Geochemical analysis of soils and sediments, Coeur d'Alene drainage basin, Idaho: sampling, analytical methods, and results

Box, Stephen E.- sbox@usgs.gov, Bookstrom, Arthur A.- abookstrom@usgs.gov, Ikramuddin, Mohammed, Lindsay, James · 2001 · Report

This report presents the locations, descriptions, analytical procedures used, and an inter-lab comparison of over 1100 geochemical analyses of samples of

This 2001 document, Geochemical analysis of soils and sediments, Coeur d'Alene drainage basin, Idaho: sampling, analytical methods, and results, is preserved in the Mountain Man Mining Library for research and reference. Original source: pubs.usgs.gov.

GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSES OF SOILS AND SEDIMENTS, COEUR D'ALENE DRAINAGE BASIN, IDAHO: SAMPLING, ANALYTICAL METHODS, AND RESULTS

by Stephen E. Box1, Arthur A. Bookstrom1, Mohammed Ikramuddin2, and James Lindsay3

Open-File Report 01-139

This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

U.S. Department Of The Interior U.S. Geological Survey

1 U.S. Geological Survey, 904 West Riverside Avenue, Room 202, Spokane, WA 99201; sbox@usgs.gov; abookstrom@usgs.gov 2Geology Department, Eastern Washington University, Mail Stop 70, Cheney, WA 99004; midramuddin@ewu.edu 31231 West Racine St., Bellingham, WA 98226

Table Of Contents

Abstract 5 Introduction 6 Purpose 6 Participants and Cooperators 7 Study Area 7 Coeur d'Alene River Basin 7 Coeur d'Alene Mining District 8 Sample Locations and Descriptions 12 Sample-Site Location Methods 12 Sample Descriptions 13 Sampling Techniques and Their Applications 14 1. Surface Grab 14 2. Vertical Groove 15 3. Depth-Bracket Sampling 16 4. Hand Cores 17 5. Power Cores 18 6. Vibro-Cores 19 7. Vibro-Piston Cores 20 8. Auger In Vibro-Core Casing 21 Sample Custody Procedures 23 Sample Preparation Methods 23 Chemical Elements 24 Analytical Methods and Their Applications 25 US Geological Survey energy dispersive Xray fluorescence analysis (USGS-EDXRF) 25 Eastern Washington University Geochemistry Laboratory (EWU) Analysis 25 EWU sample digestion procedures (4-acid) 25 EWU Analytical Methods 26 EWU ICP-MS Procedure 27 EWU ICP-AES Procedure 27 EWU FAA Procedure 30 CHEMEX Labs Analysis 30 XRAL Laboratories Analysis 31 XRAL Apparatus 31 XRAL Reagents 31 XRAL Sample Digestion Procedure (4-acid) 32 XRAL Analysis by ICP-AES 33 ACZ Laboratories 33 ACZ Microwave-Assisted Nitric Acid Digestion Procedure 34 ACZ Analysis by ICP-AES 34 Analytical Quality Control, Assessment, and Assurance 34 Quality Control Procedures 35 US Geological Survey EDXRF Quality Control 38 Eastern Washington University Geochemistry Lab (EWU) Quality Control 38 EWU analyses of known Standard Reference Materials 38 EWU Duplicates and Blanks 40 EWU Precision and Accuracy 40 EWU Analyses of Blind Standard Reference Materials 40 CHEMEX Laboratories Quality Control 40 XRAL Laboratories Quality Control 42 XRAL Precision 42

XRAL Recovery Relative to USGS SRM Target Values 42 XRAL Recovery Relative to Blind NIST SRM certified values 45 ACZ Laboratories Quality Control 45 ACZ Precision and Accuracy 45 ACZ Recovery Relative to Blind NIST SRM certified values 49 Comparison between laboratories of analyses of NIST Standards 49 Comparison between laboratories of analyses of sample splits 53 Conclusions 61 Acknowledgements 66 References 67

Figures

Figure 1. Location map of study area within Spokane River basin, Idaho and Washington. 10 Figure 2. Index map of CdA River basin study area with outlines of sample site location maps 11 Figure 3. Comparison of laboratory analyses of NIST SRMs for Pb and Zn 50 Figure 4. Comparison of laboratory analyses of NIST SRMs for Fe and Mn 51 Figure 5. Comparison of laboratory analyses of NIST SRMs for As and Cd 52 Figure 6. Comparison of Pb analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories 54 Figure 7. Comparison of Zn analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories. 55 Figure 8. Comparison of Fe analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories 58 Figure 9. Comparison of Mn analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories. 59 Figure 10. Comparison of As analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories 62 Figure 11. Comparison of Cd analyses of sample splits by EWU with those of other laboratories. 63

Tables

Table 1. Chemical Elements and Geochemical Detection Limits 28 Table 2. USGS-EDXRF Instrumental Run Parameters 29 Table 3. Quality Control Procedures for Geochemical Analysis 37 Table 4. USGS-EDXRF analysis of four NIST Standard Reference Materials 39 Table 5. EWU Precision and Accuracy Relative to NIST-Certified Values 41 Table 6. XRAL Precision and Accuracy Relative to USGS SRM SAR-L. 43 Table 7. XRAL Precision and Accuracy Relative to USGS SRM SAR-M 44 Table 8. Precision and accuracy of ACZ analyses of calibration solutions and SRMs 46 Table 9. EWU, XRAL and ACZ Blind Analyses Relative to NIST-Certified Values for SRM 2711 47 Table 10. EWU, XRAL and ACZ Blind Analyses Relative to NIST-Certified Values for SRM 2710 48 Table 11. Comparisons of Pb and Zn values by EWU and by NIST with those of other labs. 56 Table 12. Comparisons of Fe and Mn values by EWU and by NIST with those of other labs 60 Table 13. Comparisons of As and Cd values by EWU and by NIST with those of other labs 64

Appendices

A. Sample location maps (A-1 to A-10) B. Sample site location information C. Lithologic descriptions of samples D. USGS EDXRF analytical data E. EWU 4-acid ICP-MS, ICP-AES, and FAA analytical data F. CHEMEX nitric/aqua regia ICP-AES analytical data G. XRAL 4-acid ICP-AES analytical data H. ACZ microwave-assisted nitric-acid ICP-AES analytical data J. List of digital files associated with this report

Abstract This report presents the locations, descriptions, analytical procedures used, and an inter-lab comparison of over 1100 geochemical analyses of samples of soil and sediment in and downstream of a major lead-zinc-silver mining district in the Coeur d'Alene (CdA) drainage basin of northern Idaho. The samples fall in 3 broad categories: (1) samples from vertical profiles of floodplain soils in the valley of the main stem of the CdA River (767 samples) and of the South Fork of the CdA River (38 samples), (2) size fractionated surficial samples of sediment bedload within the channel of the South Fork of the CdA River (68 samples), and (3) samples from vertical profiles of sediment bedload within the channel of the main stem of the CdA River (260 samples). Five different laboratories contributed geochemical data for this report. Four of the five laboratories employed analytical methods that require sample dissolution prior to analysis; one laboratory (US Geological Survey) used analytical instrumentation (energy dispersive x-ray fluorescence [EDXRF]) that is applied to pulverized samples. Some dissolution procedures use four acids (hydrochloric, nitric, perchloric, and hydrofluoric; Eastern Washington University [EWU] Geochemical Laboratory and XRAL Laboratories, Inc.), others use two acids (nitric acid and aqua regia; CHEMEX Labs, Inc.), and some use only concentrated nitric acid (ACZ Laboratories, Inc.). Most analyses of dissolved samples were done by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES) or by ICP - MS (Mass Spectroscopy). Some analyses for Ag and K were done by Flame Atomic Absorption (FAA). Inter-laboratory comparisons are made for 6 elements: lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), arsenic (As), and cadmium (Cd). In general inter-laboratory correlations are better for samples within the compositional range of the Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Analyses by EWU are the most accurate relative to the NIST standards (mean recoveries within 1% for Pb, Fe, Mn, and As, 3% for Zn and 5% for Cd) and are the most precise (within 7% of the mean at the 95% confidence interval). USGS-EDXRF is similarly accurate for Pb and Zn. XRAL and ACZ are relatively accurate for Pb (within

5-8% of certified NIST values), but were considerably less accurate for the other 5 elements of concern (10-25% of NIST values). However, analyses of sample splits by more than one laboratory reveal that, for some elements, XRAL (Pb, Mn, Cd) and ACZ (Pb, Mn, Zn, Fe) analyses were comparable to EWU analyses of the same samples (when values are within the range of NIST SRMs). These results suggest that, for some elements, XRAL and ACZ dissolutions are more effective on the matrix of the CdA samples than on the matrix of the NIST samples (obtained from soils around Butte, Montana). Splits of CdA samples analyzed by CHEMEX were the least accurate, yielding values 10-25% less than those of EWU. Introduction This report presents a compilation of about 1,000 geochemical analyses of alluvial sediments, collected from stream-and riverbeds, banks, and floodplains downstream from mines and mills of the Coeur d'Alene (CdA) silver-lead-zinc mining district in north Idaho. Methods of sample collection, preparation, and analysis are described. Locations of sample sites are shown on maps and listed in tables showing latitude and longitude (in degrees to four decimal places), sample-depth intervals (cm), sample descriptions, and chemical analytical results for as many as 40 chemical elements. Purpose The purpose of this report is to document the results of about 1,000 chemical analyses of samples of sediments that were deposited in the CdA drainage basin before and during the era of large-scale mining in the CdA mining district, in north Idaho. These samples were collected as part of an effort to determine the character, distribution, thickness, volume, and metals contents of sediments and soils within the CdA drainage basin. Such information is needed for a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA), and for an environmental Remediation Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) being conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency. In response to requests for information from litigants on both sides of an ongoing court case, descriptions of sampling and analytical methods and procedures given here are more inclusive than those

that would accompany most purely scientific publications. Participants and Cooperators Employees and associates of the U.S. Geological Survey - Geologic Division (USGS-GD), Mineral Resources Program (MRP), Spokane Field Office (SFO) collected these sediment samples in the course of a series of geo-environmental studies conducted from 1993 to 1999. The geochemistry laboratory in the Department of Geology at Eastern Washington University provided many of the chemical analyses, and the University of Idaho provided a Livingston core sampler. This work was funded by USGS-GD-MRP. It was done in cooperation with the Coeur d'Alene Tribe, the U.S. Geological SurveyWater Resources Division (USGS-WRD), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Bureau of Land Management (USBLM), and U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (USDA-FS). Study Area The study area covered by this report is mostly within the CdA River basin in north Idaho (figure 1). The CdA mining district, which lies mostly within the South Fork drainage basin (figure 2), is one of the largest past-producers of silver in the world, and is also a giant past-producer of lead and zinc (Long, De Young, and Ludington, 1998). Coeur d'Alene River Basin The CdA River drains a large part of the north Idaho panhandle -- from a divide that defines Idaho's eastern border, to CdA Lake, near Idaho's western border (figure 1). The CdA River Basin occupies the western side of the northern Bitterroot Range, between the Clark Fork River Basin to the northeast, and the St. Joe River Basin to the south. The North Fork of the CdA River drains an area of about 900 sq mi, and its average discharge is about 2,000 ft3/s. The South Fork of the CdA River drains an area of about 300 sq mi, and its average discharge is about 500 ft3/s. The North and South Forks of the CdA River join near Enaville, Idaho, to form the main stem of the CdA River, which meanders about 58 km (36 mi) southwesterly to

CdA Lake, near Harrison, Idaho (figures 1 and 2). Relatively steep gradients of the North and South Forks flatten downstream, and approach a nearly flat gradient from Cataldo Flats to CdA Lake. The cobble-gravel bottom of the river channel upstream from Cataldo Flats to the mouth of the CdA River into CdA Lake. The cobble-gravel bottom of the river channel upstream from Cataldo Flats gives way to a large central sand bar, which occupies a wide bend in the river channel at Cataldo boat landing. Metal-enriched riverbottom sediments are predominantly sandy from there to the toe of the delta front on CdA Lake. Most of the bottom of CdA Lake beyond the delta is covered by fine-grained metal-enriched sediment (Horowitz, Elrick and Cook, 1993). The Post Falls Dam, on the Spokane River west of the northwest outlet of CdA Lake, holds summer lake level at 2,125 ft elev, and backs lake water up to about Cataldo Landing (figure 2). Thus, in summer, the CdA River becomes a long, narrow, meandering, eastern extension of the Post Falls - CdA Lake reservoir, with little or no current along the 47 km (29 mi) river distance between Cataldo Flats and CdA Lake (figure 2). Coeur d'Alene Mining District The CdA mining district is one of the giant silver-lead-zinc mining areas in the world. Its past production ranks first in the United States for silver and third for lead and zinc. Remaining resources of silver rank fourth in the United States (Long, De Young, and Ludington, 2000). The CdA district includes the Bunker Hill mine, mill, tailings impoundment, smelter, and smelter-emissions fallout zone, all of which are in the Bunker Hill Superfund Site (figure 1). The CdA district also includes about 30 other significant mine/mill complexes, and more than 100 relatively small mines and prospects, some of which are in the North Fork drainage basin. To date, the CdA district has produced about 7 million metric tonnes of lead, 3 million tonnes of zinc, and 30 thousand tonnes of silver (Long, 1998a). Significant resources remain (Long, DeYoung, and Ludington, 1998), and, as of mid-2000, production continues at a few major mines. Mining and milling in the CdA mining region have produced approximately 109 million tonnes of tailings, containing over 1 million tonnes of lead, 1 million tonnes of

zinc, and 3 thousand tonnes of silver (Long, 1998b). From 1896 to about 1910, the predominant milling technology included hand sorting, crushing with stamp mills, and gravity separation. Jigs sorted particles according to their settling velocities by "jigging" them up and down on under-water screens, or by forcing pulses of water up through the screens and particles. Zinc was not intentionally recovered, and lead recoveries commonly ranged from 50 to 80 percent. Tailings commonly contained up to 5 wt. percent each of lead and zinc (Long, 1998b). Addition of other gravity separation devices improved recoveries somewhat, but recovery from slimes (silt and finer grain sizes) remained poor. Most mill-sites were on hillsides near the bottoms of narrow canyons, and their tailings commonly were discarded directly or indirectly into passing streams. Slimes tended to wash away rapidly, but sand-and pebble-sized tailings tended to accumulate near mills, to be washed downstream during high stream-flow episodes. The flotation process was introduced in the early 1910's to treat tailings from gravity separators. By the early 1930's, most mills had converted to flotation as their principal recovery method. In flotation cells, ore-mineral particles preferentially adhere to surfaces of bubbles formed by agitation and injection of air into a slurry of finely ground mineral particles, water, and oily frothing agents. The bubbles rise through the froth, collecting ore particles, and carrying them to the surface, where they are paddled into collecting troughs. Mineral particles that do not attach to the bubbles sink, forming a slurry of tailings in oily water. Successive sink-float cycles are necessary to concentrate each recoverable ore mineral (generally lead sulfide and zinc sulfide in this case). Adoption and improvement of flotation techniques gradually increased metal recoveries, allowing mines to produce larger amounts of lower-grade ores. This resulted in production of larger quantities of finer-grained tailings (fine sand and finer grain sizes) with lower metal contents.

# # Area of Figure 2. R er Latah Creek St. Maries Clar k F ork R er Co eu r d ' Al en e Ri ve r St Jo e R iver Lake Coeur d' Alene P r ai rie R at hd rum Sandpoint Montana Washington Idaho Spokane Lake Pend Oreille Coeur d' Alene Spok an e a ey Figure 1. Regional map of the Coeur d'Alene River system and other major tributary streams and rivers of the Spokane River basin in northern Idaho, eastern Washington and western Montana. Area of figure 2 shown by outline. Harrison Coeur d' Alene Mining District 10 15 20 25 Kilometers # North Fork Spokane # # # $ So ut h F or k Wallace

Coeur d'Alene S melterville Kellogg Cataldo Bunker Hill Superfund Site Wallace Coeur d'Alene Mining District Mullan 47 o30' Coeur d'Alene Lake North F ork Harrison St. Joe River Burke Coeur d'Alene River Kingston Spokane River o Post Falls Dam Wolf Lodge Bay E ast Pt Gasser Pt. Conkling Pt. Pinehurst e Pine Ck. Figure 2: Index map of Coeur d'Alene River basin study area with outlines of sample site location maps shown in Appendix A, as well as

outlines of the Coeur d'Alene mining district and the Bunker Hill Superfund Site.

E naville N 10 Km 10 Mi OR MT WY ID AR E A OF MAP WA Nine emile Cr. Canyon Cr. City or town site Prichard Cr. Murray

R ose Lake R athdrum Prairie Map A-8 p Map A-9 Map A-7 Map A-6 Map A-4 Map A-3 Map A-2 Map A-1 p

Maries S t. Map A-10 Map A-5

Metal-enriched sediments of the CdA drainage basin are derived mostly from mining and milling wastes, discarded into the South Fork and its tributaries. Mill tailings were washed down-valley and onto floodplains by fluvial processes, including annual spring run-offs, and sudden winter floods, caused by rain-on-snow episodes. Approximately 51 percent of the tailings generated in the CdA district were discarded directly into creeks that are tributary to the CdA River (Long, 1998b). The Bunker Hill and Page mills used tailings-settling ponds beginning in 1927, but most other mills discarded tailings into creeks until 1968, when that was prohibited by Federal law. Prior to 1968, an average of about 2,000 metric tonnes of metal-bearing mine slimes were being discarded into streams each day (Hoffman, 1995), and the South Fork ran "the color of 'dirty dough'" with suspended mill tailings (Rabe and Flaherty, 1974). At the confluence of the North and South Forks the flow volume of muddy South Fork water met and mixed with about 4 times its flow volume of relatively clear North-Fork water, to form the larger CdA River, which ran turbid with suspended sediment. From 1932 to 1967 a suction dredge removed metal-enriched sediment from the river bottom near Cataldo Landing, and placed it on Cataldo Flats, forming extensive dredge-spoil deposits on the floodplain there. Each year the dredge excavated an area of about 10 hm2 (25 acres) of river channel to a depth of about 6.7 m (22 ft), forming a crescent-shaped dredge pond about 180 m (600 ft) across and 1,200 m (2,800 ft) long (Grant, 1952). Dredging was discontinued in 1967, after which tailings were no longer discarded into streams. Aerial photographs made in 1983 show that by then the dredge pond had filled, and the central sand bar had formed in approximately its present location, size and shape. Sample Locations and Descriptions Sample-Site Location Methods Sample locations are tabulated in Appendix B as decimal degrees of latitude and longitude, keyed to the North American datum of 1927 (NAD27) and given to 4 decimal places. Appendix B also lists the sample site location method used to locate each sample

site. Samples collected prior to 1996 were located on 1:24,000 scale U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps by matching identifiable features on the map to corresponding features on the ground, and (or) by measuring or triangulating from such features. Latitude and longitude of sample-site map locations were determined by measurement from the map grid, and are tabulated in decimal degrees to 4 places (Appendix B). Locations are considered accurate to within about 50 to 150 ft, depending on the distinctiveness of the site and (or) its distance from features recognized on both the ground and the map (Appendix B, site-location method "a"). Reference locations on riverbanks at opposite ends of river-channel core transects were staked and flagged. The reference locations were marked on 1:24,000-scale maps, as described above. Drill holes in the channel of the river were located by compass-and-tape measurements from the reference locations. Sample sites along onshore extensions of river transects also were located by compass-and-tape measurements from the reference locations (Appendix B, site-location method "b"). The reference location stakes were re-visited in 1996 and locations were derived with a GPS instrument. After 1996 all sample sites were located with the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS) Precise Positioning Service (PPS), using a PLGGR receiver for Federal Civilian Users (Appendix B, site-location method "c"). Locations determined in this way are considered accurate to within about 10 m (33 ft). All sample locations are plotted on digital raster graphic topographic maps (DRGs) in Appendix A (maps A1 to A10). Sample locations were also plotted on Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quadrangles (DOQQs) with a scale of 1:12000 (not shown). Sample locations on these two electronic base maps were compared to the original field maps in order to check the accuracy of the sample-site latitudes and longitudes. In some cases sample locations were corrected to reflect the known position relative to some feature on the DRG or DOQQ. Sample Descriptions Lithologic descriptions of the samples are given in Appendix C. Samples were described in the field (or laboratory) for grain size, sediment color, organic content, sedimentary and biogenic structures, and degree of cementation. Grain size was estimated using a hand lens by comparison with silt and sand samples of six classified sieve sizes,

mounted on a card, and named according to the size classification used by most North American geologists and engineers (Compton, 1985). Color was estimated by comparing sediment color to the Rock Color Chart of the Geological Society of America (Goddard and others, 1970). Sampling Techniques and Their Applications Sampling of soil and sediment within the CdA valley fall in 3 broad categories: (1) samples from vertical profiles of floodplain soils in the valley of the main stem of the CdA River (767 samples) and of the South Fork of the CdA River (38 samples), (2) surficial samples of sediment bedload within the channel of the South Fork of the CdA River (68 samples), and (3) samples from vertical profiles of sediment bedload within the channel of the main stem of the CdA River (260 samples). The range of surficial environments and sample target depths necessitated a diverse array of sampling techniques. The sampling technique used at each sample site is given in Appendix B and described in some detail below. 1. Surface Grab Surface grab samples are collected by scooping or scraping sediment from small sample sites, generally at or near the exposed sediment surface, without much digging. Spot-grab samples of sediment can be taken from relatively steep exposures, such as riverbanks, or from relatively flat exposures, such as subaerially exposed stream-beds or floodplains (Appendix B, sampling technique 1). In the summer of 1994 Julie Eddy, an Eastern Washington University student under the direction of Stephen Box, collected surface grab samples of stream sediments of the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and its tributaries (94JE samples, Appendix B). Samples were collected during summer low flow from wet or dry sediment bars within the high water channel of the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and its tributaries. Each sample is a composite of 3-5 samples collected from the upper 5 cm of the bar over a 2-5 m distance with a shovel or plastic trowel. Finer grained accumulations behind obstacles in the river channel were generally targeted for

collection. The samples were screened in the field with a 2 mm mesh screen, lightly washing the sample through the screen with river water. The oversized material was discarded. The pan with undersized material and water was allowed to settle for 10 minutes and the overlying water was gently poured off. The wet sample was placed in a pre-labeled cambric cloth bag and stored for transport in a plastic box. Samples were kept in the locked vehicle until they were transported to the locked USGS lab at Eastern Washington University (within 1-3 days of collection). 2. Vertical Groove Vertical groove samples were scooped or scraped from a steep exposure, to form a vertical groove, roughly perpendicular to sedimentary layering. Vertical groove samples are representative of the stratigraphic interval from which they are taken. Vertical groove sampling has several advantages over auger-or core drilling. It takes less equipment and time. The material is visible before, during, and after the sampling. Sampling can be done without compressing or disrupting layering or other sedimentary structures. Contamination of samples from vertically deeper samples by overlying materials, a problem with core sampling, can be avoided. Vertical groove sampling was the main technique used to sample riverbank exposures (Appendix B, sampling technique 2, Rbw map unit). Sample intervals were selected based on subdivision of the stratigraphic section into lithologically distinct intervals. Groove sampling also was used to sample floodplain sediments exposed in test pits dug into floodplain sediments above the zone of water saturation. However, groove sampling is not well suited to sampling below the water table, where pit walls tend to collapse. Before sampling, the exposure was cleaned by cutting a fresh exposure, working from top to bottom with a clean, sharp steel shovel. A stainless steel spoon or knife was used to scoop or scrape samples from the exposure, working from the bottom up, to avoid downward contamination by falling sediment. Removed sediment was caught and placed in new, finely woven, tightly sewn, 5.5 by 10.5-inch cambric cloth bags, labeled with a sample site identifier and the sample interval depth range. Sampling tools and hands were

