Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature:

Project No.: 0172.09.005.410 Page 1 of 1

Project Name: 2012 Final Cat Rev CBI?

Yes

No

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

Incoming

Outgoing

Date: 02/28/12 Time: 9:45 am

pm

Company Name: EPA Region 10 ERG Staff Name: Kimberly Landick

Contact Name: Brian Nickel Contact Phone Number: (206) 553-6251

General Subject: 2009 High Volume Dioxin Sampling at Pulp Mills

TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

On February 28, 2012 at 9:45 am I called Patty McGrath (206-553-0979) and left a message. 

On March 16, 2012 at 1pm I called Mike Cox (206-553-1597, Environmental Assessment Section) and left a 

message.

On March 23, 2012 I called Mike Cox and left a message. 

On April 4, 2012 I called Mike Cox and left a message, his recording said he would be out until April 9th.

On April 9, Mike Cox returned my call and stated that he was not the correct person to ask about high volume 

sampling. He told me to contact Mike Lidgard at 206-553-1755; he is the head of the NPDES permit division 

for Region 10. At 1:15pm I called Mike Lidgard and left a message.

On April 10, Brian Nickel (206-553-6251) returned my call and said that Mike Lidgard had passed my request 

on to him. He stated that the high volume sampling was done mostly to negate concerns about endangered 

species and fish consumption in tribal populations. There was the need to obtain more sensitive monitoring of 

dioxin/furans so the high volume sampling was conducted. He stated that a canister filter was used but that they 

tested many different filters before finding one that worked. A high volume of wastewater would be pumped 

with a positive displacement pump and the results would be analyzed on a filter. No real concerns resulted from 

this sampling and a new permit limit has not been set. The sampling was not done to determine compliance so it 

was not NPDES approved. Therefore, the data could not be used to set a new permit limit, the permit limits are 

set using water quality criteria (based on a TMDL for the watershed and further reduced based on the State of 

Washington requirements). The facility is right on the border of Idaho and Washington (400 ft upstream of WA) 

so they have to abide by WA requirements as well. A new permit has not been reissued as a result of the 

sampling. Mr. Nickel stated that he would double check his files and send me copies of the reports in the next 

few weeks. Please see the attached email correspondence.
Email Correspondence with Brian Nickel, EPA Region 10

From: Kimberly Landick

To: Brian Nickel

Date: 4/10/12 2:53 PM

Subject: Re: Fw: Clearwater Paper (formerly Potlatch) high-volume effluent sampling

Hi Brian,

Thank you for sending me this information. I will look over it and let you know if I have any 

further questions.

Thanks again,

Kimberly

----------------------------------------

Kimberly D. Landick

Environmental Engineer

Eastern Research Group, Inc. 

14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200

Chantilly, VA 20151

kimberly.landick@erg.com

Phone: 703-633-1119

From: Brian Nickel (Nickel.Brian@epamail.epa.gov)

To: Landick, Kimberly

Date: 4/10/12 12:58PM

Subject: Fw: Clearwater Paper (formerly Potlatch) high-volume effluent sampling

Kimberly: 

I'm resending this message because I had mistyped your e-mail address.

Thanks,

Brian Nickel, E.I.T.

Environmental Engineer

US EPA Region 10 | Office of Water and Watersheds | NPDES Permits Unit

Voice: 206-553-6251 | Toll Free: 800-424-4372 ext. 6251 | Fax: 206-553-0165

Nickel.Brian@epa.gov

http://epa.gov/r10earth/waterpermits.htm

Please conserve natural resources by not printing this message.

----- Forwarded by Brian Nickel/R10/USEPA/US on 04/10/2012 09:52 AM -----

From: Brian Nickel/R10/USEPA/US

To: kimberly.landic@erg.com
Date: 04/10/2012 09:17 AM

Subject: Clearwater Paper (formerly Potlatch) high-volume effluent sampling

Kimberly: 

As a follow-up to our phone conversation this morning, I had the high-volume sampling reports 

as PDFs in my own files. They are attached.

Thanks,

Brian Nickel, E.I.T.

Environmental Engineer

US EPA Region 10 | Office of Water and Watersheds | NPDES Permits Unit

Voice: 206-553-6251 | Toll Free: 800-424-4372 ext. 6251 | Fax: 206-553-0165

Nickel.Brian@epa.gov

http://epa.gov/r10earth/waterpermits.htm

Please conserve natural resources by not printing this message.

(See attached file: 2006-01-10 Potlatch ESA Surface Water Report.pdf)(See attached file: 

Potlatch 2006 ESA Monitoring Report.pdf)(See attached file: 2008-01-10 2007 High Volume 

Sampling Report.pdf)
Notes from Region 10 Pulp & Paper Data – High Volume Sampling

May 2, 2012

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring

*Can add actual dioxin results if necessary*

The Potlatch Corporation – Lewiston Facility (now called Clearwater Paper) is located just over 

the Washington border in Lewiston, Idaho. 

• NPDES ID: ID00001163

• Discharges treated wastewater via outfall 001 to the Snake River

• Flow is approximately 34 MGD (as of 2005) and the facility’s NPDES ID was re-issued 

on May 1, 2005

• “Because EPA’s re-issuance of the Facility’s NPDES permit constituted a discretionary 

action that could beneficially or adversely affect threatened and endangered species or 

their critical habitat in the vicinity of the discharge, EPA was required to consult with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service 

(NOAA Fisheries) (collectively referred to as “the Services”) as specified in the 

Endangered Species Act.” By consulting with the Services, it was determined that the 

reissuance of the permit is not likely to jeopardize the surrounding waterways. However, 

a monitoring and assessment plan was required. 

• The Tier 1 study is the first step in the monitoring and assessment plan

January 2006 Report – considers 2005 sampling results

• Purpose: to present the results of the Tier 1 monitoring and assessment plan that 

evaluated the effluent and natural waters above and below the Facility. Trace organic 

compounds and dioxin/furans were the pollutants principally addressed and a specialized 

sampling technique known as High Volume Sampling was performed.

• Sampling was conducted from 8/24/05 to 8/31/05 and from 11/13/05 to 11/19/05 

(November sampling results presented in the 2007 report).

• See dioxin results in Figure 1 & 2 below.

• Conclusions: the results of the study revealed no indications that the Facility’s effluent 

has any influence on downstream parameter measurements. “With a few exceptions, all 

measurements complied with toxicity benchmarks and applicable water quality standards. 

The few exceptions occurred at reference locations or at the farthest downstream 

sampling location from the facility.” 
Figure 1: Dioxins in Effluent, 2005

Figure 2: Furans in Effluent, 2005

January 2007 Report – considers 2006 sampling results

• Samples conducted on November 2005, March 2006, June 2006 and September 2006.

• “As with 2005, 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any sample on any date during the 

study.
• Conclusions: the results of the study revealed no indications that the Facility’s effluent 

has any influence on downstream parameter measurements. 

January 2008 Report – considers 2007 sampling results

• Samples conducted in March and June 2007.

• “In conclusion, the results of sampling and analysis upstream and downstream of the 

Facility are consistent with the finding in EPA’s Biological Evaluation and the Services’ 

Biological Opinions that the EPA’s re-issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit is not likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River 

spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon, and Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in 

the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for Snake River 

spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon and Snake River sockeye salmon.”

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and

NPDES Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Lewiston Facility 

Submitted to: 

Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Lewiston, Idaho 

Submitted by: 

AMEC Earth & Environmental

Westford, Massachusetts

January 2007 

7 7050 0900
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1

2.0 FIELD SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS...........................................................3

2.1 FIELD SAMPLING.......................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study Sampling Methods.......................3

2.1.2 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study Sampling Methods.....................4

3.0 DATA HANDLING METHODS ............................................................................................7

3.1 FIELD DATA................................................................................................................7

3.2 ANALYTICAL DATA....................................................................................................7

4.0 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................8

4.1 WEEKLY RECEIVING WATER MONITORING STUDY.............................................8

4.1.1 Field-Measured Parameters ............................................................................8

4.1.1.1 Water Velocity...................................................................................8

4.1.1.2 pH .....................................................................................................9

4.1.1.3 Dissolved Oxygen.............................................................................9

4.1.1.4 Water Temperature...........................................................................9

4.1.2 Conventional Parameters ..............................................................................10

4.1.2.1 Total Suspended Solids..................................................................10

4.1.2.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand.........................................................10

4.1.2.3 Nutrients .........................................................................................11

4.1.2.4 Ammonia Nitrogen ..........................................................................11

4.1.2.5 Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen ....................................................................11

4.1.2.6 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ...................................................................12

4.1.2.7 Total Phosphorus............................................................................12

4.1.2.8 Orthophosphate Phosphorus..........................................................12

4.1.2.9 2,3,7,8-TCDD..................................................................................13

4.1.2.10 2,3,7,8-TCDF ..................................................................................13

4.2 QUARTERLY SURFACE WATER AND EFFLUENT MONITORING STUDY...........13

4.2.1 Resin Acids....................................................................................................13

4.2.2 Phytosterols...................................................................................................15

4.2.3 Chlorophenolics.............................................................................................17

4.2.4 Chloroform.....................................................................................................18

4.2.5 Dissolved and Total Organic Carbon.............................................................19

4.2.6 Dioxin Congeners ..........................................................................................19

4.2.7 Furan Congeners...........................................................................................20

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................23

REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................24

Page i 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1 – Locations for Sediment, Benthic Community, and Receiving Water Samples 

Weekly Results

Figure 2 – Mean Water Velocity 

Figure 3 – Mean Water pH 

Figure 4 – Mean Water Dissolved Oxygen 

Figure 5 – Mean Water Temperature 

Figure 6a – Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 6b – Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 7a – Ammonia Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 7b – Ammonia Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 8a – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 8b – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 9a – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 9b – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 10a – Total Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 10b – Total Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 11a – Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 11b – Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Quarterly Results

Figure 12 – Quarterly Resin Acids in Receiving Water 

Figure 13 – Quarterly Resin Acids in Effluent 

Figure 14 – Quarterly Phytosterols in Receiving Water 

Figure 15 – Quarterly Phytosterols in Effluent 

Figure 16 – Quarterly Chlorophenols in Receiving Water 

Figure 17 – Quarterly Chlorophenols in Effluent

Figure 18 – Quarterly Chloroform Concentrations 

Figure 19 – Quarterly Physical Parameters in Receiving Water 

Figure 20 – Quarterly Dioxins in Receiving Water 

Figure 21 – Quarterly Dioxins in Effluent 

Figure 22 – Quarterly Furans in Receiving Water 

Figure 23 – Quarterly Furans in Effluent 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1 – Sample Locations 

Table 2 – Mean Velocity Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 3 – Mean pH Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 4 – Mean Water Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Results from Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring Study 

Table 5 – Mean Temperature Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Page ii
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Table 6 – Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring 

Study 

Table 7 – Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) Results from Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring Study 

Table 8 – Ammonia Nitrogen Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 9 – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 10 – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 11 – Total Phosphorus Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 12 – Orthophosphate Phosphorus Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring 

Study 

Table 13 – 2,3,7,8-TCDD Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 14 – 2,3,7,8-TCDF Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 15 – Resin Acid, Chloroform, Phytosterol and Physical Parameter Results from the 

Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study: November 2005 

Table 16 – Resin Acid, Chloroform, Phytosterol and Physical Parameter Results from the 

Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study: March 2006 

Table 17 – Resin Acid, Chloroform, Phytosterol and Physical Parameter Results from the 

Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study: June 2006 

Table 18 – Resin Acid, Chloroform, Phytosterol and Physical Parameter Results from the 

Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study: September 2006 

Table 19 – Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring 

Study: November 2005 

Table 20 – Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring 

Study: March 2006 

Table 21 – Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring 

Study: June 2006 

Table 22 – Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring 

Study: September 2006 

Table 23 – Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Monitoring Study: November 2005 

Table 24 – Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Monitoring Study: March 2006 

Table 25 – Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Monitoring Study: June 2006 

Table 26 – Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Monitoring Study: September 2006 

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Field Data Reports 

Appendix 2 – Analytical Laboratory Reports 

Appendix 3 – Validation Reports 

Page iii 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The Potlatch Forest Products Corporation - Lewiston Facility (“the Facility”) is owned and 

operated by Potlatch Forest Products Corporation (“Potlatch”), which has its headquarters in 

Spokane, Washington. The Facility is located approximately one mile east of the Clearwater 

Memorial Bridge in Lewiston, Idaho. It is situated on the south bank of the Clearwater River 

approximately three miles east of the confluence of the Clearwater and Snake River (Figure 1). 

The Facility discharges treated wastewater via a submerged 48 inch diameter, 400 foot long 

multiport diffuser located in the confluence. The diffuser is referred to as Outfall 001 (“the

Outfall”). EPA has recently reissued Potlatch’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) Permit No. ID00001163, authorizing discharge from the Outfall, to the Snake

River and seeps from the secondary treatment pond to the Clearwater River. The Facility 

discharges approximately 34 million gallons a day of treated effluent from the Outfall into the 

Snake River under NPDES permit No. ID00001163, which was re-issued by EPA on May 1,

2005. 

Because EPA’s re-issuance of the Facility’s NPDES permit constituted a discretionary action 

that could beneficially or adversely affect threatened and endangered species or their critical

habitat in the vicinity of the discharge, EPA was required to consult with the U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) 

(collectively referred to as “the Services”) as specified in the Endangered Species Act. EPA 

prepared a Biological Evaluation (BE) to evaluate whether the reissuance of the permit might 

affect species and/or their critical habitat under the jurisdiction of both the USFWS and NOAA 

Fisheries. Subsequent to NOAA Fisheries’ and USFWS’ review of the BE, the two agencies 

prepared Biological Opinions (BO) consistent with the requirements of the ESA. NOAA 

Fisheries’ BO concluded that the reissuance of the permit “is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook 

salmon, and Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in the destruction or adverse modification

of designated critical habitat for Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon and Snake 

River sockeye salmon.” 

Although the NOAA Fisheries BO concluded that the permit reissuance would not jeopardize the 

continued existence of the listed species, the BO specified non-discretionary terms and

conditions which must be met by EPA and Potlatch to minimize “take” of listed species as a

result of permit reissuance. One of the non-discretionary terms and conditions specified in the

BO was implementation of a monitoring and assessment plan to characterize conditions in

effluent, receiving water, sediment, and biological media in the vicinity of the Facility. 

Attachment 1 to the permit provides a summary of the required monitoring and a schedule for its 

implementation. The monitoring plan summary identifies several Tier 1 studies that must be

performed during the first two years of the permit, as well as Tier 2 studies that may or may not 

be performed during later years of the permit, depending upon the outcomes of the Tier 1 

studies. 

Page 1 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

The purpose of this report is to present the results of ESA Tier 1 studies undertaken during 

2006 that evaluate effluent and natural waters above and below the Facility. In particular, this

sampling was performed to fulfill requirements of the Surface Water and Effluent Study, and the 

Receiving Water Monitoring Study, that are described in detail in Appendix A and Appendix H, 

respectively, of the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Tier 1 Endangered Species Act

and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring (AMEC, 2005). Other studies proposed to be

conducted during 2006 were postponed due to dredging activities performed by the USACE. 

The Surface Water and Effluent Study principally addresses the measurement of trace organic 

compounds and dioxins/furans (some of which are required for compliance with the NPDES

permit). To do this, a specialized sampling technique known as High Volume Sampling was

employed. The Receiving Water Monitoring Study primarily evaluates conventional water 

quality parameters that are routinely measured in the field (such as biological oxygen demand, 

temperature, pH, and total suspended solids). Both studies used an upstream/downstream 

study design, and the stations that were selected and sampled during the 2006 sampling event 

are shown in Table 1 and on Figure 1. 

Page 2 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

2.0 FIELD SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 

The field sampling methods and laboratory analytical methods used to collect and analyze

samples for the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly Surface Water and 

Effluent Study are described in this section. 

2.1 Field Sampling 

Field sampling methods for collecting river water and effluent samples are described below for

the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Study. For both weekly and quarterly samples, chain of custody forms, provided by the 

analytical labs, were completed and accompanied all samples shipped to the labs. 

2.1.1 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study Sampling Methods 

Water column sampling was conducted at sample sites at shallow and mid-depth1

 each week 

during the 2006 monitoring period (July 5 through October 23). Field-measured water quality

data and water samples for water quality analyses were collected. For the remainder of this

report, collection dates will indicate the first day of collection for any given week (e.g., samples 

collected on 7/5 or 7/6 will be indicated as 7/5/06). 

The parameters selected for the weekly monitoring are grouped as follows to facilitate 

discussion of the collection methods and results:

• Field-measured parameters: physical and chemical properties measured in the field

using water quality monitoring instruments: velocity (ft/s), pH, dissolved oxygen (DO;

mg/L), and temperature (degrees Celsius); 

• Conventional parameters: laboratory measured parameters that are typically monitored

in water quality studies: total suspended solids (TSS) and biochemical oxygen demand

(BOD); 

• Nutrients: The nutrient parameters measured in this study included ammonia nitrogen 

(NH3-N), nitrate-nitrite nitrogen (NO3/NO2-N), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total 

phosphorus, and orthophosphate phosphorus (Ortho-PO4). 

• 2,3,7,8-TCDF and 2,3,7,8-TCDD 

The sampling methods used in the field closely followed those described in Appendix H, 

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Receiving Water Monitoring, of the Quality Assurance Project 

Plan (QAPP). Several deviations from the QAPP were noted: in some instances the water 

quality meter and/or the flow meter failed to operate properly and parameters were not reported.

These instances are documented in the results table as well as in the sampling logs (Appendix 

I). Analytical Perspectives performed the dioxin analyses, while Columbia Analytical Services

 1

 Because the depth of the Clearwater River reference site is shallow, measurements were obtained only 

at a shallow depth, and not at mid-depth. 

Page 3 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

(CAS) performed the remaining analyses. Eight weekly samples were either missing or

received broken by the analytical laboratory and therefore do not have results to report. The

samples were: 

• 2,3,7,8-TCDD in weekly samples collected from 

o LGP-01 on 7/5/06 

o LGP-06 and LGP-13 on 7/11/06 

o LGP-13 on 7/31/06 

• 2,3,7,8-TCDF in weekly samples collected from 

o LGP-01 on 7/5/06 

o LGP-06 and LGP-13 on 7/11/06 

o LGP-13 on 7/31/06 

Because neither 2,3,7,8-TCDD nor 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in any weekly receiving water 

sample at any location on any date, the uncertainly associated with these missing data points is 

considered minimal. 

2.1.2 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study Sampling Methods 

August 2005 represented the first round of quarterly sampling in the monitoring program, with

the November 2005 round as the second. Sampling for the 2006 quarterly monitoring period 

was conducted in March (third round), June (fourth round), September (fifth round), and 

November (sixth round). As with the 2005 data report, analytical results from the November

round of quarterly sampling were not available in time for report preparation. The 2006 report 

therefore presents the results of the second (Nov 2005), third (March 2006), fourth (June 2006), 

and fifth (Sept 2006) rounds. November 2006 sampling data will be presented in the January 

2008 Data Report. 

 

Field-measured water quality data and water samples for water quality analyses were collected 

at each sample location on the Snake River and Clearwater River at mid-depth. Effluent 

samples were taken at the Facility at the aeration basin. All high-volume samples were 

collected using a high volume water sampler. Other samples were collected using a standard

pump. All field personnel wore powder free latex gloves when handling sampling equipment 

and samples. 

Three types of samples were collected for quality control: trip blanks, field blanks, and field

duplicates. A set of trip blanks (sample vials filled with ultrapure lab water) accompanied

sample bottles to and from the field. One equipment blank was collected during each sampling 

event, with one exception. During the September 2006 sampling round, field blank samples

were not submitted for analysis of dioxins and furans. All sampling equipment was

decontaminated according to methods described in the QAPP and then rinsed with ultrapure lab

water. This rinsate was then sampled to produce the equipment blank. 

The sampling methods used in the field closely followed those described in Appendix A, 

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Surface Water and Effluent Study, of the QAPP. A few minor 

deviations relating to the use of the high volume sampler occurred during the 2006 sampling 

Page 4 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

event as with the 2005 sampling events, documented in the January 2006 report. For high

volume samples, two samples were taken per day on some days, although the QAPP stated 

only one sample would be taken per day. A standard pump was used to obtain non-high 

volume samples. 

For the September 2006 high-volume sampling, sampling methods were modified by using the 

PUF material in the column instead of the XAD. These modified methods will be applied to all

further high-volume sampling in this program. 

The parameters selected for the quarterly monitoring are: 

• Resin Acids: Abietic, Dehydroabietic, Isopimaric, Neoabietic, Palustric, Pimaric, 

Sandaracopimaric, and Total 12/14 Chlorodehydroabietic acid; 

• Phytosterols: B-sitosterol, Campesterol, Stigmastanol, Stigmasterol, and Retene; 

• Chlorophenolics: 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol, 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorphenol, 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol, 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol, 3,4,6-Trichoroguaiacol, 3,4,5-

Trichloroguaiacol, Trichlorosyringol, 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol, Pentachlorophenol, 

Tetrachloroguaiacol, and Tetrachlorocatechol; 

• Chloroform; 

• Dioxins: 

o 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD), 

o 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD), 

o 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,7,8-HxCDD), 

o 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD), 

o 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD), 

o 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD), 

o Octachlorodibenzodioxin (OCDD); and 

• Furans: 

o 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,7,8-TCDF), 

o 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF), 

o 2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF), 

o 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF), 

o 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF), 

o 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlordibenzofuran (1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF), 

o 2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF), 

o 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF), 

o 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF), 

o Octachlorodibenzofuran (OCDF). 

For November 2005, March 2006 and June 2006, Columbia Analytical Services (CAS) 

performed DOC, TOC, Chloroform and TSS analyses. Axys Laboratories (Axys) performed the

remainder of analyses for these quarters. Beginning in September 2006, Analytical 

Perspectives began performing the dioxin analyses, while CAS performed the remainder. 

Deviations from the QAPP occurred relating to the analyte list during the September 2006 

monitoring period. Several analytes defined in the QAPP are not reported in the September 

2006 results. Only two dioxin congeners (2,3,7,8-TCDD and 2,3,7,8-TCDF) were analyzed for 

Page 5 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

in this round of quarterly sampling. Individual congeners will be analyzed for in the November

2006 and future quarterly sampling efforts. A different analyte list was used for resin acids and 

phytosterols than outlined in the QAPP. This change in analyte list resulted in the reporting of

analytes not in the QAPP, and the exclusion of four resin acids (Sandaracopimaric Acid, 

Palustric Acid, Neoabietic Acid and Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid) and three

phytosterols (Campesterol, Stigmastanol, Stigmasterol). 

Page 6 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

3.0 DATA HANDLING METHODS 

Procedures for handling in the field and at the analytical laboratory are described below. 

3.1 Field Data 

Data collected during field activities were recorded in field notebooks and then entered into

database format. Because water quality measurements were taken at several depths at one or

more points at a sample location, all measurements are summarized as averages to provide an

overview of conditions present at a location. The mean water quality data were then 

summarized in two ways: by location and by sampling day. Summaries consist of calculated

maximum, minimum, mean, and median. Appendix 1 contains the field data and summaries. 

3.2 Analytical Data 

Data received from the laboratories were entered into database format through electronic data

deliverables (EDDs). When field duplicates were collected, the results of the two samples are

reported as the arithmetic mean concentration of the two results, using one half the detection

limit for non-detect results. 

Analytical data collected for the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly 

Surface Water and Effluent Study have been summarized separately. For each Study, data

have been analyzed in two ways: by sample location and by sample day. The maximum, 

minimum, median, and mean values are presented in summary tables for each round of

sampling. Non-detect results are reported as one half of the detection limit. Appendix 2 

contains the data reported from the analytical laboratories. Validation reports are presented in

Appendix 3. 

Page 7 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

4.0 RESULTS 

This section reports the results of the 2006 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the 

November 2005, March 2006, June 2006 and September 2006 rounds of the Quarterly Surface

Water and Effluent Study. Data are listed in these tables in the following order: 

• Clearwater River reference location (CR REF) 

• Snake River reference location (SR REF) 

• Locations downstream of the effluent from nearest to farthest: 

o LGP-13 

o LGP-14 

o LGP-11 

o LGP-09 

o LGP-06 

o LGP-01 

4.1 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study

For the weekly results, field-measure parameters are discussed in Section 4.1.1 and 

conventional parameters in Section 4.1.2. 

4.1.1 Field-Measured Parameters 

The parameters measured in the field during the weekly sampling were water velocity, pH, DO, 

and temperature. These parameters were measured at each location during each sampling 

period. Measurements were taken at several depths at one or more points along a transect of

the river channel at each sample site. Samples collected from shallow water are denoted with 

an “S” in the sample identification, while those collected from mid-depth are denoted with an 

“MD”. No mid-depth sample was collected at CR-REF. A mean daily value for each parameter 

was calculated from all measurements collected on a sample day. This mean represents the

conditions at the sample location at the time of monitoring. Tables 2 through 5 and Figures 2 

through 5 present the means for each sampling day for water velocity, pH, DO, and 

temperature, respectively. Results of the field parameters show similar conditions between CRREF and locations downstream of the Facility. 

4.1.1.1 Water Velocity

Table 2 and Figure 2 show mean water velocity measurements collected during the Weekly

Receiving Water Monitoring Study. As with 2005, mean water velocity at the Clearwater River 

reference location was typically greater and more variable than velocity measured at all

locations in the Snake River. Velocity in the Clearwater River decreases over the monitoring

period and ranged from 0.32 ft/s (10/16/06) to 3.67 ft/s (8/8/06). Velocity in the Snake River 

remained fairly uniform throughout the monitoring period with location averages between 0.01 

ft/s and 0.25 ft/s. 

Page 8 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

4.1.1.2 pH 

Table 3 and Figure 3 show mean pH measurements collected during the Weekly Receiving

Water Monitoring Study. Mean pH fluctuated over the monitoring period with the highest pH 

measured in the Clearwater during the last weeks of July and the first week in August.

Downstream Snake River measurements ranged from 7.62 (LGP-06; 8/15/06) to 9.05 (LGP-01; 

7/25/06). All pH measurements were in the range of the Idaho Department of Environmental 

Quality (IDEQ) water quality standard range for pH of 6.5 to 9.5. Most measurements were in

the range of the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) water quality standard range for 

pH of 6.5 to 8.5. The pH measurements that were outside the WDOE standard range were 

collected during late July, early August and mid-September. During these periods, pH at CRREF was also measured near or above 8.5 as well, suggesting that conditions are not likely

Facility-related. 

4.1.1.3 Dissolved Oxygen 

Table 4 and Figure 4 show mean DO measurements collected during the Weekly Receiving

Water Monitoring Study. Mean DO generally remained stable at all locations over the 

monitoring period. As with the 2005 weekly sampling, the highest DO concentrations were

typically observed at the Clearwater River reference location (CR-REF), while the lowest DO 

concentrations were observed at the Snake River reference locations (SR-REF) for all dates

before October, when the lowest DO concentrations were observed at LGP-13 (only slightly 

lower than other concentrations). DO concentrations were most variable during the 7/31/06

monitoring period as DO decreased from the previous week at SR-REF, LGP-06 and LGP-01. 

DO at LGP-13 (closest to the Facility) increased from the previous week during this monitoring 

period). 

Average DO for the downstream locations exceeded the WDOE water quality standard for DO,

which is a minimum of 8 mg/L DO. Individual DO measurements at approximately one half the

locations/dates did not meet the standard, including the Clearwater River reference location.

The average DO concentration measured for SR-REF is 7.5 mg/L. This water quality standard 

was used by EPA as the toxicity benchmark for DO in its Biological Evaluation and as the basis 

for the computation of the effluent limitations for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) in the 

permit. The finding that the average downstream DO measurements were at least 8 mg/L, and

were therefore compliant with the WDOE water quality standard, indicates that the Facility 

discharge is not affecting DO downstream of the Facility. 

4.1.1.4 Water Temperature 

Mean water temperatures generally decreased at all locations over the monitoring period, with 

an increase at nearly all locations during the 8/8/06 monitoring period (Table 5; Figure 5). The

highest temperatures were generally observed at SR-REF while the lowest temperatures were 

always observed at CR-REF (an average of approximately 9 degrees colder than the SR-REF

average). At the downstream Snake River locations, water temperatures tended to increase 

moving from upstream to downstream, such that the lowest average Snake River temperatures 

were measured closest to the Facility (LGP-13), and the highest temperatures were measured 

Page 9 
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

farthest from the Facility (approaching the Lower Granite Dam; LGP-01). During July, 

temperature measurements at five locations/dates (mostly at LGP-01) exceed the temperature

benchmark for July and August of 20 degrees C used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation with

temperature readings between 20.4 (LGP-11) and 22.35 (LGP-01). During this time, the SRREF temperature was also above 20 degrees. In fact, the temperatures at the Snake River 

reference location exceeded the July/August benchmark on all sampling dates. 

For August, the temperature benchmark of 20 degrees C was exceeded at six downstream 

locations/dates during the weeks of 8/8/06 and 8/15/06 with temperature readings between

20.4 (LGP-01) and 21.12 (LGP-13) degrees C. SR-REF temperatures were above 20 degrees 

C during this time as well. 

EPA’s Biological Evaluation used a temperature benchmark of 18 degrees C for September and

October. Most temperatures for all but LGP-13 exceed the September/October benchmark. 

The temperature measured at LGP-13 (closest to the Facility) did not exceed the benchmark of

18 degrees C on any September/October sampling date. 

4.1.2 Conventional Parameters 

Conventional parameters analyzed during this study were TSS and BOD. For those samples

with nondetectable concentrations, the concentration was calculated by using one half the

detection limit. If an analyte was not detectable across all sites on a given sample day, it was 

considered not present.

4.1.2.1 Total Suspended Solids 

Table 6 presents the Total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations for each sampling day of the

monitoring period. TSS concentrations were ND in all but 27 out of 221 samples. As with 2005, 

the detection limit for TSS was 5 mg/L. Detected concentrations ranged from 5 mg/L to 8 mg/L

with the maximum concentration occurring at LGP-01-MD collected on 8/21/06. Among the

upstream samples, TSS concentrations ranged from ND to 25 mg/L (SR-REF-MD). Among

downstream samples, TSS concentrations ranged from ND to 10 mg/L (LGP-01-MD). 

EPA’s Biological Evaluation used a toxicity benchmark of 10 mg/L for TSS. No exceedances 

occur in any downstream results, although a few upstream results exceed the benchmark of 10

mg/L. Average concentrations by date or by location were well below the toxicity benchmark. 

4.1.2.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand 

Table 7 and Figures 6a (shallow surface water) and 6b (mid-depth surface water) present the 

BOD concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. BOD concentrations 

ranged from ND to 137 mg/L. The maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected

at station LGP-09-S on 7/5/06. This result is an average of the initial sample result and its field 

duplicate. In this instance both results were of similar magnitude and the average therefore

represents both results appropriately. As with many other BOD results, the analytical laboratory 

qualified these results as the analyses exceeding the standard holding times. LGP-09-MD was 

Page 10
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

also elevated during the 7/5/06 period compared to previous years and other downstream 

locations (74 mg/L). In fact, BOD results from 7/5/06 at all locations (including SR-REF and CRREF) were the highest of the entire monitoring period. The samples collected on this date from 

several locations were qualified by the laboratory as having exceeded holding times. BOD 

concentrations in the qualified samples exceeded concentrations in unqualified samples 

collected on this date. Because upstream BOD concentrations were also elevated, it is unlikely

that the Facility contributed to BOD conditions downstream. 

With the exception of the 7/5/06 measurements, all BOD concentrations were below 2 mg/L at 

all locations. 

4.1.2.3 Nutrients 

During weekly monitoring, samples were analyzed for several nitrogen- and phosphoruscontaining nutrients. The nitrogen-containing nutrients were ammonia nitrogen, nitrate and 

nitrite nitrogen, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The phosphorus-containing nutrients were total 

phosphorus and orthophosphate. For those samples with a nondetectable concentration, the

concentration was calculated by using one half the detection limit. If an analyte was not 

detectable across all sites on a given sample day, it was thus not considered present. 

4.1.2.4 Ammonia Nitrogen 

Table 8 and Figures 7a (shallow surface water) and 7b (mid-depth surface water) present 

ammonia nitrogen concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. Ammonia

nitrogen concentrations during the monitoring period ranged from ND to 0.11 mg/L. The

maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected at station SR-REF-S on 7/18/06. 

Among the downstream samples, ammonia nitrogen concentrations ranged from ND to 0.05 

mg/L (LGP-01-S; 10/23/06 and LGP-01-MD; 9/05/06). In both shallow and mid-depth samples,

concentrations were typically below 0.03 mg/L. During each week, the location of the maximum 

concentration was often detected at LGP-01-S (the farthest location from the Facility). In 

shallow samples, the location of maximum concentration varied over the monitoring period. 

4.1.2.5 Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen

Table 9 and Figures 8a (shallow surface water) and 8b (mid-depth surface water) present 

nitrate/nitrite nitrogen concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period.

Concentrations of nitrate/nitrite nitrogen ranged from 0.019 J (LGP-01-S; 7/25/06) to 0.61 mg/L

(SR-REF-MD; 10/9/06) and generally increased during the 17 week monitoring period. The

maximum downstream concentration is 0.6 mg/L (LGP-13-S; 10/16/06). Maximum 

concentrations in both shallow and mid-depth samples were generally observed in the Snake 

River reference location. The concentration profile observed in the Snake River samples is 

similar to 2005 and suggests either a strong seasonal influence or the existence of a non-point 

source contribution of nitrate/nitrite nitrogen along the length of the River. 

Page 11
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

4.1.2.6 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 

Table 10 and Figures 9a (shallow surface water) and 9b (mid-depth surface water) present the

total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period.

TKN concentrations ranged from ND to 1.6 mg/L. The maximum concentration was measured 

in a sample collected at station LGP-11-MD on 7/25/06. Among the upstream samples, TKN 

concentrations ranged from ND to 0.8 mg/L. Concentrations of TKN in shallow water were more 

variable than the 2005 weekly results, with LGP-13 as the most consistent location of either 

upstream or downstream results. Mid-depth concentrations were slightly more constant over 

time than those of the shallow water samples. Concentrations at location LGP-01 (the farthest 

downstream sample location) are slightly higher than concentrations at locations closer to the

Facility. 

4.1.2.7 Total Phosphorus 

Table 11 and Figures 10a (shallow surface water) and 10b (mid-depth surface water) present 

the total phosphorus concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. Results 

were fairly consistent with the 2005 weekly sampling. Total phosphorus concentrations ranged

from 0.004J (CR-REF-S) to 0.16 mg/L (LGP-09-S; 7/11/06). Only one nondetect result was 

reported from either upstream or downstream samples (CR-REF-S). Among upstream 

samples, total phosphorus ranged from ND to 0.10 mg/L. Among downstream samples, total

phosphorus ranged from 0.02 mg/L to 0.16 mg/L. Maximum concentrations in both shallow and 

mid-depth samples were observed in different locations from week to week. Shallow depth 

concentrations remained fairly constant at the Clearwater River reference location and are

generally lower than all other locations (17 week average of 0.009 mg/L). At both depths, 

concentrations in the Snake River tended to increase over the duration of the study through

September, then decreased in October. As with nitrate/nitrite, the concentration profile

observed in the Snake River samples suggests either seasonal fluctuation patterns or the

existence of a non-point source contribution of phosphorus along the length of the River. 

4.1.2.8 Orthophosphate Phosphorus 

Table 12 and Figures 11a (shallow surface water) and 11b (mid-depth surface water) present 

the orthophosphate phosphorus concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. 

Results are similar to, if not slightly less variable over the monitoring period than in 2005. 

Orthophosphate phosphorus concentrations ranged from 0.003J to 0.09 mg/L. Nondetectable

concentrations were observed 11 times, all at the Clearwater River reference location. The

maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected at station LGP-09-MD on 10/9/05.

