Bradford_Is._Fish_Ladder_Sed_Eval_20160128.pdf

CENWP-EC-HR (Sediment Quality Team) 28 January 2016

Memorandum for the Record: Bonneville Dam, Bradford Island Fish Ladder (BIFL) Exit Dredging Project dredged material evaluation history and suitability determination.

Project Description: The BIFL is located on Bradford Island and has two entrances directly downstream of the Bonneville Dam – one on the north side of the island and one on the south side. The north and south fish ladders merge into one fish ladder, transiting by the Bradford Island Visitor Center. The BIFL exits into the south forebay of the Bonneville Dam.

Sediment and debris create shoals at the BIFL exit, and periodic maintenance dredging is needed to keep the fish ladder exit open. In the past, dredge quantities have ranged from approximately 650 cubic yards (cy) to a maximum of 2,000 cy. The BIFL exit dredging proposed for 2016 is essentially the same as occurred in 2012.

Site History Information:

BIFL Exit Dredging History: In January/February 2002, approximately 1,600 cy of sediment and debris were dredged with a clamshell from the BIFL exit. Although the material was determined to be suitable for unconfined, aquatic disposal, it was placed on a barge and transported to the RABANCO Regional Disposal Company’s facility in Roosevelt Washington.

In February 2012, approximately 650 cy of sediment and debris were dredged with a clamshell dredge from the BIFL shoal, dewatered on Bradford Island in the upland, and transported by dump truck to an approved landfill.

1997 and 2001 BIFL Sampling Events: Sediment sampling prior to 2007 is summarized in the June 2007 “Sediment Sampling & Analysis Plan: Bonneville Dam, Bradford Island Fish Ladder” (SAP, Attachment A). The shoaling material at the BIFL was determined to be suitable for aquatic placement in 1997 and in 2001.

2007 BIFL Sampling Event: On 31 July 2007, the Sediment Quality Team collected 3 sediment samples to characterize a 2,000 cubic yard (cy) shoal adjacent to the Bradford Island Fish Ladder (BIFL). Four years later, the Sediment Quality Team summarized the sediment quality data in the July 2011 “Bonneville Bradford Island Fish Ladder Sediment Quality Evaluation Report” (SQER, Attachment B).

The SQER was submitted to the interagency Portland District Project Review Group (PRG; now known as the Portland Sediment Evaluation Team1) for evaluation per the Northwest Regional Sediment Evaluation Team’s (RSET’s) 2009 Sediment Evaluation Framework for the Pacific Northwest (SEF). The SEF is used by the PRG/PSET to evaluate the suitability of dredged material for unconfined, aquatic disposal, as required under the Clean Water Act section 404(b)(1) guidelines (see 33 CFR 230.60-230.61).

1 The PRG/PSET agencies include the Portland District (Lead), Environmental Protection Agency-Region 10 (Co- Lead), National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Department of Ecology, and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.

The PRG compared sediment quality data presented in the SQER to the freshwater benthic toxicity screening levels (SLs) published in the RSET’s 2006 Interim Final SEF (freshwater SLs were not published in the 2009 SEF). Total mercury concentrations at the BIFL averaged 0.362 mg/kg (range 0.319 mg/kg to 0.402 mg/kg), exceeding the SEF screening level of 0.28 mg/kg.

On 29 July 2011, the PRG issued a negative suitability determination memorandum to the District stating that sediments in the 2,000 cy shoal were not suitable for unconfined, aquatic disposal (Attachment C).

PacifiCorp Condit Dam Removal Project: On 28 October 2011, the Condit Dam was breached by PacifiCorp to restore fish passage on the White Salmon River. The White Salmon R.

discharges into the Bonneville Pool at Underwood, WA (Columbia River Mile 168.3), approximately 23 miles upstream of Bonneville Dam. Sediments stored in Northwestern Lake were characterized prior to the dam removal; total mercury (Hg) concentrations ranged from

0.094 mg/kg to 0.881 mg/kg (average Hg conc. = 0.60 mg/kg) (Kleinfelder, 2008).

Between 1.6 and 2.2 million cy of Hg-contaminated, fine-grained sediment was discharged down the White Salmon R. into the Bonneville pool. Although sediment concentrations exceeded the 2006 Hg SL (0.28 mg/kg), the discharge was permitted, because the benefits of the stream and fish habitat restoration project outweighed the potential detrimental effects of releasing Hg-contaminated sediment into the system.

Kleinfelder et al. (2012) conducted one round of pre-dam removal sediment sampling (September 2011) and two rounds of post-dam removal sediment sampling (November 2011 and September 2012) were conducted at four locations on the Columbia River:

• On the Washington side of the Columbia R., across from Cascade Locks, OR, downstream of the White Salmon R.

• At the Wind R. confluence (Carson, WA), downstream of the White Salmon R.

• At the White Salmon R. confluence (Underwood, WA)

• At the Klickitat R. confluence (Lyle, WA), upstream of the White Salmon R.

Grain size analysis indicated that fine-grained sediment (silt + clay) was transported and deposited downstream of the White Salmon R. after the dam removal. Hg concentrations increased by 0.02 mg/kg at the Cascade Locks sampling location between September 2011 and September 2012 (from 0.07 mg/kg to 0.09 mg/kg). Hg concentrations at the Wind R. sampling location decreased slightly by 0.01 mg/kg (from 0.03 mg/kg to 0.02 mg/kg). These differences are not significant, because they are within the range of laboratory analytical variability. At the mouth of the White Salmon R., total Hg concentrations decreased by 0.08 mg/kg between September 2011 and September 2012 (from 0.98 mg/kg to 0.90 mg/kg).

