United States
                            Environmental Protection
                            Agency
                         Robert S. Kerr Environmental
                         Research Laboratory
                         Ada, OK 74820
 &EPA
Research and Development     EPA/600/M-90/Q23  December 1990

ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH  BRIEF
            Colloidal-Facilitated Transport of Inorganic Contaminants in
                   Ground Water:  Part I. Sampling Considerations


                     Robert W. Pulsa, James H. Eychanei* and Robert M. Powell0
•Abstract

Investigations at Final Creek, Arizona, evaluated routine sampling
procedures for determination of aqueous inorganicgeochemistry
and assessment of contaminant transport by colloidal mobility.
Sampling variables included pump type and flow rate, collection
under air or nitrogen, and filter pore diameter. During well purging
and sample collection, suspended particle size and number as
well as .dissolved oxygen, temperature, specific conductance,
pH, and redox potential were monitored. Laboratory analyses of
both unfiltered  samples and the filtrates were performed by
inductively coupled argon plasma, atomicabsorption with graphite
furnace, and ion chromatography. Scanning electron microscopy
with Energy Dispersive X-ray was also used for analysis of the
filtered particulates.

Suspended particle counts consistently required approximately
twice as long as the other field-monitored indicators to stabilize.
High-flow-rate pumps entrained normally nonmobile particles.
Differences in elemental concentrations using different filter-
pore sizes were generally not large with only two wells  having
differences  greater than 10 percent in most elemental
concentrations, although trends showed  increasing
concentrations with increasing filter pore sizes in most wells.
Similar differences (> 10%) were observed for some wells when
samples were collected under nitrogen rather than in air. Fe2V
Fe^ratiosfor air-collected samples were smallerthanforsamples
"U.S. EPA, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada,
OK , bU.S. Geological Survey, Tucson, A2, and CNSI Technology
Services Corporation, Ada, OK.
                      collected under a nitrogen atmosphere, reflecting sampling-
                      induced oxidation.

                      Introduction

                      Ground-water samples that are representative of actual ground-
                      water quality are, at best, difficult to obtain (Claassen, 1982).
                      Disturbance  of the subsurface environment ,is unavoidable
                      during well construction activities. Additional disturbance during
                      sample collection may drastically alter ground-water chemistry
                      due to oxidation, sorption, mixing, and turbulent flow resulting in
                      inaccurate estimations of contaminant loading  and transport
                      predictions. A common study objective is to determine what
                      constituents are mobile in an aquifer.  Many ground-water
                      samples are filtered to exclude particles dislodged from the local
                      well environment, because those particles are not mobile at
                      ordinary ground-water velocities. Because geochemical models
                      are based on the thermodynamics of dissolved constituents,
                      small pore-diameter filters have been preferred as the best way
                      to separate dissolved from particulate constituents.

                      In practice, 0.45-u.m filters are commonly used  to balance
                      between the objectives of isolating dissolved constituents and
                      permitting reasonable use in the field. Unfortunately, particle
                      sizes do not have an express lower bound so that the right filter
                      can perfectly separate particles from solutes. Particles with
                      diameters from 0.003 to 10 u.m, referred to as colloids, may form
                      in certain environments and be mobile atground-watervelocities.
                      Use of 0.45-u.m filtration may exclude an important component
                      of the contaminant load at some waste sites, particularly where
                      highly toxic metals are involved (Puls and Barcelona, 1989).

                                             ^g£> Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
Many studies  have demonstrated contaminant transport by
colloidal mobility (Gschwend and Reynolds, 1987; Eichholz et al.
1982; Enfield and Bengtsson, 1988; Robertson, 1984). There is
increasing concern that current methods of ground- water sample
collectfon may exclude this component of the contaminant loading
in a given system.   If the purpose of sampling is to estimate
contaminant transport, substantial underestimations of mobility
may result, because of colloidal associations. Numerous studies
attesttothe strong sorptive capabilities of secondary clay minerals;
hydrous Fe, Al, and Mn oxides; and humic material of colloidal
dimensions. Takayanagi and Wong (1984) determined that
more than 70 percent of thetotal Se in riverwaters adjacent to the
Chesapeake Bay was associated with organic and inorganic
colloidal particles.  Buddemeier and Rego (1986) found that
virtually all  the activity of Mn, Co, Sb, Cs, Ce, and  Eu was
associated with colloidal particles in ground-water samples from
underground nuclear-test cavities at the Nevada Test Site.
Colloidal particles generated in batch experiments,by Sheppard
et al. (1979) and Puls et al. (1989) were shown to retain substantial
proportions of radionuclides.  Further work by Sheppard et al.
(1980) concluded that the transport of radionuclides by colloidal
clay particles should be considered in contaminant-transport
models.

