REPORT ON THE EFFECT OF THE
ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA ON
WATER QUALITY IN THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER
DECEMBER 1969
Federal Water Quality Administration
Great Lakes Region
Lake Michigan Basin Office
and
National Field Investigation Center
Cincinnati, Ohio
October 22, 1970
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
/
Conclusions
Introduction
'
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-i.
Description of River Reach
' Phenol
Figure 1
Table 1
Figure 2
Microbiology
Table 2
Figure 3
Table 3
Table 4
Biology
Figure 4
Table 5
Figure 5
Table 6
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Pesticides
Figure 9
Table 7
Table 8
- Location Map, Phenol Stations
- Average Concentrations of Phenol
- Distribution of Phenol
- Results of Salmonella Study
- Location Map, Microbiology Stations
- Arithmetic Averages of Microbiological
Results with Percent Violation of
Standards
- Bacterial Survival Study
- Location Map, Biology Stations
- Results of Benthic Biota Sampling
- Location Map, Periphyton Stations
- Summary of Analysis of Attached Growth
- Effects of River Pollution on the
Community of Attached Diatoms in the
Mississippi River
- Effects of River Pollution on Bottom
Attached Algae
- Relative Density of Attached Slimes
- Location Map, Pesticide Stations
- Pesticides - Tentative Safe Concentra-
tions vs Concentrations Found
- Distribution of Pesticides
,
Page
1
5
6
9
13
14
15
16
19
20
21
23
24
30
31
38
39
40
41
42
43
46
47
48
-------
I
I TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D.)
I .. Page
Sediment Chemistry " 52
Table 9 - Results of Sediment Chemistry Sampling 55
I National Lead Company 57
Figure 10- Iron Accumulation on Glass Slides and
I in Bottom Deposits 60
Table 10 - Results of National Lead Outfall
Sampling 61
| Appendix 63
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Microbiology Results 64
-------
I
I
I
I
_
I
I
Conclusions
1. Phenols discharged in the St. Louis area constitute a violation
of the Missouri water quality standards and the proposed Illinois
water quality standards which prohibit the discharge of materials
that cause tainting of fish flesh. Phenol concentrations down-
stream from St. Louis are substantially higher than upstream phenol
I concentrations. The average phenol concentration found above river
mile 177.0 was 1.7 ug/1. Below river mile 177.0 concentrations
reached a high of 374 ug/1 in one sample and averaged 23.0 ug/1 on
the Missouri side and 9.8 ug/1 on the Illinois side.
2. Phenols discharged in the St. Louis area were detected 67 miles
downstream at Chester, Illinois and the Menard Prison at levels
which exceed the 1962 Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards
I (1 ug/1) and the State of Missouri published water quality objec-
_ tives for the Mississippi River (average 2 ug/l). Phenol concentra-
tions averaged 7.2 ug/1 on the river cross section at Chester,
Illinois (river mile 109.7).
3. Phenols discharged in the St. Louis area are a probable cause
of the tastes and odors at the Chester, Illinois and Menard Prison
water intakes, which require the use of break point chlorination
to control tastes and odors.
4. The fishery in the Mississippi River in the 6? miles between
St. Louis and Chester, Illinois has been severely damaged by wastes
from the St. Louis area and has lost most of its economic value. The
-------
I
I
_ sale of fish from the area downstream from St. Louis is nearly
non-existent because of tainted fish flesh.
I 5. Fecal coliform counts in the Missouri River at the sampling
point 7.4 miles from its' mouth and in the Mississippi River between
I the confluence with the Missouri River and at least as far as 85
*
_ miles downstream to Chester, Illinois, constitute a violation of
the Missouri water quality standards which require a maximum of no
more than 2000 per 100 ml. This was violated by 37# of the samples
taken at Chester.
Jj 6. The pathogens found in the Mississippi River as far as 37 miles
_ downstream from the St. Louis metropolitan area constitute a health
* hazard. Eleven serotypes of Salmonella were isolated from the
I stream or effluent discharging to the stream including S. paratyphi
§. odense. causative agent of paratyphoid fever in humans.
| 7. The pesticide content of the Mississippi River in the entire
^ study area, both above and below St. Louis is high and violates the
water quality standards which prohibit substances toxic to humans,
I fish and wildlife. The concentration of DDT at one point approached
the 48-hour median tolerance limit for Daphnia.
I 8. The River Des Peres, tributary to the Mississippi in the
^ St. Louis area, is grossly polluted. The phenol concentration in
* the water averaged 11.2 ug/1. Volatile solids, COD, phosphorus,
I ammonia, organic nitrogen, phenol, arsenic, sulfide, iron, barium
I
I
-------
I
I
and manganese concentrations in the sediments are very high.
| Industrial discharges are the primary source of these wastes.
_ 9. The waters of the Meramec and the Kaskaskia Rivers were rela-
tively unpolluted at the time they were sampled, but sampling of
bottom-dwelling organisms indicate that these rivers are affected
by occasional periods of pollution, probably during run-off periods.
I 10. The National Lead Company discharges a large volumes of un-
treated industrial wastes to the Mississippi River containing very
high concentrations of solids, acids, arsenic, sulfate, iron and
toxic metals. Arsenic discharged from the National Lead Company
accumulated in the Mississippi River-bed sediments for at least
5.8 miles downstream. Concentrations upstream from National Lead
Company were 2.3 mg/kg of sediment but downstream concentrations as
high as 96.4 mg/kg were present. Iron precipitates accumulated on
the natural river bottom of the Mississippi for at least 5.8 miles
restrict the growth of natural flora and fauna for at least 3.8 miles
downstream from the National Lead Company. The National Lead Company
has not complied with the recommendations of the Conference on
I.
Pollution of Interstate Waters of the Mississippi River-St. Louis
Metropolitan Area held on March 4, 1958.
11. Pollution has caused a drastic reduction in quantity of desirable
attached algal growths that contribute to fish food and oxygen pro-
duction, and an increase in growths of undesirable slime organisms
I
I
-------
I
I
in at least 23 miles of the Mississippi River downstream from the
confluence of the Chain of Rocks Canal to the confluence of the
Meramec River.
12. Floating organic solids, such as fecal material and packing-
house wastes, make the Mississippi River aesthetically objectionable,
restrict recreational development of the river and create a poten-
tial health hazard in at least 43 miles of river downstream from the
confluence of the Chain of Rocks Canal to approximately 10 miles
downstream from Crystal City, Missouri.
13. The presence of extensive oil slicks interfere with recrea-
tional boating, is aesthetically objectionable and may be indicative
of wastes that impart objectionable tastes and odors to fish in at
least 23 miles of the Mississippi River downstream from the confluence
of the Chain of Rocks Canal to the confluence of the Meramec River.
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
-------
I
I
INTRODUCTION
Water quality standards have recently been established by
the State of Missouri for the Mississippi River in order to pro-
tect and enhance the quality of the water and to insure that it
-i
will be suitable for desirable uses, present and future. The
State of Illinois has proposed water quality standards for the
Mississippi River but these have not been approved by the
Secretary of the Interior. This study was undertaken to determine
if present water quality standards are being met.
The Mississippi River, an interstate stream dividing the
states of Missouri and Illinois, serves the St, Louis-East
St. Louis metropolitan area and points downstream as a principal
source of water supply. It is also a major transportation artery,
I providing extensive commercial and recreational fishing and is
used for recreational purposes in many areas. The^ utilization of
this resource for the various functions which it is capable of
fulfilling depends on the quality of its waters. The quality of
these waters will be an important factor in the future economy of
the area. The expanding population and industrial activity in the
area are putting greater and greater pollutional loads into the
river. The enhancement of the quality of the river's waters can
only be assured by controlling the discharge of municipal,
industrial and agricultural wastes to the river.
1
I
I
-------
I
I
The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District (MSSD) had
previously conducted a year long vater quality study in the area
vith financial assistance from the the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration. 'The results of the MSSD study vere used
I extensively in the design of this study. The Federal study does
not duplicate the MSSD study but was undertaken to verify and
I supplement it.
The MSSD study indicated that the most severe water quality
problems in the river are bacterial contamination, tainted fish
and tastes and odors in water supplies. The Federal study concen-
trated on these problems with an intensive twelve-day sampling
program. Samples were collected and analysed for indicator bacteria,
pathogenic bacteria, phenol, pesticides, benthic biology, phytoplank-
ton and bottom sediment chemistry. Tue outfalls of the National Lead
Company of St. Louis were also sampled.
Description of River Reach
| The area of interest starts at Lock and Dam No. 26 at Alton,
M Illinois (River Mile 202.7) and extends downstream to the water in-
* take at Chester, Illinois (River Mile 109.7). The major tributaries
within this reach are the Missouri River which meets the Mississippi
at Mile 195.3, the River Des Peres (River Mile 171-9), the Meramec
I River (River Mile 160.7) and the Kaskaskia River (River Mile 118.1).
I
I
I
-------
I
The major population concentration along this reach is in the City
I of St. Louis on the Missouri side. The total population of the
/-, \
St. Louis metropolitan area is approximately 2.4 million.^ '
The St. Louis area is heavily industrialized and well
-i
_ diversified. The industries include meat packing plants, dairies,
textile and paper mills, chemical producers, metal processing
plants, breweries, grain processors and automotive plants to name
a few. About 75 percent of the industry in the area is located
I in Metropolitan St. Louis. The MSSD estimates the population
^ equivalent of the industrial wastes to he about h million so that
the total population equivalent is 6.k million,
The reach serves as the raw water source for several industries
and communities including St. Louis, Mo., East St. Louis, Illinois,
Chester, Illinois and the Menard State Prison in Chester, Illinois.
Industries using river water include the Illinois Power Company,
I the Olin Mathieson Chemical Company, Union Electric Company, Anheuser-
Busch brewery, and National Lead Company. The St. Louis and East
St. Louis intakes are located upstream from the metropolitan area.
The Chester and Menard State Prison intakes are approximately 50
miles below the metropolitan area. The time of water travel from
the metropolitan area to these intakes is about one day during high
flow and one and one-half days during low flow condition.^' Break
point chlorination is necessary to control taste and odor problems
I at these intakes.
I
I
-------
I
I
The St. Louis MSSD did extensive dye studies to determine
I the flow characteristics of the river. The average discharge
between December 1, 1969 and December 12, 1969 was 115,000 cfs
| at St. Louis. Estimated times of travel at this flow from river
M mile 184 based on Figure 14 of the St. Louis MSSD report are:
* RM 169 - 6 hours, RM 140.1 - 1? hours and RM 109.7 (Chester) -
I 32 hours.
The first use to be affected by pollution in a body of
| water is the fishery. In 1954 the Bi-State Development agency
I estimated that the fishery in the Mississippi River below
(4)
St. Louis was reduced by &0%. The MSSD reports further de-
clines since I960 at a rate of 7,000 pounds of fish caught per
year. The sale of commercial fish is now practically non-
I existent from St. Louis to Cape Girardeau. The reason is not
a lack of fish but tastes and odors associated with fish from
l
this reach.
I
I a lack of fish
(1)
4-V\^ e* vmf\ s\\-i
I
I
I
1
8
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
Phenol
Phenol and phenolic compounds such as cresol. and xylenol are
found in wastes from the distillation of wood, gas works, coke ovens,
* oil refineries and chemical plants. These compounds are known to
\
cause tastes and odors in water and to taint the flesh of fish. The
California Water Quality Control Board has reported that threshhold
I concentrations for taste and odor have occurred between 10 ug/1 and
_ 100 ug/1 in raw water supplies. In chlorinated water, these thresh-
hold concentrations have been reported between 0.1 ug/1 and 1 ug/1.
Fish flesh has been tainted by concentrations of 20 ug/1 to 150 ug/1
in polluted river water and concentrations of 500 ug/1 have been re-
1(2)
ported as lethal or damaging to fish in river water.
m The Public Health Service's 1962 Drinking Water Standards
* recommend a limit of 1 ug/1 in water used for public consumption;^'
The Illinois and Missouri water quality standards do not establish
a limit for phenol although the State of Missouri has published
water quality objectives which call for a maximum of 5 ug/1 at any
point after initial dilution and a monthly average of not more
than 2 ug/1 at any point in the Mississippi River. ' The standards
limit taste and odor producing substances to "concentrations "in
the stream that will not interfere with the production of potable
water by reasonable water treatment processes, or impart unpalat-
1 able flavor to food fish, or result in noticeable offensive odors
« in the vicinity of the water, or otherwise interfere with the
reasonable use of the water."
-------
I
I
The St. Louis Metropolitan Sanitary District reports that
phenolic compounds are found in considerable quantity in the
effluents from industries in St. Louis and East St. Louis. The
| major sources of phenol in the area are from chemical manu-
(1)
j facturing plants and oil refineries.
