WATER-QUALITY DATA FOR THE MISSOURI RIVER AND MISSOURI RIVER ALLUVIUM NEAR WELDON SPRING, ST. CHARLES COUNTY, MISSOURI-1991-92

By Michael J. Kleeschulte

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 93-109

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Rolla, Missouri 1993

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Dallas L. Peck, Director

For additional information write to:

District ChiefU.S. Geological Survey1400 Independence RoadMail Stop 200Rolla, Missouri 65401

Copies of this report can be purchased from:

U.S. Geological SurveyBooks and Open-File Reports SectionFederal CenterBox 25425Denver, Colorado 80225

CONTENTS

Page

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

Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 2

Missouri River............................................................................................................................................ 2

Methodology........................................................................................................................................ 2

Water-quality data.............................................................................................................................. 5

Missouri River alluvium............................................................................................................................ 9

Methodology........................................................................................................................................ 9

Monitoring well installation............................................................................................................... 9

Water-quality data.............................................................................................................................. 11

Composition and summary statistics of water from the Missouri River and the Missouri

River alluvium............................................................................................................................. 11

Quality assurance and quality control...................................................................................................... 16

References cited.......................................................................................................................................... 19

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page

Figure 1. Map showing study area................................................................................................... 3

2. Representative stiff diagrams for cross-section composite water samples collected

during low-base flow, high-base flow, and runoff conditions...................................... 6

3. Example of boxplot............................................................................................................ 7

4. Boxplots of total and dissolved uranium concentrations in water from the Missouri

River .............................................................................................................................. 8

5. Boxplots of sodium, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in water from the Missouri

River............................................................................................................................... 10

6. Graphs showing gamma logs and screened-interval data.............................................. 12

7. Representative stiff diagrams for water samples collected from wells in the Missouri

River alluvium............................................................................................................... 13

8. Boxplots of selected chemical constituents in water samples from alluvial well

clusters near Defiance................................................................................................... 14

9. Trilinear diagram of major constituents in water samples from the Missouri

River and Missouri River alluvium .............................................................................. 15

10. Boxplots of selected chemical constituents in water samples from the

Missouri River and Missouri River alluvium............................................................... 17

in

TABLES

Page

Table 1. Water-quality data for the Missouri River...................................................................... 22

2. Water-quality data for selected vertical samples from the Missouri River

upstream and downstream from the St. Charles County well field........................... 27

3. Well-construction data for well clusters in the Missouri River alluvium ..................... 28

4. Core sample descriptions from deep wells in the Missouri River alluvium near

Defiance.......................................................................................................................... 29

5. Water-quality data for wells in the Missouri River alluvium, March-June 1992 ......... 32

6. Statistical summary of selected water-quality data collected from the Missouri

River and Missouri River alluvial wells near Defiance............................................... 44

IV

CONVERSION FACTORS AND VERTICAL DATUM

Multiply fcy. To obtain

inch 25.4 millimeter

foot 0.3048 meter

mile 1.609 kilometer

acre 4,047 square meter

gallon 3.785 liter

pound 4.536 kilogram

foot per second 0.3048 meter per second

cubic foot per second 0.02832 cubic meter per second

feet per minute 0.3048 meter per minute

million gallons per day 0.04381 cubic meter per second

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

°F = 1.8 °C + 32

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929-a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.

WATER-QUALITY DATA FOR THE MISSOURI RIVER AND

MISSOURI RIVER ALLUVIUM NEAR WELDON SPRING,

ST. CHARLES COUNTY, MISSOURI--1991-92

By Michael J. Kleeschulte

ABSTRACT

This report contains the water-quality data collected at two cross sections across the Missouri River and from monitoring wells in the Missouri River alluvium near Defiance, Missouri. The upstream river cross section was about 1 mile upstream from the mouth of Femme Osage Creek and the St. Charles County well field, and the downstream cross section was about 100 feet upstream from tributary 5300 and 1.3 miles downstream from the well field. Water was sampled from alluvial wells, including four monitoring well clusters consisting of a paired shallow and deep well, the Daniel Boone Gun Club well, and a composite sample from the wells in the St. Charles County well field.

The sampling results indicate the general water composition from the Missouri River changes with different flow conditions. During low-base flow conditions, the water generally contained about equal quantities of calcium and sodium plus potassium and similar quantities of bicarbonate and sulfate. During high-base flow conditions, water from the river predominantly was a calcium bicarbonate type. During runoff conditions, the water from the river was a calcium bicarbonate type, and sulfate concentrations were larger than during high-base flow conditions but smaller than during low-base flow conditions.

The total and dissolved uranium concentrations at both the upstream and downstream cross sections, as well as from the different vertical samples across the river, were similar during each sampling event. However, sodium, sulfate, nitrate, and total and dissolved uranium concentrations varied with different flow conditions. Sodium and sulfate concentrations were larger during low-base flow conditions than during high-base flow or runoff conditions, while nitrate concentrations decreased during low-base flow conditions. Both total and dissolved uranium concentrations were slightly larger during runoff events than during low-base or high-base flow conditions.

The general composition of water from the alluvial wells was predominantly calcium bicarbonate. Water from each of the wells had a similar composition except for the raw water sample collected from the St. Charles County well field, which plotted as an intermediate value on a trilinear diagram of Missouri River water and alluvial water.

Constituent concentrations were similar in water samples from the shallow and deep clustered wells; however, slight differences in constituent concentrations were detected as the distance of the wells sampled increased from the river. Sulfate and arsenic concentrations generally decreased towards the river, while barium and manganese concentrations generally increased towards the river. Uranium concentrations were largest in the two well clusters nearest the river.

The summary statistics indicate several analytes were detected in much larger concentrations in the alluvial water than in the river water. These include (median concentrations for the river and alluvial well samples are shown in brackets or parentheses) calcium [57, 120 mg/L (milligrams per liter)], bicarbonate (203, 549 mg/L\ alkalinity (170, 450 mg/L), silica (10, 28 mg/L), ammonia [0.02 (estimated), 0.38 mg/L], barium [145, 370 [ig/L (micrograms per liter)], iron [0.005 (estimated), 7.2 mg/L], manganese [1 (estimated), 380 p.g/L], and strontium (370, 660 |ig/L). Six analytes had much

larger concentrations in the river water samples than the alluvial water samples. These include the following analytes: sodium (40,8 mg/L), sulfate (115,39 mg/L), chloride (21,6 mg/L), nitrate (1.65, less than 0.05 mg/L), total organic carbon (9.0, 1.5 mg/L), and dissolved uranium (4.8, 0.4 Mg/L).

INTRODUCTION

The 9-acre Weldon Spring quarry site is along the limestone bluffs that are adjacent to the Missouri River flood plain about 2.5 mi (miles) northeast of Defiance (fig. 1). Disposal of wastes into the quarry began in the 1940's when the U.S. Army used the quarry for the disposal of rubble and residues from the manufacture of trinitrotoluene (TNT) from a nearby ordnance works. During 1958, the Atomic Energy Commission acquired the quarry, and beginning in 1959 and continuing through 1969, the quarry was used for the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes (primarily uranium and thorium; Kleeschulte and Emmett, 1986).

During 1972, St. Charles County purchased a well field for public water supply that is located in the Missouri River alluvium about 0.6 mi east of the quarry site. Water pumped from the well field averaged about 8.8 Mgal/d (million gallons per day) during 1990 (D.N. Mugel, U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 1992). Because of the potential for the wastes from the quarry to migrate into the well field, the U.S. Department of Energy has been monitoring the water quality in wells located between the quarry and the well field. Sampling has indicated that one monitoring well has uranium concentrations larger than other alluvial wells in the area. However, the degree of variability in background chemical and radiochemical constituent concentrations in the alluvium was unknown.

During 1991, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Energy, began a study to determine the background water-quality concentration for selected chemical and radiochemical constituents in the nearby Missouri River and in the Missouri River alluvium near the quarry. This report describes the sampling methodology, water-quality results, and sampling quality assurance and quality control.

The author especially acknowledges the cooperation of Mr. D.D. Howell, Mr. Norman Engelage, and Mr. Sam Pugh for allowing the installation of monitoring wells on their property for sampling purposes. The author thanks Mr. Tom Aaron of the St. Charles County Water Department for allowing the sampling of raw water from the St. Charles County alluvial well field and the members of the Daniel Boone Gun Club for access to their well for sampling. These data could not have been obtained without their cooperation.

MISSOURI RIVER

During 1986, a ground-water model of the St. Charles County well field indicated that two-thirds of the water pumped from the well field comes directly from infiltration from the Missouri River (Layne-Western Company, Inc., 1986). Because of the extensive interaction between the alluvium and the Missouri River, a study of the water quality in the alluvium would not be complete without including the water quality of the Missouri River.

Methodology

The Missouri River was sampled at two cross sections during this study. The upstream cross section was about 1 mi upstream from the mouth of Femme Osage Creek and the downstream cross section was located about 100 ft (feet) upstream from tributary 5300 (fig. 1). The water samples were collected during three low-base flow periods, three high-base flow periods, and during the rising stage of two runoff periods to assess the water-quality variability under different flow conditions. The sampling frequency was hydrologically determined, not time dependent; however, during base-flow periods, the samples were not collected sooner than at 1-month intervals to ensure proper flushing of the stream between sampling events.

X? f s

FR

AN

KLI

N C

OU

NT

Y

ST.

LO

UIS

CO

UN

TY

Each composite sample consisted of the total water collected from 10 vertical samples (visually estimated to be of equal width) using the equal-width-increment method. The sampling locations (vertical samples) at each cross section were numbered consecutively 1 through 10. Vertical sample 1 was the sample site closest to the north bank of the river, vertical sample 10 was the site closest to the south bank, and vertical samples 5 and 6 were approximately in the middle of the river.

The water sample was collected with a 100-lb (pound), brass, depth-integrating sampler suspended by a steel cable on a power winch. The sampler was painted with an epoxy coating and equipped with a plastic intake nozzle to limit trace-element contamination from water in contact with the sampler. The water was collected in quart glass bottles that were inserted into the sampler. Water that was collected from each vertical sample was composited in a polyethylene churn splitter. After sample collection, the chemical constituents to be analyzed in the "dissolved" phase were filtered through a 0.45-micrometer membrane filter. Constituents to be analyzed as total concentrations were collected as raw or unfiltered samples.

An additional set of samples was collected during one low-base flow, one high-base flow, and one runoff event to determine if there was a variability in radiochemical constituent concentrations from one bank of the Missouri River to the other. The northern bank of the river receives ground-water inflow from the Dissected Till Plains and the southern bank receives inflow from the Ozark Plateaus Province (fig. 1). There was concern that the radiochemical ground-water quality in these physiographic provinces may be different because the St. Francois Mountains in southeast Missouri contain granites that may increase the radiochemical concentrations in the ground water, in particular, uranium concentrations.

These additional water samples were collected for radiochemical analysis at five equally spaced sites along the upstream and downstream cross sections (vertical samples 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9) and were collected using the same equipment as the composite samples. The water collected from each vertical sample was transferred from the quart glass bottle directly into a 1-gallon plastic container and each plastic container held water only from one vertical sample.

The daily mean discharge of the Missouri River at Hermann (fig. 1) on the day before the sampling event was used to estimate the discharge at the sampling site. This discharge was used because there are no large streams that discharge into the Missouri River between Hermann and the sampling sites and there typically is about one day travel time between Hermann and the sampling sites. Mean velocity for the Missouri River at Hermann during base-flow conditions was about 3.4 ft/s (feet per second; data on file at the U.S. Geological Survey in Rolla, Missouri). Hermann is 49 river mi upstream from the sampling sites so travel times are approximately 21 hours during base-flow conditions. Mean velocity for the Missouri River at Hermann was about 4.4 ft/s at a discharge of 113,000 ft3/s (cubic feet per second; data on file at the U.S. Geological Survey in Rolla, Missouri). During the runoff sample collected on June 19,1991, the travel time from Hermann would be approximately 16 hours.

