Elements influencing cost allocation in the pinal creek aquifer, arizona, usa. Part ii: Geochemical controls on groundwater quality recovery

Environmental Forensics

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 271-286

  Nicholson, Andrew ^a   Davis, Andy ^a   Helgen, S ^a  

^a Geomega   (United States)

Author keywords

Acidity; Aluminum; Aquifer; Buffering; Remediation

Indexed keywords

EID: 1642331643     PISSN: 15275922     EISSN: 15275930     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/783860633     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Allison, J. D., Brown, D. S., and Novo-Gradac, K. J. 1991. MINTEQA2/PRODEFA2, A Geochemical Assessment Model for Environmental Systems: Version 3.0. EPA/600/3-91/021 Athens, GA: USEPA.
2. Bcthke, C. M. 1998. The Geochemist’s Workbench. Champagne-Urbana. IL: University of Illinois.
3. Bethke, C. M., and Brady, P. V. 2000. How the Kd approach undermines groundwater cleanup. Groundwater 38(3):435-443.
4. Brady, P. V., and Bethke, C. M. 2000. Beyond the Kd approach. Groundwater 38(3):321-322.
5. Brown, J. G., Bassett, R. L., and Glynn, P. D. 1998. Analysis and simulation of reactive transport of metal contaminants in groundwater in Pinal Creek Basin, Arizona. J. Hydrol. 209:225-250.
6. Brown, J. G., Glynn, P. D., and Bassett, R. L. 1999. Geochemistry and reactive-transport of metal contaminants in ground water, Pinal Creek Basin, Arizona. In U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Vol. 1, Contamination from Hardrock Mining: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4018A, edited by D. W. Morganwalp and H. T. Buxton. Charleston, SC: United States Geological Survey, pp. 141-153.
7. Cronin, C. S., Walker, W. J., and Bloom, P. R. 1986. Predicting aqueous aluminum concentrations in natural waters. Nature 324:140-143.
8. Davis, A. 2003. Elements influencing cost allocation in the Pinal Creek Aquifer, Arizona, USA. Introduction and synopsis of findings. Em'iron. forensics 4(4):245-253.
9. Davis, A., Ruby, M., and Bergstrom, P. 1992. The bioavailability of arsenic and lead in soils from the Butte Mining district. Environ. Sci. Technol. 26(3):461-468.
10. Fetter, C. W. 1999. Contaminant Hydrogeology, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River. NJ: Prentice Hall.
11. Glynn, P. D., and Busenberg, E. 1996. Unsaturated zone diffusion of carbon dioxide and oxygen in the Pinal Creek Basin. Arizona. In U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program-Proceedings of the Technical Meeting. Vol. 2, Contamination from Hardrock Mining: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 94-4015, edited by D. W. Morganwalp and D. A. Aronson, Charleston, SC: United States Geological Survey, pp. 1055-1064.
12. Helgen, S., Davis, A., and Nicholson, A. 2003. Elements influencing cost allocation in the Pinal Creek Aquifer. Arizona, USA. Part 1: Geochemical fingerprinting source delineation. Em’iron. Forensics 4(4):255-269.
13. HGC. 1989. Investigation of Acid Water Contaminatation Along Miami Wash and Pinal Creek, Gila County, Arizona. Prepared for Cyprus Miami Mining Corporations.
14. Huang, K., Toridc, N., and Van Genuchten, M. Th. 1995. Experimental investigation of solute transport in large, homogeneous and heterogeneous saturated soil columns. Transport Porous Media 18:283-302.
15. Kalinowski, B. E., and Schweda, P. 1996. Kinetics of muscovite, phlogo- pite, and biotite dissolution and alteration at room temperature. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 60:367-373.
16. Labolle, E. M., and Fogg, G. E. 2001. Role of molecular diffusion in contaminant migration and recover)' in an alluvial aquifer system. Transport Porous Media 42:155-179.
17. Lind, C. J., and Oscarson, R. L. 1997. Iron deposition as acidic groundwater encounters carbonates in the alluvium of Pinal Creek, Arizona, U.S.A. Appl. Geochem. 12:83-95.
18. Marryott, R. A., Sabadell, G. P., Ahlfcld, D. P., Harris, R. H., and Pindcr, G. F.,2000. Allocating remedial costs at Superfund Sites with commingled groundwater contaminant plumes. Em’iron. Forensics 1(1):47-54.
19. McLaughlin, D. and Ruan, F. 2001. Macrodispcrsivity and large-scale hydrogeologic variability. Transport Porous Media 42:133-154.
20. Moomaw, C., Davis, A., and Helgen, S. 2003. Elements influencing cost allocation in the Pinal Creek Aquifer, Arizona. USA. Part III: Quantifying metal releases from multiple sources. Environ. Forensics 4(4):287- 303.
21. Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP). 1990. Meteoric water mobility procedure. Bureau of Mining Regulation and Reclamation. http://ndep.nv.gov/bmrr/mobility1.pdf.
22. Nicholson, A. 2003. Incorporation of silicate buffering in predicting acid rock drainage form mine wastes-A mechanistic approach. Mining Eng. 55:33-38.
23. Nordstrom, D. K. 1982. The effect of sulfate on aluminum concentrations in natural waters: Some stability relations in the system AI2O3-SO3-H2O at 298 K. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 46:681-692.
24. Nordstrom, D. K., Plummer, N. L., Langmuir, D., Busenberg, E., May, H. M., Jones, B. F., and Parkhurst, D. L. 1990. Revised chemical equilibrium data for major water-mineral reactions and their limitations. In Chemical Modeling in Aqueous Systems II, ACS Symposium Series 416, edited by D. C. Melchior and R. L. Bassett, Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, pp. 398-413.
25. Parkhurst, D. L. 1995. Users guide to PHREEQC-A computer program for speciation. reaction-path. advective-transport, and inverse geochemical calculations. USGS Water Resources Investigations Report, 95-4227.
26. Peterson, N. P. 1962. Geolog)' and ore deposits of the Globe-Miami District, Arizona. USGS Professional Paper, 342.
27. Stollenwerk, K. G. 1994. Geochemical interactions between constituents in acidic groundwater and alluvium in an aquifer near Globe, Arizona. Appl. Geochem. 9:353-369.
28. van Wesenbeck, I. J., and Kachanoski, R. G. 1991. Spatial scale dependence of in situ solute transport. Soil Sci. Soc. America J. 55:3-7.