, EPA 832–B–99–002, variously paged.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000, Ambient water 

quality criteria recommendations: Rivers and streams in 

nutrient ecoregion IX: Washington, D.C., Office of Water, 

EPA 822–B–00–019, variously paged, accessed October 

2004 at URL http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/

nutrient/ecoregions/rivers/rivers_9.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, Report to Congress: impacts and control of CSOs and SSOs: Washington, 

D.C., Office of Water, EPA 833–R–04–001, variously paged, 

accessed January 2006 at URL http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/

cso/cpolicy_report2004.cfm.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005, Environmental 

Compliance History Online (ECHO) database, accessed 

November 2005 at URL http://www.epa.gov/echo.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2005, National water-quality assessment program retrospective database for nutrients in ground 

and surface water, accessed September 2005 at URL http://

water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/dataset/retro.data.sw.

Van Metre, P. C., Mahler, B.J., and Furlong, E.T., 2000, Urban 

sprawl leaves its PAH signature: Environmental Science and 

Technology, v. 34, no. 19, p. 4,064–4,070.

Wagner, R.J., Mattraw, H.C., Ritz, G.F., and Smith, B.A., 2000, 

Guidelines and standard procedures for continuous waterquality monitors: Site selection, field operation, calibration, 

record computation, and reporting: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 00–4252, 53 p.

Wilde, F.D., ed., 2004, National field manual for the collection 

of water-quality data: Cleaning of equipment for water sampling (version 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A3, accessed 

September 2005 at URL http://water.usgs.gov/twri9A3/.

Wilde, F.D., ed., 2005, National field manual for the collection 

of water-quality data: Preparations for water sampling (version 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A1, accessed 

December 2004 at URL http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A1.
84 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 

1999, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: Collection of water samples: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. 

A4, accessed January 2002 at URL http://

pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A4/.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 

2002, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: Selection of equipment for water sampling (version 

2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A2, accessed December 2003 at 

URL http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A2/.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 

April 2004, Processing of water samples (version 2.1): U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, accessed April 2004 at http://

pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/.

Wilkison, D.H., Armstrong, D.J., Brown, R.E., Poulton, B.C., 

Cahill, J.D., and Zaugg, S.D., 2005, Water-Quality and biologic data for the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan 

Area, October 2000 to October 2004: U.S. Geological Survey 

Data-Series Report 127, 158 p. [cd rom; http://pubs.usgs.gov/

ds/2005/127/].

Wilkison, D.H., Armstrong, D.J., and Blevins, D.B., 2002, 

Effects of wastewater and combined sewer overflows on 

water quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City, Missouri 

and Kansas, July 1998–October 2000: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 02–4107, 

162 p.

Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., and 

Burkhardt, M.R., 2002, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of wastewater compounds by polystyrene-divinylbenzene solid-phase extraction and capillary-column gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4186, 37 p.

Xia, K., Bhandari, A., Das, K., and Pillar, G., 2005, Occurrence 

and fate of pharmaceuticals and personal care products 

(PPCPs) in biosolids: Journal of Environmental Quality, 

v. 34, n. 1, p. 91–104.
Tables

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199September 2004.[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 

 Discharge, mean instantaneous (ft3/s)

Minimum value 0.01 2.2 18.1 22.6 19.1 0.01 0.36 1.40 14.3 0.36 0.21 1.67 Maximum value 7.0 72.0 320 332 418 418 5.0 15.0 36.5 36.5 31.7 24.5 1Mean value 3.3 12.9 65.6 82.8 76.0 60 1.8 9.2 24.1 14.2 2.81 10.5 Median value 3 5.8 37.1 50.0 43.1 36 1.3 10.5 20.9 14.6 0.70 7.1 Number of samples 4 20 34 21 34 113 12 10 20 42 32 17 2

 Turbidity (NTU)

Minimum value 3.9 5.2 5.1 6.1 9.5 3.9 1.4 1.7 <1 <1 <1 <1 <Maximum value 9.6 39 64 51 120 120 31 7.1 14 31 27 34 4Mean value 6.1 15 16 25 41 25 11 4.3 7.0 7.5 6.1 10 1Median value 5.4 14 13 22 33 17 8.8 3.9 5.8 5.6 5.1 8.7 Number of samples 4 19 32 21 31 107 10 8 15 33 29 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1

 Oxygen, dissolved (mg/L)

Minimum value 4.5 6.0 5.0 5.1 5.6 4.5 4.4 5.3 6.2 4.4 3.0 2.0 Maximum value 15.5 18.4 15.7 20.5 15.9 20.5 17.6 13.0 9.3 17.6 14.4 12.4 1Mean value 10.4 11.2 9.5 9.4 10.0 10.0 11.7 8.4 8.6 9.7 8.8 8.0 Median value 10.8 11.3 9.3 9.0 10.2 10.0 13.4 8.3 15.4 8.7 8.6 8.1 Number of samples 4 19 32 21 32 108 11 10 19 40 30 16 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 

 pH (standard units)

Minimum value 7.20 7.54 7.09 7.19 7.12 7.09 6.90 6.54 6.94 6.54 6.58 7.07 Maximum value 8.17 8.70 8.52 8.50 8.30 8.70 8.51 7.90 8.60 8.60 8.13 8.47 Mean value 7.82 8.08 7.83 7.74 7.78 7.84 7.93 7.44 7.69 7.69 7.55 7.81 Median value 7.95 8.02 7.84 7.80 7.75 7.85 7.99 7.50 7.62 7.67 7.62 7.80 Number of samples 4 19 32 21 32 108 11 10 19 40 30 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 
 Specific conductance (μμS/cm) Minimum value 460 555 510 564 518 460 623 896 819 623 469 297 25

Maximum value 584 1,220 2,000 1,730 1,680 2,000 4,810 1,870 2,440 4,810 6,850 4,290 2,82Mean value 537 792 895 905 894 865 1,490 1,129 1,070 1,200 1,102 646 64Median value 552 767 865 865 829 811 837 1,094 985 997 747 860 86Number of samples 4 19 32 21 32 108 11 10 19 40 30 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1

 Water temperature (×C) Minimum value 5.4 2.3 1.8 1.4 0.6 0.6 1.8 15.3 6.6 1.8 1.3 1.5 

Maximum value 24.8 30.3 29.4 27.0 29.5 30.3 27.9 26.6 33.4 33.4 30.4 29.9 3Mean value 12.1 15.1 15.6 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.4 21.3 19.6 18.6 16.3 17.3 1Median value 9.2 13.1 14.6 13.7 15.0 14.2 12.2 21.8 22.5 21.8 14.3 17.7 1Number of samples 4 19 32 21 32 108 11 10 19 40 29 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 

Chloride, dissolved (mg/L) Minimum value 74 33 61 136 49 33 173 146 92 92 41 105 6

Maximum value 74 144 196 136 219 219 173 146 203 203 276 105 37Mean value 74 75 104 136 110 99 173 146 141 145 161 105 16Median value -- 66 97 -- 89 86 -- -- 134 146 139 -- 10Number of samples 1 6 6 1 7 20 1168 8 1 LRL (or LRL range) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 

 Ammonia plus organic nitrogen, total, as N (mg/L) Minimum value 0.55 0.52 0.55 0.57 0.60 0.52 0.29 1.30 0.93 0.29 0.28 0.46 

Maximum value 0.55 3.05 3.22 2.26 2.55 3.22 0.74 4.73 5.33 5.33 2.57 2.87 2Mean value 0.55 0.85 1.19 0.97 1.19 1.09 0.53 2.31 2.53 1.99 0.74 1.24 Median value -- 0.67 0.95 0.89 1.09 0.92 0.53 1.74 2.06 1.69 0.57 0.91 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Ammonia, dissolved as N (mg/L)

Minimum value <0.04 0.01 0.01 <0.02 <0.02 0.01 <0.02 0.10 <0.02 <0.02 0.01 <0.02 Maximum value <0.04 1.93 1.53 0.72 0.91 1.93 0.06 3.50 3.42 3.50 0.40 0.71 2Mean value <0.04 0.15 0.24 0.15 0.27 0.22 0.03 0.92 1.14 0.82 0.08 0.21 Median value -- 0.03 0.06 0.13 0.19 0.10 0.02 0.26 0.76 0.33 0.04 0.17 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.04 (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.0

 Organic nitrogen, total, as N (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.51 0.48 0.49 0.43 0.52 0.43 0.27 1.20 0.91 0.27 0.25 0.38 Maximum value 0.51 1.12 1.96 1.54 1.96 1.96 0.72 1.70 1.91 1.91 2.24 2.69 Mean value 0.51 0.71 0.95 0.81 0.93 0.87 0.50 1.39 1.39 1.18 0.67 1.04 Median value -- 0.63 0.88 0.82 0.90 0.83 0.49 1.34 1.33 1.23 0.56 0.82 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

 Nitrite plus nitrate, dissolved, as N (mg/L)

Minimum value 1.70 1.70 1.65 1.44 1.34 1.34 0.05 11.1 5.17 0.05 0.03 <0.05 Maximum value 1.70 14.5 11.7 7.61 10.8 14.5 1.76 18.3 12.8 18.3 3.37 3.76 Mean value 1.70 6.25 5.46 3.96 4.19 4.88 0.51 13.6 8.81 7.90 0.64 0.96 Median value -- 5.70 4.90 3.92 3.91 4.28 0.22 12.9 8.67 8.67 0.11 0.29 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

 Nitrite, dissolved, as N (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.173 0.018 0.017 0.036 0.028 0.017 0.005 0.062 0.040 0.005 0.006 <0.008 <Maximum value 0.173 0.279 0.558 0.163 0.305 0.558 0.032 0.149 0.728 0.728 0.320 0.338 Mean value 0.173 0.068 0.147 0.085 0.107 0.110 0.013 0.278 0.274 0.212 0.045 0.068 Median value -- 0.042 0.097 0.060 0.093 0.082 0.012 0.240 0.234 0.185 0.013 0.057 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.008 (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.0

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Nitrate, dissolved, as N (mg/L) Minimum value 1.53 1.53 1.61 1.40 1.30 1.30 0.04 10.8 5.02 0.04 0.03 0.30 

Maximum value 1.53 14.5 11.3 7.55 10.6 14.5 1.74 18.2 12.2 18.2 3.29 3.65 Mean value 1.53 6.18 5.32 3.88 4.08 4.77 0.50 13.3 8.53 7.75 0.59 0.89 Median value -- 5.61 4.74 3.80 3.84 4.21 0.21 12.6 8.44 8.44 0.10 0.25 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

 Nitrogen, total (mg/L) Minimum value 2.25 2.25 2.26 2.10 2.15 2.10 0.48 14.1 6.46 0.48 0.33 0.54 

Maximum value 2.25 15.5 14.8 8.75 12.8 15.5 2.40 19.7 18.1 19.7 5.86 6.64 2Mean value 2.25 7.10 6.66 4.93 5.39 5.97 1.04 15.9 11.3 9.96 1.38 2.20 Median value -- 6.34 5.98 4.81 5.18 5.25 0.80 15.2 11.4 11.4 0.93 1.56 Number of samples 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

 Nitrate, percent of total N Minimum value 68.0 67.8 62.6 63.9 51.1 51.1 8.8 69.4 64.6 8.8 4.4 3.3 

Maximum value 68.0 93.5 87.3 87.6 86.5 93.5 72.4 92.2 88.0 92.2 74.6 59.3 6Mean value 68.0 84.7 79.2 76.5 73.7 77.8 36.9 83.6 75.9 66.5 29.2 27.7 2Median value -- 86.9 81.9 77.8 76.7 78.4 31.5 86.8 76.7 68.3 16.6 19.0 Number of samples 2 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2

 Organic nitrogen, percent of total N Minimum value 22.5 5.9 9.7 11.1 10.0 5.8 25.0 6.1 9.7 6.1 21.3 26.1 1

Maximum value 22.5 23.6 29.9 28.9 35.0 35.0 85.8 11.1 17.9 85.6 88.0 92.4 9Mean value 22.5 12.6 15.6 18.1 19.2 16.8 58.0 8.9 12.6 22.7 61.8 58.5 6Median value -- 11.3 14.6 17.0 18.9 14.9 61.7 9.4 11.7 11.7 73.5 53.0 7Number of samples 2 16 30 17 30 92 8 8 17 33 31 17 2

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Orthophosphate, dissolved, as P (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.28 0.11 0.38 0.37 0.23 0.11 0.01 2.98 1.03 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <Maximum value 0.28 2.41 2.73 1.28 2.28 2.73 0.11 4.09 3.87 4.09 0.10 0.04 Mean value 0.28 0.89 1.42 0.76 0.92 1.04 0.04 3.36 2.37 2.05 0.04 0.51 Median value -- 0.86 1.50 0.83 0.78 0.84 0.03 3.25 2.42 2.42 0.04 0.07 Number of samples 1 16 18 15 18 58 8 8 17 33 19 5 1LRL (or LRL range) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.0

Phosphorus, dissolved (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.30 0.13 0.16 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.03 3.10 1.11 0.03 0.02 0.03 <Maximum value 0.30 2.33 2.95 1.93 2.51 2.95 0.06 4.32 3.69 4.32 0.29 0.40 Mean value 0.30 0.93 1.31 0.80 0.81 0.98 0.04 3.61 2.51 2.18 0.08 0.13 Median value -- 0.85 1.13 0.85 0.62 0.84 0.04 3.61 2.47 2.47 0.05 0.08 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

 Phosphorus, total (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.30 0.17 0.26 0.23 0.16 0.16 0.03 3.02 1.13 0.03 0.03 0.06 Maximum value 0.30 2.46 3.89 2.14 2.46 3.89 0.09 4.32 4.09 4.32 0.41 0.51 Mean value 0.30 0.97 1.41 0.91 0.93 1.08 0.06 3.52 2.57 2.19 0.11 0.18 Median value -- 0.90 1.14 0.90 0.75 0.88 0.05 3.47 2.58 2.58 0.08 0.12 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2LRL (or LRL range) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Dissolved phosphorous, percent of total P

Minimum value 99.3 74.3 57.5 22.0 26.6 22.0 39.4 98.5 90.2 39.4 27.7 8.3 Maximum value 99.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 10Mean value 99.3 93.3 90.7 82.7 82.2 87.1 76.4 99.8 97.1 92.6 67.5 58.3 5Median value -- 95.8 93.8 87.5 84.9 91.2 77.4 100.0 96.9 98.5 70.0 65.6 5Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 2

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Dissolved organic carbon (mg/L) Minimum value 4.20 4.04 5.14 5.20 4.93 4.04 3.20 7.20 5.39 3.20 3.31 4.09 

Maximum value 4.20 7.37 13.0 5.90 8.48 13.0 7.70 8.30 11.1 11.1 7.91 11.4 1Mean value 4.20 5.59 6.90 5.55 6.17 6.15 5.09 7.82 8.01 7.34 5.12 7.72 Median value -- 5.63 6.26 -- 5.89 5.89 4.37 7.80 8.05 7.70 4.90 -- Number of samples 1 12 13 2 13 41 5 5 13 23 15 2 1LRL (or LRL range) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 

 Total organic carbon (mg/L) Minimum value 4.0 4.4 5.8 6.6 5.7 4.0 4.1 8.0 6.5 4.1 3.8 4.0 

Maximum value 4.0 11.1 12.2 7.6 10.1 12.2 9.3 10.2 14.1 14.1 11.4 15.4 1Mean value 4.0 6.5 8.5 7.4 7.9 7.6 7.0 9.3 9.9 9.1 6.1 7.8 Median value -- 6.0 8.5 7.5 7.7 7.6 7.9 9.6 9.9 9.5 5.5 6.5 Number of samples 1 14 17 5 16 53 7 8 16 31 18 5 1LRL (or LRL range) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 

 Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/L) Minimum value -- <2 3.6 4.9 -- <2 -- -- 3.6 3.6 12 -- 

Maximum value -- <2 4.7 6.8 -- 6.8 -- -- 5.6 5.6 240 -- Mean value -- <2 4.2 5.7 -- 4.2 -- -- 4.6 4.6 126 -- Median value -- -- -- 5.5 -- 4.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 2 3 -- 7 -- -- 2 2 2 -- LRL (or LRL range) -- 2 2 2 -- 2 -- -- 2 2 2 -- 

 Chemical oxygen demand (mg/L) Minimum value -- <10 <10 -- <10 <10 -- -- 17 17 <10 48 <1

Maximum value -- 30 42 -- 35 42 -- -- 51 51 30 48 4Mean value -- 19 25 -- 20 21 -- -- 31 31 19 48 3Median value -- 18 26 -- 19 21 -- -- 33 33 18 -- 3Number of samples -- 8 9 -- 10 27 -- -- 8 8 10 1 LRL (or LRL range) -- 10 10 -- 10 10 -- -- 10 10 10 10 1

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Escherichia coli (col/100 mL)

Minimum value 7 <1 <1 150 <1 <1 42 95 <1 <1 <1 <1 Maximum value 7 7,600 2,750 4,600 10,500 10,500 860 1,100 4,600 4,600 11,300 12,500 7,3Mean value 7 690 655 1,380 1,300 1,000 255 425 620 510 1,330 2,830 8Median value -- 80 295 915 480 380 55 250 115 115 310 500 2Number of samples 1 13 30 17 30 91 4 4 13 21 29 17 LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1

Fecal coliform (col/100 mL)

Minimum value -- 37 69 -- 30 30 -- -- 25 25 <10 645 Maximum value -- 230 1,770 -- 2,300 2,300 -- -- 1,100 1,100 600 645 1,7Mean value -- 123 574 -- 437 390 -- -- 274 274 231 645 4Median value -- 122 320 -- 80 139 -- -- 174 174 182 -- 2Number of samples -- 7 8 -- 8 23 -- -- 8 8 8 1 LRL (or LRL range) -- 10 10 -- 10 10 -- -- 10 10 10 10 

 Suspended sediment (mg/L)

Minimum value 29 7 13 61 27 7 5322 8 24 Maximum value 29 79 70 105 124 124 76 62 66 76 635 74 Mean value 29 49 50 79 72 60 47 49 45 46 74 39 Median value -- 50 59 77 72 61 53 55 52 54 44 34 Number of samples 1 15 19 7 19 61 7 7 16 30 19 5 LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1

 Nitrogen, instantaneous mass (mg/s)

