<&ERfli         Ground  Water  Issue
      United States
      Environmental Protection
      Agency
                        Metal  Attenuation  Processes at Mining  Sites
                        Richard T.Wilkin
Background
The EPA Regional Ground Water Forum is a group of
EPA scientists representing Regional Superfund and
Resource Conservation  and Recovery Act Offices
(RCRA). The Forum is focused on exchanging informa-
tion related to ground-water characterization, monitor-
ing, and remediation. The application of monitored
natural attenuation (MNA) for inorganic contaminants
in ground water is a topic of concern to the Forum.
The purpose of this Issue Paper is to provide scientists
and engineers responsible for assessing remediation
technologies with  background  information on MNA
processes at mining-impacted sites. Some of the key
issues concerning the application of natural attenua-
tion for inorganic contaminants are discussed, such
as the geochemical mechanisms  responsible for at-
tenuation, attenuation capacity, monitoring parameters,
and evaluating whether attenuated metal and metalloid
contaminants will remain  immobile.

Introduction
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a major source of water con-
tamination in metal-mining and coal-mining districts world-
wide.  The causes of AMD are well known. They relate to
the natural weathering of mine wastes and rocks enriched
in metal sulfide minerals. Environmental impacts includethe
destruction of aquatic life and habitats and contamination
of drinking water resources. The most common reactions
that lead to the production of AMD involve the chemical
and biological oxidation of metal sulfides contained in mine
waste heaps, active or abandoned mine workings, or in tail-
ings piles left over from the processing of sulfide ores. The
iron sulfides: pyrite, marcasite and pyrrhotite, are perhaps
the most common sources of AMD production, because
they are ubiquitous in metal sulfide ores and because they
generally are not the target of ore beneficiation processes.
Numerous variables factor into the assessment of potential
For further information contact Richard T, Wilkin (580) 436-8874
[wilkin.rick@epa.gov] at the Ground Water and Ecosystems
Restoration Division of the National Risk Management Research
Laboratory,  Office of Research  and  Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 919 Kerr Research Drive, Ada,
Oklahoma 74820.
AMD releases, including the quantity of reactive sulfides,
grain size distribution and  grain morphology,  bacterial
activity, moisture content, and the availability of dissolved
oxygen or other oxidants (e.g., Jamboretal., 2000; Lowson,
1982; Nordstrom and Southam, 1997; Rigby et al., 2006;
Williamson and Rimstidt, 1994).
Acid mine drainage may form via the interaction of surface
water or ground water with materials  enriched  in metal
sulfides, such as tailings piles or the underground workings
of deep mines (Figure 1).  Production of AMD may occur
during mine operations and may continue for many years
after minesare closed and tailings dams aredecommissioned
from operation; consequently, evaluation of AMD is often a
long-term proposition which usually adds up to high costs
forsite characterization, monitoring and cleanup. Estimates
of the number of sites in the United States affected by AMD
vary widelyfrom200,000toover 550,000 (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 2004).  Estimated costs to cleanup
contamination at AMD sites are equally difficult to assess.
One hundred and fifty-six hardrock mining sites were on
or had the potential to be on the National Priorities List
(NPL) for cleanup underthe Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), with
potential cleanup costs of up to $24 billion dollars  (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 2004).  Mine sites are
frequently remotely located, which further adds to the costs
of site characterization, remediation, and monitoring.
In some cases, especially where ore host rock is capable
of reacting with acidic drainage, metal concentrations may
attenuate over time and space. A primary control on the
process of metal attenuation at mining-impacted sites is acid
neutralization (Al et al., 2000; Berger et al., 2000). Neutral-
izing capacity in sulfide ore tailings  is predominantly from
carbonate minerals (calciteand dolomite) because most non-
carbonate minerals associated with metalliferous deposits
are  extremely slow to react and affect pH (e.g., Jambor et
al.,  2000).  As pH increases, aqueous metal species tend
to precipitate as hydroxide, oxyhydroxide, or hydroxysulfate
minerals (Nordstrom, 1982). In addition, as pH increases
dissolved metals may adsorb onto surfaces of these newly
formed minerals and/orothersurfaces present in the environ-
ment, such as organic matter due to decreasing competition
with protons, decreased surface potential, and increased
hydrolysis of metal  ions at circum-neutral pH.

-------
Figure 1.  Impacts of mine workings and mine wastes on ground water and surface water. As oxygenated waters interact
          with sulfide minerals, pH decreases and metals are mobilized in the absence of acid-neutralizing rocks and
          overburden.
In the context of mining sites, natural attenuation refers
to the observed reduction of contaminant concentrations
and/or contaminant mass flow rates as contaminants are
transported  downgradient  from their source.  At many
mining sites that require cleanup of contaminated ground
water, monitored natural attenuation is not expected to be
relied upon as a sole remedy. The global magnitude of the
acid drainage problem is clear evidence that in most cases
natural processes are incapable of  ameliorating the acid-
ity and metal contamination produced by oxidizing sulfide
minerals. However, monitored natural attenuation may be
an effective strategy to augment more active approaches
of remediation (summarized below). In addition, natural at-
tenuation processes often tend to spread contaminants out
in space away from source zones via various mineral-water
reactions. Therefore,  it is important to recognize natural
attenuation processes from the perspective of tracking
contaminant transport and fate in the environment. This
Issue Paper provides remedial project managers and other
state or private remediation managers and their technical
support personnel with background information on the vari-
ous physical, chemical, and biological processes of natural
attenuation that may occur at mining sites. This background
information is necessary for preparing sampling plans to
support site characterization, remedy selection, and post-
remedial  monitoring efforts.

Treatment Strategies for AMD
Strategies for dealing with  AMD include source control
and  chemical or biological treatment  of contaminated
ground water. Preventing the formation or the migration
of AMD from source zones is generally a favorable option,
but is often  difficult to accomplish  effectively due  to the
large aerial extent of tailings areas and the large volumes
of materials involved.  Consequently,  cleanup efforts are
usually focused on directly treating impacted ground water
and surface water (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
2006). Remediation methods at mining sites can be gener-
ally divided into "active" and "passive" approaches (Johnson
and Hallberg, 2005). Perhaps the most straightforward and
common active approach to treat acidic effluents is through
addition of alkaline materials to raise pH, increase the rate
of ferrous iron oxidation, and  cause the removal of metals
and metalloids present in solution via mineral precipitation
or surface adsorption processes. A number of alkaline ma-
terials have been used for active treatment, including lime,
calcium carbonate, sodium carbonate, sodium hydroxide,
and magnesium oxide.  Use of these materials can lead
to effective controls on the release of acidic drainage and
dissolved metals.  The cost of maintaining direct treatment
facilities is  often high.  Large volumes of a  low-density
sludge result from the reaction between alkaline compounds
and acidic effluents. Moreover, the sludge itself becomes
an environmental  concern, both in terms of disposal and
the potential release of contaminants through subsequent
leaching (Jambor et al., 2000).
Figure 2 presents a general classification of passive AMD
treatment  systems,  which can be broadly grouped into
chemical and biological systems (Neculita et  al., 2007).
Treatment systems that rely largely on abiotic chemical pro-
cesses include open limestone channels, anoxic limestone
drains, and successive alkalinity-producing systems.  In
open  limestone channels, acidic water flows over crushed
limestone or some other alkaline agent. The goals of such
applications are to generate alkalinity, neutralize pH, and
remove soluble aluminum, iron, and manganese via mineral
precipitation (Mukhopadhyay et al., 2007; Ziemkiewicz et
al., 1997).  The treatment strategy with anoxic limestone
drains is to neutralize acid-mine drainage using limestone
while  maintaining  iron in a reduced state (as ferrous iron)