Management Area Rank and Testing Frequency: Per the SEF, projects are assigned a management area rank based on risk of contamination in the project area. The PRG assigned a “moderate” rank to the BIFL exit dredging project based on the July 2007 SQER. Associated with the project rank is a sediment testing frequency: moderate-ranked projects must be re-characterized 5 years after the prior round of characterization (i.e., by July 2012) to support aquatic disposal of the dredged material.

Discussion: In-situ sediment testing is not required to support dredging and upland placement of the BIFL exit shoal material. However, the receiving landfill will likely require a leachate analysis prior to accepting the material. If aquatic disposal of the dredged material is proposed in the future, then in-situ sediment characterization will be necessary prior to dredging. The District does not anticipate that water quality criteria will be exceeded during the dredging operation. A discussion of these concepts follows.

Dredged Material Suitability (Aquatic Disposal): The BIFL exit shoal material is not suitable for unconfined, aquatic disposal without additional characterization. Although the RSET’s updated Hg SL is 0.66 mg/kg, and the 2007 Hg concentrations measured in the BIFL shoal (0.319 mg/kg to

0.402 mg/kg) are less than the new SL, the 2007 data cannot be compared to the 2015 SLs to support aquatic placement of the BIFL exit shoal material because:

• The Condit Dam removal has changed conditions by contributing Hg-contaminated sediment to the system; additional sediment sampling would be needed to augment the 2007 data.

• Per the SEF management area rank and testing frequency guidelines, the July 2007 data have “expired;” additional sediment characterization would be necessary.

Dredged Material Suitability (Upland Disposal): Once a landfill has been identified, the project manager should coordinate with the landfill to determine the necessary testing requirements.

Based on past experience, the landfill will likely require a toxicity characteristic leachate procedure (TCLP) analysis for 8 heavy metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, and silver). Polychlorinated biphenyls were not identified as a chemical of concern in the last two rounds of characterization (2001 and 2007). However, due to the history of PCBs contamination at Bradford Island, a TCLP analysis may also be required for PCB Aroclors.

The dredging contractor can collect subsamples of dredged material during the dredging operation and submit a composite sample to an environmental laboratory for the TCLP analysis.

Hg and Water Quality in the Dredge Area: The 2009 SEF provides freshwater elutriate test triggers (ETs) for metals and some organic compounds. ETs provide an initial screening evaluation to determine if dredging would result in state water quality criteria being exceeded. If dredged sediment concentrations are below the ETs, then the dredged material is not expected to cause adverse water quality effects at the point of dredging. The Hg ET for freshwater sediment is 279 mg/kg. Total Hg concentrations in the project area sediments and the sediments released from behind Condit Dam are 3 to 4 orders of magnitude less than the freshwater Hg ET. The SEF freshwater ET calculations and ET tables appear in Attachment D.

Contact: Questions regarding this memorandum and its content can be addressed to James McMillan (PSET Lead; email: james.m.mcmillan@usace.army.mil; tel.: 503.808.4376).

References:

Kleinfelder; Ellis Ecological Services, Inc.; and JR Merit Industrial Contractors. 2012. “Condit

Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning (FERC Project No. 2342) – September 2012 Year 1 Sediment Sampling Report.” Prepared for PacifiCorp Energy (14 December).

mailto:james.m.mcmillan@usace.army.mil

Kleinfelder, 2008. “Updated Evaluation of Mercury Bioaccumulation, Underwood In Lieu Fishing Access Site, Northwestern Lake, Condit Hydroelectric Project.” FERC Project No.

2342, White Salmon, Washington (4 December).

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington

Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, National Marine Fisheries Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Sediment Evaluation Framework for the Pacific Northwest. Published May 2009, by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, 128 pp + Appendices.

ATTACHMENT A

Sediment Sampling & Analysis Plan: Bonneville Dam, Bradford Island Fish Ladder

June 2007

SEDIMENT

SAMPLING & ANALYSIS PLAN

BONNEVILLE DAM

BRADFORD ISLAND FISH LADDER

JUNE 2007

Prepared by:

Tim Sherman

Technical Review:

Mark Siipola

Portland District Corps of Engineers

CENWP-EC-HR

Bradford Island Fish Ladder SAP 2007 ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF FIGURES....................................................................................................... iii TABLE OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ iii ACRONYMS..................................................................................................................... iv

1. PROJECT OVERVIEW

1.1. Project Site Location and Description

1.2. Previous Sediment Sampling

1.3. Current Project Characteristics

2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES, PLANNING, AND LOCATION

2.1. Objectives

2.2. Planning Team and Responsibilities

2.3. Location

3. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

3.1. Ranking

3.2. Sampling Requirements

3.3. Sampling Device

4. SAMPLE COLLECTION AND HANDLING PROCEDURES

4.1. Sampling Locations and Numbering

4.2. Field Sampling Schedule

4.3. Field Notes

4.4. Positioning

4.5. Decontamination

4.6. Core Logging

4.7. Field Compositing

4.8. Field Replicates

4.9. Sample Transport and Chain-of-Custody Procedures

5. LABORATORY PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL SEDIMENT ANALYSIS

5.1. Laboratory Analyses Protocols

5.1.1. Chain of Custody

5.1.2. Limits of Detection

5.1.3. Sediment Chemistry

5.1.4. Sediment Conventionals

5.1.5. Holding Times

5.1.6. Quality Assurance/Quality Control

6. BIOLOGICAL TESTING

6.1. Bioassays

7. REPORTING

7.1. QA Report

7.2. Sediment Evaluation Report

APPENDIX A: PARAMETERS AND METHODS

APPENDIX B: QA2 DATA REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX C:

RECOMMENDED ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATION LIMITS

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Dredging Conceptual Site Model Figure 2: Vicinity Map of Bonneville Dam (Fish Ladder) Figure3: Proposed Sampling Station Locations