well rinsed after each sample was collected to avoid cross-sample contamination. 3. Depth-Bracket Sampling In 1998 EWU students John Wallis and Patrick Blair, under the direction of A.A. Bookstrom, collected 130 samples from 37 sites (labeled "T98-xx" in Appendix B) on the floodplain of the Coeur d'Alene River to fill gaps in the database on thickness and metal content of metal-enriched sediment, particularly in upland and palustrine environments. The sampling was done from late September to early November, as water levels declined, and access to marshy locations improved. Sample locations were determined from the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS) Precise Positioning Service (PPS), using a PLGGR receiver for Federal Civil Users. Locations are considered accurate to within about 30 to 50 ft. At each sample site, a pit was dug and sampled, and (or) a hole was made and sampled with a core tube or auger (Appendix B, sampling technique 3). Samples were collected from a series of 4 + 1 cm depth intervals, vertically spaced at about 20 cm centers (at depths of 0 to the 1980 volcanic ash layer, or to 4 cm, 18 to 22 cm, 38 to 42 cm, etc.). Spaced intervals were sampled to limit the size and number of samples, thus maximizing the number of sites that could be sampled and analyzed within budget. In most cases, visible contrast in the character of sediment between the bracketing samples indicates the bottom depth and thickness of the layer of metal-enriched sediment more precisely. At the outset we used a field lead-test kit to indicate whether the entire section of metal-enriched sediment had been sampled. However, by checking with a field XRF analyzer, we found that the field lead test is not dependable in oxidized metal-enriched sediment. After that, we took our samples to the BLM office in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, where rapid preliminary analyses were done for lead using their portable Outukumpu ® XRF analyzer. This gave a reliable indication of whether we had reached the bottom of the section of metal-enriched sediment. If not, we could return to the site, and try to sample deeper. A bucket auger was often used in 1998 to sample below the water table, where it was encountered in test pits. Bucket-auger samples are taken by pushing and twisting

auger teeth into the ground, thus cutting a cylindrical hole, and forcing the cut-sediment into a collection cylinder, or "bucket," above the cutter teeth. Our stainless-steel bucket auger has curved triangular bit teeth that overlap, and extend about 5 cm ahead of an open-ended sample cylinder, 6.5 cm in diameter, and 20 cm long. The diameter of the cutting head is about 7 cm. A "bucket handle" is welded to the top of the sample cylinder, and the drive pipe is screwed into a fitting at the top of the handle. Multiple sections of pipe can be added to lengthen the reach of the bucket auger. A cross bar at the top of the pipe is used to twist and press the auger into the soil, thus cutting and forcing sediment into the bucket. After penetrating 20 cm, the auger is pulled, and the sample extracted. Sediment from the top third of the bucket is discarded to avoid down-hole contamination. Sediment from the bottom part of the bucket is collected for chemical analysis. Sample intervals were determined by the penetration of the auger required to fill the auger bucket. 4. Hand Cores Various hand-driven coring devices were used to sample floodplain sediments below the water table, where test pits tend to collapse (Appendix B, sampling technique 4). One commercially available hand-driven coring device has a 2 cm (0.75-inch)- diameter transparent plastic core barrel inside a stainless steel drive tube with a slidehammer attachment. Because of excessive friction along the walls of that small-diameter core tube, it tended to penetrate faster than it accepted sediment into the core barrel. Therefore, core recoveries generally were poor, except in soft, water-saturated sediment. Our best use of this tool was to extend our sampling below the water table in hand-dug test pits. After recovery the filled plastic core tube was transported to the lab and split. Sample intervals were selected based on subdivision of the cored section into lithologically distinct intervals. Samples were collected into labeled cambric cloth bags. To improve core recovery in marsh environments, we experimented with largerdiameter PVC plastic tubes, which we sharpened on one end, and split lengthwise by sawing. We taped the two halves of the split tube together to make a core tube that could be opened. We cleared away the mat of surface vegetation, placed a block of wood over the top end of the tube, and pushed and pounded it into the sediment as far as possible.

We measured from the top of the tube to the ground, outside the tube to indicate penetration, and inside the tube to indicate core recovery. We taped shut the top of the tube to create a near vacuum, as we pulled it to extract the core. We experimented with 1- , 2-, and 3-inch diameter tubes, and found that with increasing tube diameter, core recovery increased, but core retention during withdrawal decreased. Multiple attempts were often required to successfully extract full core tubes. When we successfully extracted a core, we opened the tube lengthwise, split the core with a stainless steel knife, measured and examined the core, marked sample intervals, and sampled. We collected samples into labeled cambric cloth bags for analysis from one half of the core, and for archive from the other split half. In 1998 we used a relatively thin-walled aluminum pipe for hand coring. The thinwalled pipe was easier drive into the sediment than the thicker-walled PVC plastic pipe. However, the aluminum pipe, which was 3 inches in diameter, was not split. To remove the core, we tilted the pipe and tapped it to dislodge it, so that gravity would pull it from the pipe. The core was extruded onto a clean plywood board or plastic sheet, where it was split lengthwise with a knife, measured, described, and sampled into labeled cambric cloth bags. 5. Power Cores In the summer of 1994 a Giddings power-impact coring machine was used to drill six core holes (Appendix B, sampling technique 5) along a transect northwest from the riverbank across Strobl Marsh, east of Killarney Lake (Appendix B, sites 94GID2 to 94GID6). The trailer-mounted Giddings coring machine is powered by a small engine, which rotates the drill string, and hydraulically presses the rotating steel drill pipe downward. Core is forced into a 2-inch-diameter transparent plastic core barrel inside the drill pipe. The machine can drill to about 20 ft, using 4-ft sections of drill pipe. Penetration and recovery were noted during drilling. The transparent core tubes with recovered sediment were transported back to the lab for sampling. In the lab the transparent core tubes were split lengthwise, and the recovered core was measured and described. Sample intervals were selected based on subdivision of the cored section into lithologically distinct intervals. Samples were collected into labeled cambric cloth bags.

Because of uncertainty in the consistency of core recovery, sample intervals in Appendix C are the measured intervals plus the penetration depth of the start of the four foot core section. The gaps in sampled intervals in the GID-cores represent the difference between the core recovery and the 4 foot (122 cm) penetration interval. 6. Vibro-Cores Vibro-core drilling is particularly well suited to core sampling in sandy unconsolidated sediment that is water-saturated. A vibrating drill pipe agitates the intergranular pore water, which lifts and separates sand grains, so that the drill pipe sinks more-or-less as it would in quicksand. Vibro-core drilling of CdA River bottom sediment was done from a USGS-WRD research boat in 1994, using 9 to 12 m (30-40 ft) lengths of 7.6 cm (3 inch) diameter aluminum pipe (Appendix B, sampling technique 6). A concrete vibrator, driven by an electric motor, and powered by a portable generator, was clamped to the pipe. The vibrator was tightly clamped perpendicular to the pipe by a specially built steel bracket. Eccentric rotation of a cable-driven mechanism in the head of the vibrator creates very strong vibrations, which are transmitted to the drill pipe. We lowered the vertical pipe, with vibrator attached, over the side of the boat, until it touched bottom, measured the bottom depth, and then turned on the vibrator. At first, the vibrating pipe penetrated rapidly, but as it filled with core, its vibration was dampened, and its penetration rate decreased. In some cases we increased penetration by standing on the vibrator clamp, and bouncing up and down as it vibrated. When penetration stopped, we measured the length of pipe above the water line and plugged the top of the tube with an expanding rubber plug, to create a near vacuum as we extracted the sediment-filled core tube, using the boat's motorized winch, with its cable wrapped around the vibrator clamp. Sandy material at the bottom of a hole tended to fall out of the tube as it was pulled up through the water column, but cohesive inter-beds of clay-rich sediment acted as plugs. After transporting the horizontal core to the shore, we measured the length of the empty core tube above (and sometimes below, in the case of lost sand) the recovered core. The core was removed from the pipes by tipping them up to about 45o, and tapping their sides with a rubber mallet. Tapping reduced adhesion between the core and the tube,

and gravity pulled the core downward, extruding it from the lower end of the tube. We extruded the core onto clean plastic sheets or wooden trays. We measured core length, and compared it to the depth of penetration. Except for sand lost from the bottom of the hole during retrieval, core recovery generally was nearly 100 percent. We split the core longitudinally and described litho-stratigraphic units. The core was divided into 33.3 cm intervals for sampling. We collected one half of the split core for analysis, and the other for reference. The samples were placed in labeled, 30 by 50 cm plastic bags, marked with the drill-hole number and depth interval (in cm), and transported to the lab. 7. Vibro-Piston Cores In the summer of 1995 we rented a Livingston Piston core sampler from the University of Idaho, and William C. Rember joined us in testing it in combination with our vibro-coring equipment, in an effort to penetrate completely through the metalenriched sediment in the river channel (Appendix B, sampling technique 7). None of the 1994 vibro-cores had completely penetrated the historic, metal-enriched sediment into pre-mining sediment with background metal concentrations. The piston-core sampler, as described by Sprenke and others (2000), had been used to core metal-enriched sediment on the bottoms of several lateral lakes in the lower CdA valley. It is operated from two inflatable neoprene rafts, joined by an aluminum frame and derrick. The drill string consists of 1 to 2 m sections of 5-cm outer pipe, attached at a downward-flared, and vented conical coupling, to which a 7.6-cm PVC plastic core tube is fitted and screwed. An inner 2-cm "stinger" pipe passes through a hole in the top of the conical coupling, into the core barrel, where a rubber piston is attached to its end. The piston fits snuggly into the lower end of the core tube. As the core tube is forced into the sediment, the rubber piston is forced toward the cap at the upper end of the tube. This creates a partial vacuum, which holds the sediment core in place as the core tube is pulled out of the hole. If a hole can be re-entered, it can be deepened in two-meter increments. This piston core device had to be modified to successfully penetrate into the sandy sediments of the river bottom. Although the piston core device works well in relatively soft, cohesive lake-bottom sediment, sand is difficult to penetrate by pushing down on the core tube, and difficult to hold in the core tube when pulling up on it,

because sand is strong under compression but weak under tension. To penetrate sand found in the river channel, the concrete vibrator used with our vibro-core device was attached to the drive pipe of the piston-coring rig to allow core tube penetration by vibrating the grains apart. To keep the hole from collapsing when the first core tube is pulled out of the hole, a 20 cm diameter PVC pipe was first vibrated down to about 2 m. The vibro-piston core was begun within the 20 cm PVC casing. Penetration and recovery were carefully measured. Except for loss of most of the recovered sediment from the first core segment of 95PCK1 (sand slid out of the core tube while lifting the core out of the hole, accounting for the missing interval 15-168 cm), recovery from the other two cores of 95PCK1 and from the one core of 95PCUD2 was 100%. The cores were transported to the lab and split longitudinally. The lithology of the split core was described and sample intervals were picked based on lithologic units . We collected one half of the split core for analysis, and the other for archival storage. The samples were placed in labeled, 30 by 50 cm plastic bags and marked with the drill-hole number and depth interval (in cm). 8. Auger In Vibro-Core Casing To increase the depth of vibro-core penetration, we used thin-walled aluminum vibro-core pipe as a casing, and used a bucket auger to remove some of the sediment from within the casing, thus freeing it to vibrate more freely and penetrate deeper (Appendix B, sampling technique 8). Using the dual rafts and aluminum derrick of the piston-core sampler, we vibrated a 9 m long, 7.6 cm diameter aluminum pipe into the river-bottom sediment until it stopped. Instead of capping and pulling the pipe, we bailed the water from the pipe, and used a bucket auger (with a 7 cm diameter and sample barrel 20 cm long) to remove successive 20-cm increments of sediment. When the auger touched bottom, we marked the auger drive pipe at the top of the casing pipe, measured up 20 cm, and twisted the auger down until the 20-cm mark was at the top of the casing. We recorded the auger-sample intervals in a field notebook, and on sample bags. Samples were described and the top part of the sample was discarded to minimize possible downhole contamination. The sample for analysis was spooned from the lower end of the auger bucket, and the rest of the interval was bagged for archival storage. After partially

emptying the aluminum drill pipe, we re-attached the vibrator and vibrated the pipe deeper into the sediment until it stopped again. Then we removed more sediment with the auger, and vibrated down again, until top of the core tube approached water level. By then we were in relatively cohesive sediment, and the hole stayed open enough that we were able to advance the auger into relatively cohesive sediment below the end of the pipe. In this way we were able to recover samples to depths of 486 cm (about 16 ft) in drill hole 95VCUD1, and 572 cm (about 19 ft) in 95VCD3. Sediment flowage into hole 95VCUD1 occurred during vibration-penetration of the core tube below 338 cm sub-bottom. After vibrating the core tip to 338 cm below the bottom, we augered out the pipe to 306 cm sub-bottom (leaving 32 cm in core tube). The core tip was then vibrated to 414 cm sub-bottom, after which we found that the sediment surface in the core tube had moved up 205 cm (so our auger hit sediment at 101 cm subbottom). We augered to the end of the core tube at 414 cm sub-bottom (recording the new sample depths) and 72 cm beyond the bottom of the core tube to 486 cm, with the walls of the hole remaining open below the tube. All of the auger samples were analysed and we found that 205 cm of material with consistent metal concentrations had flowed into the hole at 338 cm, probably when the vibrator was turned on. We interpret that, after vibrating the core tip to 414 cm, the interval augered from 101 to 133 cm had been floated up above the inflowing sediment from an original depth of 306-338 cm. All of the re-augered samples from 133-338 cm were the consistent metal content material (analyses not included here) that had flowed into the hole. The material below 338 cm had much higher metal contents and is interpreted to have remained at approximately its original depth during and after the overlying sediment flowage incident. Because of the above caveats, we are highly confident in the stratigraphic section above 306 cm, and less confident in our interpretation of the true sample depths from 306-486 cm. Drill hole 95VCD3 was drilled after 95VCUD1, and, to prevent any recurrence of sediment flowage into the core tube, we did not remove more than about half of the sediment in the casing before vibrating it deeper, and there were no long time gaps during which sediment could move up into the pipe. The casing was driven to 309 cm, emptied to 84 cm, then driven to 360 cm. From there to the end of the hole at 572 cm, the hole remained open without casing. At 402 to 423 cm we penetrated a basal layer of lead-rich

sediment, containing over 26,000 ppm. Below that, lead concentrations decrease downward but are high enough to indicate probable down-hole contamination of premining-era sediment. Sample Custody Procedures The chain of sample custody was not formally documented for any of the samples listed in this report. However, samples were labeled and tracked to avoid sample loss or confusion, and were kept in secure facilities to prevent sample tampering or contamination. Sample collectors collected and transported samples in lockable government vehicles, and retained custody of the samples until they were stored at lockable government-owned or rented offices, labs, or storage facilities in Spokane, and (or) Cheney, WA. Sample collectors made an effort to separate probable metal-rich and metal-poor samples, packaging and transporting them separately to avoid possible crosscontamination between metal-rich and metal-poor samples. Informal sample lists were used to track samples at EWU. Sample-submittal forms were prepared for samples submitted to commercial labs for sample preparation or chemical analysis. Pulps of most pulverized and chemically analyzed samples are stored in the USGS Lab at EWU. However, pulps of samples analyzed by XRAL Laboratories, Inc. (XRAL), are stored at the USGS sample archive in Denver, CO. Bulk reference samples are stored at a warehouse near Cheney, WA, rented by USGS and EWU. Sample Preparation Methods Sample preparation for samples collected before 1995 (except those labeled "94JE-", discussed below) was done in the USGS Lab at Eastern Washington University (EWU), by university students working under the direction of James Lindsay, Mohammed Ikramuddin, Stephen Box, Arthur Bookstrom, and funded through a cooperative agreement between USGS and EWU. Samples collected in 1995 and 1996 were prepared at SVL Analytical, Inc., in Kellogg, ID. Sample preparation for the 1998 samples was done at the USGS sample-control/sample-preparation facility in Denver,

CO. Upon arrival in the lab, samples were dried in a warm oven at 60-80o C (except samples labeled "T98-", which were freeze-dried at the sample-preparation facility in Denver, CO). Dried samples were passed through a minus 20-mesh sieve (grain diameters less than 0.83 mm) to remove sticks, leaves, and roots. The minus 20-mesh fraction was pulverized to minus 200 mesh (grain diameters less than 0.074 mm) in a shatter-box with a chrome-molybdenum steel barrel. The stream sediment samples labeled "94JE-" were handled differently. Samples were wet sieved in the field to capture only the less than 2 mm grain size fraction. After drying samples were split and one half sample was archived in labeled plastic sample jar. The other sample split was poured into two nested sieves (250 and 63 micrometer mesh size) and agitated with a Rotap device for 20 minutes. Each sieve fraction (0.250-2.0 mm, 0.063-0.250 mm, and 0.063 mm fractions) was weighed and placed in labeled plastic sample jars. The sieves and bottom pan were cleaned with a brush and blown out with compressed air between each sample fractionation. 8-10 grams of the 0.250-2.0 mm fraction was hand ground using an agate mortar and pestle to pass through a 0.318 mm sieve and placed in a separate labeled plastic sample jar. The ground 0.250-2.0 mm fraction from all the sample sites and the other two fractions from a subset of the sample sites were shipped to the Chemex labs in Reno, Nevada for analyses. Chemical Elements Table 1 lists chemical elements mentioned in this paper, gives their chemical symbols, and specifies detection limits for elements analyzed by Inductively-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES). The elements are divided into those of generally major and minor geo chemical abundance. Concentrations of the major elements generally are expressed in wt. percent, whereas concentrations of the minor elements generally are expressed in parts per million parts (ppm). Some elements are listed without concentration units, because they are mentioned as reagents used in sample digestion procedures, but their abundance in the samples was not determined.

Analytical Methods and Their Applications US Geological Survey energy dispersive Xray fluorescence analysis (USGS-EDXRF) Most of the samples collected in 1993 were analyzed for Cu, Pb, and Zn, by USGS geochemists, James Lindsay and Bi Shea King, using Energy Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (EDXRF) at the USGS Analytical Laboratory in Menlo Park, California (Johnson and King, 1987). Appendix D lists the analytical results. EDXRF analyses were performed as follows. A prepared sample was placed in a plastic sample cup, the bottom of which is covered with 3.5-micrometer mylar film. The film was held tight with plastic ring around the outside. Each sample was analyzed in air, using a Kevex G700/7000 EDXRF Spectrometer, equipped with a Rh target X-ray tube, Si (Li) detector, and 6 secondary targets, using 200-second count times, and the run-parameters summarized in table 2. Analyses were done for Pb, Zn, and Cu. Matrix effects were compensated by ratio to the Compton scatter for the secondary target. Eastern Washington University Geochemistry Laboratory (EWU) Analysis Some of the 1993 samples and all of the 1994, 1995, and 1996 samples were analyzed at the Geochemistry Laboratory of Eastern Washington University by Dr. Mohammed Ikramuddin. All analyses were preceded by 4-acid "total extraction." Analysis of minor and trace elements was by Induced-Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectroscopy (ICP-MS). Major-element analysis was by Induced-Coupled Plasma - Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Analysis for Ag and K were by Flame Atomic Absorption (FAA). Appendix E lists the analytical results. The sample digestions and analyses were performed as follows. EWU sample digestion procedures (4-acid) Nearly total digestion of most minerals is provided by 4-acid digestion procedures, which use nitric (HNO3), perchloric (HClO4), hydrofluoric (HF), and hydrochloric (HCl) acids

to extract chemical elements from solids for analysis. Nitric and perchloric acids are strong, oxidizing acids, which attack non-silicate minerals and oxidize organic matter. Hydrofluoric acid breaks strong silicate bonds, and HCl decomposes sulfides and dissolves the salts remaining after evaporation (Hall, 1999). Such digestion extracts most chemical elements from rock-forming silicate minerals, as well as from sulfide ore minerals, and their associated gangue minerals and weathering products. Minerals that are resistant to attack include cassiterite, rutile, monazite, ilmenite, garnet, wolframite spinels, sphene, beryl, zircon, tourmaline and high concentrations of barite, none of which are minerals of environmental importance in the CdA drainage basin. 1. A 250-mg sub-sample of the pulverized sample was weighed and placed in a teflon beaker. Two ml of HNO3 and one ml of HClO4 were added to the sample and heated until the volume was reduced to half. Then 2 ml of HF and 5 ml of aqua regia were added and the sample solution heated to dryness. Another 5 ml of aqua regia is later added to the sample to completely break down any sulfide minerals. 2. The solution was heated to incipient dryness, and 4 ml of 1:1:2 HCl:HNO3:H2O were added and the solution warmed. Finally, the solution was diluted to 25 ml with ASTM Type I water (giving a final dilution factor of 100), and the solution was transferred to 60-ml polyethylene bottles. For ICP-MS analysis, the sample solutions were further diluted by a facto of 10 with Type I water. 3. For analysis of Ag a separate digestion was used. For this purpose, a prepared sample (1.0g) was digested with aqua regia and diluted to 20 ml with 2N HCl. 4. Preparation blanks, duplicate samples, and reference standards were carried through the same procedure. Only Baker instra-analysed acids and Type I water were used during the digestion procedure. EWU Analytical Methods Elemental concentrations of As, Ba, Be, Cd, Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Ga, La, Mo, Ni, P, Pb, Rb, Sb, Sn, Sr, Th, Tl, U, V, W, Y:, Zn and Zr were determined by ICP-MS, using a Perkins Elmer Sciex model 5000 ICP-MS instrument. Concentrations of Al, Ca, Fe,

Mg, Mn, and Ti were determined by ICP-AES, using a Perkin Elmer model ICP/6000 ICP-AES instrument. When concentrations of Pb and Zn were very high, their concentrations were determined by ICP-AES. Ag and K were analyzed using a Flame Atomic Absorption (FAA) Spectrophotometer, Perkin Elmer model 5000. EWU ICP-MS Procedure For all ICP-MS quantitative measurements an external calibration was used, and a linear regression (forced through zero) was applied to establish a calibration line. ICPMS calibration was performed using a reagent blank and multi-element standard solution the following concentrations: 50 ppb for Ce, Co, Cr, Cs, Mo, Pb, Rb, Sb, Sr, Th, Tl, U, V, W, Y and Zr; 100 ppb for Ba, Cd, Cu, Ga, La, Ni and Sn; 250 ppb for As, Be and Zn; and 1000 ppb for P. These solutions were prepared by serial dilution of 1000 ppm stock solutions of each element, obtained from Alfa Aesar Chemicals and Baker Chemicals. Internal standards (Sc, In and Ho; or Sc, Rh and Pt), which provided a range of atomic masses used in the analyses, were added to each blank, standard and sample solution, to correct for instrument drift and physical interferences. The final concentrations of these elements were 50 ppb of In, Rh and Ho, and 100 ppb of Sc and Pt. For ICP-MS analysis the original 4-acid digestion solutions (0.25 g sample in 25 ml with 4% HCl and HNO3) were further diluted by a factor of 10 with Type I water, so that the final solutions contained 0.4 % HCl and HNO3. In some cases it was necessary to dilute the samples further to bring the concentrations of certain elements within the linear range. EWU ICP-AES Procedure ICP-AES calibration was performed using a reagent-blank, and standard solutions with concentrations of 50 ppm for Ti, and 100 ppm for Al, Ca, Fe, Mg, Mn, Pb and Zn. Ca, Mg. Mn, Pb, Ti and Zn were analyzed directly from 4-acid digestion-sample solutions, whereas for the determination of Al and Fe, samples were further diluted by a factor of 10 and 20 respectively. Samples containing high concentrations of elements were further diluted to bring them within the linear range.