Filtration is part of this concern; but otherfactors, such as sample
exposure to atmospheres different from aquifer environments
and pump-induced  disturbance of the sampling zone, are also
important.  Oxidation-induced  precipitation and sorption
processes,  many of which  are  kinetically rapid (seconds to
minutes), may cause previously dissolved species to be removed
during filtration, resulting  in lower metal concentrations than are
actually present in the aquifer.  Filter loading and clogging with
fine particles may also occur, reducing the nominal pore size of
the filter and introducing  errors due to changing effective pore
size (Danielsson, 1982).

Background

A workshop was convened at the Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research  Laboratory (RSKERL) of the  U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency in 1988 to examine these issues and provide
technical guidance based  on currently available scientific
Information. A Superfund Ground Water Issue Paper resulting
from the workshop emphasized the importance of well construction
and-sampling methodology in obtaining representative water
chemistry  data  (Puls  and Barcelona,  1989).   Workshop
recommendations in the area of ground-water sampling are
briefly summarized  below:

    Purging

    Water that remains  in the well casing between sampling
    periods is unrepresentativeof water in the formation opposite
    the screened interval. It must be removed by purging or
    isolated from the collected sample by a packer arrangement
    prior to the collection of representative water samples. It is
    important to purge the stagnant water at flow rates below
    those used in development to avoid further development,
    well damage orthe disturbance of accumulated corrosion or
    reaction products in  the well.

    Isolation of Sampling Zone

    Isolation of the sampling zone is necessary to minimize the
    purge volume as well as to minimize air contact.  This is
    especially important since Eh/pH conditions of the formation
    waters are often sensitive to dissolved-gas content. Inflatable
    packers can be used to achieve isolation of the sampling
    zone.

    Pumping for Sample Collection

    It k\ recommended that a positive displacement pump be
    used. Other types of sample collection (e.g. bailing) may
    cause displacement of non-mobile particles or substantially
    alter ground-water chemistry leading to colloid formation
    (e.g. vacuum pumps). Surging must be avoided, and a flow
    rate close to the actual ground-water flow rate should be
    employed. While an initial approximation, flow rates around
    100 to 500 ml/min have been used to successfully sample
    ground waters in a quiescent mode.

    Assessment of Water Constituents During
    Purging and Sampling

    Monitoring  for dissolved oxygen, temperature, specific
    conductance, pH and turbidity during purging and sampling
    is recommendedtodeterminebaselineground-waterquality
    conditions prior to sampling.

    Filtration

    For estimates of contaminant mobility, filtration with coarse
    filters (> 2 u.m) using the same procedures as above or
    collection of unfiltered samples is recommended. Filtration
    foraccurate estimations of geochemistry should be performed
    in the field with in-line pressure filtration using a large (e.g.
    142 mm) polycarbonate-type (thin with  sharp pore-size
    cutoff) 0.1 u.m filter. Air contact should be minimized and
    entirely excluded for some samples. Acidification of samples
    to <: pH 2 should be performed immediately. The filter holder
    should be non-metallic. Holders made of steel  are subject
    to corrosion and may introduce non-formation  metals into
    samples. Prewashing of filters should be routinely performed.

In ah effort to test the efficacy of these recommendations, a joint
study by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S.
Geological Survey was begun in the spring of 1988. Collection
of representative unfiltered samples is quite challenging in many
systems because of the difficulty of excluding nonsuspended or
artifact particulates. Because no sampling technique is totally
passive, all contaminant-mobility estimates based on unfiltered
samples are biased toward overestimation.  An attempt was
made to minimize this bias by carefully following the workshop
recommendations.

Purpose and Objectives

The specific objectives of the study were to evaluate perturbations
to the ground-water geochemistry during sample collection and,
in particular, to identify those factors that caused significant
differences in elemental concentrations or concentrations and
size distributions of suspended particles in samples collected for
analysis.   Samples for both  dissolved  and suspended
contaminants were collected. Filters smaller than 0.45 p.m were
used to sample for dissolved constituents and for comparison
with the unfiltered or coarsely filtered samples. This document
summarizes the results of the study and addresses the efficacy
of the 1988 RSKERL filtration workshop recommendations on
ground-water sampling for metals analyses.

-------
Study Site

The study site is located at Final Creek, near Globe, Arizona,
about 130 km east of Phoenix and about 170 km north of Tucson.
Copper  has been  mined since 1903 from granite  porphyry
adjacent to an aquifer at the site.  A band of unconsolidated
alluvium 300 to 800 m wide, as much as 50 m thick, and about
20 km tong forms the upper, central part of the aquifer in a valley
along Miami Wash and Final Creek (Figures 1 and 2). Most of
the sediment in the alluvium  ranges in size from fine sand to
coarse gravel, but clay and boulder lenses also are present.
Alluvial basin fill more than 100 m thick forms the remainder of
the aquifer beneath and adjacent to the unconsolidated alluvium.
Peterson (1962) described the geology of the area.