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1: Planning Team and Responsibilities Table 2: Proposed Sampling Station Coordinates (NAD 83) Table 3: Sample Volume and Storage Table 4: Sediment Chemistry & Conventionals (See Section 5.1.3 & 5.1.4) Table 5: Minimum Laboratory QA/QC iv

ACRONYMS

Ag Silver As Arsenic Cd Cadmium CoC Contaminate of concern Cu Copper DEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality DMEF Dredge Material Evaluation Framework DQO Data Quality Objectives EPA Environmental Protection Agency Hg Hg MDL Method Detection Limit NES Newly Exposed Surface Ni Nickel PAH Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon Pb Lead PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan Sb Antimony SL Screening Levels TEL Threshold Effects Level TOC Total Organic Carbon USFWS U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service Zn Zinc

1. PROJECT OVERVIEW

1.1. Project Site Location and Description

Bonneville Dam is located between River Mile (RM) 145 and 146 of the Columbia River. The proposed dredge site is located at the fish exit (water entrance) of the fish ladder east of the Bonneville Dam First Powerhouse on the south side of Bradford Island. Approximately 2000 CY or less will be dredged by clam shell. Pending a suitability determination, material will be placed in a dispersive flowlane area below the dam. If not determined suitable for in-water disposal, material will be placed in an approved upland disposal site.

1.2. Previous Sediment Sampling

In 1991 informational sampling and analysis was done on sediment downstream from the First Powerhouse Navigational Lock, on the south side of the river, with results acceptable for unconfined in-water or upland disposal. This same downstream area was dredged in1986 and in the late 1970s.

In July 1997 seven sediment samples were collected from Bonneville Second Powerhouse forebay and water supply conduits. Two of the samples were taken from the downstream portion of the south Auxiliary Water Supply (AWS) conduit by divers inspecting the inside of the south AWS. Three additional samples were taken from the surface of the sediment deposits at the north end of the forebay. The final two samples were collected from the sediment and woody debris removed from the north AWS intake trash rack by clamshell and stockpiled on Cascade Island, at the south end of the Elevation 90 Deck crane way extension. Physical analysis, run on four sediments, indicated the material ranges from gavel to very fine sand, with largest fractions in the coarse to medium sand range. Chemical analysis, run on five sediments, included metals, pesticides/polychlorobiphenyls (PCBs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), total organic carbon (TOC), acid volatile sulfide (AVS), phenols and dioxin screen (P450). The portion of the sample submitted to the lab was representative of the material dredged, except for the woody debris. Results determined the material to be acceptable for unconfined in-water or upland disposal.

Beginning in May 2001 sediment samples were taken from an area at the Northeast end of Bradford Island, which contained high levels of PCBs from discarded electrical components discovered in the near shore area. Since the initial sampling event, several rounds of samples have been collected, both from in-water and upland areas. All discarded electrical components have been removed from the water. The investigation of this former dumpsite is still in progress.

Currently a sampling plan has been developed to further analyze sediments and both benthic and aquatic organisms.

In December 2001 three (3) sediment samples were collected from the fish ladder exit. The samples were collected using a ponar sampling device (a gravity core sampler was tried, but had only about 12” penetration). All samples were submitted for physical analyses including total volatile solids (TVS) and were analyzed for metals (9 inorganic), total organic carbon (TOC), pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), phenols, phthalates, miscellaneous extractables, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and organotin (TBT).

None of the laboratory data results exceeded their respective screening levels in the DMEF.

Levels of DDT and its derivatives (DDD & DDE) were found in all three of the samples at levels ranging from 6.39 to 6.78 ug/kg (ppb), but did not exceed the 6.9 ug/kg DMEF screening level.

All sediment is determined to be suitable for unconfined, in-water placement or suitable upland placement with return water without further characterization under guideline of the DMEF.

Although the 1577 CY of material dredged was determined to be suitable for unconfined in-water placement, it was determined, as a management option, to barge the material to RABANCO Regional Disposal Company's facility in Roosevelt Washington.

1.3. Current Project Characteristics

The current need for dredging is much the same as it was previously in 2001. Sediment has accumulated at the fish ladder (fish exit area) on the south side of Bradford Island, hampering the optimal function of the facility.

2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES, PLANNING, AND LOCATION

2.1. Objectives

• Characterize sediments in accordance with the regional dredge material testing manual protocols:

o Sediment Evaluation Framework (SEF), 2006.

o The Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal at Island, Nearshore, or

Upland Confined Disposal Facilities – Testing manual (Upland Testing Manual).

• Collect, handle and analyze representative sediment from Bradford Island Fish ladder exit (water entrance) in accordance with protocols and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements.

• Characterize sediments to be dredged for evaluation of suitability of in-water disposal.

• Analyze for full suite of physical and chemical parameters as outlined in the SEF (2006).

SEF – Table 7.2 (Appendix C of this report) contains the list of analytes and methods of analysis. Organotin will not be considered an in-water contaminate of concern at the fish ladder; results from the 2001 sediment sampling event indicate it is not present above detection limits.

2.2. Planning Team and Responsibilities

Table 1 lists the Project Team’s duties and responsibilities for the sediment-sampling project at Bradford Island Fish ladder.

Table 1: Planning Team and Responsibilities

2.3. Location

Table 2 lists the proposed sampling coordinates within the Bradford Island Fish ladder exit area.

Coordinates are based on the Lambert Projection for Oregon; North Zone (NAD 83, U.S. Survey Feet).

