Prepared in cooperation with the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 

and the Bonneville Power Administration 

Water-Quality Data, Columbia River Estuary, 2004-05 

By Jennifer L. Morace 

Data Series 213 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

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

Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary 

U.S. Geological Survey 

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 

For product and ordering information: 

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, 

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: 

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

Suggested citation: 

Morace, J.L., 2006, Water-quality data, Columbia River Estuary, 2004-05: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 213, 18 p. 

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

imply endorsement by the U.S. Government 

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

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 

ii 
 Conversion Factors 

Multiply By To obtain 

Length 

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi) 

Area 

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2) 

Volume 

liter (L) 1.057 quart (qt) 

liter (L) 0.2642 gallon (gal) 

Flow rate 

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

cubic meter per second per square 

kilometer [(m3

/s)/km2] 

91.49 cubic foot per second per 

square mile [(ft3

/s)/mi2] 

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

°F=(1.8×°C)+32 

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

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

micrograms per liter (μg/L). 

Concentrations of chemical constituents on suspended sediment are given in micrograms per gram 

(μg/g). 

iv 
Abbreviations 

GC/MS gas chromatography/mass spectrometry 

MDL method detection limit 

NASQAN National Stream Quality Accounting Network 

NAWQA National Water Quality Assessment 

NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries 

Service 

NWQL National Water-Quality Laboratory 

OBW organic blank water 

OWSC Oregon Water Science Center (USGS) 

PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon 

PBDE polybrominated diphenyl ether 

PCB polychlorinated biphenyl 

QC quality control 

RL reporting limit 

RM river mile 

RPD relative percent difference 

SPMD- semipermeable-membrane device 

STL Severn Trent Laboratory 

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

v 
Contents 

Significant Findings............................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................3

Background .....................................................................................................................................................................3

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

Sampling Design and Methods........................................................................................................................................5

Sample Collection and Laboratory Analysis..............................................................................................................6

Monthly sampling .......................................................................................................................................................6

Seasonal Samplings...................................................................................................................................................7

Reporting of Data............................................................................................................................................................8

Quality Assurance ..............................................................................................................................................................9

Types of Quality-Control Samples Used.....................................................................................................................9

Results of Quality-Control Data..................................................................................................................................10

Comparison of Data to Water-Quality Standards.......................................................................................................11

Discussion of Selected Results .....................................................................................................................................11

References Cited ..............................................................................................................................................................13

Appendix A. Methods, Reporting Limits, and Analyte Information. ........................................................................17

Appendix B. Quality-Assurance Data...........................................................................................................................18

iii 
Water-Quality Data, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

By Jennifer L. Morace 

Significant Findings 

Water-column samples were collected monthly at the Columbia River at Warrendale (RM 141), 

Beaver Army Terminal (RM 54), and the Willamette River at Portland (RM 13) to characterize waterquality conditions in the Columbia River Estuary. To further characterize water-quality conditions 

during low- and high-streamflow conditions, seasonal samplings were performed in August 2004 and 

April and August 2005. These samplings included suspended-sediment and semipermeable-membrane 

device (SPMD) extract analyses and an expanded list of analytes, including wastewater compounds, 

pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, organochlorine compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), 

polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB). These additional 

samplings were performed at the three monthly sites as well as the Columbia River at Columbia City 

(RM 82) and near Point Adams (RM 4). The following significant findings have emerged from these 

data sets: 

• None of the aquatic-life or human-health benchmarks based on the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency water-quality standards were exceeded in either the Columbia or Willamette Rivers at 

sampling sites in this study. It is important to note, however, that the majority of compounds 

measured in this study do not have standards established. Just because a compound is not addressed 

by a standard does not mean that its presence or measured concentrations are not of concern. 

• Although concentrations of arsenic, chromium, copper, and lead were not present at levels of 

concern with regards to aquatic-life toxicity, sublethal effects and signs of endocrine disruption have 

been linked to low levels of these compounds. While chromium was only detected in the Willamette 

River, arsenic was found at higher concentrations in the Columbia River than in the Willamette 

River. The median copper concentration from each of the three monthly sampling sites was 

1.0 microgram per liter, a level shown to have inhibitory effects on juvenile coho salmon. 

• Concentrations of trace elements in the Columbia River near Point Adams were elevated when 

compared to concentrations further upstream in the main stem and the Willamette River. 

• Of the 173 pesticides and degradation products analyzed, 29 were detected at least once, oftentimes 

with 2 or more compounds occurring in a sample together. Fourteen compounds were detected in the 

Columbia River, 25 in the Willamette River. 

• The triazine herbicides atrazine and simazine were the most frequently detected pesticides, most 

often in the Willamette River. 

• Eight of the 54 wastewater compounds analyzed were detected at least once, usually at trace levels. 

The known endocrine disruptor, bisphenol A, was detected in both the Columbia and Willamette 

Rivers, while the suspected endocrine disruptor, tri(2-chloroethyl)phosphate, was detected only in 

the Willamette River. 

1 
• Of the 24 pharmaceuticals analyzed, acetaminophen, a common analgesic, and diphenhydramine, a 

widely used antihistamine, were detected in the Columbia River. 

• Three of the 49 antibiotics and degradation products analyzed were detected. Anhydroerythromycin, 

a degradation product of the antibiotic erythromycin, and trimethoprim, an antibiotic used both for 

people and in aquaculture, were detected at most sites during low-flow conditions, but at only one 

site during high-flow conditions. 

• Even though organochlorine compounds on suspended sediment were monitored monthly at the 

Beaver Army Terminal site from May 2004 to April 2005, p,p’-DDT was detected only once in 

October 2004 at 0.02 micrograms per gram. No other organochlorine compounds were detected. 

• During the seasonal samplings of suspended sediment at all four sites, no organochlorine 

compounds or PAHs were detected. 

• Of the 11 PBDE congeners analyzed, all were detected on suspended sediment, usually in trace 

amounts. The only quantifiable concentrations were measured near Point Adams. 

• Of the 209 PCB congeners analyzed, 102 were detected at some time on suspended sediment at the 

four sites, usually in trace amounts. A third of these detections were quantifiable at the Willamette 

River during the high-flow sampling. There were fewer PCB detections during the low-flow 

sampling than during the high-flow sampling. 