During 1940-86, acidic mining waste solutions were discarded in
an unlined lake formed behind waste and tailings piles. In 1986,
pH at the lake surface was about 2.7 and the lake volume was
about 5.5x10» m3. By May 1988, virtually all the lake water had
been spread on inactive tailings piles to evaporate. Contamination
of ground and surface waters in the area has been described by
Eychaner (1989). The distribution of pH in the aquifer was used
as a guide in selecting wells to sample for this study (Figure 1).

Water levels and chemical quality have been monitored since
1984 in  several groups of observation wells (Figure 1). Each
group consists of separate wells individually completed with 10-
cm-diameter polyvinylchloride casing and a single well screen.
Most of the well screens are 0.9 m long; the longest screen in a
                                               well sampled forthis study is 6.1 m. Most of the wells were drilled
                                               by the hydraulic rotary method using bentonite-based drilling
                                               mud; five wells were drilled by the hollow-stem auger method.
                                               The annulus in the screened interval was packed with washed
                                               pea gravel from a nearby uncontaminated area. The gravel pack
                                               was capped with a 1 -m layer of bentonite pellets. Each well was
                                               developed  by jetting high-pressure air through the screen to
                                               dislodge and remove fine-grained material.  Comprehensive
                                               data from the study area are available (Eychaner et al, 1989).

                                               In the alluvium, hydraulic conductivity is on the order of 200 m/d
                                               on the basis of cross-sectional area, hydraulic gradient, and
                                               measured outflow (C.C. Neaville, hydrologist, U.S. Geological
                                               Survey, written commun., 1990). For thick sections of basin fill,
                                               hydraulic conductivity was estimated from aquifer tests  of two
                                               wells to range from 0.1 to 0.2 m/d (Neaville, written commun.,
                                               1990).

                                               Near the sampled wells, hydraulic conductivity was estimated on
                                               the basis of measured water-level declines and pumping rates
                                               during sampling periods using  the solution of the unsteady
                                               ground-water flow equation  (Lohman,  1979,  eq. 44).  The
                                               estimates are within an order of magnitude at best, but are useful
                                               for comparisons among the wells because of the similarities in
                                               construction. The  estimates range from 10 to 150 m/d for wells
                                               in the alluvium or uppermost basin  fill.  Estimated hydraulic
                                               conductivity for well 105, deeper in the basin fill, was 0.5 m/d. On
                                               the basis of hydraulic gradients that range from 0.005 to 0.008
                                               and assumed porosity of 0.2 or 0.3, average ground-water flow
                                               velocities near the wells range from 0.02 to 3 m/d.
     1150-
Webster
 Guich
                             Miami Wash
Final Creek
                                                                              X Colloid concentration
                                                                                        (mg/L)

                                                                             —   Line of equal pH
                                                                                    4,5,6, and 7

                                                                                0     SCALE    5 km
                                                                                I    i    ii   i    I
                                                                              Vertical Exaggeration 50x
      800
                                       Figure 1. Hydrogeologlc Section of the Aquifer

-------
                             Perennial
                             Streamflow
 33°32'
110°47'
   L
                                                           Explanation
                                                    400  Well Site and
                                                         Number
                                                         Streamflow - Sample
                                               09498400  Site and Number

                                                         Generalized Direction
                                                         of Flow
                                                                 2 Miles

                                                                3 Kilometers
33°26' -
       Former
     Acidic Lake
                           Figure 2. Plan-View of Study Site

-------
Instrumentation and Methods

Ground water was collected during two field seasons from
twelve wells selected to  represent the range of pH, solute
concentration, and hydraulic conductivity abng  Final Creek
(Figures 1 and 2). Three different pumps were used (Table 1).
At the lowest discharge, velocities induced at the borehole face
were estimated to range from 1 to 5 times the average ground-
water velocity close to each well in the alluvium. In the basin fill
underlying the alluvium, even the lowest discharge resulted in
velocities more than 400 times that of the ground  water.

Waterthat remained in the well between sampling sessions was
purged, as it was judged  to be unrepresentative  of formation
water.  An inflatable packer was used with the bladder and low-
rate submersible pumps to reduce necessary purge  volumes.
During purging, a Hydrolab Surveyor II1 with a flow-through cell
was used to monitor temperature, specific conductance,  pH,
dissolved oxygen, and  oxidation-reduction potential  (Ft
electrode).  Samples were collected only after each indicator
reached an acceptably stable  value, generally  a value that
changed by less than its measurement uncertainty during one
purge volume.  From 3 to 24 volumes were purged before
sampling, and the high flow rate submersible pump  generally
purged the larger volumes.

