U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5111

Prepared in collaboration with Ameren United Electric Company

Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment 

Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments of the 

East Fork Black River and the Black River, Southeastern 

Missouri—2006–07
Johnson’s Shut-Ins State 

Park before embankment 

breach.

U.S. Geological Survey 

hydrographer collecting 

surface-water quality 

samples.

Spillway of the lower Taum 

Sauk reservoir one day after 

the upper Taum Sauk reservoir 

embankment breach.

Wall scour and flow path of 

the upper Taum Sauk reservoir 

embankment breach.

Sediment and debris deposited in 

Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park after 

the upper Taum Sauk reservoir 

embankment breach.

Front cover
Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir 

Embankment Breach on the SurfaceWater Quality and Sediments of the East 

Fork Black River and the Black River, 

Southeastern Missouri—2006–07

By Miya N. Barr

Prepared in collaboration with Ameren United Electric Company

Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5111

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2009

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

natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, product, or firm names 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:

Barr, M.N., 2009, Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk reservoir embankment breach on the surface-water quality and 

sediments of the East Fork Black River and the Black River, southeastern Missouri—2006–07: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigation Report 2009–5111, 59 p.

ISBN 978-1-4113-2472-5
iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................................................4

Description of Study Area ............................................................................................................................4

Methods of Study...........................................................................................................................................7

Description of Sampling Network......................................................................................................7

Sample Collection and Analysis Methods........................................................................................9

Surface-Water Quality ................................................................................................................9

Suspended and Streambed Sediment....................................................................................11

Continuous Water Quality.........................................................................................................11

Quality Assurance and Quality Control ..................................................................................12

Data Analysis Methods......................................................................................................................17

Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects .......................................................................................17

Surface-Water Quality .......................................................................................................................21

Suspended and Streambed Sediments...........................................................................................27

Continuous Water Quality..................................................................................................................35

Summary........................................................................................................................................................36

References....................................................................................................................................................40

Table 2. ...........................................................................................................................................................44

Figures

 1. Map showing location of study area.........................................................................................2

2. Aerial photograph showing location of Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park boundary 

 and Taum Sauk pump-storage hydroelectric power plant facility .......................................3

3–5. Photographs showing—

 3. Rhyolite formations in Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park....................................................4

 4. Flood damage and flow path during upper Taum Sauk reservoir embankment

breach .....................................................................................................................................5

 5. Damage to the western slope of Proffit Mountain during the upper Taum Sauk

reservoir embankment breach............................................................................................6

6–7. Graphs showing—

 6. Departure from average monthly precipitation, January 2006 through 

 December 2007 ......................................................................................................................7

 7. Daily precipitation recorded at two U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging

stations, January 2006 through December 2007 ..............................................................8

8–10. Photographs showing—

 8. A U.S. Geological Survey hydrographer collecting a discrete surface-water 

 quality sample using the equal-width increment (EWI) method .................................11

 9. U.S. Geological Survey hydrographers collecting daily suspended-sediment

samples from automatic sampler .....................................................................................11

 10. Water-quality monitor used to measure field properties..............................................12
iv

11–13. Graphs showing—

 11. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and 

 streamflow from East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri, January 

 2006 through December 2007 ............................................................................................18

 12. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and 

 streamflow from East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri, January 

 2006 through December 2007 ............................................................................................19

 13. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and 

streamflow from Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, January 2006 

through December 2007 .....................................................................................................20

 14. Example of a boxplot..................................................................................................................21

15–16. Box plots showing—

 15. Streamflow, general water-quality, trace elements, and suspendedsediment concentrations for three sampling sites, January 2006 through 

December 2007 ....................................................................................................................24

 16. Seasonal trends of discrete surface-water quality cross-section data 

for turbidity, dissolved and total recoverable aluminum, and suspendedsediment concentrations at sites 1 and 2, January 2006 through 

December 2007 ....................................................................................................................26

17–19. Graphs showing—

 17. Correlation plots of various surface-water quality constituents.................................28

 18. Comparison of surface-water quality constituents with streamflow, 

January 2006 through December 2007.............................................................................29

 19. Suspended-sediment discharge in relation to daily mean streamflow, 

January 2006 through December 2007.............................................................................30

20–21. Box plots showing—

 20. Streamflow, suspended-sediment concentration, and suspendedsediment discharge from Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, 1993–95 

and 2006–07 ..........................................................................................................................35

 21. Suspended-sediment concentration data from Black River below Annapolis,

Missouri, May 1993 through December 2007.................................................................36

22. Photographs of selected stream reaches ..............................................................................37

 23. Box plot showing monthly median values for streamflow, continuous waterquality constituents, and suspended-sediment concentrations ........................................38
v

Tables

1. Analytical methods and method reporting levels used by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory ............................................................................10

2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007 .................................44

 3. Calibration criteria, correction criteria, maximum allowable limits, and ratings 

of accuracy for continuous water-quality monitor data ......................................................13

4. Cross-section physical property measurements, continuous water-quality 

monitor (CWQM) data, and automatic sampler data collected within the same 

hour, January 2006 through December 2007..........................................................................14

5. Summary statistics for selected physical properties, inorganic constituents, 

nutrients, and trace metals in the East Fork Black River and Black River, 

January 2006 through December 2007....................................................................................22

6. Results of inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry of suspended 

sediment collected during storm events and streambed sediment collected 

during low-flow periods.............................................................................................................31

7. Results of sediment particle-size analyses of streambed sediments used in 

inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry analyses......................................34
vi

Multiply By To obtain

Length

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

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

Flow rate

inch per year (in/yr) 25.4 millimeter per year (mm/yr)

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Mass

ton per day (ton/d) 0.9072 metric ton per day

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

 °F= (1.8×°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 (NAD 83).

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).

Water year in U.S. Geological Survey reports dealing with surface-water supply is the 

12-month period October 1 through September 30. The water year is designated by the 

calendar year in which it ends and which includes 9 of the 12 months. Thus, the year ending 

September 30, 2007, is called the “2007 water year”.

Conversion Factors and Datums 
Abstract 

On December 14, 2005, a 680-foot wide section of the 

upper reservoir embankment of the Taum Sauk pump-storage 

hydroelectric powerplant located in Reynolds County, Missouri, suddenly failed. This catastrophic event sent approximately 1.5 billion gallons of water into the Johnson’s Shut-Ins 

State Park and into the East Fork Black River, and deposited enormous quantities of rock, soil, and vegetation in the 

flooded areas. Water-quality data were collected within and 

below the impacted area to study and document the changes to 

the riverene system. Data collection included routine, eventbased, and continuous surface-water quality monitoring as 

well as suspended- and streambed-sediment sampling. Surface 

water-quality samples were collected and analyzed for a suite 

of physical and chemical constituents including: turbidity; 

nutrients; major ions such as calcium, magnesium, and potassium; total suspended solids; total dissolved solids; trace metals such as aluminum, iron, and lead; and suspended-sediment 

concentrations. Suspended-sediment concentrations were used 

to calculate daily sediment discharge. A peculiar blue-green 

coloration on the water surface of the East Fork Black River 

and Black River was evident downstream from the lower reservoir during the first year of the study. It is possible that this 

phenomenon was the result of “rock flour” occurring when 

the upper reservoir embankment was breached, scouring the 

mountainside and producing extremely fine sediment particles, 

or from the alum-based flocculent used to reduce turbidity in 

the lower reservoir. It also was determined that no long-term 

effects of the reservoir embankment breach are expected as 

the turbidity and concentrations of trace metals such as total 

recoverable aluminum, dissolved aluminum, dissolved iron, 

and suspended-sediment concentration graphically decreased 

over time. Larger concentrations of these constituents during 

the beginning of the study also could be a direct result of the 

alum-based flocculent used in the lower reservoir. Suspendedsediment concentrations and turbidity measurements were 

largest at the site downstream from the lower reservoir. This is 

because of the large amounts of debris deposited in the lower 

reservoir from the breach, which in turn were redeposited into 

the East Fork Black River during releases. When these constituents were plotted over time, the concentrations decreased and 

were similar to the other two sites in the study. Trend analyses 

were studied at one site with historical data. No major trends 

were discovered for streamflow, turbidity, suspended-sediment 

concentrations, or suspended-sediment discharges before or 

after the event. Although long-term effects of the elevated 

turbidity, major trace metals, and suspended sediments in the 

study area as a result of the reservoir embankment breach 

are not expected, there could possibly be other effects not 

measured during this study that could potentially affect the 

surface-water quality, such as loss of riparian habitat, changes 

in biological ecosystems, and large-scale reworking of 

sediments.

Introduction

The Taum Sauk pump-storage hydroelectric powerplant, 

owned and operated by Ameren United Electric (UE) Company, was completed in July 1963 and went into commercial 

operation in December 1963. The powerplant, named “Taum 

Sauk” after an Indian chief who once ruled tribes in the 

area, utilized reversible turbines that operated as pumps and 

hydroelectric generators. The turbines used power from other 

electric powerplants to pump water from a lower reservoir to 

an upper reservoir on top of 1,590-foot (ft) high Proffit Mountain during “off-peak” hours such as nights and weekends. 

When electricity demand was high, the pumping process was 

reversed and the pumps became turbine-generators as water 

was released from the upper reservoir to the lower reservoir 

through a 7,000-ft tunnel, producing electricity in the same 

manner as a conventional hydroelectric powerplant (Rydlund, 

2006).

Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park, managed by the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), is located along 

the East Fork Black River adjacent to Proffit Mountain (figs. 1, 

2). The “shut-ins” within the State park boundary are approximately 1 mile (mi) downstream from State Highway N. The 

term “shut-ins” is used to describe narrow, steep-sided gorges 

Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment 

Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments of the 

East Fork Black River and the Black River, Southeastern 

Missouri—2006–07

By Miya N. Barr
2 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

SHANNON REYNOLDS

DENT IRON

WAYNE

CRAWFORD Viburnum

Piedmont

Ellington

Bunker

Ironton

Annapolis

Pilot

Knob

Eminence

Arcadia

Centerville

Lesterville

U

106

B

F

Y

V

O

V

H

W

P

A 72

HH

HH

TT

BB

CC

AA

49

34

B

49

AA

49

A O

32

49 Z

J

N

U

KK

MM

21

PP

DD

CC

21

21

21

32

AC

K

K

91°15' 91°0' 90°45'

37°30'

37°15'

Current River

 Fork 

Clearwater

Lake

Middle

Black

River

East Fork Black River

Taum Sauk Cr

West

Black

Fork

River

Black River

Logan Creek

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Site 1

(07061270)

Site 3

(07061600)

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1991, 1:100,000

U.S. Census Bureau digital data, 2000, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection 

North American Datum (NAD) 1983

Site 2

(07061300) 

EXPLANATION

Upper Black River Basin

U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging 

 station and sampling site

Site 1

(07061270)

Johnson’s

Shut-Ins

State Park

Figure 2

Study

Area

Upper 

Taum Sauk 

Reservoir

Lower Taum Sauk 

Reservoir

St. Louis

Missouri

IRON

REYNOLDS

Study

area

Figure 1. Location of study area.
Introduction 3

along the course of an otherwise wide and shallow stream 

valley where a river becomes confined, or “shut-in,” to a narrow channel. Erosion of the exposed rhyolite bedrock produced unique formations such as gorges, chutes, and potholes 

throughout the state park (fig. 3). Johnson’s Shut-Ins is one 

of the most popular parks in Missouri, with nearly 250,000 

annual visitors (River Valley Region Association, 2008). 

At 5:16 a.m. on December 14, 2005, the embankment of 

the 55-acre upper reservoir failed. Overfilling during the “off 

peak” pumping cycle resulted in a 680-ft wide embankment 

breach, which caused approximately 1.5 billion gallons of 

water to spill down a steep intermittent stream valley along the 

western side of Proffit Mountain into and across the East Fork 

Black River (fig. 2). The flood wave occurred within 25 minutes of the embankment breach (Hendron and others, 2006). 

At the base of Proffit Mountain, the flood wave parted when it 

impacted the western valley wall of the East Fork Black River. 

The flood wave, which flowed upstream, removed a residential 

structure from the foundation, washed a tractor-trailer truck 

off State Highway N, and damaged a U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) streamflow-gaging station (hereinafter referred to as 

gaging station) located at the State Highway N crossing of 

East Fork Black River (fig. 4). The gaging station recorded the 

last stage measurement at 5:15 a.m. on December 14, 2005. 

The force of the flood wave stripped overburden from the 

western slope of Proffit Mountain, exposed bedrock (fig. 5) 

and deposited clay, silt, sand, gravel, and woody debris along 

the East Fork Black River from State Highway N to the lower 

reservoir. The deposited sediments ranged from approximately 

0.5 to 3 ft thick. The volume of area affected by the flood 

deposits ranged from approximately 133,000 to 2,700,000 

acre-ft (Rydlund, 2006). 

Floods of large magnitude, such as the one produced by 

the embankment failure, disrupt ecological and fluvial systems 

by altering channel configurations, substrate, and sediment 

discharge and present unique opportunities to analyze and 

document flood effects on water quality within the surrounding watershed. To address this opportunity, the USGS in collaboration with Ameren United Electric Company conducted 

a study in 2006 and 2007 on the East Fork Black River and a 

90°52' 90°50'30" 90°49' 90°47'30" 90°46'

37°29'30"

37°30'30"

37°31'30"

37°32'30"

37°33'30"

Johnson’s 

Shut-Ins 

State Park

Johnson’s 

Shut-Ins 

Proffit 

Mountain

Upper

reservoir

Lower 

reservoir

Power 

plant

Spillway

Shut-Ins

Taum

Sauk

Creek

U

N 206

intermittent stream valley

U.S. Geological Survey

 streamflow-gaging

station 07061270

U.S. Geological Survey

 streamflow-gaging

station 07061300

3.7 miles downstream 

from spillway

East Fork Black River

Base from Center for Agricultural, Resource and Environment Systems (CARES)

Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information referenced to the

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

0 1 2 MILES

0 2 KILOMETERS

Figure 2. Location of Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park boundary and Taum Sauk pump-storage hydroelectric power plant facility.
4 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

downstream Black River site to monitor the changes in water 

quality resulting from the embankment failure.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to evaluate environmental 

effects that occurred in the East Fork Black River and the 

Black River in response to the breach of the upper Taum Sauk 

reservoir embankment. Surface-water quality, continuous 

water-quality, and sediment data were collected from January 2006 through December 2007. Physical properties were 

collected every 15 minutes, transmitted hourly, and displayed 

publically by the National Water Information System website 

(NWISWeb, http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis). 

Description of Study Area

The Taum Sauk pump-storage hydroelectric powerplant 

is located in Reynolds County, Missouri, approximately 5 mi 

north of Lesterville and approximately 90 mi southwest of St. 

Louis (fig. 1). The study area is located in the Ozark Plateaus 

physiographic province (Fenneman, 1938). The study area is 

heavily wooded, and has steep, rugged topography with narrow valleys, dendritic drainages, and main channel gradients 

steeper than most channels in Missouri. Elevations in this 

region range from about 800 to 1,700 ft (Alexander and Wilson, 1995). The upper reservoir, on top of Proffit Mountain, 

has an average basin bottom elevation of approximately 1,505 

ft. The lower reservoir is at the junction of the East Fork Black 

River and Taum Sauk Creek (fig. 2; Rydlund, 2006). 

The northern part of the study area is in the St. Francois 

Mountains. The St. Francois Mountains are an area of about 

1,000 square miles (mi2) composed of exposed Precambrian 

igneous knobs and valleys underlain by Paleozoic sedimentary 

rocks, such as dolomite and sandstone (Fenneman, 1938). 

Many streams in the St. Francois Mountains flow on Paleozoic rocks in valleys between the igneous knobs. At Johnson’s 

Shut-Ins State Park, however, the East Fork Black River flows 

on and has eroded the harder exposed Precambrian granite and 

rhyolite, creating the canyon-like gorges known as “shut-ins” 

or “narrows” (Hayes and Beveridge, 1961).

Population in the study area is sparse, approximately 25 

persons per square mile (University of Missouri, 2001). Land 

use is primarily forested with some grazing pastures for livestock (Missouri Spatial Data Information Service, 2005). 

Figure 3. Rhyolite formations in Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park.
Description of Study Area 5

Tractor-trailer truck washed off State Highway N (photograph 

courtesy of Ken Beck, Reynolds County Courier, 2005). Damage sustained at original U.S. Geological Survey streamflowgaging station on the East Fork Black River at State Highway N 

(site 1), outside of Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park.

90°50'50" 90°50'40" 90°50'30"

37°32'50"

37°33'

37°33'10"

0 0.06 0.12 MILES

0 0.06 0.12 KILOMETERS

Base from Surdex Inc, proprietary to MacTec Engineering and Consulting Inc.

One-half foot pixel resolution, January 2006 

Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information referenced to the

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

Flow

Flow

Flow

State Highway N

East Fork Black River

Figure 4. Flood damage and flow path during upper Taum Sauk reservoir embankment breach. 
6 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

View looking upstream from the flood path towards the upper reservoir.

View from upper reservoir looking downstream along the flood path.

Figure 5. Damage to the western slope of Proffit Mountain during the upper Taum Sauk reservoir 

embankment breach.
Methods of Study 7

The study area has a temperate climate with average 

annual precipitation of approximately 40 inches per year (in/

yr) and a mean annual air temperature of 60 degrees Fahrenheit (°F; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

2006, 2007). Bunker, Missouri, approximately 30 mi west 

of the study area, and Arcadia, Missouri, approximately 15 

mi east of the study area, are the two nearest climatological 

stations (fig. 1). Monthly precipitation during the study period 

(January 2006 through December 2007), generally was below 

average at Bunker and Arcadia (fig. 6; National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, 2006, 2007). Average monthly 

precipitation values for the study area were calculated from 

monthly precipitation data available for the two climatological 

stations. Daily precipitation data were recorded at two USGS 

gaging stations during the study period (USGS identifiers 

07061300 and 07061600; fig. 7). 

Methods of Study

To determine the effects of the Taum Sauk reservoir 

embankment breach on surface-water quality, a network of 

three sampling sites were established at the USGS gaging stations. The sampling network included discrete surface-waterquality samples, suspended-sediment and streambed-sediment 

samples, and continuous surface-water quality monitoring.

Description of Sampling Network

An existing gaging station, East Fork Black River near 

Lesterville at State Highway N (USGS identifier 07061270; 

fig. 1), was used to provide baseline data for the East Fork 

Black River. The gage is located upstream from Johnson ShutIns State Park, approximately 1/8 mi outside the park entrance, 

and has been in operation from October 2001 to September 

2002, and from October 2003 to the current year (2008). 

The maximum recorded water-surface elevation of 838.6 

ft occurred May 12, 2002, and the mean annual streamflow 

recorded for the period of record is 70.4 cubic feet per second 

(ft3/s) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007).

Construction was ongoing during the study period in 

Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park to repair damages from the 

embankment breach. Extensive construction was performed 

to repair the East Fork Black River stream reach that flows 

through the park. MDNR began restoring the East Fork Black 

River in early 2007 to its original flow path by constructing 

point bars, high stream banks, and stream bends, to recreate 

typical eastern Ozark stream features (Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources, 2008).

