United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
June,1982
Report No.
908/6-82-004
Solid Waste
Blackfeet - Glacier, Montana
Solid Waste Management Plan
A Technical Assistance Panels Program Report
CANADA
Babb
St. Mory
Blackfeet
Indian
Reservation
Starr School
* • Blackfoot
• Kiowa Browning
E.Glacier
GLACUB CO
i PONDERA
Santa Rita
Cut Bank
Missoula
-^Helena
Montana
• Billings
FINAL REPORT
-------
BLACK FEET-GLACIER, MONTANA
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PANELS PROGRAM REPORT
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
Prepared by:
Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc.
1320 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80202
and
Robert Peccia & Associates
810 Hialeah Court
PO Box 4518
Helena, Montana 59604
June, 1982
Report No. 908/6-82-004
-------
r
~\
Public Law 94-580 - October 21, 1976
Technical assistance by personnel teams. 42 USC 6913
RESOURCE RECOVERY AND CONSERVATION PANELS
SEC. 2003. The Administrator shall provide teams of personnel,
including Federal, State, and Local Employees or contractors (hereinaf-
ter referred to as "Resource Conservation and Recovery Panels") to
provide technical assistance on solid waste management, resource recov-
ery, and resource conservation. Such teams shall include technical,
marketing, financial, and institutional specialists, and the services of
such teams shall be provided without charge to States or local govern-
ments.
This report has been reviewed by the Project Offi-
cer, EPA, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily re-
flect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
Project Officer: William Rothenmeyer, EPA Region VIII
The report is available to the public through the National Tech-
nical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield,
Virginia, 22161.
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
V
J
-------
BLACKFEET-GLACIER, MONTANA SOUD WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
ENVtROMENTAC protect,on agency recon v,„
STUDY AREA
• Groat Palls
Grand Forks
Miswuls
•HELENA
9 Sutra
Fargo 9
• BISMARCK
9 Milos C
Billings
Abtrtietn
9 PIERFIE
O Haoid City
Sioux FaJli O
Rock Spnng, # R
CHEYgNNE
Ft Col tin*
* SALT LAKE CITY
wOENVER
Green River
® Grand Junction
© Pueoio
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The successful completion of this study was made possible through the
cooperation and assistance of many individuals and agencies. Special
recognition should be given to the members of the Solid Waste Technical
Committee who have been involved in this project from its conception.
The hard work and effort provided by these individuals has been a key
for the success and completion of the project.
Vic Anderson
Montana Solid Waste Bureau
Ed Aubert
Blackfeet Tribal Health Dept.
Dennis Baker
Indian Health Service
Steve Barcus
Town of Browning
Bill Big Spring
Glacier County Commissioner
Bill Burd
High Plains Solid Waste System
John Crawford
Indian Health Service
Charles Farmer
Blackfeet Planning Program
Keith Fellbaum
Glacier National Park
James Harris
Environmental Protection Agency
Jim Hutchison
Indian Health Service
Fred Johnson
Glacier County Commissioner
Jim Kennedy
Blackfeet Tribal Health Dept.
Dan McFadyean
Blackfeet Tribal Health Dept.
Gary McFarland
Indian Health Service
Doris Morgan
Pondera County Sanitarian
Dave Moser
Glacier County Sanitarian
Bob Racine
Indian Health Service
Gary Smith
City of Cut Bank
Harvey Smith
Glacier National Park
George Wippert
Blackfeet Housing Authority
Ted Ziegler
Indian Health Service
V
J
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
A. Background 1
B. Scope of Work 2
C. Project Summary & Recommendations 2
PART TWO: STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
A. General 7
B. Population 7
C. Glacier National Park 13
D. Commercial - Industrial Development 14
PART THREE: EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONS
A. General 18
B. Applicable Laws S, Regulations 18
C. Existing Solid Waste Services & Facilities 23
D. Solid Waste Quantities 31
PART FOUR: RECYCLING FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
A. General 42
B. Types & Quantities of Recoverable Materials 42
C. Market Analysis for Secondary Materials 43
D. Summary of Recycling Feasibility 49
PART FIVE: ANALYSIS OF SPECIAL WASTES
A. General 51
B. Analysis of Individual Waste Types 52
PART SIX: EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
A. Assessment of Available Technology 61
B. Description of Applicable Alternatives 66
C. Annual System Cost Analysis. 70
PART SEVEN: RECOMMENDED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
A. General 96
B. Recommended Disposal Facilities 96
C. Organizational Strategy 100
D. Operational Strategy 105
E. Financial Strategy 108
F. Implementation Schedule Ill
APPENDIX A: LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION 113
V J
-------
( N
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
No. Description No.
1 Study Area Location Map 8
2 Glacier National Park Visitation 15
3 Existing Solid Waste Services & Facilities 25
4 Major Tourist Facilities 35
5 Seasonal Variation in Solid Waste Quantities .... 40
6 Design Criteria Zones for Alternatives Analysis ... 75
7 Areavvide Landfill Location Map 82
8 "Green Box" Container System 85
9 "Roll-Off" Container System 89
10 Combination Container System Alternative 91
11 Recommended Disposal System 98
12 Organizational Strategy 102
13 Operational Strategy 107
V /
-------
( ^
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
No. Description No.
1 Solid Waste Quantities 39
2 Waste Composition 44
3 Design Criteria 73
4 Transportation Unit Costs 79
5 Alternatives Analysis Cost Summary 81
6 Satellite Landfill Cost Summary 84
7 Browning Landfill Cost Summary 87
8 Container Facility Costs 90
9 Summary of Alternatives 93
10 Recommended Plan Annual Budget 110
11 Proportionate Cost Estimate Ill
12 Implementation Schedule 112
J
-------
/ \
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Page
No. Description No.
la Existing Solid Waste Facilities 26
lb Existing Solid Waste Facilities 27
2 Sanitary Landfill - Trench Method 68
3 Sanitary Landfill - Area Method 69
4 Roll-Off Container Site 7]
V J
-------
PART ONE
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
-------
r
"N
PART ONE
INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND
In the summer of 1978 Blackfeet tribal officials, representatives of
several federal agencies including- the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Indian Health Service, and local officials of the Town of Browning be-
gan efforts to form a Solid Waste Disposal program on the Blackfeet Indian
Reservation. Because of several problems encountered due to the overlap-
ping of various jurisdictional entities, a disposal program was never im-
plemented. In the interim, however, a tribally-managed solid waste collec-
tion and disposal service was created for the residents of the Reservation
and any private individuals or commercial establishments willing to contract
lor service.
In addition to the jurisdiction-related problems discussed above, the
solid waste disposal problem in the area was compounded in 1980 when a
bear mauling incident resulted in the deaths of two individuals in the St.
Mary area. The open dump located near St. Mary may have been a con-
tributing factor in the incident.
Based on the various jurisdictional and bear-related problems, federal
officials representing Glacier National Park and the Blackfeet Indian Reser-
vation requested assistance in the fall of 1980 under the EPA Technical
Assistance Panel Program to analyze the solid waste collection and disposal
procedures in the area and to determine the feasibility of establishing an
intergovernmental solid waste disposal program. Federal assistance funds
were subsequently obtained and a consultant was retained in February,
1981 to prepare a comprehensive solid waste management plan for the study
area. Basically, the study area encompasses the eastern portion of Glacier
National Park, all areas within the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, and the
remaining portion of Glacier County located outside the reservation.
Prior to initiating the actual study, a Technical Advisory Committee was
formed to oversee the work completed by the Consultant as well as to assist in
the decision-making process. This committee is comprised of key officials from
each jurisdictional entity located within the study area as well as
representatives from the State of Montana and local health departments, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Over the
course of the project, the Technical Committee and the Consultant met and
reviewed the status and preliminary findings of the project on several different
occasions.
V
J
-------
f N
B. SCOPE OF WORK
Initially, a detailed scope of work was developed by the Environmental
Protection Agency with cooperation and guidance from several local and
state officials. The work elements deemed applicable were developed such
that the recommendations could be formulated in an orderly sequence for
the proper disposal of solid waste generated within the study area. In-
cluded herein is a summary of the work elements considered for this pro-
ject.
1) Identification of current and future demographic conditions in
the study area, including general land use, population charac-
teristics, and visitation and use of the facilities by tourists
within Glacier National Park.
2) Identification and evaluation of current solid waste management
conditions within the study area, including solid waste storage,
collection, transfer and disposal operations and facilities, and
waste generation and composition characteristics.
3) Evaluation of alternate solid waste collection, transfer and dis-
posal concepts with emphasis placed on the practicability and
costs of the specific alternatives.
4) Evaluation of current problems and possible alternate solutions
for "special" type waste disposal, including junk vehicles, tires,
demolition debris, used oils, septic tank pumpings, and sludge.
5) Formulation of a recommended plan for properly transferring and
disposing of solid wastes generated within the study area with
regard to location, use and environmental restrictions, and prac-
ticability of each alternative.
6) Evaluation of alternative organizational structures that would be
required to implement the recommended plan by the various jur-
isdictional entities included in the study area.
7) Preparation of a report that summarizes all findings, conclusions
and recommendations of the project.
C. PROJECT SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Included in the following narrative is a summary of the findings, con-
clusions and recommendations of the study.
1. Demographic Conditions
Current estimates indicate that approximately 8,122 people live in the
study area (excluding the City of Cut Bank). It is projected that the pop-
ulation will increase to approximately 9,350 by the year 2000. Current esti-
mates indicate that 5,691, or roughly 70 percent of the study area popula-
\ 2 '
-------
r
-\
tion, are Indians. It is expected that this percentage breakdown will increase
slightly over the next 20-year period.
2. Existing Solid Waste Management Conditions
Currently the majority of the waste generated within the study area is
disposed of at a State of Montana-licensed landfill located near Browning. The
operation of this site is the responsibility of the Town of Browning. In 1979
the Blackfeet Indian Reservation instituted a rural container system consisting
of approximately 130 four-cubic-yard containers strategically located
throughout the Reservation and two 20-cubic-yard, side-loading packer
vehicles, which are utilized to periodically empty the containers and transport
the wastes to the Browning landfill. This system, which was obtained through
a grant from the Indian Health Service, is operated under the authority of the
Blackfeet Tribal Health Department. This system replaces the six open burning
dumps which served the Reservation population until recently.
In regard to Glacier National Park, the wastes currently generated in the
eastern portion of the Park are being transported to the Browning landfill for
disposal. Currently, all wastes generated at campgrounds, picnic areas and
tourist attractions under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service are col-
lected and transported to Browning daily by Park personnel utilizing a small
packer vehicle. Likewise, all wastes generated at the privately-operated facil-
ities within the Park boundaries are collected and transported by the private
concessionaire to the Browning landfill utilizing a similar packer vehicle.
The incorporated communities of Browning and Cut Bank both operate mu-
nicipally owned door-to-door collection systems. The Town of Browning dis-
poses of these wastes at their community landfill. The City of Cut Bank
operates its own sanitary landfill, and disposes of community wastes there.
3. Alternate Disposal Systems Analysis
Through a detailed analysis, several solid waste disposal concepts were
evaluated for the study area. After several meetings between the Consultant
and the Project Technical Committee members, the number of alternatives was
reduced to four. These four alternatives are: 1) utilization of several satellite
landfill sites operated in compliance with all state and federal criteria; 2)
closure of all open dump sites and the continued use of the "Green Box"
container system with minor modifications to the current collection routes; 3)
closure of all open dump sites and replacement of the "Green Box" system with
a "Roll-Off" system (40-cubic-yard container sites strategically located
throughout the study area); and 4) a program combining both the "Green
Box" and "Roll-Off"systems. Cost analysis of these alternatives determined that
the annual costs would vary from $128,350 to $214,400, with the "Roll-Off"
alternative (#3) being the least-cost alternative.
V.
3
J
-------
r
~\
4. Recycling Feasibility Analysis
Generally, there are two types of recoverable materials found in the solid
waste generated within the study area. These include: 1) secondary materials
such as ferrous and non-ferrous metals, newsprint, cardboard and glass; and
2) combustible materials that can be used as a fuel source to generate steam,
electricity and/or heat. It was determined that current market conditions do
not favor the implementation of an areawide recycling program for the
secondary materials found in the solid waste stream at this time. Regional
markets do exist, however, for individuals to recover and sell newsprint,
aluminum and glass. The analysis conducted for this study also concluded that
the feasibility of utilizing solid waste as an energy source is not cost-effective
at this time.
5. Recommended Solid Waste Management Plan
The various applicable disposal alternatives and implementation strategies
were extensively reviewed with the Technical Committee members throughout
the course of this study. Based upon these meetings, a tentative recommended
solid waste management plan was developed. The primary strategies
recommended for the study area include the following:
a. Disposal System
The recommended disposal system includes the continued and ex-
panded use of the current "Green Box" container system and the closure
of all dump sites on the Reservation except the Browning landfill, which
would serve as an areawide landfill. Under this plan, the City of Cut
Bank would continue to operate its city-owned landfill for the disposal of
all wastes from the City of Cut Bank as well as those generated in the
southeastern portion of Glacier County. The National Park Service and
the Park Concessionaire would continue to individually collect and
transport the wastes generated within the eastern portion of Glacier
National Park to the Browning landfill for disposal.
b. Organizational Strategy
The recommended organizational strategy consists of a Policy Board
representing the four main jurisdictional entities included in the study
area, which would be responsible for the operation, administration, and
financing of the recommended disposal system. The four jurisdictional en-
tities included in the project would include Glacier National Park, the
Town of Browning, Glacier County, and the Blackfeet Indian Reservation.
(Since Glacier National Park is a federal agency, it would not be allowed
to be a voting member on the Policy Board but would be involved on the
Board in an advisory capacity.) Under the recommended plan, the costs
incurred for disposing of the wastes generated by the non-Indian popula-
tion within that area of Pondera County that is located within the Black-
feet Indian Reservation would be assessed through an interlocal agreement
between the Pondera and Glacier County Commissioners. Likewise, the
proportioniate costs to dispose of the Park concessionaires waste at the
Browning landfill would be assessed through an interlocal agreement be-
V
4
J
-------
r
tween the National Park Service and the Park concessionaire. Also under
the recommended plan, the City of Cut Bank would not be included in the
regional plan and would continue to operate its collection and disposal
operations individually.
c. Operational Strategy
The recommended operational strategy included in this plan assumes
that the Browning landfill and the "Green Box" containers would continue
to be operated under the current management situation on a temporary
basis. Ultimately, however, the proposed operational strategy recommends
that the ownership and/or operation of the recommended disposal facilities
and equipment be subcontracted to private enterprise or a non-profit or-
ganization.
d. Financial Strategy
It is recommended that all financial management decisions be made by
the Policy Board for the project. The Board's responsibilities would in-
clude: 1) preparation of budgets; 2) assessment of equitable user fees;
3) preparation and administration of subcontracts; and 4) authorization of
payments for all incurred expenses. In order to administer the funds for
the program, it would be necessary to delineate a legal entity through
which all funds must pass. As a result of numerous meetings, it was the
general concensus of the advisory committee that The Blackfeet Tribe
would be the most logical entity to handle the funds due to the fact that
the tribe owns and operates the majority of the equipment and facilities
currently in use in the area. Letters from the various committee members
indicating this recommendation are included in Appendix A.
The total annual budget for the project is estimated to be $198,500.
These costs include the necessary amortization of capital, operation,
maintenance and labor necessary for the recommended disposal facilities
and systems, and necessary administrative costs to manage the disposal
program. In order to obtain the necessary reserves to fund the expenses
of the proposed project, it is recommended that each individual
jurisdictional entity pay its equivalent proportionate cost based on the
tonnage of waste generated by the entity. The estimated proportionate
costs for each entity are summarized herein. A detailed description of the
proceedure utilized to calculate the costs is included in Part Seven of this
report.
V
5
J
-------
Jurisdictional
Entity
Glacier National Park
Town of Browning
Glacier County
Blackfeet Indian Reservation
Proportionate
Annual Cost
$ 8,620
4,070
62,320
123,550
TOTAL:
$198,560
Includes $4,440 for those wastes generated by the Park Concessionaire.
Includes $2,030 for those wastes generated by the non-Indian population
in that portion of Pondera County that is included in the study area.
6
J
-------
PART TWO
STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
-------
r
PART TWO
STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
A. GENERAL
The study area for this Solid Waste Management Plan consists of all
areas within the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Glacier and Pondera coun-
ties, the portion of Glacier National Park cast of the Continental Divide,
and the remainder of Glacier County excluding the City of Cut Bank. To-
pography varies from rugged mountains m the western portion of Glacier
County to high rolling glaciated plains which cover the remainder of the
study area. The location of the study area is depicted on Figure 1.
Land use within the study area is reflective of the physical nature of
this region of Montana. The majority of the land on the Blackfeet Indian
Reservation is utilized as rangeland and, to a lesser degree, farmland.
Forest lands, most of which lie within the boundaries of Glacier National
Park, account for approximately fifteen percent of the land area. Within
the study area, the Blackfeet Indian Reservation comprises the largest
block of land ownership. Approximately 70 percent of the land within Gla-
cier County and 25 percent of the land in Pondera County lies within the
boundaries of the Reservation. Federal lands, consisting of Glacier National
Park and the Lewis and Clark National Forest, account for 21 percent of
the land in Glacier County. The remaining nine percent of the County is
privately owned.
Major communities within the study area are Browning, the only in-
corporated community and the major trade and service center on the Res-
ervation; Babb, St. Mary and East Glacier, tourist-oriented communities
located on the western edge of the Reservation; Heart Butte, located in
the extreme southern portion of the Reservation; and Blackfoot and Starr
School, both of which are located near Browning. Cut Bank serves as the
primary local trade center within Glacier County, providing numerous
types of goods and services. Several larger cities outside the study area,
including Kali spell, Great Falls and Havre, serve as regional trade cen-
ters. The study area is crossed by two major transportation routes includ-
ing U.S. Highways 2 and 89, and a network of state, tribal and county
roads. In addition, the Burlington Northern Railroad and several public
aviation facilities serve the area.
B. POPULATION
1. General
Several factors directly influence the current and projected popula-
tions of the area. These factors include birth and death rates, the differ-
V
7
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
r
-\
ence between the two being the natural increase in population; employment and
economic conditions; housing conditions; and net migration trends. Over the
past several years, numerous studies have been conducted by local, state,
tribal and federal officials as well as consultants regarding the population-
related factors for the study area. For this project, recent population data
were obtained and evaluated relative to past and existing conditions, and con-
clusions were then drawn as to the current and future populations of the
study area.
The sources of information utilized for this study include: U.S. Bureau
of the Census data, Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service
estimates and projections; the "Blackfeet Comprehensive Plan", the
"Environmental Health Profile and Priority Projection for the Blackfeet Service
Unit"; the "Profile of the Montana Native American", and numerous population
projections published by the Montana Department of Community Affairs,
Research and Information Systems Division.
Glacier County experienced a sharp population increase during the 20-
year period from 1920 to 1940 and continued to increase to a high of 11,565 by
1960. During the decade from 1960 to 1970 the county population began to
decline, a trend experienced in most areas of the state over the same period.
Recent census data indicates that the county population has continued to
decline slightly to its current level of 10,628.
Historically, the population of The Blackfeet Tribe has continued to in-
crease at about 12 percent each decade since 1920. On the Reservation, the
Indian population has continued to increase while the non-Indian population has
declined, a trend that is continuing, according to the 1980 ^census data. The
out-migration rate of the Indian population on the Blackfeet Reservation is
considerably higher than the state average, and is primarily a reflection of
local economic conditions and job opportunities. The population of The Black-
feet Tribe is quite young, with 63 percent under the age of 25. Twenty per-
cent are between 25 and 44 years of age, twelve percent are 45 through 64,
and five percent are 65 and over.
2. Study Area Population
Due to the number of jurisdictions involved and the complex financial
arrangements necessary to implement any recommended plan developed by this
study, it is valuable at this time to break the study area populations into
Indian and non-Indian populations for the Blackfeet Reservation, the Town of
Browning and Glacier County (excluding the City of Cut Bank). The following
narrative briefly summarizes the data and procedures used to determine the
study area population.
a. Indian Population Residing on the Reservation
( In general, the most accurate source of current population data
available for the study area is provided by the U.S. Bureau of the Cen-
sus. In addition to the 1980 census data, most of the previously
V
9
J
-------
mentioned sources of population data were reviewed in order to determine
the best source of information. During the review of the population data
with tribal officials, questions arose regarding the accuracy of the 1980
census count of tribal members residing on the Reservation. Tribal
officials have indicated that the 1980 census estimate is somewhat lower
than the actual population. This discrepancy may be due in part to
methods of data collection, the isolated nature of many Indian households,
and the general mobility of the Indian people. As a result, alternate
sources of population data for the Reservation were examined. The
following table summarizes several sources of information that were
utilised to develop a current estimate of Indian population on the
Blackfcet Reservation.
Blackfcet
Year U.S. Census D.I.A. Comp. Plan I.U.S.*
1970 4,594 - 4,594' 5,122
1973 - 5,741 - 5,166
1978 - 6,277
1980 5,082 - 5,500 6,098
* I.U.S. service areas include the entire counties m which reservations
arc located; thus the population for individual reservations must be deter-
mined through adjustments.
It is evident that all the estimates vary considerably from agency to
agency. The most reasonable estimate for the current Indian population
for the Elackfeet Reservation was determined to be the estimate released
by the Indian Health Service lor the Blackfcet Service Unit of 6.098'1-. By
utilizing the I.U.S. population estimate and the census data, it was
possible to determine the number of Indians residing on the Blackfcet
Reservation. This population is summarized below
6,098 - Indian Health Service estimate for
Blackfcet Service Unit
- 277 - less the number of Indians in the City of Cut Bank
- 130 - less the number of Indians not on Reservation
in Pondera County
5,691 - Total Number of Indians residing on Reservation
(includes Town of Browning)
b. Non-Indian Population Residing on the Reservation and in Glacier
County (excluding Cut Bank)
By using detailed census data for each Enumeration District within
the Reservation, it is possible to obtain an estimate of the number of
-------
non-Indians residing on the Blackfcet Reservation and within Glacier
County, excluding the City of Cut Bank.
1.285
Total number
of
non-Indians on Reservation (Glacier
County)
197
Total number
of
non-Indians in Browning
96
Total number
of
non-Indians on Reservation (Pondera
County)
853
Total number
of
non-Indians in remainder of Glacier
County (less
Cut Bank)
2,431
Total number
of
non-Indians Residing on Reservation
and in Glacier County (less Cut Bank)
c. Current Population m Town of Browning
After review of the 1980 census data with local officials of the Town
of Browning, it was determined that the estimate of 1,226 residents was
considered reasonable. This population includes 1,029 Indian residents
and 197 non-Indian residents.
d. Current Study Area Population
The following figures show the total population for the study area
that was derived from the previous calculations:
5,691 - Total number of Indians residing on Reservation
2,431 - Total number of non-Indians residing on Reservation in
Glacier County
8,122 - Total Study Area Population
3. Population Projections
Numerous sources of population projections tor the Blackfect Reservation
and Glacier County were obtained and reviewed. Many of these sources deal
strictly with total county population and the populations of incorporated cities
and towns, and do not break the population figures into the necessary com-
ponents for this study. In addition, many of the sources of population projec-
tions arc outdated, especially since the release of the current census data.
These sources are still valuable, however, because most are based upon valid
assumptions regarding the three major factors affecting population, births,
deaths, and migration.
The "Blackfect Comprehensive Plan" and population projections released
by the Indian Health Service for the Blackfect Service Unit were utilized to
forecast the future population of the Blackfcet Reservation. Historical census
data also provided a number of population trends useful in projecting study
area populations. The following narrative briefly summarizes study area popu-
lations for the Indian and non-Indian populations on the Blackfeet Reservation,
Town ot Br'owning, and the remainder of rural Glacier County.
-------
a. Future Indian Population of Reservation
Alter a review of the available Indian population projections for the
Blackfeet Reservation, it was determined that the most reasonable forecast
results from historical census data. The population of The Blackfeet Tribe
has consistently grown at ten to twelve percent each decade since ap-
proximately 1910. This historical growth trend is difficult to overlook in
the absence of other information. By utilizing this growth rate, the In-
dian population of the Blackfeet Reservation is expected to be approxi-
mately 6,380 by the year 1990 and 7,150 by the year 2000. A summary of
the Indian population of the Reservation is as follows:
POPULATION PROJECTIONS
(INDIAN POPULATION ON RESERVATION)
Blackfeet Comprehensive Plan
U.S. Low Mid High Consultant's
Year Census Projection Projection Projection I.H.S.* Estimate
1970 4,594 4,594 4,594 4,594 - 4,594
1980 5,082 5,300 5,550 6,200 6,098 5,691
1990 - 6,000 6,700 9,250 7,628 6,380
2000 - 6,900 8,100 10,200 10,142 7,150
* I.H.S. projections for entire Blackfeet Service Unit (Total Indian Population
for Glacier and Pondera counties)
* Utilizing growth trends from analysis of historical census data
b. Future Population of Non-Indians on Reservation and Glacier
County (less Cut Bank)
The population of non-Indians on the Reservation has continued to
decline since 1940, when 2,820 non-Indians were reported to reside on the
Reservation. Recent census data continues to reflect this trend as re-
vealed by the 1980 non-Indian population of 1,578 (including the Town of
Browning). Historical census data indicates that the non-Indian population
of the study area declined by nine percent between 1970 and 1980. This
decline is expected to continue in the future, most likely at at lower rate.
Assuming the non-Indian population of the study area will continue to de-
cline at a rate of five percent each decade, the non-Indian population is
expected to be 2,310 by 1990 and 2,200 by the year 2000.