In the present study, phenol samples were collected from
16 transects on the Mississippi River, one transect each on the
Missouri River, the Kaskaskia River, the Meramec River and the
| Des Peres, on every second day of the study so that there are 5
« or 6 samples from each station on each transect. Samples were also
collected from two transects upstream from the Alton Lock and Dam on
I December 10, 1969. (See Figure 1) All samples were preserved
with sodium hydroxide to a pH of 11.0, and sent to the Lake Michigan
| Basin Office for analysis within 48 hours of collection.
m The average results for each station are given in Table 1
and plotted on Figure 2, page 15. The data indicate a very severe
source of phenol on the Missouri side between river mile 183.5 and
river mile 177. A concentration of 374 ug/1 phenol was found at
| station 177A on December 11, 1969. This heavy pollution was re-
p fleeted downstream by concentrations of 276 ug/1 at 173A, 232 ug/1 at
169A. A lesser source located in East St. Louis above river mile
fl 177 is also indicated. Figure 2 shows that the phenolic compounds in the
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
river tend to flow along the shorelines and are not completely mixed
across the river until river mile 129. The average concentration of
7.2 ug/1 found at Chester near public water intakes exceeds the Public
Health Service recommendation of 1 ug/1 for water supplies and the
State of Missouri's wate^ quality objective of an average of 2 ug/1.
Relatively little phenol was found upstream from river
> mile 177.0. None was found in 20 samples taken at river mile 7.4
on the Missouri River. An overall average of 1.7 ug/1 was found in
the Mississippi River transect above river mile 177.0. Downstream
from river mile 177.0 phenol concentrations averaged 23.0 ug/1 on the
Missouri side and 9.8 ug/1 on the Illinois side.
The MSSD reports that, during 1968, 1,179 pounds of fish were
caught per mile of river in the 201 miles above the Chain of Rocks
dam and 350 pounds of fish per mile were caught in the 135 miles be-
low the dam. They also report that the sale of commercial fish is
practically non-existent between St. Louis and Cape Girardeau,
Missouri. The reason for this was stated as tastes and odors in
(1)
fish rather than lack of fish.
Conclusion number 8 of the MSSD report states "A definite re-
lationship exists between phenol concentrations and the occurrence of
taste and odor problems in water supplies located on the east bank of
the Mississippi River."
The possibility that substantial quantities of phenolic materials
might be reaching the rivers from natural sources was investigated by
collecting samples from streams believed to be unaffected by industrial
wastes. These samples were sent to the Analytical Quality Control
11
-------
I
I
I
Laboratory, Division of Water Quality Research in Cincinnati, Ohio
for analysis by Thin Layer Chromatography. This method is not
specifically designed to determine naturally occurring phenols but
extracts of several natural materials do give positive response to
" (6),
the detecting agents.
The samples were from mile point 211.0 on the Mississippi
(a composite across the river), the Cuivre River at Old Monroe,
Missouri and the Meramec River at mile point 22. No natural
phenolic materials were detected. They were estimated, if present,
to be less than 1 ug/1. The total phenol measured by the standard
1(7)
PWPCA method in Chicago was 2.2 ug/1 on the Mississippi River
sample and 1 ug/1 in the Meramec River sample. It is concluded
that naturally occurring phenols were not significant during this
study.
The present discharges of phenol and phenolic materials in
I the St. Louis and East St. Louis area are clear violations of the
water quality standard prohibiting the.discharge of substance that
impart unpalatable flavor to food fish. (Missouri Water Quality
Standards - Mississippi River, Zone 2, paragraph f.) (Illinois
Sanitary Water Board, Rules and Regulations SWB-13, Article II,
8 Riile 2. 04, paragraph 5.)
I
I
I
I
-------
RM195
RM 183.5
jE. St. LOUIS
RM 177
Herculaneumo
Fesfus o
RM I4O.I
FIGURE
RMt2|,
St. Genevieve o
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN OFFICE
MISSISSIPPI RIVER-ST. LOUIS AREA STUDY
LOCATION MAP
PHENOL _STATIONS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
Great Lakes Region Chicago, Illinois
I
Chester
RM 103.7
13
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
TABLE 1
Average Concentrations of Phenol (ug/1 )
Station
Missouri side
B
River Des Peres 1.0
Meramec River 6.9
River k.5
11.2
1.7
*Based on one sample only
NF - None detected within sensitivity of test.
14
Illinois side
D
E
Missouri 7.4
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
211.0
205.0
202.5
195.0 .
183.5
177.0
173.0
169.0
162.0
159.0
154.7
147.0
140.1
129.0
123.4
118.8
115.0
109.7
NF
3*
4*
1.6
0.4 '
1.8
101.4
76.3
69.5
39.0
25.5
20.8
17.8
15.5
13.8
13.7
12.5
9.5
7.7
NF
3*
3*
2.4
0.4
2.0
1.6
6.7
27.8
30.0
16,5
9.8
15.0
12.0
11.8
12.8
12.3
10.8
8.5
NF
3* 1*
2* NF*
1.0
1.6
2.6
1.6
8.5
9.8
10.8
3.7
10.7
9.0
9.5
8.7
10.5
8.7
7.4
7.2
NF
2*
NF*
0.6
4.6
3.0
12.0
20.0
14.3
16.0
12.2
13.0
11.8
9.5
8.5
8.5
8.2
9.5
5.5
-------
15
-------
I
I
Mi c robiolo gy
The purpose of testing water for bacteria is to detect the
presence of microbes that nay be pathogenic to man or animals.
The direct search for the presence of a specific pathogen is too
t
_ expensive and unwieldy for routine testing purposes. Instead,
the water is examined for indications of fecal contamination and,
when such indications are found, the water is assumed to be
potentially dangerous.
I The group of bacteria known as coliforms has been selected
_ as suitable indicators because they inhabit the intestinal tract
of warm blooded animals. The presence of coliforms does not
necessarily indicate fecal contamination because some forms per-
sist in soil and other environments. Other indicator organisms
are fecal streptococci, which are abundant in the intestinal tracts
of warm blooded animals. These organisms do not ordinarily multi-
ply in surface waters and are rarely found in soil or on vegetation
not contaminated by sewage.
The standards established by the State of Missouri require
that "The fecal coliform, in water designated for drinking water
supply, boating and canoeing, and/or fishing, shall not exceed
2000/100 ml (either MPN or MF count) except in specified mixing
zones adjacent to or downstream from waste outfalls."
Samples were collected at 10 Mississippi River transects,
' the Missouri transect, and the River Des Peres, Meramec River and
I
16 .
I
-------
I
I
I
Kaskaskia River sampling points on each day of the study so that
11 or 12 values are available from each point. See Figure 3.
Each transect was sampled at points, A, C and E so that the coli-
form distribution across the stream could be determined. All
samples were taken to the FWPCA mobile laboratory at Kimmswick,
Missouri and processed within six hours of collection.
| The average results of these analyses are presented in
_ Table 2. These results indicate that during the twelve days of the
study, the Missouri River was contaminated (3&% violations of
I standards), the Mississippi River above the confluence with the
Missouri was relatively clean, the Mississippi River at St. Louis
| and immediately below was more contaminated than the Missouri
_ (13% violations of standards between RM 183.5 and RM 140.1), the
Mississippi River at Chester was contaminate (31% violations) and
the Missouri side of the river was more contaminated than the
Illinois side upstream from river mile 140.1.
| Bacterial survival tests were also run on samples from se-
_ lected transects. See Figure 3. Total coliform, fecal coliform,
and fecal streptococcus counts were determined on the water as
collected and incubated for two, three, and seven days at the average
temperature of the stream when sampled, utilizing 900 ml test portions,
g Initial counts (Day 0) were made at the mobile laboratory
_ in Kimmswick, and subsequent determinations were performed in the
microbiology laboratory at the Lake Michigan Basin Office.
I
I
-------
I
I
I
The purpose of this test is to determine if there are any
substances, such as nutrients, present in the water that would
cause the bacteria to multiply or any toxic materials that might
kill them. The results, presented in Table 3»indicate no evidence
of such substances since' the dieoff rates appear to be normal.
In order to detect the presence of pathogenic organisms, 16
Moore Gauze pads for the isolation of salmonella were placed in
the stream and' two in the effluent of the Lemay Sewage Treatment
Plant (Figure 3). The genus Salmonella is responsible for some of
the most severe diseases in man, including typhoid fever and para-
p typhoid fever. All species of Salmonella are considered pathogenic
to man, usually causing enteric disorders. Twelve of the 16 pads
placed in the Mississippi River were recovered. Table 4 shows that
I 9 of the 10 pads taken from the river were positive for Salmonella.
The two pads recovered from the Lemay sewage treatment .plant effluent
| were also positive. Forty-three isolated cultures were serotyped to
_ identify species by the Communicable Disease Center at Atlanta,
Georgia. The 11 different serotypes detected are shown in Table 4.
Table 4 shows that Salmonella were detected as far south
as river mile 139.5. S. Qranienburg was isolated from the-
jj Lemay sewage treatment plant outfall and also from pads placed
« 3.1 miles downstream, 13.5 miles downstream and 32.2 miles
downstream. This may indicate that Salmonella organisms were
transported this distance in the stream. S. paratyphi-B« was
I
18
I
-------
I
I
I
I
Alton
o/
v/RM 202.5
RM195
t
I
I
I
RM 183.5
jE. St. Louis
RM 177
Herculoneumo
Fesfuso
Tronsect sampled daily
at three points.
Bacterial survival test
mode on one sample
from each point.
Moore Gauze Pad for
Salmonella.
RM 140.1
FIGURE 3
St. Genevieve o
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN OFFICE
SSISSIPPI RIVER-ST. LOUIS AREA STUDY
LOCATION MAP
MICROBIOLOGY STATIONS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERALVtATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
Great Lakes Region Chicago, Illinois
Chester
RM 109.7
19
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
Table 2
Arithmetic Averages* of Microbiological Results
vith Percent of Violations of Missouri Standard
Station
Total Coliform
Per 10O tel
Fecal Coliform
Per 100 ml % Violation
Fecal
Streptococci
Per 10O-al
Missouri
Missouri
Missouri
Miss.
Miss.
Misfe.
MiJs.
Miss.
Miss .
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss .
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
Miss.
7.4 A
7.4 C
7.4 E
202.5 A
202.5 c
202.5 E
195-0 A
195.0 c
195-0 E
183.5 A
183.5 c
183.5 E
1TT.O A
177.0 c
177-0 E
173-0 A
173.0 c
173.0 E
162.0 A
162.0 c
162.0 E
154.7 A
154.7 c
154.7 E
140.1 A
140.1 B
140.1 C
140.1 D
140.1 E
53,000
47,600
50,700
700
915
1,400
54,400
49,000
16,600
65,900
28,300
49,200
73,400
4o,6oo
38,700
63,400
38,4oo
4o,6oo
64,600
53,400
60,300
68,000
41,700
42,800
50,800
61, 400
45,200
38,500
4l,300
1,670
2,100
1,740
94
56
185
2,040
1,620
1,360
3,600
2,330
3,830
7,780
1,460
2,540
4,690
1,860
3,050
5,580
2,810
2,980
4,150
2,750
2,850
4,480
4,350
1,840
2,390
1,780
27$
54$
27$
%
$
0$
45$
36$
27$
82$
18$
100$
90$
10$
60$
91$
36$
91$
100$
58$
67$
100$
73$
91$
100$
100$
91$
63$
30$
3,680
3,700
3,740
28
39
103
3,400
3,800
1,890
5,730
3,200
17,770
1,680
3,370
4,800
13,600
2,770
3,330
17,800
5,460
2,660
12,400
3,630
3,980
12,800
9,880
6,780
4,130
2,740
*For actual results, see Appendix
20
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 2
/ Total
/ Coliform
Station Per 100 ^
Miss. 118.8 A 35,500
Miss. 118.8 C 43,000
Miss. 118.8 E 33,700
Miss. 109.7 A 3^,200
Miss. 109.7 C 35,500
Miss. 109.7 E 29,600
River Des 1.0 C 8,700
Peres
Meramec 6.9 C 3,7^0
River
Kaskaskia 4.5 C 43,400
i
x
21
(con't)
Fecal
Coliform
Per 100 ml
2,680
2,950
1,930
1,960
2,370
1,^70
2,620
69
1,140
% Violation
82$
91*
50*
33*
58*
18*
8*
0*
20*
Fecal
Streptococci
Organisms Per 100 E
5,590
7,310
3,060
5,570
4,860
2,600
5,180
162
2,580
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
s t-
§1
o
/ O CO
' o
0 >j
o a
4>
CO
H
<^£ 8 Q
0 £
H CO 0
E-i "3 03
H 0
f-.
P
O
O^ f^
^&
H
SH CO
f_f ^j
O o3
0 0
I"
o
o
0?