To monitor effects of the flood on the lower Taum Sauk 

reservoir after the embankment failure, a discontinued gaging station was reactivated in January 2006 on the East Fork 

Black River at Lesterville (USGS identifier 07061300; fig. 1) 

on State Route 21. This site previously was operated as a 

gaging station from January 1960 through September 1990. 

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

2006 2007

PRECIPITATION DEPARTURE FROM NORMAL, IN INCHES

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Figure 6. Departure from average monthly precipitation, January 2006 through December 2007.
8 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Five surface-water quality samples were collected at the site 

from June 1963 through June 1964. The constituents sampled 

included pH, specific conductance, major ions, total dissolved 

solids (TDS), whole-water alkalinity (acid-neutralizing capacity), dissolved nitrate, total iron, and dissolved manganese. 

The maximum recorded water-surface elevation of 667.68 ft 

occurred on November 19, 1985. The mean annual streamflow 

for the period of record is 120 ft3/s (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2007). 

Construction also occurred at the lower Taum Sauk 

reservoir during the study period. Because the lower reservoir 

captured much of the sediments transported during the upper 

reservoir embankment breach, the lower reservoir became 

very turbid with suspended particles. An alum-based flocculent 

was added to the lower reservoir by Ameren UE to aid in the 

settling of the finer clay particles. The flocculent removed the 

electrostatic charge of the particles, which caused the particles 

to group together and once large enough, fall from suspension. The alum-based flocculent used to reduce turbidity in the 

lower reservoir primarily is used for drinking-water treatment 

(Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2006), and was 

composed of aluminum sulfate (Al2O12S3). During the flocculation period, excess water was released from the lower reservoir to reduce the water level to the normal pool elevation, 

which resulted in the release of some flocculent into the East 

Fork Black River. Removal of the settled sediments from the 

bottom of the lower reservoir by dredging also occurred during the study period. Much of the water in the lower reservoir 

was released into the East Fork Black River before dredging 

began. Water was released through the sluice rather than over 

the spillway prior to dredging. After dredging, limited releases 

of water took place in order to restore the lower reservoir back 

to its normal pool. 

The lower part of the study area is located on the main 

stem of the Black River. A gaging station was installed along 

State Highway K (USGS identifier 07061600; fig. 1) downstream from Annapolis on the main stem of the Black River, 

downstream from the junction with the East, Middle, and West 

Forks Black River, and upstream from Clearwater Lake (fig 1). 

The mean annual streamflow for the period of record (January 

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri

Site 3 (07061600)

TOTAL PRECIPITATION, IN INCHES

3

2

1

4

0

4

3

2

1

0

2006 2007

Figure 7. Daily precipitation recorded at two U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations, January 2006 through 

December 2007.
Methods of Study 9

2006 to September 2007) is 639 ft3/s (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2007). The USGS has been collecting water-quality data 

bimonthly at the State Highway K sampling site as part of 

the Missouri ambient stream water-quality monitoring program since November 1999 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1999). 

Water-quality data were first collected at this site as part of 

the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program, 

Ozark Plateaus study unit from May 1993 through September 

1995 (Davis and others, 1995). This sampling site was used 

in the current study because of its historical dataset and to 

observe the effects of the East Fork Black River on the main 

stem of the Black River after it joined the West and Middle 

Forks.

Continuous water-quality monitors (CWQM) were 

installed at each gaging station to measure physical properties (specific conductance, pH, water temperature, dissolved 

oxygen, and turbidity). The CWQM measured the physical 

properties every 15 minutes and transmitted the data every 

hour by satellite telemetry to the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) database. Each water-quality sampling 

site also was equipped with an automatic pumping sampler 

to collect daily suspended-sediment samples. Surface-water 

quality samples were collected monthly at each site during 

the first year of the study. Storm event water-quality samples 

also were collected at each site. During the second year, the 

frequency of sampling decreased to bimonthly. Constituents 

analyzed included the physical properties listed above, indicator bacteria [fecal coliform and Escherichia coli (E. coli)], 

chemical oxygen demand (COD), nutrients such as nitrogen 

and phosphorous, major ions such as calcium and magnesium, 

and select trace metals such as aluminum, iron, and lead. 

Streambed-sediment samples also were collected four times 

during the first year of the study. These samples were sieved 

for size analyses and the fine-grained fractions less than 0.063 

millimeters (mm) were analyzed for major ions and trace metals by inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry 

(ICP-MS). 

Sample Collection and Analysis Methods

Data for this study were collected by many different techniques described further in the following sections. Surfacewater and suspended-sediment samples were collected to 

evaluate changes in the water quality during the study period. 

Streambed sediments were collected to evaluate the chemical 

composition and transport of sediments during and after the 

embankment breach. In addition, CWQMs were placed at each 

sampling site to measure physical properties in realtime. 

Hereinafter, the three sampling sites will be referred to in 

their downstream order, therefore, East Fork Black River near 

Lesterville (07061270) will be referred to as site 1, East Fork 

Black River at Lesterville (07061300) as site 2, and Black 

River below Annapolis (07061600) as site 3 (fig. 1).

Surface-Water Quality

Discrete surface-water quality sampling was performed 

monthly during 2006 and bimonthly during 2007. Storm event 

sampling also was performed during 2006. Field properties 

were measured and indicator bacteria samples were collected and analyzed by standard USGS methods as described 

in Wilde (variously dated). Water-quality samples also were 

collected according to standard USGS sample collection and 

processing protocols described by Wilde and others (2004). 

All chemical analyses were performed by the USGS National 

Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in Lakewood, Colorado, 

according to established procedures (table 1). 

Water-quality samples were collected by the equal-width 

increments (EWI) method. This method is used to collect 

samples representative of the entire stream width in a fixed 

location because the streams have relatively uniform depth 

and streamflow velocities (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006a). 

The water samples consisted of approximately 10 subsamples 

collected within the designated cross section. During low- to 

medium-flow conditions, samples were collected with a handheld DH-81 isokinetic sampler (fig. 8). During high flows, 

such as during storm events when wading was not possible, 

samples were collected from the bridge by the EWI method 

using either a D-95 sampler or a D-96 collapsible bag sampler 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2006a). All subsamples were composited in a polypropylene churn before processing.

Dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and water 

temperature were measured in-situ at three equally spaced 

sections in the stream to acquire a median value representative 

of the sampling cross section. An additional specific conductance measurement was performed on an aliquot from the 

churn to account for any degradation that may have occurred 

after collection. Measurements of pH and acid-neutralizing 

capacity (ANC) also were performed on aliquots from the 

churn. Indicator bacteria samples were collected in a separate 

500-milliliter (mL) polypropylene bottle at the centroid of the 

stream and chilled until processed by the membrane filtration 

method described in Myers and others (2007). All constituents 

listed in table 1 were extracted from the churn, processed, and 

prepared for shipment to the NWQL for chemical analysis. 

Water-quality results were published in the USGS annual 

water data reports for 2006 and 2007 (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2006b, 2007) and also are available in table 2 (at the back of 

the report).

Both suspended-sediment concentrations (SSC) and total 

suspended solids (TSS) concentrations were collected during 

the study period and are mentioned in this report extensively. 

However, there is a difference between these constituents and 

may not be considered comparable because of collection and 

analytical differences. SSC data are calculated by measuring the dry weight of all sediment from a known volume of 

a water and sediment sample. A TSS analysis is performed 

by measuring the dry weight of sediment from a known 

volume of a subsample of a composited sample (Gray and 

others, 2000). Organic particles are removed from suspended-
10 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Table 1. Analytical methods and method reporting levels used by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory.

[NTRU, nephelometric turbidity ratio unit; ICP, inductively coupled argon plasma; mg/L, milligram per liter; AES, atomic emission spectroscopy; IC, 

ion chromatography; ASF, automated-segmented flow; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; MS, mass spectrometry; μg/L, microgram per liter; AF, atomic 

fluorescence]

Analyte Analytical method Method 

number

Method reporting 

level

Turbidity Broad band lighta 2130 2 NTRU

Calcium, dissolved ICPb I-147287 0.04 mg/L

Magnesium, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 .008 mg/L

Potassium, dissolved ICP-AESa 3210-ICP .16 mg/L

Sodium, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 .1 mg/L

Chloride, dissolved ICc I-205785 .2 mg/L

Fluoride, dissolved ASF Ion-selective Electrodec I-232789 .1 mg/L

Sulfate, dissolved ICc I-205785 .18 mg/L

Residue, total suspended solids (TSS) Gravimetricc I-376589 10 mg/L

Residue, total dissolved solids (TDS) Gravimetricc I-175089 10 mg/L

Ammonia + organic nitrogen, total as N Colorimetry, ASF, Microkjeldahld I-451591 .1 mg/L

Ammonia, dissolved as N Colorimetryb I-252290 .04 mg/L

Nitrate + nitrite, dissolved as N Colorimetry, ASFb I-254590 .06 mg/L

Nitrite, dissolved as N Colorimetryb I-254090 .008 mg/L

Orthophosphate, dissolved as P Colorimetryb I-269190 .018 mg/L

Phosphorous, dissolved as P Colorimetry, ASF, Microkjeldahld I-261099 .04 mg/L

Phosphorous, total as P Colorimetry, ASF, Microkjeldahld I-261099 .04 mg/L

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Colorimetryc I-356189 10 mg/L

Aluminum, dissolved ICP-MSe I-247792 1.6 μg/L

Aluminum, total ICP-MSg I-447197 2 μg/L

Arsenic, dissolved ICP-MSh I-202005 .06 μg/L

Boron, dissolved ICP-AESi I-147295 1.2 μg/L

Cadmium, dissolved ICP-MSe I-447197 .04 μg/L

Cadmium, total ICP-MSf I-247792 .014 μg/L

Copper, dissolved ICP-MSg I-202005 .04 μg/L

Iron, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 6 μg/L

Lead, dissolved ICP-MSf I-247792 .08 μg/L

Lead, total ICP-MSg I-447197 .06 μg/L

Lithium, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 .04 μg/L

Manganese, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 .6 μg/L

Mercury, total AF, Cold Vaporh I-446401 .01 μg/L

Selenium, dissolved ICP-MSh I-202005 .04 μg/L

Strontium, dissolved ICP-AESb I-147287 1 μg/L

Zinc, dissolved ICP-MSh I-202005 .6 μg/L

Zinc, total ICP-MSh I-402005 2 μg/L

a

American Public Health Association and others, 1998.

b

Fishman, 1993.

c

Fishman and Friedman, 1989.

d

Patton and Truitt, 2000.

e

Faires, 1993.

f

Garabino and Struzeski, 1998.

g

Garbarino and others, 2006.

h

Struzeski and others, 1996.

i

Garabino and Damrau, 2001.
Methods of Study 11

sediment samples prior to analysis, while suspended-solids 

concentrations can include organics. SSC are considered the 

most accurate measurement of the actual stream-sediment 

concentrations because of the representative sampling and 

analytical techniques used (Davis and others, 1995). Although 

SSC is more accurate, TSS concentrations also were collected 

during this study because the State standards for Missouri are 

based on suspended-solids concentrations. 

Suspended and Streambed Sediment

Suspended-sediment samples also were collected during 

monthly and bimonthly water-quality sampling. Collection 

techniques were designed to obtain a cross-sectional representation of the SSC using standard USGS protocols as described 

in Edwards and Glysson (1999). During wadeable stream 

conditions, suspended-sediment samples were collected by 

the EWI method at approximately 10 subsections in the cross 

section using a DH-48 sediment sampler. Suspended-sediment 

samples also were collected on the rise, peak, and fall of storm 

events to define the SSC to streamflow relation. Storm event 

samples typically were collected from the bridge by EWI 

method using either a D-74 or D-95 sampler. 

Daily suspended-sediment samples also were collected 

at each site during the study using a programmable automatic 

sampler (fig. 9). In an effort to determine the large sediment 

fluxes that occurred as a result of the reservoir embankment 

breach, automatic samplers were programmed to collect a 

single sample twice daily during the first 3 months of the 

study. After the 3-month period, the automatic samplers were 

programmed to collect one sample per day. Twenty-four 

samples could be stored in the automatic sampler, which were 

removed from the sampler during CWQM calibration visits. All cross-section suspended-sediment samples and daily 

suspended-sediment samples were analyzed by the Missouri 

Water Science Center Sediment Laboratory in Rolla, Missouri, 

using standard USGS procedures as described in Guy (1969). 

Mean daily suspended-sediment discharges and concentrations 

were published in the USGS annual water data reports for 

2006 and 2007 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, 2007).

Streambed-sediment samples were collected during the 

first year to analyze sediment-size distribution and trace metal 

content. Monthly streambed-sediment samples were collected 

from May through August 2006. Samples were collected from 

approximately 10 to 20 subsamples in the wadeable stream 

reach surrounding the cross-section location using a sterile 

Nalgene cup. The subsamples were composited into one 

large plastic zip-lock bag and shipped to the USGS Mineral 

Resource Laboratory in Lakewood, Colorado, for size and 

chemical analysis of trace metals by ICP-MS.

Continuous Water Quality

The CWQM’s were placed at all three sampling sites to 

measure field properties and supply the public with real-time 

stream conditions by the internet. The CWQM’s were cleaned 

and calibrated following USGS standard methods and procedures as described in Wagner and others (2006). Sites were 

visited approximately every 2 weeks to maintain calibrations 

Figure 8. A U.S. Geological Survey hydrographer collecting 

a discrete surface-water quality sample using the equal-width 

increment (EWI) method.

Figure 9. U.S. Geological Survey hydrographers collecting 

daily suspended-sediment samples from automatic sampler.
12 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

and service equipment. Fouling and drift corrections were 

applied to the recorded data based on standard criteria as noted 

in table 3. These field calibration data are on file at the USGS 

Missouri Water Science Center in Rolla, Missouri.

Each CWQM sensor measures a different property: specific conductance, pH, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, 

and turbidity (fig. 10). The sensors also have individual ranges 

of operation, but none were exceeded during the study. The 

CWQM’s were deployed at each site through a 4-inch PVC 

pipe near the gaging station orifice line to protect from damage 

and to keep the monitor in a fixed location during the study 

period. 

accounting for only 13 percent or less of the total days data 

were collected from January 2006 to December 2007 at all 

sites. Publication procedures were followed as described 

in Wagner and others (2006). Daily mean values for each 

physical property (median values for pH) were published in 

the USGS annual water data reports for 2006 and 2007 (U.S. 

Geological Survey, 2006b and 2007).

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Surface-water quality-assurance samples were collected 

at all three sampling sites during the study period. A total of 

five samples were collected; three replicate samples and two 

field blank samples. The replicate samples were collected to 

determine the laboratory precision of the environmental data. 

Field blank samples were collected to detect any contamination of equipment between sites. All blank constituent concentrations were at or below the reporting level used by each 

analytical method as listed in table 1. Differences between 

replicate and environmental sample concentrations were 

within the laboratory analytical error. Field blank and replicate 

data were published in the USGS annual water data reports for 

2006 and 2007 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b and 2007) and 

also are available in table 2.

Quality control procedures also were applied to the 

physical properties collected by cross-sectional samples and 

the CWQM to ensure both datasets were comparable. Table 

4 shows cross-section measurements and the CWQM recordings of physical properties collected within the same hour. The 

relative percent difference (RPD) between cross-section and 

continuous data also are shown in the table. RPD is a measure 

of precision for two different collection methods of the same 

constituent. RPD was calculated as the absolute difference 

between the cross-section and CWQM data divided by the 

average of the two values and expressed as a percentage. A 

RPD of 162 percent is noted for turbidity measurements on 

January 29, 2006, at site 2. The CWQM became silted inside 

the deployment pipe on this date during the release of water 

from the lower reservoir and did not function properly. The 

CWQM data were rated poor, but were not deleted from the 

dataset. The SSC for the January 29, 2006, collection have a 

RPD of only 1 percent, indicating an error only in the turbidity 

measurements from the CWQM.

The average RPDs for pH, specific conductance, and 

water temperature were less than 10 percent at all sites, and 

the median RPDs were also less than 10 percent. Average 

dissolved oxygen RPDs were 12 percent except site 3, which 

was 6 percent. The median RPD for dissolved oxygen was 

11 percent or less for all three sites. The average and median 

RPDs for turbidity and SSC varied between sites. The turbidity RPD between cross-section samples and the CWQM readings were not calculated for samples at or below the reporting 

level because the analytical methods vary between the two 

datasets. The average turbidity RPD at site 1 (when crosssection measurements were greater than the reporting level) 

was 88 percent and the median was 27 percent, site 2 had an 

Specific 

conductance

probe

Dissolved 

oxygen

probe

Water 

temperature

probe pH probe

Turbidity probe

Figure 10. Water-quality monitor used to measure field 

properties.

