Laserfiche WebLink
tn M" <br /> �- �� � hLEI✓vlfll]fR <br /> 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION <br /> 4.. RESULTS �) <br /> On Table 1, the field screening (PIU) results are compared to the chemical <br /> analytical results for total petroleum hydrocarbons. A reasonably good <br /> correlation is observed at this site between field screening and chemical <br /> analytical results. Where PID readings were low, levels of reported <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons were low. Soil samples with higher PID readings <br /> had generally higher reported levels of hydrocarbons. <br /> Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as reported by the analytical <br /> laboratory (GC-FID analysis) werz found at moderate levels (239 ppm and <br /> 370 ppm) at approximately 20 feet below ground surface in borings B-3 and <br /> B-5. Petroleum hydrocathons were detected at low to moderate levels (24.8 <br /> ppm) at the 20-foot depth in B-4 and the PID reading at the 25-foot depth <br /> suglists a further decrease. Soil borings B-3 through B-5 were terminated <br /> at the approximate 25-foot de, h due to the positive PID readings and the <br /> - possibility of ground water at the 30-foot depth. <br /> i <br /> _. Field screening did not detect the presence of petroleum hydrocarbons in i <br /> borings B-I or B-2 until reaching the 25-foot depth. The analytical <br /> laboratory detected low to moderate levels (7.8 to 15.8 ppm) of petroleum <br /> hydrocarbons at the approximate 25- and 30-foot depth in these borings. <br /> The sampler retrieved from the 30-foot depth was saturated with free water <br /> indicating the presence of ground water at this depth. It is possible <br /> that ground water is the source for the hydrocarbons detected in soil <br /> samples taken from these borings. <br /> 4 <br /> 85-88-219 <br /> 6 <br />