°
c*
o
H
P
to
O 0 0
H r-l H
O UA O
l/A O tTN
OJ OJ OJ
O O O
O O co
ir\ ir\ OJ
000
poo
CO_d-*W"
l/N O O
VO VO CO
888
CM OJ H
O Q 0
-=f O VO
CO OJ H
o o o
ONO H
t- H ON
r-T
888
-3- cooj
vo^oTcvT
8§8
*\ * *\
ro-d" -zfr
888
HVO OJ
Cv?CV?H
§O O
O Q
O O
ir\ co O
VO WNVO
_-j.
*
t
H
J^
< o w
m
n
O ITN O
H OJ
O O ir\
OJ OJ -4-
O O O
. iH H t-
O 0 0
fO H ITN
H H
ITS ITN ITN
OJ H
0 O 0
OJ J- VD
O O 0
M CO H
OJ
VD p o
"^ OJ
000
OJ ON J-
H OJ H
O O O
co ir\ OJ
OJ H CO
'
888
H H ro
O?
P-88
ON coco
cv?o?
ITS
8
OJ
< 6 w
CQ
0}
g
O O O
H OJ co
i-< H
LT\O ir\
OJ O OJ
OJ OJ H
O 0 0
CO rH -3-
COOJ
§O O
O OJ
-t- OJ
coco
O O tr\
coirs OJ
88&
OJ OJ H
0 O 0
ONH co
OJ ir\-d-
0 0 O
ONOJ O
ONCO OJ
H
888
OJ ^J" CO
s
H
O O O
O O O
*\ *\
ir\ H
So o
O 0
t ONTO
oTi-T
§§1
cToN ON
H"^
o
* *
CJ^
pH
<; o H
n
CO
H
21 22
O ^* O vo O
ITNVO CO t O
H OJ
SO O ir\ O
-3- O J- I/N
-3" OJ-OJ ^f
0 0 0 O Q
O O O OJ O
CO iH H OJ OJ
8O O O 0
OJ VO LfN CO
VD CO OJ LTN
O?
O O O -d" O
ONVO COCO ON
CO.* H H ro
0 O O 0 O
ovo o oj o
OJ t- t- OJ OJ
V *
tH H
O O O O O
o o o o o
ON ON oj OJ ir\
r? i-T i-T
80 o o o
O 0 O Q
vo H CO O ON
^t -^ OJ OJ H
CO O O O O
OJ O O O O
O O O CO
oToTHco-
80 o o o
Q O O O
H O O O O
v^ *s ^ *\
ONCO O O
vo oj oj co
80 o o o
o o o o
o o o o o
H VO t VO CO
OJ-3- OJ OJ H
§§§§§
-* -d" CO ON H
ITNVO LfN ITN-d"
H
O
r~i
< M 0 Q W
to
m
H
8O l/N
t t-
CVJ H
o o o
ir\ ir\ H
-3- t- OJ
888
fvj co co
O 0 0
CO LfNlTN
ITNVO CO
Q 0 0
ON ITN OJ
CO ITNOJ
888
OJ t/N t-
ft Ti
888
IA t CO
f-Tr-T
888
ITN ONJ-
H oTrH
888
O H OJ
roco"^'
8O O
O O
o o o
v *\ *S
H H O
OJ J- H
§§§
*V *» ^
-* OJ OJ
-* COrH
§§§
COCO^O?
^J- CO CO
t-
&
H
< 0 W
(0
10
H
ITN
OJ
OJ
o
OJ
o
OJ
vo
ITN
OJ
ir\
OJ
O
H
OJ
ir\
OJ
l/N
OJ
S
OJ
§
OJ
CD
V
9)
a
f^
^,
0)
K
VO
t-
LT\
O
OJ
OJ
o
UN
cS
rH
O
OJ
OJ
8
OJ
o
t-
co
o
vo
ir\
o
8
9^
H
8
OJ
H"
o
o
CO
^
S
H
K
a
_v|
to
0$
j*^
(O
W
-------
I
«
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
also isolated from the LeMay sewage treatment plant outfall. This
organism is known to cause paratyphoid fever in humans. Its presence
in the river is a definite health hazard.
The results of the Salmonella survey show that the waters of
the Mississippi River harbor an assortment of Salmonella serotypes.
Since all Salmonella must be considered potential pathogens, their
presence in the water is a hazard to anyone using the river for fish-
ing, recreation or as a source of drinking water.
Table 4
Results of Salmonella Study
Site
River mile 18.18 Missouri side
River mile 181.8- Illinois side
River mile 179.6 Illinois side
River mile 179.0 Missouri side
Effluent LeMay Sewage Treatment Plant
(River mile 171.7) both samples
River mile 168.6 Missouri side
River mile 168.6 Illinois side
River mile 163.8 Illinois side
River mile 158.2 Missouri side
River mile 158.2 Illinois side
River mile 140.1 Missouri side (2)
River mile 139.5 Illinois side .
23
Serotyjjes found
S. cubana
S. infantis
S." heidelberg
S. java
S. cubana
S. drypool
S. derby
S. oranienburg
S. paratyphi B. odense
S. newport
S. siegburg
S. cubana
S. infantis
S. oranienburg
S. panama
negative
S. oranienburg
S. oranienburg
both negative
S. oranienburg
S. cubana
-------
I
I
I
Biology
The macro invertebrate fauna (animal life) of a river are
associated with river bottoms and are therefore known as bottom
| organisms or benthos. The benthos play an important role in the
M food chain of an aquatic system. They feed primarily on microscopic
. plant life, inert organic material and smaller animal forms. In
V turn, they serve as food organisms for many species of fish and are,
- therefore, an essential factor in the ecology of a stream.
|;
Benthic organisms also serve as indicators of the water quality
_ of a stream. Each organism has requirements for its surrounding en-
' vironmental conditions. Stoneflies, mayflies, and caddisflies, for
instance, all require high quality water on a continuous basis and
will not be found where moderate or severely polluted conditions occur.
| These are known as pollution intolerant forms. Other organisms such
as sludgeworms and bloodworms do not require as much oxygen and thrive
* on "che organic material present in polluted conditions. These are
known as pollution tolerant organisms. Some organisms can live in both clean
and polluted water, these are known as facultative organisms.
H In general, clean water conditions support a large variety of
_ organisms with pollution intolerant forms predominating. Polluted
." conditions usually produce very large populations of one or two
pollution tolerant forms and no pollution intolerant forms. Extreme
pollution may produce conditions where no life exists at all.
| 'The nature of the river bottom is also an important factor in
_ determining the nature of the benthic fauna. Sands which are continually
being shifted and turned over by currents prevent bottom animals from
I
-------
I
I
I
being established. This condition was encountered at many of the
stations in the Mississippi River and few, if any, organisms were
found at these points. The most productive areas were those where
the bottom consisted of mud or silt.
i,
B Benthic biology samples were taken at five points at each of
16 Mississippi River transects (See Figure 4)» one Missouri River
| transect, three each on the Kaskaskia and Meramec River transects and
_ /one at the River Des Peres. Each sample was collected by an aquatic
biologist, screened in a No. 30 sieve, preserved with 1Q% formalin
I and returned to the laboratory for identification of the organisms.
The results of this work are presented in Table 5, page 31.
£ Conclusions that can be drawn from the results of the regular
transect sampling on the Mississippi River are fragmentary because
* no organisms were found at most of the stations due to the shifting
I sands on the river bed. The Mississippi River upstream control sta-
tion at river mile 202.5 is unpolluted except near the mouth of the
locks on the Illinois side, where pollution is indicated by the oil on
_ the bottom and the 860 sludgeworms at point E. At river mileage 123.4,
clean water organisms were found at four of the five points and a
balanced population appears to exist. This indicates that, at this
point, the river had recovered from the waste loads of the metropolitan
J area.
^ The Meramec and Kaskaskia rivers both had very moderate numbers
* of facultative and tolerant organisms but no intolerant organisms.
I
25
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This indicates basically clean streams that are occasionally sub-
jected to slugs of pollution, probably during periods of heavy runoff.
The bottom of the River Des Peres consisted of a white caustic
material that apparently is not capable of supporting life. This is
a result of industrial wastes in the stream.
A localized area of sewered pollution in the Chain of Rocks
Canal below Lock and Dam No. 2? was noted and sampled. A tributary
at river mile 184.7 on the Granite City Army Depot property had a
strong odor of "chicken feathers" and was steaming. Samples taken
above the outfall, immediately below the outfall, 300 feet below the
outfall and ^ mile below the outfall produced very high concentrations
of sludgeworms and other pollution tolerant species indicating severe
degradation. The mild concentration of sludgeworms and mayfly larvae
at Mississippi River station 183.5 E may also be a reflection of this
pollution.
Biologists from the National Field Investigations Center con-
ducted a study to determine the effects of pollution on psriphyton
(attached organisms) in the Mississippi River. The reach studied ex-
tended from upstream of metropolitan St. Louis, Missouri, (Lock and
Dam 26) downstream to river mile 140 which is approximately 10 miles
downstream from Crystal City, Missouri. Twelve sampling stations for
attached growths were established along the 65-mile reach of river
(Figure 5)» Data for these 12 sampling stations are included in
Table 6. Field investigations for this portion of the study were ini-
tiated November 16, 1969, and completed December 12, 1969.
An attached algal community serves a vital role in the aquatic
environment. It provides the first link in the food chain for valuable
26
-------
I
I
food and game fish. Algal photosynthesis contributes dissolved oxygen
to a river. In a clean river, the community of attached algae is pre-
dominately diatoms. Increasing organic pollution causes a progressive
* reduction in the relative numbers of diatoms and gives rise to in-
i
creasing numbers of organisms that are consumers of decaying organic
material. Inorganic pollutants may be toxic and if precipitation
occurs, can blanket organisms and have a smothering effect.
Downstream from the confluence of the Chain of Rocks Canal at
station 183 (Figure 5), there was a drastic decrease (95 percent) in
numbers of attached diatoms and a reduction (78 percent) in the
quantity of chlorophyll A_ in the community of attached growths from
the preceding upstream station (Figures 6 and 7).- This condition re-
mained essentially unchanged downstream to station 160 near the con-
fluence of the Meramec River, a distance of 23 miles. Along this 23
mile reach of river, numerous outfalls were discharging waste waters
to the river. Increased turbidity caused by finely divided suspended
solids in addition to oil scum and copious quantities of floating
organic solids (such as human excrement, chunks of animal fat, hair,
and grain hulls) contributed to the reduction in attached algae.
These materials restricted the amount of solar energy (sunlight) that
penetrated the water. Sunlight is the energy needed by algal chloro-
phylls to produce food for nourishment, growth, and reproduction of
algae. These pollutants also make the stream aesthetically objection-
able and pose a potential health hazard to recreationalists. Oil
27
I
-------
I
I
slicks are indicative of wastes that impart objectionable tastes
I and odors to fish flesh.
M Competition and crowding by slime growths that feed on decay-
ing organic wastes also inhibited or restricted the growth of attached
diatoms. Both algae and slimes are carbonaceous and contribute to the
total carbon accumulated on the slides, but since algae contain
I chlorophylls and slimes do not, a community of periphyton with a high
carbon content and low chlorophyll content would contain relatively
more slime growths. The carbon to chlorophyll ratios of the attached
growths in the study reach of the Mississippi River are illustrated
in Figure 8. The change to a community containing relatively more
| carbon as compared to chlorophyll is indicative of pollution by
organic wastes, less productive of basic fish-food organisms and tends
to produce less and consume more dissolved oxygen.
Inorganic pollutants also contributed to the severe reduction
in the community of attached diatoms downstream from river mile 171.8
| where the National Lead Company discharges its waste waters to the
« river. At stations 170.0 and 168.0, numbers of attached diatoms were
the lowest for any station sampled. The artificial substrates were
heavily coated with iron deposits.
The attached growths indicated recovery from the effects of
I pollution on biota of the Mississippi River downstream from mile 150;
however, floating solids, mainly chunks of animal fat, remained
conspicuous.