The CWQM data for each property were processed 

after each site visit. Corrections based on sensor fouling and 

calibration drift were calculated and applied when necessary to correct data between site visits. If the data exceeded 

the maximum allowable correction limits as listed in table 3, 

the data were not published. Other reasons for missing data 

also included equipment failure, interference with aquatic 

biota, low flow conditions causing monitors to be out of the 

water, and ice conditions. Corrections were applied to the data 

as soon after the site visit as possible to keep accurate data 

available on the NWISweb. No data were estimated. Missing 

data or data not published were minimal for all properties, 
Methods of Study 13

Table 3. Calibration criteria, correction criteria, maximum allowable limits, and ratings of accuracy for continuous water-quality monitor data.[μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; ±, plus or minus; %, percent; SC, specific conductance; <, less than or equal to value; >, greater than; °C, degrees Celsius; mg/L, milligram per liter; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit]

Physical 

property Calibration criteria Data-correction criteria Maximum allowable limits Rating acccuracy1 Excellent Good Fair Poor

Specific conductance, μS/cm

± 5% for SC < 100 μS/cm 

or ± 3% for 

SC > 100 μS/cm

± 5% for SC < 100 μS/cm 

or ± 3% for 

SC > 100 μS/cm

± 30% < ± 3% > ± 3–10% > ± 10–15% > ± 15%

pH, standard unit ± 0.1 pH units ± 0.1 pH units ± 2.0 < ± 0.2 > ± 0.2–0.5 > ± 0.5–0.8 > ± 0.8Temperature, °C

± 1% or ± 0.5 °C 

for liquid-filled 

thermometers;

 ± 0.2 °C for 

thermisters

± 1% or ± 0.5 °C 

for liquid-filled 

thermometers; 

± 0.2 °C for 

thermisters

± 2.0 < ± 0.2 > ± 0.2–0.5 > ± 0.5–0.8 > ± 0.8

Dissolved oxygen, mg/L

Lesser of 

5% or ± 0.3 mg/L

Lesser of 

5% or ± 0.3 mg/L

± 2.0 or 20%, 

whichever 

is greater

< ± 0.3 or < ± 5%,

whichever 

is greater

> ± 0.3–0.5 or 

> 5–10%, 

whichever 

is greater

> ± 0.5–0.8 or 

> ± 10–15%, 

whichever 

is greater

> ± 0.8 or 

> ± 15%, 

whichever 

is greater

Turbidity, NTU ± 0.5 NTU or ± 5% ± 0.5 NTU or ± 5%

± 3.0 or ± 30%, 

whichever 

is greater

< ± 0.5 or < ± 5%, 

whichever 

is greater

> ± 0.5–1.0 or

> ± 5–10%, 

whichever

is greater

> ± 1.0–1.5 or 

> ± 10–15%, 

whichever 

is greater

> ± 1.5 or 

> ± 15%, 

whichever 

is greater

1Ratings of accuracy are based on combined absolute values of fouling and drift corrections applied to record.
14 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 4. Cross-section physical property measurements, continuous water-quality monitor (CWQM) data, and automatic sampler data collected within the same hour, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; mg/L, milligram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; RPD, relative percent difference; --, no data available; <, less than]Sample date Sample time Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) pH (standard units) Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature ( ̊C) Suspended-sediment concentration (mg/L) Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment Automatic sampler RPD East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1 1/27/2006 1215 2.8 2.7 4 11.9 13.4 12 7.8 7.8 0 151 146 3 7.1 6.9 3 13 -- -- 1/31/2006 1600 2.2 2.9 27 10.6 13.8 26 7.0 7.7 10 124 114 8 7.6 8.4 10 8 27 109 2/14/2006 1130 <2 .2 -- 14.0 -- -- 7.6 7.7 1 146 134 9 12.7 4.8 90 -- 8 -- 3/8/2006 1100 <2 .1 -- 10.8 -- -- 7.3 8.1 10 160 153 4 8.8 9.1 3 14 15 7 4/17/2006 1700 <2 .7 -- 9.1 8.6 6 7.8 7.9 1 148 158 7 21.7 21.7 0 9 11 20 5/10/2006 1745 19 20 5 10.0 8.7 14 7.4 7.5 1 69 85 21 15.2 15.5 2 68a 57 18 6/20/2006 0945 <2 0 -- 8.1 8.9 9 7.2 8.3 14 179 180 1 26.5 26.0 2 5 -- -- 7/11/2006 1230 <2 6.3 -- 7.9 8.7 10 7.6 8.0 5 168 215 25 24.3 24.8 2 7 36 135 8/2/2006 1455 <2 -- -- 8.2 7.8 5 8.0 8.3 4 245 246 0 35.8 34.1 5 2 -- -- 9/12/2006 1320 <2 3.8 -- 8.8 -- -- 8.1 8.2 1 226 261 14 23.7 23.7 0 3 9 100 10/24/2006 0950 3.7 -.2 223 9.7 11.2 14 7.7 8.0 4 222 214 4 9.2 9.9 7 6 10 50 11/14/2006 0850 <2 .2 -- 10.0 11.0 10 7.8 7.9 1 168 179 6 10.6 10.5 1 3 10 108 12/5/2006 1130 <2 .7 -- 12.7 12.0 6 7.2 7.7 7 107 112 5 6.7 6.9 3 <.5 113 -- 1/4/2007 0850 <2 .2 -- 11.4 12.0 5 6.9 7.8 12 115 114 1 6.8 6.9 1 1 8 156 3/27/2007 1520 <2 .9 -- 9.3 10.4 11 7.5 8.2 9 145 140 4 17.4 17.6 1 1 483 199 5/21/2007 1245 2.1 .1 182 8.8 9.0 2 6.6 8.0 19 144 137 5 20.6 20.9 1 11 5 75 7/17/2007 1415 <2 .4 -- 7.3 10.3 34 7.7 8.3 8 211 202 4 30.9 31.0 0 7 20 96 9/10/2007 1200 <2 1.5 -- 8.1 9.0 11 7.4 7.5 1 164 152 8 21.9 22.2 1 2 4 67 11/27/2007 1630 <2 0 -- 10.7 11.9 11 8.1 8.0 1 211 214 1 9.6 9.4 2 2 -- -- Average RPD 88 12 6 7 7 88 Median RPD 27 10 4 5 2 96
Methods of Study 15

Table 4. Cross-section physical property measurements, continuous water-quality monitor (CWQM) data, and automatic sampler data collected within the same hour, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; RPD, relative percent difference; --, no data available; <, less than]

Sample 

date

Sample 

time

Turbidity

(NTU)

Dissolved oxygen

(mg/L)

pH

 (standard units)

Specific conductance

(μS/cm)

Water temperature

( ̊C)

Suspended-sediment

concentration

(mg/L)

Crosssection 

measurement

CWQM 

data RPD

Crosssection 

measurement

CWQM 

data RPD

Crosssection 

measurement

CWQM 

data RPD

Crosssection 

measurement

CWQM 

data RPD

Crosssection 

measurement

CWQM 

data RPD

Crosssection 

measurement

Automatic 

sampler RPD

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

1/27/2006 1410 23 27 16 11.9 12.1 2 7.4 7.5 1 149 134 11 6.7 6.5 3 22 31 341/29/2006 1740 180 19 162 12.8 13.1 2 7.4 7.1 4 157 151 4 6.3 6.9 9 474 469 12/1/2006 1340 24 22 9 12.2 11.8 3 7.5 7.6 1 138 142 3 8.6 7.8 10 27 40 392/15/2006 1030 15 26 54 13.1 12.9 2 7.1 7.8 9 140 141 1 4.2 4.5 7 28 20 333/8/2006 1330 9.2 12 26 10.9 12.4 13 7.3 7.9 8 160 156 3 9.2 9.4 2 14 35 864/17/2006 1300 18 20 11 8.8 11.7 28 7.8 7.7 1 137 132 4 18.9 19.6 4 25 37 395/9/2006 1645 11 -- -- 9.3 -- -- 7.5 -- -- 133 134 1 18.4 18.4 0 15 -- --5/10/2006 2130 31 -- -- 7.4 -- -- 7.4 -- -- 122 99 21 17.1 17.0 1 99 70 346/19/2006 1245 16 17 6 8.0 8.3 4 7.6 7.8 3 158 157 1 26.6 26.1 2 21 68 1067/11/2006 1620 13 16 21 6.9 7.7 11 7.6 7.8 3 142 178 23 24.2 24.2 0 16 -- --8/2/2007 1030 8.4 6.6 24 6.0 7.4 21 7.6 8.0 5 233 232 0 27.9 28.2 1 16 -- --9/12/2006 1135 8.3 5.4 42 5.6 8.4 40 7.7 7.8 1 231 249 8 23.2 22.9 1 13 20 4210/23/2006 1520 9.4 6.6 35 9.2 -- -- 7.6 8.0 5 250 245 2 12.2 12.6 3 11 204 18011/13/2006 1615 4.2 5.6 29 9.3 -- -- 7.7 8.0 4 180 192 6 11.8 11.6 2 9 13 3612/5/2006 1500 43 45 5 12.1 12.3 2 6.8 7.5 10 69 71 3 7.3 6.9 6 30 152 1341/3/2007 1245 2.9 3 3 12.6 11.3 11 6.9 7.9 14 117 115 2 6.5 6.1 6 3 245 1953/27/2007 1120 4.2 6.2 38 9.6 10.3 7 7.2 7.8 8 149 146 2 16.0 16.2 1 9 9 05/21/2007 1630 6.9 -- -- 9.0 10.0 11 6.8 7.8 14 119 112 6 22.5 22.7 1 47 16 987/17/2007 1155 5.8 6.9 17 6.1 7.6 22 7.1 7.7 8 156 150 4 25.5 26.4 3 11 15 319/11/2007 0945 7.4 8.6 15 6.9 7.8 12 7.6 7.6 0 158 153 3 22.9 23.0 0 10 12 1811/27/2007 1315 2.6 1.8 36 10.4 12.7 20 8.0 7.9 1 167 168 1 8.9 8.6 3 6 7 14Average RPD 30 12 5 5 3 62Median RPD 22 11 4 3 2 38
16 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 4. Cross-section physical property measurements, continuous water-quality monitor (CWQM) data, and automatic sampler data collected within the same hour, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; mg/L, milligram per liter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; RPD, relative percent difference; --, no data available; <, less than]Sample date Sample time Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) pH (standard units) Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature ( ̊C) Suspended-sediment concentration (mg/L) Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment CWQM data RPD Cross- section measure- ment Automatic sampler RPD Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3 1/27/2006 1140 3 3 0 11.3 12.2 8 7.8 8.1 4 278 278 0 6.7 6.6 2 5 59 169 1/29/2006 1730 57 56 2 11.3 11.2 1 7.4 8.0 8 232 220 5 9.6 9.6 0 122 101 19 2/2/2006 0855 8 10 22 10.9 11.0 1 7.9 7.9 0 236 230 3 8.4 8.3 1 14 35 86 2/13/2006 1315 2.6 2.7 4 11.6 13.6 16 7.5 8.0 6 257 249 3 4.8 4.8 0 4 79 181 3/7/2006 1230 3 1.7 55 12.2 11.9 2 7.5 8.1 8 279 274 2 9.2 8.7 6 11 39 112 4/18/2006 1145 2.1 2.2 5 10.3 9.8 5 8.0 8.1 1 257 263 2 18.2 18.8 3 5 81 177 5/11/2006 1545 49 51 4 8.9 10.0 12 7.0 7.6 8 143 153 7 15.0 15.0 0 104 201 64 6/20/2006 1445 <2 2.4 -- 8.0 -- -- 7.8 8.0 3 279 282 1 26.9 27.1 1 7 709 196 7/12/2006 1030 <2 .6 -- 8.3 8.5 2 7.9 8.1 2 178 273 42 22.1 22.4 1 4 137 189 8/3/2007 1025 <2 1.3 -- 8.2 7.5 9 7.8 8.0 3 293 290 1 26.2 26.3 0 3 75 185 9/11/2006 1525 5.2 .3 178 9.7 8.5 13 7.4 8.1 9 307 296 4 21.9 22.1 1 2 152 195 10/23/2006 1135 3.5 .3 168 9.8 10.7 9 7.9 8.1 2 357 350 2 12.3 12.6 2 1 79 195 11/13/2006 1310 <2 .5 -- 11.4 11.3 1 7.8 8.2 5 291 302 4 11.9 11.8 1 4 243 194 12/19/2006 0940 2.5 1 86 10.6 11.3 6 7.3 8.1 10 234 226 3 9.3 9.3 0 1 3 100 1/4/2007 1245 <2 .9 -- 11.5 12.2 6 7.1 8.1 13 223 220 1 7.8 7.6 3 2 -- -- 2/12/2007 1400 -- .1 -- 12.8 -- -- 7.6 8.2 8 244 241 1 6.1 6.0 2 -- -- -- 3/29/2007 1145 <2 2.3 -- 10.2 10.1 1 7.8 7.6 3 271 264 3 15.1 15.4 2 12 271 183 4/3/2007 1025 -- 1.9 -- 9.9 9.9 0 7.5 7.4 1 235 230 2 15.0 15.3 2 -- -- -- 5/22/2007 0910 <2 .7 -- 8.6 9.4 9 7.3 8.0 9 235 231 2 18.5 18.4 1 83 10 157 6/12/2007 1000 -- -- -- 8.7 -- -- 7.8 8.1 4 273 266 3 20.1 20.6 2 1 260 198 7/17/2007 0910 <2 -- -- 6.8 7.8 14 7.6 7.9 4 309 300 3 23.8 24.1 1 2 195 196 9/10/2007 1530 8.5 5 52 7.7 7.8 1 7.6 7.7 1 279 271 3 24.3 24.4 0 6 517 195 11/27/2007 0945 <2 0 -- 11.4 12.4 8 8.2 8.1 1 339 333 2 8.7 8.7 0 2 7 111

Average RPD 64 6 5 4 1 162

Median RPD 52 6 4 3 1 184

aA value of 166 mg/L was previously published for this sample date in the 2006 U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Data of the United States, annual water data report, WDR–US–2006. After further 

review, it was discovered that one subsample appeared too high, because the sampler possibly hit the streambed during collection. The subsample was removed from the cross-sectional average and recalculated. 
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 17

average turbidity RPD of 30 percent and median of 22 percent, 

and site 3 had an average RPD of 64 percent and median of 52 

percent. The average SSC RPD at site 1 was 88 percent and 

the median RPD was 96 percent. Site 2 had an average RPD 

of 62 percent and a median RPD of 38 percent for SSC, while 

site 3 had an average RPD of 162 percent and a median RPD 

of 184 percent. The large RPDs of the SSC samples could 

have been caused by the location of the automatic sampler at 

each site. The automatic samplers were placed on a streambank approximately 1 ft from the edge of water at each site. It 

is possible that sediments were more concentrated along these 

streambanks where the stream velocity is typically less than in 

the centroid of the stream.

Differences between the average and median RPDs 

for dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance, and water 

temperature were 5 percent or less for all sites. Differences 

between the average and median turbidity RPDs were 61 percent at site 1, 8 percent at site 2, and 12 percent at site 3. Differences in average and median RPDs for SSC were 8 percent 

at site 1, 24 percent at site 2, and 22 percent at site 3. 

Figures 11 through 13 show the physical property measurements for the cross-section samples plotted with the daily 

mean CWQM data and daily mean streamflow. Most CWQM 

measurements show a good relation with the corresponding 

field property. The pH data from the cross-section samples do 

not appear to have a good relation with the CWQM data. This 

is because the cross-section samples represent a single pH 

value collected from the churn while the CWQM data are a 

daily median value. 

Data Analysis Methods

Data collected at each site were analyzed for statistical 

significance using a variety of methods. Cross-section waterquality samples were tested for correlation between parameters using Kendall’s tau. The correlations measure the strength 

of association between two constituents (Helsel and Hirsch, 

1992). A nonparametric test known as the Kruskal-Wallis t-test 

was performed on all constituents to test for significant differences in distributions. Constituents were determined to be 

significantly different when the “attained significance level” 

(p-value) was less than 0.05. If significant differences were 

noted, the Tukey’s multiple comparison test was performed on 

the rank-transformed data to identify similarities between the 

three sites (Helsel and Hirsch, 1992). A two-way analysis of 

variance test (ANOVA) also was performed on the rank-transformed data of selected parameters to determine the relation 

between sites as well as seasonal differences. 

Boxplots are used to graphically display the distribution 

of a selected constituent at multiple sites (Helsel and Hirsch, 

1992). Boxplots provide a visual summary of the 25th, 50th, and 

75th percentiles and any extreme values in the distribution (fig. 

14). The boxplots consists of the median value (50th percentile) 

plotted as a horizontal line, and a box is drawn from the 25th

percentile to the 75th percentile. The box length, also known 

as the interquartile range (IQR), represents one-half of the 

data values. The IQR is insensitive to the presence of extreme 

values in the distribution. If a median value does not divide 

the box into two equal parts, it indicates asymmetry in the data 

distribution. Adjacent values are located outside the box and, 

if within 1.5 times the IQR, are shown as whisker lines. The 

length of the whisker connected to the 75th percentile represents the value of the largest adjacent point; the length of the 

whisker connected to the 25th percentile represents the smallest adjacent value. Values which are more extreme in either 

direction than the adjacent values are plotted individually. 

The values equal to 1.5 to 3.0 times the IQR are called “farout values” and are represented by an ‘x’ (D.R. Helsel, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written comm., 1989). Values greater than 

the “far-out values” are represented by a circle. If the median 

data equals the 25th percentile, no center line is shown. If the 

median of the data equals both the 25th and 75th percentiles, the 

box will be plotted as a single line. Any boxplots made with 

censored data (data reported as less than a given value) were 

modified by making the lower limit of the box equal to the 

reported value.

All SSC determined by daily sediment samples were 

used to calculate the suspended-sediment discharge in tons per 

day (tons/d) using the USGS Graphical Constituent Loading 

Analysis System (GCLAS) following methods described in 

Porterfield (1972) and Koltun and others (2006). Daily mean 

SSC and daily suspended-sediment discharges were published 

in the USGS annual water data report (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, 2007). SSC for missing days were estimated when 

applicable by using a transport curve to best-fit estimated data. 

The SSC determined from cross-section suspended-sediment 

samples were used to calibrate the SSC of the daily samples 

by applying a coefficient. A coefficient is the ratio of the crosssection SSC to the daily SSC. Coefficients were applied by 

time between cross-section collections and also were adjusted 

by the streamflow. During 2006, coefficients ranged from 0.1 

to 1.09 at site 1, 0.07 to 1.38 at site 2, and 0.01 to 1.08 at site 

3. Coefficients applied to daily samples during 2007 ranged 

from 0.12 to 3 at site 1, 0.13 to 2.94 at site 2, and 0.01 to 0.33 

at site 3. 

Assessment of Surface-Water Quality 

Effects

Statistical analyses were performed on the data obtained 

from water-quality sampling, suspended-sediment samples, 

and CWQMs. This section describes results of statistical tests 

applied to historical and current data used to identify trends 

in surface-water quality data from before and after the upper 

reservoir embankment breach. Statistical summaries also were 

computed for the CWQM data from each site.
18 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Site 1 (07061270)

 Daily mean values (pH is daily median values)

 Daily mean streamflow, in cubic feet per second

 Water-quality cross-section measurement

EXPLANATION

0

10

20

30

40

1

10

100

1,000

.5

2

4

2

4

2

4

3,000 STREAMFLOW

WATER TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS

50

100

150

200

250

300

STREAMFLOW

DISSOLVED OXYGEN, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

1

10

100

1,000

.5

2

4

2

4

2

4

3,000

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

STREAMFLOW

PH, IN STANDARD UNITS

1

10

100

1,000

.5

2

4

2

4

2

4

3,000

1

10

100

.2

.4

.6

.8

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

STREAMFLOW

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

1

10

100

1,000

.5

2

4

2

4

2

4

3,000

0

5

10

15

20

STREAMFLOW

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN MICROSIEMENS PER 

CENTIMETER AT 25 DEGREES CELSIUS

1

10

100

1,000

.5

2

4

2

4

2

4

3,000 STREAMFLOW

TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS

0

10

20

30

70

80

90

100

2

4

1

10

100

.5

2

4

2

4

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

Figure 11. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and streamflow from East Fork Black River near Lesterville, 

Missouri, January 2006 through December 2007.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 19

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

1

10

100

.2

.4

.6

.8

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

150

1

10

100

1,000

.2

.4

2

4

2

4

2

4

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

STREAMFLOW

6.6

6.9

7.2

7.5

7.8

8.1

8.4

1

10

100

1,000

2

4

6

2

4

6

2

4

6

2,000

PH, IN STANDARD UNITS

STREAMFLOW

Site 2 (07061300)

 Daily mean values (pH is daily median values)

 Daily mean streamflow, in cubic feet per second

 Water-quality cross-section measurement

EXPLANATION

0

60

120

180

240

300

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN MICROSIEMENS PER 

CENTIMETER AT 25 DEGREES CELSIUS

STREAMFLOW

1

10

100

1,000

2

4

6

2

4

6

2

4

6

2,000

0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

DISSOLVED OXYGEN, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

STREAMFLOW

1

10

100

1,000

2

4

6

2

4

6

2

4

6

2,000

0

10

20

30

40

STREAMFLOW

WATER TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS

1

10

100

1,000

.2

.4

2

4

2

4

2

4

TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS

STREAMFLOW

0

20

40

60

110

130

150

170

190

1

10

100

1,000

2

4

2

4

2

4

2,000

Figure 12. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and streamflow from East Fork Black River at Lesterville, 

Missouri, January 2006 through December 2007.
20 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Site 3 (07061600)

 Continuous daily mean values (pH is daily median values)

 Daily mean streamflow, in cubic feet per second

 Water-quality cross-section measurement

EXPLANATION

0

100

200

300

400

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN MICROSIEMENS PER 

CENTIMETER AT 25 DEGREES CELSIUS

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

STREAMFLOW

6.6

7.0

7.4

7.8

8.2

8.6

PH, IN STANDARD UNITS

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

STREAMFLOW

1

10

100

1,000

.5

5

5

5

3,000

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION, 

IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

STREAMFLOW

TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS 

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

STREAMFLOW

0

15

30

45

100

115

130

150

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

WATER TEMPERATURE, IN DEGREES CELSIUS

STREAMFLOW

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

DISSOLVED OXYGEN, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER 

100

1,000

10,000

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

STREAMFLOW

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

Jan. 1 May 2 Sept. 1 Dec. 31 May 2 Aug. 31 Dec. 31

2006 2007

Figure 13. Comparison of continuous data, cross-section measurements, and streamflow from Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, 

January 2006 through December 2007.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 21

Surface-Water Quality

Summary statistics for selected water-quality constituents 

are found in table 5. The non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis t-test 

indicated that several constituents were significantly different 

between sites (p-value < 0.05). To better define these differences, the multiple comparison Tukey test was performed. 