Minimum value 445 366 2,910 4,640 3,410 366 7 674 3,540 7 4 66 Maximum value 445 2,830 23,360 22,850 25,450 25,450 86 6,510 10,750 10,750 4,820 4,250 1,7Mean value 445 1,385 8,475 9,230 8,620 7,370 36 3,665 7,250 4,630 334 780 2Median value -- 1,235 7,840 7,450 6,860 6,230 23 3,650 6,880 5,990 21 397 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Nitrate, instantaneous mass (mg/s) Minimum value 303 249 2,490 3,285 2,890 249 1.02 616 3,008 1.02 0.268 5.78 

Maximum value 303 2,530 15,020 14,600 15,400 15,400 52.2 5,160 8,760 8,760 2,415 2,330 1,0Mean value 303 1.11 6,540 6,860 6,090 5,475 17.9 3,060 5,475 3,565 176 331 1Median value -- 0.905 5,570 5,470 5,400 4,950 5.22 3,020 5,415 4,485 2.72 40.6 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 

 Organic nitrogen, instantaneous mass (mg/s) Minimum value 100 48.4 381 588 481 48.4 5.15 47.7 499 5.15 2.92 32.9 

Maximum value 100 634 6,930 6,610 7,400 7,400 41.8 723 1,500 1,500 2,010 1,720 5Mean value 100 181 1,450 1,780 1,800 1,390 16.8 341 910 555 131 375 1Median value -- 106 1,125 1,360 1,200 1,075 15.0 256 770 656 7.64 203 Number of samples 1 20 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 

 Mass phosphorus, dissolved (mg/s) Minimum value 58.9 48.4 767 202 407 48.4 0.555 140 718 0.555 0.208 1.42 

Maximum value 58.9 423 2,464 2,000 2,590 2,590 2.14 1,560 2,390 2,390 261 250 Mean value 58.9 164 1,343 1,220 1,064 1,018 1.28 841 1,575 1,015 18.0 46.4 Median value -- 146 1,260 1,290 823 972 1.24 810 1,520 1,335 0.850 17.8 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 

 Mass phosphorus, total (mg/s) Minimum value 59.3 48.7 413 823 480 48.7 0.555 136 701 0.555 0.260 3.36 

Maximum value 59.3 434 3,055 2,520 3,020 3,055 3.21 1,490 2,430 2,430 366 320 1Mean value 59.3 177 1,505 1,480 1,335 1,205 1.77 820 1,615 1,065 24.2 61.4 Median value -- 166 1,350 1,380 1,060 1,105 1.66 798 1,505 1,375 1.25 35.2 Number of samples 1 16 30 17 30 94 8 8 17 33 31 17 

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Fecal coliform, instantaneous colonies (x1000)

Minimum value -- 910 9,720 -- 2,650 910 -- -- 1,645 1,645 20 9,100 Maximum value -- 21,950 192,500 -- 303,500 303,500 -- -- 113,700 113,700 1,480 9,100 Mean value -- 4,930 63,680 -- 62,000 45,200 -- -- 24,100 24,100 319 9100 Median value -- 1,650 44,000 -- 8,910 9,720 -- -- 11,160 11,160 140 -- Number of samples -- 7 8 -- 8 23 -- -- 8 8 8 1 

Escherichia coli, instantaneous colonies (x1000) 

Minimum value 140 8 69 24,890 96 8 98 4,035 92 92 2 5Maximum value 140 434,800 2,447,000 4,221,000 122,700 4,221,000 5,210 43,600 272,300 272,300 198,400 619,500 5Mean value 140 37,200 181,950 580,100 223,200 247,300 1,435 16,100 41,450 29,000 17,720 82,500 Median value -- 1,630 41,990 103,620 91,970 47,870 213 8,380 9,345 7,650 563 14,080 Number of samples 1 13 30 17 30 91 4 4 13 21 29 17 

 Chloride, instantaneous mass (g/s)

Minimum value 14.7 5.84 58.6 486 55 5.84 6.46 57.9 63.4 6.46 0.285 -- Maximum value 14.7 54.9 212 486 270 486 6.46 57.9 103 6.46 5.48 -- Mean value 14.7 21.4 132 486 148 115 6.46 57.9 98.6 79.2 2.54 -- Median value -- 13.3 127 -- 123 81.2 -- -- 150 59.2 1.78 -- Number of samples 1 6 6 1 6 20 1146 8 -- 

 Biochemical oxygen demand, instantaneous mass (g/s)

Minimum value -- <1 3.07 12.9 -- <1 -- -- 1.87 1.87 0.187 -- Maximum value -- <1 3.86 46.1 -- 46.1 -- -- 3.69 3.69 1.05 -- Mean value -- <1 3.46 30.0 -- 13.9 -- -- 2.78 2.78 1.90 -- Median value -- -- -- 30.8 -- 3.86 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 2 3 -- 7 -- -- 2 2 2 -- 

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Chemical oxygen demand, instantaneous mass (g/s) Minimum value -- 1.25 11.7 -- 12.4 1.3 -- -- 13.6 13.6 0.102 6.84 

Maximum value -- 12.5 39.8 -- 42.0 42.0 -- -- 30.3 30.3 0.674 6.84 Mean value -- 5.10 24.9 -- 21.5 17.8 -- -- 21.5 21.5 0.273 6.84 Median value -- 2.82 24.6 -- 22.2 14.9 -- -- 20.1 20.1 0.234 -- Number of samples -- 8 9 -- 10 27 -- -- 8 8 10 1 

 Total organic carbon, instantaneous mass (g/s) Minimum value 0.793 0.367 4.00 5.00 5.10 0.367 0.096 0.317 4.00 0.096 0.043 0.889 

Maximum value 0.793 5.47 24.0 15.0 18.2 24 0.318 3.82 8.00 8.00 0.256 2.18 Mean value 0.793 1.76 9.94 9.20 9.50 7.40 0.208 2.15 6.38 3.89 0.114 1.29 Median value -- 0.810 9.00 10.0 8.24 6.58 0.190 1.98 6.00 4.00 0.084 1.02 Number of samples 1 14 17 5 16 53 7 8 16 31 18 5 1

 Dissolved organic carbon, instantaneous mass (g/s) Minimum value 0.833 0.488 4.38 7.07 3.90 0.488 0.075 0.329 2.95 0.075 0.029 0.626 

Maximum value 0.833 5.05 15.4 9.3 12.5 15.4 0.265 3.31 7.51 7.51 0.227 1.61 Mean value 0.833 1.70 8.51 8.18 7.34 5.94 0.178 2.38 5.22 3.51 0.088 1.12 Median value -- 0.918 8.84 -- 6.85 5.26 0.157 2.85 5.05 3.56 0.067 -- Number of samples 12 13 2 13 41 5 5 13 23 15 2 1

 Suspended sediment mass (g/s) Minimum value 5.75 2.22 18.7 53.0 36.6 2.22 0.303 1.19 1.22 0.303 0.168 5.06 

Maximum value 5.75 52.5 132 209 238 238 2.84 25.5 51.5 51.5 5.04 11.3 Mean value 5.75 14.1 55.3 99.4 88.7 59.8 1.36 11.1 30.2 19.0 1.06 6.85 Median value -- 5.76 42.0 85.2 72.6 46.9 1.16 6.48 31.7 18.9 0.942 5.74 Number of samples 1 15 19 7 19 61 7 7 16 30 19 5 1

Table 6. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 199

September 2004.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 

Celsius; --, no data; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data from site 13 include

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Bru

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.04 0.002 0.010 0.020 0.002 <0.04 0.066 0.020 0.020 0.006 0.011 Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.011 0.015 0.038 0.038 <0.5 0.150 0.374 0.374 0.027 0.156 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.006 0.013 0.027 0.020 -- 0.105 0.098 0.102 0.015 0.035 Median value of detection -- -- 0.006 0.013 0.028 0.020 -- 0.102 0.031 0.093 0.013 0.017 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 0 3 3 9 15 0 6 5 11 3 9 Percent Detection 0 0 10 17 32 17 0 67 24 30 10 50 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0.03-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.5 0.030 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0

1-Methylnaphthalene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.023 0.023 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.052 <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.023 0.023 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.052 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.023 0.023 -- -- -- -- 0.052 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 2 2 00 0 0 10Percent Detection 0 0 0 0 17 5 00 0 0 70LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

2,6-Di-tert-benzoquinone

Minimum value -- <0.5 0.042 0.062 <0.07 0.042 <0.5 <0.5 <0.07 0.331 0.064 <0.07 Max value -- <0.5 0.140 0.140 0.130 0.140 <0.5 <0.5 0.331 0.331 0.170 0.200 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.091 0.101 0.105 0.099 -- -- 0.331 0.331 0.117 0.127 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.105 -- -- -- -- -- 0.120 Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections 02 2 2 6 00 1 1 2 5 Percent Detection -- 0 12 13 13 12 0 0 13 8 13 29 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.5 (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0
2,6-Di-tert-butylphenol Minimum value -- <0.15 <0.09 <0.09 <0.08 0.130 <0.15 <0.15 <0.08 <0.08 <0.09 <0.09 

Max value -- <0.15 <0.15 0.130 <0.15 0.130 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.130 -- 0.130 -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 0 0 1 0 1 00 0 0 00Percent Detection -- 0 0 6 0 2 00 0 0 00LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.15 (0.09-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) 0.15 0.15 (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.09-0.15) (0.09-0.15) (0

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 0.007 0.020 0.014 0.007 <0.5 <0.5 0.027 0.027 0.011 0.013 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.030 0.032 0.430 0.430 <0.5 <0.5 0.032 0.032 0.011 0.130 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.020 0.025 0.094 0.058 -- -- 0.030 0.030 0.011 0.062 Median value of detection -- -- 0.023 0.024 0.029 0.025 -- -- -- -- -- 0.053 Number of samples 1 11 25 13 23 73 5 6 15 26 24 13 Number of detections 0 0 3 3 6 12 00 2 2 1 4 Percent Detection 0 0 12 23 26 16 0 0 13 8 4 31 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.09-0.5) (0.09-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0

2-Methylnaphthalene Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.020 0.020 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.059 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.020 0.020 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.059 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.020 0.020 -- -- -- -- 0.059 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 2 2 00 0 0 10Percent Detection 00 0 0 9 5 00 0 0 70LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
3-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (BHA)

Minimum value <5 <0.12 0.035 0.053 0.050 0.035 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 <0.12 0.056 0.068 Max value <5 <5 0.098 0.140 0.098 0.140 <5 <5 <5 <5 0.056 0.240 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.078 0.097 0.077 0.083 -- -- -- -- 0.056 0.129 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.084 0.084 -- -- -- -- -- 0.105 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 00 2 2 3 7 00 0 0 14Percent Detection 0 0 7 11 11 8 00 0 0 3 22 LRL (or LRL range) 5 (0.12-5) (0.1-5) (0.1-5) (0.1-5) (0.1-5) (0.12-5) (0.12-5) (0.12-5) (0.12-5) (0.1-5) (0.1-5) (0

3,4-Dichlorophenyl isocyanate 

Minimum value <0.5 0.160 0.120 0.160 0.085 0.085 0.035 0.055 0.068 0.035 0.069 -- Max value <0.5 2.70 1.700 0.160 1.200 2.70 0.035 0.160 2.400 2.40 0.078 -- Mean value of detection -- 0.620 0.538 0.160 0.381 0.495 0.035 0.108 0.719 0.540 0.047 -- Median value of detection -- 0.210 0.300 -- 0.320 0.300 -- -- 0.285 0.170 -- -- Number of samples 1 8 10 1 9 29 2 2 8 12 10 -- Number of detections 0 7 9 1 8 25 1 2 8 11 4 -- Percent Detection 0 88 90 100 89 86 50 100 100 92 40 -- LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 

3-?-Coprostanol

Minimum value <2 <.6 0.035 0.100 0.078 0.035 1.27 0.510 0.410 0.410 0.180 0.390 Max value <2 <2 3.50 3.35 5.20 5.20 1.27 1.80 8.00 8.00 9.70 31.0 Mean value of detection -- -- 1.190 0.843 1.000 1.04 1.27 1.05 3.88 3.08 1.86 6.68 Median value of detection -- -- 0.970 0.634 0.645 0.855 -- 0.990 4.15 2.45 0.650 3.09 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 0 25 16 19 60 1 7 20 28 11 8 Percent Detection 0 0 83 89 68 67 14 78 95 76 38 44 LRL (or LRL range) 2 (0.6-2) (0.6-2) (0.6-2) (0.6-2) (0.6-2) (0.6-2) 2 2 (0.6-2) (0.6-2) (0.6-0.8) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol) Minimum value <1 <1 0.021 <1 <1 0.021 <1 0.058 0.018 0.018 <1 <1 

Max value <1 <1 0.021 <1 <1 0.021 <1 0.400 0.018 0.400 <1 <1 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.021 -- -- 0.021 -- 0.201 0.018 0.171 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.096 -- 0.079 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 1 0 0 1 05 1 6 00Percent Detection 00 8 0 0 3 0 83 8 25 00LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11

4-Cumylphenol Minimum value <1 <1 <1 <1 0.078 0.078 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.054 <1 

Max value <1 <1 <1 <1 0.078 0.078 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.054 <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.078 0.078 -- -- -- -- 0.054 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 2 2 00 0 0 10Percent Detection 0 0 0 0 17 5 00 0 0 70LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11

4-Nonylphenol Minimum value <5 0.281 0.390 0.350 0.400 0.281 <0.70 0.530 0.520 0.520 0.396 <0.5 

Max value <5 0.348 4.74 2.10 1.63 4.74 0.642 1.44 3.91 1.98 1.40 1.20 Mean value of detection -- 0.315 1.06 1.04 0.945 0.990 0.642 0.940 1.93 1.64 0.809 0.974 Median value of detection -- -- 0.804 0.890 0.790 0.790 -- 0.925 1.75 1.40 0.811 0.963 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 2 22 14 20 58 1 6 18 25 10 10 Percent Detection 0 15 73 78 71 64 14 67 86 68 37 56 LRL (or LRL range) 5 5 (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0.5-5) 0.7 5 5 (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
4-Octylphenol

Minimum value <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.054 <1 Max value <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.054 <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.054 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 10Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 70LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11

4-tert-octylphenol

Minimum value <1 0.031 0.034 <1 0.039 0.039 <1 <1 0.057 0.057 0.075 <1 Max value <1 0.031 0.120 <1 0.120 0.120 <1 <1 0.280 0.280 0.083 <1 Mean value of detection -- 0.060 0.082 -- 0.080 0.080 -- -- 0.165 0.165 0.079 -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.093 -- -- 0.091 -- -- 0.150 0.150 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 02 3 0 2 7 00 5 5 20Percent Detection 0 18 23 0 17 18 0 0 39 21 00LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11

5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole

Minimum value <2 0.102 <0.1 0.178 0.291 <0.1 0.176 0.612 0.220 0.176 <0.1 <0.1 Max value <2 0.370 0.858 0.898 1.10 1.10 0.390 3.62 1.53 3.62 0.470 0.368 Mean value of detection -- 0.195 0.518 0.381 0.492 0.432 0.265 1.23 0.706 0.765 0.326 0.273 Median value of detection -- 0.113 0.472 0.301 0.334 0.359 0.248 0.745 0.509 0.560 0.406 0.340 Number of samples 1 13 18 7 17 56 7 9 19 35 19 6 Number of detections 0 3 7 6 8 24 4 6 13 23 6 3 Percent Detection 0 23 39 86 47 43 57 67 68 66 32 50 LRL (or LRL range) 2 2 (0.1-2) 2 2 (0.1-2) 22 2 2 (0.1-2) (0.1-2) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Acetophenone Minimum value <0.5 0.088 0.070 <0.1 0.032 0.032 <0.22 <0.22 <0.1 <0.1 0.049 0.052 

Max value <0.5 0.150 0.260 0.221 0.300 0.300 <0.5 <0.5 0.183 0.183 0.280 0.340 Mean value of detection -- 0.119 0.158 0.190 0.149 0.156 -- -- 0.162 0.162 0.162 0.163 Median value of detection -- -- 0.150 0.210 0.140 0.150 -- -- 0.160 0.161 0.130 0.150 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 2 5 3 7 17 00 5 5 5 5 Percent Detection 0 15 17 17 25 19 0 0 24 14 17 28 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.22-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.22-0.5) (0.22-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0

Acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene (AHTN) Minimum value <0.5 0.070 0.068 0.081 0.042 0.042 <0.5 0.100 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.049 

Max value <0.5 0.690 0.590 0.230 0.580 0.690 <0.5 1.600 0.820 1.60 0.066 0.049 Mean value of detection -- 0.221 0.231 0.156 0.158 0.200 -- 0.708 0.438 0.524 0.062 0.049 Median value of detection -- 0.155 0.170 -- 0.084 0.140 -- 0.695 0.460 0.460 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 10 13 2 12 37 0 6 13 19 21Percent Detection 0 91 100 100 100 95 0 100 100 79 17 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Anthracene Minimum value <0.5 <0.06 0.020 0.011 0.014 0.011 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 0.130 0.022 0.012 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.024 0.019 0.087 0.087 <0.5 0.130 <0.5 0.130 0.038 0.064 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.022 0.015 0.053 0.043 -- 0.130 -- 0.130 0.030 0.030 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.044 0.027 -- -- -- -- 0.029 0.016 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 0 2 2 11 15 01 0 1 4 5 Percent Detection 0 0 7 11 39 17 0 11 0 3 14 28 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.06-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.06-0.5) (0.06-0.5) 0.5 (0.06-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Anthraquinone

Minimum value <0.5 0.056 0.063 0.110 0.076 0.056 0.210 0.095 0.068 0.068 0.054 <0.5 Max value <0.5 0.056 0.110 0.110 0.140 0.140 0.210 0.200 0.210 0.210 0.260 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.056 0.064 0.110 0.076 0.072 0.210 0.148 0.124 0.139 0.088 -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.640 -- 0.076 0.075 -- -- 0.096 0.110 0.079 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 1 5 1 4 11 12 6 9 9 0 Percent Detection 0 10 38 50 25 28 20 33 46 38 64 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Atrazine

Minimum value 0.045 0.017 0.039 0.038 0.021 0.017 0.010 0.070 0.020 0.010 0.012 -- Max value 0.045 1.20 0.770 0.038 0.660 1.20 0.092 0.620 0.270 0.620 0.250 -- Mean value of detection 0.045 0.223 0.189 0.038 0.157 0.177 0.051 0.345 0.125 0.150 0.095 -- Median value of detection -- 0.057 0.100 -- 0.092 0.087 -- -- 0.100 0.091 0.070 -- Number of samples 1 8 10 1 9 29 2 2 8 12 10 -- Number of detections 1 7 9 1 8 26 2 2 8 12 8 -- Percent Detection 100 86 90 100 89 90 100 100 100 100 80 -- LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 