I
I
I
28
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
Alton
202.5
RMI95
I
I
I
RM 183.5
]E. St. LOUIS
RM 177
Hercutaneumo
Fes?us o
FIGURE 4
RM
St. Genevieve c
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN OFFICE
IISSISSIPPI RIVER-ST. LOUIS AREA STUDY
LOCATION MAP
| BIOLOGY STATIONS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
Great Lakes Region Chicago, Illinois
Chester
RM 109.7
-------
I
Table 5
1
tation
ssouri 7-
_ A
1
B .
r
D
I
Ississippi
A
1
B
- C
1
D
1
I'
HTssissipp-i
|A
B
1
D
1
E
1
1
Types
k
sand,
sand
sand
sand
sand
202.5
sand
sand
sand,
sand
sand,
195-0
sand
sand
sand
sand,
rock
Results of Benthic Biota Saapl
of Bottom Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
vater)
Per Sq. Meter
silt none
none
none
scuds 10
none
dragonfly nymph 10
-
none
gravel caddis fly larvae 10
none
oil none
«
caddisfly larvae 10
none
none
rock none
none
30
ing
Pollution Tolerant Total
or Facultative Organisms
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter Per Sq. Mete
sludgeworms 20 20
none 0
none 0
none 10
bloodworms 20 20
sludgeworms 20 1^0
bloodworms 50
other diptera 60
sludgeworms l8o UUO
bloodworms 230
other diptera 30
sludgeworms 80 180
bloodworas 90
sludgeworcns 90 1^0
bloodworas 30
other diptera 20
sludgeworas S6o 920
bloodworms 50
leeches 10
none 10
none 0
none 0
none *0
*
sludgewonr.s 10 20
bloodworms 1C
-------
I
I
Table 5
bation
Types of Bottom
I
Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
water)
Per Sq. -Meter
Pollution Tolerant
or Facultative
Organises
Per Sq. Meter Per Sq. Meter
Total
Organisms
fssissipj
A
r
c
1
r
>i 183.5
sand
sand
sand
sand
ooze, sand
none none
none none
none bloodvorns 20
none sludgevoras 30
none sludgeworas 70
'bloodworms 10
mayfly larvae 50
0
0
20
30
130
Mississippi 177-0
A
B
1°
^^K *,r f
mD
r
lississropi
1
I
^
1
f
1
sand
sand
sand
'silt
sand
173.0
sand
sand
sand
sand
sand
none none
none none
none - none
none bloodv/orrns 10
caddisfly larvae 10 sludgewoms 200
-
.none bloodworas 20
none none
none bloodworms 10
other diptera 90
none none
none none
-
31
0
0
10
210
20
0
100
0
0
-------
1
1
tat ion
1
Mississippi
1 V
B
Ic
1 "
E
Mississippi
B
Ic
I D
1 E
Mississippi
, A
1
1 c
'D
1
Mississippi
1 B
1°
r
E
1
Types of Bottom
169.0
sand, gravel
sand
sand, gravel
sand
sand
162
sand
sand, gravel
sand
sand, gravel
159
gravel
sand, gravel
sand
sand, gravel
sand, gravel
15^.7
sand
sand
i
sand
sajid
**»_^_
Table 5^(con't. )
Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
water)
Per Sq. Meter
-i.
none
none
roundvorms 10
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
32
Pollution Tolerant
or Facultative
Per" Sq. Meter
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
diptera 10
_
none
none
none
none
none
none
sludgevorms 10
bloodworms 20
none
bloodworms 20
Total
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
- 0
0
0
0
0
30
0
20
-------
I
I
I
I
tation
Types of Bottom
I
I
I
I
lississippi
A
C
D
(ississippi
A
B
C
D
Mississippi
I
B
Table 5 (con't.)
C
D
Mississippi
I
I
I
I
A
B
C
D
E
sand, gravel
sand, gravel
sand, gravel
sand
1^0.1
sand
sand, gravel
sand
sand, gravel
sand, oily ,
129
sand, gravel
sand, gravel
sand, gravel, rubble none
sand
123. ^
sand, gravel, roc>
sand
sand, gravel
sand, gravel
sand
Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
vater)
Per Sq. Meter
none
scuds 10
none
none
none
scuds 10
none
none
none
none
none
none
none .
aquatic beetles 10
scuds 10
none
scuds 10
scuds 20
Pollution Tolerant
or Facultative
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter
none
none
none
none
none
diptera 10
none
none
bloodworms 410
mayfly larvae 10
none
none
sludgevoras 20
none
none
sludgevoras 10
bloodworms 10
sludgeworms 20
sludgevorins '20
T<
0]
Per S
0
10
0
. 0
0
20
0
0
*10
. 10
0
0
20
10
Id
20
30
*T"C
Organisms
33
-------
I
I
Station Types of Bottom
Mississippi 118.8
A sand
B sand
M C sand
_ D . sand
* E sand
Mississippi 115
clay, ooze
__ Table 5 (cont'd)
Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
water)
Per Sq. Meter
none
none
none'
none
none
Pollution Tolerant
or Facultative
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter
none
sludgevorms 20
bloodworms 10
none
diptera 10
T<
0:
Per Si
0
20
10
0
10
none
B sand
C sand
ID sand, detritus
«- -4
E sand
Mississippi 109-7
_ A sand, gravel
B sand, gravel
1.
C sand
D silt, sand
1
1
1
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
none
bloodworms 120
other diptera 20
bloodworms 10
other diptera 80
none
none
diptera 110
bloodworms 10
other diptera 20
none
none
none
Organisms
90
0
0
110
30
0
0
0
34
-------
I
I
I*
Types of Bottom
ississippi 18^.6
Butfall below Lock
and Dam 27 (Chain
Rocks Canal)
f
Above outfall
/
Belov outfall
1300' beloJ
outfall I
rock
ooze, sand
ooze
I
I
^ mile below sand, gravel
outfall
.ver Des Peres
1.0
Below Lemay outfall sand
eramec River 6.9
A
I
I
I,
I
I
I
ooze, gravel
silt, gravel
ooze, gravel
Table 5 (cont'd)
Pollution Intolerant
Orgnaisms (clean
q. Meter
flatworms
none
none
none
vhite caustic none
precipitate
Mississippi 171.5
I Above LeMay outfall sand,silt none
stonefly larvae 10
none
none
unionid clams 10
Pollution Tolerant Total
or Facultative Organisms
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter Per'Sq. Meter
sludgeworms 1^170 1^370
fingernail clams 60
none 0
sludgeworms Vf520 ^7530
bloodworms 10
sludgeworms 26920 26920
none
sludgeworms 6360
leeches 20
sludgeworms 6650
mayfly larvae 10
sludgeworms 60
bloodworms 110
leeches 20
mayfly larvae 110
sludgeworms 30
bloodworms 30
other diptera 30
sludgeworms ^0
fingernail clams 30
bloodworms 30
mayfly larvae 20
6380
6670
koo
90
120
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
at ion
Types of Bottom
Table 5^(cont'd)
Pollution Intolerant
Organisms (clean
yater)
Sq.-
Per "Sq.. Meter
-l
skaskia River 4.5
A ^Clay, ooze, detritus none
E
cjlay, silt
clay, ooze
none
none
Pollution Tolerant
or.Facultative
sludge-worms 320
1>loodvornis TO
other diptera 120
sludgeworas 90
bloodvroras TO
other diptera 60
sludge'/roras 460
"bloodworms 80
other diptera 10
mayfly larvae 10
Total
Organisms
Per Sq. Meter
510
220
560
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
Figure 5
Meramec
River
Crystal City
204.5
LOCK and DAM 26
198.8
195.1
Chain of Rocks
Canal (LOCK 27)
-N-
160.2
I4O.O
Stations sampled for periphyton in the
Mississippi River from Lock and Dam 26
downstream to river mile 140.
37
-------
c
1
1
1
1
"t
Ik
o
ft)
^~l
Io3
p
3
*fH
_ 0
CO
^H y
1
rH
I!
o
M
3
CO
1
sO
rH
1-2
CD
I
I
l
I
I
I
:f: CT
in V)
3^
O 03
/ 4> -H
r* t.
i-, M
4>
o
P > o +3
CO M -H KT g -H
4> C ^B CO
** f« (y ^ -^-5 Q
H «i *** «-W a
& 4J
t; £ a H "w
O rD Q) 4-> O
W E: ^^> -P Q,
H fl» K) o ^
ra CD 6 w
^* *^
o o
4) ^ C
« H ^>-H
^ *
S cr
P CQ
O to ,C
0
<
sl
gi *H
(H CO
O~--v
H 60
"5
C -H
P fx
CO 01
-p >
§OOOOO O O Qoc>
ooOOo o o O^-'S'
ooooo . o o ooo
§OOOOO i ' ' i O 'Q 'Q 'Qco
ooooo o o QS.2
rHN-\VOOOONQ «-l -d- rOvJ-CVJ
K^\ OJ -O -O O O
OJ OJ
OJ KN ir\ _j- OJ N"N t ON j- vi) ir\
OOOOOO rTNO rH rH rH
rH
J- rH \O VO ro\ ON -jo VO ^j- _^- ir\
r^N -^J" ^ OJ K*\ -^ O r<~N K^V t*- '-^
till -I | i ...
M"\OJCUOOO O O O rHiO,OJ
V
u^cOrHOOOJ irvot iTvOoOOOOJ ir\vOt/NO
^CO LPiN^ONOD OJ OJ'rH rH OCQODvC O O^-H ONO
O ON ONOD t^ f C~- t T t J~ VO VO VO VD '-T\ LTN _jj- J-
OJrHrHrHrHrHHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrHrH
o rt
JO
1)
r-l
P<
§
C/3
O
1
H
P
C
CU
cf
r{
rH
CU
H
g
r
.
u-\
Q>
(X
j~ aT
bC +J
H O
cu 'z.
V
>> CD
t~< CO
C3 Vc
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1-
1
1
1
1
/
=»
S °
o
c
Tt«l
/
/
»
E^^r^Wr ,44 ^-.v-g "»«"* -5 ii .('iiiMWi'^-^'^* ,. t,, 1,1f-,'3i"s"*-^rHiV,J"^^:yin; -^4 . -v^^'^M
P1-*^ '" -'1~ ' ^! ' ' "'- '"v 'i-'5^1^*'J^ "**' ' yVa->'"*F''**V'-^ - -=^*r t 4 -" --w-. T. -»"v-^"KW
L_.__M__j
E --_-. ^-^ ,,,-u,pr,^, ,.,,
*R-jJdb*Si--*-i-'-^«-*-»^~t-*i'*»B'*^ *si.-
p
......Sfc. r
^^ n
o|
>^
r^
^^* ' \
L-^»
__JW.
-^
^_ c '>
o o j
c ^ ''
o o ri
x: o *-
0 Q: 7
L .'- ^. _u, ' - ,-^* / ' -\ ^ ^
f T--1' iZ"T? \'1"ZZL.- ^«u!2
^~
f * - " ; ' . - . ? . , . - '_Jj
ii i i
o o o o c
o m o m
oj
39
i
|
.
|- ID
»*-
o
^-* «-'
0 *E S
»rx "H
E ^
i 1
o " 'S
i J5i o o
O J= "^
Jr 3; H- v)
T- c- ^
»- c v^
Q) 0 ^2
~ <= 0
o: o _g
»--
O ^ ~ .£
- CD o o
~ ~ CL "
o j. E
* TiJ ^-*
00 .> o
o £"^
" - w °
o u
t- <-
H- t-
UJ <
0
OJ
O «>
D if
-------
I
OJ
*
o
^^
£
i-
o ^
D
s ,2
*" «fr-
^»
Si O
o
c
>-
1
1
1
B
1
1
-
1
1
1
1
1
' »
E.,,,^*-~^^- , ...... ^-jjy*,^, , Y^M.-^I, ...^ .,-^.,-^n,
^ ..,.;i,- - -'-' >,'"«
"
(
[_-.___ ;,-..,^.^--*ht.,_. . ' -1
V L. - L*_ - ^ '- :\*K&£
/
/ ' ETUI]
/
^-^^^» fc,,^.^
>"
r "^- w ""^
f
^~
-^ a
H- O V
c - «
O 0 fT
x: o k\
o o: v*
r v '.i r . ruT^nm .1 '^zi
^
___^^_ , ; r -'".%
1 1 1 1
vj- ro CM c
(Uj'bs/6if) v nAgdojomo
i
*°
_j.
-in
. E
0
H
0 ^
-CD 'CO
c
^^ o
-------
1
1
1
1
N^ I
+~
B>
(>
^~
"MX
r
4|
^H^^^
^^f^^
\
1
1
o>
. *-
«/>
i
u.
O
2 «
"* ^j
£ o
0
"c
-^-
/
1
L,
1
O
E^'^IZ-Jr^
\
f " ' *"-. . * ''.^ i
t .-"', - --- - - - .-- -- .^ -'"«« - j
).^r..^^,^._ ^, ,^ _ .VT^, . , j-^^,. TV W=^~ . , ^ .-!<- -^^«,..
-
'""''- .-I"--*......***- - . -, v -^ , c ,J^H
L -. , ..... .,-j
^ Jv
s § tf
0 0 *.
*J
.E j2 aj
-n o r>
o Q: //
^T-^U^""--." --1Z2
E:;:.;:::: i
ET iZ^
i i i i
CO <0 sj- CVJ C
0001 x (nAqdojomo/ uoqjoo) OJID^
o
o
- in
Q)
O 6
- CD ur
C/)
o
O«^ rt_
t u. <
H-
£ ° U-
.tr >
O c w r-
rirt ^\ c *-*
-2 o>
o Q Q.
