Table 7 (cont'd). Results from sampling location 7, Volunteer AAP site.
c. Analytical results for sampling location 7R.
TNT on-site
Laboratory analysis (g/g)
analysis
(g/g)
Sample
TNB
TNT
2,4-DNT
Total
Discrete samples
1a
81,200
--
98,000
--
98,000
1b
82,800
--
119,000
--
119,000
2a
21,600
--
42,600
--
42,600
2b
21,900
--
37,900
--
37,900
3a
36,600
--
76,000
--
76,000
3b
40,700
--
67,200
--
67,200
4a
77,600
--
120,000
--
120,000
4b
74,800
--
119,000
--
119,000
5a
72,200
--
100,000
--
100,000
5b
70,400
--
103,000
--
103,000
6a
69,100
--
99,500
--
99,500
6b
87,400
--
100,000
--
100,000
7a
35,000
--
66,400
--
66,400
7b
33,200
--
68,600
--
68,600
mean
57,500
86,900
Composites
C1
63,200
--
117,000
--
117,000
C2
58,200
--
94,300
--
94,300
C3
58,100
--
111,000
--
111,000
C4
49,800
--
107,000
--
107,000
C5
51,500
--
101,000
--
101,000
C6
46,400
--
112,000
--
112,000
C7
56,600
--
105,000
--
105,000
mean
55,200
107,000
std. dev.
5,800
7,520
(17.9% for field analyses and 4.3% for lab analy-
Sampling location 8
ses). No specific explanation can be offered for
The analytical data for sampling location 8 are
the unusually poor precision of the field mea-
presented in Table 8a. Acetone extracts of these
surements.
soils varied in color intensity, indicating that the
Because concentrations for the seven samples
concentrations of contaminants were quite vari-
at location 8 were clearly not normally distrib-
able from sample to sample. After appropriate
uted, log-transformed data were subjected to
dilution (ranging from 1:50 to 1:5000), reaction
ANOVA (Table 8b). F ratios were 71.2 for the field
with EnSys reagent produced reddish solutions,
results and 1553 for the lab results, denoting sig-
showing that TNT was the probable contaminant.
nificant differences among samples at greater than
Laboratory analysis confirmed the presence of
the 99.9% confidence level. LSD calculations for
TNT with concentrations ranging from about 500
to almost 30,000 g/g.
both the field and lab data indicated that most
individual samples were significantly different
The mean RSD for duplicate field analyses of
from one another.
the discrete samples from location 8 was 19.7%,
Correlation analysis was conducted on the field
which was higher than for any of the other TNT
and lab data for both the untransformed and log-
sites. In contrast, the mean RSD for the lab data
transformed data. The best fit linear regression
was 4.5%. Very similar RSDs were obtained from
line for the untransformed data had a slope of
the replicate analyses of the composite samples
26
Previous Page