Benzaldehyde

Minimum value -- -- 2.600 <0.1 <0.1 2.60 -- -- <0.15 <0.15 0.200 <0.1 Max value -- -- 2.600 <0.15 <0.15 2.60 -- -- <0.15 <0.15 0.200 0.380 Mean value of detection -- -- 2.600 -- -- 2.60 -- -- -- -- 0.200 0.360 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- -- 13 11 11 35 -- -- 2 2 10 12 Number of detections -- -- 1 0 0 1 -- -- 0 0 12Percent Detection -- -- 8 0 0 3 -- -- 0 0 10 17 LRL (or LRL range) -- -- 0.10 (0.1-0.15) (0.1-0.15) (0.1-0.15) -- -- 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Benzo[a]pyrene Minimum value <0.5 <0.07 0.038 0.025 0.018 0.018 <0.07 0.055 0.030 0.030 0.017 0.017 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.054 0.074 0.650 0.650 <0.5 0.056 0.030 0.056 0.078 0.047 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.046 0.042 0.109 0.086 -- 0.056 0.030 0.047 0.066 0.051 Median value of detection -- -- -- 0.035 0.043 0.040 -- -- -- 0.055 0.059 0.024 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 0 2 4 12 18 02 1 3 9 5 Percent Detection 0 0 7 22 41 20 0 22 5 8 31 28 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.07-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) 0.5 (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0

Benzophenone Minimum value <0.5 0.046 0.057 0.057 0.050 0.046 <0.5 0.080 0.075 0.075 0.049 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 0.260 0.310 0.057 0.370 0.370 <0.5 0.200 0.390 0.390 0.120 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.094 0.151 0.057 0.138 0.127 -- 0.148 0.181 0.172 0.085 -- Median value of detection -- 0.059 0.100 -- 0.074 0.082 -- 0.155 0.160 0.160 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 7 9 1 7 24 0 4 11 15 20Percent Detection 0 64 69 50 58 62 0 67 85 63 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate Minimum value -- <2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 2.60 -- -- <0.15 <0.15 0.200 <0.1 

Max value -- <2 2.60 <0.1 <0.15 2.60 -- -- <0.15 <0.15 0.200 0.380 Mean value of detection -- -- 2.60 -- -- 2.60 -- -- -- -- 0.200 0.360 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 12 3 14 31 -- -- 2 2 15 4 Number of detections -- 0 1 0 0 1 -- -- 0 0 12Percent Detection -- 0 8 0 0 3 -- -- 0 0 7 50 LRL (or LRL range) -- 2 0.10 0.10 (0.1-0.15) (0.1-0.15) -- -- 0.15 0.15 (0.1-0.15) 0.10 (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 1.40 Max value <0.5 3.60 3.83 <2.5 <2.5 3.83 18.0 <2.5 4.12 18.0 80.0 10.2 Mean value of detection -- 2.50 2.62 -- -- 2.56 18.0 -- 2.32 6.24 26.5 5.43 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 2.50 -- -- 2.61 3.37 16.0 4.70 Number of samples 1 8 24 17 23 73 4 5 14 23 23 17 Number of detections 02 2 0 0 4 10 3 4 5 3 Percent Detection 0 25 8 0 0 5 25 0 21 17 22 18 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (0.5-2.5) (1.5-2.5) (0

Bisphenol A

Minimum value <1 0.096 0.067 0.049 0.069 0.049 0.092 0.060 0.093 0.060 0.026 0.065 Max value <1 0.170 0.240 0.640 0.341 0.640 0.126 0.690 0.670 0.690 1.90 0.430 Mean value of detection -- 0.135 0.114 0.211 0.166 0.171 0.104 0.269 0.218 0.221 0.365 0.186 Median value of detection -- 0.140 0.087 0.160 0.160 0.140 0.094 0.160 0.146 0.142 0.110 0.165 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 3 7 16 23 49 3 8 14 25 14 10 Percent Detection 0 25 23 89 82 54 43 89 67 68 48 56 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) 1 (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0.9-1) (0

Bromacil

Minimum value <0.5 0.036 0.049 0.036 0.048 0.036 0.200 <0.5 0.200 0.200 0.038 0.058 Max value <0.5 0.058 0.210 0.036 0.210 0.210 0.200 <0.5 0.200 0.200 0.890 0.058 Mean value of detection -- 0.047 0.121 0.036 0.106 0.098 0.200 -- 0.200 0.200 0.373 0.058 Median value of detection -- -- 0.092 -- 0.061 0.058 -- -- -- -- 0.380 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 2 5 1 6 14 10 1 2 6 1 Percent Detection 0 20 38 50 50 36 20 0 8 8 43 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) Minimum value -- <0.11 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.11 <0.11 <0.08 0.116 <0.08 <0.08 

Max value -- <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 <0.11 0.116 <0.11 0.116 <0.11 <0.11 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.116 -- 0.116 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 1 00Percent Detection -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 8 00LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.11 (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) 0.11 0.11 (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0

Caffeine Minimum value <0.5 0.048 0.084 0.120 0.160 0.048 0.048 0.044 0.073 0.044 0.047 <0.08 

Max value <0.5 0.140 2.70 1.23 1.50 2.70 0.140 0.107 3.22 3.22 4.80 5.00 Mean value of detection -- 0.084 0.664 0.483 0.604 0.566 0.085 0.076 1.60 1.15 0.557 1.32 Median value of detection -- 0.071 0.568 0.420 0.502 0.500 0.085 0.076 1.60 0.986 0.130 0.868 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 5 29 18 28 80 6 3 21 30 27 17 Percent Detection 0 38 97 100 100 89 86 33 100 81 93 94 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) 0.08 (0.08-0.5) (0

Camphor Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.040 0.040 0.014 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.040 0.040 0.014 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.040 0.040 0.014 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 00 1 1 20Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 00 8 4 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Carbaryl

Minimum value <1 0.270 0.008 <0.06 0.053 0.008 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 0.019 0.025 Max value <1 0.270 0.160 <1 0.220 0.220 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.310 0.570 Mean value of detection -- 0.270 0.077 -- 0.100 0.113 -- -- -- -- 0.165 0.210 Median value of detection -- -- 0.062 -- 0.064 0.065 -- -- -- -- -- 0.034 Number of samples 1 12 30 18 28 89 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 01 3 0 4 8 00 0 0 2 3 Percent Detection 0 8 10 0 14 9 00 0 0 7 17 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0

Carbazole

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 0.014 <0.5 0.021 0.014 0.140 <0.5 <0.5 0.140 0.100 <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.014 <0.5 0.500 0.500 0.140 <0.5 <0.5 0.140 0.300 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.014 -- 0.070 0.052 0.140 -- -- 0.140 0.122 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.070 0.021 -- -- -- -- 0.105 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 1 0 3 4 10 0 1 60Percent Detection 0 0 8 0 25 10 20 0 0 4 43 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

cis-Chlordane

Minimum value -- <0.04 <0.04 0.006 0.003 0.008 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.008 0.005 Max value -- <0.04 <0.04 0.006 0.020 0.046 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.046 0.130 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.006 0.012 0.010 -- -- -- -- 0.023 0.050 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.006 -- -- -- -- 0.016 0.028 Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 0 0 1 2 3 00 0 0 3 6 Percent Detection -- 0.0 0.0 0.06 0.13 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.20 0.35 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Chlorpyrifos Minimum value <0.5 <0.02 0.017 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.017 0.016 0.007 0.020 0.008 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.056 0.049 0.006 0.056 0.007 0.025 0.048 0.048 0.065 0.110 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.037 0.028 0.006 0.027 0.007 0.021 0.032 0.023 0.043 0.038 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.017 -- 0.022 -- 0.020 -- 0.029 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 00 2 2 1 5 13 2 6 2 6 Percent Detection 0 0 7 11 4 6 14 33 10 16 7 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) 0.5 (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) (0

Cholesterol Minimum value <2 0.590 0.160 0.210 0.100 0.100 0.640 0.580 0.780 0.580 0.157 0.505 

Max value <2 1.90 6.40 5.05 9.50 9.50 2.60 3.80 16.0 16.0 8.30 180 Mean value of detection -- 1.06 2.36 1.80 1.90 2.01 1.59 1.76 6.20 4.57 1.88 16.55 Median value of detection -- 0.875 1.91 1.30 1.25 1.45 1.56 1.70 6.22 3.60 1.26 3.20 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 4 25 14 19 62 4 8 21 33 22 13 Percent Detection 0 31 83 78 68 69 57 89 100 89 76 72 LRL (or LRL range) 2 (1.5-2) (1.5-2) (1.5-2) (1-2) (1-2) (1.5-2) 1.5 (1.5-2) (1.5-2) (1-2) (1-1.5) (

Codeine Minimum value -- <0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.20 0.302 0.092 0.092 0.240 <0.1 

Max value -- <0.2 0.398 0.440 0.280 0.440 0.222 0.421 0.462 0.462 0.240 0.571 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.273 0.283 0.201 0.259 0.222 0.372 0.343 0.340 0.240 0.336 Median value of detection -- -- 0.248 0.285 0.162 0.240 -- 0.394 0.420 0.394 -- -- Number of samples -- 2 14 14 15 45 2 3 8 13 13 14 Number of detections -- 0 6 4 3 13 1 3 7 11 12Percent Detection -- 0 43 29 20 29 50 100 88 85 8 14 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.2 (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) 0.2 0.2 0.1 (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Cotinine

Minimum value <1 <0.08 <0.04 0.050 <0.04 <0.04 0.095 0.060 0.090 0.060 <0.04 0.012 Max value <1 0.220 0.810 0.172 0.590 0.810 0.095 0.110 0.370 0.370 0.720 0.273 Mean value of detection -- 0.190 0.189 0.112 0.178 0.173 0.095 0.085 0.153 0.140 0.278 0.123 Median value of detection -- -- 0.120 0.114 0.108 0.120 -- -- 0.131 0.124 0.180 0.084 Number of samples 1 13 18 7 17 56 7 9 19 35 19 6 Number of detections 0 2 10 4 8 24 1 2 12 15 5 3 Percent Detection 0 15 56 57 47 43 14 22 63 43 26 50 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.08-1) (0.04-1) (0.04-1) (0.04-1) (0.04-1) (0.08-1) (0.08-1) 1 (0.08-1) (0.04-1) (0.04-0.08) (0

Diazinon

Minimum value <0.5 0.010 0.004 0.011 0.010 0.004 0.020 0.068 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.029 Max value <0.5 0.140 0.144 0.180 0.172 0.180 0.060 0.580 0.550 0.600 0.391 0.391 Mean value of detection -- 0.071 0.066 0.064 0.074 0.069 0.237 0.260 0.182 0.217 0.098 0.091 Median value of detection -- 0.056 0.054 0.050 0.065 0.053 0.233 0.125 0.101 0.128 0.049 0.052 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 8 22 11 17 58 5 6 10 21 11 12 Percent Detection 0 62 73 61 63 64 71 67 48 57 38 67 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0

Dichlorvos

Minimum value <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.190 <1 0.190 <1 <1 Max value <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 0.200 <1 0.200 <1 <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.195 -- 0.195 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 02 0 2 00Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 8 00LRL (or LRL range) 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Dieldrin Minimum value -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.011 0.011 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.018 0.010 

Max value -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.011 0.011 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.420 0.300 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.011 0.011 -- -- -- -- 0.110 0.119 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.029 0.081 Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 0 0 0 1 1 00 0 0 5 6 Percent Detection -- 0 0 0 6 2 00 0 0 33 35 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 

Diethylphthalate Minimum value 1.30 <0.35 0.350 0.221 0.110 0.110 <0.35 <0.35 0.220 0.220 <0.25 <0.25 

Max value 1.30 1.20 0.350 0.221 0.358 1.30 <0.5 <0.5 0.370 0.370 <0.5 <0.35 Mean value of detection 1.30 1.20 0.350 0.221 0.274 0.521 -- -- 0.295 0.295 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.314 0.344 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 9 14 6 14 44 4 5 13 22 13 5 Number of detections 11 1 1 5 9 00 2 2 00Percent Detection 100 11 7 17 36 20 0 0 15 9 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.35 (0.35-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.35-0.5) (0.35-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.35) (0

d-Limonene Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.034 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.036 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.035 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 20Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Fluoranthene

Minimum value <0.5 0.017 0.027 0.025 0.030 0.017 0.040 <0.03 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.029 Max value <0.5 0.061 0.270 0.270 1.80 1.80 0.043 <0.5 0.138 0.138 0.590 0.550 Mean value of detection -- 0.035 0.074 0.085 0.248 0.138 0.042 -- 0.052 0.051 0.128 0.137 Median value of detection -- 0.036 0.048 0.064 0.100 0.064 -- -- 0.044 0.430 0.079 0.071 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 4 18 14 21 57 2 0 13 15 23 15 Percent Detection 0 31 60 78 75 63 29 0 62 41 79 83 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0

Hexahydrohexamethylcyclopentabenzopyran (HHCB)

Minimum value <0.5 0.034 0.035 <0.5 0.030 0.030 0.068 0.068 0.065 0.065 0.095 <0.5 Max value <0.5 0.110 0.120 <0.5 0.180 0.180 0.068 0.350 0.150 0.350 0.095 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.075 0.069 -- 0.070 0.071 0.068 0.158 0.109 0.123 0.095 -- Median value of detection -- 0.078 0.047 -- 0.047 0.049 -- 0.126 0.100 0.098 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 12 2 12 38 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 4 7 0 5 16 1 6 11 18 10Percent Detection 0 36 55 0 42 42 20 100 85 75 7 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Indole

Minimum value <0.5 0.023 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.023 <0.5 0.020 <0.5 0.020 0.028 <0.5 Max value <0.5 0.023 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.023 <0.5 0.024 <0.5 0.024 0.028 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.023 -- -- -- 0.023 -- 0.022 -- 0.022 0.028 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 0 0 0 1 02 0 2 10Percent Detection 09 0 0 0 3 0 33 0 8 70LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Isoborneol Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.093 0.093 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.093 0.093 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.093 0.093 -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 1 1 00 0 0 00Percent Detection 00 0 0 8 3 00 0 0 00LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Isophorone Minimum value <0.5 0.005 0.012 <0.5 <0.5 0.012 <0.5 <0.5 0.014 0.014 0.018 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 0.005 0.039 <0.5 <0.5 0.039 <0.5 <0.5 0.014 0.014 0.035 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.005 0.026 -- -- 0.016 -- -- 0.014 0.014 0.260 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 2 0 0 3 00 1 1 20Percent Detection 0 9 15 0 0 8 00 8 4 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Isopropylbenzene (cumene) Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00Percent Detection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Isoquinoline

Minimum value <0.5 0.088 0.110 0.057 0.082 0.057 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.140 <0.5 Max value <0.5 0.088 0.110 0.057 0.140 0.140 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.140 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.088 0.110 0.057 0.111 0.095 -- -- -- -- 0.140 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.088 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 1 1 3 6 00 0 0 10Percent Detection 0 9 8 50 25 15 00 0 0 70LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Lindane

Minimum value -- 0.008 <0.05 0.008 0.010 0.008 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Max value -- 0.008 <0.05 0.008 0.010 0.010 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Mean value of detection -- 0.008 -- 0.008 0.010 0.009 -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.008 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 1 0 1 1 3 00 0 0 00Percent Detection -- 50 0 6 6 6 00 0 0 00LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Menthol

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 0.220 <0.5 0.210 0.210 <0.5 <0.5 0.180 0.180 0.160 <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.220 <0.5 0.290 0.290 <0.5 <0.5 0.320 0.320 0.160 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.220 -- 0.250 0.192 -- -- 0.231 0.231 0.160 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.215 -- -- 0.220 0.220 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 2 0 3 5 00 7 7 10Percent Detection 0 0 15 0 25 13 0 0 54 29 7 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Metalaxyl Minimum value <0.5 0.073 <0.5 <0.5 0.049 0.049 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.240 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 0.073 <0.5 <0.5 0.053 0.053 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.240 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.073 -- -- 0.051 0.058 -- -- -- -- 0.240 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.053 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 0 0 2 3 00 0 0 20Percent Detection 0 9 0 0 17 8 00 0 0 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Methylsalicylate Minimum value <0.5 0.052 0.017 <0.5 <0.5 0.017 <0.5 0.037 0.099 0.037 0.042 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 0.052 0.024 <0.5 <0.5 0.052 <0.5 0.100 0.099 0.100 0.091 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.052 0.024 -- -- 0.033 -- 0.079 0.099 0.084 0.091 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.030 -- 0.099 -- 0.099 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 2 0 0 3 03 1 4 20Percent Detection 0 9 15 0 0 8 0 50 8 17 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Metolachlor Minimum value 0.006 0.007 0.010 0.012 0.010 0.006 0.004 0.029 0.023 0.004 0.012 0.055 

Max value 0.006 0.360 0.240 0.028 0.200 0.360 0.045 0.270 0.200 0.270 0.150 0.055 Mean value of detection 0.006 0.066 0.077 0.020 0.053 0.059 0.026 0.152 0.072 0.085 0.046 0.055 Median value of detection -- 0.013 0.044 -- 0.026 0.028 0.027 0.155 0.050 0.042 0.032 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 1 7 12 2 11 33 4 6 12 22 9 1 Percent Detection 100 64 92 100 92 85 80 100 92 92 64 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET)

Minimum value <0.5 0.056 0.100 0.090 0.089 0.056 <.08 0.051 0.083 0.051 0.040 0.034 Max value <0.5 0.240 0.900 0.24 0.360 2.00 0.127 0.430 1.70 1.70 0.320 0.370 Mean value of detection -- 0.147 0.287 0.180 0.198 0.224 0.163 0.188 0.428 0.343 0.146 0.190 Median value of detection -- 0.150 0.190 0.205 0.186 0.192 0.127 0.182 0.290 0.220 0.103 0.176 Number of samples 1 13 18 7 17 56 7 9 19 35 19 6 Number of detections 0 5 17 6 16 44 3 7 19 29 14 5 Percent Detection 0 38 94 86 94 79 43 78 100 83 74 83 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.08 

Naphthalene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.03 0.019 0.018 <0.03 0.018 <0.03 0.026 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.023 Max value <0.5 <0.5 0.035 0.048 2.190 2.19 <0.5 0.038 0.041 0.041 0.840 0.082 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.027 0.031 0.498 0.376 -- 0.033 0.029 0.031 0.202 0.039 Median value of detection -- -- 0.027 0.027 0.200 0.068 -- 0.036 0.028 0.032 0.022 0.035 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 0 3 3 17 23 03 3 6 7 6 Percent Detection 0 0 10 17 61 26 0 33 15 16 24 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0