-------
           AMD Passive Treatment
                     Systems
    Chemical
Biological
             Successive
             Alkalinity
             Producing
             Systems
Figure 2.  Treatment systems for acid mine drainage.
to avoid iron oxidation and the consequent precipitation of
hydrous ferric oxides on the limestone surfaces. Such surface
precipitation or armoring by iron and aluminum precipitates
greatly reduces the effectiveness of the neutralizing material.
In its simplest form, an anoxic limestone drain (ALD) is a
buried, limestone-filled trench that intercepts AMD before it
is exposed to atmospheric O2 (Cravotta and Trahan, 1999;
Hedinetal.,  1994). ALD designs are enclosed to minimize
gas flux in contrast to systems such as limestone channels
that are open to the atmosphere.  In this  way CO2 gas is
retained in the subsurface channel which leads to enhanced
calcium carbonate dissolution and alkalinity production. After
acidic waters pass through the ALD, effluents are exposed
to the atmosphere and hydrous ferric oxides are produced
by the oxidation of ferrous iron to ferric iron. In successive
alkalinity-producing systems, both  limestone and organic
matter are used  in vertical flow systems to provide alkalinity
production, sulfate reduction, and  metal removal (Keplar
and McCleary, 1994).
Biological passive  treatment systems for AMD include
bioreactors and constructed wetlands  (Figure 2). Sulfate-
reducing passive bioreactors have received recent attention
as promising technologies for AMD treatment (e.g., Alvarez
et al., 2007; Annachatre and Suktrakoolvait, 2001; Costa
and Duarte,  2005; Drury, 1999; Dvorak et  al., 1992; John-
son and Hallberg, 2005; Neculita et al., 2007; Steed et al.,
2000). The advantages of this technology are high metal
removal capacity, stable sludge,  and low operation costs.
The chemical basis for treatment of AMD by sulfate reduc-
ing bacteria involves microbially-mediated sulfate reduction
coupled to organic matter oxidation.  Sulfide precipitation
is the desired mechanism of contaminant removal,  but
other mechanisms including adsorption and precipitation of
metal hydroxides occur in passive bioreactors (Neculita et
al., 2007). The efficiency of sulfate-reducing bioreactors is
primarily controlled by the organic carbon source (Coester
et al., 2006; Gibert et al., 2004; Prasad et al., 1999; Zamzow
et al., 2006).  Solid-phase testing suggests that organic
substrates with high protein contents or low lignin contents
(e.g., manure) are better capable of supporting bacterial
activity and sustaining  contaminant  removal (Coester et
al.,2006; Gibert etal., 2004).
Artificial wetlands and biological treatment systems have
been used  since the mid-1980s for the treatment of AMD.
The effectiveness of these applications has been variable
and generally difficult  to predict (Barton and Karathanasis,
1999; Wieder,  1989; Wildeman and Updegraff, 1997),  al-
though recent process-based modeling efforts are beginning
to provide insight into  the functioning of these systems that
feedback into system design refinements and operational
improvements (Whitehead et al., 2005).  Both aerobic and
anaerobic processes  contribute to contaminant  removal in
constructed wetland systems. The oxidation of ferrous iron
to ferric iron and the  subsequent precipitation of  hydrous
ferric oxides is a dominant process that is effective in  re-
moving iron and other metals from AMD (Brenner, 2001).
Metal accumulation in these systems also occurs through
precipitation of metal sulfides via the activity of sulfate
reducing bacteria that  consume natural organic matter
and sulfate and produce reactive sulfide for metal removal
(Webb etal., 1998).
Permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) and monitored natural
attenuation (MNA) fortreatment of ground water impacted by
AMD can be classified either as chemical or biological pas-
sive treatment systems based on processfunction (Figure 2).
The application of PRBs involves the excavation  of a trench
or pit in the flow path of contaminated ground water. The
excavated volume is then filled with reactive materials that
are permeable to allow flow of contaminated ground water
and reaction to remove dissolved contaminants  via chemi-
cal or biological processes.  Reactive materials that have
been shown to be effective in increasing  pH and removing
metals include mixtures of organic carbon,  limestone, and
zero-valent iron (Benner et al., 1999; Gibert et al., 2003;
Ludwig et al., 2002; Shokes and Moller, 1999; Waybrant et
al., 1998;Wilkinand McNeil, 2003). Organic carbon-based
PRB systems take advantage of anaerobic microbiological
processes within the PRB to generate alkalinity and remove
metals  as sulfides.  In  zero-valent iron  PRB systems, a
variety  of abiotic and biotic metal uptake  processes are
important in neutralizing acidity and removing metals from
solution.  Similarly, MNA involves both biologically medi-
ated processes and  abiotic geochemical processes that
are presented in the following sections. Note that many of
the documented natural attenuation processes are actually
strategically enhanced in designed remediation systems,
such as bioreactors.
Background on MNA for Inorganic Contaminants
The term "monitored natural attenuation" refers to the long-
term examination of natural processes with the objective
that such processes will reach site-specific remedial objec-
tives. MNA can be applied in conjunction with other cleanup

-------
approaches, such as source removal, source control,  or
plume control (Rugner et al., 2006).  To be considered as
an acceptable option, MNA would be expected to achieve
site remedial objectives within a time frame that is reason-
able compared to that possible  by using other more active
remediation technologies as described above.  Natural at-
tenuation processes include a variety of physical, chemical,
and biological processes that can act to reduce the mass,
mobility, volume, or concentration of contaminants in ground
water. Attenuation  processes  important  at mining sites
include pH  buffering and acid neutralization, adsorption at
the mineral-water interface, mineral precipitation,  and dilu-
tion/dispersion (Figure 3).
   pH buffering/
 acid neutralization
   Adsorption
at the mineral-water
    interface
Dilution/dispersion
                                     Mineral Precipitation
Figure 3.  Processes of natural attenuation at mine-impacted
          sites.
EPA's Office of Research and Development is preparing
a technical resource document for the application of MNA
to inorganic contaminants in ground water (see Reisinger
et al., 2005; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007).
The  technical  resource document presents a four-tiered
assessment of MNA as a  viable remediation  option for
selected metal, metalloid, and radionuclide contaminants
encountered in ground water.  Components of the tiered
approach include 1) demonstrating contaminant sequestra-
tion mechanisms, 2) estimating attenuation rates and the 3)
attenuation capacity of aquifer solids, and 4) evaluating po-
tential reversibility issues. The technical resource document
is intended to provide a tiered decision-making approach
for determining whether MNA is likely to  be an effective
remedial approach for inorganic contaminants in ground
water at a particular location. EPA expects that users of this
document will include EPA and State cleanup programs and
theircontractors, especially those individuals responsible for
evaluating alternative cleanup methods for a given site  or
facility. A decision-making approach is provided for evaluat-
ing MNA as a  possible cleanup method for contaminated
ground water.  Emphasis is placed on developing a more
complete understanding of the site through development of
a conceptual site model that includes an understanding of
the attenuation mechanisms, the geochemical conditions
governing these mechanisms,  and indicators that can be
used to monitor attenuation progress (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 2007).
A tiered decision-making approach is an appropriate and
cost-effective way to  screen out sites  unsuitable for MNA
while collecting the most relevant data at sites that might be
amenable to this technology. Conceptually a tiered assess-
ment of MNA seeks to progressively reduce site uncertainty
as MNA-specific data is collected.  MNA for inorganics and
radionuclides is most effectively implemented through four
tiers that require progressively greater information on which
to assess the reasonableness of MNA:

Tier I.  Theplumeisnotthreateningpublichealth.isstable,
       and some direct evidence of contaminant attenua-
       tion exists.
Tier II. The attenuation capacity of  the site exceeds  the
       estimated mass of contaminant at the site.
Tier III. There  is  strong evidence  that  attenuation
       mechanism(s)  will prevail over  long  periods of
       time.
Tier IV. A record of decision including a long-term monitor-
       ing plan and other site closure considerations is
       developed.

MNA Processes at Mining  Sites
Based upon the tiered approach presented above, assess-
ments of MNA at mining sites must demonstrate that chemi-
cal, physical, orbiological processes areoccurringto mitigate
migration of contaminants, that the  capacity of the MNA
process exceeds the mass of contaminants in the source,
and that the attenuation processes are sustainable over long
periods of time. As noted previously, these conditions  are
frequently not met at mining sites. Although research findings
clearly show that attenuation  of contaminants does indeed
occurat mining sites (Table 1), the documented mechanisms
of attenuation are either rate-  or capacity-limited so that
contaminants are only  partially attenuated or attenuation
occurs over longer flow paths than are acceptable from a
site cleanup perspective.  It is equally clear,  however, that
many of the  attenuation  processes important  at mining
sites are long-lived, so  that a sound  understanding of  the
factors that control transport  and fate of metals in ground
water and across the ground  water/surface water interface
can benefit site cleanup efforts.
Acid Neutralization
A primary control on the  process of metal attenuation at
mining sites  is acid neutralization.  Many factors affect
the acid neutralization capacity of a system, including  the
type, abundance and reactivity of metal-bearing sulfides in
the ore and waste rock, permeability of the mine workings
or mine tailings, and the ability of the host or surrounding
rocks to consume acidity.  Methods are available to predict
whether or not materials will be acid-generating (e.g., U.S.
Environmental Protection  Agency, 1994). These methods
provide a numerical accounting with respect to prediction
of acid production and neutralization  potential.  In general,
materials containing elevated concentrations of carbonate
minerals orthat have elevated  inorganic carbon to total sulfur
ratios are the most effective in neutralizing acidity.
Mixing of  mine effluents with ambient ground water and
surface water dilutes the dissolved contaminants and can
result in pH increases. In surface waters, dilution and neu-
tralization can occur over spans of meters to  many kilome-
ters. Dilution and  neutralization are often tied to seasonal

-------
variations in flow patterns and volumes. Field studies have
documented more effective attenuation of mine effluents
in dry seasons compared to wet seasons (Webster et al.,
1994). Inaddition,field studies and laboratory columntesting
resu Its indicate that mineral assemblages present in tailings
piles, underlying aquifers, and receiving surface waters play
a pivotal role in controlling pH (Blowes and Ptacek, 1994;
Jurjovec et  al., 2002; Morin et  al., 1988; Sanchez-Espana
et al.,  2005). Mineral phases important in buffering pH are
calcite/siderite, aluminum hydroxides, iron hydroxides, and
aluminosilicates.

Role  of
The oxidation of iron sulfides in mine wastes  results in the
release of iron, sulfate, acidity, and metals to solution. High
aluminum and silica concentrations are also commonly en-
countered in mine effluents and are the result of weathering
of aluminosilicate minerals at low pH. Oxidation and hydro-
lysis reactions can subsequently lead to the precipitation
of a wide array of hydroxide, sulfate, and/or hydroxysulfate
minerals depending on geochemical and biogeochemical
conditions (Nordstrom and Alpers, 1999). These secondary
minerals play important roles in attenuating contaminants
from mine effluents (e.g., Accornero et al., 2005; Casiot et
al., 2005; Fukushi et al., 2003; Gault et al., 2005; Jamieson
et al., 1999; Lee et al., 2002; Lee et al., 2005; Levy et al.,
1997;McCartyetal., 1998; McGregor et al., 1998; Moncur
et al., 2005; Munketal., 2002; Sanchez-Espana etal., 2005;
Sidenko and Sherriff, 2005; Webster et al., 1998; Zanker et
al., 2002). Some of the common secondary minerals found
in association with the weathering of mine wastes, their typi-
cal pH range of formation, and documented contaminant
associations are listed in Table 1.
Table 1.  Secondary Minerals Formed from Acid Mine Waters and Contaminant Associations
Mineral
Hydroxides
Goethite
HFO, hydrous ferric
oxide
Gibbsite
Formula

FeOOH
~Fe5HO8-4H2O
AI(OH)3
Typical pH
of
formation

2-4
>5
>5-6
Examples of contaminant
at mine-impacted
settings

Sorption/coprecipitation of Pb (up
to 21 wt%), As (up to 7.7 wt%), Zn
(up to 4.6 wt%), and Cu (up to 2.5
wt%)
Sorption/coprecipitation of As-rich
ferrihydrite; As/Fe=0.02-0.1 , with
10-30% As(lll)
Sorption in the general order of
Pb>Cu>Zn>Ni with increasing pH
Reference

Lee et al. (2005)
Casiot et al.
(2005)
Munk et al.
(2002)

Hydroxysulfates
Alunite
Jarosite
Schwertmannite

KAI3(OH)6(S04)2
KFe3(OH)6(S04)2
Fe808(OH)6(S04)

4-6
2-5
2-4

Precipitation of Al
Coprecipitation with As(V) replac-
ing sulfate in the Jarosite structure
Coprecipitation of Cu, Ni and Zn

Accornero et al.
(2005)
Gault et al.
(2005)
Sidenko and
Sherriff (2005)

Sulfates
Gypsum
Anglesite
Melanterite

CaSO4«2H2O
PbS04
FeSO4«7H2O

>3
>3-4
<2

"Hardpan" precipitate
Precipitation at pH ~3; nanopar-
ticles
Coprecipitation with Zn and Cu;
temporary metal removal in a
highly soluble phase

Moncur et al.
(2005)
Zanker et al.
(2002)
Jamieson et al.
(1999)