-------
f \
c. Future Population of the Town of Browning
By utilizing growth rates similar to those projected for the Indian
and non-Indian populations of the Reservation and Glacier County it is
possible to project the future population of the Town of Browning. The
following table summarizes the current and projected populations of the
Town of Browning.
U.S. Census Consultant's Estimate
1980 1990 2000
Indian Population 1,029 1,150 1,290
Non-Indian Population 197 187 178
Total 1,226 1,337 1,468
d. Future Study Area Population
1980 1990 2000
Indians on Reservation (total) 5,691 6,380 7,150
Non-Indians on Reservation (total)
& Glacier County
(less Cut Bank) 2,431 2,310 2,200
Total Study Area Population 8,122 8,690 9,350
It should be emphasized that the future populations projected for the
study area are based upon historical trends and assumptions concerning
the future situations of the Blackfeet Reservation and Glacier County.
Projecting future populations for the study area is extremely difficult due
to the infinite number of circumstances which could dramatically alter the
present situation. Examples of these circumstances could include a major
"boom" in the oil or natural gas industry within the study area or a
situation where a fuel shortage drastically cuts the visitation to Glacier
Park and thereby affects the tourist industry in the area. Either of these
situations would be impossible to predict and would have substantial
effects upon the study area population.
C. GLACIER NATIONAL PARK
1. General
The development of Glacier National Park occurred primarily after the
Great Northern Railroad constructed its rail lines through the area in the late
1800s. In 1910, Congress created Glacier Park and development of tourist facil-
ities began a short time later. The Great Northern Railroad promoted develop-
ment within the Park through the construction of a series of lodges, hotels
and dining facilities catering to tourists transported to the Park by rail.
Visitation has increased steadily over the years due to the relative ease by
which the Park may be reached by automobile and the increase in the number
and types of recreational opportunities available within the Park. The substan-
-------
r
"\
tial increase in visitation from 1956 to 1980 is depicted in Figure 2. Peak
visitation generally occurs during June, July and August; however, visits
during the remainder of the year have generally increased in recent years.
2. National Park Service Facilities
All of Glacier National Park east of the Continental Divide is included in
the project study area. Within this portion of the Park, numerous visitor
facilities including campgrounds located at Cut Bank, Many Glacier, Rising
Sun, St. Mary, and Two Medicine exist, and visitor centers are located at
Logan Pass and St. Mary. Park entrances are located at St. Mary, Chief
Mountain, Many Glacier, Two Medicine, Waterton and near the Cut Bank Creek
area.
In addition to the previously mentioned tourist facilities, the National
Park Service also has facibties at St. Mary and East Glacier which include
maintenance shops, ranger stations and housing for permanent and seasonal
employees. Discussion of the use and waste generation at these facilities as
well as the campgrounds and visitor centers will be given in detail in Part
Three of this report.
3. Concessionaire Facilities
Concessionaire operations within the Park include hotels, motels, cabins,
gas stations, gift shops, restaurants, stables and boat houses. These facilities
are concentrated primarily at Many Glacier, Rising Sun, and Two Medicine.
Visitor concession operations in 1980 increased over the 1979 season, and
included a six percent increase in overnight lodging, a five percent increase
in concession boat passengers, and a two percent increase in bus visitors to
the Park. The use and waste generation characteristics of these facilities will
be discussed in detail later in the report.
D. COMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
Commercial development within the study area is based primarily upon the
yearly influx of tourists to Glacier National Park. Commercial facilities located
in communities on the western edge of the Reservation are most often operated
on a seasonal basis, although some year-round facilities do exist. The potential
for additional development of the tourism-recreation industry on the Reserva-
tion exists due to the natural beauty of the area, its proximity to Glacier Na-
tional Park, and the access to the area provided by AMTRAK rail service and
the highway network. Recent development of campgrounds and recreational fa-
cilities by The Blackfeet Tribe at Lower St. Mary Lake, Duck Lake and Two
Medicine Lake have provided much needed facilities for tourists.
Industrial development within the study area has been somewhat limited
and is based upon the natural resources base of the area. Timber cutting is
periodically practiced on the western edge of the Reservation adjacent to Gla-
cier National Park. Three oil and gas fields are located within the study area
V
14
J
-------
Glacier National Park V
-------
and have been producing since the mid-1920's. Major oil reserves are located
in the Cut Bank 1'ield located northeast of Cut Bank. Oil and gas development
on the western edge of the Blackfeet Reservation appears favorable, since ex-
ploration activity is quite heavy. Coal and magnetite deposits exist within the
study area and the potential for mining these mineral exists in the future.
The following narrative briefly describes the current commercial-industrial
development and assesses the potential for future development within the major
communities in the study area. Future commercial-industrial development was
evaluated with the assistance of the "Blackfeet Comprehensive Plan" and dis-
cussions with local officials.
Babb. Commercial activity is presently oriented toward seasonal
tourist trade. Many facilities arc closed during the off-
season. A small all-service facility providing basic services
on a permanent basis is seen as necessary.
Blackfoot: At one time, the community served as an important rail-
head for cattle shipments on the Reservation; currently,
Blackfoot serves as an extended housing area for Brow-
ning. This area is not viewed as having a great deal of
commercial-industrial potential.
Browning. The community will continue to be the major service center
on the Reservation. The community is also dependent upon
tourism for much commercial activity. Industrial uses on
the Reservation are centered at Browning and include a
component housing plant and the Blackieet Indian Writing
Company, a major source of employment on the Reserva-
tion. Industrial park facilities are also available, and the
conditions for future industrial development are favorable.
Future commercial-industrial development is likely to occur
in Browning.
East Glacier: The community is geared toward tourism and will continue
as such. Numerous commercial establishments and lodges
exist and most are operational seasonally. The community
located on U.S. Highway 2 and is served by AMTRAK pas-
senger rail service. East Glacier is seen as a prime area
for additional commercial expansion in the future.
Heart Butte: Commercial development in the community consists of a
small year-round store, post office and gas station. In ad-
dition, a small arts and crafts home industry is present
m Heart Butte. Light industry and some additional com-
mercial development would be well suited to the community.
V
-------
Santa Rita: The community consists primarily of housing and some li-
mited commercial-industrial activity. The community is
oriented toward the oil and gas industry in the area and
little commercial-industrial expansion is anticipated.
St. Mary: This community is primarily oriented toward providing ser-
vices to Glacier Park tourists. Few of the commercial es-
tablishments are open throughout the year. St. Mary is
expected to continue to be commercially oriented in the fu-
ture. Definite potential for additional commercial facilities
exists within the area due to the large number of tourists
passing through this "gateway" community.
Starr School- This community lacks commercial-industrial development,
probably because of its proximity to Browning. Strong po-
tential for limited commercial or light industrial develop-
ment exists within the community.
17
J
-------
PART THREE
EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONS
-------
r
~\
PART THREE
EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT CONDITIONS
A. GENERAL
When evaluating the existing solid waste management situation in a speci-
fic area, there are three major aspects that must be addressed: 1) the current
laws and regulations which govern the various phases of solid waste manage-
ment; 2) the effectiveness of existing solid waste storage, collection and
transportation services and the adequacy of the existing disposal facilities; and
3) the quantities and characteristics of the solid waste generated. Included in
the following narrative is a brief summary of these major aspects as they relate
to this project.
Obviously, there are several other aspects that are directly related to the
total solid waste management system in the area. These include: 1) the recov-
ery and recycling of solid waste; 2) the disposal of special and hazardous type
wastes; and 3) the economic, organizational and financial aspects of the exist-
ing and proposed programs and systems. In the interests of greater clarity
and better organization of this report, these aspects will be discussed in sub-
sequent chapters.
B. APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
There are basically three degrees of laws and regulations which directly
affect the management of solid waste in the study area. These include: 1) local
ordinances; 2) State of Montana disposal laws and rules; and 3) federal laws
and regulations. Included in the following text is a brief discussion of the
various laws and regulations which directly affect the management of solid
waste in the study area.
1. Local Ordinances
The Blackfeet Tribe and the Town of Browning have adopted local ordin-
ances which requii*c solid waste to be properly disposed of. These ordinances
deal primarily with local conditions such as littering, burning and solid waste
collection and disposal procedures.
2. State of Montana Laws and Regulations
The state laws concerning solid waste management were initially adopted
by the 1065 State Legislature. Since that time, the regulations have been
amended three times. The laws and regulations set forth by the State of Mon-
tana include legal and administrative control over all phases of solid waste
management including the following: 1) facility licensing; 2) standards for the
operations and maintenance of facilities; 3) facility classification; 4) solid waste
transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes; 5) litter control; 6) disposal
V.
18
J
-------
r
of dead animals; 7) feeding garbage to animals; 8) nuisances; and 9) disposal
of junk vehicles.
Included in the following narrative is a brief summary of the principal
rules and regulations which are included in the State Solid Waste Management
Act as amended in 1977. A copy of the complete rules and regulations can be
obtained from the State Department of Health and Environmental Sciences, Solid
Waste Management Bureau.
a. Disposal Sito Licenses
Under the present state laws, all sanitary landhll sites must be
licensed by the State Department of Health and Environmental Sciences,
Solid Waste Management Bureau. The Department has established three
classifications for refuse disposal sites. A summary of the three
classifications is included below
1) Class I
Class I sites may accept all groups of waste including hazardous
wastes. Class 1 sites shall not discharge these materials or their
by-products to ground or surface waters. These sites must either confine
the wastes to the disposal site with no likelihood that the wastes will
escape, or they must be situated in a location where the lcachatc from the
wastes can only percolate into underlying formations which have no hy-
draulic continuity with usable waters.
2) Class II
Class II sites are suitable for accepting decomposable and organic
materials, wood and demolition materials, and digested wastewater
sludges. The site must provide lor separation of these type materials from
underlying or adjacent usable water. The distance of the required sepa-
ration is established on a casc-by-case basis, considering factors such as
terrain, type of underlying soil formation, and natural quality of the
groundwater.
3) Class 111
Class III sites arc suitable for accepting only inert-type materials,
excluding potentially hazardous wastes. The site may contain water such
as in marshy areas which contain exposed groundwater or areas which
may be periodically flooded, such as along stream floodplains. Class III
sites shall not be located on the banks or in a live or ephemeral stream.
The Department of Health and Environmental Sciences may issue a
conditional license for solid waste management systems already in exis-
tence or under construction on the effective date of this rule. Such a
license, if granted, will be valid for up to one year. Only when the De-
partment determines that the conditional licensee has shown good cause
lor an extension will one be granted. Conditional licenses are to be
granted only if the applicant demonstrates that steps are being taken to
V.
19
J
-------
r
~\
bring the site into compliance. The local health officer must validate all
conditional licen&es beiore they are effective.
The Department nay deny or revoke a license to operate a solid
waste management system after giving the applicant and the local health
officer written notice and an opportunity for a hearing before the Board.
The decision to deny or revoke a license may be made only after finding
that a solid waste management system cannot be operated or is not being
operated in compliance with the state laws and regulations. The hearing
held before the Board on a denial or revocation shall be held pursuant to
the provisions of the Montana Administrative Procedures Act.
b. Disposal Site Operation and Maintenance Requirements
1) Class I Sites
Due to the hazardous nature of the waste that may be processed at
these sites, strict supervision is required when such sites are open. Sites
shall be fenced to prevent unauthorized access. All Class I sites using
landfillmg methods shall cover Gioup I wastes with a minimum of twelve
(12) inches of suitable earth cover material after each operating day and
up to four (4) feet of earth cover material within one week after the final
deposit ol solid waste. These steps must be taken unless the Department
is satisfied that the licensee has shown good cause for not covering the
waste.
Where other solid waste management methods are proposed to dispose
of Group 1 wastes, the operation and maintenance plan must demonstrate
to the Department's satisfaction that such disposal methods pose no
danger to man and the environment. Group II wastes disposed of at Class
I sites shall satisfy all Class II disposal requirements.
2) Class II Sites
All Class II sites using landfilhng methods shall compact and cover
solid waste with a layer ol at least six (6) inches of approved earth cover
material at the end of each operating day and at least two (2) feet of
approved earth cover material within one week after the final deposit of
solid waste at any portion of the site. These steps must be taken unless
the Department is satisfied that the licensee has shown good cause for not
covering the waste.
EPA's 1972 publication, Sanitary Landfill Design and Operation (No.
S\V-G5ts), shall be used as the general landfill design and operation
manual for the purposes of this rule. The Department may develop or
adopt guidelines for other solid waste disposal methods and procedures.
Semi-solids should be mixed with other solid waste to prevent localized
leaching, or separate, specialized disposal areas should be developed.
Sites shall be fenced to prevent unauthorized access and shall be super-
vised when open.
V.
20
J
-------
r
a
Where refuse containers arc utilized as part of a management system
for Group II solid wastes, all containers shall be maintained and kept in a
sanitary manner and emptied at lepst once a week, unless other arrange-
ments are determined acceptable.
3) Class III Sites
Although these sites are not required to be covered by earth ma-
terials daily, they shall be covered periodically.
4) Open Burning
For all classes of sites, the open burning of wastes is prohibited
unless a variance has been obtained from the Department.
5) Litter Control
Dumping must be confined to the areas within the disposal site that
can be effectively maintained. In addition, effective steps shall be taken
to control litter at all facilities.
c. Hazardous Waste [..anagement Systems
The Department nay require the maintenance of records, including
copies of waste manifests, and the submission of reports from persons
who store, treat, or dispose of hazardous wastes. Permanent records must
be maintained by the operator of a hazardous waste disposal facility,
identifying the location of each disposal area and the waste or waste
typek disposed of therein. Such disposal records shall be made available
to the new facility owner or operator if the facility is sold or leased to
another person.
No hazardous waste management system may store, treat, or dispose
of hazardous wastes m a manner which is inconsistent with methods
approved by the Department.
All hazardous waste management systems arc required to have licen-
ses issued by the Department.
Hazardous wastes found m household refuse may be disposed of at
Class II disposal sites without written authorization from the Department.
For areas not served by licensed Class I disposal sites, the Depart-
ment may, upon showing of good cause, authorize the disposal of hazar-
dous wastes at Class II disposal sites if no health hazard or no danger to
the environment would be presented.
d. Inspection and Enforcement
The Department has the authority to conduct inspections of solid
waste management systems at reasonable hours upon presentation of ap-
propriate credentials. If, after an inspection, the Department determines
21
J
-------
r
A
that violation of the Act or this rule is occurring, it shall notify the
licensee of the rature of the violation. Depending upon the severity of
the violation(s), the Department may seek a compliance schedule from the
applicant or may initiate proceedings to revoke the license. The Depart-
ment may also, through the Attorney General or appropriate county attor-
ney, seek to enjoin the licensee or collect a criminal penalty.
e. Loans and Grants
The Department shall provide financial assistance to local govern-
ments for lront-end planning activities for a proposed solid waste man-
agement system which if. compatible with the state plan whenever such fi-
nancial assistance is available.
The Department shall provide front-end organizational loans for the
implementation of an approved solid waste management system whenever
lunds lor such loans are available.
f. Refuse Disposal Districts
The state laws give the county commissioners the authority to create
solid waste districts tor the purpose of collection and/or disposal of
refuse. Cities and towns may be included in the district if approved by
the city or town councils.
g. Dead Animals
It is unlawful to place all or part of a dead animal 111 a lake, river,
creek, pond, reservoir, road, street, alley lot, or field. In addition, it is
unlawful to place a dead animal within one mile of the residence ot any
person unless the dead animal is burned or buried at least two feet un-
derground .
If a person refuses or neglects to comply with a written order or a
state or local health officer within a reasonable time specified in the
order, the state or local health officer may cause the order to be complied
with and may initiate an action to recover any expenses incurred from the
person who refused or neglected to comply with the order. The action to
recover expenses shall be brought in the name of the city or county. A
person who does not comply with rules adopted by the Board will be
guilty ot a misdemeanor.
h. On-Site Disposal
The state solid waste laws do not prohibit individuals or industry
from disposing of solid wastes on his or her own property as long as
such disposal does not create a nuisance or health hazard. A nuisance is
defined as "anything which is injurious to health or is indecent or of-
fensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of the property,
so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, or
unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner,
V
22
J
-------
r
of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any
public park, square, street, or highway."
i. Motor Vehicle Wrecking Facility Act
Under this act, each county is to establish a county motor vehicle
graveyard where any citizen may place a junk vehicle free of charge. The
county is also responsible for establishing a collection program in order to
pick up the junk vehicles and place them in the graveyard facility. Other
provisions of the law call for licensing and shielding all private motor
vehicle wrecking facilities and county motor vehicle graveyards.
j. Penalty for Violations
Any person violating the Act or regulations prescribed by the De-
partment under the Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon con-
viction, shall be fined not less than $50 nor more than $500. Each day
upon which a violation of this Act occurs shall be considered a separate
offense.
A person who stores, treats, transports, or disposes of a hazardous
waste in violation of this chapter, a rule adopted as authorized by this
chapter, or an order issued as provided for in this chapter is subject to
a civil penalty of not more than $25,000. Each day upon which a violation
occurs is a separate violation.
3. Federal Regulations
The federal regulations concerning the proper management of solid waste
are included in the "Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976"
(RCRA), which is documented as Public Law 94-580. The primary purpose of
the law is to suggest guidelines lor the proper disposal of solid and hazardous
wastes generated in the nation and also to develop guidelines for the proper
and safe recovery and re-use of recyclable materials found m the solid waste
system.
One primary feature of RCRA is the method bj which the new federal act
is to be administered by the individual state governments through the assis-
tance of the Environmental Protection Agency. Based on' this premise, the
State of Montana amended its laws and rules in 1977 to be in conformance with
the new federal guidelines. Therefore, the State of Montana's laws and rules
coincide quite closely with the new federal standards regarding solid waste
management.
C. EXISTING SOLID WASTE SERVICES AND FACILITIES
For this studj , several sources of information concerning the existing
solid wt.ste management practices m the study area wore identified. The pri-
mary sources that were utilized include: 1) interviews and discussions with
local, state and federal officials directly responsible for the regulation and
administration of the solid waste systems m the area; 2) discussions with local
officials and private citizens directly responsible for the operation and/or
V
23
J
-------
r
~\
management of the solid waste collection, transfer or disposal services and
facilities; 3) on-site inspections by the Consultant of all facilities and
equipment pertinent to the management of solid waste; and 4) review of cur-
rent and past reports and materials which have evaluated the existing systems
and facilities.
Included herein is a summary of the existing solid waste-related services
and facilities available in the study area. Figure 3 depicts the location of each
disposal site evaluated. Exhibits la and lb include photographs of the various
;,chd waste-related facilities located in the area.
1. Collection
a. Blackfcct Indian Reservation
Currently, two solid waste collection services arc available to resi-
dents on the Reservation. The High Plains Solid Waste System, a collec-
tion service administered by the Blackfeet Tribal Health Board, serves
i,"lost areas of the Reservation and some private commercial facilities, pri-
marily located in the tourist-oriented communities near Glacier National
Park. In addition, collection service is provided to several areas of tribal
housing by the Blackfeet Housing Authority.
The High Plains system utilizes two collection vehicles, a 1981 Inter-
national single-axle dicsel and a 1979 International, each equipped with a
20-cubic-yurd "Pak-IMor" side-loading compactor. The High Plains system
presently owns approximately 130 four-cubic-yard containers which are
placed throughout the Reservation. The wastes generated within most
areas of the Reservation are collected two to five times per week, de-
pending on the season. Collection schedules for commercial establishments
arc determined on an individual basis. The High Plains Solid Waste Svsteni
lias established a collection fee for all commercial units, programs and
lannly units on the Reservation in an attempt to make the program self-
sufficient and equitable. '1 his fee schedule varies dramatically and is in
the process of being updated. The system operated by the Housing Au-
thority utilizes a late-model Ford flat-bed truck for collection from perma-
nently placed containers within the housing units outside Browning. Col-
lection occurs on an as-needed basis from these residential units, and
costs for the service are included in Housing Authority programs.
Both collection services transport all waste to the Browning landfill
and are charged a dumping fee by the Town of Browning for utilizing the
lacility.
b. Town of Browning
The Town of Browning offers a municipal collection service to city
residents at a cost of $4.00 per month. This fee includes door-to-door
collection service once per week. Commercial collection schedules vary
from one time per week to daily collection, depending upon the volume of
V
24
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
Existing Waste Handling Conditions
BROWNING LANDFILL
HIGH PLAINS "GREEN-BOXES'
ST. MARY'S DISPOSAL SITE (closed)
HIGH PLAINS PACKER VEHICLE
-------
Existing Waste Handling Conditions
BABB DISPOSAL SITE
BLACKFOOT DISPOSAL SITE
HEART BUTTE DISPOSAL SITE
STARR SCHOOL DISPOSAL SITE
-------
r
A
waste generated at each establishment. Commercial rates generally range
from $10.00 to $20.00 per month, although higher monthly rates may be
charged to commercial establishments requiring special collection services.
The Town utilizes a 1979 Ford M-800 equipped with a twenty-cubic-yard
Leach compactor as a collection vehicle.
c. National Park Service
In the past, the National Park Service (NPS) provided solid waste
collection and disposal service to all facilities in Glacier National Park,
including Concessionaire operations. More recently, the NPS contracted
the collection of solid waste from its facilities to private collection con-
tractors. The most recent agreement for private collection service expired
in 1981 and thus was not utilized for the 1981 and 1982 tourist seasons.
Collection at NPS facilities during these most recent seasons is being pro-
vided by Park Service personnel. Two 12-cubic-yard rear-loading packers
are utilized to collect refuse on a predetermined schedule, from "bear-
proofed" 32-gallon containers placed in campgrounds, along roadsides,
and at staff housing at other NPS facilities. Refuse is collected daily from
nearly all NPS facilities during the tourist season, however, schedules
vary depending on the type and usage of each facility during the remain-
der of the year. All solid wastes collected at NPS facilities are trans-
ported to the landfill located in Browning for disposal. A dumping fee is
charged to the Park Service for each load of refuse deposited at the
Browning site.
d. Concessionaire Facilities
Collection of solid waste generated at Concessionaire facilities within
the Park is currently collected by the Park Concessionaire. The Conces-
sionaire operates its own collection vehicle, a standard sized rear-loading
packer, to collect and transport refuse to the landfill in Browning. Solid
waste is collected at least three times per week from the numerous facil-
ities under the Concessionaire's management.
2. Disposal Sites
a. Blackfeet Indian Reservation
Non-licensed dumps near the Reservation communities of Babb,
Blackfoot, Heart Butte and Starr School have been and to some degree
are still being used for refuse disposal. Use of some of these sites per-
sists despite the Reservation-wide collection and disposal system and ef-
forts by tribal, state and federal agencies to eliminate open dumping. Two
sites formerly used for dumping have been closed in recent years. The
Tribe is currently in the process of closing the remaining non-licensed
disposal facilities on the Reservation.
The following narrative summarizes the conditions found at several
open dump sites on the Reservation during an on-site investigation by the
V
28
J
-------
consultant in the Spring of 1980. Since that time, some of these dumps
have been cleaned up considerably or closed.
Babb: The site consists of at least forty acres of bottomland
located between U.S. Highway 89 and the St. Mary
River approximately one mile northwest of the commu-
nity. Ownership and responsibility for the site rests
with The Blackfeet Tribe. Access to the site is unrestrict-
ed and dumping may occur anywhere in the area of the
site. It appears as though some problems could be exper-
ienced from flooding, and the potential for groundwater
pollution is high due to the permeability of the soil at the
site.
Blackfoot: The site is situated on Tribal ground approximately
one-half mile northeast on the community. The site is
primarily confined to a narrow depression about 200
feet wide and 1,000 to 1,500 feet long. Access to the
site is unlimited, and the site has not been covered
for quite some time. The soils at the site are extremely
permeable. In addition, windblown litter appears to be
a real problem, because litter is scattered over a large
area.
Heart Butte: The dumpsite is located on tribal-owned land approxi-
mately one mile north of the Heart Butte community.
The site is quite large due to the large amount of ref-
use scattered over the area. Access to the site is un-
limited and windblown refuse is evident lor several
miles. The soil at the site is extremely rocky and is
not very well suited for landfilling operations.
Starr School: The site is located approximately one mile northeast of
the community on Tribal ground. The site is approxi-
mately twenty acres in size, and access is unlimited.
Some dumping has spilled over into one drainage of
Cut Bank Creek. Windblown litter also poses a problem
at the site, and the refuse at the site is occasionally
burned.
St. Mary: The site is located one-half mile northeast of the communi-
ty on seven acres of private ground. The site has been
closed and covered; however, dumping outside the fence
has continued.
b. Town of Browning
The disposal site operated by the Town of Browning is located ap-
proximately five miles northeast of the community. The site consists of 70
-------
acres of Tribal land acquired in 1975 through a 25-year lease agreement
with The Blackfeet Tribe and the B.I.A. All-weather roads provide good
access to the site. The entire site is fenced with a six-foot high chain
link fence, and access is limited by a lockable gate. The site is open from
9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays during the
winter and Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and for a
few hours on Saturday during the summer. A dozer is used to periodic-
ally maintain the site. The Town of Browning has utilized Public Service
Employment personnel as gate attendants in the past. Fees are charged
for dumping at the site and range from $.50 per carload to $5.00 per
truckload.
A site evaluation was performed by the Soil Conservation Service in
1976. The site was determined to be suitable as a landfill site with minimal
water pollution potential and good cover material. Some problems have
been experience with windblown litter due to the frequent high winds
common to the area.
The site is fully licensed as a Class II site by the State of Montana
and may accept Group II and Group III materials for disposal.
c. City of Cut Bank
A licensed disposal facility is also available for residents of Glacier
County outside the Reservation. The site is located approximately one mile
northeast of Cut Bank and consists of 80 acres of fenced land. Access to
the site is limited and an operator is on duty at all times. The site is
open Monday through Friday during the year; however, winter operating
hours are more restricted. Group II and Group III wastes are accepted
lor disposal at the site.