Nonylphenol monoethoxylate

Minimum value <5 0.969 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <1 0.800 0.400 0.400 <0.08 0.260 Max value <5 1.06 4.74 2.00 2.35 5.00 2.50 4.27 6.34 6.34 1.40 5.40 Mean value of detection -- 1.02 1.43 1.13 0.916 1.17 2.50 2.68 3.07 2.95 0.674 1.42 Median value of detection -- -- 1.48 1.40 0.570 0.985 -- 3.66 2.00 2.50 0.595 0.925 Number of samples 1 10 27 17 25 80 4 5 16 25 25 17 Number of detections 0 2 19 11 17 49 1 5 15 21 12 10 Percent Detection 0 20 73 65 68 61 25 100 94 84 52 59 LRL (or LRL range) 5 (2-5) (0.08-5) (0.08-5) (0.08-5) (0.08-5) (1-5) 5 5 (1-5) (0.08-5) (0.08-1) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Nonylphenol diethoxylate Minimum value <5 1.18 0.057 0.080 0.160 0.057 <1 2.60 1.40 1.10 0.142 0.100 

Max value <5 1.52 7.30 2.40 6.20 7.30 3.37 15.0 16.0 16.0 3.30 4.90 Mean value of detection -- 1.35 2.31 1.19 1.52 1.79 3.37 8.05 6.14 6.62 1.18 1.52 Median value of detection -- -- 1.80 1.34 0.736 1.43 -- 7.81 5.33 5.35 0.722 0.696 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 2 21 10 16 49 1 9 20 30 9 10 Percent Detection 0 15 70 56 57 54 14 100 95 81 33 56 LRL (or LRL range) 5 5 (1-5) (1-5) 1 (1-5) (1-5) 5 5 5 (1-5) 1 (

Octylphenol monoethoxylate Minimum value <1 0.263 0.068 0.032 0.054 0.032 <0.1 0.178 0.078 0.078 0.091 0.035 

Max value <1 0.264 0.490 0.450 1.10 1.10 0.714 0.347 1.36 1.36 0.700 0.650 Mean value of detection -- 0.264 0.309 0.195 0.310 0.280 0.714 0.252 0.452 0.433 0.315 0.282 Median value of detection -- -- 0.320 0.151 0.265 0.263 -- 0.232 0.398 0.357 0.225 0.220 Number of samples 1 13 27 16 27 84 7 9 21 37 27 15 Number of detections 0 2 9 6 11 28 1 3 14 18 10 9 Percent Detection 0 15 35 38 41 33 14 33 67 49 32 60 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 (0.1-1) (0.1-1) (0.1-1) (0.1-1) (0.1-1) 1 1 (0.1-1) (0.1-1) (0.1-1) (0

Octylphenol diethoxylate Minimum value <1 <0.2 0.014 0.010 0.027 0.010 0.149 <0.2 0.072 0.072 0.021 0.035 

Max value <1 <1 0.180 0.051 0.070 1.00 0.149 <1 1.80 1.80 0.200 0.072 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.089 0.035 0.082 0.077 0.149 -- 0.504 0.479 0.091 0.067 Median value of detection -- -- 0.085 0.044 0.064 0.064 -- -- 0.170 0.169 0.074 0.057 Number of samples 1 13 27 16 27 84 7 9 21 37 27 15 Number of detections 0 0 8 3 7 18 1 0 13 14 9 7 Percent Detection 0 0 30 19 26 21 14 0 62 38 33 47 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) 0.20 (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0.2-1) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
para-Cresol

Minimum value <1 <0.06 <0.03 0.024 0.011 0.011 0.031 0.036 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Max value <1 0.330 <1 0.230 0.340 0.340 0.031 0.081 0.140 0.140 0.480 0.980 Mean value of detection -- 0.330 -- 0.127 0.104 0.138 0.031 0.058 0.069 0.061 0.230 0.413 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.029 0.070 -- -- 0.053 0.036 0.078 0.284 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 01 0 2 5 8 12 4 7 5 6 Percent Detection 0 8 0 11 18 9 14 22 20 19 17 33 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.06-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0.06-1) (0.06-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) (0

Pentachlorophenol

Minimum value <2 0.043 0.027 <2 0.017 0.017 <2 0.070 0.019 0.019 0.038 <2 Max value <2 0.043 0.036 <2 0.670 0.670 <2 0.070 0.019 0.070 0.660 <2 Mean value of detection -- 0.043 0.031 -- 0.209 0.121 -- 0.070 0.019 0.045 0.222 -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.029 -- 0.075 0.033 -- -- -- -- 0.096 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 01 3 0 5 9 01 1 2 4 0 Percent Detection 0 9 23 0 42 23 0 17 8 8 29 0 LRL (or LRL range) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 

Phenanthrene

Minimum value <0.5 0.012 0.010 0.022 0.031 0.010 <0.05 <0.5 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.026 Max value <0.5 0.012 0.120 0.110 0.980 0.980 <0.5 <0.5 0.046 0.046 0.240 0.121 Mean value of detection -- 0.012 0.040 0.048 0.149 0.095 -- -- 0.028 0.028 0.085 0.050 Median value of detection -- -- 0.038 0.040 0.053 0.043 -- -- 0.026 0.026 0.050 0.040 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 1 10 5 17 33 00 6 6 16 10 Percent Detection 0 8 34 28 61 37 0 0 29 16 55 56 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) 0.06 (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0.05-0.5) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Phenol Minimum value <0.5 0.224 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.210 0.210 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 

Max value <0.5 0.320 1.10 1.60 0.960 1.60 0.450 0.810 0.345 0.810 2.53 5.92 Mean value of detection -- 0.256 0.542 0.750 0.517 0.513 0.315 0.429 0.260 0.325 0.518 1.014 Median value of detection -- 0.240 0.370 0.351 0.330 0.320 0.285 0.347 0.254 0.260 0.180 0.160 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 4 10 3 10 27 3 4 6 13 7 7 Percent Detection 0 31 30 17 36 30 43 44 29 35 24 39 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.45-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.45-0.5) (0.45-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0

Phthalic anhydride Minimum value -- <0.35 0.150 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.35 0.443 0.526 0.443 <0.15 <0.15 

Max value -- <0.35 0.620 0.924 1.30 1.30 0.802 0.926 1.30 1.30 1.50 1.20 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.521 0.498 0.656 0.565 0.802 0.674 0.894 0.831 0.852 0.705 Median value of detection -- -- 0.550 0.480 0.520 0.520 -- 0.653 1.01 0.864 0.580 0.860 Number of samples -- 2 17 16 16 51 2 3 8 13 15 17 Number of detections -- 0 11 9 12 32 1 3 8 12 7 11 Percent Detection -- 0 65 56 75 63 50 100 100 92 47 65 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.35 0.15 0.15 0.15 (0.150-.35) 0.35 (0.15-0.35) (0.15-0.35) 0.35 (0.15-0.35) (0.15-0.35) (0

Prometon Minimum value <0.5 0.014 0.023 0.003 0.037 0.014 0.016 0.022 0.018 0.016 0.012 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 0.052 0.100 0.003 0.063 0.500 7.80 1.40 1.10 7.80 0.670 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.048 0.044 0.003 0.069 0.054 1.97 0.941 0.406 1.06 0.145 -- Median value of detection -- 0.038 0.026 -- 0.063 0.054 0.036 1.40 0.100 0.069 0.100 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 4 4 1 7 16 4 3 5 12 9 0 Percent Detection 0 36 25 50 58 41 80 50 33 50 58 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Pyrene

Minimum value <0.5 0.003 0.027 0.021 0.019 0.011 0.029 <.03 0.021 0.021 0.019 0.024 Max value <0.5 0.052 0.093 0.160 1.40 1.40 0.033 <0.5 0.097 0.097 0.380 0.340 Mean value of detection -- 0.022 0.055 0.064 0.181 0.103 0.031 -- 0.043 0.041 0.081 0.091 Median value of detection -- 0.011 0.042 0.054 0.081 0.054 -- -- 0.037 0.033 0.054 0.048 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 3 17 14 21 55 2 0 11 13 19 14 Percent Detection 0 23 57 78 75 61 29 0 52 35 66 78 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.50 (0.03-0.5) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0

Sitosterol

Minimum value <2 0.550 0.580 0.740 0.590 0.550 1.40 1.10 1.20 1.10 0.700 0.890 Max value <2 2.00 2.40 2.90 5.80 5.80 2.00 1.60 6.70 6.70 2.40 0.890 Mean value of detection -- 1.36 1.34 1.82 1.84 1.53 1.77 1.40 3.04 2.49 1.07 0.890 Median value of detection -- 1.60 1.09 1.82 1.20 1.30 1.90 1.45 3.40 2.00 0.960 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 5 8 2 7 22 3 4 12 19 9 1 Percent Detection 0 50 62 100 58 56 60 67 92 79 64 100 LRL (or LRL range) 22 2 2 2 2 22 2 2 22

Stigmastanol

Minimum value <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 1.71 <2 0.540 0.540 <2 <2 Max value <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 1.71 <2 3.27 3.27 <2 2.15 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.71 -- 1.66 1.68 -- 2.15 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.18 1.45 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 18 7 17 56 7 9 19 35 19 6 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 10 3 4 01Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 14 0 16 11 0 17 LRL (or LRL range) 22 2 2 2 2 22 2 2 22

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Tetrachloroethylene Minimum value <0.5 <0.03 <0.03 0.017 0.004 0.004 <0.03 0.053 0.030 <0.03 0.017 0.017 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.017 0.028 0.028 <0.5 0.090 0.200 0.200 0.080 0.130 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.017 0.016 0.016 -- 0.072 0.079 0.076 0.039 0.055 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.020 0.019 -- -- 0.053 0.056 0.020 0.033 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 00 0 1 4 5 02 4 6 3 5 Percent Detection 0 0 0 6 14 6 0 22 19 16 10 28 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0

Tribromomethane Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 10 13 2 12 38 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00Percent Detection 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Tributylphosphate Minimum value <0.5 0.037 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.037 <0.5 0.066 0.055 0.055 <0.04 0.051 

Max value <0.5 0.140 0.200 0.420 0.470 0.420 0.650 0.700 0.680 0.700 0.680 1.500 Mean value of detection -- 0.086 0.114 0.156 0.151 0.129 0.650 0.344 0.195 0.255 0.196 0.310 Median value of detection -- 0.086 0.160 0.120 0.100 0.100 -- 0.180 0.100 0.105 0.140 0.145 Number of samples 1 11 25 12 23 72 5 6 15 26 24 13 Number of detections 0 6 20 7 17 50 1 5 14 20 11 10 Percent Detection 0 55 80 58 74 69 20 83 93 77 46 77 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.06-0.5) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Triclosan

Minimum value <1 0.051 0.120 0.049 0.056 0.049 <0.05 0.120 0.086 <0.5 0.029 0.032 Max value <1 0.076 1.10 1.30 0.592 1.30 0.130 0.420 1.03 1.03 0.360 1.00 Mean value of detection -- 0.064 0.348 0.365 0.226 0.298 0.095 0.226 0.629 0.486 0.115 0.220 Median value of detection -- -- 0.270 0.271 0.210 0.225 -- 0.220 0.630 0.470 0.089 0.088 Number of samples 1 13 27 16 27 84 7 9 21 37 27 15 Number of detections 0 2 25 16 25 68 2 8 20 30 13 14 Percent Detection 0 17 93 100 93 81 29 89 95 81 48 93 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 1 -- 1 1 (0.05-1) 1 1 (0.05-1) (0.04-1) 1 

Triethyl citrate

Minimum value <0.5 0.024 0.026 0.110 0.054 0.024 <0.5 0.120 0.062 0.062 0.051 <0.5 Max value <0.5 0.170 0.250 0.110 0.280 0.280 <0.5 0.630 0.530 0.630 0.160 <0.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.098 0.103 0.110 0.126 0.109 -- 0.354 0.194 0.241 0.106 -- Median value of detection -- 0.099 0.091 -- 0.100 0.100 -- 0.200 0.115 0.160 -- -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 6 13 24 14 1 Number of detections 0 4 8 1 5 18 0 5 12 17 20Percent Detection 0 36 62 50 42 46 0 83 92 71 14 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Triphenyl phosphate

Minimum value <0.5 0.055 0.018 0.061 0.030 0.018 <0.1 0.061 0.031 0.031 0.005 0.011 Max value <0.5 0.072 0.890 0.097 0.190 0.890 0.270 0.117 0.290 0.290 0.600 0.160 Mean value of detection -- 0.064 0.145 0.078 0.070 0.101 0.270 0.093 0.106 0.111 0.133 0.079 Median value of detection -- -- 0.070 0.076 0.067 0.070 -- 0.104 0.100 0.104 0.067 0.079 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 2 10 4 9 25 1 5 13 19 8 6 Percent Detection 0 15 30 22 32 28 14 56 62 51 28 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Tris (2-butoxyethyl) phosphate Minimum value <0.5 <0.2 <0.07 <0.07 <0.07 <0.07 0.120 0.157 0.220 0.120 0.022 <0.07 

Max value <0.5 1.90 4.70 2.80 5.20 5.20 1.10 0.565 5.80 5.80 10.0 5.10 Mean value of detection -- 0.612 1.28 0.983 1.11 1.12 0.402 0.293 1.72 1.31 1.34 1.56 Median value of detection -- 0.225 0.753 0.645 0.900 0.705 0.272 0.225 1.50 1.05 0.425 1.47 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 4 28 16 27 75 5 4 21 30 22 17 Percent Detection 0 31 93 89 96 83 71 44 100 81 76 94 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.2-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.2-0.5) (0.2-0.5) (0.2-0.5) (0.2-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0

Tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate Minimum value <0.5 0.065 0.023 0.033 0.034 0.023 0.036 0.066 0.100 0.036 0.036 0.022 

Max value <0.5 0.330 0.365 0.340 0.400 0.400 0.170 0.540 0.566 0.566 0.130 0.760 Mean value of detection -- 0.133 0.165 0.153 0.144 0.152 0.090 0.297 0.247 0.242 0.120 0.150 Median value of detection -- 0.120 0.130 0.150 0.140 0.130 0.078 0.298 0.250 0.235 0.074 0.110 Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 11 29 15 27 82 4 9 21 34 18 17 Percent Detection 0 85 97 83 96 91 57 100 100 92 62 94 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.5 (0.04-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0

Tris (dichlorisopropyl) phosphate Minimum value <0.5 0.051 0.078 0.087 0.052 0.051 0.056 0.160 <0.1 0.056 0.056 0.081 

Max value <0.5 0.400 0.460 0.180 0.530 0.530 0.520 0.410 0.590 0.590 0.300 0.081 Mean value of detection -- 0.150 0.175 0.132 0.158 0.161 0.288 0.253 0.279 0.275 0.098 0.081 Median value of detection -- 0.140 0.160 0.130 0.140 0.140 -- 0.220 0.260 0.260 0.077 -- Number of samples 1 13 30 18 28 90 7 9 21 37 29 18 Number of detections 0 9 15 3 14 41 2 4 15 21 10 1 Percent Detection 0 69 50 17 50 46 29 44 71 57 34 6 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) 0.1 0.1 0.1 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.1 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.1 (0

Table 7. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in base-flow samples collected between August 1998 and September 2004.—Continue[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from whole-water samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from site

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 

1,7-dimethylxanthine

Minimum value 0.022 <0.018 0.005 0.069 0.014 0.005 <0.019 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 Maximum value 0.022 0.151 1.52 0.718 1.28 1.52 <0.019 0.141 2.65 2.65 0.216 1.90 Mean value of detection 0.022 0.053 0.420 0.402 0.382 0.348 -- 0.141 1.05 0.994 0.112 1.08 Median value of detection -- 0.039 0.342 0.393 0.270 0.253 -- -- 0.743 0.706 0.103 0.992 Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 1 6 16 7 17 47 0 1 16 17 6 3 Percent detection 100 46 84 100 100 83 0 13 89 50 33 50 LRL 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 

 Acetaminophen

Minimum value <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 0.041 <0.009 <0.009 0.006 <0.009 0.005 0.005 0.002 <0.009 Maximum value <0.009 0.055 0.960 1.610 1.70 1.70 0.006 <0.009 1.22 1.22 0.325 10.0 Mean value of detection -- 0.055 0.227 0.506 0.284 0.295 0.006 -- 0.630 0.593 0.076 2.08 Median value of detection -- -- 0.181 0.419 0.087 0.170 -- -- 0.639 0.583 0.036 0.035 Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 0 1 16 7 15 39 1 0 16 17 15 5 Percent detection 0 8 84 100 88 68 14 0 89 50 83 83 LRL 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 

 Caffeine

Minimum value 0.030 0.013 <0.014 <0.014 0.008 0.008 0.013 0.001 <0.014 0.001 0.007 <0.014 Maximum value 0.030 0.052 1.39 1.96 1.44 1.96 0.213 0.027 3.36 3.36 0.662 6.00 Mean value of detection 0.030 0.027 0.604 0.821 0.577 0.505 0.087 0.014 1.62 1.12 0.210 2.36 Median value of detection -- 0.024 0.546 0.654 0.358 0.340 0.085 -- 1.58 0.938 0.145 1.86 Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 1 9 18 6 15 49 6 2 17 25 15 5 Percent detection 100 69 95 86 89 86 86 25 94 75 83 83 LRL 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 
 Carbamazepine Minimum value 0.004 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 0.007 0.004 <0.011 0.043 0.026 <0.011 0.002 <0.011 

Maximum value 0.004 0.127 0.077 0.019 0.058 0.127 <0.011 0.076 0.165 0.17 0.01 <0.011 Mean value of detection 0.004 0.053 0.043 0.019 0.030 0.040 -- 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.006 -- Median value of detection -- 0.039 0.032 -- 0.030 0.032 -- 0.062 0.050 0.055 0.008 -- Number of samples 1 11 13 2 12 39 5 5 12 22 14 1 Number of detections 1 9 12 1 10 33 0 5 12 17 30Percent detection 100 82 92 50 83 85 0 100 100 76 21 0 LRL 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 

Cimetidine Minimum value <0.007 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.004 0.002 <0.007 <0.007 0.006 0.006 0.002 <0.007 

