Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report TDD: 03-08-0007

D S TE TAT NI E

U S E

· ·

V Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS

R Y

O C

N N Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report M E E G N A TA N L P TIO ROTEC TDD: 03-08-0007 EPA Region X EPA Contract: 68-S0-01-02 START April 2005 Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team

Weston Solutions, Inc. · 190 Queen Anne Avenue North · Seattle, WA 98109-4926 05-0068 Cover.ai Weston Solutions, Inc. Suite 200 190 Queen Anne Avenue North Seattle, WA 98109-4926 206-521-7600 • Fax 206-521-7601 www.westonsolutions.com

26 April 2005

Ken Marcy, Task Monitor United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue, M/S ECL-115 Seattle, WA 98101 WO# 12644-001-002-0148-08

RE: Draft Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS Preliminary Assessment/ Site Inspection Report Contract No. 68-S0-01-02 TDD: 03-08-0007 Document Control Number: 12644-001-002-AAYJ

Dear Mr. Marcy:

Enclosed please find one copy of the draft version of the Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection report for the Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range (PBR) Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS), located in Umatilla County approximately 9 miles east of Hermiston, Oregon.

If you have questions or comments, please contact me at (206) 521-7659 or e-mail me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Weston Solutions, Inc.

Kevin Broom, R.G. START Site Leader

Enclosures cc: Greg Stuesse, Weston, START Project Manager, Seattle, Washington (letter only)

05-0068.doc

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT/SITE INSPECTION REPORT

Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range Formerly Used Defense Site Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation Hermiston, Umatilla County, Oregon

TDD: 03-08-0007

Submitted To:

Ken Marcy, Task Monitor U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 Prepared By:

Weston Solutions, Inc 190 Queen Anne Avenue North, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98109

April 2005

Contract No.: 68-S0-01-02 Weston Work Order No.: 12644-001-002-0148-08 Weston Document Control No.: 12644-001-002- AAYJ

APPROVALS TITLE NAME SIGNATURE DATE EPA Task Monitor Ken Marcy START Project Manager Greg Stuesse START QA Officer Paul Swift

05-0068.doc

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1

2. SITE BACKGROUND...... 2-1 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION...... 2-1 2.1.1 Site Location ...... 2-1 2.1.2 Site Description...... 2-2 2.1.3 Site Ownership ...... 2-3 2.1.4 Site Operations and Source Characteristics ...... 2-3 2.2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION ...... 2-4 2.2.1 Previous Site Investigations...... 2-4 2.3 WASTE SOURCE AREAS AND SITE CONCERNS ...... 2-5 2.3.1 Known and Potential Source Areas...... 2-5 2.3.2 Potential Receptors...... 2-5

3. FIELD ACTIVITIES AND ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL ...... 3-1 3.1 SAMPLING DESIGN (TYPES, NUMBERS, AND RATIONALE)...... 3-1 3.1.1 Potential Sources...... 3-2 3.1.2 Target Samples...... 3-3 3.1.3 Background Samples ...... 3-4 3.2 SAMPLING METHODS...... 3-4 3.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling ...... 3-5 3.2.2 Sediment Sampling...... 3-5 3.2.3 Surface Water Sampling ...... 3-5 3.2.4 Groundwater Sampling...... 3-6 3.3 ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL ...... 3-6 3.4 SAMPLE GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM LOCATIONS ...... 3-6 3.5 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTE ...... 3-6 3.6 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY ...... 3-6 3.7 SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION ...... 3-7

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL...... 4-1 4.1 SATISFACTION OF DQOS AND CRITERIA FOR MEASUREMENT DATA...... 4-2 4.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES...... 4-2 4.3 PROJECT-SPECIFIC DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES...... 4-3 4.3.1 Precision...... 4-3 4.3.2 Accuracy ...... 4-3 4.3.3 Representativeness ...... 4-4 4.3.4 Comparability...... 4-4 4.3.5 Completeness ...... 4-4

05-0068.doc iii 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section Page

4.4 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PARAMETERS...... 4-5 4.4.1 Holding Times...... 4-5 4.4.2 Blank Sample Results...... 4-5 4.4.3 Calibration Check Sample Analysis...... 4-6 4.4.4 Laboratory Control Sample Analysis ...... 4-6 4.4.5 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy— Interference Check Sample Analysis...... 4-6 4.4.6 Duplicate Sample Analysis...... 4-6 4.4.7 Matrix Spike Sample Analysis...... 4-6 4.4.8 System Monitoring Compound (Surrogate) Spike Analysis ...... 4-6 4.4.9 Detection Limits...... 4-6 4.4.10 Serial Dilutions...... 4-6 4.4.11 Other Data Assessment...... 4-7

5. ANALYTICAL RESULTS REPORTING AND BACKGROUND SAMPLES...... 5-1 5.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS EVALUATION CRITERIA ...... 5-1 5.2 BACKGROUND SAMPLE LOCATION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS...... 5-1 5.2.1 Background Sample Locations ...... 5-2 5.2.2 Background Sample Results ...... 5-2

6. POTENTIAL SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION...... 6-1 6.1 POTENTIAL SOURCE SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS...... 6-1 6.1.1 Source Description ...... 6-1 6.1.2 Sample Locations ...... 6-1 6.1.3 Sample Results...... 6-2 6.1.4 Additional Potential Source of Perchlorate ...... 6-2

7. MIGRATION/EXPOSURE PATHWAYS AND TARGETS ...... 7-1 7.1 GROUNDWATER MIGRATION PATHWAY...... 7-1 7.1.1 Groundwater Pathway Targets...... 7-1 7.1.2 Groundwater Sample Locations...... 7-2 7.1.3 Groundwater Sample Results...... 7-2 7.2 SURFACE WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY ...... 7-3 7.2.1 Surface Water Pathway Targets...... 7-4 7.2.2 Target Sample Locations ...... 7-4 7.2.3 Target Sample Analytical Results ...... 7-5 7.3 SOIL EXPOSURE PATHWAY...... 7-6 7.4 AIR MIGRATION PATHWAY ...... 7-6

05-0068.doc iv 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section Page

8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...... 8-1 8.1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL TARGETS ...... 8-1 8.2 SOURCE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS ...... 8-1 8.3 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS ...... 8-2 8.3.1 Groundwater Samples...... 8-2 8.3.2 Target Samples...... 8-2 8.4 CONCLUSIONS ...... 8-3

9. REFERENCES...... 9-1

APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX B CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED GPS COORDINATES APPENDIX C DATA VALIDATION MEMORANDA AND LABORATORY SHEETS APPENDIX D DOMESTIC WELL LOGS

05-0068.doc v 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Table of Contents

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title 2-1 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Location Map 2-2 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Site Plan 2-3 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Site Plan Air Photo 2-4 Lower Umatilla Basin Groundwater Management Area 2-5 North Morrow Perchlorate Study Area Perchlorate Results—December 2004 2-6 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Site Features 2-7 Cold Springs PBR FUDS 4-Mile TDL 2-8 Cold Springs PBR FUDS 15-Mile TDL 3-1 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Sample Location Map Area Wide 3-2 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Sample Location Map Detail 3-3 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Sample Location Aerial Photo 7-1 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Perchlorate Results—December 2004

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title 3-1 Sample Collection and Analyses Summary 3-2 Sample Coding 6-1 Potential Sources: Bombing Range Analytical Results 7-1 Groundwater Wells and Associated Population within the 4-Mile TDL 7-2 Groundwater Domestic Wells Analytical Results 7-3 Target Sediment Samples Analytical Results 7-4 Surface Water Sample Analytical Results 7-5 Population and Wetlands within the 4-Mile TDL

05-0068.doc vi 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS

Acronym Definition AAF Army Air Field AES atomic emission spectroscopy ASTM American Association for Testing and Material Standard bgs below ground surface CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System cfs cubic feet per second CLP Contract Laboratory Program CLPAS Contract Laboratory Program Analytical Service cm/sec centimeters per second CRQL Contract-Required Quantitation Limit DERP Defense Environmental Restoration Program DOA United States Department of the Army DOI United States Department of Interior DQI data quality indicators DQO data quality objectives EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Maps FUDS Formerly Used Defense Site GC Gas Chromatography GPS Global Positioning System GWMA Groundwater Management Area HRS Hazard Ranking System ICP Inductively-Coupled Plasma IDW Investigation Derived Waste LCS laboratory control sample LTL Laucks Testing Laboratories

05-0068.doc vii Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS (Continued)

Acronym Definition

LUB Lower Umatilla Basin mg/kg milligram per kilogram µg/kg microgram per kilogram µg/L microgram per liter MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MDL method detection limit MEL Manchester Environmental Laboratory mm millimeter MQO Method Quality Objectives MS matrix spike NBEC nitrogen-based explosive compound NMPS North Morrow Perchlorate Study Area NPL National Priorities List NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service NWI National Wetlands Inventory ODEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife OEW Ordnance and Explosive Waste ONHIC Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center OWRD Oregon Water Resource Department PA Preliminary Assessment PBR Precision Bombing Range PCB polychlorinated biphenyl PPE probable point of entry ppb parts per billion ppm parts per million PQL Practical Quantitation Limit QA quality assurance

05-0068.doc viii 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS (Continued)

Acronym Definition

QC quality control RAC Risk Assessment Code RPD relative percent difference RSCC Regional Sample Control Coordinator SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act SCDM Superfund Chemical Data Matrix SI Site Inspection SOP Standard Operating Procedure SOW Statement of Work SQAP Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan SQL Sample Quantitation Limit START Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team STL Severn Trent Laboratory TAL Target Analyte List TDD Technical Direction Document TDL Target Distance Limit TDS total dissolved solids USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USCB United States Census Bureau USCS Unified Soil Classification System USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey UXO unexploded ordnance Weston Weston Solutions, Inc. WRCC Western Regional Climate Center

05-0068.doc ix 26 April 2005

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

Under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 and the 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Weston Solutions, Inc. (Weston) has completed a combined Preliminary Assessment/ Site Inspection (PA/SI) at the Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range (PBR) Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS; CERCLIS ID No. ORN001002611) located in Umatilla County approximately 9 miles east of Hermiston, Oregon. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 retained Weston to complete this PA/SI pursuant to the EPA Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) Contract No. 68-S0-01-02 and Technical Direction Document (TDD) No. 03-08-0007. The purpose of this report is to provide the EPA with the background information collected for the site, to discuss the sampling activities conducted and the data collected during the PA/SI, and to present the analytical results from the data obtained as part of the investigation.

The PA and SI are generally the first and second screening investigations, respectively, in a series of assessments the EPA may complete at a known or potential hazardous waste site that is being investigated under CERCLA/SARA. The combined PA/SI integrates activities typically conducted during the PA (e.g., information gathering, site reconnaissance) with activities typically conducted during the SI (e.g., development of a site-specific Sampling Quality and Assurance Plan [SQAP], field sampling, filling data gaps) to achieve one continuous site investigation. The main objectives for the PA/SI activities are to: • Collect and analyze samples to characterize the potential sources discussed in Section 2.3 of the report. • Determine off-site migration of contaminants. • Provide EPA with adequate information to determine whether further action under CERCLA is necessary. • Document any threat or potential threat to public health or the environment posed by the site.

Any use of this document or the information contained herein by persons or entities other than the EPA Region 10 shall be at the sole risk and liability of said person or entity. START, therefore, expressly disclaims any liability to persons other than the EPA Region 10 who may use or rely upon this report in any way or for any purpose.

05-0068.doc 1-1 26 April 2005

SECTION 2

SITE BACKGROUND

2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Information presented in this section is based on a review of United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) files, site background information, Weston’s field sampling investigation conducted in December 2004, and ongoing groundwater studies being conducted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) within Umatilla and Morrow Counties.

This section includes the site location, site description, and a discussion of ownership history and operational history of the Cold Springs PBR FUDS. Photographs of site features taken during the field effort are included in Appendix A.

2.1.1 Site Location

Site Name: Cold Springs PBR FUDS

CERCLIS ID No.: ORN001002611

USACE Project No.: F10OR017201

Location: Approximately 9 miles east of the City of Hermiston, Oregon

Latitude: 45°50’59” North

Longitude: 119°06’11” West

Legal Description: Sections 5-8, Township 4N, Range 30E

County: Umatilla

Site Owner(s): Stahl Hutterian Brethren 1485 North Hoffman Road Ritzville, Washington 99169 Royal Columbia Farms PO Box 93 Hermiston, Oregon 97838

Site Contacts(s): Greg Juul for Royal Columbia Farms (541) 567-3005 John Jr. Stahl for Stahl Hutterian Brethren (509) 659-0108

05-0068.doc 2-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 2

2.1.2 Site Description

The Cold Springs PBR FUDS originally comprised 2,622.08 acres of land acquired by lease and transferred to the United States Department of the Army (DOA) in December 1941 and January 1942. The site was used for precision bombing practice for approximately 4 years until the DOA declared the property surplus in October 1946. The site is located in northeastern Oregon approximately 9 miles east of Hermiston (Figures 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, and 2-4). The land was used for livestock grazing prior to the DOA acquiring the land (USACE 1995a). Currently, the site is owned by private parties and is used as irrigated farmland.

Features associated with the bombing range included a three-tower target, a pump house with well, and three spotting and plotting towers (USACE 1995a). During World War II, several Army Air Fields (AAF) including the Walla Walla AAF and Pendleton Air Field used the Cold Spring PBR for day and night training missions (USACE 1995a). Military aircraft positioned at the Walla Walla Air Field included the B-24 Bomber and the C-45 Cargo Aircraft (USACE 1995a). Cold Springs PBR was used for practice bombing using M38A2 practice bombs (USACE 1995a).

The primary landscape feature is high plain desert with low-lying vegetation. The Columbia River, which has a local average elevation of 250 feet, is located approximately 5 miles north of the bombing target at Cold Springs PBR FUDS. Elevation at the bombing target is approximately 750 feet.

Surface water on the FUDS property consists of an unnamed canyon tributary that flows west into to Despain Gulch. Despain Gulch then flows northwest into the Cold Springs Reservoir.

Cold Springs PBR FUDS is located in the northeastern corner of the Lower Umatilla Basin (LUB) Groundwater Management Area (GWMA), located in Morrow and Umatilla Counties, Oregon (Figure 2-4). The ODEQ declared the LUB a GWMA in 1990 when groundwater sampling during the 1980s demonstrated high nitrate concentrations across the basin. In the LUB, five specific activities have contributed to high nitrate levels in groundwater, including irrigated agriculture, land application of food processing waste, livestock operations, domestic sewage, and military activities.