Streamflow and turbidity were significantly different at 

each of the three sites (p-value < 0.05; fig. 15). These findings 

were expected because all three sites have different streambed characteristics and upstream influences such as land use, 

drainage area, and the lower reservoir for sites 2 and 3. There 

were no significant differences between sites 1 and 3 and 

between sites 2 and 3 for TSS and SSC. However, the TSS 

and SSC were statistically different between sites 1 and 2. 

The differences in TSS and SSC between sites 1 and 2 could 

be caused by the presence of the lower reservoir between the 

two sites. Because the lower reservoir was drained to remove 

sediments captured from the upper reservoir embankment 

breach during the early months of the study, a large amount 

of suspended sediments likely was introduced into the East 

Fork Black River. Additionally, dredging of sediment that had 

settled out during the flocculation process also may have influenced concentration values during the first year. It is likely 

that site 3 also would have been influenced by the release of 

suspended solids from the lower reservoir, though the data 

would not have equivalent concentrations as site 2 because 

of the larger drainage area for site 3. Historical TSS and SSC 

data available for site 3 also were compared to data collected 

during 2006-07 at site 1. It was determined that data from both 

datasets were statistically similar (SSC p-value = 0.51, TSS 

p-value = 0.40). 

Cross-section water-quality data from sites 1 and 2 were 

similar in hardness, sulfate, total dissolved solids, and nitrate 

plus nitrite concentrations. The similarities in the dissolved 

constituents seem reasonable because sites 1 and 2 are along 

the same stream reach, and these constituents would not be 

expected to change as rapidly as suspended solids. Site 3 has 

additional influences of dissolved constituents from the West 

and Middle Fork Black Rivers.

In addition to determining similarities between sites, seasonal trends also were investigated. The seasons were defined 

as four 3-month periods for winter, spring, summer, and fall. 

Winter months were December through February, spring 

months were March through May, summer months were June 

through August, and the fall months were September through 

November. A two-way ANOVA test was used to identify 

differences between sites and seasons simultaneously on the 

ranked data. Few constituents showed statistically similar 

seasonal trends for all sites. However, a significant seasonal 

decrease from winter to fall was observed for turbidity and 

dissolved and total recoverable aluminum at sites 1 and 2. 

The decrease in turbidity and dissolved and total recoverable 

aluminum, especially at site 2, could be attributed to the alum 

flocculent used to reduce turbidity from suspended sediments 

in the lower reservoir during January 2006. The alum flocculent was made of aluminum sulfate, and as the flocculent 

was removed from the lower reservoir and diluted in the East 

Fork Black River, the concentrations of aluminum and sulfate 

would also be expected to decrease. Another possible source 

of the larger concentrations during the study period could 

be the upper reservoir embankment breach itself. Because 

aluminum occurs as aluminosilicate clay minerals in the soils 

of the study area, the embankment breach would have released 

aluminum to the East Fork Black River, which over time 

would have moved through the study area. A seasonal decrease 

from winter to fall in suspended sediments was observed for 

site 2, while an increase was observed for site 1 (fig. 16). The 

increase in SSC at site 1 is thought to be caused by the river 

reconstruction that took place during the spring and summer 

months. The river reconstruction involved the removal and 

stabilization of streambank material. Heavy equipment also 

was observed crossing the East Fork Black River just downstream from site 1 during base-flow conditions. The reconstruction efforts caused backflow and the deposition of point 

bars, affecting the water quality at site 1 during the summer 

and fall months of the study. 

Linear correlation analyses were performed on several 

constituents at each site using Kendall’s tau. The correlation 

measures the strength of association between two constituents (Helsel and Hirsch, 1992). All sites had coefficients 

(R2) greater than 0.70 between dissolved oxygen and water 

temperature, specific conductance and water hardness, specific 

conductance and TDS, and turbidity and SSC, indicating good 

correlation. Correlations between turbidity and TSS and TSS 

and SSC had large coefficients (R2 > 0.70) indicating strong 

correlation, but because of a limited data set and numerous 

TSS concentrations at the detection limit, the correlation coefficients could be skewed. Data collected at site 1 had larger 

correlation coefficients (R2 = 0.80 to 0.99) than the data collected at the other two sites. Site 3, the most downstream site 

and largest drainage area, had the smallest correlation coefficients (R2

 = 0.70 to 0.98). 

30 Number—Number of values 

x

x

o

o

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

50th percentile

(median)

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outlier

Lower far-out value

Upper far-out value

Upper outlier

}Interquartile range 

(IQR)

Figure 14. Example of a boxplot.
22 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 5. Summary statistics for selected physical properties, inorganic constituents, nutrients, and trace metals in the East Fork Black River and Black River, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; mg/L, milligram per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; oC, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; N, nitrogen; col, colonies; mL, milliter; μg/L micrograms per liter; all concentrations are dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Discharge (ft3/s) Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) pH Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature 

(°C)

Hardness 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3

)

Calcium 

(mg/L)

Magnesium 

(mg/L)

Potassium 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L)

Total 

dissolved 

solids 

(mg/L)

Total 

suspended 

solids 

(mg/L)

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1

Number of samples 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19Minimum .9 2 7.3 6.6 69 6.7 33 6.9 3.8 .8 4.4 57 10

25th percentile 9 2 8.5 7.3 145 9.0 66 13.6 7.8 .9 5.5 82 10Median 24 2 9.7 7.6 160 15.2 72 15.3 8.4 1.0 6.4 90 10Mean 67 3.04 9.9 7.5 163 16.7 81 16.9 9.6 1.0 6.3 99 1175th percentile 46 2.05 10.8 7.8 195 22.8 105 21.8 12.4 1.1 7.1 124 10Maximum 749 19 14.0 8.1 245 35.8 130 26.8 15.7 1.4 8.1 147 36Standard deviation 167 3.88 1.8 .4 44.8 8.9 26.2 5.4 3.2 .2 1.2 25 6

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

Number of samples 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21Minimum 2.4 2.6 5.6 6.8 69 4.2 30 6.1 3.5 .9 5.0 43 1025th percentile 20 6.9 7.4 7.2 137 8.6 61 12.6 7.1 1.0 6.4 84 10Median 30 9.4 9.3 7.5 149 16.0 69 14.4 8.2 1.1 6.9 86 10Mean 158 21 9.4 7.4 155 15.5 74 15.5 8.7 1.2 9.1 93 3375th percentile 113 18 11.9 7.6 160 22.9 85 17.6 9.7 1.3 9.7 96 16Maximum 1,090 180 13.1 8.0 250 27.9 120 25.2 14.9 1.7 25.7 152 395Standard deviation 298 38 2.4 .33 41.5 7.8 22.3 4.7 2.8 .24 5.1 25 84

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3

Number of samples 25 20 25 25 25 25 22 22 22 22 22 22 25Minimum 134 2.0 6.8 7.0 143 4.8 71 15.1 8.1 .9 11 97 1025th percentile 225 2.0 8.7 7.5 235 8.7 123 24.1 14.4 1.0 18 142 10Median 305 2.3 10.3 7.6 273 13.4 135 27.1 16 1.0 22 159 10Mean 689 8.1 10.2 7.6 267 14.5 136 27.4 16 1.0 23 161 1775th percentile 614 3.9 12.8 7.8 293 20.1 147 29.9 17.3 1.1 26.1 171 10Maximum 6,830 57 26.0 8.2 357 26.9 180 35.9 22.7 1.3 39.2 207 103Standard deviation 1313 16 1.6 .29 48.9 6.8 24.5 4.8 3.1 .11 7.6 29 22
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 23

Table 5. Summary statistics for selected physical properties, inorganic constituents, nutrients, and trace metals in the East Fork Black River and Black River, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; mg/L, milligram per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; oC, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; N, nitrogen; col, colonies; mL, milliter; μg/L micrograms per liter; all concentrations are dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Ammonia 

(mg/L as N)

Nitrite

 plus 

nitrate

 (mg/L as N)

Chemical 

oxygen 

demand 

(mg/L)

Fecal 

coliform 

(col/100 mL)

Aluminum 

(μg/L)

Aluminum, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Iron 

(μg/L)

Lead 

(μg/L)

Lead, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Manganese 

(μg/L)

Zinc 

(μg/L)

Zinc, 

total 

(μg/L)

Suspendedsediment 

concentration 

(mg/L)

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1

Number of samples 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19Minimum .008 .040 10 1 .9 2.0 4 .05 .04 2 .3 1 .525th percentile .019 .055 10 4 2 13 7.5 .08 .07 7 .6 2 2Median .020 .060 10 12 2 17 10 .09 .12 14 1 2 6Mean .034 .081 11.05 136 4 43 30.5 .11 .32 26 1 2 975th percentile .040 .060 10 30 2.1 48 33 .12 .19 36.2 1.4 2 9Maximum .216 .340 20 2,000 33.4 303 158 .30 2.70 106 1.9 4 68Standard deviation .045 .078 3.15 455 7.4 69 45.4 .05 .63 27.5 .5 .6 16

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

Number of samples 21 21 21 20 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21Minimum .010 .040 10 1 1 28 3 .04 .08 4 .30 1 325th percentile .020 .050 10 3.5 4 165 5 .08 .40 14 .6 1 11Median .040 .060 10 7 6 290 6 .08 .49 27 .7 2 16Mean .040 .080 10 22.4 7.8 497 7.4 .09 1.0 45 .9 2 4575th percentile .040 .070 10 21.3 10 585 8 .12 .84 40.2 1.4 2 27Maximum .147 .230 10 110 35.3 2,190 28 .12 6.97 156 1.8 8 474Standard deviation .030 .056 0 35 7.3 547 5.4 .03 1.45 45.4 .5 1.7 103

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3

Number of samples 25 25 20 24 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 20Minimum .010 .070 10 1 1 4 3 .04 .04 .2 .3 1 125th percentile .020 .100 10 4 2 18 4 .08 .08 1.7 1 2 3Median .020 .160 10 12 2 33 6 .08 .10 2.5 1 2 5Mean .025 .163 10.5 30.2 3.8 109 5.6 .10 .54 3.9 1 2 2075th percentile .040 .200 10 29 4.8 72.5 6 .12 .19 4.2 1 2 11Maximum .050 .380 20 290 19.7 807 12 .12 6.71 15.2 6 8 122Standard deviation .012 .077 2.23 59.5 4.4 207 2.1 .02 1.45 3.7 1.1 1.6 37
24 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Total suspended solids

 A B AB

o

o

o

oo

x

o

o

10

50

100

18 21 20

Turbidity

A

B

C

5

1

x

o

18 21 22

Sulfate

A

A

B

0

10

20

30

40

50

x

50

100

150

200 18 21 22

Hardness

A

A

B

0

x

0.1

1

10

100

1,000

18 21 25

Streamflow

A

B C

10,000

xx

o

o

x

o 50

100

150

200

250 19 21 22

Total dissolved solids

A A

B

0

CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC 

TURBIDITY RATIO UNITS

o

x

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

100

120 19 20 25

0

20

40

60

80

One value not shown for site 2 (395 milligrams per liter)

SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3

Figure 15. Streamflow, general water-quality, trace elements, and suspended-sediment concentrations for 

three sampling sites, January 2006 through December 2007.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 25

o

x

1

10

100

1,000

16 20 20

Suspended sediment

A

B AB

 A

o

o

x

o

o

x

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

19 21 25

Nitrate plus Nitrite

A

A

B

o

x

o

xx

o

o

18 21 22

Total recoverable lead

A B A

EXPLANATION 

Distributions associated with the same 

 letter for each constituent are not significantly 

 different (p-value less than 0.05) 

x

o x

x

o

o

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

19 21 25

Ammonia plus Organic as N

A

A

B

o

o

x

o

50

100

150

200 18 21 22

Dissolved Iron

A

B

B

0

CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

0

2

4

6

8

30 Number—Number of values 

x

x

o

o

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

50th percentile (median)

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outlier

Lower far-out value

Upper far-out value

Upper outlier

SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3

SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3

Figure 15. Streamflow, general water quality, trace elements, and suspended-sediment concentrations for three sampling 

sites, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued
26 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

x 0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Total recoverable aluminum

East Fork Black River 

at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

A

B

C

D

o

50

100

150

200

Turbidity

East Fork Black River 

at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

A

B

 B C

6 6 4 5

0

x

o

40

Dissolved aluminum

East Fork Black River 

at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

A

B B

C

6 6 4 5

10

20

30

0

o

o

1

10

100

1,000

Suspended sediment

D

E

F

A C G

AB AB

4 4 4 4 6 6 4 4

SITE NUMBER AND SEASON

SEASON

SEASON

TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC 

TURBIDITY RATIO UNITS

CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAM PER LITER

CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAM PER LITER CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAM PER LITER

Winter Spring Summer Fall

Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter

Spring

Summer

Fall

Winter

Spring

Summer

Fall

East Fork Black River 

near Lesterville, Missouri

Site 1 (07061270)

East Fork Black River 

at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

 A

EXPLANATION 

Distributions associated with the same 

 letter for each constituent are not significantly 

 different (p-value less than 0.05) 

30 Number—Number of values 

x

x

o

o

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

50th percentile (median)

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outlier

Lower far-out value

Upper far-out value

Upper outlier

Figure 16. Seasonal trends of discrete surface-water quality cross-section data for turbidity, dissolved and total recoverable 

aluminum, and suspended-sediment concentrations at sites 1 and 2, January 2006 through December 2007.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 27

Dissolved and total recoverable aluminum had strong 

correlation at site 1 (R2 = 0.91) and site 3 (R2 = 0.78). The 

correlation coefficient between dissolved and total aluminum 

at site 2 was only 0.39. However, a good correlation was 

observed between sulfate and total recoverable aluminum 

(R2 = 0.73) at site 2 (fig. 17). It is possible that the alum-based 

flocculent used in the lower reservoir was introduced to the 

East Fork Black River during water releases. If the flocculent 

was released into the river, it may have been diluted when 

it reached the main stem of the Black River as there was no 

correlation between sulfate and total recoverable aluminum at 

site 3 (R2 = -0.17). Correlation analyses also were performed 

between the daily mean turbidity data and the cross-section 

SSC for each site (fig. 17). The correlation coefficient for site 

1 was largest (R2 = 0.95), and the correlation coefficient for 

site 2 was smallest (R2 = 0.72). One data point was removed 

from the dataset for the correlation analysis for site 2, which 

made the R2 value more representative of the entire dataset. 

Before this data point was removed, the correlation was poor 

(R2 = 0.04). 

Water hardness, TDS, TSS, and SSC were graphically 

compared to instantaneous streamflow during the study (fig. 

18). Generally all three sites show a decrease in water hardness and TDS as the streamflow increased. TSS and SSC 

increased at sites 2 and 3 as streamflow increased, with the 

higher concentrations measured during storm events in January and May 2006. Concentrations of 395 mg/L for TSS and 

474 mg/L for suspended sediment were measured at site 2 

in January 2006. No large concentration for either constituent was measured upstream at site 1 in January 2006. The 

high concentrations for these constituents at site 2 are likely 

caused by the large amounts of water released from the lower 

reservoir which tended to cause particles to resuspend in the 

stream, especially early in the study period, when water was 

released from the lower sluice. The released water would have 

carried a large amount of the sediments and debris that flowed 

downstream into the lower reservoir from the upper reservoir 

during the embankment breach. Site 3 downstream from site 

2 on the Black River had approximately 30 percent less TSS 

concentration (103 mg/L) and SSC (122 mg/L) than were 

present at site 2 in January 2006; the East Fork Black River 

is likely the primary source of these constituents to the main 

stem of the Black River but become diluted by the influence of 

the Middle and West Forks. 

During the May 2006 event, the SSC at site 1 was 

approximately 8 times greater than the average SSC of the 

cross-section samples during the entire study period. The TSS 

concentration collected during the same event at site 1 was 

only three times greater than the average concentration during 

the study period. SSC and TSS concentrations collected at 

sites 2 and 3 during the same storm event in May 2006 are 

similar. The large difference in the concentrations of these 

constituents at site 1 may be because of the difference between 

analytical methods. It is also possible that the SSC was biased 

if the sampler touched the streambed at one or more of the 

subsections causing streambed sediment to enter the sampler 

nozzle. 

Suspended and Streambed Sediments

The SSC and suspended-sediment discharge data varied 

during the study period. During the 2006 water year (October 

2005 through September 2006), the cross-section SSC ranged 

from 2 to 68 mg/L at site 1 and decreased to a range of less 

than 0.5 to 11 mg/L during the 2007 water year (October 2006 

through September 2007; tables 2, 4, and 5). The total annual 

sediment discharge for the 2006 water year was 1,240 tons/

yr with a maximum monthly discharge of 870 tons/month in 

March and a minimum monthly discharge of 0.51 tons/month 

in August. In water year 2007, the total annual sediment 

discharge increased to 3,100 tons/yr with a maximum monthly 

discharge of 1,400 tons/month in February and a minimum 

monthly discharge of 0.49 tons/month in August (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, 2007; fig. 19). 

At site 2, the 2006 water year cross-section SSC ranged 

from 2 to 166 mg/L and decreased during the 2007 water 

year, ranging from 3 to 47 mg/L. (tables 2, 4, and 5). The total 

annual sediment discharge for water year 2006 was 6,100 tons/

yr with a maximum monthly discharge of 2,300 tons/month in 

March and a minimum monthly discharge of 5.39 tons/month 

in September. During water year 2007, the total annual sediment discharge increased to 8,100 tons/yr with a maximum 

monthly discharge of 4,600 tons/month in May and a minimum discharge of 0.61 tons/month in October (U.S. Geological Survey 2006b, 2007; fig. 19). 

The mean annual (average of both water years) sediment discharge at site 3 was 15 times greater than site 2 and 

40 times greater than the mean annual sediment discharge at 

site 1. It is likely that sediment discharges at site 3 are larger 

because of the influence of the Middle and West Forks of the 

Black River. The 2006 water year total annual sediment discharge was 29,300 tons/yr with a maximum monthly discharge 

of 16,000 tons/month in March and a minimum monthly discharge of 39 tons/month in September. For water year 2007, 

the total annual sediment discharge increased to 174,000 tons/

yr with a maximum monthly discharge of 64,000 tons/month 

in December and a minimum monthly discharge of 11 tons/

month in August (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, 2007; fig. 