Specific conductance, pH, water temperature, dissolved-oxygen concentration, and alkalinity were determined onsite. Specific conductance values were measured using a portable conductivity meter with temperature compensation designed to express readings in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 °C (degrees Celsius). The potentiometric method was used to measure both the pH value and alkalinity. Water temperature was measured with a mercury thermometer to the nearest 0.5 °C. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were measured using a portable temperature compensated meter. Alkalinity was determined on shore by incremental titration past the inflection point with 0.1600 normal sulfuric acid. The analyses from the composite samples are listed in table 1 (at the back of this report) and the analyses from each vertical sample used to define the radiochemical constituent distribution across the Missouri River are listed in table 2 (at the back of this report).

Water-Quality Data

Stiff diagrams can be used to illustrate the general water type and composition by plotting the proportions of each major ionic species contained in the water. Representative stiff diagrams drawn for the composite samples (fig. 2) indicate that the low-base flow water samples generally contained equal quantities of calcium and sodium plus potassium and similar quantities of bicarbonate and sulfate. The high-base flow composite samples predominantly were a calcium bicarbonate type water. During runoff conditions, the river water was a calcium bicarbonate type, and sulfate concentrations were larger than during high-base flow conditions but smaller than during low-base flow conditions.

A boxplot (fig. 3) can be used to visually examine the central tendency and dispersion of a group of data or for comparing two or more groups of data. The boxplot consists of the median value (50th percentile) plotted as a horizontal line and a box drawn from the 25th percentile to the 75th percentile. The box height equals the interquartile range (IQR). A vertical line is drawn from the 75th percentile upward to the upper adjacent value, which is defined as the largest data point less than or equal to the upper quartile plus 1.5 times the IQR. Likewise, a vertical line is drawn from the 25th percentile downward to the lower adjacent value, which is defined as the smallest data point greater than or equal to the lower quartile minus 1.5 times the IQR. Values 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 "outside values" and are represented by an asterisk; those values greater than 3.0 times the IQR are called "far-out values" and are represented by a circle.

The total and dissolved uranium concentrations in water from the Missouri River at different locations and during different flow conditions are shown in figure 4. The distribution of uranium concentrations at the upstream cross section was determined by compiling into one data set all the analyses from the samples collected at the upstream cross section, including the uranium analyses from the composite samples and the vertical samples collected across the river for radiochemical analyses. The same was done for the downstream sampling cross section. The distribution of uranium concentrations at vertical sample 1 was determined by compiling into one data set the analyses from the samples collected for radiochemical analyses from only vertical sample 1 at both the upstream and downstream cross sections during all three flow conditions. The same was done for samples collected at vertical samples 3,5, 7, and 9. The distribution of uranium concentrations during low-base flow was determined by compiling into one data set all the analyses from the composite samples plus the vertical samples collected for radiochemical analyses from both the upstream and downstream cross sections during low-base flow. The same was done for the analyses representing high-base flow and runoff conditions.

Total and dissolved uranium concentrations (median concentrations shown in brackets or parentheses) were slightly larger during runoff conditions [5.9, 5.6 jog/L (micrograms per liter)] than during low-base flow (5.4, 4.7 ug/L) or high-base flow (5.0, 4.3 ug/D conditions (fig. 4). Thorium concentrations were not included in these boxplots because, in all samples, thorium concentrations were less than the detection limit of 1.0 pCi/L (picocurie per liter).

UPSTREAM LOW-BASE FLOW (8-21-91)

Sodium plus potassium

Magnesium

Calcium

I I I r-4321

CATIONS

Chloride plus fluoride

Sutfate

Bicarbonate

I I I I

01234

ANIONS

UPSTREAM HIGH-BASE FLOW (7-02-91)

Sodium plus potassium

Magnesium

Calcium

432

CATIONS

Chloride plus fluoride

Sulfate

Bicarbonate

H I I234

ANIONS

DOWNSTREAM RUNOFF CONDITIONS (6-19-91)

Sodium plus potassium

Magnesium

Chloride plus fluoride

Sulfate

Calcium

432

CATIONS

Bicarbonate

234

ANIONS

MILLIEQUIVALENTS PER LITER

Figure 2. Representative stiff diagrams for cross-sectbn composite water samples collected during low-base flow, high-base flow, and runoff conditions.

SP

EC

IFIC

CO

ND

UC

TA

NC

E,

IN M

ICR

OS

IEM

EN

S P

ER

CE

NT

IME

TE

R A

T 2

5 D

EG

RE

ES

CE

LSIU

S

(Q C w CD

O

X

O O

O

****

.ol (D

£ 8 (D

O O

O -

,0. w'

O

3 CO 3

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

, IN

M

ICR

OG

RA

MS

PE

R L

ITE

R

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

, IN

MIC

RO

GR

AM

S P

ER

LIT

ER

2L (U

=3

Q.

Q.

(/)'

(/)

O.

O

Q.

C

CO

NC

EN

TR

AT

ION

, IN

MIC

RO

GR

AM

S P

ER

LIT

ER

«t

O)

0)

-si

o>

-tr

ou

«to

io)-sia

>

<X

3

? CO m

O i? o?

CO

g CO s~

m

o c 3D >

h-I

*

C

3D C

-

* *

I

H

*-

<

m 3D

%

CO

CO m

§

O

fO

9>

3D

*°

8

3CO CO m 3

fO

1

2 5 I

Sodium, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in water from the Missouri River during different flow conditions are shown in figure 5. Sodium and sulfate concentrations (median concentrations shown in brackets or parentheses) were larger during low-base flow [58, 160 mg/L (milligrams per liter)] than during high-base flow (38, 110 mg/L) or runoff conditions (37, 110 mg/L). Nitrate concentrations (median concentration shown in parentheses) were lower during low-base flow (0.60 mg/L) than during high-base flow (2.2 mg/L) or runoff conditions (2.0 mg/L).

MISSOURI RIVER ALLUVIUM

The background concentrations and the variability of chemical constituents both areally and with depth in water from the Missouri River alluvium near the St. Charles County well field were unknown. Four monitoring well clusters consisting of a shallow and a deep well were installed across the alluvium on the north side of the Missouri River near Defiance (fig. 1) to assess the concentrations and variability of chemical constituents. This area of the alluvium was chosen because it is near the Weldon Spring quarry site (about 1.4 mi upstream from the quarry) but upgradient from the ground- water flow from the quarry (Kleeschulte and Emmett, 1986). Water samples also were collected from existing wells, including the Daniel Boone Gun Club well 3 mi southwest of Defiance, and wells from the St. Charles County well field.

Methodology

The water-quality samples from the monitoring wells were collected during the first two sampling events using a stainless steel submersible pump that used Teflon1 gears to positively displace the water through a discharge line consisting of a garden hose. Water-quality samples from the monitoring wells were collected during the last two sampling events and from the Daniel Boone Gun Club well using a centrifugal pump that discharged water through a garden hose. The raw water sample from the St. Charles County water treatment plant was collected as a grab sample from the water intake causeway using a polyethylene churn splitter. This sample represents a composite of the water from the wells that were being pumped in the well field at the time of sampling.

The ground-water levels were measured from the top of casing. Specific conductance, pH, water temperature, and alkalinity were determined onsite using the same methods that were described in the previous section for the Missouri River sampling. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were determined by colorimetry to the nearest 0.05 mg/L using a diethylene glycol and rhodazine-D method developed by Chemetrics. Oxidation-reduction potentials (Eh), sulfide, total iron, dissolved iron, total ferrous iron, and dissolved ferrous iron also were measured onsite. Oxidation-reduction potentials were determined by measuring the voltage developed at the surface of a platinum electrode immersed in the sample. Sulfide concentrations were determined using the methylene blue method, total iron concentrations were determined using the ferrozine method, and ferrous iron concentrations were determined using the phenanthroline method as described by the Hach Company. Concentrations were measured by a portable spectrophotometer calibrated and set to the 665-nanometer wavelength for sulfide determination and set to the 510-nanometer wavelength for the total iron and ferrous iron determination.

Monitoring Well Installation

The holes for the monitoring well clusters (fig. 1) were drilled with hollow-stem augers. Ideally, the deep well would penetrate the alluvium to the top of bedrock; however, this penetration was only accomplished in deep well 1 farthest from the river. Augering was stopped in the other three deep wells when saturated fine-grained sands began sloughing around the auger flights, causing increased

1 Use of trade or firm names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey.

ccUJ

70

60

50

ccUJ 0.CO

1O-j 40

^ 30

20

10

SODIUM

LOW-BASE HIGH-BASE RUNOFF FLOW FLOW CONDITIONS

O

gOC

UJ O

8

200

150

100

50

SULFATE

LOW-BASE FLOW

HIGH-BASE FLOW

RUNOFF CONDITIONS

ccUJa.

2CCo

Q 1< oc

UJo

NITRATE

LOW-BASE HIGH-BASE RUNOFF FLOW FLOW CONDITIONS

Figure 5. Sodium, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in water from the Missouri River.

10

drag on the augers, and deepening of the hole could possibly result in loss of the auger flights. Consequently, the shallow wells ranged from 29.9 to 49.8 ft deep and the deep wells ranged from 37.5 to 69.5 ft deep (table 3, at the back of this report).

The monitoring well riser pipe and screen consisted of flush-wall, schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride pipe with O-rings inserted at each pipe joint. The slot size used for the well screen was 0.010 in. (inch). The natural sand pack used around the well screen to a depth of about 5 ft above the screen was formed by allowing the sands around the auger flights to collapse around the screen as the augers were slowly removed from the hole. In the shallow wells, occasionally sloughing of the sands would not occur; in these instances 30 to 40 mesh, washed sands were added to a depth of about 5 ft above the well screen.

The seal above the sand pack was constructed by placing 0.375-in. bentonite chips above the sand pack for a total thickness of about 5 ft. The remainder of the annular space was sealed by alternating fill material between natural sands and bentonite chips. This alternating sequence continued to within 5 ft of land surface, where the remaining annular space was filled with bentonite. Each well was secured with a metal protective casing.

During the drilling of the deep wells, core samples were taken with a stainless steel, split-spoon sampler. The core samples were collected at 5-ft intervals when possible. Typically, coring was discontinued at a depth of 35 to 40 ft because, when the coring bit was removed to insert the coring tool, saturated sands would flow inside the hollow stem auger, which prevented the coring tool from being reinserted. Occasional grab samples were collected after coring stopped. The core samples are described in table 4 (at the back of this report).

Vertical control was established at the top of casing and at land surface near the wells by surveying, and geophysical logging was performed at each deep well. The starting reference point for the vertical control was not an established benchmark. The altitude that was assigned to the reference point corresponded to the altitude of the reference point as shown on a 7.5 minute U.S. Geological Survey topographic map (table 3). Gamma logs for each of the deep wells are shown in figure 6. During the geophysical logging, the probe was lowered 12 ft/min (feet per minute) and the time constant (time interval between each gamma count measurement) was 2 seconds.

Water-Quality Data

The water from the alluvium predominantly was a calcium bicarbonate type (fig. 7). The stiff diagram of the water from the St. Charles County well field had a slightly different shape than the diagram of water from the other alluvial wells. The calcium and bicarbonate concentrations (70 and 399 mg/L) from the well field were less than in the other alluvial wells, whereas the sulfate concentration (98 mg/L) was larger than in the other alluvial wells (table 5, at the back of this report).

Slight changes were detected in the water quality across the alluvium. Results of water-quality samples collected in the monitoring well clusters for selected chemical constituents of concern are shown in figure 8. Sulfate and arsenic concentrations generally decreased towards the river, while barium and manganese concentrations generally increased towards the river. Uranium concentrations were largest in the two monitoring well clusters (clusters 3 and 4) closest to the river.

COMPOSITION AND SUMMARY STATISTICS OF WATER FROM THE MISSOURI RIVER AND MISSOURI RIVER ALLUVIUM

The general composition of a water sample can be represented on a trilinear diagram. The values plotted on the diagram are expressed as percentages of the total milliequivalents per liter of the major cations and anions (Hem, 1985). The composition of water sampled from the Missouri River and alluvial wells during April 8 and 9,1992, is shown on a trilinear diagram (fig. 9) together with the area that defines the general chemical composition of all samples collected from either the Missouri River

11

o120

100

80

60

.iniiniiinnuiunnnn WaH 4 (shadow)

nmmiioan wail 4 (daap)

140

120

100

80

60

iiniiiiiiiiiiini Well 3 (shadow)

iiimimmiiiiimim WaM 3 (deep)

100

80

60

ilm.............. f linn \^/^y 2 (shallow)

Wall 2 (deep)MIII iiijiinii inn imam

140o

120

£ 100

z 80

8 60

"M"M"lT'm WaH 1 (shallow)

IHllllllllllID WaH 1 (daap)

10 20 30 40 50 FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

60 70

EXPLANATION

GAMMA LOG

-rmrm SCREENED INTERVAL

Figura 6.,Gamma logs and screened-intervaJ data.