As part of the process for declaring the 550-square-mile LUB GWMA, ODEQ collected approximately 200 samples in a synoptic sampling event in 1992. EPA Region 10 Office of Environmental Assessment, Office of Water, and Office of Ecosystems partnered with ODEQ and recreated the synoptic sampling event in 2003, which updated their understanding of the current distribution of nitrate levels in the basin. Perchlorate was also included as a contaminant of concern during the 2003 sampling event. Perchlorate is a manufactured salt that has been used primarily as an oxidizer in rocket and missile fuels and explosives. It is also used in flares, fireworks, matches, some dyes, lubricating oils, electroplating, medical supplies, and was a trace contaminant in some pre-1990s Chilean nitrate fertilizers. It can also be naturally occurring in some mineral formations. Perchlorate is highly water-soluble and can be carried into lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers, and may impact groundwater (ODEQ 2004).

A separate PA/SI for the North Morrow Perchlorate Study Area (NMPS) was conducted by Weston concurrent with this PA/SI. The two sites are located within the North Morrow GWMA

05-0068.doc 2-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 2 and share some of the same concerns, including the potential presence of perchlorate in groundwater and surface water. Sample locations associated with the NMPS PA/SI are presented in Figure 2-5. The NMPS PA/SI is documented in the North Morrow Groundwater Area Wide PA/SI Report (Weston 2005).

2.1.3 Site Ownership

From December 1941 to January 1942, the DOA acquired 310.36 acres of land by an executive order with the United States Department of Interior (DOI) and 2,311.72 acres of land leased from a private party (Army Real Estate Branch 1942). In October 1946, the DOA declared the site surplus, and the site was disposed in August 1947 (USACE 1995a). The former public lands, totaling 310.36 acres, were returned to the DOI, and the remaining 2,311.72 acres were sold to private parties (USACE 1995a). Currently, the site is owned by the Stahl Hutterian Brethren and Royal Columbia Farms.

2.1.4 Site Operations and Source Characteristics

From 1942 to 1946, the United States Army Air Corps used the Cold Springs PBR for precision bombing. The Walla Walla and Pendleton Air Fields used the site for air-to-ground gunnery practice (USCAE 1995a). Reportedly, M38A2 sand-filled practice bombs were used at the bombing range. The M38A2 is constructed of light sheet metal with box-type fins welded to the bomb body. The spotting charge is assembled in a sleeve at the base of the bomb, within the fin box. The authorized spotting charges included the M1A1, M3, and M4. The spotting charge produces a flash or flame and white smoke to indicate where the bomb landed and is used to determine bombing accuracy. The fuse is an integral part of the spotting charge assembly. On impact the inertia weight drives the firing pin into the shotgun-type primer, which in turn ignites the black powder used in the spotting charges (USACE 1995a). Typically, perchlorate was a component of flash powder.

Historical documents discuss concerns associated with the site, including accidental bomb releases and numerous fires reportedly caused by practice bombs. Two accidental bomb releases at the Cold Springs PBR occurred in May 1945. The releases were reported to be “near the Cold Springs Bombing Range” (USACE 1995a). One of the accidental bomb releases was caused by incorrectly adjusted bomb rack controls. The exact location of the bombs could not be determined (USACE 1995a). Fires caused by the M38A2 practice bombs were reported by units on training missions from the Walla Walla AAF during June and July 1944 (USACE 1995a).

After 1946, when the DOA declared the property surplus, the land was transferred to the DOI. The land was eventually returned to private ownership and is currently being used as irrigated cropland.

05-0068.doc 2-3 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 2

2.2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION

2.2.1 Previous Site Investigations

Weston reviewed files at the USACE Northwest Regional Office on 23 July 2004. The previous investigations conducted at Cold Springs PBR FUDS are summarized below. • May 3, 1993 USACE Site Inspection. The USACE under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) conducted a site inspection at the Cold Springs PBR in May 1993. Based on the site inspection, the USACE determined that the site contained remnant bomb debris or Ordnance and Explosive Waste (OEW). This determination was based on interviews with land owners and visual observation of practice bomb “bodies” located at the site (USACE 1993). • June 1995 Archives Search Report Findings. The USACE produced an Archives Search Report for Cold Springs PBR. The Archives Search was conducted in order to compile information obtained through historical research at various archives and records holding facilities, interviews with persons associated with the site or its operations, and a USACE site visit. The USACE determined that OEW contamination was possible at Cold Springs (USACE 1995a). OEW recovered at the site by land owners included a live point-detonating 37 millimeter (mm) projectile unearthed by a longtime resident of the area approximately 20 years prior. The landowner had maintained the round on display and was urged to contact local authorities to remove the unexploded ordnance (UXO). Other items recovered at the site by landowners included practice bombs filled with flour and sand. • June 1995 Archives Search Report Conclusions and Recommendations. Based on the extensive archive search, USACE determined the site was contaminated with OEW in the form of 100-pound practice bomb debris (USACE 1995b). They also stated the possibility for additional OEW, based on the previous recovery of the 37-mm projectile. The 37-mm projectile was considered an abnormality, as records indicate the range was exclusively used for bombing. The USACE stated that the potential for OEW to be present in a crop circle is small, as the area has been under cultivation for at least 20 years (USACE 1995b). All items observed during the site visit were found on undisturbed ground. The USACE prepared a site Risk Assessment Code (RAC) and rated the site as a RAC 3, indicating additional action was recommended at the site. The USACE recommended that the target and impact areas should be surveyed and investigated to determine the extent of contamination to facilitate subsequent removal actions (USACE 1995b). • June 1997 Project Fact Sheet. The USCAE conducted a review of the Cold Springs PBR FUDS project. The Project Fact Sheet contained the site history and current status, as well as an updated RAC form. The USACE acknowledged that the 37-mm projectile unearthed approximately 20 years prior was likely an isolated occurrence (USACE 1997). The RAC Form was updated according to the new information, and the site was rated as RAC 4, indicating additional action to be completed (USACE 1997).

05-0068.doc 2-4 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 2

2.3 WASTE SOURCE AREAS AND SITE CONCERNS

Sampling during the PA/SI was conducted at potentially contaminated source areas and from areas that may have been potentially contaminated by the migration of hazardous substances from their respective sources. A discussion of the waste source areas and site concerns is presented below. Site features are presented in Figure 2-6.

2.3.1 Known and Potential Source Areas

Based on background information obtained from the USACE, the target area has been identified as the potential source area at Cold Springs PBR FUDS. In the 1995 Archives Search Report, the USACE located a distinct bulls-eye target with three rings in an aerial photograph dated 1949. This target is located in the very southeastern corner of Township 4 North, Range 29 East, Section 6 and the northeastern corner of Township 4 North, Range 29 East, Section 7. During the Archives Search Site Inspection, the USACE located several non-explosive practice bombs within the vicinity of the target. The former bombing range is currently used for agricultural purposes. The undisturbed land between the crop circles where the target was located is assumed to represent the potential source area. The cultivated areas are not areas of potential contamination because the soil has been tilled and worked for several years.

The type of practice bombs used at the Cold Springs PBR FUDS included the 100-pound practice bomb M38A2. The M38A2 is a sand-filled bomb, which uses an M1A1, M3, or M4 spotting charge. The M1A1 spotting charge fits into the end of the practice bomb and produces a flash of flame and white smoke to determine bombing accuracy. The M1A1 contains 3 pounds of black powder. The M3 spotting charge is 5/8 inch longer than the M1A1, but is otherwise similar. The M3 has a dark smoke filler, which is adapted for bombing practice over snow- covered terrain. The M4 spotting charge consists of a glass bottle filled with 14.4 ounces of a smoke mixture. The bottle ruptures upon impact.

Contaminants of concern associated with the bombing range include target analyte list (TAL) metals, nitrogen-based explosive compounds (NBECs), and perchlorate.

2.3.2 Potential Receptors • Groundwater—Release of contaminants to groundwater may have impacted water quality in area aquifers. Groundwater is used for domestic drinking water wells, irrigation of agricultural crops, livestock watering, and industrial purposes within the 4-mile target distance limit (TDL; Figure 2-7). • Surface water— Release of contaminants to surface water may have impacted surface water within the 15-mile TDL. Drinking water intakes, sport fishing, wetlands, and sensitive environments are located within the 15-mile TDL (Figure 2-8).

05-0068.doc 2-5 26 April 2005 OREGON

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

Cold Springs PBR FUDS

Source: USGS 1:250,000 Scale Topo, Pendleton-OR/WA, 1953 (1973), and Walla Walla-WA/OR, 1953 (1981). Site Location Map Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI 0 3 6 Umatilla County, OR N Scale in Miles 2-1Figure

05-0068 Fig2-1.ai Cold Springs PBR FUDS Area of Heaviest Bombing Concentrations

Target

Source: USGS 1:100,000 Scale Topo, Hermiston-OR/WA, 1984, and Pendleton-OR/WA, 1983. Site Plan 0 1 2 N Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI Scale in Miles Umatilla County, OR Figure 2-2

05-0068 Fig2-2.ai Umatilla 730

5N 395 Cold Springs PBR FUDS Area of Heaviest Bombing Concentrations COLD SPRINGS SR 207 RESERVOIR 82 Stanfield Loop Rd. UMATILLA ORDNANCE Hermiston DEPOT Target 4N

Westland Rd.

395

Site Plan Aerial Photo 0 1 2 N Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI Scale in Miles Umatilla County, OR Figure 2-3

05-0068 Fig2-3.ai Figure 2-4

2N Target

3N PBR FUDS

5N Cold Springs

OLD ERVO Echo Hwy

SPRINGS

RES

Echo

nfield Loop Rd. Loop nfield Sta Area of Heaviest

Stanfield

0 Umatilla County, OR Umatilla County,

29E

3 Bombing Concentrations

395 SR 207 SR

Hermiston

395

28E

SR 320

207

SR SR Westland Rd. Westland

Umatilla

ytnuoC allitamU ytnuoC ytnuoC worroM ytnuoC

27E

DEPOT Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI

UMATILLA

ORDNANCE Lower Umatilla Basin Groundwater Management Area

Irrigon

WEST EXTENSION IRRIGATION CANAL IRRIGATION EXTENSION WEST

Bombing Range Rd. Range Bombing

O C 25E 26E

Boardman

RANGE d

BOMBING R

BOARDMAN

K Tower Rd. Tower OIR

TY CAR

AFR

FUDS

BOARDMAN

24E

SIXMILE CANYON CREEK Boundary for Lower Umatilla Groundwater Management Area

anyon Sixmile C

23E

Threemile Canyon 3

ytnuoC worroM ytnuoC WILLOW CRE 1.5 ytnuoC mailliG ytnuoC Scale in Miles 0

3N N 05-0068 Fig2-4.ai Figure 2-5

3N PBR FUDS

5N Cold Springs (0.1 QJK) (0.1 QJK) SW-UR004 SW-UR004 Area of Heaviest

OLD (0.31) (0.31)

ERVO

Bombing Concentrations Echo Hwy

C SW-CL002 SW-CL002 (0.13 QJK) (0.13 QJK)

SPRINGS SW-DS001 SW-DS001

RES

Echo (0.81) (0.81) (3.1) (3.1) (4.5) (4.5) (0.98) (0.98)

(0.2 U) (0.2 U)

nfield Loop Rd. Loop nfield Sta GW-DW023 GW-DW023 GW-DW015 GW-DW015 GW-DS006 GW-DS006 (0.18 QJK) (0.18 QJK) GW-DS003 GW-DS003 GW-DW020 GW-DW020 (0.27) (0.27) GW-DW008 GW-DW008

Stanfield (0.78) (0.78)

0 SW-HR001 SW-HR001 Umatilla County, OR Umatilla County,

29E

3 GW-DW016 GW-DW016

7 (0.28) (0.28)

395 (0.53) (0.53)

GW-DW027 GW-DW027 SR 207 SR (0.66) (0.66) (0.32) (0.32) GW-DW004 GW-DW004 GW-DW010 GW-DW010 GW-DW007 GW-DW007 (0.2 U) (0.2 U) (0.2 U) (0.2 U) GW-DS004 GW-DS004 (0.2 U) (0.2 U) GW-DW009 GW-DW009

Hermiston (0.6) (0.6) GW-DW005 GW-DW005 (0.84) (0.84) GW-DW013 GW-DW013 (2.2) (2.2) GW-DS002 GW-DS002

395 (3.7) (3.7) GW-DW018 GW-DW018 (0.84) (0.84) (0.12 QJK) (0.12 QJK)

28E SW-UR003 SW-UR003 GW-DW024 GW-DW024 GW-DW006 GW-DW006 (0.17 QJK) (0.17 QJK) SW-UR002 SW-UR002

SR 320

(1.4) (1.4)

(0.19 QJK) (0.19 QJK) SW-UR001 SW-UR001 207 SR SR

GW-DW012 GW-DW012 Westland Rd. Westland (0.75) (0.75)

Umatilla GW-DW011 GW-DW011 (0.24) (0.24) (0.44) (0.44) (1.8) (1.8) GW-DW001 GW-DW017 GW-PR001 GW-PR001

GW-DW014 GW-DW014 GW-DW032 GW-DW032 (0.058 QJK) (0.058 QJK) ytnuoC allitamU ytnuoC

(0.21) (0.21) ytnuoC worroM ytnuoC

27E GW-DW031 GW-DW031 (0.23) (0.23)

DEPOT (0.2) (0.2) SW-LL001 SW-LL001 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI

UMATILLA SW-BC001 SW-BC001

ORDNANCE (0.2 U) (0.2 U)

Irrigon SW-PD001 (1.6) (1.6) (0.082 QJK) (0.082 QJK) GW-DW003 GW-DW003 GW-DW030 GW-DW030 (0.78) (0.78) GW-DW026 GW-DW026 (1.5) (1.5) GW-DS001 GW-DS001

7 (31) (31) (0.2 U) (0.2 U)

4 (0.17 QJK) (0.17 QJK) GW-DW029 GW-DW029

8 GW-DW033 GW-DW033 GW-MW002 GW-MW002 µ g/L)

(0.12 QJK) (0.12 QJK) SW-CL003 SW-CL003

WEST EXTENSION IRRIGATION CANAL IRRIGATION EXTENSION WEST Bombing Range Rd. Range Bombing

SW-WE001 SW-WE001

R (0.076 QJK) (0.076 QJK)

(0.66) (0.66)

I GW-DW022 GW-DW022 B

(4.3) (4.3)

Station ID Perchlorate Concentration ( Groundwater Sample Location Sample Location Surface Water M

U GW-DS005 GW-DS005

O C 25E 26E (1.5) SW-DS001 North Morrow Perchlorate Study Area PA/SI Perchlorate Results—December 2004 North Morrow Perchlorate Study Area PA/SI

Boardman

RANGE

(0.23) (0.23) d

BOMBING R GW-DW028

BOARDMAN

e (5.2) (5.2)

n W GW-DW021 GW-DW021

µ g/L µ g/L µ g/L

u K (0.25) (0.25) GW-DW019 GW-DW019 (5.5) (5.5)