19). The cross-section SSC ranged from 1 to 122 mg/L during 

the 2006 water year and stayed similar during the 2007 water 

year, ranging from 1 to 83 mg/L (tables 2, 4, and 5).

The increase in sediment discharge data from water year 

2006 to 2007 at all sites could be attributed to several factors: the restoration of the East Fork Black River near site 1, 

which began approximately April 2006 and continued after the 

study period; the dredging of the lower Taum Sauk reservoir 

in August 2006; an increase in storm events from November 

2006 through March 2007; and because suspended sediment 

was not collected from October 2005 through mid-January 

2006. It is possible that streambank sediment removed during 
28 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

100

1,000

10

1 10 100 1,000

1

100

1,000

0.01

1

10

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000

DAILY MEAN TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, 

Missouri 

Site 1 (07061270)

R2 = 0.95 

y = 4.4356x + 1.0125

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri 

Site 3 (07061600)

R2 = 0.74

y = 2.1234x + 5.208

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION FROM 

THE CROSS SECTION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

100

1

10

1 10 100

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri 

Site 2 (07061300)

R2 = 0.72 

y = 0.6237x + 7.3661

20

25

30

0

5

10

15

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri 

Site 2 (07061300)

R2 = 0.73 

y = 0.068x + 5.7616

TOTAL RECOVERABLE ALUMINUM IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

DISSOLVED SULFATE, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

25

30

35

40

0

5

10

15

20

TOTAL RECOVERABLE ALUMINUM IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri 

Site 2 (07061300)

R2 = 0.39 

y = 0.0052x + 5.1956

DISSOLVED ALUMINUM, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

DAILY MEAN TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS DAILY MEAN TURBIDITY, IN NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION FROM THE CROSS SECTION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION FROM 

THE CROSS SECTION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

EXPLANATION

R2 Correlation coefficient

y = Line equation

Figure 17. Correlation plots of various surface-water quality constituents.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 29

the East Fork Black River reconstruction, as well as 

bottom materials resuspended during the lower reservoir dredging, could have been remobilized in the 

stream reaches by runoff during large storm events 

in November 2006 to January 2007. Figure 19 also 

shows hydrographs of the daily mean streamflow for 

each site during the study period. The hydrographs 

indicate more high-flow events during the 2007 water 

year than during the 2006 water year. The increase in 

high flows could have caused more runoff, increasing 

the suspended-sediment discharge in the second year 

of the study. Because no sediment data were collected 

at the three sites during the first three months of the 

2006 water year, the annual sediment discharge for 

the first year of the study may not represent the actual 

sediment discharge. Sediment discharges would 

likely be larger during December 2005 and January 

2006 because of the upper reservoir embankment 

breach.

Suspended-sediment and streambed-sediment 

samples were sent to the USGS Mineral Resource 

Laboratory in Lakewood, Colorado, for ICP-MS 

chemical analysis (table 6). A suspended-sediment 

sample also was collected from the surface of the 

lower Taum Sauk reservoir shortly after the embankment breach to document early surface-water quality. Larger concentrations of calcium, potassium, 

aluminum, and iron were measured in the lower 

reservoir suspended-sediment sample compared to 

the suspended-sediment samples from the sampling 

network. The suspended-sediment sample from the 

lower reservoir was collected prior to the use of the 

alum flocculent. The suspended-sediment samples 

from the three sampling sites were collected after 

the alum flocculent was used and after the lower 

reservoir release of captured water during the upper 

reservoir embankment breach.

The suspended-sediment samples were collected 

during storm events and the streambed sediment was 

collected during low-flow periods in the summer of 

2006. The suspended-sediment aluminum concentrations from site 2 were about 1.4 times larger than the 

streambed-sediment aluminum concentrations, which 

0

50

100

150

200

Black River below 

Annapolis, Missouri 

Site 3 (07061600)

100

1,000

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

East Fork Black River 

near Lesterville, Missouri 

Site 1 (07061270)

0

50

100

150

200

1

10

100

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

9 EXPLANATION

Note: Lines between discrete sampling 

points and instantaneous streamflow

values do not indicate continuous data. 

They are strictly for the purpose of 

visualizing trends in the data.

Instantaneous streamflow

Hardness

Total dissolved solids

Total suspended solids

Suspended-sediment concentration

0

100

200

300

400

500

East Fork Black River at 

Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

1

10

100

1,000

2

2

3

4

5

6

7

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

 CONCENTRATIONS, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

INSTANTANEOUS STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Jan. 1 May 1 Sept. 1 Jan. 1 May 1 Sept. 1 Jan. 1

2006 2007 2008

Figure 18. Comparison of surface-water quality constituents with 

streamflow, January 2006 through December 2007.
30 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

is likely the result of the alum flocculent in the lower reservoir. 

The suspended-sediment samples collected in October 2006 

and January 2007 at sites 1 and 2 show larger concentrations 

of calcium, arsenic, and strontium than the streambed-sediment samples. The cause of the larger concentrations in the 

suspended sediments is unknown.

Particle-size analyses of the streambed-sediment samples 

also were performed, and the results are shown in table 7. The 

first sample collected in May 2006 at sites 1 and 2 had the 

largest silt and clay content. Later samples had much less silt 

and clay, indicating that much of the finer material had been 

transported during storm events. 

Site 3 has the longest period of record in this study. Historical sediment data from the 1993–97 NAWQA study were 

available for several of the same constituents analyzed during 

this study (Davis and others, 1995). These data and data from 

the current study were analyzed together to identify any trends 

before or after the embankment breach. The instantaneous 

streamflow values and SSC data collected in the cross section 

were used to calculate suspended-sediment discharge. 

The nonparametric Kendall’s tau test was performed 

to determine if there was a significant difference (p-value < 

0.05) in the SSC and suspended-sediment discharge with time. 

There was no significant difference found between the historical data and the current data (p-value = 0.69) for suspendedSuspended-sediment discharge, in tons per day

Daily mean streamflow, in cubic feet per second

EXPLANATION

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT DISCHARGE, IN TONS PER DAY

STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

0

250

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1,750

2,000

2,250

2,500

0.001

0.004

0.01

0.04

0.1

0.4

1

4

10

40

100

400

1,000

1,500

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

0.001

0.004

0.01

0.04

0.1

0.4

1

4

10

40

100

400

1,000

3,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

0.1

0.4

1

4

10

40

100

400

1,000

4,000

10,000

40,000

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

2006 2007

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri

Site 1 (07061270)

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri

Site 2 (07061300)

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri

Site 3 (07061600)

Missing

data

Missing

data

Figure 19. Suspended-sediment discharge in relation to daily mean streamflow, January 2006 through December 2007.
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 31

Table 6. Results of inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry of suspended sediment collected during storm events and streambed sediment collected during lowflow periods.[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; <, less than]

Sample 

date

Sample 

medium

Silver, 

mg/kg

Aluminum, 

mg/kg

Arsenic, 

mg/kg

Barium, 

mg/kg

Beryllium, 

mg/kg

Bismuth, 

mg/kg

Calcium, 

mg/kg

Cadmium, 

mg/kg

Cerium, 

mg/kg

Cobalt,

 mg/kg

Chromium, 

mg/kg

Cesium, 

mg/kg

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1

04/24/06 Suspended 4.5 35,300 8.3 177 1.8 0.09 3,090 1.5 41.5 9 39 2.210/27/06 Suspended <1 66,800 405 899 3.5 10.3 30,100 1.7 112 38.5 72.9 605/30/06 Streambed <1 82,400 47.2 580 2.5 .24 1,930 .20 184 14.2 44.4 6.606/19/06 Streambed <1 68,200 45.2 581 2.6 .21 5,570 1.8 157 30.1 48.3 5.107/11/06 Streambed <1 78,000 50.4 580 3 .24 4,820 .37 161 24.9 60.2 5.808/02/06 Streambed <1 81,100 60.7 639 2.9 .25 3,580 .41 178 31.6 54.1 5.9

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

05/10/06 Suspended 1.7 103,000 53.6 690 3.2 0.29 4,160 0.85 160 23.6 57.3 7.410/26/06 Suspended <1 102,000 256 750 3.8 3.73 16,500 1 158 24.7 61.2 7.601/08/07 Suspended <1 100,000 288 698 4.1 7.64 22,000 1 165 25.1 82.4 7.605/30/06 Streambed <1 62,000 43.5 564 2.1 .17 2,390 .34 155 14.3 38.8 4.406/19/06 Streambed <1 69,600 44.1 617 3.6 .26 5,250 108 172 40.4 65.3 5.407/11/06 Streambed <1 77,100 41.9 608 4.6 .29 6,050 1.1 136 33.4 58.6 608/02/06 Streambed <1 70,300 44.5 618 3.2 .27 2,890 .67 151 29.2 55.6 5.4

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3

05/11/06 Suspended <1 69,400 22.5 486 2.8 0.26 4,370 1.1 102 33.9 54.2 5.405/31/06 Streambed <1 52,800 19.8 373 2.4 .22 4,810 1.1 116 35.9 69.9 4.106/20/06 Streambed <1 56,100 27.5 460 2.7 .28 3,100 2.2 137 53.9 72 4.407/12/06 Streambed <1 52,600 18.5 471 2.7 .26 4,330 .88 107 43.4 105 4.108/03/06 Streambed <1 63,200 29.7 451 2.6 .33 2,380 .55 124 35.3 50.6 5.2

Lower Taum Sauk Reservoir near Lesterville, Missouri

12/27/05 Suspended <3 93,200 58 529 3.3 0.3 2,260 .31 195 16.8 48.2 7.4
32 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 6. Results of inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry of suspended sediment collected during storm events and streambed sediment collected during low- flow periods.—Continued [mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; <, less than] Sample date Sample medium Copper, mg/kg Iron, mg/kg Gallium, mg/kg Potassium, mg/kg Lanthanum, mg/kg Lithium, mg/kg Magnesium, mg/kg Manganese, mg/kg Molybdenum, mg/kg Sodium, mg/kg Niobium, mg/kg Nickel, mg/kg East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1 04/24/06 Suspended 38.1 20,000 8.4 5,134 20.1 14.6 3,392 393 0.55 283 < 0.1 30.3 10/27/06 Suspended 46.5 44,900 16.2 17,100 52.7 44.8 11,300 6,460 1.9 2,300 16 51.9 05/30/06 Streambed 26.1 30,100 23.1 34,000 94.8 32.2 3,580 717 1.8 2,230 27 21.7 06/19/06 Streambed 40.2 37,800 20 33,900 67.1 22.7 4,830 1,860 1.8 2,130 23 30.1 07/11/06 Streambed 33.4 38,100 22.2 39,000 77.4 26.8 4,900 1,520 3 1,900 24 35.4 08/02/06 Streambed 33.9 43,200 24.1 40,800 75.7 25.3 4,080 2,810 2.8 1,970 27 32.9 East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri; site 2 05/10/06 Suspended 40.4 37,700 24.2 32,904 75.3 34.1 6,082 3,070 1.7 2,561 27 34.5 10/26/06 Suspended 36.9 40,000 24.4 23,800 74.1 49.9 9,250 3,400 2.1 1,960 21 41.2 01/08/07 Suspended 44.4 38,500 24.2 24,600 77.3 51.5 8,830 1,990 2.1 1,790 22 49.2 05/30/06 Streambed 24.9 23,300 16.8 33,900 76.7 20.1 2,720 1,040 1.2 2,930 19 17.9 06/19/06 Streambed 67.6 40,500 19.9 26,000 79.3 27.6 5,170 7,320 2.1 1,980 20 55.2 07/11/06 Streambed 50.7 36,600 20.7 23,900 66.6 33.3 6,210 6,110 1.8 1,930 24 46 08/02/06 Streambed 54.4 32,500 19.8 26,300 70.1 27.6 3,940 5,350 1.9 1,980 22 40.2 Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3 05/11/06 Suspended 40.2 31,800 16.7 16,904 50.2 34.4 5,102 1,720 1.4 1,831 19 54.8 05/31/06 Streambed 47 30,900 13.8 14,600 56.9 27 4,180 2,250 2 1,400 15 51.1 06/20/06 Streambed 87.4 38,100 15.7 15,600 62.7 30.9 3,530 5,270 2.3 1,300 16 76.5 07/12/06 Streambed 57.5 28,400 13.9 14,000 51.5 28 4,010 3,240 3.8 1,340 17 65.7 08/03/06 Streambed 43.3 31,200 17.6 18,800 61.3 33.3 3,470 2,490 1.6 1,450 21 43.2 Lower Taum Sauk Reservoir near Lesterville, Missouri 12/27/05 Suspended 33.7 34,000 25 29,000 86.1 36.9 4,820 916 1.9 1,840 21 43.2
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 33

Table 6. Results of inductively coupled argon plasma-mass spectrometry of suspended sediment collected during storm events and streambed sediment collected during low-flow periods.—Continued[mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; <, less than] 

Sample 

date

Sample 

medium

Phosphorous, 

mg/kg

Lead, 

mg/kg

Rubidium, 

mg/kg

Antimony, 

mg/kg

Scandium, 

mg/kg

Strontium, 

mg/kg

Thorium, 

mg/kg

Titanium, 

mg/kg

Thallium, 

mg/kg

Uranium, 

mg/kg

Vanadium, 

mg/kg

Yttrium, 

mg/kg

Zinc,

mg/kg

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1

04/24/06 Suspended 692 29 30 0.55 8.8 19.4 5.14 1,240 .02 1.33 51.6 21.2 10210/27/06 Suspended 924 107 75 17.7 10.2 234 11.4 2,980 .76 3.16 72.5 44.4 27205/30/06 Streambed 375 28.6 162 4.4 13.2 71.3 14.6 5,150 1.09 4.13 79.2 58.6 8706/19/06 Streambed 494 165 136 4.5 12 61 13.6 4,860 .87 3.83 83.7 57.1 12607/11/06 Streambed 456 177 150 5.2 13 64.2 14.6 4,560 .97 3.91 78.4 60.8 11508/02/06 Streambed 493 108 166 5.3 13.2 64.8 15.2 4,450 .97 3.84 78.2 63.1 122

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

05/10/06 Suspended 496 38 161 4.2 15 79.4 16.5 4,430 0.84 3.81 92.1 68.8 10810/26/06 Suspended 701 63.9 137 11.9 14.6 164 15.3 3,660 1.04 3.55 98.6 54.4 22301/08/07 Suspended 746 82.6 126 13.5 15.5 280 15.4 4,040 1.05 4.24 99.1 62.2 23605/30/06 Streambed 300 38.2 131 3.5 9.8 64.8 11.8 3,990 .81 3.56 54.1 52.4 6906/19/06 Streambed 663 390 118 2.7 13.3 59.4 13.2 4,070 .93 4.05 90.7 65.8 23107/11/06 Streambed 496 391 121 3.0 13 60.5 14.3 3,930 1.04 3.88 91.2 58.5 22208/02/06 Streambed 510 400 127 2.7 11.6 60.2 14.4 3,470 .96 4.12 71.2 59.4 150

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri; site 3

05/11/06 Suspended 550 86 97 1.7 12.2 75.3 12.4 3,110 0.58 2.92 93 49.9 17205/31/06 Streambed 626 72.8 73.3 1.4 10.5 44 10.5 3,510 .66 2.78 83 45.7 15906/20/06 Streambed 778 122 82 2 11 43.2 11.4 3,160 .76 2.89 87.2 49.5 23607/12/06 Streambed 571 264 75 2 9.4 43.2 11.5 3,320 .75 3.15 69.3 44.6 31008/03/06 Streambed 591 663 105 2.6 11 51.4 13.6 3,390 .86 3.52 75.5 51.3 134

Lower Taum Sauk Reservoir near Lesterville, Missouri

12/27/05 Suspended 420 33.3 163 4.3 14.5 66.6 16.8 3,800 1.2 4.6 89.1 61.8 102
34 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

sediment discharge. Kendall’s tau was not applicable to the 

SSC data because of numerous tied (identical) values in the 

dataset at the minimum reporting level (MRL) of 0.5 mg/L. 

The historical SSC, TSS, and suspended-sediment discharge 

data were statistically compared to the current data by using 

the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to look for trends (fig. 20). Large 

p-values (0.29 for SSC, 0.57 for TSS, and 0.74 for suspendedsediment discharge) indicated that no significant differences 

were present between the historical and current data. Few 

differences appear between the streamflow boxplots for site 

3 from before and after the reservoir embankment breach 

in December 2005 (p-value = 0.45). More data outliers are 

evident before the breach, most of which are from flood events 

during 1993. Although the SSC data were not significantly different before and after the breach, the median SSC increased 

and the median suspended-sediment discharge decreased 

slightly after the embankment breach. The median streamflow did not change before or after the embankment breach. 

Because the suspended-sediment discharge decreased after the 

embankment breach while SSC increased, the suspended-sediment discharge seems to be more influenced by streamflow, 

possibly because the stream velocity is large enough to rapidly 

transport suspended sediments out of the system.

SSC also were plotted based on instantaneous streamflow ranges (base flow, median flow and high flow) at site 3 

to better observe changes that may have occurred from before 

to after the reservoir embankment breach (fig. 21). The three 

ranges of streamflow were based on the summary statistics 

for site 3 (table 5). Most sediment samples collected during 

the 1993–95 study at site 3 were collected at a median flow 

(300 to 1,000 ft3/s). The samples collected during the 2006–07 

study were evenly distributed between base (less than 300 

ft3/s) and median flows. Few data are available from both studies for high flows (greater than 1,000 ft3

/s). The base flow SSC 

for both studies are similar in concentration, with median values of 20 mg/L for the 1993–95 collection period and 4 mg/L

 for the 2006–07 period. A slight increase in SSC at median 

flow is evident, but only half as many samples were collected 

in this streamflow range during the current study than in the 

historical dataset. The median concentration could be skewed 

slightly in the 2006–07 data because fewer samples were 

collected than the 1993–95 dataset. A similar situation also is 

detected for the high streamflow data. The upper far-out value 

is shown in figure 21 for the historical data set, but the rest of 

the data are equally distributed in the data range. The current 

study data have only three values and are shown as individual 

values in figure 21. The largest SSC measured at site 3 was 

270 mg/L at a streamflow of 28,800 ft3/s in 1994. The highest measured concentration during the current study was 122 

mg/L with a streamflow of 1,140 ft3/s in January 2006. 

It was noted from January 2006 to approximately 

November 2007 that the East Fork Black River downstream 

from the lower Taum Sauk reservoir and the lower reservoir 

itself appeared to have a peculiar color ranging from bluegreen to dark brown (fig. 22). This discoloration may have 

been caused by a phenomenon known as “rock flour”, which 

Table 7. Results of sediment particle-size analyses of streambed sediments used in inductively coupled argon 

plasma-mass spectrometry analyses.