12

Well 1 (shallow) Well 1 (deep)

I I \- 4 h12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Well 2 (shallow) Well 2 (deep)

I I I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

I I I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Well 3 (shallow)

I I I H I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Well 3 (deep)

I I I I H I I I h12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Well 4 (shallow)

I H I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Well 4 (deep)

-\ \ I H I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Daniel Boone Gun Club

I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Cati°nS MILLIEQUIVALENTS PER LITER Ani°nS

St. Charles County well field

H I I I I I12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Cations MILLIEQUIVALENTS PER LITER An'°ns

EXPLANATION

Sodium plus potassium _L Chloride plus fluoride Magnesium J vSulfate

Calcium / ^^*>^ Bicarbonate

Figure 7. Representative stiff diagrams for water samples collected from wells in the Missouri River alluvium.

13

(Q

00

£(DiQ.

I(DT>

(D 55

(D 0>

10>

O (D

CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

8 & 8 S "8

(/> Si

flm

fr

8

D 10

or-

wm3D

CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

D 8 8 8 S

-OH1D

- flH

CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

o ro *k o> oo o

3D w mz o

co

CO

c

IH

I 1

Alluvial 40 wells

$ <B fc ^ ° oCALCIUM CHLORIDE PLUSFLUORIDE

PERCENTAGE OF NORMALIZED MILLIEQUIVALENTS OF MAJOR IONS

EXPLANATION

SAMPLES COLLECTED APRIL 8-9, 1992

° Missouri River

A Alluvial wells near Defiance

+ St. Charles County well field

M AREA DEFINING THE MAJOR CONSTITUENTS IN ALL SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM THE MISSOURI RIVER AND THE MISSOURI RIVER ALLUVIUM

Figure 9. Trilinear diagram of major constituents in water samples from the Missouri River and the Missouri River alluvium.

15

or the alluvium during this project. The Missouri River samples plot in a cluster and, except for the sample collected from the St. Charles County well field, all the alluvial well samples plot in a cluster. The water from the St. Charles County well field plots in the area between the Missouri River samples and the alluvial well samples. Hem (1985) states water that plots as an intermediate of two end points on a trilinear diagram is a mixture of water represented by the two end points.

Summary statistics, including the maximum, minimum, mean, and the 95th, 75th, 50th (median), 25th, and 5th percentiles, were calculated for the water samples collected from the Missouri River and the alluvial wells (table 6, at the back of this report). The mean and percentiles for multiple-censored data were estimated using a log-probability regression procedure described by Gilliom and Helsel (1986) and Helsel and Cohn (1988). This procedure is used to estimate the values less than the detection limit of a constituent; these estimated values and the detected values then are used together to estimate the mean and percentiles. A parameter is considered censored if greater than 5 percent of the total number of data values is less than the detection limit. Generally, the 95th percentile value represents a value that is about two standard deviations larger than the mean value for the analyte.

The summary statistics indicate several analytes were present in larger concentrations in the alluvial water than in the river water. These include the following analytes: [the 50th percentile (median) for the river and alluvial well samples are shown in parentheses or brackets]; calcium (57, 120 mg/L), bicarbonate (203, 549 mg/L), alkalinity (170, 450 mg/L), silica (10, 28 mg/L), ammonia [0.02 (estimated), 0.38 mg/L], barium (145, 370 |ig/L), iron [0.005 (estimated), 7.2 mg/L], manganese [1 (estimated), 380 |ig/L], and strontium (370, 660 |ig/L). Six analytes had larger concentrations in the river water samples than the alluvial water samples. These include the following analytes: sodium (40, 8 mg/L), sulfate (115, 39 mg/L), chloride (21,6 mg/L), nitrate (1.65, less than 0.05 mg/L), total organic carbon (9.0, 1.5 mg/L), and dissolved uranium (4.8, 0.4 (ig/L). The analysis of the sample from the St. Charles County well field was not included with the alluvial well data because of its plotting location on figure 9.

Concentrations for constituents of concern in the Missouri River and the Missouri River alluvium are shown in figure 10. Sulfate concentrations were larger in the water samples from the river, but barium and manganese concentrations were larger in the alluvium. Dissolved uranium concentrations typically were larger in the river; however, the variability of the uranium concentrations in the alluvium was much larger than the variability in the river samples.

QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

All water-quality samples were analyzed by laboratories of the U.S. Geological Survey. Samples were analyzed for inorganic substances according to methods described by Pishman and Friedman (1989), organic substances according to methods described by Wershaw and others (1983), and radiochemical constituents according to methods described by Thatcher and others (1977).

During the Missouri River sampling, one blank sample was collected during a high-base flow sampling event early in the project at the upstream site and one blank sample was collected midway through the project during low-base flow at the downstream site (table 1). These blank samples were both a sampler and filter blank. The blank samples were analyzed for major anions and cations, nutrients, trace elements, and radiochemical constituents. Deionized water, which had a specific conductance of less than 10 |iS/cm (microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius), was used for the blank samples. These blank samples were subjected to all aspects of sample collection, processing, preservation, transportation, and laboratory handling as the environmental samples. Also, two split samples were collected during the project, one at the upstream site and one at the downstream site. These samples were analyzed for the same constituents as the regular samples.

16

LI3

<Q

i

CD

IO

CD

IO O

CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

o o

CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

0)c?

CD en

if

CD

w en o

O>z m w m

Wc

-hH

CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

Ul

- I--I

33 WmzO

oO

5c

Split samples were collected for the U.S. Department of Energy during the March and April 1992 sampling of the alluvial wells. Blank samples were collected during the May and June 1992 samplings (table 5). These blank samples represented trip and filter blanks and were subjected to the same processes as the alluvial well samples, except they were not processed through the sampling pump. The water for the blank samples was supplied by a U.S. Geological Survey laboratory and it had no inorganic analytes larger than the detection limit. The analytes detected in the blank samples were a result of the sampling process.

The total and dissolved iron concentrations and total and dissolved ferrous iron concentrations for the wells in the Missouri River alluvium were determined onsite using a portable spectrophotometer. These measurements were made to support the measured oxidation-reduction potential and, therefore, these onsite iron values are considered semi-quantitative. The degree of error associated with these measured concentrations is evident because several dissolved iron and dissolved ferrous iron concentrations were greater than the total iron and total ferrous iron concentrations (table 5).

18

REFERENCES CITED

Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of eastern United States: New York, McGraw-Hill, 714 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 Water-Resources Investigations, Book 5, Chapter Al, 545 p.

Gilliom, R.J., and Helsel, D.R., 1986, Estimation of distributional parameters for censored trace-level water-quality data I. Estimation techniques: Water Resources Research, v. 22, no. 2, p. 135-146.

Helsel, D.R., and Cohn, T.A., 1988, Estimation of descriptive statistics for multiple-censored water- quality data: Water Resources Research, v. 24, no. 12, p. 1,997-2,004.

Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural water (3d ed.): U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 p.

Kleeschulte, M.J., and Emmett, L.F., 1986, Compilation and preliminary interpretation of hydrologic data for the Weldon Spring radioactive waste-disposal site, St. Charles County, Missouri A progress report: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4272, 71 p.

Layne-Western Company, Inc., 1986, Groundwater hydrology investigation-Weldon Spring, Missouri: Kansas City, Kansas, 62 p.

Thatcher, L.L., Janzer, V.J., and Edwards, K.W., 1977, Methods for determination of radioactive substances in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 5, Chapter A5, 95 p.

Wershaw, R.L., Fishman, M.J., Grabbe, R.R., and Lowe, L.E., 1983, Methods for the determination of organic substances in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water- Resources Investigations, Book 5, Chapter A3, 80 p.

19

Z\

AB

BR

EV

IAT

ION

S A

ND

SY

MB

OLS

USE

D I

N T

AB

LE

1

Q

Inst

anta

neou

s di

scha

rge,

in c

ubic

feet

per

sec

ond

Con

d Sp

ecifi

c co

nduc

tanc

e, in

mic

rosi

emen

s pe

r ce

ntim

eter

at 2

5d

egre

es C

elsi

uspH

In

sta

ndar

d un

its

Tem

p W

ater

tem

pera

ture

, in

degr

ees

Cel

sius

Ca

Dis

solv

ed c

alci

um, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

Mg

Dis

solv

ed m

agne

sium

, in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

rN

a D

isso

lved

sod

ium

, in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

K

Dis

solv

ed p

otas

sium

, in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

HC

03

Bic

arbo

nate

, in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

C0

3 C

arbo

nate

, in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

r

Alk

A

lkal

inity

as

calc

ium

car

bona

te, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

erS

04

Dis

solv

ed s

ulfa

te, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

Cl

Dis

solv

ed c

hlor

ide,

in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

F

Dis

solv

ed fl

uori

de, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

Br

Bro

mid

e, in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

r

Si0

2 D

isso

lved

sili

ca, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

erD

8 D

isso

lved

sol

ids,

res

idue

at

180

degr

ees

Cel

sius

, in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

rN

02

Dis

solv

ed n

itri

te a

s ni

trog

en, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

erN

02

+ N

03

Dis

solv

ed n

itri

te p

lus

nitr

ate

as n

itrog

en, i

n m

illig

ram

sp

er li

ter

NH

3 D

isso

lved

am

mon

ia a

s ni

trog

en, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

er

P to

tal

Tot

al p

hosp

horo

us, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

P0

4 D

isso

lved

ort

hoph

osph

ate

as p

hosp

horu

s, in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

rA

l D

isso

lved

alu

min

um, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

As

Dis

solv

ed a

rsen

ic, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Ba

Dis

solv

ed b

ariu

m, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Be

Dis

solv

ed b

eryl

lium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

B D

isso

lved

bor

on, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r lit

erC

d D

isso

lved

cad

miu

m, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Cr

Dis

solv

ed c

hrom

ium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rC

o D

isso

lved

cob

alt,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r lit

er

Cu

Dis

solv

ed c

oppe

r, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rF

e D

isso

lved

iron

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

Pb

Dis

solv

ed le

ad, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r lit

erLi

D

isso

lved

lith

ium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rM

n D

isso

lved

man

gane

se, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r lit

er

Hg

tota

l T

otal

rec

over

able

mer

cury

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

Hg

Dis

solv

ed m

ercu

ry, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r lit

erM

o D

isso

lved

mol

ybde

num

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

Ni

Dis

solv

ed n

icke

l, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rSe

D

isso

lved

sel

eniu

m, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Ag

Dis

solv

ed s

ilver

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

Sr

Dis

solv

ed s

tron

tium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rV

D

isso

lved

van

adiu

m, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Zn

Dis

solv

ed z

inc,

in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

TOC

T

otal

org

anic

car

bon,

in m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

er

Cy

tota

l T

otal

cya

nide

, in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

Cy

Dis

solv

ed c

yani

de,

in m

illig

ram

s pe

r lit

erU

tota

l T

otal

ura

nium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per l

iter

U

Dis

solv

ed u

rani

um, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Th-

230

Dis

solv

ed th

oriu

m 2

30, i

n pi

cocu

ries

per

lite

r

Th-

232

Dis

solv

ed th

oriu

m 2

32, i

n pi

cocu

ries

per

lite

r88

Su

spen

ded

sedi

men

t, in

mill

igra

ms

per l

iter

No d

ata

avai

labl

e <

Les

s th

an

Tab

le \

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

dat

a fo

r th

e M

isso

uri

Riv

er

Dat

eFl

ow

cond

itio

nQ

Con

dpH

Tem

pC

aM

gN

aK

HC

O,

CO

,

05-2

3-91

08

-21-

91

Mis

sour

i R

iver

com

posi

te s

ampl

e up

stre

am f

rom

the

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07-0

2-91

07-0

2-91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

e

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Run

off

Run

off

44,3

0039

,600

40,7

00

83,3

0055

,800

55,8

0061

,700

113,

000

43,8

00

672

720

660

544

601

608

574

600

560

7.8

7.9

8.2

7.8

7.6

7.6

6.9

7.7

7.4

29.5

27.5

20.0

24.5

28.5

28.5

15.0

_ 10.5

57 55 56 55 61 60 62 61 51

18 19 20 18 17 17 18 17 18

51 58 62 36 38 40 39 36 38

6.4

6.5

5.8

5.3

6.8

6.4

5.1

7.0

5.8

212

222

198

194

218

219

209

176

207

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mis

sour

i Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ple

dow

nstr

eam

fro

m t

he S

t. C

harl

es C

ount

v w

ell

fiel

d

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07-0

2-91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

44,3

0039

,600

40,7

0040

,700

83,3

0055

,800

61,7

00

113,

000

43,8

00

641

687

700

690

540

570

580

627

563

8.0

8.4

8.3

8.4

7.9

7.7

7.4

8.1

7.1

30.5

27.5

21.0

21.0

25.0

28.0

15.0

28.6

10.0

58 54 57 56 55 59 61 61 51

18 19 20 20 17 17 18 17 18

51 58 64 63 36 38 39 36 40

6.9

5.9

5.9

5.8

4.8

6.3

5.4

7.3

5.7

209

198

190

187

191

205

201

185

207

0 7 7 10 0 0 0 0 0

Mis

sour

i R

iver

bla

nk s

ampl

e

0.12

.1

70.

