Sampling ground water

Figure 13.6 Direct RPLC analysis of a blank ground water sample spiked with 4.5 (p-g 1 ETU, (a) with and (b) without column-switching. A 60 X 4.6 mm i.d. column and a 150 X 4.6 mm i.d. column were used for C-1 and C-2, respectively, with pure water as M-1 and methanol-0.025 M ammonium acetate (pH, 7.5) (5 95, v/v) as M-2 S-1 and S-2 aie the interfering peaks. Reprinted from Chromatographia, 31, E. A. Hogendoom et at., Columnswitching RPLC for the trace-level determination of ethylenetlaiourea in aqueous samples , pp. 285-292, 1991, with permission from Vieweg Publishing.

Example 6-2 The following standard addition plot was obtained for a competitive electrochemical enzyme immunoassay of the pesticide 2,4-D. A ground water sample (diluted 1 20 was subsequently assayed by the same protocol to yield a current signal of 65 nA. Calculate the concentration of 2,4-D in the original sample. 

Before starting the plutonium experiments, the influence of dissolved oxygen on the Ej, of each ground-water sample was determined by sparging separate samples with oxygen and nitrogen. 

Total cyanide concentrations in ground water samples ranged from over 300 parts per million (ppm) at the plant site to about 1 5 ppm at a spring located along the banks of the Little Spokane River Wells used for drinking water, irrigation, and livestock purposes contained total cyanide concentrations as high as 23 ppm ... 

These two terms (IDL and IQL) define only the limitations of the instmment. When analyzing real-life samples such as plant or animal tissue or even soil and ground water samples, matrix interference must be taken into consideration in order to define detection limits. This is because these real-life matrices are made up of hundreds (or even thousands) of compounds. These compounds may interfere in several ways in the detection and quantification of the analyte of interest. 

Manheim FX, Pauli, CK (1981) Patterns of ground water salinity changes in a deep continental-oceanic transect off the southeastern Atlantic coast of the U.S.A. J Hydrol 54 95-105 Martin P, Akber RA (1999) Radium isotopes as indicators of adsorption-desorption interactions and barite formation in groundwater. J Environ Radioact 46 271-286 McCarthy J, Shevenell L (1998) Obtaining representative ground water samples in a fractured and karstic formation. Ground Water 36 251-260... 

The use of the Charm II RIA test to analyze tetracycline antibiotics in water (both surface and groundwater) has been reported [84, 97]. This RIA, which was initially developed to analyze tetracycline in serum, urine, and milk, was subsequently adapted to analyze water samples at concentration levels around 1 pg L-1. Thus, samples from hog lagoons, surface water samples, and ground-water samples were tested using the RIA method and the results confirmed by LC-MS. 

Heberer T, Dunnbier U, Reilich C, Stan HJ (1997) Detection of drugs and drug metabolites in ground water samples of a drinking water treatment plant. Fresenius Environ Bull 6 438-443... 

Median, minimum, maximum, and upper quartile values are given in Table 1. The 7 sites with pH values below 5.1 are all from ponds in the Pebble West area, concentrated where sulphide-bearing rubble crop is exposed or under thin cover. All but two of the 32 sites with pH values below 5.88 (lower quartile) are from surface and ground water samples in and adjacent to the Pebble deposit. Borehole seeps are all circum-neutral. 

Water Samples. The pesticide residues in ground water samples from sites adjacent to and remote from the disposal pit locations and the well water samples were analyzed by the resin sorption method using XAD-2 as described by Richard et al. (4) and Junk et al. ( 5) for measuring very low amounts of selected pesticides. 

Based on analyses of well water from Suffolk County, New York, which show aldlcarb sulfoxide and sulfone, (and generally 0 or <10% parent aldlcarb) to be the only compounds In well water, and In an approximate 50 50 ratio. Onion Carbide decided to analyze all ground water samples using a total residue method, l.e., by oxidizing all residues present to the sulfone. 

Chromium is a common anthropogenic contaminant in surface waters, therefore Cr isotope fractionations are of potential interest in tracking Cr + pollution in groundwaters. Ellis et al. (2002, 2004)) and Izbicki et al. (2008) analyzed ground-water samples from contaminated sites and observed an increase in Cr/ Cr ratios up to 6%c during the reduction of chromate. Equilibrium fractionations between Cr(VI) and Cr (III) have been estimated by Schauble et al. (2002), who predicted Cr isotope fractionations >l%c between Cr species with different oxidation states. 