Table 2: Proposed Sampling Station Coordinates (NAD 83)

Sample Id Latitude Longitude

060507BIFL-P-01 45º 38.462’ 121º 56.572’

060507BIFL-P-02 45º 38.460’ 121º 56.539’

060507BIFL-P-03 45º 38.430’ 121º 56.528’

3. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

3.1. Ranking

This area has not been ranked, but is in relatively close proximity to a contaminated site on the north side of Bradford Island. Although the 2001 sampling event showed that material suitable for in-water placement, additional sampling will be conducted.

Task/Responsibility

CENWP

Tim

Sherman

Columbia Analytical Services

CENWP

Personnel

CENWP

Mark Siipola

Overall Project Management X Sampling Plan Development X Agency Coordination X X Positioning/Log Record X X Sediment Sampling X X Physical Analysis X Chemical Analysis X X Final Report X Technical Review X Boat & Operator X

3.2. Sampling Requirements

Sampling requirements depend on the type of sediment (heterogeneous or homogeneous), grain-size, organic content, the level of contamination (ranking in the SEF), depth of dredging prism and the need to characterize the new surface material after dredging. Three discrete samples will be collected and analyzed for PCBs. However, prior to analyses the 3 master samples will be split in the field. Procedure for splitting sample as follows: master sample will be mixed in clean stainless steel container, after mixing sample will be laid out on a clean surface and quartered. The 2 opposing quarters will be placed in one jar and the other 2 quarters in the jar to be archived (frozen) at the lab for possible future analyses. At the laboratory, sample to be analyzed should be mixed and placed on a clean surface and a pie shaped segment selected for analysis. This assures that settling during shipment and storage does not affect segment analyzed.

3.3. Sampling Device

A ponar sampler will be used to sample the sediment material. In the 2001 sampling event a gravity-core sample was attempted, with only 1-foot of penetration achieved it was not deemed necessary to attempt further gravity cores and a ponar was used to collect the additional 2 samples.

This effort will include the collection of three (3) samples at the fish exit of the ladder. The depth of the dredge prism is less than 3-feet and contains all infill material since the last dredging activity. Proposed sampling locations are shown in Figures 2 and station coordinates in Table 2.

Physical and chemical characterization analyses will be performed on all samples.

• Samples will be shipped to Columbia Analytical Services for analyses

• Turn-around-Time (TAT) will be standard 20 calendar days from laboratory receipt of samples

• Sample detection limits are those listed in SEF, 2006, Table 7.2 (see appendix C).

4. SAMPLE COLLECTION AND HANDLING PROCEDURES

4.1. Sampling Locations and Numbering

Figure 1 shows the project area vicinity map with approximate sample locations. Sampling sites are located for the best characterization of the material within the dredging prism as possible.

Proper QA/QC procedures as outlined in this section will be followed. Any deviation from these procedures shall be noted in the field log. Sample identification shall use the following convention:

060507BIFL-X-YY

where:

• 060507 denotes the sampling date (June 5, 2007).

• “BIFL” denotes samples collected from the Bradford Island Fish ladder.

• “X” denotes the type of sampling device (i.e. “P” for “Ponar”).

• “YY” denotes the numeric sample sequence number. All samples will consist of two digits.

QC replicates (if collected) will have a letter designation in place of the numeric designation of the primary sample (i.e. 060507BIFL-X-A). Duplicate samples (if collected) will be identified in the field notes. Composite samples (if collected) will have a combined number in the “YY” designation (i.e. sample 02 and 03 will be 023, etc.).

4.2. Field Sampling Schedule

The Bradford Island Fish Ladder sampling event is schedule for July 31, 2007. This date is dependent on the ability to coordinate all required services prior to this date.

4.3. Field Notes

Field notes will be maintained during sampling and compositing operations. The following, as a minimum, will be included:

• Name of personnel(s) collecting and logging samples.

• Weather conditions.

• Date and time of collection of each sediment sample.

• Depth of each station sampled as measured from the water surface. This will be accomplished using a lead-line or corrected depth recorder.

• Sample station number and individual designation numbers assigned for each individual sample.

• Descriptions of sediment or core sections.

• Length and penetration depth of sampling device if sample is a core.

• Any deviation from the approved sampling plan.

4.4. Positioning

Sampling locations will be recorded in the field to the nearest 0.1 second. Coordinates are based on the Lambert Projection for Oregon – North Zone (NAD83, U.S. Survey feet). See Table 2 in Section 2.3 for coordinates of sampling points.

4.5. Decontamination

All sampling devices and utensils will be thoroughly cleaned prior to use as outlined below:

• Rinse with site water, to remove sediment.

• Wash with brush and Alconox soap.

• Rinse with distilled water.

Utensils used to collect physical samples only or sampling devices such as the surface grab will be washed down before each sampling event. They will not, however, require the cleaning procedure outlined above as long as samples collected for chemical analyses are not in contact with core walls. All utensils used to collect chemical samples will require decontamination prior to each use. All hand work for chemical analyses will be conducted with disposable latex gloves and shall be rinsed with distilled water before and after handling each individual sample, as appropriate, to prevent sample contamination. Gloves will be disposed of between each sample or composite to prevent cross-contamination.

4.6. Core Logging

If used, each discrete core section will be inspected and described. For each core sample, the following data shall be recorded on the core log:

• Sample recovery.

• Physical soil description (including soil type, density/consistency of soil, and color),

• Odor (e.g. hydrogen sulfide, petroleum products, etc.).

• Visual stratification and lenses.

• Vegetation.

• Debris.

• Biological activity (e.g. detritus, shells, tubes, bioturbation, live/dead organisms, etc.).

• Presence of oil sheen.

• Any other distinguishing characteristics or features.

4.7. Field Compositing

No samples will be composited. Three (3) Ponar surface samples shall be collected from the Bradford Island Fish Ladder exit area and analyzed for physical and chemical contaminates as described in section 5 below.