2 
Introduction 

The Columbia River provides critical habitat for threatened and endangered salmonid species in 

the Pacific Northwest. Twelve stocks from this region are threatened or endangered, including Lower 

Columbia River Chinook and steelhead, Upper Columbia River Chinook and steelhead, Columbia River 

chum, Upper Columbia spring Chinook, Snake River spring/summer Chinook, Snake River fall 

Chinook, mid-Columbia River steelhead, Snake River steelhead, and Snake River sockeye. For at least 

some period of time, all of these stocks use the Columbia River Estuary for a migration corridor, and 

some stocks, such as the Lower Columbia River, Upper Columbia River, and Snake River fall Chinook, 

and Columbia River chum, use it for an extended period of rearing. 

The Columbia River drains 259,000 square miles of the Pacific Northwest, and flows more than 

1,200 miles from its headwaters in the Canadian Rockies of British Columbia, across the State of 

Washington, and along the border of Washington and Oregon to its mouth at the Pacific Ocean. This 

study focuses on the Columbia River Estuary, defined by the Clean Water Act as waters that are tidally 

influenced. This definition covers the lower 146 miles of the river, from Bonneville Dam to the mouth, 

and also includes the lower 26 miles of the Willamette River from Willamette Falls to its confluence 

with the Columbia River. 

During their passage through and residence in the Columbia River Estuary, salmonids are 

exposed to a variety of environmental contaminants from numerous sources including municipal and 

industrial permitted discharges, atmospheric deposition, urban and industrial nonpoint pollution, 

accidental spills of oil and hazardous materials, and runoff from agricultural and forested areas (Fuhrer 

and others, 1996; Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, 1999). In addition to inputs from the 

Lower Columbia region, contaminants may also be transported to the estuary from areas of known 

sediment contamination above the Bonneville Dam, such as Lake Roosevelt (Bortleson and others, 

1994), the Yakima River (Fuhrer and others, 2004), the Snake River (Clark and others, 1998), and in 

areas of sediment deposition behind the dams (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006). 

Background 

Earlier studies within the Columbia River Estuary have documented the presence of legacy 

pesticides and trace elements in water, suspended sediment, and streambed sediment (Fuhrer and others, 

1996; Tetra Tech, Inc., 1996; McCarthy and Gale, 1999). Studies of contaminant residues in juvenile 

salmonids (Johnson and others, 2004) and osprey (Henny and others, 2003) clearly show that some 

legacy pesticides biomagnify and move up the food chain. Trace elements in the water column have 

been significantly enriched due to mining-related activities in the upper Columbia River Basin 

(Horowitz and others, 1999) and tributary inputs, most notably the Willamette River, in the lower basin. 

In addition to the inherent toxic properties of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and mercury at 

threshold concentrations, even sublethal concentrations of some of these trace elements can inhibit 

sensory physiology, which is vital for the survival and migratory success of wild salmonids (Baldwin 

and others, 2003). Additionally, low levels of trace elements are beginning to be identified as endocrine 

disrupters that can cause embryonic and adult mortality in amphibians, birds, and fish. 

Earlier studies of currently used hydrophilic pesticides show they are present at low levels and 

often in mixtures (Fuhrer and others, 1996). In particular, organophosphate and carbamate insecticides 

were detected at environmentally relevant concentrations in tributaries affected by agricultural and 

urban land uses and also in the main-stem Columbia River. This is of concern because they can 

desynchronize the reproductive physiology of prespawning adult salmonids and disable the olfactory 

3 
functions of the male salmonid, causing problems with alarm responses, prey capture, and homing 

(Scholz and others, 2000). 

Little is known nationally, and no data are available locally, to describe adverse effects to 

salmonid populations from point and nonpoint source discharges of pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, 

hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants. These contaminants were found in 80 percent of 

the 139 streams tested nationally in 1999–2000 (Kolpin and others, 2002). Of the 95 organic wastewater 

contaminants analyzed, fecal steroids, insect repellants, caffeine, antimicrobial disinfectants, fire 

retardants, and nonionic detergent metabolites were the classes detected commonly. Many of these 

contaminant classes pose developmental or toxic risks to salmonids. 

Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) are man-made chemicals used as flame retardants in 

electronics, building materials, seat cushions, and clothing. Studies of salmon in the Great Lakes, where 

the most intensive research has been conducted to date, show that the average level of PBDE 

contamination is 80 parts per billion (Manchester-Neesvig and others, 2001). Concentrations of PBDEs 

in the upper Columbia River Basin’s mountain whitefish were as high as 72 parts per billion and have 

increased 12-fold over the period 1992–2000, with a doubling period of 1.6 years (Rayne and others, 

2003). PBDEs are similar toxicologically to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which have been 

measured in the tissue of juvenile salmon from the Columbia River Estuary at concentrations exceeding 

adverse-effects thresholds (Johnson and others, 2004). 

Purpose and Scope 

The mission of the Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership is to preserve and enhance the 

water quality of the estuary to support its biological and human communities. The current understanding 

of the interactions and relative effect of toxic contaminants and conventional pollutants on salmonid life 

histories in the Columbia River Estuary is limited. Therefore, the Estuary Partnership, along with the 

USGS and NOAA Fisheries, designed the water-quality monitoring component of the Ecosystem 

Monitoring Project to help determine the role toxics may be playing in salmonid recovery in the estuary. 

The Ecosystem Monitoring Project has two main components—habitat monitoring, which involves field 

surveys and the development of an ecosystem-classification system, and water-quality monitoring, 

comprised of water-chemistry-data collection, juvenile salmonid sampling, and the creation of three 

models related to salmonid uptake, transport, and the ecological risk of toxics. USGS collected waterquality data and NOAA Fisheries sampled juvenile salmonids at co-located sites during the same time 

periods so that these data sets could be integrated to assess the effects of water-quality contaminants on 

salmonid growth, reproduction, and immune-system function. These data are also being used by NOAA 

Fisheries to develop and calibrate their models for the Columbia River Estuary. 