Procedure. The procedure followed with XAD-8 was that of Thurman and Malcolm (8). The Suwannee River (GA) sample was filtered through 0.45-/zm Ag filters in Millipore, stainless steel, 142-mm, plate filter holders. The Laramie-Foxhills ground-water sample did not require filtration. Samples were processed on site within 24 h after collection to prevent alteration. All column eluates were adjusted to pH 2 upon collection and immediately refrigerated. 

Isolation of Residue Organics from Waters via XAD Chromatography. Residue organics were isolated from the water samples via XAD chromatographic procedures developed in our laboratory. Drinking water and ground water samples were processed via the XAD procedure described in publications (3, 9, JO, 21, 22) and detailed in the Interim Protocol developed for the USEPA (5). Waste water samples were processed via a modification of the XAD procedure (4). 

GROUND-WATER SAMPLING Establishing a Sampling Point Elements of the Sampling Protocol... 

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the sampling methods used to acquire ground-water samples near the aquifer-lake interface.

Gonthier, J.B. and Collins, C.A. (1979) High Arsenic Concentrations in Ground-Water Samples from Northern Malheur County. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, No. 1150, p. 132. 

Figure 13.14 LC-diode-array detection (DAD) chromatogram (at 220 nm) obtained after preconcentration of 50 ml of ground water sample spiked with various pollutants at levels of 3 p.g l-1 passed through (a) a PLRP-S cartridge and (b) an anti-isoproturon cartridge. Peak identification is as follows 1, chlortoluron 2, isoproturon plus diuron 3, linuron 4, diben-zuron , water matrix. Reprinted from Journal of Chromatography, A 777, I. Ferrer et al. Automated sample preparation with extraction columns by means of anti-isoproturon immunosorbents for the determination of phenylurea herbicides in water followed by liquid chromatography diode array detection and liquid chromatography-atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometry , pp. 91-98, copyright 1997, with permission from Elsevier Science.

Figure 6.2 demonstrates this in the case of a ground water sample from the former ammunition site in Elsnig (Germany). Many unknown compounds could be identified in the non-target analysis, e.g. 2,4-dinitrobenzoic acid (2,4-DNBA) and 3,5-dinitrophenol (3,5-DNP) which are major components (see Figure 6.2(a) and Table 6.1). 

Frias, S., M.J. Sanchez, and M.A. Rodriquez (2004). Determination of triazine compounds in ground water samples by micellar elec-trokinetic capillary chromatography. Anal. Chim. Acta, 503 271-278. 

Extensive efforts have been made in the environmental monitoring of dioxins from 1989 in biota and sediments and from 1998 in other media until present (Fig. 1.2) (Ministry of the Environment, 2002, Dioxins monitoring in the environment ). It could be seen from these efforts, that emission of dioxins in Japan has been decreasing from 7680-8135 g-TEQ in 1997 to 323-348 g-TEQ in 2005, a 95% reduction from the 1997 level, meeting the reduction target (Ministry of the Environment, 2004, Dioxin emission inventory ). In 2005, 3206 atmospheric samples, 2550 water samples, 1730 sediment samples, 924 ground water samples and 1782 soil samples were analyzed for their dioxin levels. 

R. Puls and M. Barcelona, Ground Water Sampling for Metals Analysis, Superfund Ground Water Issue, EPA/540/4-89/001, [US Environmental Protection Agency, 1989]. 

Ground water samples can be collected from monitoring or supply wells. Their location is not always straightforward—generally such water is sampled over hot spots and near locations following the subterranean stream in order to detect plume profile movements.19 The depth of the well and the characteristics of the surrounding land surface and upstream activities can help in the interpretation of results. 

Parker L.V. and T. Ranney. 2000. Decontaminating materials used in ground water sampling devices Organic contaminants. Ground Water Monit. Rev. 20 56-68. 

Parker, L.V. 1994. The effects of ground water sampling devices on water quality A literature review, pp. 130-141. GWMR. Spring. 

Marco, M.-P., S. Chiron, J. Gascon, et al. 1995. Validation of two immunoassay methods for environmental monitoring of carbaryl and 1-naphthol in ground water samples. Anal. Chim. Acta 311 319-329. 

---