Table 1. Chemical elements and geochemical detection limits Major Element Symbol Major Element Name ICP AES Detection Limits a Chemex Upper Limit b Minor Element Symbol Minor Element Name ICP AES Detection Limits a Chemex Upper Limit b wt % wt % ppm ppm Al Aluminum Ag Silver Ca Calcium As Arsenic 2 to 3 10,000 Chlorine Au Gold F Fluorine Ba Barium 1 to 10 10,000 Fe Iron Be Beryllium H Hydrogen Bi Bismuth 2 to 3 10,000 K Potassium Cd Cadmium 0.5 to 1 Mg Magnesium Ce Cerium N Nitrogen Co Cobalt 10,000 Na Sodium Cr Chromium 10,000 O Oxygen Cu Copper 0.5 to 1 10,000 P Phosphorus 0.001 to 0.01 Eu Europium Ti Titanium Ga Gallium 10,000 Ge Germanium Ho Holmium In Indium La Lanthanum 0.5 to 10 10,000 Lithium Lu Lutetium Mn Manganese 0.01 to 5 10,000 Mo Molybdenum 10,000 Nb Niobium Nd Neodymium Ni Nickel 10,000 Pb Lead 10,000 Sb Antimony 2 to 5 10,000 Sc Scandium Sn Tin Sr Strontium Ta Tantalum Th Thorium U Uranium Vanadium W Tungsten Y Yttrium Yb Ytterbium Zn Zinc Zr Zirconium a Lower detection limits for analysis by ICP-AES, according to XRAL and Chemex catalogues. b Upper limits for Chemex G32 package. Higher concentrations require dilution or chemical assay.

Table 2. USGS-EDXRF instrumental run parameters Element Secondary Target Kv MA Line Pb Ag L beta Zn Ge 20 2.0 K alpha Cu Ge 20 2.0 K alpha

EWU FAA Procedure Three single-element standards of Ag and K (1, 3 and 6 ppm) were used for FAA calibration. Analyses for Ag in samples containing low concentrations of Ag were done using a single standard of 0.5 ppm and a high sensitivity nebulizer. For analysis of K, original 4-acid digestion solutions of samples were further diluted by a factor of 50 and blanks, standards and samples contained 1000 ppm of Cs or Na to compensate for ionization interferences. CHEMEX Labs Analysis Splits of the 1993 samples, previously analyzed for Pb, Zn, and Cu by EDXRF, as well as samples labeled "94JE-", were analyzed for 32 elements by CHEMEX Labs, Ltd., in Reno, Nevada, using Induced-Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES) after extraction by nitric acid and aqua regia. Appendix F lists the analytical results. Chemex Labs used a nitric acid - aqua regia digestion to extract chemical constituents from pulverized samples for ICP-AES analysis. Aqua regia is a mixture of 3 parts HCl to 1 part HNO3. It is an efficient solvent for numerous metal sulfides, many sulfates (except barite), some simple oxide minerals and their hydrates, phosphates, carbonates, and organically bound elements. However, most silicates and some oxides are only slightly attacked (Hall, 1999). Chemex Labs performed the digestions and analyses as follows. A pulverized sample (1.0g) was digested with concentrated nitric acid for at least one hour. After cooling, hydrochloric acid was added to produce aqua regia, and the mixture was then digested for an additional hour and a half. The resulting solution was diluted to 25 ml with demineralized water, mixed and analyzed by ICP-AES. Elemental concentrations were determined for 32 elements, using a Jarrell Ash 1100 plasma spectrometer after calibration with proper standards. The analytical results were corrected for spectral inter-element interferences. Concentrations higher than the Chemex upper detection limit (table 1) were reported as greater than that limit.

XRAL Laboratories Analysis Since 1997, XRAL Laboratories, Inc. has been the contract laboratory for the Mineral Resources Program of the Geologic Division of the U.S. Geological Survey. XRAL Laboratories analyzed our CdA soil samples collected in 1998 for 40 elements, using 4-acid digestion, followed by ICP-AES analysis. Appendix G lists the results. Apparatus, reagents, digestion procedures, and analytical methods used by XRAL Laboratories to perform these analyses are described below. XRAL Apparatus

Thermo Jarrell Ash, Model 1160 Plasma Atomcomp simultaneous ICP-AES or

Perkin Elmer Optima 3000 simultaneous ICP-AES

Hot plate with 50-position aluminum heating block

30-mL Teflon vessels with caps (Savillex)

Drying oven set at 95o C

13x100 mm disposable polypropylene test tubes with caps XRAL Reagents Hydrochloric acid, HCl reagent grade, 37 percent Nitric acid, HNO3 reagent grade, 70 percent Hydrofluoric acid, HF reagent grade, 48 percent Perchloric acid, HClO4 reagent grade, 70 percent De-ionized water (DI) One percent nitric acid solution: 10 mL 70 percent concentrated HNO3 diluted in 1000 mL DI water

Aqua regia: three parts concentrated HCl and one part concentrated HNO3; solution is not stable and must be prepared immediately before use Lutetium internal standard (Lu): 500 g Lu/mL, as Lu2O3 in 5 percent (v/v) HCl XRAL Sample Digestion Procedure (4-acid) 1. Weigh 0.200 g sample into Teflon vessel. 2. Add 100 µL Lu internal standard to each vessel with repeating pipet. 3. Rinse side walls of Teflon vessel with a minimum amount of DI water. 4. In the fume hood, slowly add 3 mL HCl and allow any reaction to subside. 5. Add 2 mL HNO3, 1 mL HClO4, and 2 mL HF. Place sample solution vessel on hot plate with aluminum heat block at a controlled temperature of 110o C in a perchloric acid fume hood. 6. Evaporate sample solution to hard dryness on hot plate (usually overnight). 7. Remove from hot plate, cool to touch and add 1 mL HClO4 and 2 to 3 mL DI water. 8. Return to hot plate, and evaporate to hard dryness. The temperature of the hot plate is increased to 160o C. This step usually takes a few hours. 9. Remove dried sample from hot plate and cool. 10. Add 1.0 mL aqua regia with repeating pipet and let react for 15 min. 11. Add 9.0 mL 1 percent HNO3 and thread screw cap tightly on vessel. Place vessel in drying oven for 1 hour at a controlled temperature of 95o C. 12. Remove sample solution and cool. Transfer solution into labeled disposable polypropylene test tube and cap with test tube cap. 13. Analyze sample solution by ICP-AES. Sample decomposition using this multi-acid digestion technique is suited to dissolve certain rock types, soils, and sediments. The method does not fully dissolve

refractory or resistant minerals and some secondary minerals. Examples of incomplete digestion are as follows: Ba in barite, Cr in chromite, Ti in rutile, Sn in cassiterite, Al in corundum, and rare earth elements in monazite. Samples that contain elements in high concentrations where normally the element is a trace constituent or beyond the linear working range have to be diluted (i.e., Mg in a dolomite, Pb in a galena, Zn in a sphalerite, Cu in a chalcopyrite). This dilution increases the lower reporting limits. XRAL Analysis by ICP-AES The ICP-AES instrument is calibrated at the start of each day using four-element solutions for the Jarrell Ash 1160, and nine solutions for the Perkin-Elmer Optima. Calibrations are checked against certified total mean values for established geological Standard Reference Materials, including SO3 and STILL4 from the Canadian Certified Reference Materials Project, and USGS Basalt BHVO-1. The major and trace elements are determined by comparing the element intensities obtained from the standards to those obtained from the samples. There are three method preparation blanks digested with each sample set. A blank subtraction is performed to negate the effect of the reagents. ACZ Laboratories Campbell and others (1999), of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, reported the results analyses of about 800 surface-sediment samples from wetlands of the CdA River valley. ACZ Laboratories, Inc. analyzed these samples for Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As, and Cd, using microwave-assisted nitric-acid digestion, and ICP-AES. To test whether we could legitimately compile and use the USFWS and USGS data together, we needed data from analyses of the same samples, using nitric-acid digestion, as compared to EWU and XRAL four-acid digestions. Spits from the set of 27 previously analyzed samples, sent to XRAL Laboratories for analysis of four-acid extractions, were sent to ACZ Laboratories, for nitric-acid digestion and analysis by ICP-AES. Appendix H lists the results of analyses by ACZ Laboratories. ACZ Laboratories used concentrated nitric acid digestion to prepare samples for ICP-AES analysis. Nitric acid is a strong oxidizing acid, however it is less effective than HCl in attacking sulfides, and is relatively ineffective in dissolving iron and manganese

oxides because of its oxidizing properties. It is relatively ineffective in attacking silicate minerals. Digestion procedures and analytical methods used by ACZ Laboratories are described below. ACZ Microwave-Assisted Nitric Acid Digestion Procedure Splits of pulverized samples were digested using a microwave-assisted nitric-acid procedure specified by USEPA method 3051, in which a representative sample of up to 0.5 g is digested in 10 mL of concentrated nitric acid for 10 minutes using a suitable laboratory microwave heating unit. The sample and acid are placed in a fluorocarbon (PFA or TFM) microwave vessel. The vessel is capped and heated in the microwave unit. After cooling, the vessel contents are filtered, centrifuged, or allowed to settle and then diluted to volume and analyzed by the appropriate method. ACZ Analysis by ICP-AES Digested samples produced by the above procedure were analyzed for Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As, and Cd by ICP-AES, according to EPA method CLP 3/90. Analytical Quality Control, Assessment, and Assurance "Quality Control (QC) includes those activities undertaken to control the quality of services delivered by analytical laboratories" (Kane, 1991)." These services need to be timely and economic as well as consistent and accurate to within acceptable limits. "QC can be maintained only if accuracy can be measured in some manner on an on-going basis; such measurement activities in the laboratory comprise quality assessment" (Kane, 1991). Quality Assurance (QA) "involves those activities undertaken by management to ensure that both the control and the assessment activities are performed routinely and documented adequately so that the quality of services delivered is defined for, and can be demonstrated to, the clients." Economic constraints required the use of instrumental multi-element geochemical analyses rather than single element assays, even though single-element assays may be

more accurate for high concentrations of Fe (over 15 wt %), Pb, Zn, Mn or As (over 1000 ppm), or Cd (over 500 ppm). Quality Control Procedures Quality control procedures consist of a number of routine actions taken by the analytical laboratory to test the precision and accuracy of its analytical techniques. Repeated analysis of materials of known composition is the primary tool to assess the accuracy of the laboratory analyses, and repeated analyses of materials both of known and of unknown composition are used to assess analytical precision. Accuracy is a measure of how closely a result or an average result approaches the true value (Levinson, 1974), as represented by an accepted standard, or target value. Quantification of accuracy (relative to a common standard) provides a basis for comparison of results from different laboratories. Accuracy is expressed as mean percent recovery (mean of concentrations determined by the laboratory / target concentration) x 100%. Precision is a measure of consistency, or the ability to reproduce or repeat the same result (Levinson, 1974). Random errors are assumed to follow a normal Gaussian distribution about their concentration, and analytical precision is then specified as the percent relative variation at the two standard deviation (95%) confidence level (Fletcher, 1981). Analytical precision is calculated relative to the mean concentration, as Pm (2 standard deviations / mean) x 100%. All of the samples analyzed for this report are in solid form, but these solids must first be dissolved using chemical reagents before analysis using the ICP and AA analytical techniques (EDXRF analysis is performed directly on the pulverized sample). Typically the ICP and AA analytical instruments are calibrated initially and checked at regular intervals using lab-prepared solutions of laboratory reagents in known proportions, while the EDXRF is calibrated and checked with pulverized SRMs. Analyses of blanks ( distilled water and/or chemical reagents used in preparation of sample solutions) are done to assure no elements of interest are being added during sample digestion and preparation of the sample solution. Reanalysis of analyzed samples and analysis of sample splits provide additional checks on the precision (repeatability) of replicate analyses of the same material. "Spikes" are samples to which a known

concentration of elements of interest are added, and the analyses of spiked and unspiked samples are compared. Pulverized Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) of known composition that encompass the range of compositions of the unknown samples are periodically analyzed (after dissolution for ICP and AA methods) to check the accuracy of the analytical method from sample preparation to instrumental analysis. The USGS-EDXRF and EWU geochemical laboratories used United States NIST SRMs for these check standards, whereas Chemex and XRAL used Canadian SRMs, and ACZ used standards commercially prepared by Environmental Resources Associates (ERA). Typically, samples of known composition and replicate samples are also submitted "blind" to the analyst (so the analyst doesn't know they are a standard or replicate sample, and does not treat them with any special care) as an additional test of precision and accuracy. Blind submittals of USGS SRMs were used to assess the precision and accuracy of XRAL data. Accuracy of EWU, XRAL, and ACZ data were also tested by analysis of blind submittals of NIST SRMs, and comparison of laboratory results with NIST-certified values for the SRMs analyzed. Table 3 summarizes what Quality Control procedures were performed routinely by each of the five laboratories that provided chemical analyses included in this report. The commercial laboratories (ACZ, XRAL, and CHEMEX) have computerized Laboratory Information Management Systems (LIMS), in which internal records of results from quality control procedures are maintained. However, only ACZ Laboratories, Inc. provided us with printed records of those results. USGS also maintains a LIMS for XRAL data on USGS Standard Reference Materials (SRMs), which are routinely submitted for analysis with each batch of samples analyzed by XRAL. The EWU academic research laboratory maintains internal records of results from its quality control procedures, but it is not staffed to make those records public. The USGS EDXRF Laboratory is no longer staffed, but we were able to retrieve some of the Quality Control information.

Table 3. Quality control procedures, precision, and accuracy for geochemical analysis at the laboratories used for this report. subject USGS-EDXRF EWU CHEMEX XRAL ACZ Laboratory Type government, research academic, research commercial, accredited commercial, USGS contractor commercial, USFWS contractor Number of Analyses Digestion Method none 4-acid nitric acid and aqua regia 4-acid 4-acid Analytical Method EDXRF ICP-MS, ICP-AES, FAA ICP-AES ICP-AES ACP-AES Analytes Cu, Pb, Zn 35 elements 32 elements 40 elements Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As, Cd Calibration Solutions EWU-prepared CHEMEX-prep. XRAL-prepared ACZ-prepared Calibration Checks yes yes yes yes yes a. Initial yes yes yes yes yes b. Continuing yes yes, I in 10 yes yes yes c. Blank yes yes yes yes d. Re-analysis if b >5% off yes yes 5% e. Duplicate Split yes yes 5% yes 5% f. spikes yes (Lu) yes SRMs used in analyses NIST 1 SRMs NIST 1 SRMs CANMET 3 SRMs CCRMP 4 SRMs ERA 5 SRMs of known standards 1645, 2704 2710, 2711 LKSD-1 to 4 SS03 2710, 2711 STSD-1 to 4 STILL4 USGS 2 SRMs RTS-2 and 4 USGS BHVO-1 AGV-1, GXR-1 MP-2, SU-1a GXR-2, GXR-4 GXR-5, GXR-6 Percent of checks 3% 2 to 10% 3% NR 40% Precision (Pb, Zn) Pb 3.5%, Zn 2.5% Pb 8%, Zn 12% Percent Recov. (Pb, Zn) 101%, 98% Pb 100%, Zn 98% Pb 99%, Zn 99% Prep Blanks yes Reagent Blanks yes yes yes yes Run Logs yes yes yes Lab Info. . Syst. yes yes yes yes QC Data Available no longer not readily no longer available available Blind analyses of SRMs no yes no yes yes SRMs used in analyses NIST SRMs USGS SRMs NIST SRMs of known standards 2710, 2711 SAR-L, SAR-M 2710, 2711 NIST SRMs 2710, 2711 % of blind checks 2% 5% 9% Precision (Pb, Zn) 11%, 15% Mean Recov. (vs NIST) Pb 102%, Zn 99% Pb 97%, Zn 81% Pb 88%, Zn 87%

1 National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST)

3 Canada Centre for Mineral & Energy Technology

4 Canadian Certified Reference Materials Project

5 Environmental Resources Associates. Quality Control

US Geological Survey EDXRF Quality Control Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) were used to establish an EDXRF calibration curve showing the relation between measured X-ray fluorescence values and accepted values for concentrations of Pb, Zn, and Cu, in the SRMs. Two types of SRMs were used in preparing the calibration curve. For low concentrations of metals USGS National Rock Standards AVG-1, GXR-1, GXR-2, GXR-4, GXR-5, and GXR-6 were used. Mean compositions of those SRMs are given by Govindaraju, 1994. For moderate to high concentrations of metals, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Materials 2710 and 2711 were used. Certified values for mean total concentrations of elements in those materials are given by Gills (1993a, 1993b). Results from one set of check analyses of four NIST SRMs indicate calibration accuracy to within or very near the range of precision of the NIST-certified mean total values at the 95% confidence level (table 4). Of the 203 samples analyzed by USGS-EDXRF, 70 were also analyzed by EWU, 131 by CHEMEX, and 15 by XRAL. Eastern Washington University Geochemistry Lab (EWU) Quality Control EWU quality control procedures are listed in Table 3. Results of repeated analyses of known NIST SRMs were reported by EWU and are given in table 5 and discussed below. Blind analyses of the same NIST SRMs are given in tables 9 and 10 and discussed below. Of the 336 samples analyzed by EWU, 70 were also analyzed by USGS-EDXRF spectroscopy, 30 were analyzed by CHEMEX, and 27 others were analyzed by both XRAL and ACZ laboratories. EWU analyses of known Standard Reference Materials Prepared standard solutions were used to perform instrumental calibrations at 10sample intervals. Acid concentrations in standards and blanks matched those in samples for each instrumental analysis by ICP-MS, ICP-AES, or FAA. NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711 were repeatedly analyzed (table 5). USGS Rock Standards also were analyzed occasionally. The results obtained on NIST and USGS Reference Standards were within

Table 4. USGS-EDXRF analysis of four NIST Standard Reference Materials for Pb, Zn and Cu.

aNIST SRM Element NIST certified value (ppm) b(+/-) NIST precision cUSGS EDXRF value (ppm) dUSGS Recovery% Pb N R 114.3% Zn N R 103.7% Cu N R 117.2% Pb N R 84.5% Zn N R 88.0% Cu N R Pb 103.3% Zn 100.0% Cu 107.0% Pb 101.2% Zn 99.8% Cu 100.7% a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Material (SRM). b at 95% confidence level (NR is "not reported"). c Bi-Shia King, USGS, analyst, 7/8/94. d Recovery % (USGS EDXRF value/NIST value) 100%

4% of certified values for all elements except for refractory Ba, Ni, P, Ti. Measured concentrations of Ba, Ni, and P were up to 6.5% lower than NIST-certified values, while Ti was up to 15% lower. EWU Duplicates and Blanks Five percent of the samples and a few reference standards were analyzed in duplicate. The results obtained on these samples were reproducible within the range of + 5%. Preparation blanks were processed and analyzed with each batch of sediment samples to check possible contributions from acids, glassware, teflon-ware and the environment. The contributions from blanks were negligible and concentrations generally were below minimum analytical detection limits. EWU Precision and Accuracy EWU precision (relative to the means of EWU analyses of NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711) averages + 2.5 percent for Zn and Mn, + 3.5% for Pb, + 5.5% for Fe and As, and + 6.5% for Cd (table 6). EWU calibration accuracy (expressed as percent-recovery relative to NIST-certified mean total values for SRMs 2710 and 2711) averages 96% for Mn and Cd, 98% for Zn, 100% for As, Fe and Pb (table 5). EWU Analyses of Blind Standard Reference Materials NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711 were submitted to the EWU Geochemistry Laboratory as blind samples in a large analytical job in 1996. The analytical results and percent recovery are given in Tables 9 and 10. For Pb, Zn, Mn and As, the reported values are within 3% of the certified values. Fe was high by 8% for 2711, and Cd was low by almost 8% for each SRM. CHEMEX Laboratories Quality Control CHEMEX quality control procedures are summarized in table 3. Results of quality control analyses were not included in reports of analytical results received from Chemex, nor were any blind NIST standards submitted with the CdA samples. Of

Table 5. Analytical values, precision, and accuracy of EWU analyses of known and blind NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711. SRM 2710 units NIST mean NIST Pm a EWU mean b EWU std dev EWU Pm a EWU mean recov% EWU blind recov% d Al wt% 1.2% 4.5% 98.4% 97.5% Ca wt% 2.4% 0.06 10.2% 100.5% 87.2% Fe wt% 3.0% 6.2% 99.5% 100.3% K wt% 5.2% 6.1% 98.9% 96.7% Mg wt% 4.9% 3.9% 102.6% 99.6% Ag ppm 4.2% 5.4% 98.2% 99.7% As ppm 6.1% 5.6% 99.5% 98.6% Ba ppm 7.2% 4.6% 95.7% 91.1% Cd ppm 0.9% 6.0% 94.7% 92.2% Cu ppm 4.4% 2.7% 96.8% 95.4% Mn ppm 4.0% 2.6% 98.7% 97.4% Ni ppm 7.0% 6.9% 97.9% 90.9% P ppm 14.2% 5.2% 93.5% 90.6% Pb ppm 1.4% 4.3% 98.9% 100.9% Sb ppm 7.8% 3.1% 97.9% 85.9% Sr ppm 118.8% Ti ppm 3.5% 4.1% 92.7% 88.3% Tl ppm ppm 3.0% 3.8% 98.5% 87.5% Zn ppm 1.3% 2.3% 96.7% 98.0% SRM 2711 units NIST mean NIST Pm a EWU mean b EWU std dev EWU Pm a EWU mean recov% EWU blind recov% d Al wt% 1.4% 5.5% 98.0% 98.3% Ca wt% 2.8% 7.5% 98.9% 95.8% Fe wt% 2.1% 5.3% 100.8% 108.0% K wt% 3.3% 5.5% 101.2% 105.7% Mg wt% 2.9% 5.5% 101.4% 110.5% Ag ppm 8.4% 5.7% 100% 101.5% As ppm 7.6% 5.0% 100.2% 99.0% Ba ppm 5.2% 5.1% 94.1% 98.5% Cd ppm 0.6% 6.9% 96.6% 92.8% Cu ppm 1.8% 2.4% 96.2% 96.5% Mn ppm 4.4% 3.6% 99.8% 102.8% Ni ppm 5.3% 5.2% 93.9% 92.2% P ppm 8.1% 3.8% 95.5% 93.0% Pb ppm 2.7% 3.2% 101.6% 103.7% Sb ppm 9.3% 4.2% 97.6% 97.9% Sr ppm 0.3% 4.4% 97.6% 93.4% Ti ppm 7.5% 4.3% 85.8% 81.7% Tl ppm 6.1% 2.6% 97.0% ppm 3.6% 3.6% 98.4% 89.5% Zn ppm 1.4% 3.5% 99.2% 100.6% a Precision relative to mean of known standard runs (Pm (2 standard deviations/mean)*100%) b EWU number of known standard runs (n) 8 c EWU mean recovery % (EWU [known] mean/NIST mean)* 100% c Blind recovery % (EWU blind run value/NIST mean)* 100% (see Tables 9 & 10)

the 236 samples analyzed by Chemex Laboratories, USGS analyzed 131 by EDXRF spectroscopy, EWU analyzed 30 samples, and XRAL analyzed 15 samples. XRAL Laboratories Quality Control XRAL quality control procedures are listed in Table 3. Results of repeated analyses of known NIST SRMs were not included in reports of analytical results received from XRAL. However results of repeated blind analyses of USGS SRMs (Govindaraju, 1994) and a few blind analyses of NIST SRMs is discussed in the following sections. Of the 314 samples analyzed by XRAL Laboratories, 15 were analyzed both by USGSEDXRF and by CHEMEX, and 27 samples were analyzed both by EWU and by ACZ. XRAL Precision To monitor the precision of XRAL data, USGS Sample Control routinely submits for analysis USGS Standard Reference Materials SAR-L and SAR-M as blind samples, at a rate of 1 SRM sample in every 10 samples. Based on analyses of those samples, XRAL precision relative to mean results for those samples is listed for each element in tables 6 and 7. In summary, XRAL precision for 16 analyses of SAR-L and 15 analyses of SARM averaged + 5% for Fe and Mn, + 11% for Pb, + 15% for Zn, + 23% for Cd, and + 26% for As. XRAL Recovery Relative to USGS SRM Target Values Mean recoveries (relative to USGS target values) for 16 splits of SAR-L and 15 splits of SAR-M are listed for each element in tables 6 and 7. In summary, XRAL accuracy, expressed as percent recovery relative to USGS target values, averaged 95%