This report describes the water-quality data collected by the USGS from 2004 through 05 as part 

of the Ecosystem Monitoring Project and attempts to quantify the spatial distribution and temporal 

variation of water-quality conditions, including contaminant concentrations, in water and suspended 

sediment in the Columbia River Estuary, and evaluate these water-quality conditions against aquatic-life 

standards and guidelines. The analytes to be measured in this study were selected because they are 

either known to be present in Columbia River salmonids at levels of concern; known to be present in 

salmonids, but not known if present at levels of concern; present in water at concentrations known to 

affect endocrine function in adult salmonids; or not previously measured in water, but if present, are of 

potential concern to salmonid populations. 

4 
Sampling Design and Methods 

This study was designed to characterize water-quality conditions within the Columbia River 

Estuary through the analysis of water-column and suspended-sediment samples and semipermeablemembrane device (SPMD) extracts. Water-column and suspended-sediment samples were collected 

monthly at the Columbia River at Warrendale (river mile [RM] 141, site 1 on fig. 1), the Willamette 

River at Portland (Willamette RM 13, site 2), and the Columbia River at Beaver Army Terminal 

(RM 54, site 4) from May 2004 through April 2005 (table 1). To further characterize water-quality 

conditions, seasonal samplings of the water column, suspended sediment, and SPMDs were performed 

at these three sites as well as the Columbia River near Columbia City (RM 82, site 3) and the Columbia 

River near Point Adams (RM 4, site 5). The first of these seasonal samplings occurred in August 2004 

during low-streamflow conditions, when contaminants from point sources, such as urban and industrial 

areas, and nonpoint sources, such as agricultural runoff, could have a greater impact on water-quality 

conditions and aquatic-life health because there is less water available in the rivers to dilute these 

contaminant inputs. The second seasonal sampling was scheduled to occur during high-streamflow 

conditions to characterize contaminants that may have accumulated in the river as a result of episodic 

storm events during the preceding winter, as well as contaminants that enter the river directly from 

overland runoff. Based on past hydrologic conditions, streamflow is expected to be elevated in the 

January–February time frame for the Willamette River due to winter storms and in the May–June 

snowmelt time period for the Columbia River. The winter of 2004-05, however, was unseasonably dry, 

and the first major precipitation occurred at the end of March 2005. Therefore, the high-streamflow 

seasonal sampling occurred in April 2005 for both the Columbia and Willamette River sites. 

Figure 1. Map of water-quality sampling locations, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

5 
Sample Collection and Laboratory Analysis 

Monthly sampling 

The monthly samples were collected at Columbia River at Warrendale (referred to in this report 

as Warrendale), the Willamette River at Portland (Willamette), and the Columbia River at Beaver Army 

Terminal (Beaver). These sites were chosen not only because of their locations, but also because they 

have historic data sets that make it possible to study changes in water quality over time. The USGS 

operates two programs that aim at characterizing water-quality conditions across the Nation. The 

National Stream-Quality Accounting Network (NASQAN) Program was designed to characterize the 

transport of sediment and contaminants in large-river systems, including the Columbia and Mississippi 

Rivers. The National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program focuses on water quality in more 

than 50 major river basins and aquifers throughout the country. From 1974 through 2000, the 

Warrendale and Willamette sites were NASQAN sites. The Willamette site is a current (1991–present) 

NAWQA site, and the Beaver site is a continuing (1974–present) NASQAN site. 

Samples were collected and analyzed for alkalinity, chlorophyll a and pheophytin A (table 2), 

nutrients (table 3), carbon species (table 4), trace elements (tables 5 and 6), biomass (tables 7 and 8), 

bacteria (table 9), suspended sediment, and a select listing of pesticides (table 10). An expanded listing 

of pesticides and degradation products (table 10), which were too cost prohibitive to analyze on a 

monthly basis, were analyzed quarterly. Samples from Beaver were analyzed for major ions (table 5) on 

alternating months as part of the NASQAN Program. In addition, field parameters (table 2), such as pH, 

dissolved oxygen, air and water temperatures, specific conductance, and turbidity, were measured using 

a multiprobe water-quality monitor that was calibrated in the field. At Beaver, suspended-sediment 

samples were collected monthly for the analysis of organochlorine compounds (DDT, endosulfan, etc.). 

Four times during the year, suspended-sediment samples were also analyzed for trace elements at all 

three sites. 

Samples were collected using standardized depth- and width-integrating techniques and were 

processed and preserved using standard methods described in U.S. Geological Survey (1997–present). 

All samples were processed at the USGS Oregon Water Science Center (OWSC) in Portland, Oregon, 

prior to shipment to laboratories for analysis. Nutrient, chlorophyll a and pheophytin A (USEPA 

method 445.0), carbon species, major ion, and trace element samples were analyzed at the USGS 

National Water-Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in Denver, Colorado, according to methods described in 

Fishman (1993), Brenton and Arnett (1993), Patton and Truit (2000), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (1993, 1997a, 1997b), Patton and Kryskalla (2003), Faires (1993), Garbarino (1999), Garbarino 

and others (2006), Fishman and Friedman (1989), and American Public Health Association (1998). The 

pesticide samples were also analyzed at the NWQL by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry 

(GC/MS) using methods O-1126-95 and O-1126-02 described by Zaugg and others (1995), Lindley and 

others (1996), and Madsen and others (2003). A full listing of all constituents analyzed for, reporting 

limits, and method numbers can be found in Appendix A. Suspended-sediment concentrations were 

determined at the Cascades Volcano Observatory Sediment Laboratory in Vancouver, Washington, 

according to Guy (1969). Biomass samples were sent to Aquatic Analysts in White Salmon, 

Washington, for algal identification and enumeration according to analytical procedures described by 

Jim Sweet (Aquatic Analysts, written commun., May 2004). 

Unlike the depth- and width-integrated samples listed above, bacteria samples were collected as 

grab samples from the left and right banks and the center of flow at each site. The Oregon Department 

of Environmental Quality requested that these samples be collected, and coordinated the efforts for their 

6 
analysis at the Oregon Department of Health’s laboratory in Portland, Oregon. From May through 

October 2004, E.coli bacteria concentrations were determined by method 9213D using membrane 

filtration, while from November 2004 though April 2005, E.coli and total coliform bacteria 

concentrations were determined by method 9223B using a 24-hour Quantitray approach (American 

Public Health Association, 1998). For the analysis of organochlorine compounds on suspended 

sediment, approximately 25 liters of water were collected at Beaver and then filtered through a 142-

millimeter diameter, 0.7-micrometer pore-size glass-fiber filter at the OWSC laboratory. These filters 

containing the suspended sediment from the sample were then chilled and sent to Severn Trent 

Laboratories (STL) in West Sacramento, California, for sonication with hexane and methylene chloride. 