-------
Secondary precipitates  can remove contaminants from
impacted waters through adsorption and/or coprecipitation
reactions. Adsorption processes are typically categorized
by the relative "strength" of interaction between the adsor-
bate (species in solution) and the surface or adsorbent.
If solvating water molecules are positioned between  the
cation or anion and the surface, the adsorption complex is
referred to as outer sphere and is considered to be weak.
Conversely, if upon adsorption the adsorbate loses waters of
hydration such that there are no water molecules positioned
between the cation or anion and the surface, the adsorption
complex is referred to as inner sphere and is considered
to be strong.  The extent to which dissolved contaminants
will sorb to secondary precipitates as outer sphere or inner
sphere complexes will vary as a function of the contaminant
species, the secondary precipitate, pH, particle size and
surface area, and presence of other sorbing species that
may compete for adsorption sites.
Inorganic  contaminants may  be removed from  solution
due  to precipitation of an insoluble phase  in  which  the
contaminant represents a major or minor component within
the solid. Examples of secondary precipitates that form in
mine-impacted sites include oxyhydroxides [e.g. ,FeOOH(s)],
hydroxysulfates [e.g., FeeO8(OH)6(SO4)(s)], sulfates [e.g.,
PbSO4(s)], and  sulfides [e.g.,  ZnS(s)].  For each of these
minerals there  will be  a limited compositional range of
ground-waterchemistry over which precipitation could occur
and formation of these precipitates may compete with other
removal processes such as adsorption (Table 1).
Characterization of secondary precipitates is carried  out
by using a variety of tools. Mineralogical identification is
typically made by using powder x-ray diffraction techniques
(XRD).  The characterization  of particle morphology and
semi-quantitative composition are accomplished using scan-
ning electron microscopy (SEM) and x-ray energy-dispersive
spectrometry (EDX). Analysis of element partitioning to well-
crystalline and poorly-crystalline components of the solid
phase  is typically accomplished using selective chemical
extraction procedures.  Used in combination, these meth-
ods allow for the identification of attenuation mechanisms
involving secondary minerals (see U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 2007). Knowledge about the types of
mineral phases  helps to understand the  long-term stability
of attenuated metals.
One can also evaluate whether there is a potential for con-
taminant precipitation by evaluating the saturation state
of the  ground water with  respect to possible precipitate
phases using a saturation state modeling approach.  In
order to evaluate whether a ground water is oversaturated,
undersaturated, or at equilibrium with a particular phase,
computer geochemical speciation models are of practical
use. As an example, consider the solubility expression for
lead sulfate (anglesite):
               PbSO4(s) =  Pb2+ + SO42-
The mass-action expression that applies to the equilibrium
is:
A natural water may or may not be at saturation with respect
to anglesite, depending on whether the phase is indeed
present, available surface area, residence time of water, and
kinetic factors that may impede dissolution and/or precipita-
tion. If we assume equilibrium between water and anglesite,
then the ion activity product, Q, should be the same as the
equilibrium constant, Kf, i.e.,
               Q = a
                        soj-
= K = 10-
where the activity (a) of PbSO4(s) is taken to be 1.  Because
ion activity products may vary by orders of magnitude, it is
often more convenient to take the logarithm of the  ratio, that
is, to compute the saturation index,  SI:
              S/= log_ri = 0    at equilibrium

If a water is oversaturated in a particular phase, then the SI
is positive, and there is a thermodynamic driving force for
precipitation to occur.  If the water is undersaturated, then
the SI is negative, and the mineral, if present, will tend to
dissolve:
and
                 S/>0  if oversaturated
                SI< 0  if undersaturated.
                K=
As previously indicated the stability of a precipitate will
be dictated by the ground-water chemistry.  Contaminant
remobilization will occur as a result of dissolution of the pre-
cipitate phase, for example, when log Q/Kt< 0. Precipitate
dissolution may occur  due to ground water acidification,
oxidation/reduction of  precipitate components,  dilution,
or complexation of the  precipitate component(s) with dis-
solved species that form more stable compounds. Thus,
it must be recognized that attenuation processes involving
inorganic contaminants are reversible (e.g.,  Casiot et al.,
2005; Gault et al., 2005; Moncur et al., 2005). Metals taken
up at the mineral-water  interface can be released back into
solution. Geochemical modeling of mineral stability and
contaminant adsorption/desorption behavior can provide
insight into contaminant remobilization potential due tofuture
changes in geochemical conditions. However,  it must be
noted that thermodynamic databases are often incomplete
and thermodynamic constants for specific  compounds
may vary from database to database.  Thus, results  from
geochemical  models must be carefully reviewed. In addi-
tion, the method outlined above ignores rates  of mineral
dissolution and precipitation. Again data are often lacking
on the kinetics of biogeochemical processes responsible
for contaminant uptake  and remobilization, especially data
that can be applied in field systems to predict the long-term
behavior of contaminants.

      of
Microbial processes can play a role in both mobilizing and
attenuating inorganic contaminants at mining sites.   For
example, Macur et al. (2001) showed that microbial reduc-
tion of arsenate [As(V)] to arsenite  [As(lll)] occurred  over
relativelyshorttime scales and result edinenhanced arsenic
mobilization in mine tailings pore water. In addition,  iron-