07

.06

<0.2

0 .2

0<0

.10

Tab

le 1

.-W

ater

-qua

lity

dat

a fo

r th

e M

isso

uri

J?iu

er--

Con

tinue

d

to

Dat

e

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

07-0

2-91

04

-08-

92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Flow

co

ndit

ion

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

e

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

Alk 174

182

162

159

178

180

171

144

170

S0

4

Mis

sour

i

130

160

170 95

110

110

110

120

100

Cl

FB

r

Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ple

upst

ream

fro

m t

he S

t.

21 20 21 15

22

23

23 18 26

0.40 .5

0.5

0

.40

.40

.40

.40

.10

.30

0.09 .0

7.0

9

.05

.06

.07

.08

.07

.09

SiO

2D

SN

02

N0

2 +

N0

3N

H3

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

9.6

7.0

7.0

10

13

13

12 13 10

405

414

425

333

360

361

381

383

351

<0.0

1.0

1<.

01 .02

<.01 .0

1

1.4 .6

4.3

9

2.2

2.7

2.8

1.9

2.9

1.1

0.02

<.01

<.01 .0

2 .0

2 .0

2

.02

.13

Mis

sour

i R

iver

com

posi

te s

ampl

e do

wns

trea

m f

rom

the

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fi

eld

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

171

174

168

170

157

168

165

152

170

130

160

180

180 97

110

110

120

100

21 20 20 21 16

22

24 19 27

0.30 .5

0.5

0.5

0

.40

.50

.40

.10

.30

0.09 .0

5.0

9.0

9

.06

.07

.08

.06

.10

9.8

7.1

7.4

7.1

9.4

13

12 13 10

409

415

434

436

326

362

384

370

339

<0.0

1<.

01<.

01<.

01 .02

<.01 .0

2

1.4 .6

0.3

7.3

6

2.2

2.8

1.9

2.9

1.0

0.03

<.01 .0

2<.

01 .01

.02

.02

.14

Mis

sour

i R

iver

bla

nk s

ampl

e

05-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

_ _

0.20

<0

.10

50

<.10

0.10

<.10

<0.0

1.0

111 10

9 3<0

.01

<.01

<0.0

5<.

050.

03 .01

Tab

le I

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

dat

a fo

r th

e M

isso

uri

Riv

er-C

onti

nued

Dat

e

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

07-0

2-91

04

-08-

92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Flow

cond

itio

n

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

e

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

Pto

tal

0.18 .1

4.2

3

.13

.29

.81

.39

P0

4

Mis

sour

i

0.13 .0

8<.

01 .10

.15

.16

.15

.16

.09

Al

As

Ba

Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ole

uost

ream

fro

m

10<1

0 20 <10

<10

<10

<10

<10 40

3 15

03

120

110

2 17

0 4

160

3 18

0 10

11

0

4 17

02

110

Be

B

Cd

the

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

<0.5

14

0 <1

.0<.

5 12

0 <1

.014

0

<.5

90

<1.0

<.

5 11

0 <1

.0

<.5

100

<1.0

<1

0 80

<1

.0

<.5

100

<1.0

<.5

90

<1.0

Cr

Co

<1

<3<1

<3 <3

<1

<3

<1

<3

<1

<3

<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

Mis

sour

i R

iver

com

oosi

te s

amol

e do

wns

trea

m f

rom

the

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

0.21 .1

8.2

3.0

9

.14

.15

.14

.85

.39

0.13 .0

7.0

3<.

01 .10

.15

.12

.20

.09

10<1

0 50 20 20

<10

<10

<10 80

3 15

03

140

110

120

2 15

0 3

150

2 12

0

4 17

02

110

0.6

110

<1.0

<.5

30

<1.0

130

130

<.5

80

<1.0

<.

5 11

0 2.

0 <1

0 80

<1

.0

<.5

100

<1.0

<.5

90

<1.0

<1

<3<1

<3 <3 <3

2 <3

<1

<3

<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

Mis

sour

i R

iver

bla

nk s

ampl

e

05-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

0.

01 .01

<0.0

1<.

01<1

0<1

0<1

27

<1

10<0

.5

20

<1.0

<.5

<10

<1.0

<1

<3<1

5

Tab

le 1

. Wat

er-q

uali

ty d

ata

for

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er C

onti

nued

N)

Lft

Dat

ePl

owco

ndit

ion

Cu

Pe

Pb

LiH

gM

n to

tal

Hg

Mo

Ni

SeA

g

Mis

sour

i R

iver

com

posi

te s

ampl

e up

stre

am f

rom

the

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07-0

2-91

07-0

2-91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07-0

2-91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11-2

2-91

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

e

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Run

off

Run

off

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Hig

h ba

seH

igh

base

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

4 2 - 2 6 2 2 3 4 4 2 - 2 3 3 3 3

<3 <3 5 6 5 5 8 5 38

Mis

sour

i

5 4 32 4 13 7 13 10 67

<1

35<1

40 44

1 23

1 27

<1

26<1

26

<1

28<1

23

<1

<0.1

0 <0

.1

<10

2 .2

0 <

.l

<10

<1

<.10

-

<10

<1

<.10

<

.l

<10

1 <.

10

<.l

<1

02

<.10

<

.l

<10

<1

.20

<.l

<1

0

<1

.20

<.l

<1

03

<.10

<

.l

<10

<a <11 2 2 <1 2 5 2

1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ple

dow

nstr

eam

fro

m t

he S

t. C

harl

es C

ount

v w

ell

fiel

d

<1

35<1

38 45 45

<1

221

26<1

26

<1

29<1

25

1 <0

.10

0.2

<10

2 <.

10

<.l

<1

03

<.10

-

<10

2 <.

10

- <1

0

<1

<.10

<

.l

<10

2 .1

0 <

.l

101

<.10

<

.l

<10

1 .2

0 <

.l

<10

2 <.

10

<.l

<1

0

2 1 2 <! 2 1 2 3 1

2 1 2 2 <1 2 <l 4 1

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

Mis

sour

i R

iver

bla

nk s

ampl

e

05-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

__ 8 <1

<3 42

<4<1

<4

<1

<0.1

0 <0

.1

<10

2 <.

10

<.l

<1

0<

!<1

<11

<1.0

<1.0

Tab

le I

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

dat

a fo

r th

e M

isso

uri R

iver

-Con

tinu

ed

Dat

eFl

ow

cond

ition

SrV

Zn

TO

CC

y U

to

tal

Cy

tota

l8U

T

h-23

0 T

h-23

2ss

Mis

sour

i Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ple

upst

ream

fro

m th

e St

. Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

07-0

2-91

04

-08-

92

06-1

9-91

11

-22-

91

07-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

09-2

6-91

09-2

6-91

05-2

3-91

07

-02-

91

04-0

8-92

06-1

9-91

11

-22-

91

05-2

3-91

08-2

1-91

Low

bas

eLo

w b

ase

Low

bas

e

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

Low

bas

eLo

w b

ase

Low

bas

eL

ow b

ase

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Hig

h ba

se

Run

off

Run

off

__

380

430

450

340

340

340

360

380

350

390

430

460

450

340

330

360

380

360 3 <X

<6 <6 <6 <6 6 6 <6 <6

<6

Mis

sour

i

<6 <6 <6 <6 <6 6 <6 7 <6 <6 <6

8 <3 - 5 14

12 14

11

5.1

5.7

6.0

16 9.8

8.8

37 9.2

<0.0

1 <0

.01

5.6

*s A

1

^ A

"l

C

C

^ w

A

^«v A

. *J

*\J

<.01

<.

01

4.1

<.01

<.

01

5.3

<.01

<.

01

5.1

<.01

<.

01

5.4

<.01

<.

01

6.1

<.01

<.

01

7.6

<.01

<.

01

4.0

6.2

<1.0

<1

.06.

3 <1

.0

<1.0

2.6

<1.0

<1

.0

4.1

<1.0

<1

.0

4.4

<1.0

<1

.0

4.1

<1.0

<1

.0£)*

O

^ J

. *\/

^i«

v

5.6

<1.0

<1

.0

6.7

<1.0

<1

.0

243

159

162

852

566

322

2,81

0 38

0

Riv

er c

ompo

site

sam

ple

dow

nstr

eam

fro

m th

e St

. Cha

rles

Cou

ntv

wel

l fie

ld

8 <3 - 10

10 16

23 9 7

6.1

6.0

5.9

6.7

18

10 30 9.1

Mis

sour

i

0.8 .4

<0.0

1 <0

.01

5.8

<.01

<.

01

6.0

<.01

<.

01

4.2

<.01

<.

01

3.0

<.01

<.

01

3.7

<.01

<.

01

5.0

<.01

<.

01

5.6

<.01

<.

01

5.4

<.01

<.

01

3.4

Riv

er b

lank

sam

ple

<0.0

1 <0

.01

<1.0

<.01

<.

01

<1.0

6.1

<1.0

<1

.02.

8 <1

.0

<1.0

3.9

<1.0

<1

.04.

6 <1

.0

<1.0

5.9

<1.0

<1

.0

5.7

<1.0

<1

.0

5.1

<1.0

<1

.0

2.9

<1.0

<1

.0

<1.0

<1

.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1

.0

<1.0

250

142

149

1,03

0 61

0 33

0

2,81

0 42

9

a Som

e of

the

repo

rted

tota

l ura

nium

con

cent

ratio

ns m

ay h

ave

been

aff

ecte

d by

sed

imen

t in

the

raw

wat

er s

ampl

es; t

here

fore

, the

repo

rted

val

ue m

ay b

e lo

wer

th

an a

ctua

l co

ncen

trat

ions

.