[%, percent; <, less than; mm, millimeter] 

Weights in grams Percent (normalized to 100%)

Sample 

date

Total

recovered Sand Silt Clay Sand(<2–0.063 mm)

Silt

(0.063–0.002 mm)

Clay

(<0.002 mm)

East Fork Black River near Lesterville; site 1

5/30/2006 31.3 8.0 15.8 7.5 25.4 50.6 24

6/19/2006 74.2 70.2 2.8 1.2 94.6 3.7 1.7

7/11/2006 31.3 29.3 1.4 .6 93.6 4.4 2.0

8/2/2006 29.8 27.8 1.4 .6 93.4 4.5 2.1

East Fork Black River at Lesterville; site 2

5/30/2006 31.8 7.6 20.8 3.5 23.9 65.2 10.9

6/19/2006 65.7 64.2 .9 .5 97.8 1.4 .8

7/11/2006 28.0 25.6 1.5 .9 91.4 5.4 3.2

8/2/2006 32.1 31.0 .8 .4 96.4 2.3 1.3

Black River below Annapolis; site 3

5/31/2006 52.4 50.3 1.3 .9 95.9 2.5 1.6

6/20/2006 90.7 90.3 .2 .2 99.5 .3 .2

7/11/2006 30.3 29.7 .3 .3 98.1 1.0 .8

8/3/2006 26.8 26.3 .2 .2 98.4 .8 .7
Assessment of Surface-Water Quality Effects 35

is defined as the presence of fine-grained, silt and clay-sized 

sediments formed by a mechanical erosion of bedrock. When 

the extremely small sediment particles stay suspended in the 

water, the water body can appear brown, gray, irridecent bluegreen, or milky white (Molina, 2004). Rock flour is typically 

a glacial term, but the large amount of water that grinded 

the bedrock of Proffit Mountain during the upper reservoir 

embankment breach could be the source of the fine silt and 

clay particles in the East Fork Black River and the lower 

reservoir. The extremely fine sedment particles stayed suspended in the lower reservoir, which resulted in suspension of 

the particles in the riverine system downstream as water from 

the reservoir was released into the stream. The discoloration 

also could be attributed to the alum-based flocculent that was 

added to the lower reservoir to rapidly settle out suspended 

sediments that became trapped in the lower reservoir after the 

embankment breach. Aluminum sulfate-based flocculent can 

have a green to white coloration (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2009). Because no baseline data are available for the 

East Fork Black River prior to the embankment breach, it is 

difficult to determine the source of the discoloration.

Continuous Water Quality

The continuous data collected at each site were used to 

observe daily changes during the study period. These data 

were published in the USGS annual water data reports summarized as daily extremes (maximum, minimum, mean, and 

or median; U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, 2007). Monthly 

median values were calculated from each daily mean value 

and used to determine any seasonal trends at the three sites 

(fig. 23). The streamflow hydrographs showed similar trends 

at all three sites, but with different flow rates. Similar seasonal trends in both water temperature and dissolved oxygen 

monthly median values were identified at all three sites. 

Because all three sites are regionally proximate, the observations are expected. Specific conductance has a seasonal 

trend at each site with site 3 having values approximately one 

order of magnitude larger than the other two sites. This may 

be because site 3 is located on the main stem of the Black 

River downstream from the junction of the East, Middle, 

and West Fork Black Rivers. Associated with larger specific 

conductance measurements at site 3 are increased calcium, 

x

xx

o

x

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

68 23

STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION,

 IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

1

10

100

29 19

o

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

29 19

SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT DISCHARGE,

IN TONS PER DAY

p = 0.45

p = 0.74

p = 0.29

1993–95

(Before upper 

Taum Sauk Reservoir

embankment breach)

2006–07

(After upper 

Taum Sauk Reservoir

embankment breach)

1993–95

(Before upper 

Taum Sauk Reservoir

embankment breach)

2006–07

(After upper 

Taum Sauk Reservoir

embankment breach)

p = 0.45 P-Value—Significance level from 

 the Wilcoxon rank-sum test 

 (considered significantly different 

 when p-value less than or equal

 to 0.05) 

EXPLANATION

30 Number—Number of values 

x

x

o

o

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

50th percentile (median)

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outlier

Lower far-out value

Upper far-out value

Upper outlier

[Site 3, 07061600]

Figure 20. Streamflow, suspended-sediment concentration, and suspended-sediment discharge from Black River below 

Annapolis, Missouri, 1993–95 and 2006–07.
36 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Figure 21. Suspended-sediment concentration data from Black 

River below Annapolis, Missouri, May 1993 through December 

2007. SUSPENDED-SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

0.5

1

5

10

50

100

1993–95 2006–07

BASE FLOW 

(less than 300 cubic feet per second)

9 8

0.5

1

5

10

50

100 14 8

1993–95 2006–07

MEDIAN FLOW 

(300–1,000 cubic feet per second)

o

10

50

100

1993-95 2006-07

HIGH FLOW 

(greater than 1,000 cubic feet per second)

6 3

5

1

1,000

EXPLANATION 

Individual data point

30 Number—Number of values 

x

x

o

o

Upper adjacent

75th percentile

50th percentile (median)

25th percentile

Lower adjacent

Lower outlier

Lower far-out value

Upper far-out value

Upper outlier

[Site 3, 07061600]

magnesium, potassium, sulfate, and TDS concentrations 

(table 5). Water temperature values were higher in the summer 

months and lower in the winter months. Dissolved oxygen, 

which is affected by water temperature, was larger in the winter months and smaller in the summer months. 

Monthly median turbidity and SSC values were different at each site. These constituents are affected by streamflow, 

which varies at each site. Monthly median turbidity values 

were similar at sites 1 and 3; however, site 2 

had much larger turbidity values. The larger 

turbidity values could have been caused by 

the sediments that were captured in the lower 

Taum Sauk reservoir during the upper Taum 

Sauk reservoir embankment breach or by the 

of the alum-base flocculent. Large amounts of 

water released from the lower reservoir tended 

to cause particles to resuspend in the stream, 

especially early in the study period, when 

water was released from the lower sluice. Over 

time, the turbidity at this site began to steadily 

decrease as construction at the lower reservoir 

also decreased. Monthly median SSC values 

were much higher at site 2, which also could be 

caused by the large amounts of sediment or flocculent released from the lower reservoir. SSCs 

at site 3 were generally smaller than at site 2 

because of dilution by the inflow of the Middle 

and West Fork Black Rivers. All three sites 

show large SSCs early in the study during storm events, which 

caused runoff and reintroduced fine sediments that had been 

deposited along the banks from the reservoir embankment 

breach.

Although long-term effects of the elevated turbidity, 

major trace metals, and suspended-sediments in the study area 

as a result of the upper reservoir embankment breach are not 

expected, there could possibly be other effects not measured 

during this study that could potentially affect the surface-water 

quality, such as loss of riparian habitat, changes in biological 

ecosystems, and large-scale reworking of sediments.

Summary

On December 14, 2005, a 680-ft wide section of the 

upper reservoir embankment at the Taum Sauk hydroelectric 

powerplant located in Reynolds County, Missouri, failed. This 

failure resulted in the sudden release of approximately 1.5 

billion gallons of water from the upper reservoir at the top of 

Proffit Mountain, down the western slope of the mountain, 

and into and across the East Fork Black River. The flood wave 

deposited large quantities of soil, rock, and vegetation into 

Johnson’s Shut-Ins State Park and the downstream reaches of 

the East Fork Black River. The U.S Geological Survey in collaboration with Ameren United Electric Company evaluated 

the effects of the embankment breach on the surface-water 

quality and sediments of the East Fork Black River and the 

Black River. 

The data collection performed by the U.S. Geological 

Survey encompassed routine, event-based, and continuous 

surface-water quality monitoring as well as suspended- and 

streambed-sediment sampling. Surface-water quality samples collected monthly during the first year and 

bimonthly during the second year, were analyzed for a 
Summary 37

Lower Taum Sauk reservoir near sediment catchment. Note the extreme color difference. 

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, (site 3) at State Highway K, 

looking upstream.

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, (site 3) at State Highway K, 

looking downstream.

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, (site 3) at State Highway K, 

from the left edge of water.

Figure 22. Photographs of selected stream reaches.
38 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri, site 1(07061270)

East Fork Black River at Lesterville, Missouri, site 2 (07061300)

Black River below Annapolis, Missouri, site 3 (07061600)

EXPLANATION

0

5

10

15

20

25

Turbidity

NEPHELOMETRIC TURBIDITY UNITS

6.8

7.0

7.2

7.4

7.6

7.8

8.0

8.2

8.4

pH

STANDARD UNITS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Specific conductance

MICROSIEMENS PER CENTIMETER 

AT 25 DEGREES CELSIUS

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Streamflow

CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Suspended-sediment concentration 

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Dissolved oxygen

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Water temperature

DEGREES CELSIUS

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

2006 2007

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

2006 2007

Figure 23. Monthly median values for streamflow, continuous water-quality constituents, and suspended-sediment 

concentrations.
Summary 39

embankment breach and seems to have a greater influence 

on the suspended-sediment discharge than the SSC values, 

possibly because the stream velocity is high and tends to rapidly transport suspended sediments out of the system.

SSC also were observed by three ranges of streamflow; 

base, median, and high flow, using step- trend analysis with 

available data before and after the embankment breach. 

Median SSC collected at base-flow conditions decreased after 

the embankment breach and increased in median-flow conditions. High-flow conditions were not as easy to determine 

because only three event samples were collected after the 

embankment breach.

A peculiar blue-green to brown color was evident along 

the lower reaches of the East Fork Black River, the lower 

reservoir, and the Black River from January 2006 to approximately November 2007. It is possible this phenomenon was 

caused by “rock flour” a result of mechanical erosion of silt 

and clay-sized sediments as approximately 1.5 billion gallons 

of water scoured the side of Proffit Mountain during the upper 

reservoir embankment breach. The coloration could also have 

been from the alum-based flocculent used to reduce turbidity 

in the lower Taum Sauk reservoir. The flocculent used was 

composed primarily of aluminum sulfate, which can have a 

green to white color. The flocculent may have been introduced 

to the downstream portion of the East Fork Black River during 

water releases from the lower reservoir. 

The continuous water-quality monitor data were analyzed and proved to be good representations of the entire 

stream reach at each site, as cross-section measurements of 

field parameters correlated well with the continuous waterquality monitor data. Median monthly values for specific 

conductance, water temperature, and dissolved oxygen show 

similar seasonal trends. Streamflow, turbidity, and SSC were 

significantly different for each site, mainly because of stream 

size, deposition, drainage area, and the influence of the lower 

reservoir. Site 2, located downstream from the lower Taum 

Sauk reservoir, showed the largest range of turbidity and SSC. 

The largest turbidity values and SSC were observed in high 

streamflow samples collected between January and June 2006, 

then decreased from July 2006 to December 2007, as most of 

the sediments and debris from the embankment breach were 

removed from the riverene system.

Although long-term effects of the elevated turbidity, 

major trace metals, and suspended-sediments in the study area 

as a result of the upper reservoir embankment breach are not 

expected, there could possibly be other effects not measured 

during this study that could potentially affect the surface-water 

quality, such as loss of riparian habitat, changes in biological 

ecosystems, and large-scale reworking of sediments.

suite of physical and chemical constituents including: turbidity; nutrients; major ions such as calcium, magnesium, 

and potassium; total suspended solids; total dissolved 

solids; trace metals such as aluminum, iron, and lead; and 

suspended-sediment concentrations. Daily suspendedsediment discharges were calculated from daily and 

cross-section suspended-sediment samples. The real-time 

water-quality monitoring data were provided to the public 

through the internet on the U.S. Geological Survey’s 

National Water Information System website. 

Some similarities in various constituents existed 

between the sites but not all sites had the same relations. Seasonal trends were evident, mostly at site 2, for 

turbidity, dissolved and total recoverable aluminum, and 

suspended sediment. These constituents showed a gradual 

decrease from winter to fall collections. Dissolved aluminum showed a slight increase in concentrations during the 

summer months. This increase could have been from the 

dredging activity at the lower reservoir which occurred 

during August 2006. Surface-water cross-section data 

showed good correlation with related properties, such as 

streamflow and turbidity, water temperature and dissolved 

oxygen, and specific conductance and water hardness, 

which were expected.

Daily SSC were collected at all three sites and used 

to compute daily suspended-sediment discharge. The 

range of cross-section SSC decreased at each site over the 

study period, while the total annual suspended-sediment 

discharges and annual mean streamflow increased during 

2007. The increase in suspended-sediment discharge could 

be attributed to the large amount of construction along the 

East Fork Black River in the State park boundary, which 

began approximately April 2006 and continued after the 

study ended; dredging of the lower reservoir in August 

2006; increased storm events in the spring of 2007; or the 

few data available during the 2006 water year.

Concentrations of trace metals and major ions also 

were measured in suspended- and streambed-sediment 

samples. No significant differences between the suspended-sediment and bed-material data were observed. 

Samples collected at site 2 showed some elevated concentrations of calcium, phosphorous, aluminum, and 

strontium in suspended-sediment samples collected during 

events in October 2006 and January 2007, which could 

have been caused by the alum-based flocculent used 

to settle suspended sediments in the lower Taum Sauk 

reservoir.

Data collected at Black River below Annapolis 

(site 3), the furthest downstream site, were compared 

to historical data collected at this site to identify any 

existing trends in the data from the event. Suspendedsediment concentrations (SSC) were not significantly 

different before and after the breach, however, the 

median SSC slightly increased as the median suspendedsediment discharge decreased slightly after the event. The 

median streamflow showed no change before to after the 
40 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Garbarino, J.R., Kanagy, L.K., and Cree, M.E., 2006, Determination of elements in natural-water, biota, sediment, and soil 

samples using collision/reaction cell inductively coupled 

plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 5, section B, chap. 1, 88 p.

Garbarino, J.R., and Struzeski, T.M., 1998, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of elements in whole-water 

digests using inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry and inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

98–165, 101 p.

Gray, J.R., Glysson, G.D, Turcois, L.M., and Schwarz, G.E., 

2000, Comparability of suspended-sediment concentration 

and total suspended solids data: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 00–4191, 20 p. 

Guy, H.P., 1969, Laboratory theory and methods for sediment 

analysis: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. C1, 58 p.

Hayes, W.C., and Beveridge, T.R., 1961, Guidebook to the 

geology of the St. Francois Mountain area: Report of investigations No. 26, October, 1961, State of Missouri Department of Business and Administration, Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources, 137 p.

Helsel, D. R., and Hirsch, R.M., 1992, Statistical methods 

in water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 4, chap. A3, 510 p.

Hendron, A.J., Ehasz, J.L., and Paul, K., 2006, Technical 

reasons for the breach of December 14, 2005, Taum Sauk 

Upper Dam Breach: FERC No. P-2277, 134 p.

Koltun, G.F, Eberle, Michael, Gray, J.R., and Glysson, G.D., 

2006. User’s manual for the Graphical Constituent Loading 

Analysis System (GCLAS): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 4, Chap. C1, 51 p.

Molina, B.F., 2004, Glossary of glacier terminology: A glossary providing the vocabulary necessary to understand the 

modern glacier environment: U.S. Geological Survey Open 

File Report 2004–1216, accessed October 2008 from http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2004/1216/.

Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 2008, Missouri 

state parks and historic sites website, accessed January 2009 

from http://www.mostateparks.com/jshutins/recovery.htm

Missouri Spatial Data Information Service, 2005, Land use/

land cover data: Columbia, Missouri, accessed May 2008 

from http://msdis.missouri.edu/.

Myers, D.N., Stoeckel, D.M., Bushon, R.N., Francy, D.S., and 

Brady, A.M.G., 2007, Fecal indicator bacteria: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, 

book 9, chap. A7, section 7.1, (ver. 2.0) accessed May 2008 

at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A7/.

References

Alexander, T.W., and Wilson, G.L., 1995, Techniques for estimating the 2- to 500-year flood discharges on unregulated 

streams in rural Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 95–4231, 33 p.

American Public Health Association, American Water Works 

Association, and Water Environment Federation, 1998, 

Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (20th ed.): Washington, D.C., V.2130, p. 2–8 to 2–11.

Davis, J.V., Petersen, J.C., Adamski, J.C., Freiwald, D.A, 

1995, Water-quality assessment of the Ozark Plateaus study 

unit, Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma—Analysis 

of information on nutrients, suspended sediment, and 

suspended solids, 1970–92: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 95–4042, 120 p.

Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, G.D., 1999, Field methods for 

measurement of fluvial sediment: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 3, 

chap. C2, 89 p.

Faires, 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 Energy Regulatory Commission, 2006, FERC Taum 

Sauk investigation team staff report, Report of findings 

on the overtopping and embankment breach of the upper 

dam—Taum Sauk pumped storage project: FERC No. 2277, 

239 p., accessed November 2008 from http://www.ferc.gov/

industries/hydropower/safety/projects/taum-sauk/staff-rpt/

full-rpt.pdf

Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of eastern United 

States: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 689 p.

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 OpenFile 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. A1, 545 p.

Garbarino, J.R., and Damrau, D.L., 2001, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of organic plus inorganic mercury in filtered and unfiltered natural water with cold vaporatomic fluorescence spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4132, 16 p.
References 41

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2006, Climatologic data annual summary, Missouri: Asheville, North 

Carolina, National Climatic Data Center.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2007, 

Climatologic data monthly summaries, January through 

December, Missouri: Asheville, North Carolina, National 

Climatic Data Center.

Patton, C.J., and Truitt, E.P., 2000, Methods of analysis by 

the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of ammonium plus organic nitrogen 

by a Kjeldahl digestion method and an automated photometric finish that includes digest cleanup by gas diffusion: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 00–170, 31 p.

Porterfield, G., 1972. Computation of fluvial-sediment 

discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 3, chap. C3, 66 p.

River Valley Region Association, 2008, Missouri vacations 

website, accessed December 2008 at http://missourivacations.com/johnson’s-shutins-state-park/index.htm

Rydlund, Jr., P.H., 2006. Peak discharge, flood profile, flood 

inundation, and debris movement accompanying the failure 

of the upper reservoir at the Taum Sauk pump storage 

facility near Lesterville, Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5284, 48 p.

Struzeski, T.M., DeGiacomo, W.J., and Zayhowski, E.J., 

1996, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey 

National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of dissolved aluminum and boron in water by inductively coupled 

plasma-atomic emission spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96–149, 17 p.

University of Missouri, 2001, Population for Missouri counties, municipalities, and legislative districts 1990 and 2000: 

Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis, accessed 

May 2008 at http://mcdc.missouri.edu

U.S. Department of Commerce, 2009, National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Response 

and Restoration, CAMEO chemical database, accessed 

February 2009 at http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/

chemical/8226#section5

U.S. Geological Survey, 1999, Water resources data—Missouri, water year 1999, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data 

Report MO–99–1.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006a, Collection of water samples 

(ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, September, accessed April 2008 at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/

twri9A4/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006b, Water resources data of the 

United States, annual water data report, WDR–US–2006, 

accessed May 2008 at http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, Water resources data of the 

United States, annual water data report, WDR–US–2007, 

accessed May 2008 at http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/.

Wagner, R.J. Boulger, R.W., Jr., Oblinger, C.J., and Smith, 

B.A., 2006, Guidelines and standard procedures for 

continuous water-quality monitors—Site operation, 

record computation, and data reporting: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1—D3, 51 p. plus 

8 attachments; accessed April 2008 at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/tm1d3

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T., 

eds., 2004, Processing of water samples (version 2.1): U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, April, accessed April 2008 at 

http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/.