*- c*-
en o
> to
Q 0 '«
- CO - « .2
a: s
o
W 00
a>
V-
o .s*
r CJ "-
>
-------
I
I
I
I
Pesticides
Pesticides are chemicals used to control unwanted or obnoxious
animals and plants. Their use has grown dramatically since the end
of World War II. Over 875 million pounds were produced in the United
V States in 1965 which is a five fold increase over 1945. The most
" popular pesticides have been the chlorinated hydrocarbons including
DDT, Aldrin, Endrin, Lindane, Dieldrin, Heptachlor, Chlordane, and
_ Toxaphene, to narae a few. These have been popular because of their
ease of handling, persistence and their apparent lack of adverse
effects on higher order animals. This lack of adverse effects has
proven to be a delusion. The persistent or hard pesticides are very
slow to break down and have accumulated in animals at the top of food
chains. As a result, bird populations, particularly aquatic birds,
have been decimated, fish have not been able to reproduce and some
food fish have been declared inedible because of pesticides concen-
trated in their bodies. The situation has become so alarming that
several states, including Illinois, have banned the use of DDT.
The Mississippi drains a large agricultural area where the use
of pesticides is widespread, has a history of pesticide-caused fish
kills, and has pesticide-producing industries on its banks. Pesticide
samples were collected at four Mississippi River transects, the Missouri
transect, the River Des Peres and the Kaskaskia River. See Figure 9,
page 46. One sample was collected at each of the five points on each
i
-------
I
I
transect and analyzed for Lindane, Aldrin, Heptachlor, Heptachlor
| Epoxide, Dieldrin, Endrin o,p,DDT, p,p'DDT DDE, DDD Methoxychlor,
_ Chlordane and Toxaphene.
Paragraph 2d of the Missouri standards and SWB-13, rule 2.01,
l
paragraph 5 of the proposed Illinois standards read "Substances toxic
to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental to agricultural, mining,
industrial, recreational, navigational or other legitimate uses shall
be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental concentrations in the
stream. "
The National Committee on V/ater Quality Criteria states that
any addition of persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides is
likely to result "in permanent damage to aquatic populations and
recommends that their use should be avoided. The Committee further
I recommends that concentrations ranging from 1/10 to 1/100 of the 48
hour median tolerance limit valves be tentatively considered safe con-
centrations. The median tolerance limits (TLra), the concentration
that kills 50 percent of the test organisms within a specified time
span, has been reported for various pesticides. (Table III-5A,
m Report of the Committee on V/ater Quality Criteria.) Table 7 shows
the most critical 48 hour Tlai values for the pesticides considered
in this study and compares them with the maximum concentration found
in the streams.
Table 8 shows the distribution of each individual pesticide
and of DDT and its derivatives. Each of the pesticides was found in
i
i
-------
I
I
concentrations exceeding the tentative safe concentration at all
| stations where pesticides were measured. At station 202.5A in the
mm Mississippi River the DDT concentration approached the 48-hour Tim
for Daphnia pulexT an important link in aquatic food chains, and
was 96 times the tentative safe concentration.
At station 169E in the Mississippi River, the concentration
| of Endrin was 36 times the tentative safe limit and the concentra-
tion of Dieldrin was more than 6 times the tentative safe limit.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
_ ' U
-------
FIGURE 9
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN OFFICE
Kerculcneumc
Fesfus o
- ST. LOUtS AREA STUDY
LOCATION MAP
PESTICIDE STATIONS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
Great Lakes Region ' Chicago, Illinois
Chester
M 103.7
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0) CO
^~» c
CO O
CO -H
-P
I I
-P C
nS <1>
p o
C C
fl) O
E-* O
I CO
o> n
o c
H O
O ^
H -P
-P 05
CO k
aj -P
O
§
o
**
-ri
-P
Oj
CO
5S<
oj 4) ts£
a o c
-p c
c o
o o
EH
3
OJ
I
I
-p
n
to CM
o
to
o
*
to
§
0)
I
CO
ed
H
E
o
O
to
&
o
c
5
to
8
n
I
o
0)
vO
s
c^
§
CO
rH
>
rH
1
CO
O
O
c^>
9)
C
O
-P
m
u
CU
<
iH
I
43
S
o
C
cS
c
$
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7«4**
Miss. 195
'Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
~Lver Des Peres
iskaskia River
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7-4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Table 8
Distribution of Pesticides
Lindane ng/1
Missouri Side
A
t
87
5
5
9
18
- B
24
18
11
8
12
Aldrin
C
NF
NF
7
1
13
6
26
ng/1
Missouri Side
A
87
112
38
72
71
B
59
78
112
77
52
Endrin
C
28
80
9
67
54
72
40
ng/1
Missouri Side
A
41
NF
7
28
25
B
6
NF
41
16
23
C
6
4
NF
17
25
24
24
Illinois Side
D
27
2
13
6
17
E
3
21
21
24
6
Illinois Side
D
36
125
65
98
73
E
4l
66
56
109
30
Illinois Side
D
6
8
NF
56
33
E
12
NF
21
72
13
-------
I
*
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 8
Distribution of Pesticides (Cont'd)
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Heptachlor ng/1
Missouri Side
A ' B C
Illinois Side
D E
56
4
12
2k
20
10
6
NF
4
10
9
18
19
3
IT
36
8
19
11
37
Heptachlor Epoxide ng/1
Missouri Side Illinois Side
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
B
D
. D
21
8
4
hi
25
16
12
7
3
6
26
9
11
11
9
7
7
10
5
5
26
9
14
13
6
8
Total DDT (ng/1)
(o,p DDT, p,pf DDT, DDE and DDD)
Missouri Side
Illinois Side
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
A
330
121
119
136
138
B
161
127
82
119
51
C
225
78
11
148
97
121
227
D
96
212
65
254
139
D
127
90
147
421
39
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 8
k
Distribution of Pesticides (Cont'd)
o,p DDT ng/1
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Missouri Side
A ,
70
NF
13
32
25
B C
39 58
7 7
10 NF
21 31
23 21
48
82
p,p' DDT ng/1
Missouri Side
A
103
98
75
51
51
B C
85 92
75 45
31 NF
78 81
NF 48
28
111
DDD ng/1
Missouri Side
A
43
15
22
33
44
B C
21 16
NF NF
17 NF
14 21
18 19
25
' 14
Illinois Side
D
8
4
46
104
44
E
49
22
55
156
13
Illinois Side
D
9
199
NF
96
65
E
36
32
70
122 '
10
Illinois Side
D
22
5
10
15
21
E
26
20
10
61
10
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 8
i
Distribution of Pesticides (Con'd)
DDE ng/1
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
Missouri Side
A
*».
112
8
9
20
18
B
16
44
2k
5
10
Dieldrin
C
58
13
11
15
10
21
20
ng/1
Missouri Side
A
22
NF
18
19
16
B
11
16
42
10
13
C
73
20
9
37
15
6
42
Illinois Side
D
57
4
9
1*0
9
E
16
17
11
82
7
Illinois Side
D
14
NF
42
75
21
E
16
12
28
84
18
Station
Miss. 202.5
Missouri 7.4**
Miss. 195
Miss. 169
Miss. 109.7
River Des Peres
Kaskaskia River
NF - Not detected at sensitivity of test
** Transect located entirely in state of Missouri. Point A is across the
South bank and point E is near the North bank.
50
-------
I
I
Sediment Chemistry
The chemical content of the bottom sediments is an indicator
of the prevalent and historical quality of the superimposed water mass.
Sediments accumulate over a period of time and integrate the varying
1
water quality conditions that occur during that time.
The use of sediment chemistry as an indicator of stream quality is
relatively new and may "be imprecise in a river where the bottom is shifted
"by currents. Few data have been published on the concentration of pollution
indicating substances to be found in sediments. Experience with more than
fifty different harbors in the Great Lakes has been accumulated during
recent studies to determine the degree of pollution of the sediments within
these harbors. Sediment criteria, developed on the basis of this experience,
have been applied to the appraisal of the Mississippi River bottom sediments.
As shown in Table 9, iron and phosphorus dry weight concentrations
exceeded 15,000 and 500 rag/kg respectively in all samples. These values are
indicative of polluted sediments. Phenol concentrations exceeded 1.0 mg/kg
and were considered high for a number of locations including the Missouri
River, the River Des Peres, the Kaskaskia River and the Mississippi River
I at miles l8U.6 and 183.5- At Mississippi river mile 18U.6 the sample was
collected at the mouth of the outfall to the Chain of Rocks Cenal,previously
discussed on page 26. A sample was also collected 300 feet downstream from
the outfall. Both samples indicated a heavily polluted sediment. At the
51
I
I
-------
I
I
I latter station the volatile solids were 12.3 percent, phosphorus
« exceeded 5,000 mg/kg and organic nitrogen exceeded 3,500 mg/kg. Other
constituents were equally ,high as recorded in Table 9- The sediment
I samples at Stations 18U.1E and 183. 5E were affected by the outfall to
"the Chain of Rocks Canal. These samples had phosphorus concentrations
| that reached 729 tng/kg and ammonia nitrogen of 90 mg/kg. At mile point
_ 1T1.5A, upstream from the LeMay Sewage Treatment Plant outfall, the
* sediments were moderately polluted but had a high concentration of
I arsenic (7.79 mg/kg) and chromium (6h mg/kg) that may be due to the
proximity of the National Lead Company discharges. Iron at 31>000 mg/kg
I was also high at this station. At Mississippi River mile 1^0. IE the
sediment constituents were generally lowest in value of any of the
* stations studied in this investigation. The concentrations of phosphorus
fl and iron, 533 and 15,1^7 mg/kg respectively, were higher than the
concentrations of these constituents found in polluted harbors of the
| Great Lakes. It is possible that natural iron compounds are present
_ in the area, which elevate all of the iron concentrations.
The sediments in the Missouri River (mile 7.*0 contain concentrations
of phosphorus and ammonia (7^5 and 8l mg/kg respectively) that were high
and may reflect the heavy use of fertilizers in the Basin. The phenol
M concentration was 1.13 nig/kg, which is high in view of the fact that no
phenol was found in the water samples during the present study.
I ' .
I
-------
I
I
The sediments in the River Des Peres were heavily polluted
m with very high concentrations of COD, phosphorus, ammonia, organic
nitrogen, phenol, sulfide, zinc, lead, and chromium.
The Meramec River, sediments were moderately polluted but con-
tained high concentrations of metals such as iron, barium, titanium,
manganese, lead and zinc. The sources of these metals have not been
I determined.
/ The sediments in the Kaskaskia River were light to moderately
polluted. The concentrations of phosphorus and iron were higher
than in sediments from Great Lakes harbors but lower than most in
this study.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I . .
I
-------
1
Table 9
Results of Sediment Chemistry Sampling
Station Tot. Solids Vol. Solids C.O.D. Phosphorus NH^-N
I % ' ' '
Miss. 140.1 E 71.3
Miss. 183.5 E 61.2
IMiss. 184.1 E 67.5
Missouri 7 -4 E 64.3
1 River Des Peres 1.0 C 51.8
Meramec River 6.9 C 45. 2
Kaskaskia River 4.5 C 62.4
§Miss. 171.5 62.9
(above LeMay outfall)
IMiss. 184.6 (Chain of 46.2
Rocks Canal)
300' below outfall 44.2
1
Phenol Arsenic
mg/kg mg/kg
Miss. 140.1 E 0.279 2.67
IMiss. 183.5 E 1.53 3-51
Miss. 184.1 E 0.218 2.30
Missouri 7.4 E 1.13 2.96
River Des Peres 1.0 C 2.27 5.69
Meramec River 6.9 0.48 5-31
Kaskaskia River 4.5 C 2.56 2.80
Miss. 171-5 0.345 7-79*
(above LeMay outfall)
Miss. 184.6 (Chain of 3.95 3.90
Rocks Canal) at
1 out fall
300' below outfall 2.43 12.0
I*Difference in values compared to
Table 9, is due to samples being
sample location.