3. Summary of Existing Services and Facilities
The High Plains Solid Waste System provides a "green-box" service
throughout much of the Reservation and to numerous private concerns on the
edge of Glacier National Park. The National Park Service and the Concession-
aire also collect and transport wastes from their respective facilities in the
Park to the Browning landfill. In regard to the study area's disposal sites, it
is apparent that many of the existing sites are operated below current recom-
mended standards. This operation not only detracts from the aesthetics of the
area but also is potentially hazardous to the public health. Continuing efforts
arc, however, being made by local officials to close many of the open dump
sites in the area. According to these officials, this policy of improving or clos-
ing the dump sites m the study area will continue as time and funds allow.
V
30
J
-------
r
D. SOLID WASTE QUANTITIES
1. General
In order to design an efficient solid waste management plan, the nature of
solid wastes must be understood. For example, in this study area the majority
of the wastes arc generated by residences, small businesses and industries.
Iiowcvcr, significant quantities of wastes are also generated by tourists who
pass through the study area each vcar enjoying tourist attractions and the ac-
companying facilities. In order to effectively develop an efficient solid waste
disposal plan, all solid waste generation factors such as those special situations
encountered in the study area must be considered. Included in the following
narrative is a brief discussion of the solid waste generation sources, quantities
and composition characteristics which were evaluated and found to be pertinent
to the study.
2. Conventional Wastes
a. Waste Generation Hates
An important and useful tool in the evaluation and design of any
existing or proposed solid waste system is the per capita generation, or
the pounds per capita per day of solid waste generated in the area. If
the quantities of solid waste generated in the past have been weighed and
recorded, present and future quantities of waste can reasonably be pro-
jected .
From the Consultant's experience and from studies completed by var-
ious governmental groups, it has been determined that the generation rate
per capita varies with population density. Large urban areas generate a
high per capita rate because of the industrial and commercial wastes.
Rural areas with little or no commercial or industrial activity generate
relatively small amounts ol refuse. Such solid wastes usually consist of
only household wastes. Small towns generally have some commercial wastes
but have very little industrial waste. An analysis of the waste generation
information which has been compiled for this project as well as for previ-
ous solid waste-related projects in the state illustrates this point very
well. Summarized in the following text is a brief description of waste
generation data which was determined applicable for the study area.
1) Existing Disposal Site Data
An analysis of the records of all disposal sites in the study area
indicate that no disposal site has an accurate record of the quantities
of solid waste disposed of at the site. Some municipalities have estimates
of quantities of solid waste collected by their collection crews but have
little knowledge concerning the wastes brought to their disposal sites by
individual haulers and citizens. In addition, many of the disposal sites
have unlimited access and thus maintaining solid waste quantity data is
practically impossible. Based on the lack of waste generation data
available from the disposal sites located in the study area, other sources
V
31
J
-------
r
~\
of waste generation information must be obtained and reviewed so that
quantities of solid waste can be estimated tor the various jurisdictional
areas located within the study area.
2) Other Available Waste Generation Data
The most applicable solid waste generation data available today for
the study area is the resultant data that was obtained from detailed waste
Qcncration studies which were conducted for the state m conjunction with
the State oi Montana Solid Waste Management and Resource Study com-
pleted in December, 1976. During that study, detailed investigations and
surveillances were conducted at ten waste disposal sites throughout the
state. At each site, a one-week surveillance was conducted whereby the
types, quantity and origin of the wastes were recorded for each vehicle
that entered the site. Based on that information, the average waste gen-
eration rate for the various communities which utilized each site was de-
termined by dividing each community's waste generated by each commun-
ity's estimated population. Based on the data accumulated in the surveil-
lances conducted during that study, it was determined that there is a
definite correlation between the population of the individual communities
and the corresponding waste generation rates. Included below is a sum-
mary of the results of that waste generation study, "Population, Employ-
ment and Waste Generation Report for the State of Montana Solid Waste
Management and Resource Recovery Study, January, 1979." Only those
results applicable to the study area have been included.
* Cities 1,000 to 5,000- For the cities with populations between 1,000
and 5,000 there was a distinct reduction in the total waste generated
compared to the larger cities. The major reason for this was the re-
duction m commercial and industrial waste. The percentage break-
down by material type for these size communities was as follows: 79
percent residential, 13 percent commercial-industrial, and 8 percent
demolition.
4 Rural Areas- The average waste generation rate for the rural area
was 2.25 pounds per person per day. This rate was substantially
lower than all other population categories. This is expected since
primarily only residential-type wastes arc generated in rural areas
with very little commercial and industrial activity.
Average Waste Generation Rates: Based on the data obtained from
the surveillance discussed above, average waste generation rates
were developed for various population ranges in the state. The aver-
age rates determined applicable for the study area arc summarized in
the following table.
V
32
J
-------
AVERAGE WASTE GENERATION RATES
(lbs./person/day)
Population
Residential
Commercial/
Industrial
Demolition
Debris, etc. Total
1,000 to 5,000
2.20
0.50
0.55
3.25
Less than 1,000
and Rural
2.00
0.25
2.25
A review of the waste generation data which was developed for
the statewide study was compared with waste generation rates which
have been developed by other governmental entities throughout the
state and the nation. It was determined that the average general in-
formation determined to be applicable in the state compares quite
closely with other entities and thus it is considered to be quite valid
for this project.
b. Waste Quantities
Based on the waste generation rates which were determined to be
applicable lor this project, quantities of solid wastes currently gener-
ated in the study area were estimated by multiplying the appropriate
waste generation rate with the current estimated population of the study
area. Currently, it is estimated that 3,560 tons of conventional solid
wastes are generated within the study aiea each year.
3. Tourism-Related Wastes
a. General
Tourism is extremely important in many areas of Montana, and the
study aiea is no exception. One of Montana's great attractions, Glacier
National Park, is within the study area and its presence provides the ba-
sis for a thriving tourist economy. Recreational opportunities for fishing,
camping, or sightseeing arc numerous in this part of Montana. Although
tourism provides a large boost to many of the communities within the
study area, other effects may be associated with the seasonal influx of
people. The lollowing section discusses the impact tourism has on the
solid waste generation in the study area.
b. Individual Generation Sources
Throughout Glacier County and the eastern half of C-lacier National
-------
r
Park, numerous recreation sites exist under the management of the Na-
tional Park Service, the Park Concessionaire, The Blackfeet Tribe, sever-
al federal and state agencies, and private individuals. The quantities of
solid waste generated at these sites are relatively small when considered
individually; however, collectively they constitute a substantial volume of
refuse that must be dealt with accordingly. A basic inventory of existing
tourist facilities was completed with the assistance of several sources
including the use of maps, reports and interviews with involved agencies
and individuals. The tourist facilities located within the study area are
depicted in Figure 4.
The following section summarizes the tourist facilities present within
the study area and briefly discusses the solid waste management practices
of each. Estimates of current solid waste quantities generated at the vari-
ous types of facilities are also presented herein.
1) National Park Service
The National Park Service maintains five campgrounds (Cut Bank,
Many Glacier, Rising Sun, St. Mary, and Two Medicine), two visitor cen-
ters (Logan Pass and St. Mary), staff housing (St. Mary and East Gla-
cier), and maintenance facilities (primarily at St. Mary) in the eastern
half of Glacier National Park. As previously mentioned, NPS collects ref-
use from each of the facilities according to a predetermined schedule and
ultimately transports the solid waste to the Browning landfill. Actual
counts of the number of cans collected within the Park for the past sev-
eral years were obtained from NPS officials and were utilized to estimate
the current quantity of solid waste generated at NPS facilities. It is es-
timated that 165 tons of solid waste are generated at NPS facilities an-
nually .
2) Park Concessionaire
Concessionaire facilities in the Park are centered near Lake Sher-
burne, along St. Mary Lake, at Two Medicine, and at East Glacier. The
Concessionaire's operations include large hotels such as the Many Glacier
Hotel and the Glacier Park Lodge located at Lake Sherburne and East Gla-
cier, respectively; motels and cabins including the Swiftcurrent Motor Inn
and Lake Sherburne and the Rising Sun Motor Inn near St. Mary; and
numerous other facilities including gas stations, gift shops, restaurants,
grocery stores, stables and boat houses. All of these facilities require a
great deal of seasonal help and the Concessionaire provides dormitory fa-
cilities near the major hotel and accompanying facilities.
Based on information obtained from the Concessionaire for the last
year, it is estimated that approximately 175 tons of solid waste are gen-
erated annually at Concessionaire facilities within the eastern half of
Glacier Park.
V
34
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
r
*\
4 . Major Private Concerns
a. Tribal-Managed Campgrounds
Campgrounds under the management of The Blackfeet Tribe are
Chewing Blackbones, a multi-use facility near St. Mary; Duck Lake Camp-
ground, located near Babb; and Lower Two Medicine Campground located
near Two Medicine Lake. Each of these sites is served by the High Plains
Solid Waste System. Use at these facilities is similar to that experienced
at NPS camping facilities, since the season extends from mid-May through
September. It is estimated that approximately 23 tons of solid waste are
generated during the season at these sites.
b. Other Private Campgrounds
Numerous other campgrounds exist in the study area and are primar-
ily concentrated in and around the communities of Babb, St. Mary, and
East Glacier. Most of these facilities are seasonal, with tourist use
peaking in July. It is estimated that approximately 57 tons of solid waste
are generated at these private campgrounds during the camping season.
c. Motels
Motel facilities are located in most major communities within the study
area, although they are primarily centered in the tourist-oriented commu-
nities near Glacier Park. The St. Mary Lodge in St. Mary is the largest
of the non-concessionaire-operated facilities, and it offers approximately
100 motel units and employs as many as 150 seasonal employees. Several
motels are also located in Babb, East Glacier, and Browning. Some of
these are open year-round, but most limit their operations or close en-
tirely after the tourist season concludes. It is estimated that motel oper-
ations in the study area account for an additional 78 tons of solid waste
during the peak tourist season. Waste generated throughout the rest of
the year is included in the conventional waste quantities previously dis-
cussed.
5. Other Seasonal Generators
a. Border Ports
Within the study area, border ports are located at Chief Mountain,
Piegan, and Del Bonita. Solid waste collection and disposal at these sites
is generally contracted to private individuals or collection services.
Traffic at the ports, especially at Chief Mountain and Piegan, increases
during the summer due to the number of tourists wishing to visit Water-
ton Lakes National Park and the number of Canadian tourists wishing to
visit the study area. It is estimated that five tons of solid waste are
generated at these facilities during the year.
b. Montana Department of Highways
It is a general practice of the Montana Department of Highways to
place roadside litter barrels at numerous locations along major routes. In
36
J
-------
r
the post, tho Highway Deportment utilized its own maintenance personnel
to collect and dispose of refuse from these roadside barrels; however,
this practice has been modified somewhat within the study area. The
Highway Department has contracted with High Plains Solid Waste Systems
to provide collection and disposal service lor a number of four-cubic-yard
containers provided by the collection service. It is estimated that approx-
imately 30 tons of solid waste will be deposited in these roadside con-
tainers this year.
c. Waste Quantities
Based on the analysis conducted herein, it is estimated that approxi-
mately 533 tons of solid waste are generated by tourists and tho major
tourist-related facilities withm the study area annually.
G. Summary of Waste Generation
a. Solid Waste Quantities
Lascd on the investigations which were made relative to the waste
generation characteristics within the study area, the current quantities of
solid waste generated within the area have been determined. These cur-
rent quantities are depicted in Table 1. As shown, the quantities of waste
have been determined lor each major solid waste generation source in the
study area.
As further illustrated, the wastes generated in the study area have
been broken down into two waste generation categories, "conventional"
wastes ana "tourist-related" wastes. The quantity of "conventional"
wastes represents those wastes which are generated by the full-time resi-
dents living within the study area and the corresponding commercial es-
tablishments required to serve these residents. The quantity of "tourist-
related" wastes represents those additional wastes which are generated as
a result of the high tourist activity within the area.
It is estimated that 4,092 tons of solid waste are generated in the
study area annually. Approximately 86 percent of these wastes arc gener-
ated by the permanent residents and commercial establishments located
within the study area. An additional 533 tons ot solid waste, or 14 per-
cent, are generated annually as a result of tourist activity within the
study area. Of these tourist-generated wastes, G4 percent are generated
at recreation sites within Glacier National Park or at Concessionaire fa-
cilities within the Park and in nearby communities.
b. Seasonal Variation
The generation ol solid waste in the study area fluctuates dramatic-
ally from season to season. As discussed previously, there are two pri-
mary sources of wastes generated in the area: 1) the conventional wastes
generated by the permanent residents and the associated commercial es-
tablishments; and 2) the wastes resulting from the tourism activity in the
V
37
J
-------
r
rirea. From the consultant's experience in monitoring the generation of
solid waste in areas of Montana where detailed waste quantity data has
been recorded, it can be assumed that the generation of the conventional
solid waste in the summer is approximately 25 percent above average.
This is primarily due to the seasonal disposal of demolition debris, etc.
Likewise, the generation of the conventional wastes in the winter months
is approximately 25 percent below average. This seasonal fluctuation is
graphically depicted in Figure 5.
With regard to the generation of the tourist-related wastes, it is
quite apparent that the majority of these wastes are generated in the
summer months. Through the Consultant's research, it has been estimated
that almost all of the tourist-related wastes disposed of in the study area
arc generated lrom Memorial Day to Labor Day. Correspondingly, approxi-
mated 95 percent of the tourist-related wastes in Glacier National Park
arc generated during this summer period. Obviously, however, there arc
a lew unique situations m the study are where this seasonal fluctuation is
not valid.
c. Projected Waste Quantities
1) Conventional Wastes
Based on the waste generation rates which were determined to be
applicable for this project, future quantities of solid waste generated in
the study area were estimated by multiplying the appropriate waste gen-
eration rate by the projected populations of the study area through the
year ?000. The population projections and waste generation rates utilized
may diifer dramatically within the next twenty years, which will alfcet
these projections. However, at this time it is felt that the current gen-
eration rates and projected populations are most reasonable. It is esti-
mated that by the year 2000, approximately 4,100 tons of conventional
solid wastes will be generated annually in the study area.
2) Tourist-lielated Wastes
Projections of the future quantities of solid waste generated by
tourism within the study area must be examined to properly size solid
waste services and facilities. Factors which provide a basis for pro-
jecting future tourist-related waste quantities include historical and
projected visitation statistics for Clacier National Park and planned
expansion of tourist facilities within the study area.
Tourism within the study area is expected to remain extremely
dependent upon the visitation to Glacier National Park. Historically,
visitation to the Park has generally increased; however, in recent
years visitation has fallen off somewhat. National Park Service rep-
resentatives estimate that visitation will remain relatively constant at
approximately 1.5 million visitors annually. Discussions with the NPS,
local officials, and ether private businessmen revealed that no major
V
38
J
-------
TABLE 1
CURRENT STUDY AREA WASTE QUANTITIES
(Tons)
WASTE GENERATION
SOURCE
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
Peak Season
May June July Aug. Sept.
Oct Nov. Dec.
Permanent
Conventional Waste
(Res. - Comm. - Indus.)
189 235 295 338
324 324 409 377 367
299 224 179
Seasonal
1. Glacier National Park
2. Concessionaire Facilities
3. Major Private Concerns.*
a) Tribal Campgrounds
b) Other Campgrounds
c) Motels
4. Other.
a) Border Ports
b) Highway Department
-Closed-
33
34
41
52
46
52
1
4
8
7
3
10
19
18
4
14
26
25
28
37
2
-Closed-
¦ Minimal •
¦ Minimal
1
6
1
9
1 [—Minimal—
•Minimal
Subtotal. (Seasonal)
TOTAL:
19
102
156 156
190
236
295
339
343 426 565 533
90
457
302
226
180
* Minimal wastes generated during off-peak season. Any wastes generated will be considered as conventional commercial wastes.
-------
Seasonal Variation in S
Conventional
] Glacier National Park
Concessionaire
Major Private Concerns
600
^ 500
-------
r
~\
expansion of study area tourist facilities is planned at this time. Based on
this information, it is estimated that the quantity of solid waste generated
by tourism in the year 2000 will be similar to the current quantity of
tourist-generated wastes. It is extremely difficult to pro]ect the future
quantities of solid waste, since changes in the energy situation or Nation-
al Park Service policy could dramatically affect the use of study area
tourist facilities.
3) Total Study Area Waste Quantities
It is estimated that approximately 4,700 tons of solid waste will be
generated annually m the study area by the year 2000. This represents
approximately a 14 percent increase in solid waste quantities over the
next 20-year period.
V
41
J
-------
PART FOUR
RECYCLING FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
-------
r
a
PART FOUR
RECYCLING FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
A. GENERAL
The primary objective of this section of the study is to identify and eval-
uate existing and potential markets for recoverable materials in the solid waste
generated in the study area. The information obtained from this investigation
will be used to determine the potential of implementing recycling and/or re-
source recovery strategies within the area of study. The potential for imple-
menting a solid waste recycling program is directly dependent upon markets
for the recoverable materials. Revenue from the recoverable materials must be
obtained to offset the costs of collecting and separating the wastes in most
cases. If revenues for the recoverable materials cannot be obtained, other
methods of disposal will be more economical.
Historically and at the present time, the markets for recoverable materials
have shown significant fluctuation. The fluctuations may be attributed to a
number of outside forces. Among these ai*e 1) supply and demand for specific
materials; 2) strikes in virgin material industries, 3) governmental influences
through tax or price incentives; 4) foreign purchases; and 5) transportation
costs. In general, markets for recoverable materials have shown an upward
trend similar to that of most other commodities. Although future prices are
extremely difficult or impossible to predict, it would be reasonable to expect
this trend to continue. In addition to the economic factors, environmental,
technological, political and sociological forces are emphasizing recycling
programs as a desirable and practical alternative to conventional solid waste
disposal. The extreme fluctuations in price and quantities are lessened in
magnitude and frequency as the market for recoverable materials increases.
When prices arc adequate enough to make recycling attractive, many individual
waste generators practice recycling. When the market drops below a certain
economic level, these recycling materials become solid waste.
B. TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF RECOVERABLE MATERIALS
An important factor that must be determined prior to the evaluation of the
feasibility of recycling solid wastes is the quantity and composition of wastes
generated in the study area. Generally there are two types of recoverable ma-
terials found in solid wastes1 1) secondary materials that can be reused, such
as newsprint, corrugated paper (cardboard) glass, and metal containers; and
2) those materials which can be used as a fuel source to generate steam, elec-
tricity and/or heat. The analysis included in this chapter summarizes the fea-
sibility of recovering those secondary materials generated in the area. The
analysis evaluating the feasibility of utilizing solid waste as an energy source
will be included in Part Six.
42
J
-------
r
In most instances, the recoverable secondary materials that are practical
to recycle are limited to ierrous and non-ferrous metals, separated newsprint
and cardboard, and glass. In some instances, other materials such as clothing,
rubber and wood products are economically recoverable. However, these in-
stances are uncommon and will not be investigated to a great degree in this
study.
The estimated quantities of recoverable secondary materials generated in
the study area are depicted m Table 2. The quantities of materials depicted
arc based on the waste generation information developed in Part Two of this
report and the waste composition data that was determined applicable from the
state-wide solid waste study conducted in 197G. As the table indicates, ap-
proximately 242 and 41 tons of recoverable ferrous and non-ferrous metals,
respectively, arc generated in the study area annually. Also, 769 and 315 tons
oi paper and corrugated, respectively, are generated and potentially recover-
able annually. If market conditions are favorable, it is anticipated that a
majority oi this material could be recovered economically and effectively.
C. MARKET ANALYSIS FOR SECONDARY MATERIALS
A review of potential buyers lor materials that may be recovered from the
study area's solid waste indicates that real markets presently exist for many
products. Before some materials gain acceptance and arc in demand in the mar-
ketplace, however, new developments must occur within the industry to make
these commodities attractive. In most cases, the recovered materials must meet
strict specifications set dewn by industry in order to command the highest
market price. In all cases, a recycling program should be designed to be flex-
ible enough so that if one market slows down or fails, any single unit process
for a commodity can be discontinued or shifted to another market without dis-
rupting the future ol the program. During such a slowdown, it would be use-
less for the program to continue to recover that product if no other market
was available. In some situations it may also be profitable to stockpile the
material awaiting a favorable change in market conditions rather than to dis-
continue collection of the materials.
The basic objective of the product identification and marketing portion of
this study was to identify the various potential buyers who exist for the pro-
ducts which could conceivably by separated from solid wastes within the study
area. It is apparent that a large array of products could possibly be recovered
from the solid waste generated in the area. In order to explore the market po-
tential of the alternative products more efficiently, these products were
grouped into several major categories: 1) ferrous metals; 2) non-ferrous met-
als: 3) glass; and 4) paper products. The first task in this analysis was to
identify the major processes used in the recovery of the material and the uses
the material may serve. Then local markets, other Montana markets and nation-
al or regional markets were addressed for each of the major categories.
43
J
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF TOTAL WASTE COMPOSITION
FOR
STUDY AREA
(Tons Per Year)
Characteristic
Averag^
Percent
Estimated
Current Quantity
Year 2000
Projected Quantity
Combustibles.
Paper
Cardboard
Other
18.8
7.7
31.7
769
315
1,298
884
361
1,490
Subtotal
58.2
2,382
2,735
Non-Combustibles •
Ferrous
Non-Ferrous
Glass
Other
5.9
1.0
4.3
30.G
242
41
176
1,252
278
47
202
1,438
Subtotal
41.8
1,711
1,965
TOTAL:
100%
4,093
4,700
Source: "Population, Employment and Waste Generation Report" prepared
lor the State of Montana Department of Health and Environmen-
tal Sciences, 1976.
-------
r
]. Recovery Processes
a. Ferrous Metals
Basically, there are two processes for the recovery of ferrous mater-
ials from solid wastes: chemical processing and remelting. Chemical pro-
cessing is intended to extract primarily tin and copper from ferrous ma-
terials. Detinning is an industrial process which recovers tin from tin-
platcd steel cans, and which generally yields about seven pounds oi tin
from each ton of scrap cans. Copper precipitation involves the leaching
out of copper from reclaimed steel cans; presently, this process is one of
the few economically feasible methods of recovering copper from low-grade
materials.
In addition, steel scrap may be remelted in steel furnaces and iron
Jcundrics and used to produce new steel products. The main source of
remelting material, steel cans, may not be a desirable raw material due to
the low density oi the scrap and non-ferrous contaminants. Other ferrous
scrap such as white goods, appliances, automobiles, and similar materials
are denser and are better suited for the remelting process. Steel can
scrap may also be used to produce ferro-alloys when the iron is combined
with controlled quantities oi other elements. The resulting material is then
used as an additive m melts for alloy steel and castings.
b. Non-Ferrous Metals
Although non-ferrous metals, comprised primarily of aluminum, rep-
resent less than one percent of the municipal solid waste, once separated
these materials become extremely valuable and numerous markets exist.
After the general metal waste has been shredded and ferrous metals
ha\ e been magnetically removed, two processes are generally used to iso-
late the aluminum traction of the resultant material. The Iirst procedure
employs chemicals winch arc directly added to a suspension in which the
aluminum is sitting. Recoverable aluminum, comprised of numerous alumi-
num alloys and other light metals, will separate itself by collecting on the
surface. The aluminum isolated in this way can be marketed; however,
the quality of the material is reflected in low market prices. The aluminum
traction found primarily m beverage cans may be isolated by eddy cur-
rent separation, a process that essentially uses "aluminum magnets" to
attract recoverable aluminum. 1 his material is a single alloy and has a
relatively high market value. The aluminum recovered by both processes
and other scrap aluminum is remelted and cast directly into ingots tor use
in making new cans and other products.
ivaxed non-ferrous inetals account for a small portion of the total
non-ferrous metals that can be recovered from solid waste. This portion
of the waste consists of small amounts of copper, lead, zinc, brass and
other metals. Lach of these metals is valuable by itself, but extensive
processing is required to recover individual non-ferrous metals. Cur-
V
45
J
-------
( \
l'cntly, the recovery oi these metals by processing is not economically
feasible.
c. Glass
Certain types of glass which are contained in municipal solid waste
nay be recovered, rcmelted, and used in the manufacture ol new glass
products. Most glass manufacturers readily accept the scrap glass, or
cullet, because its use reduces fuel consumption and aids the melting
process by liquifying at lower temperatures than new materials. Color and
puntv requirements established by glass manufacturers limit the recovery
oi glass to some extent. The only reliable method of insuring the quality
of the recovered glass is bv manual sorting, an expensive and time-
consuming process. Unsorted crushed glass scrap has been utilized in
some areas as an aggregate m the production of asphalt and other
building materials.
d. Paper Products
Waste paper products may be recovered by several different methods
which include- 1) diiect recovery by the paper industry; 2) manual seg-
regation ol selected papers by consumers; 3) mechanical processing of
municipal waste to recover fiber material; and 4) conversion to usable
loims ol energy by processing the paper along with other post-consumer
wastes. Recovered paper is primarily used for the manufacture of building
products and for repulping. The operations that use waste papers as a
raw material arc extremely concerned about levels of contaminants such as
plastics, metals, ano oils, which have serious effects on some manufactur-
ing processes. It is very probable that some recycled papers could not be
acceptable for uses such as food packing because of public health con-
cerns.
In general there are three ma]or types oi waste paper that are easily
recoverable. These types include
1) Used containers, both solid fiber and corrugated (cardboard);
2) News, which includes newspapers and special types of news-
print;
3) Mixed papers, primarily nill wrappers, computer cards and
printouts, book stock, and magazine papers.