4.8. Field Replicates

No blind duplicate field replicate will be submitted. Laboratory QC shall be used to evaluate and access data quality. Three discrete samples will be collected and analyzed for PCBs. However, prior to analyses the 3 master samples will be split in the field.

4.9. Sample Transport and Chain-of-Custody Procedures

Upon completion of sampling, sample containers shall be packed in ice or “blue ice” in coolers to maintain an arrival temperature of 4º C ± 2ºC. Chain-of-custody procedures shall commence in the field and track delivery of samples. Sample holding times and storage requirements are presented in Table 3. Specific procedures are as follows:

• Samples shall be packaged and shipped in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation regulations as specified in 49 CFR 173.6 and 49 CFR 173.24 or delivered directly to the testing laboratory.

• Individual sample containers shall be packed to prevent breakage.

• Coolers shall be clearly labeled with sufficient information to enable positive identification. As a minimum, the following is required:

o Name of project.

o Time and date container was sealed.

o Personnel sealing cooler.

o Office name and address.

• Custody seals shall be used on cooler(s) during shipment.

• Chain-of-custody forms shall be enclosed in a plastic bag and placed inside cooler. Upon transfer of sample possession to laboratory, personnel transferring custody of coolers shall sign the chain-of-custody form. Personnel receiving cooler shall inspect the cooler(s) and record the condition of the samples.

Table 3: Sample Volume and Storage

Hold times indicated in this table are those recommended by EPA prior to extraction. Samples may be archived by freezing or stored under nitrogen to extent the hold time before extraction up to 1-year. Extracts may be stored up to 40-days before analysis.

a. Required samples sizes for one laboratory analysis. Actual volumes to be collected have been increased to provide a margin of error and allow for retest.

b. During transport to lab, samples will be stored on ice.

5. LABORATORY PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL SEDIMENT ANALYSIS

Sample Type Holding Time

Sample Size (a)

Temperature

(b) Container

Particle Size 6 Months 200 g 4º±2ºC 1-1 Quart Plastic Bag

PAHs, Phenols, Phthalates, Misc. Extractables, Chlorinated Organic Compounds

14 Days 125 g 4º±2ºC

Total Organic Carbon 14 Days 125 g 4º±2ºC

Mercury 28 Days 5g 4º±2ºC

Metals (except Mercury) 6 Months 50 g 4º±2ºC

Pesticides and PCBs 14 Days 10 g 4º±2ºC

2-8 oz Glass (combined)

5.1. Laboratory Analyses Protocols

Laboratory testing procedures shall be conducted in accordance with the DMEF. The samples shall be analyzed for all the parameters listed in sections 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 as requested on the chain-of-custody record. Columbia Analytical Services or their sub-contractors, private contract chemical analytical laboratories, shall conduct all physical and chemical analyses.

Three discrete samples will be collected and analyzed for PCBs. However, prior to analyses the 3 master samples will be split in the field. Procedure for splitting sample as follows: master sample will be mixed in clean stainless bowl, after mixing sample will be laid out on a clean surface and quartered. The 2 opposing quarters will be placed in one jar and the other 2 quarters in the jar to be archived (frozen) at the lab for possible future analyses. At the laboratory sample is to be analyzed it should be mixed and placed on a clean surface and a pie shaped segment selected for analysis. This assures that settling during shipment and storage does not affect segment analyzed.

5.1.1. Chain of Custody

A chain-of-custody record for each set of samples shall be maintained throughout all sampling activities and shall accompany samples and shipment to the laboratory. Information tracked by the chain-of-custody records in the laboratory includes sample identification number, date and time of sample receipt, analytical parameters required, location and conditions of storage, date and time of removal from and return to storage, signature of person removing and returning the sample, reason for removing from storage, and final disposition of the sample.

5.1.2. Limits of Detection

All reasonable means, including additional cleanup steps and method modifications, will be used to meet target levels. Detection of analytes between MRL and MDL should be “J” flagged and reported as an estimate. All analytes should meet detection levels listed in Table 7.2 of the SEF (See Appendix C).

5.1.3. Sediment Chemistry

Private analytical laboratories shall conduct all chemical analyses. Chemical analyses shall include: metals (6020 and 7471 series), total organic carbon (TOC) method 9060, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phenols, phthalates, chlorinated organic compounds, miscellaneous extractables by 8270 SIM method or other low level detection method, pesticides 8081A and PCB’s by 8082.

Table 4: Sediment Chemistry & Conventionals (See Section 5.1.3 & 5.1.4)

Physical Suite

Semi-Volatiles 8270C Low Level

Pest/PCBs 8081/8082

*Metals 6010/6020 7471

TOC

060507BIFL-P-01 X X X X X

060507BIFL-P-02 X X X X X

060507BIFL-P-03 X X X X X

*Metals Sb, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Hg, Ni, Ag, Zn

5.1.4. Sediment Conventionals

The private analytical laboratories will analyze physical parameters. Particle grain size distribution for each sample shall be determined. Sieve analysis shall use a geological sieve series, which shall include the sieve sizes U.S. NO. 5, 10, 18, 35, 60, 120, and 230. Hydrogen peroxide shall not be used in preparations for grain-size analysis. Hydrometer analysis shall be run on particle sizes finer than the 230 mesh. Water content shall be determined using ASTM D 2216. Sediment classification designation shall be made in accordance with U.S. Soil Classification System, ASTM D 2487.

5.1.5. Holding Times

All samples for physical and chemical testing will be maintained at the testing laboratory at the temperatures specified in Table 3 and analyzed within the holding times shown in the table (unless archived). Samples will be retained by the lab for 60 days following analysis, except for the archived samples will be held for 1 year.

5.1.6. Quality Assurance/Quality Control

The chemistry QA/QC procedures found in Table 5 will be followed.