1
1
%
2.5
3-3
3-2
3-9
7-5
4.6
3-3
*-3
16,8
12.3
Sulfide
mg/kg
9.8
40
17
5.4
105
33
17
40
61
415
mg/kg
15,410
39,090
31,945
34,770
107,430
37,310
34,545
33,060
305,000
176,000
Iron
mg/kg
15,147
17,812
17,333
17,885
24,131
32,965
22,596
31,637*
33,333
53,620
mg/kg mg/kg
533
634
729
765
6,660
438
649
824
5,600
5,570
Barium
Kg/kg
289
216
144
359
386
575
192
251
329
244
similar sample location shown
taken at a
54-
different
time and
5.2
56
90
81
421
16
24
213
662
584
Titanium
mg/kg
4.2
4.9
1.5
3.1
5.8
8.9
4.8
6.4
2.2
2.3
on page 36,
imprecise
Organic N
mg/kg
371
773
837
708
1,719
1,204
74l
832
4,688
3,686
Manganese
mg/kg
251
534
415
417
790
1,451
614
242
303
500
-------
1
g Table 9 (cont'd)
Copper Cadmium Nickel
Station mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Miss. 140.1 E 11 1.4 3^
IMlBB. 183.5 E 23 1.6 29
Miss. 184.1 E 21 NF 33
Missouri 7-4 E 17 , MF 33
I River Des Peres iJo C 37 5«8 68
* Meramec River 6.9 C 24 NF 64
Kaskaskia River 4.5 C 18 NF 35
I Miss. 171.5 - 37 -1.6 38
(above LeMay outfall)
| Miss. 184.6 (Chain of 63 4.3 121
Rocks Canal) at
outfall
300' below outfall 102 2.3 127
1
NF - None found within sensitivity of test.
| All results are reported on a dry weight basis.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Zinc
mg/kg
69
44
37
30
212
159
27
105
216
249
Lead
mg/kg
45
74
42
53
407
188
59
87
^35
44l
Chromium
mg/kg
21
36
39
9-3
^3
35
6.4
64
158
206
-------
I
National Lead Company
Special investigations were made of National Lead Company
outfalls and of bottom sediments immediately above and below the
. outfalls because information furnished by the Company indicate that
the provisions of the 1958 enforcement conference "Pollution of
I Interstate Waters, Mississippi River, St. Louis Metropolitan Area"
have not been complied with.
National Lead Company, St. Louis, Missouri, in March 1968,
applied to the Corps of Engineers for a permit to construct an
underwater sewer outfall approximately 270 ft. into the
I Mississippi River. This outfall would discharge approximately
22,000,000 gallons per day of highly acidic untreated wastes con-
taining approximately 1,330 tons of solids (210 tons of which are
m settleable solids) at an average pH of 1.8. The waste results from
the manufacture of titanium dioxide for paint pigments and is now
discharged from several individual outfalls at the river's edge.
FWQA, after a review of waste discharge data, objected to
the issuance of the permit on the following basis:
1) Wastes from National Lead Company's St. Louis, Missouri
Plant are now discharged untreated to the Mississippi River;
2) The proposed project to discharge these wastes at a
different location in the river where greater dilution and dis-
persion takes place does not change the quality or strength of the
wastes in any way;
3) The FWQA does not condone the continuing discharge of
untreated wastes to the Mississippi River;
I
-------
I
4) The continuing discharge of these wastes is causing
water quality degradation due to color, turbidity and suspended
solids.
In addition to the above formal objections voiced in
correspondence, FWQA considers these discharges to be incompatible
with Mississippi River water quality standards and the St. Louis
Area Enforcement Conference recommendations. The present discharge
is unsightly, -heavily laden with solids, highly acidic, and ex-
hibits a definite color. The result is the discoloration of the
downstream river banks, the accumulation of bottom deposits,
numerous unknown chemical reactions, and an aesthetic nuisance.
On December 12, 1969, nine samples were collected by boat
from the outfalls of the National Lead Company, Samples were
taken at each major discharge to the river in order, working from
south to north. Sample No. 1 \/as taken at the mouth of the
southernmost outfall pipe. The remaining samples were taken from
small streams formed by the discharge of several outfalls each
and are a composite of the wastes from these outfalls. The shallow
water and soft sludge banks made it impossible to reach the in-
dividual outfalls. Thus, the results of the analyses of these sam-
pies, presented in Table 10, are given in qualitative terms only.
Table 10 shows that outfall streams 3, 4, 5 and 9 were ex-
| tremely acid and had very high concentrations of dissolved solids, COD,
phosphorus, sulfate, chloride, magnesium, sodium, iron, manganese,
I
I
I
-------
I
I
nickel, zinc and chromium. Outfall No. 1 contained a high con-
centration of titanium. Outfalls 1, 3, 5> 7 and 9 contained high
_ concentration of arsenic. Outfalls 5 and 9 had particularly high
* arsenic concentrations containing 16,300 ug/1 and 6,800 ug/L,
respectively.
Increased arsenic concentrations were observed in the bottom
sediments downstream from National Lead's waste discharges. Up-
_ /stream from National Lead Company, arsenic concentrations ranged
from 1.5 to 2.3 rag/kg of sediment; in a sijc-mile reach downstream,
concentrations ranged from 5.7 to 96.4 mg/kg of sediment (Table 6).
Outfalls 3, 4 and 9 contained very high concentrations of
iron (Table 10). Iron accumulations on glass substrates and in river
^ sediments are illustrated in Figure 10. Although these results are
only qualitative, the high concentrations correlate with an estimated
discharge of more than 200 tons of iron per day by the National Lead
Company.
I
I
I
I
I
I 53
I
-------
1
1
IA
I"tn
0
0-
O
O
1 I2"
0
A
1 I
\ 10-
1 / !
/ c
1 ' - o
\J
1
1
1
0)
T3
| 5 B-l
! ^
o 4_
i :
c
* 3"
1 i
E 2-
I : ,
~~ i ~
1
^ \j
m 2
1
Figure 10
1
1
'
National Lead Co.
1 Outfalls
* ^
X
X
X
1 ^
X1
^xx"
X
/ ^
^^/
*"
1 1 1 i 1 I 1
'3 172 171 170 169 168 167 166
River Miles
National Lead
Co. Outfalls \
l^
i In
i ' \
t \
|
' »
V
\
\
1--^--*
i
^ 1
1 k i i 1 i i
IO 2OO 190 180 170 160 150 140
River Miles
Iron Accumulation on Glass Slides
and in Bottom Deposits.
so
-------
I
I
I
Table 10
Results of National Lead Outfall Sampling
I
I
Dis. Solids Susp. Solids Turbidity True Color Spec. Cond.
Sample mg/1 mg/1 JCU Units umho/CM pH
1 585 145 - 25 5 725 6.45
2 480 90 5.6 10 670 6.65
3 9,010 * 260 2.2 20 16,000 2.00
4 40,330 * 290 65 50 56,000 1.65
5 21,905 * 6,635 2.4 25 51,000 1.55
6 ' 445 3,160 .99 20 720 7.25
7 / 440 160 .85 20 TOO 6.15
8 / 425 125 -46 60 620 6.50
9 / 5,255 * 3,855 100 5 17,000 1.75
Sulfuric acid in effluent may cause result to be high.
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
60
Acidity C.O.D. Tot. Phos. NH^-N KO^+NO-j-N Org. N
Sample mg/1 mg/1 mg/1. asP mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
1 47 "33 0.704 0.45 1.3 1.0
2 69 30 0.464 0.68 1.7 1.0
3 4,000 252 2.13 0.87 0.07 1-3
4 19,125 1,226 3.20 0.75 0.14 2.5
5 12,200 1,311 26.0 1.3 0.15 4.1
6 l4o 114 5.33 0.95 O.ll 2.4
7 99 4o 0.575 0.57 0.08 1.1
8 159 31 0.55T 0.68 0.12 1.0
9 1,575 176 7.46 l.l 0.08 1.1
-------
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 10
Results of National Lead Outfall Sampling (Cont'd)
Fluoride Arsenic Sulfate Chloride Silica MBAS Calcium
Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
8
9
Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
NF - None
Sample
1
2
3
^
5
6
7
8
9
mg/1
0.70
0.72
0.92
2.1
, 2A
/ 0.82
/ 0.67
/ 0.67
1 1.8
Magnesium
Jig/1
20
26
48
320
90
36
24
28
52
found within
Nickel
mg/1
0.059
0.031
0.352
0.648
0.604
0.062
0.043
0.034
0.426
ug/1
151
99
144
66
16,300
89
171
83
6,800
Sodium
mg/1
61
50
66
116
116
51
49
48
87
sensitivity
Zinc
mg/1
0.122
0.070
3.82
20.3
2.58
0.216
0.048
0.052
0.928
-
mg/1
. 310
235
6,600
30,000
20,000
188
184
150
4,900
Potassium
mg/1
6.0
5.4
16
46
22
5-5
5.3
5-3
9-2
of test.
Lead
mg/1
0.062
0.102
0.164
0.364
0.412
6.52
0.034
0.078
0.328
61
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 "
22
23
24
4o
132 2
28
24
22
55 1
Total Iron
mg/1
24.9
4.88
2138
7420
1.78
39-0
2.32
4.92
8190
Chromium
mg/1
0.122
0.070
0.165
0.310
0.424
0.336
0.058
0.087
0.396
50 0
45 o
135 0
75 0
,327 0
289 0
99 0
70 o
,553 0
Manganese
mg/1
0.328
0.166
15.1
83.6
27.4
1.2
'0.166
0.154 '
12.9
Barium
mg/1
1.44
1.43
0.362
0.874
NF
1.19
0.380
1.19
0.480
.16 32
.15 47
.10 70
.08 331
.09 74
.20 327
.13 48
.13 49
.08 62
Copper Cadmium
mg/1
0.035
0.021
0.031
0.028
3-41
0.065
NF
0.016
1.67
Titanium
mg/1
9.60
3.00
0.033
0.06l
0.177
0.005
0.004
0.004
0.059
mg/1
0.003
0.002
0.005
0.018
0.011
0.005
NF
NF
0.002
-------
APPENDIX
62
-------
Appendix Microbiology Results
MISSISSIPPI RIVZ? STUDY
.ST. LOUIS 1SACH
Dececber 1-12, 1969
DATS ,. LM30 NO.*
Missouri River M.?.?.^A
Dec. 1 No S&nple
2 5lt6l
. 3 5377
U 556U
5 5602
6 56-SU
" 7 5737
. - 8 580^
9 5863
10 59Vr
11 5961
- 12 6069
Average
Missom-i River M.P. C.
Dec. 1 Ho Se.role
2 5^62
3 5379
U 5565
5 560U
6 5635
7 5739
8 5805
9 5365
10 . 5948
11 ' 5953
12 **
Average
Missouri P.iver M.?. S
Dec. 1 No Sarrole
2 5^63" *
- -3 5331
U 5566
5 5605.
6 5635
7 57^1 ..
8 5S:5
9 5357
10 59^9
11 55-3
12 6C£0
CO'Ji:TS/10-0 ML
TOIAL COLIFO?.:.:
1
68,000
65,000
1*7, coo
28,000
6H,COO
52,0-0-0
1}S,000 -
Ui,o-oo
80,000
1^2,000
U8,OGO
53,000
^ _
56,000
53,co-o .
59,000
-. 21;, COO
FiCAL COLIi-'OP.M
-
2,000
790
1,200
920
1,200
2,300
1,800
2,2OO
3,000
1,600
l,lfOO
1,700
2,200-
1,100
970
- laboratory Accidentlf',200
72,000
57,000
8,200-
53,000 '
39,000
_55->Cj2p_
If8,000
«_
61,000
60, ceo
117,0:0
21, CCO
62, coo
£o,c:o
55,c:3 .
73, era
U7,cco
36, ceo
3o,c:o
2,500
2,500
l,7oo
2,700
x 2,3CO
JLv2_QQ__
&/100
_
2,liOO
*910
1,100
950 ...
1,9CO
3*cco
2, CCO
2., SCO
1,5CO
1,300
FECAL STRSPi'CCCCCI
1*,1}00
3,900
3,300
-2,000
2,300
2,50-0
1,900
8,200
6,000
3,600
2,1*00
"3,730-
5,000
UjliC-0
2,lfOO
1,800
2,700
3,700
3,600
IT, SCO
5*8co
l;,3CO
2_,3QO_
3,700
1; SCO
ItJlOO
3,oco
l,6co
2,500
li!l:CO
1|,3CD
5,500
3, 6co
2, 8co
5l,coo 63
1,700
-------
DATE
IA30 NO.*
1
Missisci-foi Pdvcr M.P. *
Dec. 1
2
3-
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
Average
Kississi
Dec. 1
2
3
1*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Ko Sarnple
5U6J*
5332
5567
5607 .
5637
5727
5807
5853
5950
5996
6031
CCUZiTS/lCO :2, '
TOiAI, COLIr'ORM 7ZCAL COLlf C?_M
J02.5 A
800
970 .-
700
630
- 810
l*6o
l,8co
380
3^0
390
- . itoo
TOO
rai River M.P. tv*.} C
No S'-inole
5^65
533^
5563
5609
5633
5729
5803
5878
5951
5993
603?
-
Mississi pi River M.?. 2
Dec. 1
2
3
k
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
No Sarrole
5^66
5386
5569
5611
56-39
5731
5809
5372 .
5952
6coo
6033
~_
1,200
2,300
1,900
610
1,000
730
1*20
720 .