Maximum value <0.007 0.027 0.017 0.006 0.010 0.027 <0.007 0.165 0.037 0.165 0.002 <0.007 Mean value of detection -- 0.010 0.010 0.006 0.007 0.009 -- 0.083 0.015 0.046 0.002 -- Median value of detection -- 0.009 0.009 -- 0.006 0.007 -- 0.085 0.010 0.024 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 0 7 5 1 4 17 0 5 6 11 10Percent detection 0 54 26 14 22 30 0 63 33 33 60LRL 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 

 Codeine Minimum value <0.024 0.001 0.004 <0.024 0.003 0.001 <0.024 <0.024 0.019 0.019 <0.024 <0.024 

Maximum value <0.024 0.074 0.126 0.024 0.076 0.126 <0.024 0.297 0.170 0.297 <0.024 <0.024 Mean value of detection -- 0.020 0.042 0.024 0.032 0.033 -- 0.223 0.075 0.124 <0.024 <0.024 Median value of detection -- 0.009 0.037 -- 0.020 0.022 -- 0.239 0.071 0.091 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 17 6 16 53 7 8 16 31 17 4 Number of detections 0 5 9 1 7 22 0 5 10 15 00Percent detection 0 38 53 17 41 42 0 63 62 47 0 0 LRL 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Cotinine

Minimum value 0.009 0.010 0.016 0.042 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.018 0.005 0.002 <0.023 Maximum value 0.009 0.047 0.168 0.161 0.201 0.201 0.174 0.064 0.247 0.247 0.112 0.486 Mean value of detection 0.009 0.023 0.078 0.080 0.085 0.070 0.047 0.034 0.119 0.084 0.048 0.197 Median value of detection -- 0.022 0.079 0.096 0.075 0.068 0.025 0.033 0.120 0.062 0.054 0.156 Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 1 9 18 7 17 52 7 7 17 31 17 5 Percent detection 100 69 95 100 100 91 100 88 94 94 94 83 LRL 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 

Dehdyronifedipine

Minimum value <0.01 <0.01 0.003 <0.01 0.004 0.001 <0.01 0.002 0.001 0.001 <0.01 <0.01 Maximum value <0.01 <0.01 0.006 <0.01 0.004 0.006 <0.01 0.003 0.007 0.007 <0.01 <0.01 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.005 -- 0.004 0.004 -- 0.002 0.004 0.003 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.005 -- -- 0.004 -- -- 0.003 0.003 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 16 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 004015 02 57 00Percent detection 0 0 21 0 6 9 0 25 28 19 00LRL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

 Diltiazem

Minimum value <0.012 0.003 0.004 0.012 0.004 0.003 <0.012 <0.012 0.002 0.002 <0.012 <0.012 Maximum value <0.012 0.008 0.042 0.033 0.025 0.042 <0.012 0.049 0.083 0.083 <0.012 <0.012 Mean value of detection -- 0.006 0.013 0.022 0.014 0.014 -- 0.030 0.021 0.024 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.009 -- -- 0.009 -- 0.029 0.013 0.017 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 15 55 7 8 18 33 15 6 Number of detections 0 2 8 2 2 14 0 6 14 20 00Percent detection 0 23 42 29 13 26 0 75 76 59 00LRL 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
 Diphenhydramine Minimum value <0.015 <0.015 0.003 <0.015 <0.015 0.002 0.005 0.049 0.003 0.003 <0.015 <0.015 

Maximum value <0.015 <0.015 0.019 <0.015 <0.015 0.019 0.005 0.134 0.075 0.134 <0.015 <0.015 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.011 -- -- 0.011 0.005 0.096 0.017 0.053 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.099 0.009 0.049 -- -- Number of samples 1 12 14 3 13 43 6 8 13 27 15 2 Number of detections 002002 1 8 8 17 00Percent detection 0 0 14 0 0 5 17 100 62 62 0 0 LRL 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 

 Fluoxetine Minimum value <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 

Maximum value <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 000000 00 00 00Percent detection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LRL 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 

 Gemfibrozil Minimum value <0.015 <0.015 0.048 <0.015 <0.015 0.048 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 

Maximum value <0.015 <0.015 0.048 <0.015 <0.015 0.048 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.048 -- -- 0.048 -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 001001 00 00 00Percent detection 005002 00 00 00LRL 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Ibuprofen

Minimum value <0.018 0.037 0.074 0.099 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 Maximum value <0.018 0.037 0.256 0.574 0.296 0.574 <0.018 0.286 0.960 0.960 <0.018 1.00 Mean value of detection -- 0.037 0.146 0.337 0.187 0.182 -- 0.200 0.439 0.386 -- 1.00 Median value of detection -- -- 0.120 -- -- 0.115 -- -- 0.351 0.286 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 0 1 5 2 2 10 02 79 01Percent detection 0 8 26 29 11 18 0 25 39 25 0 17 LRL 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 

Metformin

Minimum value <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 Maximum value <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.015 0.015 <0.003 0.123 0.067 0.123 <0.003 <0.003 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.012 0.012 -- 0.088 0.067 0.081 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.067 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 000022 02 13 00Percent detection 000064 0 25 6 0.09 00LRL 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 

Ranitidine

Minimum value <0.01 0.001 0.003 <0.01 0.002 0.001 <0.01 <0.01 0.009 0.009 <0.01 <0.01 Maximum value <0.01 0.010 0.003 <0.01 0.004 0.010 <0.01 0.037 0.009 0.037 <0.01 <0.01 Mean value of detection -- 0.006 0.003 -- 0.003 0.005 -- 0.037 0.009 0.023 -- -- Median value of detection -- 0.008 -- -- -- 0.004 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 16 56 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 031026 01 12 00Percent detection 0 23 5 0 12 11 0 13 6 9 00LRL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Salbutamol (Albuterol) Minimum value <0.029 <0.029 0.007 0.006 0.003 0.003 <0.029 0.005 0.010 0.005 <0.029 <0.029 

Maximum value <0.029 <0.029 0.012 0.006 0.005 0.012 <0.029 0.034 0.018 0.034 <0.029 <0.029 Mean value of detection -- -- 0.009 0.006 0.004 0.006 -- 0.017 0.014 0.016 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- 0.007 -- 0.004 0.006 -- 0.015 0.014 0.014 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 003137 04 48 00Percent detection 0 0 16 14 17 12 0 50 22 25 00LRL 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Sulfamethoxazole Minimum value <0.023 0.021 0.008 0.004 0.013 0.004 <0.023 0.083 <0.023 <0.023 0.002 <0.023 

Maximum value <0.023 0.138 0.297 0.456 0.253 0.456 <0.023 0.170 0.755 0.755 0.002 <0.023 Mean value of detection -- 0.067 0.096 0.133 0.074 0.089 -- 0.120 0.156 0.145 0.002 -- Median value of detection -- 0.071 0.085 0.049 0.068 0.071 -- 0.118 0.100 0.100 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 0 9 16 6 14 45 0 8 17 25 10Percent detection 0 69 84 86 72 79 0 100 94 75 6 0 LRL 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 

Thiabendazole Minimum value <0.011 0.007 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 0.007 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 

Maximum value <0.011 0.007 0.088 0.030 0.056 0.088 <0.011 0.691 0.050 0.691 <0.011 <0.011 Mean value of detection -- 0.007 0.057 0.030 0.051 0.042 -- -- -- 0.370 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.037 -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 10 14 3 13 41 6 7 13 27 15 2 Number of detections 012126 01 12 00Percent detection 0 10 14 33 15 15 0 13 8 8 0 0 LRL 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Trimethoprim

Minimum value <0.014 0.001 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 <0.014 0.013 0.010 0.010 0.001 0.003 Maximum value <0.014 0.028 0.162 6.6 0.090 6.60 <0.014 0.252 0.162 0.252 0.001 0.023 Mean value of detection -- 0.015 0.037 1.35 0.029 0.204 -- 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.001 0.013 Median value of detection -- 0.015 0.026 0.036 0.020 0.025 -- 0.042 0.042 0.042 -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 0 6 17 5 10 38 0 8 18 26 12Percent detection 0 46 89 71 56 67 0 100 100 78 6 33 LRL 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 .0014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 

Warfarin

Minimum value <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 Maximum value <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 1 13 19 7 17 57 7 8 18 33 18 6 Number of detections 000000 00 00 00Percent detection 000000 00 00 00LRL 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 

Table 8. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in base-flow samples collected between May 1999 and August 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data from site 13 includes data from sites 13 

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek B

1 2 7 8 13 Basin 3 4 6 Basin 9 10 
Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 

Discharge, mean instantaneous (ft3/s) Minimum value 141 295 134 189 134 169 169 51 50 29 

Maximum value 3,780 5,280 1,550 2,820 5,280 12,800 12,800 1,240 685 2,240 Mean value 965 1,190 610 964 938 2,150 2,150 308 200 326 Median value 262 764 586 745 648 915 915 215 152 210 Number of samples 7 28 25 34 94 14 14 40 26 44 

Turbidity (NTU) Minimum value -- <1 -- 175 <1 -- -- -- 8 3 

Maximum value -- 1,200 -- 730 1,200 -- -- -- 630 410 Mean value -- 310 -- 420 340 -- -- -- 132 76 Median value -- 255 -- 410 300 -- -- -- 32 37 Number of samples -- 24 -- 10 34 -- -- -- 16 33 LRL -- 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- 1 1 

Oxygen, dissolved (mg/L) Minimum value -- 5.75 -- 4.21 4.21 -- -- -- 1.05 0.30 

Maximum value -- 9.71 -- 9.43 9.71 -- -- -- 8.27 8.63 Mean value -- 7.30 -- 5.88 6.84 -- -- -- 5.23 5.42 Median value -- 7.17 -- 5.67 6.72 -- -- -- 5.74 5.53 Number of samples -- 25 -- 12 37 -- -- -- 23 40 LRL -- 0.2 -- 0.2 0.2 -- -- -- 0.2 0.2 

 pH (standard units) Minimum value -- 7.08 -- 6.39 6.38 -- -- -- 7.17 6.94 

Maximum value -- 7.98 -- 7.66 7.98 -- -- -- 8.59 8.00 Mean value -- 7.61 -- 7.05 7.40 -- -- -- 7.65 7.48 Median value -- 7.64 -- 7.08 7.50 -- -- -- 7.55 7.50 Number of samples -- 25 -- 16 41 -- -- -- 23 40 LRL -- 0.01 -- 0.01 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 
Specific conductance (μS/cm)

Minimum value 267 250 -- 396 250 175 175 144 179 162 Maximum value 495 700 -- 1,160 1,160 1,580 1,580 715 673 817 Mean value 404 449 -- 578 502 593 592 269 394 369 Median value 442 418 -- 578 483 402 402 197 365 356 Number of samples 7 25 -- 26 58 11 11 11 23 40 LRL 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Water temperature (°C)

Minimum value -- 12.0 -- 11.6 11.6 -- -- -- 16.5 15.4 Maximum value -- 25.7 -- 28.0 28.0 -- -- -- 29.4 28.5 Mean value -- 19.6 -- 21.0 20.2 -- -- -- 20.9 20.7 Median value -- 20.0 -- 21.1 20.5 -- -- -- 20.5 19.9 Number of samples -- 25 -- 16 41 -- -- -- 23 40 LRL -- 0.15 -- 0.15 0.15 -- -- -- 0.15 0.15 

Chloride, dissolved (mg/L)

Minimum value 15.0 14.4 26.5 19.6 14.4 10.2 10.2 5.4 22.1 <0.2 Maximum value 47.9 68.7 112 116 116 350 350 165 127 123 Mean value 36.2 33.7 65.5 49.5 48.7 98.7 98.7 31.0 45.8 35.1 Median value 41.4 31.1 64.9 42.4 43.1 45.3 45.3 21.6 37.7 33.0 Number of samples 7 23 24 34 88 11 11 36 23 39 LRL 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Ammonia, plus organic nitrogen, total, as N (mg/L)

Minimum value 1.00 0.78 0.80 1.00 0.78 1.30 1.30 0.54 0.82 0.94 Maximum value 4.02 4.77 9.68 4.79 9.68 13.0 13.0 13.8 2.84 6.02 Mean value 2.53 2.62 3.09 2.48 2.68 3.84 3.85 3.25 1.58 2.36 Median value 2.30 2.62 2.74 2.16 2.55 2.80 2.80 2.49 1.49 2.02 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Ammonia, dissolved, as N (mg/L) Minimum value <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.01 0.01 <0.04 <0.04 <0.02 0.01 0.01 

Maximum value 0.14 0.23 0.44 0.62 0.62 2.28 2.28 0.41 0.65 0.67 Mean value 0.07 0.09 0.13 0.22 0.15 0.51 0.51 0.14 0.15 0.18 Median value 0.05 0.09 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.09 0.12 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL range (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) (0.02-0.04) 

Organic nitrogen, total, as N (mg/L) Minimum value 0.92 0.74 0.74 0.92 0.74 1.17 1.17 0.52 0.76 0.87 

Maximum value 4.00 4.66 9.48 4.67 9.48 12.5 12.5 13.5 2.7 5.80 Mean value 2.46 2.53 2.95 2.26 2.53 3.34 3.33 3.11 1.43 2.19 Median value 2.20 2.50 2.55 2.05 2.46 1.90 1.90 2.39 1.29 1.82 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Nitrite plus nitrate, dissolved, as N (mg/L) Minimum value 0.94 0.24 1.92 0.61 0.24 1.19 1.19 0.20 0.06 <0.05 

Maximum value 3.45 2.85 5.85 4.60 5.85 4.92 4.92 1.51 0.98 1.23 Mean value 1.79 1.70 3.57 2.22 2.40 2.54 2.55 0.64 0.46 0.53 Median value 1.36 1.65 3.79 2.10 2.14 1.90 1.90 0.59 0.43 0.48 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Nitrite, dissolved, as N (mg/L) Minimum value 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 <0.01 

Maximum value 0.08 0.21 0.33 0.29 0.33 0.36 0.36 0.23 0.13 0.14 Mean value 0.04 0.07 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.06 0.06 Median value 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.05 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL range (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008) (0.01-0.008

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Nitrate, dissolved, as N (mg/L)

Minimum value 0.91 0.14 1.88 0.492 0.14 1.17 1.17 0.04 0.02 0.03 Maximum value 3.44 2.81 5.80 4.52 5.80 4.67 4.67 1.46 0.85 1.16 Mean value 1.75 1.63 3.47 2.12 2.32 2.42 2.42 0.59 0.40 0.48 Median value 1.33 1.60 3.60 2.04 2.06 1.84 1.84 0.55 0.38 0.44 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Nitrogen, total (mg/L)

Minimum value 1.99 2.80 3.15 1.61 1.61 2.99 2.99 0.956 1.10 1.25 Maximum value 5.68 6.96 12.8 8.71 12.8 17.9 17.9 14.2 3.14 6.45 Mean value 4.33 4.32 6.66 4.70 5.09 6.40 6.40 3.90 2.04 2.90 Median value 4.95 4.11 6.64 4.46 4.91 5.72 5.72 3.08 1.96 2.52 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Nitrate, percent of total N

Minimum value 18.4 3.3 23.0 14.1 3.3 17.7 17.7 0.6 1.6 1.4 Maximum value 60.7 70.8 87.4 74.8 87.4 75.0 75.0 42.3 40.7 40.5 Mean value 40.7 38.5 53.9 44.8 45.2 41.5 41.5 20.0 19.6 18.3 Median value 45.8 39.7 55.1 47.9 47.7 42.0 42.0 16.2 18.0 17.3 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 

Organic nitrogen, percent of total N

Minimum value 37.8 24.3 11.2 21.0 11.2 20.9 20.9 43.1 46.1 45.2 Maximum value 80.6 89.1 75.0 74.1 89.1 78.8 78.8 95.2 93.3 96.3 Mean value 56.5 57.8 42.2 48.1 49.8 58.3 58.3 74.3 70.6 73.1 Median value 50.0 56.0 39.8 47.7 48.4 58.3 58.3 79.3 68.4 77.4 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Orthophosphate, dissolved as P (mg/L) Minimum value 0.01 0.03 0.37 0.07 0.01 0.15 0.15 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 

Maximum value 0.52 0.60 1.40 1.00 1.40 1.19 1.19 0.15 0.15 0.13 Mean value 0.18 0.29 0.75 0.34 0.41 0.53 0.53 0.06 0.08 0.05 Median value 0.13 0.30 0.71 0.28 0.32 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.05 0.04 Number of samples 7 18 16 28 69 12 12 22 8 19 LRL range (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.010-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) (0.01-0.02) 

Phosphorus, dissolved (mg/L) Minimum value 0.11 0.07 0.33 0.07 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.37 0.04 0.01 

Maximum value 0.58 0.67 1.57 1.01 1.57 1.38 0.32 0.18 0.17 0.21 Mean value 0.21 0.32 0.79 0.38 0.46 0.61 0.61 0.09 0.09 0.08 Median value 0.16 0.28 0.81 0.33 0.37 0.32 0.32 0.08 0.07 0.08 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 LRL range 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Phosphorus, total (mg/L) Minimum value 0.23 0.43 0.33 0.24 0.23 0.37 0.37 0.10 0.08 0.10 

Maximum value 1.54 2.16 5.22 2.79 5.22 6.30 6.30 4.19 0.49 1.91 Mean value 0.95 1.08 2.12 1.23 1.39 1.66 1.66 0.83 0.29 0.52 Median value 1.12 1.07 2.03 1.24 1.24 1.40 1.40 0.64 0.28 0.37 Number of samples 7 21 21 32 83 12 12 36 24 39 LRL 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Dissolved phosphorus, percent of total P Minimum value 9.9 6.7 7.8 6.0 6.0 9.5 9.5 1.0 13.2 2.1 

Maximum value 50 64.4 100 80.8 100 89.0 89.0 51.4 52.4 56.6 Mean value 26.3 31.8 45.5 32.9 35.3 41.4 41.4 19.9 32.9 23.5 Median value 19.6 30.3 45.6 29.9 34.7 38.0 38.0 13.8 31.7 22.6 Number of samples 7 21 21 32 83 12 12 36 24 39 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
 Dissolved organic carbon (mg/L)

Minimum value 5.30 5.40 -- 4.90 4.90 5.00 5.00 4.70 -- 4.50 Maximum value 7.00 43.3 -- 66.9 66.9 8.80 8.80 9.20 -- 9.30 Mean value 6.14 12.3 -- 13.4 10.8 6.50 6.50 6.74 -- 6.62 Median value 6.10 6.35 -- 7.00 6.50 6.17 6.20 6.50 -- 6.30 Number of samples 7 6 -- 9 22 12 12 13 -- 7 LRL 0.33 0.33 -- 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 -- 0.33 