GW-DW025 GW-DW025 Tower Rd. Tower OIR (0.2) (0.2)

TY CAR GW-DW001 GW-DW001 (3.05) (3.05)

AFR

FUDS GW-DW002

BOARDMAN

24E (9.6) (9.6) SW-SC001 SW-SC001 SIXMILE CANYON CREEK

anyon Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 2 and 3 Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 1 and 2 Sample With Perchlorate Result <1 µ g/L Sample With Perchlorate Result >8 µ g/L Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 3 and 8 Sixmile C

23E (0.11 QJK) QJK) (0.11 SW-WC003 SW-WC003

Threemile Canyon 3

EK ytnuoC worroM ytnuoC 1.5 (0.11 QJK) QJK) QJK) (0.11 (0.11 SW-WC002

SW-WC002 WILLOW CRE ytnuoC mailliG ytnuoC Scale in Miles (0.39) (0.39) (0.14 QJK) (0.14 QJK) SW-CL001 SW-WC001 SW-WC001 0

3N N Notes: and SQL. The reported result is an estimate of its concentration; any potential bias is unknown. QJK: The analyte was positively detected between the MDL U: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limit. 05-0068 Fig2-5.ai Cold Springs Cold Springs Wash PBR FUDS

Area of Heaviest Bombing Concentrations

A Line Canal Target

Despain Unnamed Gulch Tributary

Source: USGS 7.5’ Series Topo, Hat Rock, Juniper, Stanfield, and Stanfield SE-OR, 1993. Site Features 0 1500 3000 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI N Scale in Feet Umatilla County, OR Figure 2-6

05-0068 Fig2-6.ai 4-Mile TDL

3-Mile

2-Mile

1-Mile

Cold Springs .5-Mile PBR FUDS .25-Mile

Area of Heaviest Target Bombing Concentrations

Source: USGS 1:100,000 Scale Topo, Hermiston-OR/WA, 1984, and Pendleton-OR/WA, 1983. 4-Mile Target Distance Limit (TDL) Map Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI 0 0.75 1.5 Umatilla County, OR N Scale in Miles 2-7Figure

05-0068 Fig2-7.ai 15-Mile TDL

Cold Springs 15-Mile TDL Wash

Cold Springs PBR FUDS Area of Heaviest Umatilla Bombing Concentrations River Hermiston Ditch PPE

A Line Canal Despain Maxwell Gulch Target Canal Unnamed Tributary

15-Mile TDL

Source: USGS 1:100,000 Scale Topo, Hermiston-OR/WA, 1984, and Pendleton-OR/WA, 1983. 15-Mile Target Distance Limit (TDL) Map 0 1 2 N Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI Scale in Miles Umatilla County, OR Figure 2-8

05-0068 Fig2-8.ai

SECTION 3

FIELD ACTIVITIES AND ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL

Weston developed a SQAP for Cold Springs PBR FUDS in November 2004 prior to conducting any field activities (Weston 2004). The SQAP was developed based on a review of site background information and the Achieves Search Report conducted by USACE in 1995. The SQAP described the sampling strategy, sampling methods, and analytical protocols used to investigate sources of potentially hazardous substances and potential targets at the site and vicinity. With few exceptions, the PA/SI field activities were conducted in accordance with the approved SQAP. Deviations from the SQAP are described when applicable in the sampling location discussions in Section 6 (source areas) and Section 7 (target areas). Sample locations are presented in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. A summary of the samples collected for laboratory analysis during the PA/SI is presented in Table 3-1. Table 3-2 summarizes the field sample code. Photographic documentation of the PA/SI field activities is presented in Appendix A.

3.1 SAMPLING DESIGN (TYPES, NUMBERS, AND RATIONALE)

Field activities were conducted on December 1 through the 3, 2004 and included the collection of 29 samples as described below:

Source Samples • Three surface (SS-CB001 through SS-CB003) and three subsurface soil (SB-CB001 through SB-CB003) samples were collected at the bombing range. • One soil sample was collected from the inside a bomb casing located at the bombing range (SS-BS001). • One soil sample was collected from caliche soil located northwest of the bombing range from a crop circle (SS-CS001).

Target Samples • One surface water sample was collected at Line A Canal located downstream of an earthen constructed dam on the west portion of the Cold Springs Reservoir (SW-CA001). • One surface water sample was collected from Cold Springs Wash located downstream of the constructed earthen dam (SW-CW001). • One surface water and co-located sediment sample were collected from Cold Springs Reservoir at the southwest corner of the reservoir, upstream of the earthen constructed dam (SW-CR001 and SD-CR001, respectively). • One surface water and co-located sediment sample (SW-CR002 and SD-CR002, respectively) were collected from the west end of the Cold Springs Reservoir, upstream of the earthen constructed dam and north of samples SW-CR001 and SD-CR001.

05-0068.doc 3-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

• One surface water and co-located sediment sample were collected from Cold Springs Reservoir south of the confluence of Despain Gulch with the Cold Springs Reservoir (SW- CR003 and SD-CR003, respectively). • One surface water and co-located sediment sample were collected from Despain Gulch just before its confluence with Cold Spring Reservoir (SW-DG001 and SD-DG001, respectively). • One sediment sample was collected in a drainage ditch that drains the bombing range, the probable point of entry (PPE) into an unnamed tributary (SD-UT001). • Five groundwater samples were collected from privately-owned domestic wells (GW- DW001 through GW-DW005). • One surface water and co-located sediment sample were collected from Despain Gulch upstream from its confluence with Cold Springs Reservoir (SW-DG002 and SD-DG002, respectively).

Background Samples • One surface soil sample (SS-BK001) was collected to show a representation of background conditions.

Attribution Samples • One surface water and co-located sediment sample were collected from Cold Springs Canyon (SW-BK001 and SD-BK001, respectively).

Sample SW-BK001, discussed above in the target samples section, was initially assumed to be a background location because it was located upgradient of the site and site activities. Because perchlorate was detected in this sample, the background location sampled during the North Morrow Groundwater Area Wide PA/SI sampling event (SW-UR004) will be used to represent background conditions. This location was the most upstream sample collected on the Umatilla River upstream of Echo, Oregon (Figure 2-5).

The following sections present the rationale used in the selection of the PA/SI sample locations. As shown in Table 3-1, all samples collected for the Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI were assigned internal Weston sample identification numbers, Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) sample numbers, and EPA sample identification numbers. For simplicity, samples discussed in this report will be referred to using their Weston station IDs (e.g., sample SW-DG001 refers to Weston sample ID CPBR-SW-DG001-0000). The Weston sample designation code is presented in Table 3-2.

3.1.1 Potential Sources

Three surface soil (SS-CB001, SS-CB002, and SS-CB003) and three subsurface soil (SB-CB001, SB-CB002, and SB-CB003) samples were collected at the bombing range in order to characterize potential contamination at the site source. The source samples were collected based on their proximity to observed practice bomb debris. Soil samples were collected in areas with the most consolidated debris.

05-0068.doc 3-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

One soil sample (SS-BS001) was collected from within a practice bomb casing to characterize the filler historically used. The material within the bomb casing was coarse black sand in comparison with the brownish fine sand found locally at the site; therefore, it is assumed that the material used as filler was not locally derived.

One caliche soil sample (SS-CS001) was collected from a crop circle at Royal Columbia Farms. Caliche soil is a soil horizon in which calcium carbonate precipitates from a higher horizon due to leaching and forms a cemented opaque soil layer. Perchlorate occurs naturally in caliche soil, which is white, very hard, and calcareous.

3.1.2 Target Samples

All target samples were collected in order to determine whether potential contamination from the Cold Springs PBR FUDS is migrating from an on-site source to surface water, sediments, or groundwater.

3.1.2.1 Sediment and Surface Water • Two surface water samples were collected from A Line Canal and Cold Springs Wash, just downstream of the dam at Cold Springs Reservoir (SW-CA001 and SW-CW001, respectively). A Line Canal had a concrete bottom and had just a trickle of flowing water. Cold Springs Wash had a slow moving, but more abundant amount, of flowing water. Sediment samples were not collected because the dam held back any sediment and none was observed. • Co-located sediment and surface water samples were collected from two locations on the western side of Cold Springs Reservoir near the base of the earthen constructed dam. The northern most set of samples was designated as SD-CR001 and SW-CR001 and the southern most set of samples was designated as SD-CR002 and SW-CR002. • One set of co-located sediment (SD-CR003) and surface water (SW-CR003) samples was collected just downstream of the confluence of Despain Gulch with Cold Springs Reservoir. Locations for the samples collected from Cold Springs were strategically placed in order to characterize the reaches of contamination, if present. • One set of co-located sediment (SD-DG001) and surface water (SW-DG001) samples was collected from Despain Gulch just before it drained to Cold Springs Reservoir. Despain Gulch was approximately 4 feet across and 4 inches at its maximum depth. The stream was flowing moderately fast at the time of sampling. • One set of co-located sediment (SD-DG002) and surface water (SW-DG002) samples was collected on Despain Gulch before its confluence with the unnamed tributary approximately 1.5 miles upstream of its confluence with Cold Springs Reservoir. • One sediment sample (SD-UT001) was collected at the PPE in an unnamed tributary adjacent to the Cold Springs PBR target area. A surface water sample was not collected because no water was present at the time of sampling. The sediment sample was collected in a low lying area that had riparian vegetation, including cattails and grasses.

05-0068.doc 3-3 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

3.1.2.2 Groundwater

Generally, groundwater flows from the target area at the bombing range in a west-northwest direction toward the Umatilla or Columbia Rivers. Groundwater samples were collected in order to determine whether contamination from the site is migrating to groundwater and if so, to what extent. Five groundwater samples were collected at the following locations: • Ramirez residence well, located approximately 9 miles west of the target area (GW- DW001). • Messenger residence well, located west of Cold Springs Reservoir approximately 5 miles west of the target area (GW-DW002). • Stahl Hutterian private well located approximately 3 miles south of the target area (GW- DW003). • Hat Rock State Park well, located approximately 5 miles northwest of the target area (GW-DW004). • Schmittle residence well, located approximately 4 miles northwest of the target area (GW- DW005).

Wells targeted for this investigation generally occur within the shallow alluvial and basalt aquifers.

3.1.3 Background Samples

One background soil sample (SS-BK001) was collected north of Cold Springs on Royal Columbia Farm property. The soil and vegetation at the background location visually resembled the conditions at the bombing range.

One set of co-located sediment (SD-BK001) and surface water (SW-BK001) samples was collected from Cold Springs on Royal Columbia Farms property.

3.2 SAMPLING METHODS

Site-specific conditions (i.e., topography, accessibility issues, and visual evidence of contamination) were incorporated, when applicable, into the selection of sampling locations. Following are the deviations from the planned number and type of samples: • Sediment samples were not collected at Line A Canal and Cold Springs Wash because little to no sediment was present. Both bodies of water are just downstream of the constructed earthen dam at Cold Springs Reservoir. • A surface water sample was not collected at the PPE location because no surface water was present at the time of sampling. • Two groundwater samples were not collected because the property owners initially scheduled for sampling were not available during the PA/SI field effort. It should be noted

05-0068.doc 3-4 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

that one of these groundwater wells was sampled during the North Morrow Groundwater Area PA/SI and is discussed in that PA/SI report (Weston 2005).

This section presents a brief summary of field methods and procedures used during the Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI field effort. All samples were collected in accordance with Weston’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and the site-specific SQAP (Weston 2004).

3.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling

Surface soil (0 to 6 inches below ground surface [bgs]) was collected in accordance with Weston SOP RFW/R10-001. The sand-sized and finer fractions of the soil were targeted for collection, and material unsuitable for analysis, such as grass, leaves, other vegetative materials, and rocks were removed from the sample material before placement into sample containers. The surface soil samples were collected using dedicated stainless steel spoons, homogenized in dedicated stainless steel bowls, and classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS; American Association for Testing and Material Standard [ASTM] 2488). Sampling information and the sample description were recorded on a standardized field sampling form. A representative sample was placed into a pre-labeled sample container and any excess sample material was returned to the sampling location. Samples were stored in an iced cooler and remained under Weston personnel custody prior to shipment to the analytical laboratory.

3.2.2 Sediment Sampling

Surface sediment samples (0 to 6 inches bgs) were collected in accordance with Weston SOP RFW/R10-003. To minimize cross-contamination, samples were collected from the downstream reaches of the surface water body working back upstream. The samples were collected using dedicated stainless steel spoons and were homogenized in a dedicated stainless steel bowl. A physical description of the sample material was recorded on a surface sediment field sampling record form. The physical description included estimated grain size proportions (percent clay, silt, sand, and gravel), organic content, color, and odor. Any excess sample material was returned to the sampling location. Samples were stored in an iced cooler prior to shipment to the analytical laboratory.

3.2.3 Surface Water Sampling

Surface water samples were collected using the grab sample technique in accordance with Weston SOP W/R10-004, Revision 1. Each water sample was collected by opening the sample container below the surface of the water, allowing the container to fill, then capping the container while it was fully immersed. Only stations with water depth sufficient to allow submersion of the mouth of the sample container were considered suitable for sampling. The water samples for TAL analyses were preserved with nitric acid to a pH of less than 2. Samples were stored in an iced cooler prior to shipment to the analytical laboratory.

05-0068.doc 3-5 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

3.2.4 Groundwater Sampling

Groundwater samples collected from domestic wells were collected from a spigot or tap located prior to filtration or treatment. Domestic wells were sampled in accordance with SOP RFW/R10-002.

3.3 ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL

Discrete soil, sediment, surface water, and groundwater samples analyzed for TAL metals including mercury were submitted to an off-site, fixed laboratory (Contract Laboratory Program Analytical Service [CLPAS] ILM05.3). Discrete soil, sediment, and surface water samples analyzed for organochloric pesticides/polychlorinated biphenyls (pest/PCBs) were submitted to an off-site, fixed laboratory (CLPAS OLM04.3). Discrete soil, sediment, surface water, and groundwater samples analyzed for perchlorate (EPA Method 314.0) were submitted to an off- site, fixed laboratory. All soil, sediment, surface water, and groundwater samples analyzed for NBEC (SW846 8330) were submitted to an off-site, commercial laboratory. All groundwater samples analyzed for nitrate, nitrite, nitrogen; ammonia; total phosphorous; total dissolved solids (TDS); chloride, bromide, fluoride, sulfate; and alkalinity were submitted to an off-site commercial laboratory. All surface water and groundwater samples analyzed for perchlorate (EPA Method 8321A-mod) were submitted to an off-site commercial laboratory. All analyses were conducted following EPA protocols.

3.4 SAMPLE GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM LOCATIONS

A Trimble GeoExplorer Global Positioning System (GPS) unit with data logger was used to record the coordinates of the PA/SI sample locations. Location data for each station were stored in individual files within the GPS unit and were recorded on the appropriate field sampling record forms. Data from the GPS unit were downloaded by Weston personnel and transmitted via e-mail to Mr. Matt Gubitosa at the EPA.