Table 5: Minimum Laboratory QA/QC

Analytical Type Method Blank2 Duplicate2 RM2,4 Matrix

Spikes2 Surrogates7

Semivolatiles1 X X3 X5 X X Pesticides/PCBs1 X X3 X5 X X

Metals X X X6 X Total Organic Carbon X X X6

Total Solids X Total Volatile Solids X

Particle Size X

1. Initial calibration required before any samples are analyzed, after each major disruption of equipment, and when ongoing calibration fails to meet criteria. Ongoing calibration is required at the beginning of each work shift, every 10 – 12 samples or every 12 hours (whichever is more frequent), and at the end of each shift.

2. Frequency of Analysis is one per batch.

3. Matrix spike duplicate shall be run.

4. Reference material.

5. Canadian standard SRM-1.

6. NIST certified reference material 2704.

7. Surrogate spikes shall be included with every sample; including matrix-spiked samples, blanks, and reference materials.

The QC measures ICAL, ICV, CCV, blank, LCS, MS, MSD, surrogate spike analysis, and second column confirmation should be in accordance with the DOD QSM Version 3, dated January 2006. See tables B-2, B-6, B-7 for instrument maintenance and MS/MSD warning/control limits; D-3 for surrogates; D-7 for LCS limits for SVOC;

D-15 for LCS limits for OC pesticides and D-17 for PCB aroclors.

6. BIOLOGICAL TESTING

6.1. Bioassays

Bioassays are not planned for this sampling event, unless further characterization is required. If a sufficient volume of Corbicula fluminea clams are recovered during the sampling event, tissue analysis may be analyzed.

7. REPORTING

7.1. QA Report

The laboratory QA/QC reports shall be incorporated by reference. This report shall identify any laboratory activities that deviated from the approved protocols and will make a statement regarding the overall validity of the data collected.

7.2. Sediment Evaluation Report

A written discussion of findings shall be prepared documenting the physical, chemical and biological (if necessary) character of potential material to be dredged. The physical and chemical reports shall be included as reference; individual copies will be furnished as requested. As a minimum, the following shall be included in the

• Previous sampling and analyses.

• Locations where the sediment samples were collected.

• A plan view of the project showing the actual sampling location.

• Description of sampling.

• Chemical testing data, with comparisons to screening levels guidelines

• Evaluate risk using the Conceptual Site Model as described in the SEF (see Figure 1).

Fish and benthos are likely to have a complete pathway (represented by a circle). Benthos would likely be in extended contact (represented by a filled circle). However due to the location salmon and resident fish do not linger in the area and therefore have a potential, but likely not a significant exposure (represented by the open circle). The other potential receptors have an incomplete or insignificant pathway and are represented by a dash.

Only benthos and fish (including threatened and endangered species) are likely to have a complete pathway. Benthos are likely to be in extended contact with the sediment, but salmonids and resident fish do not linger in this area.

“●” - complete pathway “○” - potentially complete pathway, but likely insignificant “ - ” - incomplete or insignificant pathway

Figure 1: Dredging Conceptual Site Model.

Media of Concern

Exposure Pathway

Secondary Media Pathway

Tertiary Media Potential Receptors

Dredging Resuspension

New Exposed Surface

Open Water Disposal

Upland Disposal

Nearshore Disposal

Subaqueous Capping

Sediment

Water Column

Settled Sediment

Water Column

Upland

CDF

Nearshore

CDF

CAP

Direct Contact

Direct Contact

Bioaccumulation

Direct Contact

Tissue

Fi sh

B ird s/

M am m al s

H um an s

ES

A

Sp ec ie s

B en th ic

In ve rts

C rit ic al

H ab ita t

Disposal Method Transport Processes (Examples)

- Leaching

- Surface Runoff

- Volatilization

- Bioaccumulation

} Consideration of these transport processes are not addressed in this SEF.

Please refer to the following guidance manuals for additional information on exposure pathways associated with these disposal options.

1) Corps. 2003. Upland Testing Manual, ERD/EL TR-03-1.

2) EPA. 1998. Guidance for In Situ Subaqueous Capping of Contaminated Sediment, EPA 905-B96-004.

Figure 2: Vicinity Map of Bonneville Dam (Fish Ladder)

Figure 3: Proposed Sampling Station Locations

APPENDIX A: PARAMETERS AND METHODS

1. Recommended Sample Preparation Methods, Cleanup Methods, Analytical Methods and Detection Limits for Sediment Management Standards, Chapter 173-204 WAC, Draft - July 1996.

2. Recommended Protocols for Measuring Conventional Sediment Variables in Puget Sound, Puget Sound Estuary Program, March 1986.

3. Recommended Methods for Measuring TOC in Sediments, Kathryn Bragdon-Cook, Clarification Paper, Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis Annual Review, May, 1993.

4. Units: ug = microgram, mg = milligram, kg = kilogram, dw = dry weight, oc = organic carbon.

5. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. Laboratory manual physical/chemical methods.

Method 3050, SW-846, 3rd ed., Vol. 1A, Chapter 3, Sec 3.2, Rev 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC.

6. Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption (GFAA) Spectrometry - SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986.

7. Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) Emission Spectrometry - SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986.

8. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste. Laboratory manual physical/chemical methods.

Method 7471, SW-846, 3rd ed., Vol. 1A, Chapter 3, Sec 3.3. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC.

9. Sonication Extraction of Sample Solids - Method 3550 (Modified), SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986. Method is modified to add matrix spikes before the dehydration step rather than after the dehydration step.

