Summitville is one of the most expensive mine cleanups ever funded through Superfund.
Cleanup costs reached $120 million, with total estimates exceeding $150 million, excluding legal fees.
The most sobering part isn’t the number. It’s who paid it.
Much of the cost was borne by people and organizations that had nothing to do with the mine. As one report put it: “Long after the wealth is gone, the environmental costs and impacts remain.”
The mine, abandoned in 1992, required extensive remediation. Drainage adits were sealed. Waste piles capped. The pit backfilled. The tailings dam enlarged. Water treatment systems upgraded. And yet, decades later, pollution still escapes. Cleanup continues.
The operation used cyanide heap-leach processing. When the company went bankrupt, cyanide ponds and related facilities were left unmanaged. Contaminants migrated into the Alamosa River, killing fish and threatening downstream agricultural users.
By 2018, the site was considered largely remediated, but the state remains responsible for ~$2 million per year in ongoing water treatment and site management.
The contaminants of concern were well known heavy metals such as copper, cadmium, manganese, zinc, lead, nickel, aluminum, and iron, primarily associated with acid mine drainage.
That leads to a hard but necessary question: Was geochemical characterization adequately completed?
Whether it was done poorly or not at all, the outcome suggests the same conclusion. The project failed to design for reality. Acid generation, metal leaching, sulfate release, scaling, and long-term water quality impacts were not sufficiently anticipated.
For context, the cost of geochemical characterization is modest:
- XRF / ICP for elemental chemistry (unknown)
- XRD with interpretation (~$184 per sample)
- ABA static testing (~$81–$151 per sample)
- NAG + NAPP (~$227 per sample)
- Leach tests with full water chemistry (~$60.30 per sample)
These are not excessive expenses.
They are risk controls.
To investors, operators, managers, and regulators: profit matters. But so do public safety, long-term liability, and trust. To the mine planner, at every stage in your projects ensure you treat geochemistry as both design input and regulatory requirement.
Geochemical characterization is not a box to tick. It is a financial risk-control and public-safety measure.
References
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Summitville Mine Superfund Site Overview
Documents cleanup actions, contaminants of concern, and long-term water treatment requirements. - High Country News (January 19, 1998)
Summitville Mine Cleanup
Reporting on remediation measures, abandonment history, and ongoing pollution issues. - Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Summitville Mine Cyanide Heap-Leach Operations
Details cyanide leaching practices and environmental impacts. - Denver Post (2018)
Colorado Superfund Site Cleanup Costs
Reporting on post-remediation status and ongoing annual water treatment costs (~$2M/year). - International Network for Acid Prevention (INAP)
Global Acid Rock Drainage (GARD) Guide
Authoritative guidance on ARD prediction, ABA, NAG, kinetic testing, and mine waste geochemistry. - ALS Global
Geochemistry Services and 2025 CAD Fee Schedule
Industry-standard provider of ICP/XRF, kinetic humidity cell testing, and leach tests. - Geology Ontario
XRD-101 Mineralogical Analysis Fee Schedule
Public pricing for XRD with interpretation. - MSTA Canada
Geochemical Analysis Fee Schedules
Published pricing for ABA, NAG, and NAPP testing.
