Appendix  49

for that observation. The total observation error variance was

the sum of the laboratory, or “measurement,” error variance
and the error variance introduced in the geochemical modeling
by Bexfield and others (2012),which introduced the majority
of the uncertainty. The estimated variance for each modeled
carbon-14 observation was based on two assumptions: (1) a
normal distribution and (2) 90-percent confidence that the true
value lies between the measured value and the “best” geo-
chemically modeled value. Stated differently, the magnitude
of the uncertainty interval introduced from the geochemical
modeling was estimated with 90-percent confidence to be the
difference of the corrected and measured values.
In each iteration of the UCODE regression, the param-
eter values for a combined steady-state and transient regional
MT3D transport simulation were updated. A uniform effec-
tive porosity of 18 percent and a recharge-source carbon-14
concentration of 100 pmc produced the optimal fit between
observed carbon-14 concentrations and their corresponding
values simulated with the transient transport model.

Simulated Regional Carbon-14 Concentrations

The steady-state regional distribution of carbon-14
concentrations simulated within the top layer of the trans-
port model, which represents water at depths from zero to
14 meters below the simulated steady-state water table, is
depicted in figure 1-1. Areas of high simulated carbon-14
concentration result from the shorter times of groundwater
transport since recharge at the base of the mountains along
the eastern basin margin, the Rio Puerco, and losing reaches
of the Rio Grande. The simulated distribution is comparable
to that mapped by Plummer and others (2004, fig. 77) from
measured carbon-14 concentrations. Simulated carbon-14
concentrations in deeper model layers are smaller, represent-
ing generally increasing groundwater age with depth, and
have similar spatial variability. The area encompassed by the
local-scale model domain described in the main report is also
depicted in figure 1-1. The steady-state carbon-14 concentra-
tions simulated with the regional transport model described
in this appendix were used to specify the initial carbon-14
concentrations for the local-scale model described in the
main report. The non-random fit of carbon-14 concentrations
simulated with the regional-scale transport model to concen-
trations observed in the local study area (fig. 1-2) suggests
that the regional model over-predicts the age (under-predicts
the carbon-14 concentration) of relatively young groundwater
samples and under-predicts the age (over-predicts the car-
bon-14 concentration) of older groundwater samples in this
area.
50  Report Title

107°15’ 107°00’ 45’ 30’ 15’ 106°00’

35°30’

15’

35°00’

45’
EXPLANATION
Simulated carbon-14 concentration,
in percent modern carbon

0 - 20

21 - 40

41 - 60

30’ 61 - 80

81 - 100

Local model area

0 20 KILOMETERS

0 20 MILES
34°15’

Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000, 1999
Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 13N, North American Datum of 1983.

Figure 1-1.  Carbon-14 concentrations simulated in the top layer of the Albuquerque Basin regional transport model.
 Appendix  51

100
Observed carbon-14 concentration, in percent modern carbon

1:1 line

80

60

40 EXPLANATION
Well category
Shallow

Intermediate
20
Deep

Public supply

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Simulated carbon-14 concentration, in percent modern carbon

Figure 1-2.  Relation between observed carbon-14 concentrations

and concentrations simulated with the Albuquerque Basin regional
transport model.
Heywood—Simulations of Groundwater Flow, Transport, and Age in Albuquerque, New Mexico, for TANC to Public-Supply Wells—Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5242