Table 6. Analytical values, precision and accuracy of XRAL blind analyses of USGS Standard Reference Material (SRM) SAR-L USGS USGS XRAL XRAL XRAL XRAL Element units mean a std dev mean b std dev Pm recov% d Al wt % 5.7% 98.3% Ca wt % 5.6% 101% Fe wt % 5.1% 96.7% K wt % 4.8% 98.1% Mg wt % 181% 93.2% Na wt % 5.9% 93.0% P wt % 10.5% 85.8% Ti wt % 13.7% 115% Ag ppm 69.7% 100.9% As ppm 26.7% 131% Au ppm

N/A e N/A N/A Ba ppm 7.0% 100.9% Be ppm 30.8% 116% Bi ppm <50 N/A N/A N/A Cd ppm 24.3% 120% Ce ppm 10.1% 102% Co ppm 25.9% 97.5% Cr ppm 13.8% 133% Cu ppm 12.1% 94.0% Eu ppm

N/A N/A N/A Ga ppm 25.0% 123% Ho ppm

N/A N/A N/A La ppm 9.4% 101.0% ppm 21.8% 94.2% Mn ppm 4.1% 97.7% Mo ppm 13.3% 126.4% Nb ppm 31.2% 75.9% Nd ppm 10.8% 100.6% Ni ppm 10.9% 103.1% Pb ppm 9.7% 107.0% Sc ppm 12.5% 98.6% Sn ppm N/A <50 N/A N/A N/A Sr ppm 5.9% 93.6% Ta ppm <40 N/A N/A N/A Th ppm 13.0% 109.9% U ppm N/A N/A N/A ppm 6.4% 92.4% Y ppm 11.2% 91.1% Yb ppm 22.2% 75.7% Zn ppm 15.0% 94.0% a USGS n 5 to 24 b XRAL n=16 c Precision relative to mean (Pm) (2 std. dev./mean) 100% d Recovery % (XRAL mean/USGS mean) 100% e N/A not applicable because of qualified value

Table 7. Analytical values, precision and accuracy of XRAL blind analyses of USGS Standard Reference Material (SRM) SAR-M USGS USGS XRAL XRAL XRAL XRAL Element units mean a std dev mean b std dev Pm recov% d Al wt % 5.0% 99.2% Ca wt % 3.7% 100% Fe wt % 3.6% 94.8% K wt % 9.7% 99.6% Mg wt % 5% 93.4% Na wt % 4.3% 94.6% P wt % 12.1% 88.0% Ti wt % 11.1% 98% Ag ppm 48.3% 132.1% As ppm 24.0% 105% Au ppm

N/A e N/A N/A Ba ppm 7.5% 101.5% Be ppm 25.0% 86% Bi ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A Cd ppm 21.8% 129% Ce ppm 14.9% 99% Co ppm 28.1% 105.2% Cr ppm 63.9% 81% Cu ppm 10.9% 97.9% Eu ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A Ga ppm 31.6% 97% Ho ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A La ppm 10.9% 103.0% ppm 15.5% 91.2% Mn ppm 4.8% 96.9% Mo ppm 22.3% 121.0% Nb ppm 27.8% 95.5% Nd ppm 16.2% 93.7% Ni ppm 14.7% 100.2% Pb ppm 12.4% 113.7% Sc ppm 21.2% 94.4% Sn ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr ppm 3.6% 96.1% Ta ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A Th ppm 26.3% 100.2% U ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A ppm 5.4% 100.0% Y ppm 8.4% 85.4% Yb ppm 0.0% 71.9% Zn ppm 14.1% 95.4% a USGS n 4 to 24 b XRAL n =15 c Precision relative to mean (Pm) (2 std. dev./mean) 100% d Recovery % (XRAL mean/USGS mean) 100% e N/A not applicable because of qualified value

for Zn, 97% for Fe and Mn, 110% for Pb, 118% for As, and 125% for Cd. Data are deemed acceptable by USGS when the percent recovery of an element is between the range of 80 and 120% of the target value for that element, provided the target value of that element is 5 times the lower detection limit for that element. (See detection limits, table 1, and XRAL percent recovery, tables 6 and 7). By those criteria, XRAL data for Pb, Zn, Fe, and Mn, are of acceptable accuracy, but XRAL data for As and Cd are of marginal acceptability. XRAL Recovery Relative to Blind NIST SRM certified values NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711 were submitted to the XRAL Laboratory as blind samples and the analytical results and percent recovery (relative to NIST certified values) are listed in tables 9 and 10. Mean recoveries for the two NIST SRMs range are more than 90% for Pb and Fe ( 96.9% and 92.6%, respectively), between 85% and 90% for Mn and As (89.3% and 88.7%, respectively), and between 80% and 85% for Zn and Cd (81% and 82.5%, respectively). Recoveries were considerably less than those from the USGS SRMs. ACZ Laboratories Quality Control ACZ Laboratories listed quality control data in their report of analyses, which included the precision and recovery data for prepared calibration solutions and recovery data for known pulverized SRMs supplied by Environmental Resources Associates (ERA) (table 8). Two blind NIST SRMs were submitted with our analytical jobs and their analytical data and percent recovery are given in tables 9 and 10. All 27 samples analyzed by ACZ Laboratories were also analyzed by both EWU and XRAL laboratories. ACZ Precision and Accuracy Based on repeated analyses of prepared calibration solutions (table 8), ACZ precision is + 7% for Mn, + 8% for Pb and Cd, +10% for Fe and As, and +12% for Zn. ACZ recovery relative to ERA standards is 116% for Mn, 113% for Zn, 107% for Fe, 99% for Pb and Cd, and 87% for As.

Table 8. Analytical values, precision, and accuracy of ACZ analyses of lab-prepared calibration solutions and of nitricacid dissolutions of known, pulverized SRMs. Analyses of lab-prepared calibration solutions Analyses of pulverized SRMs Element TRUE Tests Mean FOUND Std. Dev. Precis. Pm Mean Recov. TRUE Tests Mean FOUND Mean Recov. ppm n ppm ppm % % ppm n ppm % Pb Zn Fe Mn As Cd 1 Concentration of calibration standard solution. 2 Target values supplied Environmental Resources Associates (ERA).

Table 9. Analyses of blind submittals of NIST SRM 2711 (with moderately elevated metals) by XRAL, EWU, and ACZ laboratories. Element Reporting units aNIST mean bNIST plus or minus EWU value cXRAL value ACZ value EWU dRecov. % XRAL dRecov. % ACZ dRecov. % Al % 98.3% 96.1% Ca % 95.8% 97.3% Fe % 108.0% 95.0% 67.5% K % 105.7% 96.1% Mg % 110.5% 94.3% Na % 94.1% P % 93.0% 95.9% Ti % 81.7% 98.9% Ag ppm 101.5% 97.2% As ppm 99.0% 93.3% 41.6% Au ppm Ba ppm 98.5% 97.9% Be ppm Bi ppm Cd ppm 92.8% 94.7% 88.5% Ce ppm 89.9% 108.0% Co ppm 90.0% 95.0% Cr ppm 138.3% Cu ppm 96.5% 89.5% Eu ppm Ga ppm 93.3% 176.7% La ppm 75.0% 100.0% ppm Mn ppm 102.8% 91.6% 71.3% Mo ppm 125.0% 344% Nb ppm Nd ppm 108.1% Ni ppm 92.2% 92.2% Pb ppm 103.7% 99.0% 83.7% Sb ppm 97.9% Sc ppm 111.1% Sn ppm Sr ppm 93.4% 93.8% Ta ppm Th ppm 107.1% 85.7% U ppm ppm 89.5% 98.7% Y ppm 92.0% 100.0% Yb ppm 111.1% Zn ppm 100.6% 86.3% 87.7% a - Certified values (non-certified in italics). b - at 95% confidence level. c - mean of two analyses d - % recovery relative to NIST mean values.

Table 10. Analyses of blind submittals of NIST SRM 2710 (with highly elevated metals) by XRAL, EWU, and ACZ laboratories. Element Reporting units aNIST mean bNIST plus or minus EWU value cXRAL value ACZ value EWU dRecov. % XRAL dRecov. % ACZ dRecov. % Al % 97.5% 92.0% Ca % 87.2% 97.1% Fe % 100.3% 90.2% 72.2% K % 96.7% 91.2% Mg % 99.6% 92.6% Na % 86.4% P % 90.6% 94.3% Ti % 88.3% 101.1% Ag ppm 99.7% 113.3% As ppm 98.6% 84.0% 91.1% Au ppm Ba ppm 91.1% 93.4% Be ppm Bi ppm Cd ppm 92.2% 70.3% 86.7% Ce ppm 84.2% 107.6% Co ppm 80.0% 90.0% Cr ppm 128.2% Cu ppm 95.4% 83.2% Eu ppm Ga ppm 88.2% 117.6% La ppm 70.6% 91.2% ppm Mn ppm 97.4% 87.0% 77.5% Mo ppm 94.7% 108.8% Nb ppm Nd ppm 102.9% Ni ppm 90.9% 97.9% Pb ppm 100.9% 94.8% 92.4% Sb ppm Sc ppm 103.4% Sn ppm Sr ppm 118.8% 124.9% Ta ppm Th ppm 107.7% 84.6% U ppm ppm 87.5% 91.8% Y ppm 78.3% 87.0% Yb ppm 179.5% Zn ppm 98.0% 75.6% 86.3% a - Certified values (non-certified in italics). b - at 95% confidence level. c - mean of three analyses d - % recovery relative to NIST mean values.

ACZ Recovery Relative to Blind NIST SRM certified values NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711 were submitted to the ACZ Laboratory as blind samples and the analytical results and percent recovery (relative to NIST certified values) are listed in tables 9 and 10. Mean recoveries for the two NIST SRMs are between 85% and 90% for Pb, Zn and Cd (88.1%, 87%, and 87.6%, respectively), and are between 65% and 75% for Mn, Fe and As (74%, 70% and 66.4%, respectively). Recoveries were considerably less than those reported by ACZ from the ERA SRMs. Comparison between laboratories of analyses of NIST Standards Four of the five laboratories (USGS-EDXRF, EWU, XRAL, and ACZ laboratories) analyzed NIST SRMs 2710 and 2711 as either known standards, blind submittals, or as both (discussed earlier); analyses of NIST SRMs are lacking only for CHEMEX laboratories. How well do analyses of NIST SRMs by each lab compare to the NIST-certified values for the main elements of concern here (Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As, Cd)? The accuracy (or percent recovery) can be compared by element for each analyses or for the means of several analyses (tables 4, 5, 9 and 10). Visual comparison of the accuracy between labs is given by x-y plots (NIST values on the x-axis, lab values on the y-axis) for each of these elements in figures 3, 4 and 5. For reference, the charts include a thin line with a slope of y 1.0 x, indicating a perfect correlation with NIST-certified values. Linear regressions calculated by the least squares method from the data of each lab for each these elements (projected through origin) are given as the slope of the line in tables 11 through 13 (column labeled "slope (y/NIST)". The number of available analyses of NIST SRMs from each lab is given in the same tables. A third type of comparison is given by the mean percent recovery for each element, based on all the analyses of NIST SRMs by each lab. These values are also given in tables 11 through 13. For all of the elements of concern (Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As and Cd), the EWU Geochemical Laboratories gives the closest values to the certified values NIST SRMs (within 1% for Pb, Fe, Mn, and As, 3% for Zn and 5% for Cd). Analyses by USGSEDXRF (Pb and Zn only) are nearly as accurate as those of EWU. XRAL and ACZ

ppm Pb (NIST certified value) ppm Pb value from laboratory USGS-EDXRF (K) EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) ppm Zn (NIST certified value) ppm Zn value from laboratory USGS-EDXRF (K) EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) Figure 3. Comparison of laboratory analytical values of known ("K") and blind ("B") NIST SRMs with NIST certified values. Line represents 1:1 correlation for reference. (A) Pb, (B) Zn.

Weight % Fe (NIST certified value) Weight % Fe value from laboratory EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) ppm Mn (NIST certified value) ppm Mn value from laboratory EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) Figure 4. Comparison of laboratory analytical values of known ("K") and blind ("B") NIST SRMs with NIST certified values. Line represents 1:1 correlation for reference. (A) Fe, (B) Mn.

ppm As (NIST certified value) ppm As value from laboratory EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) ppm Cd (NIST certified value) ppm Cd value from laboratory EWU (means of 8) (K) EWU (B) XRAL (B) ACZ (B) Figure 5. Comparison of laboratory analytical values of known ("K") and blind ("B") NIST SRMs with NIST certified values. Line represents 1:1 correlation for reference. (A) As, (B) Cd.

values are distinctly less than NIST-certified values for each of the 6 elements. Pb is 5 to 8% low by XRAL and ACZ, but the other 5 elements are from 10% to over 30% low by these labs. Comparison between laboratories of analyses of sample splits As discussed earlier, a large number of the soil and sediment samples were analyzed by more than one laboratory, each using a different sample preparation or analytical method. Since the EWU Geochemistry Laboratory produced analyses that most closely matched certified values for NIST SRMs, comparisons are made between the values of other labs and of EWU for Pb, Zn, Fe, Mn, As, and Cd in figures 6 through 11. For most elements (except Fe) the correlation between labs is better and there is less scatter when elemental values in the analyzed samples are less than that of the NIST SRM with the highest metal values (2710). In tables 11 through 13, the number of commonly analyzed samples between labs, the slope of a least-squares linear regression line (projected through the origin), and the coefficient of determination (R2, a measure of the scatter around the regression line) are given for each element at a given range of analytical values between each laboratory and the EWU Geochemistry Laboratory. Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of Pb (figure 6) indicates that values of USGS-EDXRF are less than 3% higher and those of XRAL and ACZ are less than 2% lower than EWU values for Pb concentrations less than 8,000 ppm. The scatter around the linear regression is relatively narrow, with R2 values of 0.96 or better (table 11). In other words, for Coeur d'Alene valley samples below 8,000 ppm Pb, the four laboratories (USGS-EDXRF, EWU, XRAL, and ACZ) give comparable analytical values for Pb (within 5%). Above 8,000 ppm Pb, the values of USGS-EDXRF, XRAL, and ACZ are 6-11% lower than those EWU, and the scatter is higher. On the other hand, Pb analyses by CHEMEX for values less than 8,000 ppm Pb are considerably lower (23%) than those of EWU, and the scatter is even higher (R2 0.85). Although we are lacking data from CHEMEX on the accuracy of its analyses relative to NIST SRMs, we can infer, from the comparison with EWU analyses of the same samples, that the accuracy or percent recovery of CHEMEX Pb analyses is roughly 77%.

ppm Pb by EWU ppm Pb by other laboratories EDXRF CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B ppm Pb by EWU ppm Pb by other laboratories EDXRF CHEMEX XRAL ACZ A blowup in B Figure 6. Pb analyses of sample splits analysed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

ppm Zn by EWU ppm Zn by other laboratories EDXRF CHEMEX XRAL ACZ A blowup in B ppm Zn by EWU ppm Zn by other laboratories EDXRF CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B Figure 7. Zn analyses of sample splits analysed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

Table 11. Comparisons of Pb and Zn values by EWU with those of other labs, and of NIST SRMs by all labs against certified values. Analyzed element 1Laboratory data compared (y/x) 2Compositional range compared (ppm) Number of sample pairs 3coefficient of determ. ( R 2) 4slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean Pb recov. of NIST SRM values 4slope (y/NIST) Pb EWU/NIST 1,162 to 5,532 100.0% Pb USGS-EDXRF/EWU 20 to 8,000 100.8% Pb USGS-EDXRF/EWU 8,000 to 35,000 Pb CHEMEX/EWU 20 to 8,000 Pb XRAL/EWU 20 to 8,000 96.5% Pb XRAL/EWU 8,000 to 35,000 Pb ACZ/EWU 20 to 8,000 88.1% Pb ACZ/EWU 8,000 to 35,000 Analyzed element Laboratory data compared (y/x) Compositional range compared (ppm) Number of sample pairs coefficient of determ. ( R 2) slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean Zn recov. of NIST SRM values slope (y/NIST) Zn EWU/NIST 350 to 6,952 98.1% Zn USGS-EDXRF/EWU 80 to 7,000 97.9% Zn USGS-EDXRF/EWU 7,000 to 16,000 Zn CHEMEX/EWU 4,000 to 7,000 Zn CHEMEX/EWU 7,000 to 10,000 Zn XRAL/EWU 60 to 7,000 79.8% Zn XRAL/EWU 7,000 to 33,000 Zn ACZ/EWU 60 to 7,000 87.0% Zn ACZ/EWU 7,000 to 33,000

1for samples analyzed by both methods (y=first listed lab, x second listed lab)

2values given from analyses by lab listed second

3measure of goodness-of-fit of least squares linear regression through the paired analytical values, projected through origin.

4slope of least-squares linear regression through paired analytical values and the origin.

Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of Zn (figure 7) indicates that USGSEDXRF and ACZ give values less than 5% lower than those of EWU for concentrations less than 7,000 ppm, while both CHEMEX and XRAL give values that are about 20% low (table 11). The relative recoveries by each laboratory relative to EWU are lower for Zn concentrations above 7,000 ppm, and the scatter is higher. Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of Fe (figure 8) indicates that, for concentrations below 16% Fe, analyses by ACZ and by XRAL are less than 8% low relative to EWU values (with considerable scatter: R2 0.90-0.92), while CHEMEX analyses are about 16 % low (table 12). Only a few samples (analyzed by XRAL and ACZ) have Fe concentrations greater than 16%, and these few samples appear to have even lower Fe recovery relative to EWU values. Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of Mn (figure 9) indicates that, for concentrations below 10,000 ppm, only XRAL analyses closely compare with those of EWU (within 1%); ACZ analyses are about 6% greater than, and CHEMEX are about 18% less than those of EWU (table 12). For Mn concentrations above 10,000 ppm, the scatter of the inter-laboratory analyses is even greater, comparisons are even worse for ACZ and CHEMEX, but recoveries are similar for XRAL. Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of As (figure 10) indicates that, for low concentrations (less than 70 ppm) XRAL and ACZ give very similar values to those of EWU, while CHEMEX gives considerably lower values (table 13). At higher concentrations (but still below the As concentration of NIST SRM 2710), all 3 laboratories (XRAL, ACZ and CHEMEX) consistently yield values that are 11-14% less than those of EWU with relatively narrow scatter (R2 0.97-0.98). Comparison of the inter-laboratory analyses of Cd (figure 11) indicates that, for Cd concentrations less than 50 ppm, XRAL analyses are very close to those of EWU (within 2%) with little scatter, while those of CHEMEX and ACZ are 8-13% lower (table 13). At concentrations from 50 to 150 ppm Cd, relative recoveries of Cd by XRAL and ACZ are higher and even closer to EWU values, although scatter is higher.

weight % Fe by EWU weight % Fe by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ blowup in B A weight % Fe by EWU weight % Fe by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B Figure 8. Fe analyses of sample splits analyzed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

ppm Mn by EWU ppm Mn by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ blowup in B A ppm Mn by EWU ppm Mn by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B Figure 9. Mn analyses of sample splits analysed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

Table 12. Comparisons of Fe and Mn values by EWU with those of other labs, and of NIST SRMs by all labs against certified values. Analyzed element 1Laboratory data compared (y/x) 2Compositional range compared (wt%) Number of sample pairs 3coefficient of determ. ( R 2) 4slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean Fe recov. of NIST SRM values 4slope (y/NIST) Fe EWU/NIST 2.7 to 3.3 100.6% Fe CHEMEX/EWU 9 to 16 Fe XRAL/EWU 2 to 16 92.1% Fe ACZ/EWU 2 to 16 69.8% Analyzed element Laboratory data compared (y/x) Compositional range compared (ppm) Number of sample pairs coefficient of determ. ( R 2) slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean Mn recov. of NIST SRM values slope (y/NIST) Mn EWU/NIST 638 to 10,100 99.5% Mn CHEMEX/EWU 3500 to 10,000 Mn CHEMEX/EWU 10,000 to 14,000 Mn XRAL/EWU 100 to 10,000 88.9% Mn XRAL/EWU 10,000 to 20,000 Mn ACZ/EWU 100 to 10,000 74.4% Mn ACZ/EWU 10,000 to 20,000

1for samples analyzed by both methods (y=first listed lab, x second listed lab)

2values given from analyses by lab listed second

3measure of goodness-of-fit of least squares linear regression through the paired analytical values, projected through origin.

4slope of least-squares linear regression through paired analytical values and the origin.

Comparison of recoveries relative to EWU for CdA samples and to NIST for NIST SRMs for each laboratory indicates general similarities with a few interesting differences (tables 11 to 13). Recoveries of Pb and Zn by USGS-EDXRF are within 4% both of EWU values of CdA samples and of NIST certified values of NIST SRM. XRAL percent recoveries of certified values of NIST SRMs are similar to percent recoveries of EWU values for CdA samples for most elements except for Mn and Cd. XRAL recovery of Mn and Cd from CdA samples relative to EWU values is 98-100%, while Mn and Cd recovery by XRAL from NIST SRMs is much lower (87-89%). In other words for a given CdA sample, XRAL and EWU yielded similar Mn and Cd analytical values, even though XRAL had much poorer recovery of Mn and Cd from NIST SRMs than did EWU. In contrast ACZ analytical values for Pb, Zn, Fe, and Mn for split CdA samples are similar to EWU values (within 6%), even though ACZ analytical values of NIST SRMs were considerably lower (12-30%) than the certified value. ACZ values for As and Cd for split CdA samples are much lower than corresponding EWU values (87-89%), and are similar to ACZ percent recoveries of certified values for NIST SRMs. These differences in recovery for CdA samples versus for NIST SRMs probably reflects differences in the way these elements are held in the matrix of the two sample types and the contrasting efficiency of the several sample dissolution methods used. Conclusions This report documents the results of over 1,100 chemical analyses of samples of sediments and soils that were deposited in the CdA drainage basin before and during the era of large-scale mining in the CdA mining district, in north Idaho. These samples were collected as part of an effort to determine the character, distribution, thickness, volume, and metals contents of sediments and soils within the CdA drainage basin. Five different laboratories using different sample preparation and analytical techniques contributed geochemical data for this report. Analytical accuracy is given by comparison of data from multiple analyses of pulverized NIST SRMs by four of the laboratories. Analytical precision is calculated for data from two laboratories (EWU and XRAL) from repeated analyses of SRMs. Analyses of splits of over 21% of the soil and sediment samples by

ppm As by EWU ppm As by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ blowup in B A ppm As by EWU ppm As by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B Figure 10. As analyses of sample splits analysed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

ppm Cd by EWU ppm Cd by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ A Blowup in B ppm Cd by EWU ppm Cd by other laboratories CHEMEX XRAL ACZ B Figure 11. Cd analyses of sample splits analysed by EWU and by one of the other 4 laboratories. (A) Entire dataset, (B) blowup of the lower left corner of A. Line shows 1:1 correlation of analytical values.