-------
reducing bacteria may cause contaminant dissociation from
aquifer solids as a consequence of iron oxide dissolution.
Metals and metalloid species associated with secondary
iron-bearing precipitates may be released via the activity
of bacteria under  certain conditions (Herbel and Fendorf,
2006; Langer and Inskeep, 2000).
Sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), however, have the ability
to reverse the reactions causing acid mine drainage, by at-
tenuating the movement of metals through the precipitation
of sulfide  minerals (e.g., Gammons et al., 2005), and by
raising the pH of the water (Tuttleetal., 1969). This process
is recognized in ex situ treatment of  acid mine drainage
as previously noted and also in the natural environment
(Church et al., 2007; Kimura et al., 2006; Koschorreck et
al., 2003; Labrenz et al., 2000; Paktunc and Dave, 2002).
The overall sulfate-reduction process can be described by
the reaction:
2CH2O
                 SO2- + 2H+
H2S
CO
H2O
where CH2O represents organic matter, either in the solid or
aqueous phase.  The resulting dissolved hydrogen sulfide
can precipitate with divalent metals in AMD, for example
(M = Cd, Cu, Fe, Ni, Pb, orZn):
             H2S + M2+(aq) = MS(s) + 2.W
The  mass concentration of  reactants involved in sulfate
reduction is usually much larger than the mass concentra-
tion of metals involved in secondary precipitation reactions,
hence these combined reactions can  lead to an increase
in alkalinity and the pH of the water, while simultaneously
attenuating divalent metals.  Alkalinity produced during the
sulfate reduction process can also drive the precipitation of
carbonate minerals, such as calcite and siderite (Paktunc
and  Dave,  2002), and can  help neutralize acidity in the
receiving water body.
Most sulfate-reducing bacteria have been considered to
be inactive at low pH (Johnson, 2003). More recent stud-
ies of acid mine drainage systems (both engineered and
natural)  have noted that there is some potential for low-pH
sulfidogenesis.  For example, in laboratory studies, sulfate
reduction has been shown to occur in solutions as low as
pH 3 in bioreactors using ethanol,  methanol,  or glycerol
(alone or in various combinations) as an organic substrate
(Kolmert and Johnson, 2001). In addition, in-situ remedia-
tion by sulfate reduction has been shown to occur in acidic
pit lakes and sediments after the pH was raised to 5-6 by
amendment with organic carbon plus lime (Wendt-Potthoff et
al., 2002). In natural AMD systems the reduction of sulfate
to sulfide has been  reported at pH values as low as 2-3
(Koschorreck et al., 2003), but there are few reports of the
isolation and/or characterization of acidophillic SRB from
these environments. In a recent study, sediments recovered
from the flooded mine workings of the  Penn Mine, a Cu-Zn
mine abandoned since the early  1960s, were cultured for
anaerobic bacteria overarangeofpHfrom4.0to 7.5 (Church
et al., 2007). Phospholipid  fatty acid  (PLFA) analyses of
Penn Mine sediment showed a high biomass level with a
moderately diverse microbial community structure composed
primarily of iron-  and sulfate-reducing bacteria.  Cultures of
sediment from the mine produced dissolved sulfide at pH
values near 7 and near 4, forming precipitates of either
iron sulfide or elemental sulfur. Phylogenetic sequences of
Penn Mine sediment and laboratory cultures were closely
aligned to the sulfate-reducing organisms Desu/fosporos/m/s
and Desulfitobacterium (Church et al., 2007). At this site,
sulfate-reducing bacteria play a role in attenuating metals at
moderately low pH. Precipitates of zinc sulfide were identi-
fied in the reducing mine sediments. In the absence of the
bacterial activity, zinc and other metals could be transported
into nearby surface waters.
Characterization of microbiological impacts on natural at-
tenuation  processes involves additional tools that can be
used during site characterization efforts.  Largely within the
last decade, genetic analyses have been used to identify
microbial communities in environmental samples.  Many
of these molecular biological methods rely on 16S rDNA
sequences, such as denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis
(DGGE).  DGGE can be used  for simultaneous analysis
of multiple samples obtained at various time intervals  to
detect microbial community changes, which is an advanta-
geous feature in studying microbial ecology and MNA (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 2007). Examples of the
use of molecular techniques in  relation to examinations of
microbiological influences of contaminant behavioral mine
sites are presented in Macur et al. (2001),  Druschel et al.
(2004), and Church et al. (2007).

Monitoring
In order to evaluate whether or not natural attenuation pro-
cesses can play a role in achieving site remediation goals,
detailed site investigations are required.   Generally, the
necessary investment in site characterization for evaluat-
ing the applicability of natural attenuation is at least or is
more expensive  and time consuming than for  other site
remediation technologies. On the other hand, where MNA
is applicable, long-term monitoring costs may be less than
for other more active remedial technologies.
The evaluation of natural attenuation in a ground watersystem
involves studies todetermine the location, concentration, and
movement of contaminants in the subsurface. Thus natural
attenuation assessments typically focus on developing site
hydrologic and conceptual models that  can be  simulated
with a computer geochemical model (see U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 2007). Evaluation of natural attenuation
usually involves not only the determination of processes of
attenuation that are currently occurring, but also projects
the sustainability of these processes into the future. Table 2
lists  attenuation  reactions of selected contaminants and
appropriate parameters  that could be  examined  during
site investigations. Table 3 lists examples  of solid-phase
analyses that would likely support MNA assessments. The
use of MNA as part of a site remedial plan will necessarily
require that a  long-term monitoring plan be established.
Such plans will be developed to enable decisions regarding
whether or not site remedial objectives are being met, and
to verify that site conditions are not changing in such a way
as to impact the major natural attenuation processes for
contaminants of concern. Long-term monitoring plans should
be developed with well defined triggers  that would  initiate

-------
      2,   Attenuation Reactions and Capacity Parameters for Selected Contaminants
 Contaminant
 Possible Attenuation Reactions
                                                                      Relevant parameters
      As
Sorption in aerobic environments
Sorption/Precipitation in anaerobic
 environments
« Abundance/stability of hosts; typically Fe and Al
 (hydr)oxides
• Solid-phase sulfide accumulation; redox buffer capacity,
 sulfate reducing activity
      Cd
Sorption in aerobic environments
Sorption/Coprecipitation carbonates
Sorption/Precipitation in anaerobic
 environments
  Abundance/stability of hosts; typically Fe and Al
 (hydr)oxides
« Abundance/stability of hosts; may require consideration
 of pH buffer capacity
« Solid-phase sulfide accumulation; redox buffer capacity,
 sulfate reducing activity
      Cu
Sorption in aerobic environments
Sorption/Coprecipitation  carbonates
Sorption/Precipitation in anaerobic
 environments
• Abundance/stability of hosts; typically Fe and Al
 (hydr)oxides
• Abundance/stability of hosts; may require consideration
 of pH buffer capacity
« Solid-phase sulfide accumulation; redox buffer capacity,
 sulfate reducing activity
      Pb
Sorption/Coprecipitation in aerobic
 environments
Precipitation as hydroxycarbonate or
 sulfate
Sorption/Precipitation in anaerobic
 environments
« Abundance/stability of hosts; typically Fe and Al
 (hydr)oxides
• Aquifer pH buffer capacity
• Solid-phase sulfide accumulation; redox buffer capacity,
 sulfate reducing activity
       U
Reductive Precipitation
Sorption
  Abundance/reactivity of electron donors
  Abundance of hosts; typically metal (hydr)oxides
       HI
Sorption in aerobic environments
Sorption
Sorption/Precipitation in anaerobic
 environments
• Abundance/stability of hosts; typically Fe and Al
 (hydr)oxides
• Abundance of hosts (clays)
« Solid-phase sulfide accumulation; redox buffer capacity,
 sulfate reducing activity
Note: Measurement objectives and methodologies to support MNA investigations are documented in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    (2007). MNA assessments focus on both the aqueous phase and the solid phase in order to identify attenuation pathways.
the implementation of contingency remedial technologies if
natural attenuation processes fail to fulfill expectations.
Conclusions
At most mining sites that require cleanup of contaminated
ground water,  MNA is not expected to be a sole remedy.
The magnitude of the acid drainage problem is clear evi-
dence that in most cases natural processes are incapable of
ameliorating the acidity and metal contamination produced
by oxidizing sulfide minerals. Nevertheless, at nearly all
mining sites, natural processes are contributing to varying
degrees and in some cases may contribute significantly
to site remedial goals. Biogeochemical processes can be
particularly important for natural attenuation of some metal
and metalloid contaminants,  under specific environmental
conditions.
                                       Cleanup of mining sites, in particular Megasites, is currently
                                       being viewed as a long-term process. This is partly due
                                       to the enormous size, the complexity of contaminants and
                                       sources, and the large volumes of materials encountered at
                                       many mining sites. It is also recognized that the long-term
                                       outcomes of site cleanup programs are extremely difficult
                                       to predict (Gustavson et al., 2007). Effective management
                                       of these sites over long periods of time requires complex
                                       organization of  site  characterization, technology selec-
                                       tion and utilization, and long-term monitoring. Given that
                                       cleanup expectations at many mining sites are long-term,
                                       it may be appropriate to include an examination of natural
                                       attenuation processes  and the  role that such processes
                                       play in removing, repartitioning, or otherwise affecting the
                                       fate of contaminants  in  the environment.