This is the same week as the 2005 maximum concentration sampling date. Among upstream 

samples, orthophosphate concentrations ranged from 0.003J to 0.07 mg/L. Among downstream 

samples, orthophosphate concentrations ranged from 0.01 mg/L to 0.09 mg/L. Maximum 

concentrations in shallow samples were observed in different locations from week to week. In 

mid-depth samples, maximum concentrations were often observed at the Snake River reference 

location. Concentrations remained constant at the Clearwater River reference location. At both

depths, concentrations in the Snake River tended to increase over the duration of the study

through September, then decreased in October. As with the 2005 results, the concentration

Page 12
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

profile observed in the Snake River samples suggests either a seasonal fluctuation pattern or

the existence of a non-point source contribution of orthophosphate phosphorus along the length 

of the River. 

4.1.2.9 2,3,7,8-TCDD 

Table 13 presents the 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring 

period. Because several samples were either received broken or recorded as not being

received by the lab, they could not be analyzed. These samples are noted in Table 13 with an

“*”. As with 2005, 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any sample on any date during the study.

As such, the results were not plotted on a figure.

4.1.2.10 2,3,7,8-TCDF 

Table 14 presents the 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring

period. As with 2,3,7,8-TCDF, several samples were either received broken or recorded as not 

being received by the lab, and could not be analyzed. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was also not detected in 

any sample on any date during the study. As such, the results were not plotted on a figure. 

4.2 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study

Quarterly results are summarized by chemical group, then by quarter in chronological order 

(November 2005, March 2006, June 2006 and September 2006). Tabulated results are 

presented separately for each quarter (Tables 15 - 26). Figures depict receiving water results of

each quarter in four separate graphs within one figure; while the effluent results are depicted in

a separate set of figures (Figures 12 – 23). Parameters with nondetectable concentrations were 

represented by one half the detection limit. If an analyte was not detectable across all sites, it 

was considered not present and thus not evaluated further. 

4.2.1 Resin Acids 

Tables 15 through 18 present the tabulated results of the resin acids and Figures 12 (receiving 

water samples) and 13 (effluent samples) graphically present the resin acid concentrations for 

each river location and effluent for each of the four quarters summarized in this report. 

November 2005

Seven of nine resin acids were nondetect in any receiving water samples (Table 15). All resin 

acids were nondetect at both reference locations. There are more nondetect resin acids in

November 2005 than in August 2005. Neoabietic acid was detected at two receiving water

locations (LGP-11, 0.004J ug/L; LGP-9, 0.001J). The average downstream concentration for

neoabietic acid is 0.0011 ug/L. The other resin acid detected is total 12/14-

Chlorodehydroabietic Acid, detected once (LGP-11; 0.003J). All resin acid concentrations in the 

receiving water are well below the toxicity benchmark of 2.2 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring 

Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. With most results nondetect and below 

Page 13
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

the benchmarks, there does not appear to be a significant concentration trend with increasing 

distance from the Facility. For most of the resin acids, there is a slight increase in concentration

(still well below the toxicity benchmark) at LGP-11 (Figure 12). 

Table 15 also presents the concentrations in the effluent as both dissolved and total. Three of

the nine resin acids were nondetect in the dissolved effluent. In comparing the dissolved and

solid fractions, the majority of resin acids are associated with the solid fraction of effluent (Table 

15; Figure 13). 

March 2006

As with November 2005, seven of nine resin acids were not detected in any receiving water 

samples (Table 16). Two resin acids were detected in the receiving water: abietic acid (one

location; LGP-09) and neoabietic acid (four locations). However, these two acids were also 

detected in the Clearwater River reference sample. Abietic acid was not detected at the

location nearest the diffuser (LGP-13/14). All resin acid concentrations in the receiving water 

are well below the toxicity benchmark of 2.2 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to 

NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. With most results nondetect and below the benchmarks, 

there does not appear to be a concentration trend with increasing distance from the Facility 

(Figure 12). 

Table 16 also presents the concentrations in total effluent. A dissolved sample could not be

analyzed because no effluent sample was collected for dissolved analysis. In this case, a

dissolved fraction concentration is not obtainable. A maximum possible solid fraction

concentration may be obtained by analyzing the total effluent sample, measuring the

concentration of total suspended solids in the sample, and assuming that the entire mass of 

analyte in the sample is present adsorbed to the suspended solids, using the following formula: 

1000 mg/g C

C C

TSS

toteff

solid = ×

where: 

Csolid = Concentration in the solid fraction of effluent (ug/g) 

Ctoteff = Concentration in total effluent (ug/L)

Palustric acid and 12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids were not detected in total effluent (Table

16; Figure 13). 

June 2006

Three of nine resin acids were not detected in any receiving water samples (Table 17). Abietic 

acid, neoabietic acid, isopimaric acid and palustric acid were detected in 5 of 5 receiving water 

samples. Three of these resin acids were detected in the upstream reference samples. All 

Page 14
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

resin acid concentrations in the receiving water are well below the toxicity benchmark of 2.2 

ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 

Table 17 also presents the concentrations in the effluent as both dissolved and total. In both the

dissolved and solid effluent samples, palustric acid and 12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids 

were not detected (Table 17; Figure 13). 

September 2006

Although none of the resin acids was detected in any receiving water sample during the 

September 2006 sampling round (Table 18, Figure 13), detection limits for all analytes were

substantially elevated (10 – 20 ug/L), relative to previous sampling rounds (generally less than

0.01 ug/L). Concentrations of resin acids detected in previous quarterly sampling rounds 

(described in the preceding paragraphs) were considerably lower than the detection limits 

achieved during the September 2006 sampling round. Additionally, the list of resin acids

reported for the September 2006 round differed from the list of resin acids analyzed during 

previous rounds. During previous quarterly sampling rounds, sandaracopimaric acid, palustric 

acid, and neoabietic acid were analyzed, but were not analyzed in the September 2006 rounds. 

In the September 2006 round, linoleic acid and oleic/linolenic acid were analyzed, but were not 

analyzed during previous rounds. 

Tables 18 and Figure 13 also present the concentrations in the effluent samples. Two total

effluent samples were collected (09/18/06 and 09/20/06) for the purposes of obtaining both a

solid fraction and a dissolved fraction concentration of resin acids in effluent. The dissolved 

fraction concentration may be obtained by filtering the effluent sample and analyzing the filtrate.

The solid fraction may be obtained by subtracting the dissolved (filtered) sample results from the 

total (unfiltered) sample results. However, because of a sample handling error, neither effluent 

sample was filtered, and both were analyzed as total effluent. 

A maximum possible solid fraction concentration was estimated for both total effluent samples

collected during the September 2006 rounds. Only linoleic acid and oleic/linolenic acid were 

detected in the effluent samples. These compounds had not been analyzed for in previous 

quarterly sampling rounds because there were not included in the list of resin acids to be 

analyzed in the QAPP. Estimated maximum possible solid fraction concentrations of these 

analytes agreed closely between the two effluent samples, with linoleic acid estimated at 9.5 

ug/g and 7.8 ug/g and oleic/linolenic acid estimated at 25 ug/g and 23 ug/g. 

4.2.2 Phytosterols 

Tables 15 through 18 and Figures 14 (river samples) and 15 (effluent samples) present the

phytosterol concentrations for each river location and effluent. 

November 2005

As shown in Table 15 and Figure 14, retene was not detected in river samples, but was 

detected in effluent samples (Figure 15). Stigmastanol was not detected in upstream river 

Page 15
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

samples, but was detected in downstream river samples and in effluent. B-sitosterol, 

campesterol, and stigmasterol were detected in upstream river, downstream river, and effluent 

samples. All phytosterol concentrations detected in river samples were lower than the toxicity 

benchmark of 2.5 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological 

Opinion. 

March 2006

As shown in Table 16 and Figure 14, retene was not detected in upstream river samples, but 

was detected in four of five downstream river samples (not detected at location LGP-13/14, 

immediately downstream of the diffuser) and in effluent samples (Figure 15). Stigmastanol, bsitosterol, campesterol, and stigmasterol were detected in upstream river, downstream river, 

and effluent samples. All phytosterol concentrations detected in river samples were lower than 

the toxicity benchmark of 2.5 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Biological Opinion. A dissolved phase effluent sample could not be analyzed because no 

effluent sample was collected for dissolved analysis. In this case, a maximum possible solid

fraction concentration was calculated using the method described above for resin acids. 

June 2006

As shown in Table 17 and Figure 14, retene was detected in the Snake River upstream sample 

and was not detected in the Clearwater River upstream sample. Retene was also detected in

two of five downstream river samples (at the two farthest downstream locations), and was 

detected in effluent samples (Figure 15). B-sitosterol and stigmastanol were not detected in any

upstream or downstream river sample, but were detected in effluent. Campesterol and 

stigmasterol were detected in upstream river, downstream river, and effluent samples. All

phytosterol concentrations detected in river samples were lower than the toxicity benchmark of 

2.5 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 

September 2006

During this sampling round, only retene and b-sitosterol were analyzed in river and effluent

samples. As shown in Table 18 and Figure 14, retene was detected in the Clearwater River 

upstream samples and was not detected in the Snake River upstream sample. Retene was not

detected in downstream river samples, and was not detected in effluent samples (Figure 15). Bsitosterol was detected in upstream river samples, downstream river sample, and in effluent. All 

b-sitosterol concentrations detected in river samples were lower than the toxicity benchmark of

2.5 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 

A dissolved phase effluent sample could not be analyzed because no effluent sample was 

collected for dissolved analysis. In this case, a maximum possible solid fraction concentration

was calculated using the method described above for resin acids. 

Page 16
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

4.2.3 Chlorophenolics 

Tables 19 through 22 and Figures 16 (river samples) and 17 (effluent samples) present the

phytosterol concentrations for each river location and effluent. 

November 2005

Only two chlorophenolic compounds were detected during this sampling round (Table 19). 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol was detected at the Clearwater River reference location, and 

tetrachlorocatechol was detected at location LGP-14. 

Table 19 and Figure 17 also show chlorophenolic concentrations in effluent samples. During 

this round, three chlorophenolics were detected in the dissolved effluent fraction (2,4,6-

trichlorophenol, 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol, and 4,5,6-trichloroguaiacol). Two chlorophenolics were 

detected in the solid effluent fraction (2,4,6-trichlorophenol and 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol).

Concentrations in the dissolved and solid effluent fractions are similar. 

March 2006

No chlorophenolic compounds were detected in upstream or downstream river samples during

this sampling round (Table 20). 

Table 20 and Figure 17 also show chlorophenolic concentrations in effluent samples. During 

this round, a sample of total effluent was analyzed for chlorophenolics, but no dissolved fraction 

analysis was conducted because a filtered sample was not collected. Three chlorophenolics

were detected in the total effluent fraction (2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol, and

3,4,6-trichloroguaiacol). A maximum possible solid fraction concentration was calculated using 

the approach described above for resin acids. 

June 2006

No chlorophenolic compounds were detected in upstream or downstream river samples during

this sampling round (Table 21). 

Table 21 and Figure 17 also show chlorophenolic concentrations in effluent samples. During 

this round, a sample of total effluent and a sample of filtered effluent were analyzed for 

chlorophenolics. Two chlorophenolics were detected in the filtered (dissolved) effluent fraction 

(2,4,6-trichlorophenol and 4,5,6-trichloroguaiacol). In the total effluent sample, two 

chlorophenolics were detected (2,4,6-trichlorophenol and 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol). The

concentrations in the dissolved fraction are similar to concentrations in the total effluent sample. 

September 2006

Only one chlorophenolic compound was detected during this sampling round (Table 22) ( 2,4,6-

trichlorophenol at location LGP-6). 

Page 17
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

Table 22 and Figure 17 also show chlorophenolic concentrations in effluent samples. During 

this round, two samples of total effluent were analyzed for chlorophenolics, but no dissolved 

fraction analysis was conducted because neither of the total effluent samples was filtered. Five

chlorophenols were detected in the total effluent samples (2,4,6-trichlorophenol, 3,4,6-

trichlorocatechol, 3,4,5-trichloroguaiacol, 3,4,6-trichloroguaiacol, and 4,5,6-trichloroguaiacol). A

maximum possible solid fraction concentration was calculated using the approach described

above for resin acids. 

4.2.4 Chloroform

Tables 15 through 18 and Figure 18 present the chloroform concentrations for each river and 

effluent sample location. 

November 2005

Chloroform was not detected at any upstream downstream river sample location (Table 15). 

Table 15 and Figure 18 also show chloroform concentrations in total effluent. During this round, 

chloroform was detected at a concentration of 1.4 ug/L in the total effluent sample, which is less 

than the toxicity benchmark for chloroform of 12.4 ug/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. 

March 2006

Chloroform was not detected in upstream or downstream river samples during this sampling

round (Table 16). 

Table 16 and Figure 18 also show chloroform concentrations in total effluent. During this round, 

chloroform was detected at a concentration of 1 ug/L in the total effluent sample, which is less 

than the toxicity benchmark for chloroform of 12.4 ug/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. 

June 2006

Chloroform was not detected in upstream or downstream river samples during this sampling

round (Table 17). 

Table 17 and Figure 18 also show chloroform concentrations in total effluent. During this round, 

chloroform was detected at a concentration of 1.3 ug/L in the total effluent sample, which is less 

than the toxicity benchmark for chloroform of 12.4 ug/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. 

September 2006

Chloroform was not detected in upstream or downstream river samples during this sampling

round (Table 18). 

Page 18
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

Table 18 and Figure 18 also show chloroform concentrations in total effluent. During this round, 

chloroform was detected at a concentration of 1.1 ug/L in the total effluent sample, which is less 

than the toxicity benchmark for chloroform of 12.4 ug/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. 

4.2.5 Dissolved and Total Organic Carbon 

Tables 15 through 18 and Figure 19 present the Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total

Organic Carbon (TOC) concentrations for each river and effluent sampling location. 

Concentrations of DOC and TOC were generally consistent in river water samples. DOC 

concentrations ranged from 1.8 mg/L at CR REF in September 2006 to 3.05 mg/L at LGP-01

(the farthest downstream location) in March 2006. Concentrations of TOC ranged from 1.8 

mg/L at CR-REF in September 2006 to 3.1 mg/L at LGP-11 and LGP-09 in March 2006. 

In the effluent, DOC ranged from 90.0 mg/L to 124 mg/L, and TOC ranged from 125 mg/L to 

141 mg/L. 

4.2.6 Dioxin Congeners 

Tables 23 through 26 and Figures 20 (river water samples) and 21 (effluent samples) present

the dioxin congener concentrations for each location and the effluent. 

November 2005

As shown in Table 23, 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any upstream or downstream river 

sampling location. 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD was not detected at upstream river locations, and was 

detected in one of six downstream location (LGP-14). The remaining 2,3,7,8-substituted dioxin

congeners were detected in at least one upstream sample and at least one downstream 

sample. 

Table 23 and Figure 21 show concentrations of dioxin congeners in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was 

not detected in the dissolved fraction of effluent, and was detected in the solid fraction of

effluent at a concentration of 0.005 pg/L, which is less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-

TCDD of 0.06 pg/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. Higher-chlorinated dioxin congeners 

(that is, those congeners that are not associated with pulp and paper manufacturing processes)

were detected in both the dissolved and solid fractions of effluent. The majority of dioxin

congeners detected in effluent were observed in the solid fraction. 

March 2006

As shown in Table 24, 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any upstream or downstream river 

sampling location. 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD was not detected at upstream river locations, and was 

detected at two of five downstream locations (LGP-11 and LGP-09). The remaining 2,3,7,8-

substituted dioxin congeners were detected in at least one upstream sample and at least one 

downstream sample. 

Page 19
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

Table 24 and Figure 21 show concentrations of dioxin congeners in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was 

not detected in the dissolved fraction of effluent, and was detected in the solid fraction of

effluent at a concentration of 0.007 pg/L, which is less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-

TCDD of 0.06 pg/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. Some of the higher-chlorinated dioxin

congeners (that is, those congeners that are not associated with pulp and paper manufacturing 

processes) were detected in both the dissolved and solid fractions of effluent. The majority of

dioxin congeners detected in effluent were observed in the solid fraction.

June 2006

As shown in Table 25, 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any upstream or downstream river 

sampling location. The remaining 2,3,7,8-substituted dioxin congeners were detected in at least

one upstream sample and at least one downstream sample. 

Table 25 and Figure 21 show concentrations of dioxin congeners in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was 

detected in the dissolved fraction of effluent at a concentration of 0.005 pg/L and in the solid

fraction of effluent at a concentration of 0.024 pg/L, both of which are less than the toxicity

benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDD of 0.06 pg/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. Some of the 

higher-chlorinated dioxin congeners (that is, those congeners that are not associated with pulp 

and paper manufacturing processes) were detected in both the dissolved and solid fractions of

effluent. The majority of dioxin congeners detected in effluent were observed in the solid

fraction. 

September 2006

As shown in Table 26, only 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 2,3,7,8-TCDF were analyzed during the

September 2006 round. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any upstream or downstream river 

sampling location. 

Table 26 and Figure 21 show concentrations of dioxin in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not

detected in either the dissolved or solid fraction of effluent. 

4.2.7 Furan Congeners 

Tables 23 through 26 and Figures 22 (river water samples) and 23 (effluent samples) present

the furan congener concentrations for each location and the effluent. 

November 2005

As shown in Table 23, 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected at the Snake River upstream river sampling 

locations and three of six (LGP-13, LGP-11, and LGP-01) downstream river sampling locations.

All concentrations are less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDFof 0.2 pg/L used in

EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

was not detected at any upstream or downstream river location. Three furan congeners 

(1,2,4,7,8-PeCDF, 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF, and 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF) were not detected in upstream 

samples, but were detected in at least one downstream sample. The remaining 2,3,7,8-

Page 20
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

substituted furan congeners were detected in at least one upstream sample and at least one

downstream sample. 

Table 23 and Figure 23 show concentrations of dioxin in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in

the dissolved fraction of effluent (0.024 pg/L) in the solid fraction of effluent (0.067 pg/L). Both

concentrations are less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDF of 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s 

Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. Some higher-chlorinated

furan congeners (that is, those congeners that are not associated with pulp and paper 

manufacturing processes) were detected in both the dissolved and solid fractions of effluent.

The majority of furan congeners detected in effluent were observed in the solid fraction. 

March 2006

As shown in Table 24, 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected at the Snake River upstream river sampling 

locations and four of five (LGP-13/14, LGP-09, LGP-06, and LGP-01) downstream river

sampling locations. All concentrations are less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDF of 

0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion.

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF was not detected at any upstream or downstream river location. Four furan 

congeners (1,2,4,7,8-PeCDF, 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF, 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF, and 1,2,3,4,7,87,9-

HpCDF) were not detected in upstream samples, but were detected in at least one downstream 

sample. The remaining 2,3,7,8-substituted furan congeners were detected in at least one

upstream sample and at least one downstream sample. 

Table 24 and Figure 23 show concentrations of dioxin in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in

the dissolved fraction of effluent at a concentration of 0.024 pg/L, and in the solid fraction of

effluent at a concentration of 0.056 pg/L, both of which are less than the toxicity benchmark for 

2,3,7,8-TCDF of 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Biological Opinion. Some higher-chlorinated furan congeners (that is, those congeners that are

not associated with pulp and paper manufacturing processes) were detected in the dissolved

and/or solid fractions of effluent. The majority of furan congeners detected in effluent were 

observed in the solid fraction. 

June 2006

As shown in Table 25, 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected at the Snake River upstream river sampling 

locations and three of five (LGP-13/14, LGP-06, and LGP-01) downstream river sampling

locations. All concentrations are less than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDF of 0.2 pg/L

used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. Four furan 

congeners (1,2,4,7,8-PeCDF, 2,3,4,7,8-PeCFD, 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF, and 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF)

were not detected in upstream samples, but were detected in at least one downstream sample. 

The remaining 2,3,7,8-substituted furan congeners were detected in at least one upstream 

sample and at least one downstream sample. 

Table 25 and Figure 23 show concentrations of dioxin in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in

the dissolved fraction of effluent at a concentration of 0.039 pg/L, and in the solid fraction of

effluent at a concentration of 0.13 pg/L, both of which are less than the toxicity benchmark for 

2,3,7,8-TCDF of 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Page 21
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

Biological Opinion. Some higher-chlorinated furan congeners (that is, those congeners that are

not associated with pulp and paper manufacturing processes) were detected in the dissolved

and/or solid fractions of effluent. The majority of furan congeners detected in effluent were 

observed in the solid fraction. 

September 2006

As shown in Table 26, 0nly 2,3,7,8-TCDD and 2,3,7,8-TCDF were analyzed during the

September 2006 round. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected at the Snake River upstream river 

sampling locations and all downstream river sampling locations. All concentrations are less 

than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDF of 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as 

appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 

Table 26 and Figure 23 show concentrations of dioxin in effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in

the dissolved fraction of effluent at a concentration of 0.0303 pg/L, and in the solid fraction of 

effluent at a concentration of 0.0274 pg/L, both of which are less than the toxicity benchmark for 

2,3,7,8-TCDFof 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Biological Opinion. 

Page 22
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

This report presents the results of sampling conducted during 2006 to complete the Quarterly 

Surface Water and Effluent Study and the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study, both part 

of the Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

required in non-discretionary terms and conditions set forth by the Services in their Biological

Opinions on the re-issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit by EPA. 

Receiving water and effluent data collected during the monitoring program has characterized 

the water quality at: 

• Two reference locations (Snake River upstream of the effluent and the Clearwater River 

upstream of the confluence with the Snake River) during both weekly and quarterly 

monitoring programs; 

• Four locations in the Snake River, downstream of the Potlatch effluent during weekly 

monitoring; and 

• Six locations in the Snake River, downstream of the Potlatch effluent during quarterly

monitoring. 

The report presents all analytical results and discusses the temporal and spatial trends in

measured parameters selected for this investigation. 

The results of both the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly Surface

Water and Effluent Study revealed no indications that the Facility’s effluent has any influence on 

downstream parameter measurements. No meaningful differences between reference location

conditions and downstream conditions were observed. With a few exceptions, all

measurements complied with toxicity benchmarks and applicable water quality standards. The

few exceptions occurred at reference locations or at the farthest downstream sampling location

from the Facility. 

In conclusion, the results of sampling and analysis upstream and downstream of the Facility 

support the finding in EPA’s Biological Evaluation and the Services’ Biological Opinions that the 

EPA’s re-issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit is not likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon, and 

Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated

critical habitat for Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon and Snake River

sockeye salmon. 

Page 23
Potlatch Forest Products Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2006 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2007

REFERENCES 

AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. (AMEC) and Anchor Environmental (Anchor). 2005.

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit

Compliance Monitoring. Potlatch Corporation Lewiston Facility. May 2005. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries). 2004. 

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation. April 2004. 

U.S. EPA. 2003. Biological Evaluation of the Potlatch Corporation Pulp and Paper Mill in

Lewiston, Idaho. December 2003. 

U.S. EPA. 2005. Authorization to Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System. Permit No.: ID0001163. Potlatch Corporation 803 Mill Road, Lewiston, 

Idaho. 

Page 24
TABLES 
Table 1

Coordinates of Sample Locations on the Snake River and Clearwater River.

Potlatch Lewiston Mill

Sample ID Latitude Longitude

CR-REF 46 15.2988 -116 33.51

SR-REF 46 23.247 -117 02.731

LGP-14 46 25.8579 -117 02.4506

LGP-13 46 25.5650 -117 02.5940

LGP-11 46 25.5418 -117 03.9994

LGP-09 46 24.9105 -117 05.4103

LGP-06 46 25.6274 -117 09.5797

LGP-01 46 33.2666 -117 16.5655
Table 2

Mean Velocity (ft/s) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 07/05/2006 1.05 2.20 0.39 0.53 0.61 0.44 07/11/2006 0.19 2.93 * * 0.10 0.19 07/18/2006 0.52 0.72 0.27 0.23 0.30 0.38 07/25/2006 0.38 3.03 0.24 0.15 0.22 0.22 07/31/2006 0.19 2.05 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.19 08/08/2006 0.26 3.67 * 0.48 0.37 0.18 08/15/2006 0.23 * 0.23 0.22 0.11 0.13 08/21/2006 0.21 0.44 0.12 0.21 0.20 0.21 08/30/2006 0.15 0.44 0.53 0.38 0.36 0.12 09/05/2006 0.22 0.41 0.25 0.37 0.24 0.22 09/12/2006 0.22 0.77 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.29 09/19/2006 0.31 * 0.09 0.07 0.22 0.11 09/26/2006 0.44 0.33 0.31 0.14 0.15 0.14 10/03/2006 1.12 3.25 1.10 0.73 0.73 0.37 10/09/2006 0.21 0.32 0.13 0.10 0.22 0.12 10/16/2006 0.22 0.32 0.31 0.22 0.35 1.23 10/23/2006 0.29 1.71 0.73 0.77 0.22 0.08 Average 0.37 1.51 0.33 0.30 0.27 0.27 

Median 0.23 0.77 0.25 0.22 0.22 0.19 Min 0.15 0.32 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.08 Max 1.12 3.67 1.10 0.77 0.73 1.23 Notes:*: Measurement not available for specific date/location
Table 3

Mean pH Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 07/05/2006 7.63 7.80 7.70 7.82 7.84 7.96 07/11/2006 8.15 8.18 8.22 8.12 7.91 8.28 07/18/2006 8.01 8.18 8.30 8.26 7.98 8.67 07/25/2006 8.17 8.21 8.42 8.47 8.35 8.58 07/31/2006 8.30 8.51 8.37 8.60 8.75 8.62 08/08/2006 8.51 9.06 8.52 8.64 8.52 7.91 08/15/2006 7.47 8.11 8.06 8.00 7.84 7.62 08/21/2006 7.65 8.08 8.09 8.00 7.71 7.76 08/30/2006 7.73 8.15 8.22 8.12 7.77 8.29 09/05/2006 8.14 8.47 8.27 8.27 8.24 8.35 09/12/2006 8.23 8.68 8.56 8.45 8.38 8.47 09/19/2006 8.38 8.62 8.57 8.60 8.58 8.54 09/26/2006 7.59 8.20 8.18 8.17 8.14 8.05 10/03/2006 7.47 7.73 7.72 7.90 7.85 7.67 10/09/2006 7.62 8.32 8.28 8.25 8.23 8.09 10/16/2006 7.50 6.89 8.02 8.15 8.22 8.28 10/23/2006 8.18 8.63 8.35 8.58 8.58 8.60 Average 7.92 8.23 8.23 8.26 8.17 8.22 

Median 8.01 8.20 8.27 8.25 8.22 8.28 Min 7.47 6.89 7.70 7.82 7.71 7.62 Max 8.51 9.06 8.57 8.64 8.75 8.67 
Table 4

Mean Dissolved Oxygen (DO, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-007/05/2006 8.15 9.66 7.86 7.88 7.90 8.46 07/11/2006 7.83 10.61 8.19 7.91 7.93 8.84 07/18/2006 7.28 9.87 7.70 7.64 7.78 8.56 07/25/2006 6.84 10.08 7.84 7.59 8.04 8.58 07/31/2006 6.48 10.38 8.67 7.68 8.33 7.61 08/08/2006 7.31 9.95 7.59 7.57 8.01 8.75 08/15/2006 7.59 10.44 8.03 8.03 8.47 8.46 08/21/2006 7.27 10.09 7.88 7.77 8.37 8.11 08/30/2006 7.06 10.01 8.33 7.67 8.03 7.60 09/05/2006 7.42 10.27 8.11 8.10 8.69 8.36 09/12/2006 7.99 10.04 8.24 7.75 8.06 8.02 09/19/2006 7.63 9.21 8.05 8.18 8.35 7.97 09/26/2006 7.87 9.13 7.70 7.84 8.03 7.71 10/03/2006 8.16 9.44 8.01 7.72 7.88 8.19 10/09/2006 7.86 9.68 7.94 7.94 8.11 7.74 10/16/2006 8.01 9.35 7.89 7.98 8.05 8.01 10/23/2006 7.66 9.21 8.02 8.13 8.35 8.00 Average 7.55 9.85 8.00 7.85 8.14 8.17 Median 7.63 9.95 8.01 7.84 8.05 8.11 Min 6.48 9.13 7.59 7.57 7.78 7.60 Max 8.16 10.61 8.67 8.18 8.69 8.84 
Table 5

Mean Temperature (degrees Celsius) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 07/05/2006 21.29 15.23 19.63 19.65 19.73 19.74 07/11/2006 21.57 12.58 19.13 19.05 18.88 19.04 07/18/2006 22.24 11.30 18.89 18.63 18.84 19.54 07/25/2006 23.72 10.42 18.16 20.40 19.65 20.60 07/31/2006 22.21 9.87 16.35 18.23 17.17 19.14 08/08/2006 22.84 10.95 21.12 21.08 20.42 20.60 08/15/2006 21.96 10.51 17.39 18.48 17.93 18.54 08/21/2006 22.02 10.54 17.92 19.47 18.36 19.09 08/30/2006 21.22 10.64 17.90 19.62 18.90 18.38 09/05/2006 20.67 10.47 17.04 18.25 18.66 18.62 09/12/2006 19.26 11.28 17.25 19.32 18.18 18.59 09/19/2006 18.39 12.79 17.95 18.13 17.91 17.49 09/26/2006 17.46 12.80 17.08 17.72 17.35 16.80 10/03/2006 20.90 14.00 19.27 19.43 19.63 19.82 10/09/2006 15.28 10.88 14.95 15.45 15.45 15.77 10/16/2006 14.61 10.44 14.38 14.45 14.47 14.36 10/23/2006 18.22 12.53 18.05 18.18 17.77 17.50 Average 20.23 11.60 17.79 18.56 18.19 18.45 

Median 21.22 10.95 17.92 18.63 18.36 18.62 Min 14.61 9.87 14.38 14.45 14.47 14.36 Max 23.72 15.23 21.12 21.08 20.42 20.60 
Table 6

Total Suspended Solids (TSS, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Week07/05/2006 5 2.5 U 2.5 U 1 3 2.5 5 3.33 2.507/11/2006 5 2.5 U 2.5 U 1 3 2.5 5 3.33 2.507/18/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/25/2006 2.5 U 8 2.5 U 1 3 2.5 8 4.33 2.507/31/2006 16 25 2.5 U 2 3 2.5 25 14.5 1608/08/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/15/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/21/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/05/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/12/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/19/2006 2.5 U 6 2.5 U 1 3 2.5 6 3.67 2.509/26/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/03/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/09/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/16/2006 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 1 3 2.5 5 3.33 2.510/23/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 3.588 4.500 2.500

Median 2.5 2.5 2.5Min 2.5 2.5 2.5Max 16 25 2.5

Samples 17 17 17Detects 3 4 0Sampling Week Detects Samples 

07/05/2006 7 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 6 7 4 10 

07/11/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 6 2.5 U 2.5 U 1 10 

07/18/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 5 5 3 10 

07/25/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 2.5 U 1 10 

07/31/2006 7 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 7 8 5 2.5 U 4 10 

08/08/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

08/15/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

08/21/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 10 1 10 

08/30/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

09/05/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

09/12/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

09/19/2006 6 7 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2 10 

09/26/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 7 2.5 U 1 10 

10/03/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 7 5 6 3 10 

10/09/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

10/16/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

10/23/2006 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 10 

Average 3.235 2.765 2.500 2.500 2.500 2.500 2.912 3.588 3.412 3.559

Median 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Min 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Max 7 7 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 7 8 7 10

Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 5 5 4Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-09-S 

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD (Avg w/ LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD

S

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 7

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Week07/05/2006 7 X 2 UX 22 X 2 3 2 22 10.33 707/11/2006 2 U 2 U 0.7 J 1 3 0.7 2 1.57 207/18/2006 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/25/2006 0.8 JX 0.6 JX 2 UX 2 3 0.6 2 1.13 0.807/31/2006 2 U 2 U 2 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/08/2006 0.6 JX 2 UX 2 UX 1 3 0.6 2 1.53 208/15/2006 1 JX 1.1 JX 1 JX 3 3 1 1.1 1.03 108/21/2006 0.5 JX 0.5 JX 2 UX 2 3 0.5 2 1.00 0.508/30/2006 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/05/2006 2 UX 0.6 X 2 UX 1 3 0.6 2 1.53 209/12/2006 1.4 XJ 0.9 XJ 0.8 XJ 3 3 0.8 1.4 1.03 0.909/19/2006 0.8 JX 1 JX 0.9 JX 3 3 0.8 1 0.90 0.909/26/2006 0.8 JX 0.7 JX 0.7 JX 3 3 0.7 0.8 0.73 0.710/03/2006 2 UX 0.5 JX 1.2 JX 2 3 0.5 2 1.23 1.210/09/2006 0.7 J 2 U 2 U 1 3 0.7 2 1.57 210/16/2006 0.5 2 U 2 U 1 3 0.5 2 1.50 210/23/2006 0.9 1.9 2 U 2 3 0.9 2 1.60 1.9Average 1.588 1.400 2.782Median 1 1.9 2Min 0.5 0.5 0.7Max 7 2 22Samples 17 17 17Detects 11 9 7Sampling Week Detects Samples 07/05/2006 7 X 14 X 16 X 14 X 137 X 74 X 2.3 J 3.2 J 3 J 4 10 10 

07/11/2006 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 U 3J 2U 2U 2U 2U 1 10 

07/18/2006 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 0.5 X 2 UX 0.6 X 0.5 X 2 UX 3 10 

07/25/2006 2 UX 2 UX 0.7 JX 2 UX 0.9 JX 0.9 JX 0.7 2 U 2 1.1 6 10 07/31/2006 0.9 J 0.6 J 2 U 0.5 J 1.5 J & U 1.1 J 1.3 JX 0.7 JX 2.1 JX 1.4 JX 9 10 08/08/2006 0.9 JX 2 UX 0.8 JX 0.5 JX 0.75 JX 2 UX 1 J 0.5 J 0.7 J 1.3 J 8 10 

08/15/2006 0.5 JX 0.9 JX 0.9 JX 0.5 JX 1.1 JX 1.6 JX 0.5 J 0.7 J 1.9 J 1.1 J 10 10 08/21/2006 2 UX 0.5 JX 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 2 U 2 U 0.7 J 0.5 J 3 10 

08/30/2006 2 UX 2 UX 1 X 2 UX 2 UX 2 UX 0.7 J 2 U 0.9 J 0.7 J 4 10 

09/05/2006 2 UX 0.5 JX 2 UX 2 UX 1.3 JX & UX 2 UX 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 10 

09/12/2006 1 JX 1 JX 1 JX 0.9 JX 1.05 XJ 1.1 XJ 1 J 1 J 1.2 J 1 J 10 10 

09/19/2006 0.8 JX 0.9 JX 0.9 JX 1 JX 0.85 JX 0.8 JX 1.3 JX 0.8 JX 1.6 JX 1.1 JX 10 10 

09/26/2006 0.8 JX 0.5 JX 0.8 JX 1 JX 0.7 JX 0.6 JX 0.5 JX 0.7 JX 2 U 0.5 J 9 10 

10/03/2006 0.6 JX 2 UX 0.5 JX 0.5 JX 1.45 UX & JX 0.6 JX 0.6 JX 0.8 JX 2 U 2 U 7 10 

10/09/2006 0.6 J 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 0.6 J 0.6 J 2 U 2 U 3 10 10/16/2006 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 0.65 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.8 1 6 10 

10/23/2006 2U 2U 2U 2U 2 U 0.9 2 U 2 U 2 U 2 U 1 10 

Average 1.71 2.17 2.27 2.17 9.37 5.63 1.25 1.31 1.61 1.51

Median 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.45 1.10 1.00 0.80 2.00 1.30Min 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.65 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Max 7 14 16 14 137 74 2.3 3.2 3 4Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 9 8 9 8 11 12 12 11 11 11Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueX: Holding time exceededND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Summ

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-11-MD LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-09-S 