Mr. Gubitosa conducted differential corrections of the data to improve location accuracy. Corrected and uncorrected GPS coordinates are provided in Appendix B.

3.5 INVESTIGATION DERIVED WASTE

Investigation Derived Waste (IDW) generated during the PA/SI sampling effort consisted of solid disposable sampling equipment and personal protective equipment. All IDW generated during the PA/SI activities was double bagged in opaque plastic garbage bags and disposed as solid waste. No IDW or general trash generated by Weston personnel remains at the site.

3.6 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY

All chain-of-custody requirements complied with Weston’s SOPs for sample handling and sample control. Chain-of-custody procedures followed the Contract Laboratory Program

05-0068.doc 3-6 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 3

Guidance for Field Samplers (EPA 2001). Information obtained during sampling was recorded in the project logbook and/or on data forms in accordance with the SQAP. Samples were also documented with photographs, including sampling location and site features as deemed appropriate.

3.7 SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION

All samples were identified using the sample numbers assigned by the EPA Regional Sample Control Coordinator (RSCC). In addition to the EPA sample numbers, all samples were assigned a unique Weston identification code based on a consistent sample designation scheme used internally by Weston and in this report. The sample designation scheme was designed to suit the needs of the field staff, data management, and data users and was not provided to the analytical laboratory.

The Weston sample ID consists of four components separated by a dash. These components are site ID, media code, station code, and sample type:

Site ID Media Code Station Code Sample Type SSSS - MM - SSsss - t [ddd]

Table 3-2 presents the codes used during the Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI. The media and station designation codes will be used in the results discussions in Sections 5 through 8.

05-0068.doc 3-7 26 April 2005 Table 3-1—Sample Collection and Analyses Summary Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Hermiston, Umatilla County, Oregon

Analysis Conducted

CPBR-SS-CB001-0000 0-6" MJ4A53 04494250 12/1/2004 945 x x x Potential Source - Discrete

CPBR-SB-CB001-0015 6-18" MJ4A54 04494251 12/1/2004 955 x x x Potential Source - Discrete

CPBR-SS-BS001-0000 NA MJ4A55 04494252 12/1/2004 1010 x x x Sand within Practice Bomb Casing

CPBR-SS-CB002-0000 0-6" MJ4A56 04494253 12/1/2004 1030 x x x Potential Source - Discrete

CPBR-SB-CB002-0015 6-18" MJ4A57 04494254 12/1/2004 1040 x x x Potential Source - Discrete

CPBR-SS-CB003-0000 0-6" MJ4A58 04494255 12/1/2004 1100 x x x Potential Source - Discrete

CPBR-SB-CB003-0015 6-18" MJ4A59 04494256 12/1/2004 1110 x x x Potential Source - Discrete CPBR-SS-CS001-0000 0-1" NA 04494257 12/1/2004 1150 x Caliche Soil Surface Water Pathway Target and Attribution Samples MJ4A60 CPBR-SW-CA001-0000 0-1" J4A60 04494258 12/1/2004 1440 x x x x x Surface Water Sample at Line A Canal MJ4A61 CPBR-SW-CW001-0000 0-1" J4A61 04494259 12/1/2004 1515 x x x x x Surface Water Sample at Line A Canal MJ4A62 Surface Water Sample at Cold Springs CPBR-SW-CR001-0000 0-1" J4A62 04494260 12/1/2004 1615 x x x x x Reservoir on the Southwest Corner MJ4A63 Sediment Sample at Cold Springs Reservoir CPBR-SD-CR001-0000 0-3" J4A63 04494261 12/1/2004 1620 x x x on the Southwest Corner MJ4A64 Surface Water Sample at Cold Springs CPBR-SW-CR002-0000 0-1" J4A64 04494262 12/1/2004 1645 x x x x x Reservoir on the Northwest Corner MJ4A65 Sediment Sample at Cold Springs Reservoir CPBR-SD-CR002-0000 0-3" J4A65 04494263 12/1/2004 1650 x x x on the Northwest Corner MJ4A68 Surface Water Sample at Cold Springs CPBR-SW-BK001-0000 0-1" J4A68 04494266 12/2/2004 1245 x x x x x Canyon MJ4A69 CPBR-SD-BK001-0000 0-3" J4A69 04494267 12/2/2004 1250 x x x Sediment Sample at Cold Springs Canyon Surface Water Sample at Despain Gulch and CPBR-SW-DG001-0000 0-1" MJ4A73 04494271 12/3/2004 855 x x x x Cold Springs Reservoir Confluence Sediment Sample at Despain Gulch and Cold CPBR-SD-DG001-0000 0-3" MJ4A74 04494272 12/3/2004 900 x x x Springs Reservoir Confluence Surface Water Sample at Cold Spring Reservoir South of the Confluence with CPBR-SW-CR003-0000 0-1" MJ4A75 04494273 12/3/2004 920 x x x x Despain Gulch

Sediment Sample at Cold Spring Reservoir CPBR-SD-CR003-0000 0-3" MJ4A76 04494274 12/3/2004 930 x x x South of the Confluence with Despain Gulch Sediment Sample at the PPE in Unnamed CPBR-SD-UT001-0000 0-3" MJ4A78 04494276 12/3/2004 1135 x x x Tributary Surface Water Sample in Despain Gulch Upstream of Confluence with Cold Springs CPBR-SW-DG002-0000 0-1" MJ4A79 04494277 12/3/2004 1300 x x x x Reservoir Sediment Sample in Despain Gulch Upstream of Confluence with Cold Springs CPBR-SD-DG002-0000 0-3" MJ4A80 04494278 12/3/2004 1310 x x x Reservoir

05-0068.xls 1 of 2 26 April 2005 Table 3-1—Sample Collection and Analyses Summary Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Hermiston, Umatilla County, Oregon

Analysis Conducted

Regional Perchlorate (EPA Sample CLP Tracking Sample Sample TAL Metals + Pesticides/ Perchlorate (EPA Method 8321A- Weston Sample ID Depth Number Number Date Time Hg PCBs NBEC Method 314.0) mod) Notes Groundwater Pathway Target Samples Groundwater Sample at the Ramirez CPBR-GW-DW001-0000 NA MJ4A66 04494264 12/2/2004 1010 x x x x Residence Private Well Groundwater Sample at the Messenger CPBR-GW-DW002-0000 NA MJ4A67 04494265 12/2/2004 1135 x x x x Residence Private Well Groundwater Sample at the Stahl Hutterian CPBR-GW-DW003-0000 NA MJ4A71 04494269 12/2/2004 1400 x x x x Private Well

CPBR-GW-DW004-0000 NA MJ4A72 04494270 12/3/2004 720 x x x x Groundwater Sample at Hat Rock State Park Groundwater Sample at the Schmittle CPBR-GW-DW005-0000 NA MJ4A77 04494275 12/3/2004 1020 x x x Residence Private Well Background Samples MJ4A70 CPBR-SS-BK001-0000 0-6" J4A70 04494268 12/2/2004 1310 x x x x Background Surface Soil Sample

05-0068.xls 2 of 2 26 April 2005 Table 3-2—Sample Coding Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Digits Descriptions Code Example 1,2,3,4 Site ID CPBR (Cold Springs PBR FUDS) GW (Groundwater) SB (Subsurface Soil) 5,6 Media Code SD (Sediment) SS (Surface Soil) SW (Surface Water) BK (Background) BS (Bomb Source, Soil within Bomb Casing) CB (Cold Springs Bombing Range) CA (Canal) CR (Cold Springs Reservoir) 7,8 Station Code CS (Caliche Soil) CW (Cold Springs Wash) DG (Despain Gulch) DW (Domestic Well) UT (Unnamed Tributary) 9,10,11 Consecutive Sample Number 001 (First Sample of Station Code) 12 Sample Type 0 (Field Sample) 13,14,15 Sample Depth (feet bgs) 000 (i.e., 0 to 0.5 ft bgs)

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005 GW-DW004

Figure 3-2 Detail

Cold Springs PBR FUDS Area of Heaviest Bombing Concentrations

GW-DW001

Target

GW-DW003

Source: USGS 1:100,000 Scale Topo, Hermiston-OR/WA, 1984, and Pendleton-OR/WA, 1983. Sample Location Map 0 1 2 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI N GW-DW005 Groundwater Sample Location Scale in Miles SD-CR001 Sediment Sample Location Umatilla County, OR SW-CA001 Surface Water Sample Location Figure SS-CB003 Soil Sample Location SB-CB003 Subsurface Soil Sample Location 3-1

05-0068 Fig3-1.ai GW-DW005

SS-CS001

Approximate Water Level at Time of Sampling SS-BK001 Cold Springs SD-BK001 Wash SW-BK001 Cold Springs PBR FUDS

GW-DW002 SW-CR002 SD-CR002 SW-CW001 SD-CR002 Area of Heaviest Bombing Concentrations SW-CA001 SW-CR001 SW-CA001 SD-CR001 SW-DG001 SS-CB001 SD-DG001 SS-CB002 SB-CB001 SB-CB002 SS-BS001 SW-CR003 SS-CB003 A Line SD-CR003 SB-CB003 Canal Constructed Earthen Dam PPE

SD-UT001

SW-DG002 Despain SD-DG002 Gulch Unnamed Tributary

Source: USGS 7.5’ Series Topo, Hat Rock, Juniper, Stanfield, and Stanfield SE-OR, 1993. Sample Location Map Detail 0 1500 3000 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI N GW-DW005 Groundwater Sample Location Scale in Feet SD-CR001 Sediment Sample Location Umatilla County, OR SW-CA001 Surface Water Sample Location Figure SS-CB003 Soil Sample Location SB-CB003 Subsurface Soil Sample Location 3-2

05-0068 Fig3-2.ai GW-DW005

SS-CS001

Approximate Water Level at Time of Sampling SS-BK001 SD-BK001 Cold Springs SW-BK001 Wash Cold Springs PBR FUDS

GW-DW002 SW-CR002 SD-CR002 Area of Heaviest SW-CW001 Bombing Concentrations SW-CA001 SW-CR001 SW-CA001 SD-CR001 SW-DG001 SS-CB001 SD-DG001 SS-CB002 SB-CB001 SB-CB002 SS-BS001 SW-CR003 SS-CB003 A Line SD-CR003 SB-CB003 Canal Constructed Earthen Dam PPE

SD-UT001

SW-DG002 Despain SD-DG002 Gulch Unnamed Tributary

Sample Location Map Detail with Aerial Photo 0 1500 3000 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI N GW-DW005 Groundwater Sample Location Scale in Feet SD-CR001 Sediment Sample Location Umatilla County, OR SW-CA001 Surface Water Sample Location Figure SS-CB003 Soil Sample Location SB-CB003 Subsurface Soil Sample Location 3-3

05-0068 Fig3-3.ai

SECTION 4

QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL

In order to ensure that data quality objectives are met, data quality indicators are evaluated to determine sample and laboratory performance. These data, known as quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) data, are necessary to determine precision and accuracy and to demonstrate the absence of interferences and/or contamination of sampling equipment, glassware, and reagents due to sample collection, preparation, and analysis activities.

Specific QC requirements for laboratory analyses are incorporated in the Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work (CLP-SOW) for Inorganic Analysis ILM05.3 (EPA 2004), Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work (CLP-SOW) for Organic Analysis OLM04.3 (EPA 2003), Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods SW-846 (EPA 1996), and Methods for Chemical Analysis of Waters and Wastes (EPA 1983).

The QC requirements or scope of work requirements were followed for analytical results reported for the Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI SQAP (Weston 2004). This section describes the QA/QC measures followed for sample analysis associated with the PA/SI and provides an evaluation for the end-user regarding usability of the data presented in this report.

All samples were collected following the procedures outlined in the site-specific SQAP prepared for this PA/SI (Weston 2004). Five laboratories conducted the chemical analysis of samples collected during the PA/SI. • A4 Scientific, Inc., located in The Woodlands, Texas, analyzed five water samples for organochloric pesticides/polychlorinated biphenyls following specifications in the EPA Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work (CLP-SOW) for Organic Analysis OLM04.3 (EPA 2003). • Sentinel, Inc., of Huntsville, Alabama, analyzed 15 soil/sediment samples and 13 water samples for TAL metals following specifications in the EPA Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work for Inorganic Analysis (CLP-SOW) ILM05.3 (EPA 2004). • Laucks Testing Laboratories (LTL) of Seattle, Washington, analyzed 13 water samples and 15 soil/sediment samples for NBEC following specifications in EPA SW846 Method 8330, Nitroaromatics and Nitramines by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (EPA 1996), and alkalinity, fluoride, chloride, bromide, sulfate, ammonia, nitrate-nitrite nitrogen, total phosphorus, and TDS following EPA Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (EPA 1983). • EPA Region 10 Laboratory-Manchester Environmental Laboratory (MEL) located in Port Orchard, Washington, analyzed 13 water samples and 16 soil/sediment samples for perchlorate following EPA Method 314.0 Determination of Perchlorate in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography (EPA 2000a).

05-0068.doc 4-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

• Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc. (STL), of Tacoma, Washington, analyzed 13 water samples for perchlorate following specifications in the laboratory SOP (using gas chromatography / tandem mass spectrometry), based on EPA SW-846 Method 8321A (EPA 1996).

EPA quality assurance chemists reviewed all data from analyses performed by MEL and CLP laboratories. Weston reviewed all data from analyses performed by commercial laboratories, and validated all data relative to project data quality objectives (DQOs).

Data qualifiers were applied following the Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review, (EPA 2002a), Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review (EPA 1999), and criteria specified in the SQAP (Weston 2004).

4.1 SATISFACTION OF DQOS AND CRITERIA FOR MEASUREMENT DATA

The project DQOs for the field effort were designed to produce data of known and documented quality in order to characterize sources, determine off-site migration of contaminants, determine whether the site is eligible for placement on the NPL, and to document threat(s) or potential threat(s) to public health or the environment posed by the site. The DQO process applied to this project followed that described in the EPA document, Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process EPA QA/G-4, (EPA 2000b).

All samples collected during the PA/SI were analyzed using definitive analytical methods, and EPA accepted all analytical methods employed for this project. The data generated for this project met or exceeded requirements for the definitive data category as defined in the EPA document, Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process for Hazardous Waste Site Operations EPA QA/G-4HW, (EPA 2000c).

A detailed discussion of the project quality objectives achieved during the PA/SI is presented in the following sections.

4.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES

Quality control checks for sample collection were evaluated by a combination of chain-of- custody protocols and laboratory QA as prescribed in the sampling or analytical methods. QC samples (e.g., matrix spike/duplicate spike samples, rinsate samples, field blanks) at a frequency of one per 20 samples (or per method) per media were collected during the PA/SI field effort. Results from these samples were compared with each method’s criteria and with criteria specified in the SQAP (Weston 2004).