 Total organic carbon (mg/L)

Minimum value 8.9 4.6 12.80 7.8 4.6 9.6 9.6 2.1 7.8 8.1 Maximum value 39.6 49.5 125 41.9 125 74.9 75 125 57.2 113 Mean value 20.4 25.4 36.9 21.5 26.6 32.2 32.1 24.7 19.3 25.8 Median value 14.5 27.2 26.8 20.2 23.8 29.2 29.2 17.0 15.3 17.2 Number of samples 7 23 23 33 86 12 12 37 24 39 LRL 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 

Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/L)

Minimum value 3.6 5.4 20 3.3 3.3 3.9 3.9 <2 16 6.6 Maximum value 18 340 240 270 340 36 36 110 95 155 Mean value 8.7 74 66 55 55 11 11 34 50 45 Median value 8.3 32 41 29 32 6.2 6.2 34 36 35 Number of samples 6 8 10 17 41 7 7 21 8 18 LRL 22222 22 222

Chemical oxygen demand (mg/L)

Minimum value 20 20 29 <10 <10 30 30 20 17 20 Maximum value 90 170 230 96 230 140 140 260 230 535 Mean value 49 75 75 44 61 63 63 74 67 89 Median value 40 66 64 37 51 45 45 63 47 64 Number of samples 7 23 23 33 86 12 12 36 23 39 LRL 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Escherichia coli (col/100 mL) Minimum value 5,900 4,600 -- 4,800 4,600 740 740 1,600 -- 11,000 

Maximum value 24,000 32,500 -- 22,000 32,500 170,000 170,000 67,000 -- 160,000 Mean value 15,900 14,600 -- 13,300 14,600 36,100 36,100 26,000 -- 51,400 Median value 17,000 8,300 -- 17,000 17,000 16,000 16,000 20,000 -- 43,500 Number of samples 7 5 -- 7 19 8 8 7 -- 7 LRL 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

Fecal coliform (col/100 mL) Minimum value 4,200 13,500 -- 5,000 4,200 22,000 22,000 41,000 -- 48,000 

Maximum value 45,000 31,000 -- 32,000 45,000 267,000 267,000 113,000 -- 190,000 Mean value 20,100 22,300 -- 18,600 19,700 97,500 97,500 71,000 -- 106,000 Median value 18,700 -- -- 16,700 16,700 50,500 50,500 59,000 -- 93,500 Number of samples 6 2 -- 7 15 4 4 3 -- 4 LRL 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

Suspended sediment (mg/L) Minimum value 152 222 187 64 64 112 112 54 31 32 

Maximum value 1,940 2,910 3,920 1,380 3,920 2,300 2,300 4,710 254 2,540 Mean value 1,070 1,095 943 663 892 808 808 723 98 353 Median value 915 885 767 554 764 387 386 328 80 106 Number of samples 7 24 23 32 86 14 14 39 24 34 LRL 1 1 1.0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Nitrogen, instantaneous mass (mg/s) Minimum value 20,800 34,600 25,700 18,800 18,800 37,400 37,400 3,420 3,070 2,230 

Maximum value 541,000 588,000 563,000 263,000 588,000 2,010,000 2,010,000 173,000 39,900 363,000 Mean value 130,000 164,000 116,000 118,000 130,000 355,000 355,000 36,300 12,200 37,600 Median value 24,000 116,000 91,300 87,200 91,300 175,000 175,000 21,900 8,820 17,800 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
 Nitrate, instantaneous mass (mg/s)

Minimum value 8,990 12,800 15,200 12,000 8,990 16,800 16,800 380 99 100 Maximum value 142,000 135,000 195,000 110,000 195,000 971,000 971,000 42,000 6,040 25,300 Mean value 34,700 52,600 57,200 48,000 50,600 14,400 144,000 6,020 2,070 4,420 Median value 12,800 42,500 46,700 38,600 40,100 52,800 52,800 2,920 1,980 2,690 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 

 Organic nitrogen, instantaneous mass (mg/s)

Minimum value 8,590 10,100 9,650 6,315 6,315 7,840 7,840 2,080 2,360 1,525 Maximum value 381,000 444,000 369,000 193,000 444,000 1,001,000 1,001,000 153,000 35,400 324,000 Mean value 91,250 105,400 55,400 61,700 74,000 198,500 198,000 28,200 8,985 31,000 Median value 12,600 59,800 33,700 46,300 46,000 86,700 86,700 17,800 5,630 12,000 Number of samples 7 23 23 34 87 12 12 36 24 39 

Mass phosphorous, dissolved (mg/s)

Minimum value 890 2,740 3,790 1,410 890 3,760 3,760 53 162 93 Maximum value 17,100 28,500 35,100 22,500 35,100 232,200 232,200 6,340 1,460 4,560 Mean value 4,250 10,350 12,070 7,630 9,250 31,260 31,300 950 482 732 Median value 1,500 7,850 8,420 6,730 7,440 9,200 9,200 518 358 517 Number of samples 7 21 21 32 87 12 12 36 24 39 

Mass phosphorous, total (mg/s)

Minimum value 3,140 5,330 7,250 3,340 3,140 6,630 6,630 372 379 278 Maximum value 165,000 160,000 213,000 78,300 213,000 526,000 526,000 62,800 9,570 84,800 Mean value 35,200 40,900 37,200 31,800 35,900 93,100 93,100 7,990 1,950 8,050 Median value 4,760 28,400 25,900 25,800 26,100 37,800 37,800 4,030 1,090 2,220 Number of samples 7 21 21 32 81 12 12 36 24 39 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Fecal coliform, instantaneous colonies (x1000) Minimum value 1,784 94,177 -- 6,813 1,784 119,940 119,940 14,727 -- 57,009 

Maximum value 481,200 290,240 -- 191,400 481,210 9,687,110 9,687,110 398,268 -- 715,410 Mean value 98,608 192,209 -- 73,390 99,320 2,695,200 2,695,200 157,100 -- 250,500 Median value 13,436 -- -- 49,880 49,880 486,820 486,820 47,300 -- 128,000 Number of samples 6 2 -- 7 15 4 4 3 -- 4 

Escherichia coli, instantaneous colonies (x1000) Minimum value 2,510 5,725 -- 6,784 2,510 358 358 427 -- 10,840 

Maximum value 256,650 304,280 -- 138,000 304,280 6,167,820 6,167,820 236,140 -- 373,530 Mean value 55,524 98,520 -- 56,190 67,090 855,130 855,130 47,600 -- 105,000 Median value 13,356 57,900 -- 32,420 28,060 105,960 105,960 20,100 -- 28,500 Number of samples 7 5 -- 7 19 8 8 7 -- 7 

Chloride, instantaneous mass (g/s) Minimum value 165 283 250 232 165 573 573 24 79 13 

Maximum value 2,040 2,900 2,480 2,630 2,900 16,400 16,440 539 738 1,540 Mean value 618 1,090 973 1,120 1,030 3,000 3,000 213 258 280 Median value 311 934 800 983 860 1,620 1,620 196 177 188 Number of samples 7 23 24 34 88 11 11 36 23 39 

Biochemical oxygen demand, instantaneous mass (g/s) Minimum value 17 495 95 72 17 34 34 13 57 73 

Maximum value 1,015 4,350 10,550 12,700 12,700 2,475 2,475 951 890 1,590 Mean value 238 1,650 1,525 1,410 1,310 787 787 254 217 468 Median value 65.3 1,200 650 446 506 322 322 135 124 193 Number of samples 6 8 10 17 41 7 7 21 8 18 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Chemical oxygen demand, instantaneous mass (g/s)

Minimum value 160 434 299 123 123 194 194 44 59 99 Maximum value 7,485 7,550 2,810 3,610 7,550 10,900 10,900 2,310 1,563 5,700 Mean value 1,870 2,680 1,080 1,195 1,620 3,480 3,480 636 425 820 Median value 273 2,120 888 861 1,010 2,340 2,340 475 181 392 Number of samples 7 23 23 33 86 12 12 37 23 39 

Total organic carbon, instantaneous mass (g/s)

Minimum value 57.9 155 104 43.8 43.8 54.0 54.0 9.00 27.1 30.7 Maximum value 3,614 2,990 4,230 1,940 4,230 9,540 9,540 1,620 382 1,965 Mean value 862 872 628 585 696 1,960 1,960 226 114 277 Median value 105 593 428 505 493 1,234 1,235 128 61 94 Number of samples 7 23 23 33 86 12 12 37 24 39 

Dissolved organic carbon, instantaneous mass (g/s)

Minimum value 22.5 137 -- 37.6 22.5 37.7 37.7 14.2 -- 52.7 Maximum value 652 644 -- 748 748 3,050 3,050 183 -- 285 Mean value 166 363 -- 276 265 478 478 62 -- 147 Median value 42 343 -- 264 219 220 220 47 -- 97 Number of samples 7 6 -- 9 22 12 12 13 -- 7 

Suspended sediment mass (g/s)

Minimum value 2,075 2,590 2,740 359 359 542 542 129 74 150 Maximum value 207,500 152,100 32,400 59,300 207,500 205,700 205,700 78,300 4,930 160,800 Mean value 45,650 42,200 14,860 20,020 26,915 51,000 51,030 7,540 719 9,260 Median value 5,370 22,460 15,460 13,010 16,150 17,850 17,850 1,830 346 741 Number of samples 7 24 23 32 86 14 12 39 24 34 

Table 11. Summary of physical properties, nutrients, bacteria, and selected chemical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 a[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; LRL, laboratory reporting level; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; --, no data; <, less than; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per cen

degrees Celsius; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; col/100 mL, colonies per 100 milliliters; mg/s, milligrams per second; g, grams; g/s, grams per second; Data for site 13 includes dat

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Cre

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004. [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 

1,4-Dichlorobenzene Minimum value <0.5 0.018 0.008 0.016 0.008 <0.5 <0.5 0.016 0.011 0.013 

Max value <0.5 0.018 0.040 0.119 0.119 <0.5 <0.5 0.045 0.051 0.077 Mean value of detection -- 0.018 0.013 0.054 0.041 -- -- 0.033 0.030 0.035 Median value of detection -- -- 0.012 0.046 0.035 -- -- 0.038 0.027 0.037 Number of samples 4 21 25 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 1 3 20 29 0 0 3 3 15 Percent detection 0 5 36 71 39 0 0 10 12 43 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.04) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.04) (0.03-0.5) 

1-Methylnaphthalene Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.038 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.038 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.038 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 2 7 4 4 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 1 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

2,6-Di-tert-benzoquinone Minimum value -- <0.07 0.046 <0.07 0.046 -- -- <0.07 <0.07 <0.07 <

Max value -- 0.485 0.337 1.33 1.33 -- -- 0.490 0.327 0.924 Mean value of detection -- 0.259 0.151 0.560 0.348 -- -- 0.199 0.214 0.345 Median value of detection -- 0.237 0.115 0.368 0.237 -- -- 0.160 0.226 0.184 Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 6 7 9 22 -- -- 11 11 11 Percent detection -- 30 32 38 33 -- -- 46 44 34 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) -- -- (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) (0.0
2,6-Di-tert-butylphenol

Minimum value -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 -- -- <0.08 0.003 <0.08 <Max value -- <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 -- -- <0.15 0.003 <0.15 <Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.003 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 0 1 0 Percent detection -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 0 4 0 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.08-0.15) -- -- (0.08-0.15) (0.09-0.15) (0.08-0.15) (0.0

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene

Minimum value <0.5 0.025 0.024 0.022 0.022 <0.5 <0.5 0.014 0.018 0.020 Max value <0.5 0.032 0.026 0.031 0.090 <0.5 <0.5 0.206 0.092 0.064 Mean value of detection -- 0.029 0.025 0.027 0.027 -- -- 0.074 0.036 0.042 Median value of detection -- -- -- 0.029 0.026 -- -- 0.042 0.032 0.039 Number of samples 4 7 3 8 22 7 7 20 15 21 Number of detections 0 2 2 3 7 0 0 10 7 7 Percent detection 0 29 67 38 32 0 0 50 47 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.09-.5) 0.09 (0.09-0.5) (0.09-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.09-05) 0.09 (0.09-0.5) 

2-Methylnaphthalene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.054 -- 0.038 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.054 -- 0.038 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.054 -- 0.038 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 1 -- 1 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 14 -- 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
3-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxyanisole (BHA) Minimum value <5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <5 <5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <

Max value <5 <5 <.12 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <0.12 <5 <Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent detection 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) 5 (0.1-5) (0.1-0.12) (0.1-5) (0.1-5) 5 5 (0.1-5) (0.1-0.12) (0.1-5) (0.

3,4-Dichlorophenyl isocyanate Minimum value -- -- -- 0.820 0.820 0.580 0.580 0.024 -- -- 

Max value -- -- -- 1.60 1.60 2.40 2.40 0.300 -- -- Mean value of detection -- -- -- 1.21 1.21 1.20 1.20 0.097 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.910 0.910 0.032 -- -- Number of samples -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 5 -- -- Number of detections -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 4 -- -- Percent detection -- -- -- 100 100 100 100 80 -- -- LRL (or LRL range) -- -- -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- -- 

3-?-Coprostanol Minimum value <2 0.091 0.210 0.110 0.091 0.680 0.680 0.340 0.205 0.380 

Max value <2 1.12 2.01 3.42 2.01 5.60 5.60 3.67 6.63 11.5 Mean value of detection -- 0.683 0.869 0.868 0.828 1.87 1.87 1.10 1.29 3.10 Median value of detection -- 0.729 0.650 0.820 0.740 0.890 0.890 0.842 0.820 2.59 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 8 12 17 37 5 5 17 21 31 Percent detection 0 38 55 61 49 71 71 55 84 89 LRL (or LRL range) 2 (0.6-2) 0.6 (0.6-2) (0.6-2) 2 2 (0.6-2) 0.6 (0.6-2) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol)

Minimum value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- 0.044 Max value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- 0.110 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.077 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 2 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 67 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

4-Cumylphenol

Minimum value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- <1 Max value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

4-Nonylphenol

Minimum value <5 <0.5 0.339 <0.5 0.339 0.340 0.340 0.226 0.380 0.543 Max value <5 3.42 2.20 2.60 3.42 2.70 2.70 2.83 4.32 6.14 Mean value of detection -- 1.24 0.957 1.19 1.12 0.970 0.970 1.656 1.51 2.24 Median value of detection -- 1.09 0.969 1.13 1.04 0.735 0.735 1.595 1.32 2.07 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 14 19 24 57 6 6 26 24 34 Percent detection -- 67 86 86 76 86 86 84 96 97 LRL (or LRL range) 5 (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0.5-5) (0.5-5) 5 5 5 0.5 5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
4-Octylphenol Minimum value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- <1 

Max value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 -- <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

4-tert-octylphenol Minimum value 0.140 <1 -- 0.140 0.140 0.120 0.120 0.120 -- 0.150 

Max value 0.200 <1 -- 0.170 0.200 0.190 0.190 0.340 -- 0.500 Mean value of detection 0.170 -- -- 0.155 0.163 0.180 0.180 0.198 -- 0.283 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.155 0.175 0.175 0.175 -- 0.200 Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 2 4 4 4 6 -- 3 Percent detection 50 0 -- 50 44 57 57 86 -- 100 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole Minimum value <2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.420 0.420 <01 <0.1 <0.1 <

Max value <2 1.29 1.06 1.49 1.49 0.450 0.450 1.30 1.02 1.52 Mean value of detection -- 0.501 0.556 0.685 0.590 0.435 0.435 0.633 0.572 0.680 Median value of detection -- 0.433 0.452 0.708 0.468 -- -- 0.596 0.547 0.621 Number of samples 4 15 19 24 62 7 7 18 10 17 Number of detections 0 10 16 15 41 2 2 9 8 12 Percent detection 0 67 84 63 66 29 29 50 80 71 LRL (or LRL range) 2 (0.1-2) 0.1 (0.1-2) (0.1-2) 2 2 (0.1-2) 0.1 (0.1-2) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Acetophenone

Minimum value 0.055 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.100 0.100 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <Max value 0.220 0.357 0.221 0.322 0.357 0.290 0.290 0.682 0.363 0.577 Mean value of detection 0.145 0.224 0.130 0.169 0.172 0.220 0.220 0.365 0.255 0.359 Median value of detection 0.160 0.266 0.102 0.105 0.105 0.270 0.270 0.382 0.282 0.387 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 3 5 4 5 17 3 3 20 9 18 Percent detection 75 24 18 18 23 43 43 65 36 51 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.22) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.22) (0.03-0.5) (0.0

Acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene (AHTN)

Minimum value 0.049 <0.5 -- 0.078 0.049 0.034 0.034 0.079 -- 0.094 Max value 0.061 <0.5 -- 0.160 0.160 0.460 0.460 0.140 -- 0.094 Mean value of detection 0.054 -- -- 0.045 0.048 0.102 0.102 0.110 -- 0.094 Median value of detection 0.051 -- -- 0.039 0.051 0.034 0.034 -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 3 0 -- 4 7 7 7 2 -- 1 Percent detection 75 0 -- 100 78 100 100 29 -- 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Anthracene

Minimum value 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.024 0.019 0.022 0.022 0.026 0.029 0.022 Max value 0.021 0.328 0.125 0.120 0.328 0.170 0.170 2.510 0.792 0.460 Mean value of detection 0.021 0.089 0.043 0.060 0.062 0.088 0.088 0.364 0.117 0.121 Median value of detection -- 0.068 0.038 0.052 0.048 0.080 0.080 0.170 0.073 0.093 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 2 18 18 20 58 4 4 31 21 30 Percent detection 50 86 82 71 77 57 57 100 84 86 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.05-0.5) 0.05 0.05 (0.05-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.05 0.05 (0.0

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Anthraquinone Minimum value 0.095 0.099 -- 0.160 0.095 0.160 0.160 0.160 -- 0.310 

Max value 0.240 0.099 -- 0.190 0.240 1.10 1.10 0.820 -- 0.990 Mean value of detection 0.178 0.099 -- 0.180 0.169 0.655 0.655 0.499 -- 0.727 Median value of detection 0.200 -- -- 0.185 0.185 0.750 0.750 0.510 -- 0.880 Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 3 1 -- 4 8 6 6 7 -- 3 Percent detection 75 100 -- 100 89 86 86 100 -- 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Atrazine Minimum value -- -- -- 0.022 0.022 0.050 0.050 <0.5 -- -- 

Max value -- -- -- 0.044 0.044 0.075 0.075 <0.5 -- -- Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.033 0.033 0.064 0.064 -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.066 0.066 -- -- -- Number of samples -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 5 -- -- Number of detections -- -- -- 2 2 3 3 0 -- -- Percent detection -- -- -- 100 100 75 75 0 -- -- LRL (or LRL range) -- -- -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- -- 

 Benzaldehyde Minimum value -- <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 -- -- <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <

Max value -- <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 -- -- 0.177 <0.15 <0.15 <Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.150 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.144 -- -- Number of samples -- 6 3 4 13 -- -- 13 15 18 Number of detections -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 5 0 0 Percent detection -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 38 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 -- -- (0.1-0.15) (0.1-0.15) (0.1-0.15) (0.