Table 13. Comparisons of As and Cd values by EWU with those of other labs, and of NIST SRMs by all labs against certified values. Analyzed element 1Laboratory data compared (y/x) 2Compositional range compared (ppm) Number of sample pairs 3coefficient of determ. ( R 2) 4slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean As recov. of NIST SRM values 4slope (y/NIST) As EWU/NIST 105 to 626 99.8% As CHEMEX/EWU 45 to 520 As XRAL/EWU 5 to 70 As XRAL/EWU 70 to 460 87.8% As ACZ/EWU 5 to 70 As ACZ/EWU 70 to 460 66.3% Analyzed element Laboratory data compared (y/x) Compositional range compared (ppm) Number of sample pairs coefficient of determ. ( R 2) slope (y/x) Number of NIST SRM analyses Mean Cd recov. of NIST SRM values slope (y/NIST) Cd EWU/NIST 21.8 to 41.7 95.3% Cd CHEMEX/EWU 15 to 45 Cd XRAL/EWU 2 to 50 80.1% Cd XRAL/EWU 50 to 150 Cd ACZ/EWU 2 to 50 87.6% Cd ACZ/EWU 50 to 150

1for samples analyzed by both methods (y=first listed lab, x second listed lab)

2values given from analyses by lab listed second

3measure of goodness-of-fit of least squares linear regression through the paired analytical values, projected through origin.

4slope of least-squares linear regression through paired analytical values and the origin.

more than one laboratory allow direct comparison of the laboratories in analysis of CdA basin materials. Inter-laboratory comparisons are made for 6 elements: lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), arsenic (As), and cadmium (Cd). In general inter-laboratory correlations are better for samples within the compositional ranges of the NIST SRMs. Analyses by EWU are the most accurate relative to the NIST standards (within 1% for Pb, Fe, Mn, and As, 3% for Zn and 5% for Cd) and are the most precise (within 7%). USGS-EDXRF is similarly accurate for Pb and Zn. CHEMEX were the least accurate, yielding values 10-25% less than those of EWU. XRAL and ACZ are relatively accurate for Pb (within 5-8% of NIST values and of EWU analyses), but were considerably less accurate for the other 5 elements of concern (10-25% of NIST values). For some elements, however, XRAL and ACZ analyses of CdA samples were comparable to EWU analyses of the same samples, suggesting that, for some elements, XRAL and ACZ dissolutions are more effective on the matrix of the CdA samples than on the matrix of the NIST samples (obtained from soils around Butte, Montana).

Acknowledgements Former USGS-GD employee Cole Smith was instrumental in organizing the Coeur d'Alene geo-environmental project in the Spokane Field Office in 1992-93. Bi- Shiea King helped James Lindsay do XRF analyses in the Menlo Park laboratories. Richard O'Leary and Stephen Wilson provided QA-QC and descriptions of USGS QAQC procedures for samples analyzed at XRAL Laboratories. USGS-WRD employees Michael Beckwith, Paul Woods, Rick Backson, and Robert Fousek helped with 1994 drilling projects. University of Idaho researcher William Rember helped with drilling in 1995, as did chemistry professor William van der Sluys and his students from Gonzaga University. Eastern Washington University students, working part-time for USGS, participated as follows: Julie Eddy collected stream sediment samples from the South Fork, Reanette Boese and Nasir Aziz did sample preparation, Andrew Knowles and Nasir Aziz helped with drilling, John Wallis and Patrick Blair did most of the 1998 floodplain sampling. Julie Campbell, of USFWS, provided information about analytical procedures contracted to ACZ Laboratories by USFWS. John Wallis completed the digital conversion of all the data and wrote the metadata file. The manuscript was greatly improved by the review of Laurie Balistrieri.

References

Abraham, Joju, 1994, Impact of mining on the trace element geochemistry and lead isotopic composition of sediments in Coeur d'Alene River, Idaho: unpublished. M.S. thesis, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, Washington, 149 p. Balistrieri, L.S., Box, S.E., Ikramuddin, Mohammed, Horowitz, A.J., and Elrick, K.A., 2000, A study of porewater in water saturated sediments of levee banks and marshes in the lower Coeur d'Alene River valley, Idaho: Sampling, analytical methods, and results: U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-126. Campbell, J.K., Audet, D.J., Kern, J.W., Reyes, Marie, and McDonald, L.L., 1999, Metal contamination of palustrine and lacustrine habitats in the CdA Basin, Idaho: Draft report, USFWS and Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc., 26 p. Condoyannis, Nick, 1995, The uptake of heavy metals and associated elements by selected plants on tailings-contaminated soils: An example from the Coeur d'Alene river Basin, Idaho: unpublished. M.S. thesis, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, Washington, 109 p. Compton, R.R., 1985, Geology in the field: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 398 p. Fletcher, 1981, Handbook of exploration geochemistry: Volume1. Analytical Methods in Geochemical Prospecting: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., Amsterdam, Oxford, New York. Fousek, R.S., 1996, Trace-element distributions in the sediments of the flood plain and river banks of the South Fork and Coeur d'Alene Rivers, Shoshone and Kootenai Counties, Idaho: unpublished. M.S. thesis, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, 333 p. Gills, 1993a, Certificate of analysis, Standard Reference Material 2710, Montana soil, highly elevated trace element concentrations: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 5 p., addendum 6 p.

Gills, 1993b, Certificate of analysis, Standard Reference Material 2711, Montana soil, moderately elevated trace element concentrations: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 5 p., addendum 7 p. Goddard, E.N., Trask, P.D., De Ford, R.K, Rove, O.N., Singewald, J.T., Jr., and Overbeck, R.M., 1970, Rock-color chart: Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO Govindaraju, K., 1994, Geostandards newsletter: Vol. XVIII Special Issue: International Working Group "Analytical standards of Minerals, Ores and Rocks, with the assistance of Centre de Recherches Petrographiques et Geochimiques (CNRS), Vandoeuver-les-Nancy, France, July 1994, ISSN 0150 5505, p. 115-117 and Appendix I, p. 01 to 03. Grant, L.A., 1952, A history of the Cataldo dredge: Fourth Annual Pacific Northwest Industrial Waste Conference Proceedings, Washington State College, Pullman, Washington, p. 101-110. Hall, Gwendy E.M., 1999, "Near total" acid digestions: Explore, Newsletter for the Association of Exploration Geochemists, no. 104, p. 15-19. Horowitz, Arthur J., Elrick, Kent A., and Cook, Robert B., 1993, Effect of mining and related activities on the sediment trace element geochemistry of Lake Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, USA Part I. Surface sediments: Hydrological Processes, v. 7, p. Hoffmann, M.L., 1995, Characterization of heavy metal contamination in two lateral lakes of the lower Coeur d'Alene River valley, northern Idaho: unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho,76 p. Johnson, R.G., and King, B.-S.L., 1987, Energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, in Beadecker, Philip A., editor, Methods of Geochemical Analyis: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1770, p. F1-F5. Kane, J.S., 1991, Quality control and reference sample data bases: Geostandards Newsletter, v. 15, no 1, p. 33 to 47.

Levinson, A.A., 1974, Introduction to exploration geochemistry: Applied Publishing Co., Calgary, 608 p. Long, K.R., 1998a, Grade and tonnage models for Coeur d'Alene-type polymetallic veins: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OF 98-583, 28 p. Long, K.R., 1998b, Production and disposal of mill tailings in the Coeur d'Alene mining region, Shoshone County, Idaho; Preliminary estimates: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report OF 98-595, 14 p. Long, K.R., DeYoung, J.H.,Jr., and Ludington, Steve, 2000, Significant deposits of gold, silver, copper, lead, and zinc in the United States: Economic Geology, v. 95, no. 3, p. 629-641. Rabe, F.W., and Flaherty, D.C., 1974, The river of green and gold: A pristine wilderness dramatically affected by man's discovery of gold: Idaho Research Foundation, Inc., Natural Resource Series, no. 4, Moscow, Idaho, 97 p. Sprenke, K.F., Rember, W.C., Bender, S.F., Hoffmann, M.L., Rabbi, F., Chamberrlain, V.E., 2000, Toxic metal contamination in the lateral lakes of the Coeur d'Alene River valley, Idaho: Environmental Geology, Springer-Verlag, v. 39, p. 575-586. US Dept. of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), 1994, Toxicological profile for zinc: Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Report TP-93/15, 230 p., 2 appendices. US Dept. of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), 1997, Toxicological profile for manganese (update): Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 201 p., 3 appendices. US Dept. of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), 1998, Toxicological profile for arsenic (update): Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 349 p., 3 appendices. US Dept. of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), 1999a, Toxicological profile for lead (update): Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 587 p., 4 appendices.

US Dept. of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), 1999b, Toxicological profile for cadmium: Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 397 p., 3 appendices. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1998, Sediment contamination in the Lower Coeur d'Alene River Basin (LCDARB): Geophysical and sediment coring investigations in the river channel, lateral lakes, and floodplains: Bunker Hill Facility Basin-Wide RI/FS Data Report, vol. 1 and 2, prepared for USEPA by URS Greiner, Inc. and CH2M Hill.

Map A-1: Sample site location map for the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and tributaries near Mullan and Burke, Idaho. Base map from USGS Thomson Falls and Wallace, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangles. r r r r r r 94JE01 94JE02 94JE03 94JE07 94JE08 94JE09 4 Kilometers r Sample site N

r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 94JE04 94JE05 94JE10 94JE11 94JE13 94JE14 94JE15 94JE16 94JE17 94JE18 94JE19 94JE20 94JE21 94JE22 94JE23 94JE12 Map A-2: Sample site locations along the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and tributaries near Wallace, Idaho. Base map from USGS Thomson Falls and Wallace, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangles. 4 Kilometers rSample sites N

r r r r r r r r r r r r r 94JE06 94JE06A 94JE06B 94JE24 94JE25 94JE26 94JE27 94JE28 94JE29 94JE30 94JE31 94JE32 94JE33 94JE34 4 Kilometers N Map A-3: Sample site location map for the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and tributaries between Osburn and Kellogg, Idaho. Base map from USGS Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle.

Sample sites

r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 93SBK17 93SBK18 BC37 93SBK38 94JE35 94JE36 94JE37 94JE38 94JE39A 94JE40 94JE41 94JE42 94JE43 94JE44 94JE45 94JE46 94JE47 94JE48 4 Kilometers N Map A-4: Sample site location map for the South Fork of the Coeur d'Alene River and tributaries between Kellogg and Pinehurst, Idaho. Base map from USGS Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle.

Sample sites

r r r r r r rr r r r r r r r r r r 93SBC10 93SBC15 93SBC36 93SBC37 93SBC39 94JE49 T98C-01 T98C-06 T98C-08 T98C-10 T98C-11B T98C-12 T98C-15 T98C-16 T98C-18 T98C-20 T98C-21 T98C-22 T98C-25 T98C-05 T98C-07 4 Kilometers N Map A-5: Sample site location map for the North Fork and mainstem of the Coeur d'Alene River between Enaville and the Cataldo Mission, Idaho. Base map from USGS Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle. Sample sites

r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 93CSC03 93SBR13 93SBC16 94VCD1 94VCD2 94VCD3 95PCUD2 95VCD3 95VCUD1 96LD-1S 96LD-105S T98C-17 T98C-26 T98R-13 T98R-14 T98R-23 T98R-24 T98R-27 T98R-29 T98R-33 T98R-34 T98R-31 T98R-32 93SBL35 4 Kilometers N Map A-6: Sample site locations for the mainstem Coeur d'Alene River between Cataldo Mission and Rose Lake, Idaho. Base map from USGS Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle. Sample sites

r r r r r r r r r r r r r rr r

r r r r r r r r r r 93ABL08 93ABL09 93SBL26 93SBL27 93SBL27B 93SBL28 93SBL28C 93SBL30 93SBL31 93SBL32 93SBL34 94Gid2 94Gid3 94Gid4 94Gid5 94Gid6 94VCK1 94VCK2 95PCK1 96K-75E 96K-89E 96K-114E 96K-178E T98L-35 T98L-36 T98L-37 T98L-38 T98L-41 T98L-42 T98R-27 T98R-28 T98R-29 T98R-30 4 Kilometers N Map A-7: Sample site locations for the main stem of the Coeur d'Alene River between Rose and Killarney Lakes, Idaho. Base map from USGS Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle. Sample sites

r r r r r r r 93ABM02 93ABM04 93ABM06 93SBM14 T98M-39 T98M-40 T98M-43 r Sample sites N 4 Kilometers Map A-8: Sample site location map for the main stem of the Coeur d'Alene River near Cave and Medicine Lakes, Idaho. Base map from USGS St. Maries, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle.

4 Kilometers N Sample sites

93SBB20 93SBB22 93SBB23 93SBB21 Map A-9: Sample site location map for the mainstem of the Coeur d'Alene River near Thompson Lake, Idaho. Base map from USGS St. Maries, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle.

Sample sites

N 4 Kilometers Sample sites

93SBC40 Map A-10: Sample site location map for the St. Joe River near St. Maries, Idaho. Base map from USGS St. Maries, Idaho 1:100,000 quadrangle.

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit SITE_ID LATITUDE LONGITUDE WTR_DEPTH APDX_MAPNO LOC_METHOD ENVIRONMNT UNIT_DESC UNIT_LABEL 93ABM02 -116.6092 MAP A-8 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93CSC03 -116.3661 MAP A-6 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93ABM04 -116.5905 MAP A-8 a Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee backslope Ulb 93ABM06 -116.5760 MAP A-8 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93ABL08 -116.5542 MAP A-7 a Marsh Palustrine, perennial PEph 93ABL09 -116.5333 MAP A-7 a Exposed channel bar Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBC10 -116.3435 MAP A-5 a Subaerial floodplain Upland, alluvial terrace Uat3 93SBR13 -116.4443 MAP A-6 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBM14 -116.5581 MAP A-8 a Miocene lake seds Highland, Miocene seds. HMs 93SBC15 -116.3608 MAP A-5 a Subaerial floodplain Upland levee sand Uls 93SBC16 -116.3706 MAP A-6 a Submerged channel River sand bar

93SBK17 -116.1750 MAP A-4 a Subaerial floodplain Jig-era overbank sediments Jos 93SBK18 -116.2016 MAP A-4 a Subaerial floodplain Jig-era overbank sediments Jos 93SBB20 -116.7239 MAP A-9 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBB21 -116.7258 MAP A-9 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBB22 -116.7039 MAP A-9 a Marsh Seasonal marsh with emergent vegetation PEs 93SBB23 -116.7036 MAP A-9 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBL26 -116.5444 MAP A-7 a Marsh Palustrine, perennial PEph 93SBL27 -116.5311 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBL27B -116.5322 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Upland levee sand Uls 93SBL28 -116.5478 MAP A-7 a Marsh Palustrine, perennial PEph 93SBL28C -116.5478 MAP A-7 a Marsh Palustrine, perennial PEph 93SBL30 -116.5355 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Upland levee sand Also 93SBL31 -116.5442 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Upland sand splay Ussc 93SBL32 -116.5428 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Upland meander scroll set Umsf 93SBL34 -116.5544 MAP A-7 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 93SBC35 -116.3728 MAP A-6 a Subaerial dredge spoils Dredge spoils, subaerial Ads1 *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 1

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID SITE_ID 93ABM02 93CSC03 93ABM04 93ABM06 93ABL08 93ABL09 93SBC10 93SBR13 93SBM14 93SBC15 93SBC16 93SBK17 93SBK18 93SBB20 93SBB21 93SBB22 93SBB23 93SBL26 93SBL27 93SBL27B 93SBL28 93SBL28C 93SBL30 93SBL31 93SBL32 93SBL34 93SBC35 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric REF_MAP SAMP_TECH EDXRF EWU-4-ACID NITRIC-AQR XRL-4-ACID ACZ-NITRIC all all some all all all some all all all all all all all all some all all all all all all all all all all some all all some all all some 2, 4 all all all all some all all some all all some all all some 4, 2 all all all all all all 2, 4 all all 2, 4 all all some all all some all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 2

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit 93SBC36 -116.2522 MAP A-5 a Exposed channel bar River, gravel bottomed Rg 93SBC37 -116.2525 MAP A-5 a Exposed channel bar River, gravel bottomed Rg 93SBK38 -116.2442 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 93SBC39 -116.2744 MAP A-5 a Subaerial floodplain Upland alluvial terrace Uat1 93SBC40 -116.5165 MAP A-10 a Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge 94Gid2 -116.5301 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 94Gid3 -116.5304 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Upland levee sand Also 94Gid4 -116.5306 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Upland levee sand Also 94Gid5 -116.5309 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Upland meander scroll set, farmed Umsf 94Gid6 -116.5315 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Upland meander scroll set, farmed Umsf 94JE01 -115.7321 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE02 -115.8187 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE03 -115.8603 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE04 -115.8896 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE05 -115.9136 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE06 -116.0775 MAP A-3 a Subaerial floodplain Jig-era overbank sediments Jos 94JE06A -116.0774 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE06B -116.0775 MAP A-3 a Subaerial floodplain Jig-era overbank sediments Jos 94JE07 -115.7861 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE08 -115.8242 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE09 -115.8432 MAP A-1 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE10 -115.8771 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE11 -115.8910 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE12 -115.9192 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE13 -115.9344 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE14 -115.9369 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE15 -115.9519 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE16 -115.9385 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 3

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID 93SBC36 93SBC37 93SBK38 93SBC39 93SBC40 94Gid2 94Gid3 94Gid4 94Gid5 94Gid6 94JE01 94JE02 94JE03 94JE04 94JE05 94JE06 94JE06A 94JE06B 94JE07 94JE08 94JE09 94JE10 94JE11 94JE12 94JE13 94JE14 94JE15 94JE16 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric all all all all all all all all all all some some all some some all some some all all some some all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 4

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit 94JE17 -115.9545 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE18 -115.9703 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE19 -115.9636 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE20 -115.9800 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE21 -115.9742 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE22 -115.9822 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE23 -115.9875 MAP A-2 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE24 -116.0067 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE25 -116.0105 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE26 -116.0167 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE27 -116.0432 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE28 -116.0481 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE29 -116.0608 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE30 -116.0533 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE31 -116.0908 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE32 -116.0476 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE33 -116.1022 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE34 -116.1108 MAP A-3 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE35 -116.1394 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE36 -116.1636 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE37 -116.1720 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE38 -116.1814 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE39A -116.1915 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE40 -116.1976 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE41 -116.2177 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE42 -116.2411 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE43 -116.2066 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE44 -116.2231 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 5

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID 94JE17 94JE18 94JE19 94JE20 94JE21 94JE22 94JE23 94JE24 94JE25 94JE26 94JE27 94JE28 94JE29 94JE30 94JE31 94JE32 94JE33 94JE34 94JE35 94JE36 94JE37 94JE38 94JE39A 94JE40 94JE41 94JE42 94JE43 94JE44 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 6

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit 94JE45 -116.2227 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE46 -116.2333 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE47 -116.2389 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE48 -116.2445 MAP A-4 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg 94JE49 -116.2520 MAP A-5 a Exposed channel bar Sandy gravels of the present channel Pcg -116.4055 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs -116.4497 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs -116.5300 MAP A-7 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 94VCD1 -116.4139 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 94VCD2 -116.4138 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 94VCD3 -116.4141 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Pre-mining era sediments in channel Rpm 94VCK1 -116.5297 MAP A-7 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 94VCK2 -116.5296 MAP A-7 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 95PCK1 -116.5300 MAP A-7 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 95PCUD2 -116.4055 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 95VCD3 -116.4139 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 95VCUD1 -116.4053 MAP A-6 b Submerged channel Sand-bottomed river channel Rs 96K-75E -116.5291 MAP A-7 b Submerged channel Pre-mining era sediments in channel Rpm 96K-89E -116.5290 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Upland sand splay Uss 96K-114E -116.5286 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Palustrine, perennial PEp 96K-178E -116.5278 MAP A-7 b Subaerial floodplain Palustrine, perennial PEp 96LD-1S -116.4138 MAP A-6 b Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw 96LD-105S -116.4141 MAP A-6 b Subaerial floodplain Riverbank wedge Rbw T98C-01 -116.2693 MAP A-5 Marsh Palustrine, seasonal, emergent plants PEs T98C-05 -116.2751 MAP A-5 Marsh Palustrine, seasonal, emergent plants PEs T98C-06 -116.3215 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee sand Also T98C-07 -116.3193 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, upper alluvial terrace Uat3 T98C-08 -116.3316 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, middle alluvial terrace Uat2 *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 7

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID 94JE45 94JE46 94JE47 94JE48 94JE49 94VCD1 94VCD2 94VCD3 94VCK1 94VCK2 95PCK1 95PCUD2 95VCD3 95VCUD1 96K-75E 96K-89E 96K-114E 96K-178E 96LD-1S 96LD-105S T98C-01 T98C-05 T98C-06 T98C-07 T98C-08 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric all all all all all all some some all all all all all all some some all some some all some some all some some all some some all some some all some some all all all some some all all all all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 8

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit T98C-10 -116.3329 MAP A-5 Exposed channel bar Upland, lower terrace base at river shore Rg T98C-11B -116.3560 MAP A-5 Marsh Riverine, high-water channel on terrace Rhc T98C-12 -116.3566 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee of slough on terrace Uat2 T98R-13 -116.3867 MAP A-6 Marsh Dredge spoils, palustrine, common reed AdsPEcr T98R-14 -116.3751 MAP A-6 Subaerial dredge spoils Dredge spoils, subaerial Ads1 T98C-15 -116.2764 MAP A-5 Marsh Palustrine, seasonal, emergent plants PEs T98C-16 -116.3578 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, middle alluvial terrace Uat2 T98C-17 -116.3640 MAP A-6 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee sand Also T98C-18 -116.3484 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, middle alluvial terrace Uat2 T98C-20 -116.3542 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, aquatic shore

T98C-21 -116.3607 MAP A-5 Marsh Palustrine, perennial, emergent plants PEp T98C-22 -116.3528 MAP A-5 Marsh Palustrine, emergent common reed PEcr T98R-23 -116.3887 MAP A-6 Marsh Dredge spoils, palustrine, common reed AdsPEcr T98R-24 -116.3846 MAP A-6 Marsh Dredge spoils, palustrine, common reed AdsPEcr T98C-25 -116.3276 MAP A-5 Subaerial floodplain Upland, middle alluvial terrace Uat2 T98C-26 -116.3713 MAP A-6 Marsh Palustrine, seasonal, emergent plants PEs T98R-27 -116.4685 MAP A-6 Marsh Palustrine, distributary, blocked PdisbE T98R-28 -116.4836 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, seasonal, bushes and trees PEsT T98R-29 -116.4746 MAP A-6 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee of blocked distributary Udisb T98R-30 -116.4955 MAP A-7 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee of channel scar Ucsl T98R-31 -116.3765 MAP A-6 Marsh Upland, channel scar (filled with sediment) Ucs T98R-32 -116.3866 MAP A-6 Subaerial floodplain Upland, distributary levee Udis T98R-33 -116.4400 MAP A-6 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee sand Also T98R-34 -116.4501 MAP A-6 Shallow lake Lacustrine, littoral LltE T98L-35 -116.5018 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, perennial, emergent plants PEp T98L-36 -116.5089 MAP A-7 Subaerial floodplain Upland, sand splay Uss T98L-37 -116.5227 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, aquatic plants PA T98L-38 -116.5324 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, perennial, emergent plants PEp *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 9