Table 2. Water-quality data for selected vertical samples from the Missouri River upstream and downstreamfrom the St. Charles County well field

[jiS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; °C, degrees Celsius; M.g/L, micrograms per liter; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than]

Vertical Specific sample conductance number Location (^.S/cm)

pH (standard

units)

Total Temperature uranium*

(°C) Qig/L)

Dissolved Dissolved Dissolved thorium thorium uranium 230 232

(\LgfL) (pCi/L) (pCi/L)

Low-base flow (07-23-91)

1

3

5

7

9

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

629 641

630 685

627 679

627 679

632 683

7.8 7.9

8.0 7.9

7.9 8.0

7.9 8.6

8.0 8.6

29.5 30.5

29.0 30.0

30.0 30.5

30.0 31.0

31.0 31.0

High-base flow

1

3

5

7

9

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

555 556

537 542

535 531

531 529

534 531

7.7 7.9

7.9 8.0

7.9 7.9

7.9 8.0

7.9 7.9

24.5 25.0

24.5 24.5

24.5 26.0

25.0 25.0

25.5 27.0

5.15.4

5.5 5.0

5.4 4.6

4.9 4.9

5.7 5.6

(05-23-91)

4.0 4.9

5.0 7.3

4.34.7

4.8 4.3

5.0 4.9

7.2 <1.0 <1.0 4.1 <1.0 <1.0

4.8 <1.0 <1.0 5.2 <1.0 <1.0

4.3 <1.0 <1.0 5.6 <1.0 <1.0

2.8 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 <1.0

4.7 <1.0 <1.0 4.7 <1.0 <1.0

5.3 <1.0 <1.0 4.6 <1.0 <1.0

4.9 <1.0 <1.0 4.1 <1.0 <1.0

4.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.8 <1.0 <1.0

4.3 <1.0 <1.0 1.4 <1.0 <1.0

4.1 <1.0 <1.0 5.1 <1.0 <1.0

Runoff conditions (06-19-91)

1

3

5

7

9

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

Upstream Downstream

594 602

598 602

595 597

598 600

596 598

7.7 8.1

7.9 8.1

8.0 8.1

8.0 8.0

8.0 8.1

27.5 28.0

28.5 28.5

28.5 28.5

28.0 29.0

29.0 29.5

4.9 6.1

6.35.4

6.1 6.6

5.8 6.0

5.8 6.6

5.9 <1.0 <1.0 5.8 <1.0 <1.0

5.9 <1.0 <1.0 5.3 <1.0 <1.0

5.7 <1.0 <1.0 5.4 <1.0 <1.0

4.7 <1.0 <1.0 5.6 <1.0 <1.0

5.8 <1.0 <1.0 5.4 <1.0 <1.0

a Some of the reported total uranium concentrations may have been affected by sediment in the raw water samples; therefore, the reported value may be lower than actual concentrations.

27

Table 3. Well-construction data for wells in the Missouri River alluvium

Well (fig. 1)

Well 1 shallow deep

Well 2 shallow deep

Well 3 shallow deep

Well 4 shallow deep

Daniel Boone Gun Club

Total depth (feet)

29.9 37.5

49.8 69.5

37.6 52.5

44.6 54.7

36.9

Screened interval

(feet)

19.9 to 29.9 27.5 to 37.5

29.8 to 49.8 49.5 to 69.5

27.6 to 37.6 37.5 to 52.5

29.6 to 44.6 44.7 to 54.7

unknown

Drill hole diameter (inches)

8.58.5

10.5 8.5

10.5 8.5

8.5 8.5

unknown

Casing diameter (inches)

2.0 2.0

4.0 2.0

4.0 2.0

2.0 2.0

1.0

Altitude of Altitude of land surface top of casing

(feet) (feet)

462.0 463.2 463.9

465.8 465.8 465.9

466.7 467.5 467.8

459.2 459.8 459.4

468.0 469.0

28

Table 4.--Core sample descriptions from deep wells in the Missouri River alluvium near Defiance

Depth, in feet Core sample description __

Well 1 (deep)

0-9 No sample10 Light gray, frequent orange-red iron stains, clayey silt; some fine-grained, clear quartz sand 15 Buff to gray, slightly calcareous clayey silt; some very fine-grained white to clear, some orange

iron stained, quartz sand; some clear to yellow, subrounded, coarse quartz sand 20 Gray silt, with trace of black organic fragments; some mica fragments (muscovite) 25 Predominantly slightly calcareous silt, with clear to white, very fine-grained, quartz sand;

trace of black organic fragments; trace of mica fragments30 Predominantly slightly calcareous silt, with clear to white, subangular to subrounded, fine­

grained quartz sand; trace of black organic fragments35 Same as at 30 feet36 Possible clay stringer 39 Possible clay stringer 41 Top of bedrock

Well 2 (deep)

0-9 No sample 10 Tan to brown, silty clay; occasional fragments of white limestone; subrounded, light green

quartz, some iron stain 15 Brown to white, angular, very fine-grained, quartz sand; some mica fragments; occasional

white, medium-grained, limestone fragments; trace of black organic fragments 20 Brown to white, angular, very fine-grained silty quartz sand; some small mica fragments;

some very fine-grained clear to white, with orange iron stain, quartz; trace of black organicfragments

25 Gray to white silty, very fine-grained quartz sand; some mica fragments; some limestonefragments; trace of black organic fragments

30 White to gray, silty to very fine-grained quartz sand; occasional fine grain, clear, quartz sand;some mica fragments; trace of black organic fragments; some limestone fragments

35 Clear to white, medium- to fine-grained, subrounded, quartz sand; occasional angular, coarse­ grained, quartz sand; some brown, subrounded, medium-grained chert; trace of blackorganic fragments

40 Large gravel or cobbles

Well 3 (deep)

0-9 No sample10 Light to dark brown, silty clay; occasional white, angular chert fragments; some very fine­

grained, clear, quartz sand15 Gray silty clay, with frequent orange-red iron stains; some very fine-grained quartz sand20 Green to brown silt; abundant clear to yellow, very fine-grained, subangular, quartz sand;

trace of limestone fragments; trace of black organic fragments25 No recovery30 Clear, white to yellow, subangular to subrounded, fine- to very fine-grained quartz sand;

occasional yellow, subangular to subrounded, medium- to very coarse-grained quartz; frequent black, organic fragments

35 Clear to yellow, some orange to red, subangular to subrounded, medium-grained, silty quartz sand; occasional white to yellow, angular to subrounded, coarse- to very coarse-grained quartz sand; general appearance is greenish-brown with frequent black organic fragments

40 - 50 Grab sample-clear to red, rounded to subangular, very fine- to very coarse-grained silty sand; frequent white to red, angular, small chert pebbles; some black organic fragments

29

Table 4.--Core sample descriptions from deep wells in the Missouri River alluvium near Defiance Continued

Depth, in feet___________________Core sample description_______________________

Well 4 (deep)

0-10 Brown to buff, calcareous, very fine-grained sandy silt; some clear, angular to subangular,fine-grained quartz; trace of black organic fragments

15 Frosted clear to yellow, subrounded, very fine- to fine-grained quartz sand; trace of blackorganic fragments

20 Clear to yellow, occasionally red, angular to subangular, fine-grained, silty quartz sand;occasional subrounded, medium-grained, quartz sand; trace of fine- to medium-grainedblack organic fragments; trace of pebble-size chert

25 Clear to white, subangular to subrounded, very fine- to fine-grained quartz sand; some fine­ grained to pebble-size black organic fragments (coal?); occasional clear to red, subangular toangular, coarse-grained chert

42 -46 Possible clay layer (from driller) 48 Large gravel 50 Grab sample subrounded to rounded, fine- to coarse-grained silty sand; some white to red

coarse-grained chert; frequent coarse-grained black organic fragments; about 10 percentpebble-size subrounded, silicate (orthoclase?)

51 -53 Hard material (clay?)55 Grab sample clear to yellow, subangular, fine-grained quartz sand; subround to round very

coarse-grained silty quartz sand; frequent brown to white, small to medium pebbles of chert and quartz; some black organic fragments

56 Possible gravel (from driller)

30

AB

BR

EV

IAT

ION

S A

ND

SY

MB

OLS

USE

D I

N T

AB

LE 5

WL

D

epth

bel

ow l

and

surf

ace

(wat

er le

vel)

, in

feet

TD

T

otal

dep

th o

f wel

l, in

feet

Con

d Sp

ecif

ic c

ondu

ctan

ce, i

n m

icro

siem

ens

per

cent

imet

er a

t 25

deg

rees

Cel

sius

pH

In s

tand

ard

unit

sE

h O

xida

tion

-red

ucti

on p

oten

tial

con

vert

ed to

sta

ndar

d hy

drog

ene

lect

rode

, in

mill

ivol

ts

Tem

p W

ater

tem

pera

ture

, in

degr

ees

Cel

sius

DO

D

isso

lved

oxy

gen,

in

mill

igra

ms

per

lite

rS2

" T

otal

hyd

roge

n su

lfid

e, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Ca

Dis

solv

ed c

alci

um, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

Mg

Dis

solv

ed m

agne

sium

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

r

Na

Dis

solv

ed s

odiu

m, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

K

Dis

solv

ed p

otas

sium

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rH

C0

3 B

icar

bona

te, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

CO

3 C

arbo

nate

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rA

lk

Alk

alin

ity

as c

alci

um c

arbo

nate

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

r

804

Dis

solv

ed s

ulfa

te, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Cl

Dis

solv

ed c

hlor

ide,

in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rF

D

isso

lved

flu

orid

e, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Br

Bro

mid

e, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

SiO

2 D

isso

lved

sili

ca, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

DS

Dis

solv

ed s

olid

s, r

esid

ue a

t 18

0 de

gree

s C

elsi

us, i

n m

illi

gram

sp

er li

ter

NO

2 D

isso

lved

nit

rite

as

nitr

ogen

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

r N

O2

+ N

Os

Dis

solv

ed n

itri

te p

lus

nitr

ate

as n

itro

gen,

in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rN

H3

Dis

solv

ed a

mm

onia

as

nitr

ogen

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rP

tot

al

Tot

al p

hosp

horo

us, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

PO4

Dis

solv

ed o

rtho

phos

phat

e as

pho

spho

rus,

in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rA

l D

isso

lved

alu

min

um, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

As

Dis

solv

ed a

rsen

ic,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Ba

Dis

solv

ed b

ariu

m,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Be

Dis

solv

ed b

eryl

lium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

r

B

Dis

solv

ed b

oron

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rC

d D

isso

lved

cad

miu

m, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Cr

Dis

solv

ed c

hrom

ium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rC

o D

isso

lved

cob

alt,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Cu

Dis

solv

ed c

oppe

r, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Fe

tota

l T

otal

rec

over

able

iron

, on

site

det

erm

inat

ion,

in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rF

e D

isso

lved

iron

, ons

ite

dete

rmin

atio

n, i

n m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Fe4

^ to

tal

Tot

al f

erro

us ir

on, o

nsit

e de

term

inat

ion,

in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rF

e4"1"

Dis

solv

ed f

erro

us i

ron,

ons

ite

dete

rmin

atio

n, i

n m

illig

ram

s pe

r li

ter

Pb

Dis

solv

ed le

ad,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Li

Dis

solv

ed li

thiu

m,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Mn

Dis

solv

ed m

anga

nese

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rH

g D

isso

lved

mer

cury

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rM

o D

isso

lved

mol

ybde

num

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rN

i D

isso

lved

nic

kel,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Se

Dis

solv

ed s

elen

ium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rA

g D

isso

lved

silv

er, i

n m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Sr

Dis

solv

ed s

tron

tium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rV

D

isso

lved

van

adiu

m,

in m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter

Zn

Dis

solv

ed z

inc,

in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

r

TO

G

Tot

al o

rgan

ic c

arbo

n, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rC

y D

isso

lved

cya

nide

, in

mil

ligr

ams

per

lite

rG

r a

Dis

solv

ed g

ross

alp

ha a

s na

tura

l ura

nium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rG

r p-

Cs

Dis

solv

ed g

ross

bet

a as

ces

ium

-137

, in

pico

curi

es p

er li

ter

Gr

p-Sr

/Y

Dis

solv

ed g

ross

bet

a as

str

onti

um/y

ttri

um-9

0, i

n pi

cocu

ries

per

lite

r

Ra-

226

Dis

solv

ed r

adiu

m 2

26, r

adon

met

hod,

in

pico

curi

es p

er li

ter

Ra-

228

Dis

solv

ed r

adiu

m 2

28, i

n pi

cocu

ries

per

lite

rU

tota

l T

otal

ura

nium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rU

D

isso

lved

ura

nium

, in

mic

rogr

ams

per

lite

rT

h-23

0 D

isso

lved

thor

ium

230

, in

pico

curi

es p

er l

iter

Th-

232

Dis

solv

ed th

oriu

m 2

32, i

n pi

cocu

ries

per

lite

rN

o dat

a av

aila

ble

< L

ess

than

to

Tab

le 5

.---W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 19

92

[Tot

al ir

on c

once

ntra

tion

s w

ere

dete

rmin

ed u

sing

the

ferr

ozin

e m

etho

d an

d fe

rrou

s ir

on c

once

ntra

tion

s w

ere

dete

rmin

ed u

sing

the

phen

anth

roli

ne m

etho

d as

des

crib

ed b

y th

e H

ach

Com

pany

]