(Avg w/ Dup) LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S
Table 8

Ammonia Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.007 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 1 3 0.007 0.025 0.02 0.02507/11/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/18/2006 0.11 0.025 U 0.025 U 1 3 0.025 0.11 0.05 0.02507/25/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/31/2006 0.009 J 0.01 J 0.025 U 2 3 0.009 0.025 0.01 0.0108/08/2006 0.013 J 0.012 J 0.009 J 3 3 0.009 0.013 0.01 0.01208/15/2006 0.015 J 0.009 J 0.009 J 3 3 0.009 0.015 0.01 0.00908/21/2006 0.039 J 0.024 J 0.018 J 3 3 0.018 0.039 0.03 0.02408/30/2006 0.017 J 0.017 J 0.011 J 3 3 0.011 0.017 0.02 0.01709/05/2006 0.047 J 0.043 J 0.044 J 3 3 0.043 0.047 0.04 0.04409/12/2006 0.029 J 0.02 J 0.016 J 3 3 0.016 0.029 0.02 0.0209/19/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/26/2006 0.015 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 1 3 0.015 0.025 0.02 0.02510/03/2006 0.017 J 0.025 U 0.007 J 2 3 0.007 0.025 0.02 0.01710/09/2006 0.038 J 0.031 J 0.032 J 3 3 0.031 0.038 0.03 0.03210/16/2006 0.041 J 0.02 J 0.012 J 3 3 0.012 0.041 0.02 0.0210/23/2006 0.019 J 0.013 J 0.015 J 3 3 0.013 0.019 0.02 0.015Average 0.029 0.022 0.020Median 0.025 0.025 0.025Min 0.007 0.009 0.007Max 0.11 0.043 0.044Samples 17 17 17Detects 14 10 10Sampling Date De07/05/2006 0.025 U 0.007 J 0.006 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.009 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.013 J 

07/11/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 07/18/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.007 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.011 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 07/25/2006 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.025 U 07/31/2006 0.008 J 0.008 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.0235 J & U 0.025 U 0.025 U 0.006 J 0.025 U 0.025 U 08/08/2006 0.028 J 0.011 J 0.015 J 0.018 J 0.017 J 0.018 J 0.021 J 0.037 J 0.01 J 0.027 J 08/15/2006 0.017 J 0.02 J 0.015 J 0.015 J 0.013 J 0.023 J 0.012 J 0.013 J 0.018 J 0.024 J 08/21/2006 0.02 J 0.02 J 0.042 J 0.033 J 0.027 J 0.019 J 0.019 J 0.02 J 0.016 J 0.042 J 08/30/2006 0.035 J 0.021 J 0.021 J 0.023 J 0.0225 J 0.022 J 0.017 J 0.019 J 0.03 J 0.029 J 09/05/2006 0.036 J 0.047 J 0.038 J 0.039 J 0.0395 J 0.037 J 0.037 J 0.043 J 0.041 J 0.05 09/12/2006 0.029 J 0.031 J 0.022 J 0.027 J 0.0265 J 0.027 J 0.025 J 0.029 J 0.02 J 0.033 J 09/19/2006 0.025 U 0.031 J 0.025 U 0.017 J 0.012 J 0.014 J 0.025 U 0.007 J 0.013 J 0.011 J 09/26/2006 0.015 J 0.019 J 0.009 J 0.014 J 0.015 J 0.017 J 0.015 J 0.018 J 0.032 J 0.027 J 10/03/2006 0.008 J 0.019 J 0.012 J 0.014 J 0.013 J 0.014 J 0.027 J 0.02 J 0.025 J 0.023 J 10/09/2006 0.03 J 0.025 J 0.029 J 0.029 J 0.024 J 0.03 J 0.025 J 0.028 J 0.043 J 0.038 J 

10/16/2006 0.02 J 0.024 J 0.019 J 0.022 J 0.015 J 0.019 J 0.031 J 0.023 J 0.04 J 0.042 J 

10/23/2006 0.006 J 0.018 J 0.015 J 0.015 J 0.012 J 0.019 J 0.016 J 0.017 J 0.05 0.016 J Average 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.023 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.027 0.028Median 0.025 0.021 0.021 0.025 0.024 0.022 0.025 0.023 0.025 0.025

Min 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.014 0.012 0.011 0.009 0.006 0.01 0.011

Max 0.036 0.047 0.042 0.039 0.040 0.037 0.037 0.043 0.05 0.05Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 12 14 13 12 13 13 12 13 12 13Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-09-S 

(Avg with LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S
Table 9

Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.11 0.11 0.013 J 3 3 0.013 0.11 0.08 0.1107/11/2006 0.15 0.16 0.017 J 3 3 0.017 0.16 0.11 0.1507/18/2006 0.19 0.15 0.025 U 2 3 0.025 0.19 0.12 0.1507/25/2006 0.26 0.26 0.038 J 3 3 0.038 0.26 0.19 0.2607/31/2006 0.23 0.24 0.027 J 3 3 0.027 0.24 0.17 0.2308/08/2006 0.25 0.25 0.017 J 3 3 0.017 0.25 0.17 0.2508/15/2006 0.28 0.29 0.033 J 3 3 0.033 0.29 0.20 0.2808/21/2006 0.33 0.5 0.044 J 3 3 0.044 0.5 0.29 0.3308/30/2006 0.38 0.38 0.045 J 3 3 0.045 0.38 0.27 0.3809/05/2006 0.35 0.39 0.045 J 3 3 0.045 0.39 0.26 0.3509/12/2006 0.42 0.42 0.031 J 3 3 0.031 0.42 0.29 0.4209/19/2006 0.41 0.41 0.014 J 3 3 0.014 0.41 0.28 0.4109/26/2006 0.45 0.43 0.011 J 3 3 0.011 0.45 0.30 0.4310/03/2006 0.52 0.52 0.012 J 3 3 0.012 0.52 0.35 0.5210/09/2006 0.55 0.61 0.013 J 3 3 0.013 0.61 0.39 0.5510/16/2006 0.59 0.59 0.025 U 2 3 0.025 0.59 0.40 0.5910/23/2006 0.57 0.09 0.007 J 3 3 0.007 0.57 0.22 0.09Average 0.355 0.341 0.025Median 0.35 0.38 0.025Min 0.11 0.09 0.007Max 0.59 0.61 0.045Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 15Sampling Date 07/05/2006 0.09 0.08 0.1 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 

07/11/2006 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.1 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.07 0.07 

07/18/2006 0.12 0.14 0.1 0.07 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.05 0.08 

07/25/2006 0.2 0.21 0.26 0.19 0.24 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.019 J 0.0407/31/2006 0.18 0.16 0.2 0.12 0.17 0.13 0.19 0.15 0.05 J 0.1

08/08/2006 0.24 0.21 0.23 0.22 0.23 0.21 0.049 J 0.18 0.22 0.

08/15/2006 0.25 0.19 0.25 0.17 0.235 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.07 0.12 

08/21/2006 0.29 0.23 0.3 0.23 0.29 0.22 0.25 0.21 0.19 0.18 

08/30/2006 0.39 0.29 0.38 0.33 0.37 0.28 0.33 0.28 0.18 0.18 

09/05/2006 0.35 0.26 0.36 0.27 0.34 0.27 0.33 0.28 0.25 0.24 

09/12/2006 0.42 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.4 0.27 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.3 

09/19/2006 0.4 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35 

09/26/2006 0.4 0.39 0.42 0.4 0.41 0.39 0.35 0.36 0.38 0.38 10/03/2006 0.53 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.46 0.45 0.42 0.43 0.42 0.4

10/09/2006 0.53 0.49 0.56 0.45 0.535 0.48 0.56 0.5 0.5 0.5 

10/16/2006 0.6 0.52 0.58 0.54 0.56 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.52 0.53 10/23/2006 0.57 0.53 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.55 0.44 0.45 0.51 0.5

Average 0.3347059 0.292 0.335 0.286 0.321 0.283 0.287 0.2758824 0.2440588 0.247

Median 0.350 0.260 0.360 0.270 0.340 0.270 0.330 0.280 0.220 0.180Min 0.09 0.08 0.1 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.049 0.08 0.019 0.049Max 0.6 0.53 0.58 0.54 0.56 0.55 0.56 0.53 0.52 0.53Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-M

LGP-11-MD

LGP-09-S (Avg 

with Dup) LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S
Table 10

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.2 0.3 0.3 3 3 0.2 0.3 0.27 0.307/11/2006 0.3 0.4 0.4 3 3 0.3 0.4 0.37 0.407/18/2006 0.3 0.2 0.1 3 3 0.1 0.3 0.20 0.207/25/2006 0.5 0.3 0.4 3 3 0.3 0.5 0.40 0.407/31/2006 0.3 0.5 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.5 0.33 0.308/08/2006 0.3 0.4 0.3 3 3 0.3 0.4 0.33 0.308/15/2006 0.05 U 0.1 0.05 U 1 3 0.05 0.1 0.07 0.0508/21/2006 0.4 0.3 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.4 0.30 0.308/30/2006 0.4 0.2 0.05 U 2 3 0.05 0.4 0.22 0.209/05/2006 0.6 0.3 0.4 3 3 0.3 0.6 0.43 0.409/12/2006 0.2 0.4 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.4 0.27 0.209/19/2006 0.8 0.5 0.4 3 3 0.4 0.8 0.57 0.509/26/2006 0.4 0.5 0.4 3 3 0.4 0.5 0.43 0.410/03/2006 0.3 0.3 0.05 U 2 3 0.05 0.3 0.22 0.310/09/2006 0.3 0.2 0.4 3 3 0.2 0.4 0.30 0.310/16/2006 0.1 0.2 0.1 3 3 0.1 0.2 0.13 0.110/23/2006 0.2 0.4 0.4 3 3 0.2 0.4 0.33 0.4Average 0.332 0.324 0.256

Median 0.3 0.3 0.3Min 0.05 0.1 0.05Max 0.8 0.5 0.4Samples 17 17 17Detects 16 17 14Sampling Date Detects Samples Minimum M

07/05/2006 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 10 10 0.1 07/11/2006 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.35 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 10 10 0.35 07/18/2006 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 10 10 0.2 07/25/2006 0.5 0.4 0.3 1.6 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 10 10 0.3 07/31/2006 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.65 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 10 10 0.3 08/08/2006 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.35 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 10 10 0.2 08/15/2006 0.2 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.05 U 0.125 U & 0.2 0.2 0.05 U 0.2 1.2 5 10 0.05 08/21/2006 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 10 10 0.2 08/30/2006 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.45 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.3 10 10 0.2 09/05/2006 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 10 10 0.2 09/12/2006 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.3 10 10 0.3 09/19/2006 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.175 & U 0.3 0.3 0.2 1 1 10 10 0.175 09/26/2006 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 10 10 0.3 10/03/2006 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.55 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.3 10 10 0.1 10/09/2006 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 10 10 0.2 10/16/2006 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.175 U & 0.4 1 0.2 0.4 0.3 9 10 0.175 10/23/2006 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.35 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 10 10 0.3 Average 0.318 0.385 0.279 0.421 0.363 0.400 0.359 0.362 0.441 0.435

Median 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3Min 0.2 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.125 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.2 0.2Max 0.5 0.7 0.4 1.6 0.65 0.7 1 0.7 1 1.2Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 16 16 16 15 17 17 16 17 17Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-MD

Summary of Downst

LGP-06-S

Average Median

LGP-11-MD LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S

Samples

LGP-09-S 

(Avg with 

Minimum

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-09-MD

CR-REF-S

LGP-11-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD Detects Maximum
Table 11

Total Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.05 0.03 0.008 J 3 3 0.008 0.05 0.03 0.0307/11/2006 0.04 0.05 0.004 J 3 3 0.004 0.05 0.03 0.0407/18/2006 0.03 0.03 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.03 0.02 0.0307/25/2006 0.1 0.04 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.1 0.05 0.0407/31/2006 0.05 0.06 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.0508/08/2006 0.05 0.05 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.0508/15/2006 0.05 0.05 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.0508/21/2006 0.05 0.05 0.008 J 3 3 0.008 0.05 0.04 0.0508/30/2006 0.08 0.07 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.0709/05/2006 0.07 0.07 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.0709/12/2006 0.06 0.06 0.005 J 3 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0609/19/2006 0.08 0.07 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.08 0.05 0.0709/26/2006 0.06 0.07 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.0610/03/2006 0.08 0.08 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.0810/09/2006 0.07 0.07 0.008 J 3 3 0.008 0.07 0.05 0.0710/16/2006 0.08 0.08 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.0810/23/2006 0.05 0.05 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.05Average 0.062 0.058 0.009Median 0.06 0.06 0.01Min 0.03 0.03 0.004Max 0.1 0.08 0.01Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 16Sampling Date Detects Samples M07/05/2006 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 10 10 07/11/2006 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.03 10 10 07/18/2006 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 10 10 07/25/2006 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.04 10 10 07/31/2006 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 10 10 08/08/2006 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 10 10 08/15/2006 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 10 10 08/21/2006 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 10 10 08/30/2006 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.14 0.06 0.05 0.05 10 10 09/05/2006 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 10 10 09/12/2006 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.065 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 10 10 09/19/2006 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.095 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.07 10 10 09/26/2006 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.08 10 10 10/03/2006 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.07 10 10 10/09/2006 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.08 10 10 10/16/2006 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.085 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 10 10 10/23/2006 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 10 10 Average 0.056 0.051 0.054 0.052 0.064 0.054 0.058 0.056 0.052 0.052

Median 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05Min 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.025 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03Max 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.09 0.08Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-09-S (Avg 

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD with Dup) LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD

Summa

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 12

Orthophosphate Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.02 0.02 0.005 J 3 3 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.0207/11/2006 0.02 0.02 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.0207/18/2006 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.005 UX 2 3 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.0207/25/2006 0.03 X 0.04 X 0.005 JX 3 3 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.0307/31/2006 0.06 X 0.07 X 0.005 UX 2 3 0.005 0.07 0.05 0.0608/08/2006 0.03 0.03 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.03 0.02 0.0308/15/2006 0.04 0.04 0.003 J 3 3 0.003 0.04 0.03 0.0408/21/2006 0.05 X 0.05 X 0.01 X 3 3 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.0508/30/2006 0.05 X 0.05 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.05 0.04 0.0509/05/2006 0.06 X 0.05 X 0.005 UX 2 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0509/12/2006 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0609/19/2006 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.009 JX 3 3 0.009 0.06 0.04 0.0609/26/2006 0.06 X 0.05 X 0.005 UX 2 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0510/03/2006 0.07 0.07 0.006 J 3 3 0.006 0.07 0.05 0.0710/09/2006 0.06 0.06 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0610/16/2006 0.06 0.06 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.06 0.04 0.0610/23/2006 0.04 0.04 0.005 U 2 3 0.005 0.04 0.03 0.04Average 0.046 0.046 0.005

Median 0.05 0.05 0.005Min 0.02 0.02 0.003Max 0.07 0.07 0.01Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 6Sampling Date 

07/05/2006 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 

07/11/2006 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 

07/18/2006 0.02 0.02 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 

07/25/2006 0.03 X 0.03 X 0.04 X 0.02 X 0.03 X 0.03 X 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 

07/31/2006 0.03 X 0.03 X 0.03 X 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.02 X 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.02 

08/08/2006 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 

08/15/2006 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 

08/21/2006 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 

08/30/2006 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 

09/05/2006 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.055 X 0.04 X 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 

09/12/2006 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 

09/19/2006 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.065 X 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.05 X 

09/26/2006 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 

10/03/2006 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.075 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

10/09/2006 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.065 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

10/16/2006 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 

10/23/2006 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Average 0.045 0.040 0.043 0.041 0.045 0.042 0.042 0.041 0.035 0.035

Median 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03Min 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01Max 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.075 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueX: Holding time exceededND: Not detectedDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-09-S (Avg 

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S with Dup) LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD

LGP-11-

MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 13

2,3,7,8-TCDD (pg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date Sample07/05/2006 0.393 U 0.3415 U * 0 2 ND ND ND ND07/11/2006 * 1.17 U 0.815 U 0 2 ND ND ND ND7/18/06 0.3075 U 0.635 U 0.715 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND7/25/06 0.403 U 0.4345 U 0.4675 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND7/31/06 1.005 U 1.025 U 0.745 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND8/8/06 0.69 U 0.485 U 0.65 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND8/15/06 1.24 U 1.075 U 1.41 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND8/21/06 0.81 U 0.74 U 0.645 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND8/30/06 0.585 U 0.82 U 0.985 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND9/5/06 0.272 U 0.296 U 0.2 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND9/12/06 0.3805 U 0.725 U 0.441 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND9/19/06 0.67 U 0.4345 U 0.439 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND9/26/06 0.57 U 0.565 U 0.3635 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/3/06 0.474 U 0.53 U 0.56 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/9/06 0.72 U 0.835 U 0.82 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/16/06 0.3875 U 0.486 U 0.98 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/23/06 0.88 U 0.905 U 0.975 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 0.612 0.677 0.701Median 0.5775 0.635 0.6825Min 0.272 0.296 0.2Max 1.24 1.17 1.41Samples 16 17 16Detects 000Sampling Date Detects Samples Minimum Maxim7/5/06 0.305 U 0.3855 U 0.635 U 0.355 U 0.805 U 1.265 U 0.331 U 0.469 U 0.52 U * 0 9 ND ND 7/11/06 1.045 U * 0.665 U 0.845 U 0.725 U 0.79 U 0.87 U * 1.245 U 1.07 U 0 8 ND ND 7/18/06 0.427 U 0.3465 U 0.427 U 0.535 U 0.512 U 0.335 U 0.367 U 0.378 U 0.341 U 0.2415 U 0 10 ND ND 

7/25/06 0.349 U 0.87 U 0.349 U 0.3975 U 0.515 U&* 0.442 U 1.615 U 1.1 U 0.975 U 0.515 U 0 10 ND ND 

7/31/06 * 0.4995 U 0.4795 U 0.387 U 0.54325 U 0.705 U 0.515 U 0.555 U 0.409 U 0.478 U 0 9 ND ND 

8/8/06 0.785 U 0.7 U 0.9 U 0.73 U 0.815 U 0.65 U 0.895 U 0.476 U 0.675 U 0.64 U 0 10 ND ND 

8/15/06 2.025 U 1.08 U 1.46 U 0.855 U 1.685 U 1.16 U 1.465 U 1.49 U 1.685 U 1.865 U 0 10 ND ND 

8/21/06 0.79 U 0.525 U 0.515 U 1.66 U 0.59425 U 0.59 U 0.48 U 0.765 U 0.585 U 0.96 U 0 10 ND ND 

8/30/06 1.16 U 0.655 U 0.905 U 0.66 U 0.6525 U 0.765 U 1.065 U 0.7 U 0.605 U 0.73 U 0 10 ND ND 

9/5/06 0.204 U 0.1745 U 0.123 U 0.2775 U 0.31775 U 0.231 U 0.181 U 0.274 U 0.297 U 0.2795 U 0 10 ND ND 

9/12/06 0.53 U 0.2315 U 0.4485 U 0.407 U 0.3955 U 0.225 U 0.289 U 0.236 U 0.285 U 0.238 U 0 10 ND ND 

9/19/06 0.49 U 0.59 U 0.289 U 0.435 U 1.3125 U 1.3 U 0.845 U 1.09 U 0.489 U 0.4515 U 0 10 ND ND 

9/26/06 0.456 U 0.4435 U 0.71 U 0.3965 U 0.3115 U 0.408 U 0.363 U 0.335 U 0.445 U 0.272 U 0 10 ND ND 

10/3/06 0.56 U 1.145 U 0.434 U 0.74 U 0.5875 U 0.411 U 0.565 U 0.775 U 0.645 U 0.885 U 0 10 ND ND 

10/9/06 0.55 U 0.655 U 0.87 U 0.55 U 1.64 U 1.15 U 1.015 U 0.452 U 0.493 U 1.5 U 0 10 ND ND 

10/16/06 0.433 U 0.3805 U 0.3715 U 0.55 U 0.344 U&* 0.372 U 0.258 U 0.52 U 0.565 U 0.54 U 0 10 ND ND 

10/23/06 0.99 U 0.77 U 1.17 U 1.42 U 0.835 U&* 0.875 U 1.275 U 1.27 U 0.72 U 1.005 U 0 10 ND ND Average 0.694 0.591 0.632 0.659 0.741 0.687 0.729 0.680 0.646 0.729

Median 0.54 0.5575 0.515 0.55 0.59425 0.65 0.565 0.538 0.565 0.59

Min 0.204 0.1745 0.123 0.2775 0.3115 0.225 0.181 0.236 0.285 0.238

Max 2.025 1.145 1.46 1.66 1.685 1.3 1.615 1.49 1.685 1.865Samples 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 16 17 16Detects 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detected*: Result not available; either sample not received by analytical laboratory or received broken.Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-09-S 

(Avg. with 

LGP-01-

S

LGP-01-

MD

Summary of Downstream 

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S

LGP-06-

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD MD
Table 14

2,3,7,8-TCDF (pg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyTier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Sampling Date07/05/2006 0.2815 U 0.4095 U * 0 2 ND ND ND ND07/11/2006 * 0.9 U 0.695 U 0 2 ND ND ND ND07/18/2006 0.505 U 0.4125 U 0.474 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/25/2006 0.246 U 0.4975 U 0.359 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/31/2006 0.655 U 0.63 U 0.715 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/08/2006 0.64 U 0.615 U 0.485 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/15/2006 1.47 U 1.48 U 1.14 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/21/2006 0.41 U 0.443 U 0.27 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2006 0.494 U 0.575 U 0.65 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/05/2006 0.419 U 0.173 U 0.1875 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/12/2006 0.3675 U 0.368 U 0.465 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/19/2006 0.4665 U 0.49 U 0.87 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/26/2006 0.3635 U 0.3975 U 0.3405 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/03/2006 0.575 U 0.4775 U 0.56 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/09/2006 0.59 U 0.321 U 1.135 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/16/2006 0.383 U 1.005 U 0.39 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/23/2006 0.6 U 0.72 U 0.565 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 0.529 0.583 0.581

Median 0.48025 0.49 0.5225Min 0.246 0.173 0.1875Max 1.47 1.48 1.14Samples 16 17 16Detects 0 0 0Sampling Date Detects Samples Minimum Ma07/05/2006 0.2125 U 0.364 U 0.444 U 0.3925 U 0.579 U 1.025 U 0.424 U 0.57 U 0.243 U * 0 9 ND 

07/11/2006 0.8 U * 0.87 U 0.875 U 0.45025 U 0.605 U 0.575 U * 0.615 U 0.645 U 0 8 ND 

07/18/2006 0.4045 U 0.4435 U 0.3795 U 0.364 U 0.43325 U 0.42 U 0.53 U 0.525 U 0.387 U 0.311 U 0 10 ND 

07/25/2006 0.4115 U 0.492 U 0.2295 U 0.303 U 0.453 U&* 0.438 U 1.45 U 0.645 U 0.585 U 0.77 U 0 10 ND 

07/31/2006 * 0.3315 U 0.705 U 0.435 U 0.3665 U 0.585 U 0.59 U 0.451 U 0.498 U 0.555 U 0 9 ND 

08/08/2006 0.905 U 1.13 U 0.63 U 0.56 U 0.8025 U 0.585 U 0.89 U 0.68 U 0.97 U 0.73 U 0 10 ND 

08/15/2006 1.345 U 1.35 U 1.795 U 0.99 U 1.58 U 1.065 U 0.94 U 1.19 U 1.115 U 1.44 U 0 10 ND 

08/21/2006 0.4555 U 0.7 U 0.57 U 0.53 U 0.555 U 1.2 U 0.66 U 0.81 U 1.01 U 1.07 U 0 10 ND 

08/30/2006 0.455 U 0.885 U 1.095 U 0.91 U 0.65 U 0.835 U 0.427 U 0.55 U 0.695 U 0.525 U 0 10 ND 

09/05/2006 0.2805 U 0.284 U 0.3995 U 0.27 U 0.302 U 0.299 U 0.28 U 0.32 U 0.44 U 0.425 U 0 10 ND 

09/12/2006 0.396 U 0.223 U 0.515 U 0.243 U 0.3085 U 0.268 U 0.223 U 0.28 U 0.356 U 0.206 U 0 10 ND 

09/19/2006 0.368 U 0.4765 U 0.3695 U 0.4025 U 0.76525 U 1.01 U 0.575 U 0.61 U 0.605 U 1.51 U 0 10 ND 

09/26/2006 0.3465 U 0.2855 U 0.291 U 0.327 U 0.39175 U 0.436 U 0.373 U 0.26 U 0.407 U 0.332 U 0 10 ND 

10/03/2006 0.4235 U 0.53 U 0.66 U 0.805 U 0.51 U 1.445 U 0.455 U 0.515 U 0.56 U 0.56 U 0 10 ND 

10/09/2006 0.4075 U 0.3885 U 0.83 U 0.575 U 1.0925 U 0.94 U 0.96 U 0.63 U 0.875 U 0.945 U 0 10 ND 

10/16/2006 0.418 U 0.565 U 0.378 U 0.3125 U 0.925 U&* 0.203 U 0.26 U 0.285 U 0.459 U 0.56 U 0 10 ND 

10/23/2006 1.075 U 0.695 U 0.815 U 0.855 U 0.735 U&* 1.15 U 1.175 U 0.93 U 0.925 U 0.645 U 0 10 ND 

Average 0.544 0.571 0.646 0.538 0.641 0.736 0.634 0.578 0.632 0.702

Median 0.41475 0.48425 0.57 0.435 0.555 0.605 0.575 0.56 0.585 0.603Min 0.2125 0.223 0.2295 0.243 0.302 0.203 0.223 0.26 0.243 0.206Max 1.345 1.35 1.795 0.99 1.58 1.445 1.45 1.19 1.115 1.51Samples 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 16 17 16Detects 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueND: Not detected*: Result not available; either sample not received by analytical laboratory or received broken.Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-01-

MD

LGP-09-

MD LGP-06-S

LGP-06-

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S MD

LGP-11-

MD

Summary of Downst

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-09-S 

(Avg. with 

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Sample Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-01-

S
Table 15 

Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyNovember 2005Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Frequency 

Detects 

Analyte Sample Date

Resin Acids12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00015 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / 6 Abietic Acid ug/L 0.019 U 0.01115 U 0.0265 U 0.0155 U 0.101 U 0.041 U 0.041 U 0.02375 U 0 / 6 Dehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.0215 U 0.0095 U 0.027 U 0.01 U 0.0285 U 0.0145 U 0.012 U 0.010875 U 0 / 6 Isopimaric Acid ug/L 0.003 U 0.0015 U 0.0045 U 0.0015 U 0.011 U 0.006 U 0.007 U 0.002875 U 0 / 6 Neoabietic Acid ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00035 U 0.0004 U 0.00025 U 0.004 J 0.001 J 0.0005 U 0.00035 U 2 / 6 Palustric Acid ug/L 0.0007 U 0.0006 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.005 U 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.000625 U 0 / 6 Pimaric Acid ug/L 0.002 U 0.0015 U 0.0025 U 0.0015 U 0.0035 U 0.0035 U 0.005 U 0.00275 U 0 / 6 Sandaracopimaric Acid ug/L 0.0015 U 0.00055 U 0.0015 U 0.0005 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0 / 6 Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.003 J 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 1 / 6 ChloroformChloroform ug/L 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 / 6 Phytosterols/Retenebeta-Sitosterol ug/L 0.396 J 0.453 J 0.408 J 0.402 J 0.7 J 0.513 J 0.766 0.949 6 / 6 Campesterol ug/L 0.024 J 0.056 J 0.028 J 0.042 J 0.072 J 0.049 J 0.064 J 0.0805 J 6 / 6 Stigmastanol ug/L 0.007 U 0.006 U 0.00605 U 0.006 U 0.0113 U 0.026 J 0.049 J 0.0695 J 3 / 6 Stigmasterol ug/L 0.032 J 0.047 J 0.038 J 0.042 J 0.059 J 0.044 J 0.059 J 0.0575 J 6 / 6 Retene ug/L 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0 / 6 Physical ParametersCarbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) mg/L 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 6 / 6 Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) mg/L 2 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.5 2.5 6 / 6 Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) mg/L 2.5 U 6 X 2.5 UX 9 X 7 5 8 6.5 6 / 6 Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated value.X: Holding time exceeded.Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

CR-REF

 CR REF C SWA

11/18/05

SR-REF

 SR REF B SWA

11/13/05

LGP-14

LGP-01 (Avg. 

 LGP 11 SWA LGP 09 SWA with Dup)

LGP-06 

 LGP 13 SWA

LGP-13 LGP-09 LGP-11

 LGP 14 SWA

11/14/05 11/14/05 11/18/05 11/16/05 11/16/05

 LGP 06 SWA

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Summ

11/17/05 
Table 16

Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyMarch 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlach Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID 

Analyte Sample Date

Resin Acids 

Pimaric Acid ug/L 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0035 U 0.001 U 0.002 U 0.0035 U 0.00225 U 0 Sandaracopimaric Acid ug/L 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0 Isopimaric Acid ug/L 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0025 U 0.0015 U 0.004 U 0.006 U 0.003 U 0 Palustric Acid ug/L 0.00035 U 0.00035 U 0.00035 U 0.00045 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0 Dehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.0205 U 0.0175 U 0.0525 U 0.0135 U 0.0275 U 0.0365 U 0.0235 U 0 Abietic Acid ug/L 0.107 J 0.0095 U 0.02 U 0.013 J 0.039 J 0.086 J 0.0265 J 4 Neoabietic Acid ug/L 0.001 J 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.001 J 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 1 Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 Chloroform

Chloroform ug/L 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 Phytosterols/ReteneCampesterol ug/L 0.04 J 0.094 J 0.103 J 0.113 J 0.121 J 0.111 J 0.1025 J 5 Stigmasterol ug/L 0.053 J 0.075 J 0.085 J 0.091 J 0.118 J 0.089 J 0.089 J 5 beta-Sitosterol ug/L 0.735 1.91 1.66 1.73 2 2.02 2.485 5 Stigmastanol ug/L 0.01015 U 0.00955 U 0.034 J 0.041 J 0.047 J 0.056 J 0.01205 U 4 Retene ug/L 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.00015 U 0.001 J 0.002 J 0.001 J 0.001 J 4 Physical ParametersCarbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) mg/L 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.9 2.8 3.05 5 Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) mg/L 2.6 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.1 3 2.9 5 Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) mg/L 2.5 U 6 6 8 10 9 3.75 U& 5 Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated value.* Maximum possible value; separate analysis of filtered portion to determine dissolved phase could not be conductedData was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

LGP-01 (Avg. 

with Dup)

3/15/06

LGP-09 LGP-06

 LGP2-03-SW-A LGP2-02-SW-A

Frequ

De

3/14/06

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11

 CR-REF-SW-A SR-REF-SW-A031306 LGP2-05-SW-A

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

 LGP2-04-SW-A

3/18/06 3/13/06 3/16/06 3/16/06 3/15/06
Table 17

Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study June 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Min

Resin Acids

Pimaric Acid ug/L 0.0015 U 0.004 U 0.004 U 0.0035 U 0.005 U 0.0045 U 0.008 U&J 1 / 5 0.Sandaracopimaric Acid ug/L 0.002 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.00075 U 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.00175 U 0 / 5 Isopimaric Acid ug/L 0.012 J 0.013 J 0.014 J 0.013 J 0.022 J 0.018 J 0.0145 J 5 / 5 0Palustric Acid ug/L 0.0035 UJ 0.0015 UJ 0.002 UJ 0.003 J 0.0055 UJ 0.003 UJ 0.00075 UJ&U 5 / 5 0.Dehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.0185 U 0.051 U 0.0415 U 0.0355 U 0.0495 U 0.041 U 0.0725 U&J 1 / 5 0Abietic Acid ug/L 0.147 0.079 J 0.073 J 0.077 J 0.145 0.136 0.0625 J 5 / 5 0Neoabietic Acid ug/L 0.003 J 0.001 J 0.001 J 0.002 J 0.003 J 0.002 J 0.000625 J&U 5 / 5 0.012,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids ug/L 0.00025 U 0.0003 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / 5 Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid ug/L 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / 5 ChloroformChloroform ug/L 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 / 5 Phytosterols/Retenebeta-Sitosterol ug/L 0.715 U 0.975 U 1.485 U 1.04 U 0.79 U 1.07 U 1.1875 U 0 / 5 Campesterol ug/L 0.026 J 0.062 J 0.08 J 0.063 J 0.05 J 0.073 J 0.0685 J 5 / 5 0Stigmastanol ug/L 0.01525 U 0.0145 U 0.0172 U 0.01285 U 0.0134 U 0.01555 U 0.0137 U 0 / 5 Stigmasterol ug/L 0.099 J 0.129 J 0.177 J 0.126 J 0.105 J 0.105 J 0.1445 J 5 / 5 0Retene ug/L 0.0006 U 0.003 J 0.001 U 0.00095 U 0.0007 U 0.114 0.002 J 2 / 5 0.Physical ParametersCarbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) mg/L 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.5 5 / 5 2Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) mg/L 2.9 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.65 5 / 5 2Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) mg/L 2.5 U 25 30 22 22 35 10.5 5 / 5 Notes:

J: Estimated value.

LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 

LGP-01 (Avg. with 

Dup)

Summary S

Frequency of 

Detects

6/7/06 6/5/06

 LGP2-03-SWA060706 LGP2-02-SW- A060506

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

6/10/06 6/8/06 6/8/06 6/7/06

Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

Analyte Sample Date

Sample ID

Location

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.

6/6/06

 CR-REF-SWA061006 SR-REF-SW- A060806 LGP2-05-SW- A060806 LGP2-04-SW- A060706

CR-REF SR-REF
Table 18

Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudySeptember 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Frequency of 

Detects Minimum Maximu

Analyte Sample Date

Resid Acids

12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Abietic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Dehydroabietic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Isopimaric Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Pimaric Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND 12-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND 14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid** ug/L 20 U 20 UJ 20 UJ&UJ 20 UJ 20 U 20 U 20 U 0 / 5 ND ND 9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Linoleic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid ug/L 10 U 10 UJ 10 UJ&UJ 10 UJ 10 U 10 U 10 U 0 / 5 ND ND ChloroformChloroform ug/L 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U&U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 / 5 ND ND Phytosterols/Retenebeta-Sitosterol ug/L 0.2 J 0.19 J 0.165 J&J 0.26 J 0.39 J 0.49 J 0.57 J 5 / 5 0.165 0.57 Retene ug/L 0.0069 J 0.024 U 0.024 U&U 0.024 U 0.0245 U 0.0245 U 0.025 U 0 / 5 ND ND Physical ParamtersCarbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) mg/L 1.8 2.7 2.8 & 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.5 5 / 5 2.5 2.8 Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) mg/L 1.8 2.6 2.5 & 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.6 5 / 5 2.5 2.7 Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) mg/L 2.5 U 6 2.5 U&U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 6 1 / 5 2.5 6 Notes:

Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results.U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J indicates estimated valueDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit.* Both effluent samples represent total effluent - the lab did not filter the sample to get just the dissolved fraction. Must calculate and report each phase as maximum possible.** Calculated by summing 12-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid and 14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid.Compounds depicted in red text were not analyzed during previous rounds because they were not included on the standard resin acid analyte list. Results reported here for informational purposes only.

LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06

9/20/06 9/20/06 

CR-REF SR-REF

LGP-13-14 (Avg. 

with Dup)

9/19/06

9/21/06 9/18/06 9/19/06 9/22/06

 CR-REF-SW-A092106 LGP-01-SW-A- 092206 

 LGP-03-SW-A- 092006 LGP-02-SW-A- 092006 LGP2-04-SW-A- 091906

LGP-01

 SR-REF-SW-A091806
Table 19

Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyNovember 2005Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2005Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Frequ

of De

Analyte Sample Date

ug/L

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.0007 UJ 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0.003 U 0.003 U 0.003 U 0.003 U 0.0005 U 0.003 U 0.003 U 0.003 U 0 / 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00035 U 0.0006 UJ 0.0005 U 0.0003 U 0.00025 U 0 / 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 0.0005 UJ 0.00025 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U R 0.0005 U 0.00025 U 0.000375 UJ&U 0 / Pentachlorophenol 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U R 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.00075 U 0 / 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.001 J 0.00025 U NA 0.0005 U 0.00025 U 0.000275 U 1 / Tetrachlorocatechol 0.001 J 0.00035 U 0.0005 U 0.0003 U NA 0.0004 U 0.00035 U 0.0004 U 1 / 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U NA 0.00025 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0 / 3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U NA 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 0.00025 U 0.0005 U 0.00025 U 0.0005 U NA 0.00025 U 0.0005 U 0.000375 U 0 / Tetrachloroguaiacol 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.00025 U 0.0005 U NA 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0.00025 U 0 / Trichlorosyringol 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U NA 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.001 U 0 / Notes:

J: Estimated value.R: Rejected; no valid data for anayte.NA - Not analyzed. See validation report for explanation.Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

CR-REF LGP-14

 CR REF C SWA

11/18/05

SR-REF

 SR REF B SWA

11/13/05

 LGP 09 SWA LGP 06 SWA 

LGP-01 (Avg. with 

Dup)

LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 

11/16/05 11/17/05 

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

S

11/14/05 11/16/05 11/14/05 11/18/05

 LGP 14 SWA LGP 13 SWA LGP 11 SWA
Table 20

Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study March 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID 

Analyte Sample Date

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U Pentachlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U Tetrachlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0035 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U Tetrachloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U Trichlorosyringol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U Notes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated value.* Maximum Possible value; separate analysis of filtered portion to determine dissolved phase could not be conductedData was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

3/14/06

LGP-01 (Avg. 

with Dup)

3/18/06 3/13/06 3/16/06 3/16/06 3/15/06 3/15/06

 CR-REF-SW-A

 SR-REF-SWA031306 LGP2-05-SW-A LGP2-04-SW-A LGP2-03-SW-A LGP2-02-SW-A

LGP-09 LGP-06

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Fr

o

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11
Table 21

Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study June 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Minimum 

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND Pentachlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND Tetrachlorocatechol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND Tetrachloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND Trichlorosyringol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND Notes:

J: Estimated value.Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

LGP-01 (Avg. 

with Dup)

6/6/06

6/10/06 6/8/06 6/8/06 6/7/06 6/7/06 6/5/06 

 CR-REF-SWA061006 SR-REF-SW- A060806 LGP2-05-SW- A060806 LGP2-04-SW- A060706 LGP2-03-SW- A060706 LGP2-02-SW- A060506

LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

Summary Statistics 

Frequency 

of Detects

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.

Location

Sample ID

Analyte Sample Date

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14
Table 22

Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudySeptember 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Pemit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Frequency of 

Detects Minimum Maximum Ave

Analyte Sample Date

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND N2,4,5-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND N2,4,6-Trichlorophenol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.00057 J 0.0025 U 1 / 5 0.00057 0.0025 0.03,4,5-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0 / 5 ND ND NPentachlorophenol ug/L 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0 / 5 ND ND N3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol ug/L 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0 / 5 ND ND NTetrachlorocatechol ug/L 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0 / 5 ND ND N3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND N3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND N4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND NTetrachloroguaiacol ug/L 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0.005 U 0 / 5 ND ND NTrichlorosyringol ug/L 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0 / 5 ND ND NNotes:

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J indicates estimated valueDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit.* Both effluent samples represent total effluent - the lab did not filter the sample to get just the dissolved fraction. Must calculate and report each phase as maximum possible.** -Calculated using average of effluent samples collected on different days.

Summary Statistics for Downstream L

9/19/06 9/19/06 9/20/06 9/20/06

 LGP2-04-SW-A091906

LGP-01

9/22/06

LGP-01-SW-A092206 CR-REF-SW-A- 092106 SR-REF-SW-A- 091806

Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

 LGP-03-SW-A092006 LGP-02-SW-A- 092006

CR-REF SR-REF

9/21/06 9/18/06

LGP-11

LGP-13-14 (Avg. 

with Dup)

LGP-09 LGP-06
Table 23

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyNovember 2005Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill

Location

Sample ID

Frequency 

of Detects Min

Analyte Sample Date

pg/L

Dioxins

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 / 6 N1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 1 / 6 0.01,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.003 J 0.0015 U 0.004 J 0.005 J 0.005 J 0.004 J 0.004 J 0.0045 J 5 / 6 0.1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.005 J 0.007 J 0.016 J 0.014 J 0.013 J 0.009 J 0.009 J 0.0105 J 6 / 6 0.1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.005 J 0.006 J 0.009 J 0.011 J 0.011 J 0.007 J 0.008 J 0.0095 J 6 / 6 0.1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.113 0.136 0.345 0.278 0.21 0.19 0.164 0.215 J& 6 / 6 0.OCDD 0.942 1.08 1.97 1.78 1.03 1.3 1.23 1.74 J& 6 / 6 1Furans2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.0025 U 0.006 J 0.00165 U 0.008 J 0.007 J 0.0035 U 0.0045 U 0.004 U&J 3 / 6 0.01,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 2 / 6 0.02,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.004 J 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.0015 U 0.00225 J&U 4 / 6 0.01,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.011 J 0.01 J 0.006 J 0.004 J 0.006 J 6 / 6 0.1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.004 J 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.004 J 6 / 6 0.1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 / 6 N2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 1 / 6 0.01,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.018 J 0.026 J 0.032 J 0.041 J 0.033 J 0.028 J 0.031 J 0.0385 J 6 / 6 0.1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.00125 U 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.004 J 6 / 6 0.OCDF 0.035 J 0.048 J 0.069 J 0.075 J 0.059 J 0.051 J 0.06 J 0.077 J 6 / 6 0.TotalsTotal TCDD 0.00125 U 0.01 0.042 0.019 0.02 0.017 0.018 0.019 6 / 6 0.Total PeCDD 0.003 0.006 0.022 0.042 0.049 0.012 0.00125 U 0.0085 5 / 6 0.0Total HxCDD 0.042 0.051 0.098 0.128 0.118 0.072 0.069 0.0855 6 / 6 0.Total HpCDD 0.225 0.266 0.696 0.544 0.417 0.385 0.329 0.4555 6 / 6 0.Total TCDF 0.029 0.056 0.051 0.085 0.075 0.056 0.059 0.0585 6 / 6 0.Total PeCDF 0.011 0.021 0.027 0.041 0.038 0.026 0.023 0.026 6 / 6 0.Total HxCDF 0.017 0.04 0.048 0.083 0.07 0.051 0.044 0.056 6 / 6 0.Total HpCDF 0.036 0.055 0.088 0.089 0.07 0.062 0.071 0.09 6 / 6 0.2.3.7.8-TCDD TEQ (WHO 1998) 0.0067 0.0088 0.0129 0.0138 0.0125 0.0099 0.0089 0.0105 6 / 6 0.0Notes:

J: Estimated value.All samples have units of pg/L, except effluent particulate sample, which has units of pg/g.TEQ calculated by summing the product of each individual congener and the corresponding toxic equivalency factor.Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

LGP-14 LGP-13

 SR REF B SWA LGP 14 SWA LGP 13 SWA

CR-REF

 CR REF C SWA

11/18/05

SR-REF LGP-09 LGP-06

11/18/05 11/16/05 

LGP-01 (Avg with Summary St

Dup)

11/13/05

 LGP 11 SWA

LGP-11

 LGP 09 SWA LGP 06 SWA

11/14/05 11/14/05 11/15/05 11/16/05
Table 24

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water Effluent Monitoring StudyMarch 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Frequency 

of Detects Mi

Analyte Sample Date 

pg/L

Dioxins

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 / 5 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 2 / 5 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.006 J 0.0015 U 0.00125 U 0.006 J 0.007 J 0.0025 U 0.005 U&J 3 / 5 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.01 J 0.01 J 0.003 U 0.014 J 0.023 J 0.017 J 0.0125 J 4 / 5 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.008 J 0.003 U 0.002 U 0.012 J 0.016 J 0.005 U 0.0095 J 3 / 5 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.137 0.187 0.138 0.252 0.49 0.276 0.202 5 / 5 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDD 0.973 1.05 0.968 2.06 2.71 1.73 1.195 5 / 5 Furans2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.002 U 0.006 J 0.008 J 0.0035 U 0.007 J 0.009 J 0.0075 U&J 4 / 5 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.0015 U 0.00125 U 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.002125 J&U 4 / 5 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.0015 U 0.005 J 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 4 / 5 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.008 J 0.009 J 0.004 J 0.005 J 4 / 5 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.005 J 0.005 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 4 / 5 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 / 5 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.002 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 1 / 5 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.016 J 0.025 J 0.008 U 0.06 J 0.051 J 0.035 J 0.026 J 4 / 5 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.005 J 0.005 J 0.0015 U 0.002125 J&U 3 / 5 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDF 0.029 J 0.045 J 0.023 J 0.105 J 0.073 J 0.072 J 0.0505 J 5 / 5 TotalsTotal TCDD 0.008 0.02 0.016 0.034 0.035 0.032 0.028 5 / 5 Total PeCDD 0.00125 U 0.047 0.014 0.044 0.039 0.038 0.0565 5 / 5 Total HxCDD 0.062 0.063 0.033 0.123 0.167 0.112 0.081 5 / 5 Total HpCDD 0.283 0.354 0.264 0.52 0.883 0.539 0.399 5 / 5 Total TCDF 0.031 0.04 0.053 0.074 0.079 0.065 0.056 5 / 5 Total PeCDF 0.012 0.026 0.015 0.052 0.045 0.037 0.0275 5 / 5 Total HxCDF 0.023 0.036 0.02 0.088 0.077 0.045 0.0405 5 / 5 Total HpCDF 0.034 0.05 0.015 0.131 0.118 0.077 0.0565 5 / 5 2.3.7.8-TCDD TEQ (WHO 1998) 0.008 0.009 0.068 0.016 0.019 0.012 0.011 5 / 5 Notes:

J: Estimated value

All samples have units of pg/L, except effluent particulate sample, which has units of pg/g.

LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09

 LGP2-05-SW-A LGP2-03-SW-A LGP2-04-SW-A

LGP-06

3/14/06 3/14/06

Summary St

CR-REF

 CR-REF-SW-A

3/14/06

SR-REF

 SR-REF-SW-A

3/14/06 3/14/06

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.TEQ calculated by summing the product of each individual congener and the corresponding toxic equivalency factor.

 LGP2-02-SW-A

Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

3/14/06 3/14/06

LGP-01 (Avg. with 

Dup)
Table 25

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyJune 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlach Mill, Lewiston, ID

Location

Sample ID

Analyte Sample Date Minimu

pg/L

Dioxins

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 / 5 ND 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.003 J 0.004 J 0.004 J 0.005 J 0.003 J 0.005 K J 0.003125 J&U 5 / 5 0.003 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.005 J 0.007 J 0.007 J 0.011 J 0.006 J 0.006 J 0.0025 U 4 / 5 0.003 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.01 J 0.017 J 0.023 J 0.025 J 0.016 J 0.02 J 0.015 J 5 / 5 0.015 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.008 J 0.013 J 0.0075 U 0.025 J 0.011 J 0.014 J 0.00925 J&U 4 / 5 0.008 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.261 0.347 0.463 0.49 0.275 0.417 0.317 J& 5 / 5 0.275 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDD 2.2 2.63 4.09 2.48 1.95 3.53 2.4385 J& 5 / 5 1.950 Furans2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.0025 U 0.007 J 0.01 J 0.0045 U 0.0035 U 0.005 J 0.003 U&J 3 / 5 0.003 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.0015 U 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.0025 U 0.002 U 0.004 J 0.001875 U 1 / 5 0.002 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.003 U 0.0025 U 0.002 U 0.004 J 0.00175 U 1 / 5 0.002 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.002 U 0.008 J 0.01 J 0.009 J 0.008 J 0.009 J 0.00275 U 4 / 5 0.003 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.003 U 0.006 J 0.007 J 0.008 J 0.003 U 0.007 J 0.00425 J&U 4 / 5 0.003 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 1 / 5 0.001 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.0015 U 0.002 U 0.0025 U 0.0025 U 0.002 U 0.005 J 0.002125 U 1 / 5 0.002 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.036 J 0.057 J 0.08 0.059 J 0.061 J 0.078 0.064 &J 5 / 5 0.059 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.005 J 0.006 J 0.007 J 0.009 J 0.007 J 0.007 J 0.005 J 5 / 5 0.005 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDF 0.071 J 0.128 0.175 0.089 J 0.122 J 0.167 0.1535 J 5 / 5 0.089 TotalsTotal TCDD 0.01 0.019 0.027 0.031 0.013 0.025 0.016 5 / 5 0.013 Total PeCDD 0.007 0.016 0.03 0.021 0.006 0.012 0.0075 5 / 5 0.006 Total HxCDD 0.063 0.102 0.126 0.19 0.101 0.127 0.1005 5 / 5 0.101 Total HpCDD 0.509 0.645 0.89 0.98 0.536 0.807 0.629 5 / 5 0.536 Total TCDF 0.039 0.087 0.102 0.13 0.079 0.085 0.047 5 / 5 0.047 Total PeCDF 0.018 0.049 0.062 0.052 0.039 0.052 0.027 5 / 5 0.027 Total HxCDF 0.04 0.081 0.119 0.094 0.081 0.117 0.074 5 / 5 0.074 Total HpCDF 0.087 0.146 0.202 0.135 0.136 0.185 0.159 5 / 5 0.135 2.3.7.8-TCDD TEQ (WHO 1998) 0.012 0.017 0.020 0.022 0.014 0.021 0.013 5 / 5 0.013 Notes:

J: Estimated value.

All samples have units of pg/L, except effluent particulate sample, which has units of pg/g.

Data was validated. Qualifiers presented represent validated results. Highlighted qualifiers are those that changed during validation.

Duplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit. If parent and duplicate qualifiers are different from each other, both are shown with an "&" separating them.

6/5/06

CR-REF

 CR-REF-SWA061006

LGP-09 LGP-06

 LGP2-03-SWA060706

6/7/06

 LGP2-02-SWA060506

6/8/06 6/8/06 6/7/06 6/6/06 

SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11

TEQ calculated by summing the product of each individual congener and the corresponding toxic equivalency factor.

Frequency 

of Detects

Summary Statisti

U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.

LGP-01 (Avg. with 

Dup)

 SR-REF-SWA060806 LGP2-05-SW- A060806 LGP2-04-SW- A060706

6/10/06
Table 26

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudySeptember 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill

Location

Sample ID

Analyte Sample Date

pg/L

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.0007 U 0.00232 U 0.002985 U , U 0.000695 U 0.00181 U 0.002505 U , U 0.00159 U 0.002235 U , U 0.003825 U , U , U 0.00082 U 0.002075 U 0.0

2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.0004 U 0.002165 U 0.00261 U , U 0.0156 0.0136 0.0292 , 0.012 J 0.0132 J , 0.0252 J , J , 0.0169 0.0113 J 0

Notes:Data have not been validated. Qualifiers presented represent analytical laboratory results.Total results were calculated by summing individual column and filter results for a given location.U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit.

SR-REF

 SR-REF-SW-A091806 (Total) LGP-13-14 (Avg. with Dup) (Total)

Column Column 

 CR-REF-SW-A092106 (Filter) LGP

091

9/21/06 9/18/06 9/19/06 

LGP-13-14 (Avg. 

with Dup) (Filter)

 LGP2-04-SW-A091906 (Filter)

LGP-11

LGP2-04-SW-A 

(Column)

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-11

LGP-13-14 

CR-REF

 CR-REF-SW-A092106 (Total)

CR-REF

9/21/06

SR-REF

 SR-REF-SW-A091806 (Filter)

9/18/06 
Table 26

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudySeptember 2006Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance MonitoringStudies Conducted in 2006Potlatch Mill

Location

Sample ID

Analyte Sample Date

pg/L

2,3,7,8-TCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF

Frequency

of Detect Minimum Maximum Average Median

0.000865 U 0.0043 U 0.005165 U , U 0.00086 U 0.001815 U 0.002675 U , U 0 / 5 ND ND ND ND 0.00101 U 0.0012 U 0.0255 

0.0124 J 0.01 J 0.0224 J , J 0.00637 J 0.00754 J 0.01391 J , J 5 / 5 0.014 0.028 0.023 0.025 0.0303 0.0274 0.5830

Notes:

Data have not been validated. Qualifiers presented represent analytical laboratory results.Total results were calculated by summing individual column and filter results for a given location.U: Analyte not detected. Value is one half the reporting detection limit.J: Estimated valueDuplicates averaged using one half the reporting detection limit.

Effluent - Pa

(pg/g)

 LGP2-EFF-AQ

091806 (Filte

9/18/06

 LGP2-02-SW-A092006 (Total) LGP2-02-SW-A- Column 092006 (Filter)

LGP-01

 LGP2-01-SW-A092206 (Total)

9/22/06

EFF - 

Particulate

 LGP2-EFF-AQA-091806 

(Filter)

9/20/06 9/20/06 9/18/06

Effluent - 

Dissolved

(Column)

LGP-06

9/22/06

LGP-01 LGP-01

 LGP2-01-SWA-092206 

Column (Filter)

LGP-06 LGP-06 Summary Statistics for Downstream Locations
FIGURES 
P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

")

")

!.

#*

#*

")

LOWER

GRANITE

DAM

1000

2000

1000

1000

1000

2000

1000

2000

2000

1000

2000

2000

2000

2000

2000

2000

1000

1000 Steptoe Canyon

Nisqually John Canyon

Clayton Gulch

So uth Dead man Gulch

Yakawawa Canyon

Keith Canyon

Wawaw ai Cany o n

MacMurray Canyo

B

n

uck Canyon

Kluge Canyon

Alm ota C reek

Offield Canyon

MATCH

LINE

LGP-B

LGP-C

LGP-A

LGP-03

LGP-02

LGP-01

127

126

125

124

123

122

121 120

119

118

117

116

115

114

113

112

111

110

109

108

!

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

"

" "

)

) )

#

#

#

# #

# #

*

*

*

* *

* *

!

!

! !

!

.

.

. .

.

I D A H O

W A S H I N G T O N

1000

1000

2000

1000

3000

1000

1000

1000

2000

1000

1000

2000

2000

Dry Creek

H atw ai Creek

Lindsay Cr e ek

Steptoe Canyon

MATCH

LINE

LEWISTON CLARKSTON

LGP-D

LGP-E

LGP-F

LGP-07

LGP-14

LGP-13 LGP-12

LGP-10

LGP-11

LGP-09

LGP-08

LGP-06

LGP-05

LGP-04

LGP-03

POTLATCH

MILL

OUTFALL

5

4

3

2

1

0

140

139

138 137

136

135

134

133

132

131

130

129

128

127

Locations for Sediment, Benthic Community, and Receiving Water Samples

Potlatch Pulp & Paper Mill

Lewiston, Idaho

0 0.5 1 2

Scale in Miles

LEGEND

!. Sediment, Benthic Community, & Water Samples

#* Sediment Samples Only

") Not Proposed for Sampling

P

Approx. River Miles

Receiving Water Sampling Transects

1000-ft Topographic Contours

200-ft Topographic Contours

Streams

River

North American Datum 1983, Washington

State Plane, South Zone, U.S. feet

J:\Jobs\050297-Potlatch\Maps\2005_07\recon_station_locs.mxd EI 07/12/2005 3:26 PM

Figure 1.
Figure 2. Mean Water Velocity (ft/s)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0

07/05/2006 07/12/2006 07/19/2006 07/26/2006 08/02/2006 08/09/2006 08/16/2006 08/23/2006 08/30/2006 09/06/2006 09/13/2006 09/20/2006 09/27/2006 10/04/2006 10/11/2006 10/18/20

Sample Date

Velocity (ft/s)
Figure 3. Mean Water pH

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

07/05/2006 07/12/2006 07/19/2006 07/26/2006 08/02/2006 08/09/2006 08/16/2006 08/23/2006 08/30/2006 09/06/2006 09/13/2006 09/20/2006 09/27/2006 10/04/2006 10/11/2006 10/18/2006

Sample Date

pH
Figure 4. Mean Water Dissolved Oxygen (DO)

56789

1011

07/05/2006 07/12/2006 07/19/2006 07/26/2006 08/02/2006 08/09/2006 08/16/2006 08/23/2006 08/30/2006 09/06/2006 09/13/2006 09/20/2006 09/27/2006 10/04/2006 10/11/2006 10/18/20

Sample Date

DO (mg/L)
Figure 5. Mean Water Temperature

05

10152025

07/05/2006 07/12/2006 07/19/2006 07/26/2006 08/02/2006 08/09/2006 08/16/2006 08/23/2006 08/30/2006 09/06/2006 09/13/2006 09/20/2006 09/27/2006 10/04/2006 10/11/2006 10/18/20

Sample Date

Temperature (Celcius) 
Figure 6a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Shallow Surface Water

0.1

1

10

100

1000

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/2006

Sample Date

BOD (mg/L)
Figure 6b. Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0.1

1

10

100

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/2

Sample Date

BOD (mg/L)
Figure 7a. Ammonia Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.12

07/05/2006 07/11/2006 07/18/2006 07/25/2006 07/31/2006 08/08/2006 08/15/2006 08/21/2006 08/30/2006 09/05/2006 09/12/2006 09/19/2006 09/26/2006 10/03/2006 10/09/2006 10/16/2006 10/23/2006

Sample Date

NH3-N (mg/L)
Figure 7b. Ammonia Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.010.020.030.040.050.06

07/05/2006 07/11/2006 07/18/2006 07/25/2006 07/31/2006 08/08/2006 08/15/2006 08/21/2006 08/30/2006 09/05/2006 09/12/2006 09/19/2006 09/26/2006 10/03/2006 10/09/2006 10/16/2006 10/23/2006

Sample Date

NH3-N (mg/L) 
Figure 8a. Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

07/05/2006

07/12/2006

07/19/2006

07/26/2006

08/02/2006

08/09/2006

08/16/2006

08/23/2006

08/30/2006

09/06/2006

09/13/2006

09/20/2006

09/27/2006

10/04/2006

10/11/2006

10/18/2006

Sample Date

NO2/NO3-N (mg/L) 
Figure 8b. Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

07/05/2006

07/12/2006

07/19/2006

07/26/2006

08/02/2006

08/09/2006

08/16/2006

08/23/2006

08/30/2006

09/06/2006

09/13/2006

09/20/2006

09/27/2006

10/04/2006

10/11/2006

10/18/2006

Sample Date

NO2/NO3-N (mg/L) 
Figure 9a. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

1.2

07/05/2006

07/12/2006

07/19/2006

07/26/2006

08/02/2006

08/09/2006

08/16/2006

08/23/2006

08/30/2006

09/06/2006

09/13/2006

09/20/2006

09/27/2006

10/04/2006

10/11/2006

10/18/2006

Sample Depth

TKN (mg/L)
Figure 9b. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface-Water

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

1.21.41.61.8

07/05/2006

07/12/2006

07/19/2006

07/26/2006

08/02/2006

08/09/2006

08/16/2006

08/23/2006

08/30/2006

09/06/2006

09/13/2006

09/20/2006

09/27/2006

10/04/2006

10/11/2006

10/18/2006

Sample Date

TKN (mg/L)
Figure 10a. Total Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.120.140.160.18

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/2006

Sample Date

Total P (mg/L)
Figure 10b. Total Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.120.140.16

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/20

Sample Date

Total P (mg/L) 
Figure 11a. Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.08

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/2006

Sample Depth

Orthophosphate (mg/L)
Figure 11b. Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.09

0.1

07/05/2006

07/11/2006

07/18/2006

07/25/2006

07/31/2006

08/08/2006

08/15/2006

08/21/2006

08/30/2006

09/05/2006

09/12/2006

09/19/2006

09/26/2006

10/03/2006

10/09/2006

10/16/2006

10/23/2006

Sample Date

Orthophosphate (mg/L) 
Figure 12. Quarterly Resin Acids in Receiving Water

Figure 12a Resin Acids in Receiving Water

November 2005

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

Location

Concentration (ug/L)

Pimaric AcidSandaracopimaric AcidIsopimaric AcidPalustric AcidDehydroabietic AcidAbietic AcidNeoabietic Acid12,14-DichlorodehydroabieticAcidsTotal 12/14-ChlorodehydroabieticAcid

Figu

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 

Concentration (ug/L)

Figure 12c Resin Acids in Receiving Water

June 2006

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (ug/L)

Pimaric AcidSandaracopimaric AcidIsopimaric AcidPalustric AcidDehydroabietic AcidAbietic AcidNeoabietic Acid12,14-DichlorodehydroabieticAcidsTotal 12/14-ChlorodehydroabieticAcid

Figu

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14

(Avg. with

Dup)

Concentration (ug/L)
Figure 13 Resin Acids in Effluent

Figure 13a Resin Acids in Effluent (Dissolved Phase)

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/L)

12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids

Abietic Acid

Dehydroabietic Acid

Isopimaric Acid

Neoabietic Acid

Palustric Acid

Pimaric Acid

Sandaracopimaric Acid

Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid

Results from these sampling rounds are for total effluent because no sample was collected 

for dissolved phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible dissolved phase 

concentrations and likely overestimate actual dissolved phase concentrations.

Figure 13b Resin Acids in Effluent (Solid Phase)

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/g)

12,14-Dichlorodehydroabietic Acids

Abietic Acid

Dehydroabietic Acid

Isopimaric Acid

Neoabietic Acid

Palustric Acid

Pimaric Acid

Sandaracopimaric Acid

Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid

Results from these sampling rounds are calculated from total effluent only (not from total 

effluent minus dissolved phase effluent) because no sample was collected for dissolved 

phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible solid phase concentrations and 

may overestimate actual solid phase concentrations.
Figure 14. Phytosterols in Receiving Water

Figure 14a Phytosterols in Receiving Water

November 2005

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(Avg. with

Dup)

Location

Concentration (ug/L)beta-Sitosterol Campesterol Stigmastanol Stigmasterol

Retene

Figu

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-

Concentration (ug/L)

Figure 14c Phytosterols in Receiving Water

June 2006

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (ug/L)beta-Sitosterol Campesterol Stigmastanol Stigmasterol

Retene

Figu

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-

(Avg. wi

Dup)

Concentration (ug/L) 
Figure 15 Phytosterols in Effluent

Figure 15a Phytosterols in Effluent (Dissolved Phase)

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/L)

beta-Sitosterol

Campesterol

Stigmastanol

Stigmasterol

Retene

Results from these sampling rounds are for total effluent because no sample was collected 

for dissolved phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible dissolved phase 

concentrations and likely overestimate actual dissolved phase concentrations.

Figure 15b Phytosterols in Effluent (Solid Phase)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/g)

beta-Sitosterol

Campesterol

Stigmastanol

Stigmasterol

Retene

Results from these sampling rounds are calculated from total effluent only (not from total 

effluent minus dissolved phase effluent) because no sample was collected for dissolved 

phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible solid phase concentrations and 

may overestimate actual solid phase concentrations.
Figure 16. Quarterly Chlorophenols in Receiving Water

Figure 16a Chlorophenols in Receiving Water

November 2005

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (ug/L) 2,3,4,6- Tetrachlorophenol 2,4,5- Trichlorophenol 2,4,6- Trichlorophenol 3,4,5- Trichlorocatechol Pentachlorophenol 3,4,6-

TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatechol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol TetrachloroguaiacolTrichlorosyringol

Figu

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP

Concentration (ug/L)

Figure 16c Chlorophenols in Receiving Water

June 2006

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (ug/L)2,3,4,6- Tetrachlorophenol 2,4,5- Trichlorophenol 2,4,6- Trichlorophenol 3,4,5- Trichlorocatechol Pentachlorophenol 3,4,6- Trichlorocatechol

Tetrachlorocatechol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol TetrachloroguaiacolTrichlorosyringol

Fig

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LG

(Avg

Concentration (ug/L) 
Figure 17 Chlorophenols in Effluent

Figure 17a Chlorophenols in Effluent (Dissolved Phase)

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/L)

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol

Pentachlorophenol

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol

Tetrachlorocatechol

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol

4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

Tetrachloroguaiacol

Trichlorosyringol

Results from these sampling rounds are for total effluent because no sample was collected 

for dissolved phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible dissolved phase 

concentrations and likely overestimate actual dissolved phase concentrations.

Figure 17b Chlorophenols in Effluent (Solid Phase)

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (ug/g)

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol

Pentachlorophenol

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol

Tetrachlorocatechol

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol

4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

Tetrachloroguaiacol

Trichlorosyringol

Results from these sampling rounds are calculated from total effluent only (not from total 

effluent minus dissolved phase effluent) because no sample was collected for dissolved 

phase analysis. Results are estimated maximum possible solid phase concentrations and 

may overestimate actual solid phase concentrations.
Figure 18. Quarterly Chloroform in Receiving Water

Figure 18a Chloroform in Receiving Water

November 2005, March 2006, June 2006, & September 2006

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(Avg. with

Dup)

Location

Concentration (mg/L) Chloroform

Figure 18b Chloroform in Effluent (Solid Phase)

05

10152025

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Location

Concentration (mg/L) Chloroform
Figure 19. Quarterly Physical Parameters in Receiving W

Figure 19a Physical Parameters in Receiving Water

November 2005

0123456789

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(Avg. with

Dup)

Location

Concentration (mg/L)Carbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) Solids, Total Suspended (TSS)

Figure 19b 

02468

1012

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 

Concentration (mg/L) 

Figure 19c Physical Parameters in Receiving Water

June 2006

05

10152025303540

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (mg/L)Carbon, Dissolved Organic (DOC) Carbon, Total Organic (TOC) Solids, Total Suspended (TSS)

Figure 19d 

01234567

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14

(Avg. with

Dup)

Concentration (mg/L) 
Figure 20. Quarterly Dioxins in Receiving Water

Figure 20c Dioxins in Receiving Water

June 2006

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (pg/L) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD

Fig

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 

Concentration (pg/L)

Figure 20a Dioxins in Receiving Water

November 2005

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (pg/L) 2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD

Fi

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-1

(Avg. with D

Concentration (pg/L) 
Figure 21 Dioxins in Effluent

Figure 21a Dioxins in Effluent (Dissolved Phase)

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD

OCDD

Figure 21b Dioxins in Effluent (Solid Phase)

0.00

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

100.00

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (pg/g)

2,3,7,8-TCDD

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD

OCDD
Figure 22. Quarterly Furans in Receiving Water

Figure 22c Furans in Receiving Water

June 2006

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg.

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (pg/L) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

Figu

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14 

Concentration (pg/L)

Figure 22a Furans in Receiving Water

November 2005

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 (Avg

with Dup)

Location

Concentration (pg/L) 2,3,7,8-TCDF 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

Figu

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-13-14

(Avg. with Dup

Concentration (pg/L) 
Figure 23 Furans in Effluent

)

Figure 23a Furans in Effluent (Dissolved Phase)

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDF

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF

OCDF

Figure 23b Furans in Effluent (Solid Phase)

0.00

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

Nov-05 Feb-06 May-06 Aug-06

Concentration (pg/g)

2,3,7,8-TCDF

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF

OCDF
E r 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and

NPDES Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Potlatch Lewiston Facility 

Submitted to: 

Potlatch Corporation 

Lewiston, Idaho 

Submitted by: 

AMEC Earth & Environmental

Westford, Massachusetts

January 2006 

7 7050 0800
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1

2.0 FIELD SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS...........................................................3

2.1 FIELD SAMPLING.......................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study Sampling Methods.......................3

2.1.2 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study Sampling Methods.....................4

3.0 DATA HANDLING METHODS ............................................................................................6

3.1 FIELD DATA................................................................................................................6

3.2 ANALYTICAL DATA....................................................................................................6

4.0 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................7

4.1 FIELD-MEASURED PARAMETERS...........................................................................7

4.1.1 Water Velocity .................................................................................................7

4.1.2 pH....................................................................................................................7

4.1.3 Dissolved Oxygen............................................................................................8

4.1.4 Water Temperature .........................................................................................8

4.2 CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS ..............................................................................9

4.2.1 Total Suspended Solids...................................................................................9

4.2.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand .........................................................................9

4.3 NUTRIENTS................................................................................................................9

4.3.1 Ammonia Nitrogen.........................................................................................10

4.3.2 Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen ...................................................................................10

4.3.3 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogenh ................................................................................10

4.3.4 Total Phosphorus ..........................................................................................11

4.3.5 Orthophosphate Phosphorus.........................................................................11

4.3.6 2,3,7,8-TCDD ................................................................................................11

4.3.7 2,3,7,8-TCDF.................................................................................................11

4.4 QUARTERLY SURFACE WATER AND EFFLUENT MONITORING STUDY...........12

4.4.1 Resin Acids....................................................................................................12

4.4.2 Phytosterols...................................................................................................12

4.4.3 Chlorophenolics.............................................................................................13

4.4.4 Chloroform.....................................................................................................13

4.4.5 Dissolved and Total Organic Carbon.............................................................13

4.4.6 Dioxin Congeners ..........................................................................................13

4.4.7 Furans ...........................................................................................................14

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................16

REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................17

Page i 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1 – Locations for Sediment, Benthic Community, and Receiving Water Samples 

Figure 2 – Mean Water Velocity 

Figure 3 – Mean Water pH 

Figure 4 – Mean Dissolved Oxygen

Figure 5 – Mean Water Temperature 

Figure 6a – Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 6b – Biochemical Oxygen Demand in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 7a – Ammonia Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 7b – Ammonia Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 8a – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 8b – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 9a – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 9b – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 10a – Total Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 10b – Total Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 11a – Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water 

Figure 11b – Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water 

Figure 12a – Resin Acids in Receiving Water 

Figure 12b – Resin Acids in Effluent 

Figure 13a – Phytosterols in Receiving Water 

Figure 13b – Phytosterols in Effluent 

Figure 14 – Quarterly Chloroform Concentrations 

Figure 15 – Quarterly DOC and TOC in Receiving Water 

Figure 16a – Dioxins in Receiving Water 

Figure 16b – Dioxins in Effluent 

Figure 17a – Furans in Receiving Water 

Figure 17b – Furans in Effluent 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1 – Sample Locations 

Table 2 – Mean Velocity Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 3 – Mean pH Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 4 – Mean Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring 

Study 

Table 5 – Mean Temperature Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 6 – Total Suspended Solids (TSS, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring Study 

Table 7 – Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring Study 

Table 8 – Ammonia Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 9 – Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Page ii
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Table 10 – Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring 

Study 

Table 11 – Total Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 12 – Orthophosphate Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring 7 7050 0800Study 

Table 13 – 2,3,7,8-TCDD Results (pg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 14 – 2,3,7,8-TCDF Results (pg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study 

Table 15 – Resin Acid Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study 

Table 16 – Phytosterol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study 

Table 17 – Chlorophenolic Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring 

Study 

Table 18 – Chloroform Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study 

Table 19 – Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) Results from the 

Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study 

Table 20 – Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Monitoring Study 

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Field Data Reports 

Appendix 2 – Analytical Laboratory Reports 

Appendix 3 – Validation Reports 

Page iii 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The Potlatch Corporation - Lewiston Facility (“the Facility”) is owned and operated by Potlatch 

Corporation, which has its headquarters in Spokane, Washington. The Facility is located 

approximately one mile east of the Clearwater Memorial Bridge in Lewiston, Idaho. It is situated

on the south bank of the Clearwater River approximately three miles east of the confluence of 

the Clearwater and Snake River. The location of the Lewiston complex is shown in Figure 1-1. 

The Facility discharges treated wastewater via a submerged 48 inch diameter, 400 foot long 

multiport diffuser located in the confluence. The diffuser is referred to as Outfall 001 (“the 

Outfall”). EPA has recently reissued Potlatch’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) Permit No. ID00001163, authorizing discharge from the Outfall, to the Snake 

River and seeps from the secondary treatment pond to the Clearwater River. The Facility 

discharges approximately 34 million gallons a day of treated effluent from the Outfall into the 

Snake River under NPDES permit No. ID00001163, which was re-issued by EPA on May 1, 

2005. 