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID T98C-10 T98C-11B T98C-12 T98R-13 T98R-14 T98C-15 T98C-16 T98C-17 T98C-18 T98C-20 T98C-21 T98C-22 T98R-23 T98R-24 T98C-25 T98C-26 T98R-27 T98R-28 T98R-29 T98R-30 T98R-31 T98R-32 T98R-33 T98R-34 T98L-35 T98L-36 T98L-37 T98L-38 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 10

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID Latitude Longitude Water depth (m) Site Location Map in Appendix A SiteLocation Method* Environment USGS map unit description USGS map unit T98M-39 -116.5590 MAP A-8 Drained marsh Palustrine, seasonal, drained, farmed PESdf T98M-40 -116.5693 MAP A-8 Drained marsh Palustrine, seasonal to perennial, drained Pespdf T98L-41 -116.5662 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, perennial, emergent rice PEpr T98L-42 -116.5644 MAP A-7 Marsh Palustrine, perennial, emergent plants PEp T98M-43 -116.5693 MAP A-8 Subaerial floodplain Upland, levee backslope Ulb *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 11

Appendix B. Sample site locations, depositional environments, depositional map units, sampling techniques and laboratory and analytical methods used on samples from that site (all=samples from site; some=some samples from site). Site ID T98M-39 T98M-40 T98L-41 T98L-42 T98M-43 USGS Sampling Technique*** USGS EDXRF EWU 4-acid CHEMEX nitric-aqua regia XRAL 4-acid ACZ nitric all all all all all *a=map,b=compass and tape,c=GPS.**1=Bookstom and others (1999),2=Box and prep.)*** 1=grab,2=grove, 3=depth-bracket,4=hand core,5=power core,6=vibro core,7=vibro-piston core,8=auger in casing. Appendix B, page 12

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93ABM02 light brown fine sand

93ABM02 medium brown medium-fine sand

93ABM02 orange laminated silt with 3 cm dark brown fine sand at 25-28

93ABM02 dark brown, ripple-laminated fine sand with wavy bedding top

93ABM02 8 couplets of dark brown, very fine sand and orange silt

93ABM02 orange-brown fine sand with climbing ripple laminations and 3 grass-mat

93ABM02 gray silty mud with irregular lens of orange cemented silty mud

93ABM02 massive gray silty mud

93ABM02 massive gray silty mud with sparse orange 0.5 cm spots

93ABM02 composite 0.5 liter channel sample of orange, sandy section

93ABM02 composite 0.5 liter sample of gray muddy section

93ABM02 composite 6 liter channel sample of orange, sandy section

93ABM02 composite 6 liter sample of gray muddy section

93CSC03 brown fine-very fine sand

93CSC03 pale brown medium and fine sand

93CSC03 tan silt-very fine sand

93CSC03 red brown silt

93CSC03 red brown very fine sand

93CSC03 red-brown fine and medium sand

93CSC03 tan very fine sand and silt

93CSC03 interbedded coarse and medium sand

93CSC03 pale brown very fine sand and silt

93CSC03 pale brown silt

93CSC03 chocolate brown silt 93CSC03 muddy red-brown silt 93CSC03 chocolate brown fine sand

93CSC03 pale brown silt-very fine sand

93CSC03 pale brown silt-very fine sand

93CSC03 gray silt and fine sand

93CSC03 gray very fine sand

93CSC03 medium sand

93CSC03 gray silt and fine sand

93ABM04 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand Appendix C, page 1

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93ABM04 rusty red-brown fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93ABM04 rusty red-brown fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93ABM04 rusty red-brown fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93ABM04 rusty red-brown fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93ABM04 orange-brown laminated silt, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93ABM04 gray massive silt, obvious root bioturbation in upper 25 cm; lake level 93ABM06 93ABM06 crs. grained, 2 cm thick red-brown quartz sand lens under angular 0.5 m quartzite block of RR embankment fill 93ABM06 93ABM06 gray silt 45 cm below 6A: lake level (2128') 50 cm below

93ABL08 red-brown silty mud

93ABL09 tan unconsolidated fine sand

93SBC10 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBC10 pale brown fine sand, weakly cemented

93SBC10 red-brown fine-medium sand, ripple-laminated with black cross-laminae,

93SBC10 brown fine sand, weakly cemented, with irregular leaf-rich seams

93SBC10 brown fine sand, weakly cemented, with irregular leaf-rich seams

93SBC10 mottled dark to light tan silty sand with 5 cm wood-rich seam at top and 1 cm charcoal seam at base

93SBC10 mottled dark to light tan silty sand

93SBC10 pebbly to cobbly gravel, clast-supported, clasts to 10 cm; river level at 360

93SBR13 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBR13 tan unconsolidated medium sand with climbing-ripple laminations

93SBR13 orange-brown laminated silt, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide; 2 cm very fine sand in center

93SBR13 dark red-brown medium-fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93SBR13 dark red-brown fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93SBR13 orange-brown laminated silt, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93SBR13 gray clayey silt with irregular orange-cemented fractures; lake level (2128') 93SBM14 93SBM14 moderately cemented tan mudstone with Miocene leaf impressions

93SBC15 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBC15 tan very fine sand with 4 cm medium fine sand in center Appendix C, page 2

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93SBC15 alternating 1-3 cm thick layers of laminated orange silt and weakly cemented pale brown fine sand

93SBC15 orange laminated silt with several 1 cm dark fine sand layers

93SBC15 orange massive silt with several 0.5-1.0 cm very fine sand layers

93SBC15 mottled gray, black, orange and brown clayey silt

93SBC15 gray clayey silt with irregular orange streaks: lake level (2127.8') at 261

93SBC16 poorly sorted gravelly sand with considerable mud; 5 cm below lake surface (2128') on mid-river sand bar

93SBK17 artificially placed angular white quartzite gravel

93SBK17 black, magnetite-rich coarse-grained sand with pea gravel lenses

93SBK17 maroon and tan ripple cross-laminated medium to coarse-grained sand with lens of imbricated gravel with rounded, 1 cm disc-shaped clasts

93SBK17 dark red-orange clayey silt, well laminated, weathered surface partially coated with white sulfate

93SBK17 bioturbated tan silty sand with some clay; upper 15 cm is organic-rich clayey silt; floating 3-5 cm pebbles in lower 25 cm

93SBK17 unconsolidated cobble conglomerate, matrix-supported in upper 20 cm, clast-supported below; average clast size: 5 cm, max. clast size: 15 cm

93SBK17 similar to above conglomerate; river at 300

93SBK18 artificially placed wood chips

93SBK18 orange-brown silt, weakly cemented

93SBK18 orange-brown silt, weakly cemented

93SBK18 ripple-laminated, very fine sand in cm beds (weathered-orange, unweathered-tan) with numerous 0.3 cm orange silt seams; several finely

93SBK18 gray clay with black sooty organics within and at base

93SBK18 gray massive clay with 5-10% floating pebbles to 3 cm in diameter

93SBK18 clast-supported round-cobble gravel coarsening downward from 2-3 cm clasts to greater than 10 cm clasts

93SBB20 red-orange silt at edge of gravelled parking lot; overlies earlier white gravel and underlies black gravel of most recent surfacing

93SBB21 unconsolidated fine sand, grading from red to black to tan upwards

93SBB21 thinly bedded dark-brown fine sand with a few 1 cm white mud layers Appendix C, page 3

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93SBB21 alternated 1 cm layers of light orange silt and dark brown fine sand; 3 cm magnetite-rich ripple-laminated fine sand at base

93SBB21 orange silt with 3.5 cm ripple-laminated fine sand in center

93SBB21 light tan-orange muddy silt in lower half; alternated dark red-brown fine sand-orange silt in upper half

93SBB21 pale gray silt (irregularly mottled orange) with disseminated black woody

93SBB21 gray clay with black organic flecks and rare red blotches

93SBB21 light brown medium sand with irregular orange streaks

93SBB21 dark gray-brown silty mud with rare orange spots

93SBB21 light brown medium sand

93SBB21 gray-brown thinly bedded fine sand, silt, and mud; lake level (2125.87') at

93SBB21 gray-brown mud

93SBB21 tan fine sand

93SBB21 gray silty clay

93SBB22 matted vegetation

93SBB22 vegetation mat with minor silt component

93SBB22 orange-brown silty clay

93SBB22 orange-brown silty clay with abundant roots

93SBB22 orange-brown clay with silty seams

93SBB22 orange-brown silty clay, mottled gray at base

93SBB22 gray and orange mottled clay, gray near base

93SBB22 gray-black organic-rich mud

93SBB22 dark-gray peat

93SBB22 dark-gray peat with preserved vegetative mats

93SBB22 gray-brown weakly layered peat

93SBB23 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBB23 lower 3 cm-dark brown fine sand; upper 3 cm-light tan silt

93SBB23 brown silt to very fine sand; grass mat layer at base

93SBB23 brown silt to very fine sand; grass mat layer at base

93SBB23 dark brown fine sand; grass mat layer at base

93SBB23 dark to light brown fine sand, ripple cross-laminated, irregular channelized

93SBB23 orange laminated silt, with 1 cm organic rich layer at base Appendix C, page 4

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93SBB23 tan to light tan mottled and massive silty clay, grossly layered in upper 10

93SBB23 tan to light tan mottled and massive silty clay

93SBL26 60% horsetail stalks, 40% gray mud; mud is brown with red tinge at top

93SBL26 gray brown mud with reddish tinge; 40% horsetail stalks and dark organic

93SBL26 gray brown mud with 30% horsetail stalks and dark organic matter

93SBL26 gray brown mud with 50% vegetative matter (including horsetail stalks)

93SBL26 upper 3 cm - brown-black muddy peat; lower 3 cm - vegetative matter

93SBL26 brown-black peat with 1.5 cm vegetative mat of horsetail stalks and grass

93SBL26 brown-black peat with 1.5 cm vegetative mat of horsetail stalks and grass

93SBL27 tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBL27 medium-grained sand with black-streaked ripple-laminations

93SBL27 orange laminated silt

93SBL27 dark brown fine-grained sand with two 1 cm orange silt layers

93SBL27 alternating dark brown fine-grained sand and orange silt

93SBL27 1 cm orange silt beds with fine sand partings

93SBL27 alternating dark brown fine-grained sand and orange silt

93SBL27 gray brown bioturbated muddy very fine sand

93SBL27 orange-brown silt filling burrow(?)

93SBL27 gray brown bioturbated muddy very fine sand

93SBL27 gray brown bioturbated muddy very fine sand

93SBL27B tan unconsolidated fine-grained sand

93SBL27B dark brown fine to medium-grained sand

93SBL27B alternating cm-thick orange silt and very fine sand beds

93SBL27B dark brown-orange silty fine sand, weakly cemented by iron hydroxide

93SBL27B laminated pale tan to orange silt and very fine sand

93SBL27B laminated pale tan to orange silt and very fine sand

93SBL27B laminated pale tan to orange silt and very fine sand

93SBL27B gray bioturbated silty fine sand

93SBL28 gray mud with 70% horsetail stalks

93SBL28 gray mud with 50% organic material (decomposed horsetail stalks)

93SBL28 gray mud with <25% organic material

93SBL28 gray mud with <25% organic material Appendix C, page 5

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93SBL28 gray mud with <25% organic material (horsetail mat parting at base)

93SBL28 gray mud with <25% organic material (horsetail mat parting at base)

93SBL28 gray mud with <25% organic material

93SBL28C vegetative mat (horsetails) with minor reddish mud

93SBL28C brown mud with 75% horsetail stalks and roots

93SBL28C brownish gray mud with 30-40% wiry black organic material

93SBL28C dark gray mud with 15 % black organic material

93SBL28C dark gray clay with 30% wiry black organic material

93SBL28C dark gray muddy compost with 60% black organic material

93SBL28C brown compost (95-100% organic) with gray coating

93SBL28C brown compost with dark smooth coating

93SBL28C brown-black composted horsetail stalks/roots

93SBL28C brown-black composted horsetail stalks/roots

93SBL30 orange-brown clayey silt to very fine sand

93SBL30 orange-brown clayey silt to very fine sand, grass root network

93SBL30 orange-brown clayey silt to very fine sand; grass mat parting at base

93SBL30 yellow-brown clayey silt to very fine sand; grass mat parting at base

93SBL30 yellow-orange clayey silt to very fine sand; grass mat parting at base

93SBL30 yellow-orange clayey silt to very fine sand; grass mat parting at base

93SBL30 bright red-orange, moderately cemented fine sand

93SBL30 black clayey silt with 20% irregular gray lenses

93SBL30 black clayey silt

93SBL30 gray-black clayey silt with 1% orange spots

93SBL30 homogenous gray clayey silt with minor orange specks

93SBL30 homogenous gray clayey silt

93SBL30 pale gray clayey silt with horizontal cracks every 0.5 cm

gray-brown unlayered clayey silt

gray-brown clayey silt with horizontal cracks every 1.5 cm

93SBL30 gray clayey silt with horizontal cracks every 2 cm

93SBL30 gray clayey silt with horizontal cracks every 1 cm

93SBL30 gray clayey silt with horizontal cracks every 1 cm

93SBL31 medium brown, very fine unconsolidated sand

93SBL31 gray-white ash (May,1980 Mt. St. Helens) Appendix C, page 6

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

93SBL31 alternating cm-thick dusky brown and medium brown silt couplets; lower 3 cm-dark brown fine sand

93SBL31 3 cm ripple-laminated salt & pepper fine sand underlain by 2 cmm pale

93SBL31 dark brown fine sand with ripple laminations defined by alternating black and pale orange streaks

93SBL31 dark brown fine sand grades up to 0.5 cm silt at top

93SBL31 tan very fine sand with black ripple-laminations, grades up to 1 cm silt at

93SBL31 light brown very fine sand with 1 cm silt at top

93SBL31 orange-brown silt with fine laminae; bright orange-brown very fine sand

93SBL31 1 cm orange silt at base, capped by two 3 cm sands with orange silt

93SBL31 orange silt with black spots; black organic parting at base

93SBL31 dark orange, tan and black fine-to medium-grained sand with ripple laminations; orange silt parting at base

93SBL31 coarsely banded orange and tan fine sand with ripple-laminations decreasing in height from 2 cm at bottom to 0.5 cm at top; gradational with

93SBL31 homogenous tan fine sand with irregular black and orange streaks

93SBL31 pale yellow brown very fine sand with orange laminae

93SBL31 alternating dark gray muddy silt and very fine sand in 0.5 cm thick layers

93SBL31 medium gray to light olive gray silty very fine sand

93SBL31 alternating gray silt and tan very fine sand in 0.5 cm layers

93SBL31 three 3 cm tan fine sand layers separated by 1 cm dark gray silt layers

93SBL32 medium brown very fine sand with roots

93SBL32 light red-orange brown very fine sand

93SBL32 dusky brown silt

93SBL32 irregular lens of dark red-brown silt in homogenous moderate brown silt

93SBL32 dusky brown silt with mottles of light brown

93SBL32 moderate brown silty mud with no mottling 93SBL34a 93SBL34 gray black mud with 10% red spots at water's edge at 2121.4' above sea 93SBL34b 93SBL34 red very fine sand and silt with gray streaks vertical meter above 93SBL34a and 10 cm below 93SBL34c 93SBL34c 93SBL34 gray black mud 10 cm above 93SBL34b and adjacent to 93SBL34d 93SBL34d 93SBL34 irregular blob of red-orange, moderately cemented mud penetrating downward into layer of 93SBL34c Appendix C, page 7

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC 93SBL34e 93SBL34 gray black mud with minor red streaks 2m east of 93SBL34d and about 1.5 m below ground surface 93SBL34f 93SBL34 red cemented silty mud along vertical fracture (3 cm wide) cutting grayblack mud layer of 93SBL34e 93SBL34g 93SBL34 25 cm thick red-orange layered silt 50 cm above 93SBL34e 93SBL34h 93SBL34 2 cm gray lens in red-orange layered silt between layers of 93SBL34g and 93SBL34i 93SBL34 25 cm red-orange layered silt-very fine sand above 93SBL34h with layer top 65 cm below ground surface

93SBC35A gravelly coarse unconsolidated sand from dredge pile west of Cataldo boat

93SBC35B gravelly coarse unconsolidated sand from dredge pile west of Cataldo boat

93SBC36 coarse to fine sand from modern sandbar

93SBC37 tan medium-coarse unconsolidated sand with scattered 1-2 cm clasts in

93SBK38 tan unconsolidated fine sand in small patches on modern gravel point bar

93SBK38 red-brown medium sand

93SBK38 gravelly coarse sand with 25% 2-cm rounded quartzite clasts

93SBK38 red-brown sandy gravel (70% 2-5 cm clasts; 30% coarse sand)

93SBC39 medium-fine sand from eddy bar in modern channel

93SBC39 light tan fine unconsolidated sand

93SBC39 orange-brown fine sand

93SBC39 marble-cake (brown, orange, black) fine sand

93SBC39 dark brown and black fine sand

93SBC39 red-brown fine sand

93SBC39 dark brown clayey very fine sand

93SBC39 light brown clayey very fine sand

93SBC39 dark brown clayey fine sand

93SBC39 unconsolidated round cobble conglomerate; river at 225

94SB40 unconsolidated medium sand from modern point bar deposit

94SB40 grassroot-filled fine sand with visible mica flakes

94SB40 brown silt to very fine sand, unlayered, with visible mica flakes

94SB40 mottled gray-orange-brown fine sand with clayey matrix; no layering Appendix C, page 8

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

94SB40 mottled gray-orange-brown fine sand with clayey matrix with two distinct 2cm dark brown silts with dark organics

94SB40 mottled gray-orange-brown fine sand with clayey matrix with 1 cm dark brown silt layer with dark organics; base is 2 m above lake surface

94Gid2 grassy duff with disseminated fine sand

94Gid2 fine sand

94Gid2 mottled red-brown to gray very fine sand and silt layers, 1-2 cm thick

94Gid2 fine sand

94Gid2 mottled red-brown to gray very fine sand and silt layers, 1-2 cm thick

94Gid2 red-brown fine sand with organics

94Gid2 mottled gray silt with organics

94Gid2 fine sand

94Gid2 dark gray silt with two 0.5 cm very fine sand layers

94Gid2 fine-very fine sand and silt layers (0.5 cm each)

94Gid2 homogenous gray fine sand

94Gid2 cm-thick layered gray muddy silt with rootlets

94Gid2 gray very fine sand

94Gid2 gray fine sand

94Gid2 gray very fine sand

94Gid2 gray silt

94Gid2 gray silt and muddy silt with rootlets; layered in 0.2-1.0 cm layers of gray

94Gid3 tan very fine sand

94Gid3 gray white ash, 1980 Mt. St. Helens

94Gid3 dark gray fine sand

94Gid3 laminated dark brown and yellow-orange very fine sand and silt layers, 94Gid3 laminated dark brown and yellow-orange very fine sand and silt layers, 94Gid3 fine salt & pepper dark gray sand

94Gid3 orange laminated silt with 5% irregular gray splotches

94Gid3 dark gray muddy silt with fine sand 155-157; plant debris rich layers at 153,

94Gid3 tan-gray muddy silt with indistinct layers

94Gid3 tan gray muddy silt & very fine sand

94Gid3 tan, massive medium-fine sand

94Gid3 tan muddy silt; black plant debris rich seam at 286 cm

94Gid3 tan fine sand

94Gid3 tan muddy silt Appendix C, page 9

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

94Gid3 tan fine sand

94Gid3 tan muddy silt

94Gid4 grassy duff layer

94Gid4 tan medium-fine sand with grass rootlets

94Gid4 very fine sand and silt layers, dark brown

94Gid4 orange brown laminated silt

94Gid4 dark brown-black fine sand

94Gid4 orange-brown silt

94Gid4 brown fine sand

94Gid4 laminated orange silt, gray on bottom

94Gid4 No recovery

94Gid4 black-brown silty clay, blotchy layers with red, eye-shaped lenses in upper

94Gid4 medium-fine brown sand

94Gid4 tan silty clay with dark gray laminae visible below 160

94Gid4 tan silty medium-fine sand

94Gid4 tan silty clay with irregular black laminae

94Gid4 No recovery

94Gid4 tan silty clay with thin fine sand laminae

94Gid4 very fine sand

94Gid4 tan silty clay with thin fine sand laminae

94Gid4 fine sand

94Gid4 tan silty clay with thin fine sand laminae

94Gid4 very fine sand

94Gid4 tan silty clay with irregular rusty blotches; sporadic thin fine sand layers

94Gid5 grassy duff layer 0-1.5 cm; tan fine sand with grass roots 1.5-5.0 cm

94Gid5 gray white ash, 1980 Mt. St. Helens

94Gid5 tan fine sand

94Gid5 fine sand, gradually changing from orange to dark brown downward

94Gid5 dark brown silty very fine sand with irregular lenses of orange silt in upper 5 cm; orange fine sand 35-36

94Gid5 homogenous dark brown-black silt becoming somewhat lighter in lower half; sharp basal contact

94Gid5 0.2-0.4 cm layers of tan very fine sand and dark brown silt

94Gid5 No recovery

94Gid5 dark gray brown silt, fine light and dark layers Appendix C, page 10

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

94Gid5 chocolate brown fine sand with twigs

94Gid5 homogenous, unlayered silty clay and very fine sand, dark at top becoming tan by 180 to bottom, irregular orange blotches throughout

94Gid6 grassy duff with fine sand content increasing downward

94Gid6 gray white ash, 1980 Mt. St. Helens

94Gid6 tan-orange very fine sand

94Gid6 orange silt

94Gid6 orange very fine sand

94Gid6 mottled orange and gray very fine sand

94Gid6 dark brown very fine sand-silt grading downward to light brown, very fine sand-silt, no layering

94Gid6 laminated gray-tan silt with pale rust splotches

94Gid6 No recovery

94Gid6 laminated gray-tan silt

94Gid6 red-brown fine sand with grass stalks

94Gid6 homogenous gray-tan silty clay and very fine sand as gradational 1-3 cm layers becoming lighter downward

light olive brown medium-grained sand

olive gray silt

olive gray muddy silt

light olive gray fine-grained sand

olive gray muddy silt

light olive gray very fine-grained sand

olive gray muddy silt

light olive gray fine-grained sand (with woody debris)

olive gray muddy silt

light olive gray fine-grained sand (with woody debris)

olive gray muddy silt

light olive gray medium-fine-grained sand

brown, medium-grained sand with black wood fragments

inclined contact between brown medium-grained sand above and olive

dark olive gray silty mud

dark olive gray silty mud with 30% very fine sand

dark olive gray silty mud with 30-60% fine sand

dark olive gray medium-grained sand with black wood chips, sticks Appendix C, page 11

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

light olive brown medium-fine-grained sand

light olive gray fine-grained sand

dark gray silt

light olive gray medium-fine-grained sand

light olive gray fine-grained sand

dark gray silt

olive gray very fine-grained sand

light olive gray fine-grained sand

olive gray very fine-grained sand

olive gray very fine-grained sand with black woody debris

olive gray very fine-grained sand

olive gray very fine-grained sand with black woody debris

olive gray fine-to very fine-grained sand

94VCD1 light olive gray coarse-grained sand (wood fragments in upper 10 cm)

94VCD1 olive gray medium-grained sand

94VCD1 dark gray muddy silt

94VCD1 olive gray medium-grained sand (abun wood chips=190-200, 210-216, 94VCD1 dark gray very fine-grained sand