During the second field season, a Malvern Autosizer lie was
used to measure suspended particles in the diameter range from
0.003 to 3 urn. The instrument determines the size distribution
of suspended particles in this size range using laser light
scattering  techniques together with photon  correlation
spectroscopy. Particle-concentration estimates were based on
calibration curves constructed using linear correlation (r2=0.999)
between photon  counts by  the instrument  and known
concentrations of kaolinite,  a secondary clay mineral.  The
kaolinite used was a reference standard obtained from the Clay
Minerals Repository at the University of Missouri. Kaolinite was
identified  by Scanning Electron Microscopy with Energy
Dispersive X-Ray  (SEM-EDX) on many of the filters from  the
sampled wells. Other particles captured on filters and  identified
by SEM-EDX included iron oxides, smectite, jarosite, silica, and
gypsum. Although the assumption that minerals in the reference
standard adequately represent the sum total of all the colloids in
the aquifer is not entirely true, photon counts provide at least a
relative measure of suspended particle concentrations.

Colloid concentrations took longer to stabilize than other field
indicators, about 50 percent longer than dissolved oxygen or
redox potential, and about twice as long as specif ic conductance,
pH, ortemperature. Well 107 was representative of the variation
of the indicators during purging at most of the wells (Figure 3).
Stable values  of the  indicators at selected wells are listed in
Table 2.

Samples were collected both in air and under nitrogen using a
field glove box. Unfiltered and filtered samples were collected,
the latter using  142-mm-diameter  Millipore and  Nucleopore
membrane filters ranging in pore size from 0.03 to 10.0 urn.
Samples were acidified in the field immediately after filtering with
double distilled concentrated nitric acid to pH < 2. Working in the
glove box was difficult, and handling thin membrane filters with
latex gloves was particularly cumbersome.

Elemental analyses were performed with inductively coupled
plasma (ICP) for most elements; atomic absorption with graphite
furnace (AAGF)for Cd, Pb, and As; and ion chromatography (IC)
for chloride  and sulfate.   Analytical precision on the ICP and
AAGF were <±10 percent, and on the IC< ±5 percent. Scanning
Electron Microscopy with Energy Dispersive X-Ray (SEM-EDX)
was used to identify colloidal material captured on the membrane
filters.

Effects  of Sampling Variables

Pumping Rates

Differences in pumping rates were expected to cause differences
in the concentrations and size distributions of colloidal particles
in suspensions and differences in elemental concentrations after
filtration.  Ten wells were purged and sampled with as many as
three different types of pumps in June 1988 and March 1989.
Pumping rates ranged from 0.6 to 92 L/min, corresponding to
velocities of 25 to 3900 m/d at the well screens. Samples were
filtered in air through  0.4-u.m filters, filtrates were analyzed for
            Table 1.  Pumps used In ground water sampling.
Brand'
GeoTech
Keck
Grundfos
Type
bladder
submersible
submersible
Power
Supply
compressed
air
12Vdc
240 V ac
Diameter
(mm)
44
44
95
Discharge
(L/min)
0.6-1.1
2.8-3.8
12-92
            1 Use of brand names is for identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement by any agency of the
            United States Government.

-------
       8

       7-

       6-

       5-

       4-

       3-

       2-

       1-
                          Photon Counts (10E4/S)
                          Redox Potential (v)
                          Specific Conductance
                          (10E3u.S/cm)
                          pH (units)
                          Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
        0.0
1.5                   3.0
       Purge Volumes
4.5
       Figure 3. Changes in Water Quality Indicators During Purging of Well 107 (Keck Pump, 3/89)
Table 2. Ground-water quality indicators for selected wells.
Well:
pH (units)
Sp.Cond.(nS/cm)
Temp.(°C)
Oxygen(mg/L)
Redox Pot.(v)
Colloids (mg/L)
104
3.92
3020
18.0
0.39
0.44
—
105
6.08
4300
19.0
—
0.28
0.4
107
3.48
7070
18.4
0.14
0.44
0.3
303
4.27
3210
19.0
0.01
0.37
—
403
5.05
3200
18.8
6.07
0.38
—
451
4.73
4060
18.9
0.24
0.25
20
503
5.74
3620
18.9
6.22
0.32
0.1

-------
 cations using ICP, and the filters were examined using SEM-
 EDX.   Particle  concentrations and size distributions were
 monitored in 1989 for five wells on unfiltered samples.