Because EPA’s re-issuance of the Facility’s NPDES permit constituted a discretionary action 

that could beneficially or adversely affect threatened and endangered species or their critical

habitat in the vicinity of the discharge, EPA was required to consult with the U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) 

(collectively referred to as “the Services”) as specified in the Endangered Species Act. EPA 

prepared a Biological Evaluation (BE) to evaluate whether the reissuance of the permit might 

affect species and/or their critical habitat under the jurisdiction of both the USFWS and NOAA 

Fisheries. Subsequent to NOAA Fisheries’ and USFWS’ review of the BE, the two agencies 

prepared Biological Opinions (BO) consistent with the requirements of the ESA. NOAA 

Fisheries’ BO concluded that the reissuance of the permit “is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River spring/summer and fall chinook 

salmon, and Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in the destruction or adverse modification

of designated critical habitat for Snake River spring/summer and fall chinook salmon and Snake 

River sockeye salmon.” 

Although the NOAA Fisheries BO concluded that the permit reissuance would not jeopardize the

continued existence of the listed species, the BO specified non-discretionary terms and 

conditions which must be met by EPA and Potlatch to minimize “take” of listed species as a 

result of permit reissuance. One of the non-discretionary terms and conditions specified in the 

BO was implementation of a monitoring and assessment plan to characterize conditions in 

effluent, receiving water, sediment, and biological media in the vicinity of the Facility. 

Attachment 1 to the permit provides a summary of the required monitoring and a schedule for 

it’s implementation. The monitoring plan summary identifies several Tier 1 studies that must be 

performed during the first two years of the permit, as well as Tier 2 studies that may or may not 

be performed during later years of the permit, depending upon the outcomes of the Tier 1 

studies. 

Page 1 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

The purpose of this report is to present the results of ESA Tier 1 studies undertaken during 

2005 that evaluate effluent and natural waters above and below the Facility. In particular, this 

sampling was performed to fulfill requirements of the Surface Water and Effluent Study, Benthic 

Community Study, and the Receiving Water Monitoring Study, that are described in detail in 

Appendix A, Appendix D, and Appendix H, respectively, of the Quality Assurance Project Plan 

(QAPP) for Tier 1 Endangered Species Act and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring (AMEC, 

2005). While sediment samples from the Snake River and Clearwater River were collected 

during sediment sampling conducted by Anchor Environmental during the summer of 2005. The 

samples were submitted to the laboratory for benthic community analysis. However, the results 

from this study were not reported to Potlatch, Anchor or AMEC until January, 9 2006. 

Therefore, the results of this study will not be included in this report. These results will be 

reported at a later date either as a supplement to this monitoring report or as part of the January 

2007 monitoring report. 

Surface Water and Effluent Study principally addresses the measurement of trace organic 

compounds and dioxins/furans (some of which are required for compliance with the NPDES 

permit). To do this, a specialized sampling technique known as High Volume Sampling was 

employed. The Receiving Water Monitoring Study primarily evaluates conventional water 

quality parameters that are routinely measured in the field (such as BOD, temperature, pH, and 

TSS). Both studies used an upstream/downstream study design, and the stations that were 

selected and sampled during the 2005 sampling event are shown in Table 1 and on Figure 1. 

Page 2 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

2.0 FIELD SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 

The field sampling methods and laboratory analytical methods used to collect and analyze 

samples for the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study and the Weekly Receiving Water 

Monitoring Study are described in this section. 

2.1 Field Sampling 

Field sampling methods for collecting river water and effluent samples are described below for 

the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent 

Study. For both weekly and quarterly samples, chain of custody forms, provided by the 

analytical labs, were completed and accompanied all samples shipped to the labs. 

2.1.1 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study Sampling Methods 

Water column sampling was conducted at every sample site each week during the monitoring 

period. Field-measured water quality data and water samples for water quality analyses were 

collected. Collections typically took 2 days per week to complete and occurred during: 8/3-

4/05, 8/10-11/05, 8/17-18/05, 8/24-25/05, 8/30-31/05, 9/7-8/05, 9/15/05, 9/21-22/05, 9/27-28/05, 

10/5-6/05, 10/11-12/05, 10/19-20/05, and 10/25-26/05. For the remainder of this report, 

collection dates will indicate the first day of collection for any given week (e.g., samples 

collected on 8/3 or 8/4 will be indicated as 8/3/05). 

The parameters selected for the weekly monitoring are grouped as follows to facilitate 

discussion of the collection methods and results:

• Field-measured parameters: physical and chemical properties measured in the filed

using water quality monitoring instruments: velocity, pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), and 

temperature; 

• Conventional parameters: laboratory measured parameters that are typically monitored 

in water quality studies: total suspended solids (TSS) and biochemical oxygen demand 

(BOD); 

• Nutrients: The nutrient parameters measured in this study included ammonia nitrogen 

(NH3-N), nitrate-nitrite nitrogen (NO3/NO2-N), total Kjedahl nitrogen (TKN), total 

phosphorus, and orthophosphate phosphorus (Ortho-PO4). 

The sampling methods used in the field closely followed those described in Appendix H, 

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Receiving Water Monitoring, of the Quality Assurance Project 

Plan (QAPP). Three deviations from the QAPP were noted: in two instances the water quality 

meter failed to operate properly and parameters were not reported, in one instance the flow 

meter was damaged and readings were not available, in one instance the water quality meter 

was not calibrated by Potlatch prior to field operation. These deviations were recorded in the 

field logs and reported to Potlatch. 

Page 3 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

2.1.2 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study Sampling Methods 

Sampling for the quarterly monitoring was conducted from 8/24/05 to 8/31/05 and from 11/13/05 

to 11/19/05. Because analytical results from the second round of quarter sampling conducted in 

November are not yet available, this report presents only the results of the first round conducted 

in August. November 2005 sampling data will be presented in the January 2007 Data Report. 

 

Field-measured water quality data and water samples for water quality analyses were collected

at each sample location on the Snake River and Clearwater River at mid-depth. Effluent 

samples were taken at the Facility at the aeration basin. All high-volume samples were 

collected using the Infiltrex 300 high volume water sampler. Other samples were collected 

using the Infiltrex 300 as a standard pump (i.e., the high-volume filters and resin columns were 

bypassed). All field personnel wore powder free latex gloves when handling sampling 

equipment and samples. 

Three types of samples were collected for quality control: trip blanks, field blanks, and field 

duplicates. A set of trip blanks (sample vials filled with ultrapure lab water) accompanied 

sample bottles to and from the field. One equipment blank was collected during the sampling 

event. All sampling equipment was decontaminated according to methods described in the 

Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and then rinsed with ultrapure lab water. This rinsate 

was then sampled to produce the equipment blank. 

The sampling methods used in the field closely followed those described in Appendix A, 

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Surface Water and Effluent Study, of the QAPP. A few minor 

deviations relating to the use of the high volume sampler, the Infiltrex 300, occurred during the 

sampling event. For high volume samples, two samples were taken per day on some days, 

although the QAPP stated only one sample would be taken per day. The QAPP also stated that 

up to four fiberglass filters would be needed, to collect suspended solids, per sample. During 

the sampling event, each sample required only one filter. Finally, rather than use a Kemmerer 

or other grab sampling device for non-high volume samples, the Infiltrex 300 was used as a 

standard pump to obtain these samples. 

The parameters selected for the quarterly monitoring are: 

• Resin Acids: Abietic, Dehydroabietic, Isopimaric, Neoabietic, Palustric, Pimaric, 

Sandaracopimaric, and Total 12/14 Chlorodehydroabietic acid; 

• Phytosterols: B-sisosterol, Campesterol, Stigmastanol, Stigmasterol, and Retene; 

• Chlorophenolics: 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol, 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorphenol, 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol, 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol, 3,4,6-Trichoroguaiacol, 3,4,5-

Trichloroguaiacol, Trichlorosyringol, 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol, Pentachlorophenol, 

Tetrachloroguaiacol, and Tetrachlorocatechol; 

• Chloroform; 

• Dioxins: 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD), 1,2,3,7,8-

Pentachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD), 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin 

(1,2,3,7,8-HxCDD), 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD), 

1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD), 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-

Page 4 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

Heptachlorodibenzodioxin (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD), and Octachlorodibenzodioxins 

(OCDD); and 

• Furans: 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,7,8-TCDF), 1,2,3,7,8-

Pentachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF), 2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran 

(2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF), 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF), 

1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF), 1,2,3,7,8,9-

Hexachlordibenzofuran (1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF), 2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran 

(2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF), 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF), 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran (1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF), and 

Octachlordibenzofurans (OCDD). 

Page 5 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

3.0 DATA HANDLING METHODS 

Procedures for handling in the field and at the analytical laboratory are described below. 

3.1 Field Data 

Data collected during field activities were recorded in field notebooks and then entered into 

database format. Because water quality measurements were taken at several depths at one or 

more points at a sample location, all measurements are summarized as averages to provide an 

overview of conditions present at a location. The mean water quality data were then 

summarized in two ways: by location and by sampling day. Summaries consist of calculated 

maximum, minimum, mean, and median values as well as standard deviations and coefficients 

of variation for each parameter. Appendix 1 contains the field data and summaries. 

3.2 Analytical Data 

Data received from the laboratories were entered into database format, including data qualifiers. 

When duplicates were collected, the results of the two samples are reported as the mean 

concentration of the two. If the resulting mean was less than the laboratory detection limit for 

that analyte, the result was recorded as nondetect (ND). 

Analytical data collected for the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly 

Surface Water and Effluent Study have been summarized separately. For each Study, data 

have been analyzed in two ways: by sample site and by sample day. Summaries consist of 

calculated maximum, minimum, median, and mean values. Undetected values were reported 

as one half of the detection limit when a parameter was detected at least once at a sample site. 

Appendix 2 contains the data reported from the analytical laboratories. Validation reports are 

shown in Appendix 3. 

Page 6 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

4.0 RESULTS 

This section reports the results of the 2005 Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the 

August 2005 round of the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study. 

4.1 Field-Measured Parameters 

The parameters measured in the field were water velocity, pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), and 

temperature. These parameters were measured at each location during each sampling period. 

Measurements were taken at several depths at one or more points along a transect of the river 

channel at each sample site. A mean daily value for each parameter was calculated from all 

measurements collected on a sample day. This mean represents the conditions at the sample 

location at the time of monitoring. Tables 2 through 5 present the means for each sampling day 

for water velocity, pH, DO, and temperature, respectively. Data are listed in these tables in the 

following order: 

• Clearwater River reference location (CR REF) 

• Snake River reference location (SR REF) 

• Locations downsteam of the effluent from nearest to farthest:

o LGP-13 

o LGP-09 

o LGP-06 

o LGP-01 

These data are also presented in Figures 2 through 5. 

4.1.1 Water Velocity

Table 2 and Figure 2 show mean water velocity measurements collected during the Weekly 

Receiving Water Monitoring Study. Mean water velocity at the Clearwater River reference 

location was typically greater and more variable than velocity measured at all locations in the 

Snake River. Over the entire monitoring period, velocity in the Clearwater River decreased from 

a maximum of 1.8 ft/s to a minimum of 0.4 ft/s. Velocity in the Snake River remained fairly 

uniform throughout the monitoring period and generally remained within 0.4 ft/s and 0.01 ft/s. 

4.1.2 pH 

Table 3 and Figure 3 show mean pH measurements collected during the Weekly Receiving 

Water Monitoring Study. Mean pH was very stable throughout the monitoring period at all 

locations, ranging from 7.31 to 8.72. During most sampling dates, pH was lowest in the 

Clearwater River. The maximum pH values observed in the Snake River occurred in different 

locations from week to week. All pH measurements were in the range of the Idaho Department 

of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) water quality standard range for pH of 6.5 to 9.5. All but three 

of the pH measurements were in the range of the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) 

Page 7 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

water quality standard range for pH of 6.5 to 8.5. The three pH measurements that were 

outside the WDOE standard range were collected on July 13, 2005, from the Snake River 

reference location (pH = 8.56) and at the two locations farthest downstream from the Facility 

(pH = 8.72 at LGP-06 and pH = 8.68 at LGP-01). These very minor deviations from the water 

quality standard range at such a distance downstream from the Facility are highly unlikely to be

attributable to the Facility’s discharge. 

4.1.3 Dissolved Oxygen 

Table 4 and Figure 4 show mean DO measurements collected during the Weekly Receiving 

Water Monitoring Study. Mean DO generally increased at all locations over the monitoring 

period. The highest DO concentrations were typically observed at the Clearwater River 

reference location (CR-REF), while the lowest DO concentrations were observed at the Snake 

River reference locations (SR-REF) for all dates before October, when the lowest DO 

concentrations were observed at LGP-01. Concentrations of DO at the other sample locations 

were similar throughout the monitoring period. With the exception of the Snake River reference 

location during the period from July 13, 2005 through August 10, 2005 (when DO ranged from 

6.25 to 7.68 mg/L), DO at all locations and dates exceeded the WDOE water quality standard 

for DO, which is a minimum of 8 mg/L DO. EPA used this water quality standard as the toxicity 

benchmark for DO in its Biological Evaluation and as the basis for the computation of the 

effluent limitations for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) in the permit. The finding that all 

downstream DO measurements were at least 8 mg/L, and were therefore compliant with the 

WDOE water quality standard, indicates that the Facility discharge is not affecting DO 

downstream of the Facility. 

4.1.4 Water Temperature 

Mean water temperatures generally decreased at all locations over the monitoring period. The 

highest temperatures were always observed at SR-REF except for 8/3/05, where the highest 

temperature was at LGP-01. The lowest temperatures were always observed at CR-REF. At 

the other Snake River locations, water temperatures tended to increase moving from upstream 

to downstream, such that the lowest Snake River temperatures were measured closest to the 

Facility, and the highest temperatures were measured farthest from the Facility (approaching 

the Lower Granite Dam). During July, only the Snake River reference location temperatures 

exceeded the temperature benchmark for July and August of 20 degrees C used in EPA’s 

Biological Evaluation. 

During August, the temperature benchmark of 20 degrees C was exceeded only at the Snake 

River reference location and on one day at location LGP-01 (the farthest downstream location), 

when a temperature of 20.3 degrees C was recorded. 

EPA’s Biological Evaluation used a temperature benchmark of 18 degrees C for September and 

October. During September, the temperature at the Snake River reference location exceeded 

the benchmark on all sampling dates. The temperature measured at the three farthest 

downstream Snake River sampling locations (LGP-09, LGP-06, and LGP-01) exceeded the 

benchmark of 18 degrees C on the first one or two sampling dates in the monitoring period, and 

Page 8 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

were below the benchmark from September 19, 2005 through the end of October. The 

temperature measured at LGP-13 (closest to the Facility) did not exceed the benchmark of 18 

degrees C on any sampling date. 

4.2 Conventional Parameters 

Conventional parameters analyzed during this study were total suspended solids (TSS) and 

biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). For those samples with nondetectable concentrations, the 

concentration was calculated by using one half the detection limit. If an analyte was not 

detectable across all sites on a given sample day, it was considered not present. 

4.2.1 Total Suspended Solids 

Table 6 presents the Total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations for each sampling day of the 

monitoring period. TSS concentrations were ND in all but 17 out of 221 samples. The detection 

limit for TSS was 5 mg/L. Detected concentrations ranged from 5 mg/L to 12 mg/L with the 

maximum concentration occurring at SR-REF-MD, on 7/7/05. Among the upstream samples, 

TSS concentrations ranged from ND to 12 mg/L. Among downstream samples, TSS 

concentrations ranged from ND to 11 mg/L. 

EPA’s Biological Evaluation used a toxicity benchmark of 10 mg/L for TSS. Two of the 221 

measurements collected during the study exceeded 10 mg/L. One exceedance of 12 mg/L 

occurred on July 7, 2005 at the Snake River reference location, and the other exceedance 11 

mg/L occurred at LGP-01 (the farthest downstream sampling location). Average concentrations 

by date or by location were well below the toxicity benchmark. 

4.2.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand 

Table 7 and Figures 6a (shallow surface water) and 6b (mid-depth surface water) present the 

BOD concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. Biochemical oxygen 

demand (BOD) concentrations ranged from ND to 7 mg/L. The maximum concentration was 

measured in a sample collected at station LGP-01-S on 9/7/05 and 9/21/05. Among the 

upstream samples, BOD concentrations ranged from ND to 1.7 mg/L. Among the downstream 

samples, BOD concentrations ranged from ND to 7 mg/L. With the exception of the three 

measurements collected from shallow surface water at LGP-01 (the farthest downstream 

sampling location) during September, all BOD concentrations were below 2 mg/L at all 

locations. Concentrations typically hovered around 1 mg/L in July and August, and decreased 

to non-detect by mid-October. 

4.3 Nutrients 

During weekly monitoring, samples were analyzed for several nitrogen- and phosphoruscontaining nutrients. The nitrogen-containing nutrients were ammonia nitrogen, nitrate and 

nitrite nitrogen, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The phosphorus-containing nutrients were total 

phosphorus and orthophosphate. For those samples with nondetectable concentrations, the 

concentration was calculated by using one half the detection limit. If an analyte was not 

Page 9 
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

detectable across all sites on a given sample day, it was considered not present and thus not 

considered present. 

4.3.1 Ammonia Nitrogen 

Table 8 and Figures 7a (shallow surface water) and 7b (mid-depth surface water) present 

ammonia nitrogen concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. Ammonia 

nitrogen concentrations during the monitoring period ranged from nondetect to 0.11 mg/L. The 

maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected at station LGP-13-S on 7/27/05. 

Among the upstream samples, ammonia nitrogen concentrations ranged from ND to 0.03 mg/L. 

Among the downstream samples, ammonia nitrogen concentrations ranged from ND to 0.11 

mg/L. In both shallow and mid-depth samples, concentrations were typically below 0.04 mg/L. 

During each week, the location of the maximum concentration varied among mid-depth 

samples. In shallow samples, the maximum concentrations were often detected at LGP-01 (the

farthest downstream sample location). 

4.3.2 Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen

Table 9 and Figures 8a (shallow surface water) and 8b (mid-depth surface water) present 

nitrate/nitrite nitrogen concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. 

Concentrations of nitrate/nitrite nitrogen ranged from nondetect to 0.62 mg/L. The maximum 

concentration was measured in a sample collected in the Snake River reference location on 

10/11/05. The minimum concentration, and the only nondetectable concentration, was 

measured in a sample collected in the Clearwater River reference location, also on 10/11/05. 

Among the upstream samples, nitrate/nitrite nitrogen concentrations ranged from ND to 0.62 

mg/L. Among the downstream samples, nitrate/nitrite nitrogen concentrations ranged from 

0.042 mg/L to 0.57 mg/L. Maximum concentrations in both shallow and mid-depth samples 

were generally observed in the Snake River reference location. Concentrations tended to 

increase over the duration of the study at both depths, with the exception of the Clearwater 

River reference location, where concentrations remained constant over the duration of the 

study. The concentration profile observed in the Snake River samples suggests the existence 

of a non-point source contribution of nitrate/nitrite nitrogen along the length of the River. 

4.3.3 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 

Table 10 and Figures 9a (shallow surface water) and 9b (mid-depth surface water) present the 

total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. 

TKN concentrations ranged from nondetect to 1.5 mg/L. Nondetectable concentrations were 

observed at several site locations as well as the Clearwater River reference location. The 

maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected at station LGP-01-S on 9/21/05. 

Among the upstream samples, TKN concentrations ranged from ND to 0.7 mg/L. Among the 

downstream samples, TKN concentrations ranged from ND to 1.5 mg/L. Concentrations of TKN 

were fairly constant during the duration of the study with perhaps a small increase over time. 

Concentrations at location LGP-01 (the farthest downstream sample location) are slightly higher 

than concentrations at locations closer to the Facility. 

Page 10
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

4.3.4 Total Phosphorus 

Table 11 and Figures 10a (shallow surface water) and 10b (mid-depth surface water) present 

the total phosphorus concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. 

Total phosphorus concentrations ranged from ND to 0.13 mg/L. Nondetect concentrations were 

observed three times, all at the Clearwater River reference location. The maximum 

concentration was measured in a sample collected at station LGP-01-S on 9/21/05. Among 

upstream samples, total phosphorus ranged from ND to 0.12 mg/L. Among downstream 

samples, total phosphorus ranged from 0.02 mg/L to 0.13 mg/L. Maximum concentrations in 

shallow samples were observed in different locations from week to week. In mid-depth 

samples, maximum concentrations were often observed at the Snake River reference location. 

Concentrations remained constant at the Clearwater River reference location. At both depths, 

concentrations in the Snake River tended to increase over the duration of the study through 

September, then decreased in October. The concentration profile observed in the Snake River 

samples suggests the existence of a non-point source contribution of phosphorus along the 

length of the River. 

4.3.5 Orthophosphate Phosphorus 

Table 12 and Figures 11a (shallow surface water) and 11b (mid-depth surface water) present 

the orthophosphate phosphorus concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring period. 

Orthophosphate phosphorus concentrations ranged from ND to 0.10 mg/L. Nondetectable 

concentrations were observed three times, all at the Clearwater River reference location. The 

maximum concentration was measured in a sample collected at station LGP-09-S and LGP-06-

S on 10/5/05. Among upstream samples, orthophosphate concentrations ranged from ND to 

0.09 mg/L. Among downstream samples, orthophosphate concentrations ranged from 0.009 

mg/L to 0.1 mg/L. Maximum concentrations in shallow samples were observed in different 

locations from week to week. In mid-depth samples, maximum concentrations were often 

observed at the Snake River reference location. Concentrations remained constant at the 

Clearwater River reference location. At both depths, concentrations in the Snake River tended 

to increase over the duration of the study through September, then decreased in October. The 

concentration profile observed in the Snake River samples suggests the existence of a nonpoint source contribution of orthophosphate phosphorus along the length of the River. 

4.3.6 2,3,7,8-TCDD 

Table 13 presents the 2,3,7,8-TCDD concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring 

period. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in any sample on any date during the study. 

4.3.7 2,3,7,8-TCDF 

Table 14 presents the 2,3,7,8-TCDF concentrations for each sampling day of the monitoring 

period. 2,3,7,8-TCDF was not detected in any sample on any date during the study. 

Page 11
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

4.4 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring Study

Parameters with nondetectable concentrations were represented by one half the detection limit. 

If an analyte was not detectable across all sites, it was considered not present and thus not 

considered in further calculations. 

4.4.1 Resin Acids 

Table 15 and Figures 12a (river samples) and 12b (effluent samples) present the resin acid 

concentrations for each river location and effluent. Most resin acids were not detected in the 

Snake River and Clearwater River: Dehydroabietic, Neoabietic, Palustric, Pimaric, 

Sandaracopimaric, and Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid. Abietic acid was detected at all 

locations and ranged from 0.009 ug/L at the Snake River reference location to 0.035 ug/L at 

LGP-09-SW-A, with a mean concentration of 0.024 ug/L and a median concentration of 0.021 

ug/L. Isopimaric acid ranged from ND at LGP-13-SW-A and LGP-14-SW-A to 0.006 ug/L at 

LGP-09-SW-A. All resin acid concentrations are below the toxicity benchmark of 2.2 ug/L used 

in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. Figure 12a shows 

that resin acids show no trend in concentration with distance from the diffuser. The resin acid

with the most variation in concentrations was abietic acid. Even among the results for this 

compound, concentrations hovered around 0.02 ug/L, with some concentrations slightly above 

and some concentrations slightly below 0.02 ug/L. 

Table 15 also presents the concentrations in the effluent as both dissolved and total. 

Dehydroabietic acid and Palustric acid were not detected in dissolved effluent. In the total 

effluent, Palustric acid was not detected. Figure 12b shows a substantial difference between 

the concentrations in the total and dissolved samples, indicating that the majority of resin acids 

are associated with the solid fraction of effluent, rather than the dissolved fraction. 

4.4.2 Phytosterols 

Table 16 and Figures 13a (river samples) and 13b (effluent samples) present the phytosterol 

concentrations for each river location and effluent. Retene was not detected in river or effluent 

samples. Stigmastanol was not detected in river samples. B-sitosterol concentrations ranged 

from 0.46 ug/L at the Clearwater River reference location to 3.39 ug/L at LGP-01-SW-A, with a 

mean concentration of 1.12 ug/L and a median concentration of 0.679 ug/L. Campesterol 

concentrations ranged from 0.038 ug/L at the Clearwater River reference location to 0.27 ug/L 

at LGP-01-SW-A, with a mean concentration of 0.076 ug/L and a median concentration of 0.054 

ug/L. Stigmasterol concentrations ranged from ND at the Clearwater Reference location to 

0.331 ug/L at LGP-01-SW-A, with a mean concentration of 0.095 ug/L and a median 

concentration of 0.067 ug/L. All phytosterol concentrations, except the maximum concentration 

of B-sitosterol in LGP-01 (the farthest location from the Facility) (3.39 ug/L), were lower than the 

toxicity benchmark of 2.5 ug/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan, attached to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Biological Opinion. 

Figure 13a shows that, with the exception of the concentration of B-sitosterol in LGP-01, 

concentrations were fairly constant in all samples. B-sitosterol had slightly elevated 

Page 12
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

concentrations in the two samples closest to the diffuser (LGP-013 and LGP-14), then

decreased downstream. This concentration profile may represent a limited area of slightly 

elevated concentrations associated with the Facility. However, given that the maximum 

concentration of this compound in LGP-01, it is certainly possible that a source of B-sitosterol 

exists in area between the Facility and sampling location LGP-01. 

Figure 13b shows a substantial difference between the concentrations in the total and dissolved 

samples, indicating that the majority of phytosterols are associated with the solid fraction of 

effluent, rather than the dissolved fraction. 

4.4.3 Chlorophenolics 

Table 17 presents the chlorophenolics concentrations for each location. Chlorophenolics were 

not detected in any river water samples, nor were they detected in the effluent samples. 

4.4.4 Chloroform

Table 18 and Figure 16 present the chloroform concentrations for each location. Chloroform 

was not detected with the exception of LGP-01 and the Effluent. At LGP-01, the chloroform 

concentration was 0.19 ug/L. In the effluent, the chloroform concentration was 1.08 ug/L. The 

detection limit for chloroform was 0.14 ug/L. Both detected concentrations of chloroform are 

less than the toxicity benchmark for chloroform of 12.4 ug/L used in EPA’s Biological Evaluation. 

4.4.5 Dissolved and Total Organic Carbon 

Table 19 and Figure 17 present the Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total Organic Carbon 

(TOC) concentrations for each river sampling location. Table 19 also presents DOC and TOC in 

effluent samples. Concentrations of DOC and TOC were generally constant in river water 

samples. DOC at LGP-11, 11.8 mg/L, was considerably greater than any other observed 

concentration of either DOC or TOC and could be the result of sampling or analytical error. At 

the other sampling locations, DOC concentrations ranged from 1.9 mg/L at CR REF to 3.1 mg/L 

at LGP-01. Concentrations of TOC ranged from 2.1 mg/L at CR-REF to 2.9 mg/L at LGP-14, 

LGP-09, LGP-06, and LGP-01. 

In the effluent, DOC was 125 mg/L and TOC was 150 mg/L. 

4.4.6 Dioxin Congeners 

Table 20 and Figures 18a (river water samples) and 18b (effluent samples) presents the dioxin 

congener concentrations for each location and the effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in 

any river sampling location except LGP-13-SW-A, where the concentration was 0.022 pg/L. 

The mean river water concentration was 0.0038 pg/L and the median was 0.0013 pg/L. The 

single detected concentration, as well as the mean and median concentrations, are below the 

toxicity benchmark of 0.06 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ 

Biological Opinion. 

Page 13
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD was ND at all locations except LGP-06-SW-A and LGP-13-SW-A. The 

maximum concentration of 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD was 0.051 pg/L (at LGP-13-SW-A), the mean 

concentration was 0.0076 pg/L, and the median concentration was 0.0013 pg/L. The 

concentration of 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD ranged from ND at two locations to 0.008 pg/L at LGP-13-

SW-A. The mean concentration was 0.0032 pg/L and the median concentration was 0.003 

pg/L. The concentration of 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD ranged from ND at three locations to 0.04 pg/L 

at LGP-13-SW-A. The mean concentration was 0.013 pg/L and the median concentration was 

0.0093 pg/L. The concentration of 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD ranged from 0.004 pg/L at the Clearwater 

River reference location to 0.038 pg/L at LGP-13-SW-A. The mean concentration was 0.012 

pg/L and the median concentration was 0.0083. The concentration of 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 

ranged from 0.056 pg/L at the Clearwater River reference location to 0.266 pg/L at LGP-01-SWA. The mean concentration was 0.167 pg/L and the median concentration was 0.17 pg/L. 

OCDD concentrations ranged from 0.307 pg/L at the Clearwater River reference location to 1.66 

pg/L at LGP-01-SW-A. The mean concentration was 0.85 pg/L and the median concentration 

was 0.83 pg/L. 

Figure 18a indicates that concentrations of tetra- and penta-chlorinated dioxin congeners at 

location LGP-13 (near the Facility) were slightly higher than upstream or downstream 

concentrations. Subsequent rounds of quarterly sampling will be helpful in evaluating whether 

phenomenon represents a trend or a random event. In either case, however, concentrations at 

LGP-13 were lower than the toxicity benchmark for 2,3,7,8-TCDD. 

2,3,7,8-TCDD was not detected in either the dissolved fraction of effluent or the solid fraction of 

effluent. Some higher-chlorinated dioxin congeners (that is, those congeners that are not 

associated with pulp and paper manufacturing processes) were detected in either the dissolved

or solid fractions of effluent. As shown on Figure 18b, the majority of dioxin congeners detected 

in effluent were observed in the solid fraction.

4.4.7 Furans 

Table 20 and Figures 19a (river water samples) and 19b (effluent samples) presents the furan 

congener concentrations for each location and the effluent. 2,3,7,8-TCDF ranged from ND at 

two locations to 0.006 pg/L at three locations. The mean concentration was 0.0044 pg/L and 

the median was 0.005 pg/L. The single detected concentration, as well as the mean and 

median concentrations, are below the toxicity benchmark of 0.2 pg/L used in EPA’s Monitoring 

Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries’ Biological Opinion. 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF ranged from ND at all locations except LGP-06-SW-A, where the 

concentration was 0.003 pg/L. 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF concentrations ranged from ND at five 

locations to 0.003 pg/L at LGP-09-SW-A and LGP-14-SW-A. 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF concentrations 

ranged from ND at four locations to 0.006 pg/L at LGP-14-SW-A. The mean concentration of 

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF was 0.0032 pg/L and the median was 0.00325 pg/L. 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 

concentrations ranged from ND at four locations to 0.004 pg/L at LGP-11-SW-A. The mean 

concentration was 0.0023 pg/L and the median was 0.0023 pg/L. 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF was not 

detected at any location. 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF was ND at all locations but LGP-06-SW-A, where 

the concentration was 0.0021 pg/L. 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF was ND at all locations but LGP-13-

SW-A, where the concentration was 0.03 pg/L. 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF was ND at all locations but

Page 14
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

LGP-11-SW-A, where the concentration was 0.003 pg/L. OCDF concentrations ranged from 

0.007 pg/L at LGP-13-SW-A to 0.045 pg/L at LGP-01-SW-A. The mean concentration was 

0.026 pg/L and the mean was 0.025 pg/L. 

2,3,7,8-TCDF was detected in both the dissolved fraction of effluent and the solid fraction of 

effluent. The detected concentration of 2,3,7,8-TCDF in effluent is below the toxicity benchmark 

for this compound used in EPA’s Monitoring Plan as appended to NOAA Fisheries Biological 

Opinion. Additionally, certain higher-chlorinated furan congeners (that is, those congeners that 

are not associated with pulp and paper manufacturing processes) were detected in either the 

dissolved or solid fractions of effluent. As shown on Figure 19b, the majority of furan congeners 

detected in effluent were observed in the solid fraction.

Page 15
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

This report presents the results of sampling conducted during 2005 to complete the Quarterly 

Surface Water and Effluent Study and the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study, both part 

of the Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

required in non-discretionary terms and conditions set forth by the Services in their Biological 

Opinions on the re-issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit by EPA. Additionally, the Behthic 

Community Study, also required as a Tier 1 study, was conducted. However, because the 

results of the study were not reported to Potlatch until January 9, 2005, the Benthic Community 

Study results will be presented in a subsequent Monitoring Study Report. 

Receiving water and effluent data collected during the monitoring program has characterized 

the water quality at: 

• Two reference locations (Snake River upstream of the effluent and the Clearwater River 

upstream of the confluence with the Snake River) during both weekly and quarterly 

monitoring programs; 

• Four locations in the Snake River, downstream of the Potlatch effluent during weekly 

monitoring; and 

• Six locations in the Snake River, downstream of the Potlatch effluent during quarterly 

monitoring. 

The report presents all analytical results and discusses the temporal and spatial trends in 

measured parameters selected for this investigation. 

The results of both the Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring Study and the Quarterly Surface 

Water and Effluent Study revealed no indications that the Facility’s effluent has any influence on 

downstream parameter measurements. No meaningful differences between reference location

conditions and downstream conditions were observed. With a few exceptions, all 

measurements complied with toxicity benchmarks and applicable water quality standards. The 

few exceptions occurred at reference locations or at the farthest downstream sampling location 

from the Facility. 

In conclusion, the results of sampling and analysis upstream and downstream of the Facility 

support the finding in EPA’s Biological Evaluation and the Services’ Biological Opinions that the 

EPA’s re-issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River spring/summer and fall chinook salmon, and 

Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated 

critical habitat for Snake River spring/summer and fall chinook salmon and Snake River sockeye 

salmon. 

Page 16
Potlatch Corporation 

Tier 1 Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring 

Studies Conducted in 2005 

Lewiston, ID 

January 2006

REFERENCES 

AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. (AMEC) and Anchor Environmental (Anchor). 2005. 

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit 

Compliance Monitoring. Potlatch Corporation Lewiston Facility. May 2005. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries). 2004. 

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion And Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation. April 2004. 

U.S. EPA. 2003. Biological Evaluation of the Potlatch Corporation Pulp and Paper Mill in 

Lewiston, Idaho. December 2003. 

U.S. EPA. 2005. Authorization to Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System. Permit No.: ID0001163. Potlatch Corporation 803 Mill Road, Lewiston, 

Idaho. 

Page 17
P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

")

")

!.

#*

#*

")

LOWER

GRANITE

DAM

1000

2000

1000

1000

1000

2000

1000

2000

2000

1000

2000

2000

2000

2000

2000

2000

1000

1000 Steptoe Canyon

Nisqually John Canyon

Clayton Gulch

So uth Dead man Gulch

Yakawawa Canyon

Keith Canyon

Wawaw ai Cany o n

MacMurray Canyo

B

n

uck Canyon

Kluge Canyon

Alm ota C reek

Offield Canyon

MATCH

LINE

LGP-B

LGP-C

LGP-A

LGP-03

LGP-02

LGP-01

127

126

125

124

123

122

121 120

119

118

117

116

115

114

113

112

111

110

109

108

!

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

"

" "

)

) )

#

#

#

# #

# #

*

*

*

* *

* *

!

!

! !

!

.

.

. .

.