Well

(fig

. 1)

Well 1 shallow

Well 1 deep

Well 2 sha

llow

Well 2 deep

Well 3 shallow

Well 3 deep

Date

3-03

-92

4-09-92

5-15-92

6-10-92

3-03-92

4-09

-92

5-15-92

6-10-92

3-04-92

4-09-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04-92

4-09-92

5-12

-92

6-09-92

3-04-92

4-08-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04-92

4-09-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

Time 1740

1500

1600

0945

1700

1345

1430

0915

1700

1100

1300

1645

1600

1000

1000

1600

1400

1745

1630

1415

1230

0820

1500

1450

WL

17.08

16.2

614

.09

14.56

17.80

16.64

14.38

15.05

20.37

19.14

16.76

17.50

20.39

19.17

16.73

17.54

22.64

23.29

18.7

719

.81

22.83

21.40

19.1

320.29

TD

Cond

29.9

849

755

720

785

37.5

91

0772

757

805

49.8

828

711

655

675

69.5

74

167

769

6636

37.6

785

705

657

659

52.5

770

692

675

654

pH 6.4

6.8

6.7

7.0

6.8

6.9

6.5

7.0

6.9

6.6

7.1

7.1

6.7

6.9

7.0

7.0

6.8

6.9

7.2

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.9

6.9

Eh

-110

-102

-100

-140 ~-82

-120

-140 -87

-135

-130 -

-130 -10

-120 --

-100

-220

-100

Temp

14.0

13.5

14.0

13.5

14.0

14.5

14.0

14.0

14.5

14.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

14.0

13.5

14.5

15.5

14.5

14.5

15.0

15.5

14.0

14.5

15.0

DO

<0.05

.05

.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05 .05

<.05 .05

<.05

<.05

<.05 .05

.05

<.05

<.05

<.05 .05

.05

<.05 .3

s2- 3 34 7 18 12 16 20 14 14 7 15 7 0 2 <5

0 3 ~ <5

Ca

120

130

130

130

130

130

140

130

120

120

110

120

110

120

110

110

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

120

Tab

le 5

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 79

92 C

onti

nued

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 4

shal

low

Wel

l 4

deep

Dan

iel

Boo

neG

un C

lub

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

nty

wel

l fi

eld

Allu

vial

wel

l bla

nk

Dat

e

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-05

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

4-09

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

Tim

e

1015

1620

1230

1045

0915

1530

1100

0920

1030

1215

1200

1600

1300

1201

WL

14.8

712

.80

13.0

713

.50

14.6

412

.50

12.7

613

.50

22.5

019

.25

21.2

4

..

TD

C

ond

44.6

90

880

275

678

5

54.7

82

075

670

072

9

36.9

97

080

582

5

100.

00

570

«

«

-_

pH 6.8

6.7

6.8

6.9

6.6

6.4

6.5

6.9

6.6

6.6

6.7

7.0

__

Eh

-120

-82

-90

-125

-92

-130 -4

0 83 -30 _ __

Tem

p

15.0

15.5

15.0

16.0

15.0

15.0

15.0

15.5

17.0

15.0

16.0

15.5

__

DO

<0.0

5<.

05<.

05<.

05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05 .0

5

_ __

s2- 14 13

<10 10 10 7 0

150 11 ~

Ca

140

140

140

140 13 120

120

130

150

140

140 70

.19

.24

Tab

le 5

.«W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 19

92 C

onti

nued

Well

(fig

- 1)

Well 1 shallow

Well 1 deep

Well 2 shallow

Well 2 deep

Well 3 shallow

Well 3 deep

Date

3-03

-92

4-09-92

5-15-92

6-10-92

3-03

-92

4-09

-92

5-15-92

6-10-92

3-04

-92

4-09-92

5-12-92

6-09

-92

3-04-92

4-09

-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04

-92

4-09-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

Mg 28 30 29 30 31 30 31 30 35 33 30 34 27 28 26 27 30 28 27 27 28 27 27 28

Na

10 11 10 10 11 11 11 10 4.7

4.8

4.8

4.6

5.2

5.7

5.4

5.1

4.3

4.2

4.3

4.0

4.4

4.5

4.4

4.3

K 3.1

3.1

3.4

3.1

3.9

3.8

4.0

3.5

2.8

3.0

2.4

2.9

2.8

3.1

3.0

2.9

5.9

6.0

5.5

5.6

4.6

4.0

3.7

3.8

HCO

3

487

508

560

531

556

531

586

565

572

549

523

534

496

506

508

494

510

483

505

494

512

495

505

559

C0

3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Alk

399

416

459

435

456

435

480

463

468

450

429

438

406

414

416

405

418

396

414

405

419

406

414

458

S04

67 61 60 62 45 54 46 52 33 25 25 25 33 31 30 30 47 41 40 37 44 39 39 40

Cl

21 19 20 20 15 16 19 19 6.6

5.9

4.8

2.7

5.3

7.9

6.8

4.8

5.3

'4.

84.

52.

8

6.0

13 4.5

2.5

P 0.30 .40

.30

.30

.50

.30

.30

.20

.20

.30

.30

.20

.20

.30

.20

.30

.20

.30

.20

.20

.20

.30

.20

.20

Br 0.03 .18

.07

.06

.06

.12

.10

.08

.04

.09

.05

.04

.03

.10

.05

.06

.01

.02

.04

.03

.02

.08

.03

.03

SiO2 33 31 31 30 39 36 37 34 30 30 30 29 32 32 31 31 18 21 22 21 25 26 24 21

Tab

le 5

. Wat

er-q

ualit

y da

ta fo

r w

ells

in th

e M

isso

uri R

iver

allu

vium

, Mar

ch-J

une

7992

Con

tinu

ed

u>

Wel

l (f

ig-

1)

Wel

l 4

shal

low

Wel

l 4 d

eep

Dan

iel

Boo

neG

un C

lub

St. C

harl

es C

ount

yw

ell f

ield

Allu

vial

wel

l bla

nk

Dat

e

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-05

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

4-09

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

Mg

31 29 29 30 28 27 26 27 46 43 41 17

.02

.02

Na

13 12 13 13 12 11 11 11 8,7

8,2

7.9

35 <.20

<.20

K 7.1

7.3

7.9

7.8

5.3

5.3

5.5

5.9

2.8

2.9

2.9

4.7

<.10

<-10

HC

O3

625

599

627

639

574

558

577

600

671

634

634

399 ~

C03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..

Alk 512

491

514

524

471

458

473

492

550

520

519

327 ..

SO4

41 30 26 25 22 14 15 24 60 52 42 98

.10

<.10

Cl

26 5.6

5.0

10 6.0

5.2

4.7

2.6

11 8.7

5.6

19 <.10

<.10

F 0.20 .3

0.3

0.3

0

.20

.20

<.10 .2

0

.10

.20

.20

.30

<.10

<.10

Br

0.03 .1

0.1

7.1

1

.36

.08

.21

.04

.03

.04

.04

.14

<.01

<.01

SiO

2

25 24 24 23 30 28 27 26 19 18 18 18

.04

.04

Tab

le 5

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 19

92 C

onti

nued

Well

(fig

- 1)

Well 1 shallow

Well 1 deep

Well 2 shallow

Well 2 deep

Well 3 shallow

Well 3 deep

Date

3-03-92

4-09

-92

5-15-92

6-10

-92

3-03

-92

4-09

-92

5-15

-92

6-10

-92

3-04

-92

4-09-92

5-12-92

6-09

-92

3-04

-92

4-09

-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04

-92

4-08-92

5-12-92

6-09

-92

3-04

-92

4-09

-92

5-12

-92

6-09

-92

DS

NO

2

511

<0.01

593

<.01

530

<.01

529

<.01

553

<.01

538

<.01

562

.02

555

<.01

489

<.01

476

<.01

435

<.01

478

<.01

449

<.01

464

<.01

434

<.01

449

<.01

458

<.01

460

<.01

445

<.01

436

<.01

461

<.01

462

<.01

442

<.01

456

<.01

N0

2 +

N03

<0.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

<.05

NH

3

0.54 .37

.42

.39

1.50 .89

1.10 .91

.41

.38

.49

.40

.41

.38

.39

.39

.04

.03

.12

.09

.18

.20

.24

.21

P tot

al

0.32 .42

.33

.41

.41

.55

.08

.69

.52

.53

.05

.35

.34

.58

.64

.41

<.01 .02

.02

.04

.13

.19

.04

.17

P04

0.03 .11

.21

.17

.34

<.01

<.01

<.01 .38

<.01 .04

<.01 .31

.37

.16

<.01 .01

.02

.03

.02

.10

.14

.10

.08

Al

As

<10 20

3<10

310

3

<10

9<10

720

6

<10

6

<10

<10

8<10

710

7

<10

<10

6<10

6<1

0 6

<10

<10

1<10

3<10

1

<10

<10

5<10

4<10

3

Ba

240

250

240

240

400

360

370

350

390

390

350

380

400

430

400

410

290

290

290

280

480

550

560

510

Be

B

<10

100

<10

120

<10

110

<10

130

<10

90<10

110

<10

120

<10

120

<10

70<10

80<10

80<10

80

<10

70<10

70<10

70<10

70

<10

60<10

70<10

60<10

60

<10

60<10

60<10

50<10

70

Tab

le 5

. Wat

er-q

ualit

y da

ta fo

r w

ells

in th

e M

isso

uri R

iver

allu

vium

, Mar

ch-J

une

7992

Con

tinu

ed

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 4

shal

low

Wel

l 4

deep

Dan

iel B

oone

Gun

Clu

b

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

nty

wel

l fie

ld

Allu

vial

wel

l bl

ank

Dat

e

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-04

-92

4-08

-92

5-15

-92

6-09

-92

3-05

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

4-09

-92

5-26

-92

6-10

-92

DS

NO

2

545

<0.0

150

6 <.

0153

1 .0

153

8 <.

01

497

<.01

46

7 .0

248

6 .0

150

5 <.

01

599

<.01

576

<.01

528

<.01

384 2

<.01

<1

<.01

NO

2 +

N0

3

<0.0

5<.

05<.

05<.

05

<.05

<.

05<.

05<.

05

<.05

<.05

<.05

-- <.05

<.05

NH

3

0.18 .1

5.1

7.1

6

.40

.41

.38

.34

.02

.02

<.01

-

.01

<.01

P t

otal

PO

4

0.19

0.

11.1

2 .0

6.0

5 <.

01.1

7 .0

8

.39

<.01

.3

2 .0

7.0

6 <.

01.3

9 <.

01

<.01

<.

01.0

3 <.

01.0

2 <.

01

~

<.01

<.01

Al

As

Ba

<10

7 37

010

7

380

<10

5 35

0<1

0 5

360

<10

1 68

0 <1

0 <1

63

0<1

0 <1

63

0<1

0 <1

63

0

<10

-

250

<10

<1

250

<10

<1

230

<10

1 33

0

<10

<1

<2<1

0 <1

<2

Be

B

<10

80<1

0 90

<10

90<1

0 90

<10

80

<10

80<1

0 80

<10

80

<10

40<1

0 40

<10

40

<10

70

<10

<10

<10

<10

Tab

le 5

. Wat

er-q

ualit

y da

ta fo

r w

ells

in th

e M

isso

uri R

iver

allu

vium

, Mar

ch-J

une

J992

--C

ontin

ued

u> oo

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 1

shal

low

Wel

l 1

deep

Wel

l 2 s

hall

ow

Wel

l 2

deep

Wel

l 3

shal

low

Wel

l 3

deep

Dat

e C

d

3-03

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-15

-92

<1.0

6-10

-92

<1.0

3-03

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-15

-92

<1.0

6-10

-92

<1.0

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-12

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-12

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-08

-92

<1.0

5-12

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-12

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

Cr

Co

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<31

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<6<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

Cu

Fe

tota

la

<1

6.40

<1

6.25

<1

6.35

<1

5.60

<1

11.0

<1

10.5

<1

13.8

<1

12.2

<1

9.35

<1 <1

8.92

<1

8.35

<1

9.15

<1

8.65

<1

8.64

<1

9.50

<1

.04

<1

.15

<1

.52

<1

.22

<1

4.00

<1

6.90

<1

6.04

<1

3.00

Fea 6.40

5.40

7.75

5.90

11.5

10.1

12.4 8.7

8.35

7.75

7.20

8.60

8.45

8.95

8.20

7.15 .0

5.1

0.7

1.1

1

4.10

6.15

6.88

2.70

tota

la

5.50

5.10

4.70

3.70

7.50

8.60

6.50

10.3 7.55

7.15

2.92

5.95

6.30

5.75

1.72

2.80

<.01 .0

4.4

5.0

2

4.00

5.50

4.36

2.07

Fe^

Pb

5.55

<1

4.45

<1

4.90

<1

5.40

<1

9.50

<1

7.45

<1

7.40

<1

9.65

<1

6.60

<1

6.50

<1

5.24

<1

6.40

<1

5.15

<1

6.90

<1

4.32

<1

3.80

<1

.03

<1.0

4 <1

.44

<1.1

2 <1

3.42

<1

6.20

<1

5.16

<1

3.12

<1

Li

33 32 32 33 34 32 33 33 43 40 40 43 38 37 34 36 40 34 34 35 37 33 34 35

Tab

le 5

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 79

92 C

onti

nued

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 4

shal

low

Wel

l 4

deep

Dan

iel

Boo

neG

un C

lub

St.