2. Secondary Materials Markets
For the purposes oi tins report, inquiries were made to three levels of
secondary materials markets, national, state, and local outlets. Several national
and state industrial and trade associations were contacted and potential buyers
of these materials were identified from each association's membership. As the
list of potential buyers increased, specific inquiries were formulated regarding
the required material specincations, the capacity each potential buyer might
have for recovered materials, and the pricing structure associated with each of
the potential products. Included herein is a summary of the market investiga-
^ 46 '
-------
; \
tions winch were conducted to determine the feasibility of recovering secondary
materials from the solid wastes generated within the study area. Prices inclu-
dea in the following' tables reflect 1S81 commodity markets.
a. Ferrous Metal Markets
On the national level, some interest was shown by Midwestern mar-
kets in purchasing ferrous materials which could potentially be recovered
from solid waste generated in the study area. Utilization of these markets
is not currently profitable due to the long" haul distances and the high
freight and handling costs required to transport the material to the near-
est plant locations.
Markets for secondary ferrous materials within Montana consist pri-
marily of scrap metal dealers, and those contacted expressed considerable
interest m purchasing recovered ferrous materials. One industry, ARCO,
located in Butte, is presently operating a copper precipitation plant and
utilises substantial quantities of shredded and detinned ferrous metals in
its process. Officials indicated that they could bo considered a potential
market for this type of ferrous material if quantities were large enough
and high standards could be maintained. Local and area markets that have
indicated an interest in purchasing certain types of ferrous scrap metal
include
Pacilic Hide & Fur (Great Falls-Cut Bank) Cast/Scrap Iron ($20-$40/Ton)
Pacific Iron t Metal (Kalispell)- Cast/Scrap Iron ($20-$40/lon)
Carl Weispman & Sons (Great Falls): Cast/Scrap Iron ($1G-$30/Ton)
Flathead Ind. for the Handicapped (Kalispell)- Steel cans ($.08/lb.)
b. Non-Ferrous Metal Markets
In regard to potential markets for the recoverable non-ferrous metals
generated within the study area, it was determined that definite national
markets exist for these materials. Several firms from the Pacific Northwest
expressed interest in these materials; however, high transportation and
handling charges effectively prevent the use of the markets at this time.
Numerous state and local outlets exist for recovered non-ferrous me-
tals, primarily because each metal is relatively valuable. Aluminum, cop-
per, brass, and to some extent lead are most often purchased by scrap
metal dealers. The price paid for each metal is dependent upon the quan-
tity and the amount of contaminants each recovered material contains. The
most favorable local and area markets are summarized as follows-
V
47
J
-------
r
Pacific Iron & Metal:
(kalispell)
Great Frills Recycling •
Pacific Hide & Fur
(Great Falls - Cut Bank)
Flathead Ind. lor the Handicapped •
(Kalispell)
Cnrl Weissman & Sons:
(Great Falls)
Aluminum ($. 20-. 30/lb.)
Brass ($.27-. 35/lb.)
Copper ($.40-.50/lb)
Aluminum (cans & scrap) $.20-.30/lb.
Brass (red & yellow) $.30-.40/lb.
Copper (No. 1 S. 2) $.45-.60/lb.
Aluminum (cans & scrap) $.20-.30/lb.
Brass (red & yellow) $.27-.35/lb.
Copper (No. 1 fL 2) $.45-.55/lb.
Aluminum (cans & scrap) $. 08-$. 30/lb .
Aluminum cans, $.25/lb.
Pennington's, Inc.-
(S hclby)
Aluminum cans, $.25/lb.
Shelby Listributors
(Shelby )
Aluminum cans, $.25/lb.
In addition, a resident ot Browning currently purchases aluminum
beverage cans from local residents for resale at a later time.
c. Glass Markets
An investigation into the location of glass container manufacturing
plants indicated that very lew glass manufacturing industries are close
enough to Montana to be considered potential markets. The Owens-Illinois
Corporation operates two glass container plants m the Pacific Northwest
which accept large quantities of recovered glass. Again, it is not feasible
to utilize this market due to high transport and handling costs.
The most favorable local markets exist with the recycling centers and
beverage distributors located m Great Falls and Kalispell. These outlets
accept only specilic types of beverage bottles. The following area markets
appear to be the most favorable outlets for certain types of beverage bot-
tles.
Great Falls Recycling: Selected bottles ($.25 or .50/casc)
Flathead Ind. lor the Handicapped: Selected bottles ($.25 or .50/case)
(Kalispell)
d. Taper Markets
Markets for recovered waste papers, including- newsprint, corrugated
and other types of mixed papers are extremely favorable. Numerous out-
lets for these materials exist within the region and the state of Montana.
1'irms located in eastern Washington and in Utah both expressed interest
in purchasing recovered materials. The paper market fluctuates a great
deal and at the present time it is not economical to use these regional
markets because of transportation costs.
V.
48
-------
Numerous outlets for waste paper within the State of Montana mnv be
utilized eifectively. Two firms located in Great Falls use newsprint
throughout the year. Currently, the price being paid for newsprint is
quite low, a reflection of the trend being experienced by the building in-
dustry. Great Falls Recycling accepts newsprint and other types of waste
paper and provides the most favorable outlet for recovered paper. The
following listing summarizes the most favorable outlets for waste paper
materials potentially recoverable from waste generated within the study
area •
Great Falls Recycling
Robinson Insulation
((..real Tails)
Allweathcr Insulation.
(Great Falls)
Newsprint & Ledger ($0.01 to 0.02/lb)
Computer Cards ($0.05/lb)
Computer Printout ($0.04/lb)
Newsprint ($20/Ton)
Newsprint ($20/Ton)
Market prices for newsprint and corrugated papers increase signifi-
cantly if large quantities of clean materials are available and if the
density of the waste paper is increased by baling. In most cases, the ma-
terial must be dehveied to the plant location.
D. SUMMARY OF RECYCLING FEASIBILITY
Included m the following narrative is a summary of current recycling ef-
forts and a discussion of the potential for economically recovering and market-
ing secondary materials found in the study area's solid waste stream.
1. Ferrous Metals
Due to the small quantity of feircus materials (242 tons per year) annu-
ally generated within the study area and the long distances between the study
area and Midwestern consumers, utilization of regional markets is prohibitive at
this time. This fact makes the utilization of local or area markets the most
leasible alternative.
Currently, efforts to recover ferrous metals within the study area consist
of voluntary recycling on an individual basis. Ferrous materials, primarily
scrap metal and junk vehicles, may be transported to outlets in Browning or
Cut Bark. An auto salvage yard is located in Browning, and three similar out-
lets are located in Cut Bank.
2. Kon-Ferrous Metals
Regional markets for non-ferrous metals exist in the Midwest and on the
West Coast; however, the high transportation costs associated with shipping
non-ferrous metals from the study area to these regional markets make their
utilization not economically feasible at this time.
-------
r
Iiowcvcr, numerous state and loeal markets exist lor non-ferrous materials
generated within the study area, primarily because of the value of many of
these metals. Although only 42 tons of non-ferrous metals are generated in the
study area, the favorable price structures of the non-ferrous metals markets
provide the largest incentive for recovery of these metals.
Currently, voluntary recycling of non-ferrous metals, primarily aluminum
beverage containers, is practiced within the study area. Many individuals reg-
uh'ily collect beverage containers and return them to beverage distributors or
scrap metal dealers located in Cut Bank, Shelby, Great Falls or Kalispell. A
local resident of Browning, has purchased aluminum cans from other residents
of the study area for ultimate sale to area scrap metal dealers. Private organ-
izations or clubs have undoubtedly collected these materials for fund-raising
projects within the study area.
Currently, the potential lor the recovery of most types of waste glass is
relatively low. Although regional markets in the Pacific Northwest expressed
interest in obtaining waste glass from the study area, available quantities of
glass and the market prices do not offset transportation charges. Utilization of
area markets is the most practical alternative. Glass recycling within the study
area consists solely of voluntary efforts. Selected beverage bottles are pur-
chased by area recycling centers or beverage distributors in Kalispell and
Great Falls.
4. Paper Products
Although national and regional markets do exist for some paper products,
it appears more feasible to utiluc the markets within the state. As previously
mentioned, several operations within Montana utilize newsprint in the manufac-
ture of cellulose fiber insulation. At this time, no efforts to recycle waste
p."per are known to exist within the study area. Prices in the paper market
arc dependent upon the building industry and are extremely variable. Suffi-
cient outlets exist within the state to purchase many types of paper products
during all market conditions. It is anticipated that recycling of newsprint or
corrugated by individuals or groups would be initiated if market conditions
were favorable.
At the present time, resource recovery options for the study area appear
limited. Due to the relatively small quantities of recoverable materials gen-
erated annually within the study area, the distance to regional markets, and in
many cases the present market pricing structure, development of an extensive
resource recovery program is not seen as feasible for the study area. Markets
for non-ferrous metals, primarily aluminum, have consistently improved in re-
cent years and implementation of a recycling program based on these recover-
able materials would appear to be the most feasible option. During favorable
market conditions, a recycling program based on recoverable paper may be
feasible.
3. Glass
50
J
-------
PART FIVE
ANALYSIS OF SPECIAL WASTES
-------
r
PART FIVE
ANALYSIS OF SPECIAL WASTES
A. GENERAL
The ouantity and composition of solid waste varies considerably
around the State nl Montana nnc \.'ithin the study area. Although various
portions of the study area generate different types and quantities of solid
waste, the conventional portion (residential and commercial) of the total
waste generated has similar composition characteristics and is generated in
about the same per capita quantities throughout the study area and the
state. These wastes arc estimated to comprise approximately 00 percent of
the total waste generated. It is the remaining ten percent of the wastes
which varies the most m composition from area to area. These "special"
wastes arc responsible lor many ol the solid waste management problems
generally experienced, because most require special handling and disposal.
It should be emphasized that regardless of the waste handling alternative
that is implemented, provisions and/or handling facilities which arc compat-
ible with the selected solid waste management system must be made avail-
able for the renaming: special wastes.
In order to determine the proper disposal method for these "special"
wastes, it is first necessary tc classify them according to waste tvpe.
During Play, 1980 the federal government through the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA) published waste classification, handling and disposal
guidelines which categorized solid waste into hazardous and non-hazardous
wastes. The State ol iVontana generally classifies wastes according to the
guidelines established by the I-PA. Under the current State regulations, all
wastes categorized by the EPA as hazardous ore considered Group I wastes
by the State and must be disposed of at a Class I disposal site. The State
further classifies all decomposable wastes, excluding hazardous wastes, as
Group II. and requires that these wastes be disposed of at a conventional
samtarv lardfill (Class II site). According to state regulations, all other
materials such as construction debris, wood wastes and inert materials arc
classified as Group III materials and can be disposed of in a Class III
disposrl site (demolition and fill site).
Included m the following section of this report is a brief evaluation of
the existing disposal regulations and practices, and suggestions for the
proper disposal ol numerous "special" wastes generated within the study
area. Obviouslv, there are other types of wastes produced within the
study area that present occasional problems to local officials and residents;
however, in most instances these problems may be solved on a case-by-
casc basis and do not warrant extensive analysis at this time. The follow-
ing narrative contains a brief summary of the information obtained and the
V
51
J
-------
r
recommendations for handling and disposal that were formulated for each type
of waste analyzed.
D. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL WASTE TYPES
1. Septic Tank Pumpings
Significant quantities of septic tank pumping are generated within the
study area each year. Septic tank systems are commonly used throughout the
study area because municipal treatment facilities are available only in Brown-
ing, Cut Bank and other small communities. Quantities of septic tank wastes
are also generated within the study area by tourists travelling in self-con-
tained camper units. Currently, the septic pumpers operating in the study
area are disposing of these septic tank pumpings in one of the municipal sew-
age systems located in the area.
According to the current EPA guidelines, septic tank pumpings are con-
sidered to be non-hazardous and may be deposited in a conventional sanitary
landlill (Class II landfill). Municipal sewage sludge and non-hazardous indus-
trial sludges may be disposed of in a similar fashion, providing proper treat-
ment has occurred. State of Montana regulations mandate that special use per-
mits be obtained before these materials are disposed of at a Class II site. The
operational procedures and environmental conditions of each site must be eval-
uated before State approval is granted.
a. General Disposal Practices
As previously mentioned, disposal of septic tank pumpings may occur
at Class II landfills if State approval is granted. Currently, very few
landfills within the state have obtained permission to dispose of this
material. Any landfill which presently accepts such materials and does not
have licensed approval is not operating in strict compliance with the law.
Numerous cases of indiscriminate dumping of septic tank pumpings occur
throughout the state each year. This practice is not only unlawful but al-
so quite hazardous, due to the potential for groundwater pollution and
public health problems.
b. Recommended Disposal Procedures
It is recommended that septic tank pumpings be disposed of at an
existing sewage treatment facility, where the material may be integrated
into the treatment process. The disposal of septic tank pumpings directly
into wastewater treatment lagoons is an acceptable disposal method. Waste-
water treatment facilities are available at Browning, Cut Bank, and sev-
eral smaller communities within the Reservation, including Starr School,
Heart Butte, Last Star, and the Blackfeet Boarding Dormitories. Existing
wastewater treatment facilities can adequately accept the quantities of
septic tank pumpings generated within the study area. Septic wastes from
self-contained camper units may be disposed of at several major camp-
grounds or at gas stations equipped with large holding tanks. Chewing
Blackbones Campground, for example, is equipped with a sewer system
52
J
-------
r
and its own Ingoon. Alternate methods of septic tank pumpings disposal
include- land spreading, drying1 in shallow evaporation ponds, and dis-
posal at licensed landfill sites.
2. Dead Animals
a. General Disposal Practices
The number of dead animals, both domestic agricultural animals and
game animals, varies throughout the year. Arimal losses may occur during
calving and lambing seasor when weather conditions are critical to many
newborn animals. Hurting season also produces numerous instances of
carcass abandonment. State law prohibits the placing of all or any part ol
a deaa animal in any water body, road, street, alley,, lot or field. It is
alc.o unlawful to place all or part of a dead animal within one mile of the
resiocncc of anv person unless it is burned or buried at least two feet
underground. Dead animals arc classified as a Group II waste and riay be
disposed of at a Class II landfill site if special procedures arc followed,
'lhcsc special procedures include supervised placement in a segregated pit
that will receive at least two feet of cover the same day the dead animal
is deposited.
Several methods ol disposal currently practiced are in compliance
with present State regulations. These include proper disposal of the car-
cass at rendering plants, and disposal at Class II landfills. Each of these
techniques, if properh rclmmistered, will contain and restrict any of the
potentially harmful constituents of the waste.
b. Recommended Disposal Procedures
Rased upon conversations with State officials and examination of
State regulations, the best method ol carcass removal and disposal is by a
rendering operation that is licensed and meets the Montana Department ol
Livestock requirements for such operations. In most instances, the ren-
dering service will provide fiec pickup and delivery if the number of
animals and transportation distances make this economical. Currently,
several rendering companies in the state provide disposal service for dead
animals. The names, locations, and phone numbers for each company arc
listed below
NAME
LOCATION
TELEPHONE NO.
Eillmps Rendering Co.
Dillon rendering Co.
Miles City Rendering Co.
Rocky Mountain Rer.cering Co.
Western Montana By-Products, Inc.
Silver Row P.ccyclcrs
Groat Falls, MT
Missoula, MT
Butte, MT
Miles City, MT
Billings, MT
Dillon, MT
248-8410
683-281?
232-1956
454-1953
543-8291
782-2740
V
53
J
-------
r
~\
The second most desirable disposal method lor dead animals is by
burial by individual owners on their own property. This method in most
instances is the least costly due to low transportation and handling costs.
A third acceptable disposal method is burial at state-approved sanitary
landfills (Browning or Cut Dank) where proper handling1 procedures arc
employed and supervision is provided.
3. Pulkv Materials
a. General Disposal Practices
Bulky wastes consist primarily of discarded appliances (white
foods), demolition debris materials (rock, brick, concrete), and numerous
types ol wood wastes. According to State guidelines, these inert materials
arc non-water soluble and arc classified as Group III wastes and may be
disposed of at Class III sites. Currently, very feu licensed Class III sites
exist within the state; therefore, most of these materials are disposed of
at Class II sites. Most lai dfills accept these materials and separate areas
ol the lite are set aside lor specihc types ol bulky items. This stockpiled
material in some cases may bo sold to scrap metal dealers for salvage.
Some white goods may be crushed and removed under the administration
of the county-wide junk vehicle program, which is discussed in this sec-
tion. II conditions permit, the vehicle crusher piay crush and transport
the white goods with crushed vehicles. Other materials such as concrete,
store or dirt may be utilized as till material. Instances of disposal in
violation of State guidelines occasionally occur; the most common offenses
involve the burning of the combustible fraction of the bulky materials,
primarilv wood wastes, or indiscriminate dumping of the materials.
b. Recommended Disposal Procedures
Alter examining the existing state laws regarding disposal ol bulky
materials, it is apparent that most of the existing disposal practices are
m conlormance with the !aus. The recommended disposal procedures for
bulky materials include 1) proper disposal at a Class III site, 2) disposal
at a licensed Class II disposal site, and 3) salvage of the usable portion
ol the bulky materials (use of stone, concrete or dirt for fill materials is
a good example).
4. Used Tires
a. General Disposal Practices
It is estimated that within the State of Montana, more than 680,000
used tires are generated each year, based upon a national average of
1.14 waste tires per registered motor vehicle per year. This represents a
substantia] mount of waste materials which must be disposed of annually.
Tire composition has changed o^'or the years and the primary non-rubber
constituents currently found m tires are woven steel belting, fiberglass
belting, poWcster cord, and steel bead wires. According to State laws,
V
54
-------
r
used vehicle tires are classified as Group III wastes and may be disposed
of at Class II or Class III disposal sites.
Tires may be processed before disposal in order to eliminate prob-
lems associated with handling and disposal. Processing may be accom-
plished by shredding, slicing or by cryogenic procedures, where mater-
ials are subjected to sudden drops in temperature and are ultimately
shattered. These processes substantially reduce the volume of the tires,
which in turn reduces transportation and handling problems. Processes
also increase the chance that some or all of the used tire constituents may
be recovered. Currently, the processed tires may be utilized as an
additive to asphalt paving materials or as an energy source.
Currently, the most common method of used tire disposal within the
study area and the state consists of stockpiling or burial in sanitary
landfills. Unless properly positioned in the landfills, however, the tires
will eventually work up to the surface. The majority of waste tires placed
in landfills are not properly buried, and periodic problems are exper-
ienced .
b. Recommended Disposal Procedures
Several alternate methods for used tire recovery and disposal have
been utilized over the last few years with success in various areas of the
nation. The most common fate of approximately one-third of the used tires
is recapping. Large tire companies collect used tires from local tire deal-
ers and recap them at plants located within the state. Recapping partially
solves the used tire problem; however, there are many waste tires not
suitable for recapping that must receive proper disposal.
Based upon the investigations conducted for this report, it is recom-
mended that waste tires be recycled by one of the methods previously
mentioned to the highest degree possible. If recycling tires is not feas-
ible, these materials should be buried or stockpiled at the sanitary land-
fills in Browning or Cut Bank. Burial of tires, although difficult, may be
the most practical method of tire disposal within the study area. Stock-
piling tires at landfills within the study area for ultimate disposal at a
large tire dump near Kalispcll may prove to be an effective means of re-
ducing problems associated with used tire handling and disposal. The fa-
cility in Kahspell will accept all tires; however, the owner will not offer
payment for the tires or arrange for transport of used tires to the site.
The owner of this recently opened facility intends to use the tires as a
fuel source at some future date. It should be noted that there are some
drawbacks to stockpiling tiros for a long period of time. These drawbacks
primarily include the potential for providing breeding grounds for
skunks, snakes, mosquitos, etc. Therefore, these drawbacks should be
evaluated prior to stockpiling tires for extended periods.
V
55
J
-------
r
A
5. Scrap Automobiles
a. General Disposal Practices
A scrap automobile can be defined as a derelict, unused, inoperable
automobile with little or no value, based on national averages, it is es-
timated that the motor vehicle survival rate decreases from 95 percent al-
ter six years m service to less than 20 percent after 14 years of service.
During its "lilc cycle", a motor vehicle will pass from a transportation
unit to a valuable source n( spare prrts for other vehicles and ultimately
to a source of scrap metal to be reused by the metal industry.
According to State law, abandoned automobiles arc classified as a
Croup II waste and may be disposed of at a Class II landfill. Due to the
largo amount of space required for storage of junk vehicles at disposal
sites and problems cnccunteied with burial oi automobiles, many landfills
fir, not accept junk vehicles.
b. Jurk Vehicle Disposal Program
A statewide junk vehicle disposal prop ram was implemented in Julv,
1973. The program is financed by several sources: 1) the sale of junk ve-
hicles, 2) a $.50 fee levied on all vehicles registered in the state; 3) a
In ensii'f fee levicu on all wrecking lacilities, and 4) a title transfer lee
of $1.50. Under this prop ram, funds are provided to counties for plan-
ning proprams as well as operation costs. Each county may determine the
typo of program it fcols best suits the needs of the county residents. As-
sistance to each county is provided by the State. The program stipulates
that each junk vehicle giavcyard must have a minimum of two acres of
land arc' must be properly shielded from public view. After 200 vehicles
have been accunnilated at each graveyard, a contract is obtained with a
scrap dealer to dispose of the vehicles. The profit obtained from the sale
of the junk vehicles is then placed in the state's earmarked revenue ac-
count .
Glacier County curiently has one licensed junk vehicle graveyard lo-
cated at Cut Bank as well as a privately owned junk vehicle wrecking fa-
cility. The county junk vehicle program is administered by the Glacier
Countv Pond Department. Jur.k vehicles arc transported to a county yard
where the}' are stockpiled until 200 vehicles have been accumulated and
contracts have been let for crushing and removal. Since the adoption of
the countv-wide junk vehicle program, at least 400 vehicles have been
crushed and removed Irom the Cut Bonk vehicle graveyard. The Blackfeet
Tribe has adopted a jur.k vehicle ordinance similar to the State of Mon-
tana's guideline?, for junk vehicle disposal. The ordinance establishes: 1)
the standards for licensing junk vehicle graveyards; 2) the criteria for
shielding the facilities from public view; and 3) the procedures necessary
for junk vehicle collection and disposal. The Tribal program is adminis-
tered in conjunction with the Glacier Countv junk vehicle program.
V
56
J
-------
r
~\
c. Pccommcncicd Disposal Procedures
It is recommended that every attempt be made to dispose of junk ve-
hicles at either the licensed junk vehicle wrecking facility in Cut Bank or
the tree licensed junk vehicle graveyard in Cut Bank.
b. Hazardous Wastes
Many wastes produced by agriculture, industry, hospitals and government
may be hazardous and may require special precautions during transport, haul-
ing and disposal. The LPA estimates that within the United States, only ten
percent of the hazaicous waste generated annually is managed in an environ-
mentally safe manner. The remainder is handled m a fashion which could po-
tentially threaten human health and the environment.
ihe Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for the safe manage-
ment of hazardous wastes. In F.lay of 1980, this agency released a revised set
of guidelines pertaining to hazaidous waste materials. The regulations included
criteria for the determination of hazardous solid wastes and hazardous waste
generators; rules for transporting and disposing of the materials; and a com-
prehensive listing ot hazardous wastes. Any solid waste which exhibits any of
i he characteristics ol hazardous waste (i.e., ignitabihtv, corrosivity, reac-
tivity, and toxicity) is subject to the revised EPA regulations.
These guidelines determined a level of hazardous waste generation for in-
dividual generators that is most effectively managed by the agency. Anv indi-
vidual who accumulates, produces, or disposes of a waste classified by the
LPA as hazardous at a rate greater than 1,000 kilograms per month (2,200
lbs/month) is subject to the LPA guidelines for hazardous waste management.
(This standard docs not apply to farmers or ranchers.) Generators of 1,000
kg/month or less ol hazardous waste ma\ dispose of the material at an on-site
facility or must ensure dehveiy of the material tc an off-site treatment,
storage or disposal facility heensed by the State to manage municipal or indus-
trial solid waste. Ir addition, special regulations apply to individuals or op-
erations which generate more than one kilogram per month of wastes categor-
izes by the EPA. as "Acute Hazardous".
The Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for hazardous waste man-
agement piovide the basis frr the State of Montana's hazardous waste policies.
Wastes elassilied as hazardous by the State are the same as those classified by
the LP/, as hazardous. Hazardous waste generators and disposal facilities arc
required to notify the State regarding the type, quantity and composition of
Die waste material being handled, and may be required to keep pertinent rec-
ords regarding the generation, transport and disposal ol the hazardous waste.
In addition, transporters ol hazardous waste materials and hazardous waste
dispor nl facilities must be hccnfcd by the State, and must operate m a manner
consistent with state and federal guidelines.
Accoromg to State regulations, hazardous wastes must be disposed of at a
Class I site. Currently, no Clasn I sites are located within the State of Mon-
V
57
J
-------
r
tana; however, some on-site disposal of hazardous waste material by industry
does occur. The nearest hazardous waste disposal sites are located in Idaho
and Oregon. Information regaining hazardous waste disposal at these sites may
be obtained by contacting the following firms:
Wes-Con, Inc. (Idaho). (208) 834-2275
Chem Security Systems, Inc. (Oregon)- (503) 223-1912
It should be stressed that the Solid Waste Management Bureau of the
State Department of Health and Environmental Sciences has the primary re-
sponsibility for the safe management of hazardous wastes, and should be con-
tacted prior to the handling and disposal of such materials. Procedures for
proper transport, handling and disposal of hazardous wastes can be determined
by State officials on a case-by-case basis.
The following narrative identifies the existing and recommended disposal
practices for the more commonly generated hazardous waste types within the
study area.
a. Pesticides and Pesticide Containers
1) General
Because of the agricultural nature of a considerable portion of
Glacier County, it is expected that significant amounts of excess pesticide
and pesticide containers are generated within the study area. Proper
handling and disposal techniques must be utilized in order to prevent
detrimental effects upon the environment and public health. According to
State law, no person shall dispose of or receive for disposal any pesticide
container or pesticide residue in a manner inconsistent with its labeling or
safe disposal criteria and procedures. It is also unlawful to dispose of
these materials by burning or by improper dumping.