I D A H O

W A S H I N G T O N

1000

1000

2000

1000

3000

1000

1000

1000

2000

1000

1000

2000

2000

Dry Creek

H atw ai Creek

Lindsay Cr e ek

Steptoe Canyon

MATCH

LINE

LEWISTON CLARKSTON

LGP-D

LGP-E

LGP-F

LGP-07

LGP-14

LGP-13 LGP-12

LGP-10

LGP-11

LGP-09

LGP-08

LGP-06

LGP-05

LGP-04

LGP-03

POTLATCH

MILL

OUTFALL

5

4

3

2

1

0

140

139

138 137

136

135

134

133

132

131

130

129

128

127

Locations for Sediment, Benthic Community, and Receiving Water Samples

Potlatch Pulp & Paper Mill

Lewiston, Idaho

0 0.5 1 2

Scale in Miles

LEGEND

!. Sediment, Benthic Community, & Water Samples

#* Sediment Samples Only

") Not Proposed for Sampling

P

Approx. River Miles

Receiving Water Sampling Transects

1000-ft Topographic Contours

200-ft Topographic Contours

Streams

River

North American Datum 1983, Washington

State Plane, South Zone, U.S. feet

J:\Jobs\050297-Potlatch\Maps\2005_07\recon_station_locs.mxd EI 07/12/2005 3:26 PM

Figure 1.
Figure 2. Mean Water Velocity

0.000.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.601.802.00

07/04/2005

07/11/2005

07/18/2005

07/25/2005

08/01/2005

08/08/2005

08/15/2005

08/22/2005

08/29/2005

09/05/2005

09/12/2005

09/19/2005

09/26/2005

10/03/2005

10/10/2005

10/17/2005

Sample Date

Velocity (ft/s)
Figure 3. Mean Water pH

6.007.008.009.00

07/04/2005

07/11/2005

07/18/2005

07/25/2005

08/01/2005

08/08/2005

08/15/2005

08/22/2005

08/29/2005

09/05/2005

09/12/2005

09/19/2005

09/26/2005

10/03/2005

10/10/2005

10/17/2005

Sample Date

pH
Figure 4. Mean Dissolved Oxygen

5.006.007.008.009.00

10.0011.0012.0013.0014.00

07/04/2005

07/11/2005

07/18/2005

07/25/2005

08/01/2005

08/08/2005

08/15/2005

08/22/2005

08/29/2005

09/05/2005

09/12/2005

09/19/2005

09/26/2005

10/03/2005

10/10/2005

10/17/2005

Sample Date

DO (mg/L)
Figure 5. Mean Water Temperature

9

10111213141516171819202122232425

07/04/2005

07/11/2005

07/18/2005

07/25/2005

08/01/2005

08/08/2005

08/15/2005

08/22/2005

08/29/2005

09/05/2005

09/12/2005

09/19/2005

09/26/2005

10/03/2005

10/10/2005

10/17/2005

10/24/2005

Sample Date

Degrees Celsius
Figure 6a. Biological Oxygen Demand in Shallow Surface Water

012345678

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

BOD (mg/L)
Figure 6b. Biological Oxygen Demand in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

1.21.41.6

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

BOD (mg/L)
Figure 7a. Ammonia Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.12

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

NH3-N (mg/L)
Figure 7b. Ammonia Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.12

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

NH3-N (mg/L)
Figure 8a. Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

NO2/NO3-N (mg/L)
Figure 8b. Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

NO2/NO3-N (mg/L) 
Figure 9a. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.20.40.60.8

1

1.21.41.6

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Depth

TKN (mg/L)
Figure 9b. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Mid-Depth Surface-Water

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

TKN (mg/L)
Figure 10a. Total Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.120.14

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

Total P (mg/L)
10b. Total Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.120.14

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

Total P (mg/L)
Figure 11a. Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Shallow Surface Water

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.12

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Depth

Orthophosphate (mg/L) 
Figure 11b. Orthophosphate Phosphorus in Mid-Depth Surface Water

0

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.09

0.1

06/25/2005

07/02/2005

07/09/2005

07/16/2005

07/23/2005

07/30/2005

08/06/2005

08/13/2005

08/20/2005

08/27/2005

09/03/2005

09/10/2005

09/17/2005

09/24/2005

10/01/2005

10/08/2005

10/15/2005

10/22/2005

10/29/2005

Sample Date

Orthophosphate (mg/L) 
Figure 12a. Resin Acids in Receiving Water

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP

(ug/L)

Abietic Acid Dehydroabietic Acid Dehydroabietic Neoabietic Acid Palustric Acid Pimaric AcidSandaracopimaric Acid Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid
Figure 12b. Resin Acids in Effluent

0123456

Abietic Acid

Dehydroabietic Acid Isopimaric Acid Neoabietic Acid Palustric AcidPimaric Acid Sandaracopimaric Acid

Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid

(ug/L) 
Figure 13a. Phytosterols in Receiving Water

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-0

(ug/L)
Figure 13b. Phytosterols in Effluent

0

1020304050607080

B-sitosterol Campesterol Stigmastanol Stigmasterol Retene

(ug/L) 
Figure 14. Quarterly Chloroform Concentrations

0

0.020.040.060.08

0.1

0.120.140.160.18

0.2

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(ug/L) 
Figure 15. Quarterly DOC and TOC in Receiving Water

02468

101214

CR-REF SR-REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LG

mg/L
Figure 16a. Dioxins in Receiving Water

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(pg/L)
Figure 16b. Dioxins in Effluent

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

2,3,7,8-TCDD 1,2,3,7,8-

PeCDD

1,2,3,4,7,8-

HxCDD

1,2,3,6,7,8-

HxCDD

1,2,3,7,8,9-

HxCDD

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-

HpCDD

OCDD

(pg/L) 
Figure 17a. Furans in Receiving Water

0.001

0.01

0.1

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01

(pg/L)
Figure 17b. Furans in Effluent

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

2,3,7,8-TCDF

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF OCDF

(pg/L) 
Table 1

Coordinates of Sample Locations on the Snake River and Clearwater River.

Potlatch Lewiston Mill

Sample ID Latitude Longitude

CR-REF 46 15.2988 -116 33.51

SR-REF 46 23.247 -117 02.731

LGP-14 46 25.8579 -117 02.4506

LGP-13 46 25.5650 -117 02.5940

LGP-11 46 25.5418 -117 03.9994

LGP-09 46 24.9105 -117 05.4103

LGP-06 46 25.6274 -117 09.5797

LGP-01 46 33.2666 -117 16.5655
Table 2

Mean Velocity Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillMean Velocity (ft/sec)Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-09 LGP-06 LG07/07/200507/13/2005 0.23 1.57 0.26 0.55 0.40 007/20/2005 0.40 1.54 0.18 0.52 0.17 007/27/2005 0.20 1.77 0.12 0.43 0.29 008/03/2005 0.19 1.62 0.19 0.26 0.31 008/10/2005 0.40 1.58 0.17 0.35 0.03 008/17/2005 0.06 1.39 0.39 0.12 0.17 008/24/2005 0.23 1.08 0.19 0.20 008/30/2005 0.33 0.86 0.12 0.14 0.24 009/07/2005 0.14 0.84 0.14 0.07 0.14 009/14/2005 0.23 1.27 0.05 0.15 0.15 009/21/2005 0.18 0.43 0.07 0.16 0.06 009/27/2005 0.22 0.39 0.13 010/05/2005 0.28 0.43 0.14 0.16 0.56 010/11/2005 0.18 0.83 0.09 0.12 0.15 010/19/2005 0.10 0.50 0.16 0.06 0.13 010/25/2005 0.22 0.72 0.11 0.09 0.13 0Average 0.22 1.05 0.16 0.22 0.21 0Median 0.22 0.97 0.14 0.15 0.16 0Min 0.06 0.39 0.05 0.06 0.03 0Max 0.40 1.77 0.39 0.55 0.56 0
Table 3

Mean pH Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillMean pHSampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-09 LGP-06 LG07/07/2005 8.23 7.81 8.28 8.18 7.92 707/13/2005 8.56 8.09 8.48 8.29 8.72 807/20/2005 8.03 7.31 8.20 8.25 8.12 807/27/2005 8.18 7.61 8.08 8.13 7.97 708/03/2005 8.07 7.75 8.15 8.37 8.05 708/10/2005 8.02 7.61 8.13 8.25 8.26 808/17/2005 8.01 7.83 8.13 8.03 7.87 808/24/2005 7.97 7.80 8.10 8.30 8.03 708/30/2005 7.97 7.38 8.10 7.78 7.87 809/07/2005 8.00 7.94 8.29 7.75 8.09 809/14/2005 7.72 7.41 8.33 7.86 7.79 709/21/2005 8.10 7.73 8.21 8.16 8.16 709/27/2005 7.69 7.95 8.03 710/05/2005 7.46 7.83 8.04 8.06 7.87 710/11/2005 8.11 8.11 710/19/2005 7.96 7.88 8.22 8.22 8.20 810/25/2005 8.23 8.22 7Average 8.00 7.73 8.20 8.12 8.08 7Median 8.01 7.80 8.18 8.16 8.07 7Min 7.46 7.31 8.04 7.75 7.79 7Max 8.56 8.09 8.48 8.37 8.72 8
Table 4

Mean Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillMean Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-09 LGP-06 LG07/07/2005 9.2 10.1 9.2 10.1 9.507/13/2005 7.5 8.0 8.1 9.2 8.9 07/20/2005 7.1 9.2 8.7 9.7 8.4 07/27/2005 7.7 9.3 9.0 9.1 9.1 08/03/2005 7.6 10.3 9.9 10.2 9.4 08/10/2005 6.2 11.0 9.4 9.9 9.4 08/17/2005 8.2 11.0 9.4 10.1 9.6 08/24/2005 8.0 10.6 9.2 9.6 8.9 08/30/2005 8.9 11.3 9.9 10.1 9.6 09/07/2005 8.8 10.0 10.0 10.0 9.5 09/14/2005 9.7 12.3 11.1 10.9 10.1 09/21/2005 9.0 11.2 9.9 9.6 9.9 09/27/2005 9.6 11.5 9.8 10/05/2005 10.4 12.8 10.8 10.7 10.5 10/11/2005 10.3 10.6 10/19/2005 9.8 11.1 10.2 10.0 10.6 10/25/2005 9.9 10.2 Average 8.5 10.6 9.6 9.9 9.6 Median 8.8 11.0 9.6 10.0 9.5 Min 6.2 8.0 8.1 9.1 8.4 Max 10.4 12.8 11.1 10.9 10.6 
Table 5

Mean Temperature Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillMean Temperature (degrees Celsius)Sampling Date SR REF CR REF LGP-13 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-07/07/2005 20.65 14.05 18.90 19.14 19.82 20.007/13/2005 21.67 14.44 18.71 18.74 19.18 19.607/20/2005 22.52 11.71 16.51 18.38 18.95 19.407/27/2005 18.40 11.34 16.10 16.98 17.92 19.008/03/2005 22.08 11.15 16.49 16.75 18.21 20.308/10/2005 23.09 11.68 16.17 17.49 19.08 19.308/17/2005 22.02 10.67 17.27 16.88 17.63 19.408/24/2005 21.10 11.57 16.58 18.28 19.12 19.608/30/2005 21.26 11.70 16.74 18.16 18.68 19.409/07/2005 20.60 11.70 16.53 17.52 17.67 18.709/14/2005 19.13 11.55 15.89 15.44 16.25 17.209/21/2005 18.31 13.23 17.04 17.61 17.77 17.409/27/2005 17.47 12.31 16.60 16.910/05/2005 15.34 9.66 14.76 14.71 14.70 15.410/11/2005 15.43 15.65 14.38 14.64 14.910/19/2005 14.98 10.66 14.86 14.35 14.43 14.510/25/2005 14.07 9.78 14.61 14.31 14.41 15.3Average 19.30 11.70 16.42 16.81 17.40 18.0

Median 20.60 11.62 16.50 16.98 17.85 19.0Min 14.07 9.66 14.61 14.31 14.41 14.5Max 23.09 14.44 18.90 19.14 19.82 20.3
Table 6

Total Suspended Solids (TSS, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 8 12 2.5 U 2 3 2.5 12 12 807/13/2005 7 6 2.5 U 2 3 2.5 7 7 607/20/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/27/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/03/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/10/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/17/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/24/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/07/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/15/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/21/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/27/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/05/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/11/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/19/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/25/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 3.088 3.265 2.500Median 2.5 2.5 2.5Min 2.5 2.5 2.5Max 8 12 2.5Samples 17 17 17Detects 220Sampling Date De07/07/2005 8 7 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 6 

07/13/2005 8 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 9 11 

07/20/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

07/27/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

08/03/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

08/10/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

08/17/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 7 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

08/24/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

08/30/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 7 

09/07/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 8 2.5 U 

09/15/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

09/21/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 8 2.5 U 

09/27/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

10/05/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

10/11/2005 1.25 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

10/19/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 

10/25/2005 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 2.5 U 5 2.5 U 

Average 2.338 2.765 2.500 2.765 2.647 2.500 2.500 2.647 3.676 3.471Median 1.25 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Min 1.25 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Max 8 7 2.5 7 5 2.5 2.5 5 9 11Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17

Detects 210110014 3Notes:

U indicates undetected

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 7

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 1.2 J 1.2 J 1.7 J 3 3 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.207/13/2005 1.1 JX 0.8 JX 0.5 JX 3 3 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.807/20/2005 0.6 JX 0.7 JX 0.7 JX 3 3 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.707/27/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/03/2005 0.5 0.6 0.5 3 3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.508/10/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/17/2005 1.3 1.5 0.9 3 3 0.9 1.5 1.5 1.308/24/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2005 0.6 0.25 U 0.8 2 3 0.25 0.8 0.8 0.609/07/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/15/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/21/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/27/2005 1 0.25 U 0.25 U 1 3 0.25 1 1 0.2510/05/2005 0.9 0.25 U 0.25 U 1 3 0.25 0.9 0.9 0.2510/11/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/19/2005 0.25 UX 0.25 UX 0.25 UX 3 3 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2510/25/2005 0.25 UX 0.25 UX 0.25 UX 3 3 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Average 0.556 0.459 0.462Median 0.25 0.25 0.25Min 0.25 0.25 0.25Max 1.3 1.5 1.7Samples 17 17 17Detects 10 7 8Sampling Date De07/07/2005 1.1 J 1 J 0.9 J 1 J 1 J 1.2 J 0.45 U 0.45 U 1.5 J 1 J 

07/13/2005 1 J 1 J 0.8 J 0.7 J 1.2 J 1 J 1.2 JX 0.8 JX 1.7 JX 1.1 JX 

07/20/2005 0.7 J 0.8 J 0.8 J 1 J 1.1 J 0.8 J 1.3 JX 1.1 JX 1.7 JX 1.1 JX 

07/27/2005 0.25 U 0.6 J 0.6 J 0.6 J 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.6 J 0.25 U 

08/03/2005 0.7 0.25 U 0.7 1 0.7 0.7 1.9 0.25 U 1.5 0.7 

08/10/2005 0.125 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.8 0.25 U 08/17/2005 1.5 1.1 1.2 1 1.3 1.4 1 1.2 1.7 1.2 

08/24/2005 0.125 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.7 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.6 0.25 U 1.3 0.25 U 08/30/2005 0.2375 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.6 1.1 0.7 09/07/2005 0.375 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.5 0.375 0.25 U 1 0.8 7 0.8 09/15/2005 0.125 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 3.6 0.25 U 09/21/2005 0.125 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 7 0.6 09/27/2005 0.2125 U 0.25 U 0.6 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 10/05/2005 0.125 U 0.6 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.825 0.25 U 0.6 0.6 0.25 U 0.25 U 10/11/2005 0.125 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 10/19/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 UX 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 

10/25/2005 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 UX 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 

Average 0.4308824 0.4617647 0.4764706 0.5147059 0.5294118 0.4764706 0.6058824 0.4735294 1.8088235 0.555882353

Median 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 1.300 0.250Min 0.125 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Max 1.5 1.1 1.2 1 1.3 1.4 1.9 1.2 7 1.2Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 6 6 9 8 7 5 7 6 12 8Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated valueX - Holding time exceeded

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S
Table 8

Ammonia Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.02 J 0.02 J 0.02 J 3 3 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0207/13/2005 0.006 J 0.004 J 0.005 J 3 3 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.00507/20/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/27/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/03/2005 0.03 0.03 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.0308/10/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/17/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/24/2005 0.02 0.02 0.005 3 3 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.0208/30/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/07/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/15/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/21/2005 0.01 0.02 0.02 3 3 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.0209/27/2005 0.03 0.03 0.03 3 3 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0310/05/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/11/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/19/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/25/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 0.013 0.014 0.012

Median 0.01 0.01 0.01Min 0.006 0.004 0.005Max 0.03 0.03 0.03Samples 17 17 17Detects 666Sampling Date De

07/07/2005 0.01 U 0.03 J 0.025 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.02 J 0.02 J 

07/13/2005 0.02 0.002 U 0.09 0.04 0.008 J 0.008 J 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 

07/20/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 

07/27/2005 0.11 0.1 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 

08/03/2005 0.005 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.04 08/10/2005 0.04 0.04 0.01 U 0.04 0.025 0.01 U 0.02 0.01 U 0.06 0.02 

08/17/2005 0.005 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.015 0.05 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.09 0.05 08/24/2005 0.02 0.008 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06 

08/30/2005 0.005 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 09/07/2005 0.005 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.04 09/15/2005 0.005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 09/21/2005 0.025 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.07 0.02 

09/27/2005 0.025 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 

10/05/2005 0.005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.04 0.03 10/11/2005 0.005 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 10/19/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.02 J 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 

10/25/2005 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.01 U 0.015 J/U 0.01 U 0.02 J 0.01 U 0.03 J 0.03 J 

Average 0.0185294 0.0194118 0.0173529 0.0176471 0.0137059 0.0151765 0.0129412 0.0141176 0.0305882 0.025882353

Median 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.020 0.020Min 0.005 0.002 0.01 0.01 0.008 0.008 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01Max 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.09 0.06Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 8 6 4 6 7 5 7 5 10 11Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S
Table 9

Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.16 0.16 0.02 J 3 3 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.1607/13/2005 0.11 0.11 0.01 J 3 3 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.1107/20/2005 0.16 0.22 0.01 J 3 3 0.01 0.22 0.22 0.1607/27/2005 0.18 0.18 0.009 J 3 3 0.009 0.18 0.18 0.1808/03/2005 0.27 0.27 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.27 0.27 0.2708/10/2005 0.34 0.34 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.34 0.34 0.3408/17/2005 0.32 0.32 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.32 0.32 0.3208/24/2005 0.38 0.38 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.38 0.38 0.3808/30/2005 0.4 0.4 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.4 0.4 0.409/07/2005 0.38 0.38 0.013 3 3 0.013 0.38 0.38 0.3809/15/2005 0.41 0.4 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.41 0.41 0.409/21/2005 0.43 0.44 0.012 3 3 0.012 0.44 0.44 0.4309/27/2005 0.52 0.51 0.017 3 3 0.017 0.52 0.52 0.5110/05/2005 0.53 0.52 0.035 3 3 0.035 0.53 0.53 0.5210/11/2005 0.62 0.61 0.0015 U 2 3 0.0015 0.62 0.62 0.6110/19/2005 0.53 0.53 0.004 J 3 3 0.004 0.53 0.53 0.5310/25/2005 0.55 0.55 0.009 J 3 3 0.009 0.55 0.55 0.55Average 0.370 0.372 0.014

Median 0.38 0.38 0.012Min 0.11 0.11 0.0015Max 0.62 0.61 0.035Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 16Sampling Date D

07/07/2005 0.17 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.16 0.13 0.16 

07/13/2005 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.05 J 0.07 0.05 

07/20/2005 0.18 0.09 0.19 0.14 0.175 0.09 0.16 0.1 0.06 0.12 

07/27/2005 0.16 0.13 0.16 0.09 0.14 0.06 0.12 0.1 0.045 J 0.042 J 

08/03/2005 0.2 0.12 0.21 0.1 0.19 0.11 0.23 0.16 0.08 0.13 08/10/2005 0.22 0.12 0.25 0.13 0.245 0.12 0.22 0.15 0.06 0.17 

08/17/2005 0.26 0.18 0.24 0.14 0.24 0.17 0.23 0.17 0.08 0.12 

08/24/2005 0.315 0.23 0.32 0.22 0.31 0.21 0.28 0.24 0.14 0.14 

08/30/2005 0.3 0.19 0.31 0.22 0.32 0.23 0.3 0.28 0.17 0.17 09/07/2005 0.3 0.21 0.32 0.2 0.325 0.19 0.29 0.24 0.1 0.2 09/15/2005 0.32 0.22 0.34 0.25 0.335 0.23 0.32 0.23 0.2 0.28 

09/21/2005 0.4 0.34 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.37 0.21 0.26 09/27/2005 0.49 0.49 0.5 0.46 0.485 0.46 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.37 

10/05/2005 0.57 0.51 0.55 0.52 0.56 0.53 0.49 0.48 0.41 0.41 

10/11/2005 0.57 0.48 0.52 0.45 0.52 0.49 0.47 0.47 0.49 0.48 

10/19/2005 0.52 0.47 0.48 0.44 0.49 0.44 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.43 

10/25/2005 0.53 0.51 0.51 0.45 0.47 0.47 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.43 

Average 0.3314706 0.2688235 0.3288235 0.2647059 0.3244118 0.2611765 0.2982353 0.2635294 0.2061765 0.233058824

Median 0.300 0.210 0.320 0.220 0.320 0.210 0.290 0.240 0.140 0.170Min 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.11 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.045 0.042Max 0.57 0.51 0.55 0.52 0.56 0.53 0.49 0.48 0.49 0.48Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

J indicates estimated value

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S
Table 10

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN, mg/L) Results from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.4 0.2 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.207/13/2005 0.1 0.1 0.2 3 3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.107/20/2005 0.2 0.2 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.207/27/2005 0.2 0.2 0.1 3 3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.208/03/2005 0.4 0.3 0.3 3 3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.308/10/2005 0.2 0.3 0.3 3 3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.308/17/2005 0.2 0.2 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.208/24/2005 0.4 0.4 0.1 3 3 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.408/30/2005 0.4 0.4 0.4 3 3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.409/07/2005 0.3 0.3 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.309/15/2005 0.3 0.3 0.7 3 3 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.309/21/2005 0.5 0.5 0.6 3 3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.509/27/2005 0.3 0.2 0.035 U 2 3 0.035 0.3 0.3 0.210/05/2005 0.3 0.2 0.2 3 3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.210/11/2005 0.2 0.2 0.08 3 3 0.08 0.2 0.2 0.210/19/2005 0.2 0.035 U 0.2 2 3 0.035 0.2 0.2 0.210/25/2005 0.4 0.4 0.3 3 3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4Average 0.294 0.261 0.254

Median 0.3 0.2 0.2Min 0.1 0.035 0.035Max 0.5 0.5 0.7Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 16 16Sampling Date De

07/07/2005 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 07/13/2005 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 07/20/2005 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 07/27/2005 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 08/03/2005 0.45 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.35 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 08/10/2005 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.035 U 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.2 08/17/2005 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 08/24/2005 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.35 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 08/30/2005 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.45 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.4 09/07/2005 0.35 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.3 09/15/2005 0.3 0.035 U 0.2 0.2 0.1675 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.4 09/21/2005 0.45 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.35 0.2 0.5 0.7 1.5 0.5 09/27/2005 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 10/05/2005 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 10/11/2005 0.2 0.4 0.035 U 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 10/19/2005 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 10/25/2005 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.5 Average 0.268 0.273 0.237 0.253 0.266 0.267 0.282 0.271 0.435 0.300

Median 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3Min 0.2 0.035 0.035 0.1 0.15 0.035 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1Max 0.45 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.5 0.5Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 16 16 17 17 16 17 17 17 17Notes:

U indicates undetected

LGP-01-MD

LGP-06-S

Average Median

LGP-11-MD LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S

Samples

LGP-09-S

Minimum

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-09-MD

CR-REF-S

LGP-11-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD Detects Maximum
Table 11

Total Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.04 0.04 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.0407/13/2005 0.04 0.04 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.0407/20/2005 0.04 0.04 0.02 3 3 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.0407/27/2005 0.04 0.04 0.007 J 3 3 0.007 0.04 0.04 0.0408/03/2005 0.06 0.06 0.007 3 3 0.007 0.06 0.06 0.0608/10/2005 0.06 0.07 0.009 3 3 0.009 0.07 0.07 0.0608/17/2005 0.06 0.06 0.008 3 3 0.008 0.06 0.06 0.0608/24/2005 0.08 0.08 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.0808/30/2005 0.08 0.09 0.009 3 3 0.009 0.09 0.09 0.0809/07/2005 0.09 0.08 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.0809/15/2005 0.08 0.08 0.007 3 3 0.007 0.08 0.08 0.0809/21/2005 0.08 0.08 0.0025 U 2 3 0.0025 0.08 0.08 0.0809/27/2005 0.1 0.1 0.005 3 3 0.005 0.1 0.1 0.110/05/2005 0.09 0.12 0.006 3 3 0.006 0.12 0.12 0.0910/11/2005 0.1 0.09 0.0025 U 2 3 0.0025 0.1 0.1 0.0910/19/2005 0.09 0.09 0.0025 U 2 3 0.0025 0.09 0.09 0.0910/25/2005 0.07 0.07 0.008 J 3 3 0.008 0.07 0.07 0.07Average 0.071 0.072 0.008Median 0.08 0.08 0.008Min 0.04 0.04 0.0025Max 0.1 0.12 0.02Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 14Sampling Date 07/07/2005 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.04 

07/13/2005 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 

07/20/2005 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 

07/27/2005 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

08/03/2005 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 

08/10/2005 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.04 0.055 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 

08/17/2005 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.06 

08/24/2005 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.065 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

08/30/2005 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 

09/07/2005 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.06 

09/15/2005 0.065 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.075 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.06 

09/21/2005 0.085 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.13 0.06 

09/27/2005 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 

10/05/2005 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.105 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 

10/11/2005 0.11 0.1 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.1 0.1 

10/19/2005 0.09 0.09 0.1 0.07 0.105 0.07 0.05 0.08 0.1 0.06 

10/25/2005 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.085 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 

Average 0.067 0.056 0.068 0.057 0.068 0.058 0.061 0.057 0.066 0.058Median 0.065 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06Min 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03Max 0.11 0.1 0.11 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.13 0.1Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 12

Orthophosphate Phosphorus Results (mg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.02 0.02 0.006 J 3 3 0.006 0.02 0.02 0.0207/13/2005 0.01 0.02 0.01 3 3 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.0107/20/2005 0.03 0.02 0.003 J 3 3 0.003 0.03 0.03 0.0207/27/2005 0.03 0.03 0.006 J 3 3 0.006 0.03 0.03 0.0308/03/2005 0.04 0.04 0.003 3 3 0.003 0.04 0.04 0.0408/10/2005 0.05 0.05 0.002 3 3 0.002 0.05 0.05 0.0508/17/2005 0.05 0.05 0.002 3 3 0.002 0.05 0.05 0.0508/24/2005 0.06 0.06 0.005 3 3 0.005 0.06 0.06 0.0608/30/2005 0.07 0.08 0.004 3 3 0.004 0.08 0.08 0.0709/07/2005 0.07 0.07 0.005 3 3 0.005 0.07 0.07 0.0709/15/2005 0.07 0.07 0.001 U 2 3 0.001 0.07 0.07 0.0709/21/2005 0.07 0.07 0.007 3 3 0.007 0.07 0.07 0.0709/27/2005 0.09 0.09 0.007 3 3 0.007 0.09 0.09 0.0910/05/2005 0.07 0.08 0.007 3 3 0.007 0.08 0.08 0.0710/11/2005 0.09 0.08 0.001 U 2 3 0.001 0.09 0.09 0.0810/19/2005 0.07 X 0.06 X 0.001 U 2 3 0.001 0.07 0.07 0.0610/25/2005 0.07 X 0.06 X 0.006 JX 3 3 0.006 0.07 0.07 0.06Average 0.056 0.056 0.004Median 0.07 0.06 0.005Min 0.01 0.02 0.001Max 0.09 0.09 0.01Samples 17 17 17Detects 17 17 14Sampling Date De07/07/2005 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 

07/13/2005 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.009 J 0.01 X 0.01 X 

07/20/2005 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 

07/27/2005 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 

08/03/2005 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 

08/10/2005 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 

08/17/2005 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 

08/24/2005 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 

08/30/2005 0.055 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 

09/07/2005 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.05 

09/15/2005 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.065 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.05 

09/21/2005 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.05 

09/27/2005 0.09 0.085 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 

10/05/2005 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.095 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 

10/11/2005 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.1 0.09 0.1 0.06 0.08 0.09 

10/19/2005 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.06 

10/25/2005 0.06 0.04 0.06 X 0.06 X 0.055 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 

Average 0.053 0.041 0.053 0.045 0.053 0.043 0.048 0.043 0.038 0.042Median 0.055 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.055 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04Min 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.009 0.01 0.01Max 0.09 0.085 0.09 0.09 0.1 0.09 0.1 0.08 0.08 0.09Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated valueX - Holding time exceeded

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 13

2,3,7,8-TCDD Results (pg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/13/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/20/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/03/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/10/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/17/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/24/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/15/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/21/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/05/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/11/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/19/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/25/2005 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 0.482 0.482 0.482Median 0.5 0.5 0.5Min 0.2 0.2 0.2Max 0.5 0.5 0.5Samples 17 17 17Detects 000Sampling Date De07/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/13/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/20/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/03/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/10/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/17/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/24/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/30/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/15/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/21/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/05/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/11/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/19/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/25/2005 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 

Average 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482Median 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Min 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2Max 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 000000000 0Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median
Table 14

2,3,7,8-TCDF Results (pg/L) from Weekly Receiving Water Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillSampling Date07/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/13/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/20/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND07/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/03/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/10/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/17/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/24/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND08/30/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/15/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/21/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND09/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/05/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/11/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/19/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0 3 ND ND ND ND10/25/2005 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0 3 ND ND ND NDAverage 0.482 0.482 0.482Median 0.5 0.5 0.5Min 0.2 0.2 0.2Max 0.5 0.5 0.5Samples 17 17 17Detects 000Sampling Date De07/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/13/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/20/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

07/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/03/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/10/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/17/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/24/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

08/30/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/07/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/15/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/21/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

09/27/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/05/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/11/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/19/2005 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 0.5 U 

10/25/2005 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 0.2 U 

Average 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482 0.482Median 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Min 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2Max 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Samples 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17Detects 000000000 0Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

Summary of Upstream Samples

Detects Samples Minimum Maximum Average Median

SR-REF-S SR-REF-MD CR-REF-S

LGP-13-S LGP-13-MD LGP-11-S LGP-11-MD LGP-09-S LGP-09-MD LGP-06-S LGP-06-MD LGP-01-S LGP-01-MD
Table 15

Resin Acid Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillResin Acids (ug/L) Detects SaAbietic Acid 0.021 J 0.009 J 0.021 J 0.0265 J 0.021 J 0.035 J 0.034 J 0.02 J 8 

Dehydroabietic Acid 0.011 U 0.0085 U 0.011 U 0.01475 U 0.0105 U 0.013 U 0.013 U 0.011 U 0 Isopimaric Acid 0.003 J 0.002 J 0.0015 U 0.00225 U 0.003 J 0.006 J 0.005 J 0.003 J 6 Neoabietic Acid 0.01485 U 0.015 U 0.01485 U 0.0146 U 0.01485 U 0.01485 U 0.01485 U 0.0147 U 0 Palustric Acid 0.0005 U 0.01965 U 0.0195 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.0193 U 0 Pimaric Acid 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.002 U 0.001 U 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.0015 U 0 Sandaracopimaric Acid 0.0005 U 0.02655 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0 Total 12/14-Chlorodehydroabietic Acid 0.0275 U 0.02775 U 0.0275 U 0.02725 U 0.0275 U 0.0275 U 0.0275 U 0.02725 U 0 Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 
Table 16

Phytosterol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillPhytosterols (ug/L) Detects Samples 

B-sitosterol 0.46 J 0.563 J 1.36 J 1.1985 J 0.632 J 0.679 J 0.596 J 3.39 8 8 Campesterol 0.038 J 0.05 J 0.059 J 0.0635 J 0.044 J 0.054 J 0.046 J 0.27 8 8 Stigmastanol 0.3441 U 0.3474 U 0.3441 U 0.34575 U 0.3441 U 0.3441 U 0.3441 U 0.3441 U 0 8 

Stigmasterol 0.034 U 0.06 J 0.076 J 0.082 J 0.06 J 0.07 J 0.062 J 0.331 7 8 

Retene 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.0025 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.001 U 0 8 

Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 
Figure 17

Chlorophenol Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston Mill

Chlorophenolics Detects Samples Min

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0005 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.00085 U 0.004 U 0.0025 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

3,4,6-Trichoroguaiacol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 0.0005 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0005 U 0.0003 U 0.0005 U 0.0003 U 0 10 

Trichlorosyringol 0.001 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0005 U 0.0015 U 0.001 U 0.001 U 0.001 U 0 10 

4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0002 U 0.0005 U 0.0002 U 0 10 

Pentachlorophenol 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.002 U 0.0015 U 0.0015 U 0.002 U 0.003 U 0.002 U 0 10 

Tetrachloroguaiacol 0.00145 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0.0014 U 0 10 

Tetrachlorocatechol 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.0003 U 0.002 U 0.0003 U 0 10 

Notes:

U indicates undetected

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 
Table 18

Chloroform Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston Mill

Chloroform (ug/L) 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.07 U 0.19 J Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01 
Table 19

Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston Mill

DOC (mg/L) 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.5 11.8 2.6 2.8 3.1 TOC (mg/L) 2.1 2.8 2.9 2.6 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 

CR-REF SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP
Table 20

Dioxin and Furan Congener Results from the Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Monitoring StudyPotlatch Lewiston MillCongener Detects Samples 

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.022 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 1 8 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.051 J 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.002125 0.00125 U 2 8 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.008 J 0.002 U 0.003 J 0.0025 0.00125 U 6 8 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.002 U 0.0075 U 0.016 J 0.04 J 0.007 J 0.011 J 0.006 U 0.012 J 5 8 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.004 J 0.011 J 0.011 J 0.038 J 0.007 J 0.007 J 0.0085 0.008 J 8 8 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.056 J 0.214 0.186 0.151 0.128 0.203 0.148 0.266 8 8 OCDD 0.307 0.81 0.902 0.478 0.748 1.01 0.8505 1.66 8 8 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.00125 U 0.002 U 0.006 J 0.006 J 0.006 J 0.005 J 0.005 0.004 J 6 8 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 0.00125 U 1 8 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.0015 U 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.003 J 0.0015 U 0.00125 U 3 8 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.0025 U 0.006 J 0.0015 U 0.005 J 0.004 J 0.004 0.0015 U 4 8 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.0015 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.004 J 0.003 J 0.0035 0.00125 U 4 8 

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0 8 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.002125 0.00125 U 1 8 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.006 J 0.018 J 0.028 J 0.007 U 0.018 J 0.022 J 0.025 0.03 J 7 8 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.00125 U 0.003 J 0.00125 U 0.001375 U 0.00125 U 1 8 OCDF 0.011 J 0.02 J 0.026 J 0.007 J 0.024 J 0.037 J 0.0375 0.045 J 8 8 Notes:

U indicates undetectedJ indicates estimated value

SR REF LGP-14 LGP-13 

Furans (pg/L)

Dioxins (pg/L)

CR-REF LGP-11 LGP-09 LGP-06 LGP-01
HIGH VOLUME QUARTERLY STUDY

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REPORT

POTLATCH NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL

COMPLIANCE MONITORING 

Prepared for

Potlatch Corporation

Lewiston, Idaho

Prepared by

Anchor Environmental, L.L.C.

1423 Third Avenue, Suite 300

Seattle, Washington  98101

January 2008
HIGH VOLUME QUARTERLY STUDY 

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REPORT 

POTLATCH NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL 

COMPLIANCE MONITORING 

Prepared for 

Potlatch Corporation

Lewiston, Idaho

Prepared by 

Anchor Environmental, L.L.C.