 Cation concentrations differed by less than 10 percent between
 pumping rates for seven of the ten wells.  These seven wells
 generally had low particle counts,  and low filter loading was
 observed  using  SEM-EDX.  Well  503, in the alluvium, was
 representative of the seven wells. Figure 4 illustrates changes in
 water-quality indicators in well 503, where the bladder pump was
 used to purge and sample, followed by use of the low-rate and
 high-rate submersible pumps. The  well therefore was purged
 with the bladder pump prtorto placement of the lattertwo pumps.
 Colloid concentration stabilized at 0.1 mg/L during pumping at
 1.1 L/min and increased to 0.7 mg/L when'discharge increased
 to 3.8 L/min before stabilizing again at 0.1 mg/L. When discharge
 increased to 30  L/min, however, colloid concentration initially
 increased to  4.4 mg/L before finally stabilizing at 0.2 mg/L.
 Particle-size distributions for the final sample with each pump are
 also shown in Figure 4.  The low-discharge pumps produced
 monomodal distributions of the same size particles. The highest
 discharge produced larger and slightly more particles in a bimodal
 distribution because of increased turbulence. The predominant
 mineral identified on the filters from well 503 was gypsum, which
 was accompanied by some iron oxide, kaolinite, and other
 particles that contained Fe+AI+S. Analytical concentrations of
 metals did not differ significantly but did reflect the observed
 mineralogy.

 For samples from the three wells where observed cation
differences exceeded 10 percent, measured particle counts and
filter loading were also significantly higher than for the other
 seven wells.  Particle counts differed by factors of 5 to 130
 between pumping rates.  Cation concentrations differed by as
 much as 50 percent for both major and trace elements. Cation
 concentrations were generally highest in samples with the lowest
 counts (leastturbid), but some anomalous behavior was observed
 for some elements (Table 3).   Pump-induced entrapment of
 colloidal particles could decrease dissolved cation concentrations
 by sorption on freshly exposed surfaces of particles which had
 been retained on filters.

 Differences in cation concentrations were especially noticeable
 at well 105.  In March 1989, pumping at 2.8 L/min mobilized 13
 times more particles and  decreased Ca,  Mg, Mn, and Sr
 concentrations by 10 to 25 percent, compared to pumping at 0.9
 L/min (Table 3). For equal volumes of filtrate, SEM photographs
 showed that the proportion of the area of a 0.1 u.m filter covered
 with particles was about 1 percentforthe lower pumping rate and
 about 30 percent for the higher rate.  In June 1988, pumping at
 12 L/min decreased concentrations of Ca, Mg, Mn, Co, Ni, and
 Sr by 20 to 50 percent compared to pumping at 1 L/min. Well 105
 is screened in the basin fill, which has the lowest ground-water
 flow velocity in this study.  Even at the lowest pumping rate, the
 velocity induced at the borehole  face was more than 400 times
 the normal ground-water velocity. Water pumped from well 105
 was visibly murky at times.

 Pumping well 451 at 0.8 L/min produced seven times  more
 particles than pumping at 3.4 L/min and decreased concentrations
 of six cations by 10 to 50 percent.  Again, the less turbid water
generally had the larger concentrations, but the higher pumping
 rate unexpectedly produced the less turbid water. This well had
the highest colloid concentrations of any well (Table 4). The
     Table 3. Cation and colloid concentration*, mg/L, after purging at different rates (March 1989, 0.4 yum filter, sampled In air).
     Well
                                 105
                                             105
                                                          451
                                                                     451
                                                                                 503
                                                                                             503
                                                                                                          503
Discharge (L/min)
Colloids
Ca
Mg
K
Fe
Mn
Al
Cu
Co
Ni
Sr
Zn
0.9
0.3
579
149
40
<.4
6.6
<.4
<.4
<.4
<-4
1.6
0.7
2.8
4.0
478
117
37
<.4
5.0
<.4
<.4
<.4*
<.4
1.4
0,9
0.8
20
586
150
16
156
108
6.5
6.4
1.5
0.3
1.9
3.0
3.4
3.0
623
162
13
151
113
10.0
12.4
1.8
0.4
2.1
3.9
1.1
0.1
703
148
12
<.4
76
<4
<4
<.4
0.6
2.3
0.06
3.8
0.1
704
146
11
<.4
76
• <.4
<.4
<.4
0.6
2.3
0.04
30
0.2
704
147
11
<-4
73
<.4 •
<.4
<.4
0.6
2.3
0.04

-------
          «.  I-
             I-
             4-
            10 -
             I-
                                       20           30

                                          Tims (min)
                                                                40
               —  Photon Counts (10E5/8)
               	  Redox Potential (v)
               	  Specific Conductance
                    (10E3nS/crn)
               	  pH (units)
               —  Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
                                             —o-
                                              20
                                          Time (min)
                                                                                             1.0 -
                                                                             50
                                                                                           8
                                                                                           •8
                                                                                                         Sampled at
                                                                                                           60 min.
                                                               0123
                                                                  Particle Size  (|n )
                                                                                             1.0 -
                                                                                                            35 min.
                                                               0       12
                                                                  Particle Size   (
         c. 20

            1!