All analyses conducted during this project yielded definitive data. Data quality indicator (DQI) targets for this project are specified below—DQOs are summarized in the SQAP. The laboratories’ DQO for completeness was 90% for soil/sediment and water samples. Precision and accuracy requirements are also outlined in the SQAP (Weston 2004).

05-0068.doc 4-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

4.3 PROJECT-SPECIFIC DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES

DQI goals—precision, accuracy, representativeness, comparability, and completeness—for this project were developed following guidelines presented in EPA Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5 (EPA 2002b). The basis for assessing each of the elements of data quality is discussed in the following subsections. QA objectives for measurement of analytical data (Method Quality Objectives; MQOs) and QC guidelines for precision and accuracy are presented in the SQAP (Weston 2004). Other DQI goals are included in EPA analytical methods employed (EPA 2004, 2003, 1996, 1983).

The laboratory and field team were able to meet overall project DQO goals.

4.3.1 Precision

Precision measures the reproducibility of measurements. It is strictly defined as the degree of mutual agreement among independent measurements as the result of repeated application of the same process under similar conditions.

Analytical precision is the measurement of the variability associated with duplicate (two) or replicate (more than two) analyses. When recovery results between different analytical delivery groups are compared, the laboratory control sample (LCS) may be used to determine the precision of the analytical method. In this case, the comparison is not between a sample and a duplicate sample analyzed in the same batch. Rather, the comparison is between the sample and samples analyzed in previous delivery groups. An LCS may be prepared and analyzed within a given batch; in this case, the analytical precision is associated with a particular preparation and analysis sequence.

Total precision is the measurement of the variability associated with the entire sampling and analysis process for one sampling event. It is determined by analysis of duplicate or replicate field samples and measures variability introduced by both the laboratory and field operations. Field duplicate samples and matrix duplicate spiked samples may be analyzed to assess field and analytical precision, and the precision measurement is determined using the relative percent difference (RPD) between the duplicate sample results.

The laboratory was able to meet project DQOs.

4.3.2 Accuracy

Accuracy is a statistical measurement of correctness and includes components of random error (variability due to imprecision) and systemic error. It reflects the total error associated with a measurement. A measurement is accurate when the value reported does not differ from the true value or known concentration of the spike or standard. Analytical accuracy is measured by comparing the percent recovery of analytes spiked into an LCS (blank spike) or into a field sample (to prepare a matrix-spiked sample or matrix-spiked duplicate sample) to a control limit.

The laboratory was able to meet project DQOs.

05-0068.doc 4-3 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

4.3.3 Representativeness

Representativeness is a measure of the degree to which data accurately and precisely represent a population, including a sampling point, a process condition, or an environmental condition. Representativeness is the qualitative term that should be evaluated to determine that measurements are made and physical samples collected at locations and in a manner resulting in characterizing a matrix or media. Subsequently, representativeness is used to ensure that a sampled population represents the target population and an aliquot represents a sampling unit.

The field team was able to meet project DQOs.

4.3.4 Comparability

Comparability is the qualitative term that expresses the measure of confidence that two data sets or delivery groups can contribute to a common analysis and evaluation. Comparability with respect to laboratory analyses pertains to method type comparison, holding times, stability issues, and aspects of overall analytical quantitation. The following items are evaluated when assessing data comparability: • Determining if two data sets or delivery groups contain the same set of parameters. • Determining if the units used for each data set are convertible to a common metric. • Determining if similar analytical procedures and quality assurance were used to collect data for both data sets. • Determining if the analytical instruments used for both data sets have approximately similar detection levels. • Determining if samples within data sets were selected and collected in a similar manner.

To ensure comparability of data collected during this investigation to other data that may have been or may be collected for the site, standard sample collection and measurement techniques were used. The field team was able to meet project DQOs.

4.3.5 Completeness

Completeness is calculated for the aggregation of data for each analyte measured for any particular sampling event or other defined set of samples. Completeness is calculated and reported for each method, matrix, and analyte combination. The number of valid results divided by the number of possible individual analyte results, expressed as a percentage, determines the completeness of the data set. For completeness requirements, valid results are all results not rejected through data validation. The requirement for completeness for this project is 90% for soil/sediment and water samples.

The following formula is used to calculate completeness:

results validofnumber validofnumber results % completene ss = results possible ofnumber ofnumber possible results

05-0068.doc 4-4 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

For this investigation, all samples are considered critical. Therefore, standard collection and measurement methods will be used to achieve the completeness goal. All laboratory data were reviewed for usability, and all project data were determined to be useable.

The project DQO of 90% for completeness was met.

4.4 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PARAMETERS

The laboratory data also were reviewed for technical holding time compliance, blank samples contamination, laboratory control sample recovery, interference check sample recovery, duplicate sample analysis, matrix spike/duplicate spike sample analysis, and serial dilution performance.

These parameters are described below in more detail, and sample-specific detail (including qualification of individual analyte results for associated samples) is provided in the data validation memoranda.

4.4.1 Holding Times

All analyses were completed within the technical holding times, with the following exceptions.

Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen • Sample CPBR-GW-DW005-0000 was analyzed outside of the technical holding time. The associated sample result has been flagged as an estimated concentration (J), possible low bias (L).

TDS • Sample CPBR-GW-DW004-0000 and CPBR-GW-DW005-0000 were analyzed outside of the technical holding time. The associated sample result has been flagged as an estimated concentration (J), possible low bias (L).

4.4.2 Blank Sample Results

All blank sample analyses met the frequency and recovery criteria, with the following exception.

Metals • Antimony, beryllium, sodium, and thallium were detected in one or more field and blank samples. The antimony, beryllium, sodium, and thallium results in samples with results less than 10 times the concentration found in the associated blank were qualified as non- detected (U) at the reported concentrations. • Arsenic, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, and nickel were detected in one or more field and blank samples. The arsenic, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, and nickel results in samples with results less than 10 times the concentration found in the associated blank were qualified as non-detected (U) at the reported concentrations.

05-0068.doc 4-5 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

4.4.3 Calibration Check Sample Analysis

All calibration check sample analyses met acceptance criteria for frequency and recovery.

4.4.4 Laboratory Control Sample Analysis

All laboratory control samples analyzed met frequency and recovery criteria.

4.4.5 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy—Interference Check Sample Analysis

All inductively coupled plasma/atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) interference check sample analyses met frequency and recovery criteria.

4.4.6 Duplicate Sample Analysis

All duplicate sample analysis met frequency and precision criteria.

4.4.7 Matrix Spike Sample Analysis

All matrix spike analyses met frequency and recovery criteria, with the following exception.

Metals • Recoveries of manganese and selenium from the matrix spike (MS) sample were less that the acceptance criterion, but greater than 10%. Associated, detected sample results were qualified as estimated concentrations (J), possible low bias (L). Associated, non-detected sample results were qualified as non-detected (U), estimated concentrations (J), unknown bias (K).

4.4.8 System Monitoring Compound (Surrogate) Spike Analysis

Surrogate spike recoveries met method acceptance criteria.

4.4.9 Detection Limits

For ILM05.3, the laboratory is required to flag all detected results below the Contract-Required Quantitation Limit (CRQL) with a ‘J’ concentration qualifier (result below the CRQL but above the method detection limit [MDL]). For consistency with previous START PA/SI reports, and as an aid in the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) scoring, the ‘J’ concentration qualifier is amended with the ‘B’ data validation qualifier. This protocol was followed for organics analyses, where a “Q” concentration qualifier is applied to analyte results between the CRQL and MDL.

All detection limits met QAPP specifications.

4.4.10 Serial Dilutions

Serial dilution analysis met all frequency and recovery criteria, with the following exception.

05-0068.doc 4-6 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 4

• Calcium, copper, magnesium, and zinc results were qualified as estimated concentrations (J), unknown bias (L), due to exceedance of the serial dilution analysis criterion.

4.4.11 Other Data Assessment

For the Inorganic Functional Guidelines review, the ‘+’ and ‘-‘ bias flags are replaced with ‘H’ and ‘L’ flags to indicate potential high and low bias, respectively. The ‘K’ flag is used to indicate unknown bias. This approach is consistent with EPA Region 10 policy.

Bias associated with estimated, non-detected values is unknown and flagged as such, since the reporting limit cannot be determined.

The data, as qualified, are ACCEPTABLE and can be used for all purposes specified in the SQAP (Weston 2004).

05-0068.doc 4-7 26 April 2005

SECTION 5

ANALYTICAL RESULTS REPORTING AND BACKGROUND SAMPLES

The following sections present the reporting criteria and reporting methods applied to the PA/SI data set. The background sampling locations are presented in Figures 2-6, 3-1, and 3-2. Tables 6-1, 7-3, and 7-4 present the analytical results for the surface soil, sediment, and surface water background samples, respectively. Data validation memoranda and Form I Analytical Results are included in Appendix C.

5.1 ANALYTICAL RESULTS EVALUATION CRITERIA

Analytical results of samples collected during this PA/SI are presented in summary tables in Sections 6 (source sample reporting) and 7 (migration exposure pathways and targets). The first column of each analytical summary table presents background sample concentrations (where appropriate) followed by the analytical results of samples collected for that particular media. The background sample concentrations were used for comparison purposes to determine detections at or above background. Concentrations of analytes detected above their respective sample quantitation limits (SQLs) are presented in bold typeface. Analytical results indicating significant concentrations in source samples (Section 6) with respect to background concentrations are underlined in addition to the bolding. Similarly, analytical results indicating elevated concentrations of contaminants in target samples (Section 7) with respect to background concentrations are also underlined in addition to the bolding. For target sample locations, only those analytes that were also detected in a source at the site were evaluated to determine whether their concentrations were elevated. For the purposes of this investigation, significant/elevated concentrations are: • Equal to or greater than the SQL if the analyte was not detected in the background samples collected for that media. • Equal to or greater than the background sample’s SQL when background concentrations were detected below the SQL. • At least three times greater than the background concentration when the background concentration equals or exceeds the SQL.

Based on EPA Region 10 policy regarding common earth crust elements, aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, and sodium are listed in the tables; however, the concentrations are not evaluated or discussed in the text.

5.2 BACKGROUND SAMPLE LOCATION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS

For PA/SIs, background samples are collected for each of the naturally occurring media from which samples were collected. Background samples were collected for soil, sediment, and surface water. Background samples were not collected for groundwater because it is assumed that perchlorate and NBECs are not naturally occurring. The results for TAL metals in

05-0068.doc 5-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 5 groundwater were compared with benchmarks established in the Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM). Results for the appropriate background samples appear in the first columns of the analytical results summary tables included in Sections 6 and 7 to be used for comparison against source and target results.

5.2.1 Background Sample Locations

As previously presented in Section 3.1, one background soil sample (SS-BK001) was collected during the PA/SI. The soil background sample was collected north of the target area on Royal Columbia Farms property in an area that has not been cultivated and had native vegetation growing.

As discussed in Section 3.1, one set of co-located background sediment (SD-BK001) and surface water (SW-BK001) samples was collected from the Cold Springs Reservoir during the Cold Springs PBR FUDS field event.

5.2.2 Background Sample Results

The background soil sample (SS-BK001) had reported concentrations of arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, silver, vanadium, and zinc were detected above their respective SQLs. NBECs and perchlorate were not detected above their respective MDLs. The soil sample consisted of reddish brown silty sand with occasional fine organic roots. Analytical results for sample SS-BK001 are presented in Table 6-1.

The background sediment sample (SD-BK001) had reported concentrations of arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, silver, vanadium, and zinc were detected above their respective SQLs. Concentrations of NBECs and pesticide/PCBs were not detected above their respective MDLs. The sediment sample consisted of dark brown silty sand with gravel. Analytical results for sample SD-BK001 are presented in Table 7-3.

The following constituents were reported above their respective SQL for the background surface water sample (SW-BK001): barium, chromium, selenium, vanadium, and zinc. NBECs and pesticides/PCBs were not detected above their respective MDLs. Perchlorate was reported at a concentration of 7.68 micrograms per liter (µg/L). The sample was slightly turbid. Analytical results for sample SW-BK001 are presented in Table 7-4.

05-0068.doc 5-2 26 April 2005

SECTION 6

POTENTIAL SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

This section presents the locations, analyses conducted, and analytical results of source samples collected during the Cold Spring PBR FUDS PA/SI, as well as comparisons to background concentrations. Source and background sampling locations are presented in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. Table 6-1 presents the analytical results of the discrete source samples collected at the bombing range and a comparison to background concentrations. Data review memoranda and Form I Analytical Results are included in Appendix C.

6.1 POTENTIAL SOURCE SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS

The potential source area investigated during this PA/SI is the former target area at the Cold Springs PBR (Figure 2-6). Potential source samples were collected on December 1 through 3, 2004. Sampling locations were selected at those places most likely to contain detectable concentrations of hazardous substances.

6.1.1 Source Description

The target at the former bombing range is located in the very southeastern corner of Township 4 North, Range 29 East, Section 6 and the northeastern corner of Township 4 North, Range 29 East, Section 7. The former bombing range has been heavily cultivated and used for farming; however, the area used for the former target is located between crop circles and has never been cultivated. Native vegetation covers the target area, which is located on a slight ridge. Numerous practice bombs and bomb debris were observed at the target area.

No liners, active run-on/runoff control systems, functioning leachate collection systems, or maintained engineered covered facilities are associated with the source area.

6.1.2 Sample Locations

Three sets of co-located surface and subsurface soil samples (SS-CB001/SB-CB001, SS- CB002/SB-CB002, and SS-CB003/SB-CB003) were collected from the suspected target at the bombing range (Figures 3-2 and 3-3). One sample (SS-BS001) was collected from within the casing of a practice bomb at the target area in order to characterize the bomb filler material.

Sample SS-CB001 was collected at the surface and SB-CB002 was collected between 6 and 18 inches bgs. Sample SS-CB002 was collected at the surface and SB-CB002 was collected between 6 and 18 inches bgs. Sample SS-CB003 was collected at the surface and SB-CB003 was collected between 6 and 12 inches bgs. It was not possible to go deeper with SB-CB003 because a practice bomb was encountered at approximately 12 inches bgs. All surface and subsurface soil samples collected from the suspected target at the bombing range consisted of brown and dry medium to fine sand with occasional organic material. The filler material collected from within the practice bomb (SS-BS001) was dark brown, medium to coarse sand.

05-0068.doc 6-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 6

6.1.3 Sample Results

All source samples from the target area were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate, and NBECs. The laboratory results indicate that arsenic, barium, beryllium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc are present above their respective SQLs (Table 6-1). Perchlorate was detected significantly above background in one source sample (SS-CB001) at a concentration of 0.83 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any source sample.