10. GCMS Capillary Column - Method 8270, SW-846, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986.

11. Purge and Trap Extraction and GCMS Analysis - Method 8260, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986.

12. Soxlet Extraction and Method 8081, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA 1986.

13. Total PCBs BT value in ug/kg oc.

APPENDIX B: QA2 DATA REQUIREMENTS

CHEMICAL VARIABLES

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

The following documentation is needed for organic compounds:

a. A cover letter referencing or describing the procedure used and discussing any analytical problems.

b. Reconstructed ion chromatograms for GC/MS analyses for each sample.

c. Mass spectra of detected target compounds (GC/MS) for each sample and associated library spectra.

d. GC/ECD and/or GC/flame ionization detection chromatograms for each sample.

e. Raw data quantification reports for each sample.

f. A calibration data summary reporting calibration range used [and decafluorotriphenylphosphine (DFTPP) and bromofluorobenzene (BFB) spectra and quantification report for GC/MS analyses].

g. Final dilution volumes, sample size, wet-to-dry ratios, and instrument detection limit.

h. Analyte concentrations with reporting units identified (to two significant figures unless otherwise justified).

i. Quantification of all analytes in method blanks (ng/sample).

j. Method blanks associated with each sample.

k. Recovery assessments and a replicate sample summary (laboratories should report all surrogate spike recovery data for each sample; a statement of the range of recoveries should be included in reports using these data).

l. Data qualification codes and their definitions.

METALS

For metals, the data report package for analyses of each sample should include the following:

a. Tabulated results in units as specified for each matrix in the analytical protocols, validated and signed in original by the laboratory manager.

b. Any data qualifications and explanation for any variance from the analytical protocols.

c. Results for all of the QA/QC checks initiated by the laboratory.

d. Tabulation of instrument and method detection limits.

e. All contract laboratories are required to submit metals results that are supported by sufficient backup data and quality assurance results to enable independent QA reviewers to conclusively determine the quality of the data. The laboratories should be able to supply legible photocopies of original data sheets with sufficient information to unequivocally identify:

f. Calibration results.

g. Calibration and preparation blanks.

h. Samples and dilutions.

i. Duplicates and spikes.

j. Any anomalies in instrument performance or unusual instrumental adjustment.

APPENDIX C:

RECOMMENDED ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATION LIMITS

Recommended Analytical Methods and Quantitation Limits for Sediment

Parameter Prep Method Analysis Method Sample Quantitation

Limit (SQL) 1/ Conventionals:

Total Solids (%) EPA 2450-G 0.1 Total Organic Carbon (%) EPA 5310B mod 0.1 Total Sulfides (mg/kg) PSEP 1997 1.0 Ammonia (mg/kg) Plumb 1981 0.1 Grain Size (%) ASTM D-422 mod 1.0 Metals (mg/kg):

Antimony EPA 6010/6020 2/ EPA 6010/6020 0.5 Arsenic EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 5 Cadmium EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 0.5 Chromium EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 0.5 Copper EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 5 Lead EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 0.1 Mercury EPA 7471 EPA 7471 0.05 Nickel EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 5 Silver EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 0.5 Zinc EPA 6010/6020 EPA 6010/6020 5 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (µg/kg):

LPAH

Naphthalene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Acenaphthylene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Acenaphthene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Fluorene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Phenanthrene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Anthracene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 2-Methylnaphthalene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7

HPAH

Fluoranthene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Pyrene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Benzo(a)anthracene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Chrysene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Benzofluoranthenes EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7

Recommended Analytical Methods and Quantitation Limits for Sediment

Parameter Prep Method Analysis Method Sample Quantitation

Limit (SQL) 1/ Benzo(a)pyrene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 6.7

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons (µg/kg):

1,4-Dichlorobenzene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 1,2-Dichlorobenzene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 Hexachlorobenzene (HCB) EPA 3550/3540 EPA 8270/8081 10 Phthalates (µg/kg):

Dimethyl phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Diethyl phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Di-n-butyl phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Butyl benzyl phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Di-n-octyl phthalate EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 1.0 Phenols (µg/kg):

Phenol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 2 Methylphenol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 4 Methylphenol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 2,4-Dimethylphenol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 Pentachlorophenol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 100 Miscellaneous Extractables (µg/kg):

Benzyl alcohol EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 50 Benzoic acid EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 100 Dibenzofuran EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 Hexachloroethane EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 Hexachlorobutadiene EPA 3550/3540 EPA 8270/8081 10 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine EPA 3550-mod EPA 8270 20 Pesticides/PCBs (µg/kg):

DDE (p,p’-, o,p’-) EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 DDD (p,p’-, o,p’-) EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 DDT (p,p’-, o,p’-) EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 Aldrin EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 Chlordane EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 Dieldrin EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 Heptachlor EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2

Recommended Analytical Methods and Quantitation Limits for Sediment

Parameter Prep Method Analysis Method Sample Quantitation

Limit (SQL) 1/ Lindane EPA 3540 EPA 8081 2 Total PCBs EPA 3540 EPA 8082 0.5 Notes:

1/ SQLs are based on dry sample weight assuming no interferences; site-specific method modifications may be required to achieve these SQLs in some cases.

2/ Includes hydrochloric acid digestion per EPA 3050-B.