1423 Third Avenue, Suite 300

Seattle, Washington  98101

January 2008 
Table of Contents 

1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Document Organization and Focus......................................................................................... 2

2 HIGH VOLUME FIELD SAMPLING METHODS.......................................................................... 3

2.1 Synopsis of Field Activities....................................................................................................... 3

2.1.1 QA/QC samples ................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Overview of Field Methods...................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Sampling Deviations from the QAPP ..................................................................................... 4

3 HIGH VOLUME ANALYTICAL METHODS ................................................................................. 5

3.1 Sample Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 5

3.2 Data Validation........................................................................................................................... 5

3.3 Analytical Deviations from the QAPP .................................................................................... 6

4 ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND COMPARISON WITH BENCHMARK CRITERIA................ 9

4.1 Results.......................................................................................................................................... 9

4.1.1 Resin Acids ......................................................................................................................... 10

4.1.2 Phytosterols ........................................................................................................................ 11

4.1.3 Chloroform ......................................................................................................................... 11

4.1.4 Total and Dissolved and Organic Carbon...................................................................... 11

4.1.5 Dioxin/Furan Congeners................................................................................................... 12

4.1.6 Retene .................................................................................................................................. 12

4.1.7 Chlorinated Phenols .......................................................................................................... 12

5 SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................... 14

6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 15

List of Tables 

Table 1 Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria –

March 2007 Sampling Episode

Table 2   Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June

2007 Sampling Episode

Table 3 Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Table 4 Statistical Summary of High Volume Water Sample Results by Analyte

List of Figures 

Figure 1     Vicinity Map

Figure 2     Approximate Locations of High Volume Water Sampling Stations

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring i 050297‐01
Table of Contents 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A    Chain‐of‐custody Forms and Laboratory Data Reports

Appendix B    Data Validation Reports

  

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring ii 050297‐01
Introduction

1 INTRODUCTION 

This section provides a brief background of the purpose for conducting high volume sampling

and analysis, describes the studies that were conducted, and outlines the contents of the

remainder of this report.

1.1 Background 

In accordance with renewal of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

Permit granting Authorization to Discharge (EPA 2005), Potlatch Corporation was required

to conduct monitoring studies in the vicinity and downstream of Outfall 001 associated with

Potlatch’s pulp and paper mill (Mill) in Lewiston, Idaho (Figure 1).  The goal of the

monitoring program was to support the effort to characterize the potential effects of

discharges from Potlatch’s mill to the Clearwater and Snake Rivers on endangered and

listed species and the environment.   

The purpose of this report is to present the results of Endangered Species Act (ESA) Tier 1

studies undertaken during 2007 that evaluate effluent and natural waters above and below

the Mill.  In particular, this sampling was performed to fulfill requirements of the Surface

Water and Effluent Study that are described in detail in Appendix A and Appendix H,

respectively, of the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Tier 1 Endangered Species Act and

NPDES Permit Compliance Monitoring (AMEC and Anchor 2005).  

The Surface Water and Effluent Study principally addresses the measurement of trace

organic compounds and dioxins/furans (some of which are required for compliance with the

NPDES permit).  To do this, a specialized sampling technique known as high volume

sampling was employed.  High volume water sampling allows for a large volume of site

water to be sampled and concentrated on different media for different constituents while

reporting these constituents at trace levels.  The high volume sampler is a water sampling

system capable of sampling 2 liters per minute.  Samples are pushed through a pre‐cleaned

glass‐wound cartridge filter via a peristaltic pump.  The pre‐filter removes the suspended

particulates in the water.  The effluent then passes through a stainless steel tube containing

the polyurethane foam (PUF), which collects the dissolved‐phase constituents.  Both the

filter and the PUF are used for dioxin/furan analysis.  Sample for analysis for the additional

parameters were collected via the high volume water sampler by bypassing all filters and

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 1 050297‐01
Introduction

pumping directly into the sample bottles.  The study used an upstream/downstream study

design, and the stations that were selected and sampled during the 2007 sampling event are

shown on Figure 2.  

1.2 Document Organization and Focus 

Section 2 describes the field effort for the collection and analysis of high volume samples.  

This section is meant to be a summary rather than a detailed account of the field activities.  

Section 3 presents aspects related to chemical analysis of samples and data validation.  

Section 4 summarizes the results and offers comparison with benchmark criteria.  Section 5

is a brief, overall summary of the field activities and analytical results.  Section 6 contains

references.

The focus of this report is on data, data quality, and comparisons to criteria determined

from the analytical results.  The QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) provides additional detail

on the design, implementation, and testing associated with the sampling program.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 2 050297‐01
High Volume Field Sampling Methods

2 HIGH VOLUME FIELD SAMPLING METHODS 

This section provides an overview of information specific to the collection of high volume

samples as required by the Mill’s permit (EPA 2005).   

2.1 Synopsis of Field Activities 

First round quarterly sampling for the monitoring program was conducted in August 2005,

and the second round was conducted in November 2005.  Sampling for the 2006 quarterly

monitoring was conducted in March (third round), June (fourth round), September (fifth

round), and November (sixth round).  Sampling for 2007 quarterly monitoring period was

conducted in March (seventh round) and June (eighth round).  This report covers only the

2007 sampling events; results from previous sampling events were previously reported.  As

specified in the NPDES permit, the eighth round of sampling completed the required high

volume study.  

Locations for collection of the high volume samples were chosen to coincide with sample

stations from prior sediment and receiving water monitoring activities and to provide

spatial representation of the study area (See Figure 2).  Sampling areas were located at two

upstream reference locations and at six locations distributed between the Potlatch Mill

discharge and the Lower Granite Dam.  A final sample was collected directly from the

Potlatch effluent.

Field‐measured water quality data and water samples for water quality analyses were

collected at each sample location on the Snake River and Clearwater River at mid‐depth.  

Effluent samples were taken at the Mill’s aeration basin.  All high‐volume samples were

collected using a high volume water sampler.  Other samples were collected using either the

high‐volume pump system or a Niskin Grab Sampler.  

The sampling methods used in the field closely followed those described in the Sampling and

Analysis Plan for Surface Water and Effluent Study (Appendix A of the QAPP; AMEC and

Anchor 2005).  Deviations from the original method were documented in the 2006 data

summary report and were also followed through in the 2007 sampling period.

Samples were shipped to the laboratories once all samples were collected.   

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 3 050297‐01
High Volume Field Sampling Methods

2.1.1 QA/QC samples 

Three types of samples were collected for quality control: trip blanks, field blanks, and

field duplicates.  A set of trip blanks (sample vials filled with ultrapure lab water)

accompanied sample bottles to and from the field.  One equipment blank was collected

during each sampling event.  All sampling equipment was decontaminated according to

methods described in the QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) and then rinsed with

ultrapure lab water.  This rinsate was then sampled to produce the equipment blank.

2.2 Overview of Field Methods 

Field sampling was conducted from a jet boat equipped with an onboard Differential Global

Positioning System (DGPS), which provided navigation support for finding sampling

locations and recording the actual locations occupied.  For transport to the laboratory,

sample coolers were packed with ice to ensure maintenance of cold temperatures.  Coolers

were shipped to the laboratories under standard chain‐of‐custody procedures.

2.3 Sampling Deviations from the QAPP 

Deviations from the QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) are documented below for the 2007

year sampling events:

• In some cases, more than one sample was collected in a day.  The QAPP (AMEC and

Anchor 2005) indicated only one sample per day would be collected.

• The QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) indicates that the high volume sampling

technique will utilize XAD resin as the collection media.  The 2007 sampling events

used PUF material in the columns, which was approved after consultation with EPA.

• Resin acids, retene, beta‐sitosterol, chloroform, chlorinated phenols, and

conventional samples collected in conjunction with the June 6, 7, and 8, 2007

dioxin/furan samples were received by the laboratory outside allowable cooler

temperatures.  Samples shipped for Saturday delivery were delivered on Monday

morning because of aircraft mechanical problems.  Fresh samples were collected on

June 21, 2007 and forwarded with no incidents to the laboratory.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 4 050297‐01
High Volume Analytical Methods

3 HIGH VOLUME ANALYTICAL METHODS 

High volume sample analysis was conducted in accordance with Appendix H of the QAPP

(AMEC and Anchor 2005).  Guidance included specification of methods, method detection

limits, and applicable QA/QC measures.  Complete details are included in the QAPP (AMEC

and Anchor 2005).

3.1 Sample Analysis 

Two laboratories were used to perform the chemical analyses on the high volume water

samples.  Analytical Perspectives (AP) was responsible for the dioxin and furan analysis

while Columbia Analytical Services (CAS) conducted the analyses for the resin acids; retene;

beta‐sitosterol, and phenol analyses.  AP is located in Wilmington, North Carolina, and CAS

is located in Kelso, Washington.  Both laboratories are accredited under the National

Environmental Laboratories Accreditation Program (NELAP).  Appendix A contains

electronic files for chain‐of‐custody forms and all laboratory data reports.

3.2 Data Validation 

Data validation was performed by Laboratory Data Consultants, Inc. (LDC), located in

Carlsbad, California.  A full data validation was performed in accordance with guidance

provided in the following documents:

• Quality Assurance Project Plan for Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES Permit

Compliance Monitoring (AMEC and Anchor 2005)   

• EPA Functional Guidelines for Organic and Inorganic Data, October 2004 and 1999  

• EPA Functional Guidelines for the Validation of Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxin (PCDD)

and Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran (PCDF) Data, 1996  

• EPA Functional Guidelines for the Validation of Inorganic Analyses  

Each data package was reviewed initially against chain‐of‐custody forms to ensure that the

requested analyses were performed.  Requirements for each analytical parameter were

reviewed to ensure the technical holding time was met for both the extraction and analytical

requirements.  Results were reviewed to assess target compound identification, compound

quantification and calculations, and achievement of compound quantitation limits.  Field

blanks were reviewed for possible contamination issues.  All initial and continuing

calibrations were reviewed for method compliance.  All surrogates, method blanks, internal

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 5 050297‐01
High Volume Analytical Methods

standards, instrument performance checks, method blank(s), matrix spikes, laboratory

control samples, and system performance checks were performed at the required frequency

and within specified QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) and method criteria.  Field duplicates

were checked for consistency and compliance with relative percent difference (RPD) criteria.   

Any omitted or discrepant data were resubmitted to the respective laboratory for

clarification and re‐analysis, if needed.  Any sample or standard data not meeting the

guidelines in the documents listed above were flagged and qualified accordingly.  All

discrepancies were tabulated and described in the validation reports.  Copies of the

qualified sample data sheets with flags are also contained in the validation reports.  

Appendix B contains all data validation reports.  

All data presented in this report were considered useable as qualified from the validation

reports.  Tables 2 and 3 contain data with the appropriate data validation qualifiers, where

applicable.  Copies of all laboratory analytical reports can be found in Appendix A.

3.3 Analytical Deviations from the QAPP 

The QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) identified the laboratory to be used for dioxin/furan

analysis for the high volume water analyses as AXYS Laboratory (AXYS).  AP replaced

AXYS as the dioxin/furan laboratory.  Two data reports were generated by AP for the

dioxin/furan analysis of the high volume water samples.  The data were reported under AP

reports P7609 and P7923.  There were no deviations noted for these analyses.  LDC, the

validation firm, noted in their narrative that the compound quantitation and contract

required control limits (CRQLs) for 2,3,7,8‐TCDF were not reported using second column

confirmation as required by the analytical method.  The AP laboratory report indicates that

they use a modified DB‐5 MS column, where each calibration sequence is evaluated by their

chemist to show that the method criteria for resolution is met for both 2,3,7,8‐TCDD and

2,3,7,8‐TCDF.  For Method 1613 samples, this evaluation is an integral part of AP’s ongoing

precision and accuracy (OPR) analysis.  All 17 specific 2,3,7,8‐isomers and their close eluters

for TCDD and TCDF can be resolved in a single analysis.  As method 1613 allows for the use

of alternative columns that meet the resolution requirements as a means to forgo the second

column confirmation, this requirement was met by AP’s analytical procedures and the data

reported without qualification.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 6 050297‐01
High Volume Analytical Methods

The QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) identified the laboratory to be used for chlorophenols,

resin acids, chloroform, phytosterols, retenes, and general chemistry as AXYS.  For the 2007

sampling events, CAS replaced AXYS as the laboratory performing these analyses.  The

change from AXYS to CAS resulted in a change to the analyte list as several analytes

identified in the QAPP for resin acids and phytosterols are not reported in the current 2007

results.  The change resulted in four resin acids being excluded (sandaracopimaric acid,

palustric acid, neobietic acid, and total 12/14 chlorodehdroabietic acid).  Three phytosterols

were also excluded in the current analyte list (campesterol, stigmastanol, and stigmasterol).  

At the time of the change of laboratories in 2006, CAS did not have current method

detection limits (MDLs) for the missing analytes and had never analyzed the analytes

before.  The EPA was notified of the change in laboratories, as well as the change in analyte

lists, in 2006.

Two data reports for the high volume water analyses were generated by CAS.  The CAS

data reports are identified as K0701767 and K0705381.  The following deviations occurred in

the CAS reports for the high volume water sampling events:

• Total suspended solids

- SR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed one day outside the technical holding time.  Sample

CR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed two days outside the holding time.  Data were

qualified accordingly. (CAS report K0701767).

• Total organic carbon (TOC)/dissolved organic carbon (DOC)

- The field blank contained low level hits for TOC (0.030 milligrams per liter

[mg/L]) and DOC (0.12 mg/L).

• Resin acids

- The reporting limit used in previous reports as reported by AXYS Laboratory

was below 1 microgram per liter (μg/L), CAS reporting limits were 20 μg/L,

which is higher than the requested benchmark of 2.2 μg/L.   

- 3,4,5‐trichloroguaiacol percent difference (%D) in the continuing calibration was

outside the method criteria (CAS report K0701767).  Data were qualified

accordingly.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 7 050297‐01
High Volume Analytical Methods

- Several sample surrogate percent recoveries (%R) were outside the QAPP‐

specified control limits the data was qualified accordingly.  Both laboratory

reports were impacted.

- The matrix spike duplicate (MSD) %R was outside the QAPP‐specified control

limits for dehydrabietic acid, 9,10‐dichlorostearic acid, and 14‐

chlorodehydroabietic acid.  The sample was qualified accordingly (CAS report

K0705381).

- The Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) for linoleic acid, isopimaric acid, and

abietic acid %R were low, and these data were qualified accordingly (CAS report

K0701767).  Dehyroabietic acid %R was high in the LCS for CAS report

K0705381).  Data were qualified accordingly.

• Retene

- Samples reported in CAS report K0705381 were reported using a raised reporting

limit of 1 μg/L due to laboratory error.  Sample holding times had already

expired when the error was detected at the laboratory.

- Sample SR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed two days outside the holding time, and

sample CR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed three days outside the holding time.  These

data were qualified accordingly (CAS report K0701767).

• Beta‐Sitosterol

- Sample SR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed one day outside the technical holding time,

and sample CR‐REF‐SW‐A was analyzed two days outside the holding time.  

These data were qualified accordingly (CAS K071767).

- The initial calibration relative response factor (RRF) for this analytes was low,

and the continuing calibration RRF was also outside method criteria. These data

were qualified accordingly (CAS K071767).

- Surrogate %R was low and outside the QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005) criteria

in samples LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐A and LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐D.  These data were qualified

accordingly (CAS K071767).

- The MS and MSD %R was low and outside QAPP (AMEC and Anchor 2005)

criteria, and the sample results were qualified (CAS K071767).

- The LCS %R was low in both data reports.  These data were qualified

accordingly.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 8 050297‐01
Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria

4 ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND COMPARISON WITH BENCHMARK CRITERIA 

4.1 Results 

This section reports the results of the 2007 Quarterly Surface Water and Effluent Study.  

Data are listed in these tables for:

• Clearwater River reference location (CR REF)

• Snake River reference location (SR REF)

• Lower Granite Pool Effluent location (LGP EFF)

Locations downstream of the outfall from nearest to farthest:

• LGP‐13 (Sample LGP‐05)

• LGP‐11 (Sample LGP‐04)

• LGP‐09 (Sample LGP‐03)

• LGP‐06 (Sample LGP‐02)

• LGP‐01 (Sample LGP‐01)

Quarterly results are summarized by chemical group, then by quarter in chronological order

(March 2007 and June, 2007).  The results for the June re‐sampling (June 21, 2007) follow the

original sample date of June 6, 2007.  Tabulated results are presented separately for March

(Table 1) and June (Table 2).  Parameters with non‐detectable concentrations were

represented by the detection limit.  If an analyte was not detectable across all sites, it was

considered not present and thus not evaluated further.  Table 3, the data summary table,

shows the comparison of both quarters’ high volume water data with the toxicity

benchmarks using the sample station and parameter list.  The statistical presentation of

these data can be found in Table 4.  Tables 1 and 2 provide the results discussed in the

following subsections.

Toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs) were calculated for all dioxin/furan congeners.  The total

concentrations for each dioxin or furan congener detected in each sample was multiplied by

its respective TEF using the World Health Organization (WHO) (Van den Berg et al 1998)

value.  The results for each congener were expressed in terms of 2,3,7,8‐TCDD equivalents

(TEQs).  A sum of the individual congener TEQs was calculated for each sample to

determine the TEQ concentration for that sample.  In the verification step (database

calculation versus manual calculations were compared to the laboratory’s calculation), a

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 9 050297‐01
Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria

discrepancy was noted in the TEF reported in permit ID000116‐3 Attachment A (page A5‐

12) with WHO‐reported TEFs.  The discrepancies were:

Congener Permit TEF WHO TEF

1,2,3,4,7,8‐HxCDD 0.5 0.1

1,2,3,6,7,8‐HxCDD 0.01 0.1

1,2,3,7,8,9‐HxCDD 0.01 0.1

1,2,3,4,6,7,8‐HpCDD 0.001 0.01

All calculations were made using the WHO TEF values.

4.1.1 Resin Acids 

All detection limits reported were above the 2.2 μg/L water column benchmark.  The

laboratory reporting limit for this analysis was 20 μg/L.  Twenty samples were collected

with six of the samples having reportable concentrations.

March 2007

All reporting limits were above the water column benchmark criteria.  Non‐detect

results were reported at a reporting limit of 20 μg/L, which negated the ability to

evaluate these data against the toxicity benchmark.  LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐A and its duplicate  

(‐D) sample showed detectable amounts of linoleic acid (59 μg/L and 17 μg/L

respectively).  Oleic acid/linolenic acid (23 μg/L) and dehydroabietic acid (13 μg/L) were

only detected in the primary sample.   

June 2007

All reporting limits were above the water column benchmark criteria.  Non‐detect

results were reported at a reporting limit of 20 μg/L, which negated the ability to

evaluate these data against the toxicity benchmark.  Four samples contained detectable

concentrations of resin acids.  LGP2‐01‐A‐070621, LGP2‐02‐070621, and LGP2‐SR‐REF‐

070621 had detectable amounts of linoleic acid (4.0 μg/L, 4.4 μg/L, and 13 μg/L

respectively).  Sample LGP2‐EFF‐070621 contained linoleic acid (54 μg/L), oleic

acid/linolenic acid (74 μg/L), pimaric acid (4.2 μg/L), isopimaric acid (13 μg/L),

dehydroabietic acid (9.3 μg/L), and abietic acid (11 μg/L).

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 10 050297‐01
Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria

4.1.2 Phytosterols 

The water column benchmark for phytosterols is 2.5 μg/L.

March 2007

Two samples had reported concentrations above the water column benchmark.  The

samples were LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐A‐070302 and its duplicate LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐D‐070302 (7.8

μg/L and 4.5 μg/L, respectively).

June 2007

One sample, LGP2‐EFF‐070621 (11 μg/L), exceeded the water column benchmark.  

4.1.3 Chloroform 

The water column benchmark for chloroform is 12.4 μg/L.

March 2007

All sample results were below the water column benchmark.

June 2007

All sample results were below the water column benchmark.

4.1.4 Total and Dissolved and Organic Carbon 

March 2007

There are no water column benchmarks established for the TOC and DOC analyses.  

TOC results ranged from 2.3 to 143 milligrams per liter (mg/L).  DOC results ranged

from 2.1 to 111 mg/L.

June 2007

There are no water column benchmarks established for the TOC and DOC analyses.  

TOC results ranged from 0.12 to 112 mg/L.  DOC results ranged from 0.3 to 97.6 mg/L.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 11 050297‐01
Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria

4.1.5 Dioxin/Furan Congeners 

Tables 1 and 2 present the tabulated results for dioxin congeners.  Water column

benchmarks exist for only two of the dioxin/furan congeners.  The benchmark for 2,3,7,8‐

TCDD is 0.06 pg/L and for  2,3,7,8‐TCDF is 0.20 pg/L.  

March 2007

Reported concentrations were below the water column benchmarks for those

compounds with benchmarks.  Sixty‐one of the 306 detectable results were for

dioxin/furan congeners.   

June 2007

Reported results were below the water column benchmarks for those compounds with

benchmarks.  Fifty‐eight of the 306 detectable results were for dioxin/furan congeners.

4.1.6 Retene 

The water column benchmark for retene is 3.2 μg/L.

March 2007

All samples were non‐detect for retene.  The non‐detect results were below the water

column benchmark for all samples.

June 2007

All sample results were non‐detect; however due to laboratory error, the reporting limit

was raised to 1 μg/L, which remained below the water column benchmark.   

4.1.7 Chlorinated Phenols 

Tables 1 and 2 present the tabulated results for chlorophenolics.  The water column

benchmarks ranged from 0.18 to 11 μg/L and are listed for each analyte in the tables.

March 2007

Two samples contained detectable concentrations of chlorophenolics.  The samples were

LGP2‐EFF‐AQ‐A‐070302 and its duplicate LGP2‐EFF‐AQ_D‐070302.  The reported

results were below the water column benchmarks.  

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 12 050297‐01
Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria

June 2007

One sample contained detectable concentrations for chlorophenolics.  The sample was

LGP2‐EFF‐070621.  The reported results were below the water column benchmarks.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 13 050297‐01
Summary

5 SUMMARY 

This report presents the results of sampling conducted during 2007 to complete the Quarterly

Surface Water and Effluent Study both part of the Tier 1 ESA Monitoring and NPDES Permit

Compliance Monitoring required in non‐discretionary terms and conditions set forth by the

Services in their Biological Opinions on the re‐issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit by EPA.

Surface water and effluent data were collected to monitor the water quality at:

• Two reference locations (Snake River upstream of the effluent and the Clearwater River

upstream of the confluence with the Snake River)  

• Six locations in the Snake River, downstream of the Potlatch effluent during quarterly

monitoring.

All measurements from the 2007 monitoring complied with toxicity benchmarks and applicable

water quality standards with the exception of the resin acids.  Due to laboratory error, the

detection limits reported for the resin acids were above the water column benchmark criteria.  

The resin acids were reported at 20 μg/L, while the water column benchmark for this analyte is

2.2 μg/L.

In conclusion, the results of sampling and analysis upstream and downstream of the Facility are

consistent with the finding in EPA’s Biological Evaluation and the Services’ Biological Opinions

that the EPA’s re‐issuance of Potlatch’s NPDES permit is not likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of Snake River steelhead, Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon, and

Snake River sockeye salmon, nor result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated

critical habitat for Snake River spring/summer and fall Chinook salmon and Snake River

sockeye salmon.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 14 050297‐01
References

6 REFERENCES 

AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. (AMEC) and Anchor Environmental (Anchor). 2005.

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Endangered Species Act Monitoring and NPDES

Permit Compliance Monitoring. Potlatch Corporation Lewiston Facility. May 2005.

Davidson, T.  2007.  Email from Toni Davidson of USFWS to Ali Wick of Anchor Environmental

L.L.C.  January 31, 2007.  Subject: Re: Potlatch caged bivalve study option.

EPA. 2003. Biological Evaluation of the Potlatch Corporation Pulp and Paper Mill in Lewiston,

Idaho. December 2003.

EPA. 1999.  USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data

Review.  EPA‐540/R‐99‐008 (PB99‐963506).  October 1999

EPA. 2004.  EPA’s Monitoring and Assessment Plan for Exposure and Effects of Effluents from

the Potlatch Pulp and Paper Mill to ESA Listed Salmonids and their Habitats.  U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, Washington.  March 1, 2004.

EPA. 2004.  USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data

Review.  OSWER 9240.1‐45.  EPA 540‐R‐04‐004.  October 2004

EPA. 2005.  USEPA Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Chlorinated

Dioxin/Furan Data Review.  EPA‐540‐R‐05‐001.  September 2005

EPA. 2005. Authorization to Discharge Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination

System. Permit No.: ID0001163. Potlatch Corporation 803 Mill Road, Lewiston, Idaho.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, Washington.

Mebane, C.  2007.  Personal communication (phone call) between Chris Mebane of NMFS and

Shawn Hinz of Anchor Environmental L.L.C.  December 2006.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries). 2004.

Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Biological Opinion and Magnuson‐

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 15 050297‐01
References

Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation.

April 2004.

Van den Berg, Martin, et. al.  1998.  “Toxic Equivalency Factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs

for Humans and Wildlife.”  Environmental Health Perspectives.  Volume 106, Number

12, December 1998.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report    January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 16 050297‐01
TABLES 
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

Sample Location Water CR-REF CR-REF LGP-01 LGP-01 

Sample Identification Column CR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-070226 LGP2-01-SW-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-070302 

Sample Date Benchmark 2/26/2007 2/26/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 

Sample Matrix μg/L W W W W 

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbon -- 3.0 -- 2.6 

Total organic carbon -- 3.0 -- 2.8 Total suspended solids -- 5 UJ -- 5 U 

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.06 0.00114 U 0.00162 U 0.00143 U 0.00171 U 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.00224 U 0.00907 U 0.00699 J 0.00362 U 

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.00391 U 0.00354 U 0.0148 J 0.00474 U 

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.00625 U 0.00357 U 0.0377 J 0.00486 U 

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.00625 U 0.00368 U 0.0287 J 0.0049 U 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.0829 0.016 J 0.33 0.00853 J OCDD 0.635 0.0834 J 1.04 0.0676 J 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.20 0.00185 U 0.00174 J 0.00412 UJ 0.00183 U 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.00624 U 0.00302 U 0.0113 J 0.00162 U 

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.00543 U 0.00284 U 0.0232 J 0.00143 U 

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0374 J 0.00625 U 

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0497 J 0.00625 U 

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0725 0.0013 U 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.000827 U 0.00113 U 0.0249 J 0.00625 U 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.0173 J 0.00625 U 0.182 0.0097 J 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.00163 U 0.00321 U 0.0668 0.00625 U 

OCDF 0.0404 J 0.0125 U 0.33 J 0.184 

Total Dioxin/Furan 0.776 0.101 2.26 0.27 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird) 0.000323 0.00176 0.0608 0.000131 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish) 0.000323 0.000111 0.0488 0.000131 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal) 9 0.00107 0.000342 0.0521 0.000207 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird) 0.000323 0.00176 0.0608 0.000131 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish) 0.000323 0.000111 0.0488 0.000131 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal) 0.0012 0.000359 0.0475 0.000258 

Resin Acids (μg/L) 1.0

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol -- 20 UJ -- 20 UJ Tetrachloroguaiacol -- 20 UJ -- 20 U Linoleic Acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 UJ Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U Pimaric acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U Isopimaric acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 UJ Dehydroabietic acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U Abietic acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 UJ 9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U 14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U 12-Chlorodehydroabietic acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U Dichlorodehydroabietic acid -- 20 UJ -- 20 U 

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 3.4 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 7.3 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 3.3 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U Pentachlorophenol 0.18 -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 3.4 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 1 of 6
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

Sample Location Water CR-REF CR-REF LGP-01 LGP-01 

Sample Identification Column CR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-070226 LGP2-01-SW-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-070302 

Sample Date Benchmark 2/26/2007 2/26/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 

Sample Matrix μg/L W W W W 

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol 3.4 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 11 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U Tetrachloroguaiacol 7.5 -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 3.4 -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 3.4 -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U Tetrachlorocatechol 2.0 -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U Trichlorosyringol 3.4 -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U Chlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene 0.5 -- 0.05 UJ -- 0.059 U 

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol 1.0 -- 0.54 UJ -- 0.29 J 

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform 12.4 -- 0.5 U -- 0.5 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 2 of 6
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-02 LGP-03 LGP-03 LGP-04 

LGP2-02-SW-A-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2-04-SW-A FILTER-070228 

3/1/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 2/28/2007 

W WWW

2.4 -- 2.2 -- 

2.7 -- 2.4 -- 

5 U -- 5 U -- 

0.0007 U 0.00116 U 0.00258 U 0.00167 U 

0.00826 U 0.00111 U 0.0113 U 0.00234 U 

0.002 U 0.00342 U 0.00374 U 0.003 U 

0.00193 U 0.00339 U 0.00383 U 0.00625 U 

0.0019 U 0.00625 U 0.00389 U 0.00303 U 

0.0098 J 0.0546 J 0.0101 J 0.131 0.0359 J 0.546 0.0477 J 0.952 0.0024 J 0.00255 U 0.00167 U 0.00275 J 

0.00256 U 0.00409 U 0.00294 U 0.00366 U 0.00625 U 0.00378 U 0.0028 U 0.00302 U 

0.000695 U 0.000811 U 0.000903 U 0.00625 U 0.000634 U 0.000781 U 0.000806 U 0.00625 U 

0.00625 U 0.000875 U 0.000932 U 0.00098 U 

0.000925 U 0.00106 U 0.00111 U 0.00118 U 

0.00625 U 0.0124 J 0.00625 U 0.0188 J 

0.00266 U 0.0017 U 0.00285 U 0.00253 U 

0.0068 U 0.0298 J 0.0137 U 0.0422 J 

0.0481 0.643 0.0578 1.15 

0.00241 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00317 

0.000133 0.000236 0.0000149 0.000556 0.000342 0.000728 0.000106 0.00187 

0.00241 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00317 

0.000133 0.000236 0.0000149 0.000556 0.000349 0.000843 0.000115 0.00207 

20 UJ -- 20 UJ -- 

20 U -- 20 U -- 

20 UJ -- 20 UJ -- 

20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 

20 UJ -- 20 UJ -- 

20 U -- 20 U -- 

20 UJ -- 20 UJ -- 

20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 3 of 6
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-02 LGP-03 LGP-03 LGP-04 

LGP2-02-SW-A-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2-04-SW-A FILTER-070228 

3/1/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 2/28/2007 

W WWW

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.054 U -- 0.05 U -- 

0.44 J -- 0.42 J -- 

0.5 U -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 4 of 6
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Wat

LGP-EFF LGP-EFF SR-REF 

LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-070302 SR-REF-SW-A FILTE

3/2/2007 3/2/2007 2/27/2007 

WW W 

-- 111 -- -- 143 -- -- 60 -- 

0.00498 J 0.0037 U 0.00121 U 

0.00625 U 0.00294 U 0.0018 U 

0.00689 J 0.0039 U 0.00436 U 

0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.00405 U 

0.007 J 0.00625 U 0.00427 U 0.0833 0.0153 J 0.0597 J 

0.494 0.0461 J 0.428 

0.0448 0.0161 0.00359 U 

0.00848 J 0.00625 U 0.00607 U 

0.0161 J 0.00625 U 0.00562 U 

0.00895 J 0.00129 U 0.000643 U 

0.00625 U 0.00127 U 0.000621 U 

0.00973 J 0.00138 U 0.000702 U 

0.00625 U 0.00158 U 0.00086 U 

0.0186 J 0.00625 U 0.00812 J 

0.00209 U 0.00242 U 0.00189 U 

0.017 J 0.0101 U 0.0231 J 

0.72 0.0775 0.519 

0.07 0.0161 0.000186 

0.0214 0.000825 0.000186 0.0223 0.00177 0.000723 

0.07 0.0161 0.000186 

0.0214 0.000825 0.000186 

0.019 0.00178 0.000814 

-- 20 UJ -- -- 20 U -- -- 59 J -- 

-- 23 -- -- 20 U -- -- 20 UJ -- -- 13 J -- -- 20 U -- -- 20 U -- -- 20 U -- -- 20 U -- -- 20 U -- -- 0.005 U -- -- 0.15 -- 

-- 0.005 U -- -- 0.01 U -- -- 0.02 J -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 5 of 6
Table 1

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – March 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Wat

LGP-EFF LGP-EFF SR-REF 

LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-070302 SR-REF-SW-A FILTE

3/2/2007 3/2/2007 2/27/2007 

WW W 

-- 0.016 -- -- 0.093 -- -- 0.011 -- -- 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U -- -- 0.005 U -- 

0.29

-- 0.052 U -- -- 7.8 J -- 

-- 1.0 -- 

Note:

Denotes reporting limit above toxicity benchmark

Denotes result above toxicity benchmark

Bold = DetectedU = The compound was analyzed for, but was not detected (ʺNon‐detectʺ) at or above the method 

J = The result is an estiinated concentration that is less than the method reporting limit but greater 

CR‐ REF = Clearwater Reference station

SR‐REF = Snake River Reference stationLGP = Lower Granite Pool

Dioxin/Furan TEQ is per section J, of permit ID0001163.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 6 of 6
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2

Sample Location Water CR-REF CR-REF LGP-01 

Sample Identification Column CR-REF-SW-A-FILTER-070606 CR-REF-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070606 LGP2-01-SW-A-FILTER-070608 LGP2-0

Sample Date Benchmark 6/6/2007 6/6/2007 6/8/2007 

Sample Matrix μg/L W W W 

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbon -- -- -- Total organic carbon -- -- -- Total suspended solids -- -- -- 

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD 0.06 0.00472 U 0.00257 U 0.00315 U 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 0.00496 U 0.00711 U 0.00864 U 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 0.00654 U 0.00781 U 0.00696 U 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 0.0125 U 0.0078 U 0.0125 U 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 0.00707 U 0.00901 U 0.00794 U 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 0.305 0.0083 U 0.147 OCDD 1.94 0.0426 J 1.02 2,3,7,8-TCDF 0.20 0.00254 U 0.00449 U 0.00462 J 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 0.00386 U 0.00455 U 0.00428 U 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 0.00328 U 0.00407 U 0.00384 U 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 0.0125 U 0.00234 U 0.00188 U 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00157 U 0.00224 U 0.00186 U 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 0.00179 U 0.00249 U 0.0125 U 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 0.00216 U 0.00341 U 0.00262 U 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 0.0403 J 0.00371 U 0.0304 J 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.00395 U 0.00563 U 0.00343 U OCDF 0.0709 J 0.013 U 0.0889 J Total Dioxin/Furan 2.36 0.0426 1.29 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird) 0.000909 0.00000426 0.00518 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish) 0.000909 0.00000426 0.000793 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal) 9 0.00365 0.00000426 0.00235 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird) 0.000909 0.00000426 0.00518 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish) 0.000909 0.00000426 0.000793 Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal) 0.00406 0.0000128 0.00257 

Resin Acids (μg/L) 1.0

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol -- -- -- Tetrachloroguaiacol -- -- -- Linoleic Acid -- -- -- Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid -- -- -- Pimaric acid -- -- -- Isopimaric acid -- -- -- Dehydroabietic acid -- -- -- Abietic acid -- -- -- 9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid -- -- -- 14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid -- -- -- 12-Chlorodehydroabietic acid -- -- -- Dichlorodehydroabietic acid -- -- -- 

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 3.4 -- -- -- 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 7.3 -- -- -- 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 3.3 -- -- -- Pentachlorophenol 0.18 -- -- -- 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 3.4 -- -- -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 1 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2

Sample Location Water CR-REF CR-REF LGP-01 

Sample Identification Column CR-REF-SW-A-FILTER-070606 CR-REF-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070606 LGP2-01-SW-A-FILTER-070608 LGP2-0

Sample Date Benchmark 6/6/2007 6/6/2007 6/8/2007 

Sample Matrix μg/L W W W 

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol 3.4 -- -- -- 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 11 -- -- -- Tetrachloroguaiacol 7.5 -- -- -- 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 3.4 -- -- -- 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 3.4 -- -- -- Tetrachlorocatechol 2.0 -- -- -- Trichlorosyringol 3.4 -- -- -- Chlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene 0.5 -- -- -- 

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol 1.0 -- -- -- 

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform 12.4 -- -- -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 2 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol W