6.1.4 Additional Potential Source of Perchlorate

During the PA/SI field event, caliche soil was sampled (SS-CS001) and analyzed for perchlorate. Caliche soil is a soil horizon in which calcium carbonate precipitates from a higher horizon due to leaching and forms a cemented opaque soil layer. Perchlorate was not detected in SS-CS001 (Table 6-1).

05-0068.doc 6-2 26 April 2005 Table 6-1—Potential Sources: Bombing Range Analytical Results Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Description Background Potential Source Field Number SS-BK001 SS-CB001 SB-CB001 SS-CB002 SB-CB002 SS-CB003 SB-CB003 SS-CS001 SS-BS001 EPA Number 04494268 04494250 04494251 04494253 04494254 04494255 04494256 04494257 04494252 CLP Number MJ4A70 MJ4A53 MJ4A54 MJ4A56 MJ4A57 MJ4A58 MJ4A59 NA MJ4A55

Surface Soil at Subsurface Soil Surface Soil at Subsurface Soil Surface Soil at Subsurface Soil Soil From Background Bombing at Bombing Bombing at Bombing Bombing at Bombing within Practice Location Soil Range Range Range Range Range Range Caliche Soil Bomb Casing Inorganics (mg/kg) Aluminum 6610 6320 7660 7370 8580 6010 5560 — 4860 Antimony 0.53 U 0.53 U 0.53 U 0.48 U 0.72 U 0.50 U 0.41 U — 0.48 U Arsenic 3.5 2.7 4.4 6.3 6.0 1.9 1.8 — 2.6 Barium 104 101 113 99.4 123 84.7 81.9 — 81.4 Beryllium 0.05 U 0.02 U 0.11 BJK 0.15 BJK 0.16 BJK 0.61 U 0.51 U — 0.52 U Cadmium 0.53 U 0.54 U 0.53 U 0.55 U 0.53 U 0.61 U 0.51 U — 0.52 U Calcium 16800 JK 6440 JK 21200 JK 12900 JK 10600 JK 3200 JK 2970 JK — 9770 JK Chromium 9.0 7.9 10.4 11.1 13.6 7.4 6.5 — 5.4 Cobalt 6.8 6.9 7.1 7.3 8.1 6.4 6.0 — 7.5 Copper 11.9 JK 11.9 JK 14.3 JK 17.4 JK 17.0 JK 11.6 JK 9.2 JK — 13.4 JK Iron 16300 16200 16500 16000 17800 16400 15800 — 20700 Lead 5.9 4.7 5.9 8.3 7.6 5.2 3.9 — 3.6 Magnesium 5480 JK 3780 JK 5650 JK 5920 JK 6380 JK 3310 JK 3040 JK — 3800 JK Manganese 303 JK 328 JK 328 JK 346 JK 378 JK 312 JK 296 JK — 330 JK Mercury 0.11 U 0.11 U 0.02 BJK 0.11 U 0.11 U 0.12 U 0.10 U — 0.10 U Nickel 10.1 9.5 11.4 12.4 14.4 8.3 7.8 — 7.5 Potassium 1500 1590 1760 1740 2000 1700 1460 — 815 Selenium 3.7 UJK 3.8 UJK 3.7 UJK 3.8 UJK 3.7 UJK 4.2 UJK 3.6 UJK — 3.6 UJK Silver 1.1 1.2 1.0 BJK 1.1 1.2 1.2 JK 1.2 — 1.4 Sodium 159 BJK 142 BJK 142 BJK 133 BJK 176 BJK 133 BJK 116 U — 229 BJK Thallium 1.8 U 2.2 BJK 2.2 BJK 2.1 BJK 2.1 BJK 2.1 BJK 2.0 BJK — 2.5 BJK Vanadium 33.5 34.6 34.6 29.8 33.3 36.8 36.8 — 42.3 Zinc 38.2 JK 33.7 JK 40.2 JK 41.1 JK 44.6 JK 39.6 JK 31.3 JK — 34.5 JK Perchlorate Method 314.0 (mg/kg) Perchlorate 0.020 U 0.83 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U Nitrate Base Explosive Compounds (mg/kg) 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 2-Amino-4,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 2-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 3-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 4-Amino-2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U 4-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U HMX 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U Nitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U RDX 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U Tetryl 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 0.20 U

Notes: Bold type indicates the sample concentration above the Sample Quantitation Limit (SQL). Bold Underline type indicates a sample concentration that is significant as defined in Section 5 mg/kg: milligram per kilogram Data Qualifiers: BJK: Analyte positively detected. Reported result lies between the MDL and SQL and reported as an estimated quantity. Unknown bias. JK: The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an unknown low-bias estimate JL: The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is a low-bias estimate U: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limit. UJK: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is an unknown bias estimate.

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005

SECTION 7

MIGRATION/EXPOSURE PATHWAYS AND TARGETS

7.1 GROUNDWATER MIGRATION PATHWAY

The Cold Springs PBR FUDS is located within the Columbia Basin in northeastern Oregon. The area is underlain by a lava-floored plain of Columbia River basalt, which was deposited during the Miocene epoch (Natural Resource Conservation Service [NRCS] 1983). The basalt has a maximum thickness of approximately 4,000 feet. The weight of the basalt layers has caused faulting throughout the area. Geological events towards the end of the ice age in the Pleistocene epoch have greatly influenced the characteristics of the soils located above the Columbia River basalt. Melt waters from receding glaciers, flooding events, and prevailing winds have caused the basalt layer to be overlain with alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, and silt. Based on the geology in the area, Weston estimates a hydraulic conductivity for the alluvial aquifer of 10–4 centimeters per second (cm/sec).

A shallow alluvial aquifer and deeper basalt aquifer are present within the area. Groundwater can migrate between the aquifers through well borings that are open to more than one aquifer (ODEQ 1992). The alluvial aquifer includes all saturated elements that overlie the Columbia River Basalt Group. Water bearing zones within the alluvial aquifer range from 10 feet bgs to 150 feet bgs (ODEQ 1995). The alluvial aquifer is composed chiefly of sand, gravel, and silt deposited by glacial outwash and flooding events. Groundwater flow in the alluvial aquifer varies due to local topography and surface water flow, but generally flows either west to the Umatilla River or northwest to the Columbia River.

Water-bearing zones in the basalt aquifer are limited to thin breccias or fracture zones at the top or base of individual basalt flows. Both aquifers are used for domestic and public-supply drinking water, irrigation, livestock watering, monitoring, and industrial purposes and are not a designated as sole source aquifers (EPA 2003). The 4-mile TDL is presented in Figure 2-7. The site is not located in a wellhead protection area. The mean annual precipitation for Hermiston, Oregon is 8.92 inches (Western Regional Climate Center [WRCC] 2004a).

7.1.1 Groundwater Pathway Targets

Groundwater is documented for use as drinking water, irrigation, industrial, and livestock purposes within the identified 4-mile TDL. According to the Oregon Water Resource Department (OWRD), approximately 91 domestic wells are located within the 4-mile TDL (OWRD 2004a). The alluvial and shallow basalt aquifers are the main sources of domestic water for rural residents in the area (OWRD 2003). It is assumed that one household uses one domestic well; therefore, based on the average of 2.67 people per household for Umatilla County, approximately 242 people use groundwater for drinking water purposes (United States Census Bureau [USCB] 2004). There are no public water supply wells within the 4-mile TDL.

05-0068.doc 7-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 7

7.1.2 Groundwater Sample Locations

Five wells were sampled during this investigation. The groundwater sample design was based on the spatial relationship of the wells to the FUDS. The shallow alluvial aquifer was targeted for sampling. Groundwater sample locations are presented in Figure 3-1. • The groundwater sample from the Ramirez well (GW-DW001) was collected on December 2, 2004. The well is located within the City of Hermiston and is approximately 9.4 miles west of the target at the bombing range. The well is relatively shallow at a depth of 67 feet bgs. Mr. and Mrs. Ramirez report that groundwater from the well is only used to irrigate their yard. Mr. and Mrs. Ramirez use City of Hermiston water as their drinking water source. • The groundwater sample from the Messenger well (GW-DW002) was collected on December 2, 2004. This well is located approximately 4.6 miles west of the target at the bombing range and is 60 feet deep. The well is used for household uses and drinking water. Two adults live in the Messenger residence. • The groundwater sample from Stahl Hutterian (GW-DW003) was collected on December 2, 2004. The well is located approximately 3.3 miles south-southeast of the suspected target at the bombing range. The Stahl well has been developed within the last two years and is approximately 720 feet deep. The Stahl’s are developing the property for their future commune so the groundwater well will be used for domestic purposes by approximately 100 people including children. Currently, the well is used for domestic purposes to support the shop and the 10 workers that live on-site. • The groundwater sample from Hat Rock State Park (GW-DW004) was sampled on December 3, 2004. The well is located approximately 5.2 miles northwest of the bombing range at the Columbia River and is 17 feet deep. Historically, local groundwater has had high nitrate levels and is currently being treated. The treatment system was turned off and the sample was collected prior to treatment. The groundwater is used at the park manager’s residence for domestic purposes, including drinking water, and at two restroom facilities at the park. Although the well was historically used for the drinking fountains at the park, it is no longer used for that purpose due to the high nitrate levels. • The groundwater sample from the Schmittle well (GW-DW005) was collected on December 3, 2004. The well is located approximately 4.2 miles northwest of the bombing range and is approximately 104 feet deep. Historically, the well has had high mineral and nitrate levels. The treatment system was turned off, and the sample was collected prior to treatment. The groundwater is used by a single family residence that includes two small children for domestic purposes such as drinking water.

7.1.3 Groundwater Sample Results

All five groundwater samples collected from domestic wells were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), and NBECs. Laboratory analytical results indicate that manganese and zinc are present in groundwater above their respective SQLs (Table 6-1). Perchlorate was detected in three samples (GW-DW002, GW-

05-0068.doc 7-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 7

DW003, and GW-DW004) at concentrations of 0.25, 0.30, and 1.2 µg/L, respectively. NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any groundwater sample. These results are presented in Table 7-2. Reported concentrations of perchlorate in groundwater are presented in Figure 7-1.

7.2 SURFACE WATER MIGRATION PATHWAY

Surface water runoff from the site drains into an unnamed tributary adjacent to the target area. The point where potential contamination from the site drains into the unnamed tributary is the PPE. Based on topographic maps of the area, the unnamed tributary historically ran for approximately 1.4 miles until it drained into Despain Gulch. Based on visual reconnaissance of the site, the unnamed tributary has been blocked by the development of a crop circle. The crop circle obstructs the pathway of the unnamed tributary for approximately 100 yards. The tributary continues on until it drains to Despain Gulch. Despain Gulch enters Cold Springs Reservoir, and Cold Springs Reservoir is drained by Cold Springs Wash and Line A Canal via a constructed earthen dam. Cold Springs Wash runs in a northerly direction for approximately 8 miles until it empties into the Columbia River, and the TDL continues downstream for another 2.9 miles (Figure 2-8).

Line A Canal runs in a westerly direction for approximately 3 miles where it divides into Hermiston Ditch, Maxwell Canal, and Line A Canal. Hermiston Ditch runs for approximately 5.5 miles until it empties into the Umatilla River, which then runs for 2.4 miles and completes the 15-mile TDL. From the divide, both Maxwell Canal and Line A Canal run in a westerly direction for approximately 7.9 miles to complete the 15-mile TDL (Figure 2-8).

No recorded stream flow statistics are available for the unnamed tributary, Despain Gulch, and Cold Springs Wash. The unnamed tributary is assumed to be a minimal stream with a stream flow of less than 10 cubic feet per second (cfs); Despain Gulch and Cold Springs Wash are assumed to be small to moderate stream with a stream flow between 100 and 1,000 cfs; the annual mean stream flow for the Maxwell Canal from 1976 to 1985 is approximately 21 cfs (United States Geological Service [USGS] 2004). The Columbia River has an estimated flow greater than 100,000 cfs (USGS 2004).

The site is located in the Columbia Plateau province. The entire site is hilly and currently used for grazing and irrigated farming. Surface soils in the vicinity of the site are characterized as Adkins fine sandy loam with 5 to 25% slopes (NRCS 2002). Permeability of the soil is moderately rapid, surface water runoff is slow, and there is only a slight hazard of water erosion (USACE 1995a). The site is not located in a floodplain (Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] 2004). The estimated drainage area for the target area is approximately 100 acres. The 2-year, 24-hour rainfall is 1.0 inch (WRCC 2004b).

The surface water pathway and 15-mile TDL (Figure 2-8) are discussed above; however, based on visual observations during the site visit, it does not seem probable that a drainage pathway of the unnamed tributary that drains the target area at the bombing range would likely flow across the crop circle. The unnamed tributary is approximately 3-feet deeper than the surface of the crop circle, and rainfall for the area is very low, which indicates that there is not enough water cause surface water flow across the crop circle. Additionally, signs of drainage across the crop

05-0068.doc 7-3 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 7 circle were not observed, and the area where the drainage was obstructed had cattails and grasses, indicating signs of pooling water. Despite the obstructed tributary, the surface water pathway will be evaluated because there is a potential that drainage could flow across the crop circle.

7.2.1 Surface Water Pathway Targets

There are reportedly four surface water intakes within the 15-mile TDL used for drinking water purposes (OWRD 2004b). It is assumed that one household with an average number of 2.67 people per household uses each intake; therefore, approximately 10 people use surface water for drinking water purposes within the TDL. The closest surface water intake used for drinking water is located on A Line Canal approximately 8 miles downstream of the PPE. Surface water along the 15-mile TDL is used for commercial food crop irrigation, commercial livestock watering, fire protection and industrial purposes (OWRD 2004b).

Cold Springs Reservoir is a warm water sport fishery that includes white crappie (Pomoxis annularis), large-mouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), and brown bullhead catfish (Ictalurus nebulosus; Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW] 2004). Fish harvest data are not available, but evidentially usage is moderate and there are no limits on fish catch (ODFW 2004). It is assumed that up to 100 pounds are harvested within the 15-mile TDL per year.

Cold Springs Reservoir is a National Wildlife Refuge used primarily by migratory birds such as Canada Geese (Branta Canadensis) and several other species of ducks. Sensitive environments are present along the 15-mile downstream TDL of the site, which are reportedly used by the species listed below (Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center [ONHIC] 2004). • The middle Columbia River summer run steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a federally- listed threatened species, reportedly uses habitat within the 15-mile surface water TDL. • The Columbia River bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), a federally-listed threatened species, reportedly uses habitat within the 15-mile surface water TDL.

Based on National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps, Weston conservatively estimates approximately 25 miles of wetland frontage along the 15-mile TDL (United States Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1981a, 1981b, 1981c, 1981d, 1981e, 1981f).