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Benzo[a]pyrene

Minimum value 0.079 <0.05 0.056 0.050 <0.05 0.150 0.150 0.018 0.048 0.089 Max value 0.083 0.580 0.379 0.442 0.580 1.200 1.200 5.760 0.752 2.000 Mean value of detection 0.081 0.233 0.138 0.144 0.164 0.493 0.493 1.072 0.216 0.404 Median value of detection -- 0.204 0.118 0.102 0.122 0.340 0.340 0.732 0.142 0.282 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 2 19 22 26 69 7 7 31 23 35 Percent detection 50 90 100 93 92 100 100 100 92 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.05-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.05-00.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.5 (0.0

Benzophenone

Minimum value -- -- -- 0.084 0.084 0.140 0.140 0.052 -- -- Max value -- -- -- 0.150 1.150 0.200 0.200 0.110 -- -- Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.117 0.117 0.160 0.160 0.077 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.150 0.150 0.061 -- -- Number of samples -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 5 -- -- Number of detections -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 -- -- Percent detection -- -- -- 100 100 100 100 100 -- -- LRL (or LRL range) -- -- -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- -- 

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate

Minimum value -- <0.9 2.70 <1.5 <0.9 -- -- 0<.9 <0.9 <0.9 <Max value -- 13.0 2.70 6.90 13.0 -- -- 5.90 6.50 4.90 Mean value of detection -- 5.78 2.70 4.58 4.99 -- -- 5.00 5.75 4.27 Median value of detection -- 2.40 -- 4.55 2.70 -- -- 4.60 -- 4.40 Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 5 1 4 10 -- -- 3 2 3 Percent detection -- 25 5 17 15 -- -- 13 8 9 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.9-2) (0.9-2) (1.5-2) (0.9-2) -- -- (0.9-2) (0.9-2) (0.9-2) (0.9

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate Minimum value -- 1.40 <1.5 1.40 1.40 <0.5 <0.5 0.340 1.30 1.40 <

Max value -- 90.0 15.6 3.30 90.0 <0.5 <0.5 6.95 8.50 3.77 Mean value of detection -- 18.0 8.84 2.40 11.1 -- -- 3.17 4.07 2.35 Median value of detection -- 6.85 -- 2.40 3.00 -- -- 2.70 3.06 2.07 Number of samples -- 20 22 26 68 2 2 29 25 32 Number of detections -- 7 2 5 14 0 0 10 5 6 Percent detection -- 35 9 19 21 0 0 34 20 19 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.5-1.5) (0.5-1.5) (0.5-1.5) (0.5-1.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.5-1.5) (0.5-1.5) (0.5-1.5) (0.5

Bisphenol A Minimum value 0.130 0.078 0.089 0.096 0.078 0.040 0.040 0.100 0.121 0.091 

Max value 0.130 0.407 0.488 0.438 0.438 0.401 0.401 0.756 0.622 0.807 Mean value of detection 0.130 0.207 0.202 0.297 0.281 0.152 0.152 0.312 0.345 0.371 Median value of detection -- 0.173 0.172 0.223 0.193 0.160 0.160 0.266 0.350 0.354 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 1 19 22 26 68 6 6 31 25 35 Percent detection 25 90 100 93 91 86 86 100 100 100 1LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.09-1) (0.09-1) 1 (0.09-1) 1 1 (0.09-1) (0.09-1) (0.09-1) (0.0

Bromacil Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 0.380 0.380 <0.5 -- <0.5 

Max value 0.870 <0.5 -- <0.5 0.870 0.400 0.400 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection 0.695 -- -- -- 0.695 0.390 0.390 -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 0 2 2 2 0 -- 0 Percent detection 50 0 -- 0 22 29 29 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT)

Minimum value -- <0.08 <0.08 0.083 0.083 -- -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <Max value -- <0.11 <0.11 0.083 0.083 -- -- 0.087 <0.11 <0.11 <Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.083 0.083 -- -- 0.087 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 0 0 2 1 -- -- 1 0 0 Percent detection -- 0 0 4 2 -- -- 0 0 0 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) -- -- (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.08-0.11) (0.0

Caffeine

Minimum value 0.035 0.043 0.203 0.160 0.035 0.087 0.087 0.200 0.300 0.310 Max value 0.130 1.12 1.18 1.25 1.25 0.800 0.800 2.00 2.58 3.30 Mean value of detection 0.081 0.396 0.602 0.646 0.543 0.507 0.507 0.762 1.10 1.37 Median value of detection 0.078 0.350 0.512 0.645 0.488 0.590 0.590 0.704 0.989 1.20 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 3 19 22 28 72 7 7 31 25 35 Percent detection 75 90 100 100 96 100 100 100 100 100 1LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) 0.08 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) 0.08 (0.08-0.5) 0.0

Camphor

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Carbaryl Minimum value 0.160 0.042 0.028 0.017 0.017 0.150 0.150 0.035 <0.06 0.040 <

Max value 0.160 0.354 0.328 0.292 0.292 0.150 0.150 1.19 1.06 1.88 Mean value of detection 0.160 0.147 0.127 0.081 0.113 0.150 0.150 0.388 0.392 0.362 Median value of detection -- 0.114 0.082 0.055 0.082 -- -- 0.333 0.305 0.239 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 1 10 11 17 39 1 1 23 18 26 Percent detection 25 48 50 61 52 14 14 74 72 74 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.06-1) 0.06 (0.06-1) (0.06-1) 1 1 (0.06-1) 0.06 (0.06-1) 

Carbazole Minimum value 0.019 <0.5 -- 0.034 0.019 0.031 0.031 0.026 -- 0.100 

Max value 0.069 <0.5 -- 0.084 0.084 0.480 0.480 0.480 -- 0.480 Mean value of detection 0.042 -- -- 0.061 0.052 0.210 0.210 0.217 -- 0.300 Median value of detection 0.037 -- -- 0.066 0.052 0.200 0.200 0.200 -- 0.320 Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 3 0 -- 3 6 7 7 6 -- 3 Percent detection 75 0 -- 75 67 100 100 86 -- 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

cis-Chlordane Minimum value -- 0.012 0.004 0.002 0.002 -- -- 0.009 0.005 0.004 

Max value -- 0.030 0.009 0.006 0.040 -- -- 0.057 0.021 0.029 Mean value of detection -- 0.021 0.006 0.004 0.008 -- -- 0.030 0.010 0.016 Median value of detection -- -- 0.005 0.005 0.005 -- -- 0.026 0.007 0.015 Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 2 5 4 12 -- -- 15 6 17 Percent detection -- 10 23 21 18 -- -- 63 24 53 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Chlorpyrifos

Minimum value <0.5 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.5 <0.5 0.015 0.013 0.018 <Max value <0.5 0.078 <0.02 0.062 0.078 <0.5 <0.5 0.076 0.154 0.340 Mean value of detection -- 0.076 -- 0.062 0.071 -- -- 0.062 0.047 0.086 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.074 -- -- 0.067 0.061 0.073 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 2 0 1 3 0 0 9 5 15 Percent detection 0 10 0 4 4 0 0 29 20 43 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.02-0.5) 0.02 (0.02-0.5) (0.02-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.02-0.5) 0.02 (0.02-0.5) 

Cholesterol

Minimum value 0.620 0.130 0.710 <0.15 0.130 0.810 0.810 0.930 1.06 <1.5 <Max value 1.30 2.80 3.62 3.08 3.62 14.0 14.0 5.78 12.5 11.1 Mean value of detection 0.870 1.71 1.83 1.60 1.63 3.32 3.32 2.40 3.58 5.11 Median value of detection 0.690 1.67 1.28 1.70 1.37 1.80 1.80 2.20 2.73 4.48 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 3 10 11 19 43 7 7 25 22 32 Percent detection 75 48 50 68 57 100 100 81 88 91 LRL (or LRL range) 2 1 1.5 (1.5-2) (1.5-2) 2 2 (1.5-2) 1.5 1.5 

Codeine

Minimum value 0.063 0.124 0.338 <0.10 0.063 0.027 0.027 <0.10 0.087 0.060 <Max value 0.140 0.124 0.338 <0.5 0.338 0.059 0.059 0.140 0.260 0.096 <Mean value of detection 0.108 0.124 0.338 -- 0.157 0.043 0.043 0.130 0.199 0.078 Median value of detection 0.120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.225 -- Number of samples 4 21 22 26 73 3 3 26 25 35 Number of detections 31 1 0 4 2 2 2 4 2 Percent detection 75 5 5 0 7 67 67 8 16 6 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.2) (0.1-0.5) (0.

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Cotinine Minimum value <1 0.038 0.025 0.037 0.025 <1 <1 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 

Max value <1 0.177 0.204 0.206 0.206 <1 <1 0.279 0.214 0.256 Mean value of detection -- 0.078 0.085 0.101 0.089 -- -- 0.181 0.120 0.145 Median value of detection -- 0.065 0.074 0.076 0.073 -- -- 0.165 0.126 0.151 Number of samples 4 15 19 24 62 7 7 18 10 17 Number of detections 0 8 13 14 35 0 0 7 8 12 Percent detection 0 53 68 58 56 0 0 39 80 71 1LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.04-1) (0.04-0.08) (0.04-1) (0.04-1) 1 1 (0.04-1) 0.04 (0.04-1) 

Diazinon Minimum value 0.100 0.025 0.018 <.03 0.018 0.038 0.038 0.026 <0.03 0.028 <

Max value 0.100 0.607 0.222 0.297 0.607 0.065 0.065 1.21 0.843 0.621 Mean value of detection 0.100 0.196 0.086 0.113 0.128 0.052 0.052 0.317 0.220 0.267 Median value of detection -- 0.141 0.077 0.094 0.098 -- -- 0.250 0.154 0.260 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 1 16 18 18 53 2 2 27 22 31 Percent detection 25 76 82 64 71 29 29 87 88 89 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.03 (0.03-0.5) 

Dichlorvos Minimum value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 0.093 0.093 0.095 -- <1 

Max value <1 <1 -- <1 <1 0.290 0.290 0.130 -- <1 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.188 0.188 0.113 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.185 0.185 -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 4 4 2 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 57 57 29 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 1 1 -- 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Dieldrin

Minimum value -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 -- -- 0.013 0.006 0.012 Max value -- <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 -- -- 0.064 0.061 0.047 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.031 0.030 0.028 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.021 0.027 0.026 Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 7 4 4 Percent detection -- 0 0 0 0 -- -- 29 16 13 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 -- -- 0.08 0.08 0.08 

Diethylphthalate

Minimum value -- <0.25 0.154 <0.25 0.154 0.310 0.310 0.225 0.218 0.160 <Max value -- 0.430 0.237 1.38 1.38 0.330 0.330 17.0 0.473 0.661 Mean value of detection -- 0.311 0.200 0.680 0.500 0.320 0.320 2.823 0.386 0.408 Median value of detection -- 0.293 0.205 0.612 0.427 -- -- 0.369 0.392 0.438 Number of samples -- 14 19 22 55 4 4 16 10 14 Number of detections -- 7 4 14 25 2 2 7 6 11 Percent detection -- 50 21 64 45 50 50 44 60 79 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.25 (0.25-0.35) (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.25-0.5) (0.25-0.35) 0.35 (0.2

d-Limonene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Fluoranthene Minimum value 0.084 0.038 0.210 0.140 0.038 0.500 0.500 0.120 0.072 0.351 <

Max value 0.210 1.99 1.61 0.690 1.99 2.90 2.90 7.38 1.92 5.20 Mean value of detection 0.156 0.690 0.480 0.402 0.492 1.35 1.35 2.24 0.621 1.15 Median value of detection 0.165 0.640 0.379 0.405 0.407 0.750 0.750 1.70 0.473 0.866 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Percent detection 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) (0.

Hexahydrohexamethylcyclopentabenzopyran (HHCB) Minimum value 0.029 <0.5 -- <0.5 0.029 0.041 0.041 0.053 -- 0.062 

Max value 0.032 <0.5 -- <0.5 0.032 0.130 0.130 0.053 -- 0.062 Mean value of detection 0.031 -- -- -- 0.031 0.071 0.071 0.053 -- 0.062 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.063 0.063 -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 0 2 5 5 1 -- 1 Percent detection 50 0 -- 0 22 71 71 14 -- 33 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Indole Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 0.088 0.088 <0.5 -- <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 0.088 0.088 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.088 0.088 -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 1 1 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 14 14 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Isoborneol

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Isophorone

Minimum value 0.048 <0.5 -- <0.5 0.048 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value 0.048 <0.5 -- <0.5 0.048 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection 0.048 -- -- -- 0.048 -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 1 0 -- 0 1 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 25 0 -- 0 11 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Isopropylbenzene (cumene) 

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Isoquinoline Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.085 0.085 0.062 0.062 0.057 -- <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.085 0.085 0.160 0.160 0.140 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.085 0.085 0.111 0.111 0.099 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 1 1 2 2 2 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 25 11 29 29 29 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Lindane Minimum value -- 0.016 <0.05 0.021 <0.05 -- -- <0.05 0.280 <0.05 <

Max value -- 0.210 <0.05 0.021 0.210 -- -- <0.05 0.280 <0.05 <Mean value of detection -- 0.113 -- 0.021 0.082 -- -- -- 0.280 -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.021 -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 17 19 21 Number of detections -- 2 0 1 3 -- -- 0 1 0 Percent detection -- 10 0 4 5 -- -- 0 5 0 LRL (or LRL range) -- 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.5 -- -- 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Menthol Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.110 0.110 0.089 0.089 0.083 -- <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.120 0.120 0.089 0.089 0.110 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.115 0.115 0.089 0.089 0.097 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 2 2 1 1 2 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 50 22 14 14 29 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Metalaxyl

Minimum value -- -- -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- -- Max value -- -- -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- -- Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 5 -- -- Number of detections -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- Percent detection -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- LRL (or LRL range) -- -- -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- -- 

Methylsalicylate

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Metolachlor

Minimum value 0.085 0.046 -- 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.016 -- <0.5 Max value 0.085 0.046 -- 0.071 0.085 0.076 0.076 0.070 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection 0.085 0.046 -- 0.045 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.043 -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- 0.042 0.050 0.057 0.057 0.043 -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 1 1 -- 4 6 6 6 4 -- 0 Percent detection 25 100 -- 100 67 86 86 57 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Minimum value 0.140 0.044 0.077 0.083 0.044 0.080 0.080 0.179 0.104 0.948 

Max value 0.230 1.47 0.435 1.20 1.47 0.270 0.270 1.50 0.586 4.76 Mean value of detection 0.198 0.709 0.242 0.464 0.438 0.187 0.187 0.698 0.267 2.05 Median value of detection 0.210 0.708 0.241 0.306 0.303 0.200 0.200 0.623 0.180 2.03 Number of samples 4 15 19 24 62 7 7 18 10 17 Number of detections 4 15 19 24 62 7 7 18 10 17 Percent detection 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1LRL (or LRL range) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5-2) (0.5

Naphthalene Minimum value <0.5 0.019 <.02 0.016 0.016 0.052 0.052 0.028 0.016 0.022 

Max value <0.5 0.130 0.046 0.072 0.130 0.052 0.052 1.09 0.753 0.130 Mean value of detection -- 0.051 0.032 0.036 0.039 0.052 0.052 0.201 0.115 0.049 Median value of detection -- 0.036 0.030 0.031 0.031 -- -- 0.073 0.035 0.040 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 7 4 16 27 1 1 20 9 18 Percent detection 0 33 18 57 36 14 14 65 36 51 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.02-0.5) (0.02-.03) (0.025-0.5) (0.02-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) (0.025-0.03) (0.025-0.5) (0.0

Nonylphenol monoethoxylate Minimum value -- 0.042 0.364 0.411 0.040 0.520 0.520 0.120 0.160 0.520 

Max value -- 2.12 2.35 2.21 2.35 2.00 2.00 2.66 3.73 4.65 Mean value of detection -- 1.04 1.13 1.04 1.07 1.09 1.09 1.30 1.27 1.56 Median value of detection -- 1.03 1.15 0.935 1.07 0.910 0.910 1.37 1.17 1.28 Number of samples -- 20 22 26 68 4 4 29 25 32 Number of detections -- 15 15 20 50 4 4 10 13 29 Percent detection -- 75 68 77 74 100 100 34 52 91 LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.8-1) (0.8-1) (1-5) (0.8-5) 1 1 (0.8-5) (0.8-1) 1 (0.8

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Nonylphenol diethoxylate

Minimum value <5 0.450 0.749 0.309 0.309 1.50 1.50 0.937 0.654 0.280 Max value <5 2.52 2.74 2.6 2.74 3.50 3.50 3.08 2.60 3.54 Mean value of detection -- 1.63 1.62 1.43 1.55 2.78 2.78 1.76 1.36 1.51 Median value of detection -- 1.88 1.32 1.40 1.45 3.05 3.05 1.40 1.29 1.50 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 6 5 7 18 4 4 9 10 24 Percent detection 0 29 23 25 24 57 57 29 40 69 LRL (or LRL range) 5 1 (1-1.1) (1-5) (1-5) 55 1 (1-1.1) (1-5) (1-

Octylphenol monoethoxylate

Minimum value <1 0.071 0.052 0.056 0.052 0.370 0.370 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Max value <1 0.608 0.530 0.980 0.980 0.370 0.370 2.65 1.55 1.51 Mean value of detection -- 0.291 0.190 0.250 0.245 0.370 0.370 1.10 0.872 0.733 Median value of detection -- 0.218 0.148 0.134 0.158 -- -- 0.860 0.820 0.673 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 8 8 12 28 1 1 17 15 22 Percent detection 0 38 36 43 37 14 14 55 60 63 LRL (or LRL range) 1 0.1 (0.1-0.12) (0.01-1) (0.1-1) 1 1 (0.1-1) (0.1-0.12) (0.1-1) (0.