These samples were then analyzed by gas chromatography using method 8081A (US Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1996a). For the analysis of trace elements on suspended sediment, 100–200 liters of 

water were collected (based on the goal of collecting 1 gram or more of sediment mass) and sent to the 

Georgia Sediment Chemistry Laboratory in Atlanta for dewatering by flow-through centrifugation. 

Sample aliquots were then digested with a combination of hydrofluoric acid, perchloric acid, and aqua 

regia (a mixture of hydrochloric and nitric acids) and then analyzed by either atomic absorption 

spectrometry for silver, cadmium, and lead or inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectroscopy 

for all others (Horowitz and others, 2001). 

Seasonal Samplings 

Besides the three sites sampled monthly, two additional sites were added for the low-streamflow 

sampling in August 2004—the Columbia River near Columbia City (Columbia City) and the Columbia 

River near Point Adams (Point Adams). The Columbia City site is downstream of the Multnomah 

Channel and has historic water-quality (Fuhrer and others, 1996) and fish-tissue (Tetra Tech, 1996) 

data. The Point Adams site coincides with a NOAA Fisheries sampling location. Studies conducted by 

NOAA Fisheries have detected organochlorine compounds in salmonids in several locations throughout 

the estuary (Johnson and others, 2004). During the high-flow sampling in April 2005, the three monthly 

sites and Point Adams were sampled; however, Columbia City was not sampled due to limited funding. 

Besides the constituents listed above for the monthly samples, samples were also collected for 

the analysis of an expanded listing of pesticides, degradation products, wastewater compounds

(table 11), pharmaceuticals, and antibiotics (table 12). These samples were collected using depth- and 

width-integrating techniques and were filtered at the OWSC laboratory through a 142-millimeter 

diameter, 0.7-micrometer pore-size glass-fiber filter before they were sent off to the appropriate 

laboratories. The samples collected for additional pesticides were analyzed by high-performance liquid 

chromatography/mass spectrometry by method O-2060-01 at the NWQL (Furlong and others, 2001). 

Additional pesticides and degradation products (method O-2002-01) and wastewater compounds 

(method O-1433-01) were analyzed by GC/MS at the NWQL (Sandstrom and others, 2001; Zaugg and 

others, 2002). The pharmaceuticals were analyzed at the NWQL according to methods described by 

Cahill and others (2004), while the antibiotics were analyzed at the Organic Geochemist Research 

Laboratory in Lawrence, Kansas, according to methods described by Michael Meyer (written commun., 

August 2006). Both the pharmaceutical and antibiotic samples were analyzed by liquid 

chromatography/electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry. 

SPMDs were deployed and suspended-sediment samples were collected during the high-flow 

sampling in April 2005 and during a low-flow sampling in August 2005 at the three fixed sites and 

Point Adams. SPMDs are passive samplers that concentrate trace levels of hydrophobic organic 

contaminants. They are sometimes referred to as "virtual fish" because they can mimic the 

bioconcentration of organic contaminants in the fatty tissues of fish. SPMDs are pieces of low-density 

7 
polyethylene lay-flat tubing with 10-angstrom-diameter cavities that are designed to sample the 

dissolved, or readily bioavailable, organic contaminants present in the water (Huckins and others, 2006). 

They complement traditional water-quality and fish-tissue monitoring because sampling occurs 

continuously during deployment and thus captures the daily range of contaminant concentrations. 

At the time of SPMD deployment, 100 to 120 liters of water were collected using depth- and 

width-integrated sampling techniques, and then filtered through a 142-millimeter diameter, 0.7-

micrometer pore-size glass-fiber filter at the OWSC laboratory in four batches of 25 to 30 liters each. 

These filters containing the suspended sediment from each sample were then chilled and sent to STL for 

analysis. After about 35 days of deployment, the SPMDs were sent to Environmental Sampling 

Technologies in St. Joseph, Missouri, for cleaning and extraction. The dialysates from these SPMDs and 

the suspended-sediment samples were analyzed for four different groups of compounds: organochlorine 

compounds, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), a selected group of 11 PBDE congeners1

 (table 13), 

and all 209 PCB congeners (table 14). The filters analyzed for organochlorine compounds (method 

8081A) and PAHs (method 8270C SIM) went through sonication with hexane and methylene chloride 

followed by analysis by gas chromatography (US Environmental Protection Agency,1996a; 1996b). The 

organochlorine compounds were detected using electron capture detectors, while the PAHs were 

detected by mass spectrometry. The filters analyzed for PBDEs (method 1614) and PCBs (method 

1668) went through a soxhlet extraction with toluene and were analyzed by high-resolution GC/MS 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999; 2006a). 

Reporting of Data 

When an analyte is measured in a laboratory, it is either detected or not detected. When it is not 

detected, it is reported as “censored,” or less than the reporting limit (RL). This does not mean that the 

analyte is not present; it simply means that it could not be detected in this sample with these conditions. 

It may be present, but at a concentration lower than the instrument can measure. Likewise, the presence 

of other material or analytes in the sample may be causing interference, preventing the analysis of the 

analyte in this sample. Or, it may not be present at all. If, however, the analyte is detected, it may be 

reported in several ways. If it is detected at a concentration above the RL, then the value is simply 

reported at the concentration measured. If the analyte is a poor performer (long-term variability or poor 

recovery) in laboratory performance samples or if matrix problems cause interference for that analyte in 

a sample, the measured concentration may be qualified as an estimated (“E”) value. 

The concentration may also be reported as an estimated value if the analyte is detected at a 

concentration below the RL but above the method detection limit (MDL). The MDL is a statistically 

derived minimum concentration that can be measured with a 99% confidence of being greater than zero 

(Childress and others, 1999). Therefore, there is a less than 1% chance that an analyte will be reported 

as a false positive or, in other words, that the concentration was reported but the analyte was not present. 