7.2.2 Target Sample Locations

Several sediment and surface water target samples were collected during this investigation; analytical results are presented in Tables 7-3 and 7-4, respectively. Sample locations are presented in Figure 3-1. • One surface water sample was collected from A Line Canal (SW-CA001) and one surface water sample was collected from Cold Springs Wash (SW-CW001), just downstream of the earthen constructed dam at the Cold Springs Reservoir. The A Line Canal had a concrete bottom with just a trickle of flowing water. Water in Cold Springs Wash was also slow moving, but had a greater flow than A Line Canal. Sediment samples were not collected

05-0068.doc 7-4 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 7

because the dam holds back sediment and there was not an appreciable amount in the A Line Canal. • Co-located sediment and surface water samples were collected from two locations on the western side of Cold Springs Reservoir. One set of co-located surface water (SW-CR001) and sediment (SD-CR001) samples was collected from the southwestern portion of Cold Springs Reservoir. The other set of co-located surface water (SW-CR002) and sediment (SD-CR002) samples was collected from the northwestern portion of Cold Springs Reservoir. • One co-located set of sediment (SD-CR003) and surface water (SW-CR003) samples was collected just downstream of the confluence of Despain Gulch with Cold Springs Reservoir. The samples collected in Cold Springs Reservoir were strategically placed in order to characterize the reaches of potential contamination. • One co-located set of sediment (SD-DG001) and surface water (SW-DG001) samples was collected from Despain Gulch just before it drained to Cold Springs Reservoir. Despain Gulch was approximately 4 feet across and 4 inches at its maximum depth. The stream was running moderately fast at the time of sampling. • One sediment sample (SD-UT001) was collected at the PPE in an unnamed tributary adjacent to the target area. A surface water sample was not collected because no water was present at the time of sampling. The area where the sediment sample was collected was a low-lying area with water type vegetation that included cattails and grasses. • One set of co-located sediment (SD-DG002) and surface water (SW-DG002) samples was collected on Despain Gulch before its confluence with the unnamed tributary, approximately 1.5 miles upstream of its confluence with Cold Springs Reservoir.

7.2.3 Target Sample Analytical Results

Sediment target samples were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), and NBECs, with the exception of sample SD-DG002, which was not analyzed for NBECs. Laboratory analytical results indicate that arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc are present in sediment above their respective SQLs. Perchlorate and NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any sediment sample. These results are presented in Table 7-3.

Surface water target samples were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), NBECs, and pesticides/PCBs, with the exception of samples SW-DG001, SW-CR003, and SW-DG002, which were not analyzed for pesticides/PCBs. Fixed laboratory analytical results indicate that arsenic, iron, manganese, and vanadium are present in surface water above their respective SQLs. Perchlorate was detected all seven samples at concentrations ranging from 0.035 (estimated value) to 12.0 µg/L. NBECs and pest/PCBs were not detected above the SQL in any surface water sample. These results are presented in Table 7- 4. Rerted concentrations of perchlorate in surface water are presented in Figure 7-1.

05-0068.doc 7-5 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 7

7.3 SOIL EXPOSURE PATHWAY

There are no residences located within 1 mile of the site (Table 7-5; MABLE, 2004). No schools or daycare facilities are located on or within 200 feet of the site source. The number of workers on-site is more than 1 but less than 100 people. Access to the site is restricted, and the target area is undeveloped between crop circles. The only persons accessing the target area would be workers for Royal Columbia Farms or the Stahl Hutterian Brethren. There are no reported sensitive terrestrial environments on-site. There are no recorded wetlands located on-site (USFWS 1981d), which is used for commercial agriculture. Table 7-5 provides resident population data and summarizes wetland acreage within the 4-mile TDL.

7.4 AIR MIGRATION PATHWAY

The potential for an air release at the site stems from the potential to release by particulate migration. The nearest individuals are workers located on-site. The number of workers on-site is more than 1 but less than 100. The population within the 4-mile TDL is estimated at 316 (Table 7-5; MABLE, 2004). Commercial agriculture occurs within ½ mile of the site.

There are 614 acres of wetlands within a 4-mile radius of the site (USFWS 1981a, 1981b, 1981c, 1981d, 1981e, 1981f). Table 7-5 summarizes the wetland acreage within 4 miles of the site. Additionally, sensitive environments are present within the 4-mile TDL and are reportedly used by the species listed below (ONHIC 2004). • The middle Columbia River summer run steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a federally listed threatened species reportedly uses habitat within the 4-mile TDL. • The Columbia River bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), a federally-listed threatened species reportedly uses habitat within the 4-mile TDL. • The Washington ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni), a state-listed endangered species reportedly uses habitat within the 4-mile TDL. • Laurence’s milk vetch (Astragalus collinus var. laurentii), a state-listed threatened plant species that is reportedly within the 4-mile TDL.

05-0068.doc 7-6 26 April 2005 Table 7-1— Groundwater Wells and Associated Population within the 4-Mile TDL Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

a b Distance (miles) Type and Number of Wells Well Population Onsite 0 0 0 to ¼ 0 0 ¼ to ½ 0 0 ½ to 1 0 0 1 to 2 10 26 2 to 3 28 75 3 to 4 53 141 Total 91 242 Notes: aOWRD 2004a. b Domestic well population is based on one household using one domestic well and 2.67 persons per household for Umatilla County. USCB 2004

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005 Table 7-2—Groundwater Domestic Wells Analytical Results Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Description Target Field Number GW-DW001 GW-DW002 GW-DW003 GW-DW004 GW-DW005 EPA Number 04494264 04494265 04494269 04494270 04494275 CLP Number MJ4A66 MJ4A67 MJ4A71 MJ4A72 MJ4A77 Location Ramirez Well Messenger Well Stahl Hutterian Well Hat Rock State Park Schmittle Well Inorganics (µg/L) Aluminum 200 U 200 U 200 U 200 U 200 U Antimony 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U Arsenic 5.0 U 5.2 U 5.4 U 10.7 U 12.9 U Barium 80.9 BJK 56.0 BJK 25.8 BJK 66.0 BJK 72.0 BJK Beryllium 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U Cadmium 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U Calcium 86200 38200 9360 77100 59600 Chromium 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 0.99 BJK 10.0 U Cobalt 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U Copper 25.0 U 4.4 BJK 25.0 U 9.1 BJK 7.3 BJK Iron 226 100 U 100 U 114 100 U Lead 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 3.3 U 10.0 U Magnesium 31300 13500 3330 BJK 23500 32300 Manganese 262 0.31 U 25.8 0.23 U 194 Mercury 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.03 U 0.04 U 0.04 U Nickel 40.0 U 40.0 U 40.0 U 40.0 U 1.8 U Potassium 14300 7060 16600 8260 5620 Selenium 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U Silver 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U Sodium 42100 54300 79700 36500 33700 Thallium 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U Vanadium 50.0 U 41.5 BJK 39.4 BJK 21.1 BJK 34.6 BJK Zinc 32.0 BJK 17.0 BJK 34.6 BJK 541 101 Perchlorate Method 314.0 (µg/L) Perchlorate 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U Perchlorate Method 8321A-mod (µg/L) Perchlorate 1.0 U 0.25 0.30 1.2 0.20 U Nitrate Base Explosive Compounds (µg/L) 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 2-Amino-4,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 2-Nitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 3-Nitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 4-Amino-2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U 4-Nitrotoluene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U HMX 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U Nitrobenzene 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U RDX 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U Tetryl 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.48 U 0.52 U

Notes: Bold type indicates the sample concentration above the Sample Quantitation Limit (SQL). µg/L: micrograms per liter. Data Qualifiers: BJK: Analyte positively detected. Reported result lies between the MDL and SQL and reported as an estimated quantity. Unknown bias. U: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limit.

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005 Table 7-3—Target Sediment Samples Analytical Results Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Description Background Targets Field Number SD-BK001 SD-CR001 SD-CR002 SD-DG001 SD-CR003 SD-UT001 SD-DG002 EPA Number 04494267 04494261 04494263 04494272 04494274 04494276 04494278 CLP Number M/J24A69 M/J24A63 M/J24A65 MJ24A74 SedimentMJ24A76 Sample at MJ24A78 SedimentMJ24A80 Sample in Sediment Sample at Cold Spring Reservoir Despain Gulch Southwest Corner of Northwest Corner of Despain Gulch and South of the Sediment Sample at Upstream of Cold Springs Cold Springs Cold Springs Confluence with the PPE in Unnamed Confluence with Cold Location Background Sediment Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Confluence Despain Gulch Tributary Springs Reservoir Inorganics (mg/kg) Aluminum 4030 8790 8530 4180 6450 8410 11400 Antimony 0.65 U 0.71 U 0.61 U 0.62 U 0.73 U 0.86 U 0.68 U Arsenic 2.4 3.9 3.6 2.0 3.0 3.5 4.4 Barium 60.9 128 113 58.9 82.9 127 160 Beryllium 0.72 U 0.11 BJK 0.07 U 0.67 U 0.75 U 0.07 U 0.20 BJK Cadmium 0.72 U 0.72 U 0.67 U 0.67 U 0.75 U 0.70 U 0.79 U Calcium 5710 JL 3760 JL 3920 JL 3250 JL 4260 JL 12000 JL 5850 JL Chromium 5.5 9.1 9.8 4.8 8.2 9.8 12.7 Cobalt 6.1 BJK 10.8 8.6 4.9 BJK 7.1 JK 8.3 8.8 Copper 7.1 JL 12.3 JL 14.0 JL 6.8 JL 9.0 JL 16.1 JL 20.5 JL Iron 12900 21500 21100 14000 17300 20000 19800 Lead 2.8 7.2 6.5 2.9 4.1 6.7 7.6 Magnesium 2640 JL 3500 JL 4410 JL 2500 JL 4010 JL 5320 JL 4690 JL Manganese 191 JL 674 JL 491 JL 216 JL 396 JL 316 JL 491 JL Mercury 0.14 U 0.02 BJK 0.02 BJK 0.13 U 0.15 U 0.14 U 0.02 BJK Nickel 5.6 JK 8.9 10.4 5.8 8.5 11.1 12.1 Potassium 994 1800 1800 944 1610 2470 3000 Selenium 5.0 UJK 5.0 UJK 4.7 UJK 4.7 UJK 5.3 UJK 4.9 UJK 5.6 UJK Silver 1.2 BJK 1.6 1.7 0.96 BJK 1.3 JK 1.4 1.5 JK Sodium 310 BJK 200 BJK 216 BJK 246 BJK 237 BJK 2010 620 JK Thallium 1.3 U 3.1 BJK 2.7 JK 1.7 U 2.1 BJK 2.3 BJK 2.5 BJK Vanadium 38.2 46.7 46.1 37.7 38.7 41.8 43.6 Zinc 28.9 JL 42.4 JL 43.8 JL 28.2 JL 35.9 JL 53.1 JL 46.9 JL Perchlorate Method 314.0 (mg/kg) Perchlorate 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U 0.020 U Nitrate Base Explosive Compounds (mg/kg) 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 2-Amino-4,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 2-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 3-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 4-Amino-2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — 4-Nitrotoluene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — HMX 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — Nitrobenzene 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — RDX 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — Tetryl 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U — Notes: Bold type indicates the sample concentration above the detection limit Bold underline type indicates a sample concentration that is significant as defined in Section 5 mg/kg: milligram per kilogram — Constituent not analyzed Data Qualifiers: BJK: Analyte positively detected. Reported result lies between the MDL and SQL and reported as an estimated quantity. Unknown bias JK: The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is an unknown bias estimate JL: The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical value is a low-bias estimate U: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limi UJK: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is an unknown bias estimate

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005 Table 7-4—Surface Water Sample Analytical Results Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Description Background Target Field Number SW-BK001 SW-CA001 SW-CW001 SW-CR001 SW-CR002 SW-DG001 SW-CR003 SW-DG002 EPA Number 04494266 04494258 04494259 04494260 04494262 04494271 04494273 04494277 CLP Number M/J4A68 M/J4A60 M/J4A61 M/J4A62 M/J4A64 MJ4A73 MJ4A75 MJ4A79

Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample in Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Despain Gulch and Cold Cold Spring Reservoir Despain Gulch Upstream Background Surface Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Cold Springs Reservoir Cold Springs Reservoir Springs Reservoir South of the Confluence of Confluence with Cold Location Water Line A Canal Line A Canal on the Southwest Corner on the Northwest Corner Confluence with Despain Gulch Springs Reservoir Inorganics (µg/L) Aluminum 200 U 278 200 U 865 872 2030 921 446 Antimony 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U 60.0 U Arsenic 14.5 U 14.0 U 32.9 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.4 U 4.2 U 6.8 U Barium 200 BJK 44.0 BJK 53.1 BJK 75.6 BJK 78.8 BJK 181 BJK 86.7 BJK 114 BJK Beryllium 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U Cadmium 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U Calcium 89200 34700 50100 28500 28600 97900 37600 97900 Chromium 10 BJK 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 0.55 BJK 1.1 BJK 10.0 U 10.0 U Cobalt 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U 50.0 U 1.4 U 50.0 U 50.0 U Copper 25.0 U 2.0 BJK 25.0 U 1.6 BJK 1.6 BJK 4.4 BJK 1.5 BJK 1.5 BJK Iron 100 U 438 416 1240 1400 2830 1330 505 Lead 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U Magnesium 56000 15600 20500 11700 11800 43800 17600 54800 Manganese 4.5 U 105 572 210 225 207 332 143 Mercury 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.03 U 0.20 U 0.20 U 0.03 U 0.03 U Nickel 40.0 U 40.0 U 40.0 U 1.4 U 40.0 U 2.3 U 40.0 U 40.0 U Potassium 13500 4030 BJK 7390 3980 BJK 3980 BJK 11200 4730 BJK 15400 Selenium 35 BJK 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 35.0 U 4.6 BJK Silver 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U 10.0 U Sodium 194000 40800 50800 32000 32000 213000 39500 225000 Thallium 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U 25.0 U Vanadium 57.6 39.2 BJK 35.6 BJK 4.1 BJK 4.8 BJK 39.8 BJK 5.1 BJK 31.9 BJK Zinc 60 BJK 14.3 BJK 14.7 BJK 10.9 BJK 11.5 BJK 34.1 BJK 14.8 BJK 35.4 BJK Perchlorate Method 314.0 (µg/L) Perchlorate 7.68 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U 8 U 12.0 2.0 U 3.63 J Perchlorate Method 8321A-mod (ug/L) Perchlorate 7.6 0.39 0.17 QJK 0.058 QJK 0.049 QJK 1.1 0.035 QJK 3.7 Nitrate Base Explosive Compounds (mg/L) 1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 1,3-Dinitrobenzene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 2-Amino-4,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 2-Nitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 3-Nitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 4-Amino-2,6-Dinitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U 4-Nitrotoluene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U HMX 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U Nitrobenzene 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U RDX 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U Tetryl 0.51 U 0.62 U 0.49 U 0.52 U 0.54 U 0.64 U 0.49 U 0.49 U

