The candidate key is $\text{(PartNbr, Warehouse)}$.
Now examine the dependencies.
First, $\text{PartNbr} \to \text{Weight, PartColor}$.
$\text{PartNbr}$ is a proper subset of the candidate key, while $\text{Weight}$ and $\text{PartColor}$ are non-prime.
Therefore, this is a $\text{2NF}$ violation.
Similarly,
$\text{Warehouse} \to \text{Location}$ has $\text{Warehouse}$ as another proper subset of the candidate key and $\text{Location}$ as a non-prime attribute.
So this is another $\text{2NF$} violation.
However,
$\text{PartNbr, Warehouse} \to \text{QOH}$ uses the entire candidate key.
Thus $\text{QOH}$ is fully functionally dependent on the key.
Separate the two partial dependencies:
$R_2\text{(PartNbr, Weight, PartColor)}$
$R_3\text{(Warehouse, Location)}$.
The key-dependent fact remains in $R_1\text{(PartNbr, Warehouse, QOH)}$.
Each resulting relation is in $\text{2NF}$.
In options B and C, $\text{Warehouse} \to \text{Location}$ remains inside a relation whose composite key contains $\text{Warehouse}$, so the partial dependency survives.
Therefore, the correct answer is A.