1*1*0
360
390.
920
02.5 E
~f -
2,100
2,800
3,300
l,6oo
£&0
810
610
770
1,1*00
700
570
1,UOO
- _
20
1*6
ko
- 56
210
1*0
1*6
1*00
- 30
56
92
-.$'' , .
_
50
Laboratory Accider.
. 50
160 '
1*6
1*0
70
30
60
' 56
-
^
90
' 2kO
150 .
21*
3*iO
1*0
180
660
160
6k
90
190
xiCAL STP.Ir-rCCCCCj.
m--m ~
< 10
30
6
22
32
72
36
12
33
28
^
- 20
; no ,
26
16
2k
26
12
1*6
90
18
1*6
39
'
30
150
no
100
180
ito
110
180
. -38
^
100
64
-------
DATE
MISSIES?
Dec. 1
2
. 3
it
5
6
7
-8
9
10;
11
/
T O'
Average
Mis sis s:
Dec. 1
2
3
It
5
6
.- 7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Mississ:'
Dec. 1
2
3
It
5
. 6
7
. 8
9
10
11
12
Avera.-e
L?-SO 110.*
Dpi. luver M.P.
No S5.Eole
5^7. *
5337
5570
5612
5690
5732
5810
5873
5953
59^9
603^
-)pi Eiver M.P.
Ko S?.Tt>le
5^68
5339
5571
56lU
5691
573^
5811
5875
595^
5993
6035
-,Ti ~2-,\-=>-r '.T "^
O-J . t Nrf _ *.«i.
No S3rrole
,5^69
'5391
5572
5616
5692
5735
5312 -
5577
5955
5995
^s\ ^ ^
cOoo
V
C
TOTAL coi-iyo?;--
-
-95-0 A
_
2,^00 '
170,000
. 2$, COO
1 32,000
58,OOO
65,000
1*1,000
67,000 .
57,000
32,000
1*5,000
5^,coo
-95.0 C
,
Vf,ooo
- 1*9,0-00
39,coo
its, coo
59, ceo
51,000
1*5,000
TUjOOO
5i*,ooo
1*7,000
36,000
1*9,000
-95- oz
1*3, coo .
9,6po
3c-Vv-\
,5^0
1*1, COO
8,500
6,200
5,6co
38, coo
3,800
21, COO
3, coo
' - 17,000
CO'J.:T3/iCO ML
;-^CAL COLITCf'M FECAL ST?2..?-IO:CCCI
80
99-0
1,200
1,100
1,500
3,700
3,6co
i*,i*oo
2,300 .
2,100
1,500
2,000"
2,300
' - : 820 '
850
910
- 1,700
1,900
2,100'
2, UOO
2,^00
1,200
1,200
1,600
2,2CO
1,200-
1*60
2,1*00
i,fcoo
980
1,000
2,900
600
1,500
3^0 .
T,I5o~
Laboratory Accident
3,000
1,600
It, 100
.- 2,800
it, 700
It, 1*00
1*,700
3,&oo
. 1,600
- 3,200
3,^00
it, 800
3,700
It, 100
2,600
3,ico
1*,2CO
5,200
3,300
It, 800
2,500
3,500
3,800
3, h 00
220
230
560
8,100
2,300
1,700
800
2,300
. 320
670
1,900
-------
DATS'
Mississi
Dec. 1
2
-. 3 "
~k
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
Average
Mi s s i s s 1
Dec. 1
2
3
U
5
6
- 7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Mississi
Dec. 1
2
3
U
5
6
7
. 8
9
10
11
12
Average
LJ'SO i:0.*
»pi Fiver M.P. .
Ho S&,Tole
5VTO
5392
5573
5617
5693
5737
5813
5873
5956
6001
6087
>?i Kivar i'.P.l5
Ho Ssj^ole
5^71
539^
5571!
5619
5 SsU
5739
58lU
5S5o
5957
6003
6033
-oi River M.?. :
?To Sa.-ole
5^72
5395
5575
5c21
5695
57^1
5315 -
5332
595?
6COp
6059
--
TOTAL COLIcORi1-'!
Jo i r-
.l33.5 A
. _
110,0-00
100,000
39,000
, '28,000
7^,000
93,000
6U,ooo
83,000 .
69,000
27,000
38,000
66,000"'
3-5 c .
_. "
26,000
. 12,000
1U,000
13,000
33,000
20,000
31,000
97,000'
20,000
3U,OOO
11,00-0
28,000
33-5 3
T ^
36,000
6i;,ooo
25,000
66, coo
27,000
if 5, COO
3^,000
100,000
62,000
. 39,cco
U3,o:o
h9,coo
CGJIaS/100 :-j,
J7.CAL COLIr'OPM
» . "
9,700
5,700
2,200
2,UOO
1,600
2,600
3,200
-3,600
U,200
3,800
550
3,600-
1,000
. - 610
720
780
770
1,100
3,000
lU,OCO
1,500
1,600
600
2,300
^ _
2,6CO
2,700 .
3,100
6,200
2,900
3,700
3,900
6,1*00
U,2CO
3,200
3,2CO
3,800
iriCAL s-r^2?rcco:ci
9,800
12,000
.2,300
6,500
- 3,100
3,100
5,300
" - 7,800
6,300
2, If 00
^,500
5,700
190
160
1,300
12,000
616
1,600
2,100
11,000
2,6CD
2,100
1,600
3,200
- 750
6,oco
22, COO
U9,cco
25,0:0
11,000
800
n,oco
26,000
7,900
36, ceo
17, coo
66
-------
DATS
Mississ3
Dec. 1
2
. 3
-it
5
6
7
8
'9
10
11 /
*/
Average;
Mississi
Dec. 1
2
3
U
5
6
- 7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
L'-KO NO.*
rpi River M.P.
Mo S?-*nole
5^73
5397
5576
5622
5695
57^2
5816
5833
No Sample
6006
6090
oni -Kiver M.P.
No £ Er.pl e
5W
5399
5577
562U
5697
57^
5817
588?
Ho Sarnie
6003
6091 -
Mississippi River M.?.
Dec. 1
2
3
It
5
6
' 7
. 8
9
10
11
12
Average
No Sa-role
5^75
5tol
5578
5626
5693
57^5
58l3 .
583T
No- Sarnie
6003
' 609?
i
co/iiTs/ico :j,
TCTJAL COLIFOPJ-: I-iCAL COI,I?G5J-I
-77.0 A
" T-
52,COO
73,000
66,000
, 70,000
58,000
65,00-0
100,000
78,000
110,000
62,000
73, too '
-77.0 c .
43,000
. .55,00-0
'27,000
31,000
UU,000
.1*0,000
1*7,000
71,000.
2U,CCO
2U, 000.
.to, 600
-77.0 3
Us, ooo
5^,coo
35,030
21;, CCO
26,000
58,000
31,0-00
' 35, COO
.
33, COO
U6,coo
. 38,700
_^ll_
3,500
3,300
. 3, too
8,200
2,000
3,000
22,000 -
2,600
21,000
8,800
7,780 "
,
2,500
Ij200
1,200
1,000
970
1,500
1,900
1,600
__
1,800
900
1, toO
.
3, coo
2,900 -
1,100
3,600
900
3,200
700
1,800
_
"5,30-0
2,900. .
2,5to
J"ECAL SI^rTCCCCC
15,000
35,000
3,200
U7,ooo
- 3,500
if, 60-0
17,000
6,700
^-
32, coo
It, 200
l,68o
"3,100
2,500
3,ico
6,600
910
it, too
3,200
3,8co
3,900
2,200
3,370
330
1,000
6,900
11,000
It ,300
2,300
It, 200
2,300
' * ._
3,7CO
12, COO
t,8oo
67
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DATS
L?-BO NO.*
Mississippi Paver M.P. .
Dec. 1
2
. 3
k
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12/
Average
-f
Dec. 1
2
3
h
i 5
6
7
: 8
9
10
n
12
Average
Misclssi
Dec. 1
2
3
4
5
. 6
7
. 8
9
10
11
. 12
Average
5^02
5^76
5U99
5579 '
5627
5699
57^7
5819
5883
l;o Sanple
6011
6093
vpi ?iver }!.?. I
5^
5V77
5501
5503
5629
5700
.57^9
5820
5890
l,ro Serrole
6013
60911
^'oi- Pivsr i-'.''3. '
5^05
5V73
5503
5531
5631
'5701
5751
5S21 '
5552
?~<*v O rj "" ^*k^ fi
itO o3--L,»j.e
6015
6095
t
CO--J:;TS/IOO i*^
TOTAL CGLiyC?:' rZC.i-L COLlr CJC-1 /^CAL Sl.-'^l-TOCC-:::
73-0 A
71,000
7^,000
81,000
.36,000
28,000
110,000
' 69,000
66,000
63,000
«* -
67,000
32,000
. 63,000 .
73-0 C . '
IA.OOO
29,000
- 35,000
28,000
26,000
1^9,000
1{5,000
5^,000
57,coo
27,000
28,000
58,000
73-0 E
68,000
" U9,cco
1A,OOO
29,000
23,000
Ul,COO
lt3,OOO
28,00-0
*! | ^ 0*00
»-
*t5 C^O
30' ooo
-. '41, COO
2,500
5,1^00
3,600
91*0
2,200
7,^00
U,500
6,800
2,700
^r
11,000
U,500
4,700
1,800
2,300
1,900
. 890
1,300 .
1,100
1,900
3,^00-
2,500 .
2,200
1,200
1,900
3,900
3,^00
3,300 -
1,100.
2,800
2,800
3,200
.2,300
2,300
_
5,90-0
2,500 ;
3,100
6,800
30,000
17,000
3,600
11,000
.. 15,000
9,7co
15,000
13,000
111, 000
111, 000
1^,000
1,000
2,500
2,100
2,700
It, 100
2,100
2,20-0
3,300
5,200
_
1,900
2,800
It, ICO
750
1,70-0
8,100
5 3 600
3,300
2,700
1,500
3-, 200
3,300
2,1:-00
57300"
63
-------
DATS
River De
Dec. 1
2
. 3
It
5
6
7
.8
9
10
*
.*/
Average
Missies:)
Dec. 1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
Average
Mississf;
Dec. 1
2
3
if
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
L?-30 NO.*
3 Ecres l.OC
*-*
- 5^96
*-*
5599
5581
5719
*-*
5839
59^2
5932
6o5U
6113
bpi Rivc-r M.P.
5*H3
5^79
5509
5582
5636
5702
5756
5822
5897
5955
6020
6c=6
Tt>i K-'ver M.?.
5^15
5^30
5511
55S3
5633
5703
5753
5823 -
5S?9
5955
6022
' 6097
CGvfrTS/100 M,
TOTAL COLIi'Ol-i:-! ?ZCAL COLjLJC?M r^CAL ST?Z?iCC&:CI
< 100
10
< 100
. <. 100
< 10
< 10
Est. 60,0-00
2,100
< 10 .
< . 10
< 10
Ij2,000
8,700
s '_.
.62.0 A
61,000
50,000
-96,000
hit ooo
Ui,cco
U2,COO
220,000
55, COO
1(8,CDO.
51,000
31,000
33,000
' 6i«.,coo
62.0 C
28, CCO
36,000
50,000
28,000
36,000
150,0-00
130,CO-D
25, CCO
£;,COO
itU,CCO
22,000
2 8, COO
53,000
.
< 10
< 10
< 100
< 100 .
' < 10
< 10'
30,000
< 100
< 10
< 10
< 10
1,100 .
2,600
1},2CO
^.500
5,800
3.000
3,900 .
*J,5CO
18,000
5,500
5,000
U,ooo
3,500
3,700
5,600
l,6co
2,70-0 -
"1,1*00 '
i,Uoo
3,000
6,300
5,900
920
2,900
3,20-D
1,100
3,3CO
2,803
2liO .
l,6oo
< 100
. 30
< 10
2,80-0
31,000
< 100
10
< 10
2^0
26,000 '
5,200
5,600
17,000
21,000
31,000
20,000
11,000
35,000
2,900
- 11,000
22, CCO
3!*, cco
2,600
18,000
kho
i,5co
2, too
3,5CO
9,800
12, CCO
m,coo
1,100
^,5CO -
3, too
3,600
8,700
5,400
69
-------
DATS
Mississ:
Dec. 1
2
. 3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 /
Average
\ir '
Dec. 1
2
3
4
5
6
, 7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Lt-so :;o.*
:,-oi River M.P.
5417
5481
5513
5534
5640
5704
5760
5824
5901
5957
6023
6093
Aiver 6.9 0
>TO qr.~pTe
5497
*-*
5600
55S2
5720
*-£
5340
5943
5933
6065
6ii4
Mississippi River- M.?.
Dec. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
-. 12
Average
5^23
5^52
*-*
55°p
56^5
. «-*
5765
532p
5905 .