94VCD1 olive gray medium-fine-grained sand

94VCD2 olive gray medium-fine-grained sand

94VCD2 light gray muddy silt

94VCD2 light gray medium-grained sand

94VCD2 light gray muddy silt

94VCD2 light gray medium-grained sand

94VCD2 light gray medium-fine-grained sand

94VCD2 very light gray muddy silt

94VCD2 olive gray fine-grained sand

94VCD3 olive gray fine-grained sand (black leaf layers @ 15 & 22 cm)

94VCD3 alternating 2 cm layers of fine-grained sand and silt

94VCD3 gray silt

94VCD3 olive gray fine-grained sand

94VCD3 olive gray medium-grained sand (woody layer @ 73 cm)

94VCD3 olive gray fine-grained sand

94VCD3 alternating 2 cm layers of fine-grained sand and silt Appendix C, page 12

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

94VCD3 medium-fine-grained sand

94VCD3 alternating 2 cm layers of fine-grained sand and silt

94VCD3 medium-grained sand

94VCD3 alternating 2 cm layers of fine-grained sand and silt (black leaf horizon @

94VCK1 light olive medium-grained sand

94VCK1 light olive medium-fine-grained sand

94VCK1 grayish-olive fine-grained sand

94VCK1 olive gray clayey silt

94VCK1 plant debris rich layer

94VCK1 olive gray clayey silt

94VCK1 grayish-olive fine-grained sand

94VCK1 olive gray clayey silt

94VCK2 light olive gray medium-grained sand

94VCK2 Medium olive gray medium-grained sand

94VCK2 medium olive gray medium-fine-grained sand

94VCK2 medium olive gray fine-grained sand with ~10% mud

94VCK2 olive gray fine-and very fine-grained sand with ~10% mud

94VCK2 gray silt with black wood chips

94VCK2 olive gray fine-and very fine-grained sand with ~10% mud

95PCK1 tan medium-grained sand

95PCK1 olive gray, fine-grained sand

95PCK1 dark gray, very fine-grained sand

95PCK1 light gray very fine-grained sand, laminated

95PCK1 dark gray organic silt

95PCK1 finely laminated, light gray very fine-grained sand

95PCK1 alternating fine-and very fine-grained sand

95PCK1 silty mud

95PCK1 alternating fine-and very fine-grained sand

95PCK1 silty mud

95PCK1 fine-grained sand with occasional silty mud rip-up clasts

95PCK1 interlayered silt/silty mud

95PCK1 fine-medium-grained sand with interlayered 1 cm silt beds

95PCK1 medium-fine-grained sand

95PCK1 peaty silty mud with sticks, roots; 1 cm fine-grained sand layers at 353,

95PCK1 medium-grained sand Appendix C, page 13

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

95PCK1 peaty silty mud

95PCK1 medium-grained sand

95PCK1 fine-grained sand

95PCK1 medium-grained sand

95PCK1 alternating organic-debris-rich muddy silt and fine-grained sand

95PCK1 medium-fine sand

95PCK1 medium sand

95PCK1 peaty silty mud

95PCK1 med sand

95PCK1 peaty silty mud

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 muddy silt

95PCUD2 sandy silt

95VCD3 fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive gray medium-grained sand

95VCD3 olive gray medium-grained sand

95VCD3 olive fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive gray silt

95VCD3 olive gray fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive black fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive black medium-grained sand

95VCD3 olive gray medium-coarse-grained sand

95VCD3 olive black fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive gray very fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive black very fine-grained sand

95VCD3 olive-brown silt

95VCD3 olive gray muddy silt with fibrous wood fragments

95VCD3 olive gray silt

95VCUD1 coarse-grained sand

95VCUD1 coarse-grained sand with wood fragments

95VCUD1 coarse-grained sand with wood fragments Appendix C, page 14

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

95VCUD1 medium-coarse-grained sand grading down to fine-grained sand

95VCUD1 fine sand and silt

95VCUD1 fine sand and silt

95VCUD1 fine sand and silt

95VCUD1 medium-fine sand

96K-75E gray clayey silt

96K-89E tan medium-fine grained sand, 4 layers, orange colored near base; 1 cm

96K-89E alternating 2-4 cm layers of very fine sand, fine sand, and red-brown silt (duff layer @ 42 cm)

96K-89E mostly red-brown silt to very fine sand with (3) 3 cm fine-grained, rippled sand beds (duff @ 52 cm); irregular gray lenses in middle part

96K-89E medium-grained sand with ripple laminations

96K-89E alternating layers of red-brown silt and very fine sand, heavily cemented by

96K-89E dark gray muddy silt with (2) 1 cm red-brown horizons @ 116 and 124 cm

96K-89E light gray muddy silt with disseminated cm-sized orange spots

96K-114E tan medium-fine grained sand

96K-114E medium brown fine sand (1 cm MSH ash @ 33 cm) Appendix C, page 15

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

96K-114E dark brown-black medium fine sand

96K-114E interlayered brown fine sand and orange silt layers

96K-114E mostly silt with thin fine sand layers

96K-114E dark brown-black medium fine sand with black streaks

96K-114E medium brown fine sand

96K-114E light gray fine sand

96K-114E dark gray muddy silt

96K-178E tan fine sand with minimal roots

96K-178E tan fine sand with abundant roots and black plant matter seam on top

96K-178E orange-brown very fine sand, laminated

96K-178E gray-white ash, 1980 Mt St. Helens

96K-178E orange-brown mottled silt & very fine sand, laminated

96K-178E orange-brown silt and very fine sand, bioturbated

96K-178E orange-brown silt and very fine sand, finely layered

96K-178E dark gray very fine sand with rare red streaks

96K-178E dark gray silt to very fine sand, layered

96LD-1S 8 medium sand-silt couplets, light brown above 10 cm, medium brown

96LD-1S alternating silt and very-fine sand, with several thin medium sand layers

96LD-1S orange-brown fine and very fine sand layers, with moderate iron-oxide

96LD-1S Orange brown silt with occasional very fine sand layers, stronger iron-oxide cementation than above

96LD-1S very fine sand, silt, clay and woody debris; med gray with 25% 96LD-105S 3 cm forest duff overlain by 2 cm of tan, medium-grained sand

96LD-105S red-brown medium-fine grained sand capped by 0.5 cm Mt St Helens ash

96LD-105S dark red-brown-black medium-fine sand with 1 cm orange silt at base

96LD-105S gray homogenous fine sand with 5 cm charcoal layer at top, scattered charcoal fragments below

T98C-1 silt, dark brown, with organic debris

T98C-1 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-1 silt, dark brown, with sparse fragments of gray clay (plowed?)

T98C-1 silt, rusty colored, with abundant fragments of gray clay (plowed?)

T98C-1 silt, rusty colored

T98C-1 clay, gray

T98C-5 soil, blackish brown, with organic debris

T98C-5 silt, red-brown (hematitic, goethitic) Appendix C, page 16

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98C-5 sand, coarse-grained, red-brown

T98C-5 clay, red-brown

T98C-5 sand, coarse-grained, red-brown

T98C-5 clay, gray

T98C-5 clay, gray, with fragments of red-brown clay (plowed?)

T98C-5 clay, gray (water saturated), with fragments of red-brown clay

T98C-5 clay, dark gray to black, organic-rich, water saturated

T98C-6 soil, black-brown

T98C-6 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-6 sand and silt, very fine-grained, red-brown

T98C-6 sandy silt, red-brown

T98C-6 silt, red-brown

T98C-6 sand and silt, very fine-grained, red-brown

T98C-6 sand, very fine-grained, red-brown

T98C-7 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98C-7 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-7 silt, orange-brown

T98C-7 sand, brown-gray

T98C-8 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98C-8 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-8 silt, red brown

T98C-8 sand, medium-grained, gray

T98C-10 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray; thick, inclined

T98C-10 silt, very fine-grained, red-brown, grading downward to clay

T98C-10 gravel

T98C-11B silt, gray, with fragments of black peat

T98C-11B silt, gray, with fragments of black peat

T98C-11B sand, very fine-grained, dark gray

T98C-12 soil, light brown to gray, organic-bearing

T98C-12 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-12 silt, red-brown

T98C-12 silt, red-brown

T98R-13 soil, dark gray to black, organic-rich

T98R-13 soil containing dispersed 1980 volcanic ash Appendix C, page 17

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98R-13 silt, red-brown (hematitic), with thin clay interbeds

T98R-13 clay, gray, with sandy to silty interbeds throughout

T98R-14 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98R-14 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98R-14 silt, red-brown, rusty, with fragments of gray silt

T98R-14 sand, yellowish brown

T98R-14 sand, gray

T98R-14 sand, gray

T98R-14 sand, gray, water saturated

T98C-15 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98C-15 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-15 silt, dark brown and black, grading down to red-brown

T98C-15 silt, layers of red, brown, gray, and red-brown

T98C-15 clay, gray, with red-brown fragments (plowed?)

T98C-15 clay, gray

T98C-16 silty mud, dark brown, organic-rich

T98C-16 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-16 silt, fine-grained, red-brown with gray interbeds

T98C-16 silt, fine-grained, dark red-brown, with interbeds of coarse, black silt

T98C-16 sand, fine-grained, red-brown, with black interbeds

T98C-16 silt, light brown and red-brown

T98C-16 sand, very fine grained, dark gray

T98C-16 sand, fine-grained, brownish gray

T98C-16 sand, medium-grained, light brown

T98C-17 silt to clay, red-brown, with roots and black organic fragments

T98C-17 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray; thick layer (1

T98C-17 silt grades downward to medium-grained sand, red brown

T98C-17 silt, red-brown

T98C-17 silt, brown-red, grading downward to

T98C-17 silt, red-brown

T98C-17 silt, grading downward to clay, reddish gray

T98C-17 clay, light brownish gray

T98C-18 soil, brown, with mossy organic material

T98C-18 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-18 silt, light brown Appendix C, page 18

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98C-18 silt, red brown

T98C-18 sand, fine-grained, dark brown

T98C-18 silt, red brown

T98C-18 silt, gray, with fragments of red-brown silt (plowed?)

T98C-18 silt, dark brown

T98C-18 silt, dark brown, with about 25 percent of clay

T98C-18 silt and clay, red-brown

T98C-18 clay, reddish brown

T98C-20 silty mud, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98C-20 silt, red-brown

T98C-20 silt, organic-rich, black

T98C-20 clay, gray

T98C-21 silt, light brown, organic-bearing

T98C-21 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-21 silt, light brown, with fragments of gray clay and plant roots (plowed?)

T98C-21 silt, red-brown, laminated

T98C-21 sand, dark gray

T98C-21B sand, medium-grained, gray

T98C-21B sand, gray

T98C-22 clay, dark brown, organic-rich, with fragments of red-brown clay (plowed?)

T98C-22 clay, dark brown, with fragments of red-brown clay (plowed?)

T98C-22 clay, gray

T98C-23 silt, brown-black, organic-rich (smells like a sewer)

T98C-23 clay, broken fragments of red and gray clay (plowed?)

T98C-23 silt, dark gray

T98C-23 clay

T98R-24 mud, black, organic-rich

T98R-24 silt, red-brown, with lenses of red-gray sand, and gray clay (plowed?)

T98R-24 clay, gray

T98R-24 sand, coarse, gray to red-brown

T98R-24 clay, gray

T98C-25 silt, light brown, organic-bearing

T98C-25 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98C-25 silt, red-brown

T98C-25 silt, organic-bearing, brown-black Appendix C, page 19

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98C-25 silt, with dark brown and red-brown horizontal lenses

T98C-25 silt

T98C-25 silt and clay, red-brown

T98C-25 silty clay, gray

T98C-25 clay, light gray

T98C-26 soil, dark brown, organic-rich

T98C-26 clay, red-brown, with horizontal lenses of gray clay

T98C-26 clay, gray

T98R-27 silt, red-brown, organic-rich

T98R-27 silt, light gray with small fragments of red-brown silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 silt, light gray with small fragments of red-brown silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 silt, light gray with small fragments of red-brown silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 sand, very fine-grained, with small fragments of red silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 silt and sand, red-brown, with fragments of red silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 silt, red brown, with small fragments of gray silt (plowed?)

T98R-27 fine-grained silt, blue gray

T98R-28 silt, black-gray-brown, organic-bearing

T98R-28 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98R-28 silt, black-gray-brown, organic-bearing

T98R-28 silt, light brown

T98R-28 clay, red

T98R-28 clay, black to gray

T98R-28 clay, black

T98R-28 clay, gray

T98R-28 clay, gray, with small fragments of red clay

T98R-29 clay, red-brown, organic-bearing

T98R-29 clay, red-brown, with fragments of black organics and gray clay

T98R-29 clay, gray, with small fragments of very red clay throughout (plowed?)

T98R-29 clay, gray with fragments of very red clay, decreasing downward

T98R-29 clay, gray

T98R-29 silt, gray, grading downward to medium-grained sand, mostly gray

T98R-30 silty soil, red-brown, organic-bearing

T98R-30 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98R-30 silt, red-brown, with rootlets

T98R-30 silt, black-gray Appendix C, page 20

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98R-31 silt, red-brown, with organic debris

T98R-31 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98R-31 silt, with rootlets

T98R-31 silt, with horizontal lenses of gray sand, 4 to 5 cm thick

T98R-31 silt

T98R-31 sand, very fine-grained, dark red-brown

T98R-31 silt, coarse, orange-red

T98R-31 silt, orange red, with fragments of gray clay

T98R-31 silt and very fine sand, orange-red

T98R-31 silt, red-brown, with fragments of gray clay

T98R-32 silt, dark brown, organic-rich

T98R-32 silt, red-brown, with organic debris, and sand layers, dark red to black

T98R-32 silt, red-brown

T98R-32 silt, red-brown, with horizontal layers of red-orange clay

T98R-32 silt, red-orange, with fragments of gray silt and clay

T98R-33 silt, dark brown, organic-rich

T98R-33 silt, red-brown

T98R-33 silt, brown

T98R-33 silt, red, with lenses of fine sand, dark brown

T98R-33 silt, dark gray with fragments of red silt

T98R-33 silt, light gray, with fragments of red silt

T98R-33 silt, yellow to reddish yellow

T98R-33 clay

T98R-34 silt, black-gray, organic-bearing

T98R-34 silt

T98R-34 clay, brown-black

T98R-34 silty clay, dark brown

T98R-34 clay, dark brown

T98L-35 clay, brown and gray, organic-bearing

T98L-35 clay, gray, water-saturated

T98L-35 silt, gray

T98L-35 sand to silt, gray

T98L-35 mixed silt, sand and clay, in order of decreasing abundance

T98L-35 sand, fine-grained, gray

T98L-35 silt, gray Appendix C, page 21

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98L-35 clay, gray

T98L-36 sand, medium-grained, light brown

T98L-36 sand, fine-grained, gray, cross-bedded

T98L-36 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine grained, very pale gray

T98L-36 sand, medium-grained

T98L-36 silt, red-brown

T98L-36 sand, fine-grained, gray, cross-bedded

T98L-36 sand, fine-grained, red

T98L-36 sand, yellow

T98L-36 sand, yellow, with clasts of gray clay

T98L-36 sand, yellow-gray

T98L-36 silt, gray

T98L-36 sand, fine-grained, gray

T98L-37 clay, gray, with organic debris and fragments of red clay (plowed?)

T98L-37 clay, gray, water-saturated, with fragments of red clay (plowed?)

T98L-37 clay, dark gray, with fragments of light gray clay (plowed?)

T98L-37 clay, gray, dark gray, and light gray

T98L-38 clay, dark brown, with limonite-cemented tubes of red clay around roots

T98L-38 clay, dark brown, organic-breaking

T98L-38 clay, gray, organic-bearing

T98L-38 clay, medium gray, organic-bearing

T98L-38 clay, gray, organic-bearing

T98L-38 clay, dark gray, organic-bearing

T98L-38 clay, brown-red, organic-bearing

T98L-38 clay, organic-bearing, with fragments of light gray and red-brown clay

T98L-38 clay

T98M-39 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing, with fragments of 1980 Mt. St. Helens

T98M-39 silt, fine-grained, dark brown, organic-bearing

T98M-39 clay, gray-brown, organic-bearing

T98M-39 clay, gray to dark brown

T98M-39 clay, gray, with fragments of light yellow to red-brown clay

T98M-39 silt, yellow-gray

T98M-39 clay, gray, with fragments of red-brown clay

T98M-39 clay, gray

T98M-40 silt, dark brown, organic-bearing, with small red fragments Appendix C, page 22

Appendix C. Lithologic descriptions of soil and sediment samples for which chemical analyses are given in this report (Appendix_C.xls, Appendix_C.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Lithologic description SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID LITH_DESC

T98M-40 silt, gray, organic-bearing, with red fragments, and red stain around

T98M-40 silty clay, dark brown

T98M-40 clay, light gray, with small fragments of red-brown clay

T98M-40 clay

T98M-40 clay, light gray with small fragments of red clay

T98M-40 silt, light gray

T98L-41 clay, gray, organic-bearing

T98L-41 silt, red-brown

T98L-41 clay, gray, with fragments of red-black clay

T98L-41 peat, black

T98L-41 clay, gray

T98L-42 clay, red-brown, organic-bearing

T98L-42 clay, gray, organic-bearing, with fragments of red clay

T98L-42 clay, organic-rich, dark gray

T98L-42 peat, dark gray

T98L-42 clay, gray

T98L-42 silt

T98M-43 silt, organic-bearing

T98M-43 1980 Mt. St. Helens ash, very fine-grained, very pale gray

T98M-43 silt, organic-bearing

T98M-43 silt, dark brown

T98M-43 silt, light brown to brown

T98M-43 fine silt, brown

T98M-43 silt, yellowish brown Appendix C, page 23

Appendix D. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) at the USGS labs, Menlo Park, CA (Appendix_D.xls, Appendix_D.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F, G

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm02 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F

93Abm04 F, G 93Abm6A 93Abm06 F 93Abm6B 93Abm06 F

93Abl08 F

93Abl09 F

93Sbc10 F

93Sbc10 F

93Sbc10 F

93Sbc10 F, G

93Sbc10 F

93Sbc10 F

93Sbc10 F

93Sbr13 F

93Sbr13 F

93Sbr13 F

93Sbr13 F

93Sbr13 F

93Sbr13 F 93Sbm14 93Sbm14 F

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc15 E

93Sbc16 F

93Sbk17 50800 12900

93Sbk17 F, G 18300 10200

93SBK17 F *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, G XRAL, none. Appendix D, page 1

Appendix D. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) at the USGS labs, Menlo Park, CA (Appendix_D.xls, Appendix_D.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbk17 F, G

93Sbk17 F

93Sbk18 F, G

93Sbk18 F

93Sbk18 F, G

93Sbk18 F

93Sbk18 F

93Sbk18 F

93Sbb20 F, G

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb21 E

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F, G

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb22 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F, G

93Sbb23 F

93Sbb23 F

93Sbl26 F, G

93Sbl26 F

93Sbl26 F

93Sbl26 F

93Sbl26 F

93Sbl26 F

93SBL26 F *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, G XRAL, none. Appendix D, page 2

Appendix D. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) at the USGS labs, Menlo Park, CA (Appendix_D.xls, Appendix_D.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27 E

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F

93Sbl27B F &lt;40

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28 F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl28C F

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30

93SBL30 E *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, G XRAL, none. Appendix D, page 3

Appendix D. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) at the USGS labs, Menlo Park, CA (Appendix_D.xls, Appendix_D.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl30 E

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31

93Sbl31

93Sbl31

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31

93Sbl31

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F, G

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl31 F, G

93Sbl31 F

93Sbl32 F

93Sbl32 F

93Sbl32 F, G

93Sbl32 F

93Sbl32 F

93SBL32 F 93SBL34a 93SBL34a F 93SBL34b 93SBL34b E, F 93SBL34c 93SBL34c E, F 25700 13200 93SBL34d 93SBL34d E, F 93SBL34e 93SBL34e E, F 26400 14100 93SBL34f 93SBL34f E, F 93SBL34g 93SBL34g E, F 93SBL34h 93SBL34h E, F 19100 11400 93SBL34i 93SBL34i E, F

93Sbc35A

93Sbc35B

93Sbc36

93Sbc37

93Sbk38 E

93Sbk38 E

93Sbk38 E

93Sbk38 E

93Sbk38 E

93Sbc39 E

93SBC39 E *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, G XRAL, none. Appendix D, page 4

Appendix D. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) at the USGS labs, Menlo Park, CA (Appendix_D.xls, Appendix_D.dbf) Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Cu (ppm) Pb (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbc39 E

93Sbc39 E

93Sbc39 E

93Sbc39 E

93Sbc39 E

93Sbc39 E

93SBC39 E *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, G XRAL, none. Appendix D, page 5

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

G, H

G, H 0.89 141.7

G, H 0.93 139.0

G, H

G, H 0.92 233.4

G, H 0.97 218.6

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 1

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 2

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 3

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

F Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd1 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd2 Na

94Vcd3 Na Na Na

94Vcd3 Na Na Na

94Vcd3 G, H Na Na Na

94Vcd3 Na Na Na

94Vcd3 Na Na Na

94Vcd3 Na Na Na

94Vck1 G, H Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94VCK1 NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 4

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 5

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 6

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 G, H Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck1 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 Na

94Vck2 G, H Na

94Vck2 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 G, H Na

95Pck1 0.61 108.7 Na

95Pck1 G, H Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 Na

95PCK1 NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 7

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 8

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 9

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

95Pck1 Na

95Pck1 G, H Na

95Pcud2 G, H 0.47 101.5 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Pcud2 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 0.63 103.1 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 G, H Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 0.67 128.0 Na

95Vcd3 0.46 114.5 Na

95Vcd3 G, H Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcd3 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 G, H Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95VCUD1 NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 10

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 11

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 12

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 0.76 118.3 Na

95Vcud1 G, H Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 0.47 104.1 Na

95Vcud1 0.50 120.9 Na

95Vcud1 0.49 126.7 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

95Vcud1 Na

96K75E

94Gid2 G, H NA

94Gid2 G, H NA

94Gid2 G, H NA

94Gid2 NA

94Gid2 NA

94Gid2 NA

94Gid2 NA

94Gid2 G, H NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 G, H NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 13

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 14

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 15

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 G, H NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid3 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 G, H NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid4 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid5 NA

94Gid6 G, H NA

94Gid6 NA

94Gid6 NA

94Gid6 NA

94Gid6 NA

94Gid6 NA

96K-89E Na

96K-89E Na

96K-89E Na

96K-89E Na

96K-89E Na

96K-89E Na

96K-114E Na

96K-114E Na

96K-114E Na

96K-114E Na

96K-114E NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 16

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_%

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 17

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 18

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

96K-114E Na

96K-114E G, H Na

96K-114E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96K-178E Na

96Ld-1S

96Ld-1S

96Ld-1S

96Ld-1S

96Ld-1S

96Ld-105S

96Ld-105S

96Ld-105S

96Ld-105S

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03

93Csc03 0.59 139.8

93CSC03 0.50 103.8 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 19

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_% *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 20

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 21

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Csc03 0.59 156.8

93Csc03 0.92 178.3

94Je06

94Je06 0.21 133.1

94Je06

94Je06

94Je06

94JE06B 93SBL34b 93SBL34 D, F NA 93SBL34c 93SBL34 D, F 0.44 487.7 NA 93SBL34d 93SBL34 D, F NA 93SBL34e 93SBL34 D, F 0.46 375.4 NA 93SBL34f 93SBL34 D, F NA 93SBL34g 93SBL34 D, F NA 93SBL34h 93SBL34 D, F 0.51 137.6 NA 93SBL34i 93SBL34 D, F NA