Cha

rles

Cou

nty

wel

l fie

ld

Allu

vial

wel

l bl

ank

Dat

e C

d

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-08

-92

<1.0

5-15

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

3-04

-92

<1.0

4-08

-92

<1.0

5-15

-92

<1.0

6-09

-92

<1.0

3-05

-92

<1.0

5-26

-92

<1.0

6-10

-92

<1.0

4-09

-92

<1.0

5-26

-92

<1.0

6-10

-92

<1.0

Cr

Co

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

<1

4<1

<3

<1

<6<1

<3

<1

5<1

7

<1

5

<1

<3

<1

<3<1

<3

Cu

Fe

tota

l8

<1

7.10

<1

7.40

<1

7.35

<1

7.60

<1

13.5

<1

13.4

<1

13.6

<1

6.60

<1

1.58

<1

1.19

<1

1.40

<1

3.54

<1 <1

Fe8 7.50

6.70

8.05

7.15

12.0

20.6

13.5 9.80

1.41

1.19

1.03

2.66

<.00

3.0

07

tota

l8

6.60

7.25

3.90

6.65

12.0 8.70

9.35

6.60

1.81

1.09 .8

0

2.68

__

Fe*4

* P

b

5.00

<1

4.95

<1

3.60

<1

3.80

<1

9.50

<1

10.2

<1

8.45

<1

1.80

<1

1.51

<1

1.15

<1

.98

<1

2.16

<1 <1 <1

Li 39 38 37 39 39 39 39 39 23 19 21 26 <4 <4

Tab

le 5

. -W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e Jf

992-

-Con

tinue

d

Well

(fig- 1)

Well 1 shallow

Well 1 deep

Well 2 shallow

Well 2 deep

Well 3 shallow

Well 3 deep

Date

3-03-92

4-09-92

5-15-92

6-10-92

3-03-92

4-09

-92

5-15

-92

6-10-92

3-04-92

4-09

-92

5-12-92

6-09

-92

3-04-92

4-09

-92

5-12-92

6-09

-92

3-04-92

4-08

-92

5-12-92

6-09-92

3-04-92

4-09

-92

5-12

-92

6-09-92

Mn

Hg

Mo

Ni

Se

610

<0.1

<10

<1

<1520

<.l

<10

1 <1

490

<.l

<10

<1

<1470

<.l

<10

<1

<1

660

<.l

<10

<1

<169

0 <.

l <10

<1

<174

0 <.

l <2

0 <1

<1670

<.l

<10

<1

<1

290

<.l

<10

<1

<126

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<124

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<126

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<1

300

<.l

<10

<1

<130

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<1

300

<.l

<10

<1

<129

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<1

330

<.l

<10

4 <1

330

<.l

<10

4 <1

380

<.l

<10

3 <1

370

<.l

<10

3 <1

370

<.l

<10

<1

<136

0 <.

l <1

0 <1

<134

0 <.

l <10

<1

<1420

<.l

<10

<1

<1

Ag

Sr

<1.0

560

<1.0

57

0<1.0

550

<1.0

550

<1.0

690

<1.0

690

<1.0

720

<1.0

67

0

<1.0

660

<1.0

660

<1.0

640

<1.0

660

<1.0

560

<1.0

59

0<1.0

560

<1.0

560

<1.0

590

<1.0

670

<1.0

66

0<1

.0

660

<1.0

580

<1.0

590

<1.0

58

0<1.0

580

V <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <12 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6

Zn

TOC

<10

2.0

<10

<10

1.7

<10

1.5

<10

2.0

<10

<10

1.8

<10

1.5

<10

1.8

<10

<10

1.5

<10

1.1

<10

1.8

<10

<10

1.5

30

1.3

<10

1.3

<10

1.5

10

1.3

<10

1.0

<10

1.5

20 <10

1.4

<10

1.0

Tab

le 5

. Wat

er-q

ualit

y da

ta fo

r w

ells

in th

e M

isso

uri R

iver

allu

vium

, Mar

ch-J

une

7992

Con

tinu

ed

Well

(fig

. D

Well 4 sha

llow

Well 4 dee

p

Dani

el Boone

Gun Clu

b

St. Charles County

well

fie

ld

Allu

vial

wel

l bl

ank

Date

3-04-92

4-08

-92

5-15-92

6-09

-92

3-04-92

4-08-92

5-15-92

6-09-92

3-05-92

5-26-92

6-10-92

4-09

-92

5-26-92

6-10-92

Mn

Hg

Mo

Ni

Se

990

<0.1

<1

0 <1

<1840

<.l

<10

<1

<1840

<.l

<10

<1

<183

0 <.l

<10

<1

<1

510

<.l

<10

<1

<1

430

<.l

<10

<1

<145

0 <.l

<20

<1

<1510

<.l

<10

<1

<1

160

<.l

<10

19

<1160

<.l

<10

17

<1140

<.l

<10

17

<1

450

<.l

<10

<1

<1

<1

<.l

<10

<1

<11

<.l

<10

<1

<1

Ag

Sr

<1.0

870

<1.0

860

<1.0

860

<1.0

870

<1.0

870

<1.0

800

<1.0

800

<1.0

820

<1.0

390

<1.0

390

<1.0

360

<1.0

400

<1.0

1

<1.0

1

V <6 <6 <6 <6 <6

<6 <12 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6 <6

Zn

TOG

<10

1.8

<10

<10

1.9

<10

1.9

<10

3.2

20 <10

1.9

<10

1.8

310

1.5

340

1.4

400

1.1

<10

<10

<10

Tab

le 5

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 79

92 C

onti

nued

to

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 1

shal

low

Wel

l 1

deep

Wel

l 2

shal

low

Wel

l 2

deep

Wel

l 3

shal

low

Wel

l 3

deep

Dat

e C

y

3-03

-92

<0.0

14-

09-9

2 <.

015-

15-9

2 <.

016-

10-9

2 <.

01

3-03

-92

<.01

4-09

-92

<.01

5-15

-92

<.01

6-10

-92

<.01

3-04

-92

<.01

4-09

-92

<.01

5-12

-92

<.01

6-09

-92

<.01

3-04

-92

<.01

4-09

-92

<.01

5-12

-92

<.01

6-09

-92

<.01

3-04

-92

<.01

4-08

-92

<.01

5-12

-92

<.01

6-09

-92

<.01

3-04

-92

<.01

4-09

-92

<.01

5-12

-92

<.01

6-09

-92

<.01

Gra 1.9

1.9

1.1

1.5

1.5

2.8

3.1

1.5

2.7

3.7

2.4

3.0

2.5

5.1

2.1

5.2

21 7.3

5.0

7.8

8.1

5.0

6.7

5.0

Gr

p-C

s

5.3

5.2

5.8

5.6

5.4

5.7

5.3

5.2

6.1

5.8

4.6

4.9

4.0

4.6

6.0

4.6

15 10 9.1

9.6

9.7

7.3

8.2

8.2

Gr

p-Sr

/Y

4.0

3.9

4.3

4.2

4.1

4.3

4.0

3.9

4.5

4.4

3.4

3.7

3.0

3.5

4.5

3.5

12 7.8

6.8

7.2

7.3

5.5

6.2

6.1

Ra-

226

0.24 .2

4.1

9.1

9

.06

.26

.26

.28

.44

.44

.39

.60

.66

.55

.58

.50

.28

.26

.31

.24

.63

.63

.70

.69

Ra-

228

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0 1.1 1.2

<1.0

<1.0 1.1 1.2

1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0 1.5

1.5

1.2

1.4

Uto

talb

<1.0 1.2

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0 5.1

<1.0

21 3.7

4.6

9.5

3.9

1.5

1.9

6.3

U

Th-

230

Th-

232

0.27

<1

.0

<1.0

.26

<1.0

<1

.0.1

7 <1

.0

<1.0

.29

<1.0

<1

.0

.18

<1.0

<1

.0.0

4 <1

.0

<1.0

.05

<1.0

<1

.0.1

1 <1

.0

<1.0

.27

<1.0

<1

.0.1

9 <1

.0

<1.0

.16

<1.0

<1

.0.3

9 <1

.0

<1.0

.17

<1.0

<1

.0.1

5 <1

.0

<1.0

.12

<1.0

<1

.0.1

3 <1

.0

<1.0

16

<1.0

<1

.04.

8 <1

.0

<1.0

4.0

<1.0

<1

.07.

0 <1

.0

<1.0

3.6

<1.0

<1

.01.

4 <1

.0

<1.0

1.6

<1.0

<1

.05.

3 <1

.0

<1.0

Tab

le 5

.--W

ater

-qua

lity

data

for

wel

ls in

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluvi

um, M

arch

-Jun

e 79

92 C

onti

nued

Wel

l (f

ig.

1)

Wel

l 4 s

hallo

w

Wel

l 4 d

eep

Dan

iel B

oone

Gun

Clu

b

St. C

harl

es C

ount

y w

ell f

ield

Allu

vial

wel

l bla

nk

Dat

e C

y

3-04

-92

<0.0

14-

08-9

2 <.

015-

15-9

2 <.

016-

09-9

2 <.

01

3-04

-92

<.01

4-

08-9

2 <.

015-

15-9

2 <.

016-

09-9

2 <.

01

3-05

-92

<.01

5-26

-92

<.01

6-10

-92

<.01

4-09

-92

<.01

5-26

-92

<.01

6-10

-92

<.01

Gra 5.7

4.0

4.3

7.8

3.5

3.3

3.1

3.8

15 6.7

8.5

2.0

<.6

<.6

Gr

p-C

s

10 11 12 12 11 9.0

11 9.7

13 9.3

6.9

7.7

^ O

^ U

Gr

p-Sr

/Y

7.5

8.1

8.8

8.8

8.0

6.7

7.8

7.4

9.4

7.0

5.2

5.7

<.6

<.6

Ra-

226

0.37 .3

5.2

9.3

3

.52

.61

.51

.52

.24

.20

.24

.38

~

Ra-

228

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0 1.2

1.7

1.4

1.5

1.1

<1.0

<1.0 1.2

-

Uto

talb

4.1

3.2

5.3

4.4

<J;«

<1.0

<1.0

10 9.2

6.9

<1.0

<1.0

<1.0

U

Th-

230

Th-

232

3 2

<1 0

<1

02.

9 <1

.0

<1.0

3 2

<1 0

<1

03.

5 <1

.0

<1.0

.36

<1.0

<1

.0

.09

<1.0

<1

.0.2

6 <1

.0

<1.0

.36

<1.0

<1

.0

9.1

<1.0

<1

.07.

6 <1

.0

<1.0

6.9

<1.0

<1

.0

.10

<1.0

<1

.0

.. ~

a C

once

ntra

tions

are

con

side

red

sem

i-qu

antit

ativ

e.b

Som

e of

the

repo

rted

tot

al u

rani

um c

once

ntra

tions

may

hav

e be

en a

ffec

ted

by s

edim

ent i

n th

e ra

w w

ater

sam

ples

; the

refo

re,

the

repo

rted

val

ue m

ay b

e lo

wer

than

act

ual c

once

ntra

tions

.

