Taum Sauk Hydroelectric Power Station
The Taum Sauk pumped storage plant is in the St. Francois mountain region of the Missouri Ozarks about 90 miles (140 km) south of St. Louis near Lesterville, Missouri, in Reynolds County. It is operated by the AmerenUE electric company.
The pumped-storage hydroelectric plant was built to help meet peak power demands during the day. Electrical generators are turned by water flowing from a reservoir on top of Proffit Mountain into a lower reservoir on the East Fork of the Black River. At night, excess electricity on the power grid is used to pump water back to the mountaintop.
The Taum Sauk plant is a pure pump-back operation: unlike most other pumped storage sites, there is no natural primary flow available for generation. It is therefore a net consumer of electricity; the laws of thermodynamics dictate that more power is used to pump the water up the mountain than is generated when it comes down. However, the plant is still economical to operate because the upper reservoir is refilled at night, when the electrical generation system is running at low-cost baseline capacity. This ability to store energy led its operator to call Taum Sauk "the biggest battery that we have."
The Taum Sauk plant was among the largest of its kind when construction began in 1960. It went into operation in 1963 with two reversible pump-turbine units that could each generate 175 megawatts of power. In 1999, the plant was upgraded with units capable of 225 megawatts apiece.
On December 14, 2005, a catastrophic failure in the upper reservoir dam put the plant out of operation until it was rebuilt, recertified, and reopened on April 21, 2010. The new upper reservoir dam, rebuilt from the ground up, is the largest roller-compacted concrete dam in North America.
Size and location
The upper reservoir can hold about 1.5 billion gallons of water (5.7 million m3; 4,600 acre-feet) behind a wall nearly 100 feet (30 m) tall. It sits 800 feet (240 m) above the 440-megawatt hydroelectric plant, which gives it a greater head than that of Hoover Dam. The two are connected by a 7,000-foot (2,100 m) tunnel bored through the mountain.
The Taum Sauk upper reservoir sits atop Proffit Mountain, not Taum Sauk Mountain about five miles (8 km) to the east. It is visible from Route 21 north of Centerville and from Route N approaching Johnson's Shut-ins State Park from the south.
Before the failure of the upper reservoir, visitors could drive to the top of Proffit Mountain and walk to an observation deck above the reservoir. Ameren operated a museum at the entrance gate highlighting the geologic and natural history of Missouri. The powerplant was frequently visited by geology students because of a striking example of Precambrian/Cambrian unconformity in the rock layers exposed by the plant's construction.
Leaks and lining
There had been minor leaks in the reservoir since it was constructed. A pumpback station was eventually installed to collect and return leakage to the reservoir. From September 13, 2004, to November 15, 2004, Geo-Synthetics installed lining material to reduce leaks.
Upper reservoir breached
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Taum Sauk Reservoir breach.|
At 5:12 a.m. on December 14, 2005, a triangular section on the northwest side of the upper reservoir failed, releasing a billion gallons (4 million m³) of water in twelve minutes and sending a crest of 20 feet (6.1 m) of water down the Black River. According to AmerenUE, a computer software problem caused the reservoir to continue filling even though it was already at its normal level. The water overtopped the walls.
The reservoir had been lined with a membrane in 2004 to minimize water leakage. It had been losing two feet of water for some time prior to the installation of the lining. The phenomenon of fine material being washed out of a reservoir structure is known as piping. Where piping occurs a reservoir structure can settle in or slump, lowering the level at which it will be overtopped at the point of settling. Periodic surveys are necessary at a reservoir to identify if leakage and "piping" is occurring. Preliminary indications are that minor leakage through the dam walls over a prolonged period, had carried away fine material in the walls, weakening the reservoir's holding walls. The failure of the reservoir occurred as the reservoir was being filled to capacity or may have possibly been overtopped.
There was no overflow spillway in the original reservoir. A maximum fill level was reported to be 6 feet (1.8 m) below the top. If the reservoir was filled in 6 hours and is 55 acres (22 ha) across, that would calculate to about 1 ft (0.30 m) of water rise in 12 minutes. The reservoir would have overflowed in about 72 minutes, once the maximum level was exceeded. It was likely that the reservoir failed once water overflowed the reservoir as earthen levees will erode when overtopped.
A memo from Richard Cooper, superintendent of Ameren’s Taum Sauk Hydroelectric Plant, indicated that the reservoir had a "Niagara Falls" style overflow on September 27 at the same spot that was breached (caused by wave action related to winds from Hurricane Rita.) Another Cooper memo had also indicated that Cooper had warned that gauges used to monitor the water height in the reservoir were malfunctioning in October.
No one was killed by the failure. The superintendent of Johnson's Shut-Ins and Taum Sauk State Parks, Jerry Toops, his wife and three children were swept away when the wall of water obliterated their home. They survived, suffering from injuries and exposure. The children were transported to a hospital in St. Louis and later released. One child was treated for severe burns which resulted from heat packs applied by rescue workers as treatment for hypothermia.
The dam of the lower reservoir, which by design is able to hold much of the capacity of the upper reservoir, withstood the onslaught of the flood. By storing most of the deluge it spared towns downstream, including Lesterville and Centerville, from a damaging flood. A voluntary evacuation order was issued for those areas, but there was no damage. The high water was stopped at Clearwater Lake, the dam of which was not damaged by the rising waters.
Litigation and Investigations
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has fined Ameren $15 million pursuant to a settlement for the breach at Taum Sauk. This is the second highest fine ever levied by FERC, only outstripped by the fine and subsequent settlement against FPL regarding the 2008 Florida electricity blackout.