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbc15 D Na Na Na

93Sbk17 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93SBB21 D NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 22

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93SBL34b 93SBL34c 93SBL34d 93SBL34e 93SBL34f 93SBL34g 93SBL34h 93SBL34i

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 41050 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 23

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93SBL34b 93SBL34c 93SBL34d 93SBL34e 93SBL34f 93SBL34g 93SBL34h 93SBL34i

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 24

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbb21 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl27 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na 93Sbl30 D Na Na Na 93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbl30 D Na Na Na

93Sbk38 D Na Na Na

93Sbk38 D Na Na Na

93Sbk38 D Na Na Na

93Sbk38 D Na Na Na

93Sbk38 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93SBC39 D NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 25

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 26

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 27

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth Interval, top (cm) Depth Interval, bottom (cm) *Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cs (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

93Sbc39 D Na Na Na

94Sb40 Na Na Na

94Sb40 Na Na Na

94Sb40 Na Na Na

94Sb40 Na Na Na

94Sb40 Na Na Na

94SB40 NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 28

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Fe (%) Ga (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Th (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) U (ppm) K_% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 29

Appendix E. Chemical composition of samples analyzed, using 4 acid dissolution, by ICP-AES and ICP-MS at Eastern Washington University (EWU), Cheney, WA (Appendix_E.xls, Appendix_E.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

(ppm) W (ppm) Y (ppm) Zn (ppm) Zr (ppm) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA *Other analyses (Appendix #): D=USGS-EDXRF, F=CHEMEX, G=XRAL, H=ACZ, none. Appendix E, page 30

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

93Abm02 100% D 12.8 0.63

93Abm02 100% D, G 12.8 0.67

93Abm02 100% D 14.2 0.66

93Abm02 100% D 10.8 0.44

93Abm02 100% D 13.0 0.52

93Abm02 100% D 12.2 0.46

93Abm02 100% D

93Abm02 100% D &lt;0.2 1.83

93Abm02 100% D

93Abm02 100% D 11.8 0.67

93Abm02 100% D &lt;0.2 1.70

93Abm02 100% D 12.2 0.46

93Abm02 100% D

93Abm04 100% D 12.8 0.81

93Abm04 100% D 12.8 1.23

93Abm04 100% D 11.8 0.75

93Abm04 100% D 12.2 0.96

93Abm04 100% D 11.8 0.57

93Abm04 100% D 24.2 1.12

93Abm04 100% D, G

93Abm06A 93Abm06 100% D

93Abm06B 93Abm06 100% D

93Abl08 100% D 13.2 0.77

93Abl09 100% D 14.0 0.41

93Sbc10 100% D 10.8 1.40

93Sbc10 100% D 13.4 1.17

93Sbc10 100% D 25.6 0.99

93Sbc10 100% D, G 29.2 1.05

93Sbc10 100% D 31.4 0.78

93Sbc10 100% D

93Sbc10 100% D &lt;0.2 2.18

93Sbr13 100% D 15.0 1.32

93Sbr13 100% D 15.6 0.91

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 1

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93Abm06A 93Abm06B

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0.24 >10000 <10

<10 <10

<10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 280 >10000 <10 <10 290 >10000 <10 <10 240 >10000 <10 <10

<10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 2

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93Abm06A 93Abm06B

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 3

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbr13 100% D 14.8 1.51

93Sbr13 100% D 45.0 1.20

93Sbr13 100% D 26.8 1.26

93Sbr13 100% D 23.2 1.44

93SBM14 93SBM14 nm D

93SBC16 nm D

93SBK17 nm D, G 54.2 0.41

93SBK17 nm D 171.0 0.84

93SBK17 nm D, G

93SBK17 nm D

93SBK18 nm D, G 55.6 1.18

93SBK18 nm D 80.4 1.32

93SBK18 nm D 12.0 0.62

93SBK18 nm D <0.2 2.03

93SBK18 nm D

93Sbb20 100% D, G 11.8 0.82

93Sbb22 100% D

93Sbb22 100% D 11.2 1.32

93Sbb22 100% D 13.8 0.88

93Sbb22 100% D 13.2 0.95

93Sbb22 100% D 12.8 0.81

93Sbb22 100% D, G 20.0 0.91

93Sbb22 100% D 41.6 1.49

93Sbb22 100% D

93Sbb22 100% D

93Sbb22 100% D

93Sbb22 100% D &lt;0.2 2.53

93Sbb23 100% D 12.0 0.68

93Sbb23 100% D 11.0 0.49

93Sbb23 100% D 11.0 0.67

93Sbb23 100% D 12.4 0.63

93Sbb23 100% D 12.4 0.59

93Sbb23 100% D 13.4 0.59

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 4

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93Sbm14

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10 <10 <10 250 >10000 <10 <10 0.27 >10000 230 >10000 <10 <10 0.23 >10000 250 >10000 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 0.51 >10000 11 <0.01 170 >10000 <10 <10 460 >10000 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 0.30 >10000 360 >10000 <10 <10 460 >10000 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 530 >10000 <10

<10

<10

<10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 5

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93Sbm14

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 6

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbb23 100% D, G 16.0 0.83

93Sbb23 100% D

93Sbb23 100% D &lt;0.2 2.13

93Sbl26 100% D, G 10.4 2.53

93Sbl26 100% D 13.2 1.64

93Sbl26 100% D 14.4 1.51

93Sbl26 100% D 21.2 2.29

93Sbl26 100% D

93Sbl26 100% D

93Sbl26 100% D

93Sbl27B 100% D 12.8 1.42

93Sbl27B 100% D 14.2 0.70

93Sbl27B 100% D 13.8 1.05

93Sbl27B 100% D 13.2 0.81

93Sbl27B 100% D 13.4 0.93

93Sbl27B 100% D 13.8 0.77

93Sbl27B 100% D 13.6 0.78

93Sbl27B 100% D 10.0 1.54

93Sbl28 100% D 13.8 2.20

93Sbl28 100% D

93Sbl28 100% D 17.4 1.39

93Sbl28 100% D 12.2 1.03

93Sbl28 100% D 12.4 1.58

93Sbl28 100% D 17.8 2.31

93Sbl28 100% D 21.2 2.50

93Sbl28C 100% D

93Sbl28C 100% D 15.8 2.29

93Sbl28C 100% D 14.8 1.35

93Sbl28C 100% D 12.2 1.03

93Sbl28C 100% D 14.8 1.33

93Sbl28C 100% D 17.4 2.34

93Sbl28C 100% D

93SBL28C 100% D Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 7

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10

<10

<10

<10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 8

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 9

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbl28C 100% D

93Sbl28C 100% D

93Sbl31 100% D 12.6 1.58

93Sbl31 100% D 13.8 0.88

93Sbl31 100% D 12.6 0.61

93Sbl31 100% D 12.6 0.52

93Sbl31 100% D 12.6 0.55

93Sbl31 100% D 11.2 0.38

93Sbl31 100% D 12.2 0.37

93Sbl31 100% D 12.6 0.32

93Sbl31 100% D 12.2 0.62

93Sbl31 100% D, G 11.2 0.83

93Sbl31 100% D 11.6 0.61

93Sbl31 100% D, G 12.2 1.52

93Sbl31 100% D 11.2 1.04

93Sbl32 100% D

93Sbl32 100% D 12.8 0.93

93Sbl32 100% D, G

93Sbl32 100% D 62.4 1.33

93Sbl32 100% D

93Sbl32 100% D &lt;0.2 2.01

93SBL34a 93SBL34 100% D 18.2 0.68

93SBL34b 93SBL34 100% D, E 25.2 0.83

93SBL34c 93SBL34 100% D, E 45.2 1.58

93SBL34d 93SBL34 100% D, E 49.6 1.19

93SBL34e 93SBL34 100% D, E 51.0 1.41

93SBL34f 93SBL34 100% D, E 40.2 1.04

93SBL34g 93SBL34 100% D, E 35.8 0.87

93SBL34h 93SBL34 100% D, E 36.4 1.18

93SBL34i 93SBL34 100% D, E 35.8 0.68

94Je01 58% &lt;0.2 0.78

94Je01 0.063-0.25 35%

94Je01 8%

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 10

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93SBL34a 93SBL34b 93SBL34c 93SBL34d 93SBL34e 93SBL34f 93SBL34g 93SBL34h 93SBL34i

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

0.19 >10000 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 770 >10000 <10

<10

<10 0.55 >10000 <10 <10 310 >10000 <10 360 >10000 <10 480 >10000 <10 390 >10000 <10 440 >10000 <10 <10 350 >10000 <10 0.67 >10000 280 >10000 <10 270 >10000 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 11

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

93SBL34a 93SBL34b 93SBL34c 93SBL34d 93SBL34e 93SBL34f 93SBL34g 93SBL34h 93SBL34i

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 60 >10000 <10 60 >10000 <10 <10 70 >10000 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 12

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

94Je02 88%

94Je02 0.063-0.25 11%

94Je03 65%

94Je03 0.063-0.25 30%

94Je03 5% 12.0 1.15

94Je04 68%

94Je04 0.063-0.25 29%

94Je04 3% 13.4 0.79

94Je05 69% 11.8 0.61

94Je06A 68%

94Je07 93% &lt;0.2 0.59

94Je08 83%

94Je09 74%

94Je10 82% 13.4 0.64

94Je11 84% 14.8 0.57

94Je12 75%

94Je13 74%

94Je13 0.063-0.25 23% 18.2 0.74

94Je13 3% 18.4 0.97

94Je14 64%

94Je15 92%

94Je16 87% 14.2 0.73

94Je17 78% 18.4 0.90

94Je18 92% 10.6 0.79

94Je18 0.063-0.25 7% 21.4 0.59

94Je19 89% 22.6 1.47

94Je20 79%

94Je21 89%

94Je22 85%

94Je23 87%

94Je24 89% 15.4 0.54

94Je25 87% 10.2 0.40

94Je26 87%

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 13

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 836 >15.00 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 14

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 15

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

94Je27 71%

94Je28 91%

94Je28 0.063-0.25 8% 17.0 0.48

94Je29 85% 63.2 0.75

94Je30 93%

94Je31 97%

94Je32 74%

94Je33 89%

94Je34 60% 10.0 0.59

94Je34 0.063-0.25 35% 11.8 0.53

94Je34 5% 31.4 0.90

94Je35 93%

94Je36 43% 19.0 0.47

94Je37 73% 19.4 0.40

94Je37 0.063-0.25 22% 21.0 0.58

94Je37 5% 43.6 1.33

94Je38 76% 10.0 0.93

94Je39A 94%

94Je40 87%

94Je41 9% 16.8 0.30

94Je41 0.063-0.25 75% 18.4 0.30

94Je41 16% 27.0 0.37

94Je42 98% &lt;0.2 0.58

94Je43 70%

94Je44 74%

94Je45 44%

94Je46 54%

94Je47 51%

94Je48 91%

94Je49 30%

94Je49 0.063-0.25 65% 15.2 0.42

94Je49 5% 23.0 0.77

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 16

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 22 1710 >10000 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10

<10 0.52 >10000 <10 <10 <10

<10 209 >15.00 <10 <10 0.48 >10000 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 17

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 18

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 19

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10 0.62 >10000 <10 <10 0.62 >10000 <10 <10 0.63 >10000 <10 208 >15.00 <10 0.64 >10000 <10 <10 0.63 >10000 200 >10000 <10 <10 0.64 >10000 200 >10000 <10 <10 0.60 >10000 200 >10000 <10 <10 0.60 >10000 200 >10000 <10 <10 0.60 >10000 160 >10000 <10 <10 0.55 >10000 210 >10000 <10 <10 0.55 >10000 160 >10000 <10 <10 0.57 >10000 230 >10000 <10 <10 0.55 >10000 330 >10000 <10 <10 300 >10000 <10 <10 <10 <10 250 >10000 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10 <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

0.51 >10000 <10 <10

<10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 20

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

<10 <10

<10

<10

<10

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 21

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) Size fraction (mm) *wt % of size fraction **Other analyses (Appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Co (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID SIZFRAC_MM WT%SIZFRAC OTHR_ANLYS

Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 22

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Hg (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ti (%) Tl (ppm) K_% <10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10

<10 <10

<10 <10

<10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 23

Appendix F. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at CHEMEX Labs in Reno, NV using nitric acid-aqua regia dissolution (Appendix_F.xls, Appendix_F.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

U (ppm) (ppm) W (ppm) Zn (ppm) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Wt % of size fraction: as % by weight of bulk sample (nm =not measured) Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, G =XRAL, none. Appendix F, page 24

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98C-01

<50

T98C-01

<50

T98C-01

<50

T98C-01

<50

T98C-05

<50

T98C-05

<50

T98C-05

<50

T98C-05

<50

T98C-05

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<10

<50

T98C-06

<10

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-06

<50

T98C-07

<50

T98C-08

<50

T98C-10

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-11B

<50

T98C-12

<50

T98R-13

<50

T98R-13

<50

T98R-13

<50

T98R-14

<50

T98R-14

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 1

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 0.716

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

24 0.515 22450 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 2

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Th (ppm) Ti (%) U (ppm) (ppm) Y (ppm) Yb (ppm) Zn (ppm) 0.385 0.231

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 3

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98R-14

<50

T98R-14

<50

T98R-14

<50

T98R-14

<50

T98R-14

<50

T98C-15

<50

T98C-15

<50

T98C-15

<50

T98C-15

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-16

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-17

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<10

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 4

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 0.055 13970 <50 <40 0.050 15410 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

16 0.240 11970 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

18 0.520 10360 <50 <40

17 0.545 10810 <50 <40

<50 <40

16 0.530 10450 <50 <40

18 0.565 11230 <50 <40

18 0.550 11440 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

0.060 14490 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

0.050 11330 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 5

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 6

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-18

<50

T98C-20

<50

T98C-20

<50

T98C-20

<50

T98C-20

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-21

<50

T98C-22

<50

T98C-22

<50

T98C-22

<10

<50

T98C-22

<50

T98C-22

<50

T98C-22

<50

T98R-23

<50

T98R-23

<50

T98R-23

<50

T98R-23

<50

T98R-24

<50

T98R-24

<50

T98R-24

<50

T98R-24

<50

T98R-24

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 7

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.065 10970 <50 <40 0.080 10250 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

14 0.540 11820 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

17 0.645 12730 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 20 0.610 10040 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 8

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 9

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-25

<50

T98C-26

<50

T98C-26

<50

T98C-26

<10

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<10

<50

T98R-27

<10

<50

T98R-27

<10

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<10

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-27

<50

T98R-28

<50

T98R-28

<50

T98R-28

<50

T98R-28

<10

<50

T98R-28

<10

<50

T98R-28

<50

T98R-28

<10

<50

T98R-28

<10

<50

T98R-28

<10

<50

T98R-29

<50

T98R-29

<50

T98R-29

<10

<50

T98R-29

<10

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 10

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 0.055 10930 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.050 30680 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 11

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Th (ppm) Ti (%) U (ppm) (ppm) Y (ppm) Yb (ppm) Zn (ppm) *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 12

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98R-29

<10

<50

T98R-29

<10

<50

T98R-29

<50

T98R-30

<50

T98R-30

<50

T98R-30

<50

T98R-30

<10

<50

T98R-30

<50

T98R-30

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-31

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-32

<50

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<10

<50

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<50

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 13

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

0.035 10590 <50 <40

18 0.280 11490 0.035 12950 <50 <40

16 0.280 13000 <50 <40

0.020 10470 <50 <40

0.025 11240 <50 <40

20 0.645 10730 0.035 14520 <50 <40 13.00

0.025 12740 <50 <40 20 0.695 12100

0.030 13440 <50 <40

<50 <40

18 0.310 11830 <50 <40 13.30

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 18 0.370 10620 <50 <40

15 0.520 10470 <50 <40

18 0.630 11070 <50 <40

17 0.645 11180 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 14

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 15

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<50

T98R-33

<10

<50

T98R-33

<10

<50

T98R-34

<50

T98R-34

<50

T98R-34

<10

<50

T98R-34

<50

T98R-34

<10

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<50

T98L-35

<10

<50

T98L-35

<10

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-36

<50

T98L-37

<50

T98L-37

<50

T98L-37

<50

T98L-37

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 16

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

15 0.600 10210 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 17

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 18

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98L-37

<10

<50

T98L-37

<10

<50

T98L-37

<10

<50

T98L-37

<10

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<10

<50

T98L-38

<50

T98L-38

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-39

<10

<50

T98M-40

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

T98M-40

<50

T98M-40

<50

T98M-40

<10

<50

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 19

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

1.193 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

0.396 <50 <40

<50 <40

0.336 <50 <40

0.466 <50 <40

<50 <40

0.503 <50 <40

0.444 <50 <40

<50 <40

0.529 <50 <40

0.583 <50 <40

0.694 <50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.669 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

0.335 <50 <40

0.440 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 20

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Th (ppm) Ti (%) U (ppm) (ppm) Y (ppm) Yb (ppm) Zn (ppm) 0.363 0.206 0.257 0.226 0.325 0.383 0.349 0.297 0.249 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 21

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

T98L-41

<50

T98L-41

<50

T98L-41

<50

T98L-41

<50

T98L-41

<10

<50

T98L-41

<10

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98L-42

<10

<50

T98L-42

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<10

<50

T98M-43

<10

<50

T98M-43

<50

T98M-43

<10

<50

T98M-43

<10

<50

T98M-43

<10

<50

93Abm02 D, F

<50

93Abm04 D, F

<50

93Sbc10 D, F

<50

93Sbk17 D, F

<50

93Sbk17 D, F

<50

93Sbk18 D, F

<50

93Sbb20 D, F

<50

93Sbb22 D, F

<50

93Sbb23 D, F

<50

93Sbk18 D, F

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 22

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.599 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.746 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

0.879 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

0.035 11180 <50 <40

<50 <40

14 0.530 13850 0.020 17330 <50 <40 20 0.390 11490 0.045 21510 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

16 0.305 11540 <50 <40 17 0.580 11890

0.030 32730 <50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 23

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Th (ppm) Ti (%) U (ppm) (ppm) Y (ppm) Yb (ppm) Zn (ppm) 0.326 0.122

0.088 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 24

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

93Sbl27B D, F

<50

93Sbl26 D, F

<50

93Sbl31 D, F

<50

93Sbl32 D, F

<50

93Sbl31 D, F

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid2 E, H

<50

94Gid3 E, H

<50

94Gid3 E, H

<50

94Gid3 E, H

<50

94Gid3 E, H

<50

94Gid4 E, H

<50

94Gid4 E, H

<50

94Gid6 E, H

<50

94Gid6 E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

E, H

<50

94Vcd3 E, H

<50

94Vcd3 E, H

<50

94Vck1 E, H

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 25

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm)

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40

20 0.760 12710 0.035 17200 <50 <40

25 0.735 12690 0.030 17740 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40 13.00

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40

20 0.430 10630 <50 <40

0.035 12960 <50 <40

0.035 13960 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

0.015 13430 <50 <40

17 0.780 16780 0.015 13950 <50 <40

17 0.875 17820 0.025 19220 <50 <40

15 0.775 15820 0.025 17280 <50 <40

20 0.825 16710 0.025 19270 <50 <40

0.020 15310 <50 <40

0.015 13260 <50 <40

0.015 12640 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 <50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 26

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Th (ppm) Ti (%) U (ppm) (ppm) Y (ppm) Yb (ppm) Zn (ppm) 0.159

0.094 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 27

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (appendix #) Ag (ppm) Al (%) As (ppm) Au (ppm) Ba (ppm) Be (ppm) Bi (ppm) Ca (%) Cd (ppm) Ce (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

94Vck1 E, H

<50

94Vck1 E, H

<50

94Vck1 E, H

<50

94Vck2 E, H

<50

95Pck1 E, H

<50

95Pck1 E, H

<50

95Pck1 E, H

<50

95Pck1 E, H

<50

95Pcud2 E, H

<50

95Vcd3 E, H

&lt;50 95Vcd3 E, H

&lt;50 95Vcd3 E, H

&lt;50 95Vcud1 E, H

<50

95Vcud1 E, H

<50

96K114E E, H

<50

96K114E E, H

<50 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 28

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

Eu (ppm) Fe (%) Ga (ppm) Ho (ppm) K (%) La (ppm) (ppm) Mg (%) Mn (ppm) Mo (ppm) Na (%) Nb (ppm) Nd (ppm) Ni (ppm) P (ppm) Pb (ppm) Sc (ppm) Sn (ppm) Sr (ppm) Ta (ppm) <50 <40

<50 <40

18 0.585 11320 <50 <40

<50 <40 19 0.730 13590 0.030 12260 <50 <40 0.050 31970 <50 <40

<50 <40

<50 <40 0.045 34950 <50 <40 0.035 22150 <50 <40 13 0.660 13710 <50 <40

15 0.680 14170 <50 <40 18 0.680 11180 0.020 10370 <50 <40 <50 <40 <50 <40

<50 <40 *Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 29

Appendix G. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at XRAL Labs in Golden, CO using 4 acid dissolution (Appendix_G.xls, Appendix_G.dbf). Sample No. SAMPLE_NO.

*Other analyses (Appendix #): D =USGS-EDXRF, E =EWU, F =CHEMEX, H =ACZ, none. Appendix G, page 30

Appendix H. Chemical composition of samples analyzed by ICP-AES at ACZ Labs in Steamboat Springs, CO using nitric acid dissolution (Appendix_H.xls, Appendix_H.dbf). Sample No. Site ID Depth interval, top (cm) Depth interval, bottom (cm) *Other Analyses (Appendix #) As (ppm) Cd (ppm) Fe (%) Pb (ppm) Mn (ppm) Zn (ppm) SAMPLE_NO. SITE_ID OTHR_ANLYS

94Gid2 E,G 16.8 8.89

94Gid2 E,G 34.2 9.17

94Gid2 E,G 28.2 13.2 3470 12500

94Gid2 E,G 83.7 12.9 17600 13700 16700

94Gid3 E,G 22.4 11.8 4320 11800

94Gid3 E,G

94Gid4 E,G

94Gid6 E,G 12.8 7.85

E,G

E,G 119 17.7 14300 18700 21500

E,G 138 15.5 20200 19200 20700

E,G 102 16.9 19200 17800 18500

E,G 165 19.3 15500 21900 27100

E,G 174 19.3 13600 24300 26900

94Vcd3 E,G

94Vck1 E,G 30.1 9.79

94Vck1 E,G 5910 11700

94Vck2 E,G 5450 12300

95Pck1 E,G 65 13.8 12600 14800 11800

95Pck1 E,G 92.8 8.01 32900 8130 15100

95Pck1 E,G

95Pcud2 E,G 90.1 9.33 35800 9760 15400

E,G 76.8 13.4 9300 15400 14400

95Vcd3 E,G 64.8 6.12 23200 5870 10700

95Vcud1 E,G

E,G 74.3 11.2 10500 12100 13500 96K114E E,G *Other analyses (Appendix #): E =EWU, G =XRAL. Appendix H, page 1

Appendix J.

List of digital files associated with this report.

Text, figures and tables of this report in PDF format of01-139.pdf

Tables in MS Excel format of01-139_appendix_b.xls of01-139_appendix_c.xls of01-139_appendix_d.xls of01-139_appendix_e.xls of01-139_appendix_f.xls of01-139_appendix_g.xls of01-139_appendix_h.xls

Tables in dBase4 format of01-139_appendix_b.dbf of01-139_appendix_c.dbf of01-139_appendix_d.dbf of01-139_appendix_e.dbf of01-139_appendix_f.dbf of01-139_appendix_g.dbf of01-139_appendix_h.dbf

Metadata for Open-File Report OF01-139 of01-139.met.txt

Plates & figures from the original