Laserfiche WebLink
column chromatography Finally, to see if any hydrocarbons were present at extremely low <br /> levels in the sample, the saturate fraction was concentrated and infected into a gas <br /> chromatograph Results showed that no petroleum hydrocarbons had partitioned into the <br /> water The sample was then concentrated an additional 10-fold down to below normal <br /> detection limits to qualitatively determine whether any hydrocarbons had partitioned into <br /> the water The concentrated sample revealed that the straight chain hydrocarbons from C14 <br /> to C19 and various branched chain hydrocarbons were present at extremely low <br /> concentrations in the water. These concentrations could not be quantified because they <br /> were below the normal analytical detection limit. <br /> 2.3.2 Groundwater Investigations <br /> In January, 1991, ERM-West conducted a preliminary groundwater investigation to <br /> determine if groundwater had been affected by the impacted soil Three monitoring wells <br /> (Well #1, 2, and 3) were installed around the former tank locations Well #1 was drilled <br /> upgradient to the former tank location and Weds #2 and #3 were placed to intercept any <br /> groundwater that may have been affected by the former leaking tanks One water sample <br /> was obtained from each well and analyzed for TPH, and gasoline using EPA Method 8015M <br /> and BTEX using EPA Method 602 All three samples reportedly had very low detections <br /> of high boiling point hydrocarbons, which were not characterized as diesel Analytical <br /> results of the water samples are summarized in TABLE 2-5 <br /> In January, 1993, ERM-West conducted the first round of quarterly groundwater sampling <br /> for the three on-site wells The samples were analyzed for extractable hydrocarbons using <br /> EPA Method 8015 None of the three samples was detected above its reporting limit of 50 <br /> jag/L. <br /> G YXMIn AWAFe FNUk"W X sa 2-11 ch�Rwr 19" <br />