            16

            14

            12

            10

              I

              I

              4

              2

              9
t
                                    10                   20
                                          Time (min)
                                                                                              1.0 -
                                                                       30' min.
                                                               0123
                                                                  Particle Size  (fn )
Figure 4a-c.     Changes In Water Quality Indicators During Purging of Well 503: (a) Bladder Pump; (b) Low Speed Submersible
                 Pump; (c) High Speed Submersible Pump

-------
 Table 4. Pumping rate data for selected wells and pumps.
Well
105



303

403

451

452

503




Date
Sampled
6-14-88

3-7-89

6-15-88

6-15-88

3-9-89

3-9-89

6-16-88

3-8-89


Pump
Discharge
(L/min)
1.0
12
0.9
2.8
0.7
24
0.8
27
0.8
3.4
0.8
28
1.0
45
1.1
3.8
30
Intake
Velocity
(m/d)
42
510
38
120
30
1000
34
1100
26
110
28
980
42
1900
47
160
1300
Formation
Velocity
(m/d)
0.012



1.33

2.93

0.25

0.75

1.63




Relative
Velocity2
460
5500
410
1300
2.9
, 99
1.5
51
5.3
22
1.8
61
3.4
150
3.7
13
100
Colloid
Concentration
(mg/L)


0.3
4.0




20
3.0
0.2
10


0.1
0.1
0.2
 ! Ratio of induced velocity at the borehole face to average ground-water velocity in the adjacent formation.
samples collected in March 1989 were noticeably turbid, even
after 2 hours of purging with the bladder pump.  In fact, tower
particle counts by the slightly higherrate pump may have resulted
from the additional purge time, as the latter was inserted following
purging and sampling with the bladder pump. Two factors may
contribute to the high colloid concentrations at well 451:

      •   it is in relatively finegrained sediment inthe alluvium,
         and

      •   it is in a part of the aquifer where pH is changing
         rapidly and iron oxide coatings on colloidal clay are
         dissolving.

For this data set, particle concentrations were not predictable
from pumping rate, purge volume, flow velocity at the screen, or
the ratio of velocity induced at the borehole face to local ground-
water flow velocity. Measured particle concentrations appear to
depend on interactions of these factors as well as geology, well
construction, and water chemistry.

Filtration Differences

Concentration differences among samples filtered through pore
sizes  ranging from 0.1  to  10 u.m were  generally less than 10
percent.  Only wells 303 (Table 5) and well 503 had differences
of greaterthan 10 percent in most elemental concentrations. The
larger differences commonly were associated with  use of the
high-rate submersible pump,  and  concentrations  generally
increased with increasing filter-pore size.

Differences less than 10 percent generally were observed  for
waters that have pH less than 4, which does not favor colloid
formation. The largest observed differences for well 403,  for
Table 5. Cation concentrations, in mg/L, for well 303 using
        different filters (June 1988,24 L/min, sampled in air).
  Element
                0.1
                              0.4 fun
10fun
Ca
Mg
K
Fe
Mn
Al
Co
Cu
Ni
Zn
391
91
4.73
171
37.7
6.74
0.68
15.0
0.68
2.75
424
100
5.49
87
40.8
7.61
0.75
16.7
0.75
3.27
492
20
9.76
211
45.5
9.93
0.86
19.2
0.88
4.13
example, were for Al, Cu, Fe, and Mg, but no consistent trend of
concentration with filter pore size is apparent (Table 6).

Filtration differencesof greaterthan 10percentwerealsogenerally
associated with use of the high-rate submersible pump because
of the increased entrainmentof particulates as observed above.

-------
  Tabla 6.  Cation concentrations, In mg/L, for well 403 using
          different filters (June 1988,0.8 L/mln, sampled in air).
Table 7. Cation concentrations, in mg/L, for samples collected in
        air and nitrogen under atmosphere (mg/L, 0.40-ftm filter,
        < 1 L/mln).
Element
Ca
Mg
K
Fe
Mn
Al
Co
Cu
Ni
Zn
0.1 \m .
533
133
5.58
0.45
34.6
1.22
0.36
1.62
0.41
0.90
0.4 jim
533
113
5.47
6.63
34.9
1.91
0.36
2.14
0.42
0.95
10 urn
554
116
5.65
1.22
34.7
1.17
0.37
1.57
0.44
1.60
Oxidation of Samples

Oxidation of samples during sample collection, filtration,  and
preservation general!/ resulted in substantial differences in most
wells between samples collected under nitrogen or in air. Work
by Holm et al. (1988) showed that diffusion of atmospheric gases
through pump tubing can introduce measurable concentrations
of oxygen into waters initially low in dissolved oxygen.  This
source of possible contamination for both sets of samples was
minimized by collection of samples  adjacent to the wellhead.
Samples collected in air were directly exposed to atmospheric
gases during filtration and acidification procedures.  Significant
differences (>10 percent) were observed in many of the wells.
Variations in differences from well to well may have been caused
by a number of different factors including:

      • slightly different exposure times to air, depending
        on water-table depth and duration of filtration and
        preservation,

      • dissolved-oxygen level,

      • redox potential (Eh), and

      • dissolved iron concentration.