Wilde, F.D., ed., chapter sections variously dated, Field measurements: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6, accessed April 

2008 at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A6
42 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments
Table 2 43

Table 2
44 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007. [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Discharge (ft3/s) Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved oxygen, percent of saturation pH Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature ( ̊C) Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3

)

Calcium 

(mg/L)

Magnesium 

(mg/L)

07061270—East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 1

January 27, 2006 Environmentala 29 2.8 11.9 100 7.8 151 7.1 72 15.3 8.2January 31, 2006 Environmental 77 2.2 10.6 90 7.0 124 7.6 55 11.3 6.6February 14, 2006 Environmental 24 <2.0 14.0 136 7.6 146 12.7 72 15.0 8.4March 8, 2006 Environmental 20 <2.0 10.8 97 7.3 160 8.8 78 16.1 9.2April 17, 2006 Environmental 36 <2.0 9.1 108 7.8 148 21.7 70 14.7 8.1May 10, 2006 Environmental 749 19.0 10.0 103 7.4 69 15.2 33 6.9 3.8June 20, 2006 Environmental 8 <2.0 8.1 103 7.2 179 26.5 87 17.9 10.4July 11, 2006 Environmental 2 <2.0 7.9 97 7.6 168 24.3 110 22.7 12.9July 11, 2006 Field blankb -- <2.0 -- -- -- -- --

M E.02 E.01

August 2, 2006 Environmental 1 <2.0 8.2 123 8.0 245 35.8 120 25.0 14.3September 12, 2006 Environmental 1 <2.0 8.8 106 8.1 226 23.7 130 26.8 15.7October 24, 2006 Environmental 10 3.7 9.7 86 7.7 222 9.2 110 22.6 13.3November 14, 2006 Environmental 16 <2.0 10.0 94 7.8 168 10.6 91 18.9 10.7December 5, 2006 Environmental 87 <2.0 12.7 106 7.2 107 6.7 50 10.3 5.9January 4, 2007 Environmental 55 <2.0 11.4 97 6.9 115 6.8 55 11.4 6.6March 27, 2007 Environmental 24 <2.0 9.3 100 7.5 145 17.4 66 13.8 7.7May 21, 2007 Environmental 27 2.1 8.8 101 6.6 144 20.6 66 13.4 7.8July 17, 2007 Environmental 8 <2.0 7.3 102 7.7 211 30.9 100 21.1 11.9September 10, 2007 Environmental 87 <2.0 8.1 95 7.4 164 21.9 71 14.7 8.3September 10, 2007 Replicatec -- <2.0 8.1 95 7.5 164 21.9 72 E.02 E.01November 27, 2007 Environmental 12 <2.0 10.7 96 8.1 211 9.6 110 22.9 13.4
Table 2 45

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type Potassium (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L)

ANC, fixed 

end point 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

ANC,

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Bicarbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Carbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

Fluoride 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L)

Total

dissolved 

solids 

(mg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental 0.81 1.65 82 82 100 <1 1.86 <.10 6.96 81January 31, 2006 Environmental .80 1.61 47 48 58 <1 1.55 <.10 7.35 76February 14, 2006 Environmental .81 1.85 64 64 78 <1 2.00 E.05 7.29 90March 8, 2006 Environmental .89 1.82 75 76 92 <1 1.79 <.10 6.96 90April 17, 2006 Environmental 1.07 1.76 66 66 79 <1 1.87 <.10 6.22 94May 10, 2006 Environmental 1.00 1.19 26 26 32 <1 .97 <.10 5.80 57June 20, 2006 Environmental 1.10 2.01 82 84 103 <1 1.59 E.06 5.37 113July 11, 2006 Environmental 1.17 2.15 100 102 123 <1 1.83 <.10 4.73 128July 11, 2006 Field blank <.16 <.20 -- -- -- -- <.2 <.10 <.18 <10August 2, 2006 Environmental 1.36 2.30 118 119 143 <1 1.79 <.10 4.37 128September 12, 2006 Environmental 1.24 2.13 112 112 137 <1 1.84 <.10 4.42 147October 24, 2006 Environmental 1.06 2.10 90 92 112 <1 2.23 E.07 8.11 124November 14, 2006 Environmental .97 2.01 76 78 95 <1 2.38 <.10 7.91 88December 5, 2006 Environmental .89 1.52 49 50 61 <1 1.83 <.10 6.93 86January 4, 2007 Environmental .79 1.52 52 52 63 <1 1.58 <.10 7.25 75March 27, 2007 Environmental .93 1.73 59 59 72 <1 1.85 <.10 6.88 82May 21, 2007 Environmental 1.02 1.75 61 61 E74 <1 1.30 <.10 5.66 82July 17, 2007 Environmental 1.11 2.15 93 95 115 <1 1.72 E.05 4.61 135September 10, 2007 Environmental 1.24 1.81 73 72 88 <1 1.75 E.06 6.43 83September 10, 2007 Replicate 1.29 1.85 -- -- -- -- 1.81 E.07 6.45 85November 27, 2007 Environmental 1.05 2.11 104 102 123 <1 2.27 <.12 6.41 124
46 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Total suspended solids (mg/L) Ammonia plus organic nitrogen (mg/L as N) Ammonia (mg/L as N) Nitrate plus nitrite (mg/L as N) Nitrite (mg/L as N) Orthophophate (mg/L as P) Phosphorous (mg/L) Phosphorus, total (mg/L) January 27, 2006 Environmental 10 E.07 <.040 E.05 <.008 <.09 <.04 <.04 January 31, 2006 Environmental <10 <.10 <.040 E.04 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04 February 14, 2006 Environmental <10 <.10 <.040 E.04 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04 March 8, 2006 Environmental <10 <.10 <.040 <.06 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04 April 17, 2006 Environmental <10 E.06 <.040 <.06 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04 May 10, 2006 Environmental 36 .36 <.040 <.06 <.008 <.09 <.04 E.04 June 20, 2006 Environmental <10 .10 E.008 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 July 11, 2006 Environmental <10 E.09 .021 <.06 E.001 E.004 <.04 <.04 July 11, 2006 Field blank <10 <.10 .014 <.06 <.002 .010 <.04 <.04 August 2, 2006 Environmental <10 E.10 .018 <.06 <.002 E.005 <.04 <.04 September 12, 2006 Environmental <10 <.10 .010 <.06 <.002 E.005 <.04 <.04 October 24, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 E.012 <.06 E.001 <.006 <.04 <.04 November 14, 2006 Environmental <10 .13 <.020 E.04 <.002 E.003 <.04 <.04 December 5, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 .216 .34 <.002 E.005 <.04 <.04 January 4, 2007 Environmental <10 E.06 <.020 .07 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 March 27, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.020 <.06 <.002 E.003 <.04 <.04 May 21, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 E.014 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 July 17, 2007 Environmental <10 E.06 <.020 <.06 E.001 <.006 <.04 <.04 September 10, 2007 Environmental <10 .11 <.020 .26 E.002 E.004 <.04 E.02 September 10, 2007 Replicate <10 .12 E.012 .27 E.002 E.005 <.04 <.04

November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 <.14 <.020 <.04 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04
Table 2 47

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type

Chemical 

oxygen demand,

high level 

(mg/L)

E. coli, 

(col/100 mL)

Fecal 

coliform 

(col/100 mL)

Aluminum, 

total 

(μg/L)

Aluminum, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Arsenic 

(μg/L)

Cadmium 

(μg/L)

Cadmium, 

total

(μg/L)

Copper 

(μg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 E4 2.1 102 E.11 .04 0.06 0.4January 31, 2006 Environmental <10 E2 E5 1.9 81 .13 <.04 <.04 <.4February 14, 2006 Environmental <10 <1 <1 E1.2 40 .18 <.04 <.04 E.4March 8, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 E13 E1.4 18 .12 E.03 <.04 10April 17, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 <1 2.7 2 .15 <.04 <.04 E.4May 10, 2006 Environmental 20 450 2,000 33.4 303 .17 <.04 E.04 1June 20, 2006 Environmental <10 E12 24 3.2 13 .19 <.04 <.04 .40July 11, 2006 Environmental <10 E13 E18 1.9 13 .39 .04 <.04 .89July 11, 2006 Field blank <10 -- -- <1.6 <2 <.12 <.04 <.04 <.40August 2, 2006 Environmental 20 180 200 2.0 16 .47 <.04 E.02 <.40September 12, 2006 Environmental <10 11 36 <1.6 14 .32 <.04 <.04 E.33October 24, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 E13 E.9 6 .19 <.04 <.02 E.27November 14, 2006 Environmental <10 E3 E12 <1.6 17 E.11 <.04 E.01 E.26December 5, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 E10 1.9 56 E.11 <.04 .07 .78January 4, 2007 Environmental <10 31 37 E.9 22 E.10 <.04 E.01 E.28March 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E1d E3 1.9 12 .15 <.04 <.02 E.28May 21, 2007 Environmental <10 E1d E3 1.7 17 .19 <.04 <.02 E.34July 17, 2007 Environmental <10 E11d E12 2.0 15 .26 <.04 .04 E.27September 10, 2007 Environmental <10 E33d E180 9.3 69 .19 <.04 <.02 .45September 10, 2007 Replicate <10 -- -- 5.6 58 .18 <.04 E.01 E.39November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E4d E4 <1.6 5 .09 <.04 <.01 <1.0

.
48 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Iron (μg/L) Lead (μg/L) Lead, total recoverable (μg/L) Manganese (μg/L) Mercury, total recoverable (μg/L) Selenium (μg/L) Zinc (μg/L) Zinc, total recoverable (μg/L) Suspended- sediment concentration (mg/L) January 27, 2006 Environmental 8 <0.08 0.31 36.4 <.010 0.09 E0.5 E1 13 January 31, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .18 13.9 <.010 .08 1.1 <2 8 February 14, 2006 Environmental 6 <.08 .11 42.5 <.010 E.04 1.3 <2 -- March 8, 2006 Environmental 16 <.08 <.06 31.2 <.010 E.06 .6 <2 14 April 17, 2006 Environmental 15 E.05 <.06 14.2 <.010 E.05 1.0 <2 9 May 10, 2006 Environmental 33 .30 2.7 8.0 E.007 E.06 1.8 4 68e June 20, 2006 Environmental 50 E.07 .13 35.9 <.010 <.08 1.2 <2 5 July 11, 2006 Environmental 158 .09 .10 106 <.010 E.05 1.9 3 7 July 11, 2006 Field blank <6 <.08 <.06 <.6 <.010 <.08 E.49 <2 -- August 2, 2006 Environmental 150 E.06 1.23 72 <.010 E.04 .6 E2 2 September 12, 2006 Environmental 38 <.08 .17 54.1 <.010 <.08 1.1 <2 3 October 24, 2006 Environmental 7 <.12 E.04 13.8 <.010 E.06 E.5 <2 6 November 14, 2006 Environmental 10 <.12 .29 9.9 <.010 E.06 .8 <2 3 December 5, 2006 Environmental 8 .16 .12 2.9 E.007 .09 1.8 E2 <.5 January 4, 2007 Environmental E4 <.12 .08 2.2 E.010 E.04 .6 <2 1 March 27, 2007 Environmental 8 <.12 E.04 4.7 <.010 E.06 .7 <2 1 May 21, 2007 Environmental 7 <.12 .07 5.0 <.010 E.05 1.5 E1 11 July 17, 2007 Environmental 33 <.12 .14 19.2 <.010 E.06 E.3 <2 7 September 10, 2007 Environmental 15 <.12 .20 6.6 <.010 .11 E.6 <2 2

September 10, 2007 Replicate E6 <.12 .25 5.7 <.010 .11 E.44 E1.1 2November 27, 2007 Environmental E8 <.08 <.06 7.0 <.010 .05 <1.8 <2 2
Table 2 49

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type Discharge (ft3/s) Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved oxygen, percent of saturation pH Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature ( ̊C) Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) Calcium (mg/L) Magnesium (mg/L)

07061300—East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 2

January 27, 2006 Environmental 28 23 11.9 99 7.4 149 6.7 61 12.6 7.07January 29, 2006 Environmental 906 180 12.8 107 7.4 157 6.3 63 13.5 7.13February 1, 2006 Environmental 253 24 12.2 108 7.5 138 8.6 59 12.1 6.96February 15, 2006 Environmental 42 15 13.1 102 7.1 140 4.2 69 14.4 7.92March 8, 2006 Environmental 28 9.2 10.9 98 7.3 160 9.2 74 15.2 8.70April 17, 2006 Environmental 31 18 8.8 98 7.8 137 18.9 65 13.6 7.52May 9, 2006 Environmental 33 11 9.3 103 7.5 133 18.4 63 13.6 7.14May 10, 2006 Environmental 1,090 31 7.4 80 7.4 122 17.1 59 12.5 6.71June 19, 2006 Environmental 18 16 8.0 102 7.6 158 26.6 73 15.2 8.41July 11, 2006 Environmental 19 13 6.9 85 7.6 142 24.2 86 17.6 10.10August 2, 2006 Environmental 30 8.4 6.0 79 7.6 233 27.9 110 23.3 13.20September 12, 2006 Environmental 2.4 8.3 5.6 67 7.7 231 23.2 120 25.1 14.90October 23, 2006 Environmental 18 9.4 9.2 88 7.6 250 12.2 120 25.2 14.90November 13, 2006 Environmental 27 4.2 9.3 88 7.7 180 11.8 97 20.2 11.40December 5, 2006 Environmental 437 43 12.1 102 6.8 69 7.3 30 6.1 3.54January 3, 2007 Environmental 113 2.9 12.6 104 6.9 117 6.5 56 11.5 6.71March 27, 2007 Environmental 20 4.2 9.6 100 7.2 149 16.0 69 14.2 8.15March 27, 2007 Replicate -- <2 -- -- -- -- -- -- <.02 <.01May 21, 2007 Environmental 53 6.9 9.0 106 6.8 119 22.5 54 11.1 6.26July 17, 2007 Environmental 27 5.8 6.1 77 7.1 156 25.5 73 15.2 8.52September 11, 2007 Environmental 133 7.4 6.9 82 7.6 158 22.9 73 15.2 8.56November 27, 2007 Environmental 7.4 2.6 10.4 90 8.0 167 8.9 85 17.9 9.70
50 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Potassium (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L) ANC, fixed end point (mg/L as CaCO3

)

ANC,

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3

)

Bicarbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3

)

Carbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3

)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

Fluoride 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L)

Total 

dissolved 

solids 

(mg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental 1.02 4.71 51 50 62 <1 1.72 <0.10 17.3 86January 29, 2006 Environmental 1.10 6.58 44 43 53 <1 1.77 <.10 25.7 90February 1, 2006 Environmental .96 4.12 45 44 54 <1 1.66 E.05 17.3 85February 15, 2006 Environmental .88 2.30 57 58 71 <1 1.74 <.10 10.3 88March 8, 2006 Environmental .90 1.85 72 72 88 <1 1.72 <.10 8.7 86April 17, 2006 Environmental 1.02 1.68 59 57 69 <1 1.63 <.10 7.5 85May 9, 2006 Environmental 1.05 1.69 57 57 70 <1 1.72 <.10 6.9 85May 10, 2006 Environmental 1.06 1.62 53 52 64 <1 1.30 E.05 6.9 83June 19, 2006 Environmental 1.17 1.76 67 67 82 <1 1.36 E.06 6.4 96July 11, 2006 Environmental 1.28 1.76 81 83 101 <1 1.51 <.10 5.9 94August 2, 2006 Environmental 1.70 2.04 108 108 131 <1 1.65 E.08 5.5 122September 12, 2006 Environmental 1.74 2.13 102 104 127 <1 3.49 E.05 5.0 152October 23, 2006 Environmental 1.47 2.08 106 107 130 <1 2.21 E.07 9.7 142November 13, 2006 Environmental 1.18 2.01 81 81 99 <1 2.48 <.10 10.7 95December 5, 2006 Environmental 1.14 1.08 24 24 30 <1 1.10 E.05 6.5 43January 3, 2007 Environmental .85 1.48 37 41 E51 <1 1.60 <.10 8.2 64March 27, 2007 Environmental .96 2.00 59 60 73 <1 1.67 <.10 9.0 81March 27, 2007 Replicate <.04 <.20 -- -- -- -- <.12 <.10 <.18 <10May 21, 2007 Environmental 1.14 1.57 46 46 56 <1 1.15 <.10 6.4 69July 17, 2007 Environmental 1.20 1.56 64 65 79 <1 1.16 <.10 6.0 125September 11, 2007 Environmental 1.25 1.56 68 67 82 <1 1.26 E.07 5.6 84November 27, 2007 Environmental 1.39 1.70 78 77 93 <1 1.59 <.12 6.4 96
Table 2 51

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type

Total 

suspended 

solids 

(mg/L)

Ammonia plus

organic nitrogen

(mg/L as N)

Ammonia 

(mg/L as N)

Nitrate 

plus 

nitrite 

(mg/L as N)

Nitrite 

(mg/L as N)

Orthophophate 

(mg/L as P)

Phosphorous 

(mg/L)

Phosphorus, 

total (mg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental 14 E0.10 <0.04 0.07 <0.008 <0.18 <0.04 <0.04January 29, 2006 Environmental 395 .35 <.04 E.05 <.008 <.18 <.04 .11February 1, 2006 Environmental 31 .11 <.04 E.04 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04February 15, 2006 Environmental 14 E.07 <.04 E.05 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04March 8, 2006 Environmental <10 E.09 <.04 E.05 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04April 17, 2006 Environmental 18 .12 <.04 E.04 <.008 <.02 <.04 <.04May 9, 2006 Environmental <10 E.10 <.04 E.04 <.008 <.09 <.04 <.04May 10, 2006 Environmental 56 .17 <.04 <.06 <.008 <.02 <.04 E.03June 19, 2006 Environmental 16 .15 <.01 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04July 11, 2006 Environmental 14 .20 .01 <.06 E.002 E.003 <.04 <.04August 2, 2006 Environmental 11 .21 .07 .09 .003 E.005 <.04 <.04September 12, 2006 Environmental <10 E.10 .02 .23 E.002 E.005 <.04 <.04October 23, 2006 Environmental <10 .16 .06 .23 .005 <.006 <.04 <.04November 13, 2006 Environmental <10 .12 .02 .16 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04December 5, 2006 Environmental 23 .24 .15 .10 E.001 E.005 <.04 E.03January 3, 2007 Environmental <10 E.07 <.02 E.05 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04March 27, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.02 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04March 27, 2007 Replicate <10 <.10 .05 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04May 21, 2007 Environmental <10 .10 .07 <.06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04July 17, 2007 Environmental <10 E.07 <.02 <.06 E.002 .009 <.04 <.04September 11, 2007 Environmental <10 .21 <.02 .06 .002 E.004 <.04 E.02November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E.12 <.02 .06 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04
52 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Chemical oxygen demand, high level (mg/L) E. coli, (col/100 mL) Fecal coliform (col/100 mL) Aluminum, total (μg/L) Aluminum, total recoverable (μg/L) Arsenic (μg/L) Cadmium (μg/L) Cadmium, total (μg/L Copper (μg/L) January 27, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 E7 35.3 997 0.44 <0.04 <0.04 E0.40 January 29, 2006 Environmental <10 E15 E20 10 2,190 .54 E.03 .11 .50 February 1, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 <1 14.1 775 .46 E.03 .05 .50 February 15, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 E2 5.1 1,110 .33 <.04 <.04 E.40 March 8, 2006 Environmental <10 E2 E8 10.1 414 .40 .11 <.04 E.30 April 17, 2006 Environmental <10 E3 <1 7.5 585 .63 <.04 <.04 .80 May 9, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 30 5.3 221 .47 <.04 <.04 .50 May 10, 2006 Environmental <10 -- -- 6.5 443 .65 <.04 E.02 .50 June 19, 2006 Environmental <10 E2 E7 8.3 337 1.00 <.04 <.04 .50 July 11, 2006 Environmental <10 78 110 3.8 290 1.00 .06 .11 .51 August 2, 2006 Environmental <10 E13 E8 10.2 175 1.60 <.04 <.04 E.38 September 12, 2006 Environmental <10 E16 E14 13.2 206 .87 <.04 <.04 .48 October 23, 2006 Environmental <10 E20 E5 2 165 .53 <.04 E.02 E.32 November 13, 2006 Environmental <10 E2 E6 2 197 .33 <.04 E.01 E.33 December 5, 2006 Environmental 10 25 25 8.5 1,520 .39 <.04 .04 .72 January 3, 2007 Environmental <10 <1 E2 2.8 77 .18 <.04 E.02 E.27 March 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E3d E4 3.3 144 .42 E.02 .02 .51 March 27, 2007 Replicate <10 -- -- <1.6 <2 <.12 <.04 <.02 <.40 May 21, 2007 Environmental <10 E6d E6 5.7 292 .53 <.04 .02 .46