2) Waste Pesticide Management Program
The Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences was
involved in a waste pesticide management program from 1969 through the
fall of 1978. The State accepted highly toxic or other waste pesticides
from throughout the state and transported them to storage bunkers lo-
cated at the inactive Glasgow Air Force Base in northeastern Montana. In
1978 , the pesticides and pesticide containers were transported to a haz-
ardous waste disposal site near Boise, Idaho. The intent of the program
was to provide safe storage and disposal. The funds for the program
were exhausted and no grant monies are currently available to continue
the program.
3) Recommended Disposal Procedures
There are several acceptable methods by which excess pesticides may
be disposed of without causing adverse effects on the environment. The
most preferred method of disposal is to return the excess material to the
V
58
J
-------
manufacturer, distributor, or to another party capable of using the ma-
terial. The alternate disposal method is burial at the state-approved
landfill sites at Browning or Cut Bank.
Several procedures are recommended for the safe disposal of pesti-
cide containers. Many combustible containers (fertilizer bags, etc.) may
be disposed of at Class 1 or Class II landfills or by incineration in li-
censed incineration facilities, depending upon the chemical constituents
the container held. Burial ol many containers may occur on farm premises
in areas which will rot pollute surface or ground waters. Non-combustible
cor taincrs (metal pesticide tanks, etc.) should be triple-rinsed, following
a procedure prescribed by the Department of Agriculture, to dilute the
hazardous material prior to disposal. After the rinsing procedure is com-
pleted, metal containers may be disposed of by 1) returning the contain-
er to the dealer of distributor; 2) depositing the container at a scrap
metal yard or junk vehicle graveyard which has obtained state authoriza-
tion to recycle pesticide containers; 3) burying the container in a li-
censed Class I or II landfill; or 4) burying on-farm m an environmentally
safe nar.ncr.
1). Used Lubrication Oils
1) General
Based upon studies performed m other regions of the country, it
has been estimated that more than two-thirds of the automobile lubrication
oil sold ends up as a waste product which is not salvaged or reclaimed.
Waste oils arc generally disposed of in trash collections, on roadways to
control dust, or placed c'ircctly ir landfills. If special precautions are not
taken, this oil may eventually find its way into groundwater sources and
may become a pollutant to v atcr supplies. According to state law, petro-
leum wastes are classified as Group I wastes and should be disposed of m
a Class I landfill. EPA regulations allou small quantities ( 1,000 kg/month
or less) to be mixed with quantities of household wastes and disposed of
at Class II sanitary landfills.
?<) Recommended Disposal Procedures
The most desirable method of reclaiming used oils and other types of
waste petroleum products is by means of reprocessing or re-refining. Af-
ter lubrication oils have been used over a period of time, contaminants
such as gasoline, water, heat and cold-resistant additives and dirt collect
m the oil. Re-refining processes may remove the contaminants and the re-
sultant product is a lubricating oil similar to the original product.
Several other methods of reclamation may be used to treat waste oils.
These include incineration and use as a fuel source, use as road oil, and
use as an asphalt constituent. Tests conducted by various industrial
groups have demonstrated the feasibility of recovering energy from sever-
-------
.1] 1a pes of waste lubricants. Waste oil may also he used as a supplemental
fuel for large boilers. Although road oils have been and arc still manu-
factured from virgin matenals, a large amount of this material is com-
prised of waste oil. Dram oil and distilled drain oil fractions may be used
as cutting stock m the production of asphalt. Most of the metallic com-
pounds present m the oil arc relatively insoluble and become coated with
asphaltic materials. These qualities make the use of waste oil as an m-
prcdiort in the production of asphalt relatively attractive.
Pa sec cn the analvns conducted herein, it is recommended that all
waste oils be ultimately rccvclcd utilizing one of the techniques discussed
above. Since there arc no re-refining or re-use facilities for used oils
located m the study area, it is recommended that collection depots be set
up at strategic locations throughout the area where individuals and com-
panies can bring these materials. These collected oils could then be
transported to facilities capable of reprocessing or reusing the oils.
7. Hospital Wastes
a. General Disposal Practices
Special wastes generated at hospitals or medical clinics are generally
(.1 two types, pathological or bacteriological. Pathological wastes, winch
include tissues, are generally incinerated at on-site facilities or trans-
ported to oilier hospitals equipped with incineration facilities. Ash re-
sulting from the incineration process in collected and landfilled. Bacteri-
ological wastes, however, receive sterili ration procedures and arc ulti-
mately lardlilled. Some wastes generated by medical facilities arc hazar-
dous, such as radioactive wastes, and require special handling and dis-
posal procedures. These procedures arc subject to EPA regulations for
tiansport, handling and disposal.
Pathological and bacteriological wastes generated at the Indian Health
Service facility m Browning arc generally incinerated and landfilled. All
other wastes which are not considered "special" are collected twice each
week by the High Plains Srlid Waste System and transported to the Brow-
ring landfill for disposal.
b. Recommended Disposal Procedures
It is recommended that special wastes generated at study area hos-
pitals or other medical facilities be auloclavcd or disinfected by other
means prior to final disposal at an approved sanitary landfill. Hospital
wastes classified as hazardous should be handled and disposed of in ac-
eoidarce with EPA regulations.
-------
PART SIX
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
-------
r
PART SIX
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATE SOLID V.ASTE
DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
/. asslssf/.li-t or avaii/ril technology
The purpose of this .section of the study is to identify those solid waste
disposal concepts that have beer, demonstrated and proven effective throughout
the state, region and nation and to evaluate in depth those concepts that ap-
pear to be applicable lor most economically solving the inefficiencies and de-
ficiencies ci the existing disposal methods m the study area. Currently in the
United States and Canaoa there arc a multitude of concepts being utilized to
transfer and dispose ol solid waste. In most instances, the local topographic,
climatic, ^oeiologic and political conditions dictate which alternatives arc most
practical anc' economical lor the area. Through a detailed literature search,
on-site investigations and the Consultant's past experience, it was determined
that five general concepts have potential applicability in the study area. These
i) elude
In the lollowing narrative, each concept is discussed and evaluated to de-
termine its specific applicability to tins project.
1 . Sanitary Landfills
Ihe sanitary landfill has bee", since the first federal laws and regula-
tions were administered m the carlv 1960s, the most widely used waste disposal
method in the nation. Generally, a sanitarv landfill is a "cut and cover" opera-
tion whereby soil is excavated from a side slope or trench and stockpiled.
Solid waste is then placed into the excavated area and compacted to a practical
degree. Finally, the cover soil is placed as ncccssarv on the compacted waste.
If a sanitary landfill is properly operated and located, it can in most in-
stances be an economical and environmentally sound method for disposing of
solid waste. If sanitary landfills are not properly operated and located utilizing
sound engineering principles, however, several problems can arise. These in-
clude- 1) air, noise and/or groundwater pollution, 2) odor problems, 3) health
hazards due to the breeding of rodents and flies, 4) nuisances and aesthetic
deficiencies due to blowing papei and litter, and 5) explosion hazards due to
methane production.
Sanitary Landfills
Intermediate Processes
Incineration with Iieat Recovery
Transfer Stations
Rural Disposal Systems
61
J
-------
r
To protect the residents 111 the state finr! nation, the State of Montana
and the United States Congress have promulgated laws, regulations and en-
forcement programs for the proper location and operation of waste disposal
sites. Currently, approximately two-thirds of the disposal sites in the state
have been licensed by the State Solid Waste Management Bureau (SWMB),
which ]] dicates general compliance with the regulations.
A current najoi problem, according to local and state officials, in regard
to the proper location and operation of waste disposal sites is public accep-
tance. This is quite common net only in Montana but throughout the nation,
primarily because of the relatively short time frame m which stringent waste
disposal laws and regulations have been in effect. The common practice for the
past sc\eral decades has been tc utilize unsightly, burning pits located either
on private property or near each community. With the increasing volume of
waste, coupled with the unavailability of land which can be utilized for waste
disposal, these past practices are no longer environmentally or sociallv accept-
able. Thus it is the Consultant's opinion that as the population in the study
area continues to increace, more public demand will be placed on the local of-
ficials to provide acceptable uastc disposal services and facilities. The sanitary
landfill is delimtely one disposal method which, if operated properly, can pro-
vide this service m an environmentally sale manner.
2. Intermediate Processes
Currently, there are numerous types of equipment being marketed that
process solid waste to a certain degree. The primary purpose for processing
waste usually is two-fold; cither f) the topography, climatic conditions or pop-
ulation distribution are such that it is not practical or economical to locate
and/cr utili:;e a sanitary landfill using conventional techniques, or 2) the
waste's composition or physical conditions must be altered so that all consti-
tuents can be recovered and reused. Eased on the Consultant's experience, it
was determined that two maior types of intermediate processes are technologic-
ally proven and warrant investigation for use within the study are;;; these are
shredding and baling solid waste prior to disposal at a sanitary landfill. In-
cluded m the following narrative is a description of the applicability of those
processes to the study area's needs.
a. Shredding
The primary purpose of shredding solid waste is to obtain a material
with, more uniform properties. Once shredded, the material is better suit-
ed for landfilhng. haling or recycling. In conjunction with landfilling, the
primary purpose ol shrecding is three-fold 1) it produces a uniform ma-
terial that will compact more easily with less possibility of future set-
tlement; 2) it reduces volume and thus reduces transportation costs
when large distances to disposal sites arc involved, and 3) it reduces op-
erational problems bv minimizing rodents, flics, blowing litter and uncon-
trolled fires.
V.
62
J
-------
r
~\
Currently, there ore several locations 111 the nation where shred-
landfill operations are m existence. A review of these existing systems by
local and state officials as well as by the Consultant have indicated sev-
eral negative concerns, basically, it has been determined that the shrcd-
landlill operation is not economical due to high capital and operational
costs. Eased on the investigations conducted to date, it is the Consul-
tant's feeling that the advantages ol increased operational efficiencies with
shred-landfill operations do not outweigh the high capital and operational
costs ol a shredding plant located in the study area.
b. Baling
I he primary purpose ol baling solid waste is to reduce the waste's
volume. The reduction m waste volume affords several advantages in the
management oi solid wastes. In regard to transportation, baling can sig-
nificantly i educe the numbn 01 trips and, correspondingly, the cost if'
large waste quantities and long distances arc involved. In regard to op-
eration of sanitary landfills, baling also offers several advantages. These
include 1) elimination cf loose, blowing paper and rubbish; 2) better
control of flies and rodents; 3) elimination of expensive landfill compaction
eqi lpmcnt; and
-------
r
stramts arc. 1) the market must have an adequate fuel demand to make it
economically vvortlnvlnle to install the necessary receiving* and firing equipment;
and 2) the market must have an agreeable attitude toward the utilization and
pricing of a new energy source.
Through modern technology the utilization of solid waste as an energy
source can be accomplished bv three basic methods 1) the use of solid waste
as a primary fuel source to generate storm; 2) the use of processed solid
\:i ;,te as a supplement fuel in combination with other fossil fuels; and 3) the
use of gases derived from pyroloyf.irr solid waste. After a thorough review of
the waste incineration ard heat recovery systems in operation throughout the
ration, it was determined that a modular incineration facility would be most
applicable for the study area. I hese types oi systems do not require a high
degree ci initial waste processing, nor do they require large quantities of
waste to be economically feasible. Those systems arc normally supplied in mod-
ules with current installations ranging m capacity from 10 to 250 tons per day.
As previously indicated, there arc approximately 4,100 tons oi waste gen-
eiated annually in the stuoy area. Based on an average heating value of 5,000
Utu's per pound for solid waste, it is estimated that the 4,100 tons oi waste
could replace approximately 41 million cubic feet of natural gas annuallv. Jp
regard to the generation ol steam, it is estimated that the energy available
iron the same waste quantity could generate approximately 1G million pounds of
steam annually, based on a generation oi 125 psi steam at a 40 percent effi-
ciency. The same energy could produce approximately one million kwh of elec-
tricity .
based on a market search for potential energy users with energy con-
sumption similar to those identified above, it was determined that no favorable
market conditions or'ist within or adjacent to the study area. Because a favor-
able market must be located m order to justify this heat recovery alternative,
tin.1 alternative was not evaluated past this initial stage.
4. 'liansicr Station
In certain circumstances it may be more feasible for o municipality or
population center to transport is waste to a larger community than to operate
its own sanitary landfill. For tins option to be feasible, transportation costs
must be reduced to a minimum. One method of reducing transportation costs is
to utilise a facility where collection vehicles and individual haulers' wastes are
deposited and transferred to large-capacity vehicles. These large vehicles in
turn would transport waste to a regional disposal site.
for areas where populations exceed 2,500 and transportation distances ex-
ceed approximately £:0 miles, it is m many instances economical and practical to
have flic transfer station equipped with a compaction unit. This allows for a
substantial mciease m the quantity of waste which can be transported each
trip. The facility should also include an enclosed tipping area for aesthetic and
V
64
-------
maintenance purposes. Currently, there are two transfer stations of this type
in Lontana; one located in Columbus and one in Forsyth.
based on the Consultant's experience ana the operational history of
transfer stations currently in use m the state and nation, it is recommended
that these facilities be evaluated in detail when the cost or availability of land
for local landfilhng operations are prohibitive. The equipment utilized for this
tvpe of facility has been utilized for several years fnd has a well-proven opcr-
«nt:i'ii.il record.
5. Container Systems'
For rural areas arid small communities where no individual door-to-door
collection service is available, one potentially economical solid waste disposal
alternative ir the use of containers strategicallv placed throughout the service
area. These containers are emptied periodically by use of specially designed
vehicle"-., and the waste is then transported to a central transfer, recycling or
disposal facility. In many instances throughout the state and nation, a con-
tamer system has replaced several smaller indiscriminate dumps, providing an
economical waste disposal method which is in compliance with all local, state
and federal laws.
Currently, there are three type's of container system;, that are being util-
ised throughout the nation. A brief description of each is included herein:
"Green Cox" SystePi
This system basically consists of locating several small containers
trom four to ten cubic yards u. size throughout a sparsely populated
area. These containers are placed in locations that are readily accessible,
including intersections of local highways, recreational areas, and in or
near small communities. These container systems can be designed such
that the waste in the containers can be emptied into cither a front-
ier dm p, side-loading or a rear-loading waste collection vehicle. Current-
ly, several areas in P, ontana including the Flackfcet Indian Reservation
utilize this type of system for the disposal of wastes in the less populated
areas.
b. "Roll-Off" System
Tins system is quite similar m concept to the "Green Box" system
described above, with the exception that fewer, larger containers are
utilized. In most instances, 40-cubic-yard containers are utilized m this
system, but containeis varying in sue from 20 to 50 cubic yards also
function well under certain circumstances. Because of the large size of
the containers, a ramp must be built at the site. A specially designed ve-
hicle with a truck chassis and a tilt-frame bed is used to load, unload
and transfer the wastes from the container site to the disposal site. Un-
like the "Croon Box" system where the container is emptied on-site, this
system requires the tilt-frame vehicle to leave an empty container and
pick up the full container. Currently, several counties m the state arc
-------
utilising tins svstem, including Big Horn, Broadwater, Carbon, Cascade,
Jefferson, Lake, Rosebud, Treasure, and Yellowstone Counties.
c. "Trsnr.tor" System
Thu- system is basically similar to the "Roll-Off" system, with the
cxccpticr. that the containers that are utilized to store the wastes are not
picked up and transported to the disposal site but instead are permanent-
ly mounted at the site. Under this alternative, the containers are approx-
imate!}' 45 cubic voids in size and are designed such that the containers
arc emptied directly into a large 100- to 120-cubic-yard open top transfer
trailer utilizing hydraulic-ally operated equipment. Like the "Roll-Off"
system, each "Transtor" container site must include a concrete retaining
wall and ramp. Currently there are several of these "Transtor" container
sited located ir oi near small communities m Alberta. Canada. There are,
however, no facilities oi :1ns type m use in Montana or adjacent states at
tins time.
i:. riGCRIPTIUH OI APPL1CAPIF ALTERNAT IVES
1. oummary or Technology /.sscssn-.ent L Preliminary Analysis
Based on the assessment of the various waste disposal incineration and
transfer concepts conducted for this project and summarized above, it was
determined that five disposal concepts warranted additional analysis. These
concepts included. 1) use of arcawidc landfills. 2) use of a "Green Box"
system, 3) use of a "Roll-Otf" system, 4) use of a "Transtor system, ana 5)
use of two transfer stations to replace the containers or arcawidc landfills
(depending upon the alternative) at Last Glacier and St. Mary. The remainder
of the concepts initially identified including intermediate processing and
incineration with heat recovery were determined to be not applicable eithei due
to then costs or applicability to the conditions of the study area and thus
were not further evaluated.
For each of the five oisposal concepts that warranted additional analysis,
preliminary schematics, locations and system costs for the necessary facilities
and services uere developed. This mfcimation was then compiled into an inter-
im report for leview by the project Technical Committee members. Based on
1 lie costs and tlie general consensus of the members of the project committee,
it wis dctei mined that the major emphasis of the final analysis should be
placed on three alternatives. These include 1) use of arcawide sanitary land-
lills, l) use of a "Given Pox" container system and 3) use of a "Roll-Cfl"
container system. Based cn this input, the remainder of the information con-
tained n; this chapter discusses in detail a description of the facilities,
services and costs for each oi these throe alternatives. It should be noted that
system layouts and costs of the remaining two alternatives that were prelimi-
narily evaluated ("Transtor" container system and transfer station alternatives)
are included m the "Second interim Report" and are on file at the office of
Robert Peccia and Associates (Helena, Montana).
V
66
J
-------
r
~\
2. Discussion oJ Applicable Facilities
For the throe waste disposal alternatives identified above to warrant an
m-depth analysis, facility layouts and operating criteria were developed. In-
cluded herein is a description o( the facilities and operating criteria for the
various alternatives evaluated lor this project. This information was then util-
ized as the basis for evaluating the annual system costs for each alternative.
These specific annual system cost analyses are included in Section C of this
chapter.
a. Sanitary Landfill
'through research and practical operating experience tor the past
two decades, it has been determined that are a variety of methods lor op-
erating a sanitarv lane1 f ill. The two nest prominent methods are the
trench a no aica methods. The trench method consists of excavating,
trenches will a dozer and/or scraper and stockpiling the soil for use as
cover material. Solid wistc is then placed into the prc-excavated
lroneh.es, compacted and covered each operating day with four to six
inches of the stockpiled cover soil. This method is primarily used in areas
where the terrain is relatively flat. Exhibit 2 depicts a schematic ot this
type ol operation.
The area landliil method differs Irom tlie trench method in that min-
imal site preparation is icquircd. In this method, individual cells are
constructed in various areas throughout the site until the entire site is
filled. Each cell represents the waste received from one operating day.
Cover material is excavatcc Irom the areas adjacent to the working face ol
the active fill area and is deposited over the previously compacted relusc.
Exhibit 3 illustrates this type of landfill method.
b. "Green Box" System
This system includes the use ot small containers ("Green Boxes")
strategically located throughout the service area and a specially designed
packer vehicle to empty the waste from each container as required and to
transport the waste to a central disposal site. This basic system is cur-
rently being utilized throughout the majority of study area. Under this
system, four-cubic-yard containers arc located within the boundaries of
the Blackfeet Indian Reservation with the containers emptied periodically
by use of one of two side-loading packer vehicles. All wastes currently
collected under this existing program are transported and disposed of at
the lar.ufill located near Browning. For this alternative it was assumed
that this current basic system would be utilized and expanded to provide
adequate service to the entiie study area.
A review of the PM.stmg "Green Box" systems in operation in the
study area as well as the state indicates that the "Green Box" system is
an economical and effective method for disposing of waste and reducing
indiscriminate dumping'. The big'g'cst drawback to the system is the limita-
tion on the types and sii.es ol materials that can be deposited due to the
67
J
-------
Sanitary Landfill-Trench Method
TYPICAL ILLUSTRATION
T«NCH MffTMOQ Of UMnttt UMO»IU'
IupUc*
(M»r «Miir»cu*
•v«r Ml)
Fmnhtd C'*d»
F»r«v Trt«th
kf(lM Trvnch
(C*v« r Ming »»c*viu< l«r
•a* m working !•«•)
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
TYPICAL ELEVATION VIEW
Source: State of Montana Solid Waste
Management and Resource
Recovery Study, August, 1976
Exhibit 2
-------
Sanitary Landfill-Area
PO«T*»i.t unci TO
LATCH (LOWING
»«n«
r— »M»*L lAATH
/• .cool¦
TYPICAL ILLUSTRATION
i' riNAL coven
on u*«n most iirr
THICKNESS or
0»ILV COVER
THICKNESS Or
Source: State of Montana Solid Waste
Management and Resource
Recovery Study, August, 1976
Exhibit 3
-------
r
small size of the container openings (three feet by four feet) as well as
the incompatibility of these types of waste with typical packer trucks.
Thus larger items such as demolition debris, tree limbs or appliances must
be transported either individually or through the use of an additional
waste pickup service (dump truck, flatbed, etc.) to a disposal site. In
some instances this can be an extreme inconvenience to area residents if
proper facilities or services arc not provided affording the possibility of
indiscriminate dumping of these items. The major advantage of the system
is the high level of service available to the population served. In most
cases, the system provides a disposal site located within a few miles of
their residence. The system also provides a 24-hour, seven-day-per-weck
service since the container sites arc not required to be monitored.
c. "Poll-Off" System
This system includes the use of large, non-compacted roll-off con-
tainers strategically located throughout the service area and a tilt-frame
vehicle specifically designed to load, transfer and unload the containers.
Tins system is basically similar m practice to the "Green Box" system
with the exception thai fewer and larger containers arc used. Because of
the large size of the containers, certain site improvements must be made
at the location of e."ch containci . These improvements include a shelter
over the dumping area, a retaining wall, ramp and a concrete pad tor
leading and unloading the containers. A layout of a typical roll-ofl site is
depicted m Exhibit 4.
A review of existing rcll-ofl systems located throughout the state
and nation indicates a wide acceptance and increasing interest in the
system. The major advantage of the "Uoll-oll" system over the "Green
Ho:." system is the flexibility and essentially limitless types oi wastes
which the system can handle. Because of the large size of the containers,
large bulky materials such as appliances, tires, demolition debris and
wood wastes can be deposited. Thus the need for additional landfill sites
or pickup services to dispose ol these waste types is not necessary. In a
rural agricultural area such as the study area, this is an important con-
sideration. The major disadvantage of this type of system compared to the
"Green Box" system is the proximity of the total service area to a dis-
posal site. Under the "Roll-Off" system concept, thn normal policy is to
locate container sites at or near current or old dump sites with the pos-
sible addition of one or two sites, depending upon the population distrib-
ution in the area. This system requires a certain percentage of the popu-
lation to travel a few additional miles to a deposit site when compared to a
"Green Box" system, m which many more drop sites are available.
C. ANNUAL SYSTEM COST ANALYSIS
1. General
The primary purpose of this section of the report is to evaluate and
compare the annual system cost for each of the specific solid waste handling
V
70
J
-------
"Roll-Off" Container Site
Container
" •!
Container
¦ Loading S
Unloading
Area
Tipping
Area
*J.
Retaining
Wall
Shelter
Fence
Site Layout
V/
Site Profile View
Exhibit 4
-------
r
alternatives that were determined applicable for the study area. As previ-
ously indicated in this chapter, there arc three basic waste handling al-
ternatives that will be clir,cussed herein. These include: 1) use of area-
wide landfills, 2) use of a "Grcon Box" container system, and 3) use ol a
"Roll-Ofi" container system.
For the three basic alternatives that were identified as being applicable
and thus warranting an in-depth analysis, specific disposal options were init-
ially identified. Detailed studies and subsequent annual costs were then calcu-
lated foi each alternative. Finally, the various cost components were individ-
ually addeti to determine each alternatives total system cost. These system
costs were thou compared with one another so that the project Technical Com-
mittee members could form general conclusions and make subsequent recommen-
dations as to the most economical and practical waste disposal alternative for
the study area.
L. Design Criteria
a. Waste Generation and Seasonal Variation
In order to effectively evaluate each solid waste disposal alternative
for this study, the volumes of solid waste generated must be determined
lor three basic criteria 1) source of waste generation, 2) seasonal vari-
ation of waste generation, and 3) geographic concentration of waste gen-
eration. Included herein is summary of these criteria determined applic-
able for the study area. A detailed analysis of the waste quantity inves-
tigations that were utilized to derive this criteria is included in Tart
Three of this report.
included in Table 3 is a sumrarv of the annual quantities of waste
generated bv each major waste generation source. As indicated in the
table, approximately 3,560 tons of waste are generated annually as a di-
rect result ni the permanent population residing within the study area.
As also depicted m the tabic, an additional 533 tons of waste are gener-
ated annuallv as a direct lesult of the tourist activity in the immediate
study area. Based on this analysis, it is apparent that approximately 13
percent ol the total waste generated in the area is tourist-related, where-
as the majority of the area's waste (87 percent) results from the perma-
nent population.