05-0068.xls 1 of 2 26 April 2005 Table 7-4—Surface Water Sample Analytical Results Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample in Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Despain Gulch and Cold Cold Spring Reservoir Despain Gulch Upstream Background Surface Surface Water Sample at Surface Water Sample at Cold Springs Reservoir Cold Springs Reservoir Springs Reservoir South of the Confluence of Confluence with Cold Location Water Line A Canal Line A Canal on the Southwest Corner on the Northwest Corner Confluence with Despain Gulch Springs Reservoir Pesticides/PCBs 4,4'-DDD 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — 4,4'-DDE 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — 4,4'-DDT 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Aldrin 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Alpha-BHC 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Alpha-Chlordane 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Aroclor 1016 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Aroclor 1221 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U 2.0 U — — — Aroclor 1232 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Aroclor 1242 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Aroclor 1248 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Aroclor 1254 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Aroclor 1260 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U — — — Beta-BHC 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Delta-BHC 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Dieldrin 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Endosulfan I 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Endosulfan II 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Endosulfan sulfate 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Endrin 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Endrin aldehyde 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Endrin ketone 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U 0.10 U — — — Gamma-BHC (Lindane) 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Gamma-Chlordane 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Heptachlor 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Heptachlor epoxide 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U 0.050 U — — — Methoxychlor 0.50 U 0.50 U 0.50 U 0.50 U 0.50 U — — — Toxaphene 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U 5.0 U — — — Notes: Bold type indicates the sample concentration above the detection limit Bold underline type indicates a sample concentration that is significant as defined in Section 5 µg/L: micrograms per liter. — Constituent not analyzed Data Qualifiers: BJK: Analyte positively detected. Reported result lies between the MDL and SQL and reported as an estimated quantity. Unknown bias U: The analyte was analyzed for but not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limi

05-0068.xls 2 of 2 26 April 2005 Table 7-5—Population and Wetlands within the 4-Mile TDL Cold Springs PBR FUDS PA/SI Umatilla County, Oregon

Distance Ring (Miles) Populationa Wetlands (Acreage)b Onsite 0 0 0 to ¼ 0 0 ¼ to ½ 0 0 ½ to 1 0 0 1 to 2 53 263 2 to 3 72 190 3 to 4 191 161 Total 316 614 Sources: aMABLE 2004. bUSFWS 1981a,b,c,d,e,f.

05-0068.xls 1 of 1 26 April 2005 GW-DW004 (1.2)

GW-DW005 (0.20 U)

SW-CW001 (0.17 QJK) SW-CR002 SW-BK001 GW-DW002 (0.049 QJK) (7.68) (0.25) SW-DG001 SW-CA001 (12.0) (0.39) SW-CR003 SW-CR001 (0.035 QJK) Cold Springs GW-DW001 (0.058 QJK) (1.0 U) PBR FUDS

SW-DG002 (3.7)

Area of Heaviest LEGEND: Bombing Concentrations Sample With Perchlorate Result >8 µg/L Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 3 and 8 µg/L GW-DW003 Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 2 and 3 µg/L (0.30) Sample With Perchlorate Result Between 1 and 2 µg/L Sample With Perchlorate Result <1 µg/L

Source: USGS 1:100,000 Scale Topo, Hermiston-OR/WA, 1984, and Pendleton-OR/WA, 1983. Cold Spring PBR FUDS PA/SI Perchlorate Results—December 2004 0 1 2 Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS PA/SI N GW-DW001 Station ID Scale in Miles (1.5) Perchlorate Concentration (µg/L) Umatilla County, OR Groundwater Sample Location Figure Surface Water Sample Location 7-1

05-0068 Fig7-1.ai

SECTION 8

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The Cold Springs PBR FUDS is located in northeastern Oregon approximately 9 miles east of Hermiston. The land was used for livestock grazing until the DOA acquired it in 1942. The DOA operated the property as a precision bombing practice range until 1946 when it was declared as surplus. Currently, the FUDS is owned by private parties and used as irrigated farmland.

The FUDS is located directly east of Cold Springs Reservoir and the LUB GWMA, located in Umatilla County, Oregon. The ODEQ declared the LUB a GWMA in 1990 when groundwater sampling during the 1980s demonstrated high nitrate concentrations across the basin.

8.1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL TARGETS

The alluvial and shallow basalt aquifers are the main sources of domestic water for rural residents in the area. The alluvial aquifer is also a major source of municipal water for the cities of Hermiston and Irrigon, and an important source of irrigation water (OWRD 2003).

The one reported drinking water surface intake in the area is part of the City of Hermiston’s public water system. Surface water is used for agricultural irrigation and livestock watering, and as a recreational resource within the surface water TDL.

The Cold Springs Reservoir is a warm water sport fishery and a National Wildlife Refuge. The reservoir includes several species of sport fish and is used by migratory birds. Sensitive environments are present along the 15-mile downstream TDL of the site, which are reportedly used by the species listed below (ONHIC 2004). • The middle Columbia River steelhead summer run (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a federally listed threatened species, reportedly uses habitat within the 15-mile surface water TDL. • The Columbia River bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), a federally listed threatened species, reportedly uses habitat within the 15-mile surface water TDL.

Based on NWI maps, approximately 25 miles of wetland frontage are located along the 15-mile TDL.

8.2 SOURCE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS

The target at the former bombing range is considered the source area for this PA/SI. The location of the former bombing range has been heavily cultivated and used for farming; however, portions of the former target area lie between crop circles which has remained uncultivated. Native vegetation covers the target area, which is located on a slight ridge. Numerous practice bombs and bomb debris were observed at the target area.

05-0068.doc 8-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 8

All source samples from the target area were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate, and NBECs. The laboratory results indicate arsenic, barium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, silver, vanadium, and zinc are present above their respective SQLs (Table 6-1). Perchlorate was detected significantly above background concentrations in one source sample (SS-CB001) at a concentration of 0.83 mg/kg. NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any source sample.

There are no liners, active run-on/runoff control systems, functioning leachate collection systems, and/or maintained engineered covered associated with the source area.

8.3 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS

8.3.1 Groundwater Samples

Groundwater samples were collected from five domestic wells during this investigation. All wells are located downgradient of the Cold Springs PBR FUDS. The groundwater sample design was based on the spatial relationship of the wells to the FUDS. The shallow alluvial aquifer was targeted for sampling.

All five groundwater samples were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), and NBECs. Fixed laboratory analytical results indicate barium, chromium, copper, manganese, vanadium, and zinc are present in groundwater above their respective SQLs. Perchlorate was detected in three samples (GW-DW002, GW-DW003, and GW-DW004) at concentrations of 0.25, 0.30, and 1.2 µg/L, respectively. NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any groundwater sample.

8.3.2 Target Samples

Several sediment and surface water target samples were collected during this investigation.

Sediment target and attribution samples were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), and NBECs, with the exception of sample SD-DG002, which was not analyzed for NBECs. Fixed laboratory analytical results indicate that inorganics are present in sediment above their respective SQLs. Perchlorate and NBECs were not detected above the SQL in any sediment sample.

Surface water target and attribution samples were analyzed for inorganics, perchlorate (using both EPA Methods 314.0 and 8321A-mod), NBECs, and pesticides/PCBs, with the exception of samples SW-DG001, SW-CR003, and SW-DG002, which were not analyzed for pesticides/PCBs. Fixed laboratory analytical results indicate that inorganics are present in surface water above their respective SQLs. Perchlorate was detected in all seven surface water samples at concentrations ranging from 0.035 (estimated value) to 12.0 µg/L. NBECs and pesticides/PCBs were not detected above the SQL in any surface water sample.

05-0068.doc 8-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 8

8.4 CONCLUSIONS

Based on human health and ecological targets identified during this PA/SI, it has been determined that the groundwater, surface water, and soil pathways are the only potentially significant pathways associated with the Cold Springs PBR FUDS. Due to the limited number of soil concentrations reported above background values, it is unlikely that the air migration pathway would significantly contribute to the site HRS score.

05-0068.doc 8-3 26 April 2005

REFERENCES

SECTION 9

Army Real Estate Branch. 1942. Final Tract Register for Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range. 13 January.

EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2004. Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work for Inorganic Analyses, Multi-Media, Multi-Concentration, ILM05.3, Superfund Analytical Services/Contract Laboratory Program, United States Environmental Protection Agency. March.

EPA. 2003. Contract Laboratory Program Statement of Work for Organic Analyses, Multi- Media, Multi-Concentration, OLM04.3, Superfund Analytical Services/Contract Laboratory Program, United States Environmental Protection Agency. March.

EPA. 2002a. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review, EPA 540/R-01/008, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. July.

EPA. 2002b. Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5, EPA/240/R-02/009, Office of Research and Development, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. December.

EPA. 2001. Contract Laboratory Program Guidance for Field Samplers, EPA/540/R-00/003.

EPA. 2000a. Methods for the Determination of Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Drinking Water, Volume 1: Method 314.0 Determination of Perchlorate in Drinking Water by Ion Chromatography, EPA815-R-00-014. Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water. August.

EPA. 2000b. Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process EPA QA/G-4, EPA/600/R- 96/055. Quality Staff, Office of Environmental Information, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

EPA. 2000c. Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process for Hazardous Waste Site Investigations EPA QA/G-4HW, EPA/600/R-00/007, Quality Staff, Office of Environmental Information, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. January.

EPA. 1999. Contract Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Organic Data Review, EPA 540/R-99/08. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. October.

EPA. 1996. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods SW-846 (through update III), Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, United States Environmental Protection Agency. December.

05-0068.doc 9-1 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 9

EPA. 1983. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. Including updates.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) Flood Rate Insurance Maps (FIRM). 2004. http://mapserver2.esri.com/cgi-bin/hazard.adol?s=0&cd=x&p=4&c=- 119.123863,45.843417%2C45.701274&p=3&d=0&s=0&cd=p&Map.x=76&Map.y=61

MABLE. 2004. Report produced on 03AUG04 by geocorr2k 1.1 Rev.

NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service). 2002. Online Soil Survey of Umatilla County, Oregon. http://www.or.nrcs.usda.gov/pnw_soil/or_data.html

NRCS. 1983. Soil Survey of Morrow County Area, Oregon.

ODEQ (Oregon Department of Environmental Quality). 2004. Fact Sheet—FAQ: Perchlorate in the Lower Umatilla Basin Groundwater Management Area—Issues and Answers. DEQ 04-ER-011. March.

ODEQ. 1995. Hydrogeology, Groundwater Chemistry and Land Uses in the Lower Umatilla Basin Groundwater Management Area: Final Review Draft.

ODEQ. 1992. Preliminary Assessment Boardman Air Force Range.

ODFW (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2004. Phone conversation between Tim Balley, ODFW, and Adrienne Barnes, Weston. 2 August.

ONHIC (Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center). 2004. Data System Search for Sensitive, Threatened and Endangered Species. 16 August.

OWRD (Oregon Water Resource Department). 2004a. Groundwater Well Database Query. http://stamp.wrd.state.or.us/apps/gw/well_log/well_log.php

OWRD. 2004b. Surface Water Rights Database Query for the 15-mile Surface Water TDL. http://stamp.wrd.state.or.us/apps/wr/wrinfo/wrinfo.php?search_type=LocationQuery

OWRD. 2003. Groundwater Supplies in the Umatilla Basin. Presented by Oregon Water Resources Department Ground Water Section. Pendleton, Oregon. April 3.

USACE (United States Army Corp of Engineers). 1997. Restoration Information Management System Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range Military Reservation, Project Fact Sheet, Original Date 26 July 1995 and Tag Review Date 25 June 1997.

USACE. 1995a. Archives Search Report Findings for the Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range Military Reservation, Umatilla County, Oregon, Project No. F10OR017201.

USACE. 1995b. Archives Search Report Conclusions and Recommendations for the Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range Military Reservation, Umatilla County, Oregon, Project No. F10OR017201.

05-0068.doc 9-2 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 9

USACE. 1993. Memorandum: Trip Report; Site Visit to DERP Site: Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range. 3 May.

USCB (United States Census Bureau). 2004. Umatilla County Household Census Information. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/41/41059.html

USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 1981a. Hat Rock, Washington-Oregon, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USFWS. 1981b. Hermiston, Oregon, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USFWS. 1981c. Juniper, Oregon-Washington, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USFWS. 1981d. Stanfield, Oregon, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USFWS. 1981e. Stanfield SE, Oregon, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USFWS. 1981f. Umatilla, Washington-Oregon, Quadrangle. 7.5-minute series National Wetland Inventory Map.

USGS (United States Geologic Survey). 2004. Calendar Year Streamflow Statistics for Umatilla County, OR. http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/annual/calendar_year/?search_criteria=state_cd&submit ted_form=introduction

USGS. 1994. Aerial Photo, Hermiston, Oregon. 6 May.

USGS. 1993a. Hat Rock Quadrangle, Oregon, 7.5-minute series (topographic).

USGS. 1993b. Juniper Quadrangle, Oregon, 7.5-minute series (topographic).

USGS. 1993c. Stanfield Quadrangle, Oregon, 7.5-minute series (topographic).

USGS. 1993d. Stanfield SE Quadrangle, Oregon, 7.5-minute series (topographic).

USGS. 1984. 1:100,000 Scale Topographic Map for Hermiston-OR/WA.

USGS. 1983. 1:100,000 Scale Topographic Map for Pendleton-OR/WA.

USGS. 1953 (1973). 1:250,000 Scale Topographic Map for Pendleton-OR/WA.

USGS. 1953 (1981). 1:250,000 Scale Topographic Map for Walla Wall-WA/OR.

05-0068.doc 9-3 26 April 2005 Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report—Cold Springs FUDS Section 9

WRCC (Western Regional Climate Center). 2004a. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary—for Hermiston, Oregon. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliRECtM.pl?orherm

WRCC. 2004b. Two-year, 24-hour Rainfall, Hermiston, Oregon. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/pcpnfreq/or2y24.gif.

Weston (Weston Solutions, Inc.). 2005. North Morrow Groundwater Area Wide Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Report. April.

Weston. 2004. Cold Springs Precision Bombing Range FUDS Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan. November.

Weston. 2003. Region 10 START Quality Management Plan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Contract No. 68-S0-01-02, TDD No. 02-09-0009, Seattle, Washington.

05-0068.doc 9-4 26 April 2005

APPENDIX A

PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION

05-0068.doc

APPENDIX B

CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED GPS COORDINATES

05-0068.doc

APPENDIX C

DATA VALIDATION MEMORANDA AND LABORATORY SHEETS

(HARDCOPY AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST)

05-0068.doc

APPENDIX D

DOMESTIC WELL LOGS

05-0068.doc