Octylphenol diethoxylate

Minimum value <1 0.019 0.014 0.022 0.014 0.130 0.130 0.087 0.046 0.062 Max value <1 0.115 0.094 0.150 0.660 0.130 0.130 0.319 0.598 0.410 Mean value of detection -- 0.075 0.043 0.068 0.057 0.130 0.130 0.173 0.189 0.151 Median value of detection -- 0.091 0.038 0.031 0.038 -- -- 0.130 0.140 0.110 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 3 6 3 12 1 1 11 15 17 Percent detection 0 14 27 11 16 14 14 35 60 49 LRL (or LRL range) 1 0.2 0.2 (0.2-1) (0.2-1) 1 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
para-Cresol Minimum value <1 0.018 0.019 0.023 0.018 <1 <1 0.017 0.028 0.016 <

Max value <1 0.260 0.064 0.086 0.177 <1 <1 0.957 0.410 0.333 Mean value of detection -- 0.084 0.028 0.040 0.047 -- -- 0.273 0.138 0.167 Median value of detection -- 0.050 0.021 0.030 0.029 -- -- 0.171 0.081 0.114 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 5 7 7 19 0 0 19 12 16 Percent detection 0 24 32 25 25 0 0 61 48 46 LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.03-1) (0.03-0.15) (0.03-1) (0.03-1) 1 1 (0.03-1) (0.03-0.15) (0.03-1) (0.0

Pentachlorophenol Minimum value 0.520 <2 -- 0.066 0.066 0.051 0.051 0.078 -- 0.760 

Max value 0.560 <2 -- 0.069 0.560 0.540 0.540 0.770 -- 0.780 Mean value of detection 0.540 -- -- 0.068 0.304 0.313 0.313 0.254 -- 0.770 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.295 0.330 0.330 0.084 -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 2 4 4 4 5 -- 2 Percent detection 50 0 -- 50 44 57 57 71 -- 67 LRL (or LRL range) 2 2 -- 2 2 2 2 2 -- 2 

Phenanthrene Minimum value 0.062 0.040 <.06 0.049 0.040 0.160 0.160 0.054 0.028 0.072 

Max value 0.079 0.790 0.641 0.260 0.790 1.60 1.60 7.45 2.06 2.40 Mean value of detection 0.069 0.291 0.171 0.137 0.185 0.564 0.564 1.338 0.307 0.425 Median value of detection 0.067 0.233 0.114 0.135 0.145 0.290 0.290 0.703 0.232 0.304 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 4 20 21 28 73 7 7 31 23 35 Percent detection 100 95 95 100 97 100 100 100 92 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.05 (0.05-0.06) 0.06 (0.05-0.06) (0.05-0.06) 0.05 0.05 (0.05-0.06) 0.06 (0.05-0.06) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Phenol

Minimum value 0.260 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.5 <0.5 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <Max value 0.260 0.402 0.954 1.35 1.35 0.500 0.500 0.730 2.13 0.766 Mean value of detection 0.260 0.294 0.535 0.518 0.447 0.500 0.500 0.416 0.659 0.460 Median value of detection -- 0.305 0.456 0.395 0.357 -- -- 0.332 0.474 0.415 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 1 9 8 12 30 1 1 14 7 12 Percent detection 25 43 36 43 40 14 14 45 28 34 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.08-0.5) (0.0

Phthalic anhydride

Minimum value -- <0.2 0.340 <0.2 <0.2 -- -- <0.35 <0.15 0.439 Max value -- 3.33 2.15 4.65 5.65 -- -- 4.90 3.00 3.28 Mean value of detection -- 1.09 1.04 1.10 1.08 -- -- 1.41 1.39 1.36 Median value of detection -- 0.810 1.07 0.970 0.924 -- -- 1.30 1.17 1.27 Number of samples -- 20 22 24 66 -- -- 24 25 32 Number of detections -- 17 21 22 60 -- -- 23 24 32 Percent detection -- 85 95 92 91 -- -- 96 96 100 1LRL (or LRL range) -- (0.2-0.35) (0.2-0.35) (0.2-0.35) (0.2-0.35) -- -- (0.2-0.35) (0.2-0.35) (0.2-0.35) (0.2

Prometon

Minimum value 0.063 <0.5 -- 0.063 0.063 0.072 0.072 0.078 -- 0.100 Max value 0.180 <0.5 -- 0.063 0.180 0.072 0.072 0.094 -- 0.140 Mean value of detection 0.122 -- -- 0.063 0.102 0.072 0.072 0.086 -- 0.120 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.063 -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 1 3 1 1 2 -- 2 Percent detection 50 0 -- 25 33 14 14 29 -- 67 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Pyrene Minimum value 0.079 0.026 0.168 0.100 Blue River 0.330 Indian Creek 0.068 0.055 0.240 <

Max value 0.150 1.56 1.28 0.600 1.56 1.90 1.90 5.54 1.57 3.60 Mean value of detection 0.111 0.547 0.391 0.325 0.395 0.886 0.886 1.742 0.478 0.859 Median value of detection 0.108 0.486 0.300 0.325 0.330 0.500 0.500 1.200 0.353 0.647 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Percent detection 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 LRL (or LRL range) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Sitosterol Minimum value 0.960 <2 -- 1.60 0.960 0.760 0.760 1.00 -- 4.20 

Max value 1.10 <2 -- 1.90 1.90 8.10 8.10 6.90 -- 4.80 Mean value of detection 1.03 -- -- 1.75 1.39 2.81 2.81 2.54 -- 4.50 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 1.35 1.70 1.70 1.40 -- 4.50 Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 2 0 -- 2 4 5 5 5 -- 3 Percent detection 50 0 -- 50 44 71 71 71 -- 100 LRL (or LRL range) 2 2 -- 2 2 2 2 2 -- 2 

Stigmastanol Minimum value <2 <2 <2 0.880 0.880 <2 <2 0.845 <2 0.828 

Max value <2 <2 <2 0.880 0.880 <2 <2 1.42 <2 2.21 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.880 0.880 -- -- 1.13 -- 1.41 Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.01 Number of samples 4 15 19 24 62 7 7 18 10 17 Number of detections 00 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 2 Percent detection 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 11 0 29 LRL (or LRL range) 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Tetrachloroethylene

Minimum value <0.5 <0.03 0.026 0.029 0.026 <0.5 <0.5 0.021 0.021 0.019 <Max value <0.5 0.120 0.066 0.029 0.500 <0.5 <0.5 1.00 0.359 1.30 Mean value of detection -- 0.082 0.049 0.029 0.060 -- -- 0.157 0.095 0.186 Median value of detection -- 0.071 0.055 -- 0.056 -- -- 0.052 0.058 0.035 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 0 3 3 1 7 0 0 15 17 13 Percent detection 0 14 14 4 9 0 0 48 68 37 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0.03-0.5) (0.03-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.03-0.5) 0.03 (0.03-0.5) 

Tribromomethane

Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 0 0 0 0 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Tributylphosphate

Minimum value 0.160 <0.06 0.100 0.086 <0.06 0.056 0.056 <0.04 <0.06 <0.04 <Max value 0.160 0.130 0.200 0.100 0.200 0.092 0.092 0.280 0.403 0.569 Mean value of detection 0.160 0.105 0.157 0.093 0.129 0.079 0.079 0.136 0.207 0.293 Median value of detection -- 0.096 0.170 -- 0.115 0.084 0.084 0.130 0.180 0.257 Number of samples 4 7 3 4 18 7 7 20 15 21 Number of detections 2 3 3 2 10 4 4 17 13 17 Percent detection 50 43 100 50 56 57 57 85 87 81 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.06-0.5) (0.06-0.5) 0.5 (0.06-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) 0.06 (0.04-0.5) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Triclosan Minimum value 0.045 <0.04 0.070 0.149 <0.04 0.084 0.084 0.041 0.057 0.120 

Max value 0.045 0.461 0.578 0.591 0.591 0.510 0.510 0.255 0.513 0.618 Mean value of detection 0.045 0.211 0.267 0.298 0.260 0.259 0.259 0.125 0.254 0.313 Median value of detection -- 0.200 0.228 0.262 0.228 0.230 0.230 0.140 0.156 0.242 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 1 19 22 26 68 5 5 23 25 34 Percent detection 25 90 100 93 91 71 71 74 100 97 1LRL (or LRL range) 1 (0.04-1) (0.04-1) 1 (0.04-1) 1 1 (0.05-1) (0.05-1) 1 (0.0

Triethyl citrate Minimum value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.063 0.063 0.027 0.027 <0.5 -- <0.5 

Max value <0.5 <0.5 -- 0.063 0.063 0.170 0.170 <0.5 -- <0.5 Mean value of detection -- -- -- 0.063 0.063 0.118 0.118 -- -- -- Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- 0.150 0.150 -- -- -- Number of samples 4 1 -- 4 9 7 7 7 -- 3 Number of detections 0 0 -- 1 1 5 5 0 -- 0 Percent detection 0 0 -- 25 11 71 71 0 -- 0 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -- 0.5 

Triphenyl phosphate Minimum value 0.018 0.019 0.018 0.027 0.018 0.014 0.014 0.061 0.049 0.023 

Max value 0.063 0.093 0.070 0.154 0.154 0.032 0.032 0.169 0.184 0.143 Mean value of detection 0.041 0.057 0.043 0.062 0.053 0.023 0.023 0.097 0.108 0.087 Median value of detection -- 0.069 0.041 0.055 0.050 -- -- 0.089 0.100 0.084 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 2 8 12 15 37 2 2 16 10 15 Percent detection 50 38 55 54 49 29 29 52 40 43 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) 0.1 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 (0.1-0.5) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued [All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14] Stream and site number Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek 2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
Tris (2-butoxyethyl) phosphate

Minimum value 0.230 <0.07 0.270 <0.07 <0.07 0.200 0.200 0.261 0.400 0.440 Max value 0.300 1.99 1.82 1.63 1.99 1.80 1.80 7.79 2.45 4.90 Mean value of detection 0.265 0.742 0.856 0.811 0.792 1.04 1.04 1.29 1.22 1.61 Median value of detection -- 0.647 0.736 0.795 0.673 1.00 1.00 0.840 1.10 1.40 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 2 16 22 23 63 7 7 31 25 35 Percent detection 50 76 100 82 84 100 100 100 100 100 1LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.07-0.5) 0.07 (0.07-0.5) (0.07-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.07-0.5) 0.07 (0.07-0.5) (0.0

Tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate

Minimum value 0.042 0.038 0.074 0.087 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.069 0.084 Max value 0.170 0.332 0.340 0.331 0.340 0.220 0.220 0.302 0.230 0.296 Mean value of detection 0.124 0.177 0.175 0.180 0.175 0.144 0.144 0.138 0.152 0.186 Median value of detection 0.160 0.153 0.160 0.168 0.159 0.140 0.140 0.130 0.150 0.186 Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 3 19 22 26 70 7 7 30 25 35 Percent detection 75 90 100 93 93 100 100 97 100 100 1LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.04-0.5) (0.0

Tris (dichlorisopropyl) phosphate

Minimum value 0.026 <0.1 <0.10 0.093 0.026 0.035 0.035 0.060 <0.1 0.052 <Max value 0.170 <0.5 0.164 0.120 0.340 0.500 0.500 0.072 <0.1 0.052 <Mean value of detection 0.095 -- 0.164 0.107 0.111 0.151 0.151 0.066 -- 0.052 Median value of detection 0.090 -- -- -- 0.107 0.140 0.140 0.066 -- -- Number of samples 4 21 22 28 75 7 7 31 25 35 Number of detections 30 1 2 6 6 6 3 0 1 Percent detection 75 0 5 7 8 86 86 10 0 3 LRL (or LRL range) 0.5 (0.1-0.5) 0.1 (0.1-0.5) (0.1-0.5) 0.5 0.5 (0.1-0.5) 0.1 (0.1-0.5) 

Table 12. Summary of selected organic wastewater compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 1999 and June 2004.—Continued[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting level; Data for site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 8 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 10 11 
166 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Table 13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 2000 and 

June 2004.

[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting limit; Data for

site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 11 Basin

1,7-dimethylxanthine

Minimum value <0.019 <0.019 0.170 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0.019 <0019 <0.019

Maximum value <0.019 <0.019 0.446 0.446 0.300 0.300 1.300 1.300 1.300

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.308 0.308 0.233 0.233 0.564 0.680 0.610

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.283 0.283 0.202 -- 0.202

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0022 3 3 325

Percent detection 0 0 50 22 43 43 38 67 46

LRL 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019

Acetaminophen

Minimum value 0.005 0.011 0.100 0.005 0.034 0.034 0.059 0.109 0.059

Maximum value 1.70 0.011 0.346 1.70 0.325 0.325 1.150 0.640 1.150

Mean value of detection 0.434 0.011 0.17 0.272 0.098 0.098 0.351 0.317 0.341

Median value of detection 0.016 -- 0.13 0.100 0.058 0.058 0.088 0.201 0.109

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Percent detection 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

LRL 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009

Caffeine

Minimum value <0.014 0.027 0.150 <0.014 0.058 0.058 0.324 0.142 0.142

Maximum value 0.074 0.027 0.713 0.713 0.585 0.585 0.619 0.710 0.710

Mean value of detection 0.042 0.027 0.426 0.235 0.358 0.358 0.470 0.373 0.444

Median value of detection 0.042 -- 0.420 0.112 0.453 0.453 0.463 0.268 0.436

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 3148 7 7 8 3 11

Percent detection 75 100 100 89 100 100 100 100 100

LRL 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Carbamazepine

Minimum value 0.007 <0.011 0.037 0.007 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011

Maximum value 0.008 <0.011 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011

Mean value of detection 0.007 -- 0.037 0.017 0.032 0.032 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- 0.008 0.030 0.030 -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 2024 3 3 000

Percent detection 50 0 50 44 50 43 000

LRL 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011
Tables 167

Cimetidine

Minimum value <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007

Maximum value <0.007 <0.007 0.011 0.011 0.024 0.024 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.011 0.011 0.020 0.020 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.024 0.024 -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 3 3 000

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 43 43 000

LRL 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007

Codeine

Minimum value <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 <0.024 0.006 0.009 <0.024 0.009

Maximum value <0.024 <0.024 0.031 0.031 0.051 0.121 0.009 <0.024 0.009

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.031 0.031 0.045 0.067 0.009 -- 0.009

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.047 0.073 -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 4 4 101

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 57 57 13 0 9

LRL 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024

Cotinine

Minimum value 0.007 0.005 0.011 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.028 0.034 0.028

Maximum value 0.034 0.005 0.092 0.092 0.121 0.121 0.177 0.103 0.177

Mean value of detection 0.018 0.005 0.033 0.034 0.068 0.068 0.075 0.063 0.072

Median value of detection 0.015 -- 0.015 0.023 0.073 0.073 0.060 0.053 0.060

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Percent detection 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

LRL 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Dehdyronifedipine

Minimum value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Maximum value <0.001 <0.001 0.010 0.010 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.010 0.010 -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 0 0 000

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 0 0 000

LRL 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001

Table 13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 2000 and 

June 2004.—Continued

[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting limit; Data for

site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 11 Basin
168 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Diltiazem

Minimum value <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012

Maximum value <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 0.013 0.013 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.013 0.013 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 1 1 000

Percent detection 0000 14 14 000

LRL 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012

Diphenhydramine

Minimum value <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015

Maximum value <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 0 0 000

Percent detection 0000 0 0 000

LRL 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Fluoxetine

Minimum value <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <00.018 0.016 0.016 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018

Maximum value 0.08 <0.018 <0.018 0.08 0.050 0.050 0.050 <0.018 0.050

Mean value of detection 0.080 -- -- 0.080 0.027 0.027 0.050 -- 0.050

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.017 0.017 -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 1001 3 3 101

Percent detection 25 0 0 11 43 43 13 0 9

LRL 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018

Gemfibrozil

Minimum value <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015

Maximum value <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 0 0 000

Percent detection 0000 0 0 000

LRL 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

Table 13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 2000 and 

June 2004.—Continued

[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting limit; Data for

site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 11 Basin
Tables 169

Ibuprofen

Minimum value <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018

Maximum value <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 <0.018

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 0 0 000

Percent detection 0000 0 0 000

LRL 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018

Metformin

Minimum value <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003

Maximum value <0.003 <0.003 0.062 0.062 0.049 0.049 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.062 0.062 0.049 0.049 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 1 1 000

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 14 14 000

LRL 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003

Ranitidine

Minimum value <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Maximum value <0.01 <0.01 <0.010 <0.01 0.014 0.014 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- 0.014 0.014 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 1 1 000

Percent detection 0000 14 14 000

LRL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Salbuterol/Albuterol

Minimum value <0.029 <0.029 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.008 <0.029 <0.029 <0.029

Maximum value <0.029 <0.029 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.008 <0.029 <0.029 <0.029

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.008 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 1 1 000

Percent detection 0 0 50 11 14 14 000

LRL 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

Table 13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 2000 and 

June 2004.—Continued

[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting limit; Data for

site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 11 Basin
170 Water Quality in the Blue River Basin, Kansas City Metropolitan Area, Missouri and Kansas, July 1998 to October 2004

Sulfamethoxazole

Minimum value <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023

Maximum value <0.023 <0.023 0.074 0.074 0.093 0.093 <0.023 <0.023 <0.023

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.074 0.074 0.066 0.066 -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 2 2 000

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 29 29 000

LRL 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023

Thibendazole

Minimum value <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011

Maximum value <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.11 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 0 0 000

Percent detection 0000 0 0 000

LRL 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011

Trimethoprim

Minimum value <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014 0.012 0.012 <0.014 <0.014 <0.014

Maximum value <0.014 <0.014 0.022 0.022 0.049 0.048 0.001 <.014 0.001

Mean value of detection -- -- 0.022 0.022 0.031 0.031 0.001 -- 0.001

Median value of detection -- -- -- 0.031 -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0011 3 3 101

Percent detection 0 0 25 11 43 43 13 0 9

LRL 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014

Warfarin

Minimum value <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006

Maximum value <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006

Mean value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Median value of detection -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Number of samples 4149 7 7 8 3 11

Number of detections 0000 0 0 000

Percent detection 0000 0 0 000

LRL 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006

Table 13. Summary of selected pharmaceutical compounds in stormflow samples collected between May 2000 and 

June 2004.—Continued

[All concentrations in units of micrograms per liter from filtered samples; <, less than; --, no data; LRL, laboratory reporting limit; Data for

site 13 includes data from sites 13 and 14]

Stream and site number

Blue River Indian Creek Brush Creek

2 7 13 Basin 6 Basin 9 11 Basin
Map showing Blue River Basin