In addition to the generation source data, Table 3 also depicts the
seasonal variation of the waste generation for each geographic area of the
study area. The locations of the geographic areas delineated in the table
arc depicted in Figure C. As depicted in the table, the waste generation
varies appreciably from summer to winter with the quantities of waste
varying from 113 tons per week to 67 tons per week for the respective
seasons. As also depicted in the table, the majority of the seasonal fluc-
tuation m waste generation occurs in the western portion of the study
72
J
-------
TABLE 3
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR WASTE QUANTITIES
I. GENERATION SOURCE:
Source
Tons/Year
1. Permanent
3,560
2. Seasonal
a)
Glacier National Park
165
b)
Concessionaire
175
c)
Tribal Campgrounds
23
d)
Non-Tribal Campgrounds
57
e)
Motels
78
0
Border Ports
5
g)
Department of Highways
30
Subtotal •
533
Total
4,093
II. SEASONAL VARIATION BY GEOGRAPHIC AREA:
Area
Average Annual
Waste Generation
Generation During
Tourist Season
Generation During
Non-Tourist Season
Tons/ Yr. T ons/Wk.
Tons/Wk.
Tons/Wk.
Northwest
759
15
38
8
Southwest
2,076
40
50
37
Northeast
576
11
12
11
Southeast
682
13
13
13
T otal•
4,093
79
113
69
73
J
-------
r
~\
area, which car. be attributed primarily to Glacier National Park and pri-
vate concessionaire facilities associated with the Park.
b. Areas Requiring Special Provisions for Bears
Through the preliminary stages of this study it became apparent that
for those regions of the study area which bears are known to frequent,
special precautions should be taken to prohibit or discourage bears from
entering or disturbing the solid waste storage or disposal facilities. The
area-: m which these special precautions should be taken are depicted on
Figure G. As indicated on the figure, the general location of the required
''bear proofed" waste facilities is the western one-fourth ol the study area
which basically includes that portion of Glacier National Park in the study
area and the area in Glacier County immediately east of the Park.
AHer evaluating several methods that have been utilized throughout
the ration to deter bears from frequenting or destroying solid waste
handling facilities, it was cetermmed that the following special "bear
proof" provisions would be the nost appropriate for the various solid
waste alternatives that were evaluated herein
(1) Sanitary Landfill
l'or the alternative m which landfills would be located in the
areas frequented by bears, a special electrified fence would be in-
stalled around the site. (This improvement has seemed to detract the
bears quite effectively m the West Yellowstone area). This fence
would basically include a ]2-foot chain link fence with the initial four
feet buried m the ground and the remaining eight feet located above
ground. The fence would be provided with low voltage electricity.
During the spring, summer and fall months, the electricity would be
turned on to deter the bears. In the winter months, the electricity
v.oukl not be necessary. A lockable gate constructed of similar ma-
terials would also be provided. This gate would only be open during
tlie specific hours that each landfill site was open.
(2) "Green Box" System
for this alternative it was determined that a special "mail box"
type lid should be installed on all containers in those areas where
bears may frequent. (These lids arc similar in principle to those
utilized on the containers located in Glacier National Park.)
(3) "Roll-Off" System
For this alternative it was determined that an electrified chain
link fence should be constructed around each "Roll-Off" container
site in the areas which bears may frequent. This fence would be
constructed and operated similarly to that discussed for the landfill
option. For these facilities, it is anticipated that maintenance per-
sonnel would open and close the gate to each container site each
morning and evening during the spring, summer and fall months
V
74
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
r
~\
whereas the container site would be kept open 24 hours per day, seven
days per week during' the winter months. It is anticipated that this duty
could be performed by a resident(s) living near each container site, and
thus little or no labor would be required.
Through discussions with members of the project Technical Committee
throughout the development of this study, the point has been brought out
that although an electrified fence or a special container lid may prohibit
boars from entering the waste dumping area, these provisions may not de-
ter the bears' attraction to the general waste disposal area. With this in
mind, the alternative of utilizing buildings to house "Green Box" and
"Roll-Oil" containers was explored. (Obviously, this option is not practic-
al foi the landfill alternative). Through discussions with federal officials
and consultants with experience in this subject, it was basically concluded
that locating container sites inside buildings docs deter bears to a greater
degree than simply utih/.nifj electrified fences, however, it is not an "iron
clad" solution to the bear attraction problem. Two major drawbacks to
utilizing this alternative that were brought up 111 discussions with those
officials with experience in this subject include 1) the extremely high
capital and maintenance cost of such facilities; and 2) the inability to
educate the general public on closing doors at sites that are not attended
by personnel employed by the disposal piogram. (In most cases it would
bo cost-prohibitive to hire full-time gate keepers at each container site).
Based on the information and research compiled for this study, it is
the general consensus of most individuals familiar with this "boar proof-
ing" subject that if proper facilities are constructed to prohibit bears
from entering the actual waste area, the bears will frequent the waste
disposal area less over a period ol time to the point that over a several-
year period the bear frequenting problem will be quite minimal. It is also
the gencial consensus that during the initial few months or in some in-
stances over the initial few years m which, a new disposal program is init-
iated whereby bears are deterred from gaining access to a waste disposal
site, bear destruction problems may actually increase compared to the
existing conditions. This is true m many cases until the bears become ac-
customed to the new program and locate now sources of food, etc.
Lased on the research conducted and the conclusions sumr.anzed
herein, 11 is this Consultant's recommendation that electrified chain link
fences would be the most cost-effective method for "bear proofing" the
landfill and roll-off container sites. Due to the numerous sites that would
have to be fenced under the "Green Box" alternative, it was determined
most cost elfective to utilue the "mailbox" lid option to "bear proof" the
containers utilized for the "Green Box" alternative rather than to fence
off each container site. Based on these conclusions, the costs developed
in the following section of this chapter incorporate these recommended
"bear proofing" concepts and improvements.
V
76
J
-------
r
~\
3. System Cost Components
For each specific solid waste option that was evaluated, it was determined
that three basic cost components wore applicable. These cost components in-
clude- 1) the individual facility capital and annual costs; 2) the disposal costs
associated with operating the necessary disposal sites; and 3) the transporta-
tion cost associated with hauling the wastes from the various waste handling
facilities to the final disposal sitc(s). Included herein is a brief discussion of
each.
a. Waste Handling and Final Disposal Facility Costs
The cosl0 associated with the construction and operation of the var-
ious waste handling facilities as well as the final disposal sites for each
alternative were calculated m detail. For each specific alternative that was
evaluated, the waste handling' and disposal costs are depicted herein.
b. Transportation Costs
V.'hor evaluating the transportation costs of solid waste disposal sys-
tems, there are two tvpes of haul that warrant consideration. These are
1) primary haul, which represents the cost of transporting- waste directly
iron the pomi of generation to cither a rural container site, transfer
station, or ultimate disposal facility, and 1) secondary haul, which rep-
resents the cost of transporting waste from one facility to another.
In most instances the primary hauling of solid waste is associated
with the use ol vehicles which initially collect or transport the waste. For
wastes generated m larger communities, a packer-type collection vehicle is
most generally used, lor wastes generated in rural areas, the primary
hrul is usually associated with individuals transporting their wastes to
cither a disposal site or container site utilizing their own vehicles. When
analvzmg the secondary hauling of wastes, vehicles specifically designed
to transport large quantities over long distances are utilized. These ve-
hicles usually include flatbeds, large transfer trailers, or compaction
trucks.
It is the intent of Hit scope of services for this project to spe-
cifically determine and include m the system cost analysis only the sec-
ondary haul costs associated with each alternative evaluated. The reason-
ing behind not including specific primary haul costs m the system cost
analysis is two-fold 1) the intent of the project is to determine the most
cost-effective method for disposing of the wastes generated in the study
area, which collides door-to-door collection and individual transportation
ol wastes from each home or business to a central disposal site; and 2) it
would be impossible to estimate the cost for each individual within the
study area to transport his or her own wastes to the various disposal
sites which were evaluated.
77
J
-------
r
In regard to estimating the secondary haul costs associated with each
alternative that was evaluated for the area, unit haul costs were devel-
oped for three vehicle types. The sources of information used to derive
the unit costs were: 1) equipment manufacturers and suppliers; 2) oper-
ating records from city, county and private firms presently operating
solid waste collection, transportation and/or disposal services; and 3) an
analysis of present labcr rates and fuel prices throughout the area.
Table 4 summarizes the unit costs for the vehicles that were deemed
necessary to transport the wastes for all solid waste transfer and disposal
systems determined applicable and warranting an m-depth analysis. In all
cases, labor costs arc not included. Labor costs are, however, included
a separate item in the total svstem cost analysis. (A labor rate of
$10.00 per hour was utilized lor this analysis). It should be noted that
the costs c'opictcd in thic table represent costs as of August, 1981 with
no inflationary factors added. It was also assumed that the vehicles would
'oc owned and operated by a non-taxable entity. Thus, no overhead,
taxes and profit are added to these vehicle costs. According to private
firms contacted by the Consultant, however, these costs appear to be
reasonable if the services were to be contracted to a private firm.
4. System Cost Analysis Summary
Included herein is a summary oi the annual system cost analyses that
were conducted for the specific disposal alternatives determined potentially
applicable for the study area. The total annual system cost for each alter-
native is summarized in fable 5. The specific discussion and itemized costs for
each alternative are included m the following narrative, tables and figures.
a. Aicawide Sanitary Landfills
For this study it was attempted to estimate the cost to operate
iandlills located throughout the study area for the two extreme levels of
service deemed practical for the study area 1) nine landfill sites stra-
tegically located throughout the study area; and 2) five landfill sites
strategically located throughout the study area. The anticipated approx-
imate locations oi the various landfills for these two options are depicted
en Figure 7.
For each of these landfill options, it was assumed that the landfill
located near Browning would be open five days per week during the sum-
mer months and three days per week during the remainder of the year.
For these options it was also assumed that the residents living in the ex-
treme eastern portion of the study area would utilize the present City of
Cut Dank landfill, where a drop charge of $10.00 per ton would be asses-
sed lor use ot the site. For the remaining landfill sites (satellite landfills)
lccated m the study area, it was assumed that the sites would be open
two days to six days per week, depending upon the season and location
of the site.
V
78
J
-------
TABLE 4
TRANSPORTATION UNIT COSTS
I.
DETREClA'l ION
Vehicle T\pc
New Price
Less
Salvage Value
1
Estimated
Mileage
Cost
Per Mile
20 c.v. Packer $ 55,000 8,250
Dump Truck 30,000 4,500
Tilt-Frame 65,000 9,750
Doicr Transport 05,000 9,750
Represents 15% of capital cost
] 75 ,000
175,000
175,000
300,000
0.27
0.15
0.32
0.18
II. OPERATION MAINTENANCE (Cost Per Mile)
Vehicle Type
Fuel
Oil & Lube
Other
Total Cost
1. 20 c.y. Packer SO.37 $0.07
2. Dump Truck 0.26 0.05
3. Tilt-Frame 0.26 0.05
4. Dozer Transport 0.52 0.08
1 bascc! on $1.30 per gnlloi (dicscl)
$0 40
0.35
0.37
0.50
$0.84
0.66
0.68
1.10
III. 'J OTA I. COST (Per Mile)
Vehicle Type
Insurance
Depreciation
Op. & Maint.
Total Cost
]. 20 c.y. Packer $0.08
2. Dump Truck 0.05
3. Tilt-Frame 0.07
4. Dozer Transport 0.10
$0.27
0.15
0.32
0.18
$0.84
0.6G
0.68
1.10
$1.19
0.86
1.07
1.38
/
-------
In order to develop estimated costs to locate and operate various
landfill sites for this alternative, certain basic assumptions were made.
For this study, it was assumed that the State of Montana laws and regu-
lations as administered by the State Department of Health & Environmental
Science Division would be adhered to. (Although these state regulations
cannot be legally enforced on tribally owned land, it was assumed that
they would be followed since all other entities including the incorporated
communities and Glacier and I'ondera Counties would be required to oper-
ate facilities under this regulation). The most prominent rules that have
been adopted b} the State oi Montana's regulations include. 1) no open
burning shall be permitted at any disposal site without a burning permit;
nl) a minimum ol six inches of soil shall be placed on all waste the same
day as deposited; 3) ro wastes shall be placed within ten feet of the high
groundwater level or a stream, and 4) access shall bo limited at each
lanofill site to the number of days deemed necessary to adequately serve
the facility users. Based o'i these rules, the following location and opera-
tional criteria were developed and utilized to estimate the annual costs for
tins landlill alternative 1) the trench landfill method would be utilized.
2) a gate attendant would be on-site during operating hours to supervise
cumping and provide general maintenance; 3) a track-type dozer would be
transported to each satellite landfill from Browning each day the sites
were open to provide daily maintenance and soil cover; 4) the excavation
01 tienchos and/or cover material and road maintenance would be contrac-
ted as required, and 5) no current facilities exist and thus all site im-
provements rcquncd to start a landfill site would be needed.
The estimated capital and annual costs to locate and operate a satel-
lite landfill site are itemized m Table G. As depicted in the table, the
costs vary depending upon whethei "bear-prooi" provisions would or
would not be necessary. As shown, the initial capital expenditure re-
quired to locate each satellite landfill will vary Jrom $32,000 to $02,500.
The total annual cost to amortize the capital expenditure as well as to
operate each site according to the State of Montana regulations is esti-
mated to vary from $17,040 to $26,620.
Since the landlill located near Browning would handle substantially
more wastes than the satellite landfill under these landfill alternative
options, specific costs have been estimated for the Browning landfill. The
estimated capital and annual cost to operate the landfill located near
Browning are depicted m Table 7. It should be noted that initial site
acquisition, development and fencing costs have been included m these
costs. Although many of these initial costs have already been expended at
the existing site, it is necessary to include all facility costs for all
alternatives m order that a true annual cost comparison can be made be-
tween the various landfill and container alternatives being evaluated
herein. It should also be noted that unlil.e the satellite landfills for which
the dozer would be transported to the site each clay, it was assumed that
-------
TABLE 5
ALTLRN A'l IViir P FA L'. SIS LIT. i A i^
AN NU A 5 COST
Cost Kleriont
Description
Use oj Area wide
Landfills
9 Sites 5 Sites
"Green Lox"
System
11 Roll-Off111
Svstem
Combination
"Crcen Box" fc
"Koll—Off" Systems
1.
Conventional Landhll
a)
b)
c)
Lite Costs
Trench Excavation
Cut Bank Drop Charge
$202,380 $11'<;,C40
24,GOO 24,660
5,700 5,7 00
$51,360
17 ,05 0
<) ,820
$ 51,360
17 ,610
5 ,7 CO
$51,360
18 ,770
3 ,40C
Subtotal •
$232,740 $155,000
$75 ,230
$74 ,67 0
S73 ,530
2 .
Transfer Facilities:
a)
b)
Amortisation
Operation & Mamt.
0 0
0 0
$17 ,170
4 ,870
$21,300
2 ,100
$21 ,170
2 ,650
Subtotal •
$0.00 $0.00
$22 ,040
$23,400
$23 ,820
3.
Transportation Costs.
a)
b)
Vehicle Depr. , O & M
Labor
$50,370 $24,870
8,190 3,620
$42 ,120
23 ,680
$20,850
9,430
$35 ,240
15 ,870
Subtotal: $58,560 $28,490 $G5,800 $30,280 $51,110
TOTAL ANNUAL COST. $291,300 $183,
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
a separate dozer would remain at the site full tine to handle the day-to-
day maintenance and cover requirements.
Based on the criteria and costs discussed above, the total annual
cost to locate and operate either five or nine landfill sites throughout the
study area was estimated. As depicted in Table 5, the total annual cost to
locate and operate five or nine landfill sites would vary respcctivclv from
$183,490 to $291,300. These costs basically indicate that the higher de-
gree of service that nine sites would offer compared to locating five sites
would meiease the total annual cost by $107,810 which represents an an-
nual cost increase of approximately 59 percent. It should be noted, how-
ever, ihat although the annual costs for five areawide landfill alternative
appear to be loss than lor the nine areawide landfill alternative, the ad-
ded expense and inconvenience incurred by many residents in driving
farther to one of the five Irndfill sites must be taken into consideration
before a final decision is made ns to the number oi landfills that is most
appropriate and cost effective.
b. "Green Box" Container System
This alternative includes the use of 130 four-cubic-yard containers
strategically located throughout the study area. (It is estimated that ap-
proximately one-half ol these containers would require specially designed
"bear-proof" lids). Under this alternative the wastes deposited in the
containers would be emptied periodically and transported to either the
browning or Cut Bank landfills by use of a 20-cubic-yard packer type
vehicle.
Tor this alternative the Consultant designed specific collection routes
to most effectively collect and transport the wastes. The locations of the
vanous collection routes and disposal sites that were designed for this
system arc depicted m ligure 8. For this alternative, it was attempted to
design the collection routes and locate the containers such that 90 percent
of the study area residents would live within a five mile radius of a con-
tainer. Based on this design, it was determined to be most cost effective
to empty all containers twice per week with the exception of Routes A and
13, where it was determined to be necessary to empty the containers ap-
proximately five times per week during the summer months due to the
high volume of waste generated in these areas as a result of the tourism
activities. Under this alternative it was also assumed that Collection
Routes A and B would originate and end at Browning with the wastes col-
lected from these routes ultimately disposed of at the Browning landfill,
lor Routes C and D, it was assumed that the packer vehicle would origi-
nate at Browning and proceed along Route C with the wastes collected
along this route disposed oi at the Cut Bank landfill. (A drop charge fee
of $10.00 per ton would be assessed by the City for use of their city
landfill). After disposing of the wastes at the Cut Bank landfill, it was
assumed that the packer vehicle would collect the wastes along Route D
and dispose of these wastes at the Browning landfill.
-------
TABLE 6
SATELLITE LANDFILL COST SUMMARY
(Less Thar 1,000 Tons per Year)
Capital Cost
Total Cost
Item
Units
Unit Cost
Conventional
"Bear-Proofed"
Land
4 ac.
$800
$ 3,200
$ 3,200
Loads
400 ft.
$15
6,000
6,000
Building
1,000 sq. It.
$15
15,000
15,000
K'isc. Utilitie
s Lump Sum (LC)
$2 ,000
2,000
2,000
reneing
1 ,700 ft.
$2 - $18
3,400
30,600
Contingency
L.S.
10'i
3,000
5,700
lotal Capital
Cost
$32,600
$62,500
Amorti;.; {ion
(12?, - 20 yrs.)
$4,400
$8,400
Am.ual Operating Cost
Units
Total Cost
I ten
Conv. "Bear-Proofed" Unit Cost Conv. "Bcar-Proofcd"
bite & Load Maint.
Lozcr E'cpr. , Oper.
fi. iMaint.
Labor
Utilities
Insurance
L.S.
1
208
208
L.S.
L.S.
L.S.
30'i;
304"
L.S.
L.S.
$500
45
10
400
500
$ 500
9, 3G0
2,080
200
500
$
500
13,680
3,040
500
500
Subtotal
Amortization ol Capital
$12 ,640
4 ,400
$18,220
8,400
'J otal Annual Cost.
1
$17 ,040
$26,620
Based on two hours per day the site is open (2 days per week all year)
based on two hours per each day the site is open (2 days per week for 40
weeks, G days per week for 12 weeks)
MOT]] Trench excavation costs arc not included.
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
r
In addition to the "Green Box" container system and landfill facilities
discussed herein, it was also determined necessary to provide a disposal
service for large bulky wastes including used appliances, bed springs and
oversized materials that cannot be placed into the four-cubic-yard con-
tainers. Two disposal alternatives lor this purpose wore evaluated during
the study 1) the location of several demolition and debris disposal sites
throughout the study area, and 2) the use of a dump truck or flatbed to
periodically travel throughout the study area on a pre-arranged schedule
to retrieve those tvpc materials and transport them to the Browning or
Cut Dank landfill for disposal. After discussing these options with the
Technical Committee members, it was determined that the latter alternative
would be most appropriate lor this purpose. Based on this it was deter-
mined that ten retrieval tups per year throughout the study area would
be made utilizing? o large dump truck and two personnel.
Based on the eruciia discussed above, the annual system cost for
this "Creen Box" alternative was estimated. A summary of these costs is
depicted in Table 5. As indicated in the table, the total annual cost for
this alternative is estimated to be $163,070. This includes $75,230 for
operation of the vanous disposal facilities, $22,040 for the amortization
i_nd annual maintenance ol the four-cubic-vard containers (see upper por-
tion of Table 8 for a breakdown of the capital and annual costs of these
containers) and $65,800 for the depi eeiation, operation, maintenance and
labor necessary to operate the vehicles utilized for providing both the
"Creen Box" and bulky materials pickup systems.
c. "Roll-Off" Container System
'ilus alternative includes the replacement of the existing- "Green Box"
system with six 40-cubic-yard "Foil-Off" containers strategically located
throughout the study area, bndcr tins alternative, the wastes deposited
in the mx containers would be transported to the areawide landfill located
near Browning lor disposal by use of a tilt-frame vehicle specially de-
signed to handle the "Roll-Oft" containers.
The location of the ^ix container sites as well as the areawide land-
fills tluit would be utilized under this disposal program arc depicted in
Figure 9. As indicated or the figure, the residents m the extreme east-
ern portion (if the study area would be required to utilize the Cut Bank
landfill si net no contamei site is located in that area. Under this pro-
gram, the City of Cut Baiil; would receive compensation ($10 per ton) for
the wastes that weic deposited at its landfill by county and reservation
residents.
For this alternative, the system was designed by the Consultant so
lhat 90 percent of the study area residents would be located within a ten-
mile ladius of either a 40-cubic-yard container or one of the two landfill
sites (Browning or Cut Bank). The system was also designed so that all
containers would be emptied at least once each week throughout the year
V
86
J
-------
1 ABLE 7
BROWNING LANDFILL COST SUMMARY
(Approximately 4,000 Tons per Year)
Capital Cost
Item
Units
Unit Cost
Total Cost
Land
Ton els
Building
[\ isc. Utilities
1 C1IC111J1,
CcntniQcncy
20 ac.
1,000 It.
1,5GC sq. It
L. 5.
3,000 ft.
I .S.
Total Capital Cost:
Amortization (12% - 20 years)
$] ,500
$15
$15
$3,000
$2.50
10%
$30,000
15,000
22,500
3,000
7 ,500
7,800
$85,800
$11 ,51)0
Annual Operation Cost
(192 Days Per Year)
Item
Units
Unit Cost
Total Cost
bite & Load Maintenance
Doxcr Lcpr., Operation,
& Maintenance
Labor.
a) Operator
b) Gate Attendant
Utilities
Insurance
L.S.
5 7 G1
5 7 G1
1 ,536
L.S.
L.S.
$1 ,500
$45
$10
$5
$1,000
$1,000
$ 1,500
25,920
5,760
7,680
1,000
1,000
Subtotal
$42 ,860
Arrortiration oi Capital
11,500
Total Annual Cost
$54 ,3(50
1
Based or three hours per each day the site is open lor covering' operations.
Based on eight liouis per each day the site is open
NOTL Trench excavation costs arc not included.
;
-------
r
with additional trips made as waste generation warranted. On the aver-
age, it was determined necessary to employ on individual for approximate-
ly ?0 hours per week to operate the tilt-frame vehicle, with the number
of hours per week varvmg from 35 during the summer months to 13 dur-
ing the winter months. Unlike the "Creen Box" system previously dis-
cussed , it was not determined necessary to provide a bulky waste pickup
service throughout the study area lor this alternative since the 40-cu1jjc-
yard containers are large enough to handle most types of wastes.
Based cn the criteria discussed above, the annual system cost for
the "Roll-Off" alternative was estimated. A summary of these costs is de-
picted m Table 5. As indicated ir the table, the total annual cost ior this
alternate c is estimated to be $128,350. This includes $74,670 for the op-
ciation ol' Browning landfill and the proportionate "drop charge" for use
of the Cut Bank landfill, $23,400 for the amortization and annual mainte-
nance of the six container silos (.see lower portion of Table 8 for a
breakdown of ccsts of the.se container sites), and $30,280 for the depreci-
ation, operation, maintenance and labor necessary to operate the tilt —
frame vehicle.
d. Combination Container System Alternative
This alternative includes a combination of the "Green Pox" and
"Koll-Olf" container systems. Under this alternative, five 40-cubic- yard
"Roll-Off" containers would be utilized in the western portion of the
study area and 32 four-cubic-yard containers would be utilized in the
eastern portion of the study area. The five "Roll-Off" container sites
would be serviced as required with a tilt-franc vehicle and the waste
would be transported to the areawide landfill located near Browning (or
disposal. For the 32 four-cubic-yard containers, the wastes deposited in
the containers would be emptied and transported to either the Cut Bank
landfill or Browning landfill by use of a specially designed packer ve-
hicle. This system was oc'jjgncd by the Consultant so that wastes gener-
ated along Collection Route A would be disposed of at the Cut Bank land-
fill (\.hcrc a drop charge of $10 per ton would be assessed) and the
wastes generated along Collection Route B would be disposed of at the
landfill locateu near Browning. This would permit the packer vehicle that
services the "Green Boxes" to collect all wastes generated in the eastern
portion of the study aica utilizing two round trips per week originating
and ending m Bicwmng. I he locations of the various facilities that would
he required under this alternative arc depicted in Figure 10.
Based on the criteri? discussed herein, the annual system cost tor
this combination container alternative was developed. A summary of these
costs is depicted in Table 5. As indicated, the total annual cost is esti-
mated to be $148,460. This annual cost includes the amortization, opera-
tion and labor costs of all disposal facilities, container sites and vehicles
necessary to service the "Green Box" and "Roll-Off" containers included
in the program.
V
88
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
TABLE 8
CONTAINER ALTERNATIVES FACILITY COSTS
1. "CRLLN BOX" CONTAINER SYSTEM • Non "Bear-Proofed" "Bear Proofed"
1. Capital Cost- (per 4 c.y. container)
2. Annual Cost:
a) Amortization (10 ypnrs @ 1 fl)
b) Maintenance ol Container
Total / nnual Cost per Container-
$500
88
25
$113
$1,000
176
50
$220
II. ROLL-OFF CON1AINLR SYSTEM:
1. Capital Cost-
Item
Non "Bear-Proofed"
"Bear-Proofed"
I and
Fencing
'Jitowork & Ramp
Concrete Slab & Wall
Shelter
Container (40 c.y.)