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-02 LGP-02 

LGP2-01-SW-D-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01-SW-D-PUF_N/A-070608 LGP2-02-070621 LGP2-02-SW-A FIL

6/8/2007 6/8/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/200

W W WW 

-- -- 2.2 -- 

-- -- 2.3 -- 

-- -- 7 -- 

0.00566 U 0.00178 U -- 0.00199 0.00961 U 0.00469 U -- 0.00279 0.00606 U 0.0142 U -- 0.00514 

0.0132 J 0.0136 U -- 0.00625 

0.0125 U 0.0154 U -- 0.00528 

0.316 0.00842 U -- 0.106 

2.05 0.0223 J -- 0.732 

0.00662 J 0.00214 U -- 0.00159 

0.0125 U 0.00371 U -- 0.00566 0.0125 U 0.00338 U -- 0.00539 0.0125 U 0.00198 U -- 0.000693 0.0125 U 0.00198 U -- 0.000594 0.0125 U 0.00211 U -- 0.000665 

0.00272 U 0.00295 U -- 0.000781 

0.0455 J 0.00397 U -- 0.0122 

0.00667 U 0.00608 U -- 0.00256 

0.16 J 0.0127 U -- 0.0244 

2.59 0.0223 -- 0.875 

0.00774 0.00000223 -- 0.00030

0.00146 0.00000223 -- 0.00030

0.00582 0.00000223 -- 0.00126 

0.00774 0.00000223 -- 0.00030

0.00146 0.00000223 -- 0.00030

0.00626 0.00000669 -- 0.00141 

-- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 4.4 J -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 3 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol W

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-02 LGP-02 

LGP2-01-SW-D-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01-SW-D-PUF_N/A-070608 LGP2-02-070621 LGP2-02-SW-A FIL

6/8/2007 6/8/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/200

W W WW 

-- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 1 U -- -- -- 0.41 J -- 

-- -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 4 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-02 LGP-03 LGP-03 LGP-03 

LGP2-02-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-03-070621 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2

6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 

W WW W 

-- 2.3 -- 2.2 

-- 2.5 -- 2.4 -- 5 U -- 5 U 

0.00225 U -- 0.00116 U 0.00258 U 0.00585 U -- 0.00111 U 0.0113 U 0.00874 U -- 0.00342 U 0.00374 U 

0.0091 U -- 0.00339 U 0.00383 U 

0.00993 U -- 0.00625 U 0.00389 U 

0.0313 U -- 0.0546 J 0.0101 J 

0.068 J -- 0.546 0.0477 J 

0.00274 U -- 0.00255 U 0.00167 U 0.00519 U -- 0.00409 U 0.00294 U 0.00447 U -- 0.00378 U 0.0028 U 

0.0033 U -- 0.000811 U 0.000903 U 

0.00311 U -- 0.000781 U 0.000806 U 0.00365 U -- 0.000875 U 0.000932 U 0.00479 U -- 0.00106 U 0.00111 U 0.00342 U -- 0.0124 J 0.00625 U 

0.00505 U -- 0.0017 U 0.00285 U 

0.0153 U -- 0.0298 J 0.0137 U 

0.068 -- 0.643 0.0578 

0.0000068 -- 0.000236 0.0000149 

0.0000068 -- 0.000236 0.0000149 

0.0000068 -- 0.000728 0.000106 

0.0000068 -- 0.000236 0.0000149 

0.0000068 -- 0.000236 0.0000149 

0.0000204 -- 0.000843 0.000115 

-- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 5 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-02 LGP-03 LGP-03 LGP-03 

LGP2-02-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-03-070621 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2

6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 

W WW W 

-- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 1 U -- 0.05 U -- 0.35 J -- 0.42 J -- 0.5 U -- 0.5 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 6 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-04 LGP-04 LGP-04 LGP-04 

LGP2-04-SW-A FILTER-070228 LGP2-04-SW-A-070302 LGP2-04-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-04-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070

2/28/2007 2/28/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 

W W W W 

-- 2.1 -- -- 

-- 2.7 -- -- -- 5 -- -- 

0.00167 U 0.00224 U 0.00581 U 0.00184 U 0.00234 U 0.00644 U 0.00743 U 0.00406 U 

0.003 U 0.00411 U 0.0125 U 0.00622 U 

0.00625 U 0.00429 U 0.0293 J 0.00633 U 0.00303 U 0.00417 U 0.0179 J 0.00687 U 

0.131 0.015 J 0.798 0.00731 U 

0.952 0.0741 J 5.47 0.0503 J 

0.00275 J 0.00256 J 0.00731 J 0.00184 U 

0.00366 U 0.00274 U 0.0125 U 0.00323 U 0.00302 U 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00298 U 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00259 U 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00245 U 0.00098 U 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00288 U 0.00118 U 0.00188 U 0.00155 U 0.0036 U 

0.0188 J 0.00779 J 0.102 J 0.00304 U 

0.00253 U 0.00198 U 0.00564 U 0.00456 U 

0.0422 J 0.0162 J 0.181 J 0.0204 U 

1.15 0.116 6.61 0.0503 

0.00317 0.00266 0.0118 0.00000503 

0.000556 0.00023 0.00322 0.00000503 

0.00187 0.000493 0.015 0.00000503 

0.00317 0.00266 0.0118 0.00000503 

0.000556 0.00023 0.00322 0.00000503 

0.00207 0.000511 0.0161 0.0000151 

-- 20 UJ -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 UJ -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 UJ -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 UJ -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 7 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-04 LGP-04 LGP-04 LGP-04 

LGP2-04-SW-A FILTER-070228 LGP2-04-SW-A-070302 LGP2-04-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-04-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070

2/28/2007 2/28/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 

W W W W 

-- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.053 U -- -- -- 0.40 J -- -- 

-- 0.5 U -- -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 8 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol W

LGP-05 LGP-05 LGP-EFF LGP-EF

LGP2-05-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-05-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-EFF-070621 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FIL

6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/2/2007 

W W WW 

-- -- 97.6 -- 

-- -- 112 -- 

-- -- 43 -- 

0.00301 U 0.00386 U -- 0.00498 

0.00579 U 0.00304 U -- 0.00625 0.00388 U 0.00823 U -- 0.00689 

0.0125 U 0.00829 U -- 0.00625 0.0042 U 0.00922 U -- 0.007 J 

0.133 0.00625 U -- 0.0833 

0.993 0.0452 J -- 0.494 

0.00276 U 0.00187 U -- 0.0448 0.00228 U 0.00736 U -- 0.00848 

0.00198 U 0.0067 U -- 0.0161 J 

0.0125 U 0.00146 U -- 0.00895 

0.0125 U 0.00141 U -- 0.00625 

0.00188 U 0.00154 U -- 0.00973 

0.00243 U 0.0021 U -- 0.00625 

0.0276 J 0.00275 U -- 0.0186 J 

0.00297 U 0.00421 U -- 0.00209 

0.068 J 0.0248 U -- 0.017 J 

1.22 0.0452 -- 0.72 

0.000515 0.00000452 -- 0.07 

0.000515 0.00000452 -- 0.0214 

0.00171 0.00000452 -- 0.0223 

0.000515 0.00000452 -- 0.07 

0.000515 0.00000452 -- 0.0214 

0.00192 0.0000136 -- 0.019 

-- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 54 J -- 

-- -- 74 J -- 

-- -- 4.2 J -- -- -- 13 J -- 

-- -- 9.3 J -- 

-- -- 11 J -- 

-- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.21 -- 

-- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.031 -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 9 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol W

LGP-05 LGP-05 LGP-EFF LGP-EF

LGP2-05-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-05-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-EFF-070621 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FIL

6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/2/2007 

W W WW 

-- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.052 -- -- -- 0.012 -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- 

0.305 

-- -- 1 U -- -- -- 11 J -- 

-- -- 1.3 -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 10 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

3,4,5-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacolLinoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 200

LGP-EFF LGP-EFF SR-REF SR-REF 

LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-PUF_N/A-070606 LGP2-EFF-AQ-D-070302 LGP2-SR-REF-070621 SR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070227 SR-R

6/6/2007 3/2/2007 6/21/2007 2/27/2007 

W WG W W 

-- 108 2.1 -- 

-- 142 2.2 -- -- 58 5 U -- 

0.00217 U -- -- 0.00121 U 0.00334 U -- -- 0.0018 U 0.00569 U -- -- 0.00436 U 0.00569 U -- -- 0.00405 U 0.00635 U -- -- 0.00427 U 

0.0161 J -- -- 0.0597 J 

0.0303 J -- -- 0.428 0.0102 J -- -- 0.00359 U 

0.00455 U -- -- 0.00607 U 0.00422 U -- -- 0.00562 U 0.00188 U -- -- 0.000643 U 0.00188 U -- -- 0.000621 U 0.00198 U -- -- 0.000702 U 0.00271 U -- -- 0.00086 U 0.00281 U -- -- 0.00812 J 0.00423 U -- -- 0.00189 U 

0.0197 U -- -- 0.0231 J 

0.0566 -- -- 0.519 

0.0102 -- -- 0.000186 

0.000529 -- -- 0.000186 

0.00118 -- -- 0.000723 

0.0102 -- -- 0.000186 

0.000529 -- -- 0.000186 

0.00119 -- -- 0.000814 

-- 20 UJ 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 17 J 13 J -- -- 25 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 UJ 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 UJ 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.13 0.005 U -- 

-- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.019 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 11 of 12
Table 2

Summary of Analytical Results and Comparison with Benchmark Criteria – June 2007 Sam

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-TrichloroguaiacolTetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 200

LGP-EFF LGP-EFF SR-REF SR-REF 

LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-PUF_N/A-070606 LGP2-EFF-AQ-D-070302 LGP2-SR-REF-070621 SR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070227 SR-R

6/6/2007 3/2/2007 6/21/2007 2/27/2007 

W WG W W 

-- 0.017 0.005 U -- 

-- 0.091 0.005 U -- 

-- 0.012 0.01 U -- 

-- 0.034 0.01 U -- 

-- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- 

0.303

-- 0.054 U 1 U -- -- 4.5 J 0.33 J -- -- 1.0 0.5 U -- 

Notes:

Denotes reporting limit above toxicity benchmark

Denotes result above toxicity benchmark

Bold = DetectedU = The compound was analyzed for, but was not detected (ʺNon‐detectʺ) at or above the method reporting limit/method detec

J = The result is an estiinated concentration that is less than the method reporting limit but greater than or equal to the method d

CR‐ REF = Clearwater Reference station

SR‐REF = Snake River Reference stationLGP = Lower Granite Pool

Dioxin/Furan TEQ is per section J, of permit ID0001163.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 12 of 12
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-V

Sample Location CR-REF CR-REF CR-REF CR

Sample Identification CR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-FILTER-070606 CR-REF-SW-A-

Sample Date Toxicity 2/26/2007 2/26/2007 6/6/2007 6/6/

Sample Matrix Benchmark W W W 

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbon mg/L -- 3.0 -- 

Total organic carbon mg/L -- 3.0 -- 

Total suspended solids mg/L -- 5 UJ -- 

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L) (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD pg/L 0.06 0.00114 U 0.00162 U 0.00472 U 0.001,2,3,7,8-PeCDD pg/L 0.00224 U 0.00907 U 0.00496 U 0.001,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD pg/L 0.00391 U 0.00354 U 0.00654 U 0.001,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD pg/L 0.00625 U 0.00357 U 0.0125 U 0.001,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD pg/L 0.00625 U 0.00368 U 0.00707 U 0.001,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD pg/L 0.0829 0.016 J 0.305 0.00

OCDD pg/L 0.635 0.0834 J 1.94 0.042,3,7,8-TCDF pg/L 0.20 0.00185 U 0.00174 J 0.00254 U 0.00

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF pg/L 0.00624 U 0.00302 U 0.00386 U 0.002,3,4,7,8-PeCDF pg/L 0.00543 U 0.00284 U 0.00328 U 0.001,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.001,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.00157 U 0.002,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF pg/L 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.00179 U 0.001,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF pg/L 0.000827 U 0.00113 U 0.00216 U 0.001,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF pg/L 0.0173 J 0.00625 U 0.0403 J 0.00

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF pg/L 0.00163 U 0.00321 U 0.00395 U 0.00OCDF pg/L 0.0404 J 0.0125 U 0.0709 J 0.0

Total Dioxin/Furan pg/L 0.776 0.101 2.36 0.0

Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird) pg/L 0.000323 0.00176 0.000909 0.000Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish) pg/L 0.000323 0.000111 0.000909 0.000Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal) pg/L 0.00107 0.000342 0.00365 0.000Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird) pg/L 0.000323 0.00176 0.000909 0.000Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish) pg/L 0.000323 0.000111 0.000909 0.000Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal) pg/L 0.0012 0.000359 0.00406 0.00

Resin Acids (μg/L) 2.2 μg/L

Linoleic Acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- 

Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- Pimaric acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- Isopimaric acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- Dehydroabietic acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- Abietic acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- 9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- 14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- 12-Chlorodehydroabietic acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- Dichlorodehydroabietic acid μg/L -- 20 UJ -- 

Phenols (μg/L) (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.005 U -- 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol μg/L 7.3 -- 0.005 U -- 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol μg/L 3.3 -- 0.005 U -- Pentachlorophenol μg/L 0.18 -- 0.01 U -- 3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol μg/L 7.5 -- 0.005 U -- 3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.005 U -- 4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.005 U -- 

Units

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 1 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-V

Sample Location CR-REF CR-REF CR-REF CR

Sample Identification CR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-070226 CR-REF-SW-A-FILTER-070606 CR-REF-SW-A-

Sample Date Toxicity 2/26/2007 2/26/2007 6/6/2007 6/6/

Sample Matrix Benchmark W W W 

Units

Tetrachloroguaiacol μg/L 10 -- 0.01 U -- 3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.01 U -- 3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.01 U -- Tetrachlorocatechol μg/L 11.0 -- 0.01 U -- Trichlorosyringol μg/L 2.6 -- 0.005 U -- Chlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene μg/L 3.2 -- 0.05 UJ -- 

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol μg/L 2.5 -- 0.54 UJ -- 

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform μg/L 12.4 -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 2 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-01 

LGP2-01-D-070621 LGP2-01-SW-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01

6/21/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 6/8/2007 

WW W W 

2.1 -- 2.6 -- 2.4 -- 2.8 -- 

5 U -- 5 U -- 

-- 0.00143 U 0.00171 U 0.00315 U -- 0.00699 J 0.00362 U 0.00864 U -- 0.0148 J 0.00474 U 0.00696 U 

-- 0.0377 J 0.00486 U 0.0125 U -- 0.0287 J 0.0049 U 0.00794 U -- 0.33 0.00853 J 0.147 

-- 1.04 0.0676 J 1.02 -- 0.00412 UJ 0.00183 U 0.00462 J 

-- 0.0113 J 0.00162 U 0.00428 U -- 0.0232 J 0.00143 U 0.00384 U -- 0.0374 J 0.00625 U 0.00188 U -- 0.0497 J 0.00625 U 0.00186 U -- 0.0725 0.0013 U 0.0125 U -- 0.0249 J 0.00625 U 0.00262 U 

-- 0.182 0.0097 J 0.0304 J 

-- 0.0668 0.00625 U 0.00343 U -- 0.33 J 0.184 0.0889 J 

-- 2.26 0.27 1.29 -- 0.0608 0.000131 0.00518 -- 0.0488 0.000131 0.000793 -- 0.0521 0.000207 0.00235 -- 0.0608 0.000131 0.00518 -- 0.0488 0.000131 0.000793 -- 0.0475 0.000258 0.00257 

20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 3 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-01 

LGP2-01-D-070621 LGP2-01-SW-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-070302 LGP2-01-SW-A-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01

6/21/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 6/8/2007 

WW W W 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

1 U -- 0.059 U -- 

0.37 J -- 0.29 J -- 

0.5 U -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 4 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-06 LGP-06 

LGP2-01-SW-D-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01-SW-D-PUF_N/A-070608 LGP2-02-070621 LGP2-02-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP

6/8/2007 6/8/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/2007 

W W WW 

-- -- 2.2 -- 

-- -- 2.3 -- 

-- -- 7 -- 

0.00566 U 0.00178 U -- 0.00199 U 0.00961 U 0.00469 U -- 0.00279 U 0.00606 U 0.0142 U -- 0.00514 U 

0.0132 J 0.0136 U -- 0.00625 U 

0.0125 U 0.0154 U -- 0.00528 U 

0.316 0.00842 U -- 0.106 

2.05 0.0223 J -- 0.732 

0.00662 J 0.00214 U -- 0.00159 U 

0.0125 U 0.00371 U -- 0.00566 U 0.0125 U 0.00338 U -- 0.00539 U 0.0125 U 0.00198 U -- 0.000693 U 0.0125 U 0.00198 U -- 0.000594 U 0.0125 U 0.00211 U -- 0.000665 U 

0.00272 U 0.00295 U -- 0.000781 U 

0.0455 J 0.00397 U -- 0.0122 J 

0.00667 U 0.00608 U -- 0.00256 U 

0.16 J 0.0127 U -- 0.0244 J 

2.59 0.0223 -- 0.875 

0.00774 0.00000223 -- 0.000304 

0.00146 0.00000223 -- 0.000304 

0.00582 0.00000223 -- 0.00126 

0.00774 0.00000223 -- 0.000304 

0.00146 0.00000223 -- 0.000304 

0.00626 0.00000669 -- 0.00141 

-- -- 4.4 J -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 20 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 5 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-01 LGP-01 LGP-06 LGP-06 

LGP2-01-SW-D-FILTER-070608 LGP2-01-SW-D-PUF_N/A-070608 LGP2-02-070621 LGP2-02-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP

6/8/2007 6/8/2007 6/21/2007 3/1/2007 

W W WW 

-- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.01 U -- -- -- 0.005 U -- -- -- 1 U -- -- -- 0.41 J -- 

-- -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 6 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-09 LGP-09 LGP-09 LGP-09 

LGP2-03-070621 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-0

6/21/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 6/7/2007 

WW W W 

2.3 -- 2.2 -- 

2.5 -- 2.4 -- 

5 U -- 5 U -- 

-- 0.00116 U 0.00258 U 0.00565 U -- 0.00111 U 0.0113 U 0.013 U -- 0.00342 U 0.00374 U 0.0106 U -- 0.00339 U 0.00383 U 0.0173 J 

-- 0.00625 U 0.00389 U 0.0123 U -- 0.0546 J 0.0101 J 0.411 

-- 0.546 0.0477 J 2.36 

-- 0.00255 U 0.00167 U 0.00536 U -- 0.00409 U 0.00294 U 0.0107 U -- 0.00378 U 0.0028 U 0.0101 U -- 0.000811 U 0.000903 U 0.00224 U -- 0.000781 U 0.000806 U 0.0125 U -- 0.000875 U 0.000932 U 0.00222 U -- 0.00106 U 0.00111 U 0.00409 U -- 0.0124 J 0.00625 U 0.0428 J 

-- 0.0017 U 0.00285 U 0.0582 UJ -- 0.0298 J 0.0137 U 0.925 UJ -- 0.643 0.0578 2.83 

-- 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00125 

-- 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00125 

-- 0.000728 0.000106 0.0065 

-- 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00125 

-- 0.000236 0.0000149 0.00125 

-- 0.000843 0.000115 0.00698 

20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 UJ -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 7 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 

LGP-09 LGP-09 LGP-09 LGP-09 

LGP2-03-070621 LGP2-03-SW-A FILTER-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-070301 LGP2-03-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-0

6/21/2007 3/1/2007 3/1/2007 6/7/2007 

WW W W 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 

1 U -- 0.05 U -- 

0.35 J -- 0.42 J -- 

0.5 U -- 0.5 U -- 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 8 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2

LGP-11 LGP-11 LGP-11 LGP-13 

LGP2-04-SW-A-070302 LGP2-04-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-04-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-05-070621 LGP2-0

2/28/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/21/2007 

W W W W

2.1 -- -- 2.1 2.7 -- -- 2.3 

5 -- -- 5 U 

0.00224 U 0.00581 U 0.00184 U -- 0.00644 U 0.00743 U 0.00406 U -- 0.00411 U 0.0125 U 0.00622 U -- 0.00429 U 0.0293 J 0.00633 U -- 0.00417 U 0.0179 J 0.00687 U -- 

0.015 J 0.798 0.00731 U -- 

0.0741 J 5.47 0.0503 J -- 

0.00256 J 0.00731 J 0.00184 U -- 

0.00274 U 0.0125 U 0.00323 U -- 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00298 U -- 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00259 U -- 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00245 U -- 0.00625 U 0.0125 U 0.00288 U -- 0.00188 U 0.00155 U 0.0036 U -- 

0.00779 J 0.102 J 0.00304 U -- 

0.00198 U 0.00564 U 0.00456 U -- 

0.0162 J 0.181 J 0.0204 U -- 

0.116 6.61 0.0503 -- 

0.00266 0.0118 0.00000503 -- 0.00023 0.00322 0.00000503 -- 

0.000493 0.015 0.00000503 -- 

0.00266 0.0118 0.00000503 -- 0.00023 0.00322 0.00000503 -- 

0.000511 0.0161 0.0000151 -- 

20 UJ -- -- 20 U 

20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 

20 UJ -- -- 20 U 

20 U -- -- 20 U 

20 UJ -- -- 20 U 

20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 20 U -- -- 20 U 

0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 

0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 

0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 9 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2

LGP-11 LGP-11 LGP-11 LGP-13 

LGP2-04-SW-A-070302 LGP2-04-SW-A-FILTER-070607 LGP2-04-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-05-070621 LGP2-0

2/28/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/21/2007 

W W W W

0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- -- 0.01 U 

0.005 U -- -- 0.005 U 0.053 U -- -- 1 U 

0.40 J -- -- 0.19 J 

0.5 U -- -- 0.5 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 10 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-13 LGP-EFF LGP-EFF LGP-EFF 

LGP2-05-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-EFF-070621 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-070302 LGP2-EF

6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 

W W W W 

-- 97.6 -- 111 -- 112 -- 143 -- 43 -- 60 

0.00386 U -- 0.00498 J 0.0037 U 0.00304 U -- 0.00625 U 0.00294 U 0.00823 U -- 0.00689 J 0.0039 U 0.00829 U -- 0.00625 U 0.00625 U 0.00922 U -- 0.007 J 0.00625 U 

0.00625 U -- 0.0833 0.0153 J 

0.0452 J -- 0.494 0.0461 J 

0.00187 U -- 0.0448 0.0161 

0.00736 U -- 0.00848 J 0.00625 U 

0.0067 U -- 0.0161 J 0.00625 U 

0.00146 U -- 0.00895 J 0.00129 U 

0.00141 U -- 0.00625 U 0.00127 U 0.00154 U -- 0.00973 J 0.00138 U 

0.0021 U -- 0.00625 U 0.00158 U 

0.00275 U -- 0.0186 J 0.00625 U 0.00421 U -- 0.00209 U 0.00242 U 

0.0248 U -- 0.017 J 0.0101 U 

0.0452 -- 0.72 0.0775 

0.00000452 -- 0.07 0.0161 

0.00000452 -- 0.0214 0.000825 

0.00000452 -- 0.0223 0.00177 

0.00000452 -- 0.07 0.0161 

0.00000452 -- 0.0214 0.000825 

0.0000136 -- 0.019 0.00178 

-- 54 J -- 59 J 

-- 74 J -- 23 -- 4.2 J -- 20 U -- 13 J -- 20 UJ -- 9.3 J -- 13 J -- 11 J -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 20 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.21 -- 0.15 

-- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.031 -- 0.02 J 

-- 0.005 U -- 0.016 

-- 0.052 -- 0.093 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 11 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 20

LGP-13 LGP-EFF LGP-EFF LGP-EFF 

LGP2-05-SW-A-PUF_N/A-070607 LGP2-EFF-070621 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A FILTER-070302 LGP2-EFF-AQ-A-070302 LGP2-EF

6/7/2007 6/21/2007 3/2/2007 3/2/2007 

W W W W 

-- 0.012 -- 0.011 

-- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.01 U -- 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

0.305 0.29 

-- 1 U -- 0.052 U -- 11 J -- 7.8 J 

-- 1.3 -- 1.0 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 12 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbonTotal organic carbonTotal suspended solids

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

2,3,7,8-TCDD1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDDOCDD2,3,7,8-TCDF1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDFOCDFTotal Dioxin/FuranTotal Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ 1998 (Mammal)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Bird)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Fish)Total Dioxin/Furan TEQ (Mammal)

Resin Acids (μg/L)

Linoleic AcidOleic Acid/Linolenic AcidPimaric acidIsopimaric acidDehydroabietic acidAbietic acid9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid12-Chlorodehydroabietic acidDichlorodehydroabietic acid

Phenols (μg/L)

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol2,4,6-Trichlorophenol2,3,4,6-TetrachlorophenolPentachlorophenol3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 H

SR-REF SR-REF SR-REF S

LGP2-SR-REF-070621 SR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070227 SR-REF-SW-A-070227 SR-REF-SW

6/21/2007 2/27/2007 2/27/2007 6

WWW

2.1 -- 2.4 

2.2 -- 2.3 

5 U -- 5 UJ 

-- 0.00121 U 0.00163 U 0.-- 0.0018 U 0.00936 U 0.-- 0.00436 U 0.00272 U 0-- 0.00405 U 0.00272 U 0-- 0.00427 U 0.00278 U 0-- 0.0597 J 0.0129 J -- 0.428 0.0632 J 

-- 0.00359 U 0.00133 U 0-- 0.00607 U 0.00251 U 0-- 0.00562 U 0.00235 U 0.-- 0.000643 U 0.0014 U 0.-- 0.000621 U 0.00133 U 0.-- 0.000702 U 0.00143 U 0.-- 0.00086 U 0.00162 U 0.-- 0.00812 J 0.00625 U 0

-- 0.00189 U 0.00236 U 0.-- 0.0231 J 0.0125 U 0

-- 0.519 0.0761 

-- 0.000186 0.0000192 0-- 0.000186 0.0000192 0-- 0.000723 0.000135 0-- 0.000186 0.0000192 0-- 0.000186 0.0000192 0-- 0.000814 0.000148 0

13 J -- 20 UJ 

20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 UJ 20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 UJ 20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 U 20 U -- 20 U 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

0.01 U -- 0.01 U 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 13 of 14
Table 3

Summary of Chemical and Conventional Analyses

Sampling Category

Sample Location

Sample Identification

Sample Date

Sample Matrix

Tetrachloroguaiacol3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol3,4,6-TrichlorocatecholTetrachlorocatecholTrichlorosyringolChlorophenols toxic unit sum

Retene (μg/L)

Retene

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol

VOCs (μg/L)

Chloroform

2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 Hi-Vol Waters 2007 H

SR-REF SR-REF SR-REF S

LGP2-SR-REF-070621 SR-REF-SW-A FILTER-070227 SR-REF-SW-A-070227 SR-REF-SW

6/21/2007 2/27/2007 2/27/2007 6

WWW

0.01 U -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 0.01 U -- 0.01 U 

0.005 U -- 0.005 U 

1 U -- 0.05 UJ 

0.33 J -- 0.86 J 

0.5 U -- 0.5 U 

Notes:

Denotes result above toxicity benchmark

Bold = DetectedU = The compound was analyzed for, but was not detected (ʺNon‐detectʺ) at or above the metho

J = The result is an estiinated concentration that is less than the method reporting limit but great

CR‐ REF = Clearwater Reference station

SR‐REF = Snake River Reference station

LGP = Lower Granite Pool

Dioxin/Furan TEQ is per section J, of permit ID0001163.

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring 14 of 14
Table 4 

Statistical Summary of High Volume Water Sample Results by Analyte 

Chemical 

Detection 

Frequency 

Percent 

Qualified 

as 

Estimated 

Result 

Average 

Max 

Detect 

Result 

Min 

Detect 

Result 

Max 

MDL 

Limit 

Min 

MDL 

Limit 

Detected 

Standard 

Deviation 

beta-Sitosterol (μg/L)

beta-Sitosterol 84% 100% 1.37 11.0 0.190 0.120 0.110 3.13 

Conventionals (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbon 100% 5% 12.9 111 0.300 2.00 0.0400 32.3 

Total organic carbon 100% 5% 15.5 143 0.120 2.00 0.0400 39.8 

Total suspended solids 21% 11% 10.0 60.0 5.00 5.00 5.00 27.2 

Dissolved organic carbon 100% 0% 108 108 108 1.00 1.00 

Total organic carbon 100% 0% 142 142 142 2.00 2.00 

Total suspended solids 100% 0% 58.0 58.0 58.0 5.00 5.00 

Dioxin/Furans (pg/L)

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD 78% 36% 0.104 0.798 0.00853 0.171 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF 56% 53% 0.0210 0.182 0.00779 0.0409 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 3% 3% 0.00672 0.0668 0.0668 

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD 6% 6% 0.00639 0.0148 0.00689 0.00559 

1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF 6% 6% 0.00548 0.0374 0.00895 0.0201 

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD 11% 11% 0.00872 0.0377 0.0132 0.0112 

1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF 3% 3% 0.00539 0.0497 0.0497 

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD 8% 8% 0.00773 0.0287 0.00700 0.0109 

1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF 6% 6% 0.00303 0.0249 0.00723 0.0125 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD 3% 3% 0.00609 0.00699 0.00699 

1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF 6% 6% 0.00521 0.0113 0.00848 0.00199 

2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF 6% 3% 0.00568 0.0725 0.00973 0.0444 

2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF 8% 8% 0.00556 0.0232 0.0130 0.00523 

2,3,7,8-TCDD 6% 6% 0.00300 0.0148 0.00498 0.00694 

2,3,7,8-TCDF 39% 33% 0.00747 0.108 0.00172 0.0289 

OCDD 100% 50% 0.679 5.47 0.0223 1.03 

OCDF 53% 53% 0.0744 0.330 0.0162 0.0812 

Phenols (ng/L)

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 0% 0% 5.00 0.830 0.830 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0% 0% 5.00 0.370 0.370 

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 11% 0% 23.4 210 150 0.550 0.550 34.6 

3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 0% 0% 10.0 2.80 2.80 

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 11% 5% 7.16 31.0 20.0 0.850 0.850 6.35 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 0% 0% 10.0 2.60 2.60 

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol 5% 0% 5.58 16.0 16.0 0.290 0.290 0 

4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 11% 0% 12.1 93.0 52.0 0.630 0.630 23.7 

Pentachlorophenol 0% 0% 10.0 1.30 1.30 

Tetrachlorocatechol 0% 0% 10.0 1.00 1.00 

Tetrachloroguaiacol 11% 0% 10.2 12.0 11.0 1.40 1.40 0.577 

Trichlorosyringol 0% 0% 5.00 0.780 0.780 

2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 0% 0% 5.00 0.830 0.830 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0% 0% 5.00 0.370 0.370 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring    050297‐01
Table 4 

Statistical Summary of High Volume Water Sample Results by Analyte 

Percent 

Chemical 

Detection 

Frequency 

Qualified Max Min Max Min Detected 

as Result 

Estimated Average 

Detect 

Result 

Detect 

Result 

MDL 

Limit 

MDL Standard 

Limit Deviation 

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 100% 0% 130 130 130 0.550 0.550 0 

3,4,5-Trichlorocatechol 100% 0% 34.0 34.0 34.0 2.80 2.80 0 

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 100% 0% 19.0 19.0 19.0 0.850 0.850 0 

3,4,6-Trichlorocatechol 0% 0% 10.0 2.60 2.60 

3,4,6-Trichloroguaiacol 100% 0% 17.0 17.0 17.0 0.290 0.290 0 

4,5,6-Trichloroguaiacol 100% 0% 91.0 91.0 91.0 0.630 0.630 0 

Pentachlorophenol 0% 0% 10.0 1.30 1.30 

Tetrachlorocatechol 0% 0% 10.0 1.00 1.00 

Tetrachloroguaiacol 100% 0% 12.0 12.0 12.0 1.40 1.40 0 

Trichlorosyringol 0% 0% 5.00 0.780 0.780 

Resin Acid (μg/L)

12-Chlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 5% 20.0 2.30 2.30 

14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 5% 20.0 2.40 2.40 

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 11% 5% 7.16 31.0 20.0 0.850 0.850 7.78 

9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid 0% 5% 20.0 4.20 4.20 

Abietic acid 5% 47% 19.5 11.0 11.0 4.50 4.50 0 

Dehydroabietic acid 11% 16% 19.1 13.0 9.30 6.20 6.20 2.14 

Dichlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 5% 20.0 7.60 7.60 

Isopimaric acid 5% 53% 19.6 13.0 13.0 5.40 5.40 0 

Linoleic Acid 26% 68% 21.8 59.0 4.00 3.90 3.90 25.8 

Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid 11% 11% 23.0 74.0 23.0 6.90 6.90 29.4 

Pimaric acid 5% 11% 19.2 4.20 4.20 4.10 4.10 0 

Tetrachloroguaiacol 11% 0% 10.2 12.0 11.0 1.40 1.40 0.707 

12-Chlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 0% 20.0 2.30 2.30 

14-Chlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 0% 20.0 2.40 2.40 

3,4,5-Trichloroguaiacol 100% 0% 19.0 19.0 19.0 0.850 0.850 

9,10-Dichlorostearic Acid 0% 0% 20.0 4.20 4.20 

Abietic acid 0% 100% 20.0 4.50 4.50 

Dehydroabietic acid 0% 0% 20.0 6.20 6.20 

Dichlorodehydroabietic acid 0% 0% 20.0 7.60 7.60 

Isopimaric acid 0% 100% 20.0 5.40 5.40 

Linoleic Acid 100% 100% 17.0 17.0 17.0 3.90 3.90 0 

Oleic Acid/Linolenic Acid 100% 0% 25.0 25.0 25.0 6.90 6.90 0 

Pimaric acid 0% 0% 20.0 4.10 4.10 

Tetrachloroguaiacol 100% 0% 12.0 12.0 12.0 1.40 1.40 

Retene (μg/L)

Retene 0% 11% 0.551 1.00 0.00250 

Volatile Organics (μg/L)

Chloroform 16% 0% 0.674 2.50 1.00 0.140 0.140 0.794 

High Volume Quarterly Study Sampling and Analysis Report January 2008

Potlatch NPDES Permit Renewal Compliance Monitoring    050297‐01
FIGURES 
SNAKE

CLARKSTON

CLEARWATER 

LOWER GRANITE DAM

SNAKE RIVER

W

A

S

H

N

I GTON

D

I

A

H

O

Project Boundary

RIVER

SNAKE RIVER

Outfall 

0 6

Scale in Miles

K:\Jobs\050297-POTLATCH\05029701\05029701-03.dwg FIG 1 Jan 03, 2008 12:52pm cdavidson

Not to Scale

WASHINGTO

Seattle

Cla

Source: Google 2007
P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

!.

LOWER

GRANITE

DAM

1000

2000

1000

2000

1000

2000

2000

1000

2000

2000

2000

1000 

Yakawawa Canyon

Keith Canyon

Wawaw ai Cany o n

MacMurray Canyo

B

n

uck Canyon

Kluge Canyon

Alm ota Creek

Offield Canyon

LGP-01(Sample ID LPG-0

120

119

118

117

116

115

114

113

112

111

110

109

108

!

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

LGP-13

(Sample ID LGP-5)

SR-REF

O N

1000

1000

2000

1000

1000

1000

2000

1000

1000 Dry Creek

Lindsay Cr e e

P a g e C r e e k

Steptoe MATCH LINE

LEWISTON CLARKSTON

LGP-11(Sample ID LPG-4)

LGP-09(Sample ID LPG-03)

LGP-06(Sample ID LGP-02)

OUTFALL

3

2

1

0

141

140

139

138

137

136

135

134

133

132

131

130

129

128

127

J:\Jobs\050297-Potlatch\Maps\2008_01\Fig_2_HighVol.mxd SMS 01/07/2008 11:27 AM
APPENDIX A 

CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY FORMS AND LABORATORY DATA REPORTS 
  

APPENDIX B 

DATA VALIDATION REPORTS