July 17, 2007 Environmental <10 40d E100 4.2 127 .75 <.04 .04 E.31September 11, 2007 Environmental <10 52d 90 4 143 1.10 <.04 .02 .45November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E2d E2 E1.0 28 .49 <.04 <.01 <1.00

.
Table 2 53

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type Iron (μg/L) Lead (μg/L)

Lead,

total

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Manganese 

(μg/L)

Mercury, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Selenium 

(μg/L)

Zinc

(μg/L)

Zinc, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Suspendedsediment 

concentration 

(mg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental <6 <0.08 0.54 64.6 <0.010 E.07 <0.6 E2 22January 29, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 6.97 156 .023 E.07 E.3 8 474February 1, 2006 Environmental E4 <.08 1.03 120 E.008 .08 .6 3 27February 15, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .76 141 <.010 <.08 .8 2 28March 8, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .39 106 <.010 E.07 1.4 E1 14April 17, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .66 34.1 <.010 .08 <.6 E1 25May 9, 2006 Environmental E6 E.04 .49 26.5 <.010 E.06 1.5 E1 15May 10, 2006 Environmental 8 <.08 1.49 32.6 E.006 E.04 1.1 3 99June 19, 2006 Environmental E3 E.05 .84 40.2 <.010 E.05 1.5 E2 21July 11, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .67 26 <.010 .09 1.8 4 16August 2, 2006 Environmental E5 <.08 .46 33 <.010 .11 <.6 E1 16September 12, 2006 Environmental 14 E.07 1.31 26.2 <.010 E.07 1.6 2 13October 23, 2006 Environmental <6 <.12 .38 36.1 <.010 .08 E.4 E1 11November 13, 2006 Environmental E4 <.12 .29 13.6 <.010 .10 .7 E2 9December 5, 2006 Environmental 28 <.12 2.15 23.3 .012 .08 .9 5 30January 3, 2007 Environmental E5 <.12 .17 14.7 .010 E.04 .6 E1 3March 27, 2007 Environmental E4 <.12 .47 12.7 <.010 .08 1.6 E2 9March 27, 2007 Replicate <6 <.12 <.06 <.2 <.010 <.08 <.6 <2 --May 21, 2007 Environmental 12 <.12 .45 10 <.010 .08 .7 E1.8 47July 17, 2007 Environmental E4 <.12 .40 13.6 <.010 E.07 E.3 E1 11September 11, 2007 Environmental 8 <.12 .42 11.1 <.010 .08 .7 <2 10November 27, 2007 Environmental <8 <.08 .08 3.9 <.010 .07 E1.0 <2 6
54 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Discharge (ft3/s) Turbidity (NTU) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) Dissolved oxygen, percent of saturation pH Specific conductance (μS/cm) Water temperature ( ̊C) Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3

)

Calcium 

(mg/L)

Magnesium 

(mg/L)

07061600—East Fork Black River near Lesterville, Missouri; site 3

January 27, 2006 Environmental 300 3 11.3 93 7.8 278 6.7 140 27.2 16.9January 29, 2006 Environmental 1,140 57 11.3 103 7.4 232 9.6 120 23.4 14.1February 2, 2006 Environmental 802 8 10.9 96 7.9 236 8.4 120 23.4 14.0February 13, 2006 Environmental 305 2.6 11.6 91 7.5 257 4.8 130 25.9 16.4March 7, 2006 Environmental 225 3.0 12.2 110 7.5 279 9.2 140 28.0 16.9April 18, 2006 Environmental 268 2.1 10.3 113 8.0 257 18.2 130 26.3 15.5May 11, 2006 Environmental 6,830 49 8.9 91 7.0 143 15.0 71 15.1 8.1June 20, 2006 Environmental 191 <2 8.0 102 7.8 279 26.9 130 26.9 16.4July 12, 2006 Environmental 204 2 8.3 97 7.9 178 22.1 140 28.0 16.5August 3, 2006 Environmental 134 <2 8.2 104 7.8 293 26.2 140 29.0 17.1August 3, 2006 Replicate -- <2 8.2 104 -- 293 26.2 140 29.4 17.3September 11, 2006 Environmental 141 5.2 9.7 115 7.4 307 21.9 160 31.7 19.0October 23, 2006 Environmental 287 3.5 9.8 93 7.9 357 12.3 170 35.2 20.9November 13, 2006 Environmental 348 <2 11.4 108 7.8 291 11.9 150 31.1 18.5December 19, 2006 Environmental 422 2.5 10.6 93 7.3 234 9.3 110 22.8 13.5January 4, 2007 Environmental 614 <2 11.5 99 7.1 223 7.8 120 23.1 14.2February 12, 2007 Environmental 370 -- 12.8 105 7.6 244 6.1 130 25.5 15.8March 29, 2007 Environmental 866 <2 10.2 103 7.8 271 15.1 140 29.0 16.8March 29, 2007 Replicate -- <2 10.2 -- 7.8 271 15.1 140 28.3 16.3April 3, 2007 Environmental 990 -- 9.9 101 7.5 235 15.0 -- -- --May 22, 2007 Environmental 378 <2 8.6 93 7.3 235 18.5 110 23.6 13.5June 12, 2007 Environmental 271 -- 8.7 97 7.8 273 20.1 -- -- --July 17, 2007 Environmental 179 <2 6.8 83 7.6 309 23.8 150 30.3 17.3September 10, 2007 Environmental 1,020 8.5 7.7 95 7.6 279 24.3 130 26.3 14.8November 27, 2007 Environmental 234 <2 11.4 98 8.2 339 8.7 180 35.9 21.3
Table 2 55

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type Potassium (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L)

ANC, fixed 

end point 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

ANC,

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Bicarbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Carbonate, 

incremental 

titration 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

Fluoride 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L)

Total 

dissolved 

solids 

(mg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental 0.86 3.38 107 108 132 <1 4.19 E0.06 27.2 160January 29, 2006 Environmental .99 4.29 77 77 93 <1 3.08 <.10 24.9 127February 2, 2006 Environmental 1.03 3.70 87 86 105 <1 3.28 E.06 23.3 132February 13, 2006 Environmental .91 3.26 105 105 128 <1 3.38 E.06 22.5 156March 7, 2006 Environmental .96 3.27 118 120 146 <1 3.89 E.09 25.2 159April 18, 2006 Environmental 1.05 2.98 111 112 135 <1 3.12 E.08 17.8 149May 11, 2006 Environmental 1.02 1.80 55 55 68 <1 2.02 E.08 11 97June 20, 2006 Environmental 1.07 2.81 122 123 150 <1 3.10 E.07 17 164July 12, 2006 Environmental .97 2.62 125 126 153 <1 2.79 <.10 15.6 154August 3, 2006 Environmental 1.16 2.80 128 129 156 <1 3.06 <.10 14.8 159August 3, 2006 Replicate 1.14 2.84 -- -- -- -- 3.10 E.06 14.9 163September 11, 2006 Environmental 1.11 3.38 125 128 156 <1 4.16 E.06 21.3 168October 23, 2006 Environmental 1.13 4.43 122 122 149 <1 5.35 E.10 38.8 207November 13, 2006 Environmental 1.05 3.95 122 121 148 <1 4.62 E.06 30.6 172December 19, 2006 Environmental .97 2.82 102 103 E125 <1 3.03 .11 20.8 127January 4, 2007 Environmental .89 2.84 91 95 E116 <1 2.88 E.08 19.2 133February 12, 2007 Environmental .85 2.85 100 100 122 <1 3.09 E.08 20.1 140March 29, 2007 Environmental 1.14 3.48 107 107 129 <1 3.30 E.07 22.6 169March 29, 2007 Replicate 1.07 3.34 -- -- -- -- 3.29 E.07 22.6 161April 3, 2007 Environmental -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --May 22, 2007 Environmental .98 2.52 97 97 118 <1 2.19 E.08 15.3 195June 12, 2007 Environmental -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --July 17, 2007 Environmental 1.09 3.08 131 133 161 <1 3.20 .10 21.6 205September 10, 2007 Environmental 1.25 3.39 107 108 131 <1 3.52 E.10 26.4 157November 27, 2007 Environmental 1.11 4.46 132 129 156 1 5.17 <.12 36.5 198
56 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Total suspended solids (mg/L) Ammonia plus organic nitrogen (mg/L as N) Ammonia (mg/L as N) Nitrate plus nitrite (mg/L as N) Nitrite (mg/L as N) Orthophophate (mg/L as P) Phosphorous (mg/L) Phosphorus, total (mg/L) January 27, 2006 Environmental <10 <0.10 <0.04 0.21 <0.008 <0.090 <0.04 <0.04 January 29, 2006 Environmental 103 .19 .050 .15 <.008 <.180 <.04 E.04 February 2, 2006 Environmental <10 E.06 <.040 .18 <.008 <.020 <.04 <.04 February 13, 2006 Environmental <10 E.06 <.040 .20 <.008 <.020 <.04 <.04 March 7, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 <.040 .16 <.008 <.020 <.04 <.04 April 18, 2006 Environmental 10 E.06 <.040 .11 <.008 <.020 <.04 <.04 May 11, 2006 Environmental 71 .33 <.040 .09 <.008 <.020 <.04 .07 June 20, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 <.010 .08 E.001 <.006 <.04 <.04 July 12, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 .011 .10 E.002 E.003 E.02 <.04 August 3, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 .014 .09 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04 August 3, 2006 Replicate <10 .11 .013 .09 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04 September 11, 2006 Environmental <10 <.10 .010 .07 <.002 E.005 <.04 <.04 October 23, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 <.020 .18 E.001 <.006 <.04 <.04 November 13, 2006 Environmental <10 .11 <.020 .23 <.002 E.003 <.04 <.04 December 19, 2006 Environmental <10 E.08 <.020 .29 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 January 4, 2007 Environmental <10 E.08 E.012 .16 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 February 12, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.020 .20 <.002 <.006 <.04 E.03 March 29, 2007 Environmental <10 .10 <.020 .19 <.002 E.003 <.04 <.04 March 29, 2007 Replicate <10 E.07 0.03 .19 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04 April 3, 2007 Environmental 20 E.05 <.020 .15 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04 May 22, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.020 .07 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04 June 12, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.020 .08 <.002 E.004 <.04 <.04

July 17, 2007 Environmental <10 <.10 <.020 .10 E.002 <.006 <.04 <.04September 10, 2007 Environmental 13 .11 <.020 .38 .002 E.004 <.04 <.04November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 <.14 E.013 .19 <.002 <.006 <.04 <.04
Table 2 57

Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued[ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated]

Sample date Sample type

Chemical 

oxygen demand,

high level 

(mg/L)

E. coli, 

(col/100 

mL)

Fecal 

coliform 

(col/100 mL)

Aluminum, 

total 

(μg/L)

Aluminum, 

total 

recoverable 

(μg/L)

Arsenic 

(μg/L)

Cadmium

(μg/L)

Cadmium, 

total

 (μg/L)

Copper 

(μg/L)

January 27, 2006 Environmental <10 <1 E10 5.6 106 0.13 <0.04 <0.04 0.5January 29, 2006 Environmental <10 E13 28 19.7 817 .22 <.04 E.03 .50February 2, 2006 Environmental <10 E11 33 7.7 241 .21 <.04 E.03 .50February 13, 2006 Environmental <10 <1 <1 2.0 84 E.08 <.04 <.04 .60March 7, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 E1 2.4 49 .14 E.03 <.04 E.3April 18, 2006 Environmental <10 E4 E13 2.0 55 .17 <.04 <.04 2.3May 11, 2006 Environmental 10 E12 E290 6.1 630 .25 <.04 .07 .80June 20, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 E3 2.2 48 .20 <.04 <.04 E.4July 12, 2006 Environmental <10 E7 32 E1.1 23 .17 <.04 <.04 <.40August 3, 2006 Environmental <10 E2 E11 1.9 28 .26 E.02 <.04 <.40August 3, 2006 Replicate <10 E2 E9 2.0 28 .26 <.04 <.04 <.40September 11, 2006 Environmental <10 E6 E16 10.7 23 .18 E.02 <.04 .52October 23, 2006 Environmental <10 <10 -- 2.0 10 .14 <.04 <.02 E.38November 13, 2006 Environmental <10 E1 E1 E.9 17 .16 <.04 <.02 E.23December 19, 2006 Environmental <10 E6 E11 5.5 38 .14 <.04 <.02 E.24January 4, 2007 Environmental <10 E6 E10 1.6 21 .12 <.04 E.01 E.31February 12, 2007 Environmental -- E2 E1 E1.0 10 .13 E.02 .05 E.28March 29, 2007 Environmental <10 E17d 46 1.6 56 .20 <.04 .02 E.35March 29, 2007 Replicate <10 -- -- E1.3 45 .18 <.04 .02 E.27April 3, 2007 Environmental -- E12d E28 -- -- -- -- -- --May 22, 2007 Environmental <10 E8d E7 2.4 25 .23 <.04 E.01 E.21June 12, 2007 Environmental -- E13d E14 -- -- -- -- -- --July 17, 2007 Environmental 20 E14d E18 E1.1 17 .20 <.04 .05 <.40September 10, 2007 Environmental <10 54d 100 2.6 78 .35 <.04 .02 .56November 27, 2007 Environmental <10 E3d E4 <1.6 E4 .12 <.04 <.01 <1.0

.
58 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments Table 2. Surface-water quality data, January 2006 through December 2007.—Continued [ft3/s, cubic feet per second; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; pH, in standard units; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; ANC, acid neutralizing capacity; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorous; E. coli, Escherichia coli; col, colonies; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; <, less than; E, estimated; --, no data available; M, presence verified but not quantified, concentrations dissolved unless otherwise indicated] Sample date Sample type Iron (μg/L) Lead (μg/L) Lead, total recoverable (μg/L) Manganese (μg/L) Mercury, total recoverable (μg/L) Selenium (μg/L) Zinc (μg/L) Zinc, total recoverable (μg/L) Suspended- sediment concentration (mg/L) January 27, 2006 Environmental <6 <0.08 0.14 3.0 <0.010 0.09 E0.5 <2 5 January 29, 2006 Environmental E4 <.08 2.28 12.9 E.007 E.07 1.7 4 122 February 2, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .45 15.2 E.006 .10 2.1 E1 14 February 13, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .09 6.7 <.010 .08 1.3 <2 4 March 7, 2006 Environmental E3 <.08 E.05 2.6 <.010 .08 1.0 <2 11 April 18, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .09 4.0 <.010 E.07 E.4 <2 5 May 11, 2006 Environmental 12 .12 6.71 6.4 E.009 E.07 1.3 8 104 June 20, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .18 3.8 <.010 E.04 .70 <2 7 July 12, 2006 Environmental <6 <.08 .12 2.5 <.010 .08 .89 <2 4 August 3, 2006 Environmental E6 <.08 .14 3.5 <.010 E.07 .87 <2 3 August 3, 2006 Replicate E3 <.08 .14 3.4 <.010 .09 1.3 E1 -- September 11, 2006 Environmental 8 E.04 .08 4.2 <.010 E.07 1.5 E2 2 October 23, 2006 Environmental <6 <.12 E.04 1.3 <.010 E.07 5.5 6 1 November 13, 2006 Environmental <6 <.12 .07 1.2 <.010 .09 E.54 E1 4 December 19, 2006 Environmental E3 E.11 .10 1.8 E.006 E.06 .98 <2 1 January 4, 2007 Environmental <6 <.12 .09 1.7 E.009 E.04 1.3 3 2 February 12, 2007 Environmental <6 <.12 .19 1.5 <.010 .09 1.1 E1 -- March 29, 2007 Environmental E4 <.12 .39 2.2 <.010 .10 1.1 2 12 March 29, 2007 Replicate E4 <.12 .32 2.3 <.010 .09 .87 3 -- April 3, 2007 Environmental -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- May 22, 2007 Environmental E3 <.12 .08 1.8 <.010 .10 E.43 <2 83

June 12, 2007 Environmental -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1July 17, 2007 Environmental <6 <.12 .10 2.4 <.010 .09 <.60 <2 2September 10, 2007 Environmental E3 <.12 .36 4.8 <.010 .10 E.34 <2 6November 27, 2007 Environmental <8 <.08 <.06 E.2 <.010 .07 E1.7 <2 2
Table 2 59

aEnvironmental samples are primary samples which are routinely collected.bField blanks are samples processed from a blank solution that is subjected to all aspects of sample collection, field processing, preservation, transportation, and laboratory handling as an environmental sample, ensuring no contamination is present.cReplicate samples are a group of samples collected in a manner such that the samples are essentially identical in composition, typically consisting of two samples collected sequentially.dValues derived by modified E. coli medium (M-TEC) method (Myers and others, 2007).eA Value of 166 mg/L was previously published for this sample date in the 2006 U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Data of the United States, annual water data report, WDR–US–2006. After 

further review, it was discovered that one subsample appeared too high, because the sampler possibly hit the streambed during collection. The subsample was removed from the cross-sectional average and recalculated.
60 Effects of the Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments

Publishing support provided by: 

Rolla Publishing Service Center

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Missouri Water Science Center

1400 Independence Road

Rolla, MO 65401

(573) 308–3667

Or visit the Missouri Water Science Center website at: 

http://mo.water.usgs.gov 
Table 2 61
Barr—Effects of Upper Taum Sauk Reservoir Embankment Breach on the Surface-Water Quality and Sediments—Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5111

Printed on recycled paper