ATTACHMENT B

Bonneville Bradford Island Fish Ladder Sediment Quality Evaluation Report

July 2011

BONNEVILLE

BRADFORD ISLAND FISH LADDER

SEDIMENT QUALITY EVALUATION

REPORT

Sampled July 2007

Prepared by:

Wendy Briner

Technical Review Mark Siipola

Portland District

Corps of Engineers

CENWP-EC-HR

ii

ACRONYMS

EPA Environmental Protection Agency USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) USF&W US Fish and Wildlife WDOE Washington Department of Ecology ODEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality WDNR Washington Department of Natural Resources DMEF Dredge Material Evaluation Framework SEF Sediment Evaluation Framework (2006 Updated DMEF) NES Newly Exposed Surface QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control TEL Threshold Effects Level TOC Total Organic Carbon PAH Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl MDL Method Detection Limit PQL Practical Quantitation Limit MRL Method Reporting Limit TVS Total Volatile Solids TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient ND non-detect ppm parts per million – mg/kg ppb parts per billion – ug/kg or ug/L pptr parts per trillion – ng/kg SL Screening level As Arsenic Cd Cadmium Ni Nickel Cu Copper Sb Thallium Cr Chromium Pb Lead Hg Mercury Ni Nickel Ag Silver Zn Zinc GC Gas Chromatography iii

Table of Contents Abstract Introduction

Sampling and Analysis Objectives Previous Studies Current Sampling Event/Discussion Results

Physical and Volatile Solids (ASTM methods) Metals (EPA method 6020/7471), Total Organic Carbon (EPA method 9060) Pesticides/PCBs (EPA method 8081A/8082), Phenols, Phthalates, Miscellaneous Extractables (EPA method 8270) Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (EPA method 8270C)

Conclusion References

Table 1, Sample Location Coordinates, (NAD 83, Oregon State Plane North)

Table 3: Physical Analysis and Volatile Solids

Table 4: Inorganic Metals - EPA method 6020/7471A (mg/kg)

Table 5: Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCBs) - EPA Method 8082 (ug/kg)

Table 6: Pesticides - EPA Method 8081 (ug/kg)

Table 7: Chlorinated Hydrocarbons - EPA Method 8270 (ug/kg)

Table 8: Miscellaneous Extractables - EPA Method 8270C (ug/kg)

Table 9: Phthalates - EPA Method 8270C (ug/kg)

Table 10: Phenols - EPA Method 8270C (ug/kg)

Table 11: Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Low Molecular Weight - EPA Method 8270C (ug/kg)

Table 12: Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) High Molecular Weight - EPA Method 8270C (ug/kg)

Figure 1: Bonneville, Bradford Island Fish Ladder, Vicinity Map

Figure 2, Bonneville, Bradford Island Fish Ladder, Sediment Sampling Station Locations

Bradford Island Fish Ladder

Sampled July 31, 2007

ABSTRACT

Bonneville Dam is located between River Mile (RM) 145 and 146 of the Columbia River. The proposed dredge site is located at the fish exit (water entrance) of the fish ladder east of the Bonneville Dam First Powerhouse on the south side of Bradford Island. Approximately 2000 CY or less will be dredged by clam shell. As a management option material will be placed at an approved upland disposal site.

The 2007 physical analyses resulted in mean values of 5.8% gravel (0.4% to 12.8% range), 36.3% sand (23.2% to 28.8% range), and 51.9% silt/clay (15.9% to 71.8% range), with 5.20% volatile solids (4.63% to 5.74% range).

The chemical analyses (see Tables 3-5) indicates only very low levels of contamination in any of the samples, with all levels below their respective SEF screening levels (SLs), with the exception of mercury (Hg), which averaged 0.362 mg/kg (ppm) (range 0.319 ppm to 0.402 ppm), exceeding the SEF screening level of 0.280 ppm. The analytical results of this characterization are consistent with historical data, again with the exception of mercury levels, which in the 2001 sampling event for dredging at the fish ladder contained an average of 0.209 ppm (range 0.202 ppm to 0.220 ppm) mercury. In a 2002 study conducted in the Bonneville Dam forebay, the average level of mercury detected in samples analyzed from 8 stations was 0.109 ppm (range 0.05 ppm to 0.188 ppm).

Detection levels were sufficiently low enough to evaluate material proposed for dredging.

The management plan for the approximately 2000 CYs of material at the fish ladder calls for the material to be placed upland at a licensed landfill, therefore the level of mercury (0.352 mg/kg) in the dredge prism, even though it exceeds the SEF screening level (0.28 mg/kg), is not an in-water disposal issue. Because this is a frequently dredged area, which has not had elevated mercury levels above the 0.28 mg/kg screening level (0.21 mg/kg in 2001 Fish Ladder Study and 0.10 mg/kg in 2003 Forebay Study) dredging down to the previously exposed surface will leave an acceptable level in the

NSM.

INTRODUCTION

The sampling and analysis objectives are stated in the Sampling and Analysis Plan and are, also, listed below. This report will characterize the sediment to be dredged and outline the procedures used to accomplish these objectives.

Sampling and Analysis Objectives

• Characterize sediments in accordance with the regional dredge material testing manual protocols:

o Sediment Evaluation Framework (SEF), 2006.

Sampled July 31, 2007

• Collect, handle and analyze representative sediment from Bradford Island Fish ladder exit (water entrance) in accordance with protocols and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements.

• Characterize sediments to be dredged for evaluation of suitability of in-water disposal

(management plan calls for material to be place upland).

• Analyze for full suite of physical and chemical parameters as outlined in the SEF (2006).

SEF – Table 7.2 (Appendix C of this report) contains the list of analytes and methods of analysis. Organotin will not be considered an in-water contaminate of concern at the fish ladder; results from the 2001 sediment sampling event indicate it is not present above detection limits.

PREVIOUS STUDIES

In 1991 informational sampling and analysis was done on sediment downstream from the First Powerhouse Navigational Lock, on the south side of the river, with results acceptable for unconfined in-water or upland disposal. This same downstream area was dredged in1986 and in the late 1970s.

In July 1997 seven sediment samples were collected from Bonneville Second Powerhouse forebay and water supply conduits. Two of the samples were taken from the downstream portion of the south Auxiliary Water Supply (AWS) conduit by divers inspecting the inside of the south AWS.

Three additional samples were taken from the surface of the sediment deposits at…