Contingency
Total Capital Cost.
$1,000
1,000
3,000
? ,000
3,000
5,000
2,000
$22,000
$1,000
10,000
3,000
7 ,000
3 ,000
5 .000
2,000
$31,000
Annual Cost:
a) Amortisation (20 years @ ]2%) $2,950
b) Maintenance 250
$4,150
450
Total Annual Cost Per Site
$3,200
$4,600
90
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
r
e. Summary
As depicted in Tabic 5 and discussed herein, there is a wide range
of costs and levels of service for the alternatives evaluated herein. In
addition, the advantages and disadvantages of each system differ, as has
been discussed m the previous narrative. Included in Table 9 is a brief
summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the four alternatives
discussed herein.
As caii be noted from the table, it appears that all alternatives have
certain advantages ard disadvantages that directly relate to the equipment
utilized for each system. From comparing the various advantages, disad-
vantages and levels of service with the estimated annual costs of each al-
ternative, it appears that the container system alternatives are more fa-
vorablc than the use of several areawide landfills. Furthermore, it ap-
pears that there is a trade-off between the ''Green Box" and "Roll-Oif"
systems. The "Green Box" alternative offers a higher number of drop lo-
cations compared to the "Roll-Off" system; however, the "Roll-Off" system
affords the opportunity to dump large loads of various size materials di-
rectly into the containers whereas the "Green Box" system does not. Fi-
nally, the annual system costs favor the "Roll-Off" system to a certain
degree, however, this difference may be slightlv offset by the fact that
several rural residents would have to drive longer distances to a "Roll-
Off" container site.
V
92
J
-------
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
ALTERNATIVE
SUMMARY OF ADVANTAGES
AND DISADVANTAGES
Use ot Arcawide Landfills
Advantages:
1. Able to accept all types of wastes
2. Compatible to a certain degree with
existing waste disposal practices
1. Limited access to specilic days and
hours
2. Limited number of sites
3. High capital & annual costs
4. Operational problems in winter
months
5. Difficulty in locating' approved sites
1. Full-time disposal privileges
2. Large number of "drop" sites
3. Compatible with existing" waste
handling conditions
4. Majority of existing residents are
familiar with system
5. System is easy to expand or modify
to changes m waste generation
characteristics
6. Minimal problems associated with lo-
cating container sites
Disadvantages.
1. Higher annual costs than other sys-
tems evaluated
2. Inability of small containers to
handle large bulky wastes
Disadvantages•
Green Pox" System
Advantages:
-------
TABLE 9
(continued)
ALTERNATIVE
SUMMARY OF ADVANTAGES
AMP DISADVANTAGES
"Giecn Box" System
(continued)
Disadvantages.
3. Higher annual maintenance L clean
up costs of containers than "Roll-
Off" system due to increased num-
ber of drop sites
4. Inability to dump wastes from large
vehicles into containers requiring
these vehicles to travel to arcawidc
landfills.
3. "Koll-Gfi" System Advantages1
1. Lowest annual cost of alternatives
investigated
2. Full-time disposal privileges
3. System easy to expand or modify
A. Able to hancilc most waste typos in-
cluding bulky materials
5. System affords dumping of wastes
from large vehicles directly into
containers
Disadvantages:
1. Comparatively few drop locations,
requiring some area residents to
drive long distances to dispose of
wastes
2. High capital costs compared to
"Green Box" system
4. Combination Container Svstems
Advantages •
1. Basically incorporates advantapes of
"Green Box" & "Roll-Off" alterna-
tives in areas where various facil-
ities arc to be utilized
V
94
-------
TABLE 9
(continued)
SUMMARY OF ADVANTAGES
ALTERNATIVE AND DISADVANTAGES
4 . Combination Container Systems Advantages:
(continued) 2. Provides a high level of service
since most residents in study area
are within a few miles of a drop lo-
cation
3. System is compatible to a certain
degree with existing wai>tc collection
and disposal conditions
Disadvantages:
1. High capital costs compared to the
"Green Box" .system
. Fewer drop locations m western
portion of study area compared to
"Green Box" alternative
V
95
J
-------
PART SEVEN
RECOMMENDED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
-------
r
PART SEVEN
RECOMMENDED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
A. GENERAL
For the past several months the alternatives that were evaluated in detail
lor this study have been reviewed by the project Technical Committee mem-
bers. After substantial review ol the information compiled during the project,
a draft management plan report was prepared and distributed in February,
1982, for review by the project Technical Committee members. Based on the
subsequent meeting and comments received, a final solid waste management
strategy was developed by the project Technical Committee Members. The de-
tails of this recommended solid waste management plan are described in this
chapter and basically include the following: 1) recommended disposal facilities;
2) organizational strategy; 3) operational strategy; 4) financial strategy, and
5) implementation schedule.
13. RECOMMENDED DISPOSAL FACILITIES
Based on the response obtained from the Technical Committee members
who have been involved with this project, a recommended disposal system was
delineated involving the continued use of the current "Green Box" container
system. Under this plan, the majority of the wastes generated within the study
area would be transported to the present landfill site located near Browning.
The wastes generated in the extreme southeastern portion of the study area as
well as those wastes generated by the residents and businesses in Cut Bank
would be disposed of at the current City of Cut Bank landfill. It is assumed
that all remaining existing dump sites would be closed under this plan. Since
the "Green Box" system cannot handle large, bulky objects such as appliances,
bed springs, demolition debris, etc., and since all small, outlying disposal
sites will be closed, the recommended plan also includes the implementation of a
special bulky material pickup service. This service would include a flatbed or
dump truck that would periodically travel throughout the study area picking
up these materials and transporting them to the Browning or Cut Bank land-
fills for disposal.
It is assumed that the municipal collection services in Browning and Cut
Bank will continue to be operated and the wastes will continue to be disposed
of at the respective landiill sites. It is also assumed that the existing
collection and disposal procedures of the National Park Service and the Park
Concessionaire will continue; wastes generated at these facilities will be
collected and transported to the Browning landfill using their own packer and
pickup vehicles.
V
96
J
-------
r
As a result of several meetings that were held with the project Technical
Committee members, it was also determined that the recommended disposal plan
may incorporate the implementation of a "Roll-Off" container system to augment
the existing "Green Box" system. Implementation of this system would most
likely occur in two to three years when the 20-cubic-yard, side-loading vehi-
cles currently used to service the "Green Box" sites will require replacement
or major overhaul. It is anticipated that, if the "Roll-Off" system is imple-
mented, 40-cubic-yard container sites would be located near Babb, St. Mary,
Kr.st Clacier, Heart Butte, Starr School, and Blackfoot. The "Green Box" sys-
tem would be utilized considerably less, with its major emphasis on serving the
eastern portion of the study r.rca. The implementation of this "Roll-Ofi" system
would also greatly reduce the need ior the special bulk waste pickup service.
The National Park Service and the Park Concessionaire would also benefit,
tincn they would be able to dump the wastes collected by their small packer
vehicles directly into the large containers that would be located near East Gla-
cier, Babb, and St. [\inrv rather than transporting the wastes individually to
Browning for disposal.
Included in the lollouing paragraphs is a more detailed discussion of the
design and operational criteria determined appropriate for the various lacilitics
ano equipment included m the recommended disposal plan discussed herein.
Since the implementation ol the "Roll-Oil" system is uncertain at this time, the
discussions and costs included m the following text will be limited to the
"Giecn Box" systcr anu the disposal facilities associated with it. The disposal
system that has been recommended for the study area is illustrated in Figure
1. "Green Box" Container Svstem
It is assumed that the four-cubic-yard containers and side-loading packer
trucks that are currently being utilized under the existing program would con-
tinue to be utilized. It is also assumed that additional containers and mainte-
nance ol the packer vehicles will be necessary to some extent. As discussed in
detail in Part Six, it is also recommended that "mail box" lids bo installed on
the containers in the extreme western portion of the study area to deter bears
m those areas.
As ocpictcd m 1'igurc 11, the collection routes lor the recommended plan
would be modified to a small ciegrcc compared to the existing routes. The major
modifications would incorporate the disposal oi the wastes collected along Route
C at the Cut Bank landfill instead of the Browning landfill, which is currently
utilised. This change would allow Route D to be completed in the same trip as
Route C.
Under this proposed system, it is anticipated that Routes A and B would
be collected an aveiage of five limes per week during the tourist season (mid-
.hnie to Labor Day) and an average of twice per week during the remainder of
the year. It is also anticipated that the remaining two routes would be col-
lected aii average of twice per week throughout the year, with no discernible
11.
97
J
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
-------
difference between the tourist and non-tourist seasons. Approximately 20,000
miles would be traveled annually by the packer vehicles to service the contain-
ers according to this plan. It is estimated that the labor requirements to op-
erate the system would be approximately 2,000 hours per year with substanti-
ally more hours required during the summer than the winter, based on one-
man crews 111 the packer vehicles. A more detailed estimate of the "Green Box"
system components and requirements are summarized below:
Waste Volumes Avg. # of Trips
(Tons/Wk) Approx. # ot Per Week Approx. Miles
Route Winter Summer Green Boxes Winter Summer per Trip
A 8 38 37 2 5 65
B 37 50 42 2 5 35
C 13 13 32 2 2 107
D 11 12 19 2 2 68
2. Bulky Materials Pickup Service
As previously discussed, the recommended plan includes the use of a spe-
cial service for the outlying areas to pick up, transport and dispose of large,
bulky materials that are periodically generated and require disposal. In order to
provide this service to area residents, it is assumed that a dump truck or flat-
bed vehicle would travel throughout the study area on a prearranged schedule
to pick up and transport these materials to either the Browning or Cut Bank
landfills for disposal. It is also assumed that additional trips could be made in
special situations. Ten trips per year were used as the basis for the cost esti-
mates included herein. It was also assumed that two personnel would be utilized
for each trip.
3. Browning Landfill
The recommended plan assumes that the existing landfill site located north
of Browning would be utilized. After preliminary investigation, it appears that
the site has sufficient capacity to dispose of the study area's wastes for the
next 10 to 20 years. It was also assumed that the site would continue to be
open six days per week during the summer and three days per week during the
remainder of the year. For each day the site is open, a gate attendant would
be on duty to supervise dumping and provide general cleanup and maintenance.
At the end of each operating day, an equipment operator would utilize a dozer
to compact and cover the wastes deposited that day. Trenches would also be
periodically excavated at the site by a private contractor.
-------
r
The basic assumptions discussed above are determined to be the estimated
laboi and equipment requirements necessary to operate the site in accordance
with all state ar.d federal regulations. Although these laws and regulations are
net m effect on tribal lands and thus are not enforceable at the Browning land-
fill site, which is located on federal trust land, it is the Consultant's recom-
mendation that the operating requirements discussed herein should be followed
lor several reasons. Furthermore, the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council should
adopt a tribal rcpulatory code in the near future that is similar to and com-
patible with the State of Lortana Solid Vcastc rules and regulations. This code
would allow the Tribal Council to require any jurisdictional entity or private
enterprise that nay manage the site m the future to operate the site m such a
manner as to cause no health hazards. In addition, the proper operation of
landfills would provide for the protection of public health, reduced fire haz-
ards, protection cl surface and groundwater from contamination, and general
aesthetics.
4. Cut Hank Landfill
Under the proposed recommended plan, the existing City of Cut Bank
landfill would continue to operate under its present conditions. According to
state inspection reports, the site is currently operating in general accordance
with state and federal regulations and criteria.
C. ORGANIZATIONAL, S'iRAlLGY
1 . Alternate Strategies
Once the disposal system and corresponding equipment, facility and labor
requirements have been determined and finalized, the next implementation step
is to identify the most practical organizational strategy. Over the past several
\ears, numerous solid waste organizational concepts have been tried and deemed
successful throughout the nation. These concepts include- 1) individual munici-
pal programs, I) ccuntv-wide programs; 3) regional authority-operated pro-
grams; 4) non-profit governmental corporation programs; 5) privately operated
programs, G) regulated utility programs; and 7) state-administered programs.
Due to the local constraints and conditions within the stud}- area, it is felt that
two organizational concepts are potentially applicable in the area for implementa-
tion of a solid waste management program. These concepts are summarized here-
in .
Individual Municipal or Area Programs
Currently the State of Montana laws and regulations provide for indi-
vidual incorporated communities to own, operate or contract the collection,
storage, transfer and disposal of solid waste in their communities. Several
of the larger communities have used this concept for the past several
^orrs with a high degree of success. However, many of the smaller com-
munities that have used tins concept have found it to be somewhat inade-
quate because of the lack of tax base and funds to provide the required
degree of seivicc and operation of facilities. With regard to a total study
area solution, this organizational concept has a severe drawback in that
V
100
J
-------
r
a
limited opportunities are available for the residents living outside the
incorporated communities. Under this system, the rural residents must
either operate their own disposal site or utilize a municipal site and pay a
user fee. Obviously, the duplication of facilities will, in most instances,
increase the costs to all residents in the area.
b. Areawide Program
This organizational concept is applicable primarily if a multi-county or
multi-jurisdictional solid waste management program is contemplated. Under
this concept, a Policy Board would be formed and equitable assessments
would be made to each user of the services and facilities provided. The
Board would then be responsible for making all administrative, operational,
and financial decisions for the waste disposal program.
2. Recommended Organizational Strategy
Based on several meetings with the members of the project Technical Com-
mittee, the Committee basically recommends that a regional or multi-jurisdictional
strategy would be a more beneficial and practical approach to implementing the
recommended disposal system than an individual municipal or area program.
Therefore, an organizational strategy based on this approach was developed for
implementation of the recommended disposal system.
The organizational strategy that was recommended by the Project Technical
committee members identifies that The Blackfeet Tribe would be the lead agency
for the implementation of the plan. By this recommendation, all necessary con-
tractual agreements, revenues and expenses to own and operate the recommend-
ed disposal facilities and services would be the ultimate responsibility of the
Tribe. Furthermore, the recommended plan identifies that the Town of Brown-
ing, Glacier County and Glacier National Park would have interlocal agreements
with The Blackfeet Tribe. These interlocal agreements basically would stipulate
that the Tribe would provide the facilities, equipment, and labor deemed neces-
sary to dispose of the entity's wastes and in return the entity would compen-
sate the Tribe on an equitable per ton basis. Letters from the various jurisdic-
tional entities indicating this recommendation are included in Appendix A of this
report.
The recommended plan also stipulates that a Policy Board would be formed
with each of four major jurisdictional entities that have indicated an interest in
participating in the program. This Board would be responsible for establishing
initial policies, setting appropriate fees, making operational and administrative
decisions regarding the operation of the various components of the disposal pro-
gram, preparing and administering all necessary contracts, and authorizing
payments for all expenses incurred by the waste disposal program. Figure 12
summarizes the various entities and strategies of the recommended organization
plan. Included herein is a brief summary of the representation and responsibil-
ities of each of the four jurisdictional entities that have indicated their interest
in participating in the recommended disposal program.
101
J
-------
Organizational Strategy
THE BLACKFEET TRIBE
POLICY BOARD
TOWN
OF
BROWNING
GLACIER COUNTY
REFUSE DISTRICT
1)
2)
All Non-Indian
Residents
All Private businesses.
Schools, etc.
-------
r
a. Glacier National Park
This entity would include all governmental facilities under the juris-
diction of the National Park Service (NPS). All fees and associated costs of
the refuse program attributed to the Park's facilities would be processed
and handled through the National Park Service's budgeting and accounting
system. Since Glacier National Park is under the jurisdiction of the federal
government, however, the representative of the NPS on the Policy Board
would act as an advisor rather than a voting member.
b. The Blackfeet Tribe
This entity would include all registered members of the Blackfeet In-
dian Reservation who live within the study area, as well as all facilities
and buildings currently under the jurisdiction of the Reservation. All re-
spective associated costs attributed to this entity for the proposed solid
waste program would be processed through the Tribal Business Council's
accounting system.
c. Town of Browning
This entity would include all residents of the Town of Browning who
are not registered members of The Blackfeet Tribe. Under the proposed
plan, all proportionate costs incurred by the solid waste disposal system
dibcussed herein that arc attributed to the residents ot llut> entity would
be processed through the Town of Browning's budgeting system. The
Town of Browning would obtain the necessary funds either through month-
ly assessments or through annual city taxes. (It should be noted that the
current Town of Browning's door-to-door collection service would not be
included under this program, and thus this service's accounting and bil-
ling procedures would have to be kept separate from the areawide refuse
program.)
d. Glacier County
This entity would include all residents not already included in one of
the previous entities as well as all private stores, businesses, industries,
etc. in Glacier County except those located in the City of Cut Bank. In
order to legally establish this entity, the Glacier County Commissioners
would be required to form a refuse disposal district. In order to form such
a district, the Commissioners must first pass a resolution of intent to
create the district, and then mail a notice ot intent to each property ow-
ner. A 30-day protest period is then assigned, with a public hearing held
at the end of this period. If less than a 50 percent protest is obtained,
the district can be formed.
Once the county refuse district is formed, each resident or business
would be assessed an equitable fee through the county taxes. All fees col-
lected through these assessments would then be processed through the
Glacier County accounting and budgeting system.
V
103
y
-------
r
Basically, the recommended strategy discussed above includes all waste
generators within the study area with the exception of three; 1) the non-
Indian population residing on the Blackfeet reservation in Pondera County,
2) the corporation that has the concession rights in Glacier National Park,
and 3) the non-Indian residents and all public and privately operated fac-
ilities and businesses in the City of Cut Bank. Summarized herein is the
recommended strategy for these major generators:
a. Pondera County
Tor the small number of non-Indian residents and businesses located
within the study area in Pondera County, it is recommended that these
residents and businesses would be assessed through the Glacier County
Keluse District. The current state law concerning refuse disposal districts
allows lor residents and businesses located in separate counties to operate
and finance concurrent refuse programs. It is recommended that the Gla-
cier and Pondera County Commissioners work together to determine the
simplest and most equitable interlocal agreement to handle the administra-
tion and financing of the disposal of the wastes generated within that por-
tion of Pondera County that is located in the study area.
b. Park Concessionaire
Since the Park Concessionaire and National Park Service's waste dis-
posal requirements and services are quite similar, it is the National Park
Service's and the Concessionaire's recommendation that all appropriate user
fees that are passed to the Concessionaire for the use ot the refuse pro-
gram's disposal facilities should be incorporated into the National Park
Service's user assessments. Through an interlocal agreement the Park Ser-
vice would then in-turn be responsible for collecting the appropriate fees
from the Concessionaire. Also the National Park Service would be respon-
sible for reflecting the Concessionaire's interests on the project Policy
Board.
c. City of Cut Bank
At this time, no indication has been made by the City of Cut Bank
that they wish to be actively involved in this areawide solid waste disposal
program. Therefore, it is assumed that the City of Cut Bank would not at
this time participate in the program and thus would not be required to
contribute any funds. However, it is also assumed that the City would ac-
cept a portion of the wastes generated at its landfill, and would be com-
pensated on a per ton basis for these wastes. Also, however, it is recom-
mended that the City of Cut Bank becoming an active member in the solid
waste program in the future should be left as an option if all parties con-
cerned determine it to be advantageous.
104
J
-------
r
D. OPERATIONAL STRATEGY
1. Alternate Operational Strategy
One of the initial decisions that must be made by the project Policy Board
should be the identification of the most practical and economical operational
strategy for each component of the recommended disposal plan. Based on an an-
alysis of the various operational strategies that have been utilized throughout
the state, it is apparent that three methods of operation are potentially applic-
able. Included herein is a brief discussion of each of these methods.
a. Public Operation
This operational strategy includes the ownership and operation of all
equipment and facilities by a public entity. Under this strategy it would
be this entity's responsibility to purchase all equipment and facilities and
hire the necessary employees to operate the system. The primary advan-
tages of utilizing this operational strategy are. 1) potential savings due to
certain local and state tax exemptions; and 2) a high degree of control
over the supervision and operation of the necessary equipment and facili-
ties. The primary disadvantages of this strategy, in most instances, in-
clude- 1) the high capital investment required to initially fund the pro-
gram, and 2) the inability to obtain maximum effort and efficiency from the
equipment due to the periodic use ol certain equipment.
b. Private Operation
This operational strategy includes the ownership of all facilities and
equipment by a private firm(s). Under this strategy the public entity
would contract to a private firm(s) to supply all sites, facilities, and labor
required to provide the requested service. In many instances, the most
cost-etlective contractual arrangement can be made when a five-year con-
tract is made between the private firm(s) and the entity. This allows the
lirm(s) to purchase and amortize the necessary capital investment over a
reasonable period. The primary advantages under this strategy arc 1) it
reduces the need to obtain financing of large capital outlays; 2) it maxi-
mizes work efficiency and equipment usage; and 3) it provides competitive
bidding for the necessary services. The major disadvantage of this strat-
egy is the lower degree of control on the operation of the system. This
can usually be overcome if a contract is negotiated containing strict per-
formance clauses.
c. Combination of Public and Private Services
Under this strategy, a public entity would own and/or provide certain
facilities and/or services, and a private firm(s) would provide the remain-
der of the necessary facilities and/or services. In many instances, this
strategy has several advantages compared to the other operational strat-
egies. Under this plan, the public entity could provide facilities and
services that are already owned or can easily be obtained, and contract
the remainder of the services out. This option reduces the capital invest-
105
J
-------
r
nicnt of the entity to a minimum. In addition, the contracting of certain
services can provide for maximum efficiency of equipment and manpower.
2. Recommended Operational Strategy
As stated previously, the ultimate administrative and decision-making du-
ties for the recommended disposal plan will be the responsibility of the Policy
Board, which will be represented by each jurisdictional entity. Since the dis-
posal program will require daily monitoring, it is assumed that the Policy Board
would hire a full-time manager to supervise the day-to-day operation of the
various components of the system as well as to keep the Board informed of the
program's status.
Based on several discussions with the members of the Technical Committee,
a tentative operational strategy tor the proposed waste disposal program has
been delineated. Obviously, this strategy must be reviewed, modified as requir-
ed, and approved by the Policy Board selected to administer the program. This
strategy is discussed in the following section, and depicted in Figure 13.
a. Container Systems
1) "Green Box" System
The existing "Green Box" system in use throughout the study area is
owned by The Blackfeet Tribe. This system was instituted in 1979 when
the containers and initial packer vehicle were obtained through a grant
from the Indian Health Service. This system is currently operated and
maintained by the High Plains Solid Waste System, a public entity adminis-
tered through the Tribal Health Department. Based on the current status
ol the ownership and operation of this system, it is recommended that the
High Plains system should continue to operate and maintain the "Green
Box" system.
2) "Roll-Olf" System
It is recommended that, if a "Roll-Otf" system is implemented in the
future, either the High Plains Solid Waste System or private enterprise
should be utilized to provide the necessary equipment, facilities and labor.
The ultimate decision should be made by the Policy Board once the decision
to utilize this system has been finalized.
b. Bulky Materials Pickup Service
Since this system is keyed quite closely to the "Green Box" system,
it is recommended that this service should be provided by the High Plains
Solid Waste System, which would provide all equipment and labor necessary
to operate and maintain the system.
c. Browning Landiill
Over the past six years, the existing Browning landfill has been util-
ized by residents of Browning as well as tribal residents living in the
Browning area. The initial development of the landfill site included funds
V
106
J
-------
Operational Strategy
POLICY BOARD
Project Manager
CUT BANK LANDFILL
CONTAINER SYSTEMS
BULK PICK-UP SERVICE
BROWNING LANDFILL
1) "Green Box" High Plains System
a. High Plains System
2) "Roll-Off"
a High Plains System, or
b. Private Enterprise
Initially Subcontract With
Town of Browning City of Cut Bank on
"Drop Charge" Basis
Ultimately
a. High Plains System, or
b. Private Enterprise
-------
r
~\
and labor from both the Blackfeet Indian Reservation and the Town of
Browning. Currently, the day-to-day landfill operation is the responsibility
of the Town of Browning.
Alter conversations with representatives of the Town of Browning and
other project Technical Committee members, it is recommended that the op-
eration of the site be ultimately subcontracted to either High Plains or pri-
vate enterprise. The new Policy Board may wish to postpone this step for
one vear to allow the Board ample time to thoroughly evaluate this strat-
egy. In the interim, the Town ol Browning should continue to operate the
site and be compensated on an equitable per ton basis.
d. City ol Cut Bank Landfill
As previously discussed, the current recommended solid waste plan
includes the use of the City of Cut Bank landfill to dispose of the wastes
generated in the southeastern portion of Glacier County. Under this plan,
the City of Cut Bank would continue to be responsible for owning and op-
erating the landfill site, and would be compensated on an equitable per ton
basis for disposing of the area's solid waste. However, if the City of Cut
Bank elects to join the areawide disposal program in the future, other op-
erational strategies could be developed.
E. FINANCIAL STRATEGY
1. Recommended Strategy
In order to administer and operate the recommended disposal plan discus-
sed m the previous sections of this chapter, it is essential that an implement-
able and practical financial strategy be developed. The financial strategy that is
chosen must. 1) assess and ultimately collect all revenues required to fund the
project, and 2) make all necessary payments to the proper jurisdictional entities
and/or private enterprise for providing the equipment and labor required to op-
erate the program's facilities and services.
It is recommended that all financial management decisions, including prep-
aration of budgets, assessment of equitable user fees, preparation and approval
of subcontracts, and authorization of payments for expenses be the responsibil-
ity of the Policy Board. In order to administer the funds for the solid waste
disposal program, however, it is necessary to delineate a legal entity through
which all funds must pass. There are two options available for this purpose: 1)
create a special solid waste authority specifically designed to administer the
program; or 2) utilize an existing jurisdictional entity to process all necessary
financial transactions.