If the analyte is detected at a concentration below the MDL, then, in this report, the value is shown as an 

“M,” indicating that the presence of the analyte was verified, but that the concentration was too small to 

be quantified. For some analyses, such as the pharmaceuticals and antibiotics, too few data have been 

collected to establish an MDL; therefore concentrations detected below the RL are reported as “M.” The 

 

1 In chemistry, the term congener refers to one of many variants or configurations of a common chemical structure. For 

example, PBDEs and PCBs occur in 209 different forms, or congeners. Each congener has two or more bromine or chlorine 

atoms located at specific sites on the PBDE or PCB molecule, respectively. 

8 
NWQL reevaluates the RL and MDL values every year and adjusts them as needed based on the 

laboratory performance data. Because of these adjustments, there may be multiple RLs shown for a 

given analyte (appendix table A4). 

The data from STL for the suspended-sediment samples and SPMD extracts were reported as the 

mass of the given analyte detected in the sample. For the suspended-sediment samples, the mass of a 

given compound was divided by the number of liters filtered to obtain a concentration of the analyte in 

the water column. The concentration of the analyte in water (micrograms per liter) was then divided by 

the concentration of suspended sediment in the water column (milligrams per liter) and the appropriate 

conversion factors were applied to achieve the concentration of the analyte on suspended sediment 

(micrograms per gram) for the sample. RLs to be used for this study were derived by doubling either the 

highest value reported in a laboratory blank or trip blank, or the MDL supplied by STL if there were no 

detections for that analyte in any blanks (tables A8 and A9). The SPMD data will be reported and 

interpreted in a future report. 

Quality Assurance 

Quality assurance is the analysis of quality-control (QC) data as a means to assess potential 

contamination and variability associated with sampling and laboratory techniques. QC samples for this 

study included field and trip blanks, replicate environmental samples, field-matrix spikes, surrogates, 

and a standard-reference sample, as well as internal laboratory QC data. The number and types of QC 

samples were distributed evenly throughout the sampling period, with more QC samples directed 

towards analyses that are not as well established for these sites, like chlorophyll and bacteria (table 15). 

The results of all of these QC samples (Appendix B) were used to assess the environmental data, and 

other data users are urged to do the same. 

Types of Quality-Control Samples Used 

Field blanks are performed by passing a volume of contaminant-free water (organic blank water 

[OBW], deionized distilled water, or inorganic blank water, depending upon the analyses being 

performed) through all sampling and processing equipment that an environmental sample would 

contact. The results of field blanks can be used to assess contamination issues associated with cleaning, 

sampling, processing, or transporting the sample. The field blanks prepared for the analysis of organic 

compounds on suspended sediment were performed slightly differently. The water was filtered directly 

from the original OBW bottle to minimize some of the sources of contamination, and test primarily the 

analytical procedure. In April 2005, 4 liters of OBW were filtered for each grouping of compounds and 

one filter was sent in for each sample. It was realized that the reporting limits for this blank sample 

would not be similar to the environmental sample because the mass of compound would be divided by 

only 4 liters, whereas the environmental samples usually involved 25 to 30 liters of water being filtered. 

Therefore, in August 2005, 24 liters of OBW were filtered onto 6 filters for each compound grouping in 

an effort to more directly mimic the actual processing procedures. 

Replicate environmental samples test for precision, which is a measure of the variability between 

two or more samples. Replicate samples in this study were collected by splitting the sample collected 

during processing into two samples to be providing to the analyzing laboratory, rather than by collecting 

two or more concurrent samples in the field. These replicate samples measure the variability of the 

processing techniques and the laboratory precision, but are not designed to measure field-sampling 

variability. One exception to this is for the analysis of pharmaceuticals in filtered water, where limited 

funding was directed at field-matrix-spike samples instead. 

9 
Field-matrix spikes were performed by adding a known amount of a spike solution with a known 

concentration to an environmental replicate sample. Field spikes were performed for all analyses for 

which spiking solutions were readily available (all pesticide and wastewater-compound analyses in 

filtered water). Spike recoveries were calculated and used to identify which compounds consistently 

under or over report the actual concentrations or which compounds were variable in their recoveries. 

Internal lab spikes were also performed for all analyses. These results help the lab determine how the 

different methods are performing and were used when needed to examine the data in this study. 

Surrogate compounds are expected to behave similarly to the target analytes and are used to 

monitor the method’s performance for the target analytes they represent. Surrogate compounds are 

added to the sample at the lab and are analyzed as part of the list of analytes. The NWQL uses the 

surrogate recoveries to assess problems associated with individual samples or sets of samples, but also 

uses long-term surrogate recoveries to assess long-term analytical precision. 

One standard-reference sample for the analysis of nutrients in water was prepared during this 

study. A sample of known nutrient concentrations (analyzed multiple times to determine a most 

probable value and the expected range) was sent to NWQL along with the routine environmental 

samples. Standard reference samples do not come in contact with sampling or processing equipment; 

therefore, the results are used to assess analytical accuracy only. 

Results of Quality-Control Data 

Contamination of samples is not considered a problem for this study. There were no detections 

for chlorophyll a, pesticides, bacteria, biomass, or antibiotics in any of the field blanks. There were but a 

few analytes with detections in the field blanks (appendix table B1), and they were all at levels that did 

not warrant concern with respect to the environmental detections. Two wastewater compounds, phenol 

and benzophenone, have been removed from consideration for this study because of concern over 

detections in the blanks (Zaugg and Leiker, 2006). Phenol is a chronic contaminant at NWQL, and the 

majority of the field blanks for this study also had detections at a significant level. Benzophenone is a 

compound with known field contamination consistency, and the field blanks for this study confirmed 

this. 

When comparing differences in concentrations from different sites or different times, the 

analytical and environmental variability must be considered. Examining environmental replicate data 

can help to quantify this variability. Relative percent difference (RPD) values, which provide a measure 

of how well the concentrations from two samples agree, were calculated for all environmental replicate 

data pairs. The RPD is calculated as the absolute difference between two values, normalized to the 

average value, and expressed as a percentage: 

( )

( ) 100

2/21

21

×

+

− ≡ Value ValueValue Value RPD (1) 

An RPD close to zero shows good agreement between the sample results. 