-------
     3.  Examples of Solid-phase Analyses to Support MNA Assessments
Method
Powder x-ray diffraction

Microbeam analysis

Wet chemical extractions

Bulk elemental analysis

Batch sorption/column testing

Oxidation/reduction capacity

Biological assays of 16S rDNA
sequences

Most Probable Number (MPN) counts
Objectives
Identification of mineral forms

Analysis of micro-scale distribution and association of contaminants

Evaluation of contaminant associations in the solid-phase

Evaluation of total concentrations of contaminants and other
minor elements
major and

Evaluation of contaminant uptake capacity

Evaluation of redox conditions/buffering capacity

Molecular characterization of microbial populations

Bacterial enumeration
Notice
The  U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency through  its
Office of Research and Development funded and managed
the research described here. It has been subjected to the
Agency's peer and administrative review  and  has been
approved for publication as an EPA document.

Quality
All research projects making conclusions or recommenda-
tions  based on  environmentally-related measurements
and funded by the Environmental Protection Agency are
required to participate in  the Agency Quality Assurance
(QA) program. This project did not involve the collection or
use of environmental data and, as such, did not require a
Quality Assurance Project Plan.

References
Accornero, M., Marini, L, Ottonello, G., and Zuccolini, M.V.
  (2005) The fate of major constituents and chromium and
  other trace elements when acid waters from the derelict
  Libiola Mine (Italy) are mixed with stream waters. Applied
  Geochemistry, 20, 1368-1390.
Al, T.A., Martin, C.J., and Blowes, D.W. (2000) Carbonate-
  mineral/water interactions in sulfidic-rich mine tailings.
  Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 64, 3933-3948.
Alvarez, M.T., Crespo, C., and Mattiasson, B. (2007) Pre-
  cipitation of Zn(ll), Cu(ll) and Pb(ll) at bench-scale using
  biogenic hydrogen sulfide from the utilization of volatile
  fatty acids. Chemosphere, 66, 1677-1683.
Annachatre,  A.P., and Suktrakoolvait, S.  (2001) Biological
  sulfate reduction using molasses as a carbon source.
  Water Environment Research, 73, 118-126.
Barton, C.D., and Karathanasis, A.D. (1999) Renovation of
  a failed constructed wetland treating acid mine drainage.
  Environmental Geology, 39, 39-50.
Benner, S.G., Blowes, D.W., Gould, W.D., Herbert, R.B., and
  Ptacek, C.J. (1999) Geochemistry of a permeable reactive
  barrier for metals and acid mine drainage. Environmental
  Science and Technology, 33, 2793-2799.
Berger, A.C., Bethke, C.M., and Krumhansl, J.L. (2000) A
  process model of natural attenuation in drainage from a
  historic mining district. Applied  Geochemistry, 15, 655-
  666.
Blowes, D.W., and Ptacek, C.J.  (1994) Acid-neutralization
  mechanisms  in inactive mine tailings. In  D.W.  Blowes,
  and J.L. Jambor, Eds. The environmental geochemistry
  of sulfide mine-wastes, p. 271-292. Mineralogical Asso-
  ciation of Canada, Waterloo.
Brenner, F.J. (2001) Use of constructed wetlands for acid
  mine drainage abatement and stream restoration. Water
  Science and Technology, 44, 449-454.
Casiot, C., Lebrun, S., Morin, G., Bruneel, O.,  Personne,
  J.C., and Elbaz-Poulichet, F. (2005) Sorption and redox
  processes controlling arsenic fate and transport in a
  stream impacted by acid mine drainage. Science of the
  Total Environment, 347, 122-130.
Church, C.D., Wilkin, R.T., Alpers, C.N., Rye,  R.O., and
  McClesky, R.B. (2007) Microbial sulfate reduction and
  metal attenuation in pH 4 acid mine water. Geochemical
  Transactions, in review.
Coester, S.E., Pulles, W., Heath, R.G.M., and Cloete, T.E.
  (2006) Chemical characterisation of  organic electron
  donors for sulfate reduction for potential use in acid mine
  drainage treatment. Biodegradation, 17, 67-77.