Tab

le 6

. --S

tati

stic

al s

umm

ary

of s

elec

ted

wat

er-q

uali

ty d

ata

from

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

nd

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluv

ial

wel

ls n

ear

Def

ianc

e

[mg/

L, m

illi

gram

s pe

r li

ter;

<, l

ess

than

; --

, no

data

; ng

/L, m

icro

gram

s pe

r li

ter;

pC

i/L, p

icoc

urie

s pe

r li

ter]

Pro

pert

y or

co

nsti

tuen

t

Spec

ific

con

duct

ance

,m

icro

siem

ens

per

cent

imet

er a

t 25

degr

ees

Cel

sius

pH, stan

dard

uni

ts

Wat

er t

empe

ratu

re,

degr

ees

Cel

sius

Cal

cium

,di

ssol

ved

(mg/

L a

s C

a)

Mag

nesi

um,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

Mg)

Sodi

um,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

Na)

Pot

assi

um,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

K)

Bic

arbo

nate

,(m

g/L

as

HC

O3)

Alk

alin

ity,

(mg/

L a

s C

aCO

3)

Typ

e of

si

te

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Num

ber

of

sam

ples

48 35 48 35 47 35 18 35 18 35 18 35 18 35 18 35 18 35

Per

cent

age

of s

ampl

es in

whi

ch v

alue

s w

ere

less

tha

n or

equ

al t

o th

ose

show

nM

axim

um

720

970 8.

67.

2

31.0

17.0

62 150 20 46 64 13 7.

37.

9

222

671

182

550

Min

imum

529

636 6.

96.

4

10.0

13.5

51 13 17 26 36 4 4.8

2.4

176

483

144

396

Mea

n

604

755 a 6.

8

26.2

14.7

57 123 18 30 46 8 6.

14.

3

202

552

168

452

95

696

922 8.

57.

1

31.0

16.2

62 142 20 44 64 13 7.

37.

8

222

645

182

529

75

639

805 8.

06.

9

29.5

15.0

61 130 19 31 58 11 6.

65.

5

210

586

174

480

50 (

Med

ian)

599

756 7.

96.

8

28.0

14.5

57 120 18 29 408 5.

93.

8

203

549

170

450

25 557

692 7.

86.

7

24.6

14.0

55 120 17 27 38 5 5.

63.

0

191

506

161

414

5

531

650 7.

26.

4

11.6

13.5

51 91 17 26 36 4 4.8

2.7

176

486

144

398

Tab

le 6

.--St

atis

tica

l sum

mar

y o

f sel

ecte

d w

ater

-qua

lity

dat

a fr

om t

he M

isso

uri R

iver

and

M

isso

uri R

iver

all

uvia

l w

ells

nea

r D

efia

nce

Con

tinu

ed

Pro

pert

y or

co

nsti

tuen

t

Sul

fate

, di

ssol

ved

(mg/

L a

s SO

4)

Chl

orid

e,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

Cl)

Flu

orid

e,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

F)

Bro

mid

e, d

isso

lved

(m

g/L

as

Br)

Silic

a,

diss

olve

d(m

g/L

as

SiO

2)

Dis

solv

ed s

olid

sre

sidu

e at

180

degr

ees

Cel

sius

Nit

rate

, di

ssol

ved

(mg/

L a

s N

)

Nit

roge

n, a

mm

onia

, di

ssol

ved

(mg/

L a

s N

)

Pho

spho

rous

, tot

al

(mg/

L a

s P)

Typ

e of

si

te

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Num

ber

of

sam

ples

18

35 18

35 18

35 18

35 18

35 18 35 18

35 18

35 16

35

Per

cent

age

of s

ampl

es in

whi

ch v

alue

s w

ere

less

tha

n or

equ

al t

o th

ose

show

nM

axim

um

Min

imum

180

95

67

14

27

15

26

2.5

.5

.1

.5

.1

.10

.05

.36

.01

13

7 39

18

436

326

599

434

2.90

.3

6 <.

05

<.05

.14

<.01

1.

50

.01

.85

.09

.69

<.01

Mea

n

127 39 21 9.4 .4

.2 .0

8 .0

8

10

27 383

498 1.

64

b c.03

.3

6

.29

c.26

95

180 63 27

22

.5

.4 .10

.24

13

37 436

594 2.

90

b c.14

1.

18 .86

c.65

75

160 47 23

15

.5

.3 .09

.10

13

31 414

538 2.

72

b c.02

.4

1

.36

c.41

50 (

Med

ian)

115 39 21 6 .4

.2 .0

7 .0

5

10

28 382

489 1.

65

b c.02

.3

8

.20

c.19

25

5

108

95

26

15

20

15

4.8

2.6

.3

.1

.2

.1

.06

.05

.03

.01

7 7

23

18

358

326

458

435

.63

.36

b b

c.01

c.O

O .1

6 .0

1

.14

.09

c.05

c.

01

Tab

le 6

. --S

tati

stic

al s

um

mary

of s

elec

ted

wat

er-q

uali

ty d

ata

fro

m t

he M

isso

uri R

iver

and

Mis

sour

i R

iver

all

uvia

l w

ells

nea

r D

efia

nce

Co

nti

nu

ed

Pro

pert

y or

co

nsti

tuen

t

Ort

hoph

osph

ate

diss

olve

d,

(mg/

L a

s P)

Alu

min

um,

diss

olve

d(u

g/L

as A

l)

Ars

enic

, dis

solv

ed

(ug/

L a

s A

s)

Bar

ium

, dis

solv

ed

(ug/

L a

s B

a)

Bor

on,

diss

olve

d(u

g/L

as

B)

Cop

per,

dis

solv

ed

(ug/

L a

s C

u)

Iron

, dis

solv

ed

(mg/

L a

s Pe

)

Lit

hium

, di

ssol

ved

(ug/

L a

s Li

)

Typ

e of

si

te

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

er

Wel

l

Num

ber

of

sam

ples

18

35 18

35 15

29 18

35 18

35 15

35 18

35 18

35

Per

cent

age

of sa

mpl

es in

whi

ch v

alue

s w

ere

less

tha

n or

equ

al t

o th

ose

show

nM

axim

um

0.20

.3

8

80

20 10 9

180

680

140

130 6 .0

67

21 45

43

Min

imum

<0.0

1

<10

<10 2

110

230 30

40 2 <3

.05

22

19

Mea

n

C0.1

1 c,

09

C16 C4 3 C4

139

389

102 79 3 b .0

13

6.9

31

35

95 C0.2

0 c.

37

C80

C20 10

C8

180

640

140

122 6 b c.

067

15 45

43

75 °0.1

5

C20 C5 4 C6

162

430

122 90 4 b c.0

138.

7

38

39

50 (

Med

ian)

C0.1

1 c.

03

C6

C3 3 C5

145

370

100 80 3 b c.

005

7.2

28

35

25

C0.0

8 c.

01

C2

cl 2 cl

110

290 88

60 2 b c.

005

4.1

26

33

5

C0.0

3 c<

.01

cl 2

110

238 30

40 2 b c.

001

.08

22

21

Tab

le 6

.--St

atis

tica

l sum

mar

y of s

elec

ted

wat

er-q

uali

ty d

ata

from

the

Mis

sour

i R

iver

and

M

isso

uri R

iver

all

uvia

l w

ells

nea

r D

efia

nce

Con

tinu

ed

Pro

pert

y or

co

nsti

tuen

t

Man

gane

se,

diss

olve

d(|i

g/L

as

Mn)

Mer

cury

, tot

alre

cove

rabl

e,(j

ig/L

as

Hg)

Mer

cury

, di

ssol

ved

(|ig/

L a

s H

g)

Nic

kel,

diss

olve

d(f

ig/L

as

Ni)

Sel

eniu

m,

diss

olve

d(|

ig/L

asS

e)

Str

onti

um,

diss

olve

d(M

-g/L

as

Sr)

Zin

c, d

isso

lved

(fig

/L a

s Z

n)

Car

bon,

org

anic

tota

l (m

g/L

as

C)

Typ

e of

si

te

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

er

Wel

l

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Num

ber

of

sam

ples

18 35 18 35 18 35 18 35 18 35 15 35 16 28

Per

cent

age

of s

ampl

es in

whi

ch v

alue

s w

ere

less

tha

n or

equ

al t

o th

ose

show

nM

axim

um

Min

imum

3 <1

990

140

.2

<.l

<.l

<

.l

5 <1

19

<1

4 <1

<1

<1

460

330

870

360

23

<340

0 <1

0

37.0

5.

13.

2 1.

0

Mea

n

cl

453 c.

l

b C2 °2 C2 b

382

648

C10

C33 11

.8 1.6

95 C3

870 c.

2

b C5 cn C4 b

460

870

C23

C352 37

.0 2.7

75 C2

610 c.

l

b C2 cl C2 b

430

720

C14 C4 14

.5 1.8

50 (

Med

ian)

25

5

cl

C<1

C<1

380

300

156

C<.1

C<

.1

C<.1

b b

b

2 C<

1 C<

1<

1 C<

1 C<

1

c2

Cl

c<1

b b

b

370

340

330

660

560

384

C10

C5

C4C<

1 C<

1 C<

1

9.0

6.0

5.1

1.5

1.3

1.0

Tab

le 6

. -Sta

tist

ical s

umm

ary

of s

elec

ted

wat

er-q

uali

ty d

ata

from

the

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

nd

Mis

sour

i Riv

er a

lluv

ial

wel

ls n

ear

Def

ianc

e-C

onti

nued

oo

Pro

pert

y or

co

nsti

tuen

t

Alp

ha, g

ross

diss

olve

d (\L

gfL

asur

aniu

m n

atur

al)

Bet

a, g

ross

diss

olve

d (p

Ci/L

as c

esiu

m-1

37)

Bet

a, g

ross

diss

olve

d (p

Ci/L

as

stro

ntiu

m/y

ttri

um-9

0)

Rad

ium

226

,di

ssol

ved,

ran

don

met

hod

(pC

i/L)

Rad

ium

228

,di

ssol

ved

(pC

i/Las

Ra-

228)

Ura

nium

,to

tald

(Hg/

L as

U)

Ura

nium

,di

ssol

ved

(Hg/

Las

U)

Typ

e of

si

te

Wel

l

Wel

l

Wel

l

Wel

l

Wel

l

Riv

erW

ell

Riv

erW

ell

Num

ber

of

sam

ples

35 35 35 35 35 48 35 48 35

Per

cent

age

of s

ampl

es in

whi

ch v

alue

s w

ere

less

tha

n or

equ

al t

o th

ose

show

nM

axim

um

Min

imum

21.0

1.

10

15.0

4.

0

12.0

3.

0

.70

.06

1.7

<1.0

7.6

3.0

21.0

<1

.0

7.2

1.40

16.0

.0

4

Mea

n 95

5.0

16.2

7.9

13.4

5.9

9.9

.39

.7

C1.0

C1

.5

5.2

7.0

C3.3

C1

2.2

4.8

6.5

2.4

10.5

75

50 (

Med

ian)

25

6.7

3.8

2.5

10.0

7.

3 5.

3

7.5

5.5

4.0

.5

.4

.2

C1.2

c.

9 c.

8

5.8

5.4

4.8

C4.6

C1

.5

<1.0

5.7

4.8

4.1

3.6

.4

.17

5 1.4

4.5

3.3 .2 c.6

3.5

<1.0 2.7 .0

5

a M

ean

pH w

ill n

ot s

atis

fact

oril

y su

mm

ariz

e th

e ty

pica

l hyd

roge

n io

n co

ncen

trat

ion

if p

H is

not

nor

mal

ly d

istr

ibut

ed.

The

min

imum

of c

enso

red

prop

erti

es is

an

esti

mat

ed v

alue

and

is n

ot re

port

ed.

c Est

imat

ed.

d So

me

of th

e re

port

ed to

tal u

rani

um c

once

ntra

tion

s m

ay h

ave

been

aff

ecte

d by

sed

imen

t in

the

raw

wat

er s

ampl

es; t

here

fore

, the

repo

rted

val

ue m

ay b

e lo

wer

th

an a

ctua

l co

ncen

trat

ions

.