Environmental replicate results indicate generally good agreement for most compound 

concentrations (appendix tables B2–B6). The RPDs for the nutrient, carbon, major ion, and trace 

element analyses were generally low, usually less than 10 percent. There was one replicate pair of 

samples for trace-element analysis from Warrendale in November 2004 that had some higher RPDs, 

particularly for aluminum, copper, and zinc. After determining the error bars for each questionable 

concentration by using the NWQL’s internal QC data, it was found that the replicate results were within 

acceptable agreement. This example portrays the variability that can be associated with the trace10 
element analyses. The suspended-sediment, chlorophyll a, pheophytin A, and pesticide and degradation 

product analyses generally had higher and more variable RPDs. This indicates that there is more 

inherent variability occurring in the analytical process for these compounds. 

Field-matrix spike recoveries for the pesticides, degradation products, and wastewater 

compounds were calculated to evaluate the effectiveness and variability of the analyses. Most 

compounds had spike recoveries within the desired range of 60 to 140 percent. When examining only 

analytes that were detected in this study (appendix table B7), the majority of the analytes had recoveries 

distributed closely around 100 percent. A few analytes, however, had lower recoveries—the sulfonyl 

urea herbicide metsulfuron methyl; the degradation products 1-naphthol, CIAT, and OIET; and the 

known endocrine disruptor, bisphenol A. Most of these analytes have shown poor recoveries in the 

internal lab spikes as well. 

The standard-reference sample that was prepared at the Warrendale site in April 2005 for the 

analysis of low-level nutrient concentrations in water agrees very well with the established 

concentrations for the reference material (appendix table B8). 

Comparison of Data to Water-Quality Standards 

Water-quality data collected during this study were screened against USEPA ambient waterquality criteria for the protection of aquatic life and human health (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2006b) and USEPA primary drinking-water regulations and human-health advisories (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2004) to identify compounds that may require further study. All 

USEPA ambient water-quality criteria are nonenforceable benchmarks that provide the basis for Oregon 

and Washington State standards. None of the USEPA benchmarks were exceeded in either the 

Columbia or Willamette Rivers at locations measured in this study. It is important to note, however, that 

the majority of compounds measured in this study do not have water-quality standards established. Just 

because a compound is not addressed by a standard does not mean that its presence or measured 

concentrations are not of concern. 

Water-quality data collected in this study cannot be evaluated against most standards for the 

States of Oregon (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2004) and Washington (Washington 

State Department of Ecology, 2003) because most standards are not based on instantaneous data, but 

rather are based on multiday average concentrations. These standards can, however, be used as 

benchmarks for comparison. The State of Oregon has total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) established 

for the Columbia River for dioxin and total dissolved gas, neither of which were measured in this study. 

The State of Oregon standards for Escherichia coli bacteria and total dissolved solids were not 

exceeded. The Washington Administrative Code standards for bacteria are based on fecal coliform 

bacteria, which were not measured as a part of this study, and the standards for turbidity were not 

exceeded. The dissolved oxygen and pH standards for both Oregon and Washington have many 

conditions built into them—designated use (aquatic life, recreation, water supply), spawning area and 

type of aquatic life present—making it difficult to determine if exceedances were measured or not. 

Discussion of Selected Results 

Although concentrations of arsenic, chromium, copper, and lead (table 5) were not present at 

levels of concern with regards to aquatic-life toxicity, sublethal effects and signs of endocrine disruption 

have been linked to low levels of these compounds (Kaltreider and others, 2001; Orazio, 2004). While 

chromium was only detected in the Willamette River, arsenic was found at higher concentrations in the 

11 
Columbia River than in the Willamette River. The median copper concentration from each of the three 

monthly sites was 1.0 microgram per liter, a level shown to have inhibitory effects on juvenile coho 

salmon (Baldwin and others, 2003). Concentrations of most trace elements were elevated near Point 

Adams when compared to the concentrations further upstream in the main stem and in the Willamette 

River. 

Of the 173 pesticides and degradation products analyzed, 29 were detected at least once, 

oftentimes with 2 or more compounds occurring in a sample together (table 10). Fourteen compounds 

were detected in the Columbia River, 25 in the Willamette River. There were also many more 

occurrences of these compounds in the Willamette River. The triazine herbicides, atrazine and simazine, 

were the most frequently detected pesticides, most often in the Willamette River. 

Eight of the 54 wastewater compounds analyzed were detected at least once, usually at trace 

levels. The known endocrine disruptor, bisphenol A, was detected in both the Columbia and Willamette 

Rivers, while the suspected endocrine disruptor, tri(2-chloroethyl)phosphate, was detected only in the 

Willamette River. 

Of the 24 pharmaceuticals analyzed, acetaminophen, a common analgesic, and 

diphenhydramine, a widely used antihistamine, were detected in the Columbia River (table 12). Three of 

the 49 antibiotics and degradation products analyzed were detected. Anhydroerythromycin, a 

degradation product of the widely used antibiotic erythromycin, was detected at all four sites where it 

was measured in August 2004 during low-flow conditions, but at none of the sites in April 2005 during 

high-flow conditions. Likewise, trimethoprim, an antibiotic used both for people and in aquaculture, 

was found at most sites in August but at only one site in April. 

Even though organochlorine compounds were monitored monthly on suspended sediment at 

Beaver from May 2004 to April 2005, p,p’-DDT was detected on suspended sediment only once in 

October 2004 at 0.02 micrograms per gram. No other organochlorine compounds were detected. During 

the seasonal samplings of suspended sediment at all four sites, no organochlorine compounds or PAHs 

were detected. Of the 11 PBDE congeners analyzed, all were detected on suspended sediment, usually 

in trace amounts (table 13). The only quantifiable concentrations were measured near Point Adams. Of 

the 209 PCB congeners analyzed, 102 were detected at some time on suspended sediment at the four 

sites, usually in trace amounts (table 14). A third of these detections were quantifiable at the Willamette 

River during the April sampling. There were fewer PCB detections during the August low-flow 

sampling than during the April high-flow sampling. 

This report presents the water-quality data collected by USGS from 2004–2005, and 

complements the juvenile-salmonid data collected by NOAA Fisheries as part of the Lower Columbia 

River Estuary Partnership’s Ecosystem Monitoring Project. NOAA Fisheries also created three models 

related to salmonid uptake, transport, and the ecological risk of toxics, and calibrated these models 

based on the water-quality and salmonid data sets. The synthesis of these data sets and models will be 

presented in a future report. The SPMD data, as well as a discussion of their relevance and a comparison 

to other SPMD and aquatic-life data sets, will also be presented in a future report. 