-------
Costa, M.C., and Duarte, J.C. (2005) Bioremediation of acid
  mine drainage using acidic soil and organic wastes for
  promoting sulphate-reducing bacteria on acolumn reactor,
  Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 165, 325-345.
Cravotta, C.A., and Trahan, M.K. (1999) Limestone drains
  to increase pH and remove dissolved metals from acidic
  mine drainage. Applied Geochemistry, 14, 581-606.
Drury, W.J. (1999) Treatment of acid mine drainage with
  anaerobic solid-substrate reactors. Water Environment
  Research, 71, 1244-1250.
Druschel, G.K., Baker, B.J., Gihring, T.M., and Banfield, J.F.
  (2004) Acid minedrainagebiogeochemiastryat Iron Moun-
  tain, California. Geochemical Transactions, 5, 13-32.
Dvorak,  D.H., Hedin, R.S., Edenborn,  H.M., and Mclntire,
  RE. (1992) Treatment of metal-contaminated water using
  bacterial sulfate reduction: results from pilot-scale reactors.
  Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 40, 609-616.
Fukushi,  K., Sasaki, M., Sato, T., Yanase,  N.,  Amano, H.,
  and Ikeda,  H. (2003) A natural attenuation of arsenic in
  drainagefrom an abandoned arsenic mine dump. Applied
  Geochemistry, 18, 1267-1278.
Gammons, C.G., Metesh, J.J., and Snyder, D.M. (2005) A
  survey of the geochemistry of flooded mine shaft water
  in Butte, Montana. Mine Water and the Environment, 25,
  100-107.
Gault, A.G., Cooke, D.R., Townsend, AT., Charnock,  J.M.,
  and Polya, D. A. (2005) Mechanisms of arsenic attenuation
  in acid mine drainage from Mount Bischoff, western Tas-
  mania. Science of the Total Environment, 345, 219-228.
Gibert, O., Pablo, J., Cortina, J.L., and  Ayora, C. (2003)
  Evaluation of municipal compost/limestone/iron mixtures
  as filling material for permeable  reactive barriers for in-
  situ acid mine drainage treatment. Journal of Chemical
  Technology and Biotechnology, 78, 489-496.
-. (2004) Chemical characterisation of natural organic sub-
  strates for  biological mitigation of acid  mine drainage.
  Water Research, 38, 4186-4196.
Gustavson, K.E., Barnthouse, L.W., Brierley,  C.L., Clark,
  E.H.,  and  Ward,  C.H. (2007)  Superfund and Mining
  Megasites. Environmental Science and Technology, 41,
  2667-2672.
Hedin, R.S., Watzlaf, G.R., and Nairn, R.W. (1994) Passive
  treatment of acid mine drainage  with limestone. Journal
  of Environmental Quality, 23, 1338-1345.
Herbel, M., and Fendorf, S. (2006) Biogeochemical processes
  controlling the speciation and transport of arsenic within
  iron coated sands. Chemical Geology, 228, 16-32.
Jambor, J.L.,  Blowes, D.W., and Ptacek, C.J. (2000) Min-
  eralogy of mine wastes and strategies for remediation.
  In D.J.Vaughan, and R.A. Wogelius,  Eds. Environmental
  Mineralogy. Eotvos University Press, Budapest.
Jamieson, H.E., Alpers, C.N., Nordstrom, O.K., and Peter-
  son, R.C. (1999) Substiturion of zinc and other metals
  in iron-sulfate minerals at  Iron Mountain, California. In
  G. Goldsack,  N. Belzile, P. Yearwood, and G. Hall, Eds.
  Sudbury '99: Mining and the Environment II, Conference
  Proceedings, Sudbury, Ontario.
Johnson, D.B. (2003) Chemical and microbiological char-
  acteristics of mineral spoils and drainage waters at
  abandoned coal and metal sites. Water, Air, and  Soil
  Pollution, 3, 47-66.
Johnson, D.B., and Hallberg, K.B. (2005) Acid mine drain-
  age remediation options: a review. Science of the Total
  Environment, 338, 3-14.
Jurjovec, J., Ptacek, C.J., and Blowes, D.W. (2002) Acid
  neutralization mechanisms and metal release in mine
  tailings: A laboratory column experiment. Geochimica et
  Cosmochimica Acta, 66, 1511 -1523.
Keplar, D.A., and McCleary,  E.G. (1994) Successive Alka-
  linity Producing  Systems (SAPS) for the  treatment of
  acidic mine drainage. Proceedings  of the  International
  Land Reclamation and Mine Drainage Conference  and
  3rd International Conference on the Abatement of Acidic
  Drainage, p. 195-204, Pittsburgh, PA.
Kimura, S., Hallberg, K.B., and Johnson, D.B. (2006) Sulfido-
  genesis in low pH (3.8-4.2) media by a mixed population
  of acidophilic bacteria. Biodegradation, 17, 57-65.
Kolmert, A., and Johnson, D.B. (2001) Remediation of acidic
  waste waters using immobilised, acidophilic sulfate-re-
  ducing bacteria. Journal of Chemical Technology  and
  Biotechnology, 76, 836-843.
Koschorreck, M., Wendt-Potthoff, K., and Geller, W. (2003)
  Microbial sulfate  reduction at low pH in sediments of
  an acidic lake in Argentina. Environmental Science  and
  Technology, 37, 1159-1162.
Labrenz, M., Druschel,  G.K., Thomsen-Ebert, T, Gilbert,
  B., Welch, S.A., Kemner, K.M., Logan, G.A., Summons,
  R.E., De Stasio, G., Bond, P.S., Lai, B.,  Kelly, S.D.,  and
  Banfield, J.F. (2000) Formation of sphalerite (ZnS) deposits
  in natural biofilms of sulfate-reducing bacteria. Science,
  290,1744-1747.
Langer, H.W., and Inskeep, W.P. (2000) Microbial reduction
  of arsenate in the presence of ferrihydrite. Environmental
  Science and Technology, 34, 3131-3136.
Lee, G., Bigham, J.M., and  Faure, G. (2002) Removal of
  trace metals by coprecipitation with Fe, Al,  and Mn from
  natural waters contaminated with acid mine drainage in
  the Ducktown Mining District, Tennessee. Applied Geo-
  chemistry, 17, 569-581.
Lee, P.K., Kang, M.-J., Choi, S.-H., andTouray, J.-C. (2005)
  Sulfide oxidation and the natural attenuation of arsenic
  and trace metals in the waste rocks of the abandoned
  Seobo tungsten mine, Korea. Applied Geochemistry, 20,
  1687-1703.
Levy, D.B., Custis, K.H., Casey, W.H., and Rock, P.A. (1997)
  A comparison of metal attenuation in mine residue  and
  overburden material from an abandoned copper mine.
  Applied Geochemistry, 12, 203-211.
Lowson, R.T. (1982) Aqueous oxidation of pyrite by molecular
  oxygen. Chemical Reviews, 82, 461-497.
                                                    10