The Missouri Highway Patrol delivered a report of its criminal investigation to the Attorney General in June 2007 which "did not name any suspect" and the Attorney General made a statement that there would be no criminal charges. According to press reports, the report states that Ameren failed to provide the identity of the person who raised the gauges meant to prevent overtopping and also states that the gauges were moved before investigators were on the scene.
KMOX radio in St. Louis reports that the EPA assisted by the U.S. Attorney's Office has begun an investigation into violations of the Clean Water Act and has requested the Highway Patrol's report.
The Public Service Commission reopened its investigation (based on the Highway Patrol report) and subsequently found the accident to be a failure of Ameren management, stating:
...the Commission can only conclude that the loss of the Taum Sauk plant was due to imprudence on the part of UE (Ameren's AmerenUE Subsidiary). UE was well-aware of the catastrophic results likely to occur if the UR (Upper Reservoir) was overtopped by over-pumping. UE knew, or should have known, that storing water against the parapet wall of a rockfill dam was “unprecedented.” UE knew,or should have known, that operating with a freeboard of only one or two feet left no margin for error and required particularly accurate control of the UR water level. Given that circumstance, UE’s decision to continue operating Taum Sauk after the discovery of the failure of the gauge piping anchoring system and the consequent unreliability of the piezometers upon which the UR control system was based is frankly beyond imprudent – it is reckless. UE also knew or should have known that the upper Warrick probes had been reset above the lowest point at the top of the UR." (PSC Report page 71, definitions of Acronyms added)
Ameren has 90 days from the date of the report to answer back to the PSC how it will meet the recommendations of the report, which include a whistle blower rule, changes in safety management structure, financial accounting for the rebuild of the upper reservoir, and single point of management for the rebuild.
Federal regulators approved Ameren's plan to rebuild the reservoir, and construction began in late 2007. The rebuilt structure is made entirely of roller-compacted concrete, unlike the earth-fill original. In addition to fill-detection instrumentation it incorporates a spillway to handle any overflow and a video system to monitor the water level. The $450 million cost of rebuilding the reservoir was covered mostly by insurance. The utility is prohibited from billing customers to recoup any of the cost.
Water was pumped into the rebuilt reservoir for the first time on February 27, 2010, and engineers monitored the response of the new structure as the water level was repeatedly raised and lowered. The final approval required from the FERC for “return to normal project operations” was received on April 1, 2010. The utility met the Missouri Public Service Commission’s in-service criteria for operations on April 15, and electricity was first generated from the new structure on April 21, 2010. The new dam was recognized by the U.S. Society on Dams with its "Award of Excellence in the Constructed Project".
Church Mountain reservoir
In June, 2001, Ameren Development Corp, a subsidiary of Ameren Corporation, announced that it had filed for a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in order to begin evaluating the construction of a much larger pump-back plant on neighboring Church Mountain. The upper reservoir of this 770 megawatt plant would be 130 acres (53 ha), and the lower reservoir would flood 400 acres (160 ha) of the scenic and environmentally significant Taum Sauk Creek valley. Resistance from a number of environmental groups, the Missouri governor's office, and the state's attorney general caused the company to conclude it was impossible to build the plant in both an environmentally friendly and cost-effective manner, and the permit application was withdrawn in August 2001. However, Ameren refused the state's request for title to or a long-term lease on Church Mountain as part of its settlement for the damage it caused to Johnson's Shut-ins State Park. Environmentalists have condemned the settlement for failing to protect Church Mountain and the Taum Sauk Creek valley, leaving the company free to resurrect the second reservoir plan in the future.
- Maggie Crane (2010-05-27). "Reporters Blog". KMOV.com. Retrieved 2010-10-30.
- "AmerenUE’s Taum Sauk Pumped Storage Plant Is Back Online". AmerenUE. 2010-04-21. Retrieved 2010-04-22.
- "U. S. Society on Dams holds annual meeting and conference in California". HydroWorld.com. PennWell Corporation. 2010-04-16. Retrieved 2010-04-19.
- "Milestones:Taum Sauk Pumped-Storage Electric Power Plant, 1963". IEEE Global History Network. IEEE. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
- "Taum Sauk Facts & Figures". Ameren. Retrieved 2013-10-09.
- AmerenUE Taum Sauk Reservoir Lining Project at the Wayback Machine
- http://www.ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2006/121306b.htm Missouri Attorney General Press Release with link to Petition for lawsuit against Ameren for breach
- http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/06323A30D4407520862572F4000BDE98?OpenDocument St. Louis Post Dispatch article
- http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-08-2007/0004604925&EDATE= Ameren Press Release
- http://www.kmox.com/pages/603101.php?contentType=4&contentId=628667= Report on EPA Investigation
- http://www.waterpowermagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=130&storyCode=2047683 Water Power Magazine on PSC Report
- http://www.psc.mo.gov/electric/report%2010-24-07.pdf Link to PSC Report Full Text
- "Conservationists laud Ameren's withdrawal of Church Mountain hydropower proposal". Sierra Club, Missouri Chapter. 2001-08-30. Retrieved 2009-08-30.
- "Conservationists See Taum Sauk Deal as Sell-Out". Missouri Parks Association. 2007-11-28. Retrieved 2009-08-30.[dead link]
- Southeast Missourian (Cape Giradeau, MO): Taum Sauk Reservoir fails
- Ameren Press Releases , 
- Daily Journal (Park Hills, Missouri): Taum Sauk Dam Fails
- National Weather Service, St. Louis Office: Taum Sauk Dam Failure
- USGS Mid-Continent Geographic Science Center 
- Johnson's Shut-Ins State Park damage update page 
- Ameren web pages on Taum Sauk and Johnson's Shut-ins restoration 
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Taum Sauk Hydroelectric Power Station.|