12 
References Cited 

American Public Health Association, 1998, Standard methods for the examination of water and 

wastewater (20th ed.): Washington, D.C., American Public Health Association, American Water 

Works Association, and Water Environment Federation. 

Baldwin, D.H., Sandahl, J.F., Labenia, J.S., and Scholz, N.L., 2003, Sublethal effects of copper on coho 

salmon—Impacts on nonoverlapping receptor pathways in the peripheral olfactory nervous system: 

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 22, no. 10, p. 2266–2274. 

Bortleson, G.C., Cox, S.E., Munn, M.D., Schumaker, R.J., Block, E.K., Bucy, L.R, Cornelis, S.B., 

1994, Sediment quality assessment of Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake and the upstream reach of the 

Columbia River, Washington, 1992: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94–315, 130 p. 

Brenton, R.W., and Arnett, T.L., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National 

Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of dissolved organic carbon by UV-promoted persulfate 

oxidation and infrared spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92–480, 12 p. 

Cahill, J.D., Furlong, E.T., Burkhardt, M.R. Kolpin, D.W., and Anderson, L.G., 2004, Determination of 

pharmaceutical compounds in surface- and ground-water samples by solid-phase extraction and highperformance liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: Journal of 

Chromatography A, v. 1041, p. 171-180. 

Childress, Carolyn J. Oblinger, Foreman, William T., Connor, Brooke F., Maloney, Thomas J., 1999, 

New reporting procedures based on long-term method detection levels and some considerations for 

interpretations of water-quality data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–193, 19 p. 

Clark, G.M., Maret, T.R., Rupert, M.G., Maupin, M.A., Low, W.H., Ott, D.S., 1998, Water quality in 

the Upper Snake River Basin, Idaho and Wyoming, 1992–95: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1160, 

http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/circ1160. 

Faires, L.M., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of metals in water by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92–634, 28 p. 

Fishman, M.J., ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 93–125, 217 p. 

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., 1989, Methods for determination of inorganic substances in water 

and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 5, 

chap. A1, 545 p. 

Fuhrer, G.J., Morace, J.L., Johnson, H.M., Rinella, J.R., Ebbert, J.C., Embrey, S.S., Waite, I.R., 

Carpenter, K.D., Wise, D.R., and Hughes, C.A., 2004, Water quality in the Yakima River Basin, 

Washington, 1999–2000: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1237, 34 p. 

Fuhrer, G.J., Tanner, D.Q., Morace, J.L., McKenzie, S.W., and Skach, K.A., 1996, Water quality of the 

Lower Columbia River basin—Analysis of current and historical water-quality data through 1994: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95–4294, 157 p. 

Furlong, E.T., Anderson, B.D., Werner, S.L., Soliven, P.P., Coffey, L.J., and Burkhardt, M.R., 2001, 

Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

Determination of pesticides in water by graphitized carbon-based solid-phase extraction and highperformance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 01-4134, 73 p. 

13 
Garbarino, J.R., 1999, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of dissolved arsenic, boron, lithium, selenium, strontium, thallium, and 

vanadium using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 99–093, 31 p. 

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

sediment and soil samples using collision/reaction cell inductively coupled plasma-mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 5, sec. B, chap.1, 88 p. 

Guy, H.P., 1969, Laboratory theory and methods for sediment analysis: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 5, chap. C1, 58 p. 

Henny, C.J., Kaiser, J.L., Grove, R.A., Bentley, V.R., and Elliott, J.E., 2003, Biomagnification factors 

(fish to Osprey eggs from Willamette River, Oregon, USA) for PCDDs, PCDFs, PCBs, and OC 

pesticides: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, v. 84, no. 3, p. 275–315. 

Horowitz, A.J., Elrick, K.A., and Smith, J.J., 1999, Annual suspended sediment and trace element fluxes 

in the Mississippi, Columbia, Colorado, and Rio Grande drainage basins: Hydrological processes, v. 

15, p. 1169–1207. 

Horowitz, A.J., Elrick, K.A., and Smith, J.J., 2001, Estimating suspended sediment and trace element 

fluxes in large river basins—Methodological considerations as applied to the NASQAN programme: 

Hydrological Processes, v. 15, p. 1107–1132. 

Huckins, J.N, Petty, J.D., and Booij, K., 2006, Monitors of organic chemicals in the environment—

Semipermeable membrane devices: New York, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 223 p. 

Johnson, L.L., Ylitalo, G.M., Brown, D., Moran, P., Anulacion, B., Boylen, D., Arkoosh, M., Kagley, 

A., and Collier, T.K., 2004, Contaminant exposure in outmigrant juvenile salmon from the Lower 

Columbia Estuary: Seattle, Washington, Northwest Fisheries Science Center Technical Report 

prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. 

Kaltreider, R.C., Davis, A.M., Lariviere, J.P., and Hamilton, J.W., 2001, Arsenic alters the function of 

the glucocorticoid receptor as a transcription factor: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 109, no. 3, 

p. 245–251. 

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., Buxton, H.T., 

2002, Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. Streams, 1999–

2000—A national reconnaissance: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, p. 1202–1211. 

Lindley, C.E., Stewart, J.T., and Sandstrom, M.W., 1996, Determination of low concentrations of 

acetochlor in water by automated solid-phase extraction and gas chromatography with mass selective 

detection: Journal of AOAC International, v. 79, no. 4, p. 962–966. 

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, 1999, Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, 

Volume 1 of Lower Columbia River estuary program information management strategy: Portland, 

Oregon, Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership, http://www.lcrep.org/mgmt_complete_plan.htm, 

accessed August 31, 2006. 

Madsen, J.E., Sandstrom, M.W., and Zaugg, S.D., 2003, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—A method supplement for the determination of fipronil 

and degradates in water by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 02–462, 11 p. 

Manchester-Neesvig, J.B., Valters, K, and Sonzogni, W.C., 2001, Comparison of polybrominated 

diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in Lake Michigan Salmonids: 

Environmental Science and Technology, v. 35, p. 1072–1077. 

14 
McCarthy, K.A., and Gale, R.W., 1999, Investigation of the distribution of organochlorine and 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds in the Lower Columbia River using semipermeable 

membrane devices: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4051, 136 p. 