-------
Ludwig, R.D.,McGregor, R.G.,Blowes, D.W.,Benner,S.,G.,
  and Mountjoy, K. (2002) A permeable reactive barrier for
  treatment of heavy metals. Ground Water, 40, 59-66,
Macur, R.E., Wheeler, J.T., McDermott, T.R., and Inskeep,
  W.P. (2001) Microbial populations associated with the
  reduction and enhanced mobilization of arsenic in mine
  tailings. Environmental Science  and  Technology, 35,
  3676-3862.
McCarty,  O.K., Moore, J.N., and Marcus, W.A. (1998) Min-
  eralogy and trace element  association in an acid mine
  drainage iron oxide precipitate; comparison of selective
  extractions. Applied Geochemistry, 13, 165-176.
McGregor, R,G., Blowes, D.W., Jambor, J,L, and Robertson,
  W.D. (1998) Mobilization and attenuation of heavy metals
  within a nickel mine tailings  impoundment near Sudbury,
  Ontario, Canada. Environmental Geology, 36, 305-319.
Moncur, M.C., Ptacek, C.J., Blowes, D.W., and Jambor, J.L.
  (2005)  Release, transport and attenuation of metals from
  an old tailings impoundment. Applied Geochemistry, 20,
  639-659.
Morin, K. A., Cherry, J. A., Dave, N.K., Lim.T.R, andVivyurka,
  A. J. (1988) Migration of acidic groundwater seepage from
  uranium-tailings impoundments, 1, Field study and con-
  ceptual hydrogeochemical model. Journal of Contaminant
  Hydrology, 2, 271-303.
Mukhopadhyay,  B.,  Bastias,  L., and  Mukhopadhyay, A.
  (2007)  Limestone drain design parameters for acid rock
  drainage mitigation. Mine Water and the  Environment,
  26, 29-45.
Munk, L, Faure, G., Pride, D.E., and Bigham, J.M. (2002)
  Sorption of trace metals to an aluminum precipitate in a
  stream receiving acid rock-drainage; Snake River, Summit
  County, Colorado, Applied Geochemistry, 17, 421-430.
Neculita,  C.-M., Zagury, G.J.,  and Brussie, B. (2007) Pas-
  sive treatment of acid mine drainage in bioreactors using
  sulfate-reducing bacteria: critical  review and research
  needs.  Journal of Environmental Quality, 36, 1-16.
Nordstrom, O.K. (1982)  Aqueous pyrite oxidation and the
  consequent formation of secondary iron minerals. In J.A.
  Kittrick, D.S. Fanning, and L.R.Hossner, Eds. Acid sulfate
  weathering, Volume 10, p. 37-56. Soil Science Society of
  America, Madison.
Nordstrom, O.K., and Alpers, C.N. (1999)  Geochemistry of
  acid mine waters. In G.S. Plumlee, and M. J. Logsdon, Eds.
  The Environmental Geochemistry of Mineral Deposits, 6A,
  p. 133-160. Society of Economic Geologists, Littleton.
Nordstrom, O.K., and Southam, G. (1997) Geomicrobiology
  of sulfide mineral oxidation. In J.F.  Banfield, and K.H.
  Nealson, Eds. Geomicrobiology:  Interactions between
  microbes and minerals, Mineralogical Society of America,
  Washington, D.C.
Paktunc, A.D., and Dave, N.K.  (2002) Formation of second-
  ary pyrite and carbonate minerals in the Lower Williams
  Lake tailings basin, Elliot Lake, Ontario Canada. American
  Mineralogist, 87, 593-602.
Prasad, D., Wai, M., Berube, R, and Henry, J.G. (1999) Evalu-
  ating substrates in the biological treatment of acid mine
  drainage. Environmental Technology, 20, 449-458,
Reisinger, H.J., Burris, D.R., and Hering, J.G. (2005) Reme-
  diation subsurface arsenic contamination with monitored
  natural attenuation. Environmental Science and Technol-
  ogy, 39, 458A-464A.
Rigby,  P.A., Dobos, S.K., Cook, F.J., and Goonetilleke, A.
  (2006) Role of organic matter in f ramboidal pyrite oxida-
  tion. Science of the Total Environment, 367, 847-854.
RQgner, H., Finkel,  M., Kaschl, A., and Bittens, M. (2006)
  Application of monitored natural attenuation in contami-
  nated land management-A review and  recommended
  approach for Europe. Environmental Science and Policy,
  9, 568-576.
Sanchez-Espana, J,, Lopez-Pamo, E.,  Santofima Pastor,
  E., Andres, J.R., Antonio, J., and Rubi,  M. (2005) The
  natural attenuation of two acidic effluents in Tharsis and
  La Zarza-Perrunal mines (Iberian Pyrite Belt,  Huelva,
  Spain). Environmental Geology, 49, 253-266,
Shokes, T.E., and Moller, G. (1999) Removal of dissolved
  heavy metals from acid rock drainage using iron metal.
  Environmental Science and Technology,  33, 282-287.
Sidenko, N.V., and Sherriff, B.L. (2005) The attenuation of
  Ni, Zn, and Cu, by secondary Fe phases of differernt
  crystallinity from surface and ground water of two sulfide
  minetailings in Manitoba, Canada. Applied Geochemistry,
  20, 1180-1194.
Steed, V.S.,Suidan,M.T, Gupta, M.,Miyahara,T, Acheson,
  C.M., and Sayles, G.D. (2000) Development of a sulfate-
  reducing biological process to remove heavy metals from
  acid mine drainage. Water Environment Research,  72,
  530-535.
Tuttle, L.H., Dugan, PR., and Randies, C.I. (1969) Microbial
  sulfate reduction and its potential utility as an acid mine
  water pollution abatement procedure. Applied Microbiol-
  ogy, 17,297-302.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1994) Acid Mine
  Drainage Prediction. EPA/530-R-94-036, U.S. EPA Office
  of Solid Waste.
-. (2004) Nationwide Identification of Hardrock Mining Sites.
  Report 2004-P-00005, Office of the Inspector General.
-. (2006) Management and Treatment of Water from Hard
  Rock Mines. EPA/625/R-06/014, Office of Research and
  Development.
-. (2007) Monitored Natural Attenuation of  Inorganic Con-
  taminants  in Ground Water, Volume 1 - Technical Basis
  for Assessment. In press, Office of Research and De-
  velopment.
Waybrant, K.R.,  Blowes,  D.W., and  Ptacek, C.J. (1998)
  Selection of reactive mixtures for use in permeable reac-
  tive walls for treatment of mine drainage. Environmental
  Science and Technology, 32, 1972-1979.
                                                    11

-------
Webb, J.S., McGinness, S., and Lappin-Scott, H.M. (1998)
  Metal removal by sulphate-reducing bacteriafrom natural
  and constructed wetlands. Journal of Applied Microbiol-
  ogy, 84, 240-248.
Webster,  J.G., Nordstrom, O.K., and  Smith, K.S. (1994)
  Transport and natural attenuation of Cu, Zn, As, and Fe
  in the acid mine drainage of Leviathan and Bryant Creeks.
  In C.N. Alpers,  and D.W. Blowes, Eds. Environmental
  Geochemistry of Sulfide Oxidation, p. 244-260. American
  Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
Webster,  J.G., Swedlung, P.J.,  and Webster, K.S. (1998)
  Trace  metal adsorption onto an acid mine drainage
  iron(lll) oxyhydroxysulfate.  Environmental Science and
  Technology, 32, 1361-1368.
Wendt-Potthoff, K., Frommichen, R., Herzsprung, P., and
  Koschorreck, M. (2002) Microbial  Fe(lll) reduction  in
  acidic mining lake sediments after addition of an organic
  substrate and lime. Water Air and Soil Pollution Focus
  2,81-96.
Whitehead, P.G., Cosby,  B.J.,  and Prior, H. (2005) The
  Wheal  Jane wetlands model  for bioremediation of acid
  mine drainage. Science of  the Total Environment, 338,
  125-135.
Wieder, R.K. (1989) A survey of constructed wetlands for
  acid coal mine drainage in the Eastern US. Wetlands,
  9,299-315.
Wildeman, T.R., and Updegraff, D.M. (1997) Passive biore-
  mediation of metals and inorganic contaminants. In D.L.
  Macalady, Ed. Perspectives in Environmental Chemistry.
  Oxford University Press, New York.
Wilkin, R.T., and McNeil, M.S. (2003) Laboratory evaluation
  of zero-valent iron to treat water impacted by acid mine
  drainage. Chemosphere, 53, 715-725.
Williamson, M.A., and Rimstidt, J.D. (1994) The kinetics
  and electrochemical rate-determining step  of aqueous
  pyrite oxidation. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 58,
  5443-5454.
Zamzow,K.L,Tsukamoto,T,K., and Miller, G.C. (2006) Waste
  from biodiesel  manufacturing as an inexpensive carbon
  source for bioreactors treating acid mine drainage. Mine
  Water and the  Environment, 25,  163-170.
Zanker,  H., Moll,  H., Richter, W., Brendler, V.,  Hennig, C.,
  Reich,!., Kluge, A., and Huttig.G (2002) The colloid chem-
  istry of acid rock drainage solution from an  abandoned
  Zn-Pb-Ag mine. Applied Geochemistry, 17, 633-648.
Ziemkiewicz, P.F., Skousen, J.G., Brandt, D.L., Sterner, PL.,
  and Lovett, R.J. (1997) Acid mine drainage treatment with
  armored limestone in open limestone channels. Journal
  of Environmental Quality, 26,  1017-1024.
                                                    12

-------
&EPA
      United
      Environmental Protectior
      Agency

       National Risk Management
         Research Laboratory
       Cincinnati, OH

       Official Business
       Penalty for Private Use
       $300


       EPA/600/R-07/092
       September 2007
Please make all necessary changes on the below label,
detach or copy, and return to the address in the upper
left-hand corner.

If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HERED;
detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the
upper left-hand corner.
PRESORTED STANDARD
 POSTAGE & FEES PAID
        EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
                                                                            Recycled/Recyclable
                                                                            Printed with vegetable-based ink on
                                                                            paper that contains a minimum of
                                                                            50% post-consumer fiber content
                                                                            processed chlorine free

-------