Large differences in concentrations were measured for well 303,
where dissolved iron concentration was greater than 200 mg/L
(Table 7).  Differences similar to those for well 303 were also
observed in wells 51,104, and 403. In contrast, the differences
were small for well 503, where the dissolved iron concentration
was less than 0.1 mg/L.

Another indication of the extent of oxidative effects  on sample
integrity was reflected in Eh values determined by various
methods for well 51  (Figure 1). The field-measured Eh value
using a R electrode was 0.43 V. A calculated Eh value, assuming
equilibrium between Fe3* and Fe(OH)3, was 0.57 V (Stollenwerk
and Eychaner,1989).  In March 1989, Fez*and Feto(al for well 51
                                                             Element


                                                             Fe

                                                             Mn

                                                             Cd

                                                             Co

                                                             Cu

                                                             Ni

                                                             Zn
                 Well 303

             air          nitrogen
                      Well 503

                 air          nitrogen
             177

             37.4

             0.02

             0.69

             15.5

             0.70

             2.53
     215

     44.7

     0.02

     0.82

     18.6

     0.84

     3.11
0.04

68.3

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.47

0.21
0.09

68.7

0.01

0.02

0.04

0.48

0.30
 were determined within one week of sample collection; Fe3* was
 computed by difference, and Eh was calculated from the ratio of
 Fe3* to Fe2*.  The calculated Eh was 0.51  V for the sample
 collected and analyzed in a nitrogen atmosphere and 0.76 Vfor
 the sample collected in air. Samples collected in the glove box
 were transported in  nitrogen-pressurized containers,  and the
 determinations were performed in laboratory glove boxes also
 pressurized with nitrogen.

 Several possible errors are associated with all these Eh evaluation
 methods. Lindberg and Runnells (1984) showed that many field
 Eh measurements may  not reflect true  redox conditions in
 ground waters. However, in acidic waters such as these, field
 measurements using R electrodes may be valid (Nordstrom et
 al. 1979). Values calculated from equilibrium constants rely on
 the assumption that Fe(OH)g is the predominant solubility
 controlling phase. Stollenwerk and Eychaner (1989) used the
 equilibrium expression:
     Fe!>* + 3H2O-
Fe(OH)3 + 3H*    log KT = -4.891,
 although other values have been reported for this reaction.
 Samples collected under nitrogen may have received some
 exposure to oxygen during sample collection, processing, and
 analysis. The Fe3* values for March 1989 were small differences
 between two large numbers and are uncertain.  Irrespective of
 these and other limitations in estimating Eh, the large difference
 observed between 0.76 V for the sample collected in air and the
 other Eh values for well 51 demonstrates the extent of oxidation
 that can occur if care is not taken to limit oxygen exposure during
 sample -collection activities in suboxicand anoxic environments.

 Conclusions

 Research at this site indicates that monitoring of water-quality
 indicators during  well purging and sampling is  important.  In
 addition to the indicators most often monitored, turbidity also
 needs to be evaluated before collecting samples. In lieu of the
 use of a turbidimeter, purging for twice the time required for
 dissolved-oxygen equilibration may be a good rule of thumb.
                                                         10

-------
 The use of a low flow rate pump can minimize entrapment of
 nonmobile suspended participates, oxygenation of formation
 water, and mixing of adjacent, possibly geochemically distinct,
 ground waters. Collection and processing of anoxic or suboxic
 ground water excluding atmospheric gases to the extent possible
 is desirable for representative and accurate  water-chemistry
 data.  The  glove box used for collection  of samples  under
 nitrogen was cumbersome and difficult to use,  especially in
 handling the thin membrane filters. If tubing of minimum length
 and maximum thickness were used, in-line filtration would probably
 mitigate  the oxidation effects observed in the present study,
 making the use of a field glove box and accompanying nitrogen
 cylinders unnecessary. Although filtration differences generally
 were not significant at this site, trends indicate that care needs to
 be taken in selection of filter pore size and that samples need to
 be filtered in the field. Additional research is needed at sites with
 distinctly different hydrology, geology, and chemistry before final
 recommendations can be  made concerning filtration.  In  the
 interim, collection of filtered and unfiltered samples forcomparison
 purposes is suggested for at least a fraction  of  the samples
 collected. Filtered samples are needed for accurate aqueous
 geochemistry  estimations, and unfiltered samples  provide
 conservative estimates of contaminant mobility.

 The sampling recommendations proposed by the RSKERL1988
 workshop participants were realistic and relatively easy to apply
 in the present study. Additional time was required for purging and
 sampling, but the additional care was warranted to obtain ground-
 water chemistry data which were as representative as possible.


 Disclaimer

 The information in this document has been funded wholly or in
 part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This
 document has been subject to the  Agency's peer and
 administrative review and has been approved for publication as
 an EPA document.


 Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Terry F. Rees,
 U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO, forthe SEM-EDX analyses;
 Donald Clark, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory,
Ada,  OK, for the  ICP and AAGF  analyses;  and Narong
Chamkasem, NSI Technology Services Corporation, Ada, OK,
for the 1C analyses.


References

Buddemeier, R. W. and J.H. Rego. 1986. Colloidal Radionuclides
in Groundwater. Annual Report. Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, Livermore, CA. UCAR 10062/85-1.

Claassen, H.C. 1982. Guidelines and techniques for obtaining
water samples that accurately represent the water chemistry of
an aquifer: U.S Geological Survey Open-file Report 82-1024,
49p.

Danielsson, L.G. 1982. On the Use of Filters for Distinguishing
Between  Dissolved and Particulate Fractions in Natural Waters.
Water Res. 16:179.
 Eichholz, G.G., B.G. Wahlig, G.F. Powell, and T.F. Craft. 1982.
 Subsurface  Migration of Radioactive Waste Materials  by
 Particulate Transport. Nuclear Technology 58:511.

 Enf ield, C.G. and G. Bengtsson. 1988. Macromolecular Transport
 of Hydrophobic  Contaminants  in Aqueous  Environments.
 Groundwater 26(1 ):64.

 Eychaner, J.H. 1989.  Movement of inorganic contaminants in
 acidic water near Globe, Arizona, in Mallard, G.E., and Ragone,
 S.E., eds., U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology
 Program—Proceedings of  the technical meeting,  Phoenix,
 Arizona, September 26-30,1988: U.S. Geological Survey Water-
 Resources Investigations Report 88-4220, p. 567-575.

 Eychaner, J.H., M.R. Rehmann, and J.G. Brown. 1989. Chemical,
 geologic, and hydrologic  data from the study of acidic
 contamination in the Miami Wash-Pinal Creek area, Arizona,
 water years 1984-87: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
 89-410,105 p.

 Gschwend, P.M. and M.D. Reynolds. 1987. Monodisperse Ferrous
 Phosphate Colloids in  an Anoxic Groundwater Plume. J. of
 Contaminant  Hydrol. 1:309.

 Holm, T.R., G.K. George, and M.J.  Barcelona. 1988. Oxygen
 Transfer Through Flexible Tubing and its Effects on Ground
 Water Sampling Results. Ground Water Monitoring Review. Vol.
 8(3):83.

 Lindberg, R.D., and D.D. Runnells. 1984. Ground Water Redox
 Reactions:  An  Analysis of  Equilibrium State Applied to  Eh
 Measurements  and Geochemical Modeling. Science, 225:925-
 927.

 Lohman, S.W. 1979. Ground-water hydraulics: U.S. Geological
 Survey Professional Paper 708, 70 p.

 Nordstrom, D.K., E.A. Jenne, and J.W. Ball. 1979. Redox Equilibria
 of Iron in Acid Mine Waters,  In Chemical Modeling in Aqueous
 Systems, American  Chemical  Society Symposium Series 93,
 E.A. Jenne (ed.) p. 51 -79.

 Peterson, N.P.  1962. Geology and ore deposits of the Globe-
 Miami district, Arizona: U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper
 342,151 p.

 Puls,  R.W. and M.J. Barcelona. 1989. Ground Water Sampling
for Metals Analyses. EPA/540/4-89/001.

 Puls,  R.W., L.L. Ames and J.E. McGarrah. 1989. The Use  of
 Batch Tests as a Screening Tool for  Radionuclide  Sorption
Characterization Studies, Hanford, Washington, U.S.A. Applied
Geochemistry. 4:63-77.

Robertson, W.D. 1984. Contamination of an Unconfined Sand
Aquifer by Waste  Pulp  Liquor: A  Case Study. Ground  Water
22(2):191.

 Sheppard, J.C., M.J. Campbell and J.A. Kittrick. 1979, Retention
of Neptunium,  Americium and Curium  by Diffusible Soil Particles.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 13(6),  680-684.
                                                       11

-------
  Sheppard, J.C., M.J. Campbell, T. Cheng and J.A. K'rttrick. 1980.
  Retention of Radionuclides by Mobile Humic Compounds.
  Environ. Sci. Technol. 14(11). 1349-1353.

  Stollenwerk, K.G. and J.H. Eychaner. 1989. Solubility of Aluminum
  and Iron in Ground Water NearGlobe, Arizona. In U.S. Geological
  Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program—Proceedings of
  the Technical  Meeting,  Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30,
  1988.

  Takayanagi, K. and G.T.F. Wong. 1984. Organic and Colloidal
  Selenium in South Chesapeake Bay  and Adjacent Waters.
  Marine Chem. 14:141-148.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA PERMIT NO. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

EPA/600/M-90/023

-------