No- S^~T)le
6028
*-x-
/^ !*- r- ~;-if* 1 T / f\ \ *r
C O'J. i D / -'.'-- ' J . -Li
TO.'Aj, CO--""0.-L'-: .-iCAb CO^i'CrM j"SCAL STI-^rl'OCGC
.62.0 E V
' i}8,ooo
Us,' o-oo
200,000 '
65,000
te.coo
,'59,coo
iA,000
29,000
61,000
36,000
U3,cco
53,000
60,000
"_
1,800 -
700
600
- 150
29,OOO
k80
2,100
, ^,500
1,300.
180
360
3,770
5^.7 A
110,000
62,000
100,000
35, COO
35, ceo
81,000
110,000
71,000
6*1,000
__
36,000
4J!-,coo
68,000
3,100
3, too
U,800
2,000
2,600
2,500
2,000
l,6oo
- 5,900
l,6oo
2,900
3,^00"
" 3., coo
70
16
" ho
16
' 16 '
20
1^0
220
100
72
48
69
2,800
5,600
3,900
2,200 --
2,300
If, 800
5,700
6,20-0
4,000
»_
U, 300
. 3, £00
₯,200
320
900
. 1,800
5,300
5,300
2,200
2,500
360
6,OOO
2,100
2,700
" 2",i}CO
.2,700 .
60
80
8^
56
70
. 150
410
290
170
220
190
"160
1,200
9,3CO
8,600
3,500
16, ceo
17, ceo"
17,000
6,200
5,200
24;cco
26^COO
12,000
70
-------
DATS
Miss it si
Dec. 1
2
3
" 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
Average
Missis?!
Dec. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Mi s s i s s f
Dec. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
" 9
10
11
12
Average
12-50 NO.*
roi River M.p.
5425
5483
*-*
5586
5647
5706
5767 '
5826
5903
I~f~) O *- y" -^ ^ r*
t \J Q i >J U- t_-
6030 * -
6100
?t> i ?.iver M.p. '.
5427
5434
*-x-
5587
56^9
5707
5769
5S27
5910
IIo S^iTole
6032
6101
roi ?iver M.P.
5432
5435
Ko S-'-Tvole
5533
5654
-5703
5774
5523
5915
5971
6037
6102
,
COUNTS /i co ML
TOTAL COLlr'OR.1-- JZCAL COLIFC?:-!
54.7 c
' 1^4,000
42,000
54,000
,29,000
' 15,000
42,000
63,000
31,000
54,000
^_
52,000
33,000
42,000
-54.7 E
55,000
37,000
- 46,000
31,000
33,000
55,000
54,000
31, coo
54,000
38,000
37,000
43,000
1-0.1 A
84,000
55,000
_^
46, 600
35,000
4S,ooo
110,000
30, coo
Broken in I?
37,ooo
22,000
4i, ceo
51,000
2,200 "
3,000
2,800
3,200
1,200
2,7OO
2,300
2,900
.1,300
7,100
1,600
a-,800.
2,000
2,300
2,200
3,100
2,200
2,500
3,900
2,500-
3,900
_
4,100
2,7CO
3/000
-
4,600
6,600
^
2,500
3,700
3,9^0
8,800
4,700
-nsit
4,OOO
2,900
3,100
4,500
riCAL Si.-^S--'i'C':CCCj.
330
1,100
1,500
2,20-0
3,6co
5,000
5,000
1,000
1,100
__
16,000
-3,100
3,6-00
220
730
1,300
3,603
3,500
7,700
7,100
3, coo
2,300
12, CCO
2,300
,4,030
4oo
- 25, coo
_~
1,200
15, CCO
16, CCO
' 27,000
3,600
"5,500
29, cco
3,2CO
-13, ore
i
71
-------
/
DAI'S
MiGcifls:
Dec. 1
2
3 -
it
5-
6
7
8
9
10
11 /
12
Average
k?-ssio?:
Dec. 1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
Avei-a^e
Mississ:
Dec. 1
2
3
it
5
6
7
, 8
9
10
11
12
Average
L?
.) -*-i. r. . c_ .-. ^ *
5^35
5^33
1^I(^» O o >-« T ft
itW Od ,,'J-C
5591
5657
' 5711
5778
5331
5913
597^
60-rO
6105
C
TOTAL COI-ll-'O?::
-
LhO.l B
6it,ooo
.53*000
lt2,COO
31, coo
' 38,000
350,000
180,000
^5,000
ii3,OOO
25,00^0
3^,000
61,000
ito.i c
53, coo
39,000
' 58, ceo
32,000
70,0-00
60, ceo
32, ceo
itl;,COO
to, coo"
2 8, COO
Ui,coo
45,000
-1^0.1 D
59,000
. 32^ coo
kh , coo
Ui,coo
37, COO
36,000
30,000
.52, COO
38,000
23 ceo
32'COO
39,000 '
cc-'jyis/ico :-ij
I-vlCAL COI-i"?C?:-:
it, 100
it, 600
It, 300
2,300
2,600
9,700
5,600 .
it, 600
3,700
it, 100
2,200
MCO
2,800
3,500
'2, too
2,500 -
2,500
5,0-00
3,000
3,700
3,5CO
3, too
1,500
1,800
2, COO
2,500
2,900
2,100
l,6co
2,1; 00
1,700
3, too
2,900
3,5CO
1,300 .
2, too
J2CAL STRIPC'CCCCCI
2,800-
6, too
1,100
11,000
lit, ceo
il2,OOO
it, 70-0
7,200
9,300
7,700
2,500
9*900
-2,600
2,300
7,600
8,900
7,600
19,000
1,600
5,600
7,500
9,300
2,600
6,800
320
2, ICO
6,500 .
it, ICO
it,2CO
6,500
760
It, SCO
7, ico
6,800
2,200
, TTioo.
72
-------
DATS
Mississ
Dec. 1
2
3 '
"-if
5
6
7
8
'9
10
n/
i
: /
Average
I'd &C-il'S
' Dec. 1
2
3
if
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Missis 3
Dec. 1
2
3
if
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
LM50 i;0.*
TO! River M.P.
5^36
5H89
Ko Ssnole
5592
5658
5712
Ho Ss-'role
5832
5919
5975
6041
6106
.TD-ci River I'.P.
X-*
5^90
55^0
5593
5567
5713
Ko S^-role '
5833
5923
5976
6050
6107
ppi p.iver M.?.
*-*
5^91
55^2
5594
55^9
571^
5789
583^
5930 '
5977
6052
6103
C
TOTAL CGI-l^C.r-:
lifO.l E
111, 000
23,000
- 58,000
. 27,000
1 52,C>00
2*1,000
1*7,000
ii2,000
38,000
56,000
~T~^ ^TC7T~
-ti,^*-*
118.8 A
35,000
26, COO
if 3, CCO
if5,COO
38,000
39,000
39,000
33 ooo
32,000
27,000
34,000
113.3 c
if 5, CCO
2 if *COO
58, cco
if 5, COO
3^,000
33,coo
78,000
81,000
26,OCO
31,000
23,000
38,000
. if 3, ooo'
o-'.rrrs./joo ;.j,
.-r^CA.o CGi,L?"C?A rr^CAL ST?JL?'i&3C-
1,900
520
- -- 2,100
2,000.
2,200'
1,600
2,500
2,000
2,000
930
1,800-
1,9-00
1,300
2, if CO
'2,500
2,100
if, 100
3,100
3,200
2,80-0
3,^00
2,700
a, 700
2,1*00
3*300
1,700
3,700
2,900
2,700
if, 000
2,300
3,100
2,200
3,2CO
-3,9^0
3,cco
260
1,1;00
if, 100
2,900
3,700
if50
3,600
3,300
5,60-0
2,100
2/fGO
560
1,200
5,900
2,900
. 9,000
12,000
3,900
i{,900
5,lfOO
12, CCO
3,700
5,600
630
if ,700
2, Uco
21, COO
7,800
13,000
8,700
if, 300
5, cco
.Ujioo
12, COO
'if, ICO
7, SCO
73
-------
DAT3
Kississ
Dec. 1,
2
3
n
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
. 12
Averf.ge
y?,cV'. c-v-
Dec. 1
2
3
It
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average _
Mi s s i s c *
Dsc. 1
2
3
' L
5
. 6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
.
1:30 i;o.-"
-ord ?dver M.P.
*-*
5U92
55^
5595
5571
5715
5791
5835
5932
5978
605^
6109
P 7? T ^ * -^ v IL S ^
**
*-x- '
*X-
56-01
5533
5721
5803
53!*1
59^
593U
Ho Sa.-rpls
::o Si-rpie
-roi p.iver M.?.
5^56
K-X-
55^9
559o
5p7o
5715
5795
5335 -
5937
5979
6059 . .
cllO
TOJAL cor/i/o?;-i
118.8 E
22,000
58,000
35,000
Ul,000
1 33,000
33,000
31,000
39,00-0
20,000
1*1,000
25,0-00
26,0:0
3^,000
3,500
2, LOO
- 2,6-00
1,500
1,600
2, SOO
5.200
5.>200
11,000
7,500
-
1*3,000
"-CP.7 A
1.3,000
LU , coo
3o ,000
2 5, COO
23,000
35, ceo
54,000
L. '4,0:0
2^, CCO
35,0:0
35,:::;
36,000
CO.:-; rs/ioo 11,
37-CAL COL I.;'0?.;-!
1,500"
2,600
570
2,000
1,100
1,500
2,60-0
2,500
2,600
2 , ^00
1,500
2,300
1,905
370
270
270
230
220
1*70
1,200
3s t. 5,000
2,6co
780
1,100
1,500
1,500
1,000
1,300
1,900
1,600
2,700
3,300
3,200
2,LCO
1 600
1,5:0
2,000
/ ijur^L- s i .-'J-. . i. :coc ~^L
360
1,100
3,30-0
3,000
3,200
2,6co
2,1(00
3,000
5,3CO
3,300
3,100
50
150
26
28
100
3,900
11,000
6,Uco
li, 100
r
2,600
530.
2, SCO
1,5CO
6,7co
l*,7co
6,8co
11, COO
15, ceo
3,100
6* -co
3,5:3
5,600
74
-------
DATS
Mississa
Dec. 1
2
3
.u
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
Missies:
Dec. 1
. 2
3
if
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Average
*I^ke M:
**:ro nun*
uso no.*
j>pi River M.p.
5^58
5^9'-f
5551
5597
5578
5517
5798
5837
5939
5930
6o5l .
6111
pp5 River, M.?.
5USO
5^95
5553
5593
5530
5718
Ito Sarrole "
5833
59-1
5931
60 03
6112
ch i {r ? ji r 3. s i n r.~. '
er vas on tag.
CC
TOTAL CGLIl-'C^::
-09.7 C
38,000
^ 9, ceo .
lf7,COO
25, coo
25,000
' 20,000
51,0-00
i;2,OOO
2U,OOO
33, COO
29,000
U3, ooo '
56,000
109.7 E
32,000
23,000
12,000
' 30,000
32,000
20, COO
37, coo
12, COO
38, coo
52,000
38, ceo
30,000
::cors vere frc.i s=-
-^
i ~\ /*> t~\ i
/ J.vO ;-_LJ
L COLJl'Or::
2,900 .
1,800
1,0-0-0
1,700
2,200
1,600."
3,500
3,^00
3,500
2,000
2 , ifOO
2,UOO
3] t f\f*\
~ « ''rW \s
1,200
. 760
710
1,60-0
950 '
2,200
1,700' -
2,200
1-,UOO
2,000
1,500
FhCAL SI.^rrTCCC-:CI
650
2,800
2,900
U,ioo
5,200
7,800
6,800
7,200
3,000
3,100
11, COO
" 3,&oo
350
7^0
110
1,9-00
2,6co
2,700
6,100
3,3co
U,2CO
3,800
2,800
2,600
75
-------
I
I
_
I
_
I
_
I
_
'
I
I
I
I
I
REFERENCES
1. Mississippi River Water Quality Evaluation and -Surveillance
Report from St. Louis, Missouri to Chester, Illinois during
October 1967 to Septenber I$6% Metropolitan St. Louis Severs
\
District ( not published)
2. Report of the Committee on Water Quality Criteria Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration (1968)
3. Water Quality Criteria - California State Water Quality Con-
trol Board (1963)
k, Mississippi River Water Pollution Investigation - St. Louis
Metropolitan Area - B. State Development Agency (195*0
5. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standard - 1962 U. S.
Dept. of Health Education and Welfare.
6. Smith, D. and Lichtenbeg, J.J. Determination of Phenols in
Surface Waters by Thin Layer Chrcinatography Special Technical
Publication No. 448.
American Society for Testing and Materials (1969)
7. FWPCA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes
November 19£>9> U.S. Department of The Interior.
------- |