After various meetings with the members of the Technical Committee, it
was the general consensus among the members to utilize an existing jurisdic-
tional entity rather than creating a new solid waste authority. It was also felt
that either The Blackfeet Tribe (administered through the Blackfeet Tribal
Business Council) or Glacier County (administered through the Glacier County
108
J
-------
r
Commissioners) would be the two most appropriate existing entities to administer
the project funds for the recommended areawide solid waste disposal program.
As stipulated in the previous section of this chapter, it is the Technical
Committee's recommendation that all assessments and payments would be proces-
sed through The Blackfeet Tribe's financing system. Utilizing The Blackfeet
Tribe in comparison to Glacier County was recommended by the committee pri-
marily because the Tribe owns and operates the majority of the solid waste sys-
tem's components currently in use.
2. Budget Requirements
The estimated budget requirements for the recommended disposal plan are
induced in Table 10. These costs include the depreciation, operation and main-
tenance costs of the various facilities and equipment identified in Part Six of
tins report, as well as the various miscellaneous costs deemed necessary to ad-
minister and manage the disposal program. As shown in this table, the total an-
nual budget lor the recommended disposal program is estimated to be $198,560.
Obviously, this cost will increase in future years, depending on inflation. It
should be noted that these costs are based on the criteria and unit prices de-
veloped in Part Six of this report, and that the exact costs should be deter-
mined after the implementation strategy has been finalized.
In order to finance the anticipated expenditures of the recommended dis-
posal program, the Consultant estimated the proportionate cost for each of the
jurisdictional entities utilizing the proposed services. The proportionate costs
for each jurisdictional entity were derived utilizing the estimated waste quanti-
ties developed in Part Three of this report. The estimated proportionate costs
lor each entity arc summarized in 'fable 11. It should be noted that since Gla-
cier National Park and Park Concessionaire utilize only the Browning landfill
and do not utilize the other services included in the waste disposal program,
the National Park Service and Park Concessionaire's fees were based on only
their proportionate per ton cost on the landfill and associated administrative
costs. The remaining jurisdictional entities' assessments, however, were based
on the proportionate costs for all services included in the disposal program.
Ihe net result of the analysis indicates that the average cost per ton for the
National Park Service and Park Concessionaire would be approximately $25.35
per ton whereas the remaining entities' average cost per ton would be approx-
imately $50.6G. It should also be noted that the costs depicted herein do not
include the National Park Service or Park Concessionaire's cost to transport the
wastes from the Park to the Browning landfill.
V
109
J
-------
TABLE 10
RECOUifyiENEFD SYSTEM L'.UDCET REQUIREMENTS
Item
Annual Expenditures
Amortization Operation,
oi Capital IUaint. & Labor
Total
] . Browning Landfill^
a. Site Costs
b. Trench Excavation
fcll,500
0
$42,860
17,050
$54,360
17,050
Subtotal
11,500
$59,910
$71,410
O
2. Cut Bank E'rop Charge'
0
$6,820
$6,820
3. "f. recn Box" System
a. Container"* .
b. Backer Vehicle
c. Labor0
517,170
9,020
0
$ 4,870
30,730
20,480
$22,040
39,750
20,480
Subtotal •
$26,190
$56,080
$82 ,270
4. Bulky Ivste Service
a. Vehicle^
b. Labor
$410
0
$1,950
3,200
$2,360
3,200
Subtutal
$410
$5,150
$5 ,560
5. Administration
a. Project Manager
b. Part-Tine Secretary
c. Office Supplies, etc.
ri. Postage L Telephone
o. Misc. Expenses
0
0
0
0
0
$20,000
6,000
2,500
1,000
3,000
$20,000
6,000
2,500
1,000
3,000
Subtotal
0
$32,500
$32,500
TOTAL COST' $38,100 $160,460 $198,560
1 Sec Table V lor cog! breakdown
^ Assumes $10 per ton drop charge
Based or 130 lour-cubic-yard containers (50% "bear-prooted")
r Based on 33,400 miles per year ($.27/mi. depr. & $.92/mi. O & i\I)
Based on 2,048 hrs./yr. @ $10/hr.
Eased on 2,750 mi./yr. ($.15/i,n. depr. & $.71/mi. O & l\i)
Based on 1G0 hrs./yr. @ $10/hr.
-------
TABLE 11
PROPORTIONATE COST ESTIMATES
Jurisdictional Estimated Waste Quantities Proportionate
Entity
Tons/Year
Annual Cost
Glacier National Park
3401
$ 8,620
Town of Browning
80
4 ,070
Glacier County Refuse District
1,23 0 2
62,320
The Blackfeet Tribe
2 ,440
123,550
Total 4,090 $198,560
* Includes 1G5 tons tor Glacier National Park and 175 tons for Park Conces-
sionaire .
2
Includes 40 tons generated by the non-indian population of Pondera County
that is located within the study area.
Note: All quantities and costs have been rounded off to the nearest signifi-
cant digit.
F. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
To effectively and efficiently implement the waste disposal plan identified
herein, it is necessary for the local officials and individuals responsible for
the program to delineate and follow a detailed schedule. Included in Table 12
is a general implementation schedule that may be appropriate.
-------
/
TABLE 12
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Task Estimated Time Frame
1. Jurisdictional Entities
Approve Management Plan
2. Form Glacier County
Refuse District
3. Form Policy Board
4. Finalize Operational Strategy
5. Hire Project Manager
6. Finalize & Award Contracts for
Purchase and/or Operation of
Necessary Facilities &. Equipment
7. Formulate Project Budget
8. Determine Final User
Assessments
9. Begin Implementation oi New
Program
July 1, 1982 - September 1, 1982
July 1, 1982 - September 1, 1982
July 1, 1982 - September 1, 1982
August 1, 1982 - October 1, 1982
August 1, 1982 - Ocotber 1, 1982
September 1, 1982 - November 1, 1982
September 1, 1982 - November 1, 1982
October 1, 1982 - November 1, 1982
November 1, 1982
V
-------
APPENDIX A
LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION
-------
tXLCUIIVl COMMII ILI
k-ARL 01 0 I 'I RSON UUIKMAH
DANIU L Gil 11 AM bH V.Ci CHAIRMAN
CHAWl I S COfMJ U > ») M I AH i
tlOUIbl C CUUI U I f<| AMIRI K
THE BLACKFEET TRIBE
OF rHE dLACKFt'L'r INDIAN RESERVATION
BROWNING. MONTANA 59417
MAY 20, 1982
Glaci er County Connussioners
County Courthouse
Cut Bank, Montana
Dear Mr. Comrussioners:
MAY I 1932
ROBERT PECCIA
& ASSOCIATES
1 HIUAL COUNCII
LAHl Ot n PLRbON
DANti I 1 GILHAM SR
CHAHl { b CONNI I LY »\
LLl ANDGROUND
AHOIII ST GODDAHO
I t ONAKD MOUNIAIN C.HII 1
Of OHGI KICKING WOMAN
IL MM i bHOW
PHILIP M KAMI 1 K JK
]n reply to your letter dated May 17, 1982, that Glacier County
cannot contract with the Blackfeet Tribe but would be in a position
to contract with High Plains Solid Waste System if certain criteria
were in place. I would like to explain at this time the full structure
of the High Plains Solid Waste System. As early as February 2, 1975
the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council went on record to begin to try
and deal with the solid waste problem wLthin the Blackfeet Reservation.
This mcludes Glacier County, City of Brcwning and all outlying rural
areas. Purchase of equipment, manpower and sanitary landfill site
were put in lrmiediate process for unproved planning. In the early
part of 1981, after numerous planning efforts progression was not
satisfactory, the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council transferred the
direction and supervision to the Blackfeet 'IVibal Health Board, which
is a registered non-profit organization. (Please find enclosed non-
profit status papers.) At the beginning of this new directive a com-
plete and totally new accounting system was set up within High Plains
Solid Waste System. At the present tine all expenses and revenue is
put through this bookkeeping system. All dollars are transferred to the
Blackfeet Tribal Finance Department, which is audited and money accounted
for on a regular basis.
High Plams Solid Waste System feels that in the past five years
opportunity has knocked a number of occasions to create a Solid Waste
District. If the County should so feel that the initial steps to begin
process of creating a Solid Waste District, then you should by all means
initiate your resolution to do so and put it before the County voters to
find out if this is the alternative that we are looking for.
Jf and when this Solid Waste District is established under the rules
layed dewn by the State of Montana and the Solid Waste District Board
decides they would like to contract with High Plains Solid Waste we would
certainly meet or beat all qualifications.
113
-------
High Plains Solid Waste management would request at this time for
your understanding and cooperation in starting this district. As you
are aware the City of Brcwnmg and the City of Cut Bank landfills are
in very bad need of updating to qualify for sanitary landfill operation
under Environmental Protection Agency rules and regulations.
If there should be any more delays please feel free to notify me
or Mr. Jim Kennedy, Health Board Director. We would be more then glad
to cane dawn and talk about the alternatives left open to us.
'Ihank you
,¦ / /;
Dill ESurd
SolLd Waste Manager
f t\
J in i Kennedy /
lloaJth Board Director
HB/yf
liiclobures
1 14
-------
GLACICC COUNTY
CUT DANK, MONTANA
May 17, 1982
Mr. Bill Burd, Manager
High Plains Solid Waste System
P. 0. Box 866
Browning, Montana 594 17
Dear Mr. Burd:
Please be advised that Glacier County cannot contract with the
Blackfeet Tribe, but we could contract with the High Plains Solid
Waste System if they are a non-profit bonded corporation.
We would appreciate an answer as soon as possible so we can
make plans to create a Refuse District.
BOARD £>F GLACIER CpUNIY COMMISSIONERS
BY .L-CHAIRHAM
cc: Robert Peccia & Associates
115
-------
Chief of The Blackfeet Nation
Earl Old Person, Chief
P.O. Box 486
3rowning, Montono 59417
(406)338-7521 or 338 7276
May 5, 1982
Technical Committee Members:
I would like to take this opportunity to convey my
sincere appreciation and thank you for your expertise
and overall input on the Solid Waste problem that exists
within our service area.
The past year of studying the problem that exists in
the Solid Waste area has been both informing and productive
and I am sure the final plan will be put together as
expertly, dedicated and productive as the past year has
been in the area of Solid Waste.
I would further like to wish all the best of luck to
the future development, planning and structure of putting
into operation the continuing phases of the Blackfeet -
Glacier Montana Solid Waste Plan.
Again on behalf of the Blackfeet Tribe I must say a
job well done.
Earl Old Person, Chairman
Blackfeet Tribe
116
-------
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
EARL OLD PERSON CHAIRMAN
DAMEL L GILHAMSR VICE CHAlRVAN
CHARLES CONNELLY *1 SECRETARY
ELOUI5EC COBELL TREASURER
THE BLACKFEET TRIBE
OF THE BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION
BROWNING MONTANA 59417
RESOLUTION
NO.
ROBFRT PSCWpV COUNCIL
& AGSOC!AT4?FPLD PERSON
DANIEL L GILHAM SR
CHARLES CONNELLY »1
LELAND GROUND
ARCHIE ST GODDARD
LEONARD MOUNTAIN CHIEF _
GEORGE KICKING WOMAN '
JERRY SHOW
PHILIP M RATTLER JR
WHEREAS: The Rlackfeet Tribal Business Council is the duly-
constituted body of the Blackfeet Tribe within the
exterior boundaries of the Blackfeet Reservation organized
pursuant to Section 16, of the Act of June 18, 1934, and
amendments thereto, and
WHEPEAS: The Blackfeet Tribal Business Council's responsibility
to the Tribe is to protect, preserve its resource and
to develop an economic base for the well-being of its
members, and
WHEREAS: The Blackfeet Tribal Eusiness Council is responsible
in all areas of endeavor including Health Conditions,
Financial Responsibility for Tribal monies, the overall
governing entities, and
WHEREAS: The Blackfeet Tribal Business Council has approved a
feasibility study of the Solid Waste System on the
Blackfeet Reservation, and
WHEREAS: This study being called The Blackfeet-Glacier Montana
Solid Waste Management Plan, and
WHEREAS: The Blackfeet Tribe has been working in Solid Waste for
the past four (4) years, and is the sole owner of property
that the sanitary landfill sits on, and is also sole owner
of the High Plains Solid Waste equipment, and
WHEREAS- The Blackfeet Tribe has a centralized bookkeeping system
which is financially sound, in its financing practice
within their governing body, and
WHEREAS: The Blackfeet Tribal Business Council is fully qualified
to enter into cooperative agreements and contracts with
other governing bodies, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That The Blackfeet Tribal Business
Council be recognized as the Leading Agency for the
Blackfeet-Glacier Montana Solid Waste Management Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That any and all financial agreements or
billing systems that is created under this Blackfeet-
Glacier Montana Solid Waste Management Plan be handled
through the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council Governing
System.
117
-------
LXf CUllVF COMMII II I
{ AFU 01 I) FM MSON CHAIRMAN
DANK L I GU HAM SH VICT CHAIRMAN
CHARLFS CONNTLn »1 SLLRCTARY
f IODISE C COIH I t IFifASUUI H
THE BLACKFEET TRIBE
or THE UL ACKI'I.EI INDIAN HCSERVAIION
BROWNING MONTANA 59417
MARCH 8, 1982
TRIBAL COUNCIL
I ARl OLD PtRSON
DANITL L GILMAM SR
CHARLES CONNCl I V « I
LELANO GROUNO
ARCHIE ST GODOARD
i fONARO mountain cmrr
Gl OHGL KICKING WOMAN
JERRY SHOW
PHILIP M RATTLER JR
TO: BLACKFEET TRIEAL BUSINESS COUNCIL
TROM: HIGH PLAINS SOLID WASTE SYSTEM
RE- RECOMMENDATION FOR ORGANIZA nIONAL STRATEGY
THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE DISCUSSED AT GREAT LENGTH VARIOUS
OPTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES TO HANDLE THE FINANCIAL PORTION OF
THE TOTAL OVERALL MANAGEMENT PLAN. THE TWO AGENCIES THAT WOULD
BF MOST OUTSTANDING AND ALSO HAS RELIABLE FINANCE STRUCTURE
CAPABLE OF ACCOUNTING FOR DOLLARS THAT IS SUBMITTED BY OTHER
GOVERNING BODIES IS: (1) THE BLACKFEET TRIBAL BUSINESS COUNCIL
AND (2) THE GLACIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
FUNDS
THE AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THE OVERALL PLAN FOR IMMEDIATE
SERVICES AND/OR FINANCIAL INPUT WOULD BE THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES:
(1) BLACKFEET TRIBE: THE BLACKFEET TRIBF IS MORE PREFERABLE
TO BE THE LEAD AGENCY FOR THE REASON THAT THE INITIAL CAPITAL
TO BEGIN OPERATIONS IS ALREADY IN THEIR OWNERSHIP. THESE INCLUDE
SOLID WASTE PICK-UP AND DELIVERY EQUIPMENT, SANITARY REFUGE DUMP
AND INVESTED OPERATIONS TO DATE.
(2) GLACIER COUNTY: GLACIER COUNTIES INPUT FINANCIALLY
WOULD BE THROUGH A SOLID WASTE DISTRICT. TO DATE THEY HAVE MO
CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN EITHER THE PICK-UP AND DELIVERY SERVICES
NOR ^HE SANITARY LANDFILL. THEIR INPUT FINANCIALLY WOULD BE
THROUGH COLLECTING TAX ON TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
AND/OR OVERALL SOLID WASTE DISTRICT FOR THE ENTIRE GLACIER COUNTY.
(3) TOWN OF BROWNING: THE CITY OF BROWNING IS NOW MANAGING
AND OPERATING THE SANITARY LANDFILL NORTH OF BROWNING. THE EQUIP-
MENT THEY HAVE IS A CAT AND ALSO THE INPUT OF MANPOWER TO OVERSEE
SANITARY LANDFILL. THE CITY OF BROWNING HAS THEIR OWN COLLECTION
SYSTEM AND THEY WOULD HAVE AN OPTION AT A LATER DATE TO JOIN INDIV-
IDUALLY AS A CITY OR JOIN THROUGH THE GLACIER COUNTY REFUGE DIS-
TRICT TAX BASIS. THEY HOWEVER WOULD HAVE TO PAY INTO THIS STRUCTURE
A GIVEN AMOUNT PER TON TO UTILIZE THE SANITARY LANDFILL.
118
-------
L X r C U IIV l COVMII ILL
I Alii m I) IM U'.or. ( H «I I'M AN
DANILI I c»ll HAM SW VICI CHAIRMAN
CHAHI I S fONNK I t »1 SICHFIARY
i Louisr c com 11 J ri asui^e u
THE BLACKFEET TRIBE
or the blackrn:i indian nrsi:nvAnoN
BROWNING MONTANA 59417
iwin/1 council
I Alii 01 I) I'l HSON
DANiri I Gil HAM Sli
CH Mil 1 s rONNl I I Y M
I I I AN13 GliOUND
AiiCHll SI (lODUAIil)
i f ONAND MOUN I AIN CMtFT
Cione.t KICKING WOMAN
II liliV SHOW
PHILIP M RAMLLP JR
(4) GLACIER NATIONAL PARK: GLACIER NATIONAL PARK WOULD
BE IK AN ADVISORY POSITION AS A GOVERNMENT ENTITY. HOWEVER,
THF COST THEY SUBMIT TO THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE ASSESSED AT THE
AMOUNT OF SERVICES RENDERED TO GLACIER NATIONAL PARK.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
SHOULD THE BLACKFEET TRIBAL BUSINESS COUNCIL DECIDE THEY
WOULD BE THE LEAD AGENCY AND/OR CONTRACTING AGENCY TOEY WOULD
HAVE THE POWER TO OVERRIDE AND/OR APPROVE ALL DECISIONS MADE
BY THIS BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS THEY WOULD BE IN AN ADVISORY
CAPACITY. THIS BOARD OF ADVISORS WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE
COUNCIL, GLACIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CITY OF BROWNING AND
GLACIER NATIONAL PARK BEFORE ANY CONTINUED PLANNING COULD BE
ACCOMPLISHED.
MANAGER OF THE PROJECT
THE PROJECT MANAGER WOULD BE DISCUSSED PER HIS DUTIES,
RESPONSIBILITIES AND PLANNING STRATEGIES AFTER THE SELECTION
OF THE ADVISORY BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
HIGH PLAINS SOLID WASTE AND SANITARY LANDFILL
THESE TWO PROJECTS WOULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNDER THE
PRESENT STRUCTURE UNTIL THE ABOVT IS PUT INTO OPERATING CON-
DITION AND IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE TRIBAL COUNCIL FOR DELEGATION
OF AUTHORITY AND/OR TO SHOW PROOF OF STABLE AND FINANCIAL
STRUCTURE.
HIGH PLAINS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FURTHER RECOMMENDS
1HAT THE HIGH PLAINS STAY UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HEALTH
BOARD FOR AN ADDITIONAL NINETY DAYS AFTER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FOR THE SOLID WASTE PLAN IS ESTABLISHED.
119
-------
l>ni'\KT'ME\T or HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Health Services Administration
Our Reference: EHE-SFC
Billings Area
Indian Health Service
2727 Central Avenue
PO Box 2143
Billings MT 59103
Mr. Barry Damschen
Robert Peccia & Associates
810 Hialeah Court
Helena, Montana 59601
Dear Mr. Damschen-
I have reviewed the Blackfeet-Glacier Montana Solid Waste Management
Plan, with particular interest in the conclusions and the recommended
solid waste management plan.
After consideration of the alternatives for the lead agency, I feel
the Blackfeet Tribe should be designated the lead agency. The Tribe
currently owns the equipment which would be utilized and would be re-
sponsible for approximately 60% of the cost of the program. Despite
the designation of the Tribe being the lead agency, a Board of Directors
should be appointed with all the responsibilities and authority to con-
trol the solid waste program's financial and managerial respects.
cc: Service Unit Director, PHS Indian Hospital, Browning, Montana
Cordially,
Gary McFarland, P. E.
District Engineer
Kalispell District Office
120
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 8, Montana Office
Federal Builoiny
301 S Park Drawer 10096
Helena Montana &9R01
Ref: 8li0
Barry E. Damschen
Robert Peccia and Associates
810 Hialeah Court
Helena, Montana 59601
Dear Barry:
You requested that the technical committee members for the
B1ackfeet-Glacier solid waste management project nominate a lead agency for
implementation of the plan.
As a member of that committee, 1 would like to suggest that the Blackfeet
Tribe assume the responsibility for plan implementation as the lead agency.
The Tribe, through the High Plains Solid Waste System, is currently acting in
that capacity.
I will see you at the next meeting in April if it falls on a date other
than the following. 1 through 9, 15, 22 and 23.
Sincerely yours
J -ri s
Environmental Engineer
121
-------
J DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BUREAU
TEDSCHWINDEN GOVERNOR
Room A20 I, Cogswell building
STATE OF MONTANA
HELENA MONTANA 59620
Telephone: (406) 449-282]
March 15, 1982
Barry Damschen
Robert Peccia & Associates
8 10 Hialeah Court
Helena, Montana 5960 1
Re: Blackfeet Glacier solid waste plan
Dear Barry,
As per the March 2, 1982 technical committee discussion the Solid
Waste Management Bureau recommends that the Blackfeet tribe be the lead
agency for implementing and operating the recommended plan. All other
entities would contract for their proportionable cost share with the
Tribe.
This is only a recommendation and is not intended in any way to be
construed as being mandatory. It is our opinion based on our knowledge
of past and present political and practical factors.
Sincerely,
Vic R. Andersen
Solid Waste Management Bureau
Environmental Sciences Division
VRA:cw
122
AN i Ui \i uM OMUN 1 V [ MP.O> f H
-------
United States Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
GLACIER NATIONAL PARK
WrST GLACIER, MONTANA 59936
IS RH'l \ KLUCK TO
D5019
May 7, 1982
Mr. Barry E. Damschen
Robert Peccia & Associates
810 Hialeah Court
Helena, Montana 59601
Dear Mr. Damschen:
The draft report for the Blackfeet-Glacier, Montana Solid Waste Management
Plan has been reviewed by the National Park Service and we concur with the
content and recommendations. It is the Park's recommendation that the
report be approved with the minor changes discussed at the last meeting
of the Technical Committee, and that implementation begin as soon as
possible.
The implementation strategy with the Blackfeet Tribal Council acting as
lead agency appears to be the most expeditious and efficient means to make
the program work and we support the concept. The National Park Service
will develop a memorandum of understanding to provide the administrative
means for participation in the program.
I want to express appreciation to the Blackfeet Tribe for initiating the
Regional Solid Waste Study and to all of the agencies and personnel that
served on the Technical Committee. We are looking forward to implementation
of the program and continuing participation to make the program successful.
Sinr-erelv,
Robert C. Haraden
Superin tendent
cc:
Ear] Old Person, Chairman
f Oth Te,r jj/$
123
-------
THE TOWN OF BROWNING
Browning, Montana 59417
Phone 338-2344
Ray 15.198?
Barry R. lanschen, P.li.
Robert Peccia h Associates
"Planners- Rngineers-Resigners
810 Rialeah Court
T;elena, Montana 59^01
. 'ear Rr. Ramschen,
I have reviewed your report for the formation of a
Solid Waste T.istrict on the Blackfeet pLeservation,
I agree vith the plan.
I believe the Blackfeet Tribal Council should be the
lead agency.
The Town of Browning will participate in the Solid Waste
Ristrict.
Sincerely,
Steve Barcus
Rayor, Town of Browning
III
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Flecsc read Instructions un the rei crse before completing]
1 REPORT NO 2
908/6 - 82 - 004
3 RECIPIENT S ACCESSION NO
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Blackfeet—Glacier, Montana Solid Waste Management Plan
A Technical Assistance Panels Program Report
5 REPORT DATE
June, 1982
6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
Barry Damschen, Daniel Norderud. Stephen Orzynski
8 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9 PERTORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Robert Peccia & Associates Fred C Hart Associates
81 0 Hialeah Court. Box 45 18 1320 Seventeenth Street
Helena, Montana 59604 Denvei. Colorado 80202
10 PROGRAM ELEMENT NO
11 CONTRACT/GRANT NO
68 -01 -6008
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U S Environmental Piotection Agency. Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Stieet
Denver. Colorado
13 TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14 SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16 ABSTRACT
Due to jurisdictional-related problems, low populations and vast distances between population cen-
ters. and extremely seasonal waste geneiation characteristics, the disposal of solid waste in the Black led
Indian Kcseivation — Glacier National Park aiea has presented various problems for the past seveial years
This report presents an analysis ol the curicnt problems confronting local officials in the area, and alter-
nate solutions to the problems that exist
The solid waste management plan summarized in the report recommends that the existing non-licensed
disposal sites m the area should be closed In addition, the existing "Green Box" container system should
be expanded to all aieas encompassed by the study, and all wastes should ultimately be disposed ol at
cithei of two licensed landfills m the area The plan also recommends that a Policy Board consisting of
lepiesentutives trom the Bluckleet '1 nbe Glacier County, the Town of Browning, and the National Paik
Service should be formed to implement the plan and make all necessary decisions concerning the manage-
ment. iinancing and operation of the pioposed waste disposal system Ultimately, it is recommended that
all financial airangcments should be conducted through the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council, primarily
because most of the existing waste disposal facilities and equipment are currently owned and operated by
the Tribe
17 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
l DESCRIPTORS
b IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
l COSATl I icld/Group
Sanitary Landfill. Solid Waste Disposal. Solid Waste
Tumsfer Systems. Solid Waste Management Plan
Glaciei County, Montana
Blackfeet Indian Reservation
Glacier National Park
18 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Released to public
19 SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21 NO OF PAGES
124
20 SECURITY CLASS (This pu$c}
22 PRICE
EPA Form 2270-1 (Rev 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION IS O DSO LL T C
-------
|