Orazio, C., 2004, Summary of endocrine disruption research in contaminant biology program (BRD): 

U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, 

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/endocrine/summary.htm, accessed August 31, 2006. 

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2004, Water quality standards—Beneficial uses, 

policies, and criteria for Oregon: Oregon Administrative Code, chap. 340, division 041, last modified 

5/20/2004, 91 p. 

Patton, C.J., and Kryskalla, J.R., 2003, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National 

Water Quality Laboratory—Evaluation of alkaline persulfate digestion as an alternative to Kjeldahl 

digestion for determination of total and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus in water: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4174, 33 p. 

Patton, C.J., and Truitt, E.P., 2000, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water 

Quality Laboratory—Determination of ammonium plus organic nitrogen by a Kjeldahl digestion 

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

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

Rayne, S., Ikonomou, M.G., and Antcliffe, B., 2003, Rapidly increasing polybrominated diphenyl ether 

concentrations in the Columbia River system from 1992 to 2000: Environmental Science and 

Technology, v. 37, p. 2847–2854. 

Sandstrom, M.W., Stroppel, M.E., Foreman, W.T., and Schroeder, M.P., 2001, Methods of analysis by 

the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of moderate-use 

pesticides and selected degradates in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction and gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

01–4098, 70 p. 

Scholz, N.L., Truelove, N.K., French, B.L., Berejikian, B.A., Quinn, T.P., Casillas, E., Collier, T.K., 

2000, Diazinon disrupts antipredator and homing behaviors in Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 

tshawytsha): Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 57, p. 1911–1918. 

Tetra Tech, Inc., 1996, Lower Columbia River Bi-State Program—The health of the river, 1990–1996: 

Redmond, Washington, Integrated Technical Report 0253–01, prepared for Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality and Washington Department of Ecology. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006, Bradford Island Cleanup, multiple documents available at 

http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/issues/bradford/documents.asp, accessed August 17, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993, Methods for the determination of inorganic substances in 

environmental samples: Office of Research and Development, EPA 600/R-93-100 (method 365.1). 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996a, Method 8081a—Organochlorine pesticides by gas 

chromatography: Office of Water, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/pdfs/8081a.pdf, 

accessed August 30, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996b, Method 8270—Semivolatile organic compounds by gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS): Office of Water, 

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/pdfs/8270c.pdf, accessed August 30, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997a, Method 440.0—Determination of carbon and nitrogen 

in sediments and particulates of estuarine/coastal waters using elemental analysis, revision 1.4: Office 

of Research and Development, http://www.epa.gov/microbes/m440_0.pdf, accessed August 30, 2006. 

15 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997b, Method 445.0—In vitro determination of chlorophyll a

and pheophytin a in marine and freshwater algae by fluorescence, revision 1.2: Office of Research 

and Development, http://www.epa.gov/microbes/m445_0.pdf, accessed August 30, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Method 1668, Revision A—Chlorinated biphenyl 

congeners in water, soil, sediment, and tissue by HRGC/HRMS: Office of Water, EPA 821/R-00-002, 

http://www.epa.gov/Region3/1668a.pdf, accessed August 30, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, 2004 Edition of the drinking water standards and health 

advisories: Office of Water, EPA 822/R-04-005, 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/drinking/dwstandards.pdf, accessed August 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a, CFR Title 40—Protection of Environment: 

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/cfr40.htm, accessed August 30, 2006. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006b, National recommended water quality criteria: Office of 

Water, http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nrwqc-2006.pdf, accessed August 31, 2006. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1997 to present, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1–A9, 2 v., 

variously paged [also available at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A, accessed August 25, 2006]. 

Washington State Department of Ecology, 2003, Water quality standards for surface water of the State 

of Washington: Olympia, Washington State Administrative Code, chap. 173–201A WAC, amended 

July 1, 2003, 101 p. 

Zaugg, S.D, and Leiker, T.J., 2006, Review of method performance and improvements for determining 

wastewater compounds (Schedule 1433): U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory 

Technical Memorandum 2006.01, 25 p. http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/tech_memos/nwql.2006-01.html, 

accessed August 31, 2006. 

Zaugg, S.D., Sandstrom, M.W., Smith, S.G., and Fehlberg, K.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of pesticides in water by C-18 

solid-phase extraction and capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with selected-ion 

monitoring: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 181, 60 p. 

Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., and Burkhardt, M.R., 2002, Methods of 

analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Laboratory—Determination of 

wastewater compounds by polystyrene-divinylbenzene solid-phase extraction and capillary-column 

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 01–4186, 37 p. 

16 
Appendix A. Methods, Reporting Limits, and Analyte Information. 

(Click on link to open table.) 

Table A1. Reporting limits and methods for the carbon and nutrient species analyzed, Columbia River 

Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A2. Reporting limits and methods for the major ions, metals, and trace elements analyzed in filtered 

water, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A3. Reporting limits for the trace elements analyzed on suspended sediment, Columbia River 

Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A4. Reporting limits, sampling frequency, use, and class for pesticides and degradation products 

analyzed in filtered water, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A5. Reporting limits and possible uses or sources of wastewater compounds analyzed in filtered 

water, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A6. Reporting limits, drug name, and class for pharmaceuticals analyzed in filtered water, 

Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A7. Reporting limits for antibiotic compounds analyzed in filtered water, Columbia River Estuary, 

2004–05 

Table A8. Derived reporting limits for organochlorine compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and 

polybrominated diphenyl ethers analyzed on suspended sediment, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table A9. Derived reporting limits for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) analyzed on suspended sediment, 

Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

17 
Appendix B. Quality-Assurance Data 

(Click on link to open table.) 

Table B1. Summary of field-blank detections, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B2. Environmental replicate results for suspended-sediment, chlorophyll a, and pheophytin A 

analyses, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B3. Environmental replicate results for carbon analyses, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B4. Environmental replicate results for nutrient analyses, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B5. Environmental replicate results for major ion, metal, and trace-element analyses, Columbia 

River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B6. Environmental replicate results for pesticides, wastewater compounds, antibiotics, and 

degradation products, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B7. Field-matrix spike recoveries for detected pesticides and degradation products and 

wastewater compounds, Columbia River Estuary, 2004–05 

Table B8. Standard-reference sample prepared for low-level nutrient analyses, Columbia River Estuary, 

2004–05 

18